MASTER 
 NEGATIVE 
 NO. 92-80510 
 
MICROFILMED 1992 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK 
 
 as part of the 
 "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" 
 
 Funded by the 
 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES 
 
 Reproductions may not be made without permission from 
 
 Columbia University Library 
 
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT 
 
 The copyright law of the United States ~ Title 17, United 
 States Code ~ concerns the making of photocopies or other 
 reproductions of copyrighted material... 
 
 Columbia University Library reserves the right to refuse to 
 accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order 
 would involve violation of the copyright law. 
 
AUTHOR: 
 
 GROTE, GEORGE 
 
 TITLE: 
 
 PLACE: 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 DA TE : 
 
 1900 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT 
 
 Master Negative # 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET 
 
 Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record 
 
 .884 
 ;G9114 
 
 D884 
 G911 
 
 Restrictions on Use: 
 
 Grote, George, 1794-1871. 
 
 Greece: i. Legendary Greece, n. Grecian history to the 
 reign of Peisistratus at Athens, by George Grote, esq. Re- 
 printed from the 2d London edition ... New York, P. F. 
 Collier & son, 1900 -1901 . 
 
 12 V. fronts., plates. 20i«». {Lettered on cover: Nations of the 
 world) 
 
 Published originally under title: History of Greece. London, 1840-56. 
 
 Copy in Barnard. 1900-01. 
 
 1. Greece — History. 
 
 Title from Haverford 
 
 I 
 
 ■^ 
 
 A 25-337 
 College. Printed by L. C. 
 
 i31<lli 
 
 TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA 
 
 FILM SlZE.__'^_S_-;>^^ REDUCTION RATIO: 
 
 IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA <|l^ IB IIB 
 
 DATE FILMED:___3 /_3^|22_ INITIALS 'Vll!^^^ 
 
 HLMEDBY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOODBRIDGE. CT 
 
 I IX 
 
c 
 
 Association for information and image iManagement 
 
 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 
 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 
 
 301/587-8202 
 
 4; 
 
 
 Centimeter 
 
 
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
 
 iiiiiiiiiiii 
 
 13 M 15 
 
 1 
 
 M 
 
 iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii ilii 1 II iliiii iiiiliiiiliiiil ml iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliii liii liiiiliiiiliiiiliiii mill II 1 
 
 iilimlim INI INI 
 
 T1 
 
 ll|ll|lipilfiyi|l|M ll|ll l|ll ll|ll|l^l|lipil|M|ll ll|M M|II|M|M Mfl|M|ll|ll ll|ll M|ll |l| 1 |l If 1 |ll^ 1 1 l| ll|ll M|M 
 
 'In r r 1 
 
 Inches 
 
 1.0 
 
 m 28 
 
 •^ III 3^2 
 
 Hi M 
 
 ■ 80 
 
 LI 
 
 *^ u 
 
 1.4 
 
 2.5 
 22 
 
 I.I 
 
 2.0 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 1.25 
 
 MfiNUFflCTURED TO fillM STflNDORDS 
 BY RPPLIED IMfiGE, INC. 
 
■:m^l&wM%Mf m 
 
 y^ii^^:^M^^'^^-^^^ ^f '■''■' '^^p#^^^i^^ 
 
 

 I 
 
 Columbia Winiotviitp 
 
 in ttje Citp of ^etD gorfe 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIVEN BY 
 
 'Robert S. Freed man ISe^oeat 
 
 y 
 
iilHillilfiilllliull 
 
 Vt- 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 'h 
 
 m^m 
 
 i* 
 
 1' n 
 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 'm^v^ 
 
 
 ^^^^^u^i 
 
 ! 
 
 ^^K <«iS 
 
 'va* 
 
 
 
 'V^! 
 
 *^^^ 
 3^: ^':. 
 
 
 '^i'^X;. 
 
 RETURN OF ALCIBIADES TO ATHENS 
 
 I'^rontispiece^ Greece^ 7<o/. one. 
 
GREECE 
 
 I. LEGENDARY GREECE 
 
 II. GRECIAN HISTORY TO THE REIGN 
 
 OF PEISISTRAIUS AJ; ATHENS 
 
 • t • 
 
 BY 
 
 George Grote. H:SQ: 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION 
 
 ILLUSTRATED 
 
 ^ yOLUME I 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 PETER FENELON COLLIER & SON 
 
 MCM 
 
• • • 
 
 ^ 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 FART L — LEGEND Aftl* G^REECB 
 
 'AvdfHJv /)pa)6)v ifEiov yevoq, oi Ka'/ito'irm 
 *H/ii^eot TipoTEpy yevei,. — Hesiod 
 
 PABT n. -fflSTORICAL GREECR 
 
 ^•OBEirr 
 
 S. FKI 
 
 
 The first idea jf this History was conceived nanj jeaifl 
 ago, at a time wK^n ancient Hellas was known to the English 
 public chiefly throu^^h the pages of Mitford ; and my purpose 
 m writing it was t) rectify the erroneous statements as to 
 matter of fact which that History contained, as well as to pre- 
 sent the general pheaomena of the Grecian world under what 
 I thought a juster anl more comprehensive point of view. My 
 leisure, however, wa& not at that time equal to the executioo 
 of any large literary undertaking ; nor is it until within the 
 last three or four years that I have been able to devote to the 
 work that contintiMHi^Mi^'eKCltlsive labor, without which, 
 though much may be done to illustrate detached points, no 
 entire or complicated subject can ever be set forth in a man 
 ner worthy to meet the pubhc eye. 
 
 Meanwhile the state of the English literary world, in ref^ 
 eience to ancient Hellas, has been materially changed in 
 more ways than one. If my early friend Dr. Thirlwall's 
 History of Greece had appeared a few years sooner, I should 
 probably never have conceiveii the design of the present 
 work at all ; I should certainly not have been prompted to the 
 task by any deficiencies, such as those which I felt and regret- 
 ted in Ifitford. The comparison of the two authors aflbrda, 
 bdeed, a stiiking pro^ of the progress of sound and enlai^ed 
 
XV 
 
 PkcrACE. 
 
 views respecting the ancient world during the present gener 
 ation. Having studied of course the same evidences as Dr 
 Thirwall, I am better enabled than others to bear testimony 
 to the learning, the sagacity, and the candor which pervade 
 his excellent work : and it is the more incumbent on me to 
 ^ve expression to this sentiment, since the particular pomts 
 on which I shall have oc<jasion to advert to it will, unavoidably, 
 be points of dissent oftener than of coincidence. 
 
 The liberal spirit of criticism, in which Dr. Thirwall stands 
 80 much distinguished from Mitford, is his own : there are 
 Other features of superiority which belong to him conjointly 
 with his age. For during the generation since Mitford 's work, 
 philological studies have been prosecuted in Germany with 
 remarkable success : the stock of facts and documents, com- 
 paratively scanty, handed down from the ancient world, 
 has been combined and illustrated m a thousand different 
 ways : and if our witnejjses cannot be multiplied, we at least 
 have numerous interpreters to catch, repeat, amplify, and ex- 
 plain their broken and half-inaudible depositions. Some of 
 the best writers in this department — Boeckh, Niebuhr, 
 0. Miiller — have been translated into our language ; so that 
 tiie EngUsh pubhc has been enabled to form some idea of the 
 new lights thrown upon many subjects of antiquity by the in- 
 estimable aid of German erudition. The poets, historians, 
 orators, and philosophers of Greece, have thus been all ren- 
 dered both more intelligible and more instructive than they 
 were to a student in the last century ; and the general pic- 
 ture of the Grecian world may now be conceived with a de- 
 gree of fidehty, which, considering our imperfect materials, it 
 18 curious to contemplate. 
 
 It is that general picture which an historian of Greece id 
 required first to embody in his own mind, and next to lay out 
 before his readers ; — a picture not merely such as to < elight 
 the imagination by brilliancy of coloring and depth o/ senti- 
 ment, but also suggestive and improving to the reason Not 
 
 
 PREFACE. ^ 
 
 omitting the points of resemblance as well as of contrast wHii 
 the better-known forms of modern society, he will especially 
 Btudy to exhibit the spontaneous movement of Grecian intel- 
 lect, sometimes aided but never borrowed from without, and 
 lighting up a small portion of a world otherwise clouded and 
 stationary. He will develop the action of that social system, 
 which, while insuring to the mass of freemen a degree of pro 
 tection elsewhere unknown, acted as a stimulus to the crea 
 tive impulses of genius, and left the superior minds sufficiently 
 UDJshackled to soar above religious and political routine, to 
 overshoot their own age, and to become the teachers of pos 
 terity. 
 
 To set forth the history of a people by whom the first spark 
 
 was set to the dormant intellectual capacities of our nature, 
 
 Hellenic phenomena, as illustrative of the Hellenic mind and 
 character, — is the task which I propose to myself in the 
 present work ; not without a painful consciousness bow much 
 the deed falls short of the will, and a yet more painful con- 
 viction, that full success is rendered impossible by an obstacle 
 which no human ability can now remedy, — the insufficiency 
 of original evidence. For, in spite of the valuable expositiona 
 of so many able commentators, our stock of information re 
 Bpecting the ancient world still remains lamentably inadequate 
 to the demands of an enlightened curiosity. We possess only 
 what has drifted ashore from the wreck of a stranded vessel ; 
 and though this includes some of the most precious articles 
 amongst its once abundant cargo, yet if any man will cast his 
 eyes over the citations in Diogenes Laertius, Athenseus, or 
 Plutarch, or the list of names in Vossius de Historicis Grae- 
 cis, he will see with grief and surprise how much larger is 
 the proportion which, through the enslavement of the Greeki 
 themselves, the decline of the Roman Empire, the change of 
 religion, and the irruption of barbarian conquerors, has been 
 irrecoverably submerged. We are thus reduced to judge of 
 Jie whole Hellenic world, eminently multiiona as it waiL 
 
^ PREFACE. 
 
 from a few compositionB ; excellent, indeed, in themselves, but 
 bearing too exclusively the stamp of Athens. Of Thucjdidea 
 and Aristotle, indeed, both as inquirers into matter of fact, 
 and as free from narrow local feeling, it is impossible to speak 
 too highly ; but, unfortunately, that work of the latter which 
 would have given us the most copious information regarding 
 Grecian political life — his collection and comparison of one 
 hundred and fifty distinct town constitutions — has not been 
 preserved : and the brevity of Thucydides often gives us but a 
 mngle word where a sentence would not have been too much, 
 and sentences which we should be glad to see expanded into 
 paragraphs. 
 
 Such insufficiency of original and trustworthy materials, as 
 compared with those resources which are thought hardly suf- 
 ficient for the historian of any modern kingdom, is neither to 
 be concealed nor extenuated, however much we may lament 
 it. I advert to the point here on more grounds than one. 
 For it not only limits the amount of information which an 
 historian of Greece can give to his readers, — compelling him 
 to leave much of his picture an absolute blank, — but it also 
 greatly spoils the execution of the remainder. The question 
 of credibility is perpetually obtruding itself, and requiring a 
 decision, which, whether favorable or unfavorable, always in- 
 troduces more or less of controversy ; and gives to those out 
 lines, which the interest of the picture requires to be straight 
 and vigorous, a faint and faltering character. Expressions 
 of qualified and hesitating affirmation are repeated until the 
 reader is sickened ; while the writer himself, to whom this 
 restraint is more painful still, is frequently tempted to break 
 loose from the unseen spell by which a conscientious criticism 
 binds him down, — to screw up the possible and probable 
 into certainty, to suppress counterbalancing considerations, 
 and to substitute a pleasing romance in place of half- 
 known and perplexing realities. Desiring, in the present 
 work, to set forth all which can be ascertained, together witl) 
 
 I'KEPAGE. 
 
 ▼y 
 
 ■uch conjectures and inferences as can be reasonably deduced 
 from it, but nothing more, — I notice, at the outset, that faulty 
 state of the original evidence which renders discussions of 
 credibility, and hesitation in the language of the judge, una- 
 voidable. Such discussions, though the reader may be as- 
 sured that they will become less frequent as we advance into 
 times better known, are tiresome enough, even with the com- 
 paratively late period which I adopt as the historical begin- 
 ning ; much more intolerable would they have proved, had I 
 thought it my duty to start from the primitive terminus of 
 Deukalion or Inachus, or from the unburied Pelasgi and 
 Leleges, and to subject the heroic ages to a similar scrutiny. 
 I really know nothing so disheartening or unrequited as the 
 elaborate balancing of what is called evidence, — the compar- 
 ison of infinitesimal probabilities and conjectures all uncerti* 
 Sed, — in regard to these shadowy times and persons. 
 
 The law respecting sufficiency of evidence ought to be the 
 same for ancient times as for modem ; and the reader will 
 find in this History an application, to the former, of criteria 
 analogous to those which have been long recognized in the 
 Jatter. Approaching, though with a certain measure of 
 indulgence, to this standard, I begin the real history of 
 Greece with the first recorded Olympiad, or 776 B. c. To 
 guch as are accustomed to the habits once universal, and still 
 ■aot uncommon, in investigating the ancient world, I may ap- 
 pear to be striking off one thousand years from the scroll of 
 history ; but to those whose canon of evidence is derived 
 from Mr. Hallam, M. Sismondi, or any other eminent histo- 
 rian of modern events, I am well assured that I shall appear 
 ^x and credulous rather than exigent or sceptical. For 
 the truth is, that historical records, properly so called, do not 
 begin until long after this date : nor will any man, who canr 
 didly considers the extreme paucity of attested facts for two 
 centuries after 776 B. c, be astonished to learn that the state 
 of Greece in 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1800, 1400 ^. o.^ ^Mi^i 
 
 
I 
 
 m 
 
 PSEl^'AGB. 
 
 —or any eailier century which it may please chronologists to 
 include in their computed genealogies, — cannot be described 
 lo him u|)on anything like decent evidence. I shall hope, 
 when I come to the lives of Socrates and Plato, to illustrate 
 one of the most valuable of their principles, — that consciouf 
 vnd confessed ignorance is a better state of mind, than the 
 l&ncy, without the reah ty, of knowledge. Meanwhile, I be^ 
 by making that confessiou, in reference to the real world of 
 Greece anterior to the Olympiads; meaning the disclaimer 
 to apply to anything like a general history, — not to exclude 
 rigorously every individual event. 
 
 The times which I thus set apart from the region of hi*> 
 tory are discernible only through a different atmosphere,-— 
 that of epic poetry and legend. To confound together these 
 disparate matters is, in my judgment, essentially unphilo- 
 eophical. I describe the earlier times by themselves, as cofr 
 ceived by the faith and feeling of the first Greeks, and known 
 only through their legends, — without presuming to measure 
 how much or how little of historical matter these legends may 
 contain. If the reader blame me for not assisting him to de- 
 termine this, — if he ask me why I do not undraw the curtain 
 and disclose the picture, — I reply in the words of the painter 
 Zeuxis, when the same question was addressed to him on ex- 
 hibiting his master-piece of imitative art : " The curtain is 
 the picture." What we now read as poetry and legend waa 
 once accredited history, and the only genuine history which 
 the first Greeks could conceive or relish of their past time : the 
 curtain conceals nothing behind, and cannot, by any ingenuity, 
 be withdrawn. I undertake only to show it as it stands, — 
 not to efface, still less to repaint it. 
 
 Three-fourths of the two volumes now presented to the 
 public are destined to elucidate this age of historical faith, 
 ae distinguished from the later age of historical reason : to 
 exhibit its basis in the human mind, — an omnipresent religioui 
 ai^ personal interpretatic»n of nature ; to illustrate it by com 
 
 I'KKFACE. |_ 
 
 parison with the like mental habit in early modem Europe ' 
 to show its immense abundance and variety of narrative 
 matter, with little care for consistency between one story 
 and another ; lastly, to set forth the causes which overthrew 
 and partially supplanted the old epical sentiment, and intro- 
 duced, in the room of literal faith, a variety of compromises 
 ind interpretations. 
 
 The legendary age of the Greeks receives its principal 
 tharm and dignity from the Homeric poems: to these, there- 
 .bre, and to the other poems included in the ancient epic, an 
 entire chapter is devoted, the length of which must be justi- 
 fied by the names of the Iliad and Odyssey. I have thought 
 it my duty to take some notice of the Wolfian controversy as 
 it now stands in Germany, and have even hazarded some 
 Bpeculations respecting the structure of the Iliad. The so 
 ciety and manners of the heroic age, considered as known in 
 a general way from Homer's descriptions and allusions, are 
 also described and criticized. 
 
 I next pass to the historical age, beginning at 776 B. c. ; 
 prefixing some remarks upon the geographical features of 
 Greece. I try to make out, amidst obscure and scanty indi- 
 cations, what the state of Greece was at this period ; and I 
 indulge some cautious conjectures, founded upon the earliest 
 verifiable facts, respecting the steps immediately antecedent 
 by which that condition was brought about. In the present 
 volumes, I have only been able to include the history of Sparta 
 and the Peloponnesian Dorians, down to the age of Peisis- 
 tratus and Croesus. I had hoped to have comprised m 
 them the entire history of Greece down to this last-mentioned 
 period, but I find the space insufficient. 
 
 The history of Greece falls most naturally into six com- 
 partments, of which the first may be looked at as a period of 
 preparation for the five following, which exhaust the free life 
 of collective Hellas. 
 
 I. Period from 776 B. c. to 560 B. c, the accession ef 
 P^isistratus at Athens and of Croesus in Lydia 
 
 A* 
 
H PREFACK. 
 
 n. From tlie accession of Peidstratos and Crcesus to th^ 
 repulse of Xerxes from (xreece. 
 
 III. From the repulse of Xerxes to the close of the Pelo 
 ponnesian war and overthrow of Athens. 
 
 IV. From the close of the Peloponnesian war to the bat- 
 tle of Leuktra. 
 
 V. From the battle of Leuktra to that of Chseroneia. 
 
 VI. From the battle of Chaeroneia to the end of the gen- 
 eration of Alexander. 
 
 The five periods, from Peisistratus down to the death of 
 Alexander and of his generation, present the acts of an his- 
 torical drama capable of being recounted in perspicuous suc- 
 cession, and connected by a sensible thread of unity. I shall 
 interweave in their proper places the important but outlying 
 adventures of the SiciUan and Italian Greeks, — introducing 
 •uch occasional notices of Grecian political constitutions, phi- 
 losophy, poetry, and oratory, as are requisite to exhibit the 
 many-sided activity of iliis people during their shoit but 
 brilliant career. 
 
 After the generation of Alexander, the political action of 
 Greece becomes cramped and degraded, — no longer interest- 
 ing to the reader, or operative on the destinies of the future 
 world. We may, indeed, name one or two incidents, especially 
 the revolutions of Agis and Kleomenes at Sparta, which are 
 both instructive and aiFeciing ; but as a whole, the period, 
 between 300 B. c. and the absorption of Greece by the Ro- 
 mans, is of no interest in itself, and is only so far of value 
 as it helps us to understand the preceding centuries. The 
 dignity and value of the Greeks from that time forward be 
 long to them only as individual philosophers, preceptors, as- 
 tronomers, and mathematicians, hterary men and critics, med 
 ical practioners, etc. In all these respective capacities, 
 especially in the great s(;hools of philosophical speculation 
 they still constitute the light of the Roman world ; thougl^ 
 gs communities, they have lost their own orbit, and have be 
 .{vnti satellites of more powerful neighbors. 
 
 
 PREFACE. ^ 
 
 I propose to bring down the lustory of the Grecian com- 
 munities to the year 300 B. c, or the close of the generation 
 which takes its name from Alexander the Great, and I hope 
 to accomplish this in eight volumes altogether. For the next 
 two or three volumes I have already large preparations 
 made, and I shall publi •! my third (perhaps my fourth) in 
 the course of the ensuing winter. 
 
 There are great disadvantages in the publication of one 
 portion of a history apart from the remainder ; for neither the 
 earlier nor the later phenomena can be fully comprehended 
 without the light which each mutually casts upon the other. 
 But the practice has become habitual, and is indeed more 
 than justified by the well-known inadmissibihty of " long 
 hopes" into the short span of human life. Yet I cannot but 
 fear that my first two volumes will suffer in the estimation of 
 many readers by coming out alone, — and that men who value 
 the Greeks for their philosophy, their politics, and their ora- 
 tory, may treat the early legends as not worth attention. 
 And it must be confessed that the sentimental attributes of 
 the Greek mind — its religious and poetical vein — here ap- 
 pear in disproportionate relief, as compared with its more 
 vigorous and masculine capacities, — with those powers of 
 acting, organizing, judging, and speculating, which will be re- 
 vealed in the forthcoming volumes. I venture, however, to 
 forewarn the reader, that thero will occur numerous circum- 
 stances in the after political life of the Greeks, which he will 
 not comprehend unless he be initiated into the course of their 
 legendary associations. He wiU not understand the frantic 
 terror of the Athenian public during the Peloponnesian war, 
 on the occasion of the mutilation of the statues called Her- 
 mae, unless he enters into the way in which they connected 
 their stability and security with the domiciliation of the gods 
 in the soil : nor will he adequately appreciate the habit of 
 the Spartan king on military expeditions, — when he offered 
 his daily public sacrifices on behalf of his army and his coun 
 
lH PBEFACB. 
 
 try, — "always to pirfonn this morning service immediately 
 before sunrise, in order that he might be beforehand in ob- 
 taining the favor of the gods,"* if he be not familiar with the 
 Homeric conception of Zeus going tc rest at night and 
 awaking to rise at eariy iawn from the side of the " white- 
 armed Here." The occasion will, indeed, often occur for 
 remarking how these legends illustrate and vivify the politi 
 cal phenomena of the succeeding times, and I have onl? now 
 to urge the necessity ot considering them as the beginning of 
 a series, — not as an entire work. 
 
 * Xenophon, Repub. LacediemDn. c^ap. xL: 3 Aei dk, drav i>vj?r<M, d^<- 
 rat fiiv TovTov tov Ipyov etc ttpe^MOC, vjoAa/^t^avetv 0ovXdfievos rifv to4 ^Mi 
 9&voiav. 
 
 LoNPOK, March 5 1846^ 
 
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION OP 
 VOLUMES I. AND II. 
 
 In preparing a Second Edition of the first two volomei 
 of my History, I have profited by the remarks and correc- 
 tions of various critics, contained in Reviews, both English 
 and foreign. I have suppressed, or rectified, some positions 
 which had been pointed out as erroneous, or as advanced 
 upon inadequate evidence. I have strengthened my argu- 
 ment in some cases where it appeared to have been imper- 
 fectly understood, — adding some new notes, partly for the 
 purpose of enlarged illustration, partly to defend certain 
 opinions which had been called in question. The greater 
 number of these alterations have been made in Chapters 
 XVI. and XXI. of Part I., and in Chapter VI. of Part 11. 
 
 I trust that these three Chapters, more full of speculation, 
 and therefore more open to criticism than any of the others, 
 will thus appear in a more complete and satisfactory form. 
 But I must at the same time add that they remain for the 
 most part unchanged in substance, and that I have seen no 
 sufficient reason to modify my main conclusions even respect- 
 ing the structure of the Hiad, controverted though they have 
 been by some of my most esteemed critics. 
 
 In regard to the character and peculiarity of Grecian le 
 gend, as broadly distinguished throughout these volumes from 
 Grecian history, I desire to notice two valuable publications 
 
21^ PBEFACB. 
 
 with ^hich I have only become acquainted since the date of 
 my first edition. One of these is, A Short Essay on Primae- 
 val History, by JohnKenrick,M. A. (London, 1846, publish- 
 ed just at the same time as these volumes,) which illustrates 
 mth much acute reflection the general features of legend, 
 not only in Greece but throughout the ancient world, — see 
 especially pages 63, 84, 92, et seq. The other work is, 
 Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, by Colonel 
 Sleeman, — first made known to me through an excellent no- 
 ttee of my History in the Edinburgh Review for October 1846. 
 The description given by Colonel Sleeman, of the state of 
 mind now actually prevalent among the native population of 
 Hindostan, presents a vivid comparison, helping the modern 
 reader to understand and appreciate the legendary era of 
 Greece. I have embodied in the notes of this Second Edi- 
 tion two or three passages from Colonel Sleeman's instruc- 
 tive work : but the whole of it richly deserves perusal. 
 
 Having now finished six volumes of this History, without 
 attaining a lower point than the peace of Nikias, in the tenth 
 year of the Peloponnesian war, — I find myself compelled to 
 retract the expectation held out in the preface to my First 
 Edition, that the entire work might be completed in eight 
 volumes. Experience proves to me how impossible it is to 
 measure beforehand the space which historical subjects will 
 require. All I can now promise is, that the remainder of the 
 work shall be executed with as much regard to brevity as is 
 consistent with the paramount duty of rendering it fit for 
 pablio acceptance. 
 
 London, April 3, IMV 
 
 KAMES OF GODS, GODDESSES, AND HEROBS> 
 
 Following the example :f Dr. Thirlwall and other exoeUenl 
 scholars, I call the Greek deities by their real Greek names, and 
 not by the Latin equivalents used among the Romans. For the 
 assistance of those readers to whom the Greek names may be leas 
 fejniliar, I here annex a table of the one apd the other. 
 
 Greek. 
 
 Tdttin. 
 
 Zeus, 
 
 Jupiter. 
 
 Posexddn, 
 
 Keptune. 
 
 Ares, 
 
 Mars. 
 
 Dionysus, 
 
 Bacchus. 
 
 Hermes, 
 
 Mercury. 
 
 Helios, 
 
 Sol. 
 
 Hephsestoa, 
 
 Vulcan. 
 
 Hades, 
 
 Pluto. 
 
 mrs, 
 
 Juno. 
 
 Athen^ 
 
 Minerva. 
 
 Artemis, 
 
 Diana. 
 
 Aphroditi, 
 
 Venus. 
 
 Eos, 
 
 Aurora. 
 
 Hestia, 
 
 Vesta. 
 
 Leto, 
 
 Latona. 
 
 Deraet^r, 
 
 Ceres. 
 
 HeraklSs, 
 
 Hercules. 
 
 Asklepius, 
 
 ^sculapius. 
 
 A few words are here necessary respecting the orthografAy 
 01 Greek names adopted in the above table and generally througb* 
 oui this history. I have approximated as nearly as I dared to 
 the Greek letters in preference to the Latin ; and on this point I 
 venture upon an innovation which I should have little doubt of 
 vindicating before the reason of any candid English student Foi 
 the ordinary practice of substituting, in a Greek name, the English 
 C in place of the Greek K, is, indeed, so obviously incorrect, that 
 
k adniHs of no rational .ustification. Our own K, piecisely and 
 in every point, coincides with the Greek K : we have thus the 
 means of reproducing the Greek name to the eye as well as to 
 the ear, yet we gratuitously take the wrong letter in preference 
 to the ri<rht. And the precedent of the Latins is here against ua 
 rather than in our favor, for their C really coincided in sound 
 with the Greek K, whereas our C entirely departs from it, and 
 becomes an S, before e, z, ^, «, and y. Though our C has so far 
 deviated in sound from the Latin C, yet there is some warrant 
 for our continuing to use it in writing Latin names, — because we 
 thns reproduce the name to the eye, though not to the ear. But 
 this is not the case when we employ our C to designate the Greek 
 K, for we depart here n. i less from the visible tiian from the audi- 
 ble original ; while we mar the unrivalled euphony of the Greek 
 language by that multiplied sibilation which constitutes the least 
 invUing feature in our own. Among German i)hilologists, the K 
 is now universally employed in writing Greek names, and I have 
 adopted it pretty largely in this work, maki.ig exception for such 
 names as the English reader has been so accustomed to hear with 
 the C, that they may be considered as being almost Anglicised. 
 I have, farther, marked the long e and the long o (//, oo,) by • 
 circumflex (Here) when they occur in the last syllable or in th* 
 penultimate of a name. 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 VOL. L 
 
 PART I. 
 
 LEGENDARY GREBOB, 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 LEGENDS BE8PECTING THE OODS 
 
 fiDeiiine of the mythical world. — How the mythes aie to be <^— ^ 
 *^m?elyadmis8ible.-Zeus-foremost in Grman concepdo^Tta 
 loSs - how conceived : human type enlarged. - Past lustory of the godi 
 K on to present conceptions. - Chao«— G«a and Um°o«-Jg«°JJ 
 disabled -ICronos and the Titans. - Kronos overreached. - Birth and 
 SSety of Zens and his brethren. -Other deities^- Ambmoussch^^^^^^ 
 Xem— Victoiv of Zeus and his brethren over Kronos and the Titans. - 
 Tvph6eus - Dynasty of Zeus. - His offspring. - General di«tnbation of 
 theSe race.-Hesiodic theogonv-its authority. - Points of diff^ 
 ^ce be^een Homer and Hesiod. - ^omeric Zeus. - Amphhed th^^^ 
 of Zeus -Hesiodic mythes traceable to Krete and I^elphL -- ^."^^ 
 SeoVony. -- Zeus and Phanes. - Zagxeus - Comparison of Hesicd an^ 
 OrXus^- Influence of foreign religions upon Greece -^spe^^^^Jj 
 fo^r^gard to the worship of D6m6t^r and ^ 9"^^:- "f ^Vfa^ 
 homicide unknown to Homer. -New and peculiar religious "^8.- C»^ 
 cuUted by voluntary teachers and promis ng «P;^i,^» Messing.. -^^^^ 
 nides, Sibylla, Bakis. - Principal mysteries <^f ^reje --- Lcstat c ntet 
 introduced from Asia 700-500 b. c. - Connected with the worship of 
 T)Snnvsos — Thracian and Egyptian influence upon Greece. — Encouj 
 E^ement io mysTlegends. -lelampus the earliest name as teacher of 
 AeD^nvsi^c^ rites - Orphic sect, a variety of the Dionysiac mystocs.- 
 ConS^rof tL my;terieB^th the Homeric Hymns -Hymn to Diorg. 
 Jis.- Alteration of the primitive Grecian idea of DK>nysos- 
 frpnrv trrafted on the ioviality of the Grecian Dionysia. — Ji^leusinian mn' 
 te- Homeric H^^^^^ to h^m^t&r. - Temple of Eleusis, built by or^cf 
 nf Dimeter for her residence.— Dem§ter prescribes the mystic ntual of 
 EleusT- HomeX^^^^^^^^ a sacred EleusiSian record, explanaloiy of t^ 
 SS of ih^Trervici- Importance of the mpt^riesto^e toW 
 Seusifl. ^ Strong hold of the legend opon Eleusmian feehnga. - JhSm- 
 
1 
 
 twm 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 ent legends respecting I (^met)§r elsewhere. — Expansion of the legends. -= 
 Hellenic importance of Demeter.— Legends of Apollo. — Del ian Apolla 
 
 Pythian Apollo. — Foundation legends of the Delphian oracle. — Th^ 
 
 served the purpose of historical explanation. — Extended worship ot 
 Apollo. — Multifarious l.jcal legends respecting Apollo. — Festivals and 
 Agones. — State of mind and circumstances out of which Grecian mvthea 
 arose. — Discrepancies in the legends little noticed. — Aphrodite. — Athen^ 
 
 Artemis. — Poseidon. — Stories of temporary servitude imposed on 
 
 gods. — Here. — Hephaes.os. — Hestia. — Hermes. — Hermes inventor of 
 the lyre. — Bargain between Hermes and Apollo. — Expository value of 
 the Hvmn. — Zeus. — Mythes arising out of the religious ceremonies. — 
 Smallpart of the animal sacrificed. — Prometheus had outwitted Zeus.— 
 Gods, heroes, and men. appear together in the mythes pages 1-64 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 CBGKND8 KKLATING TO HEROES AND MEIT. 
 
 of men as thev appear in the Hesiodic ** Works and Dajrs." — Tb» 
 Golden. — The Silver. — The Brazen. — The Heroic— The Iron.— 
 Different both from the Theogony and from Homer — Explanation of 
 this difference. — Ethical vein of sendment. — Intersected by the mjlk- 
 ical. — The "* Works and Dajrs," earliest did^-'tic poem. — First Introdao- 
 tion of daemons. — Changes in the idea of daemons. — Employed in 
 attacks on the pagan faitli. — Functions of the Hesiodic daemons. — Per* 
 ffonal feeling which pervades the " Works and Days." — Probable age of 
 the poem 64-78 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 LEGEND OF THE IAPETID8. 
 
 bpetids in Hesiod. — Prometheus and Epimetheus. — Counter-manoeuvring 
 of Prometheus and Zeus. — Pandora. — Pandora in the Theogony.— 
 General feeling of the poet. — Man wretched, but Zeus not to blame. — 
 Mischiefs arising from women. — Punishment of Prometheus. — The 
 Prometheus of ^Eschylus. — Locality in which Prometheus was con- 
 fined 73-80 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 HEROIC LEGENDS. — GENEALOGY OF ABOUS- 
 
 Btrnctiire and purposes of Grecian genealogies. — To connect the Greciam 
 communitv with their common god. — Lower members of the genealogy 
 historical —higher members non -historical. — The non-historical portion 
 equally believed, and most valued by the Greeks. — Number of such gen- 
 ealogies — pervading every fraction of Greeks. — Argeian genealop'. — 
 Inachus. — Phoroneus. — Argos Panoptes. — 16. — Romance of 16 his- 
 tfaoricized by Persians and Phoenicians. — Legendary abductions of hero 
 ises adapted to the feelings prevalent during the Persian war. — Danaoi 
 Mid the I>anaTde8. — Acrisios and Prostos. — The Proetides cured of frenrj 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 BtB 
 
 m Mclam pus. — Acrisios, Danae, and Zeus.— Perseus and the Gorgons. 
 
 — Foundation of Mycenae — commencement of Perseid djiiasry. — Ara- 
 phitrvon, Alkmene. Sthenelos. — Zeus and Alkmene. — Birth of U«rakl6fl. 
 
 — Homeric legend of his birth : its expository value. — TLe Herakleidf 
 expelled. — Their recovery of Peloponnesus and establishment in Ajgos, 
 Sparta, and Messenia 80-95 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 DKUKALION. HELLEN, AND 80N8 OF HELLKH. 
 
 Denkalion, son of Prometheus. — Phthiotis : his permanent seat. — General 
 deluge. — Salvation of Deukalion and Pyrrha. — Belief in this deluge 
 throughout Greece. — Hellen and Amphiktyon.— Sons of Hellen : Ddrna, 
 Xnthus, iEolus. — Amphiktyonic assembly. — Common solemnities and 
 games —Division of Hellas: .Sk)lians, Dorians, lonians. — Large extent 
 of Doris implied in this genealogy —This form of the legend harmonizes 
 with the great establishments of the historical Dorians. — Ach«as — 
 Durnose which his name serves in the legend. — Genealogical divcrsi- 
 IL- 96-105 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE .SOLIDS, OR RONS AND DAUGHTERS OF JSOLUS. 
 
 ItJgcnds of Greece, originally isolated, afterwards thrown into scries. — JBo- 
 \us — His seven sons and five daughters. — 1. First jEM line — SiUmft- 
 ■ens.Tyr6.-Pelias and Neleus. — PSro, Bias, and Melampns. -- Pen 
 klymenos. -Nestor and his exploits. - ^eleids down ^ Kodrus.- 
 ^d yEolid line - Kretheus. - Admetus and Alcestis - P^leus and th6 
 wife of Acastus.— Pelias and Jason. — Jason and Medea— Medea aX 
 Connth.— Third jEolid /me — Sisyphus. — Corinthian genealogy of 
 Eumelus. — Coalescence of different legends about Medea and Sisyphuj. 
 
 — Bellerophon. — FourtA ^did /inc — Athamas. — Phryxus and Hell^ 
 
 — In6 and Pal cemon — Isthmian games. — Local root of the legend of 
 Athamas — Traces of ancient human sacrifices. — Athamas m the dijr 
 trict near Orchomenos. - Eteokles - festival of the Charitesia -Found- 
 ation and greatness of Orchomenos. — Overthrow by Herakles and tha 
 Thebans. — Trophonius and Agamedes. — Ascalaphos and lalmenos.— 
 Discrepancies in the Orchomenian genealogy. — Probable mferences a« 
 to the ante-historical Orchomenos. - Its early wealth and industry.^ 
 Emissaries of the lake Kopats. - Old Amphiktyony at Kalauna. -"5?^ he 
 menos and Thebes. - Alcyone and Keyx.-Canace. - The Aloids — 
 Calved. — Elis and iEtolia. — Eleian genealogy. — Augeas^ — The Moho- 
 nid brothers. — Variations in the Eleian genealogy. — ^tolian genealogy. 
 
 ^ (Enens, Meleager, Tydeus. — Legend of Meleager in Homer. — How 
 altered by the poets after Homer. - Althaea and the burnmg brand. - 
 Grand Kalvd6nian boar-hunt — Atalanta. — Relics of the boar long pre- 
 served at ^egea. — Atalanta vanquished in Ae race by stratagem^ 
 Ddlneira. - Death of Hferakl^s. - Tydens— Old age of ^^^'^ -^ 
 crepant genealogies iud-iw 
 
^ 
 
 cxiifTEirra 
 
 •Rt lifvadt r«ip«FUiiff f laillr alMwhere. — SxpanMion of the lofifpnds. ~ 
 HHIenk lm|M>rt«nrt! of I Hl Biltl.— Leicendii of A|»ollu — DelUn A|»olla 
 mm, |*ythi»n A|Milln. — Foun<(UitkM lefMid« nA the l>el|)hian oracle. — - Fh^ 
 •emi th<> |iur|M>M« of historical explanation. — Kxtended worship of 
 Apollo.* Multifariuuii loonl Uv^mU rp«(»ectin(r Apollo.— Festivals and 
 AffAmw. — Hlole of min<l and cinumdunc es out of which Grei ian mvthet 
 MtMc. — ItiiirtMlliriri in thu l«i«ndii little noticed. — Aphrodit£. ^ Ath^nA 
 — Artemiit — PoaeldAo — Stone* of t«nii>orary tervitude imposed on 
 mAi. — HenV - - HAph««loi. — Haatia. — Henn^i — Hermes inventor of 
 Bie lyre.- Baraain Imiween Hermte and Apollo. — Kxpohitory value of 
 Ibe itymn — J^eoH. — Mjrtliea arisinfc out of the religious ceremonies.— 
 ftmalloart of the animal sacrificed — Prometheus had outwitted Zeus.— 
 Ood«, heroen, and men. ap))«ar together in the roythei y*jufn l-«4 
 
 CHAPTEH II. 
 
 I.BOBND8 1IBL4TINO TO HRROBS AND MBlf. 
 
 of men a* thev appear in the Hesiodic '* Works and Days.* — Tha 
 Golden. — The Silver — The Brazen. — The Heroic— The Iron — 
 IMflferent ^»oth from the Theojfony and from Homer — Explanation of 
 this difference. — Ethical vein of sentiment. — Intersected by the myth 
 
 leal. The " Works and Days," earliest did- -tic poem. — First Introdac- 
 
 tion of daemons. — Changes in the idea of dwmons. — Employed in 
 attnrks on the na^'an faith. — Functions of the Hesiodic daemons. — Per- 
 #onul feeling which pervades the " Works and Days.** — Probable »ge of 
 the poem • 64-73 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 LBOKND OF THB lAPBTIDft. 
 
 haetlds in Hesiod — Prome^theus and Epim^theus. — Counter-manceuvring 
 of Prometheus and Zeus — Pandora. — Pandora in the Theogony. — 
 General feeling of the poet — Man wretched, but Zeus not to blame.— 
 Mischiefs arising from women. — Punishment of Prometheus. — Tho 
 Prometheus of Aschylus. — Locality in which Prometheus was con- 
 
 ; 73-dO 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 ■BBOIC LBOBKD8. — OENBALOOT OF ABOUt. 
 
 . jctnre and purposes of Grecian genealogies. — To connect the GreciaB 
 community with their comraon god. — Lower members of the genealogy 
 historical — higher members non-historica!. — The non-historical portion 
 equally believed, and most valued by the Greeks —Number of such gen« 
 •alogies — pervading every fraction 'of Greeks — Argeian genealogy. — 
 Inachos,— Phor6neus. — Argos Panopt§s. — lo. — Romance of lo hia- 
 thoriciaed by Persians and Phoenicians. — Legendary abductions of hero 
 iMt BdBpted to the feelings prevalent daring the Persian war. — Danaof 
 wmA ^ePanaides. — Acriwy and Pnaloa. — The Proetides cored of freniri 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Bis 
 
 oy Mclnmpns. — Acrisios, Danae, and Zens. — Perscns and the Gorgons. 
 
 — Fotindation of Mycenae —commencement of Perseid dyiiasry. — Am- 
 phitryon, Alkmene, Sthenelos. — Zeus and Alkmenfi. — Birth of Ulraklds. 
 
 — Homeric legend of his birth : its expository value. — The Herakleidi 
 expelled. — Their recovery of Peloponn&jus and establishment in Argos, 
 Sparta, and Messenia 8(>-95 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 DBDKALION. ILRLLEN, AND SONS OF HELLBN. 
 
 Denkalion, son of Prometheus. — Phthiotis : his permanent seat. — General 
 deluge. — Salvation of Deukalion and Pyrrha. — Belief in this deluge 
 throughout Greece. — Hellen and Amphiktyon. — Sons of Hellen : Doras, 
 Xuthus, iEolus. — Amphiktyonic assembly. — Common solemnities and 
 games. — Division of Hellas : JEolians, Dorians, lonians. — Large extent 
 of Doris implied in this genealogy — This form of the legend harmonizes 
 with the great establishments of the historical Dorians. — Ach^eus — 
 purpose which his name serves in the legend. — Genealogical divcrsi- 
 Hm.. %-lOft 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE JCOLID8, OR SONS AND DAUOHTBRS OF iBOLUB. 
 
 Lsgends of Greece, originally isolated, afterwards thrown into scries. — Miy 
 las. — His seven sons and five daughters. — 1. First ^ciid line — Salm6- 
 Beas. Tyro. — Pelias and Nfileus. — PSro, Bias, and Melampos. — Peri 
 klymenos. — Nestor and his exploits. — Neleids down to Kodrus.— 
 Second AHolid Hue — Kretheas. — Adm^tus and Alcestis. — Pdleos and th€ 
 wife of Acastus. — Pelias and Jason.— Jason and Medea. — Medea at 
 Corinth. — r^irJ ^did line — Sisyphus. — Corinthian genealogy of 
 Eumelus. — Coalescence of different legends about Medea and Sisjrphoa. 
 — Bellerophon. — Fourth jEolid line — Athamas. — Phryxus and HellA 
 
 Ino and Palaemon — Isthmian games. — Local root of the legend of 
 
 Athamas. — Traces of ancient hnman sacrifices. — Athamas in the dii- 
 trict near Orchomenos. — Eteokles — festival of the Charitesia. — Found- 
 ation and greatness of Orchomenos. — Overthrow by Herakles and the 
 Thebans. — Trophonius and Agamedes. — Ascalaphos and lalmenos.— 
 Discrepancies in the Orchomenian genealo^. — Probable inferences ae 
 to the ante-historical Orchomenos. — Its early wealth and industry.— 
 Emissaries of the lake Kopals. — Old Amphiktyony at Kalauria. — Orcho. 
 menos and Thebes. — Alcyong and Keyx. — Canace. — The Aloids.— 
 Calyc^. — Elis and JEtolia. — Eleian genealogy. — Augeas. — The Molio* 
 nid brothers. — Variations in the Eleian genealogy. — -Sltolian genealogy. 
 - CEnens, Meleager, Tvdeus. — Legend of Meleager in Homer. — How 
 altered by the poets after Homer. — Althaea and the burning brand. — 
 Grand Kalvdonian boar-bant — Atalanta. — Relics of the boar long pre- 
 served at ^egea. — Atalanta vanquished in the race by stratagem.— 
 Deianeira. — Death of H6r«kl68. — Tydens. — Old age of OEneo* — Dit> 
 crepant genealogies lOfr-IM 
 
 I 
 
^ COHTKimL 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THJI PBLOPIOa. 
 
 Misfortmies md celebrity of tlie Pelopids. — Pelops — eponjm of Pfeiopoo- 
 n&^us — Deduction of the »ceptre of Pelopa. — Kingly attribntes of the 
 family — Homeric Pclops. — Lydia, Pisa, ctc^ post-Horaeric additions 
 — Tantalus.— Niobfi. — Pelops and CEnomaus, king of Pisa. — Charid 
 rictory of Pelops — his principality at Pisa. — Atreus, Thy estes, Chry- 
 sippoa. — Family horrors aroong the Pelopids. — Agamemnon and Mene- 
 laoM —Orestes. — The goddess Here and Mykdnae. — Legendary impor- 
 tance of MykSnae. — Its deoline coincident with the rise of Argos and 
 Sparta. — Agamemnon and Orestto transferred to Sparta 153-167 
 
 CHAPTER Vin. 
 
 LACOHIAN AND MBSSEITIAN OBHEALOOIE8. 
 
 I^lex — antochthonoas in Laf)dnia. — Tindarons and Leda. — Offspring of 
 Leda. — 1. Castor, Timandi-a, Klytaeranestra, 2. Pollux, Helen. — Casta 
 and Pollux. — Legend of the Attic Dekeleia.— luas and Lynkeus.— 
 Great functions and dowcj- of the DioscturL — Messenian genealogy.— 
 Perieres— Idas and Marpessa 168-171 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 ARCADIAN OENEALOOT. 
 
 PWasgas. — Lykaon and his fifty sons. — Legend of Lykaon — ferocity 
 punished by the gods. — Deep religious faith of Pausamas. — His view 
 of past and present world. — Kallisto and Areas. — Azan, Apheidas, 
 Elatus. - Aleus, Auge, Telephus. — Anc«ns. - Echeraus. - Echeraiw 
 kills Hyllus.— Herakleids repelled from Peloponnesus. — Coroms and 
 Asklepius. — Extended worship of Asklepius — numerous legends.— 
 Macha6n and Podaleirius. ~ Numerous Asklepiads, or descendants from 
 Asklepius. — Temples of Aiklepius —sick persons healed there . . 1 73-183 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 JBAKUS AND HIS DE8CBSDANT8. — iiSOlNA, 9ALAMI8, AND PHTHIA. 
 
 «aku8 — son of Zeus and JSgina.— Offspring of -^-a^us — Pcleus Tela 
 mon, Phokus. - Prayers of JEakus - procure relief for Greece — Phokos 
 killed bv P^leus and Tclanion. — Telamon, banished, goes to balamis. — 
 Pfileas — goes to Phthia — his marriage with Thetis. — Neoptol^ns. — 
 i^ax, his son Philaus the eponymous hero of a deme m Attica. — 1 eukrjl 
 banished, setUes in Cyprus. — Diffusion of the ^Eacid genealogy 184-190 
 
 * 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 ▲mo LEOHXD8 AND OENBAXOOIBS. 
 
 ilKhtheas — autochthonous. — Attic legends — originally from different 
 roots —each d€me had its own. — Little noticed by the oM epic poft^ 
 Kekrop8. — Kranau8 — Paiidi6n.— Daughters of Pandion — Procn€, Phi 
 
 CONTENTB. 
 
 lomdla. — Legend of Threes. — Daughters of Brechtlieas — Piokris.— 
 
 Kreiisa. — Oreithyia, the wife of Boreas. — Prayers of the Athenians :o 
 Boreas — his gracious help in their danger. — Erechtheus and Eumolpas 
 
 — Voluntary self-sacrifice of the three daughters of Erechtheus. — hie- 
 Qsa and Ion. — Sons of Pandion — ^geus, etc. — Theseus. — His legend- 
 ary character refined. — Plutarch — his way of handling the matter of 
 legend. — Legend of the Amazons. — Its antiquity and prevalence. — 
 Glorious achievements of the Amazons. — Their ubiquity. — Universally 
 received as a portion of the Greek past. — Amazons produced as present 
 by the historians of Alexander. — Conflict of faith and reason in the his- 
 torical critics 191-217 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 " KBBTAN LEOEND8. — MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 Ifinos and Rhadamanthus, sons of Zeus. — Europe. — Pasiphad and the 
 Minotaur. — Scylla and Nisus. — Death of Androgoos, and anger of Mindf 
 against Athens. — Athenian victims for the Minotaur. — Self-devotion of 
 Theseus — he kills the Minotaur. — Athenian commemorative ceremonies. 
 
 — Family of Minos. — Minos and Da;dalus — flight of the latter to 
 Sicily. — Minos goes to retake him, but is killed. — Semi-KrStan ^ttle- 
 ments elsewhere — connected with this voyage of Minds. — Sufferings of 
 the Kretans afterwards from the wrath of Minos. — Portrait of Minds — 
 bow varied. — Affinity between Krete and Asia Minor 21^SM 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ARGONAUTIO EXPEDITION. 
 
 Bhip Arf^ in the Odyssey. — In Hesiod and EumSlns. — Jason and hii 
 heroic companions. — Lemnus. — Adventures at Kyzikus, in Bithyniai 
 etc. — Herakles and Hylas. — Phineus. — Dangers of the Symplegades. - 
 Arrival at Kolchis. — Conditions imposed by M^t&s as the price of the 
 golden fleece. — Perfidy of Metes — flight of the Argonauts and Medea 
 with the fleece. — Pursuit of JE^tes — toe Argonauts saved by Medea. — 
 Return of the Argonauts — circuitous and perilous. — Numerous and 
 wide-spread monaments referring to the voyage. — Argonautic legend 
 p^enerally. — Fabulous geography — gradually modified as real geograph- 
 ical knowledge increased. — Transposition of epical localities. — How 
 and when the Argonautic voyage became attached to Kolchis. — .£et£i 
 and Circe. — Return of the Argonauts — different versions. — Continued 
 fiuth in the voyage — basis of truth determined by Strabo 231-251 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 LBOBND8 OF THBBBB. 
 
 Abundant legends of Thebes. — Amphion and Zethus, Homeric founders ol 
 Kadmus and Boeotus — both distinct legends. — Thebes. — How Thibet 
 was founded by Kadmus. — Five primitive families at Thebes called 
 Sparti. — The four d'aughters of Kadmus: 1. Ino; 2. Semele; 3. Au- 
 tono^ and her son Actaeon j 4. Agave and her son Pentheus. — He resists 
 the god Dionysus — his miserable end. — Labdakus, AntiopS, Amphido, 
 and ZSthos. — Laius — CEdipns — Legendary celebrity of CEdipas and hif 
 nmily. — The Sphinx. — EteokUt and F61yiiik«a.— Old epic poems oc 
 the sieges of Thdbes S56-96t 
 
 A. 
 
dfi 
 
 COKTEMTa 
 
 MBGS8 OF THXBBft 
 
 Oorse ]>ronoanced hy the devoted CEdipiu apon Ui tooi. — Novelties inlTO' 
 daced by ScTphokles. — DeAtb of CBdipoH — q««rel of Eteokl^s and Poly- 
 nikes for the sceptre. — Poljnikes retires to Argot — aid given to him bf 
 Adrastos. — Amphiarftos and EriphjlS. — Seven cfaiefis of the army against 
 Thebes. — Defeat of the Thebans in the field — heroic devotion o? Me 
 Boekeas. — Single combat of Eteokles and Polyiiik^ in which both perish. 
 — Repulse and destruction of the Argean chiefe — all except Adrastus — 
 AmphiariLus is swallowed up in the earth. — Kreoii, kin^ of ThSbes, forbids 
 the burial of Polynikes and the other fallen Argeian' chiefs. — Devotion 
 and death of Antigonfi. — l^he Athenians interfere to procure the interment 
 of the fallen chiefs. — Second siege of Thebes by Adrastus with the Epi- 
 goni, or sons of those slain in the first — Victory of the Epigoni — cap- 
 ture of Thebes. — Worship of Adrastus at Sikyon — how abrogated by 
 Kleisthenes. — Alkmseon — his matricide and punishment — Fatal neck 
 kceof Eriphyle 269-884 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 LEOEITD OF TROT. 
 
 Qnat extent and variety <^ the tale of Troy. — Dardanns, son of Zens.— 
 Bus, founder of Ilium. — Walls of Ilion built by Poseidon. — Capture of 
 Biam by Herakles. — Priam and his offspring. — Paris — his judgment 
 on the three goddesses. — Carries off^ Helen from Sparta. — Expeditioa 
 of the Greeks to recover her. — Heroes from all parts of Greece com 
 bined under Agamemnon. — Achilles and Odysseus. — The Grecian host 
 mistakes Teuthrania for Troy — Telephus. — Detention of the Greeks at 
 Xalig — Agamemnon and Iphigeneia. — First success of the Greeks on 
 landing near Troy. — BrisSis awarded to Achilles. — Palam§d§8 — his 
 genius, and treacherous death. — Epic chronology — historicized. — Period 
 of the Homeric Iliad. — Hector killed by Achilles. — New allies of Troy — 
 Penthesileia. — Memmon — killed by Achilles. — Death of Achilles. — 
 Funeral games celebrated iin honor of him. — Quarrel about his oanoply. 
 
 — Odysseus prevails and Ajax kills himself. — Philoktet^ and Neoptci- 
 emus. — Capture of the Palladium. — The wooden horse. — Destruction 
 of Troy. — Distribution of ihe captives among the victors. — Helen restored 
 to Menelaus — lives in dignity at Sparta — passes to a happy immor» 
 telity. — Blindness and cure of the poet Stesichorus — alteration of the 
 legend about Helen. — Eg y-ptian tale about Helen — tendency to histor- 
 Idze. — Return of the Greeks from Troy. — Their sufferings — anger of 
 fha gods. — Wanderings of the heroes in all directions. — Memorials of 
 tfiem throughout the Grecian world. — Odysseus — his final adventnres 
 and deaUi. — ^neas and his descendants. — Different stories about ^neas. 
 
 — Mneadsd at Skepsis. — IJbiquity of ^neas. — Antenor. — Tale of Troy 
 
 — its magnitude and discretpancies. — Trojan war — essentially legendaiy 
 
 — its importance as an item in Grecian national faith. — Basis of histoi^ 
 Im* it — possible, and nothing more. — Historicizing innovations — Dio 
 Oirysostom. — Historical Ilium. — Grenerally received and visited as the 
 town of Priam. — Respect shown to it by Alexander. — Successors <rf 
 Alexander — foundation of Alexandreia Tf rdas. — The Romans — treat 
 Biam with marked respect. — Mythical legitimacy of Blum — first called 
 ll question by D€metrins of Skepsis and Hestiaa. — Supposed Old Ilium, 
 or real Troy, distinguished flx)m New Binm. — Strabo alone believes in 
 QH Binm aa tfam real Tnj — other antfaors coatinae in the old fiuth- 
 
 coirrENTs. 
 
 Ilie modems follow Strabo. — The mythical foith not shaken by topo 
 
 graphical impossibilities. — Historical troas and the Teukrians Am 
 
 Greeks in the Troad — the whole territory gradually ^Eolized. — Old if atn. 
 and long prevalence of the worship of Apollo Sminthius. — Asiatic ens- 
 toms and religion — blended with Hellenic. — Sibylline prophecies. — Set- 
 tlements from Mileteus, Mitylene, and Athens 984-.'U0. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 OBBOIAN MTTHES, AS UNDBR8TOOD, FELT, AND INTERPRETED BY THE 
 
 GREEKS THEMSELyES 
 
 The mythes formed the entire mental stock of the early Greeks. — State of 
 mind out of which they arose. — Tendency to uniyersal personification. -^ 
 Absence of positive knowledge — supplied by personifying faith. — Mul- 
 titude and variety of quasi-human personages'. — What we read aa poeti- 
 cal fan«ie?, were to the Greeks serious realities. — The gods and heroes ^ 
 their chief agency cast back into the past, and embodied in the mythes. — 
 Marked and manifold types of the Homeric gods. — Stimulus which they 
 afforded to the mythopoeic faculty. — Easy faith in popular and plausible 
 stories. — Poets — receive their matter from the divine inspiration ofnhe 
 Muse. — Meaning of the word mythe — original — altered. — Matter of 
 actual history — uninteresting to early Greeks. — Mythical faith and reli- 
 gious point of view — paramount in the Homeric age. — Gradual develop- 
 ment of the scientific point of view — its opposition to the religious. 
 
 Mythopoeic age — anterior to this dissent. — Expansive force of Grecian 
 intellect. — Transition towards positive and present fact — The poet be- 
 comes the organ of present time instead of past. — Iambic, elegiac, and 
 lyric poets. — Influence of the opening of Egypt to Grecian commerce, 
 B. c. 660. — Progress — historical, geographical, social — from that period 
 to B. c. 500. — Altered standard of judgment, ethical and intellectual. — 
 Commencement of physical science — Thalls, Xenophanes, Pythagoraa. 
 — Impersonal nature conceived as an object of study. — Opposition be- 
 tween scientific method and the religious feeling of the* multitude. — How 
 dealt with by different philosophers. — Socrates. — Hippocrates. — Anax- 
 agoras.— Contrasted with Grecian religious belief. — Treatment of So 
 crates by the Athenians. — Scission between the superior men and the 
 multitude — important in reference to the mythes. — The mythes accom- 
 modated to a new tone of feeling and judgment — The poets and logo- 
 graphers. — Pindar. — Tragic poets. — ^chylus and Sophokles. — Ten 
 dencies of ^schylus in regard to the old legends. — He maintains undi- 
 minished the grandeur of the mythical world. — Euripides — accused of 
 vulgarizing the mythical heroes, and of introducing exaggerated pathos, 
 refinement, and rhetoric. — The logographers — PherekydSs, etc.— Heka- 
 tiBus — the mythes rationalized. -— The historians — Herodotus. — Earnest 
 piety of Herodotus — his mystic reserve. — His views of the mythical 
 worid. — His deference for Egypt and Egyptian statements. — His general 
 mith in the mythical heroes and eponyms' — yet combined with scepticism 
 ■B to matters of fact. — His remarks' upon the miraculous foundation of 
 the oracle at Dodona. — His remarks upon Melampus and his prophetic 
 powers. -— His remarks upon the Thessalian legend of Tempe. — Alle- 
 gorical interpretation of the mythes — more and more esteemed and 
 applied.- Divine legends allegorized. — Heroic legends historicized.— 
 limiits to this interpreting process. — Distinction between gods and d» 
 mons — altered and widened by EmpedoclAs. — Admission of dsmoni ai 
 partially evil beings — effect of such admission. — Semi-historical inter 
 
COVTEVrCk 
 
 EloB — mtoMmt Wflldi h can acoooiplish. — Some poritive cettiflc > 
 ensable as a coDstitoent of historical proof — mere popular hUk 
 dent — Mistake of ascribing to an anrecording age the historic^ 
 tense of modem times. — Matter of tradition uncertified from the banning. 
 
 — Fictitiotis matter of tradition does not implj fraud or imjKMture- •— 
 Plausible fiction often generated and accredited by ihe mere force of *itroag 
 and corimon sentiment;, even in times of instruction. — Allegoncal theory 
 of the mvthes — traced by some up to an ancient priestly caste. — R^ 
 import or the mythes supposed to he preserved in the religious mysteries. 
 
 — Supposed ancient meaning is really a modem interpretation. — Triple 
 theolo^ of the pagan world. Treatment and use of the mythes according 
 to Plato. — His views as to the necessity and use of fiction. — He deals 
 with the mythes as expressions of feeling and imagination — sustained by 
 religious faith, and not by any positive basis. — Grecian antiquitjr esssen- 
 tially a religious conception. — Application of chronological calculation 
 divests it of this charticter. — Mythioal genealogies all of one class, and 
 all on a level in respect to evidence. — Grecian and Egyptian genealogies. 
 
 — Value of each is purely subjective, having especial reference to the nith 
 of the people. — Gods and men undistinguishable in Grecian antiquity. — • 
 General recapitulation. — General public of Greece — familiar with ^dr 
 local mythes, careless of recent history. — Religious festivals — their cofl^ 
 memorative influence. — Variety and universality of mythical relics. — 
 The mythes in their bearing on Grecian art. -^ Tendency of works of art 
 Id intensify the mythioil faith 340-461 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 TBB OBBCIAH MYTHICAL TSIH COMPABED WITH THAT OF MODSBV 
 
 ■DROPE. 
 
 |flN9o(- — Sage — an universal manifestation of the human mind. — Ana]<^ 
 of the Grermans and Celts with the Greeks. — Differences between them. 
 
 — Grecian poetry matchless. — Grecian progress self-operated. — German 
 progress brought about by violent influences from without. — Operation of 
 the Roman civilization and of Christianity upon the (nimitive derman 
 mythes. — Alteration in the mythical genealogies — Odin and the other 
 
 SkIs degraded into mctn. — Grecian Paganism — what would have beeo 
 e case, if it had been supplanted by Christianity in 500 b. c — Saxc 
 Grammaticus and SnoiTO Stnrleson contrasted with Pherekydes and Hel- 
 lanikus. — Mythopceic tendencies in modem Europe still subsisting, but 
 forced into a new channel : 1. Saintly ideal; 2. Chivalrous ideal. ^Le- 
 gends of the Saints — their analogy with the Homeric theology. — Chiv- 
 Alrous ideal — Romances of Charlemagne and Arthur. — Accepted as re- 
 alities of the fore-time. — Teutonic and Scandavian epic — its analogy 
 with the Grecian. — Heroic character and self-expanding subject common 
 to both. — Points of distinction between the two — epic of the Middle Ages 
 neither stood so completely alone, nor was so closely interwoven with reU- 
 gion, as the Grecian. — History of England — how conceived down to the 
 seventeenth century — began with Brute the Trojan. — Earnest and tena* 
 dons f lith manifested ia the defence of this early history. — Judgment of 
 Milton. — Standard of historical evidence — raised in regrad to England 
 -not raised in regarl to Greece. — Miltcm's way of dealing with the 
 British fabulous history objectionable. — Two ways open of dealing with 
 tfie Grecian mythes : 1 , to omit them ; or, 2, to recount them as mytheft 
 
 — KeascMis for preferring the latter.— « Triple partition of paat time by 
 
 "" 4«i-4aa 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 GREECE 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 B'ontispiece^^^K.xxrvi of Alcibiades to Athens 
 Alexander the Great before Tyre . 
 Restoration of the Acropolis at Athens 
 The Otri Coli Mask of Jupiter . 
 
 
 
 Vol 1 
 
 !«■ 
 
 Mflh 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 PART L 
 
 LEGENDARY GREECE, 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 LEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS. 
 
 The mythical world of the Greeks opens with the godt| 
 interior as well as superior to man : it gradually descends, firs*, 
 to heroes, and next to the human race. Along with the gods are 
 found various monstrous natures, ultra-human and extra-human, 
 who cannot with propriety be called gods, but who partake with 
 gods and men in the attributes of freewill, conscious ao^ency, and 
 susceptibility of pleasure and pain, — such as the Harpies, th« 
 Gorgons, the Grasae, the Sirens, Scylla and Chary bdis. Echidna, 
 Sphinx, Chlmaera, Chrysaor, Pegasus, the Cyclopes, the Centaurs, 
 etc. The first acts of what may be termed the great mythical 
 cycle describe the proceedings of these gigantic agents — the 
 crash and collision of certain terrific and overboiling forces, 
 which are ultimately reduced to obedience, or chained up, or 
 extinguished, under the more orderly government of Zeus, who 
 supplants his less capable predecessors, and acquires precedeiMse 
 and eapremacy over gods and men — subject however to certaia 
 social restraints from the chisf gods and goddesses amund 
 
 VOL. I. 1 loc 
 
g HISTOIT OF OBEECB. 
 
 Iiiin, as wen as to the custom of occasionally convoking iod 
 eoosulting the divine agora. 
 
 I recount these events briefly, but literally, treating them 
 timply as mythes springing from the same creative imagination, 
 addressing themselves to analogous tastes and feelings, and d^ 
 pending upon the same authority, as the legends of Thebes and 
 Troy. It is the inspired voice of the Muse which reveals and 
 authenticates both, and Irom which Homer and Hesiod alike 
 derive their knowledge — the one, of the heroic, the other, of the 
 divine, foretime. I maintain, moreover, fuUy, the character of 
 these great divine agents !is Persons, which is the light in which 
 they presented themselves* to the Homeric or Hesiodic audience. 
 Uranos, Nyx, Hypnos and Oneiros (Heaven, Night, Sleep and 
 Dream), are Persons, ju«t as much as Zeus and Apollo. To 
 resolve them into mere allegories, is unsafe and unprofitable : we 
 then depart from the point of view of the original hearers, with- 
 ODt acquiring any consistent or philosophical point of view of our 
 own. I For although some of the attributes and actions ascribed 
 to these persons are often expli/^able by allegory the whole series 
 and system of them never are so : the theorist who adopts this 
 eourse of explanation finds that, after one or two simple and 
 obvious steps, the path is no longer open, and he is forced to clear 
 a way for himself by gratuitous refinements and conjectures. 
 The allegorical persons and attributes are always found mingled 
 with other persons and attributes not allegorical ; but the two 
 classes cannot be severed without breaking up the whole march 
 of the mythical events, nor can any explanation which drives us 
 to such a necessity be considered as admissible. To suppose 
 indeed that these legends could be all traced by means of alle- 
 gory into a coherent body of physical doctrine, would be incon- 
 sistent with all reasonable presumptions respecting the age or 
 soctety in which they arose. Where the allegorical mark is 
 cleariy set upon any particular character, or attribute, or event, 
 to that extent we may reognize it ; but we can rarely venture to 
 divine further, still less to alter the legends themselves on the 
 toh of any such surmises. The theogon y of the Gre(;ks conta ins 
 
 ' It is sufficient, here, to state this position briefly : more wiU be Mid 
 iwp«etiiig the alldgorttinp interprototion in a fatwt ' ^ «tei*. 
 
 LEGENDS BESPECTINO THE GODS. 
 
 aome oosmogonic ideas ; but it cannot be considered as a system 
 9it cosmogony, or translated into a string of elementary, planet- 
 ary, or physical changes. 
 
 In the order of legendary chronology, Zeus comes aft«r 
 Kronos and Uranos ; but in the order of Grecian conception, 
 Zeus is the prominent person, and Kronos and Uranos are 
 inferior and introductory precursors, set up in order to be over- 
 thrown and to serve as mementos of the prowess of their con- 
 queror. To Homer and Hesiod, as well as to the Greeks 
 universally, Zeus is the great and predominant god, " the father 
 of gods and men," whose power none of the other gods can hope 
 to resist, or even deliberately think of questioning. All the 
 Other gods have their specific potency and peculiar sphere of 
 action and duty, with which Zeus does not usually interfere ; but 
 it is he who maintains the lineaments of a providential superin- 
 tendence, as well over the pliaenomena of Olympus as over those 
 of earth. Zeus and his brothers Poseidon and Hades have made 
 a division of power : he has reserved the aether and the atmos- 
 phere to himself — Poseidon has obtained the sea — and Hades 
 the under-world or infernal regions ; while earth, and the events 
 which pass upon earth, aie common to all of them, together with 
 free access to Olympus.' 
 
 Zeus, then, with his brethren and colleagues, constitute the 
 present gods, whom Homer and Hesiod recognize as in full 
 dignity and efficiency. The inmates of this divine world are 
 conceived upon the model, but not upon the scale, of the human. 
 They are actuated by the full play and variety of those appetites, 
 sympathies, passions and affections, which divide the soul of man ; 
 invested with a far larger and indeterminate measure of power, 
 and an exemption as well from death as (with some rare excep- 
 tions) from suffering and mfirmity. The rich and diverse types 
 thus conceived, full of energetic movement and contrast, each m 
 4i8 own province, and soaring confessedly above the limits of 
 
 » Sec Hiad, viii. 405, 463; xv. 20, 130, 185. Hesiod, Theog. 885. 
 
 This unquestioned supremacy is the general representation of Zeus: at 
 Che same time the conspiracy of H6r^, Poseidon, and Ath^n^ against him, 
 suppressed by the unexpected apparition of Briareus as his ally, is anioiig 
 the exceptions. (Iliad, i. 400.) Zeus is at one time vanquished by TitM^ 
 bat rescued by Hermfis. ( ApoUod6r. 1 6, 8) 
 
 <mmm> 
 
g HISTOBr OF GREECE. 
 
 experience, were of all t hemes the most suitable for adventnrt 
 and narrative, and opeia^ed with irresistible force upon the 
 Grecian fancy. All nature was then conceived as moving and 
 working through a number of personal agents, amongst whom 
 the gods of Olympus were the most conspicuous ; the reverential 
 belief in Zeus and Apollo being only one branch of this omni- 
 present personifying faith. The attributes of all these agents 
 had a tendency to expand themselves into illustrative legends — 
 especially those of the gods, who were constantly invoked in the 
 public worship. Out of this same mental source sprang both 
 the divine and heroic mythes — the former being often the more 
 extravagant and abnormous in their incidents, in proportion as 
 the general type of the gods was more vast and awful than that 
 
 of the heroes. 
 
 As the gods have houses and wives like men, so the present 
 dynasty of gods must liave a past to repose upon;i and the 
 curious and imaginative Greek, whenever he does not find a 
 recorded past ready to Ids hand, is uneasy until he has created 
 one. Thus the Hesiodio theogony explains, with a certain degree 
 of system and coherence, first the antecedent circumstances under 
 which Zeus acquired the divine empire, next the number of his 
 colleagues and descendants. 
 
 First in order of time (we are told by Hesiod) came Chaos ; 
 next G«ea, the broad, firm, and flat Earth, with deep and dark 
 Tartarus at her base. Eros (Love), the subduer of gods as well 
 as men, came immediately afterwards.2 
 
 From Chaos sprung Erebos and Nyx ; from these latter 
 ^ther and Hemera. Gaea also gave birth to Uranos, equal in 
 breadth to herself, in order to serve both as an overarching vault 
 to her, and as a residence for the immortal gods ; she further 
 produced the mountains, habitations of the divine nymphs, and 
 Pontus, the barren and billowy sea. 
 
 Then Gaea intermarried with Uranos, and from this union 
 came a numerous offspring — twelve Titans and Titanides, three 
 Cyclopes, and three Hekatoncheires or beings with a hundre d 
 
 » Arist Polit. i. 1. w<T7rep de kgI tu eldrj iavrolg aipofjioiovmv av^punoi, ofr 
 -Mf Kol rode 0iovg, Tuv ^eCtv, 
 
 • Hesiod, Theog. 116. ApoUodorus begins with Uranos and Gaa (i. l» 
 ne does not recognize Eros, Nyx, or Erebos. 
 
 r 
 
 UKAKOS AND KRONOS. 
 
 tands each. The Titans were Oceanus, Eoeos, Erics, Hyperi6n, 
 lapetos, and Kronos: the Titanides, Theia, Rhea, Themis, 
 Mnemosyne, Phoebe, and Tethys. The Cyclopes were Brontes, 
 Steropes, and Arges, — formidable persons, equally distinguished 
 for sti*ength and for manual crafl, so that they made the thundei 
 which afterwards formed the irresistible artillery of Zeus.* 
 The Hekatoncheires were Kottos, Briareus, and Gyges, of pro- 
 digious bodily force. 
 
 Uranos contemplated this powerful brood with fear and hor- 
 ror ; as fast as any of them were bom, he concealed them in 
 cavities of the earth, and would not permit them to come out. 
 Gaea could find no room for them, and groaned under the pres- 
 sure : she produced iron, made a sickle, and implored her sons to 
 avenge both her and themselves against the oppressive treatment 
 of their father. But none of them, except Kronos, had courage 
 to undertake the deed : he, the youngest and the most daring, 
 was armed with the sickle and placed in suitable ambush by the 
 contrivance of Gaea. Presently night arrived, and Uranos 
 descended to the embraces of Gaea : Kronos then emerged from 
 his concealment, cut off the genitals of his father, and cast the 
 bleeding member behind him far away into the sea.^ Much of 
 the blood was spilt upon the earth, and Graea in consequence gave 
 birth to the irresistible Erinnys, the vast and muscular Gigantes, 
 and the Melian nymphs. Out of the genitals themselves, as they 
 swam and foamed upon the sea, emerged the goddess Aphrodite, 
 deriving her name from the foam out of which she had sprung. 
 She first landed at Kythera, and then went to Cyprus : the island 
 felt her benign influence, and the green herb started up under 
 her soft and delicate tread. Eros inmiediately joined her, and 
 partook with her the function of suggesting and directing the 
 amorous impulses both of gods and men.3 
 
 — . ■ ' ■ ■ m ill 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 140, 156. Apollod. ut sup. 
 
 * Hesiod, Theog. 160, 182. Apollod. i. 1, 4. 
 
 'Hesiod, Theog. 192. This legend respecting the birth of Aphrodlti 
 ceems to have been derived partly from her name {a<f>pdc, Jbam)^ pardy from 
 the samame Urania, ^k^podirrj Ovpavia, under which she vas m very exten* 
 ri?ely worshipped, especially both in Cyprus and Cythfera, seemingly crigi- 
 inted in both islands by the Phoenicians. Herodot i. 105. Compare thi 
 iDStractiye section in Boeckh's Metrologie^ c. iv. f 4. 
 
HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 TTranoB bcingthoB dethroned «nd disabled, Kronos andtlie Titsm 
 •cqnired their liberty and became predominant: the Cydopei 
 and the Hekatoncheires hjid been cast by Uranos into Tartarus, 
 and were still allowed to remain there. 
 
 Each of the Titans had a numerous oflspring: Ocjeanus, 
 especially, marrying hia sister Tethys, begat three thousand 
 daughters, the Oceanic nymphs, and as many sons : the riv ers 
 and springs passed for his offspring. Hyperion and his sister 
 Theia had for their children Helios, Selene, and Eos; Kceoe 
 with Phoebe begat Leto and Asteria ; the children of Krios were 
 Astrffios, Pallas, and Persies, — from Astneos and Eos sprang the 
 winds Zephyrus, Boreas, and Notus. lapetos, marrying the 
 Oceanic nymph Oymene, counted as his progeny the celebrated 
 Prometheus, Epimetheus, Menoetius, and Atlas. But the off 
 spring of Kronos were the most powerful and transcendent of alL 
 He married his sister Rhcsa, and had by her tliree daughters — 
 Hestia, Demeter, and Here — and three sons, Hades, Poseidon, 
 and Zeus, the latter at once the youngest and the greatesU 
 
 But Kronos foreboded to himself destruction from one of his 
 own children, and accordingly, as soon as any of them were bom, 
 he immediately swallowed them and retained them in his own 
 belly. In this manner hail the first five been treated, and Rhea 
 was on the point of being delivered of Zeus. Grieved and mdig- 
 nant at the loss of her children, she appUed for counsel to her 
 father and mother, Uranos and Gaea, who aided her to conceal 
 the birth of Zeus. They conveyed her by night to Lyktus in 
 Crete, hid the new-bom child in a woody cavern on Mount Ida, 
 and gave to Kronos, in place of it, a stone wrapped in swaddling 
 dothes, which he greedily swaUowed, believing it to be his child. 
 Thus was the safety of Zeus ensured.^ As he grew up his vast 
 powers fully developed themselves : at the suggestion of Gaea, 
 he induced Kronos by stratagem to vomit up, first the stone which 
 had been given to him, — next, the five children whom he had 
 previously devoured. Hestia, Demeter, Here, Poseidon and 
 Hades, were thus allowed to grow up along with Zeus ; and the 
 gtone to which the latter owed his preservation was placed netf 
 
 > Heaiod. Theqg. 4&2, 487. ApoUod. Ll,ft. 
 
 KRONO& AND ZEUS. 
 
 the temple of Delphi, where it ever afterwards stood, as a con* 
 spicuous and venerable memorial to the religious Greek.' 
 
 We have not yet exhausted the catalogue of beings genei'ated 
 during this early period, anterior to the birth of Zeus. Nyx. 
 alone and without any partner, gave birth to a numerous pro- 
 geny: Thanatos, Hypnos and Oneiros; Momus and Oizys 
 (Grief) ; Klotho, Lachesis and Atropos, the three Fates ; the 
 retributive and equalizing Nemesis ; Apate and Philotes (Deceit 
 and amorous Propensity), Geras (Old Age) and Eris (Conten- 
 tion). From Eris proceeded an abundant offspring, all mischiev- 
 ous and maleficent : Ponos (Suffering), Lethe, Limos (Famine), 
 Phonos and Mache (Slaughter and Battle), Dysnomia and Ate 
 (Lawlessness and reckless Impulse), and Horkos, the ever- 
 watchful sanctioner of oaths, as well as the inexorable punisher 
 of voluntary perjury.^ 
 
 Gaea, too, intermarrying with Pontus, gave birth to Nereus, 
 the just and righteous old man of the soa ; to Thaumas, Phorkys 
 and Keto. From Nereus, and Doris daughter of Oceanus, pro- 
 ceeded the fifty Nereids or Sea-nymphs. Thaumus also married 
 Elektra daughter of Oceanus, and had by her Iris and the two 
 Harpies, Alio and Okypete, — winged and swift as the winds. 
 From Phorkys and Keto spmng the Dragon of the Hesperides, 
 and the monstrous Grasae and Gorgons: the blood of Medusa, one 
 of the Gorgons, when killed by Perseus, produced Chrysaor and 
 the hoi-se Pegasus: Chrysaor and Kallirrhoe gave birth to 
 Geryon as well as to Echidna, — a creature half-nymph and hali- 
 serpent, unlike both to gods and to men. Other monsters arose 
 from the union of Echidna with Typhaon, — Orthros, the two- 
 headed dog of Geryon ; Cerberus, the dog of Hades, with fifty 
 heads, and the Lernaean Hydra. From the latter pro ceded the 
 Chimaera, the Sphinx of Thebes, and the Nemean lion. 
 
 A powerful and important progeny, also, was that of Styx* 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 498. — 
 
 Tuv (lev Zevf arrjpi^e Kard, x^ovb^ eifwodeiiff 
 Tlir&oi tv hya^eiif, yvdXoic vnd Hapvrfaoio, 
 2^/4' i/iev i^oirlffUj ^avfia &injToiai ^poToUttk 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 212-232. 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 240-320. Apollodor. i. 2, «. 7 
 
9 HISTORT OF GREXCI. 
 
 daughter of Ooeanus, bj Pallas ; she had Zelos and Mike (Imp» 
 riousness and Victory), and Kratoe and Bia (Strength and Force) 
 The hearty and early cooperation of Styx and her four sons with 
 Zeus was one of the main causes which enabled him to achieve 
 bin victory over the Titana. 
 
 Zeus had grown up not; less distinguished for mental capacity 
 than for bodily force. He and his brothers now determined tc 
 wrest the power from the hands of Kronoe and the Titans, and a 
 long and desperate struggle commenced, in which all the gods 
 and all the goddesses took part. Zeus convoked them to Olym- 
 pus, and promised to all who would aid him against Kronos, that 
 their functions and privileges should remain undisturbed. The 
 first who responded to the call, came with her four sons, and 
 embraced his cause, was Styx. Zeus took them all four as his 
 constant attendants, and conferred upon Styx the majestic distinc- 
 tion of being the Horkos, or oath-sanctioner of the Gods, — what 
 Horkos was to men, Styx was to the Gods.i 
 
 Still further to strengthen himself, Zeus released the other 
 Uranids who had been imprisoned in Tartarus by their father, — 
 the Cyclopes and the Centimanes, — and prevailed upon them to 
 take part with him against the Titans. The former supplied him 
 with thunder and lightning, and the latter brought into the fight 
 their boundless muscular strength. ^ Ten full years did the com- 
 bat continue ; Zeus and the Kronids occupying Olympus, and the 
 Titans being established on the more southerly mountain-chain 
 of Othrys. All nature vras convulsed, and the distant Oceanus, 
 though he took no part in the struggle, felt the boiling, the noise, 
 and the shock, not less than Gaea and Pontus. The thunder of 
 Zeus, combined with the crags and mountains torn up and hurled 
 by the Centimanes, at length prevailed, and the Titans were de» 
 feated and thurst down ijito Tartarus. lapetos, Kronos, and the 
 remaining Titans (Oceanus excepted) were imprisoned, perpetu- 
 ally and irrevo<?ably, in that subterranean dungeon, a wall of brass 
 being built around them by Poseidon, and the three Centimanes 
 being planted as guards. Of the two sons of lapetos, Mencetius 
 was made to share this prison, while Atlas was condemned Ic 
 
 ' f 
 
 THE TITANS. | 
 
 id for ever at the extreme west, and to bear upon his shooi 
 ders the solid vault of heaven. ^ 
 
 Thus were the Titans subdued, and the Kronids with Zeus ai 
 their head placed in possession of power. They were not, how- 
 ever, yet quite secure ; for Graea, intermarrying with Tartarus, 
 gave birth to a new and still more formidable monster called Ty- 
 phoeus, of such tremendous properties and promise, that, had he 
 been allowed to grow into full development, nothing could have 
 prevented him from vanquishing all rivals and becoming supreme. 
 But Zeus foresaw the danger, smote him at once with a thunder- 
 bolt from Olympus, and burnt him up : he was cast along with 
 the rest into Tartarus, and no further enemy remained to question 
 the sovereignty of the Kronids.^ 
 
 With Zeus begins a new dynasty and a different order of 
 beings. Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades agree upon the distribution 
 before noticed, of functions and localities: Zeus retaining the 
 ^ther and the atmosphere, together with the general presiding 
 function ; Poseidon obtaining the sea, and administering subterr»> 
 nean forces generally ; and Hades ruling the under-world or re- 
 gion in which the half-animated shadows of departed men reside 
 
 It has been already stated, that in Zeus, his brothers and his 
 sisters, and his and their divine progeny, we find the present 
 Gods ; that is, thase, for the most part, whom the Homeric and 
 Hesiodic Greeks recognized and worshipped. The wives of Zeus 
 were numerous as well as his offspring. First he married Metis, 
 the wisest and most sagacious of the goddesses ; but Giea and 
 Uranos forewarned him that if he permitted himself to have 
 children by her, they would be stronger than himself and dethrone 
 him. Accordingly when Metis was on the point of being deliv- 
 
 » Hesiod, Theog. 385-403. 
 
 *HMk>d,Th«Qg. 140 BM,»7. AfQUoddr.iS,4. 
 
 * The battle with the Titans, Hesiod, Theog. 627-735. Uesiod mentionf 
 nothing about the Gigantes and the Gigantomachia : Apollodorus, on the 
 other hand, gives this latter in some detail, bat despatches the Titans in a 
 few words (i. 2, 4 ; i. 6, 1 ). The Gigantes seem to be only a second edition 
 of the Titans, — a sort of duplication to which the legendary poets were often 
 Inclined. 
 
 * Hesiod, Theog. 820-869. Apollod. L 6, 3. He makes Typhon rery 
 tearly victorious over Zeus. Typhoeus, according to Hesiod, is father oi 
 Jhe irregular, violent, and mi^chievons winds : Notns, Boreas, Argest^ 
 Scphyrus, are of divine origin (870). 
 
 1* 
 
 
 I'l*!. 
 
.¥ 
 
 liO 
 
 HiiS rOBY OF GBEEGL 
 
 ered of Atbene, he swallowed her up, and her wisdom and sagap 
 city thus became permanently identified with his own being. > Hie 
 head was subsequently cut open, in order to make way for the 
 exit and birth of the goddess Athene.^ By Themis, Zeus begat 
 the Horae , by Eurynome, the three Charities or Graces ; by 
 Mnemosyne, the Muses ; by Leto (Latona), Apollo and Artemis* 
 and by Demeter, Persephone. Last of all he took for his wift 
 Here, who maintained permanently the dignity of queen of the 
 Gods ; by her he had Hebe, Ares, and Eileithyia. Hermes also 
 was bom to him by Maia, tLe daughter of Atlas: Hephasstos 
 was bom to Here, according to some accounts, by Zeus ; accord- 
 ing to others, by her own unaided generative tbrce.^ He was 
 born lame, and Here was ashamed of him : she wished to secrete 
 him away, but he made his escape into the sea, and found shelter 
 under the maternal care of the Xereids Thetis and Eurynome.^ 
 Our enumeration of the divine race, under the presidency of Zeus, 
 will thus give us,^ — 
 
 1 . The twelve great gods and goddesses of Olympus, — Zeus, 
 Poseidon, Apjwllo, Ares, Hcphaestos, Hermes, Here, Athene, 
 Artemiji, Aphrodite, Hestia, Demeter. 
 
 2. An indefinite number of other deities, not included among 
 the Olympic, seemingly because the number twelve was complete 
 without them, but some of them not inferior in power and dignity 
 to many of the twelve : — Had^, Helios, Hekate, Dionysos, Leto, 
 Dione, Persephone, Selene, Themis, Eos, Harmonia, the Chari- 
 ties, the Muses, the Eilaithyiae, the Moerae, the Oceanids and the 
 Nereids, Proteus, Eidothea, the Nymphs, Leukothea, Phorkys, 
 .£olus. Nemesis, etc 
 
 3. Deities who perform special services to the greater gods:— 
 Iris, Hebe, the Hone, etc. 
 
 4. Deities whose personality is more faintly and unsteadily 
 conceived : — Ate, the Litae, Eris, Thanatos, Hypnos, Kratos, Bia, 
 Ossa, etc,6 The same name is here employed sometimes to desig- 
 nate the person, sometimes the attribute or event not personi- 
 
 » He0k>d, Theog. 885-900. * Apollod. i. 3, 6. 
 
 » Hesiod, Theog. 900-94-4. * Homer, Iliad, xviii 3>7. 
 
 * See BurckhAidt, Homer, and Hesiod. Mythologie, sect 102. (Leipft 
 
 844) 
 
 • Aotdc — Hunger — is a person, in Hesiod, Opp. Di. 299 
 
 HESIODIC THEOGONT. ^ 
 
 ied, — an unconscious transition of ideas, which, when consciously 
 performed, is called Allegory. 
 
 5. Monsters, offspring of the Gods : — the Harpies, the Goi^ 
 fons, the Graeae, Pegasus, Chrysaor, Echidna, Chimaera, the Drik 
 |on of the Hesperides, Cerberus, Orthros, Geryon, the Lemasan 
 Hydra, the Nemean lion, Scylla and Charybdis, the Centaurs, the 
 Sphinx, Xanthos and Balios the immortal horses, etc. 
 
 From the gods we slide down insensibly, first to heroes, and 
 then to men ; but before we proceed to this new mixture, it is 
 necessary to say a few words on the theogony generally. I have 
 given it briefly as it stands in the Hesiodic Theogonia, because 
 that poem — in spite of great incoherence and confusion, arising 
 seemingly from diversity of authorship as well as diversity of 
 age — presents an ancient and genuine attempt to cast the divine 
 foretime into a systematic sequence. Homer and Hesiod were 
 the grand authorities in the pagan world respecting theogony ; 
 but in the Iliad and Odyssey nothing is found except passing 
 allusions and implications, and even in the Hymns (which were 
 commonly believed in antiquity to be the productions of the same 
 author as the Iliad and the Odyssey) there are only isolated, un- 
 connected narratives. Accordingly men habitually took their in- 
 formation respecting their theogonic antiquities from the Hesiodic 
 poem, where it was ready laid out before them ; and the legends 
 consecrated in that work acquired both an extent of circulaticMi 
 and a firm hold on the natio!ial faith, such as independent legends 
 could seldom cr never rival. Moreover the scrupulous and scep- 
 tical Pagans, as well as the open assailants of Paganism in later 
 times, derived their subjects of attack from the same source ; so 
 that it has been absolutely necessary to recount in their naked 
 gimplici*y the Hesiodic stories, in o:der to know what it was that 
 Plato deprecated and Xenophanes denounced. The strange pro- 
 ceedings ascribed to Uranos, Kronos and Zeus, have been more 
 frequently alluded to, in the way of ridicule or condemnation, 
 than any other portion of the mythical world. 
 
 But though the Hesiodic theogony passed as orthodox among 
 the later Pagans,^ because it stood before them as the only system 
 anciently set forth and easily accessible, it was evidently not the 
 
 See Gottling, Prsfat ad Hesiod. p. 23. 
 
 ttmm^m 
 
mSTOKY OF QSEICE. 
 
 only system received .lit the date of the poem itself. Homer 
 kii3W8 nothing of Uranos, in the sense of an arch-Grod sntenot 
 to Kronofl. Uranos and Gaea, like Oceanus, Tethys and Nyx, 
 are with him great and venerable Gods, but neither the one nor 
 the other present the character of predecessors of Kronos and 
 Zeus. I Tlie Cyclopes, whom Hesiod ranks as sons of Uranos 
 and fabricators of thunder, are in Homer neither one nor the 
 other; they are not noticed in the Iliad at all, and in the Odyssey 
 they are gross gigantic shepherds and cannibals, having nothing 
 in common with the Hesiodic Cyclops except the one round cen- 
 tral eye.2 Of the three Centimanes enumerated by Hesiod, Bri- 
 areus only is mentioned in Homer, and to all appearance, not as 
 the son of Uranos, but as the son of Poseidon ; not as aiding 
 Zeus in his combat against the Titans, but as rescuing him at a 
 critical moment from a conspiracy formed against him by Here, 
 Poseidon and Athene.3 Not only is the Hesiodic Uranos (with 
 the Uranids) omitted in Homer, but the relations between Zeus 
 and Kronos are also presented in a very different light. No 
 mention is made of Kronos swallowing his young children: on 
 the contrary, Zeus is the eldest of the three brothers instead of 
 the youngest, and the children of Kronos live with him and Rhea: 
 there the stolen interoourse between Zeus and Here first takes 
 place without the knowledge of their parents.^ When Zeus puts 
 Kronos down into TarUirus, Rhea consigns her daughter Here 
 to the care of Oceanus : no notice do we find of any terrific battle 
 with the Titans as accompanying that event. Kronos, lapetos, 
 and the remaining Titans are down in Tartarus, in the lowest 
 depths under the eai'th, far removed from the genial rays of 
 Helios ; but they are still [)owerful and venerable, and Hypnos 
 makes Here swear an oath in their name, as the most inviolable 
 that he can think of. ^ 
 
 • Iliad, xiv.249; xix. 259. Odyss. v. 184. Oceanus and Tethys seem to b« 
 presented in the Iliad as the primitive Father and Mother of the Gods: — 
 
 ^QKcavov re i^ewv yeveaiv, kuI fxr/Tepa T//t>vv. (xiv. 201 ). 
 
 • Odyss. ix. 87. ' Iliad, i. 401. * Iliad, xiv. 203-295 ; xv. 204. 
 
 • Iliad, Tiii. 482 ; xiv. 274-279. In the Hesiodic 0pp. et Di., Kronos it 
 represented as roling in the Islands of the Blest in the neighborhood ol 
 Oeeanofi (v. 168). 
 
 HOMEKIC THEOGONY. 
 
 Id Homer, then, we find nothing beyond the simple ftet thai 
 £eas thrust his father Kronos together with the remaining Titans 
 Into Tartarus ; an event to which he affords us a tolerable parallel 
 in certain occurrences even under the presidency of Zeus himself. 
 For the other gods make more than one rebellious attempt against 
 Zeus, and are only put down, partly by his unparalleled strength, 
 partly by the presence of his ally the Centimane Briareus. Kro- 
 nos, like Laertes or Peleus, has become old, and has been sup- 
 planted by a force vastly superior to his own. The Homeric epic 
 treats Zeus as present, and, like all the interesting heroic charac- 
 ters, a father must be assigned to him : that father has once been 
 the chief of the Titans, but has been superseded and put down 
 into Tartarus along with the latter, so soon as Zeus and the supe- 
 rior breed of the Olympic gods acquired their full development 
 
 That antithesis between Zeus and Kronos — between the Olym- 
 pic gods and the Titans — which Homer has thus briefly brought 
 to view, Hesiod has amplified into a theogony, with many tilings 
 new, and some things contradictory to his predecessor ; while Eu- 
 melus or Arktinus in the poem called Titanomachia (now lost) 
 also adopted it as their special subject^ As Stasinns, Arktinus, 
 L§8ches, and others, enlarged the Legend of Troy by composing 
 poems relating to a supposed time anterior to the commencement^ 
 or subsequent to the termination of the Iliad, — as other poets 
 recounted adventures of Odysseus subsequent to his landing in 
 fthaka, — so Hesiod enlarged and systematized, at the same time 
 that he corrupted, the skeleton theogony which we find briefly 
 indicated in Homer. There is violence and rudeness in the 
 Homeric gods, but the great genius of Grecian epic is no way 
 accountable for the stories of Uranos and Kronos, — the standing 
 reproach against Pagan legendary narrative. 
 
 * See the few fra^^ents of the Titanomachia, in Diintzer, Epic. GraBC. 
 Fragm. p. 2 ; and Hyne, ad Apollodor. I. 2. Perhaps there was more than 
 one poem on the subject, though it seems that Athenaeus had only read one 
 (viii. p. 277). 
 
 In the Titanomachia, the generations anterior to Zeus were still further 
 leagtiiened by making Uranos the son of ^th^r (Fr. 4. DOntzer). Mgason 
 was also represented as son of Pontus and GaBa, and as having fought in the 
 ranks of the Titans : in the Iliad he ( the same who is called Briarena) is tJlf 
 fiut ally of Zeus. 
 
 A Titanot/raphia was ascribed to MnssBis (Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iii. 1178 
 eompare Lactam, de Fals. Rel. i. 21). 
 
 '.•^ 
 
 *> — «i 
 
 >mmi 
 
 \m ■»* ■— »<»i<^»« 
 
14 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LEGENDS ABOUT ZEUS. 
 
 1$ 
 
 How far these storii^s are the invention of Hesiod himself ii 
 impossible to determine.^ They bring us down to a cast of fancy 
 
 * That the Hesiodic Theogony is referable to an age considerably later 
 than the Homeric poems, appears now to be the generally admitted opinion j 
 and the reasons for believing so are, in my opinion, satisfactory. Whether 
 the Theogony is composed by the same author as the Works and Days is a 
 iispated point. The Boeotian literati in the days of Pausanias decidedly 
 denied the identity, and ascribed to their Hesiod only the Works and Days : 
 Pausanias himself concura with them (ix. 31. 4; ix. 35. I), and Volcker 
 (Mithologie des Japetisch. Greschlechts, p- 14) maintains the same opinion, 
 as well as Gottling (Praef. ad Hesiod. xxi.) : K. O. Miiller (History of Grecian 
 Literature, ch. 8. § 4) thinks that there is not sufficient evidence to form a 
 decisive opinion. 
 
 Under the name of Hesiod (in that vague language which is usual in an- 
 tiquity respecting authorship, but which modem critics have not much mend* 
 ed by speaking of the Hesiiodic school, sect, or family) passed many differ- 
 ent poems, belonging to three classes quite distinct from each other, but all 
 disparate from the Homeric; epic : — 1. The poems of legend cast into histo- 
 rical and genealogical series, such as the Eoiai, the Catalogue of Women, 
 etc. 2. The poems of a didactic or ethical tendency, such as the Works and 
 Days, the Precepts of Cheiron, the Art of Augural Prophecy, etc. 3. Sep- 
 arate and short mythical compositions, such as the Shield of Heraklds, the 
 Marriage of Keyx (which, however, was of disputed authenticity, Athense. 
 ii. p. 49), the Epithalamium of P^leus and Thetis, etc. (See Marktscheffel, 
 Pnefat. ad Fragment. Hesiod. p. 89). 
 
 The Theogony belongs chiefly to the first of these classes, but it has also 
 a dash of the second in the legend of Prometheus, etc. : moreover in the por- 
 tion which respects Hekat^^, it has both a mystic character and a distinct 
 bearing upon present life and customs, which we may also trace in the allu- 
 gions to Krete and Delphi. There seems reason to place it in the same age 
 with the Works and Days, perhaps in the half century preceding 700 b. c, 
 and little, if at all, anterior to Archilochus. The poem is evidently conceiv- 
 ed upon one scheme, yet the parts are so disorderly and incoherent, that it 
 is difficult to say how much is interpolation. Hermann has well dissected 
 the exordium ; see the preface to Gaisford's Hesiod (Poetae Minor, p. 63). 
 
 K. O. Miiller tells us {ut sup. p. 90), " The Titans, according to the notions 
 of Hesiod, represent a system of things in which elementary beings, natural 
 powers, and notions of order and regularity are united to form a whole. The 
 Cyclopes denote the transient disturbances of this order of nature by stormS) 
 and the Hekatoncheires, or hundred-handed Giants, signify the fearful pow- 
 er of the greater revolutions of nature." The poem affords little pi^sump- 
 tion that any such ideas v^ere present to the mind >;>f its author, as, I 
 think, will be seen if we read 140-155, 630-745. 
 
 The Titans, the Cyclopes, and the Hekatoncheires, can no more be con- 
 Btmed into physical phaenamena than Chrysaor, Pegasus, Echidna, the Grsea^ 
 or the GoT^na Zeus, liki* Hdnkl^s, or Jas6n, or Perseus, if his advej' 
 
 more coarse and indelicate than the Homeric, and more nearly 
 resembling some of the Holy Chapters (IbqoI koyoi) of the more 
 recent mysteries, such (for example) as the tale of Dionysos Za< 
 greus. There is evidence in the Theogony itself that the author 
 was acquainted with local legends current both at Krete and at 
 Delphi ; for he mentions both the mountain-cave in Ki*ete where- 
 in the new-born Zeus was hidden, and the stone near the Del- 
 phian temple — the identical stone which Kronos had swallowed 
 — - " pla(;ed by Zeus himself as a sign and wonder to mortal men." 
 Both these two monuments, which the poet expressly refers to, 
 and had probably seen, imply a whole train of accessory and ex- 
 planatory local legends — current probably among the priests of 
 Krete and Delphi, between which places, in ancient times, there 
 was an intimate religious connection. And we may trace further 
 in the poem, — that which would be the natural feeling of Krctan 
 woi*shippers of Zeus, — an effort to make out that Zeus was jus- 
 tified in his aggression on Kronos, by the conduct of Kronos 
 himself both towards his father and towards his children : the 
 treatment of Kronos by Zeus appears in Hesiod as the retribu- 
 tion foretold and threatened by the mutilated Uranos against the 
 son who had outraged him. In fact the relations of Uranos and 
 Crsea are in almost all their particulars a mere copy and duplication 
 of those between Kronos and Rhea, differing only in the mode 
 whereby the final catastrophe is brought about. Now castration 
 was a practice thorouglily abhorrent both to the feelings and to 
 the customs of Greece ; ' but it was seen with melancholy fre- 
 
 tures are to be described, must have enemies, worthy of himself and his 
 Tast tjrpe, and whom it is some credit for him to overthrow. Those who 
 contend with him or assist him must be conceived on a scale fit to be drawn 
 on the same imposing canvas : the dwarfish proportions of man will not 
 satisfy the sentiment of the poet or his audience respecting the grandeur and 
 glory of the gods. To obtain creations of adequate sublimity for such an 
 object, the poet may occasionally borrow analogies from the striking acci- 
 dents of physical nature, and when such an allusion manifests itself clearly, 
 the critic does well to point it out. But it seems to me a mistake to treat 
 these approximations to physical phsenomena as forming the main scheme of 
 the poet, — to look for them everywhere, and to presume them where them 
 is little or no indication. 
 
 * The strongest evidences of this feeling are exhibited in Herodotus, S 
 M; viii 105. See an example of this mutilation inflicted upon « yov^ 
 
 M«M 
 
 mmm 
 
 •m^ 
 
m 
 
 HISTORY JF OBEECE. 
 
 qaenej in the domestic life as well as in the religious ^^orship of 
 Phrygia and other parts of Asia, and it even became the special 
 qualification of a priest of the Great Mother Cybele,* as well aa 
 of the Ephesian Artemis. The employment of the sickle ascrib- 
 ed to Kronos seems to be the product of an imagination familiar 
 with the Asiatic worsliip and legends, which were connected with 
 and partially resembled the Kretan."2 And this deduction be- 
 comes the more probable when we connect it with the first gen- 
 esis of iron, which Hesiod mentions to have been produced for 
 the express purpose of fabricating the fatal sickle ; for metallurgy 
 finds a place in the early legends both of the Trojan and of the 
 Kretan Ida, and the three Idaean Dactyls, the legendary inven- 
 tors of it, are assigned sometimes to one and sometimes to the 
 other.3 
 
 As Hesiod had extimded the Homeric series of gods by prefix 
 ing the dynasty of Unmos to that of Kronos, so the Orphic theog^ 
 
 named Adamas by the Thracian king Kotys, in Aristot. Polit. v. 8, 12, and 
 the tale about the Corinthian Periander, Herod, iii. 48. 
 
 It is an instance of the habit, so frequent among the Attic tragedians, of 
 ascribing Asiatic or Phrygian manners to the Trojans, when Sophocles in 
 his lost play Troilus (ap. Jul. Poll. x. 165) introduced one of the characters 
 of his drama as having been castrated by order of Hecuba, 2/caA/zy ydp 
 6pxeii (iaai?jx tKTEfivova* kfioi)^, — probably the Uatdayoybg, or guardian and 
 companion of the yonthfol Troilus. See Welcker, Griechisch. Tragod. voL 
 I p. 125. 
 
 ' Herodot. viii. 105, evvovxoi. Lucian, De DeA SyriA, c. 50. Strabo, xir. 
 pp. 640-641. 
 
 * Diodor. v. 64. Strabo, x. p. 460. Hoeckh, in his learned work Kr^ta 
 (vol. i. books 1 and 2), ban collected all the information attainable respecting 
 the early inflnences of Phirygia and Asia Minor upon Kr6te : nothing seems 
 ■scertainable except the general fact ; all the particular evidences are lamen- 
 tably vague. 
 
 The worship of the Diktsan Zeus seemed to have originally belonged to 
 (lie Eteokr^tea, who were not Hellens, and were more akin to the Asiatic 
 population than to the Hellenic. Strabo, x. p. 478. Hoeckh, Ej*^ta, vol. i 
 p. 139. 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theogon. 161, 
 
 Al-^a 6e ■Koi^traaa yevog noXiov adafiavro^ 
 Tev^e fieya dpenavovy etc. 
 
 Bee the extract from the old poem Phordnia ap. Schol. ApoU. Rhod. I ISO: 
 ■od Strabo, x. p. 472. 
 
 nttimmtm0i^>i*M 
 
 ORPHIC THEOGONY. 
 
 If 
 
 ouy lengthened it still further, i First came Chronos, or Time. 
 as a person, after him JEther and Chaos, out of whom Chronos 
 produced the vast mundane egg. Hence emerged in process of 
 time the firat-bom god Phanes, or Metis, or HerikapaRos, a per- 
 son of double sex, who first generated the Kosmos, or mundane 
 system, and who carried within him the seed of the gods. He 
 gave birth to Nyx, by whom he begat Uranos and Gaea; as well 
 as to Helios and Selene.2 
 
 From Uranos and Giea sprang the three Moerae, or Fates, the 
 three Centimanes and the three Cyclopes : these latter were cast 
 by Uranos into Tartarus, under the foreboding that they would 
 rob him of his dominion. In revenge for this maltreatment of 
 her sons, G«a produced of herself the fourteen Titans, seven 
 male and seven female : the former were Koeos, Krios, Phorkys, 
 Kronos, Oceanus, Hyperion and lapetos ; the latter were Themis, 
 Tethys, Mnemosyne, Theia, Dione, Phcebe and Rhea.3 They 
 received the name of Titans because they avenged upon Ura- 
 nos the expulsion of their elder brothers. Six of the Titans, 
 headed by Kronos the most powerful of them all, conspiring 
 against Uranos, castrated and dethroned him: Oceanus alone stood 
 aloof and took no part in the aggression. Kronos assumed the 
 government and fixed his seat on Olympos; while Oceanus 
 remained apart, master of his own divine stream.* The reign 
 
 • See the scanty fragments of the Orphic theogony in Hermann's edition 
 of the Orphica, pp. 448, .'304, which it is difficult to understand and piece 
 together, even with the aid of Lobeck^s elaborate examination (Aglaopha- 
 mus, p. 470, etc.). The passages are chiefly preserved by Proclus and the 
 later Platonists, who seem to entangle them almost inextricably with their 
 own philosophical ideas. 
 
 The first few lines of the Orphic Argonaatica contain a brief summary ot 
 the chief points of the theogony. 
 
 ■ See Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 472-476, 490-500, M^nv ffiripfia (jtepovra ^eut 
 KAvrdv 'HpiKeTralov; again, Gf/Avf koi yeverup Kparepdg iJedf 'HpiKe^raiOi 
 Compare Lactant. iv. 8, 4 : Suidas, v. ^dvric : Athena^roras, xx. 296 : Dio- 
 dAr. L 27. 
 
 This egg figures, as might be expected, in the cosmogony set forth by the 
 Hirds, Aristophan. Av. 695. Nyx gives birth to an egg, on) of which stepf 
 the golden En'js , from Eros and Chaos spring the race of birds. 
 
 ' Lobeck, Ag. p. 504. Athenagor. xv. p. 64. 
 
 * Lobeck, Ag. p. 507. Plato, Timaeus, p. 41. In the Aiovitaov Tp6<poi, of 
 ^schylus, the old attendants of the god Dionysos were said to have been 
 
 TOL. I. 20C 
 
18 
 
 HISTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 ZEUS AND ZAGREUS. 
 
 19 
 
 of KroM(M was a period of tranquillity and happiness, as well m 
 of extraordinary longevity and vigor. 
 
 Kronos and Rhea gave birtli to Zeus and his brothers and sis- 
 ters. The concealment and escape of the infant Zeus, and the 
 swallowing of the stone by Kronos, are given in the Orphic 
 Tlieogon/ substantially in the same manner as by Hesiod, only 
 in a .>tyle le.<s simple and more mysticized. Zeus is concealed in 
 the cave of :^yx, the seat of Phanes himself, along with Eide 
 and Adrasteia, who nurse and preserve him, while the armed 
 dance and sonorous instruments of the Kuretes prevent hu 
 infant cries from reaching the ears of Kronos. When grown up, 
 he lays a snare for his father, intoxicates him with honey, and 
 having surprised him in the depth of sleep, enchains and cas- 
 trates him. I Thus exalted to the supreme mastery, he swallowed 
 and absorbed into himself Metis, or Phanes, with all the preex- 
 isting elements of thingf,, and then generated all things anew out 
 of his own being and cootbrmably to his own divine ideas.^ So 
 scanty are the remains of this system, that we find it difficult to 
 trace individually the gods and goddesses sprung from Zeus 
 
 cat up and boiled in a caldron, and rendered again young, by Medeia 
 Pherecyd^s and Simonides said that Jason himself had been so dealt with. 
 Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 1321. 
 
 ' Lobeck, p. 514. Porphyry, de Antro Nymphanim, c. 16. <I>7](tI yap nap 
 'Op^fi /} Kv^, Tii) ikd vKOTiT^tfievT} Tdv dta tov fie^iro^ 66'kovy 
 
 Eir' av 6ri fuv Urjai inb dpvcrlv vfiKOfioiai 
 'Epyoimv (tnHovra fu^Laauuv IpifiofxjSuv, 
 AvTiKa fitV drjOOV. 
 
 •O Kal TTuaxei 6 Kpcvo^ koI delete ^uTejuveTai, ug Ovpavog. 
 
 Compare Timaeu.*? ap Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 983. 
 
 • The Cataposis of Phan^'s by Zeus one of the most memorable points 
 of the Orphic Theogony. Lobeck, p. 519. ; also Fragm. ri. p. 456 of Her- 
 mann's Orphica. 
 
 From this absorption and subsequent reproduction of all things by Zeus, 
 flowed the magnificent string of Ori)hic predicates al)out him, — 
 
 Zet)f apx^, Zf t)f f,'.Eff(Ta, Aidg rJ' h iravra rervKTai, — 
 
 an allusion to which is traceable even in Plato, de Legg. iv. p. 715. Plutarch, 
 de pefectu Oracul. T. ix. p. 379. c. 48. Diodorua (i. 1 1 ) is the most ancient 
 writer remaining to us who mentions the name of Phan^, in a line cited at 
 proceeding from Orpheus; wherein, however, PhanSs is identified with 
 F)ionT»98. Compare Macrobins, Satarnal I 18. 
 
 hejotkd Apollo, Dionysos, and Persephone, — the latter beini 
 confounded with Artemis and Hekate. 
 
 But there is one new personage, begotten by Zeus, who stands 
 preeminently marked in the Orphic Theogony, and whose adven- 
 tures constitute one of its peculiar features. Zagreus, «the 
 horned child,*' is the son of Zeus by his own daughter Perse- 
 phone : he is the favorite of his father, a child of magnificent 
 promise, and predestined, if he grow up, to succeed to supreme 
 dominion as weU as to the handling of the thunderbolt. He is 
 seated, whUst an infant, on the throne beside Zeus, guarded by 
 Apollo and the Kuretes. But the jealous Here intercepts his 
 career and incites the Titans against him, who, having first 
 smeared their faces with plaster, approach him on the tLx)ne, 
 tempt his childish fancy with playthmgs, and kill him with a 
 sword while he is contemplating his face in a mirror. They then 
 cut up his body and boil it in a caldron, leaving only the heart, 
 which is picked up by Athene and carried to Zeus, who in hia 
 wrath strikes down the Titans with thunder into Tartarus ; whilst 
 Apollo is directed to collect the remains of Zagreus and bury 
 them at the foot of Mount Parnassus. The heart is given to 
 Semele, and Zagreus is bom again from her under the form of 
 Dionysos. 1 
 
 ' About the tale of Zagreus, see Lobeck, p. 552, sqq. Nonnus in his Dion- 
 ysiaca has given many details about it : — 
 
 Zaypta yELvafiEvrj Kepoty 3pifo<;, etc. (vi. 264). 
 
 Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit. ad Gent. p. U, 12, Sylb. The story waa 
 treated both by Callimachus and by Euphorion, Etymolog. Magu. y. 
 Zaypei)f, Schol. Lycophr. 208. In the old epic poem Alkmaeonis or Epi- 
 goni, Zagreus is a surname of Had^. See Fragm. 4, p. 7, ed. DOntzer. 
 Respecting the Orphic Theogony generaUy, Brandis (Handbuch der Ges- 
 chichte der Gricchisch-Romisch. Philosophie, c. xvii , xviii ), K. O. Muller 
 (Prolegg. Mythol. pp. 379-396), and Zoega (Abhandlungen, v. pp. 211-263) 
 may be consulted with much advantage. Brandis regards this Theogony 
 as considerably older than the first Ionic philosophy, which is a higher ani- 
 quity than appears probable: some of the ideas which it contains, such, for 
 example, as that of the Orphic egg, indicate a departure from the string of 
 parely personal generations which both Homer and Hesiod exclusively 
 recount and a resort to something like physical analogies. On the whole, 
 we cannot reasonably claim for it more than half a century above the a^ 
 •f Onomakritus. The Theogony of Pherekydfis of Syros seems to have 
 
 mmmm 
 
 M* 
 
 ■ »m m» 'mt ' X.' -. 
 
4 
 
 fO 
 
 HISTORl OF GREECE. 
 
 HESIOD AND OBPHEUS. 
 
 SI 
 
 Such is the tissue of violent fancies comprehended under thfl 
 title of the Orphic Tlieogonj, and read as such, it aj)peard, by 
 Plato, Isokrates and Aristotle. It will be seen that it is basec? 
 upon the Hesiodic Theogony, but according to the general expan- 
 WTC tendency of Grecian legend, much new matter is added: 
 Zeus has in Homer one predecessor, in Hesiod two, and in 
 Orpheus four. 
 
 The Hesiodic Theogony, though later in date than the Iliad 
 and Odyssey, was coeval with the earliest period of what may be 
 called Grecian history, and certainly of an age earlier than 700 
 B. c. It appears to have been widely circulated in Greece, and 
 being at once ancient and short, the general public consulted it as 
 their princi])al source of information respecting divine antiquity. 
 The Orphic Theogony belongs to a later date, and contains the 
 Hesiotlic ideas and persons, enlarged and mystically disguised : 
 its vein of invention wjus less popular, adapted more to the con- 
 templation of a sect s|)ecially prepared than to the taste of a 
 casual audience, and i^ appears accordingly to have obtained cur- 
 rency chiefly among puj'ely speculative men.' Among the major- 
 
 bome some analogy to the Orphic. See Dio^n. Lat'rt. i. 119, Sturz. Frag^ 
 ment. Phertkyd. § 5-6, Brandis, Handbuch, ut sup. c. xxii. Therekyd^ 
 partially deviated from the mythical track or personal successions set forth by 
 Hesiod. iird oi ye fie fiL] /j. i vol avruv /cm rCfi fxrj fiv^cuCjQ uTravra keyeiVj 
 alov ^epeKV^T)^ Knl erepoi riveg, etc. (Aristot. Metaphys. N. p. 301, ed. 
 Brandis). Porphyrias, de A.ntro Nymphar. c. 31, kqi tov Ivpiov ^epeKvdov 
 fivxoi)^ Kai iSo^povc ko" 'ivrpa Kal i?i'paf Kal rrrAaf Xeyovru^, kgi did tovtuv 
 aiviTTOfxivov rug tuv rpvxCv yevtaeig Kal unoyeveaeir, etc. Eudemus tho 
 Peripatetic, pupil of Aristotle, had drawn up an account of the Orphic The- 
 ogony as well as of the doctrines of Pherekydcs, Akusilaus and others, which 
 was still in the hands of the Platonists of the fourth century, though it if 
 now lost. The extracts wh ich we find seem all to countenance the belief that 
 the Hesiodic Theogony formed the basis upon which they worked. See 
 about Akusilaus, Plato, Sympos. p. 178. Clem. Alex. Strom, p. 629. 
 
 ' The Orphic Theogony is never cited in the ample Scholia on Homer, 
 though Hesiod is often alluded to. (See Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 540). Nor 
 can it have l)een present to the minds of Xenophanes and Herakleitus, as 
 representing any widely diffused Grecian belief: the former, who so severely 
 condemned Homer and Hesiod, would have found Orpheus much mors 
 deserving of his censure : and the latter could hardly have omitted Orphena 
 from his memorable denunciation : — IloXvfuz&iTf voov ov StSuaKei • 'HaioSoit 
 yap uv kiida^e kgl Uv^ayopTjv, avric 6i Hevo^avf d re Kal 'E/caratov. Dioff 
 Laer. ix. 1. Isokrat^s treats Orpheus as the most censurable of all the poeti 
 
 Ity of these latter, however, it acquired greater veneration, and 
 above all was supposed to be of greater antiquity, than tho 
 Hesiodic. The belief in its superior antiquity (disallowed by 
 Herodotus, and seemingly also by Aristotle'), as well as the 
 respect for its contents, increased during the Alexandrine age and 
 through the declining centuries of Paganism, reaching its maxi- 
 mum among the New-Platonists of the third and fourth century 
 after Christ : both the Christian assailants, as well as the defend- 
 ers, of paganism, tieated it as the most ancient and venerable 
 summary of the Grecian faith. Orpheus is celebrated by Pindar 
 as the harper and companion of the Argonautic maritime heroes : 
 Orpheus and Musaeus, as well as Pamphos and Olen, the great 
 8upix)sed authors of theogonic, mystical, oracular, and prophetic 
 verses and hymns, were generally considered by literary Greeks 
 as older than either Hesiod or Homer :^ and such was also the 
 common opinion of modem scholars until a period comparatively 
 recent. It has now been shown, on sufficient ground, that the 
 
 See Busiris, p. 229 ; ii. p. 309, Bekk. The Theogony of Orj)heus, as con- 
 ceived by Apollonius Rhodius (i. 504) in the third century b. c, and by 
 Nigidius in the first century b. c. (Servius ad Virgil. Eclog. iv. 10), seems to 
 have been on a more contracted scale than that which is given in tlie text 
 But neither of them notice the tale of Zagreus, which we know to be as old 
 as Onomakritus. 
 
 ' This opinion of Herodotus is implied in the remarkable passage about 
 Homer and Hesiod, ii, .53, though he never once names Orpheus — only 
 alluding once to " Orphic ceremonies," ii. 81. He speaks more than once of 
 the prophecies of Musaeus. Aristotle denied the past existence and reality 
 of Orpheus. See Cicero de Nat. Deor. i. 38. 
 
 * Pindar Pyth. iv. 177. Plato seems to consider Orpheus as more ancient 
 than Homer. Compare Theaetet. p. 179 ; Cratylus, p. 402; De Bepubl. ii. p. 
 864. The order in which Aristophands (and Hippias of Elis, ap. Clem. 
 Alex. Str. vi. p. 624) mentions them indicates the same view, Ranae, 1030. 
 It is unnecessary to cite the later chronologers, among whom the belief in 
 the antiquity of Orpheus was universal ; he was commonly described as son 
 of the Muse Calliope. Androtion seems to have denied that he was a 
 Thracian, regarding the Thracians as incurably stupid and illiterate. Andro 
 ti6n, Fragm. 36, ed. Didot. Ephorus treated him as having been a pupil of 
 the Idaean Dactyls of Phrygia (see Diodor. v. 64), and as having leami 
 from them his reXerdg and fxvavfjpLa, which he was the first to introduce 
 into Greece. The earliest mention which we find of Orpheus, is that of the 
 poet Ibycus (about b. o. 530), bvondiOiVTOv 'Opfri». Ibyd Fragm 9, p. 841, 
 ed. Schneidewin. 
 
 tN I 
 
HISTORY OF OBEECK. 
 
 MTSTIO BITES AND PBATERNITIES. 
 
 «♦■ X 
 
 oompodtioQS which pm^aed under these names emanate for tbe 
 most part fri^m poets oi* the Alexandrine age, and subsequent to 
 the Christian aera ; and that even the earliest among them, which 
 served as the stock on which the later additions were engrafted, 
 belong to a period far more recent than Hesiod ; probably to th« 
 century preceding Ononiakritus (b. c. GlO-iilU). It seems, how- 
 ever, certain, tliat liotfi Orpheus and Musaius were names of 
 established reputation at the time when Onomakritus flourished; 
 and it is distinctly state<l by Pausanias that the latter was him- 
 self the author of the most remarkable and characteristic mythe 
 of the Orphic Theogoiiy — the discerption of Zagreus by the 
 Titans, and his resu predion as DionysosJ 
 
 The names of Orpheus and Musjeus (as well as that of Pythi^ 
 goras,'-^ looking at one side of his character) represent facts of 
 importance in the history of the Grecian mind — the gradual 
 influx of Thracian, Phrygian, and Egyptian, religious ceremonies 
 and feelings, and the iacrea^ing diffusion of special mysteriea^« 
 
 * Pausao. viii. 37, 3. TtruMOC Se KpCtrov eg Troijjatv ia^yayev "Ofir/po^f t^touf 
 elvai aoui; vno roJ KaXov/nivio TapTUfUfi ■ kcu iariv kv 'H/udf bpKi^ tu iirij' napd 
 ^e 'Ofiiipov ''OvofiuKpiTOf;, ■rrapaXafiuv tCjv TtTiivuiv to ovofj,a, Aiovva(f) re 
 avve-&ijKfv opyia, Kal flvat rovg Tirdvac T(j Aiovvau) tijv Tra^ijfiaTuv knoUiaev 
 avTovpyovg. Both the date, the character and the function of Onomakritua 
 are distinctly niflrked by Herodotus, vii. 6. 
 
 " Herodotus F)elieved in the derivation both of the Orphic and Fythagorean 
 regulations from Egypt — ouoAoyeovai fie ravra roiat 'OpipiKolai KaAeofitvoiai 
 Kai HaKxmoiai, kovac 6i A.i} urrTioiai (ii. 81). He knows the names of tiioae 
 Greeks wlio have borrowed from Egypt the doctrine of the metempsychosis, 
 but he will not mention them (ii. 123) : he can hardly allude to Huy cue bat 
 the Pythagoreans, many ol' whom he probably knew in Italy. See the 
 curioui} extract from Xenophanrs respecting the doctrine of Pythagoras, 
 Diogen. Lat'irt. viii. 37 ; and the quotation from the Silli of Timon, IlinJa- 
 yopav de yor/Tog unoKXivavr" km do^au, etc Compare Porphyr. in Vii 
 Pythag. c. 41. 
 
 ' Aristophan Ran. 1030. — 
 
 'Op^et)f fiev yap Te?.er(ig i^' ijinlv KaridEi^e, <p6vov r' aiTFxecr&aL • 
 MovffOAOf t\ k^aKEoeig re voouv Koi xpV^^f^ovc ' 'Ha/otJof 61, 
 Trig kpyacriag, KopirCw (opag, Aporovg • 6 6e \^eiog 'Ojuijpof 
 'A.it<b rov Tifirjv kqX kHo^ laxev, tz'X^v rovi^', bri xRV^^t' i^idcffxeVn 
 'Aperdf, ra^eif, dTrXiffnc avAp<jv\ etc. 
 
 T\ie lame general contrast is to be foand in Plato, Protagoraa, p. 316 ; tl» 
 opinion of Paosanias, ix. 30, 4. The poems of Mussbus seem to b%re 
 
 idiemes for religious purification, and orgies (I venture to angli- 
 cize the Greek word, which contains in its original meaning no 
 implication of the ideas of excess to which it was afterwards 
 diverted) in honor of some particular god — distinct both from 
 the public solemnities and from the gentile solemnities of primi- 
 tive Greece, — celebrated apart from the citizens generally, and 
 approachable only through a certain course of preparation and 
 initiation — sometimes even forbidden to be talked of in the 
 presence of the uninitiated, under the severest threats of divine 
 judgment. Occasionally such voluntary combinations assumed 
 the form of permanent brotherhoods, bound together by periodical 
 solemnities as well as by vows of an ascetic character : thus the 
 Orphic life (as it was called) or regulation of the Orphic brother- 
 hood, among other injunctions partly arbitrary and partly absti- 
 nent, forbade animal food universally, and on certain occasions, 
 the use of woollen clothing.' The great religious and political 
 fraternity of the Pythagoreans, which acted so powerfully on the 
 condition of the Italian cities, was one of the many manifestations 
 of this general tendency, which stands in striking contrast with 
 the simple, open-hearted, and demonstrative worship of the 
 Homeric Greeks. 
 
 Festivals at seed-time and harvest — at the vintage and at the 
 opening of the new wine — were doubtless coeval with the earli- 
 est habits of the Greeks ; the latter being a period of unusual 
 joviality. Yet in the Homeric poems, Dionysos and Demeter, 
 the patrons of the vineyard and the cornfield, are seldom men- 
 tioned, and decidedly occupy little place in the imagination of the 
 poet as compared with the other gods : nor are they of any con- 
 spicuous importance even in the Hesiodic Theogony. But during 
 the interval between Hesiod and Onomakritus, the revolution in 
 the religious mind of Greece was such as to place both these 
 deities in the front rank. According to the Orphic doctrine, 
 Zagreus, son of Persephone, is destined to be the successor of 
 Zeus, and although the violence of the Titans intercepts this lol, 
 
 considerable analogy to the Melampodia aticribed to Hesiod (see Clemen. 
 Alex. Str. vi. p. 628) ; and healing chartiis are ascribed to Orpheos as well 
 ■i to Muaaeus. See Eurip. Alcestis, 986. 
 
 ' Herod, ii. 81 ; Euripid. Hippol. 957, and the corions fragment of the kw 
 fL^ret of Euripides. 'Oo^koI ^'uh, Plato, Legg. riL 782. 
 
 VoLl • 
 
r 
 
 M 
 
 HISTORY OF 6BEECE. 
 
 yet eren when he rises again from his discerptioo under the 
 name of Dionysos, he is the colleague and coequal of his divine 
 
 father. 
 
 This remarkable change, occurring as it did during the sixth 
 and a part of the se\ enth century before the Christian aera, may 
 be traced to the influence of communication with Egypt (which 
 only became fully of»en to the Greeks about b. c. 660), as well 
 as with Thrace, Phrygia, and Lydia. From hence new religious 
 ideas and feelings were introduced, which chiefly attached them- 
 selves to the characters of Dionysos and Demeter. The Greeks 
 identified these two deities with the great Egyptian Osiris and 
 Isis, so that what was borrowed from the Egyptian worship of 
 the two latter naturally fell to their equivalents in the Grecian 
 system.' Moreover the worship of Dionysos (under what name 
 cannot be certainly made out) was indigenous in Thrace,^ 
 as that of the Great Mother was in Phyrgia, and in Lydia — 
 together with those violent ecstasies and manifestations of tem 
 porary frenzy, and tliat clashing of noisy instruments, which we 
 find afterwards chanicterizing it in Greece. The great nmstera 
 of the pipe — as well as the dythyramb,^ and indeed the whole 
 musical system appropriated to the worship of Dionysos, which 
 
 » Herodot ii. 42, 59, 144. 
 
 • Herodot ▼. 7, vii. Ill ; Euripid. Hecub. 1249, and Rhesus, 969. and the 
 Prologue to the Bacchje ; Strabo, x. p. 470 ; Schol. ad Aristophan. Aves, 
 874; Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 1069; Harpccrat. v. 2a/3o« ; Photius, 
 Evoi la(3oi. The "Lydiaca" of Th. Menke (Berlin, 1843) trace« the 
 early connection between the religion of Dionysos and that of Cybele, c. 6, 
 7. Hoeckh's Kr^ta (vol. i. p. 128-134) is instructive respecting the Phrygian 
 
 religtin. 
 
 ^ Aristotle, Polit viii. 7, 9. Udaa ytip BaKxna Kal naaa ^ roiavrri Kivvaii 
 ttaXiaTa tQv bpyavuv iariv h rolg aiXotr rdv (5' &p/xoviuv kv role ^pvyi<rrl 
 ueXem Xafi^aveL raina rd irpenov, olov 6 dtdvpafi^o^ 6oKel ofioXoyov/xevcH 
 rival ^pvytov. Enrip. Bacch. 58. — 
 
 Alp€(r&e Tuntx^pi' kv -KokeL ^pvyuv 
 
 Tvuirava, Teag re {iTirpb^ ifiH ^' eip^fiara, etc. 
 
 Plutarch, E;. in Delph. c. 9 ; Philochor. Fr. 21, ed. DViot, p. 389. The com- 
 plete and intimate manner in which Euripides identifies the Bacchic rite* of 
 Dionysos with the Phryjrian ceremonies in honor of the Great Mother, is Tery 
 lemarkabls. The fine deacription given by Lucretins (ii. 600-640) ci Ha 
 PhrygiMi Trorship is mnch enfeebled by his unsatisfactory allegoriaing 
 
 POST-HOMERIC CHANGES IN REUGION. )§ 
 
 eontrasted so pointedly with the quiet solemnity of the Pseao 
 addressed to Apollo — were all originally Phrygian. 
 
 From all these various countries, novelties, unknown to the 
 Homeric men, found their way into the Grecian worship : and 
 there is one amongst them which deserves to be specially noticed, 
 because it marks the generation of the new clasa of ideas in 
 their theology. Homer mentions many persons guilty of private 
 or involuntary homicide, and compelled either to go into exile or 
 to make pecuniary satisfaction ; but he never once describes any 
 of them to have either received or required purification for the 
 crime.' Now in the time subsequent to Homer, purification for 
 homicide comes to be considered as indispensable: the guilty 
 person is regarded as unfit for the society of man or the worship 
 of the gods until he has received it, and special ceremonies are 
 prescribed whereby it is to be administered. Herodotus tells us 
 that the ceremony of purification was the same among the Lydi- 
 ans and among the Greeks :2 we know that it formed no part of 
 the early religion of the latter, and we may perhaps reasonably 
 suspect that they borrowed it from the former. The oldest 
 instance known to us of expiation for homicide was contained in 
 the epic poem of the Milesian .Arktinu8,3 wherein Achilles ig 
 
 * Schol ad Iliad, xi. 690 — ov 6iu rit Ka&dpma 'l<piTov nop^elrai ij IIvAof, 
 kizEL TOL 'Odvaaevq fiei^uv ^earopog, kqI nap' 'O/ifjpif) ovk olda/iev <povea ko- 
 &aip6fievov, tikX avriTivovTa 7/ (pvyadevo/xevov. The examples are numer- 
 ous, and are found both in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Iliad, ii. 665 {Tlipo- 
 Umos); xiii. 697 (Meddn) -, xiii. 574 (Epeigeus); xxiii. 89 ( Patroclos) -^ 
 Odyss. XV. 224 (Theoclymenos) ; xiv. 380 fan jEtdian). Nor does the inter- 
 esting mythe respecting the functions of At^ and the Litae harmonize with 
 the subsequent doctrine about the necessity of purification. (Iliad, ix. 498). 
 
 * Herodot. i. 35 — eart de napaTrXTjaiTf tj KU'^apaig rolai Avdocm Kal rolai 
 'Ellrjat. One remarkable proof, amongst many, of the deep hold which 
 this idea took of the greatest minds in Greece, that serious mischief would 
 fall upon the community if family quarrels or homicide remained without 
 religious expiation, is to be found in the objections which Aristotle urges 
 against the community of women proposed in the Platonic Republic. It 
 could not be known what individuals stood in the relation of father, son or 
 brother : if, therefore, wrong or murder of kindred should take place, the 
 appropriate religious atonements (al vo/ii^ofievai Xvaeic) could not be applied, 
 and the crime would go unexpiated. (Aristot. Polit. ii. 1, 14. Compare 
 Thucyd. i. 125-128). 
 
 * See the Fragm. of the ^thiopis of Arktinus, in DOntzer's Collection, p. I« 
 TOL. /. % 
 
fflSTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 puri63d by Odysseus for the murder of Thersites ; seveial othen 
 occurred in the later or Hesiodic epic — Herakles, Peleus, Belle- 
 rophon, Alkmjeon, Amphiktyon, Pa?mander, Triopas, — from 
 whence they probably passed throuorh the liands of the logogm 
 phers to Apollodorus, Diodorus, and others.' The purification 
 of the murderer was originally operated, not by the hands of any 
 priest or specially sanctified man, but by those of a chief or king, 
 who goes through the apjiropriate ceremonies in the manner 
 recounted by Herodotus in his pathetic narrative respecting 
 Cropsus and Adrastus. 
 
 The idea of a special taint of crime, and of the necessity as 
 well as the sufficiency of prescribed religious ceremonies as a 
 means of removing it, appears thus to have got looting in Grecian 
 practice subsequent to the time of Homer. The peculiar rites 
 or orgies, composed or put together by Onomakritus, Methapus,* 
 and other men of more than the ordinary piety, were founded 
 upon a similar mode of thinking, and adapted to the same mental 
 exigencies. They were voluntary religious manifestations, super- 
 induced upon the old public sacrifices of the king or chiefs on 
 behalf of the whole society, and of the father on his own family 
 hearth — they marked out the details of divine service proper to 
 appease or gratify the god to whom they were addressed, and to 
 procure for the believers who went through them his blessings 
 and protection here or hereafter — the exact performance of the 
 divine service in all its specialty was held necessary, and thus the 
 priests or Hierophants, who alone were familiar with the ritual, 
 acquired a commanding position.^ Generally speaking, the^ 
 
 ' The references for tliis are collected in Lobeck's Aglaophamos. Epi- 
 inetr. ii. ad Orphica, p. %8. 
 
 ' Paasanias (iv. 1, 5) — fiereKoafirjce yilp koI Me^airoc r^c reXer^c (the 
 Eleusinian Orgies, carried by Kaukon from Eleusis into Messenia), iffTiv d. 
 O Ak Mei^oTTOf yivog fxev 7fv 'k'&rjvaio^, teXct^^ re koI opyiuv iravroiup 
 jiv&eTTjg. Again, viii. 37, 3, Onomakritus i^iovi<a<f> crvve^ij Kev opyia^ 
 ?tc This is another expression designating the same idea as the Rhesus of 
 Earipidda, 944. — 
 
 Mvtmfpiuv re rov diroftjif^Tuv <pavctc 
 
 ' T61in^, the ancestor of the Syracnsan despot Gelo, acquired great 
 politieal power as possesning rd /pd r£»v x^oviuv ^euv (Hemdot. rii 153); 
 
 PRIESTS, PROPHETS, NEW CEREMONIAL, ETC. f| 
 
 peculiar orgies obtained their admission and their influence at 
 periods of distress, disease, public calamity and danger, or re- 
 ligious terror and despondency, which appear to have been but 
 too frequent in their occurrence. 
 
 The minds of men were prone to the belief that what tliey 
 were suffering arose from the displeasure of some of the gods, 
 and as they found that the ordinary sacrifices and worship were 
 insufficient for their protection, so they grasped at new sugges- 
 tions proposed to them with the view of regaining the divine 
 favor.' Such suggestions were more usually copied, either in 
 whole or in part, from the religious rites of some foreign locality, 
 or from some other portion of the Hellenic world ; and in this 
 manner many new sects or voluntary religious fraternities, prom- 
 ising to relieve the troubled conscience and to reconcile the sick 
 or suffering with the offended gods, acquired permanent establish- 
 ment as well as considerable influence. They were generally 
 under the superintendence of hereditary families of priests, who 
 imparted the rites of confirmation and purification to communi- 
 cants generally ; no one who went through the prescribed cere- 
 monies being excluded. In many cases, such ceremonies fell into 
 the hands of jugglers, who volunteered their services to wealthy 
 men, and degraded their profession as well by obtrusive venality 
 as by extravagant promises :2 sometimes the price was lowered 
 
 he and his family became hereditary Hierophants of these ceremonies. How 
 Tdlines acqaired the Ipa Herodotus cannot say — d^ev 6e aird IXafie. 1^ 
 avToq tKTijaaro, tovto ovk Ix^ e'nroi. Probably there was a traditional 
 legend, not inferior in sanctity to that of Eleusis, tracing them to the gift of 
 Dimeter herself. 
 
 * See Josephus cont. Apion. ii. c. 35. ; Hesych. Oeot ^evioi ; Strabo, x. p 
 471 ; Plutarch, Uepl Aetaidaifiov. c. iii. p. 166; c. vii. p. 167. 
 
 ' Plato, Republ ii. p. 364 ; Demosthen. de Corona, c. 79, p. 313. The 
 deL<ndai[iu)v of Theophrastus cannot be comfortable without receiving the 
 Orphic communion monthly from the Orpheotelest» (Theophr. C!har. xvL>. 
 Compare Plutarch, Uepl rov fi^ XP^'^ Ifxfierpa, etc., c. 25, p. 400. The comic 
 writer Phrjmichus indicates the existence of these rites of religious excite- 
 ment, at Athens, during the Peloponnesian war. See the short fragment of 
 nus Kpovof , ap. Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 989 - 
 
 *Av^p x*>ptvei, Koi rd rov ^eoO Ka?Mf' 
 Bovkei Aiotrei'&T] fieraSpafuj Kal rvfiirava ; 
 
 Diopeith^ was a xp^<rf*oXoyoi, or coUecter and deliT«rer of pwphbcm^ 
 
mSTORY OF GBEECE. 
 
 to bring them within reach of the poor and even of slaves. But 
 the wide diffusion, and the number of voluntary communicants 
 •f these solemnities, j)roves how much they fell in with the feel- 
 ing of the time and how much respect they enjoyed — a respect, 
 which the more conspicuous estabhshments, such as Eieusis and 
 Samothrace, maintained for several centuries. And the visit of 
 the Kretan Epimenides to Athens — in the time of Solon, and 
 at a season of the most serious disquietude and dread of having 
 offended the gods — illustrates the tranquillizing effect of new 
 orgies' and rites of absolution, when enjoined by a man standing 
 high in the favor of the gods and reputed to be the son of a 
 nymph. The supposed Erythraean Sibyl, and the earliest collec- 
 tion of Sibylline prophecies,^ afterwards so much multiplied and 
 interpolated, and refcjrred (according to Grecian custom) to an 
 age even earlier than Homer, appear to belong to a date not long 
 posterior to Epimenides. Other oracular verses, such as those of 
 Bakis, were treasured up in Athens and other cities : the sixth 
 century before the Christian aera was fertile in these kinds of 
 religious manifestations. 
 
 Amongst the special rites and orgies of the character just 
 described, those which enjoyed the greatest Pan-Hellenic reputar 
 tion were attached to the Idiean Zeus in Krete, to Dem^ter at 
 Eieusis, to the Kabeiri in Samothrace, and to Dionysos at Delphi 
 
 which he sung (or rather, perhaps, recited) with solemnity and emphasis, in 
 public, uare irocovvreg x^V^f^o^C aifTol ^idoaa' ^deiv AioTrei^ei r^ Trapafiat- 
 vo/ihif). (Ameipsias ap. Schol. Aristophan. ut sup., which illustratei 
 Thucyd. ii. 21). 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, c. 12 ; Diogen. Lafirt. i. 110. 
 
 ' See Klausen, '• ^nea.s und die Penaten:" his chapter on the connection 
 between the Grecian and Roman Sibylline collections is among the most 
 ingenious of his learned book. Book ii. pp. 210-240 ; see Steph. Byz. ▼ 
 Tipyig. 
 
 To the same age belong the XPV^H-^^ and Ko^apfiol of Abaris and his mar 
 vellous journey through tlie air upon an arrow (Herodot. iv. 36). 
 
 Epimenides also composed Ka^apfiol in epic verse ; his Kovpijruv and 
 ILopvfiavTuv yiveaig^ and his four thousand verses respecting Minos and 
 Rhadamanthys, if they had been preserved, would let us fully into the idea* 
 of a religious mystic of that age respecting the antiquities of Greeoo. 
 (Strabo, x. p. 474; Diog«n. La€rt. i. 10). Among the poems ascribed to 
 Hesiod were comprised not only the Melampodia, but also iirij fjavriKd vui 
 *^r^<y«f ^'rt Tepaniv. Pansan. ix. 31 4. 
 
 INFLUENCE OF EXTRA-HELLENIC REUGION. !• 
 
 and Thebes.1 That they were all to a great degree analogous, 
 is shown by the way in which they unconsciously run together 
 and become confused in the minds of various authors : the an- 
 cient inquirers themselves were unable to distinguish one from 
 the other, and we must be content to submit to the like ignorance. 
 But we see enough to satisfy us of the general fact, that during 
 the century and a half which elapsed between the opening of 
 Egypt to the Greeks and the commencement of their struggle 
 with the Persian kings, the old religion was largely adulterated 
 by importations from Egypt, Asia Minor,^ and Thrace. The 
 rites grew to be more furious and ecstatic, exhibiting the utmost 
 excitement, bodily as well as mental : the legends became at once 
 more coarse, more tragical, and less pathetic The manifestations 
 of this frenzy were strongest among the women, whose religious 
 susceptibilities were often found extremely unmanageable,^ and 
 who had everywhere congregative occasional ceremonies of their 
 Dwn, part from the men — indeed, in the case of the colonists, 
 especially of the Asiatic colonists, the women had been originally 
 women of the country, and as such retained to a great degree 
 their non-Hellenic manners and feelings.-* The god Diony- 
 
 * Among other illustrations of this general resemblance, may be counted 
 an epitaph of Kallimachns upon an aged priestess, who passed from the 
 service of Demeter to that of the Kabeiri, then to that of Cybele, having 
 the superintendence of majiy young women. Kallimachus, Epigram. 42. p. 
 308. ed. Ernest. 
 
 * Plutarch, (Defect. Oracul. c. 10, p. 415) treats these countries as the orig' 
 inal seat of the worship of Daemons (wholly or partially bad, and interme> 
 diate between gods and men), and their religious ceremonies as of a corres- 
 ponding character . the Greeks were borrowers from them, according to liim, 
 both of the doctrine and of the ceremonies. 
 
 ' Strabo, vii. p. 297. 'Airavreg yd.p TTjg Sei(ndaifiovia^ a.pxriy<n>C olovrai rdf 
 yvvaiKac ' air at 6e Kcli Toi)c avdpac irponaXovvrai kq rdf knl irXiov Repair eioi 
 Tuv ^euv, Kol kopTcL^, Kal 'KOTviaofiov^. Plato (De Legg. x. pp. 909, 910) 
 takes great pains to restrain this tendency on the part of sick or suffering 
 persons, especially women, to introduce new sacred rites into his city. 
 
 * Herodot. i. 146. The wives of the Ionic original settlers at Miletos wer« 
 Karian women, whose husbands they slew. 
 
 The violences of the Karian worship are attested by what Herodotus sayi 
 of the Karian residents in Egypt, at the festival of Isis at Busiris. The 
 Egyptians at this festival manifested their feeling by beating themselves, the 
 Karians by cutting their faces with knives (ii. 61). The KapLK^ fiovaa 
 became provi rbial for funeral wailings (Pla^, ^^^- ^* P- 800) : tba as 
 
 I 
 
 !' 
 
BISTORT OF fiRBECB. 
 
 1,^ whom the legends described as clothed in feminine attire, ana 
 leading a troop of i"renzied women, inspired a temporary ecstasy, 
 and those who resisted the inspiration, being supposed to disobey 
 his will, were punished either by particular judgments or by 
 mental terrors ; while those who gave full loose to the feeling, in 
 the appropriate season and with the received solemnities, satisfied 
 his exigencies, and believed themselves to have procured immu- 
 nitv from such disquietudes for the future.'^ Crowds of women, 
 clothed with fawn-skins and bearing the sanctified thyrsus, flocked 
 to the solitudes of Parnassus, or Kitha^ron, or Taygetus, during 
 the consecrated trionrial period, passed the night there with 
 torches, and abandone<l themselves to demonstrations of frantic 
 excitement, with dancing and clamorous invocation of the god : 
 Ihey were said to tear animals limb from limb, to devour the raw 
 
 aaeasiired effusions and demonstrations of sorrow for the departed, some 
 times accompanied by cutting and mutilation self-inflicted by the mouniei 
 was a distinguishing feature in Asiatics and Egyptians as compared with 
 Greeks. Plutanh, Consolat. ad Apollon. c. 22, p. 123. Motu*nfui feeling 
 was, in fact, a sort of desecration of the genuine and primitive Grecian fes- 
 tival, which was a sea.son of cheerful harmony and social enjoyment, where 
 in the god was believed to sympathize {cv^poavvrj). See Xenophan6s ap. 
 Aristot. Rhetor, ii. 25; Xenophan. Fragm. 1. ed. Schneidewin; Theognis, 
 776 ; Flutarch, I)e Superstit p. 169. The unfavorable comments of Diony 
 Bins of Ilalicarnassus, in so far as they refer to the festivals of Greece, apply 
 to the foreign coiTUptions, not to the native character, of Grecian worship. 
 
 ' The Lydian Herakles was conceived and worshipped as a man m 
 female attire : this idea occurs often in the Asiatic religions. Mencke, 
 Lydiaca, c. 8, p. 22. ^iovvao<: u^j!>7iv Kai i^z/Avf. Aristid. Or. iv. p. 28; 
 iEt?chyl. Fragm. Edoni, ap. Aristoph. Thesmoph. \8h. Uodand^ 6 yvvvif ^ 
 TIC TTurpa ; r/f ^ oro^.r/ ; 
 
 • Melampos ciu^s the women (whom Dionysos has struck mad for theil 
 resistance to his rites), nafHiXaiStJV rove dwarururovc tuv veaviuv fier^ aXa- 
 "kayfiov Kai rivog kv&eov ;^opetaf. ApoUodor. ii. 2, 7. Compare Eurip 
 Bacch. 861. 
 
 Plato (Legg. vii. p. 790) gives a similar theory of the healing effect of die 
 Korybantic rites, which ciu"ed vague and inexplicable terrors of the mind bj 
 means of dancing and music conjoined with religious ceremonies — €d rd 
 rwv ViopviiuvTutv iufiara i eXovaai (the practitioners were women), al rum 
 iK4p6vuv BaKXtiuv iuaeic — v rCtv i^u'&ev Kparti Kivijaic irpoaiftepofiinf ti^ 
 ivrdc fo^epav ovsjav kcU /lavuc^v Kivtiaiv — bpxovfiivcvc 6e koI aiXovfUventt 
 icrrd ^euvy oif av KaXXieprfffovrec iicaaroL i^uatv, Karetpyaaaro dvrl uavuuim 
 
 DIONYSIA, KORYBANTES, ETC. 
 
 31 
 
 flesh, and to cut themselves without feeling the wound.' The 
 men yielded to a similar impulse by noisy revels in the streets, 
 sounding the cymbals and tambourine, and carrying the image of 
 the god in procession.'-^ It deserves to be remarked, that the 
 Athenian women never practised these periodical mountain excur- 
 sions, so common among the rest of the Greeks : they had their 
 feminine solemnities of the Thesmophoria,^ mournful in their 
 character and accompanied with fasting, and their separate con- 
 gregations at the temples of Aphrodite, but without any extreme 
 or unseemly demonstrations. The state festival of the Dyonysia, 
 in the city of Athens, was celebrated with dramatic entertain- 
 ments, and the once rich harvest of Athenian tragedy and comedy 
 was thrown up under its auspices. The ceremonies of the Kure- 
 tes in Krete, originally armed dances in honor of the Id^ean Zeus 
 seem also to have borrowed from Asia so much of fury, of self- 
 infliction, and of mysticism, that they became at last inextricably 
 confounded with the Phrygian Korybantes or worshippers of the 
 Great Mother ; though it appears that Grecian reserve alwaya 
 stopped short of the irreparable self-mutilation of Atys. 
 
 The influence of the Thracian religion upon that of the Greeks 
 cannot be traced in detail, but the ceremonies contained in it were 
 of a violent and fierce character, like the Phrygian, and acted 
 upon Hellas in the same general direction as the latter. And the 
 like may be said of the Egyptian religion, which was in this case 
 the more operative, inasmuch as all the intellectual Greeks were 
 naturally attracted to go and visit the wonders on the banks of the 
 
 ' Described in the Bacrhae of Euripides (140, 735, 1135, etc). Ovid, 
 Trist. iv. i. 41. " Utque suum Bacchis non sentit saucia vulnus, Cum furit 
 Edonis exululata jugis." In a fragment of the poet Alkman, a Lydian by birth, 
 the Bacchanal nymphs are represented as milking the lioness, and making 
 cheese of the milk, during their mountain excursions and festivals. (Alk- 
 man. Fragm. 14. Schn. Compare Aristid. Orat. iv. p. 29). Clemem 
 Alcxand. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 9, Sylb.; Lucian, Dionysos, c 3, T. iii. p. f r, 
 Hcmsterh. 
 
 ^ See the tale of Skyl^s in Herod, iv. 79, and Athenaeus, x. p. 445. Hero- 
 dotus mentions that the Scythians abhorred the Bacchic ceremonies, account 
 ing the frenzy which belonged to them to be disgraceful and monstrous. 
 
 » Plutarch, De Isid. et Osir. c 69, p. 378 ; Schol. ad Aristoph. Thesmoph 
 There were however Bacchic ceremonies practised to a certain extent bj tht 
 Athenian women. (Aristoph. Lysist. 388). 
 
 ' 
 
\i 
 
 Jf HI6TOBT OP GREECE. 
 
 JTue ; tbe powerfijl effect produced upon thejn is attested by n:ai<v 
 evidences, but especially by the interesting narrative of Herodo- 
 tus. Now the Egyptian ceremonies were at once more licentious, 
 and more profuse in the outpouring both of joy and sorrow, than 
 tbe Greek :^ but a still gre&trr difference sprang from the extra- 
 ordinary power, separate mode of life, minute observances, and 
 elalwrate organization, of the priesthood. The ceremonies of 
 Egypt were multitudinous, but the legends concerning them were 
 framed by the priests, and as a general rule, seemingly, known to 
 the priests alone : at least they were not intended to be publicly 
 talked of, even by pious men. They were " holy stories," which 
 it was sacrilege publicly to mention, and which from this very 
 prohibition only took firmer hold of the minds of the Greek vis- 
 itors who heard them. And thus the element of secrecy and 
 mystic silence — fbreif^n to Homer, and only faintly glanced at in 
 Hesiod — if it was not originally derived from Egypt, at least 
 received from thence its greatest stimulus and diffusion. The 
 character of the legends themselves was naturally affected by 
 this change from publicity to secrecy : the secrets when revealed 
 would be such as to justify by their own tenor the interdict on 
 public divulgation : instead of being adapted, like the Homeric 
 mythe, to the univen^al sympathies and hearty interest of a 
 crowd of hearers, they would derive their impress! veness from 
 the tragical, mournful, extravagant, or terror-striking character 
 of the incidents.2 Such a tendency, which appears explicable 
 and probable even on general grounds, was in this particular case 
 rendered still more certain by the coarse taste of the Egyptian 
 priests. That any recondite doctrine, religious or philosophical, 
 was attached to the mysteries or contained in the holy stories, 
 
 ' " ^gyptiaca nuinina fere plangoribus gaudent, Grseca pleromque chor 
 eis, barbara autem strejMtu cymbalistarum et tympanistamm et choraoUr 
 rum." (Apuleius, De Genio Swratis, v. ii. p. 149, Oudend). 
 
 • The legend of Dionysos and Prosymnos, as it stands in Clemens, cocdd 
 never have found place ir an epic poem (Admonit- ad Gent p. 22, Sylb.). 
 Compare page 1 1 of the same work, where however he so confounds together 
 Phrygian, Bacchic, and lileusinian mysteries, that one cannot distingaiah 
 them apart. 
 
 Demetrius Phaldrens saje aboat the legends belonging to these oereciomii 
 •-> Atd Kal Tu fivarfjpta Xeytrai iv aX^yopiaii irpdg kKTzXij^tv Kal fpl 
 «f V, uanep h okotu) kcU vtcrl. (De Interpretatione, c lOU. 
 
 EGYPTIAN AND THKA.CIAN HELTGION. 
 
 38 
 
 has never been shown, and is to the last degree improbaola 
 though the affirmative has been asserted by many learned men 
 Herodotus seems to have believed that the worship and pere- 
 monies of Dionysos generally were derived by the Greeks from 
 ^gTPtj brought over by Kadmus and taught by him to Melampua . 
 and the latter appears in the Hesiodic Catalogue as having cured 
 th«j daughters of Proetus of the mental distemper with which they 
 had been smitten by Dionysos for rejecting his ritual. He cured 
 Ihem by introducing the Bacchic dance and fanatical excitement: 
 this mythical incident is the most ancient mention of the Diony- 
 siac solemnities presented in the same character as they bear in 
 Euripides. It is the general tendency of Herodotus to apply the 
 theory of derivation from Egypt far too extensively to Grecian 
 mstitutions : the orgies of Dionysos were not originally borrowed 
 from thence, though they may have been much modified by con- 
 nection with Egypt as well as with Asia. The remarkable mythe 
 composed by Onomakritus respecting the dismemberment of 
 Zagreus was founded upon an Egyptian tale very similar respect- 
 ing the body of Osiris, who was supposed to be identical with 
 Dionysos :> nor was it unsuitable to the reckless fury of the Bac- 
 chanals during their state of temporary excitement, wliich found 
 a still more awful expression in the mythe of Pentheus, — torn 
 in pieces by his own mother Agave at the head of her compan- 
 ions in the ceremony, as an intruder upon the feminine rites as 
 well as a scoffer at the god.a A passage in the Iliad (the authen- 
 ticity of which has been contested, but even as an interpolation it 
 must be old)' also recounts how Lykurgus was struck blind by 
 Zeus for having chased away with a whip " the nurses of the mad 
 Dionysos,'* and frightened the god himself into the sea to take 
 
 ' Seethe curious treatise of Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. c. 11-14. p 
 556, and his elaborate attempt to allegorize the legend. He seems to have 
 conceived that the Thracian Orpheus had first introduced into Greece the 
 mysteries both of Ddmfitfir and Dionysos, copying them from those of Isii 
 •nd Osiris in Egypt. See Fragm. 84, from one of his lost works, torn, v. p 
 891, ed. Wyttenb. ' ' ^ 
 
 • ^schylus had dramatized the story of Pentheus as well as that of Ly. 
 kurgus: one of his tetralogies was the Lykurgnia (Dindorf, ^sch. Fragofc 
 115). A short allusion to the story of Pentheus appears in Eamenid. Si 
 Compare Sophocl. Antigon. 985, and the Scholia. 
 
 » Iliad, vi. 130. See the rAnarks of Mr. Payne Knight adloc 
 
 ▼OI-. I 2* 
 
HISTOBY OF GREECE 
 
 refuge in the arms of Thetis : and the fact, that Dionjsos is ac 
 frequently represented in his mythes as encountering opposition 
 and punishing the refractory, seems to indicate that his worship 
 under its ecstatic form was a late phaenomenon and introduced not 
 without difficulty. The mythical Thracian Orpheus was attached 
 as J^ponymos to a new sect, who seem to have celebrated the cere- 
 monies of Dionysos with peculiar care, minuteness and fervor, 
 besides observing various rules in respect to food and clothing, 
 it was the opinion of FCerodotus, that these rules, as well as the 
 Pythagorean, were borrowed from Egypt. But whether this be 
 the fact or not, the Orphic brotherhood is itself both an evidence, 
 and a cause, of the increased importance of the worship of Dion- 
 ysos, which indeed is attested by the great dramatic poets of 
 Athens. 
 
 The Homeric Hymns present to us, however, the religious 
 ideas and legends of the Greeks at an earlier period, when the 
 enthusiastic and mystic tendencies had not yet acquired their full 
 development. Though not referable to the same ago or to the 
 same author as either the Iliad or the Odyssey, they do to a cer- 
 tain extent continue the same stream of feeling, and the same 
 mythical tone and coloring, as these poems — manifesting but 
 little evidence of Egyptian, Asiatic, or Thracian adulterations. 
 The difference is striking between the god Dionysos as he appears 
 in the Homeric hymn and in the Bacchae of Euripides. The 
 hymnographer describes him as standing on the sea-shore, in the 
 guhe of a beautiful and richly-clothed youth, when Tyrrhenian 
 pirates suddenly approach : they seize and bind him and drag 
 him on board their vessel. But the bonds which they employ 
 burst spontaneously, and leave the god free. The steersman, per- 
 ceiving this with affright, points out to his companions that they 
 have unwittingly laid hands on a god, — perhaps Zeus himself, 
 or Apollo, or Poseidon. He conjures them to desist, and to re- 
 place Dionysos respectfully on the shore, lest in his wrath he 
 fhould visit the ship with wind and hurricane : but the cr3w de- 
 ride his scruples, and Dionysos is earned prisoner out to sea with 
 the ship under full sail. Miraculous circumstances soon attest 
 both his presence and his power. Sweet-scented wine is seen to 
 flow spontaneously about the ship, the sail and mast appear 
 adorned with vine and iiy-leaves, and the oar-peti^s with garlands 
 
 HOMERIC HYMN TO DIONYSOS. 
 
 35 
 
 rhe terrified crew now too late entreat the helmsman to steer his 
 fiourse for the shore, and crowd round him for protection on the 
 poop. But their destruction is at hand : Dionysos assumes the 
 form of a Hon — a bear is seen standing near him — this bear 
 rushes with a loud roar upon the captain, while the crew leap 
 overboard in their agony of fright, and are changed into dolphins. 
 Ther : remains none but the discreet and pious steersman, to whom 
 Dionysos addresses words of affectionate encouragement, reveal- 
 ing his name, parentage and dignity. i 
 
 This hymn, perhaps produced at the Naxian festival of Dion- 
 ysos, and earlier than the time when the dithyrambic chorus be- 
 came the established mode of singing the praise and glory of that 
 god, is conceived in a spirit totally different from that of the Bac- 
 chic Telatae, or special rites which the Bacchas of Euripides so 
 abundantly extol, — rites introduced from Asia by Dionysos him- 
 self at the head of a thiasus or troop of enthusiastic women, — in- 
 flaming with temporary frenzy the minds of the women of Xliebes, 
 — not communicable except to those who approach as pious com- 
 municants, — and followed by the most tragical results to all those 
 who fight against the god.2 The Bacchic Teletae, and the Bac- 
 chic feminine frenzy, were importations from abroad, as Euripides 
 represents them, engrafted upon the joviality of the primitive 
 Greek Dionysia ; they were borrowed, in all probability, from 
 more than one source and introduced through more than one 
 
 ' See Homer, Hymn 5, Aiovvaoc r) Ayarai. — The satirical drama of Euri- 
 pid^^s, the Cyclops, extends and alters this old legend. Dionysos is carried 
 away by the Tyrrhenian pirates, and Sil^nus at the head of the BacchaDals 
 goes everywhere in search of him (Eur. Cyc. 112). The pirates are instiga- 
 ted against him hy the hatred of H6r^, which appears frequently as a cause 
 of mischief to Dionysos (Bacchae, 286). Her^ in her anger had driven him 
 mad when a child, and he had wandered in this state over Egypt and Syria; 
 at length he came to Cybela in Phrygia, was purified (Ka^ap&elc) by Rhea, 
 and received from her female attire (Apollodor. iii. 5, 1, with Heyne'snote> 
 This seems to have been the legend adopted to explain the old verse of th« 
 Diad, as well as the maddening attributes of the god generally. 
 
 There was a standing antipathy between the priestesses and the religknK 
 establiahments of H^re and Dionysos (Plutarch, Uepl rdv kv 11 Aara/atf 
 Laidukwvf c. 2, tom. v. p. 75.5, ed. Wytt.;. Plutarch ridicules the legendary 
 reason commonly assigned for this, and provides a symbolical explanatior 
 iHiich he thinks very satisfactory. 
 
 * Enrip. Bacch. 325, 464, etc. 
 
 .J 
 
 t 
 
 
 If 
 
 ^1 
 
86 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DIFFERENCES m THE HtMBHIP OP DIONYSOa 
 
 channel, the Oq)hic life or brotherhood being one of the varieties. 
 Strabo ascribes to this latter a Thracian original, considering Or- 
 pheus, Musaeus, and Eumolpus as having been all Thracians.' It 
 is curious to observe how, in the BacchaB of Euripides, the two 
 distinct and even conflicting ideas of Dionysos come alternately 
 forward ; sometimes the old Grecian idea of the jolly and exhil- 
 arating god of wine — but more frequently the recent and import- 
 ed idea of tlie terrific and irresistible god who unseats the reason, 
 •od whose cBstrus can only be appeased by a willing, though tem- 
 porary obedience. In the fanatical impulse which inspired the 
 votaries of the Asiatic Rhea or Cybele, or of the Thracian Kotys, 
 there was nothing of spontaneous joy; it was a sacred madness, 
 during which the soul aj)peared to be surrendered to a stimulus 
 from without, and accompanied by preternatural strength and tem- 
 porary sense of power,- — altogether distinct from the unrestrain- 
 ed hilarity of the original Dionysia, as we see them in the rural 
 deme« of Attica, or in the gay city of Tarentum. There was 
 indeed a side on which the two bore some analogy, inasmuch as, 
 
 * Strabo, X p. 471 Compare Aristid. Or. iv. p. 28. 
 
 " In the lost Xantrur of tEscHvIus, in which seems to have been included 
 the tale of Pentheus, the ffoddess Xvfraa was introduced, stimulating the Bac- 
 ehs, and creating in them spasmodic excitement from head to foot : in iro- 
 iuv d' uvu 'TirepxeTai arrapay^o^ cl^ &Kf>ov Kupa, etc. fFragm. 155, DindorfJ. 
 His tragedy called Edoni also gave a terrific representation of the Bacchan* 
 als and their fury, exaggerated by the maddening music : Ilt/i n-Ar/tri ^tAof, 
 Maviac tirayuydv bfioKT^v (I'r. 54). 
 
 Sach also is the reigning sentiment throughout the greater part of the 
 Bacchffi of Euripides ; it is bronght out still more impressively in the moura- 
 ftil Atys of Catullus : — 
 
 " Dea magna, Dea Cybele, Dind3niii Dea, Domina, 
 Procul a men tuus sit furor omnis, hera, domo : 
 Alios age incitatos : alios age rabidos ! " 
 
 We have only to compare this fearful influence with the description ol 
 Bikseopolis and his exuberant joviality in the festival of the rural Dionysia 
 CAristoph. Acham 1051 sa/. ; see also Plato. Legg. i. p. 637), to see how com 
 pletely the foreign innovations recolored the old Grecian Dionysos, — Atov- 
 y<Tof TToXvy jyt^^f , — who appears also in the scene of Dionysos and Ariadn^ 
 hi llie Symposion of Xenophon, c. 9. The simplicity of the ancient Diony- 
 •i«c processions is dwelt upon by Plutarch, De Cupidine Divitianiin, p. 5 J7 
 and the original dithvramb addressed by Archilochns to Dioayfoa ia M 
 •flrnsion of «lrunkon hilaritv 'Archiloch. Frag. 69, Schneui.). 
 
 •coording to the religious point of view of the Greeks, even the 
 spontaneous joy of the vintage feast was conferred by the favoi 
 and enlivened by the companionship of Dionysos. It was upon 
 this analogy that the framers of the Bacchic orgies proceeded 
 but they did not the loss disligure the genuine character of the 
 old Grecian Dionysia. 
 
 Dionysos is in the conception of Pindar the Paredros or com- 
 panion in worship of Demeter : i the worship and religious esti- 
 mate of the latter has by that time undergone as great a change 
 as that of the former, if we take our comparison with the brief 
 description of Homer and Hesiod : she has acquired 2 much of the 
 awful and soul-disturbing attributes of the Phrygian Cybele. In 
 Homer. Demeter is the goddess of the com-fiold, who becomes 
 attached to the mortal man Jasion ; an unhappy passion, since 
 Zeus, jealous of the connection between goddesses and men, puts 
 him to death. In the Hesiodic Theogony, Demeter is the mother 
 of Persephone by Zeus, who permits Hades to carry off the latter 
 as his wife : moreover Demeter has, besides, by Jasion a son call- 
 ed Plutos, born in Krete. Even from Homer to Hesiod, the 
 legend of Demeter, has been expanded and her dignity exalted; 
 according to the usual tendency of Greek legend, the expansion 
 goes on still further. Through Jasion, Demeter becomes connect- 
 ed with the mysteries of Samothrace ; through Persephone, with 
 those of Eleusis. The former connection it is difficult to follow 
 out in detail, but the latter is explained and traced to its ori^ u 
 the Homeric Hymn to Demeter. 
 
 * Pindar, Isthm. vi. 3. x<^^'^oKp6Tov trapedpov ^rjfiijTepo^^ — the epithal 
 marks the approximation of D6m^t^*r to the Mother of the Gods, i KpoTdX4S9 
 Tvnavuv r* lax^, avv re Ppofiog avXijv Evadev (Homer. Hymn, xiii.), — th« 
 Mother of the Gods was worshipped by Pindar himself along with Pan; she 
 ttad in his time her temple and ceremonies at Thebes (Pyth. iiL 78 ; Fragm. 
 Dithyr. 5, and the Scholia ad I) as well as, probably, at Athens (Pauaan. L 
 13). 
 
 Dionysos and DAm^r are also bronght together in the choms of Sopho- 
 klfts, Antigon^, 1072. /uedcij- de -rrayKoivoig *E^eva/.viac Anovc iv KoTinotc ^ 
 and in Kallimachus, Hymn. Cerer. 70. Bacchus or Dionysos are in the Attle 
 tragedians constantly confounded with the Ddm^trian lacchos, originally so 
 different, — a personification of the mystic word shouted by the ElensiniM 
 commanicants. See Strabo, x. p. 468. 
 
 • Euripides in his Chorus in the Helena (1320 ieg.) assigns to Ddm^t^ aB 
 the attributes of Rhea, and blends the two comDletely into one. 
 
 
 I 
 
 \\ 
 
 i 
 
18 HISTORY OP GREECE 
 
 Though we find different statements respectirg the date m 
 well as the origin of the Eleusinian mysteries, yet the popular 
 belief of the Athenians, and the story which found favor at Eleu- 
 8is, ascrihed them to I he presence and dictation of the goddess 
 Demeter iierself ; just as the Bacchic rites are, according to tha 
 Bacchae of Euripides, first communicated and enforced on the 
 Greeks by the personal visit of Dionysos to Thebes, the metro- 
 polis of the Bacchic ceremonies.' In the Eleusinian legend, pre- 
 served by the author of the Homeric Hymn, she comes volun- 
 tarily and identifies herself with Eleusis ; her past abodo in 
 Krete being briefly indicated.^ Her visit to Eleusis is connected 
 with the deep sorrow caused by the loss of her daughter Perse- 
 phone, who had been seized by Hades, while gathering fiowers 
 in a meadow along with the Oceanic Nymphs, and carried off 
 to become his wife in the under-world. In vain did the reluctant 
 Persephone shriek and invoke the aid of her father Zeus : he had 
 consented to give her to Hades, and her cries were heard only by 
 Hekate and Helios. Demeter was inconsolable at the disappear- 
 Rnce of her daughter, but knew not where to look for her : she 
 wandered for nine days and nights with torches in search of the 
 lost maiden without success. At length Helios, the "spy of gods 
 and men," revealed to her, in reply to her urgent prayer, the 
 rape of Persephone, and the permission given to Hades by Zeus. 
 Demeter was smitten with anger and despair : she renounced Zeus 
 and the society of Olympus, abstained from nectar and ambro- 
 sia, and wandered on earth in grief and fasting until her form 
 could no longer be known. In this condition she came to Eleusis, 
 then governed by the prince Keleos. Sitting down by a well at 
 the wayside in the guise of an old woman, she was found by the 
 daughters of Kelers, who came hither with their pails of brass 
 for water. In reply to tlieir questions, she told them that she had 
 been brought by pirates from Krete to Thorikos, and had made 
 her escape; she ther solicited from them succor and employment 
 as a servant or as a nui-se. The damsels prevailed upon their 
 aiother Metaneira to receive her, and to entrust her with the 
 
 * Sophocl. Antigon. BaKx^iv firjrpowoXiv Qij^av. 
 
 * Homer, Hymn.Cerer. 123. The Hymn to DSmdt^r has oeen translated 
 iooompanied with ralaable illustrative notes, by J. H. Voss (Heidelb. 1826) 
 
 flOMEKlC HYMN TO DEMETER. 
 
 •ursing of the young Demophoon, their late-born brother, the 
 tnly SOD oi Keleos. Demeter was received into the house of 
 Metaneira, her dignified form still borne down by grief: she sat 
 long silent and could not be induced either to smile or to taste 
 food, until the maid-servant lamb^, by jests and playfulness, suc- 
 ceeded in amusing and rendering her cheerful. She would not 
 taste wine, but requested a peculiar mixture of barley-meal with 
 water and the herb mint.i 
 
 The child Demophoon, nursed by Demeter, throve and grew 
 up like a god, to the delight and astonishment of his parents : she 
 gave him no food, but anointed him daily with ambrosia, and 
 plunged him at night in the fire like a torch, where he remained 
 unburnt She would have rendered him immortal, had she not 
 been prevented by the indiscreet curiosity and alarm of Meta- 
 neira, who secretly looked in at night, and shrieked with horror at 
 the sight of her child in the fire.2 The indignant goddess, setting 
 the infant on the ground, now revealed her true character to 
 Metaneira : her wan and aged look disappeared, and she stood 
 oonfest in the genuine majesty of her divine shape, diflFiising a 
 dazzling brightness which illuminated the whole house. " Foolish 
 mother," she said, " thy want of faith has robbed thy son of im- 
 mortal life. I am the exalted Demeter, the charm and comfort 
 both of gods and men : I was preparing for thy son exemption 
 from death and old age ; now it cannot be but he must taste of 
 both. Yet shall he be ever honored, since he has sat upon my 
 knee and slept in my arms. Let the people of Eleusis erect for 
 me a temple and altar on yonder hill above the fountain ; I will 
 myself prescribe to them the orgies which they must religiously 
 perform in order to propitiate my favor." 3 
 
 * Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 202-210. 
 
 • This story was also told with reference to the Egyptian goddess Isis in 
 her wanderings. See Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. c. 16, p. 357. 
 
 ' Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 274. — 
 
 'Opyia 6' csbr^ kytjv vtro^ijaofjiai, wf &v iireira 
 Evayecjc ^pdovrec kfibv voov lXaaKij<r^e. 
 The same story is told in regard to the infant Achilles. His mother Thetii 
 was taking similar measures to render him immortal, when his father Poleof 
 interfered and yrevented the consummation. Thetis immediately left bin 
 in great wrath ( A.pollon. Bhod. iv. 866). 
 
 i 
 
 
 ! 
 
10 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECi 
 
 mSMETEB AT ELEUSIS. 
 
 The terrified MetMieira was incapable even of lifting up hei 
 child from the ground ; her daughters entered at her cries, and 
 began to embrace and tend their infant brother, but he sorrowed 
 and could not be pacified for the loss of his divine nurse. All 
 night they strove to ap})ease the goddess.^ 
 
 Strictly executing thcj injunctions of Demeter, Keleos convoked 
 the people of Eleusis and erected the temple on tlie spot which 
 •he had pointed out. It was speedily completed, and Demeter 
 took up her abode in it, — apart from the remaining gods, still 
 pining with grief for the loss of her daughter, and witliholding 
 her beneficent aid from mortals. And thus she remained a whole 
 year, — a desperate and terrible year: 2 in vain did the oxen 
 draw the plough, and in vain was the barley-seed cast into the 
 furrow, — Demeter suffered it not to emerge from the earth. 
 The human race would have been starved, and the gods would 
 have been deprived of thoir honors and sacrifice, had not Zeus 
 found means to conciliate her. But this was a hard task ; for 
 Demeter resisted the entreaties of Iris and of all the other god- 
 desses and gods whom Zeus successively sent to her. She would 
 be satisfied with nothing less than the recovery of her daughter. 
 At length Zeus sent Hermes to Hades, to bring Persephone 
 away : Persephone joyfully obeyed, but Hades prevailed upon 
 her before she departed 1:0 swallow a grain of pomegranate, which 
 rendered it impossible for her to remain the whole year away 
 from him.'* 
 
 With transport did Demeter receive back her lost daughter, 
 and the faithful Hekate sympathized in the delight felt by both 
 at the reunion.4 It was now an easier undertaking to reconcile 
 her with the gods. Her mother Rhea, sent down expressly by 
 Zeus, descended from Olympus on the fertile Rharan plain, then 
 smitten with barrenness like the rest of the earth : she succeeded 
 in appeasing the indignation of Demeter, who consented again to 
 
 ' Homer, Hymn. 990. — 
 
 rot' (f alf fieiXimjtro •^ftJbf^ 
 Xeiporepai yap drf fiiv kxov rpoipoL ifdk rit^uo*. 
 
 • Homer, H. Cer. 305.— 
 
 Alvorarov (f hiaurfiv iirl x^ova irovXvfJoreipav 
 Uoiifo' av^pimoic, W^ Kvvrarov. 
 
 • Hymn, v. 375. * Hymn, t. 44» 
 
 41 
 
 |Mit forth her relieving hand. The buried seed came up in abun- 
 dance, and the earth was covered with fruit and flowers. She 
 would have wished to retain Persephone constantly with her but 
 this was impossible; and she was obliged to consent that her 
 daughter should go down for one-third of each year to the house 
 of Hades, departing from her every spring at the time when the 
 seed is sown. She then revisited Olympus, again to dwell with 
 the gods; but before her departure, she communicated to the 
 daughters of Keleos, and to Keleos himself, together with Trip- 
 tolemus, Diokles and Eumolpus, the divine service and the so- 
 lemnities which she required to be observed in her honor.' And 
 thus began the venerable mysteries of Eleusis, at her special com- 
 mand : the lesser mysteries, celebrated in February, in honor of 
 Persephone ; the greater, in August, to the honor of Demeter 
 herself. Both are jointly patronesses of the holy city and 
 temple. 
 
 Such is a brief sketch of the temple legend of Eleusis, set 
 forth at length in the Homeric Hymn to Demeter. It is interest- 
 ing not less as a picture of the Mater Dolorosa (in the mouth of 
 an Athenian, Demeter and Persephone were always the Mother 
 and Daughter, by excellence), first an agonized sufferer, and then 
 finally glorified, — the weal and woe of man being dependent 
 upon her kindly feeling, — than as an illustration of the nature 
 and gi nh of Grecian legend generally. Though we now read 
 this Hymn as pleasing poetry, to the Eleusinians, for whom it 
 was composed, it was genuine and sacred history. They believ- 
 ed in the visit of Demeter to Eleusis, and in the mysteries as a 
 revelation from her, as implicitly as they believed in her existence 
 and power as a goddess. The Eleusinian psalmist shares this be- 
 lief in common with his countrymen, and embodies it in a contin- 
 uous narrative, in which the great goddesses of the place, as weD 
 the great heroic families, figure in inseparable conjunction 
 
 * Hymn, v. 475. — 
 
 'H 6h Kiovaa '^FfiLijroTzo'KoLg jSamXevai 
 Aei^ev, TpmroXefUft re, AiokXH re 7rAj7^<7r»r^, 
 Evfio^TTov re /?ty, KeAe^ 1?' rjyrjTopi TioCtv 
 t^iofioavvriv lepup • koI iiri^padtv hpyia matatk 
 Bptafivrip^ KtMoto, etc. 
 
 1 1 
 
 U 
 
IS 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 CONSECRATION OF ELEUSI& 
 
 4S 
 
 KeleoB is the son of the Eponymous hero Eleosis, and his daugli- 
 ters, with the old epic simplicity, carry their basins to the weW 
 for water. Eumolpus., Triptolemus, Diokles, heroic ancestors of 
 the privilej^ed families who continued throughout the historical 
 times of Athens to fulfil their special hereditary functions in th« 
 Kleusinian solemnities., are among the immediate recipients of in- 
 spiration from the ^od<iess ; but chiefly does she favor Metaneiri 
 and her infant son Demophoon, for the latter of whom her great- 
 est boon is destined, and intercepted only by the weak faith of 
 the mother. Moreover, every incident in the Hymn hixs a local 
 coloring and a special reference. The well, overshadowed by 
 an olive-tree near which Demeter had rested, the stream Kalli- 
 chorus and the temple-bill, were familiar and interesting places in 
 the eyes of every Eleusinian ; the peculiar posset prepared from 
 barley-meal with mint was always tasted by the Mysts (or com- 
 municants) after a prescribed fast, as an article in the ceremony, 
 while it was also the custom, at a particular spot in the pro- 
 cessional march, to permit the free interchange of personal jokes 
 and taunts upon individuals for the general amusement. And 
 these two customs are connected in the Hymn with the incidents, 
 that Demeter herself liad chosen the posset as the first interinip- 
 tion of her long and melancholy fast, and that her sorrowful 
 thoughts had been partially diverted by the coarse playfulness of 
 the servant-maid lambe. In the enlarged representation of the 
 Eleusinian ceremonies, which became established after the incor- 
 poration of Eleusis with Athens, the part of lambe herself 
 was enacted by a woman, or man in woman's attire, of suitable 
 wit and imagination, who was posted on the bridge over the Ko- 
 phissos, and addressed to the passers-by in the procession, i espe- 
 cially the great men of Athens, saucy jeers, probably not less 
 piercing than those of Aristophanes on the stage. The torch- 
 bearing Hekate received a portion of the worship in the nocturnal 
 ceremonies of the Eleusinia : this too is traced, in the Hymn, td 
 her kind and affectionate sympathy with the great goddesses. 
 
 ' Aristophanes, Vesp. l,-»63. Hesych. v. Te^vpff. Suidas, v. T^^v^iC***' 
 Compare about the details of the ceremony, Clemens Alexandr. Admon. ad 
 Gent p. 13. A similar license of unrestrained jocularity appears in the 
 rites of DdmettV in Sicily (Diodor. v. 4; see also Pausan. rii. 27, 4), and iB 
 tlw worship of Damia and Auxesia at ^gina (Herodot. v. 83). 
 
 Though all these incidents were sincerely believed by the 
 Eleusiniansasatruehistory of thepast, and as having been the real 
 initiatory cause of their own solemnities, it is not the less certain 
 that they are simply mythes or legends, and not to be treated as 
 history, either actual or exaggerated. They do not take their 
 start from realities of the past, but from realities of the present, 
 combined with retrospective feeling and fancy, which fills up the 
 blank of the aforetime in a manner at once plausible and im- 
 pressive. What proportion of fact there may be in the legend, 
 or whether there be any at all, it is impossible to ascertain and 
 useless to inquire ; for the story did not acquire belief from its 
 approximation to real fact, but from its perfect harmony with 
 Eleusinian faith and feeling, and from the absence of any standard 
 of historical credibility. The little town of Eleusis derived all 
 its importance from the solemnity of the Demetria, and the 
 Hymn which we have been considering (probably at least as old 
 as 600 B. c.) represents the town as it stood before its absorption 
 into the larger unity of Athens, which seems to have produced 
 an alteration of its legends and an increase of dignity in its great 
 festival. In the faith of an Eleusinian, the religious as well as 
 the patriotic antiquities of his native town were connected with 
 this capital solemnity. The divine legend of the sufferings of 
 Demeter and her visit to Eleusis was to him that which the heroic 
 legend of Adrastus and the Siege of Thebes was to a Sikyonian, or 
 that of Erechtheus and Athene to an Athenian grouping togethef 
 in the vsame scene and story the goddess and the heroic fathers 
 of the town. If our information were fuller, we should probably 
 find abundance of other legends respecting the Demetria : the 
 Gephyraei of Athens, to whom belonged the celebrated Harmodi- 
 os and Aristogeiton, and who possessed special Orgies of De- 
 meter the Sorrowful, to which no man foreign to their Gens was 
 ever admitted,^ would doubtless have told stories not only different 
 but contradictory ; and even in other Eleusinian mythes we dis- 
 cover Eumolpus as king of Eleusis, son of Poseidon, and a 
 Thracian, completely different from the character which he bears 
 Id the Hymn before us.2 Neither discrepancies nor want ci 
 
 ' Herodot, v, 61. 
 
 * Pausan. i. 38, Sj Apollodor. iil 15, 4. Hejme in his Note admits hu^ 
 
44 
 
 fflSTORT OF 6REE0I 
 
 evidence, in referenwj to alleged antiquities, sLocked the faith ol 
 • non-historical public. What they wanted was a picture of the 
 past, impressive to their feelings and plausible to their imagina- 
 tion ; and it is important to the reader to remember, while he 
 reads either the divine legends which we are now illustrating or 
 the heroic legends to which we shall soon approach, that he ia 
 dealing with a past which never was present, — a region essen- 
 tially mythical, neither approachable by the critic nor mensurable 
 by the chronologer. 
 
 The tale respecting the visit of Demeter, which was told by the 
 ancient Gens, called the Phytalids,' in reference to another tem- 
 ple of Demeter between Athens and Eleusis, and also by the 
 Megarians in reference to a Demetrion near their city, acquired 
 under the auspices of Athens still further extension. The god- 
 dess was reported to have first communicated to Triptolemus at 
 Eleusis the art of sowing com, which by his intervention was 
 disseminated all over the earth. And thus the Athenians took 
 credit to themselves for having been the medium of communica^^ 
 tion from the gods to man of all the inestimable blessings of 
 agriculture, which they affirmed to have been first exhibited on 
 the fertile Rharian plain near Eleusis. Such pretensions are not 
 to be found in the old Homeric hymn. The festival of the Thes- 
 mophoria, celebrated in honor of Demeter Thesmophoros at 
 Athens, was altogether different from the Eleusinia, m this mate- 
 rial respect, as well as others, that all males were excluded, and 
 women only were allowed to partake in it : the surname Thesmo- 
 phorus gave occasion to new legends in which the goddess was 
 glorified as the first authoress of laws and legal sanctions to 
 mankind.^ This festival, for women apart and alone, was also 
 
 ral persons named Euraolpus. Compare Isokrates. Panegyr. p. 55. Philo- 
 chorus the Attic antiquary could not have received the leg^end of the 
 Eleusinian Hymn, from the different account wliich he gave respecting the 
 rape of Persephon^? {l*hiloch. Fragm. 46, ed. Didot), and also respecting 
 Keleos (Fr. 28, ibid.). 
 
 * Phjtalas, the Eponym or godfather of this gens, had received Dhn^tiit 
 m a guest in his house, when she first presented mankind with the fruit of tht 
 fig-tree. (Pausan. i. 37, 2.) 
 
 * Kallimach. Hymn. Cerer. 19. Sophokl^, Triptolemos, Frag 1. Ote 
 IO| Legg. ii. 14, and the not» of Servius ad Virgil, ^n. iv. 58. 
 
 HOMERIC HYMN TO APOLLO. 4| 
 
 delebrated at Paros, at Ephesus, and in manj other parts of 
 Greece. 1 
 
 Altogether, Demeter and Dionysos, as the Grecian counter- 
 parts of the Egyptian Isis and Osiris, seem to have been the 
 great recipients of the new sacred rites borrowed from Egypt, 
 before the worship of Isis in her own name was introduced into 
 Greece : their solemnities became more frequently recluse and 
 mysterious than those o£ the other deities. The importance of 
 Demeter to the collective nationality of Greece may be gathered 
 from the fact that her temple was erected at Thermopylae, the 
 spot where the Amphiktyonic assemblies were held, close by the 
 temple of the Eponymous hero Amphiktyon himself, and under 
 the surname of the Amphiktyonic Demeter.'^ 
 
 We now pass to another and not less important celestial per- 
 sonage — Apollo. 
 
 The legends of Delos and Delphi, embodied in the Homeric 
 Hymn to Apollo, indicate, if not a greater dignity, at least a more 
 widely diffused worship of that god than even of Demeter. The 
 Hymn is, in point of fact, an aggregate of two separate com- 
 positions, one emanating from an Ionic bard at Delos, the other 
 from Delphi. The first details the birth, the second the mature 
 divine efficiency, of Apollo ; but both alike present the unaffected 
 charm as well as the characteristic peculiarities of Grecian 
 mythical narrative. The hymnographer sings, and his hearers 
 accept in perfect good faith, a history of the past ; but it is a past, 
 imagined partly as an introductory explanation to the present, 
 partly as a means of glorifying the god. The island of Delos 
 was the accredited birth-place of Apollo, and is also the place in 
 which he chiefly delights, where the great and brilliant Ionic fes- 
 tival is periodically convened in his honor. Yet it is a rock 
 narrow, barren, and uninviting : how came so glorious a privilege 
 to be awarded to it? This the poet takes upon himself to 
 explain. Leto, pregnant with A|K)11o, and persecuted by the 
 jealous Here, could find no spot wherein to give birth to her 
 offspring. In vain did she address herself to numerous places in 
 Greece, the Asiatic coast and the intermediate islands ; all were 
 
 
 ' Herodot. vi. 16, 134. ioKO{ Qea/io^pov A^/niiTpoc^-'Td kc Ipaeva )6 
 * Herodot rii. 200. 
 
4$ BISTORT OF OSEEGB. 
 
 tern^ed at the wrath of H^rS, and refused to haitwr her. As a 
 biBt resort, she approiiched the rejected and repulsive island o4 
 Delos, and promised that, if shelter were granted to her in her 
 forlorn condition, the island should become the chosen resort of 
 Apollo as well as the site of his temple with its rich accompanying 
 solemnities.^ Delos joyfully consented, but not without many 
 apprehensions that the potent Apollo would despise her unwor- 
 thiness, and not without exacting a formal oath from Leto, — who 
 was then admitted to the desired protection, and duly accomplish- 
 ed her long and painful labor. Though Dione, Rhea, Themis 
 and Amphitrite came to soothe and succor her, yet Here kept 
 away the goddess presiding over childbirth, Eileithyla, and thus 
 cruelly prolonged her pangs. At length Eileithyia came, and 
 Apollo was bom. Hardly had Apollo tasted, from the hands of 
 Themis, the immortal food, nectar and ambrosia, when he burst 
 at once his infant bands, and displayed himself in full divine form 
 and strength, claiming his characteristic attributes of the bow and 
 the harp, and his privileged function of announcing beforehand 
 to mankind the designs of Zeus. The promise made by Leto 
 to Delos was faithfully performed : amidst the numberless other 
 temples and groves which men provided for him, he ever prefer- 
 red that island as his permanent residence, and there the lonians 
 with their wives and children, and all their " bravery," congrega- 
 ted periodically from their different cities to glorify him. Dance 
 and song and athletic contests adorned the solemnity, and tho 
 countless ships, wealth, and grace of the multitudinous lonianfi 
 had the air of an assembly of gods. The Delian maidens, ser- 
 vants of Apollo, sang hymns to the glory of the god, as well as 
 of Artemis and Leto, intermingled with adventures of foregone 
 men and women, to the delight of the listening crowd. The blind 
 itinerant bard of Chios (composer of this the Homeric hymn, and 
 confounded in antiquity with the author of the Iliad) had found 
 honor and acceptance at this festival, and commends himself, in a 
 
 ' According to another legend, Leto was said to have been conveyed from 
 the Hyperboreans to Delos in twelve days, in the form of a she- wolf, to escape 
 the jealous eye of Here. In connection with this legend, it was aflSrmed 
 that the she-wolves always broup:ht forth their young only during these 
 kwelre days in the year ( Anstot. Hist. Animal, rii. 35). 
 
 DELOS AND DELPHI. ff 
 
 touching farewell strain, to the remembrance and sympathy ol 
 the Delian maidens.^ 
 
 But Delos was not an oracular spot : Apollo did not manifest 
 himself there as revealer of the futurities of Zeus. A place 
 must be found where this beneficent function, without which man- 
 kind would perish under the innumei-able doubts and perplexities 
 of life, may be exercised and rendered available. Apollo himself 
 descends from Olympus to make choice of a suitable site : the 
 hymnogmpher knows a thousand other adventures of the god 
 which he might sing, but he prefers this memorable incident, the 
 charter and patent of consecration for the Delphian temple. 
 Many different places did Apollo inspect ; he surveyed the coun- 
 try of the Magnetes and the Perrhaebians, came to lolkos, and 
 passed over from thence to P^uboea and the plain of Lelanton. 
 But even this fertile spot did not please him : he crossed the 
 Euripus to Boeotia, passed by Teumessus and Mykalessus, and 
 the then inaccessible and unoccupied forest on which the city oi 
 Thebes afterwards stood. He next proceeded to Onchestos, but 
 the grove of Poseidon was already established there ; next across 
 the Kephissus to Okalea, Haliartus, and the agreeable plain and 
 much-frequented fountain of Delph isa, or Tilphusa. Pleased 
 with the place, Apollo prepared to establish his oracle there, but 
 Tilphusa was proud of the beauty of her own site, and did not 
 choose that her glory should be eclipsed by that of the god.3 
 She alarmed him with the apprehension that the chariots which 
 contended in her plain, and the horses and mules which watered 
 at her fountain would disturb the solemnity of his oracle ; and 
 she thus induced him to proceed onward to the southern side of 
 Parnassus, overhanging the harbor of Krissa. Here he establish- 
 ed his oracle, in the mountainous site not frequented by chariots 
 and horses, and near to a fountain, which however was guarded 
 by a vast and terrific serpent, once the nurse of the monster 
 Typhaon. This serpent Apollo slew with an arrow, and suffered 
 its body to rot in the sun : hence the name of the place, Pytho,* 
 and the surname of the Pythian Apollo. The plan of his temple 
 being marked out, it was built by Trophonioe and Agam^e^ 
 
 * Uom. Hymn. Apoll. i. 179. 
 
 • Horn. Hymn. 363 — wvi^cffi^ai, to rot. 
 
 Vol 1 « 
 
 * Horn. H^n. ApolL 26S. 
 
f 
 
 iB BISTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 aided by a crowd of forward auxiliaries from the neighborhocMl 
 He now discovered with indignation, however, that Tilphusa had 
 cheated him, and went back with swift step to resent it. " Thou 
 fihait not thus," iie said, " succeed in thy fraud and retain tliy 
 beautiful water ; the glory of the place shall be mine, and not 
 thine alone." Thus saying, he tumbled down a crag upon the 
 fountain, and obstructed her Hmped current : establishing an altar 
 for himself in a grove hard by near another spring, where men 
 Btill worship him as A[)ollo Tilphusios, because of his severe 
 vengeance upon the once beautiful Tilphusa. > 
 
 Apollo next stood in need of chovsen ministers to take (iare of 
 his temple and sacrifice, and to pronounce his res{)onses at Pytho. 
 Descrying a ship, " containing many and good men," bound on 
 traffic from the Minoian Knossus in Krete, to Pylus in Pelopon- 
 nesus, he resolved to make use of the ship and her crew for his 
 purpose. Assuming the shape of a vast dolphin, he splashed 
 about and sliook the vessel so as to strike the mariners with ter- 
 ror, while he sent a strong wind, which impelled her along the 
 coast of Peloponnesus into the Corinthian Gulf, and finally to the 
 harbor of Krissa, where she ran aground. The affrighted crew 
 did not dare to disembark : but :\pollo was seen standing on the 
 shore in the guise of a vigorous youth, and inquired who they 
 were, and what was tlieir business. The leader of the Kretans 
 recounted in reply their miraculous and compulsory voyage, when 
 Aj>ollo revealed himself as the author and contriver of it, announc- 
 ing to them the honorable function and the dignified i>ost to which 
 he destined them.- They followed him by his orders to the rocky 
 Pytho on Parnassus, singing the solemn lo-Paian such as it is sung 
 in Krete, while the go<i himself marched at their head, with his 
 fine form and lofly step, playing on the harp. He showed them 
 the temple and site of the oracle, and directed them to worship 
 him as Apollo Delphinios, because they had first seen him in the 
 shape of a dolphin. " But how," they inquired, "are we to live in 
 a spot where there is neither com, nor vine, nor pasturage?" 
 " Ye silly mortals," answc^^d the god, " who look only for toil and 
 privation, know that an easier lot is yours. Ye shall live by the 
 •^-attle whom crowds of pious visitors will bring to the temple : y« 
 
 FIRST COMMENGEMEMT OF THE mCLPHIAN ORACLE. 4i 
 
 ^hall need only the knife to be constantly ready for sacrifice.^ 
 Your duty will be to guard my temple, and to officiate as minis- 
 ters at my feasts : bn* if j be guilty of wrong or insolence, either 
 by word or deed, ^r. aha^- become the slaves of other men, and 
 shall remain so forever. Take heed of the word and the warn- 
 ing." 
 
 Such are the legends of Delos and Delphi, according to the 
 Homeric Hymn to Aj)ollo. The specific functions of the god, 
 and the chief localities of his worship, together with the surnames 
 attached to them, are thus historically explained, being connected 
 with his past acts and adventures. Though these are to us only 
 interesting poetry, yet to those who heard them sung they possess- 
 ed all the requisites of history, and were fully believed as such , 
 not because they were partially founded in reality, but because 
 they ran in complete harmony with the feelings ; and, so long as 
 that condition was fulfilled, it was not the fashion of the time to 
 canvass truth or falsehood. The narrative is purely personal, 
 without any discernible symbolized doctrine or allegory, to serve 
 as a supposed ulterior purpose : the particular deeds ascribed to 
 Apollo grow out of the general preconceptions as to his attributes, 
 combined with the present realities of his worship. It is neither 
 history nor allegory, but simple mythe or legend. 
 
 The worship of Apollo is among the most ancient, capital, and 
 strongly marked facts of the Grecian world, and widely diffused 
 over every branch of the race. It is older than the Iliad or 
 Odyssey, in the latter of which both Pytho and Delos are noted, 
 though Delos is not named in the former. But the ancient Apollo 
 is different in more respects than one from the Apollo of later 
 times. He is in an especial manner the god of the Trojans, un- 
 friendly to the Greeks, and especially to Achilles ; he has, more- 
 over, only two primary attributes, his bow and his prophetic 
 powers, without any distinct connection either with the harp, or 
 witt medicine, or with the sun, all which in later times he came 
 te compreh';nd. He is not only, as Apollo Kameius, the chief 
 
 
 ^ Horn. Hymu. Apoll 381. 
 
 ' Horn. Hymn. Apoll 475 $qq 
 
 * Homer. Hymn. Apoll. 535. — 
 
 Ac^irepy fiaV iKaaro^ tx^JV tv xftpi naxaipa» 
 S^aCetv alel fi^Xa * rd 6* a<^ova navra itapeoTM, 
 
 ▼OL. I • loo. 
 
I I 
 
 1 
 
 aO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LEGENDS RESPKCrnrO ilPOLLU. 
 
 M 
 
 god of the Doric race, but also (under the surname of Patroua) 
 the great protecting divinity of the gentile tie among the lonians:* 
 he is moreover the guide and stimulus to Grecian colonization, 
 scarcely any colony being ever sent out without encouragement 
 and direction from the oracle at Delphi: A|>ollo Archegetes is 
 one of his great surnames.^ His temple lends sanctity to the 
 meetings of the Amphiktyonic assembly, and he is always in 
 filial subordination and harmony with his father Zeus : Delphi 
 and Olympia are never found in conflict. In the Iliad, the warm 
 and earnest patrons of the Greeks are Here, Athene, and Posei 
 d«)n : here too Zeus and Ajwllo are seen in harmony, for Zeus is 
 decidedly well-inclined to the Trojans, and reluctantly sacrifices 
 them to the importunity of the two great goddesses.'* The wor- 
 ship of the Sminthian Apollo, in various parts of the Troad and 
 the neighboring territory, dates before the earliest periods of 
 .£olic colonization : * hence the zealous patronage of Troy as- 
 cribed to him in the Iliad. Altogether, however, the distribution 
 and partialities of the gods in that poem are different from what 
 they become in later times, — a difference which our means of 
 information do not enable us satisfactorily to explain. Besides 
 the Delphian temple, Apollo had numerous temples throughout 
 Greece, and oracles at Abae in Phokis, on the Mount Ptoon, and 
 at Tegyra in Boeotia, where he was said to have been bom,^ at 
 Branchidae near Miletus at Klarus in Asia Minor, and at Patara 
 in Lykia. He was not the only oracular god : Zeus at Dodona 
 and at Olympia gave rcjsponses also : the gods or heroes Tropho- 
 nius, Amphiaraus, Amphilochus, Mopsus, etc., each at his own 
 
 • Harpocratioii v. 'XttoTlauv irurpuoc and 'EpKelog Zcvf. Apollo 
 nios also belongs to the Ionic Greeks generally. Strabo, iv. 179. 
 
 • Thucydid. vi. 3 ; Kalliniach. Hymn. A poll. 56.— 
 
 ^oifJoc ydp del iroXieaai ^iXfjdei 
 
 • Hiad, iv. 30-46. 
 
 • Hiad. i. 38, 451 ; Stephan. Byz. 'lltov, Tevedoc. See also Klausen. 
 and die Penaten, b. i. p. 69. The worship of Apollo Sminthios and 
 tiral of the Sminthia at Alexandria Troas lasted down to the time cf 
 der the rhetor, at the close <»f the third century after Christ. 
 
 • Plutarch. Defect. Oracol. c. 5, p. 412 ; c. 8, p. 414 ; Steph Byi. y. 
 The temple of the Ptoan Apollo had acquirsd celebrity before the 
 the poet Auos. Paosan. ix. 33, 8. 
 
 Delphi- 
 
 ^neat 
 the fes< 
 Menaa 
 
 Teyifpa 
 days of 
 
 noctoary and in his own prescribed manner, rendered tlie same 
 service. 
 
 The two legends of Delphi and Delos, above noticed, form of 
 oourse a very insignificant fraction of the narratives which onoe 
 existed respecting the great and venerated Apollo. They serve 
 only as specimens, and as very early specimens, * to illustrate 
 what these divine mythes were, and what was the turn of Gre- 
 cian faith and imagination. The constantly recurring festivals 
 of the gods caused an incessant demand for new mythes respect- 
 ing them, or at least for varieties and reproductions of the old 
 mythes. Even during the third century of the Christian aera, in 
 the time of the rhetor Menander, when the old forms of Pagan- 
 ism were waning and when the stock of mythes in existence was 
 extremely abundant, we see this demand in great force ; but it 
 was incomparably more operative in those earlier times when 
 the creative vein of the Grecian mind yet retained its pristine 
 and unfaded richness. Each god had many different surnames, 
 temples, groves, and solemnities ; with each of which was con- 
 nected more or less of mythical narrative, originally hatched in 
 the prolific and spontaneous fancy of a believing neighborhood, 
 to be afterwards expanded, adorned and diffused by the song of 
 the poet. The earliest subject of competition 2 at the great Pyth- 
 ian festival was the singing of a hymn in honor of Apollo: other 
 agones were subsequently added, but the ode or hymn constitu- 
 
 * The legend which Ephorus followed about the establishment of the Del- 
 phian temple was something radically different from the Homeric Hymn 
 (Ephori Fragm. 70, ed. Didot) : his narrative went far to politicize and ration- 
 alize the story. The progeny of Apollo was very numerous, and of the 
 most diverse attributes ; he was father of the Korybantes ( Pherekydes, Fragm. 
 6, ed. Didot), as well as of Askl6pio8 and Aristaeus (Schol. ApoUon. Khod. ii. 
 500 ; Apollodor. iii. 10, 3). 
 
 • Strabo, ix. p. 421. Menander the Rhetor (Ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett. t. iz. 
 f>. 136) gives an elaborate classification of hymns to the gods, distinguishing 
 them into nine classes, — KXijriKott inroTrefMimKoly <f>vcriKol^ fiv&iKol, yevea- 
 'A.oyiKoi, neirXatjfievoi, eixTiKol^ unevKTiKol, fiiKToi : — the second class had ref- 
 erence to the temporary absences or departure of a god to some distant place, 
 which were often admitted in the ancient religion. Sappho and Alkman 
 in their Jdetic hymns invoked the gods from many different places, — t^v fsev 
 yap 'Aprifiiv iK fivpiuv fiev bpecjv, ftvpicjv 6e iroXeuv, in 6e irorafiuv^ uvaKO- 
 "kel, — also Aphrodite and Apollo, etc. All these songs were full of adven- 
 tures and details respecting the gods, — in other words of legendary matter 
 
at mSTOBT OP GREECB. 
 
 ted the fundamental attribute of the solemnity : the Pjthia al 
 Sikyon and elsewhere were probably framed on a similar footing. 
 So too at the ancient and celebrated Charitesia, or festival of tho 
 Ctiarites, at Orchomeuos, the rivalry of the poets in theii various 
 modes of composition l»oth began and continued as the predomi- 
 nant ieature : ' and the inestimable treasures yet remaining to us 
 of Attit; tragedy and comedy, are gleanings from the once numer- 
 ous dnxmjis exhibited at the solemnity of tlie Dionysia. The 
 Ej:)h«^sians gave considerable rewards for the best hymns in honor 
 of Artemis, to be sung at her temple.- And the early lyric 
 poet ^ of Greece, though their works have not descended tons, 
 devoted their genius largely to similar productions, as may be 
 seen by the titles and fragments yet remaining. 
 
 Both the Christian and the Mahomedan religions have begun 
 during the historical agt;, have been propagated from one common 
 centre, ard iiave been erected upon the ruins of a ditferent pre- 
 existing faith. With none of these particulars did Grecian Pa- 
 ganism correspond. It took rise in an age of imagination and 
 feeling simply, without the restraints, as well as without the 
 aid, of writing or records, of history or philosophy: it was, as a 
 general rule, the sjmnt ineous product of many separate tribes 
 and localities, imitation and propagation operating as subordinate 
 causes ; it was moreover a primordial faith, as far as our means 
 of information enable us to discover. These considerations ex- 
 plain to us two facts in the history of the early Pagan mind: first, 
 the divine mythes, the matter of their religion, constituted also 
 the matter of their earliest history ; next, these mythes harmon- 
 ized with each other only in their general types, but differed in- 
 curably in respect of particular incidents. The poet who sung a 
 new adventure of A|h>11o, tlie trace of which he might have heard 
 in some remote locality, would take care that it should be agree- 
 able to the general conceptions which his hearers entertained re- 
 specting the god. He vrould not ascribe the cestus or amorous 
 influences to Athene, nor armed interierence and the aegis to 
 Aphrodite ; but, provided he maintained this general keeping, 
 he might indulge his fancy without restraint in the particular 
 
 APHRODira 
 
 events of the story.' The feelings and faith of his hearers weof 
 along with him, and there were no critical scruples to hold them 
 back : to scrutinize the alleged proceedings of the gods was re- 
 pulsive, and to disbelieve them impious. And thus these divine 
 mythes, though they had their ixwt simply in religious feeUngs*, 
 and though they presented great discrepancies of fact, served 
 nevertheless as primitive matter of history to an early Greek: 
 they were the only narratives, at once publicly accredited and 
 interesting, which he possessed. To them were aggregated the 
 heroic mythes (to which we shall proceed presently), — indeed 
 the two are inseparably blended, gods, heroes and men almost 
 always appearing in the same picture, — analogous both in their 
 structure and their genesis, and differing chiefly in the circum- 
 stance that they sprang from the type of a hero instead of from 
 that of a god. 
 
 We are not to be astonished if we find Aphrodite, in the Iliad, 
 bom from Zeus and Dione, — and in the Theogony of Hesiod, 
 generated from the foam on the sea after the mutilation of Ura- 
 nos ; nor if in the Odyssey she appears as the wife of Hephsestos, 
 while in the Theogony the latter is married to Aglaia, and Aphro- 
 dite is described as mother of three children by Ares.^ The 
 Homeric hymn to Aphrodite details the legend of Aphrodite and 
 Anchises, which is presupposed in the Iliad as the parentage of 
 iEneas : but the author of the hymn, probably sung at one of 
 the festivals of Aphrodite in Cyprus, represents the goddess as 
 ashamed of her passion for a mortal, and as enjoining Anchi- 
 ses under severe menaces not to reveal who the mother of 
 -^neas was ; 3 while in the Iliad she has no scruple in publicly 
 
 * Pindar, Olymp. xiv. ; Boeckh, Staatshaashaltung der Athener, AppMk 
 i^ix, ^ XX. p. 357. 
 
 * Alexander MuAus. apad Macrobium, Saturn, y. 2S. 
 
 ' The birth of Apollo and Artemis from Zeus and L^to is among the oldest 
 and most generally admitted facts in the Grecian divine legends. Yet Mschy- 
 lus did not scruple to describe Artemis publicly as daughter of Dimeter 
 (Hcrodot. ii. 156 ; Pausan. viii. 37, 3). Herodotus thinks that he copied this 
 innovation from the Egyptians, who affirmed that Apollo and Artemis wer« 
 the sons of Dionysos and Isis. 
 
 » 
 
 The number and discrepancies of the mythes respecting each god are at 
 tested by the fruitless attempts of learned Greeks to escape the necessity of 
 rejecting any of them by multipljring homonymous personages, — three per 
 3ons named Zeus; five named Athene; six named Apollo, etc. (Cicero, df 
 Natur. Deor. iii. 21 : Clemen. Alexand. Admon. ad Gent. p. 17). 
 » Hesiod, Theogon. 188, 934, 945 ; Homer, Iliad, v. 371 ; Odyss. viii. ?W 
 » Homer, Hymn. Vener. 248, 286 ; Homer, Iliad, v. 320, 386. 
 
 'I 
 
 f I 
 
 a) 
 
 I 
 
 { \ 
 
 }■ 
 
it mSTOBT Uf GREECE. 
 
 owning him, and he pusses everywhere as her acknowledged acn 
 Aphrodite is described in the hymn as herself cold and unimpress 
 ible, but ever active and irresistible in inspiring amorous feelingi 
 to gods, to men, and to animals. Three goddesses are record- 
 ed as memorable exceptions to her universal empire, — Athen^, 
 Artemis, and Hestia or Vesta. Aphrodite was one of the most 
 important of all the goddesses in the mythical world ; for the 
 number of interesting, pathetic and tragical adventures deducible 
 from misplaced or unhappy passion was of course very great ; 
 and in most of these cases the intervention of Aphrodite was 
 usually prefixed, with <ome legend to explain why she manifested 
 herself Her range of action grows wider in the later epic and 
 lyric and tragic poets 1 han in Homer.^ 
 
 Athene, the man-goddess,'-* bom from the head of Zeus, with- 
 out a mother and without feminine sympathies, is the antithesis 
 partly of Aphrodite, partly of ihe effeminate or womanized god 
 D^-^ysos — the latter is an importation from Asia, but Athene is 
 a Greek conception — the type of composed, majestic and unre- 
 lenting force. It app<;ars however as if this goddess had been 
 conceived in a different; manner in different parts of Greece. For 
 we find ascribed to her, in some of the legends, attributes of in- 
 dustry and home-keep mg ; she is represented as the companion 
 
 ' A lar^e proportion of the Hesiodie epic related to the exploits and adven- 
 tures of the heroic women, — the Catalogue of Women and the Eoiai em 
 bodied a string of such narratives. Hesiod and Stesichorus explained the 
 conduct of Helen and Klytaemnestra by the an^er of Aphrodit^, caused by 
 the nejylect of their father Tyndareus to sacrifice to her ( Hesiod. Fragm. 59, 
 ed. Duntzer; Stesichor Fra;;m. 9. ed. Schneidewin) : the irresistible ascen- 
 dency of Aphroditt^ is set forth in the Hippolytus of Euripidrs not less for- 
 cibly than that of Dionysos in the Bacchae. The character of Daphnis the 
 herdsman well-known from the first Idyll of Theocritus, and illustratinfi: the 
 destroying: force of Aphrodite, appears to have been first introduced into 
 Greek poetry by Stesichoras (see Klausen, ^neas, und die Penaten, vol. i. 
 pp. 526-529). Compare a striking: piece among the Fragmenta Incerta of 
 Sophoklcs (Fr. 63, Brunckl and Euripid. Troad. 946, 995, 1048. Even in 
 the 0pp. et Di. of Hesiod, Aphrodite is conceived rather as a disturbing and 
 injurious influence (v. 65). 
 
 Adonis owes his renown t» the Alexandrine poets and their contemporary 
 iovereigna (see Bion's Idyll and the Adoniazusae of Theocritus). The favor^ 
 Ites of Aphroditd, even as rounted up by the diligence of Clemens Alexao* 
 drinns, are howerer rery few in number. ( Admonitio ad GJent. p. 1 2, Sylb.) 
 
 * 'XvApo^ea d€>pov 'At^uv^i Simmias Khodius; lleXexvc, ap. Bi» 
 
 Dhffwtfon. c. 9. p. 54, Gaisford. 
 
 ATHENE.-EBECHTHEU8.-ABTEM1& 
 
 yf llephoestos, patronizing handicraft, and expert at the loom and 
 the spindle : the Athenian potters worshipped her along with 
 Prometheus. Such traits of character do not square with the 
 formidable aegis and the massive and crushing spear which Homer 
 and most of the mythes assign to her. There probably were at first 
 at least two different types of Athene, and their coalescence hai* 
 partially obliterated the less marked of the two.' Athene is the 
 constant and watchful protectress of Herakles : she is also locally 
 identified with the soil and people of Athens, even in the Iliad : 
 Erechtheus, the Athenian, is born of the earth, but Athene brings 
 him up, nourishes him, and lodges him in her own temple, where 
 the Athenians annually worship him with sacrifice and solemni- 
 ties.2 It was altogether impossible to make Erechtheus son of 
 Athene, — the type of the goddess forbade it ; but the Athenian 
 mythe-creators, though they found this barrier impassable, strove 
 to approach to it as near as they could, and the description which 
 they give of the birth of Erichthonios, at once un-Homeric and 
 unseemly, presents something like the phantom of maternity .3 
 
 The huntress Artemis, in Arcadia and in Greece proper gen- 
 erally, exhibits a well-defined type with which the legends 
 respecting her are tolerably consistent But the Ephesian aa 
 well as the Tauric Artemis partakes more of the Asiatic charac- 
 ter, and has borrowed the attributes of the Lydian Great Mother 
 as well as of an indigenous Tauric Virgin r* this Ephesian Arte- 
 
 ' ApoIlod6r. ap. Schol. ad Sophokl. CEdip. vol. 57 ; Pausan. i. 24, 3 ; ix. 26, 
 3 ; Diodor. v. 73 ; Plato, Legg. xi. p. 920. In the 0pp. et Di. of Hesiod, 
 the carpenter is the servant of Athdn^ (429) : see also Phereklos the tektuv 
 Ti the Iliad, v. 61: compare viii. 385; Odyss. viii. 493 ; and the Homeric 
 Hymn, to Aphrodite, v. 12. The learned article of O. Miiller (in the Ency- 
 clopaedia of Ersch and Gruber, since republished among his Kleine Deutsche 
 Schriften, p 134 seq.)^ Pallas AthSnS, brings together all that can be know« 
 about this goddess. 
 
 - Iliad, ii. 546 ; viii. 362. 
 
 * Apollodor. iii. 4, 6. Compare the vague language of Plato, Kritias, c. 
 iv., and Ovid. Metamorph. ii. 757. 
 
 * Herodot. iv. 103 ; Strabo, xii. p. 534 ; xiii. p. 650. About the Ephesiaa 
 Artemis, see Guhl, Ephesiaea (Berlin, 1843), p. 79 aqq. ; Aristoph. Nub. 590; 
 Autokrates in Tympanistis apnd ^lian. Hist Animal, xii. 9; and Spanheia 
 ad Kallimach. Hymn. Dian. 36. The dances in honor of Artemis some- 
 times appear to have approached to the frenzied style of Bacchanal moT» 
 ment See the words of Timothens ap. Plutarch, de Audiend. Poet p. 22 
 6 4, and vepl ^eiccd. c. 10, p. 170, also Aristoph. Lysist. 1314. They seem 
 
 i 
 
nsTOST or gseeor. 
 
 POSEIDOH. 
 
 mis passed to the colonies of Phokaea and Mildtns.1 ^1m 
 HomeHc Artemis sliares witli her brother Apollo in the dexterous 
 n»e of the far-striking bow, and sudden death is described by the 
 poel as inflicted by her gentle arrow. The jealousy of the gods 
 at the withholding of honors and sacrifices, or at the presumption 
 of mortals in contending with them, — a point of character so 
 frequently recurring in the types of the Grecian gods, — mani- 
 fests itself in the legends of Artemis : the memorable Kalydoni- 
 an boar, is sent by her as a visitation upon GCneus, because he 
 had omitted to sacrifice to her, while he did honor to other gods.3 
 The Arcadian heroine Atalanta is however a reproduction of 
 Artemis, with httle or no difference, and the goddess is sometimes 
 3onfounded even with her attendant nymphs. 
 
 The mighty Poseidon, the earth-shaker and the ruler of the 
 ^a, is second only to Zeus in power, but has no share in those 
 imperial and superintending capacities which the Father of- gods 
 and men exhibits. He numbers a numerous heroic progeny, 
 usually men of great corporeal strength, and many of them 
 belonging to the jEolic race : the great Neleid family of Pylus 
 trace their origin up to him ; and he is also the father of Poly- 
 phemus the Cyclops, whose well-earned suffenng he cruelly 
 revenges upon Odysseus. The island of Kalaureia is his Delos^s 
 and there was held in it an old local Amphiktyony, for the pur- 
 pose of rendenng to 1dm joint honor and sacrifice : the isthmus 
 of Corinth, Helike in Achaia, and Onchestos in Boeotia, are also 
 residences which he much affects, and where he is solemnly wor- 
 shipped. But the abtnle which he originally and specially se- 
 lected for himself was the Acropolis of Athens, where by a blow 
 of his trident he produced a well of water in the rock : Athene 
 came afterwartls and claimed the spot for herself, planting in 
 token of |>ossession the olive-tree which stood in the sacred grove 
 of Pandrosos: and the decision either of the autochthonous 
 
 to have been often celebrated in the Bolitudes of the mountains, which were 
 the favorite resort of Art.'mi.s (Kallimach. Hymn. Dian. 19), and theae 
 '■peitSuaitu were always causes predisposing to fanatical excitement 
 
 » Strabo, iv. p. 179. ' Hiad, ix. 529. 
 
 • Strabo, viii. p. 374. According to the old poem called Enmolpia, as- 
 cribed to Mnssens, the oracle of Delphi originally belonged to Poseidon aatf 
 Gsea. jointly: from G«a it paaseil to Themis, and from her to Apollo, tt 
 whom I'oseidon also made over his share as a compensation for the sur- 
 render of ixalauicia to him. (Pau^an. x. 5, 3). 
 
 Cecrops, or of Erechthous, awarded to her the preference, mucli 
 to the displeasure of Poseidon. Either on this account, or on 
 account of the death of his son Bumolpus, slain in assisting the 
 Eleusinians against Erechtheus, the Attic mythes ascribed to 
 Poseidon gi-eat enmity against the Erechtheid family, which he 
 IS asserted to have ultimately overthrown : Theseus, whose glo- 
 rious reign and deeds succeeded to that family, is said to have 
 been really his son.i In several other places, — in ^gina, Argos 
 and Naxos, — Poseidon had disputed the privileges of patron- 
 god with Zeus, Here and Dionysos : he was worsted in all, but 
 bore his defeat patiently .2 Poseidon endured a long slavery, in 
 common with Apollo, gods as they were,3 under Laomedon, king 
 of Troy, at the command and condemnation of Zeus : the two 
 gods rebuilt the walls of the city, which had been destroyed by 
 Herakles. When their time was expired, the insolent Laome- 
 don withheld from them the stipulated reward, and even accom- 
 panied its refusal with appalling threats; and the subsequent 
 animosity of the god against Troy was greatly determined by the 
 sentiment of this injustice.^ Such periods of servitude, inflicted 
 upon individual gods, are among the most remarkable of all the 
 incidents in the divine legends. We find Apollo on another occa- 
 sion condemned to serve Admetus, king of Pherae, as a punish- 
 ment for having killed the Cyclopes, and Herakles also is sold as 
 a slave to Omphale. Even the fierce Ares, overpowered and 
 imprisoned for a long time by the two Aloids,^ is ultimately lib- 
 erated only by extraneous aid. Such narratives attest the 
 discursive range of Grecian fancy in reference to the gods, as 
 well as the perfect commingling of things and persons, divine 
 and human, in their conceptions of the past. The god who 
 serves is for the time degraded ; but the supreme god who com- 
 mands the servitude is in the like proportion exalted, whilst the idea 
 of some sort of order and government among these superhuman 
 beings was never lost sight of. Nevertheless the mythes respect- 
 ing the servitude of the gods became obnoxious afterwards, alcmg 
 with many others, to severe criticism on the part of philosophen 
 
 ' ApoUodor. iii. 14, 1 ; iii. 15, 3, 5. « Plutarch, Synipos. viii. 6, p. 741 
 
 ' Iliad, ii. 716, 766 ; Euripid. Alkestii, 2. See Panyaais, Fragm. 12, p. S4 
 ed. Diintzer. 
 « Iliad, vii. 452 xxi. 459. » Iliad, v. 386. 
 
mSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 The proud, jealous, and bitter Herg, — the goddess of the 
 once-wealthj Mykena?, the fax et focus of the Trojan war, and 
 the ever-present protectress of Jason in the Argonautic expedi- 
 tion, 1 — occupies an indispensable station in the mythical world. 
 As the daughter of K ronos and wife of Zeus, she fills a throne 
 from whence he cannot dislodge her, and which gives her a Twhi 
 perpetually to grumble and to thwart him.2 Her unmeasured 
 jealousy of the female favorites of Zeus, and her antipathy 
 against his sons, espe<;ially against Herakles, has been the sug- 
 gesting cause of innumerable mythes ; the general type of her 
 character stands here clearly marked, as furnishing both stimulus 
 and guide to the mythopoeic fancy. The " Sacred Wedding," or 
 marriage of Zeus and Here, was familiar to epithalamic poets 
 long before it became a theme for the spiritualizing ingenuity of 
 critics. 
 
 H^phasstos is the son of Here without a father, and stands to 
 her in the same relation as Athene to Zeus : her pride and want 
 <rf sympathy are manifested by her casting him out at once in 
 consequence of his deformity .-' He is the god of fire, and espe- 
 cially of fire in its practical applications to iiandicraft, and is in- 
 dispensable as the right-hand and instrument of the gods. His 
 skill and his deformity appear alternately as the source of myth- 
 ical stories : wherever exquisite and elfective fabrication is 
 intended to be designated, Hephaestos is announced a^ the maker, 
 although in this function the type of his character is reproduced 
 in DaBdalos. In the Attic legends he appears intimately united 
 both with Prometheus and with Athene, in conjunction with 
 whom he was worshipped at Kolonus near Athens. Lemnos was 
 the favorite residence of Hephaestos ; and if we j»ossessed more 
 knowledge of this island and its town Hephaestias, we should 
 doubtless find abundarit legends detailing his adventures and 
 interventions. 
 
 The chaste, still, and home-keeping Hestia, goddess of the 
 family hearth, is far less fruitful in mythical narrative?, ir spite 
 of her very superior dignity, than the knavish, smooth-toi gued, 
 keen, and acquisitive Hermes. His function of messenger of the 
 
 * Iliad, iv. 51 ; Odyss xii. 72. 
 
 • Iliad, i. 544 ; iv. 29-38 : viii. 408. 
 
 • Iliad, xrni. 306 
 
 HI5RMES.-H0MEK1C HYMN. H 
 
 gods brings him perpetually on the stage, and affords ample scope 
 for portraying the features of his character. The Homeric hymn 
 to Hermes describes the scene and circumstances of his birth, 
 ■nd the almost instantaneous manifestation, even in infancy, of 
 kis peculiar attributes ; it explains the friendly footing on which 
 lie stood with Apollo, — the interchange of gif>s and functions 
 between them, — and lastly, the inviolate security of all the 
 wealth and offerings in the Delphian temple, exposed as they 
 were to thieves without any visible protection. Such was the 
 innate cleverness and talent of Hermes, that on the day he was 
 born he invented the lyre, stringing the seven chords on the shell 
 of a tortoise :' and he also stole the cattle of Apollo in Pieria, 
 dragging them backwards to his cave in Arcadia, so that their 
 track could not be detected. To the remonstrances of his mother 
 Maia, who points out to him the danger of offending Apollo, 
 Hermes replies, that he aspires to rival the dignity and functions 
 of Apollo among the immortals, and that if his father Zeus 
 refuses to grant them to him, he will employ his powers of thiev- 
 ing in breaking open the sanctuary at Delphi, and in carrying 
 away the gold and the vestments, the precious tripods and ves- 
 sels.2 Presently Apollo discovers the loss of his cattle, and 
 afler some trouble finds his way to the Kyllenian cavern, where 
 he sees Hermes asleep in his cradle. The child denies the theft 
 with effrontery, and even treats the surmise as a ridiculous impos- 
 sibility : he persists in such denial even before Zeus, who how- 
 ever detects him at once, and compels him to reveal the place 
 where the cattle are concealed. But the lyre was as yet un- 
 known to Apollo, who has heard nothing except the voice of the 
 Muses and the sound of the pipe. So powerfully is he fascinated 
 by hearing the tones of the lyre from Hermes, and so eager to 
 become possessed of it, that he is willing at once to pardon the past 
 
 * Homer. Hymn. Mercar. 18. — 
 
 'EffniptrK ftov^ kketptv iKij^oXov 'AToAXwvof, etc. 
 
 'Hsmer. Hymn. Merc 177. — 
 
 Kifil yap kf Tlir^uva, ftiyav iofiov avrirop^avif, 
 "Evi^ev aAff rp'nrodaq nepiKaXXiad ij^e ^ifi^r9i 
 Uop^aoi Koi xP^^^t €tc. 
 
 
HISTOBT OP GREEG& 
 
 theft, and even to conciliate besides the friendship of HermeA.' 
 Accordingly a bargain is struck between the two gods and sanc- 
 tioned by Zeus. Hermes surrenders to Apollo the lyre, invent- 
 ing for his own use the syrinx or panspipe, and receiving from 
 Apollo in exchange the. golden rod of wealth, with empire over 
 flocks and herds as well as over horses and oxen and the wild 
 animals of the woods. He presses to obtain the gift of prophecy, 
 but Apollo is under a special vow not to impart that privilege to 
 any god whatever : he instructs Hermes however how to draw 
 information, to a certain extent, from the Moera^ or Fates them- 
 selves ; and assigns to him, over and above, the function of mes- 
 Henger of the gods to Hades. 
 
 Although Apollo has acquired the lyre, the particular object 
 of his wishes, he is still under apprehension that Hermes will 
 steal it away from him again, together with his bow, and he 
 exacts a formal oath by Styx as security. Hermes promises 
 solemnly that he will steal none of the acquisitions, nor ever 
 invade the sanctuary of Apollo ; while the latter on his part 
 pledges himself to recognize Hermes as his chosen friend and 
 companion, amongst all the other sons of Zeus, human or divine.a 
 So came to pass, under the sanction of Zeus, the marked favor 
 shown by Apollo to Hermes. But Hennes (concludes the 
 hymnographer, with frankness unusual in speaking of a god) 
 ''does very little good: he avails himself of the darkness of night 
 to cheat without measure the tribes of mortal men.**3 
 
 * Homer. Hymn. Merc. 442-454. 
 
 • Homer. Hymn. Merc. 504-520. — 
 
 Kal rb fiev 'Epfi^^ 
 ArjTot^ijv ^(piXijae Sia/iTrepe^, oj- in Kal vvv, et<» 
 
 * ♦ « * * 
 
 Kal Tore Maiadoc v/df vnoaxofievo^ Karevevcre 
 M;/ TTor' uTTOKke^eiv, 6a 'E#c^/?oAof iKTeurtarai^ 
 M.ijSe nor' kfiireXutreiv -rrvKivu 66fx(f) • avrup 'AiroXXuP 
 \ijToidijc Karevevoev hr' ap^fii;) Kal (piXoTTin 
 Mr/ TLva ^iXrepiv iAAov h d^^avuroioLv iae<r^u 
 M^Tf offov, utjt' uuipa Atdf yovov, etc. 
 * Homer. Hymn. Merc. 574 — 
 
 Uavpa fiH ovv dvivrm, rd d' aKpirov tftrepoveiu 
 
 ZEUB AhO WB AlTBDOTBa ft 
 
 Here the general types of Hermes and Apoilo, coopled widi 
 the present fact that no thief ever approached the rich and seem- 
 ingly accessible treasures of Delphi, engender a string of exposi- 
 tory incidents cast into a quasi-historical form and detailing how it 
 happened that Hermes had bound himself by especial convention 
 to respect the Delphian temple. The types of Apollo seem to 
 Lave been different in different times and parts of Greece : in 
 ••^me places he was worshipped as Apollo Nomios," or the patron 
 of pasture and cattle ; and this attribute, which elsewhere passed 
 over to his son Aristaeus, is by our hymnographer voluntarily 
 surrendered to Hermes, combined with the golden rod of fruit- 
 fulness. On the other hand, the lyre did not originally belong 
 to the Far-striking King, nor is he at all an inventor : the hymn 
 explains both its first invention and how it came into his posses* 
 sion. And the value of the incidents is thus partly expository, 
 partly illustrative, as expanding in detail the general preoonoeived 
 diaracter of the Kyllenian god. 
 
 To Zeus more amours are ascribed than to any of the other 
 gods, — probably because the Grecian kings and chieftains were 
 especially anxious to trace their lineage to the highest and most 
 glorious of all, — each of these amours having its representative 
 progeny on earth.^ Such subjects were among the most promia- 
 ing and agreeable for the interest of mythical narrative, and 
 Zeus as a lover thus became the father of a great many legendfli 
 branching out into innumerable interferences, for which his sonSi 
 all of them distinguished individuals, and many of them perse- 
 cuted by Here, furnished the occasion. But besides this, the 
 commanding functions of the supreme god, judicial and admin- 
 istrative, extending both over gods and men, was a potent stimu- 
 lus to the mythopoeic activity. Zeus has to watch over his own 
 dignity, — the first of all considerations with a god : moreover as 
 Horkios, Xenios, Etesios, Meilichios, (a small proportion of his 
 thousand surnames,) he guaranteed oaths and punished perjurers, 
 he enforced the observance of hospitality, he guarded the family 
 hoard and the crop realized for the year, and he granted ezpia 
 
 I 
 
 * Kallimach. Hymn. Apoll. 47 
 
 'Kallimach. Hymn- Jov. 79. '£« dl Aide fiaat^ef, etc 
 
 ll\ 
 
 
 l\ 
 
 /. 
 
raSlORY OF GREECE 
 
 USGENDS BESPECTING THE OODS 
 
 tion to the repentant criminalJ All thess different functions 
 created a demand for mythes, as the means of translating a dim, 
 but serious, presentiment into distinct form, both self-explaining 
 and communicable to others. In enforcing the sanctity of the 
 oath or of the tie of hospitality, the most powerful of all argu- 
 ments would be a collection of legends respecting the judgment! 
 of Zeus Horkios or Xenios ; the more impressive and terrific 
 8uch legends were, the greater would be their interest, and the 
 less would any one dare to disbelieve them. They constituted 
 the natural outpourings of a strong and common sentiment, prob- 
 ably without any delib<}rate ethical intention : the preconceptions 
 of the divine agency, expanded into legend, form a product 
 analogous to the idea of the divine features and symmetry em- 
 bodied in the bronze or the marble statue. 
 
 But it was not alone the general type and attributes of the goda 
 which contributed to put in action the mythopoeic propensities. 
 The rites and solemnities forming the worship of each god, as 
 well as the details of his temple and its locality, were a fertile 
 source of mythes, respecting his exploits and sufferings, which to 
 the people who heard them served the purpose of past history. 
 The exegetes, or local guide and interpreter, belonging to each 
 temple, preserved and recounted to curious strangers these tradi- 
 tional narratives, which lent a certain dignity even to the minu- 
 tiae of divine service. Out of a stock of materials thus ample, 
 the poets extracted individual collections, such as the " Causes " 
 {Ahia) of Kallimachus, now lost, and such as the Fasti of Ovid 
 are for the Roman religious antiquities.'-^ 
 
 It was the practice to offer to the gods in sacrifice the bones 
 of the victim only, inck»sed in fat : how did this practice arise ? 
 
 * See Herodot. i. 44. Xenoph. Anahas. vii. 8. 4. Plutarch, Thdseus, 
 ( 12. 
 
 • Ovid, Fasti, iv. 21 1, abooit the festivals of Apollo : — 
 
 " Friscique imitamina facti 
 -/Era Deae comites raucaqae terga movent." 
 
 And Lactantius, v. 19, 15. '• Ipsos ritus ex rebus gestis (deorum) vel ex 
 easihus vel etiam ex mortibus, natos :'' to the same purpose Angustin. D4 
 Civ. D. vii. 18 ; Diodor. iii. h^. Plutarch's Quaestlones Graecae et Romaics 
 Are full of similar tales, professing to account for existing customs, manv 
 if tiiem religious and litorgio. See Lobeck, Orphica, p. 675. 
 
 rhe <iuthor of the Hesiodic Theogony has a story which explainfl 
 it : Pix)metheu8 tricked Zeus into an imprudent choice, at the 
 peiiod when the gods and mortal men first came to an arrange- 
 ment about privileges and duties (in Mekone). Prometheus, the 
 tutelary representative of man, divided a large steer into two 
 portions : on the one side he placed the flesh and guts, folded up 
 in the omentum and covered over with the skin : on the other, he 
 put the bones enveloped in fat. He then invited Zeus to deter- 
 mine which of the two portions the gods would prefer to receive 
 from mankind. Zeus " with both hands " decided for and took 
 the white fat, but was highly incensed on finding that he had got 
 nothing at the bottom except the bones.* Nevertheless the choice 
 of the gods was now irrevocably made : they were not entitled to 
 any portion of the sacrificed animal beyond the bones and the 
 white fat ; and the standing practice is thus plausibly explained.* 
 I select this as one amongst a thousand instances to illustrate the 
 genesis of legend out of religious practices. In the belief of the 
 people, the event narrated in the legend was the real producing 
 cause of the practice : but when we come to apply a sound criti- 
 cism, we are compelled to treat the event as existing only in ita 
 narrative legend, and the legend itself as having been, in the 
 greater number of cases, engendered by the practice, — thui 
 reversing the supposed order of production. 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 550. — ~ ' 
 
 4*7 (ia doXo<ppoveo)v • Zevc (J' &(j>d^iTa fifjdea eiSiog 
 Tvo) fi ovd' Tjyvoirjae dnXov • /ca/ca d' oaaero ^ftt^ 
 6v7/rotf uv^pdnoLaLf ru koI TEAeetr^ai efiEXkev. 
 Xepffl d' (5y' dytporeprjaiv uvelXeTo XevKdv uXei.ijtap 
 Xuxjaro Si <ppevag, ufi<fi xo^oq de fitv Iketo i^i/zdv, 
 'Qg Idev 'area Xev/cd /?odf doXly iizl rexvy. 
 
 In the second line of this citation, the poet tells us that Zeus saw through 
 the trick, and was imposed upon by his own consent, foreknowing that after 
 all the mischievous consequences of the proceeding would be visited on 
 man. But the last lines, and indeed the whole drift of the legend, imply the 
 contrary of this : Zeus was really taken in, and was in consequence very 
 angry. It is curious to observe how the religious feelings of tlie poet drivi 
 him to save in words the prescience of Zeus, though in doing so he contnk- 
 dicts aud nullifies the whole point of the story. 
 * Hesiod, Theog. 557. — 
 
 Ek tov 6' a^avaroiaiv knl x^ovl ^vA' &tr&puitutf 
 Kaiova* fitrrea Xevxa &V7)evruv inl duuutv. 
 
 fl 
 
64 
 
 HISTOm OF GREECE. 
 
 In dealing with Grecian mythes generally, it fs oonvenient tc 
 distribute them into such as belong to the Gods and such ar 
 belong to the Heroes, according as the one or the other are the 
 prominent personages. The former class manifests, more palpa- 
 bly than the latter, their real origin, as growing out of the faith 
 and the feelings, without any necessary basis, either of matter 
 of fa^t or allegory : moreover, they elucidate more directly the 
 religion of the Greeks, so important an item in their character as 
 a people. But in point of fact, most of the mythes present to 
 us G^ods, Heroes and Men, in juxtaposition one with the other 
 and the richness of Grecian mythical literature arises from the 
 infinite diversity of combinations thus opened out ; first by the 
 three class-types, God, Hero, and Man ; next by the strict keep- 
 ing with which each separate class and character is handled. We 
 shall now follow downward the stream of mythical time, which 
 begins with the Gods, to the Heroic legends, or those which 
 principally concern the Heroes and Heroines ; for the latter were 
 to the full as important in legend as the former. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 LEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN. 
 
 The Hesiodic theogony gives no account of anything like a 
 creation of man, nor does it seem that such an idea was muc^ 
 entertained in the legendary vein of Grecian imagination ; which 
 commoidy carried back i he present men by successive generations 
 to some primitive ancesior, himself sprung from the soil, or from 
 a neighboring river or mountain, or from a god, a nymph, etc 
 But the poet of the Hesiodic *^ Wurks and Days " has given us a 
 narrative conceived in a very different spirit respecting the origin 
 <rf the human race, mort: in harmony with the sober and melan- 
 cboly ethical tone which reigns through that poem.» 
 
 • Hesiod, as cited in the litymologicon Magnum (probably the Hesiodit 
 
 n" 
 
 LEGENDS BELAT1J<0 TO HEROES AND MEN. 
 
 eft 
 
 First (he tells us) the Olympic gods made the golden race, — 
 good, perfect, and happy men, who lived from the spontaneous 
 abundance of the earth, in ease and tranquillity like the gods 
 themselves : they suffered neither disease nor old age, and theii 
 death was like a gentle sleep. After death they became, by the 
 award of Zeus, guardian terrestrial daemons, who watch unseen 
 over the proceedings of mankind — with the regal privilege of 
 dispensing to them wealth, and taking account of good and bad 
 deeds.' 
 
 Next, the gods made the silver race, — unlike and greatly infe- 
 rior, both in mind and body, to the golden. The men of this 
 race were reckless and mischievous towards each other, and dis- 
 dainful of the immortal gods, to whom they refused to offer either 
 worship or sacrifice. Zeus in his wrath buried them in the 
 earth : but there they still enjoy a secondary honor, as the Blest 
 of the under- world.2 
 
 Thirdly, Zeus made the brazen race, quite different from th^ 
 silver. They were made of hard ash-wood, pugnacious and ter- 
 rible ; they were of immense strength and adamantine soul, nor 
 did they raise or touch bread. Their arms, their houses, and 
 l!»eir implements were all of brass : there was then no iron. 
 This race, eternally fighting, perished by each other's hands, died 
 out, and descended without name or privilege to Hades.^ 
 
 Catalogue of Women, as Marktscheffel considers it, placing it Fragm. 133) 
 gives the parentage of a certain Brotos, who must probably be intended aa 
 the first of men : Bporof , uf fxev Evrj/xepoc 6 MetrajyvfOf , arrd Bporov nvot 
 airox'^ovog • 6 de 'Haiodog, and Bporov tov Ai^epog kqI 'H/xipoQ. 
 » 0pp. Di. 120.— 
 
 Avrdp kireid^ rovro yevog Kard. yala KaXtnffev 
 Tol jXEv daifiovi^ eiffi Atdf fieyakov did ftovXdf 
 Ecn^Ao2, kTrix^ovioi, <pvXaKeg ^rjruv dv^pcjiront 
 Ol /5a (jtvXdatnvffiv re diKoc "fo^ ax^^^^^ ^py<^t 
 ^Hepa iaacifuvoi^ irdvrij (ftoiruvTe^ kn'' alap 
 IlXovTodorai • koI tovto yepag fiaaiTirjiov toxov* 
 •0pp. Di. 140.— 
 
 AvTdp hrel Ka} rovro yevoc Kard yala KdXwjfe, 
 Tol fiev virox^ovioi fiaKapeg ^vjjrol KaXeovrcu 
 Aevrepn, dAA' ifimjg rifijf koI rolaiv dmjdei. 
 
 • The ash was the wood oat of which spear-handles were made (Iliad, xrl 
 42) : the Iivfi<pai UeXiai arc bom along with the Gigantes and the Erio 
 VOL. 1. ,'iQc. 
 
 
 
HISTOfiT OF OKEEGR. 
 
 Ndxt, Zeos made a fourth race, far justcr and better Oiaii the 
 last preceding. These were the Heroes or demigods, who fought 
 at the sieges of Troy and Thebes. But this splendid stock alse 
 became extinct : some perished in war, others were removed by 
 Zeus to a happier st;ite in the islands of the Blest. There they 
 dweU in peace and comfort, under the government of Kronoa, 
 reaping thrice in the year the spontaneous produce of the earth, i 
 The fifth race, which succeeds to the Heroes, is of iron: it is 
 the race to which the poet himself belongs, and bitterly does he 
 regret it. He finds his contemporaries mischievous, dishonest, 
 nnjust, ungrateful, given to perjury, careless both of the ties of 
 consanguinity and of the behest« of the gods ; Nemesis and ^doa 
 (Ethical Self-reproach) have left earth and gone back to Olyra- 
 pus. How keenly does he wish that hia lot had been cast eitlier 
 earlier or later l^ I'his iron race is doomed to continual guilt, 
 eare, and suffering, with a small infusion of good; but the time 
 will come when Zeus will put an end to iL The poet does not 
 venture to predict what sort of race will succeed. 
 
 Such is the series of distinct races of men, which Hesiod, or 
 the author of the - Works and Days," enumerates as having 
 existed down to his own time. I give it as it stands, withou't 
 placing much confidence in th various explanations which critics 
 have offered. It stands out in more than one respect from the 
 general tone and sentiment of Grecian legend : moreover the 
 sequence of races is neither natural nor homogeneous, -— the 
 heroic race not having any metaUic denomination, and not occu- 
 pying any legitimate j)lace in immediate succession to the brazen. 
 Nor is the conception of the daemons in harmony either with 
 Homer or with the Hesiodic theogony. In Homer, there is 
 scarcely any distinction between gods and daemons, while the godi 
 
 njes (Theo-on. 187), — "gensque viriim trui.cis et daro robore nata " (Vir 
 gil, -^neid, viii. 315), — Juurta of oak. 
 * 0pp. Di. 157.— 
 
 AvdpiJv 'Hfujuv i&eiov yevoc, ol KoX^ovrai 
 Hfii^EO, npcTipy yeviy Kat' aweipova yaim. 
 Opp Di. 173.— 
 
 M^/cer' iireiT' u^ihw tyC) nefnrroim /lerelvm 
 'Avdpdaiv, aAA' ^ irpoai^e ^avelv, fj kneira yep6a§m. 
 N w ydp 6ii yivof iari ai6iipet» 
 
 GOLDEN, S.LVER, BRAZEN, ETC. RACES ^ 
 
 ve stated to go about and visit the cities of men in various dis- 
 
 ^ises for the purpose of inspecting good and evil proceeduigs.i 
 
 But m the poem now before us, the distinction between gods and 
 
 diemons is generic. The latter are invisible tenants of earth 
 
 remnants ol the once happy golden race whom the Olympic crods 
 
 first made : the remnants of the second or silver race are'^not 
 
 daemons, nor are they tenants of eartli, but they still enjoy an 
 
 honorable posthumous existence as the Blest of the under-worid 
 
 Nevertheless the Hesiodic daemons are in no way authors or 
 
 abettors of evil : on the contrary, they form the unseen police 
 
 of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the 
 
 world. 
 
 We may trace, I think, in this quintuple succession of earthly 
 races, set forth by the author of the " Works and Days," the con- 
 fluence of two veins of sentiment, not consistent one with the 
 other, yet both coexisting in the author's mind. The drift of 
 his poem is thoroughly didactic and ethical : though deeply pene- 
 trated with the injustice and suffering which darken the face of 
 human life, he nevertheless strives to maintain, both in himself 
 aiid m othei^ a conviction that on the whole the just and labo- 
 nous man will come off" well,^ and he enforces in considerable 
 detail the lessons of practical prudence and virtue. This ethical 
 sentiment, which dictates his appreciation of the present, also 
 guides his imagination as to the past. It is pleasing to him to 
 bndge over the chasm between th e gods and degenerate man, by 
 
 ' Odyss. xvii. 486. ~ 
 
 • There are some lines, in which he appears to believe that, under the pBMenI 
 
 Nvv df) k)(jfifif airdc h av^pCtiroKji SUaioc 
 EItjv, fifiT' ifidc vide ' kirel kqkov kari dUaiov 
 'E/ifievai, ei /lei^o) ye dUifv aSiKurepoc Hei • 
 'AAAa rod' oIttu ioXira reXelv Am repmKepawov. 
 v»n the whole, however, his conviction is to the contrary. 
 JUutarch rejects the above four lines, seemingly on no other ground than 
 
 n Bat irf 11 !'^"irT"^ ^"' """^"^^ ^' "^^^ (see^roclos S 
 ^1-^ A '° P^,^«?"y,^^»^ 'he temper of the poem : and the n,to 
 tarch » inadmiisible, m determming the critical question of what ii 
 or spnnoQi. 
 
 I 
 
4t inSTOB\ OF OBEEGE. 
 
 the suppofiition of previous races, — the first altogether port, fha 
 •econd worse thasi the first, and the third still worse than the 
 second ; and to show further how the first race passed bj gentle 
 death -sleep into glorious immortality ; how the second race was 
 sufficiently wicked to drive Zeus to bury them in the under-world, 
 yet 8' ill leaving them a certain measure of honor; while the 
 third was so desperately violent as to perish by its own animosi- 
 ties, without either name or honor of any kind. The conception 
 of the golden race passing after death into good guardian daemons, 
 which some supj)Ose to have been derived from a comparison 
 with oriental angels, presents itself to the poet partly as approx- 
 imating this race to the gods, partly as a means of constituting a 
 triple gradation of j)ost-obituary existence, proportioned to the 
 character of each race whilst alive. The denominations of gold 
 and silver, given 1 o the first two races, justify themselves, like 
 those given by Simonides of Amorgos and by Phokylides to the 
 difi'erent characters of women, derived from the dog, the bee, the 
 mare, the ass, and other animals ; and the epithet of brazen is 
 specially explained by reference to the material which the pugnar 
 cious third race so plentifully employed for their arms and other 
 implements. 
 
 So far we trace intelligibly enough the moralizing vein : we 
 find the revolutions of the past so arranged as to serve partly as 
 an ethical lesson, partly as a suitable preface to the present.' But 
 fourth in the list comes " the divine race of Heroes : " and here 
 a new vein of thought is opened by the poet. The symmetry 
 of his ethical past is broken up, in order to make way for these 
 cherished beings ot the national faith. For though the author of 
 the ** Works and Days " was himself of a didactic cast of thought, 
 
 ' Aratus (Phaenomea. 107) pves only three successive races, — the golden, 
 sliver, and brazen ; Ovid superadds to these the iron race (Metamorph. L 
 89-144) : neither of them notice the heroic race. 
 
 The observations both of Buttmann (Mythos der altesten Menschengesch* 
 Icchter, t. ii. p. 12 of the Mytholop^us) and of Volcker (Mythologie dea 
 Japetischen Geschlechts, § 6, pp. 250-279) on this series of distinct raoefl^ 
 ■re ingenious, and may be read with profit. Both recognize the disparate 
 :;haracter of the fourth link in the series, and each accounts for it in a differ- 
 ent manner. My own view comes nearer to that of Volcker, with some con- 
 siderable differences ; amongst which one is, that he rejects the verses respect* 
 ing the dferaons, whicbt seem to me capital parts of the whole scheme. 
 
 HESIODIG WORKS AND DATa 0| 
 
 like Phokylides, or Solon, or Theognis, yet he had present to hii 
 feeUngs, in common with his countrymen, the picture of Greci&o 
 foretime, as it was set forth in the current mythes, and still more 
 in Homer and those other epical productions which were then the 
 only existing literature and history. It was impossible for him 
 to exclude, from his sketch of the past, either the great persons 
 or the glorious exploits which these poems ennobled ; and even 
 if he himself could have consented to such an exclusion, the 
 sketch would have become repulsive to his hearers. But the 
 chiefs who figured before Thebes and Troy could not be well 
 identified either with the golden, the silver, or the brazen race : 
 morover it was essential that they should be placed in immediate 
 contiguity with the present race, because their descendants, real 
 or supposed, were the most prominent and conspicuous of exist- 
 ing men. Hence the poet is obliged to assign to them the fourth 
 place in the series, and to interrupt the descending ethical move- 
 ment in order to interpolate them between the brazen and the 
 iron race, with neither of which they present any analogy. The 
 iron race, to which the poet himself unhappily belongs, is the 
 legitimate successor, not of the heroic, but of the brazen. Instead 
 of the fierce and self-annihilating pugnacity which characterizes 
 the latter, the iron race manifests an aggregate of smaller and 
 meaner vices and mischiefs. It will not perish by suicidal 
 extinction — but it is growing worse and worse, and is gradually 
 losing its vigor, so that Zeus will not vouchsafe to preserve much 
 longer such a race upon the earth. 
 
 We thus see that the series of races imagined by the poet of 
 the " Works and Days " is the product of two distinct and 
 incongruous veins of imagination, — the didactic or ethical 
 blending with the primitive mythical or epical. His poem is 
 remarkable as the most ancient didactic production of the Greeks, 
 and as one of the first symptoms of a new tone of sentiment 
 finding its way into their literature, never afterwards to become 
 extinct. The tendency of the "Works and Days" is anti- 
 heroic : far from seeking to inspire admiration for adventur- 
 ous enterprise, the author inculcates the strictest justice, the 
 most unremitting labor and frugality, and a sober, not to say 
 anxious, estimate of all the minute specialties of the future. 
 Prudence and probity are his means, — practical comfort and 
 
10 nSTOKY OF cmeEOB. 
 
 happiness his end. But he deeply feels, and keenly exposes, ^e 
 manifold wickedness and short-comings of his contemporaries, in 
 reference to this capital standard. He turns with displeasure 
 from the present men, not because they are too feeble to hurl 
 either the spear of Achilles or some vast boundary-stone, but 
 because they are rapacious, knavisli, and unprincipled. 
 
 The daemons first introduced into the religious atmosphere of 
 the Grecian world by the author of the *' Works and Days," aa 
 generically different from the gods, but as essentially good, and 
 as forming the intermediate agents and i>olice between gods and 
 
 men, are deserving of attention as the seed of a doctrine 
 
 which afterwards underwent many changes, and became of great 
 importance, first as one of the constituent elements of i)agan faith, 
 then as one of the helps to its subversion. It will be recollected 
 that the buried remnants of the half-wicked silver race, though 
 thev are not recogni/.ed as daemons, are still considered as having 
 a substantive existence, a name, and dignity, in the under-world. 
 The step was easy, to treat them as duBmons also, but as daimons of 
 a defective and malignant character : this iite\) wsls made by Erape- 
 docles and Xenocrates, and to a certain extent countenanced by 
 Plato. I There came thus to be admitted among the pagan philoso- 
 phers daemons both good and bad, in every degree : and these dae- 
 mons were found available as a means of explaining many phae- 
 nomenafor which it was not convenient to admit the agency of the 
 gods. They served to relieve the gods from the odium of physical 
 and moral evils, as ^vell as from the necessity of constantly med- 
 dling in small afi'aii-s ; and the objectionable ceremonies of the 
 pagan world were defended upon the ground that in no other way 
 could the exigencies of such malignant beings be appeased. 
 They were most frequently noticed as causes of evil, and thus tho 
 name {d(etnon) came insensibly to convey with it a bad sense, — 
 the idea of an evil being as contrasted with the goodness of a god. 
 So it was found by the Christian writers when they commenced 
 their controversy with paganism. One branch of their argu- 
 ment led them to identify the pagan gods with daemons in the 
 evil sense, and the insensible change in the received meaning oi 
 Ihe word lent them a specious assistance. For they could easily 
 
 » See this subjecl. further mentioned ~~ injra^ chap, xvi p. 665. 
 
 D£MONS IN HESIOD. 
 
 71 
 
 show that not only in Homer, but in the general language of 
 early pagans, all the gods generally were spoken of as daemons— 
 and therefore, verbally speaking, Clemens and Tatian seemed to 
 affirm nothing more against Zeus or Apollo than was employed 
 in the language of paganism itself. Yet the audience of Homer 
 w Sophokles would have strenuously repudiated the proposition, 
 if it had been put to them in the sense which the word dcemon 
 bore in the age and among the circle of these Chnstian writers. 
 In the imagination of the author of the "Works and Days,** 
 the daemons occupy an important place, and are regarded aa 
 being of serious practical efficiency. When he is remonstrating 
 with the rulers around him upon their gross injustice and corrup- 
 tion, he reminds them of the vast number of these immortal ser- 
 vants of Zeus who are perpetually on guard amidst mankind, 
 and through whom the visitations of the gods will descend even 
 upon the most potent evil doers. > His supposition that the dae- 
 mons were not gods, but departed men of the golden race, allowed 
 him to multiply their number indefinitely, without too much 
 cheapening the divine dignity. 
 
 As this poet has been so much enslaved by the current legends 
 as to introduce the Heroic race into a series to which it does not 
 legitimately belong, so he has under the same influence inserted 
 in another part of his poem the mythe of Pandora and Prome- 
 theus, ^ as a means of explaining the primary diffusion, and actus] 
 abundance, of evil among mankind. Yet this mythe can in no 
 way consist with his quintuple scale of distinct races, and is in 
 fact a totally distinct theory to explain the same problem, — the 
 transition of mankind from a supposed state of antecedent hap- 
 piness to one of present toil and suffiiring. Such an inconsistency 
 is not a sufficient reason for questioning the genuineness of either 
 passage ; for the two stories, though one contradicts the other, 
 both harmonize with that central purpose which governs the 
 author's mind, — a querulous and didactic appreciation of the pres- 
 ent. That such was his purpose appears not only from the whole 
 tenor of his poem, but also from the remarkable fact that his own 
 personality, his own adventures and kindred, and his own suffer- 
 ings, figure in it conspicuously. And this introduction of self 
 
 * Opp. 1>L 252. Tpif yap fivpioi elaiv iiri x^ovl xovXu^reipy, etc. 
 ' Opp. ]>i. 5O>105. 
 
 Vol. 1 6 
 
 i 
 
mSTOBT OF OREECB. 
 
 f 
 
 f I 
 
 knparts to H a peculiar interest. The father cf Hesiod 
 over from the jEolic Kyme, with the view of bettering his con- 
 dition, and settled at Askra in Boeotia, at the foot of Mount Heli 
 con. After his death his two sons divided the family inheritance: 
 but Hesiod bitterly complains that his brother Perses cheated and 
 went to law with him, and obtained through corrupt judges an 
 unjust decision. He farther reproaches his brother with a prefer- 
 ence for the suits and unprofitable bustle of the agora, at a time 
 when he ought to b(5 laboring for his subsistence in the field. 
 Askra indeed was a miserable place, repulsive both in summer 
 and winter. Hesiod liad never crossed the sea, except once from 
 Aulis to Eubcea, whither he went to attend the funeral games of 
 Amphidamas, the chief of Chalkis ; he sung a hymn, and gained 
 as prize a tripod, whi<;h he consecrated to the muses in Helicon.' 
 These particulars, scanty as they are, possess a peculiar value, 
 as the earliest authentic memorandum respecting the doing or 
 suffering of any actual Greek person. There is no external tes- 
 timony at all worthy of trust respecting the age of the '' Works 
 and Days :" Herodotus treats Hesiod and Homer as belonging to 
 the same age, four hundred years before his own time ; and there 
 are other statements besides, some placing Hesiod at an earlier 
 date than Homer, some at a later. Looking at the internal evi- 
 dences, we may observe that the pervading sentiment, tone and 
 purpose of the poem is widely different from that of the Iliad 
 and Odyssey, and analogous to what we read respecting the com- 
 positions of Archilochus and the Amorgian Simonides. The au- 
 thor of the *' Works and Days" is indeed a preacher and not a 
 satirist : but with this distinction, we find in him the same pre- 
 dominance of the present and the positive, the same disposition 
 to turn the muse into an exponent of his own personal wrongs, 
 the same employment of ^sopic fable by way of illustration, and 
 the same unfavorable estimate of the female sex,2 all of which 
 
 » Opp. l)i. 630-650, 27-45. 
 
 * Compare the fable {aivoc) in the " Works and Days," v. 200, with thoM 
 in Archilochus, Fr. xxxviii. and xxxix., Gaisford, respecting the fox and the 
 ape; and the legend of Pandora (v. 95 and v. 705) with the fragment ol 
 Simonides of Amorgos njspecting women (Fr. viii. ed. Welcker, v. 95-115); 
 also Phokylides ap. Stobceam Florileg. Ixxi. 
 
 Isokrat^s assimilates the character of the " Works and Days " to that of 
 Theognis and Phokylidds (ad Nikokl. Or. ii. p. 23). 
 
 -'i --l'»j»^jr*." . - .^- 
 
 HESIODIO roBna M 
 
 may be traced in the two poets above mentioiied, placing both of 
 them in contrast with the Homeric epic Such an internal analogy, 
 in the absence of good testimony, is the best guide which we can 
 follow in detei-mining the date of the** Works and Days," which 
 we should accordingly place shortly after the year 700 b. c. The 
 style of the poem might indeed afford a proof that the ancient and 
 uniform hexameter, though well adapted to continuous legendary 
 narrative or to solemn hymns, was somewhat monotonous when 
 called upon either to serve a polemical purpose or to impress a 
 striking moral lesson. When poets, then the only existing com- 
 posers, first began to apply their thoughts to the cut and thrust 
 of actual life, aggressive or didactic, the verse would be seen to 
 require a new, livelier and smarter metre ; and out of this want 
 grew the elegiac and the iambic verse, both seemingly contempo- 
 raneous, and both intended to supplant the primitive hexameter 
 for the short effusions then coming into vogue. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 LEGEND OF THE lAPETIDS. 
 
 The sons of the Titan god lapetus, as described in the Heal. 
 odic theogony, are Atlas, Menoetius, Prometheus and Epimetheus.* 
 Of these, Atlas alone is mentioned by Homer in the Odyssey, 
 and even he not as the son of lapetus : the latter himself is named 
 in the Iliad as existing in Tartarus along with Kronos. The 
 Homeric Atlas " knows the depths of the whole sea, and keeps by 
 himself those tall pillars which hold the heaven apart from tlie 
 earth.'' 9 
 
 * Hesiod, Theog. 510. 
 
 • Hom. Odyss. i. 120. — 
 
 'AtXcvtoc T^yar^p 6'Ao6<ppovo(, dare ^aTidoa^ 
 HoKpikc, al yoiav re xal oipavdv &fti^ kx^^^- 
 
 ▼auL 4 
 
74 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LEGEND OP THE lAPETIDS. 
 
 n 
 
 As the Homenc theogony generally appears much expanded 
 in Hesiod, so also do€s the family of lapetus, with their varied 
 ndventures. Atlas is here described, not as the keeper of the 
 Intermediate pillars between heaven and earth, but as himself 
 condemned by Zeus to support the heaven on his head and hands ; ^ 
 while the fierce Menoetius is thrust down to Erebus as a punish- 
 ment for his ungovernable insolence. But the remaining two 
 brothers, Prometheus and Epiinetheus, are among the most in 
 ter«sting creations of Grecian legend, and distinguished in more 
 than one respect from all the remainder. 
 
 First, the main battle between Zeus and the Titan gods is a 
 contest of force purely and simply — mountains are hurled and 
 thunder is launched, and the victory remains to the strongest. But 
 the competition between Zeus and Prometheus is one of craft 
 and stratagem : the victory does indeed remain to the former, but 
 the honors of the fight belong to tbe latt«r. Secondly, Prometheus 
 and Epimetheus (the fore-thinker and the after-thinker 2) are char- 
 acters stamped at the same mint and by the same effort, the express 
 contrast and antithesis of each ot her. Thirdly, mankind are here 
 expressly brought forward, not indeed as active partners in the 
 struggle, but as the grand and capital subjects interested, — as 
 gainers or sufferers by the result. Prometheus appears in the 
 exalted character of champion of the human race, even against 
 the forn..Jable superiority of Zeus. 
 
 In the primitive or Hesiodic legend, Prometheus is not the 
 creator or moulder of man ; it is only the later additions which 
 invest him with this character-^ The race are supposed as exist- 
 
 • Hesiod, Theog. 516.— 
 
 'ArJioi 6' ovpavdv evpi)v Ix^i Kparepvg vir' dvdyKtjg 
 'EffTTjikf ite<l>aly re koI uKafiaToiat xepeaai. 
 Hesiod stretches far beyond the simplicity of the Homeric conception. 
 
 « Pindar extends the family of Epimetheus and gives him a daughter, 
 np6(l>aaig (Pyth. v. 25), Excuse, the offspring of After-thought. 
 
 3 Apollodor. i. 7. 1. Nor is he such either in ^schylus, or in the Platonic 
 fable (Protag. c. 30), though this version became at last the ma«t popular. 
 Some hardened lumps of clay, remnants of that which had been employed 
 by Prometheus in moulding man, were shown to Pausanias at Panopeus in 
 
 Fhokis (Pans. X 4,3). „ ^. 
 
 The first Epigram of Eriniui ( Anthol. i. p. 58, ed. Brunck) seems to alludf 
 
 ing, tmd Prometheus, a member of the dispossessed body of Titan 
 gods, comes forward as their representative and defender. The 
 advantageous bargain which he made with Zeus on their behalf, 
 in respect to the partition of the sacrificial animals, lias been re- 
 counted in the preceding chapter. Zeus felt that he had been 
 outwitted, and was exceeding wroth. In his displeasure he with- 
 held from mankind the inestimable comfort of tire, so that the 
 Face would have perished, had not Prometheus stolen fire, in de- 
 fiance of the command of the Supreme Ruler, and brought it to 
 men in the hollow of a ferule.' 
 
 Zeus was now doubly indignant, and determined to play off 
 a still more ruinous stratagem. Hephaestos, by his direction, 
 moulded the form of a beautiful virgin ; Athene dressed her, 
 Aphrodite and the Charities bestowed upon her both ornament 
 and fascination, while Hermes infused into her the mind of a 
 dog, a deceitful spirit, and treacherous words.- The messenger 
 of the gods conducted this " fascinating mischief" to mankind, at 
 a time when Prometheus was not present. Now Epimetheus had 
 received from his brother peremptory injunctions not to accept 
 from the hands of Zeus any present whatever ; but the beauty 
 of Pandora (so the newly-formed female was called) was not to 
 be resisted. She was received and admitted among men, and 
 from that moment their comfort and tranquillity was ex'^hanged 
 for suffering of every kind.^ The evils to which mankind are 
 liable had been before enclosed in a cask in their own keeping: 
 Pandora in her malice removed the lid of the cask, and out flew 
 these thousand evils and calamities, to exercise forever their de^ 
 stroying force. Hope alone remained imprisoned, and therefore 
 without efficacy, as before — the inviolable lid being replaced 
 before she could escape. Before this incident (says the legend) 
 men had lived without disease or suffering ; but now both earth 
 and sea are full of mischiefs, while maladies of every description 
 stalk abroad by day as well as by night,* without any hope for 
 man of relief to come. 
 
 to Promdtheus as moulder of man. The expression of Aristophanfis ( Aveg, 
 689) — Tr?Ji<Tfiara tttiXov — does not necessarily refer to Prometheus. 
 
 ' Hesiod, Theog. 566 ; 0pp. Di. 52. « Theog. 580 ; 0pp. DL 6a-«5i 
 
 » 0pp. Di. 81-90. 
 
 * Opp. Di. 93. Panddra does no. bring with her the cagk, as the common 
 
If flISTOSY OF GSEibOK. 
 
 The Theogony gives the legend here recounted, with some ww 
 riations — leaving out the part of Epimetheus altogether, as well 
 as the cask of evils. Pandora is the ruin of man, simply as the 
 mother and representative of the female sex.' And the varia- 
 tions are thus useful, as they enable us to distinguish the essential 
 from the accessory circumstances of the story. 
 
 " Thus (says the jaoet, at the conclusion of his narrative) it is 
 not possible to escape; from the purposes of Zeus." 2 His mythe, 
 connecting the calamitous condition of man with the malevolence 
 of the supreme god, shows, first, by what cause such an unfriendly 
 feeling was raised ; next, by what instrumentality its deadly re- 
 sults were brought alK>ut. The human race are not indeed the 
 creation, but the protected iiock of Prometheus, one of the elder 
 or dispossessed Titan gods : when Zeus acquires supremacy, man- 
 kind along with the i*est become subject to him, and are to make 
 the best bargain the^ can respecting worship and service to be 
 yielded. By the stratagem of their advocate Prometheus, Zeus 
 
 tersion of this «*orv would have us suppose : the cask exists fast closed in 
 Ihe custody nf Epimetheus, or of man himself, and Pandora commits the 
 fetal treachery of removinj.5 the lid. The case is analogous to that of the 
 closed bap^ of unfavorable winds which ./Eolus gives into the hands oi 
 Odysseufi, and which the guilty companions of the latter force open, to the 
 entire ruin of his hopes ( Odyss. x. 1 9-50 J. The idea of the two casks on 
 the ihreshhold of Zeus, lying ready for dispensation --one full of evils the 
 jther of benefits — is Homeric (Iliad, xxiv. 527) : — 
 
 Aotot yap re ttI'&oi KaraKeiarai kv A«df ovdei, etc. 
 
 Plntarch assimilates to this the Trii^of opened by Pandora. Consolat. ad Apol- 
 lon. c. 7. p. 105. The explanation here given of the Hesiodic piissage re- 
 lating to Hope, is druwn from an able article in the Wiener Jahrbucher, vol. 
 109(1845), p. 220, Ritter; a review of Schommann's translation of the Pro- 
 metheus of ^schylus. The diseases and evils are inoperative so long as they 
 remain shut up in the ca* k : the same mischief-making influence whio*i let! 
 them out to their calamitous work, takes care that Hope shall ^ till x^ntinnt 
 ■ powerless prisoner in the inside. 
 ^ Theog. .^90.— 
 
 'E« rjyf yap yivoq karl ywaiKdv ^ijXvrepauVf 
 T;/f ydp 6?,u<i6v hart yevo^ koI 0t)/la yvvaiKun* 
 TT r///a fxeya &vijToiai fur' avSpaai vaieraown,ttle^ 
 
 'Opp Di 105.— 
 
 Oiruf o*Tt TT^ icrl Aidf voov k^aXia(r9aL, 
 
 ZEUS AND PBOMBTHEU& 
 
 n 
 
 k cheated into such a partition of the victims as is eminently un- 
 profitable to him ; whereby his wrath is so provoked, that he tries 
 to subtract from man the use of fire. Here however his scheme 
 is frustrated by the theft of Prometheus : but his second attempt 
 is more successful, and he in his turn cheats the unthinking Epime- 
 theus into the acceptance of a present (in spite of the peremptory 
 interdict of Prometheus) by which the whole of man's happiness 
 is wrecked This legend grows out of two feelings ; partly as to 
 the relations of the gods with man, partly as to the relation of 
 the female sex with the male. The present gods are unkind to- 
 wards man, but the old gods, with whom man's lot was originally 
 cast, were much kinder — and the ablest among them stands for- 
 ward as the indefatigable protector of the race. Nevertheless, 
 the mere excess of his crafl proves the ultimate ruin of the cause 
 which he espouses. He cheats Zeus out of a fair share of the 
 sacrificial victim, so as both to provoke and justify a retaliation 
 which he cannot be always at hand to ward off: the retaliation 
 is, in his absence, consummated by a snare laid for £pimetheus 
 and voluntarily accepted. And thus, though Hesiod ascribes the 
 calamitous condition of man to the malevolence of Zeus, his piety 
 suggests two exculpatory pleas for the latter : mankind have been 
 
 the first to defraud Zeus of his legitimate share of the sacrifice 
 
 and they have moreover been consenting parties to their own 
 ruin. Such are the feelings, as to the relation between the gods 
 and man, which have been one of the generating elements of 
 this legend. The other element, a conviction of the vast mischief 
 arising to man from women, whom yet they cannot dispense with, 
 is frequently and strongly set forth in several of the Greek poets 
 — by Simonides of Amorgos and Phokylides, not less than by 
 the notorious misogynist Euripides. 
 
 But the miseries arising from woman, however great they 
 might be, did not reach Prometheus himself. For him, the rash 
 champion who had ventured " to compete in sagacity *' ^ with 
 Zeus, a different punishment was in store. Bound by heavy 
 chains to a pillar, he remained fast imprisoned for several gene« 
 rations : every day did an eagle prey upon his liver, and every 
 night did the liver grow afresh for the next day's suffering. At 
 
 ' Theog &3i. Oiweic' ipii^eTO /3ot;\df virepfuvii ^^pwUtvu 
 
HI8TOBT OF aBEEC& 
 
 ISDgth Zens, eager to enhance the glory of his favorite sou 
 cl^, permitted the latter to kill the eagle and rescue the 
 
 tive.i 
 
 Such is the Promethean mythe as it stands in the Hesiodic 
 poems ; its earliest form, as far as we can trace. Upon it was founded 
 the sublime tragedy of ^schylus, "The Enchained Prometheus,* 
 together with at least one more tragedy, now lost, by the same 
 author.2 ^s^hylus has made several important alterations; de- 
 gcribing the human race, not as having once enjoyed and subse- 
 quently lost a state of tranquillity and enjoyment, but as originally 
 feeble and wretched. He suppresses both the first trick played 
 off by Prometheus upon Zeus respecting the partition of the vio- 
 tim — and the final formation and sending of Pandora — which 
 are the two most marked ix)itions of the Hesiodic story ; while 
 on the othei hand he brings out prominently and enlarges upon 
 the theft of tire,^ which in Hesiod is but slightly touched. If he 
 ha^ thus relinquished the antique simplicity of the story, he has 
 rendered more than ample comjiensation by imparting to it a gran- 
 deur of idkil, a large reach of thought combined with appeals to 
 our earne.-t and adminng sympathy, and a pregnancy of sugges- 
 tion in regard to the relations between the gods and man,. which 
 Boar far above the Hesiodic level — and which render his tragedy 
 the most impressive, though not the most artistically composed, o* 
 all Grecian dramatic {productions. Prometheus there appears not 
 only as the heroic champion and sufferer in the cause and for the 
 protection of the human race, but also as the gifted teacher of all the 
 arts, helps, and ornaments of life, amongst which fire is only oner* 
 all this against the will and in defiance of the purpose of Zeus, who, 
 oo acquiring his empire, wished to destroy the human race and to 
 
 » Theog. 521-532. 
 
 * Of the tragedy called Ilpofirr^ei)c Avo/nevoc some few fragments yet re 
 mum: Upo^Ti^ei)^ Ilup^pof was a satyric drama, according to Dindorf 
 Welcker recognizes a thinl tragedy, Tlpofiv^ei)c Tlvfxpofyoi; and a satyric dm- 
 ma, UpofiTi^Ev^ UvpKam (Die Gric'hisch. Tragodien, vol. 1. p. 30). Thf 
 itory of Prometheus had also been Iwndled by Sappho in one of her kMl 
 songs (Servius ad Virgil. Bclog. vi. 42). 
 
 * ApoUodoras voo mentions only the theft of fire (i. 7. 1^ 
 
 * JTuch. Prom. 442-506.— 
 
 PROMETHEUS Am> fflS SUFFERINGS. 
 
 79 
 
 teget some new breed. » Moreover, new relations between Pronid- 
 theus and Zeus are superadded by ^schylus. At the commence- 
 ment of the struggle between Zeus and the Titan gods, Prometheus 
 hail vainly attempted to prevail upon the latter to conduct it with 
 prudence ; but when he found that they obstinately declined all 
 wise counsel and that their ruin was inevitable, he abandoned their 
 cause and joined Zeus. To him and to his advice Zeus owed the 
 victory : yet the monstrous ingratitude and tyranny of the latter is 
 now manifested by nailing him to a rock, for no other crime than 
 because he frustrated the purpose of extinguishing the human race, 
 and furnished to them the means of fiving with tolerable comfort.^ 
 The new ruler Zeus, insolent with his victory over the old gods, 
 tramples down all right, and sets at naught sympathy and obliga- 
 tion, as well towards gods as towards man. Yet the prophetic 
 Prometheus, in the midst of intense sufiering, is consoled by the 
 foreknowledge that the time will come when Zeus must again 
 send for him, release him, and invoke his aid, as the sole means 
 of averting from himself dangers otherwise insurmountable. The 
 security and means of continuance for mankind have now been 
 placed beyond the reach of Zeus — whom Prometheus proudly 
 defies, glorying in his generous and successful championship,3 de- 
 spite the terrible price which he is doomed to pay for it. 
 
 As the ^schylean Prometheus, though retaining the old linea- 
 ments, has acquired a new coloring, soul and character, so he has 
 also become identified with a special locality. In Hesiod, there 
 is no indication of the place in which he is imprisoned ; but ^s- 
 chylus places it in Scythia,^ and the general belief of the Greeka 
 supposed it to be on Mount Caucasus. So long and so firmly did 
 
 ^ JEsch. Prom. 231 — 
 
 PporCtv de Tuv ToXainupuv Xoyoy 
 OvK eaxev ov6ev\ dAA' uiffruaag yevof 
 Td nuVf ixPV^^ aAAo t^iTvaai veov, 
 
 • ^sch.Prom. 198-222. 123 — 
 
 (Jta r;)r Xiav (fn^orijTa fipoTCjv. 
 » ^sch. Prom. 169-770. 
 
 * Prometh. 2. See also the Fragments of the Prometheus Solutus, 177 
 179, cd. Dindorf, where Caucasus is specially named ; but v. 719 of the Ph)- 
 m^thens Vinctu? seems to imply that Mount Caucasus is a place liffereal 
 fcom that to which the suffering prisoner is chained. 
 
i9 HISrOBY OF GREEGB. 
 
 this belief continue, that the JRoman general Pompey, when ia 
 command of an -di'my in Kolchis, made with his companion, the lit» 
 erary Greek Theufihanes, a special march to view the spot is 
 Caucasus where Prometheus had been transfixed.^ 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 HEROIC LEGENDS. -GENEALOGY OF ARGOS. 
 
 Having briefly enumerated the gods of Greece, with their 
 3hief attributes as described in legend, we come to those geneal- 
 ogies which connected tliem with historical men. 
 
 In the retraspectiv«3 faith of a Greek, the ideas of worship and 
 ancestry coalesced. Kvery association of men, large or small, in 
 whom there existed a feeling of present union, traced back that 
 union to some common initial progenitor ; that progenitor being 
 either the common god whom they worshipped, or some semi-divine 
 person closely allied to him. What the feelings of the commu- 
 nity require is, a contiimous pedigree to connect them with this 
 respected source of existence, beyond which they do not think oi 
 looking back. A series of names, placed in filiation or fraternity, 
 together with a certain number of family or personal adventures 
 ascribed to some of the individuals among them, constitute the 
 ante-historical past thirough which the Greek looks back to his 
 gods. The names of this genealogy are, to a great degree, gen- 
 tile or local names familiar to the people, — rivers, mountains, 
 springs, lakes, villages, demes, etc., — embodied as persons, and 
 introduced as acting or suffering. They are moreover called 
 kings or chiefs, but the existence of a body of subjects surround- 
 ing them is tacitly implied rather than distinctly set forth ; for 
 their own personal exploits or family proceedings constitute tor 
 the mofit part the whole matter of narrative. And thus the gene* 
 
 > ArDum. Bell. Mithridat c. 108. 
 
 HEROIC LEGENDS.- GENEALOGY OF ARGOS. 
 
 81 
 
 alogy was made to satisfy at once the appetite of the Greeks for 
 romantic adventure, and their demand for an unbroken line of fil- 
 iation between themselves and the gods. The eponymous person- 
 age, from whom the community derive their name, is sometimes 
 the begotten son of the local god, sometimes an indigenous man 
 sprung from the earth, which is indeed itself divinized. 
 
 It will be seen from the mere description of these genealogies 
 that they included elements human and historical, as well as ele- 
 ments divine and extra-historical. And if we could detarmine 
 the time at which any genealogy was first framed, we should be able 
 to assure ourselves that the men then represented as present, to- 
 gether with their fathers and grandfathers, were real persons ol 
 flesh and blood. But this is a point which can seldom be ascertain- 
 ed ; moreover, even if it could be ascertained, we must at once set it 
 aside, if we wish to look at the genealogy in the point of view of 
 the Greeks. For to them, not only all the -^embers were alike 
 real, but the gods and heroes at the commencement were in a cer- 
 tain sense the most real ; at least, they were the most esteemed 
 and indispensable of all. The value of the genealogy consisted, 
 not in its length, but in its continuity ; not (according to the feel- 
 ing of modern aristocracy) in the power of setting out a prolong- 
 ed series of human fathers and grandfathers, but in the sense of 
 ancestral union with the primitive god. And the length of the 
 series is traceable rather to humility, inasmuch as the same per- 
 son who was gratified with th3 belief that he was descended from 
 a god in the fifteenth generation, would have accounted it crimi- 
 nal insolence to affirm that a god was his father or grandfather. 
 In presenting to the reader those genealogies which constitute the 
 supposed primitive hislory of Hellas, I make no pretence to dis- 
 tinguish nartes real and historical from fictitious creations ; partly 
 because I have no evidence upon which to draw the line, and part- 
 ly because by attempting it I should altogether depart from the 
 genuine Grecian point of view. 
 
 Nor is it possible to do more than exhibit a certain selection ol 
 such as were most current and interesting ; for the total number 
 of them which found place in Grecian faith exceeds computation. 
 Afl a general rule, every deme, every gens, every aggregate of 
 men accustomed to combined action, rehgious or political, had iU 
 own. The small and unimportant demes into which Attica w/u 
 voj T 4* eoc 
 
ttt BISTOBT 0/ 6BEEC& 
 
 divided had each ite ancestral god and heroes, just as much an 
 the great Athens herself. Even among the villages of Phokis, 
 which Pausanias will hardly permit himself to call towns, deduc- 
 tions of legendary antiquity were not wanting. And it is impor- 
 tant to bear in mind, when we are reading the legendary geneal- 
 ogies of Argos, or Sparta, or Thebes, that these are merely 
 §amples amidst an extensive class, all perfectly analogous, and 
 all exhibiting the religious and patriotic retrospect of some frac- 
 tion of the Hellenic world. They are no more matter of his- 
 torical tradition than any of the thousand other legendary genealo- 
 gies which men deli^^hted to recall to memory at the periodical 
 festivals of their gens, their deme, or their village. 
 
 With these few prefatory remarks, I proceed to notice the most 
 conspicuous of the Grecian heroic pedigrees, and first, that of 
 Arj]jos. 
 
 The earliest name in Argeian antiquity is that of Inachus, the 
 Bon of Oceanus and Tethys, who gave his name to the river flow- 
 ing under the walls of the town. According to the chronological 
 computations of those who regarded ihe mythical genealogies as 
 substantive history, and who allotted a given number of years to 
 each generation, the reign of Inachus was placed 198G b. c, or 
 about 1100 years prior to the commencement of the recorded 
 Olympiads.! 
 
 The sons of Inachus were Phoroneus and ^gialeus ; both of 
 whom however were sometimes represented as autochthonous 
 men, the one in the territory of Argos, the other in that of Sik- 
 yon. ^gialeus gave his name to the north-western region of 
 the Peloponnesus, on the southern coast of the Corinthian Gulf.3 
 The name of Phoroncjus was of great celebrity in the Argeian 
 mythical genealogies, and furnished both the title and the sub- 
 ject of the ancient poem called Phoronis, in which he is styled 
 " the father of mortal men."3 He is said to have imparted to 
 
 lO— 
 
 —THE HERiEO^. 
 
 ' Apollodor. ii. 1. Mr. Fynes Clinton does not admit the historical reality 
 of Inachus ; hut he place? Phordneus seventeen generations, or 570 years 
 rrior to the Trojan war, 978 years earlier than the first recorded Olympiad 
 See Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii. c. 1. p. 19. 
 
 • Pansan. ii. 5, 4. 
 
 ' Sec Diintzer, Fragm. Epic Graec. p. 57. The Ar^ian author Akasflaw 
 treated Phoroneus as the first of men, Fragm. 14. Didot an. Hem. Al«x 
 
 MKkind, who had before him lived altogether isolated, the first 
 potion and habits of social existence, and even the first knowl- 
 edge of fire : his dominion extended over the whole Peloponne- 
 sus. His tomb at Argos, and seemingly also the place called the 
 Phoronic city, in which he formed the first settlement of man- 
 kind, were still shown in the days of Pausanias.* The oflTspring 
 of Phoroneus, by the nymph Teledike, were Apis and Niobe. 
 Apis, a harsh ruler, was put to death by Thelxion and Telchin, 
 having given to Peloponnesus the name of Apia :2 he was suc- 
 ceeded by Argos, the son of his sister Niobe by the god Zeus. 
 From this sovereign Peloponnesus was denominated Argos. By 
 his wife Evadne, daughter of Str}'m6n,3 he had four sons, Ekba^ 
 sus, Peiras, Epidaurus, and Kriasus. Ekbasus was succeeded by 
 his son Agenor, and he again by his son Argos Panoptes, — a 
 
 Stromat i. p. 321. ^opuvr/ec, a synonym for Argeians; Theocrit. Idyll 
 XXV. 200. 
 
 ' Apollodor. ii. I, 1 ; Pausan. ii. 15, 5; 19, 5 ; 20, 3. 
 
 ' Apis in ^schylus is totally different : larpo/iavTig or medical charmer, 
 son of Apollo, who comes across the gulf from Naupactus, purifies the ter- 
 ritory of Arp:os from noxious monsters, and gives to it the name of Apia 
 (^schyl. Suppl. 265). Compare Steph. Byz. v. *A7r/f/ ; Soph. CEdip. 
 Colon. 1303. The name 'Ania for Peloponnesus remains still a mystery, 
 even after the attempt of Bnttmann (Lexilogus, s. 19) to throw light upon 
 it 
 
 Eusebius asserts that Niob^ was the wife of Inachus and mother of Pho- 
 roneus, and pointedly contradicts those who call her daughter of Phoroneus 
 — <t>a<rl de rive^ ^w^rfv ^opuveu^ elvai &vyarepa, 67rep oIk aXri-&FX (Chronic, 
 p. 23, ed. Scalig.) : his positive tone is curious, upon such a matter. 
 
 Hellanicns in his Argolica stated that Phordneus had three sons, Pelasgos* 
 lasus and Agenor, who at the death of their father divided his possessions 
 by lot. Pelasgus acquired the country near the river Erasinos, and built the 
 citadel of Larissa : lasus obtained the portion near to Elis. After their 
 decease, the younger brother Agfindr invaded and conquered the conntry, at 
 the head of a large body of horse. It was from these three persons that 
 Argos derived three epithets which are attached to it in the Homeric 
 poems -— 'Apyof ncAaeryt/cdv, 'laaov, 'linrofiorov (Hellanik. Fr. 38, ed. Didot* 
 Phavorin. v. Mpyof ). This is a specimen of the way in which legendary 
 persons as well as legendary events were got up to furnish an explanation 
 of Homeric epithets : we may remark as singular, that Hellanicns seems to 
 ■rply Tle^tryiKfiv 'Apyof to a portion of Peloponn^ns, while the Homeric 
 Catalogue applies it to Thessaly. 
 
 * Apollod. 1. c The mention of Stiymdn seems connected with JBathjUm 
 $(appl 255. 
 
 c 
 
 I i 
 
84 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 WANDERINGS OP 10- 
 
 very powerful prince who is said to have had eyes distributed 
 over all his body, and to have liberated Peloponnesus from sev- 
 eral monsters and wild animals which infested it -A Akusilaus and 
 -^schylus make this Argos an earth-bom person, while Phere- 
 kydes reports him as son of Arestor. lasus was the son of Arcros 
 Panoptes by Ismen«3, daughter of Asopus. According to the 
 authors whom Apollodorus and Pausanias prefer, the celebrated 
 16 was his daughter : but the Hesiodic epic (as well as Akusilaus) 
 represented her as daughter of Peiras, while jEschylus and 
 Kastor the chronolo^^st atfirmed the primitive king Jnachus to 
 have b3en her father. -' A favorite theme, as well tor the ancient 
 genealogical poets as for the Attic tragedians, were the adven- 
 tures of 16, of whom, while priestess of Here, at the ancient 
 and renowned Herjeon between Mykenae and Argos, Zeus 
 became amorous. When Here discovered the intrigue and 
 taxed him with it, he denied the charge, and metamorphosed Id 
 into a white cow. Here, requiring that the cow should be sur- 
 rendered to her, placiid her under the keeping of Argos Panop- 
 tes ; but this guardian was slain by Hermes, at the command of 
 Zeus : and Here then drove the cow 16 away from her native 
 land by means of the incessant stinging of a gad-fly, which com- 
 pelled her to wander without re])ose or sustenance over an 
 immeasurable extent of foreign regions. The wandering 16 gave 
 her name to the Ionian Gulf, traversed Epirus and Illyria, passed 
 the chain of Mount Ha^mus and the lofty summits of Caucasus, 
 and swam across the Thracian or Cimmerian Bosporus (which 
 also from her derived its appellation) into Asia. She then went 
 through Scythia, Cimmeria, and many Asiatic regions, until she 
 arrived in Egypt, wh(Te Zeus at length bestowed upon her rest, 
 restored her to her original form, and enabled her to give birth 
 to his black son Epaphos.*^ 
 
 ' Akusil. Frapm. 17, ed. Didot; ^.sch. Proraeth. 568 ; Pherekyd. Fragm. 
 22, ed. Didot; Hesiod. JEgimius. Fr. 2, p. 56. ed. DUntzer : among the 
 varieties of the story, oiie was that Argos was changed into a peacock 
 CSchol. Aristoph. Aves, 102;. Macrobius (i. 19) considers Argos as an alle- 
 gorical expression of th(5 starry heaven: an idea which Panofska also 
 upholds in one of the recent Abhandlungen of the Berlin Academy, 1837, p. 
 121 $eq. 
 
 " Apollod. ii. 1, 1 ; Paasan. ii. 16, 1 ; Mich. Prom. v. 590-663. 
 
 • JEschvl. Prom, v 790-850; Apollod. ii. 1. JF.-?chylus in the Supplioei 
 
 Such is a general sketch of the adventures which the a&cieol 
 poets, epic, lyric, and tragic, and the logographers after thera, 
 connect with the name of the Argeian 16, — one of the numeroRs 
 tales which the fancy of the Greeks deduced from the amoroaa 
 dispositions of Zeus and the jealousy of Here. That the scen3 
 should be laid in the Argeian territory appears natural, when W3 
 recollect that both Argos and Mykenae were under the special 
 guardianship of Here, and that the Heraeon between the two 
 was one of the oldest and most celebrated temples in which she 
 was worshipped. It is useful to compare this amusing fiction 
 with the representation reportei to us by Herodotus, and derived 
 by him as well from Phoenician as from Persian antiquarians, of 
 the circumstances which occasioned the transit of 16 from Argos 
 to Egypt, — an event recognized by all of them as historical 
 matter of fact. According to the Persians, a Phoenician vessel 
 had arrived at the port near Argos, freighted with goods intended 
 for sale to the inhabitants of the country. After the vessel had 
 remained a few days, and disposed of most of her cargo, several 
 
 gives a different version of the wanderings of 16 from that which appears in 
 ♦he Prometheus : in the former drama he carries her through Phrygia, Mysia, 
 Lydia, Pamphylia and Cilicia into Egypt (Supplic. 544-566) : nothing is 
 there said about Prometheus, or Caucasus or Scythia, etc. 
 
 The track set forth in the Supplices is thus geographically intelligible, 
 that in the Prometheus (though the most noticed of the two) defies all com- 
 prehension, even as a consistent fiction ; nor has the erudition of the com- 
 mentators been succes.sful in clearing it up. See Schutz, Excurs. iv. ad 
 Prometh. Vinct. pj). 144-149; Welcker, ^^chylische Trilogie, pp. 127-146, 
 and especially Volcker, Mythische Geographic der Griech. und Romer, part 
 i. pp. 3-lS. 
 
 The Greek inhabitants at Tarsus in Cilicia traced their origin to Argofl: 
 their story was, that Triptolemus had been sent forth from that town io 
 quest of the wandering 16, that he had followed her to Tyre, and then 
 renounced the search in despair. He and his companions then settled partly 
 at Tarsus, partly at Antioch (Strabo, xiv. 673; xv. 7.50). This is the 
 itory of Kadmos and Europ^ inverted, as happens th the Grecian 
 
 mythes. 
 
 Homer calls Hermes 'Apyei<f>6vrrf^ • but this epithet hardly affonls snfll 
 dent proof that he was acquainted with the mythe of Id, as Volcker sup 
 poses : it cannot be traced higher than Hesiod. According to some aathora, 
 whom Cicero copies, it was on account of the murder of Argos that Jlerm^B 
 W9B obliged to leave Greece and go into Egypt: then it wm that he tanghr 
 the Egyptians laws and letters (De Natnr. Deor. iii. 22). 
 
 I 
 
 * % 
 
86 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ABDUOnONB OF HEROIC WOMEN. 
 
 Argeian women, an I among them 16 the king's daughter, coming 
 on board to purchai^e, were seized and carried off by the crew, 
 who sold 16 in Egy])t.' The Phoenician antiquarians, however] 
 while they admitted the circumstance that 16 had left her own 
 ocuntry in one of their vessels, gave a different color to the whole 
 by affirming that she emigrated voluntarily, having been engaged 
 in an amour with tlie captain of the vessel, and fearing that her 
 parents might conic to the knowledge of her pregnancy. Both 
 Persians and Phcjeniciians described the abduction of 16 as the 
 first of a series of similar acts between Greeks and Asiatics, 
 committed each in revenge for the preceding. First came the 
 rape of Eur6pe from Phoenicia by Grecian adventurers, — |)er- 
 haps, as Herodotus supjwsed, by Kretans : next, the abduction 
 of Medeia from Kolchis by Jas6n, which occasioned the retaliatory 
 act of Paris, when he stole away Helena from Menelaos. Up to 
 this point the seizures of women by Greeks from Asiatics, and 
 by Asiatics from Greeks, had been equivalents both in number 
 and in wrong. But the Greeks now thought fit to equip a vast 
 conjoint expedition to recover Helen, in the course of which they 
 took and sacked Troy. The invasions of Greece by Darius and 
 Xerxes were intended, acconling to the Persian antiquarians, as 
 a long-delayed retribution for the injury infiicted on the Asiatics 
 by Agamemn6n and his followers."^ 
 
 The account thus j^iven of the adventures of 16, when con- 
 trasted with the genuine legend, is interesting, as it tends to illus- 
 
 ' The story in Parth^nius (Narrat 1) is built upon this version of Id's 
 adventures. 
 
 » Herodot. i. 1-6. Pau»anias (ii. 15, 1) will not undertake to determine 
 whether the account given by Herodotus, or that of the old legend, respect- 
 ing the cause which carried 16 from Argos to Egypt, is the true one : Ephoru.s 
 (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 168) repeats the abduction of 16 to Egypt, by the 
 Phoenicians, subjoining a strange account of the Etymology of the name 
 Bosporus. The remarks of Plutarch on the narrative of Herodotus are 
 enrions : he adduces as one proof of the KOKo^eia (bad feeling) of Herod- 
 Otas that the latter insert? so discreditable a narrative respecting Id, daugh- 
 ««r of Inachus, " whom all Greeks believe to have been divinized by foreign- 
 «n, to hate given name to seas and straits, and to be the source of the most 
 mnstrions regal families." He also blames Herodotus for rejecting Epaphas, 
 Id, lasas and Argos, as highest members of the Perseid genealogy. H« 
 calls Herodotus ^i\o)3iip3QfMg /Plutarch, De MaUgn. Herodoti, c. xi. xii xiv 
 fp, 85«, 857). 
 
 tnte the plueiiomeuon which early Greciao history is constantlj 
 presenting to us. — the way in which the epical furniture of aa 
 Dnknown past is recast and newly colored so as to meet those 
 changes which take place in the retrospective feelings of tha 
 present. The religious and poetical character of the old legend 
 disappears: nothing remains except the names of persons and 
 places, and the voyage from Argos to Egypt : we have in exchange 
 a sober, quasi-historical narrative, the value of which consists m 
 its bearing on the grand contemporary conflicts between Persia 
 and Greece, which filled the imagination of Herodotus and his 
 readers. 
 
 To proceed with the genealogy of the kings of Argos, lasue 
 was succeeded by Krot6pus, son of his brother Agen6r ; Kroto- 
 pus by Sthenelas, and he again by Gelanor.^ In the reign of the 
 latter, Danaos came with his fifty daughters from Egypt to 
 Argos ; and here we find another of those romantic adventures 
 which so agreeably decorate the ban*enness of the mythical gen^ 
 ealogies. Danaos and ^gyptos were two brothers descending 
 from Epaphos, son of 16 : -^gj'ptos had fifty sons, who were 
 eager to marry the fifty daughters of Danaos, in spite of the 
 strongest repugnance of the latter. To escape such a necessity, 
 Danaos placed his fifty daughters on board of a penteconter (or 
 vessel with fifty oars) and sought refuge at Argos ; touching io 
 his voyage at the island of Rhodes, where he erected a statue ot 
 Athene at Lindos, which was long exhibited as a memorial of his 
 
 ' It would be an unprofitable fatigue to enumerate the multiplied and irre- 
 concilable discrepancies in regard to every step of this old Argeian geneal. 
 ogy. Whoever desires to see them brought together, may consult Schubart, 
 Quaestiones in Antiquitatem Heroicam, Marpurg, 1832, capp. 1 and 2. 
 
 The remarks which Schubart makes (p. 3.5) upon Petit-Iiadel's ChronO' 
 logical Tables will be assented to by those who follow the unceasing string 
 of contradictions, without any sufficient reason to believe that any one of 
 them is more worthy of tmst than the remainder, which he has cited : — 
 " Videant alii, quomodo genealogias heroicas, et chronologize rationes, in 
 concordiam redigant. Ipse abstineo, probe persuasus, stemmata vera, hi»- 
 toriab fide comprobata, in systema chronologise redigi posse : at ore p«t 
 Mecula tradita, a poetis reficta, p»pe mutata, prout fabula postnlare ^ ideba 
 tor, ab historiarum deinde conditoribus restituta, scilicet, brevi qiuJiA 
 prostant stemmata — chronologiie secnndamtuinosdistribatnvinciil? aeaipof 
 wcotttnra esse." 
 
 
 [i 
 
HISTCmT OF OSEECB. 
 
 passage, ^gyptos and his sons followed them to Argos and still 
 pressed their suit, to which Danaos found himself compelled to 
 assent ; but on the wedding night he furnished each of his daugh- 
 ters with a dagger, and enjoined them to murder their husbands 
 during the hour of sleep. His orders were obeyed by all, with 
 the single exception of Hypermnestra, who preserved her hus- 
 band Lynkeus, incurring displeasure and punishment from her 
 fether. He afterwards, however, pardoned her ; and when, by 
 the voluntary abdication of Gelanor, he became king of Argos, 
 Lynkeus was recognized as his son-in-law and ultimately ^uc- 
 <^^ed Wm. The remaining daughters, having been purified by 
 Athene and Hermes, were given in marriage to the victors in a 
 gymnic contest publicly proclaimed. From Danaos was derived 
 the name of Danai., applied to the inhabitants of the Argeian 
 territory,! and to the Homeric Greeks generally. 
 
 From the legend of the Danaides we pass to two barren names 
 of kings, Lynkeus and his son Abas. The two sons of Abas 
 were Akrisios and Proetos, who, after much dissension, divided 
 between them the .Vrgeian territory; Akrisias ruling at Argos, 
 and Proetos at Tiryns. The families of both formed the theme 
 of romantic stories. To pass over for the present the legend of 
 Bellerophon, and the unrequited pa-ssion which the wife of Proetos 
 conceived for him, we are told that the daughters of Proetos, 
 beautiful, and solicited in marriage by suitors from all Greece, 
 were smitten with leprosy and driven mad, wandering in unseemly 
 guise throughout Peloponnesus. The visitation had overtaken 
 them, according to Hesiod, because they refused to take part in 
 the Bacchic rites; according to Pherekydes and the Argeian 
 Akusilaus,2 because they had treated scornfully the wooden statue 
 
 » Apollod. ii. 1. The Snpplices of iEschylus is the commencing drama 
 of a trilogy on this subject of the Danaides, — 'I/cendfr, XlyvTrrioi, Aavai- 
 dec. Welcker, Griechisch. Tragodien, vol. i. p. 48 : the two latter are lost 
 The old epic poem called Danats or DanaYdes, which is mentioned in the 
 Tabula Iliaca as containing 5000 verses, has perished, and is unfortunately 
 very little alluded to : see DOntzer, Epic. Gr»c. Fragm. p. 3 ; Welcker Der 
 Episch. Kyklus, p. 35. * 
 
 • ApoUod. I.e. J Phej-ekyd. ap. Schol. Hom. Odyss. xv. 225- Hesiod 
 Fragm Marktsch. Fr. 36, 37. 38. These Fragment* belong to the Hesiodic 
 Catalogue of Women : Apollodorus seems to refer to some other of th« 
 ■nmerous Ilosiodi:: poems. Diodorus (iv. 68) assigns the anger of Diony 
 ■*»■ as the cause. ' 
 
 DANAE AND PER8BU& $$ 
 
 Mnd siEipie equipments of Here : the religious character of tb€ 
 old legend here displays itself in a remarkable manner. Unable 
 to cure his daughters, Proetos invoked the aid of the renowned 
 Pylian prophet and leech, Melampus son of Amythaon, who 
 undertook to remove the malady on condition of being rewarded 
 with the third part of the kingdom. Proetos indignantly refused 
 these conditions : but the state of his daughters becoming aggra- 
 vated and intolerable, he was compelled again to apply to 
 Melampus ; who, on the second request, raised his demands still 
 higher, and required another third of the king(k)m for his brother 
 Bias. These terms being acceded to, he performed his part of 
 the covenant. He appeased the wrath of Here by prayer and 
 sacrifice; or, according to another account, he approached the 
 deranged women at the head of a troop of young men, with 
 shouting and ecstatic dance, — the ceremonies appropriate to the 
 Bacchic worship of Dionysos, — and in this manner effected their 
 cure. Melampus, a name celebrated in many different Grecian 
 my thes, is the legendary founder and progenitor of a great and 
 long-continued family of prophets. He and his brother Bias 
 became kings of separate portions of the Argeian territory : he 
 is recognized as ruler there even in the Odyssey, and the prophet 
 Theoklymenos, his grandson, is protected and carried to Ithaca 
 by Telemachus.i Herodotus also alludes to the cure of the 
 women, and to the double kingdom of Melampus and Bias in the 
 Art^eian land : he recognizes Melampus as the first person who 
 introduced to the knowledge of the Greeks the name and wor- 
 ship of Dionysos, with its appropriate sacrifices and phallic pro- 
 cessions. Here again he historicizes various features of the old 
 legend in a manner not unworthy of notice.^ 
 
 But Danae, the daughter of Akrisios, witn her son Perseus 
 
 > 0<iys8. XV. 240-256. 
 
 » Herod, ix. 34; ii. 49 : compare Pausan. ii. 18, 4. Instead of the Pra- 
 tides, or daughters of Proetos, it is the Argeian women generally whom he 
 represents Melampus as having cured, and the Aigeians generally who send 
 to Pylus to invoke his aid : the heroic personality wuich pervades the prim- 
 itive story Las disappeared. 
 
 Kallimachus notices the ProBtid virgins as the parties suffering froB 
 madness, but he treats Artemis as the healing ioflaence (Hymn, ad Dianaai 
 206^. 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
BSTOHY OF GBEBC& 
 
 PERSEIDS AT MYKEN^fi. 
 
 91 
 
 •equired stiH greater celebrity than her oouains the Phstfdes 
 
 An oracle had apprized Akrisios that his daughter would give 
 Iftirth to a son by whose hand he would himself be slain. To 
 guard against this danger, he imprisoned Danae in a chamber of 
 brass under ground. But the god Zeus had become amorous of 
 h«r, and found means to descend through the roof in the form of 
 a shower of gold : the consequence of his visits was the birth of 
 Perseus. When Akrisios discovered that his daughter had given 
 existence to a son, he Enclosed both the mother and the child in a 
 eofifer, which he cast into the sea.' The coffer was carried to the 
 isle of Seriphos, where Diktys, brother of the king Polydektes, 
 fished it up, and rescued both Danae and Perseus. The exploits 
 of Perseus, when he grew up, against the three Phorkides or 
 daughters of ^horkys, and the thi-ee Grorgons, are among the 
 most marvellous and imaginative in all Grecian legend : they 
 bear a stamp almost Oriental. 1 shall not here repeat the details 
 of those unpai-alleled hazards which the special favor of Athene en- 
 ableil him to overcome, and which ended in his bringing back from 
 Libya the territic head of the Grorgon Medusa, endued with the 
 property of turning every one who looked upon it into stone. In 
 his return, he rescued Andromeda, daughter of Kepheus, who 
 had been exposed to be devoured by a sea-monster, and brought 
 her back as his wife. Akrisios trembled to see him after this 
 victorious expedition, and retired into Thessaly to avoid him ; but 
 Pei*seus followed him thitiier, and having succeeded in calming 
 his apprehensions, became competitor in a gymnic contest where 
 his grandfather was among the spectators. By an incautious 
 swin"" of his quoit, he unintentionally struck Akrisios, and caused 
 his death : the predictions of the oracle were thus at last fullilled. 
 Stun«- with remorse at the catastrophe, and unwilling to return to 
 Argos, which had been the principality of Akrisios, Perseus 
 made an exchange with Megapenthes, son of Proetos king of 
 Tiryns. Megapenthes became king of Argos, and Perseus of 
 Tiryns : moreover, the latter founded, within ten miles of ArgOB, 
 the for-famol city of Mykenae. The massive walls of this city, 
 
 *Tlie beaatiful frft^nn™eiit of Simonid^ (Prapin. vii. ed. Graisfoni Fbet 
 Ifin.), describinj; Dana^ and the child thus exposed, if fiuniliar tm evetj 
 daMical reader. 
 
 Kke those of Tiryns, of whi(;h remains are yet to be seen, wer« 
 built for him by the Lykian Cyclopes.' 
 
 We here reach the commencement of the Perseid dynasty of 
 Mykenae. It should be noticed, however, that there were among 
 the ancient legends contradictory accounts of the foundation of 
 this city. Both the Odyssey and the Great Eoiai enumerated, 
 among the heroines, Mykene, the Eponyma of the city; the 
 former poem classifying her with Tyro and Alkmene, the latter 
 describing her as the daughter of Inachus and wife of Arestor. 
 And Akusilaus mentioned an Eponymus Mykeneus, the son of 
 Sparton and grandson of Phoroneus.^ 
 
 Tho prophetic family of Melampus maintained itself in one 
 of the three parts of the divided Argeian kingdom for five gene- 
 rations, down to Amphiaraos and his sons Alkmseon and Amphi 
 lochos. The dynasty of his brother Bias, and that of Megapen- 
 thes, son of Proetos, continued each for four generations : a list 
 of barren names fills up the interval.3 The Perseids of MykenaB 
 boasted a descent long and glorious, heroic as well as historical, 
 continuing down to the last sovereigns of Sparta.* The issue of 
 Perseus was numerous : his son Alkaeos was father of Amphi- 
 tryon ; another of his sons, Elektryon, was father of Alkm^nd ;^ a 
 third, Sthenelos, father of Eurystheus. 
 
 After the death of Perseus, Alkaeos and Amphitryon dwelt at 
 Tiryns. The latter became engaged in a quarrel with Elektryon 
 
 * Paus. ii. 15, 4 ; ii. 16, 5. Apollod. ii. 2. Pherekyd. Fragm. 26, Dind. 
 
 • Odyss. ii. 120. Hesiod. rra<,^Tnent. 154. Marktscheflf. — Akusil Fragm. 
 16. Pausan. ii. 16, 4. Hekatseus derived the name of the town from the 
 fivKTjc: of the sword of Perseus (Fragm. 360, Dind.). The Schol. ad Eurip. 
 Orest. 1247, mentions Myk^neas as son of Sparton, but grandson of Ph^eiu 
 the brother of Phoroneus. 
 
 * Pausan. ii. 18, 4. * Herodot. vi 53. 
 
 • In the Hesiodic Shield of Herakles, Alkm^6 is distinctly mentioned as 
 daughter of Elektryon ; the genealogical poet, Asios, called her the daugh- 
 ter of Amphiaraos and Eriphyle (Asii Fragm. 4, ed. Markt. p. 412). The 
 date of Asios cannot be precisely fixed ; hut he may be probably assigned to 
 an epoch between the 30th and 40th Olympiad. 
 
 Asios must have adopted a totally different legend respecting the birth 
 of H^rakl^s and the circumstances preceding it, among which the deaths of 
 her father and brothers are highly influential. Nor conld he have accepted 
 Uie received chronolofnr of th« sieges of Thebes and Troy. 
 
 ' 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
|§ HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 respecting cattle, and in a fit of passion killed him :' moreoTftr 
 the piratical Taj^hians from the west coast of Akarnania invaded 
 the country, and slew the sons of Elektryon, so that Aikmenfi 
 alone was left of that family. She was engaged to wed Amphi- 
 tryon ; but she l>ound him by oath not to consummate the mar- 
 riage until he had avenged upon the Teleboae the death of her 
 brothers. Amphitryon, compelled to flee the country as the 
 murderer of his uncle, took refiige in Thebes, whither Alkmenfi 
 accompanied him : Sthenelos was left in possession of Tiryns. 
 The Kadmeians of Th ibes, together with the Locrians and Pho- 
 cians, supplied Amphitryon with troops, which he conducted 
 against the Teleboae and the Taphians :- yet he could not have 
 subdued them without the aid of Komaetho, daughter of the 
 Taphian king I*terelaus, who conceived a passion for him, and 
 cut off from her father's head the golden lock to which Poseidoo 
 had attached the gift ol' immortality .3 Having conquered and 
 expelled his encimies, Amphitryon returned to Thebes, impatient 
 to consummate his marriage: but Zeus on the wedding-nigbl 
 assumed his fbmi and visited Alkmene before him : he had deter- 
 mined to produce from her a son superior to all his prior offspring, 
 — ** a specimen of invincible force both to gods and men."* At the 
 proi)er time, Alkmene was delivered of twin sons : H^rakl^ 
 the offspring of Zeus, — the inferior and unhonored Iphiklefi, 
 offspring of AjTiphitryon.^ 
 
 When Alkmene was on the point of being delivei-ed at Th^bea, 
 Zeus publicly boasted among the assembled gods, at the iustigar 
 tion of the mischief-making Ate, that there was on that day aboul 
 
 » So runs the c.ld le^nd in the Hesiodic Shield of H^rakl^s (12-82). 
 Apollodorus (or Fherekyd^, whom he follows) softens it down, and repre- 
 •ents the death of Elektryon as accidentally caused by Amphitry6a 
 (Apollod. h. 4, b. Pherekydes, Fra^m. -27, Dind,) 
 
 « Hesiod, Scut. Here. 24. Theocrit. Idyll, xxiv. 4. Telehoas, the Ep©- 
 nym of these mamuding people, was son of Poseidon (Anaximander ap. 
 Athenie. xl p. 498). 
 
 ' Apollcd ii. 4, 7. Compare the fable of Nisas at Megara, infincL, di«p 
 xfi. p. 302. 
 
 « Hcsiod. Scut. Here. 99. &tkfM ^eoimt *Apdpaai r* a^^ary^-^ <%m|i 
 A3Lir^pa 4ivTtvft^. 
 
 * Hosiod. Sc. H 50-56. 
 
 ZEUS. — ALKBfENE. — HERAKLES. |§ 
 
 .o be bom on earth, from his breed, a son who should rule over 
 
 all his neighbors. Here treated this as an empty boast, calling 
 upon him to bind himself by an irremissible oath that the pre- 
 diction should be realized. Zeus incautiously pledged his sol- 
 emn word ; upon which Here darted swiftly down from Olympus 
 to the Achaic Argos, where the wife of Sthenelos (son of Per- 
 seus, and therefore grandson of Zeus) was already seven months 
 gone with child. By the aid of the Eileithyiae, the special god- 
 desses of parturition, she caused Eurystheus, the son of Sthene- 
 los, to be born before his time on that very day, while she 
 retarded the delivery of Alkmene. Then returning to Olympus, 
 she announced the fact to Zeus : " The good man Eurystheus, 
 son of the Perseid Sthenelos, is this day born of thy loins : the 
 sceptre of the Argeians worthily belongs to him." Zeus was 
 thunderstruck at the consummation which he had improvidently 
 bound himself to accomplish. He seized Ate his evil counsellor 
 by the hair, and hurled her forever away from Olympus : but he 
 had no power to avert the ascendency of Eurystheus and the 
 servitude of Herakles. " Many a pang did he suffer, when he 
 saw his favorite son going through his degrading toil in the tasks 
 imposed upon him by Eurystheus."* 
 
 The legend, of unquestionable antiquity, here transcribed from 
 the Iliad, is one of the most pregnant and characteristic in the 
 Grecian mythology. It explains, according to the reh'gious ideas 
 famihar to the old epic poets, both the distinguishing attributes 
 and the endless toil and endurances of Herakles, — the most 
 renowned and most ubiquitous of all the semi-divine personagei 
 worshipped by the Hellenes, — a being of irresistible force, and 
 especially beloved by Zeus, yet condemned constantly to labor 
 for others and to obey the commands of a worthless and cowardly 
 persecutor. His recompense is reserved to the close of his career, 
 when his afflicting trials are brought to a close: he is then 
 admitted to the godhead and receives in marriage Heb^.2 The 
 
 Homer, Iliad, xix. 90-133 ; also viii. 361. — 
 
 Tffv alel aTevuxeax\ 4^' ^ov (piXov vldv dpfytro 
 'Epyov deiKkc ^x<»''''<^} ^^' Evpv(r^7/og dei^Awv. 
 
 • Hesiod, Theogon. 951, tgkeaac (rrovocvrac de^Xovc. Horn. Odyss. si. 
 ttO; Heiiod, £cB», Fragm. 24, Dtintzer, p. 36, itovvoorarov Kal apiarov 
 
 f\ 
 
 t 
 
 1' 
 
 lil 
 
BBTOBT or OSBBOK 
 
 twelve liJ>ii:i, iA tiiey are called, too notorious to be here detailed 
 form a very small fraction of tbe exploits of this mighty being, 
 which tilled the Herakleiaa epics of the ancient poets. He is 
 found not only in most part8 of Hellas, but throughout all the 
 :ther regions then known to the Greeks, from Gades to the river 
 Tiiennodon in the t^uxine and to Scythia, overcoming all diffi- 
 culties and vanquishing all opponents. Distinguished families 
 are everywhere to be traced who bear his patronymic, and glory in 
 the belief that they are his descendants. Among Achaeans, Kad- 
 meians, and Dorians, Herakles is venerated : the latter especially 
 reat him as their principal hero, — the Patron Hero-Grod of the 
 race : the Heraklei<ls form among all Dorians a privileged gens, 
 in which at Sparta the special lineage of the two kings wa» 
 included. 
 
 His character lends itself to mythes countless in number vm 
 well as disparate in their character. The irresistible force 
 remains constant, but it is sometimes applied with reckless vio- 
 lence against friends as well as enemies, sometimes devoted to 
 the relief of the oppressed. The comic writers often brought 
 him out as a coarse and stupid glutton, while the Athenian phi- 
 losopher Proilikos, without at all distorting the type, extracted 
 from it the simple, impressive, and imperishable apologue still 
 known as the Choice of Hercules. 
 
 After the death and apotheosis of Herakles, his son Hyllos 
 and his other childicen were expelled and persecuted by Eurys- 
 theus : the fear of his venn^eance deterred both the Trachinian 
 king Keyx and the Thebans from harboring them, and the 
 Athenians alone were generous enough to brave the risk of offer- 
 ing them shelter. Eurystheus invaded Attica, but perished in 
 the attempt by the hand of Hyllos, or by that of lolaos, the old 
 companion and nephew of Herakles.' The chivalrous coui^age 
 which the Athenians had on this occasion displayed in behalf of 
 oppressed innocence, was a favorite theme for subsequent eulogy 
 by Attic poets and orators. 
 
 All the sons of Eurystheus lost their lives in the battle along 
 with him, so that the Perseid family was now represented only 
 by the Herakleids^ who collected an army and endeavored to 
 
 ' ApoUod. iL 8, 1 He;»tje. ap. Loogin. c. 87 \ Diodor. ir. §7 
 
 EXILE OF THE HERAKLEIDB. 9i 
 
 i«oover the possessions from which they had been expelled. The 
 united forces of lonians, Achaeans, and Arcadians, then inhabit- 
 ing Peloponnesus, met the invaders at the isthmus, when Hyllos, 
 the eldest of the soiis of Herakles, proposed that the contest 
 should be determined by a single combat between himself and 
 any champion of the opposing army. It was agreed, that if 
 Hyllos were victorious, the Herakleids should be restored to 
 their possessions — if he were vanquished, that they should 
 forego all claim for the space of a hundred years, or fifty years, 
 or three generations, — for in the specification of the time, 
 accounts differ. Echemos, the hero of Tegea in Arcadia, ac- 
 cepted the challenge, and Hyllos was slain in the encounter ; in 
 consequence of which the Herakleids retired, and resided along 
 with the Dorians under the protection of jEgimios, son of DorusJ 
 As soon as the stipulated period of truce had expired, they 
 renewed their attempt upon Peloponnesus conjointly with the 
 Dorians, and with complete success : the great Dorian establish- 
 ments of Argos, Sparta, and Messenia were the result. The 
 details of this victorious invasion will be hereafter recounted. 
 
 Sikyon, Phlios, Epidauros, and Troezen^ all boasted of 
 respected eponyms and a genealogy of dignified length, not 
 exempt from the usual discrepancies — but all just as much 
 entitled to a place on the tablet of history as the more renowned 
 .Solids or Herakleids. I omit them here because I wish to 
 impress upon the reader's mind the salient features and character 
 of the legendary world, — not to load his memory with a full 
 list of legendary names. 
 
 * Herodot ix. 26 ; Diodor. iv. 58. 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. .5, 5 ; 12, 5; 26, 3. His statements indicate ho^ much the 
 predominance of a powerful neij^hbor like Argoe tended U> alter the 
 agies cf these inierior towns. 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 M 
 'J 
 
 r I 
 
 1 
 
i 
 
 uisTOBT or auooK 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 DEUKALION, HELLEN, AKD 80NS OF HELLEN. 
 
 In the Hesiodic Theogony, as weU M in the « Works and 
 Days " the leRend of Prometheus and Epimetheus presenU an 
 im^rt religious, etlucal, and social, and in this sense it is earned 
 forward by^Eschylus; but to neither ot the characters is any 
 genealogic'al function assigned. The Hesiod.c Catalogue of 
 Women brought both of them into the stream ot Grecian legend- 
 arvTineage, ^presenting I)eukali6n as the son of Prometheus 
 and pSra, and seemingly his wile Pyrrha as daughter of 
 
 ^ISSn is important in Grecian mythical nar^tive under 
 
 two point, of view. First, he is the person y«'»"y ^^^ -^ 
 
 he time of the general deluge: next, he is the lather of Hellto, 
 
 he Teat eponym of the Hellenic mce; at least th.s was the 
 
 more curre.' story, though there were other statements which 
 
 mftflp Hellen the son of Zeus. . , .1 
 
 The naTe of Deukali6n is originally connected with he 
 I okrian towns of Kynos and Opus, and with the race of the 
 Ule"es, Tut he appears finaUy as settled in Thessaly, and rulmg 
 .„ If ;ortion of that country called Phthiotis.-^ According to 
 whit s^ms to ha^^beenjhe^ldj egendary account, .t .s the 
 
 "rZiiiTiidA^n. Rliod. iii. 1085. Other accounts of the genealogy 
 rf netllit a« given in the 8..hol. ad Homer. Odyss. .. 2, on the author 
 •tv both of Hesiod and Akusilaus. 
 '''. H^i^c Catalog Fragm. .L; Gaisf Ixx. DanUer- 
 
 'Hro- yUp AoKpdg \eXeyov vyrfoaro hiuv, 
 
 AeKToifQ kK yam Xdof nope ^evKaXLu,vi, 
 
 t fntTJ^ed in one of hU dia.;gue, a. a dispuunt and whom he expressl, 
 I::,:^l"ed a, a descendant of DeukaUon (Cicero. Tuscul, D.sp. .. 10). 
 
 S 
 
ALEXANDER THE GREAT BEFORE TYRE 
 
 _ Greece , vol. one. 
 
 f» 
 
 11 
 ll 
 
 
DEUKALION, HELLEN AND SONS OF HELLEN. 
 
 deluge which transferred him from the one U) the other ; but ac- 
 cording to another statement, framed in more historicizing times, 
 he conducted a body of Kuretes and Leleges mto Thessaly, and 
 expelled the prior Pelasgian occupants.^ 
 
 The enormous iniquity with which earth was contaminated — 
 as ApoUodorus says, by the then existing brazen race, or as 
 others say, by the tifty monstrous sons of Lykaon — provoked 
 Zeus to send a general deluge.^ An unremitting and terrible 
 rain laid the whole of Greece under water, except the highest 
 mountain-tops, whereon a few stragglers found refuge. Deuka- 
 lion was saved in a chest or ark, which he had been forewarned 
 by his father Prometheus to construct. After floating for nine 
 days on the water, he at length landed on the summit of Mount 
 Parnassus. Zeus having sent Hermes to him, promising to grant 
 whatever he asked, he prayed that men and companions might 
 be sent to him in his solitude : accordingly Zeus directed both 
 him and Pyrrha to cast stones over their heads : those cast by 
 Pyrrha became women, those by Deukalion men. And thus the 
 " stony race of men " (if we may be allowed to translate an ety- 
 mology which the Greek language presents exactly, and which 
 has not been disdained by Hesiod, by Pindar, by Epicharmus, 
 and by Virgil) came to tenant the soil of Greoce.^ Deukalion 
 
 , The ktter account is given bv Dionys. Halic. i. 17 ; the former ^eems to 
 have been criven by Hellanikas, who affirme<l that the ark after the deluj;e 
 stopped upon Mount Othrys, and not upon Mount Parnassus (Schol. Find. 
 ut SHU ) tlie former being suitable for a settlement in Thessaly. 
 
 Pvrrha is tlie eponymous heroine of Pyrrhaea or Pyrrha, the ancient name 
 of aportion of Thessalv (Rhianus, Fragm. 18. p. 71, ed, DOntzer). 
 
 Hellanikus had written a work, now lost, entitled £ievKaAio>v8La : all the 
 fragments of it which are cited have reference to places in Thessaly. Lokna 
 and Pb.okis. See Preller, ad Hellanitum, p. 12 (Dorpt. 1840). Probably 
 Hellanikus is the main source of the important position occupied by Deuka- 
 lion in Grecian legend. Thrasvbulus and Akestodorus represented Dea- 
 kali6n as having founded the oracle of D6d6na, immediately after the deluge 
 
 (Etm. Mag. v. AuSuvalo^). ^ ^ . 
 
 ■ « ApoUodorus connects this deluge with the wickedness of the brazen race 
 in Hesiod, according to the practice general with the logographers of fttnng- 
 Ing together a sequence out of legends totally unconnected with eacli other 
 
 ^''^Heliod, Fragm. 135. ed. Markts. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 322, where the word 
 \iac, proposed by Heyne as the reading of the unintelligible text, appears te 
 
 VOL. 1 * "*• 
 
 !! 
 
 )' i 
 
 (li 
 
 1(1 
 
9B 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECt 
 
 an landing from the ark sacrificed a grateful offering to ZeiM 
 Phjxios, or the God of escape ; he also erected altars in Thessaly 
 to the twelve great p^wls of 01yni[)us.' 
 
 The reality of this deluge was timily believed throughout the 
 historical ii\i.*-^ of Greece : the chrouologers, reckoning up by gen- 
 ealogies, as-igned tin* (^xact date of it, an<l placed it at the same 
 time a> the con Hag rat ion of the world bv the rashness of Phae- 
 ton, during the reign of Kiutojias king of Argu>, the seventh 
 from Inachus.- Tht ineteoi'ological work of Aristotle admits and 
 reanons upon this deluge as an unquestionable fact, though he 
 alters the kx-ality by placing it west of Mount Pindus, near Do 
 dona and the river Achelous.-' He at the same time treats it an 
 a physical phaiuomenon, the result of periodical cycles i.i the 
 Rtmosphere, thus departing from the religious character of the 
 jld legend, which described it as a judgment inflicted by Zeus 
 u[)on a wicked ra,c;e. Statements tbtmded upon this event were 
 in circulation throughout (ireece even to a very late dale. The 
 Megarians atlirmed that Megaros, their hero, son of Zeus by a 
 local nymph, had found safety from the waters on the lofty sum- 
 mo jireferahlo to any of the other suj^gostions. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 47. 
 .\7- > (^ FjVviu; ofi(n)afi<n> Krr/fTdn&av XtT^ivou y6l'0^'• Aaoi d' uvofiao^ev, 
 Virgil, Georgic i. 63. "Unde homines nati, durum genus." Epicharmus ap. 
 Sohol. Pindar. Olymp. ix. 56. Hytrin, f. 153. Philochorus retained the ety 
 mology, though he gave a totally different fahle, nowise connected with 
 Deukalion, to account for it ; a cnrious proof how pleasing it was to tlie 
 fancy of the Greek (see Schol. ad Find. I. c. 68). 
 
 * Apollod. i. 7, 2. HcUanic. Fra^xm. 15. Didot. Hellanikus affirmed that 
 the ark rested on Mount Othrys, not on Mount Parnassus (Fragm. 16. Didot). 
 Servius Cad Virgil. Ecloi^. vi. 41) placed it on Mount Athdg — Hyginus (f. 
 153) on Mount ^tna. 
 
 • Tatian adv. (ir»c. c. 60, adopted both by Clemens and Easebius. The 
 Parian marble placed this delu^ in the reign of Kranaos at Athens, 752 
 years before the first recorded Olympiad, and 1528 years before the Christian 
 fern ; Apollodoms also places H in the rei^ of Kranaos, and in that of 
 Nyctimus in Arcadia (iii. 8, 2; 14, 5). 
 
 The delage and the e/cftyrotfis or conflagration are connected together also 
 hi Servios ad Virgil. Buc^ol. vi. 41 : he refines both of them into a '*muttk* 
 tknem tempomm." 
 
 ' Aristot Meteorol. i. 14. Justin rationalises the fable by telling as that 
 Deukalion was king of Thessaly, who provided shelter and protectioQ tf 
 Ike fugitives from the dehige (iL 6, II) 
 
 HELLEN AND HIS SONS. 
 
 mil of their mountain Greraneia, which had not been completely 
 Bubtnerged. And in the magnificent temple of the Olympian 
 Zeus at Athens, a cavity in the earth was shown, through which 
 it wa-^ alfinned that the waters of the deluge had retired. Kven in 
 the time of Pausanias, the priests poured into this cavity lu»ly 
 offerings of meal and honey.' In this, as in other parts of Greece, 
 the idea of the Deukalionian deluge was blended with the reli- 
 gious impressiims of the people and commemorated by their sa- 
 cred ceremonies. 
 
 The offspring of Dcukali6n and Pyrrha were two sons, Hellen 
 and Amphiktyon, and a daughter, Protogeneia, wliose son by 
 Zeus was Aethlius : it was however maintained by many, that 
 Hellen was the son of Zeus and not of Deukalion. Hellen had 
 by a nymph three sons, Dorus, Xuthus, and ^olus. He gave 
 to those who had been before called Greeks,- the name of Hel- 
 lenes, and partitioned his terrritory among his three children, 
 ^^olus reigned in Thessaly ; Xuthus received Peloponnesus, 
 and had by Creiisa as his sons, Acha»us and Ion ; while Dorus 
 occupied the country lying opposite to the Peloponnesus, on the 
 northern side of the Corinthian Gulf These three gave to the 
 inhabitants of their respective countries the names of .^^lians, 
 Aclia'ans and lonians, and Doiians.^ 
 
 Such is the genealogy as we find it in Apollo<lorus. In so far 
 as the names and filiation are concerned, many i)oints in it are 
 given differently, or im[dicitly contradicted, by Euripides and 
 other writers. Though as literal and personal history it deserves 
 
 ' Pau!*nn. i. 18, 7: 40, 1. According to the Parian marble (s. 5), Deuka- 
 lion had come to Athens after the delude, and had there himself founded the 
 temple of the Olympian Zeus. The etyniolo<;y and alle^orizatioii of the 
 names of Deukalion and Pyrrha, ^ven by Volckerin his in^renious Mytho- 
 logie des lapetischen Geschlechts (Giessen, 1824^, p. 343, app'iurs to urie not 
 at all convincinjif. 
 
 ' Such is the statement of Apollodorus (i. 7, 3^ ; but I cannot bring my ■ 
 self to believe that the name (TpaiKol) Greeks is at all old in the legend, or 
 that the passage of Hesiod, in which Graecus and Latin'is purport to be 
 menticned, is genuine. 
 
 See Hcsiod, Theopon. 1013. and Catalog. Fragm xxix. ed. Gottling 
 with the note of Gottling ; alH) Wachsmuth, Hellen. Alte.th. i. L p. 311, aad 
 Bemhardy, Griech, Literat ▼ ^L i. p. 167 
 
 * Apollod. L 7, 4. 
 
 . \ 
 
 I 
 
 \ * 
 
 1*4 i 
 
 n 
 
 r 
 
 ( 
 
 
 ■— — — * 
 
 .^AftAcSk^ 
 
100 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 *OLU8. DORtTS, AND XUTHXTS. 
 
 im 
 
 00 notice, its import is both intelligible and comprehensive. I| 
 ex{>ounds and symbolizes the tirst fraternal aggregation of Hel» 
 lenic men, together with their territorial distribution and the ia- 
 fititutions which they collectively venerated. 
 
 There were two jireat holding-points in common for every sec- 
 tion of Gre«'ks. One was the Amphiktyonic assembly, which 
 met half-yearly, alternately at Delphi and at Thermopylae ; ori- 
 ginally and t'hit'tly f »r common religious purposes, but indirectly 
 and occasionally embracing political and social objects along with 
 them. The other wa«^, the public festivals or games, ot' which 
 the Olympic came first in importance; next, the Pythian, Ne- 
 niean and Isthmian, — - institutions which combined religious so- 
 lenmities w ith recreative etlusion and hearty sympathies, in a man- 
 ner so im|K>sing and so unparalleled. Amphiktyon represents the 
 first of these institutions, and Aethlius the second. As the Am- 
 phiktyonic assembly wiis always especially connected with Ther- 
 luo[»yla' and Thessally, Amphiktyon is made the son of the Thes- 
 mlian Deukalion; but as the Olympic festival was nowise locally 
 ^nnectedwith Deukalion, Aethlius is represented lus having Zeus 
 lor his father, and a> touching Deukalion only through the mater- 
 nal line. It will be seen presently, that the only matter predi- 
 cated respecting Aethlius is, that he settled in the territory of 
 Elis, and begat Endymien: this brings him into local contact with 
 .he Olympic games, and his function is then ended. 
 
 Having thus got Hellas as an aggregate with its main cement- 
 ing forces, we man h on to its subdivision into parts, through 
 iEolus, Dorus and Xuthus, the three sons of Hellen; i a distribu- 
 tion which is tar from being exhaustive : nevertheless, the gene- 
 alogists whom Aj)ollodorus follows recognize no more than three 
 sons. 
 
 The genealogy rs essentially post-Homeric ; for Homer knows 
 Hellas and the Hellenes only in connection with a portion of 
 
 ' How literally and implicitly even the ablest Greeks believed in epony- 
 mous persons, such as Hellen and Ion, as the real progenitors of the races 
 called after him, may be seen by this, that Aristotle gives this common de 
 •ceac as the detinition of yevog (Metaphysic. iv. p. 118, Brandis) : — 
 
 Ffvof Jieye-rai, to /xev to de, d<^' or ai' oxr^ rrpurov KivijaavTOf ij( 
 
 r^tlvai OvTu yap ^eyovToi oi fiiv, 'EAAj/rff to ;. fiof. oi (5f, 'luvef T^ol 
 M^f u^d'KX^Tfvor, oi de and 'luvof, elvai irpuTov yewijaavroc- 
 
 Achaia Phthiotis. But as it is recognized in the Hesiodic Cata^ 
 *ogu»^ 1 — a mposed probably within the first century after ths 
 
 commencement of recorded Olympiads, or before 07 r> b. c. the 
 
 peculiarities of it, dating from so early a period, deserve much 
 attention. We may remark, first, that it seems to exhibit to us 
 Dorus an<l ^^olus as the only pure and genuine offspring of Hel- 
 len. For their brother Xuthus is not enrolled as an oponymus; he 
 neither founds nor names any people ; it is only his sons Acha3U8 
 and Ion, after his blood has been mingled with that of the 
 Erechtheid Kreiisa, who become eponyms and founders, each of 
 his own separate people. Next, as to the territorial distribution, 
 Xuthus receives Peloponnesus from his father, and unites him- 
 self with Attica (which the author of this genealogy seems to 
 have conceived tia originally unconnected with Hellen) by his 
 marriage with the daughter of the indigenous hero, Erechtheus. 
 The issue of this marriage, Acha?us and Ion, present to us the 
 population of Peloponnesus and Attica conjointly as related 
 among themselves by the tie of brotherhood, but as one degree 
 more distant both from Dorians and yKolians. ^^olus reigns over 
 the regions about Thessaly, and called the people in those parts 
 -/Eolians ; while Dorus occupies " the country over against Pelo- 
 ponnesus on the op|)osite side of the Corinthian Gulf," and calls 
 the inhabitants after himself, Dorians.^ It is at once evident tliat 
 
 ' 1 
 
 * Hesiod, Fra^m. 8. p. 278, ed. Marktsch. — 
 
 'KkXrjvo^ iV tyevovTo yiefitoTono'Koi ^aai'Aijei 
 Aupog Te, Soi't^of Te, kuI AloXog liznioxapfiT)^ 
 AioXiSai 6' iyivovTo ^eftiaronoTiOi paai'Xrje^ 
 KpTj-&ei>g rjd' 'A^ufMc Koi ^iau<po^ aioXofiTfTijf 
 l,aXfi(jvev^ t" &(hKO( koI i)TTcp^vfioc IlepiTjpij(. 
 
 • Apollod. i. 7, 3. 'EXXffvoc de Kal NvfKpijg 'Oparjido^ (?), Awpof, HovtJof, 
 AZoAof. AvTo^ fikv ovv (i^' avTov roi)g KoXovfievov^ TpaiKoi)^ irpotrijyopevaev 
 'EXXrjvag, toI^ de Traioiv k/nepiae r^v ;f(jpai'. Kal Eov&o^ fiev Xa/3cjv r^i* 
 JleXo7rnvvrf<Tov, kK Kpeovarjc ttjc 'Epe;^;i^fw{" 'Axai(iv iyevvrjae Kal 'luva, d<y 
 ui' ^Axaiol Kal 'luvec KaXovvrai. Aupo^ de,Ti)v nepav x'^P^^ IIcAo* 
 no vv^ a o V Xa^ otv, Toi)c kotoIkovc ci^' iavTov Aup i el c k ku- 
 XeiTiv . AioAof de, iSaaiXevuv ruv nepl OeTTaXiaiP rotrwv, Toi)( evolKoivTa^ 
 A/oAf/f irpoaijyopevae. 
 
 Strabo (viii. p. 383) and Con3n (Narr. 27), who evidently copy from th« 
 Mae source, represent Dorufl as going to settle in the territory properlj 
 known as Doris. 
 
 ■ \ 
 
 li 
 
 f 
 
 M 
 
 I 
 
lot 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 this dee^ignatioQ is in no way applicable to the oonlined district 
 between Parnassus jind (Eta, which alone is known by the nam« 
 of Doris, and its inhabitants by that of Dorians, in the historical 
 ag^. In the view of the author of this genealogy, the Dorians 
 Are the original occupants of the large range of territory north 
 of the Corinthian Gulf, comprising ^tolia, Phokis, and the 
 territory of the Ozolian Lokrians. And this farther harmonizes 
 with the other legend noticed by Apollodorus, when he states 
 that ^tolus, son of Endymion, having been forced to ex})atriate 
 from Peloponnesus, crossed into the Kuretid territory,' and was 
 there hospitably received by Dorus, Laodokus and Polypojtes, 
 eons of Apollo and Phthia- He slew his hosts, acquired the ter- 
 ritory, and gave to it the name of jEtolia : his son Pleuron mar- 
 ried Xanthippe, daughter of Dorus ; while his other son, Kalydon, 
 marries .SjoIkl, daugiiter of Amytliaon. Here again we have the 
 name of Dorus, or the Dorians, connected with the tract subse- 
 quently termed ^tolia. That Dorus should in one place be 
 called the son of Ajxillo and Phtiiia, and in another place the son 
 of Hellen by a nymph, will surprise no one accustomed to the 
 fluctuating personal nomenclature of these old legends : moreover 
 the name of Phthia is easy to reconcile with that of Hellen, as 
 both are identified with the same portion of Thessaly, even from 
 the days of the Iliad. 
 
 This story, that the Dorians were at one time the occupants, or 
 the chief occupants, of the range of territory between the river 
 Achelous and the northern shore of the Corinthian Gulf, is at 
 least more suitable to the facts attested by historical evidence 
 than the legends given in Herodotus, who represents the Dorians 
 as originally in the Phthiotid; then as passing under Dorus, the 
 son of Hellen, into the Histi^otid, under the mountains of Ossa and 
 Olympus ; next, as driven by the Kadmeians into the regions ok 
 Pindus; from thenct; passing into the Dryopid territory, on Mount 
 CEta; lastly, from thence into Peloponnesus.'^ The received 
 
 * Apollod. i. 7, 6. AiruAog (pvyuv eif r^ Koi'oijrida X^-H^*'^* 
 
 Kteivaq roi^g vrcode^ofievw^ ^iag Kai ^PltcoaXuvo^ vioi^, ACtpov kcU A.addoK09 
 Koi HcXvrroinjVy d^' iavrov rrfv ;fa>pai' AiruMav iKtlXeae, Again, i. 8, 1. 
 Wievptii/ (son of MbblOB) yvfiac Eav&iinr^ r^v Act^tov, iraida tyevvijnn 
 
 Kyrjv^pa. 
 
 * Herod, i. 56 
 
 DORIANS NORTH OF THE CORINTHIAN GULP. 
 
 vtcnry wras, that the great Dorian establishments in Peloponnesua 
 were formed by invasion from the north, and that the invaders 
 crossed the gulf from Naupaktus, — a statement which, however 
 disputable with respect to Argos, seems highly probable in regard 
 both to Sparta and Messenia. That the name of Dorians com- 
 prehended far more than the inhabitants of the insignificant 
 tetrapolis of Doris Proper, must be assumed, if we believe that 
 they conquered Sparta and Messenia : both the magnitude of the 
 conquest itself, and the passage of a large portion of them from 
 Naupaktus. harmonize with the legend as given by Apollodorus, 
 in which the Dorians are represented as the principal inhabitants 
 of the northern shore of the gulf. The statements w^hich we find 
 in Herodotus, respecting the early migrations of the Dorians, 
 have been considered as possessing greater historical value than 
 those of the fabulist Apollodorus. But both are equally matter 
 of legend, while the brief indications of the latter seem to be most 
 in harmony with the facts which we afterwards find attested by 
 history. 
 
 It has already been mentioned that the genealogy which makes 
 ^olus, Xuthus and Dorus sons of Hellen, is as old as the 
 Hesiodic Catalogue ; probably also that which makes Hellen son 
 of Deukalion. Aethlius also is an Hesiodic personage : whether 
 Amphiktyon be so or not, we have no proof.' They could not 
 have been introduced into the legendary genealogy until after th« 
 Olympic games and the Amphiktyonic council had acquired an 
 
 ' Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 57. Tbv dh 'EvSvfiiuva 'UffioSoc filv 'AeiJXtov 
 
 rov Aide f ttt KaXvKtig Traida Xejei Kcu HelcravSpor de ret avTU 
 
 (prjai, Kol 'AKovaiXao^, koI ^epcKvdrjc, kol NUaydfjoc iv devrep<fi AiruXiKuntf 
 Kal OeoTTOfiTzoq kv ^Eirorroiiaig. 
 
 Respecting the parentage of Ilellen, the references to Hesiod are very con- 
 fused. Compare Schol. Homer. Odyss. x. 2, and Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iii 
 1086. See also Hellanic. Frag. 10. Didot. 
 
 Apollodorus, and Pherekydes before him (Frag. 51. Didot), called Proto 
 geneia daughter of Deukalion; Pindar (Olymp. ix. 64) designated her as 
 daughter of Opus. One of the stratagems mentioned by the Scholiast to get 
 rid of this genealogical discrepancy was, the supposition that Deukalion had 
 two names {Siuvv/jiog) ; that he was also named Opus. (Schol. Pind. Olymp 
 bt. 85). 
 
 That the Deukalid» or posterity of Deukalion reigned in Thessaly, wm 
 nenticQ^ b( % by Hesiod and Hekatasus, ap. Schol AnoUoa. Bhcd. ir 26& 
 
 . \ 
 
 ■ \ 
 
 I, 
 
Iti 
 
 HI8T0BT OP OBBBOl 
 
 eotablished a8oendancy and universal reverenoe througboot 
 
 Gre<'t'e. 
 
 Jit'spiH'tiiig DoniA the son of* Hellen, wo find neither legends 
 Dor lejjeiulary pentMlojj^y ; respet'tinjjj Xiithus, very little beyond 
 the tale of Krciisa and Ion, which has it.s place more naturally 
 ainon^ the Attic fahlcs. Acha^us however, who is here represent- 
 ed as the son of ^Cuthus, appears in other stories with very 
 diftcriMit parentaiTi' and accomf>animents. According to the state- 
 mcnt which we tind in Dionysius of Halicamassus, Achieus, 
 Phthins and IVlasmis are sons of Poseidon and Larissa. They 
 mijjrate fmni Peloponnesus into Thessalv, and distribute the 
 Th<»ssalian territory between them, giving their names to its 
 principal divisions : their desct^ndants in the sixth genenition 
 were driven out of that country by the invasion of DeuktUion at 
 the head of the Kuretes »uid the LelegesJ This was the story 
 of those who wanted to provide an ejwnymus for the Acha'ans in 
 the southern districts of Thessaly : Pausanias accomplishes the 
 same object by dilferen: means, represeniing Achans, the son of 
 Xullms as haNini; irone ba<"k to Tfiessaly antl occupied the j)ortion 
 of it to winch his fatlier was entitled. Tlien, by wav of explain- 
 iuLT liow it was that there were Acha^ans al Sparta ami at Ariros. 
 he tells us that An'hander and Architeles, the sons of Arclueus, 
 came back from Thessaly to PelojK)nnesus, and married two 
 daiiijhters ot' Danaus : thev acquired «:rcat inlluence at Ar!n>s and 
 Sparta, and gave to the people the name of Acha*ans after their 
 father Adueus.'- 
 
 Euripides also deviates very materially from the Hesiodic 
 
 » Dionvs. II. A. Hi. 17. 
 
 * r;ui>an. vii. 1, 1-,'J. I loroilotus also niontioiis (ii. 97) Arohjinder. iwin of 
 riithius :iii(i «;rantlson of Aihii'us. who marriod the duu^ liter of Danaus. 
 Lanhor (Kssai sur la " hronolopi »riiiT«Hloto, «h \. p .i^l ) tells u> that 
 this raimot In* tlu' Danaus who lanio from K<4;ypt, the father of the tiftj 
 dauj;hters, who must have liveti two centuries earlier, a« may be proved by 
 ehrouologieai argument*i : this must be another Danaus, a<rordiug to him 
 
 Strain) seems to give <& ditlerent story resj>ectinjr the Aciiajans in Pelepon- 
 nesus : he says that ihey were the ori^Mual (>opulatioii of the peninsula, that 
 they eame in from Phthia with PeIo{>s, and inhabited Laeonia, wh'eh waa 
 'rom them ealled Argos Aohaicom, and that on the c«onquest of the Doriana, 
 iiey movid into Aehaia properly so ealled, exj^elling the lunians tbere6w 
 <8tnilH>, vili p 365). This narrative is,! presume borrowed from £phonig 
 
 THK AOLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUOIITERS OP JBOLUS. 106 
 
 genealogy in respect to those ejionymous |>ersons. In the dram* 
 called Ion, he describes Ion as son of Kreijsa by Ajwilo, but 
 adopted by Xuthus: according to him, the real sons of Xulhu8 
 and Kreusa are Dorus and AchaMis,' — eponyms of the Dorians 
 and Acha^ans in the interior of Peloponnesus. An<l it is a still 
 more capital point of dillenuice, that he omits Hellen altogether 
 — making Xuthus an Achaan by nu'c, the son of ^Kolus, who 
 18 the son of Zeus/> This is the more remarkable, as in the 
 fragments of two other dramiis of Euripides, the Melanippc and 
 the iKolus, we find llellen mentioned both Jis father of vEolus 
 and ^on o\' Zeus.-' To the general public even of the most 
 instructed city of (h*eece, fluctuations and discrepancies in these 
 mythical genealogies seem to have been neither surprising nor 
 jflensive. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE ^.OLIDS, OK SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF .BOLUS. 
 
 If two of the sons of Hellen, D()ru8 and XutAus, present to ua 
 families comparatively unnoticted in mythical narrative, the third 
 gon, >Eolus, richly makes up for the deficiency. From him we 
 pass to bis seven sons and five daughters, amidst a great abun- 
 dan<*e of heroic and [)oetical incident. 
 
 In dealing however with these extensive mythical families, it 
 is necessary to observe, that the legendary world of Greece, in 
 the maimer in which it is presented to us, appears invested with 
 a degree of symmetry and coherence which did not originally 
 belong to iu For the old ballads and stories which were sung or 
 
 ' Eurip. Ion, 1590. * Eurip. Ion, 64. 
 
 * See the Fra^^ments of these two i)lays in Matthiae's edition ; compara 
 VVelcker, Griechisch. Tragcid. v. ii- p. 842. If we may judge from the Fng- 
 ments of the Latin Melanippe of Enuius (see Eragm. 2, wd. Bothe/ Uell^ 
 ▼as introduced as on 3 of the characters of the piece. 
 
 5* 
 
 e v 
 
 ( » 
 
1 1 
 
 106 
 
 mSTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 JEOLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF iEOLUS. 
 
 i07 
 
 recounted at the multiplied festivals of Greece, each on ite own 
 special theme^ havt; Imh^ii lost: the religious narrati, #^ri, which the 
 Exegetes of every temple had [iresent to his nieim ry, explaiia" 
 tory of the |)eculiar religious ceivnionies and local customs in his 
 own town or Denie, have passed away : all these primitive ele* 
 nients, ori«nnallv distinct and unconnected, are removed out of 
 our >iglil. and we p4»s-.e<s oidy an aggregate result, formed by 
 many eoutluent sti« am- of fable, aii«l eonneeted together by the 
 agency of subseiiuent poets and logographers. Even tiie earliest 
 agents in this work of connecting and systematizing — the Ilesio- 
 Jit- jKMts — liave b<'en hardly at all preserved. Our information 
 res^>ecting Greeian mythology is derived chiefly from the prose 
 logographers who followed them, and in whose works, since a 
 continuous narrative wiis above all tilings essential to them, the 
 fabulous personages are woven into still more comprehensive 
 pedigre«s, and the original isolation of the legends still better 
 disguised, llekalieus, IMiirekydes. llellanikus, and Akusilaus 
 live«I at a time win ii tlu^ idea of Hellas as one great whole, com- 
 posed of fraternal seetions, wa.-^ ileeply nx)ted in the mind of 
 everv (iroek; and when the fancy of one or a few great families, 
 branchinur out widelv from one common stem, was more iwpular 
 and acceptable than that of a distinct indigenous origin in each of 
 the separate districts. These logographers, indeed, have t hem- 
 eel ves been lost ; but A{)ollod6rus and the various scholiasts, our 
 gnnit immediate -ourees of information respecting Grecian mytho- 
 loirv. chief! V borrowed from them : so that the legendary world of 
 GriH'ce is in fact known to us through them, eombinetl with the 
 dramatic and Alexandrine poets, their Latin imitators, and the 
 still laler class of scholiasts — except indeed such occa>ioual 
 glimpses as we obtain from the Iliad and the Odyssey, and the 
 remaining Hesiodic fragments, whicli exhibit but too frequently a 
 hopeless diversity when confronted with the narratives of the 
 logographers. 
 
 Though ^Eolus (as has been already stated) is himself called 
 the son of Hellen along with Doru> and Xuthus, yet the legend* 
 concerning the ^ilolids, far from being dependent upon this 
 genealogy, are not jUI even coherent with it : moreover the name 
 at* .£olus in the le{];end is older than that ot Heileo, inasmuch as 
 
 it occurs both in the Iliad and Odyssey. » Odysseus sees in tha 
 onder-world the beautiful Tyro, daughter of Salmoneus, and wife 
 of Kretheus, son of ^olus. 
 
 jEolus is represented as having reigned in Thessaly. his seven 
 Bons were Kretheus, Sisyphus, Athanuis, Salmoneus, Deion, 
 Mjignes and Perieres : his five daughters, Canace, Alcyone, 
 Peisidike, Calyce and rerimede. The fables of this race seem 
 to be distinguished by a constant introduction of the god Posei- 
 don, as well as by an unusual prevalence of haughty and [)re- 
 humptuous attributes among the ^U)lid heroes, leading them to 
 affront the gods by pretences of e<iuality, and sometimes even by 
 defiance. The worship of Poseidon must probably havt been 
 diffused and preeminent among a people with whom these legendi 
 originated. 
 
 SECTION I. -SONS OF iEOLUS. 
 
 Salmoneus is not described in the Odyssey as son of ^olu^ 
 but he is so denominated both in the Hesiodic Catalogue, and by 
 the subsequent logographers. His daughter Tyro became ena- 
 moured of the river Enipeus, the most beautiful of all streams 
 that traverse the earth : she frequented the banks assiduously, 
 and there the god Poseidon found means to indulge his passion 
 for her, assuming the character of the river god himself. The 
 fruit of this alliance were the twin brothers, Pelias and Neleus : 
 Tyro afterwards was given in marriage to her uncle Kretheus, 
 another son of ^.olus, by whom she had ^son, Pheres and Amy- 
 
 thaon all names of celebrity in the heroic legends.^ The 
 
 adventures of Tyro formed the subject of an affecting drama of 
 Sophokl s, now lost. Her father had married a second wife, 
 named Sidero, whose cruel counsels induced him to punish and 
 torture his daughter on account of her intercourse with Poseidon. 
 She was shorn of her magnificent hair, beaten and ill-used in 
 
 • Iliad, vi. 154. H<Tv<poc AioXidrji, etc. 
 Again Odyss. xi. 234. — 
 
 ' 'Evi^' V'^ot npuTTiv TvpiJ ISov evvaripeiav, 
 "H tpciTo Zakfiuvno^ afivfiovoq Uyovo^ eivai^ 
 ♦^ de K,>J7i^^f ywrf Ififxevai AloXldao 
 
 * Homer, Odyss. xi. 234^257 ) xv. 226. 
 
 M 
 
 A' 
 
108 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 NELEUS. -lIELAMPUa 
 
 109 
 
 ▼arious ways, and confined in a loathsome dungecn. Unable lo 
 take care of hc^r two oliiMren, she had been compelled to exjxwe 
 them immedijitely on their birth in a little boat on the rivet 
 Enipeus; thev vv.n' preserved by ll»e kindness of a herd.>inaiL 
 and when jxrowii up to maiiluxjd, rescued their mother, mid 
 reven£red her wronirs by }»uttin;jr to death the iron-heartei Sidei6.» 
 This patlietic tab' respertin«; the Umpr iniprisonnieiit of Tyr<» is 
 flubstitiited by Sopbokles in place of the Honieri<- legend, which 
 repiTsented \uy to have beconw the wife of Kretheiis and mother 
 of a numerous otlspri!!}^.- 
 
 Her father, the luijust Salmoneus, exhibited in his conduct the 
 most insolent iin|.icty towards the <xods. lie assumed the name 
 and title even of Zeus, and caused to be othrcd to himself the 
 sacritices destined tor that «rod : he also imitated the thunder and 
 li«Thtnin«r. bv driving about with brazen cahlrous attached to his 
 chariot and «:istinjr lii^hted torches towards heaven. 8uch wicked- 
 ness tiiiallv <lrew upon him the wrath of Zeus, who smote him 
 with a thunderbolt, and ctVac.-d from the earth the city which he 
 had founded, with all il> inhabitants.' 
 
 Pclias anil Neleus, "both stout vassals of the great Zeus," 
 became engaged in tlissension respecting the kingdom of lolkofl io 
 
 > Dicnlorus, iv. tiH. Sophokirs, Frapii. I. Ti/u.*. :L(i';».>i' li(hipo Kai <!>€- 
 povaa Toi'vofia. 'Vhc genius of Sophoklcs is occasionally seduced by this 
 phiy upon the etymology of a name. e\ fu in the most impressive scenes of 
 his tragedies. See Ajax, 425. Compare Ilellanik. Frajxm. [>. 9, ed. Prcller 
 There was a tirst and second edition of the Tyro — r/jr ihvrfpac Tu/jovf. 
 Schol. ad Aristoph .\v -JTr). Sec the few fra«;ments of the lost drama in 
 Dindorfs ColUMtiv»n, p. 5;i. The plot was in many resjxM-ts analogous to the 
 Antiop^ of Eurii>i«lcs. 
 
 » A thini storv, <lirt>rent both from Homer and from Sopliokles, respecting 
 Tvro, is found in Hyjrinus (Fah. Ix.): it is of a trairieal cast, and lK)rrowed, 
 like so many other talcs in that collection, from one of the lost Greek dramas. 
 
 3. ApoUod. i 9. 7. yialuuvev^ t' udiKOC Kai i'TTtpi^v^wiUtinr/pj]^. Hesiod, 
 Fragm. Coital. 8 Marivt4?chet!'el. 
 
 Where the citv of Salmoneus was situated, the ancient investigators were 
 not agreed ; whether in the Pisatid. or in Elis, or in Thessaly (see Stiabo, 
 ▼iii. p. 356). Euripiles in his ^Eolus placed him on the banKs of the 
 Alpheius (Eurip. Fr^igm. ^Eol. 1). A village and fountain in the Pisatid 
 bore the name of Salroone ; but the mention of the river Enipeus seems to 
 mftrk Thessaly as the original seat of the legend. But the tuilveti of the tale 
 pi«»eryed by Apollodorus (Virgil in the jRneid, vi. 586, has retouched Ht 
 
 Thessaly. Pelias got possession of it, and dwelt there in pleotj 
 and prosperity ; but he had oftended the goddess Here by killing 
 Sidero upon her altar, and the eliecti» of her wrath w.re manifest- 
 ed in his relations with his nei)hew Jason.* 
 
 Neleus quitted Thessaly, went into Peloponnesus, and there 
 founded the kingdom of Pylos. He purchiksed by immeobe 
 marriajJ presents, the privilege of wedding the beautiful ChloriSi 
 daughter of Amphion, king of Orchomenos, by whom he Iiad 
 twelve eons and but one daughter- — the liiir and captivating 
 Pero, whom suitors from all the neighborhood courted in mar- 
 riage. But Neleus, '* the haughtiest of living men,"< iiefuscjd to 
 entertain the pretensions of any of them : he would grant his 
 daughter only to that man who should bring to him the oxen of 
 Iphiklos, from Phylake in Thessaly. These piecious animals 
 were carefully guarded, as well by herdsmen as by a dog whom 
 neither man nor aniimU could approach. Neveaheless, liias, the 
 soji of Amythaon, nephew ot Neleus, being desperately enamored 
 ot Pero, prevailed upon his brother Melampus t^ undertake for 
 his siike the perilous adventure, in spite of the prophetic knowl- 
 edge of the latter, which forewarned him that though he would 
 ultimately succeed, the prize must be purchased by severe caj^ 
 tivity and suffering. Melamj)us, in attempting to steal the oxalic 
 was seized and put in prison; from whence nothing but his 
 prophetic |)owers rescued him. Being acquainted with the ku> 
 guage of worms, he heard these animals communicating to each 
 other, in the roof over his head, that the beams were nearly eaten 
 thioujih and about to fall in. He communiciated this intelligence 
 to his guards, and demanded to be conveyed to another pbu;e o^' 
 continement, announcing that the roof would presently fall in and 
 bury them. The prediction was fulliiled, and Phylakos, father of 
 
 marks its aneient date : the tinal eireumstance of that tale waa, that the city 
 tuid its inhabitants were annihilated. 
 
 E|)horus makes Salmoneus king of the Epeians and of the Pisats (Fragm 
 .5, ed. Didot). 
 
 The lost drama of Sophokl^s, called SaA//(jvei)f, was a 6pafM aarvuKJiw 
 Bee Dindorfs Frapn. 483. 
 
 • Horn. Od. xi 280. Apollod. i. 9, 9. Kparepu T^epavovre Atdf, elB. 
 
 * Diodor iv. 68. 
 
 ' NiyAf a re fuyu^^v/Mv^ dyaviraTov O^ovtuv f Horn- Odyss, xt. Hi). 
 
 \l: 
 
liO 
 
 IBSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Iphiklos, full of wonder at this specimen cf prophetic power, 
 immediately caused him to be relea:?ed. He further consulted 
 him respecting the condition of his son Iphiklos, who was child- 
 less ; and prouiisfd him the possession of the oxen on condition 
 of his suji^gestinji: the meiins whereby offspring might be ensured. 
 A vulture having communicated to Melampus the requisite 
 information, Podarkes, tlie son of Iphiklos, was born shortly 
 aft<*rvvards. In this manner Melampus obtained |>ossession of the 
 oxen, and conveyed them to Pylos, obtaining for his brother Bias 
 the hand of Pero ' How thi^ grt*at legendary character, by mi- 
 raculously liealinjj the derange<l daughters of Protos, procured 
 both for himself and for Bias dominion in Argos, lias been re- 
 counted in a precf'dinir chapter. 
 
 Of the twelve sons of Neleus, one at least, Periklymenos, — h«- 
 §ides the ever-memorable Nestor. — was distinguished for his ex 
 ploits as well as for his miraculous gifts. Poseidon, the divine father 
 of the race, had bestowed u[)on him the privilege of changing his 
 form at pleasure into that of any bird, beast, reptile, or insect."- He 
 had occasion for all these resources, and lie employed them for a 
 time with success in defending his family against the terrible indig- 
 nation of Herakle.-, who, provoked by the refusal of Neleus to i)er- 
 form for him the ceremony of purification after his nmrderof Iphi- 
 tus, attacked the Neleids at Pylos. Periklymenos by his extraor- 
 dinarv powers prolonged the resistarne, but the hour of his fate 
 was at length brought upon him by the intervention of Athene, 
 who [pointed him )Ut to Herakles while he was [)erched as a bee 
 upon the hero's chariot. He was killed, and Herakles became 
 completely victorious, overpowering Poseidon, Here, Ares, and 
 Hades, and even wounding the three latter, who assisted in the 
 
 ' lloni. 0(1. xi. 27><; xv. l>.U. ApoUod. i. 9. 12. The basis of this curi- 
 ous romance is in the (^liyssoy, amplified l>v subsequent poets. There are 
 points however in the old Homerir leirotid, as it is briefly sketched in the 
 fifteenth book of the ( dvssey, which seem to have been subsequently left 
 out or varied. Neleus seizes the property of Melampus dinnn^' his absence ; 
 the latter, returninjr with the oxen from Phylak^', revenges himself upon 
 Ncleas for the injury. Odyss. xv. 23.3. 
 
 * Hesio^, Catalog, ap Schol. Apollon. Rhod. i. 156-, Ovid, Metam. xii. p. 
 556; Eustath. ad Odyss. xi. p. 284. Poseidon carefully protects Antilochm 
 son of Nestor, in the Iliad, xiii. 554-563. 
 
 HBSTOB AND THE NELEIDB 
 
 111 
 
 iefenca. Eleven of the sons of Neleus perished by his hand, 
 while Nestor, then a youth, was preserved only by his accidental 
 ab*«nce at Gerena, away from his father's residence.' 
 
 The proud hou^e of the Neleids was now reduced to Nestor; 
 but Nestor singly sutiiced to sustain its eminence. He appeiura 
 not only as the defender and avenger of Pylos against the insc 
 lence and rapacity of his Ejieian neighbors in Elis, but also as 
 aiding the Lapitha3 in their terrible combat against the Centaurs, 
 and ss companion of Theseus, Peirithous, and the other great 
 legendary heroes who preceded the Trojan war. In extreme old 
 age his once marvellous power of handling his weapons has in- 
 deed passed away, but his activity remains unimpaired, and his 
 sagacity as well ad his influence in counsel is greater than ever. 
 He not only assembles the various Grecian chiefs for the arma- 
 ment against Troy, perambulating the districts of Hellas along 
 with Odysseus, but takes a vigorous part in the siege itself, and 
 is of preeminent ser\ice to Agamemnon. And aft^r the conclu- 
 sion of the siege, he is one of the few Grecian princes who re- 
 turns to his original dominions, and is found, in a strenuous and 
 honored old age, m the midst of his children and subjects, — sit- 
 ting with the sceptre of authority on the stone bench before h's 
 house at Pylos, — offering sacrifice to Poseidon, a.s his father 
 Neleus had done before him,— and mourning only over the deah 
 
 » Hesiod, Catalog, ap. Schol. Ven. ad Iliad, ii. 336 ; and Steph. Byz v. 
 Tepvvia', Homer, II. v. 392 ; xi. 693; Apollodor. ii.7, 3 ; Hesiod, Scut. Here. 
 860; Pindar, 01. ix. 32. 
 
 According to the Homeric legend, Wleus himself was not killed by He- 
 rakl^s: subsequent poets or lofrojrrapbers, whom Apollodorus follows, seem 
 to have thought it an injustice, that the offence given by Neleus himself 
 should have been avenged upon his sons and not upon himself; they there- 
 fore altered the legend upon this point, and rejected the passage in the Iliad 
 as spurious (see Schol. Ven. ad Iliad, xi. 682). 
 
 The refusal of purification by Neleus to Herakles is a genuine legendary 
 eanse : the commentators, who were disposed to spread a coating of history 
 over these transactions, introduced another cause, — Neleus, as king of Pylos, 
 had aiced the Orchomenians in their war against H^rakl^s and the Th^bani 
 
 (see Sdi. Ven. ad Iliad, xi. 689). , . r u 
 
 The neighborhood of Pvlos was distinguished for its ancient worship botli 
 & Poseidon and of Hade's: there were abondari local legends respecting 
 tliem (see Strabo, viii. pp. 344, 345). 
 
 tJ 
 
 * 
 
 r 
 
112 
 
 HISTORY OF 6REEC£. 
 
 af his favorite son Antilochus, who had fallen, along with so manj 
 brave com[)anions in arms, in the Trojan war.i 
 
 After Nestor the line of the Neleids numbers undistinguished 
 naineS) — Bonus, Penthilus, and Andropornpus, — three succes- 
 sive generations down to Melanthus, who on th« invasion of Pelo- 
 ponnesus by the Herakleids, quittt^d Pylos and retired to Athens, 
 where he became king, in a manner wliicli 1 shall hereafter re- 
 count. His son Kodrus was the last Athenian king ; and Neleus, 
 one of the sons of Kodrus, is mentioned as the principal conduc- 
 tor of what is called the Ionic emigration from Athens to Asia 
 Minor.*'^ It is certain that during the historical age, not merely 
 the jjrincely family of the Kodrids in Miletus, Ephesus, and other 
 Ionic cities, but some of the greatest families even in Athens 
 itself, traced their heroic lineage through the Neleids up to Po- 
 seidon : and the legends respecting Nestor and Periklymenos 
 would find especial favor amidst Greeks with such feelings and 
 belief The Kodrids at Epliesus, and probably some other Ionic 
 towns, long retained the title and honorary precedence of kings, 
 even after they had lost the substantial [)ower belonging to the 
 offline. They stoo-d in the same relation, embodying both religious 
 worship and suf>|)osed ancestiy, to the Neleids and Poseidon, as 
 the chiefs of the ^Eolic colunies to Agamennion and Orestes. 
 The Athenian despot Peisistratus wtis named after the son of 
 Nestor in the Odyssey ; and we may safely presume that the 
 heroic; woi-sliip ot the Neleids was jis carefully cherished at the 
 Ionic Miletus a- at the Italian Metapontum.^ 
 
 Having pursued the line of Salmoneus and Neleus to tlie end 
 of its lengendary i-areer, we may now turn back to that of another 
 son of ^olus, Kn^theus, — a line hardly less celebrated in respect 
 of the heroic names which it presents. Alkestis, tUo most beau- 
 tiful of the daughters of Pelitis,* was promised by her father ia 
 
 •About Ncst'-r, Iliinl, i. 2r)()-275 ; ii. 370; xi. 670-770; O.lyss. iii. 5. 110, 
 40'.* 
 
 "* Ilellanik. Frairm. 10, ed. Didot; Pausan. vii. 2, 3; Herodot. v. 65; 
 StralK), xiv. p. 63'i. Ilellunikus, in ^ivin^- the <;enealoij^y from Neleus tt 
 Melanthus. traces it tlirou}]jh Periklymenos and not throuj^h Nestor: tht 
 m>rds of Herodotus im|)ly that he must have in*luded Nestor. 
 
 • Herodot. v. 67 Strabo, vi. p 264 j Minmermus, Fragm. 9, Schneidewiik, 
 
 •Iliad, ii. 715 
 
 ALKESTIS AND ADMETUS. 
 
 lU 
 
 Biani*age to the man that could bring him a lion and a boar tamed 
 to the voke and drawing together. Admetus, son of Pheres, the 
 ©ponymus of Phene in Thessaly, and thus grandson of Kretheus, 
 was enabled by the aid of Apollo to fuliil tliis condition, and to 
 win her ; ' for Apollo happened at that time to be in his service 
 fk8 a slave (condemn(3d to this penalty by Zeus for having put to 
 death the Cyclopes), in which capacity he tended the herds and 
 horses with such success, an to equip Eumelus (the son of Adme- 
 tus) to the Trojan war with the fmest horses in the Grecian 
 army. Though menial duties were imposed upon him, even to 
 the dru,dgery of grinding in the mill, '^ he yet carried away with 
 him a grateful and friendly sentiment towards his mortal master, 
 whom he interfered to rescue from the wrath of the goddess Ar- 
 temis, when she was indignant at the omission of her name in his 
 wedding sacrilices. Admetus Wiis about to perish by a premature 
 death, when Apollo, by earnest solicitation to the Fates, obtained 
 for him the privilege that his life should be prolonged, if he could 
 find any person to die a voluntary death in his place. His father 
 and his mother both refused to make this sacrilice for him, but 
 the devoted attachment of his wife Alkestis disposed her to em- 
 brace with cheerfulness the condition of dying to preserve her 
 
 ' Apollodor. i. 9, 15; Eustath. ad Ihad. ii. 711. 
 
 • Euripid. Alkest. init. WeUker; (iriechisch. Tragoid. (p. 344) on the 
 lost phiy of Soidiokies called Admetus or Alk«*stis; Hom. Uiati. ii. 766; 
 Hyjxin. Fab. 50-51 ( Sophokk^s, Fr. Ine. 730 ; Dind. ap. Plutarch. Defect. 
 Orae. p. 417). This talc of the temporary servitude of particular gods, by 
 order of Zeus as a punishment for misbehavior, recurs not unfrcquentlj 
 amon«r the incidents of the mythical world. The poet Panyasis (ap. Clent 
 Alexand. Adm. ad Gent. p. 23) — 
 
 TA^ fiev /!iTjfif}T7}p, rXff 6€ «Ayrdf ' XfKJuyvrieic, 
 TA;) <U Uo(Tei6a(JV, tXt/ 6' apyvpoTO^oc ^knoXTiciv 
 'Avi^pl napa t^vtjt(}) •dTjTevaffiEV elq hiavrov 
 TAv 6e Kal o^pifio&vfior^ 'Kprj<: vrrd rrarpdf avuyKm. 
 The old legend followed out the fundamental idea with remarkable consis- 
 tency : Laomcdon, as the temporary master of Poseidon and Apollo, threat- 
 ens to bind them hand and foot, to sell them in the distant islands, and to 
 eat otf the ears of both, when they come to ask for their stipulated wagei 
 (Iliad, xxi. 45.'>). It was a new turn given to the story by the Alexandrine 
 poets, when they Introduced the motive of love, and made the servitude vol- 
 untary on the pari of Apallo (Kallimachus, Hymn. Apoll. 49 ; Tibullus, Eleg 
 H. 3, 11-30). 
 
 VOL. I. - 80C. 
 
 II 
 
 »f 
 
 J.lj^-UIB 
 
114 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 hnsband. She h.\(\ already perished, when Herakles, the andcni 
 guei4 and triend of Admetus, arrived during the first hour of 
 lamentation ; his strength and daring enabled him to rescue the 
 deceased Alkesti> even from the grasp of Thanatos (Death), and 
 to restore her alive to her disconsolate husband.* 
 
 The son of IVlias, Akastus,had received and sheltered Peleus 
 when obliged to Hy his country in consequence of the involuntary 
 murder of Kurylion. Kivtheis, the wife of Akjistus, becoming 
 enamored of Pcleus, nnaU' to him advances which he repu- 
 diated. Exasperated at his refusal, and determined to procure his 
 destruction, she persuaded tier husband that Peleus had attempt- 
 ed her chastity : upon wliicli Akastus conducted Peleus out upon 
 a hunting excursion among tiie woody regions of Mount Pelion, 
 contrived to steal from him the sword fabricated and given by 
 Hephtestos, and then left him, alone and unarmed, to perish 
 bv the hands of the Centaurs or by the wild beasts. By the 
 friendly aid ut t le Centaur Cheiron, however, PC^leus was pre- 
 served, and his sword reston'<l to liiin : returning to the city, he 
 avenge<l liimself by |»utting to deatli both Akiustus and his pertid- 
 
 ious wite.- 
 
 But amongst all the legends with which the name of Peliaa 
 is connected, l>\ far tlie most memorable is that of Jason and the 
 Argonautic exptdition. Jii^on was son of ^Eson, grandson of 
 KnHbeus, and thus great-grandson of yl^olus. Pelias, having 
 consuhed the oracle respecting the security of his dominion at 
 lolkos, had received in answer a warning to beware of the man 
 who should apptuir before him with only one sandal. He was 
 celebrating a lesuval in honor of Poseidon, when it so hapi)ened 
 that Jason a[>pe{i red before him with one of his feet unsandaled : 
 he had lost one sandal in wading through the swollen current of 
 the river Auauros. Pelias immediately understood that this was 
 
 » Eurip. Alkestis, Arg. ; Ajwllod. i. 9, 15. To bring; this beautiful lej^end 
 more into the color of history, a new version of it was snbsequently framed : 
 Herakles was eminently skilled in medirine, and saved the life of AlkAstis 
 when she was about to perish from a desperate malady (Plutarch. Amatoi 
 C. 17. vol. iv. p. 53, Wytt.). 
 
 • The lepend of Akastus and Peleus was given in great detail in the Catar 
 lagne of Hesiod (Catalog. Fragm. 20-21, Marktscheff. ) ; Schol. Pindar 
 »im. iv. 95. Scho Apoll lihod. i. 224 ; ApoUod. iii 13, 2. 
 
 MEDIA AND THE DAUGHrKRS OF PELUS. 
 
 115 
 
 iha enemy against whom the oracle had forewarned him. As a 
 m^ans of averting the danger, he imposed upon Jason the des- 
 perate ta^k of bringing back to lolkos the Golden Fleece, — the 
 fleece of that ram which had carried Phryxos from Achaia to 
 Kolchis, and which Phryxos had dedicated in the latter country 
 as an offering to the god Ares. The result of this injunction was 
 the memorable expedition — of the ship Argo and her crew call- 
 ed the Argonauts, com})Osed of the bravest and noblest youths 
 of Greece — which cannot be conveniently included among the 
 legends of the ^Eolids, and is reserved for a separate chai)ter. 
 
 The voyage of the Argo was long protracted, and Pelias, per- 
 suaded that neither the ship nor her crew won! 1 ever return, put 
 to death both the father and mother of Jason, together with their 
 infant son. vEson, the father, being permitted to choose the mannei 
 of his own death, drank bull's blood while peHbrming a sacrifice 
 to the gods. At length, however, Jason did return, bringing with 
 him not only the golden fleece, but also Medea, daughter of 
 ^etes, king of Kolchis, as his wife, — a woman distinguished for 
 magical skill and cunning, by whose assistance alone the Argo- 
 nauts had succeeded in their project. Though determined to 
 avenge himself upon Pelias, Jtison knew he could only succeed 
 by stratagem : he remained with his companions at a short dis- 
 tance from lolkos, while Medea, feigning herself a fugitive from 
 his ill-usage, entered the town alone, and procured access to the 
 daughters of Pelias. By exhibitions of her magical powers she 
 soon obtained unciualified ascendency over their minds. For ex- 
 ample, she selected from the flocks of Pelias a ram in the extrem- 
 ity of old age, cut him up and boiled him in aciildron with herbs, 
 and brought him out in the shape of a young and vigorous lamb:' 
 the daughters of Pelias were made to believe that their old father 
 could in like manner be restored to youth. In this persuasion 
 they cut him up with their own hands and cast his limbs into the 
 
 ^1 
 
 ' This incident was contained in one of the earliest dramas of Euripiddg 
 the 17 f Xmdec. now lost. Moses of Chorene (Progymnasm. ap. Maii ad Euseb 
 ft. 43), who gives an extract from the argument, says that the poet' extremof 
 mentiendi fines attinfrit." 
 
 The *Pi0TOfio< of Sophokl^s seems also to have turned upon the 
 ratastarf he (see Fragm. 479, Dindorf.). 
 
 'I 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
lie 
 
 mSTOBT OF GBBEGE. 
 
 MEDEA AT CORINTa 
 
 117 
 
 caldron, trasting that Medea would produce upon him die sauM 
 magical effect. Medea pretended that an invocation to the mooo 
 was a necessary part of the ceremony : she went up to the top 
 of the house a8 if to pronounce it, and there lighting the fire- 
 signal concerted with the Argonaut^, Jason and his companions 
 burst in and possessed themselves of the town. vSatisfied with 
 having thus revenged himself, Jason yielded the principality 
 •f lolkos to Aka^tus, son of Pelias, and retired with Medea to 
 Corintli. Thus did the goddess Here gratify her ancient wrath 
 against Pelias : she had constantly watched over Jason, and had 
 carried the '* all-notorious " Argo through its innumerable perils, 
 in order that Jason might bring home Medea to accomplish the 
 ruin of his uncle. > The misguided daughters of Pelias departed 
 
 > The kindness of llirr towards Jason seems to Ite older in the legend 
 than her displeasure OKiiiust Pelias ; at least it is specially noticed in the 
 Odyssey, as the great cause of the escape of the sliip Argo : 'AU' 'Hpt/ Tva- 
 penrui'tv, knn <pilnc V^v 'U'^'.>i' (xii. 70). In the Hesiodic Theogony Pelias 
 stands to Jason in the same relation as Enrystheus to H^-rakl^s, — a severe 
 taskmaster as well m a wick. <l and insolent man, — vSpiarf)^ Ilf Xt77C koI 
 Aram^aXor, hSiU^iaeoyof: {Theo«:, 995). A|>ollonius Rhodius keeps the wrath 
 of Hcp^ a;:ainst Pelias in the foreground, i. U; iii. 1134: iv. 242; see also 
 
 Hvgin, f. 1.3. 
 
 There is great diversity in the stories given of the proximate circum- 
 itanres connected vHth the death of Pelias : Eurip. Med. 491 ; Apollodor. i. 
 9, 27; Diodor. iv. 50-52 ; Ovid, Metam. vii. 162, 203, 297, 347 ; Pausan. viii 
 11, 2; Schol. ad Lycoph. 175. 
 
 In the legend of Akastus and IVleus as recounted above, Akastus was 
 made to perish hy the hand of Peleus. I do not take upon mc to reconcile 
 these contradiction?. 
 
 Pausanias mentions that he could not find in any of the poets, so far as 
 he had read, the names of the daughters of Pelias, and that the painter Mikon 
 had given to them names {ovopLara iV avral^ noivrri^ f^tv Mcto ovSei^, haa 
 y iwile^u^e^a hf^ei^, etc., Pausan. viii. 11,1). Yet their names are given in 
 the authors whom Diod«'>rus copied ; and Alkestis, at any rate, was most 
 memonihle. Mikon gave the names Asteropeia and Antinoe, altogether dif- 
 ferentfrom those in Diodortis. Both Diodorus and Hyginus exonerate Al 
 k»*stis from all share in the death of her father (Hygin. f. 24). ^ 
 
 The old poem called the Sonroc (see Argnm. ad Eurip. Med., and Schol 
 Aristophan. Eqnit. 1321) recounted, that Mfdea had hoiled in a caldron the 
 old JF.»dn, father of Jason, with herbs and incantations, and that she had 
 hroaght him ont young and strong. Ovid copies this { Metam. rii. 162-208) 
 It is Bioifttl*"" that Pher^kyd^s and Simonid** said that ehe had perfbrmei) 
 
 B8 voluntary exiles ti Arcadia : Akastus his son celebrated splen- 
 did funeral games in honor of his deceased father.' 
 
 Jason and Medea retired from lolkos to Corinth, where they 
 resided ten years: their children were — Medeius, whom the 
 Ceutaur Cheiron educated in the regions of Mount Pelion,'^ — 
 and Mermerus and Pheros, born at Corinth. After they had 
 resided there ten years in prosperity, Jason set his atfections on 
 Glauke, daughter of Kreon^ king of Corintli ; and as her father 
 was willing to give her to him in marriage, he determined to 
 repudiate Medea, who received orders forthwith to leave Corinth. 
 Stung with this insult ii d bent upon revenge, Medea prei)ared a 
 poisoned robe, and sent it as a marriage present to Glauke : it 
 was unthinkingly accepted and put on, and the body of the un- 
 fortunate bride was burnt up and consumed. Kreon, her father, 
 who tried to tear from her the burning garment, shared her fate 
 and i)erished. The exulting Medea escaped by means of a 
 chariot with winged serpents furnished to her by her grandfather 
 Helios : she placed herself under the protection of ^geus at 
 Athens, by whom she had a son named Medus. She left her 
 young cliildren in the sacred enclosure of the Arknean Here, 
 relying on the protection of the altar to ensure their safety ; but 
 the Corinthians were so exasperated against her for the murder 
 
 this [)rocess upon Jason himself {Schol. Aristoph, /. c). Diogenes (ap. Stol»«. 
 Florileg. t. xxix. 92j rationalizes the story, and converts Medea from an 
 enchantress into an improving and regenerating preceptress. The death of 
 iEson, as described in the text, is given from Diodorus and Apollodorus. 
 M'Mea seems to have been worshipped as a goddess in other places beside* 
 Corinth Csee Athenagor. Legat. pro Christ. 12; Macrobius, i. 12, j). 247, 
 Gronov.). 
 
 ' These funeral games in honor of Pelias were among the most renowned 
 of the mythical incidents : they were celebrated in a special poem by Stesicho- 
 rus, and represputod on the chest of Kypsclus at Olympia. Kastor, Meleager. 
 Amphiaraos, .Isison, Peleus, Moj>sos. etc. contended in them fPausan. v. 17. 
 4; Stesichon Fragm. 1. p. 54, ed. Klewe ; Athdn. iv. 172). How familiar 
 thf details of them were to the mind of «. literary Greek is indirectly attested 
 bf Plutarch, Sympos. v. 2, vol. iii. p. 762, Wytt. 
 
 " Hesiod, Theogon. 998. 
 
 ' According to the Schol. ad Eurip. M^'d. 20, Jason marries the daughter 
 of Hippotes the son of Kreon, who is the son of Lykaethos. Lykaethos, after 
 the departure of Bellerophon from Corinth, reigned twenty-seven years ; then 
 Kreon reigned thirty-five yean ; then came Hippotes. 
 
 ' i 0! 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 I, 
 
•^•^ 
 
 118 
 
 fflSTaRT OP QfiEEGB. 
 
 of Kreto and Glwike, that they dragg^id the children tkwaj frora 
 the altar and put them to death. The misei-able Jason perished 
 bj a fragment of his own ship Argo, which fell upon him while 
 he v%ari asleep under it,' being hauled on shore, according to the 
 habitual practice of the ancients. 
 
 The tirst establishment at Ephjre, or Corinth, had been found- 
 ed by Sisyphus, another ot the sons ot j-Eolus, brother of Salmd- 
 
 * Apoilodor. 1. y, 17 ; Diodor. iv. 54. The Medea of Eurypides, whiih has 
 fortunately been {treservod to us, is too well known to need express reference. 
 He makes Medea tlic destroyer of her own children, and l)orrows from this 
 circumstance the mttst pathetic touches of his exquisite drama Farraenis- 
 kos ac<us<'d him of havinjj »>cen hrihed by the Corintliians to ^ive this turn to 
 the le^'end ; and we may rej,Mrd the accusation as a proof that the older and 
 more current tale imputetl the murder of the children to the Corinthians 
 (S<hol. Enrip. Med. 275. where Didymos gives the story out of the old poem 
 of Kreophylos). i^e also ^Elian, V. H. v. 21 ; Fansan. ii. 3, 6. 
 
 The most signilicant fact in respect to the fable is, that the Ck)rinthian8 
 celebrated periodically a propitiatory sacrifice to Here Akraea and to Mermo- 
 rus and Pheres, as an atonement for the sin of having violated the sanctuary 
 of the altar. The legend grew out of this religious ceremony, and was so 
 arranged as to explain and account for it (see Eurip. Med 1376, with the 
 Schol. Diodor. iv. 5f>). 
 
 Mermerus and Pberes were the names given to the children of Medea and 
 Jason in the old Naupaktian Verses; in which, however, the legend must 
 have been recounted quite ditferently, since they said that Jason and Medea 
 had gone frora lolkos, not to Corinth, but to Corcyra; and that Mermerus 
 had perished in hunting on the opposite continent of Kpirus. Kinaethoo 
 again, another ancient genealogical poet, called the children of Medea and 
 Jason Eriopis and Medos (Pausan. ii. 3, 7). Diodorus gives them ditferent 
 njinu's (iv. 34). Hcsiod, in the Theogony, speaks only of Medeius as the son 
 
 of Jason. 
 
 Medea does not appear either in the Iliad or Odyssey : in the former, we 
 find Agamede. daughter of Augeas, '• who knows all the poisons (or medi- 
 cines) which the earth nourishes" (Iliad, xi. 740); in the latter, we have 
 Cire^, sister of ^etes, father of Medea^ and living in the ^^aean island (Odyss. 
 X. 70). Circe is daughter of the god Helios, as Medea is his granddaughter 
 
 she is herself a goddess. She is in many points the parallel of Medea,- 
 
 she forewarns and pieserves Odysseus throughout his dangers, as Medea aidl 
 Jason : according to the Hesiodic story, she has two children by Odysseus, 
 Agrius and Latinus (Theogon. 1001). 
 
 Odysseus goes to Ephyre to Ilos the son of Mermerus, to procure poisott 
 for his arrows : Enstathius treats this Mermerus as the son of M3dea (see 
 Odyss. i. 270, and Fust). As Ephyre is the legendary name of Corinth, 
 may presvne this U» be a thread of the same mythical tissue. 
 
 SISYPHUS THE iEOLID. 
 
 119 
 
 neos and Kr^theus.i The .Jk)lid Sisyphus was distinguished M 
 an unexampled master of cunning and deceit. He blocked up 
 the road along the isthmus, and killed the strangers who came 
 along it by rolling down upon them great stones from the moun- 
 tains* above. He was more than a match even for the arch thief 
 Autolycus, the son of Hennes, who derived from his father the 
 gitl of changing the color and shape of stolen goods, so that they 
 could no longer be recognized : Sisyphus, by marking his sheep 
 under the foot, detected Autolycus when he stole them, and 
 obliged him to restore the plunder. His penetration discovered 
 the amour of Zeus with the nymph ^gina, daughter of the river- 
 god Asopus. Zeus had carried her off to the island of CEnone 
 (which subsequently bore the name of ^gina) ; upon which 
 Asopus, eager to recover her, inquired of Sisyphus whither she 
 was gone: the latter told him what had happened, on condition 
 that he should provide a spring of water on the summit of the 
 Acro-Corinthus. Zeus, indignant with Sisyphus for this reveUi- 
 tion, inflicted upon him in Hades the punishment of perpetually 
 heaving up a hill a great and heavy stone, which, so soon as it 
 attained the summit, rolled back again in spite of all his efforts, 
 with irresistible force into the plain.2 
 
 In the application of the .Eolid genealogy to Corinth, Sisyphus, 
 the son of JEolus, appears as the first name : but the old Corin- 
 
 > See Euripid. ^ol.-Fragm. l,Dindorf; Dika3arch. Vit. G^aBc P. 22. 
 
 « Respecting Sisyphus, see Apollodor.i. 9,3 ; iu. 12, 6 Pausan. "A 1- Schol 
 ad Diad. i. 180. Another legend about the amour of Sisyphus with Tyro is 
 in Hvgin.fab.GO, and alK)ut the manner in which he overreached even Hades 
 (Pherekydes ap. Schol. Iliad, vi. 153). The stone rolled by Sisyphus m thi- 
 under-world appears in Odyss. xi. 592. The name of Sisyphus was given 
 during the historical age to men of craft and stratagem, such asDerkyllides 
 (Xenoph. Hellenic, iii. 1, 8). He passed for the real father of Odysseus, 
 though Heyne (ad Apollodor. i. 9, 3) treats this as another Sisyphus, where- 
 by he destroys the suitableness of the predicate as regards Odysseus^ Ihe 
 duplication 'and triplication of synonymous personages is an ordmary 
 resource for the purpose of reducing the legends into a secmmg chronological 
 
 '' EveTin the days of Eumelus a religious mystery was observed respecting 
 the tombs of Sisyphus and Neleus,- the lat er had also died at Connth,- 
 no one could say where they were buried (P: usan. ii. 2, 2> 
 
 Sisyphus even overreached Persephone, and made his escape from W 
 ander world (Theognis, 702> 
 
 Vox 1 7 
 
 ^ \ 
 
 
ISO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 thiAD post Eumelus either found or framed an heroic genealogj 
 for his native city independent both of JEolus and Sisyphus. 
 According to this ^enealoj^y, Ephyre, daughter of Oceanus and 
 Tethys, was the primitive tenant of the Corintliian territory, 
 Asopus of the Sikyonian : l>oth were assigned to the god Hehos, 
 in adjusting a dispute between him and Poseidon, by Briareus 
 HeHos divided the territory between his two sons u'Eetes and 
 Aloeus : to tlie tbnner he assigned Corinth, to the latter Sikyon. 
 -^etes, obeying the admonition of an oracle, emigrated to Kolchis, 
 leaving his territory under the rule of Bunos, the son of Hermes, 
 with the stipulation that it should be restored whenever either he 
 or any of his descendants returned. After the death of Bunos, 
 both Corinth and Sikyon were j)ossessed by E{)6peus, son of 
 Alueus, a wicked man. His son Marathon left him in disgust 
 and retired into Attica, but returned after his death and succeeded 
 to his territory, wtiich he in turn divided between his two sons 
 Corinthos and Sikyon, from whom the names of the two districts 
 were first derived. Corinthos died without issue, and the Corin- 
 thians then invited Medea from lolkos as the representative of 
 JEetes : she with her husband Jason thus obtained the sovereignty 
 of Corinth.' This legend of Eumelus, one of the earliest of the 
 genealogical f)oets, so diflerent from the story adopted by Neo- 
 phron or Euripides, was followed certainly by Simonides and 
 seemingly by Theopompus.- The incidents in it are imagined 
 and arranged with a view to the supremacy of Medea; the 
 emigration of jEetes and the conditions under which he transfer- 
 red his sceptre, being so laid out as to confer upon Medea an 
 hereditary title to the throne. The Corinthians paid to Medea 
 and to her childr^m solemn worship, either divine or heroic, io 
 conjunction with Here Aknea,*^ and this was sufficient to give to 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. 1, 1 ; 3, 10. Schol. ad Pindar. Oiymp. xiii. 74. Schol. 
 Lvcoph. 174-1024. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 1212. 
 
 * Simonid. ap. Schol. ad Eurip. Med. 10-20; Theopompu.s, Fragm. 340, 
 Didot ; though Welcker (^Der Episch. Cycl. p. 29) thinks that this does not 
 btlong to the historian Theopompns. Epimenides also followed the story ci 
 Sm das in making ^ietes a Corinthian f Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. iii. 242). 
 
 • Uepl 6e T7/^ fif KoptinJor /aeToiKr/aeuft 'l^TTrvf eKri^^rrai Kal 'EXXdviKOC' 
 9fn Kk l3el3aaiXevKe r^f Kopivdov rj M^dcta, Ev^iyAof laropel Kal "Siftuvidijf 
 X)r» <Je Kai di^dvarof ^v ^ M.^6eia, Movaatoc iv r^ irepl ' \<r&uiuv laropel, &fit 
 wai wepl ruv r^g ' kKpaiof 'Hfof hpruv t^Ti^eif. TSchol Eturip. Med, 10) 
 
 BELLEROPHOH. 
 
 M^dea a prominent place in the genealogy composed by a Corin- 
 thian poet, accustomed to blend together gods, heroes and men in 
 the antiquities of his native city. According to the legend of 
 Eumelus, Jasdn became (through Medea) king of Corinth ; but 
 ehe concealed the cliiidren of their marriage in the temple ot 
 Here, trusting that the goddess would render them immortaL 
 Jason, discovering her proceedings, left her and retired in disgust 
 to lolkos ; Medea also, being disappointed in her scheme, quitted 
 the place, leaving the throne in the hands of Sisyphus, to whom, 
 according to the story of Theopompus, she had become attached.^ 
 Other legends recounted, that Zeus had contracted a passion for 
 Medea, but that she had rejected his suit from fear of the displea- 
 sure of Here ; who, as a recompense for such fidelity, rendered 
 her children immortal :^ moreover Medea had erected, by special 
 command ot* Here, the celebrated temple of Aphroditd at Corintii. 
 The tenor of these fables manifests their connection with the 
 temple of Here: and we may consider the legend of Medea as 
 having been originally quite independent of that of Sisyphus, but 
 lltted on to it, in seeming chronological sequence, so as to satisfy 
 the feelings of those Solids of Corinth who passed for his 
 descendants. 
 
 Sisyphus had for his sons Glaukos and Omyti6n. From 
 Glaukos sprang Bellerophon, whose romantic adventures com- 
 mence with the Iliad, and are further expanded by subsequent 
 poets : according to some accounts he was really the son of 
 FoseidOn, the prominent deity of the ^olid family .3 The youth 
 
 Compare also v. 1376 of the play itself, with the Scholia and Pausan. ii. S^ 
 6. Both Alknian and Uesiod represented Medea as a goddess ( Athenogora^ 
 Legatia pro Christianis, p. 54, ed. Oxon.). 
 
 * Pausan. ii. 3, 10 ; Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 74. 
 
 * Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 32-74 ; Plutarch. De Herodot. Malign, p. 871. 
 
 * Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 98. and Schol. ad 1 ; Schol. ad Iliad, vi. 155; thb 
 •eems to be the sense of Iliad, vi. 191. 
 
 The lost drama called iobaies of Sophokl^, and the two by Enripiddt 
 called Stheneboea and BeU/rophdn, handled the adventures of this hero. 8m 
 the collection of the few fragments remaining in Dindorf, Fragm. Sophok. 
 280 ; Fragm. Eurip. p. 87-108 ; and Hygin. fab. 67. 
 
 Welcker CGriechische Tragod. ii. p. 777-800) has ingeniously put togethflf 
 •11 that can be divined respecting the two plays of Euripides. 
 
 Volcker seeks to make out that Bellerophdo is identical with FomU^ 
 
 VOL. I. i 
 
 v^^ 
 
 ■<'' 
 
 ( 
 
1» 
 
 mSTOBY or GREECE. 
 
 and beautj of Bellcirophon rendered bim the object of a strong 
 paasion on the part of the Aiiteia, wife of Prcetos king of Argos. 
 Finding her advances rejected, she contracted a violent hatred 
 towards bim, and endeavored by false accusations to prevail upon 
 her husband to kill ititn. Proetos refused to commit the deed 
 under his own root, i>ut despatched him to his son-in-law the king 
 ot Lykia in Asia Minor, putting into his hands a folded tablet full 
 of destructive symbols. Conformably to these suggestions, the 
 most perilous undertakings were imposed upon Bellerophon. He 
 was directed to attack the monst<^r Chimaera and to conquer the 
 warlike Solymi as well as the Amazons : as he returned victorious 
 from these enterprises, an ambusciide was laid for him by the 
 bravest Lykian wai'riors, all of whom he slew. At length the 
 Lykian king recognized him *'as the genuine son of a god," and 
 gave him his daughter in marriage together with half of his 
 kingdom. The grand-children of Bellerophon, Glaukos and Sar- 
 pedon, — the latter a son of his daughter Laodameia by Zeus, — 
 combat as allies of Troy against the host of Agamemnon > 
 Respecting the winged Pegasus, Homer says nothing ; but later 
 poets assigned to Bellerophon this miraculous steed, whose 
 parentage is given in the Hesiodic Theogony, as the instrument 
 both of his voyage and of his success.^ Heroic worship was paid 
 at Corinth to Bellerophon, and he seems to have been a favorite 
 theme of recollection not only among the Corinthians themselves, 
 but also among the numerous colonists whom they sent out to 
 other regions.3 
 
 From Omytion, the son of Sisyphus, we are conducted through 
 a series of three undistinguished family names, — Thoas, Damo- 
 phon, and the brothers Pro^Hxlas and Hyanthidas, — to the time 
 
 Hippios, — a ieparate jiersonifitation of oiu' of the attiibutos of the god Fosci- 
 doB For this conjecture he gives some plausible grounds (Mythologie de» 
 Japetisch. Greschlochts, p. 129 $eq.). 
 
 > Iliad, vi. 155-210 ' Hesiod, Theogon. 283. 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. 2, 4. See Pindar, Olymp. xiii. 90, addressed to Xenophon 
 ttie Corinthian, and the AdoniazusK of the Syracusan Theocritus, a poem is 
 which common Syracusan life and feeling are so graphically depicted, Idyll 
 KT. 91. — 
 
 I,vpaKoaiaic hriraatrei^ ; 
 *Qf d* tlSifif Koi roHro, Kopivi^iai el/ie^ avuf&e¥ 
 Uc KtU 6 BtAAepo^wv * HtXoirovvaaiaTl XaXevfitf. 
 
 AT HAMAS AND PHRYXU8. 
 
 flf the Dftrian occupation of Corinth^ which will be horosAer 
 
 recounted. 
 
 We now pass from Sisyphus and the Corinthian fables to 
 another son of ^olus, Athames, whose fiaraily history is not 
 less replete with mournful and tragical incidents, abundantly 
 diversified by the poets. Athamas, we are told, was king at 
 Orchomenos ; his wife Nephel^ was a goddess, and he had by 
 her two children, Phryxus and Helle. After a certain time he 
 neglected Nephel^, and took to himself as a new wife Ino, the 
 daughter of Kadmus, by whom he had two sons, Learchus and 
 Melikertes. Ino, looking upon Phryxus with the hatred of a 
 step-mother, laid a snare for his life. She persuaded the women 
 to roast the seed-wheat, which, when sown in this condition, yielded 
 no crop, 6o that famine overspread the land. Athamas sent to 
 Delphi to implore counsel and a remedy : he received for answer, 
 through the machinations of Lio with the oracle, that the barren- 
 ness of the fields could not be alleviated except by offering 
 Phryxus as a sacrifice to Zeus, The distress of the people com- 
 pelled him to execute this injunction, and Phryxus was led as a 
 victim to the altar. But the power of his mother Nephele 
 snatched him from destruction, and procured for him from Hermga 
 a ram with a fleece of gold, upon which he and his sister Helld 
 mounted and were carried across the sea. The ram took the 
 direction of the p:uxine sea and Kolchis : when they were cross- 
 ing the Hellespont, Helle fell off into the narrow strait, which 
 took its name from that incident Upon this, the ram, who was 
 endued with speech, consoled the terrified Piiryxus, and ulUmately 
 carried him safe to Kolchis : JEet^s, king of Kolchis son of the 
 god Helios and brother of Circe, received Phryxus kindly, and 
 gave him his daughter Chalciop^ in marriage. Phryxus sacri- 
 ficed the ram to Zeus Phyxios, and suspended the golden fleece 
 in the sacred grove of Ares. 
 
 Athamas — according to some both Athamas and Ino — were 
 rfterwards driven mad by the anger of the goddess H6r^ ; inso- 
 much that the father shot his own son Learchus, and would alse 
 have put to death his other son Melikertes, if In6 had not 
 ■latched him away. She fled with the boy, across the Megarian 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. 4, 3. 
 
 J 
 
 M 
 
IM 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 rumiim- 
 
 territory and Mount Geraneia, to the rock Moluris, overhanging 
 ihe Saronie Gulf: Athamas pursued her, and in order to escape 
 him she leaped into the sea. She became a sea-goddess under 
 the title of Leukotliea; while the body of Melikertes was cast 
 ashore on the neighboring territory of Schoenus, and buried by 
 his uncle Sisyphus, who was directed by the Nereids to pay to 
 him heroic honors under the name of Palaemon. The Isthmian 
 games, one of the great periodical festivals of Greece, were cele- 
 brated' in honor of the god Poseidon, in conjunction with Palae- 
 mon as a hero. Athamas abandoned his territory, and became 
 the first settler of a neighboring region called from him Athman- 
 tiA, or the Athamantian plain.i 
 
 » Eurip. MM. 1250, with the Scholia, according to which story Ino killed 
 both her children : — 
 
 'Ivu fiaveiaav hK i^etjv, fit?' ^ Atdf 
 
 Compare Valckenaer, Diatribe in Eorip.; Apollodor. i. 9, 1-2; Schol. ad 
 Pindar. Ar^m. ad Isthm. p. 180. The many varieties of the fahle of Athsr 
 mas and his family m.»y be seen in Hygin. fab. 1-5 ; Philostephanus ap. 
 Bchol. Iliad, vii. 86 : it was a favorite subject with the tragedians, and was 
 handled by ^schylus, Sophokl^s and Euripides in more than one drama 
 (see Welcker, Griechische Tragod. vol. i. p. 312-332 ; vol ii. p. 612). Heyn« 
 ■ays that the proper reading of the name is Phrixus, not PAryrt«, — incor- 
 rectly, I think : ♦pv^of connects the name both with the story of roasting the 
 wheat {(^pvytLv), and abK) with the coantr>' *pi;> m, of which it was pretended 
 that Phryxus was the Eponymus. Ino, or I^ukothea, was worshipped as a 
 heroine at Megara as well as at Corinth (Pausan. i. 42, 3) : the celebrity of 
 the Isthmian games carried her worship, as well as that of Palaemon, 
 throughout most parts of Greece (Cicero, De Nat Deor. iii. 16). She is the 
 only personage of this family noticed either in the Iliad or Odyssey : in the 
 latter poem she is a sea-goddess, who has once been a mortal, daughter of 
 Kadmus ; she saves Odysseus from imminent danger at sea by presenting 
 to him her Kpridefivov (Odyss. v. 433; see the refinements of Aristides, Orat 
 iii. p. 27 ). The voyage of Phryxus and Hell6 to Kolchis was related in the 
 Hesiodic Eoiai : we find the names of the children of Phryxus by the 
 daughter of ^^t^s quoted from that poem (Schol. ad Apollon. Rhod. ii 
 1128 • both Hesiod and Pherekyd^s mentioned the golden fleece of the ram 
 (Eratosthen. Catasterism. 19; Pherekyd. Fragm. 53, Didot). 
 
 Hekatiens preserved the romance of the speaking ram (Schol. ApoU. Rliod 
 l.«5«)- but Hellanikus dropped the story of Hell^ having fallen mto ihf 
 
 \\\ 
 
 LEGENDS AND BITES OF THE ATHAMANTIDS. 186 
 
 The legend of Athamas connects itself with some sanguinary 
 religious rites and very peculiar family customs, which prevailed 
 at Alos, in Achaia Phthiotis, down to a time» later than the his- 
 torian Herodotus, and of which some remnant existed at Orcho- 
 jienos even in the days of Plutarch. Athamas was worshipped 
 at Alos as a hero, having both a chapel and a consecrated grove, 
 attached to the temple of Zeus Laphystios. On the family of 
 which he was the heroic progenitor, a special curse and disability 
 stood affixed. The eldest of the race was forbidden to enter the 
 prytaneion or government-house ; and if he was found within ihe^ 
 doors of the building, the other citizens laid hold of him on his 
 going out, surrounded him with garlands, and led him in solemn 
 procession to be sacriticed as a victim at the altar of Zeus 
 Laphystios. The prohibition carried with it an exclusion from 
 all the public meetings and ceremonies, political as well ai 
 religious, and from the sacred tire of the state : many of the 
 mdividuals marked out had therefore been bold enough to trans- 
 gress it. Some had been seized on quitting the building and 
 actually sacrificed ; others had fled the country for a long time to 
 
 avoid a similar fate. 
 
 The guides who conducted Xerxes and his army through 
 southern Thessaly detailed to him this existing practice, coupled 
 with the local legend, that Athamas, together with Ino, had 
 .K)ught to compass the death of Phryxus, who however had 
 escaped to Kolchis ; that the Achaeans had been enjomed by a» 
 oracle to oifei up Athamas himself as an expiatory sacrifice to 
 release the countiy from the anger of the gods ; but that Kytis- 
 soros, son of Phryxus, coming back from Kolchis, had intercepted 
 the saxjrifice of Athama s,^ whereby the anger of the godfi re- 
 
 iea: according to him sue died at Pactye in the Chersonesus (Schol. ApoU. 
 
 "^rt "pcLVltius seems to have given the genealogy of Athamas by The 
 «i^ nmch in the same manner as we find it in Apollodorus (Pausan. ix. 
 
 'VcLrding to the ingenious refinements of Dionysius and Pal«pha^Oi 
 {sirl^ ApolL Rhod' ii. 1144 ., Pal^phat. de Inc«.d. c^ 31) the ram of 
 ptr^^us was ^r all a man named Krios, a faithful attendant who aided » 
 his ;scape; others imagined a ship with a ram's ^^^^^'^^^^ ^^_ 
 » Plutorih, Qu«8t. Gr«c. c. 38. p. 299. Schol. ApoU. R»»^- "' ^f' 
 ' Of t;^ Athama. of Sophokl^s, turning upon this intended, but not OOB 
 
 I 
 
HISTORY OF QBEEOl 
 
 still imapf leased, and an undying cune rested opoo Um 
 
 iamily.i 
 
 That such human sacrifices continued to a greater or less 
 extent, even down to a period later tliau llerodotud, among the 
 fiunily who worshi))ped Athamas as their heroic ancestor, appears 
 certain : mention ic« ahio made of simihir customs in parts of 
 Arcadia, and of Thessaly, in honor of Peleus and Cheiron.* 
 But we may reasonably presume, that in the period of greater 
 humanity which Herodotus witnessed, actual sacrifice had become 
 very rare. The curse and the legend still remained, but were 
 
 sominuted sacritice, little i.s known, except from a passage of Aristophanes 
 and the iScholia upon it (Nubes, 258). — 
 
 Athamas was introduced in this drama with a garland on his head, ou tha 
 point of hcinjj sacrihccd as an expiation for the death of his sou Phryxui, 
 when Herakles interposes and n'seues him. 
 
 ' llerodot. vii. 197. Plato, Minos, p. 315. 
 
 • Plato, Minds, e. 5. Kal oi mv 'Ai^«//ai'rof ^kjovoi, olac &voia^ &vovmv, 
 •EAAr/r^f ovrri;. As a testimony to the fact still existing or believed to exist, 
 liiiB dialogue is quite suiiieient, though not the work of Plato. 
 
 M.ovifio<; d' IcTopei, iv ry tuv Havfiaaiuiv avvnyuyy, kv Wt'k'krf ttj^ Qcttq^ 
 ^ia^ 'Ax<*^'^^ «ivi?fj<j7rof llr/Xti koi Xeipuvi aarai^vea^ui. (Clemens Alexand. 
 Admon. ad Gent. p. 27, Sylb.j Respecting the sacrifices at the temple of 
 Zeus Lykanis in Arciuiia, see Pluto, Republ. viii. p. 565. Pausanias (viii. p. 
 88, 5) seems to have shrunk, when he was upon the spot, even from inquir* 
 ing what they were — a striking proof of the fearful idea which he had con- 
 ceived of them. Plutuirch (l)e Dcfectu Oraeul. c. 14) speaks of raf TvuXai 
 irouwfui'a^ di'T^puiTToi^vcrla^. The Schol. ad Lycophron 229, gives a story 
 of children being sacrificed to Melikertc's at Tenedo-? ; and Apolloddms 
 ,ad Porphyr. de AbstimentiA, ii. 55, see Apollod. Fragm. 20, ed. Didot) said 
 that the Laceda3monians had sacrificed a man to Arcs — \a/ XaKedai^oviovf 
 ^alv 'An-oX/loJu/jof tv 'kpei i^veiv Hvi^pumw. About Salamis in Cyprus, 
 ^ee Lactantius, De Fals^ Religione, i. c. 21. "Apud Cypri Salaminem, 
 humanam hostiam Jovi Teucras immolavit, idque sacriiiciam posteris tradi> 
 dit : quod est nuper Undriano imperante sublatum." 
 
 Respecting human sacrifices in historical Greece, consult a good section io 
 K. F. Hermann's Gottesdienstliche AlterthOmer der Griechen (sect. 27). 
 Such sacrifices had been a portion of primitive Grecian religion, but had 
 gradually become obsolete everywhere — except in one or two solitary cases 
 which were spoken of with horror. Even in these cases, too, the reality o# 
 Ike fiu:t, in later times, is not beyond suspicion. 
 
 ATHAMANTfDB AT ALO& 
 
 lfl7 
 
 •ol called into practical working, except during periods of intense 
 national sufiering or apprehension, during which the religious 
 sensibilities were always greatly aggravated. We cannot at all 
 doubt, that during the alarm created by the presence of the Per- 
 sian king with his immense and ill-disciplined host, the minds of 
 the Thessalians must have been keenly alive to all that was ter- 
 rific in their national stories, and all that was expiatory in their 
 religious solemnities. Moreover, the mind of Xerxes himself 
 was so awe-struck by the tale, that he reverenced the dwelling-place 
 consecrated to Athamas. The guides who recounted to him the 
 romantic legend, gave it as the historical and generating cause 
 of the existing rule and practice: a critical inquirer is forced 
 (as has been remarked before) to reverse the order of precedence, 
 and to treat the practice as having been the suggesting cause of 
 its own explanatory legend. 
 
 The family history of Athamas, and the worship of Zeus 
 Laphystios, are expressly connected by Herodotus with Alos in 
 Aehi«a Phthiotis — one of the towns enumerated in the Iliad as 
 under the command of Achilles. But there was also a mountain 
 called Laphystion, and a temple and worship of Zeus Laphystios 
 between Orchomenos and Koroneia, in the northern portion of 
 the territory known in the historical ages as Boeotia. Here also 
 the family story of Athamas is localized, and Athamas is pre- 
 sented to us as king of the districts of Koroneia, Haliartus and 
 Mount Laphystion : he is thus interwoven with the Orchomenian 
 genealogy.i Andreas (we are told), son of the river Peneios, 
 was the first person who settled in the region: from him ii 
 received the name Andreis. Athamas, coming subsequently to 
 Andreus, received from him the territory of Koroneia and Haliar 
 tus with Mount Laphystion : he gave in marriage to Andreui^ 
 Euippe, daughter of his son Leuc6n, and the issue of this mar- 
 riage was Eteokles, said to be the son of the river Kephisoe. 
 Koronos and Haliartus, grandsons of the Corinthian Sisyphus, 
 were adopted by Athamas, as he had lost all his children : but 
 when his grandson Presbon, son of Phryxus, returned to him 
 from Kolchis, he divided his territory in such manner that 
 Koronos and Haliartus became the founders of the towns wlucfc 
 
 M 
 
 f 
 
 
 I 
 
 * Pausan. ix. 34, 4. 
 
BlbTOBT OP CrSEEGB. 
 
 bor? their names. Almdn, the son of SisyfJuM, 
 
 from Eteokles a {lortion of territory, where he established thf 
 
 village Almones.' 
 
 With £teokl^ I^egan, according to a statement in one of the 
 Hesiodic poems, the worship of the Charites or Graces, so long 
 and so solemnly continued at Orchomenos in the periodical festival 
 of the Charitesia, to which many neighboring towns and districts 
 seem to have contribated.^ He also distributed the inhabitants 
 into two tribes — Eteokleia and Kephisias. He died childless, 
 and was succeeded by Almos, who had only two daughters, 
 Chryse and Chrysogeneia. The son of Chryse by the god Ares 
 was Phlegyas, the father and founder of the warlike and preda> 
 tory Phlegyae, who despoiled every one within their reach, and 
 assaulted not only liie pilgrims on their road to Delphi, but even 
 the treasures of the temple itself. The ofi'ended god punished 
 them by continued thunder, by earthquakes, and by pestilence, 
 which extinguished all this impious race, except a scanty rem- 
 nant who fled into Phokis. 
 
 Chrysogeneia, tlie other daughter of Almos, had for issue, by 
 the god Poseidon, Minyas : the son of Minyas was Orchomenos. 
 From these two was derived the name both of MinyaB for the 
 people, and of Orchomenos for the town.3 During the reign of 
 Orchomenos, Hyettus came to him from Argos, having become 
 an exile in consequence of the death of Molyros : Orchomenos 
 assigned to him a portion of land, where he founded the village 
 called Hyettus.** (3rchomenos, having no issue, was succeeded 
 by Klymenos, son of Presbon, of the house of Athamas : Kly- 
 meuos was slain by some Thebans during the festival of Poseidoc 
 at Onchestos ; and his eldest son, Erginus, to avenge his death, 
 attacked the Thebans with his utmost force ; — an attack, in 
 which he was so successful, that the latter were forced to submiti 
 and to pay him an suinual tribute. 
 
 ' Pausan. ix. 34, 5. ' Ephorus, Frafrm. 68, Marx. 
 
 • Pausan. ix. 36, 1-3. See also a legend, about the three daughters of 
 BClnyas, which was treated by the Taniigraean poetess Korinna, the con tempo 
 raty of Pindar (Antonin. Liberalis, Narr. x). 
 
 * This exile of Hjetms was recounted in the Eoiai. Hesiod, Fragnk i4A 
 Mflrkt. 
 
 TBOPHONIUS AND AQAlfEDBS. 
 
 119 
 
 The Orchomenian power wafi now at its height : both lifinyas 
 and Orchomenos had been princes of surpassing wealth, and the 
 former had built a spacious and durable edifice which he had 
 filled with gold and silver. But the success of Erginus against 
 Thebes was soon terminated and reversed by the hand of the 
 irresistible Herakles, who rejected with disdain the claim of 
 tribute, and even mutilated the envoys sent to demand it : he 
 not only emancipated Thebes, but broke down and impoverished 
 Orchomenos.' Erginus in his old age married a young wife, 
 from which match sprang the illustrious heroes, or gods, Tro- 
 phonius and Agamedes ; though many (amongst whom is Pausa- 
 nius himself) believed Trophonius to be the son of Apollo.^ 
 Trophonius, one of the most memorable persons in Grecian 
 mythology, was worshipped as a god in various places, but with 
 especial sanctity as Zeus Trophonius at Lebadeia : in his temple 
 at this town, the prophetic manifestations outlasted those of Del- 
 phi itself.3 Trophonius and Agamedes, enjoying matchless 
 renown as architects, built^ the temple of Delphi, the thalamus 
 of Amphitryon at Thebes, as well as the inaccessible vault of 
 Hyrieus at Hyria, in which they are said to have left one stone 
 removable at pleasure, so as to reserve for themselves a secret 
 entrance. They entered so frequently, and stole so much gold 
 and silver, that ttyrieus, astonished at his losses, at length spread 
 a fine net, in which Agamedes was inextricaWy caught : Tropho- 
 nius cut off his brother's head and carried it away, so that the 
 
 ' Pausan. ix. 37, 2. Apollod. ii. 4, 11. Diodor. iv. 10. The two latter 
 tell us that Erginus was slain. Klymen^ is among the wives and daughters 
 of the heroes seen by Odysseus in Hades: she is termed by the SchoL 
 daughter of Minyas (Odyss. xi. 325). 
 
 * Pausan. ix. 37, 1-3. AeyeroL de 6 Tpo<puvto^ 'ArroAAwvof elvai, xal oi^ 
 *Epyivov • Kal kyd re Trei^ofiai, Kal 6<TTt( Trapd, Tpo(p6viov fj^de drf fiavrevao* 
 
 ' Platarch, De Defectu Oracul. c. 5, p. 411. Strabo. ix. p. 414. The 
 mention of the honeyed cakes, both in Aristophanes (Nub. 508) and Paasa* 
 Bias (ix. 39, 5), indicates that the curious preliminary ceremonies, for thoM 
 who consulted the oracle of Trophonius, remained the same after a lapse of 
 MO years. Pausanias consulted it himself. There had been at one time an 
 oracle of Teiresias at Orchomenos : but it had become silent at an earl^ 
 period (Plutarch. Defect. Oracul. c. 44, p. 434). 
 
 * Homer. Hymn, Apoll. 296. Pausan. ix. 11, 1. 
 
 TOL. I. ^* Stoc 
 
 IV 
 
 I 
 
 I. 
 
180 
 
 HISTORY OF QHtACE 
 
 ORC^OMENIAN GENEALOGY. 
 
 131 
 
 body, which alone remained, was insufficient to identify the thief 
 Like Amphiaraos, whom he resembles in more than one respect, 
 Trophonius was swallowed up by the earth near LebadeiaJ 
 
 From Trophonius and Aj^amedes the Orchomenian genealogy 
 passes to Ascalaphos and lalmenos, the sons of Ares by Astyo- 
 che, who are named in the Catalogue of the Iliad as leaders of 
 the thirty ships from Orchomenos against Troy. Azeus, the 
 grandfather of Astyoche in the Iliad, is introduced as the brother 
 of Erginus- by Pausanias, who does not carry the pedigree 
 lower. 
 
 The genealogy here given out of Pausanias is deserving of the 
 more attention, because it seems to have been copied from the 
 special history of <3rchomenos by the Corinthian Kallippus, who 
 again borrowed frc«m the native Orchomenian poet, Chersias : the 
 works of the latter had never come into the hands of Pausanias. 
 It illustrates forcibly the principle upon which these mythical 
 genealogies were framed, for almost every personage in the series 
 is an Eponymus. Andreus gave his name to the country, Atha- 
 mas to the Athamantian plain ; Minyas, Orchomenos, Koronus, 
 Haliartus, Almos and Hyettos, are each in like manner connected 
 with some name of people, tribe, town or village ; while Chryse 
 and Chrysogeneia liave their origin in the reputed ancient wealth 
 of Orchomenos. Abundant discrepancies are found, however, in 
 respect to this old !?enealogy, if we look to other accounts. Ac- 
 cording to one statement, Orchomenos was the son of Zeus by 
 Isionc, daugliter of Danaus ; Minyas was the son of Orchome- 
 nos (or rather of Poseidon) by Hermippe, daughter of Boeotos ; 
 the sons of Minyas were Presbon, Orchomenos, Athama^ and 
 Diochthondas.y Others represented Minyas as son of Poseidon 
 
 * Pausan. ix. 37, 3. A similar story, Imt far more romantic and amplified 
 is told by Herodotus ii. 121), respecting; the treasury vault of Rhampsini- 
 tus, king of Egypt. Oharax (ap. Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 508) gives the same 
 tale, but places the scene in the treasury-vault of Augeas, king of Elis, 
 which he says was built by Trophonius, to whom he assigns a totally 
 different genealogy. The romantic adventures of the tale rendered it emi- 
 nently fit to be inUsrwoven at some point or another of legendary histoiT, il 
 •ny country. 
 
 • Pausan. ix. 38, 6 ; 29, 1. 
 
 ■ Schoi. Apollon. Rhod. i. 330. Compare Schol. ad Lycophron. 873. 
 
 by Kallirrhoe, an Oceanic nymph,' while Dionysius called him 
 son of Ares, and Aristodemus, son of Aleas : lastly, there were 
 not wa iting authors who termed both Minyas and Orchomenos 
 sons of Eteokles.Q Nor do we find in any one of these gen- 
 ealogies the name of Amphion, the son of lasus, who figures 
 so prominently in the Odyssey as king of Orchomenos, and whose 
 beautiful daughter Chloris is married to Neleus. Pausanias 
 mentions him, but not as king, which is the denomination given 
 to him in Homer.3 
 
 The discrepancies here cited are hardly necessary in order to 
 prove that these Orchomenian genealogies possess no historical 
 value. Yet some probable inferences appear deducible from the 
 general tenor of the legends, whether the facts and persons of 
 which they are composed be real or fictitious. 
 
 Throughout all the historical age, Orchomenos is a member ol 
 the Boeotian confederation. But the Boeotians are said to have 
 been immigrants into the territory which bore their name from 
 Thessaly ; and prior to the time of their immigration, Orchome- 
 nos and the surrounding territory appear as possessed by the 
 Minyae, who are recognized in that locality both in the Iliad and 
 in the Odyssey ,4 and from whom the constantly recurring Epon- 
 ymus, King Minyas, is borrowed by the genealogists. Poetical 
 legend connects the Orchomenian Minyae on the one side, with 
 Pylos and Tryphylia in Peloponnesus ; on the other side, with 
 Phthiotis and the town of lolkos in Thessaly ; also with Corinth,* 
 
 ' Schol. Pindar, Olymp. xiv. 5. 
 
 « Schol. Pindar, Isthm. i. 79. Other discrepancies in Schol. Vettad Iliad. 
 iL Catalog. 18. 
 
 ^ Odyss. xi. 283. Pausan. ix. 36, 3. 
 
 * Iliad, ii. 5, 1 1. Odyss. xi. 283. Hesiod, Fragm. Eoiai, 27, Diintz. 'l^ev 
 <5' 'Opxofievov Mivv^iov. Pindar, Olyrap. xiv. 4. HaXatyovuv M.ivvuv tma- 
 KOTToi. Herodot. i. 146. Pausanias calls them Mnyae even in their 
 dealings with Sylla (ix. 30, 1). Buttraann, in his Dissertation (iiber die 
 Minyae der Altesten Zeit, in the Mythologus, Diss. xxi. p. 218), doubts 
 whether the name Minyae was ever a real name ; but all the passages mak« 
 Kgainst his opinion. 
 
 * Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 1186. i. 230. "Lkti^io^ Se Av/^vrpioc i>noi r<n)f 
 %€pl T7fv 'lwA«dv oUovvrac Mivvac Ka?iei<r^ai ; and i. 763. T^v yap 'lot^Kdw 
 "i Mivvai (f'uc wv, ug ^-not Xcfiuvidijg tv Ivf^fiiKToig : also Eostath. ad Iliad, ii 
 512. Stepn iJyz. v, Mivva. Orchomenos and Pylos run together in the 
 iiind of the poet of the Odyssey, xL 458. 
 
t 
 
 m 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREBOK. 
 
 through Sisyphus and his sons. Pherekydes represented Neleaa, 
 king of Pylos, as having also been king of Orchomenos.i In the 
 region of Triphylia, near to or coincident with Pylos, a Miuyeian 
 river is mentioned by Homer ; and we find traces of residents 
 called Minyte even in the historical times, though the account 
 given by Herodotus of the way in which they came thither is 
 Btnuige and unsatisfactory .'^ 
 
 Before the great changes which took place in the inhabitants 
 of Greece from the immigration of the Thesprotians into Thessaly, 
 of the Boeotians into Boeotia, and of the Dorians and jEtolians 
 into Peloponnesus, at a date which we have no means of deter 
 mining, the Minyie and tribes fraternally connected with them 
 seem to have occupied a large portion of the surface of Greece, 
 from lolkos in Thessaly to Pylos in the Peloponnesus. The 
 wealth of Orchomenos is renowned even in the Iliad ; * and when 
 we study it8 topography in detail, we are furnished with a proba- 
 ble explanation both of its prosperity and its decay. Orchome- 
 nos was situated on the northern bank of the lake Kopais, which 
 receives not only the river Kephisos from the valleys of Phokis, 
 but also other rivers from Paniassus and Helicon. The waters 
 of the lake find more than one subterranean egress — partly 
 through natural rifts and cavities in the limestone mountains, 
 partly through a tunnel pierced artificially more than a mile in 
 length — into the plain on the north-eastern side, from whence 
 they flow into the Euboean sea near Larymna r^ and it appears 
 
 ' Pherekyd. Fragm. 56, Didot. We see by the 55th Fragment of the 
 •ame author, that he extended the genealogy of Phryxos to Pherai in 
 
 Thessaly, 
 
 • Herodot. iv. U5. Strabo, viii. 337-347. Horn. Iliad, xi. 721. Paasan 
 ▼. 1, 7. iroTttfiHv Mivvriiov, near El is. 
 
 ' Iliad, ix. 381. 
 
 * See the description of these channels or Katabothra In Colonel Leake'i 
 Travels in Northern Greece, vol. ii. c. 15, p. 281-293, and still more elabo- 
 rately in Fiedler, Reise durch alle Theile des Konigreichs Griechenlands, 
 Leipzig, 1840. He traced fifteen perpendicular shafts sunk for the purpose 
 of admitting air intc the tunnel, the first separated from the last by about 
 J900 feet: they are now of course overgrown and stopped up (vol. i. p 
 
 115). 
 
 Forchhammer states the length of this tunnel as considerably greater thaa 
 Tliat is here itated. He also gives a plan of the Lake Kopats with the sm- 
 
 AMPHnmroKT at kalahria. 
 
 Ihftt, 80 kmg m thede channels were diligently watched and kept 
 dear, a large portion of the lake was in the condition of alluvud 
 iand, preeminently rich and fertile. But when the channels cama 
 to be either neglected, or designedly choked up by an enemy, th:» 
 water accumulated to such a degree, as to occupy the soil o^* more 
 than one ancient town, to endanger the position of KopaB, and to 
 occasion the change of the site of Orchomenos itself from th^ 
 plain to the declivity of Mount Hyphanteion. An engineer, 
 Krat^, began the clearance of the obstructed water-courses ic 
 the reign of Alexander the Great, and by his commission — tlie 
 destroyer of Thebes being anxious to reestablish the extinoc 
 prosperity of Orchomenos. He succeeded so far as partially to 
 drain and diminish the lake, whereby the site of more than one 
 ancient city was rendered visible: but the revival of Thebes by 
 Kassander, after the decease of Alexander, arrested the progre« 
 of the undertaking, and the lake soon regained its former dimen- 
 sions, to contract which no farther attempt was made.' 
 
 According to the Theban legend,2 Herakles, after his defeat of 
 Erginus had blocked up the exit of the waters, and converted 
 the Orchomenian plain into a lake. The spreading of these 
 waters is thus connected with the humiliation of the Minyae ; and 
 there can be little hesitation in ascribing to these ancient tenants 
 of Orchomenos, before it became boiotized, the enlargement and 
 preservation of these protective channels. Nor could such an 
 object have been accomplished, without combined action and ac- 
 knowledged ascendency on the part of that city over its neigb- 
 bors, extending even to the sea at Larymna, where the river Kd- 
 phisos discharges itself. Of its extended influence, as well as 
 of its maritime activity, we find a remarkable evidence in the 
 ancient and venerated Amphiktyony at-Kalauria. The little is- 
 
 founding region, which I have placed at the end of tfte second volume of 
 this History. See also jn/m» vol. ii. ch. iii. p. 391. 
 
 • We owe this interesting fact to Strabo, who is however both concw 
 and unsatisfactory, viii. p. 406-407. It was affirmed that there had be«l 
 two ancient towns, named Eleusis and Ath6n8B, originally foinded by Oe- 
 crdps, situated on the lake, and thus overflowed (Steph. Byz. v. 'Ad^iw 
 Diogen. Laort. iv. 23. Pausan. ix. 24, 2). For the plain or mirsh DMT Or 
 ehomenos, see Plutarch, Sylla, c. 20-22. 
 
 •Diod6r.iv. 18. Paosan. ix. 38, 5 
 
 
18t 
 
 HISTORY OP OnSBCK. 
 
 THEBES AND OBCHOMENU&. 
 
 Itt 
 
 land 80 named, near the harbor of Troez^n, m Peloponnesud, wac 
 •acred to Poseidon, and an asylum of inviolable sanctity. At the 
 temple of Poseidon, in Kalaiiria, there had existed, from unknown 
 date, a periodical sacrifice, celebrated by seven cities in common 
 — Hermione, Ef>idaurus, JEgins^ Athens, Prasiae, Nauplia, and 
 the Minyeian Orchomenos. This ancient religious combination 
 dates from the time when Nauplia was independent of Argos, 
 and Prasiae of Sparta : Argos and Sparta, according to the usual 
 practice in Greece, continued to fulfil the obligation each on the 
 part of its respective dependent.' Six out of the seven states are 
 at once sea-towns, and near enough to Kalauria to account for 
 their participation in this Amphiktyony. But the junction ot 
 Orchomenos, from its comparative remoteness, becomes inexpli- 
 cable, except on the supjxjsition that its territory reac^hed the sea, 
 and that it enjoyed a considerable maritime traffic ■ — a fact which 
 helps to elucidate lx)th its legendary connection with lolkos, and 
 its partnership in what is called the Ionic emigration.-^ The my- 
 thical genealogy, whereby Ptoos, Schoeneus and Erythrios are 
 enumerated amono; the sons of Athamas, goes farther to confirm 
 the idea that the towns and localities on the south-east of the 
 lake recognized a fraternal origin with the Orchomenian Minyae, 
 not less than Korooeia and Ilaliartus on the south-west.-' 
 
 The great power of Orchomenos was broken down, and the 
 city reduced to a secondary and half-dependent position by the 
 Boeotians ol* Thebes ; at what time, and under what circumstances, 
 history has not preserved. The story, that the Theban hero, 
 Herakles, rescued his native city from servitude and tribute to 
 Orchomenos, since it comes from a Kadmeian and not from an 
 Orchomenian legend, and since the details of it were favorite 
 subjects of commemoration in the Thebian temples,** aflbrds a 
 presumption that Thebes was really once dependent on Orcho- 
 
 ' iStrabo, viii. p. 374. 'Hi' de Kai ' \fi<(nKrvovia rig Tzepi rd lepdv tovto, inra 
 noXeuv al (lereixov r^i &vaiac ' rjaav 6h 'EpfxiutVf 'En-tdavpof, Alyiva^ 'A^r/vat^ 
 D/oaatetf, Nat/irAtfif, 'Ofi^o/zevof o M.ivveiog. 'YTrep /xev ovv riJv NavirXiii^v 
 *Apyeloi^ imep Upameutv de ^cucedatfiovioi, ^v$TeXovv. 
 
 'Pansan. ix. 17, 1 ; 26, I. 
 
 ' See MuUer, Orchomenos und die Minyer, p. 214. Patisan. ix. SS, • 
 M, 3. The genealogy is as old as the poet Asiot. 
 
 < Hero-* i. 146. Paasan. rii. 2, 2. 
 
 ■wnoB. Moreover the savage mutilations inflicted by the hero 
 OQ the tribute-seeking envoys, so faithfully portrayed in his sup- 
 name Rhinokoloustes, infuse into the mythe a portion of that 
 bitter feeling which so long prevailed between Thebes and Or- 
 chomcmos, and which led the Thebans, as soon as the battle of 
 Leuc/ ra had placed supremacy in their hands, to destroy and de- 
 populate their rival.' The ensuing generation saw the same fate 
 retorted upon Thebes, combined with the restoration of Orcho- 
 menos. The legendary grandeur of this city continued, long 
 after it had ceased to be distinguished for wealth and power, im- 
 perishably recorded both in the minds of the nobler citizens and 
 in the compositions of the poets ; the emphatic language of Paa- 
 ■anias shows how much he found concerning it in the old epic« 
 
 SECTION n.-DATTGHTERS OF ^OLITS. 
 
 With several of the daughters of ^iolus memorable mythical 
 pedigrees and narratives are connected. Alcyene married Keyx, 
 the son of Eosphoros, but both she and her husband dispkyed 
 in a high degree the overweening insolence common in the -^Eolic 
 race. The wife called her husband Z««s, while he addressed her 
 as Here, for which presumjituous act Zeus punished them by 
 changing both into birds.3 
 
 Canace had by the god Poseidon several children, amongst 
 
 » Theocrit. xvi. 104. — 
 
 'Q 'EreoKXeioi ^vyarpec &tai, al Mitweiov 
 'OpXOftevov ifn'kioKjai, anex'^opievav ttokg OifSai^. 
 
 The scholiast gives a sense to these words much narrower than they really 
 bear. See Diodor. xv. 79; Paasan. ix. 15. In the oration which Isokratii 
 places in the mouth of a Plataean, complaining of the oppressions of Thebet, 
 the ancient servitude and tribute to Orchomenos is cast in the teeth of the 
 Thebans (Isokrat Orat Plataic. vol. UL p. 32, Auger). 
 
 « Pausan. ix. 34, 5. See also the fourteenth Olympic Ode of Pindar, ad- 
 dressed to the Orchomenian Asopikus. The learned and instructive work 
 of K. O. Miiller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, embodies everything which 
 can be known respecting this ooce- memorable city; indeed the contents of 
 the work extends much farther than its title promises. 
 
 » Apollodor. i. 7, 4. A. Keyx, — king of Trachin, — the friend of Herakldt 
 ■id protector of the Herakleids to the extent of his power (Hcsiod. 8c* 
 Hercul. 355-473 : ApoUoddr. ii. 7, 5 ; Hekat«. Fragm. 353, DidoC). 
 
id6 
 
 HISTO lY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE QIQANTIO ALOIDtft. 
 
 Iff 
 
 whom were Ep6p«eus and AloeusJ Aloeus married Imphimedea, 
 who became enamored of the god Poseidon, and boasted of her 
 intimacy with him. She had by him two son^, Otos and Kphi- 
 altes, the huge and formidable Aloids, — Titanic beings, nine 
 fathoms in height and nine cubits in breadth, even in their boy- 
 hood, before they ha<l attained their full strength. These Aloids 
 deiied and insulted the gods in Olympus ; they paid their court 
 to Here and Artemis, and they even seized and bound Ares, 
 confining him in a. brazen chamber for thirteen months. No one 
 knew where he was, and the intolerable chain would have worn 
 him to death, had not Eriba3^^ the jealous stepmother of the 
 Aloids, revealed the place of liis detention to Hermes, who carried 
 him sun-eptitiously away when at the last extremity ; nor could 
 Ares obtain any atonement for such an indignity. Otus and 
 Ephialtes even prepared to assault the gods in heaven, piling up 
 Ossa on Olympus and Pel ion on Ossa, in order to reach them. 
 And this they would have accomplished had they been allowed 
 to grow to their lull maturity ; but the arrows of Apollo put a 
 timely end to their short-lived career.^ 
 
 ' Canacd, danjjhtcr of MoIuh, is a subject of deep tragical interest both in 
 Eoripid^ and Ovid. The eleventh Heroic P^pistie of the latter, founded 
 mainly on the lost tragedy of the former called ^Eolus, purports to be from 
 Canace to Macareus, and contains a pathetic description of the ill-fated pas- 
 sion between a brother and sister: see the fragments of the ^olus in Din- 
 dorf s collection. In the tale of Kannos and Byblis, both children of Mil6t06, 
 the results of an incestuous passion are different but hardly less melancholy 
 (Ptirthenios, Narr. xi). 
 
 Makar, the son of vEolns, is the primitive settler of the island of Lesbos 
 (Horn, Hymn. Apoll. .37) : moreover in the Odyssey, .^Eolus son of Hippotes, 
 the dispenser of the winds, has six sons and six daughters, and marries 
 the former to the latter (Odyss. x. 7). The two persons called ^olus are 
 brought into connection genealogically (see Schol- ad Odyss. I. c, and Dio' 
 dor. iv. 67), but it seems probable that Euripides was the first to place the 
 names of Macareus and Canace in that relation which confers upon them 
 their poetical celebrity. Sostratus (ap. Stobaeum, t. 614, p. 404) can hardly 
 be considered to h»ve borrowed from any older source than Euripidds 
 Welcker (Griech. Trsigod. vol. ii. p. 860) puts together all that ca i be known 
 respecting the structoire of the loit drama of Euripides. 
 
 ■ Iliad, V. 386 ; Odyss. xi. 306 ; Apollodor. i. 7. 4. So Typhc'ieus, in the 
 Hcsiodic Theogony. ithe last enemy of the gods, is killed before he comei 
 to maturity (Theog. 'J37). For the diffti.-ent turns given ti> this ancient Hq 
 
 The genealogy assigned to Calyce, another daughter of .^x>lui^ 
 conducts us from Thessaly to Elis and ^tolia. She married 
 Aethlius (the son of Zeus by Protogeneia, daughter of Deukalion 
 and sister of Hellen), who conducted a colony out of Thessaly 
 and settled in the territory of Elis. He had for his son Endy- 
 mion, respecting whom the Hesiodic Catalogue and the Eoiai 
 related several wonderful things. Zeus granted him the privilege 
 of determining the hour of his own death, and even translated 
 him into heaven, which he forfeited by daring to pay court to 
 Here: his vision in this criminal attempt was cheated by a cloud, 
 and he was cast out into the under- world.' According to other 
 
 meric legend, see Heyne, ad Apollodor. 1. c.,and Uyginus.f. 28. The A16idii 
 were noti<e<l in the Hesiodic poems (ap. Schol. Apoll. Khod. i.482). Odys 
 sens does not see them in Hades, as Heyne by misUike says; he sees their 
 mother Iphimedea. Virgil (vEn. ri. 582) assigns to them a place among the 
 Butlerers of punishment in Tartarus. 
 
 Eumelus, the Corinthian poet, designated Aloeus as son of the god Helioe 
 and brother of ^etes, the father of Mfidea (Eumel. Fragm. 2, Marktscheffel). 
 The scene of their death was subsequently laid in Naxos ( I'indar, Pyth. iv. 
 88) : their tombs were seen at Anthedon in Boeotia (Tausan. ix. 22, 4). The 
 very curious legend alluded to by Pausanias from Hegesinoos, the author of 
 an Atthis, — to the effect that Otos and Ephialtes were the first to establish 
 the worship of the Muses in Helicon, and that they founded Ascra along with 
 GEoklos, the son of Poseidon, — is one which we have no means of tracing 
 &rther (Pausan. ix. 29, I). 
 
 The story of the Aloids, as Diodorus gives it (v. 51, 52), diverges on 
 almost every point : it is evidently borrowed from some Naxian archaeologist, 
 and the only information which we collect from it is, that Otos and Ephialt^ 
 received heroic honors at Naxos. The views of O. MuUer (Orchomenos, p. 
 387 ) appear to me unusually vague and fanciful 
 
 Ephialtes takes part in the combat of the giants against the gOds (Apollo- 
 dor. t. 6, 2), where Heyne remarks, as in so many other cases, " Ephialte^s hie 
 non confundendus cum altero Aloei filio ; " an observation just indeed, if we 
 are supposed to be dealing with personages and adventures historically real, 
 but altogether misleading in regard to these legendary characters ; for here 
 the general conception of Ephialtes and his attributes is in both cases the 
 same ; but the particular adventures ascribed to him cannot be made to coB- 
 fist, as facts, one with the other. 
 
 » Hesiod, Akusilaus and Pherekydes, ap. Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv, 57. 
 Iv (5' avT(^ ^avuTov rafum. The Scholium is very full Df matter, and es 
 kibits many of the diversities in the tile of Endjmion : see also ApoUo46t 
 L 7, 5 ; Pausan. v. 1, 2 ; Conon. Narr. 14. 
 
 \ 
 
I 
 
 m 
 
 BISTORT OF 6IIKECB. 
 
 ilories, his great beauty caused the goddess Sdl^ne to beomie en* 
 mored of him, and to visit him by night during his sleep: — the 
 deep of Endymion became a proverbial expression for enviable, 
 ondisturbed, and deathless repose.^ Endymion had for issue 
 (Pausanias gives us three different accounts, and Apollodorus a 
 fourth, of the name of his wife) Epeios, ^tolus. Paeon, and a 
 daughter Eurylcyde. He caused his three sons to run a race on 
 the stadium at Olympia, and Epeios, being victorious, was re- 
 warded by becoming his successor in the kingdom : it was after 
 him that the people were denominated Epeians. 
 
 Both the story here mentioned, and still more, the etymologi 
 cal si^ificatioii of the names Aethlius and Endymion, seem 
 plainly to indicate (as has before been remarked) that this gene- 
 alogy was not devised until after the Olympic games had become 
 celebrated and notorious throughout Greece. 
 
 Epeios had no male issue, and was succeeded by his nephew 
 Eleios, son of liiuykyde by the god Poseidon : the name of the 
 people was then changed from Epeians to Eleians. ^tolus, the 
 brother of Epeios, having slain Apis, son of Phoroneus, was com- 
 pelled to flee from the country : he crossed the Corinthian gulf 
 and settled in the ten-itory then called Kuretis, but to which he 
 gave the name of -^tolia.^ 
 
 The son of Eleios, — or, according to other accounts, of the 
 god Helios, of Poseidon, or of Phorb{is,3 — is Augeaa, whom we 
 find mentioned in the Iliad as king of the Ef)eians or Eleians. 
 Nestor gives a long and circumstantial narrative of hii own ex- 
 ploits at tlie head of his Pylian countrymen against his neighbors 
 the Epeians an.l their king Augeas, whom he defeated with great 
 loss, slaying Miilios, the king's son-in-law, and acquiring a vast 
 
 » Theocrit. iii 49 ; xx. 35 ; where, however, Endymion is connected with 
 Latinos in Caria {me SchfA. ad loc). 
 
 * Pausan. v. I. ;J-6-, Apollodor. i. 7, 6. 
 
 » Apollodor. ii. 5, 5; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 172. In all probability, thfl 
 «ld legend made A u<,'eas the son of the god Helioa : Helios, Augesis and Aga^ 
 aifede are a triple j-eries parallel to the Corinthian genealogy, Helios. jEetea 
 Aod Media ; not to mention that the etjraology of Augeas connects him 
 frith HMios. Tbtsocritas (xx. 55) designates him as the son of the god He- 
 Bos, through whose favor his cattle are made to prosper and multiply ^th 
 3'joh astonis? ing saccesa (xx. 117). 
 
 ELEIAN GENEALOGY. 
 
 13t 
 
 booty .1 Augeas was rich in all sorts of rural wealth, and pos- 
 sessed herds of cattle so numerous, that the dung of the animals 
 accumulated in the stable or cattle enclosures beyond all power 
 of endurance. Eurystheus, as an insult to Herakles, imposed 
 upon him the obligation of cleansing this stable : the hero, dis- 
 daining to carry off the dung upon his shoulders, turned the course 
 of the river Alpheios through the building, and thus swept the 
 encumbrance away .2 But Augeas, in spite of so signal a ser- 
 vice, refused to Herakles the promised reward, though his son 
 Phyleus protested against such treachery, and when he found that 
 he could not induce his father to keep faith, retired in sorrow 
 and wrath to the island of Dulichi6n.3 To avenge the deceit 
 practised upon him, Herakles invaded Elis; but Augeas had 
 powerful auxiliaries, especially his nephews, the two Molionidg 
 (sons of Poseidon by Molione, the wife of Aktor), Eurytos and 
 Kteatos. These two miraculous brothers, of transcendent force, 
 grew together, — having one body, but two heads and four arms.^ 
 
 ' Iliad, xi. 670-760 ; Pherekyd. Fragm. 57, Didot. 
 
 • Dioddr, iv. 13. 'T/^pewf iveKev Evpvff^ei}^ irpoaira^e Ka^dpai • 6 Se *Hpo- 
 (cAf/f rd fjhf Tolg ufioic t^eveyKelv avrrjv direSoKifiaaiv, IkkXIvuv r^v U rvf 
 O/Jpfcjf alaxvvvv, etc. (Pausan. v. 1. 7 ; Apollodor. ii. 5, 5). 
 
 It may not be improper to remark that this fable indicates a purely pasto 
 ral condition, or at least a singularly rude state of agriculture ; and the way 
 in which Pausanias recounts it goes even beyond the genuine story : wf koI 
 TO, TToXku TTj^ X'^P^C avTCi t/Stj diareXelv upyu bvra vnb tuv (ioaKTjfidruv rfj^ 
 Kowpov. The slaves of Odysseus however know what use to make of the 
 dung heaped before his outer fence (Odyss. xvii. 299) ; not so the purely 
 carnivorous and pastoral Cycldps (Odyss. ix. 329). The stabling into which 
 the cattle go from their pasture, is called Koirpo^ in Homer, — 'EMoixjnc tf 
 KOTTpov, krr^v fioravfi^ Kopeauvrai (Odyss. x. 411) : compare Iliad, xviii. 575 
 — MvKfj^fiifi J' and Koirpov tireaaevovTo TreSovSe. 
 
 The Augeas of Theocritus has abundance of wheat-land and vineyard, as 
 well as cattle : he ploughs his land three or four times, and digs Ms vine- 
 yard diligently (xx. 20-32). 
 
 ' The wrath and retirement of Phyleus is mentioned in the Iliad (ii. 633), 
 but not the cause of it. 
 
 * These singular properties were ascribed to them both in the Hesiodic 
 poems and by Pherekydes (Schol. Ven. ad II. xi. 715-7.50, et ad H. xxiil 
 •38), but not in the Hiad. The poet Ibykos (Fragm. 1 1 , Schneid. ap. Athenie. 
 ii. 57) calls thent aAi/cof iaoKe<pd^ovi, hiyviovg, ^Afj.<l>OTsqovg yeyadra^ h 
 ue(f) dpyvpi(f}. 
 
 There were temples and divine honors to Zeus Molion (Lactantins. dff 
 FalsA Rcligionc. i. 22) 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
iiO 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE 
 
 II 
 
 Such was their irresistible might, that HeraklSs was defeated 
 ftnd repelled fit)m Elis : but presently the Eleians sent the two 
 Molionid brothers as Theori (sacred envoys) to the Isthmiap 
 games, and Herakles, placing himself ti ambush at Klednae, sur- 
 prised and kilUid them as they passed through. For this murder- 
 ous act the Ehjians in vain endeavored to obtain redress both at 
 Corinth and at Argoe ; which is assigned as the reason for the 
 lelf-ordained exclusion, prevalent throughout all the historical 
 age, that no Eleian athlete would ever present himself as a com- 
 petitor at the Isthmian games.' The Molionids being thus re- 
 moved, Herakles again invaded Elis, and killed Augeas along 
 with his children,— all except Phyleus, whom he brought over 
 from Dulichion, and put in possession of his father's kingdom. Ao- 
 eording to the more gentle narrative which Pausanias adopts, Au- 
 geas was not killed, but pardoned at the request of Phyleus.2 He 
 wa«* worshipped as a hero^ even down to the time of that aothor. 
 
 It was on occasion of this conquest of Elis, according to the old 
 mythe which Pindar has ennobled in a magnificent ode, that 
 Herakles first consecrated the ground of Olympia, and established 
 the Olympic gjimes. Such at least was one of the many fables 
 respecting the origin of that memorable institution.^ 
 
 Phyleus, after having restored order in Elis, retired again to 
 Dulichion, and left the kingdom to his brother Agasthen^s, which 
 again brings us into the Homeric series. For Polyxenos, son of 
 Agasthenes, is one of the four commanders of the Epeian forty 
 ships in the Iliad, in conjunction with the two sons of EorytOB 
 
 • Paustui. V. 2, 4. The inticription cited by Pausanias proves that this wa8 
 tlie reason assigntid by the Eleian athletes themselves for the exclusion ; bat 
 there were several different stories. 
 
 • Apollodor. ii. 7, 2. Diodor. iv. 33. Pausan. v. 2, 2 5 3, 2. It seems eri- 
 dcnt from these accounts that the genuine legend represented Herakles m 
 having been dt-fcau'd !>y the Molionids . the unskilful evasions both of Apol* 
 lodorus and Dio<l«»rus betray this. Pindar ('Olyrap. xi. 25-50) gives the story 
 without any flatteiy to Herakles. 
 
 * Pansan. t. 4, I. 
 
 * The Amenian copy of Eusebius gires a different genealogy respectfaig 
 Elis and Pisa : A^'thlius, Epeius, Endymion, Alexinus ; next (Enomaas voA 
 Pclops, then H^rakl^ Some counted ien generations, others three, betwMl 
 Herakles and Iphitus, who renewed the discontinued Olympic garnet {••• 
 
 Eoaeb. cc py c. xxxii. p. 140). 
 
 EPEIANS AND ELEIANS. 
 
 141 
 
 «nd Kteatos, and with DidrSs son of Amarynceus. Meges, th« 
 Bon oi Phyleus, commands the contingent from Dulichion and the 
 Echinades.1 Polyxenos returns safe from Troy, is succeeded by 
 his son Amphi machos, — named after the Epeian chief who had 
 follen before Troy, — and he again by another Eleios, in whose 
 time the Dorians and the Herakleids invade Peloponnesus.* 
 These two names, barren of actions or attributes, are probably 
 introduced by the genealogists whom Pausanias followed, to till 
 up the supposed interval between the Trojan war and the Dorian 
 invasion. 
 
 We find the ordinary discrepancies in respect to the series and 
 the members of this genealogy. Thus some called Epeios son of 
 Aethlius, others son of Endymion :^ a third pedigree, which car 
 ries the sanction of Aristotle and is followed by Conon, designated 
 Eleios, the first settler of Ehs, as son of Poseidon and Eurypyle, 
 daughter of Endymion, and Epeios and Alexis as the two sons of 
 Eleio8.4 And Pindar himself, in his ode to Epharmostus the 
 Locrian, introduces with much emphasis another king of the 
 Epeians named Opus, whose daughter, pregnant by Zeus, was 
 conveyed by that god to the old and childless king Locrus : the 
 child when bom, adopted by Locrus and named Opus, became the 
 ei)onymous hero of the city so called in Locris.s Moreover Heka- 
 taeus the Milesian not only affirmed (contrary both to the Iliad 
 and the Odyssey) that the Epeians and the Eleians were different 
 people, but also added that the Epeians had assisted Herakles in 
 his expedition against Augeas and Elis ; a narrative very differ- 
 ent from that of Apollodorus and Pausanias, and indicating besides 
 that he must have had before him a genealogy varying from 
 theirs.^ 
 
 It has already been mentioned that jEtolus, son of Endymion, 
 
 » niad, a 615-630. 
 
 ' Schol. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 86. 
 
 ' Pansan. v. 3, 4. 
 
 * Schol. Yen. ad IL xi. 687 ; Conon, Narratxv.ap. Scriptt. Mythogr. Wett 
 p. 130. 
 
 * Pindar, Olymp. ix. 62: Schol. ibid. 86. ^Ottovvto^ riv ^yarrfp 'HXctwr 
 ScUTiXecjc, ^v 'ApiaroreXijc KafifSvffijv KaXel. 
 
 * E/taraiof 6e 6 MiX^atoc irepovc Xeyei rdv 'HAe/wv rot)f 'ETrciWf • r^ yw* 
 HpaKXti ovarparevaaL roii^ 'ETretovf Koi awavekeiv abr^ rov re Aiyiav Koi 
 rifv 'HW (Hekat ap. Strab. viiL p. 341)- 
 
 I . 
 
142 
 
 msTomr op oseecb. 
 
 althjEa and meleager. 
 
 141 
 
 quitted Peloponn^us in consequence of having slain Apis.! The 
 oountrjr on the north of the Corinthian gulf, between the rivers 
 F.uenus and Achelous, received from him the name of ^tolia 
 instead of that oi'Kuretis . he acquired possession of it after having 
 alain Dorus, Laodokus and Polypoates, sons of Apollo and Phthia, 
 by whom he had be«n well received. He had by his wife Pronoe 
 (the daughter ol" Pborba^) two sons, Pleuron and Kalydon, and 
 from them the two chief towns in ^tolia were naraed.^ Pleuron 
 married Xanthippe, daughter of Dorus, and had for his son Ag§- 
 nor, from whom sprang Portheus, or Porthaoii, and Demonike : 
 £uenos and TliesLius were children of the latter by the god 
 Ares.-' 
 
 Portheus had three sons, Agnus, Melas and CEneus : among 
 the offspring of riiestius were Althasa and Leda,* — names which 
 bring us to a period of interest in the legendary history. Leda 
 marries Tyndan^us and beoomes mother of Helena and the Dios- 
 curi: Alth;£a marries CEneus, and has, among other children, 
 Meleager and JDeianeira; the latter being begotten by the god 
 Dionysus, and the former by Ares.^ Tydeus also is his son, the 
 
 * Epliorus said that ^tolas had been expelled by Salmoneas king of the 
 Ept'iaa^ and Pisata (ap. Strabo. viii. p. 357 j : he must have had before him a 
 different story and different genealogy from that which is given in the text 
 
 * Apollodor. i. 7, 6. Dorus, son of A{X)llo and Phthia, killed by ^tolos, 
 after having hospitably received him, is here mentioned. Nothing at all is 
 known of this ; but the conjunction of names is such as to render it probaUe 
 that there wa^ soone legend connected with them : possibly the assistance 
 given by Apollo to the Ktirctes against the ^tolians, and the death of Melea- 
 ger by the hand of Apollo, related both in the Eoiai and the Minyas CPausan. x. 
 31, 2), may haveVen grounded upon it. The story connects itself with what 
 is stated by Apollodorus about Dorus son of Hellen (see sitpra, p. 136). 
 
 ' According to the ancient genealogical poet Asius, ThestiiLs was son of 
 Ag^nor the son of Pleuron CAsii Fragm. 6, p 413, ed. Marktsch.). Compare 
 the genealogy of ^Ctolia and the general remarks upon it, in Brandstater, 
 Gcschichte des ^Etcil. Landes, etc., Berlin, 1844, p. 23 seq. 
 
 * Respecting Lcda, see the statements of Ibykus, Phcrekyd^, Hellanikus, 
 etc. CSchol. Apollon. Rhod. i. 146). The reference to the Corinth iaca of 
 Eumelos is curious : it is a specimen of the matters upon which these old 
 genealogical poems dwelt 
 
 •Apollodor. i. 8, 1; Euripides, Meleager, IVag. 1. The three sons of 
 Portheus are named in the Iliad (xiv. 116) as living at Pleuron and KalydAa 
 The name CEneuB doubtless brings Diooysoa into the legend. 
 
 fcther of Diom^d^s : warlike eminence goes Land in hand with 
 tragic calamity among the members of this memorable family. 
 
 We are fortunate enough to find the legend of Althaea and 
 Meleager set forth at considerable length in the Hiad, in the 
 Bpeeeh addressed by Phoenix to appease the wrath of Achilles. 
 CEneus, king of Kalydon, in the vintage sacrifices which he offered 
 to the gods, omitted to include Artemis : the misguided man either 
 forgot her or cared not foi her;i and the goddess, provoked by 
 •uch an insult, sent against the vineyards of CEneus a wild boar, of 
 vast size and strength, who tore up the trees by the root and laid 
 prostrate all their fruit. So terrible was this boar, that nothing less 
 than a numerous body of men could venture to attack him : Melea- 
 ger, the son of CEneus, however, having got together a consider- 
 able number of companions, partly from the Kui^tes of Pleuron, at 
 length slew him. But the anger of Artemis was not yet appeased, 
 and she raised a dispute among the combatants respecting the pos- 
 session of the boar's head and hide, — the trophies of victory. In 
 this dispute, Meleager slew the brother of his mother Althaea, prince 
 of the Kuretes of Pleur6n : these Kuretes attacked the JEtolians 
 of Kalydon in order to avenge their chief. So long as Meleager 
 contended in the field the Italians had the superiority. But he 
 presently refused to come forth, indignant at the curses impre- 
 cated upon him by his mother: for Althaea, wrung with sorrow 
 for the death of her brother, flung herself upon the ground in 
 tears, beat the earth violently with her hands, and implored 
 Hades and Persephone to inflict death upon Meleager, — a prayer 
 which the unrelenting Erinnys in Erebus heard but too well. So 
 keenly did the hero resent this behavior of his mother, that he 
 kept aloof from the war; and the Kuretes not only drove the 
 -Italians from the field, but assailed the walls and gates of Kaly- 
 ddn, and were on the point of overwhelming its dismayed * ' ' '. 
 tants. There was no hope of safety except in the arm of ^ 
 ger ; but Meleager lay in his chamber by the side of his beaiitiful 
 wife Kleopatra, the daughter of Idas, and heeded not the necessity. 
 
 ' *H Xa^eT\ ^ ovK kvorjaev • uaaaaro dh fieya ^^^ (Hiad, ix. 533). The dt 
 «rmctive influence of At§ is mentioned before, v. 502. The piety of Xenophon 
 reprof'.aoes this ancient circumstanoe, — Olvcwf (F h -pip^ inujo&uiivcv n^ 
 ^•i, etc (De Venat c. i) 
 
 Vol 1 8 
 
 i\. « 
 
 
 \ 
 
 i 
 
 h 
 
 \ 
 
 ■'\ 
 
144 
 
 rflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 \ 
 
 While the shouts of expected victory were heard from the assail* 
 anU at the gates, i-he ancient men of ^tolia and the priests ot the 
 gods earnestly besought Meleager to come forth," offering him his 
 choice of the fattest land in the plain of Kalydon. His dearest 
 friends, his father CEneus, his sisters, and even his mother herself 
 added their supplications, but he remained inflexible. At length 
 the Kuretes penetrated into the town and began to burn it ; at 
 this last moment, Kleopatra his wife addressed to him her pathetic 
 appeal, to avert from her and from his family the desperate hor- 
 rors impending over them all. Meleager could no longer resist 
 he put on his armor, went forth from his chamber, and repelled 
 the enemy. But when the danger was over, his countrymen with- 
 held from him the splendid presents which they had promised, 
 because he had rejected their prayers, and had come forth only 
 when his own haughty caprice dictated.^ 
 
 Such is the legend of Meleager in the Iliad : a verse in the 
 iecond book mentions simply the death of Meleager, without far- 
 ther details, as a reason why Thoas appeared in command of the 
 jEtOlians before Troy? Though the circumstance is indicated only 
 indirectly, there seems little doubt that Homer must have con- 
 ceived the death of the hero as brought about by the maternal 
 curse : the unrelenting Erinnys executed to the letter the invocar 
 tions of Althiea, though she herself must liave been willing to re- 
 tract them. 
 
 Later poets both enlarged and altered the fable. The Hesi- 
 odic Eoiai, as well as the old poem called the Minyas, represented 
 Meleager as liaving been slain by Apollo, who aided the Kuretes 
 in the 'war; and the incident of the burning brand, though quite 
 at variance with Homer, is at least as old as the tragic poet Phry- 
 nichus, eariier than ^schylus.^ The Moerae, or Fates, presenting 
 themselves to Althaea shortly after the birth of Meleager, pre- 
 dicted that the child would die so soon as the brand then burning 
 an the fire near at hand should be consumed. Althaea snatched 
 It from the flames and extinguished it, preserving it with the 
 ttmost care, until she became incensed against Meleager for th€ 
 
 » These priests formed the Chorus in the Meleager of SophoklesCSchol 
 •d Iliad, ib. 575). 
 
 • niad, ix. 525-595. ' Il'f<^- » ^* 
 
 ^ Paoiiaii. X. 31. Sl The IXtvpuviai, a lost tra^y of Phrynichw 
 
 > '■ 
 
 1 
 
 KALYDONIAN BOAR. 
 
 146 
 
 death of her brother. She then cast it into the fipt, and as sooo 
 AS it was consumed the life of Meleager was brought to a close. 
 
 We know, from the sharp censure of Pliny, that Sophokles 
 heightened the pathos of this subject by his account of the mourn- 
 ful death of Meleager's sisters, who perished from excess of grief. 
 They were changed into the birds called Meleagrides, and their 
 never-ceasing teai-s ran together into amber.' But in the hands 
 of Euripides — whether originally through him or not,'-^ we can- 
 not tell — Atalanta became the prominent figure and motive of 
 the piece, while the party convened to hunt the Kalydonian boar 
 was made to comprise all the distinguished heroes from every 
 quarter of Greece. In fact, as Heyne justly remarks, this event 
 is one of the four aggregate dramas of Grecian heroic life,3 along 
 with the Argonautic expedition, the siege of Thebes, and the Ti-o- 
 jan war. To accomplish the destruction of the terrific animal 
 which Artemis in her wrath had sent forth, Meleager assembled 
 not merely the choice youth among the Kuretes and ^tolians (as 
 we fine in the Iliad), but an illustrious troop, including Kastor and 
 Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus, Peleus and Telamdn, Theseus and 
 Peirithous, Anka^us and Kepheus, Jason, Amphiaraus, Admetus, 
 EurytiOn and others. Nestor and Phoenix, who ap|)ear as old 
 men before the walls of Troy, exhibited their early prowess as 
 auxiliaries to the suffering Kalydonians.^ Conspicuous amidst 
 them all stood the virgin Atalanta, daughter of the Arcadian 
 
 ' Plin. H. N. xxxvii. 2, 11. 
 
 * There was a tragedy of ^schylus called 'Aralavrrj, of which nothing 
 remains (^othe, ^schyli Fra^^m. ix. p. \S). 
 
 Of the more recent dramatic writers, several selected Atalanta as their 
 TOhject CSee Brandstater, Geschichte ^toliens, p. 65). 
 
 * There was a poem of Stesichoras, 2v6i^7pat (Stesichor. Fragm. 15. n 
 
 * The catalogue of these heroes is in Apollodor. i 8, 2; Ovid, Metemor. 
 Tiii. 300 ; Hygin. fab. 173. Eoripidls, in his play of Meleager, gave an ena- 
 meration and description of the heroes Csee Fragm. 6 of that play, ed. Matth.> 
 Nestdr, in this picture of Ovid, however, does not appear qaite so invincible 
 •8 in his own speeches in the Iliad. The mythographers thought it necea- 
 •ary to assiprn a reason why Herakl^s was not present at the Kalydonian 
 adventure : he was just at that time in servitude with Omphald in Lydia 
 fApollod. ii. 6, 3). This seems to have been the idea of Ephoms, and it is 
 ■nch m his style of interpretation (see Ephor. Pragm. 9, ed. Didot.). 
 
 TOL. I. 7 lOoc. 
 
 N: 
 
 » ■',1, 
 
 * .1 
 
 
 /I 
 
 , 
 
 •< 
 
 ' i 
 
 J 
 
146 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 'ii 
 
 Schoeneus ; beautiful and matchless for swiftness of foot, but living 
 in the forest as a huntress and unacceptable to Aphrodite.' Seve- 
 ml of the heroes were slain by the boar, others escaped by va- 
 rious stratac^ems : at length Atalanta first ^hot him in the hack, 
 next Amphiaraus in the eye, and, lastly, Meleajrer killed him. 
 Enamoured of the beauty of Atalanta, Meleager made over to her 
 the jhief si)oil.s of the animal, on the plea that she had inflicted 
 the first wound. But his uncles, the brothers of Thestius, took 
 them away from her, asserting their rights as next of kin,2 if Me- 
 leager declined to keep the prize for himself: the latter, exaspe- 
 rated at this behavior, slew them. Althaa, in deep sorrow for 
 her brothers and v/rath against her son, is impelled to produce 
 the fatal brand which she had so long treasured up, and consign it 
 to the flames.^ The tragedy concludes with the voluntary death 
 both of Althiea and Kleopatra. 
 
 Interesting as tht; Arcadian huntress, Atalanta, is in herself, 
 she is an intrusion, and not a very convenient intrusion, into the 
 Homeric story of the Kalydonian boar-hunt, wherein another 
 female Kleopatra, already occuj)ied the foreground.^ But ihe 
 more recent version became accredited throughout Greece, and 
 
 ' Euripid. Meleag. l-raKni- vi. Matt. — 
 
 KvirpUoc de (iiai]fi, 'KpK(iq 'AraAavr;;, Kin>aq 
 
 l^al TO-* ^xovaa, etc. 
 There was a drama ' Meleager " both of Soi)hokles and Euripides : of th« 
 former hardly any frapments remain, — a few more of the latter. 
 
 • Hyjrinus. fab. 229. 
 
 ' Diodor, iv. 34. Apollodorus (i. 8 ; 2-4) given fir8l the usual narrative, in- 
 cluding Atalanta; next, the Homeric narrative with some additional circom- 
 Btanoes, hat not including either Atalanta or the fire-brand on which Melea- 
 per's life depended. He prefaces the latter with the words oi Je (paai, etc 
 Antoniniii Liberalis gives this second narrative only, without Atalanta, from 
 
 Nicander CNarrat. 2). 
 
 The Latin scenic pjet, Attius, had devoted one of his tragedies to thi» 
 subjocr, takinc; the general story as given by Euripides : " Reraanet gloria 
 apud me : exuvias dipnavi Atalantse dare," seems to be the speech of Melea- 
 gcr. (Attii Frasrm. 8. ap. Poet. Seen. Lat. ed. Bothe, p. 215). The readen 
 of the ^neid will naturally think of the swift and warlike virgin Camilla, ai 
 die parallel of Atalanta 
 
 * The narrative of Apolloddrng reads awkwardly — MfXeaypof lx<^t 
 yvvaiKa KAeora'pav, iovAofievog 6k Kal ii 'AraAavrryf reKvoiroitiaaff^ai* et« 
 
 ri; 
 
 ATALANTA- 
 
 149 
 
 was sustained by evidence which few persons in those days feh 
 any inclination to controvert. For Atalanta carried away with her 
 the spoils and head of the boar into Arcadia ; and there for sue 
 cessive centuries huns: the identical hide and the gigantic tusks 
 of three feet in length, in the temple of Athene Alea at Tcgea 
 Kallimachus mentions them as being there preserved, in the third 
 century before the Christian aara ;' but the extraordinary value set 
 upon them is best proved by the fact that the emperor Augustus 
 took away the tusks from Tegea, along with the great statue of 
 Athene Alea, and conveyed them to Rome, to be there preserved 
 among the public curiosities. Even a century and a half after- 
 wards, when Pausanias visited Greece, the skin worn out with 
 age was shown to him, while the robbery of the tusks had not 
 been forgotten. Nor were these relicts of the boar the only me- 
 mento preserved at Tegea of the heroic enterprise. On the 
 pediment of the temple of Athene Alea, unparalleled in Pelo- 
 ponnesus for beauty and grandeur, the illustrious statuary Skopas 
 had executed one of his most finished reliefs, representing the 
 KalydOnian hunt. Atalanta and Meleager were placed in the 
 front rank of the assailants, and Ankaeus, one of the Tegean 
 heroes, to whom the tusks of the boar had proved fatal,^ was 
 represented as sinking under his death- wound into the arms of 
 his brother Epochos. And Pausanias observes, that the Tegeans, 
 while they had manifested the same honorable forwardness as 
 other Arcadian communities in the conquest of Troy, the repulse 
 of Xerxes, and the battle of Dipae against Sparta — might fairly 
 claim to themselves, through Ankaeus and Atalanta, that they 
 alone amongst all Arcadians had participated in the glory of the 
 KalydOnian boar-hunt.3 So entire and unsuspecting is the faith 
 
 » Kallimachus, Hymn, ad Dian. 217.— 
 
 Oil fiiv IttikXijtol KaXvSuvioi aypevrrfpe^ 
 yLifi4>ovTai KiinpoLo * rd, yiip aijfiijia vi/ciyf 
 "kpnaAirjv eioijWEv, ix^i d' in i^pdf oSovraC' 
 
 * See Pherekyd. Frag. 81, ed. Didot. 
 
 ' Pausan. viii. 45, 4; 46, 1-3; 47, 2. Lucian, adv. Indoctum, c. 14. t HL 
 
 p. Ill, Reiz. 
 
 The officers placed in charge of the public curiosities or wonders at Room 
 iol M Tolc ^avuaaiv) affirmed that one of the tusks had been accidentallf 
 
 f 
 
 '* 
 
 ! 
 
148 
 
 MISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ^ 
 
 I 
 
 III 
 
 both of the Tegean^i and of Pausanias in the past historical real' 
 itj of this ramantic adventure. Strabo indeed tries to transform 
 the romance into something which has the outward semblance of 
 history, by remarking that the quarrel respecting the boar's head 
 and hide cannot have been the real cause of war between the 
 Kuretes and the iEtolians ; the true ground of dispute (he con- 
 tends) was probably the possession of a portion of territory.' His 
 remarks on this hea«l are analogous to those of Thucydides and 
 other critics, when tliey ascribe the Trojan war, not to the rape of 
 Helen, but to views of conquest or political apprehensions. But 
 he treats the general fact of the battle between the Kuretes and 
 the JEtolians, mentioned in the Iliad, as something unquestiona- 
 bly real and historical — recapitulating at the same time a va- 
 riety of discrepancies on the part of different authors, but not 
 giving any decision of his own respecting their truth or false- 
 hood. 
 
 In the same manner as Atalanta wa^ intruded into the Kaly- 
 donian hunt, so also she seems to have been introduced into the 
 memorabie funeral games celebrated after the decease of Pelias 
 at lolkos in which she had no [)lace at the time when the works 
 on the c^iest of Kypselus were executed.- But her native and 
 genuine locality is Arcadia ; where her race-course, near to the 
 town of Methydrion, was shown even in tlie days of Pausanias.^ 
 This race-course had been the scene of destruction for more than 
 
 broken in the voyage from Greece : the other was kept in the temple of Bac- 
 chus in the Imj>enal (lardens. 
 
 It is numbered anionjij the memorable exploits of Thrseu.'* that he van 
 qaighed and killed a formidable and gi}i:antic sow, in the territory of Krora- 
 myon near Corintli According to some critics, this Krommyonian sow waa 
 the mother of the Kalydonian boar (Strabo, viii. p. 380). 
 
 ' Strabo, X. p. 466. YloXe^ov (V FfjnreaovTo^ Toir Qeanadai^ irpdg ( ivea 
 Kal MeXeaypov, 6 fiev UotrjT^ig, afi<t>i avdg Ke<pa?.^ Kai depfiari, Kara rffv -rrepl 
 Tov KuKpov /xv^oXoyiav • wf 6e ro eUdc, rrepl fiepovg r^f ;^w^ac, etc. This 
 remark is also similar to Mr, Payne Knijjht's criticism on the true causes of the 
 Trojan war, which were (he tells us) of a political character, independent ©f 
 Helen and her abduction (Prolegom.ad Homer, c. 53). 
 
 •Compare Apollodor. iii. 9, 2, and Pausan. v. 17, 4 She is made to 
 wrestle with Peleus at tliese funeral games, which seems foreign to her char 
 •rter. 
 
 • P»isan. riii. 35, 8 
 
 /ITALAMTA. 
 
 1« 
 
 «ie unsuccessfiil suitor. For Atalanta, averse to marraee had 
 proclaimed that her hand should only be won by the competitor 
 who could surpass her in running: all who tried and failed were 
 condemned to die, and many were the persons to whom her 
 beauty and swiftness, alike unparalleled, had proved fatal At 
 length Medanion, who had vainly tried to win her affections by 
 assiduous services in her hunting excursions, ventured to enter 
 the perilous lists. Aware that he could not hope to outrun her 
 except by stratagem, he had obtained by the kindne.^s of Aphro- 
 dite three golden apples from the garden of the Hesperides, 
 which he successively let fall near to her while engaged in the 
 race. The maiden could not resist the temptation of picking 
 them up, and was thus overcome : she became the wife of Mei- 
 lanion and the mother of the Arcadian Parthenop^us, one of the 
 seven chiefs who perished in the siege of Thebes. i 
 
 Respecting the vaneties in this interesting story, see Apollod. iii. 9, 2; 
 Hygm. f. 185; Ovid, Metam. x. 560-700; Propert. i. 1,20; ^:Uan, V. H 
 xiii. 1. U,aavcuvog au<ppovEarepog. Aristophan. LysisH^t 786 and Schol 
 In the ancient representation on the chest of Kypselus (Paus. v 19 U 
 Medanion wa.s exhibited standing near Atalanta, who was holding a fawn 
 no match or competition in running was indicated. 
 
 There is great discrepancy in the naming and patronymic description of 
 the parties in the ..tory. Three different persons are announced as fathers 
 ot Atalanta, Schoeneus. Jasus and Manalos ; the successful lover in Ovid 
 and seemingly in Euripides also) is called Hippomenes, not Meilanion. lo 
 the Hesiodic poems Atalanta was daughter of Schceneus ; Hellanikus called 
 her daughter of Jasus. See Apollodor. 1. c; Kallimach. Hvmn to Dian. 
 214 with the note of Spanheim ; Schol. Eurip. Phoeniss. 150; Schol. Theocr. 
 Idy I. »'. 40; also the ample commentary of Bachet de Meziriac, Sur let 
 Ep. res d Ov.de, vol. i. p. 366. Servius (ad Virg. Eclog. vi. 61 ; ^neid, iii 
 113) calls Atalanta a native of Scyros. 
 
 Both the ancient scholiasts (see Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 769) and the modern 
 t^mmentators, Spanheim and Heync, seek to escape this difficulty by 
 •opposing two Atalantas, - an Arcadian and a Boeotian : assuming the 
 principle of their conjecture to be admissible, they ought to suppose at least 
 
 Certainly if personages of the Grecian mythes are to be treated as hii.- 
 toncally real and their adventures as so many exaggerated and mi.colored 
 facts. It will be necessary to repeat the process of multiplying entities to an 
 infinite extent. And this is one among the many reasons for rejecting th« 
 hindamental supposition. j^v-uug uim 
 
 But when we consider these personages as purely legendary, so Ihal » 
 
 . \:' ! 
 
 it 
 
 •M 
 
 ■} 
 
 f I . ' 
 
 -« 
 
aio 
 
 HUTOKY OF OBEECE. 
 
 .) 
 
 ^w 
 
 We have yet another female in the family of CEneus, whoid 
 same the legend has immortalized. His daughtei Deianeirawaa 
 iought in marriage by the river Achelous, who presented himself 
 ia various shapes, first as a serpent and afterwards as a buiL 
 From the importunity of this hateful suitor she was rescued be 
 the arrival of Herakles, who encountered Achelous, vanquished 
 him and broke off one of his horns, which Achelous ransomed by 
 iurrendering to him the horn of Amaltheia, endued with the 
 mii-aculous property of supplying the possessor with abundance 
 of any food or drink which he desired. Herakles was rewai-ded 
 for his prowess by the possession of Deianeira, and he made 
 over the horn of Amaltheia as his marriage-present to CEneua.* 
 Compelled to leave the residence of CEneus in consequence of 
 having in a fit of anger struck the youthful attendant Eunomus, 
 and involuntarily killed hira;-^ Herakles retired to Trachin, cro6»- 
 ing the river Euenus at the place where the Centaur Nessus was 
 
 historical basis can neither be affirmed nor denied respecting them, we et 
 cape the necessity of such inconvenient stratagems. The test of identity if 
 then to be sought in the attributes, not in the legal description, — in the 
 predicates, not in the subject. Atalanta, whether bom of one father or 
 another, whether belonging to one place or another, is beautiful, cold, re- 
 pulsive,' daring, swift of foot and skilful with the how, — these attributei 
 •onstitute her identity. The Scholiast on Theocritus (iii. 40), in vindicating 
 kis supposition that ther« were two Atalantas, draws a distinction ftmnded 
 »pon this very principle : he says that the Boeotian Atalanta was To^on^, and 
 the Arcadian Atalanta dpofiaia. But this seems an over-refinement: both 
 the shooting and the rranning go to constitute an accomplished huntress. 
 
 In respect to Farthenopaeus, called by Euripid^-s and by so many othew 
 the son of Atalanta, it is of some importance to add, that Apollodoroa 
 Aristarchus, and Antiroachus, the author of the Thebaid, ai»sisrned to him a 
 pedigree entirely different, — making him an Argeian, d.e son of Talaoe 
 Hid Lysimache,' and brother of Adrastns. (ApoUodor. i. 9, 13 ; Aristarch. 
 ap. Schol. Soph. (Ed. Col. 1320 ; Antimachus ap. Schol. ^schyl. Sep. Theb. 
 532; and Schol. Supplem. ad Eurip. Phoeniss. t viii. p. 461, ed. Matth 
 ApoUodOrus is in fact Inconsistent with himself in another passage). 
 
 ' Sophokl. Trachin. 7. The horn of Amaltheia was described by Phe«»- 
 kyd^s (Apolk)d. ii. 7, ^) ; see also Strabo, x. p. 458 and Dioddr. iv. 35, who 
 dtes an interpretation of the fables (oi e/KaCovref <?? aitruv raAr/'»if ) tt> tiM 
 effect that it was symbolical of an embankment of the unruly river by B^ 
 rakl^, and consequent recovery of very fertile land. 
 
 * Hellanikus (ap. Athen. ix. p. 410) mentioning this incident, in two 
 «t workik called the Kttendant by two uiffereot namep 
 
 i 
 
 lli 
 
 (ENEUS. - DEIANEIR A. 
 
 IM 
 
 IWcustomed to carry over passengers for hire. Nessus carried 
 over Deianeira, but when he had arrived on the other side, began 
 to treat her with rudeness, upon which Herakles slew him with 
 an arrow tinged by the poison of the Lernaean hydra. The dying 
 Centaur advised Deianeira to preserve the poisoned blood which 
 flowed from his wound, telling her that it would operate as a 
 philtre to regain for her the aifections of Herakles, in case she 
 should ever be threatened by a rival. Some time afterwards the 
 hero saw and loved the beautiful lole, daughter of Eurytos, king 
 of CEchalia : he stormed the town, killed Eurytos, and made lole 
 his captive. The misguided Deianeira now had recourse to her 
 supposed philtre : she sent as a present to Herakles a splendid 
 tunic, imbued secretly with the poisoned blood of the Centiiur. 
 Herakles adorned himself with the tunic on the occasion of offer- 
 ing a solemn sacrifice to Zeus on the promontory of Kenaeon in 
 Euboea: but the fatal garment, when once put on, clung to -him 
 indissolubly, burnt his skin and flesh, and occasioned an agony 
 of pain from which he was only relieved by death. Deianeira 
 slew herself in despair at this disastrous catastrophe.' 
 
 ' The beautiful dnima of the Trachiniie has rendered this story familiar: 
 compare ApoUod. ii. 7, 7. Hygin. f. 36. Diodor. iv. 36-37. 
 
 The capture of a!:chalia {Oixa?>iac uTiuaic) vf&s celebrated in a very an 
 cient epic poem by Kreoj)hylos, of the Homeric and not of the Hesiodic 
 character: it passed with many as the work of Homer himself. (See Diint- 
 zer, Fragm. Epic. Groecor. p. 8. Welcker, Der Epische Cyclus, p. 229). 
 The same subject was also treated in the Hesiodic Catalogue, or in the Eoiai 
 (see Hesiod. Fragm. 129, ed. Marktsch.) : the number of the children ol 
 Eurytos was there enumerated. 
 
 This exploit seems constandy mentioned as the last performed by Hera- 
 kles, and as immediately preceding his death or apotheosis on Mount (Eta: 
 but whether the legend of Deianeira and the poisoned tunic be very old, we 
 
 cannot tell. 
 
 The tale of the death of Iphitos, son of Eurytos, by Heraklfis, is as ancient 
 as the Odyssey (xxi. 19-40) : but it is there stated, that Eurytos dying left 
 bis memorable bow to his son Iphitos (the bow is given afterwards by Iphi- 
 tos to Odysseus, and is the weapon so fatal to the suitors), — a statement not 
 very consistent with the story that CEchalia was taken and Eurytos slain by 
 Herakles. It is plain that these were distinct and contradictory legends. 
 Compare Soph. Trachin. 260-285 (where Iphitos dies before Eurytos), not 
 only with the passage just cited from the Odyssey, but also with Pherekyd^ 
 Fragm. 34, Didot. 
 
 Hygin us (f. 33) differs altogether in the narentage of Deianeira he i alii 
 
 1' 
 
 « 
 
 I ^1 
 
 / 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 .» 
 
 0am 
 
IM 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ) 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 We have not yet exhausted the eventful career of CEnend and 
 
 his family — ennobled among the jEtolians especially, botli b) 
 religious worship and by poetical eulogy — and favorite themes 
 not merely in somo of the Hesiodic poems, but also in other 
 ancient epic productions, the Alkmaeenis and the Cyclic ThebaisJ 
 By another marriai^e, CEneus had for his son Tydeus, whose 
 poetical celebrity is attested by the many different accounts given 
 both of the name and condition of his mother. Tydeus, having 
 slain his cousins, the sons of Melas, who were conspiring against 
 Oilneus, was forced to become an exile, and took refuge at Argoe 
 with Adrastus, whot^e daughter Deipyle he married. The issue 
 of tliis marriage wa.s Diomedes, whose brilliant exploits in the 
 sietye of Troy were not less celebrated than those of his father at 
 the siege of Thebes. After the departure of Tydeus, CEneus 
 was deposed by the sons of Agrios, and fell into extreme poverty 
 and wretchedness, from which he was only rescued by his grand- 
 son Diomedes, after the conquest of Troy .2 The sufferings of 
 this ancient warrior, and the final restoration and revenge by 
 Diomedes, were tiie subject of a lost tragedy of Euripides, which 
 even the ridicule of Aristophanes demonstrates to have been 
 eminently pathetic.^ 
 
 Though the genealogy just given of CEneus is in part Ho- 
 meric, and seems to have been followed generally by the mytho- 
 graphers, yet we find another totally at variance with it in 
 Hekatseus, which he doubtless borrowed from some of the oW 
 poets : the simplicity of the story annexed to it seems to attest 
 its antiquity. Orestheus, son of Deukalion, first passed into 
 
 her daughter of Dcxamenos : his acoount of her marriage with Ilerakl^'s is 
 in every respect at variance with Apollodorus. In the latter, Mn6simach4 
 is the daughter of Dexamenos ; Ht rakK's rescues her from the importunitiea 
 of the Centaur Eurytioii (it. 5, 5). 
 
 ' See the references in Apollod. i, 8, 4-5. Pindar, Isthm. iv. 32. MeXirav 
 6k aoi^toraig At«V tftari irpoafiaXov ot(3i^6fi€vot 'Ev fiiv AiruXuv ^aiaiai 
 ^ewalc Oivetdai KpaTeftot, etc. 
 
 * Hekat. Fragm. 341, Didot. In this story CEneus is connected with the 
 first discovery of the vine and the making of wine (oivo^) : compare Hygin. 
 f. 129, and Servius ad \irgil. Georgic. i. 9. 
 
 * See Welcker (Griechisch. Tragod. iL p. 583) on the lost tragady caM 
 
 (Bneus. 
 
 THE PELOnDS. 
 
 168 
 
 iKtdlia, and acquired the kingdom : he was father of Phytiod, 
 who was father of CEneus. ^tolus was son ol CEneus. i 
 
 The original migration of ^tolus from Elis to CEtolia — and 
 the subsequent establishment in Elis of Oxylus, his descendant 
 in the tenth generation, along with the Dorian invaders of Pelo- 
 ponn^us — were commemorated by two inscriptions, one in the 
 ^ora of Elis, the other in that of the ^tolian chief town, 
 rhermum, engraved upon the statues of ^tolus and Oxylus,^ 
 respectively. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 THE PELOPIDS. 
 
 Among the ancient legendary genealogies, there was none 
 which figured with greater splendor, or which attracted to itself 
 
 Timokles, Comic, ap. Athenee. vii. p. 223. — 
 
 Tepu>v Tig uTvxei ; Karifiai^ev rbv Oivia. 
 
 Ovid. Heroid. ix. 153.— 
 
 '* Heu ! devota domus ! Solio sedet Agrios alto 
 (Enea desertum nuda seuecta premit." 
 
 The account here given is in Hyginus (f. 175) : but it is in many points 
 diflFerent both from Apollodorus (i. 8, 6; Pausan. ii. 25) and Pherekydot, 
 (Fragm. 83, Didot). It seems to be borrowed from the lost tragedy of Euri 
 pides. Compare Schol. ad Aristoph. Acham. 417. Antonin Liberal, c. 37. 
 In the Iliad, CEneus is dead before the Trojan war (ii. 641). 
 
 The account of Ephiorus again is different (ap. Straho. x. p 462) ; he joins 
 Alkmseon with Diomedes : but his narrative has the air of a tissue of quasi- 
 historical conjectures, intended to explain the circumstance that the ^tolian 
 Diomedes is king of Argos during the Trojan war. 
 
 Pausanias and Apollodorus affirm that CEneus was buried at CEnd be- 
 tween Argos and Mantineia, and they connect the name of this place with 
 kirn. But it seems more reasonable to consider him as the cponymi-oa Uftrt 
 of CEniailsB in ^tolia. 
 
 * Ephor. Fragm. 29. Didot ap. Strab x. 
 
 7* 
 
 ■^•i 
 
 mtk 
 
 «irt»^««><«Mi^ 
 
 'I 
 
(• 
 
 IM 
 
 mSTOBT OF OBEECE. 
 
 I 
 
 It' 
 
 i. 
 
 A higher degree of poetical interest and pathos, than that of tin 
 Peloiiids — Tantalus, Pelops, Atreus and Thyestes, Agamemnon 
 and Menelaus and .S^gisthus, Helen and Klytaemnestra, Orestes 
 and Elektra and Hermione. Each of these characters is a star 
 of the firfit magnitude in the Grecian hemisphere : each name 
 Bu*y^e?ts the idea of some interesting romance or some harrowing 
 tra'^edy : the curse which taints the family from the beginning 
 inflicts multiplied wounds at every successive generation. So, at 
 least, the story of tlie Pelopids presents itself, after it had been 
 successively expanded and decorated by epic, lyric and tragic 
 poets. It will be ^utlicient to touch briefly upon events with 
 which every reader of Grecian poetry is more or less familiar, 
 and to offer some remarks upon the way in which they were col- 
 ored and modifled by different Grecian authors. 
 
 Pelops is the eponym or name-giver of the Peloponnesus : to 
 find an eponym for every conspicuous local name was the invaria- 
 ble turn of Grecian retrospective fancy. The name Peloponnesus 
 is not to be found either in the Iliad or the Odyssey gior any other 
 denomination which can be attached distinctly and specially to 
 the entire peninsula- But we meet with the name in one of the 
 most ancient post-Homeric poems of which any fragments have 
 been preserved — the Cyprian Verses — a poem which many 
 (seemingly most persons) even of the contemporaries of Herodo- 
 tus ascribed to the author of the Iliad, though Herodotus contra- 
 dicts the opinion. ' The attributes by which the Pelopid Aga- 
 memnon and his house are marked out and distinguished from 
 the other heroes of the Iliad, are precisely those which Grecian 
 imagination would naturally seek in an eponymus — superior 
 
 wealth, power, splendor and regality. Not only Agamemnon 
 
 — — — _ « 
 
 ' Hesiod. ii. 117. Fragment. Epicc. Graec. Diintzer. ix. Kvnpia, 8.~ 
 
 Al^a re AvyKei)^ 
 Tavyerot nfMaiiSaive noalv raxeeaai neKon^dg, 
 ^AKporarcv S" ava^ug diedepKETo vi/aov anaaav 
 
 Also the Homeric Hyran. Apoll. 419, 430, and Tyrtaeus, Fragm. I.— 
 {Eivofiia) — IS.vpelav HeAoTrof vrjaov tupiKOfxeya. 
 
 The Schol. ad Iliad, ix. 246, intimates that the name lUXowowijowc 
 m one or more of the Hesiodic epics. 
 
 WEA1.TH AND REGALITY OF THE PELOPIDS. 1^ 
 
 fciuiself, but his brother Menelaus, is « more of a king ^ eveii thaa 
 N«stor or Diomedes. The gods have not given to the king of 
 the " much-golden " Mykense greater courage, or strength, or 
 ability, than to various other chiefs; but they have conferred 
 upon him a marked superiority in riches, power and dignity, and 
 have thus singled him out as the appropriate leader of the 
 forces.^ He enjoys this preeminence as belonging to a privileged 
 family and as inheriting the heaven-descended sceptre of Pelops, 
 the transmission of which is described by Homer in a very 
 remarkable way. The sceptre was made " by Hephaestos, who 
 presented it to Zeus ; Zeus gave it to Hermes, Hermes to the 
 charioteer Pelops ; Pelops gave it to Atreus, the ruler of men; 
 Atreus at his death left it to Thyestes, the rich cattle-owner ; 
 Thyestes in his turn left it to his nephew Agamemnon to carry, 
 that he might hold dominion over many islands and over all 
 
 Argos."'-^ . . 
 
 We have here the unrivaUed wealth and power of the kmg 
 of men, Agamemnon," traced up to his descent from Pelops, and 
 accounted for, in harmony with the recognized epical agencies, 
 by the present of the special sceptre of Zeus through the haiids 
 of Hermes ; the latter being the wealth-giving god, whose bless 
 
 > Iliad, ix. 37. Compare ii. 580. Diomedes addresses Agamemn6n 
 
 Sot Se diavdixa 6C>Ke Kpovov naii ayKvXofirjTea 
 ZKTiizTp<f> fiev TOL 6CiKE T£Ttfiva&ai nepl itavruv* 
 'AXk^v d' ovTOL dunev, 6, re Kpdrog eotI fiiyioTov. 
 
 A similar contrast is drawn by Nestor (D.i. 280) between Agamemnon and 
 
 Achilles. Nestor says to Agamemnon (IL ix. 60) — 
 
 'Atp«(577, en)/zfvdp^f «n) r^p ^aai^evraTog kcau 
 
 And this attribute attaches to Menelaus as well as to his \~ther. For whe. 
 
 Diomedes is about to choose his companion for the night expedition mtc 
 
 Ihe Trojan camp, Agamemnon thus addresses him (x. 232) : 
 Tbv fuv S9i irapov y aiphtreai, ov /c' h&e^trda ^ 
 ^aivofiivuv Tdv apiarov, brrel fxefuiaoi ye 'KoXhA ' 
 yinde av Y aiAo/ievoc a^ai (bpeal, rdv /lev apeiu 
 KaXXeiireiv ai> 6e xetpov' dicaaaeai alSol eUuVt 
 »Ec yevei^ dpSoVy el koI (3amXevTep6g kariv, 
 •Qf i(paT\ iddeiae 61 ntpl ^av&u> MevtXov. 
 * Iliad i" 10V 
 
 ^i 
 
 m^ 
 
 ^k»«hw-' -r 
 
\h 
 
 I 
 
 IM 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 ) 
 
 ^ 
 
 bif^ 18 most efficacious in furthering the process of acquisition, 
 whether by theft or by accelerated multiplication of flocks and 
 herds.' The wealth and princely character of the Atreids were 
 proverbial among the ancient epic poets. Paris not only cames 
 away Hellen, but much property along with her : 2 the house of 
 Menelaus, when Telemachus visits it in the Odyssey, is so re- 
 splendent with gold and silver and rare omament,^ as to strike 
 the beholder with astonishment and admiration. The attributes 
 assigned to Tantalus, the father of Pelops, are in conformity with 
 the general idea oi" the family — superhuman abundance and en- 
 joyments, and intimate converse with the gods, to such a degree 
 that his head is turned, and he commits inexpiable sin. Bui 
 though Tantalus himself is mentioned, in one of the most suspi- 
 cious passages of the Odyssey (as suffering punishment in the 
 nnder-world), he is not announced, nor is any one else announced, 
 as father of Pelops, unless we are to construe the lines in the 
 Iliad as implying that the latter was son of Hermes. In the con- 
 ception of the author of the Iliad, the Pelopids are, if not of di- 
 vine origin, at least a mortal breed specially favored and enno- 
 bled by the gods — beginning with Pelops, and localized at My- 
 kenff. No allusion is made to any connection of Pelops either 
 with Pisa or with Lydia. 
 
 The legend which connected Tantalus and Pelops with Mount 
 Sipyius may probably have grown out of the -^Colic settlement* 
 at Magnesia and Kynie. Both the Lydian origin and the Pisatic 
 sovereignty of Pelops are adapted to times later than the Iliad, 
 when the Olynipic g«mes had acquired to themselves the general 
 reverence of Greece, and had come to serve as tiie religious and 
 recreative centre of the Peloponnesus — and when the Lydian 
 
 « I I.I. — —I ■ —11^- ■ , „ — . I.,— ..— ■— --. - — ,-,■ ■ -,,— ,■..,, „ ■, i_ .. Ill a 
 
 * Iliad, xiv. 491. Ilesiod. Theog. 444. Homer, Hymn. Mercur. 526-568 
 '02.fiov Kai n'kovTov duau nepiKuTiXea ftu^dov. Compare Eustath. ad Iliad. 
 
 xvi. 182. 
 
 * Iliad, iii. 72 ; vii. 363. In the Hesiodic Eoiai was the followiii u>aplet 
 ^Fmgm. 55. p. 43, Diintzer) : — 
 
 'Mk^v (iiv yap HuKev 'OAv/zTTiOf XlaKi&ijmv, 
 Sovv 6' ' Afurr^aovidai^, nXovrov 6' krrop' ' Krpeidijai,. 
 
 Again, Tyrtaeus, Fragm. 9, 4. — 
 
 Oid' ft TavraXidtu HeXottoi ^aaiKehrepo^ elf, eto. 
 ' OdvM. IT. 45-7 i 
 
 TANTALUS. 
 
 ]» 
 
 and Phrygian heroic names, Midas and Gyg^ were the types 
 
 of wealtii and luxury, as well as of chariot driving, in the imagt* 
 iaation of a Greek. The inconsiderable villages of the Pisatid 
 derived their whole importance from the vicinity of Olympia : 
 they are not deemed worthy of notice in the Catalogue of Homer. 
 Nor could the genealogy which connected the eponym of the en- 
 tire peninsula with Pisa have obtained currency in Greece unless 
 it had been sustained by preestablished veneration tor the locality 
 of Olympia. But if the sovereign of the humble Pisa was to be 
 recognized as forerunner of the thrice-wealthy princes of Mikense, 
 it became necessary to assign some explanatory cause of his 
 riches. Hence the supposition of his being an immigi'ant, son ol 
 a wealthy Lydian named Tantalus, who was the oft'spring of Zeus 
 and Ploutd. Lydian wealth and Lydian chariot-driving render- 
 ed Pelops a lit person to occupy his place in the legend, both as 
 ruler of Pisa and progenitor of the Mykenaean Atreids. Even 
 with the admission of these two circumstances there is considen^ 
 ble difficulty, for those who wish to read the legends as consecu- 
 tive history, in making the Pelopids pass smoothly and plausibly 
 from Pisa to Mykenae. 
 
 I shall briefly recount the legends of this great heroic femilj 
 as they came to stand in their full and ultimate growth, after the 
 localization of Pelops at Pisa had been tacked on as a preface to 
 Homer's version of the Pelopid genealogy. 
 
 Tantalus, residing near Mount Sipyius in Lydia, had twc chil- 
 dren, Pelops and Niobe. He was a man of immeose ^'Ossessions 
 and preeminent happiness, above the lot of humanity : the gods 
 communicated with him freely, received him at thsir banquets, 
 and accepted of his hospitality in return. Intoxicated with such 
 prosperity, Tantalus became guilty of gross wickedness. He 
 stole nectar and ambrosia from the table of the gods, and reveal- 
 ed their secrets to mankind : he killed and served up to them at 
 a feast his own son Pelops. The gods were horror-struck when 
 they discovered the meal prepared for them : Zeus restored the 
 mangled youth to life, and as Demeter, then absorbed in grid 
 for the loss of her daughter Persephone, had eaten a portion ot 
 the shoulder, he supplied an ivory shoulder in place oi it. Tan- 
 talus expiated his guilt by exemplary punishment. He wan 
 placed in the under-world, with fruit and water seemingW clos« 
 
 !!J 
 
 v-Jm 
 
!f 
 
 J58 
 
 HISTOBr OF GREECE 
 
 > 
 
 ♦ 
 
 to him, yet eluding his touch as oflen as he tried to grasp tliem 
 and leaving his hunger and thirst incessant and unappeasedJ 
 Pindar, in a very remarkable passage, finds this old legend r^ 
 volting to his feelings : he rejects the tale of the flesh of Pelops 
 having been served up and eaten, as altogether unworthy of the 
 gods.- 
 
 Niobe, the daughter of Tantalus, was married to Amphion, 
 ajn\ had a numer(»u.s and flourisliing offspring of seven sons and 
 t^ven daughters. Though accepted as the intimate friend, and 
 companion of Leto, the mother of Apollo and Artemas,^ she was 
 presumptuous enough to triumph over that goddess, and to place 
 herself on a footing of higher dignity, on account of the superior 
 number of her children. Ajx)llo and Artemas avenged this in- 
 gult by killing all the sons and all the daughters : Niobe, thus 
 left a childless and disconsolate mother, wept herself to death, 
 and was turned into a rock, which the later Greeks continued 
 always to identify on Mount Sipylus.^ 
 
 Some autliors represented Pelops as not being a Lydian, but a 
 king of Paphlagonia ; by others it was said that Tantalus, hav- 
 ing become detested from his impieties, had been expelled from 
 Asia by llus tlie king of Troy, — an incident which served the 
 double purj)ose of explaining the transit of Pelops to Greece, 
 and of imparting to the siege of Troy by Agamemnon the charac- 
 ter of retribution tor wrongs done to his ancestor.^ When Pe- 
 lops came over to Greece, he found CEnomaus, son of the god 
 Ares and Harpiniia, in possession of the principality of Pisik 
 
 DiodAr. iv. 77. Iloin. Odvss. xi. 582. Pindar ijives si different version 
 of the punishment inflicted on Tnntahis : a vast stone was perpetually im- 
 pendinjs: over his head, and threatening to fall (Olymp. i. 56 ; Isthra. vii, 20). 
 
 * Pindar. Olymp. i 45. Compare the sentiment of Iphigeneia in Eorip- 
 W^s. Iph. Tanr. 387. 
 
 ' Sappho (Fragm. 82, Schneidewin) — 
 
 AaTO) Kfil Nto^ia /laXa /uhv <i>iXai ijaav eracpai- 
 
 Sappho assigned to Niohe eighteen children (Anl. Grell. N. A. iv. A. xx. 7) j 
 Hesiod gave twenty ; Homer twelve (ApoUod. iii. 5). 
 
 The Lydian historian Xanthus gave a totally different version both of the 
 genealogy and of the misfortunes of Niob^ (Parthen. Narr. 33). 
 
 * Ovid, Metam. vi. 164-311. Pausan. i. 21, 5 ; viii. 2, 3. 
 
 * Apollon. Khod ii. 358. and Schol. ; Ister. Fragment 59, Dindorf ; Dl» 
 i5r. iv. 74. 
 
 fELOPS AND (ENOMAUS. 
 
 IS9 
 
 immediately bordering on the district of Olympia, OEnomaus, 
 havin*' been apprized by an oracle that death would overtake him 
 if he permitted his daughter Hippodameia to marry, refused to 
 irive her in marriage except to some suitor who should beat him 
 in a chariot-race from Olympia to the isthmus of Corinth ;i the 
 ground here selected for the legendary victory of Pelops deserves 
 attention, inasmuch as it is a line drawn from the assumed centre 
 of Peloponnesus to its extremity, and thus comprises the whole 
 territory with which Pelops is connected as eponym. Any suitor 
 overmatched in the race was doomed to forfeit his life ; and the 
 tieetness of the Pisan horses, combined with the skill of the 
 charioteer Myrtilus, had already caused thirteen unsuccessful 
 competitors to perish by the lance of CEnoraaus.2 Pelops enter- 
 ed the lists as a suitor: his prayers moved the god Poseidon to 
 Bupply him with a golden chariot and winged horses ; or accord- 
 ing to another story, he captivated the affections of Hippoda- 
 meia herself, who persuaded the charioteer Myrtilus to loosen 
 the wheels of CEnomaus before he started, so that the latter was 
 overturned and perished in the race. Having thus won the hand 
 of Hippodameia, Pelops became Prince of Pisa-S He put to 
 death the charioteer Myrtilus, either from indignation at his 
 treachery to CEnomaus,^ or from jealousy on the score of Hip- 
 podameia: but Myrtilus was the son of Hermes, and though 
 Pelops erected a temple in the vain attempt to propitiate that 
 god, he left a curse upon his race which fwture calamities were 
 destined painfiiUy to work out.^ 
 
 Pelops had a numerous issue by Hippodameia : PittheuS, 
 Troezen and Epidaurus, the epon yms of the two Argolic cities 
 
 > Diodor. iv. 74. 
 
 * Pausanias (vi. 21, 7) had read their names in the Hesiodic Eoiai. 
 
 » Pindar, Olymp. i. 140. The chariot race of Pelops and CEnomaus waa 
 represented on the chest of Kypselus at Olympia : the horses of the former 
 were given as having wings (Pansan, v. 17, 4). Pherekydes gave the same 
 story (ap. Schol. ad Soph. Elect. 504). 
 
 * It is noted by Herodotns and others as a remarkable fact, that no mnim 
 were ever bred in the Eleian territory : an Eleian who wished to breed • 
 mule sent his mare for the time out of the region. The Eleians thcmseivei 
 Mcribed this ph«nomenon to a disability bronght on the land by a c-^rtt 
 Tom the Ups of CKnomaoa Herod, iv. 80 j Plutarch, Quaest Gr«BC. p.308). 
 
 * Pans. V. I, 1 ; Sophok. Elektr. 508; Emip Oreat 985, with Schol.. 
 Plato, Kratyl. p. 395 
 
 H 
 
 r 
 
 mmm 
 
 itm 
 
 mm^-mami^'* ■■iiin« 11 lir', * 
 
im 
 
 HISTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 \fi 
 
 to called, are said to have been among them : Atreus and Thy 
 estes were also his sons, and his daughter Nikippe married Sthe- 
 oelus of Mykenae., and became the mother of EurystheusJ We 
 hear nothing of the principality of Pisa afterwards : the Pisatid 
 villages became absorbed into the larger aggregate of Elis, after 
 a vain struggle to maintain their separate right of presidency 
 over the Olympic festival. But the legend ran that Pelops left 
 his name to the whole peninsula: according to Thucycides, he 
 was enabled to do this because of the great wealth which he liad 
 drought with him from Lydia into a poor territory. The histo 
 nan leaves out all the romantic interest of the genuine legends — 
 preserving only this one circumstance, which, without being bet- 
 ter attested than the rest, carries with it, from its common-place 
 «nd prosaic chara<jter, a pretended historical plausibihty.'^ 
 
 Besides his numerous issue by Hippodameia, Pelops had an 
 dlegitimate son named Chrysippus, of singular grace and beauty, 
 towards whom he displayed so much affection as to rouse the 
 jealousy of Hippodameia and her sons. Atreus and Thyestea 
 conspired together to j)ut Chrysippus to death, for which they 
 were banished by Peloj)S and retired to Mykenie,' — an event 
 which brings us into the track of the Homeric legend. For 
 Thucydides, having found in the death of Chrysippus a suitable 
 ground for the secession of Atreus from Pelops, conducts him at 
 once to Mykenui, and siiows a train of plausible circumstances 
 to account for his having mounted the throne. Eurystheus, king 
 of Mykena-, was the maternal nephew of Atreus: when he 
 engaged in any foreign expedition, he naturally entrusted the 
 regency to his uncle ; the people of Mykenae thus became accus- 
 tomed to be governed by him, and he on his part made elforts to 
 conciliate them, so that when Eurystheus was defeated -xnd slain 
 in Attica, the M}'kenaean people, apprehensire of an invasion 
 from the Herakleids, chose Atreus as at once the most jv^werful 
 
 ' Apollod. ii. 4, 5. Pausan. ii. 30, 8; 26, 3 ; v. 8, 1. Hesiod. ap. Schol 
 ad Iliad. XX. 116. 
 
 « Thucyd. i. 5 
 
 ' We find two distinct legends respecting Chrysippus : his abdnctiou by 
 Laias king of Thebe.*, on which the lost drama of Euripides called Chry* 
 •ippus turned (see Welcker, Griech. Tragiidien, ii. p. 536), and his death b| 
 be bands of his half-brothers. Hyginns (f. 85) blends the two tojfetber. 
 
 
 ATREUS AND THYESIES. 
 
 idi 
 
 and most asceptable person for his successor.' Such was the t«l« 
 which Thucydides derived " from those who had learnt ancient 
 Peloponnesian matters most clearly from their forefathers." The 
 introduction of so much sober and quasi-political history, unfor- 
 tunately unauthenticated, contrasts strikingly with the highly poeN 
 i^al legends of Pelops and Atreus, which precede and follow it. 
 
 Atreus and Thyestes are known in the Iliad only as successive 
 possessors of the sceptre of Zeus, which Thyestes at his death 
 bTqueathes to Agamemnon. The family dissensions among this 
 fated race commence, in the Odyssey, with Agamemnon the son 
 of Atreus, and ^gisthus the son of Thyestes. But subsequent 
 poets dwelt ui)on an implacable (luarrel between the two fathers 
 The cause of the bitterness was differently represented: some al- 
 leged that Thyestes had intrigued with the Kretan Aerope, the 
 wffe of his brother; other narratives mentioned that Thyestea 
 procured for himself surreptitiously the possession of a lamb 
 with a orolden fleece, which had been designedly introduced 
 amonc the flocks of Atreus by the anger of Hermes, as a cause 
 of enmity and ruin to the whole family.2 Atreus, after a violent 
 
 > Thucyd i 9 XeyovmSeol TaUeXoirovvTioiuv aaipeaTara iivrjiiTfTrafyu ruv 
 nporeoov dedeyfievoc. According to Hellanikus, Atreus the elder son re- 
 turns to Pisa after the death of Pelops with a great army and makes him. 
 self master of his father's principality ( Helhmik. ap Schol. ad Iliad, n. 105) 
 Hellanikus does not seem to have been so solicitous as Thucydides to bnng 
 the storv into conformity with Homer. The circumstantial genealogy giv- 
 en in Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 5. makes Atreus and Thyestes reside during 
 their banishment at Makestus in Triphylia: it is given without any special 
 authority, but may perhaps come from Hellunikus. ,« rp.. 
 
 ^ ^schil. Agamem. 1204, 1253, IG08; Hygin. 86; Attn Fragm.l9. Thw 
 was the storv of the old poem entitled AlkmoeSnis ; seemingly also of Phe- 
 rekvdes though th^ latter rejected the story that Hermes had produced the 
 Kolden iamb with the special view of exciting discord between the two broth, 
 ers, in order to avenge the death of Myrtilus by Pelops (see Schol. ad 
 
 Eurip. Orest. 996> o u i j ; \ 
 
 A different legend, alluded to in Soph. Aj. 1295 (see Schol. arf te.), 
 recounted that Aerop^^ had been detected by her father Katreus in unchaste 
 commerce with a low-bom person ; he entrusted her in his anger to Naa- 
 plius, with directions to throw her into the sea : Nauplius however not only 
 spared her life, but betrothed her to Pleisthenes, father of Agamemndn 
 
 dnd son of Atreus. , 
 
 The tragedy entitled Atreus of the Utin poet Attiuf, seems to Imt" 
 
 vot. I. 1^ <^ 
 
 » m 
 
 .9 r" 
 
102 
 
 tOSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 I 
 
 burst of indignation, pretended to be reconciled, and invited Thy 
 estes to a banquet, in which he served up to him the limbs o^ 
 bis own son, and the father ignorantly partook of the fatal meal. 
 Even the all-seeang Helias is said to have turned back his chariot 
 to the east in order that he might escape the shocking spectacle 
 ci this Thy<'stean banquet; yet the tale of Thyestean revenge 
 
 tht' inunU;r of Atreus perpetrated by ^gisthus, the incestuous 
 
 otrspriiigof Thyestes by liis daughter Pelopia — is no less replete 
 Willi horrors J 
 
 Homeric legend is never thus revolting. Agamemnon and 
 Menelaus arc known to us chietly with their Homeric attributes, 
 which have not been so darkly overlaid by subsequent poets as 
 those of Atreus and Thyestes. Agamemnon and Menelaus are 
 art'ectionate brothers : they marry two sisters, the daughters oi 
 Tyndareus king of Sparta, Klytiemnestra and Helen ; for Helen, 
 the real offspring of Zeus, passes as the daughter of Tyndariu8.=i 
 Tlic '^ king of men " reigns at Mykena) ; Menelaus succeeds Tyn- 
 dareus at Sparta. ()f the ra[)e of Helen, and the siege of Troy 
 consequent upon it, I shall speak elsewhere : I now tnucli only 
 upon the fjimily legends of the Atreids. Menelaus, on his return 
 from Troy with the recovered Helen, is driven by storms far 
 away to the disiMiit regions of PhcjtJiiicia and Kgypt, and is ex- 
 posed to a thousand dangers and hardships before he again sets 
 fool in Peloponnrsus. But at lengtli he reaches Sparta, resumes 
 his kingdoui, and passes the rest of his days in uninterrupted 
 happiness and splendor : being moreover husbiuid of the godlike 
 Helen and son-in-law of Zeus, he is even spared the pangs of 
 death. When the fulness of his days is past he is transported 
 to the Elysian tields, there to dwell along with " the golden-haired 
 Rhadamanthus " in a delicious climate and in undisturbed re 
 po6e.y 
 
 Far different is the fate of the king of men, Agamemnon. 
 
 brought out, with puinful fidelity, the harsh and savn^e fVatures of thif 
 family legend (see Aul. Gell. xiii. 2, and the frf^raents of Attius now remain 
 ing, together with the tragedy called Thyestes, of Senecaj. 
 
 * Hygin. fab. 87-88. 
 
 * So we mast say in conformity to the ideas of antiquity: oompare Htf 
 IBS!, Il:a«l, xvi. 176 and Herodot. vi. 53 
 
 * Horn. Odyss. iii. 280-300 ; iv. 83^660. 
 
 ,1 
 
 AGAMEMNON AND MLNELAUS. 
 
 168 
 
 During his absence, the un warlike ^gisthus, son of Thyestds, 
 had seduced his wife Klytaemnestra, in spite of the special warn- 
 ing of the gods, who, watchful over this privileged fjimily, had 
 sent their messenger Hermes expressly to deter him from the 
 attempt.^ A venerable bard had been left by Agamemnon as 
 the companion and monitor of his wife, and so long as that guar 
 dian was at hand, iEgisthus pressed his suit in vain. But he got 
 rid of the bard by sending him to perish in a desert island, and 
 then won without dithculty the undefended Klytiemnestra. Igno- 
 rant of what had passed, Agamemnon returned from Troy vic- 
 torious and full of hope to his native country ; but he had scarcely 
 landed when -rli^gisthus invited him to a banquet, and there with 
 the aid of the treacherous Kiytiemnestra, in the very hall of fes 
 tivity and congratulation, slaughtered him and his companions 
 "Hke oxen tied to the manger." His concubine Ka'^sandra, the 
 prophetic daughter of Priam, perished along with him by the 
 hand of Klyticmnestra herself.^ The boy Orestes, the only male 
 offspring of Agamemnon, was stolen away by his nurse, and 
 placed in safety at the residence of the Phokian Strojjhius. 
 
 For seven years iEgisthus and Klytiemnestra reigned in tran 
 quillity at Mykenai on the throne of the murdered Agamemnon. 
 But in the eighth year the retribution announced by the gods over- 
 took them : Orestes, grown to manhood, returned and avetiged 
 his father by killing JEgisthus, according to Homer; subsequent 
 poets add, his mother also. He recovered the kingdom of My- 
 iense, and succeeded Menelaus in that of Sparta. Hermione, the 
 only daughter of Menelaus and Helen, was sent into the realm 
 of the Myrmidons in Thessaly, as the bride of Neoptolemus, sod 
 of Achilles, according to the promise made by her father during 
 the siege of Troy.^ 
 
 Here ends the Homeric legend of the Pelopids, the final act 
 of Orestes being ciled as one of unexampled glory.^ Later poeto 
 made many additions : they dwelt upon his remorse and hardly- 
 
 * Odyss.i. 38 ; iii. 310. — avu7iKi<^or Mylax^oio. 
 
 « Odyss. iii. 260-275; iv. 512-537 ; xi 408. Deinias in his Argolica, and 
 other historians of that territory, fixed the precise day of the murder of 
 Agamemnon,— the thirteenth of the month Gamelion (Schol. ad Sophokl 
 Elektr. 275) 
 
 » Ody»8. iii 306 ; iv. 9 * Odr88. i. 2M 
 
 i 
 
164 
 
 HISTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 \)\ 
 
 earned pardon for the murder of his mother, and upon biB d» 
 voted friend;5hip for Pylades ; they wove many interesting tales, 
 too, respecting his sisters Iphigeneia and Elektra and his cousin 
 Hermione, — names whicli have become naturalized in every 
 climate and incorporated with every form of poetry. 
 
 Tliesc po«;ts did not at alJ scruple to depart from Homer, and 
 to give other genealogies of their own, with respect to the chief 
 persons of the I*elopid family. In the Iliad and Odyssey, Aga- 
 memnon is sou of Atreus : in the llesiodic Eoiai and in Stesicho- 
 rus, he is son jf P'sisthenes the son of Atreus.' In Homer, he 
 is specially marked as reigning at Mykenae ; but Stesichorus, Si 
 monides and Pindar^ represented liim as having both resided 
 and perished at Sparta or at Ainykite. According to the ancient 
 Cyprian Verses, Helen was represented as the daughter of Zeiia 
 and Nemesis : in one of the Hesiodic poems she was introduced 
 as an Oceanic nympli, daughter of Oceanus and Tethys.'^ The 
 genealogical discrejiancies, even as to the persons of the principal 
 heroes aii<l heroine-, are far too numerous to be cited, nor is it 
 necessary to advert to them, except as they bear upon the un- 
 availing attempt to convert such legendary parentage into a basif 
 of historical record or chronological calculation. 
 
 The Homeric j)oems ])robably represent that form of the le- 
 gend, resj)ecting Agamenuion and Orestes, which was current 
 and [Kipular among the ./Eolic colonists. Orestes was the great 
 heroic chief of the ^olic emigration ; he, or his sons, or his de- 
 scendants, are supjjosed to have conducted the Achaeans to seek 
 
 * Hesiod. Fragni. 60. p. 44, cd. DUiitzer; Stesichor. Fragra. 44, Kleine. 
 The SchoIi;iat ad Soph. Elcktr. 539, in reference to another dLscrepancy be- 
 tween Homer and the He.siodic poems about the children of Helen, remark* 
 diat we ought not t(» divert our attention from that which is moral and sal* 
 atary to ourselves in the poets ( ru r/^iKii k(U xPV^'-f^O' ^f^v foig ivrvyxavovai). 
 in order to cavil at their genealogical contradictions. 
 
 Welcker in vain fjndeavors to show that Pleisthenes was originally intro- 
 duced as the father of Atreus, not as his son (Griech. Tragod. p. 678). 
 
 ' Schol. ad Eurip Orest. 46. 'Ofiijpog kv 'iivKTjvai^ <^<ji rd ^aaiMia ro9 
 * Xyofjik/Avovw: ' ZrTftrixopo^ 6e Koi S/iiuvidj/c, ^v AaKedaifiovi^ Pindar, Pytll* 
 xi. 31 ; Nem. viii. 21. St^ichoms had composed an 'Opiareia, copied ia 
 many points from a still more ancient lyric Oretteia by Xanthas : compait 
 A then. xii. p. 513, atid jElian, V. H. iv. 26. 
 
 • Besiod, ap. Schol. ad Pindar, Nem. x. 150. 
 
 .1 
 
 AGAMEMNON AND ORESTES. 
 
 165 
 
 a new home, when they were no longer able to make head against 
 the invading Dorians : the great families at Tenedos and other 
 iEclic cities even during the historical aera, gloried in tracing 
 back their pedigrees to this illustrious source.' The legends con- 
 nect? d with the heroic worship of these mythical ancestors form 
 the basis of the character and attributes of Agamemnon and his 
 family, as depicted in Homer, in which Mykenae appears as the 
 first place in Peloponnesus, and Sparta only as the second : the 
 former the special residence of " the king of men ; " the latter 
 tliat of his younger and inferior brother, yet still the seat of a 
 member of the princely Pelopids, and moreover the birth-place 
 of the divine Helen. Sparta, Argos and Mykenai are all three 
 dejii^nated in the Iliad by the goddess Here as her favorite cities ;» 
 yet \\ie connection of Mykenae with Argos, though the two towns 
 we.ce onlv ten miles distant, is far less intimate than the conneo- 
 tion of Mykenae with Sparta. When we reflect upon the very 
 peculiar manner in which Homer identifies Here with the Grecian 
 host and its leader, — for she watches over the Greeks with the 
 active solicitude of a mother, and her antipathy against the Tro- 
 jans is implacable to a degree which Zeus cannot comprehend, 3 
 — and when we combine this with the ancient and venerated 
 Hereon, or temple of Here, near Mykenae, we may partly ex- 
 plain to ourselves the preeminence conferred upon Mykenae in 
 the Iliad and Odyssey. The Heraeon was situated between Argos 
 and Mykenae ; in later times its priestesses were named and ita 
 affairs administered by the Argeians ; but as it was much nearer 
 
 • See the ode of Pindar addressed to Aristagoras of Tenedos (Nem. xi 
 85 ; Stralx), xiii. p. 582). There were Penthilids at Mitylene, from Penthi- 
 lus, son of Orestes (Aristot. Polit. v. 8, 13, Schneid.). 
 
 ■ Iliad, iv. 52. Compare Euripid. H^^rakleid. 350 
 
 ■ Iliad, iv. 31. Zeus says to Here, — 
 
 Aaifioviii^ ri vv ee Upioftoc^ Upia/UHo re iratoec 
 Toaaa KQKd, ffi^eaKov br' uffirepxk fieveaivei( 
 'I/liov k^aXaira^ai kvKrifievov nToXie^pov ] 
 Ei Si (TV y\ elaeMovaa vvTmc koi reix^a /laKpd, 
 'Qfidv PefiptJ'Aoic Tlpiafiov UpinfAOiS re TralStic* 
 'AAXovf re 1 ooa^, rort xev ;j;6Xov k^nKenaio, 
 
 ikgam xviii. 358, — 
 
 if fta vv fttlo 
 *E^ abrr: iyivovro napiiKOfioutfTts 'A^OMC. 
 
166 
 
 HISTOSY OF GREEGS, 
 
 10 MykdoflB than to Argoa, we may with probability conclude that 
 it originally belonged to tlie former, and that the increasing power 
 of the latter enabled tiiem to usurp to themselves a reUgious 
 privilege which was always an object of envy and contention 
 among the Grecian communities. The .^Eolic colonists doubtless 
 took out with them in their emigration the divine and heroic 
 legends, as well as the worship and ceremonial rites, of the Hd- 
 WBon ; and in those legends the most exalted rank would be s» 
 signed to the close-adjoining and administering city. 
 
 Mykenae maintained its independence even down to the Persian 
 invasion. Eighty of its heavy-armed citizens, in the ranks of 
 Leonidati at Thennopylaj, and a number not inferior at Plataea, 
 opheld the splendid heix>ic celebrity of their city during a seas<Mi 
 of peril, when tbe more powerful Argos disgraced itself by a 
 treacherous neutirality. Very shortly afterwards MykenaB was 
 enslaved and its mhabitants expelled by the Argeians. Though 
 this city so long maintained a separate existence, its importance 
 had latterly sunk to nothing, while that of the Dorian Argos was 
 augmented very much, and that of the Dorian Sparta still more. 
 
 The name of Mykenae is imperishably enthroned in the Iliad 
 and Odyssey ; but all the subsequent fluctuations of the legend 
 tend to exalt the j^lory of other cities at its expense. The recog 
 nition of the Olympic games as the grand religious festival oi 
 Peloponnesus gave vogue to that genealogy which connected Pe- 
 iops with Pisa or Elis and withdrew him from Mykenae, More 
 ever, in the poems of the great Athenian tragedians, Mykenae is 
 constantly contbunded and treated as one with Argos. If any 
 one of the citizens of the former, expelled at the time of its final 
 subjugation by tlui Argeians, had witnessed at Athens a drama of 
 .^ischylus, Sophokles, or Euripides, or the recital of an ode of 
 Pindar, he would have heard with grief and indignation the city 
 of his oppressors made a partner in the heroic glories of his 
 own.» But the g^eat political ascendency acquired by Sparta 
 contributed still farther to degrade Mykenae, by disposing subse- 
 quent poets to treat the chief of the Grecian armament against 
 Troy as having been a Spartan. It has been already mentioned 
 that Stesichorus, Simonides and Pindar adopted this version <A 
 
 ' See the preface of Diweu to the tenth Hem. of Pindar. 
 
 AQAMEMNON AT SPARTA 
 
 im 
 
 die legend : we know that Zeus Agamemnon, as well as the hero 
 Menelaus, was worshipped at the Dorian Sparta,^ and the feeling 
 of intimate identity, as well as of patriotic pride, which had grown 
 up in the minds of the Spartans connected with the name of 
 Agamemndn, is forcibly evinced by the reply of the Spartan Sy- 
 agrus to Gelon of Syracuse at the time of the Persian invasion 
 <ff Greece. Gelon was solicited to lend his aid in the inuninent 
 danger of Greece before the battle of Salamis : he offered to 
 furnish an immense auxiliary force, on condition that the supreme 
 command should be allotted to him. ^ Loudly indeed would the 
 Pelopid Agamemnon cry out (exclaimed Syagrus in rejecting this 
 application), if he were to Icam that the Spartans had been de- 
 prived of the headship by Geldn and the Tyracusans.** ^ Neadj 
 a century before this event, in obedience to the injunctions of the 
 Delphian oracle, the Spartans had brought back from Tegea to 
 Sparta the bones of *^ the Lacdnian Orestes," as Pindar denomi- 
 nates him : 3 the recovery of these bones was announced to them 
 as the means of reversing a course of ill-fortune, and of procuring 
 victory in their war against Tegea.^ The value which they set 
 upon this acquisition, and the decisive results ascribed to it, ex- 
 hibit a precise analogy with the recovery of the bones of Theseoa 
 from Skyros by the Athenian Cimdn shortly after the Persiao 
 invasion.^ The remains sought were those of a hero properly 
 belonging to their own soil, but who had died in a foreign land, 
 and of whose protection and assistance they were for that reason 
 deprived. And the superhuman magnitude of the bones, which 
 were contained in a coffin seven cubits long, is well suited to the 
 legendary grandeur of the son of Agamenmdn. 
 
 * Clemens Alexandr. AdmoDit ad Gent p. 24. *Ayafiefivova yo&p tiv9 
 ^ia iv ^irapry Tinaa&ai Xtu<j>vXoc laropel. See also CEnomaos ap. Eaaebb 
 Praeparat. Evangel, v. 28. 
 
 * Herodot vii. 159. 'H ke /ut/ olfiu^ciev 6 Ue^onidrj^ ^Xyofitfivuv, irv*»- 
 utvo^ STrapnyraf anapaip^a^ai tt/v ijyefwviav vnb Te\uv6g re kcU tuv £«f^ 
 novaUtv : compare Homer, Iliad, vii. 125. See what appears to be an iisi- 
 IMion of the same pa98^:e in Josephas, De Bello Jodaico, m. 8, 4. ^^ 
 uiXaXa y av areva^eiav ol irdrpioi vojuoi, etc. 
 
 *Pindar. Pyth. xi. 16. * HerodoC L M. 
 
 *Flatan:ii. Theseus, c. 36, Cimoo, c 8 j Paosao. iii. 3i 6. 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 4Bi 
 
 i<» ' ■■'^ 
 
 MM*1 
 
HISTORY OF GBEECI 
 
 I 
 
 » 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 LACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES. 
 
 The earliest naiaes in Laconian genealogy are, an autocft* 
 
 thonous Lelex and a Naiad nymph Kleochareia. From this pail 
 •prung a son Eurotiis, and from him a daughter Sparta, who be- 
 came the wife of Lacedaemon, son of Zeus and Taygete, daughter 
 of Atla3. Ainyklas, son of Lacedaemon, had two sons, Kynortaa 
 and Hyacinthus — l;he latter a beautiful youth, the favorite of 
 Ajx)llo, by whose hiind he was accidentally killed while playing 
 al quoits: the festival of the Hyacinthia, which the Lacedasmo- 
 nians generally, and the Amykheans with special solemnity, cele- 
 brated throughout the historical ages, was traced back to this 
 legend. Kynortas was succeeded by his son Perieres, who mar- 
 ried Gorgophone, daughter of Perseus, and had a numerous issue 
 — Tyndareus, Ikarius, Aphareus, Lcukipj)us, and Ilippokoon. 
 Some authors gave the genealogy ditferently, making Perieres, 
 Bon of ^olus, to be the father of Kynortas, and (Ebalus son of 
 Kynortas, from whom sprung Tyndareus, Ikarius and Hippo- 
 koon.i 
 
 Both Tyndareus and Ikaiius, expelled by their brother Hip- 
 pokoon, were forced to seek shelter at the residence of Tliestius, 
 king of Kalydon, w hose daughter, Leda, Tyndareus espoused. 
 It is numbered among the exploits of the omnipresent Herakies, 
 that he slew Hippokoon and his sons, and restored Tyndareus to 
 his kingdom, thus creating for the subsequent Herakleidan kings 
 a mythical title to the throne. Tyndareus, as well as his brothers, 
 are persons of interest in legendary narrative : he is the %ther 
 of Kastor, of Timandra, married to Echemus, the hero of Tegea,2 
 lod of Klytaemnestra, married to Agamemnon. Pollux and the 
 erer-memorable Helen are the offspring of Leda by Zeus. Ik*' 
 
 * Compare ApoUod. iii. 10, 4. Pausan. iii. 1, 4. 
 
 * Hesiod. ap Schol Fiadar. OljmpL xi 79. 
 
 I 
 
 LaCOjWAK and MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES. 
 
 fe the father of Penelop^, wife of Odysseus: the contrast 
 Wtween her behavior and that of Klytaemnestra and Helen 
 became the more striking in consequence of their being so nearly 
 rolated. Aphareus is the father of Idas and Lynkeus, while 
 Leukippus has for his daughters, Phoebe and Ilaeira. Accord- 
 ing to one of the Hesiodic poems, Kastor and Pollux were both 
 sens of Zeus by I«eda, while Helen was neither daughter of Zeus 
 nor of Tyndareus, but of Oceanus and Tethys.' 
 
 The brothers Kastor and (Polydeukes, or) Pollux are no less 
 celebrated for tb^ir fraternal affection than for their great bodily 
 accomplishment^ ; Kastor, the great charioteer and horse-master; 
 Pollux, the firs* of pugilists. They are enrolled both among the 
 hunters of the Kalydonian boar and among the heroes of the 
 Argonautic expedition, in which Pollux represses the insolence 
 of Amykus, J'mg of the Bebrykes, on the coast of Asiatic Thrace 
 — the latter, a gigantic pugilist, from whom no rival has ever 
 escaped, challenges Pollux, but is vanquished and killed in the 
 fight.2 
 
 The two brothers also undeilook an expedition into Attica, for 
 the purpose of recovering their sister Helen, who had been 
 carried off by Theseus in her early youth, and deposited by him 
 at Aphidna, while he accompanied Perithous to the under-world, 
 in order to assist his friend in carrying off Persephone. The 
 force of Kastor and Pollux was irresistible, and when they re- 
 demanded their sister, the people of Attica were anxious to restore 
 her: but no one knew where Theseus had deposited his prize. 
 The invaders, not believing in the sincerity of this denial, pro- 
 ceeded to ravage the country, which would have been utterij 
 ruined, had not Dekelus, the eponymus of Dekeleia, been able to 
 indicate Aphidna as the place of concealment. The autochtho- 
 nous Titakus betrayed Aphidna to Kastor and Pollux, and Helen 
 
 fl 
 
 * Hesiod. ap. Schol. Pindar. Nem. x. 150. Fragm. Hesiod Duntzer, 5». 
 p. 44. Tyndareus was worshipped as a god at Lacedaemon CVarro ap. Serr 
 ftd Virgil, ^neid. viii. 275). 
 
 * Apollon. Rhod. ii. 1-96. Apollod. i. 9, 20. Theocrit xxii. 26-133. li 
 the account of Apollonius and Apollodoros, Amykus is slain in the contest; 
 in that of Theocritus he is only conquered and forced to give in, with a 
 promise to renounce for the future his brutal conduct; thcare were Mvenit 
 different narratiret. See Schol. Apollon. Rhod ii. 106. 
 
 VOL ^ 8 
 
 >•»*■ 
 
 •«ki 
 
 t'MU 
 
 If m 
 
 »'.» 
 
 M0' '" * * " > ^ 
 
I 
 
 170 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 KASTOB AND POLLUX. 
 
 171 
 
 > 
 
 was recovered : the br-others in evacuating Attica, carried away 
 into captivity ^thra, the mother of Theseus. In after-days, 
 when Kastor and PcJlux, under the title of the Dioskuri, had 
 come to be worshipped as powerful gods, and when the Athenians 
 were greatly ashamed of this act of Theseus — the revelation 
 made by Dekelus was considered as entitling him to the lasting 
 gratitude of his country, as well as to the favorable remembrance 
 o4 the Lacedaemonians, who maintained the Dekeleians in the 
 constant enjoyment of certain honorary privileges at Sparta,^ and 
 even spared that deme in all their invasions of Attica. Nor is it 
 .improbable that the existence of tliis legend had some weight in 
 determining the Lacedaemonians to select Dekelia as the place of 
 their occupation during the Peleponnesian war. 
 
 The fatal combat b<itween Kastor and Polydeukes on the one 
 gide, and Idsis and Lynkeus on the other, for the possession of 
 the daughters of Leukippus, was celebrated by more than one 
 ancient poet, and forms the subject of one of the yet remaining 
 Idylls of Theocritus. Leukippus had formally betrothed his 
 daughters to Idas and Lynkeus ; but the Tyndarids, becoming 
 enamored of them, outbid their rivals in the value of the cus- 
 tomary nuptial gifts, j)ersuaded the father to violate his promise, 
 and carried otf Phtjebe and Ilaeira as their brides. Idas and 
 Lynkeus pursued them and remonstrated against the injustice : 
 according to Theocritus, this was the cause of the combat. But 
 there was anotlier tale, which seems the older, and which assigns 
 a different cause to the quarrel. The four had jointly made a 
 predatory incursion into Arcadia, and had driven otf some cattle, 
 but did not agree about the partition of the booty — Idas carried 
 off into Messenia a portion of it which the Tyndarids claimed a» 
 
 » Diodor. iv. 63. Herml, iv. 73. ^eKeA^^JV 61 tCjv Tore Ipyaaafievuv l(y- 
 yav xphotfiov ^f Tdv iravra xpovov, uf avrol 'A^rjvaloi liyovai. According 
 to other authors, it was Akademus who made the revelation, and the spot 
 called Akademia, near Athens, which the Lacedaemonians spared in con- 
 iideration of this service (Plutarch, Theseus, 31, 32, 33, where he gives 
 several different versions of this tale by Attic writers, framed with the view 
 of exonerating Theseus). The recovery of Helen and the captivity of ^.thr» 
 were represented on the ancient chest of Kypselus, with the following corioM 
 
 inscnp Y^vdapida ' EXivav t^perov, Ai^pav 6* 'X^eva^ev 
 
 •EAueroi/. PMwan. v. 19 I 
 
 IT ofim. To reTenge and reimburse themselTee, the Tyndarids 
 invaded Messenia, placing themselves in ambush in the hollow of 
 an ancient oak. But Lynkeus, endued with preternatural pow- 
 ers of vision, mounted to the top of Taygetus, from whence, as he 
 could see over the whole Peloponnesus, he detected them in their 
 chosen place of concealment. Such was the narrative of the 
 ancient Cyprian Verses. Kastor perished by the hand c^ Idas, 
 Lynkeus by that of Pollux. Idas, seizing a stone pillar from the 
 tomb of liis father Aphareus, hurled it at Pollux, knocked him 
 down and stunned him ; but Zeus, interposing at the critical 
 moment for the protection of his son, killed Idas with a thunder- 
 bolt. Zeus would have conferred upon Pollux the gift of immor- 
 tality, but the latter could not endure existence without his brother: 
 be entreated permission to share the gift with Kastdr, and both 
 were accordingly permitted to live, but only on every other day.^ 
 
 The Dioskuri, or sons of Zeus, — as the two Spartan heroesi 
 Kastor and PoUux, were denominated, — were recognized in the 
 historical days of Greece as gods, and received divine honoiB. 
 This is even noticed in a passage of the Odyssey,^ which is at any 
 rate a very old interpolation, as well as in one of the Homerio 
 hymns. What is yet more remarkable is, that they were invoked 
 during storms at sea, as the special and all-powerful protectors of 
 the endangered mariner, although their attributes and their 
 celebrity seem to be of a character so dissimilar. They were 
 worshipped throughout most parts of Greece, but with preemineo 
 sanctity at Sparta. 
 
 Kastor and Pollux being removed, the Spartan genealogy 
 passes from Tyndareus to Menelaus, and from him to Orestes. 
 
 Originally it appears that Messene was a name for the western 
 portion of Laconia, bordering on what was called Pylos : it is so 
 represented in the Odyssey, and Ephorus seems to have included 
 it amongst the possessions of Orestes and his descendants. 
 
 ' Cypria Carm. Eragm. 8. p. 13, Diintzer. Lyoophron, 538-666 with 
 8chol. Apollod. iii. 11, 1. Pindar, Nem. x. 55-90. erepr^fupov u^avaaia»' 
 also Homer, Odyss. xi. 302, with the Commentary of Nitzsch, voL iii p. 34&. 
 
 The combat thus cods more favorably to the Tyndarids; but probably tfat 
 account least favorable to them is the oldest, since their dignity weat on 
 ttiaally increasing, until at lost they became great deitiea. 
 
 ' Odysi. zxL 15, Diodor. xv. 66. 
 
I 
 
 172 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 ARCADIAN GENEALOGY. 
 
 i7« 
 
 I 
 
 ii 
 
 Throughout the whole duration of the Messenico-Ddrian kiii|^ 
 
 dom, there never was any town called Messene: the town was 
 
 first founded by EpaDieinondas, after the battle of Leuctra. The 
 
 h'.Toic genealogy of Messenia starts from the sarae name as that 
 
 of Laconia — from the autochthonous Lelex: his younger son, 
 
 Folykaon, marries Messene, daughter of the Argeian Triopas, 
 
 and settles the country. Pausanias tells us that the posterity of 
 
 this pair occupied the country for five generations; but he in 
 
 vain searched the ancient genealogical poems to find the names 
 
 of their descendants.' To them succeeded Perieres, son of 
 
 ^olus ; and Aphareus and Leukippus, according to Pausanias, 
 
 were sons of Perieres. Idas and Lynkeus are tiie only heroes, 
 
 distinguished for personal exploits and memorable attributes, 
 
 belonging to Messenia proper. They are the counterpart of the 
 
 Dioskuri, and were interesting persons in the old legendary 
 
 poems. Marpessa wa^ the daughter of Euenus, and wooed by 
 
 Apollo : nevertheless Idas- carried her otf by the aid of a winged 
 
 chariot which he had received from Poseidon, Euenus pui*sued 
 
 them, and when he arrived at the river Lykormas, he found 
 
 himself unable to overtake them : his grief caused him to throw 
 
 himself into the river, which ever afterwards bore his name. Idas 
 
 brought Marpessa safe to Messenia, and even when Apollo there 
 
 claimed her of him, he did not fear to risk a combat with the god. 
 
 But Zeus interfered :is mediator, and permitted the maiden to 
 
 choose which of the two she preferred. She attached herself to 
 
 Ida^J, being apprehensive that Apollo would desert her in her old 
 
 age : on the death of her husband she slew herself. Both Idas 
 
 and Lynkeus took part in the Argonautic expedition Mid in 
 
 tlie Kalydonian boar-ltunt.^ 
 
 ' Pausan. iv. 2, 1. 
 
 ' Iliad, ix. 553. Simonides had handled this story in detail (Schol. Ven. 
 H ix. p. 553). Bacchylidf's Cap, Schol. Pindar. Istlim. iv 92) celebrated in 
 one of his poems the competition among many eager suitors for the hand of 
 Marpessa, under circumsuinces similar to the compeiition for Uippodameia, 
 daughter of (Enomaus. Man^ unsuccessful suitors perished by the hand of 
 Buenas : their skulls were affixed to the wall of the temple of Poseidon. 
 
 ' ApoUod. i. 7, 9. Pausan. iv. 2, 5. Apollonius Rhodius describes Idas as 
 fall of boast and self-contidence, heedless of the necessity of divine akL 
 Probably this was the cbaracier of the brothers in the old legend, as the 
 enemies of the Dioskuri. 
 
 The wrmth of the Dioskori agminst Messenia was treated, even in Ike 
 
 Aphareus, after the death of his sons, founded th^ tuwn of 
 Ar§ne, and made over most part of hie dominions to hi« iummm 
 N^leufi, with whom we pass into the Pylian genealogy. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 ARCADIAN QENEALOGY. 
 
 Fhe Arcadian divine or heroic pedigree begins with Pelasgus, 
 whom both Hesiod and Asius considered as an indigenous man, 
 though Akusilaus the Argeian represented him as brother of 
 Argos and .son of Zeus by JS'iobe, daughter of Phoroneus : this 
 logographer wished to establish a community of origin between 
 the Argeianfl and the Arcadians. 
 
 Lykaen, son of Pelasgus and king of Arcadia, had, by different 
 wives, fifty sons, the most savage, impious and wicked of man- 
 kind : Maenalus was the eldest of them. Zeus, in order that he 
 might himself become a witness of their misdeeds, presented 
 himself to them in disguise. They killed a child and served it 
 up to him lor a meal; but the god overturned ftie table and 
 struck dead with thunder Lykaun and all his fifty sons, with tSie 
 single exception of Nyktimus, the youngest, whom he spared at 
 the earnest intercession of the goddess Gtea (the Earth). The 
 town near which the table was overturned received the name of 
 Trapezus (Tabletown). 
 
 This singular legend (framed on the same etymological type 
 as that of the ants in ^gina, recounted elsewhere) seems ancient, 
 and may probably belong to the Hesiodic Catalogue. But Pau- 
 sanias tells us a story in many respects different, which waa 
 represented to him in Arcadia as the primitive local account, and 
 which becomes the more interesting, as he tells us that he himself 
 My believes it. Both tales indeed go to illustrate the same 
 
 historical times, as the grand cause of the subjection of the Mess^nians by 
 the Spartans: that wrath bad been appeased at the time whe^ Epameinondw 
 ^;9coustituted Messene (Pausan. iv. 2?, 1 j. 
 
 I 
 
 mm*m 
 
 tmrnm^-tti 
 
 m 9 
 
174 
 
 fflSTOBT OP OBEBOK. 
 
 \ 
 
 point — the ferocity of Lyka6a*s character, as well as the croal 
 rites which he practi^sed. The hitter was the first who established 
 the worship and solemn games of Zeus Lykaeus : he offered up a 
 child to Zeus, and made libations with the blood upon the altar. 
 Immediately after having perpetrated this act, he was changed 
 into a wolf.* 
 
 **Of the truth of this narrative (observes Pausanias) I feel 
 persuaded : it has been repeated by the Arcadians from old times, 
 and it carries probability along with it. For the men of that day, 
 from their justice and piety, were gaests and companions at table 
 with the gods, who manifested towards them approbation when 
 they were good, and anger if they behaved ill, in a palpable man- 
 ner: indeed at that time there were some, who having once been 
 men, became gods, and who yet retain their privileges as such — - 
 Aristaeus, the Kretan Britomartis, Herakles son of Alkmena, Am- 
 phiaraus the son of Oikles, and Pollux and Kastor besides. We 
 may therefore believe that Lykaon became a wild beast, and that 
 Niobe, the daughter of Tantalus, became a stone. Bat m my 
 time, wickedness ha\'ing enormously increased, so as to overrun 
 the whole earth and all the cities in it, there are no ferther 
 examples of men exalted into gods, except by mere title and from 
 adulation towards the powerful: moreover the anger of the gods 
 fidb tardily upon the wicked, and is reserved for them after their 
 departure from henots." 
 
 * ApoUodor. iii. 8, I. Hygin. fab. 176. Eratosthen. Oatasterism. 8. Pan* 
 •an. viii. 2, 2S. A different story respecting the immolation of the child is 
 m Nikolaas Damask. Fiag. p. 41, Oreili. Lykaon is mentioned as the first 
 ibander of the temple of Zeus Lykseus in Schol. Eurip. Crest 1662 ; but 
 nothing is there said about the human sacrifice or its consequences. In the 
 historical times, the festival and solemnities of the Lykaea do not seem to 
 have been distinguished materially from the other agones of Greece (Pindar, 
 Olymp. xiii. 104; Nem. x. 46): Xenias the Arcadian, one of the generals 
 In the army of Cyrus thr younger, celebrated the solemnity with great mag- 
 nificence in the march through Asia Minor (Xen. Anab. i. 2, 10). But the 
 fiible of the human sacrifice, and the subsequent transmutation of the person 
 who had eaten human food into a wolf, continued to be told in connectaoQ 
 with them (Plato, de Republic, viii. c. 1.5. p. 417). Compare Pliny, H.N. 
 viii. 34. This passage of Plato seems to afford distinct indication that the 
 practice of offering human victims at the altar of the Lykaean Zens iras 
 neither prevalent nor recent, but at most only traditional and antiquated' 
 and it therefore limits th<3 sense or invalidates the anthority of the FlModi^ 
 Platonic dialogue, Minoe« c & 
 
 LYKAON AND fflS SONS. 
 
 i7» 
 
 Pausanias then proceeds to censure those who, by multiplying 
 false miracles in more recent times, tended to i-ob the old and 
 grenuine miracles of their legitimate credit and esteem. The 
 passage illustrates forcibly the views which a religious and in- 
 structed pagan took of his past time — how inseparably he blend- 
 ed together in it gods and men, and how little he either recognized 
 or expected to find in it the naked phaenomena and historical 
 laws of connection which belonged to the world before him. He 
 treats the past as the province of legend, the present as that of 
 history ; and in doing this he is more sceptical than the persons 
 with whom he conversed, who believed not only in the ancient, 
 but even in the recent and falsely reported mi "acles. It is true 
 that Pausanias does not always proceed consistently with thi» 
 position : he often rationalizes the stories of the past, as if he 
 expected to find liistorical threads of connection ; and sometimes, 
 though more rarely, accepts the miracles of the present. But in 
 the present instance he draws a broad line of distinction between 
 present and past, or rather between what is recent and what is 
 ancient : his criticism is, in the main, analogous to that of Arrian in 
 regard to the Amazons — denying their existence during times 
 of recorded history, but admitting it during the early and un- 
 recorded ages. 
 
 In the narrative of Pausanias, the sons of Lykaon, instead of 
 perishing by thunder from Zeus, become the founders of the 
 various towns in Arcadia. And as that region was subdivided 
 into a great number of small and independent townships, each 
 having its own eponym, so the Arcadian heroic genealogy appears 
 broken up and subdivided. Pallas, Orestheus, Phigalus, Trape- 
 zeus, Maenalus, Mantineus, and Tegeat^s, are all numbered among 
 the sons of Lykaon, and are all eponyms of various Arcadian 
 towns.' 
 
 The legend respecting Kallisto and Arkas, the eponym of 
 Arcadia generally, seems to have been originally quite uidepcnd 
 ent of and distinct from that of Lykaon. Eumelus, indeed, and 
 Bome other poets made Kallisto daughter of Lykaon ; but neither 
 Hesiod, nor Asius, nor Pherekydes, acknowledged any relation* 
 ship between them.2 The beautiful Kallisto, companion oi 
 
 f i 
 
 
 Pans. riii. 3. Hygin. fab. 177. 
 
 ' Apollod. iii. 8, 8. 
 
176 
 
 mSTOBr OF QBEECE. 
 
 TELEFHU8 
 
 177 
 
 Arlftinis in the cbuse, had bound herself by a vow of cha^titj 
 Zeus, either by persuahion or by force, obtained a violation of the 
 vow, to the grievouH displeasure both of Here and Artemis. The 
 former changed K:Ulist6 into a bear, the latter when she was io 
 that shape killed her with an arrow. Zeus gave to tiie unfortu- 
 nate Kallisto a place among the stars, as the constellation of the 
 Bear: he also jireserved the child Arktu^, of which she was 
 pregnant by him, and gave it to the Atlantid nymph Maia to 
 
 bring upJ 
 
 Arkas, when he became king, obtained from Triptolemus and 
 communicated to his j)eople the first rudiments of agriculture ; 
 lie also taught them to make bread, to spin, and to weave. He 
 bad three sons — Azan, Ai)heidas, and Elatus : the first w&s the 
 eponym of Azania, the northern region of Arcadia ; the second 
 was one of the heroes of Tegea ; the third was father of Ischys 
 (rival of Apollo for the affections of Koronis), as well as of 
 iEpytus and Kylleii : the name of yEpytus jimong the heroes of 
 Arcadia is as old as the Catalogue in the Iliad.'^ 
 
 Aleus, son of Apheidas and king of Tegea, was the founder 
 of the celebrated temple and worship of Athene Alea in that 
 town. Lykurgus and Kepheus were his sons, Auge his daugh- 
 ter, who was seduc<;d by H«Vakles, and secretly bore to him a 
 child : the father, discovering what had haj)pened, sent Auge to 
 Nauplius to be sold into slavery : Teuthras, king of Mysia in 
 Asia Minor, purchased her an<l made her his wife : her tomb was 
 shown at l*orgamu,i on the river Kaikus even in the time of 
 Pausanias.^ 
 
 ' Pausiin. viii. 3, 2. Apollod. iii. 8, 2. Hesiod. apnd Eratosthen. Cataa- 
 terism. 1 Fnigm. 182, Marktsdi. Hy^'in. f. 177. 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, ii. 6tH. Find. Olymp. vi. 44-63. 
 
 The tomb of jEpytu^ , mentioned in the Iliad, was shown to Pausaniah 
 between Phencus and Stymphalus (Pausan. viii, 16, 2). ^pytus was a cog- 
 nomen of Hermes (Pausan. viii. 47, 3). 
 
 The hero Arkas was worshipped at Mantineia, under the special injunc- 
 tion of the Delphian orwle f Pausan. viii. 9, 2). 
 
 » Pausan. viii. 4, 6. Apollod. iii. 9, 1. Diodor. iv. 33. 
 
 A separate leg:end respecting Auge and the birth of Telephus was current 
 at Tegea, attached to the temple, statue, and cognomen of Eileithyia in tht 
 Tegeatic agora (Pansaii. viii. 48, 5). 
 
 Hekat»as seems to have narrated in detail the adventures of AogS (Pan 
 gan. viii 4, 4 ; 47, 3. Hekat«. Fragm. 345, Didot). 
 
 EuriA>id^'9 followed a different story about Auge and the birth of TSlephof 
 
 The child Telephus, exposed on Mount PartheniuB, wan won* 
 ierfully sustained by the milk of a doe : the herdsmen of Kory- 
 thus brought him up, and he was directed by the Delphian oracle 
 to go and find his parents in Mysia. Teuthras adopted him, and 
 he succeeded to the throne : in the first attempt of the army of 
 Agamemnon against Troy, on which occasion they mistook their 
 point and landed in Mysia, his valor signally contributed to the 
 repulse of the Greeks, though he was at last vanquished and 
 desperately wounded by the spear of Achilles — by whom how- 
 ever he was afterwards healed, under the injunction of the ora- 
 cle, and became the guide of the Greeks in their renewed attaci 
 U[>on the Trojans.' 
 
 From Lykurgus,2 the son of Aleus and brother of Auge, we 
 pa^s to his son Ankams, numbered among the Argonauts, finally 
 killed in the chase of the Kalydonian l>oar, and father of Agape- 
 n6r, who leads the Arcadian contingent against Troy, — (the 
 adventurers of his niece, the Tegeatic huntress Atalanta, have 
 already been touched upon), — then to Echemus, son of Aeropus 
 and grandson of the brother of Lykurgus, Kepheus. Echemus 
 is the chief heroic ornament of Tegea. When Hyllus, the son 
 of Herakles, conducted the Herakleids on their first expedi- 
 tion against Pelopormesus, Echemus commanded the Tegean 
 troops who assembled along with the other Peloponnesians at the 
 isthmus of Corinth to rei)el the invasion : it was agre^ 1 that the 
 dispute should be determined by single combat, and Echemus, as 
 the champion of Peloponnesus, encountered and killed Hyllus. 
 
 in his lost tragedy called Auge (See Strabo, xiii. p. 615). Respecting the 
 VLvaoi of JEschylus, and the two lost dran.as, 'AXeadal and yivaoi of Sopho- 
 kles, little can be made out. (See Welcker, Griechisch. Tragod. p. 53, 
 •08-414). 
 
 ' Telephus and his exploits wei^ much dwelt upon in the lost old epic 
 poem, the Cyprian Verses. See argument of that poem ap. DOntzer, 
 Bp. Fragm. p. 10. His exploits were also celebrated by Pindar (Olymp. 
 be. 70-79J; he is enumerated along with Hector, Cycnus, Memnon, the 
 most distinguished opponents of Achilles (Isthm. iv. 46). His birth, •• 
 well as his adventures, became subjects with most of the great Attic tngt- 
 diaus. 
 
 ' There were other local genealogies of Tegea deduced from Lykurgus : 
 Botachus, eponym of the Deme Botachid^e at that place, was his gran^os 
 (Nicolaos ap. Steph. Byi. v. Buraxldai). 
 
 VOL. I. $• i2oc 
 
 
178 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 U 
 
 .1 
 
 \ 
 
 • i 
 
 Pursuant to the stipalation by which they had bound themselve^ 
 the Herakleida retired, and abstained for three generations from 
 pressing their claim upon Peloponnesus^ This valorous exploit of 
 their great martial hero was cited and appealed to by the Tegeatea 
 before the battle of Plataea, as the principal evidence of their 
 claim to the second post in the combined army, next in pomt of 
 honor to that of the Lacedaemonians, and superior to that of the 
 Athenians : the latter replied to them by producing as counter-evi- 
 dence the splendid heroic deeds of Athens, — the protection of the 
 Herakleids against Eurystheus, the victory over the Kadmeians 
 of Thebes, and the complete defeat of the Amazons in Attica.^ 
 Nor can there be any doubt that these legendary glories were 
 both recited by the speakers, and heard by the listeners, with 
 profound and undoubting faith, as well as with heart-stirring 
 
 admiration. 
 
 One other person there is — Ischys, son of Elatus and grand 
 son of Arkas — in 1 he fabulous genealogy of Arcadia whom it 
 would be improper to pass over, inasmuch as his name and 
 adventures are conn«K!ted with the genesis of the memorable god 
 or hero iEscuIapius, or Asklepius. Koronis, daughter of Phleg- 
 yas, and resident near the lake Bojbeis in Thessaly, was beloved 
 by Apollo and became pregnant by him : unfaithful to the god, 
 Bhe listened to the piopositions of Ischys son of Elatus, and con 
 sented to wed him : a raven brought to AiX)llo the fatal news, 
 which so incensed him that he changed the color of the bird 
 from white, as it previously had been, into black.2 Artemis, to 
 
 » Herodot. ix. 27. Echcmus is described by Pindar (01. xi. 69) as gaining 
 the prize of wrestling in tbe fabulous Olympic games, on their first estab- 
 lishment by Herakles. Ue also found a place in the Hesiodic Catalogue ai 
 husband o'f Tiraandra, the sister of Helen and Klytamnestra (Hesiod 
 Jragm. 105, p. -3 1 8, Marktscheff.). 
 
 « Apollodor. iii. 10, 3; Hesiod, Fragm. 141-142, Marktscheff.; Strab. b 
 p. 442; Phcrekydes, Fragm. 8; Akusilaus, Fragm. 25, Didot 
 
 Tw fitv up dyye?MC ff^^s Kopa^^ lepm «^^ ^^ ^^ 
 Tltr&u #c ifya^hfv, koi f>' l<f>paaev Ipf atdrXa 
 *oi^(f) aKefxreKOfiTi. hri 'Uxv^ yvfie Kopwviv 
 E/Aartt^/f, ^Xeyvao dioyvf/roio ^vyarpa. (Hesiod, Fr.) 
 
 Tlie change of the color of the crow is noticed both ji Ovid, Metamorph 
 u. 632, in Antonin. Liberal, c. 20, aad in Serviua ad Virgil, ^aeid. rii 761 
 
 r 
 
 V| 
 
 ASKLEPIUtS. 
 
 179 
 
 ATenge the wounded dignity of her brother, pat KoroniB to 
 death ; but Apollo preserved the male child of which she was 
 about to be delivered, and consigned it to the Centaur Cheirdn to 
 be brought up. The child was named Asklepius or ^sculapius, 
 and acquired, partly from the teaching of the beneficent leech 
 Cheiron, partly from inborn and superhuman aptitude, a knowl- 
 edge of the virtues of herbs and a mastery of medicine and sur- 
 gery, such as had never before been witnessed. He not only 
 cured the sick, the wounded, and the dying, but even restored the 
 dead to life. Kapaneus, Eriphyle, Hippolytus, Tyndareus and 
 Glaukus were all atfirmed by different poets and logographers to 
 have been endued by liim with a new life.* But Zeus now Ibund 
 himself under the necessity of taking precautions lest mankind, 
 thus unexpectedly protected against sickness and death, should 
 no longer stand in need of the immortal gods : he smote Askld- 
 pius with thunder and killed him. Apollo was so exasperated 
 by this slaughter of his highly-gifled son, that he killed the 
 Cyclopes who had fabricated the thunder, and Zeus was about to 
 condemn him to Tartarus for doing so ; but on the intercession 
 of Latona he relented, and was satisfied with imposing upon him 
 a temporary servitude in the house of Admetus at Pherae. 
 
 Asklepius was worsliipped with very great solemnity at Trikka, 
 at Kos, at Knidus, and in many different parts of Greece, but espe- 
 cially at Epidaurus, so that more than one legend had grown up 
 
 though the name " Corvo custode ejus " is there printed ^vith a capital letter, 
 as if it were a man named Corvus. 
 
 > Schol. Eurip. Alkest. 1; Dioddr. iv. 71; Apollodor. iii. 10,3; Pindar, 
 Pyth. iii. 59; Sextos Empiric, adv. Grammatic. L 12. p. 271. StesichoriM 
 named Eriphyle — the Naupaktian verses, Hippolytus — (compare Serviua 
 ad Virgil, ^neid. vii. 761) ; Fanyasis, Tyndareus; a proof of the popularity 
 of this tale among the poets. Pindar says that jEsculapins waa " tempted by 
 gold" to raise a man from the dead, and Plato (Legg. iii- p- 408) copiei 
 him : this seems intended to afford some color for the subsequent punish- 
 ment. " Mercede id captum (observes Boeckh. ad Pindar. I.e.) ^scula- 
 pium fecisse recentior est fictio ; Pindari fortasse ipsius, quern tragici secuti 
 sunt: hand dnbie a medicorum avaris moribus profecta, qui GraBComm 
 medicis nostrisque communes sunt." The rapacity of the physicians (grant- 
 mg it to be ever so well-founded, both then and now) appears to me less 
 likely to have operated upon the mind of Pindar, than the dispoaition to 
 extenuate the cruelty of Zeus, by imputing guilty and sordid views to AsklA 
 pia». Compare the citation from Dikaearchus, infrh p. 249, note 1. 
 
 I* 
 
 i\\ 
 
 V 
 
 I! 
 
 I 
 
.1 
 
 f' 
 
 liO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ASKLEPIAD FAMILIES IN GREECE. 
 
 lai 
 
 'respecting the details of his birth and adventures : in particular) 
 his mother was by some called Arsinoe. But a formal applica> 
 tion had been made on this subject (so the Epidaurians told 
 Fausanias) to the ora«»le of Delphi, and the god in reply acknowl- 
 edged that Asklepius was his son by Konmis.' The tale above 
 lecounted seems to have been both the oldest and the most cur- 
 rent. It is adorned by Pindar in a noble ode, wherein howevei 
 he omits all mention of the raven as messenger — not specifying 
 who or what the spy was from wliom Apollo learnt the infidelity 
 of Koronis. By many this was considered as an improvement in 
 respect of poetical effect, but it illustrates the mode in which the 
 characteristic details and simplicity of the old fables- came to be 
 exchanged for dignified generalities, adapted to the altered taste 
 of society. 
 
 Machaon and Podaleirius, the two sons of Asklepius, com 
 mand the contingent from Trikka, in the north-west region of 
 Tiiessaly, at the siege of Troy by Agamemnon.^ They are the 
 leeches of tlie Grecian army, highly prize<l and consulted by all 
 the wounded chiefs. Tiieir inedieal renown was further pro- 
 longed in the subseiiiient poem of Arktinus, the Iliu-Persis, 
 wherein the one was represented as unrivalled in surgical opera- 
 tions, the other as sagacious in detecting and appreciating morbid 
 symptoms. It was J^odaleirius who first noticed the glaring 
 
 ' Pausun. ii. 26, where s.?vcral distinct stories are mentioned, each spring 
 in;j: up at some one or other of the sanctuaries of the god : quite enough to 
 justify the idea of these ^^iScuIapii (Cicero, N. D. iii. 22). 
 
 Homer, Hymn ad ulLsculap. 2. The tale briefly alluded to in the Homeric 
 Hymn, ad Apollin. 209. is evidently ditferent: Ischys is tliere the companioo 
 of Apollo, and Koronis is an Arcadian damsel. 
 
 Aristides, the fervent worshipper of Asklepius, adopted the story of Koro- 
 nis, and composed hymnti on the }u/iov Kopcoiudor kuc yeveaiv tov ^eoit 
 (Orat. 2,3. p. 463, Dind.). 
 
 * See Pindar, Pyth. iii. The Scholiast puts a construction upon Pindar s 
 words which is at any rate far-fetched, if indeed it be at all admissible : be 
 •apposes that Apollo knew the fact from his own omniscience, without any in- 
 formant, and he praises Pindar for having th is transformed the old fable. But 
 the words ov6' ^;iai^e okoivov seem certainly to imply some informant : to 
 •appose that okokov mean^ the god's own mind, is a strained interpretatioa 
 
 ^ Iliad, u. 730. The Messenians laid claim to the sons of Asklepius m 
 their heroes, and tried to JQ>stify tke pretension bgr a forced construction at 
 iiomer (Pausau. iii. 4 '* ' 
 
 iijes and disturbed deportment which [)receded the saicide of 
 Ajax.' 
 
 Galen appears uncertain whether Asklepius (aa well as Dion* 
 y«u8) was originally a god, or wheth. r he was first a man and 
 then became afterwards a god -^ but ApoUoddrus professed to fix 
 the exact date of his apotheosis.3 Throughout all the historical 
 a^es the descendants of Asklepius were numerous and widely 
 difiused. The many families or gentes called Asklepiads, who 
 devoted themselves to the study and practice of medicine, and 
 who principally dwelt near the temples of A8kle»^inA whither 
 sick and suffering men came to obtain relief — all recognized the 
 god not merely as the object of their common worship, but also 
 as their actual progenitor. Like Solon, who reckoned Iseleui 
 and Poseidon as his ancestors, or the Milesian HekataBus, who 
 traced his origin through fifteen successive links to a god — like 
 the privileged gens at Pelion in Thessaly,* who considered the 
 wise Centaur Cheiron as their progenitor, and who inherited from 
 him their precious secrets respecting the medicinal herbs of which 
 
 ' Arktinus, Epicc. GrsBc. Fragm. 2. p. 22, Diintzer. The llias Minor nieih 
 tioned the death of Machaon by Eurypylus, son of Telephus (Fragm. 5. pi 
 i9, Diintzer). 
 
 * ^ koKXrinio^ yi toi koI ^lofvaor, nr* uv^puTzoi izporepov ^(rrjfv elre k(U 
 a(}xv^fv &£oi (Gralen, Protreptic. 9. t. 1. p. 22, Kuhn.). Paasanias considers 
 him as ^ed^ k^ upxr/g (ii. 26, 7). In the important temple at Smyrna he 
 was worsnipped as Zft)f 'Acr/cAiyirtof (Aristides, Or. 6. p. 64 ; Or. 23. p. 456, 
 Dind.). 
 
 3 ApoUodor. ap. Clem. Alex. Strom, i. p. 381 ; see Heyne, Praerment 
 Apollodor. p. 410. According to Apollodoros, the apotheosis of Heraklte 
 and of ^sculapius took place at the same time, thirty-eight years after H6- 
 rakies began to reign at Argos. 
 
 < About Hekataeus, Herodot. ii. 143 ; about Solon, Diogen. La£rt, Vit 
 Platon. init. 
 
 A curious fragment, preserved from the lost works of Dikaearchas, tells oi 
 of the descendants of the Centaur Cheiron at the town of Pelion, or perhaps 
 at the neighboring town of Demetrias, — it is not qaite certain which, per- 
 haps at both (see Dikaearch Fragment, ed Fuhr, p. 408). Tatrnyv dk rfit 
 6ifvafiiv kv Tuv iToTurCiv oide yivo^, 6 6^ "keyercu Xci^vof anoycvov elvai ' 
 rapadiSuaL 6e koI deiKwai iraHjp viu, koX odruf ^ dvvofjitc (frvXamterai, «c 
 oMeig u/iXog oide tCjv noXiTotv • oix 5<Tt-ov 6e rcn>f hciaTafievovf ra <pdpfuuut 
 mtr&ov toIq Kafivoiai ^ori^eiv, dAAd npoiKa. 
 
 Plato, de Republ iii. 4 (p 391) 'A;t*'^Att)f *ir) r^) oo^urar^ Xeipum 
 ^v&pdfjifiEvoc. Compare Xenophon, De Venat c. 1 
 
 I .-''■ 
 
 «..n *r--«-' 
 
 M#ta 
 
 I. t 
 
181 
 
 mSTOBY OF GBLECK. 
 
 t) 
 
 ii 
 
 ^ 
 
 iH 
 
 their neighborhood wiis full, — Asklepiads, even of the later 
 times, numbered and speciiied all the intermediate links which 
 separated them from their primitive divine parent. One of these 
 genealogies has been preserved to us, and we may be sure that 
 there were many such, as the Asklepiads were found in many 
 different places, i Am<»ng them were enrolled highly instructed 
 and accomplished men, such as the great Hip}X)crates and the 
 historian Ktesias, who prided themselves on the divine origin of 
 themselves and their g(?n3"- — so much did the legendary element 
 pervade even the most philosophical and positive minds of his- 
 torical Greece Nor can there be any doubt that their means of 
 medical observation must have been largely extended by their 
 vicinity to a temple so much frequented by the sick, who came in 
 confident hopes of divine relief, and who, whilst they offered up 
 aaeritice and prayer to ^sculapius, and slept in his temple in 
 order to be favored with healing suggestions in their dreams, 
 might, in case the god withheld his supernatural aid, consult his 
 
 ' See the genealoj^y at length in Le Clerc, Historic de la Mt'decine, lib. ii. 
 c. 2. p. 78, also p. 287 ; also Littro, Introduction aux (Euvres Completes 
 d*Hip{>ocTate, t. i. p. 35. Hippocrates was the seventeenth from jEscula 
 pias. 
 
 Theo|)onipu.s the historia i went at considerahle length into the pedigree 
 of the Asklepiads of Kos and Knidus, tracing them np to Podaleirius and 
 his first settlement at Syrnuis in Karia (see Theopomp. Fragra. Ill, Didot) : 
 Polyanthus of Kyrene composed a special treatise -rein rfiq tCxv ' XaKAi]Kta- 
 <?d>v yevearur (Sextus Empiric, adv. Gramraat. i. 12. p. 271); see Stephan. 
 Byz. V. K<I>c, and especially Aristides, Orat. vi. Ascl^piadm. The Asklepiads 
 were even reckoned among the ' \pxvy^'''nL of Rhodes, jointly with the He- 
 imkleids (Aristides, Or. 44, nd Uhod. p. 839, Dind.). 
 
 In the extensive sacred enclosure at Epidanrus stood the stataeH of Askle- 
 |»ias and his wife Epione ( Pausan. ii. 29, 1 ) : two daughters are coupled with 
 him by Aristophanes, and he was considered especially evrtaig (Flatus, 654) 
 Jaso, Panakeia and Hygieia are named by Aristides. 
 
 •Plato, Protagor. c. 6 (p.. 311). 'Ittkokput^ rdv Koxtv^ rdv roJv 'Atr^/^- 
 matiCtv; also Ph»dr. c 121. (p. 270). About Ktesias, Galen, 0pp. t. v. p. 
 652, Basil. ; and Bahrt, Frafjm. Ktesiae, p. 20. Aristotle (see Stahr. Aristo- 
 telia, i. p. 32) and Xenophon, the physician of the emperor Claudius, were 
 both Asklepiads (Tacit. Annal. xii. 61). Plato, de Republ. iii. 405, calls 
 them ToiV KOfi^oi)^ ^ A.(TKXTfTria6ac. 
 
 Pausanias, a disiinguishedi physician at Getia in Sicily, and contemporary 
 of the philosopher Empedokles, w&s also an Asklepiad : see the verses oi 
 fSmuedokltts upon him. Dioe-en. Laert viii. 61. 
 
 i» » iij:. i >. — 
 
 ^a^^mimmm ii i « i !*■ O ■ > i 
 
 mtm 
 
 ASKLEPIADb AT KOS. rRIEKA, fi'rO. 
 
 183 
 
 bving iescendants.1 The sick visitors at K6s, or Trikka, or 
 Epidaurus, were numerous and constant, and the tablets usuallj 
 hung up to record the particulars of their maladies, the remedies 
 resorted to, and the cures operated by the god, formed both an 
 interesting decoration of the sacred ground and an instructive 
 memorial to the Askl^piads.^ 
 
 The genealogical descent of Hippocrates and the other Askl^ 
 piads from the god Asklepius is not only analogous to that of 
 Hekataius and Solon from their respective ancestoral gods, but 
 also to that of the Lacedaemonian kings from HerfJtles, upon the 
 basis of which the whole supposed chronology of the ante-histo- 
 rical times has been built, from Eratosthenes and Apollodorus 
 down to the chronologers of the present century.3 I shall revert 
 lo this hereafter. 
 
 » Strabo, vui. p. 374 ; Aristophan. Vesp. 122 j Plutus, 635-750 ; where th« 
 visit to the temple of ^sculapius is described in great detail, though with 
 a broad farcical coloring. 
 
 During the last illness of Alexander the Great, sevenl of his principal 
 officers slept in the temple of Serapis. in the hope that remedies would be 
 suggested to them in their dreams (Arrian, vii. 26). 
 
 Pausanias, in describing the various temples of AsklSpios which he saw, 
 announces as a fact quite notorious and well-understood, " Here cures are 
 wrought by the god " (ii. 36, 1 ; iii. 26, 7 ; vii. 27, 4) : see Suidas, v. 'Apia- 
 Tapxog. The Orations of Aristides, especially the 6th and 7th, Asklepius 
 and the AskUpiadoR, are the most striking manifestations of faith and thanks- 
 giving towards ^sculapius, as well as attestations of his extensive working 
 throughout the Grecian world ; also Orat 23 and 25, 'Upuv Aoyog, 1 and 3 : 
 and Or. 45 (De RhetoricA, p. 22. Dind.), al t' tv ^AaKTijjirtov tuv ael diarpi 
 QovTuv uyeXalf etc. 
 
 * Pausan. ii. 27, 3; 36, 1. Tavraic ^eypaftfieva kfffi Koi ^vSpCw KM.i 
 ywaiKuv ovofiara aKe(r&fVTu>v vtrd rov ^AokXijitiov, irpoaen di Koi v6aij/ia, 
 6. Ti iKaaroQ ivoarjoe, koi ^Truf /di>i7, — the cures are wrought by the god 
 
 himself. 
 
 ' " Apollodorus aetatem Hircnlis pro cardine chronologisB haboit " (Heyne. 
 ■d Apollod* r. Fragm. p 410 j. 
 
184 
 
 HlSrO&Y OF QREECm 
 
 iEAKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS 
 
 184 
 
 t! 
 
 ) 
 
 ll 
 
 I 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 JEAKUS AND fflS DESCEND ANTS. -.EGIN A, SALAMIS, AND PHTfflA 
 
 The memorable heroic genealogy of the jEakids establishes a 
 fabulous connection b^iween jEgina, Salamis, and Phthia, which 
 we can only recognize as a fact, without being able to trace ita 
 
 ongm. 
 
 19 
 
 ^akus was the son of Zeus, born of .^Egina, daughter of Aso- 
 pus, whom the god had carried off and brought into the island Ui 
 which he gave her name : she was afterwards married to Aktor, 
 and had by him Menojtius, father of Patroclus. As there were 
 two rivers named Asopus, one between Phlius and Sikyon, and 
 another between Thebes and Platjea — so the ^ginetan heroic 
 genealogy was connected both with that of Thebes and with that 
 of Phlius : and this belief led to practical consequences in the 
 minds of those who accepted the legends as genuine history. For 
 when the Thcbans, in the B8th 01ymi)iad, were hard-pressed in 
 war by Athens, they were directed by the Delphian oracle to 
 ask assistance of their next of kin : recollecting tliat Tliebe and 
 Jl''.<rina had been sistcMs, common daughters of Asopus, they were 
 induced to apply to tho J^^ginotans as their next of kin, and the 
 iEginetans jrave them aid, first by sending to them their common 
 heroes, the iLakids, n.ixt by actual armed force.' Pindar dwells 
 emphatically on the hecoic brotherhood between Thebes, his native 
 city, and ^gina.'-^ 
 
 ^akus was alone in iEgina: to relieve him from this solitude 
 Zeus changed all the ants in the island into men, and thus pro- 
 vided him with a numerous population, who, from their origin, 
 were called Myrmidons.:' By his wife Endeis, daughter o f Chei - 
 
 » Herodot. V. 81. « Nem. iv. 22. Isthm. vii. 16. 
 
 » This tale, respecting: the transformation of the ants into men, is as old 
 UH the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women. See Dontzer, Fragm. Epicc. 21. p. 
 84 ; evidently an etymological tale from the name Myrmidones. Pausaniai 
 throws aside both the etymology and the details of the aataclc : L^ aajn 
 
 v^n, .£akus had for his sons PSleus and Telamon : by the Nereid 
 Psamathe, he had Phokus. A monstrous crime had then recently 
 been committed by Pelops, in killing the Arcadian prince, 8tym- 
 phalus, under a simulation of friendship and hospitality : for this 
 the gods had smitten all Greece with famine and barrenness. 
 The oracles affirmed that nothing could relieve Greece from this 
 intolerable misery except the prayers of ^akus, the most pioui 
 of mankind. Accordingly envoys from all quarters flocked to 
 -<Egina, to prevail upon ^akus to put up prayers for them ; on his 
 supplications the gods relented, and the suffering immediately 
 ceased. The grateful Greeks established in ^gina the temple 
 and worship of Zeus Panhellenius, one of the lasting monuments 
 and institutions of the island, on the spot where ^akus had 
 offered up his prayer. The statues of the envoys who had come 
 to solicit him were yet to be seen in the ^^akeium, or sacred 
 edifice of ^akus, in the time of Pausanias : and the Athenian 
 Isokrates, in his eulogy of Evagoras, the despot of Salamis in 
 Cyprus (who traced his descent through Teukrus to ^akus), 
 enlarges upon this signal miracle, recounted and believed by 
 other Greeks as well as by the -^ginetans, as a proof both of 
 the great qualities and of the divine favor and patronage dis- 
 played in the career of the ^akids.' jEakus was also employed 
 to aid Poseidon and Apollo in building the walls of Troy.^ 
 
 Peleus and Telamon, the sons of ^akus, contracting a jeal- 
 
 that Zeus raised men from the earth, at the prayer of jEakus (ii. 29, 2) : 
 other authors retained the etymology of Myrmidons from fxinj/xTjKtc,, but gave 
 a different explanation (Kallimaclius, Fragm. 114, Duntzer). M.vpfj.id6iu/v 
 kaaJiva (Strabo, viii. p. 375). 'Errrrz/v, n olKtarrig (Hygin. fab. 52). 
 
 According to the Thessalian legend, Myrmidon was the son of Zeus by 
 Eurymedusa, daughter of Kletor ; Zeus having aj^sumed the disguise of as 
 ant (Clemens Alex. Admon. ad Gent. p. 25. Sylb.). 
 
 ' Apollod. iii. 12, 6. Isokrat. Evagor. Encom. vol. ii. p. 278, Auger. Paa 
 flan. i. 45, 13; ii. 29, 6. Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 1253. 
 
 So in the 106th Psalm, respecttng the Israelites and Phinees, v. 29, '* They 
 provoked the Lord to anger by their inventions, and the plague was great 
 among them ; " " Then stood up Phinees and prayed, and so the plague 
 ceased ; " " And that was counted unto hiri for righteousness, among all 
 posterities for evermore." 
 
 * Pindar, Olymp. viii. 41, with the Scholia. Didymof did not find thif 
 story in any odier poet older than Pindai 
 
•1 
 
 186 
 
 mSTOBY OF GSEKCE. 
 
 tni^y of their bastard brother, Phokus, in oontsequence of Id* 
 eminent iikill in |2:ymnastic contests, conspired to put him tx) death. 
 Telamon filing his quoit at him while they were playing together, 
 and Peleus despatched hira by a blow with his hatchet in the 
 back. They then concealed the dead body in a wood, but ^akus, 
 having discovered both the act and the agents, banished the 
 brothers from the island. ^ For both of them eminent destinies 
 were in store. 
 
 While we notice the indifference to the moral quality of ac- 
 tions implied in the old Hesiodic legend, when it imputes dis- 
 tinctly and nakedly this proceeding to two of the most admired 
 persons of the heroic world — it is not less instructive to witnesd 
 the change of feeling which had taken place in the age of Pindar. 
 That warm eulojrist of the great ^akid race hangs down his 
 head with shame, and declines to recount, though he is obliged 
 darkly to glance at the cause which forced the pious JEakus to 
 banish his sons from jEgina. It appears that Kallimachus, if 
 we may judge by a short fragment, manifested the same repug- 
 nance to mention it.'^ 
 
 Telamon retired to Salamis, then ruled by Kychreus, the son 
 of Poseidon and Salamis, who had recently rescued the island 
 from the plague of a terrible serpent. This animal, expelled 
 from Salamis, retired to Eleusis in Attica, where it was received 
 and harbored by the goddess Demeter in her sacred domicile.3 
 Kychreus dying childless left his dominion to Telamon, who, mar- 
 
 ' Apollod. iii. 12, <>, who relates the tale somewhat differently ^ but the old 
 flpic poem Alkmaeonis gave the details (ap. Schol. Eurip. Androraach. 685) — 
 
 'Evi!^a fiev uvri^eoc TeAa/iwv rpoxoeidei dioKi^ 
 THrj^e Kupij ' Tlrilei>c de i^owf avd x^^P^ ravvaac^ 
 ^A^ivijv Hxa^Kov kTre-rz'Kijyei fieru vura. 
 
 ■ Pindar, Nem. v. 15, with Scholia, and Kallimach. Frag. 136. Apolloni- 
 us Rhodins represents the fratricide as inadvertent and unintentional (i. 92); 
 one instance among;3t many of the tendency to soften down and moralise 
 the ancient tales. 
 
 Pindar, however, rteems to forget this incident when he speaks in other 
 places of the general character of PSleas (Olymp. ii. 75-86. Isthm. vii. 40). 
 
 ^ Apollod. iii. 12, 7. Eaphorion, Fragm. 5, Diintzer, p. 43, Epicc. GrffC. 
 There may have been a tutelary serpent in the temple at Eleusis, as there wee 
 in that of Athene Pc»lias at Athens (Herodot viii. 41. Pbotins, T. OUovow 
 \<^w Aristophan. Lysistr. 759, with the SchoL). 
 
 PELEUS AND TELAMON. 
 
 187 
 
 lying Periboea, daughter of Alkathoos, and gra id-daughter of 
 Pelops, had for his son the celebrated Ajax. Telamon tooic 
 pttrt both in the chase of the Kalydotiian boar and in the Argo- 
 muitic expedition : he was also the intimate friend and companion 
 of Herakles, whom he accompanied in his enterprise against the 
 Amazons, and in the attack made with only six ships upon Lao- 
 medon, king of Troy. This last enterprise having proved com- 
 pletely successful, Telamon was rewarded by Herakles with the 
 possession of the daughter of Laomedon, Hesione — who bore to 
 him Teukros, the most distinguished archer amidst the host of 
 Agamennon, and the founder of Salamis in Cyprus.' 
 
 Peleus went to Phthia, where he married the daughter of 
 Eurytion, son of Aktor, and received from him the third part of 
 his dominions. Taking part in the Kalydonian boar-hunt, he 
 onintentionally killed his father-in-law Eurytion, and was obliged 
 to flee to lolkos, where he received purification from Akastus, 
 ■on of Pelias : the danger to which he became exposed by the 
 calumnious accusations of the enamoured wife of Akastus has 
 already been touched upon in a previous section. Peleus also 
 was among the Argonauts ; the most memorable event in his life 
 however was his marriage with the sea-goddess Thetis. Zeue 
 and Poseidon had both conceived a violent passion for Thetis. 
 But the former, having been forewarned by Prometheus that 
 Thetis was destined to give birth to a son more powerful than 
 his father, compelled her, much against her own will, to marry 
 Peleus ; who, instructed by the intimations of the wise Cheiron, 
 was enabled to seize her on the coast called Sepias in the south- 
 em region of Thessaly. She changed her form several times, 
 but Peleus held her fast until she resumed her original appear- 
 ance, and she was then no longer able to resist. All the gods 
 were present, and brought splendid gifts to these memorable nup- 
 tials : Apollo sang with his harp, Poseidon gave to Peleus the 
 immortal horses Xanthus and Balius, and Cheiron presented m 
 
 ' AppoUod. iii. 12, 7. Hesiod. ap. Strah. ix. p. 393. 
 
 The libation and prayer of Herakles, prior to the birth of Ajax, and his 
 fixing the name of Ae yet unborn child, from an eagle {aiETb^) which ap- 
 peared in response to his words, was detailed in the Hesiodic Eoia, and ii 
 celebrated hj Findair (Isthm t. 30-54). See also the Scholia 
 
 w 
 
 ^i^ 
 
/ 
 
 BISTOBY OF (IREEGK. 
 
 ACHILLES AND AJAX. 
 
 189 
 
 ionnidable spear, cot from an ash-tree on Mount P61ion. Wo 
 shall have reason hereafter to recognize the value of both tnese 
 gifts in the exph>its of Achilles.* 
 
 The prominent part assigned to Thetis in the Iliad is well 
 known, and the post- Homeric poets of the Legend of Troy in- 
 troduced her as actively concurring first to promote the glory, 
 finally to bewail the death of her distinguished son.'^ Peleus, 
 having survived both his son Achilles and his grandson Neopto- 
 lemus, is ultimately directed to place himself on the very spot 
 where he had originally seized Thetis, and thither the goddess 
 comes herself to fetch him away, in order that he may exchange 
 the desertion and decrepitude of age for a life of immortality 
 along with the N«^reids.^ The spot was indicated to Xerxes when 
 he marched into Greece by the lonians who accompanied him, 
 and his magi oliiered solemn sacrifices to her as well as to the 
 other Nereids, as the presiding goddesses and mistresses of the 
 *oast.^ 
 
 Neoptolemus or Pyrrhus, the son of Achilles, too young to 
 engage in the commencement of the siege of Troy, comes on the 
 Btage after the death of his father as the indispensable and pro- 
 minent agent in the final capture of the city. He returns vict<Mr 
 from Troy, not to Phthia, but to Epirus, bringing with him the 
 captive Andromache, widow of Hector, by whom Molossus is 
 
 ' Appollodor. iii 13, 5. Homer, Iliad, xviii. 434; xxiv. 62. Pindar, 
 Nein. iv. 50-68; Istfim. vii. 27-50. Herodot. vii. 192. Catullus, Carm. 64. 
 Epithal. Pel. et Thetidos, with the prefatory remarks of Doering. 
 
 The nuptials of Peleus and Thetis were much celebrated in the Hesiodic 
 Catalo|;ue, or perhaps in the Eoiai (Diinteer, Epic. Grtec. Frag. 36. p. 39), 
 and jEgimius — see Schol ad Apollon. Rhod. iv. 869 — where there is a 
 curious attempt of Staphylus to rationalize the marriage of Peleus and 
 Thetis. 
 
 There was a town, seemingly near Pharsalus in Thessaly, called Thetide 
 inm. Thetis is said to have been carried by Peleus to both these places: 
 probably it grew op round a temple and sanctuary of this goddess (Pherekyd. 
 Frag. 16, Didot; Hellank. ap. Stcph. Byz. QeartSciov). 
 
 * See the arguments of the lost poems, the Cypria and the .^thiopis, as 
 given by Proclus, in DOntzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr. p. 11-16; also Schol. ad 
 Hiad. xvi. 140; and the extract from the lost irvxoffTOiTia *f JCschylu, i|i 
 Plato, de Republic, ii. c. 21 (p. 382, St.). 
 
 * Eurip. Androm. 1242-1260; Pindar^ Olymp. il 8t. 
 Uerodot. vii 198 
 
 bom to him. He himself perishes in the full vigor of life «t 
 Delphi by the machinations of Orestes, son of Agamemnon. But 
 his son Molossus — like Fleance, the son of Banquo, in Macbeth 
 — becomes the father of the powerful race of Molossian kings, 
 who played so conspicuous a part during the declining vigor of 
 the Grecian cities, and to whom the title and parentage of iEakida 
 was a source of peculiar pride, identifying them by community 
 of heroic origin with genuine and undisputed Hellenes.^ 
 
 The glories of Ajax, the second grandson of JEakus, before 
 Troy, are surpassed only by those of Achilles. He perishes by 
 his own hand, the victim of an insupportable feeling of humilia- 
 tion, because a less worthy claimant is allowed to carry oft' from 
 him the arms of the departed Achilles. His son Philaeus receives 
 the citizenship of Athens, and the gens or deme called Philaidaa 
 traced up to him its name and its origin : moreover the distin 
 guished Athenians, Militiades and Thucydides, were regarded ai 
 members of this heroic progeny .2 
 
 Teukrus escaped from the perils of the siege of Troy as well 
 as from those of the voyage homeward, and reached Salamis in 
 safety. But his father Telamon, indignant at his having relum- 
 ed without Ajax, refused to receive him, and compelled him to 
 expatriate. He conducted his followers to Cyprus, where he 
 founded the city of Salamis : his descendant Evagoras was re- 
 cognized as a Teukrid and as an ^akid even in the time of 
 Isokrates.3 
 
 * Plutarch, Pyrrh. 1; Justin, xi. 3; Eurip. Androm. 1253; Arrian, Exp. 
 Alexand. i. 11. . 
 
 * Pherekydes and Hellanikus ap. Marcellin. Vit. Thucydid. init. ; Pausaa. 
 ii. 29, 4; Plutarch, Solon, 10. According to Apollodorus, however, Phere 
 kydes said that Telamon was only the friend of Peleus, not his brother,— 
 not the son of ^akus Ciii. 12, 7) : this seems an inconsistency. There was 
 however a warm dispute between the Athenians and the Megarians respect- 
 ing the title to the hero Ajax, who was claimed by both (see Pausan. i. 42, 
 4; Plutarch, /. c.) : the Megarians accused Peisistratus of having interpolated 
 a line into the Catalogue in the Tiad (Strabo, ix. p. 394). 
 
 * Herodot. vii. 90; Isokrat. Enc. Ovag. ta sup.; Sophokl. Ajax, 984-995; 
 Vellei. Patercul. i. 1 ; JEschyl. Pers. 891, and Schol. The return from 7roy 
 of Teakras, hf s banishment by Telamon, and his settlement in Cyprus, form 
 •d the subject of the Tevxpoc of Sophokles, and of a tragedy under a similw 
 
 tm 
 
/ 
 
 190 
 
 mSTOBT OP GREECE. 
 
 R 
 
 » 
 
 Such was the wplendid heroic geoealogj of the .^akids, m 
 
 family renowned for military excellence. The ^akoion at -^gi- 
 na, in which prayer and sacrifice were offered to ^akns, remain- 
 ed in undiminished dignity down to the time of Paosanias.^ This 
 genealogy connects together Tarious eminent gentes in Achaia 
 Phthiotis, in ^gina, in Salamis, in Cyprus, and amongst the 
 Epirotic Molossians. Whether we are entitled to infer fix)m it 
 that the island of .^igina was originally peopled by Myrmidones 
 from Achaia Phthiotis, as O. MuUer imagines,^ I will not pretend 
 to aflirm. These mythical pedigrees seem to unite together spe 
 
 cial clans or gentes, rather than the bulk of any community 
 
 just as we know tliat the Athenians generally had no part in the 
 jEakid genealogy, though certain particular Athenian families laki 
 claim to it. The intimate friendship between Achilles and the 
 Opuntian hero Pai^roclus — and the community of name and fre- 
 quent conjunction between the Locrian Ajax, son cfit Oileus, and 
 Ajax, son of Telamon — connect the -/Eakids with Opus and the 
 Opuntian Locrians, in a manner which we have no farther means 
 of explaining. Pindar too represents Menoetius, father of Patro- 
 clus, as son of Aktor and -^gina, and therefore maternal brothei 
 of JEakus.3 
 
 title by Pacuvius (Cicijro de Orat i. 58 j ii. 46^ ; Sophokl. Ajax, 892 j Pacavii 
 Fragm. Teucr. 15. — 
 
 ** Te repndio, nee recipio, natam abdico, 
 
 Facesse." 
 
 The legend of Teukros was connected in Attic archaeology with the pecaliar 
 
 functions and formalities of the judicature, ev ^^^earroi (Paosan i S8, i2* 
 
 u. 29, 7). ' ' 
 
 » Hesiod, Fragm. Diintz. Eoiai, 55, y. 43.— 
 
 'AA/c^ ftkv yap ISuKev 'OU/nmw: AloKiSaiau, 
 Novv <J' 'Xfiv^aoviSaic, ir?Mvrov S* iirof/ 'Arpeid^i, 
 Polyb. V. 2.— 
 
 AiaKida^, iroT.euf,} Kexaprforag ^e datri 
 • See his ^ginetica, p. 14, his earliest work. 
 
 ' Pindar, Olymp. b;. 74. The hero Ajax, son of OTleus, wrs espedafl^ 
 worshipped at Opus ; aolemn festivals and games were celebrated in hit 
 honor. 
 
 
 ATTIC LEGENDS AND Q£N£AL06I£8 
 
 191 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES 
 
 I'he most ancient name in Attic archaeology, as far as our 
 means of information reach, is that of Erechtheus, who is men- 
 tioned both in the Catalogue of the Iliad and in a brief allusion 
 of the Odyssej. Born of the P:arth, he is brought up by the 
 goddess Athene, adopted by her as her ward, and installed in her 
 temple at Athens, where the Athenians offer to him annual sac- 
 rifices. The Athenians are styled in the Iliad, " the people of 
 Erechtheus."' This is the most ancient testimony concerning 
 Erechtheus, exhibiting him a.s a divine or heroic, certainly a su- 
 perhuman person, and identifying him with the primitive ger- 
 mination (if I may use a term, the Grecian equivalent of which 
 would have pleased an Athenian ear) of Attic man. And he 
 was recognized in this same character, even at the close of the 
 fourth century before the Christian a^ra, by the Butadai, one of 
 the most ancient and important Gentes at Athens, who boasted 
 of him as their original ancestor : the genealogy of the great 
 Athenian orator Lykurgus, a member of this family, drawn up 
 by his son Abron, and painted on a public tablet in the Erechthe- 
 ion, contained as its first and highest name, Erechtneus, son of 
 Heph«stos and the Earth. In the Erechtheion, Erechtheus was 
 worshipped conjointly with Athene : he was identified with the 
 god Poseidon, and bore the denomination of Poseidon Erecb- 
 
 ' Iliad, ii. 546. Odyss. vii. 8L — 
 
 01 d" up' 'AT^Tfva^ elxov 
 
 Aiffiov 'EpexT^f/oc fieyaXTfTopog, 6v ttot' 'A^Tft^ 
 epefe, Aide -^vyarrip, teke 6e ^ei^upo^ 'Apovpt 
 KuS 6' Iv ^A^Tfvya' elaev ^^ hi niovi vrj^^ 
 'Ei^a<Je fuv ruvpoiat koI upveioic i^uovToi 
 Kovpoi ' k^vaiuv. neaire\Xouevuv h'tavrutf. 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 10 
 
 mmn 
 
192 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 1. 
 
 tlieus : one of the family of the Butadae, chosen among f hemselvea 
 by lot, enjoyed the privilege and performed the functions of his 
 hereditary priestJ Herodotus also assifms the same earth-bom 
 orijrin to Erechtheus:2 but Pindar, the old i)oem called the Da- 
 niiis, Euripides and Apollodorus — all name Eriehthonius, son of 
 Iir-phastos and the Eartl^ as the being who was thus adopted 
 and made the temple-companion of Athene, while Apollodorus in 
 another place identities Eriehthonius with Poseidon.^ The Ho- 
 meric scholiast treated Erechtheus and Eriehthonius as the same 
 pcivon under two names H and since, in regard to such mythical 
 persons, there exists no other test of identity of the subject ex- 
 cept perfect similarity of the attributes, this seems the reasonable 
 conclusion. 
 
 We may presume, from the testimony of Homer, that the first 
 and oldest conceT)tion of Athens and its sacred acropolis places it 
 under the special pix)tection, and represents it as the settlement 
 and favorite abode of Athene, jointly with Poseidon ; the latter 
 being the inferior, though the chosen companion of the former, 
 and therefore excthanging his divine appellation for the cog- 
 nomen of Erechtheus. But the country called Attica, which, 
 during the historical ages, forms one social and political aggregate 
 with Athens, was originally distributed into many independent 
 
 • See the Life of Lykui^ns, in Plutarch's (I call it hv that name, tw it is 
 always printed with hi;! works) Lives of the Ten Orators, torn. iv. p. 382- 
 384, Wytt. Karfr/nv 6t- rd ; rVof aird tovtup kqI 'Epex^iu,^ rov F^f Kal 
 
 '^'P'^^^^'-ov Km f<rTiv avTii rj Karayijy^ rov yevovg tC>v lepaaafievuv 
 
 Tov noaeidQvo<:, etc. "Of r^v iepcjavvrfv UonndCivoc 'Epex^eoc elxe (pp. 
 382, 38.3). Erechtheus Hupedpoc of Atht^ne— Aristides, Panathenaic p. 
 184, with the Scholia of Frommel 
 
 Btatgs, the eponytnus of the Hiitadie, is the first priest of Poseidon Erich- 
 thonius: Apollod. iii. 15, 1. So Kallais (Xenoph. Svmpos. viii. 40), Upei>^ 
 
 ' Ilerodot. viii. 55. 
 
 • Harpokration, v. Khrox^Civ. 'O 6i Uivfiapo^ Kal 6 ryv lavatda neirointtiH 
 0nmv. 'Epix^ovtov r^ mairrrov Kal F^f ^avF/vai. Euripidds, Ion. 31 
 Apollod. iii. 14, 6 ; 15, 1. Compare Plato, Tim«as, c. 6. 
 
 • Schol. ad Biad. ii. 546, where he cites also Kallimachns for the story of 
 Enchthonius. Etyraolocricon Magn. 'Epex^evc. Plato (Kritias, c. 4) em- 
 ploys va^e and general language to describe the agency of H^phostos and 
 Ath^nfi, which the old fable in ApoUodonw (iu. 14, 6) detaUs in coarser 
 terms. See Ovid, Metam. ii. 757 
 
 LhOENDS OF THE ATTIO DEMES AND GENTE& 
 
 IM 
 
 A6mes or cantons, and included, besides, various religiouB claiM 
 or hereditary sects (if the expression may be permitted) ; that 
 is, a multitude of persons not necessarily living together in the 
 same locality, but bound together by an hereditary communion of 
 sacred rites, and claiming privileges, as well as perfbnning obli- 
 gations, fou'^ded upon the traditional authority of divine persons 
 for whom they had a common veneration. Even down to the 
 beginning of the Peloponnesian war, the demots of the various 
 Attic denies, though long since embodied in the larger political 
 union of Attica, and having no wish for separation, still retained 
 the recollection of their original political autonomy. They lived 
 in their own separate localities, resorted habitually to their own 
 temples, and visited Athens only occasionally for private or po- 
 litical business, or for the great public festivals. E)ach of those 
 aggregates, political a^ well as religious, had its own eponymous 
 god or hero, with a genealogy more or less extended, and a trrJn 
 of mythical incidents more or less copious, attached to his name, 
 according to the fancy of the local exegetes and poets. The 
 eponymous heroes Marathon, Dekelus, Kolonus, or Phlius, hf^d 
 each their own title to worship, and their own position as themes 
 *ji' legendary narrative, independent of Erechtheus, or Poseidon, 
 or Athene, the patrons of th(' acro])olis common to all of them. 
 
 But neither the archaeology of Attica, nor that of its various 
 component fractions, wa.s much dwelt u|x>n by the ancient epic 
 poets of Greece. Theseus is noticed both in the Iliad and 
 Odyssey as having carried ofl' from Krete Ariadne, the daugh- 
 ter of Minos — thus commencing that connection between the 
 Kretan and Athenian legends which we afterwards find so large- 
 ly amplified — and the sons of Theseus take part in the Trojan 
 war.i The chief collectors and narrators of the Attic mythes 
 were, the prose logographers, authors of the many compositions 
 called Atthides, or works on Attic archaeology. These writers — 
 Hellanikus, the contemporary of Herodotus, is the earliest com- 
 poser of an Atthis expressly named, though Pherekydes also 
 touched upon the Attic fables — these writers, I say, interwove 
 into one chronological series the legends wliich either greatly oo 
 copied their own fancy, or commanded the most general reverence 
 
 ' iKthra, mother of Theseiw, is also mentioned (Homer, Iliad, iii. 144). 
 TOL. I. 9 l3oc. 
 
IM 
 
 HISTOBT OP GREECE. 
 
 ATHENE AND POSEIDON. 
 
 J 
 
 i 
 
 among their countiymen. In this way the religious and politico 
 legend * of Eleusis, a town originally indepeLdent of Athens, but 
 incorj)orated with it l)efore the historical age, were worked into 
 one continuous sequence along with those of the Erechtheids. 
 In this way, Kekrops, the e}>onymous hero of the portion of 
 Attira called Kekropsa, came to be placed in the mythical chro- 
 nolot^y at a higher fioint even than the primitive god or here 
 Erechtheus. 
 
 ^oJJ?^^ j^ ^^^^^ ^o have reigned in Attica ■ 1020 years before the 
 first Olympiad, or 1 796 years b. c. In his time happened the 
 deluge of Deukalion, which destroyed mo;^t of the inhabitants of 
 the country : after a long interval, Kekrops, an indigenous person, 
 half man and half serpent, is given to us by Apollodorus as the 
 first king of the country: he bestowed upon the land, which had 
 before been called Acte, the name of Kekropia. In his day there 
 ensued a dispute between Athene and Poseidon respecting the 
 po8session of the acropolis at Athens, which each of them cov- 
 eted. First, Poseidon struck the rock with his trident, and 
 produced the well of salt water which existed in it, called the 
 Erechtheis : next came Athene, who [danted the sacred olive-tree 
 ever afterwards seen and \ enerated in the j)ortion of Erech- 
 theion called the cell of Pandrosus. The twelve gods decided the 
 dispute ; and Kekrops having testified before them that Athene 
 bad rendered this inestimable service, they adjudged the spot to 
 her in preference to Poseidon. Both the ancient olive-tree and 
 the well produced by Poseidon were seen on the acropolis, in the 
 temple consecrated jointly to Athene and Erechtheus, throughout 
 the historical ages. Poseidon, as a mark of his wrath for the 
 
 • Hellunikus, Fragin. 62 ; Pliilothor. Fragra. 8, ap. Euseb. Praep. Evang. 
 X. 10 p 489. Larcher (Chronologie d'Herodote, ch ix. s. 1. p. 278) treats 
 both the historical personality and the date of Ogyges as perfectly well aa- 
 thenticatcd. 
 
 It is not probable that Philochorus should have given Any calculation of 
 6me having reference to Olympiads ; and hardly conceivable that Hellani 
 kas shonld have done so. Justin Martyr quotes Hellanikns and Philochonu 
 •8 having mentioned Moses. — wf a<^6Spa apxaiov koI na?.aiov t€>v ^lovSaiutf 
 ApxovToi; Mtji>fff wf fiifjivrjvrai — which is still more incredible even than th^ 
 
 srtion of Eusebius about their having fixed the date of Ogyftea 1^ v OVfm 
 (see Philochor. Fragm. 9). 
 
 196 
 
 witk 
 
 preference given to Ath^nS, inundated the Thriasian 
 
 water.* 
 
 During the reign of Kekrops, Attica was laid waste by Karian 
 f)irates on the coast, and by invasions of the Aonian inhabitants 
 from Ikeotia. Kekrops distributed the inhabitants of Attica into 
 twelve local sections — Kekropia, Tetrapolis, Epakria, Dekeleia, 
 Eleusis, Aphidna, Thoriku.s, Brauron, Kytherus, Sphettus, Ke- 
 phisius, Phaierus. Wishing to ascertain the number of iuhabitanta, 
 he commanded each man to cast a single stone into a general heap: 
 the number of stones was counted, and it was found that there 
 were twenty thousand.'- 
 
 Kekrops married the daughter of Aktajus, who (according to 
 Pausanias's version) had been king of the country before him, 
 and had called it by the name of Aktjea.^ By her he had three 
 daughters, Aglaurus, Erse and Pandrosus, and a son, Erysichthon, 
 Kekrops is called by Pausanias contemporaiy of the Arcadian 
 Lykiw'^n, and is favorably contrasted with that savage prince in re- 
 spect of his piety and humanity.'* Though he has been often desig- 
 nated in modern histories as an immigrant from Egypt into Attica, 
 
 • Apollod. ill. 14, 1 ; Ilerodot. viii. 55 ; Ovid. Motam. vi. 72. The story 
 current among the Athenians rej)resciited Ki;krops as the judge of this con- 
 troversy (Xenoph. Memor. iii. 5, 10). 
 
 The impressions of the trident of Poseidon were still shown upon the rock 
 in the time of Pausanias (Pausan. i. 26, 4). For the sanctity of the ancien 
 olive-tree, see the narrative of Herodotus (/. r.). relating what happened to i. 
 when Xerxes occupied the acropolis. As tliis tale seems to have attached it- 
 self specially to the local peculiarities of the Ercchtheium, the part which Pr> 
 scidon plays in it is somewhat mean : that god appears to greater advantage 
 in the neighborhood of the 'iTrrorr/f KoAwv^f, as described in the beautiful 
 Chorus of Sophokl^s (CEdip. Colon. 690-712). 
 
 A curious rationalization of the monstrons form ascribed to Kekrops 
 (dt0v^r) in Plutarch (Sera Num. Vindict p. 551). 
 
 • Philochor. ap. Stra>)0. ix p. 397. 
 
 " The Parian chronological marble designates Aktaeos as an antochthonons 
 person. Marmor Parium, Epoch. 3. Pausan. i. 2, 5. Philochorus treated 
 Akta'us as a fictitious name (Fragni. 8, nt sup.). 
 
 • Pausan. viii. 2. 2. The three daughters of Kekrops were not annoticed 
 in the mythes (Ovid, Metam. ii. 739) : the tale of Kephalus, son of Herse by 
 Hermes, who was stolen away by the goddess Eos or Hemera in consequence 
 of his surpassing beauty, was told in more than one of the Hesiodic poemt 
 'Pausan. i. 3, l; Hesiod. Theog. 986), See also Eurip. Ion. 269 
 
196 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 FANDION. - PROKNE. - TEREUS. 
 
 197 
 
 yet the far greater nuimher of ancient authorities represent iuta 
 as indigenous or eartli-bornJ 
 
 Erysichthon died without issue, and Kranaus succeeded him, — 
 another autochthonous person and another eponymus, — for the 
 name Kranai was an old denomination of the inhabitants of At- 
 tica.2 Kranaus was dethroned by Amphiktyon, by some called 
 an autochthonous man ; by others, a son of Deukalion : Amphik- 
 tyon in his turn was expelled by Erichthonius, son of Hephaestos 
 and the Earth, — the same person apparently as Erecbtheus, but 
 inserted by Apollodorus at this point of the series. Erichthonius, 
 the pu[)il and favored companion of Athene, placed in the acropo- 
 lis tlie original Palladium or wooden statue of that goddess, said 
 to have dropped from heaven : he was moreover the first to cele- 
 brate the festival of the Panathen;pa. He married the nymph 
 Pasithea, and had for his son and successor Pandion.' Erichtho- 
 nius was the first person who taught the art of breaking in horsea 
 *o the yoke, and who drove a chariot and four.^ 
 
 In the time of Pandion, who succeeded to Erichthonius, Dio- 
 nysus and Demeter both came into Attica : the latter was received 
 by Keleos at Eleusis.'' Pandion married the nymph Zeuxippe, 
 and had twin sons, Erechtheus and Butes, and two daughters, 
 Prokne and Philomela. The two latter are the subjects of a memo- 
 rable and well-known legend. Pandion having received aid in 
 repelling the Thebans from Tereus, king of Thrace, gave him his 
 daughter Prokne in marriage, by whom he had a son, Itys. The 
 beautiful Philomela, going to visit her sister, inspired the barbarous 
 Thracian with an irresistible passion : he violated her person, con- 
 fined her in a distant pastoral hut, and pretended that she was dead, 
 cutting out her tongue io prevent her from revealing the truth. Af- 
 ter a long interval, Philomela found means to acquaint her sister of 
 the cruel deed which had been perpetrated ; she wove into a gar- 
 ment words describing her melancholy condition, and despatched it 
 
 ' Jul. Africanus also (ap. Euseb. x. 9. p. 486-488) calls Kekrops yrjy^v^^ 
 ami avTox'&Civ. 
 
 ' Herod, viii. 44. Kpavaal 'X&T/vat, Pindar. 
 
 • Apollod. iii. 14. Paasan. i. 26, 7. * Virgil, Georgic iii. 114. 
 
 * The mythe of the visit of D^m^ter to Eleusis, on which occasion she 
 ronchsafed to teach her holy rites to the leading Eleasinians, is more foUf 
 toached upon in a previouit chapter (see ante, p. SO). 
 
 by a trusty messenger. Prokne. overwhelmed with sorrow and an- 
 ger, took advantage of the free egress enjoyed by women during the 
 Bacchanalian festival to go and release her sister : the two sis- 
 ters then revenged themselves upon Tereus by killing the boy Itys, 
 and serving him up for his father to eat : after the meal had been 
 finished, the horrid truth was revealed to him. Tereus snatched a 
 hatchet to put Prokne to death : she fled, along with Philomela, 
 and all the three were changed into birds — Prokne became a swal- 
 low, Philomela a nightingale, and Tereus an hoopoe.i This ttUe, 
 so popular with tlie |x)ets, and so illustrative of the general clitir- 
 acter of Grecian legend, is not less remarkable in another point of 
 view — that the great liistorian Thucydides seems to allude to it 
 as an historical fact,^ not however directly mentioning the final 
 metamorphosis. 
 
 After the death of Pandion, Erechtheus succeeded to the king- 
 dom, and his brother, Butes, became priest of Poseidon Erich- 
 thonius, a function which his descendants ever afterwards exer- 
 cised, the Butadie or Eteobutadae. Erechtheus seems to appear 
 in three characters in the fabulous history of Athens as a god, 
 
 ' Apollod. iii. 14, 8; ^soh. Supplic. 61; Soph. Eiektr. 107; Ovid, Meia- 
 morph. vi. 42.'3-670. Ily^rimis ^rives the fable with some additional circum 
 stances, fab. 45. Antoninus Liberalis (Narr. 11), or Boeus, from whom he 
 copies, has composed a new narrative by combining together the names of 
 Pandareos and AMon, as pivcn in the Odyssey, xix. 523, and the adven- 
 tures of the old Attic fable. The hoopoe still conrinued the habit of chasing 
 the nightingale ; it was to the Athenians a present fact. See Schol. Aristonh 
 Aves, 212. 
 
 * Thucyd. ii. 29. He makes express menti m of the nightingale in con- 
 nection with the story, though not of the metamorphosis. See below, chap, 
 xvi. p. 544, note 2. So also does Pausanias mention and reason upon it as a 
 real incident : he founds upon it several moral reflections (i. 5, 4 ; x. 4, 5) : 
 the author of the \oyoc 'Kmru(l>ioc, ascribed to Demosthenes, treats it in the 
 same manner, aa a fact ennobling the tribe Pandionis, of which Pandion was 
 the eponymus. The same author, in touching upon Kekrops, the eponvmus 
 of the Kekropis tribe, cannot believe literally the story of his being half man 
 and half serpent: he rationalizes it by saying that Kekrops was so called be- 
 cause in wisdom he was like a man, in strength like a serpent (Demosth. 
 p. 1W7, 1398, Rciske). Hcsiod glances at the fable (Opp. Di. 566), opdpoyon 
 Havdiovli upro xc/uduv ; .see also ^lian, V. H. xii. 20. The subject 
 handled by Sophokl^ in his lost Tereus. 
 
I! 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 196 
 
 Blhl'OKY OF GREECE. 
 
 ATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES 
 
 Pot^eidon Erechtheus' — as a hero, Erechtheus, son of the Kartk 
 — and now, as a king, 8on of Pandion : so much did the ideas of 
 divine and human rule become confounded and blended together 
 in the imagination of the Greeks in reviewing their early times. 
 
 The daughters of Erechtheus were not less celebrated in Athe- 
 nian legend than those of Pandion. Prokris, one of them, is 
 among the heroines seen by Odysseus in Hades: she became the 
 wife ol" Kephalus, son of Deiones, and lived in the Attic derne of 
 Thorikus. Kej)halus tried her fidelity by pretending that he 
 was going away tor a long [»eriod ; but shortly returned, disguis- 
 ing his person and bringmg with him a splendid necklace. He 
 presented himself to IVokris without being recognized, and suc- 
 ceeded in triumphing over her chastity. Having accomplished 
 this object, he revealed to her his true character : she earnestly 
 besought his fbrgiventjss, and j)revailed upon him to grant it. 
 Nevertheless he became shortly afterwards the unintentional au- 
 thor ot" her death : for he was fond of hunting, and staid out a 
 long time on his excursions, so that Prokris suspected him of 
 visiting some rival. Slie determined to watch him by concealing 
 herself in a thicket n<;ar the place of his midday repose; and 
 when Kephalus implored the presence of Nephele (a cloud) to 
 protect him from the sun's rays, she suddenly started from her 
 hiding-place : Kephalus, thus disturbed, cast his hunting-spear 
 unknowingly into the thicket and slew his wife. Erechtheus in- 
 terred her with great magnificence, and Kephalus was tried for 
 the act before the court of Areopagus, which condemned him to 
 exile.- 
 
 Krensa, another dauighter of Erechtheus, seduced by Apollo, 
 becomes the mother of Ion, whom she exposes immediately after 
 Lis birth in the cave north of the acropolis, concealing the fact 
 from every one. Apollo prevails upon Hermes to convey the 
 new-bom child to Delphi, where he is brought up as a servant of 
 the temple, without knowing his parents. Kreu?H niiirries Xuthus, 
 son of .^Eolus, but continuing childless, she goes with Xuthus to 
 
 * Piseidon is sometimes spoken of nnder the name of Erechtheus simply 
 (Lyoophron. 158). See He^yehins, v. 'KppYi^fff. 
 
 ■ Pherekvd^, Fragrm. 77. Didot; ap. Schol. ad Odyss. xi. 320; Hellanikoa 
 Fr. 82; ap. Schol. Eurio. Orest. 1648. Apollodoros (iii 15, 1) gives f^ 
 itorv differently. 
 
 199 
 
 Ae Delphian oracle to inquire for a remedy. The god presents 
 to them Ion, and desires them to adopt him as their son : their 
 son Achaeus is afterwards bom to them, and Ion and Acha^us 
 become the eponyms of the lonians and Achseans.i 
 
 Oreithyia, the third daughter of Erechtheus, was stolen away 
 by the god Boreas while amusing herself on the banks of the 
 Dissus, and carried to his residence m Thrace. The two sons of 
 this marriage, Zetes and Kalais, were bom with wings: they 
 took part in the Argonautic expedition, and engaged in the pur- 
 suit of the Harpies : they were slain at Tenos by Heraklea, 
 Kleopatra, the daughter of Boreas and Oreithyia, was married to 
 Phineus, and had two sons, Plexippus and Pandion ; but Phineus 
 afterwards espoused a second wife, Idaea, the daughter of Darda- 
 nus, who, detesting the two sons of the former bed, accused them 
 falsely of attempting her chastity, and persuaded Phineus in his 
 wrath to put out the eyes of both. For this cruel proceeding he 
 was punished by the Argonauts in the course of their voyage.2 
 
 On more than one occasion the Athenians derived, or at least 
 believed themselves to have derived, important benefits from this 
 mairiage of Boreas with the daughter of their prima3val hero: 
 one inestimable service, rendered at a juncture highly critical for 
 
 * Upon this story of Idn is founded the tragedy of Euripides which bears 
 that name. I conceive many of the points of that tragedy to be of the in- 
 vention of Euripides himself: but to represent Ion as s«n of Apollo, not of 
 Xuthus, seems a genuine Attic legend. Respecting this drama, see O. MiU- 
 ler, Hist of Dorians, ii. 2. 13-15. I doubt however the distinction which he 
 draws between the lonians and the other population of Attica. 
 
 • Apollodor. iii. 15, 2; Plato, Phaedr. c. 3 ; Sophok. Antig. 984; also the 
 copious Scholion on Apollon. Rhod. i. 21 2. 
 
 The tale of Phineus is told very differently in the Argonautic expedition 
 as given by ApolWnius Rhodius, ii. 180. From Sophokl^s we learn that 
 this was the Attic version. 
 
 The two winged sons of Boreas and their chase of the Harpies were no- 
 ticed in the Hesiodic Catalogue (see Schol. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 296) But 
 whether the Attic legend of Oreithyia was recognized in the Hesiodic poemi 
 seems not certain. 
 
 Both ^schylus and Sophokl^s composed dramas on the subject of Orei- 
 thyia (Longin. de Sublimit c. 3). » Orithyia Atheniensis, filia Terrigena 
 Ct a Borea in Thraciam rapta " (Servius ad Virg. iEneid. xii. 83). Ter- 
 tifSpoK is the yvyevrfc 'Epex^evc. Philochorus (Fragm. 30) rationalixed thu 
 r^ uid said that it alluded to the effects of a violent wind 
 
200 
 
 tUbrOBT OF OBEECE. 
 
 1 
 
 
 Grecian indopendenoe, deserves to be specified, i At the t» « of 
 the inv&sion of Greec«3 by Xerxes, the Grecian fleet was assem* 
 bled at Chalcis and Artemision in Euboea, awaiting the approach 
 ol" the Persian force, so overwhelming in its numbers as well by 
 sea as on land. The i-*ersian tleet had reached the coast of Mag* 
 nesia and the south-eastern corner of Thessaly without any ma- 
 terial damage, when the Athenians were instructed by an oracle 
 ^ to mvoke the aid of their son-in-law/' Understanding the ad- 
 vioe 10 point to Boreas., they supplicated his aid and that of Orei* 
 thyia, most earnestly, as well by prayer as by sacrilice,'2 and the 
 event corresponded to tlieir wishes. A furious north-easterly wind 
 immediately arose, and continued for three days to afflict the Peiv 
 sian fieet as it lay on an unprotected coast : the number of ships 
 driven ashore, both vessels of war and of provision, was immense, 
 and the injury done to the armament was never thoroughly re- 
 paired. 8uch was the powerful succor which the Athenians de- 
 rived, at a time of their utmost need, from their son-in-law Boreas ; 
 and their gratitude was shown by consecrating to him a new tem- 
 ple on the banks of the Ilissus. 
 
 The three remaining daughters of Erechtheus — he had six in 
 alP — were in Athenian legend yet more venerated than their 
 sisters, on account of having voluntarily devoted themselves to 
 death lor the safety of their country. Eumolpus of Eleusis was 
 the son of Poseidon and the eponymous hero of the sacred gens 
 called the Eumolpids, iji whom the principal functions, appertain- 
 ing to the mysterious rites of Demeter at Eleusis, were vested 
 by hereditary privilege : he made war upon Erechtheus and the 
 
 * Uerodot. vii. 189. 01 c'' uv 'A^i]valoi a<pt, keyovai jiorf^Tfaavra rdv Bop^v 
 vporepoVf ical tote EKtiva KUTepyaaaaiiat, * Kui ipov uTre/ti^ovref Bopeu idpVm 
 ffavTo irapd iroTafidv 'IXtaaov 
 
 * Uerodot. 1. c. \i.&7}vai')i rdv Boprjv iK ■deoTTponiov hreKaXeactPTOf kTi^oth 
 TOf o^pi aXXov jifiTiaTTjpLOVy rdv yofifipdv iirUovpov Ka?Jaa(r&cu. Bopijf (S^, 
 Kurd, rdv 'EAA^vuv Xoyov e^et, yvvaiKa *Arr<«^, ^Qpei^iijv rrtv ^Epex^V<K' 
 Kara Afj rb Krjdof tovto, ol W.&tfvaioit avu/iaXkeofievoi atfn rdv Bop^ yofi^pbt 
 fivai, etc. 
 
 * Suidas and Photius, v. Wdpi&evoi : Protogeneia and Pandora are givea 
 an the names of two of them. The sacrifice of Pandora, in the Iambi of 
 Hipponax (Hipponact. Frajpn. xxi. Wilck. ap. Athen. ix. p. d^Ol, 
 allnde to this daughter of Erechthess. 
 
 LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES OF ELEUSIS. tJO] 
 
 A^thenians, with the aid of a body of Thracian allies ; indeed it 
 appears that the legends of Athens, originally foreigii and un- 
 friendly to those of Eleusis, represented him as having been hira- 
 self a Thracian bom and an immigrant into Attica. • Respecting 
 Eumolpus however and his parentage, the discrepancies much 
 exceed even the measure of license usual in the legendary ge 
 oealogies, and some critics, both ancient and modern, have sought 
 to reconcile these contradictions by the usual stratagem of sup- 
 posing two or three different persons of the same name. Even 
 Pausanias, so familiar with this class of unsworn witnesses, com- 
 plains of the want of native Eleusinian genealogists,2 and of the 
 extreme license of fiction in which other authors had indul<yed. 
 
 In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, the most ancient tcsdmony 
 before us, — composed, to all appearance, eariier than the com- 
 plete incorporation of Eleusis with Athens, — Eumolpus appears 
 (to repeat briefly what has been stated in a previous chapter) as 
 one of the native chiefs or princes of Eleusis, along with Tripto- 
 
 ' Apollodor. iii. 15,3; Thucyd. ii. 15; Iskorates (Panegyr, t. i. p. 206; 
 Panathenaie. t. ii. p. 560, Auger), Lykurgus, cont. Leocrat. p. 201, Reiske' 
 Pausan. i. 38, 3 ; Euripid. Erechth. Fragm. The Schol. ad. Soph. (Ed. CoL 
 1048 gives valuable citations from Ister, Akestodoros and Androtion : w« 
 Bee that the inquirers of antiquity found it difficult to explain how the Eumol- 
 pids could have acquired their ascendant privileges in the management of 
 the Eleusinia, seeing that Eumolpus himself was a foreigner. — Z^reirai, ri 
 driTToTE ol EvfioXmdai rutv teIetQv t^upxovai, ^evol bvTEg. Thucydidds doM 
 net call Eumolpus a Thracian : Strabo's language is very large and vague 
 (vii. p. 321 ) : Iskorates says that he assailed Athens in order to vindicate 
 the rights of his father Poseidon to the sovereign patronage of the city. Hy- 
 ^nus copies this (fab. 46). 
 
 Pausan. i. 38. 3. 'EXEvalviol te upxaloi, cite ov irpoaovruv a^iai yEvsa- 
 K6yu)v^ uXXa te nXdaaa^ai ^EdCjKam Kal fidXioTa k<: to, yti/tf rCtv iipuuv. Se« 
 Heyne ad Apollodor. iii. 15, 4. " Eumolpi nomen modo commnnicatnm 
 plnribns, modo plurium hominum res et facta cnmnlata in annm. Is ad 
 quem Hercules venisse dicitur, serior cetate fiiit: antiquior est is de quo hoc 
 
 loco agitur antecessisse tamen hunc debet alius, qui cum Triptolemo 
 
 rixit," etc. See the learned and valuable comments of Lobeck in his Aglao- 
 phamus, tom. i. p. 206-213: in regard to the discrepancies of this narrative 
 he observes, I think, with great justice (p. 211), "quo uno exemplo ex innn- 
 nairabilibus delecto, arguitur eorura temeritas, qui ex variis discordibasque 
 poetarum et mythographorum narratiunculis, antiquao fam» formam et quasi 
 KiMMuneiita recognosci posse sperant." 
 
 It I 
 
mSTOBT OF GBEECB. 
 
 lemus, Diokl^, Polyxeinns and Dolichus : Keleos is the 
 or principal among these chiefs, the son or lineal descendant of 
 the eponymous Eleusis himself. To these chiefs, and to the three 
 daughters of Keleos, the goddess Demeter comes in her sorrow 
 for the loss of her daughter Persephone : being hospitably enter- 
 tained by Keleos she reveals her true character, commands that 
 a temple shall be built to iier at Eleusis, and prescribes to them 
 the rites according to which they are to worship her.' Such 
 seems to have been the ancient story of the Eleusinians respect- 
 ing their own religious antiquities: Keleos, with Metaneira his 
 wife, and the other chief; here mentioned, were worshipped at 
 Eleusis, and from thence transferred to Athens as local gods or 
 heroes.'^ Eleusis became incorporated with Athens, apparently 
 not very long before the time of Solon ; and the Eleusinian wor- 
 ship of Demeter was then received into the great religious 
 solemnities of the Athenian state, to which it owes its remarkable 
 subsequent extension and commanding influence. In the Atti- 
 cized worship of the Eleusinian Demeter, the Eumolpids and the 
 Kerykes were the principal hereditary functionaries : Eumolpus, 
 the eponym of this great family, came thus to play the principal 
 |)art in the Athenian legendary version of the war between 
 Athens and Eleusis. An oracle had pronounced that Athens 
 could only be rescued from his attack by the death of the three 
 daughtei-s of Erechtheus ; their generous patriotism consented to 
 the sacrifice, and their fatlier put them to death. He then went 
 forth confidently to the battle, totally vanquished the enemy, and 
 
 * Homer, Hymn, ad Cerer. l.'>3-475. — 
 
 'H de KLovaa ^e/niaTOTToXoif fiaaiXevat 
 
 Aei^ev TpiirTokefUfi re, Aiok^I te TrX^^imrif}^ 
 EiffxoXTTOv Te /Siy^ KeAfw i>' ijyifTopi Aautv^ 
 Ap^ofioavvijv iepuv. 
 Also V. 105. 
 
 Tijv 6e Idov Ke Aeoco ' EXtvotvidao ^vyarpe^. 
 The hero Eleusis is mentioned in Paasanias, i. 38, 7 : some said that he was 
 the son of Hermes, others that Fie was the son of Ogygus. Compare Hygin. 
 f 147. 
 
 ' Keleos and Metaneira wer«! worshipped by the Athenians with divine 
 honors ( Athenajiroras, Le^t. p. 53, ed. Oxon.} : perhaps he confounds divint 
 and heroic honors, as the Christiao controversialists against Paganism 
 dispoaed to da Triptolemos had a temple at EImmi (Tansan i. 36, •> 
 
 / 
 
 DAUGHTERS OF ERECHTHEU& 
 
 901 
 
 Ulled Eumolpus with his own hand.* Erechtheus was wor* 
 shipped as a god, and his daughters as goddesses, at Athens.* 
 Their names and their exalted devotion were cited along with 
 those of the warriors of Marathon, in the public assembly of 
 Athens, by orators who sought to arouse the languid patriot, or 
 to denounce the cowardly deserter; and the people listened both 
 to one and the other with analogous feelings of grateful veneration, 
 as well as with equally unsuspecting faith in the matter of tacL^ 
 
 * Apollodor. iii. 15, 4. Some said that Immaradus, son of Eumolpus, had 
 been killed by Erechtheus (Tausan. i. 5, 2); others, that both Eumolpus and 
 his son had experienced this fate (Schol. ad Eurip. Phoeniss. 854;. But we 
 learn from Pausanias himself what the story in the interior of the Erechtheioa 
 was, — that Erechtheus killed Eumolpus (i. 27, 3^. 
 
 ■^ Cicero, Nat. Dcor. iii. 19 ; Philoclior. ap. Schol. (Edip. Ck)l. 100. Thre© 
 dau<,-hters of Erechtheus perished, and three daughters were worshipped 
 (Apollodor. iii. 15,4; Hesychius, Zevyog Tpinap^evov, Eurip. Ereehtheua. 
 Fragm. 3, Dindorf) ; but both Euripides and Apollodorus said that Erech- 
 theus was only required to sacrifice, and only did sacrifice, one, — the other 
 two slew themselves voluntarily, from affection for their sister. I cannot but 
 think (in spite of the opinion of Welcker to the contrary, Griechiscb. Tragdd> 
 ii. p. 722) that the genuine legend represented Erechtheus as having iacrifioed 
 all three, as appears in the Ion of Euripides (276) : — 
 
 lov. TlaHip ' Epf;f tJeOf aug e^ae avyyovovg ; 
 fyHBUSA. 'ErAjy Trpb yaiai a<}>ayia irap^'^ivov^ KTavelv. 
 
 loM. 2t) <r i^eau'&Tjg Trwf Kamyv^ruv fjiuvij ; 
 Creusa. Bpe^of veoyvuv fnirpog ijv ev uyKaAnig. 
 Compare with this passage, Demosthen. Aoyof * Emracp, p. 1397, Reisk 
 Just before, the death of the three daughters of Kekrops, for infringing the 
 commands of Athene, had been mentioned. Euripides modified this in hk 
 Erechtheus, for he there introduced the mother Praxithea consenting to th« 
 immolation of one daughter, for the rescue of the country from a foreign ln» 
 vader : to propose to a mother the immolation of three daughters at once, 
 would have been too revolting. In most instances we find the strongly 
 marked features, the distinct and glaring incidents as well as the dark con- 
 trasts, belong to the Hesiodic or old Post-Homeric legend ; the changes made 
 afterwards go to soften, dilute, and to complicate, in proportion as the feel- 
 mgs of the public become milder and more humane ; sometimes however the 
 later poets add new horrors. 
 
 ^ See the striking evidence contained in the oration of Lykurgna against 
 Leocrates (p. 201-204. Reiske ; Demosthen. Aoy. 'ETiraf I.e.; and Xeno- 
 phon, Memor. iii. 5, 9^ : from the two latter passages we see that the Athe« 
 flian story represented the invasion under Eumolpus as a combined assaak 
 from the wetitem continent. 
 
 J". 
 
 f.: I 
 
 
 -> 1 
 
 
 
V 
 
 XH 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Though Erechtheus gained the victory over Eumolpus, jel 
 the story represents Poseidon as having put an end to the life 
 and reign of Erechtheus, who was (it seems) slain in the battle. 
 He was succeeded by his son Kekrops II., and the latter aj^^ain by 
 his son Pandion II.,' — two names unmarked by any incidents, 
 and which appear to be mere duplication of the former Kekrops 
 and Pandion, placed there by the genealogizers for the purpose 
 of tilling up what seemed to them a chronological chasm. The 
 Attic legends were associated chietly with a few names of respect- 
 ed eponymous personages ; and if the persons called the children 
 o£ Pandion were too numerous to admit of their being con- 
 veniently ascribed to one father, there was no difficulty in sup- 
 posing a second prince of the same name. 
 
 Apollodorus passes at once from Erechtheus to his son Kekrops 
 II., then to Pandion II., next to the four sons of the latter, ^geus, 
 Pallas, Nisus and Lykus. But the tragedians here insert the 
 story of Xuthus, Krejisa and Ion ; the latter being the •son of 
 Kreiisa by Apollo, but given by the god to Xuthus, and adopted 
 by the latter as his own. Ion becomes the successor of Erech- 
 theus, and his sons Peleon, Hoples, Argades and Aigikores 
 become the eponyms of the four ancient tribes of Athens, which 
 subsisted until the revolution of Kleisthenes. I6n himself is the 
 eponym of the Ionic race both in Asia, in Europe, and in the 
 -^gean islands : Dorus and Achaeus are the sons of Krelisa by 
 Xuthus, so that Ion is distinguished from both of them by beino 
 of divine parentage.^ According to the story given by Philocho- 
 rus. Ion rendered such essential service in rescuing the Athenians 
 from the attack of the Thracians under Eumolpus, that he was 
 afterwards made king of the country, and distributed all the in- 
 habitants into four tribes or castes, corresponding to different 
 modes of life, -i- soldiei-s, husbandmen, goatherds, and artisans.3 
 And it seems that the legend explanatory of the origin of the 
 festival Boedromia, originally important enough to furnish a name 
 
 ' ApoUodor. iii. 15, 5; Earip. Ion, 282; Erechth. Fragm. 20, Dindorf. 
 
 • Enrip. Ion. 1570-1595 The Kreiisa of Sophokles, a lost tragedy, seemii 
 li> have related to the same subject 
 
 Pansanias (vii. 1, 2) telL«< as that Xuthus was chosen to arbitrate betweae 
 the contending claims of the sons of Erechtheus. 
 
 ^ Philochor. ap. Harpccmt. v. Botjdpouia ; Stnbo, viii. p. 389 
 
 PANDION AND AGEU8. 
 
 'I! 
 
 to one of the Athenian months, was attached to the aid thus 
 dered by lon.i 
 
 We pass from Ion to persons of far greater mythical dignity 
 and interest, — iEgeus and his son Theseus. 
 
 Pandion had four sons, ^geus, Nisus, Lykus, and Pallas, 
 between whom he divided his dominions. Nisus received the 
 territory of Megaris, which had been under the sway of Pandion, 
 and there founded the seaport of Nisaia. Lykus was made king 
 of the eastern coast, but a dispute afterwards ensued, and he quit- 
 ted the country altogether, to establish himself on the southern 
 coast of Asia Minor among the Termilae, to whom he gave the 
 name of Lykians.'-^ ^geus, as the eldest of the tour, became 
 king of Athens ; but Pallas received a portion both of the south- 
 western coast and the interior, and he as well as his childreo 
 appear as frequent enemies both to -/Egeus and to Theseus. 
 Pallas is the eponym of the deme Pallene, and the stories 
 respecting him and his sons seem to be connected with old and 
 standing feuds among the different demes of Attica, originally 
 inde})endent communities. These feuds penetrated into Uie 
 legend, and explain the story which we find that .^^us and 
 Theseus were not genuine Erechtheids, the former being denomi- 
 nated a supposititious child to Pandion.^ 
 
 jEgeus^ has little importance in the mythical history except as 
 the father of Theseus : it may even be doubted whether his name 
 is anything more than a mere cognomen of the god Poseidon, who 
 was (as we are told) the real father of this great Attic Herakles. 
 As I pretend only to give a very brief outline of the general 
 territory of Grecian legend, I caimot permit myself to recount in 
 
 * Philochor. ap. Harpocrat. v. Boijdpofiia. 
 
 « Sophokl. ap. Strab. ix. p. 392 ; Herodot. i. 173 ; Strabo, xii. p. 573. 
 ^ Plutarch, Theseus, c 13. Xlyei)^ iJerdf yevofievoi Ravdiovt^ kui (inSkp 
 Toiq ' Ept;t;t?et(5atf izpoaijKuv. Apoliodor. iii. 15, 6. 
 
 * -^geus had by Medea Cwho took refuge at Athens after her flight from 
 Oorinthj a son named Medus, who passed into Asia, and was considered as 
 the eponymus and progenitor of the Median people. Datis, the general who 
 commanded the invading Persian army at the battle of Marathon, sent a 
 formal communication to the Athenians announcing himself as the descend- 
 ant of MMos, and requiring to be admitted as king of Attica: 8«ch is tht 
 statement of Di adorns CExc Vatic, vii.-x. 48; see also SchoL AiifloplMB 
 Pac. 289). 
 
 .11 
 
 ( f I 
 
 
 i' ) 
 
 •-. I 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 I'l 
 
 .;') 
 
 i!;) 
 
j J 
 
 i06 
 
 fflSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 detail the chivalrous cai*eer of Theseus, who is found both in ttie 
 Kalydonian boar-hunt and in the Argonautic expedition — Ida 
 personal and vicUjrious encounters with the robbers Sinnis, Pro- 
 crustes, Periphetes, Sciron and others — his valuable service in 
 ridding his country of the Kromrnyonian sow and the Maratho 
 nian bull — his conquest of the Minotaur in Krcte, and his escfiix} 
 from tlie danglers of the labyrintli by the aid of Ariadne, whom 
 he subsequently carrie? otf and abandons — his many amorous 
 adventures, and his expeditions botli against the Amazons and 
 into the under- world along with Peirithous.i 
 
 Thucydides delineates the character of Theseus as a man who 
 combined sagacity witii j)olitical jKiwer, and who conferred upon 
 his country the inestimable benetit of uniting all tiie separate and 
 self-governing demes of Attics into one common political society .* 
 From the well-earned reverence attaclied to the assertion of 
 Thucydides, it has been customary to reason U{)on this assertion 
 «» if it were historically autlientic, and to treat the romantic 
 attributes which we tind in Plutarch and Diodorus as if they were 
 fiction superinduced upon this basis of fact. Such a view of the 
 case is in my judgment erroneous. The athletic and amorous 
 knight-errant is the old version of the character — the profound 
 
 • Ovid, MeUiinoriih. vii. 433. — 
 
 " Te, maxime Theseu, 
 
 Mirata est Marathon Cretai sanguine Tauri : 
 Quoilque Suis .soourus arat C/romyona colonus, 
 Munas opasque tuum est. Tcllus Epidauria per t« 
 Clavigcram vi<lit Vulcan! occumbere prolem : 
 Vidit et immanem Cephisias ora Procrustem. 
 Ccrcjonis letuin vidit Cerealis Eleosin. 
 Occidit ille Sinis," etc. 
 Respecting the amours of Th^'seus, Ister especially seems to have entereo 
 into great details ; but some of them were noticed both in the Hesiodic 
 poems and by Kekrops, not to mention Pherekydfis (Athen. xiii. p. 557^. 
 Peirithous, the intimate friend and companion of Theseus, is the eponymous 
 hero of the Attic deme or gens Perithoidfie ( Ephorus ap. Photiam, v. U.ept' 
 doidai). 
 
 • Thac. ii. If. * Eireidii 6v Qijard^ kjiaaiTievaey yevofiEvo^ fierd, tov ^ueroi 
 icdi 6vvard(t ra re dXKa iuKoafiijae n^ ;)fa>pav, KtU KaraXvaac tup aXXut 
 «iAMW ra re fiavXevr^fna KtU rdf d^df , i{ r^ vvv voXiv fiw^Ktei 
 
 THESEUS AND HIS ADVENTURES. 
 
 Wl 
 
 and long-sighted politician is a subsequent correction, introduced 
 indeed by men of superior mind, but destitute of historical war- 
 ranty, and arising out of their desire to tind reasons of their own 
 for concurring in the veneration which the general public paid 
 more easily and heartily to their national hero. Theseus, in the 
 Iliad and Odyssey, fights with the Lapithie against the Centaurs : 
 Theseus, in the Hesiodic poems, is misguided by his passion for 
 the beautiful ^gle, daughter of Panopeus:' and the Theseus 
 described in Plutarch's biogmphy is in great part a continuation 
 and expansion of these same or similar attributes, mingled with 
 many local legends, explaining, like the Fa^^ti of Ovid, or the 
 lost Aitia of Kailiniachus, the original genesis of prevalent reli- 
 gious and social customs.2 Plutarch has doubtless greatly soften- 
 ed down and modified the adventures which he found in the Attic 
 logographers as well as in the poetical epics called Theseis 
 For in his preface to the life of Theseus, after having emphati- 
 cally declared that he is about to transcend the boundary both of 
 the icnown and the knowable, but that the temptation of comparing 
 the founder of Athens with the founder of Rome is irresistible, 
 he concludes with the following remarkable words: " I pray tliat 
 this fabulous matter may be so far obedient to my endeavors as 
 to receive, when purified by reason, the aspect of history : in 
 those cases where it haughtily scorns plausibility and wiU admit 
 no alliance with what is probable, 1 shall beg for indulgent hear- 
 ers, willing to receive antique narrative in a mild spirit.**^ We 
 see here tliat Plutarch sat down, not to recount the old fables as 
 he found them, but to purify them by reason and to impart to 
 them the aspect of history. We have to thank him for having 
 retained, after this purification, so much of what is romantic and 
 marvellous ; but we may be sure that the sources from which he 
 borrowed were more romantic and marvellous still. It was the 
 
 * Iliad, i. 265 ; Odyss. xi. 321. I do not notice the suspected line, Odysg. 
 xi. 630. 
 
 * Diodorus also, from his disposition to assimilate Th6seus to HSraki6t, 
 lias given us his chivalrous as well ba his political attributes(iy. 61). 
 
 ' Plutarch, Theseus, i. Ein iitv ovv rjfilv, UKa^aipdjXEvov /Mytp rd fiv^Cnh^ 
 hnaKOvaai Kai 'AafSelv laropia^ orjuv' dnov d' uv av-&a6C>^ tov vt^avov irepi- 
 fpov^, Kai fif) dixTiTai r^v npdc td eUdg fii^iVf eiyvufiovuv iuipoarut 
 
 ..!! 
 
 ,i;.i 
 
 
 !l! 
 
 Ii 
 
 ii! 
 
 ''I 
 ,1 
 
 i 
 
 
 (' 
 
208 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 teodency of the enlighWned meu of Athens, from the daya ci 
 Solon downwards, to retine and politicize the character of Thd- 
 •eu8:^ even Peisistratus expunged from one of the Hesiodic 
 poems the line which described the violent passion of the hero 
 for the fair ^:£^le : '^ and the tragic poets found it more congenial 
 to the feelings of their audience to exhibit liim as a dignified 
 and Hberal sovereign, rather than as an adventurous single-handed 
 fighter. But the logographers and the Alexandrine poets re- 
 mained more faithful to the old fables. The story of Hekale, the 
 hospitable old woman who received and blessed Theseus when 
 he went against tlie Maiathonian bull, and whom he found dead 
 when he came back to recount the news of his success, was 
 treated by Kallimachus : 3 and Virgil must have had his mind 
 foil of the unrefined legends when he immbered this Attic Hera- 
 kles among the unhappy sufierers condemned to endless penance 
 in tlie under-world.^ 
 
 Two however among the Theseian fables caimot be dismissed 
 without some special notice, — the war against the Amazons, and 
 the expedition against Krete. The former strikingly illustrates 
 the facility as well as the tenacity of Grecian legendary faith; 
 the latter embraces the story of Daedalus and Minos, two of th« 
 most eminent among Grecian ante-historical personages. 
 
 The Amazons, daugliters of Ares and Harmcnia,'' are both 
 
 » See Isokmt^s, I'anathenaic. (t. ii. p. 510-512, Auger); Xenoph. Memor. 
 iii. 5. 10. In the Helen® Encomium, Isokrates enlarges more upon the per 
 sohhI exploits of Theseus in conjunction with his great political merits (t. ii 
 p, 342-350, Auger). 
 
 ' riutarch, Theseus, 20. 
 
 • See tlie epigram of Kriiiagoras, Antholog. Pal. vol. ii. p. 144; ep. xt. 
 •d. Brunck. and Kallimach. Frag. 40. 
 
 *XeiSeL <5' (Kallimachus) 'EkuXijc re ^piXo^etvoco KaAii)v, 
 KcU Orjael Ma/>ai>uv ov^ eni-dT/Ke ttovovj-. 
 
 Some beautiful lines are preserved by Suidas, v. E^ravAia, irepl 'E/caX^ 
 •ovovo^f (probably spoken by Theseus himself, see Plutarch, TheseUi ft 
 
 14). 
 
 'Wi, npTjeia ywaiKCnf^ 
 
 Tifv bddVy 9iv iiviai ^fiaXyeeg oi irepouaiv 
 
 Mpffaofie^a ' ^vvdv ydp inavXiov h'-'ev unaai. 
 ^ Viigfl, J£neid, vi. 617. '' Sedet SBtemamqoe sedebit Infelix Th^reoi ' 
 •Pberekvd. Frajfrn. 25, Didot. 
 
 THE AMAZONS 
 
 20S 
 
 'I! 
 
 jorly creations and frequent reproductions of the ancient epic — • 
 which was indeed, we may generally remark, largely occupied 
 both with the exploits and sufferings of women, or heroines, the 
 wives and daughters of the Grecian heroes — and which recog- 
 nized in Pallas Athene the finished type of an irresistible female 
 warrior. A nntion of courageous, hardy and indefatigable women, 
 dwelling apart from men, permitting only a short temporary in- 
 tercourse for the purpose of renovating their numbers, and burn- 
 ing out their right breast with a view of enabling themselves to 
 draw the bow freely, — this was at once a general type stimu- 
 lating to the fancy of the poet and a theme eminently popular 
 with his hearers. Nor was it at all repugnant to the faith of the 
 latter — who had no recorded facts to guide them, and no other 
 standard of credibility as to the past except such poetical nar- 
 ratives themselves — to conceive communities of Amazons as 
 having actually existed in anterior time. Accordingly we find 
 these warlike females constantly reappearing in the ancient poems, 
 and universally accepted as past realities. In the Iliad, when 
 Priam wishes to illustrate emphatically the most numerous host 
 in which he ever found himself included, he tells us that it was 
 assembled in Phyrgia, on the banks of the Sangarius, for the 
 purpose of resisting the formidable Amazons. When Bellero- 
 phon is to be employed on a deadly and perilous undertaking,* 
 by those who indirectly wish to procure his death, he is despatch- 
 ed against the Amazons. In the ^thiopis of Arktinus, describing 
 the post-Homeric war of Troy, Penthesileia, queen of the Ama- 
 zons, appears as the most effective ally of the besieged city, and 
 as the most formidable enemy of the Greeks, succumbing only 
 to the invincible might of Achilles.^ The Argonautic heroes find 
 the Amazons on the river Thermodon, in their expedition along 
 
 Iliad, iii. 186 : vi. 152. 
 * See Proclus's Argument of the lost ^thiopis (Fragm. Epicor. Graecor. 
 cd. Diintzer, p. 16). We are reduced to the first book of Quintus Smymieas 
 for some idea of the valor of Penthesileia ; it is supposed to be copied more 
 or less closely from the .^thiopis. See Tychscn's Dissertation prefixed to 
 his edition of Quintus, sections 5 and 12. Compare Dio. Chrysostom. Or. 
 zi. p. 350, Reiske. Philostratos (Heroica, c. 19 p. 751) gives a strange 
 transformation of this old epical narratiye into a descent of Amazons opoo 
 die island sacred to Achilles. 
 
 TOL I. 14oc. 
 
 r.i 
 
i\o 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFCR 
 
 the southern coast of the Euxine. To the same spot Heracl^ 
 goes to attack them, in the performance of the ninth labor im- 
 posed upon him by Eurystheus, for the purpose of procuring the 
 girdle of the Amazonian queen, Hippoljte;' and we are told 
 that they had not yet recovered from the losses sustained in thia 
 severe aggression when Theseus also assaulted and defeated them, 
 carrying otf their queen, Antiope.'^ This injury they avenged 
 by invading Attica, — an undertaking as Plutarch justly observes) 
 * neither triHing nor feminine," especially if according to the 
 statement of Hellanikus, they crassed the Cimmerian Bosporus 
 on the winter ice, beginning their march from the Asiatic side of 
 the Paulus Myeotis.' They overcame all the resistances and dif 
 Acuities of this prodigious march, and penetrated even into Athens 
 itself, where the tinal b:»ttle, hard-fought and at one time doubt- 
 fill, by which Theseus crushed them, was fought — in the very 
 
 ' Apollon. Ilhod. ii. 966, 1004; Apollod. ii. 5-9; Diodor ii. 46; iv. 16. 
 The Amazons were supposed to speak the Thracian lanjiria^ (Schol. ApoU 
 Rhod. ii. 953), tliou^h some authors asserted them to he natives of Lihyia, 
 others of ^^thiopia {if>. 965). 
 
 Hellanikus (Fra<;. 33, ap. Sehol. Pindar. Nem. iii. 6.5) said that all the 
 Arjronaufs had assisted Herakles in this expedition : the fniLnnent of the old 
 epic |>oem (perhaps the 'A//cC6rm) there quoted mentions Telamon specially. 
 
 • The many diversities ir the story respecting Theseus an«l the Amazon 
 Antiope are well set fortli in Bachet de Meziriac (Commentaires sur Ovide, 
 ti. p. 31 7). 
 
 Weleker (Der Epische Cyclus. p. 313) supposes that the ancient epic poem 
 ctkUed hy Suidas 'A//aC'^v^a, related to the invasion of Attica hy the Ama- 
 xons, and that this poem is the same, under another title, as the 'An^.r of 
 Hegesinous cited hy Pausanias : I cannot say that he establishes this con- 
 jecture satisfactorily, but the chapter is well worth consultin^^. The epic 
 Theseis !*eems to have given a version of the Amazonian contest in many 
 respects different from that which Plutarch has put together out of the logo- 
 graphers (see Plut. Thes. 28 ) : it contained a narrative of many unconnect- 
 ed exploits belonging to Theseus, and Aristotle censures it on that account 
 as ill-constructed (Poetic, c. 17). 
 
 The "X^a^ovic or Wua^oiiKu of Onasus can hardly have been (as Heyne 
 
 •apposes, ad Apollod. ii. 5, 9) an epic poem : we may infer from the ration- 
 
 •lizing tendency of the citation from it ( Schol. ad Theocrit. xiii. 46, and 
 
 dchol. Apollon. Rhod. i. 1207) that it was a work in prose There ^as aa 
 
 kfiaCovic by Possis of Magnesia CAthenaens, vii. p. 296 j. 
 
 • Plutarch, Theseus, 27. Pindar COlyrap. xiii 84) represents the Araazom 
 m having come from the extreme north, when Bcllerophon conquers them 
 
 INVASION OF ATTICA BY THE AMAZONS 
 
 211 
 
 ik&Krt of the city. Attic antiquaiies confidently pointed out the 
 exact position of the two contending armies : the left wing of the 
 Amazons rested upon the spot occupied by the commemorative 
 monument called the Amazoneion ; the right wing touched the 
 Pnyx, the place in which the public assemblies of the Athenian 
 democracy were afterwards held. The details and fiuctuationa 
 of the combat, as well as the final triumph and consequent truce, 
 were recounted by these authors with as complete faith and as 
 much circumstantiality as those of the battle of Platxea by Herod- 
 otus. The sepulchral edifice called the Amazoneion, the tomb 
 cr pillar of Antiope near the western gate of the city — the spot 
 called the Horkomosion near the temple of Theseus — even the 
 hill of Areiopagus itself, and the sacrifices which it was custom- 
 ary to offer to the Amazons at the periodical festival of the Thd- 
 seia — were all so many religious mementos of this victory;^ 
 which was moreover a favorite subject of art both with the 
 •culptor and the painter, at Athens as well as in other parts of 
 Greece. 
 
 No portion of the ante-historical epic appears to have been more 
 deeply worked into the national mind of Greece than this inva- 
 sion and defeat of the Amazons. It was not only a constant theme 
 of the logographers, but wa.s also familiarly appealed to by the 
 popular orators along with Marathon and Salamis, among those 
 antique exploits of which their fellow-citizens might justly be proud. 
 It formed a part of the retrospective faith of Herodotus, Lysias, 
 Plato and Isokrates,'- and the exact date of the event was settled 
 
 ' Plutarch, Theseus, 27-28 ; Pausan. i. 2, 4 ; Plato, Axiochus, c. 2 ; Har 
 pocration, v. 'Afxa^ovelov ; Aristophan. Lysistrat. 678, with the Scholia. ./Es- 
 chyi. (Eumenid. 685) says that the Amazons assaulted the citadel from the 
 Areiopagus : — 
 
 Udyov r' 'Apeiov rovtJ', ^AfiaCovuv idpav 
 
 Z/ciyvaf r', 5r' ^At^ov Qriaeut^ /card <l>^6vov 
 
 J^rparrjXaTovaai, koL rroXiv veoirroXiv 
 
 Trfvd* {nlfiTTvpyov dvreirvpyuadv irore. 
 
 • Herodot. ix. 27, Lysias (Epitaph, c. 3) represents the Amazons as 6f> 
 Xovaai TToXXuv i^vuv : the whole race, according to him, waa nearly extin- 
 guished in their unsuccessful and calamitous invasion of Attica. Isokratda 
 ([Panegyric, t. i. p. 206. Auger) says the same ; also Panathenaic, t. iii. p. 560^ 
 Auger; Demosth. Epitaph, p. 1391. Reisk. Pausanias quotes Pindar's no* 
 tice of the invasion, and with the follMt belief of its historical reality (vii. 3, 4) 
 
 :i 
 
 (j 
 
 I! 
 
 ii 
 
 
 
 
fl8 
 
 mSIOKY OF QBEECE. 
 
 AMAZONS IN ASIA. 
 
 218 
 
 by the rhronologista.' Nor did the Athenians stand alone in soek 
 m belief. Throughout manj other regions of Greece, both £uro> 
 pean ar i Asiatic, traditions and memorials of the Ama7X)ns wert 
 found. At Megara, at Trojzen, in Laconia near Cape Taenanw, 
 at Chseroneia in Bceotia, and in more than one part of Thessaly, 
 •epulchres or monuments of the Amazons were preserved. The 
 warlike women (it wat said), on their way to Attica, had nol 
 tra\ erse<l those countries, without leaving some evidences of their 
 
 Amongst the Asiatic Grcieks the supposed traces of the Amazong 
 were vet more rmmerou?. Their proper territory was asserted to 
 be tlie town and plain of Themiskyra, near the Grecian colony of 
 Amisus, on the river Thermodon, a region called after their ntune 
 by Roman historians and geographers.^ But they were believed 
 to have conquered and occupied in early times a much wider range 
 of territory, extending even to the coast of Ionia and ^olis. 
 Ephesus, Smyrna, Kyme, Myrina, Paphos and Sinope were af- 
 firmed to have been founded and denominated by them.* Some 
 
 Plato mentions tho iuvunion of Attica by ttie Amazons in the Menexeaa* 
 (c.9), but the passage in the treatise De Le^f,'. c. ii. p. 804, — u/coiwv yapd^ 
 fiv^ovi rrahuovc mKnafiai, etc. — is even a stronger evidence of his own be- 
 lief. And Xcnophon in the Anahasis, when he compares the quiver and the 
 hatchet of his barbarous enemies to " those which the Amazons carry," evi- 
 dently believed himself to be speaking of real persons, though he cx>uld hav* 
 seen only the costumes and armature of those painted by Mikon and other! 
 (Anabas. iv. 4, 10; compare iEschl. Supplic. 293, and Aristophan. Lysistr. 
 •78; Lucian. Anachars, c. 34. v. iii. p. 318). 
 
 How copiously the tale was enlarj^d upon by the authors of the Atthidei, 
 we see in Plutarch, Theseus, 27-28. 
 
 Hckataus (ap. Steph. Byz. 'A/iaCoi'fiov ; also Frafi^m. 350, 351, 352, Dl- 
 dot) and Xanthus (ap. Hesyehium, v. BovXefin) both treated of the AniA- 
 ions : the latter passage onght to be added to the collection of the Fragment 
 
 of Xanthus by Didrt. 
 ' Clemens Alexandr. Stromat, i. p. 336; Manner Pariom, Epoch. 21. 
 • Plutarch, Thes, 27-28. Steph. Byz v. 'Afia^oveiov. Pausan. ii. 32, 8r 
 
 ui. 25, 2. 
 
 3 Pherekydfis ap. Schol. ApoUon. Rh. ii. 373-992 ; Justin, ii. 4 ; Straho, 
 xii. p. 547, eefuaKVfMv, rd tuw 'A^Cwwv oUnrffpiov ; Diodor. il 45-4d j 
 Ballast ap. Serv. ad Virgil. ^Eneid. xi. 659; Pompon Mela, i. 19; PUn.E 
 N. vi. 4 The geography of Quintus Cortius (vi. 4) and of Philostratus (H0> 
 lok c. 19) is (.n this point iwielinite, and even inconsistent 
 
 Ephor. Fragm. 87, Didd. Strabo, xi- p. 506 j xiu p. 573 j xiiL p. 622 
 
 ' 
 
 jwiiiiors placed them in Libya or Ethiopia ; and when the Pooti« 
 Greeks on the north-western shore of the Euxine had become 
 acquainted with the hardy and daring character of the Sarmatian 
 maidens, — who were obliged to have slain each an enemy in 
 battle as the condition of obtaining a husband, and who artificially 
 prevented the growth of the right breast during childhood, -^ they 
 could imagine no more satisfactory mode of accounting for such 
 attributes than by deducing the Sarmatians from ji colony of va- 
 grant Amazons, expelled by the Grecian heroes from their terri- 
 tory on the Thermodon.' Pindar ascribed the first establishment 
 of the memorable temple of Artemis at Ephesus to the Amazons. 
 And Pausanias explains in part the preeminence which this tem- 
 ple enjoyed over every other in Greece by the widely diffused 
 renown of its female founders,^ respecting whom he observes 
 (with perfect truth, if we admit the historical character of the old 
 epic), that women possess an unparalleled force of resolution in 
 resisting adverse events, since the Amazons, after having been 
 first roughly handled by Herakles and then completely defeated 
 
 Pausan. i v. 31,6; vii. 2. 4. Tacit. Ann. iii. 61. Schol. ApoUon. llhod. ii. 
 
 965. 
 
 The derivation of the name Sinope from an Amazon was given by Heka 
 tteus (Fragm. 352). Themiskyra also had one of the Amazons for its epony- 
 mas (Appian, Bell. Mithridat. 78). 
 
 Some of the most venerated religious legends at Sinopfi were attached to 
 Che expedition of Herakles against the Amazons : Autolykus, the oracle- 
 giving hero, worshipped with great solemnity even at the time when the town 
 was besieged by LucuUus, was the companion of H^raclds (Appian, ib. c.83). 
 Even a small mountain village in the territory of Ephesus, called Latoreia, 
 derived its name from one of the Amazons ( Athenae. i. p. 31 ). 
 
 » Herodotiv. 108-117, where he gives the long tale, imagined by the Pon- 
 tic Greeks, of the origin of t'» Sarmatian nation. Compare Hippokrat^, De 
 Afire, Locis et Aquis, c. 17; Ephorus, Fragm. 103 ; Skymn. Chius, v. 102j 
 Plato, Legg. vii. p. 804 ; Diodor. ii. 34. 
 
 The testimony of Hippokrat^s certifies the practice of the Sarmatian wo- 
 men to check the growth of the right breast : Tdv de^iov 6e fia^dv ovk kxovaiv. 
 Tlaidtoiai yap kovaiv in vriirioiatv at fitiripec xf^^f^'^ov Terexvrifievov kir' avre^ 
 roitTif) iidirvpov iroieovaai, npd^ rdv fia^dv ri^ecuri rdv di^ov • Kal imKaierait 
 6are r^ av^rj<^iv <^eipea^ai, kc 6i rdv di^iov ufiov Kal {3paxiova irdaav r^ 
 hxpv Koi rd TrX^^of iKdidovcu. 
 
 Kt^ias also compares a warlike Sakian woman to the Amazons (Fngflk 
 Persic, ii. pp. 221,449, Bahr). 
 
 ■ Pausan. iv. 31,6; vii. 2, 4 Dlonys. Peri«g«t 838 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 I) 
 
214 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 STBABO AND ARRIAN. 
 
 tli 
 
 by Theseus, could yet find courage to play so conspicuous a pan 
 in the defence of Troy aoainst the (irecian besiegers.^ 
 
 It is thus that in wluit is called early Grecian history, as th« 
 Greeks themselves looked back upon it, the Amazons were among 
 the most prominent and undisputed per^oiia^es. Nor will the cir- 
 cumstance appear wonderful if we retlecf, tliat the belief in them 
 was t'lv^i established at a time when tiic Grecian mind was fed 
 with nothiiu: else but reli^nous legend and epic f>oetry, and that 
 the incident.^ of the supposed past, as received from these sources, 
 were addressed to their faith and feelings, without being required 
 to adapt themselves to any canons of credibility drawn from 
 present experience. But the time came when the historians of 
 Alexander the Great audaciously abused this ancient credence. 
 Amongst other tales calculated to exalt the dignity of that monarch, 
 they athrmed that after his conquest and subjugation of the Per- 
 sian emj>ire, he had been visited in Hyrcania by Thalestris, queen 
 of the Amazons, who admiring his warlike prowess, was anxious to 
 be enabled to return into her own country in a condition to produce 
 offspring of a breed so inv incible.- But the Greeks had now been 
 accustomed for a century and a half to historical and [)hilosophical 
 criticism —and that uninquiring faith, which was readily accorded 
 to the wonders of the pa^t, could no longer be invoked for them 
 when tendered as present reality. For the fable of the Amazons 
 was here reproduced in its naked simplicity, without being ration- 
 alized or painted over with historical colors. 
 
 Some literary men indeed, among whom were Demetrius ot 
 Skepsis, and the Mitylenean Theophanes, the companion of Pom- 
 pey in his expeditions, still continued their belief both in Ama- 
 zons present and Amazons past ; and when it becomes notorious 
 that at least there were none such on the banks of the Thermodon, 
 these authors supposed them to have migrated from their original 
 locality, and to have settled in the unvisited regions north of 
 Mount Caucasus.3 Strabo, on the contrary, feeling that the gwunda 
 
 ' Fausan. i. 15, 2. 
 
 ' Arrian, Exped. Alex. vii. 13; rompure iv 15; Quint. Curt. vi. 4; Jus- 
 tin, xlii. 4. The note of Frein>htniius on the at>ove passage of Quintus Cur 
 tins i> full of valuable references on the subject of the Amazons. 
 
 " Strabo, xi. p. 503-504 ; Appian, Bell Mithridat. c. 103 ; Plutaroh, 
 
 ii 
 
 rf disbelief applied with equal force to the ancient stories and to 
 the modern, rejected both the one and the other. But he remarka 
 at the same time, not without some surprise, that it was usual 
 with most persons to adopt a middle course, — to retain the Ama» 
 zons as historical phaenomena of the remote past, but to disallow 
 them as realities of the present, and to maintain that the breed 
 had died out.' The accomplished intellect of Julius Caesar did not 
 scruple to acknowledge them as having once conquered and held 
 in dominion a large portion of Asia;'- and the compromise be- 
 tween early, traditional, and religious faith on the one hand, and 
 
 peius, c. 35. Plin. N. H. vi. 7. Plutarch still retains the old description of 
 Amazons from the mountains near the Thermodon. Appian keeps clear of 
 this freo|]Taphical error, probably copying more exactly the language of The- 
 ophanes, who must have been well aware that when Lucullus besieged The- 
 miskyra, he did not find it defended by the Amazons Csee Appian, Bell. Mith- 
 ridat. c. 78). Ptolemy (v. 9) places the Amazons in the imperfectly known 
 regions of Asiatic Sarmatia, north of the Caspian and near the river Rha 
 (Volga). ** This fabulous community of women (observes Forbiger) Hand 
 Vnch der alten Geographic, \l 77, p. 457) was a phaenomenon much too inter- 
 esting for the geographers easily to relinquish." 
 
 > Strabo, xi. p. 505. 'Idiov de ri aviii^i^v'^f. r^ Xoyt^ rrepl tu>v *AfiaC6v(jv 
 Ol fiev yap ulloi rb uv^o>6ec nat rb hropiKbv di(jpiafievov Ix^vm ' rH yap na- 
 lata Kal rptvdf) Kot repaTdd-q, fiv^ot KaXovvrai • [Note. Strabo does not always 
 speak of the fiv^ot in this disrespectful tone ; he is sometimes much displeased 
 with those who dispute the existence of an historical kernel in the inside, 
 especially with regard to Homer.l n & laropia ^ovleraL raXvyi^f f, avre naXa- 
 ibv, dvre veov • Kal rb TeparuSeg v ovk ix^i, v airaviov. Tlepl ^e tCjv 'AfiaCovtJV 
 T(i airu Tieyerat Kal vvv Kal Tza'kal, reparcj^v t' ^vra, Kal iriareuc n6f)f>(j. 
 Ttf ydp uv moTvaeiev, wf yvvaiKtJv arparo^, v iroli^, v ^^vo^, (jvarairj uv izort 
 Xupk avSpiJv ; Kal oh fiovov avarairi, aXXa Kot k<p66ovc Trotr/ffairo hrl r^v oA- 
 lorpiav, Kal Kparrjoeuv oh raw kyyhg fiovov, uare Kal fiixpi rriq vvv 'luviof 
 npoeWelv, alM Kal Siarrovrtov areiXairo arpariav fiixptrv, 'Arn^^f; 'AAAa 
 uf/v ravrd ye aird, ical vvv "keyrrai irepl avrCbv ■ iTTireivei Si tt)v 
 iSiorriTa Kal rb iriarevea^ai to, iralaia /luXXov f) ri 
 vvv. There are however, other passages in which he speaks of the Amar 
 
 ions as realities. 
 
 Justin (ii. 4) recognizes the great power and extensive conquests of the 
 Amaxons in very early times, but says that they gradually declined down to 
 the reign of Alexander, in whose time there were jiist a few remaininrj ; the 
 queen with these few visited Alexander, but shortly afterwards the whole 
 breed became extinct. This hypothesis has the merit of convenience, per 
 baps of ingenuity. 
 
 • Saetonius, Jul. Ciesar, e 22. " In Syrift quoque regtasse Semiramn 
 
 Vol 1 11 
 
216 
 
 mSTORT OP GREECE. 
 
 established habits of critical research on the other, adopted by 
 the historian Arrian, deserves to be transcribed in his own words, 
 as illustrating strikingly the powerful sway of the old legends 
 even over the most positive-minded Greeks : — " Neither Aris- 
 tobulus nor Ptolemy (he observes), nor any other competent wit- 
 ness, has recounted this (visit of the Amazons and their queen 
 to Alexander) : nor does it seem to me that the race of the 
 Amazons was prescribed down to that time, nor have they been 
 noticed either by any one before Alexander, or by Xenophon, 
 thousrh he mentions both the Phasians and the Kolchians, and 
 the other barbarous nations which the Greeks saw both before 
 and after their arrival at Trapezus, in which marches they must 
 have met with the Amazons, if the latter had been still in exist- 
 ence. Yet // is incredible to me that this race of women, celebra- 
 ted as they have been oy authors so many and so commanding, 
 %hould never have existed at all. The story tells of Hcrakles, 
 that he set out from Greece and brought back with him the 
 girdle of their queen Hippolyte; also of Theseus and the Athe- 
 nians, that they were the first who defeated in battle and repel 
 led these women in their inva>^ion of Europe ; and the combat 
 of the Athenians with the Amazons has been painted by Mikon, 
 not less than that between the Athenians and the Persians. More- 
 over Herodotus has spoken in many places of these women, and 
 those Athenian orators who have [)ronounced panegyrics on the 
 citizens slain in battle, have dwelt u[)on the victory over the 
 Amazons as among the most memorable of Athenian exploits. 
 If the satrap of Media sent any equestrian women at all to Alex- 
 ander, I think that they must have come from some of the neigh- 
 boring tribes, practised in riding and equipped in the coi*lume 
 generally called Amazonian."' 
 
 There cannot be a more striking: evidence of the indelible force 
 
 (Juliu!? Csesar said this), majcmamque Asise partem Ama<onas tenuisse quon- 
 dam." 
 
 In the splendid triumph of the emperor Aurelian at Rome after the defeat 
 of Zenobia, a few Gothic women who had been taken in arms were exhibited 
 among the prisoners ; the official placard carried along with them annoon- 
 ced them as Amazons ( Vopitcua Aurel in Histor August. Scrip, p 260, ad 
 Paris). 
 
 * Arrian, Expedit. Aiexand. riL 13. 
 
 I 
 
 I. 
 
 ii 
 
 X 
 
 m 
 
 O 
 > 
 
 
 X 
 
 w 
 
 > 
 
 n 
 
 X 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 > 
 > 
 
 
 2: 
 
LEGEND AS CONCEIVED BY ARRIAN. 
 
 tl7 
 
 with which these ancient legends were worked into the national 
 faith and feelings of the Greeks, than these remarks of a judi- 
 cious Ivistorian u[W)n the fable of the Amazons. Probably if any 
 plausible mode of rationalizing it, and of transforming it into a 
 quasi-political event, had been offered to Arrian, he would have 
 been better pleased to adopt such a middle term, and would have 
 rested comfortably in the supposition that he believed the legend 
 in its true meaning, while his less inquiring countrymen were 
 imposed upon by the exaggerations of poets. But as the story 
 was presented to him plain and unvarnished, either for accept- 
 ance or rejection, his feelings as a patriot and a religious mao 
 prevented him from applying to the past such tests of credibility 
 as his untrammelled reason acknowledged to be paramount in 
 regard to the present. When we see moreover how much his 
 belief was strengthened, and all tendency to scepticism shut out by 
 the familiarity of his eye and memory with sculptured or painted 
 Amazons' — we may calculate the irresistible force of this sensi- 
 ble demonstration on the convictions of the unlettered public, at 
 once more deeply retentive of passive impressions, and unaccus- 
 tomed to the countervailing habit of rational investigation into 
 evidence. Had the march of an army of warlike women, from 
 the Thcrmudun or the Tanais into the heart of Attica, been re- 
 oounted to Arrian as an incident belonging to the time of Alexan- 
 der the Great, he would have rejected it no less emphaticiilly than 
 Strabo ; but cast back as it was into an undefined past, it took 
 rank among the hallowed traditions of divine or heroic antiquity, 
 — gi atifying to extol by rhetoric, but repulsive to scrutinize in 
 •rgument.*-^ 
 
 ' Ktesias described as real animals, existing in wild and distant rejriona, 
 Ac hetcrop:eneous and fantastic combinations which he saw srnlptnrod in 
 the East (see this stated and illustrated in Bahr, Preface to the Frapm. of 
 Ktegias, pp. &8, 59). 
 
 '^ Heyne observes ( Apollodor. ii. .5, 9) with respect to the fable of the Ama- 
 zons. "In his historiarum fidem aut vestigia nemo quaesiverit." Admitting 
 die wisdom of this comisel (and I think it indisputable),why are we required 
 to presume, in the absence of all proof, an historical basis for each of those 
 other narrattves, such as the Kalydonian boar-hunt, the Argonautic expedi- 
 tion, or the siege of Troy, which go to make up, along with the story of the 
 Amazons, the aggregate matter of Grecian legendary faith ? If the tale of 
 
 vol,. I. 10 
 
 I ^k 
 
 J| I 
 
 I I 
 I I 
 
:< . 
 
 nM 
 
 mSTOBY OF GBEEOB. 
 
 KRETAN LEGENDS. — MINOS AND HIS FAMIIV. 
 
 219 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 XRETAN LEGENDS.-MINOS AND HIS FAMILY 
 
 lo understand the adventures of Theseus in Krete, it will bf 
 necessary to touch briefly upon Minos and the Kretan heroio 
 
 genealogy. 
 
 Minos and Rhadamanthus, according to Homer, are sons of 
 Zeus, by Europe,' daughter of the widely -celebrated Phc^nix, 
 
 the Amazons could gain currency without any such support, why not other 
 portions of the ancient epic ? 
 
 An aathor of easy belief, Dr. F. Nagel, vindicates the historical reality 
 of the Amazons (Geschichte der Amazonen, Stutgart, 1838). I subjoin 
 here a different explanation of the Amazonian tale, j)roceeding from another 
 aathor who rejects the historical basis, and contained in a work of learning 
 and value {Guhl, Ephesiaai, Berlin, 1843. p. 132): — 
 
 ** Id tantum monendum videtur, Amazonas nequaquam historice accipien 
 das esse, sed e contrario totas ad mythologiara pertinere. Earum enim 
 fabulas quum ex frequentium hierodularum gregibus in cultibus et sacris 
 Asiaticis ortas esse ingeniose ostenderit Tolken, jam inter omnes mythohguB 
 peritos cot*.,, at, Amazonibus nihil fere nisi peregrini cujusdara cultiis notio- 
 nem expressuni esse, ejusque cum Graecorum religione certamen frequent- 
 ibus istis pugnis designatum esse, quas cum Amazonibus tot Graecorum 
 heroes habuisse credebantar, Hercules, Bellerophon, Theseus, Achilles, et 
 vel ipse, quem Ephesi cultum fuisse supra ostendimus, Dionysus. Quae 
 Amazonum notio primaria, quum paulatim Euemeristica (ut ita dicam) 
 ratione ita transformaretur, ut Amazones pro vero feminarum populo habe- 
 rentnr, necesse quoque erat, ut omnibus fere locis, ubi ejusmodi reiigionum 
 certamina locum habuerunt, Amazones habitasse, vel eo usque processisse, 
 crederentur. Quod cum nusquam manifestius fuerit, quam in Asia minore. 
 et potissimum in eti parte ()uaB Graeciam versus vergit, baud mirandum est 
 omnes fere ejus orae urbes ab Amazonibus conditas putari." 
 
 I do not know the evidence upon which this conjectural interpretation 
 
 •sts, but the statement of it, though it boasts so many supporters among 
 Aythological critics, carries no appearance of probability to my mind. Prian 
 lights against the Amazons as well as the Grecian heroes. 
 
 * Earope was worshipped with very peculiar solemnity in the island d 
 Xr6t« (aee Dictys Cretensis, De Bello Trojano, i. c. 2). 
 
 Th* venerable plane-tree, under which Zeus and Europe had reposed, wai 
 
 i 
 
 
 bom in Krete. Minos is the father of Deukalion, whose son 
 Idomeneus, in conjunction with Meriones, conducts the Kretan 
 troops to the host of Agamemnon before Troy. Minos is rulei 
 of Kiiossus, and familiar companion of the great Zeus. He is 
 spoken of as holding guardianship in Krete — not necessarily 
 meaning the whole of the island : he is farther decorated with a 
 golden sceptre, and constituted judge over the dead in the under- 
 world to settle their disputes, in which function Odysseus linds 
 him — this however by a passage of comparatively late interpola- 
 tion into the Odyssey. He also had a daughter named Ariadne, 
 for whom the artist Daedalus fabricated in the town of Knossua 
 the representation of a complicated dance, and who was ultimate- 
 ly carried otf* by Theseus : she died in the island of Dia, de- 
 serted by Theseus and betrayed by Dionysos to the fatal wrath 
 of Artemis. Rhadamanthus seems to approach to Minos both 
 in judicial functions and posthumous dignity. He is conveyed 
 expressly to Eubce, by the semi-divine sea-carriers the Phsea- 
 cians, to inspect the gigantic corpse of th ^< earth-born Tityus — 
 the longest voyage tbey ever undertook. He is moreover atlei 
 death promoted to an abode of undisturbed bliss in the Elysiar 
 plain at the extremity of the earth.' 
 
 According to j)oets later than Homer, Europe is brought over 
 by Zeus from Phoenicia to Krete, where she bears to him three 
 sons, Minos, Rhadamanthus and Sarpedon. The latter leaves 
 Kieie and settles in Lykia, the population of which, as well as 
 that of many other portions of Asia Minor, is connected by va- 
 
 still shown, hard by a fountain at Goetyn in Krete, in the time of Theophras- 
 tus: it was said to be the only plane-tree in the neighborliood which never 
 cast its leaves (Theophrasr. Hist. Plant, i. 9). 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, xiii. 249, 450; xiv. 321. Odyss. xi. 322-568; xix. 179; 
 \v. 564- vii 321. 
 
 The Homeric Minos in the under-world is not a judge of the previous 
 lives of the dead, so as to determine whether they deserve reward or pun- 
 ishment for their conduct on earth : such functions are not assigned to him 
 earlier than the time of Plato. He administers justice ammg the dead, who 
 are conceived as a sort of society, requiring some presiding judge : ^efiiff- 
 TEvovTa veKveaai, with regard to Minos, is said very much like (Odyss. xl 
 484; vvv d' avre fiiya Kpareeic veKveaai with regard to Achilles. See thit 
 matter partially Ulustrated in Heyne's Excnrsoa xi. to the sixth book of the 
 Aoeid of VirgiL 
 
 I 
 
 * ^v»ii' i 
 
220 
 
 mSTORTf OF GREECE 
 
 nous mjthical genealogies with Krete, though the Sarp^don cil 
 the Iliad has no connection with Krete, and is not the son of 
 Europe. Sarpedon having become king of Ljkia, was favored 
 by his father, Zeus, with permission to live for three generations.^ 
 At the same time tlie youthful Miletus, a favorite of vSarpedon, 
 quitted Krete, and established the city which bore his name on 
 the coast of Asia Minor. Rhadamanthus became sovereign of 
 and lawgiver among the islands in the .^gean : ne subsequently 
 went to Bceotia, where he married the widowed Alkmeno, 
 mother of Herakles. 
 
 Europe finds in Krete a king Asterius, who marries her and 
 adopts her children by Zeus : this Asterius is the son of Kres, 
 the eponym of the island, or (according to another genealogy by 
 which it was attempted to be made out that Minos was of Dorian 
 race) he was a son of the daughter of Kres by Tektamus, the 
 son of Dorus, who had migrated into the island from Greece. 
 
 Minos married Pasiphae, daughter of the god Helios and Per- 
 seis, by whom he had Katreus, Deukalidn, Glaukus, Androgeos, 
 names marked in the legendary narrative, — together with seve- 
 ral daughters, among whom were Ariadne and Phsedra He 
 off'ended Poseidon by neglecting to fulfil a solemnly-made vow, 
 and the displeased god atiiicted his wife Pasiphae with a mon- 
 strous passion for a bull. The great artist Daedalus, son of Eu- 
 palamus, a fugitive from Athens, became the confidant of this 
 amour, from which sprang the Minotaur, a creature half man and 
 half buU.'^ This Minotaur was imprisoned by Minos in the laby- 
 rinth, an inextricable inclosure constructed by D<edalus for that 
 express purpose, by order of Minos. 
 
 Minos acquired great nautical power, and expelled the Karjan 
 mhabitants from many of the islands of the ^Egean, which he 
 placed under the government of his sons on the footing of tribu 
 
 * Apollodor. iii. 1, 2. Kal avn^ Siduai Zevc em rpelg yevfug Cv^. This 
 eircumstancc is evidently imagined by the logographers to sk count for the 
 appearance of Sarpedon in ihe Trojan war, fighting against Idomeneus, the 
 grandson of Minos. Nisus is the eponymus of Nisaea, the port of the town 
 of Megara : his tomb was shown at Athens (Pausan. i. 19, 5) Minos is the 
 eponym of the island of Miooa (opposite the port of Nisaea), where it 
 affirmed that the fleet of Minds was stationed ( Pausan. i. 44, 5). 
 
 ' ADolIodor iii. 1. 2. 
 
 KRETAN LEGENDS. — MINOS AND HIS FAMILY. 
 
 221 
 
 t 
 
 t 
 
 taries. He undertook several expeditions against various placer 
 on the coast — one against Ni/.os, the son of Pandion, king of Me- 
 gara, who had amongst the hair of his head one peculiar lock oi 
 a purple color : an oracle had pronounced that his life and reign 
 would never be in danger so long as he preserved thi:? precious 
 lock. The city would have remained inexpugnable, if Scylla, 
 the daughter of Nisus, had not conceived a violent passion for 
 Minos. While her father was asleep, she cut off the lock on 
 which his safety hung, so that the Kretan king soon became vio 
 torious. Instead of performing his promise to carry Scylla away 
 with him to Krete, he cast her from the stern of his vessel into 
 the sea :^ both Scylla and Nisus were changed into birds. 
 
 Androt^eos, son of Minos having displayed such rare qualities 
 as to vanquish all his competitors at the Panathenaic festival in 
 Athens, was sent by ^geus the Athenian king to contend against 
 the bull of Marathon, — an enterprise in which he perished, and 
 Minos made war upon Athens to avenge his death. He was for 
 a long time unable to take the city : at length he prayed to hi% 
 father Zeus to aid him in obtaining redress from the Athenians, 
 and Zeus sent upon them pestilence and famine. In vain did 
 they endeavor to avert these calamities by offering up as pro- 
 pitiatory sacrifices the four daughters of Hyacinthus. Their 
 sufferings still continued, and the oracle directed them to submit 
 to any terms which Minos might exact. He required that they 
 should send to Krete a tribute of seven youths and seven mai- 
 dens, periodically, to be devoured by the Minotaur,^ — offered to 
 him in a labyrinth constructed by Daedalus, including countless 
 different passages, out of which no person could escape. 
 
 Kverv ninth year this offering was to be despatched. The 
 more common story was, that the youths and maidens thus des- 
 tined to destruction were selected by lot — but the logographer 
 Hellanikus said that Minds came to Athens and chose them him- 
 self 3 The third period for despatching the victims had arrived, 
 
 ' Apollodor. iii. 15, 8. See the Ciris of Virgil, a juvenile poem on the 
 snbject of this fiible ; also Hyginus, f. 198; Schol. Eurip. Hippol. 1200 
 Propertius (iii. 19, 21) gives the features of the story with tolerable fidel 
 ity ; Ovid takes considerable liberties with it (Metam. viii. 5-150). 
 
 ■ Apollodor. iii. 15, 8. 
 
 ' See, on the subject of Theseus and the Minotaur, Eckermann, Lcshrbad* 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 , I 
 
 i 
 
29t 
 
 HISTOBT OF GBEEGB. 
 
 THESEUS AND THE MINOTAUR. 
 
 228 
 
 sod Athens was plunged in th^ deepest affliction, when Theseoi 
 determined to devote himself as one of them, and either to t«v 
 minate the sanguinary tribute or to perish. He prayed to Posei- 
 46n for help, and the Delphian god assured him that Aphrodite 
 would sustain and extricate him. On ai-riving at Knossus he 
 was fortunate enough to captivate the affections of Ariadne, the 
 daughter of Minos, who supplied him with a sword and a clue of 
 thread. With the former he contrived to kill the Minotaur, the 
 latter served to guide his footsteps in escaping from the labyrinth 
 Having accomplished this triumph, he left Krete with his ship 
 and companions unhuit, carrying off Ariande, whom however he 
 Boon abandoned on the island of Naxos. On his way home to 
 Athens, he stopped at Delos, where he offered a grateful sacrifice 
 to Apollo for his esca}3e, and danced along with the young men 
 and maidens whom he had rescued from the Minotaur, a dance 
 called the Geranus, imitated from the twists and convolutions <rf 
 the Kretan labyrinth. It had been concerted with his father 
 ^geus, that if he succeeded in his enterprise against the Mino 
 taur, he should on his return hoist white sails in his ship in place 
 of the black canvas which she habitually carried when employed 
 on this mournful embassy. But Theseus forgot to make the 
 change of sails ; so that ^geus, seeing the ship return with her 
 equipment of mourning unaltered, was impressed with the sorrow- 
 ful conviction that his son hud perished, and cast himself into th* 
 sea. The ship which made this voyage was preserved by the 
 Athenians with careful solicitude, being constantly repaired with 
 new timbers, down to the time of the Phalerian Demetrius : every 
 year she was sent from Athens to Delos with a solemn sacrifice 
 and specially-nominated envoys. The priest of Apollo decked 
 her stem with garlands before she quitted the port, and during 
 the time which elapsed until her return, the city was understood 
 to abstain from all act* carrying with them public impurity, so 
 that it was unlawful to put to death any person even under f<M^ 
 mal sentence by the dikastery. This accidental circumstance 
 
 dei Religions Geschichte und Mythologie, vol. ii. ch. xiii. p. 133. He main- 
 tains that the tribute of these human victims paid by Athens to Minds is aa 
 Wstarical fact. Upon what this belief is (j^onded, I confesf I do not 
 
 Mcomes especially memorable, from its having postponed foi 
 thirty days the death of the lamented Socrates.' 
 
 The legend respecting Theseus, and his heroi<i rescue of the 
 seven noble youths and maidens from the jaws of the Minotaur, 
 was thus both commemorated and certified to the Athenian public, 
 by the annual holy ceremony and by the unquestioned identity 
 of the v^^ssel employed in it. There were indeed many varieties 
 in the mode of narrating the incident; and some of the Attic 
 logographers tried to rationalize the fable by transforming the 
 Minotaur into a general or a powerful athlete, named Taurus, 
 whom Theseus vanquished in Krete.*^ But this altered version 
 never overbore the old fanciful character of the tale as maintain- 
 ed by the poets. A great number of other religious ceremonies 
 and customs, as well as several chapels or sacred enclosures in 
 honor of different heroes, were connected with different acts and 
 special ordinances of Theseus. To every Athenian who took 
 
 • Plato, Phajdon, c. 2, 3 ; Xenoph. Meinor. iv. 8. 2. Plato especially notic- 
 ed Tore dig ^nra tKeivov^, the seven youths and the seven maidens whom 
 Theseus conveyed to Krcte and brought back safely : this number seems an 
 old and constant feature in the legend, maintained by Sappho and Bacchy- 
 lides as well jis by Euripides (Here. Fur. 1318). See Servius ad Virgil 
 -/Encid. vi. 21 
 
 ' For the general narrative and its discrepancies, see Plutarch, Th^s 
 c. 15-19; Diodor. iv. 60-62; Pausan. i. 17,3; Ovid, Epist. Ariadn. Thfis 
 104. In that other portion of the work of Diodorus which relates more es- 
 pecially to Krete. and is borrowed from Kretan logographers and historians 
 (v. 64-80), he mentions nothing at all respecting the war of Minds with 
 Athens. 
 
 In the drama of Euripides called Theseus, the genuine story of the youths 
 and maidens about to be offered as food to the Minotaur was introduced 
 (Schol. ad Aristoph. Vesp. 312). 
 
 Ariadne figures in the Odyssey along with Theseus : she is the daughter of 
 Minos, carried off by Theseus from Krete, and killed by Artemis in the way 
 home : there is no allusion to Minotaur, or tribute, or seJf-devotion of Thd- 
 seus (Odyss. xi. 324 ). This is probably the oldest and simplest form of tho 
 legend — one of the many amorous (compare Theognis, 1232) adventures 
 of Theseus : the rest is added by post- Homeric poets. 
 
 The respect of Aristotle for Minos induces him to adopt the hypothesis 
 that the Athenian youths and maidens were not put to death in Kr^te, but 
 grew old in servitude (Aristot. Fragm. Borriacov UoXireiaf p. 106. ed 
 Neumann, of the Fragments of the treatise Uepl lloXiretciv. Plutarch, Qusm* 
 Gr»e. p. 298). 
 
 -» I ... l a ^ 
 
I ! 
 
 224 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 part in the festivals of the Oschophoria, the Pjtuiepsia, or tne 
 Kybernesia, the name of this great hero was familiar, and the 
 motives for offering to him solemn worship at his own special 
 festival of the Theseia, became evident and impressive. 
 
 The same Athenian legends which ennobled and deoorated the 
 character of Theseus, piiinted in repulsive colors the attributes 
 of Minos; and the traits of the old Homeric comrade of Zeua 
 were buried under those of the conqueror and oppressor of 
 Athens. His history like that of the other legendary personages 
 of Greece, consists almost entirely of a string of family romances 
 and tragedies. His son Katreus, father of Aerope, wife of Atreua, 
 was apprized by an oracle that he would perish by the hand of 
 one of his own children : he accordingly sent them out of the 
 island, and Althaemenes, his son, established himself in Rhodes. 
 Katreus having become old, and fancying that he had outlived 
 the warning of the ora«3le, went over to Rhodes to see Althae- 
 menes. In an accidental dispute which arose between his atten- 
 dants and the islanders, -^Uthsemenes inadvertently took part and 
 slew liis father without knowing him. Glaukus, the youngest 
 son of Minos, pursuing a mouse, fell into a reservoir of honey and 
 wa-< drowned. No one knew what had become of him, and bis 
 father was inconsolabk^ ; at length the Argeian Polyeidus, a 
 prophet wonderfully endowed by the gotls, both discovered the 
 boy and restored him to life, to the exceeding joy of Minos. i 
 
 The latter at last found his death in an eager attempt to over- 
 take and punish Dajdalus. This great artist, the eponymous 
 hero of the Attic gens or deme called the Dajdalidae, and the 
 descendant of Erechtheus through Metion, had been tried at the 
 tribunal of Areiopagus and banished for killing his nephew 
 Talos, whose rapidly improving skill excited his envj:- He took 
 refuge in Krete, where he acquired the confidence of Minos, and 
 was employed (as has been already mentioned) in constructing 
 the labyrinth ; subsequt ntly however he fell under the disple3.sure 
 of Minos, and was confined as a close prisoner in the inextricable 
 windings of his own edifice. Hi? unrivalled skill and rescwrce 
 however did not forsaki; him. He manufactured wings both fisf 
 
 * Apollodor. iii cap. 2-3. 
 
 * Flierekyd Fragm. 105 ; Hellanik. Fragm. 83 (Didot) \ Pansan. vii. 4,1 
 
 DEATH OF MINOS IN SICILY. 
 
 himself and for his son Ikarus, with which they flew over thi 
 sea : the father arrived safely in Sicily at Kamikus, the residence 
 of the Sikanian king Kokalus, but the son, disdaining paternal 
 example and admonition, fiew so high that his wings were melted 
 by the sun and he fell into the sea, which from him was called 
 the Ikarian sea.^ 
 
 Daedalu** remained for some time in Sicily, leaving in various 
 parts of the island many prodigious evidences of mechanical and 
 architectural skill.^^ At length Minos bent upon regaining posses- 
 sion of his person, undertook an expedition against Kokalus with 
 a numerous fleet and army. Kokalus affecting readiness to de- 
 liver up the fugitive, and receiving Minds with apparent friend- 
 ship, ordered a bath to be prepared for him by his three daugh 
 ters, who, eager to protect Daedalus at any price, drowned the 
 Kretan king in the bath with hot water.3 Many of the Kretans 
 who had accompanied him remained in Sicily and founded the 
 town of Minoa, which they denominated after him. But not long 
 afterwards Zeus roused all the inhabitants of Krete (except the 
 towns of Polichna and Praesus) to undertake with one accord an 
 expedition against Kamikus for the purpose of avenging the 
 death of Minos. They besieged Kamikus in vain for five years, 
 until at last famine compelled them to return. On their way 
 along the coast of Italy, in the Gulf of Tarentum, a terrible 
 storm destroyed their fleet and obliged them to settle perma- 
 nently in the country : they founded Hyria with other cities, and 
 became Messapian lapygians. Other settlers, for the most part 
 Greeks, immigrated into Krete to the spots which this movement 
 
 * Diodor. iv. 79 ; Ovid, Metamorph. viii. 181. Both Ephorus and Phili»» 
 tus mentioned the coming of Dfledalas to Kokalus in Sicily fEphor. Fr. 99 ; 
 Philist. Fragm. 1, Didot) : probably Antiochus noticed it also (Diodor. xii. 
 71). Kokalus was the point of commencement for the Sicilian historians. 
 
 » Diodor. iv. 80. 
 
 'Pausan. vii. 4, 5 ; Schol. Pindar. Nem. iv. 95 ; Hygin. fab. 44 ; ConoA 
 Narr. 25 ; Ovid. Ibis, 291. — 
 
 " Vel tua maturet, sicut Minoia fata, 
 
 Per caput infiisie fervidus humor aquae." 
 
 This 8lofy formed the subject of a lost drama of Sophokles, KafiUioi m 
 Wivug ; it was also told by Kallimachus, iv klriois^ as well as by 
 •brniu CSchol. Iliad, ii. 145). 
 
 ▼OL. I. 10* IS*- 
 
.\ 
 
 226 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CHARACTEB OF MINOS IN LEGENb. 
 
 had left vacant, and in the second generation after Minds ooeiii> 
 red the Trojan war. The departed Minos was exceedingly o^ 
 fended with the Kretans for co<>perating in avenging the injury 
 to Menelaus, wsiuce the Greeks generally had lent no aid to the 
 Kretans in their expedition against the town of Kamikus. He 
 sent upon Krete, after the return of Idomeneus from Troy, such 
 terrible visitations of famine and pestilence, that the population 
 again died out or expatriated, and was again renovated by fresh 
 immigrations. The intolerable suffering' thus brought upon the 
 Kretans by the anger of Minos, for having cooperated in the 
 general Grcian aid to Menelaus, was urged by them to tlie 
 Greeks as the reason why they could take no part in resisting 
 the invasion of Xerxes ; and it is even pretended that they were 
 advised and encouraged to adopt this ground of excuse 1)V the 
 Delphian oracle.-^ 
 
 Such is the Minds of the j)oets and logofrraphers, with his 
 legendary and romantic attributes : the familiar comrade of the 
 great Zeus, — the judge among the dead in Hades, — tlie husband 
 of Pasiphae, daughter of the god Helios, — the father of the god- 
 dess Ariadne, as well sis of Androgeos, who perishes and is wor- 
 Bhipped at Athens,^^ and of the boy Glaukus, who is miraculously 
 restored to life by a prophet, — the person beloved bv Scylla, and 
 the amorous pursuer of the nymph or goddess Britomartis,'*— 
 
 ' Tlii8 curious and very characteristic narrative is pven by Hcrodot. rif 
 I6if-I7l. 
 
 * Heredot. vii. 169. The; answer ascribed to the Delphian oracle, on the 
 question bping put by the Kretan envoys whether it would be liettcr for them 
 to aid the Greeks against Xerxes or lot, is hig ily emphatic and poetical . 
 '2 vfjTnoi, kmfitfi(f>£(r&e baa vfiiv ek TuvM-FveAeu TCfiuptj^uTuv Mivid<; eTc^fiype 
 ittjviuv SuKpvfiaTa, on ol fu-v ov ^we^eirpi/^avTo avrijj rbv ev KafxiKif) ^nvarnp 
 yevbfievov, vfieig dk Ksivoiai ttjv iK UnapTr]^ dpTax^^loav vrr' dvdpdc iSap/ieu- 
 pov yvvaiKa. 
 
 If such an answer was ever returned at £^1, I cannot but think that it 
 must have been from some oracle in Krete .tself, not from Delphi. The 
 Delphian oracle could never have so far fcrgotten its obii^utions to the 
 general cause of Greece, an that critical moment, which involved moreovei 
 the safety of all its own treasures, as to deter the Kretans from giving assist- 
 saee. 
 
 ' llesioil, Theogon. 949 : Pausan. i. 1,4. 
 
 « Kallimach. Uvmn. ad Dian. 189. Strabo (x. p. 476) dwells ^o npoa 
 
 227 
 
 ( 
 
 I 
 
 the proprietor of the Labyrinth and of the Minotaur, and th« 
 exacter of a periodical tribute of youths and maidens from Athena 
 as food for this monster, — lastly, the follower of the fugitive 
 artist Daedalus to Kamikus, and the victim of the three ill-dis 
 posed daughters of Kokalus in a bath. With this strongly- 
 marked portrait, the Minos of Thucydides and Aristotle has 
 searcely anything in common except the name. He is the first 
 to acquire IVuiiussokrafy, or command of the ^gaean sea : he ex- 
 pels the Karian inhabitants from the Cyclades islands, and sends 
 thither fresh colonists under his own sons ; he puts down piracy, 
 in order that he may receive his tribute regularly ; lastly, he at- 
 tempts to conquer Sicily, but fails in the enterprise and perishes.^ 
 Here we have conjectures, derived from the analogy of the 
 Athenian maritime empire in the historical times, substituted in 
 place of the fabulous incidents, and attached to the name of 
 Minos. 
 
 In the fable, a tribute of seven youths and seven maidens ia 
 paid to him periodically by the Athenians ; in the historicized 
 narrative this character of a tribute-collector is preserved, but 
 the tribute is money collected from dependent islands ;9 and Aris- 
 
 the strange contradiction of the legends concerning Minos: I agree with 
 Hoeckh (Kreta, ii. p. 93) that 6a(Tf/6?Loyog in this passage refers to the tribute 
 exacted from Athens for the Minotaur 
 
 ' Thuycd. i. 4. M.ivo>g yup, TraWaiTaTo^ Civ uKoy la/nev^ vavriKdv EKTrjaaro, 
 Kol Tijg vvv 'E,A?itjVLKyg ^a'AaaariQ knt nkelaTov iKpuT^ae, koX rwv ILvKkudtM 
 VT/auv ffp^i re xal OLKiarijq avrog tuv Trkeiaruv eyiveTo, Kupag e^eXuaag koI 
 Toig tavTov iraidac fiye/aovag kyKaraaTTjaaq • to re "kyaTiKtiv, wf et/tdf, Ka&y- 
 pel EK Trig ^aXdaajig, €<jt' oaov ijdvvarOf tov Tag rrpoaodvg fjuLTCXov ievai avT^ 
 See also c. 8. 
 
 Aristot Polit. ii. 7, 2, AokeI (5* ij vrjaog Kot irpbg t^v apx^ t^v 'EXkrivLK^ 
 
 tre<pvK£vai Kai KEia-&aL KaAug dib Kal ttjv TTJg ^aXuaaijc dp^v Kare- 
 
 cxev 6 Mivuc, Kai Tug vtjaovg Tag fiEV txci-p^^oaTo, Tag 6i (^las • TE?Mg d' ^iri 
 ^Efievog Ty l,iKEAi<^ Tbv fSiov kTe'kEVTrjaev kKsl nepl KufiiKov. 
 
 Ephorus (ap. Skymn. Chi. 542) repeated the same statement: he men 
 tioncd also the autochthonous king Kres. 
 
 * It is curious that Herodotus expressly denies this, and in language which 
 shows that he had made special inquiries about it : he says that the Karians 
 or Leleges in the islands (who were, according to Thucydides, expelled by 
 Minos) paid no tribute to Minos, but manned his navy, t. e. they stood to 
 Minos much in the same relation as Chios and Lesbos stood to Athena 
 ^Herodot. i. 171). Oik may trace here the influence of those discossiona 
 
123 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 totle points out to us how conveniently Krete is situated ic ex- 
 ercise empire over tbe ^gaean. The expedition against Kami 
 kus, instead of being directed to the recovery of the fugiUvc 
 Daedalus, is an attempt on the part of the great thalassokrat to 
 conquer Sicily. Herodotus gives us generally the same view of 
 the character of Minos as a great maritime king, but his notice 
 of the expedition against Kamicus includes the mention of Dae- 
 dalus as the intended object of itJ Ephorus, while he des'!ribed 
 Minos as a commanding and comprehensive lawgiver imposing 
 his commands under the sanction of Zeus, represented Iiim as 
 the imitator of an earlier lawgiver named RluuUiinanthus, and 
 also as an immigrant into Krete from the iEolic Mount Ida, along 
 with the priests or sacred companions of Zeus called the Idaei 
 Dactyli. Aristotle too points him out as the author of the Sys- 
 sitia, or public meals common in Krete as well as at Spaita, — 
 other divergences in a new direction from the spirit ol the old 
 
 fiAbles.'-^ 
 
 The contradictory attributes ascribed to Minos, together with 
 the perplexities experic^nced by those who wished to introduce a 
 regular chronological arrangement into these legendary events, 
 has led both in ancient and in modern times to the supposition of 
 two kings named Minos, one the grandson of the other, — Minos 
 I., the son of Zeus, lawgiver and judge, — Minos II., the thalas- 
 gQkrat, — a gratuitous conjecture, which, without solving the prob- 
 lem required, only adds one to the numerous artifices employed 
 for imparting the semblance of history to the disparate matter of 
 legend. The Kretans were at all times, from Homer downward, 
 expert and practised aeamen. But that they were ever united 
 
 which must have been prevalent at that time respecting the maritime empirt 
 of Athens. 
 
 ' Uerodot. vii. 170. Aeyerai yap Mlvu Kara ^^njcriv AaidiiXov uKiKOfitvov 
 kg iLnaviijVy rriv vvv "LtKO/'iriv koKov^vtiv^ airo^aveiv ^taiif> iJavarw. 'Arti 
 &k xpovov KpfiToc, "^eoir a<j>t enorp vvovroqy etc. 
 
 • Aristot Polit. ii. 7, 1 ; vii. 9, 2. Ephoras, Fragm. 63, 64, 65. He sal 
 ftside altogether the Homeric genealogy of Minos, which makes him brothef 
 of Rhadamanthns and bom in Krete. 
 
 Strabo, in pointing out the many contradictions respecting Minos, r»» 
 marks, 'E<rrt 6e koI dAXo^ Xoyo^ ovx 6fio\oyov(ievo^, ruv fiev ^ivov r^f vfi<n9 
 rdv Mivu XeyovTuVf rCiv dk kntx^piw. By the former he doubtless means 
 Bphorsi though he has not here specified him (x. p. 477). 
 
 \ 
 
 CHARACTER OF MINOS IN LEGEND. 
 
 under one government, or ever exer:dsed maritime domioion in 
 the ^gaean is a fact which we are neither able to affirm nor to 
 deny. The Odyssey, in so far as it justifies any inference at all, 
 points against such a supposition, since it recognizes a great di- 
 versity both of inhabitants and of languages in the island, and 
 designates Minos as king specially of Knossus : it refutes still 
 more jwsitively tlie idea that Mhios put down piracy, which the 
 Homeric Kretans as well as others continue to practise without 
 acruple. 
 
 Herodotus, though he in some places speaks of Minos as a per- 
 son historically cognizable, yet in one passage severs him point- 
 edly from the generation of man. The Samian despot " Poly- 
 krates (he tells us) was the first person who aspired to nautiod 
 dominion, excepting Minos of Knossus, and others before him 
 (if any such there ever were) who may have ruled the sea; but 
 Polykrates is the first of that which is called the generation of 
 mail who aspired with mu(;h chance of success to govern Ionia 
 and the islands of the uEga^an."' Here we find it manifestly in- 
 timated that Minos did not belong to the generation of man, and 
 the tale given by the historian respecting the tremendous calam- 
 ities which the wrath of the departed Minos inflicted on Krete 
 confirms the impression. The king of Knossus is a god or a 
 hero, but not a man ; he belongs to legend, not to history. He 
 is the son as well as the familiar companion of Zeus ; he mar- 
 ries the daughter of Helios, and Ariadne is numbered among his 
 oftsjH'ing. To this superhuman person are ascribed the oldest 
 and most revered institutions of the island, religious and politi- 
 cal, together with a period of supposed ante-historical dominion. 
 That there is much of Kretan religious ideas and practice em- 
 bodied in the fables concerning Minos can hardly be doubted : 
 nor is it improbable that the tale of the youths and maidens sent 
 
 ' Herodot. iii. 122. Tlo'kvKpaTrig yuf) tfrri irpuTog tuv Tificl^ Ififxev £>tA^ 
 Vfjjv, Of -dakaaaoKpaTEEiv inf:vo^^ij, nape^ Mivwoj re tov KvuoaioVt koI e. d| 
 ru uX/M^ rporepo^ tovtov ijp^e ri/^ ^a?.aTTTig • rfjg d e uv^puTrtjtif^ 
 keyofiivTjc yeveric Ilo/lv^parjyf iarl -rpCjTOf IXTridac iroXXag ix*^ 'Iat«4^ 
 ft Kol VT}(To)v ap^eiv. 
 
 The expression exactly corresponds to that of Pausan'as, ix. 5, 1, kirl tw* 
 tuiXov/ievcjv 'Hptjuv, for ^e age preceding the dv^puir^h yevhi ; abo viiL SL 
 I, if rd, uvuripu) tov dir^ftunuv yevovc. 
 
 V 
 
 i 
 
«do 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECT^. 
 
 from Athens may be based in some expiatory offerings refr 
 dered to a Kretan divinity. The orjpastic worshij) of" Zeus, sol 
 emnized by the armed priests with impassioned motions and vio- 
 lent excitement, was of ancient date in that island, as well as the 
 connection with the worship) of Apollo both at Delphi and at 
 Delos. To analyze the fables and to elicit from them any trust- 
 worthy particular facts, appears to me a fruitless attempt. The 
 religious recollection?, the romantic invention, and the items of 
 matter of fact, if any such there be, must forever remain indis- 
 Bolubly amalgamated as the |)oet originally blended them, for the 
 amusement or edification of his auditors. Hoeckh, in his in- 
 Btnictive and learned collection of facts respecting ancient Krete, 
 construes the mythical genealogy of Minos Ho denote a combina- 
 tion of the orgiastic worship of Zeus, indigenous among the 
 Eteokretes, with the worship of the moon imported from Phoe- 
 nicia, and signified by the names Europe, Pasiphae, and Ariad- 
 ne.' This is specious as a conjecture, but I do not venture to 
 speak of it in terms of greater confidence. 
 
 From the connection of religious worship and legendary tales 
 between Krete and various parts of Asia Minor, — the Troad, 
 the coast of Miletus and Lykia, especially between Mount Ida 
 in Krete and Mount Ida in tEoHs, — it seems reasonable to infer 
 an ethnographical kindred or relationship between the inhabitants 
 anterior to the period of Hellenic occupation. The tales of Kre- 
 tan settlement at Minoa and Engyion on the south-western coast 
 of Sicily, and in lapyj^ia on the Gulf of Tarentum, conduct us 
 to a similar presumption, though the want of evidence forbids our 
 tracing it farther. In the time of Herodotus, the Eteokretes, or 
 aboriginal inhabitants of the island, were confined to Polichna 
 and Praesus ; but in earlier times, prior to the encroachments of 
 the Hellenes, they had occupied the lai-ger portion, if not the 
 whole of the island. Minos was originally their hero, subse- 
 quently adopted by the immigrant Hellenes, — at least Herodotus 
 considers him as barbarian, not Hellenic.'^ 
 
 ' Hoeckh, Kreta, vol. ii. pp. .'>6-67. K. O. Miiller also (Dorier. ii. 2, 14) 
 A religions interpretation upon these Kreto>Attic legends, br t he ex* 
 them in a manner totally different from Hoeckh. 
 » Herodct. L 173 
 
 
 ARGONAUTIC EXPEDinOll 
 
 ISl 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION. 
 
 The ship Argft was the theme of many songs during the old- 
 est periods of the Grecian epic, even earlier than the Odyssey. 
 The king .^etes, from whom she is departing, the hero Jason, 
 who commands her, and the goddess Here, who watches over 
 him, enabling the Argo to traverse distances and to escape dan- 
 gers which no ship had ever before encountered, are all circum- 
 stances briefly glanced at by Odysseus in his narrative to Alki- 
 nous. Moreover, Euneus, the son of Ja^^on and Hypsipylft, 
 governs Lemnos during the siege of Troy by Agamemndn, and 
 carries on a friendly traffic with the Grecian camp, purchasing 
 from them their Trojan prisoners.' 
 
 The legend of Halus in Achaia Phthiotis, respecting the re- 
 ligious solemnities connected with the family o£ Athamas and 
 Phryxus (related in a previous chapter), is also interwoven with 
 the voyage of the Argonauts ; and both the legend and the solemni- 
 ties seem evidently of great antiquity. We know further, that the 
 adventures of the Argo were narrated not only by Hesiod and in 
 the Hesiodic poems, but also by Eumelus and the author of the 
 Naupactian verses — by the latter seemingly at considerable 
 length.''^ But these poems are unfortunately loet, nor have we 
 
 ' 0dy>is. xiL 69 — 
 
 OIjj 6^ Keivrj ye napinXei •Kovrowopot v^vf, 
 'Apyw iraatfitXovaa, Trap' AlrfToo irXeovaa 
 Koi vi) KE T^v Iv^' uKa ^dXev fityakat iroTi Trerpof, 
 *AXX' 'Hprj napirceix-^ev, ktrel <piXoc hev 'I^ffQV. 
 
 See also Iliad, vii. 470. 
 
 • See Hesiod, Fragm. Catalof/. Fr. 6. p. S3, Duntz. , Eoiai, Frag. 36. p 
 89; Frag. 72. p. 47. Compare Schol. ad ApoUon. Rhod.i. 45; ii. 178-297 
 I12S; iv. 254-284. Other poetical sources — 
 
 The old epic poem jEgimitu, Frag. 5. p. 57, Dimti. 
 
232 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 any means of deten ining what the original story was ; for the 
 narrative, as we have it, borrowed from later sources, is enlarged 
 by local tales from the subsequent Greek colonies — Ky zikus, 
 Herakleia, Sinope, and others. 
 
 Jason, commanded by Pelias to depart in quest of the golden 
 fleece belonging to the speaking ram which had carried away 
 Phryxus and Helle, was encouraged by the oracle to invite the 
 noblest youth of Greece to his aid, and fifty of the most distin 
 guished amongst them obeyed the call. Herakles, Theseus, 
 Telamon and Peleus, Kastor and Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus — 
 Zetes and Kalais, the winged sons of Boreas — Meleager, Am- 
 phiaraus, Kepheus, Laertes, Autolykus, Mencetius, Aktor, Ergi- 
 nus, Euphemus, Ankanus, Poeas, Periklymenus, Augeas, Eurytus, 
 Admetus, Akastus, Kaeneus, Euryalus, Peneleos and Leitus, 
 Askalaphus and lalmenus, were among them. Argus the son 
 of Phryxus, directed by the promptings of Athene, built the ship, 
 inserting in tlie |>row a piece of timber from the celebrated oak 
 of Dodoiia, which was endued with the faculty of speech :' Ti- 
 phys was the steersman, Idmon the son of Apollo and Mopsus 
 
 Kimethdn in tho HtrakU ia touched upon the death of Hylas near Kius in 
 Mysia {Schol. Apollon. Rhod. i. 1357). 
 
 The epic poem Naupactia^ Fraj;. 1 to 6, Diintz. p, 61. 
 
 Eum^lus, Fra^. 2. .3, 5, p. 65, Diintz. 
 
 Kfnmenidf's, the Kretan prophet and poet, composed a poem in 6500 lines, 
 ^kpyovq vavTTTjyiav tf., kqI 'Idffovo^ elg Ko?.xovr uTronhwv (Dio^en. Laer. i. 
 10, 5), which is noticed more than once in the Scholia on Apollonius, on 
 snbjects connected with the poem (ii 1125; iii. 42). See Mimncrm. Frag. 
 10, Schneidewin, p. 15. 
 
 Antimachus, in his poem Lydf\ touched upon the Argonautic expedition, 
 and has been partially copie<l hy Apollonias Rhod. (Schol. Ap. Rh. i. 1290; 
 ii. 296: iii. 410; iv. il5.3) 
 
 The logographers Pherckydrs and Hekataeus seem to have related the ex- 
 pedition at considerahle length. 
 
 The Bibliothek der alten Literatur und Kunst (Gottingen, 1786, 2U» 
 Stiick, p. 61 ) contains an instructive Dissertation by Groddeck, Ueber die 
 Argonautika, a sammary of the variou«i authorities respecting this expedi* 
 tion. 
 
 * Apollon. Rhod. i. 525 ; iv. 5^0. Apollodor. i. 9, 16. Valerius Flaccoi 
 (i. 300) softens down the speech of the ship Argo into a dream of Jasoa 
 Alexander Folybistor explidned what wood was nsed (Plin. H. M. xiii 
 
 ARGONAUTS AT LEMNOS. 
 
 icoompanied them as prophets, while Orpheus came to amuiM 
 their weariness and reconcile tLeir quarrels with his harp.i 
 
 First they touched at the island of Lemnos, in which at that 
 time there were no men ; for the women, infuriated by jealousy 
 and ill-treatment, had put to death their fathers, husbands and 
 brothers. The Argonauts, after some difficulty, were received with 
 friendship, and even admitted into the greatest intimacy. They 
 Blaid some months, and the subsequent population of the island was 
 
 * Apollonius Rhodius, Apollodorus, Valerius Flaccus, the Orphic Argonau- 
 tica, and Hyginus, have all given Catalogues of the Argonautic heroes (thert 
 was one also in the lost tragedy called A^fiviai of Sophokles, see Welcker 
 Gr. Trag. 327): the die- > . -icies among them are numerous and irreconcil 
 able. Burmann, in the Catalogus Argonautarum, prefixed to his edition of 
 Valerius Flaccus, has discussed em copiously. I transcribe one or two of 
 the remarks of this conscientious and laborious critic, out of many of a simi. 
 lar tenor, on the impracticability of a fabulous chronology. Immediately 
 before the first article, Acastus — " Neque enim in astatibns Argonautarum 
 nllam rationem temporum constare, neque in stirpe et stemmate deducendA 
 ordinem ipsura naturae congniere videbam. Nam et huic militiae adscribi 
 videbani Heroas, qui per naturae leges et ordinem fati eo usque vitam ex- 
 trahere non potuere, ut aliis ab hac expeditione remotis Heroum railitiis no- 
 mina dedisse uarrari deberent a Poetis et Mythologis. In idem etiam tempuf 
 avos et Nepotes conjici, consanguineos aetate longe inferiores prioribus ut 
 floquales adjungi, concoquere vix posse videtur." — Art. Ancceus : " Scio objicl 
 posse, si seriem illam majorem respiciamus, hunc AncsBum simul cum proa 
 vo suo Talao in eandem profectum fuisse expeditionem. Sed similia exem- 
 pla in aliis occurrent, et in fabulis rationem temporum non semper accura- 
 tam licet deducere." — Art. Jasdn: " Herculi enim jam provectA aetate ad 
 haesit Theseus juvenis, et in Amazonia expeditione socius fuit, interfuit huio 
 expeditioni, venatui apri Calydonii, et rapnit Helenam, quas circa Trojanum 
 bellum maxime floruit : quae omnia si Theseus tot temporum intervaliis 
 distincta egit, secula duo vel tria vixisse debuit. Certe Jason Hypsipylem 
 neptem Ariadnes, nee videre, nee Lemni cognoscere potuit." — Art Melea- 
 ger: "Unum est quod alicui longum ordinem majorum recensenti scrupn* 
 lum roovere possit : nimis longum intervallum inter ^olura et Meleagrum 
 intercedere, ut potuerit interfuisse huic expeditioni : cum nonus fere numer- 
 etur ab ^olo, et plnrimi ut Jason, Argus, et alii terti^ tantum ab Molo 
 gsneratione distent. Sed saepe jam notavimns, frustra temporum conocn* 
 lAm in fabulis quasri." 
 
 Read also the articles Castdr and Pollux^ Nestdr PSleus, StaphyhiSy etc. 
 
 We may stand excused for keeping clear of a chronolo^^ Which i^ fertilf 
 sniy in difficulties, and ends in nothing but ilksioos. 
 
884 
 
 HISIOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 the fruit of their visit HypsipylS, the queen of the island. Mm 
 to Jason two sonsJ 
 
 They then proceeded onward alonjr the coast of Thrace, up the 
 Hellespont, to the southern coast of the Propontis, inhabited by 
 the Doliones and their king Kyzikus. Here they were kindly 
 entertained, but after their departure were driven back to the 
 same spot by a storm ; and as they landed in the dark, the inhabi- 
 tants did not know them. A battle took place, in which the 
 chief, Kyzikus, was killed by Jason ; whereby much grief was 
 occasioned as soon as the real facts became known. After Kyzi- 
 kus had been interred with every demonstration of mourning and 
 solemnity, the Argonauts proceeded along the coast of Mysia.^ 
 In this part of the voyage they left Herakles behind. For Hylas, 
 his favorite youthful companion, had been stolen away by the 
 nymphs of a fountain, and Herakles, wandering about in search 
 of him, neglected to return. At last he sorrowfully retired, ex- 
 acting hostages from the inhabitants of the neighboring town of 
 Kius that they would persist in the search.^ 
 
 * Apollodor. i. 0, 17 : Apollon. Rhod. i. 609-915 ; Herodot. iv. 145. Theocri- 
 tus (Idyll, xiii. 29) omits all mention of I^nnnos, and represents the Arg6 
 as arriving on the third day from lolkos at the Hellespont Diodorus (iv 
 II) also leavo out Leinnos. 
 
 • Apollon. Hhod. 940-1020; Apollodor. i. 9, 18 
 
 ' A[)onodor. i. 9, 19. This was the relipous lejrend, explanatory of arerc 
 mony peiformod for many centuries hy the people of Pnijia : thi'v ran round 
 .he lake Askanias shontin<; and clamonng for Hylas — " ut littus Hyla, Hyla 
 
 cmne sonaret." (Vir<ril, Eclog.) "in cujus memoriam adhuc 
 
 solemni ciirsatione lacum populus circuit et Hvlam voce clamat." Solinas, 
 C. 42. 
 
 There is endless discrepancy as to the concern of Herakles with the 
 Argonantic expedition. A story is alluded to in Aristotle (Politic, iii. 9) 
 that the ship Ar^o herself ri'fnsed to take him on hoard, hecause he was 00 
 mach superioi in stature and power to all the other heroes — ov yap ^i?.eiv 
 ai}Tbv uyetv r^iv ^Apyij uera ru>v aAXwv, (if VTrepi3aXkovTa ttoXi) tCtv TrXcjr^potv. 
 This was the story of Pherekydes (Fr. 67, Didot) as well as cf Antimachufl 
 (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 1290) : it is probably a very ancient portion of the 
 legend, inasmuch as it ascril^es to the ship sentient powers, in consonance 
 with her other miraculous pioperties. The etymology of Aphetie in Thes 
 •aly was connected with the tale of HSrakles having there been put on shore 
 tnm tfie Argo (Herodot. vii. 193): Ephoms said that he staid away volnn* 
 Iviljr from fondness for f>mphald ^Frag. 9, Didot). The old epic poel 
 
 
 PHINEUS AND THE HARPIES. 
 
 986 
 
 Thf»y next stopped in the country of the Bebrykiaos, where 
 liie boxing contest took place between the king Amykus and the 
 Argonaut Pollux:^ they then proceeded onward to Bithynia, 
 the residence of the blind prophet Phineus. His blindness had 
 been inflicted by Poseidon as a punishment for having communi- 
 cated to Phryxus the way to Kolchis. The choice had been al- 
 k)wed to him between death and blindness, and he had preferred 
 the latter.- He was also tormented by the harpies, winged mon- 
 sters who came down from the clouds whenever his table was 
 Bet, snatched the food from his lips and imparted to it a foul 
 and unapproachable odor. In the midst of this misery, he hail- 
 ed the Argonauts as his deliverers — his prophetic powers having 
 enabled him to foresee their coming. The meal being prepared 
 for him, the harpies approached as usual, but Zetes and Kalais, 
 the winged sons of Boreas, drove them away and pursued them. 
 They put forth all their speed, and prayed to Zeus to be enabled 
 to overtake the monsters ; when Hermes appeared and directed 
 them to desist, the harpies being forbidden further to molest 
 Phineus,3 and retiring again to their native cavern in Krete.^ 
 
 Phineus, grateful for the relief afforded to him by the Argo- 
 nauts, forewarned them of the dangers of their voyage and of the 
 precautions necessary for their safety; and through his suggestions 
 they were enabled to pass through the terrific rocks called Sym- 
 plegades. These were two rocks which alternately opened and 
 
 Kiiieethon said that Herakles had placed the Kian hostages at Trachin, and 
 that the Kians ever afterwards maintained a respectful correspondence with 
 that place (Schol. Ap. Rh.i. 1357). This is the explanatory legend con- 
 nected with some existing custom, which we are unable further to unraveL 
 
 * See above, chap. viii. p. 169. 
 
 * Such was the old narrative of the Hesiodic Catalogue and Eoiai. Sea 
 Schol. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 181-296. 
 
 ' This again was the old Hesiodic story (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 296),— 
 
 'EvtJ' oly' Ei'xcrr^ov XlvTjtifi vrlfifxedovTi. 
 
 Apollodorus (i. 9, 21^, Apollonius (178^00), and Valerius Flacc. ^iv. 428- 
 530) agre^ in most of the circumstances. 
 
 * Such was the fate of the harpies as given in the old Nuupaktian Verses 
 (See Fragm. Ep. Grace. Diintzer, Naupakt. Fr. 2. p. 61). 
 
 The adventure of the Argonauts with Phineus is given by Diodorus in ■ 
 manner totally different (Diodor. iv. 44) : he seems to follow Dionysiiu ot 
 liityl^nS (see Schol. Apolidn. Rhod. u. 207). 
 
t33 
 
 HISTORY OF QKEECfc. 
 
 •I 
 
 •hot, with a fiwifl and \ iolent collision, so that it was difficalt evm 
 for a bird to fly through during the short interval. When the 
 Argu arrived at the dangerous spot, Euphemus let loose a dove^ 
 which ilew tii rough and just escaped with the Iosh of a few feath* 
 ers of her tail. This was a signal to the Argonauts, according 
 to the prediction of Phiueus, that they might attempt the pas* 
 gage with conlidenct'. Accordingly they rowed with all theu 
 might, and {)assed safijly through: the closing rocks, held foi 
 a moment asunder by the powerful arms of Athene, just crushed 
 the ornament at the stem of their vessel. It had been decreed 
 by the gods, that so soon as any ship once got through, the pas- 
 sage should forever afterwards be safe and easy to all. The rocks 
 became fixed in their separate places, and never again closed.' 
 Alter again halting (»n the coast of the Maryandinians, where 
 their steersman Tiphyn died, &s well as in the country of the 
 Amazons, and after picking up the sons of Phryxus, who had 
 been cast away by Paseidon in their attempt to return from Kol* 
 chis to Greece, they arrived in safety at the river Pha^^is and the 
 residence of ^2etes. In passing by Mount Caucasus, they saw 
 the eagle which gnawed the liver of Prometheus nailed to the 
 rock, and heard the groans of the sufferer himself. The sons of 
 Phryxus were cordially welcomed by their mother Chalciope.* 
 Application was made to ^^etes, that he would grant to the Ar- 
 gonauts, heroes of divine parentage and sent forth by the man- 
 date of the gods, possession of the golden fleece: their aid in 
 return was proffered to him against any or all of his enemies. 
 But the king was wroth, and peremptorily refused, except upon 
 conditions which seemed impracticable.^ Hephajstos liad given 
 him two ferocious and untamable bulls, with brazen feet, which 
 breathed lire from their nostrils: Jasdn was invited, as a proof 
 both of his illustrious descent and of the sanction of the gods to 
 his voyage, to harness these animals to the yoke, so as to plough 
 a large field and sow it with dragon's teeth.^ Perilous as tiw 
 condition was, each one of the heroes volunteered to make tlw 
 
 ' Apollodor. i. 9, 22. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 310-615. 
 ' Apollodor. i. 9, 23. Apollon. Rhod. ii. 850-1267. 
 ' Apollon. Rhod. iii. 320-385. 
 * ApoUon Rhod. iu. 410 Apolkidor. i. 9. n 
 
 4 
 
 RETURN OF THE ARGONAUTS. 
 
 9S7 
 
 attempt. Idmon aspecially encouraged Jason to undertake iU 
 and the goddesses Here and Aphrodite made straight the way 
 for him."^ Medea, the daughter of jEfites and Eidyia, having 
 seen the youthful hero in his interview with her father, had con- 
 ceived towards him a passion which disposed her to employ every 
 means for his salvation and success. She had received from 
 Hekate preeminent magical powers, and she prepared for Jason 
 the powerful Prometheian unguent, extracted from an herb which 
 had grown where the blood of Prometheus dropped. The body 
 of Jason having been thus pre-medicated, became invulnerable^ 
 either by fire or by warlike weapons. He undertook the enter- 
 prise, yoked the bulls without suffering injury, and ploughed the 
 field : when he had sown the dragon's teeth, armed men sprung 
 out of the furrows. But he had been forewarned by Medea to 
 cast a vast rock into the midst of them, upon which they began 
 to fight with each other, so that he was easily enabled to subdue 
 them all.** 
 
 The task prescribed had thus been triumphantly performed. 
 Yet ^etes not only refused to hand over the golden fleece, but 
 even took measures for secretly destroying the Argonauts and 
 burning their vessel. He designed to murder them during the 
 night after a festal banquet ; but Aphrodite, watchful for the 
 «afety of Jason,^ inspired the Kolchian king at the critical mo- 
 ment with an irresistible inclination for his nuptial bed. While 
 he slept, the wise Idmon counselled the Argonauts to make their 
 escape, and Medea agreed to accompany them.^ She lulled to 
 sleep by a magic potion the dragon who guarded the golden fleece, 
 
 ' This was the story of the Naupaktian Verses (Schol. Apollon. Rhod. 
 iii. 515-525) : Apollonius and others altered it Idmon, according to them, 
 died in the voyage before the arrival at Kolchis. 
 
 * Apollon. Rhod. iii. 50-200. Valer. Flacc. vi. 440-480. Hygin. fab. 9% 
 ' Apollon. Rhod. iii. 835. Apollodor. i. 9, 23. Valer. Flacc. vii. 35« 
 
 Ovid, Epist. xii. 15. 
 
 '■' Isset anhelatos non prsemedicatas in ignes 
 Immemor .^sonides, oraque adanca boam." 
 
 * Apollon. Rhod. iii. 1230-1400. 
 
 * The Naapaktian Verses stated this (see the Fragm. 6, ed. DOntser, p, 
 •1), ap. Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 59-86). 
 
 * Such was the story of the Naapaktian Verses (See Fragm. 6. p fl 
 DontMr ap. Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 59, 86, 87). 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 placed that mach-desired prize on board the vessel, mid accom 
 panied Jas6n with his companions in their flight, carrying along 
 with her the young Apsyrtus, her brother, i 
 
 JE^tes, profoundly exasperated at the flight of the Argonaut* 
 with his daughter, assembled his forces forthwith, and put to sea 
 in pursuit of them. So energetic were his eflforts that he shortly 
 overtook the retreating vessel, when the Argonauts again owed 
 their safety to the stratagem of Medea. She killed her brother 
 Apsyrtus, cut his body in pieces and strewed the limbs round 
 about in the sea. ^Eetes on reaching the spot found these sorrow- 
 fill traces of his murdered son ; but while he tarried to collect the 
 scattered fragments, and bestow upon the body an honorable in- 
 terment, the Argonauts escaped.^ The spot on which the unfor- 
 tunate Apsyrtus was cut up received the name of Tomi.^ Thia 
 fratricide of Medea, however, so deeply provoked the indiguatioa 
 of Zeus, that he condemned the Argo and her crew to a trying 
 
 > Apollod6r. i. 9, 23. Apoll6n. Rhod. iv. 220. 
 
 Pherekydes said that Jason killed the dragon (Fr. 74, Did.). 
 
 • This is the story of Apollodoras (i. 9, 24), who seems to follow Phef» 
 kjdes (Fr. 73, Didot). ApoUonius (iv. 225-480) and Valerius Fiaccus (viii. 
 362 seq.) ipve totally different circumstances respecting the death of Apsyr 
 tns ; bat the narrative of Pherekydes seems the oldest : so revolting a story 
 as that of the cutting; up of the little boy cannot have been imagined in later 
 
 times. 
 
 Sophokl^ composed two tragredies on the adventures of Jason and Medea, 
 both lost — the KoX^^'Vc and the iKv^ai. In the former he represented the 
 murder of the child Apsyitus as having taken place in the house of ^Eetes: 
 in the latter he introduced the mitigating circumstance, that Apsyrtus was 
 the son of jEetes by a different mother from Medea (Schol. Apollon Rhod. 
 
 It. 223) 
 
 • Apollodor. i. 9, 24, rdv ronov irpoatiyooevae T'i/zot>f . Ovid. Trist. iii. 9. 
 The story that Apsyrtus was cut in pieces, is the etymological legend expla* 
 natoryof the name Tomi. 
 
 There was however a place called Apsarus, on the southern coast of th« 
 Enxine, west ot Trapezus, where the tomb of Apsjrrtus was shown, and 
 wh(Te it was affirmed that lie had been put to death. He was the eponymoi 
 of the town, which was said to have been once called Apsyrtus, and only 
 oorrapted by a barbarian pronunciation (Arrian. PeriploiJ, Euxin. p. 6{ 
 GeojBrr. Min. v. I ). Compare Procop. Bell. Goth. iv. 2. 
 
 8trabo connects the deal h of Apsyrtus with the Apsjrrtides, islands off tllf 
 eoast of Ill3rria, in the Adriatic (vii p. 316). 
 
 ARGONAUTS IN LIBYA. 
 
 289 
 
 ▼oyage, full of hardship and privation, before she was permitted 
 to reach home. The returning heroes traversed an immeasurafafe 
 length both of sea and of river : first up the river Phasis into the 
 ocean which flows round the earth — then following the course of 
 that circumfluous stream until its junction with the Nile,' they 
 came down the Nile into Egypt, from whence they carried the 
 Argo on their shoulders by a fatiguing land-journey to the lake 
 Tritonis in Libya. Here they were rescued from the extremity 
 of want and exhaustion by the kindness of the local god TritAn, 
 who treated them hospitably, and even presented to Euph^mus a 
 clod of earth, as a symbolical promise that his descendants should 
 one day found a city on the Libyan shore. The promise was 
 amply redeemed by the flourishing and powerful city of Kyren6,« 
 whose princes the Battiads boasted themselves as lineal descend- 
 ants of Euphemus. 
 
 Refreshed by the hospitality of Triton, the Argonauts found 
 themselves again on the waters of the Mediterranean in their way 
 homeward. But before they arrived at lulkos they visited Ciro^ 
 at the island of ^aea, where Medea was purified tor the murder 
 erf Apsyrtus : they also stopped at Korkyra, then called Drepan4» 
 where Alkinous received and protected them. The cave in that 
 island where the marriage of M^ea with Jason was oonsnm 
 mated, was still shown in the time of the historian Timseus, at 
 well as the altars to Apollo which she had erected, and the rit«f 
 
 * The orij^inal narrative was, that the Arg6 returned by navigating the 
 circumfluous ocean. This would be almost certain, even without positive 
 testimony, from the early ideas entertained by the Greeks respecting geog» 
 faphy •, but we know further that it was the representation of the Hesiodie 
 poems, as well as of Mimnermus, HekatAUs and Pindar, and even of Anti* 
 machns. Schol. Parisina Ap Rhod. iv. 254. 'E«araiOf 6^ 6 MtXj?(Tt«.(, *Jtd 
 rm> ^aaidoc cv^^-^nv (p7}<7lv avrot)f etf rdv *QKeav6v' did dt tov *Qiceavo€ 
 KareTi^dv elg tov NelXov • Ik 6e tov NetAov elc Ttjv K<n^' rffiac ^a'Aanutat 
 ^oiodo^ Sk KcU Hivdapo^ kv TIv^iovIkcuc koI ^Avrifiaxoc h Am5^ 6td ni 
 ^Qkeovov (pafflv ^Welv avTovg etc tt/v Ai(3vifv elra ^curriiaavTo^ rr^ ^Apyti 
 £/C Td vfieTepov (Kpinfff^ai Tri^-ayoc. Compare the Schol. Edit, ad iv. 259. 
 
 • Seethe fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar, and Apolloa Rhod. iv. 1551-175^ 
 The tripod of Jas6n was preserved by the Euesperitaj in Libya, Diod. iv, 
 
 66 : but tho legend, connectinor the Argonauts with the lake Tritdois in likj% 
 b ipven with some considenible diflerences in Herodotai, hr. 179^ 
 
 Vol. 1 12 
 
«40 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 1 
 
 tmd sacridces wldch she had first instituted.' After leaTing 
 Korkyra, tlie Argo was overtaken by a perilous storm near the 
 kland of Thera. Tlie herotis were saved from imminent peril by 
 the supernatural aid of Apollo, who, shooting from his golden bow 
 an arrow which pierced tlie waves like a track of light, caused a 
 new island suddenly to spring up in their track and present to 
 them a {)ort of refuge. The island was called Anaphe ; and the 
 gratefid Argonauts established upon it an altar and sacrifices in 
 honor of Apollo jEgletes, which were ever afterwards continued, 
 and traced back by the inhabitants to -this originating adventure.^ 
 On approaching the; coast of Krete, the Argonauts were pre- 
 vented from landing by Talos, a man of brass, fabricated by 
 Hephaistos, and presented by him to Minos for the protection of 
 the island.3 This vigilant sentinel hurled against the approach- 
 ing vessel fragments ol' rock, and menaced the heroes with de- 
 struction. But Medea deceived him by a stratagem and killed 
 him ; detecting and assailing the one vulnerable point in his body. 
 The Argonauts were thus enabled to land and refresli themselves. 
 They next ])roceeded onward to iEgina, where however they 
 again experienced resistance before they could obtain water — 
 then along the coast of Euboea and Locris back to lolkos in »he 
 galf of Pagasap, the place from whence they had started. The 
 proceedings of Pelias during their absence, and the signal revenge 
 taken upon him by Medea after their return, have already been 
 narrated in a preceding section.^ The ship Argo herself, in 
 which the chosen heroes of Greece had performed so long a 
 voyage and braved so many dangers, was consecrated by Jason to 
 Foseidou at the isthmus of Corinth. According to anothw 
 
 » Apollon Uhoii. iv. 11153-1217. Timaeus, Fr. 7-8, Didot. Ti/iauK h 
 Zepicvp^ Xtyuv yevko^m ririif yduov^^ Koi vefi ttj^ ^aiac IffTopei, in kcU vv9 
 ieScjv ayicrdai avHjv /car' iviavrdv, MTjdelac rrpuTov T^vadmjc tv tC) tov Ato^ 
 KLvo^ lepi^. Koi 0ufioi)t Se ^nai juvrffieZa ruv yafi<jv Idpvaarr&ai awryy^ 
 ukv r^c ^aUaav^, ovfioitpiiv 61 m »r6A«jf . 'OvoixaXiovai, dk rdv ftkv, ffvupCtp 
 
 • Apollodor. i. 9, 25. Apoll6n. Rhod. iv. 1700-1725. 
 
 * Some called Talos a remnant of the brazen race of men (SchoL ApoH 
 Bind. ir. 1641). 
 
 « AooUodor. i. 9, 86. ApoUda Bbod.lv 1638. 
 
 J4FM0RIALS LKVT BY THE ARGONAUTS. 
 
 Uk 
 
 jcooarii^ phe was translated to the stars by Athcn^ and became a 
 constellation.^ 
 
 Traces of the presence of the Argonaut-^ were found n<it only 
 in the regions which lay between lolkos and Kolchis, but also in 
 the western portion of the Grecian world — distributed more or 
 less over all the spots visited by Grecian mariners or settled by 
 Grecian colonists, and scarcely less numerous than the wander- 
 ings of the dispersed Greeks and Trojans after the capture of 
 Troy. The number of Jasonia, or temples for the heroic worship 
 of Jasdn, was very great, from Abdera in Thrace,- eastward along 
 the coast of the Euxine, to Armenia and Medea. Tlie Argonauta 
 had left their anchoring-stone on the coast of Bebrykia, near 
 Kyzikus, and there it was preserved during the historical ages in 
 the tem})le of the Jasonian Athene.^ They had founded the great 
 temple of the Idsean mother on the mountain Dindymon, near 
 Kyzikus, and the Hieron of Zeus Urios on the Asiatic point a« 
 the mouth of the Euxine, near which was also the harbor ol 
 Phryxus.4 Idmun, the prophet of the expedition, who was 
 believed to have died of a wound by a wild boar on the Mary- 
 andynian coast, was worshipped by the inhabitants of the Pontic 
 Herakleia with great solemnity, as their Heros Poliuchus, and 
 that too by the special direction of the Delphian god. Autolykus, 
 another companion of Jason, was worshipped as CEkist by the 
 inhabitants of Sinope. Moreover, the historians of Herakleia 
 pointed out a temple of Hekate in the neighboring country of 
 
 ' Diodor iv. 53. Eratosth. Catasterism. c. 35. 
 « Strabo, xi. p. .526-531. 
 ' Apollon. Rhod i. 955-960, and the Scholia- 
 There was in Kyzikus a temple of Apollo under different hnKkfjoet/^; 
 
 acme called it the temple of the Jasonian Apollo. 
 
 Another anchor however was preserved io the temple of Rhea on thebankl 
 
 of the Phasis, which was affirmed to he the anchor of the ship Argo. Arriaa 
 
 •aw it there, but seems to have doubted its authenticity (Teriplus, Enxia. 
 
 Pont. p. 9. Geogr. Min. v. l). 
 
 * Neanthes ap. strabo. L p. 45. Apollon. Rhod. i. 1125, and Schol. Steph 
 Byz v. ^pi^o^. 
 
 Apolldnins mentions the fountain called Jasoneae, on the hill of Dindymon 
 Apollon. Rhod. ii. 532, and the citations from Timosthen^ and Herodoms in 
 ht Scholia. See .also Appiaa Syriac. c. 63. 
 
 ▼OL. I. 11 16of^ 
 
 • ■% 
 
242 
 
 HISTORY GF GBEEC?E. 
 
 Paphlagonia, first erectad by Medea ;' and the important toim aH 
 Pantikapseon, on the European side of the Cimmerian Bosponia, 
 ascribed its first settlement to a son of ^etes.2 When the return- 
 ing ten thousand Greeks sailed along the coast, called the Jaso- 
 nian shore, from Sinope to Herakleia, they were told that the 
 nrandson of ^etes was reigning king of the territory at th«i mouth 
 of the Phasis, and the anchoring-places where the Argo had 
 stopped were specially pointed out to them.3 In the lofty re- 
 <Hons of the Moschi, near Kolchis, stood the temple of Leukothea, 
 founded by Phryxus, which remained both rich and respected 
 down to the times of the kings of Pontus, and where it was an 
 inviolable rule not to offer up a ram.4 The town of Dioskurias, 
 oorth of the river Phasis, was believed to have been hallowed by 
 the presence of Kastor and Pollux in the Argo, and to have re- 
 ceived from them its appellation.^ Even the interior of Medea 
 and Armenia was full of memorials of Jason and Medea and 
 their son Medus, or of Armenus the son of Jason, from whom the 
 Greeks deduced not only the name and foundation of the Medes 
 wad Armenians, but also the great operation of cutting a channel 
 through the mountains for the efflux of the river Araxes, which 
 they compared to that of the Peneius in Thessaly.^ And the 
 
 * See the historians of He rakleia, Nymphis and Promathidas, Fragm. Orelli, 
 pp. 99, 100-104. Schol. ad Apollon. Khod. iv. 247. Strabo, xii. p. 546. 
 Antolykus, whom he calls companion of Jason, was, according to another 
 legend, comrade of Herakles in his expedition against the Amazons. 
 
 * Stephan. Byz. v. llavri'iairaiovy Eastath. ad Dionys. Perieget. 311. 
 
 ' Xenophon, Anabas. vi. 2, 1 ; v. 7, 37. ■* Strabo, xi. p. 499. 
 
 • Appian, Mithridatic. c. 101. 
 
 • Strabo, xi p. 499, 503, 526, 531 ; i. p. 45-48. Justin, xlii. 3, whose 
 statements illastrate the way in which men found a present home and appli- 
 cation for the old fables, — "Jason, primus humanorum post Hercnlem et 
 Liberam, qui reges Orieniis fuisse tradnntur, earn cceli plagam domuisse 
 dicitur. Cum Albanis foedus percussit, qui Herculem ex ItaliA ab Albano 
 montc, cum, Geryone extincto, armenta ejus per Italiam duceret, secud 
 dicuntur; quique, memores ItalicaB originis, exercitum Cn. Pompeii bella 
 Mithridatico fratres consalwtavere. Itaque Jasoni totus fere Oriens, ut con 
 ditori, divinos honores templaqne constituit ; quae Parmenico, dux Alexandri 
 Magni, post multos annos dirui jussit, ne cujusquam nomen in Oriente ve«e 
 rabilius quam Alexandri esset." 
 
 The Thessalian companions of Alexander the Great, placed by his yictoriflc 
 in possession of rich acqaxsitions in these regions, pleased themselve* bt 
 
 MEMORIALS LEFT BY THE ARGONAUIS. 
 
 Homan ^neral Pompey, after having oompleted tbe ofmqa&gt and 
 
 escpulsion of Mithridates, made kxig marches through Kiolchit 
 into the regions of Caucasus, for the express purpose of oonteci* 
 plating the spots which had been ennobled by the exploits of tbt 
 Argonauts, the Dio<^kuri and Herakles.' 
 
 Li the west, memorials either of the Argonauts or of the pur 
 suing Kolchians were pointed out in Korkyra, in Krete, in Kpi* 
 ms near the Akrokeraunian mountains, in the islands called Ap* 
 syrtides near the lUyrian coast, at the bay of Caieta as well as al 
 Poseidunia on the sonthem coast of Italy, in the island of JEth%i 
 liaor Elba, and in Libya.^ 
 
 Such is a brief outline of the Argonautic expedition, one of 
 the most celebrated and widely-diffused among the ancient talet 
 cf Greece. Since so many able men have treated it as an uii* 
 disputed reality, and even made it tbe pivot of systematic chro* 
 nological calculations, 1 may here repeat the opinion long ago 
 expressed by Heyne, and even indicated by Burmann, that ths 
 process of dissecting the story, in search of a basis of £Eict, is oaa 
 altogether fruitless.^ Not only are we unable to assign the datt 
 
 rivifyinjr and multiplying all these old fables, proving an ancient kindrei 
 between the Medes and I'hessalians. See Strabo, xi. p. 530. The templflt 
 gf Jason were rt/nujuEva a<t>u6Qa i'lro ruv Bapiiupuv (ib. p. 526 ). 
 
 The able and in^juisitive geop^rapher EratosthenSs was among those who 
 fblly belie red that Jason had left his ships in the f%asis,and had undertakes 
 a land expedition into the interior country, in which be had conquered Media 
 tnid Armenia (Strabo. i. p. 46^. 
 
 ^ Appian, Mithridatic. 103 : rot)f KoA;|fovc tiriiet.^ «ai^' iaropiav r^f 'Apy^ 
 povtCjv Kal Aio(TKovp<jv Kai 'HpaicAeovf hridrffuaf^ Koi fuiXiara rd ircv^og ldet9 
 i&E7L(.)V. o UpofiTfT^ei <ba(Tl ytveodai irepl rd KavKaaov 6po^. The lofty cr^g 
 ar Caucasus called Strobilus, to which Promdthens had been attached, 
 was pointed out to Arrian himself in his Periplns (p 12. Gepgr. Miaof 
 vol. i.)- 
 
 • Sirabo, i. pp. 21, 45, 46 ; v. 224-252. Pompon. Mel. ii 3. IHoddr. ir. 
 Apolldn. Rhod. iv. 656. Lycophron, 1273. — 
 
 Tifpaiv fUiKedva^ a(i<pi KcpKCuov vairoQ 
 'Apyowf re KXecvdv dpfiov klhr^ fieyaif. 
 
 * Heyne, Observ. ad ApoUodor. i. 9, 16. p. 72. " Bfinun in modam t/XBtm 
 li hi his commentis ccrtam ftindam historicom vel geographicQOi tot t8 
 
 l! 
 
fU 
 
 mSTOBT OF GSEECC 
 
 cr identify the crew, oi- decipher the log-book, of the Argd, bol 
 we have no means of settUng even the prelimiDary questkv^ 
 whether the voyage be matter of fact badly reported, or legend 
 from the beginning. The widely-distant spots m which the moo- 
 omenta of the voyage were shown, no less than the mcidents oi 
 the voyage itself, suggests no other parentage than epical fancy. 
 The supernatural and the romantic not only constitute an insep- 
 arable portion of the narrative, but even embrace all the promi- 
 nent and characteristic features ; if they do not comprise the 
 whole, and if there be intermingled along with them any spnnk 
 ling of historical or geographical fact, — a question to us indetei- 
 miiiable — there is at least no solvent by which it can be diseo- 
 ga-ed, and no test by which it can be recognized. Wherever 
 the Grecian mariner siiiled, he carried his religious and patriotic 
 mythes along with hirn. His fancy and his faith were alike fuU 
 of the lon^ wanderin}Ts of Jason, Odysseus, Parseus, Heraklda, 
 Dionysus, Triptolerau. or 16 ; it was pleasing to him in succesa, 
 and consoling to him in difficulty, to beUeve that their journeys 
 had broucrht them over the ground which he was himself travere- 
 ing There was no lale amidst the wide range of the Grecian 
 epic more calculated to be popular with the seaman, than the 
 history of the primaeval ship Argo and her distinguished crew, 
 comprising heroes from all parts of Greece, and especially the 
 
 quirere studet, aut se reperiss7,Tt^historicam vel geographicam aliqaam 
 ioctrinam, svstemu nos dicimus, inde procadi posse, putat," etc. 
 
 See also the observation's interspersed in Burmann's Catalogus Argonaata 
 ram, prefixed to his edition of Valerius Flaccus. ^ , . . 
 
 The Persian antitiuarians whom Herodotus cites at the beginning of hi* 
 history (i 2-4 -it is much to be regretted that Herodotus did not inform M 
 who thev were, and whether they were the same as those who said that Per. 
 «eus was an Assyrian by birth and had become a Greek, vi. 54), joined 
 together the abductions of 16 and of Europe, of Medea and of Helen, a« 
 piUrs of connected proceedings, the second injury being a retaliation for the 
 first — they drew up a debtor and creditor account of abductions between 
 Asia and Europe. The Kolchian king (they said) had sent a herald to 
 Greece to ask for his satisfaction for the wrong done to him by Jason and tt 
 le-demand his daughter Medea ; but he was told in reply that the Greeks had 
 received no satisfaction for the previous rape of 16. 
 
 There was some ingenmty in thus binding together the old fables, so a»n 
 lepresent the invasions of Greece by Parias and Xerx^ as retaliations ifl 
 dM nnexpiated destmctioii wronght by Agamemndn. 
 
 ; 1 
 
 FABULOUS LOCALrrrES. 
 
 246 
 
 Tyndarids Kastdr and Pollux, the heavenly piotecton. jDvokad 
 during storm and peril. He localized the legend anew wherevef 
 he went, often with some fresh circumstances suggested either by 
 his own adventures or by the scene before him. He took a sort 
 d' religious possession of the spot, connecting it by a bond ol 
 fitith with his native land, and erecting in it a temple or an altar 
 with appropriate commemorative solemnities. The Jasonium 
 thus established, and indeed every visible object called after the 
 name of the hero, not only served to keep alive the legend of 
 the Argo in the minds of future comers or inhabitants, but was 
 accepted as an obvious and satisfactory proof that this marvellous 
 vessel had actually touched there in her voyage. 
 
 The epic poets, building both on the general love of fabulous 
 incident and on the easy faith of the people, dealt with distant 
 and unknown space in the same manner as with past and unre* 
 oorded time. They created a mythical geography tor the for- 
 mer, and a mythical history for the latter. But there was this 
 material difference between the two: that while the unrecorded 
 tune was beyond the reach of verification, the unknown space 
 gradually became trodden and examined. In proportion as au- 
 thentic local knowledge was enlarged, it became necessary to 
 modify the geography, or shift the scene of action, of the old 
 mythes ; and this perplexing problem was undertaken by some 
 of the ablest historians and geographers of antiquity, — for it was 
 painful to them to abandon any portion of the old epic, as if it 
 were destitute of an ascertainable basis of truth. 
 
 Many of these fabulous localities are to be found in Homer 
 and Hesiod, and the other Greek poets and logographers, — Ery- 
 theia, the garden of the Hesperides, the garden of Phcebus,! to 
 which Boreas transported the Attic maiden Orithyia, the deli' 
 ex>us country of the Hyperboreans, the Elysian plain,^ the fleet 
 iog island of .^^lus, Thrinakia, the coimtry of the^thiopians, Uie 
 
 - Sophokl. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295. — 
 
 TTTcp re irovrov Travr' ^tt' iaxara x^ovb^^ 
 NvKToc re nriyag oiptivov r' avairrvxo^t 
 ^Oi^ov re jraXatdv ktjitov. 
 
 * Odyss. iv. 56S. The Islands of the Blessed, in Hesiod, are 
 (0pp. Di. 169). 
 
 i 
 
S46 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Laestrygones, the Kvkldpes. lae Lctopha^, the Sirens, tbt^ diu 
 jnr-rians and the Gororons, etc. These are plates which (to OM 
 the expression of Pindar respecting the Hyperboreans) you can- 
 not approach either by sea or by land :^ the wins^s of the p jet 
 alone can carry you thither. They were not introduced into the 
 Greek mind by incorrect geographiciii reports, but, on the coa- 
 tiary, had their orijrin in the legend, and passed from thence into 
 the realities of geography,* which they contributed much to per- 
 vert and confuse. For the navigator or emigrant, starting with 
 an unsusjncious faith in their real existence, looked out for them 
 in his distant voyages, and constantly fancied that he had seen iX 
 heard of tlicm, so as to he able to identify their exact situation. 
 The most contradictor} accounts indeed, as might be expected* 
 were often given respecting the latitude and longitude of sucti 
 fiwtciiui spots, but this did not put an end to the general belief 
 in their real existence. 
 
 In the present advanced state of geographical knowledge, the 
 Hory of tliat man who after reading Gulliver a Travels went W 
 
 > lif>ioa, Thcugon. 275-290. Homer, Iliad, i. 42.i. Odvss. i. 23 i i» 
 ift-206 ; X 4-83 ; xii. 135. Mimneroi. Fragm. 13, Schneidewin. 
 •Pindar. Pytb.x. 29.— 
 
 Naval d' oi'TC ire^d^ iuv av evpoig 
 
 'Ec "TireplBopeuv dyojva 'dnvfiaruv )d6v. 
 
 Uap" oli VOTE UepaeiH: t^aiaaro liaytTuq, etc. 
 
 Befliod. and the old epic j)oem called the Epigoni, both mentioned the Hypei 
 borcans (Herod, iv. 32-34). 
 
 3 This idea is well stated and sustained by Voleker (Mythische GeoejrapJue 
 der Griechen und R<imer cap. i. p. 11), and by Nitzsch in his Coiiiments ott 
 the Odvssev—Iutroduct. Remarks to b. ix p. xii.-xxxiii. The twelith 
 and thirteenth chapters of the History of Orchomenos, hy O. Miiller, aie 
 also full of good remarks on the geography of the Argonautic voyage (pp, 
 
 874-299). 
 
 The most striking evidence of this disposition of the Greeks is to be 
 fc'jud in the legendary discoveries of Alexander and his companions, whe« 
 they marched over the unti-odden regions in the east of the Persian empire 
 (Bee Arrian. Hist Al. v. 3: compare Lucian. Dialog. Mortuor. xiv. vol. i. p. 
 J12. Tauch : because these ideas were tirst broached at a time when geo* 
 graphical science was sutttciently advanced to canvass and criticize them. 
 The earlv settlers in Italy, Sicily and the Eaxine, indulged their fancifti 
 mion without the fear of any such monitor: there was no sui h thmg aa f 
 map before tha day:* of Anaximander, the disciple of T!mlS*. 
 
 rftRVEttWON Ot jOfcOGRAPrfY BY LEWIWD. 
 
 9^/ 
 
 iok in his map for Lilliput, appears an absurdity. But those 
 who fixed the exact locality of the floating island of ^olus or 
 the rocks of the Sirens did much the same ;' and, with their ig- 
 norance of geography and imperfect appreciation of historical 
 evidence, the error was hardly to be avoided. The ancient be- 
 lief which fixed the Sirens on the islands of Sirennsae off the 
 coa.sl of Naples — the Kyklopes, Erytheia, and the Laestrygones 
 in Sicily — the Lotophagi on the island of Meninx- near the 
 Lesser Syrtis — the Plijrakians at Korkyra — and the goddess 
 Circe at the promontory of Circeium — took its rise at a time 
 when these regions were first Hellenized and comparatively little 
 visited. Once embodied in the local legends, and attested by vis* 
 ible monuments and ceremonies, it continued for a long time un- 
 assailed ; and Thucydides seems to adopt it, in reference to Kor- 
 kyra and Sicily before the Hellenic colonization, as matter of 
 fact generally unquestionable,^ though little avouched as to de- 
 tails. But when geograpical knowledge became extended, and 
 the criticism upon the ancient epic was more or less systematized 
 by the literary men of Alexandria and Pergamus, it appeared to 
 many of them impossible that Odysseus could have seen so 
 many wonders, or undergone such monstrous dangers, within 
 limits 80 narrow, and in the familiar track between the Nile and 
 the Tiber. The scene of his weather-driven course was then 
 shifted further westward. Many convincing evidences were dis- 
 covered, especially by Asklepiades of Myrlea, of his having vis- 
 ited various places in Iberia:'^ several critics imagined that he 
 
 ' See Mr. Payne Knight, Prolegg. ad Homer c. 49. Compare Spohn -^ 
 " de extrema Odysseae parte " — p. 97. 
 
 ^ Strabo, xvii. p. 834. An altar of Odysseus was shown upon this island, 
 AS well as some other evidences {avfij3o?ia) of his visit to the place. 
 
 ApoUonius Rhodius copies the Odyssey in speaking of the island of Thri- 
 nakia and the cattle of Helios fiv. 965, with Schol.). He conceives Sicily 
 as Thrinakia, a name afterwards exchanged for Trinakria. The Scholiast 
 ad Apoll. (I.e.) speaks of Trinax king of Sicily. Compare iv. 291 with thf 
 Scholia. 
 
 ^ Thucyd. i. 25-vi. 2. These local legends appear in the eyes of Strabo 
 convincing evidence (i. p. 23-26), — the tomb of the siren Parthenope at 
 Naples, the stories at Cumae and Dikaearchia about the veKvofiavrelov of 
 Avernus, and the existence of places named after Baios and Misenos, th« 
 companions of Odysseus, etc. 
 
 * Strabo, iii. p. 150-157. Ov yap (lovov ol /card r^ 'IraXiav kcU likekm 
 
 r, 
 
 a 
 
 i\ 
 
 ■ > /I 
 
 ! 
 

 HISTORY or GREECE. 
 
 had wandered about in the Atlantic Ocean o«t8ide of the Strait 
 of Gibraltar,* and they recognized a section of Lotopliagi oa th^ 
 
 •wrot KOi aXTioi riveq tCjv toiovtuv aijfitia i)tro-ypd<^vaiv, aX^ik Kcd ev r^ 
 'l^^pi? 'Odmatta ;ro>Uf dcMtwrat, kcu "Xi^rjvdg Ufjov, Koi aXXa fivpta Ixvij 
 TffC iK.eivov rrh'ivijc, Kal uk^jv rCtv ix tov TputKov nokifiov -rrepiyevouhfuiv 
 (I adopt Grossknrd's correction of the text from ytvofxevotv to nepiyevofievuv, 
 in the note to his German translation of Straho). 
 
 Asklopiades (of Myrlea in Bithynia, ahout 170 b. c.) resided some time 
 In Turditiinia, the south-w;'steni repon of Spain alonjr the Ouadalquivir 
 as a teaeher of Greek liforatare {irauhvaac rd. ynauunriKfi)^ and rem 
 posed a periet'e^^i-^ of the IfN'rian tribes, which unfortunately has not been 
 pres«Tved. He made various discoveries in archu^olojjy, and successfully 
 connected his old le^'cnds with several portions of the territory before him. 
 His discoveries were, — 1. In the teujple of Athene, at this Ihcrian town of 
 Odysseia, then> wer»' !»hieids and beaks of ships attixed to the walla, mona 
 ments of the visit of Odysseus liimself 2. Amonjij the Kallseki, in the 
 northern part of Portugal, ^4everal of the companions of Teukros had set> 
 tied and left descendants: taerc were in that region two (Jrecian cities, oad 
 called Hellenes, the other called Amphilochi ; for Amphilochus also, the soQ 
 of Amphiarans, had died in Iberia, and many of bis soldiers had taken ap 
 their pennant iit residence in the interior. 3. Many new inhabitants had 
 come into Il)eria with the expedition of Herakles ; some also after the con- 
 quest of Mesene by the Lacedaemonians. 4. In Cantabria, on the nortit 
 coast of Spain, there was a town and region oi IjacedaBmooiao colonists. 
 5. In the same portion of the country there Wiis the town of Opsikelh^ 
 founded by Opsikellas, one of the companions ot Anterior in his emigration 
 from Troy (Strabo, iii. p. 157). 
 
 This is a specimen of the manner in which the seeds of Grecian mythM 
 eame to be distributed over so large a surface. To an ordinary Greek 
 reader, these legendary discoveries of Asklepia^les would probably be more 
 Interesting than the positive facts which he communicated respecting tiie 
 Iberian tribes ; and his Turditanian auditors would be delighted to hear — 
 while he was reciting and explaining to them the animated passage of the 
 Iliad, in which Agamemnon extols the inestimable value of the bow of 
 Teukros ( viii. 2S1 ) — that the heroic archer and his companions had actually 
 set foot in the Iberian peninsula. 
 
 ^ This was the opinion of Krat^ of Mallos, one of the most distinguished 
 of the critics on Homer : it Wiis the subject of an animated controversy be- 
 tween him and Aristarchus (Aulas Gellius, N. A, xiv. 6; Strabo, iii. p. 157). 
 8«e the instructive treatise of Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis, c. v. § 4. p. 251 . 
 Much controversy also took place among the critics respecting the ground 
 which Menelaus went over in his wanderings (Odyss. iv.). Krat^ affiiraed 
 Iktti he had circumnavigated the aoatbem extremity of Africa and gone tt 
 
 ERYTHEIA. - GEBYON. 
 
 24d 
 
 •oast of Mauritania, over and above those who dwelt on the 
 island of MOninx.' On the other hand, Eratosthenes and Apd 
 lodorus treated the places visited by Odysseus as altogether un 
 real, for which scepticism they incurred much reproach.2 
 
 The fabulous island of Ery theia, — the residence of the three 
 headed Geryon with his magnificent herd of oxen, under the 
 custody of the two-headed dog C rthrus, and described by He- 
 Bod, like the garden of the Hesperides, as extra-terrestrial, on the 
 farther side of the circumfluous ocean ; — this island was sup- 
 posed by the interpreters of Stesichorus the poet to be named by 
 bim off the south-western region of Spain called Tartessus, and 
 in the immediate vicinity of Gades. But the historian Hcka- 
 tflBus, in his anxiety to historicize the old fable, took upon him- 
 self to remove P>y theia from Spain nearer home to Epirus. He 
 thought it incredible that Herakles should have traversed Europe 
 fix)m east to west, for the purpose of bringing the cattle of Ger- 
 y6n to Eurystheus at Mykenae, and he pronounced Geryon to 
 have been a king of Epirus, near the Gulf of Ambrakia. The 
 oxen reared in that neighborhood were proverbially magnificent, 
 and to get them even from thence and bring them to Mykenas 
 (he contended) was no inconsiderable task. Arrian, who cites 
 this passage fix)m Hekataeus, concurs in the same view, — an il- 
 lustration of the license with which ancient authors fitted on 
 their fabulous geographical names to the real earth, and brought 
 down the ethereal matter of legend to the lower atmosphere of 
 history.^ 
 
 India : the critic Aristonikus, Strabo*s contemporary, enumerated all the 
 different opinions (Strabo, i. p. 38). 
 
 ' Strabo, iii. p. 157. * Strabo, i. p. 22-44 ; vii. p. 299 
 
 ' Stesichori Fragm. ed. Kleine ; Geryonis, Fr. 5. p. 60 ; ap. Strain), iii. p. 
 148 ; Herodot. iv. 8. It seems very doubtful whether Stesichorus meant to 
 indicate any neighboring island as Brytheia, if we compare Fragm. 10. p. 
 67 of the Geryonis, and the passages of Athensens and Eustathius there 
 died. He seems to have adhered to the old fable, placing Erytheia on 
 tiie opposite side <^ the ocean-stream, for Herakles crosses the ocean to get 
 k>it. 
 
 HekatSBUs, ap. Arrian. Histor. Alex. ii. 16. Skylax places Erytheia^ 
 ** whither Geryon is said to have come to feed his oxen,** in the Kastid terri* 
 lory near the Greek city of Apollonia on the Ionic Gulf, northward of tht 
 Kerannian mountains. There were splendid cattle coniecrated to Hfiliof 
 
 II* 
 
£50 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Both the track and the terminus of the Argonautic voyage ap- 
 pear in the most ancient epic as little within the conditions of real' 
 ity, as tlu' speaking timbers or the semi-divine crew of th^ vesseL 
 In the Odyssey, iEetes and Circe (Hesiod names Medea also) are 
 brother and sister, offspring of Helios. The-^a'an island, adjoining 
 the circumfluous ocean, " where the house and dancing-ground of 
 Eos are situated, and where Helios rises," is both the residence of 
 Circe and of ^"etes, inasmuch as Odysseus, in returning from the 
 former, follows the same course as the Argo had previously taken 
 in returning from the latterJ Even in the concejition of Mimner- 
 mus, al)Out COO b. c, JFm still retained it** fabulous attributes in 
 conjunction witli the o<?ean and Helios, without having been yet 
 identified with any known j)ortion of the solid earth ;2 and it was 
 justly remarked by Demetrius of Skepais in antiquity^ (though 
 
 near Apollonia, watched l»y the citizens of the place with great care (Hero 
 doi ix. 93i Sky lax, c. 26) 
 
 Aiioat Erytheia, Cellerius observes (Geo^^r. Ant. ii. I, 227), "Insula Ery 
 thetu, qaam vcteres adjunpunt Gadihus, vel demersa est, vel in scopuiis (ja«f- 
 renda, vel purs est ipsaram Gadium, necjue hodio ejus formie aliqan. an 
 deRcripta est, fertur superesse." To make the disjunctive catalo^e coiDplAte. 
 be oupht to have added, ' «jr it never really existed," — not the least prub* 
 ble supposition of all. 
 
 » Ilesiod, Thoogon. 950-992 ; Iloiner, Odyss xii. 3 69. — 
 
 OiKia Kal ;(o/>o/ ^Iffi, Kai uvr 'Aai 7je7uoio 
 •Mimnerm. Fragm. 10-11, Schneidewin •, Athena^, vii. p. 277.— 
 
 Oidt KOT^ uv pitya Ku^ag dvijyaytv avTug bjauv 
 'E^ Aa/f TtXtaa^ akyivotcaai' h^bv, 
 
 CK'cJ' av ^tt' 'ilKcavov naXdv Ikovto (hiov. 
 * * * ♦ 4 
 
 'A/tra'ff ;fpy<Tty Keiarai tv ^oXufKf^. 
 'S2«Farof> rrapa ;f p/Aeo', Iv' ^ero T&eio^ ''\rjouiv, 
 
 » Strabo, i p. 45-46. /^eftTjrpiog o ^Krplfio^ Trpdf Ne<i:"&v T&v KvC*- 
 
 CJ^fdv (fnXoTi/iior £ pu^ dvTtXeytjVf eiirovTa, <irt oi 'Apyovavrai T/ieovret 
 f/f ^ufftf Tdv v<p' 'Ofirjpofv Kal tCjv ukTiMV 6fio2x)yovfievov ir^oi/v, n^pvaavTB 
 Tu Tiji '\6aiaq fMijTpdg Upu iKi Kv^ikov ... ..dpxvv ^rjol fiTj^ etd Evai 
 TT). elg ^uaiv unod jfiiav tov 'laffovof 'Ofif/pov. Agam, p 
 46, napaXa^uv fiuprvpa Mlfivtpfunf, of iv rip *QKeav^ noii^aac QiKtjaiv Ak\ -^oiv 
 CIC. 
 
 The Adverb ^iXoTifioTipu.q reveals to us the municipal rivalry and conten 
 
 iEETES. - GIBOE. ~ JBA 
 
 i!$tnibo vatily tri«« to refute him), that neither Homer nor Mim- 
 nermtis aefiipfnates Kolchis either as the residence of .^l^tSs, or 
 as the terminus of the Argonautic voyage. Hesiod carried the 
 returning Argonauts through the river Phasis into the 'ocean. 
 But some of the poems ascribed to Eum^us were the first 
 which mentioned .^tes and Kolchis, and interwove both of 
 them into the Corinthian mythical genealogy J These poeras se^m 
 to have been composed subsequent to the foundation of Sinop^ 
 and to the commencement of Grecian settlement on the Borys- 
 thenr^s, between the years 600 and 500 b. c. Tlie Greek mari- 
 ners who explored and cok>nized the southeni coa'^t of the Eux- 
 ine, found at the extremity of their voyaj::e the river Phasia 
 and its barbarous inhabitants: it was the easternmost point 
 whi h Grecian navigation (previous to the time of Alexander the 
 Great) ever attained, and it was within sight of the impassable 
 barrier of Caucasus.^ They believed, not unnaturally, that they 
 had here found " the house of Eos (the morning) and the rising 
 place of the sun,** and that the river Phasis, if they could follow 
 it to its unknown beginning, would conduct them \o the circum- 
 fluous ocean. They gave to the spot the name oi ^a, and the 
 %bulous and real title gradually became associated together mio 
 one oomi)ound appellation, — the Kolchian ^a, or -^a of Kol- 
 chis. ^ While Kolchis was thus entered on the map as a fit re- 
 presentative for the Homeric " house of the morning," the nar- 
 row strait of the Thracian Bosporus attracted to itself the 
 poetical fancy of the Symplegades, or colliding rocks, throu^ 
 which the heaven-protected Argo had been the first to pass. 
 The powerful Greek cities of Kyzikus, Herakleia and Sinopd, 
 each fertile in local legends, still farther contributed to give this 
 direction to the voyage ; so that in the time of Hekataeus it had 
 become the established belief that the Argd had started froir 
 lolkos and gone to Kolchis. 
 iBetes thus received his home from the legendary faith and 
 
 tion between the small town Skepsis and its powerfal neighbor Kyaukii% 
 respecting points of comparative archaeology. 
 
 ' EumAlus, Fragm. \L.vpu)ma 7, KopLvi^iaxd. 2-5. pp. 63-68, Dontaer. 
 
 • Arrian, Periplus Pont. Eoxin. p. 12, ap. Gcopr. Minor vol. i. Qe HMl 
 the Caucasus from Diosknrias. 
 
 < Herodot i. 2 ; vii. 193-197. Eurip Med. 2. Yaler. Flacc. v. a4 
 
i52 
 
 iDSTORY 9 OSBECE. 
 
 tuacj of the eastern Greek navigators : his sister Circe, origl- 
 Dally his fellow- resideni, was localized by the western. The 
 Hesiodic and other poems, giving expression to the imaginative 
 impulses of the inhabitants of CumaR and other early Grecian 
 settlers in Italy and Sicily,^ had referred the wanderings of 
 Odyssens to the western or Tyrrhenian sea, and liad planted the 
 Cyclopes, the Laestrygones, the floating island of ^olus, the 
 Lotophagi, the Phaeacians, etc., about the coast of Sicily, Italy, 
 Libya, and Korkyra. In this way the ^aean island, — the resi 
 dence of Circ6, and the extreme point of the wanderings of 
 Odysseus, from whence he passes only to the ocean and into 
 Hades — came to be placed in the far west, while the ^a of 
 ^etes was in the far east, — not unlike our East and West In- 
 dies. The Homeric brother and sister were separated and sent 
 to opposite extremities of the Grecian terrestrial horizon.^ 
 
 The track from lolkos to Kolchis, however, though plausible 
 as far as it went, did not realize all the conditions of the genuine 
 feibulous voyage : it did not explain the evidences of the visit of 
 these maritime heroes which were to be found in Libya, in KretS 
 
 » Strabo, i. p. 23. Volcker (Ueber Homerische Geographic, v. 66) is in 
 ftmctive upon this point, as upon the geography of the Greek poets gene- 
 lally. He recognizes the purely mythical character of ^a in Homer and 
 Het:iod, but he tries to prove — unsuccessfully, in my judgment — that 
 Homer places ^.etes in the oast, while Circe is in the west, and that Homer 
 refers the Argonautic voyage to the Euxine Sea. 
 
 « Strabo (or Polybius, whom he has just been citing) contends that Homer 
 knew the existence of JEetes in Kolchis, and of Circe at Circeinm, as histor- 
 fcal persons, as well as the voyage of Jason to ^a as an historical fact 
 Upon this he (Homer) bnilt a superstmcture of fiction [Tpoafiv-devfia): he 
 fevented the brotherhood between them, and he placed both the one and the 
 other in the exterior ocean ((rvyytveioQ re Fnlaae tCjv ovtu StcpKinfievuv, Kai 
 i^uKtavtOfibv (ifKpoiv, i. p. 20) ; perhaps also Jason might have wandered as 
 for as Italy, as evidences (arifuld nva) are shown that he did (ib.). 
 
 But the'idea that Homer conceived JRet^s in the extreme east and Circl 
 in the extreme west, is not reconcilable with the Odyssey. The supposition 
 of Strabo is alike violent antl unsatisfactory. 
 
 Circe was worshipped as a goddess at Circeii (Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 19). 
 Hesiod, in the Theogony, rei)resents the two sons of Circe by Odyssens af 
 rajgcing over all the warlike Tyrrhenians (Theog. 1012), an undefined 
 western soveroirrnty. The great Mamilian gens at Tnsculum traced thfeif 
 rt ttf ' yf tv to OdyMeos and Cirod (Dionys. HaL iv. 45). 
 
 RETURN 0¥ IKE ABUONAUTS. 
 
 m AnaphS, in Eorkjiu, in the Adriatic Gulf, m Italy and ie 
 .^thalia. It became necessary to devise another route for tbeoi 
 in their return, and the Hesiodic narrative was (as I have belbfV 
 observed), that they came back by the circumfluous ocean; fint 
 going up the river Phasis into the circumiluous ocean; foUoir 
 ing that deep and gentle stream until they entered the Nila^ 
 and (rame down its course to the coast of Libya This seemi 
 also to have been the belief of Hekataeus.' But presently sev- 
 eral Greeks (and Herodotus among them) began to discard the 
 idea of a circumfluous ocean-stream, which had perva-it^ th^ 
 old geographiral and astronomical fables, and which sxpiained 
 the supposed ea^y comraunir'ation between one extremity of ths 
 earth and another. Another idea was then started for the return- 
 ing voyage of the Argonauts. It was supposed that the riv6r 
 Ister, or Danube, flowing from the Rhipaean mountains in tin 
 north-west of Kurope, divided itself into two branches, one of 
 which fell into the Euxine Sea, and the other into the Adriatic 
 
 The Argonauts, fleeing from the pursuit of ^etes, bad been 
 obliged to abandon their regular course homeward, and had gooe 
 from the Euxine Sea up the Ister; then passing down the othet 
 branch of that river, they had entered into the Adriatic, the 
 Kolchian pursuers following them. Such is the story given bf 
 Af>ollonius Bhodius from Timagetus, and accepted even by ao 
 able a geographer as Eratosthenes — who preceded him by ooQ 
 generation, and who, though sceptical in regard to the locaiitii?* 
 visited by Odysseus, seems to have been a firm believer in th'i 
 reality of the Aigonautic voyage.^ Other historians again, amoci^ 
 
 ' See above, p. 239. There is an opinion cited from Hckataeus in St hoL 
 A|x>ll. Rhod. iv. 284. contrary to this, which is given by the same ocholiaat 
 on iv. 259. But, in spite of the remarks of Klausen (ad Fragment. Hek»> 
 taei. 187. p. 98), I think that the Schol. ad. iv. 284 has made a miatake ia 
 citing Hekataeus ; the more so as the scholiast, as printed from the Codes 
 Parisinus, cites the same opinion without mentioning Hekataeus. Aoooni 
 ing u> the old Homeric idea, the ocean stream flowed all round the earthi 
 and was the source of all the principal rivers which flowed into the great in- 
 ternal sea, or Mediterranean (see Hekataeus, Fr. 349 ; Klausea, ap. Arrian. 
 h. 16, where he speaks of the Mediterranean as the f^eyuXri ^dXaa<ja). Ba> 
 taining this old idea of the ocean-stream, Hekataeus would naturally believa 
 that the Phasis joined it : nor can I agree with Klausen (ad Fr. 187} tlMl 
 this imi»lie8 a degree of ignorance toe gross x) impute to him. 
 
 « Apollon. Bhod. iv. 287 ; Schol. ad iv. 284 : Pindar. Pyth. iv 447, wH^ 
 
-I 
 
 154 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREEC& 
 
 whom was Timaeus, though they considered the ocean as an out^ 
 fr sea, and no longer admitted the existence of the old Homeric 
 ocean-stream, yet imagined a story for the return-voyage of the 
 Argonauts somewhat resembling the old tale of Hesiod and 
 fiekat^jeus. They alleged that the Argo, after entering into th6 
 Palus Mseotis, had followed the upward course of the river Ta« 
 Dais ; that she had then been carried overland and launched in a 
 river which had its mouth in the ocean or great outer sea. When 
 in the ocean, she had coasted along the north and west of Europe 
 until she reached Gades and the Strait of Gibraltar, where she 
 entered into the Mediterraneaji, and there visited the many places 
 q)eciiSed in the fable. Of this long voyage, in the outer sea to 
 the north and west of Europe, many traces were affirmed to 
 exist along the coast of the ocean.' There was again a third 
 version, according to which the Argonauts came back as they 
 went, through the Thracian Bosporus and the Hellespont. In 
 this way geographical plausibility was indeed maintained, but a 
 large portion of the fabulous matter was thrown overboard.'- 
 
 Such were the various attempts made to reconcile the Argo- 
 nautic legend with enlarged geographical knowledge and improv- 
 ed historical criticism. The problem remained unsolved, but the 
 
 Schol. ; Strabo, i. p. 46-57 ; Aristot. Mirahil. Aascnlt. c. 105. Altars were 
 riiown in the Adriatic, which had been erected both by Jason and by Medea 
 (ib). 
 
 Aristotle believed in the forked course of the Ister, with one embochurc ill 
 the Eaxine and another in the Adriatic : he notices certain fishes called rpi- 
 Xtai, who entered the river i like the Argonauts) from the Euxine, went up 
 il as far as the point of bifurcation and descended into the Adriatic ( Ilistor. 
 Animal, viii. 15). Compare Ukert, Greographie der Griech. undRomer. vol. 
 tii. p. 145-147, aboat the supposed course of the Ister. 
 
 * Diodor. iv. 56; Timaeus, Fragin, 53. Goller. Skymnus the geographer 
 also adopted this opinion (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 284-287). The pseudo-Or- 
 pheus in the poem called Aigonautica seems to give a jumble of all the dif- 
 ferent stories. 
 
 * Diodor iv. 49. This was the tale both of Sophokles and of Kallimachas 
 (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 2?4). 
 
 See the Dissertation of Ukert, Beylage iv. vol. i. part 2. p. 320 of his 
 Qeographie der Griechen ond Romer, which treats of the Argonautic voy- 
 age at some length ; also J. H. Voss, Alte Weltkunde Ober die Gestalt del 
 Brde, published in the second volume of the Kritische Blatter, pp. 162, 314- 
 ; and Forbi^r, Handbuch der Alten Greographie-Einleitnng, p. 8. 
 
 p;i 
 
 1 
 
 ARGONAUTIC LEGEND MODIFIEt 
 
 Suth in the legend did not the less oootiDae. It wm m fintt 
 originally generated at a time when the unassisted namdTe of 
 the inspired poet sufficed for the oonviction of his hearers; k 
 eoQsecrated one among the capital exploits of that hen>ic and 
 eoperhuman race, whom the Greek was accustomed at once to 
 look back upon as his ancestors and to worship conjointly with 
 his gods : it lay too deep in his mind either to require historical 
 evidence for its support, or to be overthrown by geographical 
 difficulties as they were then appreciated. Supposed traces of 
 the past event, either preserved in the names of places, or embo- 
 died in standing religious customs with their explanatory oom* 
 ments, served as sufficient authentication in the eyes of the curiooi 
 inquirer. And even men trained in a more severe school of 
 criticism contented themselves with eliminating the palpable ooQ- 
 tradictions and softening down the supernatural and romantic 
 events, so as to produce an Argonautic expedition of their own 
 invention as the true and accredited history. Strabo, though he 
 can neither overlook nor explain the geographical impossibilities 
 of the narrative, supposes himself to have discovered the basis 
 of actual fact, which the original poets had embellished or exag^ 
 gerated. The golden fleece was typical of the great wealth of 
 Kolchis, arising from gold-dust washed down by the rivers ; and 
 the voyage of Ja^on was in reality an expedition at the head of 
 a considerable army, with which he plundered this wealthy couil" 
 try and made extensive conquests in the interior.* Strabo hat 
 nowhere laid down what he supposes to have been the exact 
 measure and direction of Jason's inarch, but he must have rs* 
 garded it as very long, since he classes Jason with Dionysus and 
 Herakles, and emphatically characterizes all the three as having 
 
 * Strabo, i. p. 45. He speaks here of the voyaj^ of Phryxus, as well ai 
 tfiat of Jason, as having been a military undertaking? {(Trpareia) : so again, 
 iii p. 149, he speaks of the military expedition of Odysseus — v rov '0<5wf- 
 oeui arparia^ and ^ 'HpoKleovc OTparia (ib.). Ag^ain xi. p. ♦QS. Ol /iv^&oif 
 alviTTofievoi rijv ^Idaovo^ (Trpareiav Trpoe^'&ovTo^ t^^XP'- '^^ MriSia^ • kri dl 
 Koorepov TT/i0^pi^ov. Compare also Justin, xlii. 2-3; Tacit. Annal. vi. Si. 
 
 Strabo cannot speak af tne old fables with literal fidelity : he unconscious- 
 ly transforms them into qoasi-historical incidents of his own imaginatioa. 
 Piodoros gives a narrative of the same kind, with decent substitiiteB for tht 
 fcbalous elements (iv. 40-47-56). 
 
 I • 
 
 I 
 
fM 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 traversed wider spaces of ground than any modems eoald e^uaL^ 
 Such was the compromise which a mind like that of Strabo made 
 with the ancient legends. He shaped or cut them down to the 
 level of his own credenc^e, and in this waste of historical criticism, 
 without any positive evidence, he took to himself the credit of 
 greater penetration than the literal believers, while he escaped 
 Ibe necessity of breaking formally with the bygone heroic world 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 LEGENDS OF THEBES. 
 
 The Boe6tians generally, throughout the historical age, though 
 rell endowed with bodily strength and courage,^ are represented 
 J proverbially deficient in intelligence, taste and fancy. But 
 the legendary population of Thebes, the Kadmeians, are rich in 
 mythical antiquities, divine as well as heroic. Both Dionysus 
 And Herakles recogniztj Thebes as their natal city. Moreover, 
 the two sieges of Thebes by Adrastus, even taken apart from 
 
 ' Strabo i. p. 48. The far-cxten.ling expeditions undertaken in the east- 
 ern regions by Dionysus and Herakles were constantly present to the mind 
 of Alexander the Great as subjects of comparison with himself: he imposed 
 Bpon his followers perilous and tryin- marches, from anxiety to equal or 
 mrpass the alleged exploits of Semirarais, Cyrus, Perseus, and Herakles. 
 (Arrian, v 2, 3; vl 24, 3 ; vii. 10, 12. Strabo, iii. p. 171 ; xv. p. 686 ; xvu. 
 
 ** » The eponym Boeotus is son of Poseidon and Ame (Euphorion ap. 
 Eastath. ad Ili'ad. ii. 507). It was from Ame in Thessaly that the Bceotiaos 
 were said to have come, when they invaded and occupied Boeotia. Euri- 
 pides made him son of Poseidon and Melanippe. Another legend recited 
 Boeotus and Hellen as sons of Poseidon and Antiope (Hygm. f. 157-186). 
 
 ITie Tanagraan poetess Korinna (the rival of Pindar, whose compositioM 
 in the BcBotian dialect are unfortunately lost) appears to have dwelt upoa 
 Ihii native Bceofcian genealogy : she derived the Ogygian gates of Thebef 
 ftom Ogygus, son of Bceotus ( Schol. Apollon. Rhod. Ui. 1 1 78), also the Frag 
 Bents of Korinna in Schneidewin's edition, fir. 2. p. 498. 
 
 LEGENDS OF THEBES. 
 
 253 
 
 Cudnius, Antiope, Amphion and Zethus, etc, are the most pro- 
 minent and most characteristic exploit?, next to the siege of Troj, 
 of that preexisring race of heroes who lived in the imagination 
 of the historical Hellenes. 
 
 It is not Kadmus, but the brothers Ampliion and Zethus, who 
 are given to us in the Odyssey as the first founders of Thebea 
 and the first builders of its celebrated walls. They are the sons 
 of Zeus by Antiope, daughter of Asopus. The scholiasts who 
 desire %■> reconcile this tale with the more current account of the 
 foundation of Thebes by Kadmus, tell us that after the death of 
 Amphion and Zethus, Eurymachus, the warlike king of the 
 Phlegya?, invaded and ruined the newly-settled town, so that 
 Kadmus on arriving was obliged to re-found it.' But Apollo- 
 dorus, and seemingly the older logographers before him, placed 
 Kadmus at the top, and inserted the two brothers at a lower 
 point in the series. According to them, Belus and Agenor were 
 the sons of Epaphus, sod of the Argei^n 16, by Libya. Agenor 
 went to Phoenicia and there became king : he had for his off- 
 spring Kadmus, Phcenix, Kilix, and a daughter EurOpa ; though 
 in the Iliad Europa is called daughter of Phoenix.^ Zeus fell in 
 love with Europa, and assuming the shape of a bull, carried her 
 across the sea upon his back from Egpyt to Krete, where she 
 bore to him Minos, Rhadamanthus and Sarpedon. Two out of 
 the three sons sent out by Agenor in search of their lost sister, 
 wearied out by a long-protracted as well as fruitless voyage, 
 abandoned the idea of returning home : Kilix settled in Kilikia, 
 and Kadmus in Thrace.^ Thasus, the brother or nephew oi 
 
 * Homer, Odyss. xi. 262, and Eustath. ad loc. Compare Schol. ad IHad. 
 ziii. 301. 
 
 * Iliad, xiv. 321. 16 is Kepoeaaa npofidrup of the Thebans. Eurip. Phoe- 
 ■iss. 247-676. 
 
 ^ Apollodor. ii. 1, 3; iii. 1, 8. In the Hesiodic poems (ap. Schol. ApolL 
 Rhod. ii. 178), Phoenix was recognized as son of Agenoi. Pherekydes also 
 described both Phoenix and Kadmus as sons of Agenor (Pherekyd Fragm. 
 40, Didot). Compare Servius ad Virgil, ^neid. 1. 338. Pherekydes ex- 
 |«essly mentioned Kilix (Apollod. ib.). Besides the Evpuireia of Stesicho> 
 IBS (see Stesichor. Fragm. xv. p. 73, ed. Kleine), there were several other 
 ncient poems on the adventures of Earopa ; one in particular by Eumdlof 
 (Schol. ad Biad. vi. 138), which however can hardly be the same as the rA 
 
 VOL. L 170C 
 
t 
 
 I 
 
 2M 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 Kadmus, who had accompanied them in the voyage, settled ani 
 
 p:ave name to the ijiland of Phasus. 
 
 Both Herodotus and Euripides represent Kadmus as an emi- 
 grant from Phoenicia, .•onducting a body of Ibllowers in quest ot 
 Eur()[)a. The account of ApoUodorus describes him as having 
 come originally from Libya or Egypt to Phajnicia: we may 
 presume that this wa:t also the statement of the earlier logo- 
 S^aphers Pherekydes and Hellanikus. Conon. who histori«Mze8 
 and politicizes the whole legend, seems to have found two differ- 
 ent accounts ; one connecting Kadmus with Egypt, another bring- 
 ing hiin from Phoenicia. He tries to melt down the two into 
 one, by representing tliat the Phoenicians, who sent out Kadmus, 
 had acquired great jiower in Egypt — that the seat of their king- 
 dom was the Egyptian Thebes — that Kadmus was despatched, 
 under pretence indeed of hnding his lost sister, but really on a 
 project of conquest — and that the name Thebes, which he gave 
 to liis new estallishment in Ikeutia, was borrowed from Thebes 
 in Egy[)t, his ancestoriil seat.' 
 
 Kadmus went from Thrace to Delphi to procure information 
 respecting his sister Eiiropji, but the god directed him to take no 
 farther trouble about Jier; he was to follow the guidance of a 
 eow, and to found a city on the spot where the animal should li6 
 down. The condition was realized on the site of Thebes. The 
 neighboring fountain Areia was guaixled by a tierce dragon, the 
 ofispring of Ares, who destroyed all the persons sent to fetch 
 water. Kadmus killed the dragon, and at the suggestion of 
 Athene sowed his teeth in the earth :- there sprang up at once 
 the aimed men called the Sparti, among whom he flung stonea, 
 
 liny rd elg Evpuinjv allmk'd to by Paasanias (ix. 5, 4). See WoUner de 
 Cydo Epico, p. 57 (Mdnst t 1825). 
 
 * Conon, Narrat. 37. Perhaps the most remarkable thing of all is the 
 tone of unJ)oandcd self-confidence with which Conon winds up this tissue 
 of uncertitied suppositions — ir€f>l fxev Kadfiov koI QtjiSuv olKiaeuf oirrog 6 
 mAr/i^OC Aoyof • rd iSe aAAo fjir&o^ Kal yoTjreia uKorj^. 
 
 * Stesichor. (Fragm. 16 ; Kleine) ap. Schol. Eurip. Phoeniss. 680. Tb* 
 place where the heifer had lain down was still shown in the time of Paasar 
 Bias (ix. 12, 1). 
 
 Lysimachus, a lost author who wrote ThebaTca, mentioned Europa at 
 iMiving come with Kadmus to Thebes, and told the story in many odier i^ 
 very ditferently (Schol Apoll. Rhod. iii. 1179). 
 
 
 KADMUS AND HIS DAUGHTERS. 
 
 2dd 
 
 and they immediately began to assault each other until all were 
 slain except five. Ares, indignant at this slaughtt^r, was about 
 to kill Kadmus; but Zeus appeased him, condemning Kadmus 
 to an expiatory servitude of eight years, after which he married 
 Harmonia, the daughter of Ares and Aphrodite — presenting to 
 her the splendid necklace fabricated by the hand of Hephaeg- 
 tos, which had been given by Zeus to Europa. • All the gods 
 came to the Kadmeia, the citadel of Thebes, to present congrat- 
 ulations and gifts at these nuptials, which seem to have been 
 hardly less celebrated in the mythical world than those of Peleus 
 and Thetis. The issue of the marriage was one son, Polydorus, 
 and four daughters, Autonoe, Ino, Semele and Agave.- 
 
 From the tive who alone survived of the warrioi*s sprung from 
 the dragon's teeth, arose five great families or gentes in Thebes ; 
 the oldest and noblest of its inhabitants, coeval with the founda- 
 tion of the town. They were called Sparti, and their name 
 Beems to have given rise, not only to the fable of the sowing of 
 the teeth, but also to other etymological narratives.^ 
 
 All the four daughters of Kadmus are illustrious in fabulous 
 history. Ino, wife of Athamas, the son of -^olus, has already 
 been included among the legends of the -Solids. Semele became 
 the mistress of Zeus, and inspired Here with jealousy. Mis- 
 guided by the malicious suggestions of that goddess, she solicited 
 Zeus to visit her with all the solemnity and terrors which sur^ 
 
 * ApoUodor. iii. 4, 1-3 Pherekydes gave this account of the necklace, 
 which seems to imply that Kadmus must have found his sister Eurupa. The 
 narrative here given is from Hellanikus ; that of Pherekydes differed from 
 it in some respects : compare Hellanik. Fragm. 8 and 9, and Pherekyd. Frag. 
 44. The resemblance of this story with that of Jason and iEetes (see above, 
 chap. xiii. p 237) will strike every one. It is curious to observe how the 
 old logographer Pherekydes explained this analogy in liis narrative ; he said 
 that Athene had given half the dragon's teeth to Kadmus and half to MUxi^s 
 (see Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13). 
 
 * Hesiod, Theogon. 976. Leukothea, the sea-goddess, daughter of Kad 
 mas, is mentioned in the Odyssey, v. 334 ; Diodor. iv. 2. 
 
 ' Eurip. Phoeniss. 680, with the Scholia ; Pherekydes, Fragm. 44 ; Andro- 
 lion, ap. Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13. Dionysius {^.) called the Sparti an 
 Wvof Boformf (Schol. Phceniss. 1. c.). 
 
 Even in the days of Plutarch, there were persons living who traced thoil 
 mt to the Sparti of Thebes (Plutarch, Ser. Num. Vindict. p 563). 
 
 t •• • '"" 
 
f60 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ivunded him when he approac^hed Here herself. The god ui^ 
 willingly consented, iind caine in his chariot in the midst of 
 thunder and lightnin^i, under which awful accompaniments tha 
 mortal frame of Semele perislied. Zeus, taking from her tlie 
 child of which she was pregnant, sewed it into his own thigh : 
 after the proper interval the child was brouglit out and born, and 
 became the great god Dionysus or Bacchus. Hermes tooi^ him 
 to Ino and Athaiiuis to receive their protection. Afterwards, 
 however, Zeus having transformed him into a kid to conceal him 
 from the persecution of Here, the nymphs of the mountain Nysa 
 became his nurses.^ 
 
 Autonoe, the third daughter of Kadmus, married the pastoral 
 hero or god Aristaias. and was mother of Aktaun, a devoted 
 hunter and a favorite companion of the goddess Artemis. She 
 however became displeased with him — either because he looked 
 into a fountain while she was bathing and saw her naked — oi 
 according to the legend set forth by the i)oet Stesichorus, because 
 he loved and courted Semele — or according to Euripides, be- 
 cause he presumptuously vaunted himself as her superior in the 
 chase. She transformed him into a stag, so that his own dogs 
 set upon and devoured him. The rock upon wliich Akta^on used 
 lo sleep when fatigued with the chase, and the spring whose 
 transparent waters had too clearly revealed the form of the god- 
 dess, were shown to Pausanias near Plattea, on the road to 
 Megara.2 
 
 * ApoUodor. iii. 4, 2-9 ; Diodor. iv. 2. 
 
 • See ApoUodor. iii. 4, 3 ; Stesichor. Frapm. xvii. Kleine; Paasan ix. 2, 
 3; Eurip. Bacch. 337; Diodor. iv. 81. The old logographer Akusilaoa 
 copied Stesichorus. 
 
 Upon this well-known story it is unnecessary to multiply references. I 
 shall however briefly notiot; the remarks made upon it by Diodorus and by 
 Pausanias, as an illustration of the manner in which the literary Greeks of a 
 later day dealt with their old national lejjrends. 
 
 Both of them appear implicitly to believe the fact, that Aktaeon was 
 devoured by his own do^'s, but they differ materially in the explanation 
 OI it. 
 
 Diodorus accepts and vindicates the miraculous interposition of the dis- 
 pleased ^ddess to punish .Aktaeon, who, aecordinji: to one st )ry, had boasted 
 of his superiority in the chiise to Artemis, — acoordini; to another stcry, had 
 presamed to solicit the goddess in marriage, emboldened by the great num- 
 bers of the feet of animals ilain in the chase which he had hong up as offior 
 
 DIONYSTTTS AT THEBES 
 
 261 
 
 A^ve, the remaining daughter of Kadmus, married Ev^hidn, 
 one of the Sparti. The issue of these nuptials was Pentheua, 
 who, when Kadmus became old succeeded him as king of Thebes. 
 In his reign Dionysus appeared as a god, the author or discoverer 
 of the vine with all its blessings. He had wandered over Asia, 
 India and Thrace, at the head of an excited troop of female en- 
 thusiasts — communicating and inculcating everywhere the Bac- 
 chic ceremonies, and rousing in the minds of women that 
 impassioned religious emotion which led them to ramble in 
 solitary mountains at particular seasons, there to give vent to 
 violent fanatical excitement, apart from the men, clothed in fawn- 
 skins and armed with the thyrsus. The obtrusion of a male spec- 
 tator upon these solemnities was esteemed sacrilegious. Though 
 the rites had been rapidly disseminated and fervently welcomed 
 in many parts of Thrace, yet there were some places in which 
 they had been obstinately resisted and their votaries treated with 
 rudeness ; especially by Lykurgus, king of the Edonian Thra- 
 dans, upon whom a sharp and exemplary punishment waa 
 inflicted by Dionysus. 
 
 Thebes was the first city of Greece to which Dionysus came, 
 
 ings in her temple. " It is not improbable (observes Diodorus) that the god 
 dess was angry on both these accounts. For whether Aktaeon abused these 
 hunting presents so far as to make them the means of gratifying his own 
 desires towards one unapproachable in wedlock, or whether he presumed to 
 call himself an abler hunter than her with whom the gods themselves will 
 act compete in this department, — in either case the wrath of the goddess 
 e^ainst him was just and legitimate (ofioTioyovfievr^v kul 6iKaiav opyfjv lax* 
 fcpdg airbv ff i^eof). With perfect propriety therefore (KaiJoAov de irf&avu^) 
 was he transformed into an animal such as those he had hunted, and torn to 
 pieces by the very dogs who had killed them." (Didot. iv. 80.) 
 
 Pausanias, a man of exemplary piety, and generally less inclined to 
 scepticism than Diodorus, thinks the occasion unsuitable for a miracle or 
 special interference. Having alluded to the two causes assigned for the dis* 
 pleasure of Artemis (they are the two first-mentioned in my text, and dis- 
 tinct from the two noticed by Diodorus), he proceeds to say, " But I believe 
 Aat the dogs of Aktaeon went mad, withoat the interference of the goddess : 
 in this state of madness they would have torn in pieces withoat distinction 
 •ny one whom they met (Pans. ix. 2, 3. kyu Se koi uvev t?eotJ irel^ofiat vocoit 
 Xvaaav kTri[ia}.clv rov 'AKvaiuvog Toi>g Kvvac)." He retains the truth of tht 
 final catastrophe, bat rationalizes it, excluding the special interventioii of 
 Artemis 
 
262 
 
 HTRTORr OF OKKFCE. 
 
 at tlif nead of his Asiatic troop of females, to obtain divine hoc 
 ors and to establish hiB peculiar rites in his native city. The 
 venerable Kadmus, together with his daughters and the prophet 
 Teiresias, at once acknowledged the divinity of the new god. and 
 be*mn to offer their worship and praise to him along with the 
 golemiiities which lie enjoined. But Pentheus vehemently op- 
 posed the new ceremonies, reproving and maltreating the god 
 who introduced them : nor was his unbelief at all softened by 
 the miracles which Dionysus wrought for his own protection and 
 for that of his followciv. His mother Agave, with her sisters 
 and a large body of other women from Thebes, had gon^ out 
 from Thebes to Mount Kitha^ron to celebrate their solemnities 
 under the influence of the Bacchic frenzy. Thither Pentheus 
 followed to watch them, and there the punishment due to his 
 impiety overtook him. The avenging touch of the god having 
 robbed him of his senses, he climbed a tall })ine for the purpose 
 ol* overlooking the feminine multitude, who detected him in this 
 position, pulled down the tree, and tore him in pieces. Agave, 
 mad and bereft of consciousness, made herself the foremost io 
 this assault, and carried back in triumph to Thebes the head of 
 her slaughtered son. The aged Kadmus, with his wife Harmo* 
 ma, retired among the Illyrians, and at the end of their lives 
 were changed into serpents, Zeus permitting them to be traua* 
 ferred to the Eiysian fields. < 
 
 ' ApoUod. iii. 5, 3-4 ; Theocrit. Idyll, xxvi. Eurip Bacch. jxissim. Sacb 
 Mi the trajjical plot of this memorable draraa. It is a strikinjx proof of the 
 deep-8Pated reverence of the people of Athens for the sanctity of the Bacchic 
 ceremonies, that they could have borne the spectacle of Airave on the stage 
 with her dead son's head, aiul the expressions of triinn pliant sympathy in 
 her action on the part of the Chorus (1168), Mn\a/f/ 'A a // .' This drama, 
 written near the close of the life of Euripides, and exhibited by his son aft«jr 
 his death (Sehol. Aristoph. Ran. 67), contains passages stron|j:ly incnlcataog 
 Ac necessity of implicit deference to ancestoi ial authority in matters of re- 
 Kpion. nnd favorably contrastinjr the unintjuiring faith of the vulfzar with the 
 dissentin*: and inquisitive tendencies of superior minds: see v. 196; cwa 
 iMure vv. 389 and 422. — 
 
 Ovt^iv ao0djtimf^iT\'^a roirrr (Saiiioniv. 
 
 Ov^'' fjv ^C uKfXiiV TO (TO(pdv efrpijrai <l>pevuv, 
 Saeh reproofs " insaoientis sapientin" certainly do not fall in with <iie pUil 
 
 PEN'i HEUS. - LABDAKUS. - UOUS. - ANTIOPB. 
 
 Po)yd6rns and Labdakns successively became kings of ThdbM : 
 the latter at his death left an infant son, Laius, who was depriTed 
 •f his throne by Lykus. And here we approach the legend of 
 Antiope, Zethus and Amphidn, whom the fabulists insert at this 
 point of the Theban series. Antiopd is here the daughter of Nyk- 
 teus, the brother of Lykus. She is deflowered by Zeus, and 
 then, while pregnant, flies to Epopeus king of Sikyon : Nykteua 
 dying entreats his brother to avenge the injury, and Lykus 
 accordingly invades Sikydn, defeats and kills Epopeus, and brings 
 back Antiop^ prisoner to Thebes. In her way thither, in a cave 
 near Eleutherae, which was shown to Pausanias,' she is delivered 
 of the twin sons of Zeus — Amphion and Zethus — who, exposed 
 to perish, are taken up and nourished by a shepherd, and pass 
 their youth amidst herdsmen, ignorant of their lofty descent. 
 
 Antiope is conveyed to Thebes, where, after undergoing a long 
 persecution from Lykus and his cruel wife Dirke, she at length 
 escapes, and takes refuge in the pastoral dwelling of her sons, 
 now grown to manhood. Dirke pursues and requires her to be 
 delivered up ; but the sons recognize and protect their mother, 
 taking an ample revenge upon her persecutors. Lykus is slain, 
 and Dirke is dragged to death, tied to the horns of a bulL' 
 
 ■■M - ■ - - -.. 
 
 of the drama itself, in which Pentheus appears as a Conservative, resisting 
 the introduction of die new religious rites. Taken in conjunction with the 
 emphatic and submissive piety which reigns through the drama, they coun- 
 tenance the supposition of Tyrwhitt, that Euripides was anxious to repel 
 the imputations, so often made against him, of commerce with the philoso- 
 phers and participation in sundry heretical opinions. 
 
 Pacuvius in his Pentheus seems to have closely copied Euripides; see 
 Bervius ad Virg. ^neid. iv. 469. 
 
 The old Thespis had composed a tragedy on the subject of Pentheus' 
 finidas. OeoTrig • also ^schylus ; compare his Eumenides, 25. 
 
 According to Apollodorus (iii. 5, 5), Labdakus also perished in a simiUv 
 way to Pentheus. and from the like impiety, — kKeivtfi (ftpovCw iraparc'^aia, 
 
 ' Pausan. i. 38. 9. 
 
 * For the adventures of Antiope and her sons, see ApoUodor. iii. 5 \ 
 Pausan. ii. 6, 2 ; ix. 5, 2. 
 
 The narrative given respecting Epopeus in the ancient Cyprian veraei 
 ■eeras to have been very different from this, as far as we can judge from dw 
 brief notice in Proclus's Ai^ument, — wf 'E7ra>7rei)f ^i^e/pof ripf AvKovpjfm 
 iAvKov) yvvalKa i^eirofy&^&j} : it approaches more nearly to the story givea 
 Id the seventh fable of Hyginus, and followed by Prooertias (iii. 15); tilt 
 
 Vol. 1 13 
 
164 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Amphidn and ZethuB, having banished Laius, beoome kings oi 
 Tnebes. The former, taught by Hermes, and possessing exqoi^ 
 ite skill on the lyre, employs it in fortifying the city, the stones 
 of the walls arranging themselves spontaneously in obedience to 
 the rhythm of his song J 
 
 Zethus marries Aedon, who, in the dark and under a fatal mis- 
 take, kills her son Itylus : she is transformed into a nightingale, 
 while Zethus dies of grief.^ Amphion becomes the husband of 
 Niobe, daughter of Tantalus, and the father of a numerous off- 
 spring, the complete extinction of which by the hands of Apollo 
 and Artemis has already been recounted in these pages. 
 
 Here ends the legend of the beautiful Antiope and her twin 
 smis — the rude and unpolished, but energetic, Zethus — and the 
 refined and amiable, but dreamy, Amphion. For so Euripides, 
 in the drama of Antiope unfortuoately lost, presented the two 
 
 c^hth fable of Hyginuu contains the tale of Antiope as given by Euripides 
 and Ennius. The story of Pausanias differs from both. 
 
 The Scholiast ad Apollon. Rhod. i. 735. says that there were tw© persons 
 named Antiope ; one, daughter of Asopus, the other, daughter of Nykteus. 
 Pausanias is content with supposing one only, really the daughter of Nyk* 
 teus, but there was a ^///i// that she was daughter of Asopus (ii. 6, 2). Asiat 
 made Antiope daughtnr of Asopus, and mother (both by Zeus and by Epd- 
 pens : such a junction of divine and human paternity is of common oceur 
 renoe in the Greek legends) of Zethus and Amphion (ap. Pans. I. c.). 
 
 The contradictory versions of the story are brought together, though no# 
 very perfectly, in Sterk's Essay De Labdacidarum Historic, p. 38-43 (Ley- 
 den, 1829). 
 
 ' This story al)out the lyre of Amphion is not noticed in Homer, but ii 
 was narrated in the ancient iTTTj ig Kvptjirr/v which Pausanias had read : the 
 wild beasts as well as the stones were obedient to his strains (Paus ix. 5, 4). 
 Pherekydes also recounted it (Pherekyd. Fragm. 102, Didotj. The tablet 
 of inscription {*Avaypa(f>/i) at Sikvon recognized Amphion as the tirst com 
 poser of poetry and harp-music (Plutarch, de MusicA, c. 3. p. 1132). 
 
 • The tale of the wife and son of Zethus is as old as the Odyssey (xix. 
 525). Pausanias adds the statement that Zethus died of grief (ix 5,5: 
 Pherekydes, Fragm. 102, Did.). Pausanias, however, as well as Apollodo- 
 ros, tolls us that Zethus msn-ied Thebe, from whom the name Thebes was 
 gtwen to the city. To reconcile the conflicting pretensions of Zethus and 
 Amphidn with those of Kadmus, as founders of Thebes, Paueanias supposei 
 that the latter was the original settler of the hill of the Kadmeia, while tin 
 two forme* extended the settlement to the lower city (ix 5, l-A) 
 
 LAIUS AND (EDIPUS. 
 
 MS 
 
 lunothers, in affectionate union as well as in striking contrast.! It 
 18 evident that the whole story stood originally quite apart from 
 Ihe Kadmeian family, and so the rudiments of it yet stand in 
 the Odyssey ; but the logographers, by their ordinary connecting 
 artilices, have opened a vacant place for it in the descending se- 
 ries of The ban mythes. And they have here proceeded in a 
 manner not usual with them. For whereas they are generally 
 fond of multiplying entities, and supposing ditferent historical 
 personages of the same name, in order to introduce an apparent 
 gmoothuess in the chronology — they have here blended into one 
 person Amphion the son of Antiope and Amphion the father of 
 Chloris, who seem clearly distinguished from each other in the 
 Odyssey. They have further assigned to the same person all the 
 circumstances of the legend of l^iobe, wliich seems to have been 
 originally framed quite apart I'rom the sons of Antiope. 
 
 Amphion and Zethus being removed, Laius became king of 
 Thebes. With him commences the ever-celebrated series of ad- 
 ventures of CEdipus and his family. Laius forewarned by the 
 oracle that any son whom he might beget would kill him, caused 
 CEdipus as soon as he was born to be exposed on Mount Kithie- 
 ron. Here the herdsmen of Polybus king of Corinth acciden- 
 tally found him and conveyed him to their master, who brout'lit 
 him up as his own child. In spite of the kindest treatment, 
 however, CEdipus when he grew up found himself exposed to 
 taunts on the score of his unknown parentage, and went to Delphi 
 to inquire of the god the name of his real father. He received 
 for answer an admonition not to go back to his country ; if he did 
 so, it was his destiny to kill his father and become the husband of 
 his mother. Knowing no other country but Corinth, he accord- 
 ingly determined to keep away from that city, and quitted Delphi 
 by the road towards Boeotia and Phdkis. At the exact sfwt 
 
 ' See Valckenaer. Diatribe in Eurip. Reliq. cap. 7, p. 58 ; Welcker, 
 Griechisch. Tragod. ii. p. 811. There is a striking resemblance between the 
 Antiope of Euripides and the Tyro of Sophokles in many points. 
 
 Plato in his Gorgias has preserved a few fragments, and a tolerably clear 
 general idea of the characters of Zethus and Amphion (Gorg. 90-92) • le* 
 also Horat. Epist. i 18, 42. 
 
 Both Livius and Pacuvius had tragedies on the scheme of this of Eun« 
 Kb, the former seemirgly a translation. 
 TOL. I. 12 
 
nm 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 where the roads leading to these two countries ilyrked, he met 
 Laius in a chariot drawn by mules, when the insolence of one of 
 the attendants brought on an angry quarrel, in which CEdipua 
 killed Laius, not knowing him to be his father. The exact 
 place where this event happened, called the Divided Way', was 
 memorable in the eyes of all literary Greeks, and is specially 
 adverted to by Pausaniiis in his periegesis. 
 
 On the death of Laius, Kreon, the brother of Jokasta, sue 
 ceeded to the kingdom of Thebes. At this time the country was 
 under the displeasure of the gods, and was vexed by a terrible 
 monster, with the face of a woman, the wings of a bird, and th« 
 tail of a lion, called the Sphinx'-' — sent by the wrath of Here 
 and occupying the neighboring mountain of Phikium. The 
 Sphinx had learned from the Muses a riddle, which she proposed 
 to the Thebans to resoh e : on every occasion of failure she took 
 away one of the citizens and ate him up. Still no person could 
 solve the riddle ; and so great was the suffering occasioned, that 
 Kreon was obliged to offer both the crown and the nuptials of 
 his sister Jokasta to an^ one who could achieve the salvation of 
 the city. At this juncture CEdipus arrived and solved the rid- 
 dle : upon which the Sphinx immediately threw herself from the 
 acropolis and disappeared. As a recompense for this service, 
 CEdipus was made king of Thebes, and married Jokasta, not 
 aware that she was his mother. 
 
 These main tragical circumstances — that CEdipus had ig- 
 Dorantly killed his father and married his mother — belong to 
 the oldest form of the legend as it stands in the Odyssey. The 
 gods (it is added in that poem) quickly made the facts known to 
 mankind. Epikasta (so Jokasta is here called) in an agony of 
 sorrow hanged herself: CEdipus remained king of the Kad- 
 meians, but underwent many and great miseries, such as the 
 
 • «ee the description of the locality in K. C>. MiUler (Urchomeuos, c. i. p. 
 87). 
 
 The tombs of Laius and his attendant were still seen there in the days of 
 Pausanias (x. 5, 2). 
 
 • Apollodor. iii. 5, 8. An author named Lykus, in his work entitled TTiS- 
 ttalca, ascribed this visitation to the anger of Dionysus (Schol. Hesiod, 
 Theogon. 326). The Sphinx (or Phix, from the Boeotian Mount Phikiam) 
 U as old as the Hesiodic Theogony, — ♦«/c' 6X67]v rtKe, KaSueioiaiv oXr^pov 
 (Theog. 326;. 
 
 ADVENTURES OF (EDIPU&. 
 
 907 
 
 Ei-innyes, who avenge an injured mother, inflict^ A passage in 
 the Iliad implies that he died at Thebes, since it mentions tie 
 tiineral games which were celebrated there in honor of him. 
 His misfortunes were recounted by Nestor, in the old Cyprian 
 verses, among the stories of aforetime.2 A fatal curse hung both 
 upon himself and upon his children, Eteokles, Polynikes, Anti- 
 gone and Ismene. According to that narrative which the Attic 
 tragedians have rendered universally current, they were his chil • 
 dren by Jokasta, the disclosure of her true relationship to him 
 having been very long deferred. But the ancient epic called 
 (Edipodia, treading more closely in the footsteps of Homer, rep- 
 resented him as having after her death married a second wife, 
 Euryganeia, by whom the four children were born to him : and 
 the painter Onatas adopted this story in preference (o that <A 
 Sophokles.3 
 
 ' Odyss. xi. 270. Odysseus, describing what he saw in the nnder-worldi 
 
 Mtys,— 
 
 M^repa r' OiSiiroSao l6ov, KaXifv ''EmKuarriv, 
 "H fivya Ipyov Ipe^ev aldpetyai vooio, 
 rrifiafievTf ^ viei • 6 6' bv narep' k^evapl^ac 
 Trjfiev • a^ap d' dvanvara '^eol ^iaav uvdpuiroiaL 
 'AAA' 6 fiEv kv QijSij TTokvT/puTift uXyea Traffjfwi;, 
 Ka6fieiutv r/vaaae, i^euv oAoag 6iu fSovTid^ • 
 'H J' ^iJij e/f Alddo TrvXdprao Kparepolo 
 'AipafxivTf (ipoxov aliri^v ti^' vfTjXoio fieTid^pov, 
 *C uxei axofiEVTj • r^ d' uXym kuXXitt' bniaau 
 Tlo'KXu fiaX\ 6aaa re firjTpbq 'Epivvvec kKTeXeovaiv. 
 Iliad, xxiii. 680, with the scholiast who cites Hesiod. Proclus, Argnm 
 »d Cypria, ap. DOntzer, Fragm. Epic. Graec. p. 10. Nt'arwp 61 kv napeK^dtm 
 
 diTfyeirai Kai rd. irepl Oidinovv, etc. 
 
 ' Pausan. ix. 5, 5. Compare the narrative from Peisander in Schol. ad 
 Eurip. Phoeniss. 1773; where, however, the blindness of CEdipus seems to 
 be unconsciously interpolated out of the tragedians. In the old narrative 
 of the Cyclic ThehaTs, (Edipus does not seem to be represented as blind 
 (Leutsch, Thebaidis Cyclici Reliquiae, Getting. 1830, p. 42). 
 
 Pherekydes (ap. Schol.'Eurip. Phoeniss. 52) tells us that (Edipus had three 
 children by Jokasta, who were all killed by Erf^nus and the Minya (this 
 muirt refer to incidents in the old poems which we cannot now recover) ; 
 then the four celebrated children by Euryjraneia ; lastly, that he married a 
 third wife, Astymedusa. Apollodorus follows the narrative of the trage- 
 dians, but alludes to the different version about Euryganeia, — elal <J' o'i ^aaiv^ 
 etc. (iii. 5, 8). 
 
 Hellanikus (ap. Schol. Eur. Phoeniss. 59) mentioned the lelf-inflicted blind 
 
HISTORY Of GREECE 
 
 The dispates <A Eteokles and Polynikes for the throne of theif 
 father gave occasion not only to a series of tragical tamily inci- 
 dents, but also to one of the great quasi-historical events of legen- 
 dary Greece — the two sieges of Thebes by Adrastus, king of 
 Argos. The two ancient epic poems called the Thebais and the 
 Epigoni (if indeed both were not parts of one very comprehen- 
 sive poem) detailed these events at great length, and as it appears, 
 with distinguished poetitjal merit ; for Pausanias pronounces the 
 Cyclic Thebais (so it was called by the subsequent critics to dis- 
 tinguish it from the mo]-e modem Thebais of Antimachus) infe- 
 rior only to the Iliad and Odyssey ; and the ancient elegiac poet 
 Kallinus treated it as an Homeric composition.' Of this once- 
 valued poem we unfortunately possess nothing but a few scanty 
 fragments. The leading points of the legend are briefly glanced 
 at in the Iliad ; but our knowledge of the details is chiefly derived 
 from the Attic tragedians, who transibrmed the narratives of their 
 predecessors at pleasure, and whose popularity constantly eclips- 
 ed and obliterated the ancient version. Antimachus of Kolophon, 
 contemporary with Euripides, in his long epic, probably took no 
 less liberties with the old narrative. His Thebaid never became 
 generally popular, but it exhibited marks of study and elabora- 
 tion which recommended it to the esteem of the Alexandrine 
 critics, and probably contributed to discredit in their eyes the old 
 cyclic poem. 
 
 The logographers, who gave a continuous history of this siege 
 of Thebes, had at least three preexisting epic poems — the The- 
 bias, the CEdipodia, and the Alkraa^onis, — from which they 
 
 ness of (Edipus ; but it seems doubtful whether this circumstance was inclu* 
 ded in the narrative of Pherekydes. 
 
 ' Pausan, ix. 9. 3. 'ErroiijTS^Ti 6e k^ rdv TroXefiov tovtov koI i-Kii, OijSati rd 
 de eni] ravra KaAAtvof, infuKO/iievoc avruv ^f fivrjfirjv^ Jt<l>riaev ^OfiTjpov rbv 
 voirjnavra eivai. KaXkivif) 61 noXkoi re kcU u^ioi Xoyov kotu ravra eyvuaav • 
 iyu de r^v noifjaLV TavTrjv fierd ye 'lAmda Koi to, Itttj tu ig 'Odvaaea trraivu 
 ftu?,iaTa. The name in the txsxt of Pausanias stands Ka^aivog, an unknown 
 person : most of the critics recognize the propriety of substituting Ka'/.?uvoi. 
 and Leutsch and Welcker have given very sufficient reasons for doing so. 
 
 The 'A/i^mpfw e^e'^aaia kv QifJar, alluded to in the pseudo-Herodotean 
 of Homeri seems to be tke description of a special passage in this Tb^ 
 
 SIEGES OF THEBES. 
 
 S09 
 
 cnold borrow. The subject was also handled in some of the He- 
 siodic poems, but we do not knov/ to what extent.' The Thebai's 
 was composed more in honor of Argos than of Thebes, as the 
 first line of it, one of the few fragments still preserved, beto 
 kens.2 
 
 SIEGES OF THEBES. 
 
 The legend, about to recount fraternal dissension oi the mc8l 
 implacable kind, comprehending in its results not only the imme- 
 diate relations of the infuriated brothers, but many chosen com- 
 panions of the heroic race along with them, takes its start from 
 the paternal curse of CEdipus, which overhangs and detennines 
 all the gloomy sequel. 
 
 CEdipus, though king of Thebes and father of four children 
 by Euryganeia (according to the ai:dipodia), has become the de- 
 voted victim of the Erinnyes, in consequence of the self-inHicted 
 death of his mother, which he has unconsciously caused, as well 
 as of his unintentional parricide. Though he had long forsworn 
 the use of all the ornaments and luxuries which his father had in- 
 herited from his kingly progenitors, yet when through age he had 
 come to be dependent upon his two sons, Polynikes one day broke 
 through this interdict, and set before him the silver table and the 
 splendid wine-cup of Kadmus, which Laius had always been ao- 
 eustomed to employ. The old king had no sooner seen these 
 precious appendages of the regal life of his father, than his mind 
 was overrun by a calamitous phrenzy, and he imprecated terrible 
 curses on his sons, predicting that there would be bitter and end- 
 less warfare between them. The goddess Erinnys heard and 
 heeded him ; and he repeated the curse again on another occasion, 
 when his sons, who had always been accustomed to send to him 
 the shoulder of the victims sacrificed on the altar, caused the but- 
 
 ' Hesiod, ap. Schol. Iliad, xxiii. 680, which passage does not sesm to me 
 to much at variance with the incidents stated in other poets as Leutsch 
 imagines. 
 
 * 'Apyoc deide, i>cd, voXvdiMfiov, kv^^ev avcucrec (sec Leutsch, ib. c. 4. p 
 
tm 
 
 justost of orebob. 
 
 U)ck to be serred to him ia place of it.^ He resented tins a^ tt 
 insult, and prayed the gods that thej might perish each by the 
 band of the other. Throaghout the tragedians as well as in the 
 old epic, the paternal curse, springing immediately from the mis- 
 guided Cb^dipus himself, but remotely from the parricide and 
 incest with which he has tainted his breed, is seen to domineer 
 o\'er the course of events — the Erinnys who executes that curae 
 being the irresistible, though concealed, agent ^schylus not 
 only preserves the fatal efficiency of the paternal curse, but even 
 briefly glances at the causes assigned for it in the Thebais, with- 
 out superadding any new motives. In the judgment of Sopho- 
 klt 8, or of his audience;, the conception of a father cursing his 
 sons upon such apparently trifling grounds was odious ; and that 
 great poet introduced many aggravating circumstances, describing 
 the old blind father as having been barbarously turned out of 
 doors by his sons to wander abroad in exile and poverty. Though 
 by this change he rendered his poem more coherent and self- 
 justifying, yet he departed, from the spirit of the old legend, 
 
 * Fragm. of the Thebats, up. Athen«. xii. p. 465, dri ovTi^t vapt^Kov ixTrw- 
 MSni & atrriyopevKei, Xeyuv wtcj^. 
 
 Airrap 6 dtoye^^ijg fjfHj^ ^oviJdf TloXweiKri^ 
 Updra fuv OhMirodi kqX^v irape^^Ke rpairel^ap 
 'Apyvpiijv Kut^fioio i^eoippovog • avrup irreiTa 
 Xpvaeov ifnrX^aev kuXov diirac ^deo^ olvov • 
 AvTup fiy' uf tt>pd(r&ij irapaKEifieva Trarpdg iolo 
 TifiTjevra yepa^ fieya oi KaKbv ifiireae i^vfi(^. 
 Al-^a rfe "rraialv koioi fier' afjiiporepoiatv k-rrapuc 
 'Ap^aXf Of r}pdTo • ^edv (T ov Xdv&av* 'Epivvv^ • 
 'Qc oi) ol irarpuja y' M (fnXoTtiTi ddaaivro, 
 Eiev (J' ilfMiporepoic aiel troXefiot te fidxai re, 
 See Leutsch, Thebaid. C}ci. Reliq, p. 38. 
 The other fragment frcm the same Thebafs is cited by the Schol. ad Soph 
 
 aSdip. Colon. 1378.— 
 
 'laxiov wf evoijae, x^^f^o^ (BaXev, elKs re fiiy&ov ' 
 'Q fioi iytj^ naldig fwi oveideiwreg Inefi^av, 
 EvKTo ^il SaaiXvi koI aX^Mig ui^avdroiaty 
 Xipaiv vtt' uXX^Xuv KaTajirifievai 'Aido^ e'laio. 
 Td 61 irapcTrXTfaia ri;) Ikoxokj Kai AI(txv?,oc h role 'Eirra hrl ^I3ac, lo 
 
 spite of the protest of Schaia, in his note, I think that the scholiast has am* 
 
 derstood the words k-niKorof rpofOf (Sept. ad Theb. 787) in their phiin and 
 
 lust meaning 
 
 ADRASTUS OF ARGOS. 
 
 271 
 
 iccording to which (Edipus has contracted by his unconscious 
 misdeeds an incurable taint destined to pass onward to his progeny. 
 His mind is alienated, and he curses them, not because he has 
 suffered seriously by their guilt, but because he is made the blind 
 instrument of an avenging Erinnys for the ruin of the house of 
 Laius.i 
 
 After the death of (Edipus and the celebration of his funeral 
 games, at which amongst others, Argeia, daughter of Adrastus 
 (afterwards the wife of Polynikes), was present,2 his two sons 
 soon quarrelled respecting the succession. The circumstances 
 are differently related ; but it appears that, according to the orig- 
 inal narrative, the wrong and injustice was on the part of Poly- 
 nikes, who, however, was obliged to leave Thebes and to seek 
 shelter with Adrastus, king of Argos. Here he met Tydeus, a 
 fugitive, at the same time, from ^tolia : it was dark when they 
 arrived, and a broil ensued between the two exiles, but Adrastus 
 came out and parted them. He had been enjoined by an oracle 
 to give his two daughters in marriage to a lion and a boar, and 
 he thought this occasion had now arrived, inasmuch as one of the 
 combatants carried on his shield a lion, the other a boar. He 
 accordingly gave Deipyle in marriage to Tydeus, and Argeia to 
 Polynikes: moreover, he resolved to restore by armed resistance 
 both his sons-in-law to their respective countries.^ 
 
 ' The curses of CEdipus are very frequently and emphatically dwelt upon 
 both by^schylus and Sophokles (Sept. ad Theb. 70-586, 655-697, etc. j 
 (Edip. Colon. 1293-1378). The former continues the same point of view 
 as the Thebats, when he mentions — 
 
 Tdf Trepi&v/iovc 
 
 Kardpac 0^aipi<j>povog Oldi-xoda (727) ; 
 or, Myov r' uvoia Kal (bpevCiv 'Epivvvc (Soph. Antig. .')84). 
 
 The Scholiast on Sophokles fCEd. Col. 1378) treats the cause assigned by 
 the ancient Thebats for the curse vented by CEdipus as trivial and ludicrous. 
 The ^geids at Sparta, who traced their descent to Kadmus, suffered from 
 terrible maladies which destroyed the lives of their children ; an oracle di- 
 rected them to appease the Erinnyes of Laius and (Edipus by erecting a 
 temple, upon which the maladies speedily ceased (Herodot iv.). 
 
 * Hesiod. ap. Schol. Iliad, xxiii. 680. 
 
 * ApoUodor. iiL 5, 9 ; Hygin. f 69 ; ^schyl. Sept. ad Theb. 573. Hyginaa 
 says that Polynikes came clothed in the skin of a lion, and Tydeus in that 
 -rf a boar ; perhaps after Antimachus, who said that Tydeus had been broqgiX 
 
nSTORT OF OREICI. 
 
 On proposiiig the expedition to the Argeian diiefii arooiid hhr 
 
 he fonnd moet of tbeni willing auxiliaries ; bat Amphiaraus — 
 formerly bis bitter opponent, but now reconciled to him, and 
 hasband of bis sister Eripbjle — strongly opposed him.' He 
 denounced the enterprise as unjust and contrary to the will of 
 the gods. Again, being of a prophetic stock, descended from 
 Melampus, he foretold the certain death both of himself and of 
 the principal leaders, should they involve themselves as accom- 
 plices in the mad violence of Tydeus or the criminal ambition of 
 Polynik^ Amphiaraus, already distinguished both in the Kaly- 
 donian boar-hunt and in the funeral games of Pelias, was in the 
 Theban war the most conspicuous of all the heroes, and absolutely 
 indispensable to its success. But his reluctance to engage in h 
 was invincible, nor was it possible to prevail upon him exc^ 
 through the influence 'of his wife Eriphyld. Polynikes, having 
 brought with him from Thebes the splendid robe and necklace 
 given by the gods to U^rmonia on her marriage with Kadmiis, 
 offered it as a bribe to Eriphyle, on condition that she would 
 influence the determination of Amphiaraus. The sordid wife, 
 seduced by so mat(;hless a present, betrayed the lurking-place of 
 her husband, and involved him in the fatal expedition.'- Amphia- 
 raus, reluctantly dragged forth, and foreknowing the disastrous 
 issue of the expedition both to himself and to his associates, 
 addressed his last injunctions, at the moment of mounting his 
 chariot, to his sons Alkmaeon and Amphilochus, commanding 
 AlkmaBon to avenge his approaching death by killing the venal 
 Eriphyle, and by undertaking a second expedition against Thebes. 
 The Attic dramatist;; des^cribe this expedition as having been 
 conducted by seven chiefs, one to each of the seven celebrated 
 gates of Thebes. But, the Cyclic Thebais gave to it a much 
 
 up by swineherds ( Antimaiih. Fragm. 27, ed. Diintzer ; ap. Schol. Iliad, iv. 
 
 400). Very probably, however, the old Thebais compared Tydeus and Toly- 
 
 nikes to a lion and a boar, on account of their courage iuid fierceness ; a 
 
 simile quite in the Ilomerio character. Mnaseas gave the words of the oracle 
 
 («p. Schol. Eurip. Phceniss 411 j. 
 ' See Pindar, Nem. ix. 30, with the instructive Scholium 
 * Apollodor. iii. 6, 2. The treijchery of " the hateful Eriphyle" is noticed 
 
 in the Odyssey, xi. 327 : (J'dysseus sees her in the under- world alon^ vitk 
 
 the many wives and daogbfeen of the heroes. 
 
 MABCH OF ADRASTU8 AGAINST THEBES. 
 
 97ft 
 
 more comprehensive character, mentioning auxiliaries from 
 Axcadia, Messene, and various parts of Peloponn^us ;> and the 
 application of Tydeus and Polynik^ at MykenaB in the course of 
 their circuit made to collect allies, is mentioned in the Iliad. 
 They were well received at Mykenae ; but the warning signals 
 given by the gods were so terrible that no Mykensean could 
 venture to accompany them.2 The seven principal chiefs how- 
 ever were Adrastus, Amphiaraus, Kapaneus, Hippomedon, Par- 
 thenopaBus Tydeus and Polynikes.3 When the army had 
 advanced as far as the river Asopus, a halt was made for sacrifice 
 and banquet; while Tydeus was sent to Thebes as envoy to 
 demand the restoration of Polynikes to his rights. His demand 
 was refused ; but finding the chief Kadmeians assembled at the 
 banquet in the house of Eteoklds, he challenged them all to con- 
 tend with him in boxing or wrestling. So etticacious was the aid 
 of the goddess Athend that he overcame them all ; and the Kad- 
 meians were so indignant at their defeat, that they placed an 
 ambuscade of fifty men to intercept him in his way back to the 
 army. All of them perished by the hand of this warrior, small 
 in stature and of few words, but desperate and irresistible in the 
 fight. One alone was spared, Maeon, in consequence of special 
 signals from the gods.* 
 
 The Kadmeians, assisted by their allies the Phokians and the 
 Phlegyae, marched out to resist the invaders, and fought a batti« 
 
 * Pausan. ii. 20,4; ix. 9, 1. His testimony to this, as he had read and 
 Admired the Cyclic Thebais, seems quite sufficient, in spite of the opinion ot 
 Welcker to the contrary (^schylische Trilogie. p. 375). 
 
 " Iliad, iv. 376. 
 
 ' There are differences in respect to the names of the seven : .^schylos 
 (Sept. ad Theb. 461) leaves out Adrastus as one of the seven, and includes 
 Bteoklus instead of him ; others left out Tydeus and Polynikes, and inserted 
 Eteoklua and Mekisteus (Apollodor. iii. 6, 3). Antimachus, in his poetical 
 ThdbaU, called Parthenopaeus an Argeian, not an Arcadian (Schol. ad 
 .^schyl. Sept. ad. Theb. 532). 
 
 * Iliad, iv. 381-400, with the Schol. The first celebration of the Nemean 
 games is connected with this march of the army of Adrastus against Thebes* 
 they were celebrated in honor of Archemonis, the infant son of Lykurgus, 
 who had beea killed by a serpent while his nurse HypsipylS went to show the 
 fountain to the thirsty Argeian chiefs ( Apollod. iii. 6,4; Schol. ad Pindar 
 Kern. 1) 
 
 VOL. L i^* I8gt 
 
f74 
 
 HTSTORT OF GBEBOI 
 
 near t^e Isnidnian hilL, in which they were defeated and forced to 
 
 retire within the walls. The prophet Teiresias acquainted them 
 that if Menoekeus, son of Kreon, would offer himself as a victim 
 to Ares, victory would be assured to Thebes. The generous 
 youth, as soon as he hiamt that his life was to be the price of 
 safety to his country, went and slew himself before the gates. 
 The heroes along with Adrastus now commenced a vigorous 
 attack upon the town, each of the seven selecting one of the gates 
 to assault. The contest was long and strenuously maintained 
 but the devotion of Mencekeus had procured for the Thebans the 
 protection of the gods. Parthenopseus was killed with a stone by 
 Periklymenus ; and when the furious Kapaneus, having planted 
 a scaling-ladder, had mounted the walls, he was smitten by a 
 thunderbolt from Zeus and cast down dead upon the earth. This 
 event struck terror into the Argeians, and Adra^^tus called back 
 his troops from the attack. Tiie Thebans now sallied forth to 
 pursue them, when Eteokles, arresting the battle, proposed to 
 decide the controversy by single combat with his brother. The 
 challenge, eaj^erly accef>ted by Polynikes, was agreed to by 
 Adrastus : a single combat ensued between the two brothers, in 
 which lK)th were exasperated to fury and both ultimately slain by 
 each other's hand. This equal termination left the result of the 
 general contest still undetermined, and the bulk of the two armies 
 renewed the fight. In tlie sanguinary struggle which ensued the 
 sons of Astakus on the Theban side displayed the most conspicu- 
 ous and successful valor. One of them,' Melanippus, mortally 
 wounded Tydeus — while two others, Leades and Amphidikus, 
 killed Eteoklus and Hippomedon. Amphiaraus avenged Tydeus 
 by killing Melanippus ; Imt unable to arrest the rout of tlie army, 
 
 * The story recounted that the head of Melanippus was broujijht to Tydeus 
 as he wiis idK>ut to expire of his wound, and that he knawed it with his teeth 
 a story tourhed upon by Sophokles (apud Herodian. in Rhetor. Graec. t viii 
 p. 601, Walz.). 
 
 The lyric poet Bacchylides |ap. Schol. Aristoph. Ave«, 1535) seems to have 
 bandied the story even earlier than Sop^iokles. 
 
 We find the same allegation embodied in charges against real historical 
 ■len : the invective of Montarius against Aquiliua Kegnlns, at the beginning 
 •f the reign of Vespasian, affirmed, "■ datam interfectori Pisonis peconiam t 
 Itegolo, appetitumque morsu Pisonis oaf %" ^ Tacit Hist. iv. 42^ 
 
 
 X 
 
 AHPHIARACa 
 
 ae fled with t!i»i rest, closely pursued by Periklymenas. ITie 
 latter was about to pierce him with his spear, when the benefioenoe 
 of Zeus rescuetl him from this disgrace — miraculously opening 
 the earth under him, so that Amphiaraus with his cliariot and 
 horses was received unscathed into her bosom.^ The exact spot 
 where this memorable incident happened was indicated by a se- 
 pulchral building, and shown by the Thebans down to the days oi 
 Pausanias — its sanctity being attested by the fact, that no animal 
 would consent to touch the herbage which grew within the sacred 
 inclosure. Amphiaraus, rendered immortal by Zeus, was wor- 
 shipped as a god at Argos, at Thebes and at Ordpus — and for 
 many centuries gave answers at his oracle to the questions of the 
 pious applicant.2 
 
 * Apollodor. ill. 6,8. Pindar, Olymp. vi. 11 j Nem. ix. 13-27. Pausan. 
 IX. 8, y 18, 2-4. 
 
 Euripides, in the PhoenisssB 0122 sajq.), describes the battle generally; see 
 also ^]sch. S. Th. 392. It appears by Pausanias that the Thebans had 
 poems or legends of their own, relative to this war : they dissented in various 
 points from the Cyclic Th^-bais (ix. 18, 4> The Th^bais said that Perikly- 
 menus had killed Parthenopaeus ; the Thebans assigned this exploit to 
 Asphodikus, a warrior not commemorated by any of the poets known to us. 
 The village of Harma, between Tanagra and Mykalessus, was affirmed bj 
 some to have been the spot where Amphiaraus closed his life CStrabo, ix. p 
 404) : Sophokles placed the scene at the Amphiaraeinm near Oropos Cap 
 fitrabon. ix. p. 399). 
 
 * Pindar, Olymp. vL 16. 'Enra ff Itretra nvpdv vixpuv reXea^evruv 
 TaXaiovi^a^ Elnev kv &^f3aiai tolovtov ri Inog' Ho&iu arpariuq df&akfidv 
 ifidc ^AfKftoTepov, fiuvriv t* ayai9dv Koi Sovpi fiuxetr&cu. 
 
 The scholiast affirms that these last expressions are borrowed by Pindai 
 from the Cyclic Thcbafs. 
 
 The temple of Amphiaraus (Tausan. ii. 23, 2), his oracle, seems Id have 
 been inferior in estimation only to that of Delphi CHerodot. i. 52; Pausan. i 
 34 ; Cicero, Divin. i. 40 J. Croesus sent a rich present to Amphiaraus, ttvi^o- 
 pfvof avTov r^v re aper^ koi tt}v ttii^tjv CHerod. 1. c) ; a striking proof how 
 these interesting legends were recounted and believed as genuine historical 
 facts. Other adventures of Amphiaraus in the expedition against Thebes 
 were commemorated in the carvings on the Thronus at Amyklse CPansan 
 iii. 18,4). 
 
 -/Eschylus CSept Theb. 611) seems to enter into the Theban view, doubt 
 less highly respectful towards Amphiaraus, when he places is the mouth of 
 the Kadmeian king Eteokles such high encomiums on An^^pl^^^Lpj^^^fL^ ^agi ^ 
 Biarkea a tontrast with tbe other ctaeksi frcMn Ai^gos. 
 
 >^i ^1 
 
 •ta^ 
 
170 
 
 mSTOBT OP OBEIOB. 
 
 BEPULTUEi: OF THE CHIEPS 
 
 m 
 
 Adrastas, thus deprived of the prophet and warrior whom he 
 regarded as " the e^e of his army," and having seen the other 
 chiefs killed in the disastrous fight, was forced to take flight sin- 
 gly, and was preserved by the matchless swiftness of his horse 
 Areion, the offspring of Poseidon. He reached Argos on his 
 return, bringing with him nothing except " his garments of woe 
 and his black-maned steed."' 
 
 Kreon, father of the heroic youth Menoekeus, succeeding to 
 the admiuisi ration of Thebes after the death of the two hostile 
 brothers and the re]>ulse of Adrastus, caused Eteokles to be 
 buried with distinguished honor, but cast out ignominiously the 
 body of Polynikes a? a traitor to his country, forbidding every 
 one on pain of death to consign it to the tomb. He likewise 
 refused permission to Adrastus to inter the bodies of his fallen 
 comrades. This proceeding, so offensive to Grecian feeling, gave 
 rise to two further tales; one of them at least of the highest 
 pathos and interest. Antigone, the sister of Polynikes, heard 
 with indignation the revolting edict consigning her brother's body 
 to the dogs and vultures, and depriving it of those rites which 
 were considered essential to the repose of the dead. Unmoved 
 by the dissuading counsel of an affectionate but timid sister, and 
 unable to procure assistance, she determined to brave the hazard 
 and to bury the body with her own hands. She was detected in 
 the act ; and Kreon, though forewarned by Teiresias of the con- 
 sequences, gave orders that she should be buried alive, as having 
 deliberately set at naught the solemn edict of the city. His son 
 Harmon, to whom she was engaged to be married, in vain inter- 
 ceded for her life. In an agony of despair he slew himself in 
 the sepulchre to which the living Antigone had been consigned ; 
 
 * Pausan. viii 25, 5, from the Cyelic ThebaYs, Eljuarn /vypd <t>ipu)v cri)v 
 'Apeiovi Kvavoxa'iTTji-^ also ApoIIodor. iii 6, 8. 
 
 The celebrity of the hoirse Areion was extolled in the Iliad (xxiii. 346), 
 in the Cyclic Thebats, and also in the Thebafs of Antimachus (Pausan. L 
 c.) : by die Arcadians of Thelpusia he was said to be the offspring of Dem6« 
 l6r by Poseidon, — he, and a daughter whose name Pausanias will not com 
 munieate to the uninitiated (7f rd ovofia eg aTeXiarovg Xiyeiv ov voiji^ovffi, 
 L o). A different story is in the Schol. Hiad. xxiii. 346; and in Antimach- 
 m who affirmed that " GaRa herself had produced him, as a wonder to mor 
 ma men" '«ee Antimach. Frog. 16. p. 109; Epic Grmc. Frag. ed. Duntzer) 
 
 jmd bis mother Enrydik^, the wife oi Ere6n, inocusolable for lib 
 death, perished by her own hand. And thus the new light which 
 seened to be springing up over the last remaining scion of the 
 devoted family of CEdipus, is extinguished amidst gloom and 
 horrors — which overshadowed also the house and dynasty of 
 Kre6n.» 
 
 Tl.c atly?r tale stands more apart from the original legend, 
 Mid -'cems to have had its origin in the patriotic pride of the 
 Athenians. Adrastus, unable to obtain permission from the Th^ 
 bans to inter the fallen chieftains, presented himself in suppliant 
 g:uise, accompanied by their disconsolate mothers, to Theseus at 
 Eleusis. He implored the Athenian warrior to extort from the 
 perverse Thebans that last melancholy privilege which no decent 
 or pious Greeks ever thought of withholding, and thus to stand 
 forth as the champion of Grecian public morality in one of its 
 most essential points, not less than of the rights of the subterra- 
 nean gods. The Thebans obstinately persisting in their refusal, 
 Theseus undertook an expedition against their dty, vanquished 
 them in the field, and compelled them by force of arms to permit 
 the sepulture of fheir fallen enemies. This chivalrous interposi- 
 tion, celebrated in one of the preserved dramas of Euripides, 
 formed a subject of glorious recollection to the Athenians through 
 out the liistorical age : their orators dwelt upon it in terms of 
 animated panegyric ; and it seems to have been accepted as a 
 real fact of the past time, with not less imphcit conviction than 
 th*^ battle of Marathon.-^ But the Thebans, though equally per- 
 suaded of the truth of the main story, dissented from the Athe- 
 nian vei-siou of it, maintaining that they had given up the bodies 
 for sepulture voluntarily and of their own acoord. I'he tomb of 
 
 ^ Sophokl. Anti^'on. 581. Nvv ydp kaxUra^ virep Pl^ac kreraro (j>uo( tu 
 OlStTTov Soiioif, etc. 
 
 The pathetic tale here briefly recounted forms the subject of this beantifru 
 tragedy of SophoklSs, the argument of which is supposed by Boeckh to have 
 been borrowed in its primary rudiments from the Cyclic Thcbais or the 
 OiMipodia (Boeckh, Dissertation appended to his translation of the Anti- 
 gone, c. X. p. 146) j see ApoIIodor. iii. 7, 1. 
 
 .aischylus also touches upon the heroism of Antigone (Sep. Theb. 984). 
 
 • ApoIIodor. iii. 7, 1 ; Kurip. Sujip. passim; Herodot. ix 27; Plato, Men«z 
 an. c 9 ; Lysias, Epitaph, c 4 ; Isokrat. Onrt. Panegyr. p 196, Auger 
 
 • i 
 
978 
 
 HISTORY Of GBEECR 
 
 the chieflains was shown near Eleusis even is the days of Fuh 
 
 Mtnias.i 
 
 A large proportion both of the interesting persons and of the 
 exalted acts of legendjiry Greece belongs to the female sex. Nor 
 can we on this occasion pass over the name of Evadne, the de- 
 voted widow of Ka{)aneus, who cast herself on the funeral pile 
 of her husband and pctrished.- 
 
 The defeat of the seven chiefs before Thebes was amply aven- 
 ged by their sons, again under the guidance of Adrastus : — ^gia- 
 leus son of Adrastus. Thersander son of Polynikes, Alkmaeon 
 and Amphilochus, sons of Amphiaraus, Diomedes son of Tydeus, 
 Sthenelus son of Kapaneus, Proraachus son of Parthenopaeus, and 
 Euryalus son of Mekistheus, joined in this expedition. Though 
 all these youthful warriors, called the Epigoni, took part in the 
 expedition, the grand and prominent place appears to have been 
 occupied by Alkraieon, son of Amphiaraus. Assistance waa 
 given to them from Cbrinth and Megara, as well as from Mes- 
 sene and Arcadia; wliile Zeus manifested his favorable disposi- 
 tions by signals not to be mistaken.^ At the river Glisa^ the 
 Epigoni were met by the Thebans in arms, and a battle took 
 place in which the latter were completely defeated. Laodamas, 
 son of Eteokles, killed iEgialeus, son of Adrastus ; but he and 
 his army were routed and driven within the walls by the valor 
 and energy of Alkmfeon. The defeated Kadmeians consulted 
 the prophet Teiresias, who informed them that the gods had de- 
 clared for their enemies, and that there was no longer any hope 
 of successful resistance. By his advice they sent a herald to the 
 assailants offering to surrender the town, while they themselves 
 conveyed away their wives and children, and fled under the com 
 
 ^ Pausan. i. 39, 2. 
 » Eurip. Supplic. 1004-UIO 
 
 » Homer, Iliatl, iv. 406. Sthenelus. the comp&nion of Diomedes and ont 
 if toe Epigoni, says to Agamemnon, — 
 
 'Hfxeic roi mirepuv ficy' ufieivovec ftM'Ojtff'?' elvav 
 'Hfieic Kai ej^^^j/j- ^dof elTiOfisv iTrrarrvXoto, 
 Uavporepov \adv uyayov^' {-tto reixof 'Apeiov, 
 llei^ofuvoi TEpdeaai ^edv koI Zrjvdc apuy^- 
 kkroi 6e a^eripgaiv aToa^aXiffciv i^iopra. 
 
 
 SECOND EXPEDITION. — THE EPIGONL 
 
 m 
 
 mand of Laodamas to the Illyrians,! upon which tlie Epigoni 
 entered Thebes, and established Thersander, son of Polynikes, 
 on the throne. 
 
 Adrastus, who in the former expedition had been the single 
 survivor amongst so many fallen companions, now found himself 
 the only exception to the general triumph and joy of the con- 
 querors : he had lost his son ^gialeus. and the violent sorrow 
 arising from the event prematurely cut short his life. His soft 
 Toice and persuasive eloquence were proverbial in the ancient 
 epic.2 He was worshipped afi a hero both at Argos and at Sik- 
 yon, but with especial solemnity in the last-mentioned place, 
 where his Heroum stood in the public agora, and where his ex- 
 ploits as well as his sufferings were celebrated periodically in ly- 
 ric tragedies. Melanippus, son of Astakus, the brave defender 
 of Thebes, who had slain both Tydeus and Mekistheus, was wor- 
 shipped with no less solemnity by the Thebans.3 The enmity 
 of these two heroes rendered it impossible for both of them to be 
 worshipped close upon the same spot. Accordingly it came to 
 pass during the historical period, about the time of the Solonian 
 legislation at Athens, that Kleisthenes, despot of Sikyon, wishing 
 to banish the hero Adrastus and abolish the religious solemnities 
 celebrated in honor of the latter by the Sikyonians, first applied 
 to the Delphian oracle for permission to carry this banishment 
 into effect directly and forcibly. That permission being refused, 
 he next sent to Thebes an intimation that he was anxious to in- 
 troduce their hero Melanippus into Sikyon. The Thebans will- 
 ingly consented, and he assigned to the new hero a consecrated 
 spot in the strongest and most commanding portion of the Sik- 
 yonian prytaneium. He did this (says the historian) " knowing 
 that Adrastus would forthwith go away of his own accord ; since 
 
 ' Apollodor. iii. 7, 4. Herodot. v. 57-61. Pausan. ix. 5, 7 ; 9, 2. Diodor. 
 iv. 65-66. 
 
 Pindar represents Adrastus as concerned in the second expedition again«t 
 Thebes (Pyth. viii. 40-58). 
 
 2 T'Aucraav r' 'Adp^arov /xeiXixoyTjpw kxoi (Tyrtaeus, Eleg. 9, 7, Schneide- 
 win); compare Plato, Phaedr. c. 118. " Adrasti pallentis imago " meets the 
 eye of JSneas in the under-world (^neid, vi. 480). 
 
 ' About Melanippus, see Pindar. Nem. x. 36. His sepulchre was shows 
 near the Proetid ^lates of Tneoes (Pausan. ix. 18, 1). 
 
 N 
 
 .trxVd^ 
 
180 
 
 HISTOBT OF OREEG& 
 
 ERIPHYLE AND ALKMJION. 
 
 281 
 
 Melanippus wm of all persons the most odious to him, as having 
 slain both his son-in-law and his brother." Kleisthenes more- 
 over diverted the festivals and sacrifices which had been offered 
 to Adrastus, to the newly established hero Melanippus ; and the 
 lyric tragedies from the worship of Adrastus to that of Diony- 
 sus. But his dynasty did not long continue after his decease, 
 and the Sikyonians then reestablished their ancient solemnities.! 
 
 Near the Proetid gate of Thebes were seen the tombs of 
 two combatants who had hated each other during life even more 
 than Adrastus and Melanippus — the two brothers Eteokles and 
 Polynikes. Even as heroes and objects of worship, they still 
 continued to manifest their int-xtinguishable hostility : those who 
 offered sacrifices to them observed that the flame and the smoktt 
 from the two adjoining altars abhorred all communion, and flev 
 off in directions exactly opposite. The Theban exegetes assured 
 Pausanias of this fact. And though he did not himself witness 
 it, yet having seen with his own eyes a miracle not very dissimi- 
 lar at Pionise in Mysia, he had no difficulty in crediting their 
 assertion.2 
 
 Amphiaraus when forced into the first attack of Thebes — 
 against his own foreknowledge and against the warnings of the 
 
 ' This very curious and illustrative story is contained in lierodot. v. 67. 
 •En-fi (Jc 6 ^edg tovto ov napefiidov, tnieWuv unlau (Kleisthenes, returning 
 from Delphi) fippovn^e fiTixavrjv Tyavrdg 6 '\6pr,arog analXaJe- 
 rat. 'Hcde ol e^evpr/ai^ai edoKee, Trtfifag k G^/iaf rug Boiuriag, k<p^ i^cAetv 
 knayayka&ai }&eXhvn:nov rbv 'KaraKov • ol 6e Qrj^alot Uoaav. 'ErTriyayero 
 <Je Tbv MeXavtTTTrov 6 K}.tiadivTjg, kuI yap tovto del uKT/yr/ffaa^ai, wf Ix^icT- 
 Tov kdvTa 'A6pfiar<t} ' of rdv re dde'X^cov UvKiarea inreKTdvee, Kai rdv yafi- 
 
 0pdv Tvdia. 
 
 The Sikyonians (Henxlotua says) r« re df) aXXa krifiuv rbv '\dpijarov, Koi 
 wpdc r<i TTu^ea avTov TpoyiKolai yj^potm lyepaipov ■ tov fiev ^l6vv(Tov ov Tifie- 
 uvTeq, Tdv SI "XdprjaTov. 
 
 Adrastus was wor8hii»ped as a hero at Megara as well as at Sikyon: the 
 Megarians affirmed thai; he had died there on his way back from Thebes 
 (Pausan. i. 43, I; Dieuchidas, ap. Schol. ad Pindar. Nera. ix. 31). Hia 
 house at Argos was still shown when Pausanias visited the town (ii. 23, 2). 
 
 •Pausan. ix. 18,3. Ta kn avToig dpoi/jieva ov ^eaadftevog niOTu dfiuf 
 iireiXT}<^ civat. Compare Hygin. f 68. 
 
 " Et nova fratemo veniet concordia fumo, 
 
 Quern vetas accensii separat ira pyra." (Ovid, Ibis, 35.* 
 The Ule was copied by Orid from Kallimachus (Trigt. v. 5, 38.) 
 
 ;jodB — had enjoined his sons Alkmseon and Amphilochua not 
 only to avenge his death upon the Thebans, but also to punish 
 the treachery of their mother, " Eriphyle, the destroyer of her 
 husband." 1 In obedience to this command, and having obtained 
 the sanction of the Delphian oracle, Alkmaeon slew his mother ;'-* 
 but the awful Erinnys, the avenger of matricide, inflicted on him 
 a long and terrible punishment, depriving him of his reason, and 
 chasing him about from place to place without the possibility of 
 repose or peace of mind. He craved protection and cure from 
 the god at Delphi, who required him to dedicate at the temple, as 
 an offering, the precious necklace of Kadmus, that irresistible 
 bribe which had originally corrupted Eriphyle.^ He further inti- 
 mated to the unhappy sufferer, that though the whole earth was 
 tainted with his crime, and had become uninhabitable for him, 
 yet there was a spot of ground which was not under the eye of 
 the sun at the time when the matricide was committed, and where 
 
 ' kvdpnSaiJiavT' 'EpKtfvAijv (Pindar, Nem. ix. 16). A poem Eryphile waa 
 Included among the mythical comi>ositions of 8tesichorus : he mentioned in 
 it that Asklepius had restored Kapaneus to life, and that he was for that 
 reason struck dead by thunder from Zeus (Stesichor. Fragm. Kleine, 18, p. 
 74). Two tragedies of Sophokles once existed, Epigoni and AlkmcBdn 
 ( Welcker, Griechisch. Tragod. i. p. 269) : a few fri^^ents also remain of the 
 Latin Epigoni and Alphesibuea of Attius : Ennius and Attius both composed 
 or translated from the Greek a Latin AlkmcBdn (Poet. Scenic. Latin, ed. Both, 
 pp. 33, 164, 198). 
 
 * Hyginus gives the fable briefly (f 73; see also Asclepiades, ap. Schol. 
 Odyss. xi. 326). In like manner, in the cane of the matricide of Orestes, 
 Apollo not only sanctions, but enjoins the deed ; but his protection against 
 the avenging Erinnyes is very tardy, not taking effect until after Orestes haa 
 been long persecuted and tormented by them (see ^schyl. EMmen. 76, 197 
 462). 
 
 In the Alkmijedn of the later tragic writer Thodektes, a distinction waf 
 drawn the gods had decreed that Eriphyle should die, but not that Alk- 
 m«6n should kill her (Aristot. Rhetoric, ii. 24). Astydamas altered the 
 storj- still more in his tragedy, and introduced Alkmaeon as killing his 
 mother ignorantly and without being aware who she was (Aristot. Poetic, c. 
 27). The murder of Eriphyle by her son was one of the napn^fifiEvoi 
 ui^o. which could not be departed from; but interpretations and qualifica- 
 tions were resorted to, in order to prevent it from shocking the softened 
 feelings of the spectators : see the criticism )( Aristotle on the Alh/uBdn of 
 Euripides (Ethic. NicoHL iii. 1, 8). 
 
 ' Ephoms ap. AthensB. ri. p. 232. 
 
in — =- 
 
 m .^. JLXU 
 
 UlfSTUKY or OKKKCK 
 
 llieFefore AJkmsBon yet might find a tranqui] slwlter. The 
 promise was realized at the mouth of the river Achelous, whose 
 turbid stream was perpetually depositing new earth and forming 
 additional islands. Upon one of these, near CEniadae, Alkmaeon 
 settled, permanently and in peace : he became the primitive 
 hero of Akamania, to which his son Akaman gave name.' The 
 necklace was found among the treasures of Delphi, together with 
 that which had been given by Aphrodite to Helen, by the Phd- 
 kian plunderers who stripped the temple in the time of Philip 
 of Macedon. The Phokian women quarrelled about these valu- 
 able ornaments : and we are told that the necklace of Eriphyle 
 was allotted to a woman of gloomy and malignant disposition, 
 who ended by putting her husband to death ; that of Helen to a 
 beautiful but volatile wife, who abandoned her husband from a 
 ^reference for a young Epirot/-^ 
 
 There were several other legends respecting the distracted 
 Alkinaeon, either appropriated or invented by the Attic trage- 
 dians. He went to Phegeus, king of Psophis in Arcadia, whose 
 daufihter Arsinoe he married, giving as a nuptial present the 
 necklace of Eriphyle. Being however unable to remain there, 
 in consequence of the unremitting persecutions of the maternal 
 Erinnys, he soughf shelter at the residence of king Achelous, 
 whase daughter Kallirhoe he made his wife, and on whose soil he 
 obtained repose. -^ IJut Kallirhoe would not be satisfied without 
 
 ' Tliu( yd. ii. 68-102. « Athenie. 1 . v. 
 
 ' Apollodor. iii. 7, 5-6; Paiisan. viii. 24, 4. These two authors have pre- 
 sen-ed the story of tho. Akamanians and the old form of the lejrend, repre- 
 •entin^ Alkmseon as having foand shelter at the abode of the person or king 
 Achelous, and married his daughter : Thucydides omits the personality (^ 
 Achelous, and merely announcesi the wanderer as having settled on certain 
 new islands deposited by the river. 
 
 I may remark that this is a singularly happy adaptation of a legend to an 
 existing topographical fact. Generally speaking, before any such adaptation 
 can be rendered plausible, the legend is of necessity much transformed ; here 
 it is tak^^ii exactly as it stands, and still fits on with great precision. 
 
 Eph^rus recounted the whole sequence of events as so much political his- 
 tory, divesting it altogether of the legendary character. Alkmaeon and Dio- 
 jQedes, after having taken Thebes with the other Epigoni. jointly undertook 
 ■n expoditton into ^tolia and Akamania : they first punished the enemies of 
 Jic old (Eneus, grandfather of Diomedes, and established the latter as king 
 In Kaljdon j next they conquered Akamania for Alkmseon. AlkmsBon, 
 
 X 
 
 6IEG£S OF THEBES 
 
 Ihe possession of the necklace of EriphylS, and Alkmaedn went 
 back to Psophis to fetch it, where Phegeus and his sons slew 
 him. He had left twin sons, infants, with Kallirhoe, who prayed 
 fervently to Zeus that they might be preternatu rally invested 
 with immediate manhood, in order to revenge the murder of their 
 father. Her prayer was granted, and her sons Amphoterus and 
 Akaman, having instantaneously sprung up to manhood, proceed- 
 ed into Arcadia, slew the murderers of their father, and brought 
 away the necklace of Eriphyle, which they carried to Delphi.' 
 
 Euripides deviated still more widely from the ancient epic, by 
 making Alkmaeon the husband of Manto, daughter of Teiresiaj^ 
 and the father of Amphilochus. According to the Cyclic Th'i- 
 bais, Manto was consigned by the victorious Epigoni as a special 
 oflfering to the Delphian god ; and Amphilochus was son of Am- 
 phiaraus, not son of Alkmaeon.^ He was the eponymous hero of 
 the town called the Amphilochian Argos, in Akailiania, on the 
 Bhore of the Gulf of Ambrakia. Thucydides tells us that he 
 went thither on his return from the Trojan war, being dissatisfied 
 with the state of affairs which he found at the Peloponnesian 
 Argos.3 The Akamanians were remarkable for the numerous 
 prophets which they supplied to the rest of Greece : their heroes 
 
 though invited by Agamemnon to join in the Trojan war, would not consent 
 to do so (Ephor. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 326 ; x. p. 462). 
 
 * Apollodor. iii. 7, 7 ; Pausan. viii. 24, 3-4. His remarks upon the mis- 
 chievous longing of Kallirhoe for the necklace are curious : he ushers them 
 in by saying, that "many men, and still more women, are given to fall into 
 absurd desires," etc. He recounts it with all the bonne foi which belongs lo 
 the most assured matter of fact. 
 
 A short allusion is in Ovid's Metamorphoses fix. 41 2 j 
 
 * Thebaid, Cy. Rcliqu. p. 70, Leutsch; Schol. Apollon Rliod. i. 408. The 
 following lines cited in Athenaeus (vii. p. 317) are supposed by Boeckh, with 
 probable reason, to be taken from the Cyclic Thebais ; a portion of the 
 advice of Amphiaraus to his sons at the time of setting out on his laM 
 expedition, — 
 
 TlovXvrroSo^ [loiy TtKvov, Ix^^ voov, 'A/i^tAo;f* J^p^-tit 
 Tolaiv l<l>apfi6^ov, tuv av Kara drjfiov iKijai. 
 
 There were two tragedies composed by Euripides, aoder the title of 'A>t«- 
 (laiuv, 6 did i^u^tdoc, and 'AXKfialuv, 6 did ILopiv&ov (Dindorf, FraiciB 
 Enrip. p. 77). 
 ' Apollodor. iii. 7, 7 ; Thucyd. ii. 68. 
 
IB4 
 
 HIBTOK? OF OKKBOB. 
 
 LEGEND OF TROT. 
 
 285 
 
 were natnrallj drawn from tho ^reat prophetic raee of llie H^ 
 
 lampodids. 
 
 Thus end.^ the legend of the two sieges of Thebes ; the great- 
 est event, except the siege of Troy, in the ancient epic ; the great* 
 est enterprise of war. between Greeks and Greeks, during tbid 
 time of those wh(» are called the Heroes. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 LEGEND OF TROY. 
 
 We now arriye at the capital and culminating point of thio 
 Grecian epic, — the two sieges and capture of Troy, with the 
 destinies of the tlispersed heroes, Trojan as well as Grecian, 
 after the second and most celebrated capture and destruction of 
 the city. 
 
 It would require a large y<4ume to convey any tolerable idea 
 of the vast extent and expansion of this interesting fable, tirst 
 handled by so many poets, epic, lyric and tragic, with their end- 
 less additions, transformations and contradictions, — then purged 
 and reciist by historical inquirers, who under color of setting 
 aside the exaggerations of the poets, introduced a new vein of 
 prosaic invention, — lastly, moralized and allegorized by philoso- 
 phers. In the present brief outline of the general field of Gre- 
 cian legend, or of that which the Greeks believed to be their an- 
 tiquities, the Trojan war can be regarded as only one among a 
 large number of incidents upon which Hekataeus and Herodotus 
 looked back as constituting their fore-time. Taken as a special 
 legendary event, it is indeed of wider and larger interest than 
 any other, but it is a mistake to single it out from the rest as if 
 it rested upon a different and more trustworthy basis. I must 
 therefore confine myself to an abridged narrative of the current 
 and leading facts ; and amidst the numerous contradictory state- 
 ments which are to be found respecting every one of them, I 
 know no better gn>und of preference than comparatiye antiquity^ 
 
 though even the oldest tales which we possess — those contained 
 in the Iliad — evidently presuppose others of prior date. 
 
 The primitive ancestor of the Trojan fine of kings is Dardanus, 
 son of Zeus, founder and eponymus of Dardania :' in the account 
 of later authors, Dardanus was called the son of Zeus by £lektra, 
 daughter of Atlas, and was further said to have come from Samo- 
 thrace, or from Arcadia, or from Italy ;2 but of this Homer men- 
 tions nothing. The first Dardanian town founded by him was in 
 a lofty position on the descent of Mount Ida ; for he was not yet 
 strong enough to establish himself on the plain. But his son 
 Erichthonius, by the favor of Zeus, became the wealthiest of man- 
 kind. His flocks and herds having multiplied, he had in his pas- 
 tures three thousand mares, the offspring of some of whom, by 
 Boreas, produced horses of preternatural swiftness. Tros, the 
 son of Erichthonius, and the eponym of the Trojans, had three 
 gons — Bus, Assaracus, and the beautiful Ganymedes, whom Zeus 
 stole away to become his cup-bearer in Olympus, giving to his 
 father Tros, as the price of the youth, a team of immortal horses. 
 
 From Bus and Assaracus the Trojan and Dardanian lines di- 
 vei'fre ; the former passing from Bus to Laomedon, Priam and 
 Hector; the latter from Assaracus to Capys, Anchises and 
 j^]neas. Bus founded in the plain of Troy the holy city of 
 Bium; Assaracus and his descendants remained sovereigns of 
 
 Dardania.'* 
 
 It was under the proud Laomedon, son of Bus, that Poseidon 
 and Apollo underwent, by command of Zeus, a temporary servi- 
 tude ; the former building the walls of the town, the latter tending 
 the flocks and herds. When their task was completed and the 
 penal period had expired, they claimed the stipulated reward ; 
 but Laomedon angrily repudiated their demand, and even threat- 
 ened to cut off their ears, to tie them hand and foot, and to sell 
 them in some distant island as slaves.^ He was punished for thia 
 
 » Iliad, XX. 215. 
 
 « Hellanik. Fragm. 129, Didot ; Dionys. Hal. i. 50-61 ; Apollodor. iii. 12 
 1 ; Schol. Iliad, xviii. 486 ; Varro, ap. Servium ad Virgil. JEneid. iii 167 
 Kephalon. Gergithius ap. Steph. Byz. v. 'Apiafiij. 
 
 * Iliad, V. 265 ; Hellanik. Fr. 146 ; ApoUod. ii. 5, 9. 
 
 < Iliad, XX. 236. 
 
 » Iliad, vii. 451 ; xxi. 456. Hesiod. ap. Schol. Lycophr. 393 
 
5W» 
 
 fflSTORT OF OntEECh. 
 
 PARIS AND HELEN. 
 
 S67 
 
 tivAchery nj a sea-monster, whom Poeeiddn sent to ravage Ui 
 fields and to destix)y his sabjects. Laomedon publicly offered tha 
 immortal horses given by Zeus to his father Tros, as a reward to any 
 one who would destroy the monster. But an oracle declared that a 
 virgin of noble blood must be surrendered to him, and the lot fell 
 upon Hesione, daughter of Laomedon himself. Herakles arriving 
 at this critical moment, killed the monster by the aid of a fort 
 built for him by Athene and the Trojans,' so as to rescue both the 
 ex[>osed maiden and the people ; but Laomedon, by a second act 
 of i>erfidy, gave him mortal horses in place of the matchless ani- 
 mals which had b«^n promised. Thus defrauded of his due, Hera- 
 kles equipped six ships, attacked and captured Troy and killed 
 Laomedon,^ giving Hesione to his friend and auxiliary Telamon, 
 to whom she bore the celebrated archer Teukros.^ A painful 
 sense of this expedition was preserved among the inhabitants of 
 the historical town of Ilium, who offered no worship to Uerar 
 kles.-* 
 
 Among all the sons of Laomedon, Priam^ was the only one who 
 had remonstrated against the refusal of the well-earned guerdon 
 of Herakles ; for which the hero recompensed him by placing 
 him on the throne. Many and distinguished were his sons and 
 daughters, as well by his wife Hekabe, daughter of Kisseus, as 
 by other women.** Among the sons were Hector,' Paris, Deipho* 
 
 ' Iliad, XX. 145 ; Dionys. Hal. i. 52. 
 
 * Iliad, V. 640. Menekles (ap. Schol. Venet. ad loc.) affirmed that thif 
 expedition of Herakles was a fiction ; but Dikaearchus gave, besides, other 
 ex})loits of the hero in the same neighborhood, at Thebfi Hypoplakie (Sch^l 
 Hind vi. .396) 
 
 ^ Diodor. iv. .32-49. Compare Venet. Schol. ad Iliad, viii. 284. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii. p 596. 
 
 * As Dardanns, Tros and Has are respectively eponyms of Dardania 
 Troy and Ilium, so Priam is eponym of the acropolis Perfjamum. llpiajuo^ ig 
 in the -/Eolic dialect Uepliafwi (Hesychins) : upon which Ahrens remarks, 
 " Caetemm ex hac j^licft nominis forma aj)paret, Priamum non minus arcis 
 Urpyufiuv eponymum esse, quam Ihim urbis, Troem popali : Ufi^yafia enim 
 a Mepiafia natum est, i in } mutato.'' ( Ahremi, De Dialecto -/EolicA, 8, 7. p 
 56: compare ibid. 28, 8. p. 150, 7re/i/i' dnuhj). 
 
 * Iliad, vi. 245 ; xxiv. 495. 
 
 ' Hector was affirmed, both by Steisichorus and Ibykus. to be the son of 
 /kpollo ( Stesichorus, ap. Schol. Yen. ad Iliad, xxiv. 259 ; Ibyki Fragm. adr 
 
 bus, Helenas, Troilus, Polites, Polyddrus ; among the daug'ateir 
 Laodike, Kreiisa, Polvxena, and Kassandra. 
 
 The birth of Paris was preceded by formidable presages; tor 
 Hekabe dreamt that she was delivered of a firebrand, and Priam, 
 on consulting the soothsayers, was informed that the son about 
 to be honi would prove fatal to him. Accordingly he directed 
 the child to be exposed on Mount Ida ; but the inauspicious kind- 
 ness of the god8 preserved him, and he grew up amidst the flocks 
 and herds, active and beautiful, fair of hair and svmmetrical in 
 person, and the special favorite of Aphrodite.' 
 
 It was to this youth, in his solitary shepherd's walk on Mount 
 Ida, that the three goddesses Here, Athene, and Aphrodite were 
 conducted, in order that he might determine the dispute respect- 
 ing their comparative beauty, which had arisen at the nuptials o4 
 Peleus and Thetis, — a dispute brought about in pursuance of the 
 arrangement, and in accomplishment of the deep-laid designs, of 
 Zeus. For Zeus, remarking with pain the immoderate numbers of 
 the then existing heroic race, pitied the earth for the overwhelming 
 burden which she was compelled to bear, and determined to 
 lighten it by exciting a destructive and long-oontinued wturJ^ 
 
 ed. Schneldcwin) : both Euphorion (Fr. 125, Meineke) and Alexander .fitoliw 
 follow the same idea. Stesichorus further statcii, thit after the siege ApoUa 
 had earned Hekabe away into Lykia to rescue T or from -^frptivity (Pansa- 
 nias, X. 27, 1) : according to Enripides, Apollo had promised that she should 
 die in Troy (Troad. 427). 
 
 By Sappho, Hector was given as a surname of Zeus, Zfi)f 'E/crwp (Hesj- 
 ehius, V. 'EKTnpec) ; a prince belonging to the regal family ot Chios, anterior 
 to the Ionic settlement, as mentioned by the Chian poet Ion (raosao. vii a^ 
 3^, was so called. 
 
 • Iliad, iii. 45-55 ; Schol. Iliad, iii. 325 ; Hygin. fab. 91 ; Apollodor. iii 12, ft. 
 
 * This was the motive assigned to Zens by the old epic poem, the Cyprii 
 Verses (Frag. I. Diintz. p. 12; ap. Schol. ad Iliad, i. 4) : — 
 
 'H 3e iaropia irapd Jlraaivip t^ tu KvTrpia ireimirfKOTi elirmn obruf 
 
 'Hi' ore (ivpia ^OXa Kara x^ova nAaJ^oficva 
 
 ^apvarepvov irAarof oliyf. 
 
 ZeiJc ^e Iduv kXerjffEj xai iv irvKivaic irpairldecmi 
 Svvi^f ro Kov<piffai av&pCytrtJv Trafi^dropa yaiaVj 
 'VnriaTc iroXe/iwv fieyaXr/v iptv 'IXuucoio, 
 'Ofppa Kevdxreiev ^dvanp fiiipo^ ' old* hi Tpocy 
 •Hpwff KTeivavro, Aide S* ireXeiero ^ovTJi. 
 Th<^ iame motive i? Sooched upon by Borip. Orest, 168ft ; 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 14 
 
 k 
 
28b 
 
 BISTORT OP OREEGl. 
 
 GRECIAN AKSTAMENT AGAINST TROT. 
 
 289 
 
 Paris awarded the palm of beauty to Aphrodite, who promised 
 him in recompense the possession of Helena, wife of the Spartan 
 Menelaus, — the daughter of Zeus and the fairest of living women 
 At the instance of Aphrodite, ships were built for him, and he 
 embarked on the enterprise so fraught with eventual disaster 
 to his native city, in spite of the menacing prophecies of his 
 brother Helenus, and the always neglected warnings of Kassan- 
 dra.> 
 
 Paris, on arriving at Sparta, was hospitably entertained by 
 Menelaus as wtU as by Kastor and Pollux, and was enabled to 
 present the rich gifts which he had brought to Helen.'-^ Menelaus 
 then departed to Krcte, leaving Helen to entertain his Trojan 
 guest — a favorable moment which was employed by Aphrodite 
 to bring about the intrigue and the elopement. Paris carried 
 away with him both Helen and a large sum of money belonging 
 to Menelaus — made a prosperous voyage to Troy — and arrived 
 there safely with his prize on the third day .3 
 
 Menelaus, informed by Iris in Krete of the perfidious return 
 made by Paris for his hospitality, hastened home in grief and 
 
 serionsily maintained, a.s it seems, by Chrysippus, ap. Plutarch. Stoic. Rep. p. 
 1049 : but the poets do not commonly ^ back farther than the passion of 
 Paris for Helen (Theog:nis, 1232; Simonid. Amorg. Fragm. 6, 118). 
 
 The judgment of Paris was one of the scenes represented on the ancient 
 chest of Kypselns at Olympia (Pausan v. 19, 1). 
 
 • Argument of the 'Ettt} Kvicfjia Cap. Diintzer, p. 10). These warnings of 
 Kassandra form the subject of the obscure and affected poem of Lycophron. 
 
 • According to the Cyprian Verses, Helena was daughter of Zeus by Ne- 
 mesis, who had in vain tried to evade the connection (Athenae. viii. 834). 
 Hesiod (Schol. Pindar. Nem. x. 150) represented her as daughter of Oceanus 
 Mid Tethys, an oceani*; nymph: Sappho (Fragm. 17, Schneidewin), Pausa- 
 nias (i. 33, 7), ApoUodorus (iii. 10, 7), and Isokrates (Encom. Helen, v. ii. p 
 iii66, Auger) reconcile the pretensions of Leda and Nemesis to a sort of joint 
 maternity (see Heinrichsen, De Carminibus Cypriis, p. 45-4b^. 
 
 • Herodot. ii. 117. He gives distinctly the assertion of the Cyprian Verses 
 which contradicts the argument of the poem as it appears in Proclus (Fragm. 
 LI.), according to which latter, Paris is driven out of his course by a storin 
 and captures the city of Sidon. Homer (Iliad, ri. 293) seems however to 
 eoantenance the statement in the argument. 
 
 That Paris was guilty of robbery, as well as of tha abduction of Helen, ii 
 several times mentioned in the Iliad f iii. 144 ; vii. 350-363), also in the argft 
 ment of the Cyprian Verses (see .^schyL Agam. 534) 
 
 Indignation to consult with his brother Agamemnon, as well aa 
 with the venerable Nestor, on the means of avenging the out- 
 rage. They made known the event to the Greek chiefs around 
 them, amonjr whom they found universal sympathy : Nestor, Pal- 
 amedes and others went round to solicit aid in a contemplated 
 attack of Troy, under the command of Agamemnon, to whom 
 each chief promised both obedience and unwearied exertion until 
 Helen should be recovered.' Ten years were spent in equipping 
 the expedition. The goddesses Here and Athene, incensed at 
 the preference given by Paris to Aphrodite, and animated by 
 steady attachment to Argos, Sparta and Mykence, took an active 
 part in the cause ; and the horses of Here were fatigued with 
 her repeated visits to the different parts of Greece.^ 
 
 By such eftbrts a force was at length assembled at Aulis^ in 
 Boeotia, consisting of 1186 ships and more than 100,000 men, — 
 a force outnumbering by more than ten to one anything that the 
 Trojans themselves could oppose, and superior to the defenders 
 
 ' The ancient epic (Schol. ad II. ii. 286-339) does not recognize the story 
 •if the numerous suitors of Helen, and the oath by which Tyndareus bound 
 lAem all before he made the selection among them, that eavh should swear 
 not only to acquiesce, but even to aid in maintaining undisturbed pos.sessioo 
 to the husband whom she should choose. This story seems to have been 
 first told by Stesichorus (see Fragm. 20. ed. Kleine ; Apollod. iii. 10, 8^. Yei 
 it was evidently one of the prominent features of the current legend in the 
 time of Thucydides (i. 9; Earipid Iphig. Aul. 51-80; Soph. Ajax, 1100). 
 
 The exact spot in which Tyndareus exacted this oath from the suitors 
 near Sparta, was pointed out even in the time of Pausanias (iii. 20, 9). 
 
 * Iliad, iv. 27-55 ; xxiv. 765. Argument. Carm. Cypri. The point is em- 
 phatically touched upon by Dio Chrysostom (Orat. xi. p. 335-336) in his 
 assault upon the old legend. Two years' preparation — in Dictys Cret 
 I 16. 
 
 ' The Spartan king Agesilaus, when about to start from Greece on his 
 expedition into Asia Minor (396 b. c.) went to Aulis personally, in order 
 that he too might sacrifice on the spot where Agamemnon had sacrificed 
 when he sailed for Troy (Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 4, 4). 
 
 Skylax (c. 60) notices the lepov at Aulis, and nothing else : it seems to 
 have been like the adjoining Delium, a temple with a small village grown up 
 around it 
 
 Aulis is recognized as the port from which the expedition started, in the 
 Hesiodic Works and Days (v. 650' 
 
 TOL. L 13 19«5. 
 
 *9m 
 
29C 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREEd- 
 
 of Troy even with all her allies included^ It comprised heroei 
 with their followers from the extreme points of Greece — from 
 the north-western portions of Thessaly under Mount Olympus, 
 as well as the western islands of Dulichium and Ithaca, and the 
 eastern islands of Krete and Rhodes. Agamemnon himself con- 
 tributed 100 ships manned with the subjects of his kingdom of 
 Mykrnir. besides furnishing 60 ships to the Arcadians, who pos- 
 sessed none of their own. Menelaus brought with him 60 ships, 
 Nestor from Pylus 00, Idoraeneus from Krete and Diomedes 
 from Argos 80 each. Forty ships were manned by the Eleians, 
 under four different chiefs ; the like number under Megts from 
 Dulichium and the Echinades, and under Thoas from Kalydoo 
 and the other jEtolian towns. Odysseus from Ithaca, and Ajax 
 from Salamis, brought 12 ships each. The Abantes from Eu- 
 boea, under Elephenor, filled 40 vessels ; the Boeotians, under 
 Peneleos and Leitus, 50 ; the inhabitants of Orchomenus and 
 Aspledon, 30 ; the light-armed Locrians, under Ajax son of Oile- 
 us;^ 40 ; the Phokians as many. The Athenians, under Menes- 
 theiis, a chief distinguished for his skill in marshalling an army^ 
 mustered oO ships ; the Myrmidons from Phthia and Hellas, undei 
 Achilles, assembled in 50 ships ; Protesilaus from Phylake and 
 Pyrasus, and Eurj^pylus from Ormenium, each came with 40 
 ships ; Machaon and Podaleirius, from Trikka, with 30 ; Adme- 
 tus, from Phene and the lake Boebeis, with 1 1 ; and Philoktetes 
 fiom Meliboea with 7 : the Lapithae, under Polypoetes, son of 
 Peirithous, tilled 40 vessels; the ^nianes and Perrhaebians, 
 under Guneus,3 22 ; and the Magnetes under Prothous, 40 ; these 
 last two were from the northernmost parts of Thessaly, near the 
 mountains Pelion and Olympus. From Rhodes, under Tlepole- 
 mus, son of Herakles, appeared 9 shipi ; from Syme, under the 
 comely but effeminate Nireus, 3 ; from Kos, Krapathus and the 
 
 ' Iliad, ii. 1 28. Uschold CGreschichte des Trojanischcn Bo-iegs, p. 9, Stntgart 
 1836) makes the total 135,000 men. 
 
 • The Hesiodic Catalogue notices Oileus. or Dens, with a singular etymo 
 logy of his name (Frajrm. 136, ed. Marktscheflfel). 
 
 ^ Foivf i)f is the Heros Eponymus of the town of fronnus in Thessaly ; th« 
 dnplication of the con^onnnr r<n<l shortening: of tho vowei Oelonc; **> ^ 
 JEoIic dialect ( Ahrens, De Dialect. i£olic 60, 4. p. 220). 
 
 ACHILLES. - AJAX. - ODYSSEUS. 
 
 mi 
 
 neighboring islands, 30, onder the orders ot Pheidippus nd An- 
 
 tiphus, sons of Thessalus and grandsons of Herakles.^ 
 
 Among this band of heroes were included the distinguished 
 warriors Ajax and Diom^es, and the sagacious Nestor ; while 
 Agamemnon himself, scarcely inferior to either of them in prow- 
 ess, brought with him a high reputation for prudence in command. 
 But the most marked and conspicuous of all were Achilles and 
 Odysseus ; the former a beautiful youth born of a divide mother, 
 swift in the race, of fierce temper and irresistible might ; the lat- 
 ter not less efHcient as an ally from his eloquence, his untiring 
 endurance, his inexhaustible resources under difficulty, and the 
 mixture of daring courage with deep-laid cunning which never 
 deserted him :- the blood of the arch-deceiver Sisyphus, through 
 an illicit connection with his mother Antikleia, was said to flow 
 in his veins,^ and he was especially patronized and protected by 
 the goddess Athene. Odysseus, unwilling at first to take part io 
 the expedition, had even simulated insanity ; but Palamedes, sent 
 to Ithaca to invite him, tested the reality of his madness by phu> 
 ing in the furrow where Odysseus was ploughing, his infant son 
 Telemachus. Thus detected, Odysseus could not refuse to join 
 the Achaean host, but the prophet Hahtherses predicted to him 
 that twenty years would elapse before he revisited his native 
 land.'^ To Achilles the gods had promised the full efiulgenoe of 
 
 ' See the CataIo<xue in the second book of the Iliad. There mast pit A> 
 ably have been a Catalogue of the Greeks also in the Cyprian Verses j /bc 
 a Catalogue of the allies of Troy is specially noticed in the Argument of 
 Proclus (p. 12, Diintzer). 
 
 Euripides (Iphi^. Aul. 165-300) devotes one of the songs of the Chorat 
 to a partial Catalogue of the chief heroes. 
 
 According to Dictys Crctensis, all the principal heroes engaged in the 
 expedition were kinsmen, all Pelopids (i. 14) : they take an oath not to laj 
 down their arms until Helen shall have been recovered, and they receive 
 from Agamemnon a large sum of gold. 
 
 ' For the character of Odysseus, Iliad, iii. 202-220} x. 247. Odyss. xSL 
 «95. 
 
 Th« Philokt^tes of SophoklSs carries out very justly the character of tiht 
 Homeric Odysseus (see v. 1035) — more exactly than the Ajax of the saint 
 poet depicts it. 
 
 * Sophokl. Philoktet. 417, and Schol.— also Scbol. ad Soph I^bc 19a 
 
 * Homer, Odyss. xxiv. 115; MbOijI As;am. 841 ; SopbokL PhitoiEtdt. lOU 
 
II 
 
 S92 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 I\ 
 
 . -v 
 
 heroic glory before the walls of Troy ; oor oould the place be 
 taken without both his cooperation and that of his son after hiek 
 But they had forewarned him that this brilliant career would b6 
 rapidly brought to a close ; and that if he desired a long life, he 
 must remain tran(iuil and inglorious in his native land. In spite 
 of the reluctance of his mother Thetis, he preferred few years 
 with bright renown, and joined the Achaean host.' When Nes- 
 tor and Odysseus came to Phthia to invite him, both he and his 
 intimate friend Parroclus eagerly obeyed the call.a 
 
 Agamemnon and his powerful host set sail from Aulis ; but 
 being ignorant of the locality and the direction, they landed by 
 mistake in Teuthrania, a part of Mysia near the river Kaiku.3, 
 and began to ravjige the country under the persuasion that it 
 was the neighborhood of Troy. Telephus, the king of the coun- 
 try,'^ opposed and j'epelled them, but was ultimately defeated and 
 severely wounded by Achilles. The Greeks now, discovering 
 their mistake, retired ; but their fleet was dispersed by a storm 
 and driven back to Greece. Achilles attacked and took Skyrus, 
 and there married Deidamia, the daughter of Lycomedes.^ Te- 
 lephus, suffering from his wounds, was directed by the oracle to 
 come to Greece and present himself to Achilles to be healed, by 
 applying the scraj.ings of the spear with which the wound had 
 been given : thus restored, he became the guide of the Greeka 
 when they were prepared to renew their expedition.^ 
 
 with the Schol. Argument of the Cypria in Heinrichsen, De Carmin. Cypr. 
 
 p. 23 (the sentence is left out in DOntzer, p. 11). 
 
 A lost tragedy of Sophokles, 'Odvaoei)^ lAacvo/ievoc, handled this subject 
 Other Greek chiefs were not less reluctant than Odysseus to take part in 
 
 the expedition : see the tale of Pcemandrus, forming a part of the temple- 
 
 legend of the Achilleium at Tanagra in BcBotia (Plutarch, Question. Griea 
 
 p. 299). 
 
 ' niad,i.352;i,.411. • Iliad, xi. 782. 
 
 Telephus was the son of Auge, daughter of king Aleus of Tegea in 
 
 Arcadia, by Heraklfis : respecting her romantic adventures, see the previoui 
 
 chapter on Arcadian legends — Strabo's faith in the story (xii. p. 572) 
 The spot called the Harbor cf the Achaeans, near Gryneium, was stated 
 
 to be the place where Agamemnon and the chiefs took counsel whether the? 
 
 ihould attack Telephus or not (Skylax, c. 97 ; compare Strabo, xiv. p. 622) 
 * Diad, xi. 664; Argum. Cypr. p. 11, Dontzer; Diktys Cret. ii. 3 4 
 » Eunpid. Telephus, Frag. 26, Dmdorf ; Hygin. f 101 ; Diktys, ii. 10. Eu- 
 
 fipidfid had treated the Jidventure of Telephus in this lost traeedv ■ he garw 
 
 AGAMEMNON AND IPmOENEU. 
 
 The armament was again assembled at Aulis, but the godd^^ 
 Artemis, displeased with the boastful language of Agamemnon, 
 prolonged the duration of adverse winds, and the offending chief 
 was compelled to appease her by the well-known sacrifice of hia 
 daughter Iphigeneia.* They then proceeded to Tenedos, from 
 whence Odysseus and Menelaus were despatched as envoys to 
 Troy, to redemand Helen and the stolen property. In spite of 
 the prudent counsels of Antenor, who received the two Greciao 
 chiefs with friendly hospitality, the Tr jans rejected the demand, 
 and the attack was resolved upon. It was foredoomed by th« 
 gods that the Greek who first landed should perish; Protesi- 
 laus was generous enough to put himself upon this forlorn hope, 
 4nd accordingly fell by the hand of Hector. 
 
 Meanwhile the Trojans had assembled a large body of allien 
 from various parts of Asia Minor and Thrace : Dardanians under 
 -^neas, Lykians under Sarpedon, Mysians, Karians, Mseonians, 
 Alizonians,2 Phrygians, Thracians, and P8eonians.3 But vain 
 
 the miraculous cure with the dust of the spear, irpurrolaL Xoyxvc ^e'Kyercu 
 pivvfiam. Diktys softens down the prodigy: " Achilles cum Machaone et 
 Podalirio adhibcutes curam vulneri," etc. Pliny (xxxiv. 15) gives to the 
 nist of brass or iron a place in the list of genuine remedies. 
 
 '' Longe omnino a Tiberi ad Caicum : quo in loco etiam AgamemnoB 
 errasset, nisi ducem Telephum invenisset" (Cicero, Pro L. Flaccx), c. 29). 
 The portions of the Trojan legend treated in the lost epics and the trage 
 dans, seem to have been just as familiar to Cicero as those noticed in the 
 Iliad. 
 
 Strabo pays comparatively little attention to any portion of the Trojan 
 war except what appears in Homer. He even goes so far as to give a reason 
 why the Amazons did not come to the aid of Priam: they were at enmity 
 with him, because Priam had aided the Phrygians agaist them (Iliad, iii 
 188 : in Strabo, rolg '\uaiv must be a mistake for tolq ^pv^iv). Strabo'can 
 hardly have read, and never alludes to, Arktinus; in whose poem the brave 
 ftod beautiful Penthesileia, at the head of her Amazons, forms a marked 
 epoch and incident of the war (Strabo, xii. 552). 
 
 • Nothing occurs in Homer respecting the sacrifice of Iphigeneia (see 
 Schol. Ven. ad H. ix. 145). ^ 
 
 « No portion of the Homeric Catalogue gave more trouble to Demetiim 
 oiT Skepsis and the other expositors than these Alizonians (Strabo, xii. p 
 S49; xiii. p. 603) : a fictitious place called Alizonium, in the region of Ida, 
 w»8 got up to meet the difficulty (elf 'kXi^uvunf, tovt' ^ reirXaafii 
 :>ov Trpdf r^v rC)v ^AXi^uvuv virb&emv, etc., Strabo, 1. c). 
 
 ' See the Catalogae of the Trojana (Iliad, il 81ft-«77>. 
 
 ; 
 
 11 
 
BBTOBT OP GBEBGB. 
 
 was the attfeoipt to oppose the hmdiog of the Qtrnkm the TV^ 
 
 JRDs were routed, and even the invuhieratle Cjcnua,* eon of 
 Poseidou, one of the great bulwark* ot' the deieooe, was siain hj 
 Achilles. Having driven the Trojans within their wall&, Achillei 
 jittHcked and stormed Lyjuessus, Pedasus, Lesbos and olhef 
 places in the neigh ]x)rhood, twelve towns on the searooast and 
 eleven in the interior; he drove off the oxen at' JEueas and 
 pur.^ued the hero himself, who narrowly escaped with his life : 
 he surprised and killed the youthful Troilus, son of Priam, and 
 captured several of the other sons, whom he sold as prisoners 
 into the islands of tlie iBgean.-^ He acquired as his captive the 
 fair Briseis, while (>hryseis was awarded to Agameomon: hfl 
 was moreover eager to see the divine Helen, the prize and sti- 
 mulus of this memorable struggle; and Aphrodite and Thetis 
 contrived to bring at»out an interview between them.^ 
 
 At this period of the war the Grecian army was deprived of 
 Palamedes, one of its ablest chie£$. Odysseus had not forgiven 
 the artifice by which Palamedes had detected his simulated in- 
 sanity, nor was he without jealousy of a rival clever and cun- 
 ning in a degree equal, if not superior, to himself; one who had 
 enriched the Greeks with the invention of letters, of dice tor 
 
 * Cycnas was said by later writers to be king of Kolonae in the Troad 
 (S:ra')0, xiii. p. 589-603., Aristotcl Khetoric. iu 23). Jisthyliis introiluctti 
 np n * ^:ti(' stage both Cycnus and Mcmnon in territic equipments (Ari#- 
 toph II. an. 957. OW .^inrkTjrrov avToi)g Kvkvovc uytjv koX iAmvovoi wrf- 
 6uvo<t>u?Mf ottu.'aoix). Compare Welcker, .^Ischyl. Trilogie, p. 433. 
 
 « Iliad, xxiv. 752; Argument of the Cypria, pp. 11, 12, Diintzer. These 
 desultory exploits of A.hilles fumit^hed much interesting romance to the 
 later Greek poets (see Parthenius, Narrat. 21). See the neat summary of 
 the principal events of tlie war in Quintns Smym. xiv. 125-140; Dio Chry- 
 sost. Or. xi. p. 338-342. 
 
 Troilus is only once named in the Diad (xxiv. 253); he was mentioned 
 also in the Cypria ; but liis youth, beauty, and untimely end made him an 
 object of great interest with the sulisequent poets. Sophokles had a tragedy 
 called Trdilus (VVelcker, Griechisch. Tragod. i. p. 124) ; Tdv avdponaida dea- 
 noTTiv uTTuXeaa, one of the Fragm. Even earlier than Sophoklds, his beau- 
 ty was celebrated by the tragedian Fhrynichus (Athens, xiii. p. 564 ; Viigil, 
 ^eid, i. 474; Lycophron, 307). 
 
 ' Argument. Cypr. p. HI, Diintv. Ko^ fierd ravra 'A;(iAAei)( 'EAevtfp iwu 
 Bvuii deuaao'&ai, koI awriyayov avTodf tic ^^ ^^^ 'A^pJcJtny Koi Orrif. i| 
 •oene which would have lieen highly in terestiug fai the bands of HooMr. 
 
 MURDER OF PALAMEDES. 
 
 aiuajement, of night-watches, as well as with other useful Bug 
 gestions. According to the old Cyprian epic, Palamedes was 
 drowned while fishing, by the hands of Odysseus and DiomedesJ 
 Neither in the Iliad nor the Odyssey does the name of Palamedes 
 occur : the lofty position which Odysseus occupies in both those 
 poems — noticed with some degree of displeasure even by Pin- 
 dar, who described Palamedes as the wiser man of the two is 
 
 sufficient to explain the omission.^ But in the more advanced 
 period of the Greek mind, when intellectual superiority came to 
 acquire a higher place in the public esteem as compared with 
 military prowess, the character of Palamedes, combined with his 
 unhappy fate, rendered him one of the most interesting persona- 
 ges in the Trojan legend, -^schylus, Sophokles and Euripides 
 each consecrated to him a special tragedy ; but the mode of his 
 death as described in the old epic was not suitable to Athenian 
 ideas, and accordingly he was represented as having been falsely 
 accused of treason by Odysseus, who caused gold to be buried in 
 his tent, and persuaded Agamemnon and the Grecian chiefs that 
 Palamedes had received it from the Trojans.3 He thus forfeited 
 his life, a victim to the calumny of Odysseus and to the delusion 
 
 ' Argura. Cypr. 1. 1.; Pausan. x. 31. The concluding portion of the 
 Cypria seems to have passed under the title of UaXafitideia (see Fragm. 16 
 and 18. p. 15, DOutz.; Welcker, Der Episch. Cycl. p. 459; Eustath.ad Horn. 
 Odyss. i. 107). 
 
 The allusion of Quintus Smymaeus (v. 197) seems rather to point to the 
 story in the Cypria, which Strabo (viii. p. 368) appears not to have read. 
 
 * Pindar, Nem. vii. 21 ; Aristides, Orat 46. p. 260. 
 
 ' See the Fragments of the three tragedians, IlaAa^cJjyf — Aristeides, Or. 
 xlvi. p. 260 ; Philostrat. Heroic, x. ; Hygin. fab. 95-105. Discourses for and 
 •gainst Palamedes, one by Alkidamas, and one under the name of Gorgias, 
 are printed in Reiske's Orr Graec. t. viii. pp. 64, 102; Virgil, ^neid, ii. 82,' 
 with the ample commentary of Servius — Polyaen. Proce. p. 6. 
 
 Welcker (Griechisch. Tragod. v. i. p. 130, vol. ii. p. 500) has evolved with 
 ingenuity the remaining fragments of the lost tragedies. 
 
 According to Diktys, Odysseus and Diomedes prevail upon Palamddes to 
 be let down into a deep well, and then cast stones upon him (ii. 15). 
 
 Xenophon (De Venatione, c. 1) evidently recognizes the story in the 
 Cyjiria, that Odysseus and Diomedes caused the death of Palamedes ; but 
 he cannot t)elieve that two such exemplary men were really guilty of 89 
 •iquiious an act — kukoI 6e iirpa^av to ipyov. 
 One of toe emmences near Napoli still bears the name of PaJamidhL 
 
 \\ 
 
 ■ « ■ 
 
mSTOPY OF GREECfc. 
 
 > 
 
 •f the leading Griiekg. In the last speech made bj the phflu^ 
 pher Socrates to his Athenian judges, he alludes with sclemnity 
 and fellow-feeling to the unjust condemnation of Palamedes, ai 
 analogous to tliat which he liimself was about to suffer, and \ua 
 companions seem to liave dwelt with satisfaction on the compari- 
 son. Palamedes passed for an instance of the slanderous enmity 
 and misfortune A'hjch so often wait upon superior genius.' 
 
 In these expeditions the Grecian army consumed nine years, 
 during which the subdued Trojans dared not give battle witliout 
 their walls for fear of Achilles. Ten years was the fixed epical 
 duration of the siege of Troy, just as five years was the duration 
 of the siege of Kamikus by the Kretan armament which came 
 to avenge the death of Minos :^ ten years of pre[)aration, ten 
 years of siege, and ten years of wandering for Odysseus, were 
 periods suited to the rough chronological dashes of the ancient 
 epic, and suggesting no doubts nor difficulties with the original 
 heai-ers. But it was otherwise when the same events came To be 
 contemplated by the historicizing Greeks, who could not be satia- 
 fied without either Jinding or inventing satisfactoiy bonds of co- 
 herence between the separate events. Thucydides tells us that 
 the Greeks were le.ss numerous than the poets have represented, 
 and that being moreover very poor, they were unable to procure 
 adequate and constant provisions : hence they were compelled to 
 disperse their amiy, and to employ a part of it in cultivating the 
 Chersonese, — a part in marauding expeditions over the neigh- 
 borhood. Could the whole army have been employed against 
 Troy at once (he says), the siege would have been much ''more 
 speedily and easily concluded.^^ If the great historian could per- 
 mit himself thus to amend the legend in so many [mints, we 
 might have imagined that the simpler course would have been to 
 include the duration of the siege among the list of poetical ex- 
 aggerations, and to affirm that the real siege hnd lasted only one 
 
 'Plato, Apolog. S(KT. c. .S2; Xenoph. Apol. Socr. 26; Menior. iv. 3,^; 
 Liban. pro Socr. p. 242, «d. Morell. ; Lacian, Dial. Mort 20. 
 
 ^ HerodoL vii. 170. I'en years is a proper mythical period for a we^t war 
 ac last : the war between the Olympic gods and the Titan «)ds W» tea 
 jears (Hesiod, Theogxjii. 636). Compare de«drv iviavr^ iHom CVtm 
 an. 17). 
 
 ' nncjrd. L U. 
 
 I ' 
 
 -I 
 
 ANGER OP ACHILLES, 
 
 297 
 
 instead of ten. But it seems that the ten years* duration 
 was so capital a feature in the ancient tale, that no critic ventured 
 to meddle with it. 
 
 A period of comparative intermission however was now at 
 hand for the Trojans. The gods brought about the memorable 
 fit of anger of Achilles, under the influence of which he refused 
 to put on his armor, and kept his Myrmidons in camp. Accord- 
 ing to the Cypria, this was the behest of Zeus, who had compas- 
 sion on the Trojans : according to the Iliad, Ajwllo was the origi- 
 nating cause,' from anxiety to avenge the injury which his priest 
 Chryses had endured from Agamemndn. For a considerable 
 time, the combats of the Greeks against Troy were conducted 
 without their best warrior, and severe indeed was the humiliation 
 which they underwent in consequence. How the remaining Gre- 
 cian chiefs vainly strove to make amends for his absence — how 
 Hector and the Trojans defeated and drove them to their ships 
 — how the actual blaze of the destroying flame, applied by Hec- 
 tor to the ship of Protesilaus, roused up the anxious and sympa- 
 thizing Patroclus, and extorted a reluctant consent from Achil- 
 les, to allow his friend and his followers to go forth and avert the 
 last extremity of ruin — how Achilles, when Patroclus had been 
 killed by Hectdr, forgetting his anger in grief for the death of 
 his friend, reentered the fight, drove the Trojans within their 
 walls with immense slaughter, and satiated his revenge both 
 upon the living and the dead Hector — all these events have 
 been chronicled, together with those divine dispensations on 
 which most of them are made to depend, in the immortal verse 
 of the Iliad. 
 
 Homer breaks off with the burial of Hector, whose body haa 
 just been ransomed by the disconsolate Priam ; while the lost 
 poem of Arktinus, entitled the -^thiopis, so far as we can judge 
 from the argument still remaining of it, handled only the subse- 
 quent events of the siege. The poem of Quintus Smymaeus, com- 
 posed about the fourth century of the Christian aera, seems in its 
 first books to coincide with the -^thiopis, in the subsequent 
 books partly with the liias Minor of Lesch^s.^ 
 
 * Homer, Diad, i. 2L 
 
 • Tychsen, Commentat. de Qointo SmymsBo, $ iiL c. d-7 
 
 IS* 
 
 The 'mo9 
 
 a^mn 
 
 ^ mi» * m 
 
fM 
 
 HISTORY OF QHTTXm. 
 
 DEATH OP ACHILLfch 
 
 899 
 
 The Trojans, dismayed by the death of Hectdr, were again aih 
 inated with ho|)e by the appearance of the warlike and beautiful 
 queen of the Amazons, Penthesileia, daughter of Ares, hitherto 
 invincible in the held, who came to their assistance from Thrace 
 at the head of a band of her countrywomen. She again led the 
 besieged without t)ie walls to ent^ounter the Greeks in the open 
 field ; and under her auspices the latter were at first driven back, 
 until she too was slain by the invincible ai-rn of Achilles. The 
 victor, on taking off the helmet of his fair enemy as she lay oc 
 the ground, wjis profoundly atfected and captivated by her 
 charms, for which he was scornfully taunted by Thersites: ex- 
 asperated by this rash insult, he killed Thersites on the spot with 
 a blow of his list. A violent dispute among the Grecian chiefs 
 was the result, for Diomedes, the kinsman of Thersites, warmly 
 resented the proceeding ; and Achilles was obliged to go to Les- 
 bus, where he was purified from the act of homicide by Odys- 
 seus. ' 
 
 Next arrived Memnon, son of Tit bonus and Eos, the most 
 stately of living men, with a powerful band of black Ethiopians, 
 to the assistance of Troy. Sallying forth against the Greeks, he 
 made great havoc among them : the brave and popular Anti- 
 lochus perished by his hand, a victim to filial devotion in defence 
 of Nest4")r.^ Achilles at length attacked him, and for a long time 
 the combat was doubtful between them : the prowess of Achilles 
 and the supplication of Thetis with Zeus linally prevailed; 
 
 lltfMJK; was treated l)otli by Arktinus and by Lesches : with the latter it 
 formed a part of the Ilias Minor. 
 
 ' Argument of the i€thiopis, p. 16, Diintzerj Quint. Smym. lib. i.; Dik- 
 tys Cret iv. 2-:i. 
 
 In the Philoktetes, of Sophokles, Thersites survives Achilles (Soph. Phil 
 358-445). 
 
 - Odyss. xi. 522. Kelvnv (^t) Ka^Xicrroj' Moi-. fierct Mrfivova dlov : gee also 
 Odyss. iv. 187 ; Pindar, Pyth. vi. 31. ^schylus (ap. Strabo. xv. p. 798) 
 conceives Memnon as a Persian startinjj^ from Susa. 
 
 Ktesias gave in his history full details respecting the expedition of Men* 
 noil, sent by the king of Assyria to the relief of his dependent, Priam 01 
 Troy ; all this was said to be recorded in the royal artViivcs. The Egjp> 
 tians affirmed that Memnon had come from Egypt (Diodor ii. 22 ; oompaiv 
 iv. 77): the two stories are blended together in Pansaniaa, x. 31, 2. The 
 Pfirys^ans pointed out the pr>ad along which he had marched. 
 
 «rhilsi Eos obtained for her yanquished sod the oonsoling gift of 
 
 immortaiity. His tomb, however,' was shown near the Propontia, 
 within a tew miles of the mouth of the river -^sepus, and was 
 visited annually by the birds called Memnonides, who swept it 
 and bedewed it with water from the stream. So the traveller 
 Pausanias was told, even in the second century after the Chris- 
 tian aiia, by the Hellespont ine Greeks. 
 
 But the fate of Achilles himself was -now at hand. After 
 routing the Trojans and chasing them into the town, he was slain 
 near the Ska?an gate by an arrow from the quiver of Paris, di- 
 rected under the mierring auspices of A|X)llo.*- The greatest 
 efforts were made by the Trojans to possess themselves of the 
 body, which was however rescued and borne off to the Greciao 
 camp by the valor of Ajax and Odysseus. Bitter was the grief of 
 Thetis for the loss of her son: she came into the camp with 
 the Muses and the Nereids to mourn over him; and when a 
 magniticent funeral-pile had been prepared by the Greeks to bum 
 him with every mark of honor, she stole away the body and con- 
 veyed it to a renewed and immortal life in the island of Leuke in 
 the Euxine Sea. According to some accounts he was there bleit 
 with the nuptials and company of Helen.3 
 
 * Argum. TEth. iii sup. ; Quint. Smym. ii. 396-550 ; Pausan. jl. 31, 1. 
 Pindar, in praising? Achilles, dwells much on his triumphs over Hector, T^le 
 phus, Memnon, and Cycnus, but never notices Penthesileia (Olymp. iL90 
 Kem iii. 60; vi. 52. Isihm. v. 43). 
 
 -/Eschylus, in the "^vxoaraaia, introduced Thetis and Eos, each in an atti- 
 tode of supplication for her son, and Zeus weij^hing in his golden scales the 
 aouls of Achilles and Memnon (Schol. Ven. ad Iliad, viii. 70: Pollux, ir. 
 130; Plutarch, De Audiend. Poet p. 17). In the combat between Achilles 
 and Memnon, represented on the chest of Kypselus at Olympia, Thetis and 
 £6s were given each as aidmg her son (Pausan. v. 19, 1). 
 
 « Iliad, xxii. 360 ; Sophokl. Philokt. 334 ; Virgil, ^neid, vi. 56. 
 
 ' Ar<rum. ^thiop. xU sup. ; Quint. Smym. 151-583 ; Homer, Odyss. v. 310; 
 Ovid, Metam. xiii. 284; Eurip. Androm. 1262; Pausan. iii. 19, 13. Accord- 
 ing toDiktys (iv. 11), Paris and Deiphobus entrap Achilles by thepromiae 
 •f an interview with Polyxena and kill him. 
 
 A minute and curious description of the island Leuk^, or 'A;<ftX^of v^oofi 
 ll lEriven in Arrian (Periplus, Pont Euxin. p. 21 ; ap. Gcogr. Min. t. 1). 
 
 The heroic or divine empire of Achilles in Scythia was recognised hf 
 4lkaeas the poet ( Alksei Fragm. Schneidew. Fr. 46), 'kxiX^^ d yof item 
 
 
ioo 
 
 HTSTORY OF crftEROR 
 
 /*' 
 
 Thetis celebrated sphndid fiineral games in honor of her soi^ 
 and offered the unrivalled panoply, which Hepha\sto.s had forjred 
 and wrougljt for him, as a j>rize to the moat distinguished warrior 
 io the Grecian army. Odysseus and Ajax became rivals for the 
 distinction, when Athene, together with some Trojan prisoners, 
 who were a.^ked from which of the two their country had sustained 
 greatest injury, decided in favor of the tbrmer. The gallant Ajax 
 lost his senses with grief arid humiliation: in a Ht of phnnzy he 
 slew some sheep, mistaking them for the men who had wronged 
 him, and then fell upon his own sword. » 
 
 Odysseus now learnt from Heleims son of Priam, wiiom he had 
 captured in an ambuscade,'-* that Troy could not be taken unless 
 both Philoktetes.and Neoptolemus, son of Achilles, could be pre- 
 vailed U|H)n to join ihe besiegers. The former, having been stung 
 in the foot by a serpent, and beaming insuj)portable to the 
 Greeks from the stench of his wound, had been left at Lemnus in 
 
 ^tKtic finhir Eustnthius (a<l Dionys. Porie^'«^t. 307) pive.^ tlio story of hUt 
 having followed Iphip^nria thither: compare Antonin. Liberal. 27. 
 
 Ibyku.s represented .\(*hilles as having espoused Medea in the Elysian 
 Field (Idyk Fraiu'm. IK, Sehneidewin> ISiniondes followed this story (ap. 
 fichol. Apoll. Hhod iv. 815). 
 
 ' Argument of yKthiopis and Ilias Minor, and Fragm. 2 of the latter^pp. 
 17, 18, Dlntz. ; Quint. Smyrn. v 120-482; Horn. Odyss. xi. 550: Pindar, 
 Kem. vii. 26. The Ajax of Sophokles, and the contending speeches between 
 AJAx and Ulysses in the beginning of the thirteenth hook of Ovid's Meta- 
 ■lorphoses, are too well known to need special reference. 
 
 The suicide of Ajax seems to have been described in detail in the JEthi 
 Opis : compare Pindar. Isthm. iii. 51. and the Scholia adloc., which show the 
 attention paid by Pindar to the minute circumstances of the old epic 
 See Fragm. 2 of the 'Wov rifpatf of Arktinus, in Dontz. p. 22, which would 
 •eem more properly to belong to the ^.thiopis. Diktys relates the suicide 
 of Ajax, as a consequence of his unsuccessful competition with Odysseug, 
 not about the arms of Achilles, but about the Palladium, after the taking of 
 the city (v. 14). 
 
 There were, however, many different accounts of the manner in which 
 Ajax had died, some of which are enumerated in the argument to the drama 
 of Sophokles. Ajax is never wounded in the Iliad: ^schylas made him 
 invnlnerable except under tY 2 armpits (see Schol. ad Sophok Ajac. 838)* 
 tfie Trojans pelted hira with mad — el jrwf /Sop^i^ety iird rov irifkjv (Schol 
 dad. xiv. 404). 
 ' Soph. Philokt 604. 
 
 NEOPTOLEMUS AT TBOY 
 
 Ml 
 
 Ap commencement of the expedition, and had Rpent ten years^ in 
 mi.^ery on that desolate island ; but he still pos.sesged the peerlen 
 bow and arrows of HOrakl^s, which were said to be essential to 
 Ihe capture of Troy. Diomedes fetched Philoktet^"\*^ from I^m- 
 nns to the Grecian camp, wher3 he was healed by the skill ol 
 Machaon,- and took an active part against the Trojans — en- 
 ga«rino^ in sinjz:le combat with Paris, and killing him with one of 
 the llcraklcian anows. The Trojans were allowed to carry away 
 for burial the body of tliis prince, the fatal cause of all their suf. 
 fcrin«i^s; but not until *t had been manji^led by the hand of Mene- 
 laus.^ Odysseus went tc *he island of Skynis to invite NeoptcJe- 
 mus to the army. "^The untried but impetuous youth fjladly obey* 
 ed the call, and received from Odysseus his father's armor, while 
 on tfic other hand, Eurypylus, son of Tjlephus, came from Mysia 
 as auxiliary to tlie Trojans and rendered to thera valuable servioe 
 — turnin*^ the tide of fortune for a time a^jrainst the Greeks, and 
 killinjj^ some of their bravest chiefs, amon«]«^t whom wa,s numbered 
 Peneleos, and the unrivalled leech Machaon.'* The exploits of 
 
 * Soph, Philokt. 70.1. '12 fte^ea rffvxny *Of fiij(i* olvoxvrnv Trofiarof 'Htrdif 
 StKCTi/ xpovovy etc. 
 
 In the narrative of Diktys fii. 47), Philoktetes returns from Lemnus to 
 Troy iMUch earlier in the war before the death of Achilles, and without aUf 
 
 «8.si;.MH'<l en use. 
 
 * Acconlinpr to Sophokles. Ilenikles sends Asklepius to Troy to heal Philuk 
 tdtcs (S.»ph. Philokt. Ul.'j). 
 
 The subject of IMiiloktetes formed the subject of a trai;edy both bj^^sdqp- 
 Ins and by EuripidtlM (}>oth lost) as well as by Sophokles 
 
 ^ Arirument. Iliad Minor. DUntz. I. c. Kal rbwEKfrnv I'TrdM^vfAaov/carw 
 Ktax'ih'ra uvF^'i/irvm <^aKTuvmv ol Tpwff. See Quint. Smyrn, x. 240 : be 
 differs here in many respects from the arj^ments of th(t old f>ocms as ^vea 
 by Produs, both as to the incidents an J as to their order in time (Diktys, I?. 
 SO) Tlie wounded Paris flees to (Enone, whom he had deserted in order to 
 follow Helen, and entreats her to cure him hyher.«!kill in simples: she rOi 
 ftises, and permits him to die ; she is afterwards stunf^ with remorse, aai 
 hanjxs herself (Quint. Smyrn. x. 28.5-331; Afwllodor. iii. 12, 6; Condo. 
 Narrat. 23 ; see Bachet de Meziriac, Comment, sur lea Epttres d*Ovide, t L 
 p. 456). The story of fEnone is as old as Hellanikus and Kephaldn of Qe|w 
 gis (see Hellan. Fragm. 126, Didot). 
 
 * To mark the way in which these lep^ndary events pervaded and becaat 
 embodied in the local worship, I may mention the received praetk» In tfti 
 grtat temple of Askldpiiu (father of Machaon) at Peigamvs, vmk ia tii 
 
 •^-^^h-^ka 
 
 ■4 ■^m^^a^-^mm'^^- 
 
1 
 
 ao2 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE 
 
 Neoptolemus were numerous, worthy of the glory of his race and 
 the renown of his father. He encountered and slew Eurypylua^ 
 together with numbers of the Mysian warriors : he routed the 
 Trojans and dro^e them within their walls, from whence they 
 never again emerged to give battle : nor was he less distinguished 
 for his good sense and persuasive diction, than for forward energy 
 fn the field.' 
 
 Troy however was still impregnable so long as the Palladium, 
 a^ statue given by Zeus himself to Dardanus, remained in the 
 Citadel; and great care had been taken by the Trojans not only 
 40 conceal this valuable present, but to construct other statues so 
 like it as to mishjad any intruding robber. Nevertheless the 
 enterprising Odysseus, having disguised his person with miserable 
 clothing and self-infiicted injuries, found means to penetrate into 
 tlie city and to convey the Palladium by stealth away: Helen 
 alone recognized him; but she was now anxious to return to 
 Greece, and even assisted Odysseus in concerting means for the 
 capture of the town.-i 
 
 To accomplish this object, one final stratagem was resorted ta 
 By the hands of P:peius of Panopeus, and at the suggestion of 
 Athene, a capacious hollow wooden horse was constructed, capable 
 rf containing one hundred men : the elite of the Grecian heroes, 
 Neoptolemus, Odysseus, Menclaus and others, concealed them- 
 •elves in the inside of it, and the entire Grecian army sailed away 
 
 tfme of Pausaniiis. Telej)hus, father of Eurypylus, was the local hero and 
 mythical king of Teuthrania, in which Pergamus was situated. In the 
 hymns there sung, the proem and the invocation were addressed to Telephus • 
 bat nothing was said in them about Eurypylas, nor was it permitted even to 
 ■ention his name in the temple. — '' they knew him to be the slayer of Ma- 
 Cfcaon :»' upxovrai fiev in-o T//;if>ov tCjv {>fxv<jv, npoaifdovaL de ovdev ic rdp 
 EvpvTTV^^, ohdl ipxvv kv T^ va^ ^eXovmv bvofiaCetv avrdv, oia kmardfiev^ 
 ^ea &vTa Maxuovoc (Pausan. iii. 26, 7). 
 
 The combination of these (lualities in other Homeric chiefs is noted in a 
 •nbsequent chapter of his work, ch. xx. vol. ii. 
 
 » Argument, niad. Minor, p. 17, Diintzer. Homer, Odyss. xi. 510-520. 
 Paosan. iii. 26, 7. Quint. Smym. vii. 553; viii. 201. 
 
 « Argument. Diad. Minor, p. 18, Duntz.; Arctinus ap. Dionvs. Hal. i. 69; 
 Bomer, Odyss. iv. 246; Quint. Smym. x. 354: Virgil, ^neid! ii. 164, and 
 Ihe 9th Excursus of Heyne on that book. 
 
 Compare with this leijend about the PaUadiam,the Roman legend resveok 
 k« the AncyUa ( Ovid, Faati, lU. 381 ). * ^-^ 
 
 h i 
 
 TROJAN HORSE. -LAOCOON 
 
 308 
 
 lo Tenedos, burning their tents and pretending to have abandoned 
 the siege. The Trojans, overjoyed to find themselves fi-ee, 
 issued from the city and contemplated with astonishment the 
 fabric which their enemies had left behind: they lon»»^ doubted 
 what should be done with it; and the anxious heroes from within 
 heard the surrounding consultations, as well as the voice of Helen 
 when she pronounced their names and counterfeited the accents 
 of their wives.' Many of the Trojans were anxious to dedicat6 
 it to the gods in the city as a token of gratitude for their deliver- 
 ance: but the more cautious spirits inculcated distrust of an 
 enemy's legacy; and Laocoon, the priest of Poseidon, manifested 
 his aversion by striking the side of the horse with his spear, 
 rh<' sound revealed that the horse was hollow, but the Trojans 
 heeded not this warning of possible fraud ; and the unfortunate 
 Laocoon, a victim to his own sagacity and patriotism, miserably 
 perished before the eyes of his countrymen, together with one of 
 his sons, — two serpents being sent expressly by the gods out of 
 the sea to destroy him. By this terrific spectacle, together with 
 the perfidious counsels of Sinon, a traitor whom the Greeks had 
 left behind for the special purpo.se of giving false information, 
 the Tiojans were induced to make a breach in their own walls, 
 and to drag the fatal fabric with triumph and exultation into their 
 citv.- 
 
 » Odyss. iv. 275 ; Virgil, ^neid, ii. 14; Heyne, Excurs. 3. ad ^neid. ii- 
 Stesirhorus, in his 'I'/l.ov TLipaic, gave the number of heroes in the wooden 
 horse Hs one hundred (Stesichor. Fragm. 26, ed. Kleine; compare Athen» 
 xiii. |». 610). 
 
 * Odyss. viii. 492 ; xi. 522. Argument of the 'Uiov Iltpai^ of Arktinus, 
 p. 21. Diiiitz. Hv(Hn. f. 108-135. Bacchylides and Euphorion ap. Servium 
 ad Virpl. ^^neid. ii. 201. 
 
 Both Sinon and Laocoon came orij2:inally from the old epic poem of Arkti- 
 nus. thouffh Virgin may perhaps have immediately l>orrowed both them, and 
 ofhfT matters in his second book, from a poem passing under the name at 
 Plsander (see Macrob. Satnr. v. 2; Hevne, Excurs. 1. ad JEn. ii. ; Welcker, 
 Der Episch. Kyklus, v. 97). We cannot give credit either to Arktinus or 
 Pisander for the masterly specimen of oratory which is put into the month of 
 Sinon in the ^neid. 
 
 In Quinius Smyrnaeus (xii. 366), the Trojans torture and mutilate Sinoa 
 to extort from him the truth : his endurance, sustained by the inspiration of 
 Here, is proof against the extremity of suffering, and he adheres to his falM 
 Me. This is probably an incident of the old epic, though the de/icate taiti 
 
 
 ^^mjn 
 
m^ 
 
 nrSTHRY OF OKEECE. 
 
 CAPTTTRE OF TROY. 
 
 305 
 
 The destruction of Troy, according to the decree of the gods, 
 was now irrevocably sealed. While the Trojans indulged in a 
 night of riotous festivity, Sinon kindled the fire-signal to the 
 Greeks at Tenedos, loosening the bolts of the wooden horse, from 
 out of which the enclosed heroes descended. The city, assailed 
 both from within and from without, was thoroughly sacked and de- 
 atroyed, with the slaughter or captivity of the larger portion of its 
 heroes as well as its people. The venerable Priam perished by 
 the hand of Neoptolemus, having in vain sought shelter at the 
 domestic altar of Zeus Herkeios ; but his son Deiphobus, who 
 rince the death of Paris had become the husband of Helen, de- 
 fended his house desperately against Odysseus and Menelaus, and 
 sold his life deariy. After he was slain, his body was fearfully 
 mutilated by the latter.'- 
 
 Thus was Troy utterly destroyed — the city, the altars and 
 temples,'^ and the population. iEneas and Antenor were permit- 
 ted to escape, wiih their families, having been always more 
 favorably regarded b} the Greeks than the remaining Trojans. 
 According to one version of the story, ihey had betrayed the 
 
 of Virgil, and his sympatiiy with the Trojans, lias induced him to omii it. 
 Euphorio'n ascribed the ]>roceedings of Sinon to Odysseus : he also gave a 
 diflFcrent cause for the death of Laocoon (Fr. 3o-36. p. 55, ed. Duntz., in toe 
 Pragraents of Epic Poets after Alexander the Great> Sinon is eraipo^ 
 'Odrff(7fwf in Pausan. x. 27, 1 . 
 
 » Odyss. viii. 515; Aro:umcnt of Arktinas, ut sup.; Euripid. Hecub. 903, 
 Vii^. ^n. vi. 497 •, Quinn. Smyrn. xiii. 35-229; Lesches ap. Pausan. x. 27, 
 a- Diktys, V. 12. Ibykus and Simonides also represented Deiphobus as the 
 avTepdoTTjc ' EXev^/f (Scliol. Horn. Iliad, xiii. 517). 
 
 The night-battle in the interior of Troy was described with all its fearful 
 details both by Lesches and Arktinus : the ' aiov liepmi of the latter seems to 
 havTj been a separate j>ocm, that of the former constituted a portion of the 
 Ilias Minor (see Welcker, Der Epische Kyklns, p. 215): the nXtov Uepaic 
 by the lyric poets Sakadas and Stesichonis probably added many new inci- 
 dents Polygnotus had painted a succession of the various calamitous scenes, 
 drawn from the poem of Lesches, on the walls of the lesche at Delphi, with 
 the name written over each figure (Pausan. x. 25-26). 
 
 Hellanikus fixed the precise day or the month on which the oapture toa 
 place (Hellan. Fr 143-144), the twelfth day of Thargelioa. 
 
 • iFtSchyi. Agamemn. !i27. — 
 
 Buuoi S ditrroi koX iJewv iSpvfxara^ 
 
 dty to the Greeks : a panther's skin had been hung over the 
 door of Antenor's house as a signal for the victorious besiegers to 
 Bpaie it in the general plunder. i In the distribution of the prin- 
 cipal captives, Astyanax, the infant son of Hector, was cast from 
 the top of the wall and killed, by Odysseus or Neoptolemus: 
 Polyxena, the daughter of Priam, was immolated on the tomb of 
 Achilles, in compliance with a requisition made by the shade of 
 the deceased hero to his countiymen ;2 while her .sister Kassandra 
 was presented as a prize to Agamemnon. She had sought 
 sanctuary at the altar of Athene, where Ajax, the son of Oileus, 
 making a guilty attempt to seize her, had drawn both upon him- 
 self and upon the army the serious wrath of the goddess, insomuch 
 that the Greeks could hardly be restrained from stoning him to 
 deatli.^ Andromaciie and Helenus were both given to Neopto- 
 lemus, who, according to the Uias Minor, carried away also 
 ^neas as his captive.^ 
 
 Helen gladly resumed her union with Menelaus : she accom- 
 panied him back to Sparta, and lived with him there many years 
 in comfort and dignity ,5 passing afterwards to a happy immortality 
 
 * This symbol of treachery also figured in the picture of Polygnotus. 
 A diflferent story appears in Schol. IJiad. iii. 206. 
 
 * Euripid. Hecub. 38-114, and Troad. 716; Lesches ap.Pausan. x.25, 9; 
 Virgil, ^Eneid, iii. 322, and Servius ad loc. 
 
 A romantic tale is found in Diktys respecting the passion of Achilles for 
 Polyxena (iii. 2). 
 
 3 Odyss. xi. 422. Arktinus, Argum. p. 21, Diintz. Thcognis, 1232 
 Pansan. i. 15. 2; x. 26, 3; 31, 1. As an expiation of this sin of their 
 national hero, the Lokrians sent to Ilium periodically some of their maidens, 
 to do menial service in the temple of Athene (Plutarch. Ser. Nurain. Vindict 
 p. 557, with the citation from Euphorion or Kallimachus, Diintzer Epicc- 
 Vet. p 118). 
 
 < Lesches, Fr. 7, Dontz.; ap. Schol. Lycophr. 1263. Compare Schol. ad. 
 1232, for the respectful recollection of Andromache, among the traditions of 
 tfas Molossian kings, as their heroic mother, and Strabo, xiii. p. 594. 
 
 * Such is the story of the old epic Csee Odyss. iv. 260, and the fourth book 
 generally ; Argument of Ilias Minor, p. 20. DOntz.). Polygnotus, in the 
 paintings above alluded to, followed the same tale fPausan. x. 25, 3). 
 
 The anger of the Greeks against Helen, and the statement that Menelaoi 
 
 ■fter the capture of Troy approached her with revengeful purposes, but waf 
 
 so mollified by her surpassing beauty as to cast away his uplifted sword, 
 
 belongs to the age of th«i tragedians {Machjl Agamem. 685-1455 : Eurip, 
 
 VOL. I. 20oc. 
 
 \ 
 
 
 r 
 
 *■ iM'.ih 
 
 ! 
 
wm 
 
 fflSTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 in the Elysian tields. She was worshipped as a goddess with het 
 ln*other8 the Dioskuri and \wr husband, having her temple, status 
 and ahai* at Th< rapnie and elsewliere, and various examples of 
 her mirat'ulous interventions were cited amoni; the Greeks.' The 
 lyric poet Stesichorus had ventured to denounce her, conjointly 
 with her sister Kiyla;mne>iru, in a tone of rude and [)hiin-spoken 
 severity, resenihli nil that of Kuripides and Lycophmn afterwards, 
 but strikinjijly yp})o-it»' to the (klicacy and respect with wliicli she 
 is always handle<l by Homer, who never admits reproaches a«rainst 
 her except from her own lips.- lie was smitten with blindness, 
 
 Androm. «UK>-<)21> ; llclm. 75-120 ; Troiid. 8'JO-lu57 ; compare also the tine 
 lines in the yEneid. ii ')r.7-:)S8 ). 
 
 ' See tlie tU'scripfion in llrrodot. vi.61 of the prayers offered to her, and 
 of the mira<l<' which she wrou<.dif, to remt)ve the npnlsive uj_'liness of a little 
 Spartan giil of hi;;!! l.unily. Compare also Pindar. Oiynip iii. 2, and the 
 Scholia Jit tl»e hejiinninj; of liif o<le ; Kurip. Helen. l«i«)2, and < )rest. Hj32- 
 17or); Isoknit. Kncoin Helen ii [>. .'if>M. Anirer ; Hio Chrysost. Or. xi. p. 
 311. t?" ' hofiin^ii rrapn ro/f "K/.///<Tf ; Theodeetes ap. Ari>t(>t. Tol. i. 2, 19 
 0f/(,-r u-' afKpoiv fKyovor fH^^ioftaruv. 
 
 • Euripid. Troad. 982 .sv./. ; T^ycophron ap. Steph. By;^. v A/'yi-f; St©- 
 iichorns ap. Schol. Kurip. Orest. 2*i9 ; Frajrin. 9 and 10 of the * Wov Jlf/KTIC, 
 Schneidewin : — 
 
 OvvsKa Tvv6ufnuc ^e^ijv uKuai ^eolq fnu( Aci^cr ' ijinodupov 
 KvTTpiSor ■ Kt'ii'd (^e Twihtptu KovpoiGi xo^uxrafieva 
 Ai}(ifwv{- TpiyujU(»x Ti&ijm 
 
 Kal Xnrejiivopnc 
 
 Further ' EAfi;/ hoifj'' drr7/pr, etc. 
 
 He had prohahly contrasted her with other females carried away hy force. 
 
 Stesiehorns also atlinned that Iphi^^eneia was the dan!j:hterof Helen, by 
 Thesens. horn at Arjro>< hefon* her inarriajre with Menelan.s and nnide over 
 to Klytivinnestm : thi^ tale was perpetuated hy the tetnple of Eileithyia at 
 Ar^s, which the Arjjeians attirme(i to have been erected hy Helen (Pansan, 
 li. 22. 7). The ajres aserihed hy Hellanikns and other lojxosrraphcrs (Hellaa 
 Ft. 74 ) to Thesons and Helen — he fifty years of ajre and she a child of seveo 
 — when he carried her off to Aphidnne, can never have been the orifrinal form 
 of anv poetical le<reTid ; these a^t^s were probably imapcined in order to make 
 the mrthical chronoloiry run smoothly, for Theseus belonp; to the {genera- 
 tion before the Trojan war. But we oagjht always to recollect that Helen 
 liei'er jrrows old {t9/v rup t^ri^ ^/luev* ayrjpu — Qnint, Smvm x. 312), and 
 that her chronolofjy consists only with an immortal being: Servins observe! 
 fad .fi'ineid. ii. BHi) — " Helenam immortalfm fui.«?se indicat tempos. Nam 
 constat fratres ejus cum Anronantis fnisse. Arjjonantarnm filii cum Theba- 
 lus rrhebano Eteoclis et Pol vniois belle) dimkavemnt. Item illomm filil 
 
 HELEN.-BTESICHORU& 
 
 and made sensible of his impiety ; Vit having repented and oom 
 posed a special poem formally retracting the calumny, wab per- 
 mitted to recover his sight. In his poem of recantation (the 
 fiimous palinode now unfortunately lost) he pointedly contradicted 
 the Homeric narrative, atiirming that Helen had never been to 
 Troy at all, and that the Trojans had cairied thither nothing but 
 her image or eidolon.^ It is, probably, to the excited religious 
 feelings of Stesichorus that we owe the first idea of this glaring 
 deviation from the old legend, which could never have been 
 recommended by any considerations of poetical interest. 
 
 Other versions were afterwards started, forming a sort of com- 
 promise between Homer and Stesichorus, admitting that Helen 
 had never really been at Troy, without altogether denying her 
 elopement. Such is the story of her having been detained in 
 Egypt during the whole term of the siege. Paris, on his de- 
 parture from Sparta, had been driven thither by storms, and the 
 Egyptian king Proteus, hearing of the grievous wrong which he 
 
 contra Trojain hella gcsserunt. Ergo, si" immortalis Helena non fuissct, tot 
 sine duhio scculis durare non posset " So Xenophon, after enumerating 
 many heroes of different ages, all pupils of Cheiron, says that the life of 
 Cheiron suffices for all, he being brother of Zeus CDe Venatione, c. \). 
 
 The daughters of Tyndareus are Klytajmnestra, Helen, and Timandra, all 
 Cpen to the charge advanced by Stesichorus : see about Timandra, wife of 
 the Tegeate Echemus, the new fragment of the Hesiodic Catalogue, recently 
 wstored by Geel CGottling, Pref. Hesiod. p. Ixi.). 
 
 It is carious to read, in Bayle's article H€Une, his critical discussion of the 
 adventures ascribed to her — as if they were genuine matter of history, man 
 or less correctly reported. 
 
 > Plato, Republic, ix. p 587. c ID. dtyirep rb r^f 'EAcvj/f el6u7u>v Zny- 
 cixopoc <^m TtepKidxVTov yivecr^ai Iv Tpoirf, ayvoig, tov alrj^ov^. 
 
 Isokrat Encom. Helen, t. ii. p. 370, Auger; Plato, Phcedr. c. 44. p. 243- 
 144; Max. Tyr Diss. xL p. 320, Davis; Conon, Narr. 18; Dio Chryaort. 
 Or. xi. p. 323. Tbv (jlev Irrjaixopov h ry varepov udy ^eyeiv, wf rd Kapa- 
 vav olfde TrXevaeiev if 'EXevrj ovddfioae. Horace, Od. L 17 
 Bpod. xvii. 42. — ' 
 
 " Infamis Helenas Castor offensus vice, 
 Fraterque magni Castoris, victi prece, 
 Adempta vati reddidere lumina." 
 ftnsan. iii. 19, 5. Virgil, surveying the war from the point of view of the 
 Trojans, had no motive to look upon Helen with particular tendemoat: 
 Deiphobns imputes to her the basest treachciy (.£neid, vl 511. ^toeimt 
 mUaie Laejous,-" compare il 667). 
 
 
 !.,4 
 
 f \ 
 
 WJ 
 
 — -«, r 
 
009 
 
 mSTOBT OF GRFECS. 
 
 RETURN OF THE GRECIAN HEROES. 
 
 809 
 
 had committed towards Menelaus, had sen: him away from ttt 
 ooantry with sevenj menaces, detaining Helen until her lawful 
 bnsband should come to seek her. When the Greeks reclaimed 
 Helen from Troy, the Trojans assured them solemnly, that she 
 neither was, nor e^ er had been, in the town ; but the Greeks, 
 treating this allegation as fraudulent, prosecuted the siege until 
 their ultimate succetis contirmed the correctness of the statement, 
 nor did Menelaus j-ecover Helen until, on his return from Ti-oy, 
 he visited Egypt.' Such was the story told by the Egyptian 
 priests to Herodotus, and it appeared satisfactoiy to his hia- 
 toricizing mind. *• For if Helen had really been at Troy (he 
 argues) she would certainly have been given up, even had she 
 been mistress of Priam liimself instead of Paris: the Trojan 
 king, with all his family and all his ^ul>jects, would never know- 
 ingly have incurred utter and irretrievable destruction for the 
 purpose of retaining her: their misfortune was, that while they 
 did not pos>ess, and therefore could not restore her, they yet 
 found it impossibhj to convince the Greeks that such was the 
 fact." Assuming the historical character of the war of Troy, 
 the remark of Herodotus admits of no reply; nor can we great- 
 ly wonder that he acquiesced in the tale of Helen's Egyptian 
 detention, as a substitute tor the " incredible insanity" which the 
 
 ' Herodot. ii. 120. ov yap 6t] ovto> ye (ppevoiSXafSi/g r/v 6 Upla/io^^ ov3* ol 
 dX?jn TTpoaijKovTf^ avrT), etc. The passage is too long to cite, but is highly 
 enrioas : not the least remarkable part is the relig:iou8 coloring which ha 
 gives to the new version of the story which he is adopting, — "the Trojaofli 
 though they had not got Helen, yet could not persuade the Greeks that ttut 
 was the fact ; for it was the divine will that they should be destroyed root 
 and branch, in order to make it plain to mankind that upon great crimes the 
 gods inflict great panishments." 
 
 Dio Chrysoetom (Or. xi. p. 333) reasons in the same way as Hcrodotos 
 against the credibility of the received narrative. On the other hand, IsO" 
 kratcs, in extolling Helen, dwells on the calamities of the Trojan war as a teit 
 of the peerless value of the prize CEncom. Hel. p. 360, Aug.) : in the view 
 of Pindar {Olymp. xiii. 56), as well as in that of Hesiod (0pp. Di. 165), 
 Helen is the one prize contended for. 
 
 Euripides, in his tragedy of Helen, recognizes the detention of Helen is 
 Egypt and the presence of her fIdwAov at Troy, bnt he follows Stesicharoi 
 IB den3riiig her elopement altogether, — Hermes had carried her to Egypt iS 
 ft ckwd (Helen. 35-45. 706) : compare Voo Hotf, I>e Mytbo Heieo» 
 pides, cap. 2. p. 35 (Leydoi, 1843). 
 
 g^enuine legend imputes to Priam and the Trojans. Paixsanias, 
 opot ..he same ground and by the same mode of reasoning, pn>> 
 Bounces that the Trojan horse must have been in point of fact a 
 battering-engine, because to admit the literal narrative would be 
 to impute utter childishness to the defenders of the city. And 
 Mr. Payne Knight rejects Helen altogether as the real cause of 
 the Trojan war, though she may have been the pretext of it ; for 
 he thinks that neither the Greeks nor the Trojans could have 
 been so mad and silly as to endure calamities of such magni- 
 tude " for one little wonian."i Mr. Knight suggests various po- 
 litical causes as substitutes ; these might deserve consideration, 
 either if any evidence could be produced to countenance them, 
 or if the subject on which they are brought to bear could be 
 shown to belong to the domain of history. 
 
 The return of the Grecian chiefs from Troy furnished matter 
 to the ancient epic hardly less copious thtm the siege itself, and 
 the more susceptible of indefinite divei*sity, inasmuch as those 
 who had before acted in concert were now dispersed and iso- 
 lated. Moreover the stormy voyages and compulsory wanderings 
 of the heroes exactly fell in with the common aspirations after 
 an heroic founder, and enabled even the most remote Hellenic 
 settlers to connect the origin of their town with this prominent 
 event of their ante-historical and semi-divine world. And au 
 absence of ten years afforded room for the supposition of many 
 domestic changes in their native abode, and many family misfbr^ 
 tunes and misdeeds during the interval. One of these heroic 
 * Returns," that of Odysseus, has been inunortalized by the verse 
 >f Homer. The hero, after a series of long-protracted suffering 
 and expatriation, inflicted on him by the anger of Poseidon, at 
 last reaches his native island, but finds his wife beset, his youth- 
 ful son insulted, and his substance plundered, by a troop of inso- 
 lent suitors ; he is forced to appear as a wretched beggar, and to 
 endure in his own person their scornful treatment; but finally, 
 by the interference of Athene coming in aid of his own courage 
 
 Pansan. i. 23 8 ; Payne Knight. Prolegg. ad Homer, c. 53. Euphoria 
 tenstmed the wooden horse into a Grecian ship called "IrrTrof, " The Hcrm 
 Enphorion, Fragrt.. 34. ap. Diintzer, Fragm Epicc. Gr»c. p. 56^ 
 See Thucyd. i 12; vi. 2. 
 
 ; 
 
 rr 
 
mo 
 
 mSTORr OF GREKCX 
 
 a.i(l stratagem, he w enabled to overwhelm his enemies to resamt 
 his family position, and to recover his property. The return oi 
 several other Grecian chiefs was the subject of an epic poem by 
 Hagias, which is now lost, but of which a brief abstract or argu- 
 ment still remains : there were in antiquity various other poexnt 
 of similar title and analogous matter.' 
 
 As usual with the ancient epic, the multiplied sufferings of thit 
 ba<'k-voyage are traced to divine wrath, justly provoked by the 
 sins of the Greeks :; who, in the fierce exultation of a victor}' pur- 
 chased by so many hardships, had neither respected nor eveo* 
 spared the aluirs of the gods in Troy ; and Athene, who had been 
 their most zealous ally during the siege, was so incensed by their 
 final recklessness^, more especially by the outrage of Ajax, soQ 
 of Oileus, that she:Actively harassed and emhittt^red their r&tuniy 
 in spite of every effort to ap[)ease her. The chiefs began to 
 quarrel among th(;niselves ; their formal assembly became • 
 scene of drunkenness ; even Agamemnon and Menelaus lost 
 their fraternal hai*niony, and each man acted on his own separate 
 resolution.-' Nevt rtlieless, according to the Odyssey, Nestor, 
 Dioniedes, N«*opt()leinus, Idomeneus and Philoktetes reached 
 home speedily and safely: Agamemnon also arrived in PelofH>i> 
 nesus, to perish by the hand of a ti-eacherous wife ; but Mene> 
 laus was condemned to long wanderings and to the severest pri- 
 vations in Egypt, C^yprus and elsewhere, before he could set foot 
 in his native land. The Lokrian Ajax jierished on the Gyneaa 
 rock.' Though exposed to a terrible storm, he had already 
 peached this plai'e of safety, when he indulged in the rash boast 
 of having escaped in defiance of the gods : no sooner did PO" 
 fi^don hear this language, than he struck with his trident the 
 
 * Suidas, V. Nocrrof Wullner, De Cydo Epico, }) 93. Also a poeOi 
 ^Arpfuiuv Ku^odog (Athenae vii, p. 281). 
 
 * Upon this the turn of fortune in Grecian affairs depends {JEschyi. Agft 
 menin. 338; Odyss. iii 130; Eurip. Troad. 69-95). 
 
 * Odyss. iii. 130-161 ; ^Eschyl. Agamemn. 650-662. 
 
 * Odyss iii. 188-19t. ; '\v. 5-87. The Efryptian cit/ cf Kanopas, at Um 
 month of the Nile, wa« believed to have taken its name from the pilot of 
 Menelaas, who had died and was buried there ( Strabo, xviL p. 801 ; Tacit 
 Ann. ii. 60). MeveAoiOf voftog so called after Menelaui (DfO Chrjscst. zi 
 p. 361). 
 
 til 
 
 UBIQUITY OF THE BETUBNING HEBOEd. 
 
 m(k winch Ajax was grasping and precipitated both into the seSi' 
 Kalchas the soothsayer, together with Leonteus and FclypfBl^ 
 proceeded by land from Troy to Kolophon.^ 
 
 In respect however to these and other Grecian heroes, tales 
 were told diti'erent from those in the Odyssey, assigning to theoi 
 a long expatriation and a distant home. 2>Jest6r went to Italy, 
 where he founded Metapontum, Pisa and Herakleia:^ Philok- 
 tetes^ also went to Italy, tbunded Petilia and Krimisa, and sent 
 settlers to Egesta in Sicily. Neoptolemus, under the advice of 
 Thetis, marched by land across Thrace, met with Odysseus, who 
 had come by sea, at Maroneia, and then pursued his journey to 
 Epirus, where he became king of the Molossians.5 Idomeneos 
 came to Italy, and founded Uria in the Salentine peninsula. Dl- 
 omedes, after wandering far and wide, went along the Itahaa 
 coast into the innermost Adriatic gulf, and finally seUled in Datt- 
 nia, founding the cities of Argyrippa, Beneventura, Atria and 
 Diomedeia : by the favor of Athene he became immortal, and 
 was worshipped as a god in many dilierent places.^ The I^ 
 
 > Odvss. iv. 500. The epic Noaroi of Hagiaa placed this adventure of 
 Ajax on the rocks of Kaphareus, a soatliem promontory of Euboea (AignaL 
 hocToi, p. 23, Diintaer). Deceptive iighte were kindled on the dangerooi 
 locks by Nauplius, the father of Palamedes, in revenge for the death of fait 
 ton (Sophoklos, NovTrAtof Uvpnaeug, a lost tragedy; Hygin. f. 116; Seneo. 
 
 Agamemn. 567). 
 
 * Argument, fioaroi, ut tup. There were monuments of Kalchas neif 
 Sipontura in Italy also (Strabo, vi. p. 284), as well as at Selge in Piridto 
 
 (Strabo, xii. p. 570). . „..,:,,-• 
 
 » Strabo, v. p. 222; vi. p. 264. Vellei. Paterc. i. 1 ; Servius ad JEoi. x. 17* 
 fie had built a temple to Athene in the island of Keds ( Strabo, x. p. 487). 
 
 * Strabo, vi. pp. 254, 272 ; VirgU, ^n. in. 401, and Servius ad lac; I^- 
 
 ^^BoT'the tomb of Philoktetes and the arrows of Herakles which he had 
 Bsed against Troy, were for a long time shown at Thurium CJustin, xx. l> 
 
 6 Argumeut. ^ooroi, p. 23, DUntz.; Pindar, Nera. iv. 51. According W 
 Pindar however, Neoptolemus comes from Troy by sea, misses the island of 
 Skyms, and sails round to the Epeirotic Ephyra (Nem. vii. 37). 
 
 * Pindar, Nem. x. 7, with the Scholia. Strabo, ui. p. 150; v. p. 314-3S5; 
 wl p 284 ' Stephan. Byz. 'ApyvpiTrna, ^lofiv^ua. Aristotle recogm»8 b^ 
 ts buried in the Diomedean islands in the Adriatic (AnthoL Gr. Branc^ i. 
 
 ^-m identioa cripod which had been gained by Diom§d«s. as victor to 
 
 4 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 15 
 
 ***- 
 
 ■Mte 
 
319 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECB. 
 
 / 
 
 krian followers of Ajax founded the Epizephyrian Lokri on tht 
 BOutheramost corner of Italy,' besides another settlement in Libya 
 I have spoken in another place of the compulsory exile of Teu- 
 kros, who, besides founding the city of Salamis in Cyprus, is said 
 to have establishe<l some settlements in the Iberian peninsula.^ 
 Menestheus the Athenian did the like, and also founded both Elaea 
 in Mysia and Skylletium in Italy .^' The Arcadian chief Aga- 
 penor founded Paphus in Cyprus.^ Epeius, of Panopeus in 
 Phokis, the constructor of the Trojan horse with the aid of the 
 goddess Athene, settled at Lagaria near Sybaris on the coast of 
 Italy ; and the very tools which he had employed in that remark- 
 able fabric were sliown down to a late date in the temple of 
 Athene at Metapontum."* Temples, altars and towns were also 
 pointed out in Asia Minor, in Samos and in Krete, the foundation 
 of Agamemnon or of L is followers.^ The inhabitants of the Gre- 
 cian town of Skione, in the Thracian peninsula called Pallene oi 
 Pellene, accounted tliemselves the offspring of the l^elleniaiib 
 from Achiea in Peloponnesus, who had served under Agamem- 
 d6ii before Troy, and who on their return from the siege had 
 been driven on the s|)Ot by a storm and there settled." The 
 Pamphylians, on the Houthern coast of Asia Minor, deduced their 
 
 the chariot-race at the funeral games of l*atrocIus, was shown at Delphi in 
 the time of Phanias, attested by an inscription, as well as the dagger which 
 had been worn by Helikaion, son of Antenor CAthenae. vi. p. 232 J. 
 
 * Virgil, ^neid, iii. 399. ; xi. 265 ; and Senrius, ibid. Ajax, the son of 
 Otleus, was worshipped there as a hero (Conon, Narr. 18). 
 
 * Strabo, iii. p. 257; Isokrates, Evagor. Encom. p. 192; Justin, xliv. S. 
 Ajax, the son of Teakro«, established a temple of Zeus, and an hereditary 
 priesthood always held by his descendants fwho mostly bore the name of 
 Ajax or Teukros), at Olbe in Kilikia ( Strabo, xiv. p. 672). Teukros carried 
 with him his Trojan captives to Cyprus (Athenae. vi. p. 256). 
 
 •Strabo, iii. p. 140-150; vi. p. 261; xiii. p. 622. See the epitaphs OD 
 Teakros and Agapenor bj- Aristotle ( Antholog. 6r. ed. Bmnck. i. p. 179*1 80). 
 
 * Strabo, xiv. p. 683 ; I^ausan. viiL 5, 2. 
 
 * Strabo, vi. p. 263 ; Justin, xx. 2 ; Aristot Mirab. Ausc. c. 108. Also ths 
 ?|M^am of the Rhodian Simmias called HsXekvc (Antholog. Gr. Brunck. i. 
 p. 210). 
 
 * Vellei. Patercul. i. 1. Stephan. Byz. v. Aafnrr]. Strabo, xiii. p. 605 ; xiv 
 p. 639. Theopompas (Firagm. Ill, Didot) recoanted that Agamemnoo and 
 tfe followers had possessed themselves of the larger portion of Cyprus 
 
 f Thncydid. iv. ISa 
 
 I 
 
 MEMORIALS OF TUB DISPERSED HEROES. 
 
 81tt 
 
 ftom the wanderings of Amphilochus and Kalchas after 
 ike «ege of Troy : the inhabitants oi the Amphilochian Argoe 
 <m the Gulf of Ambrakia revered the same Amphilochus as their 
 ibunder.^ The Orchomenians under lalmenus, on quitting the 
 onquered dty, wandered or were driven to the eastern extremity 
 of the Euxine Sea ; and the barbarous Achaeans under Mount 
 Caucasus were supposed to have derived their first establishment 
 ftom this 80urce.'3 Meriones with his Kretan followers settled 
 •t Engyion in Sicily, along with the preceding Kretans who had 
 remained there after the invasion of MinSs. The Elyminians io 
 Sicily also were composed of Trojans and Greeks separately 
 driven to the spot, who, forgetting their previous differences, 
 ■nited in the joint settlements of Eryx and Egesta.^ We hear 
 of Podaleirius both in Italy and on the coast of Karia ;^ o( Aka* 
 nas, son of Theseus, at Ainphipolis in Thrace, at Soli in Cyprus, 
 and at Synnada in Phrygia ;^ of Guneus, Prothous and Eurypy* 
 Ins, in Krete as well as in Libya.^ The obscure poem of hy* 
 oopliron enumerates many of these dispersed and expatriated 
 lieroes, whose conquest of Troy was indeed a Kadmeian victory 
 (according to the proverbial phrase of the Greeks), wherein tbB 
 mfierings of the victor were little inferior to those of the van- 
 quished.'' It was particularly among the Italian Greeks, where 
 they were worshipped with very special solemnity, that their 
 presence as wanderers from Troy was reported and believed.^ 
 
 • Herodot. vii. 91 ; Tharyd. ii. 68. According to the old elegiac poet 
 Kallinos, Kalchas himself had died at Klarus near Kolophon after his march 
 from Troy, but Mopsus, his rival in the prophetic function, had conducted hit 
 followers into Pamphylia and Kilikia ( Strabo, xii. p. 570; xiv. p. 668). "Hie 
 oracle of Amphilochus at Mallus in Kilikia bore the highest character for 
 exactness and truth-telling in the time of Pausanias, fiavTelov uipevdiaTaroit 
 T&v in* hfjiov (Paus. i. 34, 2). Another story recognized Leonteus and Poly 
 pates as the founders of Aspendus in Ivilikia (Enstath. ad Iliad, ii. 138). 
 
 « Strabo, ix. p. 416. ' Diod6r. iv. 79 ; Thucyd. vi. 2. 
 
 • Stephan, Byz. v. Supva; Lvcophron, 1047. 
 
 • ^.schines, De Falsft Leg^at c, 14; Strabo, xiv. p. 683; Stephan. By* 
 
 • Lvcophron, 877-902, with Scholia; Apollodor. Frap^. p. 386, Heyaa 
 rhere is also a long enumeration of these returning wanderers and fonnclOT 
 tf new settlements in Solinns (Polyfaist c. 2). 
 
 7 Strabo, iii p. 150. 
 
 • Aristot Mirabil. Auscalt 79, 106, 107, 109; ill. 
 
 TOL. I. 14 
 
 l( 
 
 |i 
 
 » ' 
 
 H^ 
 
 "••"^* 
 
4 
 
 tfU 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 
 I pass over the numerous other tales which circulated among 
 the ancients, illustratinj^ the ubiquity of the Grecian and TroJMi 
 heroes as well as that of the Argonauts, — one of tho most strik« 
 ing features in the Hellenic legendary world.' Amongst them 
 all, the most interesting, individually, is Odysseus, whose i-oman- 
 tic adventures in fabulous places and among fabulous persons 
 have been made familiarly known by Homer. The goddesses 
 Kalypso and Circe ; the semi-divine mariners of Phaeacia, whose 
 ships are endowed with consciousness and obey without a steers- 
 man ; the one-eyed Cyclopes, the gigantic Laestrygones, and the 
 wind-ruler ^olus ; the Sirens who ensnare by their song, as thf 
 Lotophagi fiiscinate by their food — all these pictures formed in- 
 tegral and interesting portions of the old epic. Homer leaves 
 Odysseus reestablished in his house aud family ; but so marked 
 a personage could never be permitted to remain in the tameness 
 of domestic life : the epic poem called the Telegonia ascribed to 
 ffciin a subsequent seri<js of adventures. After the suitors had 
 been buried by their relatives, he offered sacrifice to the Nymphs, 
 and then went to Elis to inspect his herds of cattle there pastur- 
 mg : the Eleian Polyxenus welcomed him hospitably, and made 
 him a present of a bowl : Odysseus then returned to Ithaka, and 
 fulfilled the rites and sacrifices prescribed to him by Teiresias in 
 his visit to the under-world. This obligation discharged, he went 
 to the country of the Thesprotians, and there married the queen 
 Kallidike: he headed the Thesprotians in a war against the 
 Brygians, the latter being conducted by Ares himself, who fierce- 
 •ly assailed Odysseus ; but the goddess Athene stood by him, and 
 be was enabled to make head against Ares until Apollo came 
 
 * Strabo, i. p. 48. After dwelling emphatically on the long voyages of 
 Dionysus, Herakles, Jason, Odysseus, and Menelaus, he says, Mveiav (U kcU 
 AvTfjvopa Kal 'EverotV, nal drrAwf tov^ ck tov TpuiKOv noXefiov rrXavrf&evrof 
 elf TTuaav t^v olKOVfu-vrjv, u^iov fi^ rCnf iraXaiuv uv&pio'iruv vofiiacu ; 
 Swf fi7 ydp dr/ rolq Tore "E^Ai/mv, 6/ioiu>c ical Tolg ^afiapoig, 6iu rdv rfn arpor 
 Teta^ Xpavov, airojSaXeiv rU re hv olKift Kal ry aTparei^ Tzopitr&evTa: Cxtre furd 
 f^ TOV 'IXiov KaraoTpo^v rove re vtKrjaavraq kirt Xi^etav Tpairi<r&ai dtd 
 Tdf airopiac, nal irolXi^ fid'AXov rot)f rjmj^evTac kcU Trepiyevo/nevovc kK roi 
 woXifuw. Kal 6if koI iroXtnc vird roiiru v KTto^fivai keyovrai Karik 
 wAaav r^v i^u Ttjf 'EXXd6o( wapaXiaVfioTt & dwovKoiT^sea^ 
 
 ^NEAS AND HIS WA14DESING& 
 
 815 
 
 ■nd parted them. Odysseus then returned to Ithaka, leaving 
 the Thesprotian kingdom to Polypoet^s, his son by KaQidikd. 
 Felegonus, his son by Circe, coming to Ithaka in search of hie 
 father, ravaged the island and killed Odysseus without knowmg 
 who he was. Bitter repentance overtook the son for his un- 
 designed parricide : at his prayer and by the intervention of 
 his mother Circe, both Penelope and Telemachus were made im- 
 mortal : Telegonus married Penelope, and Telemachus married 
 
 Circe.' 
 
 We see by this poem that Odysseus was represented as tha 
 mythical ancestor of the Thesprotian kings, just as Neoptolemue 
 was of the Molossian. 
 
 It has already been mentioned that Antenor and JEneas stand 
 distinguished from the other Trojans by a dissatisfaction with 
 Priam and a sympathy with the Greeks, which is by Sophokles 
 and others construed as treacherous collusion,'^ — a suspicion in- 
 directly glanced, lliough emphatically repelled, by the ^^neas of 
 Virgil.3 In the old epic of Arktinus, next in age to the Iliad 
 and Odyssey, j^neas abandons Troy and retires to Mount Idai 
 In terror at the miraculous death of Laocoon, before the entry of 
 the Greeks into the town and the last night-battle: yet Leschda, 
 in another of the ancient epic i)oems, represented him as having 
 been carried away captive by Neoptoleraus.4 In a remarkable 
 
 ' The Telegonia, composed by Eugaramon of Kyrene, is lost, but the 
 Argument of it has been preserved by Proclus (p. 25, Diintzer; Dictys, vi 
 
 Pausani^s quotes a statement from the poem called Thesprdtis, respecting 
 a son of Odysseus and Penelope, called Ptoliporthus, born after his return 
 from Troy (viii. 12, 3). Nitzsch (Hist. Homer, p. 97) as well as Lol)eck 
 seem to imagine that this is the same poem as the Telegonia, under another 
 title. 
 
 Aristotle notires an ora«^le of Odysseus among the Eurytancs, a branch 
 of the jEtolian nation : there were also places in Epirus which l)oasted of 
 Odysseus as their founder (Schol. ad Lycophron. 800; Stephan. ^yz. v. 
 Bovvfif^ia-^ Etymolog. Mag. 'kpKeiatog', Plutarch, Quaist. Gr. c. 14). 
 
 * Dionys. Hal. i. 46-48; Sophokl. ap. Strab. xiii. p. 608; Livy, i. 1 ; Xeoo 
 jAa 1, Venat. i. 1 5. 
 
 » Mn. ii. 433. 
 
 * Argument of '\7uov llipcTic ; Fragm. 7. of Lesch^, in DOntzer'B CoUtf 
 
 tlon, p. 19-21. 
 
 Hellanikn? sorm^ to have adopted this retirement of -/Eneas to the ftroilf 
 
 \k f ' 
 
 ' I 
 
 t. 
 
 
 :)l 
 
I 
 
 (16 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 i i 
 
 h 
 
 passage of the Hiad, PoseidOn describes the family of Priam ai 
 having incurred the hjitred of Zeus, and predicts that ^neaa 
 and his descendants shall reign over the Trojans : the race of 
 Dardanus, beloved by Zeus more than all his other sons, would 
 thus be preserved, since ^neas belonged to it. Accordingly, 
 when jEneas is in imminent peril from the hands of Achilles, 
 Poseidon specially inteHeres to rescue him, and e^ n the implaf 
 cable miso-Trojan goddess Here assents to the proceeding.^ These 
 passages have been construed by various able critics to refer to a 
 familv of philo-Hellenic or semi-Hellenic ^neadie. known even 
 in the time of the early singers of the Iliad as masters of some 
 territory in or near th<; Troad, and professing to be descended 
 from, as well as worshipping, ^neas. In the town of Skepsia, 
 situated in the mountainous range of Irla, about thirty miles east- 
 ward of Ilium, there existed two noble and priestly families who 
 professed to be descended, the one tVora Hector, the other from 
 iEneas. The Skepsian critic Demetrius (in wliose time both these 
 families were still to be found) informs us that Skamandrius son 
 of Hector, and Asciinius son of jT^^neas, were the archegets or 
 heroic founders of his native city, wliich had been originally 
 dtuated on one of the highest ranges of Ida, and was subse- 
 
 est parts of Mount Ida, l)iiit to luive leiomiled it witli the stories of the 
 mijjration of ^neas, by savin*; that he only reinained in Ida a little time, 
 aiid then (juitted the country altoj^ether by virtue of a convention concluded 
 with the Greeks (Dionys. Hal. i 47-48). Anion^ the iurtnite variety ci 
 stories respecting this hero, one was, that after havinj; effected his settle- 
 ment in Italy, he had returned to Troy and resumed the sceptre, bequeath- 
 inp it at his death to Ascanius (Dionys. Hal. i. 5.3) : this was a comprehdl- 
 live scheme for apparently reconciling; all the Icjjends. 
 ' Iliad, XX. 300. Poseidon speaks, respectin«; >Kneas — 
 
 'A/^A' ayeT^\ fi/ueig TTF.p fiiv vn' tK i^amroj' uydyufiev^ 
 M^TTw: Kai KpoviSri^ Kexn^tjfferai., aUev 'A^fA/fyf 
 TovSe KaraKTeivy • uopLfiov 6e oi ear" uXeacrdaL, 
 '0<f>pa fi^ da-reouo^ /ever) kol a^avrof oXj/rai 
 Aapddvov, bv Kpovidfjc izepl ttuvtuv (piXaro TraidaVf 
 01 l^ev i^eyevovTo, yvvaiKC)v re ■&vrjTd(jjv. 
 •H<5j7 yhp lipid fiov yeve^v fix^vpc Kpoviuv 
 Nvv Se Af} klvetao jiiij Tpueaaiv dvd^eiy 
 Ka2 iraiduv TraMef, roi kev fieroT^ia'^e yevuvTU. 
 Again, v. 339, Poseidon tells ^neas that he has nothing to drtad from 9a§ 
 Other Greek than Achilles. 
 
 WORSHIP OF HECTOR AND ^NKAS IN THE TROAD. 311 
 
 qaently transferred by them to the less lofty spot on which it 
 etood in his time.' In Arisbe and Gentinus there seem to have 
 been families professing the same descent, since the same arche- 
 gets were acknowledged.'^ In Ophrynium, Hector had his con«. 
 secrated edifice, and in Ilium both he and JSneas were worshipped 
 as gods:3 and it was the remarkable statement of the Lesbian 
 Menekrates, that iEneas, " having been wronged by Paris and 
 stripped of the sacred privileges which belonged to him, avenged 
 himself by betraying the city, and then became one of the Greeks."^ 
 One tale thus among many respecting JEneas, and that too the 
 lUOftt ancient of all, preserved among the natives of the Troad, 
 who worshipped him as their heroic ancestor, was, that after the 
 capture of Troy he continued in the country as king of the re- 
 maining Trojans, on friendly terms with the Greeks. But there 
 were other tales respecting him, alike numerous and irreconcil- 
 
 • See O. Miiller, on the causes of the mythe of JEneus and his voyaj^e to 
 Italy, in Classical Journal, vol. xxvi. p. 308 ; Klausen, ^neas and die Pen. 
 ten, vol. i. p. 43-52. 
 
 Dematrius Skeps. ab. Strab. xiii. p. 607 ; Nicolaus ap. Steph. Hyz. ▼. 
 'koKavia. Demetrius conjectured that Skepsis had been the regal seat of 
 jEneas : there was a village called ^neia near to it (Strabo, xiii. p. 603). 
 
 • Steph. Byz. v. '\.pia(irj, Vevrivoq. Ascanius is king of Ida after the 
 departure of the Greeks (Conon, Narr. 41; Mela, i. 18). Ascanius portui 
 between Phokae and Kyme. 
 
 » Strabo, xiii. p. 595; Lycophron, 1208, and Sch.; Athenagoras, Legat 
 1. Inscription in Clarke's Travels, vol. ii. p. 86, 01 IXieiq rdv irdrpLov ^edw 
 hlveiav. Lucian, Deor. Concil. c. 12. i. 111. p. J34, Hemst 
 
 • Menekrat. ap. Dionys. Hal. i. 48. ^kxaioi)^ cJe dvlri elxe (after the buria4) 
 HOI eSoKEOV T7/C OTpaTifig rvv Ke<paXi)v dirnpax^ai. 'Ofxuq 6e Td<j>ov ahrii) dai- 
 oovrfc, knoXefiEOV yy irdaij, uxpt-? 'XXioq iaTM, klve'ua kvdovroc. Aiveinc 
 ydp driTw: kuv vird 'AXe^avdpov, Kal aird yepeuv lepcjv k^eipyofievoc, dverpei>§ 
 Jlpiafiov, kpyaadfiEvog dl ravra, eIc 'Axaiuv kyEybvEi. 
 
 Abas, in his Troica, gave a narrative different from any other preserved : 
 •* Quidam ab Abante, qui Troica scripsit, relatum ferunt, post discessom a 
 Troja Graecorum Astyanacti ibi datum regnum, hunc ab Antenore expol- 
 gam sociatis sibi finitimis civitatibus, inter quas et Arisba fuii: ^nean hoc 
 »gre tulisse, et pro Astyanacte arma cepisse ac prospere gest^ re Astvanact; 
 lestituisse regnum" (Servius ad Virg. ^neid. ix. 264). According to Dik- 
 tys, Antenor remains king and ^neas goes away (Dikt. v. 17): Antenor 
 brings the Palladium to the Greeks (Dikt. v. 8). Syncellus, on the con- 
 trary, tells us that the sons of Hectdr recovered Dium by the suggestions ci 
 Helenas, expelling the Atenorids (Syncell. p. 322, ed. Bonn) 
 
 
 «»»•*> 
 
 «p-^-an« 
 
 ■Hfcfi 
 
 9i*l 
 
 Ty 
 
I 
 
 1.1 
 
 81S 
 
 BISTORT Ol* GREECB. 
 
 1. 
 
 ■ble : the hand of destiny marked him as a wanderer {fctto pro- 
 fitgus), and his ubiquity is not exceeded even by that of Odj9> 
 teas. We hear of him at iEnus in Tiirace, in Pallene, at .J*kieiA 
 m the Therniaic Gulf^ in Delus, at Orclkomenus and Mantineia 
 in Arcadia, in the islands of Kythera and Zakynthus, in JLeukas 
 and Ambrakia, at Buthrotum in Epirus, on the Valentine penin* 
 ■uhi and various other plai^-es in the 8onthern region of Italy ; at 
 Dref»ana and Sej^esta in Sicily, at Carthafre, at Cape Palinurua, 
 Cumie, Misennni, C'aieta, and finally in Latinm, whore he laya 
 the first humble foundation of the nii«rhty Rome and her em- 
 pire. • And the reason why his wanderings were not continued 
 Btill further wa^, that the oracles and the pronounced will of the 
 gods directed him to settle in Latium.- In each of these numer* 
 ous places his visit was commemorated and certified by local 
 monuments or sj)ecial legends, particularly by temples and per- 
 manent ceremonies in honor of his mother Aphrodite, whosa 
 worship accompanied him everywhere : there were also many 
 temples and many diflcrcnt tombs of ^neas himself.^ The vast 
 asicendency acquired by Rome, the ardor with which all th« 
 Kterarv Romans es|)oused the idea of a Trojan origin, and tha 
 fact that the Julian family recognized jEneas as their gentila 
 primary ancestor, — all contributed to give to the Roman versioo 
 of his legend the preponderance over everv' other. The variooa 
 Other places in which monuments of j£neas were found came 
 thus to be represented as places where he had halted for a time 
 
 * Dionys. Halic. A. R. i. 48-54 ; Hcvne, Excnrs. 1 ad JEneid. in. ; De 
 Mnosp Frrorihus, and Ex curs. 1 ad A^a^. v.; Conon. Narr. 46 ; Livy, xl. 4; 
 Stephan. Byz. MvFia. The inhabitants of ^neia in the Thermaic Gaif 
 ipoj-shipped him with fjent solemnity as their heroic foander (Pausan. iii 
 82, 4 : viii. 12, 4). The tomb of Anchises was shown on the contines of the 
 Arradian On'homenna and Mantineia (compare Steph. Byz. v, Kacnxu) 
 ■nder the moantain calle^l Anchisia, near a temple of Aphrodite : on ttaa 
 discrepancies respecting the death of Anchises (^Heyne Excurs. 17 ad JEtk 
 Ut.) ■ Sepesta in Sicily founded by ^neas (Cicero, Vcrr. iv. 33). 
 
 • Tof; Ae ftfiKeri irpoourepu ttj^ EvpuTrtfc ir^evaai rdv TpioiKdv ffroJUw, al ft 
 }^ifOinol tyevovTo alrtoi^ etc. (Dionys. Hal. i. 55). 
 
 ' Dionys. Hal. i. 54. Among other places, his tomb was shown at Beam 
 ijnthia, in Phrygia (Festns, v. Romam, p. 224, ed. Muller) : a carious artidi^ 
 vHrioh contains an as«emhlag« of the most contrauictiMy statemeats respeel 
 Pir both ^^neas and Latinos. 
 
 ^NEAS FROM TROY TO ROME. 
 
 319 
 
 «u Ills way from Troy to Latium. But though the legendary 
 pretensions of these places were thus eclipsed in the eyee of 
 those who constituted the literary public, the local belief was not 
 extinguished : they claimed the hero as their permanent proper- 
 ty, and his tomb was to them a proof that he had liNed and died 
 among them. 
 
 Antenor, who shares with jEneas the favorable sympathy of 
 the Greeks, is said by Pindar to have gone from Troy along with 
 Menelaus and Helen into the region of Kyrene in Libya.' But 
 according to the more current narrative, he j)laced himself at 
 the head of a body of Eneti or Veneti from l*aphlagonia, who 
 had come as allies of Troy, and went by sea into the inner part 
 of the Adriatic Gulf, where he conquered the neighboring bar- 
 barians and founded the town of Patavium (the modern Padua) ; 
 the Veneti in this region were said to owe their origin to his im- 
 migration.'- We learn further from Strabo, that Opsikelhis, one 
 of the companions of Antenor, had continued his wanderings 
 even into Iberia, and that he had there established a settlement 
 bearing his name.3 
 
 Thus endeth the Trojan war; together with its sequel, the dis- 
 persion of the heroes, victors as well as vanquished. The ac- 
 count here given of it has been unavoidably brief and imperfect ; 
 for in a work intended to follow consecutively the real history of 
 the Greeks, no greater space can be allotted even to the most 
 splendid gem of their legendary period. Indeed, although it would 
 be easy to fill a large volume with the separate incidents which 
 have been introduced into the *' Trojan cycle," the misfortune is 
 that they are for the most part so contradictory as to exclude all 
 possibility of weaving them into one connected nan*ative. We 
 are compelled to select one out of the number, generally without 
 any solid ground of preference, and then to note the variations of 
 the rest. No one who has not studied the original documents 
 
 ' Pindar, Pyth. v„ and the citation from the Noorot of Lysirnachus in the 
 Scholia; given still more fully in the Scholia ad Lyccphron. 875. There 
 was a Ao^of ^ kvTTjvopidcjv at Kyrene, 
 
 *LivT, i. 1. Servias ad ^neid. i. 242. Strabo, i. 48 j t 212. OvM, 
 F«8ti, iv. 75. 
 
 ' 8^«lx>, iii. p. 167. 
 
 1 
 
 
 ^f 
 
If 
 
 aso 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 \ t 
 
 }^ 
 
 can imajrine the extent to which this discrepancy proceeds ; M 
 eovere almost every f)ortion and fragment of the tale. ' 
 
 Jiul though much may have been thus omitted of what the 
 reader might expect to lind m an account of the Trojan war, its 
 genuine character has been studiously preserved, without either 
 exaggeration or abaiement. The real Trojan war is that which 
 wa-^ recounted by Homer and the old epic poets, and continued 
 b} all the lyric and tragic composers. For the latter, though 
 th«iy took groat lilurties with the particular incidents, and in- 
 troduced to some extent a new moral tone, yet worked more or 
 less faithfully on the Homeric scale: and even Euri})ides, who 
 departed the most widely from the feeling of the old legend, nev 
 er lowered down his matter to the analogy of contemporary life. 
 They preserved its well-defined object, at once righteous and ro- 
 mantic, the recovery of the daughter of Zeus and sister of thfl 
 Dioskuri — its mixed agencies, divine, heroic and human — the 
 colossal Ibrce and de<;ds of its chief actors — its vast maenitude 
 and long duration, as well as the toils which the conquerors un- 
 derwent, and the Niimesis which followed upon their success. 
 And these were the circumstances which, set forth in the lull 
 blaze of epic and tragic poetry, bestowed upon the legend its 
 powerful and imperishable influence over the Hellenic mind. 
 The enterprise was one comprehending all the members of the 
 Hellenic body, of which each individually might be proud, and 
 in which, nevertheless, those feelings of jealous and narrow par 
 triotism, so lamentably prevalent in many of the towns, were as 
 much as possible excloded. It supplied them with a grand and 
 inexhaustible object t)f common sympathy, common faith, and 
 common admiration ; and when occasions arose for bringing to- 
 gether a Pan-Hellenic force against the barbarians, the prece- 
 dent of the Homeric expedition was one upon which the elevated 
 minds of Greece could dwell with the certainty of rousing an 
 uimnimous impulse, if not always of counterworking sinister by- 
 
 Thesc (livtTsitio-^ are well set forth in the useful Dissertation of Fucha 
 De Varietarc Fahularum Troicarum (Cologne, 1830). 
 
 Of the nuniher of romantic statement pat forth respecting: Helen and 
 Achilles especially, some idea may be formed from the foanh. fifth and sixth 
 chapters of Ptolemy HepfiaestioR (apod Westerraann. Seriott Mythof^rapb 
 |K 188, etc). 
 
 SPURIOUS TROJAN WAR OP THE fflSTORIANS. 321 
 
 motives, among their audience. And the incidents comprised in 
 Ae Trojan cycle were familiarized, not only to the public mind 
 but also to the public eye, by innumerable representations both of 
 the sculptor and the painter, ~ those which were romantic and 
 chivalrous being better adapted for this purpose, and therefore 
 more constantly employed, than any other. 
 
 Of such events the genuine Trojan war of the old epic waa 
 for the most part composed. Though literally believed, i-everen- 
 tially cherished, and numbered among the gigantic pha^nomene 
 of the past, by the Grecian public, it is in the eyes of modem 
 mquiry essentially a legend and nothing more. If we are asked 
 whether it be not a legend embodying portions of historical mat 
 ter and raised upon a basis of truth, - whether there may not 
 really have occurred at the foot of the hill of Ilium a war purely 
 human and political, without gods, without heroes, without Helen 
 without Amazons, without Ethiopians under the beautiful son of 
 t-os, without the wooden horse, without the characteristic and ex- 
 pressive features of the old epical war, -like the mutilated trunk 
 of Deiphobus in the under-worid ; if we are asked whether there 
 was not really some such historical Trojan war a., this, our an- 
 swer must be, that a.s the possibility of it cannot be denied so 
 neither can the reality of it be affirmed. We possess nothing but 
 the ancient epic itself without any independent evidence : had it 
 been an age of records indeed, the Homeric epic in its exquisite 
 and unsuspecting simplicity would probably never have come 
 into existence. Whoever therefore ventures to dissect Homer, 
 Arktinus and Lesches, and to pick out certain portions as matters 
 Of fact, whde he sets aside the rest as fiction, must do so in fuU 
 reliance on his own powers of historical divination, without any 
 means either of proving or verifying his conclusions. Among 
 many attempts, ancient as well a., modern, to identify real objecte 
 m this historical darkness, that of Dio Chrysostom deserves at- 
 tention for its extraordinary boldness. In his oration addressed 
 tothe inhabitants of Ilium, and intended to demonstrate that the 
 lYojans were not only blameless as to the origin of the war, but 
 ^nctonous in its issue -he overthrows all the leading points of 
 the Homenc narrative, and re-writes nearly the whole from be- 
 ^mng to end : Paris is the lawful husband of Helen, Achillea ii 
 Slam by Hect6r, and the Greeks retire without taJting Troy, dm 
 ^^^•'- U* 21oc 
 
 t\ 
 
 Ii 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 ^ ^' 
 
11 
 
 S22 
 
 mSTOBY OF GBEECE. 
 
 graced as well as baffled. Having shown without difficulty tluH 
 the Iliad, if it be looked at as a history, is full of gaps, incougrui« 
 ties aiid absurdities, he proceeds to compose a more plausible iiar- 
 iBtive of his own, which he tenders as so much authentic matter 
 of fact. The most imj>ortant point, however, which his Oration 
 brings to view is, the literal and confiding belief with which the 
 Homeric narrative wjis regarded, as if it were actual history, not 
 only by the inhabitants of Ilium, but also by the general Grecian 
 public. ' 
 
 The small town of Ilium, inhabited by ^olic Greeks,^ and 
 raised into importanct; only by the legendaiy reverence attached 
 to it, stood upon an elevated ridge forming a spur from Mount 
 Ida, rather mure than three miles from the town and promontory 
 of Sigeium, and about twelve stadia, or less than two miles, from 
 the sea at its nearest point. From Sigeium and the neighboring 
 town of Achilleium (with its monument and temple of Achilles), 
 to the town of Iih<jet«Mum on a hill higher up the Hellespont 
 (with its monument and chapel of Ajax called the Aianteium^), 
 was a distancti of sixty stadia, or seven miles and a half in the 
 straight course by sea : in the intermediate space was a bay and 
 an adjoining plain, comprehending the embouchure of the Sca- 
 maiuler, and extending to the base of the ridge on which Ilium 
 stood. This plain was the celebrated plain of Troy, in which 
 the great Homeric battles were believed to have taken place: the 
 portion of the bay near to Sigeium went by the name of the 
 Naustathmon of the Achieans (t. e. the spot where they dragged 
 their ships tishore), and was accounted to have been the camp of 
 Agamemnon and his vast array ."^ 
 
 * Dio Chrysost. Or xi. ». olO— $22. 
 
 * Herodot v. 122. Pausiin. v. 8,3: viii, 12, 4. A/oXfVf kK Ttfikn^q Tp^ia 
 Ax;, the title pro(Iaime<l at the Olympic games; like Pilolevc utto UovpcvaCt 
 from Myrina in the more southerly region of iEolis, as we tind in the list 
 of visitors at the Charitesia, at Orchomenos in Boeotia (Corj. Inscrip. 
 Boeckh. No. 1583;. 
 
 * See Paasanias, i. 35, 3, for the legends current at Iliam respecting the 
 W9st size of the bones of Ajax in his tomb. The inhabitants aftirraei that 
 ■Iter the shipwreck of Odysseus, the arras of Achilles, which he was carry- 
 ing away with him, were washed up by the sea against the tomb of Ajax 
 Pliny gives the distance at thirty stadia : modem travellers make it somo 
 tfling more than Pliny, but "onsiderably less than Strabo. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii. p. 596-&9S Strabo distinf^ishes the ^Axaitr^v Nav<rro^A«it^ 
 
 HISTORICAL ILIUM. 
 
 Historical Iliitm was founded, according to the questionable 
 •tatement of Strabo, during the last dynasty of the Lydian 
 kings,' that is, at some period later than 720 b. c. Until after 
 the days of Alexander the Great — indeed until the period of 
 Roman preponderance « — it always remained a place of inconsid- 
 erable power and importance, as we learn not only from the aa> 
 serrion of the geographer, but also from the fact that Achilleium, 
 Sigeium and Rhoeteium were all independent of it.2 But incon- 
 siderable as it might be, it was the only place which ever bore 
 the venerable name immortalized by Homer. Like the Homeric 
 Bium, it had its temple of Athene,^ wherein she was worshipped 
 as the presiding goddess of the town : the inhabitants affirmed 
 that Agamemnon had not altogether destroyed the town, but tlwit 
 it had been reoccupied after his departure, and had never ceased 
 to exist.4 Their acropolis was called Pergamum, and in it wa« 
 shown the house of Priam and the altar of Zeus Herkeius where 
 that unhappy old man had been slain: moreover there were 
 exhibited, in the temples, panoplies which had been worn by the 
 Homeric heroes,'^ and doubtless many other relics appreciated by 
 admirers of the Iliad. 
 
 which was near to Si>;^eium, from the ^Axatuv Xi/nrfv, which was moi-e toward! 
 the middle of the bay between Sigeium and Rhceteium ; but we gather frooi 
 bis language that this distinction was not universally recognized. Alexaa* 
 der landed at the 'Axaiuv T^ifiTjv (Arrian, i. \\y 
 
 * Sirabo, xiii. p. 593. 
 
 * Herodot. v. 95 (his account of the war between the Athenians and Mitj- 
 lenseans about Sigeium and Achilleium) ; Stralx), xiii. p. 593. T^v de rOm 
 ^Viuiijiv T^okiv Tjjv vvv Ttug fiEV KufioTTo'kLV slval ipaai, rd lepbv Jt^^^^^^ '^ 
 ^kdrivdQ fiiKpbv kol evreXeg. 'AApfai'*5pov de uva^avra fieru Ti)v km Vpaviio^ 
 VCKTjv, ava&rjfinai re Koafifjaat rb Upbv kqI irpoaayopevaat irb^uv, etc. 
 
 Again, Kal rb 'IXiov, o vvv larl, KufionoTiic rtg ffv ore npurov 'Fuuaioc ii^ 
 *Acia^ kneffrfaav. 
 
 * Besides Athene, the Inscriptions authenticate Zf i)j HoTnev^ at Iliani 
 (Corp. Inscrip. Boeckh No. 3599). 
 
 * Strabo, xiii, p. 600. Xtyovai A' ol vvv 'i/,4e/f Kal tovtOj wf ovde re/l«m 
 awejSatvev ij<j>aviaT&ai ttjv TroXiv Kara ttjv uXuaiv vnb tu>v 'A;j;ait!>v, oW k^ 
 Xeitp^ij ovSiiroTs. 
 
 The situation of Blum (or as it is commonly, but erroneously, termed, 
 /iew Ilium) appears to be pretty well ascertained, aljout two miles from the 
 •ea (Rennell, On the Topography of Troy, p. 41-71 j Dr Clarke'i Travelst 
 toLiip 102). 
 
 * ^rxes passing by Adramyttium, and leavinj^tfae range of Mount IdaoB 
 
 K 
 
 
 •^^w^*. 
 
 ■ ■* «._ . .. ^_ -^ . <_: 
 
'j 
 
 324 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCl. 
 
 
 < 
 
 These were testimonies which few persons in thase ages were 
 mclined to question, when combined with the identity of name 
 and general locality ; nor does it seem that any one did question 
 them until the time of Demetrius of Skepsis. Hellanikus ex- 
 pressly described this Ilium as being the Ilium of Homer, for 
 wb^ch assertion Strabo (or probably Demetrius, from whom the 
 narrative seems to be copied) imputes to him very gratuitously 
 Wi undue partiality towards the inhabitants of the town * Hero- 
 dotus relates, that Xerxes in his march into Greece visited the 
 place, went up to the Pergamum of Priam, inquired with much 
 interest into the details of the Homeric siege, made libations to 
 the fallen heroes, and offered to the Athene of Ilium his mag- 
 nificent sacrifice of a thousand oxen : he probably represented 
 and believed himself to be attacking Greece as the avenger of 
 the Priamid family. The Lacedaimonian admiral Mindarus, 
 while his fieet lay at Abydus, went personally to Ilium to offer 
 sacrifice to Athene, and saw from tliat elevated spot the battle 
 fiwight between the squadron of Dorieus and the Athenians, on 
 the shore near Rhoeteium.-* During the interval between the 
 
 his left hand, //ie e^ ri/v IXidSa y/jv ^Auino/nepov (Ve tov arftarot 
 
 hcl TOV lKafiavSpf)v .h' to llpiafiov Wiiiyafiov uve^rjf ifiepov lx<^v 
 
 ^erjaa<r&aL, QeT/aufxevoc Se, Kal nv^ o/jlevoc kcivuv ^xaara, r§ 
 *kdvvaiy ry 'Umdt l&vae (iovc ;rfXmf • xo(^C <5f ol fiayoi Tolaiv fjoumv Ixe- 
 
 avTo 'AjLia rjfiepTg 6e inopeveTO, kv apiaTcpy fikv cnrepyuv Toiteiov 
 
 •woKlv koL 'Oippvvelov Kal Aupdavov, ^irep dr} 'Afivd<f) bfiovpoi eoTiv • h de^iif 
 (te, Tipyi^ac TevKpovg (Herod, vii. 43). 
 
 Respecting Alexander (Arrian, i. 11), 'AveX^ovra dk ^f 'Utov, rp 'A^r]v^ 
 ^vaai Ty 'lAiddi, Kal t^v xavoTzXiav T7)v avToit uva^elvai ctf rdv vadv, kcU 
 Ka^eTteiv dvrl TavTrj^ tuv iepuv Tiva 6nXuv lr< iK tov TpuiKov epyov ffu^i- 
 fuva ' Mai TavTa Xiyovaiv oti oi vnaaniaral i<l>epov irpd avTov if rdf futxac- 
 Qvaai de avTdv iirl tov ^ufiov tov Afdf tov 'EpKeiov /l6>of Karixei, (ifivLV 
 Upiufiov napaiTOVfievov r^ NeonrTOAefiOV yevei, 6 dij ig avTov Ka&r/Ke. 
 
 The inhabitants of Uium also showed the lyre which had belonged U» 
 Paris (Plutarch, Alexand. c. 15). 
 
 Chandler, in his History of Ilium, chap. xxii. p. 89, seems to think that 
 the place called by Herodotus the Pergamum of Priam is different from the 
 historical Ilium. But th€ mention of the Iliean Athene identifies them m 
 
 tfie same. 
 
 * Strabo xiii. p. 602. *EAAdvt/cof 6e x^^Cofievo^ Tolq 'Utcvoti;, olo^ b 
 ixeivov fiv-&o<:, awTfyopei r.^) rifv avT^v elvai "koKlv rj)v vvv rf tote. Hellan- 
 {kns had written a work called TpuiKa. 
 
 ■ Xenoph. Uelleo. i- 1, 10. Skylax places Ilium twenty-five stadia, oi 
 
 RELICS AND MEMORIALS AT ILIUM. 
 
 8t^ 
 
 Peloponnesian war and the Macedonian invasion of Persia. Dium 
 was always garrisoned as a strong position ; but its domain ww 
 «till narrow, and did not extend even to the sea which was so 
 ■ear to it.i Alexander, oc crassing the Hellaspont, sent im 
 army from Sestus to Abydus, under Parmenio,and sailed person, 
 ally from Elaeeus in the Chersonese, after having solemnly sac- 
 rificed at the Eheuntian shrine of Protesilaus, to the harbor of 
 the Achaeans between Sigeium and Rhojteium. He then ascended 
 to Ilium, sacrificed to the Iliean Athene, and consecrated in her 
 temple his own panoply, in exchange for which he took some of 
 the sacred arms there suspended, which were said to have been 
 preserved from the time of the Trojan war. These arms were 
 carried before him when he went to battle by his armor-bearera. 
 It is a fact still more curious, and illustrative of the strong work- 
 ing of the old legend on an impressible and eminently religious 
 mind, that he also sacrificed to Priam himself, on the very altar 
 of Zeus Herkeius from which the old king was believed to have 
 been torn by Neoptolemus. As that fierce warrior was his heraie 
 ancestor by the maternal side, he desired to avert from himself 
 the anger of Priam against the Achilleid race.2 
 
 about three miles, from the sea (c. 94). But I do not understand how lie 
 
 can call Skepsis and Kebren iroTieig Inl ^a')iuaay. 
 
 ' See Xenoph Hellen. iii. i. 16; and the description of the seizure of 
 
 Ilium, alonp with Skepsis and Kebren, by the chief of mercenaries, Chad- 
 
 demus, in Demosthen. cont. Aristocrat, c 38. p 671 : compare ^neas 
 
 Poliorcetic. c. 24, and Polyaen. iii. 14. 
 •Arrian, I. c. Dik»archus composed a separate work respecting this 
 
 sacrifire of Alexander, nrpl rriq h 'U«V i^vmac CAthenie. xiii. p. 603; 
 
 Dikivarch. Frag^m. p. 114, ed Fuhr). 
 Theophrastus, in noticing old and venerable trees, mentions the <l>nrol 
 
 (Qurrcus (Bsculus) on the tomb of Ilus at Ilium, without any doubt of tiw 
 authenticity of the place (De Plant, iv. 14); and his contemporary, liw 
 harper Stratonikos, intimates the same feeling, in his jest on the visit of a 
 bad sophist to Ilium during the festival of the Ilieia (Athense viii. p. 351). 
 The same may be said respecting the author of the tenth epistle ascribed to 
 the orator -ffischines (p. 737), in which his visit of curiosity to Ilium is 
 described — as well as about Apollonius of Tynua. or the writer who 
 describes his life and his visit to the Troad ; it is evident that he did not dis- 
 tnisr the upxato'Aovia of the Ilieans. who affirmed their town to be the rati 
 Tpdv (Philostrat. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. Iv. 11). 
 The goddess AthdnS of Ilium was reported to have renderod valimUf 
 
 ii 
 
r 
 
 I] 
 
 ^36 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 ' 
 
 } » 
 
 Alexander made to the inhabitants of Ilium many munificiSiii 
 promises, which he probably would have executed, had he not 
 been prevented by untimely death : for the Trojan war was 
 amongst all the Grecian legends the most thoroughly Pan-Hel- 
 tenic, and the young king of Macedon, besides his own sincere 
 legendary tiiith, was anxious to merge the local patriotism of the 
 separate Greek towns in one general Hellenic sentiment under 
 himself as chief One of his successors, Antigonns,^ founded the 
 city of Alexandria in the Troad, between Sigeium and the more 
 southerly promontory of Lektum ; compressing into it the inhab- 
 itants of many of the neighboring ^olic towns in the region 
 of Ida, — Skepsis, Kebren, Hamaxitus, KolonoB, and Neandria, 
 though the inhabitants of Skepsis were subsequently permitted 
 by Lysimachus to resume their own city and autonomous gov- 
 ernment. Ilium however remained without any special mark oi 
 fiivor until the arrival of the Romans in Asia and their triumph 
 o\er Antiochus (about. 190 B. c). Though it retained its walla 
 and its defensible i)osition, Demetrius ot" Skepsis, who visited it 
 shortly before that event, described it as being then in a state of 
 neglect and poverty, many of the houses not even having tiled 
 rDofs.2 In this dilapidated condition, however, it was still mythi- 
 
 •ssistancc to the inhabitants of Kyzikus, when they were besieged by 
 Milhridatcs, coniniemoratud by inscriptions set up in Ilium (Plutarch, 
 Luouli. 10). 
 
 » Strabo, xiii. p. 603-607. 
 
 * Livy, XXXV. 43 ; xxxvii. 9. Polyb. v. 7d-l 11 Cpas^sages which prove ma 
 Dinni was fortitied and defiensible about b c. 218). Strabo, xiii. p. 594. Kai 
 rb '\?tov 6\ o vvv eari. KcjfioTroXig rig }fv, ore irpurov 'Pufiaioi Tf/g 'Aaiac tne* 
 ^nav Kol t^eSalov 'Avrioxov rdv /xeyav U rf/f kvrdc tov Tavpov. ^Tjai yovv 
 Atifir/Tpio^ 6 XKT}7l>iog, (xeipaKiov kniMjuriaav eig r;)v noTiiv kot' kKeivovg Toi)( 
 UupoiX, olrug uXiyupiffievv/v uhiv T7/v KaroiKiav, oxrve firjde Kepa/uurag ix^iv 
 Tdf fTTeyag. 'Hyrjaiuva^ 6f, roi>g Fakdrag irepatui^ivrag eK Tff<; Evpcjiri/gy uva» 
 ftrrvat (lev elc t^v noAiv ihofievovc kpvfiarog, napaxpv/^a rf' lK?inrelv did rd 
 ^e'xxiCTOV' tforepov ^ kiravopT^uacv eax^ ^^^^^^' Eir' EKuKuaav avrfjv no- 
 7uv oi fierd 'PtfiiSpiov, etc 
 
 This is a very clear and precise statement, attested by an eye-witness. 
 Bnt it is thoroughly incon.*.istent with the statei^jent made by Strabo in the 
 previous chapter, a dozen lines l)efore, as the text now stands ; for he there 
 informs us that Lysimachu;*, after the death of Alexander, paid great atten- 
 tion to Ilium, surrounded it with a wall of forty stadia in circumference. 
 wected a temple, and aggregated to Ilium the ancient cities around, which 
 
 RKSPECT SHO-WN TO ILIUM. 
 
 88? 
 
 «il!y recognized both by Antiochus and by the Roman oonsal 
 Livius, who went up thither to sacrifice to the Iliean Athend. 
 The Romans, proud of their origin from Troy and ^neas, treat- 
 ed Ilium with signal munificence ; not only granting to it immu- 
 nity from tribute, but also adding to itvS domain the neighboring 
 territories of Gergis, Rhoeteium and Sigeium — and making the 
 Bieans masters of the whole coast' from the Peraja (or conti- 
 
 V 
 
 were in a st.itc of decay. Wc know from Livy that the aggregation of 
 Grergis and Rhnetcium to Ilium was effected, not by Lysimachus, hut by the 
 Romans (Livy, xxxviii. 37); so that the Jirst statement of Strabo is not 
 only inconsistent with his second, but is contradicted by an independent au- 
 thority. 
 
 I cannot but thmk that this contradiction arises from a confusion of tha 
 text in Str.ibo's first passage, and that in that passage Strabo really meant to 
 speak only of the improvements brought about by Lysimachus in Alexan 
 dreia Trdas : that he never meant to ascribe to Lysimachus any improve- 
 ments in riium^ but, on the contr.iry. to assign the remarkable attention paid 
 by Lysimachus to Alexandreia Tr6as^ as tlic reason why he had neglected to 
 fulfil the promises held out by Alexander to Ilium. The series of facts runt 
 thus: — 1. Ilium is nothing better than a ku/itj at the landing of Alexander; 
 2. Alexander promises great additions, but never returns from Persia to ac- 
 complish them ; 3. Lysimachus is absorbed in Alexandreia Troas, into whidi 
 he aggregates several o*" the adjoining old towns, and which flourishes undef 
 his hands ; 4. Hence Ilium remained a /cw/xjy when the Romans entered Asm^ 
 as it had been when Alexander entered. 
 
 This alteration in the text of Strabo might be effected by the simple trans- 
 position of the words as they now stand, and by omitting dre Knl, ffSrj fTrc- 
 fte2.Ti^T/, without introducing a single new or conjectural word, so that dii 
 passage would read thus: Merd 6e ttjv eKeivov (Alexander's) Tr'/evT^v Avtn- 
 fiax<K fidXiara rrjg ^ AXe^avSpeiag tnefieTiiidr], ovvifiKKTfiivTjg (ikv ijdr) viz* 'Avtv 
 y6vov,Kal TrpoffTjyopevnfievTjc^AvTiyoviac fierafiaXovarfg 6e rovvo/ia • ( Wo^e ydfk 
 t{}a€(3eg eivai rot)c ' AXe^dvdpov diade^a/aevovg kKeivov Trporepov KTi^eiv iTTUvih 
 fiovc TToXefc, cZi9' ^avTcJv) koI veuv KareaKevaae koI reixog nepiEfiaXero bacm 
 40 (rraSiuv • (twukkte Se eig avT7)v rdg KVKXif) Trokeig upxaiaf, fjdri KeKOKotpii- 
 
 vac. KcU 6^ Kal avvefieive TroXfwv. If this reading be adopted, the 
 
 words beginning that which stands in Tzschucke's edition as sect. 27, and 
 which immediately follow the last word ttoAcwv, will read quite suitably and 
 coherently, — Kcu rb 'IXiov cT, o vvv karl, KunoiroTug rtc ^, 5re irpOrov *P(*» 
 fKuoi TTjc 'A<Ttaf kTTePrjaav, etc., whereas with the present reading of the pa»- 
 Mjcre they show a contradiction, and the whole passage is entirely confused. 
 
 ' Livy, xxxviii. 39: Strabo, xiii. p. 600. KaricKairrat ds Kal rd ^'.yfiap 
 4nc6 Tutv ^IXieuv did ttjv uTreiT^eiav itTT* iKeivoic ydpf^v tarepov if wapakit 
 96oa 71 uexpi AapddvoVj koI vvv vit' iKeivoif km. 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 ii 
 
 •ir*- 
 
 ' I ■ ^— " ' J\ ^ 
 
u 
 
 828 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 nental possessions) of Tenedos (southward of Sigeium) to the 
 boundaries of Dardsinus, which had its own title to legendary 
 reverence as the spottial sovereignty of -^neas. The inhabitants 
 of Sigeium could not peaceably acquiesce in this loss of their 
 autonomy, and their oity was destroyed by the llieans. 
 
 The dijjfnity and jiower of Ilium being thus prodigiously en- 
 hanced, we cannot doubt that the inhabitants assumed to ihem- 
 selvcs exaggerated ini|K)rtunce as the recognized parents of all- 
 corn (ucring Rome. Partly, we may naturally suppose, from the 
 jealousies thus aroused on the part of their neighbors at Skepsis 
 and Alexandreia Trnjis — partly from the pronounced tendency 
 of the age (in which Kratcs at Pergaraus and Aristarchus at 
 Alexandria divided between them the palm of literary celebrity) 
 towards criticism and illustration of the old poets — a blow was 
 now aimed at the mythical legitimacy of Ilium. Demetrius of 
 Skepsis, one of the most laborious of the Homeric critics, had 
 composed thirty l)ooks of t-ommeut upon the Catalogue in the 
 Diad: Hestia^a. an authoress of Alexandreia Troas, had written 
 on the same subject : both of them, well-acquainted with the 
 locality, remarked that the vast battles described in the Iliad 
 could not be packed into the narrow space between Ilium and 
 the Naustathmon of I he (Greeks; the more so, as that space, too 
 small even as it then st(X)d, had been considerablv enlarsred since 
 the date of the Iliad by dejwsits at the mouth of the Skaman- 
 der.' They found no ditHculty in pointing out topographical in- 
 congruities and inq>ossibilities as to the incidents in the Iliad, 
 which they professed to remove by the startling theory that the 
 Homeric Ilium had not occupied the site of the city so called. 
 There was a village, called the village of the llieans, situated 
 
 ' Strabo, xiii. 599. naparii^ij ded Arj/u^rpLo^ koi ttjv WAe^avdpivTfv 'Ecrn- 
 aiav fia(yn)pa, rrjv avyyputl^aaav irepi rf]^ '■Ofif/pov 'lAmtJof, irvvi^avofievTiv, el 
 irepl r^v vvv koTliv 6 ir6}.euoc crvvtarri, Kal rd TpuiKdv irediov nov tariv, o fxi- 
 Tai;v r^f TroAfwf koi tf}^ y^aXuaarjc o ttoijjt^^ <ppa^ei • rd fiev yap npd rz/f vifv 
 iroAewf dpijfievov, np6x(M>^a elvai tCjv noTa^uv, varepov yeyovoc. 
 
 The words tov lanv are introduced conjecturally by Grosskurd, the ex 
 oellent German translator of Strabo but they seem to me necessary to mak« 
 the sense complete. 
 
 Hesitaea is cited more than once in the Homeric Scholia fSchol Vcnet. ad 
 lUad. ui. 64 ; Enstath. ad Iliad, ii. 5381 
 
 HYPOTIfESIS OF AN OLD AND NEW lUUM. 928 
 
 miner less than four miles from the city in the direction of Mou«t 
 
 :t,ri" • ;-",r ' ""'° "» -' -"^ "-' -»" ^ 
 
 No positive proof was produced .o sustain the conclusion, fo» 
 Strain, express^ states that not a vestige of the ancient cit; ^ 
 mmed at the V.IlaRe of the llieans :> but the fundatnental ^ul 
 posmotj «... hacked by a second accessory supposition, to expla.^ 
 how ,t lutppened that all such vestiges had disappeared. N er! 
 ^e less Strabo adopts the unsupported hypothesis of Demetrius as 
 If It were an authenticated (act - distinguishing pointedly be- 
 tweenOld and New Ilium, and even censuringUllalik^ for 
 havng ma.ntatned the received local faith. IJut I cttnnot find 
 tliat Demetnus and Hest.a-a have bee.. (Allowed i.. this res„ect 
 l^y any other w.iter of at.cient times excepting Strabo. II um 
 8t.ll co..t.nued to be talked of a..d treated by every o..e •« tlm 
 genu.,.e Homeric T.oy : the cuel jests of the Ko,..a^ rebel Fm! 
 bn,t, when he sacked the town a,.d .n.«saered the inhabitants- 
 the co,„pe..sat.on made by Sylla, and the p.-onou,.ced favor of 
 Jul.usCa.sar and Augustus, _ all prove this continued recogni- 
 t.on of .dent.ty.« Arrian, though a native of Nicon.edia, hdd- 
 mg a high appointment in Asia Minor, and remarkable for the 
 exactness of his to,K)graphical notices, describes the visit of 
 Alexander to Ilium, without any suspicion that the place with all 
 Its relics was a mere counterfeit: Aristides, Dio Chrysostom Pau 
 sanias, Appian, and Ph.tarch hold the same language.:^ ' Bu 
 
 ^^^^;;;^j;;^;|ter^see^ °^^„ ^^ ^ 
 
 ■ Strabo, xiii. p. 599 OMi, f' ,>„f aC^.T^^p~^„^,,^ SeUi. 
 
 Vel,trAer'i.'t'"''^ ''™'""'"'- "'''^ ^'«'«-''- S---. c. . . 
 
 A J-'r?".","' ""*'' P»"''*«°'"« Baraes celebrated at Ilium in honor of 
 Athene by the Ibeaus conjointly with various other neighboring eiUes (see 
 Ojrp. Inscr. Bocckh. No. 3601-3602, with Bocckh's Lcrvatloust The 
 ralaab e ■nsenption No. 3595 attest, the liberality of Antioehu, Soter to- 
 wards the Il.ean Athene as eariy as 2?8 B. c. 
 
 «Jf,?T'J "' ^^^'"^ """''•■ ^''O Aristides, Or 43, Ehodiaca p 
 MO (Dindorf p 369). The curious Oratio xi. of Dio Chrysostom, in whieh 
 he wntes his new version of the TrojV. war, is addressed to the inhabit«« 
 
 '} 
 
 J I 
 
 » 
 
 i 
 
 ■ --> 
 
/) 
 
 II 
 
 aso 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 
 BupiM>sition trom Strabo as implicitly a.*; he took it from D^mft 
 trius. They rail Ilium by the disrespectful ap|>elIation of N^fm 
 Ilium — while the truvcller in the Troad looks for Old Ilium as 
 if it were the untquestionable sfx)t where Priam had lived and 
 moved ; the nam* is even tbrmally enrolled on the best maps re- 
 cently prepared (if the ancient Troad.i 
 
 I TJ 
 
 The controversy, now half ii century old. respecting; Troy and Uie 
 Trojan war — between Bryant aii<l his various opi-onenis, Monitt, (JillxJrt 
 Wakefield, the Briii.sh Critic, etc., seems now nearly fo!;;o:ien, aiid 1 euanot 
 think that the pamphlets on either side would he considered as displaying 
 mneh ability, if published at the present day. The discussion was first 
 raised by the publication of I^ (chevalier's account of tlie plain of Troy, in 
 which the author professed to have discovered the true site of Old Ilium 
 (the supposed Homeric Troy), about twelve miles from the sea near Bounar- 
 bashi. Upon this account Bryant published some animadversions, followed 
 up by a second treatise, in which he denied the historical reality of the Trojan 
 war, and advanced the hypothesis that the tale was of Egyptian origin (Dis- 
 sertation on the Wiiir of Troy, and the Expedition of the Grecians as de 
 8cril)ed by Honticr. showinp: that no such Expedition was ever undertaken, 
 and that no such cit}' of Thryj^na existed, by Jacob Bryant; seeminj;ly 1797, 
 thouj^h there is no date in the title-page: Morritt's reply was published in 
 1798). A reply from Mr. Bryant and a rejoinder from Mr Morritt, as well 
 as a pamphlet from G. Wakefield, appeared in 1799 and 1800, besides ao 
 Expostulation by the former addressed to the British Critic. 
 
 Bryant, havinj^' dwelt both on the incredil)ilities and the inconsistencies of 
 the Trojari war, as it is recounted in Grecian legend generally, nevertheless 
 admitted that Homer had a groundwork for his story, and maintained that 
 that groundwork was Egyptian. Homer (he thinks) was an Ithacan, de- 
 8cende«l from a family originally emigrant from Egypt: the war of Troy 
 was originally an Egvptian war, which explains how Memnon the P^thiopian 
 came to take part in it : '' upon this history, which was originally Egyptian, 
 Homer founded the scheme of his two principal poems, adapting things to 
 Greece and Phrygia by an ingenious transposition:" he derived information 
 from pnests of Memphis or Thelnjs (Bryant, pp. 102, 108, 126). The 'Hpwf 
 AlyvTTTxoc, mentioned in the second book of the Odyssey (1.5). is the Egvp- 
 tian hero, who atfordf, in his view, an evidence that the population o»' that 
 island was in part derived from Egypt. No one since Mr. Bryant, 1 appre- 
 hend, has ever construed the passage in the same sense. 
 
 Bryant's Egyptian hypothesis is of no value ; but the negative portion of 
 his argument, summing up the particulars of the Trojan legend, and con- 
 tending against its historical credibility, is not so easily put aside. Few 
 persons will share in the zealous conviction by which Morritt tries to make il 
 appear that the 1100 ships, the ten years of war, the large confederacy of 
 princes from all parts of Greece, etc., have nothing but what is consonatt witJi 
 
 LEGEND OF TROt. 
 
 881 
 
 8trabo has heie converted into geographical Biatter of fact an 
 hypothesis purely gratuitous, with a view of saving the accuracy 
 €f the Homeric topography ; though in all probability the locali- 
 ty of the pretended Old Ilium would have been fouod open to 
 difficulties not less serious than those which it was intr >daced to 
 obviate.' It may be true that Demetrius and he were justified in 
 
 historical probability ; difficulties being occasionally eliminated by the plea of 
 oar ignorance of the time and of the subject ( Morritt, p. 7-21 ). Gilbert Wake- 
 field, who maintains the historical reality of the siege with the utmost inten- 
 tkjt and even compares Bryant to Tom Paine (W. p \7), is still moro 
 displeased with those who propound doubts, and tells us that '* grave dispu- 
 tation in the midst of such darkness and uncertainty is a conflict with chi- 
 aweras" (W. p. 14). 
 
 The most plausible lino of argument taken by Morritt and Wakefield is, 
 where they enforce the positions taken by Strabo and so many other authors, 
 ancient as well as modem, that a superstructure of fiction is to be distin 
 gnished from a basis of truth, and that the latter is to be amintained 
 while the former is rejected (Morritt, p. 5; Wake. p. 7-8). To this Bryant 
 replies, that " if we leave out every absurdity, we can make anything plaa* 
 Bible ; that a fable may be made consistent, and we have many romances 
 that are very regular in the assortment of characters and circumstances : this 
 may be seen in plays, memoirs, and novels. But this regularity and corres 
 pondence alone will not ascertain the truth" (Expostulation, pp. 8, 12, IS) 
 *' That there are a great many other fables besides that of Troy, regular and 
 consistent among themselves, believed and chronologized by the Greeks, and 
 even looked up to by them in a religious view (p. 13), which yet no one now 
 thinks of admitting as history." 
 
 Morritt, having urged the universal belief of antiquity as evidence that 
 the Trojan war was historically real, is met by Bryant, who reminds him 
 that the same persons believed in centaurs, satyrs, nvmphs, augury, aruspicy ; 
 Homer maintaining that horses could speak, etc. To which Morritt replies, 
 " What has religious belief to do with historical fiicts ? Is not the evidence 
 on which our faith rests in matters of religion totally different in all iti 
 parts from that on which we ground our belief in history ? " ( Addit. Re- 
 marks, p. 47). 
 
 The separation between the grounds of religious and historical belief is by 
 no means so complete as Mr. Morritt supposes, even in regard to modem 
 times ; and when we apply his position to the ancient Greeks, it will be 
 found completely the reverse of the truth. The contemporaries of Herodo- 
 tus and Thucydides conceived their early history in the most intinuite con- 
 Junction with their religion. 
 
 * For example, adopting his own line of argument (not to mention those 
 battles in which the pursuit and the flight reaches from the city to the ships 
 nd back again), it might have been tuged to him, that by supposing thf 
 
 . 
 
 II 
 
 i 
 
^ 
 
 I) 
 
 I 
 
 h 
 
 HTSTOKT OF OREEOB. 
 
 Iheir negative ailment, so as to show that the battles deecribei 
 in the Iliad could not possibly have taken phioe if the city of 
 Piiam had stood on the hill inhabited by the Ilieans. But tht 
 legendary feith subsisted before, and continued withoat abt^ 
 ment afterwarda, notwithstanding such topographical impossibifi- 
 ties. Hellanikus, Herodotus, Mindarus, the guides of Xerxei, 
 and Alexander, had not been shocked by them : the case of the 
 latter is the strongest of all, because he had received the best 
 education of his time under Aristotle — he was a passionate ad- 
 mirer and constant reader of the Iliad — he was moreover per- 
 sonally familiar with the movements of armies, and lived at • 
 lime when maps, which began with Anaximander, the disciple of 
 Thales, were at least known to all who sought instruction. Now 
 If, notwithstanding such advantages, Alexander fully believed in 
 the identity of Ilium, unconscious of these many and glaring U^ 
 pographical difficulties, much less would Homer himself, or the 
 Homeric auditors;, be likely to pay attention to them, at a period, 
 five centuries earlier, of comparative rudeness and ignorance^ 
 when prose records as well as geographical maps were totally 
 unknown.^ The inspired poet might describe, and his hearew 
 
 \l 
 
 fionierie Troy to be four miles farther otF from the sea, he aj^jrravated the 
 difficulty of rolling tfae Trojan horse into the town : it was already sufficiently 
 hard to propel this vast wooden animal full of heroes from the Greek Nao- 
 •tathmon to the town of Ilium. 
 
 The Trojan horse, with its accompaniments Sinon and Laocoon, is oos 
 of the capital and indispensable events in the epic : Homer, Arktinns. Let- 
 ches, Virjril, and Quintus Srayrnajns, all dwell upon it emphatically as tiie 
 proximate cause of the capture. 
 
 The difficulties and inconsistencies of the movements ascribed to Greeks 
 and Trojans in the Iliad, when api)lied to real topoprraphy, are well set forth 
 b Spohn, IJe Agro Trojano, Leipsic, 1814: and Mr Maclaren has shown 
 (Dissertation on the To|)o^raphy of the Trojan War, Edinburgh, 1822) that 
 these difficulties are nowise obviated by removing Ilium a few miles furthar 
 from the sea. 
 
 • Major Rennell arpues differently from the visit of Alexander, emplof' 
 ing it to confute the hypothesis of Chevalier, who had placed the Homeric 
 Troy at Bounarbashi, the site supposed to have been indicated by Dem^ 
 Irius and Strabo : — 
 
 " Alexander is said to have been a passionate admirer of fTie Iliad, and 
 •e had an opportunity of deciding on tfie spot how fer the tepography ww 
 nnsistent with the narratiye. HifMi in bMD shown the site of UniinMhMM 
 
 Ot>NTmUANCB OF TWC MTTHICAL FAITH IN ILIUM. 388 
 
 woald Ksten with delight to the tale, how Hectdr, pursued by 
 Achilles, ran thrice round the city of Troy, while the trembling 
 Trojans were all huddled into the city, not one daring to come out 
 even at this last extremity of their beloved prince — and while the 
 Grecian army looked on, restraining unwillingly their uplifted 
 «)ears at the nod of Achilles, in order that Hector might perish 
 bj no other hand than his ; nor were they, while absorbed by 
 this impressive recital, disposed to measure distances or calculate 
 topographical possibilities with reference to the site of the real 
 DiumJ The mistake consists in applying to Homer and to the 
 Homeric siege of Troy, criticisms which would be perfectly just 
 if brought to bear on the Athenian siege of Syracuse, as de- 
 scribed by Thucydides;2 in the Peloponnesian war3 — but which 
 
 for that of Troy, he would probably have questioned the fidelity either of 
 the historical part of the poem or his guides. It is not within credil)ility, 
 tet a person of so correct a judgment as Alexander could have admired a 
 poem, which contained a long history of military details, and other transactions 
 diat could not physically have had an existence. What pleasure could he 
 receive, in contemplating as subjects of history, events which could not hav« 
 happened ? Yet he did admire the poem, and therefore must havefouiid tkt 
 iopoyraphy consistent : that is, Bounarbashi, surely, was not shown to him for 
 Troy (Reynell, Observations on the Plain of Troy, p. 128). 
 
 Major Rennell here supposes in Alexander a spirit of topographical criti- 
 cism quite foreign to his real character. We have no reason to believe that 
 the site of Bounarbashi was shown to Alexander as the Homeric Troy, or 
 that any site was shown to him except Tlium, or what Strabo calls New Ilium 
 Still less reason have we to believe that any scepticism crossed his mind, 
 or that his deep-seated faith required to be confirmed by measurement of 
 
 distances. 
 
 ' Strabo, xiii. p. 599. Old' ff rov "E«ropof <5^ irepidpofXT} tj ircpi ttjv Tokiy 
 iX€L rt ev^oyov ■ ov yap ken irepiSpofioc V vvv, dia t^v avvexv (taxiv ' rj Sk 
 irakaia ixei irepiSpo/n^v. 
 
 * Mannert (Geographie der Griechen und Romer, th. 6. heft 3. b. 8. cap 
 8) is confused in his account of Old and New Ilium : he represent- that 
 Alexj^nder raised up a new spot to the dignity of having been the Homeric 
 Ilium, which is not the fact : Alexander adhered to the received local belief. 
 Indeed, as far as our evidence goes, no one but Demetrius, Hestisea, and 
 Strabo appears ever to have departed from it. 
 
 • There can hardly be a more singular example of this same confusion, 
 than to find elaborate military criticisms from the Emperor Napoleon, upon 
 Ibe description of the taking of Troy in the second book of the JEneid. 
 Be shows that gross faults are committed in it, when looked at from tht 
 
 i 
 
i 
 
 HISTOKT OF OBEEd. 
 
 mn not more appliicable to the epic narrative than they would It 
 Id the exploits of jimadis or Orlanda 
 
 There is every reason for presuming that the Ilium visited bf 
 Xerx^ and Alexander was really the ^ holy Ilium" present to 
 tiie mind of Homer ; and if so, it must have been inhabited, either 
 by Greeks or by some anterior population, at a period earlier than 
 that which Strabo assigns. History recognizes neither Troy the 
 city, nor Trojans, as actually existing ; but the extensive region 
 called Tr6a«(, or the Troad (more properly Troias), is known 
 both to Herodotus and to Thucydides : it seems to include the 
 territory westward of an imaginary Hne drawn from the north- 
 east comer of the Adramyttian gulf to the Propontis at Parium^ 
 einoe both Antandrus, Kolonae, and the district inmiediately 
 Rxmd Ilium, are regarded as belonging to the I'road.^ Herodo- 
 tus further notices the Teukrians of GergisS (a township oonteiw 
 mlnous with Ilium, and lying to the eastward of the road from 
 Dium to Abydus), i*onsidering them as the remnant of a larger 
 Teukrian |K)pulati<)n which once resided in the country, ami 
 which had in very early times undertaken a vast migration from 
 Asia into Europe.^ To that Teukrian population he thinks that 
 the Homeric Trojans belonged i^ and by later writers, especially 
 by Virgil and the other lionmns, the names Teukrians and Tro- 
 jans are employed as equivalents. As the name Trojans is not 
 mentioned in any contemporary historical monument, so the 
 
 point of view of a general (see an interesting article by Mr. G. C. Lewis, in tbi 
 Classical Museum, vol. i. p 205, •* Napoleon on the Capture of Troy**). 
 
 Havinj; cited this critieism from the highest authority on the art of war, 
 we may find a suitable parallel in the works of distinguished poblicists. The 
 •ttack of Odyssens on the Ciconians (descrilwd in Homer, Odyss. ix. 39-61 1 it 
 dted both by Grotius (De Jure Bell, et Pae. iii. 3, 10) and by Vattel (Droit 
 dee Gens, iii. 202) as a case in point in international law. Odysseus is con 
 •Idered to have sinned against the rules of international law by attackiog 
 them as allies of the Trojans, without a formal declaration of war. 
 
 > Compare Herodot. v! 24-122; Thucyd. i. 131. The 'IXiac yv Is a p«l 
 4tt the Troad. 
 
 • Herodot. vii. 43. 
 
 • Herodot. r. 122. dXe fiev Alo?Ja( irdvTOf, 5<Tot r^v 'IXiada y^v ^eiumrm, 
 tlAe 6k Vepyi^ag. to7\ ^imXenp^evraig rov 6px^^^^ Tewpuv, 
 
 For the migration of the Teukrians and Mysians into Europe see Heroddl 
 ffl. 20; the Paeonians, on the Strymon called themaelves tbeit 
 
 • Herodot. ii. 118; v. 13. 
 
 THE TEUKRIANS. 
 
 le Tettkrians never once occurs in the old epic. It appears to 
 liave been first noticed by the elegiac poet Kallinus, about 
 660 B. c, who connected it by an alleged immigration of Teu- 
 krians from Krete into the region round about Ida. Othen 
 again denied this, asserting that the primitive ancestor, Teukrua, 
 had come into the country from Attica,' or that he was of indige- 
 nous origin, born from Skamander and the nymph Idiua — all 
 various manilestations of that eager thirst after an eponymoua 
 hero which never deserted the Greeks. Gergithians occur io 
 more than one spot in ^^olis, even so far southward as tiie 
 neighborhood of Kyme :'- the name has no })lace in Homer, but 
 he mentions Gorgythion and Kebriones as illegitimate sons of 
 Priam, thus giving a sort of epical recognition both to Geigig 
 and Kebreii. As Herodotus calls the old ei)ical Trojans by the 
 name Teukrians, so the Attic Tragedians call them Phrygians ; 
 though the Homeric hymn to Ai^hrodite represents Phr^giana 
 and Trojans as completely distinct, specially noting the diversity 
 of language ;3 and in the Iliad the Phrygians are simply num- 
 bered among the allies of Troy from the far Ascania, without in- 
 licatioii of any more intimate relationship.^ Nor do the tales 
 which connect Dardanus with Samothrace and Arcadia find 
 countenance in the Homeric poems, wherein Dardanus is the aoo 
 of Zeus, having no root anywhere except in Dardania.5 The 
 mysterious solemnities of Samothrace, afterwards so highly vene- 
 rated throughout the Grecian world, date from a period much 
 later than Homer ; and the religious affinities of that island as 
 well as of Krete with the territories of Phrygia and ^olis, were 
 certain, according to the established tendency of the Greciao 
 mind, to beget stories of a common genealogy. 
 
 To pass from this legendary world, — an aggregate of streams 
 distinct and heterogeneous, which do not willingly come into coii 
 
 ' Straho. xiii. p. 604 ; Apollodor. iii. 12, 4. 
 
 Kephalon of Gergis called Teukrus a Kr§tan CStephan. Byz. v. 'Aplafhf), 
 
 « Clearchus ap. Athaene. vi. p. 256 ; Stralx), xiii. p. 589-616. 
 
 • Homer, Hymn, in Vener. 116. 
 
 • Iliad, ii. 863. Asius, the brother of Hecab6, lives in Phrygia on the 
 of the Sanpfanns (Iliad, xvi. 717). 
 
 • See Hellanik. Pragm. 129, ISO. ed. Didot : and Kephaldn Getgithins 
 Sleph. Byz. v. *ApuT0if. 
 
 
 k 
 
 I 
 
 Ii 
 
 ! 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 16 
 
88U 
 
 HISTORY or GREECE. 
 
 r 
 
 'I 
 'I 
 
 fluence, and cannot be forced to intermix, — mto the cl-iutrei 
 vision afforded by Herodotus, we learn from him that in the yoar 
 500 B. c. the whole ••oast-region from Dardanus southward to the 
 promontory of Lektiim (including the town of Ilium), and from 
 I^ktum eastward to Adraniyttium, had been ^Eolized, or waa 
 occupied by iEolic (Greeks — likewise the inland towns of Skep- 
 sis' and Kreben. So that if we draw a line northward from Adra- 
 myttium to Kyzikus on the l*roi:)ontis, throughout the whole ter- 
 ritory westward from that line, to the Hellespont and the ^Egean 
 Sea, all the considerable towns would be Hellenic, with the excep- 
 tion of Gergis and tlie Teukrian |)opulation around it, — all the 
 towns worthy of note were either Ionic or il-^olic. A century ear- 
 lier, the Teukrian poi>ulation would have embraced a wider range 
 
 perhaps Skepsis and Kreben, the latter of which places was 
 
 colonized by Greeks fnnn Kyme :-' a century afterwards, during 
 the satrapy of Pharuaba^^us, it appears that Gergis had become 
 Hellenized as well as the lest. The four towns. Ilium, Gergis, 
 Kebren and 8kei)sis, all in iotty and strong positions, were distin- 
 guished each by a solemn worship and temple of Athene, and by 
 the recognition of that goddess as their special patroness.-^ 
 
 The author of the Iliad conceived the whole of this region as 
 occupied by people not Greek, — Trojans, Dardanians, Lykians, 
 Lelegians, Pela-^gian^ and Kilikians. He recognizes a temple 
 and worship of Athene in Ilium, though the goildcss is bitterly 
 
 • Skepsis received some colonists from tlie Ionic Miletus (Anaximenea 
 •pud Straho, xiv. p 635) ; but the coins of the place prove that its dialect 
 waa ^Eolic. See Klausen, JEneas und die Penaten, torn. i. note 180. 
 
 Arisbe also, near Aby lus, seems to have been settled from Mitylenc CEu 
 •tath. ad Iliad, xii 97). 
 
 The extraordinary fertility and rich black mould of the plain around Ilium 
 18 noticed by modern travellers (see Franklin, Remarks and Observations oa 
 the Plain of Troy, London, 1800, p. 44 ) : it is also easily worked : - a couple 
 of buffaloes or oxen were sufficient to draw the plough, whereas near Constan- 
 tinople it takes twelve or fourteen. 
 
 • Ephorus ap. Harpocrat. v. Kcfipr/va. 
 
 » Xenoph. Hellen. i. 1, 10 ; iii. 1, 10-15. 
 
 One of the jjreat motives of Dio in setting aside the Homeric narrative of the 
 Trojan war. is to vindicate Athene from the charge of having unjustly d«» 
 rtmyed her own city of Ilinm (Orat. xi. p. 310 : fidXiara 6ia fijv 'AiJ^vav 5iruc 
 «ii^ ioKT] adiKUf diaf&eipai rifv iavrrjc /roAtv). 
 
 BODfERlC AND mSTOUGAL TBOAD. 
 
 hcstile to the Trojans • and Arktinus described the Palladium as 
 the capital protection of the city. But perhaps the most remark* 
 able feature of identity between the Homeric and the historical 
 iEolis, is, the solemn and diffused worship of the Sminthian A{>oila 
 Chryse, Killa and Tenedos, and more than one place called Smia- 
 thium, maintain the surname and invoke the protection of that 
 god during later times, just as they are emphatically described to 
 do by Homer.' 
 
 When it is said that the Post-Homeric Greeks gradually Hel- 
 lenized this entire region, we are not to understand that the whole 
 previous population either retired or was destroyed. The Greeks 
 settled in the leading and considerable towns, which enabled them 
 both to protect one another and to gratify their predominant tastes. 
 Partly by force — but greatly also by that superior activity, and 
 power of assimilating foreign ways of thought to their own, which 
 distinguished them from the beginning — they invested all the 
 public features and management of the town with an Hellenic air, 
 distributed all about it their gods, their heroes and their legends, 
 and rendered their language the medium of public administration, 
 religious songs and addresses to the gods, and generally for com« 
 munications wherein any number of persons were concerned. But 
 two remarks are here to be made : first, in doing this they could 
 cot avoid taking to themselves more or less of that which belonged 
 
 * Strabo, X. p. 473; xiii. p. 604-^5. Folemon. Fragm. 31. p. 63, ed. 
 Preller. 
 
 Polemon was a native of Ilinm, and had written a periegesis of the place 
 ^ihout 200 B. c, therefore earlier than Demetrius of Skcpsis) : he may have 
 witnessed the improvement in its position effected by the Romans. He 
 noticed the identical stone upon which Palamedes had taught the Greeks to 
 play at dice. 
 
 The Sminthian Apollo appears inscribed on the coins of Alexandreia Troas; 
 tnd the temple of the god was memorable even down to the time of the em- 
 peror Julian (Ammian. Marcellin. xxii. 8). Compare Menander (the Rhetor) 
 WKpl ^ETTiSeiKTtKuv^ Iv. 14 ; apad Walz. Collect Rhetor, t ix. p. 304 ; also 
 Wepi 'SfjUv&iaKcJv^ iv. 17. 
 
 J^uiv^oc, both in the Kr#tan and the .^k>lic dialect, mesnt a. Jidd-numm: 
 tbe re^on seems to have been greatly plagaed by these little animals. 
 
 Poleroo could not have accepted the theory of DSm^trios, that Iliam wat 
 Bot the genuine Troy : his Periegesis, describing the localities and relict of 
 Oiam, impli<Mi the Intimacy of the place tm a matter of oonrse. 
 
 ▼OL. I. 15 22 
 
 I M' 
 
mSTORT OP 0!n?ECR 
 
 to the parties with whom thej fraternized, so that the result 
 Dot pure Hellenism ; next, that even this w&« done onlj in the 
 towns, without being fully extended to the territorial domain 
 around, or to those smellier townships which stood to tiic town in 
 ft de[)endeiit relation. The -/Kolie and Ionic Greeks borrowed 
 fiom the Asiatics whom they had Uellenized, musical instrumenta 
 and new laws of rhythm and »nelody, which they knew how to turn 
 to account: they further adopted more or less of those violent 
 and maddening religious rites, man'fested occasionally in self- 
 inflicted suffering and mutilation, which were indigenous in Asia 
 Minor in the worship of the (Ireat Mother. The ivligion of the 
 Greeks in the region oi' Ida as well as at Kyzikus was more 
 orgiastic than the native worship of Greece Proper, just as that 
 erf Lampsacus, Priapus and Parium was more licentious. From 
 the Teukrian region of Gergis, and from the Gergithes near 
 Kyme, sprang the original Sibylline prophecies, and the legend- 
 ary Sibyll who plays so important a part in the tale of ^^neas : 
 the mythe of the Sibyll, whose prophecies are supposed to be 
 heard in the hollow bhist bursting out from obscure caverns and 
 apertures in the rocks,' was indigenous among the (lergithian 
 Teukrians, and passed from tiie Kymieans in ^Eolis, along with 
 ^e other circumstances of the tale of TEne.is, to their brethren 
 thd inhabitants of Curaae in Italy. The date of the Gergithian 
 Sibyll, or rather of the circulation of her supposed prophecies, is 
 phiced during the reign of Croesus, a period when Gergis was 
 thoroughly Teukrian. Her prophecies, though embodied in 
 Greek verses, had their root in a Teukrian soil and feelings ; and 
 the promises of future empire which they so liberally make to the 
 fugitive hero escaping from the flames of Troy into Italy, become 
 interesting from the remarkable way in which they were realized 
 by Rome.'^ 
 
 Vii^l, ^neid, vi. 42: — 
 
 Excisum Eabolcse latus ing^ens mpis in antmm, 
 Qno lati ducuiit aditus centum, ostia centum y 
 TJnde munt totidem voces, responsa Sibyllae. 
 
 'Pauffanias, x. 12, 8; Laotantius, i. 6, 12; Steph. Brz. ▼. Wpfiijooof ^ 
 %Ao\. Plat. Phaedr. p. 31 5, Hekker. 
 Th» date of this Gergiti jmi iSibyli, or ot' Ibe prophecMtf pasaui^ under hfll 
 
 LEGEND OF TROT 
 
 At what time Ilium and Dardanus became .£o]ized we have 
 ao information. We find the Mitylenseans in poegessioD of Si- 
 geium in the time of the poet Alkasus, about 600 b. c. ; and the 
 Athenians during the reign of Peisistratus, having wrested it ivotL 
 them and trying to maintain their possession, vindicate the pro- 
 ceeding by saying that they had ad much right to it as the Mity- 
 len:eans, " for the latter had no more claim to it than any of the 
 other Greeks who had aided Menelaus in avenging tiie abduct ioh 
 of Helen."' This is a very remarkable incident, as attesting the 
 celebrity of the legend of Troy, and the value of a mythicid title 
 in international disputes — yet seemingly implying that the estab- 
 lishment of the Mitylenaeans on that spot must have been sufll 
 cieiilly recent. The country near the junction of the Hellespont 
 and the Propontis is represented as originally held -by Bebrykian 
 Thracians, while Abydus was first occujiied by Milesian colonista 
 in the reign and by the permission ot* liie Lydian king Gyges^ 
 — to whom the whole Troad and the neighboring territory be- 
 longed, and ui)on whom therefore the Teukrians of Ida must have 
 been dependent. This must have been about 700 b. c, a [)eriod 
 
 name, is stated by Herakleides of Pontas, and there seems no reason fbr 
 calhn<:^ it in question. 
 
 Kliiusen (^Eneas und die Penaten, hook ii. p. 205) has worked out oe 
 piously the circulation and legendary import of the Sibylline prophecies. 
 
 ' Herodot. v. 94. "Liyuov rd elXs TleiaifTTpaTft^ <^i-Xf^V irapu Mirv 
 
 Arjvanov 'A^I^T/vaioi, uKot^tiKvvvTE^ Xoyu ovdiv fiaX>ov kioXtvai ueTe&9 
 
 T/yj- 'IXm<5of X^PV^y '/ <"^ f**^ '^'P'- ^a^ tqIctl uV/oiniy oaui 'EaAj71'wi' avve^e-rp^ 
 ^avTo MrveAcw raf 'EAfVjyf ripTrayaf. In ^-ichylos (EuiPenid. 402 j the god- 
 dess Athene claims the land about the Skamamler, as having been presented 
 to the Bona of Theseua by the general vote of the Grecian chiefs : — 
 
 'Att^ ^Kafiuvdpov yf/v KaraipT^aTovfievij^ 
 "Hv 6f) t' 'AxaiC)v uKTopeq re Kai trpofioi 
 Twv aixfiakuTuv ;f/»>7/xarwv Aa;fOf fih/a^ 
 "Eveifiav avroirpefivov elq rd ttuv tpol, 
 '¥^aipeTdv dupTifia Orjaeu^ tokoi^. 
 
 In the days of Peisistratus, it seems Athens was not bold enough or poiw<» 
 erfal enoujjrh to advance this vast pretension. 
 
 * Charon of Lampsacus ap. Schol. ApoUon, Rhod. ii. 2 ; Bemhardv el 
 Diony§. Peri»*get. 805. p. 747. 
 
 ' Such at least is the statement of Strabo (xii. p. 590) ; thoagh such «l 
 extent of Lydian rule at that time seems not easy to reconcile with the 
 eeedings of the nbseqaent Lydian kings. 
 
 
 L 
 
 M 
 
 \ 
 
 I 
 
V 
 
 
 \\ 
 
 \ 
 
 840 
 
 mSTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 eonsiderably earlier than the Mitylenaean occupation of Sigeiois 
 Lampsacus and Papsus, on the neighboring shores of the Propoo 
 tie, were also Milesian colonies, though we do not know their date 
 BariuiQ was jointly setth^l from Miletus, Erjthras and Parus. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 3ECIAN MYTHES, AS UNDERSTOOD, FELT AND INTERPRETED 
 BY TIIK GREEKS THEMSELVES. 
 
 The preceding sections have been intended to exhibit a sketch 
 rf that narrative matter, so abundant, so characteristic and so 
 interesting, out of which early Grecian history and chronology 
 ha 'e been extracted, liaised originally by hands unseen and 
 firoiu data unassignable, it existed lirst in the sliape of floating 
 talk among the people, from whence a large })ortion of it passed 
 into the song of the poets, who multiplied, transformed and adorn- 
 ed i: in a thousand various ways. 
 
 These mythes or current stories, the spontaneous and earliest 
 growth of the Grecian mind, constituted at the same time the 
 entire intellectual stock of the age to which they belonged. They 
 are the common root of all those different ramifications into which 
 the mental activity of the Greeks subsequently diverged ; con- 
 taining, as it were, the preface and germ of the positive history 
 and philosophy, the dogmatic theology and the professed romance, 
 which we shall hereafter trace each in its separate development. 
 They furnished aliment to the curiosity, and solution to the vague 
 doubts and aspirations of the age ; they explained the origin of 
 those customs and standing peculiarities with which men were 
 &miliar ; they impressed moral lessons, awakened patriotic sym 
 pathies, and exhibited in detail the shadowy, but anxious presen 
 timents of the vulgar a& to the agency of the gods : moreovef 
 lliey satisfied that craving for adventure and appetite for tht 
 
 GENERAL REMARKS ON MYTHICAL NARRATIVES. 34i 
 
 liiarvellous, which has in modern times become the province of 
 fiction proper. 
 
 It is diflficult, we may say impossible, for a man of mature age 
 to carry back his mind to his conceptions such as they stood when 
 he was a child, growing naturally out of his imagination and feel- 
 ings, working ui)on a scanty stock of materials, and borrowing 
 from authorities whom he blindly followed but imperfectly appre- 
 hended. A similar difficulty occurs when we attempt to place 
 ourselves in the historical and quasi-philosophical point of view 
 which the ancient mythes present to us. We can follow perfect- 
 ly the imagination and feeling which dictated these tales, and we 
 can admire and sympathize with them as animated, sublime, and 
 affecting poetry ; but we are too much accustomed to matter of 
 fact and philosophy of a positive kind, to be able to conceive a 
 time when these beautiful fancies were construed literally and 
 accepted as serious reality. 
 
 Nevertheless it is obvious that Grecian mythes cannot be either 
 understood or appreciated except with reference to the system of 
 conceptions and belief of the ages in which they arose. We 
 must suppose a public not reading and writing, but seeing, hear- 
 ing and telling — destitute of all records, and careless as well as 
 ignorant of positive history with its indispensable tests, yet at the 
 same time curious and full of eagerness for new or impressive 
 incidents — strangers even to the rudiments of positive philoso- 
 phy and to the idea of invariable sequences of nature either in 
 the physical or moral world, yet requiring some connecting the- 
 ory to interpret and regularize the phaenomena before them. Such 
 a theory was supplied by the spontaneous inspirations of an early 
 fancy, which supposed the habitual agency of beings intelligent 
 and voluntary like themselves, but superior in extent of power, 
 and different in peculiarity of attributes. In the geographical 
 ideas of the Homeric period, the earth was flat and round, with 
 the deep and gentle ocean-stream flowing around and returning 
 mto itself: chronology, or means of measuring past time, there 
 existed none ; but both unobserved regions might be described, 
 the forgotten past unfolded, and the unknown future predicted — 
 through particular men specially inspired by the gods, or endow- 
 ed by them with that peculiar vision whidi detected and inter 
 preted passing signs and omens. 
 
 ;'i 
 
 
 !ii 
 
''■ , 
 
 ^42 
 
 BISTOBT OP GRECCK 
 
 ! 
 
 If eren tbe mdinients of scientific geogmphj and physics, 
 •o universally diffused and so invaluable as a security agauoit 
 error and delusion., were wanting in this early stage of society^ 
 Iheir place was abundantly supplied by viyacity of imaginatica 
 and by personifying sympathy. The unbounded tendency of tfaa 
 Homeric Greeks to multiply fictitious persons, and to construe 
 the phaenomena which interested them into manifestations of de- 
 sign, is above all things here to be noticed, because the form oi 
 personal narrative, universal in their mythes, is one of its many 
 manifestations. Their polytheism (comprising some elements of 
 an original fetichism, in which particular objects had themselves 
 been supposed to be endued with life, volition, and design) recogk* 
 nized agencies of unseen beings identified and confounded \vith 
 the different localities and departments of the physical world. 
 Of such beings there were numerous varieties, and many grada> 
 tions both in power and attributes ; there were differences of a^o, 
 sex and local residttnce, relations both conjugal and filial between 
 them, and tendencies sympathetic as well as repugnant. The 
 gods formed a sort; of political community of their own, which 
 had its hierarchy, its distribution of ranks and duties, its conten- 
 tions for {X)wer and occasional revolutions, its public meeting's in 
 the agora of Olym{)us, and its multitudinous banquets or festi- 
 vals.' The great Olympic gods were in fact only the most exalted 
 amongst an aggregate of quasi-human or ultra-human personages, 
 — dn^mons, heroes, nymphs, eponymous (or name-giving) genii, 
 identified with each river, mountain,'^ cape, town, village, or knovm 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, i. 603; xx. 7. Hesiod. Theo^^on. 802. 
 
 • Wc read in the ILiad that Asteropaeus was grandson of the beautiful 
 river Axias. and Achilles, after having slain hira, admits the dignity of thl« 
 parentage, but boasts that his own descent from Zens was much greats*, 
 •iDce even the great river Aehelons and Oceanus himself is inferior to Zeoi 
 (xxi. 157-191). Skamandcr fights with Achilles, calling his brother 8imoii 
 10 his aid (213-308). Tyro, the daughter of Salmoneus, falls in love with 
 Enipeus, the most beautiful of rivers (Odyss. xi. 237). Acheloas appear! 
 AS a suitor of Deianira (Sophokl. Trach. 9). 
 
 There cannot be a burner illustration of this feeling than what is told of 
 the New Zealanders at the present time. The chief Uea-Uea appeals to hit 
 ancestor, the great mountain Tonga Riro: " I am the Hea-Ueo, and rait 
 Qfet joa all, just as my ancestor Tonga Riro, the mountain of snow, standi 
 ibove ail this land." (£. J. Wakefield, Adventnreg in New Zealand, vol 1 
 
 PERSOXIFVING SYMPATHT AND DiAOWAnON. 
 
 dtt 
 
 gircumscription of territory, — besides horses, bulls, and do«^s, ot 
 immortiil breed and peculiar attributes, and monsters of strange 
 
 ch. 17. p. 465). Heu-Heu refused permission to any one to ascend the moun- 
 tain, on the ground that it was his tipuna or ancestor : '• he constantly idcn 
 titled himself with the mountiiin and tailed it his sacred ancestor" (vol. ii. c. 
 4. p 113). Tlie mountains in New Zealand are accounted by the nativea 
 masculine and feminine: Tonga Riro, and Taranaki, two male mountains, 
 quarrelled about the affections of a small volcanic female mountain in tlie 
 neighborhood {ibid. ii. c. 4. p. 97). 
 
 The religious imagination of the Hindoos also (as described by Colonel 
 Sleeman in his excellent work, Rambles and Recollections of an Indian 
 Official), atlords a remarkable parallel to that of the early Greeks. Colonel 
 SleemiUi says, — 
 
 ♦' 1 asked some of the Hindoos about us why they called the river Mother 
 Nerbudda, if she was really never married. Her Majesty (said they with 
 great respect) would really never consent to be manied after the indignity 
 she suffered from her affianced bridegroom the Sohun : and we call her 
 mother because she blesses us all, and we are anxious to ; 3cost her by the 
 name which we consider to be the most respectful and en '-aring. 
 
 " Any Englishman can easily conceive a poet in his hig-hest calenture of 
 
 the bram, addressing the Ocean as a steed that knows Iiis rider, and patting 
 
 <he crested billow as his flowing mane. But he must come to India to urC 
 
 derstand how every individual of a whole community of many millions can 
 
 address a fine river as a living being — a sovereign princess who hears and nn. 
 
 derstands all they say, and exerciser a kind of local superintendence over thek 
 
 ajfairs, without a single temple in which her image is worshipped or a 
 
 smgle priest to profit by the delusion. As in the case of the Ganges, it is 
 
 the river itself to whom tlwy address themselves, and not to any deity residing in it 
 
 or presiding over it — tho stream itself is the deity which 'tills their imagina- 
 
 toons, and receives their homage " (Rambles and Recollections of an In- 
 
 dten Official, ch. iii. p. 20). Compare also the remarks in the same work 
 
 on the sanctity of Mother Nerbudda (chapter xxvii. p. 261 ) ; also of the holy 
 
 personality of the earth. " The land is considered as the mother of the 
 
 prince or chief who holds it, the great parent from whom he derives all that 
 
 maintains him, his family, and his establishments. If well-treated, she yieldi 
 
 this in abundance to her son; but if he presumes to look upon her with the 
 
 eye of desire, she ceases to be fruitful ; or the Deity sends down hail or 
 
 bhght to destroy all that she yields. The measuring the surface of th« 
 
 fcelds, and the frequently inspecting the crops by the chief himself or his 
 
 Immediate agents, were considered by the people in this light — either it 
 
 ihould not be done at all, or the duty should be delegated to inferior agenta 
 
 Whose close inspection of the great parent could not be so displeasing to tte 
 
 Deity" (Ch. xxvii. p. 248). t- ^ »m 
 
 See also about the gods who are believed to reside in trees— the Peepqt 
 
 <1 
 
 ( I 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 (i 
 
 11 
 
U4 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 r ' 
 
 fineaxnents and combinations, ** Gorgons and Harpies and Chi- 
 maeras dire.'* As there were in every (/ens or family special gen- 
 tile deities and foregone ancestors who watched over its members, 
 forming in each the characteristic symbol and recognized «niar- 
 antee of their union, so there seem to have been in each <ruild 
 or trade peculiar beings whose vocation it was to cooperate or 
 to impede in various stages of the business.^ 
 
 The extensive and multiform personifications, here faintly 
 sketched, pervaded in every direction the mental system of the 
 Greeks, and were identified intimately both with their ccnception 
 and with their description of phenomena, present as well as past. 
 That which to us is interesting as the mere creation of an exube- 
 rant fancy, wa-^ to the Gref.-k genuine and venerated reality. 
 Both the earth and tlie solid heaven (Giea and Uranos) were both 
 conceived and spoken of by him as endowed with appetite, feel- 
 ing, sex, and most of the various attributes of humanity. Instead 
 of a sun such as we now see, subject to astronomical laws, and 
 forming the centre of a system the changes of which we can 
 ascertain and foreknow, he saw the great god Helios, mounting 
 his chariot in the morning in the east, reaching at mid-day the 
 height of the soUd heaven, and arriving in the evening at tha 
 western horizon, with horses fatigued and desirous of repose. 
 
 tree, iho cotton-tree, etc. (ch. ix. p. 112), and the description of the anntuU 
 marriaj^e celehrated between the sacred pebble, or pebble-jrod, Salijrram, 
 and the sacred shrub To-Dlseji, celebrated at preat expense and with a ciuBd- 
 roas procession (chap. xix. p. 158; xxiii. p. 185). 
 
 * See the song to the i)Otters, in the Homeric Epigrams (14) : 
 
 E/ /itFv duaere ft.i(n%n', ueiffu, u KEpafir]e(,' 
 
 ¥A) Sk fiE^Mv&elvv KOTv^oi^ koI nuvra Kuvanrpa 
 ^fwx^f/vai re Ka?i<jft kcU Tcfi^Q Ctvov uptadai 
 
 'Hv <5' fTr' dvaifiriTjv Tpe<f>^evTeg rprvdrj uprf(r&e^ 
 
 ^vyKo^eu 6^ ^TTiiTa Kafiivtf) drj'XTjTipaq 
 ZvpTpi^r ^fiuc, Sfiapayov re, Kai 'XafSerov, ^de Ha/SuKnjVf 
 'Qfiodaitoy '&\ be rfjde rexvy KQKtL noXXd, tropH^ei^ etc. 
 A certain kindred betwem men and serpents (ovyyeveidv rtva irpdf nj#| 
 ^/f) was recognized in the pecaliar gens of the 6<fnoyeveic near Partol^ 
 
 who possessed the gift of healing by their touches the bite of the ^ 
 
 Ihe ori^nal hero of this gens was said to have been traiulbnned fo>m a 
 pnt into a maa (Strabo, xiii. p. 588). 
 
 ., ''J 
 
 rd 
 
 ^ 
 
 O.EA, TTBA^TOS, HELIOS, ETC. 
 
 f 
 
 846 
 
 Helios, having favorite spots wherein his beautifu. cattle grazed, 
 took pleasure in contemplating them during the course of his 
 journey, and was sorely displeased if any man slew or injured 
 them : he had moreover sons and daughters on earth, and as hia 
 aJl-seeing eye penetrated everywhere, he was sometimes in a 
 situation to reveal secrets even to the gods themselves — while 
 on other occasions he was constrained to turn aside in order to 
 avoid contemplating scenes of abomination.' To us these now 
 appear puerile though pleasing fancies, but to an Homeric Greek 
 
 ' Odyss. ii. 388; viii. 270; xii. 4, 128, 416; xxiii. 362. Iliad, xiv. 344. 
 
 The Homeric Hymn to Demeter expresses it neatly (63) 
 
 • HtXiov S* iKOvro, i?f<iv tTKorrov r/6e Kai uvi^puv. 
 Also the remarkable story of Euenius of Apollonia, his neglect of the sacred 
 cattle of Helios, and the awful consequences of it (Herodot. ix. 93 : compare 
 Thcocr. Idyll, xxv. 130). 
 
 I know no passage in whidi this conception of the heavenly bodies as Per 
 sons is more strikingly set forth than in the words of the German chief 
 Boiocalus, pleading the cause of himself and his tribe the Ansibarii before 
 the Roman legate Avitus. This tribe, expelled by other tribes from its native 
 possessions, had sat down upon some of that wide extent of lands on the 
 Lower Rhine which the Roman government reserved for the use of its sol- 
 diers, but which remained desert, because the soldiers had neither the meant 
 nor the inclination to occupy them. The old chief, pleading his cause before 
 Avitus, who had issued an order to him to evacuate the lands, first dwelt upon 
 his fidelity of fifty years to the Roman cause, and next touched upon the enor- 
 mity of retaining so large an area in a state of waste (Tacit. Ann. xiii. 55): 
 " Quotara j)artem campi jacere, in quam pecora et armenta militum aliquan- 
 do transmitterentur ? Servarent sane receptos gregibus, inter hominum 
 femam : modo nc va^^titatem et solitudinem mallent, quam amicos populos 
 Chamavorum quondam ea arva, mox Tubantum, et post Usipiorum fuisse. 
 8icuti coelura Diis, ita terras generi mortalium datas : quseque vacuse, eat 
 publicas esse. Solem delude respiciens, et ccetera sidera vocans, quasi coram 
 faiterrogabat — vellentne contueri inane solum f potius mare superfunderent adver- 
 $us terrarum ereptores. Commotus his Avitus," etc. The legate refused the 
 leqaeat, but privately offered to Boiocalus lands for himself apart from tha 
 tribe, which that chief indignantly spumed. He tried to maintain himself !• 
 the lands, but was expelled by the Roman arms, and forced to seek a homf 
 among the o J-.er German tribes, all of whom refused it. After much wander- 
 faig and privation, the whole tribe of the Ansibarii was annihilated : its wai^ 
 fiors were all slain, its women and children sold as slaves. 
 
 I notice this afflicting sequel, in order to show that the brave old chief WM 
 pleading before Avitus a matter of life and death both to himself and hit 
 tribe, and that the occasion was one least of all suited for a mere rhetoric^ 
 
 16* 
 
 r 
 
 tl 
 
n 
 
 HISTOBT OF GBEECE. 
 
 they seemed perfectly natunil and plausible. In his view, thf 
 description of the sun, as given in a modern astronomical treatise, 
 would have appealed not merely absurd, but repulsive and im- 
 pious. Kven in later times, when the {>ositive sjurit of inquiry 
 had made considerable pro«;ress, Auaxagoras and other asti-ono- 
 mers incurred the charge ol' blasphemy lor dispersonitying Helios, 
 JUid trying to assign invariable laws to the solar phaenomena-i 
 Personilyiiig tictioa was in this way blended by the Homeric 
 
 |wro80{)op(jL'ia, His appeal is one biiicere and heartfelt to the personal feelings 
 and symy ithien of iieiiott. 
 
 Ta<aa.s, in rc|)ortin;^ the speech, accompanies it with the gloss " qua« 
 coram/' to mark that the speaker here passes into a ditierent order of ideaa 
 from that to which hinisi If or his readers were accustomed. If lioioealus 
 could have heard, and reported to his tribe, an astronomical lecture, he would 
 have introdu<'ed some explanaMon, in order to hiciiiiate to his trihe the com* 
 prtliensit>n of Helios undt r a point of view so new to them. While Taeittii 
 find.s it necessary to illustrate by a comment the f>frs(m>Jicafim of the sim, 
 Boiocalus would have had some trouble to make his tribe comprehend th« 
 re ijinition of Uu- ijod Il'lim. 
 
 ' PhysiciU astronomy was l)oth new and accounted impious in the time of 
 the Peloponnesian war; see I'lutan li, in his reference to that eclipse which 
 provcil so fatal to the Athenian army at Syracuse, in consequence of the 
 religious feelings of Nikias ; ov yiip r/veixovTo tov^ (pvaiKov^ kui fiereupoXiaxa^ 
 TOTE Kn7.ovutvovf^ wf, t'lQ a>'riar u^oyov^ nai (^vrufifii (mfiovoi/rov^ KnI Konfm 
 vayKt'Ofitva Trudr/ iharpi^ovra^ rb {^rlov (Plutarch. Nikias, c. 23, and Perikl^ 
 C 32 ; Diodor. xii. 39 ; Demetr. Phaler. ap. Diogen. I^tJrt, ix. 9, 1). 
 
 *' You strange man, MelGtus," said Socrates, on Iiis trial, to his accuser, 
 "are you seriously afiirming that I do not think Helios and Selene to be 
 gods, as the rest of mankind think ?" " Certainly not, gentlemen of the 
 Dikastery {this is the reply of Melttus)^ Socrates says that the sun is a stone, 
 and the moon earth." "Why, my dear MelC-tus, you think you are preferring 
 an accusation against Anaxagora<* ! You account these J)ikasts so con- 
 temptibly ignorant, as not to know that the hooks of Anaxagoras are full of 
 such doctrines ! Is it from me that the youth acquire such teaching, when 
 they may buy the books for a drachma in the theatre, and may thus laugh 
 me to scorn if I pretended to announce su^'h views as my own — not to nia^ 
 turn their extreme absurdity?^'' (aAA6>c re koi ovtuq iiToira bvra, Plato, Apolog. 
 Socrat. c. 14. p. 26). 
 
 The divinity of Helios and Selene is emphatically set forth by Plato, Legg. 
 X. p. 886-889. He permits physical astronomy only ander great restnctiont 
 and to a limited extent Compare Xenoph. Memor. iv. 7, 7 ; Dic^en. Lafiit 
 ii 8; Platarch, De Stoicor Bepngnant. c. 40. p. 1053; and Schaabach ai 
 AnangowB Fragmenta, p. 6. 
 
 I 
 
 
 rOBM OF PEK80NAL NARRATIVE IN THE MYTflES, S47 
 
 f>.ieeks with their conception of the physioal phaenomena oefbre 
 them, not gimply in the way of poetical ornament, but as a genu- 
 ine portion of their every-day belief. 
 
 It was in this early state of the Grecian mind, stimulating so 
 forcibly the imagination and the feelings, and acting through them 
 opon the belief, that the great body of the mythes grew up and 
 obtained circulation. They were, from first to la«?t, personal 
 narratives and adventures ; and the persons who predominated 
 as subjects of them were the gods, the heroes, the nymphs, etc., 
 whose names were known and reverenced, and in whom every 
 one felt interested. To every god and every hero it was consis- 
 tent with Grecian ideas to ascribe great diversity of human mo- 
 tive and attribute : each indeed has his own peculiar type of 
 character, more or less strictly defined ; but in all there was a 
 wide foundation for animated narrative and for romantic incident. 
 The gods and heroes of the land and the tribe belonged, in the 
 conception of a Greek, alike to the present and to the past : ha 
 worshipped in their groves and at their festivals ; he invoked their 
 ftrotection, and believed in their superintending guardianship^ 
 even in his own day : but their more special, intimate, and sym- 
 pathizing agency was cast back into the unrecorded past' To 
 
 * Hesiod, Catalog. Fragm. 76. p. 48, ed. Diintrer:— 
 
 Zwai ydp rnre Saireg iaav ^woi re ^ouKOif 
 • A'&avdroig re ^tolai KaTodvrjToii t* dth^pomocc. 
 
 Both the Theogonia and the Works and Days bear testimony to the same 
 general feeling. Even the heroes of Homer suppose a preceding age, t!w 
 fai mates of which were in nearer contact with the gods than they themselvw 
 (Odyss. viii. 223; Iliad, v. 304; xii. 382). Ck>mpare Catullus, Carm. 64; 
 Epithalam. Peleoset Thetidos, v. 382-408. 
 
 Menandcr the Ehetor (following generally the steps of Dionys. Hal. Ait 
 Bhetor. cap. 1-8) suggests to his fellow-citizens at Alexandria Troas, proper 
 and oomplimentary forms to invite a great man to visit their festival of dM 
 8minthia : —oavep yiip * ArroXXuva -KokTMKiq Idixero rj noXic toIq ^fiiv^iotc, 
 l^viKa iivv t^£Ot)f irpo^avuf iirtdrjfietv rolg uv&puiroif, 
 obru Kotaklf ir6X«c vvv ftpoadex^raL (irepl ^EmdeiKTiK. s. iv. c. 14. ap. Wall 
 0611. Bhstor. t ix. p. 304). Menander seems to have been a native of Ale» 
 andria Tf^as, thoogh Soidas calls him a Laodicean (see Walz. Pnef. ad i 
 ix. p. XT.-ZX. ; and Trepi Ifuv^ioKiJv, sect. iv. c. 17). The festival of thi 
 8miathia lasted down to his time, embracing the whole duration of paganiiS 
 from Homer downwards. 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 ^ 
 
 i: 
 
 u 
 
 1 •' 
 
 II." 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 •I 
 

 J 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 848 
 
 raSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 give suitable utterance to this general sentiment, — to fumw 
 body and movement and detail to these divine and heroic pir 
 
 existences, which were conceived only in shadowy outline, Ui 
 
 lighten up the dreams of what the past must have been,» in the 
 minds ot those who knew not what it really had been — such waa 
 the spontaneous aim and inspiration of productive genius in the 
 community, and such were the purposes which the Grecian 
 mythes preeminently accomplished. 
 
 The love of antiquities, which Tacitus notices as so prevalent 
 among the Greeks of his day,-^ was one of the earliest, the most 
 durable, and the most widely diffused of the national propensi- 
 ties. But the antiquities of every state were divine and heroic, 
 reproducing the lineaments, but disregarding the measure and 
 limits, of ordinary humanity. The gods formed the starting-{)oiut, 
 beyond which no man thought of looking, though some gods were 
 more ancient than others : their progeny, the heroes, many of 
 them sprung from human mothers, constitute an intermediate link 
 between god and man. The ancient e{)ic usually recognizes the 
 presence of a multitude of nameless men, but they are intro- 
 duced chiefly for the purpose of filling the scene, and of executing 
 the orders, celebrating the valor, and bringing out the personality, 
 of a few divine or heroic characters.^ It was the glory of bards 
 and storytellers to be able to satisfy those religious and patriotic 
 predispositions of the public, which caused the primary demand 
 
 ' P. A. Miiller observes justly, in his Soffn- Bibliothek, in reference to the 
 Icelandic mythes, " In dem Mytliischen wird das Lebcn der Vorzeit darges- 
 tellt, wie es wirklich dem kicdlichen Verstande,der jugendiichen Einbildung- 
 skraft, uncj dem vollen Ilerzcn, erscheint." 
 
 CLange's Untersuchungfen iiher die Nordische nnd Deutsche Heldensage, 
 translated from P. A. Miiller, Introd. p. I.) 
 
 * Tims visited the temple of the Paphian Venus in Cyprus, " spectatA 
 opulentia donisque regum, qu«que alia latum antiquitatibus Grsecorum 
 genus inc^rfrt' tvfi/sfa/i o<(/?mc/iV, de navigatione primum consuluit" (Tacit 
 Hist. ii. 4-5) 
 
 ' Aristotel. Problem, xix. 48. Oi 6e riytfiovtc rdv upxaluv fiovoi ijtra^ 
 fjpueg- oi 6i /aol uv^punoi. Istros followed this opinion also: but the 
 more common view seems to have considered all who combated at Troy aa 
 heroes (see Schol. Iliad, ii. HO; xv. 231), and so Hesiod treats them (Odd 
 Di. 158). * ^^' 
 
 In refei3nc« to the Trojan war, Aristotle says— /cai^oTrtp Iv roZf 'Hpwl 
 ••iC irep: Upidfwv uvi^everai (Ethic. Nicom i. 9; compare vii. \). 
 
 OOD AND MEN IN COMMUNION. 
 
 an 
 
 fcr thoir tales, and which were of a nature eminently inTiting aad 
 expansive. For Grecian religion was many-sided and many 
 colored ; it comprised a great multiplicity of persons, togethei 
 with much diversity in the types of character ; it divinized everf 
 
 vein and attribute of humanity, the lofty as well as the mean 
 
 the tender as well as the warlike — the self-devoting and adven- 
 turous* as well as the laughter-loving and sensual. We shall her©, 
 after teach a time when philosophers protested against such 
 identification of the gods with the more vulgar appetites and en- 
 ^yments, believing that nothing except the spiritual attributes of 
 man could properly be transferred to superhuman beings, and 
 drawing their predicates respecting the gods exclusively from what 
 was awful, majestic and terror-striking in human affairs. Such 
 restrictions on the religious fancy were continually on the in- 
 crease, and the mystic and didactic stamp which maiked the last 
 century of paganism in the days of Julian and Libanius, contrast* 
 forcibly with the concrete and vivacious forms, full of vigorous 
 impulse and alive to all the capricious gusts of the human temper, 
 ament, which people the Homeric Olympus, i At present, how- 
 
 ' Generation by a god is treated in the old poems as au act entirely human 
 and physical (ffxlyij — Trope Ae^aTo) -, and this was the common opinion ia 
 the days of Plato (Plato, Apolog. Socrat c. 15. p. 15); the hero Astrabakni 
 is father of the Lacedaemonian king Dcmaratas (Herod, ri. 66). {KerodoCm 
 does not believe the story told him at Babylon respecting Belos (I 182}) 
 Euripides sometimes expresses disapprobation of the idea (Ion. 390), Utt 
 Plato passed among a large portion of his admirers for the actn&i son of 
 Apollo, and his reputed father Aristo on marrying was admonished in a 
 dream to respect the person of his wife Pcriktion^, then pregnant by Apaflo^ 
 nntil after the birth of the onild Plato (Plutarch, Qu«st Sympos. p. 717. 
 ▼iii. 1 ; Diogen. Lafirt iii. 2 • Origen, cont Cels. i. p. 29). Plutarch (in LA 
 of Numa, c. 4 ; compare L;.'j /.f Theseus, 2) discusses the subject, and is ia* 
 dined to disallow everything beyond mental sympathy and tenderness in a 
 god : Pausanias deals timidly with it, and is not always consistent with him- 
 self; while the later rhetors spiritualize it altogether. Meander, neol '£«- 
 SeiKTiKiov, (towards the end of the third century b. c.) prescribes rules tat 
 praising a king: you are to praise him for the gens to which he belongs: 
 perhaps you may be able to make out that he really is the son of some god; 
 fiw many who seem to be from men, are really sent down by God and are emth 
 nations /hm the Supreme Potena/'^iroXXol rd fiev doKelv i^ dv^pumav eM, 
 rf d* a^Tf^ei^ napa rov ^eov Karatri/iTovTa kxu eltrtv dirdfi/ioiiu 6vtuc roi 
 upeirropoc • koI ydp Tiptuc^n^ kvofu^ero fiiv *Afi<^rpOuPoc, r^ Si dXr/^eia #f 
 
 ( : 
 
 u 
 
 '1 
 
 fll 
 
 II 
 
 t 
 
 1;}" 
 
 
ni 
 
 
 850 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 ever, we have only to consider the early, or Homeinc and HesW 
 odic paganism, and its operation in the genesis of the mythical 
 narratives. We cannot doubt that it supplied the most powerful 
 stimulus, and the only one which the times admitted, to the crea* 
 tive faculty of the peophi ; as well from the sociability, the gra- 
 dations, and the mutual action and reaction of its gods and heraes, 
 SB from the amplitude, the variety, and the purely human cast, 
 of its fundamental types. 
 
 ^eia T/fv KaraiioAi)v ovpavoi^ev ixet, etc. (Menander ap. Walz. Collect. Khe- 
 lor. t. ix. c. i. p. 218). Again — rrepi ^^fini^uiK^r Zt-vg — }iv^mi> ..aiSup 
 dnfiiovpyeiv hevor/rrt- — Xt/aaui t^v '\<7KXrj~ior y-'ieaii' k 6 rj fii o v p. 
 ynat, p .322-.327; compare Hermo*,'enes, about the story of Apollo and 
 Daphne, Progymnasm. c 4 ; irid Julian. Orat. vii. p. 220. 
 
 The contrast of the pa;r;in phraseology of this age (Menander had him- 
 •<*lf composed a hymn of invocation to Apollo — rr//>.' '¥,]ku>iuu)v, c. ;i'. t. ix. 
 ». 136, Walz.) with that of Homer is very worthy of notice. In the Hesi- 
 Odic Catalo^'ue of Women much was said respecting the marriages and 
 loiiours of the gods, so as to furnish many suggestions, like the love-songs 
 of Sappho, to tlie composers of Epithalamic Odes (Menand. ib. sect. iv. c. 
 %. p. 268). 
 
 Menander gives a specimen of a prose hymn fit to be addressed to the 
 bmimhian Apollo (p. 320) ; the spiritual character of which hymn forms the 
 most pointed contrast with the Homeric hymn to the same god. 
 
 We may remark an analogous case in which the Homeric hymn to Apollo 
 fs modified by Plutarch. To provide for the establishment of his temple at 
 Delphi, Apollo was described as having himself, in the shaoe of a dolphin, 
 ■wam before a Kretan vessel and guided it to Krissa, where he directed the 
 terrified crew to open the Delphian temple. But Plutarch says that this old 
 •tatement was not correct ; the god had not himself appeared in the shape 
 of a dolphin — he had sent a dolphin expressly to guide tiie vessel (PlutardL 
 de Solertid Animal, p. 983> See also a contrast between the Homeric 
 Zeus, and the genuine Zeus, {akri-divhq) brought out in Plutarch, Defect 
 Oracnl. c. 30. p. 426. 
 
 Illicit amours seem in these later times to be ascribed to the daiftovec : see 
 the singular controversy started among the fictitious pleadings of the ancient 
 rhetors — Nofiov 5vrof, Trapi^evovc koI Ka'&apilq elvai rue lepeiac, Upeia Ttf 
 
 tbpE^ uTOKwv <pepovaa, koi Kpivercu *AXX' kpel, ^ai^ did rdf Twf 
 
 iatfiovuv iiTKpoiTijaeic Kai imiiovXa^ irepire&eitr^at • Kal Trwf oix avotfm 
 mtfuS^ rd ToiovTov ; idei yap npog tJ fi^ dipaipt&Tfvat r^v irap&eviav ^opelh 
 r« afrorpoiraiov, ov ^r/v irpdc rd rcKeiv (Anonymi Scholia ad Hermogea. 
 IroffeiCy ap. Wala. Coll. Rh. t. vii. p. 162). 
 
 ApsinSs of Gadara, a sophist of the time of Diocletian, pretended to be 
 A eon of Pan (see Suidas, v. ^A'^ivtn). The anecdote respecting the riven 
 Skamander and Maeander, in tlie tenth epistle ascribed to the orator ./EmU* 
 Mi (p- 737), is curioa.4, bat wo do not know :be •Ute of that ejiuitie. 
 
 
 BTnitTLUS TO MTTHOPOac FACULTY. 
 
 861 
 
 fhough we may thus explain the mjthopoeic fertility of tiM 
 t> ^eeks, I am far from pretending that we can render any suffi- 
 tient account of the supreme beauty of their chief epic and ar* 
 tistical productions. There is something in the first-rate produc- 
 tions of individual genius which lies beyond the compass of philo- 
 sophical theory : the special breath of the Muse (to speak the 
 language of ancient Greece) must be present in order to give 
 them being. Even among her votaries, many are called, but few 
 are chosen ; and the peculiarities of those few remain as yet her 
 own secret. 
 
 We shall not however forget that Grecian language was also 
 an indispensable requisite to the growth and beauty of Grecian 
 mythes — its richness, its flexibility and capacity of new com- 
 binations, its vocalic abundance and metrical pronunciation : and 
 many even among its proper names, by their analogy to words 
 really significant, gave direct occasion to explanatory' or illustra- 
 tive stories. Etymological mythes are found in sensible pro- 
 portion among the whole number. 
 
 To understand properly ihen the Grecian mythes, we must try 
 to identify ourselves with the state of mind of the original my- 
 thopoeic age ; a process not very easy, since it requires us to 
 adopt a string of poetical fancies not simply as realities, but at 
 the governing realities of the mental system;' yet a proocfli 
 
 * The mental analogy between the early stages of human civilizatioo and 
 tilie childhood of the individual is forcibly and frequently set forth in the 
 works of Vicx). That eminently original thinker dwells upon the poetical 
 And religious siLsceptibillties as the first to develop themselves in the humea 
 mind, and as furnishing not merely connecting threads for the explanatioB 
 of sensible phsenomena, but also aliment for the hopes and fears, and meaoe 
 of socializing influence to men of genius, at a time when reason was jet 
 Asleep. He points oat the personifying instinct ("islinto d' animazione "^ as 
 the sj»ontan«ous philosophy of man, " to make himself the rule of the nni- 
 verse,** and to suppose everywhere a quasi-human agency as the determining 
 CAa.se. He remarks that in an age of fancy and feeling, the conceptioiu ao4 
 lAnguage of {soetry coincide with those of reality and common life, instead 
 of standing apart as a separate vein. These views are repeated freqaeatlj 
 (And with some variations of opinion as he grew older) in his Latin worit 
 th Uno Uhiversi Juris Principio^ as well as in the two saccessive r^ fh rfwm 
 •f his great Italian work, Scienza Nuova (it mast be added that Vioo as at 
 expositor is {hpoUx, and does not do justice to his own powers of 
 Iboiigfat) : I eelect the followinf from die eeoond eiNtioB «f the 
 
 i/l 
 
 'it 
 
.1 
 
 B52 
 
 HISTORY Op" GREECfc. 
 
 V 
 
 I ' 
 
 ( I. 
 
 ■ 
 
 whi<;h would only reproduce something an^V>gous to our own 
 childhood. The age was one destitute both of recorded history 
 and of positive science, but full of imagination and sentiment and 
 religious impressibility; from these sources sprung that multitude 
 of supposed persons around whom all combinations of sensible 
 
 published by himself in 1744, Lklla Metafisica Poetica (see vol. v. p. 189 of 
 Ferrari's edition of his Works, Milan, 18.'36) : - Adunque la sapienza poetica, 
 che fu la prima sapienza della Gentilit.i, dovette incominciare da una Meta- 
 fisica, non rar/ionata eil astratfa, qual h questa or degli addottrinati, ma st^ntita 
 ed linmayinata, (|uale dovett' essere di tai primi uomini, siccome quelli ch' 
 erano di niun raziocinio, e : utti robusti sensi e vif^orosissime fantasie. come 
 h stato nelle dcfrniti ('the Axioms) stabilito. Questa fu la loro propria poesia, 
 la qua] in essi fu una facult.i loro connaturale, perche erano di tali sensi e di 
 8i fatte fantasie natural mcntc forniti, nata da vjnoranza di cMjioni — la qual fu 
 loro madre di maravi<;lia di lutte le cose, che quelli ignoranti di tutte le cose 
 fortcmente ammiravano. 'Vh\ poesia incominci6 in essi divina: perche nello 
 stesso tempo ch' essi immaginavano le ca(;ioni delle cose, (;he sentivano ed 
 ammiravano, essere Dei, come ora il confermiamo con gli Americani, i quali 
 
 totte le cose <hc superano la loro picciol capacit-i, dicono e.sser Dei nello 
 
 ■tesso tempo, diciamo, alle cose aramirate davano 1' essere di sostanze dalla 
 propria lor idea: ch' e appunto la natura dei fanciulli, che osserviamo pren- 
 dere tra raani cose inanimate, e transtullarsi e favcllarvi, come fussero quelle 
 personc vive. In cotal guisa i primi uomini delle nazioni gentili. come fan- 
 
 cinlli del nascente gencr amnno, dalla lor idea creavan essi le cose per 
 
 la loro robusta ignoranza, il facevano in forza d' una corpokntissima fantasia, 
 e perch' era corpolentissima, il facevano con una maravigliosa suhlimit.i, tal 
 e tanta, che perturbava all' eccesso essi medesimi, che tingendo le si ( rea. 
 
 ▼ano Di questa natura di cose umane resto eterna proprieta spiogata 
 
 con nobil espressione da Tacito, che vanamente gli uomini spaventati^z/r/Mni 
 nmtd creduntqneJ^ 
 
 After describing the condition of rude men, terrified with thunder and 
 other vast atmospheric phaBiiomena, Vico proceeds {ib. p. 172) — *' In tal 
 caso la natura della mente uraana porta ch' ella attribuisca all' eftetto la sua 
 natura : e la natura loro era in tale stato d' uomini tutti robuste foi-ze di corpo, 
 che urlando, brontolando, spicgavano le loro violentissime passioni, si finsero 
 il cielo esser un gran corpo animato, che per tal aspetto chiamavano Giove, 
 che col fischio dei fulmini e col fragore die tuoni volesse lor dire qualche 
 
 oosa E si fanno di tatta la natura un vasto corpo animato, che senta 
 
 pMsioni ed affetti." 
 Now the contrast with modem habits of thought : — 
 "■ Ma siccome ora per la natura delle nostre umane menti troppo ritiratA 
 dai sensi nel me<le8imo volgo — con le tante astrazioni, di quante sono pient 
 1b lingae — con tanti voeabofi astratti — e di troppo assottigliata con V art! 
 deUo KriTere, e qnaat spiritualezEata cob 1« practica dei numeri — en Maui- 
 
 GRECIAN IMAGINATION AND SENTIMENT. 
 
 phenomena were grouped, and towards whom curiosity, sympa. 
 thies, and reverence were earnestly directed. The adventures 
 of such persons were the only aliment suited at )nce both to the 
 appetites and to the comprehension of an early Greek ; and the 
 mythes which detailed them, while powerfully interesting his 
 
 f^viente niegato di poterforniarelA vasta imagine di cotal donna che d^no 
 Natura smipateiica, che mentre con la bocca dicono, non hanno nulla in lor 
 mente perocche la lor mente c dentro il falso, che e nulla; ne sono soccorsi 
 ialla fantasia a poterne formare una falsa vastissima imagine. Cosi ora ci h 
 mturalmente megato di poter entrare nella vasta iminaginativa di quel primi ^wmini 
 le menn dei quali di nulla erano assottigliate, di nulla astratte, di nulla 
 
 spiritualezzate Onde diceramo sopra ch» ora appena intender si pud 
 
 a^atto immaginar non si pud, come pensassero i primi uomini che fondarono 
 la umanitu gentilesca." 
 
 In this citation (already almost too long for a note) I have omitted several 
 sentences not essential to the general meaning. It places these early divine 
 fables and theological poets (so Vico calls them) in their true point of view 
 and assigns to them their proper place in the ascending movement of ha' 
 man society : it refers the mythes to an early religious and poetical age, in 
 which feeling and fancy composed the whole fund of the human mind, over 
 aiid above the powers of sense: the great mental change which has'since 
 taken place has robbed us of the power, not merely of believing them as they 
 were ongmally believed, but even of conceiving completely that which their 
 first inventors intended to express. 
 
 The views here given from this distinguished Italian (the precursor of F. 
 A. Wolf in regard to the Homeric poems, as well as of Niebuhr in regard to 
 theRoinan history; appear to me no less correct than profound; and the 
 obvious inference from them is, that attempts to explain (&s it is commonly 
 called) the mythes (/. e. to translate them into some physical, moral or his- 
 lorical statements, suitable to our order of thought) arc, even as guesses, 
 essentially unpromising. Nevertheless Vico, inconsistently with his own 
 general view, bestows great labor and ingenuity in attempting to discover 
 internal meaning symbolized under many of the mythos; and even lays 
 down the position, "che i primi uomini della Gentiliti csseiido stati sempU- 
 cissimi, quanto i fanciulli, i quali per natura son varitieri : le prime favole 
 non poterono finger nulla di falso: per lo che dovettero necessariamente cs- 
 •erejere narrazioni" (See vol v. p. 194; compare also p. 99, Axiom xvi.) 
 If this position be meant simply to exclude the idea of designed imposture, 
 ft may for the most part be admitted ; but Vico evidentlv intends something 
 more. He thinks that there lies hid under the fables a bksis of matter of fact 
 -not literal but symbolized - which he draws out and exhibits under the 
 form of a civil history of the divine and heroic times : a confusion of doc- 
 tnne the more remarkable, since he disrinctly tells us (in perfect conformity 
 •nth the long passage above transcribed from him) that the special mutter of 
 ^^^- ^ 23oc 
 
 'H 
 
•S4 
 
 HISTORY OF OBEECB 
 
 V ' 
 
 amotions, furnished to him at the same time a quasi-history and 
 quasi-phi1osof>hy : they filled up the vacuum of the unrecorded 
 fMist, and explained many of the puzzling incognita of the pres- 
 ent' Nor need we wonder that the same plausibility which cap- 
 
 ^ese early ni ythes b " impossibility accredited as truth," — " che la di lei pro- 
 pria muteriii o P imjyjssibile crf^dibUe" (p. 176, and still more fully in the first 
 rediirtion of ihc Scitrjui Nuovcl, b. iii. c. 4 ; vol iv. p. 187 of his Works). 
 
 When we read the Canones Mi/tho/oijici of Vi( o (I)e Tonstantia Ph:loioj,na, 
 Pars Posterior, c. xxx. ; vol. iii. p 363), and his explanation of the lejrends 
 of the* ( )1 ympic jrods, Hercules, Theseoi, Kadraus, etc^ we see clearly that 
 the meaning which he professes to brin«; out is one previously put in by 
 bimsilf. 
 
 There are some just remarks to the same purpose in Karl Ritter's Vbr» 
 kalle Europnisch I Viker — Gisrhichten, Abschn. ii. p. 150 seq. (Berlin, 1820> 
 He too points out how niu< h the faith of the old world (der Glaubc der Vor- 
 welt) has liecouie forei;:n to our minds, since the recent advances of *'Politik 
 and Kritik," and how impossible it is for us to elicit history from their con- 
 ceptions by our analy-is, in cases where they have not distinctly laid it oat 
 for us. The great length of this note prevents roe from citing the passage: 
 and he seems to me also (like Vico) to pursue his own particular investiga- 
 tions in forgetfulness of the principle laid down by himself 
 
 * O. Muller, in his Proietjonumi zu einer wissenschnfllicUen Mythologie (cao. 
 iv p. 108), has pointc<l out the mistake of supposing that there existed ori- 
 ginally .«ome nu( Icus of pure reality as the starting-point of the mythes, and 
 that upon this nucleus fiction was superinduced afterwards : he maintains 
 that the real and the ideal were blended together in the primitive coDeepti(Kl 
 of the mythes. Respecting the general state of mind out of which the mythflt 
 grew, see especially pages 78 and 110 of that work, which is everywhere foU 
 of instruction on the subject of the Grecian mythes, and is eminently sug«- 
 gestive, even where tho {lositions of the author are not completely made oai. 
 The short U< Idensage der Griechenby Nitzsch (Kiel, 1842, t. v.) contains raoiB 
 of just and original thought on the subject of the Grecian mythes than any 
 work with which I am acquainted. I embrace completely the subjective 
 point of view in which he regards them ; and although I have profited much 
 from reading his short tract, I may mention that before I ever saw it, I had 
 enforced the same reasonings on the subject in an article in the Westminster 
 Review, May 1843, on the Ueroen-Gesckichten of Niebuhr. 
 
 Jacob Grimm, in the preface to his Deutsche Mytholocfie p. 1, /st edit. Gott 
 1835), pointedly insist*^ on the distinction between " «Sa^ »* and history, af 
 Well as upon the fact that the former has its ch»«f root in religious belief 
 "Legend and history (he says) are powers each by itself, adjoining indeed 
 ©n 'he confines, but hating each its own separate and exclosive ground j* 
 ■Ift: p. xxvii. of the same introduction. 
 
 A view substantially similar is adopted by William Grimm, the other 0( 
 Ibe two distinguished brothers whose labors have so mnoli elucidated Te« 
 
 tARLl GREEK POETS. 
 
 865 
 
 tivated his imagination and his feelings was sufficient to engendei 
 spontaneous belief; or rather, that no question as to truth or 
 falsehood of the narrative suggested itself to his mind. His 
 faith is ready, literal and uninquiring, apart from all thought of 
 discriminatiiii; fact from tiction, or of detecting hidden and sym- 
 bolized meaning; it is enough that what he hears be intrinsically 
 plausible and seductive, and that there be no special cause to pix>- 
 voke doubt. And if indeed there were, the poet overrules such 
 doubts by the holy and all-sufficient authority of the Muse, whose 
 omniscience is the warrant for his recital, as her inspiration is 
 the cause of his success. 
 
 The state of mind, and the relation of speaker to hearers, thus 
 depicted, stand clearly marked in the terms and tenor of the an- 
 cient epic, if we only put a plain meaning upon what we read. 
 The poet — like the prophet, whom he so much resembles — 
 aings under heavenly guidance, inspired by the goddess to whom 
 he has prayed for her assisting impulse : she puts the word into 
 his mouth and the incidents into his mind : he is a privileged man 
 chosen as her orga n and speaking from her revelations." As the 
 
 tonic philology and antiquities. He examines the extent to which either his- 
 torical matter of fact or historical names can be traced in the Deutsche IleldeH- 
 mge ; and he comes to the conclusion that the former is next to nothing, the 
 latter not considerable. He draws particular attention to the fact, that the 
 audience for whom these poems were intended had not learned to distin- 
 guish history from poetry (W. Grimm, DetUsche Heldensage, pp 8. 337 342 
 845. 399, Gott. 1829). :/ f r , , * 
 
 * Hesiod, Theogon. 32. — 
 
 • • • kfeiTvevaav di Cthe Muses^ fioi avd^v, 
 
 QeijjVj (if Kkeioifii tut' kaadfi€va, rrpo r' iovrOf 
 
 Kal (le Ke'kov^' vfivelv [xaKupuv yevo^ aiev eovruVf etc 
 
 Odyss. xxii. 347 ; viu. 63, 73, 481, 489. Avfi6doK* ^ ae ye MoOa' WWo^e, 
 
 Aide Tra^f, fj aey 'AkoUuv : that is, Demodocus has either been inspired as 
 a poet by the Muse, or as a prophet by Apollo : for the Homeric Apollo is 
 not the god of son;?. Kalchas the prophet receives his inspiration from 
 Apollo, who confers upon him the same knowledge both of past and future 
 •8 the Muses give to Hesiod (Iliad, i. 69) : — 
 
 Kd^xac QecTopidTjc, oiuvonoXuv 6x^ apiarog 
 "Of i^Tf Tu r' iovra, rd r' haabp.Eva^ irpo r' iovra 
 "Hv Siu imvToavvrjv, Tffv ol rrope ^oi^w: ^knoXJiuv, 
 Also niad, ii. 485. 
 
 Both the ixavTLc and the aoidb^ are standing, recognized profesukms (Odyit 
 Jsvii 383), like the physician and the carpenter, dfjfjuoepyot. 
 
 i 
 
HI8TOBT OF GB^OK. 
 
 Muse grants the gift of song to whem she will, sc ihe mmetmMt 
 
 in her anger snatches it awaj, and the most cwnsLmmate human 
 genius is then left silent and helpless.' It is true that these ex- 
 pressions, of the Muse inspiring and the poet singing a tale of 
 past times, have pjissed from the ancient epic to compositions pro- 
 duced under very different circumstances, and have now degen- 
 erated into unmeaning forms of speech ; but thej gained cur- 
 rency originally in their genuine and literal acceptation. If poeta 
 hud from the beginning written or recited, the predicate of sing- 
 ing would never have been ascribed to them ; nor would it have 
 ever become customary to employ the name of the Muse as a 
 die to be stamped on licensed fiction, unless the practice had be- 
 gun when her agency was invoked and hailed in perfect good 
 fiiith. JJelief, the fruit of deliberate inquiry and a rational Tcm- 
 tiny of evidence, is in such an age unknown : the simple faith of 
 the time slides in unconsciously, when the imagination and feel- 
 ing are exalted ; and inspired authority is at once understood, 
 easily admitted, and implicitly confided in. 
 
 Tiie word mythe (fiv{^oi:, fabula, story), in its original mean- 
 ing, signified simply a statement or cuiTent narrative, without any 
 connotative implication either of truth or falsehood. Subse- 
 quently the meaning of the word (in Latin and English as well as 
 in Greek) changed, and came to carry with it the idea of an old 
 personal narrative, always uncertified, sometimes untrue or avow- 
 edly fictitious/-' And this change was the result of a silent alter- 
 ^^^J'*^^^^ mental state of the society, — of a transition on the 
 
 ' Iliad, ii. :)9y. ~" 
 
 In this later sense it stands pointedly opposed to laropia, history, which 
 seems originally to have designated matter of fact, present and seen by tha 
 describer, or the result of his personal inquiries (see lierodot. i. 1 ; Verriuf 
 Flacc. ap. Aul. Cell. v. 18; Eusebius, Hist. Ec( Ics. iii. 12; and the observa- 
 tions of Dr Jortin, Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. p. 59). 
 
 The original use of the word Aoyof was the same as that of ^liJof — a 
 current tale, true or false, as the case might be ; and the term designating a 
 person much conversant with the old legends (^oyioc) is derived from it 
 (Herod. L 1 ; ii. 3). Hekataus and Heroiiotus both use 16} o( in this seiue. 
 Herodotus calls both ^laop and Hekataeus Ao; unoioi (u. 134-143) 
 
 Aristotle (Metaphys. i. p. 8, ed. Brandis) seems to ase fxv^o( in this sense, 
 where he says — did kqi (fnUfiv^o^ 6 i^iXdaoi^ trof ianv • 6 ydp /ivdoc 
 avyKEiTat U ^avfiaaiuv, etc. In the same treatise Cxi. p. 254), he uses it fo 
 sifirnify fabulous amplification and transformatioo of a dodiiiie trae m tbt 
 Ctoin. 
 
 <i i 
 
 FAITH m THE EARLY MYTHES. 
 
 857 
 
 pmrt of the superior minds (and more or less on the part of all) 
 to a stricter and more elevated cason of credibihty, in conse 
 quence of familiarity with recorded history, and its essential tests, 
 affirmative as well as negative. Among the original hearers of 
 the mythes, all such tests were unknown ; they had not yet learn- 
 ed the lesson of critical disbelief; the mythe passed unquestioned 
 from the mere fact of its currency, and from its harmony with 
 existing sentiments and preconceptions. The very circumstances 
 which contributed to rob it of literal belief in after-time, strength- 
 ened its hold upon the mind of the Homeric man. He looked for 
 wonders and unusual combinations in the past ; he expected to 
 hear of gods, heroes and men, moving and operating together 
 upon earth ; he pictured to himself the fore-time as a theatre in 
 which the gods interfered directly, obviously and frequently, for 
 the protection of their favorites and the punishment of their foes. 
 The rational conception, then only dawning in his mind, of a sys- 
 tematic course of nature was absorbed by this fervent and lively 
 faith. And if he could have been supplied with as periect and 
 philosophical a history of his own real past time, as we are now 
 enabled to furnish with regard to the last century of England or 
 France, faithfully recording all the successive events, and ac- 
 counting for them by known positive laws, but introducing no 
 special interventions of Zeus and Apollo — such a history would 
 have appeared to him not merely unholy and imimpressive, but 
 destitute of all plausibility or title to credence. It would have 
 provoked in him the same feeling of incredulous aversion as a 
 description of the sun (to repeat the previous illustration) in a 
 modern book on scientific astronomy. 
 
 To us these mythes are interesting fictions ; to the Homeric 
 and Hesiodic audience they were " rerum divinarum et huma- 
 narum scientia," — sui aggregate of religious, physical and his- 
 torical revelations, rendered more captivating, but not less true 
 and real, by the bright coloring and fantastic shapes in which they 
 were presented. Throughout the whole of *' mythe-bearing Hel- 
 las''J they formed the staple of the uninatructed Greek mind, 
 
 * M. Ampere, in his Histoire Litt&aire de la France (ch. viii. v. i. p. 310) 
 Jbtingnishes the Saga (which corresponds as nearly aa possible with the 
 Qieek fiv^og, Aoyof, Imxupiof ^yoc), as a special prodiict of the intellect 
 
 //I 
 
 I 
 
95$ 
 
 HISTORY OP OBEEOB. 
 
 V 
 
 upon which history- and philosophy were by ao slow degrees M* 
 perinduccd; and they continued to be the aliment of ordinary 
 thought and conven^ation, even after history and philosophy had 
 partially supplanted the mythical faith among the leading meo, 
 and disturbed it mci'e or less in the ideas of all. The men, the 
 women, and the children of the remote demes and villages of 
 Greece, to whom Thucydides, Hippocrates, Aristotle, or Uippar- 
 chus were unknown^ still continued to dwell upon the local tables 
 which formed their religious and patriotic antiquity. And Paii- 
 sanias, even in his time, heard everywhere divine or heroic le- 
 gends yet alive, precisely of the type of the old epic ; he found 
 the conceptions of religious and mythical faith, coexistent with 
 those of positive science, and contending against them at more 
 or less of odds, according to the temper of the individual. Now 
 it is the remarkable characteristic of the Homeric age, that no 
 such coexistence or contention had yet begun. The reUgioiia 
 and mythical point of view covers, for the most part, all the 
 pha-nomena of nature; while the conception of invariable se* 
 quence exists only in the background, itself personitied under tho 
 name of the Mcera;, or Fates, and produced generally as au ex- 
 ception to the omnipotence of Zeus for all ordinary purposeib 
 
 not capalile of being correctly desiguuted either an history, or us tictioQ, ft 
 M philosophy : — 
 
 ** 11 est un pays, ia S( andinavie, ou la tradition racont^e s'est d^velopp^ 
 plus rompletenient qu'aiUeurs, on ses produit.s ont ete' plus soigneuseraeot 
 recueillis et mieux conscTves : dans ce pays, lis ont re«;u an nom particulier, 
 dont reijuivalcnt exact ne se trouve pas hors des langues Germaniques : c'ett 
 le mot Sfuja, Sage^ ce tpCon dit. ce quon raro))U, — la tradition orale. Si 1*00 
 |n%nd ce mot non dans une acception restreinte, mais dans le sens ge'neral 
 eix le prenait Niebuhr quand il Tappliquoit, par exemple, aux traditions popn- 
 laires qui ont pu fourni'* u Tite Live une portion de son histoire, la Saga 
 doit etre comptee parnii les produits spontanes de Timagination humaioe. 
 La Saga a son existence propre comme la poCsie, comme Thistoire, comme 
 le roman. Elle n'cst pas la poosie, parcequ'elle n'est pas chante'e, mais par- 
 \^ ; elle n'est pas Thisunre, parcequ'elle est denuec de critique ; elle n*eit 
 pas le roman, parcequ'elle est sincere, parcequ'elle a foi a ce qu'elle racontt. 
 Elle n'invente pas, maiw r^p^te : elle pent se tromper. mais elle ne meat 
 jamais. Ce recit souveiit merveilleux, que personne ne fabrique sciemment. 
 flt que tout le monde alt^re et falsifie sans le vouloir, qui se perp^tue ^ !• 
 Baniere des chants primitifs et popnlaires, — ce r^rit, quand il ac 
 ■OB k an b^ros, mab 4 iin saint, 8*appelle one kytnde.** 
 
 NO OTHER LEARNIHG EXCEPT THE MYTHES. 
 
 Voluntary agents, visible and invisible, impel and govern every 
 thing. Moreover this point of view is universal throughout tha 
 community, — adopted with equal fervor, and carried out with 
 equal consistency, by the loftiest minds and by the lowest. The 
 great man of that day is he who, penetrated like others with the 
 general faith, and never once imagining any other system of na- 
 ture tJian the agency of these voluntary Beinjis, can clothe them 
 in suitable circumstances and details, and exhibit in living body 
 and action those types which his hearers dimly prefigui'e. Such 
 men were the authors of the Iliad and the Odyssey ; embodying 
 in themselves the whole mi'a'^ure of intellectual excellence which 
 their age was capable of feeling: to us, the first of poets — but 
 to their own public, religious teachers, historians, and philoso- 
 phers besides — inasmuch as all that then represented history 
 and philosophy was derived from those epical effusions and from 
 others homogeneous with them. Herodotus recognizes Homer 
 and Ilcsiod as the main authors of Grecian belief respecting the 
 names and generations, the attributes and agency, the forms and 
 the worship of the gods.i 
 
 History, philosophy, etc., properly so called and conforming to 
 our ideas (of which the subsequent Greeks were the first crei^- 
 tors), never belonged to more than a comparatively small num- 
 ber of thinking men, though their influence indirectly aff*ected 
 more or less the whole national mind. But when positive science 
 and criticism, and the idea of an invariable sequence of events^ 
 came to supplant in the more vigorous intellects the old mythical 
 creed of omnipresent personification, an inevitable scission was 
 produced between the instructed few and the remaining commu- 
 nity. The opposition between the scientific and the religious 
 point of view was not slow in manifesting itself: in general lan- 
 guage, indeed, both might seem to stand together, but in every 
 particular case the admission of one involved the rejection of the 
 other. According to the theory which then became predkxn- 
 inant, the course of nature was held to move invariably on, by 
 powers and attributes of its own, nnless the gods chose to inter- 
 fere and reverse it ; but they had the power of interfering as 
 €Aen and to as great an extent as they thought fit Here Urn 
 
 .Il 
 
 ' Herodot. ii. 53. 
 
 Vol 1 
 
 17 
 
\ 
 
 ! 
 
 960 
 
 mSTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 question was at once opened, respecting a great variety of paitio* 
 olar phaenomena, whether they were to be regarded as natural 
 or miraculous. No constant or discernible test could be suggest- 
 ed to discriminate the two : every man was called upon to settle 
 the doubt for himsellj and each settled it according to the extent 
 of his knowledge, the force of his logic, the state of his health, 
 his hopes, his fears, and many other considerations affecting his 
 separate conclusion. In a question thus perpetually arising, and 
 fall of practical consequences, instructed minds, like Perikles, 
 Thucydides, and Euripides, tended more and more to the scien- 
 tific point of view,' in cases where the general public were con- 
 stantly gravitating towards the religious. 
 
 » See Plutarch, Perikl. capp. 5, 32, 38; Cicero, De Repuhl. i. 15-16, ecL 
 
 tail. 
 
 The phjrtologist Theophrastus. in his valuable collection of fiicts respert- 
 inp veg^etable organization, is often under the necessity of opposing: his sci- 
 emitic interpretation of curious incidents in tne vcp:etable world to the 
 religious interf)retation of them which he found current. Anomalous phae- 
 BOmena in the frrowih or decay of trees were construed as sif2:ns from the 
 gods, and submitted to a prophet for explanation (see Histor. Plantar, ii. 3, 
 Iv. 16; V. 3). 
 
 We may remark, however, that the old faith had still a certain hold over 
 Ilis mind In commenting on the story of the willow-tree at Philippi, and 
 the venerable old plane-tree at Antandros (more than sixty feet high, and 
 fequiring four men to gra.sp it round in the girth), having been blown down 
 by a high wind, and afterwards spontaneously resuming their erect posture, 
 lie oflfers some explanations how such a phaenomenon might have happened, 
 bat he admits, at the end, that there may be something extra-natural in the 
 ease, 'AAAd ravra fikv lnu(, Hu (pvaiKfj^ airiac lariv, etc. (De Cans. Plant r 
 4) : see a similar miracle in reference to the cedar-tree of Vespasian (Tacit. 
 Hist. ii. 78). 
 
 Euripides, in his lost tragedy called MeXav'nnrr} lo(f>fl, placed in the moQtli 
 if Melanippe a formal discussion and confutation of the whole doctrine of 
 repara, or supernatural indications (Dionys. Halicar. Ars Rhetoric, p. 300- 
 »6, Reisk). Compare the Fables of Phaedrus, iii. 3; Plutarch, Sept SapL 
 Conviv. ch. 3. p. 149; and the curious philosophical explanation by which 
 llie learned men of Alexandria tranquillized the alarms of the vulgar, oa 
 occasion of the serpent said to have been seen entwined round the head of 
 tlie crucified Kleomenes (Plutarch, Kleomen. c. 39). 
 
 It 13 one part of the duty of an able physician, according to the Hippo- 
 ewtic treatise called Prognosticon (c. 1. t ii. p. 112, ed. Littr6), when he 
 ffeits his patient, to exaraire whether there is anything divine in the malady, 
 ilM de Kal el ri ^elov fvtO"iv h r^i uovaoiai this, however, does not agree 
 
 THE OTRI (OLI MASK OF JUPITER 
 
 (I'reece, vol. one. 
 
MYTHOPCEIC AGE. 
 
 The age immediately prior to this unsettled condition of thought 
 IR the really mythopoeic age ; in which the creative taculties at 
 the ."Society know no other employment, and the mass of the 80- 
 oeity no other mental demand. The perfect expression of such a 
 periml, in its full peculiarity and grandeur, is to be found in tlie 
 Iliad and Odyssey, — poems of which we ctiniiot determine the 
 exact date, but which seem both to have existed prior to the lirst 
 Olympiad, 770 li. c, our earliest trustworthy mark of Grecian 
 time. For some time after that event, the mythopoeic tendencies 
 continued in vigor (Arktinus, Lesches, Eumelus, and seemingly 
 most of the Hesiodic poems, fall within or shortly after the lii-st 
 century of recorded Olympiads) ; but from and alter this first 
 century, we may trace the operation of causes which gradually 
 enfeebled and narrowed them, altering the j>oint of view from 
 which the-mythes were looked at. What these causes were, it 
 will be necessary briefly to intimate. 
 
 with the inemonible doctrine laid down in the treatise, De A( re, Locis et 
 Aquis (c. 22. p. 78, ed Littr6), and cited hereafter, in this chapter. Nor 
 does Galen seem to liave re;:ardcd it as harinonizinji: with the ^'■eneral viewi 
 of rfipfKKTatfts, In the excellent Prolegomena of Mr. Littrt^ to hU <'diti<m 
 «f Hippocrates (t, i p. 76) will be found an inedited scholium, whcreia tha 
 l^inion of Baccheius and other physicians is given, that the affections of tte 
 plague were to l)e looked upon as divine, ina*;much as the disea;3e came from 
 God ; and also the opinion of Xenophon, the friend of Praxajrora.s, that the 
 **penu< of days of crisis ** in fever was divine; ''For (said Xenophon ) juit 
 as the Diosknri, being gods, appear to the mariner in the storm and bring 
 him salvation, so also do the days of crisis, when they arrive, in fever.* 
 Galen, in commenting upon this doctrine of Xenophon, says that the author 
 •* has expressed his own individual feeling, but has no way set forth tlio 
 ©pinion of Hippocrates :" 'C) i5t ruv Kpcalfujv yfvoq ijfxepujv elTTu>v elvai ^eiop, 
 iavToif Ti iruT^oc ufxoTioyTjcrcv ■ ov fiijv 'linroKpaTovg ye tj^v yvdfi'qv kdei^n 
 (Galen, 0pp. t. v. p. 120, ed. Basil). 
 
 The comparison of the Diosknri appealed to by Xenophon is a precise 
 reproduction of their function as descril)ed in the Homeric Hymn (Hymn 
 xxxiii. 10): his personification of the "days of crisis" introduces the old 
 religious agency to fill up a gap in his medical science. 
 
 I annex an illustration from the Hindoo vein of thought: — "It is a rule 
 with the Hindoos to bury, and not to burn, toe bodies of those who die of 
 the smalLpox: for (say they) the small pox is not only caased by the god 
 dess Davey, but is, in fact, Davey herself; and to burn the body of a peraoQ 
 affected with this disease, is, in reality, neither more nor less than to Imm dk 
 ^^v/^^w." (Sleeman, Rambles and Recollections, etc vol L ch. xxf. p, 231) 
 
 VOL. T. 16 
 
 U1 
 
 f 
 
S62 
 
 HISTORY OF OREECK. 
 
 INCREASED ATTENTION TO PRESFNT FACTB. 
 
 ses 
 
 The foremost and most general of all is, the expansivi^ foroe 
 of Grecian intellect itself, — a quality in which this lemarkable 
 people stand distinguished from all their neighbors and contempo- 
 raries. Most, if not all nations have had mythes, but no nation 
 except the Greeks have imparted to them immortal charm and 
 imiversal interest ; and the same mental capacities, which raised 
 the great men of the poetic age to this exalted level, also pushed 
 forward their successors to outgrow the early faith in which the 
 mythes had been generated and accredited. 
 
 One great mark, as well as means, of such intellectual expan- 
 sion, was the habit of Mttending to, recording, and combining, posi- 
 tive and present facts, botli domestic and foreign. In the genu- 
 ine Grecian epic, the theme was an unknown and aoristic past; 
 but even as early as the Works and Days of Hesiod, the present 
 begins to figure : the man who tills the earth appears in his own 
 solitary nakedness, apart from gods and heroes — bound indeed 
 by serious obligations to the gods, but contending against many 
 difficulties which are not to be removed by simple reliance on 
 their help. The poet denounces his age in the strongest terms aa 
 miserable, degraded and profligate, and looks back with reveren* 
 tial envy to the extinct heroic races who fought at Troy and 
 Thebes. Yet bad as the present time is, the Muse condescends 
 to look at it along with him, and to prescribe rules for human life— 
 with the assurance that if a man be industrious, frugal, provi* 
 dent, just and friendly in his dealings, the gods will recompense him 
 with affluence and security. Nor does the Muse disdain, while 
 holding out such promise, to cast herself into the most homely de- 
 tails of present existence and to give advice thoroughly practical 
 and calculating. Men whose minds were full of the heroes of 
 Homer, called Hesiod in contempt the poet of the Helots ; and 
 the contrast between the two is certainly a remarkable proof of 
 the tendency of Greek poetry towards the present and the 
 positive. 
 
 Other manifestations of the same tendency become visible in 
 the age of Archilochus (b. c. 680-660). In an age when metri- 
 cal composition and the living voice are the only means whereby 
 the productive minds of a community make themselves felt, the 
 kivention of a new m(;tre, new forms of song and recitaticn, or 
 
 diversified aecompaniraents, constitute an epoch. The iambic, 
 elegiac, choric, and lyric poetry, from Archilochus downwards, all 
 indicate purposes in the poet, and impressibilities of the hearers, 
 very ditl'erent Irom those of the ancient epic In all of them the 
 personal feeling of the poet and the special! ies of present 
 time and place, are brought prommently forward, while in the 
 Homeric hexameter the poet is a mere nameless organ ot the 
 historical Muse — the hearers are content to learn, believe, and 
 feel, the incidents of a foregone world, and the tale is hardlv \em 
 suitable to one time and place than to another. The iambic me- 
 tre (we are told) was first suggested to Archilochus by the bitter- 
 ness of his own private antipathies; and the mortal wounds in- 
 flicted by his lampoons, upon the individuals against whom they 
 were directed, still remain attested, though the verses themselves 
 have perished. It was the metre (according to the well-known 
 judgment of Aristotle) most nearly approaching to couunon 
 speech, and well suited both to the coarse vein of seiiiitnent, and 
 to the smart and emphatic diction of its inventor.^ Snnonides of 
 Aniorgus, the younger contemporary of Archilochus, employed 
 the same metre, with less bitterness, but with an anti-heroic ten- 
 dency not less decided. His remaining fragments present a mix- 
 ture of teaching and sarcasm, having a distinct bearing u|)on 
 actual life.- and carrying out the spirit whicii partially appears 
 in the Ilcsiodic Works and Days. Of Alka^us and JSajiphd, 
 though untbrtunately we are comjtelled to speak of them u[)OB 
 htiarsay only, we know enougli to satisfy us that their own pci- 
 sonal sentiments and suiierings, their relations private or pubiio 
 
 * Horat. lie Art Poet. 79 : — 
 
 '• Archilochum proprio rahies armavit Tamlx)," etc, 
 
 Compare Epist. i. 19, 23, and Epod. vi. 12; Aristot. Rhetor, iii. 8, 7, and 
 Poetic c. 4 — also SynesiuM de Soinniis — uarrep ^AA-Kiiog kuc 'A/j;fMo;fO£', 
 oi dei^mravj/uani t;/v t:v(7Tofxiav si rov oIkeIov /i/o^ tKuTfpo^ (Alcaei Fitig* 
 ment. Halle, 1810, p. 205). Quintilian speaks in striking lanjruage of the 
 power of expression manifested by Arehilochus (x. 1, CO). 
 
 ° iSimonides of Amorgas touches briefly, but in a tone of contempt nytcxk 
 the Trojan war — y waiKog ovveK' un<^i(Sripiufih>ovg ( Simonid. Fraj^m. 
 8. p. 36. V. 118) ; he seems to think it absurd that so destructive a Ftniggto 
 •hocid have taken place ''pro und muUeraUd," to use the phrase of Mi. Favm 
 Knight. 
 
864 
 
 mSTOkr OF GREECE, 
 
 with tne contemporary world, constituted the soul of those 8h<Mt 
 effusions which gave them so much celebrity .1 and in the few re- 
 mains of the elegiac poets preserved to us — Kallinus, Mimner 
 mus, Tyrtaeus — the impulse of some present motive or circum 
 stance is no less conspicuous. The same may also be said of So 
 Ion, Theognis and Piiokylides, who preach, encourage, censure, 01 
 complain, but do not recount — and in whom a profound ethical 
 Bensibility, unknown to the Homeric poems, manifests itself: the 
 form of poetry (to use the words of Solon himself) is made the 
 substitute for the public speaking of the agora.'^ 
 
 Doubtless all these poets made abundant use of the ancient 
 mythes, but it was by turning them to present account, in the 
 way of illustration, or flattery, or contrast, — a tendency which 
 we may usually dettict even in the compositions of Pindar, in 
 spite of the lofty an<l heroic strain which they breathe through- 
 out. That narrative or legendary poetry still continued to be 
 composed during the seventh and sixth centuries before the Chris- 
 tian apra is not to be questioned ; but it exhibited the old epical 
 
 * See Quintilian, x. 1, »53. Horat. Od. i. 32; ii. 13. Aristot. Polit. iii. 10, 
 4. Dionys llalic. observes (Vett. Scriptt. Ccnsur. v. p. 421) respecting 
 
 Alkaeus — 7ro?i>.axov ^ovv to fierpov tl rig rrtpuXoCy pr/TOfjiKfji; Uv evpot 
 voXiTeiav ^ and Stmf)o (xiii. p. 617), tu araaiurtKu KaXoiffieva rov 'AA/ca/ot/ 
 noii/fiara. 
 
 There was a large dash of sarcasm and homely banter aimed at neighbors 
 and contemporaries in the poetry of Sappho, apart from her impassioned 
 love-son^ — uX?.(ji: aKuTrrei tov uypoiKov vvf^piov koI tov ^vpiopbv t6v kv 
 Toif yufioi^y evTelearaTa Kai kv Tre^oic ovofiaai fxaXTiov fj kv ttoltjtikoIq. 'Q<rre 
 aitTffc fiuXXdv kari rd izoLhfiaTa ravra diaXejjji^at 9i adeiv ■ ovd' uv ap/uoaai 
 vpoc Tdvxopov /} Kpdg r/).' hpav, el /if/ Tig elrj x^pog 6ca?,eKTiK6g (DemStr 
 Phaler, De Interpret, c. Ii57). 
 
 Compare aiso Herodot. ii 135, who mentions the satirical talent of Sap- 
 pho. employed against her brother for an extravagance about the courtezan 
 Rhodopi?. 
 
 ' Solon, Fragm. iv. 1, ed. Schneidewin : — 
 
 AvTdg KTjpv^ TjMnv uf Ifieprrjg ^alafilvog 
 KocTfiov kneuv ^d^v dvr ayopfjg T^e/uevog, etc. 
 See Brandts, Handbuch der Griechischen Philosophie, sect. xxiv.-xXT 
 Plato states that Solon, in his old age, engaged in the composition of ao 
 epic poem, which he left unfinished, on the subject of the supposed island 
 cf Atlantis and Attica (Plato, Timaus, p. 21, and Kritias, p. 113). Pto 
 tvch, Soldn. c. 31. 
 
 KORMATTON OF AH HTSTOBICAL SENSE. 
 
 865 
 
 Jbaracter without the old epical genius ; both the inspiration of 
 the composer and the sympathies of the audience had become 
 more deeply enlisted in the world before them, and disposed to 
 fasten on incidents of their own actual experience. From Soldo 
 and Theognis we pass to the abandonment of all metrical restric 
 tions and to the introduction of prose writing, — a fact, the im- 
 portance of which it is needless to dwell upon, — marking as well 
 the increased familiarity with written records, as the commence- 
 ment of a separate branch of literature for the intellect, apart 
 from the imagination and emotions wherein the old legends had 
 their exclusive root. 
 
 Egypt was first unreservedly opened to the Greeks during 
 the reign of Psarametichus, about b. c. 660 ; gradually it became 
 much frequented by them for military or commercial purposes, 
 or for simple curiosity, and enlarged the range of their thoughts 
 and observations, while it also imparted to them that vein of 
 mysticism, which overgrew the primitive simplicity of the Ho- 
 meric religion, and of which I have spoken in a former chapter 
 They found in it a long-established civilization, colossal wonders 
 of architecture, and a certain knowledge of astronomy and geo- 
 metry, elementary indeed, but in advance of their own. Moreover 
 it was a portion of their present world, and it contributed to form 
 in them an interest for noting and describing the actual realities 
 before them. A sensible progress is made in the Greek mind 
 during the two centuries from b. c. 700 to B. c. 500, in the re- 
 cord and arrangement of historical facts : an historical sense arises 
 in the superior intellects, and some idea of evidence as a discrim- 
 inating test between fact and fiction. And this progressive ten- 
 dency was further stimulated by increased communication and 
 by more settled and peaceful social relations between the various 
 members of the Hellenic world, to which may be added material 
 improvements, purchased at the expense of a period of turbu* 
 lence and revolution, in the internal administration of each sepa- 
 rate state. The Olympic, Pythian, Nemean, and Isthmian games 
 became frequented by visitors from the most distant parts of 
 Greece : the great periodical festival in the island of Delos brought 
 together the citizens of every Ionic community, with their wivea 
 and children, and an ample display of wealth and omamenta.^ 
 
 ' Homer, Hymn, ad Apollin. 155 j Thucydid. iii. 104. 
 
966 
 
 mSTOBY OP GREECE. 
 
 Numerous and flourishiog colonies were founded In Sicily, tin 
 
 ■outh of Italy, the coasts of Epirus and of the Euxine Sea : the 
 Pliokicans explored the whole of the Adriatic, established Mii»> 
 •alia, and penetrated even as iar as the south of Iberia, with 
 which they carried on a lucrative commerce. * The geographical 
 Ideas of the Greeks were thus both expanded and rectified : the 
 first pre{)aration of a map, by Anaximander the disciple of Thales, 
 is an epoch in the history of science. We may note the ridicule 
 bestowed by Herodotus both upon the supposed people called 
 Hyperboreans and u{)on the idea of a circumfluous ocean-stream, 
 as demonstrating the pro^rress of the age in this department of 
 faiqiiiry.-^ And even earlier than Herodotus, Xanthus had no- 
 ticed the occurrence of fossil marine productions in the interior 
 irf' Asia Minor, which led him to reflections on the changes of the 
 earth's surface with respect to land and water.^ 
 
 If then we look down the three centuries and a half which 
 elapsed between the commencement of the Olympic ara and the 
 •ge of Herodotus and Thucydides, we shall discern a striking 
 advance in the Greeks, — ethical, social and intellectual. Posi- 
 tire history and chronology has not only been created, but in the 
 case of Thucydides, the qualities necessary to the historios^rapheTy 
 in their application to recent events, have been developed with 
 a degree of perfection never since surpassed. Men's mindH have 
 assumed a gentler as well as a juster cast ; and acts come to be 
 criticized with reference to their bearing on the internal happi* 
 ness of a well-regulated community, as well as apon the stand* 
 
 ' Herodot. i. 163. 
 
 ■ UeroJot. iv. 36. yeXu 6e bpiutv Trj^ ireptoSov^ ypaTjfavra^ voXXoii^ ^A^ 
 %ai nvStva voov Ix^^"^^^ k^jj-yijaufievov' ol 'QKeavov re (ieovra ypu<l>ovai 'tefM^ 
 r^i» yA)y. hv(rav KVKXorepea cif uird ropvov, etc., a remark probably directed 
 ^:ainst Hokatieiis 
 
 Respecting the map of Anaximander, Strabo, i. p. 7; IHc^n. LaCrt fi 
 I ; A^athemer ap. Geograph. Minor, i. 1 . irpuro^ ero^^ijae Tr)v oLtovfUPift 
 
 Aristar::oras of Miletus, who visited Sparta to solicit aid for the revolted 
 «0nians against Darius, brou;;ht with him a brazen tablet or map, by meaat 
 it which he exhibited the relative position of places in the Persian cm^nn 
 Herodot. v, 49). 
 
 * Xanthus ap. Stiaoo. I p. 50j ziL p. 579. Ck>mpare Creozer, 
 UBuhifp. 162. 
 
 COMMENCEMENT OP PHYSICAL SCIENCE. 
 
 867 
 
 mg harmony of fraternal states. While Thucydides treats the 
 habitual and licensed piracy, so coolly alluded to in the Homeric 
 poems, as an obsolete enormity, many of the acts described in 
 the old heroic and Theogonic legends were found not less repug- 
 nant to this improved tone of feeling. The battles of the gods 
 with the Giants and Titans, — the castration of Uranus by hia 
 son Kronus, — the cruelty, deceit and licentiousness, often sup- 
 posed both in the gods and heroes, provoked strong disapproba- 
 tion. And the language of the philosopher Xenophanes, who 
 composed both elegiac and iambic poems for the express purpose 
 of denouncing such tales, is as vehement and unsparing as that 
 of the Christian writers, who, eight centuries afterwards, attack- 
 ed the whole scheme of paganism.' 
 
 Nor was it alone as an ethical and social critic that Xeno- 
 phanes stood distinguished. He was one of a great and eminent 
 triad — Thales and Pythagoras being the others — who, in the 
 sixth century before the Christian aera, first opened up those 
 veins of speculative philosophy which occupied afterwards so 
 large a portion of Grecian intellectual energy. Of the material 
 differences between the three I do not here speak ; I regard them 
 only in reference to the Homeric and Hesiodic philosophy which 
 preceded them, and from which all three deviated by a step, 
 perhaps the most remarkable in all the history of philosophy. 
 In the scheme of ideas common to Homer and to the Hesiodic 
 Theogony (as has been already stated), we find nature distribut- 
 ed into a variety of personal agencies, administered according to 
 the free-will of different Beings more or less analogous to man 
 — each of these Beings having his own character, attributes and 
 powers, his own sources of pain and pleasure, and his own espe- 
 cial sympathies or antipathies with human individuals ; each being 
 determined to act or forbear, to grant favor or inflict injury in 
 his own department of phaenomena, according as men, or perhaps 
 other Beings analogous to himself, might conciliate or offend him. 
 The Gods, properly so called, (those who bore a proper name 
 and received some public or family worship, ) were the most com- 
 manding and capital members amidst this vast network of agents 
 
 * Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empiric, adv. Mathemat ix. 193 Fragm. 1. Po0i 
 6nec. ed. Schneidewin. Diogen. Laert. ix. 18. 
 
•88 
 
 BISTOBT OF GBEECE. 
 
 TisiUle and invisible, sprt^ad over the universe.* The whole vie* 
 of nature was purely religious and subjective, the spontaneoat 
 gunrgestion of the early mind. It proceeded from the instinctive 
 tendencies of the feelings and imagination to trans{)ort, to the 
 world without, the familiar type of free-will and conscious per- 
 •onal action : above all, it took deep hold of the emotions, from 
 the widely extended s;y mpathy which it so perpetually called 
 forth between man and nature.=^ 
 
 The first attempt to disenthral the philosophic intellect from 
 this all-personifying religious faith, and to constitute a method of 
 interpreting nature distinct from the 8{K)ntaneous ins[)irations of 
 untaught minds, is to be found in Thales, Xenophanes and Pytha- 
 goras in the sixth century before the Christian sera. It is in 
 them that we first find the idea of Person tacitly set aside or 
 limited, and an impersonal JVature conceived as the object of 
 study. The divine husband and wife, Oceanus and 'Icthya, 
 parents of" many gods and of the Oceanic nym]>hs, together with 
 the avenging god<less Styx, are translated into the material sub- 
 stance water, or, as we ought rather to say, the Fluid: iuid 
 Tiialrs set hini<elf to prove that water Mas the primitive element, 
 out of which all thf- different natural substances had ])een fbrnied.3 
 He, as well as Xenophanes and Pythagoras, stalled the jiroblem 
 of physical i)hilosophy, with its objective character and invariable 
 laws, to be discoverable by a proper and methodical api^lkation 
 Of the human intellect. The Greek word 0rn/,-, denoting nature, 
 and Its derivatives phystcs and physiolotpj, unknown in that hirge 
 8enM« to Homer or Hesiod, as well as the word Kosmn,s, to denote 
 the mundane sysieui, tir-t appears with these philosoi)hers.4 The 
 
 • \hA(M\ ()j)(). I)i. 12J; Ilomtr, Hymn, ad \'enfT 260. 
 
 » A (leterue of the primitive faith, on this ground, is found in Plutarch, 
 
 Quii's'ion SynipKs. yji. 4. 4^ p. 793 
 
 ' Aristotel Metaphys. i. 3. 
 
 * Plutarch, Plrn-it. Philos. ti. 1 ; also Stobaeus, Edocr. Physic, i. 22, whew 
 the dit!'erence l>etween the Homeric expressions and those of the snbUquent 
 philosophers is seen. Damtn, Lexic. Homeric, v. ^i>a,i: ■ Alexander voB 
 Hamf)oldt, Kosmos, p. 76, the note 9 on pajre 62 of that admirable work. 
 
 The title of the treatises of tlie early philosophers (Melissus. Deirokritw 
 Ptemenides, Empedocles, AlLia«6u, etc.) was frequently Ih/u •;'i,7£(^j iGal«B 
 0pp. torn. i. p. 56, ed. Basil \ 
 
 STUDY OF IMPERSONAL NAFURE. 
 
 de9 
 
 elemental analysis of Thales — the one unchangeable cosmic sub- 
 t^iince, varying only in appearance, but not in reality, as suggest- 
 ed by Xenophanes, — and the geometrical and arithmetical 
 combinations of Pythagoras, — all these were different ways of 
 approaching the explanation of physical phsenomena, and each 
 gave rise to a distinct school or succession of philosophers. But 
 they all agreed in departing from the primitive method, and in 
 recognizing determinate properties, invariable sequences, and 
 objective truth, in nature — either independent of willing or 
 designing agents, or serving to these latter at once as an indispen- 
 sable subject-matter and as a limiting condition. Xenoj)hanefl 
 disclaimed openly all knowledge respecting the gods, and pro- 
 nounced that no man could have any means of ascertaining when 
 he was right and when he was wrong, in affirmations respecting 
 them :' while Pythagoras represents in part the scientific tenden- 
 cies of his age, in part also the spirit of mysticism and of special 
 fraternities for religious and ascetic observance, which became 
 diffused throughout Greece in the sixth century before the Chris- 
 tian aBra. This was another point which placed him in antipathy 
 with the simple, unconscious and demonstrative faith of the old 
 poets, as well as with the current legends. 
 
 If these distinguished men, when they ceased to follow the 
 primitive instinct of tracing the phainomena of nature to personal 
 and designing agents, passed over, not at once to induction and 
 observation, but to a misemployment of abstract words, substitut- 
 ing metaphysical eideola in the place of polytheism, and to an 
 exaggerated application of certain narrow physical theories — we 
 must remember that nothing else could be expected from the 
 scanty stock of facts then accessible, and that the most profound 
 study of the human mind points out such transition as an inevita- 
 ble law of intellectual progress.^ At present, we have to compare 
 
 * Xenophan ap. Sext. Empiric, vii. 50; viii. 326. — 
 
 Kal rb fxev ovv fftKpeg ovtl^ avrjp Idev, ovre rif koTLV 
 EMwf afupl deCfv re kol uaaa Xeytt nepl ttuvtuv • 
 Ei ycLp Kol rd fiaXiara tvxoi rereXeafievov e/7r&>v, 
 Ai»TOf 5fiU}^ oi)K olde, 46ko^ d' iirl irdffi reTVKTUi. 
 
 Compare Aristotel. De Xenophane, Zenone, et Georgia, capp. 1-il. 
 ' See the treatise of M. Aog^ste Comte (Qmrs de Philoaophie Positive)^ 
 
 ▼OL. I. 16* 24oc 
 
870 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 9il 
 
 them only with that state of the Greek mind' which theypartiaQj 
 superseded, and with which they were in decided opjK^fsitioii. The 
 rudiments of physical science were conceived and developed 
 among iJiiperior men ; but the religious feeling of the mass was 
 averse to them; and the aversion, though gradually miti<>;ated, 
 never wholly died away. Some of the philosophers were not 
 ba<kwaid in charging others with irreligion, while the multitude 
 seems to have felt the ^allle sentiment more or less towards all — 
 or towards that postulate of constant sequences, with determinate 
 condition-! of occurrence, which scientific study implies, and which 
 they could not reconcjle with their belief in the agency of the 
 gods, to whom they were constantly praying for sj»ecial succor 
 and bles^^ings. 
 
 Tlie dis. repancy between the scientific and the religious [)oiiit 
 of view wjis dealt with difierently by ditlerent philosophers. Thus 
 Socrates openly admitted it, and assigned to each a distinct and 
 independent province. He distributed phaenomena into two class- 
 es : one, wherein the connec^tion of antecedent and consequent waa 
 invariable and ascertainable by human study, and therefore fu- 
 ture results accessible to a well-instructed foresight ; the other 
 and those, too, the most comprehensive and important, which the 
 gods had reserved for themselves and their own unconditional 
 agency, wherein there was no invariable or ascertainable se- 
 quence, and where the result could only be foreknown by some 
 omen, prophecy, or other special inspired communication from 
 themselves. Each of these classes was essentially distinct^ and 
 required to be looked at and dealt with in a manner radically in- 
 compatible with the other. Socrates held it wrong to apply the 
 scientific interpretation to the latter, or the theologic^al interpre- 
 tation to the former. Physics and astronomy, in his opinion. 
 
 his doctrine of tht" threo successive stages of the human mind in reference to 
 Bciontitic study — the theological, the metaphysical, and the positive; — a 
 doctrine laid down j^enerallv in his first lecture ('vol. i. p. 4-12), and larp:ely 
 appHod and illustrated throu<i:hoat his instructive work. It is also re-st«ted 
 and elucidated by Mr. John Stuart Mill, in his System of Logic, Ratiocinative 
 Mid Inductive, vol. ii. p. 610. 
 
 • " Human wisdom (('ivT^poirivij ao<pia), as contrasted with the primitiTe 
 theology (oi u^yxnioL koI dic^pipovrrc "rrept rclc ^Eokoyla^)^ to take dlie wordi 
 Ol Aristotle (Meteo-»log. ii. 1. pp. 41-42, ed. Taachnitt). 
 
 HIPPOCRA FES. - ANAXAGORAS 
 
 Monged to the divine class of phaenomena, in which human 
 search was insane, fruitless, and impious.' 
 
 On the other hand, Hippocrates, the contemporary of Sooratds, 
 denied the discrepancy, and merged into one those two chu^ses ol 
 phjenomena, - — the divine and the scientifically determinable, — 
 which the latter had put asunder. Hippocrates treated all phae- 
 nomena as at once both divine and scientifically determinable. 
 In discussing certain peculiar bodily disorders found among the 
 Scythians, he observes, " The Scythians themselves ascribe the 
 cause of this to Grod, and reverence and bow down to such suf- 
 ferers, each man fearing that he may suffer the like ; and I my- 
 Belf think too that these affections, as well as all others, are di- 
 vine : no one among them is either more divine or more human 
 than another, but all are on the same footing, and all divine ; nev- 
 ertheless each of them ha.s its own physical conditions, and not 
 one occurs without such physical conditions.""^ 
 
 ' Xenoph. Memor. i. 1, 6-9. Tiifiev uvayKcua (luKparij^) ovve^ovXeve laU 
 npuTTeiv, (jf kvofiLi^ev upiar uv npax^vvai • nepl 6h rCtv udr^Tiuv biru^ utto- 
 ^ijaoiTo^ (lavrevaofitvov^ l7rf//7rev, ei Koiriria. Kal roitg fiEXTiovrac oiKovg t» 
 Kal TToXeti- Ka^g oUfjaeiv fiavriK^c Hv T^poodeia^ai ' tektovikov fiiv yup f 
 XalKEVTiKdv h yeupyiKdv ^ dv^puiruv apxtKdv, ^ tuv toiovtuv ipyuv t^eTath 
 riK<H'y Tj "koytcrriKfiv, ^ o'lKovofitKdVf ^ (jTpaTijyiKdv yEVEO&aiy navra rd. roiavra, 
 ^a^Tjftara Kal uv^pojTrnv yvo)fiij alpericL, tvofii^ev eivai • rd de fiEyiara tuv hf 
 TovToic l<!>r] Tovq t& e oi>^ t avT olq Kara'^Eiir Ea^ai^ uv oMev 6f/A09 
 
 eivai Tolg av^ptjnoi^ Toi)f 6i' fiTjdtv tCjv toiovtuv oio/nevovr tivai 
 
 daifioviov^ uX/A TTuvra t^c uv^9p<jiriv7jc yvufirj^, daifiovg.v l^pij • daifutv^v Si 
 Koi Tovg fiavTEVofjLEVoVQ a rol^ uvdpurroic IduKav oi ^eol fxa^ovm dtaKpivetW. 
 
 'E^7/ 6e 6ttv, a fiEv [xadovra^ ttoieIv IduKav ol t^eoi, fiav^uveiv • A 
 
 ds /xf) f5;)/-a Tolg uvx^puTTOi^ eoti, iTEipua^aL diu fiavriKfi^ irapa tCw ^euv rrtiv 
 davKT^ai' rot)f i?eot)f yap, ol^ uv cjmv ikeu, ffij/ialvEiv. Compare also 
 Memorah. iv. 7. 7 *, and Cyropaed. i. 6, 3, 23-46. 
 
 Physical and astronomical phaenomena are classified by Socrates among 
 the divine class, interdicted to human study (Memor. i. I, 13) : rd ^Eiaot 
 daifxovta as supposed to rav^puTZEia. Plato (Phileb. c. 16 ; Lepg. x. p. 886- 
 889 j xii. p. 967) held the sun and stars to be gods, each animated vith ita 
 •pecial soul • he allowed astronomical investifration to the extent necessaiy 
 for avoiding blasphemy respecting these bcinji^ — f^^XP'- ^<»* f^^ fi^a<bijftel9 
 fTEpi avTu '^ vii. 821 ). 
 
 * Hippocrates, De Acre, L«)cis et Aquis, c. 22 fp. 78, ed. Littre, sect 106 
 ed. Petersen) : 'En re npo^ TovrioKn eirvovxtat yiyvovrax ol nXeiaroi H 
 ^KirdijaL^ Kal yvvaKr)ta kpya^ovTat Kal en al ywc Vcff diaXeyovrai re dfMoUif 
 mtktvvTaX re ol tolovtol dvav6oiecg. 01 fiiv ov» hrix^itptoi r^ alriifp icfitt 
 
 f- 
 
172 
 
 fflSTOBT OF GREECE. 
 
 A third distinguished philosopher of the same day, Anaxagontf, 
 allegorizing Zeus and the other personal gods, proclaimed the 
 doctrine of one common pervading Mind, as having first estab* 
 fished order and system in the mundane aggregate, which had 
 once been in a state of chaos — and as still manifesting its unin« 
 terrupted agency for wise and good purposes. This general doc- 
 trine obtained much admiration from Plato and Aristotle ; but 
 they at the same tim(5 remarked with surprise, that Anaxagoras 
 never made any use at all of his own general doctrine for the ex- 
 planation of the phaenomena of nature, — that he looked for noth- 
 ing but physical causes and connecting laws," — so that in fact 
 the spirit of his particular researches was not materially different 
 from those of Demokritus or Leukippus, whatever might be the 
 difference in their general theories. His investigations in meteor- 
 ology and astronomy, treating the heavenly bodies as subjects for 
 calculation, have been already noticed as offensive, not only to 
 the general pubhc of ( jreece, but even to Socrates himself among 
 them : he was tried at Athens, and seems to have escaped con 
 demnation only by voluntary exile.2 
 
 Tf&eaai ^e^ Kai ae^ovrai Tovreovg Toi>c uvdpuTzov^ koI TrpoaKvveovm, dedoi 
 itoTtQ irepl iuvriuv iKaaroi. 'E/aol 6e Kal uvT€(f) doKeei ravra tu iru^ea ^ele 
 elvai, Kal rtiAAa Trtivra, Kal oidiv Hepov irepov ^eiorepov oi^Si av&puTTivCi 
 Ttpov, &JiX(k iruvra ^ela ■ iKaarov de Ixei (^vaiv tuv roiovreuv, Kal ovdh 
 Avev f^iaioi yiyverat, Kal tovto rd TraiJof, wf fiol doKeei yiyvecr^ai, 0pa(T«#, 
 
 etc. 
 
 Again, sect. 112. 'AAAa y^p, uairep Kal Ttpbrepov ilt^a, '^ela ftev xai 
 Tavrd toTL d/ioiu^ rolat uAXoiaij yiyverat 6e kotu (ftvaiv iKaara. 
 
 Compare the remarkable treatise of Hippocrates, De Morbo Sacro, capp 
 1 and 18, vol. vi. p. 352->'J94, ed. Littr6. See this opinion of Hippocratei 
 illustrated by the doctrines of some physical philosophers stated in Aristotle 
 Physic, ii. 8. Cja-rrep vei 6 Zei'f, ovx ottu>^ rbv oltov av^i/aig, ulV k^ uvuyKrf^, 
 etc. Some valuable observations on the method of Hippocrates are also 
 found in Plato, Phsedr. p. 270. 
 
 ' See the graphic picture in Plato, PhaBdon. p. 97-98 (cap. 46-47) : com- 
 pare Plato, Legg xii. p. 967 ; Aristotel. Metaphysic. i. p. 13-14 (ed. Bran* 
 dis) ; Plutarch, Defect. Oracul. p. 435. 
 
 Simplicius, Commentar. in Aristotel. Physic, p. 38. koI bnep de b kv ^ai- 
 duvi IcjKpdrric kyaXei tu 'Ava^ayop^, rd tv ralg tQv Kara fiipoc alTioTioyiai^ 
 wit T(f) vy Kexpv<T^ai, uXXil ral^ v'kiKaic anoSoaEmv, oIkeIov r}v r^ <^vaio7uoyi^ 
 Anaxagoras thought that the superior intelligence of men, as compared with 
 odier animals, arose from his possession of hands (Aristot. de Part. Animal 
 if. 10. p. 687, ed. Bekk.> 
 
 ' Xenophon, M«morab. ir. 7. SocraUs said, Kot napa^pov^wu rdv rat)r;r 
 
 GRECTAN RELIGIOUS BELIEF 
 
 The three eminent men just named, all essentially difiereol 
 €rom each other, may be taken as illustrations of the philosophical 
 mind of Greece during the last half of the fifth century b. 0» 
 Scientific pursuits had acquired a powerful hold, and adjii&ted 
 them.selves in various ways with the prevalent religious iheliof^ 
 ot the age. Both Hippocrates and Anaxagoras modilied their 
 ideas of the divine agency so as to suit their tliirst for scientific 
 ^fk«5oarch. According to the former, the gods were the really ef- 
 fi«.4eiit agents in the production of all phsenomena, — the mean 
 and inditferent not le^is than the terrific or tutelary. Being thua 
 alike connected with all phaenomena, they were specially asso* 
 ciated witii none — and the proper task of the inquirer was, to find 
 oat those rules and conditions by which (he assumed) their agency 
 was always determined, and according to which it miglit be Ibro* 
 told. And this led naturally to the proceeding which Plato and 
 Aristotle remark in Anaxagoi'a.s — that the ali-governing and 
 Infinite Mind, having been announced in sublime language at 
 the beginning of his treatise, was afterward left out of sight, and 
 never ai>plied to the explanation of particular phsenomena, be- 
 ing as much consistent with one modification of nature as with 
 
 fiepiufuvra ovdev tjttov fj ' Kva^ayopaq Trape<pp6vijaEv, 6 /ieytarov <f>i)oi>r/amf 
 Hi Ttfi raf tC)v t^euv fxrjxavdg e^tjyeiai^ai^ etc. Compare Schaubach, Anax- 
 agoroj Fiimintut. p. 50-141 } Plutarch, 2s'ikias, 23, and Periklc;., ti-o2 ; J)io 
 gen. Lacrt. ii 10-14. 
 
 The lonir philosojiliy, from wliieh Anaxagoras receded more in lan;juage 
 than in .spirit, seems to have been the least pujiular of all the schools, though 
 some of the commentators treat it as conforinal)le to vuljrar opinion, becausa 
 it conrined itself for the mo.st part to phajnomenal explanations, and did not 
 reto;;nize the nouunna of Plato, or tlie to iv vor/Tov of Panneuides, — " qualif 
 fuit lonicorum, quae turn dominabatur, ratio, vulgari opinione et coniniuai 
 sensu comprobaui" (Karstcn, Parmenidis Fragment., De Pannenidis I'liilo- 
 sophlA, p. 1.54). This is a mistake: the Ionic philosophers, who constantly 
 •ean lied for and insisted U|>on physical laws, came more directly into conflid 
 with the sentiment of the multitude than the Eleatic school. 
 
 The iai^r atmos[«heric phaenomena were connected in tlie most intimato 
 manner with Grecian religious fueling and uneasiness (.see Dc^mokritus ap* 
 Sect Empiric, ix. sect. 19-24. p. 552-.554, Fabric): the attempts of Anajt* 
 agoras and Demokritus to explain them were more displeasing to the pablifl 
 than the Platonic speculations (Demokritus ap. Aristot. Meteorol. ii ^: 
 Scob<ens, Eclog. Physic, p. 594 : compare Mollach, Democriti F^'afpnentfe, 
 lib. ir. j,. 394). 
 
874 
 
 HISTORY dF GREECE. 
 
 another. Now 8u«h a view of the divine agency could ae^ei b€ 
 reconciled with the religious feelings of the ordinary Grecian 
 believer, even as they stood in the time of Anaxa^oras ; still 
 less could it have been reconciled with those of the Homeric 
 man, more than three centuries earlier. By him Zeus and 
 Athene were conceived as definite Persons, objects of special 
 reverence, hopes, and fears, and animated with peculiar feelings, 
 sometimes of favor, sometimes of wrath, towards himself or his 
 family or country. They were propitiated by his prayers, and 
 prevailed upon to lend him succor in danger — butoflended and 
 disposed to bring evil u[)on him if he omitted to render thanks 
 or sacrifice. This sense of individual communion v/ith, and de- 
 pendence u|>on them was the essence of his faith ; and with that 
 faith, the all-pervading Mind proclaimed by Anaxagoras — 
 which had no more conj^em with one man or one phaenomenon 
 than with another, — could never be brought into harmony. Nor 
 could the believer, while he i)rayed with sincerity for special 
 blessings or protection from the gods, acquiesce in the doctrine 
 of Hippocrates, that their agency was governed by constant laws 
 and physical conditions. 
 
 That radical discord between the mental impulses of science 
 and religion, which manifests itself so decisively during the 
 most cultivated ages of Greece, and which harassed more or 
 less so many of the philoso[>hers, produced its most afflicting re- 
 sult in the condenmation of Socrates by the Athenians. Accord- 
 ing to the remarkable passage recently cited from Xenophon, it 
 will appear that Socrates agreed with his countrymen in denounc- 
 ing physical speculations as impious, — that he recognized the re- 
 ligious process of discovery as a peculiar branch, coordinate with 
 the scientific, — and that he laid down a theory, of which the ba- 
 sis was, the confessed divergence of these two processes from the 
 beginning — thereb}'^ seemingly satisfying the exigencies of re- 
 ligious hopes and fears on the one hand, and those of reason, in 
 her ardor for ascertaining the invariable laws of phaenomena, on 
 the other. We may remark that the theory of this religious and 
 extra-scientific process of discovery was at that time sufficiently 
 eomplete ; for Socrates could point out, that those anonalous phae* 
 •omena which ^iie o^ods had reserved for themseU ub, and into 
 
 BOCRATBS AND THB ATHENIANS. 
 
 978 
 
 irhich science was forbidden to pry, were yet accessible to tkt 
 •eekings of the pious man, through oracles, omens, and other excep- 
 tional means of communication which divine benevolence voucb- 
 •afed to keep open. Considering thus to how great an extent 
 Bocnites was identified in feeling with the religious public ci 
 Athens, and considering moreover that his performance of open 
 religious duties was assiduous — we might wonder, as Xenophdn 
 does wonder,' how it could have happened that the Athenian di- 
 kasts mistook him at the end of his life for an irreligious man. 
 But we see, by the defence which Xenophon as well as Plato 
 gives for him, that the Athenian public really considered him, is 
 Bpite of his own disclaimer, as homogeneous with Anaxagoras 
 and the other physical inquirers, because he had applied similar 
 scientific reasonings to moral and social phaenomena. They look- 
 ed upon him with the same displeasure as he himself felt towards 
 the physical philosophers, and we cannot but admit that in this 
 respect tliey were more unfortunately consistent than he was. It 
 is true that the mode of defence adopted by Socrates contributed 
 much to the verdict found against him, and that he was further 
 weighed down by private offence given to powerful individuals 
 and professions ; but all these separate antipathies found thei? best 
 account in swelling the cry against him as an over-curious soep* 
 tic, and an impious innovator. 
 
 Now the scission thus produced between the superior minds 
 and the multitude, in consequence of the development of science 
 and the scientific point of view, is a fact of great moment in tha 
 history of Greek progress, and forms an important contrast be» 
 twcen the age of Homer and Hesiod and that of Thucydides; 
 though in point of fact even the multitude, during this later age^ 
 were partially modified by those very scientific views which thejT 
 regarded with disfavor. And we must keep in view the prim* 
 itive religious faith, once universal and unobstructed, but subse* 
 quently disturbed by the intrusions of science ; we must follow 
 the great change, as well in respect to enlarged intelligence as 
 to refinement of social and ethical feeling, among the Greeksi 
 from the Hesiodic times downward, in order to render some ao 
 fount of the altered manner in which the ancient mythes 
 
 ' Xenophdn, Memorab. i. 1 
 
876 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 to be dealt with. These mythes, the spontaneous growth of 4 
 creative and penionifying interpretation of nature, had struck 
 root in Grecian associations at a time when the national faith 
 required no support from what we call evidence. They were 
 WM submitted, not simply to a feeling, imagining, and believing 
 public, but also to special classes of instructed men, — philoso- 
 phers, historians, ethical teachers, and critics, — and to a public 
 partially modified by their ideas' as well as improved by a wider 
 practical experience. They were not intended for such an au- 
 dience ; they had ceased to be in complete harmony even with the 
 lower strata of intellect and sentiment, — much more so with the 
 higher. But the} were the cherished inheritance of a past time ; 
 they were interwoven in a thousand ways with the religious faith; 
 the patriotic retrospect^ and the national worship, of every Gre- 
 cian community ; the general type of the mythe was the ancient, 
 &miliar, and universal form of Grecian thought, which even the 
 most cultivated men had imbibed in their childhood from the 
 poets,2 and by which they were to a certain degree unconsciously 
 
 ' It is curious to S(;e that some of the most recondite doetrines of the Py 
 tha^orean philoso[)hy were actually brought before the j^eneral Syracusan 
 pa i lie in the comedies of Epicharmus : " In contcediis 8uis personus ssepe ita 
 eolloqui fecit, ut sententijvs Pytha^'oricas et inuniversum sublimiu vitae prae- 
 cei)r.i immisccret" {^Tfysar, De Doriensiura Comoedii, p. Ill, Col. 1828). 
 The fraj^ments preserved in Dioj^en. LafTt. (iii. 9-17) present both criticisms 
 upon the Hcsiodic doctrine of a primieval chaos, and an exposition of the 
 an'hetypal and immutable ideas fas opposed to the fluctuatinn; phaenoraena 
 of sense) which Platr* afterwards adopted and systematized. 
 
 Epicharmus seem? to have combined with this abstruse philosophy a 
 strong vein of comic shrewdness and some turn to scepticism (Cicero, Epis- 
 tol. ad Attic, i. 19) : '• ut crebro mihi vafer ille Siculus Epicharmus insusurret 
 cantilenam suam." ^"'lemens Alex. Strom, v. p. 258. Nt2V>f koX fiifivaa' am" 
 tfreiv up&pa ratiTa r-ltv <ppevC)v. Z<liuev apn^/nu) koI Xoyifffio)' raiira yup au^ei 
 ftporoic. Also his contemptuous ridicule of the prophetes.ses of his time 
 who cheated foolish women out of their money, pretending to universal 
 knowledp^e, sal TriivTa yiyvuiOKovTi n} tt)vuv "koyu (ap Polluc. ix. 81). See; 
 •bout Epicharmus, O. Miiller, Dorians, iv. 7, 4. 
 
 These drainas seem to have been exhibited at Syracuse between 48O-460 
 B. c, anterior even to Chionides and Magrnes at Athens fAristot. Poet c. 3): 
 be say^ t o A A ^ Trpdri'poq, which can hardly be literally exact. The critics of 
 the Horatian age looked upon Epicharmus as the prototype of Plautus fHor 
 Epifltol. ii. I. ftd). 
 * The thiid book of the republic of Plato is particularly striking io Tefe» 
 
 POFI S AND LOGOGRAPHERS. 
 
 877 
 
 mslaved. Taken as a whole the mythea aad acquired prescrip* 
 live and ineffaceable possession : to attach, call in question, or 
 repudiate them, was a task painful even to undertake, and far 
 beyond the power of any one to accomplish. 
 
 For these reasons the anti-mythic vein of criticism was of 
 no effect as a destroying force, but nevertheless its dissolving de- 
 composing and transforming influence was very considerable. To 
 accommodate the ancient mythes to an improved tone of sentiment 
 and a newly created canon of credibility, was a function which 
 even the wisest Greeks did not disdain, and which occupied nc 
 small proportion of the whole intellectual activity of the nation. 
 
 The mythes were looked at from a point of view completely 
 foreign to the reverential curiosity and literal imaginative faith 
 of the Homeric man ; they were broken up and recast in order 
 to force them into new moulds such as their authors had never 
 conteived. We may distinguish tour distinct classes of minds, 
 in the literary age now under examination, as having taken them 
 in hand — the poets, the logographers, the philosophers, and the 
 historians. 
 
 With the poets and logographers, the mythical persons are real 
 predecessors, and the mythical world an antecedent fact ; but it 
 IB divine and heroic reality, not human ; the present is only half- 
 brother of the past (to borrow^ an illustration from Pindar in his 
 allusion to gods and men), remotely and generically, but not 
 closely and specifically, analogous to it. As a general habit, the 
 old feelings and the old unconscious faith, apart from all proof or 
 evidence, still remain in their minds ; but recent feelings have 
 grown up which compel them to omit, to alter, sometimes even to 
 reject and condemn, particular narratives. 
 
 Pindar repudiates some stories and transforms ethers, because 
 they are inconsistent with his conceptions of the gods. Thus he 
 formally protests against the tale that Pelops had been killed 
 and served up at table by his father, for the immortal gods to eat; 
 he shrinks from the idea of imputing to them so horrid an appe- 
 
 Mice to the use of tfie poets in education : see also his treatise De I-egg. viL 
 p. 810-811. Some teachers made their pupils learn whole poets by heart 
 {Skov^ mtiiTdc kKuav^avtnf), others preferred extracts and selection*. 
 i*uidar,Nem. vi 1. Compare Simonid^, Fngm. 1 (Qaisford). 
 

 976 
 
 mSTOfiY OF QBEEOE. 
 
 tite ; he pronounces the tale to have been originally fabricated 
 by a slanderous neighlx)r. Nor can he bring himself to recount 
 the quarrels between ditferent gods.' Tlie amours of Zeus and 
 A{)ollo are no way disfdeasing to him ; but he occasionally sup 
 presses someot* tiie simple details of the old mythe, as deticient 
 in dignity : thus, iiccording lo the Ilesiodic narrative, Apollo was 
 inform* m1 by a raven ot" the infidelity of the nymph Korunis : but 
 the mention of the raven did not appear to Pindar consistent 
 with the majesty of the gcxl, and he therefore wraps up the mode 
 of iletection in vai^ue and mysterious language.^ lie feels con- 
 siderable repugnance to the character of Odysseus, and intimates 
 more than once that Horner has unduly exalted him, by force of 
 poetical artifice. With the character of the j^Eakid Ajax, on the 
 other hand, he has tlie deepest sympathy, as well as with htfl 
 untimelv and inf^lorious death, occasioned by the undeserved pre- 
 ference of a less worthy rival.^ He ap[)eals lor his authority usu- 
 ally to the Muse, but sometimes to*' ancient sayings of men,* 
 accompanied with a general allusion to story-tellers and bards,— 
 admitting, however, that these stories present great discrepancy, 
 and sometimes that they are false.'* Yet the marvellous and 
 the supernatural ?i4Jord no ground whatever for rejecting a 
 story : Pindar makes an express declaration to this eliiect in re- 
 ference to the romantic adventures of Perseus and the Grorgon's 
 head^ He treats even those mythical characters, which con- 
 flict the most palpably with positive experience, as connected 
 by a real genealogical thread with the world before him. Not 
 merely tue heroes of Troy and Thel>es, and the demigod seamen 
 of Jason and the ship Argo, but also the Centaur Cheiron, the 
 hundred- headed Typhos, the giant Alkyoneus, Antasus, Bellero*. 
 
 ' Pindar, Olymp. i. 3()-J.> ; ix. 32-45. 
 
 ' Pyth. iii 25. See the allusions to Semclt'-, Alkmena, and D»nae, Pyth. 
 tii. 98; Nem. x. 10. Compare also snpra^ cliap. ix. p. 245. 
 
 * Pindar. Nera. vii. 20-30 : viii. 23-31. Isthm. iii. "xi-eo 
 
 It seems to be sympathy for Ajax, in odes addressed to nobfie ^^inetaa 
 Tictors, which induces him thus to depreciate Odysseus ; for he eulo^zes Sisy 
 phus, specially on account of his cunning and resources (Olymp. xiii. 50) 
 in the ode addressed to Xenophon the Corinthian. 
 
 * Olymp. L 28 ; Nem. viii. 20 ; Pyth. i. 93 \ Olymp. vii 55 ; Nem ri. IS 
 ^VTi (T av^p^nuiV ndXaiai fn/aieg^ etc 
 
 * pyth. X. 49. Compare Pyth. xiL 1 1-22. 
 
 TBAGIC POETA 
 
 879 
 
 l^on and Pegasus, the Chimaera, the Amazons and the Hypei^ 
 boreans — all appear painted on the same canvas, and touched 
 with the same colors, as the men of the recent and recorded past, 
 Phalaris and Krcesus ; only they are thrown back to a greater 
 distance in the perspective.' The heroic ancestors of those great 
 ^gineUn, Thessalian, Theban, Argean, etc. families, whose pre- 
 sent members the poet celebrates for their agonistic victories, 
 sympathize with the exploits and second the efforts of their de- 
 scendants : the inestimable value of a privileged breed and of 
 the stamp of nature is powerfully contrasted with the impotence 
 of unassisted teaching and practice.*^ The power and skill of 
 the Argeian Theaeus and his relatives as wrestlers, are ascribed 
 partly to the fact that their ancestors Pamphae3 in aforetime 
 had hospitably entertained the Tyndarids Kastor and Pollux.3 
 Perhaps however the strongest proof of the sincerity of Pindar's 
 mythical faith is afforded when he notices a guilty incident with 
 ihame and repugnance, but with an unwilling confession of its 
 truth, as in the case of the fratricide committed on Phokus by 
 his brothers Peleus and Telamon.^ 
 
 ^Eschylus and Sophokles exhibit the same spontaneous and 
 nninquiring faith as Pindar in the legendary antiquities of Greece, 
 taken as a whole ; but they allow themselves greater license as 
 to the details. It was indispensable to the success of their com- 
 positions that they should recast and group anew the legendary 
 events, preserving the names and general understood relation of 
 those characters whom they introduced. The demand for novelty 
 of combination increased with the multiplication of tragic specta- 
 cles at Athens : moreover the feelings of the Athenians, ethical 
 as well as political, had become too critical to tolerate the literal 
 reproduction of many among the ancient stories. 
 
 Both of them exalted rather than lowered the dignity of the 
 mythical world, as something divine and heroic rather than human. 
 
 ' Prth. i. 17; iii 4-7 ; iv. 12 ; viii. 16. Nem. iv. 27-32 ; v. 89. Isthm. V. 
 81 ; ri. 44-48. Olymp. iii. 17 ; viii. 63 ; xiii. 61-87. 
 
 • Nem. iii. 39 ; v. 40. avyyevrjq evdofia — TzoTfio^ avyyevrjg ; v. 8. Oljrmp. 
 ix. 103. Pindar seems to introduce <pvg, in cases where Homer would hatt 
 Bientioned the divine assistance. 
 
 ^ Nem. x. 37-51. Compare the family legend of the Athenian Ddmr 
 crates, in Plato, Lysis, p. 295. « Nem. v. !9-i& 
 
 \ 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
 
>- 
 
 HISTOBY OF OREECB. 
 
 The Prometheus of .^schjlus is a far more exahed ooncepUaa 
 than his keen-witted namesake in Hesiod, and the more homely 
 details of the ancient Thebais and Q^dipodia were in like manner 
 modihed by Sophokles.' The reli^ijious ajrcndes of the eld epic 
 are constantly kept prominent, and the paternal curse, — the 
 wrath of deceased persons against those from whom they ha^e 
 sustained wrong, — the judgments of the Erinnys against guilty 
 or foredoomed perj-ons, sometimes inflicted directly, sometimes 
 brought about through dementation of the sufferer himself (like 
 the Homeric Ate), — are frequent in their tragedies;-^ 
 
 * See aftove, chap xiv. p. 368. on the Legend of the Siege of Thebes. 
 
 ' The curse of (Edi|)as is the determining^ force in the Sept. ad Thdbw, 
 'A()u t\ 'E(>iia'i>i 77aTf)o^; i] fieyacrdsivyi^ (v. 70) ^ it reappears several times in 
 the <'<)iirse of the drama, with particular solemnity in the mouth of Eteokl§8 
 (695-709, 725, 785, etc. ) ; he yields to it as au irresistible force, as carrying 
 ihe family to ruin : — 
 
 'En-f* rd -rrpdy/ia Kupr' iirtaTrepxet i9edf, 
 'Irtj tar' ovftov, KVfia Kukvtov Xuxt^v, 
 ^oiiitj arvyrj^EV miv rd Xdiov ytvo^ 
 * « * * * 
 
 ^/"kcnt yup ^x^pu fiot T-arpdc re^i' (ipa 
 'ErjpolQ uKXaixjToig bufiaatv npootCavet^ etc 
 
 So aj2:ain at the openiiiyrof the Ajjamemnon, the /j-vufiuv fif/vic reKvoirotvof 
 (v. 15')) and the siicrii re of Iphi^eneia are dwelt upon as leaving behind 
 tfiem an avenfj^inir doom upon A<r:jraenin«ni, thoujrh he took }»re(aurions for 
 gair^'inirher month dnrinjj the sacritice and thus preventing her from giving 
 tttterance to imprecations — 'iff^D/yov dpalov oiKoir B/a ^aA/i^wy r' uvavAi^ 
 uhn {K(iTanxnv)^\.M^. The Erinnys awaits A^'amemnon even at the 
 moment cf his victorious consummation at Troy (467; compare 762-990, 
 1336-143.3): she is mo*t to be dreaded after preat ;^'Ood fortune: she enforces 
 the curse which ancestral crimes have broujrht upon the house of Atreus — 
 irpu)Tapx<u; utt] — Ka'^.aMl d/nnftTiaf. ^o/iwr (1 185-1197, Choeph. 692) — the 
 earse imprecated by the outra*red Thyestes 0601). In the ChoOphorae, 
 Apollo menaces Orestes with the wrath of his deceased father, and all the 
 direful visitations of the Erinnyes, unless he undertakes to revenj;e the nmr- 
 der (271-296). Mcra and 'K/kvviV brinj:r on blood for blood (647). But the 
 moment that Orestes, placed between these conflicting: obli^tions (925), has 
 achieved it, he becomes himself the victim of the Erinnyes, who drive him 
 ■ad even at the end of the Choephorae (ewf 6' er' sfiopuv eifd, 1026), and 
 who make their appearance bodily, and pursue him throughoat the thiid 
 drama of diis fearful trilogy. The Eidolon of Klytsmnestra impels them to 
 vengeance (Emnenid 9fi ) and even spars them on when they appear to leka 
 
 V- 
 
 JESCHYLUa 
 
 881 
 
 ^schylus in two of his remaining pieces brings forward th« 
 gods as the chief personages, and far from sharing the objection 
 of Pindar to dwell upon dissensions of the gods, he introduces 
 Prometheus and Zeus in the one, Apollo and the Eumenides in 
 the other, in marked opposition. The dialogue, first superinduced 
 by him upon the primitive Chorus, gradually became the most 
 important portion of the drama, and is more elaborated in Sopho- 
 kles than in ^schylus. Even in Sophokles, however, it still 
 generally retains its ideal majesty as contrasted with the rhetori- 
 cal and forensic tone which afterwards crept in ; it grows out of 
 the piece, and addresses itself to the emotions more than to the 
 reason of the audience. Nevertheless, the effect of Athenian 
 political discussion and democratical feeling is visible in both these 
 dramatists. The idea of rights and legitimate privileges as op- 
 posed to usurping force, is applied by iEschylus even to the so- 
 ciety of the gods : the Eumenides accuse Apollo of having, with the 
 insolence of youthful ambition, " ridden down " their old preroga- 
 
 Apollo conveys Orestes to Athens, whither the Erinnyes pursue him, and 
 prosecute him before the judgment-seat of the goddess Athene, to whom 
 they submit the award; Apollo appearing as his defender. The debate 
 between " the daugliters of Night " and the god, accusing and defending, is 
 eminently curious (576-730) : the Erinnyes are deeply mortified at the humil- 
 iation put upon them when Orestes is acquitted, but Athene at length recon- 
 ciles them, and a covenant is made whereby they become protectresses of 
 Attica, accepting of a permanent abode and solemn worship ( 1006 J : Orestfis 
 returns to Argos, and promises that even in his tomb he will watch that none 
 of his descendants shall ever injure the land of Attica { 770> The solemn trial 
 and acquittal of Orestes formed the consecrating legend of the Hill and Jodi 
 cature of Areiopagus. 
 
 This is the only complete triology of ^schylus which we possess, and the 
 avenging Erinnyes (416) are the movers throughout the whole — unseen in 
 the first two dramas, visible and appalling in the third. And the appearance 
 of Cassandra under the actual prophetic fever in the first, contributes still 
 ferther to impart to it a coloring different from common humanity. 
 
 The general view of the movement of the Oresteia given in Welcker 
 (^schyl. Trilogie, p. 445) appears to me more conformable to Uellenie 
 ideas than that of Klausen ( Theologumena ^schyli, pp. 157-169), whose 
 yaluable collection and comparison of passages is too much affected, both 
 here and elsewhere, by the desirs to bring the agencies of the Greek mythical 
 irorld into harmony with what a religious mind of the present day would 
 approve. Moreover, he sinks the personality of Athene too much in tba 
 Mpreme authority o^ Zens (p. .58-168). 
 
 / 
 
! 
 
 B&i 
 
 HTSTOBT OF CSEECB. 
 
 JESCHYLUS. 
 
 888 
 
 tiyes^ — while the Titan Prometheus, the champion of sofiFiring 
 homanity against tlie unfriendly dispositions of Zeus, ventures to 
 depict the latter as a recent usurper reigning only by his su{)eriof 
 Btrength, exalted by one successful revolution, and destined at 
 some future time to be overthrown by another, — a fate which 
 cannot be averteti except through warnings communicable only 
 by Prometheus himself.'^ 
 
 It is commonly undei-stood that ./Eschylus disapproved of the 
 march of democracy at Athens during his later years, and that 
 the Eumeniiles is intended as an indirect manifestation in favor 
 of tl»e senate ot Areiopagus. Without inquiring at present whether 
 such a special purpose can be distinctly made out, we may plain- 
 ly see that the poet introduces, into the relations of the gods with 
 each other, a feeling of jK)litical justice, arising out ot* Uie time* 
 in which he lived and the debates of which he was a witness. 
 But though jilsch) lus incurred reproaches of impiety from Plato, 
 and seemingly also ti-om the Athenian public, for particular speech- 
 es and incidents in his tragedies,^ and though he does not adhere 
 
 * Euraenklc!*. 150. — 
 
 *Itj TTcu Aide, hriK?MTroe niXeL, 
 Neof de ypaiac daifj-ova^ Ka^nnraau, etc. 
 *rhe same metaphor apiin. v. 731. iEschylus seems to delight in contras»i 
 tog the young and the old p:ods: compare 70-162, 882. 
 
 The Erinnyes tell Apollo that he assumes functions which do not belong 
 to him, and will thus desecrate those which do belong to him (715-754): — 
 'AAA' QinaTipu Ttpdyuar\ ov A a;^ w v, affSeig, 
 fAavTfia d' ovk l^* dyvu fiavrevaei /levuv. 
 The refusal of the king Pelasgos, in the Supplices, to undertake what he 
 'eels to be the sacred duty of protecting the suppliant Danaides, without first 
 wbraitting the matter to his people and obtaining their expressed consent, and 
 the fear which he expresses of their blame {Kar' dpxac yap (tn?.ainog Aeuf ), aie 
 iMore forcibly set forth than an old epic poet would probably have thought n« 
 eaaary (see Supplices, 369, 397, 485, 519). The solemn wish to exclude both 
 *narchy and despotism from Athens bears still more the mark of political 
 feeling of the time— /t^r' avai^xov fiiire dearroTnvuevov (Eumenid. 527- 696^ 
 « Prometheus, 35, 151, 170, 309, 524, 910, 940, 956. 
 
 ' Plato, Repuhl. ii. 381-383 ; compare .«schyl. Fragment 159, ed. Din 
 lorf. He was charged, also with having divulged in some of his plays secret 
 ■•tteni of the mysteries of Demeter, but is said to liave excused himself by 
 sieging ignorance : ht) was not aware that what he bad " ~^ 
 
 lo the receiveil vein of religious tradition with the same strictneM 
 ms Sophokles — yet the ascendency and interference of the gods 
 is never out of sight, and the solemnity with which they are 
 represented, set otf by a bold, ligurative, and elliptical style of 
 
 in the mysteried (Aristot Ethic. Nicom. iii. 2; Clemens Alex. IStrAnL ii 
 p. 387); the story is ditlerent ii^ain in ^lian, V. H. v. 19. 
 
 iluw little can be miide out distinctly respecting this last accusation nua 
 be seen in Lobcck, Aglaopham. p. 81. 
 
 Cicero (Tusc. l)is. ii. 10) calls ^schylus " almost a Pythagorean :" upcs 
 what thti epithet;is founded we do not know. 
 
 There is no evidence to prove to us that the Prometheus Vinctns wm 
 considered as impious by the public before whom it was represented ; but its 
 obviouri meaning has been so regarded by modern critics, who resort to manj 
 different explanations of it. in order to prove that when proj»erly construed 
 it is not impious liut if we wish to ascertain what ^schylus really meant, 
 we ought not to consult the religious ideas of modern times ; we have no 
 tast except what we know of the poet's own time and that which had pre- 
 ceded him. Tho explanatioas given by the ablest critics seem generally to 
 exhibit a predetermination to bring out Zeus as a just, wise, merciful, and 
 all-powerful Being; and all, in one way or another, distort the figures, alter 
 tiic perspective, and give far-fetched interpretations of the meaning, of this 
 striking drama, which conveys an impression directly contrary (see Welck- 
 er, Trilogie, iEsch. p. 90-117, with the explanation of Dissen there given; 
 Elausen, Theologum. ^sch. p. 140-154; Schiiraann, in his recent tran8l»> 
 tion of the play, and tho criticism on that translation in the Wiener Jahr^ 
 bucher, vol. cix. 1845, p. 245, by F. liitter). On the other hand, Schoti 
 (Excnrs. ad Prom. Vinct. p. 149) thinks that ^schylus wished by means of 
 this drama to enforce upon his countrymen the hatred of a despot Thoogfa 
 I do not agree in this interpretation, it appears to me less wide of the tmtJl 
 than the forcible methods employed by others to bring the poet into hwr- 
 mony with their own religions ideas. 
 
 Without presuming to determine whether ^schylus proposed to himself 
 any special purpose, if we look at the .^chylean Prometheus in referenct 
 only to ancient ideas, it will be found to borrow both its characters and all 
 its main circumstances from the legend in the Hesiodic Theogony. Zens 
 acquires his supremacy only by overthrowing Kronos and the 'i'itans the 
 Titan god Prometheus is the pronounced champion of helpless man, and 
 negotiates with Zeus on their behalf: Zeus wishes to withhold from them 
 the most essential blessings, which Prometheus employs deceit and theft to 
 procure for them, and ultimately with success; undergoing, however, seveiV 
 punishment for so doing from the supeiior force of Zeus. These are tht 
 main features of the jflschylean Prometheus, and they are all derived fron 
 the legend as it stands in the Theogony. As for the human race, they an 
 depicted as abject and helpless in an extreme degree, in .^schylos eveo 
 
 Vol. 1 18 
 
a84 
 
 mSTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 8mHoCi.Ea. 
 
 88ft 
 
 expression (often but imperfectly intelligible to modem readers)^ 
 reaches its maximum in his tragedies. As he throws round tht 
 
 ■lore than in Hesiod : they appear as a race of abori^^inal savages, havinj^ 
 tfie frod Prometheus for their protector. 
 
 ,/EschyIus has worked up the old legend, homely and unimpressive as wa 
 read it in Hesiod, into .i sublime ideal. We are not to forget that Promd- 
 tbeus is not a man. but a god, — the equal of Zeus in race, though his infe- 
 lior in power, and belonging to a family of gods who were once superior to 
 Zens : he has moreover deserted his own kindred, and lent all his aid and 
 nperior sagacity to Zeus, whereby chiefly the latter was able to acquire 
 npremacy (this last circumstance is an addition by ^schylus himself to the 
 HeHiodic legend). In spite of such essential service, Zeus had doomed him 
 Id cruel punishment, for no other reason than because he conferred upon 
 helpless man the prime means of continuance and improvement, thus thwart- 
 ing the intention of Zeus to extinguish the race. 
 
 Now Zeus, though superior to all the other gods and exercising general 
 control, was never considered, either in Grecian legend or in Grecian religious 
 belief, to be superior in so immeasurable a degree as to supersede all free 
 •etion and sentiment on the part of gods less powerful. There were many 
 M legends of dissension among the gods, and several of disobedience against 
 Zeos : when a |)oet chose to dramatize one of these, he might so turn hit 
 eom position as to sympathize either with Zeus or with the inferior god, with- 
 •Dt in either case shocking the general religious feeling of the country. And 
 if there ever was an instance in which preference of the inferior god would 
 be admissible, it is that of Prometheus, whose proceedings are such as to call 
 forth the maximum of human sympathy, — superior intelligence pitted against 
 •nperior force, and resolutely encountering foreknown suffering, for the sole 
 porpose of rendering inestimable and gratuitous service to mortals. 
 
 Of the Prometheus Solutus, which formed a sequel to the Prometheus 
 Vinctus (the entire trilogy is not certainly known), the fragments preserved 
 ■re very scanty, and the guesses of critics as to its plot have little base to 
 proceed upon. They contend that, in one way or other, the apparent objec- 
 tions which the Prometh. Vinctus presents against the justice of Zeus were 
 tn the Prometh. Solutus removed. Hermann, in his Dissertatio de jEschy^ 
 Promefkeo Soluto (Opuscula, vol. iv. p. 256), calls this position in question: 
 I transcribe from his Dissertation one passage, because it contains an im- 
 pcHtant remark in reference to the manner in which the Greek poets handled 
 their religious legends : " while they recounted and believed many enomrf. 
 ties respecting individual gods, they always described the Godhead in the 
 ihstract as holy and faultless.** 
 
 « Immo illud admirari oportet, quod qunm de singulis Diis indignissimi 
 ^flsquc crederent, tamen ubi sine certo nomine Deum dicebant, immuneu 
 •b omni vitio, summiiciue sanctitate pr«ditnm intelligebant. Ulam igitui 
 ivris s«vitiam ut exousent defensores Trilogis, et jure punitom volant P"v> 
 
 gods a kind of airy grandeur, so neither do his men or neroet 
 appear like tenants of the common earth* the mythical world 
 from which he borrows his characters is peopled only with " the 
 immediate seed of the gods, in close contact with Zeus, in whom 
 the divine blood has not yet had time to degenemte :*'' his indi- 
 fiduals are taken, not from the iron race whom Hesiod acknow- 
 Jed;^es with shame as his contemporaries, but from the extinct 
 heroic race which had fought at Troy and Thebes. It is to them 
 that his conceptions aspire, and he is even chargeable with fre- 
 quent straining, beyond the limits of poetical taste, to realize hig 
 picture. If he does not consistently succeed in it, the reason is 
 because consistency in such a matter is unattainable, since, after 
 all, the analogies of common humanity, the only materials which 
 the most creative imagination has to work upon, obtrude them- 
 selves involuntarily, and the lineaments of the man are thus seeo 
 even under a dress which promises superhuman proportions. 
 
 Soj)hokles, the most illustrious ornament of Grecian tragedy, 
 dwells upon the same heroic characters, and maintains their 
 grandeur, on the whole, with little abatement, combining with it a 
 fiu* better dramatic structure, and a wider appeal to human sym- 
 pathies. Even in Sophokles, however, we find indications that 
 an altered ethical feeling and a more predominant sense of artistio 
 perfection are allowed to modify the harsher religious agencies of 
 the old epic ; occasional misplaced effusions* of rhetoric, as well 
 
 metheum — et in seqncnte fabola reconciliato Jove, restitutam arbitrantor 
 divinam justitiam. Quo invento, vereor ne non optirae dignitati oonsalofr- 
 rint supremi Deorum, qnem decuerat potius non saevire omnino, qoam pla* 
 cari ea lege, ut alius Promethei vice lueret" 
 
 * ^schyl. Fragment 146, Dindorf ; ap. Plata Repub. iii p. 391 : comp«a 
 Strabo. xii. p. 580. — 
 
 ol ^euv dyxUTTTopoi 
 
 Ol ZjTvof ^yyi>^, olq hf *Ma^^ Tay^ 
 Af^f trarp^ov Pufioc kar' hf al^epiy 
 KovKo Oifnv i^injXov <dfia Aaifiovuv. 
 There is one real exception to this statement — the P^»^ which • 
 feonded upon an event of recent occurrence; and one apparent exception^ 
 Ae Prometheus Vinctus. But in that drama no individual mortal is inait 
 Id appear; we can hardly consider lo as an kiprjfitpo^ (253). 
 
 * For the characteristics of ^schylus see Aristophan. Ran. '7^,adjh> 
 fOMsim, The competition between ^schylos and Euripides turns upon yp* 
 
 ▼OL. I. 17 a5oc 
 
im 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 as of didactic prolixity, may also be detected. It is JEschjimt 
 not Sophokles, who f(»rms the marked antithesis to Euripides ; it 
 fe .^Eschylus, not Sojjhokles, to whom Aristophanes awards the 
 prize of tragedy, as the poet who assigns most perfectly to the 
 heroes of the past those weighty words, imposing equipments, 
 simplicity of great deeds with little talk, and masculine energy 
 superior to the corru{)tions of Aphrodite, which beseem the com- 
 rades of Agamemnon and Adrastus.' 
 
 How deeply this feeling, of the heroic character of the mythi- 
 cal world, possessed the Athenian mind, may be judged by the 
 bitter criticisms made on Euripides, whose compositions were 
 pervaded, partly by ideas of physical philosophy learnt under 
 Anaxagoras, partly by the altered tone of education and the wide 
 diffusion of practical eloquence, forensic as well as political, at 
 
 fiac dyadai, 1497 ; the weight and majesty of the words, 1362; irpuTog tup 
 •EA/jyvwv TTvpyuxraf ^iifiara OE^va, 1001, 921, 930 ("sublimis et gravis et 
 grandiloquus saepe usque ad vitium," Quintil. x. 1 ) ; the imposing appearance 
 of his heroes, such as Memnon and Cycnus, 961 ; their reserve in speech, 
 908 ; his dramas " full of Ares " and his lion-hearted chiefs, inspiring the 
 auditors with fearless spirit in defence of their country,— 1014, 1019, 1040; 
 his contempt of feminine tenderness, 1042. — 
 
 iEscH. Oi)d' oiS' ovfhlc tjvtlv kpuaav TrwTror' ktroiriaa yvvaiKa. 
 
 EURIP. Ma Ai\ ovSi\ yap ^v T?fc 'A^podi'rjyf ovSev aoi. 
 
 *AA/L' knl aol rot kol toI^ aoimv ttoXXt) itoTl^ov ^niKa^oiro. 
 To the same general purpose Nubes ( 1347-1356), composed so many yeaw 
 earlier. The weight and majesty of the ^schylean heroes (fiapof, rd utyako- 
 irpeTzeq) is dwelt upon in the life of ^schylus, and Sophokles is said to have 
 derided it — 'Qarep yiip >'» l.o<poK?,7/c llfje, tov klaxv'>'OV dtaTenaLXf^ 
 byKov, etc. (Plutarch, ])e Profect. in Virt. Sent. c. 7), unless we are to un- 
 derstand this as a mistake of Plutarch quoting Sophokles instead of Euri- 
 pides, as he speaks in th«5 Frogs of Aristophanes, which is the opinion both 
 of Lessing in his Life of Sophokles and of Welcker (iEschyl. Trilogie, p. 
 
 535). 
 
 * See above, Chapters xiv. and xv. 
 
 iEschylus seems to have been a greater innovator as to the matter of the 
 afthes than either Sophokles or Euripides (Dionys. IIalic.Judic.de Vett 
 Script, p. 422, Reisk.). For the close adherence of Sophokles to the Homeric 
 epic, see Athen*. vii. p 277; Diogen. LaCrt. iv. 20 ; Suidas, v. TVoXifiunf 
 JBschylus puts into the mouth of the Enmenides a serious argument derived 
 from the behavior of Zeus in chaining his father Kronos (Eumen. 64<?) 
 
 ALTERED TONE Of BDRIPIDE8. 
 
 Athens.! While Aristophanes assails Euripides as the represen- 
 tative of this ^ young Athens," with the utmost keenness of 
 sar^^asm, — other critics also concur in designating him as having 
 ml<^arized the mythical heroes, and transformed them into mem 
 characters of common life, — loquacious, subtle, and savoring ck 
 the market-place.2 In some of his plays, sceptical expression* 
 and sentiments were introduced, derived from his philosophical 
 studies, sometimes confounding two or three distinct gods into ona, 
 iometimes translating the personal Zeus into a substantial ^ther 
 with determinate attributes. He put into the mouths of some of 
 his unprincipled dramatic characters, apologetic speeches which 
 were denounced as ostentatious sophistry, and as setting out a 
 triumphant case for the criminal.^ His thoughts, his words, and 
 the rhythm ot his choric songs, were all accused of being deficient 
 in dignity and elevation. The mean attire and miserable attitude 
 
 * Sec Valckcnaer, Diatribe in Euripid. Fragm. capp. 5 and 6. 
 
 The fourth and tifth lectures among the Draniaiische Vorlesumjen of August 
 Wilhclm Schlegol depict both justly and eloquently the difference between 
 JEschylus, Sophokles and Euripides, especially on this point of the gradual 
 ■inking of the mythical colossus into an ordinary man; about Euripiddt 
 especially in lecture 5. vol.i. p. 206, ed. Heidelberg 1809. 
 
 * Aristot. Poetic, c. 46. Oiov koI l^o<}>OK/Jjg ititTj, avTog fikv olovg del ttouIp 
 Evpnridrig <if, oiol elai. 
 
 The Ranae and Achameis of Aristophanes exhibit fully the reproachee 
 urged against Euripides : the language put into the mouth of Euripides ia 
 the former play (vv. 93.5-977) illustrates specially the point here laid down. 
 Plutarch (De Gloria Atheniens c. 5) contrasts v EipimSov ao<pia Kai ^ 
 2o0o/tAfoi'c XoyioTij^. Sophokles either adhered to the old mythes or intro 
 duced alterations into them in a spirit comformable to their original charac* 
 ter, while Euripides refined upon them. The comment of Demetrius Phale- 
 reus connects to Aoyiov expressly with the maintenance of the dignity of the 
 tales. 'Xp^ofiai de and tov fieyaloizpeizov^^ bnep vvv Xoy i ov ovofiuCovoiw 
 
 (c.38). 
 » Aristophan. Ran 770, 887, 1066. 
 Euripides says to ^schylus, in regard to the language employed by both 
 
 of them, — 
 
 * Hv ovv ai> "keyyq AvKa(3i^Trovf 
 
 Kai Tlapvdffacjv iifilv ^eyt&r)^ tovt' karl rd ;tP37ara didiunuw, 
 
 "Ov XPV <Ppd^eLV uv^pojTreiug ; 
 
 JEschylus replies, — 
 
 'AXA*, 0) KOKoSaifiov, avayKfi 
 
 "Heyakciv yvufiCiv Kai diavoiuv laa koI to. /ifffUtTa rutrtiv. 
 
888 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 in which he exhibited CEneus, Telephus, Thyestes, Ino, ami 
 other heroic characters, were unmercifully derided,' though it 
 seems that their [)C»sition and circumstances had always l>een 
 painfully melancholy ; but the effeminate pathos which Euripides 
 brought so nakedly into the foreground, was accounted unworthy 
 of the majesty of a legendary hero. And he incurred still great- 
 er obloquy on another point, on which he is allowed even by his 
 enemies to have only reproduced in substance the preexisting 
 
 tales, the illicit and fatal passion depicted in several of his 
 
 female characters, such as Phaedra and Sthenoboea. His oppo- 
 nents admitted that thase stories were true, but contended that 
 they ought to be kept back and not produced upon t' 3 stage, — 
 a proof both of the continued mythical faith and oi the more 
 sensitive ethical criticism of his age.2 The marriage of the six 
 
 Kai yitf) Toic luarioic hl^'^v xpt^vrai iroTii) aefivoTipoicri. 
 " A ^fiov ;tp7/CTrwf naTadei^avTO^ 6ie%VfiTivo) av. 
 
 EuRiP. TidpaaoQ, 
 JESCH. UpCiTOV fi€v roi>f f3a(Ti2.evovrac f>aKt* ufxmffxuv, h' iXeivol 
 Toic uv&pi'.yTiir (paivoLvr' rival. 
 For the character of the lanjruajre and measures of Euripidt^s, as rep^esen^ 
 ed by ^Eschylus, see also v. 1297, and Pae. 527. Philosophical discussion 
 was introduced by Euripides (Dionys. Hal. Ars Rhetor, viii. 10-ix. 11) about 
 the MelanippS, where the doctriue of prodigies (rtpag) appears to have beeo 
 argued. Quintiliun (x. 1) remarks that to young beginners injudicial plead- 
 ing. the study of Euripides was much more specially profitable than that oi 
 Sopnokles : compare Dio Chrysostom, Orat. xviii. vol. i p. 477, Reisk. 
 In Euripides the heroes themselves sometimes deliveied moralizing dis 
 
 l^nrses: ehiiyuv rnv \^eXKepo<pbvTt]v yvufioloyovvTa (Welcker, Griechisch. 
 
 Tragod. Eurip. Stheneb. p. 782). Compare the fragments of his Bellero- 
 phon (15-25, Matthiaj), and of his Chrysippus (7, ib.). A striking story it 
 found in Seneca, Epistol. 115 ; and Plutarch, de Audiend. I oetis, c. 4. t. i. p. 
 
 70, Wytt. 
 
 * Aristophan. Ran. 840. — 
 
 u aTupLv7i.ioavXkeKTd6i^ 
 Kat irruxo'Toik koI ^Kioav^/>anra.dTi • 
 Bee also Aristophan. Ac ham. 385-422. For an unfavorable criticism npos 
 •nch proceeding, see Aristotat. Poet. 27. 
 
 » Aristophan. Ran. 1050. — 
 BtrviP. UoTepov (V oil K 5vra?.6yov rovrov irepi r^r ^a'i^fX^C ^e^rjif^ J 
 3H Md M\aXV dvr'- dTiX' a-xoKpyirreiv xf»h rb irovvpdv tov ye Trot^r^ 
 Kal fifj napdyi'iv fiijde diAaoKtiv. 
 b the Hercnlca Furciw, Enripidfis outs In reUef and even exftggerate8 Cht 
 
 CENSURES ON EURIPmES. 
 
 880 
 
 daughters to the six sons of -Si^olus is of Homeric origin, and 
 stands now, though briefly stated, in the Odyssey : but the in- 
 cestuous passion of Macareus and Canace, embodied by Euripides* 
 in the lost tragedy called .^Eolus, drew upon him severe censure. 
 Moreover, he often disconnected the horrors of the eld legends 
 with those religious agencies by which they had been originally 
 forced on, j>refacing them by motives of a more refined character, 
 which carried no sense of awful compulsion : thus the considera- 
 tions by which the Euripidean Alkmaeon was reduced to the ne- 
 cessity of killing his mother appeared to Aristotle ridiculous.* 
 After the time of this great poet, his successors seem to have 
 followed him in breathing into their characters the spirit of com- 
 mon life, but the names and plot were still borrowed from the 
 stricken mythical families of Tantalus, Kadmus, etc.: and the 
 heroic exaltation of all the individual personages introduced, as 
 contrasted with the purely human character of the Chorus, is 
 
 worst elements of the ancient mythes : the implacable hatred of Her^ towardf 
 Herakles is pushed so far as to deprive him of his reason (by sending dowt 
 Iris and the unwilling \.vaaa), and thus intentionally to drive him to slay hit 
 wife and children with his own hands. 
 
 • Aristoph. Ran. 849, 1041, 1080; Thesmophor. .547 ; Nubes, 1354. Grauer^ 
 De Medid Graecorum Comoedift in Rheinisch. Museum, 2nd Jahrs. 1 Heft, p. 
 51. It suited the plan of the drama of iEolus, as composed by Euripides, to 
 place in the mouth of Macareus a formal recommendation of incestuoof 
 marriages : probably this contributed ronch to offend the Athenian pablie 
 See Dionys. Hal. Rhetor, ix. p. 355. 
 
 About the liberty of intermarriage among relatives, indicated in Homer, 
 parents and children being alone excepted, see Terpstra, Antiquitas Homericti 
 cap. xiii. p. 104. 
 
 Ovid, whose poetical tendencies led him chiefly to copy Euripid^, observes 
 {Trist. ii. 1,380) — 
 
 " Omne genus scripti gravitate Tragcedia vincit, 
 Haec quoque materiam semper amoris habet. 
 Nam quid in Hippolyto nisi csBoae flamma novercae ? 
 Nobilis est Canace fratris amore sui." 
 
 This is the reverse of the truth in regard to jEschylus and Sophokl^s, and 
 only very partially true in respect to Euripides. 
 
 * Aristot. Ethic. Nicom. iii. 1, 8. Koi yap tov KvpiiriSov ^A?.Kfiai(Jva yeXoZl 
 ^perai rd. avayKaaavra finrpoKTov^aac (In the lost tragedy called *AAicii"fc 
 Im» 6 Sid iro4j>i6oc). 
 
HISTORY or GSEEGB. 
 
 Dombered by Aristotle among the essential pcnots of tiN 
 theory of traj^edy.* 
 
 The tendency then of Athenian tragedy — powerfully maul- 
 tested in ^schylus, and never wholly lost — was to uphold ao 
 ■nquestioning faith and a reverential estimate of the general 
 mythical world and its personages, but to treat the particular nar- 
 fatives rather as matter for the emotions than as recitals of actual 
 fiwt. The logofijrapliers worked along with them to the first 
 ef these two ends, bul not to the second. Their grand object 
 was, to cast the myth<!S into a continuous readable series, and 
 they were in conseiiuence compelled to make selection between 
 hioonsistent or contradictory narratives ; to reject some narrup 
 tivea as false, and to leceive others as true. But their prefer- 
 ence was determined more by their sentiments as to what was 
 appropriate, than by any pretended historical test. Pherekydes, 
 Akusilaus and Hellanikus- did not seek to banish miraculous or 
 fantastic incidents from the mythical world; they regarded it as 
 peopled with loftier beings, and expected to find in it phaenomena 
 not i)aralleled in their own degenerate days. They reproduced 
 the tables as they found them m the poets, rejecting little except 
 the discrepancies, and producing ultimately what they believed 
 to be not only a contniuous but an exact and trustworthy history 
 of the past — wherein they carry indeed their precision to such 
 a length, that Hellanitius gives the year, and even the day of th« 
 capture of Troy.^ 
 
 Ilekataeus of Miletus (500 B. c), anterior to Pherekydes and 
 Hellanikus, is the earliest writer in whom we can detect any dis- 
 position to disallow tlio prerogative and s})ecialty of the mythea, 
 and to sollen down their characteristic prodigies, some of which 
 
 HERODOTUS, THUCY?IDES, ETC. 
 
 891 
 
 ' Aristot. Poetic. 26-27. And in his Problemata also, in giving- the reason 
 why the Hypo- Dorian and Hypo-Phrygian musical modes were never as- 
 t^ned to the Chorus, he nys — 
 
 Tai'Ta 6e ufiCtu X'^>P9 f^^^ uvait/xoaru^ Tolg di dvro okijv^c oUeioTefa. 'EKeivm 
 pihf yap rjpCtuv ftlfXTiTCU' oi de ijyefidvec "^^^ apxaiuv fiovoi f^crav ^pwff, ol A 
 ^oi avi>^>u>7rof , uv lariv 6 X^P^K- ^'^ *<*^ dpfio^ei airy rd yoepbv kcU tjovxU^ 
 t|^o^ Kal fiiXof • uvT^puniKd yap, 
 
 ' See Miiller, Prolegom sa einer wissenschaftlichen Mythologie, c. Si p 
 
 i' 
 
 98. 
 
 ' Hellanic. Fragment 143, ed. Didoti 
 
 fcowever still find favor in his eyes, as in the case of the speaking 
 ram who carried Phryxus over the Hellespont. He pronounced 
 the Grecian fables to be « many and ridiculous ;" whether from 
 their discrepancies or from their intrinsic improbabilities we do 
 not know : and we owe to him the first attempt to force them with- 
 in the limits of historical credibility ; as where he transforms the 
 three-headed Cerberus, the dog of Hades, into a serpent inhabit- 
 ing a cavern on Cape Ta^narus — and Geryon of Erytheia into a 
 king of Epirus rich in herds of oxen.i Hekataeus traced the 
 genealogy of himself and the gens to which he belonged through 
 a line of fifteen progenitors up to an initial god,2 — the clearest 
 proof both of his profound faith in the reality of the mythical 
 world, and of his religious attachment to it as the point of junc- 
 tion between the human and the divine personality. 
 
 We have next to consider the historians, especially Herodotus 
 and Thucydides. Like Hekataeus, Thucydides belonged to a 
 gens which traced its descent from Ajax, and through Ajax to 
 iEakus and Zeus.:< Herodotus modestly implies that he himself 
 had no such privilege to boast of 4 Their curiosity respecting the 
 
 ' Hekataei Fragm. ed. Didot. 332, 346, 349 ; Schol. Apollon. Rhod. 1. 256 j 
 Athenae. ii. p. 13') ; Skylax, c. 26. 
 
 Perhaps Hekatoeus was induced to look for Erytheia in Epirus by the 
 brick-red color of the earth there in many places, noticed by Pouqueville and 
 other travellers CVoyage dans la Grece, vol. ii. 248 : see Klausen, jEneas 
 nnd die Penaten, vol. i. p. 222). 'EKaraloc 6 MiXfjffioc — Tioyov evpev eUora, 
 Pausan. iii. 25, 4. He seems to have written expressly concerning the fabu- 
 lous Hyperboreans, and to have upheld the common faith against doubti 
 which had begun to rise in his time : the derisory notice of Hyperboreans in 
 Herodotus is probably directed against Hekatajus, iv. 36 : Schol. Apollon. 
 Rhod. ii. 675 ; Diodor. ii. 47. 
 
 It is maintained by Mr. Clinton (Fast. Hell. ii. p. 480/ and others (see not 
 ad Fragment. Hecataji, p. 30, ed. Didot). that the work on the Hyperboreans 
 was written by Hekatajus of Abdera, a literary Greek of the age of Ptolemy 
 Philadelphus — not by Hekatasus of Miletus. I do not concur in this opin- 
 ion. I think it much more probable that the earlier Hekataeus was the 
 author spoken of. 
 
 The distinguished position held by Hekataus at Miletus is marked not 
 ooly by the notice which Herodotus takes of his opinions on public matterg, 
 bat also by his negotiation with the Persian satrap Artaphemes on behalf c# 
 bis countrymen (Dioddr. Excerpt, xlvii. p. 41, ed. Dindorf ). 
 
 • Herodot. ii. 143 » MarcelUn. Vit- Thucyd. init 
 
 * Herodot. ii. 143. 
 
 / 
 
 I 
 
TOSTORT OF GREECR 
 
 past had no other materials to work upon except the myth< 
 but these they found already cast by the loj?ographers into a con* 
 tinuous series, and presented as an aggrefj:ate of antecedent his* 
 lory, clironologically deduced from the times of the gods. Id 
 common with the body of the Greeks, both Herodotus and Thu- 
 cydides had imbibed that complete and .nsuspecting belief in the 
 general reality of ra)'thical antiquity, which was interwoven with 
 the reIi«i^ion and the patriotism, and all the public demonstrations 
 (A' the Hellenic world. To acquaint themselves with the genuine 
 details of this foretime, was an inquiry highly interesting to them : 
 but the increased positive tendencies of their age, as well as their 
 own habits of personal investigation, had created in them an /«'«- 
 iorical sense in regard to the past as well as to the present. Hav 
 ing acquired a habit of appreciating the intrinsic tests of histor- 
 ical credibility and probability, they found the particular narra- 
 tives of the j)oets and logographers, inadmissible as a whole even 
 in the eyes of Hekata'us, still more at variance with their stricter 
 canons of criticism. And we thus observe in them the constant 
 struggle, as well as the resulting comj>romise, between these two 
 opposite ten<lenties ; on one hand a lirm belief in the reality of 
 the mythical world, on the other hand an inability to accept the 
 details which their only witnesses, the poets and logogra-phers, 
 told them respecting it. 
 
 bach of them however performed the process in his own way 
 Herodotus is a man of deep and anxious religious feeling ; he 
 often recognizes the special judgments of the gods as determining 
 historical events : his piety is also j>artly tinged with that mystical 
 vein which the last two centuries had gradually infused into the 
 religion of the Greeks — for he is apprehensive of giving oflence 
 to the gods by reciting jjublicly what lie has heard respecting 
 them ; he frequently stops short in his narrative and intimates 
 that there is a sacred legend, but that he will not tell it : in othei 
 cases, where he feels compelled to speak out, he entreats forgive- 
 ness for doing so from the gods and heroes. Sometimes he wiD 
 not even mention the name of a god, though he generally thinka 
 himself authorized to do so, the names being matter of public 
 notoriety.! Such picms reserve, which the open-hearted Herodoi 
 
 • Herodot. ii. 3, 51, 61 , 65, 170. He alludes briefly (c 51) to an ipbg koyoi 
 which WM communieated in the Samothracian mysteries, but he does net 
 
 THE MTTHES AS VIEWED BY HERODOTUS. 
 
 tes avowedly proclaims as chaining up his tongue, affords a strik* 
 ing contrast with the plain-spoken and unsuspecting tone of the 
 ancient epic, as well as of the popular legends, wherein the goda 
 and their proceedings were the familiar and interesting subjects 
 of common talk as well as of common sympathy, without ceasins 
 to inspire both fear and reverence. 
 
 Herodotus expressly distinguishes, in the comparison of Poly- 
 krates with Minds, the human race to which the former belonged, 
 from the divine or heroic race which comprised the latter.' But 
 he has a firm belief in the authentic personality and parentage of 
 all the names in the raythes. divine, heroic and human, as well 
 as in the trustworthiness of their chronology computed by gene- 
 rations. He counts back 1600 years from his own day to that of 
 Semele, mother of Dionysus ; 900 years to Herakles, and 800 
 years to Penelope, the Trojan war being a little earlier in date.« 
 Indeed even the longest of these periods must have seemed to him 
 comparatively short, seeing that he apparency accepts the prodi- 
 gious series of years which the Egyptians professed to draw fmm 
 a recorded chronology — 17,000 years from their god Herakles, 
 and 15,000 years from their god Osiris or Dionysus, down to 
 their king Amasis^ (550 b. c.) So much was his imagination 
 £Eimiliarized with these long chronological coraputations barren of 
 events, that he treats Homer and Hesiod as " men of yesterday,* 
 though separated from his own age by an inter tjvI which he reck- 
 ons as four hundred years.4 
 
 mention what it was : also about the Thesraophoria, o\ reXerTi of DemSt^ 
 (c 17l> 
 
 Kai irepi fiev tovtuv roaavra rjfuv elirovai, koI napa r iv •&eC)v kcU ijpuuy 
 titfiEVEia eh (c. 45). 
 
 Compare similar scruples on the part of Pausanias (vii 25 and 37). 
 
 The passage of Herodotus (ii. 3) is equivocal, and has b^cn understood in 
 jiore ways than one (see Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 1287). 
 
 The aversion of Dionysius of Halikarnassus to reveal the divine secrets ■ 
 ttOt less powerful (see A. R. i. 67, 68), and Pausanias joomi'iii. 
 
 Herod, iii. 122. « Herod, ii. 145. 
 
 ' Herodot. ii. 43-145. Kal ravra Alyvirrioc uTpeKeug ifxurl iirl<Tra<r&<u, 
 tki re JioyiCofievoi koX ael anoypaiftofievoi ret. irea, 
 
 * Herodot, ii. 53. fuxpi ob npciffv re Kal X'^h* <^f elireiv A679. Haiodth 
 ydp Koi 'Ofiijpov 7ih,Kiftv rrrpoKoaioiOi ireeri doKeu fiev npea^vripa&t yetm 
 
 .17» 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
IM 
 
 mSTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 Herodotus bad been profoundly impressed with what he saw 
 
 and heard in Egypt. The wonderful monuments, the eviden 
 antiquity, and the peculiar civilization of that country, acquired 
 fiuch prej)onderance in his mind over his own native legends, that 
 he is disposed to trace even the oldest religious names or institu- 
 tions of Greece to Egyptian or Phoenician original, setting aside 
 in favor of this hypothesis the Grecian legends of Dionysus and 
 Pan.' Tiie oldest Grecian mythical genealogies are thus made 
 ultimately to lose themselves in Egyptian or Phoenician antiquity, 
 and in the full extenl of these genealogies Herodotus firmly be- 
 lieves. It does not seem that any doubt had ever crossed his 
 mind a^ to the real personality of those who were named or de- 
 Bcribed in the [)0|)ular mythes: all of them have once had reality, 
 either as men, as heroes, or as gods. The eponyras of cities, 
 demes and tribes, are all comprehended in this affirmative cate- 
 gory ; the supposition of fictitious personages being apparently 
 never entertained. Deukalion, Hellen, Dorus,'^ — Ion, with his 
 four sons, the eponyms of the old Athenian tribes,*^ — the au- 
 tochthonous Titakus and Dekolus,4 — Danaus, Lynkeus, Perseus, 
 Amphitryon, Alkmen:i, and Ilerakles,"^* — Talthybius, the heroic 
 progenitor of* the pri\ileged heraldic gens at Sparta, — the Tyn- 
 darids and Helena,^ — Agamemnon, Menelaus, and Orestes,^ ^ 
 Nestor and his son Peisistratus, — Asopus, Thebe, and ^gina, 
 — Inachus and 16, j^ietes and Medea,** — Mebnippus, Adrastus, 
 and Amphiariius, as v,rell as Jason and the Argo,^ — all these are 
 occupants of the real past time, and predecessors of himself and 
 his contemjKjraries. In the veins of the Lacedaemonian kings 
 flowed the blooil both of Kadrnus and of Danaus, their splendid 
 pedigree being traceable to both of these great mythical names: 
 Herodotus carries the lineage up through Herakles first to Per- 
 seus and Danae, then through Danae to Akrisius and the Egyp- 
 tian Danaus ; but be drops the paternal lineage when he comet 
 
 » Herodot. ii. 146. ' Herod, i. 56. 
 
 ' Herod, v. 66. * Herod, ix. 73 
 
 * Herod, ii. 43-44, 91-98, 171-182 (the Egyptians admitted the truth of 
 the Greek lej;end, that Perseos had come to Libya to fetch the Gorgon'a 
 head). 
 
 * Herod, ii. 113-120; iv. 145 ; viL 134. ' Herod, i. 67-68 ; ii. 118. vii. 159 
 «Herod 11,2,4} ▼ 8£, 65. >Herod. i. 52; 17.145; ¥.67; vii 19» 
 
 BELTfiP OF HERODOTUS IN MYTHICAL PEBSONS. 
 
 896 
 
 Id Perseus (inasmuch as Perseus is the son of 2^u8 by DanaS» 
 without any reputed human father, such as Amphitryon was to 
 Herakles), and then follow the higher members of the series 
 through Danae alone.' He also pursues the same regal geneal- 
 ogy, through the mother of Eurysthenes and Procles, up to Poly- 
 Dikes, CEdipus, Laius, Labdakus, Polydorus and Kadmus; and 
 he assigns various ancient inscriptions which he saw in the temple 
 of the Ismenian Apollo at Thebes, to the ages of Laius and 
 CEdipus.2 Moreover, the sieges of Thebes and Troy, — the Ar- 
 
 gonautic expedition, — the invasion of Attica by the Amazons, 
 
 the protection of the Herakleids, and the defeat and death of 
 Eurystheus, by the Athenians,3 — the death of Mekisteus and 
 Tydeus before Thebes by the hands of Melanippus, and the 
 touching calamities of Adrastus and Amphianius connected with 
 the same enterprise, — the sailing of Kastor and Pollux in the 
 
 Arg6,4— the abductions of 16, Europa, Medea and Helena, 
 
 the emigration of Kadmus in quest of Europa, and his coming 
 to Boe«'»tia, as well as the attack of the Greeks upon Troy to re- 
 cover Helen,^— all these events seem to him portions of paal 
 history, not less unquestionably certain, though more clouded over 
 by distance and misrepresentation, than the battles of Salamis 
 and Mykale. 
 
 But though Herodotus is thus easy of faith in regard both to 
 the persons and to the general facts of Grecian mytl»«8, yet when 
 he comes to discuss particular facts taken separately, we find him 
 applying to them stricter tests of historical credibility, and often 
 disposed to reject as well the miraculous as the extravagant. 
 Thus even with respect to Herakles, he censures the levity of 
 the Greeks in ascribing to him absurd and incredible exploits ; 
 he tries their assertion by the philosophical standard of nature, 
 or of determinate powers and conditions governing the course of 
 events. " How is it consonant to nature (he asks), that Herakles, 
 being, as he was, according to the statement of the Greeks, a 
 wian, should kill many thousand persons ? I pray that indulgence 
 may be shown to me both by gods and heroes for saying so muck 
 
 * Herod, vi. 62-53. 
 
 ■ Herod v. 61 ; ix. 27-28. 
 
 * Herod, i. 1-4; ii 49, 113: Iv. 147.- v. 94. 
 
 * Herod iv. 147 : v. »-61. 
 « Herod. i.6S; iv. 14ft; ▼. ( 
 
 f'*' ♦ 
 
 i 
 
 
 \ 
 
899 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 m tins." The religious feelings of Herodotus here told him thai 
 lie was trenching u[)on the utmost limits of admissible scepti 
 dsm.' 
 
 Another striking instance of the disposition of Herodotus to 
 rationalize the miniculous nai-ratives of the current mythes, is to 
 be fbund in his account of the oracle of Dodona and its alleged 
 Egyptian origin. Here, if in any case, a miracle was not only 
 in full keeping, but apparently indispensable to satisfy the exi- 
 gences of the religious sentiment ; anything less than a miracle 
 would have appeared tame and unimpressive to the visitors of so 
 revered a spot, much more to the residents themselves. Accord- 
 ingly, Herodotus heard, both from the three priestesses and from 
 the Dodonar'ans generally, that two black doves had started at 
 the same time from Thebes in Egypt : one of them went to Libya, 
 where it directed the Libyans to establish the oracle of Zeus 
 Ammon ; the other came to the grove of Dodona, and perched 
 on one of the venerable oaks, proclaiming with a human voice 
 that an oracle of Zeus must be founded on that very spot. The 
 injunction of the speaking dove was respectfully obeyed.- 
 
 Such was the tale related and believed at Dodona. But He- 
 rodotus had also heard, from the priests at Thebes in Egypt, a 
 different tale, ascribing the origin of all the prophetic establish- 
 ■lents, in Greece as well as in Libya, to two sacerdotal women, 
 who had been carried away from Thebes by some Phoenician 
 
 * Herod, ii. 45. Xiyavai 6i TroTikii koI aXka aveniffKeTrTuc ol 'EXTajve^- 
 ttvf&i}^ de avricjv Kal bde 6 fiv'&oi kariy rdv Tept tov 'Hpa/cAf of ?.eyovai .... 
 ... "Ert dk iva hovra n>v 'Hpa/cXea, Koi In av^puirov uf dr/ (ftaaiy ku^ <f>v (Tit 
 1;^ et iroXXHc fivpiaSac ^tovevaai ; Kal irepl /niv rovruv ro^avra rj^lv eiirovci^ 
 Koi napd. Tu>v ^^euv kgI irapu tuv Tjpoxjv ev/ieveia elrj. 
 
 We may also notice the manner in which the historian criticizes the strat 
 ■g«m whereby Peisistratas established himself as despot at Athens — by 
 dressing up the stately Athenian woman Phye in the costume of the goddess 
 Athent', and passing off her injunctions as the commands of the goddess : 
 die Athenians accepted her with unsuspecting faith, and received Peisistratu» 
 tt h«r command. Herodotus treats the whole affair as a piece of extravar 
 gaint silliness, Trpdyfia evri'&koTarov fiaKpC) (i. 60). 
 
 ' Herod, il. 55. Auduvaiov Se al iprjtai kleyov ravra, avvDfioTioyew 
 
 ii a^i Kal ol a?,h>i Au3(jvaloi ol jctpl rb Ipov. 
 
 The miracle sometimes takes another form ; the oak at Dodftna was itielf 
 •ndaed with ipeech (Dionys. Hal. Ara Rhetoric, i. 6; Strabo). 
 
 ] 
 
 HERODOTUS AND THE JtfHlACLE OF DODONA 
 
 997 
 
 merchants and sold, the one in Greece, the other in Libya. Ha 
 Theban priests boldly assured Herodotus that much pains had 
 been taken to discover what had become of these women so ex- 
 ported, and that the fact of their having been taken to Greeoe 
 and Libya had been accordingly verified.* 
 
 The historian of Halicarnassus cannot for a moment think of 
 admitting the miracle which harmonized so well with the feelinp 
 of the priestesses and the Dodonaeans.a " How (he asks) could 
 a dove speak with human voice ? ** But the narrative of the priests 
 at Thebes, though its pixxiigious improbability hardly requires to 
 be stated, yet involved no positive departure from the laws of 
 natui-e and possibility, and therefore Herodotus makes no diffi- 
 culty in accepting it. The curious circumstance is, that he turai 
 the native Dodonaean legend into a figurative representation, or 
 rather a misrepresentation, of the supposed true story told by tbe 
 Tlieban priests. According to his interpretation, the woman who 
 came from Thebes to Dr)d6na was called a dove, and atfirmed to 
 utter sounds like a bird, because she was non-Hellenic and s|K>k8 
 a foreign tongue : when she learned to speak the language of the 
 country, it was then said that the dove spoke with a human voioa 
 And the dove was moreover called black, because of the woman^ 
 Egyptian color. 
 
 That Ilei-odotus should thus bluntly reject a miracle, recount- 
 ed to him by the i)rophetic women themselves as the prime chf^ 
 cumstance in the origines of this holy place, is a proof of the hoU 
 which habits of dealing with historical evidence had acquired 
 over his mind ; and the awkwardness of his explanatory media- 
 tion between the dove and the woman, marks not less his auxie* 
 ty, while discarding the legend, to let it softly down into a stoiy 
 quasi-historical and not intrinsically incredible. 
 
 We may observe another example of the unconscious tendency 
 
 * Herod, ii. 54. 
 
 • Herod, ii. 57. 'EtteI reu rpoTr^ &v ireXeidc y« dv^ponryitri ^lw^ fSiy^atro; 
 Accordiniar to one statement, the word UeXetu^ in the Thessalian dialadi 
 
 meant both a dove and a prophetess (Scriptor Rer. Mythicarum, ed. Bcda^ 
 L 96). Had there been any truth in this, Herodotus could hardly have 
 fiuled to notice it, inasmuch ae it wool! exactly have helped him oat of Ite 
 difiSculty which he felt 
 
 
B98 
 
 HISTORY OF 02EECB. 
 
 of Herodotus to eliminate from the mythes the idea of speciil 
 aid from the gods, in his remarks upon Melampus. He design 
 Dates Melampus ** as a clever man, who had acquired for himself 
 the art of prophecy ;" and had procured through Kadmus much 
 iDformation about the reUgious rites and customs of Egypt, many 
 of which he introduced into Greece' —especially the name, the 
 ghcrifices, and the phallic processions of Dionysus : he adds, " that 
 Melampus himself did not accurately comprehend or bring out 
 the whole doctrine, but wise men who came after him made the 
 necessary additions."-' Though the name of Melampus is here 
 maintained, the character described^ is something in the vein of 
 Pythagoras — totally different from the great seer and leech of 
 the old epic mythes — the founder of the gifted family of the 
 Amythaonids, and the grandfather of Amphiaraus.^ But that 
 which is most of all at variance with the genuine legendary spirit, 
 is the opinion expressed by Herodotus (and delivered with some 
 emphasis as his own), that Melampus " was a clever man, who 
 had acquired for himself prophetic powers." Such a supposition 
 would have appeared inadmissible to Homer or Hesiod, or indeed 
 to Solon, in the preceding century, in whose view even inferior 
 arts come from the gods, while Zeus or Apollo bestows the power 
 
 * Herod, ii. 49. 'Evci. fiev vvv ^;//ii Me/La/zTToda yevbfievov avSpa ao(pbvy 
 mavTiKTiv re fwvr^ cnniTrjaaLy koI nvdo^evov an'' kiyvTCTov, oXka te TroXTid, 
 iavyvffaa^ai 'EXXjjai^ koI tu irepl tov Aiovvoov^ uXiya avruv KapaUu^avra, 
 
 * Herotl. ii. 49. 'Arpexewf fiev oi travra avXkaiiuv rbv Tioyov ^yve ■ (Me- 
 lampus) 111}: ol kmyvofievoi TovT(f> Go^^iaral /le^ovug i^e<fnjvav. 
 
 ^ Compare Herod, iv. 95 ; ii. 81. 'EXatjvuv ov ry tKr^eveararcf) aoipiaT^ 
 Ilv&a} opa. 
 
 * Homer, Odyss. xi. 290 ; xv. 225. ApoUodor. i. 9, 11-12. Hesiod, Eoiai, 
 
 Fragm. 55, ed. Diintzer (p. 43) — 
 
 'AA/c^v fiev yap eduKev 'OXv/xnioc klaKidnm, 
 
 ^ovv 6^ Afi j^aovldat^ , ttXovtov d' inop' Aiptidijai. 
 
 also Frag. 34 (p. 38), and Frag. 65 (p. 45) ; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 118. 
 
 Herodotus notices the celebrated mythical narrative of Melampus healing 
 the deranged Argive \iomen (ix. 34); according to the original legend, the 
 daughters of Proetus. In the Hesiodic Eoiai (Fr. 16, Duntz. ; ApcUod. ii. 2) 
 liie distemper of the Proetid females was ascribed to their having repudiated 
 the rites and worship of Dionysus ( Akusilaus, indeed, assigned a different 
 cause), which shows ihat the old fable recognized a conuecflo^ betw«M 
 Melampus and. these rites 
 
 ELIMINATION OP MYTHICAL NARRATIVE. 
 
 if prophesyingJ The intimation of such an opinion by Herod<K 
 tns, himself a thoroughly pious man, marks the sensibly diminish- 
 ed omnipresence of the gods, and the increasing tendency to look 
 Ibr the explanation of phaenomena among more visible and deter* 
 minate agencies. 
 
 We may make a similar remark on the dictum of the historiaa 
 respecting the narrow dehle of Tempe, forming the emboucl/ure 
 of the Peneus and the efflux of all the waters from the Thessa- 
 Kan basin. The Thessalians alleged that this whole basin ci 
 Thessaly had once been a lake, but that Poseidon had split the 
 chain of mountains and opened the efflux ;2 upon which primi- 
 
 » Homer, Iliad, i. 72-87 ; xv. 412. Odyss. xv. 245-252 ; iv. 233. Some 
 times the gods inspired prophecy for the special occasion, witliout confer 
 linjr upon the party the permanent gift and status of a prophet (compare 
 Odyss. i. 202; xvii. 383). Solon, Fragm. xi. 48-53, Sclmeidewia : — 
 'ATiXov fidvTiv ^^^KEV uva^ iKuepyog 'Atto/IAui;, 
 
 'Eyvw (J' avdpl KOKdv rrjXodev kpx6fi€VOVf 
 *Q< avvofiaprr/auKTi T&eui 
 
 Herodotus himself reproduces the old belief in the special gift of prophenc 
 power by Zeus and Apollo, in the story of Euenius of Apollonia (ix. 94). 
 
 See the fine ode of Pindar, describing the birth and inspiration of Jamas, 
 eponymous father of the great prophetic family in Elis called the Jamidf 
 (Herodot. ix. 33), Pindar, Olymp. vi. 40-75. About Teiresias. Sophoc. (Ed. 
 Tyr. 283-4 1 0. Neither Nestor nor Odysseus possesses the gift of prophecy. 
 
 * More than one tale is found elsewhere, similar to this, about the detila 
 •f Tempe: — 
 
 " A tradition exists that this part of the country was once a lake, and 
 that Solomon commanded two deeves, or genii, named Ard and Beel, to turn 
 off the water into the Caspian, which they effected by cutting a passage through 
 the mountains : and a city, erected in the newly-formed plain, wa^ named 
 after them Ard-u-beel." (Sketches on the Shores of the Caspian, by W. B. 
 Holmes. ) 
 
 Also about the. plain of Santa Fe di B >gota, in South America, that it 
 was once under water, until Bochica clt;ft the mountains and opened a 
 channel of egress (Humlwldt, Vues des CordilKres, p. 87-88); and about 
 die plateau of Kashmir (Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. i. p 102), drained in 
 a like miraculous manner by the saint KAsyapa. The manner in whidi 
 eonjectures, derived fi-om local configuration or peculiarities, are often made 
 to assume the form of traditions^ is well remarked by the same illustriook 
 traveller : ^ Ce qui se presente comme une tradition, n'est souvent que itf 
 reflet de Timpression que laisse Taspect des lieox. Des bancs de coqaillef 
 4 demi-fossiles, repandnes dans les isthmes oa sat dM plateaux, font nattvt 
 
 J 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 •,•. « 
 
100 
 
 mSTORY OF OREECn 
 
 tiTC belief, thoroughly conformable to the genius of Homer and 
 Hesiod, Herodotus comments as follows : " The Thessalian state- 
 ment is reasonabhi. For whoever thinks that Poseidon shakes 
 the earth, and that the rifts of an 'earthquake are the work of 
 that god, will, on seeing the Hf^tiie in question, say tliat Poseidoo 
 has caused it. For the rift of the mountains is, as appeared to 
 me (wlien I saw it), the work of an earthquake." Herodotus 
 admits the reference to Poseidon, when pointed out to him, but 
 it stands only in the background : what is present to his mind is 
 the phaenomenon of the earthquake, not as a special act, but as 
 part of a system of habitual operations.^ 
 
 infime chez les hommcs les moins avances dans la culture Intel lectuelle, 
 Rdee de grandes inondations, d'anciennes communications entre des bassina 
 Kmitrophes. Des opinions, que Ton pourroit appeler syste'matiques, se trou- 
 ▼ent dans les foreta de I'Orenoque comme dans les iles de la Mer du Sud 
 Dans I'une et dans I'autre de ces contre'es, elles ont pris la forme des tradi 
 tlons." (A. von Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. ii. p 147.) Compare a 
 rimilar remark in the same work and volume, p. 286-294. 
 
 > Herodot. vii. 129. (Poseidon was worshipped as llerpaloc in Thessaly, 
 to commemoration of this geological interference : Schol. Pindar. Pyth. ir. 
 S45.) Td de naXatdv Xeyerai, ovk kovroc koj tov avhjvo^ Kal diEKpoov Tovrov, 
 
 T<n)f irorufiovc tovtov^ ^tovToc irotelv r^v QeaaaXinv miaav Tzelayoi. 
 
 AvToi fiev wv eiaoaXot Xkyovat lloaeideuva Tzou/aat tov av^uva, di' ov ften 
 6 n^vftdf, oUdra Af } orref. 'Oariq yap vo/ii;ei Uoaeidiuva tijv yr/v adeiv, 
 Kol Tu duareura inrd ffeiofiov tov i»€OV tovtov epya elvoL, Kal uv EKelvo ISCxv 
 ^ij aooeiSitJva iroivcrai. 'E<jtI yap aeifffiov Ipyov, wf kfiol e(}>aiveT0 elvat, 
 il diuffTamg tuv ovpiuv. In another case (viii. 129), Herodotus believes thai 
 Pbseidon produced a preternaturally high tide, in order to punish the Per- 
 tians, who had insulted his temple near Potidxa : here was a special motive 
 Rm- the god to exert his power. 
 
 This remark of Herodotus illustrates the hostile ridicule cast by Aristo- 
 phanes (in the Nubes) upon Socrates, on the score of alleged impiety, be- 
 caase he belonged to a school of philosophers (though in point of fact he 
 discountenanced that line of study) who introduced physical laws and forcef 
 to place of the personal agency of the gods. The old man Strepsiades Id 
 quires from Socrates, Who rains ? Who thunders ? To which Socrates re 
 riles, " Not Zeus, but the Nephelae, i. e. the clouds : you never saw rain with- 
 oat clouds." Strepsiades then proceeds to inquire — " But who is it thai 
 compels the clouds to move onward ? is it not Zeus V Socrates — « Not 
 m all ; it is «thereal rotation." Strepsiades — " Rotation ^ that had escape^ 
 ae : Zeus then no hmger exists, and Rotation reigns in his place." 
 grUPS 'O <J' avaynd^uv iati Tif mvTa<: (Ne^tAaf ), ovx 6 Zevf, uare ^i 
 
 LEGEND or TBOT IN HERODOTUS. 
 
 401 
 
 Herodotus adopts the Egyptian version of the legend of Troy, 
 Ibunded on that capital variation which seems to have originated 
 with Stesichorus, and according to which Helen never left Sparta 
 at all — her eidolon had been taken to Troy in her place. U{>oii 
 this basis a new story had been framed, midway between Homer 
 and Stesichorus, representing Paris to have really carried off 
 Helen from Sparta, but to have been driven by storms to EgypC» 
 
 SocRAT. *H/CfOT\ aXX* al^epio^ dlvoc. 
 
 Streps. Alvoc ; tovti fi' k?,eX7J^ei — 
 
 *0 Zet)f OVK tjv, u?.V avr" avTov Alvog vvvl fSaatXevutv, 
 
 To the same effect v. 1454, A?vof fiaaiTievei rov At' ii£XT}?iaKijg " Rota 
 
 tk>n has driven oat Zeus, and reigns in his place." 
 
 If Aristophanes had had as strong a wish to turn the public antipathies 
 against Herodotus as against Socrates and Euripides, the explanation here 
 given would have afforded him a plausible show of truth for doing so ; and 
 h is highly probable that the Thessalians would have been sufficiently dis- 
 pleased with the view of Herodotus to sympathize in the poet's attack upon 
 him. The point would have been made (waiving metrical considerations) — 
 He in fide l3aai?i€veLy Tdv Uoaei^uv' k^elrjlaKug. 
 
 The comment of Herodotus upon the Thessalian view seems almost as if it 
 were intended to guard against this very inference. 
 
 Other accounts ascribed the cutting of the defile of Tempe to Heraklea 
 (Diodor. iv. 18). 
 
 Respecting the ancient Grecian faith, which recognized the displeasure of 
 Poseidon as the cause of earthquakes, see Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 3, 2 ; Thucy 
 did. i. 127; Strabo, xii. p 579; Diodor. xv. 48-49. It ceased to give uni\er- 
 sal satisfaction even so eariy as the time of Thales and Anaximenes -ec 
 Aristot. Meteorolog. ii. 7-8 ; Plutarch, Placit. Philos. iii. 15 ; Seneca, NatumL 
 Quaesl. vi. 6-23) ; and that philo.sopher, as well as Anaxagoras, Dcmocritua 
 and others, suggested different physical explanations of the fact Notwith- 
 standing a dissentient minority, however, the old doctrine still continued to 
 be generally received : and Diodorus, in describing the terrible earthquake 
 in 373 B. c, by which Helike and Bura were destroyed, while he notices 
 those philosophers (probably Kallisthenes, Senec. Nat. Quaest. vi. 23) who 
 inbstituted physical causes and laws in place of the divine agency, rejecti 
 their views, and ranks himself with the religious public, who traced this for 
 midable phaenomenon to the wrath of Poseidon (xv. 48-49). 
 
 The Romans recognized many different gods as producers of earthquakes , 
 an unfortunate creed, since it exposed them to the danger of addressing 
 their prayers to the wrong god : " Unde in ritualibos et pontificiis obser- 
 vatur, obtemperantibns sacerdotiis caute, ne alio Deo pro alio nominate 
 mm quis eomm terram concutlat, piacula committantar." (Ammian. Afar 
 00II. xviL 7.) 
 
 VOL. I. 26oC 
 
 €^j 
 
 1 
 
 ') 
 
102 
 
 HISTORY OF OBEECB. 
 
 whenj she remained during the vrhole siege of Troy, having been 
 detained by Pniteus, the king of the country, until Menelauf 
 came to reclaim her after his triumph. The Egyptian pnesta, 
 with their usual boldness of assertion, professed to have beard 
 the whole story from Menelaus himself — the Greeks had be» 
 ■ei^ed Troy, in the full persuasion that Helen and the stoleo 
 trejisures were within the walls, nor would they ever believe the 
 repeated denials of the Trojans as to the fact of her presence. In 
 intimating his pi*eference for the Egyptian narrative, Herodotus 
 betrays at once his perfect and unsuspecting confidence thpt he is 
 dealing with genuine matter of history, and his entire distrust of 
 the epic poets, even including Homer, upon whose authority that 
 6up|)Oscd history rested. His reason for rejecting the Homeric 
 version is that it teems with historical improbabilities. If Helen 
 had been really in Troy (he says), Priam and the Trojans would 
 never have been so insane as to retain her to their own utter 
 niin : but it was the divine judgment which drove them into the 
 miserable alternative of neither being able to surrender Helen, 
 nor to satisfy the Greeks of the real fact that they had never 
 had |X)ssession of her — in ord<'r that mankind might plainly 
 read, in the utter destruction of Troy, the great punishments with 
 which the gods visit great misdeeds. Homer (Herodotus thinks) 
 had heard this story, but designedly departed from it, because 
 it was not so suitable a subject for epic poetry. i 
 
 Enough has been said to show how wide is the difference be- 
 tween Herodotus and the logographers with their literal ti*an- 
 script of the ancient legends. Though he agrees with them in 
 admitting the full series of persons and generations, he tries the 
 circumstances narrated by a new standard. Scruples have arisen 
 in his mind res|)€cting violations of the laws of nature: the poets 
 
 • Herod, ii. 116. thKeet difioi koI "Ofujpog rdv Xoyov tovtov rrv^ecr^ai ' aXV 
 91) yilp ofioiu^ t vTzpeitrig }jv tg rfiv h:oirou7iv ifv rif) iripif) r^ Trep kj^aaro' 
 ii o fierrjKE avTov, drj^uaag cjf kqI tovtov kntoTaiTO rdv Xoyov. 
 
 Herodotus then produces a passage from the Iliad, with a view to prove 
 that Home knew of the voyage of Paris and Helen to Egypt; but the 
 passage pro * is nothing at all to the point. 
 
 Again (c. 120), hiis slender confidence in the epic poets breaks oat — el xfi^t 
 
 Ti TOlffl ItOTTOIOICI \p£<l)fl£VOV ?.h £IV. 
 
 It is remarkable that Herodotus is disposed to identify Helen with thl 
 friv9 ^AppodiTij whose temple he saw at Memphis (c. 112). 
 
 THE MYTHES AS TREATED BY THUCYDIDES. 
 
 mm 
 
 are unworthy of trust, and their narratives must be brought into 
 conformity with historical and ethical conditions, before they can be 
 admitted as truth. To accomplish this conformity, Herodotus is 
 willing to mutilate the old legend in one of its most vital points: 
 he sacrifices the personal presence of Helena in Troy, which ran 
 through every one of the ancient epic poems belonging to the 
 Trojan cycle, and is indeed, under the gods, the great and present 
 moving force throughout. 
 
 Thucydides places himself generally in the same point of view 
 as Herodotus with regard to mythical antiquity, yet with some con- 
 siderable differences. Though manifesting no belief in present 
 miracles or prodigies,' he seems to accept without reserve the pre- 
 existent reality of all the persons mentioned in the mythes, and 
 of the long series of generations extending back through so many 
 supposed centuries : in this category, too, are included the epony- 
 mous personages, Hellen, Kekrops, Eumolpus, Pandion, Amphi- 
 k>chus the son of Amphiaraus, and Akarnan. But on the other 
 hand, we find no trace of that distinction between a human and 
 
 an heroic ante-human race, which Herodotus still admitted, nor 
 
 any respect for Egyptian legends. Thucydides, regarding the 
 personages of the mythes as men of the same breed and stature 
 with his own contemporaries, not only tests the acts imputed to 
 them by the same limits of credibility, but presumes in them the 
 same political views and feelings as he was accustomed to trace 
 m the proceedings of Peisistratus or Perikles. He treats the 
 Trojan war as a great political enterprise, undertaken by all 
 Greece ; brought into combination through the imposing power of 
 
 1 u 
 
 Ut conquirere fabulosa fsays Tacitus, Hist. ii. 50, a worthy parallel of 
 Thucydides) et fictis oblectare legentiura aniraos, proc«J gravitate ccepti 
 operis crediderim, ita vulgatis traditisque demere fidcm non ausim. Die, 
 quo Bebriaci certabatur, avera inusitatd specie, apud Kegium Lepidum cele- 
 bri vico consedisse, incolaa memorant ; nee deinde coetu hominum aut cir- 
 cumvoUtantium alitura, territam pulsamque, donee Otho se ipse interficeret: 
 tnm ablatati ex oculis : et tempora reputantibus, initium finemque miraculi 
 cum Othonis exitu competisse." Suetonius (Vesp. 5) recounts a different 
 miracle, in which three eagles appear. 
 
 ^ This passage of Tacitus occurs immediately after his magnificent descrip- 
 tion of the suicide of the emperor Otho, a deed which he contemplates with 
 the most fervent admiration. His feelings were evidently so wi ought lyi 
 that he was content to relax the canons of historical credibility. 
 
 I 
 
 1/ 
 
 . 
 
 { 
 
404 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEGK 
 
 Agamemnon, not (according to the legendary narrative) through 
 the influence of the oath exacted by Tyndareus. Then he ex- 
 plains howr the predecessois of Agamemnon arrived at so vast a 
 dominion — be;j^inriing with Pelops, who came over (as he says) 
 from Asia with great wealtli among the poor Peloponnesiana, 
 and by in<'uiis of iliis wealth so aggrandized himself, though a 
 foi>*ign<ir, as to be<;ome the eponym of the peninsula. Next fol- 
 lowed his son Atr( IIS, who acquired after the death of Eurystheus 
 the dominion of Mykena?, which had before been jx)ssessed by 
 the descendants of Perseus : here the old legendary tale, which 
 described Atreus as having been banished by his father Pelops 
 in consequence of the murder of his elder brother Chrysippus, is 
 invested with a politi<*al bearing, as explaining the reason why 
 Atreus retired to Al^-kenye. Another legendary tale — the defeat 
 and death ot* Eurystheus by the fugitive Herakleids in Attica, so 
 celebi-ated in Attic tragedy as having given occasion to the gen» 
 eix)us protecting intervention of Athens — is also introduced as 
 furnishing ilie cause why Atreus succeeded to the deceased Eurys- 
 theus : " for Atreus, the maternal uncle of Eurystheus, had been 
 entrusted by the latter with his government during the expedition 
 into Attic-a, and hsid ettectually courted the people, who were 
 moreover in great fear of being attacked by the Herakleids." 
 Thus the Pelopids acquired the supremacy in Peloponnesus, and 
 Agamemnon was enabled to get together his 1200 ships and 
 100,000 men for the expedition against Troy. Considering that 
 contingents were furnished from every portion of Greece, Thucj- 
 dides regards this as a small number, treating the Homeric cata- 
 logue as an authentic muster-roll, perhaps rather exaggerated 
 than otherwise. He then proceeds to tell us why the armament 
 was not larger : many more men could have been furnished, but 
 there was not sutiicient money to purchase provisions for theif 
 subsistence; hence they were compelled, after landing and gaining 
 a victory, to fortify their camp, to divide their army, and to send 
 away one portion ibr the purpose of cultivating the Chersonese, 
 and another portion to sack the adjacent towns. This was the 
 grand reason why the siege lasted so long as ten years. Fot if 
 it had been possible to keep the whole army together, and to a0i 
 
 THUCTDroES nif rs^ war of trot. 
 
 405 
 
 irith an undivided force, Troy would hav^ been taken both earlier 
 vid at smaller cost^ 
 
 Such is the general sketch of the war of Troy, as given by 
 Thucydides. So diffeient is it from the genuine epical narrative 
 that we seem hardly to be reading a description of the same 
 event ; still less should we imagine that tne event was known, 
 to him as well as to us, only through the epic poets themselves. 
 The men, the numbers, and the duration of the siege, do indeed 
 remain the same ; but the cast and juncture of events, the deter- 
 mining forces, and the characteristic features, are altogether het- 
 erogeneous. But, like Herodotus, and still more than Herodotus, 
 Thucydides was under the pressure of two conflicting impulses 
 — he shared the general faith in the mythical antiquity, but at 
 the same time he could not believe in any facts which contradict- 
 ed the laws of historical credibility or probability. He was thus 
 under the necessity of torturing the matter of the old mythes 
 into conformity with the subjective exigencies of his own mind : 
 he left out, altered, recombined, and supplied new connecting 
 principles and supposed purposes, until the story became auch as 
 no one could have any positive reason for calling in question ; 
 though it lost the impressive mixture of religion, romance, and 
 individual adventure, which constituted its original charm, it ac- 
 quired a smoothness and plausibility, and a poetical ensemble^ 
 which the critics were satisfied to accept as historical truth. And 
 historical truth it would doubtless have been, if any independent 
 evidence could have been found to sustain it. Had Thucydides 
 been able to produce such new testimony, we should have been 
 pleased to satisfy ourselves that the war of Troy, as he recounted 
 it, was the real event ; of which the war of Troy, as sung by the 
 epic poets, was a misreported, exaggerated, and ornamented re- 
 cital. But in this case the poets are the only real witnesses, and 
 le nari-ative of Thucydides is a mere extract and distillation 
 from their incredibilities. 
 
 A few other instances may be mentioned to illustrate the views 
 of Thucydides respecting various mythical incidents. 1. He 
 treats the residence of the Homeric Phaeakians at Corkyra as an 
 undisputed fact, and employs it partly to explain the efficiency d 
 
 -- €1 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 9-12. 
 
406 
 
 mSTORY OF OHEECE. 
 
 MYTiaOAL KOTIGBS IM THITC7DIDES. 
 
 407 
 
 the Korkjrean navy in times preceding the Peloponnesiaa war.* 
 2. He notices, witli equal confidence, the story erf* Tereus aad 
 Prokne, daugliter of Pandion, and the murder of the child Ityi 
 by Prokne his mother, and Philomela; and he produces this 
 ancient mjthe with especial reference to the alliance between the 
 Athenians and Tenis, king of the Odiysian Thracians, during the 
 time of the Peloponnesian war, intimating that the Odrysian 
 Teres was neither c»f the same family nor of the same country as 
 Tereus the husband of Prokne.- The conduct of Pandion, in 
 giving his daughter Prokne in marriage to Tereus, is in his view 
 dictated by |X)litical motives and interests. 3. He mentions the 
 Strait of Messina an the place through which Odysseus is said to 
 have sailed. ' 4. The Cyclopes and the Ltestrygones (he says) 
 were the most ancient reported inhabitants of Sicily ; but he caa- 
 not tell to what race they belonged, nor whence they came.-* 5« 
 Italy derived its uu ne from Italus, king of the Sikels. 6. Kry% 
 and Kgesto in Sicily were founded by fugitive Trojans after thf 
 capture of Troy ; also Skione, in the Thracian peninsula of Pai 
 lene, by Greeks fioui the Ach:ean town of Pellene, stopping 
 thither in their return from the siege of Troy : the Amphilocliiao 
 Argos in the Gulf of Ambrakia was m like maimer founded by 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 25. 
 
 * Thucyd. ii. 29. Km rd ^pyou rd nepl tov 'Itvv al yvvaiKeg h rtj yy ravr^ 
 hrpainv noAXoi^ de Kat ruw rrotijrCiv tv utjSovo^ f^vrjuy AavAtaf tj bpvi\ 
 hruvofjt/iarai. EUd^ 6it Kai rb Kfjdog llavdlova ^vuipaaT^ai rrjr i^vyarpb^ did 
 Toaovrov, in dxpt'jieig. ry irpoc uXXrj?^vg, (iu?i'/.ov t] dtu iroXkuv r/fitpuv if 
 *06pvaag udov. The first of these sentences would lead us to infer, if it caina 
 from any other pen tlmn that of Thueydides, that the writer believed the 
 metamorphosis of PhiloineUi into a ni«j:htinj;alo : see above, cli. xi. p. 270. 
 
 The observation respecting:: the convenience of nei«;hl)orhood for the mar* 
 riage is remarkal)le, and shows how (ompletely Thueydides regarded the 
 event aa historical. What would he have said respecting the marriage of 
 Oreithyia, daughter of Erechtheus, with Boreas, and the prodigious distance 
 iHiich she is reported to have been carried by her husband ? 'T7re/:> re tuvtop 
 wavT\ ^Tf* Iffxara X'^ovoc, etc. (Sophokles ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295.) 
 
 From the way in which Thueydides introduces the mention of this event, 
 we see that he intended to correct the misapprehension of his CMintrymen, 
 wbo having just made an alliance with the Odrysian 7 tr^«, were led by that 
 circumstance to think of the old mythical TireM, and to regard him a» the 
 ancestor of Teres. 
 
 » Thucvii. iv. 24 * Thucyd. vi. 2 
 
 Amphilocfaus son of Amphiarang, in his return fr^m the 8am« 
 enterprise. The remorse and mental derangement of the madri- 
 iddid Alkmaeon, son of Amphiardufl, p also mentioned by Thuey- 
 dides,' as well as the settlement of his son Akaman in the oountrj 
 called after him Akamania.-^ 
 
 Such are the special allnsions made by this illustrious author 
 in the course of his history to mythical events. From the tenor 
 of his language we may see that be aooounted all that oould be 
 known about them to be uncertain and unsatisfactory ; but he hat 
 k much at heart to sbow^ that even the greatest were inferior sn 
 
 * Thneyd. if. 68-103; Iv. 190; H fi. AntiochoB of Syracuse, the oontem 
 porary of Thueydides, also nientiooed Italos as the epooymoos king of Italy . 
 lie farther named Sikelus, who came to Morgos, son of Italos, after having 
 keen banished from Rome. He talks aboat Italos, jost as Thocydid^ taUn 
 about Theseos, as a wise and powerfol king, who first acquired a grefll 
 dominion (Dionys. H. A. R. 1 12, 3S, 78). Aristotle also menticiied ItaloB 
 in the same general terms (Polit, vii. 9, 2). 
 
 ' We may here notice some particolare respecting Isokrates. He mani 
 fests entire confidence in the aatfaentieity of the mythical genealogies and 
 cfaronolo^ ; bot while he treats the mythical personages as historically real, 
 be re^^ards them at the same time not as human, but as half-gods, soperior 
 to humanity. About Helena, Theseus, Sarpedon, Cycnus, Memnon, Achil- 
 les, ete., see Encom. Helen. Or. x. pp. 282, 292, 295. Bek. Helena was wor- 
 rtiipped in his time as a goddess at Tberapns (i&. p. 295). He recites tha 
 settlements of Danaos, Kadmus, and Pelops in Greece, as undoubted histofi* 
 cal facts (p. 297). In his discourse called Bunris^ he accuses PoiykratSs, tte 
 flophist, of a gross anachronism, in having placed Bosiris subsequent in poinf 
 of date to Orpheus and ^Eolos (Or. xi. p. 301, Bek.), and he adds that thi 
 tale of Busiris having been slain by HSrf^I^ was chrooologically impossibb 
 (p. 309). Of the long Athenian genealogy from Kekrops to Theseoa, h^ 
 q)eaks with perfect historical confidence CPanathenaic. p. 349, Bek.) ; imo0 
 less so of the adventures c^ H§rakl^ and his mythical contemporaries, whic^ 
 he places in the month of Archidamos as a jostification of the Spartan tick 
 to Messenia (Or. vi. ArdadoamM», P* 156, Bek. ; compare Or v. PhiUppuM^ pp 
 114, 138), 0a<T^v, o/c 'rrepl rCn> iraXaiuv iTKrrtvofiev, etc He condemna tfa^ 
 poets in strong language for the wicked and dissolute tales which they dr> 
 calated respecting the gods : many of them (he says) had been punished f» 
 •och blasphemies by MindneaB, poverty, exile, and other minfortooes (Or. 3eI 
 p. 309. Bek.). 
 
 In general, it may be said that IsokratSs applies no principles of faistorica' 
 Oiticism to the mythes ; be rejects sudl AS *ppev to htns iliii llMJiiiliki m 
 viwortfay, and beliefw the i 
 
 Vo]. 1 19 
 
 c-*.. S 
 
408 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEciw 
 
 KrHOBUS, THilOPOMPUS^ XENOPHON, ETC. 
 
 magiiituae and importance to the Peloponnesian warJ In thif 
 respect his opinion seems to have been at variance with that 
 which was popular among his contemporaries. 
 
 » Thacyd. i. 21-22. 
 
 The first two volumes of this history have been noticed in an able artkk 
 of the Quarterly Review, for October, 1846 ; as well as in the Heidelberget 
 JahrbQcher der Uteratur (1846. No. 41. pp. 641-655), by Professor Kortiim. 
 
 While expressing, on several points, approbation of my work, by which I 
 feel much flattered — Wth my English and my German critic take partial 
 objection to the views respecting Grecian legend. While the Quarterly Re- 
 viewer contends that the mythopceic faculty of the human mind, though 
 essentially loose and untrustworthy, is never creative, but requires some basis 
 of fact to work upon— Kortiim thinks that I have not done justice to Thucy- 
 iides, as regards his way of dealing with legend ; that I do not allow suffi 
 dent weight to the authority of an historian so circumspect and so cold- 
 blooded (den kalt-bUnbigsten und besonnensten Historiker des Alterthuras, 
 p. 653) as a satisfactory voucher for the early facts of Grecian history in his 
 preface CHerr G. Fehlt also, wenn er das anerkannt kritische Pro-oemium als 
 Gewahrsmann verschroaht, p. 6.54). 
 
 No man feels more powerfully than I do the merits of Thucydides as an 
 historian, or the value of the example which he set in multiplying critical in- 
 quiries respecting matters recent and verifiable. But the ablest judge or 
 ibdvocate, in investigating specific facts, can proceed no further than he finds 
 witnesses having the means of knowledge, and willing more or less to tell 
 truth. In reference to facts prior to 776 b. c, Thucydides had nothing before 
 him except the legendary poets, whose credibility is not at all enhanced by 
 die circumstance that he accepted them as witnesses, applying himself only 
 to cut down and mo<lify their allegations. His credibility in regard to the 
 specific facts of these early times depends altogether upon theirs. Now we 
 in our day are in a bei;ter position for appreciating their credibility than he 
 was in his, since the foundations of historical evidence are so much more fully 
 understood, and good or bad materials for history are open to comparison in 
 such large extent and variety. Instead of wondering that he shared the 
 general faith in such delusive guides — we ought rather to give him credit 
 for the reserve with which he qualified that faith, and for the sound idea of 
 historical possibility to which he held fast as the limit of his confidence. 
 But it is impossible to consider Thucydides as a satisfactory guaranfce 
 (G^wihrsmannJ for matters of fact which he derives only from such sources. 
 
 *^X)fessor Kortiim considers that I am inconsistent with myself in refusing 
 to discriminate particular matters of historical fact among the legends — 
 and yet in accepting these legends (in my chap.xm.j as giving a faithful mv 
 ror of the general stale of early Grecian society Cp. 653). It appears to mt 
 that this is no inconsistency, but a real and important distinction. Whethet 
 HIrakias, Agamemnon, Odysseus, etc were real persons, and performjd al^ 
 
 40t 
 
 To tonch a little upon the later historians by whom these 
 ■lythes were handled, we find that Anaximenes of Lampsacut 
 composed a consecutive history of events, beginning from the 
 Theogony down to the batde of Mantineia.i But Ephorus pro- 
 fessed to omit all the mythical narratives which are referred to 
 times anterior to the return of the Herakleids, (such restriction 
 would of course, have banished the eieg© of Troy,) and even re- 
 proved those Hho introduced raythes into historical writing; 
 adding, that everywhere truth was the object to be aimed at.9 
 Yet in practice he seems often to have departed from his own 
 rule.3 Theopompus, on the other hand, openly proclaimed that 
 
 or a part, of the possible actions ascribed to them — I profess myself unable 
 to determine But even assuming both the persons and their exploits to be 
 fictions, these very fictions will have been conceived and put together in con- 
 formity to the general social phenomena among which the describer and his 
 hearers lived —and will thus serve as illustrations of the manners then preva- 
 lent. In fact, the real value of the Preface of Thucydides, upon which Pi-o- 
 fes.sor KortOra bestows such just prai.se, consists, not in the pjirticular facts 
 which he brings out by altering the legends, but in the rational general views 
 which he sets forth respecting eariy Grecian society, and respecting the stepi 
 as well as the causes whereby it attained its actual jxjsition as he saw it 
 
 Professor Kortiim also affirms that the mythes contain " real matter of 
 fact along with mere conceptions :" which aflSrmation is the same as that of 
 the Quartedy Reviewer, when he says that the mythopceic faculty is not 
 creative. Taking the mythes in the mas.'*, I doubt not that this is true, nor 
 have 1 anywhere denied it. Taking them one by one, I neither affirm nor 
 deny it. My position is, that, whether there be matter of fact or not, we have 
 no test whereby it can be singled out, identified, and severed from the accom- 
 panying fiction. And it lies upon those, who proclaim the practicability of 
 such severance, to exhibit some means of verification better than any which 
 has been yet pointed out. If Thucydides has failed in doing this, it is cer- 
 tain that none of the many authors who have made the same attempt after 
 him have been more successful. 
 
 It cannot surely be denied that the mythopceic faculty is creative, when we 
 have before us so many divine legends, not merely in Greece, hut in other 
 countries also. To suppose that these religious legends are mere exaggera- 
 tions, etc. of some ba.sis of actual fact — that the gods of polytheism were 
 merely divinized men, with qualities distorted or feigned— would be to em- 
 bcaie m substance the theory of Euemerus. 
 
 * Diodor XV. 89 He was a contemporary of Alexander the Great 
 
 * Diodor. iv. 1. Strabo, ix. p. 422, tTnTLfitjaa^ roi^ (piXofiv^ovaiv iv ry rfff 
 kfTutfiiac ypaipy. 
 
 * Ephorus recounted the principal adventures ol H#rakl^ (Fr«gm. 8. 9l 
 TOL. 1 18 
 
 '^\ . vLwJ 
 
ilO 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 he could narrate fables in his history better than Herodotm, m 
 Ktesias, or Hellairilcus.i The fragments which remain to 00, 
 exhibit some proof that this promise was performed as to quan- 
 tity ;2 though as to his style of narration, the judgment of Die- 
 nysius is unfavorable. Xenophon ennobled his favorite amuse* 
 ment of the chase by numerous examples chosen from the heroic 
 world, tracing their portraits with all the simplicity of an undi- 
 minished faith. Kallisthenes, like Ephorus, professed to omit all 
 mythes which referred to a time anterior to the return of the Hera 
 kleids; yet we know that he devoted a separate book or portion of 
 hi^history to the Trojan war.3 Philistus introduced some mythe? 
 in the earlier portions of his Sicilian history ; but TimaBus was dis- 
 tinguished above all others for the copious and indiscriminate way 
 in which he collected and repeated such legends.^ Some of these 
 
 ed Marx.), the tales of Kadmus and Harmonia (Fragrn. 12), the banish 
 ment of ^tolu3 from Elis (Fragm. 15; Strabo, viii. p. 357); he drew in- 
 ferences from the chronology of the Trojan and Theban wars (Fragm 28) ; 
 be related the coming of Daedalus to the Sikan king Kokalus, and the expe- 
 dition of the Amazons (Fragm. 99-1 03 J. 
 
 He was particularly copious in his information about Krirretc, airoiKuu ajid 
 ffwyyeveiat (Folyb. ix. 1). 
 
 » Strabo, i. p. 74. 
 
 • Dionys. Halic. De Vett Scriptt. Judic. p. 428, Reisk j ^lian, V. H. iii. 
 18, OfOTTO/zTTOf deivdc //tnJoAoyof. 
 
 Theopompus affirm<id, that the bodies of those who went into the forbid- 
 den precinct (rd a^anw) of Zeus, in Arcadia, gave no shadow (Polyb. xvL 
 12). He recounted the story of Midas and Sildnus (Fragm 74, 75, 76, ed. 
 Wichers) ; he said a good deal about the heroes of Troy ; and he seems to 
 have assigned the misfortunes of the N6<ttoi to an historical cause — the rot- 
 tenness of the Grecian ships, from the length of the siege, while the genuine 
 epic ascribes it to the anger of Athdnd (Fragm. 112, 113, 114; Schol. 
 Homer. Iliad, ii. 135) ; he narrated an alleged expulsion of Kinyras from 
 Cyprus by Agamemnon (Fragm. Ill); he gave the genealogy of the Mace 
 donian queen Olympias up to Achilles and JE^akus (Fragm. 232). 
 
 • Cicero, Epist. ad Familiar, v. 12; Xenophon de Venation, c. 1. 
 
 • Philistus, Fragm. 1 (GoUer), Daedalus, and Kokalus; about Liber and 
 Juno (Fragm. 57) ; ab.Dut the migration of the Sikels into Sicily, eighty yean 
 after the Trojan war (ip. Dionys. Hal. i. S). 
 
 Timaeus Fragm. 50, 51, 52, 53, Goller) related many febles respecting 
 Jason, M^dea, and the Argonauts generally. The miscarriage of the Athe 
 ■iaii armament under Nikias, before Syracuse, is imputed to the anger of 
 BlnUds against the Athenians because they came to assist the Egefltaiy 
 
 EUEMERTJ& 
 
 nx 
 
 writers employed their ingenuity in transforming the mythical 
 
 circumstances into plausible matter of history : Ephorus, in paF> 
 ticular, converted the serpent Pytho, slain by Apollo, into a ty- 
 rannical king.^ 
 
 But the author who pushed this transmutation of legend into 
 history to the greatest length, was the Messenian Euemerus, con- 
 temporary of Kassander of Macedon. He melted down in this 
 way the divine person? and legends, as well as the heroic — rep- 
 resenting both gods and heroes as having been mere earthbom 
 men, though superior to the ordinary level in respect of force 
 and capacity, and deified or heroified after death as a recompense 
 for services or striking exploits. In the course of a voyage into 
 the Indian sea, undertaken by command of Kassander, Euemerus 
 professed to have discovered a fabulous country called Panchaia, 
 in which was a temple of the Triphylian Zeus : he there de- 
 scribed a golden column, with an inscription purporting to have 
 been put up by Zeus himself, and detailing his exploits while on 
 earth.2 Some eminent men, among whom may be numbered 
 Polybius, followed the views of Euemerus, and the Roman poet 
 Ennius3 translated his Historia Sacra ; but on the whole he never 
 acquired favor, and the unblushing inventions which he put into 
 circulation were of themselves sufficient to disgrace both the .au- 
 thor and his opinions. The doctrine that all the gods had once 
 existed as mere men offended the religious pagans, and drew 
 upon Euemerus the imputation of atheism ; but, on the other 
 hand, it came to be warmly es{x)used by several of the Christian 
 assailants of paganism, — by Minucius Felix, Lactantius, and 
 St. Augustin, who found the ground ready prepared for them in 
 their efforts to strip Zeus and the other pagan gods of the attri- 
 butes of deity. They believed not only in the main theory, but 
 also m the ^op^ous details of Euemerus ; and the same man whom 
 Strabo casts aside as almost a proverb for mendacity, was ex- 
 descendants of Troy (Plutarch, Nikias. 1), — a naked reproduction of gen- 
 uine epical agencies by an historian ; also about Diomedes and the Danni- 
 ans ; Phafithon and the river Eridanus ; the combats of the Gigantes in the 
 Phlegraean plains (Fragm. 97, 99, 102). 
 
 ' Strabo, ix. p 422. 
 
 • Compare Diodor. v. 44-46; and Lactantius, De Falsi Relig. l 11. 
 
 » Cicero, De Nature D«>r. i. 42 ; Varro, De Re Bust L 4a. 
 
 \ ^% 
 
 %.y , 
 
412 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tolled by them as an excellent specimen of careful historical 
 inquiry.' 
 
 But though the pagan world repudiated that " lowering tone 
 of explanation," which effaced the superhuman personality of 
 Zeus and the great gods of Olympus, the mythical persons and 
 narratives generally came to be surveyed more and more from 
 the point of view of history, and subjected to such alterations as 
 might make them look more like plausible matter of fact. Fo 
 lybius, Strabo, Di'adorus, and Pausanias, cast the mythes into 
 historical statements — with more or less of transformation, as 
 ^e case may require, assuming always that there is a basis of 
 truth, which may be discovered by removing poetical exaggera- 
 tions and allowing for mistakes. Strabo, in particular, lays down 
 that principle broadly and unequivocally in his remarks upon 
 Homer. To give pure fiction, without any foundation of fact, 
 was in his judgment utterly unworthy of so great a genius ; and 
 he comments with considerable acrimony on the geographer Era- 
 tosthenes, wh3 maintains the opposite opinion. Again, Polybius 
 tells us that the Homeric jEoIus, the dispenser of the winds by 
 
 ' Strabo, ii. p. 102. Ov iroXv ovv XuneraL ravra ruv llv^eu Kai Kvr//xepoi 
 nal " AvTi<}>avovg ^ev<T/^rwr ; compare also i. p. 47, and ii. p. 104. 
 
 St Augustin, on tho contrary, tells us (Civitat. Dei, vi. 7), " Quid de ipse 
 Jove senserunt, qui nutricem ejus in Capitolio posuerunt ? Nonne attestati 
 tout omnes Eueraero, qui non fabulosa garrulitate, sed historicd diligentid^ 
 homines fuisse mortalcsque conscripsit ? " And Minucius Felix (Octav. 20- 
 91 ), " Euemerus exequitur Deorum natales : patrias, sepulcra dinumerat, et 
 per provincias monstnit, Dictaei Jovis, et Apollinis Delphici, et Phariae Isidis, 
 et Cereris Eleusiniae." Compare Augustin, Civit. Dei, xviii. 8-14; and 
 Clemens Alexand. Cohort, ad Gent. pp. 15-18, Sylb. 
 
 Lactantins (De FalsA Relig. c. 13, 14, 16) gives copious citations from 
 Bnnlus^s translation of the Historia Sacra of Euemerus. 
 
 Evrjfxepoc, 6 iTriKXTjy^et^ ux^fo^, Sextus Empiricus, adv. Physicos, ix. ^ 17» 
 51. Compare Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 42 } Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, 
 c. 23. tom. ii. p. 475, ed. Wytt. 
 
 Nitzsch assumes (Helden Sage der Griechen, sect. 7. p. 84) that the voy- 
 age of Euemerus to Panchaia was intended only ».s an amusing romance, 
 and that Strabo, Polybius, Eratosthenes and Plutarch were mistaken in con- 
 itrning it as a serious recital. Bottiger, in his Kunst-Mythologie der Grie- 
 ehen (Absch. ii. s. 6. p. 190), take^ the same view. But not the least reason it 
 pven for adopting this opinion, and it seems to me far-fetched and improbable* 
 Lobeck (Aglaopham. p. 989), though Nitzsch alludes to him as hciding i| 
 no inch tendency, as far as I can observe. 
 
 POLYBR^S, DIODORUm ETC. 
 
 413 
 
 appointment from Zeus, was in reality a man eminently skilled 
 in navigation, and exa'^ in predicting the weather ; that the Cy- 
 clopes and Laestrygone.^ vere wild and savage real men in Sicily ; 
 and that Scylla and Chk^rybdis were a figurative representation 
 of dangers arising from pirates in the Strait of Messina. Strabo 
 speaks of the amazing expeditions of Dionysus and Herakles, 
 and of the long wanderings of Jason, Menelaus, and Odysseus, 
 in the same category with the extended commercial range of the 
 Phoenician merchant-ships : he explains the report of Theseus 
 and Peirithous having descended to Hades, by their dangerous 
 earthly pilgrimages, — and the invocation of the Dioskuri as the 
 protectors of the imperiled mariner, by the celebrity which they 
 bad acquired as real men and navigators. 
 
 Diodorus gave at considerable length versions of the current 
 febles respecting the most illustrious names in the Grecian myth- 
 ical world, compiled confusedly out of distinct and incongruous 
 authors. Sometimes the mythe is reproduced in its primitive 
 simpHcity, but for the most part it is partially, and sometimes 
 wholly, historicized. Amidst this jumble of dissentient authori- 
 ties we can trace little of a systematic view, except the general 
 conviction that there was at the bottom of the mythes a real 
 chronological sequence of persons, and real matter of fact, his- 
 torical or ultra-historical. Nevertheless, there are some few 
 occasions on which Diodorus brings us back a step nearer to the 
 point of view of the old logographers. For, in reference to 
 Herakles, he protests against the scheme of cutting down ihe 
 mythes to the level of present reality, and contends that a speciii 
 standard of ultra-historical credibility ought to be constituted, so 
 as to include the mythe in its native dimensions, and do fitting 
 honor to the grand, beneficent, and superhuman personality oi 
 Herakles and other heroes or demi-gods. To apply to such per- 
 sons the fX)mmon measure of humanity (he says), and to cavil at 
 the glorious picture which grateful man has drawn of them, is at 
 ODce ungracious and irrationaL All nice criticism into the truth 
 of the legendary narratives is out of place : we show our reve- 
 rence to the god by acquiescing in the incredibilities of his his- 
 tory, and we must be content with the best guesses which we cat 
 make, amidst the inextricable confusion and numberless discrep 
 
 
 .t 
 
 ;i. 
 
414 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PAL^PHATUfcu 
 
 415 
 
 iDcies which tViey present! Yet though Dioddrus here exhibit! 
 • preponderance of the religious sentiment over the purely his- 
 torical point of view, and thus reminds us of a period eailier 
 than Thucydides — he in another place inserts a series of stories 
 which seem to bo derived from Euemerus, and in which Uranus^ 
 Kronus, and Z<;u8 appear reduced to the character of human 
 kings celebrated for their exploits and benefactions.^ Many of 
 the authors, whom Diodorus copies, have so entangled together 
 Grecian, Asiatic. Egyptian, and Libyan fables, that it becomes 
 Impossible to ascertain how much of this heterogeneous mass can 
 be considered as at all connected with the genuine Hellenic 
 
 mind. 
 
 Fausanias is far more strictly Hellenic in his view of the Gre- 
 cian mythes than Diodorus : his sincere piety makes him inchned 
 to faith generally with regard to the mythical narratives, but 
 subject nevertheless to the frequent necessity of historicizing or 
 allegorizing them. His belief in the general reality of the myth- 
 ical history and chronology is complete, in spite of the many 
 
 fl I — —.— I. N ■■ -" ■ — I II Mill 
 
 ' Diodor. iv. 1-8- 'Evioi yup tuv uvaytvoaKovruVy ov 6iKaigi :^;/)w^fvoi Kpiaei. 
 raKf)i,3tg eTriCr/Tovaiv ev rale upxa'iai^ fiv^^oXoyiatc, Emarjq role TzpaTTOfievoLq 
 h tC) Ka-d' i/fiui ;tP''^V« '''^^ ^" diaraCofieva tCjv kpyuv 6iu rd fxeye^aq, Ik rov 
 «ai?' avTovc (3iov TtKfxaLpofievoi, tt/v 'HpOKXeovc ^vva/uiv Ik rrj^ dm^-veiac tCjv 
 vvv uvdpiJTruv ^ecjpovmv, uare 6iu r^ virepjioTirrv rov fzeye^ov^ ruv ^pyuv 
 innaTeiar&ai r^v ypatprfv. Ka^d^iov yap tv Talg upxaiaig fivi^o?ioyiaig ovk ek 
 wavToc Tponov n l k pu g r^v ulrj-^ e lav k ^ et aar eov. Kai yap h> 
 Tolg ^EiiTpotg irenetafievoi jut/te K ev ravpovg 6i<pvtlc e^ irEpoye- 
 vuv acjfiuTiJv vwap^ai, fiT/TE Tijpvovijv Tpiau/xarov, dfiug ir poa6EXO (le'&a 
 Tug T oiavT ag ^iv& o'koy lag, Kai raig e tt t (Jtj ftaa i aig avvav^- 
 9fiEV Tr)v Tov i9fot) TifiTiv. Kol yap aTonmK 'HpaKAta fitv kri kot 
 iv&pii)Trovg ovra roig idioig novoig E^rjfxtpuaai ttjv oUovfiEVT]v, Tovg 6' av&pct* 
 wovg, km'ka^ofiEvot'g r^c noiVTjg EVEpyEOtag, avKO<^avT eIv tov hri Toli 
 KoX/iiaToig Ipyotr trraivov, etc. 
 
 This is a remarkable passa^'e : first, inasmuch as it sets forth the total inap- 
 plicability of analogies drawn from the historical past as narratives al)oat 
 Heraklcs ; next, inasmuch as it suspends the employment of criticj.l and 
 smntific tests, and invokes an acquiescence interwoven and identified with 
 the feelings, as the proper mode of evincing pious reverence for the god 
 Herakles. It aims at r producing exactly that state of mind to which th« 
 mythes were addressed, nd with which alone they coa\d ever ht in thoron^ 
 harmony 
 
 « Diodor iii 45-60 ; v. 44-46. 
 
 discrepancies which be finds in it, and which he is unabi»-. tc 
 reconcile. 
 
 Another author who seems to have conceived clearly, and 
 applied consistently, the semi-historical theory of the Gnxiian 
 mythes, is Palaephatus, of whose work what appears to be a short 
 abstract has been preserved.^ In the short preface of this trea- 
 tise " concerning Incredible Tales," he remarks, that some men, 
 from want of instruction, believe all the current narratives ; while 
 others, more searching and cautious, disbelieve them altogether. 
 Each of these extremes he is anxious to avoid. On the one 
 hand, he thinks that no narrative could ever have acquired cre- 
 dence unless it had been founded in truth ; on the other, it ia 
 impossible for him to accept so much of the existing narratives 
 as conflicts with the analogies of present natural phaenomena. 
 If such things ever had been, they would still continue to be — 
 but they never have so occurred; and the extra-analogical features 
 of the stories are to be ascribed to the license of the poets. Pala 
 phatus wishes to adopt a middle course, neither accepting al« 
 nor rejecting all : accordingly, he had taken great pains to sepa- 
 rate the true from the false in many of the narratives ; he ha<^ 
 vfsited the localities wherein they had taken place, and mad 
 careful inquiries from old men and others.^ The results of h]« 
 
 * The work of Palajphatus, probably this original, is alluded to in the 
 Ci'm of Virgil (88): — 
 
 "Docta PalaephatiS testatnr voce papyrus." 
 The date of Palsephatns is unknown — indeed this passage of the Cim 
 seems the only ground that there is for inference respecting it. That which 
 we now possess is probably an extract from a larger work — made by anothei 
 person at some later time : see Vossius de Historicis Griecis, p. 478, ed 
 Westermann. 
 
 ^Palasphat. init ap. Script. Mythogr. ed. Westermann, p. 268. TCn 
 av^puTTuv ol fiEv rrei^ovrai Traai rolg XeyofUvoig, ug avofii'kfiToi ao<(tiag Koi 
 kniaTTjiiTig — ol dk nvKvoTEpoi rr^ <f>vmv Kot iroXvnpdy/zoveg imiarovm rd 
 ^apcnrav firfdEV yevia^ai rovruv. 'Efiol 6e doKtsl yevetr&ai navra ru Xeyi- 
 
 f"'^ ' yEvo/ieva Si riva ol noirjTal koI ?,oy6ypa<l>oi irapiTpejJ/av elg ri 
 
 iiriarorepov Koi ^avfiaaiurepov tov -davfiul^ELv ivcKO rot)f av^p6irovg. *Eyd 
 ft yiviMTKu, 6ti oi) dvvaTai rd ToiavTa elvai ola koi ?iiyeTai • rodro di Ka. 
 UeiXii<^, 6rt el ^ syiveTo, oin uv iXiyeTo. 
 
 The main assumption of the semi-historical theory is here shortly ani 
 learly stated. 
 
 One of the early Christian writers, Minucius Felix, is astonished nt tha 
 9ey belief of his pagan forefathers in miracles If ever such thiagf HoA 
 
 i 
 
 f'. 
 
416 
 
 fflSTORY OF GHEKCB. 
 
 MTTHES AS HANDLED BY THF. PHILOSOPHERS. 
 
 417 
 
 V 
 
 researches are presented in a new version of fifty legends, amaig 
 the most celebrated and the most fabulous, comprising the Cen. 
 taurs, Pasiphae, Aktaeon, Kadmus and the Sparti, the Sphinx, 
 Cycnus, DaRdalus, the Trojan horse, JEoluSj Scylla, Gerydn, 
 
 Bellerophon, etc. 
 
 It must be conl'essed that Palaephatus has performed his promise 
 of transforming the " incrediljilia " into narratives in themselves 
 plausible and unobjectionable, and that in doing so he always 
 follows some thread of analogy, real or verbal. The Centaurs 
 (he tells us) were a l)ody of young men from the village of 
 Nephele in Thessaly, who first trained and mounted horses fa 
 the purpose of n'i)elling a herd of bulls belonging to Ixi6n king 
 of the Lapithaj, which had run wild and done great damage: 
 they pursued th(^se wild bulls on horseback, and pierced them 
 with their 8f)eai*s, thus acquiring both the name of Pricken 
 (ntyTOQt^) and the imputed attribute of joint body whh the 
 horse. Aktaeon was an Arcadian, who neglected the cultivation 
 of his land for the pleasures of hunting, and was thus eaten up 
 by the expense of his hounds. The dragon whom Kadmus 
 killed at Thebes, was in reality Drako, king of Thebes ; and the 
 dragon's teeth which he was said to have sown, and from whence 
 iprung a crop of armed men, were in point of fact elephants' 
 teeth, which Kadmus as a rich Phoenician had brought over with 
 him : the sons of Drako sold these elephants' teeth and employed 
 the proceeds to hjvy troops against Kadmus. Dccdalus, instead 
 of flying across the sea on wings, had escaped from Krete in a 
 iwifl sailing-boai; under a violent storm: Kottus, Briareus,and 
 Gyges were not persons with one hundred hands, but inliabitants 
 of tlie village of Hekatoncheiria in Upper Macedonia, who 
 warred with the inhabitants of Mount Olympus against the 
 Titans : Scylla, whom Odysseus so narrowly escaped, v. as a fast- 
 
 heen done in former times (he affirms), they woald continue to be done now; 
 as they cannot be done now, we may be sure that they never were rea//^ dene 
 formerly (llinucius Felix, Octav. c. 20) : " Majoribus enira nostris tam facilii 
 in mendaciis fides Init, at temer^ crediderint etiam alia monstniosa mirt 
 miracula, Scyllam multiplicera, Cbimaeram mnltiformem, Hydram, et Ceo» 
 tanros. Quid illas smiles fabolas — de hominibas aves, et feras bominos, e) 
 de hominibas arbores atqae floras? ^ios,ii' tmaU facta, Jkr&U; qpttajit^ 
 am fottmi, idea nee facta Mitf * 
 
 jBailing piratical vessel, as was also Pegasus, the alleged winged 
 horse of BellerophOnJ 
 
 By such ingenious conjectures, Palaephatus eliminates all the 
 incredible circumstances, and leaves to us a string of tales per- 
 ff^ctly credible and commonplace, which we should readily believe, 
 provided a very moderate amount of testimony could be pro- 
 duced in their favor. If his treatment not only disenchants the 
 original mythes, but even eflTaces their generic and essential char- 
 acter, we ought to remember that this is not more than what is 
 done by Thucydides in his sketch of the Trojan war. Palaepha- 
 tus handles the mythes consistently, according to the semi-his- 
 torical theory, and his results exhibit the maximum which that 
 theory can ever present. By aid of conjecture, we get out of the 
 impossible, and arrive at matters intrinsically plausible, but to- 
 
 ' Palaephat. Narrat. 1, 3, 6, 13, 20, 21, 29. Two short treatises on the sam« 
 subject as this of Palaephatus, arc printed along with it, both in the collection 
 of Gale and of Westermann ; the one, HeracUti de Incredibilibus, the other 
 Anonj/mi de IncredibUibus. They both profess to interpret some of the extra- 
 ordinary or miraculous mythes. and proceed in a track not unlike that of 
 Palajphatus. Scylla was a beautiful courtezan, surrounded with abomiuBbla 
 parasites : she ensnared and ruined the companions of Odysseus, though he 
 himself was prudent enough to escape her (Heracht. c. 2. p. 313, West.) 
 Atlas was a great astronomer : Pasiphae fell in love with a youth named 
 Taurus ; the monster called the Chimaera was in reality a ferocious queen, 
 who had two brothers called Leo and Drako ; the ram which carried Phryxu* 
 and Helle across the -<Egean was a boatman named Krias (Heraclit. c. 2, 6. 
 15,24). 
 
 A great number of similar explanations are scattered throughout the 
 Scholia on Homer and the Commentary of Eastathias, without specificatioB 
 of their authors. 
 
 Theon considers such resolution of fable into plausible history as a proof 
 of surpassing ingenuity (Progymnasmata, cap 6, ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett 
 Gr«ec. i. p. 219). Others among the Rhetors, too, exercised their taleott 
 sometimes in vindicating, sometimes in controverting, the probability of the 
 ancient mythes. See the Progymnasmata of Nicolaus — KaraoKiv/j un 
 eUoTa TO, Kara Si6i3iji> ^kvaoKev^ 6ti oiK eUora rd Kord. fii60ijv (ap. Walz. 
 Coll. Rhetor, i. p. 284-318), where there are many specimens of this fanciful 
 mode of handling. 
 
 Plutarch, however, in one of his treatises, accepts Minotaurs, Spiiinxes. 
 Centaurs, etc. ae realities; he treats them as products of the monstrous, 
 mcestuons, and ungovernable lusts of man, which he contrasts with tb« 
 simple and moderate passions of animals (Plutarch, Gryllos, p. 990) 
 VOL. I. 18* 27oc 
 
 i 
 
#18 
 
 HlhrORY OF Qftmch 
 
 ALLEGORIZING TEHDENCT. 
 
 419 
 
 V 
 
 •■Ily urcertified ; beyond this point we cannot penetrate, wHhoal 
 the lio:ht of extrinsic evidence, since there is no intrinsic mark to 
 distinguish truth from plausible fiction.' 
 
 It remains that we should notice the manner in which the an> 
 dent mythes were received and dealt with by the philosopliera. 
 The earliest exj^ression which we hear, on the part of philosophy, 
 is the severe censure bestowed uj:)on them on ethical grounds by 
 Xenophanes of Kolophon, and seemingly by some others of his 
 oontem[)oraries.'- It was apparently in reply to such charges, 
 which did not admit of being directly rebutted, that Theagenes 
 tif Rljegium (alK)ut r)20 B. c.) first started the idea of a double 
 meaning in the Homeric and Hesiodic narratives, — an interior 
 sense, different trom that which the words in their obvious mean- 
 ing bore, yet to a certain extent analogous, and discoverable by 
 sagacious divination. Upon this principle, he allegorized espe- 
 dally the battle of the gods in the Iliad.'^ In the succeeding cen- 
 
 * The irrarned Mr. Jiicoh Bryant rey^ards the explanations of Palaephatus as 
 If they M,K.rc foiiiKhd upon real fact. He admits, for example, the dty Ne 
 phele allttjfed by that author in his exposition of the fable of the Centaurs. 
 Moreovei, he speaks with much commendation of Palipphatus penerally: 
 • lie CPalaphatus) wrote early, and seems to have been a serious and sen- 
 sible person ; one who saw the absurdity of the fables upon which the 
 theology of his country was founded." (Ancient Mythology, vol. i. p. 411- 
 435.) 
 
 So also Sir Thomas Brown ( Enquiry into Vulgar Errors, Book I. chap. 
 Vi. p. 221, ed. 18.35 alludes to Palaephatus as having incontestablv pointed 
 out the real basis of the fables. '" And surely the fabulous inclination of 
 those days was greater than any since : which swarmed so with fables, and 
 from such slender prounds took hints for fictions, poisoning the world ever 
 after : wherein how fer they succeeded, may be exemplified from Palaspha- 
 tas, in his Book of Fabulous Narrations,** 
 
 ' Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empir. adv. Mathemat. ix. 193. He also disap- 
 proved of the rites, accompanied by mourning and wailing, with which the 
 Eleates worshipped Leukothea : he told them, el uev dedv v-rroJ.afifiuvowji^ 
 lir) ^jiijveiv el Se un^pwTov, fi^ \H<eiv (Aristotel. Rhet. ii. 23). 
 
 Xenophanes pronounced the battles of the Titans, Gigantes,and Centann 
 to be " fictions of our predecessors,** K^uafiaTa tuv nporepov (Xenophaa 
 Fragm. 1. p. 42, ed Schneidewin). 
 
 See a ctirious comparison of the Grecian and Roman theology in DicnjK, 
 'Halicam. Ant- Rom. ii. 20. 
 
 » Schol. Iliad, xx. 67 : Tatian. adv. Graec. c. 48. Herakleitus indignantly 
 fspeiled the impudent atheists who found fault with the divine mythes of tilt 
 
 tary, Anaxagoras and Metroddrus carried out the allegorical ex 
 planation more comprehensively and systematically ; the tbrmef 
 representing the mythical personages as mere mental conceptions, 
 invested with name and gender, and illustrative of ethical pr^ 
 oepts, — the latter connecting them with physical principles and 
 phaenoraena. Metrodorus resolved not only the persons ot* Zeua, 
 
 Here, and Athene, but also those of Agamemnon, Achilles, and Heo- 
 tor, into various elemental combinations and physical agencies, and 
 treated the adventures ascribed to them as natural facts concealed 
 under the veil of allegory.* Empedokles, Prodikus, Antisthen^ 
 Parmenides, Herakleides of Pontus, and in a later age, Chrysip- 
 pus, and the Stoic philosophers generally ,2 followed more or less 
 
 liiad, ignorant of their true allegorical meaning: ^ tuv inupvofitpuv t^ 
 'Ofi^pcf) T6?.fia roi)f 'Hpac deafioi>g alriurai, Kai vofiiCovmv i^v riva da^jfL^ 
 1% "»*fw Trpdf 'OfiTjpov ix^iv fiavlac ravra—'H ob nefivrf bri t* Uptfto 
 O^oti^fv, etc. AtAjyde d' avToi)^ on tovtoi^ role Ineaiv iKre^eo?^ynrai v ro# 
 'KavTog yiveacc, Kai ru awexug ^ddfxeva reaaapa atoixela tovtuv tup arixum 
 terl Tci^cc (Schol. ad Horn. Iliad, xv. 18). 
 
 ' Diogen. LaCrt. ii. 11 ; Tatian. adv. Graec. c. 37 ; Hesychius, v. 'Kyofikfg- 
 vova. See the ethical turn-given to the stories of Circe, the Sirens, and 
 Scylla, in Xenoph. Memorab. i. 3, 7 ; ii. 6, 11-31. Syncellus, Chronic, p. 
 149. 'Epfinvevovffi de ol ' Xva^ayopeioi rov^ fiv^udei^ ^eovc, vovvfiev rov Aia, 
 H^ 6e 'kdrivdv tfxvtiv, etc. 
 
 Uschold and other modem German authors seem to have adopted in ita 
 full extent the principle of interpretation proposed by Metrodorus — treat- 
 ing Odysseus and Penelope as personifications of the Sun and Moon, etc 
 See Helbig, Die Sittlichen Zustando des Griechischen Helden Alters, Einlei 
 tang, p. xxix. (Leipzig, 1839.) 
 
 Corrections of the Homeric text were also resorted to, in order to escape 
 the necessity of imputing falsehood to Zeus (Aristotel. De Sophist Elench. 
 c. 4). 
 
 «Sextus Empiric, ix 18; Diogen. viii. 76; Plutarch, De Placit. Philo- 
 soph. i. 3-6; De Poe.si Homerica, 92-126 ; De Stoicor. Repugn, p. 1050, 
 Menander. De Encomiis, c. 5. 
 
 Cicero. De Nat. Deor. i. 14, 15, 16,41; ii. 24-25 '♦Physica ratio noo 
 melegans inclusa in impias fahnlas." 
 
 In the B(i£ch(E of Euripides, Pentheus is made to deride the tale of the 
 motherless infant Dionysus having been sewn into the thigh of Zens. Tel- 
 resiaa while reproving him for his impiety, explains the story away in a soil 
 of allegory : the firipdi Atd^ (he says; was a mistaken statement in place of 
 the al^fip x^ova iyxvKXovfievo^ (Bacch '235-290). 
 
 Lucretius (iiL 995-1036) allegorizes the conspicuous sufferers in Had^,^ 
 Tantalus, Sisyphus, Tityus, and the Danalds, as well as the ministers of 
 
 1 
 
 J 
 
 I 
 
 kV .* 
 

 «o 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 •I 
 
 I' 't 
 
 Ibe same principle of treating the popular gods as allegorical pe^ 
 aonages ; while the expositors of Homer (such as Stesimbrotus^ 
 Glaukon, and others, even down to the Alexandrine age), though 
 none of them proceeded to the same extreme length as Metrod6- 
 ru8, employed allegory amongst other media of explanation for 
 the purpose of solving diiiiculties, or eluding reproaches against 
 the poet. 
 
 In the days of Plato and Zenophon, this allegorizing interpre- 
 tation was one of the received methods of softening down the ob- 
 noxious mythes — though Plato himself treated it as an insuffi- 
 cient defence, seeing that the bulk of youthful hearers could not 
 see through the allegory, but embraced the story literally as it 
 was set forth.* Pausanias tells us, that when he first began to 
 write his work, he treated many of the Greek legends as silly and 
 undeserving of serious attention ; but as he proceeded, he gradu- 
 ally arrived at the full conviction, that the ancient sages had de- 
 signedly spoken in enigmatical language, and that there was val- 
 uable truth wrapped up in their narratives : it was the duty of a 
 pious man, therefore, to study and interpret, but not to reject, 
 
 penal infliction, (\*rberas and the Furies. The first four are emblematic 
 descriptions of various defective or vicious characters in human nature,— 
 tfie deisidaemonic. the amhitioas, the amorous, or the insatiate and qaemlons 
 man ; the last two represent the mental terrors of the wicked. 
 
 ' Ot vvv Tvepl "OfiTjpov Setvoi — so Plato calls these interpreters (Kratylns, 
 p. 407) ; see also Xenoph. Sympos. iii. 6 ; Plato, Ion. p. 530 ; Plutarch, De 
 Audiend. Poet. p. 19. vnovoia was the original word, afterwards succeeded 
 by uXkriyopia. 
 
 'Upa^ 6e Seofiot)^ kqI 'H^amrov f)itpeic ivrd narpdg, ftiXXovTo^ ry fiijTpl tt/tt- 
 TOfxevTi ufiwelv, Kal T^cofiaxiac ^(foc 'Ofiepo^ TVETVoiJiKev, ov TrapadEKveov elf 
 T^v TToXiv, ovt' tv VTTOV oiai^ TT Eir oiT] fievag, ov r^ dv ev v ttov oi- 
 it V. 'O yiip veot; ohx' olog re xpiveiv 6,n re v^ovoia Kal b (i^, aXX* d a% 
 rri'kiKOVTog dv h'lfS^ kv rai^ So^aig, dvaeKviKTu rt koi ufieTuffTara <piXei yiy» 
 9ea^ai (Plato, Republ. ii. 17. p. S78). 
 
 The idea of an interior sense and concealed purpose in the ancient poett 
 Occnrs several times in Plato (Theietet. c. 93. p. 180) : irapa fiev rijv apxaiuv, 
 utrd TTOLTjaeug iniKpvTZTOfievuv rot)f 7roA.Aot)f , etc. ; also Prot&gor. c. 20. p 
 816. 
 
 " Modo Stoieum Homerum faciunt, — modo Epicurcum, — modo Perip** 
 teticum, — mo<io Acadcmicum. Apparat nihil horuro esse in illo, quit 
 omnia sunt." (Seneca, £p. 88.) Compare Plutarch, De Defecta Oracol e 
 U-12. t. ii. p. 702, Wjtt, and Julian, Orat. vii. p. 216 
 
 
 .i 
 
 PAUSANIAS AND HIS \TEW OP THE MYTHES. 
 
 421 
 
 iniri<« current and accredited respecting the gods.! And otheni 
 — arguing from the analogy of the religious mysteries, which coald 
 not be divulged without impiety to any except such as had beeo 
 specially admitted and initiated, — maintained that it would be a 
 profanation to reveal directly to the vulgar, the genuine scheme 
 of nature and the divine administration : the ancient poets aod 
 philosophers had taken the only proper course, of talking to the 
 many in types and parables, and reserving the naked truth for 
 privileged and qualified intelligences.^ The allegorical mode of 
 explaining the ancient fablesS became more and more popular in 
 
 * Pausan. viii, 8, 2. To the same purpose (Strabo, x. p 474), allsgory is 
 admitted to a certain extent in the fables by Dionys. Halic. Ant. Bom. iL 90. 
 The fragment of the lost treatise of Plutarch, on the Platean festival of ttm 
 Daedaia, is very instructive respecting Grecian allegory (Fragm. iz. t 5. p. 
 764-763, ed. Wyt ; ap Euseb. Praepar. Evang. iu. 1). 
 
 * This doctrine is set forth in Macrobius (i. 2). He distinguishes between 
 fabula and fabnlosa narratio: the former is fiction pur«, intended either to 
 amuse or to instruct — the latter is founded upon truth, either respectiiif 
 hnman or respecting divine agency. The gods did not like to be pabUdy 
 talked of (according to his view) except under the respectful veil of a faU) 
 (the same feeling as that of Herodotus, which led him to refrain from insert- 
 ing the iepol "kbyoi in his history) The supreme god, the rayadhv. tiie 
 Vfiurov alriov, could not be talked of in fables : but the other gods, the a^ria. 
 or aethereal powers and the soul, might be, and ought to be, talked of in that 
 manner alone. Only superior intellects ought to be admitted to a knowledge 
 of the secret reality. " De Diis caeteris, et de animA, non frustra se, nee at 
 oblectent, ad fabulosa convertunt ; sed quia sciunt inimioam esse naturce aptf 
 tarn nudamqm expositionem sui : (|uae sicut vulgaribus sensibus hominimi 
 intellectum sui, vario rerum tegmine operimentoque, subtraxit ; ita ^ pra 
 
 dentibus arcana sua voluit per fabulosa tractari Adeo semper ita se eC 
 
 aciri et coli numina maluerunt, qualiter in vulgus antiquitus fabulata est 
 
 Secundum haec Pythagoras ipse atque Empedocles, Parmenides qiio- 
 
 que et Heraclides, de Diis fabulati sunt: necsecus Tim«us." Compare also 
 Maximus Tyrius, Dissert, x. and xxxii. Amobius exposes the allegorical 
 interpretation as mere evasion, and holds the Pagans to literal historical fiict 
 CAdv. Gentes, v. p. 185, ed. Elm.> 
 
 Respecting the allegorical interpretation applied to the Greek fableti 
 Bottiger (Die Kunst — Mythologie der Griechen, Abhchn. ii. p I7g;' 
 NitZBch (Heldensage der Griech. sect. 6. p. 78) ; Lobeck (Aglaopham. a 
 I3S-155). ^ 
 
 * According to the anonymous writer ap. Westermann (Script Myth, pi, 
 •S8), every personal or denominated god may be construed in three diffeno 
 Wayi: either npayfiaTiKu^ (historically, as having been a king or a maD|»- 
 
 '. r 
 
 i 
 
 
 '« 
 
 • * 
 
 
 J I 
 
H 
 
 h 
 
 iTi 
 
 HLJTORT OF GBEECC. 
 
 lite thiid acid foiirtli centuries after the ChriBtian aera, especiaOj 
 among the new Platonic philosophers ; being both congenial tm 
 
 •r ^vxiKCtCt in which theory Here signifies the soui; Athene, prudence. 
 Aphrodite, desire ; Zeus, miW, etc. — or aroixeiaKug, in which system Apollo 
 ■ignifies the sun ; Poseidon, the sea ; Herg, the upper stratum of the air, or 
 mlhsr ; Athene, the lower or denser stratum ; Zeus, the upper hemisphere *, 
 Kronus, the lower, etc. This writer thinks that all the three principles of 
 csanstruction may be resorted to, each on its proper occasion, and that neither 
 of them excludes the others. It will be seen that the first is pure Euemer- 
 ism ; the two latter are modes of allegory. 
 
 The allegorical construction of the gods and of the divine mythes is copi- 
 ously applied in the treatises, both of Phumutus and Sallustius, in Gale's 
 collection of mythological writers. Sallustius treats the mythes as of divine 
 origin, and the chief poets as inspired (iJeoAjyTrrot): the gods were propitious 
 to those who recounted worthy and creditable mythes respecting them, and 
 Sallustius prays that they will accept with favor his own remarks (cap. 3 
 •nd 4. pp. 245-251, Gale). He distributes mythes into five classes; theo- 
 logical, physical, spiritual, material, and mixed. He defends the practice of 
 speaking of the go<ls under the veil of allegory, much in the same way as 
 Macrobius (in the preceding note) : he finds, moreover, a good excuse even 
 for those mythes which imputed to the gods theft, adultery, outrages towards 
 a father, and other enormities: such tales (he says) were eminently suitable, 
 since the mind must at once see that the facts as told are not to be taken as 
 being themselves the real truth, but simply as a veil, disguising some interior 
 truth (p. 247 j. 
 
 Besides the Life of Homer ascribed to Plutarch (see Gale, p. 325-332). 
 Heraclides {not Heraclides of Pontus) carries out the process of allegorizing 
 the Homeric mythe;? most earnestly and most systematically. The applica- 
 tion of the allegorizing theory is, in his view, the only way of rescuing 
 Homer from the charge of scandalous impiety — Truvry yelp ijaeiirioev, el 
 ft^div riXkriyopriaev (Herac. in init. p. 407, Gale). He proves at length, that 
 the destructive arrows of Apollo, in the first book of the Iliad, mean nothing 
 at the bottom except a contagious plague, caused by the heat of the summer 
 son in marshy ground (pp. 416-424). Athene, whc darts down from Olym- 
 pus at the moment when Achilles is about to draw his sword on Agamem- 
 non, and seizes him by the hair, is a personification of repentant prudence 
 (p. 435). The conspiracy against Zens, which Homer (Iliad, i. 400) relates 
 to hare been formed by the Olympic gods, and defeated by the timely aid of 
 Thetis and Briareus — the chains and suspension imposed upon Here — the 
 jBsting of Hephaestos by Zeus out of Olympus, and his fall in Lemnus — 
 tiie destruction of the Grecian wall by Poseidon, after the departure of the 
 Greeks — the amorjub scene between Zeus and Here on Mount Gargarus — 
 tfie distribution of the universe between Zens, Poseidon, and Hades — all 
 tfiese he resolves into peculiar manifestations and conflicts of the elemental 
 labstances in nature. To the much-decried battle of the gods, he gives a 
 
 LATER PLATONIC PHILOSOPHERS. 
 
 489 
 
 tfieir orientalized turn of thought, and useful as a shield againal 
 the attacks of the Christians. 
 
 It was from the same strong necessity, of accommodating the 
 old mythes to a new standard both of belief and of appreciation, 
 that both the historical and the allegorical schemes of transform- 
 ing them arose ; the literal narrative being decomposed for the 
 purpose of arriving at a base either of particular matter of fact, 
 
 torn partly physical, partly ethical (p. 48l> In like manner, he transforms 
 and vindicates the adventures of the gods in the Odyssey: the wanderings 
 of Odysseus, together with the Lotophagi, the Cyclops, Circe, the Sirens, 
 ^olus, Scylla, etc., he resolves into a series of temptations, imposed as a 
 trial upon a man of wisdom and virtue, and emblematic of human life (p. 
 496). The story of Ares, Aphrodite, and Hephasstos, in the eighth book of 
 the Odyssey, seems to perplex him more than any other : he offers two 
 explanations, neither of which seems satisfactory even to himself (p. 494). 
 
 An anonymous writer in the collection of Westermann (pp. 329-344) has 
 
 discussed the wanderings of Odysseus upon the same ethical scheme of in- 
 
 terpretation as Heraclides : he entitles his treatise " A short essay on the 
 
 Wanderings of Odysseus in Homer, worked out in conjunction with ethical 
 
 reflections, and rectifying what is rotten in the story, as well as may be, for 
 
 the benefit of readers." (rb fiv&ov aa&pbv ^tpaKtvovca.) The author 
 
 resolves the adventures of Odysseus into narratives emblematic of different 
 
 situations and trials of human life. Scylla and Charybdis, for example (c. 8 
 
 p. 338), represent, the one, the infirmities and temptations arising out of the 
 
 body, the other, those springing from the mind, between which man is called 
 
 upon to steer. The adventure of Odysseus with .(Eolus, shows how little good 
 
 a virtuous man does himself by seeking, in case of distress, aid from conjurore 
 
 and evil enchanters ; the assistance of suah allies, however it may at first 
 
 promise well, ultimately deceives the person who accepts it, and renders him 
 
 worse off than he was before (c. 3. p. 332). By smh illustrations does the 
 
 author sustain his general position, that there is a great body of valuable 
 
 ethical teaching wrapped up in the poetry of Homer 
 
 Proclus is full of similar allegorization, both of Homer and Hesiod : thf 
 third Excursus of Heyne ad Iliad, xxiii. (vol. viii. p. 563), De AllegoriA 
 Homerica, contains a valuable summary of the general subject 
 
 The treatise De AstrologiA, printed among the works of Lucian, containt 
 specimens of astrological explanations applied to many of the Grecian 
 uv&oi, which the author as a pious man cannot accept in their literal mean- 
 ing. " How does it consist with holiness (he asks) to believe that ^neas 
 wag son of Aphrodite, Minds of Zeus, or Askalaphus of Mars ? No ; thest 
 wero men bom under the favorable influences of the planets Venus, Jupiter, 
 and Mars." He considers the principle cf astrological explanation peculiarly 
 fit to be applied to the mythes of Homer and Hesiod (Ladan, De Astrologift 
 
 1 
 
 ;, 
 
 J: 
 
I/.. 
 
 h 
 
 4S4 
 
 mSTORT OP OREBGI. 
 
 or of general physical or moral truth. Instructed men 
 commonly disposed to historicize only the heroic legends, and to 
 allegorize more or less of the divine legends : the attempt of 
 £uemerus to historicize the latter was for the most part denounced 
 •8 irreligious, while that of Metrodorus to allegorize the former 
 net with no success. In allegorizing, moreover, even the divine 
 legends, it was usual to apply the scheme of allegory only to the 
 inferior gods, though some of the great Stoic philosophers car- 
 lied it farther, and allegorized all the separate personal gods, 
 leaving only an ;all-pervading cosmic Mind,' essential as a co- 
 efficient along with Matter, yet not separable from Matter. But 
 many pious pagans seem to have perceived that allegory pushed 
 Id this extent was fatal to all living religious faith,^ inasmuch as 
 it divested the gods of their character of Persons, sympathizing 
 with mankind and modifiable in their dispositions according to 
 the conduct and prayers of the believer: and hence they per- 
 mitted themselves to employ allegorical interpretation only to 
 lome of the obnoxious legends connected with the superior gods, 
 leaving the personality of the latter unimpeached. 
 
 One novelty, however, introduced seemingly by the philosopher 
 Empedokles and atlerwards expanded by others, deserves notice, 
 inasmuch as it modified considerably the old religious creed by 
 drawing a pointed contrast between gods and daemons, — a dis- 
 tinction hardly at all manifested in Homer, but recognized in the 
 Works and Days of Hesiod.^ Empedokl^ widened the gap be- 
 tween the two, and founded upon it important consequences. The 
 gods were good, immortal, and powerful agents, having freewill 
 
 * See Ritier, Geschichte der Phiioeophie, 2nd edit, part 3. book 11. chap. 4. 
 p. 592 ; Varro ap. Aagusdn. Civitat Dei, vi. 5, ix. 6 ; Cicero, Nat. Deor. ii. 
 M-28. 
 
 Chrysippns admitted the most important distinction between Zeus and th« 
 other gods (Plutarch de Stoicor. Repugnant, p. 1052.) 
 
 ^ Plutarch, de Isid. et Osirid. c. 66. p. 377 ; c. 70. p. 379. Compare oa 
 this subject O. Miillcr, Prolegom. Mythol. p. 59 seq^ and Eckermaun, Lehr* 
 bach der Religions Qeschichte, vol. i. sect ii. p. 46. 
 
 ' Hesiod, Opp. et Dl 122 : to the same effect Pythagoras and Thalte 
 .r^iogen. Laer. viii. S2; and Plutarch, Placit. Philos. i. 8). 
 
 The Hesiodic daemons are all good : Athenagoras ( Legat. Chr. p. 8i sayi 
 that Thal€s admitted a distinction between good and bad dtsmuri. wuiok 
 Mems rerj doubtful. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE D.F.MOXS. 
 
 495 
 
 and intelligence, but without appetite, passion, or infirmity : the 
 demons were of a mixed nature between gods and men, ministers 
 and inteipreters frcm the former to the latter, but invested also 
 with an agency and dispositions of their own. They were very 
 long-lived, but not immortal, and subject to the passions and pro- 
 pensities of men, so that there were among them beneficent and 
 maleficient daemons with every shade of intermediate difference.' 
 
 » The distinction between Qeol and Aalfiovec is especially set forth in the 
 treatise of Plutarch, De Defectu Oraculorum, capp. 10, 12, 13, 15, etc. He 
 leems to suppose it traceable to the doctrine of Zoroaster or the Orphic 
 mysteries, and he represents it as relieving the philosopher from great per- 
 plexities : for it was difficult to know where to draw the line in admitting or 
 rejecting divine Providence : errors were committed sometimes in affirming 
 God to be the cause of everything, at other times in supposing him to be the 
 cause of nothing. 'Eirei rd diopiaai itCj^ xPVOteov Kal /nexpi nvuv t?) npovoitji, 
 XaXeTTdv.ol fxev ovSevdc 47rA(jf rdv i&edv, ol St bfiov ri navruv alriov iroi- 
 otwref, dffToxovm rov fierpiov Kal Trperrovroc. Ei fiev ovv Xeyovaiv ol Ae- 
 ycwrer, 5rt OAarwv rb rale yewu)fievaic iroioTTfatv iiroKei/xevov oroixeiw 
 Hevpdv, vvv vXijv Kal (^vrnv KaXovmv, iroXXCv airffUa^e Kal fieydTiuv utto- 
 piuv roi>c (paoffoipovc tfiol 6h doKovm TrXeiovag Ivaai Kal /lel^ovac aTTopiag oi 
 Tb TU)v daifz6v(ov yevoc h fieau> ^euv Kal dvi»puir<jv, Kal rpoirov riva r^ 
 noivcjviav Tffiuv avvayov ek rairb xal avvairrov, l^evpovrec (c. I0> 'H 6ai- 
 uovuv <^mc ixovaa Kal ird^og ^vtjtov Kal i^eov dvvofxiv (c. 13). 
 
 Eial ydp, (if h dv^potiroic, Kal Saifwrnv dper^c 6id<j>opal, Kal rov ira^rjUKod 
 Kal uUyov role f^ev d(r»evh Kal dfiavpbv in Xei^avov, Cxrirep 7repirrcj/m, rol( 
 ik TToAi) Kal 6vaKarda(iearov heariv, uvlxvif Kal (rv/i(3oU iroUaxov ^vatai 
 Kal releral Kal fzv&oXoyiaL ffCt^ovai Kal dia<fwXdrrovaiv IvdiEanapfUva (ib.l . 
 compare Plutarch, de Isid. et Osir. 25. p. 360. 
 
 KalfA^vonaglvre [iv^olq Kal dfivoic Tiiyovai Kal (jidovoL^ 
 -nvro fiev dpnaydc, rovro de irXdvac ^euv, Kpirpei^ re Kal ifnrydcKal Xarpeiac, 
 ob ^eCiv eiaiv dlld Saifiov-jv ira^ijiiara, etc. (c. 15) : also c. 23 ; also De Isid. 
 et Osir. c. 25. p. 366. 
 
 Human sacrifices and other objectionable rites are excused, as necessary 
 for the purpcse of averting the anger of bad daemons (c. 14-15). 
 
 Empedoklds is represented as the first author of the doctrine which im- 
 puted vicious and abominable dispositions to many of the damons Cc. 15, 
 16, 17,20), rot)f eiaayofievovc iirb 'EfnredoKXeovg daifiovae; expelled from 
 heaven by the gods, ^ev^roi Kal oipavoirerele (Plutarch, De Vitand. Afir. 
 Alien, p. 830) ; followed by Plato, Xenokrates, and Chrysippus, c. 17 : com- 
 pare Plato 'Apolog. Socrat p. 27 ; Politic, p. 271 ; Symposion, c. 28. p. 203), 
 though he seems to treat the dai/xoveg as defective and mutable beings, rather 
 than actively maleficent Xenokrates represents some of them both as wick- 
 id and powerful in a high degree : — SevoKpdrtfc Kal ruv iifupCtv rdf dir» 
 
 i: 
 
 i, 
 
h 
 
 flISTOBY OF GREECa. 
 
 It had been tlie mistake (according to these philosophers) of thfl 
 old mjthes to ascribe to the gods proceedings really belonging !o 
 the djemons, who were always the immediate communicants with 
 mortal nature, inspiring prophetic power to the priestesses of th« 
 oracles, sending dreams and omens, and perpetually interfering 
 cither for good or for evil. The wicked and violent dsemons, 
 having committed many enormities, had thus sometimes incurred 
 punishment from the gods : besides which, their bad disjx>siti< as 
 had imposed upon men the necessity of appeasing them by reli- 
 gious ceremonies of a kind acceptable to such beings : hence, the 
 human sacrifices, the violent, cruel, and obscene exhibitions, the 
 wailings and fastings, the tearing and eating of raw flesh, which 
 it had become customary to practise on various consecrated occa- 
 sions, and especially in the Dionysiac solemnities. Moreover, the 
 discreditable actions imputed to the gods, — the terrific combats, 
 the Ty phonic and Titanic convulsions, the rapes, abductions, flight, 
 servitude, and concealment, — all these were really the doings and 
 sufferings of bad diemons, placed far below the sovereign agency 
 — equable, undisturbed, and unpolluted — of the immortal gods. 
 The action of such diemons upon mankind was fitful and inter- 
 mittent ; they sometimes perished or changed their local abode, 
 SO that ora^'les which had once been inspired became after a time 
 forsaken and disfranchized.' 
 
 This distin( tion between gods and daemons appeared to save 
 ID a great degree both the tru*h of the old legends and the dig"- 
 
 fpu^ac, Kal Tuv iopruv baai TrAr/yaj- Ttva^ ^ Koneroiig, fj vrjoTeiag, tj (Jua^jy/ztof, 
 ^ alaxpoXoyiav vxovaiv, ovre ^edv riuaig ovre daijuovuv ohrac npoc^Keiv 
 Xfynaruv^ u'KX ehai <pvaeig kv Tcp Trepuxovri fieyuXag uev Kal laxvpuc, dvarpo- 
 xovc 6e Kal aKvdncjTTut:, ai xotpovat role roiovroic, ical rvyxa 
 vovaai irpdc ovi^ev t'lXXo xeipov rp e'TTov rat (Plutarch, De Isid. 
 Bt Osir. c. 26. p 361 ; Quaestion. Rom. p. 283) : compare Stobseus, Eclog. 
 Phys. i. p. 62. 
 
 ' Plutarch, De Defect Orac. d 5. p. 418. Chrysippus admitted, among 
 the various conceivable causes to account for the existence of evil, the suppo 
 ■Ition of some nef^Iigent and reckless daemons, Saifidvca ipav?La. kv olg r^ 6vrt 
 yivovrat Kal eyKXrjreai u^itkecai (Plutarch, De Stoicor. Repi^iant p. 1051). 
 A distinction, whiich I do not fully understand, between i^eol and Saifioveft 
 was also adopted among the Locrians at Opus : Aaifiuv with them seems t» 
 hare been equivalent to f/z^f (Plutarch, Quiestiox Gr»c. c 6. p. adS) laf 
 tke note above, pj). 350-351. 
 
 INTERPBETATION OF THE MYTHES. 
 
 or 
 
 ■itj of the gods : it obviated the necessity of pronouncing either 
 that the gods were unworthy, or the legends untrue. Yet although 
 devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious 
 eensibility, it was found inconvenient afterwards, when assailants 
 arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as 
 indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, 
 it still retained the same word dcemons with an entirely altered 
 signification. The Christian writers in their controversies found 
 ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors" for treating aU 
 the gods as daemons - and not less ample warrant among the later 
 pagans for denouncing the daemons generally as evil bein^rg.Q 
 
 Such were the different modes in which the ancient mythes 
 were treated, during the literary life of Greece, by the four classes 
 above named - poet^, logographers, historians, and philosophers. 
 
 Literal acceptance, and unconscious, uninquiring faith, such as 
 they had obtained from the original auditors to whom they were 
 addressed, they now found only among the multitude — alike 
 retentive of traditional feelings and fearful of criticizing the pro- 
 
 Tatian. adv. Graecos, c. 20; Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit. ad Gentes 
 pp. 26-29, Sylb. ; Minuc. Felix, Octav. c. 26. "Isti igitur impuri spiritus, ut 
 Ofltensum a Magis, a philosophis, a Platone, sub statuis et imaginibus conse- 
 •?rati delitescunt, et afflatu suo quasi auctoritatem prasentis numinis conse- 
 qnuntur," etc. This, like so many other of the aggressive arguments of the 
 Christians against paganism, was taken from the pagan philosophers them 
 «lves. 
 
 Lactantius, De Ver& Philosophic, iv. 28. " Ergo iidem sunt Daemones. 
 ^los fatentur execrandos esse: iidem Dii, quibus supplicant. Si nobis cre- 
 d-ndum esse non putant, credant Homero ; qui summum ilium Jovem D«» 
 iDonibus aggregavit," etc. 
 
 ' See above, Chapter II. p. 70, the remarks on the Hesiodic Theogony. 
 
 ^ A destructive inundation took place at Pheneus In Arcadia, seemingly 
 m the time of Plutarch : the subterranean outlet (fiapa^pov) of the rivei 
 had become blocked up, and the inhabitants ascribed the stoppage to the 
 •nger of Apollo, who had been provoked by the stealing of the Pythian 
 tripod by Herakles : the latter had carried the tripod to Pheneus and de- 
 posited it there. 'Ap' oiv ovk aroiruTepoc tovtuv 6 'A-rrokkuv, ei 4feveuTa( 
 AvoXXvm roi^c vt)v, kfn^^OQ rb 0upa^pov, Kal KaraKXvaag r^v xcjpav anaoav 
 abruv, 6n irpd xcMuv iruv, olf ijHxatv, 6 'Hpa/cA^f dvaairdaac 'ov ipinoda 
 TW ixavTLKbv eli ^evedv dnnveyKe; (Plutarch, de Serd Numin. Vindict4, 
 ^ 577; compare Pausan. viii. 14, 1.' The expression of Platarch, that 
 th» abstraction of the tripod by Hdrakl^ had taken place 1000 ' 
 
 n 
 
 ' 
 
 i( 
 
 J 
 
■"*^^ 
 
 BSTOBT OF ORECOS 
 
 ings of the gods.^ Bat with imftnielecl men they 
 
 SCHEME OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 ntfher subjectn iif respectful and curious analysis — all agreeiog 
 that the Word at) tendered to them was inadmissibia, yet all equally 
 convinced that it contained important meaning, though hidden 
 yet not undiscoverable. A very large proportion of the force 
 of Grecian intellect was engaged in searching after this unknown 
 ba^e, by guesses, in which sometimes the principle of semi-his 
 tori(ral interpretation was assumed, sometimes that of allegori 
 cal, without anj; collateral evidence in either case, and without 
 possibility of v(;rification. Out of the one assumption grew a 
 string of allegorized phienomenal truths, oot of the other a long 
 aeries of seeming historical events and chronological persons, •— 
 both elicited from the transformed mythes and from notbii^ 
 dae.^ 
 
 before, is that of the critic, who thinks it needful to historicize and chronol- 
 ogize the genuine legend ; which, to an inhabitant of Pheneas, at the time of 
 the inundation, wm doubtless as little questioned as if the theft of Uerakldf 
 had been laid in th(; preceding generation. 
 
 Agathocles of Syracuse committed depredations on the coa^^ts of Ithacs 
 •nd Korkyra : the excuse which he offered was, that Odysgeus had come tO 
 Sicily and blinded Polyphemus, and that on his return he had been kindfy 
 received by the Phseakians (Plutarch, ib.). 
 
 This is doubtless a jest, either made by Aj^athocles, or more probably in* 
 rented for him ; but it is founded upon a popular belief. 
 
 * " Sanctiusque el reverentius visum, de actis Deorum credere qnam scire.* 
 (Tacit German, c. 34.) 
 
 Aristides, however, represents the Homeric theoloiry (whether he would 
 have in<'luded the Hesiodic we do not know) as believed quite literally among 
 tfie multitude in his time, the second century after Christianity (Aristid. Orat. 
 iiL p. 25). 'ATToptJ, oTTij TTore xpV f^e dia'&e<r&ai (ie&' vficjv, izorepa wf rctf 
 iroA/Lotf doKei koI 'Ofji^p<ft 6e (TvvdoKei^ ^eCw ira^^fiara av^Treia^rjvai kcu rj/uiCf 
 eiov 'Apeof deofta kqI 'AttoAAwvoc ^rireio/g koI 'HipaiaTov (tiyl>eig elg ^ukaaaaVf 
 o^Tu Si Kol 'Ivovf uxTI i^oi ifivydc rivac. Compare Lucian, Zei)g Tpayo)6off 
 c. 20, and De Lucta, c. 2 ; Dionys. Halicar. A. R. ii. p. 90, Sylb. 
 
 Kallimachus CHjcmn. ad Jov. 9) distinctly denied the statement of dia 
 Kretans that they possessed in Krete the tomb of Zeus, and treated it as ai 
 Instance of Kretan mendacity; while Celsus did not deny it, hat explained 
 k in some figurative manner — aivirrofievo^ rpoircxd^ vrrowMOf (Origen. cont 
 Celsnm, iiL p. 137). 
 
 ' There is here a change as compared with my first edition ; J had inserted 
 Iwrc some remarks on the allegorical theory of interpretation, as comparai 
 with the semi-histoiicaL An able article on my work (in the EdiEboi]^ 
 
 429 
 
 rhe utmost which we accomplish by means of the eemi-hi^ 
 hfrical theory, even in its most successful applications, is, that 
 after leaving out from the mythical narrative all that is miracu- 
 lous or high-colored or extravagant, we arrive at a series of credi- 
 ble incidents — incidents which may, perhaps, have really occur 
 red, and against which no intrinsic presumption can be raised. 
 This is exactly the character of a well-written modem novel (as, 
 for example, several among the compositions of Defoe), the whole 
 story of which is such as may well have occurred in real life : it 
 is plausible fiction, and nothing beyond. To raise plausible fic- 
 tion up to the superior dignity of truth, some positive testimony 
 or positive ground of inference must be shown ; even the highest 
 measure of intrinsic probability is not alone sufficient. A man 
 who tells us that, on the day of the battle of Platiea, rain fell on 
 the spot of ground where the city of New York now stands, will 
 neither deserve nor obtain credit, because he can have had no 
 means of positive knowledge ; though the statement is not in the 
 slightest degree improbable. On the other hand, statements in 
 themselves very improbable may well deserve belief, provided 
 they be supported by sufficient positive evidence ; thus the canal 
 dug by order of Xerxes across the promontory of Mount Athos, 
 and the sailing of the Persian fleet through it, is a fact which 1 
 believe, because it is well-attested — notwithstanding its remark- 
 able improbability, which so far misled Juvenal as to induce him 
 to single out the narrative as a glaring example of Grecian men- 
 dacity.' Again, many critics have observed that the general tale 
 of the Trojan war (apart from the superhuman agencies) is not 
 more improbable than that of the Crusades, which every one ad- 
 mits to be an historical fact. But (even if we grant this position, 
 which is only true to a small extent), it is not sufficient to show 
 an analogy between the two cases in respect to negative presump- 
 tions alone ; the analogy ought to be shown to hold between them 
 
 Beview, October 1846), pointed out that those remarks required modification 
 and that the idea of allegory in reference to the construction ©f the mythai 
 Was altogether inadmissible. 
 * Juvenal, Sat. x. 1 74 : — 
 
 " Creditur olim 
 Velificatus Athos, et quantum Graecia mendaz 
 Audet in historic," etc. 
 
 i 
 
 
 1/ 
 
 ••»* *"i 
 
/>/ 
 
 480 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEOI. 
 
 in respect to pOHitive certificate also. The Crusades are a carioof 
 pbapnomenon in history, but we accept them, nevertheless, as an 
 unquestionable fact, because the antecedent improbability is suiw 
 mounted by adi^quate contem[X)rary testimony. When the like 
 testimony, both in amount and kind, is produced to establish the 
 historical reality of a Trojan war, we shall not hesitate to deal 
 with the two events on the same footing. 
 
 In applying the semi-hi.storical theory to Grecian mythical nar- 
 rative, it has been often forj^otten that a certain strength of testi- 
 mony, or [)ositive ground of belief, must first be tendered, before 
 we can be called upon to discuss the antecedent f)rohability or 
 improbability of the incidents aHcged. The belief of the Gn^eks 
 themselves, without the smallest aid of special or contemf)orary 
 witnesses, has been tticitly assumed as sufficient to supjx)rt the 
 case, provided only sufficient deduction be made from the mythi- 
 cal narratives to remove all antecedent iiii})robabiIities. It has 
 been taken for granted that the faith of the people must have 
 rested originally upon some particular historical event, involving 
 the identical persons, things, and places which the original mythea 
 exhibit, or at least the most prominent among them. But when 
 we examine the pyschagogic influences predominant in the so- 
 ciety among whom this belief originally grew up, we shall see 
 that their belief is of little or no evidentiary value, and that the 
 growth and difibision of it may be satisfieictorily explained without 
 supposing any special basis of matters of fact. The popular 
 faith, so far as it counts for anything, testifies in favor of the en- 
 tire and literal mythes, which are now universally rejected afl 
 mcredibic' We have thus the very minimum of positive proof. 
 
 ' Colonel Sleeman observes, respecting the Hindoo historical mind — 
 "History to this people is all a fairy tale.'* (Rambles and Recollections of 
 an Indian Official vol. i. ch. ix. p. 70 ) And again, " The popular poem of 
 the Hamaen descril)es the abduction of the heroine by the monster king of 
 Ceylon, Rawuii ; aed her recovery by means of the monkey general, Han- 
 nooman. Every word of this poem, the people assured me was written, if 
 not by the hand of the Deity himself, at least by his inspiration, which was 
 the same thing — and it must consequently be true. Ninety-nine out of a 
 handred, among the Hindoos, implicitly believe, not only every woid of the 
 poem, but every word of every poem that has ever been written in Sanscrit 
 If you ask a man whether he really believes any very egregious absurdity 
 quoted from these l)ooks, he replies, with the greatest naXveU'in the world, Ib 
 
 % 
 
 TRUTH UNDISTINGDISHABLE FROM FICTION 43^ 
 
 •nd the maximum of negative presumption : we may diminish 
 the latter by conjectural omissionfl and interpolations, but we can- 
 not by any artifice increase the former; the narrative ceaaee to 
 be incredible, but it stiU remains uncertified, — a mere common, 
 place possibility. Nor is fiction always, or essentiaUy, extrava- 
 gant and incredible. It is often not only phuj^ible and coherent 
 but even more hke truth (if a paradoxical phrase may be aUow- 
 ed) than truth itself. Nor can we, in the absence of any extrio. 
 •k test, reckon upon any intrinsic mark to discriminate the one 
 from the other. ^ 
 
 it not written in the book; and how should it be there written, if not true f 
 The Hindoo religion reposes upon an entire prostration of'mind, — thK 
 continual and habitual burrender of the reasoning faculties, which we are 
 •ccnstomed to make occasionally, while engaged at the theatre, or in tilt 
 perusal of works of fiction. We allow the scenes, characters, and incidents 
 to pass before our mind's eye, and move our feelings — without stopping a 
 moment to ask whether they are real or true. There is only this difference 
 — that with people of education among us, even in such short intervals of 
 illusion or ahtiruion, any extravagance in the acting, or flagrant improbability 
 in the fiction, destroys the charm, breaks the spell by which we hare been so 
 mysteriously hoan.l, and restores us to reason and 'the realities of ordinair 
 life. With the Hindoos, on the contrary, the greater the iraprobahility, the 
 more monstrous and preposterous the fiction — the greater is the charm it 
 bas over their minds ; and the greater their learning in the Sanscrit, th« 
 more are they under the influence of this charm. Believing all to be writtea 
 by the Deity, or under his inspirations, and the men and things of former 
 days to hHve been very different from men and things of the present day. 
 aiid the heroes of these fables to have been demi«rods, or people endowed 
 with powers far superior to those of the ordinary men of their own day^ 
 the analogies of nature are never for a moment considered ; nor do quesfioM 
 Of probability, or possibility, according to those analogies, ever obtrude to 
 dispel the charm with which they are so pleasingly bound. They go OQ 
 through life reading and talking of these monstroils fictions, which shock 
 the taste and understanding of other nations, without ever questioning t^ 
 truth of one single incident, or hearing it questioned. There was a tia%. 
 nd that not far distant, when it was the same in England, and in ever? 
 Other European nation ; and there are, I am afraid, some parts of Eurooo 
 where it is so still. But the Hindoo faith, so far as religion* questions aio 
 •oncemed, is not more capacious or absurd than that of the Greeks or Ra- 
 mans in the days of Socrates or Cicero : the only difference is, that 
 the Hindoos a greater number of the questions which mterest manL..- , 
 fcrought under the head of religion." (Sleeman, Rambles, etc, voL L 
 aXTi. p 227 : compare vol. ii. ch. v. p. 51 ; viii. p 97.) 
 ' I^Mti Lyttleton, in commenting 00 the tales of the Jrisb bwdi, in Ui 
 Vol. I 20 
 
 ii 
 
 »^H 
 
 ' ■ I 
 
 .— * 
 
4S2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 In tlie semi-historical theory respecting Grecian mythical MV 
 rative, the critic unconsciously transports into the Homeric age 
 tho6e habits of classification and distincticfi, and that standaid of 
 acceptance or rejection, which he finds current in his own. 
 Amongst us, the dlMtinction between historical fact and fiction is 
 highly valued as well as familiarly understood : we have a long 
 history of the past, deduced from a study of contemporary evi- 
 dences ; and we have a body of fictitious literature, stamped 
 with its own mark and interesting in its own way. Speaking 
 generally, no man could now hope to succeed permanently in 
 transferring any striking incident from the latter category into 
 the former, nor could any man deliberately attempt it without 
 incurring well-merited obloquy. But this historical sense ^ now so 
 deeply rooted in the; modern mind that we find a difficulty in con- 
 ceiving any people to be without it, is the fruit of records and 
 inquiries, first applied to the present, and then preserved and 
 studied by subsequent generations ; while in a society which has 
 not yet formed the habit of recording its present, the real facts 
 of the past can never be known ; the difference between attested 
 
 History of Henry II., has the following just remarks (book iv. vol. iii. p. 13 
 quarto) : " One may reasonably suppose that in MSS. written since the Irish 
 received the Roman letters from St. Patrick, same traditional truths recorded 
 iiefore by the bards in their unwritten poems may have been preserved to our 
 tames. Yet these cannot be so separated from many fabulous stories derived 
 from the same sources, as to obtain a firm credit ; it not being sufficient to 
 establish the aathonty •(/ suspected traditions, that they can be shown not 
 to be 80 improbable or absurd as others with which they are mixed — sine* 
 there may he specious <u well as senseless Jictions. Nor can a poet or bard, 
 who lived in the sixth or seventh century after Christ, if his poem is still 
 extant, be any voucher for facts supposed to have happened before the in 
 carnation ; though his evidence (allowing for poetical license) may bo 
 received on such matters as come within his own time, or the remembrance 
 of old men with whom he conversed. The most judicious historians pay no 
 regard to the Welsh or British traditions delivered by Geoffrey of Monnioath, 
 though it is not impoesible but that tome of these may be true.*' 
 
 One definition of a mythe given by Plntarch coincides exactly with a 
 ^fcctous Jiction : 'O fiv^o^ elvai (iov^erat Aoyof Y'«*'<^f iocKug dXrji&iv^ (Fla* 
 tarch, Bellone an pace clariores fneront Athenieases, p- 348). 
 
 " Der Grund-Trieb des My thus CCreuaer justly expresses itj das Q» 
 dachte in ein Getchehimes amzusetzen.*' (Symbolik der Altea Welt, 
 48. D. 99.^ 
 
 Sran HISTORICAL THEORY. 
 
 matter rf&ct »d plausible fiction _ between truth a„d that 
 «^h,ch ,8 hke truth -can neither be discerned nor sought for 
 let It ,8 precselyupon the supposition that this distinction is 
 present t^ men's habitual thoughts, that the semi-historical theory 
 ot the mythes is grounded. ' 
 
 It is perfectly true, as has often been stated, that the Grecian 
 epic contains what are called traditions respecting the past -the 
 larger port.on of it, indeed, «,nsists of nothing else. But whal 
 are these traditions? They are the matter of those son^ a.3 
 Stones which have acquired hold on the public mind; they are 
 the c-eations of the poets and storytelle.^ themselves, each of 
 whom hnds some preexisting, and adds others of his own new 
 ind previously untold, under the impulse and authority of the 
 mspinng Muse. Homer doubtless found many songs and stories 
 current with respect to the siege of Troy ; he received and trans- 
 muted some of these traditions, recast and transformed others, 
 and enlarged the whole mass by new creations of his own. To 
 the subsequent poets, such as Arktinus and Lesches, these Ho- 
 menc creations formed portions of preexisting tradition, with 
 wh^h they dealt m the same manner; so that the whole mass of 
 traditions constituting the tale of Troy became larger and large, 
 '•ith each successive contributor. To assume a generic ditftr- 
 5tce between the older and the newer strata of tradition - to 
 xeat the former bs morsels of history, and the latter as appen- 
 lages of fictio.. -is an hypothesis gratuitous at the least, not to 
 ^y inadmissible. For the further we travel back into the past, 
 
 „H Trj^° "■* "^^^^ ^""^ '^^ "^^ -l^y "f PO^iti^e history 
 uid the deeper do we plunge into the unsteady twilight and 
 gorg«.us clouds of fancy and feeling. It was one of the agree- 
 »ble dreams of the Grecian epic, that the man who travelled far 
 enough northward beyond the Rhipaean mountains, would in time 
 -each the dehcious country and genial climate of the virtuous 
 Hyperboreans- the votaries and favorites of Apollo, who dwelt 
 m the extreme north beyond the chilling blasts of Boreas. Now 
 ie hope that we may, by carrying our researches up the stream 
 rf time, exhaust the limite of fiction, and land ultimately upon 
 »me points of solid truth, appears to me no less illusory than 
 ius northward journey in quest of the Hyperborean elysium. 
 
 19 2800. 
 
 I 
 
434 
 
 fflfcTORY OF r.REECF.. 
 
 The g^miml di«p«o«ition to adopt the Remi-hifltonnal theory M 
 to the genesis of Grecian myihes, ariseft in part from reluctance 
 In critics to impute to the mythojKKic ages extreme credulity or 
 fraud; together wilh the usual presumption, that where much is 
 believed some jwrtion of it must be true. There would be some 
 weight in these grounds of reasoning, if the ages under discus- 
 sion had been supplied with records and accustomed to critical 
 inquiry. But amongst a people unprovi<lcd with the former and 
 strangers to the latter, credulity is naturally at its maximum, as 
 well in the narrator himself as in his hearers: the idea of delib- 
 erate fraud is moreover inapplicable,' for if the hearers are dis- 
 posed to accept what is related to them a^ a revelation from the 
 Muse, the (rstrti^ of c<mij)Ositioii is quite sufficient to impart a 
 similar j^ersuasion to the iH)et whose mind is penetrated with it. 
 The belief of that day can hardly be said to stan<l apart by itself 
 as an act of reason. It becomes confounded with vivacious im- 
 agination and earnest emotion ; and in every case where these 
 mental excitabilities an» powerfully acted upon, faith ensues un- 
 consciously and as a matter of courst\ llow active and |)r()tni- 
 ncnt such toniliMU'ics wen; among the early (ireeki*, the extraor- 
 dinary boauly aiul originality of their epio poetry may teaeh lis. 
 
 It is, besides, a presumption tar t<)i> largely an<l indiscriiniiiately 
 applied. e\ en in our own advanced age, that where much is Iw- 
 lieved, something must necessarily be true — that accredited 
 fiction is always traceable to some basis of historical truth.'' The 
 
 ' In reference to the loose statements of the Highlanders, Dr. .Iiihnsou oli- 
 •erves, " He that goes into the Highlands with a minil naturally acquics- 
 eeni, and a credulity eager for wonders, may perhaps come l)ack with an 
 opinion very different from mine ; for the inhabitants, knowing the ignoranc* 
 of all strangers in ihtii language and antiquities, are perhaps not very sent- 
 polons adherents to truth ; yet I do not say that they deliberately speak stud- 
 ied falsehood, or have a settled purpose to deceive. They have acquired and 
 con.sidered little, and do not always feel their own ignorance. They are not 
 much accustomed to be interrogated by others, and seem never to have thought 
 of interrogating themselves ; so that if tAey <fo not hiow what they tell to be true, 
 tha/ likrviM do not distinctly perceive it to be fahe. Mr. Boswell was very dili- 
 |ent in his inqnirit«, and the result of his invettigations was, that the answv 
 to the second question was commonly such as nullified the answer to the 
 (Journey lo the Western Islands, p. 272, 1st edit., 1775). 
 
 * I oonaidered this position more at large in an article in the " WestminiM 
 
 PT.ArSTBI,!? FTOTfON, HOW GENERATED ^gg 
 
 ■floenee of imagination and feeling ig „<,t confined .imply (» th* 
 prr.es., of retouching, transforming, or magnifying n.nativ^ 
 ongutaliy .oun,|ed on fact ; it will often ^t. r,L narratTver,^ 
 .Is -wn without any such preliminary basi,. Where there is any 
 general body of sentiment perv.uling men living i„ society, whe.he^ 
 t he religious or political -love, admiration, or antipathy- a, 
 .nc,der,ts tending ,„ illustrate that .,enti,^e^t are eLrly we" 
 c-.d, rapid yclr,-ulated and (a, a general nde) easHy accred- 
 .>'d. II real meidents are not at hand, impressive fictions will 
 be provided ,* sati.sfy the demand. The perfect harmony of such 
 fictions w„li the prevalent feeling stands in the place „f certi- 
 tying testimony, and causes men lo hear them not merely with 
 crclence, but even with delight: to call them in ooestion and 
 re,,u.re pr.,f, i., a task which cannot be undertaken without'^ 
 curring obloquy. Of ,„,.h tendencies in the human mind, abun- 
 dant evidence is furnished by the innumerable religious le.enda 
 which have acquired currency in various parts of the worid", and 
 of which no country was more fertile than f;rw.r.,._ i^^^nda 
 which derived their origin, not from special ft^-M misreportedand 
 exaggerated, hut frt.m pious feeling, pervading the society, and 
 ranslated into narrative by forward and imaginative mi^ds- 
 legends, ,n which not merely the incident*, but ofrcn even the 
 personages are unreal, yet in which the generating sentiment ia 
 conspicuously discernible, providing its own matter as well aa ita 
 own orm. Other sentiment, also, as well as the religious, pro- 
 vided they be fervent and widely diffused, will find expression in 
 current narrative, and becr^me portions of the general public b,^ 
 net — every celebrate<l and noforioas character is the s„„rce of 
 a thousand firtions exemplifying his peculiarities. And if it' be 
 true, as I thmk present observation may show us. that such crea- 
 tive agencies are even now visible and effective, when the mate- 
 rials of genuine history are copious and criticallv studio - much 
 more are we warranted in concluding that, in ages destitute of 
 records, stranger to hi.storical testimony, and fuU of belief in 
 divine inspiration both as to the fbture and as to the past, narra 
 ^^^ purel y fictiUous will acquire ready a nd oninquiringoedence, 
 
 Review for »Uy, ia43, on Kiebahr's Greek Leg^^wTth Vb*ch 
 much in the present chapter wUI be found to coincide. 
 
 i 
 
 
 f-' 
 
' ™ 
 
 186 
 
 mSTORV OF GREECE 
 
 provided only they be plausible and in harmony with tb* preooii- 
 ceptions of the auditors. 
 
 The allegorical interpretation of the raythes has been by ser^ 
 ral learned investigators, especially by Creuzer, connected with 
 the hypothesis of an ancient and highly instnicled body of priests, 
 having their origin either in Egypt or in the East, and communi- 
 cating to the rude and barbarous Greeks religious, physical, and 
 historical knowledge under the veil of symbols. At a time (we 
 are told) when language was yet in its infancy, visible symbols 
 were the most vivid means of acting upon the minds of ignorant 
 hearers : the next step was to pass to symbolical language and 
 expressions — for a plain and literal exposition, even if understood 
 at all, would at least have been listened to with indifference, as 
 not corresponding with any mental demand. In such allegoriz 
 ing wmy, then, the early priests set forth their doctrines respect- 
 iflg God, nature, and humanity — a refined monotheism and a 
 theological philosophy — and to this purpose the earliest my thes 
 were turned. But another class of mythes, more popular and 
 more captivating, grew up under the hands of the poets — mythes 
 purely epical, and descriptive of real or supposed past events. 
 The allegorical mythes, being taken up by the poets, insensibly 
 became confounded in the same category with the purely narra- 
 tive mythes — the matter symbolized was no longer thought of, 
 while the symbolizing words came to be construed in their own 
 literal meaning — and the basis of the early allegory, thus lost 
 among the general ]3ublic, was only preserved as a secret among 
 various rehgious fraternities, composed of members allied together 
 by initiation in certain mystical ceremonies, and administered by 
 hereditary families of presiding priests. In the Orphic and Bac- 
 chic sects, in the Eleusinian and Samothracian mysteries, was 
 thus treasured up the secret doctrine of the old theological and 
 philosophical mythes, which had once constituted the primitive 
 legendary stock of Greece, in the hands of the original priest- 
 hood and in ages anterior to Homer. Persons who had gone 
 through the preliminary ceremonies of initiation, were permitted 
 at length to hear, though under strict obligation of secrecy, thii 
 Ancient religious and cosmogonic doctrine, revealing the destina- 
 tioo of 4Qan and the certainty of posthumous rewards and puiisb* 
 
 THEORIES OF LEARNED ION. 
 
 487 
 
 menta — all disengaged from the corruptions of poets, as well ai 
 from the symbols and allegories under which they still remained 
 buried in the eyes of the vulgar. The mysteries of Greece were 
 thus traced up to the earliest ages, and represented as the only 
 faithful depository channels of that purer theology and physics 
 which had originally been communicated, though under the 
 unavoidable inconvenience of a symbolical expression, by an 
 enlightened priesthood coming from abroad to the then rude 
 bai'barians of the country. ^ 
 
 * For this general character of the Grecian mysteries, with their concealed 
 treasure of doctrine, see Warhurton, Divine Legation of Moses, book ii. sect. 4. 
 
 Payne Knight, On the Symbolical Language of ancient Art and Mytholo- 
 gy, sect. 6, 10, 11,40, etc. 
 
 Saint Croix, Recherches sur les Mysteres du Paganisme, sect. 3, p. 106* 
 sect 4, p. 404, etc. ' ' • i 
 
 Oreuzer, Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten Volker, sect. 2, 3, 23, 39, 
 42, etc. Meiners and Heeren adopt generally the same view, though there 
 are many divergences of opinion between these different authors, on a sub- 
 ject essentially obscure. Warburton maintained that the interior doctrine 
 communicated in the mysteries was the existence of one Supreme Divinity, 
 combined with the Euemeristic creed, that the pagan gods had been mere 
 men. 
 
 See Clemens Alex. Strom, v. p. 582, Sylb. 
 
 The view taken by Hermann of the ancient Greek mythology is in many 
 points similar to that of Creuzer, though with some considerable difference. 
 He thinks that it is an aggregate of doctrine — philosophical, theological, 
 physical, and moral — expressed under a scheme of systematic personifica- 
 tions, each person being called by a name significant of the function personi- 
 fied : this doctrine was imported from the East into Greece, where the poets, 
 retaining or translating the names, but forgetting their meaning and connec-' 
 tion, distorted the primitive stories, the sense of which came to be retained 
 only in the ancient mysteries. That true sense, however, (he thinks,) maybe 
 recovered by a careful analysis of the significant names : and his two disser- 
 tations (Dc Mythologia Graecorum AntiquissimA, in the Opuscula, vol. ii.) 
 exhibit a specimen of this systematic expansion of etymology into narrative. 
 The dissent from Creuzer is set forth in their published correspondence, 
 especially in his concluding « Brief an Creuzer iibcr das Wesen und die 
 Behandlung der Mythologie," Leipzig, 1819. The followng citation from 
 his Latin dissertation seta forth his general doctrine : — 
 
 Hermann, De Mythologil Grsecorum AntiquissimS, p. 4 (Opuscula, vol. 
 o. p. 171): " Videmus rerum divinarum humanarumque scientiam «x 
 Asia per Lyciam migrantem in Europam : videmus fabulosos poetas pcre- 
 grinam doctrinam, monstruoso tumore orientis sivc exutam, sive nondwa; 
 
 I 
 
 : 
 
 t ■ ^ 
 
 I 
 
 'I 
 
 f 
 
 Jb" 
 
t 
 
 Wi 
 
 HIBTOKT OF GREECE. 
 
 But this theory, though advocate'd by several learned men, has 
 been shown to b" unsupporltMl and erroneoud. It implies a mis- 
 Utkim view both of the antiquity and tho [)urport of the myste- 
 ries, whicli canruit be safely carried u[) even to the age of Ilesiod, 
 wad which, thou<rh imposing and venerable aa religious ceremo- 
 nies, incluiled no recondite or esoteric teaciiing.i 
 
 todutam, qimsi de inte^ro GriecA specie proercantes; videmus ixjOtas, illijs, 
 qaorum omnium vera noraina nominihus — ab arte, quA elarel>ant, petitis — 
 obliterata Hunt, diu in ThraeiA hajrentes, raroqiie tandem etiam rum aliis 
 Gnccise partibus commereio jiincton : qualis Pamphus, non ipse Atheniensis, 
 Athenien^'ibus hymnos Deonmi fecit Videmus denique retrusam paulatim 
 in mvsteriorum secretum illam sapientura doctrinam, vitiatam reli^Monam 
 |ieiturt)ationc, corniptam inscitii\ interpretum, obseuratam levitate amuiniom 
 §ectantiuni — mleo ut eam ne illi quidem intelligerent, qui haereditariam a 
 prioribuH {xn'^sin colentes, <juura injrenii pr^stantifi omnes prajstin;rucreiil, 
 tant'i illos obliviont raerserant, ut ipsi sint prirai auct<:)re8 oranis eruditionii 
 
 habiti ' 
 
 Hermann thinks, however, that by porsuing the supgestions of etymology, 
 vestij^'s may still Iw discovered, and something like a history compiled, of 
 Grecian belief aa it stood anterior to Homer and Hesiod: " Est autom io 
 hac omni ratione judicio maxime opus, quia non testibus res ajritur, sed ad 
 Inter|>retandi solertiam omnia revooanda sunt" (p. 172). To the same ^ne- 
 ral purpose the French work of M. Em^rie David, Kcchenhes sur le Dieq 
 Jupiter— reviewed by O. MiUler: see the Kleine Scliriften of itie latter, vol. 
 
 li. p. 82. 
 
 Mr. Bryant ha'* also employed a profusion of learning;, and nuineroM 
 etymological conjectures, to resolve the Greek niythcs into mistakes, perver- 
 fions, and mutilations, of the exploits and doctrines of oriental tribes long- 
 lost and by-gone — A monians, Cnthites, Arkites, etc. " It was Noah (hs 
 thinks) who was represented under the different names of Thoth, Herm^, 
 Menes Osiris, Zeuth, Atlas, Phoroneus, Prometheus, to which list a farther 
 nnmlKM- of great extent might be added: the Novf of Anaxjigoras was in 
 reality the patrian h Noah" (Ant. Mythol. vol. ii. pp. 253, 272). " The Cuth- 
 Hes or Amonians, descendants of Noah, settled in Greece from the east, 
 celebrated for their skill in building and the arts" (ib. i. p. 502; if. p. 187). 
 The greatest part of the Grecian theology arose from misconception and 
 Wanders, the storie? concerning their gods and heroes were founded on terms 
 misinterpreted or abused" (i6. i. p. 462). " The number oi different actioM 
 •scribed to the various Grecian gods or heroes all relate to one people or 
 fcmily. and are at bottom one and the same history" (ife. ii. p. 57). " Th« 
 fcbles of Prometheus and Tityus were Uiken from ancient Amonian temples, 
 from hieroglyphics misunderstood and badly explained" (i. p. 426) : MC 
 lipeeiallv vol. ii. p 160. 
 
 * The Anti-dymboUk ol' Vots, and stiU more the Aglaophaouu of I^tock, 
 
 TRIPLE THEOLOGY OF PA^AHW^. 43^ 
 
 Hie doctrine, supposed to have been originally symbolize 1 and 
 •u^sequently overclouded, in the Greek mythes, was in ro^litv 
 first intruded into them by the unconscious fancies of later inter 
 preters. It was one of the various roads which instructed meo 
 took to escape from the literal admission of the ancient mythes 
 aiid to arrive at some new tbrm of belief, more consonant with 
 their ideas of what the attributes and character of the gods ought 
 to be. It wa^ one of the ways of constituting, by help of the 
 mysteries, a philosophical religion apart from the general public, 
 Md of connecting that distinction with the earliest periods of 
 Grecian society. Such a distinction was both avowed and iusti- 
 fied among the superior men of the later pagan worid. Varm 
 and 8c«.vola distributed theology into three distinct departments. 
 J- the mythical or fabulous, the civil, and the physical. The 
 torst had its place in the theatre, and was left without any inter- 
 ference to the poets ; the second belonged to the city of m»litical 
 community a.s such, ^ it comprised the regulation of all the public 
 worship and religious rites, and was consigned altogether to the 
 direction of the magistrate; the third was the privilege of philc 
 Bophers, but was reserved altogether for private discussion in the 
 ■chools, apart from ^general public' As a member of the 
 
 •re full of instruction on the subje^t^Tthil supposed interior doctrine, and 
 00 the ancient mystenes in general: the latter treatise, especially, is no lea. 
 Astingmshed for its judicious and eircumspeet criticism than for its copioa. 
 
 Mr. Halhed (Preface to the O«ntoo Code of Laws, pp. xiii.-,iv.) ha. good 
 observations on the vanity of all attempts to allegorize the Hinda mythT 
 gy: he observes, with perfect truth, " The vulgar and illiterate have alwar. 
 understood the mythology of their country in it, literal sense; and th«, 
 was a time to everrnation, when the highest rank in it was equally vulgar 
 •nd illiterate with the lowest a uit^a^ ^ „ . . . 
 
 «;«.oi« ** u . I ^ ^ **'°^° esteems the astonishimr 
 
 mimcles attributed to a Brima, or a Kishen, as facts of the most indubitaWi 
 •nthenticity, and the relation of them as most strictly historical " 
 
 Compare also Gibbon's remarks on the allegorizing tendencies of the later 
 PUtonists (Hist. Decl. and Fall, vol. iv. p 71 ). 
 
 ' Varro, ap. Augustin. De Civ. Dei, iv. 27; vi. 5-6. " Dicis fabulosof 
 Oeos aecommodatos esse ad theatmra, naturales ad mundum, civiles ad 
 urbem. Varro, de religionibus loquens, multa esse vera dixit, qu« non 
 modo vulgo scire non sit utile, sed etiam tametsi falsa sint, aliter existimare 
 populum expediat: et ideo Gr»cos teletas et raysteria tacitumitate narieti 
 iHwque cUusisse ^ (ibid iy'K^^ See Villoisoo, De TripUci Theologii Com 
 
 if 
 
 /: 
 
-|Q mSTOKY OF GKEKCR 
 
 rftv th« Dhilcsopher sympathized with the audience in the tbM- 
 i?' *d S^k rdevoul sLe i« the established ceremomes, Bor 
 ,? W5«pd in trvine what he heard in the one or saw m 
 r otLr tl IwTlScal standard. Bnt >" the pnv^ ^ 
 the "t^^yy ^ „r inquisitive men, he enjoyed the fiiUeal 
 
 f.!^fjrri every Reived tenet, and of broaching hi. 
 bberty of ^^""""^^'J^^^!^ respecting the existence and natuw 
 rrnl'^r B7.rer£:rrn: thl activity of the vhilosop^. 
 i Linfw;.. maintained and trnth elicited ; but it was such ruth 
 ^. he body of the people ought not to hear, lest their faith a 
 I r o.^eslli>hed^eligious worship should be overth^wju 
 ineir u^n ^ thpolotrv from the fabulous, VariO 
 
 In thus distinguishing the «-"! "'^'"^^ ^ blame of the objeo 
 
 sumptions, and without any venfymg tej "^ «Mdem* 
 
 which constituted the charm of their I'te"^"'^'^.^" ^.ed ; bat 
 etance of the po,.ular religion, wej=ani«tbeaUUUurpnsea^ 
 
 „cn,a.io.p 8.. an.. Lae.an.ius, »^OH*.;•^rror. ^;^ The^-^« - 
 I S«>ic Chrysippas,ap. ^^tS "^X.^" "=^^^^'*'''" ^^ 
 
 •n» triple diTOian of Varro is "P*^"*** '",„'? . ' , . ^ j- oiv ««(< 
 
 OPINION OF PLATQ 
 
 441 
 
 It is gratifying to fiiid Plato discussing the subject in a mora 
 philosophical spirit The Platonic Socrates, being asked whether 
 he believed the current Attic fable respecting the abduction of 
 Oreithyia (daughter of Erechtheus) by Boreas, replies, in sub- 
 stance, — " It would not be strange if I disbelieved it, as the 
 clever men do ; I might then show my cleverness by saying that 
 a gust of Boreas blew her down from the rocks above while she 
 was at play, and that, having been killed in this manner, phe was 
 reported to have been carried off by Boreas. Such speculations 
 are amusing enough, but they belong to men ingenious and busy- 
 minded overmuch, and not greatly to be envied, if it be only for 
 this reason, that, after having set right onefaUe, they are under the 
 necessity of allying the same process to a host of others — Hippo- 
 centaurs, Chimseras, Gorgons, Pegasus, and numberless other 
 monsters and incredibilities. A man, who, disbelieving these 
 stories, shall try to find a probable basis for each of them, will 
 display an ill-placed acuteness and take upon himself an endless 
 burden, for which I at least have no leisure : accordingly, I 
 forego such researches, and believe in the current version of tht 
 •tories."! 
 
 These remarks of Plato are valuable, not simply because they 
 point out the uselessness of digging for a supposed basis of truth 
 in the mythes, but because they at the same time suggest the 
 true reason for mistrusting all such tentatives. The mythes form 
 
 » Plato, Phaedr. c. 7. p. 229 : — 
 
 Phjedrcs. EZttc ^loi, Ci luKfHiTec., ai) tovto rb (iv&oXoyrnta 7rei-&ei aXij^h 
 dvat ; 
 
 Socrates. 'AAA' el cfKiaroiriv^ cjtnrep ol ao<l>ol, oIk liv aroTrof eltfv, elra 
 Oo<piC6/i£voc <l>alfjv avT)}v irvevfxa Bopeov Karii tCjv nXifaiov irerp<jv <n)v ^op- 
 uoKeig KalCovaav Ctaac, koI ovtu 6^ reXevT^oaaav ?.€x^vai iirb rov Bopiov 
 
 ivapnaarbv yeyovevat ^EycH de, <j ^aldpCf aXXuc fJ^v tcl roiavra 
 
 Xapievra ^yovfxai, "kiav 61 Seivov koI hriirovov Kal oh iruw eirvxov^ dvdpdCt 
 Kar^ aXAo fL,iv ovSev, 6ti d' ai/rtfi avayKij fierd. tovto rd tuv 'IiriroKevTavpon 
 cldof knavop-diva^ai^ Kal aviJtf rd r^f Xcfiaipa^. Kal hril!>/!>ei 6i 5;^fXof Toioih 
 rjfv Vopybvutv Kal Uriyaauv^ koI ak?Mtv afiijxavuv ttX^ij re Kal aToiriai TepOf 
 foXoyuv TtvCnf <l>va€uv • alg el tiq airioTuv npocfiifi^i kotcL rd eUdc iKoaroPf 
 ire dypoiKifi tivl ao<pig. xp^H-^^* tto/IA^c ai)T(f> axoy^-vi Se^aei, *'EfMt 6k irpdg 
 
 ravTa ov6afiu>c lart axo^ '(y&ev 6^ ;);a£pe£v kaaoQ rofHui^ 
 
 wti^ofievoc 6i T(j) vouiCoftev(f} irepl airrCtVf b riv6^ iXtyov^ OKonv «^ ro^a dXk 
 trbvt etc. 
 
 190 
 
 ^! 
 
 i| 
 
 i 
 
 I '' 
 
-^ mSTOKT OF GREECE 
 
 a cla.s= a,,a.1, abundant as well as peculiar: to remove any in*. 
 
 by simple conjecture, and without any collateral evidence, ts of no 
 advantLe, unless vou can perform a similar process on the re- 
 »ainder! If the process be trustworthy, it ought .o be appl.ed^o 
 all ■ a,.d e rou.:rs., if it be not applicable to all, .t is not trust- 
 '„;,by as applied to any one specially; always assunnng no 
 r,"cial evide,!cc to be accessible. To detach any >nd.v.du^ 
 „vthc from the class to which it belonps .s to presen it - an 
 erVoncous point of view ; we have no choice except to ud.n. them 
 a. ,hey stand, by putting out^elves approxtmat.vely n.o tl^ 
 frame of mind of .hose for whon. they were destmed and to whom 
 thev appeared wcrthy of credit. 
 
 If Plato thu.. discountenances all attempts to transform the 
 nivthes by interpretation into history or philosophy, indirect^ 
 recognizing the generic difference between them ^ we hnd sub. 
 .tantiuUy the same view pervading the elal)orate precepts in las 
 tmmse on the Uepublic. He there regards the mythes, no aa 
 embo<lvin.^ either matter-of-fact or philosophical pnnciple, but as 
 portions of religious and patriotic faith, and instruments of etlucd 
 ITition. Instead of allowing the poets to frame them accordmg 
 »o the impulses of their own genius, and with a view to imme 
 iiate popularity, he directs the legislator to provide types of his 
 own for the characters of the gods and heroes, and to -PP;--- ^^ 
 luch divine and heroic legends as are not in harmony with these 
 preestablished canons. In the Platonic system, the mythes are 
 not to be matter, of history, nor yet of spontaneous or casual ho- 
 tion, but of prescribed faith : he supposes that the l-ople -U 
 believe, as a thing of course, what the poets circulate and he 
 tb rdbr^ that the latter shall circulate nothing which dc^ 
 
 not tend to ennoble and improve the feelings. He conceives the 
 mythes as stories composed to illustrate the general sentiments 
 Tf the poets and the community, respecting the character and 
 attribute, of the gods and heroes, or respecting the social relations, 
 1 etcal dutie:; as well as motives of mankind: ^ence the obh- 
 gation upon the legislator to prescribe ^-^-''"^^'^^'^l^^l^ 
 Lracter which shall be illustrated, and to restrain the poets from 
 Mowing out any opposing fancies. « Let us neither beheje our 
 selves (he exclaims), nor permit any one to cnx^ukte, that Th^ 
 
 OPINION OF PLATU 
 
 448 
 
 seas son of Poseiddn and Peirithous son of Zeus, or any other 
 hero or sou of a god, could ever have brought themselves to 
 commit abductions or other enormities such as are now falsely 
 ascribed to them. We must compel the poets to say, either that 
 such persons were not the sons of gods, or that they were not the 
 perpetrators of such misdeeds."' 
 
 Most of the mythes which the youth hear and repeat (accord 
 ing to Plato) are false, but some of them ai-e true: the great and 
 prominent mythes which appear in Homer and Hesiod are no less 
 fictions than the rest. But fiction constitutes one of the indis- 
 pensable instruments of mental training as well as truth ; only 
 the legislator must take care that the fiction so employed shall be 
 beneficent and not mischievous.^ As the mischievous fictions 
 Che says) take their rise from wrong [)reconceptions respecting 
 me character of the*gods and heroes, so the way to correct them 
 is to entbrce, by authorized compositions, the adoption of a mow 
 wrrect standard.** 
 
 ' Plato. Rcpub. ill. 5. p. 391. The perfect ignorance of all men respecting 
 ihe god.s, rendered the task of fiction easy (Plato, Kritias, p. 107). 
 
 • Plato, Repub. ii. 16. p. 377. Adyuv de dirrdv eidog, rd fxev d?i,T^^€C^ V^^" 
 ioC 6' erepov ; Nai UaiSevnov d' h afK^toTepoL^, irporepov d' iv tocc i)Ev6e- 
 
 ftv Ov fiav^iiveiQ, 5ri irpurov roig Tratdioic fiv^ovg Xeyo/nev ♦ tovto 6i 
 
 trov wf rd 5Xov eiizEiv r/zf vdof , ivL de Koi uXri^fj HpuTov j^fuv kniO' 
 
 'saTi]TEov Toig fiv&OTVoLolg, KOL bv fiev av Ka?^dv fiv^ov noiijauaiv, tyKpiriov^ 
 
 hv <J' av fi^, uTTOKpiTiov 6v de vvv Tiiyovai, rove TroXAoOf tKfiTiriTtov 
 
 ovg 'H(TiO(5of Kal 'OfjTjpog f/fxlv kleyeTtjv^ nal ol ulloi noiTjrai Ovtoi 
 
 yap irov fiv^ov; rolg uv&pcjTToig tf)ev6elc (JVVTi&tvTeg ^Tieyov re kcU Xeyovai. 
 Woiovg d^, T) 6" Of, Kal ri avruv /iefx<i>6fievog ^yeig ; 'Onep, tjv d' tyd^ XP^ i^oi 
 vpCtTov Kal fiuXiara fiefKpea^aiy aATnag re Kal kliv Tig fjir/ «oXwf ^EvdrjTOL. Tt 
 TOVTO ; 'Orav Tig EUaQ^ KOKcJg r^ 7i6y<f) izepl -^euv te koI i/puuVy olot eIolv, 
 uoTTep ypa<f>£vg fir/Sev eoiKora ypa<f>uv oig av bfioia (iovTirjToi ypaipai. 
 
 The same train of thought, and the precepts founded upon it, are followed 
 up through chaps. 17, 18, and 19 ; compare De Tiegg.xii. p. 941. 
 
 Instead of recognizing the popular or dramatic theology as something 
 distinct from the civil (as Varro did), Plato suppresses the former as a sep- 
 arate department and merges it in the latter. 
 
 ^ Plato, Repnb. ii. c. 21. p. 382. Td h Tolg loyoig fffevSog irore kclI tl xph* 
 aifiov^ Cxrre firj u^iov Eivai fiiaovg ; 'Ap* ov npog te Torbg iroXE/iiovg koi rum 
 K2?MVfUpav i^L^uiVy oTav diu fiaviav fj Tiva uvoiav kukov rt i-rriXEipuai irpaT* 
 reiv, T&re airorpon^g ^veko ug ^p/naxov xPV'^^f^v yiyvercu; Kal iv slf 
 vvv 6^ iXiyofiev Talg fiv&o?oyiaig, did, rd fi^ eldevai *»f 
 Tu7i.r}-&ig ^;fet Trepl tuv waXatuv, a<pojno lovv Tg^ r^ il^ 
 & f' ' t ^ € V dog, 6ri udXitTTo^ oUtu xpijaiuov irofjovuep . 
 
 i 
 
 /! 
 
 i^ 
 
144 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 The comments which Plato has delivered with so much forei 
 III his Republic, and the enactments which he deduces from them. 
 are inthe main an expansion of that sentiment of condemnation, 
 which he shared with so many other philosophers, towards a large 
 portion of the Homeric and Hesiodic stories.^ But the manner 
 fo which he has set forth this opinion, unfolds to us more clearly the 
 real character of the mythical narratives. They are creations of 
 the productive minds in the community, deduced from the sup- 
 posed attributes of the gods and heroes : so Plato views them, 
 and in such character he proposes to amend them. The legisla- 
 tor would cause to be prepared a better and truer picture ot the 
 foretime, because he would start from truer (that is to say, more 
 creditable) conc(;ptions of the gods and heroes. I or Plato re- 
 jects the mythes respecting Zeus and Here, or Theseus and 
 Peirithous, not from any want of evidenccTbut because they are 
 unworthy of gods and heroes : he proposes to call torth new 
 mythes, which, though he admits them at the outset to be hction, 
 he knows will soon be received as true, and supply more valua- 
 ble lessons of conduct. ^ , .. 
 
 We may consider, then, that Plato disapproves of the attempt 
 to identify the old mythes either with exaggerated history or 
 with disguised philosophy. He shares in the current f^^^th with- 
 out any suspicion or criticism, as to Orpheus, Palamedes, Daeda- 
 lus Amphion, Theseus, Achilles, Cheiron, and other mythical 
 personages ;^ but what chiefly tills his mind is, the inherited sen- 
 timent of deep reverence for these superhuman characters and 
 for the age to which they belonged, - a sentiment sufficiently 
 Btronc to render him not only an unbeliever in such legends as 
 conflict with it, but also a deliberate creator of new legends for 
 the purpose of expanding and gratifying it. The more we ex- 
 amine this sentiment, both in the mind of Plato as well as m 
 
 " I The cen^'hich Xenophanes pronounced upon Ae Homeric legendt 
 hasllready been noticed : Herakleitus (Diogen. La.rt ix. 1) and Metroda. 
 ^;I::coLpanio. and follower of Epicurus, were not less profu e m thd^ 
 favectives kv ypatifiam tocovtol^ ru rrocvrv ^eXo^dopvrac (Plutarch, Noo 
 '^Z^ierZ.isecu.anrn Epicurum, p. 1086). He even adv.ed person. 
 ^IZ ashamed to confess their utter ignorance of Homer, *^ jhc ex^n^ 
 rfuot knowing whether Hector was a Greek or a Trojan (Plut. »^. p. 1094) 
 • PUto. Republic hi. 4-5. p. 391 j De L^gg. in. L P- 677. 
 
 GRECIAN CHRONOLOOY FOUNDED ON MTTHJKa 
 
 4m 
 
 Uiatof the Greeks generally, the more shal! we be eon\moed 
 that it formed essentially and inseparably a portion of Hellenic 
 religious faith. The mythe both presupposes, and springs out oft 
 a settled basis, and a strong expansive tbrce of religious, social,' 
 and patriotic feeUng, operating upon a past which is little better 
 than a blank as to positive knowledge. It resembles history, in 
 60 far as its form is narrative ; it resembles philosophy, in soVar 
 as it is occasionally illustrative ; but in its essence and substance, 
 in the mental tendencies by which it is created as well as in those 
 by which it is judged and upheld, it is a popularized expression 
 of the divine and heroic faith of the people. 
 
 Grecian antiquity cannot be at all undei-stood except in con- 
 nection with Grecian religion. It begins with gods and it ends 
 with historical men, the former being recognized not simply as 
 gods, but as primitive ancestors, and connected with the latter by 
 a long mythiciil genealogy, partly heroic and partly human. Now 
 the whole value of such genealogies arises from their being taken 
 entire ; the god or hero at the top is in point of fact the most im- 
 portant member of the whole ;i for the length and continuity of 
 the series arises from anxiety on the part of historical men to join 
 themselves by a thread of descent with the being whom they 
 worshipped in their gentile sacrifices. Without the ancestorial 
 god, the whole pedigree would have become not only acephalous, 
 but worthless and uninteresting. The pride of the Herakleids, 
 Asklepiads, ^akids, Neleids, Daedalids, etc. was attached to the 
 primitive eponymous hero and to the god from whom they sprung 
 not to the line of names, generally long and barren, through which 
 the divine or heroic dignity gradually dwindled down into com- 
 mon manhood. Indeed, the length of the genealogy (as I have 
 before remarked) was an evidence of the humility of the his- 
 torical man, which led him to place himself at a respectful dis- 
 tance from the gods or heroes ; for Hekataeus of Miletus, who 
 nmked himself as the fifteenth descendant of a god, might per- 
 
 * For a description of similar tendencies in the Asiatic religions, 
 
 Mbrersi Die Phonizier, ch. v. p. 153 (Bonn, 1841): he points out the saiiM 
 phaenomena as in the Greek, — coalescence between the ideas of ancestry 
 •nd worship, — confusion between pods and men in the past, ^ iBcreasii^ 
 tendency to Enemerize (pp. 156-157). 
 
 'i !' 
 
 /: 
 
 , 
 I 
 i 
 
446 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECTR 
 
 ha})s have accounUtd it an overweening impiety in any living maa 
 to claim a god for his immediate father. 
 
 The whole chronology of Greece, anterior to 776 b. c, consists 
 of calculations founded upon these mythical genealogies, espe- 
 dally upon that of the Spartan kings and their descent from 
 Herakles, — thirty years being commonly taken as the equiva- 
 leot of a generation, or about three generations to a century. 
 This process of computation was altogether illusory, as applying 
 Iiistorical and chronological conditions to a case on which they 
 had no bearing. Though the domain of history was seemingly 
 enlarged, the religious element was tacitly set aside : when the 
 heroes and gods were chronologized, they became insensibly ap- 
 proximated to the limits of humanity, and the process indirectly 
 gave encouragement to the theory of Euemerus. Personages 
 originally legendary and poetical were erected into definite land- 
 marks for measuring the duration of the foretime, thus gaining in 
 respect to historical distinctness, but not without loss on the score 
 of religious association. Both Euemerus and the subsequent 
 Christian writers, who denied the original and inherent divinity 
 of the pagan god?, had a great advantage in carrying their chro- 
 nological researches strictly and consistently upwards — for all 
 chronology fails as soon as we suppose a race superior to common 
 
 humanity. 
 
 Moreover, it is to be remarked that the pedigree of the Spartan 
 kings, which Apolloddrus and Eratosthenes selected as the basii 
 of their estimate of time, is nowise superior in credibility and 
 trustworthiness to the thousand other gentile and family pedigrees 
 with which Greece abounded ; it is rather indeed to be numbered 
 among the most incredible of all, seeing that Herakles as a pro- 
 genitor is placed at the head of perhaps more pedigrees than any 
 other Grecian god or hero.' The descent of the Spartan king 
 Leonidas from Herakles rests upon no better evidence than that 
 of Aristotle or Hippocrates from Asklepius,2 __ of Evagoras or 
 
 » According tc that which Aristotle seems to recognize (Histor. Animal. 
 fii. 6), Herakles was father of seventy-two sons, but of only one daughter- 
 he was essentially afif>ev6yovoc, illustrating one of the physical peculiaritiea 
 noticed by AristoUe. Euripides, 1^ owever, menUons daughters of Herakles ir 
 tbe plural number (Earipid. Herakleid. 45). 
 
 « Hippocrates was twentieth in descent from Herakles. and ninetetntt 
 
 MYTHICAL GENEALOGIES. 
 
 447 
 
 1 
 
 Thucydides from j^akus,— of Socrates from Dsedalus, — of the 
 Spartan heraldic family from Talthybius, — of the prophetic 
 lamid family in Elis from lamus, — of the root-gatherers io 
 Pelion from Cheiron, — and of Hekataeus and his gens from 
 Bome god in the sixteenth ascending line of the series. Tliero 
 is little exaggeration in saying, indeed, that no permanent com- 
 bination of men in Greece, religious, social, or professional, was 
 without a similar pedigree ; all arising out of the same exigences 
 of the feelings and imagination, to personify as well as to sanctify 
 the bond of union among the members. Every one of these 
 gerttes began with a religious and ended with an historical person. 
 At some point or other in the u^ ward series, entities of history 
 were exchanged for entities of religion ; but where that point is 
 to be tbund we are unable to say, nor liad the wisest of the an- 
 cient Greeks any means of determining. Thus much, however, 
 we know, that the series taken as a whole, though dear and pre- 
 cious to the believing Greek, possesses no value as chronological 
 evidence to the historian. 
 
 When Hekataeus visited Thebes in Egypt, he mentioned to the 
 Egyptian priests, doubtless with a feeling of satisfaction and 
 
 pride, the imposing pedigree of the gens to which he belonged, 
 
 with fifteen ancestors in ascending line, and a god as the initial 
 progenitor. But he found himself immeasurably overdone by the 
 priests ^* who genealogized against him."" They showed to him 
 three hundred and forty-one wooden colossal statues, representing 
 the succession of chief priests in the temple in uninterrupted 
 series from father to son, through a space of 1 1,300 years. Prior 
 to the commencement of this long period (they said), the gods 
 dwelling along with men, had exercised sway in Egypt ; but they 
 
 from Asklepius (Vita Hippocr. by Soranus, ap. Westermann, Scriptor. 
 Bios,'raphic. viii 1) ; about Aristotle, see Diogen. Ladrt. v. 1. Xenophon, the 
 physician of the emperor Claudius, was also an Asklepiad (Tacit. Ann xii 
 61J. 
 
 In Rhodes, the neighboring island to Kos, was the gens 'AXiaSat, or sons 
 of Helios, specially distinguished from the 'AMaaral of mere associated 
 worshippers of Helios, rd xoivdv tuv 'AXiaSCw koI tuv 'Almarwv (Bee t\m 
 Inscription in Boeckh's Collection, No. 2525, with Boeckh^s comment). 
 
 * Herodot. u. 144. 'EKarait^ 6k yeverj'AayriiTavTi iuijrdv, kgI uvadrfaavn 
 k iiuuudiKarov i>edv, avreyeverf^yrfffav eirt r^ &pi^fir/(jet, ob dcKOfievoi nap 
 •*Tov, and ^eov yeva^ai av^pctnov dvreyeveffXoyriaap 6i 6de, etc. 
 
if 
 
 «48 
 
 mSTORY OF GKFECE. 
 
 repudiated altogetr»«r the idea of men begottei- by god?, or ol 
 
 lieroesJ 
 
 But these counter firenealogie^, are, in respect to trust worthiness 
 and evidence, on tiit: same footing. Each represents partly the 
 religious faith, partly the retrospective imagination, of the persons 
 from whom it emanated ; in each, the lower members of the series 
 (to what extent vfn cannot tell) are r3al, the upper members fabu- 
 lous ; but in each also the series derived all its interest and all 
 its imposing *;ifect from being conceived unbroken and entire. 
 Herodotus is much perplexed by the capital discrepancy between 
 the Grecian and Egyptian chronologies, and vainly employs his 
 ingf'nuity in reconciling them. There is no standard of objective 
 evidence by which either the one or the other of them can be 
 tried : each has its own subjective value, in conjunction with the 
 faith and feelings of Egyptians and Greeks, and each presup- 
 poses in the believer certain mental prepossessions which are not 
 to be found beyond its own local limits. Nor is the greater or 
 less extent of duration at all important, when we once pass the 
 limits of evidence and verifiable reality. One century of recorded 
 time, adequately studded with authentic and orderly events, pre- 
 sents a greater mass and a greater difficulty of transition to the 
 imagination than a hundred centuries of barren genealogy. Her- 
 odotus, in discussing the age of Homer and Hesiod, treats an an- 
 terior point of 400 years as if it were only yesterday ; the reign 
 of Henry VI. is separated from us by an equal interval, and the 
 reader will not require to be reminded how long that interval 
 
 now appears. 
 
 The mythical age was peopled with a mingled aggregate of 
 gods, heroes, and men, so confounded together that it was often 
 impossible to distinguish to which class any individual name 
 belonged. In regard to the Thracian god Zalmoxis, the Helles- 
 pontic Greeks interpreted his character and attributes according 
 to the scheme of Euemerism. They affirmed that he had been 
 a man, the slave of the philosopher Pythagoras at Samos, and 
 that he had by abilities and artifice established a religious ascen- 
 dRBcy over the minds of the Thracians, and obtained from them 
 
 » Herod, ii. 143-145. Kai ravra Alyviruoi uTp€ite(j{ ^aalv iirio iuai^ait ait: 
 Ti 'Aoyi^o/ievoi Koi akl anoypa^oueviH ra trf. 
 
 CONFUSION BETWEEN OODS AND ME». 
 
 41! 
 
 firine honors. Herodotus cannot bring himself to believe this 
 story, but he frankly avows his inability to determine lehether 
 Zalmoxis was a god or a man,» nor can he extricate himself from 
 a similar embarrassment in respect to Dionysus and Pan. Amidst 
 the confusion of the Homeric fight, the goddess Athene confers 
 upon Diomed^s the miraculous favor of dispelling the mist from 
 his eyes, so as to enable him to discriminate gods from men ; and 
 nothing less than a similar miracle could enable a critical reader 
 of the mythical narratives to draw an ascertained boundary-line 
 between the two 2 But the original hearers of the mythes felt 
 neither surprise nor displeasure from this confusion of the divine 
 with the human individual. They looked at the past with a film 
 
 * Herod, iv. 94-96. After having related the Eaemeristic version given 
 by the Hellc^pontic Greeks, he concludes with his ckaracteristic frankne« 
 and simplicity — 'E/w rJe, irepl fiev tovtov koI tov Karayaiov oUtj/^qtoc, ovre 
 &m(TTiu, oire uv m<rrevu ri Xitjv. doKeu 6e iroTiXolat ireai irporepov rdv ZaA- 
 uo^tv TOVTOV yevia^ai nv&ayopeu. EZre 61 kyivtTo nf ZaXfio^iq uv^puwoc, 
 eir' /<tW Saifiov riq TeTijm ovto^ kmxcjpioc, xa^P^ru. So Plutarch (Numa 
 e. 19) will not undertake to determine whether Janus was a god or a king 
 elre dai/icjv, eWe (iaaiXei)^ yevofievoc, etc. 
 
 Herakleitus the philosopher said that men were ^eol ^vt/toI^ and the godi 
 were av^puKOL u^dvaToi (Lucian, Vitar. Anctio. c. 13. vol. i. p. 303, Tauch. 
 compare the same author, Dialog. Mortuor. iii. vol t p. 182, ed. Taachn) 
 
 * Iliad, V. 127: — 
 
 'Kx^vv 3* av Toi utt* otp^aXfiCtv §h)Vj r) irplv kir^ev, 
 
 '0<Pp' €v yiyvCtaKTfg T)fuv ^ebv, ijde koI avdpa. 
 Of this undistinguishable confusion between gods and men, striking illiu. 
 Irations are to be found both in the third book of Cicero de Natur^ Deorum 
 (16-21), and in the long disquisition of Straf>o (x pp. 467-474) respecting 
 the Kabeiri, the Korybantes, the Dactyls of Ida : the more so, as he cites the 
 Statements of Pherekydes, Akusilaos, Demetrius of Skepsis, and others. 
 Under the Roman empire, the lands in Greece belonging to the immortal 
 gods were exempted from tribute. The Roman tax-collectors refused to 
 recognize as immortal gods any persons who had once been men ; but thii 
 mle oould not be clearly applied (Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 20). See the re- 
 marks of Pausanias (ii. 26, 1) about Asklepius : Galen, too, is doubtftil about 
 Askldpms and Dionysus — 'A<T/cA»77rf6f yi tol koi Atowooc, elT' dv^puiTM 
 ^poTepov fi<jTr,v, ilte kqI dpxrr^ev ^eoi (Galen in Protreptic. 9. torn. i. p. 22, 
 ed. Kohn). Xenophon (De Venat c. i) considers Cheiron as the brother oC 
 Zens. 
 
 The ridicule of Lucian (Decrum Concilium, t. iii. p 527-538, Hemi.| 
 wings out stai more forcibly the confiuion here indicated. 
 
 wm.. I. 
 
 i 
 
 ' J 
 
 r 
 
ISO 
 
 mSTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 •f faith oyer tlieir eyes — neither knowing the value, nor desiring 
 the attainment, of an unclouded vision. The intimate oompanion- 
 ihip, and the occasional mistake of identity between gods and 
 men, were in full harmony with their reverential restrospeci. 
 And we, accordingly, see the poet Ovid in his Fasti, when he un- 
 dertiikes the task of unfolding the legendary antiquities of early 
 Rome, reaccpiiring, by the inspiration of Juno, the power of 
 seeing gods and men in immediate vicinity and conjunct action, 
 iuch Is it existed before the development of the critical and hia- 
 
 toriral vsense.' 
 
 To resume, in brief, what has been laid down in this and tb^ 
 preceding chapters respecting the Grecian mythes : — 
 
 1 . They are a special product of the imagination and feelings, 
 radically distinct botli from history and philosophy : they cannot 
 be broken down and decomposed into the one, nor allegorized into 
 the other. There are indeed some particular and even assignable 
 mylhes, whicli raise intrinsic presumption of an allegorizing ten- 
 dency ; and there are doubtless some others, though not specially 
 assignable, which contain portions of matter of fact, or names of 
 rearpersons, embodied in them. But such matter of fact cannot 
 be verified by any intrinsic mark, nor we are entitled to presume 
 its existence in any given case unless some collateral evidence 
 
 can be produced. 
 
 2. We are not warranted in applying to the mythical world 
 the rules either of historical credibility or chronological sequence. 
 Its personages are gods, heroes, and men, in constant juxtapositioo 
 and reciprocal sympathy ; men, too, of whom we know a large 
 proportion to be fictitious, and of whom we can never a^certaitt 
 liow many may have been real. No series of such peisonagei 
 
 serve as materials for chronological calcuUtion. 
 
 » Ovifi, Fasti, vi. 6-20 : — 
 
 "Fas mihi prascipne vultus vidisse Deonmi, 
 
 Vel quia sum vates. vel quia sacra cano . . . . 
 
 . . . Ecce Deas vidi 
 
 Ht>rrueram, tacitoque animum pallore fatebar : 
 
 Com Dea, qaos fecit, sustalit ipsa metus. 
 Kainqne ait — O vates, Romani conditor amd^ 
 
 Aase per exiffuos magna referre modoe; 
 Jm tibi fecisti nuraen coeleste videndi, 
 Cam placnit nmneria condere festa tak." 
 
 •ENERAL RECAPITULATIOlf. 
 
 451 
 
 8. l^e mythes were originally produced in an age which had 
 W0 records, no philosophy, no criticism, no canon of beUef, and 
 scarcely any tincture either of astronomy or geography — but 
 which, on the other hand, was full of religious faith, distinguished 
 for quick and susceptible imagination, seeing personal agents 
 where we look only for objects and connecting laws ; — an age, 
 moreover, eager for new narrative, accepting with the unconscious 
 impressibility of children (the question of truth or falsehood being 
 never formally raised) all which ran in harmony with its pre- 
 existing feelings, and penetrable by inspired prophets and poets 
 in the same proportion that it was indifferent to positive evidence. 
 To such hearers did the primitive poet or story-teller address 
 himself: it was the glory of his productive genius to provide 
 suitable narrative expression for the faith and emotions which he 
 ahared in common with them, and the rich stock of Grecian 
 mythes attests how admirably he performed his task. As the 
 gods and the heroes formed the conspicuous object of national 
 reverence, so the mythes were partly divine, partly heroic, partly 
 both in one.» The adventures of Achilles, Helen, and Diomedes, 
 of CEdipus and Adrastus, of Meleager and Athaea, of Jason and 
 the Argo, were recounted by the same tongues, and accepted with 
 the same unsuspecting confidence, as those of Apollo and Artemis, 
 of Ares and Aphrodite, of Poseidon and Herakles. 
 
 4. The time however came, when this plausibility ceased to be 
 complete. The Grecian mind made an important advance, social- 
 ly, ethically, and intellectually. Philosophy and history were 
 constituted, prose writing and chronological records became famil- 
 iar ; a canon of belief more or less critical came to be tacitly 
 recognized. Moreover, superior men profited more largely by 
 the stimulus, and contracted habits of judging different from the 
 
 > The fourth Eclogue of Virgil, under the form of a prophecy, gives a 
 fcithful picture of the heroic and divine past, to which the legends of Trtf 
 ■ad I he Argonauts belonged : — 
 
 •- Die Deftm vitam accipiet, Divisque videbit 
 
 Permixtoe heroas,*' etc 
 " Alter erit turn Tiphys et altera quae vehat Argo 
 Delectofi heroas : erunt etiam altera bella, 
 Atqne itemm ad Trojam magnos mittetnr Adiillaaf 
 
 f 
 
 I 
 
 f 
 
462 
 
 HISTORY OF OHEECE. 
 
 ▼ulgar : the god Elenchus' (to use a personification of Menander) 
 the giver and prover ot truth, descended iiAo their minds. Iiit« 
 the new intell.M-tual medium, thus altered in its elements, and no 
 longer uniform in its finality, tlie mytlies descended by inheritr 
 ance ; but i\wy were found, to a certain extent, out of harmony 
 even with the feelings of the people, and altogether dissonant 
 witli thos«« of instructed men. But the most superior Greek waa 
 •till a (;reek, and cherished the common reverential sentiment 
 towards the fon^time of his country. Though he could neither 
 believe nor respect the mythes as they stood, he was under an 
 im|)erious mental necessity to transform them into a state worthy 
 of his belief and respect. Whilst the literal mythe still contiimed 
 to float anion- the i>oets and the people, critical men interpreted, 
 altered, decomposed, and added, until they fountl something which 
 satisfied their minds as a supposed real basis. They manufac- 
 tured some dognuis of 8upi>osed original philosophy, and a long 
 series of fancied history and chronology, retaining the mythical 
 names and jienerations even when they were obliged to discard 
 or recast the'mvthical events. The interpreted mythe was thus 
 promoted into a reality, while the literal mythe was degraded into 
 a tiction.'^ 
 
 ' Lucian, Pseudol. c. 4. Ha/ja/cXj^/eof iffilv rCv^evavdpov irpoTioyuv ek, 6 
 •EXf yxof , i*Aoc a7i7]^ei9 ^'^^^ ^n^hm ^^^f, olx * <i(yVfiOTaTOi 'Cnf M r^ 
 OKffvfv &9a0ati'oi'Tuv. (See Meineke ad Menandr. p. 284.) 
 
 • The fbllowi tip passage from Dr. Ferguson's Essay on Civil Society Cp«rt 
 fi sect i p 126) bears well on the subject before us: — 
 
 *"Tf conieitu-es and opinions formed at a distance have not a Rufficient 
 •nthoritv in the historv of mankind, the domestic antiquities of every nation 
 must for this verv reason be received with caution. They are, for the most 
 nart the mere ronjectures or the fictions of subsequent apres ; and even where 
 aT first thev ccntained some resemblance of truth, they still vary with t!io 
 imagination of those hv whom they were transmitted, and in every genera- 
 tion receive a different form. They are made to bear the stamp of the timet 
 llirouch which thev have passed in the form of tradition, not of the ages to 
 
 which their ;>r?tended descriptions relate When traditionary 
 
 fcbles are rehearsed bv the vulgar, they bear the marks of a national chaKC 
 ter and thoui-b mixed with absurdities, often raise the imagination and mot« 
 die heart • when made the materials of poetry, and adorned by the skill aod 
 the eloquence of an ardent and superior mind, they instruct the trnderstand- 
 B,g as well as engage the passions. It h only in the management of nM 
 antiquaries, or stript of the ornaments which the Uws of history forbid 
 
 
 Sltbsequent age of interp .fetation. 
 
 458 
 
 The habit of distinguishing the interpreted from the literal 
 aythe has passed from the literary men of antiquity to those of 
 the modem world, who have for the most part construed the 
 divine mythes as allegorized philosophy, and the heroic mythes 
 as exaggerated, adorned, and over-colored history. The early 
 ages of Greece have thus been peopled with quasi-historical per- 
 sons and quasi-bistori(;al events, all extracted from the mythes 
 after making certain allowances for f)oetical ornament But we 
 must not treat this extracted product as if it were the original 
 snbstance ; we cannot properly understand it except by viewing 
 it in connection with the literal mythes out of which it was ob- 
 tained, in their primitive age and appropriate medium, before the 
 superior minds had yet outgrown the common faith in an all- 
 personified Nature, and learned to restrict the divine free-agency 
 by the supposition of invariable physical laws. It is in this point 
 of view that the mythes are important for any one who would 
 correctly appreciate the general tone of Grecian thought and 
 feeling ; for they were the universal mental stock of the Hellenic 
 world — common to men and women, rich and poor, instructed 
 and ignorant ; they were in every one's memory and in every 
 one's mouth,' while science and history were confined to com- 
 
 tO wear, that they become unfit even to amme the fancy or to serve any purpom 
 wkatever. 
 
 ** It were absurd to quote the fable of the Iliad or the Odyssey, the 
 l^end of Hercules, Theseus, and CEdipus, as authorities in matters of fact 
 relating to the history of mankind ; but they may, with great justice, be cited 
 to ascertain what were the conceptions and sentiments of the age in which 
 they were composed, or to characterize the genins of that people with whose 
 imaginations they were blended, and by whom they were fondly rehearsed 
 and admired. In this manner, fiction may be admitted to vouch for tilt 
 ^nius of nations, while history has nothing to offer worthy of credit" 
 
 To the same purpose, M. Paulin Paris (in his Lettre k M. H. de Mon 
 merqa^, prefixed to the Roman de Berte aux Grans PS^, Paris, 1836), re- 
 •pecting the " romans " of the Middle Ages: "P<itir Wen connattre ITiis- 
 toire du moyen Sge, non pas celle des faits, mais celle des moenrs qui rendent 
 les faits rraisemblables, il faut I'avoir ^tudi^e dans les romana, et vofla 
 ponrquoi TEDstoire de France n*e8t pas encore faite." (p. xxi.) 
 
 * A curious evidence of the undiminished popularity of the Grecian mytiiM 
 Id the exclusion even of recent history, ia preserved by Vopiscus at the be- 
 gfaming of his Life of Aurclian. 
 
 The prsBfect of the city of Bone, Janios Tiberianos, to^ Vopiscus intf 
 
 t ■ 
 ; 
 
 I 
 
 'r 
 
454 
 
 mSTOR^ OF GBEECT 
 
 paratively few We know from Thucydides how em>iieoudy 
 Zd carelessly die Athenian public of his day retained the hi^ 
 tory of Peisistnitus, only one century past;> but the adventures 
 of the gods and heroes, the numberless explanatory legends at- 
 tached to visible objects and periodical ceremonies, were the 
 theme of gene.-al talk, and any man unacquainted with them 
 would have found himself partially excluded from the sympathy 
 of his neighbors. The theatrical representations, exhibited to the 
 entire city T,opulation, and Hstened to with enthusiastic interest, 
 both presupposed and perpetuated axiquaintance with the great 
 lines of heroic fable: indeed, in later times even the pantomimic 
 dancers embraced in their representations the whole held ot ray- 
 Ihical incident, and their immense success proves at once how 
 popular and how well known such subjects were. The namefl 
 and attributes of the heroes were incessantly alluded to m th» 
 way of illustration, to point out a consoling, admonitory or re- 
 pre^sive moral: the simple mention of any of them sufficed to 
 call up in every one's mind the principal events of his lite, and 
 the poet or rhapsode could thus calculate on touching chords doI 
 less familiar tlian susceptible.'^ 
 
 his rarria^re on th. festival-day of the Hilaria; he was connected by the ti« 
 «f relationship wi..h Aurelian, wl»o had died alK)ut a generation before - and 
 as the carriaK-e p^tssed by the splendid Temple of the Sun, ^^ich Aure 1,^ 
 had consecrated, he asked Vop.scus, what author had written the hfe of tha* 
 emperor ? To which Vopiscus replied, tbat he had read some Greek worka 
 which touched upon Aurelian, but nothing? in Latin. Whereat the venerable 
 prefect was profoundly ^meved : " Dolorem gemitQs sui vir sanctus per haw: 
 verba profudit : Ergo Thersitem. Siwmem, cceteraque ilia prod.yia vetustatis, 
 «t nos bene scimm. et po^teri freq,ientabunt: divum Aurelianum, clanssimum 
 principem, severissimum Imperatorem, per quem totus Romano nomim orbui 
 L restimtus, posreri nescient 1 Deus avertat banc ament.am Et tamer, 
 M bene memini, ephemeridas illius viri scriptas habemus, etc. (HistonaB 
 
 Anjnist. Scriptt. p. 209, ed. Salmus.) v«r.;«pn« 
 
 This impi^ssive, remonstrance produced the Life of Aurelian by VopiscM 
 The materials seem to have been ample and '^'^^hentic ; it is to be regrett^ 
 <iiat they did not fall into the hands of an author quahfied to turn them W 
 better account. 
 
 ' Thucvd. vi. .5<>. .. «. s, ^^"ii^r, 
 
 • Paasin. i. 3, 3. A-fyera. ^ev (J^ Kal aXka oiK iXrj^V jropd rcHf iro?,M»i( 
 daloTopiac avvKcoiC oioL, Kal bnoca vkovov ev^i h ^acSuvh ^^ ^«^^*« 
 ipn^V^Moif mard hrn>f^ivoic, etc The treatise of Lucian, De SaltatioM. W 
 
 POPULARITY OP GRECIAN MY Cd£^. 
 
 466 
 
 A fdmilar effect was produced by the multiplied reli^poos fes* 
 tirals and processions, as well as bj the oracles and prop^eciee 
 
 A curious proof how much these mythes were in every one & memory, and 
 how large the range of knowledge of them was which a good dancer po9* 
 «8sed (see particularly c. 76-79. t ii. p. 308-310, Hemst). 
 Antiphanes ap. Atbenae. vi. p. 223 : — 
 
 MaKupiov koTLv Tj rpay<f)6ia 
 vo'ujfia Kard icavT\ el ye irpuTov oL Tioyoi 
 inrd Tcjv ^eardv elaiv iyvutpiofievoi 
 vptv Koi Tiv' elneiv • <jf viropv^aai povov 
 del rdv noijfT^v. Oidiirotw yap av ye <^Ci^ 
 Ttt d" a}Jia TcavT^ laaaiv 6 irar^p Aaio^, 
 pTjTTjp 'loKuoTTj, ^vyaTepe^^ iraide^ rivec 
 ri ir£ioe& ovto^j ti neTroiijKev. "Ar irdXtv 
 eliry Tig 'X^Kfialuvaj koX tu naidia 
 iruvT^ rfi^df elp7jx\ bri pavelg uneKTOve 
 rrjv prirep' • ayavaKTuv (T 'k6paaroq ev'&euc 
 fj^ei, nakiv & uTretcnVy etc. 
 The first pages of the eleventh Oration of Dia Chrysostom contain sooM 
 •triking passages both as to the universal acquaintance with the mythes, and 
 as to their extreme popularity (Or. xi. p. 307-312, Reisk> See also the 
 commencement of Heraklides, De Allegoric! Homerica (ap. Scriptt Myth, 
 ed. Gale, p. 408), about the familiarity with Homer. 
 
 The Lyde of the poet Antimachus was com|)Osed for his own consolation 
 under sorrow, by enumerating the r/pwi/caf avpc^opag (Plutarch, Consolat 
 ad Apollon. c. 9. p. l()6: compare .^chines cont. Ktesiph. c. 48) : a sepal* 
 chral inscription in Thera, on the untimely death of Admetus, a youth of the 
 heroic gens ^.gidae, makes a touching allusion to his ancestors Peleus and 
 Phcres (Boeckh, C. L %. ii. p. 1087). 
 
 A curious passage of Aristotle is preserved by Demetrius Phalerens ( ilepJ 
 *Eppnveiagy c. 144), — 'Oatp yap avTiTjjc Kal povurrjc elpl^ (juXoprrdorepof 
 yeyova (compare the passage in the Nikomachean Ethics, i 9, povurijg Koi 
 dTEKvoc). Stahr refers this to a letter of Aristotle written in his old age, the 
 mythes being the consolation of his solitude (Aristotelia, i. p. 201). 
 
 For the employment of the mythical names and incidents as topics erf 
 pleasing and familiar comparison, see Menander, llepl 'E7r/t5«#crt*. 4 ir- 
 capp. 9 and 11, ap. VVulz. Coll. Rhett t. ix. pp. 283-294. The degree in 
 which they passed into the orflinary songs of women is illustrated by a 
 touching epigram contained among the Chian Inscriptions published in 
 Boeckh's Collection (No. 2236) :— 
 
 Btrr<j Kal ^aivig^ (plXij v/neprj (?), al avvepiitOLf 
 
 AX Trevixpai. ypaiai^ r^*!' iKki^Tfpev 6pov. 
 ^AfuftoTepai Koku, irpijTai yevoc—ot yXvKi>g bp^pef, 
 UpbQ Xvxvov (p pv^ovc ^Sopev ^pw&ium. 
 These two poor women were "ot afraid to ho&st of tb«ir fiunily d( 
 
 A ol. 1 !»1 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 f 
 
 *'. • 
 
I> 
 
 466 
 
 fflSTORY OF OBEECE, 
 
 VARfBTY OF BTTTHICAL RELICS 
 
 457 
 
 which circulated in every city. The annual departure of tlM 
 Theoric i«hip from Athens to the sacred island of Delos, kept 
 alive, in the minds of Athenians generally, the legend of Theseus 
 and his adventurous enterprise in Krete;' and in like manner 
 most of the other public rites and ceremonies were of a com- 
 memorative character, deduced from some mythical person or 
 incident familiarly known to natives, and forming to strangers a 
 portion of the curiosities of the place.*^ During the period of 
 Grecian subjection under the Romans, these curiosities, together 
 with their works of art and their legends, were especially clung 
 to as a set-off against present degradation. The Theban citizen 
 who found himself restrained from the liberty enjoyed by all 
 other Greeks, of consulting Amphianius as a prophet, though 
 the sanctuary and cliapel of the hero stood in his own city — 
 
 Ihey probably belonged to some noble gens which traced its origin to a god 
 or a hero. About the songs of women, see also Agathias, i. 7. p. 29, ed. 
 
 Bonn. 
 
 In the fimily of the wealthy Athenian Democrates was a legend, that hii 
 primitive ancestor (son of Zeus by the daughter of the Archegetes of the 
 denie Aixoneis, to which he belonged) had received Herakles at his table: 
 this legend wiis so rife that the old women sung it, — aTr^p a/ vpaiai dSovai 
 f Plato? Lysis, p. 205). Compare also a legend of the deme 'Avayvpof^f. 
 ttentioned in Suidas ad voc. 
 
 " Who is this virgin V asks Orestes from Pylades in the Iphigeneia in 
 Teuris of Euripides (662), respecting his sister Iphigeneia, whom he doei 
 mat know as priestess of Artemis in a foreign land : — 
 
 Tii" tarii' >i vtdvii ; a>f 'EA/iT/viKUf 
 
 'Av//p£ ?' Vf^ui' ^otf T iv 'lM(t) novovc 
 
 fi6<TToi T^ 'A^atwv, tov r' ev oiuvoi^ ao^tdv 
 
 K«X^:avr', 'A;t<XAeuf r' ovvofi\ etc. 
 
 kaHv i) ^evfj yivog 
 
 'E«fft??v. '\pyeia rig, etc. 
 » Plato, Pha'do, c. 2. 
 
 ' The Philopseudes of Lucian (t. iii. p. 31, Hemst. cap. 2,3, 4) showg not 
 doly the pride which the general public of Athens and Thebes took in theii 
 old mythes (Triptolemus, Boreas, and Oreithyia, the Sparti, etc.), but the 
 way in which thev treated every man who called the stories in question as a 
 fool or as an atheist. He remarks, that if the guides who showed the anti- 
 quities had been restrained to tell nothing but what was true, they would 
 kftve died of hunger ; foi the visiting strangers would not care to hear plaia 
 troth, even if they could have got it for ncthing {f^v^e afii<r»l tC^v ^evum 
 AA^^C aKOveiv t&e'krjaavTuv'\. 
 
 ■unld not be satisfied without a knowledge of the story which 
 
 explained the origin of such prohibition,' and which conducted 
 him back to the originally hostile relations between Amphiarans 
 and Thebes. Nor can we suppose among the citizens of 8iky6a 
 Anything less than a perfect and reverential conception of the 
 legend of Thebes, when we read the account given by llerodotua 
 of the conduct of the despot Kleisthenes in regard to Adrastus 
 and Melanippus.- The Troizenian youths and maidens,-' who 
 universally, when on the eve of marriage, consecrated an oflering 
 of their hair at the Heroon of Hippolytus, maintained a lively 
 recollection of the legend of that unhappy recusant whom Aphro- 
 dite had so cruelly punished. Abundant relics preserved in many 
 Grecian cities and temples, served both as mementos and attes- 
 tations of other legendary events ; and the tombs of the heroes 
 counted among the most fiowerful stimulants of mythical remin- 
 iscence. The sceptre of Pelops and Agamemnon, still preserved 
 in the days of Pausanias at Chuironeia in BceOtia, was the work 
 of the god Hephaestos. While many other alleged productions 
 of the same divine hand were preserved in different cities ol 
 Greece, this is the only one which Pausanias himself believed to 
 be genuine : it had been carried by Elektra, daughter of Ag»- 
 memnon to Phokis, and received divine honors from the citizens 
 of Cha^roneia.^ The spears of Meriones and (Jdysseus were treas- 
 ured up at Engyium in Sicily, that of Achilles at Phaselis ; tlio 
 sword of Memnon adorned the temple of Asklepius at Nicome- 
 dia; and Pausanias, with unsuspecting contidence, adduces the 
 two latter as proofs that the arms of the heroes were ma<le of 
 brass.^ The hide of the Kalydonian boar was guarded and shown 
 by the Tegeates as a precious possession ; the shield of Euphor- 
 bus was in like manner suspended in the temple of Branch i das 
 near Miletus, as well as in the temple of Here in Argos. Visible 
 
 » llerodot. viii. 134. * Herodot. v. 67. 
 
 •» Furii)id. Hippolyt. 1424; Pausan. ii. 32, 1; Lucian, Dc De§ SyriA,c. 
 60. vol. iv. p. 287, Tauch. 
 
 It is curious to see in the account of Pausanias how all the petty pecoliar- 
 itaes cf the objects around became connected with explanatory details gmr 
 ing oat of this affecting legend. Compare Pausan. i 22, 2. 
 
 • Pausan. ix. 40, 6. 
 
 • Plutarch, Marcell. c 20; Pausan. m. 3, 6 
 
 TOL. L 
 
 { 
 
 f 
 
498 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MTTHES STIMULANTS TO GRECIAN ART. 
 
 459 
 
 felics of Epeius and Philokt«t^s were not wanting, while Strabe 
 raises his voice with indignation against the numerous Palladia 
 which were shown in different cities, each pretending to be the 
 genuine image from Troy.i It would be impossible to specify 
 Uie number of chapels sanctuaries, solemnities, foundations ot 
 one sort or another, smd to have been first commenced by heroic 
 or mythical personages. - by Herakl^s, Jason, Medea, Alkmaeon, 
 Diomedes, Odysseus, Danaus, and his daughters,-^ etc. Perhaps 
 in some of these cases particular critics might raise objections, but 
 the great bulk of the people entertained a firm and undoubted 
 
 belief in the current legend. 
 
 If we analyze the intellectual acquisitions of a common C^re- 
 dan townsman, from the rude communities of Arcadia or Phokis 
 even up to the enlightened Athens, we shall find that, over and 
 above the rules of art or capacities requisite for his daily wants, 
 it consisted chiefly of the various mythes cx>nnected with his gens, 
 bis city, his religious festivals, and the mysteries in which he 
 might have chosen to initiate himself, as weU a^ with the works of 
 art and the more striking natural objects which he might see 
 around him, — the whole set off and decorated by some knowl- 
 edge of the epic and dramatic poets. Such was the intellectual 
 and imaginative reach of an ordinary Greek, considered apart 
 from the instructed few : it was an aggregate of religion, of so- 
 cial and patriotic retrospect, and of romantic fancy, blended into 
 one indivisible faith. And thus the subjective value of the 
 mythes, looking at them purely as elements of Grecian thought 
 and feeling, will appear indisputably great, however little there 
 may be of objective reality, either historical or philosophical, 
 
 discoverable under them. 
 
 Nor must we omit the incalculable importance of the mythes 
 as stimulants to the imagination of the Grecian artist in sculp- 
 ture, in painting, in carving, and in architecture. From the 
 divine and heroic legends and pers onages were borrowed thosa 
 
 ' » Pa^^viir46, 1 , Diogen. Laor. viii. 5 ; Strabo, vi. p. 263 ; Appian, 
 Bell. Mithridat c. 77 ; uEschyl. Eumen. 380. 
 
 Wachsmath has collected the numerous citations out of Pausanias on tbif 
 mbject ( Uellenische Aherthumskunde, part ii. sect. 1 1 5 p. 1 1 1 ). 
 
 * Herodot. u. 182; Plalarch, Pyrrh. c. 32 ; Schol. ApoU. Rbod nr. 1217* 
 WHldr. iv. 56. 
 
 paintings, statnes, and reliefs, which rendered the tempi's, jop- 
 ticos, and public buildings, at Athens and elsewhere, objects of 
 iurpassing admiration ; and such visible reproduction contributed 
 again to fix the types of the gods and heroes lamiliarly and io* 
 delibly on the public mind.» The figures deUneated on cups and 
 vases, as well as on the walls of private houses, were chiefly 
 drawn from the same source — the mythes being the great store- 
 house of artistic scenes and compasition. 
 
 To enlarge on the characteristic excellence of Grecian art 
 would here be out of place : I regard it only in so far as, having 
 originally drawn its materials from the mythes. it reacted upon 
 the mythical faith and imagination — the reaction imparting 
 8tren"-th to the former as well as distinctness to the latter. To 
 one who saw constantly before him representations of the battles 
 of the Centaurs or the Amazons,^ of the exploits performed by 
 Perseus and Bellerophon, of the incidents composing the Trojaa 
 war or the Kalydonian boar-hunt — the process of belief, even 
 in the more fantastic of these conceptions, became easy in pro- 
 portion as the conception was familiarized. And if any person 
 had been slow to believe in the efficacy of the prayers of Mac 
 kus, whereby that devout hero once obtained special relief from 
 Zeus, at a moment when Greece was perishing with long-con- 
 tinued sterility, his doubts would probably vanish when, on visit- 
 ing the iEakeium at yEgina, there were exhibited to him the 
 statues of the very envoys who had come on the behalf of the 
 distressed Greeks to solicit that ^akus would pray for them.^^ A 
 Grecian temple-* was not simply a place of worship, but the 
 actual dwelling-place of a god, who was believed to be introduced 
 by the soleiun dedicatory ceremony, and whom the imagination 
 of the people identified in the most intimate manner with his 
 
 * *Hfit^iu)v ufteralr, the subjects of the works of Polygnotus at AtheM 
 fMelanthius ap. Plutarch. Ciim'm. c 4 ) : compare Theocrit. xv. 138. 
 
 • The Centaurom.'ichia and the Amazonomachia are constantly associated 
 top:ether in the ancient Grecian reliefs (see the Expedition Scientifiqne d© 
 Morec, t. ii. p. 16, in the explanation of the temple of Apollo Epikureiua at 
 Phipaleia). 
 
 » Pausan. ii. 29, 6. 
 
 ♦ Ernst Cnrtius, Die Akropolis von A then, Berlin, 1844, p. 18. 
 •dv Gentes, vL p 203, ed. Elmenhorst 
 
 
 r 
 
s. 
 
 il 
 
 4eo 
 
 HlSlOlf^OF GREECE. 
 
 itatue. The presence or removal of the statue was conceived aa 
 identical with that of the being represented, — and while th« 
 Btatue was solemnly waslied, dressed, and tended with all the re- 
 spectful solicitude which would have been bestowed upon a real 
 person,» miraculous tales were often rile respecting the manileata- 
 tion of real internal feeling in the wood and the marble. At 
 perilous or critical momenta, the statue was affirmed to have 
 sweated, to have wept, to have closed its eyes, or brandished the 
 spear in its hands, in token of sympathy or indignation.^ Such 
 lee^ends, springing up usually in times of suflering and danger, 
 and linding few men bold enough openly to contradict them, ran 
 ID complete harmony v^ ith the gen eral mythical faith, and tend ed 
 
 > See"th7^e of tl^Sginetans lending the A':^k\i\s for a time to the 
 Thehans (Herodot. v. 80), who soon, however, returned them : likewise send- 
 intr the ^:akid8 to the battle of Salamis (viii. 64-80). The Spartans, .when 
 they decreed that only on. of their two kings should be <>"'«" ""'^^^ 
 .eryice. decn-ed at the same time that only one of the lyndands should go 
 out with them (V. 75) : they once lent the Tyndarids as aids to the envoy^ 
 of Epizephvrian Locri, who prepared for them a couch on board he.r sh^ 
 JDiodor Excerpt, xvi. p. 15, l)indorf> The Thebans grant the.r hero 
 Melanippus to Kleisthenes of Sikyon (v. 68). What was sent, must proba- 
 bly have been a consecrated copy of the genuine statue. 
 
 Respecting the solemnities practised towards the statues, see Plutarch^ 
 Alkfbi'ad. 34 ; Kallimaeh. Hymn, ad Lavacr. Palladis, mit with the no^ 
 of Spanheim; K. O. MQller, Arch«ologie der Kunst § 69; comp^ 
 Plutarch, Qua^stion. Rom.uc. ^ 61. p. 279; and Tacit. Mor. Germ. c. 40, 
 
 ^ThTmYnneHn which th,e real presence of a hero was identified with W, 
 statue (Tbv dcKacov del &ed, ohoc (.evsLV au^ovra rovg idpvf.evov^.- Mcnan- 
 der Fragm. 'nvioxo^, P- n, Meineke), consecrated ground and oracle, la 
 ^wherTmore powerfully attested than in the Hero.ca of l^H^lostratus^^app. 
 2-20 pp 674-692; also De Vit. ApoUon. Tyan. iv. U), respecting Protest 
 LT a^El^us, Ajlx at the Aianteium, and Hector at II'- ' P-^l^ 
 m,peared exactly in the equipment of his statue, -^Aa^^cJa ^^lYlsen^ 
 riveerr«A.«6v r,6.ov, ^nne, Kal r6 ayaX.a rovro (p. 674). The Pn^s^^f 
 »d sympathy of the hero Lykus is essential to the satisfaction of the At^ 
 "an Zlts ( Aristophan. Vesp. 389-820) : the fragment of ^* ^^^^^ 
 by Lactantius, De Falsa Religione (i. 22), is curious. - To.c VP<^oc jo^ '^arU 
 4v noMv Kal rvv x^P-^ ISpvf^evo^c (Lycnrgus cont. Leocrat^ c 1 )^ 
 ^ Plutarch, Timoleon, c. 12 ; Strabo, vi. p 264. Tbeophn^tus tre^t. Aj 
 perspiration as a natural phenomenon in ^l^e statues made of ^da^^ 
 (Histor. Plant, v. 10). Plutarch discusses the ciedibihty of this sort of 
 piracies in his Life of Coriolanus, c. 37-38. 
 
 ANCIENT AND MODERN MYTHICAL VEES- 
 
 461 
 
 I 
 
 Id strengthen it in all its various ramifications. The renewed 
 jM!tivity of the god or hero both brought to mind and accredited 
 the preexisting mythes connected with his name. When Boreas, 
 during the invasion of Greece by Xerxes, and in compliance 
 with the fervent prayers of the Athenians, had sent forth a provi* 
 dential storm, to the irreparable damage of the Persian armada,^ 
 the sceptical minority (alluded to by Plato), who doubted the 
 mythe of Boreas and Oreithyia, and his close connection thus ac- 
 quired with Erechtheus, and the Erechtheids generally, must fbr 
 Uie time have been reduced to absolute silence. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 THE GRECIAN MYTfflCAI. VEIN COMPARED WITH THAT OF 
 
 MODERN EUROPE. 
 
 I HAVE already remarked that the existence of that populv 
 narrative talk, which the Germans express by the significant 
 word Sage or VoVcs-Sage, in a greater or less degree of perfection 
 or development, is a phaenomenon common to almost all stagea 
 of society and to almost all quarters of the globe. It is the 
 natural effusion of the unlettered, imaginative, and believing man, 
 and its maximum of influence belongs to an early state of the 
 human mind ; for the multiplication of recorded facts, the diffu- 
 sion of positive science, and the formation of a critical standard 
 of belief, tend to discredit its dignity and to repress its easy and 
 
 * Herodot. vii. 189. Compare the gratitude of the Megalopolitans to 
 Boreas for having preserved them from the attack of the Lacedaemonian king 
 Agis (Pausan. viii. 27, 4.— viii. 36, 4> When the Ten Thousand Greek* 
 were on their retreat through the cold mountains of Armenia, Boreas blew 
 In their faces, " parching and freezing intolerably." One of the propheti 
 fecommended that a sacrifice should be offered to him, which was ddM^ 
 •* and the painful effect of the wind appeared to every one forthwith to omm 
 in a marked manner}" (koX ndat d9f nepn^vu^ ido^t "X^^ai rd ^oXeirdv rsf 
 wvevfiaToc — Xenoph. Anab. iv. 5, 3.) 
 
 t\ 
 
 ' i 
 
 '\ 
 
4m 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 dbondant flow. It supplies to the poet Uith materiiils ti> 
 kine and adom, and a basis as weU as a stimulus tor further ii 
 ▼entions of his own ; and this at a time when the poet is reUgic 
 teacher, historian, and philosopher, all in one, — not, as he be- 
 comes at a more advanced period, the mere purveyor of avowed, 
 Ibough interesting, tiction. 
 
 Such popular stories,* and such historical songs (meamng by 
 historical, simply tiiat which is accepted as history) are found in 
 most quarters of the globe, and especially among the Teutonic 
 and Celtic populations of early fc'urope. The old Gothic songs 
 were east into a conl inuous history by the historian Ablavius ;i 
 and the i>oems of the Germans respecting Tuisto the earth-born 
 god, his son Munnus, and his descendants the e{>onyms of the var 
 riou's German tribes;^ as they are briefly described by Tacitus, 
 remind us of Hesiod, or Eumelus, or the Homeric Hymns. 
 Jacob Grimm, in his learned and valuable Deutsche Mythologie, 
 has exhibited coinous evidence of the great fundamental analogy, 
 alon- with many spc^cial differences, between the German, Scan- 
 dinavian, and Grecian mythical world; and the Dissertation of 
 Mr. Price (j)retixed to his edition of Wartons History of En 
 glish Poetry) sustains and illustrates Grimm's view. The same 
 personifying imagination — the same ever-present conception of 
 the will, sympathies, and antipathies of the gods as the producing 
 causes of phuinomena, and as distinguished from a course of na- 
 ture with its invariable sequence — the same relations between 
 gods, heroes, and men, with the Uke difficulty of discriminating 
 the one from the other in many individual names — a similar 
 wholesale transfer of human attributes to the gods, with the ab- 
 sence of human limits and liabilities — a like beUef in Nymphs, 
 Giants, and other beings, neither gods nor men — the same co- 
 alescence of the religious with the patriotic feeling and faith 
 — these are positive features common to the early Greeks with 
 the early Germans : and the negative conditions of the two 
 
 » Joraandts, De Ueb. Gcticis, cai)p. 4-6. 
 
 * Tacit Mor German, c 2 " Celebrant carminibus antiqms. quod unam 
 apod eos inemori* et annaliuni penus est, Tuistonem Deura terra editum, fli 
 filiaiD Manoum, originera gentis conditoresque. Quidam Ucentiri vetnaP^ 
 Dlnres Deo ortos, pluresque gentU appellationes, Marsos, GambriviM ' 
 Vandaliosque affinnant : eaque vera et antique nomina.* 
 
 ^1 
 
 MYTHES AMONG THE EARLY GERMANS. 
 
 Ml 
 
 •re not less analogous — the absence of prose writing, positivci 
 records, and scientific culture. The preliminary basis and 
 encouragements for the mythopceic faculty were thus extremely 
 similar. 
 
 But though the prolific forces were the same in kind, the re- 
 Bults were very diiferent in degree, and the developing circum* 
 stances were more different still. 
 
 First, the abundance, the beauty, and the long continuance of 
 early Grecian poetry, in the purely poetical age, is a phaenome- 
 non which has no parallel elsewhere. 
 
 Secondly, the transition of the Greek mind from its poetical to 
 its comparatively positive state was self-operated, accomplished 
 by its own inherent and expansive force — aided indeed, but by 
 no means either impressed or provoked, from without. From the 
 poetry of Homer, to the history of Thuqydides and the philoso- 
 phy of Plato and Aristotle, was a prodigious step, but it was the 
 native growth of the Hellenic youth into an Hellenic man ; and 
 what is of still greater moment, it was brought about without 
 breaking the thread either of religious or patriotic tradition — 
 without any coercive innovation or violent change in the mental 
 feelings. The legendary world, though the ethical judgments and 
 rational criticisms of superior men had outgrown it, still retained 
 its hold upon their feelings as an object of affectionate and reve- 
 rential retrospect. 
 
 Far different from this was the development of the early Ger 
 mans. We know little about their early poetry, but we shall run 
 no risk of error in affirming that they ha J nothing to compare 
 with either Iliad or Odyssey. Whether, if left to themselves, 
 they would have possessed sufficient progressive power to make 
 a step similar to that of the Greeks, is a question which we 
 cannot answer. Their condition, mental as well as political, was 
 violently changed by a foreign action from without. The in- 
 fluence of the Roman empire introduced artificially among them 
 new institutions, new opinions, habits, and luxuries, and, above 
 all, a new religion; the Romanized Germans becoming them- 
 selves successively the instruments of this revolution with regard 
 lo such of their brethren as still remained heathen. It was • 
 revolntioo often brought about by penal and coercive means : tin 
 
 \\ 
 
 I 
 
 'I 
 
iS4 
 
 raSTOW OP GREECE. 
 
 •) 
 
 I 
 
 ii 
 
 •id gods Thor and Woden were formally deposed and renoiiiMSi 
 tiieir images were crumbled into dust, and the sacred oaks ol 
 worship and prophecy hewn down. But even where conver- 
 non was the fruit of preaching and f)ersuasion, it did not the leM 
 Dreak up all the associations of a German with respect to that 
 mythical world which he called his past, and of w^ich the ancieirt 
 god » constituted both the charm and the sanctity : he had now 
 only the alternative of treating them either as men or as daemons.* 
 That mixed religious and patriotic retrospect, formed by th« 
 coalescence of piety with ancestral feeling, which constituted the 
 appropriate sentiment both of Greeks and of Germans towards 
 their unrecorded antiquity, was among the latter banished by 
 Chiistianity : and while the root of the old mythes was thua 
 cankered, the commemorative ceremonies and customs with which 
 they were connected, either lost their con>ccrated character or 
 disappeared altogether. Moreover, new influences of great im- 
 portance were at the same time brought to bear. The Latin 
 lanmia^e, together with some tinge of Latin literature — the habil 
 of writing and of recording present events — the idea of a sya- 
 tematic law and pacilic adjudication of disputes, — all these form 
 ed a part of the genenil working of Roman civilization, even alter 
 the decline of the Roman empire, ui>on the Teutonic and Cekta 
 
 » On the hostile influence exercised by the change of relipon on the old 
 ffcandiiuivian poetry, sec: an interesting article of Jacob Gri.nni m the Got- 
 tin^^en Uelehrtc Anzei-en, Feb. 18.30, pp. 268-273 ; a review of Olaf Iir^gv- 
 ton's Sa-a. The article flelden, in his Deutsche Mytholoprie, is also full of 
 tastmction on the same subject: see also the Einleitung to the book, p. 11, 
 
 2inl edition. , , , u «/ 
 
 A similar obser\'ation has been made with respect to the old mythes of 
 the paffan Russians bv Kiobboff: - LVtablissemcnt du Christianisrae, ce 
 gufrc du bonheur des nations, fut vivement apprecie par les Rosses, qui daM 
 leur juste reconnaissan.-e, le personnifierent dans un heros. Vladimir le 
 Grand, ami dcs arts, pi-otecteur de la reli^non qu'il prote^ea, et dont lei 
 fruits^ tirent oublier les fautes, devint I'Arthus et le Charlemafrne de la Rus- 
 ae, et ses hauu« faits furent un mythe national qui domina tons ceax do 
 paganisme. Auiour de lui se ^Toupcrent ces iruerriers aux formes athl^ 
 au6s, au cojur j^nereux dont la poe'sie aime a entourer le berceau mysten- 
 eax dcs peoples: et los exploits du vaillant Dohrinia, de RoL'dai, d Ilia, de 
 Carilo, animerent les ballades nationales. et vivent encore dans de naTft 
 i^ts " (EichhoflF. Hi^oire de !• Langae et littAratuTB des Slave-, Fan* 
 \8S9, part ni ch. 2. p. 190.) 
 
 5Ai<l 7 GERMAN GENEALOGIES TO ODDf. 
 
 4ft 
 
 tribes. A class of specially-educated men was formed, upon • 
 Latin basis and upon Christian principles, consisting too almost 
 entirely of priests, who were opposed, as well by motives of rival- 
 ry as by religious feeling, to the ancient bards and storytellers of 
 the community : the " lettered men"^ were constituted apart from 
 * the men of story," and Latin literature contributed along with 
 religion to sink the mythes of untaught heathenism. Charle- 
 magne, indeed, at the same time that he employed aggressive and 
 violent proceedings to introduce Christianity among the Saxons, 
 Also took special care to commit to writing and preserve the old 
 heathen songs But there can be little doubt that this step was 
 the suggestion of a large and enlightened understanding peculiar 
 to hiiiwi«*lf. The disposition general among lettered Christians 
 rf th«c Age is more accurately represented by his son Louis le 
 Debonnaire, who, having learned these songs as a boy, came to 
 abhor them when he arrived at mature years, and could never 
 be induced either to repeat or tolerate them.2 
 
 According to the old heathen faith, the pedigree of the Saxon^ 
 Anglian, Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish kings, — probably also 
 those of the German and Scandinavian kings generally, — WM 
 trac^ to Odin, or to some of his inmiediate companions or heroio 
 fions.^ I have already observed that the value of these genealo- 
 
 * This distinction is curiously brought to view by Saxo Grammaticus, 
 where he says of an Englishman named Lucas, that he was " Uteris quidem 
 tenuiter instructus, sed historiarum scientiA apprime eruditus" (p. 330, apud 
 Dahlmann's Historische Forschungen, vol. i. p. 176). 
 
 * " Barbara et antiquissima carmina (says Eginhart, in his Life of Charle* 
 magne), quibus veterum regum actus et bella canebantur, conscripsit." 
 
 Theganus says of Louis le Debonnaire, " Poetica carmina gentilia, qu# 
 hi juventute didicerat, respuit, nee legere, nee audire, nee docere, voluif 
 (De Gestis Ludovici Imperatoris ap. Pithceum, p. 304, c. xix.) 
 
 ' See Grimm's Deutsche Mythologie, art Helden, p. 356, 2nd edit, Hefc 
 gist and Horsa were fourth in descent from Odin (Venerable Bede, Hist i 
 15). Thiodolff, the Scald of Harold Haarfager king of Norway, traced tht 
 pedigree of his sovereign through thirty generations to Yngarfrey, the son 
 of Niord, companion of Odin at Upsal ; the kings of Upsal were called Yng- 
 Ifaiger, and the song of Thiodolff. Ynglingatal (Dahlmann, Ilistor. Forschang, 
 i p. 379). Eyvind, another Scald, a century afterwards, deduced the pedi- 
 gree of Jarl Hacon from Saming, son of Yngwifrey (p. 381). Are Frode^ 
 tfie Icelandic historian, carried up his own genealogy through thirty-six 
 fenerations to Yngwe ; a genealogy which Torfi»iw «ccepte as trustworthy 
 
 VOL. I. 20* 30oc 
 
 I 
 
 \i 
 
 
 ' 
 
 / 
 
 
466 
 
 BISTORT OF GREECE 
 
 gi« consisted not 80 much iB their length, as m the r^^^ 
 Stoched to the name serving as prumuve source After tto 
 worship attached to Win had been extinguished, the gen^o^ 
 eal line was lengtUen«l up to Japhet or Noah, -and Odm .w 
 tonger accounted wonhy ,o stand at the top, w- degraded mto 
 one of the simple human members of it.> And we fand thu. 
 riuratioM of the original mythical genealogies to have taken 
 Ice even among th/ Scandinavians, although the mtroduct.on 
 ifChristianity was in those parte both longer deferred, so as to 
 
 o,nK,«in.' it to the line of «ns« given by Saxo Grummaticus (p 352). Tor. 
 fcuTmrkes HaroUl Haam^er a des.en.iant from Odin through twenty-^ven 
 ^: : ons; Aifr... of England through twon.y-thrce ^"'-'-^'^^'^ 
 Mcr.ia through tilWen (p »62). See also the translation hy >»"B« f P" ^ 
 Mulle;^'. Saga Bihli".hek. Introd. p. xxviii. and the genealog.cal tables pre- 
 fivp(J to Snorro Sturleson's Edda. ,. • _^ 
 
 Mr ShaTon Turner conceives the human existence of Odin to be d.strn^ 
 ,y proved, seemingly upon the san.e evuieuee as Eaemems ^-Ueved m .^ 
 human existence of Zeu. (History of the Anglo-Saxons, Appendix to b. U. 
 ch. 3. p. 219, 5th edit). 
 
 » Dahlmann, Histor. Forschung. t. i. p. 
 
 }0 There is a valuable article 
 
 Z -,T-->82) by Stuhr, " Uber oinigc Hauptfn.gcn des Nord.schen Al.erthnms, 
 whe'rein the waiter illustrates both the strong motive and the effeetive te- 
 Jencv on the part of the fhristian dergy who had to deal w.th these newly 
 !^v'e«ed Teu.oni. pagans, ,o Euen.eri.e the old go<ls, and to represent a 
 genealogy, whi.h they were unable to . ffaee from men s nuuds, as if it con 
 
 ■iBte<l onlv of mere men. 
 
 Mr Joim Kemble (Ul>er die Stammtafel der Westsachsen, ap. Stuhr, p. 
 854) remarks, that " nobiUtas," among that people, consisted in descent from 
 
 Odin and the other go<ls 
 
 Colonel Slceman also deals in the same manner with the religious Wgendi 
 Of the Hindoos, - so natural is the proceeding of Euemems, towards any 
 religion in which a critic does not believe:— r i • i 
 
 "\hev (the Hindoos) of course think that the incarnation of their three 
 ereat divinities were beings inhnitely 8Ui)erior to prophets, being in all their 
 ^tributes and prerogatives equal to the divinities themselves. Bvt we are 
 ditl^sed to think that these incnrnations ic^e nothing more than great mm wham 
 l/bzr flatttrers and poets have exalted into gods,- this uyis tf^ way m which mm 
 made their pods in ancient Greece and Kgypt.- AW that the poets have sang 
 of the actions of these men is now received as revelation from heave^ 
 tKoagh nothing can be more monstrous than the actions ascribed to the tail 
 fcicarnation, Krishna, of the best of the gods, Vishnoo." ( Sleeman, RamUif 
 Mid Recollections of an Indian Official, vol. i. ch. viii. 61.) 
 
 SCANDINAVIAN SCALDS. 
 
 467 
 
 kftve ti ne for a more ample development of the heathen poedcal 
 vein • - and seems to have created a less decided feeling of and 
 pathy (especially in Iceland) towards the extinct faith.^ The 
 poems and tales composing the Edda, though first committed to 
 writing after the period of Christianity, do not present the ancient 
 gods in a point of view intentionally odious or degrading. 
 
 The transposition above alluded to, of the genealogical root 
 from Odin to Noah, is the more worthy of notice, as it illustrated 
 the genuine character of these genealogies, and shows that they 
 sprung, not from any erroneous historical data, but from the turn 
 of the religious feeling; also that their true value is derived 
 from their being taken entire, as connecting the existing race of 
 men with a divine originaL If we could imagine that Grecian 
 paganism had been superseded by Christianity in the year 500 
 B.C., the great and venerated gentile genealogies of Greece would 
 have undergone the like modification ; the Uerakleids, PelopidSi 
 JEakids, Asklepiads, &c., would have been merged in some larger 
 aggregate branching out from the archaeology of the Old Testa- 
 ment. The old heroic legends connected with these ancestral 
 names would either have been forgotten, or so transformed as to 
 suit the new vein of thought; for the altered worship, ceremo- 
 nies, a. d customs would have been altogether at variance with 
 them, H i the mythical feeling would have ceased to dwell upon 
 those to fhoni prayers were no longer offered. If the oak of 
 Dodona had been c»»' down, or the Theoric ship had ceased to be 
 Bent IjX'm Ati ons <i Delos, the mythes of Theseus and of the two 
 black deves w<> il-^. have lost their pertinence, and died away. As 
 it was, the chai-^^JB from Homer to Thucydides and Aristotle took 
 place internally, i^jadually, and imperceptibly. Philosophy and 
 history wer*. superj/iduced in the minds of the superior few. but 
 the feeliiii^s of the general public continued unshaken — the sa- 
 cred o^jects remj\jned the same both to the eye and to the heart 
 
 See P. E. Miiller, Uber den Ursprung und Verfall der Islandischen 
 Historiographie, p. 63. 
 
 In the Leitfaden zur Nordischen Alterthumskunde, pp 4-5 (Copenhagen, 
 1837), is an instructive iai.itmary of the different schemes of interpretation 
 ipplied to the northern i^ij^x^rs: 1, the historical; 2, the geographical; • 
 fbe astronomical ; 4, the plyu» il* ^ the allegorical 
 
 ft 
 : 
 
 'I 
 
 ■nil 
 
 I 
 t 
 
 I' 
 
468 
 
 HISTORY OF OREECB 
 
 — and the worship of the ancient gods was CTcn adornei by new 
 fuxihitects and sculptors who greatly strengthened its imposing 
 
 While then in Greece the mythopceic stream continued in the 
 ■ame course, only witli abated current and influence, in modern 
 Europe its ancient bed was blocked up, and it was turned into 
 Mw ajid divided channels. The old religion — though as an as- 
 cendent faith, unanimously and publicly manifested, it became 
 extinct — still continued in detached scraps and fragments, and 
 under various alterations of name and form. The heathen gods 
 ADd goddesses, deprived as they were of divinity, did not pass 
 out of the recollection and fears of their former worshippers, but 
 were sometimes represented (on principles like those of Eueme- 
 rus) as having been eminent and glorious men — sometimes de- 
 graded into daemons, magicians, elfs, fairies, and other supernatural 
 agents, of an inferior grade and generally mischievous cast. 
 Christian writers, such as Saxo Grammaticus and Snorro Stur- 
 leson, committed to writing the ancient oral songs of the Scandiv- 
 ian Scalds, and digested the events contained in them into contin- 
 uous narrative — peribrming in this respect a task similar to that 
 of the Grecian logographers Pherekydes and Hellanikus, in 
 reference to Hesiod and the Cyclic poets. But while Pherekydes 
 and Hellanikus compiled under the influence of feelings substan- 
 tially the same as those of the poeis on whom they bestowed 
 their care, the Christisan logographers felt it their duty to point out 
 the Odin and Thor of the old Scalds as evil daemons, or cunning 
 enchanters, who had iascinated the minds of men into a false beUef 
 in their divinity. i In some cases, the heathen r ecitals and ideas 
 
 ~~»"lnterea tamon homines Christiani in nuinina non credant ethnica, nee 
 aliter fidem narrationibus hisce adstruere vel adhibere debent, quara in libn 
 hujas prooemio monitum estde causis et occasionibus cur et quomodo genus 
 humanura a vera fide aberraverit." (Extract from the Prose Edda, p. 75, 
 In the Lexicon MytholoKicum ad calcem Eddae S»mund. vol. iii. p. 357, Co- 
 
 penbag. edit.) 
 
 A similar warning is lo be found in another passage cited by P. E. Mailer 
 TTbei den Ursprung un-i V^rfall der Isltindischen Historiographie, p. 138 
 Coponhagen, 1813 ; compare the Prologue to the Prose Edda, p. 6, and Mai 
 let, Introduction a I'Hisioire de Dannemarc, ch. vii. pp. 114-132. 
 
 Baxo Grammaticus represents Odin sometimes as a magician, sometimoi 
 M an evU d«mon, sometimes as a high priest or pontiflf of heatheniMB, w!i© 
 
 ■ I f 
 
 UBOENDS OP THE SAINia 
 
 4m 
 
 
 were modified so as to suit Christian feeling. But when preserved 
 without such a change, they exhibited themselves palpably, and 
 were designated by their compilers, as at variance with ihe r^ 
 gious belief of the people, and as associated either with impoe> 
 tore or with evil spirits. 
 
 A new vein of f^entiment had arisen in Europe, unsuitable in* 
 deed to the old mythes, yet leaving still in force the demand for 
 mythical narrative generally. And this demand was sati>(ied. 
 6pea):ing generally, by two classes of naiTatives,— the legends 
 of the; Catholic Saints and the Romances of Chivalry, corre- 
 sponding to two types of cliaracter, both perfectly accommodated 
 to the feelings of the time, — the saintly ideal and the chivalrous 
 ideal. 
 
 Hoth these two classes of narrative correspond, in character as 
 well as in greneral purpose, to the Grecian mythes — being sUh 
 ties accepted as realities, from their full conformity with the ptfh 
 dispo.>itions and deep-seated faith of an uncritical audience, and 
 prepared beforehjmd by their authors, not with any reference to 
 
 imposed so powerfully upon tJie people around him as to receive divine hon- 
 ors. Thor also is treated as having been an evil daemon. (See Lcxicoo 
 Mytholopc. ut snpm, pp. 567, 915.) 
 
 Respecting the function of Snorro as lojrographer, see Prafat. ad EddaiB, 
 nt supra, p. xi. He i.s much more faithful, and less unfriendly to the old re- 
 ligion, than the other logographers of the ancient Scandinavian Sagas. (Leil* 
 fedeu der Nordischen Alterthiimer, p. 14, by the Antiquarian Society of 
 Copenhagen. 1837.) 
 
 By a singular transformation, dependent upon the same tone of mind, the 
 authors of the French Chansons de Geste, in the twelfth century, turned 
 Apollo into an evil d^tnon. patron of the Mussulmans (see the Roman of 
 Garin le Loherain, par M. Paulin Paris, 1833, p. 31 ) : '• Car mienx vaot Diex 
 que ne fait ApoUi.s." AL Paris observes, " Get ancien Dieu des beaux arts 
 est Tun de.s demons le plus souvent design^s dans nos pocmes, comme patroc 
 des Musulmans." 
 
 The prophet Mahomet, too, anathematized the old Persian epic anterior to 
 Ids reliirion. " C'est a I'occasion de Naser Ibn al-Hareth, qoi avait apporte de 
 Perse I'Klstoire de Rustem et dTsfendiar, et la faisait reciter par des chan- 
 tenses dans les assemblees des Koreischites. que Mahomet pronon^a le ven 
 ■nivant (of the Koran): II y a des bommos qui achetent des contes frivoleai, 
 poiird^u>nmer par-la les hommes dc la voie de Diea, d'nne mani^reinsensea 
 et pour la livrer k la ri8€>e : mais leur punit on les ooanira de h 
 (Mohi, Preface au Livre dea Rois de Fsrdoosi, p. ziii) 
 
 
 11 
 
 \i 
 
 
 f( 
 
 1 
 
 f 
 
«ro 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the conditions of hisUirical proof, but for the purpose of calling 
 forth sympathy, emotion, or reverence. The type of the saintly 
 character belongs to Christianity, being the history of Jesufc 
 Christ as described in the gospels, and that of the prophets m 
 the Old Testament ; whilst the lives of holy man, who acquired 
 a religiott* wpntation iVom the fourth to the rcuncenth century 
 of the rhristianffira, wijre invested with attributes, and illustrated 
 with ample details, tending to assimilate them to this revered 
 model. The numerous miracles, the cure of diseases, the expul- 
 8ion of daemons, the temptations and sufferings, the teachings 
 and commands, with which the biography of Catholic saints 
 abounds, grew chiefly out of this pious feeling, common to the 
 writer and to his readc^rs. Many of the other incidents, recounted 
 in the same performances, take their rise from misinterpreted al- 
 legories, from ceremonies and customs of which it was pleasing 
 lo find a consecrated origin, or from the disposition to convert the 
 etymology of a name into matter of history : many have also been 
 Bug-ested by local peculiarities, and by the desire of stimulating 
 or justifying the devotional emotions of pilgrims who visited some 
 consecrated chapel or image. The dove was connected, in the 
 faith of the age, with the Holy Ghost, the serpent with Satan ; 
 lions, wolves, stags, unicorns, etc. were the subjects of other cm- 
 blematic associations; and such modes of belief found expression 
 for themselves in many narratives which brought the saints into 
 conflict or conjoint action with these various animals. Legendi 
 of this kind, so indefinitely multiplied and so preemmently pop- 
 ular and affecting, in the Middle Ages, are not exaggerations cf 
 particular matters of fact, but emanations in detail of some cur- 
 wnt faith or feeling, which they served to satisfy, and by which 
 they were in turn am ply sustained and accredited.^ 
 
 ^ » The le7end^ of thcTaints have been touched upon by M. Guizot (Cooii 
 tfffis^U Modeme, le,o. xvii.) and by M. Amper. (ffisU>ire Littera.re de 1. 
 p«nt7 ii. cap. U, 15, 16) ; but a far more copious and elaborate account 
 Xm coupled with much just criticism, is to be found i" t^e ^^-J^* 
 Essaisur les I^gendes Pieuses du Moyen Age, par L.F.Alfred Mauiy. 
 
 ^Q^i scan^ly adverts at all to the more or less of -^^^^^^^'^^^^ 
 lained in these biographi.^ : he regards them altogether ss they grew <>»t of 
 «d answered to thfp«.dominant emotions and mental ex gences of the a^ 
 TjiriZr. d'un d/uge de fables absurdes, la morale delate avec un gp«4 
 
 LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS. 
 
 471 
 
 Every reader of Pausanias will recognize the great general 
 analogy beiween the stories recounted to him at the temples 
 which he visited, and these legends of the Middle Ages. Though 
 the type of character which the latter illustrate is indeed mate- 
 rially difierent, yet the source as well as the circulation, the gen- 
 erating as well as the sustaining forces, were in both cases the 
 &ame. Such legends were the natural growth of a religious faith. 
 
 empire " (p. 159, ed 1829> " Lea le^endes ont et6 pour les Chre'tiens de ce 
 temps (qu'on me permette cette comparaison purement littc'raire) ce que sont 
 pour les Orientaux ces lonj;s rccits, ces histoires si brillantes et si varices, 
 dont les Mille et une Nuits nous donnent un echantillon. C'e'tiiit \k que 
 rimaginarion populaire errait librement dans un monde inconnu, raerveil- 
 leux, piein de mouvcment et de pocsie" (p. 175, ibid). 
 
 M. Guizot takes his comparison with the tales of the Arabian Nights, ai 
 heard by an Oriental with uninquiring and unsuspicious credence. Viewed 
 with reference to an instructed European, who reads these narratives as 
 pleasing but recognized fiction, the comparison would not 1x5 just ; for no one 
 in that age dreamed of questioning the truth of the biographies. All the 
 remarks of M. Guizot assume this implicit faith in them as literal histories : 
 perhaps, in estimating the feelings to which they owed their extraordinary 
 popularity, he allows too little predominance to the religious feeling, and too 
 much influence to other mental exigences which then went along with it; 
 •nore especially as he remarks, in the preceding lecture (p. 116), " Le carac- 
 \kre general de Tepoque est la concentration du developpement intellectuel 
 dans la sphere religieuse." 
 
 How this absorbing religious sentiment operated in generating and accred- 
 iting new matter of narrative, is shown with great fulness of detail in the 
 work of M. Maury : " Tons les ecrits du moyen age nous apportent la 
 preuve de cette preoccupation exclusive des esprits vers I'Histoire Sainte et 
 les prodiges qui avaient signale' I'avenement du Christianisme. Tons nous 
 mcntrent la pensee de Dieu et du Ciel, dominant les moindres ceuvres de 
 cette <?poque de naive et de cre'dule simplicite. D ailleurs, n'e'taite-ce pas le 
 moine, le clerc, qui constituaient alors les seuls e'crivains? Qu'y a-t-il 
 cJ'e'tonnant que le sujet habituel de leurs meditations, de leurs (Etudes, se 
 refle'tut sans cesse dans leurs ouvrages ? Partout reparaissait a Timagination 
 Jesus et ses Saints: cette image, I'esprit I'accueillait avec soumission et 
 obeissance : il n osait pas encore envisager ces ciflestes pens^es avec Tceil de 
 la critique, armd de defiance et de doute ; au contraire, Fintelligence le* 
 •coeptait toutes indistinctement et s'en nourrissait avec avidity. Ainsi s'ac- 
 creditaient tons les jours de nouvelles fables. Unefoi vive veiU sans cesse cU 
 nouveaux /aits qu'elle puisse croire, com me la charite' veut de nouveaux bien- 
 (kits pours s'exercer" (p. 43> The remarks on the History of St. Christo- 
 pher, whose perscnality was allegorized by "/ither and Melancthon, 
 ourioas (v. 57\ 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 ;i 
 
 \ 
 
 •J 
 
 ^ - 
 
 
PI' 
 
 il 1 
 
 i79 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tamest, unexamining, jmd interwoven with the feelings at atiint 
 when the reason does not need to be cheated. The lives of the 
 Saints bring us even back to the simple and ever-operative theo 
 Wy of the Homeric aj,'e ; so constantly is the hand of God ex 
 h^ited even in the minutest details, for the succor of a tavored 
 individual, — so completely is the scientific point of view, re- 
 gpcctin- the phaenomena of nature, absorbed into the religious.i 
 During^'the intellectual vigor of Greece and Rome, a sense of the 
 invariable course of nature and of the scientific explanation ot 
 pha-nomena had been created among the superior minds, and 
 throu-h tl.^Mn indirectly among the remaining community ; thus 
 limitincr to a certain extent the ground open to be occupied by a 
 religious legend. With the decline of the pagan literature and 
 philosophy, before the sixth century of the Christian jera, this 
 scientific conception gradually passed out of sight, and lelt the 
 mind free to a religious interpretation of nature not less simple 
 and naif than that wliieh had prevailed under the Homeric pa- 
 ganism.^ The great religious movement of ^heEeformation, and 
 » « Duis le. prodiges qii71wdmettait avoir dd necessaire.nent s'operer 
 n tonibeau .lu saint nouvellement canonise, I'expression ; Ca^ci visum, 
 SlXrcssun, muti loquelam, surdi auditum, paralytici debitum membro 
 JTm otKcium, recuperabant; etait devenue phitot une fonnule d usage que • 
 Ztion litterale du fait.' (Maury, Essai sur les Legendes Pieu«es d4 
 
 **To"the fanfe purpose M. Ampere, eh. 14. p. 361 : '' II y a nn certai. nom- 
 b«.de fairs que I'agiographie reproduit constamment, quelque soil ^o" ^^^ J 
 ordinairement ce personaage a eu dans sa jeunesse une vision qui lui a 
 ^^leson avenir: ou bien, une prophetie lui a --"-^?f i^;;^ ^ 
 -^ur. Plus tard, il opere un certain nombrc de miracles, toujours le. 
 i^i^es- il exorcise des possed^s, ressuscite des morts, il est averti de sa fin 
 ^ un'songe. Puis srson tombeau s'accomplissent d'autres mervedle. 
 
 A-neu-Dr^s semblables." _ , . .»^ ^ 
 
 ^A L words from M Ampire to illustrate this : " Cest done an six.^ 
 Acle que la legende se constitae: c'est alors qtfelle pren* complfetement to 
 a«ct^re na.f qui lui api«trtient : qu'elle e.st elle-meme, qu'clle se s^pare d^ 
 Soate influence ^trangfere. En meme temps, Hgnorance dev.ent de plus ^ 
 Plos grossicre, et par suite la cr^lulit^ s'accroit: les ca am.t^s du temps «« 
 Stolouries,et Ton ana plus grand besoin de remedc «* f ^/"^^ 
 .... Les recita miracolenx se sabstitnent anx argumens de la th^log* 
 t» miracles sont devenns la meillenre demonstration du Chnstmnwine 
 etet la aenle que pnUsent compr^ndre les esprits grossiers des barbarcs (. 
 
 Igidn, c. 17. p. 401 : « U« dm €«r»ctire8 de U l^nde est de meler ooB 
 
 LEGENDS OF THE SAINTS. 
 
 47S 
 
 Ibe gradual formation of critical and philosophical habits in tha 
 ■lodem mind, have caused these legends of the Saints, — onoe 
 
 fltamment le pueril au grand : il faat ravoaer, elle d^figure parfois an pea 
 ces hommes d'unc trempo si forte, en mettant sur leur compte des anecdotes 
 dont le caract^re n'est pas toujours serienx ; elle en a us^ ainsi pour St. 
 Colamban, dont nous verrons tout a I'heure le role vis-^-vis de Brunehant 
 et des chefs Merovingiens. La legende auroit pa se dispenser de nooi 
 spprendre, comment un jour, il se fit rapporter par un corbeaa les gants 
 qu'il avait perdus : comment, un autre jour, il empecha la bierc ie coaler 
 d'un tonnsau perce, et di verses merveilles, certainement indignes de sa 
 memoire." 
 
 The miracle by which St. Columban employed the raven to fetch back his 
 lost gloves, is exactly in the character of the Homeric and Hesiodic age : the 
 earnest faith, as well as the reverential sympathy, between the Homenc man 
 and Zeus or Athene, is indicated by the invocation of their aid for hiS own 
 sufferings of detail, and in his own need and danger. The criticism of M. 
 Ampere, on the other hand, is analogous to that of the later pagans, after 
 the conception of a course of nature h.nd become established in men's mindn, 
 so far as that exceptional interference; by the gods was understood to be, 
 comparatively speaking, rare, and only supposable upon what were called 
 great emergences. 
 
 In the old Hesiodic legend (see above, ch. ix. p. 245^, Apollo is apprized 
 by a raven of the infidelity of the nymph Koronis to him — rw piev up' ayye- 
 ^of ^A»^e Kopa^, etc. (the raven appears elsewhere as companion of Apollo, 
 Plntarch. de Isid. et Os. p. 379, Herod, iv. 15.) Pindar, in his version of th« 
 legend, eliminated the raven, without specifying how Apollo got his knowl 
 edge of the circumstance. The Scholiasts praise Pindar much for having 
 rejected the puerile version of the story — f^naivel rbv Hivdapov b 'Apre/ioiv 
 6ti napaKpovaafievo^ rfjv nepl rbv KooaKa laropiav, avrbv Si'' kavrov kyvuKE- 
 
 vai (pTjol rbv ' AttoXAw ;jfa//of /v ovv tdaaq r^ ToiovTcp fiv^(ft r e X e w j 
 
 6vT I Xijp^Sei, etc. — compare also the criticisms of the Schol.^ Soph. 
 (Edip, Kol. 1378, on the old epic Thebals ; and the remarks of Arrian 
 (Exp. Al. iii. 4) on the divine interference by which Alexander and his 
 armv were enabled to find their wav across the sand of the desert to the 
 temple of Ammon. 
 
 In the eyes of M. Ampere, the recital of the biographer of St. Columban 
 appears puerile (ovttcj Idov ude ^eovg ava<pavSa tpi?.Fivrc^f Odyss. iii. 221); 
 in the eyes of that biographer, the criticism of M. Ampere would have ap- 
 peared impious. When it is once conceded that phsenomena are distributa 
 ble under two denominations, the natural and the miraculous, it must be left 
 to the feelings of each individual to determine what is and what is not, a 
 suitable occasion for a miracle. Diodorus and Pausanias differed in opinion 
 (as stated in « previous chapter) about the death of Actseon by his owq 
 lK>ands, — the former maintaining that the case was one fit for the special 
 taKMTvention of the goddess Artemis, the latter, that it was not so. Tk 
 
 t 
 
 t • 
 
 II 
 
 i 
 
 It 
 
 H 
 
474 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tLe charm and cherished creed of a numerous pubhc,' to ^ 
 altoirether out of credit, without even being re^'arded, among 
 Prot^tant^ at leasv. a^ worthy of a formal scrutiny n.to the evf 
 dence — a proof of the transitory value of public belief, how- 
 ever sincere and fervent, -as a certificate of historical truth, if if 
 be blended with religious predispositions. ^^ ^ 
 
 a^tion'i7onTdctcrmnml.lc only by the rcli^^ious feelings and conscience oC 
 L two dissentients: no common standard of judgmentcan be imposed upon 
 Uiem ; for no reasonin^^n derived from science or philosophy are available, m^- 
 niitoh a! in this ease the verv point in dispute is, whether the sc.ent.fic peat 
 of view be admissible. Those who are disposed to adopt the suP^narural 
 belief will tind in every ease the language open to them wherew.th Diony 
 ^u of lahcarnassus (in recounting a miracle wrought by Vesta, m the 
 ear y times of U<m.aa history, for the purpose of rescumg an unju^t^y 
 I^eused virgin) reproves the sceptics of his rime: Mt is well worth while 
 Te observes) to eeount the special manifestation (^..^ac.mc) whuh the 
 S^dtrshoied to thee unjustly accused virgins. For these --~^ 
 fxtraotdinarv as thev arc. have lK3en held worthy of belief by tbe Romany 
 !^d hltorians have 'tnlked much about them. Those persons, indeed, who 
 Sriei<tical schemes of philosophy (if, indeed, we must ea them 
 vhlosoM pulling in pieces as they do all the special mandestions {u.ucrac 
 S^;'^; rac ^.'^a^ -C r.. ...v) of the gods which ^ave taken pa« 
 ^oi Greeks or barbarians, will of course turn thrs. stones also into .1^ 
 :^e ascribing them to the vain talk of men, as if none of the gods eared at 
 dl for mankind. But those who, having pushed their researches farther 
 tli V tl gods not t.> be indidVrent to human affairs, but favorable to good 
 menlnd hostile to had - will not treat these special manifestations as m^4 
 ^el le tl".^^^^^^^^^^ (l>io.-.ys. Halic. ii. 68-69.) riutarch, after noticing 
 r great numl>er of miraculous statements in ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^ 
 anxietv to draw a ine between the true and the false, but cannot tmd 
 where "excess, both of credulity and of incredulity Tbe tells us) m such 
 la rsisdan<^ rous: caution, and nothing too much, is the best course 
 m ni 1 s,T6. Polvbius is for granting p^^rmission to historians to recouni 
 Sden; .nJber of niira.les to kec,> up a fueling " P^^;^"^ 
 tude but not m re: to measure out the proper quantity (he ob.trves) is 
 r^Jult, but not impossible i^va.a,ay,a^oc earc. ij -oaor,,, ov ,,v unapa 
 
 ''^ TUlTat Bollandist collection of the Lives of the Saints, intended to 
 comprise the whole vear, did not extend beyond the nine months from 
 ia^'arv to October, which occupy fifty three large^ vo umes. The month 
 of April tills three of those volumes, and exhibits the »'-- «^;*'Vw 
 Had the collection run over the entire year, the total "-^^/^^^^j;^ 
 raphies could hardly have been less than 25,000, and might have been evei 
 greater (see Guizot, Cours d'ffistomj Modeme, le^on xvu- p. 1571 
 
 4*OI3TD8 OF CHTVALRT. 
 
 47S 
 
 The same mythopoeic vein, and the same susceptibility and 
 ik^ility of belief, which had created both supply and demand for 
 the legends of the Saints, also provided the abundant stock of 
 romantic narrative poetry, in amplification and illustration of the 
 chivalrous ideal. What the legends of Troy, of Thebes, of the 
 Kalydonian boar, of CEdipus, Theseus, etc. were to an early 
 Greek, the tales of Arthur, of Charlemagne, of the Niebelungen, 
 were to an Englishman, or Frenchman, or German, of the twelftii 
 ©r thirteenth century. They were neither recognized fiction nor 
 authenticated history : they were history, as it is felt and wel- 
 comed by minds unaccustomed to investigate evidence, and un- 
 conscious of the necessity of doing so. That the Chronicle of 
 Turpin, a mere compilation of poetical legends respecting Charle- 
 magne, was accepted as genuine history, and even pronounced to 
 be such by papal authority, is well known ; and the authors of 
 the Romances announce themselves, not less than those of the 
 M Grecian epic, as being about to recount real matter of fact.^ 
 It is certain that Charlemagne is a great historical name, and it 
 
 * See Warton's History of English Poetry, vol. i. dissert L p. xvii. Again, 
 In sect. iii. p. 140: ''Vincent de Beauvais, who lived under Louis IX. of 
 Prance Cabout 1260), and who, on account of his extraordinary erudition, 
 was appointed preceptor to that king's sons, very gravely classes Archbishop 
 furpin's Charlemagne among the real histories, and places it on a level 
 irith Suetonius and Caesar. He was himself an historian, and has left a 
 large history of the world, fraught with a variety of reading, and of high 
 TOpnte in the Middle Ages ; but edifying and entertaining as this work might 
 oave been to his contemporaries, at present it serves only to record their 
 ;>rejudice8 and to characterize their credulity." About the full belief in 
 Arthur and the Tales of the Round Table during the fourteenth century, 
 and about the strange historical mistakes of the poet Gower in the fifteenth, 
 tee the same work, sect. 7. vol. ii p. 33; sect. 19. vol. ii. p. 239. 
 
 "L'auteur de la Chronique de Turpin Csays M. Sismondi, Litterature da 
 Bfidi, vol. i. ch. 7. p. 289) n'avait point I'intention de briller aux yeux da 
 public par une invention heureuse, ni d'amuser les oisifs par des contes mer- 
 ▼eilleux qu'ils reconnoitroient pour tels : il presentait aux Fran<jais tons ces 
 faits ^tranges comma de I'histoire, et la lecture des Mgendes fabuleuses avait 
 Aooontum^ k croire k de plus grandes merveilles encore ; aussi plusieurs dft 
 ees fables furent elles reproduites dans la Chronique de St. Denis." 
 
 Again, A, p. 290 : • Souvent les anciens romanciers, lortqn'ils entreprenneLt 
 ■n n^cit de la cour de Charlemagne, prennent un ton plus ^evtf : ce ne soBt 
 ^loint des fiifdes qa'ila vont codter, c'est de Thistoire nadonale, ^ c'est la 
 
 it 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 >i 
 
«?6 
 
 HISTOHY OF GREECI» 
 
 m iHKsible, though not certain, that the name of Arthur may be 
 historical also. But the Cliarlemagne of history, ani the Chadd- 
 magne of romance, have little except the name in common nof 
 could we ever detei-mine, except by independent evidence (which 
 in this case we happen to possess), whether Charlemagne wai 
 A real or a fictitious person.^ That illustrious name, as well as 
 the more problematical Arthur, is taken up by the romancers, nd 
 with a view to celebrate realities previously verified, but for the 
 purpose of setting forth or amplifying an ideal of their own, in 
 such manner as both to rouse the feelings and captivate the fiuth 
 
 of their hearers. 
 
 To inquire which of the personages of tlie Carlovingian epic 
 were real and wliich were fictitious, — to examine whether th« 
 expedition ascribed to Charlemagne against Jerusalem had ever 
 taiten place or not, — to se[)arate truth from exaggeration in tha 
 exploits of the Knights of the Round Table, — these were prob- 
 
 gloire de leurs ancetres qu'ils veuleiit celebrer, et ils ont droit alors k deman- 
 der (ju'on les dcoute avei respect." 
 
 The Chronicle of Turpin was inserted, even so late as the year 15G6, hi 
 the collection printed by Scardius at Frankfort of early German historiaiM 
 CGiniruene', Histoire Litteraire d' Italic, vol. iv. part ii. ch. 3. p. 157). 
 
 To the same point — that these romances were listened to as real stories 
 ^sce Sir Walter Scott's Preface to Sir Tristram, p Ixvii. The authors of 
 tiie Lcjzends of the Saints are not less explicit in their assertions that every- 
 thing' which they reccunt is true and well-attJ?sted (Ampere, c. 14. p. 358). 
 
 » The series of articles by M. Fauriel, published in the Revue des Deax 
 Mondes, vol. xiii. arc full of instruction resj)ectin^' the orij-in, tenor, azid 
 inrtutncc of the Romances of Chivalry. Thoujrh the name of Charlemagne 
 appears, the romancers are really unable to distin^^uish him fi-om Charles 
 Marielorfrom Charles the Bald (pp. 537-.')39). They ascril)e to him an 
 expedition to the Holy Land, in which he coniiucred Jerusalem from the 
 Saracens, obtained possession of the relics of the passion of Christ, the 
 crown of thorns, etc These precious relics he carried to Rome, fi-om 
 whence they were taken to Spain by a Saracen emir, named Balan. at the 
 head of an army. The expedition of Charieman:ne ajrainst the Saracens in 
 Spain was undertaken for the pnrjiose of recoverinj? the relics: **Cee 
 divers romans peuvert etre regardes comme la suite, comme le developpe 
 ment, de la fiction de la conquete de Jerusalem par Charlemagne." 
 
 Respectin*^ the Romance of Rinaldo of Montauban ftlescribing the strag 
 gles of a feudal lord against the emperor; M Fauriel observes, " fl n*y a jt 
 cn>i8, aucnn fondewent historique : c'est selon to«te apparencc, la pore es 
 pression poe'tique du fait g^n^ral, ' etc (p. 542. ^ 
 
 i 
 
 CHARLEMAGNE. 
 
 477 
 
 lems which an audience of that day had neither disposition to 
 M;dertake nor means to resolve. They accepted the narrative 
 •8 they heard it, without suspicion or reserve ; the incidents ro. 
 kited, as well as the connecting links between them, were in full 
 karmony with their feelings, and gratifying as well to their 
 •ympathies as to their curiosity : nor was anything farther want- 
 ing to induce them to believe it, though the historical basis might 
 be ever so slight or even non-existent J 
 
 * Among the "formulas consacr^s** (observes M. Fauriel) of the roman- 
 eers of the Carlovingian epic, are asseverations of their own veracity, and of 
 the accuracy of what they are about to relate — specification of witnesses 
 whom they have consulted — appeals to pretended chronicles : " Que ces 
 citations, ces indications, soient parfois se'rieuses et sinc^res, cela pent etre ; 
 mais c'est une exception et une exception rare. De telles allegations de la 
 part des romanciers, sont en ge'ne'ral un pur et simple mensonge, mais non 
 toutefois un mensonge gratuit. ' C'est un mensonge qui a sa raison et sa 
 convenance : il tient au d^sir et au besoin de satisfaire une opinion accoutu- 
 mee ii supposer et ii chercher du vrai dans les fictions du genre de celles ou 
 Ton allegue ces pre'tendues autorite's. La maniere dont les auteurs de cea 
 fictions les qualiHent souvent eux-memes, est une consequence naturelle de 
 kur pretention d'y avoir suivi des documens v^n^rables. Ils les qualifient 
 de chansons de vieille histoire^ de haute histoire^ do bonne geste, de grande bay-on- 
 me: et ce n'est pas pour se vanter qu'ils parleut ainsi: la vanite d'auteor 
 n'est rien chez eux, en comparaison du besoin qu'ils ont d'etre crus, de passer 
 pour de simples traducteurs, de simples r^pe'titeurs de le'gendes ou d'histoire 
 consacree. Ces protestations de v^racite, qui, plus ou moins expresses, sont 
 de rigueur dans les romans Carlo vingien8,y sont aussi frequemment accom 
 pagn^es de protestations accessoires contre les romanciers, qui, ayant deja 
 traite' un sujet donn^, sont accus(?s d'y avoir fausse' la v^rite." (Fauriel, 
 Orig. d I'Epopcfe Chevaleresque, in the Revue des Deux Mondes, vol. xiiL 
 p. 554.; 
 
 About the Cycle of the Round Table, see the same series of article! 
 (Rev. D. M. t. xiv. pp. 170-184;. The Chevaliers of the Saint Graal were a 
 sort of id^al of the Knights Templars : " Une race de princes h^roTques, 
 originaires de I'Asie, fut pr^dc8tin6e par le ciel meme a la garde du Saint 
 Graal. Perille fut le premier de cette race, qui s'^tant convert! au Chris- 
 tianisme, passa en Europe sous TEmpereur Vespasien," etc. ; then follows a 
 •tring of fabulous incidents : the epical agency is similar to that of Home! 
 — Aide <5' IreXeiero l3ovX^. 
 
 M. Paulin Paris, in his Prefaces to the Romans des Douze Pairs de 
 lirance, has controverted many of the positions of M. Fauriel, and with »»nc- 
 eess, so far as regards the Provencal origin of the Chansons de Gertt, 
 •Melted by the latter. In regard to the Romances of the Round Table* he 
 
 f 
 
r^r' 
 
 478 
 
 HISTORY OP CHSEEOB. 
 
 The romancea of chivalry representee!, to tliope wfco hcsnl 
 tbem, real deeds of the foretime — « glories of the foregone men," 
 lo use the He.siodic expression! — at the same time that they ent 
 bodied and filled up the details of an heroic ideal, such as that 
 age could conceive and admire — a fervent piety, combined with 
 strength, bravery, and the love of adventurous aggression, directed 
 Bomctimes against intidels, sometimes against enchanters or mon- 
 stei-s, sometimes in defence of the fair sex. Such characteristics 
 wore naturally popular, in a century of feudal stniggle& and uni- 
 
 agrees substantinlly with M. Fauriel ; but he tries to assi^ a gi-eater histo- 
 rical value to the poems of the Carlovinpan epic, — very unsuccessfully, in 
 my opinion. But his own analysis of the old poem of (iarin (ie Loherain 
 bears out the very opiTiion which he is confuting: "Nous sommes au refund 
 de Charles Martcl, et nous reconnaisson.^J sous d'antrcs noms les dL-tails 
 exacts de la fameuse difaite d'Attila dans les champs Catalauni(|ues. Saint 
 Loup et Saint Nicaise, ^^lorieux prelate du quatrieme siecle, reviennent 
 fipircr autonr du phm de P^pin le Bref : enfin pour comple'ter la confusion, 
 Charles Martel nieort sur le champ de bataille, a la place du roi des Visi- 
 
 goths, Theodoric Toiites les }xirties d^- la min-ati'ov sont vraies: seule- 
 
 ment toutes .t> tronviul d^phc^es. En g6neral, les peuplcs n'cntendent rien k 
 la chronolopie : les < vonemcns restcnt: les individus, les lieux et les 6poiiue8, 
 ne laisscnt ancnnc tnice : c'cst pour ainsi dire, une d^'coration sceniqne quo 
 Ton applique inditf<?t-emmcnt a des r(5cit8 souvent contraires." (Preface to 
 the Roman de Garin le Loherain, pp.xvi.-xx.: Pari.s, 1833.) Compare also 
 his lA'ttre i\ M. Monmerque, prefixed to the Roman de Berthe aux Grans 
 Pi68, Paris, 1836. 
 
 To say that all th«j parts of the narrative are true, is contrary to M. Paris*! 
 •wn showing: some parts may be true, separately taken, but these fragments 
 of truth are melted down with a large mass of fiction, ana cannot be dis- 
 criminated unless wo i>osscss some independent test. The puet who picka 
 out one incident from the fourth century, another from the tiftn, and a few 
 more from the eighth, and then blends them all into a continuous tale along 
 with many additions of his own, shows that he takes the items of fact because 
 they suit the purposes of his narrative, not because they happen to be attested 
 hy historical evidence. His hearers are not critical : they desire to hav» 
 their imaginations and feelings affected, and they are ccntent to accept wit*^ 
 out question whatever accomplishes this end. 
 
 * Hcsiod, Theogon. 100 — Klka irporepcjv aa^purrruv. Puttenham talks of 
 the remnant of bards existing in his time (1589) : "Blind Harpers, or such 
 Bke Taveme Minstrels, whose matters are for the most part stones of old 
 fiM^, as the Tale of Sir Topaze, the Reportes of Bevis of Southampton, Adam 
 Bell, Clymme of the aongh. and sach other old Romances or Histoncd 
 Bkfmes} (Arte of English Pbcsi?, book ii cap. 9.) 
 
 NKBELrNGEN LIED. ^ EBDA. 
 
 m 
 
 kisecaritj, when the grand subjects of common respeel ami 
 interest were the Church and the Crusades, and when the latter 
 eBpedally were embraced with an enthusiasm trulj astonishing; 
 
 The long Grerman poem of the Niebelungen Lied, as well at 
 the Volsunga Saga and a portion of the songs of the £dda, relate 
 to a oommon fund of mythical, superhaman personages, and of 
 &buious adventure, identified with the earliest antiquity of the 
 Teutonic and Scandinavian race, and representing their primitive 
 sentiment towards ancestors of divine origin. Sigurd, Brynhilde, 
 Gudrun, and Atle, are mythical characters celebrated as well by 
 the Scandinavian Scalds as by the Grerman epic {xjets, but with 
 many varieties and separate additions to distinguish the one from 
 the other. The German epic, later and more elaborated, includes 
 various persons not known to the songs in the Edda, in imrticu* 
 lar the prominent name of Dieterich of Bern — presenting, more- 
 over, the principal characters and circumstances as Christian, while 
 in the Edda there is no trace of anything but heathenism. There 
 Is, indeed, in this the old and heathen version, a remarkable anal- 
 ogy with many points of Grecian mythical narrative. As in the 
 case of the short life of Achilles, and of the miserable Labdakidt 
 of Thebes — so in the family of the Volsungs, though sprung from 
 and protected by the gods — a curse of destiny hangs upon them 
 and brings on their ruin, in spite of preeminent personal quali 
 ties. I The more thoroughly this old Teutonic story has beeo 
 traced and compared, in its various iransibimations and acoom« 
 paniments, the less can any well-established connection be made 
 out for it with authentic historical names or events. We must 
 acquiesce in its personages as distinct in original conception from 
 oommon humanity, and as belonging to the subjective mythical 
 world of the race by whom they were simg. 
 
 Such were the compositions which not only interested the 
 
 * Respecting the Yolsanga Saga and the Niebelungen Lied, the work ol 
 Lange — Untersachangen ober die Geschichte and das Veiiialtniss <kr 
 Nordischen and Deutschen Ueldensage — is a raloable translation from the 
 Danish Saga-Bibliothek of P. E MOlkr 
 
 P. E. Mallor maintains, indeed, the histwical basis of Uie tales respecting 
 Ibe Volsungs (see pp. loa-107) — apon arguments very ansatisliictory * 
 IlKKtgh the genuine Scandinanan origin of the tale ib perfectly made 
 Th* dMpttf added bf Ln^ge UmnU; at thi clan (see p. 48S, 01c), ( 
 
 i 
 
 •'r 
 
 Vol. 1 
 
 2a 
 
 ■i I 
 
1 
 
 r V 
 
 V 
 
 1> 
 I 
 
 ]) 
 
 «50 
 
 mSlORY OF OBEfiCB. 
 
 emotions, but also satisfied tbe undistinguishing historical curio, 
 ttty, of the ordinary public in the middle ages. The exploit oi 
 mmy of these romantic lieroes resemble in several points thoae 
 of the Grecian ; the adv(;ntures of Perseus, Achilles, Odysseua, 
 Atalanta, liellerophon, Ja^on, and the Trojan war, or Ai'gonautic 
 expedition generally, would have fitted in perlectly to the Car- 
 lovingian or other epice ol' the period.' That of the middle agea, 
 
 iuster views as to the character of the primitive mythology, though lie too 
 advances some positions respecting a something " reinsymbolisches " m the 
 background, which I find it difficult to follow (see p. 477, etc). - There are 
 very ancient epical ballads still sung by the people in the Faro Islands, many 
 of them relating to Sigurd and his adventures (p. 412). 
 
 Jacob Grimm, in his Deuts.he Mythologie, maintains the purely mythical 
 character, as opposed to the historical, of Siegfried and Dieterich (Art. Helden, 
 
 pp. 344-346). 
 
 So too, in the great PerBian epic of Ferdousi, the principal characters are 
 religious and mythical. M. Mohl observes, — '' Les caract^res des person- 
 nages principaux de I'ancienrie liiatoire de Perse se retrouvent dans le livre 
 des Rois (de Ferdousi) tels que les indiquent les parties des livres de Zoro- 
 aster que nous poss^dons encore. Kaioumors, Djemschid, Feridoun, Gush- 
 tasp, Isfendiar, etc. jouent dans le po^me ^pique le meme role que dans les 
 Livres sacrees : k ce\k pr^s, ([ue dans les derniers ils nous apparaissent k 
 Cravers une atmosphere my :hologique qui grandit tous leurs traits : man 
 cette difference est pr^cisement celle qu'on devait s'attendre a trouver entre 
 la tradition religieuse et la tradition epique." (Mohl, Livre des liois par 
 
 Ferdousi, Preface, p. 1.) 
 
 The Persian historians subsequent to Ferdousi have all taken his poem aa 
 the basis of their histories, and have even copied him faithfully and literally 
 (Mohl, p. 53) Many of his heroes became the subjects of long epical biog- 
 raphies, written and recited without any art or grace, often by writers whose 
 names are unknown {ib. pp. 54-70). Mr. Morier tells us that "the Shah 
 Nameh is still l»elieved by the present Persians to contain their ancient his- 
 tory " (Adventures of Hadgi Baba, c. 32). As the Christian romancers 
 transformed Apollo into the patron of Mussulmans, so Ferdousi makes Alex- 
 ander the Great a Christian: "La critique historique (observes M. Mohl) 
 <tait du temps de Ferdousi chose presqu' inconnue." (ib. p. xlviii.) About the 
 absence not only of all historiography, but also of all idea of it, or taste for H 
 among the eariy Indians, Persians, Arabians, etc., see the learned book of 
 Nork, Die Gotter Syriens, Pnjface, p. viii. seqq. (Stuttgart, 1842.) 
 
 > Several of the heroes of the ancient worid were indeed themselves popu- 
 lar subjects with the romancers of the middle ages, Theseus, Jason, etc.; 
 Alexander the Great, more m) than any of them. 
 
 Dr. Warton obserres, resjieeting the Argonautic expedition, ^ Few stones 
 
 EXPANSIVE CHAKACTER OF EWC LEGEHD. 
 
 ike the Grecian, was eminently expansive m its nature; 
 •tOFMSs were successively attached to the names and oompanioof 
 of Charlemagne and Arthur, just as the legend of Troy waa 
 enlarged by Arktinus, Lesches, and Stesichorus, — that of Thebes, 
 by tresh miseries entailed on the tated head of CEdipus, — and 
 that of the Kalydoniaii boar, by the addition of Atalanta. Alto- 
 gether, the .>tate of mind of the hearers seems in both cases to 
 have been much the same, — eager for emotion and sympathy, 
 and receiving any narrative attuned to their feelings, not merely 
 with hearty welcome, but also with unsuspecting belief. 
 
 Nevertheless, there were distinctions deserving of notice, which 
 rentier the foregoing proposition more absolutely exact with re- 
 gard to Greece than with regard to the middle ages. The talea 
 of tlte epic, and the mythes in their most popular and extended 
 ftigniUcation, were the only intellectual nourishment with which 
 the Grecian public was supplied, until the sixth century before 
 the (/hristian aera : there was no prose writing, no history, no 
 philosophy. But such was not exactly the case at the time when 
 the epic of the middle ages appeared. At that time, a portion of 
 tiociety possessed the Latin language, the habit of writing, and 
 some tinge both of history and philosophy : there were a aeriet 
 of chronicles, scanty, indeed, and imperfect, but referring to ooof 
 
 of antiquity have more the cast of one of the old romances than this of Jasoo. 
 An expedition of a new kind is made into a strange and distant country, 
 attended with infinite dangers and difficolties. The king's daughter of the 
 new country is an -jnchwitress ; she falls in love with the yonng prince, whe 
 is the chief adventurer. The prize which he seeks is guarded by braaen-foo^ 
 ed bulls, who breathe fire, and by a hideoos dragon, who never sleeps. Tha 
 princess lends him the assistance of her charms and incantations to conquer 
 these obstacles; she gives him possession of the prize, leaves her father*! 
 coart, and follows him into his native country." (Warton, Observations 9a 
 Spenser, vol. i. p. 178.) 
 
 To the same purpose M. Gingnen^ : " Le premier modMe des F^es n*e«(- 
 il pas dans Circe', dang Calypso, dans M4d4el Celtu des g^ans, dan« Poly- 
 ph^me, dan? Cacus, et dans les g^ans, on les Titans, cette race ennemie dm 
 Inpiter ? s serpens et ies dragons des romans ne sont-ils pas des soooet' 
 mrs da dt|^t>n des Hesperides et de celni de la Toison d*or ? Les Magi- 
 Jens! la Thessalie en tftoit pleine. Les armes cnchant^ce fanp^n^trablatl 
 eUes sent de la m^e trempe, et Ton pent les croire forgoes an mftme ftm^ 
 Mao qae celles d'Achille et cTEn^.'* (QingUBii^ HistoirB Litt^raire d'lttOI^ 
 •oi. iv. part M. ck. 9, p. 161.) 
 
 VOL. L f 1 •!••• 
 
 r— i« 
 
I 
 
 y ^ 
 
 482 
 
 H[»TORY OF GKEEOB. 
 
 EARLY fflSTOBY OF ENGLAND. 
 
 48d 
 
 temporary events and preventing the real history of ib- p^l 
 from passing into oblivion : there were even individual scholars, 
 in the twelfth century, whose acquaintance with Latin literature 
 wag sufficiently considerable to enlarge their minds and to im- 
 prove their judgments. Moreover, the epic of the middle ages, 
 though deeply imbued with religious idea^, wa^ not directly ama^ 
 oamated with the religion of the people, and did not always find 
 fevor with the clergy; while the heroes of the Grecian epic 
 were not only Unked in a thousand ways with existing worship, 
 practices, and sacred localities, but Homer and Hesiod pass with 
 Herodotus for the constructors of Grecian theology. We thu8 
 flee that the ancient epic was both exempt from certain d.stmct. 
 imr influences by which that of the middle ages was surrounded, 
 Wd more closely identified with the veins of thought and feehng 
 prevalent in the Grecian public Yet these counteracting in- 
 Suences did not prevent Pope Calixtus II. from declanng the 
 Chronicle of Turpin to be a genuine history. 
 
 If we take the history of our own country as it was conceiv^ 
 «d written from the twelfth to the seventeenth century by Hard- 
 TDK, Fabyan, Grafton, Hollinshed, and others, we shall fand th^ 
 Hwas supposed to begin with Brute the Trojan, and was earned 
 iown ftt)m thence, for many ages and through a long succession 
 of kings, to the times of Julius Caesar. A similar behef of de- 
 goent from Troy, arising seemingly from a reverential imitatioo 
 of the Romans and of their Trojan origin, ^^^^^"^^."*..^ 
 fcncy of other Kuropean nations. With regard to the Enghsh, 
 the chief circulator of it was Geoffrey of Monmouth, and it pasa- 
 ed with little resistance or dispute into the national faith — tbe 
 kings from Brute downward being enrolled in regular chronolo- 
 gical series with their respective dates annexed. In a dispute 
 which took place during the reign of Edward I. (a. i>. 1^01) 
 between England and Scotland, the descent of the kings of Eng- 
 tend from Brute the Trojan was solemnly embodied in a docu- 
 Bent put forth to sustain the rights of the crown of England, aft 
 m argument bearing on the case then in discussion : and it pasa- 
 •d without attack from the opposing party,i _an incident whicH 
 
 * See Warton's History of English Poetry, sect. iii. p. 131, note. "^ 
 MM beibp) the sixteenth centuiy presumed to doubt that the Francs derlfif 
 
 umiimtii 08 of the appeal made by JEschin^, in the contention 
 between the Athenians and Philip of Maceddn, respecting Am- 
 pbipolis, to the primitive dotal rights of Akamas son of Theseus 
 — and also of the defence urged by the Athenians to sustain their 
 fKMiquest of Sigeium, against the reclamations of the Mityleneans, 
 •Therein the former alleged that they had as much right to the 
 nlace as any of the other Greeks who had formed part of the 
 •dctorious armament of Agamemnon.' 
 
 The tenacity with which this early series of British kings waa 
 I'afended, is no less remarkable than the facility with which it 
 iras admitted. The chroniclers at the beginning of the seven- 
 teenth century warmly protested against the intrusive scepticism 
 which would cashier so many venerable sovereigns and efface so 
 many noble deeds. They appealed to the patriotic feelings of 
 their hearers, represented the enormity of thus setting up a pre- 
 sumptuous criticism against the belief of ages, and insisted on 
 the danger of the precedent as regarded history generally.^ How 
 this controversy stood, at the time and in the view of the illus- 
 
 their origin from Francus son of Hector ; that the Spaniards were descend- 
 ed from Japhet, the Britons from Brutus, and the Scotch from Fergus." 
 
 {Rid. p. 140.) 
 According to the Prologue of the prose Edda, Odin was the supreme 
 
 king of Troy in Asia, ** in eii tcrr^ quam nos Turciam appellamus 
 
 Hinc omnes Borealis plagae magnates vel primores genealogias suas refer- 
 ant, atque principes illius urbis inter numina locant : sed in primis ipsum 
 Priamum pro Odeno ponunt," etc. They also identified Tros with Thor. 
 (See Lexicon Mythologicum ad calcem Eddee Sajmund, p. 552. vol. iii.) 
 
 * See above, ch. xv. p. 458 ; also iEschines, De Falsfi Legatione, c. 14 , 
 Herodot. v. 94. The Herakleids pretended a right to the territory in Sicily 
 near Mount Eryx, in consequence of the victory gained by their progenitor 
 Herakles over Eryx, tlie eponymous hero of the place. (Herodot. v. 43.) 
 
 * The remarks in Speed's Chronicle (book v. c. 3. sect. 11-12), and the 
 preface to Howes's Continuation of Stow's Chronicle, published in 1631, are 
 curious as illustrating this earnest feeling. The Chancellor Fortescue, in 
 impressing upon his royal pupil, the son of Henry VI., the limited character 
 of English monarchy, deduces it from Brute tlie Trojan : " Concerning the 
 different powers which kings claim over their subjects, I am firmly of opin- 
 ion that it arises solely from the different nature of then- original institutioa 
 Bo the kingdom of England had its original from Brute and the Trojana, 
 who attended him from Italy and Greece, and became a mixed kind of 
 government, compounded of the regal and the poUtkaL** (Hallam, Hist 
 liid. Ages, ch. viii. P. 3, page 230.) 
 
404 
 
 m^TOTTY Of ORKKCI. 
 
 fflSTORICAL STANDARD OF CltTIDrBILmr. 
 
 4M 
 
 ,» 
 
 .1 
 \ 
 
 ^.v-. author «f Pamdiwe Loit, 1 *hall jrive in hie own wonK it 
 lliey appew in th« second |>ag« o* hi? HiBtory of EngUuicL Aft«r 
 Uving briefly toucheil u|ioii the Btoriew of SaniotheB eon U J#- 
 ■lliet^ Albion w>n o» Neptwne, eto., he (MWieeds : — 
 
 * Bttt now ot* Urutu^ ami hi8 line, with the whole progeny at 
 kings to the entrance of Jnliu.* Osar, we cwiiiot so easily be 
 discharged: descent* of aiu^ntry long continued, laws and ex- 
 nloitj* not plainly 8P« ming to be Ijormwod or devised, which on 
 Um oomraon belief have wrought no Hmall impression : ^iefmrled 
 ly mrmt/. ilen^ed vHerly ^ few. For what though Unitu. and thu 
 whole Twjan pn^cnce were yielded up, seeing they, who tti-st do- 
 vined to bring us 8omf noble ancestor, were content at first with 
 Brntu8 the C\>nsul, till better invention, though not willing tofor»- 
 ip the name, taught them to remove it higher into a more fabu- 
 lous age, and by the pame remove lighting on the Twjan taloa, 
 in affectation to make iJm? Briton of one original with the R*)mam 
 pitched there : Yd thtme old and inhwn ktfiffs. n€rer any to ham 
 bmn real persons, or dfme in their Ih^s at least some paH of what 
 m hng hath been remprnhered. eannoi he thovfjhf inthovf too strict 
 imrefhilitff. For thej»e, and tho^e causes above mentioned, thai 
 which hath received approl»ation from so many. I have chosen 
 BOt to omit. Certain or uncertain, be that \\\km\ iIjc credit of those 
 whom 1 must tbUow : so far as keeps aloof from impossible or 
 obsuvfL attested by ancient writers from books more ancient, 1 
 roftLse not, as the due and pn^yer subject of story.^i 
 
 Yet in spite of the general belief of so many centuries — in 
 Bpiteof the concurrent jx^rsuasion of historians and poets — in 
 8|>ite of the declai-ation of Milton, extorted from his feelings 
 rmtlier than irom hi^ reason, that thi:s long line of qua-si-hLstorical 
 kings and exploits could not be all unworthy of belief — in spit« 
 of so large a body of authority and precedent, the historians of 
 the nineteenth century begin the history of England with Juliui 
 Ciesar. They do not attempt either to settle the date of king 
 Bladud's accession, or to determine what may be the basis of 
 truth in the affecting narrative of Lear.a The standard of hif 
 
 i '^ AntiquiUkb emm r&^pit faboiag ficus etiam Lonniinqaam iocondilti 
 etas aotem jam excidEa, pr«8eitim elodens omne quod fieri noo pol8i^ 
 -nit" ete. COicero, De RepubUc^, iL 10, p. 147, ed. MaiL; 
 * Dr ZachM^ Grev ha« the following obaervationt in hia Notes onShrtl 
 
 credibility, es^»erially with regaH to modern erents, hut 
 Indeed been greatly and senmWj nrised within the fawt hundrei 
 
 years, 
 
 Bot in regard to ancient Grecian history, the ndes of evidence 
 etill continue relaxed. The dictum of Milton, regarding the aote- 
 Ca sarian history of England, still represenU pretty exactly tho 
 feeling now prevalent resp^M-ting the mythical history of Gpceoa 
 *• Yet those old and yn^torn kings (Agaroemn6n, Achilles, (Jdy»- 
 §eus, Jason, Adrastiis, Amphiaraus, Meleager, etc), never any 
 to have been real person?, or done in their live« at l^-a^t .-^ome 
 pari of what so long liatli been remembered, cannot l>e thought 
 without too strict inereduiity.*' Amidst much fiction (we are ^till 
 toM), there most be some tmth : but how is soch truth to be 
 singled out? Milton floes not even attempt to make the »ev©- 
 ran< e : he contents himself with " keeping aloof from the impos- 
 pible and the absurd," and ends in a narrative which ba^ indeed 
 the merit of l>eing 8ober-cok>red, bot which he never for a moment 
 thinks of recommending to his readers as true. So in regard le 
 the legends of Greece, — Troy, Thebes, the Argonauts, the Boar 
 of Kalydoo, Herakles, Theseus, (Edipus, — the conviction stUI 
 hoWs in men's minda, that there must be something true at the 
 bottom ; and many readers of this work may be displeased, I 
 fear, not to see conjured up before them the Eidolon o4* an ao- 
 tiientic history, even though the vital spark ci evidence he 
 altogether wantingJ 
 
 prare ( London, 1 754, yol. i p. 11 2 ). In commenting on the pawa^ ia 
 Lear, Nerv i» an angler tn (Me laie»> nf darh»em, he saym, '^ This is one <tf 
 Shakspeare's most reraarkable oMaekftmums. Kinj? L«ar socceederfhte 
 father Bladad anno mnT)di 3106; and Nero, anno mnndi 4017, was sizteM 
 years old, when be married Octavia, Cesar's danghter. See Foncii Onw- 
 
 Doiogia, p. 94.* ^ 
 
 8acb a sappoeed chronological discrepancy w<oald hardly be poiatei 
 
 in any commentary now written. 
 
 The introdnction prefixed by Mr. Giies, to his recent translation of 
 fny of Monmooth ( 1842), gives a just view both of die nse which O T oii 
 poets made of his tales, and of the general credence ao long and ao «■■» 
 pectingly accorded to them. The list of old Bririah kings given by Mt 
 QBei alao descrres attention, as a parallel to the GfBdan geaealogieaartBriW 
 
 la the Olympiads. _ . . 
 
 » The foUowmg pasas^e, irom tbe Pvefisce of Mr. Price to W HtDBli 
 4»«l£aslMii Poetry, is alike jm aod 
 
m::» 
 
 «86 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUBJECTIVE VIEW OF THE MYTHES. 
 
 487 
 
 'J 
 
 'it': 
 
 I 
 
 I presume to think that our great poet has proceeded upoa 
 mistaken views with respect to the old British fables, not less ia 
 
 Preface is, indeed, full of philosophical reflection on popular fables gene- 
 rally. Mr. Price observes (p. 79) : — 
 
 " The great evil with which this long-contested question appears to be 
 threatened at the present day, is an extreme equally dangerous with the 
 Incredulity of Mr. Ritson, — a disposition to receive as authentic liistory, 
 voder a slightly fabulous coloring, every incident recorded in the British 
 Chronicle. An allegorical interpretation is now inflicted upon all the mar- 
 vellous circumstances ] a forced construction imposed upon the less glaring 
 deviations from probability; and the usual subterfuge of baffled research,— 
 erroneous readings and etymologiciil sophistry, — is made to reduce every 
 itubborn and intractable text to something like the consistency required. It 
 might have been expecte(i that the notorious failuree of Dionysius and Plu- 
 tarch, in Roman history, vvould have prevented the repetition of an error, 
 which neither learning nor ingenuity can render palatable; and that the 
 havoc and deadly ruin effected by these ancient writers (in other respects so 
 yaluable) in one of the moHt beautiful and interesting monuments of tradi- 
 tional story, would have acted as sufficient corrective on all future aspirants. 
 The favorers of this system might at least have been instructed by the phi- 
 losophic example of Livy, — if it be lawful to ascribe to philosophy a line 
 of conduct which perhaps was prompted by a powerful sense of poetic 
 beauty, — that traditional record can only gain in the hands of the future 
 historian by one attractive aid, — the grandeur and lofty graces of that in- 
 comparable style in which the first decade is written ; and that the best duty 
 towards antiquity, and the most agreeable one towards posterity, is to trans- 
 mit the narrative received as an unsophisticated tradition, in all the plenitude 
 of its marvels and the awful dignity of its supernatural agency. For, liow- 
 over largely we may concede that real events have supplied the substance of 
 any traditive story, yet the amount of absolute facts, and the manner of those 
 fiwjts, the period of their occurrence, the names of the agents, and the local- 
 ity given to the scene, are all combined upon principles so wholly beyond 
 onr knowledge, that it becomes impossible to fix with certainty upon any 
 •ingle point better authenticated than its fellow. Probability in such decis- 
 ions will often prove the most fallacious guide we can follow ; for, independ- 
 ently of the acknowledged historical axiom, that * le vrai n'est pas toujours 
 le vraisemblable,' innumerable instances might be adduced, where tradition 
 has had recourse to this very probability to confer a plausible sanction upon 
 her most fictitious and romantic incidents. It will be a much more useful 
 labor, wherever it can be effected, to trace the progress of this traditional 
 story in the country where it has become located, by a reference to those 
 aatnral or artificial monuments which are the unvarying sources of fictitious 
 0Tents ; and, by a strict comparison of its details with the analogous memo- 
 rials of other nations, to separate those elements which are obviously of i 
 MtiT« growth, firom the occorrences bearing the impress of a foreign origia 
 
 that which he leaves out than in that which he retains. To omit 
 the miraculous and the fantastic, (it is that which he really meant 
 by " the impossible and the absurd,") is to suck the lifeblood out 
 of these once popular naiTatives, — to divest them at once both 
 of their genuine distinguishing mark, and the charm by which 
 they acted on the feelings of believers. Still less ought we to 
 consent to break up and disenchant in a similar manner the my thes 
 of ancient Greece, — partly because they possess the mythical 
 beauties and characteristics in far higher perfection, partly be- 
 cause they sank deeper into the mind of a Greek, and pervaded 
 both the public and private sentiment of the country to a much 
 greater degree than the British fables in England. 
 
 Two courses, and two only, are open ; either to pass over the 
 mythes altogether, which is the way in which modern historians 
 treat the old British fables, or else to give an account of them 
 as mythes ; to recognize and respect their specific nature, and to 
 abstain from confounding them with ordinary and certifiable his- 
 tory. There are good reasons for pursuing this second method 
 in reference to the Grecian mythes ; and when so considered, 
 they constitute an important chapter in the history of the Grecian 
 mind, and indeed in that of the human race generally. The his- 
 torical faith of the Greeks, as well as that of other people, in 
 reference to early and unrecorded times, is as much subjective 
 and peculiar to themselves as their religious faith : among the 
 Greeks, especially, the two are confounded with an intimacy 
 which nothing less than great violence can disjoin. Gods, heroes, 
 and men — religion and patriotism — matters divine, heroic, and 
 human — were all woven together by the Greeks Tnto one indi- 
 visible web, in which the threads of truth and reality, whatever 
 they might originally have been, were neither intended to be, 
 
 We shall gain little, perhaps, by such a course for the history of human events ; 
 but it will be an important accession to our stock of knowledge on the his- 
 tory of the human mind. It will infallibly display, as in the analysis of eveiy 
 fimilar record, the operations of that refining principle which is ever obliter 
 ating the monotonous deeds of violence that fill the chronicle of a nation's 
 early career, and exhibit the brightest attribute in the catalogue of man's 
 intellectual endowments, — a glowing and vigorous imagination, — bestowing 
 vpon all the impulses of the mind a splendor and virtuous dignity, which, 
 however fallacious historically considered, are never without a powerfiill| 
 ••deeming good, the ethical tendency of all their lessons " 
 
486 
 
 mSTOBT OF GRFECE. 
 
 
 nor were actually, distinguisliable. Compofted of «uch material 
 and animated by the electric spark ot genius, the mythical an- 
 tiquities ot Greece formed a whole at once trustworthy and 
 captivating to the laiRh and ieelings of the people ; but neithei 
 trustworthy nor captivating, when we sever it from these sub- 
 jective (Auditions, and expose its naked elements Lo the scrutiny 
 Oi' aji objective criticism. Moreover, the sepaiate jjortions of 
 Gre«:iaii inytliical foretime ought to be considered willi reference 
 to that aggregate of which they form a part ; to detach th- divine 
 from the heroic legends, or some one of the heroi,- legends from 
 the remainder, as if there were an essential and generic dirt'erence 
 between them, is to present the whole under an erroneous point 
 of ^•iew. The mytJies of Troy and Thebes are no more to be 
 handU^d objectively, with a view to detect an historical base, than 
 those ot Zeus in Krete, of Ajjoilo and Artemis in Delos, of 
 Hertnes, or of Prometheus. To single out the Siege of Troy 
 from the other mythe.8, as if it were entitled to preeminence afe 
 an ascertained historical and chronological event, is a proceeding 
 which destroys the true chaiat^ter and coherence of the mythical 
 worid: we only transfer the story (as has been remarked in th« 
 preceding chapter) from a class with which it is connected by 
 every tie both of common origin and fraternal atfinity, to another 
 with which it has no relationship, except such as violent and 
 gratuitous criticism may entbrce. 
 
 B^ drawing this marked distinction between the mythical and 
 the historical world, — l)etween matter appropriate only for sub- 
 jective history, and matter in which objective evidence is attain- 
 able—we shall onlj carry out to its proper length the just and 
 well-known position long ago laid down by Varro. That learned 
 man recognized three distinguishable periods in the time pre- 
 ceding his own age: ''First, the time from the beginning of 
 mankind down to the first deluge ; a time wholly unknown. Sec- 
 ondly, the period from the first deluge down to the first Olympiad, 
 which is called ths mythical period, because many fabulous things 
 w« recounted in it. ^ Thirdly, the time from the first Olympiad 
 aoim to ourselves, which is called the historical period, because 
 tke things done in it are comprised in true histories."^ 
 
 "^^lUTO ap. Censoiir- cie Die Natali : Varronis Fragm. p. 219, ed^S^ 
 gtr, 1M3 ' Varro tria «li«:rimina temporum ewe tndit. Primum ab fco» 
 
 PARTITION OF PAST TIME BY VAERO. 
 
 48& 
 
 Taking the commencement of true or objective history at the 
 point indicated by Varro, 1 still consider the mythical and histor* 
 kal periods to be separated by a wider gap than he would have 
 admitted. To select any one year as an absolute point of com* 
 mencement, is of course not to be understood literally : but in 
 point of fact, this is of very little importance in reference to the 
 present question, seeing that the great mythical events — the 
 sieges of Thebes and Troy, the Argonautic expedition, the Kaly- 
 donian boar-hunt, the Return of the Herakleids, etc. — are all 
 placed long anterior to the first Olympiad, by those who have 
 applied chronological boundaries to the mythical narratives. Th^. 
 period immediately preceding the first Olympiad is one exceed- 
 ingly barren of events ; the received chronology recognizes four 
 hundred years, and Herodotus admitted five hundred years, from 
 that date back to the Trojan war. 
 
 iDum principio usque ad cataclysm um priorem, quod propter ignorantiam 
 vocatur udriXov. Secundum, a cataclysm© priore ad Olyrapiadem primam, 
 quod quia in eo multa fabulosa referuntur, Alytfucon nominatnr. Tertiam 
 a primsi Olympiade ad nos : quod diritur Historicov. quia res in co gesta 
 ▼ens historiis continentur." 
 
 To the same purpose Africanus. ap. Easebiam, Pr»p. Ev. xx. p. 487' 
 mXP*^ f^ 'O'kviAindduVy ovdev uKfiiiieg iffropTjTOi roi( 'EXX^ai, nuvTuv 99J»B 
 l[VftivuVt Koi Karii fuj^ev airoit rwv irpd rov ovfifu»owrw, fiB. 
 
M 
 
 !) 
 
1' ! 
 
 This hrok is due two weeks froir »>r 
 
 DUE DATE 
 
 
 
 >ft 
 
 
 * 
 
 kUG 8 ra 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 201-6503 
 
 
 Printed 
 in USA 
 
 i 
 
 864- 
 
 ^rote 
 Greece 
 
 684- 
 
 G3U4 
 
 ' 
 
 
 / 
 
 OCT 2 5 1937 
 
,Sf 
 
 rfA-.t ■ 
 
 'J^i 
 
 ■'.*,' "J 
 
 
 ■-« t^. 
 
 ' .>•*:■ 
 
 
 ';,-,*'* 
 
 
 ■•*. * 
 
BIBLIOGIIAPHIC IRREGULARITIES 
 
 MAIN 
 
 ENTRY! H'fo^^s C^to>t^e. 
 
 V 
 
 Bibliographic ItTeguIarities in the Original Pocuinent 
 List volumes and pages affected; include name of institution if filming borrowed text. 
 
 Page(s) missing/ not available: 
 
 .Volumes(s) missing /not available: 
 Illegible and /or damaged page(s):_ 
 
 ^ Page(s) or volumes(s) misnumbered: 
 
 Bound out of sequence: 
 
 Page(s) or illustration(s) filmed from copy borrowed from: Bav^cvv^^ 
 
 Other: 
 
FILMED IN WHOLE 
 OR PART FROM A 
 
 COPY BORROWED 
 FROM BARNARD 
 
 COLLEGE 
 
1 » 
 
 t 1« 
 
 .i>!o 
 
 '. » 
 
 -U: 
 
 
 ft--^< 
 
 'if: 'P 
 
 
 f**^i 
 
 sWl 
 
 
 .>L.*.'^f* 
 
 i^. 
 
 ' i-t-. 
 
 *lw*«.~«-^' 
 
 I- l. 
 

 Columbia ?Hniberfitttp 
 
 in rtjt dtp of ^etD gort 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIVEN BY 
 
 T^obcrt S. Frcedman Be^^st 
 
 #1 
 
 1 I 
 

 § 
 
 ) 
 
/ 
 
 A1M)I.I,() RELVEDERE 
 
 Jrontisf-ifif, (.ri'de, 70/. tivo. 
 
 GREECE 
 
 I. LEGENDARY GREECE 
 
 II. GRECIAN ;;iSR):<Y tq THE REIGN 
 
 OF PEISISTRATUS AT ATHENS 
 
 BY 
 
 GEoi?GE' GroVe, Esq. 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION 
 
 ILLUSTRATED 
 
 VOLUME II 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 PETER FENELON COLLIER & SON 
 
 MCMI 
 
 I 
 
 ^t» *• 
 
 HOBEWT S 
 
 I: 
 
 it. 
 
(' 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 VOL. n. 
 
 I 
 
 POBEST S. WHFFDkUkti SHimJ&fl 
 
 
 PART I. 
 
 CONTINUATION OF LEGENDARY dREXOI. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 N/ 
 
 0LO6INiy EVENTS OF LEOENDAKY GREECB. — PERIOD OF IlfTBRMEDlATB 
 DARKNESS, BEFORE THE DAWN OF HISTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 Section I. — Return of the Heraki Js into PeloponnSsm. 
 
 Pixile and low condition of the Herakleids. — Their reappearance as a pow 
 erful force along with the Dorians. — Mythical account of this alliance, as 
 well as of the three tribes of Dorians. — Temcnus, Kresphonteg, and 
 Aristodemus, iiiTade Peloponnesus across the gulf of Corinth. — The 
 prophet Kamos slain by llippotes. — Oxylus chosen as guide. — Division 
 of the lands of Peloponnesus among the invaders. — Explanatory value 
 of these legendary events. — Mythical title of the Dorians to Peloponne- 
 sus. — Plato makes out a different title for the same purpose. — Other 
 legends respecting the Achaeans and Tisamenus. — Occupation of Argos, 
 Sparta, and Messenia, by the Dorians. — Dorians at Corinth — AlOtes. — 
 Oxylus and the JEtoliana at Elis. — Rights of the Eleians to superintend 
 the Olympic games. — Family of Temenus and Kresphontes lowest in 
 the series of subjects for the heroic drama. — Pretence of the historical 
 Spartan kings to Achwan origin. — Emigrations from Peloponnesus con- 
 sequent on the Dorian occupation. — Epeians, Py leans, Achaans, lonians. 
 — Icnians in the north of Peloponnesus — not recognized by Homer. — 
 Date assigned by Thucydides to the return of the Herakleids. .pages 1-14 
 
 Section II. — Migration of Thessaliana and Boeotians. 
 
 ^essalians move from Thesprotis into Thessaly. — Non- Hellenic character 
 of the Thessalians. — Boeotians — their migration from Thessaly into 
 Boeotia. — Discrepant legends about the Boeotians. — Affinities between 
 Boeotia and Thessaly. — Transition from mythical to historical Bob- 
 ctia • 14—19 
 
 !!l 
 
* 
 
 iv CONTKNTS. 
 
 SbCTICN 111 — Ell ijratiotifi from Greece to Asia and the Islands of tha 
 
 jrEijoaan. 
 
 I. JEolic Enr ignition. 
 
 Secession of the iiiyt!ii<ul i:i*<s of (irceco. — ./Eolic migration under the 
 PclomJs ." 1<*- 21 
 
 1:. luiiic Kuiignitioii. 
 
 Ionic ernip^ratioii — hratufies otT from the Ici^cndary history of Athens. — 
 The.Hcu.s and Menesthfus. — iU-storution of tiie sons of Theseus to theii 
 father's kin;;doni. — Tliey an- displaci-d by tlie Neleids. — Mehmthus and 
 Kodrus. — Devotion and" diaih of Kodrus — No more kings at Athens. 
 — Quarrel of thf xui-^ oi Ki.dni-, and i'mi:^ration of Neiieus. — Ditferent 
 races who furnished the eniigraut- t.» h.iiia 21-25 
 
 3. Dor!*' Kiuiurations. 
 
 Dorian colonies in Asia. — Tlu-ra. — Ix-gend of the Minyae from Lemnos. 
 — Minyae in Trijdiylia. — Migrations of Dorians to Krete. — Story of 
 Andron. — Althseincnes, 1. under of Khodcs. — Kos, Knidus, and Karpa- 
 thus 25-31 
 
 Intervening blank hctw.cn legend and history. — Difficulty of explaining 
 that blank, on the hy[.oth«,i4 of continuous tradition. — Such an intervM 
 essentially connected with the genois of kgeml 31-34 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 APPLICATIOy OF CHRONOr.OOT TO GRECIAN LEGEND. 
 
 Different schemes of chronology proposed for the mythical events. — The data 
 essential to chronological determination are here wanting. — Modern chro- 
 nologists take up the same ]>rohlem as ancient, but with a different canon 
 '>f belief. — Mr. Clinton's opinion on the computations of the date of the 
 Trojan war. — Value of the chronological computations depends on the 
 trustworthiness of the genealogies. — Mr. Clinton's vindication of the 
 genealogies — his proofs. — 1. Inscriptions — none of proved antiquity. — 
 Genealogies — numerous, and of unascertainable date. — 2. Eariv poete. 
 — Mr. Clinton's separation of the genealogical persons into real and fabu- 
 loos: principles on which it is founded. — Remarks on his opinion.— 
 His concessions are partial and inconsistent, yet sutScient to render the 
 genealogies inapplicable for chronology. — Mr.'Clinton's positions respect- 
 w^ historical evidenco. — To what extent presumption may stand ia 
 
 CONTENTS. V 
 
 fkv^or of the early poets. — Plausible fiction satisfies the conditions laid 
 down by Mr. Cliiilon — not distinguishable from truth without the aid of 
 evidence. — Kadmus, Danaus, HvUus, etc., all eponyms,and falling undef 
 Mr. Clinton's definition of fictitious persons. — What is real in the geneal- 
 ogies cannot be distinguished from what is fictitious.— At what time did 
 the poets begin to produce continuous genealogies, from the mythical to 
 the real world ? — Evidence of mental progress when men methodize the 
 past, even on fictitious principles 34-^7 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 STATE OF SOCIETY AND MANNERS AS EXHIBITED IN GRECIAN LBOKITO. 
 
 Legendary poems of Greece valuable pictures of real manners, thougli 
 giving no historical facts. — They are memorials of the first state of 
 Grecian society — the starting-point of Grecian history. — Comparison 
 of legen«lary with historical Greece — government of the latter — of 
 the former. — The king — in legendary Greece. — His overruling per- 
 sonal ascendency. — Difficulty which Aristotle found in explaining to 
 himself the voluntary obedience paid to the early kings. — The boule — 
 the agora: their limited intervention and subordination to the king.— 
 The agora — a medium for promulgation of the intentions of the king.— 
 Agora summoned by Telemachus in Ithaka. — Agora in the second book 
 of the Iliad — picture of submission which it presents. — Conduct of 
 Odysseus to the people and the chiefs. — Justice administered in the agora 
 by the king or chiefs.— Complaints made by Hesiod of unjust judgment 
 ill his own cAse. — The king among men is analogous to Zeus among 
 gods. — The Council* and Assembly originally media through which the 
 king acted, become, in historical Greece, the paramount depositaries of 
 power. — Spartan kings an exception to the general rule — their limited 
 powers.— Emplovment of public speaking as an engine of government — 
 coeval with the earliest times. — Its effects in stimulating intellectual 
 development. — Moral and social feeling in legendary Greece. — Omnipo 
 tence of personal feeling towards the gods, the king, or individuals.— 
 Eff'ect of special ceremonies. — Contrast with the feelings in historical 
 Athens. — Force of the familv.tie. — Marriage — respect paid to the wife. 
 
 — Brothers, and kinsmen. — Hospitality. — Reception of the stranger and 
 the suppliant. — Personal sympathies the earliest forni of sociality.— 
 Ferocious and aggressive passions unrestrained. — Picture given by 
 Hesiod still darker. — Contrast between heroic and historical Greece. — 
 Orphans. — Mutilation of dead bodies. — Mode of dealing with homicide. 
 
 — Ap{)eased by valuable compensation [noivrj) to the kinsman of the 
 murdered man. — Punished in historical Greece as a crime against society. 
 
 — Condition, occupations, and professions of the Homeric Greeks. -^ 
 Slaves. — Thetes. — Limited commerce and navigation of the Homeric 
 Greeks. — Kretans, Taphians, Phcenicians. — Nature of Phoenician_trade af 
 indicated by Homer, — Weapons and mode of fighting of the Homeric 
 Greeks. — Contrast with the military array of. historical Greece. — Analo- 
 gous change — in military array and in civil society. — Fortification ot 
 towns. —Eariiest residences of the Greeks — hill-villages lofty and diffi- 
 calt of access. — Homeric society recx)gnize8 walled towns, individia/ 
 
I CONTENTS. 
 
 propertT, «nd stronB" local attachmentf. — Means of defence superior to 
 those or attack. — Habitual piracy. — Extended geographical knowledge 
 in the Hesiodic poems, as compared with Homer. — Astronomy and 
 physics. — Coined money, writing, arts. — Epic poetry. — Its great and 
 permanent influence on tKe (ireek mind 57-1 18 
 
 CHAPTER XXI 
 
 GRECIAN KPIC. HOMERIC POEMS. 
 
 Two classes of epic poetry — Homeric — Hesiodic. — Didactic and mystic 
 Hexameter poetry — later m a genus than the epic. — Ix)st epic poenw. 
 
 — Epic poets and their probable dates. — E[»ic (vcle. — What the epic 
 cycle was — an arrangement of the poems according to continuity of nar- 
 rative. — Relation of the epic cycle to Homer. — What poems were in- 
 cluded in the cycle. — The Iliad and Odyssey are the only poems of the 
 cycle preserved. — Curiosity which these two poems provoke — no data 
 to satisfy it. — Diftercnt poems ascribed to Homer. — Nothing known, 
 and endlots diversity of opinion, respecting the person and date of Ho 
 mer. — Poetical gens of the Homerids. — Homer, the superhnman cpony- 
 mus and fiithcr of this gens. — What may he the dates of the Iliad and 
 Odyssey. — Date assigned by Herodotus the most probable. — Probable 
 date of the Iliad and Odyss<?y between 850 and 776 b. c— Epic poems 
 recited to assembled companies, not read by individuals apart. — Lyric 
 and choric poetry, intended for the car. — Importance of the class of 
 rilMModes, singers, and reciter's. — Rhaj)Sodcs condemned by the Sorratic 
 philoeophers — undeservedly. — Variations in the mode of reciting tho 
 ancient epic. — At what time the Homeric poems began to be written. --- 
 Prolegomena of Wolf — raised new questions respecting the Homeric 
 text ^ connected unity of a ithorship with poems written from the he- 
 ginning. — The two questions not necessarily connected, though com- 
 monly discussed together. — Few traces of writing, long after the Homeric 
 age. — Bards or rhapsodes oC ade(juate memory, less inconsistent with the 
 conditions of the age than long MSS. — Blind bards. — Possibility of 
 preserving the poems by memory, as accurately as in fact they were pre- 
 served. — Argument from th'3 lost letter Digamma. — When did the Ho- 
 meric poems begin to be written ? — Reasons for j)rcsuming that they 
 were first written about the middle of the seventh teiitury b. c. — Con- 
 dition of the Iliad and Odyssey <lown to the reign of Peisistratus. — 
 Theorv of Wolf — Authorities quoted in its favor. — Olyections against 
 it. — Other long epic poems besides the Iliad and Odyssey. — Catalogue 
 in the Iliad — essentially a part of a long poem — its early authority. — 
 Iliad and Odyssey were entire poems long anterior to Peisistratus, whether 
 tfiey were originally composed as entire or not. — No traces in the Ho- 
 meric poems, of ideas or cusioms belonging to the age of Peisistratus. — 
 Homeric poems. 1. Whether by one author or several. 2. Whether of 
 one date and scheme — Question raised by Wolf — Sagen-pocsie. — New 
 standard applied to the Homeric poems. — Homeric unity — generally re- 
 jected by German critics in the last generation — now again partially 
 rerived. — Scanty evidence — difficulty of forming any conclusive opinioou 
 
 — Method of studying the (joestion of Homeric unity. — Odyssey to ba 
 ■mdied nrst, as of more simple and intellig'ble structure than the Ili ai — 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Vli 
 
 Q^lys^ev — tridences of one design throughout its .structure. — ExhibiU 
 vef V tew marks of incoherence or contradiction. — Chronological reckon- 
 in'-'iii the Odvssev, inacounuc in one case. — Inference erroneouslv drawn 
 from hence, that the parts of the poem were originally separate. -- Doubla 
 start and duul)le stream of events, ultimately brought into confluence m 
 the Odvssev. - Skill displavod in this point by the poet — Difficulty of 
 ima.rijun'' the (Jdvsscv broken i\\) into many existing poems or songs. -- 
 Structuie of tho" Odvssiv — csscntiallv one — cannot have been pieced 
 together oat of prcc'xistit.l' epics — Analogy of the Odyssey shows thrt 
 long and premeditated c|)i(al composition consists with the capacities of 
 the eariy Greek mind — Ili:id — much loss coherent and uniform thaa 
 the Odv*?sev. — Incoherence prevails only in parts of the poem— mani- 
 fest coherence in other paris. — Wolfian theory explains the former, but 
 not the latter. — Theory of Wclckcr, Lange, and Nitzsch. — Age of the 
 Epos preparatorv to thiit of the Epopee. — Iliad essentially an organized 
 p(5em— but thcori-itial silicme docs not comprehend the whole poem.-- 
 Iliad— ori<'inallv an Arhilleis built upon a narrower plan, then enlarged- 
 
 — Parts which constitute the primitive Achilleis exhibit a coherent se- 
 quence of events. — Disai)lcment of Agamemnon, Odysseus, and Diorae- 
 des all in the battle of the eleventh l>ook. — The first book concentrates 
 attention upon Arhilles, and upon Uic distress which the Greeks are to 
 incur in conse.,ucn<e of the ii^jury done to him. — Nothing done to realize 
 this expectation until the iM-hth book — Primitive Achilleisincludcs books 
 i viii xi to xxii. — Niurh book am unsuitable addition. — Transition trom 
 the Achilleis into the Iliad, in the beginning of the «eeond book. — Transi- 
 tion from the Iliad ba.k into the Achilleis at the end of the seventh book 
 
 — Fortification of the (ii ccian lanap. — Zeus in the fourth book, or Iliad 
 diff-erent from Zeus in the first and eighth, or Achilleis. — Contmuouj 
 Acl^ill^is — from the oleventh book onward. — Supposition of an enlarged 
 Achilleis is the most consonant to all the parts of the poem as it stands.— 
 Question of one or manv authors — ditticult to decide. — Odyssey all by 
 one author, Iliad proiiablV not. — DitVerence of style in the last six books 
 
 — may be explained without supposing dirt'erence of authorship. — La*l 
 two books — probablv not parts of the original Achillfiis. — Books ii. to 
 vii inclusive. — Book x. — Odyssey — probably by a diflferent author from 
 the Iliad — but perhaps of the same age. — Real character of the Ho- 
 meric poems — essentially popular. - Add'cssed to unlettered minds, but 
 touching those feelings WUich all men h« re in common. — No <^dacto« 
 purpose in Homer llS-aOi 
 
 ■aiHiiiiii 
 
 iiiii 
 
vlfi 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 t 
 
 PART II. 
 
 HISTORICAL GRSBCS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 GENERAL CEOCmAPUT AND LIMITS OF ORKECE. 
 
 northern boun«L'iry of Greece — Olympus. — Scardos and Pindus — then 
 extension and dissemination through southern Greece and Peloj)onnej«u9, 
 — Ossa and Pelion — to the Cychides. — Geolo«rical features. — Irregu 
 larity of the Grecian waters — rivers dry in summer. — Frecjuent marshes 
 and lakes. — Subterranean course of rivers, out of hind-locked basins. — 
 Difficulty of land commurucation and transport in Greece. — Indentations 
 in the line of coast — universal accessibility by sea. — Sea communi(;a- 
 tion essential for the islands and colonics. — Views of the ancient philoso 
 phers on the influence of maritime habits and commerce. — Difference 
 Detwecn the land-stiites and the sea-states in Greece. — Effects of the con- 
 fij^'urution of Greece upon the political relations of the inhabitants. — 
 Effects upon their intellectual development. — Limits of (jlrcoe. — It-; 
 chief productions. — Climate — better and more healthy in ancient times 
 than it is now. — Great difference between one part of Greece and 
 another. — Epirots, Macedonians, etc. — Islands in tlie ^Ej^^ean. — Greeks 
 on the coast of Asia Minor 21 \-23i 
 
 C H APTE H II. 
 
 tHE HELLENIC PEOPLE GENERALLY IV THE EARLY HISTORICAL TIMES- 
 
 The Hellens <rencrally. — HaiiKuians — the word used as antithesis to Heb 
 lens. — Hellenic agjrrejxatc — bow held toirether. 1. Fellowship of blood 
 2. Common lanjruage. — (ireek lanjrua^* t^^entially one with a variety 
 of dialects. 3. Common ieli;xious sentiments, localities, and sacrifices.— 
 Olympic and other sacred j,'au»cs. — Habit of common sacrifice an early 
 feature of the Hellenic mind — bepan on a small scale. — Amjjhiktyonies 
 •—exclusive religious partnerships. — Their beneficial influence in creating 
 sympathies. — What was called the Am[>hiktyonic Council.— Its twelve 
 constituent members and their mutual position. — Antiquity of the Coun- 
 cil — airaplicity of the old oath. — Ainphiktyonic meetint; originally at 
 Thermopylae. — Valuable influence of these Amphiktyonies and festivals 
 in promoting Hellenic unii»n. — Amphiktyons had the superintendence of 
 the temple of Delphi. — But their interference in Grecian affairs is onliy 
 rare and occasional. — Many Hellenic states had no participation in it. — 
 Temple of Delphi. — Ora.des generally — habit of the Greek mind to 
 consiilt them. — General analogy of manners an ong the Greeks. — Polit- 
 
 inal sovereitrntv attached to each separate city - essential t> the Hellenic 
 ^ndTScitv stood to the rest in an international relation. - But city 
 go"etTnem\'Snri- village residence ^^ ^-|-<^JP- ^^^e"-!^^^^^^^ 
 fcaleof living. -Village residents -mu^^^^^^^^ m -J^X G--^,ri^"J-y 
 
 f.,,,» ;»a nreiixistinc elements uutiaceaoit. mincni ^v f, 
 
 act — IS P'^^^f \- ",;;-„^ ]vio,pi«n8— spoke a barbarous language. — His- 
 
 CHAPTER HI- 
 
 MEMBERS OF THE HELLENIC AOGREG.^TE, SEPARATELY TAKEN.-GREE« 
 
 NORTH OF PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 power of \'1<^^^''>' Y]'i" 1 all tributaries of the Thcssalians, but 
 
 kagnetes, Malians, ^^olopes. etc a u mnuiar _ The CEt«L 
 
 Dickies 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 .TRUEST HIBTORICAL VIEW OF PELOPONNESUS. DORIANS IN AROO. 
 
 AND THE NEIGHBORING CITIES. 
 
 pUtHbution of Peloponnesus a,,o«. 450 B--^„°-r-iSrat-"e;^lS 
 Western Y^^T^'^^'mfilrfuJc^^oen^Aisirih^.tion and that of 776 
 
 r^"t 0>t^7aS'-%-n"K^^^ ^'^ of COK.U.- 
 
COXTFNTS. 
 
 I 
 
 AffO0 and the neiffhbo -int; Dorians im-atcr (hnn Sparta in 776 B. c. - 
 Early settlements of the Dorians at Anms and rorintfi — Temeniofi — 
 i*<l <*f Solv^iiis. — Dorian settlers untvcil liv sea. — Early Dorians io 
 Krete. — The DrjopianH — their setilcnients formed I.v sea. — I>orian .set- 
 dements in Arffos quite distim-t from those in Sparta 'rtn<l in Messenia! — 
 Early position of Aro^js — metropolis of tiic iioiiihl^oriiiir Dorian cities. — 
 Pheidon the Tomemu— feinj^ of Ar:fos. — His claims an.! f.rojects as 
 representatire ni 'T«r«4fe. — lie einims t\m rj.^hr of pn .Jdinjr at the 
 Olympic }?nme8. — T?,»lationR of Pisa witli I'hci.loti, and of Sparta with 
 Elis. — Conflict between Pheidon and the Spartans, at or ahoiit the 8th 
 Olympiad, 747 b. c. — Phei«lon the earliest (in- -k who coined money and 
 determined a .scale of weijrht — Coincideiui- oj" rh,. ^Evrinienn s.ale with 
 the Bahyloniiin. ~ Ar^jos at this time th- first state in Peloponnesn.s. — 
 Her subsequent decline, from the relaxation of lui- cotifetleracv of rities. - 
 Dorians in the Arj^olie peninsula — tfu-ir early ((Miimerfc with the Dorian 
 islfiiid.s in the ^«:ean. — From he»i< .• aro-r tl,,- ( oinaj^n- of money, etc.. by 
 Pheidon. — Pheidonian eoinnj,'e and st.Kical scale — I»clon- ori<a'naIlv to 
 Argos, not to ^gina " _ ."'298-325 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 .«TOLO-I>ORIAN SMiaBATIOy INTO PELOPON.VKSU3. — ELIS, LACOMIA, 
 
 AND MES9KKIA. 
 
 ^^lian emigration into Peloponnesus. — Dorians of Sparta and Steny 
 kl^rus — aeeompanyin^' or folluwin^r them across th<' Corinthian pulf -- 
 Settlement at Sparta nnwle by marcliin^r aloujr the valleys of the Alpheuj 
 and hurotas. — Causes wl»ieh favon-d the settiumeiit. — Settlements con- 
 fined at Hrst to Sparta and Sti*nyklern.s. — First view of histori«al Sparta. 
 — Mcssenian kin;;s — Analoj^ou.s representations in rei^ard to the early 
 proeeedinirs both of Spartans and Messenians. — The kin<'s of Stenv- 
 klerus did Jiot possess all Messenia. — Olympic festival — tl^- early point 
 Of union of Spartans, Messenians. and Kleians. _ Previous inhabitants of 
 TOUthern Peloponnesus — i,ow far different from the Dorians. — Doric and 
 -«olic dialect 325-337 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 LAWS AND DISCIPLINE OF LTKUKOUS AT SPARTA. 
 
 lojurpis -- authorities of llutarch rcspeetinir him. - Uncertainties about 
 his prenealo-y. -Probable date of Lykur-us. - Of.inion of (). Miiller 
 (that Sparta IS the perfect type of J)orian character and tendencies) is 
 incorreci.--Pecul.anty of Sparta. ^ Early date of Lvkn.-.i/ - View 
 token of Lykur^'us by Herodotus.- Little' said about Lvkm-us in the 
 earlier authors. — Copious ieiails of Plutarch. — Reirencv of Lykur-us - 
 lus long absence from SpartJi. — He is sent by the Delphian oracle to 
 reform the sUte. — His institutions ascrik^d to him — senate and F>opular 
 •Membly -- ephoi^ — Constitution ascribed to Lykur^us agrees with that 
 Which we find in Homer. — Pair of kinirs at Sparta — their constant dis- 
 •J"*i?"* — * security to the state a^rainst despotism. — Idea of Kleomenes 
 fte rhird respecting the first appointment of the ephors. — Popular origin 
 ^ the board of ephors — <»ath interchanged between them and the kinga 
 
 I 
 
 CONTENTS. «i 
 
 c„»y,rdination of the kings, and supremacy of the ephors, during Al 
 i^S t^^^^^^ -Position L'd priyillges of 4ie kings. - Power of th« 
 Historical times , _ ^j^ Sen&te. — Spartan constitution — • 
 
 Xse^uTarchy - W d^^^ of the constitution without formal change 
 
 L 1 E^PoY the reject in Greece and pride in the Spartans themselves 
 Z Don'ns dM^^^^ tribes, - hW^ Pampjiyli and Dyman«^ 
 
 tS distinctions known among the Spartans. - Population of Laco- 
 X^ 1 Spawns. - 2. PerioBki. - Special meaning of the word Penoeki 
 ? T i;,;« Sto ement of Isokrates as to the origin of the PenoekL — 
 Bta^erentoFFpt^^^^^^^ Isokrates, ^et not wholly irreco^ 
 
 Sr- Spawns and Peric^ki-no distinction of race known between 
 V\^T\n historical times. — 3. Helots — essentially villagers. — They were 
 SrfTladscZi g^S^^^ condition and treatment. - Bravery and 
 
 ^f thP Hefots - fear and cruelty of the Spartans. - Eyideuce of 
 r ?lfa^ct oS Vt' ^oyernmen^ - The ^.vpteia^-^^^ai^^^^^^ 
 Helote— Economical and social regulaUons a.«icnbcd to Lykurgns — 
 Son oflanr-Svssitia, or pubUc mess. -Public training or d.sxi- 
 nW ^Manners and training of the Spartan women - opinion of Ans- 
 K- Suuement of Xenophon and Plutarch. - Number of rich women 
 totle. .^""^™7'.". .. __ thev had probably procured exempUon from 
 
 L^a^etta^^^^ «f ^-"^« ^^^^"^^ '^ the century of Agis and lOeo- 
 menls - Circumstances of Sparta down to the rcign of Agis. - Dimin- 
 S number o^ citizens and degradation of Sparta in the reign of Agij 
 - His ardSit wish to restore the dignity of the state. - Historic fancy of 
 rvkJJiruslTan equal partitioner of lands grew out of this filing. - l^ar- 
 d&roUted by Agis. -Opinion that Lykurgus proposed some agra- 
 riln inTeXence/but^not an entire repartition, gratuitous and imP^-^'/^ 
 ^The statemen't of Plutarch is best explained by supposing it a fiction 
 ;?the time o7 Agis.- Acknowledged difficulty of understanding by what 
 means X fixednumber and integrity of the lots was mamtamed. - Plu- 
 SX Story about the ephor Epitadeus. - Landed property was always 
 ^neauallv divided at Sparta. -Nor were there any laws which tended to 
 eouSit -OpLon^ suppositions with regard 
 Tthe Soartan law and practice of succession.- Lykurgean system - 
 •1-^allv «nnHed onlv to Sparta -introduced equal severity of discnpline, 
 ""T^nnlLv^of nrot"^^ Dorian allotment of land in Sparto 
 ZZTl ptffily n Ji equal.'- Gradual conquest of L-onia the^«^ 
 of the new force imparted by the Lykurgean disciphne.- Conquest of 
 li'vkl^ Pharis! and' GerontL«, by\ing Teleklus. - Helus conqu^rjj 
 by Alkamenes. — Progressive increase of Sparta j^7-4»t 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 FIRiT AND SECOND MB88BNIAN WABB. 
 
 ABthorities for the history of the Messenian wars. -Chiefly belong to thj 
 to^e afSr the foundation of Messene by Epameinonda^. - Absenc^of «j 
 or ancient traditions concerning these wars : «)iHradicttcii8 abcnt the Me» 
 
Qi CONTENTS. 
 
 tenlan hero Aristomen&i — Dates of the first wars — B.C. 743-724.— 
 Caasefl alleged by the Spartans. — Spartan king Teleklus slain bv thi 
 Mcssenians at the temple of Artemis Limnatis. — First Mcsscnian war. 
 
 — Messcnian kings, Euphaes and Aristodemaa. — Messenians roncentrat« 
 themselves on Mount Ithome — after a long siege they are completclj 
 con<|uered. — Harsh treatment and Helotisra of the conquered Messen 
 under Sparta. — Revolt of the Messenians against Sparta — second 
 lenian war — Aristomenes. — His chivalrous exploits and narrow one 
 
 — end of the second war. — The Messenians acrain conquered. — Narrv 
 liTe of Pausanias, borrowed from the poet Rhianiis, is undeserving of 
 credit. — The poet Tyrtreus, the ally of Sparta — his great efficiencv and 
 influence over the Spartan mind. — Musical susceptibilities of the Spartana. 
 
 — Powerful ethical effect of the old Grecian music. — Sufferings of the 
 Spartans in the second Messenian war. — Date of the second war, b. c. 
 648-631. — Punishment of the traitor Aristokrates, king of the Arcadian 
 Orchomenus, — Spartans acquire the cc jntry west of Taygetus. — The 
 Messenian Dorians had no considerable fortified places — lived in small 
 townships and villages. — Relations of Pisa and Elis. — Struggles of the 
 Pisatae and Tripbylians for autonomy — the latter in after times sustained 
 by the political interests of Sparti . .' 421-440 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 CONQUESTS OF 8PABTA TOWARDS ARCADIA AND ARGOLIB. 
 
 ilste of Arcadia. — Tcgea and Mantineia the most powerful Arcadian towna, 
 before the building of Me^ialopolis. — Encroachments of Sparta ufX)n the 
 •outhern boundary of Arciidia. — Unsuccessful attempts of the Spartana 
 a^inst Tegea — They art; directed f>y the oracle to bring to Sparta the 
 bones of the hero Orestes. — Their operations against Tegea become more 
 •uccessful ; nevertheless, Tegea maintains her independence. — Bounda- 
 ries of Sparta towards Argos — conquest of Thyreatis by Sparta — Battle 
 of the three hundred .select champions, between .Sparta and Argos, to decide 
 the possession of the Thyreatis — valor of ( >tliryades. — Thryeatis comes 
 into possession of Sparta — efforts of the Argeiaiis to recover it. — Altera- 
 tion of Grecian opinion, a.? to the practice of deciding disputes by seleit 
 champions. — Kynurians in Art;olis, said to be of Ionic race, but r)orizod. 
 
 — Full acquisition of the southern portion of Peloponnesus. tVom xa to 
 sea, by the Spartans before 54U b. c. — Great comparative })Owcr of Sparta 
 at that early time. — Carefal personal training of the Spartans at a time 
 when other states had no training at all. — Military institutions of Spart-* 
 
 — Peculiar and minute military subdivisions, dist'inct from the civil E.iO- 
 moties, etc. — Careful drilling of the Enomoties. — In other Grecian cities 
 there were no peculiar military divisions distinct from the civil. — Recog- 
 nized superiority of Sparta —'a part of early Grecian sentiment — coinci- 
 dent with the growing tendency to increased communion. — Homeric mod^ 
 of fighting — probably belonged to Asia, not to Greece. — Argos — her 
 •trugglcH to recover the hendship of Greece. — Her conquest of Mycenae, 
 Tiryns, and Kleonae. — Nemean games. — Aebaia — twelve aatonomouj 
 towns, perhaps more — little known 441-464 
 
 I 
 
 L/ST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 I 
 
 GREECE 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 Frontispiece — Apollo Belvedere 
 
 Argonautic Expedition ....••*• 
 
 Theatre of Dionysius at Athens 
 
 Reconstruction of the Altar on the Acropolis Pergamon , 
 
 

 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PART I. 
 
 CONTINUATION OF LEGENDARY GREECE. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 CLOSING EVENTS OF LEGENDARY GREECE. -PERIOD OF INTERME 
 DIATE DARKNESS, BEFORE THE DAWN OF fflSTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 SECTION I.— RETURN OF THE HERAKLEIDS INTO PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 In one of the preceding chapters, we have traced the descending 
 series of the two most distinguished mythical families in Pelopon- 
 nesus, — the Perseids and the Pelopids : we have followed th« 
 former down to Herakles and his son Hyllus, and the latter down 
 to Orestes son of Agamemnon, who is left in possession of that 
 ascendancy in the peninsula which had procured for his father 
 the chief command in the Trojan war. The Hemkleids, or sons 
 of Herakles, on the other hand, are expelled fugitives, dependent 
 upon foreign aid or protection: Hyllus had perished in single 
 combat with Echemus of Tegea, (connected with the Pelopids by 
 marriage with Timandra sister of Klytaemn^stra,') and a solemn 
 compact had been made, as the preliminary condition of this duel, 
 that no similar attempt at an invasion of the peninsula should be 
 undertaken by his family for the space of one hundred years. At 
 the end of the stipulated period the attempt was renewed, and 
 with complf/te success ; but its success was owing, not so much t« 
 
 ^ Hesiod, Eoiai, Fragm. 58, p. 43, ed. Dixitzer. 
 
f 
 
 \v 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 I f 
 
 
 2 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the valor of the invaders as (o a powerful bodj of new allies. The 
 Herakleids reappear as leaders and oorapanionsof the Dorians, — - 
 a northerly section of tin' Gieek name, who now first come into 
 importance, — poor, indeed, in mythical renown, since they ar6 
 never noticed in the Iliad, and only once casually mentioned in 
 the Odyssey, as a fraction aniontr the many-ton^nied inhabitants 
 of Krete, — but destintnl to form one of the Ln-aml and |>redomi- 
 nant elements throujihont all the career of historical Hellas. 
 
 The son of Ilylhis — Kleodanis — as well as his <j:raridson 
 Aristomachus, were m^v (]<a<l, and the lineage of Ilerakies was 
 represented by the three sons of the latter, — Temeruis, Kres- 
 pliiintes, and Aristodemus, and under th(*ir conduct the Dorians 
 p<'n«'tralcd into the peninsula. Tlic mythical account traced back 
 this intimate uni(»n lietntM-n tlie llerakh'ids and the Dorians to a 
 |)rior war, in wliich H«'rakles himself had rendcreil inestimable 
 aid to the Dorian king .Kgirnius, when the latter was hard pressed 
 in a contest with th«* Lapith;e. Herakh-s defeated the Laj)i!ha?, 
 ruid sh'w theii* king Konwnis ; in return for wliich .llgimius 
 as-igned to hi-^ deliveni* one third [>art of his whole territory, and 
 .idopted Hyllus as hi- >on. Herakles desirt'd that the territory 
 thii- made o\ cr migiit 1 e h<M in icserve until a time should come 
 when liis desciMidants might stand in need ot' it ; and tiiat time did 
 come, alter tfie death ot' llyllus, (set Chap. V.) Some of the 
 Ilei'akleids then tbund .«.lielter at Trikorytiius in Attica, but the 
 remainder, turning their step- towards yEgimius, solicited from 
 him the allotment of land which had Im'cu promised to their v;d- 
 iant progenitor. yEgimiijs receixcd them aecordiuL!; to his euiraire- 
 ment, and assigned to them the stipulated third }>ortion of lii: 
 territory:' and from thi^ momeiit the Herakleids and Dorians 
 
 RETURN OF THE HERAKLEIDS. 
 
 8 
 
 ' Diodor. iv. .'i7-G0; Ap<>Iliiil."ir ii. 7. 7; Ephoiii- a;t Steph. Hyz. \\'uuv, 
 FniL'-m. 10, ed. Marx. 
 
 The Doric institutioiH an' i'a!K'<I hy Pindar rt&uiH Ariuiov lijpiHol (Pyth. 
 i. 124). 
 
 There exi.><ted an nrnienr epic poem, now lo'^t, but cited on some fcwocca 
 •Ions !»y authors still preserved, under the title \/}iuio^; the authorship l>eing 
 sometimes ascribed to Hesiod, sometimes to Kerkops (Athente. xi. p. 503) 
 The few fragments which r«;main do not enable us to make out the schemt 
 of it, inasmnch as they embrace different mythical incidents lying very wide 
 ti OAch other,-— Id, the Argonaats, Peleus, arjd Thetis, etc. Bat the nam* 
 
 iK'came intimately united together into one social communion. 
 Pamphylus and Dymas, sons of /Egimius, accompanied Temenua 
 and his two brothers in their invasion of Peloponnesus. 
 
 Such is the mythical incident which professes to explain the 
 *i; igin of those three tribes into which aU the Dorian communities 
 were usually divided, — the Hylleis, the Phamphyli, and the 
 Dymanes, — the first of the three including certain particular fam- 
 ilies, such as that of the kings of Sparta, who bore the special 
 name of Herakleids. Hyllus, Pamphylus, and Dymas are the 
 eponymous heroes of the three Dorian tribes. 
 
 Ttimenus and his two brothers resolved to attack Peloponnesus, 
 ot by a land-march along the Isthmus, such as that in which 
 .lyllus had been previously slain, but by sea, across the narrow 
 inlet between the promontories of Rhium and Antirrhium, with 
 which the Gulf of Corinth commences. According to one story, 
 indeed, — which, however, does not seem to have been known to 
 Herodotus, — they are said to have selected this line of march by 
 the express direction of the Delphian god, who vouchsafed to 
 expound to them an oracle which had been delivered to Hyllua 
 in the ordinary equivocal phniseology. Both the Ozolian Lo- 
 iirians, and the il^tolians, inhabitants of the northern coast of the 
 Gulf of Corinth, were favorable to the enterprise, and the former 
 granted to them a port for building their ships, from which memo- 
 rable circumstance the })ort ever afterwards bore the name of 
 Naupaktus. Aristodemus was here struck with lightning and 
 died, leaving twin sons, Eurysthenes and Prokles ; but his remain- 
 iiig brothers continued to press the exi)edition with alacrity. 
 
 At this juncture, an Akarnanian prophet named Karnus jjre- 
 sented himself in the campi under the inspiration of Apollo, and 
 
 which it bears seems to imply that the war of ^gimius against the Lapithae, 
 an.l the aid ^iven to him by Herakles, was one of its chief topics. Both O. 
 MiiUer (History of the Dorians, vol. i. b. 1, c. 8) and Welcker (Der Epische 
 Kyklus, p. 263) appear to me to go beyond the very scanty evidence which 
 we possess, in their determination of this last poem ; compare Marktschcffel, 
 Traefat. Hesiod. Fragm. cap. 5, p. 159. 
 
 » Respecting this prophet, compare (Enomans ap. Eusebium, Prseparat 
 Evangel, v. p. 211. According to that statement, both Kleodaus (here called 
 AndcBus) son of Hyllus, and Aristomachus son of Kleodaeus, had made sep- 
 arate and successive attempts at the head of the Herakleids to penetrate into 
 Peloponnesus through the Isthmus : both had failed and perished, having 
 
 \i 
 
4 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 ■ttered various predictions : he was, however, so much suspected 
 ©f treacherous coHusion vvitli the Peloponnesians, that Hippotcs, 
 great-grandson of FIrrakles rhroufjrh Phylas and Antiotrhus, slew 
 him. His death dn;w u|>on the army the wrath of Apollo, who 
 destroyed their vessels and pnnish<Ml them with famine. Teme- 
 nus, in his distress, ag:iin applying r<» the Delphian god for succor 
 and counsel, wjls made a«'(juaiiited with the cause of so mucK 
 iuffering, and was directed to hani^li Hippotes for ten years, to 
 offer expiatory sacritice for tin* death of Karnus, and to seek as 
 the guide of the army a man with three eyes.i (jn coming ha^'k 
 to Naupaktus, he met the /Ktolian Oxylus, son of Andrnemon, re- 
 tuniing to his countiy, after a temporary exile in Elis, incurred 
 for homicide: Oxyhn had lo^t on*- <yc, hut as he was seated on 
 a hnrsr, the man and the hoi-so to'^eth^T made up the three eyes 
 re<(iiired, and he wa-^ u<I«)[it<d a> th*- truidr prescribed l»y the 
 oracle.'-' CoiKluctrd h\' liirn. tlu'v r<'litt«tl their shi[)s, lauilc<l on 
 the opposite coa^t ol' Achaia, and man*lied to attack Tisamenus 
 0on of Orestes, then the great potentate of the [x'niusula. A 
 decisive battle wa^ li night, in which (h<' latter was vanquisluid 
 and slain, and in which l*ainphylus and l)yma>; also [>erishcd. 
 This battle made the Dorian-^ so coniplctely masters of the Pelo- 
 poniu'sus, that they pror<(<h' 1 to <[istributc the territory among 
 themselves. The fertih* land t>f Klis ha<l been by previous stip- 
 ulation nserved toi- )\y In , as a rccotnpfn^e for his services as 
 conductor: ;uid if u;i< aLrrct'd that th<; three Ilerakleids, — Te- 
 menu-, lvresi)htMiies, iiid ih<' infant sons ot" Aristodemus, — should 
 draw lots for Argo^, Nnarta, and Me-sene. Argos fell to Teme- 
 nus, Sparta to the hhi- of Ari>to<leiuus, and Messene to Kres- 
 phontes ; the latter having secure<l for himself this prize, the 
 most fertile territory of the three, by the fraud of putting into the 
 
 misjinder^tnod tho admrmition of the Delphian oracle. (Enomau.s could 
 have known nothinir of the pledjje jjiven hy Hyllus, as the con<htion of the 
 tin{^\e coinhat between Blyllus and Echenius (according to Herodotus), that 
 the Ilerakleids should make no fresh trial for one hundred years; if it had 
 been understood that they had j:jiven and then violated such a pledge, snch 
 tioiation would probabi}' have been adduced to account for their failure. 
 
 ' Apollodor. ii. 8, 3: Fausan. iii. 13 "? 
 
 ■ Apollodor. ii. 8, 3. According to the account of Pausaniae, the beat! 
 xxpon which Oxylos rode was a male, and had lost one eye (Pais. v. 3, fti 
 
 
 MYTHICAL BEARING OF THE STORY. 
 
 vessel out of which the lots were drawn, a lump of clay instead 
 of a stone, whereby the lots of his brothers were drawn out while 
 his own remained inside. Solemn sacrifices were offered by each 
 upon this partition : but as they proceeded to the ceremony, a 
 miraculous sign was seen upon the altar of each of the brothers, 
 — a toad corresponding to Argos, a serpent to Sparta, and a ibx 
 to Messene. The prophets, on being consulted, delivered the 
 import of these mysterious indications : the toad, as an animal 
 slow and stationary, was an evidence that the possessor o^ Argoa 
 would not succeed in enterprises beyond the limits of Ids own 
 city; the serpent denoted the aggressive and formidable future 
 reserved to Sparta ; the fox prognosticated a career of wile and 
 deceit to the Messenian. 
 
 Such is the brief account given by ApoUodorus of the Return 
 of the Herakleids, at which ix)iut we pass, as if touched by the 
 wand of a magician, from mythical to historical Greece. The 
 story bears on the face of it the stamp, not of history, but of 
 legend, — abridged from one or more of the genealogical poets,i 
 and presenting such an account as they thought satisfactory, of 
 the first formation of the great Dorian establishments in Pelo- 
 ()onnesus, as well as of the semi-^tolian Elis. Its incidents are 
 so conceived as to have an explanatory bearing on Dorian insti- 
 tutions, — upon the triple division of tribes, cliaracteristic of the 
 Dorians, — upon the origin of the great festival of the Karneia 
 at Sparta, alleged to be celebrated in expiation of the murder of 
 Karnus, — upon the different temper and character of the Dorian 
 states among themselves, — upon the early alliance of the Dorians 
 with Elis, which contributed to give ascendency and vogue to the 
 Olympic games, — upon the reverential dependence of Dorians 
 towards the Delphian oracle, — and, lastly, upon the etymology 
 of the name Naupaktus. If we possessed the narrative more in 
 detail, we should probably find many more examples of color 
 
 ' Herodotus observes, in reference to the Lacedaemonian acconnt of theif 
 first two kings in Peloponnesus, (EurysthenSs and ProklSs, the twin sous of 
 Aristod6mus,) that the Lacedtemonians gavs a stoiy not in Itarmony unth cum 
 tf the poets, — AaKeSaifiovtoL yctp, dfioXoyeovrec oiSevl irotriTf^ 
 
 Xeyovacv airbv ^ApicTTodijfiov paaiXevovra dyayelv c^iac ic ra6rf0 
 
 T^ X<^pvv r^v vvv Urearai, dXX' ob rot)f *Api<rT9dfffiov iraidac (Herodot 4 
 
 'I 
 
 ii 
 
nn 
 
 f 
 
 \\ 
 
 I 
 
 § raSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ing of the legentiaiy past suitable to the circumstances of the 
 historical present. 
 
 Above all, this legend makes out in favor of the Dorians ai>d 
 their kings a mythical title to their Peloponnesian establishments; 
 Argos, Sparta, and Messene are presented a.s rightfully belong- 
 ing, and restored by just retribution, to the children of Herakles. 
 It was to them that Zeus had specially given tlie territory of 
 Sparta ; the Dorians came in as their subjects and auxiliaries^.' 
 Plato gives a very different version of the legend, but we find 
 that he, too, turns the story in such a manner as to embody a 
 claim of right on the part of the conquerors. According to him, 
 the Achaeans, who returned from the capture of Troy, found 
 amonff their fellow-citizens at home — the race which had ^rrown 
 up during their absence — an aversion to readmit them: after 
 a fruitless endeavor to make good their rights, they were at last 
 expelled, but not without much contest and blooilshed. A leader 
 named Dorieus, collected all these exiles into one body, and from 
 him they received the name of Dorians instead of Achaeans ; then 
 marching back, under the conduct of the Herakleids into Pelo- 
 ponnesus, they recovered by force the possessions from which they 
 had been shut out, and constituted the three Dorian establish- 
 ments under the separate Herakleid brothers, at Argos, Spartti, 
 and Messene. These three fraternal dynasties were founded upon 
 a scheme of intimate imion and sworn alliance one with the other, 
 for the purpose of resisting any attack wliich might be made upon 
 them from Asia,- either by the remaining Trojans or by their allies. 
 Such is the story as Plato believed it ; materially different in 
 
 * Tyrtaeus, Frag:m. — 
 
 Airdf yap Kpovi(ji\ /caA/lmrf^avov iruffig 'Hoaf, 
 
 Zeii' 'HpaKXei^aic rijvde deduKC ttoXlv • 
 Olatv ufia, rrpoXirruvrec 'Eptveov rjvefioevTay 
 
 FiVpeiav rTe?w07rof vrjaov utpiKofzeT^a. 
 
 In a similar manner Pindar says that Apollo had planted the sons of 
 Herakles, jointly with those of ^gimius, at Sparta, Argos, and Pylas (Pyth. 
 r. 93). 
 
 laokrat^s (Or. vi. Arckidamus, p. 120) makes out a good title by a differenS 
 line of mythical reasoning. There seem to have been also stories contain 
 lag mythical reasons why the Herakleids did not acquire posses: ka of Aica 
 4i« (Polysn. i. 7). 
 
 * FUto, Legg. iii. 6-7, pp. 682-686. 
 
 !l 
 
 I 
 
 STORY AS GIVEN BY PLATO. 
 
 the incidents related, yet analogous in mythical feeling, and em- 
 bodying alike the idea of a rightful reconquest. Moreover, the 
 two accounts agree in representing both the entire conquest and 
 tlie tri[)le division of Dorian Peloponnesus as begun and com- 
 pleted in one and the same enterprise, — so as to constitute one 
 single event, wliich Plato would probably have called the Return 
 of the Achirans, but which was commonly known as the Return 
 of the Herakleids. Though this is both inadmissible and incon- 
 sistent with other statements which approach close to the histori- 
 cal times, yet it bejirs every mark of being the primitive view 
 originally presented by the genealogical poets: the broad way in 
 which the incidents are grouped together, was at once easy for 
 ^he imagination to follow, and impressive to the feelings. 
 
 The existence of one legendary account must never be under 
 stood as excluding the probability of other accounts, current at 
 the same time, but inconsistent with it: and many such there 
 were as to the first establishment of the Peloponnesian Dorians. 
 In the narrative which I have given from Apollodorus, conceived 
 apparently under the influence of Dorian feelings, Tisamenus is 
 stated to have been slain in the invasion. But according to 
 another narrative, which seems to have found favor with the his- 
 torical Aclurans on the north coast of Peloponnesus, Tisamenus, 
 though expelled by the invaders from his kingdom of Sparta or 
 Argos, was not slain : he was allowed to retire under agreement, 
 together with a certain portion of his subjects, and he directed 
 his steps towards the coast of Peloponnesus south of the Cor- 
 inthian Gulf, then occupied by the lonians. As there were re 
 lations, not only of friendship, but of kindred origin, between 
 lonians and Achieans, (the eponymous heroes Ion and Achaeus 
 pass for brothers, both sons of Xuthus, (Tisamenus solicited from 
 the lonians admission for himself and his fellow- fugitives into 
 their territory. The leading lonians declining this request, under 
 the apprehension that Tisamenus might be chosen as sovereign 
 over the whole, the latter accomplished his object by force. After 
 a vehement struggle, the lonians were vanquished and put to 
 flight, and Tisamenus thus acquired possession of Helike, as well 
 afi of the northern coast of the peninsula, westward from Sikyon ; 
 which coast continued to be occupied by the Achasans, and re* 
 ceived its name from them, throughout all the historical timei. 
 
 lij 
 
9 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 The loniaos retired to Attica, many of them taking part in what 
 is called the Ionic emigration to the coast of Asia Minor, which 
 followed shortly aiter. Fausanias, indeed, tells us that Tisame- 
 nus, having gained a decisive victory over the louians, fell in the 
 engagement,' and did not himself live to occupy the country of 
 which his troops remained masters. But this story of the death 
 of Tisamenus seems to arise from a desire, on the part of Fau- 
 sanias, to blend together into one narrative two discrepant le- 
 gends ; at least the historical Achaeans in later times continued to 
 regard Tisamenus tiimself as having lived and reigned in their 
 territory, and as having left a regal dynasty which lasted down 
 to Ogyges,^ after whom it was exchanged for a popular govern- 
 ment.^ 
 
 The conquest of Temenus, the eldest of the three lloi-akh-ids 
 originally comprehended only Argos and its neighborhood ; it was 
 from thence thatTnczen, Epidaurus, ^Egina, Sikyon, and Fhlius 
 were successfully occupied by Dorians, the sons and son-in-law 
 of Temenus — Deiphontes, Fhalkes, and Keisus — being the 
 leaders under whom this wiis accomplished.^ At Sparta, the suc- 
 cess of the Dorians was furthered by the treason of a man 
 named Fhilonomus, who received as recompense the neighboring 
 town and territory of Amyklaj.^ Messenia is said to have sub- 
 mitted without resistance to the dominion of the Ilerakleid Kres 
 phontes, who established his residence at Stenyklarus : the Fy- 
 liiui Melanthus, then ruler of the country, and representative of 
 the great mythical Uneage of IS'eleus and Nesiur, withdrew with 
 
 * 1*11 usan. vii. 1-3. 
 
 *rolyb. ii. 45; iv. 1; Stmlx), viii. pp. 383-384. This Tisamenus de- 
 rives his name from the memorable act of revenge ascribed to his father 
 Orestes. So, in the legend of the Siege of Thel)es, Thersander, as one of 
 the Epigoni, avenged his father Polynikes : the son of Thersander was also 
 called Tisamenus CHerodot. iv. 149). Compare O. Muller, Dorians, i. p. 69 
 note 9, Eng. Trans. 
 
 ' Diodor. iv. I. The historian Ephorus embodied in his work a narratira 
 in considerable detail of this grand event of Grecian legend, the Return of 
 the Herakleids, — with which he professed to commmce his copsecutiv© hif 
 lory : from what sourires he borrowed we do not knoir. 
 
 * Strabo, viii. p. 389. Pausan. ii. 6, 2 ; 12, I. 
 
 * CoBoq^Kar. 36 ; Btrabo, viii. p. 365 
 
 OXYLUS AND THE .ETOUANS IN ELIS. | 
 
 Ws household gods and with a portion of his subjects tt 
 Attica.' 
 
 The only Dorian establishment in the peninsula not directl/ 
 connected with the triple partition is Corinth, which is said tc 
 have been Dorized somewhat later and under another leader, 
 though still a Herakleid. Hippot^s — descendant of Herakles 
 in the fourth generation, but not through Hyllus, — had been 
 giilty (as already mentioned) of the murder of Kamus the 
 prophet at the camp of Naupaktus, for which he had been ban- 
 islied and remained in exile for ten years ; his son deriving the 
 name of Aletes from the long wanderings endured by the father 
 At the head of a body of Dorians, Aletes attacked Corinth : he 
 pitched his camp on the Solygeian eminence near the city, and 
 harassed the inhabitants with constant warfare until he compelled 
 them to surrender. Even in the time of the Feloponnesian war, 
 tlie Corintliians professed to identify the hill on which the camp 
 of these assailants had been placed. The great mythical dyn- 
 asty of the Sisyphids was expelled, and Aletds became ruler 
 and CEkist of the Dorian city ; many of the inhabitants, however, 
 -(S^olic or Ionic, departed.'^ 
 
 The settlement of Oxylus and his JEtolians in Ells is said b> 
 some to have been accomplished with very little opposition ; the 
 leader professing himself to be descended from ^tolus, who had 
 been in a previous age banished from Elis into JCtolia, and the 
 two people, Epeians and ^Etolians, acknowledging a kindred 
 origin one with the other.^^ At first, indeed, according to Epho- 
 rus, the Epeians appeared in arms, determined to repel the in- 
 truders, but at length it was agreed on both sides to abide the issue 
 of a single combat. Degmenus, the champion of the Epeians, 
 confided in the long shot of his bow and arrow ; but the -^tolian 
 Pyra^chmes came provided with his sling, — a weapon then un- 
 known and recently invented by the JEtolians, — the range of 
 which was yet longer than that of the bow of his enemy : he 
 
 ' Strabo, viii. p. 359 ; Conon, Narr. 39. 
 
 •Thucydid. iv. 42. Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 17 j and Nem. vii. 154. 
 CJoDon, Narrat. 26. Ephor. ap. Strab. viii. p. 389. 
 
 Thucydides calls the ante-Dorian inhabitants of Corintli .Allans Ooiii9« 
 ealls them lonians. 
 
 ' Ephorus ap. Strabo, z. p. 463. 
 
 fi 
 
 I 
 
10 
 
 HISTORY OF GKKKCE. 
 
 ACH.EAN LEGENDS ADOPTED BY THE DORIANS. 
 
 11 
 
 thui^ killed Decrmeniis, and secured tlie victory to Oxylus and hii 
 followers. According to one statement, the Kj)eijins were ex- 
 pelled ; accordini^ to another, they fraternized amicably with thfl 
 new-com<'rs : whatev or may be the truth as to this matter, it is cer- 
 tain that their name is from this moment lost, and that they never 
 reappear anion*,' the historical elements of Greece -.^ we hear 
 from this time forvrard only of Ekians, said to be of -^tolian 
 
 desreni.- 
 
 One m()>t impm-tant pri\ilt lto \va> connected with the ])Osse3- 
 gion of the Kleian t -rniory ity Oxyhis, (ouph'd with his claim on 
 the ;:rratitude of tl'*' Dorian kiiiL^s. Tlic Ehians acquired the ad- 
 ministration of th<; tcmph' at Olympia, wiiich the Aclia\ans are 
 eaid to have posse mmI IkIoh" them ; and in consideration of this 
 sju-red function, wh ch suh>e(pM>ntly ripc^K'd into tlie celebration 
 of the meat Olvmpic .L^uncs, tlieii" territory was solemnly pro- 
 nounee.l lo be inviolal^le. Siieli \va> the statement of Ei>lioriis:3 
 we fiii.l. in thisca-' a- in >o many others, that the Return of ths 
 Hcralvlei.N i< mad- to supply a legendary ba>is for the historical 
 itate of thinirs in PeloponiK-su-. 
 
 It was the praetiee of iIk- .-Jivat Attic tra,uc<lian-, with raiT ex- 
 ception>. lo select tin- >ubjicts (.f their composition from the heroic 
 or legendary world, and Euripi<le> had composed three dramas, 
 now lost, on the adventures ..f Temenus with his daughter Hyrne- 
 tho and his s-on-in-law Deiphontes, — on the ianiily misfortunes 
 of Kresphontcs and Meroj)e, — and on the successful valor of 
 Archelans the :-on of Temenus in Ma<*e(l(.nia. where he was al- 
 ie'^-ed to have lirst begun tlie .lyna-iy of the Tenienid kings. Of 
 the>e sul)Jeets the first and second were eminently tragical, and 
 the third, relating to Archelaus, appear^ ii> have been undertaken 
 by Euripides in cotnj)liment to his contemi)orary sovereign and 
 
 » Strabo, viii. p. 35S ; Vim^an. v. 4, 1 . One of the six towns in TViphylia 
 mentioned by Herodotus is called 'E-fim- (Herodot. iv. 141)). 
 
 « Herodot." viii. 73 ; Pausan. v. 1, 2. Ilekat^us amrmed that the Epeians 
 were completely alien to the EK ians ; Strabo does not seem to have been 
 •ble to satisfy himself i'ither of the atlirmalive or negative (Hekutajus, Fr. 
 S48, ed. Didot ; Strabo. viii. p. 341 ). 
 
 » Ephorus Ap. Strabo. viii. p. 358. The tale of the inhabitants of Pisa, 
 the territory more immediately bordering upon Olympia, was very different 
 from this. 
 
 patron, Archelans king of Macedonia: we are even told that 
 those exploits which the usual version of the legend ascribed to 
 Tememis, were reported in the drama of Euripides to have been 
 performed by Archelans his son.i Of all the heroes, touched 
 upon by the three Attic tragedians, these Dorian Herakleids 
 stand lowest in the descending genealogical series, — one mark 
 amongst others that we are approaching the ground of genuine 
 history. 
 
 Though the name Acha^ai\s, as denoting a people, is hence- 
 forward contined to the North* Peloponnesian territory specially 
 called Achaia, and to the inhabitants of AchiT?a, Phthiotis, north 
 of Mount CEta, — and though the great Peloi)onnesian states 
 always seem to have prided themselves on the title of Dorians, 
 — yet we find the kings of Sparta, even in the historical ag'\ 
 taking pains to appropriate to themselves the mythical glories of 
 the Achieans, and to set themselves forth as the representatives 
 of Agamemnon and Orestes. The Spartan king Kleomenes even 
 went so fiir as to disavow formally any Dorian parentage ; for 
 when the priestess at Athens refused to permit him to sacrifice in 
 the temple of Athene, on the plea that it was peremptorily closed 
 to all Dorians, he replied : " I am no Dorian, but an Acha^an."'-^ 
 Not only did the Spartan envoy, before Gelon of Syracuse, con- 
 iiect the indefeasible title of his country to the supreme command 
 of the Grecian military force, with the ancient name and lofty 
 prerogatives of Agamemnon,^ — but, in farther pursuance of the 
 same feeling, the Spartans are said to have carried to Sparta both 
 the bones of Orestes from Tegea. and those of Tisamenus from 
 Helike,^ at the injunction of the Delphian oracle. There is also 
 a story that Oxylus in Elis was directed by the same oracle to 
 invite into his country an Achaean, as CEkist conjointly with him- 
 
 ' Agatharchides ap. Photiiim, Sect. 250, p. 1332. Oud' Evpimdov Karr/yo- 
 pu, Tu) \\px£/-u(f) TTepiTET^etKuTo^ Tug Trjfiivov npu^etg. 
 
 Compare the I''ra<2:ments of the Trj/^hnSai, "'Apx^/^aog, and Kpea<l>6vTj]g, [^ 
 Dindorf 's edition of Euripides, with the illustrative remarks of Welclcer, 
 Griechische Tragodien, pp. 697., 708, 828. 
 
 The Prologue of the Archelaus seems to have gone through the wholt 
 »eries of the Herakleidan lineage, from JEgyptus and Danaus downward! 
 
 * Herodot. v. 72. ^ Herodot. vii. 15». 
 
 * Herodot. i. 68; Paosan. vii. 1.3 
 
 i 
 
 i\ 
 
 f 
 
 ¥ 
 
12 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 HOMERIC PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 la 
 
 lelf ; and that he called in Agorius, the great-grandson of Orea* 
 let), fi-om Helike, witli a small number of Achaeans who joined 
 JiimJ The Dorians themselves, being singularly poor in native 
 legends, endeavored, not unnaturally, to decorate themselves vvitt 
 those legendary ornaments which the Ach;uuns possessed in 
 abundance. 
 
 As a consequence of the Dorian establishments in Pelopon- 
 Bigsus, several migrations of the preexisting inhabitants are rep- 
 resented as taking place. 1. The Epeians of Elis arc either 
 expelled, or merged in the new-comers under Oxylus, and lose 
 their separate name. 2. The Pylians, together with the gr6at 
 heroic fiunily of Nt-leus and his son Nestor, who preside over 
 them, give place to the Dorian establishment of Messenia, and 
 retire to Athens, where their leader, Melanthus, becomes king : a 
 large |)ortion of them take part in the subsequent Ionic emigra- 
 tion. 3. A |)ortion of the Achaeans, under Penthilus and other 
 descendants of Oresi!^, leave Pelo{)onnesus, and form what is 
 called the iEolic emigration, to Lesbos, the Truad, and the (iulf 
 of Adramyttium : the muae ^oliansy unknown to Homer, and 
 seemingly never applied to any separate tribe at all, being intro- 
 duced to designate a large section of the Hellenic name, partly in 
 Greece Proper, and j»artly in Asia. A. Another portion of Aclue- 
 ans expel the loniaus from Achaia, properly so called, in the 
 north of Peloponnesus; the lonians retiring to Attica. 
 
 The Homeric poems describe Achaeans, Pylians, and Epeians, 
 in Peloponnesus, but take no notice of lonians in the northern 
 district of Achaia : on the contrary, the Catalogue in the Iliad 
 distinctly includes this territory under the dominions of Agamem 
 non. Though the Catalogue of Homer is not to be regarded as an 
 historical document, l^i to be called as evidence for the actual state 
 of Peloponnesus at jmy prior time, it certainly seems a better 
 authority than the statements advanced by Herodotus and others 
 respecting the occupation of northern Pelo[)onnesus by tlie loni- 
 ans, and their expulsion from it by Tisamenus. In so far as the 
 Catalogue is to be trusted, it negatives the idea of lonians at 
 Hdiik«, ttid oountenaaces what seems in itself a more natui^ 
 
 fopposition, — that the historical Achieans in the north part of 
 Peloi)onnesu3 are a small undisturbed remnant of the powerl'ul 
 Achiran population once distributed throughout the peninsula, 
 until it was broken up and partially expelled by the Dorians. 
 
 The Homeric legends, unquestionably the oldest which we 
 posse??, are adapted to a population of Achneans, Danaans, and 
 Argeians, seemingly without any special and recognized names, 
 either aggregate or divisional, other than the name of each sepa^- 
 rate tribe or kingdom. The post-Homeric legends are adapted to 
 a population chtssitied quite differently, — Hellens, distributed 
 into Dorians, lonians, and iEolians. If we knew more of the 
 time and circumstances in which these different legends grew up, 
 we should probably be able to explain their discrepancy ; but in 
 our present ignorance avo can only note the fact. 
 
 AVhatever difhculty modem criticism may find in regard to the 
 event called " The Return of the Herakleids," no doubt is ex- 
 pressed about it even by the best historians of antiquity. Thucy- 
 dides accepts it as a single and literal event, having its assignable 
 date, and carrying at one blow the acquisition of Peloponnesus. 
 The date of it he fixes as eighty years after the capture of Troy. 
 Wliether he was the orijrinal determiner of this epoch, or copied 
 it from some previous author, we do not know. It must have 
 been fixed according to some computation of generations, for 
 there were no other means accessible, — probably by means of 
 the lineage of the Herakleids, which, as belonging to the kin^a 
 of Sparta, constituted the most public and conspicuous thread of 
 connection between the Grecian al and mythical world, and 
 measured the interval between the Siege of Troy itself and the 
 fii-st recorded Olympiad. Herakles himself represents the gen 
 eration before the siege, and his son Tlepolemus fights in the be- 
 sieging army. If we suppose the first genei*ation after Herakles 
 to commence with the beginning of the siege, the fourth genera 
 tion after him will coincide with the ninetieth year after the same 
 epoch ; and therefore, deducting ten years for the duration of the 
 struggle, it will coincide with the eightieth year after the capture 
 rf the city ;i thirty years being reckoned for a generation. Thf 
 
 »1 
 
 * PAOsan. ▼. 4, 2. 
 
 * The date of Thucydides is calculator, lienl ^Uioi/ ahjoLv (i. 13). 
 
14 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MIGRATION OF B(EOTIANS FROM THESSALY. 
 
 18 
 
 date assignerl by Thucydides will thus agree iiith the distance in 
 which Temenus, Kresphontes, and Aristodemus, stand removed 
 from Htrakles. The interval of eighty years, between tlie cap- 
 ture of Troy and the Return of the Herakleids, appears to have 
 been admitted by Apollodurus and Eratosthenes, and some other 
 professed chronologists of antiquity: but there were different 
 reckonings which vuso found more or less of support. 
 
 SECTION II. -MIGRATION OF TIIKSSALIANS AXD BUImHAXS. 
 
 In the same passsage in which Thucydides speaks of the Return 
 of the Herakleids, he al-o marks out the date of another event a 
 litthj antecedent, which is alleged to liave powerfully affected the 
 condition of Northi?rn Greece. '• Sixty years after tlie capture 
 (,t" Troy (he tells us) the liceotians were driven by the Tliessa- 
 lians from Ani«*% and miLnutcd into the land then called Kadmeis, 
 but now liu'otia, wherein there had previously dwelt a section 
 of their race, wiio had contributed the contingent to the Trojan 
 
 war. 
 
 The expulsion liere mentioned, of the Boeotians from Arne 
 ** by the Thessaliiins," has been construed, with probability, to 
 allude to llic immijxration of the Thessalians, properly so called 
 trom tlie Thesprotid in Epirus into Thessaly. That the Thessa- 
 lians had migrated into Thessaly from the Thesprotid territory, 
 is stated by Herodotus,' though he says nothing about time or 
 circumstances. Antiphus and Fheidi{)pus appear in the Homeric 
 Catalogue as .omraanders of the Grecian contingent from the 
 islands of Kos and Karpathus, on the south-east coast of Asia 
 Minor: they are sons of Thessalus, who is himself the son of 
 Herakles. A legend ran that these two cliiefs, in the dispersion 
 which ensued after the victory, hud been driven by storms into 
 the Ionian Gulf, and cast upim the coast of Epirus. where they 
 landed and settled at Ephyre in the Thesprotid.- It was Thes- 
 
 » Herod, vii. 176. 
 
 • See the Epigram :i.scribed to Aristotle (Antholojj. Graec. t. L p. 181, ed. 
 R«isk ; Velleius Patercul. i. 1 ). 
 
 The SchoUa on Lycophron (912) give a story somewhat different. EphyrS 
 k giren as the old legeiidarj name of the city of Krannon in TheMoiy ( Kineas, 
 
 ealus, grandfon of Pheidippus, who was reported to have con- 
 ducted the Thesprotians across the passes of Pindus into Thes- 
 saly, to have conquered the fertile central plain of tliat country, 
 and to have imposed upoii it his own name instead of its previouj 
 denomination ^olis.i 
 
 AVhatever we may think of this legend as it stands, the state 
 of Thessaly during the historical ages renders it highly probable 
 that the Thessalians, properly so called, were a body of immi- 
 grant conquerors. They appear always as a rude, warlike, vio- 
 lent, and uncivilized race, distinct from their neighbors the Ach- 
 aans, the Magnetes, and the Perrha^l>ians, and holding all the 
 three in tributary dependence : these three tribes stand to them 
 in a relation analogous to that of the Lacediemonian Perioeki 
 towards Sparta, while the Penesta?, who cultivated their lands, 
 are almost an exact parallel of the Helots. Moreover, the low 
 level of taste and intelligence among the Thessalians, as well as 
 certain points of their costume, assimilates them more to Mace- 
 donians or Epirots than to Hellens.'^ Their position in Thessaly 
 is in many respects analogous to that of the Spartan Dorians in 
 Peloponnesus, and there seems good reason for concluding that 
 the former, as well as the latter, were originally victorious in- 
 vaders, though we cannot pretend to determine the time at which 
 the invasion took place. The great family of the Aleuads,3 and 
 probably other Thessalian families besides, were descendants of 
 Herakles, like the kings of Sparta. 
 
 There are no similar historical grounds, in the case of the 
 alleged migration of the Boeotians from Thessaly to Boeotia, to 
 justify a belief in the main fact of the legend, nor were the 
 different legendary stories in harmony one with the other. While 
 the Homeric Epic recognizes the Boeotians in Boeotia, but not ia 
 
 ap. Schol. Pindar. Pyth. x. 85), which creates the confusion with the Thes- 
 protian Ej)liyre. 
 
 * Hcrodot. vii. 176; Velleius Patercul. i. 2-3; Charax. ap. Stephan. Bjri 
 ▼. ^upiov ; Polyaen. viii. 44. 
 
 There were i everal different statements, however, about the parentage oT 
 Thessalus, as well as about the name of the country (Strabo, ix. p. 443 
 Stephan. Byz. v. Al/novia). 
 
 • See K. O. Miiller, Eistory of the Doriane, Introductioa sect. 4 
 ' Pindar, Pyth. x. 2. 
 
 Ol 
 
19 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THUCYDTDES AND PAUSAMAS. 
 
 IT 
 
 Thessaly, Thucydid^s records a statement which he had found 
 of their migration from the latter into the former ; but in order 
 lo escape the necessity of fiatly contradicting Homer, he inserts 
 the parenthesis that there had been previously an outlying frac- 
 tion of Boeotians in Boeotia at the time of the Trojan war,' from 
 whom the troops who served with Agamemnon were drawn. 
 Nevertheless, the dis«.Tepancy with the Ilia*!, though less strik- 
 ingly obvious, is not removed, inasmuch as the Catalogue is 
 un°u'sually copious in (mumerating the contingents from Thessaly, 
 without once mentioning Boeotians. Homer distinguishes Orcho- 
 menus from Boeotia, ;md he does not specially notice Thebes in 
 the Catalogue : in otlier respects his enumeration of the towns 
 coincides pretty well with the ground historically known after- 
 wards under the name of Ba^otia. 
 
 Fausanias gives u> a short sketch of the events which he sup- 
 poses to have'interveried in this section of Greece between the 
 Siege of Troy and the Return of the Ilerakleids. Fenele6s, the 
 lead'er of the' Boeotians at the siege, having been slain by Eury- 
 pylus the son of T.'h>phiis, Tisamenus, son of Thersiuider and 
 grandson of Polyuik ^, actrd as their commander, both during 
 the remainder of th. Mt -e and after their return. Autesion, hia 
 son and successor, bvxiumi subject to the wrath of the avenging 
 Erinnyes of Laius and <Eilii>n>^: tlie oracle directed him to ex- 
 patriate, and he joint«l tlie Dorians. In his place, Damasichthon, 
 eon of Opheltiis and grandson of Peneleos, beaime king of the 
 Btrotians: he ua^ succeeded by Ptoleniicus, who Wiks himself 
 followed by Xantlul^. A war having broken out at that time 
 between the AthfniM» and Hccotians, Xanthus engaged in sin- 
 gle combat with Mdanthn^ .^on oi' Andropompus, the champion 
 of Attica, and perislicd by the running <>f I'i-^ opponent. After 
 the death of Xanthus, the Boeotians j.as.^ed from kingship to 
 popdar governmei\t;i As Melanthus was of the lineage of the 
 Neleids, and had migrated from Pylus to Athens in consequence 
 of the successful establishment of the Dorians in Messenia, the 
 due. with Xanthus must have been of course subsequent to the 
 Heturn of the Herakleids. 
 
 » Thncyd. i. 12. tjv Si avrdv koi 
 Koi If 'IXiov hrpaTsvaav, 
 
 9 l)tfka'a£sa«% %ir ^ wL. 
 
 Here, then, we have a summary of alleged Boeotian history 
 between the Siege of Troy and the lieturu of the Herakleids, ia 
 which no mention is made of the immigration of the mass of 
 Bceotians from Th(v->saly, and seemingly no possibility left of 
 fitting in so great and capital an incident. The legends followed 
 hy Pausanias are at variance with those adopted by Thucydides, 
 but they harmonize much better with Homer. 
 
 So deservedly high is the authority of Thucydides, that the 
 migration here distinctly announced by him is commonly set 
 down as an ascertained datum, historically as well as chronologi- 
 cally. But on this occasion it can be shown that he only followed 
 one amongst a variety of discrej^ant legends, none of which there 
 were any means of verifying. 
 
 Pausanias recognized a migration of the Boeotians from Thes- 
 saly, in early times anterior to the Trojan war;" and the account 
 of Ephorus, as given by Strabo, professed to record a series of 
 changes in the occuj)ants of the country : First, the non-Hellenic 
 Aones and Temmikes, Leleges and Hyantes ; next, the Kad- 
 meians, who, after the second siege of Thebes by the Epigoni, 
 wtre expelled by the Thracians and Peiasgians, and retired°into 
 Thessaly, where they joined in communion with the inhabitants 
 of Anic, — the whole aggregate being called Boeotians, After 
 the Trojan war, and about the ume of the ^^olic emigration, 
 these Bffiotians returned from Tliessaly and reconquered Boeotia,* 
 driving out the Thracians and Peiasgians, — the former retiring 
 to Parnassus, the latter to Attica, li was on this occasion (he 
 says) that the Minyaj of Orchomenus were subdued, and forcibly 
 incorporated with the Boeotiajis. Ejihorus seems to have lol- 
 lowed, in the main, the same narrative as Thucydides, about the 
 movement of the Boeotians out of Thessaly ; coupling it, howevei, 
 v/ith several details current as explanatory of proverbs and cus- 
 tom3.2 
 
 * Paa»an ix. &» & 
 
 * Pansan. x. 8, 3. 
 
 « Ephor. Fragm. 30, ed. Marx. ; Strabo, ix pp. 401-402. The stoiy «l 
 the BcEotians at Ame, in Polyamus (i. 12), probably comes from Ephonw. 
 
 D^odorus (xix. 53) gives a summary of the legendary history of Thfibw 
 from Deukalion downwards : he tells us that the BoBotians were expeOed 
 frora Iheir country, and obliged to return into Thessaly during the Trcnaa 
 TOL. II. 20C 
 
 »•: 
 
18 
 
 HLSTORY OF GRKKCE. 
 
 MYTHICAL AND mSTORICAI BCEOTIA. 
 
 19 
 
 The only fact which we make out, independent of these leg»^nds, 
 is, that there existed c<»^'»iri hoinoiiv mies and certain alfmities ot 
 relij^Mous w/)rship, between parts cf liuL-otia and parts of The-saly, 
 which appeal- to indicate a kindred race. A town named Arne,' 
 similar in name to the Thessalian, was enumerated in th<.' lio-o- 
 tian Catalogue of Honu.r, :uid anticiuaries identiti«'d it sometimes 
 with the historical town Chieroneia,-' sometimes with Aknephium. 
 Aloreover, there was nf*ar the Baotian Koruneia a river nauKMl 
 Kuarius, or Konilius, and a venerable temple dedicated to tlu; 
 Itonian Athene, in tiie sacred ground of which the P[imb«eotia, 
 or public council of the Bix'otian name, was held; there was also 
 a temple and a river of similar denomination in Thes.-aly, near 
 to a town called Iton, or IiVmuis.^ AVe may from these circum- 
 stances presume a certain ancient kindred between the population 
 of these regiuns, and such a circumstance is sullicient to explain 
 the 'feneration of legends describing migrations backward and 
 forward, whether true or not in point of liict. 
 
 war, in couse<[uence of the ahseiu;e of so iiuuiy of their brave warriors at 
 
 Troy ; they did not tirul their way back into Baotia until the fourth ^a-neration. 
 
 » Stephen. By/., v, 'Apvri, makes the Thes.^aliau Arne an uTToiKor of the 
 
 Bceotian. 
 
 « Homer, Iliad, ii.; Strabo, ix. p. 413; Pausan. ix. 40. 3. Some of the 
 families at Chieroneia, even durinjj: the time of tlie Konian dominion in 
 Greece, traced their origin to Teripoltas the j.rophet, who was said to have 
 accompanied Ophebas in his invading march out of Thessaly (Plutarch, 
 
 Cuuon, e. I). 
 
 » Strabo, i.K. 411-435; Homer, Iliad, ii. 6% ; Ilekaticus, Fr. 33S, Didut. 
 
 The fragment froTi Alkaus (cited by Strahu. hut }.rirtly,and with a muti- 
 lated text,) serv( > unlv to identify the river ;tnd the town. 
 
 Itonus was said to be son of Amphiktyon. an.l Ba'otus son of Bonus 
 (Pausan. ix. 1, 1. 34, 1: compare Steph. Byz. v. Uoturm) by Melanippc. 
 By another legendary genealogy (prol)ably arising after tlie name .-tJolic had 
 obtained footing; as the class-name for a large section of Greeks, but as old 
 as the poet Asius. CHvmpiad 30), the eponymous hero Ba;<itU8 was fastened 
 on to the great lineage of yEolus, through the paternity of the god Poseidon, 
 either with Melanippe or with Arne. daughter of vEolus (Asias,Fr 8, ed. 
 Duntzer; Strabo. vi. p. 265; Diodor. v. 67 ; Hellanikus ap. Schol. Iliad, il 
 494). Two lost plavs of Euripides were founded on the misfortunes of 
 Melanippe, and her' twin children by Poseidon, — Boeotus and uEolus 
 (Uygin. Fab. 186; *ee the Fragments of UelavnzTrr} 2o^// and UeXaviTTirri 
 iUOfiuTu: in Dindorf 3 edition, and the instmctive comments of Welcker, 
 Ofieelt Trat;i>J. vol . ii. pp. 840-860). 
 Vol. 3 1 
 
 What is most important to remark i.«, that the stories of Thu- 
 cydides and Ephorus bring us out of the mythical into the histor- 
 ical Bccotia. Orchomenus is Boeotized, and we hear no more of 
 the once-i)Owerful Minyai : there are no more Kadmeians at 
 Thebes, nor Boeotians in Thessaly. The Minyaj and the Kad- 
 meians disappear in the Ionic emigration, which will be present!/ 
 adverted to. Historical Boeotia is now constituted, apparently 
 in its federative league, under the presidency of Thebes, just as 
 we find it in the time of the Persian and Peloponnesian wars. 
 
 SEC HON III. -EMIGRATIONS FROM GREECE TO ASIA AND TH£ 
 
 ISLANDS OF TITE iEO^AN. 
 
 1. .5:0LTC.~ 2. IONIC. — 3. DOIIIC. 
 
 To complete the transition of Greece from its mythical to i?i 
 historical condition, the secession of the races belonging to tlie 
 former must follow upon the introduction of those belonging" to 
 the latter. This is accomplished by means of the iEolic and 
 Ionic migrations. 
 
 The presiding chiefs of the iEolic emigration are the represcn 
 tatives of the heroic lineage of the Pelopids : those of the Ionic 
 emigration belong to the Neleids ; and even in what is called the 
 Doric emigration to Thera, the CEkist Theras is not a Doriau 
 but a Kadmeian, the legitimate descendant of GCdipus and Kad 
 mus. 
 
 The JEolic, Ionic, and Doric colonies were planted along the 
 western coast of Asia Minor, from the coasts of the Propontis 
 southward down to Lykia (I shall in a future chapter speak more 
 exactly of their boundaries) ; the ^Eolic occupying the northern 
 portion, together with the islands of Lesbos and Tenedos; tho 
 Doric occupying the southernmost, together with the neighboring 
 islands of Rhodes and Kos ; and the Ionic being planted between 
 the'sn, comprehending Chios, Samos, and the Cyclades islands. 
 
 1. ^EOLIC E.MIGRATI0N. 
 
 The ^olic emigration was conducted by the Pelopids : the 
 original story seems to have been, that Orestes himself was at the 
 head of the first batch of colonists, and this version of the event 
 
 
20 
 
 HISTORY OF liREECE. 
 
 IONIC EMIGRATION. 
 
 21 
 
 is still preserved by Pindar and by HellanikusJ But the more 
 current narratives represented the descendants of Orestes as 
 chiefs of the expeditions to jEolis, — his illegitimate son Pen- 
 thilus, by Erigone daughter of 7Egisthus,2 together with Echtla- 
 tus and Gras, the son and grandson of Penthilus, together with 
 Kleues and Malaus, descendants of Agamemnon through (mother 
 lineage. According to the axx'ount given by Strabo, OrestO-s be- 
 gan the emigration, but died on his route in Arcadia ; his son 
 Penthilus, taking the guidance of the emigrants, conducted them 
 bv the long land-journey through Boeotia and Thessaly to 
 Tlirace;-* tVom wh»,>iice Archelaus, son of Penthilus, led them 
 across the Hellespont, and settled at Daskylium on the Propon- 
 tis. Gras, son of Aichelau?, crossed over to Lesbos and pos- 
 sessed himself of lUv. island. KUnies and Malaus, conducting 
 another body of Acliieans, were longer on their journey, and 
 lingered a considerable time near Mount Phrikium, in the terri- 
 tory of Lokris ; ultimately, Iiowever, they passed over by sea to 
 Asia and took possession of Kyme, south of the Gulf of Adra- 
 myttium, the most considerable of all the ^olic cities on the 
 •ontinent.4 From Lesbos and Kyme, the other less considerable 
 JEolic towns, spreading over the region of Ida as well as the 
 Troad, and comprehending the inland of Tenedos, are said to 
 have derived their oTi;^in. 
 
 Though there are many differences in the details, the accounts 
 agree in re[»resenling these iEolic settlements as formed by the 
 
 ' Pindar, Ncm. xi. 43; Ilellaiiie. Frdgin. 114, ed. Didot. Compare St© 
 phan. Byz. v. Uipir^'^or. 
 
 * Kinsethon ap. Pausan. ii. 18, 5. Penthilids existed in Lesbos during the 
 historical times (Aristot. Polit. v. 10, 2). 
 
 ' It has sometimes l>een supposed that the ronntry railed Thrace here 
 means the residence of the Thracians near Parnassus ; but the length of the 
 journey, and iie number of years which it took up, are so specially marked, 
 that I think Thrace in its usual and obvious sense must be intended. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii. p. 582. Helhinikus seems to have treated of this delay near 
 Mount Phrikium (see Steph. Byz. v. ^piKiov). In another account (xiii. p. 
 621 I, probably copied from the Kymsean Ephoras, Strabo connects the estab- 
 lishmenta of this colony with the sequel of the Trojan war : the Pelasgians, 
 the occupants of the territory, who had been the allies of Priam, wer« 
 weakened hj the defeat which they had sustained and unable to resist tb« 
 
 Aehaeans expatriated from Laconia under the piidance of the 
 dispossessed Pelo}>ids.' We are told that in their journey through 
 Baotia they received considerable reinforcements, and Strabo 
 adds that the emigrants started from Aulis, the port from whence 
 Agamemnon departed in the expedition against Troy.*^ He also 
 informs us that they missed their course and experienced many 
 losses from nautical ignorance, but we do not know to what pai^ 
 ticular incidents he alludes.3 
 
 2. IONIC EMIGRATION. 
 
 The Ionic emigration is described as emanating from and di- 
 rected by the Athenians, and connects itself with the previoui 
 legendary history of Athens, which must therefore be here briefly 
 recapitidated. 
 
 The great mythical hero Theseus, of whose military prowess 
 and errant exploits we have spoken in a previous chapter, was 
 still more memorable in the eyes of the Athenians as an internal 
 political reformer. He was supposed to have performed for them 
 the inestimable service of transforming Attica out of many states 
 into one. Each deme, or at least a great many out of the whole 
 number, had before his time enjoyed political independence under 
 its own magistrates and assemblies, acknowledging only a federal 
 union with the rest under the presidency of Athens : by a mix- 
 ture of conciliation and force, Theseus succeeded in putting down 
 all these separate governments, and bringing them to unite in one 
 political system, centralized at Athens. He is said to have es- 
 tablished a constitutional government, retaining for himself a de- 
 fined power as king, or president, and distributing the people into 
 three classes : Eupatrida), a sort of sacerdotal noblesse ; Geomori 
 and Demiurgi, husbandmen and artisans.-* Having brought these 
 important changes into efficient working, he commemorated them 
 for his posterity by introducing solemn and appropriate festivals. 
 In confirmation of the dominion of Athens over the Megarid ter- 
 ritory, he is said farther to have erected a pillar at the extremity 
 of the latter towards the Isthmus, marking the boundary between 
 Peloponnesus and Ionia. 
 
 * VelleiuB Patercul. i. 4 : compare Antikleides ap. Athenae. xi. c. 3 ; Pan* 
 •anias, iii. 2, 1. 
 ' Strabo, ix. p. 401. ' Strabo, i. p. 10. * Plutarch, Theseus, c. 24, 25, a& 
 
 t 
 
22 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE THESEID KINGS IN ATTICA -MELANTHTJS. 
 
 2S 
 
 But a revolution so extensive was not consummated withoiH 
 creating raucli disrontent ; and Menestheus, the rival of Theseus, 
 — the first sj>eciin<*ii as we are told, of an artful demagogue, — 
 took advanta;.^' uf ihi^ tieling to assail and undermine him. The- 
 seus had quitted Attica, to accompany and assist his friend I*eiri- 
 thous, in liis journey down to the under-world, in order to carry 
 off the goddtss Persephone, — or (as those who were critical in 
 Icendarv storv prc*'errcd recounting) in a journey to the reai- 
 dence of Aidont n . i Ingof the Molossians in Epirus, to carry on 
 his daughter. In ilils enterprise, Peirithous perished, while Th^ 
 seu- was cast into |)rison, from whence he was only liberated by 
 the intercession of IKrakles. It was during his temporary ab- 
 sence, that the Tyndarids Castor and l*ollux invaded Attica for the 
 purpose of rtro\eriiig their sister Helen, whom Theseus had at 
 
 former perioil taken away from Sparta and deposited at 
 Aphi<hia' ; and the partisans of Menestlieus took advantage both 
 of the absence of Tlii -ni- and of the calamity which his licen- 
 tiousness had hroiejlit uj)on the country, to ruin his popularity 
 with the people. W hen he returned, he found them no longer 
 disposed to endure his dominion, or to continue to him the honors 
 which their previous feelings of gratitude had conferred. Hav- 
 ing, therefore, placed his sons und<'r the protection of Elephenor, 
 in Eubu'a, he sought an asylum with L\ komedes, prince of Scy- 
 ros, from whom, hov ever, he received nothing but an insidious 
 welcome and a traitorous death.' 
 
 Menestheus, succeeding to the honors of the expatriated hero, 
 commanded the Athenian troops at the Siege of Troy. But 
 though he survived tlie capture, he never returned to Athens, — 
 different stories beinj.; related of the place where he and his com- 
 panions settled. During this inteival the feelings of the Athe- 
 nians having changed, they restored the sons of Theseus, who 
 had served at Trov inder Elephenor, and had returned unhurt. 
 to the station and fuiictions of their father. The Theseids Demo- 
 phoon, Oxyntas, Aplieidas, and Thy nice tes had successively filled 
 this poet for the space of about sixty years,'- when the Dorian in* 
 vaders of Peloponnesus (as has been before related) compelled 
 Mekothus and the Neleid family to abandon their kingdom of 
 
 * Plutarch, Theseus, c. 34-35. 
 
 •Eusebius, Chronic, t an. pp. 228-229, ed. Scaliger; Pausan. ii 18,7, 
 
 Fylus. The refugees found shelter at Athens, where a fortunat« 
 adventure soon raised Melanthus to the throne. A war breaking 
 out between the Athenians and Boeotians, respecting the boundary 
 tract of Qiinoe, the Boeotian king Xanthus challenged Thymoe- 
 tes to single combat : the latter declining to accept it, Melanthus 
 not only stood forward in his place, but practised a cunning 
 stratagem with such success as to kill his adversary. He was 
 forthwith chosen king, Thymoetes being constrained to resign.' 
 
 Melanthus and his son Kodrus reigned for nearly sixty year& 
 during which time large bodies of fugitives, escaping from ihe 
 recent invaders throughout Greece, were harbored by the Athen- 
 ians : so that Attica became populous enough to excite the alarm 
 and jealousy of the Peloponnesian Dorians. A powerful Dorian 
 force, under the command of Aletes from Corinth and Althaj- 
 menes from Argos, were accordingly despatched to invade the 
 Athenian territory, in which the Delphian oracle promised them 
 success, provided they abstained from injuring the person of Ko- 
 drus. Strict orders were given to the Doiian army that Kodrus 
 should be preserved unhurt; but the oracle had become known 
 among the Athenians,^ and the generous prince determined to 
 bring death upon himself as a means of salvation to his country. 
 Assuming the disguise of a peasant, he intentionally provoked a 
 quarrel with some of the Dorian ti"ooj)s, who slew him without 
 suspecting his real character. No sooner was this event known, 
 than ihe Dorian leaders, despairing of success, abandoned their 
 
 * Ephorus ap. Harpocration. v. WTrarovpia: 'E^opof iv SevTip<f)^ u^ diM 
 r^v i'TVtp tC)V ofHCJV inrar^v yevo/ievTjv, on TroTiF/wivTuv *AT&fjvaiuv imd( 
 BoicjTovc VTep T7]^ Tuv fJi.e'kaivutv X'-^I^^^C, Me/Min^og 6 tQv 'AO^ijvaiuv Baoi- 
 ^edf Bav^ov rov Qrj^alov fiovo/xaxi^i> uTrtKTeiveif. Compare Strabo, ix. p. 
 393. 
 
 Ephorus derives the term 'Anarovpia from the words signifying a trick 
 with reference to the boundaries, and assumes the name of this great lonie 
 festival to have been derived from the stratajj^em of Melanthus, described in 
 Cono!! (Narrat. 39) and Polyaenus (i. 19). The whole derivation is fancifnl 
 and erroneous, and the story is a curious specimen of legend growing oat 
 of etymology. 
 
 • The orator Lykurgus, in his eulogium on Kodrus, mentions a DelphiaP 
 chisen named Kleomantis, who secretly communicated the oracle to tft^ 
 Athenians, and was rewarded by them foi doing so with cirijatc iv IU*vrt. 
 vei^ (Lycarg. cont Leocrat. c. 20). 
 
 I 
 
 ■.^Miiliiii 
 
n 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 \ 
 
 'f' 
 
 enterprise and evacuated the country. i In retiring, however, 
 they retained possession of Megara, where they established per- 
 manent settlers, and which became from this moment Dorian, — 
 seemingly at iirst a dependency of Corinth, though it afterwards 
 acquired its freedom and became an autonomous community.^ 
 This memorable act of devoted patriotism, analogous to that of 
 the daughters of Erechtheus at Athens, and of Menoekeus at 
 Thebes, entitled Kodrus to be ranked among the most splendid 
 characters in Grecian Ictgend. 
 
 Kodrus is numbered as the last king of Athens : his descend- 
 ants were styled Archons, but they held that dignity for life, — 
 a practice which prevailed during a long course of years after- 
 wards. Medon and Aeileus, his two sons, having quarrelled 
 about the succession, the Delphian oracle decided in favor of the 
 former; upon which the latter, affronted at the preference, re- 
 solved upon seeking a laew home.3 There were at this moment 
 many dispossessed sections of Greeks, and an adventitious popu- 
 lation accumulated in Attica, who were anxious for settlementa 
 beyond sea. The expeditions which now set forth to cross the 
 ^gean, chiefly under the conduct of members of the Kodrid 
 family, composed colle(;tively the memorable Ionic Emigration, 
 of which the lonians, recently expelled from Peloponnesus, form- 
 ed a part, but, as it would seem, only a small part ; for we hear 
 of many quite distinct races, some renowned in legeml, who with- 
 draw from Greece anaidst this assemblage of colonists. The 
 Kadmeians, the Minyce of Orchomenus, the Abantes of Euboea, 
 the Dryopes ; the Molossi, the Phokians, the Boeotians, the Arca- 
 dian Pelasgituis, and e^en the Dorians of Epidaurus, — are re- 
 presented as furnishing each a [iroportion of the crews of tliese 
 emigrant vessels.** Nor were the results unworthy of so mighty 
 
 » Pherekydes, Frac;m. 110, ed. Didot; Veil. Paterc. i. 2; Conon, Narr. 26; 
 Polyajn. i. c. 18. 
 
 Hellanikus traced the penealojrv of Kodrus, through ten generations, up 
 to Deukalion (Fragment 10, ed. Didot) 
 
 • Strabo, xiv. p. 653 • Pausan. vii. 2, 1. 
 
 * Herodot i. 146; Pausan. vii. 2, 3, 4. Isokrates extols his Atheaiao 
 sncestors for having provided, by means of this emigration, settlements for 
 •o large a number of distressed and poor Greeks at the expense of Barbsr 
 tians (Or. xiL Panathenaic. p. 341) 
 
 KODRUS AND THE KODRIDS. 
 
 25 
 
 a confluence of different races. Not only the Cyclades islands 
 in the JEgean, but the great islands of Samos and Chios, near 
 the Asiatic coast, and ten different cities on the coast of Asia 
 Minor, from Miletus in the south to Phokaea in the north, were 
 founded, and all adopted the Ionic name. Athens was the me- 
 tropolis or mother city of all of them : Androklus and Neileus, 
 the CEkists of Ephesus and Miletus, and probably other CEkists 
 also, started from the Prytaneium at Athens,^ with those solem- 
 nities, religious and political, which usually marked the departure 
 of a swarm of Grecian colonists. 
 
 Other mythical families, besides the heroic lineage of Neleus 
 and Nestor, as represented by the sons of Kodrus, took a lead- 
 ing part in the expedition. Herodotus mentions Lykian chiefs, 
 descendants from Glaukus son of Ilippolochus, and Pausanias 
 tells us of PhilOtas descendant of Peneleos, who went at the 
 head of a body of Thebans : both Glaukus and Peneleos are 
 commemorated in the Iliad.'2 And it is a remarkable fact men- 
 tioned by Pausanias (though we do not know on what authority), 
 that the inhabitants of Phokaia, — which was the northernmost 
 city of Ionia on the borders of ^olis, and one of the last found- 
 ed^ consisting mostly of Phokian colonists under the conduct 
 
 of the Athenians Philogenes and Da^mdn, were not admitted 
 into the Pan-Ionic Amphiktyony until they consented to choose 
 for themselves chiefs of the Kodrid family.3 prokles, the chief 
 who conducted the Ionic emigrants from Epidaurus to Samoa, 
 was said to be of the lineage of Ion, son of Xuthus.4 
 
 Of the twelve Ionic states constituting the Pan-Ionic Amphik- 
 tyony — some of them among the greatest cities in Hellas — I 
 shall say no more at present, as I have to treat of them again 
 when I come upon historical ground. 
 
 8. DORIC smORATIONS. 
 
 The uEolic and Ionic emigrations are thus both presented to 
 Of as direct consequences of the event called the Return of the 
 
 » Herodot. i. 146; vii. 95; nii. 46. Vellel Paterc i. 4. PhcrekydA^ 
 «g. 1 1 1, ed. Didot * Herodot. i. 147 ; Pausan. rb %7» 
 
 Frag 
 
 « Pausan. vii. 2. 2; viL Ij 4» 
 
 VOL. IX. 
 
 li 
 
 4 i:>aii0aa. vii. «, a. 
 
26 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 Herakieids: and in like manner the formation oi the Dorian 
 Hexapolis in the south-\vc<tern corner of Asia Minor : Koa, 
 Knidus, Halikarnassus, and Rhodes, with its three separate citi^ 
 as well as the Dorian (jstablishraents in Krete, Melos, and Thera, 
 are all traced more or less directly to the same great revolution. 
 Thera, more especially, has its root in the legendary world. lu 
 Gilkist was Theras, a descendant of the heroic lineage of Gidipua 
 and Kadmus, and maternal uncle of the young kings of Sparta, 
 Eurysthenes and Prokles, during whose minority he had exercised 
 the regency. On their coming of age, his functions were at an 
 end : but being unable to endure a private station, he determined 
 to put himself at the head of a body of emigrants : many came 
 forward to join him, and the expedition was farther reinforced by 
 a body of interlo|)ers, belonging to the Minyie, of whom the Lace- 
 daemonians were anxious to get rid. These Minyae had arrived 
 in Laconia, not long before, from the island of Lemnos, out of 
 which they had been expelled by the Pela-gian fugitives from 
 Attica. Tliey landed without asking permission, took up their 
 abode and began to *' liglit their fires " on Mount Taygetus. When 
 the Lacediemonians sent to ask who they were, and wherefoi*e 
 they had come, the Minyae replied that they were sons of the 
 Argonauts who had landed at Lemnos, and that, being expelled 
 fit)m their own homes, they thought themselves entitled to solicit 
 an asylum in the territory of their fathers : they asked, withal, to 
 be admitted to share both the lands and the honors of the state. 
 The Lacediemonians granted the recpiest, chiefly on the ground 
 of a common ancestry, — their own great heroes, the Tyndarids, 
 having been enrolled in the crew of the Argo : the Minyie were 
 then introduced as citizens into the tribes, received lots of land, 
 and began to intermarry with the preexisting families. It was 
 not Ion;., however, before they became insolent : they demanded a 
 share in the kingdom (which was the venerated privilege of the 
 Herakieids), and so grossly misconducted themselves in other 
 ways, that the Lacediemonians resolved to put them to death, and 
 began by casting them into prison. While the Miny« were thus 
 confined, their wives, Spartans by birth, and many of them daugh- 
 ters of the principal men, sohcited permission to go in and see 
 them : leave being granted, they made use of the interview to 
 
 THERA AND THE MINYAE. 
 
 n 
 
 change clothes with their husbands, who thus escaped and fled 
 again to Mount Taygetus. The greater number of them quitted 
 Laconia, and marched to Triphylia, in the western regions of 
 Peloponnesus, from whence they expeUed the Paroreat4B and the 
 Kaukones, and founded six towns of their own, of which Lepreum 
 was the chief. A certain proportion, however, by permission of 
 the Lacediemonians, joined Theras, and departed with him to the 
 island of Kalliste, tlien possessed by Phoenician inhabitants, who 
 were iV^sccnded from the kinsmen and companions of Kadmus, 
 and wU) had been left there by that prince, when he came forth 
 in search of EurOpa, eight generations preceding. Arrivmg thus 
 ainon- men of kindred lineage with himself, Theras met with a 
 fraternal reception, and the island derived from him the name, 
 under which it is historically known, of Thera.i 
 
 Such is the foundation-legend of Thera, believed both by the 
 Lacedaemonians and by the Thera^ans, and interesting as it brings 
 before us, cliaracteristically as well as vividly, the persons and 
 feelin-s of the mythical worid, — the Argonauts, with the Tynda- 
 rids as their companions and Minyae as their children. In Le- 
 preum, as in the other towns of Triphylia, the descent from the 
 Minyie of old seems to have been believed in the historical times, 
 and the mention of the river Minyeius in those regions by Homer 
 tended to confirm it.2 But people were not unanimous as to the 
 le-end by which that descent should be made out ; while some 
 acfopted the story just cited from Herodotus, others imagined that 
 ChlOris, who had come from the Minyeian town of Orchomenus 
 as the wife of N61eus to Pylus, had brought with her a body of 
 her couiitrymen.2 
 
 I Herodot. iv. 145-149; Valer. Maxim, iv. c. 6; PolyaBn. vu 49, who. 
 however gives the narrative differently by mentioning " Tyrrhenians from 
 S2nos Jding Sparta during the Helotic war :" another narrative m h.s col 
 tecfion(viii. 71), though imperfectly preserved, seems to approach m^ 
 closely to Herodotus. 
 
 « Homer, Iliad, xi. 721. i_ , j r ♦».-> 
 
 3 Strabo viii. p. 347. M. Raoul Rochette, who treats the legends for the 
 «.«at n-irt as if they were so much authentic history, is much displeased with 
 ^.: lofor ad^ tn'g this diversity of stories (Histoire des Colonies Grecque- 
 t ni oh 7 p 54) • « Aprfes des details si clairs et si positifs, comment ^it-U 
 possible que ce meme Strabon, bouleTerwnt toute la chronologie, hm 
 
 n 
 
CLOSING EVENTS OF LEGENDARY GKEECE. 
 
 m 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 S^ 
 
 These Mill} ae from Lemnos and Imbros appear again as poi« 
 CioDS of another narrative respecting the settlement of the colony 
 of Melos. It has already been mentioned, that when the Herak* 
 leids and the Dorians invaded Laconia, Philonomus, an Achaean, 
 treacherously betrayed to them the country, for which he received 
 as his recompense the territory of Amyklae. He is said to havt 
 peopled this territory by introducing detaclmients of Minyae from 
 Lemnos and Imbros, who, in the third generation after the return 
 of th(3 Uerakleids, became so discontented and mutinous, that the 
 Lacedicmonians resolved to send them out of the country as emi- 
 grants, under their chiefs Polls and Delphus. Taking the direc- 
 tion of Krete, they stopped in their way to land a portion of their 
 colonists on the island of Melos, which remained throughout the 
 historical times a faithful and attached colony of Laceda^mOnJ 
 On arriving in Krete, they are said to have settled at the town 
 of Gortyn. We find, moreover, that other Dorian establishments, 
 either from Lacedar;mon or Argos, were formed in Krete ; and 
 Lyktos in particular, is noticed, not only as a colony of Sparta, 
 but as distinguished for the analogy of its laws and customs/^ It 
 is even said that Krete, immediately after the Trojan war, had 
 been visited by the wralh of the gods, and depopulated by famine 
 and pestilence ; and that, in the third generation afterwards, so 
 great was the influx of emigrants, the entire population of the 
 island was renewed, with the exception of the Eteokretes at 
 Polichnai and Pnesus.^ 
 
 arriver les Minyens duns lu Triphylie sous la condnite dc Chloris, m^re de 
 Nestor ? " 
 
 The story which M. Kaoul Kochette thus puts tti>ide, is quite equal in 
 point of credibility to that which he accepts : in fact, no measure of credibility 
 can be applied. 
 
 * Conon, Narrat. 36. Compare Plutarch, Question. Grajc. p. 21, where 
 Tjrrrhcnians from Lemnos are mentioned, as in the passage of Polyaenus, 
 referred to in a precedin«i note. 
 
 « Strabo, x. p. 481 ; Aristot. Polit. ii. 10. 
 
 * Herodot. vii. 171 (see above, Ch. xii. vol. i. p. 226). Diodorus (v. 80), 
 •s well as Herodotus, mentions generally large emigrations into Krete from 
 Lacedcmon and Argos ; but even the laborious research of M. Raoul Bo* 
 dMtte (Histolre des Colonies Grecqnes, t iil c. 9, pp. 60-68) full io collect 
 H^ any distinct particulars of them. 
 
 There were Dorians in Krete in the time of the Odyssey: 
 Homer mentions different languages and different races of men, 
 Eteokretes, Kydones, Dorians, Achaeans, and Pelaftgians, as all 
 coexisting in the island, which he describes to be populous, and 
 to contain ninety cities. A legend given by Andron, based seem- 
 ingly upon the statement of Herodotus, that Dorus the son of 
 Hellen had settled in Histiaeotis, ascribed the first introduction of 
 the three last races to Tektaphus son of Dorus, — who had led forth 
 from that country a colony of Dorians, Achaians, and Pelasgiana, 
 and had landed in Krete during the reign of the indigenous king 
 Kres.i This story of Andron so exactly fits on to the Homeric 
 Catalogue of Kretan inhabitants, that we may reasonably pre- 
 sume it to have been designedly arranged with reference to that 
 Catalogue, so as to afibrd some plausible account, consistently 
 with the received legendary chronology, how there came to be 
 Dorians in Krete before the Trojan war, — the Dorian colonies 
 after the return of the Herakleids being of course long posterior 
 in supposed order of time. To find a leader sufficiently early fbi 
 his hypothesis, Andron ascends to the primitive Eponymus Do- 
 rus, to whose son Tektaphus he ascribes the introduction of a 
 mixed colony of Dorians, Achieans, and Pelasgians into Krete : 
 these are the exact three races enumerated in the Odyssey, and 
 the king Kres, whom Andron affirms to have been then reigning 
 in the island, represents the Eteokretes and Kydones in the 
 list of Homer. The story seems to have found favor among 
 native Kretan historians, as it doubtless serves to obviate what 
 
 * Steph. Byz. v. Aupiov. — Ilepl uv IrrropEi 'AvSpuv, Kprjrbg kv ry vr^a^ 
 SaaiXevovToc, Tek ra<f>ov rdv Aupov tov 'ETi/.rjvog, bpfirjaavTa kK r^g kv OerroAJp 
 Tore fiev Aupidoc, vvv 6e 'IffriaiijTiSor /caAou/uef 7/f, a(piKi<r^at elg Kp^TTjv /ier^ 
 Awptfwv re koI ^kxaiCw koI Jle'kaaydv, ruv ovk airapavTuv elf Tv/!>liijviap, 
 Compare Strabo, x. pp. 475-47G, from which it Is plain that the story WH 
 addaced by Andron with a special explanatory reference to the paaaage in 
 the Odyssey (xv. 175.^ 
 
 l*he age of Andr6n, one of the authors of AtthidSs, is not precisely asoor> 
 tsinable, but he can hardly be put earlier than 300 b. o. ; see the preliminaiy 
 Dissertation of C. MQller to the Fragmenta Historiconim Gnecomm, ed. 
 Didot, p. Ixxxil ; and the Prolusio de Atthldnm Scriptoriboa, prefixed It 
 Lena's edition of the Fragments of PhanodSmns and Pdmdo, fk zzvift. Xipa 
 l»12. 
 
 ^\ 
 
 '■I 
 
 n 
 
 if 
 
 r" ; 
 
 '•«*M2i|iiiilr. 
 
^ 
 
 FnSTORY OF GREECE 
 
 would Otherwise t)e a contradiction in the legendary chronol- 
 ogy-' 
 
 Another Dorian emigration from Peloponnesus to Krete, which 
 
 extended also to Rhodes and Kos, is farther said to have been 
 conducted by Altha?menes, who had been one of the chiefs in the 
 expedition against Attica, in which Krodus perlttied. Thia 
 prince, a Herakleid, and third in descent from Temenus, was in 
 duced to expatriate by a family quarrel, and conducted a body 
 of Dorian colonists from Argos first to Krete, where some of 
 them remained ; but the greater number accompanied him to 
 Rhodes, in which island, after expelling the Karian possessors, he 
 founded the three cities of Lindus, lalysus, and Kameirus.^ 
 
 It is proper here to add, that the legend of the Rhodian archae- 
 ologists respecting their oekist Altha}menes, who was worship})ed 
 in the island with heroic honors, was something totally differenl 
 from the preceding. Althnemenes was a Kretan, son of the king 
 Katreus, and grandson of Minos. An oracle predicted to him 
 that he would one day kill his father : eager to escape so terrible 
 a destiny, he quitted Krete, and conducted a colony to Rhodes, 
 where the famous temple of the Atabyrian Zeus, on tlie lofty 
 summit of Mount Atabyrum, was ascribed to his foundation, built 
 80 as to command a view of Krete. He had been settled on the 
 island for some time, when his father Katreus, anxious again to 
 embrace his only son, followed him from Krete : he landed in 
 Rhodes during the night without being known, and a casual collis- 
 ion took place between his attendants and the islanders. Althse- 
 menes hastened to the shore to assist in repelling the supposed 
 enemies, and in the fray had the misfortune to kill his aged 
 
 fiither.3 
 
 Either the emigrants who accompanied Althiemenes, or ?ome 
 
 > See Dioddr, iv. 60 ; v. 80. From Straho, (/. c.) however, we see that 
 Others rejected the story of Andron. 
 
 O. Moller (History of the Dorians, b. i. c. 1, ^ 9) accepts the stor, as sub- 
 Mantially true, putting aside the name Dorus, and even regards it as certain 
 tfiat Minos of Kn688ns was a Dorian ; but the evidence with which he sup- 
 this oonclusion appears to me loose and fanciful. 
 
 • Conon.. Narrat. 47 ; Ephonis, Fragm. 62, ed. Marx. 
 
 * Diodor. V. 59 -, Apollodor. iii. 2. 2. In the Chapter next but one preoo^inf 
 
 BLAJ^K PERIOD WHICH SVCCEEDW. 
 
 31 
 
 other Dorian colonists afterwards, are reported to have settled at 
 K6s, Knidus, Karpathus, and Halikarnassus. To the last men- 
 tioned city, however, Anthes of Troezen is assigned as the cekist! 
 the emigrants who accompanied him were said to have belonged 
 to the Dymanian tribe, one of the three tribes always found in a 
 Doric state : and the city seems to have been characterized as a 
 colony sometimes of Troezen, sometimes of Argos.i 
 
 ^Ye thus have the -^Eolic, the Ionic, and the Doric colonial en 
 tablishments in Asia, all springing out of the legendary age, and 
 all se; forth as consequences, direct or indirect, of what is called 
 the Return of the Ilerakleids, or the Dorian conquest of Pelo- 
 ponnesus. According to the received chronology, they are suc- 
 ceeded by a period, supposed to comprise nearly three centuries, 
 which is almost an entire blank, before we reach authentic chro- 
 nology and the first recorded Olympiad, — and they thus form 
 the concluding events of the mythical world, out of which we 
 now pass into historical Greece, such as it stands at the last- 
 mentioned epoch. It is by these migrations that the parts of the 
 Hellenic aggregate are distributed into the places which they oc- 
 cupy at the dawn of historical daylight, — Dorians, Arcadians, 
 ^tolo-Eleians, and Acha'ans, sharing Peloponnesus unequally 
 among them, — JEolians, lonians, and Dorians, settled both in 
 the islands of the ^gean and the coast of ^Vsia Minor. The 
 Return of the Herakleids, as well as the three emigrations, 
 uffiolic, Ionic, and Doric, present the legendary explanation, 
 Buitabhj to the feelings and belief of the people, showing how 
 
 this, Diodorus had made express reference to native Rhodian mythologists, 
 — to one in particular, named Zeno (c. 57). 
 
 Wesseling supposes two different settlers in Rhodes, both named AlthiB- 
 menes : this is certainly necessary, if we are to treat the two narratives ai 
 historical. 
 
 ' Strabo, xiv, p. 653 ; Pausan. ii. 39, 3 ; Kaliimachns apud Stephan. Bya. 
 ?. * k^LKupvaaaof, 
 
 Herodotus (\\\. 99) calls Halikarnassus a colony of Troezen ; Pomponioi 
 Mela (i 16,) of Argos. Vitruvius names both Argos and Troezen (ii. 8, 12); 
 but the two oekists whom he mentions, Melas and Arevanius, were not m 
 well known as Anthes ; the inhabitants of Halikarnassus being called An- 
 Aeacke (see Stephan. Byz. v. 'A^ijvai ; and a cnrions inscription in BoAckh'f 
 C(Nrpii0 Inscriptionum, No. 2655). 
 
 
ds 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECB. 
 
 LEGENDARY PAST IMAGINED AS DISTANT. 
 
 Greece passed from the heroic racea who besieged lYoj and 
 Thebes, piloted the adventurous Argo, and slew the monstr-ous 
 boar of Kalydon, to the historical races, differently named and clasd- 
 ified, who furnished victors to the Olympic and Pythian games. 
 
 A patient and learned French writer, M. Baoul Rochette,, — 
 who construes all th«3 events of the heroic age, generally speak- 
 big, as so much real history, only making allowance for tli^ mis- 
 takes and exaggerations of poets, — is greatly perplexed by the 
 blank and interruption which this supposed continuous series of 
 history presents, from the Return of the Herakleids down to the 
 beginning of the Olympiads. He cannot explain to himself so 
 long a period of al>solute quiescence, after the important incidents 
 and striking adventures of the heroic age ; and if there happened 
 nothing worthy of nx'ord during this long period, — as he pre 
 sumes, from the fact that nothing has been transmitted, — he 
 concludes that this njust have arisen from the state of suffering 
 and exhaustion in which previous wars and revolution ha<l left 
 the Greeks: a long interval of complete inaction being required 
 to heal such wounds. ^ 
 
 ' " La p^riode qui me seinble la plus obscure et la plus rcmplie de difficul- 
 (es n'eit pas celle que je rieus de parcourir : c'est celle qui separe I'epoque 
 des He'rachdes de I'inKtitution des Olyrapiades. La perte des ouvrages 
 d'Ephore et de Theopompe est sans doute la cause en grande partie du vide 
 immense que nous offre dans cet intervalle I'histoire de la Grece. Mais si 
 Ton en excepte re'tablissement des colonies Eoliennes, Doriennes, et lonien- 
 ne», de TAaie Mineure, et quelques evenemens, tres rapproch^s de la pre- 
 miere de ces dpoques, I'cspace de plus de quatre slides qui les separe est 
 CDUvert d'une obscurity presque impenetrable, et Ton aura toujours lieu de 
 g etonner que les ouvrages des anciens n'offrent aucun sccours pour reraplir 
 ane lacune aussi considerable. Une pareille absence doit aussi nous faire 
 soap<;ocner qu'il se passa dans la Grfece pen de ces grands ^v^nemens qui se 
 graveut fortement dans la me'moire des hommes : puisque, si les traces ne 
 s'en e'taient point conservees dans les e'crits des contemporains, au moins le 
 Bourenir s'en seroit il perpetue' par des monumens: or les monumens et 
 I'histoire se taisent e'galement. II faut done croire que la Grfece, agit^e depuis 
 si long temps par des revolutions de toute esp^ce, epuise'e par ses demiferes 
 Emigrations, se touma toute enti^re vers des occupations paisibles, et ne 
 chercha, pendant ce long intervalle, qu'k gu^rir, au scin du repos et de 
 Tabondance qui en est la suite, les plaies profondes que sa population avail 
 •ooffertes. (Raoul Rochette, Histoire des Colonies Grecques, t. ii. c. 16. p. 455,1 
 
 To the samu purpose, Gillies (History of Greece, ch. iii. p. 67,<iuarf>* 
 
 Assumii/g M. Rochette's view of the Leroic ^es to be ooirect, 
 •nd reasoning upon the supposition that the adventures ascribed 
 to the Grecian heroes are matters of historical reality, trans- 
 mitted by tradition from a period of time four centuries before 
 the recorded Olympiads, and only embellished by describing 
 poets, — the blank which he here dwells upon is, to say the least 
 of it, embarrassing and unaccountable. It is strange that the 
 stream of tradition, if it had once begun to flow, should (like 
 several of the rivers in Greece) be submerged for two or three 
 centuries and then reappear. But when we make what appears 
 to me the proper distinction between legend and history, it will 
 be seen that a period of blank time between the two is perfectly 
 conformable to the conditions under which the former is gen- 
 erated. It is not the immediate past, but a supposed remote past, 
 which forms the suitable atraosj)here of mythical narrative, — a 
 past originally quite undetermined in respect to distance from the 
 present, as we see in the Iliad and Odyssey. And even when 
 we come down to the genealogical poets, who affect to give a cer- 
 tain measure of bygone time, and a succession of persons as well 
 as of events, still, the names whom they most delight to honor 
 and upon whose exploits they chiefly expatiate, are those of the 
 ancestral gods and heroes of the tribe and their supposed con- 
 temporaries ; ancestors separated by a long lineage from the 
 present hearer. The gods and heroes were conceived as re- 
 moved from him by several generations, and the legendary mat^ 
 ter which was grouped around them appeared only the more im- 
 posing when exhibited at a respectful distance, beyond the days 
 of father and grandfather, and of all known predecessors. The 
 Odes of Pindar strikingly illustrate this tendency. We thus see 
 how it happened that, between the times assigned to heroic adven- 
 ture and those of historical record, there existed an intermediate 
 blank, filled with inglorious names ; and how, amongst the same 
 society which cared not to remember proceedings of fathers and 
 grandfathers, there circulated much popular and accredited narra- 
 tiye respecting real or supposed ancestors long past and gone 
 
 •• The obscure transactiDns of Greece, daring the four following centurief 
 in correspond with the splendor of the Trqjan, or even of the Aiigonaatir 
 expedition," etc. 
 
 OL. U. ^ ^^ 
 
 y 
 
 n 
 
34 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 MR. CLINTONS CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 35 
 
 The obscure and barren centuries which immediately precede 
 the first recorded 01yn»piad, form the natural separation between 
 the legendary return of the Herakleids and the historical wars 
 of Sparta against Messene, — between the province of leg(Mid, 
 wherein matter of fact (if any there be) is so intimately combined 
 with Its accompaniments of fiction, as to be undistinguishable 
 without the aid of extrinsic evidence, — and that of histor> 
 where some matters of fact can hi ascertained, and where a 
 iagacious criticism may be usefully employed in trying to add to 
 their number. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 APPLICAnOX OF CHRONOLOGY TO GKEriAN IJ-.r.EXD. 
 
 1 NEED not repeat, what has already been sutficiently set forth 
 in the preceding pages, that the mass of Grecian incident anterior 
 to 776 B. c. appears to me not reducible either to history or to 
 chronology, and that any chronological system which may be 
 applied to it nuist be essentially uncertified and illusory. It wtis, 
 however, chronologized in ancient times, and has continued to be 
 go in modern ; and the various schemes employed for this pur- 
 pose may be found stated and compared in the first volume (the 
 last published) of Mr. Fynes Clinton's Fasti Hellenici. There 
 were among the Greeks, and there still are among modem 
 gcholars, important differences as to the dates of the principal 
 ©vents :' Eratosthenes dissented both from Herodotus and from 
 Phanias and Kallimachus, while Larcher and Raoul Rochette 
 
 1 Larcher and Kaoul Hochette, adopting the chronological date of Herodo- 
 tB9 fix the taking of Troj at 1270 b.c, and the Return of the Herakleids at 
 1190 B.C. According to the scheme of Eratosthenes, these two evcnta 
 stand at 11 84 and 1104 B. C. 
 
 O. Muller, in his Chronological Tables (Appendix vi. to History of Do- 
 li«at>Tol ii. p. 441, Epgl. transl), gives no dates or computation of yeaif 
 
 fwho follow HeiXKlotus- stand opi>osed to O. Miiller and to Mr. 
 Clinton. That the reader may have a general conception of 
 the order in which these legendary events were disposed, 1 
 transcribe from the Fasti Hellenica a double chronological table, 
 conf lined in p. 139, in which the dates are placed m series, from 
 Phoroneus to the Olympiad of Coro^bus in b. c. 776, -m the 
 first column according to the system of Eratosthenes, in the 
 second according to that of Kallimachus. 
 
 '-The following Table (savs Mr. Clinton) offers a summary 
 view of the leading periods from Phoroneus to the Olympiad of 
 (on. Inis, and exhibits a double series of dates; the one proceed- 
 in.' from the date of Eratosthenes, the other from a date founded 
 oirthe reduced calculations of Phania^s and Kallimachus, w;^ich 
 strike out fifty-six years from the amount of Eratosthenes. Pha- 
 Bias as we have seen, omitted fifty-five years between the Return 
 and the registered Olympiads ; for so we may understand the 
 account : Kallimachus, fifty-six years between the Olympiad of 
 Iphitus and the Olympiad in which Coroebus won.» 
 
 anterior to the Capture of Troy and the Return of the Herakleids, which 
 he places with Eratosthenes in 1184 and 1104 B.C. 
 
 C Muller thinks (in his Annotatio ad Marmor Panum, appended to the 
 Fra<^menta Historicorum Or«.corum, ed. Didot, pp. 556, 568, 572 ; compare 
 his Prefatorv notice of the Fragments of Hellanikus, p. xxvin of the same 
 volume) tha't the ancient chronologists, in their arrangement of the myth.ca^ 
 events as antecedent and consequent, were guided by certain numerical 
 ItfKhments, especially by a reverence for the cycle of 63 years, product of 
 *he sacred numbers 7"X 9 = 63. I cannot think that he makes out h« 
 hvpothesis satisfactorily, as to the particular cycle followed, though it is not 
 improbable that some preconceived numerical theories d,d gmde these early 
 calculitors He calls attention to the fact that the Alexandrine computation 
 of dates was onlv one among a number of others discrepant, and that modem 
 inquirers are too apt to treat it as if it stood alone, or carried «ome superior 
 fluhoritv (pp. 568-572; compare Clemen. Alex. Stromat. i. p. 145, Sylb. 
 For exarn^e 0. Muller observes, (Appendix Vo Hist, of Dorians, p. 442,) 
 that - Larcher's crificism and rejection of the Alexandrine chronologists may 
 perhaps be found as groundless as they are presumptuous," -an observatiojj. 
 which, to say the least of it, ascribes to Eratosthenes a far higher aathontf 
 
 than he is entitled to. , , /ii • / •««..--. 
 
 » The date of Kallimachus for Tphitui is approved by Clavier (rrea 
 
 Temps, torn. ii. p. 203), who considern it m not far from the tmth. 
 
 f, 
 
 { 
 
 ft 
 I 
 
 i» 
 
86 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 **The first column of this Table exhibits the curmtt yean 
 ^fore and after the fall of Troy ; in tlie second cc.umn of dates 
 tlie complete intervals are expressed.** 
 
 Imn 
 
 the Fall I 
 of Troy . I 
 
 Te&ra fn- 
 terreniDgl 
 between 
 th« ditl'er- ; 
 enteveutal 
 
 (570) ' \Phoroneus, p. 19 
 
 * ' \ Pehsf/us r. {> 13, 88 
 
 (250) \Deukalion, p. 4;! 
 
 /9'«ii S ^rechthf'us 
 
 ^'^""' I Diirdantis. p. 88 
 
 (150) Az4in, Aphida , Elatus 
 
 130 iKmlmus, p. 85 
 
 (100) l/V/c/w „., 
 
 78 jBirth of Ihrcuies , 
 
 (42j Ar;;onjitUs 
 
 30 p'irst Theban war, p. 51, h. . ,. 
 
 26 IDeath of Hercules 
 
 24 'Death of Kurystheus, p. 106, x.. 
 
 20 ll)c:ith of Hyljm 
 
 18 Accession of Aifamenimm 
 
 16 Second Tlielmi, war, p. 87, I .. 
 
 10 Trojan expedition (9y |m) , , , , 
 
 Years 
 
 aft IT 
 
 the Fall 
 
 of Tri)v. 
 
 60 
 
 SOO 
 
 408 
 852 
 
 Troy taken 
 
 Orestes rcipis a>: Ar«,'os in the 8th year . . 
 
 The The.ssaii occnpy Thessaly 
 
 The Haofi return to Bceotia in the 60th yr. 
 
 ^Eolic inisrration under Penthiltts ', . 
 
 Return of the Ifermluhe m the 80th year 
 Ali'tes reip:ns at Corinth, p. 130, m ..'... 
 
 Migration of Tl.erus 
 
 Lesbos o<cnpied 130 years after the lera. 
 
 Death of Cofinis . . . ' 
 
 Ionic mijrration 60 years after the lietum. 
 Cyme foun<led 150 years after the Jera . . | 
 Smyrna, 168 years after the ajra,p. 105, t.j 
 
 287 
 
 I 33 
 
 50 
 
 I 50 
 
 20 
 
 30 
 
 22 
 
 36 
 
 12 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 2y 9m 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 7 
 59 
 
 90 
 
 29 
 1 
 
 21 
 8 
 1 
 
 II 
 
 18 
 131 
 
 299 
 
 OlyiTipiad of Tphkus I 3 ^^^ 
 
 Olympiad of Coro^Ms .1 
 
 B.C. 
 
 Era- 
 tcwUi. 
 
 (1753) 
 (1466) 
 (1433) 
 (1383) 
 
 (1333) 
 1313 
 
 (12^3) 
 1261 
 
 (12-25) 
 1213 
 1209 
 1207 
 1203 
 1200 
 1198 
 1192 
 
 1183 
 1176 
 
 1124 
 
 1104 
 1075 
 1074 
 1053 
 1045 
 1044 
 1033 
 1015 
 
 884 
 776 
 
 B. C. 
 
 K&IU. 
 mach. 
 
 (1697) 
 (1410) 
 (1377) 
 (1327) 
 
 (1277) 
 1257 
 
 (1227) 
 1205 
 
 (1169) 
 1157 
 1153 
 1151 
 1147 
 1144 
 1142 
 1136 
 
 1127 
 1120 
 
 1068 
 
 1048 
 1019 
 1018 
 997 
 989 
 988 
 977 
 959 
 
 828 
 776 
 
 •These dates, distingruished from the rest by braces, are proposed m man 
 OH)}iKtiires, founded upon the probable length of generationa. 
 
 APPLICATION OF CHRONOLOGY TO LEGEND. 
 
 Ml 
 
 Whu^ver chronology is possible, researches such as thoee of 
 Mr. CUntou, which have conduced so much to the better un- 
 dersunding of the later times of Greece, deserve respectful 
 attention. But the ablest chronologist can accomplish nothing, 
 unless he is supplied with a certain basis of matters of fact, pure 
 and distinguishable from fiction, and authenticated by witnesses 
 both knowing the truth and willing to declare it. Possessing 
 this preliminary stock, he may reason from it to refute distinct 
 falsehoods and to correct partial mistakes : but if all the original 
 statements submitted to him contain truth (at least wherever 
 there U truth) in a sort of chemical combination with fiction, 
 which he has no means of decomposing, — he is in the conditioo 
 of one who tiies to solve a problem without data : he is first 
 obliged to construct his own data, and from them to extract hia 
 conclusions. The statements of the epic poets, our only original 
 witnesses in this case, correspond to the description here given. 
 Whether the proportion of truth contained in them be smaUer or 
 greater, it is at all events unassignable, — and the constant and 
 intimate admixture of fiction is both indisputable in itself, and, 
 indeed, essential to the purpose and profession of those from 
 whom the tales proceed. Of such a character are aU the depos 
 ing witnesses, even where their tales agree ; and it is out of a 
 heap of such tales, not agreeing, but discrepant in a thousand 
 ways, and without a morsel of pure authenticated truth, — that 
 the critic is called upon to draw out a methodical series of his- 
 torical events adorned with chronological dates. 
 
 If we could imagine a modern critical scholar transported into 
 Greece at the time of the Persian war, — endued with his 
 present habits of appreciating historical evidence, without sharing 
 in the religious or patriotic feelings of the country, — and invited 
 to prepare, out of the great body of Grecian epic which then 
 existed, a History and Chronology of Greece anterior to 776 
 B. c, assigning reasons as well for what he admitted as for what 
 he rejected, — I feel persuaded that he would have judged the 
 undertaking to be Uttle better than a process of guesswork. Bui 
 the modern critic finds that not only Pherekydes and HellamkiM, 
 but also Herodotus and Thucydides, have either attempted the 
 task ©r saactioned the belief that it was practicable, — a matter 
 not at all surprising^ wlken we consider both their iia]9<%w VMr 
 
 V' 
 
 t\ 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 
38 
 
 mSTORY OF GREEClL. 
 
 ERATOSTHENES. -THE FIBST OLYMPIAD. 
 
 39 
 
 perience of historical evid-^nce and the powerful ascendency of 
 religion and patriotism in predisposing them to antiquarian belief, 
 — and he therefore accepts the problem as they have bequeathed 
 it, adding his own etibrts to bring it to a satisfactory solution. 
 Nevertheless, he not only follows them with some degree of 
 reserve and uneasiness, but even admits important distinctions 
 quite foreign to their habits of thought. Thucydides talks of the 
 deeds of Hellen and his sons with as much confidence as we now 
 Bpeak of William the Conqueror: Mr. Clinton recognizes Hel- 
 len, with his sons Dorus, ^olus, and Xuthus, as fictitious persons. 
 Herodotus recites the great heroic genealogies down from Kad- 
 mus and Danaus, with a belief not less complete in the higher 
 members of the series than in the lower: but Mr. Clinton admits 
 a radical distinction in the evidence of events before and after 
 the first recorded Olympiad, or 776 b. c.,— 'Mhe first date in 
 Grecian chronology (he remarks, p. 123,) which can be fixed 
 upon mUhentic evidence,'' — the highest point to which Grecian 
 chronology, reckoning upward, can be carried. Of this impor- 
 tant epoch in Grecian development, -- the commencement' of 
 •uthentic chronological hfe, — Herodotus and Thucydides had no 
 knowledge or took no account: the later chronologists, from 
 Timneus downwards, noted it, and made it serve as the basis of 
 their chronological comparisons, so far as it went : but neither 
 Eratosthenes nor Apollodurus seem to have recognized (though 
 Varro and Africanus did recognize) a marked difference in 
 respect of certainty or authenticity between the period before 
 and the period after. 
 
 In farther illustration of Mr. Clinton's opinion that the first 
 recorded Olympiad is (he earliest date which can be fixed upon 
 authentic evidence, we have, in p. 138, the following just remarks 
 in reference to the dissentient views of Eratosthenes, Phanias, 
 and Kallimachus, about the date of the Trojan war : " The chro- 
 nology of Eratosthenes (he says), founded on a careful comparison 
 of circumstances, and approved by those to whom the same stores 
 of information were open, is entitled to our respect. But we must 
 remember that a conjectural date can never rise to the autl^rity 
 •f evidence ; that what is accepted as a substitute for testimony 
 Ib not an equivalent : witnesses only can prove a date, and in the 
 0^ these, the knowledge of it is plainly beyond our reach. 
 
 lit' in the absence of a better light we seek for what is probable, 
 we are not to forget the distinction between conjecture and proof 
 between what is probable and what is certain. Tht.' computation, 
 then, of Eratosthenes for the war of Troy is open to inquiry ; and 
 if we find it adverse to the opinions of many preceding writers, 
 who fixed a lower date, and adverse to the acknowledged length 
 of generation in the most authentic dynasties, we are allowed to 
 follow other guides, who give us a lower epoch." 
 
 Here Mr. Clinton again plainly acknowledg'^s the want of evi 
 dence, and the irremediable uncertainty of Grecian chronology 
 before the Olympiads ; and the reasonable conclusion from his 
 argument is, not simply, that " the computation of Eratosthenes 
 was open to inquiry," (which few would be found to deny,) but 
 that both Eratosthenes and Phanias had delivered positive opin- 
 ions upon a point on which no sufficient evidence was accessible, 
 and therefore that neither the one nor the other was a guide to 
 be followed.! Mr. Clinton does, indeed, speak of authentic dynas- 
 ties prior to the first recorded Olympiad, but if there be any 
 such, reaching up from that period to a supposed point coeval 
 with or anterior to the war of Troy, — I see no good reason 
 for the marked distinction which he draws between chronology 
 before and chronology after the Olympiad of Koroebus, or for the 
 necessity which he feels of suspending his uj)ward reckoning at the 
 last-mentioned epoch, and beginning a different process, called 
 " a downward reckoning," from the higher epoch (supposed to be 
 somehow ascertained without any upward reckoning) of the first 
 patriarch from whom such authentic dynasty emanates.2 Herod- 
 otus and Thucydides might well, upon this supposition, ask of 
 
 » Karl Muller observes (in the Dissertation above referred to, appended to 
 the Fragmenta Historicum Gr«corum, p. 568) : "Quod attinet aeram Tro 
 janam, tot obruiraur et tarn diversia veterum scriptorum computationibas, ut 
 iingulas enamerare negotiuin sit t«dii plenum, eas vel probare vel improbaro 
 168 vana nee vacua ab arrogantiA. Nam nemo hodie nescit quanam M&i 
 his habenda sit omnibus." 
 
 * The distinction which Mr. Clinton draws between an upward and a down- 
 ward chronology is one that I am unable to comprehend. His doctrine ii| 
 that upward chronology is trustworthy and practicable up to the first record- 
 ed Olympiad ; downward chronology is trustworthy and practicable from Pho- 
 roneur. down to the Ionic migration : what is uncertain is, the length of the 
 intermediate line which joins the Ionic migration to the first recor#wd Olym 
 

 mSTOEY OF GREECE. 
 
 If 
 
 Mr. Clinton, why hv. called upon them to alter their method of 
 proceeding at the year 776 b. c, and why they might not be 
 allowed to pursue their " upward chronological reckoning," with- 
 out interruption, from Leonidaa up to Danaus, or from Peisistratus 
 up to Ilellen and Deukalion, without any alteration in the point 
 of view. Authentic dynasties i'l-om the Olympiads, up to an 
 epoch above the 1 rojan war, would enable us to obtain chrono- 
 logical proof for the latter date, instead of being reduced (as Mr, 
 Qinion affirms that we are) to *' conjecture " instead of proof. 
 The whole question, as to the value of the reckoning from the 
 
 piad, — tlie downward iind the iipwani tcriiuMus. (See Fobti Hellenici, vol. L 
 lutroduct. p. ix. second edit, and j* 12.5. eh. vi.) 
 
 All chronology roust l>€^in l»y reekoninj^ upwards : vvhen by this process 
 we have arrived at a certain determined era in earlier time, we may from 
 that date reckon downwards, if we please. We must be able to reckon up- 
 wards from the present time to the Christian era, before we can employ that 
 event as a fixed point for chronological determinations generally. But if 
 Eratosthenes could perform correctly the upward reckoning from his owa 
 time to the fall of Troy, so he couhl also perform the upward reckoning up 
 to the nearer point of th<e Ionic migration. It is true that Eratosthenes gives 
 all his statements of time from an older point to a newer (so far at least as 
 we can judge from Clemens Alex. Strom. I, p. 336) ; he says " From the cap- 
 ture of Troy to the return of the Ilerakleids is 80 years ; from thence to the 
 Ionic migration, 60 years ; then, farther on, to the guardianship of Lykurgus, 
 159 years ; then to the first year of the first Olympiad, 108 years ; from which 
 Olympiad to the inva.si(»n of Xerxes, 297 years ; from whence to the begin- 
 ning of the Pcloponnesian war, 48 years," etc. But here is no difference 
 between upward reckoning as high as the first Olympiad, and then down- 
 ward reckoning for the intervals of time above it. Eratosthenes first found 
 or made some upward reckoning to the Trojan capture, either from his own 
 time or from some time at a known distance from his own : he then assumes 
 the capture of Troy as an era, and gives statements of intervals going down- 
 wards to the Pcloponnesian war : amongst other statements, he assigns clearly 
 that interval which Mr. Clinton pronounces to be undiscoverable, viz. the 
 •pace of time between the Ionic emigration and the first Olympiad, interpos* 
 ing one epoch between them. I reject the computation of Eratosthenes, or 
 iny other computation, lo determine the supposed date of the Trojan war* 
 but, if I admitted it, I could have no hesitation in admitting also the space 
 which he defines between the Ionic migration and the first Olympiad. Euse* 
 bias (Priep. £v. x. 9, p 48.5) reckons upwards from the birth of Christ, 
 BMikiiig various halts, but never breaking off, to the initial phenomena of 
 OreciAB antiqaity, — the deluge of Deukalion and the conflagration if Pbafl 
 
 l! 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF INSCRIPTIO.mS. 
 
 
 Olympiads up to Phor^neus, does in truth turn upon this point: 
 Are those genealogies, which profess to cover the spaje between 
 the two, authentic and trustworthy, or not ? Mr. Chnton appears 
 to feel that they are not so, when he admits the essential diflferenco 
 in the character of the evidence and the necessity of altering the 
 method of computation, before and after the first recorded Olym- 
 piad ; yet, in his Preface, he labors to prove that they possess 
 historical worth and are in the main correctly set forth : moreover, 
 that the fictitious persons, wherever any such are intermingled, 
 may be detected and eliminated. The evidences upon which he 
 relies, are : 1. Inscriptions ; 2. The early poets. 
 
 I. An inscription, being nothing but a piece of writing on mar- 
 ble, cai-ries evidentiary value under the same conditions as a pub- 
 lished writing on paper. If the inscriber reports a contemporary 
 fact which he had the means of knowing, and if there be no rea- 
 son to suspect misrepresentation, we believe his assertion : if, on 
 the other hand, he records facts belonging to a long period before 
 his own time, his authority counts for little, except in so far as 
 we can verify and appreciate his means of knowledge. 
 
 In estimating, therefore, the probative force of any inscription, 
 the first and most indispensable point is to assure ourselves of its 
 date. Amongst all the public registers and inscriptions alluded 
 to by Mr. Clinton, there is not one which can be positively refer- 
 red to a date anterior to 776 b. c. The quoit of Iphitus, — the 
 public registers at Sparta, Corinth, and iilis, — the list of the 
 priestesses of Juno at Argos, — are all of a date completely un- 
 certified. O. Muller does, indeed, agree with Mr. Clinton 
 (though in my opinion without any sufficient proof) in assigning 
 the quoit of Iphitus to the age ascribed to that prince : and if we 
 even grant thus much, we shall have an inscription as old (adopt- 
 ing Mr. Clinton's determination of the age of Iphitus) as 828 
 B. c. But when Mr. Clinton quotes O. Miiller as admitting the 
 registers of Sparta, Corinth, and Elis, it is right to add that the 
 latter does not profess to guarantee the authenticity of these doc- 
 uments, or the age at which such registers began to be kept. It 
 is not to be doubted that there were registers of the kings of 
 Sparta carrying them up to H^rakl^ and of the kings of Eli* 
 fiom Oxylus to Iphitus ; but the qoestioo is, at what time did 
 tbese lists begin to be kepi c ontliMiWMly ? 1^ ^ ^ P^^°^ yfidik 
 
 il 
 
 
 ill 
 
 
 
42 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 r til 
 
 t 
 
 i 
 
 we have no means of deciding, nor can we accept Mr. Olinton'l 
 unsupported conjecture, when he tells us : '^Perhaps these wer6 
 begun to he writtei as early as B. c. 1048, tlie ])robahle time of 
 the Dorian conquest." Again, he tells us : '' At Argos, a register 
 was preserved of the priestesses of Juno, which might he more 
 ancient than the catalogues of the kings of Si)arta or Corinth. 
 That register, from which llellanikus composed his work, con- 
 tained the priestesses from the earliest times down to the age of 
 
 llellanikus himself But this catalogue miyJd have been 
 
 commenced as earl}' as the Trojan war itself, and even at a still 
 earlier date." (pp. x. xi.) Again, respecting the inscriptions 
 quoted by Herodotus from the temple o( the Ismenian Ai)ollo at 
 Thebes, in which .Vmj)hitryo and Laodama- are named, Mr. 
 Clinton says, ''They were ancient in the time ol Herodotus, which 
 may perhaps carry them back 4<M) years before his time: and in 
 that case they miyht a|)pri);irli within 'MK) year- of Laodamas and 
 within 400 vears of the piol.alile time of Kadinus himself." — -'It 
 is granted (he adds, in a note,) that these inscriptions were not 
 (fpnuine, that is, not of the date to which they were assigned by 
 Herodotus himself. But that they were ancient, cannot be 
 
 doubted," &;c. 
 
 The time when Herodotus saw the temple of the Ismeniaa 
 Apollo at Thebes can hardly have been earlier than 4r)0 B. C. 
 reckoning ui)war(ls I'rom hence to 770) B. c, we have an interval 
 of 32G years : the iinscrii)tions which Herodotus saw may well 
 therefore have been ancienf, without being earlier than the first 
 recorded Olympiad. Mr. Clinton do(>s, indeed, tell us that an- 
 cient "may perhaps" be construed as 40() years earlier than He- 
 rodotus. But no careful reader can permit himself to convert 
 Buch bare possibility into a ground of inference, and to make it 
 amilable, in conjunction with other similar possibilities before 
 enumerated, for the pur[)ose of showing that there really existed 
 inscriptions in Greece of a date anterior to 77 G B. c. Unless 
 Mr. Clinton can make out this, lie can derive no benefit from in- 
 scriptions, in his atttimpt to substantiate the reality of the mythi- 
 cal persons or of the mythical events. 
 
 Tlie truth is, that the Herakleid pedigree of the Spartan kingt 
 (as has been observed in a former chapter) is only one out of 
 the Dumerous divine and heroic genealogies with wWch tlve Hel- 
 
 UNKNOWN DATE OF THE INSCRIPTIONS. 
 
 48 
 
 lenic world abounded,^ — a class of documents which become 
 historical evidence only so high in the ascending serie3 as the 
 
 * See the string of fiibulous names placed at the head of the Halikarnas- 
 slan Inscription, professing to enumerate the series of priests of Poseidon 
 from the foundation of the city CInscript. No. 2655, Boeckh), with the com- 
 mentary of the learned editor: cor.pare, also, what he pronounces to be an 
 inscription of a genealogy partially fabulous at Hierapytna in Krete (No. 
 
 2563). 
 
 The memorable Parian marble is itself an inscription, in which legend and 
 history — gods, heroes, and men — are blended together in the various sue- 
 cessiv'e epochs without any consciousness of transition in the mind of the 
 
 inscriber. 
 
 That the Catalogue of Priestesses of Here at Argos went back to the ex- 
 treme of f\\bulous times, we may discern by the Frajirments of llellanikus 
 (Frag. 45-53). So also did the registers at Sikyon ; they professed to re 
 cord Amphion, son of Zeus and Antiope, as the inventor of harp-musio 
 (Plutarch, De MusicA, c. 3, p. 1132). 
 
 I remarked in the preceding page, that Mr. Clinton erroneously cites K 
 0. Mailer as a believer in the chronological aHthenticity of the lists of the eaily 
 Spartan kings : he says (vol. iii. App. vi. p. 330), " Mr. Muller is of opinion 
 that an authentic account of the years of each LacedaBmonian reign from the 
 return of the Heraclidte to the Olympiad of Korcpbus had been preserved to 
 the time of Eratosthenes and Apollodorus." But this is a mistake ; foi 
 Miiller expressly disavows any belief in the authenticity of the lists (Dorian:*, 
 i. p. 146) : he says: " I do not contend that the chronological accounts in the 
 Spartan lists form an authentic doiniment, more than those in the catalogue of 
 the priestesses of Here and in the list of Ilalikarnassian priests. The chro- 
 nological statements in the Spartan lists may have been formed from impor- 
 feet memorials : but the Alexandrine chronologists must hare found such 
 tables in existence," &c. 
 
 The discrepancies noticed in Herodotus (vi. 52) are alo"e sufficient to 
 prove that continuous registers of the names of the Lacedaemonian kings 
 did not begin to be kept until very long after the date here assigned by Mr 
 
 Clinton. 
 
 Xenophon (Agesilaus, viu. 7) agrees with what Herodotus mentions to hiiva 
 been the native Lacedemonian story,— that Aristodemus (and not his sons) 
 was the king who conducted the Dorian invaders to Sparta. What is 
 farther remarkable is, that Xenophon calls him — 'ApiarofJjy^of 6 'Hpa/£/.eovf. 
 The reasonable inference here is, that Xenophon believed Aristodemus to b« 
 the son of Hdrakles, and that this was one of the various genealogical storiej 
 current. But here the critics interpose ; " 6 'npa/tXeovf (observes Schneider,) 
 non Traif, sed airoyovoq, ut ex Herodoto, viii. 131, admonuit Weiske." Surely, 
 if Xenoph6n had meant this, he would have said 6 af 'HpaxAcovc- 
 
 Perhaps particular exceptional cases might be quoted, wherein the verj 
 common phra«e of 6, followed by a genitive, means descendant, and net son 
 
 II 
 
 f n 
 
 lii 
 
44 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 h 
 
 names composing them are authenticated by contemporary, or 
 nearly contemporarf, enrolment. At what period thi^ practice 
 of enrolment begar., we have no information. Two remarks, 
 however, may be made, in reference to any approximative guess 
 as to the time when actual registration commenced : First, that 
 the number of namiis in the pedigree, or the length of past time 
 which it professes to embrace, affords no presumption of any 
 superior antiquity m the time of registration : Secondly, that, 
 looking to the acknowledged paucity and rudeness of Gr€»cian 
 writing, even down to the GOth Olympiad (540 B. c), and to the 
 absence of the habit of writing, as well as the low estimate of 
 its value, which such a state of things argues, the presumption is,, 
 that written enrolment of family genealogies, did not commence 
 until a long time at\er 776 B. c, and the obligation of proof falls 
 upon him who maintains that it commenced earlier. And thid 
 second remark is farther borne out, when we observe that thei*e 
 is no registered list, except that of the Olympic victors, which 
 goes up even so high as 776 B. c. The next list which O. Mul- 
 ler and Mr. Clinton produce, is that of the Karneonicae, or victors 
 at the Kameian festival, which reaches only up to G76 b. c. 
 
 If Mr. Clinton then makes little out of inscriptions to sustain 
 his view of GreciaJi history and chronology anterior to the re- 
 corded Olympiads^, let us examine the inferences which he draws 
 from his other source of evidence, — the early poets. And here 
 it will be found, Fin^t, that in order to maintain the credibility of 
 these witnesses, he lays down positions respecting historical evi- 
 dence both indefensible in themselves, and especially inapplica- 
 ble to the early timiis of Greece : Secondly, that his reasoning is 
 at the same time inconsistent, — inasmuch as it includes admis- 
 sions, which, if properly understood and followed out, exhibit 
 these very witnesses as habitually, indiscriminately, and uncon- 
 sciously mingling truth and fiction, and therefore little fit to be 
 believed upon their solitary and unsupported testimony. 
 
 To take the second point first, he says. Introduction, p. ii-iii : 
 ** The authority even of the genealogies has been called in ques- 
 
 But if any doabt be allowed upon tbis point, chronological computation^ 
 foandeil on genealogies, will be exposed to a serioud aadirlonal suspicion 
 Why are we to assame that Xenophon mu^ give the samo slory as Uerodo* 
 , iml«88 Mb words naturally tell as so ? 
 
 ifi''iliiiiiliilii'i1iili'ri- 
 
 1^' 
 
 CHRONOLOGICAL E^^DENCE OF THE POETS. 
 
 « 
 
 tion by many able and learned persons, who reject Danaus, Kad- 
 mus, Hercules, Theseus, and many others, as fictitious persons. 
 It is evident that any fact would come from the hands of tha 
 poets embellished with many fabulous additions : and fictitious 
 genealogies were undoubtedly composed. Because, however, 
 some genealogies were fictitious, we are nK justified in concluding 
 •iiat all were fabulous In estimating, then, the histori- 
 cal value of the genealogies transmitted by the early poets, we 
 (nay take a middle course ; not rejecting them as wholly false, 
 «4or yet implicitly receiving all as true. The genealogies con-' 
 fain many real persons, but these are incorporated with many Jic- 
 Morn names. The fictions, however, will have a basis of truth: 
 the genealogical expression may be false, but the connection 
 which it describes is real. Even to those who reject the whole 
 as fabulous, the exhibition of the early times which is presented 
 in this volume may still be not unacceptable : because it is neces- 
 sary to the right understanding of antiquity that the opinions of 
 the Greeks concerning their own origin should be set before us, 
 even if these are erroneous opinions, and that their story should 
 be told as they have told it themselves. The names preserved 
 by the ancient genealogies may be considered of three kinds ; 
 either they were the name of a race or clan converted into the 
 name of an individual, or they were altogether fictitious, or lastly, 
 they were real historical names. An attempt is made, in the 
 four genealogical tables inserted below, to distinguish these three 
 
 classes of names Of those who are left in the third class 
 
 («. e. the real) all are not entitled to remain there. But I have 
 only placed in the third class those names concerning which there 
 seemed to be little doubt. The rest are left to the judgment of 
 the reader." 
 
 Pursuant to this principle of division, Mr. Clinton furnishes 
 four genealogical tables,^ in which the names of persons repre- 
 senting races are printed in capital letters, and those of purely 
 fictitious persons in italics. And these tables exhibit a curious 
 sample of the intimate commixture of fiction with that which he 
 calls truth: real son and mythical father, real husband and 
 mythical wife, or vice versd. 
 
 > Bee Mr. Clinton's work, pp. 32, 40, loa 
 
 l! 
 
 \ 
 
 Hi! 
 
 
46 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ANCIENT AND MODERN CHRONOLOGISTS. 
 
 47 
 
 Upon Mr. Clinton's tables we may remark : — 
 
 1. The names singled out as fictitious are distinguished by nA 
 common cliaracter, nor any mark either assignable or defensible, 
 from those which are left as real. To take an example (p. 40), 
 why is Itonus the first pointed out as a fiction, while ItOnus the 
 •econd, together winh Physcus, Cynus, Salmoneus, Ormenus, etc^ 
 in the same page, are preserved as real, all of them being epo- 
 nyms <y* towns just: as much as Itonus ? 
 
 2. It" wa are to discard Hellen, Dorus, JEolus, Ion, etc., as not 
 being real individual persons, but expressions for personified 
 races, why are we to retain Kadmus, Danaus, Hyllus, and several 
 others, who ai*e just as much eponyms of races and tribes as the 
 four above mentioned? llyllus, Pamphylus, and Dymas are the 
 eponyms of the three Dorian tribes,' just as Hoples and the other 
 three sons of Ion were of the four Attic tribes : Kadmus and 
 Danaus stand in the same relation to the Kadmcians and Dana- 
 ans, as Argus and Achaius to the Argeians and Acliieans. Be- 
 sides, there are many other names really eponymous, which we 
 cannot now recognize to be so, in consequence of our imperfect 
 acquaintance with the subdivisions of the Hellenic population, 
 each of which, speaking generally, had its god or hero, to whom 
 tlie original of the; name was referred. If, then, eponymous 
 names are to be excluded from the category of reality, we shall 
 find that the ranks of the real men will be thinned to afar greater 
 extent than is indicated by Mr. Clinton's tables. 
 
 3. Though Mr. Clinton does not carry out consistently either 
 of his disfranchising qualifications among the names and persons 
 of the old mytiies, he nevertheless presses them far enough to 
 strike out a sensible proportion of the whole. By conceding thus 
 much to modern scepticism, he has departed from the point of 
 view of Hellauikus and Herodotus, and the ancient liistorians 
 generally ; and it i> singular that the names, which he has been 
 the most forward to sacrifice, are exactly those to which they 
 were most attached, and which it would have been most painful 
 to their faith to part with, — I mean the e}K)nymous heroes. 
 Neither Herodotus, nor Hellanikus, nor Eratosthenes, nor any 
 
 * "From these three " (Hyllus, Pamphylus, and Dymas.) says Mr. CUntoi^ 
 tol. i. ch. 5, p. 109, " the three Dorian tribes derived their names.'* 
 
 CTiC of the chronological reckoners of antiquity, would have ad- 
 mitted the distinction which Mr. Clinton draws between persons 
 real and persons fictitious in the old mythical world, though they 
 mit^ht perhaps occasionally, on special grounds, call in question 
 the existence of some individual characters amongst the mythical 
 ancestry of Greece ; but they never dreamed of that general 
 severance into real and fictitious persons, which forms the princi- 
 ple of Mr. Clinton^s " middle course." Their chronological com- 
 i)uiations for Grecian antiquity assumed that the mythical char- 
 a 'teis, in their full and entire sequence, were all real persons. 
 Setting up the entire list as real, they calculated so many genera- 
 tions to a century, and thus determined the number of centuries 
 wliich separated themselves from the gods, the heroes, or the 
 autochthonous men who formed in their view the historical start- 
 in«- i)oint. But as soon as it is admitted that the personages in 
 the mvthical world are divisible into two classes, partly real and 
 i)artly fictitious, the integrity of the series is broken up, and it 
 can be no lonn^er employed as a basis for chronological calculation. 
 In the estimate of the ancient chronologers, three succeeding per- 
 sons of the same lineage — grandfather, father, and son, — counted 
 for a century ; and this may pass in a rough way, so long as you 
 are thoroughly satisfied that they are all real persons : but if, in 
 the succession of persons A, B, C, you strike out B as a fiction, 
 the continuity of data necessary for chronological computation 
 disappears. Now Mr. Clinton is inconsistent with himself in 
 
 tlijg^ that, while he abandons the unsuspecting historical faith 
 
 of the Grecian chronologers, he nevertheless continues his chro- 
 noloo-ical computations upon the data of that ancient faith, — 
 upon' the assumed reality of all the persons constituting his ante- 
 historical generations. What becomes, for example, of the Hera- 
 kleid genealogy of the Spartan kings, when it is admitted that 
 eponymous persons are to be cancelled as fictions ; seeing that 
 Hyllus, through whom those kings traced their origin to Hera- 
 kles comes in the most distinct manner under that category, as 
 much so as Hoples the son of Ion ? It will be found that, when 
 we once cease to believe in the mythical world as an uninter* 
 rupted and unalloyed succession of real individuals, it become* 
 unfit to serve as a basis for chronological computations, and thai 
 Mr. Clinton, when he mutilated the data of the ancient rhronolo. 
 
 II 
 
 fl 
 
 „t 
 
 t' 
 
 I i 
 
fflSTORl OF GREECE. 
 
 gigtf!, ought at the same time to have abandoned their j)roblema 
 as insoluble. GenettJogieB of real persons, such as Herodotus 
 and Eratosthenes believed in, afford a tolerable basis for calcula 
 tions of time, within certain limits of error: "genealogies contain 
 ing many real persons, but incorporated with many fictitious 
 names,'' (to use the language just cited from Mr. Clinton,) are 
 essentially unavailable for such a purpose. 
 
 It is right here to add, that I agree in Mr. Clinton's view of 
 these eponymous persons : I admit, with him, that " the genea- 
 logical expression may often be false, when the connection which 
 it describes is reaL* Thus, for example, the adoption of Hyllus 
 by JBgimius, the father of Pamphylus and Dymas, to the privileges 
 of a son and to a third fraction of his territories, may reasonably 
 be construed as a mythical expression of the fraternal union of 
 the three Dorian tril)es, Hylleis, Pamphyli, and Dymanes: so 
 about the relationship of Idn and Achaeus, of Dorus and ^olus. 
 But if we put this construction on the name of Hyllus, or Ion, or 
 Achaeus, we cannot at the same time employ either of these 
 persons as units in chronological reckoning : nor is it consistent 
 to recognize them in the lump as members of a distinct class, 
 and yet to enlist them as real individuals in measuring the dura- 
 tion of past time. 
 
 4. Mr. Clinton, while professing a wish to tell the story of the 
 Greeks as they liave told it themselves, seems unconscious how 
 capitally his point of view differs from theirs. The distinction 
 which he draws between real and fictitious persons would have 
 appeared unreasonable, not to say offensive, to Herodotus or 
 Eratosthenes. It is undoubtedly right tliat the early liistory (if 
 BO it is to De called) of the Greeks should be told as they have 
 told it themselves, and with tliat view I have endeavored in the 
 previous narrative, an far as I could, to present tlie primitive 
 legends in their original color and character, — pointing out at 
 the same time the manner in which they were transformed and 
 distilled into history by passing through the retort of later an- 
 nalists. It is the legend, as thus transformed, which Mr. Clinton 
 seems to understand as the story told by the Greeks themselves, 
 — which cannot be admitted to be true, unless the meaning of 
 the ei5>ression be specially explained. In Ids general distinc- 
 tion, however, between the real and fictitious persons of the 
 
 PRESUMPTIVE VALUE Ob- 'fESTBIONY. 4M 
 
 mythical world, he departs essentially from the point of view 
 even of the later Greeks. And if he had consistently followed 
 out tliat distinction in his particular criticisms, he would have 
 found the ground slipping under his feet in his upward march 
 even to Troy, — not to mention the series of eighteen genera^ 
 tions farther up, to Phoroneus ; but he does 7iot consistently fol- 
 low it out, and therefore, in practice, he deviates little from the 
 footsteps of the ancients. 
 
 l{l)iough has been said to show that the witnesses upon whom 
 Mr. Clinton relies, blend truth and fiction habitually, indiscrimi- 
 nate! v, and unconsciously, even upon his own admission. Let 
 us now consider the positions which he lays down respecting 
 historical evidence. He says (Introduct. pp. vi-vii) : — 
 
 " We may acknowledge as real persons all those whom there 
 is no reason for rejecting. The presumption is in favor of the 
 early tradition, if no argument can be brought to overthrow it. 
 The persons may be considered real, when th*^ description of 
 them is consonant with the state of the country at that time: 
 when no national prejudice or vanity could be concerned in in- 
 venting them ; when the tradition is consistent and general : when 
 rival or hostile tribes concur in the leading fajcts : when the acta 
 ascribed to the person (divested of their poetical ornament) enter 
 into the political system of the age, or form the basis of other 
 transactions which fall within known historical times. Kadmua 
 and Danaus appear to be real persons : for it is conformable to 
 the state of mankind, and perfectly credible, that Phoenician and 
 Egyptian adventurers, in the ages to which these persons are 
 ascribed, should have found their way to the coasts of Greece: 
 and the Greeks (as already observed) had no motive from any 
 national vanity to feign these settlements. Hercules was a real 
 person. His acta were recorded by those who were not friendly 
 to the Dorians ; by Achaeans and .Slolians, and lonians, who had 
 no vanity to gratify in celebrating the hero of a hostile and rival 
 people. His descendants in many branches remained in many 
 statet down to the historical times. His son Tlepolemus, and 
 hift grandson and great-grandson Cleodaeus and Aristomachus, 
 m acknowledged (i. e. by O. Miiller) to be real persons : and 
 thero is no reason that can be assigned for receiving these, w^m 
 will DOl be equally valid for establiaiung the reality both d " 
 
 i\ 
 
 Uil 
 
 Wll,. I J 
 
 4oe. 
 
50 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECli 
 
 PLAUSIBLE FICTION. 
 
 ft] 
 
 cules and Hyllus. Above all, Hercules is authenticated by thb 
 testimonieb both of the Iliad and Odyssey." 
 
 These positions appear to me inconsistent with any sound views 
 of the conditions of historical testimony. According to what is 
 here laid down, we are bound to accept as real all the persons 
 mentioned by Homer, Arktinus, Lesches, the Hesiodic poet?, 
 Eumelus, Asius, etc., unless we can adduce some positive ground 
 in each particular case to prove the contrary. If this position 
 be a true one, the greater part of the history of England, from 
 Brute the Trojan down to Julius Cie>ar, ought at once to be 
 admitted as valid and A\orthy of credence. What Mr. Clinton 
 here calls the early tradition, is in }X)int of fact, the narrative of 
 these early poets. The word tradition i> an equivocal word, and 
 b<*«'S the whole question ; for while in its obvious and literal 
 meaning it implies only something handed down, whether trutli 
 or fiction, — u is tacitly uu<U rstood to imi>ly a tale descriptive of 
 some real matter of fact, taking its rise at the time when that 
 fact happened, and originally arciirate, but corrupted by subse- 
 quent oral transmission. Uiuk'r-laiuling, theretoiv, by Mr. Clin- 
 ton's words early tradition, tlie tales of the old jioets, we shall 
 find his position totally inadmissible, — that we are bound tc 
 admit the persons or statemeius of Homer and Hesiod as real 
 unless where we can i)roduce reasons to the contrary. To allow 
 this, would be to put them upon a par with good contemporar} 
 witnesses ; for no greater privilege can be claimed in favor even 
 of Thucydides, than the title of his testimony to be believed 
 unless where it can be contradicted on special grounds. The 
 presumption in favor of an asserting witness is either strong or 
 weak, or positively nothing, according to the compound ratio of 
 his means of knov/ledge, his moral and intellectual habits, and 
 his motive to speak the truth. Thus, for instance, when Hesiod 
 tells us that his father quitted the jEolic Kyme, and came to 
 Askra in Boeotia, we may fully believe him ; but when he de- 
 scribes to us the battles between the Olympic gods and the Titans, 
 or between Herakles and Cycnus, — or when Homer depicts the 
 eflbrts of Hector, aided by Apollo, for the defence of Troy, and 
 the struffffles of Achilles and Odysseus, with the assistance of 
 
 CO » 
 
 Here and Poseidon, for the destruction of that city, events pro- 
 feasedly long past and gone, — we cannot presume either of tbein 
 Vol. % % 
 
 to be in any way worthy of belief. It cannot be showp that they 
 posse>sed any means of knowledge, while it is certain that they 
 could have no motive to consider historical truth : their object 
 was to satisfy an uncritical appetite for narrative, and t6' interest 
 the emotions of their hearers. Mr. Clinton says, that " the per- 
 sons may be considered real when the description of them is 
 consistent with the state of the country at that time." But he 
 hae forgotten, first, that we know nothing of the state of the 
 country except what these very poets tell us ; next, that fictitious 
 i)ersons may be just as consonant to the state of the country as 
 real persons. While, therefore, on the one hand, we have no 
 independent evidence either to alfirm or to deny that Achilles or 
 Atramemnon are consistent with the state of Greece or Asia 
 Minor, at a certain supposed date 1 1 83 b. c, so, on the other 
 hand, even assuming such consistency to be made out, this of 
 itself w ould not prove them to be real persons. 
 
 Mr. Clinton's reasoning altogether overlooks the CAistence ot 
 plausible Jiction, — fictitious stories which harmonii^e peifectly 
 well with the general course of facts, and which are distinguish 
 ed from matters of fact not by any internal character, but by the 
 circumstance that matter of fact has some competent and well- 
 intbrmed witness to authenticate it, either directly or through 
 legitimate inference. Fiction may be, and often is, extravagant 
 and incredible ; but it may also be plausible and specious, and in 
 that case there is nothing but the want of an attesting certificate 
 to distinguish it from truth. Now all the tests, which Mr. Clin- 
 ton pro[)oses as guarantees of the reality of the Homeric persons, 
 will be just as well satisfied by ])lausible fiction as by actual 
 matter of fact : the plausibility of the fiction consists in its satis- 
 fying those and other similar conditions. In most cases, the tales 
 of the poets did fall in wiih the existing current of feelings in 
 their audience : " prejudice and vanity" are not the only feelings, 
 but doubtless prejudice and vanity were often appealed to, and it 
 was from such harmony of sentiment that they acquired their 
 hold on men's belief. Without any doubt, the Iliad appealed 
 most powerfully to the reverence for ancestral gods and heroes 
 among the Asiatic colonists who first heard it : the temptation ot 
 putting forth an interesting tale is quite a sufficient stimulus to 
 tlie invention of the poet, and the plausibility of the tale a suffi- 
 
 >1 
 
 1^1 
 
 lii 
 
 I 
 
 r 
 
 ■tlMllii 
 
 mmmi 
 
S2 
 
 HISTOkY OF GREECE. 
 
 1 f 
 
 if I 
 
 I 
 
 f \ 
 
 dent passport to th«i belief of the hearers. Mr. Clinton talks of 
 •* consistent and general tradition." But that tlie tale oi' a poet, 
 when once told with effect and beauty, acquired general belief, 
 — is no proof that it was founded on fact: otherwise, what are 
 we to say to the divine legends, and to the large portion of th« 
 Homeric narrative which Mr. Clinton himself sets aside as un- 
 true, under the designation of " poetical ornament ? " When a 
 mythical incident is recorded as " forming the basis " of some 
 known historical fact or institution, — as, for instance, the suc- 
 cessful stratagem hy which Melanthus killed Xanthus, in the bat- 
 tle on the boundary, as recounted in ray last chapt "^r, — we may 
 adopt one of two views ; we may either treat the incident as real, 
 and as having actually given occasion to what is described as its 
 etlect, — or we may treat the incident as a legend imagined in 
 order to assign some plausible origin of the reality, — *' Aut ex 
 re nomen, aut ex vocabulo fabula."^ In cases where the legend- 
 ary incident is refeiTed to a time long anterior to any records, 
 — as it commonly is, — the second mode of proceeding appears 
 to me far more consonant to reason and probability than the first. 
 It is to be recollected that all the persons and facts, here defended 
 as matter of real liistory, by Mr. Clinton, are referred to an age 
 long preceding the first begiiming of records. 
 
 I have already remarked that Mr. Clinton shrinks from his 
 own rule in treating Kadmus and Danaus as real persons, since 
 they are as much eiwnyms of tribes or races as Dorus and Helleiii 
 And if he can admit Herakles to be a real man, I cannot see 
 upon what reason he can consistently disallow any one of the 
 mythical personages, for there is not one whose exploits are more 
 strikingly at variance with the standard of historical probability. 
 Mr. Clinton reasons upon the supposition that " Hercules was a 
 Dorian hero:" but he was Achajan and Kadmeian as well as 
 Dorian, though the higends respecting him are different in all the 
 three characters. Whether his son Tlepolemus and his grandson 
 Cleodaeus belong to the category of historical men, I will not 
 take upon me to sa}, though O. Midler (in my opinion without 
 any warranty) appears to admit it ; but Hyllus certainly is not a 
 real man, if the canon of Mr. Clinton himself respecting th« 
 
 ' Pumponias Mela ilL 7* 
 
 VALUE OF THE GENEAL JGIES. 
 
 51 
 
 epon T -as is to be trusted. " The descendants of Hercules (oU 
 serves Mr. Clinton) remained in many states down to the histor* 
 ical times." So did those of Zeus and Apollo, and of that god 
 whom the historian Hekatii^us recognized as his progenitor in the 
 sixteenth generation ; the titular kings of Ephesus, in the histor^ 
 ical times, as well as Peisistratus, the despot of Athens, traced 
 their origin up to iEolus and Hellen, yet Mr. Clinton does not 
 hesitate to reject ^olus and Hellen as fictitious persons. I dis- 
 pute the propriety of quoting the Iliad and Odyssey (as Mr. 
 Clinton does) in evidence of the historic personality of Hercules. 
 For, even with regard to the ordinary men who figure in those 
 poems, we have no means of discriminating the real from the 
 fictitious ; while the Homeric Herakles is unquestionably more 
 than an ordinary man, — he is the favorite son of Zeus, from his 
 birth predestined to a life of labor and servitude, as preparation 
 for a glorious immortality. Without doubt, the poet himself be- 
 lieved in the reality of Hercules, but it was a reality clothed with 
 superhuman attributes. 
 
 Mr. Clinton observes (Introd. p. ii.), that "because some gene- 
 alogies were fictitious, we are not justified in concluding that all 
 were fabulous." It is no way necessary that we should maintain 
 60 extensive a position : it is sufficient that all are fabulous so far 
 as concerns gods and heroes, — some fabulous throughout, — and 
 none ascertainably true, for the period anterior to the recorded 
 Olympiads. How much, or what particular portions, may be 
 true, no one can pronounce. The gods and heroes are, from our 
 point of view, essentially fictitious ; but from the Grecian point 
 of view they were the mo«t real (if the expression may be per- 
 mitted, u e. clung to with the strongest faith) of all the members 
 of the series. They not only formed [)arts of the genealogy as 
 originally conceived, but were in themselves fbe grand reason 
 why it was conceived, — as a gold*.n chain to connect the living 
 man with a divine ancestor. The genealogy, therefore, taken as 
 H whole, (and its value consists in its being taken as a whole,) 
 was from the beginning a fiction ; but the names of the father 
 and grandfather of the living man, in whose day it first came 
 torth, were doubtless those of real men. Wherever, therefore, 
 we can verify the date of a genealogy, as applied to some living 
 person, we may reasonably presume the two lowest members of 
 
 \ 
 
 r 
 
 i 
 
I 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 I 
 
 54 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 it to be also tliose of real persons : but this has no api>lication to 
 the- time anttM'ior to tlie Olympiads, — still le-s to the pretended 
 times of the Trojan war, the Kalydonian boar-hunt, or the del- 
 uge of Deukalion. To reason (as Mr. Clinton does, Introd. p. 
 vi.), — " Because Aristomachus was a real man, therefore his 
 father C leodicus, his grandfather Hjllus, and so farther upwards, 
 ete., must have been real men,"— is an inadmissible conclusion. 
 Th«- historian Ilekjita-us was a real man, and doubtless his father 
 Ilegesander, also, — but it would be unsafe to march up his gene- 
 alogical ladder fitbM-n steps, to tlie i)resence of the ancestorial 
 god of wliom he be usted : the upper steps of the ladder will be 
 tound broken and unreal. Not to mention that the inference, 
 from real son to real father, is inconsistent with the admissions in 
 Mr. Clinton's own genealogical tables ; for he there inserts the 
 names of several mythical fathers as having begotten real his- 
 torical sons. 
 
 The general authority of Mr. Clinton's book, and the sincere 
 respect which I entertain for his elucidations of the later chro- 
 nology, have impose-l uj)on me the duty of assigning those grounds 
 on which I dissent from his conclusions prior to the first recorded 
 Olympiad, 'i he reader who desires to see the numerous and con- 
 tradiotory guesses (they deserve no better name) of the Greeks 
 thenis.'lves in the a; tempt to chronologize their mythical narra- 
 tives, will find tliem in the copious notes annexed to the first half 
 of his iirst volume. As I consider all such researches not merely 
 as fruitless, in regard to any trustworthy result, but as serving to 
 divert attention from the genuine form and really illustrative 
 character of Grecian legend, I have not thought it right to go 
 over the same ground in the present work. Differing as I do, 
 however, from Mr. Clinton's views on this subject, I concur with 
 him in deprecating the application of etymology (Intr. pp. xi-xii.) 
 as a general scheme of explanation to the characters and eventu 
 of Greek legend. Amongst the many causes which operated a^ 
 fiuggestives and stimulants to Greek fancy in the creation of thesi> 
 interesting tales, doubtless etymology has had its share ; but it 
 cannot be applied (sis Hermann, above all others, has sought to 
 apply it) for the purpose of imparting supposed sense and syst^oi 
 tc the general body of mythical narrative. I have already re 
 irked on this topic in a former chapter. 
 
 H 
 
 1 
 
 APPLICATION OF CHRONOLOOT TO LEGEND. 
 
 55 
 
 It would be curious to ascertain at what time, or by whom, the 
 earliest continuous genealogies, connecting existing persons with 
 the supposed antecedent age of legend, were formed and pre- 
 served. Neither Homer nor Hesiod mentioned any verifiable 
 present persons or circumstances : had they done so, the age of one 
 or other of them could have been determined upon good evidence, 
 which we may fairly presume to have been impossible, from the 
 endless controversies upon this topic among ancient writers. In 
 the Hesiodic Works and Days, the heroes of Troy and Thebes 
 are even presented as an extinct race,' radically different from 
 the poet's own contemporaries, who are a new race, far too de- 
 praved to be conceived as sprung from the loins of the heroes ; 
 so that we can hardly suppose Hesiod (tliough his father was a 
 native of the ^olic Kyme) to have admitted the pedigree of 
 the ^olic chiefs, as reputed descendants of Agamemnon. Cer- 
 tain it is, that the earliest jjoets did not attempt to measure or 
 bridge over the supposed interval, between their own age and the 
 war of Troy, by any deiinite series of fathers and sons: whether 
 Kumelus or Asius made any such attempt, we cannot tell, but 
 che earliest continuous backward genealogies which we find men- 
 tioned are those of Pherekydes, Hellanikus, and Herodotus. It 
 is well known that Herodotus, in his manner of computing the 
 upward genealogy of the Spartan kings, assigns the date of the 
 Trojan war to a period 800 years earlier than himself, equivalent 
 about to B. c. 1270-1250; while the subsequent Alexandrine 
 chronologists, Eratosthenes and Apollodorus, place that event m 
 1181: and 1183 b. c. ; and the Parian marble refers it to an in 
 termediate date, different from either, — 1209 b. c. Ephorus, 
 J Mianias, Timaeus, Kleitarchus, and Duris, had each his own con- 
 jectural date ; but the computations of the Alexandrine chronol- 
 ogists was the most generally followed by those who succeeded 
 them, and seems to have passed to modern times as the received 
 date of this great legendary event, — though some distinguished 
 inquirers have adopted the epoch of Herodotus, which Larcher 
 has attempted to vindicate in an elaborate but feeble disserta- 
 tion/^ It is unnecessary to state that, in my view, the inquiry 
 
 ' See the preceding volume of this History, Chap. 11. p. 66. 
 ■ Larcher, Chronologie d'Herodote, chap. xiv. pp. 352-401. 
 From the capture of Troy down to the passage of Alexander with hif 
 
 '. ')! 
 
 
 t! 
 
 fi*'^ 
 
•I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 U i> 
 
 C 
 
 f 
 I t 
 
 m 
 
 K'^TORY OF GREECTE. 
 
 IS • • • I i( 
 
 chus ) 
 
 820 
 
 1mm no other value except to illustrate the ideas which guided 
 the Greek mind, and to exhibit its progress from the days of 
 Homer to those of Herodotus. For it argues a considerable 
 mental progress when men begin to methodize the past, even 
 though thej do so on fictitious principles, being as yet unprovided 
 with those records which alone could put them on a better course. 
 The Homeric man was satisfied with feeling, imagining, and 
 
 invadinj,' army into Asia, the latter a known date of 334 b. c, the following 
 different reckonings were made : — 
 
 Phanias gave 715 years. 
 
 Ephorus..... " 735 " 
 Eratosthenes " 774 " 
 Timjeus 
 Kleitarcl 
 
 Duri.s '■ 1000 " 
 
 (Clemens Aioxand. Strom, i. p. 337.) 
 Democritus estimated a space of seven hundred ami thirty vcars between 
 his composition of the UiKpdc AiuKOfjfwc ami the capture of Troy (Diogren. 
 LaCrt. ix. 41). I^okrates holievcd the Lacedajmonians to have been estab- 
 ished in Peloponne.sus seven hundred years, and he repeats this in three dif- 
 ferent passaji;es (Archidani. p. 118; Panathen. p. 275; De Pace, p. 178). 
 The dates of these three orations themselves differ by twenty-four years, the 
 Archidamus being older than the Panathenaic by that interval; yet he em- 
 ploys the same number of years for each in calculating backwards to the 
 Trojan war, (see Clinton, vol. i. Introd. p. v.) In round numbers, his calcu- 
 lation coincides pretty nearly with the eight hundred years given by Ilerod- 
 otas in the preceding century. 
 
 The remarks of Boeckh on the Parian marble frenerally, in his Corpus 
 Inscriptionum Graec. t. ii. pp. 322-336, are extremely valuable, but especially 
 his criticism on the epoch cf the Trojan war, which stands the twenty -fourth 
 in the Marble. The ancient chronologists, from Damastes and Hellanikua 
 dowuwards, professed to fix not only the e.\act year, but the exact month, 
 day, and hour in which this celebrated capture took place. [Mr. Clinton 
 pretends to no more than the possibility of determining the event within fifty 
 years, Introduct. p. vi.] Boeckh illustrates the manner of their argumentation. 
 O Miiller observes (History of the Dorians, t ii. p. 442, Eng. Tr.), "In 
 reckoning from the migration of the Heraklidae downward, we follow the 
 Alexiindrine chronology, of which it should be observed, that our materials 
 only enable us to restore it to its original state, not to examine its correctness " 
 But I do not see upon what evidence even so much as this can be done. 
 Mr Clinton, admitting that Eratosthenes fixed his date by conjecture, sup- 
 poses hkn to have chosen " a middle point between the longer and shortei 
 computations of his predecctssors.'* Boeckh thinks tliis explanation unsat 
 '*^^tory (/. c. p 328 ) 
 
 
 STATE OF SOCIEIY, ETC. IN LEGENDARY GREECE. 
 
 57 
 
 believing particular incidents of a supposed past, without any 
 attempt to graduate the line of connection between them and 
 himself: to introduce fictitious hypotheses and media of connec- 
 tion is the business of a succeeding age, when the stimulus of 
 rational curiosity is first felt, without any authentic materials to 
 supply it. We have, then, the form of history operating upon 
 the matter of legend, — the transition-state between legend and 
 history ; less interesting, indeed, than either separately, yet neo- 
 eseary as a step between the two. 
 
 ' 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 STATE OF SOCIETY AND MANNERS AS EXHIBITED IN GRECIAN 
 
 LEGEND. 
 
 Though the particular persons and events, chronicled in the 
 Ie<^endary poems of Greece, are not to be regarded as belonging 
 to the province of real history, those poems are, nevertheless, full 
 of instruction as pictures of life and manners ; and the very same 
 circumstances, which divest their composers of all credibility as 
 historians, render them so much the more valuable as unconscious 
 expositors of their own contemporary society. While professedly 
 describing an uncertified pa^t, their combinati:>ns are involuntarily 
 borrowed from the surrounding present : for among communities, 
 .such as those of the primitive Greeks, without books, without 
 means of extended travel, without acquaintance with foreign lan- 
 guages and habits, the imagination, even of highly gifted men, 
 was naturally enslaved by the circumstances around them to a far 
 greater degree than in the later days of Solon or Herodotus; 
 insomuch that the characters which they conceived and the 
 scene* which they described would for that reason bear a stronger 
 generic resemblance to the realities of their own time and 
 locality. Nor was the poetry of that age addressed to lettered 
 and cntical authors, watchful to detect plagiarism, sated with 
 
 i 
 
68 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 H 
 
 / 
 
 simple imagery, and requiring something of novelty or peculiarity 
 in every fresh production. To captivate their emotions, it waf 
 pufficient to depict, with genius and fervor, the more obvious 
 manifestations of human adventure or suffering, and to idealize 
 tnat type of society, Ijoth private and pubhc, with which th« 
 hearers around were familiar. Even in describing: the arods, 
 where a great dejjn* of latitude and deviation might have been 
 expected,' we see ihat Homer intro<lii<'«*> into Olympus the pas- 
 sions, the caprices, the love of {)0wer and patronage, the alterna- 
 tion of dignity and weakness, which animated the bosom of an 
 ordinary Grecian chief; and this tendency, to reproduce in sub- 
 stance t'ie social relations to which he had been accustomed, 
 would operate still more poweriully when he had to describe sim- 
 ply human characters, — the chief and his people, the warrior 
 and his comrades, the husband, wife, father, and son, — or the 
 imperfect rudiments of judicial and administrative proceeding. 
 That his narrative on all these points, even with fictitious charac- 
 ters and events, presents a close approximation to general reality, 
 there cjm be no reason to doubt.- The necessity under which he 
 lay of drawing from a store, then happily unexhausted, of per- 
 sonal experience and oh-ervation, is one of the causes of that 
 freshness and vivacity of description fur which he stands unri- 
 valled, and which constituted the imperishable charm of the Iliad 
 and Odyssey from tlie beginning to the end of Grecian literature. 
 While, therefore, we renounce the idea of chronologizinfr or 
 historioizing tlie cveiUs of Greciuii Icgtnd, we may turn them to 
 profit as valiiuble iiicnorials of that state of society, feeling, and 
 intelligence, which must l)e to us the starting-point of the history 
 of the people. Of course, the legimdary age, like all those wliich 
 succeeded it, had its antecedent causes and determining condi- 
 tions ; but of these we know nothing, and we are compelled to 
 
 ' Kat Tov( i>«ot>f de diu tovto TTuvTef ^aai SaatXeiieirSai, dn Kai avrol, ol 
 ^cv In Kai viv, ol 6e rd ipfaiov, ij3aot%.cimTO. 'Uawep 6i Kat Til eidr/ iaimlf 
 ui^/ioiovaiv ol iv-dputroi, ovtu koI Toi( (3iovf tuv iJewv (Aristot. Politic, i 
 I. 7> 
 
 ' In the pictures of the Homeric Heroes, there is no material difference of 
 character recognized between cue race of Greeks and another, — or even 
 between Greeks and Trojans. See Helbig, Die Sittlicben Zostande de< 
 Griechischcn Heldenalters, part ii. p. 53. 
 
 POLITICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 89 
 
 •ssume It as a primary fact, for the purpose of foUowmg out ib 
 subsequent changes. To conceive absolute begmn.ng or ongm 
 (as Niebuhr has justly remarked) is beyond the reach of our 
 faculties : we can neither apprehend nor verify anything beyond 
 ,.ro.ncss, or development, or decay,' - change from one set of 
 circ^uustanees to another, operated by some definite combmat.on 
 of nhvsical or moral laws. In the case of the Greeks, the 
 legendary age, as the earliest in any way known to us, must be 
 „^en as the initial state from which this series of changes com- 
 mences. AVe must depict its prominent characteristics as well as 
 we can, and show, -partly how it serves to prepare, partly how 
 i, torms a contrast to set off,- the subsequent ages of Solon, of 
 Verikles, and of Demosthenes. 
 
 1 The political condition, which Grecian legend everywhere 
 presents to us, is in its princij.al features strikingly different from 
 l.KU which had become universally prevalent among the Greeks 
 in the time of the PeloponnOsian war. Historical oligarchy, as 
 well as dcn.o<racv, agreed in requiring a certain established sys- 
 tern of goverument, comprising the three elements of specialued 
 functions, temporary functionaries, and ultimate responsibility 
 
 . N-i..,ul,r, Uo,nischc Ges.hkh.o, vol. i. p. 55, 2d edit. "Erkennt man aber 
 d .. aller U .prun;; jcnsei.. u„screr nur Entwickelung and lort^ang fussen- 
 d ;» i«e llut ; Id la.«hrankt .id, von Stnfe auf Stufe .m Umfang der 
 G ki e ,.ur«ck,.u.ehe„, so wird man Volker eines Stammcs (das he.ss^ 
 dur'h eicen.hnn,liehc Art und Sprachc identi.ch) vielfach cbcn an s.ch 
 
 en 4^Ue"ondcn Kustonlandcm an.reffcu ohne dass irgond etwas die 
 
 Vo; uleuung crhcischte, cine von die»cn gctrenntcn Landschaften sc, die 
 ui^uU .Cliche Bdmath gewescn von wo ein Theil nach dcr andern gewan- 
 Lr 2 . .Uies is' der Geographic dcr Tbiergeschlcchter und d« 
 ""getation analog: dercn grosse Ikzirkc durchGehurgegesch.edenwerden, 
 } and besohrankte Mecre einschliessen." , • • i- .«/•#*- 
 
 ' "men wc once recognise, however, that aH Mutebey.nn.ngl.'^ oui^O^ 
 nach of our menUd co,u:eption., u:hich con,prehend vo>lu.g beyond <fc^f.,m«U 
 Z7pLe>s, and when we attempt nothing more than to go back from 
 I late? to he eariier stages in the compass of history, we shall ofien find 
 on opposite «>asts of the same sea, people of one stock (that ,s, of Jhe ^'»e 
 LulL customs and language,) without being warranted in supposing that 
 dlher of these separate coasts was the primitive home f«,m whence em.p^nu 
 „^sed over to the other. This is analogous to the geography of amm^ 
 and planu, whose wide districts are severed by mountain, and mcloee ™wntf 
 teas " 
 
 til 
 
 t: 
 
60 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 (nndcr some forms or other) to the mass of qualified citizens, — 
 either a Senate or an Ecclesia, or both. There were, of course, 
 many and capital distinctions between one government and 
 another, in respect to the qualification of the citizen, the attri- 
 butes and efficiency of the general assembly, the admissibility to 
 power, etc. ; and men might often be dissatisfied with the way in 
 which these questions were determined in their own city. But 
 
 in the mind of every man, some determining rule or system 
 
 iomething like what in modem times is called a constitution — 
 was indispensable to any government entitled to be called legiti- 
 mate, or capable of creating in the mind of a Greek a feeling of 
 moral obligation to obey it. The functionaries who exercised 
 authority under it might be more or less competent oi popular ; 
 but his personal feelings towards them were commonly fost in his 
 attachment or aversion to the general system. If an^ energetic 
 man could by audacity or craft break down the constittidon, and 
 render himself pernianent ruler according to his own »rill and 
 pleasure, — even though he might govern well, he could never in- 
 spire the people witli any sentiment of duty towards him. His 
 sceptre was illegitimate from the beginning, and even the faking 
 of his life, far from being interdicted by that moral feeling which 
 condemned the shedding of blood in other cases, was considered 
 meritorious. Nor could he be mentioned in the language except 
 by a nanu'i (ivmiwog, despot,) which branded him as an object 
 of mingled fear and dislike. 
 
 If we carry our eyes back from historical to legendary Greece, 
 we find a picture tlu reverse of what luis been here sketched. 
 We discern a government in which there is little or no scheme or 
 system, — still less any idea of responsibility to the governed, — 
 but in which the mainspring of obedience on the part of the peo- 
 ple consists in their personal feeling and reverence towards the 
 
 The Greek name Tvpavir,,- cannot be properly rendered ti/mnf ; for many 
 of the ^vpavvoL by no means deserved to bo s) called, nor is it consistent 
 with the use of languap? to speak of a mild and wpll-intentioncd tyrant 
 The word despot is the nearest approach which wo can irake to it, since it is 
 understood to imply that a man hjis got more power than he oujrht to have, 
 wbile it does not exclude a beneticent use of such power bv some individnaJs 
 It ia, however, very inadequate to express the full stren^nh .>f Grecian *et4 
 il% which the origixial word called forth. 
 
 THE KING OR CHIEF. 
 
 !hief. We remark, first and foremost, the king : next, a limit 
 number of subordinate kings or chiefs ; afterwards, the mass of 
 armed freemen, husbandmen, artisans, freebootere, etc ; lowest of 
 all, the free laborers for hire, and the bought slaves. The king 
 is not distinguished by any broad or impassable boundary from 
 the other cliiefs, to each of whom the title hasileus is applicable as 
 well as to himself: his supremacy has been inherited from his 
 ancestors, and passes by descent, as a general rule, to his eldest 
 Bon, having been conferred upon the family as a privilege by the 
 favor of Zeus.i in war, he is the leader, foremost in personal 
 prowess, and directing all military movements ; in peace, he is 
 the t^eneral protector of the injured and oppressed ; he farther 
 offers up those public prayers and sacrifices which are intended 
 to obtain for the whole people the favor of the gods. An ample 
 domain is assigned to him as an appurtenance of his lofty posi- 
 tion, while the produce of his fields and his cattle is consecrated 
 in part to an abundant, though rude hospitality. Moreover, he 
 receives frequent presents, to avert his enmity, to conciliate his 
 favor,2 or to buy off his exactions ; and when plunder is taken 
 
 ' The l»hffiakian king Alkinous fOdyss. vii. 55-65) : there are twelve other 
 riuKakian Haai>J/ec, he is himself the thirteenth fviii. 391). 
 
 The chief men in the Iliad, and the suitors of Penelope in the Odyssey, 
 are railed usually and indiscriminately both BafffAf/ff and 'Ava«ref ; the lat 
 ter word, however, designates tliem as men of property and masters of slaves, 
 (analogous to the subsequent word iSeaizhTri^, which word does not occur in 
 Homer, though diaTroiva is found in the Odyssey,) while the former word 
 marks them as persons of conspicuous station in the tribe (see Odyss. L 
 393-401; xiv. 63). A chief could only be BaatAei>f of freemen; but h» 
 might be "Ava^ either of freemen or of slaves. 
 
 Agamemnon and Menelaus belong to the most kingly race (yfvof ^aai'Aev' 
 Trpov : compare Tyrt«us, Fragm. ix. v. 8, p. 9, ed. Schneidewin) of the Pelo- 
 pids, to whom the sceptre originally made for Zeus has been given by Herm^ 
 (Iliad, ii. 101; ix. 160; x. 239); compare Odyss. xv. 539. The race ot 
 Dardanus are the favorite offspring of Zeus, (^aaiAevrarov among the Tro- 
 jans (Iliad, XX. 304). These races aic the parallels of the kingly proaapuM 
 called Amali, Asdingi, Gungingi, and Lithingi, among the Goths, Vandab, 
 and Lombards CJornandes, De Rebus Geticis, c. 14-22; Paul Wamefri(t 
 Gest. Laugob. c 14-21) ; and the apxii^^v fevo^ among the Chaonian Epirotf 
 (Thucyd. ii. 80). 
 
 • Odyss. L 392 ; xi. 184 ; xiu. 14 ; xix. 109.— 
 
 Ov [ihv yap tl KaKdv (3aaiXevefiev * alif/a re ol du 
 'Afveiov neXtraif Kal ri/iijiffrepoc airoQ. 
 
HISIORY OF GREECE. 
 
 From (he enemy, a large previous share, comprising probably the 
 most a/Iuring female captive, is reserved for him, apart from the 
 general distribution.* 
 
 Iliad, ix. 154-297 Cwheii Agamemnon is promising seven townships to 
 Achilles, as a means of appeasing his wrath^ : — 
 
 *Ev d' uv6f}fg vaiovcL noXvpftf/veg, rroluiJovrai, 
 
 Oi Ke ae durlvrfai, t^eov tif, rifi^aovai, 
 
 Kai aoi vno anTfTrrpu* Anrapur reXeovai T^i/niarac. 
 
 8ee Iliad, xii. 312; and the reproaches of ThersitCs (ii. 22%}^ fiaai?.r,ac 
 dui»H:>ay,vr fHesiod, Opp. Di. 38-264). 
 
 The Roman kings had a large rtinvoc assigned to them, — '' agri, arva, et 
 arhusta el pascui lati attjiie uhoixs " (Cicero. De Kepuhl. v. 2) : the Gernlan 
 kings received presents: • Mos »>t civitutihus (observes Tacitus, respootinj; 
 the (iermans whom he de.srnf»es, M G. 15; ultro ac viritiin conferre princip" 
 i»)us vel armcntorurii vel trui,niin. quod pro honore acceptum etiam necessi 
 tatihus subvenit." 
 
 The revenue of the IVr.-iaa kings l)efore Darius consisted only of what 
 were called i?u/)«, or [.resents ( Hen.d. iii. 8'J; : Darius tirst introduceil both 
 the iiauic of tribute and the deti-niiiuatc assessment. King rolvdektes, in 
 S.Tiphos, invites lii^ frien.;> tr) a A stival. the condition of which is that each 
 guest shall contribute to a i ;,k/i (^ tor liis hemtit ( Pherekydes, Fragm. 26, 
 * 1. Didot); a case to which the Thraeian biin^uet prepiired by Scathes 
 iiifords an exact parallel ( Xenophon, Ana!., vii. 3, IG-32: compare Thucyd. 
 ii. 97, and W.h ker. /Kschyl. Trilogic. p. 38 1 ). Such Aids, or Benevolences, 
 even if oriiriiially voluntary, beeame in the .-iid eompulsory. In the Euro- 
 pean inonarehies of the .Middle A<rv<. what were ('aUed free' gifts were more 
 ancient than public taxe. - The feudal Aids (observes Mr. Hallam; are the 
 bcK'mning of taxation. ..t v bi<h they for a long time answered the purpose." 
 (Middle Ages, eh. ii. part i p. 189.) So about the Aides in the old French 
 Monanhy, " La Cour des Ai<les avoit c'te instituee, et sa juri.sdiction s'e'toit 
 forme'e, lorsque le domaine des Hois suffisoit a toutes les depenses de I'Etat, 
 les droits d' Aides etoient ah)rs ties supple'mens pea considerables et toujours 
 temporaires. Depuis, le demaine des Rois avoit e'te aneanti : les Aides, aa 
 contraire, Etoient devenues jermanentes et formoient presque la totality des 
 ressources du trdsor." (Histoire de la Fronde, par M. de St. Aulaire, eh. iii 
 p. 124.) 
 
 ' 'Errf /^ro/f yepam TrarpiKal jiaatlelai, is the description which Thncj 
 dides gives of these heroic governments (i. 13). 
 
 The language of Aristotle (Polit iii. 10, 1) is much the same : 'H i3aai?.eia 
 — tf nepi rot)f ^puiKovc XP^vovc — ai^ri) d' fjv Uovruv fiev, tTri tlol J' upiafxi- 
 fOti' arpaniydf & }}v Kai SiKaar^^ 6 (3a(nXei>c, Koi tuv -rrpdc rov^ ^eoi>i 
 
 It can hardly be said correcdy, however, that the king's authority ww 
 ii/ined: nothing can well bf5 more indefinite. 
 Agmmemnon enjoyed or assumed the power of putting to death a di^be 
 
 ATTRIBVTES AND POWER OF THE KING. 
 
 68 
 
 Such is the position of the king, in the heroic times of Greece, 
 — the only person (if we except the heralds and priests, each 
 both si)ecial and subordinate,) who is then presented to us ad 
 clothed witli any individual authority, — the person by whom all 
 the executive functions, then few in number, which the society 
 requires, are either performed or directed. His personal ascen- 
 dency derived from divine countenance, bestowed both upon 
 
 himself individually and upon his race, and probably from ac- 
 credited divine descent — is the salient feature in the picture. 
 The people hearken to his voice, embrace his propositions, and 
 obey his orders: not merely resistance, but even criticism upon 
 his acts, is generally exhibited in an odious point of view, and is, 
 indeed, never heard of except from some one or more of the subor- 
 dinate princes. To keep alive and justify such feelings in the 
 public mind, however, the king must himself possess various ac- 
 complishments, bodily and mental, and that too in a superior 
 degree. 1 He must be brave in the Held, wise in the council, 
 and eloquent in the agora ; he must be endued with bodily strength 
 and activity above other men, and must be an adept, not only in 
 tlie use of his arms, but also in those athletic exercises which the 
 crowd delight to witness. Even the more homely varieties of 
 manual acquirements are an addition to his character, — such as 
 the craft of the carpenter or shipwriglit, the straight furrowing 
 of the ploughman, or the indefatigable persistence of the mower 
 without rei^se or refreshment throughout the longest day.2 The 
 
 dient soldier ( Aristot Polit. iii. 9,2). The words which Aristotle read in the 
 speech of Agamemnon in the Iliad - Uap j up if^ot ^avaroc - are not m our 
 present copies : the Alexandrine critics effaced many traces of the old 
 
 manners. ^,. /ti*„^ 
 
 ' Striking phrases on this head are put into the mouth of Sarpedon (Hiad, 
 
 ''"l^n^'^^r? named and commissioned by Zeas,-~'E« 6e t.ib^ ^aalm 
 (Hesiod, Theogon. 96; Callimach. Hymn, ad Jov. 79) : Kparep. ^^P^'^^J" 
 Lof is a sort of paraphrase for the kingly dignity in the case of Pelias and 
 Neleas (Odyss. xi. 255; compare Iliad, ii. 204). 
 
 « Odvsseus builds his own bed and bedchamber, and his own raft (Odyss. 
 xxiii 188- V 246-255) : he boasts of being an excellent mower and plough- 
 man (xviii. 365-375) : for his astonishing proficiency in the athletic cOntestj 
 ^ yk. 180-230. Paris took a share in buUding his own house (Iliad, t4 
 814|. 
 
m 
 
 HISTORY Of GR£i:CE. 
 
 REPUBLICAN FEELING m HISTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 65 
 
 conditions of vohintary of»f (Hence, during the Grecian herok 
 times, are family descent with pers'>nai force and superiority 
 mental as well as bodily, in the chief; coupled with the favor of 
 the gods ; an old chief, smii as Peleus and Laertes, cannot retail 
 his |)osition.' But, on the other hand, wliere these elements of 
 force are present, a «:(X)<1 (h'al of violence, caprice, and rapacity 
 is tolerated: the ethical judgment is not exact in scrutinizing th« 
 conduct of individujils >o jir* rniiK'iitly endowed. As in the case 
 of the gods, the gcn.Tul .•{)ithcts (»f </vo(l just, etc., are applied to 
 tliem as euphcnlisnl^ arising iVoni submission and fear, being not 
 only not suggested, but often pointedly belied, by their particulai 
 acts. These words signify-* the nian of birth, wealth, inlluence, 
 and daring, whose arm is strong to destroy or to protect, whatever 
 may be the turn of his moral sentiments ; while the ofiposite epi- 
 thet, bad, designates the puoi, lowly, and weak; from whose dis- 
 positions, be they ever so virtuous, society has little either to hope 
 or to fear. 
 
 Aristotle, in his general tiieory ot government,2 lays down th« 
 
 * Odyss. xi. 496; xxiv. I.J()-l'48. 
 
 'See this prominent nuaniii;: of t!ie words uya^or, Ifjx)}.:,,;, KaKoq, etc* 
 copiously illustrated in VVelrkei'- .\(i.-lknt Prolegomena to Theognis, sect. 
 9-16. Camcrarius, in lii* notes on tiiat jjoet (v. 19;, had already conceived 
 clearly the sense in whicl these words are used. Iliad, xv. 323. Ola re roig 
 uyai^otai napadpuucf i .'/ff. Compare llesiod, Opp- 1)1. 216, and tlie Imo 
 in Athcnaeus, v. p. 178, M 7<'>ua7ni. iV u^adoi ihiXiJv IttI dairac 'taaiv. 
 
 ^*Moralis illarum voci;ni vi>, et n'i'ifis — quarum hcec a lexieographis et 
 commentatoribus pluriniis fere i.ej;lecta est — probe discernenda' erunt. Quod 
 quofaciiius fierct, nescio an nbi posterior intellectus valet, majuscula scriben- 
 dura fmi«set 'Ayai^oi tt Komx."' 
 
 If this advice of Weloker could have been followed, much misconception 
 woald have been obviated. The referenee of these words to power and not 
 to worth, is their primitivo import in the Greek language, descending from 
 the Iliad downward, and determinin'; the habitual designation of parties 
 during the period of active political dispute. The ethical meaning of tho 
 word hardly appears until tlio discussions raised by Socrates, and prosecuted 
 by hia disciples; but the primitive import still continued to maintain concur^ 
 rent footing. 
 
 I shall have occasion to touch more largely on this subject, when I come 
 to expound the Grecian political parties. At present it is enough to remaric 
 that the epithets of good men, b^ men, habitnally applied afterwards to tW 
 aristocratical parties, dem^end from the rudest period of Grecian sodttf. 
 * Aristot. PoUt i. 1, 7. 
 
 position, that the earliest sources of obedience and authority 
 among mankind are personal, exhibiting themselves most perfectly 
 ic the type of paternal supremacy ; and that therefore the kingly 
 government, as most conformable to this stage of social sentiment, 
 became probably the firet established everywhere. And in fact 
 it still continued in his time to be generally prevalent among the 
 non-Hellenic nations, immediately around ; though the Phoeni- 
 cian cities and Carthage, the most civilized of all non-Hellenic 
 states, were republics. Nevertheless, bo completely were the 
 feelings about kingship reversed among his contemporary Greeks, 
 that he finds it difficult to enter into the voluntary obedience paid 
 by his ancestors to their early heroic chiefs. He cannot explain 
 to his own satisfaction how any one man should have been so 
 much superior to the companions around him as to maintain such 
 immense personal ascendency: he suspects that in such small 
 communities great merit was very rare, so that the chief had f(;w 
 competitors.! Such remarks illustrate strongly the revolution 
 which the Greek mind had undergone during the preceding cen- 
 turies, in regard to the internal grounds of political submission 
 But the connecting link, between the Homeric and the republi 
 can schemes of government, is to be found in two adjuncts of 
 the Homeric royalty, which are now to be mentioned, — the 
 boule, or council of chiefs, and the agora, or general assembly 
 
 of freemen. 
 
 These two meetings, more or less frequently convoked, and 
 interwoven with the earliest habits of the primitive Grecian com- 
 munities, are exhibited in the monuments of the legendary age 
 
 » Kal dia tovt' lauc t^aaiAevovTo irporepov, 6n awavtov ffv evpelv avdpa^ 
 6ia<li^povTag kqt' uperffv, aAXwc te koI tote fiLnpug oUovvTog noXeic (Polit. 
 lii. 10, 7) ; also the same treatise, v. 8, 5, and v. 8, 22. Ov yivovrai d' Itl fia- 
 fftAemt vvv, etc. 
 
 Aristotle handles monarchy far less copiously than either oligarchy or 
 democracy: the tenth and eleventh chapters of his third book, in which he 
 discusses it, are nevertheless very interesting to peruse. 
 
 In the conception of Plato, also, the kingly government, if it is to work 
 well, implies a breed superior to humanity to hold the sceptre (Legg. iv, %, 
 
 p. 713). 
 
 The Athenian dramatic poets (especidlly Euripid6sj often put into tht 
 mooths of their heroic characters popular sentiments adapted to the demo- 
 eratical atmosphero of Atheus, — very diiFercuL IVom what wo find in Homer 
 
 VOL. II. 5oc. 
 
 *1 
 
 \ 
 
«e 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 AGORA IN ITHAKA. 
 
 67 
 
 A3 opportunities for advising the king, and media for promulgal- 
 jng h,s intentions to the people, rather than as restraints uum 
 his authority. Unquestionably, they must have ccnduced in pr£C- 
 tiee to the latter result as well as to (he former; but this is not 
 the light in which the Homeric poems describe them. The chiefs 
 kings f)rinces, or gerontes — for the same word in Greek desi^r- 
 nates both an old man and a man of conspicuous rank and uot 
 tion — compose the council,' in which, according to the repre 
 mentations in the Iliad, the resolutions of Agamemn6n on the one 
 side, and of Ilectur on the other, appear uniibrmly to prevail. 
 llie harshness and even contempt with which Hect«5r treats re- 
 spectful opposition from his ancient companion Polydama^ — 
 tlie des[)onding tone and conscious inferiority of the latter 'ind 
 Die unauimous assent which the former obtains, even when quite 
 in the wrong — all tJiis is clearly set forth in the poem .-^ while 
 in the Grecian camp we see Nestor tendering his advice in the 
 most submissive and delicate manner to Agamemnon, to be adopt- 
 ed or rejected, as " the king of men" might determine.3 The 
 council IS a purely consultative body, assembled, not with any 
 powerof peremptorily arresting mischievous resolves of the kine 
 but solely for his information and guidance. He himself is the 
 presiding (boulephorus, or; member^ of council ; the rest, col- 
 lectively as well as individually, are his subordinates. 
 
 We proceed from tlie council to the agora: accordinrr to what 
 seems the received eiistom, the king, after having talked over 
 his intentions with tht forn.er, proceeds to announce them to the 
 people. The heralds make tlie crowd sit down in order ^ and 
 
 l9o-41o. l/.ov, iraAaiov tj fioy i p ovt o( {\i 37]) 
 
 • Iliad, xviii. 313.— 
 
 'EKTopi (xev yap kn^vrjaav koku ^tiTiouvri, 
 RovlvdafiavTi 6' ap ovrig, <V Icd/r/v 6p{i^tro 8ovJl^v 
 Also. xii. 213, where Polydamas says to Hector, — 
 
 tT^i oi'de fiev ov^'e tviKe 
 
 Arifiov iovra rrape^ uyopevefiev, ovt' tvl (flovAy, 
 OvTi Tror' h TTtlsfnp^ abv 6e Kpdro^ alev ui^eiv. 
 
 • Iliad, ix. 95-101. 
 
 • niAd, vii. 126, n^Aeuf - 'EfftJAdf Mvpfiidovov BovA^^pof ^<r Ayoptfrme 
 Considerable strsss seoms to be laid on the necessity that the people ii 
 
 eriorce silence: any one of the chiefs or councillors — but as it 
 seems, no one '^Isei — is allowed to address them : the king lirsl 
 promulgates his intentions, which are then open to be comment- 
 ed jpon by others. But in the Homeric agora, no division of 
 affirmative or negative voices ever takes place, nor is any format 
 resolution ever adopted. The nullity of positive function strikes 
 us even more in the agora than in the council. It is an assem- 
 bly for talk, communication, and discussion, to a certain extent, 
 by the chiefs, in presence of the people as listeners and sympath- 
 izers, — often for eloquence, and sometimes for quarrel, — but 
 here its ostensible purposes end. 
 
 Tlie agora in Ithaka, in the second book of the Odyssey, is 
 convened by the youthful Teleraachus, at the instigation of Athene, 
 not for the purj^ose of submitting any proposition, but in ord«T to 
 give formal and public notice to the suitors to desist from their 
 iniquitous intrusion and pillage of his substance, and to absolve 
 himself farther, before gods and men, from all obligations towards 
 them, if they refuse to comply. For the slaughter of the suitors, 
 in all the security of the festive hall and banquet (which forms 
 the catastrophe of the Odyssey), was a proceeding involving 
 much that was shocking to Grecian feeling,^ and therefore re- 
 quired to be preceded by such ample formalities, as would leave 
 both the delinquents themselves without the shadow of excuse, 
 and their surviving relatives without any claim to the customary 
 satisfaction. For this special purpose, Telemachus directs the 
 heralds to summon an agora: but what seems most of all sur- 
 
 the a-ora should sit down (Iliad, ii. 96) : a standing agora is a symptom of 
 tumult or tenor (Iliad, xviii, 246); an evening agora to which men come 
 elevated by wine, is also the forerunner of mischief (Odyss. 111. 138). 
 
 Such cridences of regular formalities observed in the agora are not with- 
 
 oat interest. 
 
 ' I'liud, ii. 100.— 
 
 etjTor' avT^c 
 
 Sjfoior', uKoiaeiav 61 iMTpe<l>euv ^aaiXii"V. 
 Niweh (ad Odvss u. U) controverts this restriction of indiTidual mamf«|. 
 Ution to the chieh : the view of 0. Mailer (Hist Donans, b. .... c 3) appe«i 
 TL more correct: such wa. also the opinion of Anstotle-^ai ™««. 
 
 TirtirpOf* (Schol. Diad. U. 17): compare the same statement m his H4» 
 ZcCn Bthics, in. 5. '^ ^^^ «• 6»5 ' 0«»y«»- "• ♦'»• 
 
 \ t 
 
 i 
 
 Ml 
 
HISTORY OF GRE1£CE. 
 
 prising is, that none had ever been sumnoned or held since 'he 
 departure of Odysseus himself, - an interval of twenty yeATs. 
 « No agora or session has taken place amongst us (says the 
 gray -headed ^gyptius, who opens the proceedings) since Odys- 
 seus went on shipboard : and now, who is he that has called us 
 together? what man, young or old, has felt such a stron- neces- 
 eity .'' Has he received intelligence from our absent warriors, or 
 has he other public news to communicate? He is our good 
 friend for doing thk : whatever his projects may be, I pray Zeus 
 to grant him success." i Telemachus, answering the appeal forth- 
 with, proceeds to tell the assembled Ithakaiis that he has no 
 public news to conmiunicate, but that he has convoked them 
 upon his own private necessities. Next, he sets forth, pathetic- 
 ally, the wickedness of the suitors, calls upon them personally to 
 desist, and upon the people to restrain them, and concludes by 
 solemnly warning tliem, that, being henceforward free from all 
 obligation towards tliem, he will invoke the avenging aid of Zeu. 
 60 « that they may be slain in the iuterior of his own house, with-' 
 out bnnging upon him any sub.secjucnt penalty."'^ 
 
 We ai-e not of course to construe the Homeric description as 
 wiythmg more than an /./..,/, approximating to actual reality. 
 But allowing all th it ca.. {>e required for such a limitation, it 
 exhibits the agora more as a special medium of publicity and 
 intercommunication,^ from tlie king to the body of the people, 
 tha n as including an v^idea of responsibility on the part of the 
 
 * Odyss. ii. 25-40. 
 Odjss. ii. 43, 77, 145.- 
 
 \ i ''"f^'. character is j^iven of the public assemblies of the earlv Fmnk. 
 and I^mbards Pfetfel, Histoi.e du Droit Public en Alk„..,.K., t. i. p 8 
 bismondi, Histoire des Republiques Italiennes, t. i c > p "n 
 
 Dionysius of Halikarnassus (ii. 12) pays rather too hi^^h a c'ompiiment to 
 the moderation of the Grecian heroic kin-s Uniment to 
 
 ^ The kings at Rome, like the Grecian^eroic kings, beunm with an norii 
 aw.ev^roc: the words of Pomponius (De OnVin: Juri; i. 2,) would t 
 perhaps more exactly applicable to the latter than to tbe former- " Initi^ 
 niritatis nostras Populus «ine certA lege, sine jure certo. primurn ao^erc insti 
 ^ : ommaque manu a Regibus gabernabantur." Tacitus savs ( Ann. i^^ 
 «6), Nobis Romulus, ut libitum, imperitaverat: dein Numa reiigionibus i 
 divmo jure popuJum dennxit, rcpertaqae qu^am a TuHo et Anco • Jd 
 
 GRECIAN AGORA IN THE ILIAD. ۤ 
 
 former or restraining force on the part of the latter, however 
 such o nsequences may indirectly grow out of it. The primidve 
 Greci^Ji government is essentially monarchical, reposing on per- 
 Bonal feeling and divine right : the memorable dictum in the 
 Iliad is borne out by all that we hear of the actual practice; 
 « The ruler of many is not a good thing : let us have one ruler 
 
 only, one king, — him to whom Zeus has given the sceptre 
 
 and the tutelaiy sanctions." ^ 
 
 The second book of the Iliad, full as it is of beauty and 
 vivacity, not only conllrms our idea of the passive, recipient, and 
 listening character of the agora, but even presents a repulsive 
 ricture of the degradation of the mass of the people before the 
 chiefs. Agamemnon convokes the agora for the purpose of 
 immediately arming the Grecian host, under a full impression 
 Uiat the gods have at last determined forthwith to crown his 
 arms with complete victory. Such impression has been created 
 by a special visit of Oneirus (the Dream-god), sent by Zeus 
 during his sleep, — being, indeed, an intentional fraud on the 
 pM-t of Zeus, though Agamemnon does not suspect its deceitful 
 character. At this precise moment, when he may be conceived 
 to be more than usually anxious to get his army into the lield 
 ftnd snatch the prize, an unaccountable fancy seizes him, that, 
 instead of inviting the troops to do what he really wishes, and 
 encouraging their spirits for this one last effort, he will adopt a 
 course directly contrary : he will try their courage by professing 
 
 praecipuus Servius Tullius sanctor legum fuit, quis etiam Reges obtempera- 
 rent." The appointment of a Dictator under the Republic was a reproduc- 
 tion^ for a short and definite interval, of this old unbounded authority (Cicero, 
 De Repub. ii. 32; Zonaras, Ann. vii. 13; Dionys. Hal. v. 75> 
 
 See Rubino, Untersuchungen iiber Romische Verfassung und Geschichte, 
 Cassel, 1839, buch i. abschnitt 2, pp. 112-132; and Wachsrauth, Hellenische 
 Alterthumskunde, i. sect. 18, pp. 81-91. 
 
 » Iliad, ii. 204. Agamemnon promises to make over to Achilles seven 
 well-peopled cities, with a bot y of wealthy inhabitants (Hiad, ix. 153) ; and 
 Menelaus if he could have in luccd Odysseus to quit Ithaka, and settle new 
 him in Argos, would have dep )pulated one of his neighboring towns in order 
 to make room for him (Odyss iv. 176). . ,. -■ 
 
 Manso (Sparta, i. 1, p. 34) and Nitzsch (ad Odyss. iv. 171) are mclinei 
 ID exclude thcss passages as spurious, — a proceeding, in my opinion, iniid> 
 missible, without more direct grounds than they are able to prodace. 
 
70 
 
 fflSTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 to believe that the siege had become desperate, and that thero 
 was no choice except to go on sliipboard and flee. Announcing 
 lo Nestor and Odysseus, in preliminary council, his intention to 
 hold this strange language, he at the same time tells them that he 
 relies upon them to jppose it and counterwork its effect upon tho 
 multitude.' The agora is presently assembled, and the kirif' of 
 men pours forth a speech full of dismay and despair, concluding 
 by a distinct exh«irt:Uiuii to all present to go aboard and return 
 home at once, linnicdiatrly the wiiole army, chiefs as well as 
 people, break up aid proceed to execute his orders: every one 
 rushes off to get his ship afloat, except Odysseus, who looks on 
 in mournful silence and astonislimeiit. The army would have 
 been quickly on its voyage home, had not the goddesses Here 
 and Athene stimulated Odysseus to an instantaneous interierence. 
 He hastens among tlte dispersing crowd and diverts them from 
 their purpose of retreat : to the chiefs he addresses flattering 
 words, trying to shame them by gentle ex[>ostulation : but the 
 people he visits with harsh reprimand and blows from his scep- 
 tre,'3 thus driving them back to their seats in the airora. 
 
 Amidst the dissatisfied crowd thus unwillingly brought back, 
 
 the voice of Thersites is heard the longest and the lou(h»st, a 
 
 man ugly, deformed, and unwarlike, but fluent in speech, and 
 especially severe and unsparing in his censure of the chiefs, 
 Agamemnon, Achilles an<l Odysseus. Upon this occasion, he 
 addresses to the people a speech denouncing Agamemnon for 
 selfish and greedy exaction generally, but particularly for his 
 recent ill-treatment of Achilles, — and he endeavors, moreover 
 to induce them to persist in their scheme of departure. In reply, 
 Odysseus not only rebukes Thersites sharply for his impudence 
 in abusing the commander-in-chief, but threatens that, if ever 
 iuch behavior is repeated, he will strip him naked, and thrash 
 him out of the assembly with disgraceful blows ; as an earnest of 
 which, he administers to him at once a smart stroke with the 
 
 ' Iliad, ii. 74. fl/ju^ra i' iytJv tizeaiv neipijaofiaiy etc. 
 •Iliad, ii 188-196.— 
 
 'OvTiva fitv ^cuji'Krja Kal k^oxov uvdpa Kixeirj, 
 
 Tovd* ayavoif knieaaiv ipijTvacurKe napaara^ 
 
 Ov & av irifMV r' dvdpo l6oi, fioouvrd t' kiptvpoi^ 
 
 imittm 
 
 ODYSSEUS AND THERSITES. 
 
 71 
 
 studded sceptre, imprinting its painful mark in a bloody weal 
 across his back. Thersites, terrified and subdued, sits down 
 weeping ; while the surrounding crowd deride him, and express 
 the warmest approbation of Odysseus for having thus by force 
 put the reviler to silence.^ 
 
 Both Odysseus and Nestor then address the agora, sympathiz- 
 ing with Agamemnon for the shame which the retreat of the 
 Greeks is about to inflict upon him, and urging emphatically 
 upon every one present the obligation of persevering until the 
 sie<^e shall be successfully consummated. Neither of them ani- 
 madverts at all upon Agamemnon, either for his conduct towardi 
 Acliilles, or for his childish freak of trying the temper of the 
 
 army."- 
 
 There cannot be a clearer indication than this description — 
 so graphic in the original poem — of the true character of the 
 Homeric agora. The multitude who compose it are listening and 
 acquiescent, not often hesitating, and never refractory3 to the 
 chief The fate which awaits a presumptuous critic, even where 
 his virulent reproaches are substantially well-founded, is plainly 
 set forth in the treatment of Thersites ; while the unpopularity 
 of such a character is attested even more by the excessive pains 
 which Homer takes to hea[) upon liim repulsive personal defor- 
 mities, than by the chastisement of Odysseus ; — he is lame, bald, 
 crook-backed, of misshapen head, and squinting vision. 
 
 But we cease to wonder at the submissive character of thd 
 agora, when we read the proceedings of Odysseus towards the 
 people themselves; — his tine words and flattery addressed to the 
 chiefs, and his contemptuous reproof and manual violence towards 
 the common men, at a moment when both were doing exactly the 
 
 » Iliad, ii. 213-277. 
 
 • Iliad, ii. 284-340. Nor does Thersites, in his criminatory speech against 
 Agamemnon, touch in any way upon this anomalous point, though, in the 
 circumstances under which his speech is made, it would seem to be of all 
 others the most natural, — and the sharpest thrust against the commander 
 
 in-chief. 
 
 . * See this illustrated in the language of Theseus, Eurip. Supplic 949-^^ 
 
 Ao^ai de XPV(<^ * ^^ Tcolei "Kaaij rdde ' 
 ^o^ei d\ f'fiov -^kTiOvro^' aXkd. tov \6yov 
 Ilfioa6oi>c, ^X^ifi' ov ^f*ov evfieviarepov. 
 
 } 
 
 i 
 
n 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 JUDICIAL AT TRIBUTES OF THE AGORA. 
 
 7S 
 
 same thing, — fijiailin«? the express bidding of Agamemnon, upon 
 whom Odysseus lofv^ not offer a single comment. This scene, 
 which excited a sentiment af strong displeasure among the 
 democrats of hislorica.* Athens,' affords a proof that the feeling 
 of personal dignity, of wliich philosophic observers in Greece — 
 Herodotus, Xeno[)h6n, IlippocTates, and Aristotle — boasted, as 
 distinguishing the free Greek citizen from the slavisli Asiatic, 
 was yet undeveloped in the time of Homer. ' The ancient epic 
 is commonly so filled with the personal adventures of the chiefs, 
 and the people are so consf.uitly depicted as simple appendages 
 attached to them, that we rarely obtain a glimpse of the treat- 
 ment of the one apart fr)m the other, such as this memorable 
 Homeric agora affords. 
 
 There remains one other point of view in which we are to re- 
 gard the agora of [»rimitive Greece,— as tlie scene in wliich jus- 
 tice was administered. The king is spoken of as constituted by 
 Zeus the great judge of society : he has received from Zeus the 
 sceptre, and along with it the powers of command and sanction : 
 the people obey these commands and enforce these sanctions, 
 under him, enriching him at the same time with lucrative pres- 
 ents and paymenis.3 Sometimes the king separately, sometimes 
 the kings or chiefs or gerontes in tlie i)Iural number, are named 
 as deciding dispuies and awarding satisfaction to complainants; 
 always, however, in public, in the midst of the assembled agora.^ 
 
 * Xcnophon. Memnnih. i. 2, 9. 
 
 Aristot I\»ht vii r,, l ; Hippocrat Do Acre, Loc. ct Aq. v. 85-86} He- 
 rodot. vii. 13.5. 
 
 * The aKtjTZTpov, r^euiarec, or ^^ifug, and uyopn, i^o together, under the pre- 
 siding superintendence of the gods. The goddess Themis both convokes 
 iind dismisses tht; agora (see Iliad, xi. 806 ; Odyss. ii. 67 ; Iliad, xx. 4) 
 
 The ^efiiare^, commandments and sanctions, belong properly to Zeoi 
 (Odyss. xvi. 403) , fn)m him they are given in charge to earthly kings along 
 with th« iceptre (Ihad, i. 238; ii. 206). 
 
 Th» •ommentators on Homer recognized ^efitc, rather too strictly, at 
 •yqpdf Mi (SovXfic }.ilv (see Eustath. ad Odyss. xvi. 403). 
 
 Thm prM«nt8 and the Xnrapal ^efuare^ (Iliad, ix. 156). 
 
 * H«ilod, Theogon. 85 ; the single person judging seems to be mentioiMd 
 (Odyss. xii. 439). 
 
 It deserves to be noticed that, in Sparta, the senate decided accusationf 
 9f homicide (Aristot Polit. iii 1, 7) : in historical Athens, the senate 
 if Areiupugus originaiiy did the same, and retained, even when its poweil 
 
 In one of the compartments of the shield of Achilles, the details 
 of a judicial scene are descj-ibed. While the agora is full of an 
 eager and excited crowd, two men are disputing about the fine 
 of satisfaction lor the death of a murdered man,— one averring, 
 the other denying, that the fine had already been paid, and both 
 demanding an inquest The gerontes are ranged on stone seats,* 
 in the holy circle, witli two talents of gold lying before them, to 
 be awarded to such ol the litigants as shall make out his case to 
 their satisfaction. The heralds with their sceptres, repressing 
 the warm sympathies of the crowd in favor of one or other of 
 the parties, secure an alternate hearing to both.2 This interest- 
 ing picture completely harmonizes with the brief allusion of 
 Hesiod to the judicial trial — doubtless a real trial — between 
 himself and his brother Perses. The two brothers disputed 
 alK)ut their paternal inheritance, and the canse was carried to be 
 tried by the chiefs in agora ; but Perses bribed them, and ob- 
 tained an unjust verdict for the whole.3 So at least Hesiod 
 allirms, in the bitterness of his heart ; earnestly exhorting his 
 brother not to waste a precious time, required for necessary la- 
 bors, in the unprofitable occupation of witnessing and abetting 
 litigants in the agora, — for which (he adds) no man has proper 
 leisure, unless his subsistence for the year beforehand be safely 
 treasured up in his garners.^ He repeats, more than once, his 
 complaints of the crooked and corrupt judgments of which the 
 Kin"S were habitually guilty ; dwelling upon abuse of justice as 
 
 were much abri<li;ed, the trial of accusations of intentional homicide and 
 
 wounding. 
 
 Kespecting the judicial functions of the early Roman kings, Dionys. HaL 
 A. R. X. I. Td fikv apxalov ol iSaaiXelc ^9' avTcjv travTov Tolg deofxevoig ruf 
 SUag, Kal rb 6iKaiu)^'ev viz' iKeivuv, tovto vofiog tjv (compare iv. 25 ; Mid 
 Cicero, Repablic. v. 2 ; Rubino, Untersachongen, i. 2, p. 122). 
 
 * Iliad, xviii. 504. — 
 
 01 6e yipovTeg 
 
 Emr' em ^eoTolai XIt^oic, lep^ tvl kvk2^. 
 Bcveral «)f the old northern Sagas represent the old men, assembled for th« 
 purpose of judging, as sitting on great stones in a circle, called the UrtW 
 Usring, or Gerichtsring (Leitfaden der Nordischen Alterth-lraer, p. 31, 
 Copcnhag. 1837). 
 « Homer, Iliad, xviii. 497-5 0. * Hesiod, Opp. Di 37 
 
 * Hesiod, Opp Di. 27-33. 
 
 VOL. n* 4 
 
 / 
 
7A 
 
 mSTORT OF GREECi-. 
 
 CONTRAST WITH HISTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 71 
 
 the crying evil of his day, and predicting n?> well as invoking the 
 vengeance of Zeus to repress it. And Homer ascribes the tre- 
 mendous violence of the autumnal storms to the wrath of Zeus 
 against those judges who disgrace the agora with their >\ic'ked 
 verdicts.' 
 
 Though it is certain that, in every state of society, the feelings 
 of men when ass«MJibled in multitude will command a ctrtain 
 measure of attention, yet we thus find the agora, in judicial mat- 
 ters still more tliun in political, serving merely the purpose of 
 publicity. It is he king who is the grand personal mover of 
 Grecian heroic society.^ lie is on earth, the equivalent of Zeus 
 in the agora of the gods : the supreme god of Olympus is in the 
 habit of carrying on his governm(*nt with frequent i)ublicity, of 
 hearing some dissentient opinions, and of allowing himself occa- 
 sionally to be wheedled by Aphrodite, or worried into compliance 
 by Here : but his determination is at last conclusive, subject only 
 to the overruling i iterference of the Moirai, or Fates.^ Both the 
 soc'iety of gods, and the various societies of men, are, according 
 to the conceptions of Grecian legend, carried on by the i)ersonal 
 rule of a legitimate sovereign, who does not derive his title from 
 the special a|)poiniment of his subjects, though he governs with 
 their full consent. In fact, Grecian legend presents to us hardly 
 anything else, except these great individual ])ersonalities. The 
 race, or nation, is ks it were absorbed into the prince : eponymous 
 persons, especially, are not merely princes, but fathers and rep- 
 resentative unities, each the eipiivalent of that greater or less 
 asirre^atc to which he j'ives name. 
 
 But though, in tlie primitive Grecian government, the king is 
 the legitimate as well as the real sovereign, he is always con- 
 ceived as acting through the council and agora, lioth the one 
 and the other are established and essential media through which 
 liis ascendency is brought to bear upon the society ; the absence 
 of such assemblies is the test and mark of savage men, as in the 
 
 * llesiod, 0pp. Di. 250-263 ; Homer, Iliad, xvi. 387. 
 
 ^ Tittmann (Darstellung der Griechischen Staatsverfassungen, book ii. p. 
 63) (jives too lofty an idea, in my judgment, of the condition and functiona 
 of the Homeric agora. 
 
 ' lliAd, i. 520-527 j iv. 14-56 ; especially the agora of the gods (xx. 16)< 
 
 case of the Cyclopes.' Accordingly, he must possess qualities fit 
 to act with etl'ect upon these two assemblies : wise reason for the 
 council, unctuous elotpience for the agora.'- Such is the idial of 
 the heroic government : a king, not merely full of valor and re- 
 source as a soldier, but also sutliciently superior to those ai'ound 
 him to insure both the deliberate concurrence of the chiefs, and 
 the heart V adhesion of the masses.3 That this picture is not, in 
 all mdividual cases, realized, is unquestionable ; but the endow- 
 ments so often predicated of good kings show it to have been the 
 type present to the mind of the describer."* Xenophon, in his 
 Cyrop^dia, depicts Cyrus as an improved edition of the Homeric 
 Agamemnon,—'' a good king and a powerful soldier," thus ideal- 
 izing the perfection of personal government. 
 
 It is important to point out these fundamental conceptions of 
 government, discernible even before the dawn of Grecian his- 
 tory, and identified with the social life of the people. It shows 
 us that the Greeks, in their subsequent revolutions, and in the 
 political experiments which their countless autonomous comwu* 
 
 ' Udvss. ix. 11 4. — 
 
 Tulaiv d' (the Cyclopes) ovf uyopal ^ovlri<popQi, ovre diniarei 
 'A/iA' oZy' viprjkCjv opfuv vaiovai Kuprjva 
 'Ev a-JTEoai yXacpvpolGi • ^efiiaTEvei 6k Uaarog 
 llacduv Tjd" u2.6x(^v ' ovd' a7Jkri'Ku>v iiKiyovai. 
 These lines illustrate the meaning of i^f/z^f. 
 
 * .See this point set forth in the prolix discourse of Aristeides, Ilrpi 'Piyro- 
 s>iKm (Or. xlv. vol. ii. p. 99) : 'Hcriudof ravTu. dvTLKpi)g ' Ofijjpif) /.«}«* 
 
 oTt re 7/ l)JiTopiKi] cvvedpoq rr/g jicffiTiiK^g, etc. 
 
 =* Ptleus, king of the Myrmidons, is called (Iliad, vii. 126) 'Eo^Ug Uvpfii- 
 t^ovuv (3ovXii9opo(: 7j6' ayopr]T^g — Diomedts, uyopy 6e r' ufiehu (iv.400) — 
 Nestor, Ai/iV UvXiuv uyoprjrijg — Siirpcddn, Avuluv '^ovXrii^ope >. 633; ; and 
 Idomemus, KprjTuv (3ovXr}(p6pe (xiii. 219). 
 
 Hesiod (Theogon. 80-96) illustrates still more amply the icIM of the king 
 governing by persuasion and inspired by the Muses. 
 
 * See the striking picture in Thucydides (ii. 65). Xenophon, in the Cyro- 
 pajdia, puts into the mouth of his hero the Homeric comparison between thf 
 good king and the good shepherd, implying as it does immense superiority of 
 organization, moraUty, and intelligence (Cyropad. viu. p. 450, Hutchinson). 
 
 Volney observes, respecting the emirs of the Druses in Syria : |' Every- 
 thing depends on circumstances : if the governor be a man of ability, he is 
 absolute ; if weak, he is a cipher. This proceeds from the want of tixod 
 laws; a want common to all Asia." (Travels in Egypt and Syria, vol. ii. p 
 66.) Such was pretty much the condition of the king in primiavo Greece* 
 
 i 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 nities presented, worked upon preexisting materials, — develop- 
 ill*' and exaltin": elements which had been at first subordinate, 
 and suppressing, or remodelling on a totally new principle, that 
 which had been originally predominant. When we approach 
 historical Greece, we find that (with the exception of Sparta) 
 the primitive hereditary, unresponsible monarch, uniting in him- 
 Belf all the functions of government, has ceased to reign,— whiU 
 the feeling of legitimacy, which originally induced his people tQ 
 obey him willingly, has been exchanged for one of aversion 
 towards the character and title generally. The multifarious 
 functions which he once exercised, have been parcelled out among 
 temporary nominees. On the other hand, the council, or senate, 
 and the agora, originally simple media through which the king 
 acted, are elevated into standing and independent sources of au- 
 thority, controlling and holding in responsibility the various spe- 
 cial olBcers to whom executive duties of one kind or another are 
 confided. The general principle here indicated is common both 
 to the oligarchies and the democracies which grew up in his- 
 torical Greece: much as these two governments differed from 
 esich other, and many as were the varieties even between one 
 oligarchy or democracy and another, they all stood in equal 
 contrast with the principle of the heroic government. Even in 
 Sparta, where the hereditary kingship lasted, it was preserved 
 with lustre and influence exceedingly diminished,' and such 
 timely diminution of its power seems to have been one of the 
 essential condition.- of its i)reservation.'-2 Though the vSpaitan 
 kings had the hereditary command of the military forces, yet, 
 
 • Nevertheless, the .juestion put by Leotychides to the aepos. d Sjiartan 
 kinj; Demaratus, — buoiov tl nij rh apx^^v fierd to ^-tacn'Aevfiv ( llerodot. vL 
 63), and the poignant insult whi« h those words conveyed, atford one among 
 many other evidences of the lotiy estinnite current in Sparta respeciinj,' the 
 rc;jai dignity, of which Aristotle, in the roliti<a, seems hardly to take suffi- 
 cient account 
 
 » O. MiUlcr ( Hist. Dorians, book iii. i. 3) affirms that the fundamental 
 features of the royalty were maintained in the Dorian states, and obliterated 
 only in tlie Ionian and demot-ratical. In this point, he has been followed 
 by varinns other authors (see Helbig, Die Sittlieh. Zustande des lleldenai- 
 ♦jer^ u 73), hnt his position appears to me substantially inc<»rrect, even as 
 regards Sparta ; and strikingly incoirect, iu rejjard to the other Dorian 
 otatm. 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING. 
 
 77 
 
 cren in all foreign expeditions, they habitually acted in obedience 
 to orders from home ; while in aflairs of the interior, the supe- 
 rior power of the ephors sensibly overshadowed them. So thai, 
 unless possessed of more than ordinary force of character, they 
 seem to have exercised their chief influence as presiding mem- 
 bers of the senate. 
 
 There is yet another point of view in which it behoves us to 
 take notice of the council and the agora as integral portions of 
 the legendary government of the Grecian communities. We are 
 thus enabled to trace the employment of public speaking, as the 
 standing engine of government and the proximate cause of obe- 
 dience, to the social infancy of the nation. The iK)wer of speech 
 in the direction of public aflfairs becomes more and more obvious, 
 developed, and irresistible, as we advance towards the cul- 
 minating period of Grecian history, the century preceding the 
 battle of Choeroneia. That its development was greatest among 
 the most enlightened sections of the Grecian name, and smallest 
 among the more obtuse and stationary, is matter of notorious 
 fact ; nor is it less true, that the prevalence of this habit was one 
 of the chief causes of the intellectual eminence of the nation gen* 
 erally. At a time when all the countries around were plunged 
 comparatively in mental torpor, there was no motive sufficiently 
 present and powerful to multiply so wonderfully the productive 
 minds of Greece, except such as arose from the rewards of pub- 
 lic speaking. The susceptibility of the multitude to this sort of 
 guidance, their habit of reqiriring and enjoying the stimulus 
 which it supplied, and the open discussion, combining regular 
 forms with free opposition, of practical matters, political as well 
 as judicial, — are the creative causes which formed such con- 
 spicuous adepts in the art of persuasion. Nor was it only pro- 
 fessed orators who were thus produced; didactic aptitude was 
 formed in the backgi'ound, and the speculative tendencies were 
 supplied with interesting phenomena for observation and combi- 
 nation, at a time when the truths of physical science were almost 
 inaccessible. If the primary effect was to quicken the powers 
 of expression, the sexiondary, but not less certain result, was to 
 develop the habits of scientific thought. Not only the oratory of 
 Demosthenes and Perikles, and t'he colloquial magic of Socrates, 
 but also the philosophical speculations of Plato, and the syste- 
 
78 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MORAL AND SOCIAL FEELING. 
 
 71 
 
 matic politics, rhetoric, and \\)^c of Aristotle, are traceable to 
 the same general tendencies in the minds of the Greciaii jx-ople : 
 an«l we find the germ of these expansive forces in the senate and 
 igora of their legendary government. Tlie poets, first epic and 
 tlien lyric, were the precursors of the orators, in their |>o\ver of 
 niovinfT' the feelinji^s of an assembled crowd ; whilst the Homeric 
 poems — the general training-book of educated Greeks — consti- 
 tuted a treasury of direct and animated expression, full of con* 
 cnte forms, and rare in the use of abstractions, and thence better 
 suited to the workings of oratory. The subsequent critics had 
 no difficulty in selecting from the Iliad and Odyssey, samples of 
 elotjuence in all its phases and varieties. 
 
 On the whole, then, the society depicted in the old Greek poems 
 is loose and unsettled, presenting very little of legal restraint, 
 and still less of legal protection, — but concentrating such |>oliti- 
 cal power as does exist in the hands of a legitimate hereditary 
 king, \vho>e ascendency over the other chiefs is more or less com- 
 plete according to his personal force and character. Wliether 
 that ascendency be greater or less, liowever, the mass of the 
 people is in either case [)oliiically passive and of little account 
 Thouirh the Grecian freeman of the heroic age is above the de- 
 graded level of the Gallic plebs, as described by Ca?sar,i he is far 
 from rivalling the fierce independence and sense of dignity, com- 
 bined with individual force, wliich characterize the Germanic 
 tribes before their establishment in the Roman empire. Still 
 less does his condition, or the society in which he moves, cor- 
 respond to those pleasing dreams of spontaneous rectitude and 
 innocence, in which Tacitus and Seneca indulge with regard to 
 primitive man.2 
 
 » Caesar, Bell. Gallic, vi. 12. 
 
 * Seneca, Epist. xc. ; Tacitus. Annal. iii. 26. •• Vctustissimi mortaliam 
 f!»avs the latter), nulla adhuc mail lihidine .sine probro. scelcre, co([ne sine 
 pa?n;\ aut cocn itione, agebant : neque praemiis opus erat, cum honesta suopte 
 ingenio peterentur ; at ubi nihil contra raorera cuperent, nihil per nietum 
 Tetabantur. At postquara exui jequalitas, et pro modestii et pudore ambitio 
 et vis incedebat, provenere dominationes, multosque apud populos cetemum 
 mansere," etc. Compare Strabo, vii. p. 301 
 
 These are the same fancies so eloquently set fortb by Kousscao, in the 
 IftKt century. A far more sagacious criticism pervades the preface of Thncy- 
 
 2. The state of moral and social feeling, prevalent in Icgendarj 
 Greece, exhibits a scene in harmony with the rudimentary po- 
 litical fabrics just described. Throughout the long stream of 
 legendary narrative on which the Greeks looked back as their 
 past history, the larger social motives hardly ever come into 
 play : either individual valor and cruelty, or the personal attach- 
 ments and quarrels of relatives and war-companions, or the feudl 
 of private enemies, are ever before us. There is no sense of 
 oblif^ation then existing, between man and man as such, — and 
 verv little between each man and the entire community of which 
 he is a member ; such sentiments are neither operative in the 
 real world, nor present to the imaginations of the poets. Per- 
 sonal feelings, either towards the gods, the king, or some near and 
 known individual, fill the whole of a man's bosom : out of them 
 arise all the motives to beneficence, and all the internal restraints 
 upon violence, antipathy, or rapacity : and special communion, 
 as well as special solemnities, are essential to their existence. 
 The ceremony of an oath, so imposing, so paramount, and so in 
 dispensable in those days, illustrates strikingly this principle. 
 And even in the case of the stranger suppliant, — in which an 
 apparently spontaneous sympathy manifests itself, — the succor 
 and kindness shown to him arise mainly from his having gone 
 through the consecrated lonnalities of supplication, such as that 
 of sitting down in the ashes by the sacred hearth, thus obtaining 
 a sort of privilege of sanctuary.' That ceremony exalts him 
 
 ' Seuthes, in the Anabasis of Xcnophon (vii. 2, .33), describes how. when 
 an orphan youth, he formerly supplicated Medokos, the Thracian king, to 
 grant him a troop of followers, in order that he might recover his lost do- 
 minions. eKad^tCofiTfv evdi(ppiog avT(^ Ikcttjc dovval fioi uvdpa^. 
 
 Thucydides gives an interesting description of the arrival of the exile 
 Themistokles, then warmly pursued by the Greeks on suspicion of treason, 
 at the house of Admetus, king of the Epirotic Molossians. The wife of 
 Admetus herself instructed the fugitive how to supplicate her husband in 
 form • the child of Admetus was placed in his arms, and he was directed to 
 sit down in this guise close by the consecrated hearth, which was of the nature 
 of an altar. While so seated, he addressed his urgent entreaties to Ad- 
 metus for protection : the latter raised him up from the ground and promised 
 what was asked. "That (says the historian) was the most powerful form of 
 supplication." Admetus, — uKovaag uviffTTjai re avrdv fiera tov kavTov vUof, 
 barren koX ex^v avrdv iKa^eCero, koI fi ky lo tov iKerev jxa ifv 
 
 w 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CONTRAST WITH HISTORICAL T1ME8. 
 
 81 
 
 Ibto iomething more than a mere suffering man, — it places hira 
 in express fellowsliip with the master of the house, under the 
 tutelary sanctions of Zeus Hiketesios. There is great difference 
 between one form of supplication and another; the suppliant, 
 however, in any fonn, becomes more or less the object of a par- 
 ticular sympathy. 
 
 llie sense of obligation towards the gods manifests itself 
 separately in habitual acts of worship, sacrifice, and libations, or 
 
 (Thuc. i 136> So Tt;Iephas, in the lost drama of iEschylus called 'Sivcrol, 
 takes up the child Orestes. See Bothe's Fragm. 44 •, Schol. Aristoph. Ach. 305 
 
 In the Odvssey, both Naasikaa and the goddess Athene instruct Odysseus 
 in the proper form of :mpplicating Alkinous : he first throws himself down 
 at the feet of queen Arete, embracing her knees and addressing to her his 
 prayer, and then, without waiting for a reply, sits down among the ashes 
 on the hearth, — C>g e/rrwv, kot' up" ii^er' kn' eaxupy iv Koviijai, — Alkinoua 
 is dining with a large company: for some time both he and the guests aro 
 silent : at length the ancient Echeneus remonstrates with him on his tardi- 
 ness in raising the stranger up from the ashes. At his exhortation, the I*h»e- 
 akian king takes Odysseus by the hand, and, raising him up, places him on 
 a chair beside him : he then directs the heralds to mix a bowl of wine, and 
 to servo it to every one round, in order that all may make libations to Zeus 
 Hiketesios. This ceremony clothes the stranger with the full rights aii<l 
 character of a suppliant (Odyss. vi. 310; vii. 75, 141, 166): Kard. vnum^ 
 itfuKTopov, .^chyl. Supplic. 242. 
 
 That the form counted for a great deal, we see evidently marked : but of 
 course supplication is often addressed, and successfully addressed, in circum- 
 stances where this form cannot be gone through. 
 
 It is difficult to accept the doctrine of Eustathius, (ad Odyss. xvi. 424,) 
 that UeTijc is a vox media (like ^eh'oc), arvplied as well to the Utrafioxr as 
 to the UiTTj^, properly so called : but the word d?.X^7ioini.i-, in the passage 
 just cited, does seem )o justify his observation : yet there is no direct au- 
 thority for such use of the word in Homer. 
 
 The address of Theoclymenos, on first preferring bis supplication to Tel- 
 emachus, is characteristic of the practice (Odyss. xv. 260); compare also 
 Iliad, xvi. 574, and Ihsiod. Scut. Hercul. 12-85. 
 
 The idea of the ^eivog and the ikft/jc run very much together. I can 
 hardly persuade myself that the reading iKerevtye (Odyss. xi. 520 j is truly 
 Homeric: implying as it does the idea of a pitiable sutlerer, it is altogether 
 out of place when prc'dicated of the proud and impetuous Neoptolemus : 
 we should rather have expected eKelevae. (See Odyss. x. 15.) 
 
 The constraining efficacy of special formalities of supplicatioa, among 
 the Scythians, is powerfully set forth in the Toxaris of Lucian : tlie suppliant 
 eta npon an ox-hide, with his hands confined behind him (l..ucian, Toxaria 
 I- 4d, vol. iii. p. 69, Tauchn.) — the fieyiarTj UeTTipia among thj t people 
 
 by votive presents, such as that of the hair of Achilles, which he 
 has pledged to the river-god Spercheius,i and such as the con- 
 stant dedicated offerings which men who stand in urgent need of 
 the divine aid first promise and afterwards fulfil. But the feel- 
 ing towards the gods also appears, and that not less frequently, 
 as mingling itself with and enforcing obligations towards some 
 particular human person. The tie which binds a man to his 
 father, his kinsman, his guest, or any special promisee towards 
 whom he has taken the engagement of an oath, is conceived in 
 conjunction with the idea of Zeus, as witness and guarantee ; 
 and the intimacy of the association is attested by some surname 
 or sj)ecial appellation of the god.- Such personal feelings com- 
 posed all the moral influences of which a Greek of that day was 
 susceptible, — a state of mind which we can best appreciate by 
 contrasting it with that of the subsequent citizen of historical 
 Athens. In the view of the latter, the great impersonal authority, 
 called " The Laws," stood out separately, both as guide and sanc- 
 tion, distinct from religious duty or private sympathies : but of 
 this discriminated conception of positive law and positive morali- 
 ty,3 the germ only can be detected in the Homeric poems. The 
 appropriate Greek word for human laws never occurs. Amidst 
 a very wavering phraseology ,4 we can detect a gradual transition 
 
 ' Iliad, xxiii. 142. 
 
 « Odyss. xiv. 389. — 
 
 Ov ytip TovvEK* kyu (f aldeaaofxai^ oiSe (piXfjeru, 
 *AA/ia Am ^eviov deiaa^^ avrtv d' iXeaipuv. 
 
 ' Nagelsbach (Homerische Theologie, Abschn. v. s. 23) gives a just and 
 well-sustained view of the Homeric ethics : " Es ist der charakteristische 
 Standpunkt der Homerischen Ethik, dass die Spharen des Rechts, der Sitt- 
 lichkeit, und Religiositat, bey dem Dichter, dcrchaus noch nicht anseinander 
 fallen, so dass der Mensch z. B. SUaiog seyn kmnte ohne ^eovSijc zu seyn — 
 sondem in unentwickelter Einheit beysammen sind." 
 
 * Nri/zot, laws, is not an Homeric word ; vofioc, law, in the singular, occim 
 twice in the Hesiodic Works and Days (276, 388> 
 
 The employment of the words diKij, diKai, i^e/^tf, ■&epu(TT€^, in Homer, if 
 curious as illustrating the early moral associations, but would require fill 
 more space than can be given to it in a note ; we see that the sense of eack 
 of these words was essentially fluctuating. Themis, in Homer, is somethnef 
 decidedly a person, who exercises the important function of opening and 
 elosiag the agora, both of gods and men (Iliad, xx. 4 : Odyss. ii. 68), and 
 
 4* 6o& 
 
 j 
 
 «<it»i>«j» 
 
82 
 
 HISTOKV OF C.RKKCE. 
 
 FAMILY REL.A TIONS. 
 
 88 
 
 from the priinirive i(J«ea of a personal goddess Themis, attached 
 to Zeus, first to his sentences or orders called Themistes, and 
 next by a still fart her remove to various established customs, 
 which those sentences were believed to sanctify, — the authority 
 of rehgion and that of custom coalescing into one indivisible 
 
 obligation. 
 
 The family relations, as we might expect, are set forth in our 
 pictures of the legendary world as the grand sources of lasting 
 union and devoted attachment. The paternal authority is highly 
 riverenced : the son who lives to years of maturity, repays by 
 affection to his pai-ent:4 the charge of his maintenance in infancy, 
 which the language notes by a special word ; whilst on the other 
 hand, the Erinnys, whose avenging hand is put in motion by the 
 curse of a father or mother, is an object of deep dread.i 
 
 who, besides that, acts and speaks (Iliad, xiv. 87-9.i; ; ahvavs the associate 
 and companion of Zeus, the highest god. In Hesiod, (The.><;. UOl.) she is 
 the wife of Zeus: in ^schylus, (Prometh. 209,) she is the same as Vala: 
 even in Plato, (Legj;. xi. p. 936,) witnesses swear (to want of knowled^'C of 
 matters under inquest) by Zeus, Apollo, and Themis. Themis m a person 
 is probably the oldest sense of the word: then we have the plural I'^i/uare^ 
 (connected with the verb u^rifii, like i^tofidc and re^fiog), which are (not 
 persons, but) special appurtenances or emanations of the supreme god, or 
 ©f a king acting under liim, analoi;ous to and joined with the sceptre. The 
 •ceptrc, and the ^efiiare^ or the (^Uat constantly go tof^ether (Iliad, ii. 209; 
 ix. 99):' Zeus or the king is a judge, not a law-maker; he issues decrees or 
 special orders to settle particular disputes, or to restrain particular men ; and, 
 agreeable to the concrete forms of ancient language, the decrees are trcatf ,1 
 •8 if they were a collect on of ready-made substantive things, actually m 
 kis possession, like the sceptre, and prepared for being delivered out when 
 the proper occasion arose : dLKuaTroloi, olre ^ifiiarag Updc Aidf dpvarai 
 (B. i. 138), compared with the two passages last cited: 'Acppova tovtov 
 ivevrac, be ovriva olde ^tfiiara (11. v. 761), 'Xypiov, ovTe dUac tv dSoTo 
 ovre ^Efiiarat: (Odyss. ix. 215). The plural number iViKaL is more commonly 
 ttsed in Homer than the lingular : diKv is rarely used to denote Justice, an 
 tn abstract concepUon ; ii. more often denotes a special claim of right on 
 the part of some given man (U. xviu. 508). It sometimes also denotes, 
 ■imply, established custom, or the known \oi, — f\t^uv dUrj, yepovTuv, ^eluv 
 Baailriuv, ^euv (see Daram's Lexicon, ad voc.) ^ifiic is used in the Mma 
 
 ■lanner. 
 
 See, upon this matter, Platner, De Notion* Juris ap. Homerum, p. 81 , 
 
 tnd O. Miiller, Prolegg. Mythol. p. 121. 
 
 > Oidi TOKevai Qpinrpa (piXoic dneduKe (II. iv. 477) : ^ptnrpa or ^penTtjpui 
 |«NBpare D. ix. 454 ; Odjsa. ii. 134 ; Hesiod, 0pp. Di. 186;. 
 Vol. 2 8 
 
 In regard to marriage, we find the wife occupying a station of 
 great dignity and influence, tho'igh it was the prai!tice for the 
 husband^to purchase her by valuable presents to her parents,— 
 a practice extensively prevalent among early communities, and 
 treated by Aristotle as an evidence of btu-barism. She even 
 seems to live less secluded and to enjoy a wider sphere of action 
 than was allotted to her in historical Greece.^ Concubines are 
 fre(iuent with the chiefs, and occiisionally the jealousy of the wife 
 breaks out in reckless excess against her husband, as may be 
 Been in the tragical history of Phojnix. The continence of La- 
 ertes, from fear of displeasing his wife Antikleia, is especially 
 noticed.'^ A large portion of the romantic interest which Grecian 
 legend inspires Is derived from the women : P enelope, Androma- 
 
 1 Aristot Polit^. 5, 11. The tiha, or present given by the suitor to the 
 father, as an in.Uuement to grant his daughter in marriage, arc spoken of 
 asveryvaluable,-a:r.p..>-«^r«(Il.xi.244; xvi.lTB; xxii.472): to grant 
 a daughter without hha was a high compliment to the intended son-m-law 
 (11. ix. 141 : compare xiii. 366). Among the ancient Germans of rao.tus, 
 the husband gave presents, not to his wife's father, but to herself (1 act 
 Germ c 18): the customs of the cariy Jews were in this respect completely 
 Homeric; sec the case of Sheche.n and Hiuah (Genesis, xxxiv 12) a..d 
 others, etc.; also Mr. Catlin's Letters on the North American Indians, vol 
 
 i. Lett. 26, p. 213. - , r 11 1 
 
 The Greek hha correspond exactly to the mumlhtm of the Lombard an4 
 Alemannic laws, which is thus explaine.l by Mr. Price (Notes on the L.iws 
 of Kin.' Ethelbert, in the Ancient Laws and Instuules ot Lngland, ranslated 
 and pirbiished bv Mr. Thorpe, vol. i. p 20) : " The Longobard.c law .s the 
 mo^t copious of all the bari.aric codes in its provisions respecting marriage, 
 and parliculariy so on the subje<t of the Mund. From that law it appear, 
 that the Mundium was a sum paid over to the family of the bnde, for trans- 
 ferring the tutelage which they possessed over her to the family of the bus- 
 band ' Si quis pro muliere liber.\ aut puelU mundium dedent et c. tradita 
 fuerit ad uxorem,' etc. (ed. Rotharis, c. 183.) In the same sense m which 
 the term occurs in these dooms, it is also to be met with m the Alemannic 
 law : it was also common in Denmark and in Sweden, where the bride was 
 called a mund-l>onght or a mund-given woman." 
 
 According to the 77th Law of King Ethelbert (p. 23), this m«n^ waa 
 often paid in cattle : the Saxon daughters were ndp^evot d^em^oLai (lUad, 
 
 xviii. 593). _ . . . tt 
 
 •Odyss. 1.430; Iliad, ix. 450; see also Terpstra, Antiquitaa Homenca, 
 
 eapp. 17 and 18. , 
 
 Polygamy appears to be ascribed to Priam, but to no one else (Iliad, xxl 
 
 W). 
 
u 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PERSONAL SYMPATHIES. 
 
 85 
 
 11 
 
 che, Helen, Enytaemnestra, Eriphyle, lokasta, Hekabe, etc, all 
 stand in the foreground of the picture, either from their virtues 
 their beauty, their crimes, or their sufferings. 
 
 Not only brothers, but also cousins, and the more distant blood- 
 relations and clansmfin, appear connected together by a strong 
 feeling of attachment, sharing among them universally the obli- 
 gation of mutual self-defence and revenge, in the event of injury 
 to any individual of ihe race. The legitimate brothers divide 
 between them by lot the paternal inheritance, — a bastard brother 
 receiving only a small share; he is, however, commonly very well 
 treated,! though the murder of Phokus, by Telamon and Peleus, 
 constitutes a flagrant exception. The furtive pregnancy of young 
 women, often by a god, is one of the most frequently recurring 
 incidents in the legendary narratives ; and the severity with 
 which such a fact, when discovered, is visited by the father, is 
 generally extreme. As an extension of the family connection, 
 we read of larger unions, called the phratry and the tribe, which 
 are respectfully, but not frequently, mentioned.'- 
 
 The generous readiness with which hospitality is afforded to 
 the stranger who asks for it,3 the facility witli which he is allowed 
 to contract the peculiar connection of guest with his host, and the 
 
 * Odyss. xiv. 202-215: compare lliiui, xi. 102. The primitive German 
 law of succession divided the paternal inheritance amonfj the sons of a de- 
 ceased father, under the implied obhpition to maintain and portion out their 
 iistcrs (Eichhom, Deutscliet Privat-Recht. sect. 330. 
 
 »lUad,ii.362.— 
 
 ^k<PpT]Tupy ude/ataro^, uviffriog iariv eKeivoCy 
 "Of iroXifiOV Iparai, etc. (II. ix. 63.) 
 
 These three epithets include the three different classes of personal sym 
 paihy and obligation: 1. The Phratry, in which a man is connected with 
 father, mother, brothers, cousins, brothers-in-law, clansmen, etc.; 2. The 
 ^.fiiorec, whereby he is connected with his fellow-men who visit the same 
 }v.-or»; 8. His Hestia, or Hearth, whereby he becomes accessible to the 
 JMv©f and the Uerri^ : — 
 
 T^ (T 'Odvffevf ^A^of oft) xai a'AKifjov lyxo^ iSuKev^ 
 *Apx^v ^eivoffiiv^g KpoaKi)dio^ ov6i rpaniC,^ 
 TvCtT7}v d.'XXijTi.oiv (Odyss xx. 34.) 
 ' Tt must be mentioned, however, that when a chief received a stranger 
 . .tl made ])resents to him, lie reimbursed to himself the value of the preseaM 
 • . io!le<-tion8 among the people (Odyss. xiii 14; xtx. 197): apyaXiov ydp 
 •vi *;>o/«df ;j;<M<<Ta<n>a<, says Alkinoos. 
 
 '9 
 
 I 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 permanence wuh which that connection, when created by partak- 
 ing of the same food and exchanging presents, is maintained even 
 tbrougb a long period of separation, and even transmitted from 
 father'' to son — these are among the most captivating ft-atures 
 of the heroic society. The Homeric chief welcomes the stranger 
 who comes to ask shelter in his house, first gives him refresh- 
 ment, and then inquires his name and the purpose of his voyage.i 
 Though not inclined to invite strangers to his house, he cannot 
 repel "them when they spontaneously enter it craving a lodging.^ 
 The suppliant is also commonly a stranger, but a stranger under 
 peculiar circumstances ; who i.roclaims his own calamitous and 
 abject condition, and seeks to place himself in a relation to the 
 chief whom he solicits, something like that in which men stand to 
 the ^ods. Onerous as such special tie may become to him, the 
 chief cannot decline it, if solicited in the proper form : the cere- 
 mony of supplication hjis a binding effect, and the Erinnys punish 
 the hardhearted person who disallows it. A conquered enemy 
 may sometimes throw himself at the feet of his conqueror, and 
 solicit mercy, but h(j cannot by doing so acquire the character 
 and claims of a suppliant properly so called : the conqueror has 
 free discretion eitiier to kill him, or to spare him and accept a 
 
 ransom.3 
 
 There are in the legendary narratives abundant examples ot 
 individuals who trans gress in particular acts even the holiest of 
 
 » Odyss. i 123; iii. 70, etc. 
 
 « Odvss. xvii. 383.— , , .qv 
 
 Ttc 7^9 ^^ ^elvov KaXel aXXo'&ev avr^c iireAtfuv 
 •AAXov y' d fiv Tuvd\ ol drjfXLutpyoi laaiv, etc. ; 
 which breathes the plain-spoken shrewdness of the Hesiodic Works and 
 
 jtJavs, V. 355. , ^ . umi.^ 
 
 3' See the illustrative case of Lykaon, in vain cravmg mercy from Achilles. 
 
 flliad,xxi. 64-97. 'Avn rot €/>' //cf rao. etc.) 
 
 Menelaus is about to spare the life of the Trojan Adrastus, who clasps his 
 knee, and craves mercv, offering a largre ransom, - when Agamemnon repeli 
 tne idea of qnarter, and kills Adrastus with his own hand : his speech to 
 Menelaus displays the extreme of violent enmity, yet the poet says, - 
 'Qf; eiTTuv, Trapt-XEiavv ude?.(peiov i^peva^ fjpuc, 
 Ala Lfi a TrapetTTwv, etc. 
 
 Adi-astus is not called an Uernc, nor is the expression used ^ respect U 
 Dolon (II. X. 456), nor in the equally striking case of Odysseus (Odyss. xif 
 179), when begging for his life. 
 
 iH 
 
 mmt 
 
 M^oi^B 
 
86 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK 
 
 'I 
 
 il 
 
 these personal ties, but the savage Cyclops is the only person d»- 
 •cribed as professedly indifferent to them, and careless of tha* 
 nnction of the gods which in Grecian belief accompanied tliem 
 til.' In fad, the tragical horror which ])ervades the lineage of 
 Athamas or Kadraus, and which attaclies to many of the acts of 
 Herakles, of Peleus and Telamon, of Jason and Medea, of Atreus 
 ind Thyestes, etc., is founded upon a deep feeling and sympathy 
 with those special obligations, which conspicuous individuals, un- 
 der the temj)orary stimulus of the maddening Ate, are driven to 
 riolate. In such conflict of sentiments, between the oblijration 
 generally reverenced and the exceptional deviation in an individ- 
 ual otherwise admired, consists the pathos of the story. 
 
 These feelings — of mutual devotion between kinsinen and 
 companions in arms — of generous hos{)itality to the stranger, 
 and of helping protection to the suppliant, — constitute the bright 
 spots in a dark age. AVe find them very generally j)revalent 
 amongst communities essentially rude and barbarous, — amongst 
 the ancient Germans as described by Tacitus, the Druses in 
 Lebanon,'-^ the Arabian tribes in the desert, and even the North 
 American Indians. 
 
 > Odyss. ix. 112-275. 
 
 * Tacit. German, c. 21. ' Quemcunque mortaliuin arccre tecto, nefns ha- 
 I>€tur : pro fortunfi quisque apparatis epuHs excipit : cum dofercre qui modo 
 hospes fuerat, monstratur hospitii et comes, proximam domuni non invitari 
 ideunt : nee interest — pari huraanitate accipiuntur. Notum ignotumque, 
 quantum ad jus hospitii, nemo discernit." Compare Caj.sar, B. G. vi. 22. 
 
 See about the liruses and Arabians, Volney, Travels in K^'vpt and Syria 
 Tol. ii. p. 76, Engl. Transl.; Niebuhr, Bcschrcibun^' von Arabieu, Co|)enh. 
 1772, pp. 46-49. 
 
 Pomponius Mela describes the ancient Germans in lan;:ua{je not inapj)li- 
 eoble to the Homeric Greeks*: "Jus in viribus habent, adoo ut ne latrocinii 
 quidem |»udeat: tantitm hospitibus boni, mitesque supplicibus." (iii. 3.) 
 
 " The hospitality of the Indians is well known. It extends even to stranjjers 
 who take refuge amouj; them. They count it a most sacred duty, trom 
 which no one is exempted. Whoever refuses relief to any one, commits a 
 grievous offence, and not only makes himself detested and abhorred by all, 
 bnt liable to revenge from the offended person. In their conduct towards 
 their enemies they are cruel aud inexorable, and, when enraged, bent npon 
 norhing bat murder and bloodshed. They are, however, remarkable for con 
 fCiUing their passions, and waiting for a convenient opportunity of grutify- 
 iniij them. But then their fury knows no bounds. If they cannot satisfy 
 Uieir resentni^Mjt, they will t ven call upon their friends and postority to do 
 
 STATE OF SOCIETY, ETC. 
 
 87 
 
 
 They are the instinctive manifestations of human sovjiality, 
 standing at first alone, and for that reason appearing to possess a 
 
 it. The longest space of time cannot cool their wrath, nor the most distant 
 place of refuge afford security to their enemy." (Loskiel, History of the 
 Mission of the United Brethren among the North American Indians, Part 
 
 I. ch. 2, p. 15.) 
 
 " Charlevoix observes, fsays Dr. Ferguson, Essay on Civil Society, Part 
 
 II. \ 2, p. 145,) that the nations among whom he travelled in North America 
 never mentioned acts of generosity or kindness under the notion of duty. 
 They acted from affection, as they acted from appetite, without regard to 
 its consequences. When they had done a kindness, they had gratified a d(^ 
 «ire : the business was finished, and it passed from the memory. The spirit 
 with which they give or receive presents is the same as that which Tacitus 
 remarks among the ancient Germans : ' Gaudcnt muneribus, sed nee data 
 imputant, nee acceptis obligantur.' Such gifts are of little consequence, ex- 
 cept when cmploved as the seal of a bargain or a treaty." 
 
 Respecting the Morlacchi (Illyrian Sclavonians), the Abbe Fortis says 
 (Travels in Dalmatia, pp. 55-58): — 
 
 '« The hospitality of the Morlachs is equally conspicuous among the poor 
 as among tlie opulent. The rich prepares a roasted lamb or .sheep, and the 
 poor, with equal cordiality, gives his turkey, milk, honey,— whatever he 
 has. ' Nor is their generosity confined to strangers, but generally extends to 
 
 all who a»-i in want Friendship is lasting among the Morlacchi. They 
 
 have even w-ade it a kind of religious point, and tie the sacred bond at the 
 foot of tho altar. The Sclavonian ritual contains a i>articular benediction, 
 for the solemn union of two male or two female friends, in presence of the 
 whole congregation. The male friends thus united are called Pobratimi, and 
 the females Posestreme, which means half-brothers and half-sisters. The 
 duties of tb«5 Pobratimi are, to assist each other in every case of need and 
 danger, to revenge mutual wrongs, etc. : their enthusiasm is often carried so 
 
 far as to risk, and even lose their life But as the friendships of tho 
 
 Moriacchi are strong and sacred, so their quarrels are commonly unextin- 
 guishable. They pass from father to son, and the mothers fail not to put 
 their children in mind of their duty to revenge their father, if he has had th<3 
 misfortune to be killed, and to show them often the bloody shirt of the de- 
 
 Qcsised A Morlach is implacable, if injured or insulted. With hiiu, 
 
 revenge and justice have exactly the same meaning, and truly it is the prim- 
 itive idea and I have been told that in Albania the effects of revenge arc 
 Btill more atrocious and more Usting. There, a man of the mildest charac- 
 ter is capable of the most barbarous revenge, believing it to be his positive 
 dutv . . . A Moriach who has killed another of a powerful family is com- 
 monlV obliged to save himself by flight, and keep out of the way for several 
 years' If during that time he has been fortunate enough to escape the 
 search of his pursuers, and has got a small sum of money, he endeavors to 
 obtain pardon and peace It is the custom in some places for the offended 
 
88 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 FEROCIOUS PASSIONS IINRESTRAINED. 
 
 o9 
 
 greater tutelary force than really belongs to them, — bpiieficent, 
 indecnl, in a high degree, witli reference to their own ap[>ro[)riaro 
 period, but serving as a very imperfect compensation for the im- 
 potence of the magistrate, and for the absence of any all-per- 
 vading sympathy or sense of obligation between man and maji. 
 We best appreciate their importance when we compare the Ho- 
 meric society with that of barbarians like the Tliracians, who 
 tattooed their bodies, as the mark of a generous lineage, — sold 
 their children for export as slaves, — considered robbery, not 
 merely as one admissible oocuj)ation among others, but as the 
 only honorable mode of life ; agriculture being held contemptible, 
 — and above all, delighted in the shedding of blood as a luxury. 
 Such were the Tliracians in the days of Herodotus and Thucy- 
 dides : and the Fromeric society forms a mean term between that 
 which these two historian- vet <[i\v in Thrace, and that which 
 they witnessed among their own civilized countrymen.^ 
 
 party to threaten the criniin:il. holilriuj all sorts of arms to his throat, and 
 at lust to consent to accej>t his riinsoni." 
 
 Conceniin^ the inllminr <>t r ice twn <listin(t tendencies — devoted per- 
 sonal friendship and inij>lrt(al»lv aniiiuKsiiies — ainon;L; the Illyrico-Scluvonian 
 population, see Cyprieu lioin rt. Lis Slaves de ia Tuniuie, ch, vii. pp. 42-46, 
 and Dr. Joseph Miiller, Alhani .11, Kuau-lien, und die CEsterreichisch-Mon- 
 tene^renische Granzc, Prn'j;. 1K44, pp. 24-25. 
 
 "It is for the virtue of hos{»it;tlity (observes Goguet, Oripn of Laws, etc 
 vol. i. book vi. ch. iv ), that the primitive times are chiefly famed. But, in 
 my opinion, hospitality was then exercised, not so much from generosity and 
 greatness of soul, as from necessity. Common interest probably j^ave riac 
 to that custom. In remote anti(|uity, there were few or no public inns . rhcy 
 entertained stranj^crs, in order tliat they miirht render them the sanu -tr\ ji e, 
 if they happened to travel into their country. Hosi>itality was rccifirocai. 
 Wlien they received strangers into their houses, they acquired a ri^bt of' 
 being received into theirs a^ain. This right was rejrarded by the aucieuu 
 as sacred and inviolable, and extended not only to those who had accjuireti 
 k, but to their children and posterity Besides, hospitality in these tiroe«» 
 conld nof be Attended with nuuh ex}»ense . men travelled but little. In a 
 word, the modem Arabians prove that hospitality may consist with the 
 greatest vices, and that this spt'cie> of ticuerosity is no decisive evidence of 
 gO(»dnes« of heart, or rectitude of manners " 
 
 The book of Genesis, amidst many other features c£ resemblance to the 
 Homeric manners, presents that of ready and exuberant hcspitality to the 
 •tranger. 
 
 * Ke^pecting tho Thracians. comnire Ilerodot. v 11, Thucydid. vU 
 
 Wien, however, among the Homeric men we pass beyond the 
 mlluence of the private ties above enumerated, we tind scarcely 
 Any other moralizing forces in operation. The acts and advent 
 tures commemorated imply a community wherein neither the 
 protection nor the restraints of law are practically felt, and where 
 in ferocity, rapine, and the aggressive propensities generally, seem 
 restrained by no internal counterbalancing scruples. Homicide, 
 especially, is of frequent occurrence, sometimes by open violence, 
 gometimes by fraud : expatriation for homicide is among the most 
 constantly recurring acts of the Homeric poems- and savage 
 brutalities are often ascribed, V-xm to admired heroes, with appa- 
 rent iitiitfercnce. Achilles sacrifices twelve Trojan prisoners on 
 the tomb of Fatroklus, while his son Neoptolemus not only slaught- 
 ers the aged Priam, but also seizes by the leg the child Astyanax 
 (son of the slain Hector) and hurls him from one of the lofty 
 towers of Troy.' Moreover, the celebrity of Autolykus, the ma- 
 ternal grandfather of Odysseus, in the career of wholesale rob- 
 bery and perjury, and the wealth which it enabled him to acquire, 
 are described with the same unaffected admiration as the wisdom 
 
 29-30. The expression of the latter liistorian is remarkable, — rd 6k yevo( 
 Tuv Gp(z/cwv, o/wia ro?f /xalicTTa tov }3a[)f3afjiKOv, kv (Jt uv ^apar}a% 
 ooviKUTaTov k ar I. 
 
 Compare Herodot. viii. 116; the cruelty of the Thracian king of tho 
 Bisaltae towards his own sons. 
 
 The story of Odysseus to Eumaeus in the Odyssey (xiv 210-226) furnishet 
 a valuable comparison for this predatory disposition among the Thracians. 
 Odysseus there treats the love of living by war and plunder as his own 
 peculiar taste • he did not happen to like regular labor, but the latter is not 
 treated in any way mean or unbecoming a freeman . — 
 
 Ipyov dt fioi ov ip'tkov ijev 
 Ot(5' oUoxpeXlrj, V re Tpe<peL <iy?.ad. rUva, etc. 
 
 » Ilias Mmor, Fragra. 7, p. 18, ed. DQntzer , Iliad, xxiii. 175 Odysseus ii 
 mentioned once as obtaining poison for his arrows (Odyss. i. 160), but no 
 poisoned arrf)W8 are ever employed in either of the two poems. 
 
 The anecdotes recounted by the Scythian Toxaris in Lucian's work so 
 entitled (vol. ii. c. 36, p 544, seqq. ed. Hemst.) afford a vivid picture of this 
 combination of intense and devoted friendship between individuals, with the 
 most revolting cruelty of manners. " You Greeks hve in peace and tranquil- 
 Uty," observes the Scythian, — Trap' vf^iv Se avvexelc ol noXe/ioL, koX fj^ iireXav- 
 VOfXEV dXTioic, 1) vnoxupovfiev liriovTac, ^ avfnreaovrei inip vofifn 1j XeiacfiOJC^ 
 ut^a, iv^a fjiciXiaTa del 0tPwv dyoi><iv, etc 
 
 f\ 
 
 
 u 
 
1/ 
 
 I 
 
 90 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 If 
 
 of Neslor or the 3trengtli of AjaxJ Achilles, Menelaus, Odjs* 
 Beus, j)ilhige in person, vvherever they can find an opportunity, 
 em}»loying both force and stratajrem to surmount resistance.- The 
 vocation of a pirate is recognized and honorable, so th.nt a host, 
 when he asks his guest what is the purpose of his voyage enu- 
 merates enricliment by indiscriminate maritime plunder as among 
 those projects which may naturally enter into his contemplation.^ 
 Abduction of cattle, and expeditions for un{)rovoked ravage ad 
 well as for retaliation, between neighboring tribes, appear ordi- 
 nary phenomena ;• and ihe established inviolability of lieralds 
 seems the only evidence of any settled feeling of obligatio' 
 between one community and another. While the house and 
 property of Odysseus, during his long absence, enjoys no public 
 
 ' Oilyss. xxi. 397 ; I'lu-rekydt-s, Fra;.ari. O^, (mI Didot; Autoiykus, TrXtlaTa 
 K/.f-rruv i^rlaavplC^v. The Ikiineric Hymn u> llormt's (the ^reat patron-god 
 of Autoiykus) is a farther .specimen of the aihniration wliieh might be made 
 to attaeh to clever thievinj;. 
 
 The f/fxepoKoiToc aurip, likely to roh the farm, is one fjreat enemy ajxainst 
 whom llesiod advises precaution to he taken, — a sharp-toollied dog, well-fed, 
 to serve as guard (Opp. Di. t><)4). 
 
 » Iliad, xi. 624; xx. 18-<. Odyss. iv. 81-90; ix. 40; xiv. 230; and tha 
 indirect revelation (Odyss. xim. 284), coupled with a compliment to the dex- 
 terity of Odysseus. 
 
 ' Even in the century prior to Thucydides, undistin;:rui!>hing plunder at sea, 
 committed bv Greek ships a}.:ainst ships not (irec-k. seems not to have been 
 held discreditable. The l*hokjean Dionysius, after the ill-success of the Ionic 
 revolt, poes with his three ships of war to Sicily, and from thence plunders 
 Tyrrhenians and Carthaginians (Herod, vi. 17 ). — /T/lcTTjg Kareori/K€€,'EA^ 
 vuv fiiv ov6evdg, Kapxfjihi'iui' tVf Kal 'Vvuativdv. Compare the conduct of 
 the Phokaean settlers at Alalia in Corsica, after the conquest of Ionia by 
 Harpapus (Herodot. i. 166). 
 
 In the treaty between the Romans and Carthaginians, made at some period 
 subsequent to 509 b. c, it is stipulated, — 'Yov Ka/.oi) Wnpurripiov, Macrnaf, 
 Tapajjiov, fitj ArjiCea^ai e-nreKiiva 'Tufiaiovr uJid" tfi7ropeveai&ai, fxrjde it6?av 
 KTunv (Polyb. iii. 24, 4). Plunder, commerce, and colonization, are here 
 assumed as the three objects which the Roman ships would f)ursue, unless 
 they were under special obligation to abstain, in reference to foreigners. This 
 morality approaches nearer to that of the Homeric age, than to the staio 
 of sentiment which Thucydides indicates as current in his day among the 
 Greeks. 
 
 * See the interestintr bon.stfulne.ss of Nestor, Iliad, xi. 670-700 j also OdjMi 
 •«. i<Ji Odvss. 
 
 iii. 'i : Thui- .d. i. 5. 
 
 ■> 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 KEPRESENTATION BY HESIOD. 
 
 91 
 
 
 t' 
 
 
 tfotection.i those ur principled chiefs, who consume his substance 
 find sympathy rather than disapprobation among the people of 
 Ithaka As a general rule, he who cannot protect himself finds 
 no protection from society: his own kinsmen and immediate 
 iomnanions are the only parties to whom he can look with conh- 
 dence for snpport. And in this respect, the representation given 
 by HcMod makes the picture even worse. In his emphatic 
 denunciation of the fifth age, that poet deplores not only the 
 absence of all social justice and sense of obligation among his 
 contemporaries, but also the relaxation of the ties of family and 
 ho^l.ifdity.'^ There are marks of querulous exaggeration in the 
 „oem of the Works and Days ; yet the author professes to de- 
 ' ...ibe the real state of things around him, and the features oi his 
 picture, soften them as we may, will still appear dark and calam- 
 itous It is, however, to be remarked, that he contemplates a 
 state of peace, - thus forming a contrast with the Homeric poems. 
 His copious catalogue of social evils scarcely mentions liability 
 to i.lunder by a foreign enemy, nor does he compute the chances 
 of pre<latory aggression as a source of profit. 
 
 Tiiere are two special veins of estimable sentiment, on which 
 it may be interesting to contrast heroic and historical Greece, 
 and which exhibit the latter as an improvement on the lormer, 
 not less in the aff-ections than in the imellect .,..,. 
 
 The law of Athens was peculiarly watchful and provident with 
 respect both to the persons an.l the property of orphan minors ; 
 but the description given in the Iliad of the utter and hopeless 
 destitution of the orphan hoy, despoiled of his paternal inherit- 
 ance, and abandoned by all the friends of his fathei-^ whom he 
 urgently supplicates, and who all harshly cast him ofi; is one of 
 the most pathetic mors els in the whole poem.^ In releren c« 
 • Odvss. iv. 165, among many other passages. Telcmachus laments the 
 misfortune of his race, in ■cspeet that himself, Odysseus, and Laertes were a^l 
 S sons of their fathers : there were no brothers to ser,e as mutual auxU- 
 
 laries (Odyss. xvi. 118). 
 •Opp. Di- 182-199: — 
 
 Ov6k narfip naideaatv bfiouog, ov6e ri Tratdef, 
 Ovde Ulvoc ^eivo66K(f), Kal kralpog haip<tt, 
 Om KaaiyvjjTog <piM kaaerai, (if rd Trdpoc fl-ep, 
 Ati/'a de ynpaaKovraq uTifiTjaovaL TOKfjau etc. 
 3 Diad, xxii. 487-500. Hesiod dwells upon injury to orphan childroa 
 hof«Ter,'as a heinous offence (Opp. Di. 330). 
 
i 
 
 ni 
 
 92 
 
 HISTORY Oh GREECE 
 
 again to the treatment of the dead body of an enemy w? find uU 
 the Greek chiefs who come near (not to mention the conduct of 
 Achilles himself) piercing with their spears the corpse of the 
 elain Hector, while some of them even pass disgusting tauutg 
 upon it. We may add, from the lost epics, the mutilation of the 
 dead bodies of Paris and Deiphobus by the hand of Menelaus.^ 
 But at the time of the Persian invasion, it was regarded as 
 unworthy of a righ /-minded Greek to maltreat in any way the 
 dead body of an enemy, <jven where such a deed might seem tp 
 be justified on the plea of retaliation. After the battle of Plar 
 taea, a proposition was made to the Spartan king Pausanias, 
 to retaliate upon the dead body of Mardoiiius the indignitiea 
 which Xerxes had htaptjtl upon that of Leonidas at Thermopy- 
 lae. He indignantly spurned the suggestion, not without a severe 
 rebuke, or rather a halt-suppressed menace, towards the pro- 
 poser: and the feeling of Herodotus himself goes heartily along 
 with him.-* 
 
 The different manner of dealing with homicide presents a third 
 test, perhai>s more striking yet, of the change in Grecian feelings 
 and manners during the three centuries preceding the Persitm 
 invasion. That which the murderer in the Homeric times had 
 to dread, wji^, not public prosecution and punishment, but the 
 personal vengeance of the kinsmen and friends of the deceased, 
 who were stimulated by the keenest impulses of honor and obli- 
 gation to avenge tlie deed, and were considered by the public aa 
 Bpecially privileged to do so.3 To escape from this danger, he 
 
 * Iliad, xxii. 371. oviV apa ol tlq avotrijn ye ■Kapearr}. Ar«j:ument of 
 Iliad. Minor, ap. DOnt/cr, Epp. Fragm. p. 17; Virj,'il, ^T^neid, vi. 520. 
 
 Both Ajramemiion and the Oiliad Ajax cut off the heads of shiin warriors, 
 and send iheni rolling like a lall or like a mortar among the crowd of war 
 riors (Iliad, xl. 147; xiii. 102) 
 
 The ethical maxira preachtd hv Odysseus in the Odyssey, not to after 
 boastful shouts over a slain enemy {Ovk. Sai//, Kra/ievoiuiv Irz* uvlpaaiv «VJt«- 
 raafT^ai, xxii. 412), is ahundaiulv violated in the Iliad. 
 
 * Herodot. ix. 78-79. Contrast this strong expression from Pausanias, 
 with the conduct of the Carthaginians towards the end of the PeloponneJian 
 war, after their capture of Seliiius in Sicily, where, after having put to death 
 16,000 person^, they mutilated the dead bodies, — /card Tb TrarpLov eT?of 
 (Piodor. xiii. f^-Sej. 
 
 * The Mosaic law recognizes this habit and duty on the part of the r^ 
 
 
 COMPOSITION FOB CRIMES. 
 
 08 
 
 is obliged to flee the country, unless he can prevail upon the 
 incensed kinsmen to accept of a valuable payment (we must not 
 ppeak of coined money, in the days of Homer) as satisfaction for 
 <heir slain comrade. They may, if they please, decline the offer, 
 and pci-sist in their right of revenge ; but if they accept, they are 
 bound to leave the offender unmolested, and he accordingly 
 remains at home without farther consequences. The chiefs in 
 agora do not seem to interfere, except to insure payment of the 
 
 stipulated sum. 
 
 Here we recognbe once more the characteristic attribute of 
 the Grecian heroic age, — the omnipotence of private force, tern- 
 pcred and guided by family sympathies, and the practice nullity 
 of that collective sovereign afterwards called The 6%, — who in 
 historical Greece becomes the central and paramount source of 
 obligation, but who appears yet only in the background, as a 
 germ of promise for the future. And the manner in which, in the 
 case of homicide, that germ was developed into a powerful reality, 
 presents an interesting field of comparison with other nations. 
 
 For the practice, here designated, of leaving the party guilty 
 of homicide to compromise by valuable payment with the rela- 
 tives of the deceased, and also of allowing to the latter a free 
 choice whether they would accept such compromise or enforce 
 their right of personal revenge, — has been remarked in many 
 rude communities, but is particularly memorable among the early 
 German tribes.* Among the many sepa rate Teutonic establish- 
 
 tives of the murdered man, and provides cities of refuge for the purpose of 
 gheltering the otfender in certain cases (Deuteron. xxxv. 13-14; Bauer, 
 Handbuch der HebraTschen Alterthiimer, sect. 51-52). 
 
 The relative who inherited the property of a murdered man was specially 
 obliged to avenge his death (H. Leo, Vorlesungen Qber die Geschichte des 
 Judischen Staats. — Vorl. iii. p. 35). 
 
 » « Suscipere tam inimicitias, seu patris, sea propinqui, quam amicitiaa, 
 necesse est. Nee iraplacabiles durant : loitur enim etiam homicidiura certo 
 pecoram armentorumque numero, recipi^ue satisfactionera universa domw.'* 
 (Tacit. German. 21.) Niebuhr, Beschreibung von Arabien, p. 32. 
 
 "An Indian feast (savs Loskiel, Mission of the United Brethren in North 
 America,) is seldom concluded without bloodshed. For the murder of a man 
 one hundred yards of wampum, and for that of a womtn two hundred 
 yards, must be paid br the murderer. If ho is too poor, which is commonly 
 the case, and his friends cannot or wiU not assist him, he most fly fix)m Ui« 
 resentment of the relations." 
 
94 
 
 Hlbi'ORY OF GREECE 
 
 
 ments which rose upon the ruins of the Western Empire <vi Roik«, 
 the right as well as duty of private revenge, for personal injury 
 or insult offered to any member of a family, — and the endeavor 
 to avert its effects by mc^ans of a pecuniary composition levied 
 upon the offender, chiefly as satisfaction to the i>arty injured, but 
 partly also as perquisite to the king, — was adopted as the basis 
 of their legislation. Thiis fundamental idea was worked out in 
 elaborate detail as to the valuation of the injury inflicted, where- 
 in one main circumstance was the rank, condition, and power of* 
 the sufferer. The object of the legislator was to preserve the 
 society from standing feuds, but at the same time to accord such 
 full satisfaction as would induce the injured person to waive his 
 acknowledged right of personal revenge, — the full luxury of 
 which, as it presented itself to the mind of an Homeric Greek, 
 may be read in more than one passage of the Iliad.' The Ger- 
 
 Kogge (Gerichtswesen der Germanen, capp. 1, 2, 3), Grimm (Deutsche 
 RcchtsalterthUmer, book v. cap. 1-2), and Eichhoni (Deutsches Privat-llecht. 
 sect. 48) have expounded this idea, and the consequences deduced from it 
 among the ancient Germans. 
 
 Aristotle alludes, as an illustration of the extreme silliness of ancient 
 Greek practices (tvii^i] Trufiirav)^ to a custom which he states to have still 
 continued at the ^olic Kyme, in cases of murder. If the accuser produced 
 in support of his charge a certain number of witnesses from his own kin- 
 dred, the person was held peremptorily guilty, — olov kv Kiy/j/ Tzepi rd tpovtuil 
 vouoc ioTiv, uv Try.fi'&oq tl Trapacr^^/rai fiaprvpoiv 6 Shokuv tov <pin'oi> tui> 
 cirov (TvyY(vuv, ivoxov elvat T(^ <(f6v(f} ruv f^vyovra (Polit. ii. 5, 12), This 
 presents a curious parallel with the old German institution of the Eides- 
 iielfem, or conjurators, who, though most frequently required and produced in 
 support of the party accused, were yet also brought by the party accusing. 
 See Bogge, sect. 36, p. 186 ; Grimm, p. 862. 
 
 ' The word ttolv^ indicates this satisfaction hij valuable pat/ment for wrong 
 done, especially for homicide that the Latin word puna originally meant 
 the same thing, may be infened from the old phrases dare pamis, pendere 
 panas. The most illustrative passage in the Iliad is that in which Ajax, in 
 the embassy undertaken to cimciliate Achilles, censures by comparison the 
 inexorable obstinacy of the latter in setting at naught the proffered presonti 
 of Agamemnon (D. ix. 627) : — 
 
 NiyA^f • teal fiev riq re KaoiyvijTOLo <p6voio 
 UoiviiVt fl ov iratddc idi^aro re^veturof • 
 Kai /i' 6 fiiv kv i^f^t) fiivei airovy tro'XX diroriaof ' 
 Tov <Jf r' kptirierat, Kpadiij Kal ^vfiog ayrpujpy 
 TLoiv^ de^afiivov 
 
 COMPOSITION FOR CRIMES. 
 
 9i 
 
 man codes begin by trying to bring about the acceptance of t 
 li.\ul pecuniai-y composition as a constant voluntary custom, an4 
 proceed ultimately to enforce it as a peremptory necessity : tho 
 idea of society is at first altogether subordinate, and its intiuencB 
 passes only by slow degrees from amicable arbitration into im- 
 perative control. 
 
 The Homeric society, in regard to this capital point in human 
 progression, is on a level with that of the Germau tribes ai 
 described by Tacitus. But the subsequent course of Greciai 
 legislation takes a direction completely different from that of the 
 German codes : the primitive and acknowledged right of private 
 revenge (unless where bought off by pecuniary payment), instead 
 of being developed into practical working, is superseded by more 
 comprehen^ive views of a public wrong requiring public inter- 
 vention, or by religious fears respecting the posthumous wrath of 
 the murdered person. In historical Athens, this right of private 
 revenge wtis discountenanced and put out of sight, even so early 
 as the Drakonian legislation,! and at last restricted to a few ex- 
 
 The TToa;) is, in its primitive sense, a genuine payment in valuable com- 
 modities serving as compensation (Iliad, iii. 290; v. 266 ; xiii. 659): but it 
 comes by a natural metaphor to signify the death of one or more Trojans, ai 
 a satisfaction for that of a Greek warrior who had just fallen (or vice wcr«4, 
 Iliad, xiv. 483; xvi. 398); sometimes even the notion of compensation 
 gcncrallv (xvii. 207 J. In the representation on the shield of Achilles, the 
 genuine proceeding about ttoivt) clearly appears : the question there tried is, 
 whether the payment stipulated as satisfaction for a person slain, has reallj 
 been made or not, — 6vo J' dvdpeg eveiKeov elvsKa noLvfjQ 'Xvdpbg dnotp^ipi- 
 rot', etc. (xviii. 498.) 
 
 The danger of an act of homicide is proportioned to the number and 
 power of the surviving relatives of the slain ; but even a small number ii 
 sulficient to necessitate flight ( Odyss. xxiii. 1 20J : on the other hand, a largo 
 body of relatives was the grand source of encouragement to an insolent 
 criminal (Odyss. xviii. 141). 
 
 An old law of Tralles in Lydia, enjoining a nominal ttolv^ of a medimntu 
 of beans to the relatives of a murdered person belonging to a contemptible 
 class of citizens, is noticed by Plutarch, Quaest. Graec. c. 46, p. 302. Evca 
 in the century preceding Herodotus, too, the Delphians gave a ttoivti ai 
 satisfaction for the murder of the fabulist ^sop ; which noiv^ was claimed 
 and received by the grandson of .^isop's master (Herodot. ii. 134. Plutarch. 
 Ser. Num. Vind. p. 556). 
 
 > See Lysias, De Csede Eratosthen. Orat L p. 94 ; Plutarch. Soloot i 
 • ', Demosthen. cont. Aristokrat. pp. 698-637. 
 
I 
 
 
 n 
 
 I 'i 
 
 9§ HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tremc and special cai^es; ivhile the murderer came to be consid- 
 ered, first as havings sinned against the gods, next as having 
 deeply injured the society, and thus at once as requiring absolu- 
 tion and deserving punishment. On the first of these two 
 grounds, he is interdicted from the agora and from all holy places, 
 as well as from public functions, even while yet uiAtripd and sim- 
 ply a suspected person ; for if this were not done, the wrath of 
 the gods would manifest itself in bad crops and other national 
 calamities. On the second ground, he is tried before the council 
 of Areiopagus, and ;f found guilty, is condemned to deatli, or 
 perhaps to disfranchisement and banishment.' The idea of a 
 propitiatory payment to the relatives of the deceased has ceased 
 
 Plato (Dc Lof^^. ix. pp. 871-874), in his copiou- iHiial sn<rprestions to deal 
 witli homicide, both intentional and accidental, concurs in general with the 
 old Attic law (see Mattljia, MisteliaiR-a ridlologica, vol. i. p. 1.01) : and as 
 he states with sufficient distinctness the grounds of his propositions, wc see 
 how completely the idea of a ri*jht to private or family reven«je is aKscnt 
 from his mind. In one laarticular case, he confers ujjon kinsmen the priv- 
 ilege of avenging their nnirdered relative (p. 871) ; but generally, he ratlier 
 ■eeks to enforce upon them strictly the duty of hrin<j:inf,^ the suspected mur- 
 derer to trial before the court By the Attic law. it was only the kinsmen 
 of the deceased who had the right of prosecuting for murder, — or the master, 
 if the deceased was an oUtnig (l)eniosthen. coiit. Kuerg. ct ]Miiesi[)ul. c. I8j; 
 they might by forgiveness shorten the term of hanisliment for the uninten- 
 tional murderer (Demosth. cont. Makart. p. 1069). They seem to have been 
 regarded, generally speaking, as religiously obliged, but not legally com. 
 pellable, to undertake this duty; compare Plato, Eathyi)liro, capp. 4 and 5. 
 
 ' Lysias, cont. Aporat. Or. xiii. p. 137. Antiplu.n Tetralog. i. 1, p. 629. 
 \\.avii6opov <5' ifilv iarl Toinh^ [iiapbv Kot hvayvov uvra, tl(; Til rfiiEvrj tuv 
 ^euv tiaiovTa fiiaiveii' r ,r a-; leiai' a^' ruv. irrl >'■ - - avru^ rparzt\aQ lovra 
 Gi^K.aTa-Kifiir'kdvaL roiY uvairiovr- tn )dp rovrov al re tKJtopiai yivovTai, 
 dvoTVX^h ^' o^ Tzpu^tii' fayiinravrai. 
 
 The three Tetralogies of Atitipho are all very instrucrive respecting the 
 legal procedure in cases of alleged homicide : as also t!ie Oration De Cade 
 Herodis (see capp. 1 and 2) — tov vojaov Keijuivov, rdv uKOKTeivavra uvra- 
 nffOai'tiv, etc. 
 
 The case of the Spartan Drakontius. one of the Ten Thousand Greeks 
 wh« served with Cyrus the younger, and permanently exiled from his country 
 in consequence of an involuntary murder committed during his boyhooij, 
 presents a pretty exact parallel to the fatal quarrel of Patroklus at dice, 
 when a boy, with tlie son of AmpWiamas, in consequence of which he wae 
 fn ecd to seek shelter under the roof of Peleua (compare Iliad, xxiii. 8^ 
 with Xenoph. Anabas. i\. 8. 25) 
 
 SOCILTT OF LEGENDARY GREECE. 
 
 97 
 
 
 ' 
 
 altogether to be admitted : it is the protection of society which 
 dictates, and the force of society which indicts, a measure of 
 puniskment calculated to deter for the future 
 
 3. The society of legendary Greece includes, besides the 
 chiefs, tJie general mass of freemen (Xaoi), among whom stand 
 out by special names certain professional men, such as the car- 
 penter, the smith, the leather-dresser, the leech, the prophet, the 
 bard, and the fisherman, i We have no means of appreciating 
 their condition. Though lots of arable land were assigned in 
 special property to individuals, with boundaries both carefully 
 marked and jealously watched,-2 yet the larger proportion of sur- 
 face was devoted to pasture. Cattle formed both the chief item 
 in the substance of a wealthy man, the chief means of making 
 payments, and the common ground of quarrels, — bread and meat, 
 in large quantities, being the constant food of every one.3 The 
 estates of the owners were tilled, and their cattle tended, mostly 
 by bought slaves, but to a certain degree also by poor freemen 
 called Thetes, working for hire and for stated periods. The prin- 
 cipal slaves, who were intrusted with the care of large herds of 
 oxen, swine, or goats, were of necessity men worthy of confidence, 
 their duties placing them away from their master's immediate 
 
 » Odyss. xvii, 384 ; xix. 135. Iliad, iv. 187; vii. 221. I know nothing 
 which better illustrates the idea of the Uomeric dT/fiioepyoi, — the herald, the 
 prophet, the carpenter, the leeeh, the bard, etc., — than the following descrip- 
 tion of the structure of an East Indian village (Mill's History of British 
 India, b. ii. c 5, p. 266) : *' A village, politically considered, resembles a cor- 
 poration or townshij). Its proper establishment of officers and servants coa- 
 Bists of the following descriptions: the potail, or head inhabitant, who 
 settles disputes and collects the revenue, etc. ; the curnum, who keeps the 
 accounts of cultivation, etc. ; the tallier ; the boundary-man ; the superinten- 
 dent of tanks and water-courses ; the Brahman, who performs the village 
 worship ; the schoolmaster ; the calendar Brahman, or astrologer, who pro- 
 claims the lucky or unpropitious periods for sowing or thrashing; the smith 
 and carpenter ; the potter ; the washerman ; the barber ; the cowkeeper ; the 
 doctor ; the dancing-girl who attends at rejoicings ; the musician, and the 
 
 poet.' 
 
 Each of these officers and servants {dTjfiioepyoi) is remunerated by a defi- 
 Bite perquisite — so much landed produce — out of the general crop of th« 
 Tillage (p. 264^. 
 
 * Iliad, xil 421 ; xxi. 405. 
 
 ' lUad, i. 155 ; ix. 154; xiv. 1»^ 
 
 vol* U- * 
 
 70Q. 
 
!| 
 
 I '" 
 
 98 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ^ye.1 They had other slaves subordinate to them, and appear to 
 have been well-treated ; the deep and unshaken attachmert of 
 Eumanis the swineherd and Philoetius the neatherd to the family 
 and aflairs of the absent Odysseus, is among the most iutejesting 
 points in the ancient epic. Slavery was a calamity, vhich in 
 that period of insecurity might befall any one : the chief who 
 conducted a freebooting expedition, if he succeeded, brought back 
 with him a numerous troop of slaves, as many as he could seize,^ 
 — if he failed, became very likely a slave himself: so that the 
 slave was often by birth of equal dignity with his master: Eu- 
 mieus was himself the son of a chief, conveyed away when a 
 cliild by his nurse, and sold by Phoenician kidnappers to Laertes. 
 A slave of this character, if he conducted himself well, might 
 often expect to be enfranchised by his master and placed in an 
 independent holding.^ 
 
 On the whole, the slavery of legendary Greece does not pre- 
 sent itself as existing under a peculiarly harsh form, especially 
 if we consider that ail the classes of society were then very much 
 i:pon a level in point of taste, sentiment, and instruction.4 In the 
 absence of legal seciurity or an effective social sanction, it is 
 probable that the condition of a slave under an average master, 
 may have been as good as that of the free Thete. The class of 
 slaves whose lot a[)pears to have been the most pitiable were the 
 
 * Odysseus ami other -hicfs of Ithaka had oxen, sheep, mules, etc., on the 
 continent and in Peloponnesus, under the care of herdsmen (Odyss. iv. 636; 
 xiv. 100). 
 
 Leukanor, kinjj of Bosporus, asks the Scythian Arsakoraas — Iloaa de 
 fiofjKfjfiara^ ^ Koaaq ufid::aq f.v^^f» ravra yap vfielc TrXovreire ] (Lucian, Tox- 
 aris, c. 45 ) The cnnneration of the property of Odysseus would have 
 placed the SooKTjfiara in the front line. 
 
 * ^fiu)al (5' df 'A;t;f Af If '/.t] Ina ar o ( Iliad, xviii. 28 : compare also Odyss. 
 L; 397; xxiii. 357 ; particularly xvii. 441). 
 
 * Odyss. xiv. 64; xv 412; see also xix. 78: Eurykleia was also of dig 
 niiied birth (i. 429). The questions put by Oiysseus to Euraseus, to which 
 the speech above referred to is an answer, indicate the proximate causes of 
 •lavery : " Was the city of your father sacked 1 or were you seized by pirates 
 Then alone with your sheep and oxen ?" (Odyss. xv. 385.) 
 
 Eumaens had purchased a slave for himself (Odyss. xiv. 448). . 
 
 * Tacitus, Mor. Germ. 21. "Dominum ac servum nullis edncatioiiifl 
 doliciis dignoscas : inter cadem pecora, in e&dem hamo, degunt,' etc. ( JaYO> 
 DfiJ. Sat. xiv. 167.) 
 
 < 
 
 > 
 
 JO 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 > 
 
 n 
 
 tn 
 
 C 
 
 i 
 
 t 
 
 •s. 
 
 § 
 
 I 
 
SLAVERY IN LEGENDARY GREECE. 
 
 99 
 
 .\ 
 
 femaiv's, — more numerous than the males, and performing the 
 principal work in the interior of the house. Not only do they 
 ht^eni to have been more harshly treated than the males, but they 
 were clunTed with the hardest and most exhausting labor which 
 the estaUishment of a Greek chief required: they brought in 
 water fn)n, the spring, and turned by hand the house-mills, which 
 ground tlie large (piatitity of flour consumed in his family.^ Tliis 
 oppressive task was })erformed generally by female slaves, in his- 
 toiical as well as legendary Greece.^ Spinning and weaving was 
 tlie constant occupation of women, whether free or slare, of every 
 rank and station : all tlie garments worn both by men and women 
 were iasliioncd at home, and Helen as well as Penelope is expert 
 and assiauous at the occupation;^ The daughters of Keleos at 
 Elciisis go to the well with their basins for water, and Nausikaa, 
 daughter of Alkinous,^ joins her female slaves in the business of 
 washing lier garments in tlie river. If we ai^ obliged to point 
 out the licrceness and insecurity of an early society, we may at 
 the same time note witli pleasure its characteristic simplicity of 
 
 > O.hss. vii. 104; xx. 116; Iliad vi. 457; compare the Book of Genesis, 
 ch. xi. 5. The expression of Telenuichus, when lie is jiroceedinp: to hang 
 up ilie female slaves who had mishehaved, is bitterly contemptuous: — 
 Mfj fiiv tyr) Kadapu) ^avurif) and ^Vfidv fkoifinv 
 Tuwr, etc. (Odyss. xxii. 464.) 
 
 The humble cstablisliment of Ilesiod's farmer does not possess a mill; he 
 has nothing better than a wooden j)estle and mortar for grinding or bruising 
 the corn ; both are constructed, and the wood cut from the trees, by his 
 own hand (0pp. Di. 423), though it seems that a professional carpenter 
 ("the servant of Athene,") is required to put together the plough (v. 430). 
 The Virgilian poem Moretum, (v. 24,) assigns a hand-mill even to the 
 humblest rural establishment. The instructive article "Corn Mills," in 
 Beckmann's Hist, of Inventions (vol. i. p. 227, Eng. transl.), collects all the 
 information available, about this subject. 
 
 » See Lvsias, Or. 1, p. 93 (De Csede Eratosthenis). Plutarch (Nou posM 
 suavitcrvivi secundum Epicurum, c. 21,p. 1X01),—^ axv ok tliic alerplt 
 'rpdg fiv?.T]v KivovfiivT], — and Kallimachus. (Hymn, ad Delum, 242,) — /in^ 
 «i9t inlal ^vaTOKe€c (ioyiovffiv aTierpideg^ — notice the overworked conditioa 
 
 of these women. 
 
 The "grinding slaves" {aTierpidec) arc expressly named in one of tbe 
 Laws of Ethelbert, king of Kent, and constitute the second class in point of 
 Talue among the female slaves (Law xi. Thorpe's Ancient Laws and Initi- 
 
 totes of England, vol. i p. 7> 
 ■ Odyss. iv. 131 xix 235. * Odyss. ri. 96 ; Hymn, ad Ddmdtr. 10ft 
 
 i] 
 
 fj 
 
 \ 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
100 
 
 ffrSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION. 
 
 101 
 
 manners : Ki'bcc <a, llachel, and the dauglitoi*s of Jetliro, h\ the 
 early Mosaic narrative, as well as the wife of the native Macedo- 
 nian chief (with whom the Temenid Perdiccas, ancestor o^ Thilip 
 and Alexander, tirst took service on retiring from Argos\ hakirig 
 lier own cakes on the hearth,' exhibit a j)arallrl in this respect to 
 the Homeric pictures. 
 
 AVe obtain no particulars resjwctingeithertlie common freemen 
 generally, or the })artieular class of them called Thetes. Th«;se 
 latter, engaged for s|MH'ial jobs, or at tiio harvest and other busy 
 gea-^otis of field labor, stem to have given their labor in exchange 
 for \>oanl and clothing: they are mentioned in the same line with 
 the slaves,- and were (as has been just observed) probably on thu 
 whole little better otf. The condition of a poor freeman in tliosQ 
 days, without a lot of hui«l of his own, going about from one tem- 
 porary job to another, and having no powerful fiunily and no 
 iiocial authority to look u[) to for protection, must hav«' been suf- 
 ficiently miserable. When Eumauis indulge«l his expectation of 
 being manumitted by his masters, he thought at the same time 
 /hat they would give him a wife, a house, and a lot of land near 
 to themselves ;^ without which collateral advantages, simple 
 manumission might perhaps have been no improvement in his 
 comlition. To be Thete in the service of u very poor farmer is 
 selected by Achilles as the maximum of human hardship : such a 
 person could not gi\ <' to his Thete the same ample tbod. and good 
 shoes and clothing, as the wealthy chief Eurymaclms, while he 
 would exact more severe labor.- It was j)robably among such 
 smaller occupants, who could not advance the price necessary to 
 purchase slaves, and were glad to sa\ f the cost of keep when 
 tJiev did not need service, that the Thetes found employment: 
 though we may conclude^ that the brave and strong amongst these 
 poor tVeemen found it preferable to accompany some freebooting 
 cliietand to live by t lit plunder acquired.* The exact Ilesiod 
 
 ' Herodot. viii. 137 * Odyss. iv. 643 ^ Qdyss. xiv. 64. 
 
 ♦ Compare Odyss. xi. 4D0, with xviii. 358. Klyta;mni*stra, in the Aya- 
 wttmndn of jEschylus, preaches a something similar doctrine to Kassandra, — 
 kow much kinder the up^tctoTrAovrot decirora} were towards their slavea, 
 Ihan masters who had risen by unexpected pro.^perity (Agamemn 1042). 
 
 * Thucvdid i. 5, trpdirovro npd^ X^oreiav. rjyovLiivuv nvfipuw ov to* 
 kAwaTuTuTuv, Kee^ov^ rov e^erepov avruv iveKa, Kai toi^ iicr&eveai, Tpo<^(^ 
 
 I 
 
 
 advises his farmer, whose work is chiefly performed by slaves, t<i 
 employ and maintain the Thete during summer-time, but to dis- 
 miss him as soon as the harvest is completely got in, and then to 
 take into his house for the winter a woman " without any child ;" 
 who would of course be more useful than the Thete for the indoor 
 occupations of that season.* 
 
 In a state of soci ^ty such as tliat which we have been describ- 
 ing, Grecian commerce was necessarily trifling and restricted. 
 The Homeric poems mark either total ignorance or great vague- 
 ness of apprehension respecting all that lies beyond the coasts of 
 Greece and Asia Minor, and the islands between or adjoining 
 them. Libya and Egypt are supposed so distant as to be known 
 only by name and hearsay : indeed, when the city of Kyrene 
 was founded, a century and a half after the first Olympiad, it 
 was difficult to find anywhere a Greek navigator who had ever 
 visited the coast of Libya, or wa'* fit to serve as guide to the 
 colonists.2 The mention of the Sikels in the Odyssey ,3 leads us to 
 
 ' Hesioil, Opp. Di. 459 — i<l>of)fiijT^^vai, dfiuc J/ua>cf re koI avro^ — and 
 
 603 : — 
 
 Airiip irrfjv dff 
 
 YliiVTa fiiov KaTif&riai InZ/pfievov lvdo-&i ocKOVy 
 
 (^r/Tu r' aoiKov jroieicr^aij koI utckvov IpL'&ov 
 
 Ai^etJ^ai KeXofiat ' xaXeirr} (T vnoiropTiq Ipi'do^. 
 
 The two words a olk ov noiela^ai seem hear to be taken together in 
 the sense of " dismiss the Thete," or " make him houseless ;" for when put 
 out of liis employer's house, he had no residence of his own. Gottling (ad 
 foe.), Nitzsch (ad Odyss. iv. 643), and Lehrs (Quaest. Epic. p. 205) all construe 
 uoiKov witli T^fjra, and rcj)resent Ilesiod as advising that the houseless Thete 
 should be at that moment taken on, just at the time when the summer's work 
 was finished. Lehrs (and seemingly Gottling also), sensible that this can 
 never have been the real meaning of the poet, would throw out the two lines 
 as spurious. I may remark farther that the translation of i?^c given by 
 Gottling — villicus — is inappropriate : it includes the idea of superintendenc* 
 over other laborers, which does not seem to hare belonged to the Thete in 
 any case. 
 
 There were a class of poor free women who made their living by taking 
 in wool to spin and perhaps to weave : the exactness cf their dealing, as w«l| 
 as the poor profit which they made, are attested by a touching Homeric 
 simile (Ihad, xiii. 434). See Iliad, vi. 289; xxiii. 742. Odyss. xv. 414. 
 
 • Herodot. iv. 151. Compare Ukert, Greographie der Griechen and Romer, 
 f»nl pp. 16-19. 
 
 Odyss. XX. 383 ; xixiv. 210. The identity of the Homeric Schcn.^ will 
 
 [ 
 
 Ht:. ' .!r ! glL!a| 
 
102 
 
 HJSTOKTf OF GREECE. 
 
 THE PHa:NICIAXS.-n^TERCnANGE. 
 
 103 
 
 conclude that Korkjra, Italy, and Sicily were not wholly urknowa 
 to the poet : among seafaring Greeks, the knowledge of tha 
 latter implied the knowledge of the two former, — since the habi- 
 tual track, even of a well-equipped Athenian trireme during the 
 Peloponnesian war, from Peloponntisus lo Sicily, was by Korkyra 
 and the Gulf of Tarentum. The Phokacans, long afterwards, 
 were the first Greeks who explored either the Adriatic or Tyi- 
 rhenian sea.^ Of the Euxine sea no knowledge is manifested in 
 Homer, who, as a general rule, presents to us the names oi dis- 
 tant regions only in <;onnection with romantic or monstrous ac- 
 companiments. The Kretans, and still more the Taphians (who 
 are supposed to have occupied the western islands off the coast of 
 Acarnania), are mentioned as skilful mariners, and the Taphian 
 Mentes professes to be conveying iron to Temesa to be there ex- 
 changed for copper f but both Taphians and Kretans are more 
 corsairs than traders.3 The strong sense of the dangers of the 
 sea, expressed by the poet Hesiod, and the imperfect structure of 
 the early Grecian ship, attested by Thucydides (who points out 
 the more recent date of that improved ship-building which pr& 
 vailed in his time), concur to demonstrate the Oaaii nftrvow rui^g^ 
 of nautical enterprise.^ 
 
 Such was the state of the Greeks, as traders, at a time whec 
 Babylon combined a crowded and industrious population with 
 extensive commerce, and when the Phcenician merchant-ships 
 visited in one direction the southern coast of Arabia, perhaps 
 even the island of Ceylon, — in another direction, the British 
 islands. 
 
 The Phoenician, the kinsman of the ancient Jew, exhibits the 
 type of character belonging to the latter, — with greater enterprise 
 
 Korkyra, and that of the Homeric Thrinakia with Sicily, appear to me not 
 at all made out. Both Welcker and Klausen treat the Phasakians as purely 
 mythical persons (see W. €. Miiller, De Corcyraeorum Republic^, Getting. 
 1^'^5, p. 9). 
 
 ' Herodot. i. 163. 
 
 • Nitzsch. ad Odyss. i. 1 81 ; Strabo, i. p. 6. The situation of Temesa, 
 whether it is to be placed in Italy or in Cyprus, has been a disputed point 
 ajnuii^ critics, both ancient and modem. 
 
 ' (>(ly»s. XV. 420. Ta^/ot, ATjlcropeg uvSpeg ; and xvi. 426. Iljinil It 
 Dt-UM'tcr. V. 12.']. 
 
 * Hesiod 0pp. Di. 615-r»8l ; Thncyd. i. 13. 
 
 and ingenuity, and less of religious exclusiveness, yet still differ* 
 eut from, and even antipathetic to, the character of the Greeks, 
 In the Homeric poems, he appears somewhat like the Jew of the 
 Middle Ages, a crafty trader, turning to profit the violence and 
 rapacity of others, — bringing them ornaments, decorations, the 
 finest and brightest products of the loom, gold, silver, electrura, 
 ivory, tin, etc., in exchange for which he received landed produce, 
 skins, wool, and slaves, the only commodities which even a 
 wealthy Greek chief of those early times had to oiler, — prepared 
 at the same time for dishonest gain, in any manner which chance 
 might throw in his way.^ He is, however, really a trader, not 
 undertaking expeditions with the deliberate purpose of surprise 
 and plunder, and standing distinguished in this respect from the 
 Tyrrhenian, Kretan, or Taphian pirate. Tin, ivory, and electrum, 
 all of which are acknowledged in the Homeric poems, were the 
 fruit of Phujuiciau trade with the West as well as with the East.3 
 
 * Odyss. xiv. 290 ; xv. 416. — 
 
 ^oivi^ JjXi^eif avfjp, uTzaTTj'^La c/(5a;f, 
 
 TpUKTTJCf Of ^// 7ro/.Xd KUK^ UV^puTZOLOLV t<l)f>} CI. 
 
 The interesting narrative given by Euraajus, of the manner in which he 
 fell into shivery, is a vivid picture of Phoenician dcjiling (compare Herodot. 
 1. 2-4. Iliad, vi. 290; xxiii. 743). Paris is reported to have visited Sidon, 
 and brought from thence women eminent for skill at the loom. The Cyprian 
 Verses (see the Arr^mcnt. ap. Dnntzer, p. 17) affirmed that Paris had landed 
 at Sidon^ and attacked and captured the city. Taphian corsairs kidnapped 
 slaves at Sidon (Odyss. xv. 424). 
 
 The ornaments or trinkets (fii^r/j/zara) which the Phoenician merchant 
 carries with him, seem to be the same as the 6aida?ia TroAAa, Hopnag re 
 yva/xTTTug t?' e/AKnr, etc. which Hephaestus was employed in fabricating 
 (Iliad, xviii. 400) under the protection of Thetis. 
 
 "Fallacissimum esse genus Phcenicum omnia raonumenta vetustatis atque 
 omnes historiaj nobis prodiderunt." (Cicero, Orat. Trium. partes ineditae, 
 ed. Mali, 1815, p. 13.) 
 
 * Ivory is frequently mentioned in Homer, who uses the word kAi(pai ex- 
 clusively to mean that substance, not to signify the animal. 
 
 The art of dyeing, especially with the various shades of purple, was in 
 after-ages one of the special excellences of the Phoenicians : yet Homer, 
 where he alludes in a simile to dyeing or staining, introduces a Mseonian ot 
 Karian woman as the performer of the process, not a Phoenician (Iliad, iv 
 -41). 
 
 What the electrum named in the Homeric poems really is cannot be posi 
 tirely determined. The wori in antiquity meant two different things : 1 
 
104 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 NATURE OF PH(EN[C1AN TRADE. 
 
 lOb 
 
 Thucjdides tells us that the Phoenicians and Karians, in Teiy 
 early periods, occupied many of the islands of the ^^gean, and 
 we know, from the striking remnant of their mining works which 
 Herodotus himself saw in Tluusus, off the coast of Thrace, tha^ 
 fhey had once extracted gold from the mountains of that island, 
 — at a period indeed very far back, since their occupation must 
 have been abandoned prior to the settlement of the poet Archilo- 
 chus.i Yet few ol' the islands in the iEgean were rich in such 
 valuable products, nor was it in the usual course of Phoenician 
 proceeding to occupy islands, except where there was an adjoining 
 mainland with whi(;h trade could be carried on. The traffic of 
 these active mariners required no permanent settlement, but as 
 occasional visitors they were convenient, in enabling a C^reek 
 chief to turn his captives to account, — to get rid of slaves or 
 friendless Thetes who were troublesome, — and to supply himself 
 with the metals, precious as well as useful.'-^ The halls of Alki- 
 
 •mber ; 2, an impure j::oId, coiituiuing as much as one-fifth or more of silver 
 (I'liny, il. N. xxxiii. 4). The passages in which we read the word in the 
 Odyssey do not fwsitivcly exclude cither of these meanings ; but they present 
 to us clectrum so much in juxtaj)osition with gold and silver each separately, 
 that perhaps the second meaning is more probable than the first. Herodotus 
 onderstands it to mean amber (iii. 115): Sophokles, on the contrary, employs 
 it to designate a metal akin to gold (Antigone, 1033). 
 
 See the dissertation of Buttmann, appended to liii collection of essays 
 caKed Mifthologiis, vol. ii. p. 337 ; also, Beckmann, History of Inventions, voL 
 iv. p. 12, Engl. Transl, "The ancients (observes the latter) used as a pecu- 
 liar metal a mixture of gold and silver, because they were not acquainted 
 with the art of separating them, and gave it the name of electrum.'" Dr 
 Thirlwall (Hist, of Gnjece, vol. i. p. 241 ) thinks thut the Homeric electrum is 
 amber ; on the contrary, Hiillmann thinks that it was a metallic substance 
 (Handels, Geschichte der Griechen, pp. 63-81). 
 
 Beckmann doubts whether the oldest Kaamrepot; of the Greeks was really 
 tin: he rather thinks that it was "the staunum of the Romans, the werk of 
 •ur smelting-houses, — that is, a mixture of lead, silver, and other accidental 
 metals." (Ibid. p. 20). The Greeks of Massalia procured tin from Britain, 
 through Ganl, by the Seine, the Saone, and the Rhone (Diodor. v. 22). 
 
 * Herodot. ii. 44 ; vi. 47. Archiloch. Fragm. 21-22, ed. Gkusf. CEnomaoB 
 sp. Easeb. Praep. Ev. r\. 7. Thucyd. i. 1& 
 
 The Greeks connected this Phoenician settlement in Thasos with the 
 legend of Kadmns and his sister Eordpa: Tbasvs, the eponymns of the 
 island, WM brother of Kadmiis. (Herod. •&.) 
 
 * The angry Laomedda Ihreateos wim Pgtoidte and ApoUo ask from 
 
 Dous and Menelaus glitter with gold, copper, and electrum ; while 
 large stocks of yet unemployed metal — gold, copper, and iron — 
 are stored up in the treasure-chamber of Odysseus and other 
 chiefs.i Coined money is unknown to the Homeric age, — th« 
 trade carried on being one of barter. In reference also to the 
 metals, it deserves to be remarked that the Homeric descriptiona 
 universally suppose copper, and not iron, to be employed for 
 aims, both offensive and defensive. By what process the copper 
 Nvjus tempered and hardened, so as to serve the purposes of the 
 warrior, we do not know;- but the use of iron for these objects 
 belongs to a hiter age, though the Works and Days of llesiod 
 6Ui)i)Ose this change to have been already iutroduced.3 
 
 hi::i (at the expiration of their term of servitude) the sti})ulated wages of 
 their labor, to out off their ears and send them otV to some distant islands 
 (Iliad, xxi. 454). Compare xxiv. 752. Odyss. xx. 383; xviii. 83. 
 ' ( )(lyss. iv. 73 ; vii. 85 ; xxi. fil. Iliad, ii. 226 , vi. 47. 
 ' Ste Millin. Mineralogie Homen<iuo, p. 74. That there are, however, 
 modis of temjioring co])per, so as to imi)art to it the hardness of steel, has 
 been proved by the cxpcriuK'nts of the Comtc de Caylus. 
 
 The Mas^agetai employed only copper — no iron — for their weapons 
 (Hen-aot. i. 215). 
 
 ' Hesiod. Opp I)i. 150-420. The examination of the various matters of 
 antiquity discoverable tlirou^:hput the north of Europe, as published by the 
 Anti(|uarian Society of C'oi)i'nliagen, recognizes a distinction of three suc- 
 cessive ages: 1. Implenients and arms of stone, bone, wood, etc. : little or 
 no use of metals at all ; clothing made of skins. 2. Implements and armg 
 of copper and gold, or rather bronze and gold ; little or no silver or iron. 
 Articles of gold and electrum are found belonging to this age, but none of 
 silver, nor any evidences of writing. 3. The age which follows this has be- 
 longing to it arms of iron, articles of silver, and some Runic inscriptions: 
 it is the last age of northern paganism, immediately preceding the introdac- 
 tion of Christianity (Lciifaden zur Nordischen Alterthumskunde, pp. 31, 57, 
 63. Copenhagen, 1837). 
 
 The Homeric age coincides with the second of these two periods. Silver 
 is comparatively little mentioned in Homer, while both bronze and gold &n 
 familiar metals. Iron also is rare, and seems employed only for agricultural 
 purposes — X(jva6v re, x^^*^^^' ^^ "• ' hcr&fira i>' v^avrrjv (Iliad, vi. 48; 
 Odyss. ii. 338 ; xiii. 136). The tP^<^o;tOfTf and the ;^:aX/cei)f are both men- 
 tioned in Homer, but workers in silver and iron are not known by any special 
 flame f Odyss. iii. 425-436). 
 
 " The hatchet, wimble, plane, and level, axe the tools mentioned by Uoni«r, 
 who appears to have been unaequ&inted with the saw, the S(pim'e, and thi 
 compass." (Gillies, Ili&t. of Creere, chap. ii. p. 61.) 
 
 5* 
 
 i 
 
 l\ 
 
U)6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MILITARY AND CIVIL RETROSrECT. 
 
 107 
 
 The mode of fighting among the Homeric heroes is not lesi 
 
 difFe'rent froiu .he liistoriciil limes, than the material of which 
 
 their arms were composed. The lIopUt<-.s or lioavy-arm<'d in- 
 
 fantry of historical Greece, maintained a close order and vvi.'U- 
 
 dressed line, charging the enemy with their spears protended at 
 
 even distance, and coming thus to close conflict without breaking 
 
 their rank: there were special troops, bowmen, shngers, etc, 
 
 armed with missiles, but the hoplite had no weapon to employ in 
 
 this manner. Tlie heroes of the Iliad and ()<ly>.ey, on the 
 
 contrary, habitiuiUv employ the spear as a mi^sih^ which tlicy 
 
 launeh with tremendous force : each of tliem is mounted m his 
 
 war-chariot, drawn by two horses, and calculated to contain the 
 
 warrior and his charioteer; in which latter capacity a tnend or 
 
 comrade will sometimes consent to MTve. Aavaneing in his 
 
 chariot at *ull sp< ed, in front of his own .nbbei-, he liurls las 
 
 spear against the enemy : sometimes, in.lee.l, he will tight on Ux>t, 
 
 mid haiHl to hand, but the eha.iot i^ umkiIIv wav to reeeive him 
 
 .f he chcK»ses, or to insure his retreat. The n.a<s of the (.reeks 
 
 and Trojans, coming forward to the charge, witliout any reguhir 
 
 Ptcp or cvcnly-maiiitaine<l line, make th<ir attack in the >ame way 
 
 bv hurlin- their spears. Each eliief wears habitually a long 
 
 t;;ord aiufa short dagger, besides his two spears to br launeheJ 
 
 forward, — the spear being also u.ed, if oreaMon serves, as a 
 
 weapon for thrust. Kverv man is protected by shield, helmet, 
 
 breastplate, and greaves: but the armor of the chiefs is greatly 
 
 euperior to that of the amimon men, while they themselves are 
 
 both stronger aiul more exi>ert in the use of their weai.ons 
 
 There arc a few bowmen, as rare exceptions, but the general 
 
 equipment and proceeding is a. here described. 
 
 Such loose array, immortalized as it is in the Iliad, is familiar 
 to every one; and the contrast which it presents, with those 
 inllexible ranks, and that irresistible simultaneous charge which 
 bore down the Persian throng at Tlata^a and Kunaxa,^ is such 
 
 " TheGuuls, kuoNv-n to Polvbius, seemingly the Cisalpine Gauls only, pos- 
 sessed all their property in cattle and gold.- t^pw^^a Kal ^pvcTc>f,-on 
 account ot tne easy transportability of both (Polyb. ii. 17). 
 
 » Tyit«tts, in his m^itary expressions, seems to conceive the Homenc mode 
 of hurling the spear as still prevalent, - cJopi; '^' ^^^^^^"^ / " \\" " ^J 
 (Frairm ix. Gaisford). Either he had his mind prepossessed with the Ua 
 
 as to illustrate forcibly the general difference between heroic 
 and historical Greece. While in the former, a few splendid 
 ligures stand forward, in prominent relief, the remainder being a 
 mere unorganized and ineffective nniss, — in the latter, these units 
 have been combine<l into a system, in which every man, olliecr 
 and soldier, has liis assigned place and duty, and the victorv, 
 when gained, is the joint work of all. Preeminent individual 
 prowess is indeed materially abridged, if not wholly excluded, — 
 no man can do more than maintain his station in tlie line :^ but 
 on the other hand, the grand purposes, aggressive or defensive, 
 for which alone arms are taken up, become more assured and 
 easy, and long-sighted combinations of the general are rendered 
 for the first time practicable, when he has a disciplined body of 
 men to obey him. In tracing the picture of civil society, we 
 have to remark a similar transition — we pass from llerakles, 
 Theseus, Jason, Achilles, to Solon, Pythagoras, and Pcrikles — 
 from *'the shepherd of his people," (to use the j)hrase in which 
 Homer depicts the good side of the heroic king,) to the legislator 
 who hitroduces, and the statesman who maintains, a preconcerted 
 system by which willing citizens consent to bind themselves. It" 
 commanding individual talent is not always to be found, the whole 
 community is so trained as to be able to maintain its course under 
 inferior leaders ; the rights as well as the duties of each citizen 
 being predetermined in the social order, according to principles 
 more or less wisely Uid down. The contrast is similar, and the 
 transition equally remarkable, in the civil as in the military 
 picture. In fact, the military organization of t}ie Grecian repub- 
 lics is an element of the greatest importance in respect to the 
 conspicuous part which they have played in human affairs,^ 
 
 mcric array, or else the close order and conjunct spears of the hopliles had 
 not yet been introduced duriag the second Messcnian war. 
 
 Thiersch and Schneidewin would substitute ^aXXovTec in place of /iaA- 
 Aai-rcf. Euripides (Androm, 695) has a similar expression, yet it does not 
 apply well to hoplites ; for one of the virtues of the hoplite consisted in car- 
 rying his spear steadily : ^oparuv KivrjaK; betokens a disorderly march, and 
 the want of steady courage and self-possession. See the remarks of Bra- 
 sidas upon the ranks of the Athenians under Kleon at Amphipolig (Tbucjd 
 r. 6). 
 
 * Euripid. Andromach. 696. 
 
 I'. 
 
 f ■ 
 I'' 
 
108 
 
 niSTORY OF GREECI'.. 
 
 SITES OF TOWNS. 
 
 10^ 
 
 thoir ciiperiority over other contem[)orary natn^ns in this respecf 
 beiujjf liardly less striking than it is in many others, as we shall 
 liave ot'cjision to see in a subsequent stage of this history. 
 
 K\ en lit the most advanced point of their tactics, the Greeks 
 could etfect little against a walled city, whilst the heroic weapons 
 and array were still less available for such an undertaking as a 
 eiege. Fortifications are a feature of the age deserving conside- 
 rable notice. Then? was a time, we are toM, in which the prim- 
 itive Greek towns or villages derived a precarious security, not 
 from their walls, but merely from sites lofty and dillicult of ac- 
 cess. They were not built immediately uj)on the shore, or close 
 Uf)on any convenient landing-[)lace, but at some distance inland, 
 on a rock or elevation which could not b(j ai)proached without 
 notice or scaled without ditliculty. It was thought sufficient at 
 that time to guard against ])iratical or marauding surprise : but as 
 the state of societ)- became assured, — as the chance of sudden 
 assault comparatively dimini-^hed and industry increased, — these 
 uninviting abodes were exchanged for more convenient sites on 
 the plain or declivity beneath; or a [)ortion of the latter was in- 
 closed within larger boundaries and joined on to the original 
 foundation, which tlius became the Acropolis of the new town. 
 Thebes, Alliens, Argos, etc., belonged to the latter class of cities ; 
 but there were in many parts of Greece deserted sites on hill- 
 tops, still retaining, even in historical times, the traces of former 
 habitation, and some of them still bearing the name of the old 
 towns. Among the mountainous parts of Krete, in iEgina and 
 Rhodes, m portions of Mount Ida and Parnassus, similar rem- 
 nants might be perceived.' 
 
 » 'H TToAma TToAff ill Algina. (Uerodot. vi. 88), ' AffTvirdAaia in Sam us 
 (Polycen. i. 23. 2, Etymol. Magn. v. ' AarvTruXaia) : it became seemingly the 
 acropolis of the subse<|ucnt city. 
 
 About the deserted sites in the lofty regions of Krete, see Theophrastus, 
 De Ventis, v 13, ed. Schneider, p 7«2 
 
 The site of RaXaicKtiific in Mount Ida,— • ^Jravw KijSprjvoc Kara rb fiereu- 
 poTarovTfji 'I(Jj7f (Strabo, xiii p 607), varepov di Karurepu oradioic i$V- 
 Kovra eif t/jv vvv Iktj^iv iieruKia'&uoav Taphos in Cyprus was the same 
 diflUnoe below the ancient Palae Paphos (Strabo, xiv. p. 683). 
 
 Near Mantineia in Arcadia was situated bpo^ kv T<f» ntdiift, rti ipeima It* 
 UavTiveia^ kxov ''^f lipx^ia^ ' taXelrai 6e rd x<^ptov htp' Vfiuv IlroXfc (Pausan. 
 viiL ia>4) See a sJ^iUr statement about the lofty sites of the aociect 
 
 Probably, in such primitive hill villages, a continuona circle q£ 
 wall would hardly be required as an additional means of defence, 
 and would oflen be rendered very difficult by the rugged nature 
 of the ground. But Thucydides represents the earliest Greeks 
 — those whom he conceives anterior to the Trojan war — as liv- 
 ing thus universally in unfortified villages, chiefly on account of 
 their poverty, rudeness, and thorough carelessness for the mor- 
 row. Oppressed, and held apart from each other by perpetual 
 fear, they had not yet contracted the sentiment of fixed abodes: 
 they were unwilling even to plant fruit-trees because of the un- 
 certainty of gathering the produce, — and were always reatly to 
 dislodge, because there was nothing to gain by staying, and a bare 
 Bubsistence might be had any where. He compares them to the 
 mountaineers of jEtolia and of the Ozolian Lokris in his own 
 time, who dwelt in their unfortified hill villages with little or no 
 Intercommunication, always armed and fighting, and subsisting 
 on the produce of their cattle and their woods,' — clothed in un- 
 dressed hides, and eating raw meat. 
 
 The picture given by Thucydides, of these very early and un- 
 
 town of Orchomeims (in Arcadia) {Paus. viii. 13, 2), of Nonakris (viii. 17, 
 5,) of Lusi (viii. 18, 3), Lykoreia on Parnassus (Pans. x. 6, 2; Strabo, ix. 
 ». 418). 
 
 Cornjiare als(3 Plato, Legg. iii. 2, pp. 678-679, who traces these lofty and 
 craggy dwellings, general among the earliest Grecian townships, to the com* 
 mencement of human society after an extensive deluge, which had covered 
 all the lower grounds and left only a few survivors. 
 
 * Tnucyd. i 2. ^alverai yap ij vvv *E/lAdf KaXovfihijf oi Tralat ^e/Saitaf 
 olKovfiev^^ u/lAa fieTavaaraaEi^ re ovaai ru nporepa, koI fu^6iuQ iKaaroi r^it 
 iavrCiv afroXeiirovreCt ^laCo/ievot iird Tivuv del irXeiovuv ' ttj^ yap ifiiropiof 
 ohK ovffij^f oid* kiTLiiLyvvvTt^ adeu^ aX2,T}Xoic, ovre Karit y^v oire 6iu ^aXuaarj^t 
 vefio/xevoi de tu cvtCjv iKaarot baov uiro^yVf Kal nEpiovmav ;fp7;iarwv ovK 
 ixovref ovSe yrjv <l>vTevovTegy uSijXov bv dTzoTe ri( ^Tre^i^wy, Kal artLXLOTui9 
 lifia 6vTuv, aXXog iK^aipTjaETaiy t^c ?"£ /cai?' Tjfiepav uvayKaiov Tpo<l>7Jc navrO' 
 Xov liv 7]yovp.evoL kTTiKparetVj ov xf^Xewuc dnaviaTavTO^ koX dt* avrb oirt 
 Ueye&ei ttoXedv itjx^ov, ovre r^ a^^-77 napa/rKEV^. 
 
 About the distant and unfortified villages and rude habits of the Jlitolians 
 and Lokrians, see Thucyd. iii. 94 ; Pausan. x. 38, 3 . also of the Cisalpine 
 Gauls, Polyb. ii. 1 7. 
 
 Both Thucydides and Aristotle seem tohaf e conceived the Homeric period 
 as mainly analogous to the (3upf3apoi of their own day — Avct V 'Aptorore- 
 \ijg XeyuVf OTi ToiavTa ael noiet *Ofi7jpog ola })v Tore ^v 6k roiavra rd 
 vaXatcL olanep Kal vvv kv roig Qao&dpotQ (Schol. Iliad, x. ISIK 
 
 / 
 
110 
 
 fflSTORY Of GREECE. 
 
 DEFENCE AGAINST AGGRESSION 
 
 111 
 
 recorded times, can only be taken as conjectural, — the conjectures, 
 indeed, of a statesman and a philosopher, — generalized too, in 
 part, from the many parti<'ular instances of contention and expul- 
 sion of chiefs which he found in tlie old legendary poems. The 
 Homeric poems, however, present to us a different picture. They 
 recognize wallcMl I owns, fixed abodes, strong local attachments, 
 hereditary individual property in land, vineyards planted and 
 carefully cultivated, established temples of the gods, and splendid 
 palaces of the chiefs.^ The description of Thucydides belongs 
 to a lower form of society, and bears more aniUogy to that which 
 the poet himself conceives jis antiquated and barbarous, — to the 
 savage Cyclopes, who dwell on tlie tops (»f mountains, in hollow 
 caves, without the jdougli, without vine or fruit culture, without 
 arts or instruments, — or to the primitive settlement of Dardanua 
 son of Zeus, on the higher ground of Ida, while it was reserved 
 for his descendants and successors to t'ounj the holy Ilium on the 
 plain.'- Ilium or Troy represents the peri'tMnion ot Homeric soci- 
 ety. It is a consecrated spot, containing temples of the gods as 
 well jvs the pahire of Friam, and surrounded by walls which are 
 the fabric of the gods ; while the auteeedent form of ruder society, 
 whieh the poet briefly glances at, is the parallel of that which the 
 theory of Thucydides ascribes to his own early semi-barbarous 
 
 ancestors. 
 
 Walled towns serve thus as one of the evidences, that a large 
 part of the population of Greece had, even in the Homeric 
 times, reached a level higher than that of the ^tolians and Lok- 
 rians of the days of Thucydides. The remains of Mykena3 and 
 Tiryns demonstrat<i the massy and Cyclopian style of architecture 
 employed in thos«! early days : but we may remark that, while 
 mo<lern observers seem inclined to treat the remains of the former 
 is very imposing, :md signiticant of a great princely family, Thu- 
 tydides, on the eontrary, speaks of it as a small place, and labors 
 
 • C)dyss. vi. 10; respecting Nausithous. } Ast king of the l'ha;akians : 
 'Afi<pl 6e Tvixog iWaaae 7To/ei, kcI idei^aTo oIkov^, 
 Ka.1 v7joi>^ Tzoifjae \>e(2»v, koL kdiiccaT^ apovpaq. 
 The vineyard, olive-ground, and garden cf LaCrtes, is a model of careful 
 tuhivation (Odyss. xxiv. 245); see also the shieli of Achi/lrs (lliaJ, xril. 
 Ml-580), and the Kalydonian plain (Iliad, ix. 575). 
 » Odvss. X. 106-1 l.-i ; Iliad, xx. 216. 
 
 to elude the inference, which might be deduced from its insignifi- 
 cant size, in disproof of the grandeur of Agamemnon, i 8ucL 
 fortifications supplied a means of defence incomparably superior 
 to those of attack. Indeed, even in historical Greece, and after 
 the invention of battering engines, no city could be taken except 
 by surprise or blockade, or by ruining the country around, and 
 thus depriving the inhabitants of their means of subsistence. 
 And in the two great sieges of the legendary time, Troy and 
 Thebes, the former is captured by the stratagem of the wooden 
 horse, while the latter is evacuated by its citizens, under tlie 
 warning of the gods, after their defeat in the field. 
 
 This decided superiority of the means of defence over those of 
 Attack, in rude ages, has been one of the grand promotive causes 
 both of the growth of civic life and of the general march of hu- 
 man improvement. It has enabled the progressive portions of 
 mankind not only to maintain their acquisitions against the pre- 
 datory instincts of the ruder and poorer, and to surmount the 
 ditUculties of incipient organization, — but ultimately, when their 
 organization has been matured, both to acquire predominance, and 
 to uphold it until their own disciplined habits have in part passed 
 to their enemies. The important truth here stated is illustrated 
 not less by the history of ancient Greece, than by that of modem 
 Europe during the Middle Ages. The Homeric chief, combining 
 superior rank with superior force, and ready to rob at every con- 
 venient opportunity, greatly resembles the feudal baron of the 
 Middle Ages, but circumstances absorb him more easily into a city 
 life, and convert the independent j>otentate into the member of a 
 governing aristocracy.'-^ TraiHc by sea continued to be beset with 
 
 * Thucyd. i. 10. Kal un fxtu MvK:/tai fUKpuv rjv, ^ el ri rCtv Tore rru/ua/xa 
 tifj u^La;(f}itJV 6oKel eivai, etc. 
 
 ' Nagelsbach, Homerische Theologie, Abschn. v. sect. 54. Hesiod strongly 
 Condemns robbery, — Aujr aya^/j, upna^ 6e kokt], ^^avdroio doreipa (0pp. 1)1. 
 356, comp. 320) ; but the sentiment of the Grecian heroic poetry seems not 
 to go against it, — it is looked uj)OU as a natural employment of superior 
 force, — kvTofiaroL tJ' uya^ol deikiJv em Saira^ laaiv (Athenae. v. p. 178, 
 comp. Pindar, Fragm. 48, ed. Dissen.)- the long spear, sword, an 1 breast- 
 plate, of the Krctan Hybreas, constitute his wealth (Skolion 27, p. 877 ; Poet. 
 Lyric, ed. Bergk), wherewith he ploughs and reaps, — while the u iwarlike, 
 irho dare not or cannot wield these weapons, fall at his feet, and call him 
 The Great King. The feeling is different in the later age of Demfttrini 
 
 f. 
 
112 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 danger from pirates, long after it had become tolerably assured 
 by land : the " wet ways ** have always been the last resort of 
 lawlessness and violence, and the ^gean, in particular, has in all 
 times suffered more than other waters under this calamity. 
 
 Aggressions of the sort here described were of course most 
 numerous in those earHest times when the ^Egean was not yet 
 an Hellenic sea, and when many of the Cyclades were occupied, 
 DDt by Greeks, but by Karians, — pcrha[»3 by Phajnicians : the 
 number of Kariau sepulchres discovered iu the sacred island of 
 
 Poliorketes (about 310 B. 0.) : in the Ithyphallic Ovle, addressed to liiin at hii 
 entrance into Athena, robbery is treated as worthy only of ^tolians : — 
 
 AiTuXiKdv yap apiriiaai to. tuv rriXa^, 
 Nwi dk, Kai Tu n6p/>u>. — 
 
 CPoet. Lyr. xxv. p. 453, ed. Schneid.) 
 
 The roblxjries of powerful men, and even highway robbery <,'eMeralIy 
 found considerable approving sentiment in the Middle Ages. "All Europe 
 Cobserves Mr. Hallam, Hist. Mid. A^r ch. viii. part 3, p. 247) was a scene of 
 intestine anarchy during the Middle Ages : and though England was far less 
 exposed to the scourge of private war than most nations on the continent, 
 we should find, could we recover the local annals of every country, such an 
 accumulation of petty rapine and tumult, as would almost alienate us from 
 
 the Ut)erty which served to engender it Highway mbbery whs from 
 
 the earliest times a sort of national crime We know how long the out 
 
 laws of Sherwood lived m tradition 5 men who, like some of their betters. 
 have been permitted to redeem, by a few acts of generosity, the just ignominy 
 of extensive crimes. Tlu se, indeed, were the heroes of vulgar applause ; but 
 when sucli a judge as Sir John Fortescue could exult, that more Englishmen 
 were hanged for robbery in one year than French in seven, — and that, if an 
 Englishman be poor, and set another having riches, which via>i be taken from him 
 by might, he will not spare to do so, — it may be perceived how thoroughly 
 these sentiments had pervaded tlw public mind." 
 
 The robberies habitually committed by the noblesse of France and Ger- 
 many during the Middle Ages, so much worse than anything in England, — 
 and those of the highland chiefs even in later times, — are too well known to 
 need any references : as to France, an ample catalogue is set forth in 
 Pulaure's Histoire de la Noblesse (Paris, 1792). The confederations of the 
 Gorman cities chiefly originated in the necessity of keeping the roads and 
 rivers open for the transit of men and goods against the nobles who infested 
 tne h.^\ roads. Scaligcr might have found a parallel to the ?.rifrral of th« 
 heroa ai:es in the noblej-se of la Rouerguc, as it stood even in the 16th 
 f • 'T!M n'li h he thus describes: "In Comitatu Rodez pessirni sont 
 • «v tiMituT: nee p<ssunt reprimi." (ap. Dulaure, c. 9.) 
 
 PIRACY 
 
 113 
 
 Delus seems to attest such occupation as an historical fact.i Ac- 
 cording to Ihe legendary account, espoused both by Herodotus 
 and by ThucydidOs, it was the Kretan Minos who subdued these 
 islands and established his sons as rulers in them ; either expel- 
 ling the Karians, or reducing them to servitude and tribute.* 
 Thuoydides presumes that he must of course have put dowa 
 [)iracy, in order to enable his tribute to be remitted in safety, 
 like the Athenians diiring the time of their hegemony.3 Upon 
 tlie legendary thahi^socraty of Minos, I have already remarked 
 in another place :4 it is sullicient here to repeat, that, in the 
 Homeric poems (long subsecpient to Minos in the current chro- 
 nology), we lind piracy both frequent and held in honorable esti- 
 mation, as Thucydides himself emphatically tells us, — remarking, 
 moreover, that the vessels of those early days were only half 
 decked, built and equipi>ed after the piratical fashion,-^ in a man- 
 ner ui)on which the nautical men of his time looked back with 
 disdain. Improved and enlarged shipbuilding, and the trireme, 
 or ship with three banks of oars, common for warlike purposes 
 during the Persian invasion, began only with the growing skill, 
 activity, and importance of the Corinthians, three quarters of a 
 century after tlie first OIympiad.6 Corinth, even in the Homeric 
 poems, is distinguished by the epithet of wealthy, which it ac- 
 quired principally from its remarkable situation on the Isthmus, 
 and from its two harbors of Lechaium and Kenchreae, the one on 
 the Corinthian, the other on the Saronic gulf. It thus supplied 
 a convenient connection between Epirus and Italy on the on* 
 Bide, and the iEgean sea on the other, without imposing ui)on 
 the unskilful and timid navigator of those days the necessity of 
 circumnavigating Peloponnesus. 
 
 The extension of Grecian traffic and shipping is manifested 
 
 * Thncyd. i. 4-8. r^j- vvv ' E?.A7fviK'?^^ ^alaacT}^. 
 
 » Herodot. i. 171 ; Thucyd. i. 4-8. IsokratSs (Panathenaic. p. 241) takes 
 credit to Athens for having finally expelled the Karians out of these islands 
 St the time of the Ionic emigration. 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 4. TO TE lytTTiKbv 6 ^ € I K d c, tca^vP^i U rrii ^aUarni^ If 
 haov r/6vvaTo, rov raj- TrpoaoSovc /^aUov Uvai avTi^). 
 
 ♦ See the preceding volume of this History, Chap. xii. p. 227. 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 10. rv naXaiC, rpoirt^ ^trrpixurepw itaofaKevaaiUva, 
 « Thncyd. i 13. 
 
 TOL,U. ^^ 
 
114 
 
 HISTORY OF GREi:CE. 
 
 HOMEKIC ASTRONOMY. 
 
 115 
 
 by a comparison of the Homeric with the Ilesiodic poems ; in 
 res[)ect to knowle«lge of places and countrie:^, — the latter being 
 probably referable to dates between b. c. 740 and b. c. G40. In 
 llomer, acquaintance is shown (the accuracy of sucli acquaint- 
 ance, however, being exaggerated by Strabo and other friendly 
 critics) with continental Greece and its neighboring islands, with 
 Krete and the principal inlands of the u-Egeun, and with Thrace, 
 the Troad, the Hellespont, and Asia Minor between Paphlagonia 
 northward and Lykia southward. The Sikels are mentioned in 
 the Odyssey, and Sikania in the last book of that poem, but no- 
 thing is said to evince a knowlege of Italy or the reaiiiles of the 
 western world. Libya, Egypt, and Phoenike, are known by 
 name and by vagoe hearsay, but the Nile is only mentioned as 
 »* the river Egypt :" while the Euxine sea is not mentioned at 
 all.^ In the Hesiodic |)oems, on the other hand, the Nile, the 
 Ister, the Phtxsis, and the Eridanus, are all specitied by name ;- 
 Mount ^tna, and the island of Ortygia near to Syracuse, the 
 Tyrrhenians and Ligurians in the west, and the Scythians in the 
 north, were also noticed.' Indeed, within forty years after the 
 first Olympiad, tlui cities of Korkyra and Syracuse were founded 
 from Corinth, — tlie first of a numerous and powerful series of 
 colonies, destined to impart a new character both to the south of 
 Italy and to Sicil) . 
 
 In reference to the astronomy and physics of the Homeric 
 Greek, it has already been remarked that he connected together 
 the sensible phenomena which form the subject matter of these 
 Bciences by threads of religious and personifying fi^icy, to which 
 the real analogies among them were made subordinate ; and that 
 these analogies did not begin to be studied l)y themselves, apart 
 
 • See Voelcker, Homerische Geographic, ch. ill. sect. 55-63. He has 
 brougrht to bear much learning and ingenuity to identify the places visited 
 by Odysseus with reil lands, but the attempt is not successful Compare 
 also Ukert, Horn. Geog. vol. i. p. 14, and the valuable treatises of J. H 
 Voss, Alte Weltkunde, annexed to the second volume of his Kritische Bla^ 
 ter (Stuttgart, 1828), pp. 245-413. Voss is the father of just views respect- 
 ing Homeric geography. 
 
 • Hesiod. Theog. ;{38-340. 
 
 • Heaiod. Theogoui. 1016; Hesiod. Fragm. 190-194, ed. Gottling; Strab<\ 
 l.p 16; Tii. p 300 Compare Ukert, Geographic der Griechen und Romer, 
 I n.a7. 
 
 Vol. 9 * 
 
 froiL the religious element by which they had been at first over- 
 laid, until the age of Thales, — coinciding as that period did 
 with the increased opportunities for visiting Egypt and the inte- 
 rior of Asia. The Greeks obtained access in both of these coun- 
 tries to an enlarged stock of astronomical observations, to the use 
 of the gnomon, or sundial, ^ and to a more exact determination 
 of the length of the solar year,2 than that which served as the 
 
 ' The Greeks learned from the Babylonians, ttoP.ov kuI ; vt'ofiova kuI ri 
 SuuKaUhKa fit-pea tt/c vuiprjg (llerodot. ii. 109). In my first edition, 1 had 
 interpreted the word -nolov in Herodotus erroneously. I no vv believe it to 
 mean the same as horologium, the circular plate upon which the vertical 
 srnomon projected its shadow, marked so as to indicate the hour of the day, 
 — twelve hours between sunrise and sunset ; see Ideler, Handbuch dei Chro- 
 nologic, vol. i. p. 233. Respecting the opinions of Tliales, see the same 
 work, part ii. pp. 18-57; Plutarch, dc Tlacit. Philosophor. ii. c. 12, Aristot. 
 de c'a-lo, ii. 13. Costard, llisc and Progress of Astronomy among the 
 
 Ancients, p. 99. 
 
 * We have very litde information respecting the early Grecian mode of 
 computing time, and we know that though all the dificrent states computed 
 by lunar periods, yet most, if not all, of them had diticrent names of months 
 as well as ditlcrcnt days of beginning and ending the!/ months. All their 
 immediate computations, however, were made by months : the lunar period 
 was their immediate standard of reference for determining their festivals 
 and for other purposes, the solar period being resorted to only as a correc- 
 tive, to bring the same months constantly into the same seasons of the year 
 Their original month had thirty days, and was divided into three decades, as 
 it continued to be during the times of historical Athens (Hesiod. 0pp. Di. 
 766). In order to bring this lunar period more nearly into harmony with 
 the sun, they intercalated every year an additional month : so that their 
 years included alternately twelve months and thirteen months, each month 
 of thirty days. This period was called a Dieteris, — sometimes a Trictcris 
 Solon is said to have first introduced the fashion of months differing in 
 length, varying alternately from thirty to twenty-nine days. It appears, how- 
 ever, that Herodotus had present to his mind Ac Dieteric cycle, or yeari 
 alternating between thirteen months and twelve months (each month of 
 thirty days), and no other (Hcrodot. i. 32; compare ii. 104). As astrono- 
 mical knowledge improved, longer and more elaborate periods were calcu- 
 lated, exhibiting a nearer correspondence between an integral number of 
 lunations and an integral number of solar years. First, we find a period of 
 four years ; next, the OctaCteris, or period of eight years, or seventy-nine 
 lunar months ; lastly, the Metonic period of nineteen years, or 235 Innai 
 months. How far any of these larger periods were ever legally authorized, 
 or brought into civil usage, even at Athens, is matter of much doubt Se« 
 Ideler, Uber die Astronomischea Beobachtungen der Alten, pp, 176-lW: 
 Macrobius, Saturnal. i. 13. 
 
i 
 
 116 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 R j 
 
 basis of their various lunar i)erio(Is. It is pretended that Thale« 
 was the first wlio {jredicted an eclipse of the sun, — not, indeed; 
 accurately, but with large limits of error as to the time of its 
 occurrence, — and tliat he al»,o |>ossessed so profound an acquaint- 
 aiice with meteorological phenomena and probabilities, as to be 
 able to foretell an abundant crop of olives for the comuig year, 
 and to realize a large .^um of nioncv by an olive speculation.' 
 
 From Thales downward we trace a succession of astronomical 
 and physical theories, more or less successful, into which I do 
 not intend here to enter: it is sufficient at present to contrast 
 the father of the Ionic philosophy with the times preceding him, 
 and to mark the first commencement of scientific prediction ^long 
 the Greeks, however imperfect at the outset, as distinguished 
 from the inspired dicta of i)rophets or onides, and from those 
 special signs of the purposes of the gods, which formed the habit- 
 ual reliance of the Homeric man.^ We shall see these two modes 
 of anticipating the future, — one based upon the philosophical, 
 the other upon the religious appreciation of nature, — running 
 simultaneously on throughout Grecian history, and sharing be" 
 tween them in unequal portions the empire of the Greek mind ; 
 the former acquiring lx)th greater predominance and wider appli-' 
 cation among the intellectual men, and i)artially restricting, but 
 never abolishing, the s|K)ntaneous employment o*' the latter among 
 the vulgar. 
 
 Neither coined money, nor the art of writing,3 nor painting, 
 nor sculpture, nor imaginative architecture, belong to the Ho^ 
 meric and Hesiodic times. Such rudiments of^arts, destined 
 ultimately to acquire so great a development in Greece, as may 
 have existed in these early days, served only as a sort of nucleus 
 to the fancy of the poet, to shape out for himself the fabulous 
 
 • Herodot. i. 74 ; ArisDt Polit. i. 4, 5. 
 
 • Od^ss. iii 1 73. — 
 
 'H riof^ev di ^edv ^'> eiv repac airilp df ijuiv 
 
 Aei^e, Kol ijvCtyu ire?.ayo^ fjiiaov etc EdjSoiav 
 
 Tefiveiv, etc. 
 Compare Odysa. xx. 100; Iliad, i. 62; Eorip. Suppl. 216-230. 
 
 The oftfiara XvypH mentioned in the IHad, vi. 168, if they prove any. 
 thing, are rather an evidence against, than for, the sxiBtence of alphabeticai 
 ""*— at the time£ when iJie Uiad was oomoosed 
 
 EPIC POETRY. 
 
 117 
 
 creations ascribed to Hephapstus or Daedalus. No statues of the 
 godf, not even of wood, are mentioned in the Homeric poems. 
 All the many varieties, in Grecian music, poetry, and dancing,— 
 the former chiefly borrowed from Lydia and Phrygia, — date 
 from a period considerably later than the first Olympiad : Ter- 
 pander, the earliest musician whose date is assigned, and the in- 
 ventor of the harp with seven strings instead of that with four 
 strings, does not come until the 2Gth Olympiad, or 676 B. c. : the 
 poet Archilochus is nearly of the same date. The iambic and 
 elegiac metres — the first deviations from the primitive epic strain 
 and subject — do not reach up to the year 700 B. c. 
 
 It is this epic poetry which forms at once both the undoubted 
 prerogative and the solitary jewel of the earliest era of Greece. 
 Of the many epic poems which existed in Greece during the 
 eight century before the Christian era, none have been preserved 
 except the Iliad and Odyssey : the j3iLthiopis of Arktinns, the 
 Ilias Minor of Lesches, the Cyprian Verses, the Capture of 
 (Echalia, the Returns of the Heroes from Troy, the Thebais and 
 the Epigoni, — several of them passing in antiquity under the 
 name of Homer, — have all been lost. But the two which re- 
 main are quite sufficient to demonstrate in the primitive Greeks, 
 a mental organization unparalleled in any other people, and pow- 
 ers of invention and expression which prepared, as well as fore- 
 boded, the future eminence of the nation in all the various de- 
 partments to which thought and language can be applied. Great 
 as the power of thought afterwards became among tlie Greeks, 
 their f>ower of expression was still greater : in the former, other 
 nations have built upon their foundations and surpassed them, — 
 in the latter, they still remained unrivalled. It is not too much 
 to say that this flexible, emphatic, and transparent character of 
 the language as an instrument of communication, — its perfect 
 aptitude for narrative and discussion, as well as for stirring all 
 the veins of human emotion without ever forfeiting that character 
 of simplicity which adapts it to all men and all times, — may be 
 traced mainly to the existence and the wide-spread influence of 
 the Iliad and Odyssey. To us, these compositions are interesting 
 as beautiful poems, depicting life and manners, and unfolding cer- 
 tain types of character with the utmost vivacity and artlessness: 
 to their original hearer, they possessed all these sources of attrae 
 
m f ^ 
 
 lis 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tion, together with others more powerful still, to which we ar« 
 now strangers. Upon him, they bore with the full weight and 
 solemnity of history and religion combined, while the charm of 
 the poetry was only secoi dary and instrumental. The poet was 
 lljcn the teacher and preacher of the community, not simply the 
 amuser of their lei.^ure hours : they looked to him for revelations 
 «f the unknown j)a.st and for expositions of the attributes and 
 dispensations of the gods, just as tliey consulted the prophet for 
 his privileged insight into the future. The ancient epic com- 
 prised many different poets and poetical compositions, which ful- 
 filled this purpose with more or less completeness : but it is the 
 exclusive prerogative of the Iliad and Odyssey, that, after the 
 minds of men had ce;ised to be in full hurmony with their original 
 d-isign, they yet retaiined their empire by the mere force of secon- 
 d^fry excellences : while the remaining e])ics — (hough scrvino' 
 as food for the curious, and as storehouses for lojjo'T^raphers, 
 tragedians, and artists — never seem to have acquired very wide 
 poptdarity even among intellectual Greeks. 
 
 I sb«dl, in the succeeding chaj)t^r, give some accoujit of the 
 epic cycle, of its relation to tlni Homeric poems, and of the 
 genera^ evidences respecting tho Kt*<ir, both as to antiquity and 
 authorship. 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 GEI-CIAN EPIC. -HOMERIC Pv)FMS. 
 
 At the head of the once abundant epical compositions of 
 Greece, most of them unfortunately lost, stand the Iliad and 
 Odyssey, with the immortal name of Homer a^tAched to each 
 of them, embracing separate portions of the comprehensive 
 legend of Troy. They form the type of what may be called 
 the heroic epic of the Greeks, as distinguished from the gene- 
 alogical, in which latter species some of the Hesiodic poems — 
 the Catalogue of TV amen, the Koiai, and the Naup^tia— • 
 
 \ 
 
 ■ » — I JWI... 
 
 DIDACTIC HEXAMETER POETRY. 
 
 n9 
 
 stood conspicuous. Poems of the Homeric charactjr (if so it 
 may be called, though the expresssion is very indefinite,) — being 
 confined to one of the great events, or great personages of Gre 
 cian legendary antiquity, and comprising a limited number of 
 characters, all contemporaneous, made some approach, more or less 
 successful, to acertain poetical unity ; while the Hesiodic poems, 
 tamer in their spirit, and unconfined both as to time and as to 
 persons, strung together distinct events without any obvious view 
 to concentration of interest, — without legitimate beginning or 
 end.i Between these two extremes there were many gradations : 
 biographical poems, such as the Herakleia, or Theseis, recounting 
 all the principal exploits performed by one single hero, present a 
 character intermediate between the two, but bordering more 
 closely on the Hesiodic. Even the hymns to the gods, which 
 pass under the name of Homer, are epical fragments, narrating 
 particular exploits or adventures of the god commemorated. 
 
 Both the didactic and the mystico-religious poetry of Greece 
 began in Hexameter verse, — the characteristic and consecrated 
 measure of the epic ;2 but they belong to a different species, and 
 burst out from a different vein in the Grecian mind. It seems to 
 have been the more common belief among the historical Greeks, 
 that such mystic effusions were more ancient than their narrative 
 poems, and that Orpheus, Musaius, Linus, Olen, Pamphus, \nd 
 even Hesiod, etc., etc., the reputed composers of the former, were 
 of earlier date than Homer. But there is no evidence to sustain 
 this opinion, and the presumptions are all against it. Those com- 
 positions, which in the sixth century before the Christian era 
 passed under the name of Orpheus and Musaeus, seem to have 
 been unquestionably post-Homeric, nor can we even admit the 
 modified conclusion of Hermann, Ulrici, and others, that the 
 mystic poetry as a genus (putting aside the particular composi* 
 tions falsely ascribed to Orpheus and others) preceded in order 
 of time the narrative.^ 
 
 * Aristot- Poet. c. 17-37. He points out and explains the superior struc 
 turc of the Iliad and Odyssey, as compared with the semi Homeric and bio 
 graphical poems : but he takes no notice of the Hesiodic, or genealogical. 
 
 ■ Aristot. Poetic, c. 41. He considers the Hexameter to be the natural 
 measure of narrative poetry : any other would be unseemly. 
 
 * Ulrici, Geschichte des Griechischen Epos, 5te Vorlesung, pp. 96-lCO 
 G. Hermann, Ueber Homer und Sappho, in his Opnscala, torn, fi >. 80. 
 
 '1 
 
120 
 
 mi»ri;KY OF GRKECE. 
 
 Besides the Iliad and Odyssey, we make out the titles of 
 ahoiil thirty lost epic (K»eiiis, sometimes with a brief* hint of theif 
 contents. 
 
 Concerning the legeo 1 of Troy there were five : the Cyprian 
 V(;rses, the TEthiopis, and tlie Capture of Troy, both ascribed to 
 Arktinus ; the lesser Iliad, ascribed to Lesche^ ; the Returns (of 
 the Heroes from Troy), to which the name of Hagias of Troezen 
 id attached ; and the Telegonia, by Eugammon, a continuation of 
 the Odyssey. Two poems, — the Thebais and the Epigoni (per- 
 haps two parts of one and the same poem) were devoted to the 
 legend of Tliebes, — the two sieges of that city by the Argeians. 
 Another poem, called CEdi podia, had for its subject the tragical 
 destiny of (Edipus and his family ; and perhaps that which is 
 cited as Euroi)ia, or verses on Europa, may have comprehended 
 the tale of her brother Kadmus, the mythical founder of ThehesJ 
 The exploits of Ilerakles were celebrated in two com[>ositions, 
 ?ach called Ilerakleia, by Kinsethon and Pisander, — probably 
 also in many others, of which the memory has not been preserved. 
 The capture of Giichalia, by Ilerakles, formed the subject of a 
 separate epic. Two other poems, the iEgimius and the Minyas, 
 are supposed to have be(3n founded on other achievements of this 
 hero, — the effective aid which he lent to the Dorian king -^gi- 
 mius against the Lapitlue, his descent to the under-world for the 
 purpose of rescuing the imprisoned Theseus, and his conquest of 
 the city of the Minyaj, tiie poweiful Orchomenus.^ 
 
 Other epic poems — tlie PhorOnis, the Danais, the Alkmaionis, 
 the Atthis, the Amazonia — we know only by name, and can just 
 guess obscurely at their contents so far as the name indicates.^ 
 
 The superior antiquity of Orpheus ns compared with Homer passed as a 
 received position to the classical Homans (Horat. Art Poet. 392). 
 
 ' Respecting these lost epics, see*Duntzer, Collection of the Fragmenta 
 Epicor. Grrecorum ; Wiillner, De Cyclo Epico, pp. 43-66 : and Mr. Fynes 
 Clinton's Chronology, vol. iii. pp. 349-359. 
 
 * Welcker, Der Epische Kvklus, pp. 256-266 ; Apollodor. ii. 7, 7 ; Diodoi 
 iv. 37 ; 0. Mailer, Dorians, i 28. 
 
 'Welcker (Der Epische Kyklus, p. 209) considers the Alkmaeonis as the 
 same with the Epigoni, and the Atthia of Hegesinous the same with th« 
 Amazonia: in Saidas (v. 'O/ufjpoi) the latter is among the poems ascribed to 
 Homer. 
 
 Leutsch (Thebaidos Cyclicje Relitjui.e. pp. 12-14) views the ThebaTi and 
 ♦he Epigoni as diflferent parts of the same uoom. 
 
 'ft V 
 
 GRECIAN EPIC. 
 
 121 
 
 Tlie Titanomachia, the Gigantomachia, and the Corhithiaca, 
 three compositions all ascribed to Eumelus, afford by means of 
 their titles an idea somewhat clearer of the matter which they 
 comprised. The Theogony ascribed to Hesiod still exists, though 
 partially corrupt and mutilated : but there seem to have been 
 other poems, now lost, of the like import and title. 
 
 Of the poems composed in the Hesiodic style, diffusive and 
 full of genealogical detail, the principal were, the Catalogue of 
 Women and the Great Eoiai ; the latter of which, indeed, seem3 
 to have been a continuation of the former. A large number of 
 the celebrated women of heroic Greece were commemorated in 
 these poems, one after the other, without any other than an arbi- 
 trary bond of connection. The Marriage of Keyx, — the Me- 
 lainpodia, — and a string of fables called Astronomia, are farther 
 ascribed to Hesiod : and the poem above mentioned, called -^gi- 
 mius, is also sometimes connected with his name, sometimes with 
 that of Kerkops. The Naupaktian Verses (so called, probably, 
 fi-om the birthplace of their author), and the genealogies of 
 Kinaethon and Asius, were compositions of the same rambling 
 character, as far as we can judge from the scanty fragments re- 
 maining.' The Orchomenian epic poet Chersias, of whom two 
 lines only are preserved to us by Pausanias, may reasonably be 
 referred to the same category .2 
 
 The oldest of the epic poets, to whom any date, uirrying with 
 it the semblance of authority, is assigned, is Arktinus of Miletus, 
 who is placed by Eusebius in the first Olympiad, and by Suidas 
 in the ninth. Eugammon, the author of the Telegonia, and the 
 latest of the catalogue, is placed in the fifty-third Olympiad, b. c. 
 566. Between these two we find Asius and Lesches, about the 
 thirtieth Olympiad, — a time when the vein of the ancient epic 
 was drying up, and when other forms of poetr}' — elegiac, iambic, 
 iyric, and choric — had either already arisen, or were on the 
 point of arising, to compete with it.3 
 
 ^ See the Fragments of Hesiod, Eumelus, Kinaethon, and Asiiu, in tht 
 collections of Marktscheffel, Duntier, Gottling, and Gaisford 
 
 I have already, in going over the ground of Grecian legend, referred to afl 
 Iheae lost poems, in their proper places. 
 
 ■ Panaan. ix. 38, 6 ; Plutarch, Sept Sap. Con v. p. 156. 
 
 » See Mr. Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, about the date of Arktinna, toI S p 860 
 
 TOI«. II. 6 
 
122 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 It has already been stated in a former chapter, that in the early 
 commencements of prose-writing, llekatajus, Fherekydes, and 
 Other logographers, made it their business to extract from the 
 ancient fables something like a continuous narrative, chronolog- 
 ically arranged. It was upon a principle somewhat analogous 
 that the Alexandrine literati, about the second century before the 
 Christian era,' arranged the multitude of old epic poets into a 
 series founded on the supposed order of time in the events nar* 
 rated, — beginning with the intermarriage of Uranus and G;e, 
 and the Theogony, — and concluding with the death of Odysseus 
 by the hands of his son Telegonus. This collection passed by 
 the name of the Epic Cycle, and the poets, whase compositions 
 were embodied in it, were termed Cyclic poets. Doubtless, the 
 epical treasures of the Alexandrine library were larger than had 
 ever before been brought together and submitted to men both of 
 learning and leisure : so that multiplication of such compositions 
 in the same museum rendered it advisable to establish some fixed 
 order of perusal, and to copy them in one corrected and uniform 
 edition.^ It pleased the critics to determine precedence, neither 
 
 * Perhaps Zenodotus, th*; superintendent of the Alexandrine library under 
 rtolemy Philadelphus, in tlie third century b. c. : there is a Scholion on 
 riimtus, published not many years ago by Osann, and since more fully by 
 Kitschl, — " Caecius in commento Comoediarum Aristophanis in Pluto, — 
 Alexander ^tolus, et Lycophron Chaleidensis, et Zenodotus Ephcsius, im- 
 pulsa regis Ptolemaei, Philudelphi cognoraento, artis poetices libros in unum 
 collegerunt et in ordinera redegerunt. Alexander tragoedias, Lycophron 
 comoedias, Zenodotus vcro Iloraeri poeraata et relic^uorum illustrium poet- 
 arum." See Lange, Ueber die Kyklischen Dichter, p. 56 (Mainz. 18.37); 
 Welcker, Der Epische Kyklus, p. 8 ; Ritschl, Die Alexandrinischen Biblio- 
 theken, p. 3 (Breslau, 1838). 
 
 Lange disputes the suflSciency of this passage as proof that Zenodotua 
 was the framer of the Epic Cycle : his grounds are, however, unsatisfactory 
 to me. 
 
 ' That there existed a cyclic ropy or edition of the Odyssey {ff kvkXlkt}) ig 
 proved by two passages in the Scholia (xvi. 195; xvii. 25), with Boeckh'a 
 remark in Battmann's edition : this was the Odyssey copied or edited along 
 with the other poems of th<; cycle. 
 
 Our word to edit — or edition — suggests ideas not exactly suited to the 
 proceedings of the Alexandrine library, in which wc cannot expect to find 
 anything like what is nov/ called publication. That magnificent establish- 
 ment, possessing a large collection of epical manuscripts, and ample means 
 of every kind at command, would naturally desire to have these compoii 
 
 EPIC CYCLE. 
 
 128 
 
 by antiquity nor by excellence of the compositions themselves, 
 but by the supposed sequence of narrative, so that the whole 
 taken together constituted a readable aggregate of epical an- 
 tiquity. 
 
 Much obscurity* exists, and many ditferent opinions have been 
 expressed, respecting this Epic Cycle : I view it, not as an ex- 
 clusive canon, but simply as an all-comprehensive classification, 
 vith a new edition founded thereupon. It would include all the 
 epic poems in the library older than the Telegonia, and apt for 
 continuous narrative ; it would exclude only two classes, — first, 
 the recent epic poets, such as Panyasis and Antimachus ; next, 
 the genealogical and desultory poems, such as the Catalogue of 
 Women, the Eoiai, and others, which could not be made to fit 
 in to any chronological sequence of events.^ Both the Iliad and 
 
 tions put in order and corrected by skilful hands, and then carefully copied 
 for the use of the library. Such copy constitutes the cyclic edition : they 
 might perhaps cause or permit duplicates to be made, but the iKdoaig or 
 edition was complete without them. 
 
 ' Respecting the great confusion in which the Epic Cycle is involved, see 
 the striking declaration of Buttmann, Addenda ad Scholia in Odysseum, p 
 575 : compare the opinions of the ditferent critics, as enumerated at the end 
 of Welcker's treatise, Episch. Kyk. pp. 420-453. 
 
 ' Our information respecting the Epic Cycle is derived from Eutychius 
 Proclus. a literary man of Sicca during the second century of the Christian 
 era, and tutor of Marcus Antoninus (Jul. Capitolin. Vit. Marc. c. 2), — not 
 from Proclus, called Diadochus, the new-Platonic philosopher of the fifth 
 century, as Heyne, Mr. Clinton, and others have imagined. The fragments 
 from his work called Chrestomathia, give arguments of several of the losi 
 cyclic poems connected with the Siege of Troy, communicating the import 
 ant fact that the Iliad and Odyssey were included in the cycle, and giving 
 the following description of the principle upon which it was arranged: 
 Lialafi^dvEL de nepl rov ^.eyofievov Ittikov kvk/mv^ 6f upx^TaL fiev kK r^i 
 
 OVf)dvov Kol Tm bfioXoyovuevrig fii^euc Kal ireparovTai 6 IrriKdi 
 
 KVK?iOC, U 6ia<^6po}v TTOiTjTuv avfnr?LT)povfiEVOC, fiixpt rfjc uTTo^aaeug 'OSvaaim 
 
 \eyet 6e uc rov kniKOV kvkIov ra iroirjfiara diaau^erai Kai aizovdd- 
 
 ^rai Tolc KoV.olg ovx ovru Std, ttjv upeT7}v, ug Slim rr^v uKoXov^iav tu> 
 iv avry npay [xutuv (ap. Photium, cod. 239). 
 
 This much-commented passage, while it clearly marks out the cardina] 
 principle of the Epic Cycle {uKoXovT^ta Tzpayfidruv)^ neither aflRrms nor de- 
 nies anything respecting the excellence of the constituent poems. Proclm 
 gpeaks of the taste common in his own time {atrovda^ercu, toZ( voX'kolc) i 
 tiwre was not much relish in his time for these poems as socfa, but people 
 
 
 
 I I 
 
11 
 
 i 
 
 124 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the Odyssey were comprised in the Cycle, so that the denominar 
 tion of cyclic poet did not originally or designedly carry with it 
 any association of contempt But as the great and capital poems 
 were chiefly spoken of bj' themselves, or by the title of their 
 own separate authors, so the general name of poets of the VycU 
 came gradually to be applied only to the worst, and thus to imply 
 Tulgarity or common-place ; the more so, as many of the inferior 
 compositions included in the collection seem to have been anony- 
 mous, and their authors in consequence describable only under 
 some such common designation as that of the cyclic poets. It is 
 in this manner that we are to explain the disparaging sentiment 
 connected by Horace and others with the idea of a cyclic writer, 
 though no such sentiment was implied in the original meaning of 
 the Epic Cycle. 
 
 The poems of the Cycle were thus mentioned in contrast and 
 antithesis with Homer,' though originally the Iliad and Odyssey 
 
 were much interested in the sequence of epical events. The abstracts which 
 he himself drew up in the Ibrnj of arguments of several poems, show that 
 he adapted himself to this t^iste. We cannot collect from his words tha^ he 
 intended to express any opinion of his own respecting the goodness or bad- 
 ness of the cyclic poems. 
 
 * The pradual growth of a contemptuous feeling towards the seriftor 
 tjfclicns (Horat. Ars. Poetic. 136), which was not originally implied in the 
 name, is well set forth by Limge (Ueber die Kyklisch. Dicht. pp. 53-56). 
 
 Both Lange (pp. 36-41 ), however, and Ulrici (Geschichte des Griech. Epos, 
 9te Vorles. p. 418) adopt another opinion with respect to the cycle, which I 
 think unsupported and inadmissible, — that the several constituent poems 
 were not received into it entire (/. c with only such changes as were requi- 
 site for a corrected text ), but; cut down and abridged in such manner as to 
 produce an exact continuit}' of narrative. Lange even imagines that the 
 cyclic Odys.scy was thus dealt with. But there seems no evidence to coun- 
 tenance this theory, which would convert the Alexandrine literati from critics 
 into logographers. That the cyclic Iliad and Odyssey were the same in the 
 main (allowing for corrections of text) as the common Iliad and Odys.sey, i^ 
 •hown by the fact, that Proclus merely names them in the series without 
 giving any abstract of their contents : they were too well known to render 
 inch a process necessary. Nor does either the language of Proclus, or that 
 of Ciecius as applied to Zenodotus, indicate any transformation applied to 
 Ihe poets whose works are described to have been brought together and put 
 iDIo a certain order. 
 
 The hypothesis of Lange is founded upon the idea that the {uxoXov^ia 
 nfioyuiruv) continuity of narrated events mast necessarily have been exact 
 
 SHI 
 
 M ■1| 
 
 
 WHAT THE EPIC CYCLE. 
 
 126 
 
 had both been included among them : and this alteration of t\m 
 meamntr of the word has given birth to s mistake as to the pri- 
 mary purpose of the classification, as if it had been designed espe- 
 cially to part off the inferior epic productions from Homer. Bui 
 while some critics are disposed to distinguish the cyclic poets too 
 pointedly from Homer, I conceive that Welcker goes too much 
 into the other extreme, and identifies the Cycle too closely with 
 that poet. He construes it as a classification deliberately framed 
 to comprise all the various productions of the Homeric epic, 
 with its unity of action and comparative paucity, both of persona 
 and adventures, — as opposed to the Hesiodic epic, crowded with 
 beparate persons and pedigrees, and destitute of central action as 
 well as of closing catastrophe. This opinion does, indeed, coincide 
 10 a great degree with the fact, inasmuch as few of the Hesiodic 
 epics appear to have been included in the Cycle : to say that 
 none were included, would be too much, for we cannot venture to 
 pet aside either the Theogony or the ^gimius; but we may 
 account for their absence perfectly well without supposing any 
 design to exclude them, for it is obvious that their rambling 
 character (like that of the Metamorphoses of Ovid) forbade the 
 possibility of interweaving them in any continuous series. Con- 
 tinuity in the series of narrated events, coupled with a certain 
 degree of antiquity in the poems, being the principle on which 
 the arrangement called the Epic Cycle was based, the Hesiodic 
 poems generally were excluded, not from any preconceived in- 
 tention, but because they could not be brought into harmony with 
 such orderly reading. 
 
 What were the particular poems which it comprised, we can- 
 not now determine with exactness. Welcker arranges them aa 
 
 and without break, as if the whole constituted one work. But this woull 
 not be possible, let the framers do what they might : moreover, in the attempt, 
 the individuality of all the constituent poets must have been sacrificed, ia 
 euch manner that it would be absurd to discuss their separate merits. 
 
 The continuity of narrative in the Epic Cycle could not have been more 
 than approximate, — as complete as the poems composing it would admit: 
 nevertheless, it would be correct to say that the poems were arranged in 
 series upon this principle and upon no other. The librarians might have 
 arranged in like manner the vast mass of tragedies in their possetaion (if 
 they had chosen to do so) upon the principle of sequence in the subiectl 
 httd they done so, the series would have formed a Tragic Cyek. 
 
 i 
 
 
 '^\\ 
 
 
126 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I I 
 
 follows : Titanomachia, Danais, Amazonia (or Atthis), CEdipo- 
 dia, Thebais (or Expedition of Amphiaraus), Epigoni (or Alk* 
 maeonis), Minyas (or Phokais), Capture of CEchalia, Cyprian 
 Verses, Iliad, -^thiopis, Lesser Iliad, Iliupersis or the Taking 
 of Troy, Returns of the Heroes, Odyssey, and Telegonia. Wuell- 
 ner, Lange, and Mr. Fynes Clinton enlarge the list of cyclic 
 poems still farther.* But all guch reconstructions of the Cycle 
 are conjectural and destitute of authority : the only poems which 
 we can affirm on positi^•e grounds to have been comprehended in 
 it, are, first, the series respecting the heroes of Troy, from the 
 Cypria to the Telegonia, of which Proclus has preserved the 
 arguments, and which includes the Iliad and Odyssey, — next, 
 the old Thebais, which is expressly termed cyclic,^ in order to dis- 
 tinguish it from the potm of the same name composed by Anti- 
 machus. In regard to other particular compositions, we have no 
 evidence to guide us, either for admission or exclusion, except 
 our general views as to the scheme upon which the Cycle was 
 framed. If my idea of that scheme be correct, the Alexandrine 
 critics arranged therein all their old epical treasures, down to 
 the Telegonia, — the good as well as the bad ; gold, silver, and 
 iron, — provided only tltey could be pieced in with the narrative 
 series. But I cannot ^'enture to include, as Mr. Clinton does, 
 the Europia, the Phoroois, and other poems of which we know 
 only the names, because it is uncertain whether their contents 
 were such as to fulfil their primary condition : nor can I concur 
 with him in thinking that, where there were two or more poems 
 of the same title and subject, one of them must necessarily have 
 been adopted into the C}x*le to the exclusion of the others. There 
 may have been two Theogonies, or two Herakleias, both compre- 
 hended in the Cycle ; the purpose being (as I before remarked), 
 not to sift the better from the worse, but to determine some fixed 
 order, convenient for reading and reference, amidst a multiplicity 
 of scattered compositions, as the basis of a new, entire, and cor- 
 lected edition. 
 
 ' Welcker, Der Epische Kyklus, pp. 37-41 ; Wuellner, De Cyclo Epico^ 
 p. 43, teq. ; Lange, Ueber die Kyklischen Dichter, p. 47 ; Clinton, Fasti Heir 
 lenid, vol. i. p. 349. 
 
 • Schol Pindar Olymp. vL 26 ; Athenae. xl p. 465. 
 
 HOMER. 
 
 117 
 
 Wbatevrr may have been the principle on which the cyclic 
 poems were originally strung together, they are all now lost, 
 except those two unrivalled diamonds, whose brightness, dim« 
 ming all the rest, has alone sufficed to confer imperishable glorj 
 even upon the earliest pha'^e of Grecian life. It has been the 
 natural privilege of the Iliad and Odyssey, from the rise of 
 Grecian philology down to the present day, to provoke an in- 
 tense curiosity, which, even in the historical and literary days of 
 Greece, there were no assured facts to satisfy. These composi- 
 tions are the monuments of an age essentially religious and poet- 
 ical, but essentially also unphilosophical, unreflecting, and unre- 
 cording : the nature of the case forbids our having any authentic 
 transmitted knowledge respecting such a period ; and the lesson 
 must be learned, hard and painful though it be, that no imaginable 
 reach of critical acumen will of itself enable us to discriminate 
 fancy from reality, in the absence of a tolerable stock of evidence. 
 After the numberless comments and acrimonious controversies* 
 to which the Homeric poems have given rise, it can hardly be 
 said that any of the points originally doubtful have obtained a 
 solution such as to command universal acquiescence. To glance 
 at all these controversies, however briefly, would far transcend 
 the limits of the present work ; but the most abridged Grecian 
 history would be incomplete without some inquiry respecting the 
 Poet (so the Greek critics in their veneration denominated Homer), 
 and the productions which pass now, or have heretofore passed, 
 under his name. 
 
 Who or what was Homer ? What date is to be assigned to 
 him ? What were his compositions ? 
 
 A person, putting these questions to Greeks of different towns 
 and ages, would have obtained answers widely discrepant and 
 contradictory. Since the invaluable labors of Aristarchus and 
 
 ' It is a memorable illustration of that bitterness which has so much dis- 
 graced the controversies of literary men in aJt ages (I fear, we can make no 
 exception), when we find Pausanias saying that he had examined into the 
 ages of Hesiod and Homer with the most laborious scrutiny, but that he 
 knew too well the calumnious dispositions of contemporary critics and poets. 
 Id declare what conclusion he had come to (Paos. ix. 30, 2) : Uepl de 'Hmodow 
 re iiXiKiac Koi 'Of^^pov, noXvirpayftovijaavTi i( rd &Kpi0i<rraTov o^ fioi ypd^eiw 
 ^di> fjVj iiriarafievift rd (ptXairiop aXkotf re aU obx fytuna baoi Kar* ifti M 
 roifaet r^ hruv Ka&euni9Keaa». 
 
 ;n 
 
 I' 
 
198 
 
 HISTORY OT SSEECt. 
 
 the otLer Alexandrine critics on the text of the Iliad and Odys- 
 •ey, it has, indeed, been customary to regard those two (putting 
 aside the Hymns, and a few other minor poems) as being thd 
 only genuine Homeric compositions : and the literary men called 
 Chorizontes, or the Separators, at the head of whom were Xenon 
 and Hellanikus, endeavored still farther to reduce the number 
 by disconnecting the Iliad and Odyssey, and pointing out that 
 both could not be the work of the same author. Throughout 
 the whole course of Grecian antiquity, the Iliad and the Odys- 
 •ey, and the Hymns, have been received as Homeric : but if we 
 go back to the time of Herodotus, or still earlier, we find that 
 several other epics also were ascribed to Homer, — and there 
 were not wanting » critics, earlier than the Alexandrine age, who 
 reg'.irded the whole Epic Cycle, together with the satirical poem 
 called Margites, the Batrachorayomachia, and other smaller pieces, 
 as Homeric works. The cyclic Thebais and the Epigoni (whether 
 lUey be two separate jK)ems, or the latter a second part of the 
 lormer) were in early days currently ascribed to Homer: the 
 eame was the case with the Cyprian Verses: some even attri* 
 buted to him several other poems,^ the Capture of CEchalia, the 
 Lesser Iliad, the Phokais, and the Amazonia. The title of the 
 poem called Thebais to be styled Homeric, depends upon evi- 
 dence more ancient tlian any which can be produced to authenti- 
 cate the Iliad and Odyssey: for Kallinus, the ancient elegiac 
 poet (B. c. 640), mentioned Homer as the author of it, — and his 
 opinion was shared by many other competent judges.^ From the 
 
 ' See the extract of Proclus, in Thotius Cod. 239. 
 
 * Suidas, V. 'Ofiripoc] Eustath. ad Iliad, ii. p. 330. 
 
 * Pausan. ix. 9, 3. The name of Kallinus in that passage seems certainly 
 correct: To 6e irrri ravra (the Thebais) KaUuvog, iKfuKOjuevoc avTuv ii 
 .tv^/ij/v, l^Tjaev 'OfiTjpov rov noifiaavTa eivat • KaAAtv^ 6e rroTiXoi re 
 a^toi Xoyov Kara Tavrd. eyvotaav. 'Eyu de r^v nolriaiv tuvttjv fiera ye 'U 
 Aa Kol 'Odvaaeiav kTraivQ (la^iaTa. 
 
 To the same purpose f.he author of the Certamen of Hesiod and Hon- , 
 and the paeudo- Herodotus (Vit. Homer, c. 9). The 'A^<j>tapiu kU^aaia, 
 illudcd to in Sttidas as the production of Homer, may be reasonably identi- 
 fied with the Thebais (Siudas, r. 'O^fipoi). 
 
 The cyclographer Dionysius, who affirmed that Homer had lived botk m 
 the Theban and tlie Trojan wars, mast have recognized that poet as oollMi 
 *f the Thebais as well as of the Iliad (ap. Procl. ad Hesiod. p. 3). 
 
 HOMER. 
 
 va 
 
 rcmarka. le description given by Herodotus, of the expulsion of the 
 rhapsodes from Siky6n, by the despot Kleisthen^s, in the time 
 of Solon (about B. c. 580), we may form a probable judgment 
 thi't the Thebais and the Epigoni were then rhapsodized at Sik- 
 joFi as Homeric productions, i And it is clear from the language 
 
 Ilerodot. v. 67. Y.leLO'&hrig yup ^Apyeioifft TToXefxricrac — tovto fiev, /5a- 
 ^Hf)Sovg Inavae kv "Lmvuvi ayuvi^eo'&ai^ tuv 'O/nijpeicjv kneuv eiveKO, on 
 *Apyeioi re kgI 'Apyof rd. 7roAA<i nuvra vfiviaTai — tovto dc, ijp^ov yup rjv 
 Kai eoTi iv airy Ty uyopa tvjv I,iKVuviuv ^kdpijaTov tov TaAaot*, tovtov 
 ii:v&vfirjae 6 KXeia^evijc^ kovTa ^ kpyeiov, iKpaXelv Ik Tjjg X'^PVQ- Herodotus 
 then goes on to relate how Kleisthenes carried into effect his purpose of 
 banishing the hero Adrastus : first, he applied to the Delphian Apollo, for 
 permission to do so directly, and avowedly ; next, on that permission being 
 refused, he made application to the Thcbans, to allow him to introduce into 
 Sikyon their hero Melanippus, the bitter enemy of Adrastus in the old 
 Theban legend ; by their consent, he consecrated a chapel to Melanippus in 
 Jie most commanding part of the Sikyonian agora, and then transferred to 
 :he newly-imported hero the rites and festivals wliich had before been given 
 to Adrastus. 
 
 Taking in conjunction all the points of this xery curious tale, I venture to 
 think that the rhapsodes incurred the displeasure of Kleisthenes by reciting, 
 not the Homeric Iliad, but the Homeric TlielxUs and Epigoni. The former docs 
 not answer the conditions of the narrative : the latter fulfils them accurately. 
 
 1. It cannot be said, even by the utmost latitude of speech, that, in the 
 Iliad,*' Little else is sung except Argos and the Argeians," — ("in illis ubique 
 fere nonnisi Argos et Argivi celebrantur, ") — is the translation of Schweigh- 
 hauser^: Argos is rarely mentioned in it, and never exalted into any primary 
 importance : the Argeians, as inhabitants of Argos separately, are never dO 
 ticed at all: that name is applied in the Iliad, in common with the Achaeam 
 and Danaans, only to the general body of Greeks, — and even applied to 
 them much less frequently than the name of AchiEans. 
 
 2. Adrastus is twice, and only twice, mentioned in the Iliad, as master of 
 |]ie wonderful horse Areion, and as father-in-law of Tydeus ; but he makes 
 no figure in the poem, and attracts no interest. 
 
 Wherefore, though Kleisthenes Tuight have been ever so much incensed 
 against Argos and Adrastus, there seems no reason why he should have 
 interdicted the rhapsodes from reciting the Hiad. On the other hand, the 
 Thebais and Epigoni could not fail to provoke him especially. For, 
 
 1. Argos and its inhabitants were the grand subject of the poem, and the 
 proclaimed assailants in the expedition against Thebes. Though the poem 
 itself is lost, the first line of it has been preserved (Lentsch, Thcb. Cje\ 
 Reliq. p. 5; compare Sophocles, (Ed. Col. 380 with Scholia), — 
 
 'kpyoi ueide, ^eu. iroXvdixJfiov^ iv&e» avoicref, Ptc. 
 
 VOL. U S* •OOi 
 
 i 
 
 'I 
 
 n 
 
li, 
 
 r, 
 
 # 
 
 I 
 
 130 
 
 insiORY OF GREECL. 
 
 of Herodotus, that in his time the general opinion ascribed ic 
 Homer both the Cyprian Verses and the Epigoni, though h( 
 himself dissents.^ In spite of such dissent, however, that his- 
 torian must have conceived the names of Homer and Hesiod to 
 be nearly coextensive with the whole of the ancient epic ; other- 
 wise, he would hardly have delivered his memorable judgment, 
 that they two were the framers of Grecian ilieogony. 
 
 Tlie many ditferenc cities which laid claim to the birth of 
 Homer (-even is rather below the truth, and Smyrna and Chios 
 are the most prominent among them,) is well known, acd most of 
 them had legends to tell respecting his romantic parentage, his 
 alleged blindness, an<l his life of an itinerant bard, i^cquainted 
 with i)0verty and sorrow/- The discrepancies of statement re- 
 
 2. Adrastu's was kin<? of Argos, and the chief of the expedition. 
 It is therefore literally true, that Arjjos and tlie Argoiuns were *' the burden 
 of the song" in these two poems. 
 To this we may add — 
 
 1. The rhapsodes would have the strongest motive to recite the Thchals 
 and E])igoni at Sikyon, where Adrastus was worshipped and enjoyed so vast 
 a popularity, and where lie even attracted to himself the choric solemnities 
 which in other towns were given to Dionysus. 
 
 2. The means which Kleisthcnes took to get rid of Adrastus indicates a 
 special reference to the ThebaJs : he invited from Thebes the hero Mclanip 
 pus, the Iltctor of Thebes, in that very ])oem. 
 
 Tor these reasons, I think we may conclude that the *Ofi^peia Itrrj, alluded 
 to in this very illustrative story of Herodotus, are the Tiiebafs and the Ej)i- 
 goni, not the Iliad. 
 
 ' Ilcrodot. ii. 117 ; iv "2. The words in which Herodotus intimates his 
 own dissent from the reigning opinion, are treated as spurious by F. A 
 Wolf, and vindicated by Sehweighhauser : whether they be admitted or not» 
 the general currency of tlie opinion adverted to is equally evident. 
 
 ' The Life of Homer, which passes falsely under the name of Herodotus, 
 contains a collection of these ditferent stories : it is supposed to hav3 beec 
 written about the second century after the Christian era, but the statements 
 which it furnishes are probably several of them as old as Ephorus (compare 
 also Proclus ap. Thotium, c. 239). 
 
 The belief in the blindness of Homer is doubtless of far more ancient 
 date, since the circumstarice appears mentioned in the Homeric Hymn to 
 tbe Delian Apollc where the bard of Chios, in some very touching lines, 
 recommends himself and his strains to the favor of the Delian maidens 
 employed in the worship of Apollo. This hymn is cited by Thucydides aa 
 laqaestionably authentic, and he doubtless accepted the lines as a descrip- 
 tion of the personal condition and relations of the author of tho Iliad and 
 
 
 TALES ABOUT HOMER. 
 
 181 
 
 9f<y^Yig the date of his reputed existence ai« no less worthy of 
 remark ; for out of the eight different epochs assigned to him, the 
 oldest differs from the most recent by a period of four hundred 
 and sixty )X'ars. 
 
 Thus conflicting would have been the answers returned in dif- 
 ferent portions of the Grecian world to any questions respecting 
 the person of Homer. But there were a poetical gens (fraternity 
 or guild) in the Ionic island of Chios, who, if the question had 
 been put to them, would have answered in another manner. To 
 them. Homer was not a mere antecedent man, of kindred nature 
 with themselves, but a divine or semi-divine eponymus and pro- 
 genitor, whom they worshipped in their gentile sacrifices, and in 
 whose ascendent name and glory the individuality of every mem- 
 ber of the gens was merged. The compositions of each separate 
 Homerid, or the combmed efforts of many of them in conjunc- 
 tion, were the works of Homer: the name of the individual bard 
 perishes and his authorship is forgotten, but the common gentile 
 
 Odyssey (Thucyd. iii. 104) : Simonides of Keos also calls Homer a Chian 
 (Frag. 69, Schneidewin). 
 
 There were also tales which represented Homer as the contemporary, the 
 eousin, and the rival in recited composition, of Hesiod, who (it was pretend- 
 ed) had vanquished him. See the Certamen Homeri et Hesiodi, annexed 
 lo the works of the latter (p. 314, ed. Go tiling 5 and Plutarch, Conviv. Sept 
 Sai)ient. c. 10), in which also various stories respecting the Life of Homer 
 are scattered. The emperor Hadrian consulted the Delphian oracle to know 
 who Homer was : the answer of the priestess reported him to be a native of 
 Ithaca, the son of Telemachus and Epikaste, daughter of Nestor (Certamen 
 Hom. et lies. p. 314). The author of this Certamen tells us that the author- 
 ity of the Delphian oracle deserves implicit confidence. 
 
 Hellanikus, Damastes, and Pherekydes traced both Homer and Hesiod 
 op to Orpheus, through a pedigree of ten generations (see Sturz, Fragment 
 Hellanic. fr. 75-144; compare also Lobeck's remsirks — Aglaophamus, p. 32S 
 — on the subject of these genealogies). The computations of these authoii 
 earlier than Herodotus are of value, because they illustrate the habits of 
 mind in which Grecian chronology began: the genealogy might be easUy 
 continued backward to any length in the past. To trace Homer up to 
 Orpheus, however, would not have been consonait to the belief of tkt 
 
 Homerids. 
 
 The contentions of the diflferent dties which disputed for the birth of 
 Homer, and, indeed, all the legendary anecdotes drcnlated in antiquity n 
 ipecting the poet, are oopiou8<y diicuflsed in Weldser, Der Epischo K jklot 
 (pp. 194-199). 
 
 \'i 
 
 < 
 
 % 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 4 
 
 ( 
 1 
 
i; 
 
 130 
 
 insiORY OF GREECE. 
 
 II 
 
 of Herodotus, that in his time the general opinion ascribed tc 
 Homer both the C}prian Verses and the Epigoni, though h« 
 himself dissents.^ In spite of such dissent, however, that hii- 
 lorian must have conceived the names of Homer and Hesiod to 
 be nearly coextensive with the whole of the ancient epic; other- 
 wise, he would hardlj'' have delivered his memorable judgment, 
 that they two were the franiers of Grecian iheogony. 
 
 Tlie many different cities which laid chiim to the birth of 
 Homer (seven is rather below the truth, and Smyrna and Chiofl 
 are the most prominent among them,) is well known, ard most of 
 thorn had legends to tell respecting his romantic j)arentage, his 
 alleged blindness, and his life of an itinerant bard, i:,cquainted 
 with poverty and soriow.- The discrepancies of statement re- 
 
 2. Adrastus was kinj; o^ Argos, and the chief of the expedition. 
 It is therefore literally true, that Argos and the Arg^iuns were " the burden 
 of the song" in these twc poems. 
 To this wc may add — 
 
 1. The rhapsodes woul 1 Iiave the strongest motive to recite the Thc!>als 
 •nd Epigoni at Sikyon, where Adrustus was worshij)ped and enjoyed so vast 
 ■ popularity, and where lie oven attracted to himself the choric solemnities 
 which in other towns were given to Dionysus. 
 
 2. The means which Ivleisthenes took to get rid of Adrastus indicates a 
 fpecial reference to the Thebais : lie invited from Thebes the hero Melanip 
 pus, the l/fctor of Tliebcs, in tliat very poem. 
 
 For these reasons, I thir^k we may conclude that the *0/i^peia enT], alluded 
 to in this very illustrative story of Herodotus, are the Thebats and the Epi- 
 goni, not the Iliad. 
 
 ' llerodot. ii. 117; iv 32. The words in which Herodotus intimates hii 
 own dissent from the reigning opinion, are treated as spurious by F. A 
 Wolf and vindicated by Schwtighhauser: whether they be admitted or notj 
 the general currency of the opinion adverted to is equally evident. 
 
 * The Life of Homer, which pjisscs falsely under the name of Herodotus, 
 contains a collection of these diiferent stories : it is supposed to hav3 beec 
 written about the second century after the Christian era, but the statements 
 which it furnishes are pro>»ably several of them as old as Ephorus (compare 
 also Proclus ap. Photium, c. 239). 
 
 The belief in the blindness of Homer is doubtless of far more ancient 
 date, since the circwmstance appears mentioned in the Homeric Hymn to 
 the Delian Apollc where the bard of Chios, in some very touching lines, 
 recommends himself and his strains to the favor of the Delian maidens 
 eaployed in the worship of Apollo. This hymn is cited by Thucydides ai 
 ■aqnestionably authentic, and he doubtless accepted the lines as a descrip- 
 lioo of the personal conditaon and relations of the author of the Iliad and 
 
 TALES ABOUT HOMER. 
 
 181 
 
 •p^>A!irig the date of his reputed existence ai-e no less worthy of 
 remark ; for out of the eight different epochs assigned to him, the 
 oldest differs from the most recent by a period of four hundred 
 and sixty }t;ars. 
 
 Thus conflicting would have been the answers returned in dif- 
 ferent portions of the Grecian world to any questions respecting 
 the person of Homer. But there were a poetical gens (fraternity 
 or guild) in the Ionic island of Chios, who, if the question had 
 been put to them, would have answered in another manner. To 
 them, Homer was not a mere antecedent man, of kindred nature 
 with themselves, but a divine or serai-divine eponymus and pro- 
 genitor, whom they worshipped in their gentile sacrifices, and in 
 whose ascendent name and glory the individuality of every mem- 
 ber of the gens was merged. The compositions of each separate 
 Homerid, or the combmed efforts of many of them in conjunc- 
 tion, were the works of Homer : the name of the individual bard 
 perishes and his authorship is forgotten, but the common gentile 
 
 Odyssey (Thucyd. iii. 104): Simonides of Keos also calls Homer a Chian 
 (Fra<^. 69, Schneidewin). 
 
 Tnere were also talcs which represented Homer as the contemporary, the 
 eousin, and the rival in recited composition, of Hesiod, who (it was pretend- 
 ed) had vanquished him. See the Certamen Homeri et Hesiodi, annexed 
 lo the works of the latter (p. 314, ed. Gottling ; and Plutarch, Conviv. SepL 
 Sapient, c. 10), in which also various stories respecting the Life of Homer 
 are scattered. The emperor Hadrian consulted the Delphian oracle to know 
 who Homer was : the answer of the priestess reported him to be a native of 
 Ithaca, the son of Telemachus and Epikaste, daughter of Nestor (Certamen 
 Hom. et Hes. p. 314). The author of this Certamen tells us that the author- 
 ity of the Delphian oracle deserves implicit confidence. 
 
 Hellanikus, Damastes, and Pherekydes traced both Homer and Hesiod 
 up to Orpheus, through a pedigree of ten generations (see Sturz, Fragment 
 Hellanic. fr. 75-144; compare also Lobeck's remarks — ^^^/jAamu*, p. 321 
 — on the subject of these genealogies). The computations of these authon 
 earlier than Herodotus are of value, because they illustrate the habits of 
 mind in which Grecian chronology began : the genealogy might be easily 
 continued backward to any length in the past. To trace Homer ap to 
 Orpheus, however, would not have been consonait to the belief of tiM 
 Homerids. 
 
 The contentions of the diflferent cities which disputed for the birth id 
 Homer, and, indeed, all the legendary anecdotes drcolated in antiquity le 
 ipecting the poet, are oqpioaBlgr ditcnssed in Walcker, Der Bpiscfae Kjkkm 
 (pp. 194-199). 
 
 'i* 
 
 i / 
 
 il 
 
 (J 
 
 
 « U 
 
 ili 
 
1! 
 
 132 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 father lives and grows in renown, from generation to geners 
 lion, by the j]^enius of his self-renewing sons. 
 
 Huch was tho conception entertained of Homer by the poetical 
 gens called Homcrida?, or Ilomerids ; and in the general ob^ 
 fecurity of the whole case, 1 lean towards it as the most plausible 
 conception. Homer is not only the ref)uted author of the various 
 eom{)osition9 emanating from the gentile members, but also the 
 recipient of the many different legends and of the divine gene- 
 alogy, which it plciivses their imagination to confer uyHin him. 
 Such manufacture of fictitious personality, and such perfect 
 incor|)oration of the entities of religion and fancy with the real 
 world, is a process familiar, and even habitual, in the retrospec- 
 tive vision of the Greeks.* 
 
 It is to be remarked, that the }K)etical gens here brought to 
 view, the Ilomerids, are of indis[)utable authenticity. Their ex- 
 istence and their considerations were maintained down to the 
 historical times in the island of Chios.2 If the Ilomerids were 
 8till conspicuous, even in the days of Akusilaus, Pindar, Hellani- 
 kus, and Plato, when their productive invention had ceased, and 
 when they had become only guardians and distributors, in com- 
 mon with others, of the treasures bequeathed by their predeces- 
 Bors, — far more exalted must their position have been three 
 centuries before, while they were still the inspired creators of 
 epic novelty, and wh(;n the absence of writing assured to them 
 the undisputed monopoly of their own compositions.^ 
 
 * Even Aristotle ascribe*! to Horner a divine parentage: a damsel of the 
 isle of Ids, pregnant by some god, was carried off by pirates to Smyrna, at 
 the time of the Ionic emigration, and there gave birth to the poet (Aristotel. 
 «p. Plutarch. Vit. Homer p. 1059). 
 
 Plato seems to have considered Homer as having been an itinerant rhap- 
 ■ode, poor and almost friendless (Hepubl. p. 600). 
 
 •Pindar, Nem. ii. 1, and Scholia; Akusilaus, Fragm 31, Didotj Harpo- 
 krttion, T. 'OfiTipiSai ; Hellanic. Fr. 55, Didot; StralK), xiv. p. 645. 
 
 It seems by a passage of Plato (Phadrus, p. 252), that the Honierid* 
 profesfied to possess unpublished verses of their ancestral poet — In^ unj^era 
 Compare Plato, Kepublic. p 599, and Isocrat. Helen, p. 218. 
 
 •NitMch (De Historitl Homeri, Fascic. 1, p. 128, Fascic. 2, p. 71), and 
 Ulrici (Greschichte der Episch. Poesit, vol. i. pp. 240-381) question the anti- 
 quity of the Homerid gens, and limit their functions to simple reciters, deny* 
 Wii that they ever composed songi or poems of their own. Yet these genten 
 
 i 
 
 PERSONALITY OF HOMEU. 
 
 138 
 
 Homer, then, is no individual man, but the divine or hemic 
 fclher (the ideas of worship and juicestry coalescing, as they 
 constantly did in the Grecian mind) of the gentile Ilomerids, 
 and he is the author of the Thebais, the Epigoni, the Cyprian 
 Verses, the l^roccms, or Hymns, and other poems, in the same 
 sense in which he is the author of the Iliad and Odyssey, — as- 
 suming that these various comi)Ositions emanate, as perhaps they 
 may, from dilferent individuals numbered among the Ilomerids. 
 But this disallowance of the historical personality of Homer is 
 quite distinct from the question, with which it has been often 
 conlbunded, whether the Iliad and Odyssey are originally entire 
 poems, and whether by one author or otherwise. To us, the 
 name of Homer means these two poems, and little else : we desire 
 to know as much as can be learned respecting their date, their 
 original composition, their })rescrvation, and thei»* mode of com- 
 munication to the public. All these questions are more or lesi 
 complicated one with the other. 
 
 Concerning the date of the poems, we have no other informar 
 tion except the various aflirmations respecting the age of Homer, 
 
 such Jis the Euneida;, the Lykomidai, the Butadae, the Talthybiada;, tht 
 descendants of Cheiron at Pelion, etc., the Hesychidaj (Schol. Sophocl. (Edip^ 
 Col. 489), (the acknowledged parallels of the lIoni6ridae), may be surely all 
 considered as belonging to the earliest known elements of Grecian history: 
 rarelv, at least, if ever, can such gens, with its tripartite character of civil, 
 religious, and professional, be shown to have commenced at any recent period. 
 And in the early times, composer and singer were one person: often at 
 least, though probably not always, the l»ard combined both functions. The 
 Homerie uoiAog sings his own compositions ; and it is reasonable to imagine 
 that many of the early Homerids did the same. 
 
 See Niebuhr, Romisch. Gesch. vol. i. p. 324 ; and the treatise, Ueber die 
 Sikeler in der Odyssee, — in the Rheinisches Museum, 1828, p. 257; and 
 Boeckh, in the Index of Contents to his Lectures of 1834. 
 
 " The sage Vyasa (observes Professor Wilson, System of Hindu Mythology, 
 Int. p. Ixii.) is represented, not as the author, but as the arranger and com- 
 piler of the Vedas and the Purines. His name denotes his character, mean* 
 ing the arranger or distributor (Welcker gives the same meaning to the name 
 Honwr) ; and the recurrence of many Vyasas, — many individuals who uew- 
 modelled the Hindu scriptures, — has nothing in it that is improbable, except 
 the fabulous intervals by which theu- labors are separated." Individual 
 ■Bthorship and the thirst of personal distinction, are in this case also buried 
 one great and common name, as in t!!ie case of Homer 
 
 f 
 
 itj 
 
 V 
 
 
)1 
 
 1 •' 
 
 ;■ . 
 
 
 134 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 which differ among themselves (as I have before observed) by 
 an interval of four liundred and sixty years, and which for the 
 most part determine the date of Homer by reference to some 
 other event, itself fabulous and unauthenticated, — such as the 
 Trojan wjir, the Return of the Ilerakleids, or the Ionic migra- 
 tion. Krates placed Homer earlier than the Return of the 
 Herakleids, and less than eighty years after the Trojan war: 
 Eratosthenes put him one hundred years after the Trojan war : 
 Aristotle, Aristarchus, and Castor made his birth contemporary 
 with the Ionic migration, while Apollodorus brings him down to 
 one hundred years after that event, or two hundred and forty 
 years after the taking of Troy. Thucydides assigns to him a 
 date much subsequent to the Trojan war.i On the other hand, 
 Theopompus and Eiiphorion refer his age to the far more recent 
 period of the Lydian king, Gyges, (01. 18-2.3, b. c. 708-688,) 
 and put him live hundred years after the Trojan epoch.- What 
 were the grounds of these various conjectures, we do not know ; 
 though in the stat(ments of Krates and Eratosthenes, we may 
 pretty well divine. But the oldest dictum preserved to us re- 
 specting the date of Homer, — meaning thereby the date of the 
 Iliad and Odyssey, — appears to me at the same time the most 
 credible, and the most consistent with the general history of the 
 ancient epic. Herotlotus places Homer four hundred years be- 
 fore himself; taking his departure, not from any fabulous event, 
 but from a point of real and authentic time.^ Four centuries 
 
 ' Thucyd. i. 3. 
 
 * See the statements and citations respecting the age of Homer, collected 
 in Mr. Clinton's Chronology, vol. i. p. 146. He prefers the view of Aristotle, 
 Mid places the Iliad and Odyssey a century earlier than I am inclined to do, 
 - 940-927 B. c. 
 
 Krates, prohahly placed the poet anterior to the Return of the Herakleidi, 
 because the Iliad makes no mention of Dorians in Peloponnesus : Erastot* 
 tlienes may be supposed to have grounded his date on the passage of the 
 Iliad, which mentions the three generations descended from -Sneas. Wa 
 should have been glad to know the grounds of the very low date assigned 
 bj Theopompus and Enphorion. 
 
 The pseudo- Herodotus, in his life of Homer, pats the birth of the poet 
 ooe hundred and sixty-eight years after the Trojan war. 
 
 ' Herodot ii. 53. H^rakleides Ponticus affirmed that Lykurgus had 
 hrooght into Peloponnesus the Homeric poems, which had before been 
 
 HOyERIC POEMS INTENDED FOR HEARERS. 
 
 IM 
 
 ADteiior to Herodotus would be a period commencing with 880 
 3.C. so that the composition of the Homeric poems would thua 
 fall in a space between 850 and 800 B. c. We may gather from 
 the language of Herodotus that this was his own judgment, 
 opposed to a current opinion, which assigned the poet to an 
 earlier epoch. 
 
 To place the Iliad and Odyssey at some periods between 850 
 B. c. and 776 B. c, appears to me more probable than any other 
 date, anterior or posterior, — more probable than the latter, be- 
 cause we are justified in believing these two poems to be older 
 than Arktinus, who comes shortly after the first Olympiad ; — 
 more probable than the former, because, the farther we push the 
 poems back, the more do we enhance the wonder of their pre- 
 servation, already sufficiently great, down from such an age and 
 society to the historical times. 
 
 The mode in which these poems, and indeed all poems, epic as 
 well as lyric, down to the age (probably) of Peisistratus, were 
 circulated and brought to bear upon the public, deserves particu- 
 lar attention. They were not read by individuals alone and 
 apart, but sung or recited at festivals or to assembled companies. 
 This seems to be one of the few undisputed facts with regard to 
 the threat poet : for even those who maintain that the Iliad and 
 Odyssey were preserved by means of writing, seldom contend 
 that they were read. 
 
 In appreciating the effect of the poems, we must always tako 
 account of this great difference between early Greece and our 
 own times, — between the congregation mustered at a solemn 
 festival, stimulated by community of sympathy, listening to a 
 measured and musical recital from the lips of trained bards or 
 rhapsodes, whose matter was supposed to have been inspired by 
 the Muse, — and the solitary reader, with a manuscript before 
 him ; such manuscript being, down to a very late period in Greek 
 literature, indifferently written, without division into parts, and 
 without marks of punctuation. As in the case of dramatic per- 
 
 unknown out of Ionia. The supposed epoch of Lykurgus aas sometimes 
 been employed to sustain the date here resigned to the Homeric poems j b«t 
 •verything respecting Lykurgus is too d lubtful to serve as evidence in olbei 
 laqiiiries. 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 ^(t 
 
 !(' 
 
13G 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 fr 
 
 !' 
 
 I| i 
 
 formal .ces, in all ages, so in that of the early Grecian epic, — a 
 very large proportion of its impressive effect was derived from 
 the talent of the reciter and the force of the general accompani 
 ments, and would have disappeared altogether in solitary reading. 
 Originally, the bard sung his own epical narrative, commencing 
 with a procemiuni or hymn to one of the gods :' his profession 
 was sepamte and special, like that of the car[)enter, the leech, or 
 the prophet: his manner and enunciation must have lequired par- 
 ticular training no less than his imaginative faculty. His charac- 
 ter presents itself in the Odyssey as one highly esteemed ; and 
 in the Iliad, even Achilles does not disdain to touch the lyre 
 with his own hands, and to sing heroic deeds.2 Not only did 
 the Iliad and Odyssey, mid the {K)ems embodied in the Epic 
 Cycle, [)roduce all their impression and gain all their renown hy 
 this process of oral delivery, but even the lyric and choric poets 
 who succeeded them were known and felt in the same way by 
 the general public, even after the full establishment of luibits of 
 reading among lettered men. While in the ease of the epic, 
 the recitation or singing had been extremely simple, and the 
 measure comparatively little diversitied, with no other accompan- 
 iment than that of the four-stringed harp, — all the valuations 
 superinduced upon the original hexameter, beginning with the 
 pentameter and iambus, and proceeding step by step to the com- 
 
 * The Homeric hymns are prooems of this sort, some very short, consisting 
 onlv of a few lines, — others of considerable length. The Hymn ("or, rather, 
 one of the two hymns) to Apollo is cited by Thucydides as the ProoBm of 
 Apollo. 
 
 The Hymns to Aphrodite, Apollo, Hermes, l^em^ter, and Dionysus, are 
 genuine epical narratives. Hermann (Praif. ad Hymn. p. Ixxxix.) pro- 
 nounces the Hymn to Aphrodite to be the oldest and most genuine : portiona 
 of the Hymn to Apollo (Herm. p. xx.) are also very old, but both that hymn 
 and the others are largely interpolated. His opinion respecting these inter* 
 polations, however, is disputed by Franke CPraefat. ad Hymn. Homeric p. 
 ix-xix.) ; and the distinction between what is genuine and what is spurious, 
 depends upon criteriainot very distinctly assignable. Compare Ulrici, Gesch. 
 der Ep. Poes. pp. 38r)-391. 
 
 ■ Phemius, Demodokus, and the nameless bard who guarded the fidelity 
 of Klyt»mnestra, betcir out this position (Odyss. i. 155; iii. 267; viii. 490; 
 Xxi. 330; Achilles in Iliad, ix. 190). 
 
 A degree of inviolability seems attached to the person of the herd •• ipaii 
 ■■ to that of the herald (Odyss. xxii. 355-357). 
 
 r 
 'I 
 
 1f "il W i |W l P» » W i i i |r i 
 
 SINGERS AND RHAPSODES. 
 
 187 
 
 plicated strophes of Pindar and the tragic writers, still left the 
 general effect of the poetry greatly dependent upon voice and 
 accompaniments, and pointedly distinguished from mere solitary 
 reading of the words. And in the dramatic poetry, the lajt in 
 order of time, the declamation and gesture of the speaking actor 
 alternated with the song and dance of the chorus, and with the 
 instruments of musicians, the whole being set oft' by imposin<T 
 visible decorations. Now both dramatic effect and song are 
 familiar in modern times, so that every man knows the difl'erence 
 between reading the words and hearing them under the appro- 
 priate circumstances : but poetry, as such, is, and has now long 
 been, so exclusively enjoyed by reading, that it requires an esj)e- 
 cial memento to bring us back to the time when the Iliad and 
 Odyssey were addressed only to the ear and feelings of a i)ro- 
 miscuous and sym|)athizing multitude. Readers there were none, 
 at least until the century preceding Solon and Peisistratus : from 
 that time forward, they gradually increased both in number and 
 influence; though doubtless small, even in the most literary 
 period of Greece, as compared with modern European society. 
 So far as the production of beautiful epic i)oetry was concerned, 
 however, the select body of instructed readers, furnished a less 
 potent stimulus than the unlettered and listening crowd of the 
 earlier periods. The poems of Choerilus and Antimachus, 
 towards the close of the Peloponnesian war, though admired by 
 erudite men, never acquired popularity ; and the emperor Ha- 
 drian failed in his attempt to bring the latter poet into fashion 
 at the expense of Homer, i 
 
 • Spartian. Vit. Hadrian, p. 8 ; Dio Cass. Ixix. 4 : Plut. Tim. c. 36. 
 There are some good observations on this point in Niike's comments on 
 Choerilus, ch. viii. p. 59 : — 
 
 " Habet hoc epica poesis, vera ilia, cujus perfectissimam normam agnosci- 
 mus Homericam — habet hoc proprium, ut non in possegsione virorum 
 eruditorum, sed quasi viva sit et coram populo recitanda: ut cum popuk) 
 crescat, et si populus Deorum et antiquorum heroum facinora, quod pr»- 
 cipium est epicae poeseos ar^rumentum, audire et secum repetere dedidicerit, 
 obmutescat. Id vero tum factum est in Graecii, quum populus ea ntAUi, 
 quam pueritiam dicere possis, peracta, partim ad res serias tristesque, poUti- 
 cas maxime — easque multo, quam artea, impeditiores— abstrahebatur: 
 partim epicae poeseos pertaesus, ex aiiis poeseos generibus, qua tum nasce- 
 bantur, novum et diversum oblectamenti genus primo pr«sagire, sibi, deind« 
 haiuire, c<£pit." 
 
 ^V 
 
 
 
 •I 
 
 I 
 
 r, 
 
 ^ Ci 
 
 !(' 
 
f 
 
 p.* 
 
 4 
 
 I* 
 
 1 
 
 138 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 It will be seen by what has been here stated, that that class of 
 men, who formed the medium of communication between the 
 verse and tlie ear, were of the highest importance in the ancient 
 world, and especially in the earher periods of its career, — the 
 bards and rhapsodes for the e[>ic, the singers for the lyric, the 
 actors and singers jointly with the dancers for the cliorus and 
 drama. The lyric and dramatic i)oets taught witli their own lips 
 the delivery of their compositions, and so j)romiiicntly did this 
 business of teaching present itself to the view of the public, that 
 the name Didaskalia, by which the dramatic exhibition was com 
 monly designated, derived from thence its origin. 
 
 Among the number of rhapsodes who frequented the festivals 
 at a time when Grecian cities were multiplied and easy of access, 
 ibr the recitation of the ancient epic, there must have been of 
 course great difter(!nces of excellence ; but that the more consid- 
 erable individuals of the class were elaborately trained and 
 highly accomplished in the exercise of their profession, we may 
 assume as certain. But it happens that Socrates, with his two 
 pupils Plato and Xenophon, s])eak contemptuously of their merits ; 
 ai d many persons have been disposed, somewhat too readily, to 
 admit this sentence of condemnation as conclusive, without taking 
 account of the point of view from which it was delivered.' These 
 
 Kake remarks, too, that the " splondidissirna et propria Homcricae pocseos 
 «Btas, ea quaj sponte quasi sua inter popuUim et quasi cum populo vivcret," 
 did not reach below Feisistratus. It did not, 1 think, reach even so low as 
 
 that period. 
 
 » Xcnoph. Memorab. iv. 2, 10 ; and Sympos. iii. 6. Oladd n ovv k^voi 
 
 ij/tdiuTepov /5aVv<5u>v ; ^tjAov yup on rttf vKovoiag ovt iniaravTai 
 
 10 de ZTvaifiiipoTifi re koc '\vaiifiuv6p<f) Kai u?.?lOIC tto^.'XoIc noXi) deSuKoc 
 upyvpiov^ uare ovdev ee rwv Tro?.?.ov u^'tuv ?ie?.7)^£. 
 
 These vKovolai are the hidden meaninj^s, or allegories, which - certain sel 
 of philosophers undertook to discover in Homer, and whi:h the rhapsodef 
 were no way called upon to study. 
 
 The Platonic dialogue, called Ion, ascribes to Ion the double function of • 
 rhapsode, or impressive reciter, and a critical expositor of the poet (IsokratSa 
 •Iso indicates the same double character, in the rhapsodes of his time, — 
 Panathenaic, p. 240) ; but it conveys no solid grounds for a mean estimate of 
 the class of rhapsodes, while it attests remarkably the striking effect produced 
 bv their recitation (c. (T, p. 535). That this, class of men came to combine 
 the habit of expositoni comment on the poet with their original profession 
 of reciting, proves the tendencies of the age ; probably, it also brought then 
 Into rivalry with the philosophers. 
 
 tJNDESERVED CONDEMNAri(*N OF RHAPSODES. 
 
 139 
 
 philosophers considered Homer and other poets with a view to 
 instruction, ethical doctrine, and virtuous practice : they analyzed 
 the characters whom the poet described, sifted the value of the 
 lessons conveyed, and often struggled to discover a hidden mean- 
 ing, where they disapproved that which was apparent. When they 
 found a man like the rhapsode, who professed to impress the 
 Homeric narrative upon an audience, and yet either never med- 
 dled at all, or meddled unsuccessfully, with the business of expo- 
 sition, they treated him Avith contempt; indeed, Socrates depre- 
 ciates the poets themselves, much upon the same principle, as 
 dealing with matters of which they could render no rational 
 account.i It wiis also the habit of Plato and Xenophon to dis- 
 parage generally professional exertion of talent for the purpose 
 of gaining a livelihood, contrasting it often in an indelicate man- 
 ner with the gratuitous teaching and ostentatious poverty of their 
 master. But we are not warranted in judging the rhapsodes by 
 such a standard. Though they were not philosophers or moral- 
 ists, it was their province — and it had been so, long before the 
 philosophical point of view was opened — to bring their poet 
 home to the bosoms and emotions of an assembled crowd, and to 
 penetrate themselves with his meaning so far as was suitable for 
 that purpose, adapting to it the appropriate graces of action and 
 intonation. In this their genuine task they were valuable mem- 
 bers of the Grecian community, and seem to have possessed all 
 the qualities necessary for success. 
 
 These rhapsodes, the successors of the primitive aoedi, or 
 Dards, seem to have been distinguished from them by the discon- 
 tinuance of all musical accompaniment. Originally, the bard 
 Bung, enlivening the song with occasional touches of the simple 
 fbur-stringed harp : his successor, the rhapsode, recited, holding 
 
 The grounds taken by Aristotle (Problem, xxx. 10 ; compare Aul. ^Telliua, 
 XX. 14) against the actors, singers, musicians, etc of his time, are moro 
 icrious, and have more the air of truth. 
 
 If it be correct in Lehrs (dc Studiis Aristarchi, Diss. ii. p. 46) to identify 
 those early glossographers of Homer, whose explanations the Alexandrine 
 critics so severely condemned, with the rhapsodes, this only proves that the 
 rhapsodes had come to undertake a douHe duty, of which then: predeooMon 
 before Solon would never have dreamed 
 
 * Plato, Apolog. Socrat. p, 22. c. 7. 
 
 'I 
 
 u 
 
 n 
 
 ( 
 
 » 
 
 ) 
 
 % 
 
 (i 
 
I 
 
 140 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 «'■: 
 
 I 
 
 i' 
 
 I 
 
 (' 
 
 in his hand nothing hut a hranch of hiurel and depending for 
 effect upon voice and manner, — a species of musical and 
 rhytlimical declamation,' which gradually increa&ed in vehement 
 
 ' Aristotel. Poetic:, e. 47 ; VVelcker, I)er Episch. Kyklosi ; Uober den Vor- 
 trag tier Iloinerischen G«dicnte, p[). 340-406, whi* h collects all the facts 
 respecting the aoMJi and the rhapsodes. Unfortunately, the ascertained 
 points are very few. 
 
 The laurel branch in the hand of the singer or reciter (for the two cxpies- 
 Bions are often confounded) seems to have been peculiar to the recitation 
 of Homer and Hesiod (Hesio<i, Theog. 30; Schol. ad Aristophan. Nub. 1307. 
 rau>an. x. 7, 2j. '* Poemata omne genus (says Apuleius, Florid, p. 122, 
 Bipont.) apta virgtr^ lyrae, socco, cothurno." 
 
 Not only Homer wnd Hesiod, but also Archilochus, were recite<l by rhap 
 sodt's (Athenaj. xii 620; also Plato, Legg. ii. p. 658). Consult, besides, 
 Nitzsch, I)e Historic Homeri, Fascic. 2, p. 114, .sx/, respecting the rhapsodes ; 
 and (). Mdller, Hiittory of the Literature of Ancient Greece, ch. iv. s. 3. 
 
 The ideas of singing and sjKjech are, however, often confounded, in refer 
 ence to any verse solemnly and emphatically delivered (Thucydid. ii. 53) 
 
 — ifX'tOKovre^ ol wpecrSvTFfMi vraXaL ^6e<j &at , '^H^et Awpm/cof KoXefiog nal 
 ?.otfi(i^ ufi' avTifi, And the rhapsodes are said to sing Homer (Plato, Eryxias, 
 c. 13; Ilcsych. v. B^u/xji-mff) ; Straho (i. p. 18) has a good passage upon 
 nong and speech. 
 
 William Grimm (Deutsche Heldensage, p. 373) supposes the ancient Ger- 
 man heroic romance* to have been recited or declaimed in a similar manner 
 with a simple accompaniment of the harp, as the Servian heroic lays are 
 even at this time delivered. 
 
 Fauriel also tells us, respecting the French Carlovingian Epic (Romans 
 de Chevalerie, Revue des Deux Mondes, xiii. p. 559) : ** The romances of 
 the 12th and 13th cftnturies were really sung: the Jong/eur invited his audi 
 ence to hear a belle chanson (fhistoire^ — 'le mot chanter no manque jamais 
 dans la for mule iniliale,' — and it is to be understood literally: the music 
 was simple and intermittent, more like a recitative ; the jongleur carried a 
 tebek, or violin with three strings, an Arabic instrument ; when he wished to 
 rest his voice, he played an air or ritoumelle upon this ; he went thus about 
 from place to place, :ind the romances had no existence among the people, 
 except through tlie aid and recitation of these jongleurs." 
 
 It appeart that there had once been rhapsodic exhibitions at the festivals of 
 Dionysus, but they were discontinued ( Klearchus ap. Athenae. vii. p. 275) 
 
 — probifcbij toperseded by the dithyiamb and the tragedy. 
 
 Tbe •Cymology of it>a^<fi6di is a disputed point : Welcker traces it to l>L^6o% , 
 iBOst critics derive it hom (>unTeiv (ioid^y, which O. Miiller explains "to 
 denote the coupling together of verses without any considerable divisioQi or 
 pauses, — the even, unbroken, continuous flow of the epic poem," aa OOQ- 
 trasted with the Atrophic or choric periods il c). 
 
 \ ARI.\TIOXS IN IIECITATION. 
 
 141 
 
 emphasis and gesticulation until it approached to that of the 
 dramatic actor. At what time this change look place, or whethcf 
 the two different modes of enunciating the ancient epic may for a 
 certain period have gone on simultaneously, we have no means 
 of determining. Hesiod receives from the Muse a hranch of 
 hiurel, as a token of his ordination into their service, which 
 marks him for a rhapsode ; while the ancient hard with his harp 
 is still recognized in the Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, 
 as efficient and popular at the Panionic festivals in the island of 
 Delos.i Pcrhai)S the improvements made in the harp, to which 
 three strings, in addition to tiie original four, were attiwdied hy 
 Terpander (b. c. 660), and the growing complication of instni- 
 mental music generally, may have contributed to discredit the 
 primitive accompaniment, and thus to promote the practice of 
 recital : the story, th»t Terpander himself composed music, not 
 only for hexametej [)oems of his own, but also for those of 
 Homer, seems to irdicate that the music which preceded him was 
 ceasing to find favor.a By whatever steps the change from the 
 bard to the rhapsode took place, certain it is that before the time 
 of Solon, the latter was the recognized and exclusive or'^an of 
 
 ' Homer, Hymn to ApoU. 170. The Ki^apig, uoidrj, upx^^f^^^C, f^re con- 
 stantly put together in that hymn : evidently, the instrumental accompani- 
 ment was essential to the hymns at the Ionic festival. Compare also the 
 Hymn to Hermes (430), where the function ascribed to the Muses can hardly 
 be understood to include non-musical recitation. The Hymn to Hermes is 
 more recent than Terpander, inasmuch as it mentions the seven strings of 
 the lyre, v. .50. 
 
 ^ Terpander, — see Plutarch, de MusicA, c. 3-4 ; the facts respecting him 
 are collected in Plehn's Lesbiaca, pp. 140-160; but very little can be authen 
 ticated. 
 
 Stesander at the Pythian festivals sang the Homeric battles, with a harp 
 accompaniment of his own composition (Athenaj. xiv. p. 638). 
 
 The principal testimonies respecting the raphsodizing of the Homeric 
 poems at Athens, chiefly at the Panathcnaic festival, are Isokrates, Pane- 
 gyric, p. 74; Lycurgus contra Leocrat. p. 161 j Plato, Hipparch. p. 228; 
 Diogen. LaSrt. Vit. Solon, i. 57. 
 
 Inscriptions attest that rhapsodizing continued in great esteem, down to 
 a late period of the historical age, both at Chios and Teds, especially th« 
 former : it was the subject of competition by trained youth, and of prizes fbi 
 Jie victor, at p.°riodical religious solemnities: see Corp, Inscript. Boeckh^No 
 «: 14-3088. 
 
 f 
 
 \' 
 
 m 
 
 i 
 
142 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 :J 
 
 ^1 
 
 the old Epic ; iometimes in short fragments before private 
 eoin panics, by single rhapsodes, — sometimes several rhapsodes 
 in continuous succession at a public festival. 
 
 Kespecting the mode in wliieh the Homeric poems were pre- 
 served, during the two centuries (or as some tliink, longer 
 interval) between their original composition and tlie period shortly 
 preceding Solon, — and respecting tlieir original composition and 
 subsequent changes, — there are wide differences of opinion 
 among able critics. Were they preserved with or without being 
 written? Was the Iliad originally composed as one poem, and 
 the Odyssey in like manner, or is each of them an aggregation 
 of ])arts originally self-existent and unconnected? Was the 
 authorship of ea.-h i)oem single-headt-d or many-headed ? 
 
 Either tacitly or explicitly, these (piestions have been generally 
 coupled together and discussed with reference to each other, by 
 inquiries into the Homeric poems ; though Mr. l*ayne Knight's 
 Prole»'omena have the merit of keeping them distinct. Half a 
 century ago, the acute and valuable Prolegomena of F. A. Wolf, 
 turning to accor4nt the Venetian Scholia which had then been 
 recently publishcnl, first opened philosoi)hical discussion as to the 
 history of the Hcmieric text. A considerable part of that disser- 
 tation (though by no means the whole) is employed in vindi- 
 cating the position, previously aimounced by Bentley, among 
 others, that the separate constituent ])ortions of the Iliad and 
 Odyssey had not been cemented together into any compact body 
 and unchangeable order until the days of Peisistratus, in the 
 sixth century before Christ. As a step towards that conclusion. 
 Wolf raaintaincil that no written copies of either poem could be 
 shown to have existed during the earlier times to which their 
 composition is referred, — and that without writing, neither the 
 perfect symmetry of so complicated a work could have been 
 originally conceived by any poet, nor, if realized by him, trans- 
 mitted with assurance to posterity. The absence of easy and 
 convenient writing, such as must be indispensably supposed for 
 long manuscripts, among the early Greeks, was thus one of the 
 points in Wolf's case against the primitive integrity of the Iliad 
 and Odyssey. By Nitzsch and other leading opponents of Wolf, 
 the connection of the one with the other seems to have been 
 incepted as he originally put it ; and it has beeu considered 
 
 HOMERIC POEMS. -WRITTEN OR UNWRITTEN. 
 
 14.1 
 
 incumbent on those, who defended the ancient aggregate char- 
 acter of the Iliad and Odyssey, to maintain that they were 
 written poems from the beginning. 
 
 To me it appears that the architectonic functions ascribed 
 by Wolf to Peisistratus and his associates, in reference to 
 the Homeric poems, are nowise admissible. But much would 
 undoubtedly be gained towards that view of the question, if it 
 oould be shown that, in order to controvert it, we were driven to 
 the necessity of admitting long written poems in the ninth century 
 before the Christian era. Few things, in my opinion, can be 
 More improbable : and Mr. Payne Knight, opposed as he is to the 
 Wolfian hypothesis, admits this no less than Wolf himself.^ The 
 traces of writing in Greece, even in the seventh century before 
 the Christian era, are exceedingly trifling. We have no remain- 
 ing inscription earlier than the 40th Olympiad, and the early 
 inscriptions are rude and unskilfully executed: nor can we even 
 assure ourselves whether Archilochus, Simonides of Amorgus, 
 Kallinus, Tyrtasus, Xanthus, and the other early elegiac and lyric 
 
 * Knight, Prolcgom. Horn. c. xxxviii-xl. " Haud taraen uUum Homeri- 
 corum carininum exemplar Pisistrati scculo antiquius extitisse, aut sexcen- 
 tesimo prius anno ante C. N. scriptum fuisse, facile credara : rara enim et 
 perdifficilis crat iis temporibus scriptura ob pcnuriam materi» scribendo 
 idoneaj, quum literas aut lapidibus exarare, aut tabulis ligneis aut laminig 
 
 mctalli alicujus insculpere oportcret Atque ideo memoriter retenta 
 
 8unt, ct haec ct alia veterum poctarum carmina, et per urbes et vicos et in 
 prinripum virorum sedibus, decantata a rhapsodis. Neque mirandum est, 
 ea per tot saecula sic Integra conservata esse, quoniam — per eos tradit& 
 erant, qui ab omnibus Groeoiae et coloniarum regibus ct civitatibus racrcede 
 satis ampla conducti, omnia sua studia in iis ediscendis, retinendis, ct rite 
 recitandis, conferebant." Compare Wolf, Prolegora. xxiv-xxv. 
 
 The evidences of early writing among the Greeks, and of written poemt 
 even anterior to Homer, may be seen collected in Kreuser ( Vorfragen ueber 
 Homeros, pp. 127-159, Frankfort, 1828> His proofs appear to me altogether 
 inconclusive. Nitzsch maintains the same opinion (Histor. Homeri, Fast L 
 sect. xi. xvii. xviii.), — in my opinion, not more successfully: nor does Fnuis 
 (Epigraphice Gr«c. Introd. s. iv.) produce any new arguments. 
 
 I do not quite subscribe to Mr. Knight's language, when he says thai 
 there is nothing vxtnderful in the long preservation of th ' Homeric poenM 
 unwritten. It is enough to maintain that the existence, and pructical use of 
 long manuscripts, by all the rhapsodes, under the condition and circoni- 
 ■tances of the 8th and 9th centuries amon^ the Greeks, would be a grealM 
 woiwicj 
 
 'I 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 Mi 
 
 % 
 
 \\ 
 
 tfl 
 
144 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MKMOKY OF PROFESSIONAL RKCITEKS. 
 
 UD 
 
 poet^, committed their com])ositions to writing, or at what time 
 the practice of doing so became familiar. The first positive 
 ground, which authorizes us to presume the existence of a manu- 
 script of Homer, is in tin; famous ordinance of Solon with regiird 
 to the rhapsodes at the Panathenaa ; but for what length of time, 
 previously, manuscripts had existed, we are unable to say. 
 
 Those who maintain the Homeric poems to have been written 
 from the beginning, rest their case, not upon positive proofs,— nor 
 yet upon the existing habits of society with regard to poetry, for 
 they admit generally that the Iliad and Odyssey were not 
 read, but recited and heard,— but upon the supposed necessity 
 that there must have been manuscripts,' to insure the preserva- 
 tion of the poems.,— tl»e unassisted memory of recitei*s being 
 neither sufficient nor trustworthy. But here we only escape a 
 emaller difficulty by nmning into a greater; for the existence of 
 trained bards, gifted with extraordinary memory, is f;\r les8 
 astonishing than that of long manuscripts in an age essentially 
 non-reading and non-writing, and when even suitable instruments 
 and materials for the procress are not bvious. iMoreovcr, there 
 is a strong positive reason for believing that the bard Wivs under 
 no necessity for refreshing his memory by consulting a manu- 
 Bcript. For if such had been the fact, blindness would have been 
 a disqualification for the profession, which we know that it was 
 not ; as well from ihe example of Demodokus in the Odyssey, as 
 frtMu that of the blind bard of Chios, in the hymn to the Delian 
 Apollo, whom Tliucydides, as well as the general tenor of 
 Grecian legend, identifies with Homer himself.'^ The author of 
 tliat Hymn, be he who he may, could never have described a 
 
 ' See this argument strongly put bv Nitzsch, in the prefatory remarks at 
 the l)eginning of his second volume of CommentRries on the Odyssey (pp. 
 x-xxix). He takes great pains to discard all idea that the poems were 
 written in order to Ik? read. To the same purpose. Franz (KpigraphicA 
 Grac. Introd. p. 32), who adopts Kitzsch's positions, — " Andituris enim, non 
 lecturis, carmina parahant." 
 
 'Odyss. viii. 65; Hymn, ad Apoll. 172; Pseudo-Hcrodot. Vit. Homer. 0. 
 
 3 : Thucvd. iii. 104. . . , ^ 
 
 Various commentators on Homer imagined that, under the misfortune Of 
 Dct,n..U)kus, the poet in reality described his own (Schol ad Odysa 1 1{ 
 Maxim. Tyr. xxxvin 11 
 
 5lmd man as attaining the utmost perfection in his art, if he liad 
 beeu conscious that the memory of the bard was only maintained 
 by constant reference to the manuscript in his chest. 
 
 Nor will it be found, after all, that the effort of memory 
 required, either from bards or rhapsodes, even for the longest of 
 these old Epic i)oems, — though doubtless great, was at alfsuper- 
 human. Taking the case with reference to the entire Iliad and 
 Odyssey, we know that there were educated gentlemen at Athens 
 who could repeat both poems by heart:' but in the profession;U 
 
 ' Xcnoph. Synipos. iii. 5. Compare, rcsi)ccting the laborious discipline of 
 tlic Gallic Druids, and the numl>er of unwritten verses which they retained 
 in thoir memories, Ca-sar, B. G. vi. 14; Mela. iii. 2; also Wolf, Prolegg. s. 
 xxiv. and llcrod. ii. 77, about the prodigious memory of the Egyptian prfcstj 
 at Heliopolis. 
 
 I transcribe, from the interesting Discours of M. Fauriel (prefixed to his 
 Chants Populaires de la Grecc Mo^lerne, Paris 1824), a few particulars re- 
 specting the number, the mnemonic power, and the popularity of those 
 ••rant singers or rhapsodes who frequent the festivals or jxineght/ris of 
 modern Greece : it is curious to learn that this profession is habitually exer 
 tised by blind men (p, xc. sei/.). 
 
 « Les avcugles exercent en Gi-ece une profes^jion qui los rend non seule- 
 ment agreablcs, mais necessaires; le caractere, limagination, et la co-idiiioo 
 du peuple, etaut ce qu'ils sont : c'est la profession de chanteurs ambulani. 
 ......lis sont dans I'usagc, taut sor le continent que dans les iles, dc la 
 
 Grece, d'apprendre par c<jeur le plus grand nombre qu'ils peuvent dot bau- 
 sons populaires de tout genre ct de toute epo.jue. Quelques uns finissent 
 par en savoir une quautite' prodigieuse, et tous eu savent beaucoup. Avec 
 ce tre'sor dans leur memoire, ils sont toujours en raarche, traversent la Grece 
 en tout sens ; ils s'en vont de ville en ville, de village en village, chantant k 
 Tauditoire qui se forme aussitot autour d'eux, partout ou ils se montrent, 
 celies de leurs chansons qu'ils jugent convenir le mieux, soit a la localite, 
 soit i la circonstance, et re<,oivent une petite re'tribution qui fait tout leur 
 revenu. lis ont I'air de chercher de prefe'rence, en tout lieu, la pariie la plus 
 inculte de la papulation, qui en est toujours la plus curieuse, la plus avide 
 d impressions, et la moins difficile dans le choix de ceux qui leur sont offertes. 
 Les Turcs seuls ne les ecoutent pas. C'est aux re'unions nombreuses, aux 
 fetes de village eonnues sous le nora de Paneghyris, que ces chanteurs am- 
 bulans accourcnt le plus volontiers. lis chantent en s'accompagnant d'uo 
 instrument a cordes que Ton touche avec un archet, et qui est exacUment 
 Tancienne lyre des Grecs, dont il a conserve' le nom comme la fonnc. 
 
 •• CeUc lyre, iK)ur etre entiere, doit avoir cinq cordes : mais souvent elle 
 n'en a que deux ou tr:is, dont les sons, comme il est aise' de presumer, n'oni 
 rien de bicn harmonieux. Les chanteurs aveugles vont ordinairement iioi^ 
 ▼OL. II. 7 lOuc 
 
 K\ 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
THE LETTER DIGAMMA. 
 
 m 
 
 146 
 
 HISlOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 recitations, we are not to imagine that the same person did go 
 through the wiiole : the recitation was essentially a joint under- 
 taking, and the rl^ipsodfs who visited a festival would naturally 
 understand among themselves which i>art of the i)oem should 
 devolve upon each particular individual. Under such circun«- 
 Btances, and with such means of j>reparation beforehand, the 
 quantity of ver.^c which a rha])Sode could deliver wouM be 
 measured, not so much by the exhaustion of his memory, as by 
 the [)liysical sutliciency of his voice, having reterence to the 
 sonorous, emi>lKitic, and rhythmical pronunciation recpiired 
 from him.' 
 
 But what guarantee have we for the exact transmission of 
 the text for a space of two c*in<iAries by simply oral means? It 
 
 et chacun d'eux cliunie u part dc^ Mutns : muis qiielijuefois aussi ils so 
 reunissent par groupcs de deux ou <U* trois, puur dire eiisemi>le Its imjines 
 
 chansons Ces nMHlernes rhajt-it'ii-^.-* doivent vlvc. divisr's en deux classes. 
 
 Lcs uns (et ce soiit, >elon toute appar«i.'ve, les plus nonilireux) sc bornent u 
 la function de recutillir, d'apprendre pur ruiur, et de mettrc en circulation, 
 dcs pieces qu'ils n'ont point eomposees L*:s autres (et ce sont ceux (jui 
 forinent Tordre le plus distinjjrue de leur corps), a cette fonction de repeti 
 teurs et de colporteurs des po<sies d'autrei, jo:.«frent cellu de pootes, et ajout- 
 
 cnt ii la uiasse des chansons ap[)rise8 d'autres cSants de leur fa<;on 
 
 Ces rhapiodes aveu;.^les sont les nouvellistes et les litstorkms, en menie temjis 
 que les poetes du pcuple, en celu parfaitement seir '>lahlcs aux rhapsodes 
 aneiens de la (Jrece " 
 
 To pass to another country — Persia, once the grva*. rival of Greece. 
 ** The Kurroglian rhapsodes are called KnrnM/Iuu- Khans, from khaundeu, to 
 iing. Their duty i^, to know }>y fieart all the mejjUsses (mcet**igs) of Kurro- 
 glou, narrate them, or sing them with the accompaniment of the favorite 
 instrument of Kurroglou, the chungur, or sitar, a three-string€d guitar. Fer- 
 dausi has also his bhah-minui' Khans ^ and the prophet Mohamranl his Koran 
 Khaiis. The memory of those singers is truly astonishing. At cverv request, 
 they recite in one breath for some hours, witliout stammering, begi«*ning the 
 tale at the passage or verse pointed out by the hearers." ( Specimens «f the 
 Popular Poetry of l*crsia, as found in the Adventures and Improvi-Htiona 
 cf Kurroglou, the Bandit Minstrel of Northern Persia, by Alexander Ch^i- 
 ko: London 1842, Introd. p. 13.) 
 
 " One of the songs of the Calmuck national bards sometimes lasts a \rhe^e 
 day." (Ibid. p. 372.) 
 
 * There are just remarks of Mr. Mitford on the possibility that the Homem 
 poems might have been presened without writing (History of Greece. toI 
 Ipp 13^.137). 
 Vol. 2 5 
 
 may be replied, that oral transmission would hand down the text 
 as exactly as in point of fact it was handed down. The great 
 lines of each poem, — the order of parts, — the vein of Homeric 
 feeling, and the general style of locution, and, for tlie most part, 
 the true words, — would be maintained: for the professional 
 training of the rhapsode, over and above the precision of his 
 actual memory, would tend to Ilomerize his mind (if the ex- 
 pression may be permitted), and to restrain him within this magic 
 circle. On the other hand, in respect to the details of the text, 
 we should expect that there would be wide differences and 
 nunieious inaccuracies: and so there really were, as the records 
 contained in the Scholia, together with the passages cited in 
 ancient authors, but not found in our Homeric text, abundantly 
 testify.- 
 
 IMoreover, the state of the Iliad and Odyssey, in respect to the 
 letter called the Digamma, affords a proof that they were recited 
 tor a considerable jjeriod before they were committed to writing, 
 insomuch that the oral pronunciation underwent during the in- 
 teival a sensible change.^ At the time when these poems were 
 composed, the Digamma was an effective consonant, and figured 
 as such in the structure of the verse : at the time when they were 
 
 ' Villoison, Prolegomen. pp. xxxiv-lvi; Wolf, Prolegomen. p. 37. Diint- 
 zer, in the Epicor. Gnec. Fragm. pp. 27-29, gives a considerable list of the 
 Homeric passages cited by ancient authors, but not found cither in the Iliad 
 or Odyssey. It is hardly to be doubted, however, that many of these pas- 
 sages bolonge i to other epic poems which passed under the name of Homer. 
 Welckcr (Dcr Episch. Kyklus, pp. 20-133) enforces this opinion very justly, 
 and it harmonizes with his view of the name of Homer as coextensive wi h 
 the whole Epic cycle. 
 
 * See this argument strongly maintained in Giese (Ueber den JEolischen 
 Dialekt, sect. 14. p. 160, seqq.). He notices several other particulars in the 
 Homeric language, — the plenitude and variety of interchangeable grammat- 
 ical forms, — the numerous metrical licenses, set right by appropriate oral 
 intonations, — which indicate a language as yet not constrained by the fixity 
 of written authority. 
 
 The same line of argument is taken by 0. Midler (History of the Litera- 
 ture of Ancient Greece, ch. iv. s. 5). 
 
 Giese has shown also, in the same chapter, that all the manuscriota of 
 Homer mentioned in the Scholia, were written in the Ionic alphabet (with 
 H and Q as marks for the long vowels, and no special mark for the rough 
 breathing), in so far as the special citations out of them enable us to Tcri^ 
 
 'I 
 
 I / 
 
148 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 COMMENCEMENT OF AVRITL"sa. 
 
 committed to writing, it had ceased to be pronounced, and ther(v 
 fore never found a place in any of the manuscripts, — insomuch 
 that the Alexandrine critics, though they knew of its existence 
 hi the much later |x>ems of Alkaus and Sappho, never recognized 
 it in Homer. The hiatus, and the various j.^M-plexities of metre, 
 occasioned by the loss of the Digamma, were corrected by ditl'er- 
 ent grammatical stratagems. But the whole h'l^Ury of this lost 
 letter is very curious, and is lendered intelligible only by the 
 supposition that the Iliad and Odyssey belonged for a wide sj)ace 
 of time to the memory, the voice, and the ear, exclusively. 
 
 At what perio<l these jroems, or, indeed, an} other Greek 
 |X)ems, first began to be written, must be matier of conjecture, 
 thou<Tli there i-- ground for assurance that it was before; the 
 tinie'of Sol6n. If, in the absence of evidence, we may venture 
 upon naming any more determinate period, the question at once 
 suggests itself, what were the purpose, which, in that stage of 
 societv, a manuscript at its first commencement must have been 
 intended to answer? For whom was a writen Iliad necessary? 
 Not for the rhapsodes ; for with them it was not only i»lanted in 
 the memory, but also interwoven with the feelings, and conceived 
 in conjunction with all tho>e il<\ions and intonations of voice, 
 pauses, and other oral artifices, whicli were required for emphatic 
 delivery, and which the naked manuscript could never reproduce. 
 Not tor the general public, — ///f,y were accustomed to receive it 
 with its rhapsodic delivery, and with its accompaniments of a 
 solemn and crowded festival. The only i)crsons for whom the 
 written Iliad would be suitable, would be a select few ; studious 
 and curious men, — a class of renders, callable of analyzing the 
 complicated emotions which they had exi>erienced as hearers in 
 the crowd, and who would, on perusing the written words, realize 
 in their imaginations a sensible i)ortion of the impression com 
 municated by the reciter.' 
 
 149 
 
 > Nitzsch and W-.^lcker ar^'ue, thai because the Homeric poems were htam 
 with great delifrht and interest, therefore the tirst rudiments of the art of 
 writing, even whiU hoset by a thousand mechanical difficulties, would be 
 employed to reconl them. 1 cannot adopt this opinion, which appeare U 
 me to derive all ity plausibility from our present familiarity with reading 
 and writing. The Hrst step from the recited to the written poem is reallf 
 niic of great Wolence, as well a^ useless for any want then actnally felt. 1 
 
 Incredible as the statement may seem in an agt like the pred« 
 ent, there is in all early societies, and there was in early Greece, 
 a time when no such reading class existed. If we could discover 
 at what time such a class first began to be formed, we should be 
 able to make a guess at the time when the old Epic poems were 
 tirst committed to writing. Now the period which may with the 
 greatest probability be fixed upon as having first witnessed the 
 formation even of the narrowest reading class in Greece, is the 
 middle of the seventh century before the Christian era (b. c. ('^i'>(i 
 to B. c. 630), — the age of Terpander, Kallinus, Archilochus, 
 Simonides of Amorgus, etc. I ground this supposition on the 
 change then operated in the character and tendencies of Grecian 
 poetry and music, — the elegiac and iambic measures having 
 been introduced as rivals to the primitive hexameter, and poetical 
 compositions having been transferred from the epical past in 
 the affairs of present and real life. Such a change was inii)or- 
 t;mt at a time when poetry was the only known mode of publicar 
 tion (to use a modem phrase not altogether suitable, yet the 
 nearest approaching to the sense). It argued a new way of 
 looking at the old epical treasures of the people, as well as a 
 
 much more agree with Wolf when he says: '' Diu enim illorum hominura 
 vita ft simplicitas nihil admodum habuit, quod scriptuni di;;num videretur: 
 in aliis omnibus occupati aj^unt ilH, quie posteri scribunt, vel (ut de quibus- 
 d;im populis accepimus) ctiam monstnuam operam banc spernunt t^inquam 
 indccori otii : carmina autem quae pangunt, longo usu sic ore fundere et 
 excipere consnevernnt, ut cantu et recitatione cum maxime vigentia deducere 
 ad mutas notas, ex illius letatis sensn nihil aliud esset, quam perimere ea et 
 vitali vi ac s[)iritu j)rivare." (Prolegom. s. xv. p. 59.) 
 
 Some good remarks on this subject are to be found in William Humboldt's 
 IntrotUiction to his elaborate treatise Ueber die Kawi-Spracke, in reference to 
 the oral tales current among the Bascjuca. He, too, observes how great and 
 repulsive a proceedinj^ it is, to pass at first from verse sung, or recited, to 
 verse written; implying that the words are conceived detached from the 
 Vortrn<f, the accompanying^ music, and the surrounding and sympathizing 
 assembly. The Basque tales have no charm for the people themselves, when 
 put in Spanish words and read (Introduction, sect. xx. p. 258-259). 
 
 Unwritten prose tales, preserved in the memory, and said to be repeated 
 nearly in the s^me words from age to age, are mentioned by Mariner, in the 
 Tonsra Islands (Mariner's Account, vol. ii. p. 377). 
 
 The Druidical poems were kept unwritten by design, after writing wm la 
 eetablishcd u.s9 for other purposes (Casar, B. G. vi. 13). 
 
 I: 
 
IM) 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEKCE 
 
 HOMERIC POEMS PRESERVED UNWRITTEN. 
 
 151 
 
 thirst for nev^ poetical effect ; and the men who stood frrward m 
 it may weU be considered as desirous to study, and competent to 
 criticize, from their own individuftl point of view, the written 
 words of the Homeric rhapsodes, just as we are told tliat Kallinu3 
 both noticed and eulogized the Thebais as the production of Ho- 
 mer. There seems, therefore, ground for conjecturing, that (for 
 tlie use of this i.ewly-formed and important, but very narrow 
 class) manuscrii>ts of the Homeric poems and other old epics — 
 the Tliebais and the Cypria as well as the Iliad and the Odyssey 
 — began to be compiled towards the middle of the seventh cen- 
 tury b. c. :» and the opening of Egypt to Grecian commerce, 
 wliich took i)lace about the same [»eriod, would furnish increased 
 facilities for obtaining the retiui>ite papyrus to write upon. A 
 reading class, when once formed, would doubtless slowly increase, 
 and the number cf manuscrii)ts along with it ; so that before the 
 time of Solon, iiiXy years afterwards, both readers and manu- 
 Bcripts, though still comi)aratively few, might have attained a 
 certain recognized authority, and formed a tribunal of reference, 
 a^'ainst the carelessness of individual rhapsodes. 
 
 We may, I think, consider the Iliad and Odyssey to have been 
 preserved withoui the aid of writing, for a period near upon two 
 centuries.2 But is it true, as Wolf imagined, and as other able 
 
 ' Mr. Fynes Clinton (Fasti Hellenici, vol. i. pp. 368-373) treats it as a 
 matter oi' certainty that Archilochus and Alkman u^rote their poems. I am 
 not aware of any evidence for announcing this as positively known, — ex- 
 cept indeed, an admission of Wolf, which is, doubtless, {jood as an argximeH- 
 turn ad hominem, hut; is not to he received as proof (Wolf, Prolcg, p. 50). 
 The evidences mertioned hy Mr. Clinton (p. 368) certainly cannot b^ 
 r^^'^^arded as proving anvthint; to the point. 
 
 ' Giese (Ueber den .¥.ohsrhen Dialekt, p. 172) places the first writing of 
 the separate rhapso.Hcs composint: the Iliad in the seventh century B. C 
 
 « The songs of the Icelandic Skalds were preserved orally for a period 
 lonc-cr than two centuries,— P. A Mailer thinks very much longer,— 
 before they were collected, or embodied in written story by Snorro and 
 Sieinund (Lan-e, Untersuchungen Qber die Gesch. der Nordischen Heldcn- 
 sage p 98; also, Introduct. pp. xx-xxviii). He confounds, however, ofter., 
 the presc^^•atiun of the songs from old time, -with the question, whether 
 thev have or have not an historical basis. 
 
 iVnd there were, doubtless, many old ()ards and rhapsodes in ancient 
 Greece cf whom the same mi-ht be said wliich Saxo GrammaUcus affirmi 
 of an k nglishman named Lucas, that he was " Uteris ttuidenP tenuiter u» 
 
 entics have imagined, also, that the separate portions of which 
 these two poems are composed were originally distinct epica' 
 ballads, each constituting a separate whole and intended foi 
 separate recitation? Is it true, that they had not only no com- 
 mon author, but originally, neither common purpose nor fixed 
 order, and that their first permanent arrangement and integration 
 was delayed for three centuries, and accomplished at last only 
 by the tiiste of Peisistratus conjoined w^ith various lettered 
 
 friends ?^ 
 
 This hypothesis — to which the genius of Wolf first gave 
 celebrity, but which has been since enforced more in detail by 
 others, especially by William MuUer and Lachmarm — appears 
 to me not only unsupported by any suflicient testimony, but also 
 opposed to other testimony as well as to a strong force of inter- 
 nal probability. The authorities quoted by Wolf are Josei)hus, 
 Cicero, and Pausanias :^ Josephus mentions nothing about Pei- 
 
 structus, sed historiarum scientiii apprirae eruditus." (Dalilmann, Ilistorischa 
 
 Forschungen, vol. ii. p. 176.) 
 
 * " Homer wrote a sequel of songs and rliapsodies, to be sung by himself 
 for small earnings and good cheer, at festivals and other days of merriment; 
 the Iliad he made for the men, the Odysseus for the other sex. These loose 
 songs were not collected together into the form of an epic poem until 500 
 
 fears after." 
 
 Such is the naked language in which Wolf's main hypothesis had beeo 
 previously set forth by Bentley, in his " Remarks on a late Discourse of 
 freethinliing, by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis," published in 1713: the passage 
 remained unaltered in the seventh edition of that treatise published in 1737 
 See Wolf's Troleg. xxvii. p. 115. 
 
 The same hypothesis may be seen more amply developed, partly m the 
 work of Wolfs pupil and admirer, William Mailer, Uomerisclie VorschuU 
 (the second edition of which was published at Leipsic, 1836, with an excel- 
 lent introduction and notes by Baumgarten-Crusius, adding greatly to the 
 value of the original work by its dispassionate review of the whole contro- 
 versy), partly in two valuable Dissertations of Lachraann, published in tho 
 Philological Transactions of the Berlin Academy for 1837 and 1841. 
 
 « Joseph, cont. Apion. i. 2 ; Cicero de Orator, iii. 34; Pausan. vii. 2C, 6: 
 eora}>are the Scholion on Plautus in Ritschl, Die Alexandrin. Bibliothek, p. 
 i. yElian (V. H. xiii. 14 j), who mentions both the introduction of the 
 Homeric poems into Peloponnesus by Lykurgus, and the compilation bj 
 Peisistratus, can hardly be considered as adding to the value of the testi- 
 mony : still less, Libanius and Suidas. What we learn is, that some literary 
 ind critical men of the Alexandrine age (rao'-e or fewer, as the case via] 
 
 t 
 
 .V 
 
REGULATIONS OF flOT/JN. 
 
 153 
 
 ld2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tifltratu8, but nicnly states (what we may accept as the prohahio 
 fact) thut t!i«' Homeric jKurns wore originally unwritten, and 
 preservcil only in j^ont^s or recitations, from which they were at A 
 subsfNjuciii period put in!owritin«r: hence manyof th(* (liscrepuji- 
 cies in the t«xt. On the other hand, Cicero an<l Pau^anias 350 
 farther, and affirm tluit l'<"i>i>tr:itus }>oth colh'cted, and arran«[^etl 
 in the existing order, fh" ihapsodies of tlie Iliad and Odyssey, 
 (imjdied a- poems orijrin^iHv enfin, and suhseipK-ntly broken inti 
 pieces,) which he foun<l partly contused and partly isolated from 
 each other, — each part being then remembered only in its own 
 jKM-tion of the Grecian world. Respecting Ilipparchus the son 
 of Peisislratus, too, we arc told in the Pseudo-Platonic dialogue 
 which bears his name, that ho was the tirst to introthice into 
 Attica, the po«>try of Homer, and that he prescribed to the rhap- 
 sode> to recite the parts of the Panathenaic festival in regular 
 gequcuce.' 
 
 \Volf and William Miller CKX*asionally s[H"ak as if they admit- 
 ted something like an lli;ni and Ody>sey as established aggregates 
 j)rior to Pei^istratus; but for the most part ihey represent him or 
 his &*sociates as having been the tirst to put together Homeric 
 j^oems which were before distinct aiul self-existent conij>08itions. 
 And Lachmann, the recent expositor of the same theory, ascribes 
 to Peisistratus still inoro uneijuivoi-ally this original integration 
 of part^ in reference to the IHiid, — distributing the tirst twenty- 
 two books of the j>oem into sixteen separate songs, and treating ii 
 as ridiculous to imagine that the fusion of these songs, into an 
 order such as we now read, belongs to any date earlier than 
 Peisistraius.- 
 
 he; but Wolf exiijr^crsites wht n ho talks of an vnatiimous conviction) spoko 
 of reisistratus as having tirst put together the fractional jiarts of the Iliail 
 and Odvsscv into entire poems. 
 
 » Plato, Hip] •arch. p. 228. 
 
 * *' Doch ich koniino niir Hald lacherlich von wenn ieh noch immer die 
 Moglichkeit gelten lus.<c. dass wnsere Ilias in dem «regen\vnrtigen Zusam- 
 memhansre der bedeutenden Theile, nnd nieht bios der wenijren bedeutond- 
 sten, jemals vor der Arbeit des Pisistrftttis gedacht worden sey." (Lachmann, 
 Femcre Bctrachtungen Ohcr die Ilias, !»ect. xxviii. p. 32 ; Abhandlnn«,^n B<t 
 lin. Academ. 1841.) How firr this admission — that for the fetv most tm}x>r 
 tatd portions of the Iliad, thei-e did exist an established order of saccesiiion 
 prior to Peisistratias — is intended to reach, I do not know j but the language 
 
 Upon this tlieory we may renuirk, first, that it stands opposed 
 to the testimony existing respecting the regulations of So26n; 
 whO; before the time of Peisistratus, had enforced a fixed order 
 of lecitation on the rhapsodes of the Iliad at the l*anathenaic 
 festival ; not only directing that they should go through the 
 rhapsodies sen'dtim, and without omission or corruption, but also 
 establishing a prompter or censorial authority to insure obedience,* 
 
 of Laehmann goes fartlior than either Wolf or William Miiller. (Sec WollJ 
 Prolegomen. pp. exli-<xlii, and W. Midler, Homerische Vorschule, Absch 
 nitt. vii. pp. 96, 98, 100, 102.) The latter admits that neither Pelsistratuj 
 nor the Diaskeuasts couhl have made any considerable changes in the lliiio 
 and ()dys.sey, either in the way of addition or of transposition ; the i)oem» 
 as a<.,'j;rejjjates beinfj^ too well known, and the lloraeric vein of invention too 
 completely e.xtinct, to admit of such novelties, 
 
 I confess, I do not see how these last-mentioned admissions can be rccon- 
 eiletl with the main doctrine of Wolf, in so fju- as regards l*eisistrq^u.s. 
 
 ' Diogen. LaCrt. i 57. — Ta di- '0^r;/>ou [^ vTro/JoAz/f yiypa^e (loAuv) 
 (ia\lHf)6no-&aiy olov otzov 6 irpuTog Daj^fv, thcn^ev upxtodai top upj^u/ievoVf 
 <jf ipi/ai Aievxif^ag Iv Toig 'MeyapcKolg. 
 
 Kespecting Ilipparchus, son of Peisistratus, the Pseudo-Plato tells us (in 
 the dialogue soc;dled, p. 228), — Kal ru 'Ofir/pov Itttj irpCtTuc CKofuatv dg rf/v 
 \yv TavTT/vlf Kai ijuuyKaae tuvq (iaTpipdovg Hava^r/vaioig e^ VTro/L^yfof 
 ioi^r/g avTu duivaiy uo tt ep v vv In oiie iroiovaL. 
 
 These words have provoked uultiplied eriticisras from all the learned 
 men who have touched upon tJie theory of the Homeric poems, — to deter- 
 mine wluit was the practice which Solon found existing, and wh:.t was the 
 change which he introduced. Our information is too scanty to pretend »o 
 certainty, but I thiuk the exphuiation of Hermann the most satisfactorf 
 (" Quid sit viroiSok^ et v tt ofiXf) 6 rj v." — Opuscula, torn. v. p. 300, torn. 
 
 vii. p. 162). 
 
 'T7ro/3oXfif h the technical term for the prompter at a theatrical represen- 
 tation (Plutarch, Praicept gerend. Ueip. p. 813); viroiio/if} and vtzoj^uXXelv 
 hare corresponding meanings, of aiding the memory of a speaker and keep- 
 ing him in accordance with a certain standard, in possession of the prompter: 
 Bce the words k^ vno^olfiq^ Xenophon. Cyropxed. iii. 3, 37. *YTro/3o/.^, there- 
 fore, has no necessary connection with a series of rhapsodes, but would apply 
 just as much to one alone ; although it happens in this case to be broughl 
 t3 bear upon several in succession. 'TiroAij-ffjic, again, means ** the taking 
 op in saccession of one rhapsode by another :" though the two words, there- 
 ft>re, have not the same meaning, yet the proceeding described in the two 
 passages, in reference both to Sol»')n and Hipparchus, api>ear8 to be in 
 iubstancc the same, — i,e. to insure by compulsory supervision, a conoc^ 
 
 3t 
 
 
161 
 
 rirsroRY of greece. 
 
 which implies the existence (at the >am«' time that it proclaims 
 
 the oceasioiuil infriii^'iMuent) of an ordt rly a-^ncgate, as well a^ 
 or mamiscripts proresse<lly complete. Next, tlic theory ascribe? 
 a) Prisi>tratus a character not only materially ditlerent from 
 what is iniiicated hy Cicero and Pausania^. — who re[)resent 
 him. not as having }m; together ;itom^ originally distinct, hut a^ 
 t)ie renovator of an am-ient onler snl>se<iiiently lo-f, — hut also 
 ID itself unintelligihle, and inconsistent with (ireiian hahit and 
 feeling. That reisisiratns should take pain^ to repr.-^> tli.' 
 license, or make np for the unfaithful memory, of individual 
 rhapsodes, and to < nnohle the Panathenaie f.v^tival by the most 
 correct recital (»f a great and verurahle poem, according to th«! 
 
 PE<JrT.ATIONS OF PEISISTRATUS. 
 
 15d 
 
 and orderly rr.itatiun l>y the succrssive rhapsodes who Avcnt tlu-ouirh the 
 
 ditlerent partes of tlie ])Ovni. 
 
 There i> i;«">'l nason t > r(nirlu<lo from this pa>?;age that the rhap^xle- 
 before Sol6n were guilty both of nei;lii:etire aiul of otni^^ioii in tlnir ixvitu] 
 ©f Hom.T, but no iva>on to imapne either tlint th.y tiansiH.std tlir hooks, 
 or that the lejritiniate onh r was not prrviously ir.o-ni/ed. 
 
 The appointment of a systcmaii*- -tm ^.>>.. if, or promptei, {>hrmly iiuli(aa» 
 ihe exi>itence of conijilete munuseripts. 
 
 The direction of SoI.".r, that ilomer sh<ml»l 1-e rhapso.lizcl lui.Ur uiq 
 iceurity of a prompter wiih his iH:iiiu>en{)t. appear^ ju-t the same as that of 
 the orator Lykur^Mis in leferent-e to ^r.sehybi^. Sophokles, and Kurii>id<iM 
 (Pseudo-Plutarch. Vit. X. Hhetor. Lyeur^d Vit.) — f'>V'. ''f''/''^ 
 
 <:,{> j^a'AKuc eU6va(: uva^fivai run' ttouitCjv Alcxv>.'n\ :Li',,i>h/.tovr, Evfu 
 
 TTi'dof, Kai rue Tpa}it}dia<: avTui ^■.' : ,><iil'a{iti"rr vv/urrur, Kat W-r r/,i 
 
 roAfcjf ypafifiarea irapaio] t}VijaKeiv tok; i-oKiUn'u ■ <ii }np #c'/i' aiTdi 
 
 {aX?.u() 'i'K0Kpiv6C-&at. Tlie word ,:>/ur. which occurs la>t hut one. is intro- 
 duced bv the conjecture of Grysar, who has cited ami cxphiined the above 
 passajre of the Pscudo-P'utareh in a vahiablo dissertation — /A- (,'nrrurum 
 TriKfadid, qualis fuit cirri temjxtm iM nu>sf/uNt's (Colo<rne, 1830). AH the 
 critics adroit the text as it now stands to bo unintelliiiible, and various cor- 
 rections have been propo^etl, anion- which that of Grysar seems the best. 
 From his Dissertation, 1 transcribe the following passage, which illustratei 
 the rhapsodizing of Homer ^c v7to.I>7.^^ : — 
 
 " Quum histriones fabulis interpolandis «gre abstinerent, Lycurgus legem 
 supra indicatam eo tulit onsilio, ut recitationes histrionum cum publico illo 
 exemplo ommao conpruns redderet. Quod ut assecpieretur, constituit, ut 
 dura fabula in scena recitarentur. scriba puMicus simul exemplum civitatia 
 icopiceret, juxto sive in ifieatro sive in poslMcnio sedens. Hac enim verbi 
 TupavaynuaKetv est signiticatio, posita pra3cipue in prsepositione rrapa, at 
 idem sit, quod contra sive Jiirta legere ; id quod faciunt ii, qui lecta ab alUn 
 •e/ tfritata cum s:iis cori/t^rv cupiurU.''^ (Grysar, p. 7.) 
 
 standard received among the best judges in Greece, — thi« is a 
 task both suitable to his position, and recpiiring nothing more 
 than an improved recension, together with exact adherence to it 
 on the part of the rhapsodes. But what motive had he to string 
 together several p»ems, previously known only as separate, into 
 one new whole? What feeling could he gratify by introducitt;? 
 the extensive changes and transpositions surmised by Lai'hmanu, 
 for the purpose of binding together sixteen songs, which ti»e 
 rhapsodes are assumed to have been accustomed to recite. aiK* 
 the people to hear, ea(di by itself apart? Peisistratus was not a 
 I>oet, seeking to interest the public mind by new creations and 
 cond>inations, but a ruler, desirous to impart solemnity to a greaf 
 religious festival in his native city. Now such a i>inpose uould 
 be answered by selecting, amidst the divergences of rhapHxlea 
 in ditlerent parts of Greece, that order of text which intelligent 
 men couhl approve as a reti'.rn to the pure and pri=tuie Ihad; 
 but it woidd be defeated if he attempted large innovations of Um 
 own, and brought out for the first time a new Iliad by blending 
 together, altering, and transposing, many old and well-known 
 songs. A novelty so bold would have been more likely to ollend 
 thai* to plea.se both the critics and the multitude. And it it 
 were even enforced, by authority, at Athene, no probable reason 
 can be given why all the other towns, and all the rhapsodes 
 throughout Greece, should abnegate their previous habits in 
 favor^of it, since Athens at that time enjoyed no i)olitical ascen- 
 dency such as she accpiired during the following century. On 
 the whole, it will ai)pear that the character and position of 
 Peisistratus himself go far to negative the function which Wolf 
 and Lachmann put upon him. His interference presupposes 
 a certain foreknown and ancient aggregate, the main lineamente 
 of which were familiar to the Grecian public, although many of 
 th^3 rhapsodes in their practice may have deviated from it both 
 by omission and interpolation. In correcting the Athenian 
 recitations conformably with such understood general type, he 
 might hope both to procure respect for Athens, and to constitute 
 a fashion for the rest of Greece. But this step of " coUectin" 
 Ae torn body of sacred Homer," is something generically difler- 
 ent from the composition of a new Iliad out of preexisting song* 
 
 II 
 
15fi 
 
 HISTORY OF JREFCE. 
 
 the former is as easy, suitable, and promising, as the latter is 
 violent and gratuitous.^ 
 
 To sustain the inference, that Peisistratus was the first arch- 
 •tect of the Iliarl and Odyssey, it ought at least to be shown that 
 ao other long and continuous poems existed during the earlier 
 centuries. But the contrary of this is known to be the fact. 
 The ^thiopis of Arktinus, which contained nine thousand one 
 hundred verses, dates from a [lenod more than two centuries 
 earlier than Peisistratus: several other of the lost cyclic epics, 
 some among them of «;onsiderable length, appear during the 
 century succeeding Arktinus; and it is imi)ortant to notice that 
 three or four at least of these poems passed currently under tho 
 name of Homer;2 There is no greater intrinsic dilliculty in 
 
 ' That the Iliad or Odyssey were ever recited with all the parts entire, at 
 any time anterior to Solon, i^ a point whitli Hitscld denies (Die Alexandrin. 
 Bii)Uothek. pp. 67-70). He thinks that before Solon, they were always recited 
 ill parts, and without any fixed order amonj; the parts. Nor did Solon 
 determine (as he thinks) the order of t!io parts : he only checked the license 
 of the rliapsodes as to the recitation of tlie separate books : it was Pesistra- 
 tus, who, with the help of Onomakritus and others, first settled the order of 
 the parts and bound each poem into a whole, with some corrections and 
 interpolations. Nevertheless, he admits that the parts were originally com- 
 posetl by the same poet, and adapted to form a whole amoni,'st each other : 
 but this primitive enlireness (he asserts) was only maintained as a sort of 
 traditional belief, never reali/.ed in recitation, and never reduced to an obvi- 
 ous, unequivocal, and permanent Aict, — until the time of IVisistrutus. 
 
 There is no sufficient -rrc und, I think, for denying all entire recitation 
 previous to Solon, and wc only interpose a new difficulty, l>oth grave ani 
 gratuitous, bv doing so. 
 
 « The ^Lthiopis of Arktiuas contained nine thousand one hundred verses 
 as we learn from the Tabula Iliaca : yet Troklus assigns to it only four 
 books. The Ilias Minor had four books, tlie Cyprian Verses eleven, thoog,*- 
 we do not know the number of lines in either. 
 
 Nitzsch states it as a certam matter of fad, that Arktinus recited his own 
 poem a^one, though it was too long to admit of his doing so without interrup- 
 tion. (See his Vorrede to the second vol. of the Odyssey, p. xxiv.) There 
 is no evidence for this assertion, and it appears to me highly improbable. 
 
 In reference to the Romances of the Middle Ages, belonging to the Cycle 
 of the Round Table, M. P^auriel tells us that the German Ptrceval hixs nearl/ 
 iwentv-five thousand verses (more than half as long again as the Iliad) ; the 
 Perceval of Christian of Troyes, probably more ; the German Tristan, of 
 Ck)dfr«v of StrasburL'. has more tht\n twenty-three thousand ; aometimes, th£ 
 
 AGGREGATE ILIAD AND ODYSsSEY- 
 
 157 
 
 inpposiig long epics to have begun with the Iliad and Odyssey 
 than with the ^thiopis : the ascendency of the name of Homer 
 and the subordinate position of Arktinus, in the history of early 
 Grecian poetry, tend to prove the former in preference to the 
 
 latter. 
 
 Moreover, we find particular portions of the Iliad, which 
 expressly pronounce themselves, by the'r own internal evidence, 
 as belono^ino' to a large whole, and not as separate integers. We 
 C4U1 hardly conceive the Catalogue in the second book, except as 
 a fractional composition, and with reference to a series of ap- 
 proaching exploits ; for, taken apart by itself, such a barren enu- 
 meration of names could have stimulated neither the fancy of the 
 poet, nor the attention of the listeners. But the Homeric Cata- 
 logue had acquired a sort of canonical authority even in the time 
 of Solon, insomuch that he interpolated a line into it, or waa 
 accused of doing so, for the purpose of gaining a disputed point 
 against the Megarians, who, on their side, set forth another 
 version.! No such established reverence could have been felt for 
 this document, unless there had existed for a long time prior to 
 Peisistratus, the habit of regarding and listening to the Iliad as 
 a continuous poem. And when the philosopher Xenophanes, 
 contemporary with Peisistratus, noticed Homer as the universal 
 teacher, and denounced him as an unworthy describer of the gods, 
 he must have connected this great mental sway, not with a number 
 of unconnected rhapsodies, but with an aggregate Iliad and 
 Odyssey ; probably with other poems, also, ascribed to the same 
 author, such as the Cypria, Epigoni, and Thebais. 
 
 We find, it is true, references in various authors to portions ol 
 the Iliad, each by its own separate name, such as the Teichom- 
 achy, the Aristeia (preeminent exploits) of Diomedes, or Aga- 
 memnon, the Doloneia, or Night-expedition (of Dolon as well 
 
 poem is begun by one author, and continued by another. (Fauriel, Remans 
 de Chevalerie, Revue des Deux Mondcs, t. xiii. pp. 695-697.) 
 
 The ancient unwritten poems of the Icelandic Skalds are as much lyric 
 as epic : the longest of them does not exceed eight hundred lines, and they 
 «w for the most part much shorter, (Untersuchungen iiber die Geschichte del 
 Nordischen Heldensage, aus P. A. Miiller's Sagabibliothek von G. " 
 Frankf. 1832, Introdaet. t xliL) 
 
 ^ Plutarch, Solon, 10. 
 
\5S 
 
 filSTUKY OF GREECE. 
 
 AGGREGATE ILIAD AND ODYSSEY. 
 
 159 
 
 as of Odysseus and I)ioino<ies), etc., and hence, it has beeft 
 concluded, that these portions originally existed as separate 
 poems, beft re they were cemented together into an Iliad. ]5ut 
 such references prove nothing to the point ; tor until tfie Iliad 
 was divided by Aristarchus and his colleagues into a given 
 number of books, or rhapsodies, designated by the series of letters 
 in the al{)habet, there wjis no method of calling attention to any 
 particular portion of the i>0€m exce[)t l»y sj)ecial indication of 
 its subject-matter.' Authors subseijuent to IV'isi>tratiis, surli as 
 Herodotus and Plato, v ho unquestionably conceived tlie Ilia<l as 
 a whole, cite the separate fractions of it by designations of this 
 sort. 
 
 The foregoing remarks on the Woltian hypothesis respecting 
 the t«'xt of the Iliad, tend to separate two points which are by no 
 means necessarily connected, though that hypothesis, as set fortli 
 by Wolf himself, by \V. Midler, and by Lachmann, presents the 
 two in conjunction. First, was the Iliad originally projected and 
 com[>osed by one author, and as one {>oem, or were the different 
 parts composed sepanttely and by uneoimected authors, and 
 subsequently strung together into an aggregate ? Secondly, 
 assuming that the internal evidences of the poem negative the 
 former supposition, and drive us upon the latter, was the con- 
 struction of the whole poem deferred, and did the parts exist only 
 in their separate state, until a period so late as the reign of 
 Peisistratus ? It is obvious that these two questions are essen- 
 tially separate, and that a man may believe the Iliad to have 
 been put together out of preexisting songs, without recognizing 
 the age of Peisistratus as the j)eriod of its tirst compilation. 
 Now, whatever may be the steps through which the poem passed 
 to its ultimate integrity, there is sufficient reason tor believing 
 that they had been accomplished long before tliat period : the 
 friends of Peisistratus found an Iliad already existing and already 
 ancient in their time, even granting that the poem had not been 
 ongioally born in a state of unity. Moreover, the Alexandrine 
 critics, whose remarks tire preserved in the Scholia, do not even 
 notice the Peisistratic recension among the many manuscript* 
 
 • The Homeric Scholiast refers to Quintus Calaber h rr) ' AfiaCovofxaxi^ 
 irhich was v/nly one portion >f his long poem (Schol. ad Iliad, ii. 220). 
 
 which they had before them : and Mr. Payne Knight justly 
 iafers from their silence that either they did not possess it, or it 
 was in tlieir eyes of no great authority ;' which could ne\er have 
 been the case if it had been the prime originator of Ilome/ic 
 unity. 
 
 The line of argument, by which the advocates of \Voir*fl 
 hypothesis negative the primitive unity of the poem, consists in 
 exposing gaps, incongruities, contradictions, etc, between the 
 separate parts. Now, if in spite of all these incoherences, 
 standing mementos of an antecedent state of separation, the 
 component poems were made to coalesce so intimately as to 
 appear as if they had been one from the beginning, we can better 
 understand the complete success of the proceeding and the uni- 
 versal prevalence of the illusion, by supposing such coalescence 
 to have taken place at a very early period, during the productive 
 days of epical genius, and before the growth of reading and criti- 
 cism. The longer the aggregation of the separate poems was 
 deferred, the harder it would be to obliterate in men's minds the 
 previous state of separation, and to make them accept the new 
 aggregate as an original unity. The bards or rhapsodes might 
 have found comparatively little difliculty in thus piecing together 
 distinct songs, during the ninth or eighth century before Christ; 
 
 * Kni{^ht, Frolcgg. Homer, xxxii. xxxvi. xxxvii. That Peisistratus 
 caused a corrected MS. of the Iliad to be jjreparcd, there seems good reason 
 to believe, and the Scholion on Plautus edited by Kitschl (see Die Alcxan- 
 drinische Bibliothek, p. 4) s|>ecifies the four j)ersons (Onomakritus was one) 
 employed on the task. Kitschl fancies that it served as a sort of Vulf^ate 
 for the text of the Alexandrine critics, who named specially other M8S. 
 (of Chios, Sinope, Massalia, etc.) only when they diverged from this Vul- 
 gate: he thinks, also, that it formed the original from whence those other 
 MSS. were first drawn, which are called in the Homeric Scholia al Koivaly 
 KOLVoTtpai (pp. 59-CO). 
 
 Welcker supposes the Peisistratic MS. to have been either lost or carried 
 away when Xerxes took Athens (Dcr Epische Kyklus, pp. 382-388). 
 
 Compare Nitzsch, Hisior. Homer. Fasc. i. pp. 165-167 ; also his commen* 
 tary on OdyBS. xi. 604, the alleged interpolation of Onomakritus j and Ulrid, 
 Gesclilchte der Hellen. Pees. Part i. s. vii. pp. 252-255. 
 
 The main facts respecting the Peisistratic recension are collected and 
 discussed by Grafenhan, Geschichte der Philologie, sect. 54-64, vol L 
 pp. 266-311. Unfortonstely, we caonot get beyond mere conjecture and 
 powibility. 
 
160 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 but it we sup|X)»e the process to be deferred until tLe Utter half 
 «f the sixth century, — ii" we imagine that Solon, with all his 
 conteraporaries and piedecessors, knew nothing about any aggre- 
 gate Iliad, but was accustomed to read and liear only those six- 
 teen distinct epical piece's into wliirh Lachmaun would dissect 
 th*» Iliad, each of tlie sixteen bearing a separate name of its 
 own, — no comj)ilation tlien for the first time made by the friends 
 pf Peisistratus could have eifaced the established habit, and 
 planted itself in the general convictions of Greece as the j)rimi- 
 tive Homeric production. Had the sixteen pieces remained dis- 
 united and individualized down to the time of l*eisistratus, 
 they would in all probability have continued so ever afterwards; 
 nor could tlie extensive changes and transpositions which (ac- 
 cording to Laclimaiui's theory) were reipiired to melt them down 
 into our present Iliad, have obtained at that late period universal 
 acce()tance. Assuming it to be true that such clianires and trans- 
 positions did really take place, they must at least be referred to 
 a period greatly earlier than Peisistratus or Solon. 
 
 The whole tenor of the {)oems themselves confirms what is 
 h(M'e remarked. There is nothing either in the Iliad or Odyssey 
 which savors of modernism, applying that tenn to the age of 
 Peisistratus ; nothing which brings to our view the alterations, 
 brought about by two centuries, in the Greek language, the 
 coined money, the habits of writing and reading, the despotisms 
 and republican governnients, the close military array, the im- 
 proved construction of shi|)s, the Am})hiktyonic convocations, the 
 mutual frequentation of religious festivals, the Oriental and 
 Egyptian veins of religion, etc., familiar to the latter epoch. 
 These alterations Onomakritus and the other literary friends of 
 Peisistratus, could hardly have failed to notice even without 
 design, had ihay then for the first time undertaken the task of 
 piecing together many self-existent epics into one large aggre- 
 gate.^ Everything in the two great Homeric poems, both in 
 
 ' W.-\If allows bc"th the uniformity of coloring, and the antiquity of color 
 tag, i« hich pervade the Homeric poems ; also, the strong line by which they 
 •tand distinguished from the other Greek poets : " Immo congruunt in iis 
 omnia ferme in idem ingenium, in eosdem mores, in eandem formam sentientli 
 •C loqaendi.** (Prolegom. p. cclxv; compare p. cxxxviii.; 
 
 He thinks, indeed, that this harmonr was restored by the ability and care 
 
 LATER INTEGRATION IMPOSSIBLE. 
 
 161 
 
 substance and in language, belongs to an age two or three cen» 
 turics earlier than Peisistratus. Indeed, even the interpolationi 
 (or those passages which on the best grounds are pronounced to 
 be such) betray no trace of the sixth century before Christ, and 
 may well have been heard by Archilochus and Kallinus, — in 
 some cases even by Arktinus and Ilesiod, — as genuine Homeric 
 matter. As far as the evidences on the case, as well internal as 
 external, enable us to judge, we seem warranted in believing tliat 
 the Iliad and Odyssey were recited substantially as they now 
 stand, (always allowing for partial divergences of text, and inter- 
 polations,) in 77 G B. c, our first trustworthy mark of Gre- 
 cian time. And this ancient date, — let it be added, — as it is 
 the best-authenticated fact, so it is also the most important attri- 
 bute of the Homeric poems, considered in reference to Grecian 
 history. For they thus afford us an insight into the ante-histor- 
 ical character of the Greeks, — enabling us to trace the sub- 
 sequent forward march of the nation, and to seize instructive 
 contrasts between their former and their later condition. 
 
 Rejecting, therefore, the idea of compilation by Peisistratus, 
 and referring the present state of the Iliad and Odyssey to a 
 period more than two centuries earlier, the question still remains, 
 by what process, or through whose agency, they reached that 
 state ? Is each poem the work of one author, or of several ? If 
 the latter, do all the parts belong to the same age ? What ground 
 is there for believing, that any or all of these parts existed before, 
 as separate poems, and have been accommodated to the place in 
 which they now a{)pear, by more or less systematic alteration ? 
 
 The acute and valuable Prolegomena of Wolf, half a century 
 ago, powerfully turned the attention of scholars to the necessity 
 of considering the Iliad and Odyssey with reference to the ago 
 and society in which they arose, and to the material diff*erence« 
 in this respect between Homer and more recent epic poets.* 
 
 of Aristarchus, (" mirificum ilium conccntum revocatum Aristarcho impri- 
 mis debemus.") This is a very exaggerated estimate of the interference 
 of Aristarchus : but at any rate the concentus itiself was ancient and original, 
 and Aristarchus only restored it, when it had been spoiled by interveuinf 
 accidents ; at least, if we are to construe revocatum strictly, which, perhaps, 
 ii hardly consistent with Wolf's main theory. 
 * See Wolf, Prolegg. c. xii. p. xliii. " Nondum enim prorsus ejecta il 
 
 TOL. n. Hoc 
 
lt>2 
 
 HISrORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 Since that time, an elaliorate study has been bestowed upon thi 
 early maniftitations of poetry (Sagen-poesie) among other na. 
 lions; and the German critics especially, among vhom ihia 
 descrij>tion of literature has been most cultivated, have selected 
 it a.s the only ai)propriate analogy for the Homeric poems. Such 
 poetry, consisting for the most part of short, artless effusions, 
 with little of deliberate or far-sighted combination, htis been 
 assumed by man}' critics as a fit standard to apply for measuring 
 the ca})acities of the Homeric age ; an age exclusively of speak- 
 ers, singers, and hearers, not of readers or writers. In place of 
 the unbounded auiniraiion which was felt for Homer, not merely 
 a-< a poet of detail, but as constructor of a long epic, at the time 
 M hen Wolf wrote his rruhgoineiia, the tone of criticism j[)assed 
 to the opposite extreme, and attention was fixed entirely upon 
 tlic defects in the arrangement of the Iliad and Odyssey. What- 
 ever was to be found in them of symmetry or pervading system, 
 was j)ronounced to be decidedly post-Homeric. Under such pre- 
 conceived anticipations. Homer seems to have been genenilly 
 studied in Germany, during the generation succeeding Wolf, the 
 negative portion of whose theory was usually admitted, though 
 as to the positive substitute, — what ex[)lanation was to be given 
 of the history and present constitution of the Homeric poems, — 
 there was by no means tlie like agreement. During the last 
 ten years, Imwever. a contrary tendency has manifested itself; 
 the Woltian tlieory has been reexamined and shaken by Nitzsch, 
 who, as well as (). Muiler, Welcker, and other scholars, have 
 revived the idea A' original Homeric unity, under certain modifi- 
 cations. The change in Gothe's oi)inion, coincident with tliis 
 new direction, is recorded in one of his latest works.^ On the 
 
 explosa est conim ratio, qui Hornerum ct Cailimachuin et Virgilium ct 
 Koniuim ct Miltonum eodem animo legunt, ncc (|uid uniuscujiisque fctas 
 ferat, exi>eiKlere le^endo ct computarc laborant." etc. 
 
 A similar ami earlier attempt to construe the Homeric poems with refer- 
 ence to their age, i- to he seen in the treatise called // Vero Omero of Vice, 
 — marked with a jjood deal of original thought, but not strong in erudition 
 (()pere di Vico, ed. Milan, vol. v. pp. 437-497). 
 
 ' In the forty-sixth volume of his collected works, in the little treattst 
 'Homer, noch einmai':" compare G. Lange, Ueber die Kykfischen Dichtei 
 (Mainz 1837), Preface, p. vi. 
 
 diffic;lties involnhng the subject. 
 
 iGd 
 
 other hand, the original opinion of Wolf has also been repix^ 
 duced within the last live years, and fortified with several new 
 observations on the text o the Iliad, by Lachmann. 
 
 The point is thus still under controversy among able scholars, 
 and is i)robably destined to remain so. For, in truth, our means 
 of knowledge are so limited, that no man can produce arguments 
 sufticiently cogent to contend against opposing preconceptions; 
 and it creates a painful sentiment of diffidence when we read the 
 expressions of equal and absolute persuasion with which the two 
 opposite conclusions have both been advanced.i ^\ e have noth- 
 in. to teach us the history of these poems except the poems 
 themselves. Not only do we possess no collateral information 
 
 > ' Non esse totam Iliadem aut Odysseam unius poeta^ opus, ita extra 
 •dubit^^t onem positam puto, ut qui secus sentiat, eum non satis lectitassedla 
 earn ina contendam." (Godf. Hermann, Pr^fat. ^^ Odysseam I^^ 18^5 P 
 iv) See the language of the same eminent critic m hi. t.eatise Ueber 
 
 l^f^^o beginrdng of the eleventh book, and line five hundred and 
 i^^v of tie fifteenth, into four songs, ^Mn the »n^'i-;t ckgree d.ffc^^^^^^^^^ 
 Tir spi it » ('• ihrcm Geiste nach hochst verschicdene Lieder, ) tells us thai 
 their ^P>"^' _^ uifference of spirit inconsiderable, - whosoever d#es 
 
 .K Inl now beloi- to one artisticallv constructed Epos, -"will do 
 :^Z:rtZ:. ^^ any more either with my criticisms or wiUi e^ 
 Letrv because he is too weak to understand anything about it, ( ^vul tr 
 Ls^k^ar^^etwasdarin zu verstehen:"; I^eriiere Betrachtungen Leber 
 
 .JZ^^^TS^lner satisfies perfectly, in the main, all the e-gencies of 
 Tartis tc epic - adds, that this will make itself at once evident to all those 
 Thotve al^ense of artistical symmetry; but that, for those to whom thai 
 Tense is wan ing, no conclusive demonstration can be given He wanis th, 
 atter however hat they are not to deny the existence of that which their 
 str ^igMed vi ion cannot distinguish, for everything cannot be made clear to 
 .Sof which the mature man sees through at a glance CUlnci, Gesch ichUi 
 tX^cl^^oXos. Part i. eh. vii. pp. 260-261 ). Read also Payne Kn.gh^ 
 pTokfc xxvii, about the insanity of the Wolfian school, obvious even to 
 
 nirrm^flrt^^^ dissent fi.m both I^mann ^ Ulricl ; for U 
 appertomeamistakelopatthe Diad and Odyssey od the saaie footing 
 M Ulrici does, and as is tw ftequently dooe by othera. 
 
184 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCT:. 
 
 HOMERIC UNITY. 
 
 16d 
 
 respecting tliem or th«ir authors, but we have no one to describ« 
 to us the peo[)le or the age in which they originated ; our knowl- 
 edge respecting contemporary Homeric society, is collected exclu- 
 gively from the Homeric compositions themselves. We are 
 ignorant whetiier any other, or what other, poems preceded them, 
 or divided with them the public favor ; nor have we anything 
 better than conjecture to dotemiine eith<T the circumstances 
 under which they wen; brought before tlie liearers, or the condi- 
 tions which a bard of that day was required to satisfy. On all 
 these points, moreover, tlie age of Thucydides' and Plato seems 
 to have been no better informed than we are, except in so far as 
 they could profit by the analogies of the cycUc and other epic 
 poems, which would doubtless in intmy cases have atforded vahi- 
 able aid. 
 
 Nevertheless, no classical scholar can be easy without some 
 opinion resjiecting the authorshif) of these immortal poems. And 
 the more defective the evidence we possess, the more ess« ntial is 
 it that all that evidence should be marshalled in the clearest 
 order, and its bearing upon the jxiints in controversy distinctly 
 understood beforehand. Both thesf^ conditions seem to have 
 been often neglected, throughout tlie long-continued Homeric 
 discussion. 
 
 To illustrate the fust point: Since two poems are compre- 
 hended in the problem to be solved, the natural process would be, 
 first, to study the easier of the two, and then to apply the conclu- 
 sions thence deduced as a means of explaining the other. Now, 
 the Odyssey, looking at its ag^^regate character, is incomparably 
 more easy to comprehend than the Iliad. Yet most Homeric 
 critics apply the mien scope at once, and in the first instance, to 
 the Iliad. 
 
 To illustrate the second point : What evidence is sufficient to 
 negative the supposition that the Iliad or the Odyssey is a poem 
 originally and intentionally one ? Not simply particular gaps and 
 
 ' Plato, Aristode, and their contemporaries generally, read the most sus 
 picious portions of the Hon^ric poems as genuine (Nitzsch, Plan und €rang 
 der Odyssee, in the Prefae«j to his seeoiid vol. of Comments on the Odyssey, 
 pp. Ix-lxiv). 
 
 Thacydides accepts the Hymn to Apollo as a compositicn by tb« aathoi 
 of the Iliad. 
 
 contradictions, though they be even gross and numerous ; but the 
 preponderance of these proofs of mere unpi ei)ared coalescence 
 over the other proofs of designed adaptation scattered throughout 
 the whole poem. For the poet (or the co6i)erating poets, if more 
 than one) may have intended to compose an harmonious whole, 
 but may have realized their intention incompletely, and left 
 partial faults ; or, perhaps, the contradictory rm(\s may have crept 
 in through a corrupt text. A survey of the whole i)oem is 
 necessary to determine the question ; and this necessity, too, haa 
 not always been attended to. 
 
 If it had happened that the Odyssey had been preserved to ii8 
 alone, without the Iliad, I think the dispute respecting Homeric 
 unity would never have been raised. For the former is, in my 
 judgment, pervaded almost from beginning to end by marks of 
 designed adaptation; and the special faults which Wolf, W 
 Muller, and B. Thiersch,* have singled out for the purpose of 
 disproving such unity of intention, are so few, and of so liUle 
 importance, that they would have been universally regarded a3 
 mere instances of haste or unskilfulness on the part of the poet, 
 had they not been seconded by the far more i^werful battery 
 opened against the Iliad. These critics, having laid down their 
 general presumptions against the antiquity of the long epopee, 
 illustrate their principles by exposing the many Haws and fissures 
 in the Iliad, and then think it sufficient if they can show a few 
 similar defects in the Odyssey,— as if the breaking up of Homeric 
 unity in the former naturally entailed a similar necessity with 
 regard to the latter; and their method of proceeding, contrary to 
 the rule above laid down, puts the more difficult problem in the 
 foreground, as a means of solution for the easier. We can 
 hardly wonder, however, that they have applied their observa 
 tions in the first instance to the Iliad, because it is in every man's 
 esteem the more marked, striking, and impressive poem of the 
 two,— and the character of Homer is more intimately identified 
 witii it than with the Odyssey. This may serve as an explana- 
 tion of the course pursued ; but be the case as it may in re8i)ect 
 Co comparative poetical merit, it is not the less true, that, as ao 
 
 M 
 
 » Bemhard Thiersch, Uebcr das Zeitalter und Vaterland des Hornet 
 (Halbcrstadt, 1832), .'^linleitung, pp. 4-18. 
 
166 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ERRONEOUS INFI REXCE. 
 
 1G7 
 
 aggrej^ate, the Odjssey is more simple and easily understood, an<i 
 therefore, ought to come first in the order of analysis. 
 
 Now, looking at the Odyssey by itself, tlie |»roof's of an unity 
 of design seem unequivocal and everywhere to be found. A 
 premeditated structure, and a concentration of interest upon one 
 prime hero, under well-defined circumstances, may be traced from 
 the first book to the twenty-third. Odysseus is always either 
 directly or indirectly kept before the reader, as a warrior return- 
 ing from the fulness of glory at Troy, exposed to manifold and 
 protracted calamities during his return home, on which his whole 
 60ul is so bent that he refuses even the immortality offered by 
 Calypso; — a victim, moreover, even at\er his return, to mingled 
 injury and insult from the suitors, who have long been plundering 
 his property, and dishonoring his house ; but at length obtaining, 
 by valor and cunnin;j; unitt-d, a signal revenge, wliich restores him 
 to all that he had lost. All the persons and all the events in 
 the poem are subsidiary to this main plot : and the divine agency, 
 necessary to satisfy the feeling of the Homeric man, i- i)ut forth 
 by Poseidon and Athene, in both « a-»- from dispositions directly 
 bearing upon Odys < h. To appreciate the unity of the Odyssey, 
 we have only to read the objections taken against that of the 
 Iliad, — especially in regard to the long withdrawal of Achilles, 
 not only from the scene, but from the memory, — together with 
 the independent prominence of Ajax, l)i«.medes, and other heroes. 
 How far we are entitled from hem e to infer the want of premed- 
 itated unity in the Iliad, will be presently considered ; but it is 
 certain that the constitution of the 0«lyssey, in this re^t>ect, 
 everywhere demonstrates the presence of such unity. Wliatever 
 may be the interest attached to Penelope, Telemachus, or 
 Eumaeus, we never disconnect them from their association with 
 Odysseus. The present is not the place for collecting the many 
 marks of artistical stnicture dispersed throughout this poem ; but it 
 may be worth while to remark, that the final catastrophe realized 
 in the twenty-second book, — the slaughter of the suitors in the 
 Teiy house which they were profaning, — is distinctly and promi- 
 oently marked out in the first and second books, promised by 
 Teiresias in the eleventh, by Athene in the thirteenth, and by 
 H t^ i^n in the fifteeiQth, and gradually matured bj a series of 
 
 suitable preliminaries, throughout the eight Looks preceding it4 
 occurrence.! Indeed, what is principally evident, and what has been 
 often noticed, in the Odyssey, is, the equable flow both of the nar* 
 rative and the events ; the absence of that rise and fall of interest 
 which is sufficiently conspicuous in the Iliad. 
 
 To set against these evidences of unity, there ought, at least, 
 to be some strong cases produced of occasional incoherence or 
 contradiction. But it is remarkable how little of such counter- 
 evidence is to be found, although the arguments of Wolf, W. 
 Muller, and B. Thiersch stand so much in need of it. They 
 have discovered only one instance of undeniable inconsistency in 
 the parts, — the number of days occupied by the absence of Tele- 
 machus at Pylus and Sparta. That young prince, though repre- 
 sented as in great haste to depart, and refusing pressing invita- 
 tions to prolong his stay, must, nevertheless, be supposed to have 
 continued for thirty days the guest of Menelaus, in order to bring 
 his proceedings into chronological harmony with tliose of Odysseus, 
 and to explain the first meeting of father and son in the swine- 
 fold of EumoBus. Here is undoubtedly an inaccuracy, (so Nitzsch^ 
 treats it, and I think justly) on the part of the poet, who did not 
 anticipate, and did not experience in ancient times, so strict a 
 scrutiny ; an inaccuracy certainly not at all wonderful ; the 
 matter of real wonder is, that it stands almost alone, and that 
 there are no others in the j>oem. 
 
 Now, this is one of the main points on which W. Muller and 
 
 ' Coxnpftre i, 295; it 145 {vrjrroitoi K.ev irreira ^o/iuv Ivrocxtev o}jour&t\f 
 XL 118; xiiL395; xv- 178; also xiv. 162. 
 
 * Nitzsch, Plan and Gang der Odyssee, p. xliii, prefixed to the fecond roL 
 of his Commentary on the Odysseit. 
 
 "At carroinom primi auditores non adeo curiosi erant (observes Mr. 
 Payne Knight, Proleg. c xxiii.), ut ejusmodi rerum rationes aut exquirerent 
 aut expenderent ; neqne eorum fides e subtiliorihus congruentiis omniso 
 pcndebat Monendi enim sunt etiam atqne etiam Homerieomm ^tadioii, 
 reteres illos aoLdoi^ non Ungua professori4 inter viros criticos et grammati> 
 cos, ant alios quoscanqae argntiarum captatores, carmina cantitasse, sed 
 inter eos qui sensibus animorum libere, incaute, et effuse indulgerent,'* etc 
 Chap, xxii-xxvii of Mr. Knight's Prolegomena, are valuable to the sam« 
 purpose, showing the ** homines rudes et agrestes," of that day, as excellenl 
 judges of what fell under their senses and observation, but careless, creda 
 loos, and unobservant of contradiction, in matters which came onlj anikt 
 the mind's eje. 
 
 f 
 
 «i 
 
166 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ERRONEOUS INFIRENCE. 
 
 aggregate, the Odyssey is more simple and easily understood, an<i 
 therefore, ought to come first in the order of analysis. 
 
 Now, looking at the Odyssey by itself, the proofs of an unity 
 of design seem unequivocal and everywhere to be found. A 
 premeditated structure, and a concentration of interest upon one 
 prime hero, under well-defined circumstances, may be traced from 
 the first book to the twenty-third. Odysseus is always either 
 directly or indirectly kept before the reader, as a warrior return- 
 ing from the fulness < f glory at Troy, exposed to manifold and 
 prutnu'trd calamitit- iliiring his return homo, on wliich his whole 
 Boul i> -() bent that !»♦• refuses even the immortality offered by 
 Calypsc. ; — a victim, moreover, even at\er his return, to mingled 
 injury and insult from the suitors, who have long been plundering 
 his propertv, and dishonoring liis house; but at length obtaining, 
 by valor and cunnin^r united, a signal revenge, which restores him 
 to all that he ha.l Int. All the persons and all the events in 
 the poem are subsidiary to this m.ain plot: and the divine agency, 
 necestmry to satisfy the feeling of the Homeric man, is [)ut forth 
 by Poseidnn and AtlM^-m-, in both <a-.-^ from dispositions directly 
 bearing upon Odysseu^. Tu appnci:,}.- fhf' unify of the Odyssey, 
 we hav«' only to rea<l the object iuit^ taken against that oi the 
 
 llijid, especially in n'ganl to tl..' l«»ng wiilidrawal of Achilles, 
 
 not only from the scene, but from tin- memory,— together with 
 the inik'iM'ndent promiiieiice of Ajax, l>i(.medes, and other heroes. 
 How far we are entitled from henr.- to iut.r the want of premed- 
 itated unity in the Iliad, will be presently considered; but it is 
 certain that the constitution of the Odyssey, in this respect, 
 everywhere deraonstrutes tlir j.n-eiirc of such unity. Whatever 
 Biay be the interest attached to IN neU.j.e, Telemachus, or 
 £um:eui», we never «Hscomieet them from their association with 
 Odysseus. The present is not the place for collecting the many 
 marks of artistical structure dispersed throughout this poem ; but it 
 may be worth while to remark, that the final catastrophe realized 
 in the twenty-second l)ook,-— the slaughter of the suitors in the 
 ▼ery house which they were profaning,— is distinctly and promi- 
 nently marked out in the first and second books, promised by 
 Teiresias in the eleventh, by Athene in the thirteenth, and by 
 Helen in the fifteenth, and gradually matured bjr a series of 
 
 1G7 
 
 suitable preliminaries, throughout the eight l<K)ks preceding itk 
 occurrence.^ Indeed, what is principally evident, and what has been 
 often noticed, in the Odyssey, is, the equable flow both y}{ the nar- 
 rative and the events ; the absence of that rise and fall of interest 
 which is sufficiently conspicuous in the Iliad. 
 
 To set against these evidences of unity, there ought, at least, 
 to be some strong cases produced of occasional incoherence or 
 contradiction. But it is remarkable how little of such counter- 
 evidence is to be found, although the arguments of Wolf, W. 
 Muller, and B. Thiersch stand so much in need of it. They 
 have discovered only one instance of undeniable inconsistency in 
 the parts, — the number of days occupied by the absence of Tele- 
 machus at Pylus and Sparta. That young prince, though repre- 
 sented as in great haste to depart, and refusing pressing invita- 
 tions to prolong his stay, must, nevertheless, be supposed to have 
 continued for thirty days the guest of Menelaus, in order to bring 
 his proceedings into chronological harmony with those of Odysseus, 
 and to explain the first meeting of father and son in the swine- 
 fold of Eumaeus. Here is undoubtedly an inaccuracy, (so Nitzsch^ 
 treats it, and I think justly) on the part of the poet, who did not 
 anticipate, and did not experience in ancient times, so strict a 
 sciiitiny ; an inaccuracy certainly not at all wonderful ; the 
 matter of real wonder is, that it stands almost alone, and that 
 there are no others in the poem. 
 
 Now, this is one of the main points on which W. Miiller and 
 
 ' Compare i, 295; ii. 145 (vtjttolvoI kev iTzeiTa 66/icjv ivroa^ev oAoiai^f ) j 
 xi. 118; xiii. 395; xv. 178; also xiv. 162. 
 
 ' Nitzsch, Plan und Gang der Odyssee, p. xliii, prefixed to the second voL 
 of his Commentary on the Odysseis. 
 
 " At carminum primi auditores non adeo curiosi erant (observes Mr. 
 Payne Knight, Proleg. c. xxiii.), ut ejusmodi rerum rationes aut exquirerent 
 aut expenderent ; neque eorum fides e subtilioribus congruentiis omnino 
 pcndebat. Monendi enim sunt etiam atque etiam Homericorum &tudio0i, 
 veteres illos uoLdoi^ non linguA professoriA inter viros criticos et grammati* 
 cos, aut alios quoscunque argutiarum captatores, carmina cantitasse, sed 
 inter eos qui sensibus animorura libere, incaute, et effuse indulgerent,*' etc 
 Chap, xxii-xxvii. of Mr. Knight's Prolegomena, are valuable to the samt 
 purpose, showing the " homines rudes et agrestes," of that day, as excellenl 
 judges of what fell under their senses and observation, but careless, credi 
 loos, and unobservant of coatradictioo, in matters which came onlj nndtf 
 the mind's eje. 
 
 4 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 i ^ 
 
 r 
 
168 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 R. Tliiersch rest ihclr theory, — explaining the chronological 
 «,.»rusion by supposing that the journey of Telemachus to Pylu^ 
 ana Sparta, constituted tiie subject of an epic originally separate 
 (<x>rai)ri8ing the first four books and a portion ot the hfteenth) 
 and inooriK,rated at second-hand with the remaining poem. And 
 they conceive this view to be farther confirmed by the double 
 a^^mbly of the gods, (at the beginning of the first book as we 1 
 m of tlie fifth,) which they treat as an awkward repetition, such 
 as could nut have form.>d part of the primary scheme ot any epic 
 poet. But liere they only escape a small difficulty by running 
 imo another and a greater. For it is impossible to comprehend 
 how the first four books and part of the fifteenth can ever have 
 comtituted a disti.ict epic; since the adventures of Telemachus 
 have no satisfactory terminUion, except at the pomt of confluence 
 with those «.f lis father, when the unexpected meeting and recog- 
 nition takes phue under the roof of Eumxus,- nor can any epic 
 poem ever have described that meeting and recognition without 
 Living some account how Odysseus came thither. Moreover, the 
 first two books of the Odyssey distinctly lay the ground, and 
 awiT expectation forward, to the final catastrophe of the poem, 
 — treating Telemachus as a su]>ordinate person, and his expedi- 
 tion .IS merely provisional towards an ulterior result. iSor can 1 
 aiiree with W. Muller, that the real Odyssey might well be sup- 
 pTxed to begin with the fifth book. On the contrary, the exhibi 
 tiun of tlie suitors and the Ithakesian agora, presented to us in 
 the second bock, is absolutely essential to the full comprehension 
 of the books Hubsequent to the thirteenth. The suitors are far 
 U>o imporumt personages in the poem to allow ot their being first 
 introduced in so informal a manner as we read "\!.i^« ^;f ^.^"J; 
 book: indeed, the passing allusions of Athene (xiii. 310, 67 o) 
 and EumjBUs (xiv. 41, 81) to the suitors, presuppose cognizance 
 of them on the part of the hearer. , , . . r 
 
 Lastly, the twofold discussion of the gods, at the begmning of 
 the first and fifth books, and the double interference of Athene, 
 Ikr from being a needless repetition, may be shown to suit per- 
 fcctly both the genuine epical conditions and the unity of the 
 poem.' For althoug h the final consummation, and the orgamza- 
 ^^.m^\^^^^orr^< t in saying"^, in the first assembly of thegoda, 
 Zeus promises something ^ hici he does not perform : Zeus docs not pram^ 
 
 IINTTY OF THE ODYSSEY. 
 
 169 
 
 tiou of mejisures against the suitors, was to be accomplished by 
 Odysseus and Telemachus jointly, yet the march and adventures 
 of the two, until the moment of their meeting in the dwelling of 
 Eumaeus, were essentially distinct. But, according to the reli- 
 gious ideas of ffiR old epic, the presiding direction of Athene 
 was necessary fcr the safety and success of both of them. Her 
 first interference arouses and inspires the son, her second produces 
 the liberation of the father, — constituting a point of union and 
 common origination for two lines of adventures, in both of which 
 <ihe takes earnest interest, but which aie necessarily for a time 
 kept apart in ordei* to coincide at the proper moment. 
 
 It will thus appear that the twice-repeated agora of the gods in 
 the Odyssey, bringing home, as it does to one and the same divine 
 agent, that double start which is essential to the scheme of the 
 poem, consists better with the supposition of premeditated unity 
 than with that of distinct self-existent parts. And, assuredly, the 
 manner in which Telemachus and Odysseus, both by different 
 roads, are brought into meeting and conjunction at the dwelling 
 of Eumaeus, is something not only contrived, but very skilfully 
 contrived. It is needless to advert to the highly interesting 
 character of Eumaius, rendered available as a rallying-point, 
 though in different ways, both to the father and the son, over 
 and above the sympathy which he himself inspires. 
 
 If the Odyssey be not an original unity, of what self-existent 
 parts can we imagine it to have consisted ? To this question it is 
 difficult to imagine a satisfactory reply : for the supposition that 
 Telemachus and his adventures may once have formed the subject 
 of a separate epos, apart from Odysseus, appears inconsistent 
 with the whole character of that youth as it stands in the poem, 
 and with the events in which he is made to take part. We could 
 better imagine the distribution of the adventures of Odysseus 
 himself into two parts, — one containing his wanderings and 
 return, the other handling his ill-treatment by the suitors, and his 
 
 to send Hermes as messenger to Kalypso, in the first book, though Atlienft 
 urges him to do so. Zeus, indeed, requires to be urged twice before l:e di<> 
 tates to Kalypso the release of Odysseus, but he had already intimated, io 
 the first book, that he felt great difficulty in protecting the hero, because of 
 the wrath manifested against him by Poseidda. 
 ▼OL. II. 8 
 
 . V 
 
 \ . 
 
 II' 
 
STRUCTURE OF THE ODVSSEY. 
 
 171 
 
 17U 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 final triumph. But though either of these iwo subjectA might 
 have been adequate to furnish out a separate poem, it is never, 
 theless certain that, as thej are presented in the Odyssey, the 
 former cannot be divorced from the latter. The simple return 
 of Odysseus, as it now stands in the poem, could satisfy no one 
 as a final close, so long as the suitors remain in possession of hi9 
 house, and forbid his reunion with his wife. Any poem which 
 treated his wandc rings and return separately, must have repre- 
 sented his reunion with Penelope and restoration to his house, as 
 following natural!)' upon his arrival in Itliaka,— thus taking little 
 or no no°ice of the suitors. But this would be a capital mutilation 
 of the actual epical narrative, which considers the suitors at home 
 as an essential portion of the destiny of the much-suffering hero, 
 not less than his ^ hip wrecks and trials at sea. His return (sepa- 
 rately taken) is foredoomed, according to the curse of Polyphe- 
 mus, executed by Poseidon, to be long deferred, miserable, solitary, 
 and ending with destruction in his house to greet him ;' and the 
 ground is "bus laid, in the very recital of his wanderings, for a 
 new series of events which are to happen to him after his arrival 
 in Ithaka. There is no tenable halting-place between the depar- 
 ture of Odysseus from Troy, and the final restoration to his house 
 and his wife. The distance between these two events may, 
 indeed, be widen^.^l, by accumulating new distresses and impedi- 
 ments, but anv separate portion of it cannot be otherwise treated 
 than as a fraction of the whole. The beginning and the end are 
 here the data in respect to epical genesis, though the intermediate 
 events admit of being conceived as variables, more or less 
 numerous : so tliat the conception of the wliole may be said 
 without impropriety both to precede and to govern that of the 
 
 constituent parts. 
 
 The general result of a study of the Odyssey may be set 
 down as follows: 1. The poem, as it now stands, exhibits 
 unequivocally adaptation of parts and continuity of structure, 
 whether by one or by several consentient hands : it may, perhaps, 
 
 » Odyss, ix. 534. — 
 
 'Oipe Kaicug n^oi, bleaa^ anb iruvrag i:Talpovs, 
 
 Njydf ^tt' a?.?iOTpiTjg, evpoi 6' iv nvfiara oIko) — 
 
 •Of l^l^ar' £vx6fi£voi' (the Gjclops to Poseiddn) rod <J' l/cAve Kvavoxalm 
 
 be a secondary formation, out of a preexisting Odyssey of smallei 
 dimensions ; but, if so, the parts of the smaller whole must have 
 been so far recast as to make them suitable members of the 
 larger, and are noway recognizable by us. 2. The subject- 
 matter of the poem not only does not favor, but goes far to ex- 
 clude, the possibility of the Wolfian hyj)othesis. Its events 
 ^not be so arranged as to have composed several antecedent 
 substantive epics, afterwards put together into the present a*'- 
 gregate. Its authors cannot have been mere compilers of pre- 
 existing materials, such as Peisistratus and his friends: they 
 must have been poets, competent to work such matter as they 
 found, into a new and enlarged design of their own. Nor can 
 the age in which this long poem, of so many thousand lines, was 
 turned out as a continuous aggregate, be separated from the 
 ancient, productive, inspired age of Grecian epic. 
 
 Arriving at such conclusions from the internal evidence of the 
 Odyssey,! we can apply them by analogy to the Iliad. We learn 
 something respecting the character and capacities of that early 
 age which has left no other mementos except these two poems. 
 Long continuous epics (it is observed by those who support the 
 views of Wolf), with an artistical structure, are inconsistent with 
 the capacities of a rude and non- writing age. Such epics (we may 
 reply) are not inconsistent with the early age of the Greeks, and 
 the Odyssey is a proof of it ; for in that poem the integration of 
 the whole, and the composition of the parts, must have been 
 simultaneous. The analogy of the Odyssey enables us to rebut 
 that preconception under which many ingenious critics sit down 
 to the study of the Iliad, and which induces them to explain all 
 the incoherences of the latter by breaking it up into smaller 
 unities, as if short epics were the only manifestation of poetical 
 
 * Wolf admits, in most unequivocal language, the compact and artful 
 structure of the Odyssey. Against this positive internal evidence, he setg 
 the general presumption, that no such constructive art can possibly have 
 belonged to a poet of the age of Homer: " De Odyssea maxime. cujaa 
 admirabilis summa et compages pro praeclarissimo monument© Graeci ingenii 
 
 habenda est Unde fit ut Odysseam nemo, cui omnino priscus vatei 
 
 placeat, nisi perlectam e manu deponere queat. At ilia ars id ipsum est, 
 qnod vix ac ne vix quidem cadere videtur in vatem, singulas tantum rhapsodiM 
 decantantem," etc. (Prolegomen. pp. cxviii-cxx ; compare cxii.) 
 
 
172 
 
 fflSTORY OF QREECE. 
 
 power which the age admitted. There ought to be no reluctance 
 in admitting a presiding scheme and premeditiitiid unity of parts, 
 in so far as the parts themselves point to such a conclusion. 
 
 That the Iliad is not so essentially one piece as the Odyssey, 
 every man agrties. It includes a much greater multiplicity of 
 events, and what is yet more important, a greater multiplicity of 
 prominent personages : the very indefinite title which it beara, 
 as contrasted with the speciality of the name, Odyssey, marks 
 the difference at once. The parts stand out more conspicuously 
 from the whole, and admit more readily of being felt and appre- 
 ciated in deta<;hed recitation. We may also add, that it is i 
 more unequal execution than the Odyssey, — often rising to a far 
 higher pitch of grandeur, but also, occasionally, tamer : the story 
 does not move on continuously ; incidents occur without plausible 
 moti\ e, nor can we shut our eyes to evidences of incoherence 
 and contradiction. 
 
 To a certain extent, the Iliad is open to all these remarks, 
 though Wolf and William Muller, and above all Lachmann, ex- 
 aggerate the case in degree. And from hence has been deduced 
 the hypothesis which treats the parts in their original state as 
 separate integers, independent of, and unconnected with, each 
 other, and forced into unity only by the afterthought of a subse- 
 quent age ; or sometimes, not even themselves as integers, but as 
 aggregates grouped together out of fragments still smaller, — 
 short epics formed by the coalescence of still shorter songs. 
 Now there is some plausibility in iliese reasonings, so long as the 
 discrepancies are looked upon as the whole of the case. But in 
 point of fact they are not the whole of the case : for it is not les? 
 true, that there are large portions of the Iliad which present 
 positive and undeniable evidences of coherence as antecedent 
 and consequent:, though we are occasionally perplexed by incon- 
 aistencies of dt.-tail. To deal with these latter, is a portion of 
 the duties of the critic But he is not to treat the Iliad as if 
 inconsistency prevailed everywhere throughout its parts*; for 
 coherence of parts — symmetrical antecedence and consequence 
 — is discernible throughout the laiger half of the poem. 
 
 Now the Wolfian theory explains the gaps and contradictions 
 throughout th(i narrative, but it explains nothing else. If (aa 
 l4achmann thinks) the Iliad originally consisted of sixteen song^ 
 
 STRLCTURE OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 173 
 
 or little substantive epics, (Lachmann's sixteen songi cover tba 
 space only as far as tlie 2-2d book, or the deatli of Hector, and 
 two more songs would have to be admitted for the 23d and 24th 
 books), — not only composed by different authors, but by eachi 
 without any view to conjunction with the rest, — we have then 
 no rigfit to expect any intrinsic continuity between them ; and all 
 that continuity which we now find must be of extraneous origin. 
 \Vhere are we to look for the origin ? Lachmann follows Wolf, 
 in ascribing the whole constructive process to Peisistratus and 
 his associates, at a period when the creative epical faculty is 
 admitted to have died out. But upon this supposition, Peisistra- 
 tus (or his associates) must have done much more than omit, 
 transpose, and interpolate, here and there ; he must have gone 
 far to rewrite the whole poem. A great poet might have recast 
 preexisting separate songs into one comprehensive whole, but no 
 mere arrangers or compilers would be competent to do so : and we 
 are thus left without any means of accounting for that de^-ree of 
 continuity and consistence which runs through so large a portion 
 of the Iliad, though not through the whole. The idea that the 
 poem, as we read it, grew out of atoms not originally designed tor 
 the places which they now occupy, involves us in new and inex- 
 tricable difficulties, when we seek to elucidate either the mode of 
 coalescence or the degree of existing unity .'^ 
 
 * Lachmann seems to admit one case in which the composer of one song 
 manifests cognizance of another song, and a disposition to give what will 
 form a sequel to it. Ili.s fifteenth song (tlie Patrokleia) lasts from xv. 59d 
 down to the end of the 17th book: the sixteenth song (including the four 
 next books, from eighteen to twenty-two inclu>;ive) is a continuation of tho 
 fifteenth, but by a different poet. (Fcrnerc Betrachtungen uber die Uias, 
 Abhandl. Berlin. Acad. 1841, sect. xxvi. xxviii. xxix. pp. 24, 34, 42.) 
 
 This admission of premeditated adaptation to a certain extent breaks up 
 the integrity of the Wolfian hypothesis. 
 
 » The advocates of the Wolfian theory, appear to feel the difficulties which 
 beset it ; for their languajre is wavering in respect to these supposed primary 
 constituent atoms. Sometimes Lachmann tells us, that iic original pieces 
 were much finer poetry than the Iliad as we now read it; at another time, 
 that it cannot be now discovered what they originally were : nay, he farther 
 admits, (as remarked in the preceding note,) that the poet of the sixteenth 
 Bong had cognizance of the fifteenth. 
 
 But if it be granted that the original constituent songs were so composed 
 though by different poets, as tha^ the more recent were adapted to the earlier 
 
 », 
 
 r 
 
174 
 
 msroR\r of jreece. 
 
 STRUCTURE OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 176 
 
 Admitting tht;n premeditated adaptation of part3 to a certaio 
 extent as essential to the Iliad, we may yet inquire, whether it 
 was produced all at once, or gradually enlarged, — whether by 
 one author, or by several ; and, if the parts be of different age, 
 which is the primitive kernel, and which are the additions. 
 
 Welcker, Lange, and Nitzsch^ treat the Homeric poems as 
 representing a second step in advance, in the progress of popular 
 poetry. First, comes the age of short narrative songs ; next, 
 wl en these have become numerous, there arise constructive minds 
 who recast and blend together many of them into a larger aggrc. 
 gate, conceived upon some scheme of their own. The age of the 
 epos is followed by that of the epopee, — short, spontaneous effu- 
 sions preparing the way, and furnishing materials, for the archi- 
 tectonic genius of the poet. It is farther presumed by the above- 
 mentioned autln)rs, that the pre-Homeric epic included a great 
 abundance of such smaller songs, — a fact wiiich admits of no 
 proof, but which seems countenanced by some passages in Homer, 
 and is in itself no way improbable. But the transition from such 
 songs, assuming them to be ever so numerous, to a combined and 
 continuous poem, forms an epoch in the inteUectual history of the 
 nation, implying mental qualities of a higher order than those 
 upon which the songs themselves depend. Nor is it to be imag- 
 ined that the materials pass unaltered from their first state of 
 isolation into tleir second state of combination. They must of 
 necessity be recast, and undergo an adapting process, in which 
 
 with more or less dexterity and success, this brings us into totally different 
 conditions of the problem. It is a virtual surrender of the Wolfian liypoth- 
 esis, which, however, Lachraann both means to defend, and does defend 
 with ability ; though his vindication of it has, to my mind, only the effect of 
 exposing its inherent weakness by carrying il out into something detailed 
 and positive. I nill add, in respect to his Dissertations, so instructive as a 
 microscopic examioation of the poem, — 1. That I tind myself constantly 
 dissenting from /'.at critical feeling, on the strength of which he cuts out 
 parts as interpolations, and discovers traces of the hand of distinct poets ; 2 
 That his objectior s against the continuity of the narrative are often founded 
 upon hnes which the ancient scholiasts and Mr. Payne Knight had already 
 pronounced to he interpolations ; 3. That such of his objections as are 
 founded upon lirics undisputed, admit in many cases of a complete and, 
 •atisfactory reply. 
 
 » Lange, in his letter to Goethe, Ueber die Einheit der Iliade, p. 33 (1826) 
 Nitzsch, Historia Homeri, I asciculus 2, Prsefat. p. x. 
 
 the genius of the organizing poet consists ; nor can we hope, by 
 simply knowing them as they exist in tlie second stage, ever to 
 divine how they stood in the first. Such, in my judgment, is the 
 right conception of tlio Homeric epoch. — an organizing poetical 
 mind, still preserving that freshness of observation and vivacity 
 of details which constitutes the cliarm of the ballad. 
 
 Nothing is gained by studying the Iliad as a congeries of frag- 
 ments once inde[)endent of each other : no portion of the poem 
 can be shown to have ever been so, and the supposition introduces 
 dilficulties greater than those wliich it removes. But it is not 
 necessary to affirm that the whole poem a*'- we now read it 
 belonged to the original and preconceived pla.-.i In this respect, 
 the Iliad produces, upon my mind, an impression totally different 
 from the Odyssey. In the latter poem, the characters and inci- 
 dents are fewer, and the whole plot appears of one projection, 
 from the beginning down to the death of the suitors: none of tlie 
 parts look as if they had been composed separately, and inserted 
 by way of addition into a preexisting smaller poem. But the Iliad, 
 on the contrary, presents the appearance of a house built upon a 
 plan comparatively narrow, and subsequently enlarged by succes- 
 sive additions. The first book, together with the eighth, and the 
 books from the eleventh to the twenty second, inclusive, seem to 
 form the primary organization of the poem, then properly an 
 Achilleis : the twenty-third and twenty-fourth books are, perhaps, 
 additions at the tail of this primitive poem, which still leave it 
 nothing more than an enlarged Achilleis. But the books from the 
 iBecond to the seventh, inclusive, together with the tenth, are of a 
 wider and more comprehensive cliaracter, and convert the poem 
 
 ' Even Aristotle, the great builder- up of the celebrity of Homer as to 
 epical aggregation, found some occasions (it appears) on which he was obliged 
 to be content with simply excusing, without admiring, the poet (Poet 44 
 Tol^ u7i?uOic aya-^olg 6 ttoltjttj^ ijdvvuv u(^avi^ei rb utottov. ) 
 
 And Hermann observes justly, in his acute treatise De Interpolationibut 
 Homeri (Opuscula, torn. v. p. 53), — "Nisi admirabilis ilia Homericorum 
 carminum suavitas lectorum animos quasi incantationibus quibusdam captoi 
 teneret, non tarn facile delitescerent, quae accuratius considerata, et multa 
 minus apte quam quis jure postulet composita esse apparere necesse eit." 
 
 This treatise contains many criticisms on the structure of the Iliad, some 
 of them very well founded, though there are many from which I dissent 
 
 \ 
 
 f y 
 
 ♦J 
 
 "••^r 
 
 1 1 
 
 u^ 
 
 w 
 
176 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECF 
 
 from an Achilleis into an Iliad.' The primitive frontispiece, 
 inscribed with the anger of Achilles, and its direct consequencea, 
 yet remains, after it has ceased to be coextensive with the poem. 
 The parts added, howeier, are not necessarily inferior in merit to 
 the original poem : so far is this from being the case, that amongst 
 l-hem are comprehended some of the noblest efforts of the Grecian 
 epic. Nor ai'e they more recent in date than the original ; strictly 
 speaking, they must b(j a little more recent, but they belong to 
 tlie same generation and state of society as the primitive Achilleis. 
 These qualifications are necessary to keep apart different ques- 
 tions, which, in discussions of Homeric criticism, are but too oilen 
 
 confounded. 
 
 If we take those portions of the ][)oera which I imagine to have 
 constituted the original Achilleis, it will be found that the sequence 
 of events contained in them is more rapid, more unbroken, and 
 more intimately knit together in the way of cause and effect, than 
 in the other books. Ileyne and Lachmann, indeed, with otlier 
 objecting critics, complains of the action in them as being too 
 much crowded and hurried, since one day lasts from the beginning 
 of the eleventh book to the middle of the eighteenth, without any 
 sensible halt in tlie march throughout so large a portion of the 
 journey. Lachmann, likewise, admits that those separate songs, 
 into which he imagines that the whole Iliad may be dissected, 
 cannot be severed with the same sharpness, in the books subse- 
 <]uent to the eleventh, iis in those before it.2 There is only one 
 
 • In reference to the books from the second to the .seventh, inclusive, I 
 Agree with the observations of William Muller, Ilomerische Vorschule, Ab 
 
 schnit. viii. pp. 1 1 6-1 1 8. 
 
 « Lachmann, Fernere Betrachtungen iiber die Ilias, Abhandlungen Berlin. 
 
 Acad. 1841, p. 4. 
 
 After having pointed onl certain discrepancies which he maintains to prove 
 different composing hands, he adds : " Nevertheless, we must be careftil 
 not tc regard the single constituent songs in this part of the poem as being 
 distinct and separable in a degree equal to those in the first half; for they 
 all with one accord narmfmize in one particular circumstance, which, with 
 reference to the story of the Iliad, is not less important even than the anger 
 of Achilles, viz. that the three most di.'itinguished heroes, Ajramemnon, Odys- 
 •eas, and Diomedes, all becc ne disabled throughout the whole duration of 
 
 the battles." 
 
 linportant for the story of the .4 -hilMi's, I should sa)', not for that of thf 
 
 SUBJECT OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 177 
 
 real halting-place from the eleventh book to the twenty-second.— . 
 the death of Patroclus ; and this can never be conceived as the 
 end of a separate poem,i though it is a capital step in the devel- 
 opment of the Achilleis, and brings about that entire revolution 
 in the temper of Achilles which was essential for the purpose of 
 the poet. It would be a mistake to imagine tliat there ever could 
 have existed a separate poem called Patrocleia, though a part of 
 (he Iliad was designated by that name. For Patroclus has no 
 substantive position: he is the attached friend and second of 
 Achilles, but nothing else, — standing to the latter in a relation of 
 dependence resembling that of Telemachus to Odysseus. And 
 the way in which Patroclus is dealt with in the Iliad, is, (in my 
 judgment,) the most dexterous and artistical contrivance in tha 
 poem, — that which approaches nearest to the neat tissue of the 
 Odyssey.2 
 
 Iliad. This remark of Lachmann is highly illustrative for the distinction 
 between the original and the enlarged poem. 
 
 ' I confess my astonishment that a man of so much genius and power of 
 thought as M. Benjamin Constant, should have imagined the original Iliad 
 to have concluded with the death of Patroclus, on the ground that Achille* 
 then becomes reconciled with Agamemnon. See the review of B. Constant's 
 work, De la Religion, etc., by O. Muller, in the Kleine Schriften of the latter, 
 vol. ii. p. 74. 
 
 2 He appears as the mediator between the insulted Achilles and the Greeks, 
 manifesting kindly sympathies for the latter without renouncing his fidelity 
 to the former. The wounded Machaon, an object of interest to the whole 
 camp, being carried off the field by Nestor, •— Achilles, looking on from his 
 distant ship, sends Patroclus to inquire whether it be really Machaon ; which 
 enables Nestor to lay before Patroclus the deplorable state of the Grecian 
 host, as a motive to induce him and Achilles again to take arms. The 
 compassionate feelings of Patroclus being powerfully touched, he is hasten- 
 ing to enforce upon Achilles the urgent necessity of giving help, when he 
 meets Eurypylus crawling out of the field, helpless with a severe wound, 
 and imploring his succor. He supports the wounded wairior to his tent, 
 and ministers te his suffering; but before this operation is fully completed, 
 the Grecian host has been totally driven back, and the Trojans are on the 
 point of setting fire to the ships: Patroclus then hurries to Achilles to pro- 
 claim the desperate peril which hangs over them all, and succeeds in obtain- 
 ing his permission to Uke the field at the head of the Myrmidons. The 
 fray in which Patroclus is kept present to the hearer, as a prelude to hia 
 brilliant but short-lived display, when he comes forth in arms, — the con^ 
 trost between his characteri.stic gentleness and the ferocity of Achilles. - 
 VOL. II. S*' 12oc. 
 
 i\\ 
 
 <!' 
 
 \\ '« 
 
178 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECg. 
 
 The great and capital misfortune which prostrates the strengtn 
 of the Greeks, and renders them incapable of defending them- 
 Belves without Acliilles, is the disablement, bj wounds, of Aga- 
 memnon, Diomedes, and Odysseus ; so that the defence of the 
 wall and of the ships is left only to heroes of the second magni- 
 tude (Ajax alone excepted), such as Idomeneus, Leonteus, Foly- 
 pa-tes Meriones, Memelaus, etc. Now, it is remarkable that all 
 these three first-rate chiefs are in full force at the beginning of 
 the eleventh book: mU three are wounded in the battle which that 
 book describes, and at the commencement of which AgamemnoD 
 is full of spirits and courage. 
 
 Nothing can be more striking than the manner in which Homer 
 concentrates our attention in the first book upon Achilles as the 
 hero, his quarrel ^^ith Agamemnon, and the calamities to the 
 Greeks which are held out as about to ensue from it, through the 
 intercession of Thetis with Zeus. But the incidents dwelt upon 
 from tlie beginning of the second book down to the combat 
 between Ilect'or and Ajax. in the seventh, animatc<l and interesting 
 as they are, do nothing to realize this promise. They are a 
 eplendid picture of the Trojan war generally, and eminently 
 Buitable to that larger title under which the poem has been 
 immortalized,— but the consequences of the anger of Achilles do 
 not appear until the eighth book. The tenth book, or Doloneia, 
 is also a portion of the Iliad, but not of the Achilleis : while the 
 ninth book api)ears to me a subsequent addition, nowise harmo- 
 nizing with that main stream of the Achilleis which flows from 
 the eleventh book to the twenty-second. The eighth book ought 
 to be read in immediate connection with the eleventh, in order to 
 see the structure of what seems the primitive Achilleis ; for there 
 are several passages in the eleventh and the following books, 
 which prove that the poet who composed them could not have 
 had present to his mind the main event of the ninth book,— the 
 outpouring of profound humiliation by the Greeks, and from 
 Agamemnon, especi ally, before Achilles, coupled with formal 
 
 «nd the natural traia of circumstances whereby he is made the vehicle of 
 reconciliation on the piirt of his offended friend, and rescue to his imperiled 
 countrymen,— all these exhibit a degree of epical skill, in the author of the 
 primitive Achilleis, tc which nothing is found parallel in the adde-i books of 
 the Iliad 
 Vol. 2 6 
 
 EXTENT OF THE ACHILLEIS. 
 
 179 
 
 offers to restore Briseis, and pay the amplest compensation for 
 past wrong. 1 The words of Achilles (not less than those of 
 
 * Observe, for example, the following passages : — 
 
 1. Achilles, standing on the prow of his ship, sees the general army of 
 Greeks undergoing defeat by the Trojans, and also sees Nestor conveying in 
 his chariot a wounded Avarrior from the field. He sends Patrodus to find 
 oat who the wounded man is: in calling forth Patroclus, he says (xi. 607),-- 
 
 Nvv oi(j irepl yovvar^ hfia arnjcrea^ai 'Axa.ioi>c 
 KiaaofiEvovg • XP^^^ 7"^P iKuverai ovket' avcKToc. 
 
 Heyne, in his comment, asks the question, not unnaturally, " Poenituerat 
 igitur asperitatis erga priorem legationem, an homo arrogans expectaverat 
 alteram ad se missam iri ?" I answer, neither one nor the other: tlie words 
 imply that he had received no embassy at all. He is still the same Achilles who 
 in the first book paced alone by tlie seashore, devouring his own soul under 
 a sense of bitter affront, and praying to Thetis to aid his revenge: this 
 revenge is now about to be realized, and he hails its approach with delight 
 But if we admit the embassy of the ninth book to intervene, the passage 
 becomes a glaring inconsistency for that which Achilles anticipates aa 
 future, and even yet as contingent, had actually occurred on the previous even- 
 ing; the Greeks had supplicated at his feet, — they had proclaimed their intol- 
 erable need, — and he had spurned them. The Scholiast, in his explanation 
 of these lines, after giving the plain meaning, that " Achilles shows what he 
 has long been desiring, to see the Greeks in a state of supplication to him," 
 — seems to recollect that this is in contradiction to the ninth book, and tries 
 to remove the contradiction, by saying " that he had been previously molli- 
 fied by conversation with Phoenix," — Tfdrj de irpofia'kax'^EiC ^v iK tuv ^oIvl- 
 Kog loycjVf — a supposition neither countenanced by anything in the poet, 
 nor suflScient to remove the difficulty. 
 
 2. The speech of Poseidon (xiii. 115) to encourage the dispirited Grecian 
 heroes, in which, after having admitted the injury done to Achilles by Aga- 
 memnon, he recommends an effort to heal the sore, and intimates " that the 
 minds of good men admit of this healing process," {'AX/I' uKecjfiei&a •daaaov 
 uKearai re (ffpiveg ka&?^.Cn>,) is certainly not very consistent with the supposi- 
 tion that this attempt to heal had been made in the best possible way, and 
 that Achilles had manifested a mind implacable in the extreme on the 
 evening before, — while the mind of Agamemnon was already brought to 
 proclaimed humiliation, and needed no farther healing. 
 
 3. And what shall we say to tlie language of Achilles and Patroclus, at 
 the beginning of the sixteenth book, just at the moment when the danger 
 has reached its maximum, and when Achilles is about to send forth hifl 
 friend? 
 
 Neither Nestor, when he invokes and instructs Patroclus as intercesaor 
 with Achilles (xi. 654-790), nor Patroclus himself, though in the extrenM 
 
 
180 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Patroclus and Nestor) in the eleventh and in the following book% 
 plainly implj that the humiliation of the Greeks before him, for 
 
 of anxiety to work upon the mind of Achilles, and reproaching him with 
 hardness of heart, — ever bring to remembrance the ample atonement which 
 hfid been tendered to him ; while Achilles himself repeats the original ground 
 of quarrel, the wrong olfered to him in taking away Briseis, continuing the 
 language of the first book; then, ^nthout the least allusion to the atonement 
 and restitution since tendered, he yields to his friend's proposition, just like 
 a man whose wrong remained unredressed, but who was, nevertheless, forced 
 to take arms by necessity (xvi. 60-63) : — 
 
 *A?w^a Tu fxtv ■KpoTETvx'^o.i- edaofiev, oW apa ttu^ t/v 
 *Ao/repx£C Kexo2.C)aT^ai evi. (ppealv ijtol Itprjv ye 
 Oi) TTplv pLTjVf&^hv Kararruvne/Liev, a/17.' orrorav 6^ 
 N^rtf ^jWac u^LKTiTai avrrj re TrroAeuoc re. 
 
 I agree with the Scholiast and Ilcyne in interpreting etpijv ye as equiraleni 
 to <^ievo9}^ijv, — not as referring to any express antecedent declaration. 
 
 Again, farther on in the same speech, " The Trojans (Achilles says) now 
 press boldly fonvard uf>on the ships, for they no longer see the blaze of my 
 helmet : but if Agamemnon were favorahlij disjx^srd towards me, they would 
 presently run away and 'ill the ditches with their dead bodies" (71): — 
 
 Titxn nev pEvyovrer Ivar/.uvr 
 
 Wkijaetnv veavuv, d fiot KpriuT ^ kynur^vuv 
 'HTTia elt^eiT}' vvv ^e rrrpumv ufi<t>tfiaxovTai. 
 Now here again, if we take our start from the first book, omitting the ninth, 
 the sentiment is perfecth just. But assume the ninth book, and it becomes 
 false and misplaced ; for Agamemnon is then a prostrate and repentant 
 man, not merely " favorably disposed" towards Achilles, but offering to pay 
 any price for the purpose of appeasing him. 
 
 4. Again, a few lines firther, in the same speech, Achilles permits Patro- 
 clus to go forth, in consideration of the extreme peril of the fleet, but restricts 
 l.im simply to avert this peril and do nothing more: " Obey my words, so 
 that you may procure for me honor and glory from the body of Greeks^ and 
 that they may send back to me the damsel, giving me ample presents beside.** 
 when you have driven the Trojans from the ships, come back again " * - 
 
 *Qf av fioi Tifjrjv (le^aT^Tfv koX kvSoq apoLo 
 Ilpdf navTuw AavaC)v • arup at izepiKaTCkea Kovpijv 
 *A^ aTTovdoacjaif Trpori d' ayXaa SCtpa iropuaiv • 
 *Eic i/jyoiv e/iaaaf, livai tvoXlv (84-87). 
 
 TTow nre we to reconcile this with the ninth hook, where Achilles declarei 
 t lilt he does not care for being honored by the Greeks, ix. 604? In th« 
 -♦ '^uth of the affnmted Achilles, of the first book, such words are apt enough: 
 
 ^^^l {.THnt soccor, bat only to the extent necessary for the emergency, 
 ;• wav as to insure redres5 hx his own wrong, — which redresf 
 
 NINTH BOOK OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 181 
 
 .ti,.i 
 
 ».li'M 
 
 which he thirsts, is as yet future and contingent : that no plenary 
 apology has yet been tendered, nor any offer made of restoring 
 
 he has no reason as yet to conclude that Agamemnon is willing to grant 
 But the ninth book has actually tendered to him everything which he her« 
 demands, and even more (the daughter of Agamemnon in marriage, withoot 
 the price usually paid for a bride, etc.) : Brliiis, whom now he is so anxious 
 to repossess, was then offered in restitution, and he disdained the offer. Mr. 
 Knight, in fact, sti'ikes out these lines as spurious; partly, because they con- 
 tradict the ninth book, where Achilles has actually rejected what he hero 
 thirsts for (" Dona cum puella jam antea oblata aspernatus erat,") — partly 
 because he thinks that they express a sentiment unworthy of Achilles ; in 
 which latter criticism I do not concur. 
 
 5. We proceed a little farther to the address of Patroclus to the Myrmi- 
 dons, as he is conducting them forth to the battle : " Fight bravely, Myrmi- 
 dons, that we may bring honor to Achilles ; and that the wide-ruling Agar 
 memnon may know the mad folly which he committed, when he dishonored 
 the bravest cf the Greeks." 
 
 To impress this knowledge upon Agamemnon was no longer necessary. 
 The ninth book records his humiliating confession of it, accompanied by 
 atonement and reparation. To teach him the lesson a second tame, is to 
 break the bruised reed, — to slay the slain. But leave out the ninth book, 
 and the motive is the natural one, — both for Patroclus to offer, and for the 
 Myrmidons to obey: Achilles still remains a dishonored man, and to hum- 
 ble the rival who has dishonored him is the first of all objects, as well with 
 his friends as with himself 
 
 6. Lastly, the time comes when Achilles, in deep anguish for the death of 
 Patroclus, looks back with aversion and repentance to the past. To whal 
 point should we expect that his repentance would naturally turn 1 Not to 
 ins primary quarrel with Agamemnon, in which he had been andeniabl/ 
 wronged, — but to the scene in the ninth book, where the maximum of atone- 
 ment for the previous wrong is tendered to him and scornfully rejected. Yet 
 when we turn to xviii. 108, and xix. 55, 68. 270, we find him reverting to the 
 primitive quarrel in the first book, just us if it had been the last incident in 
 his relations with Agamemnon: moreover, Agamemnon (xix. 86), in hu 
 speech of reconciliation, treats the past just in the same way, — deplores hii 
 original insanity in wronging Achilles. 
 
 7. When we look to Sie pray«rs of Achilles and Thetis, addressed to Zeui 
 in the first book, we find that the consummation prayed for is, — honor to 
 Achilles, — redress for the wrong offered to him, — victory to the Trojani 
 until Agamemnon and the Greeks shall be made bitterly sensible of the 
 wrong which they have done to their bravest wavrior (i. 409-509). Now thii 
 consummatijan is brought about in the ninth book- Achilles can get no more, 
 nor does he ultimately get more, either in the way of redress to himself ot 
 remorseful humiliation of Agamemnon, than what is here tendered The 
 defeat which the Greeks suffer in the battle of the eightli book ( Ki?MC ^^X9\ 
 
 jm 
 
 \f\ 
 
 \ \\ 
 
 r 
 
 mlm^HIMa^tlm 
 
) 
 
 182 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Briseis; while both Nestor and Patroclus, with all their wish ts 
 induce him to take arms, never take notice of the offered atone- 
 ment af d restitution, but view him as one whose ground for 
 
 b;i3 brouf^ht about the consummation. The subsc<jucnt and much more 
 destructive defeats which they undergo are thus causeless : yet Zeus is repre- 
 sented as inflicting them reluctantly, and only because they are necessary to 
 honor Achilles (xiii. 35{» ; xv. 75, 2.35, 598 ; compare also viii. 372 and 475). 
 
 If we reflect upon tht constitution of the poem, we shall see that the fun- 
 damental sequence of i leas in it is, a series of misfortunes to the Greeks, 
 broufrht on by Zeus for the special purpose of procuring atonement to 
 Achilles and bringing humiliation on Agamemnon : the introduction of Pa- 
 troclus superadds new motives of the utmost interest, but it is most harmo- 
 niously worked into the fundamental sequence. Now the intrusion of the 
 ninth book breaks up the scheme of the poem by disuniting the sequence* 
 Agamemnon is on his knees before Achilles, entreating pardon and proffering 
 reparation, yet the calamities of the Greeks become more and more dreadful. 
 The atonement of the ninth book comes at the wrong time and in the wrong 
 manner. 
 
 There are four passages (and only four, so far as I am aware) in which 
 the embassy of the ninth book is alluded to in the subsequent books : one in 
 xviii. 444-456, which was expunged as spurious by Aristarchus (see the 
 Scholia and Knight's commentary, ad loc.) ; and three others in the following 
 book, wherein the gifts previously tendered by Odysseus as the envoy of 
 Agamemnon are noticed as identical with the gifts actually given in the 
 nineteenth book. I feel persuaded that these passages (vv. 140-141, 192- 
 195, and 243) are specially inserted for the purpose of establishing a connec- 
 tion l)€tween the ninth book and the nineteenth. The four lines (192-195) 
 are decidedly better away: the first two lines (140-141) are noway neces- 
 •ar}'; while the word x^'-^'^^ (which occurs in both passages) is only rendered 
 admissible by being stretched to mean nudius tertius (Heyne, ad loc.). 
 
 I will only farther remark with respect to the ninth book, that the speech 
 of Agamemnon ("17-28), the theme for the rebuke of Diomedes and the ob- 
 scure commonplace of Nestor, is taken verbatim from his speech in the 
 second book, in which place the proposition, of leaving the place and flying, 
 is made, not seriously, but as a stratagem (ii. 1 JO, 118, 140). 
 
 The length of this note can only he excused by its direct bearing upon 
 the structure of the Iliad. To show that the books from the eleventh 
 downwards are composed by a poet who has no knowledge of the ninth 
 book, is, in my judgment, a very important point of evidence in aiding us to 
 understand what the original Achilleis was. The books from the second to 
 the seventh inclusive arc insertions into the Achilleis, and lie apart from ite 
 plot, but do not violent!}' contradict it, except in regard to the agora of th« 
 gods at the beginning of the fourth book, and the almost mortal wotma of 
 Sarp^on in his battle with Tlepolemus. But the ninth book overthrows the 
 fk?.ndamental scheme of t;he poem. 
 
 NINTH BOOK OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 188 
 
 quarrel stands still the same as it did at the beginning. More* 
 over, if we look at the first book, — the opening of the Achilleis, 
 — we shall see that this prostration of Agamemnon and the chief 
 Grecian heroes before Achilles, would really be the termination 
 of the whole poem ; for Achilles asks nothing more from Thetis, 
 nor Thetis anything more from Zeus, than that Agamemnon and 
 the Greeks may be brought to know the wrong they have done to 
 their capital warrior, and humbled in the dust in expiation of it. 
 We may add, that the abject terror in which Agamemnon appears 
 in the ninth book, when he sends the supplicatory message to 
 Achilles, as it is not adequately accounted for by the degree of 
 calamity which the Greeks have experienced in the preceding 
 (eighth) book, so it is inconsistent with the gallantry and high 
 spirit with which he shines at the beginning of the eleventh.^ 
 The situation of the Greeks only becomes desperate when the 
 three great chiefs, Agamemnon, Odysseus, and Diomedes, are 
 disabled by wounds ;^ this is the irreparable calamity which 
 works upon Patroclus, and through him upon Achilles. The 
 ninth book, as it now stands, seems to me an addition, by a 
 different hand, to the original Achilleis, framed so as both to 
 forestall and to spoil the nineteenth book, which is the real recon- 
 ciliation of the two inimical heroes : I will venture to add, that it 
 carries the pride and egotism of Achilles beyond even the largest 
 exigences of insulted honor, and is shocking to that sentiment of 
 Nemesis which was so deeply seated in the Grecian mind. We 
 forgive any excess of fury against the Trojans and Hector, after 
 the death of Patroclus ; but that he should remain unmoved by 
 restitution, by abject supplications, and by the richest atoning 
 
 M. 
 
 ' Helbig ( Sittl. Zustande des Heldenalters, p. 30^ says, " The conscious- 
 ness in the bosom of Agamemnon that he has offered atonement to Achilles 
 strengthens his confidence and valor," &c. This is the idea of the critic, not 
 of the poet. It does not occur in the Iliad, though the critic not unnaturally 
 imagines that it must occur. Agamemnon never says, " I was wrong in 
 provoking Achilles, but you see I have done everything which man could do 
 to beg his pardon." Assuming the ninth book to be a part of the original 
 conception, this feeling is so natural, that we could hardly fail to find it, ai 
 the beginning of the eleventh book, numbered among the motives of Aga 
 memnon. 
 
 ■ Iliad, xi. 659; xiv. 128: xvi. 25. 
 
 W 
 
184 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 < 
 
 presents, tendered from the Greeks, indicates an implacability 
 8uch as neither the lirst book, nor the books between the eleventh 
 and seventeenth, convey. 
 
 It is with the Grecian agora, in the beginning of the second 
 book, that the Iliad (as distinguished from the Achilleis) com- 
 mences, — continued throng i the Catalogue, the muster of the two 
 armies, the single combat between Menelaus and Paris, the 
 renewed promiscuous battle caused by the arrow of Pandarus, 
 the (Epipolesis, or) personal circuit of Agamemnon round th*? 
 armv, the Aristeia, or brilliant ex})loit3 of Dioraedes, the visit of 
 Hector to Troy for the purposes of sacrifice, his interview with 
 Andromache, and his combat with Ajax, — down to the seventh 
 book. All these ar(i beautiful poetry, presenting to us the general 
 Trojan war, and its conspicuous individuals under different points 
 of view, but leaving no room in the reader's mind for the thoughi 
 of Achilles. Now% the ditliculty for an eidarging poet, was, to 
 pass from the Achdleis in the iirst book, to tlie Iliad in the 
 second, and it will accordingly be found that here is an awkward- 
 ness in the structure of the poem, which counsel on the poet's 
 behalf (ancient or modern) do not i<atisfactorily explain. 
 
 In the first book, Zeus has promised Thetis, that he will pun- 
 ish the Greeks for the wrong done to Achilles : in the beginning 
 of the second book, he deliberates how he shall fulfil the promise, 
 and sends down for that purpose " mischievous Oneirus " (the 
 Dream-o-od) to visit Agamemnon in his sleep, to assure him that 
 the t^ods have now with one accord consented to put Troy into 
 his hands, and to exhort him forthwith to the assembling of his 
 army for the attack. The ancient commentators were here per- 
 plexed by the circumstance that Zeus puts a falsehood into the 
 mouth of Oneirus. liut there seems no more difficulty in explain- 
 in «» this, than in the narrative of the book of 1 Kings (chap. xxii. 
 20), where Jehovah is mentioned to have put a lying spirit into 
 the mouth of Ahab's prophets, — the rtal awkwardness is, that 
 Oneirus and his falsehood produce no effect. For in the first 
 place, Agamemnon takes a step very different from that which 
 liis dream recommends, — and in the next place, when the Gre- 
 cian army is at lengt.h armed and goes fortl^ to battle, it does not 
 experience defeat, (which would be the case if the exhoitation of 
 Od -irus really pi >ved mischievous,) but carries on a fuccessfui 
 
 ENLARGEMENT OF ACHILLEIS INTO ILIAD. 
 
 18^ 
 
 day's battle, chiefly through the heroism of Diomedes. Instead 
 of arming the Greeks forthwith, Agamemnon convokes first u 
 council of chiefs, and next an agora of the host. And though 
 himself in a temper of mind highly elate with the deceitful as- 
 suiances of Oneirus, he deliberately assumes the language of 
 despair in addressing the troops, having previously prepared Nes- 
 tor and Odysseus for his doing so, — merely in order to try the 
 cx>uiage of the men, and with formal instructions, given to these 
 two other cliiefs, that they are to speak in opposition to him. 
 Now this intervention of Zeus and Oneirus, eminently unsatisfac- 
 tory when coupled with ths incidents which now follow it, and 
 making Zeus appear, but only appear, to realize his promise of 
 honoring Achilles as well as of hurting the Greeks, — forms ex • 
 actly the point of junction between the Achilleis and the Iliad.^ 
 The freak which Agamemnon plays off upon the temper of 
 his army, though in itself childish, serves a sutficient purpose, not 
 only because it provides a special matter of interest to be sub- 
 mitted to the Greeks, but also because it calls forth the splendid 
 description, so teeming with vivacious detail, of the sudden 
 breaking up of the assembly after Agamemnon's harangue, and 
 of the decisive interference of Odysseus to bring the men back, 
 an well as to put down Thersites. This picture of the Greeks 
 in agora, bringing out the two chief speaking and counselling 
 heroes, w^as so important a part of the general Trojan war, that 
 the poet has permitted himself to introduce it by assuming an 
 inexplicable folly on the part of Agamemnon ; just as he haa 
 ushered in another fine scene in the third book, — the Teicho- 
 skopy, or conversation, between Priam and Helen on the walls 
 of Troj, — by admitting the supposition that the old king, in 
 the tenth year of the war, did not know the persons of Aga- 
 niLMnnon and the other Grecian chiefs. This may serve as an 
 ex{)lanation of the delusion practised by Agamemnon towardi 
 hl^ assembled host; but it does not at all explain the tame and 
 empty intervention of Oneirus.'-^ 
 
 ' The intervention of Oneirus ought rather to come as an immediate pre- 
 Itminarj to book viii. than to book iL The first forty-seven lines of book ii 
 would fit on and read consistently at the beginning of book viii, the events 
 •f will, h book form a proper sequel to the mission of Oneirus. 
 
 * (). Mailer (History of Greek Literature, ch. v.^ 8.) doubts whether du 
 
i 
 
 M 
 
 186 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 If the initial inddent of the second book, whereby we pass out 
 of the Achilleis into the Iliad, is awkward, so also the final inci- 
 dent of the seventh book, immediately before we come back into 
 the Achilleis, is not less unsatisfactory, — I mean, the construc- 
 tion of the wall and ditch round the Greek camp. As the poem 
 now stands, no plausible reason is assigned why this should be 
 done. Nestor proposes it without any constraining necessity : 
 for the Greeks ar(; in a career of victory, and the Trojans are 
 making offers of compromise which imply conscious weakness, — 
 while Diomedes is so confident of the approaching ruin of Troy, 
 that he dissuades his comrades from receiving even Helen her- 
 self, if the surrender should be tendered. "Many Greeks have 
 been slain," it is true,' as Nestor observes ; but an equal or 
 greater number of Trojans have been slain, and all the Grecian 
 heroes are yet in fall force : the absence of Achilles is not eveu 
 adverted to. 
 
 Now this account of the building of the fortification seems to 
 
 bej^iiining of the second book was written " l)y the ancient Homer, or bv one 
 of the later Honierid.^ :" he thinks the speech of A<;anieninon, wherein he 
 phiys off the deceit npon his army, is "a copious parody (of the same words 
 used in the ninth book ) composed by a later Homerid, and inserted in tho 
 room of an orijiiually shorter account of the arming of the Greeks." He 
 treats the scene in the Cirecian airora as " an entire mythical comedy, full of 
 line irony and with an anuisiiii: plot, in which the deceiving and deceived 
 Ajraraemnon is the chitf character." 
 
 The comic or ironical character which is here ascribed to the second book 
 appears tome fancit'ul and incorrect ; but MoUer evidently felt the awkward- 
 ness of the opening incident, though his way of accounting for it is iot 
 successful. The second book seems to my judgment just as serious as any 
 part of the poem. 
 
 I think also that the words alluded to by Jliiller in the ninth book ar« 
 a transcript of those in the second, instead of the reverse, as he believes, — 
 because it seems probable that the ninth book is an addition made to the 
 poem after the books between the first and the eighth had been already in- 
 serted, — it is certainly introduced after the account of the fortification, 
 contained in the seventh book, had become a part of the poem : see ix. 349. 
 The author of the Embassy to Achilles fancied that that hero had been too 
 long out of sight, and out of mind, — a supposition for which there was no 
 room in the original A^hiileis, when the eighth and eleventh books followed 
 in immediate successic-n to the first, but which offers itself natorallr to aoi 
 one on reading our present Iliad. 
 
 ■ Iliul, viL327 
 
 FORTIFICATION OF THE GEECIAN CAMP. 
 
 187 
 
 be an after-thought, arising out of the enlargeraent of the poem 
 beyond its original scheme. The original Ach.Ue.s passing at 
 once from the first to the eighth,- and from thence to the eleventh 
 book, might well assume the fortification, - and talk of it as a 
 thing existing, without adducing any special reason why it was 
 erected The hearer would naturally comprehend and follow tbo 
 existence of a ditch and wall round the ships, as a matter of 
 course, provided there was nothing in the previous narrative to 
 make him believe that the Greeks had originally been without 
 these bulwarks. And since the Achilleis, immediately after the 
 promise of Zeus to Thetis, at the close of the first book, went on 
 to describe the fulfilment of that promise and the ensuing dis- 
 asters of the Greeks, there was nothing to surprise any one ii. 
 hearing that their camp was fortified. But the case wa. altered 
 when the first and the eighth books were parted asunder, m order 
 to make room for descriptions of temporary success and glory oil 
 the part of the besieging army. The brilliant scenes sketched 
 in the books, from the second to the seventh, mention no fortifica- 
 tion, and even imply its nonexistence ; yet, since "ofce "^ '' 
 occurs amidst the first description of Grecian disasters in the 
 Pi<,hth book, the hearer, who had the eariier books present to his 
 „,:mory, might be surprised to find a fortification mentioned im^ 
 mediately afterwards, unless the construction of it were specially 
 announced to have intervened. But it will at once appear, that 
 there was some difticulty in finding a good reason why the 
 
 . Heyne treats the eighth book as decidedly a separate song, o^ «?«; « 
 supposWon which the language of Zeus and the agora of the gods at the 
 wSare alone sufficient to refute, in my .judgment (txcursus 1 ad hb^ 
 K 4 P 269). This Excursus, in describing the sequence of even s m 
 1' rL nLses at once and naturally from book eighth to book eleventh. 
 
 And Mr ptvne Kntght, when he defends book eleventh against Heyne. 
 sayl " E undeciml rkapsodia Uiadis narrata sunt, baud minus ex an^ 
 Zktis pendent : neque rationem pugn« commissar, neque rerum m ea ge3_ 
 Zm nexum atque ordinem, quisquam intelligere posset, ms. .r«,n <t 
 Zl« Tchillis, et .ictaria-n quam Trojani inde consecut. erant, antea cor. 
 
 TL/71T: u:d::^^id the eleventh book, we must have before^ 
 .nefi^t and he eighth (which are those that describe the anger an I with- 
 d»w:^ of iehiUes'and the defeat which the Greeks experience , »n» 
 qaence of it) ; we m»y dispense with the rest 
 
188 
 
 HISTOR\ OF GREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 Greeks should begin to fortify at this juncture, and that th** po.-i 
 who discovered the gap might not be enabled to fill it up wiih 
 •uccess. As the Greeks have got on, up to this moment, without 
 the wall, and as we have heard nothing but tales of their succes^j, 
 why should they now think farther laborious precautions for 
 Becurity necessary ? We will not ask, why the Trojans should 
 eland quietly by and permit a wall to be built, since the truce 
 was concluded expnissly for burying the dead.' 
 
 * O. Miiller (Hist. Greek Literat ch. v. § 6) says, about this wall : " Nor 
 is it until the Greeks are taught by the experience of tltejirst day's Jiijhting, that 
 the Trojans can resist them in open battle, that the Greeks build the wall 
 
 round their ships This appeared to Thucydides so little conformable to 
 
 historical probability, that, without regard to the authority of Homer, he 
 placed the building of these walls immediately after the landing." 
 
 It is to be lamented, 1 think, that Thucydides took ui)on him to determine 
 the point at all as a matter of history ; but when he once undertook this, the 
 acconnt in the Iliad waa not of a nature to give him much satisfaction, nor 
 does the reason assigned by Miiller make it better. It is implied in Midler's 
 reason that, before the first day's battle, the Greeks did not believe that the 
 Trojans could resist them in open battle: the Trojans (according? to him) 
 never had maintained the tield,so long as Achilles was up and fi^-htTngon the 
 Grecian side, and therefore the Greeks were quite astonished to find now, for 
 the first time, that they could do so. 
 
 Now nothing can be more at variance with the tenor of the second and 
 following books than this supposition. The Trojans come forth readilv and 
 fight gallantly; neither Agamemnon, nor Nestor, nor Odysseus consider 
 them as enemies who cannot hold front; and the circuit of exhortation by 
 Agamemnon (Epipolesis), so strikingly described in the fourth book, proves 
 that he does not anticii)ate a very easy v.ctory. Nor does Nestor, in pro- 
 posing the construction of the wall, give the smallest hint that the power of 
 the Trojans to resist in the open field was to the Greeks an unexpei ltd 
 discovery. 
 
 The reason assigned by Mflller, then, is a fancy of his own, proceeding 
 from the same source of mistake as others among his remarks ; because he 
 tries to find, in the books between the first and eighth, a governing reference 
 to Achilles (the point of view of the Achilleis), which those books distinctly 
 refuse. The Achilleis was a poem of Grecian disasters up to the time when 
 Achilles sent forth Patroelus ; and during those disasters, it might suit the 
 poet to refer by contrast to the pa.st time when Achilles was active, and to 
 flay that then the Trojans did not dare even to present themselves in battle- 
 array in the field, whereas now they were assailing the ships. But the author 
 of books ii. to vii. has nc wish to glorify Achilles: he gives us a picture of 
 the Trojan war generally, and describes the Trojans, not only as brave and 
 eqoA] eoemice, but well known by the Greeks themselves to bj sa 
 
 THE DOLONEIA. 
 
 189 
 
 The tenth book, or Doloneia, was considered by some of the 
 ancient scholiasts,^ and has been confidently set forth by the 
 modern Wolfian critics, as originally a separate poem, inserted by 
 Peisistratus into the Iliad. How it can ever have been a separate 
 poem, I do not understand. It is framed with great specialty for 
 the antecedent circumstances under which it occurs, and would 
 suit for no other place ; though capable of being separately 
 lecited, inasmuch as it has a definite beginning and end, like the 
 story of Nisus and Euryalus in the .^neid. But while distinctly 
 presupposing and resting upon the incidents in the eighth book, 
 and in line 88 of the ninth, (probably, the appointment of senti- 
 nels on the part of the Greeks, as weU of the Trojans, formed the 
 close of the battle described in the eighth book,) it has not the 
 slightest bearing upon the events of the eleventh or the follow- 
 in^ books : it goes to make up the general picture of the Trojan 
 war, but Ues quite apart from the Achilleis. And this is one 
 mark of a portion subsequently inserted, — that, though fitted on 
 to the parts which precede, it has no infiuence on those which 
 
 If the proceedings of the combatants on the plam of iroy, 
 between the first and the eighth book, have no reference either 
 to Achilles, or to an Achilleis, we find Zeus in Olympus still 
 more completely putting that hero but of the question, at the 
 beginning of the fourth book. He is in this last-mentioned pas- 
 sage the Zeus of the Iliad, not of the Achilleis. Forgetful of hia 
 promise to Thetis, in the first book, he discusses nothing but the 
 question of continuance or termination of the war, and manitests 
 anxiety only for the salvation of Troy, in opposition to the miso- 
 Trojan goddesses, who prevent him from giving effect to the 
 victory of Menelaus over Taris, and the stipulated restitution of 
 Helen, — in which case, of course, the wrong offered to Achilles 
 would remain unexpiated. An attentive comparison will render 
 it evident that the poet who composed the discussion among tho 
 gods, at the beginning of the fourth book, has not been careful to 
 put himself in harmony either with the Zeus of the first book, or 
 with the Zeus of the eighth. 
 
 ' The building of Uie Grecian wall, as it now stands described, is an one* 
 pUiiMd proceeding, which Miiller'i ingenuity does not render consistent. 
 > Schoi. ad lUad. z. 1. 
 
190 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 UOOKS Xl-XXn OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 191 
 
 I 
 
 So soon as we enter upon the eleventh book, tht* march of th€ 
 poem becomes quite different. We are then in a series of events, 
 each paving the way for that which follows, and all conducing to 
 the result promised in the first book, — the reappearance of 
 Achilles, as the onl}- means of saving th« Greeks from ruin, — 
 preceded by ample atonement,^ and followed by the maximum 
 both of glory and revenge. The intermediate career of Patro- 
 clus introduces new elements, which, however, are admirably 
 woven into the scheme of the poem, as disclosed in the first book. 
 I shall not deny that there are perplexities in the detail of 
 events, as described in the battles at the Grecian wall, and before 
 the ships, from the eleventh to the sixteenth books, but they 
 appear only cases of partial confusion, such as may be reasonably 
 ascribed to imperfections of text : the main sequence remains 
 coherent and intelligible. We find no considerable events which 
 could be left out without breaking the thread, nor any incon- 
 gruity between one considerable event and another. There is 
 nothing between the eleventh and twenty-second books, which 
 is at all comparable to the incongruity between the Zeus of 
 die fourth book and the Zeus of the first and eighth. It 
 may, perhaps, be true, that the shield of Achilles is a super- 
 added amplification of that which was originally announced in 
 general terms, — because the poet, from the eleventh to the 
 twenty-second books., has observed such good economy of his 
 materials, that he is hardly likely to have introduced one par- 
 ticular description of such disproportionate length, and having so 
 little connection with the series of events. But I see no reason 
 for believing that it is an addition materially later than the rest 
 of the poem. 
 
 It must be confessed, that the supposition here advanced, in 
 reference to the structure of the Iliad, is not altogether free from 
 difficulties, because the parts constituting the original Achillei^ 
 
 ' Agamemnon, after deploring the misguiding influence of Ate, whkd> 
 faidaced him to do the original wrong to Achilles, says (xix. 88-137), — 
 
 \KXV t'rrel aaffdfiijv koc fiev <ppEva^ i^iXeTO Zedf, 
 *Aip i&eXu upiaaLy dofievci r* uirepeiai^ anoiva, etc. 
 
 • The supposition of a smaller original Iliad, enlarged by sacce99iYe adSi 
 dons to the present dimensions, and more or less interpolated (we mosil 
 
 Uave been more or less altered or interpolated, to suit the addi-^ 
 tions made to it, particularly in the eighth book. But it present! 
 fewer difficulties than any other supposition, and it is the only 
 means, so far as I know, of explaining the difference between 
 one part of the Iliad and another ; both the continuity of struc- 
 ture, and the conformity to the opening promise, which are 
 manifest when we read the books in the order i. viii. xi. to xxii, 
 as contrasted with the absence of these two qualities in books ii. 
 to vii. ix. and x. An entire organization, preconceived from 
 the beginning, would not be likely to produce any such disparity, 
 nor is any such visible in the Odyssey ;i still less would the result 
 
 distinguish enlargement from interpolation, — the insertion of a new rhapsody 
 from that of a new line), seems to be a sort of intermediate compromise, 
 towards which the opposing views of Wolf, J. H. Voss, Nitzsch, Hermann, 
 and Boeckh, all converge. Baumgarten-Crusius calls this smaller poem an 
 
 Achilleis. 
 
 Wolf, Preface to the Goschen edit, of the Hiad, pp. xii-xxiii ; Voss, Anti- 
 Symbolik, part ii. p. 234 5 Nitzsch, Histor. Homeri, Fasciculus i. p. 112 ; and 
 Vorrede to the second volume of his Comments on the Odyssey, p. xxvi : 
 "In the Iliad (he there says) many single portions may very easily bo 
 imagined as parts of another whole, or as having been once separately sung." 
 (See Baumgarten-Crusius, Preface to his edition of W. Muller's Homor 
 ische Vorschule, pp. xlv-xlix.) 
 
 Nitzsch distinguishes the Odyssey from the Iliad, and I think justly, in 
 respect to this supposed enlargement. The reasons which warrant us in 
 applying this theory to the Iliad have no bearing upon the Odyssey. If there 
 ever was an Ur-Odyssee, we have no means of determining what it con- 
 tained. 
 
 > The remarks of 0. Miiller on the Iliad (in his History of Greek Litera- 
 ture) are highly deserving of perusal : with much of them I agree, but there 
 is also much which seems to me unfounded. The range of combination, ana 
 the far-fetched narrative stratagem which he ascribes to the primitive author, 
 are in my view inadmissible (chap. v. § 5-11 : — 
 
 " The internal connection of the Iliad (he observes, § 6) rests upon the 
 union of certain parts , and neither the interesting introduction, describing 
 the defeat of the Greeks up to the burning of the ship of Protesilaua, nor the 
 turn of affairs brought about by the death of Patroclus, nor the final pacifi- 
 cation of the anger of Achilles, could be spared from the Iliad, when the 
 fruitful seed of such a poem had once been sown in the soul of Homer, and 
 had begun to develop its growth. But the plan of the Iliad is certainly very 
 much extended beyond what was actually necessary ; and in particular, the 
 preparatory part, consisting of the aUempts on the part of (he ether ht.rots to 
 aompennte for the absence of Achilles, has, it must be owned, been drawn (ml 
 
 '~iir""r- 
 
i\>t 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 be explained by supposing integers originally separate, ami 
 brought together without any designed organization. And it is 
 
 to a disproportionate length, so that the suspicion ♦hfltt'here were later inser- 
 tions of importance applies v«ri*h greater probabUity to the first than to u e 
 
 last books A design manifested itself at an early period to make this 
 
 poem complete in itself, so that all the subject,, dcacriptions, and actions, 
 whicli could alone give interest to a poem on the entire war, might find a 
 blacc within the limits cf its composition. For this purpose, it is not im- 
 probable that many lays of earlier i)ards, who had sung single adventures of 
 the Trojan war, were laid under contribution, and the finest parts of them 
 incorporated in the now poem." 
 
 These remarks of O. Mailer intimate what is (in my judgment) the right 
 view, inasmuch as they recognize an extension of the plan of the poem 
 beyond its original limit, manifested by insertions in the first half; and it is 
 to be observed that, in his enumeration of those parts, the union of which is 
 necessary to the internal connection of the Iliad, nothing is mentioned ex- 
 cept what is comprised in books i. viii. xi. to xxii. or xxiv. But his desciip 
 lion of " the prepctratory part,'' as " the attempts of the other heroes to comimisate 
 for the absence of Achilles" is noway borne out by the poet himself. From 
 the second to the seventh book, Achilles is scarcely alluded to ; moreoveii, the 
 Greeks do perfectly well without him. This portion of the poem displays, 
 not " the insufficiency of all the other heroes without Achilles," as Muller 
 had observed in the preceding section, but the perfect sufficiency of the Greeks 
 nnder Dioraedes, Agamemnon, etc. to make head against Troy ; it is only 
 in the eighth book that their insufficiency begins to be manifested, and only 
 in the eleventh book that it is consummated by the wounds of the three 
 great heroes. Diomedes is, in fact, exalted to a pitch of glory in regard 
 to contests with the gods, which even Achilles himself never obtains after- 
 wards, and Helenus the Trojan puts him above Achilles (vi. 99) in terrific 
 prowess. Achilles is me;:i*ioned two or three times as absent, and Agamem- 
 non, in his speech to the Gjvjcian agora, regrets the quarrel (ii. 377), but we 
 never hear any such exhortation as, " Let us do our best to make up for the 
 absence of Achilles," — rot even in the Epipolesis of Agamemnon, where it 
 would most naturally be found. " Attempts to compensate for the absence 
 of Achilles." must, therefore, be treated as the idea of the critic, not of the 
 
 fjoet. 
 
 Though O. Muller has glanced at the distinction between the two parts 
 of the poem (an original part, having chief reference to Achilles and the 
 GreAs; and a superinduced part, having reference to the entire ivar), he has 
 not conceived it clearly, nor carried it out consistently. If we are to distin- 
 gnish these two points' of view at all, we ought to draw the lines at the end 
 of the first book and at the beginning of the eighth, thus regarding the inter- 
 mediate six books as belonging to the picture of the entire war (or the Hiad 
 M distiugaished from the AchiU^is) : the point of view of the Achilleis, 
 Aopped at the end of the first book, is resumed at the beginning of the eighth 
 
 VARIOUS POSSIBLE HYF JTHLbES. 
 
 1^3 
 
 between these three suppositions that our choice has to be made. 
 A scheme, and a large scheme too, must unquestionably be 
 a*lmitted as the basis of any sufficient hypothesis. But the 
 
 The natural fitting together of these two parts is noticed in the comment of 
 Ueyne, ad viii. 1 : *• Cajterum nunc Jupiter aperte solvit Thetidi promisMU 
 dum reddit causara Trojanorum hello superiorera, ut Achillis desiderium 
 Achivos, et poenitentia injuria ei illatie Agamemnonem incessat {cf i. 5) 
 Nam qu£e adhuc narrata sunt, partim continebantur in fortune belli utrinque 
 
 tentata partim valebant ad nanationcm variandam," etc. The first 
 
 and the eighth books belong to one and the same point of view, while all 
 the intermediate books belong to the other. But O. Miiller seeks to prove 
 that a portion of these intermediate books belongs to one common point of 
 view with the first and eighth, though he admits that they have been en- 
 larged by insertions. Here I think he is mistaken. Strike out anything 
 which can be reasonably allowed for enlargement in the books between the 
 first and eighth, luid the same ditficulty will still remain in respect to the 
 remainder; for all the incidents between those two points are brought out in 
 a spirit altogether indifferent to Achilles or his anger. The Zeus of the 
 fourth book, as contrasted with Zeus in the first or eighth, marks the differ- 
 ence; and this description of Zeus is absolutely indispensable as the con- 
 necting link between book iii. on the one side and books iv. and v. on the 
 other. Moreover, the attempt of O. Miiller. to force uj)on the larger portion 
 of what is between the first and eighth books the point of view of the 
 Achilleis, is never successful: the poet does not exhibit in those books 
 " insufficient efforts of other heroes to compensate for the absence of Achilles," 
 but a general and highly interesting picture of the Trojan war, with promi- 
 nent reference to the original ground of quarrel. In this picture, the duel 
 between Paris and Menelaus forms naturally the foremost item, — but how 
 far-fetched is the reasoning whereby 0. Moller brings that striking recital 
 within the scheme of the Achilleis ! » The Greeks and Trojans are for the 
 first time struck by an idea, which might have occurred in the previous nine 
 years, if the Greeks, when assisted by Achilles, had not, from conjUdenre in th£ir 
 'superior strejigth, considered every compromise as unworthy of them, — namely, 
 to decide the war by a single combat between the authors of it." Here the 
 causality of Achilles is dragged in by main force, and unsupported either by 
 any actual statement in the poem or by any reasonable presumption ; for it 
 is the Trojans who propose the single combat, and we are not told that they 
 had ever proposed* it before, though they would have had stronger reasons 
 for proposing it during the presence of Achilles than during his absence. 
 
 O. Muller himself remarks (§ 7), " that from the second to the seventh 
 book Zens appears as it were to have forgotten his resolution and his prom- 
 ise to Thetis." In other words, the poet, during this part of the poem, drops 
 the point of view of the Achilleis to take up that of the more comprehensix e 
 Iliad : the Achilleis reappears in book viii, — again disappears in book i% 
 - and IS resumed from book xi. to the end of the poem. 
 
194 
 
 HISTORY OF GRZECE. 
 
 Achilleis would have been a long poein, half the length of the 
 present Iliad, and probably not less compact in its structure than 
 the Odyssey. Moreover, being j)arted off only by an imaginary 
 line from the boundless range of the Trojan war, it would admit 
 of enlargement more easily, and with greater relish to hearers, 
 than the adventures of one single hero; while the expansion 
 would naturally tjike place by adding new Grecian victory, — 
 since the original ])oem arrived at the exaltation of Achilles only 
 through a painful series of Grecian disasters. That the })oem 
 under these circumstances should have received additions, is no 
 very violent hypothesis : in fact, when we recolle<jt that the 
 integrity both of the Achilleis and of the Odyssey was neither 
 guarded by printing nor writing, we shall perhaps think it less 
 wonderful that the former was enlarged,' th:in that the latter was 
 not. Any relaxation of the laws of epieal unity is a small price 
 to pay -^or that splendid poetry, of which we find so much 
 between the first and the "ighth books oi' our Iliad. 
 
 The question res[)ectipf unity of authorship is different, and 
 more difficult to determine, than that respecting consistency of 
 parts, and sequence in the narrative. A poem conceived on a 
 comparatively narrow scale may be enlarged afterwards by its 
 original author, with greater or less coherence and success : the 
 
 * This tendency to insert new lionioixentou-; matter l»y new poets into 
 poems already existing, is noticed by M. Fiiuricl, in reference to tlie Romans 
 of the Middle Ages : — 
 
 " C'est un phe'nomene remaninahle dans riiistoiie de la poesic e'pique, 
 que cette disposition, cette tendance coiisitunte dii trout [»o|)iilairc ii anialgaraer, 
 a lier en une seule et meme conijiosition le j>lus j)ossil)le des compositions 
 diverses, — cette disposition persiste chez uu penplc, tant que iu poe'sie con- 
 serve un reste de vie ; tant qu'elle s'y transniet par la tradition et qu'elle y 
 circuie a I'aide du chcnt ou des recitations ])ubli(iues. Kile cesse partout oil 
 la po^sie est une fois fixe'e duns les livres. et n'agit plus (jue par la lecture, 
 — cette demiere epoque est })Our ainsi dire, ccllc de la ])ropriete' poe'tique — 
 celle ou chaque poete pretend a une existence, a une gloire, personnelles ; et 
 ou la pcesie cesse d'etre une esjiece dc rresor tommun dont le peuple jouit 
 ct dispose a sa manicTc. sans s'in<iuie'r'r des indi\ idu-^ qui le lui ont fait." 
 (Fauriel, Sur les Remans Chevaleresqucs, lc<,on 5»«e, Revue des Deux 
 Mondes, vol. xiii. p. 707.) 
 
 M. Fauriel thinks that the Shaii Nnnieh of Ferdusi was an amalgamation 
 of epic poems originally separate, and that probably tho Mahabharat was 80 
 also (*6. 708). 
 

 c 
 
 V. 
 
 r; 
 
 
 
 
 xt-'/n 
 
 
 
 
 m ■ !.. ■ » ii M I m ■■ iiii^^pyywwBW>yi^«||i«p^wwWpigy^ wywpewpwapp* 
 
 UNll"^' OF AllTIlORSIlIP. 
 
 195 
 
 Faii-t of Gootlic aHorc's an cxn.Tijilc evon in our own generation. 
 On tlie otluT li.iihl, a systematic poem may well have been con- 
 ceived and executed by prearranged concert between several 
 poets ; among wliom jjrobablj- one Avill be the governing mind, 
 t]MMj;7h tlie rest may be efl'ective, and perliaps cquall}-^ effective, 
 in rc-pcct to exccnlion of the parts. And tlie age of the early 
 Grecian ej)ic was favorable to such fraternization of |)oets, of 
 which the Gens called llomerids j>robably exhibited many speci- 
 mens. In the recital or singing of a long unwritten ])oem, many 
 liajtls nnist havi; consjured together, and in the earliest times the 
 composer and the singer were one and the same person J Now 
 the individuals comprised in the llomerid Gens, though doubtless 
 verv different among theni'^elves in respect of mental capacity, 
 wer*' yet humogeneous in respect of tiaining, means of observa- 
 tion and instruelion, f^^oeial (experience, religious feelingfi and 
 tlieories, etc., to a degree much greater than individuals in 
 modern times. Fallible as our inferences are on this point, 
 where we ha^e only internal evidence to guide us, without any 
 contemporary ]K)ints of comparison, or any sj>ecie3 of collateral 
 information res}>ecting the age, the society, the poets, the hearers, 
 or the language, — we nuist nevertheless, in the present case, 
 take coherence of structure, together with consistency in the tono 
 of ihouglit, feeling, language, customs, etc., as presumptions of 
 one author; and the contrary as presumptions of severalty; 
 allowing, as well as we can, for that inequality of excellence 
 which the same author may at dilfcrent times present. 
 
 * Tlie remarks of Bocckli. iijion llic i.ossibility of such cooperation of pocti 
 towurds one and tiie same selicmc arc perfectly just : — 
 
 '• Atfjui (juomodo componi a vnriis auctoribus successu tcmporura rhapso- 
 dic poiuerint, quie i»ost prima initiii dirccto: jam ad idem consilium ct quam 
 
 vornnt uiiitntni'. (ariniiiis sitit missis istorum dcclnmationibus qui 
 
 populi UTiiversi opus llomerum esse jactant turn potissimum intellige- 
 
 lur, ubi centis civili^ Ilomcridarum propriam et pecullarcm Ilomericam 
 pocsin fuisse, vcteribus ij)sis si iion testibus, at ccrte ducibus, conccdetur. 
 
 Qua? quum ita sint, non erit adco diOicilc ad intclligcndum, quomodo, 
 
 post prima initia ab egrc^'io vate facta, in gcnte sacrorum et artis cotnma- 
 cione sociat'i, multie rhapsoditc ad unum potuerint consilium dirigi " (Index 
 Lection. 1834, p. 12.) 
 
 I transcribe this passage from Gicse (Uebcr den jEolischcn Diakkt, j^ 
 157), not having been able to §ee the essay of which it forms a part 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
196 
 
 nisroRY OF Gni:]:rE. 
 
 Now, the cii<ii iD-ade out against single-headed authoraliip of 
 the Odyssey, jiiipears to nio \evy weak ; and those who disput<^ 
 it, are guided more by their a priori rejection of ancient epiciil 
 unity, than by any positive evidence which the poem itself aflbrds. 
 It is otherwise with regard to the Iliad. Whatever presumption.^ 
 a disjointed structure, several apparent inconsistencies of part«, 
 aTid large excrescence of actual matter beyond the opening! 
 promise, can sanction, — may reasonably be indulged against tl. 
 supposition that this poem all ])roceeds from a single author. 
 There is a dltference of opinion on the sui>ject among the best 
 critics, which is, probably, not dt-'siincd to be adjusted, since so 
 much depend:- parti}'" upon critical feeling, partly u[)on the general 
 reasonings, in respect to ancient opical unity, with which a man 
 sits down to the study. For the champions of unity, such as Mr. 
 Payne Knight, are \itvy ready to strike out nunicnni^ and oft'tn 
 considerable passages as interpolations, thus me<'ling tlie objec- 
 tions raised agrunst unity of authorship, on tlic grou!id of special 
 inconsistencies. Hermann and Boeckli, th(>:i;rli not going the 
 Icn'^th of Lac!»mann in mainlaiuin'r t!i!i original tlicorv of Wolf, 
 airree with the latter in reco'jni/inLC diversity of autlioi'S in the 
 poem, to an citent overpa,=slng the limit of what can fairly be 
 called interp'v)l.ition. Payne Knight and Nitzsch are equally per- 
 suaded of tl'i conti'ary. Here, then, is a decided contradiction 
 among critics, all of whom have minutely studied the poems 
 since the Wollan question was raised. And it is such critics 
 alone who can be said to constitute authority; for the cursory 
 reader, who dwells i[>on I lie parts simply l;>ng rnongh to n-li^^h 
 their poetical hcauty, is strurk oidy by that gt'iicral saniene < ot 
 coloring which Wolf himself admits to pervade the poem.i 
 
 Having aheady intimated that, in my judgment, no theory of 
 the structure oi' the poem is admissible which does not admit an 
 original and precon(;erted Achilleis, — a stream which begins at 
 the tirst book and ends with the death of Hector, in the twenty- 
 second, although the higher part5 of it now remain only in the 
 condition of two detached lakes, the first book and the eighth, — 
 1 reason upon the same basis with respect to the authorshi|), 
 
 * Wolf, Prokfrom. p cxxxviii. •* Qulppe in universytm idem fonns est 
 Mnnibas libris ; idem habitus sententiarum, orationis, numeronim," etc 
 
 ' 
 
 U" 
 
 t 
 
 UNITY OF AUTHORSHIP. 
 
 191 
 
 AsflTiming continuity of structure as a presumjvtive proof, tha 
 whole of this Achilleis must be treated as corapo-^ed by one 
 author. Wolf, indeed, affumed, that he never read the poem 
 continuously th.rough without being painfully impressed with the 
 inferiority! and altered style of the last six books,— and Lach- 
 maun carries this feeling farther back, so as to commence with 
 the seronteenth book. If I could enter fully into this sentiment, 
 r shonld then be compelled, not to deny the existence of a precon 
 ceivod scheme, but to imagine that the books from the eighteenth 
 to tho twcmty-secoiid, though forming j)art of thiit scheme, or 
 Achilleis, had yet been executed by another and an inferior poet. 
 But it is to be remarked, firet, that inferiority of poetical merit, to 
 a certain extent, is quite reconcilable with unity of authorship ; 
 and, secondly, that the very circumfilanccs upon which Wolf's 
 unfavorable judgment is built, seem to arise out of increased 
 difficulty in the poet's task, when he came to the crowning cantos 
 of his designed Achilleis. For that which chiefly distinguishes 
 these books, is, flic direct, ineessant, and manual intervention of 
 the gods and goddesses, formei'ly permitted by Zeus, —* and tho 
 repetition of vast and fantastic conceptions to wliich such super- 
 human agency gives occasion ; not omitting the battle of Acliilles 
 against Skamander and Simois, and the burning up of these rivera 
 by Heplucstus. Now, looking at this vein of ideas with the eyea 
 of a modern reader, or even with those of a Grecian critic of the 
 literary ages, it is certain that the elfect is unpleasing : the gods^ 
 sublime elenients of poetry when kept in due proportion, are hero 
 somewhat vulgarized. Uui though the i>oet here has not buo- 
 cecded, and probably success was impossible, in the task wliich 
 he has prescribed to himself, — yet the mere fact of his under- 
 taking it, and the manifest distinction between his employment 
 of divine agency in these latter cantos as compared with the 
 
 ' Wolf, ProK'gonien. p. cxxxvii. " Equidcm ccrtc quotics in confinenti 
 lectione ad istas partes (»'. e. the Inst six books) deveni, nunquam non in 
 lis talia qun?dajn sensi, qnre nisi illae tam mature cum ceteiis coaluissent, 
 quovis pif^norc contendam, dudum ab cruditis dctccta et animad versa fuisse, 
 immo multa ejus generis, ut cum nunc 'OfiTjpiKuTara habeantur, si tantnm- 
 modo in Ilymnis legercntur, ipsa sola eos suspicionibns vodeiac adspersm 
 essent." Compare the sequel, p. cxxxviii, ** ubi nervi deficiant et spiritai 
 Homericas, — jejanum et firigidnm in locis XSOltifl^'* etc 
 
 i 
 
 li ; 
 
 I 
 
 '1 
 
 m 
 
 ' ' t^ ' t -y H 
 
 ■— - ■ lf(^l% 
 
 ) JLIi*l«IVJ J| 
 
'f, 
 
 I 
 
 198 
 
 Ills r GUY OK GKKKCE 
 
 BOOKS II-VII OF THE ILIAD. 
 
 199 
 
 il 
 
 1 ■ 
 
 preceding, i-fc ns explicable only on lli?^ siii)|>osition that they an 
 the latter cantos, and conic in designed secpieuce, as the contin- 
 uance of a previous plan. The poet wishes to i^urroimd the 
 comin"- forth of Achilles with the maxinium of glorious and 
 terrific circumstance ; no Trojan enemy can for a moment hold 
 out against hiin:^ the gods mu.^t dos<-(nd to the plain of Troy and 
 fight in person, -whiio Zeus, who at the beginning of the eighth 
 book, had forbidden them to take part, expressly encourages them 
 to do so at Mie beginning of the twentieth. If, then, the nine- 
 teenth book (which contains tlie reconciliation between Achilles 
 and Agamemnon, a subject naturally somewliat tame) and the 
 three following books (where wo have before us only the gods, 
 Achilles, and the Trojans, without ho[)e or courage) are inferior 
 in execution and interest to the seven preceding books (which 
 describe the long-dis])uted and often doubtful death-struggle 
 between the Greeks and Trojans without Achilles), as AVolf and 
 other critics affirm, — we may explain the dilfcrcnce without sup- 
 posing a now poet as c<>mi»oscr; for (he conditions of the poem 
 had become essentially more dilhcull, and the subject more 
 unpromising. The necessity of keeping Achilles above the level, 
 even of hero'c prowess, restricted the poet's means of acting upon 
 the sympathy of his hearers.^ 
 
 ^ Iliad, XX. 25. Zeus addresses the agora of the pods,— 
 Wu'PoTEpoLOL (J' apT]y€T\ liT.T] vooq iarlv UaaTov 
 El yUp 'A;t:fAAc})f oiog trrl Tpueacn /taxeirai, 
 Oiik liivvv^' l^ovai TToduKca II;;Af/tjra. » 
 
 Kal 6e fiiv Kal rrpnnOcv {fTroTpofittcTKov oi^'n-rer' 
 Ni'J- (T OTE 6f} Kal Ovjiov haipov X''>^Tat alvu^, 
 £iuSu fiT} Kal rnxoi' vrrep fiopov l^aXana^Tj. 
 The forma' restriction rut upon the gods by Zeus at the bcginnin- of tho 
 eighth book, and the removal of that restriction at the heginn.ng of the 
 twentieth, are evidently parts of one j)rcronccivcd scheme. 
 
 It is difficult to determine whether the battle of the gods and goddesses m 
 book xxi. (385-520) is to be expunged as spurious, or only to be blamed as 
 of inferior merit ("improbanda tantum,iiou resecanda - hoc enim est illnd, 
 quo plcrumqno summa crisc.s Ilomericte redit," as lleync observes m 
 another place, Obss. Iliad, xviii. 444). The objections on the score of non- 
 Homeric locution are not forcible (see T. Ivnighl, «J /oc.), and the scene 
 belongs to that vein of conception which animi^tes the poet in the closing act 
 
 of his AchillCis. , . 
 
 • IVhile admitting that these last books of the Ihad aic not equal m 
 
 ' 
 
 
 Tlie last two Ix^oks of the Iliad may have formed pavt of the 
 original Achillcis. Hut the prol>ability rather is, that they are 
 ftddilions ; for the death of Hector satisfies the exigencies of a 
 coherent scheme, and we are not entitled to extend the oldest 
 j»oem beyond the limit which such necessity prescribes. It has 
 been argued on one side by Nitzsch and O. JVIuller, that the mind 
 could not leave olf with satislaction at the moment in which 
 Achilles sales his revenge, and while the bodies of Patroclus 
 and Hector are lying unburied, — also, that the more mereifuJ 
 temj)er which he exhibits in the twenty-fourth book, must always 
 have been an indispensable secjuel, in order to create proper sym- 
 jiatliy with his triumph. Other critics, on the contrary, have 
 taken special grounds of exception against the last book, and have 
 endeavored to :.ct it aside as different from the other books, both 
 
 interest with tliosc between the elev(!ntli and eighteenth, we inav add tliat 
 they cxliibit many striking beauties, both of i)lan and execution, and one in 
 I»articul:ir niMy he noticed as an examjjlc of hnf>py ej)ical adaptation. 'I'hc 
 Trojan'^ are on the point of ravishing from the Greeks tlie dead hodv of 
 Palroclii*^, when Achilles (hy the inspiration of Here and Iris) shows himself 
 unarmed on the Grecian inonnd, and by his mere figure and voice strikes 
 Buch terror into the Trojans that they relinquish the dead body. As soon as 
 night arrives, Polydamas i)roposcs, in the Trojan agora, that the Trojans 
 shall retire without fartluT delay from the ships to the town, and shelter 
 themselves witliin the walls, without awaiting the assault of Achilles armed 
 on the next morning. Hector rej»el.s this counsel of Polydamas with ex- 
 pressions, — not merely of overweening confidence in his own force, even 
 a);ainst Aehilles, — hut aNo of extreme contemj)t and harshness towards the 
 giver; whose wisdom, however, is proved hy the utter discomfiture of the 
 'J'rojans the next day. Now this angry deportment and mistake on the part 
 of Hector is made to tell strikingly in the twenty-second hook, just before 
 his death. There yet remains a moment for him to retire within the walls, 
 and thtis obtain shelter against tlie near approach of his irresistible enemy, 
 hut he is strink with the rfMoih-eiion of that fatal moment when he repelled 
 the coun*-el which would have saved his countrymen : '* Jf I enter the town, 
 Polydamns will he the first to reproach me, as having brought destruction 
 upon Troy on that fatal night when Achilles came forth, and when I 
 resisted liis better counsel." (Compare xviii. 250-315; xxii. 100-110; and 
 Aristot. Etliic. iii. 8.) 
 
 In a discussion respecting the structure of the Iliad, and in reference to 
 ftrguinenta which deny all designed concatenation of parts, it is not ont of 
 place to notice this affecting touch of poetry belonging to those books whioh. 
 faro reproached as the fcehle-(. 
 
 I ;«^ji|,9lfpi 
 
 i-i.i^.. i 
 
 m»~A» 
 
200 
 
 fflSTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 in tone and language. To a certain extent, the peculiarities of 
 the last book appear to me undeniable, tliougU it is plainly a 
 designed continuance, and not a substantive poem. Some weight 
 aUo is due to tlie remark about the twent}'-t]iird book, that 
 Odysseus and DiomedGs, who have been wounded and dir-able.l 
 during the fight, now reappear in perfect force, and contend m 
 the games: here is no case of miraculous healing, and the incon- 
 sistency is more likely to have been admitted by a separate 
 enlarging poet, than by the schemer of the Acliilleis. 
 
 The splendid books from the -rmnd to v. :\'22 of iUo, seventh,^ 
 are eijual, in mosi })arts, to any |)ortion of the Achilleis, and are 
 pui.-.tcdly distingui-aiel from the latter by the broad view which 
 they cxhibiv of the general Trojan war, with all its pnneipal 
 personages, localities, and cati.^es — yet without a<lvancing tho 
 result promised in the first book, or, indeed, any linal i.uri)03e 
 whatever. Even ihe desperat" wound inflicted by Tlepolemus 
 on Sarpedon, is tb;-gotten, when the l:\fter hero is called forth in 
 the subsequent .'^ ohillcis.- The at ginuents of Lachmami, who 
 dissects these six books into three or four separate songs,-' carry 
 no convictioa to ray mind ; and I see no reason why we should 
 not consider all of them to be by the same author, bound together 
 by the connnon '^■ irpose of giving a great collective picture which 
 may properly be leriued an Iliad. The tenth l>ook, or IJoloueia, 
 though adapted ; peeially to the place in which it stand.-, agrees 
 with the books between the tirst and eighth in belonging only to 
 the general plernre of t!ie vrar, witlu^nt helj)ing forward the 
 march of the Aci illtiis ; yet it seems conceived in a lower vein, 
 in so far as we can trust our modern ethical sentiment. One is 
 
 ' The latter portion of the .soventh iiook is !»poiU'd by the very un^ntist'nc- 
 tory addition introduced to ex}.laiu the constructiuH of the wiill find ditch: 
 all the other incidents (the agora and embassy of the Trojans, the truce for 
 burial, the arrival of wine-ships from Lemnos, etc.) suit perfectly with tho 
 scheme of the poetr of these books, to depict the Trojan war generally 
 
 « Unle<»s, indeed, we are to imagine the combat between Tlepolemus and 
 Sarpedon, and tliat betu een Glaukus and Diomedes, to he separate songs ; 
 and they arc among the very few j)assagC8 in the Iliad which are completely 
 separable, implying no special antecedents. 
 
 ' Compare also Heyne, Excursus ii. sect ii. ad Hiad. xxiv. rol viii 
 
 p. 78a. 
 
 • 
 
 I'NITT OF AUTHORSHIP 
 
 ' 
 
 .. > 
 
 ■ 
 
 ^ 
 
 201 
 
 unwilfing to believe that the author of the fifth book, or Aristeia 
 of DiomCdi-s, would condescend to employ the hero whom he 
 there so brightly glorifies, — the victor even over Ares himself,--* 
 in .-slaughtering newly-arrived Thracian sleepers, without aoy 
 hirge purpo>e or necessity.' Tlie ninth book, of which 1 have 
 already spoken at length, belongs to a different vein of conce})tion, 
 and seems to me more likely to liave emanated from a eeparata 
 composer. 
 
 A\'hile intimating these views respecting the autliorsliip of tlie 
 iliml, as being in my judgment tlie most probable, I must repeat 
 that, though the study of the poem carries to my miud a suflicient 
 conviction respecting its structure, the question between unity and 
 I)lurj»Iity of authors is essentially less determinable. The poem 
 consists of a pai1 original, and other ])arts superadded; yet it is 
 certainly not impossible that the author of the former may 
 
 ' Subsequent poets, seeminf^ly thinkiii/i; that the naked fitory, (of Diomedes 
 shuj;:rhtoriii^; Kliesus and his companions in tlnnr sleep,) as it now stands in 
 the Iliad, was too displeasing, adopted ditVerent ways of dressing it up. 
 Thus, according to Pindar (ap. Schol. Iliad, x. 435), lihcsus fought one day 
 as (lie ally of 'JVoy. and did such terrific damage, that tlie Greeks had no 
 other means of averting total destruction from his hand on the next day, 
 except by killin!:: him durinji the nif^ht. And the Euripidean drama, called 
 I{h'\sus, though representing' the latter ns a new-comer, yet puts into the 
 mouth of Athene tiie like overwhelming predictions of what. he would do on 
 the cominp day, if suffered to live ; so that to kill him in the night is the 
 only way of saving' the (Jreeks (Eurij). Khes. G02) : moreover, Khesus him- 
 self i-? there brought forward as talking with such overweetiin)^ insolence, 
 that the sympathies of man, and the envy of the gods, are turned against 
 him (ih. 458). 
 
 Bnt the story is best known in the form and with the a-Mition (e(»u;»'.ly 
 unknown to the Iliad) which Virgil has adopted. It was decreed by fate that, 
 If the splendid liorses of inu'sti*; wer'* [)ermitted on<c cither to lastc the 
 Trojan jyrovender, or to drink of the river Xanthus, nothini; could preservf 
 the Greeks from ruin (^Eneid, i. 468, with Servius, ad loc.) : — 
 
 "Ncc procul hinc Rhesi niveis tentoria vclis 
 Agnoscit lacrymans : primo quae prodita sorano 
 Tydidcs multA rastabat caede crucntus: 
 Ardentesque avertit equos in castra, priusquam 
 Pabula gustasscnt Trojae, Xanthmnque bibissent." 
 
 All these Tersions are oertainlj imprOTements apon the etory as it stAQdi to 
 tbBlliad. 
 
 9» 
 
 ^^ 
 
 rf^C ABI 
 
 
 'ip 
 
 Ii-,'-. 
 
 h» 
 
 > ■» ' 
 
 ¥^ 
 
202 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 himself have composed the latter; and such would be my belief 
 if I regarded plurality of composers as an inadmissible idea. On 
 this supimsition, we must conclude that the poet, while anxious 
 for the addition of new, and for the most part, highly interesting 
 Diatter, has not thought fit to recast the parts and events in such 
 manner a, to impart to the whole a pervading thread o( consensus 
 and organization, such as we see in the Odyssey. 
 
 Tliar the Odyssey is of later date than the Iliad, and by a 
 different author, seems to be now the opinion of most critics, 
 especially of Tayne Knighti and Nitzsch ; though O. MiJller leans 
 to a contrary conclusion, at the same lime adding that he thinks 
 tlie arguments either way not very decisive. There are consid- 
 erable'' differences of statement in the two poems in regard to 
 gome of the gods : Iris is messenger of the gods in the Iliad, and 
 Hermes in the Odyssey : JEolus, the dispenser of the winds in 
 the Odyssey, is not noticed in the twenty-third book of the Iliad, 
 but, on the contrary, Iris invites the winds, as indei)endent gods, 
 to come and kindle the; funeral i)ile of Patroclus ; and, unless we 
 are to expunge the song of Demodokus in the eighth book of tho 
 Odyssey, as spurious, Aphrodite there appears as the wife of 
 Hephiestus, — a relationship not known to the Iliad. There are 
 also some other point.- of difference enumerated by Mr. Knight 
 and others, which tend to justify the presumption that the author 
 of the Odyssey is not identical either with the author of the 
 Achilleis or his enlargers, which G. Hermann considers to be a 
 point unquestionable.2 Indeed, the difficulty of supposing a long 
 coherent poem to have been conceived, composed, and retained, 
 without any aid of writing, appears to many critics even now, 
 insurmountable, thougli the evidences on the other side, are, in 
 my view, sufficient to outweigh any negative presumption thus 
 euggested. But it is improbable that the same person should 
 iiave powers of memorial combination sufficient for composing two 
 Buch poems, nor is there any proof to force upon us such a suppo- 
 
 Bition. 
 
 Presuming a difference of authorship between the two poems, 
 
 ' Mr. Knight places tne Iliad about two centuries, and the Odyssey ono 
 century, anterior to Hesiod : a century between the two poems iProlegg. c 
 
 bd.) 
 
 » Hermann, Praefat ad Odyss p. vii. 
 
 AGE OF ILIAD AND ODYSSEt. 
 
 208 
 
 1 feel less convinced about the supposed juniority of the Odyssey. 
 The discrepancies in manners and language in the one and the 
 other, are so little important, that two different persons, in the 
 same age and society, might well be imagined to exhibit as great 
 or even greater. It is to be recollected that the subjects of the 
 two are heterogeneous, so as to conduct the poet, even were he 
 the same man, into totally different veins of imagination and 
 illustration. The pictures of the Odyssey seem to delineate the 
 game heroic life as the Iliad, though looked at from a distinct 
 {)oint of view : and the circumstances surrounding the residence 
 of Odysseus, in Ithaka, are just such as we may i«uppose him to 
 have left in order to attack Troy. If the scenes presented to us 
 are for the most part pacific, as contrasted with the incessant 
 fighting of the Iliad, this is not to be ascribed to any greater 
 sociality or civilization in the real hearers of the Odyssey, but to 
 the circumstances of the hero whom the poet undertakes to 
 adorn : nor can we doubt that the po<'ms of Arktinus and 
 Lesches, of a later date than the Odyssey, would have given U8 
 as much combat and bloodshed as the Iliad. I am not struck by 
 those proofs of improved civilization which some critics affirm the 
 Odyssey to present : Mr. Knight, who is of this opinion, never- 
 theless admits that the mutilation of Melanthius, and the hanging 
 up of the female slaves by Odysseus, in that poem, indicate 
 greater barbarity than any incidents in the fights before Troy.i 
 The more skilful and compact structure of the Odyssey, has been 
 often considered as a proof of ks juniority in age : and in the ca>e 
 of two poems by the same author, we might plausibly contend 
 that practice would bring with it improvement in the combining 
 acuity. But in reference to the poems before us, we must rec- 
 ollect, first, that in all probability the Iliad (with which the 
 comparison is taken) is not a primitive but an enlarged poem, 
 and that the primitive Achilleis might well have been quite as 
 coherent as the Odyssey ; secondly, that between different 
 authors, superiority in structure is not a proof of subsequent 
 composition, inasmuch as, on that hypothesis, we should be com 
 pelled to admit that the later poem of Arktinus would be an 
 Improvement upon the Odyssey ; thirdly, that, even if it were sc^ 
 
 * Knight, Prolegg. 1, c. Odyss. xxii. 465-478. 
 
204 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 we could only infer that the author of the OJyssoy h«d heard the 
 Achilieis or the Iliad ; we could not infer that h«s lived one or 
 two generations afterwards.! 
 
 On the whole, the balance of probabilities ccevmo in fevor of 
 distinct authorship for the two poems, but the same age, — and 
 that age a very early one, anterior to the first Olympiad. And 
 they may thus be used as evidences, and contemporary evidences, 
 for the phenomena of primitive Greek civilization ; while they 
 also show that the power of constructing long premeditated epics, 
 without the aid of writing, is to be taken as a characteristic of 
 the earliest known Greek mind. This was the point controverted 
 by Wolf, which a full review of the case (in my judgment) 
 decides against him : it is, moreover, a valuable result for the 
 historian of the Greeks, inasmuch as it marks out to him the 
 ground from which he is to start in appreciating their ulterior 
 progress.'^ 
 
 ' The arguments, upon the faith of which Payne Knight and other critics 
 have maintained the Odyssey to be younger than the Iliad, are well stated 
 and examined in Bernard Thiersch, — Quaestio de Diversd Iliadis et Odys 
 seie ^tate, — in the Anharg (p. 306) to his work Ueber das Zeitalter und 
 Vaterland des Homer. 
 
 He shows all such arguments to De very inconclusive; though the grounds 
 upon which he himself maintains identity of age between the two appear to 
 me not at all more satisfactory (p. 327) : we can infer nothing to the pomt 
 from the mention of Telemachus in the Iliad. 
 
 Welcker thinks that there is a great difference of age, and an evident 
 difference of authorship, between the two poems (Dtr Episch. Kykivs, 
 
 p. 295). 
 
 O. Miiller idmits the iimm^ recent date of the Odyssey, but considers it 
 " difficult and hazardous to raise upon this foundation any definite conclu 
 sions as to the person and age of the poet." (History of the Literature of 
 Ancient Greece, ch. v. s. 13.J 
 
 * Dr. Thirlwall has added to the second edition of his History of Greece 
 a valuable Appendix, on the early history of the Homeric poems (vol. i. pp. 
 500-516); which contains copious information respecting the discrepant 
 opinions of German criticjj, with a brief comparative examination of theuf 
 reasons. I could have wished that so excellent a judge had superadded, to 
 his enumeration of the views of others, an ampler exposition of his own. 
 Dt. Thirlwall seems decidedly convinced upon that which appears to me th« 
 most important point in th(! Homeric controversy : " That before the appear* 
 auce of the eariiest of the jjoems of the Epic Cycle, the Iliad and Odyssey, 
 tven if they did not exist precisely in their present form, had at least reached 
 
 POPULAR CHARACTER OF THE POEMS. 
 
 205 
 
 Whatever there may be of truth in the different conjectures of 
 critics respecting the authorship and structure of these unrivalled 
 poems, we are not to imagine that it is the perfection of thei» 
 epical symmetry which has given them their indissoluble hold 
 upon the human mind, as well modern as ancient. There is some 
 tendency in critics, from Aristotle downwards,^ to invert the 
 order of attributes in respect to the Homeric poems, so as to dwell 
 most on recondite excellences which escape the unaided reader, 
 and which are even to a great degree disputable. But it is given 
 to few minds (as Goethe has remarked^) to appreciate fully the 
 mechanism of a long poem ; and many feel the beauty of the sep- 
 arate parts, who have no sentiment for the aggregate perfection 
 of the whole. 
 
 Nor were the Homeric poems originally addressed to minds of 
 the rarer stamp. They are intended for those feelings which 
 the critic has in common with the unlettered mass, not for that 
 enlarged range of vision and peculiar standard which ho has 
 acquired to himself. They are of all poems the most absolut ly 
 and unreservedly popular : had they been otherwise, they could 
 
 their present compass, and were regarded each as a complete and well-defnicd 
 whole, not as a fluctuating aggregate of fugitive pieces." (p. 509.) 
 
 This marks out the Homeric poems as ancient both in the items and in 
 the total, and includes negation of the theory of Wolf and Lachmann, who 
 contend that, as a total, they only date from the age of Peisistratus. It is 
 then safe to treat the poems as unquestionable evidences of Grecian antiquity 
 (meaning thereby 776 b. c), which we could not do if we regarded all con- 
 gruity of parts in the poems as brought about through alterations of 
 Peisistratus and his friends. 
 
 There is also a very just admonition of Dr. Thirlwall (p. 516) as to the 
 difficulty of measuring what degree of discrepancy or inaccuracy might or 
 might not have escaped the poet's attention, in an age so i.uperfectly known 
 to us. 
 
 ' There are just remarks on this point in Heyne's Excursus, ii. sect. 2 and 
 4, ad 11. xxiv. vol. viii. pp. 771-800. 
 
 * " Wenig Deutsche, und vielleicht nur wenige Menschen aller neuem 
 Nationen, haben GefUhl fiir ein sesthetisches Ganzes : sie loben und tadeln 
 BUT stellenweise, sie entziicken sich nur stellenweise." (Goethe, Wilhelm 
 Meister: I transcribe thie from Welcker's -^schyl. Trilogie, p. S06.) 
 
 What ground there is for restricting this proposition to modan le oatt 
 trSAted with annent nations I am uiiable to conceive. 
 
206 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 not have lived so 1 ng in the mouth of the rhapsodes, and the 
 ear and memory of me people : and it was then that their influ- 
 ence was first acquired, never afterwards to be shaken. Their 
 beauties belong to tlie parts taken separately, which revealed 
 themselves spontaneously to the listening crowd at the festival,— 
 far more than to tlie whole poem taken together, which could 
 hardly be appreciated unless the parts were dwelt upon and suf- 
 fered to expand in tiie mind. The most unlettered hearer of 
 those times could readily seize, while the most instructed reader 
 can still recognize, the characteristic excellence of Homeric nar- 
 rative, — its Straightforward, unconscious, unstudied simplicity, — 
 its concrete forms of speechi and happy alternation of action 
 
 > The KLvovaeva bv6fxara of Homer were extolled by Aristotle ; see Schol. 
 ad Iliad i. 481 ; compare Dionys. Haliearn. De Compos. Verbon c. 20. 
 uar. uviVev ^Iv 6ta<^epuv yivofisva ra ^payfiara v ^eyofieva dpav. Respect, 
 inff the undisguised bursts of feeling by the heroes, the Scholiast ad Ihad. i 
 349 tells us,-eTotfxov to rjpoiKov Trpbg (5a/cpva, - compare Euripid. Helen 
 959, and the severe censures of Plato, Republ. ii. p. 388. , -^ , 
 
 The Homeric poems were the best understood, and the most widely 
 popular of all Grecian composition, even among the least mstructed per- 
 sons, such (for example) as the semibarbarians who had acquired the Greek 
 lan.niage in addition to their own mother tongue. (Dio Chrysost. Or x^ iii. 
 vol i. p 478 ; Or. liii. vol ii. p. 277, Eeisk.) Respecting the simplicity and 
 perspicuity of the narrative style, implied in this extensive popularity, Por- 
 phyry made a singular remark : he said, that the sentences of Homer really 
 presented much difficulty and obscurity, but that ordinary readers fancied 
 thev understood him, " because of the general clearness which appeared to 
 run through the poems." (See the Prolegomena of Villoison s edition of 
 the Iliad, p. xli.) This remark affords the key to a good deal of the Homeric 
 criticism. There doubtless were real obscurities in the poems, arising troni 
 altered associations, customs, religion, language, etc a^ well as from cor- 
 rupt text: but while the critics did good service in elucidating these diffi- 
 culties, thev also introduced artificially many others, altogether of their own 
 creating. Refusing to U satisfied with the plain and obvious meaning, they 
 sought in Homer hidden purposes, elaborate innuendo, recondite motives 
 even with regard to petty details, deep-laid rhetorical artifices (see a spec^ 
 men in Dionys. Hal. Ar/Rhetor. c. 15, p. 316, Reiske ; nor is even Aristotte 
 exempt from similar tendencies, Schol. ad Iliad, iii. 441, x. 198), or a sub- 
 stratum of philosophy allegorized. No wonder that passages, quite perspio- 
 noos to the vulgar reader, seemed difficult to them. 
 
 There could not be so sure a way of missing the real Homer as by seaich. 
 ing for him in these devious recesses. He is essentially the poet ot tr^e 
 
 SIMPLICITY OF HOMERIC POETRY. 
 
 20/ 
 
 K^ith dialogue, — its vivid pictures of living agents, alwayi 
 clearly and sharply individualized, whether in the commanding 
 proportions of Achilles and Odysseus, in the graceful presence 
 of Helen and Penelope, or in the more humble contrast of Eu- 
 mceus and Melanthius ; and always, moreover, animated by the 
 £rankness with which his heroes give utterance to all theii 
 transient emotions and even all their infirmities, — its constant 
 reference to those coarser veins of feeling and palpable motives 
 which belong to all men in common, — its fulness of graphic 
 details, freshly drawn from the visible and audible world, and 
 though often homely, never tame, ror trenching upon that limit 
 of satiety to which the Greek mind was so keenly alive, — lastly, 
 its perpetual junction of gods and men in the same picture, and 
 familiar appeal to ever-present divine agency, in harmony with 
 the interpretation of nature at that time universal. 
 
 It is undoubtedly easier to feel than to describe the impressive 
 influence of Homeric narrative : but the time and circumstances 
 under which that influence was first, and most powerfully felt, 
 preclude the possibility of explaining it by comprehensive and 
 elaborate comparisons, such as are implied in Aristotle's remarks 
 upon the structure of the poems. The critic who seeks the 
 explanation in the right place will not depart widely from the 
 point of view of those rude auditors to whom the poems were 
 originally addressed, or from the susceptibilities and capacities 
 common to the human bosom in every stage of progressive cul- 
 ture. And though the refinements and delicacies of the poems, 
 fts well as their general structure, are a subject of highly interest- 
 ing criticism, — yet it is not to these that Homer owes his wide- 
 spread and imperishable popularity. Still less is it true, as the 
 well-known observations of Horace would lead us to believe, 
 
 broad highway and the market-place, touching the common sympathies and 
 satisfying the mental appetencies of his countrymen with unrivalled effect j 
 but exempt from ulterior views, either selfish or didactic, and immersed in 
 the same medium of practical life and experience, religiously construed, aa 
 his auditors. No nation has ever yet had so perfect and touching an expo- 
 sition of its early social mind as the Iliad and Odyssey exhibit 
 
 In the verbal criticism of Homer, the Alexandrine Pterati seem to hava 
 made a very great advance, as compared with the glossographers who pre- 
 ceded them. (See Lehrs, De Studiis Aristarchi. Dissert, ii. p. 42.1 
 
208 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 that Homer is a teacher of ethical wisdom akin and supenc^ U 
 Chrysippus or Crantor.> No didactic purpose is to be found m 
 the Iliad and Odyssey ; a philosopher may doubtless extract, 
 from the incidents and strongly marked characters which it con- 
 tains, much illustrative matter for his exhortations, — but 
 ethical doctrine which he applies must emanate from his own 
 reflection. The homeric here manifests virtues or infirmities, 
 fierceness or compassion, with the same straightforward and 
 simple-minded vivacity, unconscious of any ideal standard by 
 
 » Horat Epist. i. 2, v. 1-26 : — 
 
 " Sirenum \oces, et Circes pocula nosti : 
 
 Qu» si cum sociis stultus cupidusque bibisset, 
 Vixissct canis immundus, vel arnica luto sus." 
 Horace contrasts the folly and greediness of the compamons of Ub-se., in 
 a^epting the refreshments tendered to them by C.rce wi.h the clf-coni- 
 3 of Ulysses himself in refusing them. But in the mc.den as described 
 mthe original poem, neither the praise nor the blame here imphed, finds 
 Iny countenance. The companions of Ulysses follow the universal pract.ee 
 in accepting hospilality tendered to strangers, the fatal consequences of 
 whil Tn their particular case, they could have no ground for suspecting 
 wh le l^ysses is preserved from a similar fate, not by any «f -^-^^^^ «^ 
 r's o^; but by a'previous divine warning and a special antidote which had 
 not bee; vouchsafed to the rest (see Odyss. x. 285). And the incident of 
 the Sirens, if it is to be taken as evidence of anything, indicates rather the 
 .bsence, t^an the presence, of self-command on the part of Ulysses 
 
 Of the violent mutations of text, whereby the GrammaUa or cntics tried 
 to eaace from Homer bad ethical tendencies {we must remember that many 
 If these men were lecturers to youth), a remarkable specimen is afforded by 
 
 Venet. Schol. ad Iliad, ix. 453; compare ^.^"^-^^'/^^'^t'h he h^ms^^^ 
 9-^ Phcenix describes the calamitous family tragedy m which he himself 
 had been partly the agent, partly the victim. Now that an Homenc hero 
 'htld confess ^y pfoceUings, and still more guilty designs, without any 
 expression of shame or contrition, was insupportable to the fee lingB of the 
 critics. One of them, Aristodemus, thrust two negative particles m to one 
 of the Hnes ; and though he thereby ruined not only the sense but the metre, 
 his emendation procured for him universal applause, because he had mam 
 tained the innocence of the hero {kcI ov ^ovov nv6oKcf^v<rev, a^Aa Kat ertfiv^v, 
 ^ eix^efiri Tvpvaac rbv .o^a). And Aristarehus thought the case soalarm. 
 tog, that he^ruck out from the text four lines which have only been pre- 
 ^ to us by Plutarch ('O ^ev ^Kpiorapxo, HecXe ra Inv ravra. ^o /i , . 
 THV). S€« the Fragment of Dioscorides {nepl rC.v rrap^ ^Of.r,p^ No/u*v| 
 in Didof s Fragraenta Bistoricor. Graecor. vol. u. p. 193. 
 
 HOMERIC HEROES 
 
 209 
 
 vehich his conduct is to be tried ;^ nor can we trace in the poec 
 any ulterior function beyond that of the inspired organ of the 
 Muse, and the nameless, but eloquent, herald of lost adventures 
 out of the darkness of the past. 
 
 ' " C'est un tableau ideal, k coup sGr, que celui de la societe Grecque 
 dans les chants qui portent le nom d'Homere : et pourtant cette societe y 
 est toute entiere reproduite, avec la rusticite, la ferocite de ses moeurs, ses 
 bonnes et ses mauvaises passions, sans dessein de faire particuli^rement 
 ressortir, de celebrer tel ou tel de ses merites, de ses avantages, ou de laisscr 
 dans I'ombre ses vices et ses maux. Ce melange du bien et du mal, du fort 
 et du faible, — cette siraultane'ite d'id^es et de sentiraens en apparence con- 
 traires, — cette variete, cette incoherence, ce developperaent inegaJ de la 
 nature et de la destinee humaine, — c'est pr^cisement \k co qu'il y a de plus 
 poetique, car c'est le fond meme des choses, c'est la v^rite sur I'homme et le 
 monde : et dans les peintures ideales qu'en veulcnt faire la po^sie, le roman 
 et mdme I'histoire, cet ensemble, si divers et pourtant si harmonieux, doit so 
 rotroaver: sans quoi I'ideal veritable y manque aussi bien que la r^it^."* 
 {Goicot, Conrs d'Histoire Modeme, Ld<;on 7Q3o, vol. i. p. 285.) 
 
 (I 
 
 . ___^j^_^2aC'-"3a«-- 
 
 iiMMkii^'NiiliPil!!*' f>' ■' 'V'.:.WS;.-' 
 
Vols 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PART II. 
 HISTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 GENERAL GEOGRAPHY AND LIMITS OF GREECE. 
 
 Greece Proper lies between the 3Gth and 40th parallels of 
 north latitude, and between the 21st and 26th degrees of east 
 longitude. Its greatest length, from Mount Olympus to Cape 
 Tcenarus, may be stated at 250 English miles ; its greatest 
 breadth, from the western coast of Akarnania to Marathon m 
 Attica, at 180 miles ; and the distance eastward from Ambrakia 
 across Pindus to the Magnesian mountain Homole and the 
 mouth of the Peneius is about 120 miles. Altogether, its area 
 is somewhat less than that of Portugal.' In regard, however, 
 to all attempts at determining the exact limits of Greece proper, 
 we may remark, first, that these limits seem not to have been 
 very precisely defined even among the Greeks themselves ; and 
 uext, that so large a proportion of the Hellens were distributed 
 nmong islands and colonies, and so much of their influence upon 
 he world in general produced through their colonies, as to 
 
 > Compare Strong, Statistics of the Kingdom of Greece, p. 2 j and Knm 
 HeUas, vol i. ch. 3, p. 196. 
 
212 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE 
 
 render the extent of their original domicile a matter of com- 
 paratively httle moment to verify. 
 
 The chain called Olympus and the Cambunian mountains, 
 ranging from east and west, and commencing with the ^gean 
 sea or the gulf of Therma, near the 40th degree of north 
 latitude, is prolonged under the name of Mount Lingon, until it 
 touches the Adriatic at the Akrokeraunian promontory. The 
 country south of this chain comprehended all that in ancient 
 times was regarded as Greece, or Hellas proper, but it also com. 
 prehended something more. Hellas proper,* (or continuous 
 Hellas, to use the language of Skylax and Diksearchus) was 
 understood to begin w ith the town and gulf of Ambrakia : from 
 thence, northward to the Akrokeraunian promontory, lay the 
 land called by the Greeks Epirus, — occupied by the Chaoniaus, 
 Molossians, and Thesprotians, who were termed Epirots, and 
 were not esteemed to belong to the Hellenic aggregate. This at 
 least was the general understanding, though -^tolians and Akar- 
 nanians, in their more distant sections, seem to have been not less 
 widely removed from the full type of Hellenism than the Epirots 
 were ; while Herodotus is inclined to treat even Molossians and 
 Thesprotians as Hellens.9 
 
 At a point about midway between the iEgean and Ionian seas, 
 Olympus and Lingon are traversed nearly at right angles by the 
 still longer and vaster chain called Pindus, which stretches in a 
 line rather west of north from the northern side of the range of 
 Olympus : the system to which these mountains belong seems to 
 begin with the lofty masses of greenstone comprised under the name 
 of Mount Scardus, or Scordus, (Schardagh,);^ which is divided only 
 
 * Dikaearch, 31, p. 4G0, nl. Fuhr: — 
 
 'H 6' 'EAAif uTTo TTjg 'A/ijSpaKiag elvat doKel 
 Muhara cvvexnc to itepoQ • avTTj 6' epxerai 
 'Eirl Tdv Torafiov TirjveLbv, «£• ^iTiiag ypinpeij 
 'Opof re MayvTj-.iov 'OfioXijv KEKlrjfievov. 
 Skylax, c. Sh.-^'Xft^paKia — hvrev&ev apxerac ij '1^Xk<jLc'<Jvv€XVi eivat 
 usxfii Uvveiov TcoTufxov, koI 'Ofioliov MayvrjrtKffc TroXewf, ^ iari irapd -69 
 troTouov. 
 
 « Herod- i. 146 ; ii. 56. The Molossian Alkon passes for a Hellen (Herod 
 vL 1J7). ^ 
 
 • Th« mountain systems in the ancient Macedonia and lUyricum. nortf* 
 
 GENERAL GEOGRAPHY OF GREECE. 
 
 213 
 
 oy the narrow cleft, containing the river Drin, from the limestone 
 of the Albanian Alps. From the southern face of Olympus, 
 Pindus strikes off* nearly southward, forming the boundary be- 
 tween Thessaly and Epirus, and sending forth about the 3*Jtk 
 degree of latitude the lateral chain of Othrys, — which latter takea 
 an easterly course, forming the southern boundary of Thessaly, 
 and reaching the sea between Thessaly and the northern coast 
 of Euboca. Southward of Othrys, the chain of Pindus, under the 
 name of Tymphrestus, still continues, until another lateral chain, 
 called (Eta, projects from it again towards the east, — forming 
 the lofty coast immediately south of the Maliac gulf, with the 
 narrow road of Thermopylae between the two, — and terminating 
 at the Euboean strait. At the point of junction with (Eta, the 
 chain of Pindus forks into two branches ; one striking to the 
 westward of south, and reaching across ^tolia, under the names 
 of Arakynthus, Kurius, Korax, and Taphiassus, to the promon- 
 tory called Antirrhion, situated on the northern side of ths 
 narrow entrance of the Corinthian gulf, over against the cor- 
 responding promontory of Rliion in Peloponnesus ; the otliei 
 tending south-east, and forming Parnassus, Helicon, and Kitlut- 
 rOn ; indeed, ^galeus and Hymettus, even down to the south- 
 ernmost cape of Attica, Suniura, maybe treated as a coiitiimauce 
 of this chain. From the eastern extremity of (Eta, also, a range 
 of hills, inferior in height to the preceding, takes its departure in 
 a south-easterly direction, under the various names of Knemis, 
 Ptoon, and Teumessus. It is joined with Kitha^ron by the lateral 
 communication, ranging from west to east, called Parnes ; while 
 
 of Olympus, have been yet but imperfectly examined : see Dr. Griesebach, 
 Reise durch Rumelien und nach Brussa im Jahre 1839, vol. ii. ch. 13, p. 112, 
 se^iq. (Getting. 1841), which contains much instruction respecting the real 
 relations of these mountains as compared with the different ideas and repre- 
 sentations of them. The words of Stra!)o (lib. vii. Excerpt 3, ed. Tzschucke), 
 that Scardus, Orbelus, Rhodope, and H«mus extend in a straight line from 
 the Adriatic to the Euxine, are incorrect. 
 
 See Leake's Travels in Northern Greece, vol. i. p. 335: the pass of 
 Tschangon, near Castoria (through which the river Devol passes from 
 the eastward to fall into the Adriatic on the westward), is the only cleft 
 hi this long chain from the 'ver Drin 'i the north down to the centre ol 
 Greece. 
 
214 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the celebrated Pentelikus, abundant in marble quarries, consti- 
 tutes its connecting link, to the south of Parnes with the chain 
 from Kithaeron to Sunium. 
 
 From the promontory of Antirrhion, the line of mountains 
 crosses into Peloponnesus, and stretches in a southerly direction 
 down to the extremity of the peninsula called Taenarus, now 
 Cape Matapan. Forming the boundary between Elis with Mes- 
 genia on one side, and Arcadia with Laconia on the other, it 
 bears the successive names of Olenus, Panachaikus, Pholoe, 
 Erymanthus, Lykaeus, Parrhasius, and Taygetus. Another series 
 of mountains strikes off from Kithaeron towards the south-west, 
 constituting, under the names of Geraneia and Oneia, the rugged 
 and lofty Isthmus of Corinth, and then spreading itself into 
 Peloponnesus. On entering that peninsula, one of its branches 
 tends westward along the north of Arkadia, comprising the 
 Akrokorinthus, or citadel of Corinth, the high peak of Kyllene, 
 the mountains of Aroanii and Lampeia, and ultimately joining 
 Erymanthus and Pholoe, — while the other branch strikes south- 
 ward towards the south-eastern cape of Peloponnesus, the for 
 midable Cape Malea, or St. Angelo, — and exhibits itself under 
 the successive names of Apesas, Artemisium, Parthenium, 
 Parnon, Thornax, and Zarex. 
 
 From the eastern extremity 3f Olympus, in a direction rather 
 to the eastward of sooth, stretches the range of mountains first 
 called Ossa, and afterwards Pelion, down to the south-eastern 
 comer of Thessaly. l^he long, lofty, and naked back-bone of the 
 island of Eubcea, may be viewed as a continuance both of this 
 chain and of the chain of Othrys : the line is farther prolonged 
 by a series of islands in the Archipelago, Andros, Tenos, Myk- 
 onos, and Naxos, belonging to the group called the Cyclades, or 
 islands encircling the sacred centre of Delos. Of these Cyclades, 
 others are in like manner a continuance of the chain which reaches 
 to Cape Sunium, — Keos, Kythnos, Seriphos, and Siphnos join on 
 to Attica, as Andros does to Euboea. And we might even con- 
 sider the great island of Krete as a prolongation of the system of 
 mountains which breasts the winds and waves at Cape Malea, the 
 island of Kythera forming the intermediate link between them. 
 Skiathus, Skopelus, and Skyrus, to the north-east of Euboea, also 
 
 
 GEOLOGICAL FEATURES. 
 
 UB 
 
 mark themselves out as outlying peaks of the range compreheoa 
 ing Pelion and Euboea.^ 
 
 By this brief sketch, which the reader will naturally compare 
 with one of the recent maps of the country, it will be seen that 
 Greece proper is among the most mountainous territories in 
 Europe. For although it is convenient, in giving a systematic 
 view of the face of the country, to group the multiplicity of 
 mountains into certain chains, or ranges, founded upon approxi- 
 mative uniformity of direction ; yet, in point of fact, there are so 
 many ramifications and dispersed peaks, — so vast a number of 
 hills and crags of different magnitude and elevation, — that a 
 comparatively small proportion of the surface is left for level 
 ground. Not only few continuous plains, but even few contin- 
 uous valleys, exist throughout all Greece proper. The largest 
 spaces of level ground are seen in Thessaly, in ^tolia, in the 
 western portion of Peloponnesus, and in Bceotia ; but irregular 
 mountains, valleys frequent but isolated, land-locked basins and 
 declivities, w^hich often occur, but seldom last long, form the 
 character of the country .2 
 
 The islands of the Cyclades, Euboea, Attica, and Laconia, 
 consist for the most part of micaceous schist, combined with and 
 often covered by crystalline granular limestone.3 The centre 
 
 * For the general sketch of the mountain system of Hellas, see Kruse, Hellas, 
 vol. i. eh. 4, pp. 280-290 ; Dr. Cramer, Geog. of An. Greece, vol. i. pp. 3-8. 
 
 Respecting the northern regions, Epirus, Illyria, and Macedonia, O. McJ- 
 ler, in his short but valuable treatise Ueher die Makedoner, p. 7 (Berlin, 
 1825), may be consulted with advantage. This treatise is annexed to the 
 English translation of his History of the Dorians by Mr. G. C. Lewis. 
 
 ' Out of the 47,600,000 stremaa (= 12,000,000 Enghsh acres) included in 
 the present kingdom of Greece, 26,.500,000 go to mountains, rooks, rivenj, 
 lakes, and forests, — and 21,000,000 to arable land, vineyards, olive and cur 
 rant grounds, etc. By arable laud is meant, land fit for cultivation ; for s 
 comparatively small portion of it is actually cultivated at present (8troag, 
 Statistics of Greece, p. 2, London, 1842). 
 
 The modern kingdom of Greece does not include Thessaly. The epithet 
 KoiTiog (hollow) is applied to several of the chief Grecian states, — Koi^if 
 *HXff, KOiX^ AaKeSaifzuVy KOiTidv 'Apyog, etc. 
 
 Kopiird^og b^pvcf. re koI KoiXaiverai,^ Strabo, viii. p. 381. 
 
 The fertility of Boeotia is noticed in Strabo, ix. p. 400, and in the valuabto 
 ft-agment of Dik»archus, B/of 'EAXatJof, p. 140, ed. Fuhr. 
 
 • For the geolotrical and minAralogical character of Greece, see the 
 
 4"^ 
 
 (| 
 
 r 
 
 
216 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 and v/est of Peloponnesus, as well as the country north of the 
 Corinthian gulf from the ^^If of Ambrakia to the strait of Eub<s&^ 
 present a calcareous formation, varying in different localities as 
 to color, consistency, and hardness, but, generally, belonging or 
 approximating to the chalk : it is often very compact, but is dis- 
 tinguished in a marked manner from the crystalline limestone 
 above mentioned. The two loftiest summits in Greece' (both, 
 however, lower than Olympus, estimated at nine thousand seven 
 hundred feet) exhibit thi.i formation, — Parnassus, which attains 
 eight thousand feet, and the point of St. Elias in Taygetus, which 
 is not less than seven thousand eight hundred feet. Clay-slate, 
 and conglomerates of sand, lime, and clay, are found in many 
 parts : a close and firm conglomerate of lime composes the Isth- 
 mus of Corinth : loose deposits of pebbles, and calcareous breccia, 
 occupy also some portions of the territory. But the most impor 
 tant and essential elements of the Grecian soil, consist of the 
 diluvial and alluvial formations, with which the troughs and 
 basins are filled up, resulting from tlio decomposition of the older 
 adjoining rocks. In the^ie reside the productive powers of the 
 country, and upon these the grain and vegetables for the subsis- 
 tence of the people depen<l. The mountain regions are to a great 
 degree barren, destitute ac present of wood or any useful vegeta- 
 ion, though there is reason to believe that they were better 
 wooded in antiquity : in many parts, however, and especially in 
 JEtoUa. and Akarnania, they afford plenty of timber, and in all 
 parts, pasture for the catile during summer, at a time when the 
 plains are thoroughly burnt up.2 For other articles of food, 
 
 undertaken by Dr. Fiedler, by orders of the present government of Greece, 
 in 1834 and the following years (Reise durch alle Theile des Konigreichs 
 Griechenland in Auftrag der K. G. Regierung in den Jahren 1834 bis 1S37, 
 especially vol. ii. pp. 512-530). 
 
 Professor Ross remarks upon the character of the Greek limestone, — 
 hard and intractable to the mason, — jagged and irregular in its fracture, — 
 as having first determined in ejirly times the polygonal style of architecture, 
 which has been denominated (he observes) Cyclopian and Pelasgic, without 
 the jeast reason for either denomination (Reise in den Griech. Inselo, vol. I 
 p. t^f. 
 
 ' Griesebac^, Reisen durch Rumelien, vol. ii. ch. 13, p. 124. 
 
 *In passing through the "alley between CEta and Parnassus, going 
 kmards Elateia, Fiedler observes the striking change in the character of thi 
 
 RIVERS. 
 
 «17 
 
 dependence must be had on the valleys, which are occasionallj of 
 singular fertility. The low ground of Thessaly, the valley of 
 the Kephisus, and the borders of the lake Kopais, in Boeotia, the 
 western portion of Elis, the plains of Stratus on the confines of 
 Akarnania and ^tolia, and those near the river Pamisus io 
 Messenia, both are now, and were in ancient times, remarkable 
 for their abundant produce. 
 
 Besides the scarcity of wood for fuel, there is another serious 
 inconvenience to which the low grounds of Greece are expased, 
 
 the want of a supply of water at once adequate and regular.' 
 
 Abundance of rain falls during the autumnal and winter months, 
 little or none during the summer ; while the naked limestone of 
 the numerous hills, neither absorbs nor retains moisture, so that 
 the rain runs off as rapidly as it falls, and springs are rare.« 
 Most of the rivers of Greece are torrents in early spring, and dry 
 before the end of the summer : the copious combinations of the 
 ancient language, designated the winter torrent by a special and 
 separate word.3 The most considerable rivers in the country are, 
 the Peneius, which carries off all the waters of Thessaly, finding 
 an exit into the -^gean through the narrow defile which parts 
 Ossa from Olympus, — and the Achelous, which flows from Pin- 
 dus in a south-westerly direction, separating -^tolia from Akar 
 nania, and emptying itself into the Ionian sea : the Euenus alac 
 
 country: «Romelia (i. c. Akarnania, ^tolia, Ozolian Lokris, etc), woody 
 well-watered, and covered with a good soil, ceases at once and precipitously; 
 while craggy limestone mountains, of a white-grey color, exhibit the cold 
 character of Attica and the Morea." (Fiedler, Reise, i. p. 213.) 
 
 The Homeric Hymn to Apollo conceives even the iridiov irvp7i<popoh 
 of Thebes as having in its primitive state been covered with wood (v. 227). 
 
 The best timber used by the ancient Greeks came from Macedonia, the 
 Euxine, and the Propontis: the timber of Mount Parnassus and of EuboB* 
 was reckoned very bad ; that of Arcadia better (Theophrast. v. 2, 1 ; iii. 9). 
 
 » See Fiedler, Reise, etc. vol. i. pp. 84, 219, 362, etc. 
 
 Both Fiedler and Strong (Statistics of Greece, p. 169) dwell with great 
 reason upon the inestimable value of Artesian wells for the country. 
 
 • Ross, Reise auf den Griechischen Inseln, vol. i. letter 2, p. 12. 
 
 » The Greek language seems to stand singular in the expression ^ff<//a/^ 
 povc, — the Wadys of Arabia manifest the like alternation, of extreme tcm- 
 pora!ry fulness and violence, with absolute dryness (Kriegk, Schriften zur 
 allgemeinen Erdkunde, p. 201, Leipzig, 1840). 
 
 TOIm u. 
 
 10 
 
 • 
 
218 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 takes its rise at a more southerly part of the same mountain 
 chain, and falls into tlie same sea more to the eastward. The 
 rivers more to the southward are unequal and inferior. Ke- 
 phisus and Asopus, in Ba30tia, Alpheius, in Elis and Arcadia, 
 Pamisus in Messenia, maintain each a languid stream throughout 
 the summer ; while thti Inachus near Argos, and the Kephisus 
 and Ilissus near Athens, present a scanty reality which falls short 
 «itill more of their great poetical celebrity. Of all those rivers 
 which have been noticed, the Achelous is by far the most impor- 
 tant. The quantity of mud which its turbid stream brought 
 down and deposited, oc(!asioned a sensible increase of the land at 
 its embouchure, within the observation of Thucydides.^ 
 
 But the disposition and properties of the Grecian territory, 
 though not maintaining permanent rivers, are favorable to the 
 multiplication of lakes and marshes. There are numerous 
 hollows and inclosed bjisins, out of which the water can tind nc 
 superficial escape, and where, unless it makes for itself a subter- 
 ranean passage through rifts in the mountains, it remains either 
 as a marsh or a lake according to the time of yeai\ In Thessaly, 
 we find the lakes Nessonis and Boebeis*; in uEtolia, between the 
 Achelous and Euenus, Strabo mentions the lake of Trichonis, 
 besides several other lakes, which it is difficult to identify indi- 
 vidually, though the quantity of ground covered by lake and 
 marsh is, as a whole, very considerable. In Boeotia, are situated 
 the lakes KopaVs, Hylike, and Harma; the first of the three 
 formed chiefly by the river Kephisus, flowing from Parnassus on 
 the north-west, and shaping for itself a sinuous course through 
 the mountains of Phokis. On the north-east and eastj the lake 
 Kopais is bounded by the high land of Mount Ptoon, which 
 intercepts its communication with the strait of Euboea. Through 
 1^ limestone of this mountain, the water has either found or 
 uf ced several subterraneous cavities, by which it obtains a partial 
 ,^ress on the other side of the rocky hill, and then flows into the 
 strait. The Katabothra, as they were termed in antiquity, yet 
 exist, but in an imperfect and half-obstructed condition. Even 
 in antiquity, however, they never fully sufficed to carry off* the 
 surplus waters of the Kephisus ; for the remains are still found 
 
 » Thucydid. ii. 102. 
 
 MARSHES AND LAKES. 
 
 219 
 
 of an artificial tunnel, pierced through the whole breadth of the 
 rock, and with perpendicular apertures at proper intervals to let 
 in the air from above. This tunnel — one of the most interest- 
 ing remnants of antiquity, since -it must date from the prosperous 
 days of the old Orchomenus, anterior to its absorption into the 
 Boeotian league, as well as to the preponderance of Thebes, — is 
 now choked up and»rendered useless. It may, perhaps, have 
 been designedly obstructed by the hand of an enemy, and the 
 scheme of Alexander the Great, who commissioned an engineer 
 from Chalkis to reopen it, was defeated, first, by discontents in 
 Boeotia, and ultimately by his early death.i 
 
 The Katabothra of the lake Kopais, are a specimen of the 
 phenomenon so frequent in Greece,— lakes and rivers finding for 
 themselves subterranean passages through the cavities in the 
 limestone rocks, and even pursuing their unseen course for a 
 considerable distance before they emerge to the light of day. In 
 Arcadia, especially, several remarkable examples of subterranean 
 water communication occur ; this central region of Peloponnesus 
 presents a cluster of such completely inclosed valleys, or basins.^ 
 
 ^ Strabo, ix. p. 407. 
 
 2 Colonel Leake observes (Tiavels in Morea, vol. iii. pp. 45, 153-155), 
 « The plain of Tripolitza (anciently that of Tegea and Mantineia) is by far 
 the greatest of tluit cluster of valleys in the centre of Peloponnesus, each of 
 which is so closely shut in by the intersecting mountains, that no outlet if 
 afforded to the waters except through the mountains themselves," etc. Re- 
 specting the Arcadian Orchomenus, and- its inclosed lake with Katabothra, 
 gee the same work, p. 103 ; and the mountain plains near Corinth, p. 263. 
 
 This temporary disappearance of the rivers was familiar to the ancient 
 observers — ol KaramvoixevoL tuv iroTufXiJV. ( Aristot. Meteorolog. i. 13. Dio- 
 dor. XV. 49. Strabo, vi. p. 271 ; viii. p. 389, etc.) 
 
 Their familiaritv with this phenomenon was in part the source of som« 
 geographical suppositions, which now appear to us extravagant, respecting 
 the lon<^ subterranean and submarine course of certain rivers, and their re- 
 appearance at very distant points. Sophokles said that the Inachus of Akar- 
 nania joined the Inachus of Argolis : Ibykus the poet affirmed that th« 
 Asopus, near Sikyon, had its source in Phrygia; the river Inopus of the httle 
 island of Delos was alleged by others to be an effluent from the mighty 
 Nile : and the rhetor Zoilus, in a panegyrical oration to the inhabitants of 
 Tenedos. went the length of assuring them that the Alpheius in Elis had itt 
 •ouroe in their island (Strabo, vi. p. 271 ). Not only Pindar and other poetf 
 JAntigon. Caryst. c. 155),.but also the historan TimoBus (Timsei Frag. I»7 
 
 V .1 
 
 l«>«MllWMiWPpll|ltt^^ 
 
220 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECF. 
 
 It will be seen from these circumstances, that Greece, cod- 
 •idering iis limited total <;xtent, offers but little motive, and still 
 less of convenient means, for internal communication among its 
 Tarious inhabitants.! Each village, or township, occupying its 
 
 ad. GoUer), and Pausanias, also, with the greatest confidence (v. 7, 2), believed 
 chat the fountain Arethusa, at Syracuse, was nothing else but the reappear- 
 ance of the river Alpheius from Peloponnesus : this was attested by the 
 actual fact that a goblet or cup (^mJ.jy), thrown into the Alplieius, had come 
 ap at the Syracusan fountain, which Timaeus professed to have verified, — 
 but even the arguments by which Strabo justifies his disbelief of this tale, 
 show how powerfully the phenc»mena of the Grecian rivers acted upon his 
 mind- " If (says he, /. c.) the Alpheius, instead of flowing into the sea, fell 
 into some chasm in the earth, there would be som^ plausiliility in supposing 
 that it continued its subterranean course as fur as Siiilv without mixiii<' 
 with the sea: but since its junction with the sea is matter of observation, 
 and since there is no aperture visible near the shore to absorb the water of 
 the river {arofxa rd Karamvov rb ^£v/j.a rov ttotujucw), so it is plain that the 
 water cannot maintain its separation and its sweetness, whereas the sprint; 
 Arcthusa is perfectly good to drink." I have translated here the sense 
 rather than the words of Strabo; but the phenomena of '' rivers falling into 
 chasms and being drunk up," for a time, is exactly what happens in Greece. 
 It did not appear to Strabo im| ossiMe that the Alpheius might traverse this 
 great distance underground ; n(>r <lo we wonder at this, when we learn that 
 a more able geographer than he (Eratosthenes) sup[)osed that the marshes 
 df Rhinokolura, between the Mediterranean and the Red sea, were formed 
 by the Euphrates and Tigris, which flowed underground for the length of 
 6000 stadia or furlongs (Struho, xvi. p. 741 : Seidel. Fragm. Eratosth. p. 
 194): compare the story aliout the Eu|)hrates passing underground, and 
 reappearing in Ethiopia as the river Nile (Pausan. ii. 5, 3). This disap- 
 pearance and reappearance of rivers connected itself, in the minds of ancient 
 physical philosophers, with the sup[)osition of vast reservoirs of water in the 
 inverior of the earth, which were protruded upwards to the surface by some 
 gttiieous force (see Seneca. Nat. Quaist. vi. 8). Pomponius Mela mentions 
 an idea of some writers, that the source of the Nile was to be found, not in 
 our {oUov/iivTj) habitable secticm of the globe, but in the Antichthon, or 
 southern continent, and that it flowed under the ocean lo rise up in Ethiopia 
 (Mela, i. 9, 55). 
 
 These views of the ancients, evidently based upon the analogy of Grecian 
 rivers, are well set forth by M. Letronne, in a paper on the situation of the 
 Terrestrial Paradise, as represented by the Fathers of the Church ; cited in 
 A. von Humboldt, Examen Critique de I'Histoire de la Geographic, etc. 
 vol.iii. pp. 118-130. 
 
 ' " Upon the arrival of the king and regency in 1 833 (observes Mr. Strong). 
 no carriage-roads existed in Greece; nor were they, indeed, mnch wanted 
 previously, as d,>wn to that period not a carriage, waggon, or cart, or anj 
 
 WANT OF INTERNAL COMMUNICAriON. 
 
 221 
 
 plain vrith the inclosing mountains,' supplied its own mail* vanta 
 whilst the transport of commodities by land was sufficientlj 
 difficult to discourage greatly any regular commerce with 
 neio-hbors. In so far as the face of the interior country wa* 
 concerned, it sev3med as if nature had been disposed, from th^ 
 becdnning, to keep the population of Greece socially and politi- 
 cally disunited, — by providing so many hedges of separation, 
 and so many boundaries, generally hard, sometimes impossible, 
 to overleap. One special motive to intercoMrse, however, arose 
 out of this very geographical constitution of the country, and its 
 endless alternation of mountain and valley. The difference of 
 climate and temperature between the high and low grounds is 
 very great ; the harvest is secured in one place before it is ripe 
 in another, and the cattle find during the heat of summer shelter 
 and pasture on the hills, at a time when the plains are burnt up.'^ 
 The practice of transferring them from the mountains to the 
 plain according to the change of season, which subsists still as i: 
 
 other description of vehicles, was to be found in the whole country. The 
 traffic in general was carried on by means of boats, to which the long indented 
 line of the Grecian coast and its numerous islands afforded every facility. 
 Between the seaports and the interior of the kingdom, the communication 
 was effected by means of beasts of burden, such as mu'es, horses, and camels." 
 (Statistics of Greece, p. 33.) 
 
 This exhibits a retrograde march to a point lower than the description ot 
 the Odyssey, where Telemachus and Peisistratu.s drive their chariot from 
 Pylus to Sparta. The remains of the ancient roads are still seen in many 
 parts of Greece (Strong, p. 34). 
 
 * Dr. Clarke's description deserves to be noticed, though his warm eulogies 
 on the fertility of the soil, taken generally, are not borne out by later ob- 
 servers : " The physical phenomena of Greece, differing from those of any 
 other country, present a series of beautiful plains, successively surrounded 
 by mountains of limestone ; resembling, although upon a larger scale, and 
 rarely accompanied by volcanic products, the craters of the Phlegraean fields. 
 Everywhere, their level surfaces seems to have been deposited by watei; 
 gradually retired or evaporated ; they consist for the most part of the richest 
 soil, and their produce i8 yet proverbially abundant. In this manner, stood 
 the citief of Argos, Sikyon, Corinth, Megara, Eleusis, Athens, Thebes, Am* 
 phissa, Orchomenus, Chaeronea, Lebadea, Larissa, Pella, and many othcTB." 
 (Dr. Clarke's Travels, vol. ii. eh. 4, p. 74.) 
 
 * Sv W- Gell found, in the month of March, summer in the low plains ol 
 Mesaoaia, spring in Laconia, winter in Arcadia (Joomej in Greece, pf 
 85S-3i9^ 
 
 r 
 
222 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 did in ancient times, is intimately connected with the structure 
 of the country, and must from the earliest period have brought 
 about communication among the otherwise disunited villages.^ 
 
 Such difficulties, however, in the internal transit by land, were 
 to a great extent counteracted by the large proportion of coast, 
 and the accessibility of the country by sea. The prominences 
 and indentations in the line of Grecian coast, are hardly less 
 remarkable than the multiplicity of elevations and depressions 
 which everywhere mark the surface.- The shape of Pelopon- 
 nesus, with its three southern gulfs, (the ArgoHc, Laconian, and 
 Messenian,) was compared by the ancient geographers to the 
 leaf of a plane-tree : the Pagasasan gulf on the eastern side of 
 Greece, and the Ambrakian gulf on the western, with their nar- 
 row entrances and considerable area, are equivalent to internal 
 
 ' The cold central region (or mountain plain. — ufjorzeihor) of Tripolitzu, 
 (Htfers in climate from tlie maritime regions of lV'Io|iuiie.ssii.s, as much as 
 
 the south of England from the south of Fraiice No appearance of 
 
 spring on the trees near Te^ea, though not more than twenty-four miles 
 
 from Argos Cattle are sent from thence every winter to the maritime 
 
 plains of Elos in Laconia (Leake, Trav. in Morca, vol. i. pp. 88, 98, 197). 
 The pasture on Mount Oiona (lx)undary of Elis;, Arcadia, and Achaia) is 
 flot healthy until June (Leake, vol. ii. p. 119) ; compare p. 348, and Eiedlcr, 
 Reise, i. p. 314. 
 
 See also the Instructive Inscription of Orchomenus, in Boeckh, Staats 
 haushaltung der Athener, t. ii. p. 380. 
 
 The transference of cattle, belonging to pruprietors in one state, for tem- 
 porary pasturage in another, is as old as the Odyssey, and is marked by 
 Tarions illustrative incidents : see the cause of the first Messenian wur 
 (Diodor. Fragm. viii. vol. iv. p. 23, ed. Wess ; Pausan. iv. 4, 2). 
 
 • ** Universa autem (Peloponnesus), velut pensante aeijuorum incursus 
 satur^, in montes 76 extollitur." (Plin. H. N. iv, 6.) 
 
 Strabo touches, in a striking passage (ii. pp. 121-122), on the in6^ence 
 of the sea in determining the shape and boundaries of the land: his obser- 
 rations upon the great superiority of Europe over Asia and Africa, in re- 
 •pect of intersection and interpenetration of land by the sea- water are remark- 
 able '. fj fj^v ovv 'EvpcoTTij no?ii'jax7/fioveaTdTTi naauv ioTi, etc. He does not 
 especially name the coast of (Greece, though his remarks have a more exact 
 bearing upon Greece than upon any other country. And we may copy a 
 passage out of Tacitus ( Agricol. c. 10), written in reference to Britain, which 
 
 applies far more precisely to Greece : '' nusquam latins dominari mare 
 
 DOC litore tenus accrescere aut resorberi. sed influere penitus et ambiro, m 
 mgif etiam a^^uc montibus i%S€ti velut t» suo.^ 
 
 ACCESSIBILITY BY SEA. 
 
 223 
 
 lakes : Xcnophon boasts of the double sea which embraces so 
 large a proportion of Attica, Ephorus of the triple sea, by which 
 Boeotia was accessible from west, north, and south, — the Eu- 
 boean strait, opening a long Hue of country on both sides to 
 coasting navigation.^ But the most important of all Grecian 
 gulfs are the Corinthian and the Saronic, washing the northern 
 and north-eastern shores of Peloponnesus, and separated by the 
 narrow barrier of the Isthmus of Connth. The former, espe- 
 cially, lays open -^tolia, Pliokis, and Boeotia, as well as the 
 whole northern coast of Peloponnesus, to water approach. Co- 
 rinth, in ancient times, served as an entrepot for the trade 
 between Italy and Asia Minor, — goods being unshipped at 
 Lechaeum, the port on the Corinthian gulf, and carried by land 
 across to Cenchreai, the port on the Saronic: indeed, even the 
 merchant-vessels themselves, when not very large,^ were con- 
 veyed across by the same route. It was accounted a prodigious 
 advantage to escape the necessity of sailing round Cape Malea : 
 and the violent winds and currents which modern experience 
 attests to prevail around that formidable promontory, are quite 
 sufficient to justify the apprehensions of the ancient Greek 
 merchant, with his imperfect apparatus for navigation.^ 
 
 * Xenophon, De Vectigal. c. 1 ; Ephor. Frag. 67, ed. Marx; Stephan. By?. 
 BoiDvia. 
 
 '■^ Pliny, H. N. iv. 5, about the Isthmus of Corinth : " Lechaea) hinc, Cen 
 chreae illinc, angustiarum termini, longo et ancipiti navium ambitu {i. e. 
 round Cape Malea), quas magnitudo plaustris transvehi prohibet: quam ob 
 causam perfodere navigabili alveo angustias eas tentavere Demetrius rex, 
 dictator Csesar, Caius princeps, Domitius Nero, — infausto (ut omnium exita 
 patuit) incepto." 
 
 The dfoA/cof, less than four miles across, where ships were drawn across, 
 if their size permitted, stretched from Lechajum on the Corinthian gulf, to 
 Schoenus, a little eastward of Cenchreae, on the Saronic gulf ( Strabo, viii. p. 
 S80). Strabo (viii. p. 335) reckons the breadth of the dioXKog at forty stadia 
 (about 4| English miles); the reality, according to Leake, is 3i English 
 miles (Travels in Morea, vol. iii. ch. xxix. p. 297). 
 
 ^ The north wind, the Etesian wind of the ancients, blows strong in the 
 iEgean nearly the whole summer, and with especially dangerous violence at 
 three points, — under Karystos, the southern cape of Euboea, near Cape 
 Malea, and in the narrow strait between the islands of Tenos, Mykonoa. 
 and Delos (Ross, Reisen auf den Griechischen Inseln, vol. i. p. 20). Set 
 alio Colonel Leake's account of the terror of the Greok boatmon, from thf 
 
 f 
 
124- 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 It will thus appeal' that there was no part of Greece proper 
 which could be consitl«?red as out of reach of the sea, while most 
 parts of 't were couvenient and easy of access : in fact, the Arca- 
 dians were the only large section of the Hellenic name, (we may 
 add the Doric, Tetrapolis, and tlie mountaineers along the chain 
 of Pindus and Tymj)hrestus ) who were altogether without a 
 sea{>ort-* But Greece proper constituted only a fraction of tlie 
 entire Hellenic world, during the historical age : there were the 
 numerous islands, and still more numerous continental colonies, 
 all located as independent intruders on distinct points of the 
 coast,^ in the Euxine, the JEgean, the Mediterranean, and the 
 Adriatic ; and distant from each other by the space which sepa- 
 rates Trebizond from Marseilles. All these various cities were 
 comprised in the name Helhis, which implied no geographical 
 continuity : all i)rided themselves on Hellenic blood, name, 
 religion, iind mythical ancestry. As the only communication 
 
 gales and cunonts round Mount Athos : the canal cut by Xerxes through 
 the isthmus was justiried by sound reasons (Travels in Northern Greece, 
 vol. iii. c. 24, p. 145). 
 
 » The Periplus of Skylax enumerates every section of the Greek name, 
 with the insignificant exceptions noticed in the text, as partaking of the line 
 of coast; it even mentions Arcadia (c. 45), because at that time Leprcum 
 had shaken oflf the supremacy of Elis, and was confederated with the Area 
 dians (about 360 B.C.): Leprcum possessed about twelve miles of coast 
 which therefore count as Arcadian. 
 
 * Cicero (De Republica, ii. 2-4, in the Fragments of that lost treatise, ed 
 Maii) notices emphatically both the general raaiitirae accessibility of Greciar 
 towns, and the effects of that circumstance on Grecian character : " Quod 
 de Corintho dixi, id hand scio an liceat de cunct& GraeciA verissime dicere 
 Nam et ipsa Peloponnesus fere tota in man est: nee prater Phliuntios ulli 
 Kant, quorum agri non contingant mare : et extra Peloponnesum JEniancs 
 et Dores et Dolopes soli absunt a mari. Quid dicam insulas Grseciae, qua 
 tluctibus cinctae natant paene ipsae simul cum civitatium institutis et mon- 
 bus ? Atque hsec quidera, ut supra dixi, veteris sunt Graecise. Coloniarum 
 vero quse est deducta a (Jraiis in Asiam, Thraciam, Italiara, Siciliam, Afri- 
 cam, prater unam Magmesiam, quam unda non alluat ? Ita barbarorum 
 •gris quasi adtexta quaedam videtur ora esse Gracia." 
 
 Compare Cicero, Epistol. ad Attic vl 2, with the reference to DikaBarchus, 
 who agreed to a great extent in Plato's objections against a maritime site 
 (De Legg. iv. p. 705 ; al&o, Aristot. Pohtic. vii. 5-6). The sea (says Plato) 
 b indeed a salt and bitter neighbor (fidla ye utjv ovrwc difivpiiv koI irutfbt 
 yeiTovijfia ), though convenient for purposes of daily use. 
 
 GRECIAN LANDSMEN AND SEAMEN. 
 
 2t5 
 
 between them was maritime, so the sea, important, even if W6 
 lo(#k to Greece proper exclusively, was the sole channel for 
 transmitting ideas and improvements, as well as for maintaining 
 sympathies — social, political, religious, and literary — throughout 
 these outlying members of the Hellenic aggregate. 
 
 The ancient philosophers and legislators were deeply im- 
 pressed with the contrast between an inland and a maritime ci^: 
 in the former, simplicity and uniformity of life, tenacity <rf 
 ancient habits, and dislike of what is new or foreign, great force 
 of exclusive sympathy, and narrow range both of objects and 
 ideas ; in the latter, variety and novelty of sensations, expansive 
 imagination, toleration, and occasional preference for extraneous 
 customs, greater activity of the individual, and corresponding 
 mutability of the state. This distinction stands prominent in 
 the many comparisons instituted between the Athens of Perikles 
 and the Athens of the earlier times down to Solon. Both Plato 
 and Aristotle dwell upon it emphatically, — and the former 
 especially, whose genius conceived the comprehensive scheme 
 of prescribing beforehand and insuring in practice the whole 
 course of individual thought and feeling in his imaginary com- 
 munity, treats maritime communication, if pushed beyond the 
 narrowest limits, as fatal to the success and permanence of any 
 wise scheme of education. Certain it is, that a great difference 
 of character existed between those Greeks who mingled much 
 in maritime affairs, and those who did not. The Arcadian may 
 stand as a type of the pure Grecian landsman, with his rustic 
 and illiterate habits, ^ — his diet of sweet chestnuts, barley-cakes, 
 and pork (as contrasted with the fish which formed the chief 
 seasoning for the bread of an Athenian,) — his superior courage 
 and endurance, — his reverence for Lacedaemonian headship fui 
 
 ' Hekatseas, Fragm. 'Ap/caJiicdv 6ei:Tvov. . . .[lu^ag koI veia xpea. Herodot 
 t 66. 'Ba?iav^(f>ayoc dvSpeg. Theocrit. Id. vii. 1 06. — 
 
 Kyv fiev Tav&' ipd^g, u Uuv <l>i2,e, fiy tl tv iratdei 
 ^ApKadiKol GKiTiXaiaiv virb ir^evpag re Kai u/iovc 
 TaviKa fiaaTiadoLEv bre Kpta TVT'&a napeiij • 
 Et (T uXhjjq vevaaiQ Kara fiev XP^O, tzavf din}xe(T<Tl 
 AaKvofiEvo^ Kvuaaio, etc. 
 
 The alteration of Xloi, which is obviously out of place, in the scholia on ffaif 
 passage, to ivioi, appears unquestionable. 
 
 VOL. u. 10* 15oe. 
 
MirrORY or OKEKCK. 
 
 Il will Ihm •|t|H«ir ibm fUmm wm im part of OnMJce |.roi>er 
 wbMl mM Im wii*i4irtnl m imjI of n?arh of tUt! se% while iiio«l 
 
 laa tlii^ iKirk, TetnifKUiN ati.l ilie iiioiiiiiaiiieers uloii,? tlio cliam 
 Hi' piiifliH miti Tvm|»»irff4hi4 ) wlio were alioj^rilier without a 
 i«i,Hirt,« liiit (i««*'c» |»ruiK.i , .m.tit.jl.a ci.ly a fnwJlion .»t the 
 •nlire IMIenir worM, aiiriri- the hiMorual rigc- : tl.rre w.-re the 
 mmmfmm blaiiOa, *iia ntiU n.oro .unmrnus euoti.untal calonies, 
 All locttUwl m iiid«|ieiidenl iiUiu«l«ird on diatinci i>oiiiLs ot the 
 mmU^ in ill© lin^^^ «*»^' -^^^'J^"' ^'»^ MeditcrnuuNui, and the 
 Adriatic; mAOmmi from . a.h othtr by the s|a.H whicli sepa- 
 rai.H Trrhi/.ond frcMI MarnifUltflk Ml iht-n- var.ous cities sswe 
 COiiipriMd in Wu iiaiiu- Utdhi«, whirh implitMl no juiograplmal 
 CiHitinuitv : all prided th.'i.i.idvc** on Helhnir hhKxl, naiiu", 
 fuligioii, m.d niythitml a... e.try. As the only conimunuat.on 
 
 «iUa,ia.-u.- M- r,..ui Mount Atho.: tlu, cunul .ut by Xerxes through 
 5,e istlumi> .1. ,. I hymmul reasons (Travels in Northern brceco. 
 
 *'*' The IVrii.lus of Skvlax ei.nnierate.H every section of the Greek name, 
 with the inHiirniHcam exeeption. noticed in the text, as partaki.ia: of the hnc 
 af eo«iHt; it even nuntion* Areadia (e. 45), lieeause at that time Lepreiim 
 had shaken oft" the .ii|>re.na. y of Elis, and was confederated w.th the Ann 
 dians (alH.«t ;i6<) .« < )• ^^'preiuu possessed about twelve miles of eoast 
 which therefore count as Arcadian. ... .1 
 
 « Cicero (l>e UepuhlicA. ii. 2-4, in the Fnurments of that lost treatise, ed 
 Maii) notice, emphaiically lK>th the t,'eneral maiitime accessibility of Greciar 
 towns, and the etfecls of that circumstance on Grecian character: quixJ 
 de Corinlho dixi, id hmud s. io an liceat de cunctA Gra^ciA venssime dicere 
 Nam et ip.a Peloponnesus fere tota in man est: nee pr«ter Fhhuntios ull. 
 «ant, nnorum agji non continjrant mare: et extra Peloponnesum ^niane. 
 et Dores et Dolopet soli absunt a man. Quid dicam insulas Gr«ci«, qua 
 floctilHM cinet« natant p«ne ips« simul cum civitatium mstitutis et mo-. 
 \m» ! AUiue hiec quidem, ut supra dixi, veteris sunt Gr«ci«. Coloniarum 
 tero qu» est deducta a Graiis in Asiam, Thraciam, Italiam Sicilmm, Atn- 
 cam. prater unam Ma^nesiam, quam unda non alluati Ita barbarorum 
 •ffrii quasi adtcxta quiedam videtur era esse Graecia." 
 
 Compare Cicero, Epistol. «l Attic vi 2, with the reference to Dik«arehus. 
 irlio JvMd to a gimt extent in Plato's objections against a mantime site 
 'Dt iWi^. p. 7057 al«o, Aristot Pohtic rii. 5-6). The sea (says Plalo) 
 •m indeeda salt and bitter neighbor (fwXa ye «^r ovruf &ifivp.^v Aoi ^iMf^ 
 ftiTovnftaU though conrenieni for porpoMS of daUy Ui©. 
 
 GRECIAN LANDSMKN AND SEAMEN. 
 
 2tb 
 
 between them was maritime, so the sea, important, even if W6 
 lo<»k to Greece proper exclusively, was the sole channel for 
 transmitting ideas and improvements, as well as for maintaining 
 iympathies — social, political, religious, and literary — throughout 
 these outlying members of the Hellenic aggregate. 
 
 The ancient philosophers and legislators were deeply im- 
 pres.sed with the contrast between an inland and a maritime dty : 
 in the former, simplicity and uniformity of life, tenacity of 
 ancient habits, and dislike of what is new or foreign, great force 
 of exclusive sympathy, and narrow range both of objects and 
 ideas ; in the latter, variety and novelty of sensations, expansive 
 imagination, toleration, and occasional preference for extraneous 
 customs, greater activity of the individual, and corresponding 
 mutability of the state. This distinction stands prominent in 
 the many comparisons instituted between the Athens of Periklea 
 and the Athens of the earlier times down to Solon. Both Plato 
 and Aristotle dwell upon it emphatically, — and the former 
 especially, whose genius conceived the comprehensive scheme 
 of prescribing beforehand and insuring in practice the whole 
 course of individual thought and feeling in his imaginary com- 
 munity, treats maritime communication, if pushed beyond the 
 narrowest limits, as fatal to the success and permanence of any 
 wise scheme of education. Certain it is, that a great difierence 
 of character existed between those Greeks who mingled much 
 in maritime affairs, and those who did not. The Arcadian may 
 stand as a type of the pure Grecian landsman, with his rustic 
 and illiterate habits,* — his diet of sweet chestnuts, barley-cakes, 
 and pork (as contrasted with the fish which formed the chief 
 seasoning for the bread of an Athenian,) — his superior courage 
 and endurance, — his reverence for Lacedaemonian headship as 
 
 ^ 
 
 t 
 
 \ 
 
 ' Hekatseus, Fragm. ''XpKaSiKdv SeiTzvov. . . ./za<r«f xal leia Kpea. Herodot 
 i. 66. 'Qa^avTjipayoi, avdpeq. Theocrit Id. vii. 106. — 
 
 Kr/v nev raid' kp6y^, w Wdv (jtiXe, fit) ri tv iratdei 
 ^ApKodiKol OKLkXaLatv virb irXevpac re Kot otfwvf 
 TavUa fiacrriaSoiev dre Kpia Tvr^u irapeiri • 
 E/ & uXkuq VEvaai^ Kara fiev XP^^ irairf bvvxt<fOi 
 AaKvofievo^ Kvuaaio, etc. 
 
 The alteration ofXloi, which is obviously out of place, in the scholia on tlilf 
 passage, to tvioi^ appears unquestionable. 
 
 VOL. u. 10* 16oc. 
 
 
M 
 
 2£6 
 
 IIISTORV OP (JKKECE. 
 
 in old und niBtornary infl.H'ncc, — his sterility of intellect and 
 miajrination, a« well as his slackness in enterprise, -- h« un- 
 changeable nidenei»« of relations with tho jt^kIs whuh led h,.n 
 to ^^urge and prick Pan, if he vnme ha<k nnpty-lutM.lcd tmm 
 tlu- rha^e; while the inhabitant of Phuka-a or M.letus cxeni- 
 nU«c4 the Grecian mariner, eager in scan hot -am, — artive, 
 Ikilful, and daring at sea, but inferior in stedfast bravery on 
 H„a —more excitable in imagination a^ w.ll a^ more mutable 
 in ehamcter,-full of pomp and expense in religious mamtesta- 
 l.ons towanls the Kphesian Artemis or the Apollo of Hraneh.d.e ; 
 with a mind more open t.> the varietie> ot (ireeian energy ^nu 
 tu the refining influences of < Ireeian eivili/ati.,n. 1 he 1 elopon- 
 newans generally, and th.- l.Kedie.i.onia.H in part.eular, ap- 
 proached to the Arcadian type, - >vhile the Athenians ot the 
 m\h century n. c. sto.Kl foremost in the other; snp.Tad<l.ng to it, 
 liowever, a «hdieai'V of taste, and ti predominant- ot intellectual 
 sympathy and enjoyments, whieh seem to l.av l.rrn peculiar to 
 
 thi'inselves. ,., . 
 
 The eonfi-uration of the Grecian territory, so like in many re- 
 „Hrt. to thaT of Switwrlaiul, produced two etfects of great moment 
 ' ,Ue rharaelrr and history of the peo,de. In the lirst place, 
 it ,n.it.«riallv strengtl.eue*! their powers of defence : it shut up the 
 country a-air.st tho.o iuvii.Mo.KS Ironi the interior, which succes- 
 •ively subjugated all their rontincntal colonics ; and it at the same 
 time ren/lered each fraition mure ditlicult to be attacked by the 
 IV t .o i^ to exercise a certain conservative influence in ivssunng 
 ,1,/ tenure of actual possessors: for the pass of Thermopylae, 
 between Thessaly aiul Plu^kis, that of Kithteron, between Bo^otia 
 «nd Mtica, or the mountainous range of Oneion and Geraneia 
 lion- the I^th.nu. of C<»rinth, were positi which an inferior 
 number of bruv. nea .ould ludd against a much greater force of 
 i^..ailants. U-.t. in th- next place, while H tended to protect 
 tuich section of Greeks from being conquered, it also kept them 
 polilicallv disunited, and perj^etuated their separate autonomy. 
 It foster'ed that poweriul principle of repulsion, which disposed 
 even the smallest township to constitute itself a political uml 
 •nart from the rest, and to resist all idea of coalescence with 
 others, either amicable or cou.pulsory. To a modern^ead^, 
 accustomed to large political aggregations, and securities for good 
 
 INTELLECTUAL EFFECTS OP LOCALITY. 
 
 927 
 
 rovernment through the representative system, it requires a 
 certain mental effort to transport himself back to a time when 
 even the smallest town clung so tenaciously to its right of self- 
 legislation. Nevertheless, such was the general habit and feel- 
 ing of the ancient worid, throughout Italy, Sicily, Spain, and 
 Gaul. Among the Hellenes, it stands out more conspicuously, 
 for several reasons,— first, because they seem to have pushed the 
 multiplication of autonomous units to an extreme point, seeing 
 that even islands not larger than Peparethos and Amorgos had two 
 or three separate city communities ;» secondly, because they pro- 
 duced, for the first time in the history of mankind, acute system- 
 a:ic thinkers on matters of government, amongst all of whom the 
 iilea of the autonomous city was accepted as the indispensable basis 
 f i)olitii al speculation ; thirdly, beoHuse this incurable subdivision 
 proved finally the cause of their ruin, in spite of pronounced 
 intellectual superiority over their conquerors : and lastly, because 
 incapacity of i>olitical coalescence did not preclude a powerful and 
 extensive sympathy between the inhabitants of all the separate 
 cities, with a constant tendency to fraternize for numerous pur- 
 poses', social, religious, recreative, intellectual, and aisthetio^l. 
 For these reasons, the indefinite mi>ltiplication of self-governing 
 towns, though in truth a phenomenon common to ancient Europe, 
 as contrasted with the large monar diies of Asia, appears more 
 inarked among the ancient Greeks than elsewhere: and there 
 cannot be any 'doubt that they owf it, in a considerable degree, 
 to the multitude of insulating boirdaries which the configuration 
 of their country presented. 
 
 Nor is it rash to suppose that t>i2 same causes may have tended 
 to promote that unborrowed intellectual development for which 
 they stand so conspicuous. General propositions respecting the 
 working of climate and physi-^l agencies upon character are, 
 indeed,^treacherous ; for our k-iowledge of the globe is now suffi- 
 cient to teach us that heat and cold, mountain and plain, sea and 
 land, moist and dry atmosphere, are all consistent with the 
 greatest diversities of r^^^dent men: moreover, the contrast 
 between the population of Greece itself, for the seven centuriee 
 
 preceding the Christian era, and the Greeks of more moden 
 
 — " 
 
 » Skylax, Peri])!. 59. 
 
 . I. 
 \ 
 
 « ill 
 
2S8 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 times, is alone enough to inculcate reserve in sucli speculatioos 
 Nevertheless, we may venture to note certain improving \nf\u' 
 ences, connected with their geographical position, at a time when 
 they had no book:^ to study, and no more advanced predecessors 
 to imitate. We may remark, first, that their position made them 
 at once mountaineers and mariners, thus supplying them with 
 great variety of objects, sensations, and adventures ; next, that 
 each petty community, nestled apart amidst its own rocks,' was 
 sutficientiy severed from the rest to possess an individual life and 
 attributes of its own, yet not so far as to subtract it from the sym- 
 pathies of the remainder; so that an observant Greek, com- 
 mercing with a great tliversity of half countrymen, whose language 
 he understood, and whose idiosyncrasies he could appreciate, had 
 access to a larger mass of social and t>olitical experience than any 
 other man in so unadvanced an age could personally obtain. The 
 Phosniciau, suiMirior to the Greek on ship-board, traversed wider 
 distances, and saw a greater number of strangers, but had not the 
 same means of intimate communion with a multiphcity of fellows 
 in blood and langua-.je. His relations, cK)nfmed to purchase and 
 sale, did not comprise that mutuality of action and reaction which 
 pervaded the crowd at a Grecian festival. The scene which her^ 
 presented itself, was a mixture of uniformity and variety highly 
 stimulating to the observant faculties of a man of genius, — who 
 at the sam^e time, if he sought to communicate his own impres- 
 sions, or to act upon this mingled and diverse audience, wtis 
 forced to shake otl' what was peculiar to his own town or commu- 
 nity, and to put t'ortli matter in harmony with the feelings of all 
 It is thus that we may explain, in part, that penetrating appre- 
 hension of human life and character, and that power of touching 
 sympathies common to all ages and nations, which surprises us so 
 much in the unlettered authors of the old epic. Such periodical 
 intercommunion of brethren habitually isolated from each other, 
 was the only means then open ol' procuring for the bard a diver- 
 sified range of experience and a many-colored audience ; and it 
 was to a great degre<J the result of geographical causes. Perhaps 
 among other natioos such faciUtating causes might have been 
 
 MINERAL PRODUCTIONS. 
 
 2^ 
 
 found, yet without producing any result comparable to the Iliad 
 and Odyssey. But Homer was, nevertheless, dependent upon 
 the conditions of his age, and we can at least point out those 
 peculiarities in early Grecian society, without which Homeric 
 excellence would never have existed, — the geographical position 
 i% one, the language another. 
 
 In mineral and metallic wealth, Greece was not distinguished. 
 Gold was obtained in considerable abundance in the island of 
 Siphnos, which, throughout the sixth century B. c, was among 
 the richest communities of Greece, and possessed a treasure- 
 chamber at Delphi, distinguished for the richness of its votive 
 offerintys. At that time, gold was so rare in Greece, that the 
 Lacedaemonians were obliged to send to the Lydian Croesus, in 
 order to provide enough of it for the gilding of a statue.* It 
 appears to have been more abundant in Asia Minor, and the 
 quantity of it in Greece was much multiplied by the opening of 
 mines in Tlirace, Macedonia, Epirus, and even some parts of 
 Thessaly. In the island of Thasos, too, some mines were reopened 
 with profitable result, which liad been originally begun, and sub- 
 sequently abandoned, by Phoenician settlers of an earlier century. 
 From these same districts, also, was procured a considerable 
 amount of silver ; while, about the beginning of the fifth century 
 B. c, the first effective commencement seems to have been made 
 of turning to account the rich southern district of Attica, called 
 Laureion. Copper was obtained in various parts of Greece, 
 especially in Cyprus and Euboea, — in which latter island was 
 also found the earth called Cadmia, employed for the purification 
 of the ore. Bronze was used among the Greeks for many pur- 
 poses in which iron is now employed : and even the arms of the 
 Homeric heroes (different in this respect from the later historical 
 Greeks) are composed of copper, tempered in such a way as to 
 impart to it an jistonishing hardness. Iron was found in Euba>a, 
 Boeotia, and Melos, — but still more abundantly in the moun« 
 
 » Cicero, dc Orator. 144. « Ithacam illam in aspeirimis saxulis, sicut nida 
 Inn, affijuua." 
 
 • Herodot i. 52 ; iii. 57 ; vi. 46-125. Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, 
 
 b. i. ch. 3. 
 
 The gold and silver offerings sent to the Delphian temple, even from the 
 Homeric times (11. ix. 405) downwards, were numerous and valuable; 
 eapecially those dedicated by Croesus, who (Herodot. i. 17-52) seems to 
 have surpassed all predecessors. 
 
 rjti 
 
 • 1 
 
 ll 
 I 
 
 1 <i 
 
280 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFCE. 
 
 lainous rei(ion d the Laconian Taygetus. There is, however 
 no part of Greece where the remains of ancient metallurgy 
 appear now so conspicuous, as the ishuul of Seriphos. Ihe 
 excellence arid varieties of marble, from Pontelikus, Ilymettus, 
 Faros, Karystus, etc., and otlier parts of the country, — so essen- 
 tial for the purposes of sculpture and architecture, — is well 
 
 known.i 
 
 Situated under the siime i>arallels of latitude as the coast ot 
 Asia Minor, and th^ southernmost regions of Italy and Spain, 
 Greece produced wheat, barley, tiax, wine, and oil, in tlie earliest 
 time, of which we have any knowledge ;^ though the currants, 
 Indian corn, silk, and tobacco, which the country now exhibits, 
 %re an addition of more recent times. Theophrastus and other 
 authors, amply attest the observant and industrious agriculture 
 prevalent among the ancient Greeks, as well as the care with 
 which its various natural productions, comprehending a great 
 diversity of plants, lierbs, and trees, were turned to account. The 
 cultivation of the vine and the olive, — the latter indispensable 
 to ancient life, not merely for the purposes which it serves at 
 present, but also from the constant habit then prevalent of anoint- 
 ing the body, — appears to have been particularly elaborate ; and 
 the many ditlerent accidents of soil, level, and exposure, which 
 were to be found, not only in Hellas proi)er, but also among the 
 scattered Greek settlements, atlbrded to observant planters mate- 
 rials for study and comparison. The barley-cake esems to havfl 
 been more generally eaten than the wheaten loaf ;3 but one o: 
 
 » Strabo, X. p. 447 ; xiv. pp. 680-684- Stcplum. Byz. v. AW#of, A««f 
 iJoi^c^v. Kruse, Hellas, eh. iv. vol. i. p. 328. Fiedler, Reisen in Gnechen- 
 
 land vol. ii- PP- 118-5&9. 
 
 « me to second edition. - In my first edition, I had asserted that cotton 
 grew in Greece in the time of Punsanias, - following, though with some 
 doubt, the judgment of some critics, that /itaaoc meant cotton. 1 now 
 believe that this was a mistake, and have expunged the passage. 
 
 3 At the repast provided at the public cost for those who dmed m the 
 Prytaneiom of Athens, Solon directed barley-cakes for ordinary days, wheaten 
 Iweaa for festivals (Athenaeus, iv. p. 137). . . ,« ,i,„* «r 
 
 The milk of ewes and goats was in ancient Greece preferred to ^at of 
 cows (Aristot. Hist. Animal, iii. 15, 5-7); at present, also, coVs-milk Mid 
 butter is considered unwholesome in Greece, and is seldom or never eaten 
 IKruao, Hellas, vol. i. eh. 4, p. 368). 
 
 VEGETATION. —DIET. 
 
 281 
 
 otliei of them, together with vegetables and fish, (sometimes freshi 
 but more frequently salt,) was the common food of the population ; 
 the Arcadians fed much upon pork, and the Spartans also con- 
 sumed animal food ; but by the Greeks, generally, fresh meat 
 seems to have been little eaten, except at festivals and sacrifices. 
 The Athenians, the most commercial people in Greece proper, 
 though their light, dry, and comparatively poor soil produced 
 excellent barley, nevertheless, did not grow enough corn for their 
 own consumption : they imported considerable supplies of corn 
 Irom Sicily, from the coast of the Euxine, and the Tauric Cher- 
 sonese, and salt-fish both from the Propontis and even from 
 Gades '^ the distance from whence these supplies came, when we 
 take into consideration the extent of fine corn-land in Boeotia and 
 Thessaly, proves how little internal trade existed between the 
 various regions of Greece proper. The exports of Athens 
 consisted in her figs and other fruit, olives, oil, — for all of which 
 phe was distinguished, — together with pottery, ornamental man- 
 ufactures, and the silver from her mines at Laureion. Salt-fish, 
 doubtless, found its way more or less throughout all Greece ;2 but 
 the population of other states in Greece lived more exclusively 
 upon their own produce than the Athenians, with less of purchase 
 and sale,3 — a mode of life assisted by the simple domestic econ- 
 
 * Theophrast. Caus. PI. ix. 2; Demosthen. adv. Leptin. c. 9. That salt- 
 fish from the Propontis and from Gades was sold in the markets of Athena 
 during the Peloponnesian war, appears from a fragment of the Marikas of 
 Eupolis CFr. 23, ed. Meineke ; IStephan. Byz. v. Vadtipa) : — 
 ITorep' }jv rb rupixoc, ^pvyiov ^ TadeipiKov ; 
 
 The PhcBnician merchants who brought the salt-fish from Gades took 
 back with them Attic pottery for sale among the African tribes of the coast 
 of Morocco (Skylax, Peripl. c. 109). 
 
 ' Simonides, Fragra. 109, Gaisford. — 
 
 Upoade fiiv ti^^' ufioLaiv lx<^v Tpr/xelav uatXXav 
 'l^i^L'f *| 'Apyovg e/f Teyeav l<l>epov, etc. 
 
 The Odyssey mentions certain inland people, whc knew nothing either of 
 the sea, or of ships, or the taste of salt : Pausanias looks for them in Epirua 
 (Udyss. xi. 121 ; Pausan. i. 12, 3). 
 
 •* KvTovpyol re yap eiat HeAoTrovv^aioi (says Peiikles, in his speech to tht 
 Athenians, at the commencement of the Peloponncnian war, Thucyd. i. 141) 
 «ta/ ovre Idia ovre iv koivu xpvH-^-''^ tariv avTolc, etc, — avdpec yeupyol lud 
 t>i} &a^aa(j;oi, etc. (ib. c. 14^) 
 
 W'i 
 
282 
 
 IflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LOCAL DIVERSITY. 
 
 283 
 
 oniy universaUj prevalent, in whi^.h the women no only carded 
 and spun all tbi wool, but also wove out of it the clotlnng and 
 bedding employed in the family. Weaving was then considered 
 a=> much a woman's business as spinning, and the same feehng 
 and habits still prevail to the present day in modern Greece, 
 where the loom is constantly seen in the peasants' cottages, and 
 always worked by women.* 
 
 The climate of Greece appears to be generally described by 
 modern travellers in more tavorable terms tlian it was by the 
 ancients, which is easily explicable from the classical interest, 
 picturesque beauties, and transparent atmosphere, so vividly 
 appreciated by an Knglish or a German eye. Herodotus,^ Hii>. 
 pocrates, and Aristotle, treat the climate of Asia as far more 
 genial and favorable both to animal and vegetable life, but at the 
 same time more enervating tlian that of Greece : the latter, they 
 speak of chiefly in reterence to its changeful character and diversi- 
 ties of local temperature, which they consider as highly stimulant 
 to the energies of the inhabitants. There is reason to conclude 
 that ancient Greece was inucli more lieaithy than the same terri- 
 tory is at presiiit, ina>uiu.li as it was more industriously culti- 
 vated, and the towns botli more raretiilly administered and better 
 supplied with Mater. But the ditlV-rences in respect of health- 
 me.-s, between one i»ortion of Greece and another, appear always 
 to ha've been considerable, and this, as wtll as the diversities of 
 climate, atfecte*! the local habits and character of the particular 
 sections. Not merely were there great diiferences between 
 the mountaineers and the inhabitants of the plahis,^ — between 
 Lokrians, .Etolians, Thokians, Dorians, CLta'ans, and Ar^dians, 
 on one hand, and the inhabitants of Attica, Boeotia, and Elia, oo 
 
 » In Egypt, the men sat at home and wove, while the women did ont-door 
 business : *l>oth the one and tlie other excite the surprise of Herodotus and 
 Sophokles (lIero«l. ii. 35 ; Soph. CEd- Col. 340). 
 
 For the spinning and weaving of the uio<iern Greek peasant women, sea 
 Leake, Trav. Mo»^a, vol. i. pp. 13, 18, 223, etc. ; Strong, Stat. p. 185. 
 
 'Hcrodot. i. 142; Hippocrat. De Aere, Loc. et Aq. c 12-13; Aristot 
 
 Folit. vii. 6. 1. J • * 
 
 * T\m mountaiioeers of MwHa are, at this tia s, unable to come down into 
 iie marihy plain of Wrachori, without being taken ill after a few daj9 
 (Fic«ller, Bei^ iii Ghech. I p. 184). 
 
 the Other, — but each of the various tribes which went to compose 
 these categories, had its peculiarities ; and the marked contrast 
 between Athenians and Boeotians was supposed to be represented 
 by the light and heavy atmosphere which they respectivelj 
 breathed. Nor was this all : for, even among the Boeotian aggre- 
 gate, every town had its own separate attributes, physical as well 
 a^ moral and political :' Oropus, Tanagra, Thespiae, Thebes, 
 Anthedon, Ilaliartus, Koroneia, Onchestus, and Plataea, were 
 known to Boeotians each by its own characteristic epithet: and 
 Diksearchus even notices a marked distinction between the inhab- 
 itants of the city of Athens and those in the country of Attica. 
 Sparta, Argos, Corinth, and Sikyon, though all called Doric, had 
 each its own dialect and peculiarities. All these differences; 
 depending in part upon climate, site, and other physical consid- 
 erations, contributed to nourish antipathies, and to perpetuate 
 that imj)erfect cohesion, which has already been noticed as an 
 indelible feature in Hellas. 
 
 The E{)irotic tribes, neighbors of the ^tolians and Akarna 
 nians, tilled the space between Piudus and the Ionian sea until 
 tliey joined to the northward the territory inhabited by the pow- 
 erful and barbarous Illyrians. Of these Illyrians, the native 
 Macedonian tribes ai)pear to have been an outlying section, 
 dwelling northward of Thessaly and Mount Olympus, eastward 
 of the chain by which Pindus is continued, and westward of the 
 river Axius. The Epirots were comprehended under the various 
 denominations of Chaonians, Molossians, Thesprotians, Kasso- 
 paans, Amphilochians, Athamanes, the -^thikes, Tymphaii, 
 Orestae, Parorai, and Atintanes,"^ — most of the latter being 
 small communities dispersed about the mountainous region of 
 
 ' Dikaarch. Fragm. p. 145, ed. Fuhr — B/of 'EXXador. 'laropovai if ol 
 HoiuTol rd /car' avroiic virupxovTa Idia uKA.'qpTjfiaTa "keyovre^ ravra — T^ 
 uiv alnxpoKepSeiav KaroiKelv h 'i2/>w7rcj, rbv 6e 6-&6vov kv Tavaypg.^ t^v 
 (DiTioveiKLav h Qeaniaic, t^v v(3ptv ev Q^fiaiCy r^v 7r?.€0ve^tav h ^ Kvi^ijdovu, 
 T':v -rrrpispyiav ev Kopcjveia, kv THaTaiaig ttjv uTia^oveiav, rdv nvperbv h 
 <♦' w^rrro), rf/v avaic^ijciav h ' kXiapTt^. 
 
 Alvont the distinction between 'A^ijvalui and 'AttlkoI, see the same work, 
 p 141. 
 
 « Strabo, vii. pp. 322, 324, 326 , Thucydid. ii. 68. TheopompiM (up 
 v>trab 1. c. ) reckoned 14 Epirotic ^1^9. 
 
 
 ' 'I 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 f>r.A„. There was, however, much confusion in the appli 
 !:«! of the comprehensive name Ejnro, .Inoh was a ftle 
 ^ T .Uo-^ether bv the Greeks, and given purely upon geo- 
 pve.^ altogether b considerations. Kpirus seems at 
 
 LT :t\rs X,^ edTo Pelo,x>nnesus, and to have signified 
 
 fhT ^.n "a re^on northward of the gulf of Corinth , and m 
 
 h , Sn 1 -nse, it comprehended the Mans and Akama 
 
 Z ions of whom spoke a dialect difficult to understand, 
 
 n,ans, Po;'>°"^ J 'J^^ ^'^^„,,,, „,^„ „.e Epirots fron, Ilel- 
 
 ;:i\":i " The ^rSe of Dodona forms the point of ancient 
 n"on b tw en Greeks and Kpirots, which was superseded by 
 nolThi asthe civilization of Hellas developed itself. Nor .s .t 
 • i« ': distinguish Kpirots from H-f nians on the^ one 
 h^nd than from Hellenes on the other; the language, the dress, 
 S the fashion of wearing .he hair being often analogous, wln^ 
 The Lundaries, amidst rude ,ncn and untravelled tracts, were 
 very inaccurately understood.^ , ,t n • 77A i^ n 
 
 Si M..,L.. V- no .c.„le„...... d*" i»l."J •' '»■■'•'■ 
 
 farther northward. , 
 
 Thev include farther, confining ourselves to -/6 "• c-, the 
 Jat mals of islands between the coast of Greece and hat of 
 AsTa M^or, from Tenedos on the north, to Rhodes, Krete^ ax.d 
 K;h'rnout..-rd ., and the great islands of ^^-^ 
 ^.fmo. and Euboca, as well as the groups called the Sporade. 
 ^li^rCyL^^s. Respecting the four considerable .sla^B 
 
 nearer to the coasts of Macedonia and Thrace, - Lemnos Imbros, 
 nearer to mcL doubted whether they 
 Samothrace, and lhabO>, — it may 
 
 » Hcrodoti. 146, ii. 56, vi. 127. 
 
 ;^::^;f"hrEp^^^^ tribeswe. ..,X...o.-spoke Greek in addition 
 
 ''^:T^.S::^^^ of these regions, the excellent disserta^n^ 
 O.^Uller above quoted, Ueber die Makedoner ; appended to the fi«t rol-mt 
 if ,he Engliih translation of his History of the Donaas. 
 
 GREEKS IN ASIA MINOR. 
 
 2d6 
 
 «rere at that time Hellenized. The Catalogue of the Iliad includes, 
 under Agamemnon, contingents from uEgina, Eubcea, Krete, 
 Karpathus, Kasus, Kos, and Rhodes : in the oldest epical tes- 
 timony which we possess, these islands thus appear inhabited by 
 Greeks ; but the others do not occur in the Catalogue, and are 
 never mentioned in such manner as to enable us to draw any 
 inference. Euboea ought, perhaps, rather to be looked upon as 
 a portion of Grecian mainland (from which it was only separated 
 by a strait naiTow enough to be bridged over) than as an island. 
 But the last five islands named in the Catalogue are all either 
 wholly or partially Doric : no Ionic or ^olic island appears in 
 it : these latter, though it was among them that the poet sung, 
 appear to be represented by their ancestral heroes, who came 
 from Greece proper. 
 
 The last element to be included, as going to make up the 
 Greece of 776 b. c, is the long string of Doric, Ionic, and 
 iEolic settlements on the coast of Asia Minor, — occupying a 
 iipace bounded on the north by the Troad and the region of Ida, 
 and extending southward as far as the peninsula of Knidus. 
 Twelve continental cities, over and above the islands of Lesbos 
 and Tenedos, are reckoned by Herodotus as ancient .^k)lic foun- 
 dations, — Smyrna, Kyme, Larissa, Neon-Teichos, Temnos, 
 Killa, Notium, ^giroessa, Pitana, iEgae, Myrina, and Gryneia. 
 Smyrna, having been at first JEolic, was afterwards acquired 
 through a stratagem by Ionic inhabitants, and remained per- 
 manently Ionic. Phoksea, the northernmost of the Ionic settle- 
 ments, bordered upon iEolis : Klazomenae, Erythra?, Teos, 
 Lebedos, Kolophon, Priene, My us, and Miletus, continued the 
 Ionic name to the southward. These, together with Samos and 
 Chios, formed the Panionic federation.^ To the south of Mile- 
 tus, after a considerable interval, lay the Doric establishments of 
 Myndus, Halikarnassus, and Knidus : the two latter, together 
 with the island of Kos and the three townships in Rhodes, 
 constituted the Doric Hexapolis, or communion of six cities, 
 concerted primarily with a view to religious purposes, but pro* 
 dicing a secondary effect analogous to political federation. 
 
 Bach, then, is the extent of Hellas, as it stood at the cooi* 
 
 (I 
 
 i 
 
 * Herodot. i. 143-1 5C 
 
836 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 HELLENIC PEOPLE GENERALLY. 
 
 zsr 
 
 mencement of the recorded Olympiads. To draw a picture even 
 for Sate, we possess no authentic materials, and areoW.ged 
 ^an^e^ate statements which belong to a later age: and th. 
 IsidLation might alone suffice to show how uncertified are aU 
 Sin of the Greece of 1183 b. c, the supposed epoch of 
 the Trojan war, four centuries earlier. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE HELLENIC PEOPLE GENERALLY, IN THE EAKLT 
 
 HISTORICAL TIMES. 
 
 THE territory indicated in the last "'^''P"^^ " !""' V^nf Z' 
 iHE leriiu/ J connects the city ot Am- 
 
 Lr numerous outlying <^^>^^^ ^';::L^^ HeUeos, 
 
 Both metit.pol.tans »"'i,'=f°"'^'' "'f.^^. ^ glorying in the 
 
 and were recognized as such "^^ ^^' ^^,f] T^ i,l^^^n^ 
 
 its inhabitants ;' whatever miglit De ine „emK. 
 l,lr\nd whatever might be their degree of civilization. The 
 BCter, and whatever ° Thebes with their ancient and 
 
 rulers and people "^^^Sypt an Thebes wU ^^^ 
 
 gigantic monuments, the -^'f^'y Tynans «ia J^ ^^ 
 
 phil-Hellene Arganthonms of Tartessus, and t^,e P 
 
 Jatricians of Rome (to^thejnd^gnatum^d Cato^ J«er*^ 
 
 ' Z TT^TrvIt^^ih^i^^r^ainst the continaance of the classifioa- 
 
 J„tw gLT nd B WaTlr the latter word hac^ «>n.e to ,mp., 
 
 •wniprised in it. At first, it seemed to have expressed more of 
 repugnance than of contempt, and repugnance especially towaixk 
 the sound of a foreign language J Afterwards, a feeling of their 
 own superior intelligence (in i>art well justified) arose among the 
 Greeks, and their term barbarian was used so as to imply a loir 
 state of the temper and intelligence ; in which sense it wa« 
 petained by the semi-Hellenized Romans, as the proper antithesis 
 to their state of civilization. The want of a suitable word, cor- 
 responding to barbarta7i, as the Greeks originally used it, is so 
 inconvenient in the description of Grecian phenomena and senti- 
 ments, that I may be obliged occasionally to use the woril in its 
 primitive sense. 
 
 The Ilellens were all of common blood and parentage, 
 
 were all descendants of the common patriarch Hellen. In treat- 
 ing of the historical Greeks, we have to accept this as a datum: 
 it represents the sentiment under tlie influence of which they 
 moved and acted. It is placed by Herodotus in the front rank, 
 as the cliief of those fuur ties which bound together the Hellenic 
 aggregate: 1. Fellowship of blood; 2. Fellowship of language; 
 3. Fixed domiciles of gods, and sacrifices, common to all; 
 i. Like manners and dispositions. 
 
 T/iese (say the Atlienians, in their re]>ly to the Spartan envoys, 
 in the very crisis of the Persian invasion) "Athens will never 
 disgrace herself by betraying." And Zeus Hellenius was recog- 
 
 (treeks ; he proscribes theh* medicine alto;,'cther, and admits only a sHghl 
 ta!«te of their literature : " Quod bonum sit eorum literas inspicere, non per 
 
 tJiscere Jurarunt inter se, Barbaros necare oranes medicinA, sed liot 
 
 i}*-^uni mercede faciunt, ut fides iis sit et facile disperdant. Nos quoque 
 dit titant Barbaros et spurios, nosque magis quam alios, Opicos appellatione 
 ftjedant." 
 
 ' Kapuv ffyTjaaro f3apf3aoo<i>cjvu'v. Homer, Iliad, ii. 867. Homer does not 
 nse the word (SapjSapoi, or any words signifying either a Hellen generally or 
 ft non-Hellen generally (Thucyd. i. 3). Compare Strabo, viii. p. 370; and 
 XIV. p. 662. 
 
 Oyjd reproduces the primitive sense of the word fSup^apo^, when he speaki 
 of himself as an exile at Tomi (Trist. v. 10-37): — 
 
 " Barbams hie ego snm, quia non intelligor ulli." 
 
 The Egyptians had a word in thei* language, the exact equivalent ol 06f^ 
 
 Boflog in this sense (Herod, ii. 158). 
 
 I 
 
 I? 
 
S38 
 
 HISTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 LANOUAUE AND DIALECTS. 
 
 2i» 
 
 nized as the god watclung over and enforcing the fraternity th« 
 
 "hSus, Her,>dotus, and Thucydides,-^ all believed that ther, 
 had been an ante-Hellenic period, when different languages, 
 Mutually unintelligible, were s,K>ken between Mount Olympus 
 Td Cape Malea. However this may be, dur.ng the h,. tor.cal 
 is the Greek language was universal ^]^-^^^^ '-I ^ 
 -branching out, however, into a great vanety of d.alect>, which 
 were rou.hly c4sified by kter literary n.en >nto lon.c, Don . 
 lie and Attic. But the classification presents a sen^blance of 
 SariT;: which in point of fact does not seem to have been 
 Xed each t.,wn,'each smaller subdivision o O.e Hel^m 
 n-ime having peculiarities of dialect belonguig to itself, ^ow 
 r ;tt^edU.n who framed the quadruple division t«,k no ice 
 chieflv if not exclusively, of the written dialects -tho^e which 
 tril ennobl..d by poe.s or other au.liors ; the mere spoken 
 dfom" we e for the most part ncglected.3 That there was no 
 uch thin. a. one Ionic dialect in .he speech of the P-ple called 
 loIieSek we know from the indisputable tesCmouy of Ilerodo- 
 u Twho te mus that there were four capital varieties of speech 
 long the twelve Asiatic town^ecially knovMi a. lon.c. Ol 
 
 ' l7i^;7Tm^4r7r^EW,v<«;>. i»v ifiat/^iv re Kal 6^yXu<,cov, «« 
 Uorod. Ml. 141.- iuoToowa-TCv npoiorat ycvea 
 
 «..v Ifyi^au, re.u.a .a _''-"". 'b X 7 ) ^^C ^^^ ^'- " 'E^^'«»* 
 
 i. 57 ; Thucya. i. 3, - «ra .oXe,c ", .o - X X,^" v ^, 
 
 > " Antiqui grammatin cas tantum d'''''^^-^:*;^"^ i** „„„ notabant.- 
 „si essent: ce.eras, q-- ■>»" -B-^^"" -' " ThS b en the case, to . 
 ,^, , De ^;«f - ^t•,L^^e^a:ehTof .ode™ times tbo.«h 
 r^nlg iTw Xrsuf h iorLe. facility for tb, registration of nopal- 
 
 dialects- 
 « Herod, i. U2. 
 
 course, the varieties would liave been much more numerous if 
 he had given us the impressions of his ear in Eubo^a, the Cj- 
 clades, Massalia, Rhegium, and Olbia, — all numbered as Greeks 
 and as lonians. The Ionic dialect of the granmiarians was an 
 extract from Homer, Ilekatieus, Herodotus, Hippocrates, etc.; 
 to wliat living speecli it made the nearest approach, amidst those 
 divergences which the historian has made known to us, we cannot 
 tell. Sappho and Alka'us in Lesbos, Myrtis and Korinna in 
 Boeotia, were the great sources of reference for the Lesbian and 
 Boiotian varieties of the iEolic dialect, — of which there was a 
 third variety, untouched by the i)oets, in Thessaly." The analogy 
 between the different manifestations of Doric and ^Eolic, iis well 
 as that between the Doric generally and the ^olic generally, 
 contrasted with the Attic, is only to be taken as rough and 
 approximative. 
 
 But all these different dialects are nothing more than dialects, 
 distinguished as modifications of one and the same lan<yua'>-e, and 
 exhibiting evidence of certain laws and principles pervading 
 them all. They seem capable of being traced back to a certain 
 /deal mother-language, peculiar in itself and distinguishable from, 
 though cognate with, the Latin ; a substantive member of what 
 lias been called the Indo-European family of langua^-es. This 
 truth has been brought out, in recent times, by the comparative 
 examination applied to the Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, German, 
 and Lithuanian languages, as well as by the more accurate 
 analysis of the Greek language itself to which such studies have 
 given rise, in a manner much more clear than could have been 
 imagined by the ancients themselves.2 It is needless to dwell 
 upon the importance of this uniformity of language in holding to- 
 getlier the race, and in rendering the genius of its most favored 
 members available to the civilization of all. Except in the rarest 
 cases, the divergences of dialect were not such as to prevent 
 
 * Respecting the three varieties of the ^ohc dialect, differing considerably 
 from each other, see the valuable work of Ahren.s De J)ial.^:()l. sect. 2, 32, 
 
 50. 
 
 • The work of Albert Giese, Ueber den ^:olischen Dialekt (unhappily 
 not finished, ou account of the early death of ^e author,) presents an iii|^ 
 nioas specimen of such analysis 
 
 '*^ 
 
 f 
 
240 
 
 HISTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 OLYMPIC AND PYTmAN GAMES. 
 
 241 
 
 
 every Greek from uiulerstanding, and being understood by, evGiy 
 other Greek, -a fact remarkable, when we consider how WMn^ 
 of their outlying colonist., not having taker, out women m ti.e^ 
 emi^o-ation, intermarried with non-llelknic wives. And the 
 :,ei taction and popuh.xity of their eax-ly epic iK>ems, was here of 
 inestimable value for the diOusio.i of a common type ot language, 
 and for thus keeping together the sympathies ot tbe He ^'^||^ 
 world ' The Homeric dialect became the standard followed by 
 all Greek poets for ihe hexameter, as nuiy be seen part.culai'ly 
 IVom the example of Ilesiod,- who adheres to it ui the matu, 
 though his father was a native of the .Kolic Kyme, and he him.seU 
 resident at Askra, Id. the^:olic Ba>otia,-and the early iambic 
 an<l elegiac compositions are framed on the .>.uiie model. Intel- 
 lectual Greeks in all cities, even the niost distant outrjusts trom 
 the central hearth, became early accu^toinnl to one type ot 
 literary speech, and possessors of a common stock ot legend^N 
 
 luaxims, and metaphors. , ,. . i 
 
 That commimity of religious sentiments, localities, and sacri- 
 fices which Herodotus names as the third bond of union among 
 the Greeks, was a phenomenon, not (like the race ajid the laii- 
 guage) interwoven with their primitive constitution, but of gradual 
 growth In the time of Herodotus and even a century earlier, 
 it wi^ at its full nu.tunl) : but there had been a period when no 
 reli-ious mectiugs common to the whole Hellenic body existed. 
 What are called the Olymi»ic, Pythian, Nemeaii, and Isthmian 
 runes (the four most cons|>icuous amidst many others analogous,) 
 were in reality, great religious iestivals, - for the gods then gave 
 their' special sanction, mune, an<l presence, to recreaUve meetings 
 _ the closest asso<-iation then prevailed between the leelings ot 
 common worship .md the sympatliy in common amusement.^ 
 
 " ' Sec the interesting remarks of Dio Chryso.tom on tlie attachment of the 
 inhabitants of Olbia (or Borysthenes) to the Homeric poems : most of them, 
 he says could repeat the Iliad by heart, thuujrh their dialect was partially 
 barbarized, and the city in a sad state of ruin (Dio Chrysost, Orat. xxxn. p. 
 
 '*'« P?ato,^'Legg. ii. 1, p. 653; Kratylus, p. 406; and Dionys. Hal. An. Rhe- 
 toric c 1-2, p 226 — eedf fxkv ye irov 7rdvr«c iraaayf yaru'oaa^ it^vnyvpe,^ 
 fiytfM:>vKal Mw^or olov OXvuTTiW ulv, 'OXvi^rtoc Zevi ' rov 6' t^ H^U 
 
 Though this association is now no longer recognized, it is, never 
 theless, essential that we should keep it fully before us, if we 
 desire to understand the life and proceedings of the Greeks. To 
 Herodotus and his contemporaries, these great festivals,' then 
 frequented by crowds from every part of Greece, were of' over- 
 whelming importance and interest ; yet they had once been purely 
 local, attracting no visitors except from a very narrow neighbor- 
 hood. In the Homeric poems, much is said about the common 
 gods, and about special i)laces consecrated to and occupied by 
 several of them : the chiefs celebrate funeral games in honor of 
 a deceased father, which are visited by ccmpetitors from different 
 parts of Greece, but nothing appears to manifest public or town 
 festivals open to Grecian visitors generallyj And, though the 
 rocky Pytho, with its temple, stands out in the Iliad as a^'place 
 both venerated and rich, — the Pythian games, under the super- 
 intendence of the Amphiktyons, with continuous enrolment of 
 victors, and a Pan-Hellenic reputation, do not begin until after 
 the Sacred War, in the 48th Olympiad, or 586 b. c.a 
 
 The Olympic games, more conspicuous than the Pythian, as 
 well as considerably older, are also remarkable on another ground, 
 
 Apollo, the Muses, and Dionysus are ^vveopTaffrai Kai ^vyxupev rat (Homer 
 Hymn to ApoU. 146). The same view of the sacred pames is given by 
 Livy, in reference to the Romans and the Volsci (ii. 36-37): " Se ut con- 
 sceleratos contaminatosque, ab huiis, festis diehm, cfgtu gaodammodo )iominum 
 
 Deorumque, abactos esse ideo nos ab sede piorum, ccctu, concilioque 
 
 abigi." It is curious to contrast this with the dislike and repugnance of 
 Tertullian: " Idololatria omnium ludorum mater est, — quod enim specta 
 culum sine idolo, quis ludus sine sacrificio ? " (De Spectaculis, p. 369.) 
 
 » Iliad, xxiii. 630-679. The games celebrated by Akastus] in honor ol 
 Tehas, were famed in the old epic (I'ausan v. 1 7, 4 ; Apollodor. i. 9, 28). 
 
 2 Strabo, ix. p. 421 ; Pausan. x. 7, 3. The first Pythian games celebrated 
 by the Amphiktyons, after the Sucred War, carried with them a substantial 
 reward to the victor (an uyuv xprffiarcrrf^) ■ but in the next, or seoond Pylh- 
 an games, nothing was given but an honorary reward, or wreath of laurd 
 leaves (aywr ortipaviTTji) : the first coincide with Ol^-mpiad 48, 3 ; tlie second 
 with Olympiad 49, 3. 
 
 Compare Schol. ad Pindar. Pyth. Argument : Pauaan. x. 37, 4-5 j Krause. 
 Die Pythien, Nemcen, und Isthmien, sect. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 The Homeric Hymn to ApoHo, is composed at a time eariier than tlie 
 Sacred War, whnn Krissa is flourishing; earlier than th»» Pythian games, m 
 cefcKrated by the Amphiktyons. 
 
 11 
 Ii 
 
 
I 
 
 242 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 inasmuch as they supplied hi=^torical computers with the oldest 
 backward record of continuous time. It was in the year 7/0 
 B. C, that the Eleians inscribed the name of their countryman, 
 Korabus, as victor in the competition of runners, and that they 
 bec^an the practice of inscribing in like manner, in each Olympic, 
 or'tiitli recurring year, the name of the runner who won the 
 prize. Even for a long time after this, however, the Olympic 
 games seem to have remained a local festival ; the prize being 
 uniformly carried cS: at the first twelve Olympiads, by some 
 competitor either of Klis or its immediate neighborhood. The 
 Nemean and Isthmian jrames did not become notorious or fre- 
 quented until lat.T even than the Pythian. Soh.nJ in his legi>- 
 lation, |)roclaimed the large reward of five hundred drachms tor 
 every Athenian who gain«-d an Olympic prize, and the lower sum 
 of one hundred drachms for an Isthmiac prize. He counts the 
 former, as Pan-Hellenic rank and renown, an ornament even to 
 the city of which the victor was a member, — the latter, as par- 
 tial, and confined to the neiglilK>rhood. 
 
 Of the beginnings of these great solemnities, we cannot pre 
 Slime to speak, except in mythical language : we k now them onl y 
 
 » riutarch, Solon. 23. The Isthmian A^'on was to a certain exten'. a 
 featival of old Athenian ori^'in : tor arnon- the many le-ends respecting: its 
 first institution, one of the most notorious represented it as havin- been 
 founded by Theseus after his victory over Smis at the Isthmus (see Srhoi. 
 ad Pindar. Isth. Argument.; Pausan. ii. 1, 4), or over Skeiron (Plut^^rch. 
 Theseus, c 25). Plutarch says that they were first established by The^ius 
 as funeral games for Skeiron, 'and Pliny gives the same story (II. N. vii ^7) 
 According to Hellanikus, the Athenian Theors at the Isthmian games had 
 a privileged place, ( Plutarch, /. c). 
 
 There is, therefore, good reason why Solon should single out the Xsth 
 mionikse as persons to be specially rewarded, not mentioning the Pyt>.'.on 
 ikee and Nemconik*, — the Nemean and Pythian games not havnig the* 
 acquired Hellenic importance. Diogenes Lafirt. (i. 55) says that Solon 
 provided rewards, not only for victories at the Olympic and Isthmian, but 
 also uvuAoyov eiri ruv uA/.wv, which Krause (Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, 
 iect. 3, p. 13) supposes to be the truth: I think, very improbably The 
 sharp invective of Timokreon against Themistocles, charging him araous 
 other things with providing nothing but cold meat at the Isthmian gamef 
 {'ia^fxol 6' kiravdoKtvE yeXoioc fpvxpa Kpia irapix<ov, Plutarch. Themistoc f 
 81 ), seems to imply that the Athenian visitors, whom the The6rs were -alU 
 iDon to take care of at those games, were n tmeroos. 
 
 Vol. 2 
 
 8 
 
 AMPHIKTYONIES. 
 
 248 
 
 in thoir comparative maturity. But the habit of common sacri- 
 fice, on a small scale, and betw een near neighbors, is a part of 
 the earliest habits of Greece. The sentiment of fraternity, 
 between two tribes or villages, first manifested itself by sending a 
 sacred legation, or Theoria," to offer sacrifice at each other's fes- 
 tivals, and to partake in the recreations which followed ; thus 
 establishing a truce with solemn guarantee, and bringing them- 
 selves into direct connection each with the god of the other under 
 his appropriate local surname. The pacific communion so 
 fostered, and the increased assurance of intercourse, as Greece 
 gradually emerged from the turbulence and pugnacity of tlie 
 heroic age, operated especially in extending the range of this 
 ancient habit : the village festivals became town festivals, largely 
 frequented by the citizens of other towns, and sometimes with 
 special invitations sent round to attract Theors from every 
 Hellenic community, — and thus these once humble assemblages 
 gradually swelled into the pomp and immense confluence of the 
 Olympic and Pythian games. The city administering such holy 
 ceremonies enjoyed inviolability of territory during the month 
 of their occurrence, being itself under obligation at that time 
 to refrain from all aggression, as well as to notify by heralds'^ 
 the commencement of the truce to all other cities not in avowed 
 hostility with it, Elis imposed heavy fines upon other towns — 
 even on the powerful Lacedaemon — for violation of the Olympic 
 truce, on pain of exclusion from the festival in case of non- 
 payment. 
 
 Sometimes this tendency to religious fraternity took a form 
 called an Amphiktyony, different from the common festival. A 
 
 ' In many Grecian states (as at iEgina, Mantincia, Truezcn, Thasos, etc.) 
 these Theors formed a permanent college, and seem to have been invested 
 with extensive functions in reference to religious ceremonies: at Athens, 
 they were chosen for the special occasion (see Thucyd. v. 47; AristoteL 
 Polit. v. 8,3; 0. Mailer, vEginetica, p. 135; Demosthen. de Fals. Leg. p* 
 
 380). 
 
 « About the sacred truce, Olympian, Isthmian, etc., formally announced 
 by two heralds crowned with garlands sent from the administering city, and 
 irith respect to which many tricks were played, see Thucyd. v. 49 ; Xenophon, 
 Hellen. ir. 7, 1-7; Plutarch, Lycurg. 23; Pindar, Isthm. ii. 35, — arrovcJo^o. 
 ftoi-'KapvKEc wpdv — Thucyd. viii. 9-10, is also peculiarly inatmctiva ill 
 Regard to the practice and the feeling. 
 
 i;i 
 
 i 
 
II 
 
 tu 
 
 HISTORY Of GREECE 
 
 aMI'HIKTYONIES. 
 
 246 
 
 ceitain number of towns entered into an exclusive religious 
 partnership, for the celebration of sacrifices periodically to the 
 god of a particular temple, which was supposed to be the common 
 property, and under tlie common protection of all, though one of 
 the number was often named as permanent administrator; while 
 all other Greeks were excluded. That there were many religious 
 partnerships of this sort, whicli have never acquired a place in 
 history, among the early Grecian villages, we may, perhaps, 
 gather from the etymology of the word, (Am[)hiktyons' desig- 
 nates residents around, or neighbors, considered in the point of 
 Tiew of fellow-religionists,) as well as from the indications pre- 
 Berved to us in reference to various parts of the country. Thui 
 there was an Amphiktyony'^ of seven cities at the holy island 
 of Kalauria, close to the luirbor of TrcEzen. Ilermione, Epi- 
 daurus, iEgiria, Athens, l*ra>iaN Nauplia, and Orchomenus, 
 jointly maintained the temple and stvnctuary of Poseidon in that 
 island, (with whieli it would seem that the city of Troez^n, though 
 close at hand, had no connection,) meeting there at stated periods, 
 to offer formal sacrifices. These seven cities, indeed, were not 
 immediate neighbors, but the speciality and exclusiveness of 
 their interest in the temple is seen from the ftict, that when the 
 Argeians took Nau{)lia, they adopted and fulfilled these religious 
 obligations on behalf of the prior inhabitants: so, also, did the 
 Lacedaemonians, when they had captured Prasiae, Again, in 
 Triphylia,^ ^ituated between the Pisatid and Messenia, in the 
 western part of Peloponnesus, there was a similar religious 
 meeting and partnership of the Triphylians on Ca|>e Samikon, 
 at the temple uf the Samian Poseidon. Here, the inhabitants 
 of Makiston were intrusted with the details of superintendence, 
 as well as with the duty of notifying beforehand the exact time 
 of meeting, (a precaution essential amidst the diversities and 
 irregularities of the Greek calendar,) and also of proclaiming 
 what was called the Samian truce, — a temporary abstinence 
 from hostilities, which bound all Triphylians during the holy 
 period. This latter custom discloses the salutary influence of 
 such institutions in presenting to men's minds a common object 
 
 of reverence, common duties, and common enjoymezits ; thui 
 generating sympathies and feelings of mutual obligation amidst 
 petty communities not less fierce than suspicious.^ So, too, the 
 twelve chief Ionic cities in and near Asia Minor, had their Pan- 
 Ionic Amphiktyony peculiar to themselves: the six Doric cities, 
 in and near the southern corner of thfit peninsula, combined for 
 till' like purpose at the tem[)le of the Triopian Apollo ; and the 
 feeliii"^ of special partnership is here particularly illustrated by 
 tilt fact, that Ilalikarnassus, one of the six, was formally extruded 
 by the remaining live, in consequence of a violation of the rules.'^ 
 'a here was also an Amphiktyonic union at Onchestus in Ba30tia, 
 in the venerated grove and temple of Poseidon :^ of whom it 
 consisted, we are not informed. These are some specimens of 
 tlic sort of special religious conventions and assemblies which 
 seem to have been frequent throughout Greece. Nor ought we 
 t'j omit those religious meetings and sacrifices which were com- 
 mon to all the members of one Hellenic subdivision, such as the 
 I'aiii-Doiotia to all the Bteotians, celebrnted at the temple of the 
 Itonian Atliene near Koroneia,* — the common observances, 
 rendered to the temple of Apollo Pythaeus at Argos, by all those 
 nei«rhboring towns which had once been attached by this religious 
 
 » Pindar, Isthm. iii. % {iv. 14) ; Nem. vi. 40, 
 
 • ftirabo, viii. p. a:i ' Strabo. viii. p. 343,- Pausan v. «. L 
 
 ' At lolkos, on the north roast of the Gulf of Papftssu, and at the borderi 
 ot the Magnt'tcs, Thessalians, and Acljteans of Plithiotis, was celebrated a 
 jH I iodiral relij^ious festival, or pan<\u^yris, the title of wliieh we are prevented 
 hum making out by the iinperfect'on of Strabo's text (btrabo, ix. 436). It 
 stands in the text as printed in Tzschueke's edition, 'Evravi^a de kui tt/v 
 Wv/.ultiijv navTjyvpiv, avvert'kovv. The mention of IlvAaiVtr/ irav^yvfjic, whieh 
 •onducts us only to the Amphiktyonic convocations of Thermopylae and 
 l>el{)hi is here unsuitable ; and the lK3st or rarisian MS. of Strabo presentf 
 ii ^'ap (one among the many which embarrass the ninth book) in the place 
 of the word Uv^ouKyv. Dutneil conjectures r^v U eXia/c^v navriyvpiv, deriv- 
 ing the name from the celebrated funeral games of the old epic celebrated 
 by Akastus in honor of his father Pelias. Grosskurd (in his note on tlie 
 pa.s8ay:e) approves the conjecture, but it seems to me not probable that « 
 Grecian panegyris would be named after Pelias. n^yAiaAc^r, in reference to 
 the neighboring mountain and town of Pelion, might perhaps be less ob- 
 jectionable (see Dikaearch. Fragm. pp. 407-409, ed. Tuhr.), but we caimal 
 determine with certainty. 
 
 « Herod, i. ; Dionys. Hal iv. 25. 
 
 ' Strabo, ix. p. 412; Homer. Hymn. Apoll. 23.2. 
 
 « Btrabo, ix. p. 411. 
 
 ii 
 
 ,11 
 
 
)46 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECi:. 
 
 THE GREAT AMPHIKTYOmC ASSEMBLY. 
 
 MP 
 
 thread to the Argeians, — the similar periodical ceremoniesj 
 frequented by all who bore the Achaean or il^^tolian name, — and 
 the splendid and exhilarating festivals, so favorable to the diffu- 
 sion of the early Grecian poetry, which brought all lonians at 
 stated intervals to the sacred island of DelosJ This latter class 
 of festivals agreed with the Amphiktyony, in being of a special 
 tnd exclusive character, not open to all Greeks. 
 
 But there was one amongst these many Am])hiktyonies, which, 
 
 llioucrh startiii- tVuni tlie smallest beginnings, gradually expanded 
 
 iiito°so comprehensive a character, and acquired so marked a 
 
 predominance over the rest, as to be called The Amphiktyomc 
 
 Assembly, and even to have been mistaken by some authors tor 
 
 a sort of federal Hellenic Diet. Twelve sub-races, out of the 
 
 number which made up entire Hellas, belonged to this ancient 
 
 Arai.hiktvonv, the meetings of which were held twice in every 
 
 year: in^spring, at the temple of Apollo at Delphi; in autumn, 
 
 at Thermopvlav in the sacred precinct of Demeter Amphiktyoms. 
 
 Sacred deputies, including a chief called the Hieromnemon, and 
 
 gubordinates called the Pylagoraj, attended at these meetings 
 
 from each of the twelve races: a crowd of volunteers seem to 
 
 have accompanied them, for purposes of sacrifice, trade, or 
 
 enjovment. Their si)ecial, and most important function, cxm- 
 
 sisted in watching over the Delphian temple, in which all the 
 
 twelve sub-raco ha<l a joint interest; and it was the immense 
 
 wealth and national ascendency of this temple, which enhanced 
 
 to so great a \nwh the dignity of its acknowledged adminis- 
 
 trators. 
 
 The twelve (.'onstituent members were as follows: Thessalians, 
 Boeotians, Dorians, lonians, Pcrrluebians, Magnetes, Lokrians, 
 CEta^ans, Achaans, Fhokians, Doloi)es, and Malians-'-i AH are 
 
 » Thmyd. iii. 104; v. 55. Pausan. vii. 7, 1 ; 24, 3. Polyb. v. 8; ii. 54. 
 
 Homer. Hymn. ApoU. 146. j%:^„ 
 
 According to what seems to have been the ancient and sacred tradition, 
 the whole of the month Kameius was a time of peace among the Dorians; 
 Aouch this was often neglected in practice at the time of the Pcloponnc.ian 
 w»r (Thuc V 54). But it may he doubted whether there was any festival 
 Of Karneia common to all the Dorians : the Kameia at Sparta seems to 
 h^ve been a Laccdicmonian festival. v ar 
 
 'The list of the Amphiktyonic constituency is diffcreitly given by ^ 
 
 counted as races, (if we treat the Hellenes as a race, we must 
 call these sub-races,) no mention being made of cities :' all count 
 equally in respect to voting, two votes being given by the depu- 
 ties from each of the twelve : moreover, we are told that, in 
 determining the deputies to be sent, or the manner in which the 
 votes of each race should be given, the powerful Athens, Spaita, 
 and Thebes, had no more influence than the humblest Ionian, 
 Dorian, or Boeotian city. This latter fact is distinctly stated by 
 ^^schines, himself a pylagore sent to Delphi by Athens. And 
 so, doubtless, the theory of the case stood : the votes of the Ionic 
 races counted for neither more nor less than two, whether given 
 by deputies from Athens, or from the small towns of Erythrae and 
 Priene ; and, in like manner, the Dorian votes were as good in 
 the division, when given by deputies from Bocon and Kytinion 
 in the little territory of Doris, as if the men delivering them had 
 been Spartans. But there can be as little question that, in 
 practice, the little Ionic cities, and the little Doric cities, pretended 
 to no share in the Amphiktyonic deliberations. As the Ionic 
 vote came to be substantially the vote of Athens, so, if Sparta 
 was ever obstructed in the management of the Doric vote, it must 
 have been by powerful Doric cities like Argos or Corinth, not 
 by the insignificant towns of Doris. But the theory of Amphik- 
 tyonic suffrage, as laid down by iEschines, however little reaiized 
 in practice during his day, is important, inasmuch as it shows In 
 full evidence the primitive and original constitution. The first 
 establishment of the Amphiktyonic convocation dates from a 
 time when all the twelve members were on a footing of equal 
 independence, and when there were no overwhelming cities 
 (such as Sparta and Athens) to cast in the shade the humbler 
 members, — when Sparta was only one Doric city, and Athena 
 only one Ionic city, among various others of consideration, not 
 much inferior. 
 
 There are also other proofs which show the high antiquitir of 
 
 chines, by Harpokration, and by Pausanias. Titt^nann (Ueber don Amphik* 
 tyonischen Bund, sect. 3, 4, 5) analyzes and compares their varioui statt^ 
 QMutfi, and elicits the catalogue given in the text. 
 
 ^ .^^chines, De Fals. Legat. p. 280, c. 36. — Karrj^f&fxijaafirjv di i^v% 
 
 ditdexa^ Tu fiETEXovra rov Upov Kal tovtuv iSei^a iKoarov l ^ n yy Itra 
 
 iftf^^fv yev6u€V0Vf rd fieyiarov Tij) iXdrrovit etc. 
 
2^ 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECt. 
 
 FUNCTIONS OF THE AMPHIKTYONIC ASSEMBLf. 
 
 249 
 
 this Amphiktyonic convocation. JEscliines gives us an ex trie 
 from the oath which had been taken by the sacred deputiets, who 
 attended on behalt' of their respective races, ever since its tirst 
 establishment, and which still apparently continued to be taken 
 in his day. The antique simplicity of this oath, and of the con- 
 ditions to which the members bind themselves, betrays tiie early 
 age in which it originated, as well as the humble resources of 
 those towns to which it was applied.' " We will not destroy 
 any Amphiktyonic town, — we will not cut off any Amphiktyonic 
 town from running water,"— such are the two prominent obliga- 
 tions which ^Kschinc^ specifies out of the old oath. The second 
 of the two carries us back to the simplest state of society, and 
 to towns of the smallest size, when the maidens went out with 
 Ihcir i):i."^iii- to fetch water from the spring, hke the daughters 
 of Keh'os at Eleusis. or tliose of Athens from the fountain of 
 Kullirrlioe.- \Ve may even conceive that the special mention 
 of this detail, in the cuvciiant between the twelve races, is bor- 
 rowed literally from agreements still eai'lier, among the villages 
 or little towns in whi.'h the members of each race were distriU 
 uled. At any rate, ii proves satisfactorily the very ancient date 
 to which the commedcement of the Amphiktyonic convocation 
 must be refi'rred. The belief of iEschines ((>erhaps, also, the 
 belief general in hi:> time) was, that it commenced simultaneously 
 with the tlrst foundation of the Delphian temple, — an event 
 of which we have no historical knowledge; but there seems rea- 
 son to suppose that its original establishment is connected with 
 Thermopylie and Demeter Amphiktyonis, rather than with 
 Delphi and A[)olU). The speeial surname by which Demeter 
 and her temple at Thermopvhe was known,^' — the temple of the 
 hero Amphiktyon which stood at its side, — the word Pylae, 
 which obtained fooling in the language to designate the half- 
 yearly meeting of the deputies both at Thermopylae and at 
 
 » JEschin. Fals. Legal, p. 279, c. 35 : 'Xfia 61 H dpx^iC Su^FMov ttiv 
 KTiaiv Tov iepov, Kai r};v ^fn^riiv avvodov yevofiivijv rJ-v 'Afi(piKTv6vfM>, koX 
 roi>C dpKOV^ avTuv uviyiov, ev otf ivopKov f/v role dpxaioig fiTjdefMiav noXit 
 rCw ' K^fiKTVovidvjv uvaararov noir/aiiv fiTjtS" vddruv vafiartaiuv cl/>f«ii», elc. 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, vi. 457. Homer, Hymn to Dimeter, 1)0, 107, 170. Ba 
 rV.ot vi. 137. Thucyd. ii. 15. 
 
 * 'ferodot. vii. 200 ; Livy, xaxi. 32. 
 
 Delphi, — these indications point to Thermopylie (the real cen- 
 tral point for all the twelve) as the primary place of meetings 
 arid to the Delphian half-year as something secondary and super- 
 rwlded. On such a matter, however, we cannot go beyond a 
 ^Mijecture. 
 
 The hero Amphiktyon, whose temple stood at Thermopylae, 
 pa3sed in mythical genealogy for the brother of Hellen. And it 
 may be ailirmed, with truth, that the habit of forming Amphikty 
 onic unions, and of frequenting each other's religious festivals 
 was the great means of crrating and fostering the primitive 
 feeling of brotherhood among the children of Hellen, in those 
 early times when rudeness, insecurity, and pugnacity did so 
 much to isolate them. A certain number of salutary habits and 
 sentiments, such as that which the Amphiktyonic oath embodies, 
 in regard to abstinence from injury, as well as to mutual protec- 
 tion,i gradually found their way into men's minds : the obligations 
 thus brought into play, acquired a substantive efficacy of their 
 own, and the religious feeling which always remained connected 
 with them, came afterwards to be only one out of many complex 
 agencies by which the later historical Greek was moved. Athens 
 and Sparta in the days of their might, and the inferior citi**.s in 
 relation to them, played each their own political game, in which 
 religious considerations will be found to bear only a subordinate 
 part. 
 
 The special function of the Amphiktyonic council, so far as 
 we know it, consisted in watching over the safety, the interests, 
 and the treasures of the Delphian temple. " If any one shall 
 plunder the pro{)erty of the god, or shall be cognizant thereof, or 
 shall take treacherous counsel against the things in the temple, 
 we will punish him with foot, and hand, and voice, and by every 
 meiuis in our power." So ran the old Amphiktyonic oath, with 
 
 * The festival of the Amarynthia in Eubcea, held at the temple of Artemis 
 of Amarynthus, was frequented by the Ionic Chalcis and Eretria as well aa 
 by the Dryopic Karystus. In a combat proclaimed between ChalcLj and 
 Kretria, to settle the question alx)ut the possession of the plain of Lelantunii, 
 It was stipulated that no missile weapons should be used by either party 
 this agreement was inscribed'and recorded in the temple of Artcmyi (Strabo 
 B. p. 448 ; Livy, xxxv. 38). 
 
 ij 
 
1 
 
 POWER OF THE AMPinKTYONIC ASSEMBLY. 
 
 2/>l 
 
 25U 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 an energetic imprecation attached to it.i And there are soma 
 examples in whie^i the council-^ construes its functions so largely 
 as to receive and adjudicate upon complaints against entire cities, 
 for offences against the religious and patriotic sentiment of the 
 Greeks generally. But for the most part its interference relates 
 directly to the Deljphian temple. The earliest case in which it is 
 brought to our vi(*w, is the Sacred War against Kirrha, in the 
 ir.th Olympiad, or 6U5 ii. c, conducted by Eurylochus, the Thes 
 .-^alian, and Kleisthenes of Sikyon, and proposed by Solon of 
 Athens :^ we find the Amphiktyons also, about half a century 
 afterwards, undertaking the duty of collecting subscriptions 
 throughout the Hellenic world, and making the contract with 
 the Alkma^onids for rebuihling the temple at*ter a confiagration.-* 
 But the influence of this council is essentially of a fluctuating 
 and intermittent character. Sometimes it appears forward to 
 decide, and its decisions command respect ; but such occa^^ions 
 are rare, taking th.> general course of known Grecian history; 
 while there are other occasions, and those too especially affecting 
 the Delphian temple, on which we are surprised to find nothing 
 said about it. In the long and perturbed period which Thucydi 
 des describes, he never once mentioned the Amphiktyons, though 
 the temple and the safety of its treasures form the repeated sub- 
 
 ' JEschin. De Fals. Legal, c. 35, p. 279 : compare adv. Ktesiphont. c. 3t 
 
 p. 406. 
 
 « See the charge wliich ^schines alleges to have been brought by the 
 Lokrians of Amphissa against Athens in the Amphiktyonic Council (adv. 
 Ktesiphont. c. 38, p. 409). Demosthenes contradicts his rival as to the fact 
 of the charge having been brouglit, saying that the Amphisscans had not 
 given the notice, customary and required, of their intention to bring it : a 
 reply which admits that the charge ml</U be brought (Demosth. de Coron^, 
 
 c. 43, p. 277). 
 
 The Amphiktvons offer a reward for the life of Ephialtes, the betrayer of 
 the Greeks at Thermopylaj; they also jrect columns to the memory of the 
 fellen Greeks in that memorable strait the place of their half-yearly meeting 
 
 (Herod, vii. 213-228) 
 
 -» iEscIiin. adv. Ktenph. 1, c. Plutarch, Solon, c. xi, who refers to Ans- 
 totle h ry rCtv {iv^iovtKCjv fivaypa^j — Pausan. x. 37, 4; Schol. ad Pindar 
 Nem. ix. 2. T(if 'KfKinKTvovtmq dUaq. oaai TroAtm Trpdf Tzo^eig eioiv (Strabo 
 ix. p. 420). These Amphiktyonic arbitrations, however are of raie occur 
 lence in history, and very common y abased. 
 
 • Herodot ii. 180 v. 62. 
 
 ject^ as well of dispute as of express stipulation between Athenj 
 and Sparta: moreover, among the twelve consutuent members 
 of the council, we find three — XhQ Perrha?bians, the Magnetes, 
 and the Achaeans of Phthia — who were not even independent, 
 but subject to the Thessalians, so that its meetings, when they 
 were not matters of mere form, probably expressed only the feel- 
 ing's of the three or four leading members. When one or more 
 of these great powers had a party purpose to accomplish against 
 
 others, when Philip of Macedon wished to extrude one of the 
 
 members in order to procure admission for himself, — it became 
 convenient to turn this ancient form into a serious reality, and we 
 shall see the Athenian ^schines providing a pretext for Philii? 
 to meddle in favor of the minor Boeotian cities against Thebes, 
 by alleging that these cities were under the i)rotoction of the ohi 
 
 Amphiktyonic oath.- 
 
 It is thus that we have to consider the council as an element 
 in Grecian affairs, — an ancient institution, one amongst many 
 instances of the primitive habit of religious fraternization, but 
 wider and more comprehensive than the rest, — at first, purely 
 religious, then religious and political at once; lastly, more the 
 latter than the former, — highly valuable in the infancy, but 
 unsuited to the maturity of Greece, and called into real workiiig 
 only on rare occasions, when its etficiency happened to fall in 
 with the views of Athens, Thebes, or the king of Macedon. In 
 6uch special moments it shines with a transient light which af- 
 fords a partial pretence for the imposing title bestowed on it by 
 Cioero, — " commune Graciae concilium :"3 but we should com- 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 112, iv. 118, v. 18. The Phokians in the Sacred War (b.c 
 354) pretended that they had an ancient and presciii.tive right to the admin 
 istration of the Delphian temple, under accountability to the general body 
 of Greeks for the proper employment of its possessions, — thus setting aside 
 the Amphiktyons altogether (Diodor. xvi. 27). 
 
 « ^schin. de Fals. Legat. p. 280, c. 36. The party intrigues which moved 
 the council in regard to the Sacred War against the Phokians (b. c. 3.')5) 
 may be seen in Didorus, xvi. 23-28, scq. 
 
 3 Cicero, De Invention, ii. 23. The representation of Dionysins of Hall 
 kamassus (Ant. Rom. iv. 2.5) overshoots the reality still more. 
 
 About the common festivals an<l Amphiktyones of the Hellenic worid 
 generally, see Wachsmuth, Hellenische Alterthumskunde, vol. i. sect 22, 
 24, 25 ; also, C F. Hermann. Lehrbuch der Griech. StaatsalterthOrae^ sect 
 1U13. 
 
 
 ^ta 
 
252 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DELPHIAN ORACLE. 
 
 253 
 
 pletely misinterpret Grecian history if we regarded it as a (ed- 
 3ral council, habitually directing or habitually obeyed. Had there 
 existed any such " commune concilium" of tolerable wisdom and 
 patriotism, and had the tendencies of the Hellenic mind been 
 capable of adapting themselves to it, the whole course of later 
 Grecian history would probably have been altered ; the Mace- 
 donian kings would have remained only as respectable neighbori, 
 borrowing civilization from Greece, and ex{)fiH]ing their military 
 energies ujion Thracians and lUyrians ; while united Hellas might 
 even have maintained her own territory against the conquering 
 legions of Rome. 
 
 The twelve constituent Amphiktyonic races remained unchanged 
 until the Sacred War against the Phokians (b. c. 355), after 
 which, though the number twelve was continued, the Phokians 
 were disfranchised, and their votes tmnsferred to Philip of Mace- 
 don. It has been already mentioned that these twelve did not 
 exhaust the whole of Helhis. Arcadians, Elcans, Pisans, Minyie, 
 Dryopes, jEtolians, all genuine Hellens, are not comprehended 
 in it ; but all of them had a right to make use of the temple of 
 Delphi, and to contend in the Pythian and Olympic games. The 
 Pythian games, celebnited near Delphi, were under the superin- 
 tendence of the Amphiktyons,' or of some acting magistrate chosen 
 by and presumed to represent them : like the Olympic games, 
 they came round every four years (the interval between one 
 celebration and another being four complete years, which the 
 Greeks called a Pentaeteris) : the Isthmian and Neraean games 
 recurred every two years. In its first humble form, of a compe- 
 tition among bards to sing a hymn in praise of Apollo, this festi- 
 val was doubtless of immemorial anti^iuity;- but the first exten* 
 
 ' Plutarch, Sympos. rii. 5, 1. 
 
 * In this early phase of the Pythian festival, it is said to have been cele- 
 brated every eight years, marking what we should call an Octaeteris, and 
 what the early Greeks called an Ennaeteris (Censorinus, De Die Natali, c. 
 18). This period is one of considtrable importance in reference to the prin- 
 ciple of the Grecian calendar, for ninety-nine lunar months coincide very 
 nearly with eight solar years. The discovery of this coincidence is ascribed 
 by Censorinus to Kleostratus of Tenedos, whose age is not directly known : 
 he must be anterior to Meton, who discovered the cycle of nineteen solai 
 yea.-», but (I imagine) not much anterior. In spite of the authority of Idelei 
 it seems to me not proved, nor can I believe, that this octennial period with it# 
 
 sion of it into Pan-Hellenic notoriety (as I have already remark- 
 ed), the first multiplication of the subjects of competition, and 
 the first introduction of a continuous record of the conquerors, 
 date only from the time when it came under the presidency of 
 the Amphiktyons, at the close of the Sacred War against Kirrha. 
 What is called the first Pythian contest coincides with the third 
 year of the 48th Olympiad, or 585 b. c. From that period for- 
 ward, the games become crowded and celebrated : but the date 
 just named, nearly two centuries after the first Olympiad, is a 
 proof that the habit of periodical frequentation of festivals, by 
 numbers and from distant parts, grew up but slowly in the Gre- 
 cian world. 
 
 The foundation of the temple of Delphi itself reaches far be- 
 '. ond all historical knowledge, forming one of the aboriginal in- 
 stitutions of Hellas. It is a sanctified and wealthy place, even in 
 ihe Iliad: the legislation of Lykurgus at Sparta is introduced 
 under its auspices, and the earliest Grecian colonies, those of 
 Sicily and Italy in the eighth century B. C, are established in 
 consonance with its mandate. Delphi and Dodona appear, ir. 
 the most ancient circumstances of Greece, as universally vene- 
 rated oracles and sanctuaries : and Delphi not only receives honoi-s 
 and donations, but also answers questions, from Lydians, l*hry- 
 gians, Etruscans, Romans, etc : it is not exclusively Hellenic- 
 One of the valuable services which a Greek looked for from this 
 and other great religious establishments was, that it should resolve 
 his doubts in cases of perplexity, — that it should advise him 
 whether to begin a new, or to persist in an old project, — that it 
 should foretell what would be his fate under given circumstances, 
 and inform him, if sufifering under distress, on what conditions 
 
 solar and lunar coincidence was known to the Gricks in the earliest times of 
 their mythical antiquity, or before the year 600 b. c. See Ideler, Handl)U( h 
 der Chronologic, vol. i. p. 366 ; vol. ii. p. 607. The practice of the Elcians to 
 celebrate the Olympic games alternately after forty-nine and fifty lunar months, 
 though attested for a later time by the Scholiast on Pindar, is not jiroved to 
 he old. The fact that there were ancient octennial recurring festivals, docs 
 not establish a knowledge of the properties of the octaeteric or ennacteric 
 period : nor does it seem to me that the details of the Boeotian Saipv7j<popia^ 
 described in Proclus ap. Photium, sect. 239, are very ancient See, on the 
 old mythical Octaeteris, O. Miiller, Orchomcnos 218, seqq.j&nd Krause. Dif 
 Pythiea, Nemeen, und Isthmien, sect. 4, p. 22. 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 >' 
 
f94 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECL 
 
 ANALOGIES PERVADING THE HELLENIC RACE. 
 
 255 
 
 the gods would grant him relief. The three priestesjes of Do* 
 dona with their venerable oak, and the priestess of Delphi sit- 
 ting on her tripod under the influence of a certain gas or vapor 
 exhaling from the rock, were alike competent to determine these 
 difficult points : and we shall have constant occasion to notice in 
 this history, with what complete faith both the question was put 
 and the answer treasured up, — what serious influence it often 
 exercised both upon public and private proceeding. i The hex- 
 ameter verses, in which the Pythian priestess delivered herself, 
 were, indeed, often so equivocal or unintelligible, that the most 
 serious believer, with all anxiety to interpret and obey them, 
 often found himself ruined by the result ; yet the general faith 
 in the oracle was noway shaken by such painful experience. For 
 as the unfortunate issue always admitted of being explained upon 
 two hypotheses, — either that the god had spoken falsely, or that 
 his meaning had not been correctly understood, — no man of 
 genuine piety ever hesitated to adopt the latter. There were 
 many other oracles throughout Greece besides Delphi and Do- 
 dona: Apollo was open to the inquiries of the faithful atPtoon 
 in Boeotia, at Abas in Phokis, at Branchidie near Miletus, at 
 Patara in Lykia, and other places : in like manner, Zeus gave 
 answers at Olympia, Poseidon at Tienarus, Ampliiaraus at Thebes, 
 Amphilochus at Mallas, etc. And this habit of consulting the 
 
 ' See the argument of Ciocro in favor of divination, in the first book of 
 his valuable treatise De Divinatione. Chrvsippus, and the ablest of the stoic 
 philosophers, both set forth a plausible theory demonstrating, a prian\ the 
 probability of prophetic warnings deduced from the existence and attributes 
 of the gods : if you deny altogether the occurrence of such warnings, so 
 essential to the welfare of man, you mu.^t deny either the existence, or the 
 Ibreknowledge, or the beneficence, of the gods (c. 38). Then the veracity of 
 the Delphian oracle had been demonstrated in innumerable instances, of 
 which Chrysippus had made a large collection : and upon what other sup- 
 position could the immense credit of the oracle be explained (c. 19) ? " Col- 
 l^it iimnmerabilia oracula Chrysippus, et nullum sine locuplete teste et 
 anctore : quae quia nota tibi sunt, relinquo. Defendo nnum hoc : nnnquam 
 illud oraculom Delphis tarn celebre clarumque fuisset, neque tantis donis 
 refertam omDium populorum et regum, nisi omnis aetas oraculorum illomm 
 
 reritatem esset experta Maneat id. quod negari non potest, nisi omnem 
 
 historiam penrerterimus, mttltis saecu/is verax fuisse id oracnlun ." Cicero 
 ■dmits that it had become less trustworthy in his time, and tries lo explaifl 
 Ihis decline of prophetic Dower compare Flutarch, De Defeat. OnMol. 
 
 eracle formed part of the still more general tendency of the 
 Greek mind to undertake no enterprise without having first as- 
 certained how the gods viewed it, and what measures they were 
 likely to take. Sacrifices were oflfiered, and the interior of the 
 victim carefully examined, with the same intent : omens, prodi- 
 gies, unlooked-for coincidences, casual expressions, etc., were all 
 construed as significant of the divine will. To sacrifice with a 
 view to this or that undertaking, or to consult the oracle with the 
 same view, are familiar expressions^ embodied in the language. 
 Nor could any man set about a scheme with comfort, until he 
 had satisfied himself in some manner or other that the gods were 
 favorable to it. 
 
 The disposition here adverted to is one of those mental analo- 
 o^ies pervading the whole Hellenic nation, which Herodotus indi- 
 cates. And the common habit among all Greeks, of respectfully 
 listening to the oracle of Delphi, will be found on many occasions 
 useful in maintaining unanimity among men not accustomed to 
 obey the same political superior. In the numerous colonies espe- 
 cially, founded by mixed multitudes from distant parts of Greece, 
 the minds of the emigrants were greatly determined towards cor- 
 dial cooperation by their knowledge that the expedition had been 
 directed, the cekist indicated, and the spot either chosen or ap- 
 proved, by Apollo of Delphi. Such in most cases was the fact : 
 that god, according to the conception of the Greeks, " takes de- 
 lif^ht always in the foundation of new cities, and himself in person 
 lays the fii*st stone." ^ 
 
 These are the elements of union — over and above the com- 
 mon territory, described in the last chapter — with which the 
 historical Hellens take their start : community of blood, language, 
 religious point of view, legends, sacrifices, festivals,3 and also 
 (with certain allowances) of manners and character. The anal 
 
 * Xenophon, Anabas. vii. 8, 20 : 'O 6e 'Aaiddrijc uKovaac, 5n ituIlv k n' 
 avTov Tc^vfiivog elij 21evo0cjv, i^avH^erai, etc. Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 2| 
 22: fiT) ;t;p77(Trj7pm^e<n?a< rovg 'EXXrjvac i(f 'EAA^vuv TroA?^^, — compare 
 Iliad, vii. 450. 
 
 " Callimach. Hvmn. Apoil. 55, with Spanheim's note ; Cicero, De Divinat 
 
 1.1. 
 
 » See this point strikingly illustrated by Plato, Repub. v. pp. -^If^-All 
 
 (c. 16), and Isocrates, Panegyr. p. 102 
 
 l! 
 
 'Ulii 
 
S6e 
 
 HISrORY OF GREECE. 
 
 POLITICAL DISUNION. 
 
 Of 
 
 ogy of manners and charartrr between the rude inhabitants of 
 the Arcadian Kyna^tha' and the polite At lens, was indeed ac- 
 companied with wide ditferences: yet if we compare the two 
 with foreign contemporaries, we shall Jiiid certain nc«;ative char- 
 ftcteristics, of much importance, common to both. In no city 
 of historical Greece di<l there prevail either liuman sacrifictfi,^ 
 —-or deliberate mutilation, such as cutting off the nose, ears, 
 hands, feet, etc«, — or cjistration, — or selling of children into 
 slavery, — or polygamy, — or the feeling of nnliniit<'d obedience 
 towards one man : all customs whirh niiglit be pointed out as 
 existing among the contemporary Cj'rtha<:inian.'«, Egyptians, Per- 
 sians, Thracians,'^ etc. Tlie habit of running, wrestling, boxing, 
 etc., in gymna«»tic contest'^, with lli«* i)ody perfectly naked, — 
 was common to all Greeks, havii»g Ixun tirst adopted as a Lace- 
 daemonian fiu^hicm in the fourteenth Olympiad : Thucydides and 
 Herodotus remark, that it was not only not |)ra('tised, l>ut even 
 regarded as un!5e<»rnly, among non-Hellens.* Of such cu-toms 
 indeed, at once common to all the Greeks, and peculiar to them 
 
 * Resperting the Arcadian Kyna'tlm, «fo tho romarkahle ohsorvatitnisi of 
 Polybius iv. 17-23. 
 
 * Soe al)ovo, vol. i. ch. vi. \\. 120 of this History. 
 
 ' For examples and cvideTU-os of these practices, sec Herodot, ii. 162 ; tlio 
 rffnputation of the nose and ears of Patarbemis, by Apries, king of Ejj:yi»t 
 (Xenophon, Anjih. i. 9-13). There were a larprc numl)er of men deprived 
 of hands, feet, or i.'-yesijrht, in the satrapy of Cynis the younger, wlio hiid 
 inflicted all these 8«5vere punishmeuts for the prevention of crime, — he did 
 not (says Xenophon) sutler criminals to ^cot!' at him {ela KurayeA^v). The 
 fKTofif) was carried on at Sardis (Heroilot. iii. 49), — 500 Trainee tKTofiini 
 formed a portion of the yearly tribute paid by the Babylonians to the court 
 of Sasa (Herod, iii. 92). Selling of children tor exportation by the Thra- 
 ciani> (Herod, t. 6) ; there is «»ome trace of this at Athens, prior to the Solo- 
 nian legislation (l*luUirch, Solon, 23), arising probably out of the cruel 
 state of the law l>etwcen debtor and creditor. For the sacrifice of children 
 to Kronns by the <r^arthaginians, in troubled times, (according to the lan- 
 guage of Knnius, '' Poeni soliti suos sacrificare puellos,") Didor. xx. 14; xiii. 
 86. Porphyr. de Abstinent, ii. 56 : the practice is abundantly illustrated in 
 Mover's Die Religion der Phonizier, pp. 298-304. 
 
 Aman blames Alexander for cutting off the nose and ears of the Satrap 
 3essus, saying that it was an act altogether barbaric, {{. c. non-Hellenic,) 
 (Exf\ Al ir. 7, 6) About the aeBaofih^ ^eoirxniif trepl rbv 3a<riXia in 
 Asia, see Strabo, xi. p. 526. 
 
 * TliiicTd. i 6 ; Herodot i. 10. 
 
 fls distinguished from others, we cannot specify a great number | 
 but we may see enough U) convince ourselves that there did really 
 exist, in spite of local differences, a general Hellenic sentiment 
 and chariicter, which counted among the cementing causes of an 
 union apparently so little a.ssured. 
 
 For we must recollect that, in respect to political >overeignt)r, 
 tsomjAete disunion was among their most cherished principles. 
 Tlie only source of supreme authority to which a Greek felt 
 respect and attachment, way to be sought within the walls of his 
 own city. Authority seated in another city might operate upoc 
 his fears, — might procure for him increased security and advan- 
 tages, as we shall have occasion hereafter to show with regard to 
 Athens and her subject allies, — might even be mildly exercised, 
 tuiil inspire no special aversion : but, still, the principle of it was 
 repugnant to the rooted sentiment of his mind, and he is always 
 found gravitating towards the distinct sovereignty of his own 
 boule, or ekklesia. This is a disposition common both to democ- 
 racies and oligarchies, and operative even among the different 
 towns belonging to the same subdivision of the Hellenic name, — 
 Achieans, I*hokians, Boeotians, etc. The twelve Achaean cities 
 are harmonious allies, with a periodical festival which partakes 
 of the character of a congress, — but equal and independent 
 political communities: the Bceotiein towns, under the presidency 
 of Thebes, their reputed metropolis, recognize certain common 
 obligations, and obey, on various j>articular matters, chosen offi- 
 cers named b<jeotarchs, — but we shall see, in this, as in other 
 ca>es, the centrifugal tendencies constantly manifesting them- 
 selves, and resisted chiefly by the interests and f>ower of Thebes 
 Tliat great, successful, and fortunate revolution, which merged 
 the several independent f)olitical communities of Attica into the 
 single unity of Athens, took place before the time of authentic 
 history : it is connected with the name of the hero Theseus, 
 but we know not how it was effected, while its comparatively 
 large size and extent, render it a signal exception to Hellenic 
 tendencies generally. 
 
 Political disunion — sovereign authority within the city wafli 
 — thus formed a settled maxim in the Greek mind. The rela- 
 tion between one dty and another was an international relation, 
 
 VOL. a. 17^ 
 
 
258 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 not a relation subsisting between members of a common politicai 
 aggregate. Within a few miles from his own city- walls, an 
 Athenian found himself in the territory of another city, wlierein 
 he was nothing more than an alien, — where he could not acquire 
 property in house or land, nor contract a legal marriage with any 
 native woman, nor sue for legal protection against injury, except 
 through the mediation of some friendly citizen. The right of 
 intermarriage, and of acquiring landed property, was occasionally 
 granted by a city to some individual non-freeman, as matter of 
 special favor, and sometimes (though very rarely) reciprocated 
 generally between two separate cities.^ But the obligations 
 between one city and another, or between the citizen of the one 
 and the citizen of the other, are all matters of sjjewal covenant, 
 agreed to by the sovereign authority in eadi. Such coexistence 
 of entire political severance with so much fellowship in other 
 ways, is perplexing in modern ideas, and modern language is not 
 well furnished with expressions to describe Greek political 
 phenomena. Wt may say that iui Athenian citizen was an alien 
 when he arrived as a visitor in Corinth, but we can liardly say 
 that he was a fnrthjHer ; and though the rehitions between Cor- 
 inth and Atliens were in j)rin('iple infcrndtional, yet that word 
 would be obviou>Iy unsuitabh' to the numerous petty autonomies 
 of Hellas, beside.-^ that we reijuiie it for describing the relations 
 of Hellenes generally with Persians or Carthaginians. We are 
 compelled to use a word such as ititerpolitical, to describe the 
 transactions between separate Greek cities, so numerous in the 
 course of this history. 
 
 As, on the one hand, a Greek will not consent to look for sove- 
 reign authority beyond the limits of his own city, so, on the other 
 hand, he must have a city to look to: scattered villages will not 
 eatisfy in his mind the exigencies of social order, security, and 
 dignity. Though the coalescence of smaller towns into a larger 
 is repugnant to his feelings, that of villages into a town appears 
 to him a manifest advance in the scale of civilization. Such, at 
 least, is the governing sentiment of Greece throughout the his* 
 torical period ; for tliere was always a certain portion of the 
 
 ' Aristot. Poh't iii fi 12. It is nnneressary to refer to the mapy inscrip- 
 tions which confer jpoii some individual non-freomnn the right of ixiyafiia 
 
 9Dd tyKTTj9.r 
 
 VILLAGE COMMUNITIES. 
 
 259 
 
 Hellenic aggregate — the rudest and least advanced among them 
 — who dwelt in unfortified villages, and u{X)n whom the citizen 
 of Athens, Corinth, or Thebes, looked down as inferiors. Such 
 village residence was the character of the Epirots^ universally, 
 and prevailed throughout Hellas itself, in those very early and 
 even ante-Homeric times upon which Thucydides looked back 
 as deplorably barbarous ; — times of universal poverty and inse- 
 curity, — absence of pacific intercourse, — petty warfare and 
 plunder, compelling every man to pass his life armed, — endless 
 migration without any local attachments. Many of the consid- 
 erable cities of Greece are mentioned as aggregations of pre- 
 existing villages, some of them in times comparatively recent, 
 Tegea and Mantineia in Arcadia, represent, in this way, the 
 confluence of eight villages, and five villages respectively; Dyme 
 in Achaia was brought together out of eight villages, and Elis in 
 the same manner, at a period even later than the Persian inva- 
 sion ;■- the like seems to have happened with Megara and Tan- 
 agra. A large proportion of the Arcadians continued their 
 village life down to the time of the battle of Leuktra, and it 
 suited the purposes of Sparta to keep them thus disunited ; a 
 policy which we shall sec hereafter illustrated by the dismember- 
 ment of Mantineia (into its primitive component villages), which 
 A"^esilaus carried into effect, but wliich was reversed as soon as 
 the power of Si)arta was no longer paramount, — as well as by 
 the foundation of Megalopolis out of a large number of petty 
 Arcadian towns and villages, one of the capital measures ot 
 Epameinondas.3 As tliis measure was an elevation of Arcadian 
 
 ' Skylax, Peripl. c. 28-33 ; Thucyd. ii. 80. See Die ChryBostom, Or. 
 xlvii. p. 225, vol. ii. ed. Reisk, — huXaov ifpovvro SioiKiei(r&at Kara Kufiac, Toli 
 (Jafj,iaf)oi^ ufioLov^, ff axvfid TToXewf Kal bvojia Ix^^-^' 
 
 « Strabo, viii. pp. 337, 342, 386 ; Pausan. viii. 45, 1 \ Plutarch, Qnml 
 Gra;c. c. 17-^7. 
 
 ' Pausan. viii. 27, 2-5 ; Diod. xv. 72: compare Arist. Polit ii. 1, 5. 
 
 The description of the dioiKtaic of Mantineia is in Xenophon, Hellen. r. 
 2, 6-8: it is a flagrant example of his philo-Laconian bias. We see by the 
 case of the Phokians after the Sacred War, (Diodor. avi 60; Pausan. x. 3, 
 8,) how heavy a punishment this dioUiaig was. Compare, also, the instmctaTe 
 speech of the Akauthian envoy Kleigenes, at Sparta, when he invoked the 
 Lacedaemonian interference for the purpose of crusljing the incipient fedor- 
 AtbOD, or junction of towns into a common political aggregate, which n ;»• 
 
t90 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ANTt-HELLENIC INHABITANTS. 
 
 2a 
 
 imiwrtance, so the rcTerso proceeding — the breaking up of a 
 city into its elementary villages — was not only a senieuce of 
 privation and suifering^ but also a complete extinction of Grecian 
 rank and dignity. 
 
 The Ozolian Lokrians, the ^tolians, and the Akarnanians 
 maintained their sepai*ate village residence down to a still later 
 period, preserving along with it their primitive rudeness and 
 disorderly pugnacityJ Their villages were unfortilied, and 
 defended only by comparative inaccessibility ; in case of need, 
 they fled for safety with their cattle into the woods and mountains. 
 Amidst such inauspicious circumstances, there was no room foi 
 that expansion of the social and political feelings to which prr»- 
 tected intramural residence and increased numbers gave birth; 
 there was no consecrated acrojKjlis or agora, — no ornamented tem- 
 ples and porticos, exhibiting the continued oflerings of successive 
 generations,- — no theatre for music or recitation, no gymnasium 
 for athletic exercises, — none of those fixed arrangements, for 
 transacting public business with regulaiity and decorum, whicli the 
 Greek citizen, with his powerful sentiment of locality, deemed 
 essential to a dignified existence. The village was nothing 
 more than a fraction and a subordinate, appertaining as a limb 
 to the organized body exiled the city. But the city and the state 
 
 growing up round Olynthus (Xen. Hellen. v. 2, 11-2). The wise and 
 •dminihle c(Miduot of Olynthus, and the reluctance of the neighboring cities 
 to merge themsulves in this union, are forcibly set forth ; also, the interest 
 of S[>aria in keeping all the Greek towns disunited. Compare the deserip 
 tion of the treatment of Capua by the Romans {Livy, xxvi. 16). 
 
 ' Thucyd. i. 5; iii. 94. Xenoph. Ilellen. iv. 6, 5. 
 
 ■ Pausanias, x 4, I ; his remarks on the Phokian Tro/.cc; Panopeus indicate 
 what he included in the ideu of a iroXic : elye ovofiuaat nc nuAiv Kai toV' 
 rot/f, Off ye ovk tip^eto, ov ptfAVuotov iartv o6 iticTpoVy ovk uyopuv hxovaiv^ 
 ovx v6up Karepxofitvov eg Kprjvriv • dXkd hf *^S)fiM^ kriXaig Kara rag KaXv^ag 
 ItakLora rag iv rolg opeati', wrav-^a oUova*, hnZ ^dfadfx^. bfiug 6e opct ye 
 TTK X^P<^ ^taiv avTolg elg roi>g ofxopovg, Koi i^ rdv ai?.^oyov awe6povg Kal 
 ovToi irefiirovat rbv ^dklkov. 
 
 The piKpd. noliapara of tlie Pelasgians on the peninsula of Mount Athos 
 (Thucyd. iv. 109) seem to h*ve been something betireen villages and cities. 
 When the Phokians, after the Sacred War, were deprived of their cities and 
 forced into villages by the Amphiktyons, the order wjis Uiai no village shoald 
 contain more than tifty houses, and that no village should be within the dis 
 Canoe of a furlong of any other (Diodor. xvL 60). 
 
 «? e m his mind, and in his language, one and the same. While 
 no organization less than the city can satisfy the exigencies » of 
 an intelligent freeman, the city is itself a perfect and self-sutiicient 
 whole, admitting no incorporation into any higher political unity. 
 It deserves notice that Sparta, even in the days of her greatest 
 power, was not (properly speaking) a city, but a mere aggluti* 
 nation of five adjacent villages, retaining unchanged its old- 
 fashioned trim : for the extreme defensibility of its frontier and the 
 military prowess of its inhabitants, supplied the absence of walls, 
 while the discipline imposed upon the Spartan, exceeded in rigor 
 and minuteness anything known in Greece. And thus Sparta, 
 though less tlian a city in respect to external appearance, was 
 more than a city in respect to perfection of drilling and fixity 
 of political routine. The contrast between the himible appear- 
 ance and the mighty reality, is pointed out by Thucydides."^ The 
 inhabitants of the small territory of Pisa, wherein Olympia is 
 situated, had once enjoyed tlie honorable privilege of adminis- 
 tering the Olympic festival. Having been robbed of it, and 
 subjected by the more powerful Eleians, they took advantage ot 
 various movements and tendencies among the larger Grecian 
 powers to try and regain it ; and on one of these occasions, we 
 find their claim repudiated because they were villagers, and 
 unworthy of so great a distinction.^ There was nothing to be 
 cidled a city in the Pisatid territory. 
 
 In going through historical Greece, we are compelled to 
 accept the Hellenic aggregate with its constituent elements as a 
 primary fact to start from, because the state of our information 
 does not enable us to ascend any higher. By what circumstances, 
 or out of what preexisting elements, this aggregate was brought 
 together and modified, we find no evidence entitled to credit. 
 There are, indeed, various names which are affirmed to designate 
 ante-Hellenic inhabitants of many parts of Greece, — the Pelasgi, 
 
 * Aristot Polit. i. 1 , 8. i] S' kK ttXeiovu puv Koivuvia reXetog tzo'Kig ij 6^ 
 iraaijg ix^vtra rrepag rtjg avrapKeiag. Compare also iii. 6, 14 j and Plato^ 
 Legg. viii. p 848. 
 
 • Thucyd. i. 10. oDre ^woiKKT^eiarjg iroXeug^ ovre lepolf Koi KaTOfficeva^ 
 noXvTeXeffi xpv<^<^f^evTjg, Kard, Kupag 6k t^ ira?Mi<p T^g 'E?L\adot rpowy oUta 
 ^eiarjg^ ^aivoir* av i)Trodee(JTf:p(u 
 
 ' Xenophon, Hellen. iii. 2, 31. 
 
 ., 
 
 \ 
 
262 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFXE. 
 
 PELASGIAN LANGUAGE. 
 
 268 
 
 the Leleges, the Kurttes, the Kaukones, the Aones, the Tem- 
 mikes, the llyantes, the Telcliines, the Buiotian Thracians, the 
 Teleboa;, the Ephyri, the Phlegyie, etc. These are names 
 belonging to legendary, not to hi.^torical Greece, — extracted out 
 of a variety of conflicting legends, by the logognii)hers and subse- 
 quent historians, who strung together out of iIrui a supposed 
 history of the past, at a time w hen tlie conditions of historical 
 evidence were very little understood. That these names desig- 
 nated real nations, may be true, but here our knowledge ends. 
 We have no well-informed witness to tell us their times, theii 
 limits of residence, their acts, or their character; nor do we know 
 how far they are identical with or diverse from the historical 
 Hellens, — whom wc are wariantcd in calling, not, indeed, the tirst 
 inhabitants of the country, but the first known to us upon any tol- 
 erable evidence. If any man is inclined to call the unknown ante- 
 Hellenic period of Greece by the name of Felasgic, it is open to 
 him to do so ; but this is a name carrying with it no assured 
 predicates, noway enlarging our insight into real history, nor 
 enabling us to explain — what would be the real historical 
 problem — how or from whom the Hellens acquired that stock 
 of dispositions, aj)titud(js, arts, etc., with which they begin their 
 career. Whoever has examined the many conflicting systems 
 respecting the Pelasgi, — from the literal belief of Clavier, 
 Lurcher, and Kaoul Kochette, (which appears to me, at least, the 
 must consistent way of proceeding,) to the interpretative and 
 half-incredulous processes applied by abler men, such as Niebuhr, 
 or O. Muller, or Dr. Thirlwall,' — will not be displeased with my 
 
 * Larcher, Chronologie d'Herodote, ch. viii. pp. 215, 274; Raoul Rochette, 
 Histoire des Colonies Cireci, ues, book i. ch. 5 ; Kiebuhr, Romische Geschichte, 
 vol. i. pp. 26-64, 2(i ed. (the section entitled Die Oenotrer und I*elasger); 
 O. Muller, Die Etrusker, vol. i. (Einleitung, ch. ii. pp. 75-100) ; Dr. Thirl- 
 wall, History of Greece, vol. i. ch ii. pp. 36-64. The dissentient opinions of 
 Kruse and Mannert may be found in Kruse, Hellas, vol. i. pp. 398-425; 
 Manncrt, Geographic der Griechen und Romer, part viii. Introduct. p. 4, 
 
 Niebuhr puts together al the mythical and genealogical traces, many of 
 them in the highest degree vague and equivocal, of the existence of Pelasgi 
 in rarioug localities ; and then, summing up their cumulative effect, assert* 
 (''not M an hypothesis, but with full historical conviction," p. 54) ^'that 
 there was a lime when the Pelasgiuns, perhaps the most extended people in 
 
 resolution to decline so insoluble a problem. No attested facti 
 are now present to us — none were present to Herodotus and 
 Thucydides, even in their age — on which to build trustworthy 
 affirmations respecting the ante-Hellenic Pelasgians. And where 
 such is the case, we may without impropriety apply the remark 
 of Herodotus, respecting one of the theories which he had heard 
 for explaining the inundation of the Nile by a supposed con- 
 nection with the circumfluous Ocean, — that "the man who 
 carries up his story into the invisible world, passes out of the 
 range of criticism."^ 
 
 As far as our knowledge extends, tliere were no towns or vil- 
 lages called Pelasgian, in Greece proper, since 776 b. c. But 
 there still existed in two different .'aces, even in the age of 
 Herodotus, people whom he believed to be Pelasgians. One 
 portion of these occupied the towns of Plakia and Sky lake near 
 Kyzikus, on the Propontis ; anothci dwelt in a town called Kres- 
 ton, near the Thermaic gulf.2 There were, moreover, certain 
 i>iher Pelasgian townships which he does not specify, — it seems, 
 indeed, from Thucydides, that there were some little Pelasgian 
 townships on the peninsula of Athos.^ Now, Herodotus acquaints 
 MS with the remarkable fact, that the people of Kreston, those of 
 Plakia and Skylake, and those of the other unnamed Pelasgian 
 townships, all spoke the same language, and each of them re 
 ipectively a different language from their neighbors around them. 
 
 ftil Europe, were spread from the Po and the Amo to the Rhyndakns," (near 
 Kyzikus,) with only an interruption in Thrace. What is perhaps the most 
 remarkable of all, is the contra.<t between his feeling of disgust, despair, and 
 aversion to the subject, when he begins the inquiry ("Me name Petasgi,^^ he 
 says, '• w odious to the historian, who hates the spurious phildoijy out of which the 
 pretences to knowledge on the subject of such extinct people arise" p. 28), and the 
 full confidence and satisfaction with which he concludes it. 
 
 ' Herodot. ii. 23 : 'O Se nepl tov 'Hkeuvov eliraCj Ic a^avec T'dv pv-&ov 
 avevsiKa^^ ovk Ixel IXeyxov 
 
 ' That Kreston is the proper reading in Herodotus, there seems every 
 rOMon to believe — not Kroton, as Dionys. Hal. represents it fAnt Rom. 
 L 26) — in spite of the authority of Niebuhr in favor of the latter. 
 
 * Thucjd. iv. 109. Compare the new Fragmenta of Strabo, lib. vil edited 
 from the Vatican MS. by Kramer, and since by Tafel CTubingen, 1844), 
 ■act 84, p. 26, — (^Kjjaav 6h ttjv X€f)f>6v7jaov tcvttjv tuv Ik Aiffivav TLeXaa* 
 Xflv nvff, ctf Kevre Siyp^pevoL iroXlafiaTa • KAcG»wdf , 'OA^^v^ov, 'An^ci^wotm 
 
 « 
 
 t 
 
 
 M 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
264 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 HISTORICAL PELASGIANS. 
 
 He informs us, moreover, that their hinguage was a barbarous (i . • 
 a noD-Uellenic) language ; and this fact he quotes as an evidenoa 
 to prove that the ancient Peiasgian language was a barbarouii 
 language, or distinct from the Hellenic. He at the same time 
 states expressly? that he has no positive knowledge what language 
 the ancient PeLasgians spoke, — one proof, among others, that no 
 memorials nor means of distinct inlbrmation concernins: that 
 people, could have been open to him. 
 
 This is the one single fact, amidst so many conjectures con- 
 cerning the Pelasgians, which we can be said to know upon the 
 testimony of a competent and contemj)orary witness : the few town- 
 ships — scattereti and inconsiderable, but all that Herodotus in his 
 day knew as Pelasgian — spoke a barbarous language. And uf)on 
 such a point, he must be regarded as an excellent judge. If, then, 
 (infers the historian,) all the early Pelasgians spoke the same 
 language as tho!*e of Kreston and Plakia, they must have changed 
 their language at the time when they passe<l into the Hellenic 
 aggregate, or b<icame Hellens. Now, Herodotus conceives that 
 aggregate to have been gradually enlarged to its great actual size 
 by incorporating with itself not only the Pelasgians, but several 
 other nations once barbarians;' the Hellens havins: been orijii- 
 nally an inconsiderable people. Among those other nations 
 once barbarian, whom Herodotus supj>oses to have become 
 Hellenized, we may probably ninnber the Leleges ; and with 
 respect to them, as well as to the Pelasgians, we have contem- 
 porary testimony proving the existence of barbarian Leleges in 
 later times. Philippus, the Karian historian, attested the pres- 
 ent existence, and believed in the past existence, of Leleges 
 in his country, as serfs or dependent cultivators under the 
 Karians, analogous to the Helots in Laconia, or the Penestae in 
 Thes8aly.2 We may be very sure that there were no Hellens 
 — no men speaking the Hellenic tongue — standing in such a 
 relation to the Karians. Among those many barbaric-speaking 
 
 265 
 
 ' Herod, i. Hil. vpo<TKex(^pVf(OTuv avru koI aXXuv t&veuv (3(xp^aput 
 
 9VXVUV. 
 
 ' Athenie. vl. p. 271. ^iXifriro^ tv T<f> Kepi Kapuv Kal XeXeyuv avyypap. 
 UOTit KaraXi^ac rot^r AaKedaifioviuv ElXuTag Kal Toi)f OerraXuta^c frevecrof. 
 
 nations whom Herodotus believed to have changed their language 
 and passed into Hellens, we may, therefore, fairly consider the 
 Leleges to have been included. Fcr next to the Pelasgians and 
 Pelasgus, the Leleges and Lelex figure most conspicuously in 
 the legendary genealogies ; and both together cover the larger 
 portion of the Hellenic soil. 
 
 Confining myself to historical evidence, and believing that no 
 assured results can be derived from the attempt to transform 
 legend into history, I accept the statement of Herodotus with 
 confidence, as to the barbaric language s{X)ken by the Pelasgians 
 of his day ; and I believe the same with regard to the historical 
 Lelege*, — but without presuming to determine anything in 
 regard to the legendary Pelasgians and Leleges, the supposed 
 ante-Hellenic inhabitants of Greece. And I think this course 
 more consonant to the laws of historical inquiry than that which 
 comes recommended by the high authority of Dr. Thirl wall, who 
 softens and explains away the statement of Herodotus, until it is 
 made to mean only that the Pelasgians of Plakia and Kreston 
 epoke a very bad Greek. The affirmation of Herodotus is dis- 
 tinct, and twice repeated, that the Pelasgians of these towns, 
 and of his own time, spoke a barbaric language ; and that word 
 appears to me to admit of but one interpretation.' To 8up[)ost 
 
 * Herod, i. 57. 'Uvriva Si yXuaaav leaav oi lie'kaayoU ovk fx^ urprKiui 
 elnaL. el 6k ;j;pfuv lari TEKfiaLpofievoic Xeyeiv rolai vvv Iti iovat HeXaaydv^ 
 
 rCiV vnep Tvpajjvuv YLprjaruva iroXiv oUeovrdv Kal rijv WXaKt^v re Koi 
 
 ^KvXuKriv YieXaayCjv oUiaavruv Iv '"EXkrjanovTif) koX baa uXXa IleAacy- 
 
 yiKu iovra rroXlafiaTa rd ovvofia fieriftaXe' ei Tovrotai 6ei Xiyeiv, fjaav ol 
 lUXaayol fiap^apov yXiJaaav ievrtc- ^l Toiwv tjv Kal nuv toiovto rd Ilf Aa<y- 
 yiKbVy TO ^ATTiKdu e-^vo^y kbv HeTiaayLKbv ufia ry /iera/3oXy rg if 'EA/ijyvof 
 Kal rfjv yXuaaav fieTif/a^e • Kai yap dij ovre oi Kpijaruvi^rai ovdufioiaL ru/v 
 vvv a<piac irepioiKeovruv iial dfioyXuaaot, ovre ol U?.aKirfvoi * er^/crt <5^, 6fiih 
 y?Maaoi. dr/Xoixri de, on rdv r/veiKavTo yXuaarj c x^P^ '^''^V P^ fiera 
 ^aivovrec h Tavra rd, ;fwp^a, tovtov ix^*^^^ ^ <pv?.aKy, 
 
 In the next chapter, Herodotus again calls the Pelasgian nation (idp 
 Baoov. 
 
 Respecting this language, heard by Herodotus at Krestdn and Plakiu, Dr. 
 Thirl wall observes (chap. ii. p. 60), " This language Herodotus describes am 
 barbarous, and it is on this fact he grounds his general conclusion as to the 
 uicient Pelasgian tongue. But he has not entered into any details that 
 might hare served to ascertain the manner or degree in which it differed 
 from the Greek. Still, the expressions he uses would have appeared to 
 
 TOL. U. 1^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
266 
 
 HISTORY OF GUEECE. 
 
 that a man, who, like Herodotus, had heard almost everj' variety 
 of Greek, in the course of his long travels, as well as Egyptian, 
 
 imply that it was essentially foreign, had he not Bpoken quite as strongly in 
 another passage, wh«ire it is impossible to ascribe a similar meaning to his 
 words. When he is enumerating the dialects that prevailed among the 
 Ionian Greeks, he observes that the Ionian cities in Lydia agree not at all in 
 their tongue witli thc>se of Karia; and he applies the very same term to these 
 dialects, which he had before used in siMuking of the remains of the Pelaa- 
 gian language. This passage affords a measure by which we may estimate 
 the force of the word kirbarian in the former. Nothing more can be safely 
 inferred from it, than tliat the Felasgian language which Herodotus heard on 
 the Helles])ont, and elsewhere, sounded tu him a strange jargon ; as did the 
 dialect of Ephcsus to a Milesian, and as the Uolognese does to a Florentine. 
 Tbis fact leaves its real nature and relation to the Greek quite uncertain 
 and we are the less justitic-d in building on it, as the history of Pelasgian 
 settlements is extremely obscure, and the traditions which Herodotus reports 
 on that subject have by no means e([ual weight with statements made from 
 his personal observation ' (TliirhvuU, History of Greece, ch. ii. p. 60, 2d edit.) 
 
 In the statement delivered by Herodotus (to which Dr. Thirlwall here 
 refers) about the language ?j.okcn in the Ionic Greek cities, the historian 
 had said (i. 142), — Vltjarsau iSe oh rriv avrr^v ovtol vEvofiUacn, d/lAa TpoTcovc 
 reaaepac napayuyfuv. Miletus, Myus, and Priene,— j?v rr) Kapiy kotoUvv. 
 rai Kara ravru SiaXeyofievai a(fn. Ephesus, Kolophon, etc, — avral at itolti^ 
 rfoi npoTtpov lex^thriai o^oloyiovai Kara yluaaav ovdev, a<pi 6'e dfioipuvi- 
 ovai. The Chians ftud Erythraeans, — /cani ruvrd dtaXeyovrai, lufiioi 6e 
 iK f^uvTuv povvoi. OvToi x^pO-'^'^VP^^ yluacTTjc Ttatjeper yiyvovrai. 
 
 The words yTiuamjg x^P^'^^W ("distinctive mode of speech ") are common 
 to both these passages, but their meaning in the one and in the other is to 
 be measured by reference to the subject-matter of which the author is speak- 
 ing, as well as to the words which accompany them, — especially the word 
 /?('/y>/iapof in the first i)assage. Nor can I think (with Dr. Thirlwall) that the 
 meaning of t^uptiapt*^ is to be determined by reference to the other two 
 words: the reverse is, in my judgment, correct. Bupi^apor is a term definite 
 and unequivocal, but )Aijaarn: xapaKrr/p varies according to the comparison 
 which you happen a;; the moment to be making, and its meaning is here 
 determined by its conjunction with t^up;iapo£. 
 
 When Herodotus was speaking of the twelve Ionic cities in Asia, ha 
 might properly point out the differences of speech among them as so many 
 different x<^P^>^''IP^^ y?^o)oarjg : the limits of difference were fixed by the 
 knowledge which his hearers possessed of the persons about whom he was 
 speaking ; the lonians being all notoriously Hellens. So an author, describ- 
 ing Italy, might say that Bolognese, Romans, Neapolitans, Genoese, etc. had 
 different \apaKTfiptq yXC^aam \ it being understood that the difference was 
 •uch as might subsist among persons ail Italians. 
 
 But there is also a ;ca/ja/£r^p ■^lutaarjq of Greek generally (abstractioo 
 
 ALLEGED ANTE-HELLENIC COLONIES. 
 
 267 
 
 Phoenician, Assyrian, Lydian, and other languages, did not know 
 how to distinguish bad Hellenic from non-Hellenic, is, in mj 
 judgment, inadmissible ; at any rate, the supposition is not to hn 
 adopted without more cogent evidence than any which is here 
 found. 
 
 As I do not presume to determine what were the antecedent 
 internal elements out of which the Hellenic aggregate was formed, 
 'to I confess myself equally uninformed with regiU'd to its external 
 constituents. Kadnius, Danaus, Kekrops, — the eponyms of the 
 Kadmeians, of the Danaans, and of the Attic Kekropia, — present 
 themselves to my vision as creatures of legend, and in that charac- 
 ter I liave already adverted to them. That there may have been 
 very early settlements in continental Greece, from Phoenicia and 
 Egypt, is nowise impossible ; but I see neither positive proof, nor 
 ground for probable inference, that there were any such, though 
 traces of Phuenician settlements in some of the islands may doubt- 
 less be pointed out. And if we examine the character and 
 aptitudes of Greeks, as compared either with Egyptians or Pha3ni- 
 cians, it will appear that there is not only no analogy, but an 
 obvious and fundamental contrast : the Greek may occasionally 
 be found as a borrower from these ultramarine contemporaries, 
 but he cannot be looked npon as their offspring or derivative- 
 Nor can I bring myself to accept an hypothesis which implies 
 (unless we are to regard the supposed foreign emigrants as very 
 
 made of its various dialects and diversities), as contrasted with Persian, 
 Phoenician, or Latin, — and of Italian generally, as contrasted with German 
 or English. It is this comparison which Herodotus is taking, when he 
 describes the language spoken by the people of Kreston and Plakia, and 
 svhich he notes by the word (Sapf^apov as opposed to 'EXXt^vikov : it is with 
 reference to this comparison that x^P°''^'''VP y^^ojouvCi io the fifty-seventh 
 chapter, is to be construed. The word (iapftapog is the usual and recognized 
 antithesis of 'EA/I-t/t, or 'V.AlrjviKhg. 
 
 It is not the least remarkable part of the statement of Herodotus, that 
 the language spoken at Kreston and at Plakia was the same, though the 
 places were so far apart from each other. This identity of itself shows that 
 he meant to speak of a substantive language, not of a " strange jargon," 
 
 I think it, therefore, certain that Herodotus pronounces the Pelasgians of 
 his day to speak a substantive language different from Greek ; but whethei 
 dUilering from it in a greater or less degree {e. g. in the degree of IjStin oi 
 if Phoenician), we have no means of deciding. 
 
 
 1 
 
 \*' 
 
 'Vl 
 
 il 
 
 I 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 few in number, in which case the question loses mobt of its im. 
 portance) that the Hellenic language — the noblest among the 
 many varieties of human speech, and possessing within itself a 
 pervading symmetry and organization — is a mere confluence of 
 two foreign barbaric languages (Phoenician and Egyptian) with 
 two or more internal baibaric languages, — Pelasgian, Lelegian, 
 etc. In the mode of investigation pursued by different historians 
 into this question of early foreign colonies, there is great differ- 
 ence (as in the case of the Pelasgi) between the different authors, 
 — from the acquiescent Euemerism of Raoul Rochette to the 
 relined distillation of Dr. Thirlwall, in the third chapter of his 
 History. It will be found that the amount of i)Ositive knowledge 
 which Dr. Thirlwall guarantees to his readers in that chapter is 
 extremely inconsiderable ; for though he pioeeeds upon the gene- 
 ral theory (different from that which I hold) that historical mat- 
 ter may be distinguished and elicited from the legends, yet when 
 the question arises respecting any definite historical result, his 
 canon of credibility is too just to permit him to overlook the 
 absence of positive evidence, even when all intrin>ic incredibility 
 is removed. That which I note as Terra Incognita, is in his view 
 a land which may be known up to a certain point ; but the map 
 which he draws of it contains so few ascertained places as to 
 differ very little from absolute vacuity. 
 
 The most ancient district called Hellas is affirmed by Aristotle 
 to have been neai- Dodona and the river Achelous, — a description 
 which would have been unintelligible (since the river does not 
 flow near Dodona), if it had not been qualffied by the remark, 
 that the river had often in former times changed its course. He 
 states, moreover, that the deluge of Deukalion took place chiefly 
 in this district, \\ hich was in those early days inhabited by the 
 Selli, and by the people then called Graeci, but now Hellenes.! 
 The Selli (called by Pindar, Helli) are mentioned in the Iliad as 
 the ministers of the Dodonajan Zeus, — " men who slept on tho 
 ground, and never washed their feet;" and He^iod, in one of iho 
 lost poems (the Eoiai), speaks of the fat land and rich pastures 
 of the land called Hellopia, wherein Dodona was s ituated.^ On 
 
 * Aristotel. Meteiirol. i. 14. 
 
 •Homer, Iliad, xvi. 234; Hesiod, Fragm. 149, ed. Marktschetifel ; bo> 
 phoki. Trachin. 1174; Strabo. vii. o. 328. 
 
 AMPHIKTYONIC CONVOCATION. 
 
 269 
 
 what authority Aristotle made his statement, we do not know| 
 but the general feeling of the Greeks was different, — connecting 
 Deukalion, Hellen, and the Hellenes, primarily and specially 
 with the territory called Achaia Phthiotis, between Mount 
 Othrys and QLta. Nor can we either affirm or deny his asser- 
 tion that the people in the neighborhood of Doduna were called 
 Graeci before they were called Hellenes. There is no fiscertained 
 instance of the mention of a people called Grasci, in any author 
 earlier than this Aristotelian treatise ; for the alhisions to Alkman 
 and Sophokles prove nothing to the point.' Nor can we explain 
 how it came to pass that the Hellenes were known to the Romans 
 only under the name of Graeci, or Graii. But the name by which 
 a people is known to foreigners is oflen completely different from 
 its own domestic name, and we are not less at a loss to assign the 
 reason, how the Rasena of Etruria came to be known t« the 
 Romans by the name of Tuscans, or Etruscans. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 MEMBERS OF THE HELLENIC AGGREGATE, SEPARATELY TAKE^. 
 -GREEKS NORTH OF PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 Having in the preceding chapter touched upon the Greeks 
 in their aggregate capacity, I now come to describe sepa- 
 rately the portions of which this aggregate consisted, as they 
 present themselves at the first discernible period of history. 
 
 * Stephan. Byz, v. TpniKor. —TpacKex ie rrapd, r^ ^KTiKfidvi al tuv 'EXA7- 
 r^v fjiijrepe^, Koi Trapa ^o6oKXn kv TloifitaLv. karl Se 37 fieraTrXauTfib^y ^ T^f 
 Tpnl^ tvt^eiac k'aIji^ kariv. 
 
 The word rpaiKec, in Alkman, meaning " the mothers of the HeUeoes, ' 
 may well be only a dialectic variety of ypdcf, analogous to xA^f^ and opvi^, 
 for KXeic, opvir, etc. ( Ahrens, De Dialecto DoricA, sect 11, p. 91 ; asd sect 
 31, p. 242), perhaps declined like ywaiKr^. 
 
 The term used by Sophokles, if we may believe Photius, was not TpmiKbr^ 
 iwt VaiKoc (Photius, p. 480, 15; Dindorf. Fragment Soph. 933: ^mpare 
 45S ' Eustathios (p. 890J seems undecided between the two 
 
 \\ 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 #, 
 
 Vi 
 
 
 ii 
 
970 
 
 HisTomr or oiTErcE. 
 
 SLOW TENDENCY TO COOPKRATION. 
 
 271 
 
 It has already been mentioned that the twehe races or enbdi- 
 visions, membera of what is called the Amphiktyonic convocation, 
 were as follows : — 
 
 North of the ])ass of Thermopylap, — Thessalians, Perrhaebians 
 Alajrnetes, Acha'ans, Melians, jEnianes, Dolopes. 
 
 South of the pass of Thermopylae, — Dorians, lonians, Bao- 
 Jans, Lokrians, Phokians. 
 
 Other Hellenic races, not comprised among the Amphik 
 tyons, were — 
 
 The iEtolian> and Akarnanians, north of the gulf of Corinth. 
 
 The Arcadiars, Eleians, Pisatans, and Triphylians, in the cen- 
 tral and western portion of Peloponnesus : I do not here name 
 the Achaeans, who occupied the southern or Peloponnesian coast 
 of the Corinthian gulf, because they may be presumed to have 
 been originally of the same race as the Phthiot Achajans, and 
 therefore participant in the Amphiktyonic constituency, though 
 their actual connection with it may have been disused. 
 
 The Dryopes, an inconsiderable, but seemingly peculiar sub- 
 division, who occupied some scattered points on the sea-coast, — 
 Ilermione on the Argolic peninsula; Styrus and Karystus in 
 Euboea ; the island of Kythnus, etc. 
 
 Though it may be said, in a general way, tliat our historical 
 discernnicTit of tLe Hellenic aggregate, apart from the illusions of 
 legend, commences with 776 B. c, yet, with regard to the larger 
 number of its subdivisions just enumerated, we can hardly be 
 said to possess any si)ecitic facts anterior to the invasion of 
 Xerxes in 480 b. c. Until the year 5G0 b c, (the epoch of 
 Croesus in Asia Minor, and of Peisistratus at Athens,) the his- 
 lory of the Greeks p'esents hardly anything of a collective 
 character : the movements of each portion of the Hellenic world 
 begin and end 9'>art from the rest. The destruction of Kirrha 
 by the Amphiktyons is the first historical incident which brings 
 into play, in defence of the Delphian temple, a common Hellenic 
 feeling of active obligation. 
 
 But about 560 b. c, two important changes are seen to com6 
 into operation, which alter the character of Grecian history, -^ 
 extricating it out of its former chaos of detail, and centralizing 
 Its isolated phenomena : 1. The subjugation of the Asiatic 
 Gresks by Lydia and by Persia, followed by their struggles foi 
 
 emancipation, — wherein the European Greeks became impli- 
 cated, first as accessories, and afterwards as principals. 2. The 
 combined action of the large mass of Greeks under Sparta, aa 
 their most powerful state and acknowledged chief, succeeded by 
 the rapid and extraordinary growth of Athens, the complete 
 development of Grecian maritime power, and the struggle 
 between Athens and Sparta for the headship. These two causey 
 though distinct in themselves, must, nevertheless, be regarded as 
 working together to a certain degree, — or rather, the second 
 grew out of the first. For it was the Persian invasions of 
 Greece which first gave birth to a wide-spread alarm and antipa- 
 thy among the leading Greeks (we must not call it Pan-Hellenic, 
 since more than half of the Amphiktyonic constituency gave 
 earth and water to Xerxes) against the barbarians of the East, 
 and impressed them with the necessity of joint active operations 
 under a leader. The idea of a leadership or hegemony of col 
 lective Hellas, as a privilege necessarily vested in some one 
 
 state for common security against the barbarians, thus became 
 current, — an idea foreign to the mind of Solon, or any one of 
 
 the same age. Next, came the miraculous development of 
 Athens, and the violent contest between her and Sparta, which 
 should be the leader ; the larger portion of Hellas taking side 
 with one or the other, and the common quarrel against the Per- 
 sian being for the time put out of sight. Athens is put down, 
 Sparta acquires the undisputed hegemony, and agaiii the anti- 
 barbaric feeling manifests itself, though faintly, in the Asiatic 
 expeditions of Agesilaus. But the Spartans, too incompetent 
 either to deserve or maintain this exalted position, are over- 
 thrown by the Thebans, — themselves not less incompetent, with 
 the single exception of Epameinondas. The death of that single 
 man extinguishes the pretensions of Thebes to the hegemony, 
 and Hellas is left, like the deserted Penelopfi in the Odyssey, 
 worried by the competition of several suitors, none of whom is 
 strong enough to stretch the bow on which the prize depends.^ 
 Such a manifestation of force, as well as the trampling down of 
 
 * Xenophon, Hellen. vii. 5, 27 ; Demosthenes, De Coron. c. 7, p. 23^ — 
 itkXd TIC V^ uKpiTog kuI napd tovtoiq koL napd Tolf u/U.o^ 'Ek/iijaiv 1(H( Mi 
 
 
 ''H 
 
 'f 
 
 'i 
 
; 
 
 272 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 COMMON APATHY AGAINST THE PERSIANS. 
 
 273 
 
 the competing suitors, is reserved, not for any legitimate Hellenic 
 arm, bnt for a semi-IIellenizecr Macedonian, *' brought up al 
 Fella," and making p:oed his encroachments gradually from the 
 north of Olympus. The hegemony of Greece thus passes forever 
 i>ut of Grecian hands ; but the conqueror finds his interest in 
 rekindling the old sentiment under the influence of which it had 
 tirst sprung up. He binds to him the discordant Greeks, by the 
 force of tlieir ancient and common antipathy against the Great 
 King, until the desolation and sacrilege once committed by 
 Xerxes at Athens is avenged by annihilation of the Persian 
 empire. And this victorious consummation of Pan-Hellenic 
 antipathy, — the dream of Xenophon * and the Ten Thousand 
 Greeks after the battle of Kunaxa, — the hope of Jason of 
 Plierae, — the exhortation of Isokrates,^ — the project of Philip, 
 aufl the achievement of Alexander, — while it manifc\-ts the 
 irresistible might of Hellenic ideas and organization in the then 
 existing state of the world, is at the same time the closing scene 
 of substantive Grecian life. The citizen-feelings of Greece 
 become afterwards merely secondary forces, subordinate to the 
 preponderance of Grt'ek mercenaries under Macedonian order, 
 and to the rudest of all native Hellens, — the ^Etolian moun- 
 taineers. Some few individuals are indeed found, even in the 
 third century b. c, worthy of the best times of Hellas, and the 
 Achaean confederation of that century is an honorable attempt 
 to contend against irresistible ditliculties : but on the waole, 
 that free, social, and political march, which gives so much 
 interest to the earlier centuries, is irrevocably banished Irora 
 Greece after the genei'ation of Alexander the Great. 
 
 The foregoing brief sketch will show that, taking the period 
 fit>m Croesus and Peisistratus down to the generation of Alex- 
 aoder (560-300 b. c), the phenomeca of Hellas generally, and 
 
 ' Demosthen. de Coron. c. 21, p. 247. 
 
 • Xenophon, Anabas. iii 2, 25-26. 
 
 * Xenophon, Hellen. vi 1, 12 ; Isocrates, Oxat ad Philipp., Orat v p. 107. 
 This difvconrse of Isokrates is composed expressly for the purpose of calling 
 on Philip to put himself at the head of united Greece against the Persians 
 the Oratio iv, called Pane^rica, recommends a combination of all Greeks 
 ftw die same purpose, but under the liegrenion 7 of Athens, putting aside all 
 lotestme differences: see Orat. iv. pp. 4.V68. 
 
 ber relations both foreign and inter-political, admit of being 
 grouped together in masses, with continued dependence on one 
 or a few predominant circumstances. They may be said to 
 constitute a sort of historical epopee, analogous to that which 
 Herodotus has constructed out of the wars between Greeks and 
 barbarians, from the legends of 16 and Europa down to the 
 repulse of Xerxes. But when we are called back to the period 
 between 776 and 560 b. c, the phenomena brought to our know) 
 edge are scanty in number, — exhibiting few common feelings of 
 interests, and no tendency towards any one assignable purpose 
 To impart attraction to this first period, so obscure and unprom- 
 ising, we shall be compelled to consider it in its relation with the 
 second ; partly as a preparation, partly as a contrast. 
 
 Of the extra-Pelo})onnesian Greeks north of Attica, during 
 these two centuries, we know absolutely nothing ; but it will be 
 possible to furnish some information respecting the early condi- 
 tion and struggles of the great Dorian states in Peloponnesus., 
 and respecting the rise of S])arta from the second to the first 
 place in the comparative scale of Grecian powers. Athens 
 becomes first known to us at the legislation of Drako and the 
 attempt of Kylon (620 b. c) to make himself despot ; and we 
 gather some facts concerning the Ionic cities in Euboea and Asia 
 Minor, during the century of their chief prosperity, prior to the 
 reign and conquests of Croesus. In this way, we shall form to 
 ourselves some idea of the growth of Sparta and Athens, — of 
 the short-lived and energetic development of the Ionic Greeks, 
 — and of the slow working of those causes which tended to 
 bring about increased Hellenic intercommunication, — as con- 
 trasted with the enlarged range of ambition, the grand Pan- 
 Hellenic ideas, the systematized party-antipathies, and the 
 intensified action, both abroad and at home, which grew out of 
 the contest with Persia. 
 
 There are also two or three remarkable manifestations which 
 will require special notice during this first period of Grecian 
 history: 1. The great multiplicity of colonies sent forth by 
 individual cities, and the rise and progress of these several 
 colonies ; 2. The numl>er of despots who arose in the various 
 Grecian cities ; 3. The lyric poetry j 4. The rudiments of that 
 
 ▼OL. n. 12» i8oc 
 
 'S 
 
 f ,1 
 
 ,v 
 
 
 \ 
 
 I i\ 
 
 Uf 
 
 i 
 
 k 
 
 M 
 
274 
 
 HISTORr OF GREECE. 
 
 THESSALY 
 
 97b 
 
 which afterwards ripened into moral philosophy, as manifestecl 
 in gnomes, or aphorisms, — or the age of the Seven Wise Men. 
 
 But before I proceed to relate those earliest proceedings (un- 
 Tortunately too few) of the Dorians and lonians during the his- 
 torical period, together with the other matters just alluded to, it 
 will be convenient to go over the names and positions of those 
 other Grecian states respecting whieli we have no information 
 during these first two centuries. Some idea will thus be formed 
 of the less important members of the Hellenic aggregate, pre- 
 vious to the time when they will be called into action. AVc 
 begin by the territory north of the jiass of Thermopylae. 
 
 Of the different races who dwelt between this celebrated |)a«s 
 and the mouth of the river Peneius, by far the moc^t poweHul and 
 important were the Thessalians. Sometimes, in<leed. the whole 
 of this area passes under the name of Thessaly, — since nomi- 
 nally, though not always really, the power of the Thes.-aliaiir; 
 extended over the whole. We know that the Trachinian Hera- 
 kleia, founded by the Lacedaemonians in the early years of the 
 Peloponnesian war, close at the pass of Thermopylae, was plant- 
 ed upon the territory of the Thessalians.i But there were alpo 
 within these limits other races, inferior and dependent on the 
 Thessalians, yet said to be of more ancient date, and certainly 
 not less genuine subdivisions of the Hellenic name. The Perr- 
 haibi-2 occupied the; northern portion of the territory between the 
 lower course of the river Peneius and Mount Olympus. The 
 Mjignetes3 dwelt along the eastern coast, between Mount Ossa 
 and Pelion on one side and the ^:gean on the other, compris- 
 ing thfe south-eastern cape and the eastern coast of the gulf of 
 Pagasae as far as lolkos. The Achaeans occupied the territory 
 calfed Phthiotis, extending from near Mount Pindus on the west 
 to the gulf of Pa^jasae on the east,» — along the mountain chain 
 
 » Thacyd. iii. 93. 01 Qeaaalol kv Avvafxei dvrec tuv rai-rj? ;twf>'"»', ««' ^'^ 
 iKl ry yj UriCero (Herakleia), etc. 
 
 » Hcrodot. vii. 173 ; Strabo, ix. pp. 440-441. Herodotus noti( e<: the pa?=3 
 o^er the chain of Olrmpus or the Cambunian mountains by which Xerxes 
 •Dd his army passed'out of Macedonia into Perrheebia ; see the description 
 of the pass and the neighboring country in Leake, Travels in Northern 
 Qioeoe, ch. xxviii. vol iii- pp. 338-348 ; compare Livy, xlii. 53. 
 
 ' Skrlax, Periplus. c. 66 *, Herodot. vii. 183-188. 
 
 « Skylax, Peripl c. 64 ; Strabo, ix. pp. 433-434. Sophokles included the 
 
 Vol. 2 ^ 
 
 of Othr}'s with its Literal projections northerly into the Thessa^ 
 iian plain, and southerly even to its junction with CEta. Tlw 
 three tribes of the Maliiuis dwelt between Acha?a Phthiotis and 
 Thermopyla?, including both Trachin and Herakleia. Westward 
 of Achiea Phthiotis, the lofty region of Pindus or Tymphrestus, 
 with its declivities both westward and eastward, was occupied 
 by the Dolopes. 
 
 All these five tribes, or subdivisions, — Perrha^bians, Magueies, 
 Achteans of Phthiotis, Malians, and Dolopes, together with cer- 
 tain Epirotic and Macedonian tribes besides, beyond the boun- 
 daries of Pindus and Olympus, — were in a state of irregular 
 dependence upon the Thessalians, who occupied the central plain 
 or basin drained by the Peneius. That river receives the streams 
 from Olympus, from Pindus, and from Othrys, — flowing through 
 a region which was supposed by its inhabitants to have been 
 once a lake, until Poseidon cut open the defile of Tempe, through 
 which the waters found an efilux. In ti*avelling northward from 
 Thermopylae, the commencement of this fertile region — the am- 
 plest space of land continuously productive which Ilelhis presents 
 — is strikingly marked by the steep rock and ancient fortress of 
 Thaumaki ; i from whence the traveller, passing over the moun- 
 tains of Achsea Phthiotis and Othrys, sees before him the plains 
 and low declivities which reach northward across Thessaly to 
 Olympus. A narrow strip of coast — in the interior of the gulf 
 of Pagasa;, betw^een the Magnetes and the Acha?ans, and con- 
 taining the towns of Amphanajum and Pagasaj - — belonged ta 
 
 territory of Trachin in the limits of Phthiotis (Strabo, /. e.). Herodotus 
 considers Phthiotis as terminating a little north of the river Sperchei'is 
 (vii. 198). 
 
 ' See the description of Thaumaki in Livy, xxxii. 4, and in Dr. Hollauti'i 
 Travels, ch. xvil. vol. ii. p. 112, — now Thomoko. 
 
 ^ Sk/ax, Peripl. c. 65. Hesychius (v. UayaaiTTjg 'Atto/.acjv) seems to 
 ••cckon Pagasae as Achaean. 
 
 About the towns in Thessaly, and their various positions, see Manno»^^ 
 Geograph. der Gr. und Riimer, part vii. book iii. ch. 8 ai»d 9. 
 
 There was an ancient religious ceremony, celebrated by the Delphians 
 every ninth year (Ennaeteris) : a procession was sent from Delphi to the 
 pu.ss of Tempe, consisting of well-born youths under an archi-theor, who 
 represented the proceeding ascribed by an old legend to Apollo ; that god 
 *&s believed to have gone thither to receive expiation after the slaughtftr of 
 
 II 
 
 i 
 
 I ^-4 
 
 Hi 
 
 • # 
 
270 
 
 HTSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 this proper territory of Thessaly, but its great expansion was 
 inland : within it were situated the cities of Pherae, Pharsalus, 
 Skotussa, Lari^sa, Krannon, Atrax, Pharkadon, Trikka, Metro- 
 polis, Pelinna, etc. 
 
 The abundance of corn and cattle from the neighboring plains 
 sustained in these cities a numerous population, and above all a 
 proud and disorderly noblesse, whose manners bore much resem- 
 blance to those of the heroic times. They were violent in their 
 behavior, eager in armed feud, but unaccustomed to i>olitical 
 discussion or comj)roraise ; faithless as to obligations, yet at the 
 same time generous in their hospitalities, and much given to the 
 enjoyments of tlie table. * Breeding the finest horses in Greece, 
 they were distinjjuished for their excellence as cavalry ; but their 
 infantry is little noticed, nor do the Thessalian cities seem to 
 have possessed that congregation of free and tolerably equal citi 
 icns, each master of his own arms, out of whom the ranks of 
 
 the serpent Pytho : at least, this was one among several discrepant legends. 
 The chief youth plucked and brought back a branch from the sacred laurel at 
 Tenip^, as a token that he had fulfilled his mission : he returned by '' the 
 •acred road," and broke his fast at a place called AenrviuCj near Larissa. A 
 solemn festival, freiuented by a large concourse of people from the sur- 
 rounding regions, was celebrated on this occasion at Tempe, in honor of 
 Apollo Tempeites ( Att'aovvl Ttfi7relT(f, in the JEoVic dialect of Thessaly : see 
 Inscript. in Boeckh, Corp. Ins. No. 1767). The procession was accompanied 
 by a flute-player. 
 
 See Plutarch, Qiiasst. Gr»c. ch. xi. p. 292: De MusicS, ch. xiv. p. 1136, 
 ilCUan, V. H. iii. 1 : Stephan. Byz. v. Aeirrviux. 
 
 It is important to notice these religious processions as establishing inter- 
 coarse and sympathies between the distant members of Hellas: but the 
 inferences which O. MdUcr (Dorians, b. ii. 1, p. 222) would build upon them, 
 •s to the original seat of the Dorians and the worship of Apollo, are not to 
 be trusted. 
 
 Plato, Krito, c. 15, p. 53. /a^Z yup 6ff ■rvleiavTi ura^ca kui uKoXaaia (com- 
 pare the beginning of tl*e Menon) — a remark the more striking, since ho 
 had just before described the Boeotian Thebes as a well-regulated city, 
 though both Dikajarchus and Polybius represent it in their times as so much 
 tfie contrary. 
 
 See also Demosthen. Olynth. i. c. 9, p. 16, cont Aristokrat. c. 2?, p. 657; 
 8chol. Earip. Phceniss. 1466; Theopomp. Fragment. .%4-178, ed. Didot; 
 Aristophanes, Plut. 521. 
 
 The march of political affairs in Thessaly is understood from Xenopb 
 Hetfea xi. l : compare Anabas. L 1, 10, and Thucyd. iv 78. 
 
 'J 
 
 THESS.\LY. 
 
 277 
 
 hoplites were constituted, — the warlike nobles, such as the Aleu- 
 adse at Larisia, or the Skopadae at Krannon, despising everything 
 but equestrian service for themselves, furnished, from their ex- 
 tensive herds on the plain, horses for the poorer soldiers. These 
 Thessalian cities exhibit the extreme of turbulent oligarchy, oo* 
 casionally trampled down by some one man of great vigor, but 
 little tempered by that sense of political communion and reveiv 
 tnce for established law, which was found among the better 
 cities of Hellas. Both in Athens and Sparta, so different io 
 many respects from each other, this feeling will be found, if not 
 indeed constantly predominant, yet constantly present and ope- 
 rative. Both of them exhibit a contrast with Larissa or Pheraa 
 not unlike that between Rome and Capua, — the former, with 
 her endless civil disputes constitutionally conducted, admitting 
 (he joint action of parties against a common foe ; the latter, with 
 her abundant soil enriching a luxurious oligarchy, and impelled 
 according to the feuds of her great proprietors, the Magii, Blossii, 
 
 md Jubellii.^ 
 
 The Thessalians are, indeed, in their character and capacity 
 IS much Epirotic or Macedonian as Hellenic, forming a sort of 
 'ink between the two. For tlie Macedonians, though trained in 
 iftertimcs upon Grecian principles by the genius of Philip and 
 Alexander, so iis to constitute the celebrated heavy-armed }»ha- 
 lanx, were originally «(even in the Peloi)onnesian war) distin- 
 guished chiefly for the excellence of their cavalry, like the Thes- 
 salians ;'^ while the broad-brimmed hat, or kausia, and Uie short 
 spreading-mantle, or chlamys, were common to both. 
 
 We are told that the Thessalians were originally emigrants 
 from Thesprotia in Epirus, and conquerors of the plain of the 
 Peneius, which (according to Herodotus) was then called iEolis, 
 and which they found occupied by the Pelasgi.3 It may be 
 doubted whether the great Thessalian families, — such as the 
 Aleuada? of Larissa, descendants from Herakles, and placed by 
 
 ' See Cicero, Orat in Pison. c. 11 ; De Leg. Agrar. cont. Rullnw, e 
 
 34-35. 
 « Compare the Thessalian cavalry as described by Polybm."j, iv. 8, witb tm 
 
 Macedonian as described by Thucydides, ii. 100. 
 
 « iierodot. vii. 176 ; Thucyd. i- 12. 
 
 V 
 
 
 ]> 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 'I 
 
 ■■■^-■^-'•■^' "=••- 
 
 SgSz 
 
 aufid 
 
f78 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PERRH.EBIAN& - MAGNETES. 
 
 279 
 
 Pindar on the same level a^ the Lacediemonian king:si — veould 
 have admitted this The.^sprotian origin ; nor d«x?s it coincide with 
 the tenor of tltose legends wliich make the ejwnym, Thessalus, 
 eon of Herakles. Moreover, it is to be remarked that the lan- 
 guage of the Thessalians was Hellenic, a variety of the ^olic 
 dialect;- the same (so far as we can make out) as that of the 
 people whom rhey must have found settled in the country at 
 their first conquest. If then it be true that, at some j>eriod ante- 
 rior to the commencement of authentic history, a l>ody of Thes- 
 protian warriors crossed the passes of Pindus, and established 
 themselves as conquerors in Thessaly, we must suj^pose them to 
 have been more warlike than nuuivroiis, and to have gradually 
 dro}>})ed their jvrimitive language. 
 
 In other respects, tlie condition of the population of Tiiessaly, 
 such as we tind it during the historical j>eriod, favors the sup|>osi- 
 tion of an original mixture of conquerors and conquered: for it 
 pecms that tljcit was among the Thcssalians and their dependents 
 a triple gratlation, sonicw bat anak>gous to tiiat of Laconia. First, 
 a class of rich proi)rietors distributed throughout the principal 
 cities, possessing most of the soil, and constituting separate oli- 
 garchies, l(X)selv banging togetber.3 Next, the subject Acha-ans, 
 Magnetes, Penba-bi, ditlering from the Laconian Peri^ki in 
 this point, that ibey retained their ancient tribe-name and sepa- 
 rate Ampbiktyoiiic franchise. Thirdly, a class of serfs, or depen- 
 dent cultivators, corresj)onding to the Laconian Helots, who, till- 
 ing the lands of the wealthy obgairlis, paid over a proportion of 
 its produce, furnished tlie retainers by which these great fami- 
 lies were surrounded, served as tlieir tbllowers in the cavalry, 
 and were in a condition ut" villanage, — yet with the imiK)rtant 
 reserve, that they could not be sold out of the country,^ that they 
 
 ' Pindar, Pylh. x init. witli the Scholia, and the valuable comment of 
 Boeckh, in referen.-e to tlu- Aleuada> ; Schntiiler ad Aristot. PoHt. v. 5, 9; 
 anil the Essay of lUittmann. Von dom Geschlocht dor Aleuaden, art. xxii. 
 ToL ii. p. 254, cf the collection called '• Mythobgu>." 
 
 * Ahrens, De Dialect. .Eolica, c. 1, 2. 
 
 ' See Aristot. Tolit. ii. 6, 3 ; Thucyd. ii. 99-. iK). 
 
 • The words ascribed by Xenophon (Hclleu. vi. I, 11) to Jason of Phera 
 M well as to Theocritus (xvi. 34), attest the numbers and vigor of the Thes- 
 wlian Pene«t«, and the great wealth of the Aleuadae and Skopad«. Both 
 th«e families acquired celebrity from the verses of Simonides: he was p« 
 
 had a permanent tenure in the soil, and that they maintained among 
 one another the relations of family and village. This last mention- 
 ed order of men, in Thessaly called the Penesta?, is assimilated 
 by all ancient authors to the Helots of Laconia, and in both cases 
 the danger attending such a social arrangement is noticed by 
 Plato iuid Aristotle. For the Ilelots as well Jis the Penestas had 
 their own common language and mutual symj)athies, a separate 
 residence, arms, and courage ; to a certain extent, also, they pos- 
 sessed the means of acquiring property, since we are told that 
 some of the Penestai were richer than their masters. ^ So many 
 means of action, combined with a degraded social i)osition, gave 
 rise to frequent revolt and incessant apprehensions. As a general 
 rule, indeed, the cultivation of the soil by slaves, or dependents, 
 for the benefit of proprietors in the cities, prevailed tliroughout 
 most parts of Greece. The rich men of Thebes, Argos, Athens, 
 or Elis, must have derived their incomes in the same manner; 
 but it seems that there was often, in other places, a larger in 
 termixture of bought foreign slaves, and also that the number, 
 fellow-feeling, and courage of the degraded village population 
 was nowhere so great as in Thessaly and Laconia. Now the 
 
 origin of the Penestie, in Thessaly, is ascribed to the conquest ol 
 
 A. 
 
 tronized and his muse invoked by both of them; see ^lian, V. II. xii. 1 ; 
 Ovid, Ibis, 512; Quintilian, xi. 2, 15. Pindar also boasts of his friendship 
 with Thorax the Alcuad (Pyth. x. 99). 
 
 The Thcssalian urSpaToSKTrat, alluded to in Aristophanes (Plutus, 521), 
 must have sold men out of the country for slaves, — either refractory Penes- 
 Jtae, or Perrhaebian, Magnetic, and Achaan freemen, seized by violence : the 
 Athenian comic poet Mnesimachns, in jesting on the voracity of the Pharsa- 
 Jians, exclaims, ap. Athenae. x. p. 418 — 
 
 upa TTOV 
 
 Pagasae was celebrated as a place of export for slaves (Hermippus ap. 
 Athenie. i. 49). 
 
 Menon of Pharsalus assisted the Athenians against Amphipolis with 200, 
 pr 300 " Peneatae, on horseback, of his own " — ( U.ev£(TTai<: idioig) Demos- 
 then. TTepl Ivvra^. c. 9, p. 173. cont. Aristokrat. c. 51, p. 687. 
 
 ' Archemachus ap. Athena, vi. p. 264; Plato, Legg. vi. p. 777 j Arifitoi 
 Polit. ii. 6, 3 ; vii. 9, 9 ; Dionys. Halic. A. R. ii. 84. 
 
 Both Plato and Aristotle insist on the extreme danger of having nuII»e^ 
 ons slaves, fellow-countrymeu and of one language — {ofiopvXoij ofio^uvo^ 
 
 ) Sf 
 
 \] 
 
 \ , 
 
 t 
 
 -I 1h 
 
S80 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 the teiritory bj the Thesprotians, as that of the Helots in L* 
 conia is traced to the Dorian conquest The victors in both 
 countries are said to have entered into a convention with the 
 vanquished popuhition, whereby the latter became serfs and 
 tillers of the land for the benefit of the former, but were at the 
 same time protected in their holdings constituted subjects of the 
 8tau% and secured against beinj^ sold away as slaves. Even in 
 the lliossalian cities, thotigh inhabited in common by Thessalian 
 prot>rietors and their Penestie, the quarters assigned to each 
 were to a great degree separated: what waa called the Free 
 Agoi-a could not be trodden by any Penest, except when specially 
 ^uInmonedJ 
 
 Who the people were, whom the conquest of Thessaly by the 
 Thesprotians reduced to this jiredial villanage, we find differently 
 stated. According to Theopompus, they were Perrhiebians and 
 Magnetes ; according to others, Pelasgians ; while Archemachus 
 alleged them to have been Boeotians of the territory of Arne;- 
 — some emigrating, to escape the conquerors, others remaining 
 and ai-cepting the condition of serfs. But the conquest, assuming 
 it as a fact, occurred at far too early a day to allow of oui 
 making out either tlie manner in which it came to pass, or the 
 state of things whicii preceded it. The Pelasgians whom 
 Heroilotus saw at Krtston an^ atlirmcd by him to have been the 
 de.H-cndMnts of those who quitted Thessaly to escape'^ tlie invading 
 Thesprotiiuis ; though others held that the Bccotians, driven ou 
 this occasion from their habitations on the gulf of Pagtisie near 
 the Achieans of Phthiotis, precipitated themselves on Orchome- 
 nus and Bojotia, and settled in it, expelling the Miny* and 
 the Pelasgians. 
 
 • Aristot, Polit. vii. 11, 2. 
 
 * Theopompus ami Anhemathus ap. Athense. vi. pp. 264-26o. compare 
 Thueyd. ii. 12; Steph. B\i. v. ApiTi — the converse of this story in Strabo, 
 ix. pp. 401-411, of the Thessalian Ame being settled from Bijeotia. Thai 
 the rillains or Penestae were completely distinct from the circumjacent de- 
 pendcnis. — AchKans, Mag:netes, rerrhaebians, we see by Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 
 5. They had theu- epon\Tiiou8 hero Penestes, whose descent was traced to 
 Thessalns son of Herakles; they were thus connected with the mythic&l 
 fcther of the nation (S«^hol. Aristoph. Vesp. 1271^ 
 
 ' llerodot. i. 5' : romparc vii. 17€. 
 
 ,*S»31Ba£:'. 
 
 DIVISTOXS OP THESSALY. 
 
 281 
 
 Passing over the legends on this subject, and rcnfining our* 
 iclves to historical time, we find an established quailr iple di\i8ion 
 of Thessaly, said to have been introduced in the time of Aleua>, 
 the ancestor (real or mythical) of the powerful Alcuadic, — 
 Thessaliotis, Pelasgiotis, Histiteotis, Phthiotis.' In l*htliioii. 
 were comprehended the Aclurans, whose chief towns w< re Meli- 
 t*ea, Itonus, Thebae, Phthiotides, Alos, Larissa, Kremaste, and 
 Pteleon, on or near the western coast of the gulf of Pagiisre. 
 Histiaiotis, to the north of the Peneius, comprised the Periiue- 
 bians, with numerous towns strong in situation, but of no great 
 size or importance ; they occupied the passes of Olympus'-* and 
 are sometimes considered as extending westward across Pindus. 
 Pelasgiotis included the Magnetes, together with that which \vr.s 
 called the Pelasgic plain, bordering on the western side of PcKoii 
 and Ossa.3 Thessaliotis comprised the central plain of Thessaly 
 and the upper course of the river Peneius. This was the i)oliti(al 
 classification of the Thessalian power, framed to suit a time 
 wher the separate cities were maintained in harmonious action 
 by favorable circumstances, or by some energetic individual 
 ascendency ; for their union was in general interrupted and dis- 
 orderly, and we find certain cities standing aloof while the n st 
 went to war.4 Though a certain political junction, and obliga- 
 tions of some kind towards a common authority, were recognized 
 in theory by all, and a chief, or Tagus,^ was nominated to enforce 
 
 » Hellanikus, Frafrm. 28, ed. Didot ; Harpocration, v. Terpapxia : the qii ul- 
 ruplc division was older than Hekataius (Steph. Byz. v. Kpavvuv). 
 
 Ilckatseus connected the Perrhasbians with the genealogy of ^olus throti<;h 
 Tyro, the daughter of Salmonens: they passed as MoXel^ (Hekatajus, Fra^ 
 .'134, ed. Didot; Stephan. Byz. v. 4>aAarva and Tovvoi). 
 
 The territory of the city of Histiaa (in the north part of the island of 
 Enbaa) was also called Histiaiotis. The double occurrence of this name 
 (no uncommon thing in ancient Greece) seems to have given rise to the 
 ■ta-^ment, that the Perrhabi had subdued the northern parts of Eubaa, and 
 carried over the inhabitants of the Euboean Histiaea captive into the north 
 •irest of Thessaly (Strabo, ix. p. 437, x. p. 446). 
 
 • Pliny, H. N. iv. 1 ; Strabo, ix. p. 440. 
 
 * Strabo, ix. p. 443. 
 
 * Diodor xviii. 11 ; Tbucyd. ii. 22. 
 
 • The Inscription No 1770 in Boeckh's Corpus Inscript. contains a lettai 
 of the Roman consul, Titus Quinctius Flamininus, add'essed to the city d 
 
 ' i' 
 
 if 
 
 ,1! 
 
 "i i 
 
 i^Miip 
 
POWEB OF THE THESSALIANS. 
 
 28d 
 
 282 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 obedience, — yet it frequently happened that the disputes of th« 
 cities aosong themselves prevented the choice of a Tagus, ol 
 drove him out of the country ; and left the alliance little more 
 than nominal. Larissa, Pharsalus,' and Phei*a;, — each with ita 
 cluster of dependent towns as adjuncts, — seem to have been 
 nearly on a par in strength, and each torn by intestine faction, 
 60 that not ordy was the supremacy over common dependents 
 relaxed, but even the means of repelling invaders greatly en- 
 feebled. The dependence of the Perrha*bians, Magnetes, 
 Achaeans, and Malians, might, under these circumstances, bo 
 often loose and easy. But the condition of the Penestaj — who 
 occupied the villages belonging to these great cities, in the cen- 
 tral plain of Pelasgiotis and TliessaliOtis, and from whom the 
 A-leuada; and Skopadie derived their exuberance of landed prod- 
 uce — was noway mitigated, if it was not even aggravated, by 
 such constant factions. ISor were there wanting cases in whicli 
 the discontent of tliis subject-class was employed by members of 
 the native oligarchy,- or even by foreign states, ibr the purpose 
 of bringing about political revolutions. 
 
 " When Tliessaly is under her Tagus, all the neighboring people 
 pay tribute to her ; she can send into the field six thousand cav- 
 alry and ten thousand hoplites, or heavy-armed infantry,"^ ob- 
 served Jason, despot of Phcra?, to Polydamas of Pharsalus, in 
 endeavoring to prevail on the latter to second his pretensions to 
 that dignity. The impost due from the tributaries, seemingly 
 considerable, was I hen realized with arrears, and the duties upon 
 
 Kyretiae (north of At rax in Perrhaebia). The letter is addressed, Kvpeniui 
 Toic Tayoif itai rr) no'/.eL, — the title of Ta^i seems thus to have been given 
 to the magistrates of separate Thessalian cities. The Inscriptions of Than- 
 maki (No. 1773-1774) have the title dpxf^vTe^, not rayoL The title ra}(jc 
 was peculiar to Thcssaly (Pollux, i. 128). 
 
 * Xenophon, Hellcn. vi. 1, 9; Diodor. xiv. 82; Thucyd. i. 3. Herod, vii. 
 6, calls the Aleuadae OeooaXiric fiaai?J/ec. 
 
 * Xenophon, Memorab. i. 2, 24 ; Hellenic, ii. 3, 37. The loss of the comedy 
 called IldAetf of Eupolis (see Meineke, Fragm. Com icon Graec p. 513) prob* 
 ably prevents us from understanding the sarcasm of Aristophanes (Veep. 
 1263) about the naparrpeaiSeia of Amynias among the Penestse of Pharsalus,' 
 bot the incident there alluded to can have nothing to do with the proceei 
 iogs ofKritias, toach(?d upon by Xenophon 
 
 » Xenophon. Hellen. vi. 1, •-la 
 
 imports at the harbors of the Pagasajan gulf, imposed for the 
 benefit of the confederacy, were then enforced with strictness ; 
 but the observation shows that, while unanimous Thessaly was 
 very powerful, her periods of unanimity were only occasional.* 
 Among the nations which thus paid tribute to the fulness of 
 Thessalian power, we may number not merely the Perrhaebi, 
 Magnetes, and Aclueans of Phthiotis, but also the Malians and 
 Dolopes, and various tribes of Epirots extending to the west- 
 ward of Pindus.2 We may remark that they were all (except 
 the Malians) javelin-men, or light-armed troops, not serving in 
 rank with the full panoply; a fact which, in Greece, counts as 
 pre'^umptive evidence of a lower civilization : the Magnetes, too, 
 had a peculiar close-fitting mode of dress, probably suited to move- 
 ments in a mountainous country.^ There was even a tmie whep 
 the Thessalian power threatened to extend southward of Ther- 
 mopylaN subjugating the Phokians, Dorians, and Lokrians. So 
 much were the Phokians alarmed at this danger, that they had 
 built a wall across the pass of Thermopylae, for the purpose of 
 more easily defending it against Thessalian invaders, who are 
 reported to have penetrated more than once nito the 1 hokian 
 valleys, and to have sustained some severe defeats.4 At what 
 precise time these events happened, W3 find no information ; but 
 it must have been considerably earlier than the invasion of 
 Xerxes since the defensive wall which had been built at Tlier- 
 mopyhe, by the Phokians, was found by Leonidas in a state of 
 ruin. But the Phokians, though they no longer felt the neces- 
 Bity of keeping up this wall, ha.l not ceased to fear and hate the 
 Thessalians,-an antipathy which will be found to mamfest 
 itself palpably in connection with the Persian invasion. On the 
 
 . Demosthen. Olynth. i. c. 3, p. 15 ; ii. c. 5. p. 21 The orator had occas on 
 to denounce Philip, as having got possession of the public authority of A* 
 Thessalian confederation, partly by intrigue, partly by force ; and we that 
 hear of the ?uf.evH and the dyopal, which formed the revenue of the con. 
 
 « Xeiophon (Hellen. vi. 1, 7) numbers the Mapa.oi among these tnbofijr 
 n^ along with the Dolopes: the Maraces are named by Phny (ttN 17 
 I) al.o, along with the Dolopes, but we do not know where they dwelt 
 
 » Xenophon, Hellen. vi. 1, 9 , Pindar, Pyth. iv. 80. 
 
 • Uerodot. vii. 176; viii- 27-28. 
 
 <«' 
 
 i»i 
 
284 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 (ETiiANS. - iENI.AJfES. 
 
 285 
 
 whole, the resistanpf of the Phokians was successful, for th« 
 f ower of the Thessalians never reached southward of the pass.' 
 It will be recollected that these different ancient races, Per- 
 rha^bi, Magnetes Achaans, Malians, Dolopes, — thougn tribu- 
 taries of the Thessalians, still retained their Ampliiktyonic 
 franchise, and were considered as legitimate Hellenes : all except 
 ilic Malians arc, indeed, mentioned in the Iliad. We shall rarely 
 !iave occasion to speak much of them in the course of this his- 
 1 )ry: they are found siding with Xerxes (chiefly by constraint) 
 in his attack of GretJce, and almost indifferent in the struggle 
 between Sparta and Athens. That the Acha^ans of PhthiOtis 
 are a portion of the same race as the Achaeans of Pelo]ionnesus 
 it seems reasonable to believe, though we trace no historical 
 evidence to authenticate it. Acha^a Phthiotis is the seat of 
 llcllen, the i)atriarch of the entire race, — of the primitive 
 Hellas, by some treated as a town, by others as a district of some 
 breadth, — and of the great national hero, Achilles. Its con- 
 nection with the Pelcponnesian Achaans is not unlike that of 
 Doris with the Peloponnesian Dorians.'- We have, also, to 
 notice another ethnical kindred, the date and circumstances of 
 which are given to us only in a mythical form, but which seems, 
 nevertheless, to be m itself a reality, — that of the Magnetes on 
 Pelion and Ossa, with tlie two divisions of Asiatic Magnetes, or 
 Magnesia, on Mount Sipylus and Magnesia on the river Maun- 
 der. It is said that these two Asiatic homonymous towns were 
 founded by migrations of the Thessalian Magnetes, a body of 
 w hom became consecrated to the Delphian god, and chose a new 
 abode under his directions. According to one story, these emi- 
 grants were warriors, returning from the Siege of Troy ; accord- 
 ing to another, they sought fresh seats, to escape from the 
 Thesprotian conquerore of Thessaly. There was a third story, 
 according to which the Thessalian Magnetes themselves were 
 represented as colonists^ from Delphi. Though we can elicit no 
 
 * The story of invading Thessjvlians at Keressus, near Leuktra in Boeotia, 
 (Pausan ix. 13, 1,) is not at all probable. 
 
 ' One story was, that these Achaeans of Phthia went into Peloponnesoi 
 •ith Pelops, and settled in Laconia (Strabo, viii. p. 365). 
 
 ' Arisioteles ap. Athenai. iv. p. 1 73 Cooon, Nairat. 29 , buubo, xir. jf 
 147 
 
 distinct matter of fact from these legends, we may, ncvertheleaa^ 
 admit the connection of race between the Thessalian and the 
 Asiatic Magnetes, as well as the reverential dependence of botli, 
 manifested in this supposed filiation, on the temple of Delphi 
 Of the Magnetes in Krete, noticed by Plato as long extinct in 
 tiis time, we cannot absolutely verify even the existence. 
 
 Of the Malians, Thucydides notices three tribes (ytv^) a.- 
 existing in his time, — the Paralii, the Hieres (priests), and the 
 Trachinii, or men of Trachin :' it is i>ossible that the second ot 
 the two may have been possessors of the sacred spot on which 
 the Amphiktyonic meetings were held. The f)re valence of the 
 hoplites or heavy-armed infantry among the Malians, indicates 
 that we are stepping from Thessalian to more southerly Hellenic 
 habits : the Malians recognized every man as a qualified citizen, 
 who either had served, or was serving, in the ranks with his full 
 panoply .2 Yet the panoply was probably not perfectly suitable 
 to the mountainous regions by which they were surrounded ; for, 
 at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, the aggressive moun- 
 taineers of the neighboring region of (Eta, had so harassed and 
 
 Hoeck (Krcta, b. iii. vol. ii. p. 409) attempts (unsuccessfully, in my judg- 
 ment) to reduce these stories into the form of substantial history. 
 
 > Thncyd. iii. 92. The distinction made by Skylax (c 61) and Diodorus 
 (xviii. 11) between 'SLri'kul^ and MaXif<c— the latter adjoining the former 
 on the north — appears inadmissible, though Letronne still defends it (Peri- 
 ple de Marcien d'H^racl^, etc., Paris, 1839, p. 212). 
 
 Instead of MaAicZf, we ought to read Aafiielc, as O. Miiller observes (Do- 
 rians, i. 6, p. 48). 
 
 It is remarkable that the important town of Lamia (the modem Zeitun) 
 is not noticed either by Herodotus, Thiicydides, or Xenophon ; Skylax is 
 the first who mentions it. The route of Xerxes towards Thermopylae lay 
 along the coast from Alos. 
 
 The Lamieis (assuming that to be the correct reading) occupied the nortli- 
 em coast of the Maliac gulf, from the north bank of the Spercheius to the 
 town of Echinus ; in which position Dr. Cramer places the Mi/Xteif IlapaXio- 
 — an error, I think (Geography of Greece, vol. L p. 436). 
 
 It is «ot improbable that Lamia first acquired importance during the 
 course of those events towards the close of the Peloponnesian war, when tht 
 Lacedamonians, in defence of Herakleia, attacked the Achaeans of Phthioti^ 
 and even expelled the (Etaans for a time from their seats (see Thacyd. viii 
 3; Diodor. xiv. 38). 
 
 * Artetot. PoUt iv. 10. 10. 
 
 Iii 
 
 
 
 
 ^n 
 
 ■■ BM iww H ifHy " ngm 
 
286 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 overwhelmed them in war. that they were forced to throw them 
 lelves on the protection of 8j>arta ; and the establishment of the 
 Spartan colony of Herakleia, near Traohin, was the result of 
 their urgent application. Of tliese mountaineers, described under 
 the general name of Git«ans, the principal were the ^nianes, 
 (<^ Knienes, as they are termed in the Homeric Catalogue, as 
 well as by Hero(h)tus), — an ancient Hellenic' Amphiktyonic 
 race, who are said to have parsed through sevenil successive 
 migrations in Tliessaly and Epirus, but who, in the historical 
 times, had their settlement and tlieir chief town, Hypata, in the 
 upper valley of the Spercheius, on the northern declivity of 
 Mount CEta. l>ut 'ither tribes were j)robably also included in 
 the name, such as those TEtolian tribes, the Bomians and Kalli- 
 ans, whor;e liigh nn»! cold abochs appntachcd near to the Maliac 
 gulf. It is in thi.^ st-nse that we are to undtrstand the name, as 
 comprehending/ all the |>r<»lat()rv tribes along this extensive 
 mountain range, wiieii we are told of the elaniage done by tht 
 (Eta'ans, botli to th«* Malians on tlie east, and to the Dorians on 
 the ^outh : but then are some cases in which the name CEtaean? 
 seems to designate expressly the /Enianes, especially when they 
 are mentioned as exercising the Amphiktyonic franchise.'-^ 
 
 The line soil, abundant moisture, and genial exposure of the 
 southern declivities of Othrys,-^ — especially the valley of the 
 bpercheius, through which river all these waters pass away, and 
 which annually gives forth a fertilizing inundation, — present a 
 marked conti-ast wiih the barren, cragirv, and naked masses of 
 Mount CEta, whicli forms one side of the pass of Thermopylie. 
 Southward of the pass, the Lokrians, Fhokians, and Dorians, 
 occupied the mountains and passes between Thessaly and Boeo- 
 
 ' Plutarch, Qaaestion. Grace, p. 294. 
 
 * Thucyd. iii. 92-97 ; viii. 3. Xenoph. Hellen. i. 2, 18; in another passage 
 Xenophon expressly di«tinguishes the CEtaei and the ^nianes (Helien. iii 
 5, 6). Diodor. xiv. 38. l^schines, De Fj.1s. Leg. c. 44, p. 290. 
 
 • About the fertility as well as the beauty of this valley, see Dr. Hollaod^s 
 Travels, ch. xvii. vol. ii. p. 108, and Forchhammer (Hellenika, Griechenland. 
 im Neuen das Alte, Berlin, 1837). I do not concur with the latter in his 
 attempts to resolve the mythes of Herakles, Achilles, and others, into physi- 
 cal phenomena ; but his descriptions of local scenery and attributes are mot! 
 fivid and masterly. 
 
 f 
 
 LOKRIANS. 
 
 287 
 
 da. The coast opposite to the western side of Euboca, from the 
 neighborhood of Thermopylae, as far as the Boeotian frontier at 
 Anthedon, was possessed by the Lokrians, whose northera fron 
 tier town, Alpeni, was conterminous with the Malians. There 
 was, however, one narrow strip of Phokis — the town of Daph- 
 nus, where the Phokians also touched the Eubcean sea — which 
 broke this continuity, and divided the Lokrians into two sections, 
 — Lokrians of !Mount Knemis, or Epiknemidian Lokrians, and 
 Lokrians of Opus, or Opuntian Lokrians. The mountain called 
 Knemis, running southward parallel to the coast from the end 
 of CEta, divided the former section from the inland Phokians 
 and the upper valley of the Kephisus : farther southward, joining 
 continuously with Mount Ptoon by means of an intervening 
 mountain which is now called Chlomo, it separated the Lokrians 
 of Opus from the territories of Orchomenus, Thebes, and Anthe- 
 don, the north-eastern portions of Bocotia. Besides these two 
 sections of the Lokrian name, there was also a third, completely 
 separate, and said to have been colonized out from Opus, — the 
 Lokrians surnamed Ozola^, — who dwelt apart 0!i the western 
 side of Phokis, along the northern coast of the Corinthian gulf 
 They reached from Amphissa — which overhung the plain of 
 Krissa, and stood within seven miles of Delphi — to Naupaktus, 
 near the narrow entrance of the gulf; which latter town wa^ 
 taken from these Lokrians by the Athenians, a little before the 
 Pcloponnesian war. Opus prided itself on being the mother-city 
 of the Lokrian name, and the legends of Deukalion and Pyrrha 
 found a home there as well as in Phthiotis. Alpeni, Nikaea, 
 rhronium, and Skarpheia, were towns, ancient but unimportant, 
 of the Epiknemidian Lokrians ; but the whole length of this 
 Lokrian coast is celebrated for its beauty and fertility, both by 
 incient and modern observers.^ 
 
 ^ Strabo, ix. p. 425 ; Forchhammer, Hellenika, pp. 11-12. Kynus is some- 
 limes spoken of as the harbor of Opus, but it was a city of itself as old ai 
 the Homeric Catalogue, and of some moment in the later wars of Greece, 
 irhen military position came to be more va.Hied than legendary celebrity 
 (Livy, xxviii. 6 ; Pausan. x. 1, 1 ; Skylax, c. 61-62} ; the latter counts Thro- 
 Dium and Knemis or Knemides as being Phokian, not Lokrian; which they 
 were for a short time, during the prosperity of the Phokians, at the beginning 
 of the Sacred War, though not permanently (-^schin. Fals. Legat. c. 42. » 
 
 .>, 
 
 1( 
 I! 
 
^dS 
 
 UISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 
 The Phokianri were bounded on the north by the little terri- 
 tories called Doris and Dryopis, which separated them from the 
 Malians, — on the north-east, east, and south-west, by the dif- 
 ferent branches of Lokrians, — and on the south-east, by the 
 Boeotians. They touched the Euboean sea, (as has been men- 
 tioned) at Daphnus, the point where it approaches nearest to 
 their chief town, Elateia ; their territory also comprised most part 
 of the lofty and bleak range of Parnassus, as far as its southerly 
 termination, where a lower portion of it, called Kirphis, pro- 
 jects into the Corinthian gulf, between the two bays of An- 
 tikyra and Krissa; the latter, with its once fertile plain, \ny 
 immediately under the sacred rock of the Delphian Apollo. 
 Both Delphi ar.d Krissa originally belonged to the Phokian 
 race, but the sanctity of the temple, together with Lacedaemonian 
 aid, enabled the Delphians to set up for themselves, disavowing 
 their connection with the Phokian brotherhood. Territorially 
 speaking, the most valuable part of Phokis» consisted in the 
 valley of the river Kephisus, which takes its rise from Parnassus, 
 not far from tlie Phokian town of Lilaia, passes between (Eta 
 and Knemis on one side, and Parnassus on the other, and enteis 
 Boeotia near Ch;eroneia, discharging itself into the lake KopaVs. 
 It was on the priojectiug mountain ledges and rocks on each side 
 jf this river, that the numerous httle Phokian towns were situ- 
 ated. Twenty-two of them were destroyed and broken up into 
 villages by the Amphiktyonic order, after the second Sacred 
 War ; Abie (one of the few, if not the only one, that was spared) 
 being protected by the sanctity of its temple and orade. Oi 
 these cities, the most important was Elateia, situated on the left 
 bank of the Kepliisus, and on the road from Lokris into Phokis, in 
 the natural march of an army from Thermopylae into Bceotia. 
 The Phokian towns'^ were embodied in an ancient confederacy, 
 
 46). This serves a^ one presumption about the age of the Periplus of Sky- 
 kx (see the notes of Klausen ad Skyl. p. 269). These Lokrian towns lay 
 along the important road from Thermopylae to Elateia and Bceotia (Pausan 
 fii. 15, 2; Livy, xxxiii. 3) 
 
 » Paosan. x. 33, 4. 
 
 • Pausan. x. 5, I ; Demosth. Fals Leg. c. 22-28 ; Diodor. xvi. 60, with 
 
 fte note of Wesseling 
 The tenth book of Pausanias, though the larger half of it is devoted ta 
 
 SiiBg iaiW i iB iCr^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 
 
 PHOKIANS. - DORI A NS. 
 
 289 
 
 
 which held its periodical meetings at a temple between DauIiB 
 and Delphi. 
 
 The little territory called Doris and Dryopis, occupied the 
 fouthern declivity of Mount CEta, dividing Phokis on the noith 
 an 1 north-west, from the -^tolians, ^Enianes, and Malians. That 
 which was called Doris in the historical times, and which 
 reached, in the time of Herodotus, nearly as far eastward as the 
 Maliac gulf, is said to have formed a part of what had been once 
 called Dryopis ; a territory which had comprised the summit of 
 CEta as far as the Spercheius, northward, and which had been 
 inhabited by an old Hellenic tribe called Dryopes. The Dorians 
 acquired their settlement in Dryopis by gift from Herakles, who, 
 along with the Malians (so ran the legend), had expelled the 
 Dryopes, and compelled them to find for themselves new seats 
 at Hermione, and Asine, in the Argolic peninsula of Pelopon- 
 nesus — at Styra and Karystus in Euboea, — and in the island 
 of Kythnus ;' it is only in these five last-mentioned places, that 
 liistory recognizes them. The territory of Doris was distributed 
 into four little townships, — Pindus, or Akyphas, Boeon, Kytinion, 
 and Erineon, — each of which seems to have occupied a separate 
 valley belonging to one of the feeders of the river Kephisus, — 
 the only narrow spaces of cultivated ground which this " small 
 and sad ** region presented.^ In itself, this tetrapolis is so insig- 
 nificant, that we shall rarely find occasion to mention it ; but it 
 acquired a factitious consequence by being regarded as the me- 
 tropolis of the great Dorian cities in Peloponnesus, and receiving 
 on that ground special protection from Sparta. I do not here 
 touch upon that string of ante-historical migrations — stated by 
 
 Delphi, tells us all that we know respecting the less important towns of 
 Phokis. Compare also Dr. Cramers Geography of Greece, vol. ii. sect 10; 
 and Leake's Travels in Northern Greece, vol. ii. ch. 13. 
 
 Two funeral monuments of the Phokian hero Schedius (who commands 
 the Phokian troops before Troy, and is slain in the Iliad) marked the two 
 extremities of Phokis, — one at Daphnus on the Eubcean sea, the other at 
 Aiitikyra on the Corinthian gulf (Strabo, ix. p." 425; Pausan. x. 36, 4). 
 
 ' Herodot. viii. 31, 43, 46; Diodor. iv. 57 ; Aristot. ap. Strabo, viii. p. 373, 
 
 0. MuUer (History of the Dorians, book i. ch. ii.) has given all that caa 
 be known about Doris and Dryopis, together with some matters which appeal 
 to me very inadequately authenticated. 
 
 ■'' lIoAfif fi'Kpal Kal At'Tpo^uoot, Strabo, ix. j>. 427 
 
 i] 
 
 y\ 
 
 i\ 
 
 u 
 
 "I 
 
 TOL. II 
 
 1« 
 
 19oc. 
 
 i^4 
 
290 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 f 
 
 1 1 
 
 \ •' 
 
 Herodotus, and illimtrated by the ingenuity as well as deco. ated 
 by the funcy of O. Muller — through which the Dorians are 
 aifiliated with tlie patriarch of tlie Hellenic race, — moving 
 originally out of I'lithiotis to Histiaoiis, then to Pindus, and 
 hi<tlv to Doris. The residence of Dorians in Doris, is a fact 
 which meets ih at the commencement of history, like that of the 
 ]*hokians and Lokrians in their respective territories. 
 
 We next pa-s to the vEtolians, whose extreme tribes covered 
 the bleak heights of Cb^ta and Korax, reaching almost within 
 siurht of the INIaliat gult^vhere they bordered on the Dorians and 
 Malians, — whih' their central and western tribes stretched along 
 tlic frontier of the Ozolian Lokrians to the flat plain, abundant in 
 in.irsh and lake, near the month of the Eucnus. In the time of 
 Herodotus an<l Thucydides, tliey do not seem to have extended 
 so far westward a^ the Achclous; but in later times, this latter 
 river, throughout ihe greater part of its lower course, divided 
 them from the Akanianians :' on the north, they touched ui)on 
 the Doloi)ians, and upon a parallel of latitude nearly as far north 
 as Ambrakia. There were three great divisions of the ilCtolian 
 name, — the Apodoti, Ophioneis, and Eurytanes, — each of which 
 w as subdivided into severid ditferent village tribes. The north- 
 ci-n and eastern ]»ortion of the territory'^ consisted of very high 
 mountain ranges, and even in the southera portion, the mountains 
 ^rakynthus, Kurion, C'halkis, Taphiassus, are found at no great 
 (1 -tance from the ^ea; while tlie chief towns in iEtolia, Kalydon, 
 IMeuron, Chalkis, — seem to have been situated eastward of the 
 Euenus, between the last-mentioned mountains and the sea.^ 
 The lirst two towns have been greatly ennobled in legend, but 
 
 ' Herotl. vii. 126; Thuiyd. ii. 102. 
 
 ' Sec the difficuh journey of Fiedler from Wrachori northward by Karpe- 
 nlt/, and then across the north-western portion of the mountains of the an- 
 cient Eurytanes (the southern eontinuation of Mount Tymphrestus and (Eta), 
 into the upper vaUey of the Spereheius (Fiedler's Reise in Griechenland, voL 
 i. pp. 177-191 ). a part of the longer journey from Missolonghi to Zeitun. 
 
 Skvlax (c. 3.'j) reckons ^^tolia as extending: inland as far as the hounda- 
 rie« of the iEnianes on the Spereheius — which is quite correct — ^.tolia 
 Epiktetus — ue\pL ti/v Ohala^, Strabo, x. p. 450. 
 
 * Strabo. x. pp. 459-460. There is. however, g-eat uncertainty about th« 
 position of these anci.>nt towns: compare Krus3, Hellas, vol. iii. ch. xi. pp 
 M3-255, and BrandstAter, Geschichte des jEtolischen Landes, pp. 121-134. 
 
 rcsr 
 
 AKARJ^ANIANS. 
 
 291 
 
 are little named in history ; while, on the contrary, ThermuB, the 
 chief town of the historical jEtolians, and the place where the 
 AiTfrrefrsiiG meetinjr and festival of the ^tolian name, for the 
 choice of a Pan-^tolic general, was convoked, is not noticed by 
 any one earlier than Ephorus.^ It was partly legendary renown, 
 partly ethnical kindred (publicly acknowledged on both sides) with 
 the Eleians in Peloponnesus, which authenticated the title of the 
 ^tolians to rank as Hellens. But the great mass of the Apodoti, 
 i:urytancs, and Ophioneis in the inland mountains, were so rude 
 in their manners, and so unintelligibleS in their speech (which, 
 however, was not barbaric, but very bad Hellenic,) that this title 
 might well seem disputable, — in point of fact it was disputed, in 
 later times, when the iEtolian power and depredations had 
 become obnoxious nearly to all Greece. And it is, probably, to 
 this difference of manners between the ^tolians on the sea-coast 
 and those in the interior, that we are to trace a geographical 
 division mentioned by Strabo, into ancient uEtolia, and iEtolia 
 Epiktetus, or acquired. When or by whom this division was 
 introduced, we do not know. It cannot be founded upon any 
 conquest, for the inland iEtolians were the most unconquerable 
 of mankind : and the affirmation which Ephorus applied to the 
 wliole ^tolian race, — that it had never been reduced to sub- 
 jection by any one, — is, most of all, beyond dispute concerning 
 the inland portion of it.^ 
 
 Adjoining the ^tolians were the Akarnanians, the westem- 
 ni.st of extra-Peloponnesian Greeks. They extended to the 
 luaian sea, and seem, in the time of Thucydid^s, to have occupied 
 
 ' Ephorus, Fragm. 29, Marx. ap. Strabo, p. 463. The situation of Ther- 
 inns. " the acropolis as it were of all jEtolia," and placed on a spot almost 
 uiuipproachable by an army, is to a certain extent, though not wholly, cap». 
 bic of bein^ determined by the description which Polybius gives of the rapid 
 n»arch of Phiiij) and the Macedonian army to surprise it. The maps, both 
 of Kruse and Kiepert, place it too much on the north of the lake Trich6ni«: 
 *Mo map of Fiedler notes it, more correctly, to the east of that lake (Polyb 
 " 7-8: compare Brandstater, Geschichte des ^tol. Landes, p. 133). 
 
 ' Thucyd. iii. 102. — ayvuaroraToi fie yldoadv ehi^ koI ufi6<fiayot Ct^ Xi 
 y ovrat. It seems that Thucydides had not himself seen or conrerBed 
 with them, but he does not call them l3ap(3apoi. 
 
 =• Ephorus, Fragment. 29, ed. Marx. ; Skymn. Chios, t. 471 ; Strabo, x p 
 45). 
 
 
 I ii 
 
292 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 BCEOTI ANS. - ORCHOMENUS. 
 
 298 
 
 I 
 
 1 1 
 
 I' 
 
 both tianks of the river Achelous, in the lower part of itsouufsc, 
 — though the left bank appears afterwards as belonging to the 
 iEtolians, so that tlie river came to constitute the boundary, often 
 disputed and decided by arms, between them. The principal 
 Akarnanian towns. Stratus and Q^^niada', were both on the right 
 barik ; tlie latter on the marsh v and o\ erflowed land near its 
 mouth. Near the Akanianians, towards the gulf of Ambrakia, 
 were found barbaiiuii, or non-Hellenic nations, — the Agrseans 
 and the Amphilocliians : in the midst of the latter, on the shores 
 of the Ambrakian gidf, the Greek colony, called Argos Amphi- 
 lochicum, was established. 
 
 Of the five Hellenic subdivisions now enumerated, — Lo- 
 krians, Phokians, Dorians (of Doris), ^tolians, and Akarnanians 
 (of whom Lokrians, Phokians, and -/Ktolians arc comprised in 
 tlic Homeric catalogue), — we have to say the same as of those 
 north of Thcrmopyla? : there is no information respecting them 
 from the comraencenient of the historical period down to the 
 l*ersian war. Even that important event brings into action only 
 the Lokrians of the Euboean sea, the Phokians, and the Dorians: 
 we have to wait until near the Peloponnesian war, before we 
 re(juire information respecting the Ozolian Lokrians, the ^to- 
 lians, and the Akarnanians. These last three were unquestionably 
 the most backward members of the Hellenic aggregate. Though 
 not absolutely without a central town, they lived dispersed in 
 villages, retiring, when attacked, to inaccessible heights, perpetu- 
 ally armed and in readiness for aggression and plunder wherevei 
 they found an opportunity.' Very different was the condition of 
 the Lokrians op[)osite Eubo^a, the Phokians, and the Dorians. 
 These were all orderly town communities, small, indeed, and 
 poor, but not less well administered than the average of Grecian 
 townships, and perhaps exempt from those individual violences 
 which so frequently troubled the Boeotian Thebes or the great 
 cities of Thessaly. Timaeus affirmed (contrary, as it seems, to 
 the supposition of Aristotle) that, in early times, there were no 
 
 * 1 Imcyu. I. 6; iii. 94. Aristotle, however, included, in his» large collection 
 of Uo'^iTtiai, an 'AKapvuvuv IloAiTtia as well as an Alrcj^uv HcAimo 
 (Aristotelis Rerum Publicarum Reliqiiie, cd. Neumann, p. 102j Strabo rii 
 
 r 321). 
 
 slaves either among the Lokrians or Phokians, and that the 
 work required to be done for proprietors was performed by poor 
 freemen ;i a habit which is alleged to have been continued until 
 the temporary prosperity of the second Sacred War, when the 
 plunder of the Delphian temple so greatly enriched the Pho- 
 kian leaders. But this statement is too briefly given, and too 
 imperfectly authenticated, to justify any inferences. 
 
 We find in the poet Alkmaa (about 610 B. c), the Erysl- 
 ch2ei»r., or Kalydonian shepherd, named as a type of rude rus- 
 ticity, — the antithesis of Sardis, where the poet was born.a 
 And among the suitors who are represented as coming forward 
 to claim the daughter of the Sikyonian Kleisthenes in marriage, 
 there appears both the ThessaUan Diaktorides from Krannon, a 
 member of the Skopad family, — and the iEtolian MalSs, brother 
 of that Titormus who in muscular strength surpassed all his con- 
 temporary Greeks, and who had seceded from mankind into the 
 inmost recesses of JStolia : this ^toUan seems to be set forth ha 
 a sort of antithesis to the delicate Smindyridfis of Sybaris, the 
 most luxurious of mankind. Herodotus introduces these charac- 
 t/^rs mto his dramatic picture of this memorable wedding.3 
 
 Between Phokis and Lokris on one side, and Attica (from 
 which it is divided by the mountains Kithaeron and Parn^) on 
 the other, we find the important territory called Boeotia, with it? 
 ten or twelve autonomous cities, forming a sort of confederacy 
 under the presidency of Thebes, the most powei-ful among them. 
 Even of this territory, destined during the second period ot this 
 history, to play a part so conspicuous and effective, we know 
 nothin<r during the first two centuries after 776 b. c. We first 
 acquire some insight into it, on occasion of the disputes between 
 Thebes and Platsea, about the year 520 b. c. Orchomenus, on 
 the north-west of the lake Kopais, forms throughout the histori- 
 cal times one of the cities of the Boeotian league, seemingly the 
 second after Thebes. But I have already stated that the Orcho- 
 
 ~ » Tim«us, Fragm. xvii. ed. Goller; Polyb. xu. 6-7} Athen^ua, vi. p 
 
 364 
 
 » This brief fragment of the Uapdeve'ia of Alkman is preserved by St« 
 
 phaa. Bya. {'l^-pvaixv), and aUuded to by Strabo, x. p. 460: b«j WelrVei 
 Aikm. Fragm. xi. and Bergk, Alk. Fr. xiL 
 •Heredot vi. 127. 
 
i 
 
 S94 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 
 I 
 
 inenian legends, the Catalogue, and otlier allusions in Homer, and 
 the traces of past power and importance yet visible in the his- 
 torical age, attest the early political existence of Orchomenus 
 and its neighborhood apart from Boeotia.' The Amphiktyony in 
 which Orchomenus participated, at the holy island of Kalauria 
 near the Argolic peuinsula, seems to show that it must once ha\ e 
 possessed a naval force and commerce, and that its territory must 
 have touched the sea at Ilalae and the lower town of LarymnJ^ 
 near the southern frontier of Lokris ; this sea is separated by a 
 very narrow space from the range of mountains whicli join Knemis 
 and Ptoon, and which inclose on the east both the basin of Orcho- 
 menus, Aspledon, and Kopae, and tlie lake Kopais. The migration 
 of the Boeotians out of Thessaly into Boeotia (which is repre- 
 sented as a consequc;nce of the conquest of the former country by 
 the Thesprotians) is commonly assigned as the compulsory force 
 which Boeotized Orchomenus. By whatever cause, or at what- 
 ever time (whether before or after 77G b. c.) the transition may 
 have been effected, we fnid Orchomenus completely Boeotian 
 throughout the known historical age, — yet still retaining its local 
 Minyeian legends, and subject to the jealous rivalry^ of Thebes, 
 as being the second city in the Boeotian league. The direct road 
 from the passes of Fhokis southward into Boeotia went through 
 Chseroneia, leaving Lebadeia on the right, and Orchomenus on 
 the left hand, and passed the south-western edge of the lake 
 
 » See an admirable topographical description of the north part of Bujotia, 
 ^the lake Kopars and its environs, in Forchhammer's Helleuika, pp. 159- 
 186, with an exphmatory map. The two long and laborious tunnels con- 
 structed by the old Orchomenians for the drainage of the lake, as an aid to 
 the insufficiency of the natural Katabothra, are there very clearly laid down : 
 one goes to the sea, tl e other into the ncighI)oring lake Hylika, which is 
 iurrounded by high rocky banks and can take more water without overflow- 
 ing. The lake Kopais is an inclosed basin, receiving all the water from 
 Doris and Phokis through the Kephisus. A copy of Forchhammer's map 
 will be found at the end of the present volume. 
 
 Forchhammer thinks that it was nothing but the similarity of the name 
 It6nca (derived from hea, a willow-tret) yrhieh gave rise to the tale of ao 
 emigration of people from the Thessalian to the Boeotian Itone (p. 148). 
 
 The Homeric Catalogue presents Kopa, on the north of the lake, as Bow 
 lian, but not Orchomenus nor Aspledon (Iliad, ii. 502). 
 
 • See O. Miiller. Orcliomenos, cap. xx. p. 418, seq. 
 
 B(EOTIAN CONFEDERACY. 
 
 295 
 
 Kopais near the towns of Koroneia, Alalkomenae, and Haliarfub, 
 — all situated on the mountain Tilphossion, an outlying ridge 
 connected with Helicon by tlie intervention of Mount Leibe 
 thrius. The Tilphossieon was an important military post, com- 
 manding that narrow pa.^s between the mountain and the lake 
 which lay in the great road from Phjkis to ThebesJ The to 
 ritorv of this latter city occupied the greater part of central 
 H<x*otia, south of the lake Kopais ; it comj»rehended Aknpphia 
 and Mount Ptoon, and probably touched the Euboean sea at the 
 village of Salganeus south of Anthedon. South-west of Thebe.'^, 
 occupying the southern descent of lofty Helicon towards the 
 inmost corner of the Corinthian jrulf. and bordering on the south- 
 eastern extremity of Phokis with the Pliokian town of Bulis, 
 stood the city of Thespitr. Southward of the Asopus, between 
 that river and Mount Kithjrron, were Platnea and Tanagra ; in 
 the south-eastern corner of Boeotia stood Oropus, the frequent 
 subject of contention between Thebes and Athens ; and in the 
 road between the Euboean Chalkis and Thebes, the town of 
 INfykalessus. 
 
 From our first view of historical Boeotia downward, there 
 appears a confederation which embraces the whole territory: 
 and during the Peloponnesian war, the Thebans invoke "the 
 ancient constitutional maxims of the Boeotians" as a justification 
 of extreme rigor, as well as of treacherous breach of the peace, 
 •igainst the recusant Platieans.^ Of this confederation, the 
 greater cities were primary members, while the lesser were 
 attached to one or other of them in a kind of dependent union. 
 Neither the names nor the number of these primary members 
 can be certainly known : there seem grounds for including 
 Thebes, Orchomenus, Lebadeia, Koroneia, Haliartus, Kopae, 
 Antheddn, Tanagra, Thespiae, and Plata^a before its secession.^ 
 
 * See Demostheu. De Fals. Legat. c. 43-45. Another portion of this nar- 
 row road is probably meant by the pass of Koroneia — to. nepi Kopuveiav 
 arevd, (Diodor. xv. 52; Xenoph. Hellen. iv. 3, 15) — which Epameinondaa 
 occupied to prevent the invasion of Kleombrotus from Phokis. 
 
 ' Thucyd. ii. 2 — Kara rd TTurpia tuv ttuvtuv ^okjtuv : compare tha 
 ipeech of the Thebans to the Lacedaemonians after the rapture of Plattea. 
 iii. 61, 65, 66. 
 
 * Thucyd. iv. 91 j C. F. Hermann, Griechischc Staats Alterthiimer. lect 
 
 • \ 
 
 V, 
 
 I 
 
 >'i 
 
w 
 f 
 
 i 
 t 
 
 296 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 . ' 
 
 Aknephia, with the neighboring Mount Ptoon and its oracle, 
 Skolus, Glisas, and other places, were dependencies of I'hebes: 
 Chaproneia, Aspledon, Holmones, and Ilyettus, of Orchomenus: 
 Siph:e, Leuktra, Keressus, and Thisbe, of ThespinsJ Certain 
 generals or magistrates, called Bceotarchs, were chosen annuaUj 
 to manage the common affairs of the confederation. At the time 
 of the battle of Delium in the Peloponnesian war, they were 
 eleven in number, two of them from Thebes ; but whether this 
 number was always maintained, or in what proportions the choice 
 was made by the different cities, we find no distinct information. 
 There were likewise, during the Peloponnesian war, four ditil'ereut 
 senates, with whom the Bceotarchs consulted on matters of im- 
 portance ; a curious arrangement, of which we have no explana- 
 tion. Lastly, there was the general concilium and religious 
 festival, — the P.ambo'otia, — held periodically at Koroneiji. Such 
 were the forms, as far as we ran make them out, of the Bccotian 
 confederacy ; each of the separate cities possessing its own senate 
 and constitution, and having its political consciousness as an 
 autonomous unit, yet with a certain habitual deference to the fed- 
 eral obligations. Sul>stantially, the aflairs of the confederation 
 will be found in the hands of Thebes, managed in the interests 
 of Tliebau ascendency, which apjjears to have been sustained by 
 no other feeling except respect for superior force and bravery. 
 The discontents of the minor Boeotian towns, harshly repressed 
 an<l punished, form an uninviting chapter in Grecian history. 
 
 One piece of information we find, respecting Thebes singly and 
 apart from the other Bojotian towns anterior to the year 700 b. c. 
 Though brief, and incompletely recorded, it is yet highly valuable, 
 as one of the first incidents of solid and positive Grecian history. 
 Diokles, the Corinthian, stands enrolled as Olympic victor in the 
 13th Olympiad, or 728 b. c, at a time when the oligarchy called 
 Bacchiadae possessed the government of Corinth. The beauty 
 of his person attracted towards him the attachment of Philolaus, 
 one oi the members of this oligarchical body, — a sentiment 
 
 ? 79 ; Herodot v. 79 ; Boeckh, Commentat. ad InscripL Boeotic. ap. Corp. 
 Ins. Gr. part v. p. 726. 
 
 ' Herodot viii. 135 ; ix. 15-43. Pausan ix. 13, 1 ; ix. 23, 3; ix. 24, 3 
 ix. 32, 1-4. Xenophon, Hellen. vi. 4, 3-4 : compare 0. Miiller, Orchoine 
 aoe, oa^ xz. p. 403 
 
 EARLY LAWS OF PHILOLAUS AT THEBES. 
 
 297 
 
 which Grecian manners did not proscribe ; but it also provoked 
 an incestuous passion on the part of his own mother, Halcyone, 
 from which Diokles shrunk with hatred and horror. He aban- 
 doned forever his native city and retired to Thebes, whither he 
 was followed by Philolaus, and where both of them lived and 
 died. Their tombs were yet shown in the time of Aristotle, 
 close adjoining to each other, yet with an opposite frontage; that 
 df Philolaus being so placed that the inmate could command a 
 view of the lofty peak of his native city, while that of Diokles 
 was so disposed as to block out all prospect of the hateful spot. 
 Tliat which preserves to us the memory of so remarkable an 
 incident, is, the esteem entertained for Philolaus by the Thebans 
 — a feeling so profound, that they invited him to make laws for 
 them. We shall have occasion to point out one or two similai 
 cases, in which Grecian cities invoked the aid of an intelligent 
 stranger; and the practice became common, among the Italian 
 republics in the Middle Ages, to nominate a person not belonging 
 to their city either as podesta or as arbitrator in civil dissensions. 
 It would have been highly interesting to know, at length, what 
 laws Philolaus made for the Thebans ; but Aristotle, with his 
 usual conciseness, merely alludes to his regulations respecting the 
 adoption of children and respecting the multiplication of offspring 
 in each separate family. His laws were framed with the view 
 to maintain the original number of lots of land, without either 
 subdivision or consolidation ; but by what mean3 the purpose was 
 to be fulfilled we are not informed.' There existed a law at 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 9, 6-7. "Sofio^irrj^ d' ahroi^ (to the Thebans) kyiviro 
 ^ilo'^ao^ rrepl r' dUuv tlvuv koI nepl rr/c TraidoTtoitag, ov^ KaXovaiv Utivoi 
 vofwvc ^eriKOvc ' nal tovt' iarlv ISiuc vn' Udvov vevofio^ervfievov, bnu^ 6 
 upi^fidg aoCrirai rwv KX^puv. A perplexing passage follows within three 
 lines of this, — <l>^XoAaov de Ulov kariv rj ruv ovcrtuv avonUhjai^, — y^huh 
 raises two questions : first, whether Philolaus can reallv be meant in the 
 second passage, which talks of what is 16lov to Philolaus,' while the first pas- 
 sage had already spoken of something idiuq vevo^o^errffief^- by the same 
 person. Accordingly, Gottling and M. Barthelemy St. Hnw.o follow one 
 of the MSS. by writing ^akeov in place of ^iXoXaov. Nexi, what is the 
 meaning of dvofzdXuacg ? O- Muller (Dorians, ch. x. 5, p. 209) considers it 
 to mean a " fresh equalization, just as dvaSacfidc means a fresh division," 
 adopting the translation of Victorius and Schlosser. 
 The point can hardly be decisively settled; but if this tranilatioc of dvt 
 
 13* 
 
Sd3 
 
 HISTOKY OF GKKECK. 
 
 U y 
 
 Thebo. which perhaps may have been part of tin. sclieme of 
 PhiloUuis, prohihitin- exposure of children, and empouenng a 
 father under the pressure of extreme poverty, to bring his new- 
 born infant to the magistrates, who sold it for a i)nce to any 
 citize.i-purchaser,- taking from him the obligation to bnng it 
 up hut allowing him in return, to consider the adult a^ his slave.i 
 From tiiese brief allusions, coming to us without accompanying 
 illustration, we can draw no other inference, except that the great 
 problem of population— the relation between the well-being ot 
 the citizens and their more n.- less rapid increa.se in numbers-- 
 l,ul e.i-a-ed the serious attention even of the earliest Grecian 
 lc.n.lators? AVe may, however, observe that the old Corinthian 
 lerri.lator, Pheidon, (whose i>recise date cannot be lixed) is stated 
 bv Ari<totle,ito have contemplated much the same object as that 
 which is a>cribed to Philolaus at Thebes; an unchangeable num- 
 ber both of citizens and of lots of land, without any attempt to 
 ftlter the unequal ratio of the lots, one to the other. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FARIIFST HISTORICAL VIEW OF PELOPONNESUS. DORIANS IN 
 EARLILST HbSTORRM^ ^^^^ xeIGHRORING CITIES. 
 
 We now }>a.^s from the northern members to the heart and 
 head of Greece, - Peloponnesus and Attica, taking the former 
 first in order, and giving as much as can be ascertained re- 
 specting its early historical phenomena. . , • 
 
 The traveller who entered Pelo{>onnesus from Boeotia dunng 
 the youthful days of Herodotus and Thucydides, found an array 
 
 ^ua^he correctrthere is good ground for preferring the word 4>a/io. ro 
 ^aolaov : since the proceeding: described would harmonize better with the 
 ideas of Phaleas {Aristot. Fob ii. 4, 3). 
 
 • Aiis'tot Poht-H. 3, 7 This Pheiuoii seems different from Pheidon of 
 Afgoe, «8 far as we are «nabled to judge 
 
 EARLIEST HISTORICAL VIEW OF PELOPONNESUS. 209 
 
 if powerful Doric cities conterminous to each other, and be*nn 
 ling at the isthmus of Corinth. First came Megara, stretching 
 across the isthmus from sea to seji, and occupying the high and 
 rugged mountain-ridge called Geraneia ; next Corinth, with ita 
 strong and conspicuous acrojKdis, and its territory including 
 Mount Oneion as well as the portion of the isthmus at once most 
 level and narrowest, which divided its two harbors called Le- 
 chiciim and Kenchreai. Westward of Corinth, along the Corin- 
 thian gulf, stood Sikyon, with a plain of uncommon fertility, 
 between the two towns: southward of Sikyon and Corinth were 
 Phlius and Kleoiwe, both conterminous, as well ii< Corinth, with 
 Argos and the Argolic peninsula. The inmost bend of the 
 Argolic gulf, including a considerable space of flat and niai>hy 
 ground adjoining to the sea, was possessed by Argos; the Ar- 
 golic peninsula was divided by Argos with the Doric cities of 
 Epidaurus and Troezen, and the Dryopian city of Ilennione, the 
 latter possessing the south-western corner. Proceeding south- 
 ward along the western coast of the gulf, and }'a->ing over the 
 little river called Tanos, the traveller found hiniM If in the do- 
 minion of Sparta, which comprised the entire soufhern region of 
 the peninsula from its eastern to its western sea, where the river 
 Neda flows into the latter. lie first passed from Argos across 
 the dilTicult mountain range called Parnon (which bounds to the 
 west the southern portion of Argolis), until he found himself in 
 the valley of the river (Enus, which he ffjllowed until it joined 
 the Eurotas. In the larger valley of the Eurotas, far removed 
 from the sea, and accessible only through the mo-t impracticable 
 mountain roads, lay the five unwalled, una<lorned, adjoining 
 villages, which bore collectively the formidable name of Sparta. 
 The whole valley of the P^urotas, from Skiritis and Beleminatis 
 at the border of Arcadia, to the Ltw'onian gulf, — expanding in 
 several parts into fertile plain, especially near to its mouth, 
 where the towns of Gythium and Helos were found, — belonged 
 to Sparta ; together with the cold and high mountain ruigc to 
 the eastward, which projects into the promontory of Malea,— and 
 the still loftier chain of Taygetus to the westward, which ends 
 in the promontory of Taenarus. On the other side of Taygetus, 
 on the banks of the river Pamisus, which there flows into the 
 Messeimn gulf, lay the plain of Mes-ene, the richest land in the 
 
doo 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ARCADIA 
 
 
 1/ 
 
 i 
 
 II 
 
 peninsula. This plain had once yielded its arai>le j)ioduce to the 
 free Messenians Dorians, resident in the towns of Sten^r kleru.^ 
 and Andania. But in the time of which we speak, the name of 
 Messenians was l>orne only by a body of brave but homeless 
 exiles, whose restoration to the land of their forefathers over 
 passed even the exile's proverbially sanguine hope. Their land 
 was confounded with the western portion of Laconia, which 
 reached in a south-westerly direction down to the extreme point 
 of Cape Akritjis, and northward as far as the river Neda. 
 
 Throughout his whole journey to the point last mentioned, 
 from the borders of Boeotia and Megaris, the traveller would only 
 step from one Dorian state into another. But on crossing from 
 the south to the north bank of the river Neda, at a point near 
 to its mouth, lie w ould find himself out of Doric lai\d altogether : 
 fu-st, in the territory called Triphylia, — next, in that of Pisa, or 
 the Pisatid, — thirdly, in the more spacious and powerful state 
 called Elis ; these; three conii)rising the coast-land of Peloponne- 
 sus from the mouth of tlie Neda to that of the Larissus. The 
 Triphylians, distributed into a number of small townships, the 
 largest of which was Lepreon, — and the Pisatans, equally des- 
 titute of any centralizing city, — had both, at the period of 
 which we are rkow speaking, been concpiered 'y 6^ ^^^^ 
 powerful northern neighbors of Elis, who enjoyed the advaiitage 
 of a spacious territory united under one goveminwjt| the mid- 
 dle portion, called the Hollow Elis, being for the most part 
 fertile, though the tracts near the ^<'a were more sandy and 
 barren. The Eieians were a section of iEtolian emigrants 
 into Peloponnesus, but the Pisatans and Triphylians had both 
 been originally independent inhabitants of the j)eninsula, — the 
 latter being {itRrmed to belong to the same race as the Minyai 
 who had occupied the ante-Boeotian Orchomenos : both, too, bore 
 the ascendency of Elis with perpetual murmur and occasional 
 
 resistance. 
 
 Crossing the river Larissus, and pursuing the northern coast 
 of Peloponnesus routh of the Corinthian gulf, the traveller would 
 pass into Achaia, — a name which designated the narrow strip of 
 level land, and the projecting spurs and declivities, between that 
 gulf and the northernmost mountains of the peninsula, — SkoUis, 
 Erymanthus, Aroania, Krathis, and the towering eminence called 
 
 301 
 
 KyFeng. Achaean cities, — twelve in number at least, if not 
 mof i, — divided this kmg strip of land amongst them, from the 
 me:ith of the Larissus and the north-western Cape Araxus on 
 one side, to the western boundary of the Sikyonian territory on 
 the other. According to the accounts of the ancient legends and 
 the belief of Herodotus, this territory had once been occupied by 
 Ionian inhabitants whom the Achaeans had expelled. 
 
 In making this journey, the traveller would have finished the 
 circuit ol' Peloponnesus ; but he would still have left untrodden 
 the great central region, inclosed between the territories just 
 enumerated, — approaching nearest to the sea on the borders of 
 Triphylia, but never touching it anywhere. This region w^as 
 Airadia, possessed by inhabitants who are uniformly represented 
 as all of one race, and all aboriginal. It was high and bleak 
 full of wild mountain, rock, and forest, and abounding, to a de-' 
 gree unusual even in Greece, with those land-locked basins from 
 whence the water finds only a subterraneous issue. It was dis- 
 tributed among a large number of distinct viUages and cities. 
 Many of the village tribes, — the Manalii, Parrhasii, Azanes, 
 etc., occupying the central and the western regions, were num- 
 hcred among the rudest of the Greeks : but along its eastern 
 frontier there were several Arcadian cities which ranked de- 
 s( rvedly among the more civilized Peloponnesians. Tegea, Man- 
 tiiieia, Orchomenus, Stymphalus, Pheneus, possessed the whole 
 eastern frontier of Arcadia from the borders of Laconia to those 
 of Sikyon and Pellene in Achaia : Phigaleia at the south west- 
 erii corner, near the borders of Triphylia, and Hera^a, on thj 
 north bank of the Alpheius, near the place where that river quitg 
 Arcadia to enter the Pisatis, were also towns deserving of notice. 
 Towards the north of this cold and thinly-peopled region, near 
 iMieneos, was situated the small town of Nonakris, adjoining to 
 which rose the hardly accessible crags where the rivulet of Styx » 
 
 ' Uerodot. vi. 74 ; Pausan. viii. 18, 2. See the description and print of tha 
 river Styx, and the neighboring rocks, in Fiedler's Reise durch Griechenland, 
 »cl. i. p. 400. 
 
 He descril)es a scene amids; these rocks, in 1826, when the troops U 
 l)>rahim Pasha were in the Morea, which realizes the fearful pictures of war 
 after the manner of the ancient Gauls, or Thracians. A crowd of five thOQ* 
 •and Grwjfci, of every age and sex, had found she'ter in a grassy and bmi^ 
 
 I 
 
 UlC^ 
 
80:j 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DORIAN EMIGRATION INTO PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 309 
 
 ifc 
 
 f 
 
 flowed down : a point of common feeling for all Arcadians, from 
 the terrific sanction wiiicli this water was understood to impart 
 
 to their oaths. 
 
 The distribution of Peloponnesus here sketched, suitable to 
 the Persian invasion and the succeeding half century, may jUso 
 be said (with some allowances) to be adapted to the whole inter- 
 val between about B. C. 550-370 ; from the time of the conquest 
 of Thyreatis by Sparta to the battle of Leuktra. But it is not 
 the earliest distribution which history presents to us. Not pre- 
 suming to criticize the Homeric maj) of Peloponnesus, and going 
 back only to 770 B.C., we find this material difference, — that 
 Si)arta occu{)ies only a very small fraction of the large territory 
 above described ;is belonging to her. Westward of the summit of 
 Mount Tii\getu.-> aie found another section of Dorians, independ- 
 ent of Sparta: the Messenian Dorians, whose city is on the hill 
 of Stenyklerus, near the .>outli-we>teiii boundary of Arcadia, and 
 whose possessions cover the fertile {.lain of Messene along the 
 river Pamisus to its mouth in the Messenian gulf: it is to be noted 
 that Messene wa^ :hen the name of the [.lain generally, and that 
 no town so called existed until after the battle of Leuktra. Again, 
 eastward of the valley of tlie Eurotas, the mountainous region 
 and the western sliores of the Argolic gulf down to Cape Malea 
 ait also independ.!nt of Si)arta; belonging to Argos, or rather 
 to Dorian towns in unison with Argos. All the great Dorian 
 towns, from the borders of the ^Megai'id to the eiistern frontier 
 of Arcadia, as above enumerated, aj.pear to have existed in 776 
 B.C.: Achaia wast in the same condition, so far as we are able 
 to judge, as well as Arcadia, except in regard to its southern 
 fi-ontier, conterminous with Sparta, of which more will hereafter 
 be said. In res|»ect to the western })ortion of Peloponnesus, 
 Klis (properly m) railed) appears to have embraced the same 
 
 spot ernhosonKa arni.lst these cratrs,— few of them armed. They were 
 pursued hv five thouj-and Egyptians and Arabians: a very small resistance, 
 in such ground, would have kept the troops at bay, but the poor men either 
 could not or would not ofter it. They were forced to surrender : the young- 
 fst and most energetic ca.st themselves headlong from the rocks and per- 
 ished : three thousand prisoners were carried away captive, and sold fof 
 slaves at Corinth, Patnus, and Modon : all those who were unfit for sale well 
 massacred on the spot by the Egyptian troops. 
 
 territory in 77G b. c. as in 550 B. c: but the Pisatid had been 
 recently conquered, and was yet imperfectly subjected by the 
 P^leians; while Triphylia seems to have been quite independ- 
 ent of them. Respecting the south-western promontory of Pelo- 
 ponnesus down to Cape Akritas, we are altogetiier without infor- 
 mation : reasons will hereafter be given for believing that it did not 
 at that time form part of the territory of the IVIessenian Dorians. 
 
 Of tlie diflerent races or people whom Herodotus knew m 
 Peloponnesus, he believed three 'to be aboriginal, — the Arca- 
 dians, the Achaeans, and the Kynurians. The Acha\ans, though 
 belonging indigenously to the j)eninsula, had yet removed from 
 the southern portion of it to the northern, expelling the previous 
 Ionian tenants : this is a part ol" the legend respecting the Dorian 
 (onquest, or Return of the Ilerakleids, and we can neither verify 
 nor contradict it. But neither the Arcadians nor the Kynurians 
 had ever cliauged their abodes. Of the latter, I havo not before 
 spoken, because they were never (so far as history knows them) 
 an independent population. They occupied the larger portion' 
 of the territory of Argolis, from Ornea% near the northern'^ or 
 Phliasian border, to Thyrea and the Thyreatis, on the Laconian 
 border: and though belonging originally (as Herodotus imagines 
 iMther than asserts) to the Ionic race — they had been so long 
 subjects of Argos in his time, that almost all evidence of their 
 Hute-Dorian condition had vanished. 
 
 But the great Dorian states in Peloponnesus — the capital 
 f)owers in the peninsula — were all originally emigrants, accord- 
 ing to the belief not only of Herodotus, but of all the Grecian 
 world : so also were the ^tolians of Elis, the Triphylians, and 
 the Dryopes at Hermione and Asine. All these emigrations 
 are so described as to give them a root in the Grecian legendary 
 world : the Triphylians are traced back to Lemnos, as the off- 
 -pring of the Argonautic heroes,^ and we are too uninformed 
 
 ' This is the only way of reconciling Herodotus (viii. 73) with Thucydi- 
 des (iv. 56, and v. 41). The original extent of the Kynnrian territory is a 
 point on which neither of them had any means of very cc rrect information , 
 but there is no occasion to reject the one in favor of the other. 
 
 ' Herod, viii. 73. 0/ 6k Kvvovpioiy avTox^oveg eovreg, duKtovai uovvot 
 shai 'luwEi • iKdeSupuvvrai de, viro re ^Apyeluv up^ofievoi Kai tov ^pofoi 
 kovTti ^Oiwi^rai Kal nepioiKOt, ' Herodot. ir. 145-14& 
 
 I 
 
S04 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 about them to venture upon any historical guesses. Bu respert. 
 STtheDorians, it may perhaps be possible, by examimng th« 
 ^l Wstorical si nation in which they are presented to us. to ofler 
 
 LI ^teetures as to the P-^^^^<^'-7~,^:t[yti 
 thev arrived. The legendary narrative of it has already been 
 liirihe first chapler of this volume, _ that great mythical 
 fvent ^ led the Return of the Children of Ilerak les by which 
 tte firsTestablishment of the Dorians in the promised land o. 
 Felov^LTsus was explained to the full satisfaction o Oreca,. 
 S Sngle aniament and expedition, acting by the .pcoal 
 S tionof tU^Delphian god. and -'i-t^^^y ;»>-^''™: '^It 
 ?„eal descendants of the principal AcU.o-Donan her e, ^ough 
 HvUus, (the eponymus of the pni.opal tribe,) -the nation l 
 heroes of the preexisting popnlation vanquisliod aud expeUed, 
 airthe greater par, of the peninsula botb acpiwed and paru- 
 "neiati strolcc|-.he cireums.ances o,' .he I>---n ^^^^^ ]^ 
 to the historical relations of Laconia a-ul >.I---''-" , ",^fj 
 ly 5H,wer of A:tolian Elis, with its Olympic gam.s a. th. bond 
 !( union in Peloponnesus, attached to tUis evct a- aa u,,.-nJ^ge, 
 in the person of Oxyl.,.,-all these particulars compose a nana 
 live weU calculated to impress the retrospective imagination ot a 
 olk They exhibit an epical fitness and sutliciency which it 
 would be unseasonable to impair by historical <'>-'"«^™- 
 
 The Alexandrine chronology sets down a period of S.S >ca s 
 from the Return of the Ilcrakleids to the first Olympiad (1 104 
 B C -776 B.C,),-a period measured by the lists of the kings 
 Of Sparta, oa the trustworthiness of which some -marks have 
 .Irei been offered. Of these 328 years, the first 2^0, *t he 
 klir Le altogether barren of facts ; and even ,f we admitted 
 Si tTbe historical, we should have nothing to recount except 
 i uecession of royal names. Being unabb- either .'o gu-an - 
 The entire list, or to discover any valid test lor discnnunaf ng he 
 h t rical ani the non-historical items, I >- ^-;r;.:':ri eU 
 l4iced=emonian kings as they appear m Mr. Clinton. I .u.ti Uel 
 et^i. There were two joint kings at Sparta, throughout nearlj 
 lu Le historical time of independent Greece, deducing theu 
 "Lent from Herakles through Eurysthenes and P^okles th. 
 ^ Is of Aristodemus; the latter being on, of those thr«. 
 
 KARLIEST fflSTOKlCAL MEW Of PELOPONKESUb. 
 
 905 
 
 Herakleid brotliers to whom the conqiest of the peninsula id 
 astiribed : — 
 
 Line of Kurymthents. 
 
 Eurysthenes reigned 42 years, 
 
 Ai;is 
 
 Echostratus 
 
 LulHjtas 
 
 Doryssus 
 
 Ajj^csiluiis 
 
 Archelaus 
 
 Telcklus 
 
 Alkamenes 
 
 (; 
 
 31 
 
 ii 
 
 35 
 
 u 
 
 37 
 
 u 
 
 29 
 
 u 
 
 44 
 
 (( 
 
 60 
 
 (C 
 
 40 
 
 (t 
 
 10 
 
 ti 
 
 u 
 
 a 
 
 Line 
 
 of ProhU$. 
 
 
 Pi-okles 
 
 .... rei'T'nfcvj 
 
 51 yejiw 
 
 Sous 
 
 (i 
 
 Eurypon 
 
 U 
 
 « 
 
 Prytanis ... . 
 
 (( 
 
 49 » 
 
 En nomas . . . . 
 
 <i 
 
 45 '• 
 
 Charilaus . . . . 
 
 (k 
 
 60 " 
 
 Nikander 
 
 Ik 
 
 38 •» 
 
 Ulieopouipus . 
 
 (( 
 
 10 '» 
 
 328 
 
 Both Theopompus and Alkamenes reigned considerably longei 
 but tlie chronologists affirm that the year 77G b. c. (or the tir^l 
 Olympiad) occurred in the tenth year of each of their reigns. It 
 is necessary to add, with regard to this list, that there are some 
 material discrepancies between different authors even as to th» 
 flames of individual kings, and still more as to the duration ol 
 their reigns, as may be sf^an both in Mr. Clinton's chronology 
 and in Miiller's Appendix to the History of the Dorian.-. > The 
 alleged sum total cannot be made to agree with the items without 
 ;rreat license of conjecture. O. Miiller observes,^ in rel'erence to 
 this AJexandrine chronology, " that our materials only enable us 
 to restore it to its original state, not to verify its correctness." 
 
 ' Herodotus omits Sous between Prokles and Eurypon, and inserts Poly- 
 dektes between Prytanis and Eunomns : moreover, the accounts of tiie 
 Lacedaemonians, as he states them, represented Lykurgus, the lawgiver, as 
 uncle and puardian of Labotas, of the Euryathenid house, — while Simonides 
 made him son of Prytanis, and others mad* him son of Eunomus, of the 
 Proklid line: compare Herod, i. 65 ; viii. 131. Plutarch, Lycurg^. c. 2. 
 
 Some excellent remarks on this early series of Spartan kings will be found 
 in Mr. G. C. Lewis's article in the Philological Museum, vol. ii. pp. 42-48. 
 ia a review of Dr. Arnold on the Spartan Cowtitution. 
 
 Compare also Larcher, Chronologie d'Herodolc. ch. 13, pp. 484-514. He 
 lengthens many of the reigns considerably, in onler to suit the earlier epodl 
 vhich he assigns to the capture of Troy and the Return of the Herakleid*. 
 
 • History of the Dorians, vol. ii. Append, p. 442. 
 
 voi . II. 20oo 
 
006 HISTORY OF GREECE, 
 
 In point of fact thev are insufficient even for tlie former purpose, 
 as the dissensions among learned critics attest. 
 
 We have a succession of names, still more barren of facts, in 
 the case of the Dorian sovereigns of Corinth. This citj had its 
 ov n line of Herakleids, descended from Herakles, but not through 
 Hyllus. Hippotes, the progenitor of the Corinthian Herakleids, 
 was reported in the legend to have originally joined the Dorian 
 irvaders of the Peloponnesus, but to have quitted them in conse- 
 quence of having slain the prophet Karnus.' The three brothers, 
 when they became masters of the peninsula, sent for Aletes, the 
 Bon of Hippotes, and placed him in possession of Corinth, over 
 which the chronologists make him begin to reign thirty years 
 after the Herakleid conquest. His successors are thus given • - 
 
 Aletes reigned 38 years, 
 
 Ixion •' 38 " 
 
 Agelik. " 37 « 
 
 Jfryiiinis *' 35 " 
 
 Bacchis « 35 « 
 
 Agelas " 30 « 
 
 Eudemus " 25 " 
 
 Aristomedes " 35 " 
 
 Agemon " 16 " 
 
 Alexander " 25 " 
 
 Telest«*s « 12 «* 
 
 Automenes " 1 " 
 
 327 
 
 BACCHTAD.E AT CORINTH. 
 
 ^Oi 
 
 * This story — that the heroic ancestor of the great Corinthian Bacchijtd« 
 kad slain the holy man Karnus, and had been punished for it by lonjj: ban- 
 iihment and privation — leads to the conjecture, that the Corinthians did not 
 celebrate the festival of the Karneia, common to the Dorians generally, 
 
 Herodotus tells us, with regard to the Ionic cities, that all of them cele- 
 krated the festival of .Vpaturia, except Ephesus and Kolophon ; and that 
 tiiese two cities did not celebrate it, " because of a certain reason of murder 
 eommitted," — ovroi yup /novvoi 'lovwv ovk uyovaiv ^Xnarovpia' Koi ovroi 
 Kord <^6vov Tiva CKfj^iv (Herod. L 147). 
 
 The murder of Karnus by Hippotes was probably the cpdvov anrjiptg which 
 ftirbade the Corinthians fronr celebrating the Karneia ; at least, this supposi* 
 lioii gives to the legend a special pertinence which is otherwise wanting t» 
 H Respecting the Kai-neia and Hyacinthia, see Schoell De Origine Graed 
 
 fUBatU, pp. 70-78. Tubingen, 1828. 
 
 There were TaricDs lingular castoms conne^.tcd with the Grecian festival* 
 
 Vol. 2 10 
 
 Such was the celebrity of Bacchis, we are told, that thosd who 
 iocceeded him took the name of Bacchitids in place of Aletiads 
 or Herakleids. One year after the accession of Automenes, the 
 family of the Bacchiads generally, amounting to 200 persona, 
 determined to abolish royalty, to constitute themselves a standing 
 oligarchy, and to elect out of their own number an annual Pry- 
 tanis. Thus commenced the oligarchy of the Bacchiads, which 
 lasted for ninety years, until it was subverted by Kypselus in 
 657 B. C' Reckoning the thirty years previous to the begin- 
 ning of the reign of Aletes, the chronologists thus provide an 
 interval of 447 years between the Return of the Herakleids and 
 the accession of Kypselus, and 357 years between the same 
 period and the commencement of the Bacchiad oligarchy. The 
 Bacchiad oligarchy is unquestionably historical ; the conquest of 
 the Herakleids belongs to the legendary world ; while the inter- 
 val between the two is filled up, as in so many other cases, by a 
 mere barren genealogy. 
 
 When we jump this vacant space, and place ourselves at the 
 first opening of history, we find that, although ultimately Sparta 
 came to hold the first place, not only in Peloponnec^us, but in all 
 Hellas, this was not the case at the earliest moment of which we 
 have historical cognizance. Argos, and the neighboring towns 
 connected with her by a bond of semi-religious, semi-political 
 union, — Sikyon, Phlius, Epidaurus, and Troezen, — were at first 
 of greater power and consideration than Sparta; a fact which 
 the legend of the Herakleids seems to recognize by making Te- 
 
 which it was usual to account for by some legendary tale. Thus, no native 
 of Elis ever entered himself as a competitor, or contended for the prize, at 
 the Isthmian games. The legendary reason given for this was, that Herakles 
 had waylaid and slain (at Kleonae) the two Molionid brothers, when they 
 were proceeding to the Isthmian games as Theors or sacred envoys from the 
 Eleian king Augeas. Redress was in vain demanded for this outrage, and 
 Molione, mother of the slain envoys, imprecated a curse upon the Eleians 
 generally if they should ever visit the Isthmian festival. This legend is the 
 06voi» CT/c^^fc, explaining why no Eleian runner or wrestler was ever known 
 to contend tb ,re (Pausan. ii. 15, 1 ; v. 2, 1-4. Ister, Fragment. 46, ed. 
 Didot). 
 
 • Diodor. Fragm. lib. vii. p. 14, with the note of Wesseling. Strabo (viii. 
 p. 378) states the Ba^'^hiad oligarchy to have lasted nearly tw© hundretJ 
 yean. 
 
 i\ 
 
 j>i 
 
\H 
 
 808 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREFXK 
 
 DORIAN CONQUEST OF ARGOS AND CORINTL. 
 
 309 
 
 menus the eldest brother of the three. And Herodotus assures 
 OS that at one time all the eastern coast of Peloponnesus down to 
 Cape Melea, including the island of Cythera, all which came 
 afterwards to constitute a material jmrt of Laconiji, liad belonged 
 to ArgosJ Down to the time of tlie lirst Messenian war, the 
 comparative importance of the Dorian establishments in Pelo- 
 ponnesus appears to have been in tlie order in which the legend 
 placed them, — Argos first,- 8|>arta second, Messene third. It 
 will be seen hereafter that the Argeians never lost the recollec- 
 tion of tliis early {»reeminence, from which the growth of Spai'ta 
 had extruded them; and the liberties of entire Hellas were more 
 than once in danger from their disastrous jealousy of a more for- 
 tunate competitor. 
 
 At a short distance of about three miles from Argos, and at 
 the exact point where that city a{)proaches nearest to the sea,3 
 was situated the isolated hillock called Temenion, noticed both by 
 Strabo and Pausanias. It was a small village, deriving both its 
 name and its celebrity from the chapel and tomb of the hero 
 Temenus, who was there worshipped by the Dorians ; and the 
 statement which Pausanias heard was, that Temenus, with his 
 invading Dorians, iiad seized and fortified the s|K)t, and employed 
 it as an armed post to make war upon Ti>anienii» and the Achae- 
 ans. What renders this report deserving of the greater attention, 
 is, that the same thing is affirmed with regard to the eminence 
 called Solygeius, near Corinth : this too was believed to be the 
 place which the Dorian assailants had occupied and fortified against 
 
 * Hcrodot. i. 82. The historian adds, besides Cythera, kqI at Tionrai ruv 
 v^auv. What other islands are meant, I do not distinctly understand. 
 
 • So Plato (Lejrjj. iii. p. 692), whose mind is full of the old mythe and the 
 tripartite distrihution of Peloponnesus anionjr the Heraklcids, — v ^' ai, 
 irpu»Tevovaa kv Tolq rore ;fp6voif run; -tui rt/v diavofii/v. i] ire pi rb 'Apyof^ 
 etc. 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. 38, I : Straho, viii. p. 3G8. Professor Ross observes, inspect- 
 ing the line of coast near Arjjros, " The seaside is thoroughly flat, and for 
 the most part marshy ; only at the single point where Argos comes nearest 
 to the coast, — between the month, now choked hy sand, of the united Inachna 
 and Charadrus, and the efflux of the Erasinus, overgrown with weeds and 
 bulrushes, — stands an eminence of some elevation and composed of firmei 
 earth, upon which the ancient Temenion was placed.** (Reisen im PelopoQ 
 QC8, vol. i. sect. 5, p. 149, Berlin, 1841} 
 
 the preexisting Corinthians in the city. Situated close upon 
 the Saronic gulf, it wr.3 the spot which invaders landing from 
 that gulf would naturally seize upon, and which Nikias with his 
 powerful Athenian fleet did actually seize and occupy against 
 Corinth in the Peloponnesian war.' In early days, the only waf 
 of overpowering the inhabitants of a fortified town, generally 
 also planted in a position itself very defensible, was, — that tlie 
 invaders, entrenching themselves in the neighborhood, harassed 
 the inhabitants and ruined their produce until they brought them 
 to terms. Even during the Peloponnesian war, when the art of 
 besieging had made some progress, we read of several instances 
 in which this mode of aggressive warfare was adopted with effi- 
 cient results."2 We may readily believe that the Dorians obtain- 
 ed admittance both into Argos and Corinth in this manner. And 
 it is remarkable that, except Sikyon (which is affirmed to have 
 been surprised by night), these were the only towns in the Argo- 
 lic region which are said to have resisted them ; the story being, 
 that Phlius, Epidaurus, and Troezen had admitted the Dorian 
 intruders without opposition, although a certain portion of the 
 previous inhabitants seceded. We shall hereafter see that the 
 non-Dorian population of Sikyon and Corinth still remained con- 
 siderable. 
 
 The separate statements which we thus find, and the position 
 of the Temenion and the Solygeius, lead to two conjectures,— 
 tirst, that the acquisitions of the Dorians in Peloponnesus were 
 also isolated and gradual, not at all conformable to the rapid 
 strides of the old Herakleid legend ; next, that the Dorian invad- 
 ers of Argos and Corinth made their attack from the Argolic 
 and the Saronic gulfs, — by sea and not by land. It is, indeed, 
 difficult to see how they can have got to the Temenion in any 
 otlier way than by sea ; and a glance at the map will show that 
 the eminence Solygeius presents itself,^ with reference to Corinth, 
 as the nearest and most convenient holding-ground for a mari- 
 time invader, conformably to the scheme of operations laid by 
 Nikias. To illustrate the supposition of a Dorian attack by sea 
 on Corinth, we may refer to a story quoted from Aristotle (which 
 
 ' Thucyd. iv. 42. 
 ■ Thacyd. iv. 42. 
 
 Thucyd. i. 122 i iii 85 , vii. 18-27} viiL 38-4a 
 
dio 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DORIANS AT SPARTA AND IN JilESSENE. 
 
 811 
 
 we find embodied in the explanation of an old adage), repto^u^t 
 ing IIij)potes the father of Aletes as havinxr crossed the Malia* 
 gulfi (the sea immediately bordering on the ancient Maleana, 
 Dryoi)ians, and Dorians) in ships, for the purpose of colonizing. 
 And if it be •••afe to trust the mention of Dorians in the Odyssey, 
 as a part ot the population of the island of Crete, we there have 
 CXI example of Dorian settlements wliich must have been effected 
 by sea, and that too at a very eaily period. " We must suppose 
 (observes O. Miiller,^ in reference to these Kretan Dorians) that 
 the Dorians, pressed by want or restless from inactivity, con- 
 structed piratical canoes, manned these frail and narrow barks 
 witli soldiers who themselves worked at tlie oar, and thus being 
 changed from mountaineers into seamen, — the Normans of 
 Greece, — set sa 1 tor the distant island of Krete." In the same 
 manner, we nuiy conceive the ex})editions of the Dorians against 
 Argos and Corinth to have been effected ; and whatever difficul- 
 ties may attacii to this hypothesis, certain it is that the difficulties 
 of a long land-march, along such a territory as Greece, are still 
 more serious. 
 
 The supposition of Dorian emigrations by sea, from the Ma- 
 liac gulf to the north-eastern promontory of Peloponnesus, is 
 farther borne out; by the analogy of the Dryopes, or Dryopians. 
 During the histoi*ical times, this people occupied several detached 
 settlements in vari«jus j>arts of Greece, all maritime, and some 
 insular; — they were found at Ilermione, Asine, and Eion, in 
 the Argolic peninsula (very near to the important Dorian towns 
 
 * Aristot. ap. Prov. Vatican, iv. 4, y[rf?uaKov irXolov, — also, Prov. Siiidas 
 
 X 2 
 
 ' Hist, of Dorian?, ch. i. 9. Andron positively affirms that the Dorians 
 came from Ilistiteotis to Krete : but his affirmation does not seem to me 
 to constitute any additional evidence of the fact : it is a conjecture adapted 
 to the passage in the Odyssey (xix. 174), as the mention of Achceans and 
 Pehi.sgians evidcntl} shows. 
 
 Aristotle (ap. Strah. viii. p. 374) appoirs to have believed that the Hera 
 kleids returned to Argos out of the A-tic Tetrapolis (where, according to 
 the Athenian legend, they had ol»tained shelter when persecuted by Eurys- 
 thens), accompanying a body of lonians who then settled at Epidaurus. Ho 
 Cftnnot, therefore, have connected the Dorian occupation of Argos with the 
 flspedition from Naupaktus. 
 
 constituting the Amphiktyony of Argos,') — at Styra and Karys- 
 tU9 in the island of Eubaa, — in the island of Kythnus, and even 
 at Cyprus. These dispersed colonies can only have been p^ont- 
 ed by expeditions over the sea. Now we are told that the origi- 
 nal Dryopis, the native country of this people, comprehended 
 both the territory near the river Spercheius, and north of CEta, 
 afterwards occupied by the Malians, as well as the neighboring 
 district south of CEta, which was afterwards called Doris. From 
 hence the Dryopians were expelled, — according to one story, by 
 the Dorians, — according to another, by Herakles and the Malians : 
 however this may be, it was from the Maliac gulf that they started 
 on shipboard in quest of new homes, which some of them found 
 on the headlands of the Argolic peninsula.2 And it was from 
 this very country, according to Herodotus,^ that the Dorians also 
 set forth, in order to reach Peloponnesus. Nor does it seem 
 tmreasonable to imagine, that the same means of conveyance, 
 U'hich bore the Dryopians from the Maliac gulf to HermionS 
 %nd Asine, also carried the Dorians from the same place to tho 
 Temenion, and the hill Solygeius. 
 
 The legend represents Sikyon, Epidaurus, Troezen, Phlius, 
 and Kleonaj, as all occupied by Dorian colonists from Argos, 
 under the different sons of Temenus : the first three are on the 
 sea, and fit places for the occupation of maritime invaders. Ar- 
 gos and the Dorian towns in and near the Argolic peninsula are 
 to be regarded as a cluster of settlements by themselves, com- 
 pletely distinct from Sparta and the Messenian Stenyklerus, 
 which appear to have been formed under totally different condi- 
 tions. First, both of them are very far inland, — Stenyklenia 
 not easy, Sparta very difficult of access from the sea ; next, we 
 know that the conquests of Sparta w^ere gradually made down 
 the valley of the Eurotas seaward. Both these acquisitions pre- 
 sent the appearance of having been made from the land-side, aiid 
 
 ' Herod, viii. 43-46 ; Diodor. iv. 37 ; Pausan. iv. 34, 6. 
 
 * Strabo, viii. p. 373 ; ix. p. 434. Herodot. viii. 43. Pherekydes, Fr. 29 
 find 88, ed. Didot. Steph. Byz. v. ApvonTj. Apoll"xlor. ii. 7, 7. SchoL 
 Apollon. Rhod. i. 1213. 
 
 ' Herodot. i. 56. — iir&evTex d't avri^ Ig ttjv ApvoiriSa uceS^, nal Ik Tfjf 
 ApvoTTidoc oiruc Ic HeTioirovviiaov iAt^dv, Aupixdv ixX^iJjy, — to th« 
 purpose, viii. 31-43. 
 
 I' 
 
312 
 
 mSTORV OF GREECls. 
 
 ARGEIAN CONFEDERACY. 
 
 813 
 
 perhaps in the direction which the Herakleid k»gend de>'eribe8, 
 — by warriors enteririii Peloponnesus across the narrow mouth 
 of the Corinthian gulf, through the aid or invitation of those 
 JEtolian 6*>*tlers who at the saine time colonized Elis. The early 
 and intimate connection (on which I shall touch presently) be- 
 tween Sparta and tlie Olympic games as administered by the 
 Eleians, as well as the leading part ascribed to Lykurgus in th.- 
 coastitution of the solemn Olympic truce, tend to strengthen such 
 a persuasion. 
 
 In considering the ejirly affairs of the Dorians in PelojMKinesu.«, 
 we are apt to have our minds biasetl, first, by the Herakleid 
 legend, which impart* to them an impressive, but deceitful, epicjd 
 unity ; next, by the asj»ect of the later and better-known historv, 
 which presents the Spiirian power a< unquestionably pre{>onder> 
 ant, aiid Argos only as second by a long interval. Hut the first 
 view (as I have ah-ea^ly remarked) which opens to us, of real 
 Grecian history, a lilth- before 776 b. c, exhibits Argos with its 
 alliance or confederacy of neighboring cities colonized from itself 
 as the great seat of Dorian powrr in the peninsuhi, and Sparta 
 as an our lying state of inferior consequence. The recollection 
 of this state of things lasted after it had ceased to be a reality, 
 tnd kept alive pretensions on the part of Argos to the headship 
 of the Greeks as a matter of right, which she became quite inca- 
 pable of sustainiag either by adequate jx>wer or by statesmanlike* 
 sagacity. The growth uf 6pariaii j>ower was a succession of en- 
 croachments upon Argos. 1 
 
 How Sparta came constantly to gain upon Argos will be miUler 
 for future explanation : at present, it is sutJicient to remark, tliat 
 the ascendency of Argos was derive<l not exclusively from her 
 own territory, but came in part from her position as metropolis 
 of an alliance of autonomous neighboring cities, all Dorian and 
 ill colonized from herself, — and this was an element of power 
 
 » See Herodot. vii. US. The Ar^reians say to the Lacedjemonians, in refer 
 - to the chief comraand of the Greeks — xa/rof Kard yt rd dUaiov yiv.' 
 
 #0.- -r^v vyfuovitiv eui-T^, ere. Sehweijrhaaser and others explain the poic. 
 
 br refprenoe to the coramand of Agamemnon : but liis is at best onlv a pan 
 
 of the fonndation of their claim : they had a more recent historical xvaht; 
 
 to plead also : compare Strabo. viii. p 37f . 
 
 essentially fluctuating. What Thebes was to the cities ol Boeotiai 
 id which she either was, or professed to have been, the founder, 
 the same was Argos in reference to Kleonae, Phlius, Sikyon, 
 Kpidaurus, Troezen, and ^gina. These towns formed, in mythi- 
 vul language, ** the lotof Temenus,"-^ — in real matter of fact, tho 
 confederated allies or subordinates of Argos : the first four of 
 Them were said to have been Dorized by the sons or immediate 
 relatives of Temenus ; and the kings of Argos, as acknowledged 
 <lescendants of the latter, claimed and exercised a sort oi sttzerainete 
 over them. Hermione, Asine, and Nauplia seem also to havo 
 !)een under the supremacy of Argos, though not colonies.- But 
 liiis supremacy Wiis not claimed directly and nakedly : agreeably 
 10 the ideas of the time, tlie ostensible pur})oses of the Argeian 
 confederacy or Amphiktyony were religious, though its secondary 
 and not less real eflects, were political. The great patron-god of 
 I lie lesigue was Apollo Pythaeus, in whose name the obligations 
 incumbent on the members of the league were imposed. While 
 in each of the confederated cities there was a temple to this god, 
 liis most holy and central sanctuary was on the Larissa or acrop* 
 •»lis of Argos. At this central Argeian sanctuary', solemn sacri* 
 iice^ were offered by Epidaurus as well as by other members of 
 ilie confederacy, and, as it should seem, accompanied by money- 
 
 ' 'H^Civ KTicavTuv (so runs the accusation of tlie Theban orators, againsi 
 ihe captive Plat«ans, before their Laeeda-monian judges, Thucyd. iii. 61.) 
 UAaraiav varefyov rf/^ dXA>7f Botwr/af — ovk tj^'lovv avTol, uanep krux'&i] r^ 
 rrpuroVf rjytfiovFvt(r&ai t'9* r;/zwv, l^u 6e tuv a7JXuv BoiutQv irapa^arvovref 
 i« irdrptay tirtti^ irpocnjvayKu^ovTo, npoaex^pv^f^v irpbt: ' h'&Tjvcuov^ koI fiei* 
 
 * Respecting Pheidon, king of Argos, Ephorus said, — rifv Xrjiiv dXi/m 
 nekfifie r^v Trffiivov ^leaTraofievTjv df n/^iu f/epTf (ap. Strabo. viii. p. 358). 
 
 ^ The worship of Apollo Pythaeus, adopted from Argos both at Hermiond 
 and iVsine, shows the connection between them and Argos (Pausan. ii. 35, 
 2; ii. 36, 5): bnt Paosanias can hardly be justified in saying that the 
 Argeians actually Dorvaed Hermion^ : it was Dryopian in the time of He- 
 rodotus, and seemingly for a long time afterwards (Herodot. viii. 4<). The 
 Hermionian Inscription, No. 1193, in Boeckh's Collection, recognizes their 
 old Dryopian connection with Asine in Laconia : that town had once I)ecn 
 neii^bor of Hermione, but was destroyed by the Argeians, and the inhab- 
 itants received a new home from the Spartans. The dialect of the Herraio- 
 ■ians Cprobably that of the Dryopians generally) was Doric. See AhreiM, 
 De Dialecto DoricA, pp. 2-12. 
 
 VOL. u 14 
 
 I \ 
 
 i 
 
 ggggC! 
 
ai4 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 PHEIDON OF ARGOS. 
 
 315 
 
 payments,! — which the Argeians, as chief administrators on 
 behalf of the common god, took upon them to enforce af'ain&l 
 defaulters, and actually tried to enforce during the Peloponnesiaii 
 war against Epidaurus. On another occasion, during the 66th 
 Olympiad (b. c. 514), they imposed the large fine of 500 talenta 
 upon each of the tviro states Sikyon and ^^gina, for having lent 
 ships to the Spartan king Kleomenes, wherewith he invaded the 
 Argeian territory. The ^ginetans set the claim at defiance, but 
 the Sikyonians acknowledged its justice, and only demurred to 
 its amount, professing themselves ready to pay 100 talents.2 
 There can be no doubt that, at this later period, the ascendency 
 of Argos over the members of her primitive confederacy had 
 become practically inoperative ; but the tenor of tlie cases men- 
 tioned shows that her claims were revivals of bygone privileges, 
 which had once been effective and valuable. 
 
 How valuable the privileges of Argos were, before the great 
 rise of the Spartan |)ower, — how important an ascendency they 
 conferred, in the hands of an energetic man, and how easily they 
 admitted of being used in furtherance of ambitious views, is 
 shown by the remarkable ease of Pheidon, the Temenid. The 
 few facts which we learn resj)ecting this prince exhibit to us, for 
 the first time, something like a real position of parties in the 
 Peloponnesus, wherein the actual coiiHict of living historical 
 men and cities, comes out in tolerable distinctness. 
 
 Pheidon was designated by Ephorus as the tenth, and by 
 Theopompus as the sixth, in lineal dpi^cent from Temenus. 
 Respecting the date of his existence, opinions the most dis- 
 crepant and irreconcilable have been delivered ; but there 
 seems good reason for referring him to the period a little before 
 and a little after the 8th Olympiad, — between 770 b. c. and 730 
 
 * Thucyd. v. 53. Kvpiuraroi rov lepov h^av ol 'kpyeloi. The word 
 rtarrpa^ff, which the historian uses in regard to the claim of Argos againsr 
 Epidaurus, seems to imply a money-payment withheld : compare the offer- 
 ings exacted by Athens from Epidaurus (Herod, v. 82). 
 
 The peculiar and intimate connection between the Argeians, and Apollo, 
 irith his surname of PythaCus, was dwelt upon by the Argeian pootei? 
 Telesilla (Pausan. ii. 36, 2). 
 ■ Herodot. vi. 92. See O. Miiller History of the Dorians, eh. 7, 13. 
 
 B. C.^ Of the preceding kings of Argos we hear little : one of 
 them, Eratus, is said to have expelled the Dryopian inhabitants 
 of Asine from their town on the Argolic peninsula, in conse- 
 quence of their having cooperated with the Spartan king, Nikan- 
 der, when he mvaded the Argeian territory, seemingly during 
 the generation preceding Pheidon ; there is another, Damokra- 
 tidas, whose date cannot be positively determined, but he appears 
 rather as subsequent than as anterior to Pheidon.'- We are in- 
 formed, however, that these anterior kings, even beginning with 
 Medon, the grandson of Temenus, had been forced to sub 
 mit to great abridgment of their power and privileges, and 
 that a form of government substantially popular, though nomi- 
 nally regal, had been established.^ Pheidon, breaking through 
 
 ' Ephor. Fragm. 15, ed. Marx; ap. Strabo, viii. p. 3.')8 ; Theopompus, 
 Fragm. 30, ed. Didot ; ap. Diodor. Fragm. lib. iv. 
 
 The Parian Marble makes Pheidon the eleventh from Herakle.s, and jilacea 
 him B. c. 895 ; Herodotus, on the contrary ("in a passage which aifbrds con- 
 t^iderable grounds for discussion), places him at a period which cannot bo 
 much higher than 600 b. c. (vi. 127.) Some autliors suspect the text of 
 Herodotus to be incorrect: at any rate, the real epoch of Pheidon is 
 determined by the 8th Olympiad. Several critics suppose tu<o Pheidoiis^ 
 each king of Argos, — among others, O. Miiller (Dorians, iii. 6, 10); but 
 there is nothing to countenance this, except the impossibility of reconciling 
 Herodotus with the other authorities. And Weissenborn. in a dissertation 
 of some length, vindicates the emendation of Pausanias proposed by some 
 former critics, — altering the 8th Olympiad, which now stands in the text 
 \)i Pausanias, into the twenty -eighth^ as the date of Pheidon's usurpation at 
 the Olympic games. Weissenborn endeavors to show that Pheidon cannot 
 have flourished earlier than 660 b. c. ; but his arguments do not appear to 
 me very forcible, and certainly not suflficient to justify so grave an alteration 
 in the number of Pausanias (Beitrage zur Griechischen Alterthumskunde, 
 p. 18, Jena, 1844). Mr. Clinton (Fasti Hellenici, vol. i. App. 1, p. 249) 
 places Pheidon between 783 and 744 b. c. ; also, Boeckh. ad Corp. Inscript 
 No. 2374, p. 335, and Miiller, ^ginetica, p. 63. 
 
 '"^ Pausan. ii. 36, 5 ; iv. 35, 2. 
 
 ^ Pausan. ii. 19, 1. ^Apyeloi Se, are iariyopiav kol to avTovofxov ayairCtvTe^ 
 ^K ndXaLOTiiToVy rd. rfig k^ovaia^ rwv (^aaiTiecjv i^ i^^xiffTov npo^yayov, cl>f 
 M^>5(jvi Tu Keiaov Kot role uTroyovoig rd ovofia Aet^i^^vat rov ^aaiXiuc fiovov 
 This passage has all the air of transferring back to the early government of 
 Argos, feelings which were only true of the later. It is ciuious that, in thii 
 chapter, though devoted to the Argeian regal line and government, Pausft* 
 uias takes no notice of Pheidto: be mentioiis him onl/ with reference to tht 
 i\i»p\Med Olympic ceremony. 
 
 I' 
 
816 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I| 
 
 the limits impa«»ed, made himself despot of Argos. He then re^ 
 established the power of Argos over all the cities of her confed- 
 eracy, which had before been so nearly dissolve*! as to leave ail 
 the members practically independent.* Next, ho is said to have 
 acquired dominion over Corinth, and to have endeavored to 
 assure it, by treacherously entrapping a thousand of her warlike 
 citizens ; but his artifice was divulged and frustrated by Abron, 
 one of his confidential friends.^ He is farther reported to have 
 aimed at extending his sway over the greater part of Pelopon- 
 nesus, — laying claim, as the descendant of Herakle?, through 
 the eldest son of Hyllus, to all the cities which that restle.<is 
 and irresistible hero had ever taken.^ According to Grecian 
 ideas, this legendaiy title was always seriously construed, and 
 often admitted as conclusive ; though of course, where there 
 were strong op{>osing interests, reasons would be found to elude 
 it. Pheidon would have the same ground of right as that 
 which, two hundred and fifty years afterwards, determined the 
 Herakleid Dorieus, i rother of Kleomenes king of Sparta, to 
 acquire for himself the territory near Mount Eryx in Sicily, be- 
 cause his progenitor,^ Herakles, had conquered it before him. 
 So numerous, however, were the legends respecting the con- 
 qnests of Herakles, that the claim of Pheidon must have covered 
 the greater part of Peloponnesus, except Sparta and the plain of 
 Messene, which were already in the hands of Ilerakleids. 
 
 Nor was the ambition of Pheidon satisfied even with these 
 large pretensions. He farther claimed the right of presiding 
 at the celebration of those religious games, or Agones, which had 
 
 * Ephorus, ut suprh. 4fel6uva rbv ^kpyetov, Sekotov dvra arrd Tr)fiivov^ 
 iwdfiei de iirepfSeiSXTiptvov roig Kar' avrdvj a^' ^f rf/v re Xfj^iv 6Xijv uvi2.af3e 
 r^i "'rpivov SiEOTraopei'Tiv e/f irXeiij fiipVy etc. What is meant by the lot of 
 Timentis has been already explained. 
 
 * Plutarch, Narrat. Amator p. 772 ; Schol. Apollon. Rhod. iv. 1212 ; com- 
 pare Didymus, ap. Scliol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 27. 
 
 I cannot, however, bttlieve that Pheidon, the ant ient Corinthian huv giver 
 mentioned by Aristotle, is the same person as Pheidon the king of Argcs 
 iPolit. ii. 6, 4). 
 
 * Ephor. ut fuprh. lipb^ rovroi^, iiri^ea^ai Kai raig v^' 'HpaKTiiovg alpv 
 &tt<raig noXeai^ ical Tm\ uyiJvaf aiioiv ri^ivai avrdv^ ovf kKel^oq l-&iiue 
 fntTwi' 6e elvcu Kai tov 'OJ.vfi-maKov, etc. * Herodut v. 43 
 
 ADMINISTRATION OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES. 
 
 317 
 
 lieen instituted by Herakles, — and among these was numbered 
 the Olympic Agon, then, however, enjoying but a slender fraction 
 of the lustre which afterwards came to attach to it. The presi- 
 dency of any of the more celebrated festivals current throughout 
 Greece, was a privilege immensely prized. It was at once dig- 
 nitied and lucrative, and the course of our history will present 
 more than one example in which blood wa« shed to determine 
 what state should enjoy it. Pheid6n marched to Olympia, at the 
 epoch of the 8th recorded 01}Tnpiad, or 747 b. c. ; on the 
 occasion of which event we are made acquainted with the real 
 state of parties in the peninsula. 
 
 The plain of Olympia, — now ennobled only by immortal 
 recollections, but once crowded with all the decorations of 
 religion and art, and fomiing for many centuries the brightest 
 centre of attraction known in the ancient world, — was situated 
 on the river Alpheius, in the territory called the Pisatid, hard 
 by the borders of Arcadia. At what time its agonistic festival, 
 recurring every fifth year, at the first full moon afler the sum- 
 mer solstice, first began or first acquired its character of special 
 sanctity, we have no means of determining. As with so many of 
 the native waters of Greece, — we follow the stream upwtvrd to 
 a certain point, but the fountain-head, and the earlier flow of his- 
 tory, is buried under mountains of unsearchable legend. The 
 first celebration of the Olympic contests was ascribed by Grecian 
 legendary faith to Herakles, — and the site of the place, in the 
 middle of the Pisatid, with its eight small townships, is quite suf- 
 ficient to prove that the inhabitants of that little territory were 
 warranted in describing themselves as the original administrators 
 of the ceremony.' But this state of things seems to have been 
 altered by the ^tolian settlement in Elis, which is represented 
 as having been conducted by Oxylus and identified with the 
 Return of the Herakleids. The ^tolo-Eleians, bordering upon 
 the Pisatid to the north, employed their superior power in sub- 
 duing their weaker neighbors,2 who thus lost their autonomy and 
 became annexed to the territory of Elis. It was the general rule 
 tlu*oughout Greece, that a victorious state undertook to perform* 
 
 
 * Xenoph. Hellen. vii. 4, 28 i Diodor. jlv. 7& 
 ' Strabo, viii. p. 354. 
 
 ' Thu<ycL iv. 98 
 
818 
 
 HISTOBY Of GREECE. 
 
 iEQINiEAN SC,^XE OF WTCIGHTS AND MEASURES. 
 
 dl9 
 
 the current services of the conquered people towards i he gocis, 
 — such services being conceived as attaching to the soil : hence, 
 the celebration of the Olympic games became numbered among 
 the incumbences of Elis, just in the same way as the worship of 
 the Eleusinian Demeter, when Eleusis lost its autonomy, was 
 included among th(j rehgious obligations of Athens. The Pisa- 
 tans, however, never willingly acquiesced in this absorption of 
 what had once been their separate privilege ; they long main- 
 tained their conviction, that the celebration of the games was 
 their right, and strove on several occasions to regain it. On those 
 occasions, the earliest, so far Jis we hear, was connected with 
 the intervention of Pheidon. It was at their invitation that the 
 king of Argos went to Olympia, and celebrated the games him- 
 self, in conjunction with the Pisatans, as the lineal successor of 
 Herakles ; while the Eleians, being thus forcibly dispossessed, 
 refused to include the 8th Olympiad in their register of the vic- 
 torious runners. But their humiliation did not last long, for the 
 Spartans took their part, and the contest ended in the defeat of 
 Pheidon. In the next Olympiad, the Eleian management and 
 the regular cnrolmtint appear as before, and the Spartans are 
 even said to have confirmed Elis in her possession both of Pisa- 
 tis and Triphylia.' 
 
 Unfortunately, these scanty particulars are all which we learn 
 respecting the armed conflict at the 8th Olympiad, in which the 
 religious and the political grounds of quarrel are so intimately 
 blended, — as we shall find to be often the case in Grecian his- 
 tory. But there is one act of Pheidon yet more memorable, of 
 which also nothing beyond a meagre notice has come down to 
 as. He first coined both copper and silver money in jEgina, 
 and first established a scale of weights and measures,2 which, 
 through his influence, became adopted throughout Peloponnesus, 
 and acquired, ultimately, footing both in all the Dorian states, 
 and in Bceotia, Thessaly, northern Hellas generally, and Mace- 
 donia, — under the name of the jEginaean Scale. There arose 
 
 *Pau9ai). V. 22, 2; Strabo, viii. pp. 354-^58; Herodot vi. 127. The namt 
 of the victor (Antikl^ the Messenian), however, belonging to the 8th Olym 
 piad, appears Jaly in the lists ; it mast have been supplied afterwards. 
 
 • Herodot vi. 127; Ephor. ap. Strab. viii. pp. 358-376. 
 
 iubsequently another rival scale in Greece, called the EuboiC| 
 differing considerably from the ^Egina^an. We do not know at 
 what time it was introduced, but it was employed both at Athens 
 and in the Ionic cities generally, as well as in Euboea, — being 
 modified at Athens, so far as money was concerned, by Solon's 
 debasement of the coinage. 
 
 Tlie copious and valuable information contained in M. Boeckh'a 
 recent publication on Metrology, has thrown new light upon these 
 monetary and statical scales.' He has shown that both the -^gi- 
 naean and the Euboic scales — the former standing to the latter 
 in the proportion of 6:5 — had contemporaneous currency in 
 different parts of the Persian empire ; the divisions and denomi- 
 nations of the scale being the same in both, 100 drachmae to a 
 raina, and GO minae to a talent. The Babylonian talent, mina, 
 and di-achma are identical with the ^ginaean : the word mina is 
 of Asiatic origin ; and it has now been rendered highly probable, 
 that the scale circulated by Pheidon was borrowed immediately 
 from the Phoenicians, and by them originally from the Babylonians. 
 The Babylonian, Hebraic, Phoenician, Egyptian,^ and Grecian 
 scales of weight (which were subsequently folloAved wherever 
 coined money was introduced) are found to be so nearly conform- 
 able, as to warrant a belief that they are all deduced from one 
 common origin ; and that origin the Chaldaean priesthood of 
 Babylon. It is to Pheidon, and to his position as chief of the 
 
 * Metrologische Untersuchungen iiber Gewichte, Miinzfusse, and Masse 
 ties Alterthums in ihrem Zusaminenhange dargestcllt, von Aug. Boeckh; 
 Berlin, 1838. 
 
 See chap. 7, 1-3. But I cannot agree with M. Bocrkh, in thinking that 
 Pheidon, in celebrating the Olympic games, deduced from the Olympic 
 stadium, and formally adopted, the measure of the foot, or that he at all 
 settled measures of lenyth. In general, I do not think that M. Boeckh's con- 
 clusions are well made out, in respect to the Grecian measures of length and 
 capacity. In an examination of this eminently learned treatise (inserted in 
 the Classical Museum, 1844, vol. i.), I endeavored to set forth both the nev 
 and interesting points established by the author, and the various others in 
 Irhich he appeared to me to have failed. 
 
 * I have modified this sentence as it stood in my first edition. It is not 
 correct to speak of the Egyptian money scale : the Egyptians had no CQint^ 
 money. See a valuable article, in review of my History, in the Christiaa 
 Reformer, by Mr. Keorick, who pointed out this inaccoracf . 
 
 ■ ■ it 
 
820 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ARC, OS AND SPARTA. 
 
 321 
 
 ^ I? 
 
 Argeian confeder'acj, thAt the Greeks owe the first introduction 
 of the Babyloniiin scale of weight, and the first employment ol 
 coined and stamped money. 
 
 If we maturely weigh the few, but striking acis of Pheid6n 
 which have been preserved to us, and which there is no reason to 
 discredit, we shall find ourselves introduced to an early historical 
 fttate of Peloponnesus very different from that to which aiiotlier 
 century will bring us. That Argos, with the federative cities 
 attached to her, was at this early time decidedly the commanding 
 power in that peninsula, is sufficiently shown by the establishment 
 and reception of the Pheidonian weights, measures, and monetary 
 liystem, — while the other incidents mentioned completely har- 
 monize with the Fame idea. Against the oppressions of Elis, the 
 Pisatans invoked Pheidon, — partly as exercising a primacy in 
 Peloponnesus, ju)U as the inhabitants of Lepreum in Triphylia,' 
 three centuries afterwards, called in the aid of Sparta for the same 
 object, at a time when Sparta possessed the headship, — and 
 partly as the lineal representative of Herakles, who had founded 
 those games from the management of which they had been unjustly 
 extruded. On the other hand, Sparta appears as a second-rate 
 power. The ^gina-un f^cale of weight and measure was adopted 
 there as elsewhere,^ — the Messenian Dorians were still equal 
 and independent, — and we find 8j)arta interfering to assist Elis 
 by virtue of an obligation growing (so the legend represents it) 
 out of the common iEtoIo- Dorian emigration ; not at all from 
 any acknowledged primacy, such as we shall see her enjoying 
 hereafter. The first coinage of co[)per and .silver money is a 
 capital event in Grecian history, and must be held to imply con- 
 siderable commerce as well as those extensive views which belong 
 only to a conspicuous and leading position. The ambition of 
 Pheidon to resume all the acquisitions made by his ancestor 
 Herakles, suggests the same large estimate of his actual power. 
 He is characterized as a despot, and even as the most insolent 
 
 I 
 
 » Thucyd. v. 31. 
 
 •Plutarch, Apophthegm. Laconic, p. 226; Dikaarchus ap. Athena 
 
 fw 141. 
 
 The iBgin»an mlna, drachma, and obolas were the denominations 
 liloyed in stipalatiomi among the Peloponnesiaa states (Thucyd. v. 47). 
 
 3<* all despots : i bow far he deserved such a reputation, we have 
 no means of judging. We may remark, however, that he lived 
 before the age of despots or tyrants, properly so called, and 
 before the Herakleid lineage had yet lost its primary, half-politi- 
 cal, hnlf-religious character. Moreover, the later historians have 
 invested his actions with a color of exorbitant aggression, by 
 applying them to a state of things which belonged to their time 
 and not to his. Thus Ephorus represents him as havinc^ de- 
 prived the Lacedaimonians of tlie headship of Peloponnesus, which 
 they never possessed until long after him, — and also as setting 
 at naught the sworn inviolability of the territory of the Eleians, 
 enjoyed by the latter as celcbrators of the Olympic games ; where- 
 as the Agonothesia, or right of superintendence claimed by Elis, 
 
 had not at that time acquired the sanction of prescription, 
 
 while the conquest of Pisa by the Eleians themselves had proved 
 that this sacred function did not protect the territory of a weaker 
 people. 
 
 How Pheidon fell, and how the Argeians lost that supremacy 
 which they once evidently possessed, we have no positive details 
 to inform us : with respect to tlie latter point, however, we can 
 discern a sufiicient explanation. The Argeians stood predomi- 
 nant as an entire and unanimous confederacy, which required a 
 vigorous and able hand to render its internal organization effec- 
 tive or its ascendency respected without. No such leader after- 
 wards appeared at Argos, the whole history of which city is 
 destitute of eminent individuals : her line of kings continued at 
 least down to the Persian war,- but seemingly with only titular 
 functions, for the government had long been decidedly popular 
 The statements, which r<*present the government as popular an- 
 terior to the time of Pheidon, appear unworthy of trust. That 
 prince is rather to be taken as wielding the old, undiminished 
 prerogatives of the Herakleid kings )ut wielding them with un- 
 usual effect, — enforcing relaxed privileges, and appealing to the 
 
 * Herodot vi. 127. ^eiduvoc tov 'Apyeiuv rvpavvov — rov ij3pi(TavT0f 
 mtjfurra St) 'ElXrfvuv Airavruv. Pausanias (vi. 22, 2) copies the expression. 
 
 Aristotle cites Pheidon as a person who, being a /3a<T<ket)f, made himself a 
 fipavvoc (Politic vlii. 8, 5). 
 
 ■ Herodot vii 149. 
 
 VOL. II. 14» 21oc 
 
t22 
 
 HISTORY OF GRP:ECE. 
 
 old heroic sentiment in reference to Herakles, rather than revo 
 lutionizing the existing rehitions either of Argos or of Peiopon" 
 nesus. It w:as in fact the great and steady growth of Sparta, for 
 three centuries after the Lykurgean institutions, which operated 
 as a cause of subversion to the previous order of command and 
 obedience in Greece. 
 
 Tlie assertion made by Herodotus, — that, in earlier times, the 
 whole eastern coast of Laconia as far as Cape Malea, inchiding 
 the island of Kythera and several other islands, had belonged to 
 Argos, — is referred by O. Muller to about the 50th Olympiad, or 
 580 B. c. Perhaps it had ceased to be true at that i)eriod ; but 
 that it was true in the age of Pheidon, there seem good grounds 
 for believing. What is probably meant is, that the Dorian towns 
 on this coast, l*rasia', Zarex, Epidaurus Lim* ni, and Bceaj, were 
 once autonomous, and members of the Aigeiaii confederacy, — a 
 fact highly probabh\ on independent evidence, with respect to 
 Epidaurus Limera, inasniuili as that town Mas a settlement from 
 Epidaurus in the Argolic iK'ninsula: and ll<je;e too had its own 
 cekist and ei>onymus, the llerakleid IJuuis,' noway connected with 
 Sparta, — perhaps derived from tlie same source as the name 
 of the town Ba'on in Doris. Tiie Argeian confederated towns 
 would thus comprehend the whole coast of the Argolic and Saro- 
 nic gulfs, from Kythera as tar as ^Kgina, besides other islands 
 which we do not know: JEgina had receivrd a colony of Dorians 
 from Argos and E})idaunis, upon whicii latter town it contiimed 
 for some time in a state of dependence.' It will at once be seen 
 that this extent of coast implies a considerable degree of com- 
 merce and maritime activity. We have l»e-i<i<'< to consider the 
 ransre of Doric colonies in the southern inlands of the ^Egean 
 and in the south-western corner of Asia Minor, — Krete, Kos, 
 Rhodes (with its three distinct cities), Ilalikarnassus, Knidus, 
 Myndus, Nisyrus, Syme, Kari)athus, Kalydnji, etc. Of the Doric 
 estaj[)lishmeiits here named, several are connected (as has been 
 before staled) with the great emigration of the Temenid Altha^ 
 menes from Argos : but what we particularly observe is, that they 
 oflen referred as colonies promiscuously to Argos, Troez^ 
 
 >Puusan. iii. 22, 9; iii. 23,4. 
 
 * Herodct. v. 83 ; fcitnibo, viii. p. 375. 
 
DORIANS IN ASIA AND IN THE ISLANDS. 
 
 829 
 
 4 
 
 Epirlaiiras i — more frequently however, as it seems, to Argos. 
 All these settlements are doubtless older than Pheidon, and we 
 may conceive them as proceeding conjointly from the allied Dorian 
 towns in the Argolic peninsula, at a time when they were more 
 \n the habit of united action than they afterwards became : a 
 captain of emigrants selected from the line of Herakles and 
 Temenus was suitable to the feelings of all of them. We may 
 thus look back to a period, at the very beginning of the Olym- 
 piads, when the maritime Dorians on the east of Peloponnesus 
 maintained a considerable intercourse and commerce, not only 
 among themselves, but also with their settlements on the Asiatic 
 c()a>t and islands. That the Argolic peninsula formed an early 
 centre for maritime rendezvous, we mav farther infer fi'om the 
 very ancient Amphiktyony of the seven cities (Ilermione, Epi- 
 daurus, JEgina, Athens, Prasia% Nauplia, and the Minyeian Or- 
 clutnienus), on the holy island of Kalauria, off the harbor of 
 
 (ezen.2 
 
 Tr 
 
 The view here given of the early ascendency of Argos, as the 
 head of the Peloponnesian Dorians and the metropolis of the 
 Asiatic Dorians, enables us to understand the capital innovation 
 of l^heidon, — the first coinage, and the tirst determinate scale 
 of weight and measure, known in Greece. Of the value of such 
 improvements, in the history of Grecian civilization, it is super- 
 fluous to speak, especially when we recollect that the Hellenic 
 Rtates, having no political unity, were only held together by the 
 
 4 
 
 \\i 
 
 • Rhodes, K6s. Knidus, and Halikarnassus are all treated by Strabo (xir 
 p. G53) as colonies of Argos: Rhodes is so described by Thucydides (vii. 
 57), and Kos by Tacitus (xii. 61 ). Kos, Kalydna, and Nisyrus are described 
 by Herodotus as colonies of Epidaurus (vii. 99): Halikarnassus passef 
 «ometimes for a colony of Troezen, sometimes of Tra?zen and Argos con- 
 jointly: "Cum Melas et Areuanius ab Argis et Troezene coloniam com- 
 munem eo loco induxerunt, barbaros Caras et Leleges ejecerunt (Vitruv. it 
 8 12: Stepb. Byz. V. 'AAf«:«oi'a<T(Toj')." Compare Strabo, x. p. 479 ; Conon, 
 Narr. 47 ; Diodor. v. 80. 
 
 Raoul Rochette (Histoire des Colonies Grecques, t. iii. ch. 9) and O. Mfll- 
 ler CHistory of the Dorians, ch. 6) have collected the facts about theM 
 A-siatic Dorians. 
 
 The little town of Boeae had its counterpart of the same name in 
 (8teph. Byz. v. Boiov). 
 
 « Strabo, p. 374. 
 
324 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 aggregate of spontaneous uniformities, in language, religion, sym- 
 pathies, recreations, and general habits. We see both how l^hei- 
 don came to conti-act the wish, and how he acquired the power, 
 to introduce throughout bo much of the Grecian world an uni- 
 foi-m scale ; we also see that the Asiatic Dorians form the link 
 between him and Phoenieia, from whence the scale was derived, 
 just as the Euboic scale came, in all probability, through the 
 Ionic cities in Asisa, from Lydia. It is asserted by Ephorus, and 
 admitted even by the ablest modem critics, that Pheidon first 
 coined money *' in JEgina : " ^ other authors (erroneously believ- 
 ing that his scale was the Euboic scale) alleged that his coinage 
 had been carried on " in a place of Argos called Euboea." ^ ^'ow 
 both these statements appear highly improbable, and both are 
 traceable to the same mistake, — of supposing that the title, by 
 which the scale had come to be commonly known, must neces- 
 sarily be derived from the place in which the coinage had been 
 struck. There is every reason to conclude, that what Pheidon 
 did was done in Argos, and nowhere else: his coinage and scale 
 were the earliest known in Greece, and seem to have been known 
 by his own name, " the Pheidonian measures," under which de- 
 signation they were described by Aristotle, in his account of the 
 constitution of Argos.^ They probably did not come to bear the 
 specific epithet of JBgincean until there was another scale in 
 vogue, the Euboic, from which to distinguish them ; and both the 
 epithets were probably derived, not from the place where the 
 scale first originated, but from the people whose commercial 
 activity tended to make them most generally known, — in the one 
 case, the ^ginetans ; in the other case, the inhabitants of Chalkis 
 and Eretria. I think, therefore, that we are to look upon the 
 Pheidonian measures as emanating from Argos, and as having 
 
 ' Ephorus ap. Strabo, viii. p. 376 ; Boeckh, Metrologie, Abschn. 7, 1 : se© 
 also the Marmor rarinm, Epoch 30. 
 
 * Etymologicon Ma/Lrn. Ev(ioiKbv vofitafia. 
 
 * Pollux, Onomastic x. 179. Elrj d' av Kcd ^eidctv ri dyyeiov i\aifipdv,ani 
 rCi ^eiduviuv fterpuv 6vofiac/^ivov, vvep 6v h 'Apyeifjv voTurcig, ^AfMnorg' 
 Kric }Jyei. 
 
 Alao Ephoras ap. Strab. viii. p. 358. Kal juirfM i^eUpe rd ^etdC>veta imXo^ 
 U9va KOi (jTa^uoi)^, koI vofiiana Kexapayfievov, etc 
 
 iETOLO-DORIAN EMIGRATION 
 
 82& 
 
 no greater connection, originally, with -^gina, than with any 
 other city dependent upon Argos. 
 
 There is, moreover, another point which deserves notice. What 
 was known by the name of the iEgina?an scale, as contrasted 
 with and standing in a definite ratio (6 ; 5) with the Euboic scale, 
 related only to weight and money, so far as our knowledge ex- 
 tends : I we liiwe no evidence to show that the same ratio extend- 
 ed either to measures of length or measures of capacity. But 
 there seems ground for believing that the Pheidonian regulations, 
 taken in their full comprehension, embraced measures of capacity 
 as well as weights : Pheidon, at the same time when he deter- 
 mined the talent, mina, and drachm, seems also to have fixed the 
 dry and liquid measures, — the niedimnus and metretes, with theii 
 l>arts and multiples: and there existed- Pheidonian measures 
 of capacity, though not of length, so I'ar as we know. The -3?^gin- 
 sean scale may thus have comprised only a portion of what was 
 established by Pheidon, namely, that which related to weight and 
 money. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 iBTOLO-DOBIAN EMIGRATION INTO PELOPONNESUS. -ELIS. 
 
 LACONIA, AND MESSENIA. 
 
 It has already been stated that the territory properly called 
 Elis, apart from the enlargement which it acquired by conquest, 
 included the westernmost land in Peloponnesus, south of Achaia, 
 and west of Mount Pholoe and Olenus in Arcadia, — but not 
 extending so far southward as the river Alpheius, the course of 
 which lay along the southern portion of Pisatis and on the bor 
 ders of Triphylia. This territory, which appears in the Odyssey 
 
 > This differs from Boeckh's opinion : see the note in pagi 31S. 
 • Theophrast. Character, c. 13 j PoUux, x. 179. 
 
d26 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 Hi 
 
 AS ** the divine Elis, where the Epeians hold 8way,"i is in the his. 
 torical times occupied by a population of ^Etolian origin. The 
 connection of race between the historical Eleians and the his- 
 torical ^tolians was recognized by both parties, nor is there any 
 ground for disputing it.2 
 
 That ^tolian invaders, or emigrants, into Elis, would cross 
 from Naupaktus, or some neighboring point in the Corinthian 
 gulf, is in the natural course of things, — and such is the course 
 which Oxylus, the conductor of the invasion, is represented by the 
 Herakleid legend as taking. That legend (as has been already 
 recounted) introduces Oxylus as the guide of the three Hera- 
 kleid brothers, — Temenus, Kresphontes, and Aristodemus, — 
 and as stipulating with them that, in the new distribution about to 
 take place of Peloponnesus, he shall be allowed to possess the 
 Eleian territory, coupled with many holy privileges as to the 
 celebration of the Olympic games. 
 
 In the preceding chapter, I have endeavored to show that the 
 settlements of the Dorians in and near the Argolic |>eninsula, so 
 far as the probabilities of the case enable us to judge, were not 
 accomplished by any inroad in this direction. But the localities 
 occupied by the Dorians of Sparta, and by the Dorians of Steny- 
 klerus, in the territory called Messene, lead us to a different con- 
 clusion. The easiest a.nd most natural road through which emi- 
 grants could reach either of these two spots, is through the Eleian 
 and the Pisatid countiy. Colonel Leake observes,^ that the 
 direct road from the Eleian territory to Sparta, ascending the 
 valley of the Alpheius, near Olympia, to the sources of its branch, 
 the Theius, and from thence descending the Eurotas, atFords the 
 only easy march towards that very inaccessible city: and both 
 ancients and moderns liave remarked the vicinity of the source 
 of the Alpheius to that of the Eurotas. The situation of Steny- 
 klerus and Andania, the original settlements of the Messenian 
 Dorians, adjoining clos«?ly the Arcadian Parrhasii, is only at a 
 Bhort distance from th e course of the Alpheius ; being thus reached 
 
 ' Odyss. xv. 297. f Strabo, x. p. 479. 
 
 » Leake, Travels in Morea, vol. iii. eh. 23, p. 29 ; compare Diodor. xv. 66. 
 
 The distance from Olympia to Sparta, as marked on a pillar which Pan- 
 ianias saw at Olympia, was 660 stadia, — about 77 English miles (Pausaa 
 n. 16, 6). 
 
 DORIAN SETTLEMENTS AT SPARTA. 
 
 327 
 
 most easily by the same route. Dismissing the idea of a grea* 
 collective Dorian aimament, powerful enough to grasp at onca 
 the entire peninsula, — we may conceive two moderate detach- 
 ments of hardy mountaineers, from the cold regions in and near 
 Doris, attaching themselves to the JEtolians, their neighbors, who 
 were proceeding to the invasion of Elis. After having aided 
 the -^tolians, both to occupy Elis and to subdue the Pisatid, 
 these Dorians advanced up the valley of the Alpheius in quest 
 of settlements for themselves. One of these bodies ripens into 
 the stately, stubborn, and victorious Spartans ; the other, into the 
 fhort-lived, trampled, and struggling Messenians. 
 
 Amidst the darkness which overclouds these original settle- 
 ments, we seem to discern something like special causes to deter- 
 mine both of them. With respect to the Spartan Dorians, we 
 are told that a person named Philonomus betrayed Sparta to 
 them, persuading the sovereign in possession to retire with his 
 people into the habitations of the lonians, in the north of the 
 peninsula, — and that he received as a recompense for this accept- 
 able service Amykhe, with the district around it. It is farther 
 stated, — and this important fact there seems no reason to doubt, 
 — that Amyklae, — though only twenty stadia or two miles and 
 a half distant from Sparta, retained both its independence and 
 its Achaean inhabitants, long after the Dorian emigrants had ac- 
 quired possession of the latter place, and was only taken by 
 them under the reign of Teleklus, one generation before the first 
 Olympiad.^ Without presuming to till up by conjecture incurable 
 gaps in the statements of our authorities, we may from hence 
 reasonably presume that the Dorians were induced to invade, 
 and enabled to acquire, Sparta, by the invitation and assistance 
 of a party in the interior of the country. Again, with res 
 to the Messenian Dorians, a different, but not less effectual U 
 tation was presented by the alliance of the Arcadians, in the 
 south-western portion of that central region of Peloponnesus. 
 Kresphontes, the Herakleid leader, it is said, espoused the daugh- 
 ter^ of the Arcadian king, Kypselus, which procured for hina the 
 
 ' " -'■'■ ■' I ■ ^^M^— ^^.^M^^^^— ^ ■■■■I — ■* -i-ii .. — III I —I. I ^ mi 
 
 ' Strabo, viii. pp. 364, 365 ; Pausan. iii. 2 5 : compare the ^tory of Kiinik 
 Paosan. iii. 13, 3. 
 * Pausan. iv. 3, 3 ; viii. 29. i 
 
 V 
 
32» 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE 
 
 I 
 
 }i 
 
 support of a powcrfal section of Arcadia. rii> settlement al 
 Htenyklerus was a considerable distance from the sea, at the 
 north-eaflt corner of Messenia,' clo-»e to the Arcadian frontier; 
 and it will be ?-een hereafter that tin's Arcadian alliance is acoii- 
 8fant and material element in the disputes of th(^ Messenian 
 Dorians with Sparta. 
 
 Wc may thns trace a reasonable se<pience of events, showing 
 how two i)odie> (»f Dorians, havinj^ first assisted the A^Ao\o- 
 Kleians to compur the I*isatid, and thns tindinj^ themselves on 
 the banks of the Al|)heins, followed the upward course of that 
 river, th»' on*' to settle at Spartfi, the other at Stenjklerus. The 
 historian Kj)honi<, from whom our s<'antj fragments of informa 
 tion respecting these early settlements arc <lerived, — it is im- 
 portant to note tliat he lived in tlu^ age immf'diately succeeding 
 the first fbiuidation of Messene as a city, the restitution of the 
 long-exiled Messeiijans, and the amputation of tli*^ fertile western 
 half of Laconiji, for their benefit, by Epameinondas, — imparts to 
 these proc(»edings an immediate decisiveness of effect which does 
 not properly belong to them : as if the Spartans had become at 
 once possessed of all Laconia, and the Messetn'ans of all Mes- 
 senia: Pausanias, t(X), speaks as if the Arcadians collectively had 
 assisted and allied themselv<'s with Kresphontes. This is the 
 general spirit which pervades his ac<onnt, tiiongh the [)articular 
 facts in so far as we find any such, do not always harmonize 
 with it. Now we are ignorant of the preexisting divisions of 
 the country, either east or west of Mount Taygetus, at the time 
 when the Dorians invaded it. But to treat the one and the 
 other as integral kingdoms, handed over at once to two Dorian 
 leaders, is an illusion borrowed from the old legend, from the his- 
 toricizing fancies of Ephonis, and from the fact that, in the well- 
 known times, this whole territory* came to be really united under 
 the Spartan power. 
 
 At what date the Dorian settlements at Sparta and Stenyk- 
 UiTUs were effected, we have no means of determining. Yet, that 
 there existed between them in the earliest times a degree of fra- 
 iBmity which did not prevail between Lacedaemon and Argos, 
 
 KARLIEST HISTORY OF SPARTA. 
 
 ;529 
 
 * Strabo (viii. p. 366) blames Euripides for calling MessenS an inland 
 ; but the poet ieems to have been quite correct in doing so. 
 
 we may fairly presume from the common temple, with joint 
 religious sacrifices, of Artemis limnatis, or Artemis on ih« 
 Marsh, erected on the confines of McBsenia and Laconia.' Oar 
 first view of the two, at nil approaching to distinctness, seems to 
 date from a period about half a century earlier than the firfl 
 Olympiad (77G b. c), — a^"t the reign of king Teleklus of the 
 Eurystheneid or Agid line, and the introduction of the Lykurgean 
 discipline. Teleklus stands in the list as the eighth king dating 
 from Eurysthenes. But how many of the seven kings before 
 him are to be considered as real persons, — or how much, out of 
 the brief warlike expeditions ascribed to them, is to be treated as 
 authentic history, — I pretend not to define. 
 
 The earliest determinable event in the internal history of Sparta 
 is the introduction of the Lykurgean discipline; the eariiest 
 external events are the concjuest of Amyklae, Pharis, and Geron- 
 thrje, effected by king Teleklus, and the first quarrel with the 
 Messenians, in which that prince was slain. When we come to 
 see how deplorably great was the confusion and ignorance which 
 reigned with reference to a matter so preeminently important a^ 
 Lykurgus and his legislation, we shall not be inclined to think 
 that facts much less imj:)ortant, and belonging to an earlier epoch, 
 can have been handed down upon any good authority. And in 
 like manner, when we learn that Amyklse, Pharis, and Geronthrae 
 (all south of Sparta, and the first only two and a half miles dis- 
 tant from that city) were inde[>endent of the Spartans until the 
 rei«'^n of Teleklus, we shall require some decisive testimony before 
 we can believe that a community so small, and so hemmed in aa 
 Sparta must then have been, had in earlier times undertaken 
 expeditions against Helos on the sea-coast, against Kleitor on the 
 extreme northern side of Arcadia against the Kynurians. or 
 against the Argeians. If Helos and Kynuria were conquered by 
 these eariy kings, it appears that they had to be conquered a 
 second time by kings succeeding Teleklus. It would be more 
 natural that we should hear when and how they conquered the 
 places nearer to them, — Sellasia, or Belemina, the valley of the 
 CEnus, or the upper valley of the Eurotas. But these seem to be 
 
 * Pausan. iv. 2, 2. jierelxov <'£ avTov turvoi ^upleuv ol re Meaa^vioi lad 
 AjOutedaifiovLOi, 
 
830 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 assumed as matters of course ; tLe proceedings ascribed to tha 
 early Spartan kings are such only as might beseem the palmy 
 days when Sparta was undisputed mistress of all Laconia. 
 
 The succession of Messenian kings, beginning with Kresphon- 
 tes, the Herakleid brother, and continuing from father to son, — 
 ilipytus, Glaukus, Isthnius, Dotadas, Subotas, Phintas, the last 
 being contemporary with Teleklus, — is still less marked by inci- 
 dent than that of the early Spartan kings. It is said that the 
 reii'-n of Kresphontes was troubled, and himself ultimately slain 
 by mutinies among his subjects : yEpytus, then a youth, having 
 escaped into Arcadia, wiis afterwards restored to the throne by 
 the Arcadians, Spartans, and Argeians.i From -^pytus, the 
 Messenian line of kings are stated to have been denominated 
 TEpytids in preference to llerakleids, — which affords another 
 proof of their intimate connection with the Arcadians, since ^py- 
 tus was a very ancient name in Arcadian heroic antiquity.'^ 
 
 There is considerable resemblance l)etween the alleged behavior 
 of Kresphontes on first settling at Stenyklerus, and that of Eurys- 
 thenes and Proklts at Sparta, — so far as we gather from state- 
 ments alike meagre and uncertified, resting on the authority of 
 Ephorus. Both are said to have tried to place the preexisting 
 inhabitants of the country on a level with their own Dorian bands ; 
 both provoked discontents and incurred obloquy, with their con- 
 temporaries as well as with posterity, by the attempt ; nor did 
 eitlier permanently succeed. Kresphontes was forced to concen- 
 trate all his Dorians in Stenyklerus, while after all, the discontents 
 ended in his violent death. And Agis, the son of Eurysthenes, 
 is said to have reversed all the liberal tentatives of his father, so 
 as to bring the whole of Laconia into subjection and dependence 
 on the Dorians at Sparta, with the single exception of Amyklae. 
 So odious to the Spartan Dorians was the conduct of Eurysthenes, 
 that they refused to acknowledge him as their oekist, and conferrec' 
 that honor upon Agis ; the two lines of kings being called Agiadb 
 
 * Pausan. iv. 3, 5-6. 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, ii. 604. — 
 
 AlirvTioi napa tvfiiSov, 
 fit^\ adloc. 6 d' AfTTiTOf apxaiovarog rjpu^, 'Ap«dc Td yrvof. 
 
 THE MESSENIAN DORIANS. 
 
 331 
 
 and Eurypontids, instead of Eurystheneids and Prokleids.^ Wo 
 cee in these statements the same tone of miwd as that whiith 
 pervades the Panathenaic oration of Isokrates, the master of 
 Ephorus, — the facts of an unknown period, so colored as to suit 
 an ideal of haughty Dorian exclusiveness. 
 
 Again, as Eurysthenes and Prokles appear, in the picture of 
 Ephorus, to carry their authority at once over the whole of 
 Laconia, so too does Kresphontes over the whole of Messenia, — 
 over the entire south-western region of Peloponnesus, westward 
 of Mount Taygetus and Cape Taenarus, and southward of the 
 river Neda. He sends an envoy to Pylus and Rhium, the 
 western and southern portions of the south-western promontory 
 of Peloponnesus, treating the entire territory as if it were one 
 sovereignty, and inviting the inhabitants to submit under ecpuii 
 laws.2 But it has already been observed, that this supposed 
 
 ' Compare the two citations from Ephorus, Strabo, viii. pp. 361-365. 
 Unfortunately, a portion of the latter citation is incurably mutilated in the 
 text : O. Muller (History of the Dorians, book i. ch. v. 13) has proposed an 
 ingenious conjecture, which, however, cannot be considered as trustworthy. 
 Grosskurd, the German translator, usually skilful in these restorations, leaves 
 the passage untouched. 
 
 For a new coloring of the death of Kresphontes, adjusted by Isokrates so 
 as to suit the purpose of the address which he puts into the mouth of Anhi- 
 damus king of Sparta, see the discourse in his works which passes under 
 that name (Or. iv. pp. 120-122). Isokrates says that the Messenian Dorians 
 slew Kresphontes, whose children fled as suppliants to Sparta, imploring 
 revenge for the death of their father, and surrendering the territory to the 
 Spartans. The Delphian god advised the latter to accept the tender, and 
 they accordingly attacked the Messenians, avenged Kresphontes, and appro- 
 [)riated the territory. 
 
 Isokrates always starts from the basis of the old legend, — the triple 
 Dorian conquest made all at once : compare Panathenaic. Or. xii. dd 
 270-287. ^^ 
 
 * Ephorus ap. Strabo, viii. p. 361. Dr. Thiriwall ohserves (History of 
 Greece, ch. vii. p. 300, 2d edit.), « The Messenian Pylus seems long to have 
 retained its independence, and to have been occupied for several centuries 
 by one branch of the family of Neleus ; for descendants of Nestor are men- 
 tioned an allies of the Messenians in their struggle with Sparta in the latter 
 half of the seventh century b. c." 
 
 For this as.sertion, Dr. Thiriwall cites Strabo (viii. p. 355). I agree with 
 bin. as to the matter af fact : I see no proof that the Dorians of Stenyklerus 
 ••ver ruled over wha< is called the lilessenian Pylus j for, of course, if they 
 
832 
 
 insrORV OF GREECB. 
 
 oneiK'ss liiul iiylivisihility is not less uncertified in regard to 
 
 il«'ss<'iiia than in njranl to Laconiju How large a proportion of 
 tlie tbriner tt'iritory tht's«i kings of Stenykli^rua may l»ave ruled, 
 we hav«' no rn*'ans t>t* <l«.'t«'rniiniiig, hut there were certainly pot' 
 tions of it which they did not rule, — not merely <lurin«^ the reign 
 of Tch'klus at Sparta, but still later, during the first Messenian 
 war. For not only are we informe<l tliat Teleklus established 
 three townships, I'oieessji, Kcht;iie,» and I'ragium, near the Me8- 
 senian gulf, and on tlie <(Mnse of the rivrr Nedon, but we read 
 alM) a farther in.iti r (»f evidence in the roll of Olympic rictors. 
 Kvery competitor tor the prize at one of these great festivals was 
 ilway» entered a-* member of some autonomous Hellenic commu- 
 nity, which com^tituted his title to approach the lists; if success- 
 ful, he w;is proi'laiiw'd w ith tln^ name of the community to which 
 he belonged. Mow during the lirst ten Olympiads, seven winners 
 are proclaimed as Messenians ; in the 1 Ith 01ympia<l, we tind the 
 iKUue of Oxythemis Korouicus, — Oxythemis, not of Koroneia in 
 IkBotia, but of Konme in the western bend of the Messenian gulf,' 
 
 did not rute over it Iwlbre the m ron.l Mosstt»ijin war, they never ac(iaired it 
 at all. But on reference to the pa><sHpe in StratK), it will not he fonnd to 
 prove anything to thu point ; for Strabo is speakin/;, not of the Messenian 
 Fylus, hut of the Tnpkiflian Pyhis : he takes pains to show that Nestor 
 hiul nothing to do with the Messnncui Pylus^ — fiiarofXK airoyovoi means 
 Iho inhabitants of Triphylia, near I>epreura : compare p. 350. 
 
 ' Strabo, viii. p. 36a. Concerning the situation of Koron^, in the Messe- 
 nian gttlf, see Pauaanias, iv.34, 2 ; Strabo, viii. p.3Gl ; and the observationf 
 of Colonel I^eake, Travels in Morca, ch. x. vol. i. pp. 439-448. He placetr 
 it near the modem Petalidhi, seemingly on good grounds. 
 
 « See Mr. Clinton's Chronological Tables for the year 732 b. c.; O Mallei 
 (in the Chronological Table subjoined to his History of the Dorians) calte 
 this victor, OxythemU ttf Kordtma^ in Bootia. But this is inadmissible, on two 
 f rounds : 1. The occurrence of a B<rotiaa competitor in that early day a» 
 the Olympic games. The first eleven victors (I put aside Oxythemis, 
 LorauAC he is the sttbj«»ct of the argnment) are all from western and southern 
 l'elo{>onuesus ; then come victors from Corinth, Megara, and Epidanriw ; 
 then from Athens ; there is one from Thebes in the 41 at Olympiad. I infer 
 from hence that the celebrity and frequentation of the Olympic games 
 increased only by degrees, and had not got beyond Peloponnesus in the 
 f^ghth century B. c. 2. The name Corona;us. Kopwva^of, is the proper and 
 formal title for a citizen of Koron^, not for a citizen of Koroneia : the latter 
 styles himself Kopwvirvc- The ethnical name Kopwvei);, as belonging to 
 Knrdreia in BoBOtia, is placed beyond doubt by several inscriptions in Boeckh's 
 
 Ui.YM?lC FESTIVAL. 
 
 a^a 
 
 §ome miles on the right bank of the Pamisus, and a considerable 
 distance to the north of the modern Coron. Now if Korone had then 
 been comprehended in Messenia, Oxythemis would have; been 
 proitlaiined ha a Messenian, like the seven wiimers who preceded 
 him ; and the fact of his being pro<'Jaimed as a Koron^ean, ]>roves 
 that Korone was then an independent eommimity, not under the 
 doHjinion of the Dorians of Stenyklerus. It 8eems clear, therefore, 
 that the hitter did not rei^i^n over the whole territory conimofily 
 known as Messenia, though we are unable to assign the proportion 
 of it which they actually possessed. 
 
 Tlie Olympic festival, in its origin doubtless a privilege of the 
 neighl>oring Tisalans, seems to have derived its great and gra<lii- 
 ully ex[)anding importance from the ^2UjU>-Kleian settlement in 
 I*cloi)onnesus, combined with the Dorians of Laconia and Me- 
 scnia. Lykurgus of Sparta, and Jphitug of Elis, are alleged to 
 have joined their efforts for the purpose of establishing both the 
 
 collection; especially No. 1583, in which a citircn of that town is proolaimeo 
 IIS victorious at tlie festival of tiie Cliuritesia at Ortiioraenns: compare Nos 
 15S7-1503, in whicli tlie same ethnical name occurs. The Ikcotian inscrip 
 tioii^ attest irj like njunner the prevalence of the same etymological law in 
 oi ining ethnical names, for the town-i near Koroneia : thu.H, C/totrdn&'a makes 
 
 The Inscriptions afford evidence y>erf(irtly decisive as to the ethnical title 
 iiidcr which a citizen of Koroneia iu i^iK>iia would have caused hi«i*elf to 
 be entered and proclaimed at the Olympic games ; better tiian Uie evidence 
 of Herodotus aud Thucydides, who l>oth call tht:ni Ho^uviioi (Jlerodot. r, 
 79; Thucyd. iv. 93) : l*oIybius agrees with the Inscription, and speaks of the 
 Kopuvei^, A€iia(hi.(:, Xaipuvfi^ (xxvii, 1). O. Mniler him.self admits, m 
 another place ( OrchomenoiJ, p. 480;, that the proi>er ethnical name is Ko/^o- 
 vf / 4. The reading of Strabo (ix. p- 411 ) is not trustworthy : see Groaskurd, 
 ad lot'. ; compare Steph. Byz. Kofuji^eia aud Ko(jui>i). 
 
 In regard to the formation of ethnical names, it seems the general ruk, 
 that a town ending in r/ or a^, preceded by a consonant, had its ethnical Ueriv- 
 ative in aio^ ; such as Ikicivtj, T<)(y.'.)vq, Kvutj, Qf/,iaij 'Ai^^rat ; while names 
 ending in e«z had their ethnicon in evr, as 'A/.e^uv6peia, 'Afiutjeta, le'/.evKtia^ 
 Ai aifiuxeia (the recent cities thui; founded by the successors of Alexander 
 are perhaps the best evidences that can be taken of the analogies of the 
 language), MtvUi/zTrem, Ue/Areia, in addition to the Bceotian names of towns 
 »lx)ve quoted There is, however, great irregularity in particular cases, «md 
 the number of towns called by the same name created an anxiety to Tar| 
 the ethnicon for etjch : see Stephan. Byz. v. 'HpuKMicu 
 
33i 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ACHvEANS IN PELOPONNESUS. 
 
 835 
 
 fanctity of the Olympic truce and the inviolability of the Eleiao 
 territory. Henc", though this tale is not to be construed ai 
 matter of fiict, \v«* may see that the Lacedaemonians regarded 
 the Olympic gami;s as a }K)rtion of their own anti([uities. More- 
 over, it is certain, both that the dignity of the festival increa^^ed 
 isimultaneously with their ascendency, • and tl at their peculiar 
 fashions were xci-y early introduced into the practice of the 
 Olympic comj>ctitors. Probably, the three bands of cooperat- 
 ing invaders, TICiolians and Spartan and Mcssenian Dorians, 
 may have adoj)ted this festival as a periodical renovation of mu- 
 tual union and fraternity ; from which cause the games became 
 an attractive centre for the western ])ortion of Peloponnesus, be 
 fore they were much frequented by people from the eastern, oi 
 still more from extra-Peloponnesian Hellas. For it cannot be 
 altogether accidental, when we read the names of the first twclv*' 
 proclaimed Olympic victors (occupying nearly half a century from 
 776 B. c. downwards), to find that seven of them are Messenians, 
 three Eleians, one from Dyme, in Achaia, and one from Korone ; 
 while after the 12th Olympiad, Corinthians and Megarians and 
 Kpidaurians begin to occur ; later still, extra-Peloponnesian vic- 
 tors. We may reasonably infer from hence that the Olympic 
 ceremonies were at this early period chiefly frequented by visi- 
 tors and competitors from the western regions of Peloponnesus, 
 and that, the aflluence to them, from the more distant parts of 
 the Hellenic world, did not become considerable until the first 
 Messenian war liad closed. 
 
 Having thus stt forth the conjectures, to which our very 
 e^canty knowledge points, respecting the first establishment of 
 the -^iitolian and l^orian settlements in Elis, Laconia, and Mes. 
 Benia, connected as they are with the steadily increasing dignity 
 and frequentation of the Olympic festival, I proceed, in the 
 next chapter, to that memorable circumstance which both deter- 
 mined the character, and brought about the political ascendency, 
 of the Spartans separately : I mean, the laws and discipline 
 of Lykurgus. 
 
 * The entire nakedness of the competitors at Olympia was adopted from 
 the Spartan practice, ^ecminply in the 14th Olympiad, as is testified by the 
 epigram on Orsippus the Megarian. Previous to that period, the Olympic 
 competitors had Sia^uuaTa ivepi to, aidola (Thucyd. i. 6). 
 
 Of the preexisting inhabitants of Laconia and Messenia, whom 
 we are accustomed to call Achaans and Pylians, so little ia 
 known, that we cannot at all measure the difference between 
 them and their Dorian invaders, either in dialect, in habits, or ia 
 intelligence. There appear no traces of any difference of dialect 
 among the various parts of the population of La^'onia : the Mes- 
 Benian allies of Athens, in the Peloponnesian war, sj)eak the same 
 dialect as the Helots, and the same also as the Ambrakiotic colo- 
 nists from Corinth: all Doric' Nor are we to suppose that the 
 Doric dialect was at all peculiar to the people called Dorians. 
 As far as can be made out by the evidence of Inscriptions, it 
 seems to have been the dialect of the Phokians, Delphians, Lo- 
 krians, JEtolians, and Achieans of l*hthi6tis : with respect to the 
 latter, the Inscriptions of Thaumaki, in Achaea Phthiotis, afford a 
 l)roof the more curious and the more cogent of native dialect, 
 because the Phthiots were both immediate neighbors and sub* 
 jects of the Thessalians, who spoke a variety of the ^olic. So, 
 too, within Peloponnesus, we find evidences of Doric dialect 
 among the Acha^ans in the north of Peloponnesus, — the Dryo- 
 pic inhabitants of Hermione,^ — and the P^leuthero-Lacones, or 
 Laconian townships (compounded of Perioeki and Helots), eman- 
 cipated by the Romans in the second century B. c. Concerning 
 the speech of that population whom the invading Dorians found 
 in Laconia, we have no means of judging: the presumption 
 would rather be that it did not difter materially from the Do- 
 ric. Thucydides designates the Corinthians, whom the invading 
 Dorians attacked from the hill Solygeius, as being iEolians, and 
 Strabo speaks both of the Achaians as an JEoVic nation, and of 
 the JE.oVk dialect as having been originally preponderant in 
 Peloponnesus.^ But we do not readily see what means of in 
 formation either of these authors possessed respecting the speech 
 of a time which must have been four centuries anterior even to 
 Thucydides. 
 
 Of that which is called the jEolic dialect there are three 
 
 ' Thncyd. iii. 112 ; iv. 41 : compare vii. 44, about the sameness of soanj 
 cf the war-shout, or paean, as delivered by all the different Dorians. 
 
 •Corpus Inscript. Boeckh. Nos. 1771, 1772, 1773; Ahrens, De Dialedt 
 l>oricA, sect. i-ii. 48. 
 
 ' Thucyd. iv, 42 ; Strabo, viii. p. 333 
 
8S6 
 
 HISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 marked and distinguishable varieties, — the Lesbiar., the Thee- 
 Halian, and the Boeotian ; the Thessalian forming a mean term , 
 between the other two. Ahrens has shown that tlie ancient gram 
 raaticaJ critics are accustomed to atfirm peculiarities, as belong- 
 ing to the JEioWg dialect gf^nerally, which in truth belong only to 
 I he Lesbian variety of it, or to the poems of Alkaeus and Sappho, 
 which these critics att<jntively studied. Lesbian .Sijolic, Thes- 
 hulian -^Kolic, and Bojoi ian ^'olic, are all different : and if, ab- 
 fttracting from these differences, we confine our attention to that 
 wliich is common to all three, we shall find Uttle to distinguish this 
 abstract JSolic from the abstract Doric, or that which is common 
 A> the many varieties of the Doric dialect. ^ These two are sis- 
 len, presenting, both of them, more or less tlie Latin side of the 
 Gi^eek language, while the relationship of either of them to the 
 Attic and Ionic is mor^ distant. Now it seems that, putting 
 Aside Attica, the speech of all Greece,^ from Perrhaebia and 
 Mount Olympus to Cape Malea and Cape Akritiu^, consisted of 
 different varieties, either of the Doric or of tiie JEolic dialect ; 
 tiiis being true (as far as we are able to judge) not less of the 
 aboriginal Arcadians tlian of the rest. The Laconian dialect 
 
 * See the valuable work of Ahrens, I)e Dialeeto JEolic&, sect. 51. He 
 observes, in reference to Uie Lesbian, Thessalian, and Bojotian dialects . 
 " Ties ilJu.s dialectos, quae cptimojure JEoVicsxi vocari videntur-^ quia, qui 
 illi-> u."<i <uni, j^oles erant — comparanteni mirum habere oportet, quod Asia- 
 norum jfColum et Bceotorum dialecti tantum inter se distant, qnantum vix 
 ah aUA (ju^vis Graw'se linguae dialeeto." He then ennmerates many point? 
 of differeoee : " Contra tot tantasque differentias pauca reperinntur eaqne 
 
 fv«i.' levia, qua' utrique dialeeto, ncque siniul Doricai, communia sint 
 
 Viiies his comparatis tauturn inttressc inter utramque dialectum, atdubitare 
 liteat, an i^'.oles Boeoti non magis cum ^.olibus Asianis conjuncti fueriut, 
 qaam qui hodie rairo quodam fjisu Saxones vocantur euni antiquis Saxon* 
 tbus. Nib'lominus Thesealicii dialeeto in coniparationem vocata, diversis- 
 sima quae videntur aliquo vi.nculo conjungere licet. Quamvis enim panea de 
 eii comperta habeamus, noc tamen certura est, alia Thessalis com Lesbiis, 
 ftha cum soUs Bceotis communia esse." (P. 222-223.) 
 
 • Aboat the .^k>Iic dialect of the Perrhaebians, see Stephanas Byz. v. T6v~ 
 Mf, and ap. Eustath. ad Iliad, p. 335. 
 
 The Attic judgmeot, in comparing these different varieties of . .reek speech, 
 if eaqpretsed in the story of a man being asked — Whether the Bceotians of 
 the Thessalians vrere most of barbarians ? He answered — The EleMxa 
 (Snstath. ad Iliad, p 304). 
 
 LAWS AND DISCIPLINE OF LYKURGUS. 
 
 39i 
 
 contained more specialties of its own, and approached nearer to 
 the JEolic and to the Eleian, than any other variety of the 
 Dorian : it stands at the extreme of what has been classilied as 
 the strict Dorian, — that is, the farthest removed from Ionic and 
 Attic The Kretan towns manifest also a strict Dorism ; as well 
 14S the Lacedaemonian colony of Tarentum, and, seemingly, most 
 of the Italiotic Greeks, though some of them are called Achaean 
 colonies. Most of the other varieties of the Doric dialect (Pho- 
 kian, Lokrian, Delphian, Achaean of Phthiotis) exhibit a form 
 departing less widely from the Ionic and Attic : Argos, and the 
 towns in the Argolic peninsula, seem to form a stepping-stone 
 between the two. 
 
 These positions represent the little which can be known re- 
 epecting those varieties of Grecian speech which are not known 
 to us by written works. The little presumption which can be 
 raised upon them favors the belief that the Dorian invaders of 
 Laconia and Messenia found there a dialect little diiferent from 
 that which they brought with them, — a conclusion which it is the 
 more necessary to state distinctly, since the work of O. MiJiler 
 lias caused an exaggerated estimate to be formed of the distinc- 
 tive peculiarities whereby Dorism was parted off from the real 
 oi Hellaa 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 LAWS AND DISCIPLINE OF LYKUBGUS AT SPARTA. 
 
 Plutabch begins his biography of Lykurgus with the 
 following ominous words : — 
 
 " Concerning the lawgiver Lykurgus, we can assert absolutely 
 nothing which is not controverted : there are different stories in 
 respect to his birth, his travels, his death, and also his mode ot 
 proceeding, political as well as legislative : least af all is the timft 
 in which he lived agreed upon.^ 
 
 VOL. II. 15 22o<a. 
 
 
da8 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DATE AND PARENTAGE OF LYKURGUS. 
 
 339 
 
 And ihis exordium is but too well borne out by the unsatisfac- 
 tory nature of the accounts which we read, not only in Plutarch 
 himself, but in thote other authors out of whom we are obliged 
 to make up our idea of the memorable Lykurgean system. If 
 we examine the sources from which Plutarch's life of Lykurgus 
 is deduced, it will appear that — excepting the poets Alkmaii, 
 Tyrtieus, and Simonides, from whom he has borrowed less tlian 
 we could have wi^hed — he has no authorities older than Xen- 
 ophon and Plato : Aristotle is cited several times, and is unques 
 tionably the best of his witnesses, but the greater number of them 
 belong to the century subsequent to that philosopher. Keitlier 
 Herodotus nor P2pliorus are named, though the former furnishes 
 bome brief, but interesting particuhirs, — and the latter also (as 
 far as we can judge from the fragments remaining) entered at 
 large into the proceedings of the Spartan lawgiver.' 
 
 Lykurgus is described by Herodotus as uncle and guardian to 
 king Labotas, of the Eurystheneid or Agid line of Spartan kings ; 
 and this would place him, according to the received chronology, 
 about 220 years before the first recorded Olympiad (about b. c. 
 996).2 All the other accounts, on the contrary, seem to repre 
 sent him as a younger brother, belonging to the other or Prokleid 
 line of Spartan kings, though they co not perfectly agree respect 
 ing his parentage. While Simonides stated him to be the son of 
 Prytanis, Dieutychidas described him as grandson of Prytanis, 
 son of Eunomus, brother of Polydektes, and uncle as well as 
 guardian to Charilaus, — thus making him eleventh in descent 
 from Herakles.3 This latter account was adopted by Aristotle, 
 coinciding, according to the received chronology, with the date 
 of Iphitus the Eleian, and the first celebration of the Olympic 
 games by Lykurgns and Iphitus conjointly,* which Aristotle 
 
 • See Heeren, Disscrtatio de Fontilms Plutarchi, pp. 19-25. 
 
 • Herodot. i. 65. Moreover, Herodotus gives this as the statement of tho 
 Lftcediemonians them^'lves. 
 
 • Plutarch, Lykiir^'. i . I. According to Dionys. Halik. (Ant. Rom. ii. 49/ 
 Lykurgus was uncle, not son, of Eunomus. 
 
 Aristotle considers Lykurgus as jjuardian of Charilaus (PoUtic. ii. 7, 1) 
 •ompare v. 10, 3. Sec O. Muller (Hist, of Dorians, i. 7, 3). 
 
 •Phlegon also adds Kleosthencs of Pisa (Dc Olympiis ap. Meursii Opp 
 rtL p 129). It appears that there existed a quoit at Olympia, upon whicb 
 
 Vol. 3 11 
 
 ju:cepted as a fact. Lykurgus, on the hypothesis here mentioned, 
 would stand about B. c. 880, a century before the recorded 
 Olympiads. Eratosthenes and ApoUodorus placed him "not a 
 few years earlier than the first Olympiad." If they meant hereby 
 the epoch commonly assigned as the Olympiad of Iphitus, their 
 date would coincide pretty nearly with that of Herodotus : if, on 
 the other hand, they meant the first recorded Olympiad (b. C. 
 776), they would be found not much removed from the opinion 
 of Aristotle. An unequivocal proof of the inextricable confusion 
 in ancient times respecting the epoch of the great Spartan law- 
 giver is indirectly aflbrded by Timieus, who supposed that there 
 had existed two persons named Lykurgus, and that the acts 
 of both had been ascribed to one. It is plain from hence that 
 there was no certainty attainable, even in the third century before 
 the Cliristian era, respecting the date or parentage of Lykurgus. 
 Thucydides, without mentioning the name of Lykurgus, informs 
 us that it was "400 years and somewhat more" anterior to the 
 close of the Peloponnesian war,' when the Spartans emerged 
 from their previous state of desperate internal disorder, and en- 
 tered upon " their present polity." We may fairly presume that 
 
 the formula of the Olympic truce was inscribed, together with the names of 
 Iphitus and Lykurgus as the joint authors and proclaimers of it. Aristotle 
 believed this to be genuine, and accepted it as an evidence of the fact whit h 
 it professed to certify : and O. Muller is also disposed to admit it as genuine, 
 — that is, as contemjwrary with the times to which it professes to relate. I 
 come to a different conclusion : that the quoit existed, I do not doubt ; but 
 that the inscription upon it was actually set down in writing, in or near b. c. 
 880, would be at variance with the reasonable probabilities resulting from 
 Grecian palaeography. Had this ancient and memorable instrument existed 
 at Olympia in the days of Herodotus, he could hardly have assigned to 
 Lykurgus the epoch which we now read in his writings. 
 
 The assertions in Muller's History of the Dorians (i. 7, 7), about Lykur 
 irus, Iphitus, and Kleosthenes "drawing up the fundamental law of the 
 Olympic armistice," are unsupported by any sufficient evidence. In the 
 later times of established majesty of the Olympic festival, the Eleians did 
 undoubtedly exercise the power which he describes ; but to connect this with 
 iinv deliberate regulation of Iphitus and Lykurgus, is in my judgment incor- 
 rect. See the mention of a similar truce proclaimed throughout Triphylia by 
 the Makistians as presidents of the common festival at the temple <jf Um 
 Samian Poseidon (Strabo, viii. p. 343). 
 
 » Thocyd. i. 18. 
 
 n 
 
 \ \ 
 
 Mi 
 
340 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 this alludes to the Lykurgean discipline and constitution, wliicU 
 Thucydides must tlius have conceived as introduced about B. c 
 830-820, — coincidinjn^ with something near the commencemeni 
 of the reign of king Teleklus. In so far iis it is possible to form 
 an opinion, amidst evidence at once so scanty and so discordant, 
 I incline to adopt the opinion of Thucydides as to the time at 
 which the Lykurgean constitution was introduced at Sparta. 
 The state of " eunomy " and good order which that constitution 
 brought about, — combined with the healing of great previous 
 internal sedition, which had tended much to enfeeble tliem, — is 
 represented (and with great plausibility) as the grand cause of 
 the victorious carter beginning with king Teleklus, the conqueror 
 of Amyklae, Pharis, and Geronthrae. Therefore it would seem, 
 in the absence of better evidence, that a date, connecting the 
 fresh stimulus of the new discipline with the reign of Teleklus, is 
 more probable than any epoch either later or earlier.! 
 
 ' Mr. Clinton fixes the legislation of Lykargus, " in conformity with Thu 
 cydiih-51," at about 81" b, c, and his regency at 852 b. c, about thirty-five 
 years previous (Fasti Hellen. v. i. c. 7, p. 141) : he also places the Olympiad 
 of Ii)hitus B. c. 828 (F. H. vol. ii. p. 410; App. c. 22). 
 
 In that chapter, Mr. Clinton collects and discusses the various statements 
 respecting the date of Lykurj^us : compare, also, Larcher ad Herodot i. 67 
 and Chronologic, pp. 486-492. 
 
 The differences in these statements must, after all, be taken as they stand, 
 for they cannot be reconciled except by the help of arbitrary suppositions, 
 which only mislead us by producing a show of agreement where there is 
 none in reality. I agnie with Mr. Clinton, in thinking that the assertion of 
 Thucydides is here to lie taken as the best authority. But I altogether dis- 
 sent from the proceeding which he (in common with Larcher, Wesseling, Sir 
 John Marsham, and otlicrs) employs with regard to the passage of Herodotus, 
 where that author calls Lykurgus the guardian and uncle of Labotas (of the 
 Eury^theneid line). Mr. Clinton says : " From the notoriety of tlie fact that 
 Lycurgus was ascribed to the other house (the Prokleids), it is manifest thai 
 the fhissage must be corrufdtd" (p. 144); and he then goes on to correct ^ 
 text of Herodotus, agrueably to the proposition of Sir J. Marsham. 
 
 This proceeding seems to me madmissible. The text of Herodotus reads 
 perfectly well, and is not contradicted by anything to be found elsewhere 
 in Herodotus himself: moreover, we have here a positive guarantee of its 
 accuracy, for Mr. Clinton himself admits that it stood in the days of Pausa- 
 nias just as we now read it (Pausan. iii. 2, 3). By what right, then, do w« 
 alter it ? or what do we gain by doir-g so ? Our only right to do so, is, th« 
 •s.-iu»cption that there must have Ikjcu uniformity of belief and means o/ 
 
 y %.■ 
 
 CONTRADICTORY ACCOUNTS. 
 
 341 
 
 O. Mil Her after glancing at the strange and Improbable cir 
 cumstances handed down to us respecting Lykurgus, observes, 
 " that we have absolutely no account of him as an individual 
 person." This remark is perfectly just : but another remark, 
 made by the same distinguished author, respecting the Lykurgean 
 system of laws, appears to me erroneous, — and requires more 
 especially to be noticed, inasmuch as the corollaries deduced from 
 it pervade a large portion of his valuable History of the Dorians, 
 He atfirras that the laws of Sparta were considered the true Doric 
 institutions, an<l that their origin was identical with that of the 
 people : Sparta is, in his view, the full type of Dorian principles, 
 tendencies, and sentiments, — and is so treated throughout liis 
 entire work.'^ But such an opinion is at once gratuitous (for the 
 l)assage of Pindar cit(?d in 8nj)port of it is scarcely of any value) 
 and contrary to the whole tenor of ancient evidence. The insti- 
 tutions of Si)artii were not Dorian, but peculiar to herself; ^ dis- 
 tinguishing her not less from Argos, Corinth, Megara, Epidaurus, 
 SikyOn, Korkyra, or Knidus, than from Athens or Thebes. Krete 
 Mas the only other portion of Greece in which there prevailed 
 institutions in many respects analogous, yet still dissimilar in 
 those two attributes which form the real mark and pinch of Spar- 
 tan legislation, namely, the military discipline and tlie rigorous 
 private training. There were doubtless Dorians in Krete, but 
 we have no proof that these peculiar institutions belonged to 
 
 Siitisfactory jiscertainiiicnt, (respecting facts and persons of the nintli and 
 tenth centuries before the Christian era,) existing among Greeks of the fifth 
 ind succeeding coiiruries ; an assumption which 1 hold to be incorrect. And 
 ill we gain is, an illusory unanimity produced, by gratuitously putting wordg 
 into the mouth of one of onr witnesses. 
 
 If Ave can prove Herodotus to have been erroneously informed, it is right 
 to do so; but we have no ground for altering his deposition. It affords a 
 clear proof that there were very different stories as to the mere question, to 
 which of the two lines of Herakleids the Spartan lawgiver belonged, — and 
 that there was an enormous difference as to the time in which he Hved. 
 
 ' History of the Dorians, i. 7, 6. 
 
 ' History of the Dorians, iii. 1, 8. Alf Kopstadt recognizes this as an 
 error in Moller's work : see his recent valuable Dissertation "De Roma 
 Laconicarum Constitutionis Lycurgese Origins et Indole," Gryphiae, 184?, 
 wet 3, p. 18. 
 
 • Among the many other evidences to this point, sec Aristotle, Ethic r 
 9; Xenophon, KepnbL Laced. 10, 8. 
 
342 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LYKURGUS, AS DESutClBED BY HERODOTUS. 
 
 345 
 
 them more tluui to ihe other inhabitants of tlie island. That the 
 Spartans had an original organization, and terideneies common to 
 them with the other Dorians, we may readily concede ; but the 
 Lykurgean constitution impressed upon them a p3culiar tendency, 
 which took them out of the general march, and rendered them 
 the least fit of all states to be cited as an example of the class- 
 •ttributes of Dorism. One of the essential causes, which made 
 the Spartan institutions work so impressively upon the Grecian 
 mind, was their perfect singularity, combined with the conspicu- 
 ous ascendency of the state in which they were manifested ; while 
 the Kretan communities, even admitting their partial resemblance 
 (which was chiefly in the institution of the Syssitiii, and was alto- 
 gether more in form than in spirit) to Sparta, were too insignifi* 
 cant to attract noti(!e except from speculative observers. It is 
 therefore a mistake on the part of O. Muller, to treat Sparta as 
 the type and representative of Dorians generally, and very many 
 of the positions advanced in his History of the Dorians require 
 to be moditied when this mistake is pointed out. 
 
 The first capital fact to notice respecting the institutions ascribed 
 lo Lykurgus, is the very early period at which they had their 
 commencement : it seems impossible to place this period later 
 than 825 b. c. We do not find, nor have we a right to expect, 
 trustworthy history in reference to events so early. If we have 
 one foot on historical ground, inasmuch as the institutions them- 
 selves are real, — the other foot still fioats in the unfaithful re- 
 gion of my the, when we strive to comprehend the generating 
 causes : the mist yet prevails which hinders us from distinguish- 
 ing between the god and the man. The light in which Lykur- 
 gus appeared, to an imtelligent Greek of the fifth century before 
 the Christian era, is so c4early, yet briefly depicted, in the follow- 
 ing passage of Hero«lotus, that I cannot do better than translate 
 it : — 
 
 '* In the very early times (Herodotus observes) the Spartans 
 wore among themselves the most lawless of all Greeks, and unap- 
 j>roachable by foreigners. Their transition to good legal order 
 took place in the following manner. When Lycurgus, a Spartan 
 of consideration, visited Delphi to consult the oracle, the instant 
 that he entered the sanctuary, the Pythian priestess exclaimed, — 
 *• 'I'hou art come, Lycurgus, to my fat shrine, beloved by Zeus, 
 
 and by all the Olympic gods. Is it as god or as man that 1 am 
 to address thee in the spirit? I hesitate, — and yet, Lycurgua, 
 I incline more to call thee a god." 
 
 So spake the Pythian priestess. " Moreover, in addition to 
 these words, some affirm that the Pythia revealed to him the 
 order of things now established among the Spartans. But the 
 Laced(enwnians themselves say, that Lycurgus, when guardian of 
 his nephew Labotas, king of the Spartans, introduced these insti- 
 tutions out of Krete. No sooner had he obtained this guardian- 
 ship, than he changed all the institutions into their present form, 
 and took security against any transgression of it. Next, he con- 
 stituted the military divisions, the Enomoties and the Triakads, 
 as well as the Syssitia, or public mess : he also, farther, appointed 
 the ephors and the senate. By this means the Spartans passed 
 from bad to good order : to Lycurgus, afler his death, they built 
 a tem[)le, and they still worship him reverentially. And as might 
 naturally be expected in a productive soil, and with no inconsid- 
 erable numbers of men, they immediately took a start forward, 
 and flourished so much that they could not be content to remaiii 
 tranquil within their own limits," etc 
 
 Such is our oldest statement (coming from Herodotus) respect- 
 ing Lykurgus, ascribing to him that entire order of things which 
 the writer witnessed at Sparta. Thucydides also, though not 
 mentioning Lykurgus, agrees in stating that the system among 
 the Lacedfemonians, as he saw it, had been adopted by them four 
 centuries previously, — had rescued them from the most intoler- 
 able disorders, and had immediately conducted them to prosper- 
 ity and success.! Hellanikus, whose writings a little preceded 
 those of Herodotus, not only did not (any more than Thucydides) 
 make mention of Lykurgus, but can hardly be thought to have 
 attached any importance to the name ; since he attributed the 
 constitution of Sparta to the first kings, Eurysthenes and Prokles.* 
 
 But those later writers, from whom Plutarch chiefly compiled 
 his biography, profess to be far better informed on the subject of 
 Lykurgus, and enter more into detail. His father, we are told, 
 was assassinated during the preceding state of lawlessness ; hii 
 elder brother Polydektes died early, leaving a pregnant widow 
 
 » Ucrodot i. 65-66 ; Thucyd. i. IS. 
 
 » Strabo, rxi^. p. 3W 
 
 'A 
 
 \\\ 
 
 \W 
 
 ^gsmmsm^ 
 
 utmmt 
 
}' 
 
 o44 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 who made to Lykurgus propositions that he should mai-ry Jiia 
 and become king. But Lykurgus, repudiating the oiler with 
 indignation, awaited the birth of his young ne[>hew Charilaus, 
 held up the child }»ublicly in the agora, as the future king of 
 Sparta, and immediately relinquished the authority which he had 
 provisionally exercised. However, the widow and her brotlier 
 Leonidas raised shinderous accusations acainst him, of designs 
 menacing to the lift of the infant king, — accusations which he 
 deemed it proper to obviate, by a temporary absencti. Accord- 
 ingly, he left Spart;A and went to Krete, where he studied the 
 I)olity and customs of tlie dillerent cities ; next, he visited Ionia 
 and Egypt, and (jis some authors affirmed) Libya, Iberia, and 
 even India. While in Ionia, he is reported to have obtained 
 from the descendants of Kreophylus a copy of the Homeric poems, 
 which had not up te that time become known in Peloponnesus : 
 there were not wanting authors, indeed, who said that he had 
 conversed with lloruer himself.^ 
 
 Meanwhile, the young king Charilaus grew up and assumed 
 the sceptre, as re|)rcsenting the Frokleid or Eurypontid family. 
 But the reins of government had become more relaxed, and the 
 disorders worse than ever, when Lykurgus returned. Finding 
 that the two kings as well as the people were weary of so disas- 
 trous a condition, he set himself to the task of applying a correc- 
 tive, and with this view consulted the Delphian oracle; from 
 which he received strong assurances of the divine encouragement, 
 together with one or more special injunctions (the primitive 
 Rhetra; of the constitution), which he brought with him to Sparta.- 
 He then suddenly presented himself in the agora, with thirty of 
 the most distinguished Spartans, all in arms, as his guards and 
 partisans. King Clmrilaus, though at first terrified, when informed 
 of the designs of his uncle, stood forward willingly to second 
 them ; while the bulk of the Spartans respectfully submitted to 
 the venerable Herakleid, who came as reformer and missionary 
 
 ' Platarch, Lvkurg. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 'For an instructive review of the text as well as the meaning cf this 
 ancient Rhetra, see UrU(^hs, Ueber die Lycurgischen Rhetrea, published sincd 
 the first edition of this History. His refutation of the rash charges of Got* 
 tlini: seems to me comp'ete : but his own conjectures are not all equally 
 plausible : nci can I 8ubs»;ribe to his explanation of udfcaracr&fu. 
 
 SANCTION BROUGHT BY LYKURGUS FROM DELPHL 846 
 
 ftx)m Delphi. » Such were the steps by wliich Lykurgus acquired 
 his aa cendency : we have now to see how he employed it. 
 
 His first proceeding, pursuant to the Rhetra or Compact brought 
 from Delphi, was to constitute the Spartan senate, consisting of 
 twenty-eight ancient men ; making an aggregate of thirty in con- 
 junction with the two kings, who sat and voted in it. With this 
 were combuied periodical assemblies of the Spartan people, in the 
 open air, between the river Knakiun and the bridge Babyka. Yet 
 no discussion was permitted in these assemblies, — their functions 
 were limited to the simple acceptance or rejection of that which 
 had previously been determined in the senate.^ Such was the 
 
 * Plutarch. Lvkur;z c. 5-6. Hciinipi)us, the scholar c/ Aristotle, professed 
 to pive the; ii.imcs of twenty out of these thirt/ devoted partisans. 
 
 There was, however, a difierent story, which represented that Lykurgus, on 
 hi-, return from his travels, found Charilaus governing like a despot (Hera- 
 < lid. Pontic, c. 2). 
 
 ' Tlie words of the old Rhetra — At-^f 'ETiAaviov koI 'A^^vug 'EXTuivlcn 
 trphv h^pvnnfiEvoVy (pvAiir <i>vAu^avra, kul u,3uc UjSu^avra^ TpiuKovra, yepovaiav 
 *svv U{>xayiTaLg, KaTaarijaavTa^ upa^ f ^ oj(>ac unel'kul^Et.v fiera^i) Ba/?v/caf koI 
 KixiKiuvor. ovTug elrT(p£peiv re Kai cKpcoraa^ai' diifiif) (T ayopHtv elfiev Koi 
 
 KpiiToc. (Plutarch, ih.) 
 
 The reading dyopav (last word but three) is that of Coray's edition: other 
 readings proposed are Kvpinv, niuyuv, uyoplav, etc. The MSS., however, %re 
 incurably corrupt, and none of the conjectures can be pronounced certain. 
 
 The Rhetra contains various remarkable archaisms, — uTreTiXii^tiv — u<^i 
 CTaa^ai, — the latter wonl in the sense of putting the question for deci^iion 
 corresponding to the function of the 'A(pf:(TTrfp at Knidus, (Plutarch, Qua;st. 
 Gr»c. c. 4; .see Schneider, Lexicon, ad. voc.) 
 
 O. Miiller connects rpiuKovTa with a>,iaf, and lays it down that there were 
 thirty Obes at Sparta: I rather agree with those critics who place the comma 
 after uiSd^avrn, and refer the number thirty to the senate. Urlichs, in his 
 Dissertation Ueber Die Lykurgisch. Rhetren (published in the Rheinischea 
 Museum for 1847, p 204), introduces the word TrpcffiSvyeviac after TpiaKovra; 
 which seems a just conjecture, when we look to the addition afterwards 
 made by Theopompus. The statements of Muller about the Obes seem to 
 me to rest on no authority. 
 
 The word Rhetra means a solemn compact, either originally emanating 
 from, or subsequently sanctioned by, the gods, who are always parties to 
 iuch agreements: see the old Treaty between the Eleians and Heraeans,— 
 'A FpaTpa, between the two, — commemorated in the valuable inscriptioL 
 still preserved, — as ancient, according to Boeckh, as Olymp. 40-60, (Boeckh. 
 Corp. Inscript. No. 2, p. 26, part i.) The words of Tyrtaeus imply such a 
 •impact between contracting parties : first the kings, then the senate, laslU 
 
 15* 
 
 / 
 
 \ '1 
 
846 
 
 HISTURV OF GREECE. 
 
 LYKIIRGEAN RHETRA. 
 
 347 
 
 Spartan political constitution as fixed by L} kurgus ; but a cen- 
 tury afterwards (so Plutarch's account runs), under the kinga 
 PolydOrus and Theopompus, two important alterations were made. 
 A rider was then attached to the old Lykurgean Rhetra, by which 
 it was provided that, "in case the people decided crookedly, the 
 senate, with the kings, should reverse their decisions :"i while 
 
 the people — Ev-&eiair (ifjTpai^ uvraTafieiSofiivovg — where the parti 
 ciple last occurring applies not to the people alone, but to nil the three. The 
 Rhetraof I.ykurgusemjmated from the Delphian god; but the kings, senatei 
 and people all bound themselves, both to each other and to the gods, to obey 
 it. The explanations given of the phrase by Nitzsch and Schomann (in Dr. 
 Thirlwall's note, ch. viii. p. 334) seem to me less satisfactory than what ap- 
 pears in C. F. Hermann (Lehrbuch der Griech. Staatsalterthiimer, s. 23). 
 
 Nitzsch (Histor. Homer, sect. xiv. |ip. 50-55) does not take sufficient account 
 of the distinction between the meaning of i)^Tpa in the early and in the later 
 times. In the time of the Ephor Epitudeus, or of Agis the Third, he is right 
 in saying that ^'r/Tpa is equivalent to scitum, — still, however, with an idea of 
 greater solemnity and unchangeability than is implied in the word vu/iof, 
 analogous to what is understood hy a fundamental or organic enactment in 
 modern ideas. The old ideas, of a mandate from the Delphian god, and a 
 compact between the kings and the citizens, which had once been connected 
 with the word, gradually dropped away from it. There is no contradiction 
 in Plutarch, therefore, such as that to which Nitzsch alludes (p. 54). 
 
 Kopstadt's Dissertation (pp. 22, 30) touches on the same subject. I agree 
 with Kopstadt (Dissert, pp. 28-30), in thinking it probable that Plutarch 
 copied the words of the old Lykurgean constitutional Rhetra, from the ac 
 count given by Aristotle of the Spartan polity. 
 
 King Theopompus probably brought from the Delphian oracle the impor- 
 tant rider which he tacked to the mandate as originally brought by Lykurgus 
 — ol ^aatXeic QeoTrof^Tro^ kuI Tio/.vi^upog rude r^ ^'/rpa 7rapiveypail>av. The 
 authority of the oracle, together with their own influence, would enable them 
 to get these words accepted by the people. 
 
 • At 6h aKo?uuv 6 6uuo^ Dmlto, ruvg Trpea-ivytPEar Kal apxaytrag dKoarar- 
 fjpac: elfiev. (Plutarch, ih.) 
 
 Plutarch tells us that the primitive Rhetra, anterior to this addition, spe- 
 cially enjoined the assembled citizens either to adopt or reject, without change, 
 ihe Rhetra proposed by the kin^rs and senate, and that the rider was in- 
 troiiuced because the assembly had disobeyed this injunction, and adopted 
 amendments of its own. It is this latter sense which he puts on the word 
 OKo}.iav. XJrlichs (Uebor Lye. Rhetr. p. 232) and Nitzsch (Hist. Homer, p 
 54) follow him, and the latter even construes the epithet EvT^eiaic l)T]Tpaii; 
 kiTanafiEL^ofievovq of Tyrtaeus in a corresponding sense r he says, " Populu» 
 UB (rhetris) evSeiaic, i. e. nihil injlexis, suffragari jubetur: nam lex cnjus 
 Ty-ta'us admonet, ita sanxerat — si pojtulus rogationem inf,exam (i. e. non 
 
 «« *er change, perhaps intended as a sort of compensation fo. 
 rs bridle ou'the'popular assembly, introduced into the consUtu- 
 lion a new executive Directory of tive men, called Kphor«. Thu 
 Board -annually chosen, by some capricious method, the result of 
 S could not'well be foreseen, and open to be tilled by every 
 Sparta., citizen - either originally received, or gradually drew to 
 itLlf, functions so extensive and commanding, m regard to .nter- 
 „al administration and police, as to limit the author.ty of the km^ 
 to little more than the exclusive command of the military force. 
 Herodotus was informed, at Sparta, that t he ephors a s w eU a. the 
 
 ^^^^^;^;;^^^^^^^^^^Z^Z^^^^) aocircre volaerit, senatorcs et auctore, 
 "tT-^^^L place, h sec„.s highly improbable that .he primitive Rhet™. 
 
 .r"r:::;c A>uci.., ..u. oon.^^^^ 
 V^t:::^^:^^^'^^^^^ --^ by .m. Theopo»- 
 
 ;„s 2lh twently betokens a previous dispute and refractory behavio. 
 
 ^hhrslna:^:?';; explam«i„n .hioh these -hor, give of the 
 
 ■ 5 „ „„ f<ri m<c is not conformable to the ancient Greek, as w« 
 
 words oKolu^v and "'^"'' f' '^ " , ^„^, jes are the proper t^X, 
 
 Hnd it in Uomcr an. " -oJ^ f "^ "^^^ l^Zr^t docLent. In Hesiod, ».)( 
 
 -r "";:re"::cd a s: t wis almost exactly corresponds to n>*. 
 and a«/a.f »■;« '^^ ^ ^ „,^i^ primitive etymology, may be traced 
 
 and u-rong (winch "-''''^' '3;;; " ^^.^j, s^e Hesiod. Opp. I>i. 36, 192, 
 
 r r,;'t;;;i;r^or;i?v;: airfxiUon. . ^^r^. ^^i,^ 
 
 PMinl' wl ere the l.hn.scs are constantly repeated, <»«a. .5«a,, «pA<«^ 
 Gottling, wntre i remarkable expression, Opp. Di. 9. 
 
 trr:' T;.':«1o>L; clpare . .... m^^^r. ...o„c: also Hom^. 
 t i^^v 387 or ?lv nr ayo.i a.oMu, .,/.■... ^.>-r„f ; and xxni. 580. 
 
 a det;rmina.ion ^iH"-. [^-f^ -^^0- t'oTance, any deci.io» 
 
 These words gave to "^,^'"f; ^ ^ ,,j^ u retained only the power 
 
 „f the public assembly ''^f^^mW^^oposiuor^s of the aathorities, fi™t 
 
 tr S-^seiral"::;- 0-- eVs. -d this UmiU. ^^« 
 
 " r":::!rexVrainT:cirrexpression «oX,.v, as the antithesis .0 .h, 
 jr ^;;lre^-.C Mr^^C (Dissertau sect. .5. p. 124). 
 
 \ 
 
848 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 senate had b«;en constituted by Lykurgus ; but the authonty of 
 Aristotle, as well as the internal probability of the case, sanctioiM 
 the belief that they wi're subsequently added.' 
 
 Taking the political constitution of Sparta ascribed to Lykurgus, 
 it appears not to have differed materially from the rude organiza- 
 tion exhibited in the Homeric poems, where we always tind a 
 council of chiefs or old men, and occasional meetings of a listening 
 agora. It is hard to suppose that the Spartan kings can ever 
 have governed without some formalities of this sort ; so that tlie 
 innovation (if innovation there really was) ascnbed to Lykurgus, 
 must have consisted in some new details respecting the senate 
 and the agora, — in fixing the number^ thirty, and the life-tenure 
 of the former, — and the special place of meeting of the latter, na 
 well as the extent of privilege which it was to exercise ; conse- 
 crating the whole by the erection of the temples of Zeus llellanius 
 and Athene Hellania. The view of the subject presented by 
 Plutarch as well as by Plato,^ as if the senate were an entire 
 novelty, does not consist with the pictures of the old epic. Hence 
 we may more naturally imagine that the Lykurgean political con- 
 stitution, apart from tlie ephors who were afterwards tacked to it, 
 presents only the old features of the heroic government of Greece, 
 defined and regularizetl in a particular manner. The presence of 
 two coexistent and coordinate kings, indeed, succeeding in hered- 
 itary descent, and both belonging to the gens of Herakleids, is 
 
 ' Herod, i. 65 : compare Phitarch, Lycurj?. c. 7 ; Arixtotet. Polit. v. 9, 1 
 (where he gives the answtr of kin<; Theopompus). 
 
 Aristotle tells us that the ephors were chosen, but not how they were 
 chjscn; only, that it was in some manner excessively puerile, — TraiSapiudrj^ 
 yiif) fan 7.iai' (ii. 6, 16). 
 
 M Barthelcmy St. Hilaire, in his note to the passage of Aristotle, pre 
 •Times that thev were of course chosen in the same manner as the senators ; 
 hot there seems no sufficient ground in Aristotle to countenance this. Nor 
 is it easy to reconcile the words of Aristotle respecting the election of the 
 ■enators, where he assimilates it to an aipeffic dwaarevTcKT} (Polit. v. 5, 8; 
 ii. 6, 18), with the description which Plutarch (Lycurg. 26) gives of tha) 
 election. 
 
 * Kopstadt agrees in this supposition, that the tumber of the senate wir 
 probably not peremptorily fixed before the Lykurgean reform (Dissertat. a 
 mp. sect. 13, p. 109). 
 
 ■ Plato, Legg. iii. p. 691 ; Plan Epist. viii. p. 354, B. 
 
 KETROSPECTIVE HYPOTHESES OF LAIER SPARTANS. 348 
 
 !• « f^ Qr^oT^n the orioin of which receives 
 
 aomethinK peculiar to bparta, — me on^ui kj ^ * • ^ j -^ 
 
 Xr ex,Ction than a reference to the twin sons of Ans.»d^ 
 mus Eurysthenes and Prokles. These two primitive ance»toM 
 Ze ; type of the two lines of Spartan kings ; for they are said o 
 
 have pZsscd their lives in P^'H--' •l'-f"^'°"Vw;a!Tviul^ 
 habitual state of the two contemporaneous kings at Sparta. \V lule 
 the coexistence of the pair of kings, equal in power and a>nstanUy 
 waiting each other, had often a baneful effect "PO" '•- ~ 
 of public measures, it was, nevertheless, a security to tJie sUOe 
 alLt successful violence,' ending in the establishment of a d^ 
 ^.Um, on the part of any ambitious individual among the legal 
 
 '"'Durin-' five successive centuries of Spartan history, from Poly- 
 dOrus anS Theopompus downward, no such violence was auemp^d 
 
 bv any of the kings," until the times of Agis the Third and 
 Kleoufenis the Thi^ri, _ 240 b. c. to 220 b. c. The mportan«» 
 of Greece had at this last-mentioned period irretrievably declined^ 
 aid he independent political action which she once^sessed 
 had become subordinate to the more powerful force ^^tUrfJhe 
 klian mountaineers (the rudest among her own sons) or to 
 Fnirotic Macedonian, and Asiatic foreigners, preparatory to the 
 faal lb orption by the Komans. But amongst all the Grecian 
 states SpaSa had declined the most , her ascendency wa« totally 
 ;::: "anrher pecunar training and discipline (to which she h^ 
 chiefly owed it) had degenerated in every way. Under the^ 
 uutowa'd circumstances, two young kings, Agis and Kleomenes 
 The former a generous enthusiast, the latter more violent and 
 "liiot,- conceived the design of --"•'"^.^''^^iyj^jrf 
 
 r Bu^ the Lykurgean constitution had been, eveaj«_tL« 
 
 . The '»";P'~^y. °7""2 tl' ^sUtate himself satrap of Hellas under 
 the liberty of combined ««''»'• ^^Vj^^j ^^ established Laced»monian 
 the PenUn monarch, rather than »g«^" ■" ^ „eiM 
 
 ^.enunenf, though -^;"2ris11^,:°;,K a, p'cX «inung to p.. 
 Herodot. v. 32). 
 
 \ 
 
 
\ 
 
 350 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 ORIGINAL FUNCTIONS OF THE EPHORS. 
 
 351 
 
 / 
 
 time of Xenophon,' in part, an ideal not fully realized in practice 
 — much less was it a reality in the days of Kleomenes and Agis 
 moreover, it was an ideal which admitted of being colored accord' 
 ing to the fancy or feelings of those reformers who professed, and 
 probably believed, that they were aiming at its genuine restora- 
 tion. What the reforming kings found most in their way, was 
 the uncontrolled autliority, and the conservative dispositions, of 
 the ephors, — which they naturally contrasted with the original 
 fulness of the kingly power, when kings and senate stood alone. 
 Among the various ways in which men's ideas of what the primi- 
 tive constitution had l>een, were modified by the feelings of their 
 own time (we shall presently see some other instances of this), is 
 probably to be reckoned the assertion of Kleomenes respecting 
 the first appointment of the ephors. Kleomenes affirmed that the 
 ephors had originally been nothing more than subordinates and 
 deputies of the kings, chosen by the latter to perform for a time 
 their duties during th(j long absence of the Messenian war. Start- 
 ing from this humble position, and profiting by the dissensions of 
 the two kings,2 they had in process of time, especially by the 
 ambition of the ephor Astero[)Us, found means first to constitute 
 themselves an independent board, then to usurp to themselves 
 more and more of the kingly authority, until they at last reduced 
 the kings to a state of intolerable humiliation and impotence. As 
 a proof of the primitive relation between the kings and the ephors, 
 he alluded to tliat wliich was the custom at Sparta in his own 
 time. When the ophors sent for either of the kings, the latter 
 had a right to refuse obedience to two successive summonses, but 
 the third summons h<' was bound to obey.* 
 
 It is obvious that the fact here adduced by Kleomenes (a 
 curious point in Spartan manners) contributes little to prove the 
 conclusion which he deduced from it, of the original nomination 
 of the ephors as mere deputies by the kings. That they were 
 first appointed at the time of the Messenian war is probable, and 
 coincides with the tale that king Theopompus was a consenting 
 
 * Xe«ophon, Republic. Laced, c. 14. 
 
 * Platarch, Agis, c. 12 Tovto yap rd apxelov (the ephors) l<rxveiv it 
 Jkai^pug T(jv flacTi/Juv. etc. 
 
 * Pltttaroh, Kleomenes, € 10. ar/fxelov de roiroVj rd l^ixP* 9^P, ^0^ 
 rawmitofievuv rdv iaaiAea ruv *E^6p(.>v, etc. 
 
 party to the measure, — that their functions were at first com 
 paratively circumscribed, and extended by successive encroach- 
 ments, is also probable ; but they seem to have been from the 
 beginning a board of specially popular origin, in contraposition 
 to the kings and the senate. One proof of this is to be found in 
 the ancient oath, which was every month interchanged between 
 the kings and the ephors ; the king swearing for himself, that he 
 would exercise his regal functions according to the established 
 laws, — the ephors swearing on behalf of the city, that his au- 
 thority should on that condition remain unshaken.^ This mutual 
 compact, which probably formed a part of the ceremony during 
 the monthly sacrifices ottered by the king,'^ continued down to a 
 time when it must have become a pure form, and when the kings 
 had long been subordinate in power to the ephors. But it evi- 
 dently began first as a reality, — when the king was predominant 
 and ettective chief of the state, and when the ephors, clothed with 
 functions chiefly defensive, served as guarantees to the people 
 against abuse of the regal authority. Plato, Aristotle, and 
 Cicero,3 all interpret the original institution of the ephors as 
 designed to protect the people and restrain the kings : the latter 
 assimilates them to the tribunes at Rome. 
 
 Such were the relations which had once subsisted between 
 the kings and the ephors : though in later times these relations 
 had been so completely reversed, that Polybius considers the 
 former as essentially subordinate to the latter, — reckoning it as 
 a point of duty in the kings to respect the ephors "as their 
 fathers."'* And such is decidedly the state of things throughout 
 
 ' Xenophon, Republic. Lacedscmon. c. 15. Kai opKovg fxiv u2.2,Tf?.oic Kard 
 (if/va TTOiovvrat' 'E<popoi fiev vnip rf]^ TroAeuf, (3aaiXevg d' virep kavrov. 'O di 
 opKOC i(TTi, tC> fiEV I3aai?iei, Kard. tov^ r^f rroXeog Kei^uivovg vofiovg ^aaiTiev- 
 CELv. Ty 6e noltL^ kfinedopKovvToc kKeivov, aarvipekiKTOv r^f (iaai^eiav nap- 
 
 ' Herodot. vi. 57. 
 
 'Plato, Legg. iii. p- 692; Aristot. Polit. v. 11, 1; Cicero de Republic. 
 Fragm. ii. 33, ed. Maii — " Ut contra consulare imperium tribun'i plebis, sic 
 ill (ephori) contra vim regiam constituti ;" — also, De Legg. iii. 7, and Valer. 
 ilax. It. 1. 
 
 Compare Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 7 ; Tittmann, Griechisch. Staats «if0.s8ttnic 
 
 p. 108, seqq. 
 * Polyb. xxiv. 8. 
 
 ( 
 
 I 
 
POWERS OF THK SPARTAN KINGS. 
 
 S53 
 
 i52 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE- 
 
 all the better-known period of history which we shall hereaft«i 
 traverse. The epliors are the general directors of public affairs' 
 and the supreme controlling l>oard, holding in clieck every other 
 authority in the state, without any assignable limit to their pow- 
 ers. The extraordinary ascendency of tliese magistrates is par- 
 ticfdarly manifested in the fact stated by Aristotle, that they 
 €«♦ rapted themselves from the public discipline, so that iheir 
 self-indulgent year of office stood in marked contrast with the 
 toilsome exercises and sober mess common to rich and poor alike. 
 The kings are reduced to a certain number of special functions, 
 combined with privileges partly rehgious, partly honorary : their 
 most important political attribute is, that they are ex officio gen- 
 erals of the military force on foreign expeditions. But even 
 here, we trace the s<3nsible decline of their ix)wer. For whereas 
 Herodotus was informed, and it probably had been the old privi- 
 lege, that the king could levy war against whomsoever he chose, 
 and that no Spartan could impede him on pain of committing 
 sacrilege,^ — we shall see, throughout the best-known periods of 
 this history, that it is usually the ephors (with or without the 
 senate and public assembly) who determine upon war, — the 
 king only takes the command when the army is put on the march. 
 Aristotle seems to treat the Spartan king as a sort of hereditary 
 geuftwd ; but even in this privilege, shackles were put upon him, 
 — tor two, out of the live ephors, accompanied the army, and 
 their power seems to have been not seldom invoked to insure 
 obedience to his orders.-' 
 
 The direct political powers of the kings were thus greatly cur- 
 tailed ; yet importance, in many ways, was still left to them. 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 14-16; 'E<rrt de koI t/ dlaira tuv 'E<^6p<jv ovx 6fioh> 
 yovfiiuri tu ^ovAr/fiaTi r/;f TroXewf ' avrif fiev yap dvei/xevij ?,iav hjri' kv tU 
 Toii uAA'Uf liuXkov vTTep3iiX).eL em rd OKXrjpbv^ etc. 
 
 * Herodot. vi. 56. 
 
 ^ Arii^tot. ii. 7, 4 : Xenoph. Republ. Laced, c. 13. Uavaavia^, Trelaa^ -i* 
 *E(t>6puv rptif;, k^dyei (ppovpuv, Xenoph. Hellen. ii. 4, 29; (ppovpdp i(^iifvav rf 
 'Eipopoi, iiL 2, 23. 
 
 A special restriction was put on the functions of the king, as military 
 commander-in-chief, in 417 B.C., after the ill-conducted expedition ofAgia, 
 •on of Archidamns, against Argos. It was then provided that ten Spartag 
 eoansellors should always accompany the king in every expedition (Thucyd 
 ▼.•8) 
 
 They possessed large royal domains, in many of the townships 
 of the Perioeki : they received frequent occasional presents, and 
 when victims were offered to the gods, the skins and other por- 
 tions Lelonged to them as perquisttes 'A they had their votes in 
 the senate, which, if they were absent, were given on their be- 
 half, by such of the other senators as were most nearly related 
 to them: the adoption of children received its formal accom- 
 plishment in their presence, — and conflicting claims at law, for 
 the hand of an unbequeathed orphan heiress, were adjudicated 
 by them. But above all, their root was deep in the religions 
 feelings of the people. Their preeminent lineage connected the 
 entire state with a divine paternity. They, the chiefs of the 
 Herakleids, were the special grantees of the soil of Sparta from 
 the gods, — the occupation of the Dorians being only sanctified 
 and blest by Zeus for the purpose of establishing the children of 
 Herakles in the valley of the Eurotas.2 They represented the 
 state in its relations with the gods, being by right priests of 
 Zeus Lacedfpmon, (the ideas of the god and the country coalesc- 
 ino" into one), and of Zeus Uranius, and offering the monthly 
 sacrifices necessary to insure divine protection to the people. 
 Though individual persons might sometimes be put aside, noth- 
 'ir\fr short of a new divine revelation could induce the Spartanb 
 to step out of the genuine lineage of Eurysthenes and Prokles. 
 Moreover, the remarkable mourning ceremony, which took place 
 at the death of every king, seems to indicate that the two kingly 
 families — which counted themselves Achaean,^ not Dorian — 
 
 • The hide-money {depfiariKov) arising from the numerous victims offered 
 at public sacritices at Athens, is accounted for as a special item of the public 
 revenue in the careful economy of that city : see Boeckh, Public Econ. of 
 Athens, iii. 7, p. 333 ; Enj,'. Trans. Corpus Inscription. No. 157. 
 ' Tyrtaeti, Fragm. 1, ed. Bergk ; Strabo, xviii. p. 362 : — 
 Avrd<: yap Kpovluv KaAh(TTe<puvnv iruaig "Hpijg 
 
 Zedf 'HpaKleiiaic rr/vde deduKE 'Kokiv 
 Olffiv ufia npoXtiTovrec "Eplveov ^vefioevra 
 Eipeiav IliTionug viia tv u(piKnfir&a. 
 Compare Thucyd. v. 16; Herodot. v. 39; Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 3, 3 ; Plutarch. 
 
 Lysand. c. 22. 
 
 ' Herod, v. 72. See the account in Plutarch, of the abortive stratagem of 
 Lysander, to make the kingly dignity elective, by patting forward a j»iitii 
 irho passed for the son of Apollo (Plutarch, Lysand. c. 25-26). 
 
 TOL. u. 23oc 
 
 \ 
 
S6A 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 were consideied as the great common bond of union between th« 
 ihree comjwnent parts of the population of Laconia, — Sparcang, 
 Perioeki, and Helots. Not merely was it required, on this occa- 
 sion, that two members of every house in Sparta should appear 
 in sackcloth and ashes, — but the death of the king was formally 
 made known throughout every part o^ Laconia, and deputies 
 from the townships of the Perioeki, and the villages of the 
 Helots, to the number of several thousand, were summoned to 
 S[)arta to take their share in the profuse and public demonstra- 
 tions of sorrow,' which lasted for ten days, and which imparted 
 to the funeral obsequies a superhuman solemnity. Nor ought 
 we to forget, in enumerating the privileges of the Spartan king, 
 that he (conjointly with two officers called Pythii, nominated by 
 him,) carried on the communications between the state and the 
 temple of Delphi, and had the custody of oracles and prophecies 
 generally. In most oi' the Grecian states, such inspired declara- 
 tions were treasured up, and consulted in cases of public emer- 
 gency : but the intercourse of Sparta with the Delphian oracle 
 was peculiarly frequent and intimate, and the responses of the 
 l*vthian priestess met with more reverential attention from the 
 Spartans than from any other Greeks.'^ So much the more im- 
 portant were the king's functions, as the medium of this inter- 
 course : the oracle always upheld his dignity, and often even 
 seconded his underhand personal schemes.^ 
 
 Sustained by so great a force of traditional reverence, a Spar 
 tan king, of military talent and individual energy, like Agesilaus, 
 exercised great ascendency ; but such cases were very rare, and 
 we shall find the king throughout the historical period only a 
 secondary force, available on special occasions. For real politi- 
 cal orders, in the greatest cases as well as the least, the Spar- 
 tan looks to the council of ephors, to whom obedience is paid 
 with a degree of precision which nothing short of the Spartan 
 discipline could have brought about, — by the most powerful 
 
 * Xenoph. Hellen. iii. 3, 1. 'Ayic^irvxe aefivoTipag ^ /car' av&f^nrtm 
 
 • For the priWleges of the Spartan kings, see Herodot vL 56-67 j Xoo^ 
 pbon, RepuW. Laced, c. 15} Plato, Alcib. L p. 123. 
 
 Here dot vi. 66, and Thucyd. v. 16, famish examples c^tfais. 
 
 LARGE POWTRS OF THE EPHORS. 
 
 355 
 
 dtii«ns not less than by the meanest.i Both the internal poliot 
 and ihe foreign affairs of the state are in the hands of the ephora, 
 ?. ho exercise an authority approaching to despotism, and alto- 
 gether without accountability. They appoint and direct the body 
 of three hundred young and active citizens, who performed the 
 immediate police service of Laconia: they cashier at pleasure 
 any subordinate functionary, and inflict fine or arrest at their own 
 discretion: they assemble the military force, on occasion of 
 foreif'n war, and determine its destination, though the king ha« 
 the actual command of it: they imprison on suspicion even the 
 regent or the king himself :2 they sit as judges, sometimes indi- 
 vidually and sometimes as a board, upon causes and complaints of 
 great moment, and they judge without the restraint of written laws, 
 the use of which was peremptorily forbidd en by a special Rhetra, ^ 
 
 » Xenophon, Republ. Laced, c. 8, 2, and Agesilaus, cap. 7, 2. 
 2 Xenoph. Rep. Laced. 8, 4 ; Thucydid. i. 131 ; Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 14- 
 upx'iv Mav fieyd?.T]v Kal iaorvpavvov Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 13, — //^ Xim^^a^ 
 
 vouoi^ kyypa(^0Lg. 
 
 Plato, in his Republic, in like manner disapproves of any general enact- 
 ments, tying up beforehand the discretion of perfectly educated men, like hii 
 guardians, who will always do what is best on each special occasion (Be- 
 
 pul)lic, iv. p. 425). 
 
 ' Besides the primitive constitutional Rhetra mentioned above, page 345, 
 various other Rhetra are also attributed to Lykurgus: and Plutarch singles 
 out three under the title of " The Three Rhetra," as if they were either the 
 only genuine Lvkurgean Rhetrae, or at least stood distinguished by some 
 peculiar sanctity from all others (Plutarch, Quaest. Roman, c. 87. Agesilaua. 
 
 These three were (Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 13 ; comp. Apophth. Lacon. p. 
 2-^7) • 1 Not to resort to written laws. 2. Not to employ in house-building 
 any other tools than the axe and the saw. 3. Not to undertake military 
 expeditions often against the same enemies. , . 
 
 I a-ree with Nitzsch (Histor. Homer, pp. 61-65) that these Rhetra, though 
 doubtless not actually Lykurgean, are, nevertheless, ancient (that is, probably 
 dating somewhere between 650-550 b. c.) and not the mere ^f «"« «f ^^^^IJ^J 
 writers, as Schoraann (Ant. Jur. Pub. iv. 1 ; xiv. p. 132) and Urbchs (p. 241) 
 Bcem to believe. And though Plutarch specifies the number three, yet there 
 Be. ms to have been still more, as the language of Tyrtaus must be held to 
 indicate: out of which, from causes which we do not now understand, tlie 
 three which Plutarch distinguishes excited particular notice. 
 
 These maxims or precepts of state were probably preserved along with the 
 dicta of the Delphian oracle, ftom which aathority, donbtless, many of them 
 Buiy have emanated, -SOch as the femous ancient prophecy 'A ^tA^A^/iani 
 
866 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SENATE AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY. 
 
 857 
 
 erroneously conn*Lcted with Lykurgus himself, but at any rate 
 ancient. On certain occasions of peculiar moment, they take 
 the sense of the senate and the public assembly,^ — such seeina 
 to have been the habit on questions of war and peace. It ap- 
 pears, however, that p<.*rsons charged with homicide, treason, or 
 capital offences generyJly, were tried before the senate. We 
 read of several instances in which the kings were tried and 
 severely fined, and in which their houses were condemned to be 
 razed to the ground, probably by the senate, on tlie proposition 
 cl the ephors : in one instance, it seems that the ephors inflicted 
 b) their own authority a fine even upon Agesilaus.2 
 
 War and peace appear to have been submitted, on most, if not 
 on all occasions, to the senate and the public tissembly ; no matter 
 could reach the latter until it had passed througli tlie former. 
 And we find some i'ew occasions on which the decision of the 
 public assembly was a real expression of opinion, and operative 
 as to the result, — as, for example, the assembly which immedi 
 
 iKupTcv (JAei, ukXo Se ovd^v (Krebs, Lectiones Diodoreae, p. 140. Aristotel. 
 Urpi n.o'AiT€iu)V, ap. Schol. ad Eurip. Andromach. 446 Schumaim, Coinm 
 uil Plutarch. Ag. et Cleom«;n. p. 123). 
 
 Nitzsch has j,'Ood remarks in explanation of the prohi!)ition against "using 
 written laws." This prohibition was probably called forth by the circumstance 
 t!nit other Grecian states were employing lawgivers like Zaleukus, Drako, 
 Charondas, or Solon, — to present them, at once, with a series of written 
 enactments, or provisions. Some Spartans may have proposed that an anal- 
 ogous lawgiver should be lominated for Sparta: upon which proposition a 
 negative was i>ut in thti most solemn manner possible, by a formal Khetra. jier- 
 haps passetl after advice frc' i Deljjhi. There is no such contradiction, there- 
 fore, (when we thus concei^t; the event.) as some authors represent, in forbid- 
 diuL' the use of written laws by a Rhetra itself, put into writinci^. To employ 
 a phrase in greater analogy with modem controversies — " The Si)artans, on 
 the direction of the oracle, resolve to retain their unwritten common law. and 
 
 not to codify." 
 
 ' 'E(5c^e rolg 'E<{>6poig Kal rij 'tKKArinia (Xen. Hellen. iii 2. 23). 
 
 ■ The case of fyt^tfchidei, Herod, vi. 72 ; of Pleistodnar, Thu( yd. ii. 21 -v. 
 16 ; Afjis the Stcond, Thucyd. v. 63 ; A</is the Third, IMuf^irch, Agis, c. 19 : sec 
 Plutarch, Agesilaus, c. 5. 
 
 Respecting the ephors ^x^^uerally, see Wachsmuth, Hellen. Alterthum 
 •kande, v. 4, 42, vol. i. p. 223 ; Cragius, Pep. Lac. ii. 4, p. 121. 
 
 Aristotl 2 distinctly marks the cplior-; :•. - ''irvTFvt^vroc : <o tliat the ston 
 •llnded to briefly in the Rhetoric (iii. 18) is not easy to he undersiood. 
 
 »ti^ly preceded and resolved upon the Peloponnesian war. Here, 
 ,n addition to the serious hazard of the case, and the general 
 caution of a Spartan temperament, there was the great personal 
 weiorht and experience of king Archidamus opposed to the war, 
 though the ephors were favorable to iO The public assembly, 
 under such peculiar circumstances, really manifested an opinion 
 and came to a division. But, for the most part, it seems to have 
 been little better than an inoperative formality. The general 
 rule pennitted no open discussion, nor could any private citizen 
 Bpeak except by special leave from the magistrates. Perhaps 
 even the general liberty to discuss, if given, might have been of 
 no avail, for not only was there no power of public speakmg, but 
 no habit of canvassing public measures, at Sparta ; nothing was 
 more characteristic of the government than the extreme seci-ecy 
 of its proceedings.9 The propositions brought forward by the 
 ma<-istrates were either accepted or rejected, without any Hcense 
 of Amending. There could be no attraction to invite the citizen 
 to be present at such an assembly : and we may gather from the 
 lan-uage of Xenoi^hon that, in his time, it consisted only of a 
 cerrain° number of ' notables specially summoned in addition to 
 the senate, which latter body is itself called "the lesser Ekkle- 
 sia3" Indeed, the constant and formidable diminution in the 
 number of qualified citizens was alone sufficient to thin the attend- 
 ance of the assembly, as well as to break down any imposmg 
 force which it might once have possessed. 
 
 ' Thucyd i. 67, 80, 87. ^rXXoyov a<p(jv avTuv rdv eiu^ora. 
 
 2 ThucVd iv. 68. rm ^olirnac rd Kpvnrbv : compare iv. 74 ; also, h» 
 remarkable expression about so distinguished a man as Brasrdas, ^v 6e ovk 
 «dV.mror, <ic XaKeda^iiovm. hmlv, and iv. 24, about the Lacedaemonian 
 enioys to Athens. Compare Schomann, Antiq. Jur. Pub. Gra^c. iv. 1, lo 
 p. 122. Aristotel. Polit. ii. 8, 3. 
 
 ^T^v fiiKpav KuXovfiEvvv EKKAvaiav (Xenoph. Hellen. m. 3, 8), wIikH 
 means the ; rpovr.c, or senate, and none besides, except the ephor^ who con- 
 vok^d it. (See Lachmann, Spart. Verfass. sect 12, p. 216.) What is st.U 
 more to \^ noted, is the expression oi UKlnroi as the equivalent of »7 ^^a^v- 
 ffin (compare Hellen. v. 2, 11 ; vi. 3, 3), evidently showing a special and 
 limited number of persons convened : see, also, n. 4, 38 ; iv. 6, 3 ; v. 2, 33 , 
 
 rtiiicyd. v. 77. . , . 
 
 The expression oi Ikk^vto* coaM aever have got into use as an eqiiivatenl 
 
 ff^r the A.thenian ecclesia. 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
858 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 SPARTAN CONSTITUTION OLIGARCHICAL 
 
 359 
 
 An assembly thus circumstanced, — though always retained aa 
 a formality, and though its consent on considerable matters and 
 for the passing of laws (which, however, seems to have been a 
 rare occurrence at Sparta) was indist)ensabk'. — could be very 
 little of a practical check u{)on the administration of the ephors. 
 The senate, a permanent body, with the kings included in it, wa3 
 the onlj real check upon them, and must have been to a certain 
 extent a concurrent body in the government, — though the large 
 and imposing languajic in which its political supremacy is spoken 
 of by Demosthenes und Isokrates exceeds greatly the reality of 
 the case. It^ most important function was that of a court of 
 criminal justice, befoie whom every man put on trial for his life 
 was arraigned.' But both in this and in llieir other dutic.<^, we 
 find the senators a- vtll as the kings and the ephors char^^d 
 with corruption and venality.- As they were not ap[)oiii:eJ 
 until sixty years of age, and tlicn held their otUces tor life, we 
 may readily believe that some of them continued to act after the 
 period of extreme and dis(pialifying senility, — which, though the 
 ♦extraordinary respect of the Lacethemonians for old age would 
 doubtless tolerate it, could not fail to impair the influence of the 
 body as a concurrent element of govennnent. 
 
 The brief sketch here given of the Spartiin government will 
 show that, though Greek theorists foun<l a difficulty in determin- 
 ing under what class they should arrange it,-* it was in substance 
 
 ' Xenoph. Kepuhl. Laced. 10 ; Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 17 ; iii. 1, 7 ; Demosthen. 
 cont. Leptin. c. 23, p. 489; Isokrates, Or. xii. (Piinathenaic.) p. 266. The 
 lanpiajie of Demosthenes seems particularly inaccurate. 
 
 Plutarch (Agresihius. c. 32), on occasion of some suspected conspirators, 
 who were put to death h;v A^esilaus and the ephors, when Sparta was in 
 imminent danger from the attack of Epameinondas, asserts, that this was the 
 first time that any Spartan had ever been put to death without trial. 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 18 Compare, also, Thucydid. i. 131, about the guilty 
 Pausanias, — ~/(Trfia»t' xf*VM^<^^ diakvaetv rffv (5m/3oX^v ; Herodot. v. 72; 
 Thucyd. V. 16, — al»out the kings I^otychides and Pleistoanax ; the brare 
 •nd able Gylippus, — Plutarch, Lysand. c. 16. 
 
 ' The ephors are sometimes considered as a democratical element, because 
 every Spnrfan citi/cn hml a chance of becoming ephor ; sometimes as a 
 desnotical element, bcrau^f in the exercise of their power they were sabjeob 
 to little rc^^'niinr and n<i responsibility : see Plato, Legg. iv, p 712 ; AristOt 
 !'(.::(. ii. 3, 10; iv. 7, 4, b. 
 
 a close, unscrupulous, and well-obeyed oligarchy, — including 
 within it, as subordinate, those portions which had once been 
 dominant, the kings and the senate, and softening the odium, 
 without.abating the mischief, of the system, by its annual change 
 of the ruling ei»hors. We must at the same time distinguish the 
 government°froni the Lykurgean discipline and education, which 
 doubtless tended much to equalize rich and poor, in respect to 
 practical life, habits, and enjoyments. Herodotus (and seem- 
 ingly, also, Xenophon) thought that the form just described was 
 that which the government had originally received from the hand 
 of Lykurgus. Now, though there is good reason for suijposing 
 othervviserand for believing the ephors to be a subsequent addi- 
 tion,— yM, the mere fact that Herodotus was so informed at 
 Sparta, points our attention to one important attrit ^ax of the 
 Spartan polity, which it is proper to bring into view. This attri- 
 bute is, its unparalleled steadiness, for four or fiv6 successive 
 centuries, in the midst of governments like the Gre^ lan, all of 
 which had undergone more or less of fluctuation. No cons''dera- 
 ble revolution— not even any palpable or formal change -- oc- 
 curred in it, from the days of the Messenian ;\ar, down to those 
 of Agis the Third : in spite of the irreparable blow which the 
 power and territory of the state sustained from Epameinondas 
 and the Thebans, the form of government, nevertheless, remained 
 unchanged. It was the only government in Greece which couM 
 trace an unbroken, peaceable descent from a high antiquity, and 
 from its real or supposed founder. Now this was one of the 
 main circumstances (among others which will hereafter be men- 
 tioned) of the astonishing ascendency which the Spartans ac- 
 quired over the Hellenic mind, and which they will not be 
 found at all to deserve by any superior ability in the conduct of 
 affairs. The steadiness of their political sympathies, — exhibited 
 at one time, by putting down the tyrants, or despots, at another, 
 by overthrowing the democracies,— stood in the place of ability ; 
 and even the recognized failings of their government were often 
 covered by the sentiment of respect for its early commencement 
 and uninterrupted continuance. If such a feeling acted on the 
 Greeks generaliy,i much more powerful was its action upon the 
 
 ~'~A specimen of liie way in which this antiquity was lauded, may be sceE 
 in Isokrates, Or. xii. (Panatheriaic.) p. 288 
 
 I i 
 
 v:j 
 
sw 
 
 HISTORY OF OREECE. 
 
 SPARTAN TRIBES. 
 
 361 
 
 Spartans themselves, in inflaming that haughty exclusiveness for 
 wliich they stood distinguished. And it is to be observed tnat 
 the Spartan mind continued to be cast on the old-fashioned scale, 
 and unsusceptible of modernizing influences, longer tLan that 
 of most other people of Greece. The ancient legendary faith, 
 and devoted submission to the Delphian oracle, remained among 
 tliem unabated, at a time when various infiueiices had consider- 
 &l)ly undermined it among their fellow-IIellens and neighbor. 
 Kijt though the unchanged title and forms of the government 
 thus contributed to its imposing effect, both at home and abroad, 
 the causes of internal degeneracy were not the less really at work, 
 in undermining its efficiency. It has been already stated, tliat 
 the number of qualified citizens went on continually diminishing, 
 and even of this diminished number a larger proportion than be- 
 fore were needy, since the landed ]>roi)erty tended constantly to 
 concentrate itself in fewer hands. There grew up in this way a 
 body of discontent, which had not originally existed, both among 
 the poorer citizens, and among those who had lost their fran 
 chise as citizens ;. thus aggravating the danger arising from 
 Perioiki and Helots, who will be presently noticed. 
 
 We pass from the i)olitical constitution of Sparta to the civil 
 ranks and distribution, economical relations, and lastly, the pe- 
 culiar system of Jiabits, education, and discipline, said to have 
 been established among the Laceda'monians by Lykurgus. Here, 
 again, we shall find ourselves impeifectly informed as to the ex- 
 isting institutions, and surrounded by confusion when we try to 
 explain how those institutions arose. 
 
 It seems, however, ascertained that the Dorians, in all their 
 settlements, were divided into three tribes, — the Hylleis, the 
 Pamphyli, and the Dymanes : in all Dorian cities, moreover, 
 there were distinguished Herakleid families, from whom oekists 
 were chosen when new colonies were formed. These three tribes 
 can be traced at Argos, Sikyon, Epidaurus, Trcezen, Megara, 
 Korkyra, and seemingly, also, at Sparta.^ The Hylleis recog- 
 nized, as their eponym and progenitor, Hyllus, the son of H^ra- 
 
 ' Herodot. v. 68; Stephan Byz. 'r/.;i£tf and Avfiav; O. Muller, Doruafi 
 U. 5, a ; Boeckh id Corp. Inscrip. No. 1123. 
 Thucyd. i. 24, about Phaliis, the Herakleid, at Corinth. 
 
 kles, and were therefore, in their own belief, descended from 
 Herakles himself: we may suppose the Herakleids, specially so 
 called, comprising the two regal families, to have been the elder 
 brethren of the tribe of Hylleis, the whole of whom are some- 
 times spoken of as Herakleids, or descendants of HSrakles.i 
 But there seem to have been also at Sparta, as in other Dorian 
 towns, non-Dorian inhabitants, apart from these three tribes, and 
 embodied in tribes of their own. One of these, the ^geids, 
 faid to have come from Thebes as allies of the Dorian invaders, 
 is named by Aristotle, Pindar, and Herodotus,^ — while the 
 ^:gialeis at Sikyon, the tribe Hyrnethia at Argos and Epidaurus, 
 and others, whose titles we do not know, at Corinth, represent, in 
 like manner, the non-Dorian portions of their respective commu 
 nities.3 At Corinth, the total number of tribes is said to have 
 been eight.4 But at Sparta, though we seem to make out the 
 existence of the three Dorian tribes, we do not know how many 
 tribes there were in all : still less do we know what relation the 
 Oba?, or Obes, another subordinate distribution of the people, 
 bore to the tribes. In the ancient Rhetra of Lykurgus, the 
 Tribes and Obes are directed to be maintained unaltered : but 
 the statement of O. MiiUer and Boeckh^ — that there were thirtj 
 
 ' See Tyrtaus, Fragm. 8, 1, ed. Schneidewin, and Pindar, Pyth. i. 61, 7. 
 71, where the expressions "descendants of Herakles " plainly comprehend 
 more than the two kinjrly families. Plutarch, Lysand. c. 22; Diodor. xi. 58. 
 
 2 Herodot. iv. 149; Pindar, Pyth. v. 67 ; Aristot. \aK(jv. UoXit. p. 127, 
 Fraj^m. ed. Neuman. The Talthybiadae, or heralds, at Sparta, formed a 
 family or caste apart (Herod, vii. 134). 
 
 0. Mailer supposes, without any proof, that the ^geids must have been 
 adopted into one of the three Dorian tribes ; this is one of the corollaries 
 from his fundamental supposition, that Sparta is the type of pure Donsm 
 (vol ii. p. 78). Kopstadt thinks (Dissertat. p. 67) that I have done injustice 
 I) 0. Mailer, in not assenting to his proof: but, on studying the point over 
 ft^rain, I can see no reason for modifying what is here stated in the text. The 
 Section of Schomann's work (Antiq. Jur. Publ. Groec. iv. 1, 6, p. 115) ott 
 this subject asserts a great deal more than can be proved. 
 
 ' Herod, v. 68-92; Boeckh, Corp. Inscrip. Nos. 1130,1131 ; Stephan. Byi. 
 w. 'Ypvi^iov ; Pausan. ii. 28, 3. 
 
 *PhotittS Uuvra 6ktu; also, Proverb. Vatic. Suidas, xi. 64; compaw 
 
 Ilesychius, v. KvvoipaXoi. ^^ 
 
 » Muller. Dorians, iii. 5, 3-7 ; Boeckh. ad Corp. InscnpUon. part iv. wci 
 
 3, p. 609. 
 
 VOL. 11. 1^ 
 
 
862 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 POPULATION OF LACONIA. 
 
 363 
 
 Ob§s in aii, ten to each tribe - rests up.n no other evidence than 
 a peculiar puncfiation of this Rhetra, which various other ( ritics 
 reiect ; and seemingly, with good reason. We are thus left with- 
 out any information respecting the Obe, though we know that it 
 was an old, peculiar, and Lasting division among the Spart^m 
 people, since it occurs in the oldest Rhetra of Lykurgus, as well 
 as in late inscriptions of the date of the Roman empire. In 
 similar inscriptions, and in the account of Pausanias, there n, 
 however, recognized a classification of Spartans distinct from and 
 independent of the three old Dorian tribes, and founded upon 
 the different quarters of the city, — Limna3, Mesoa, Pitane, and 
 Kynosura ;' from one of the.-e four was derived the usual de- 
 scrii)tion of a Spartan in the days of Herodotus. There is 
 reason to supiH»^' tluit the old Dorian tribes became anti(iuated 
 at Sparta, (as the four old Ionian tribes did at Athens,) and that 
 the toi)ical elassirication derived from the quarters of the city 
 superseded it, — these quarters having been originally the sepa- 
 rate villages, of the a^^gre-ate of which Sparta was comi)Osed.^ 
 That the number of the old senators, thirty, was connected with 
 the three Dorian tribes, deriving ten members from each, is 
 probable enough, thougli there is no proof of it. 
 
 Of the popuhiiion of Laeonia, three main divisions are recog- 
 nized, — Spartans, Peria-kt, and Helots. The first of the three 
 were the full (|ua]itied citizens, who lived in Sparta itself, fulfilled 
 all the e^xiixenees of the I.ykurgean discipline, paid their quota to 
 the Syssitia, or i)ublic mess, and were alone eligible to honors'^ or 
 
 ' Pausan. iii. 16. f ; Hero.lot. iii. 55; Boeckh. Corp. Inscript. Nos. 1241 
 1338, 1347, H25; Sieph. Byz v. Mfffoa; Stnvbo, viii. p. 364; Hesych. v. 
 
 lliTuvrj. 
 
 There is much confusion and discrepancy of opinion about the bpartim 
 tribes. Cragius admits six (l)e Republ. Lacon. i. 6) : Meursius, eight (Rep. 
 Lacon i. 7): Barthclemv (Vova^-e du Jcune Anacharsis. iv. p. 185) makes 
 them five Manso has discussed the subject at larpe. but I think not very 
 gatisfiictorilv, in the ei-hth Beilage to the first l>ook of his History of Sparta 
 (vol ii. p. 125) ; and Dr. Thirlwall's second Appendix (vol. i. p. 517) both 
 notices all the difftrent modern opinions on this obscure topic, and adds 
 •everal useful criti«-isms. Our scanty stock of original evidence leavei 
 much room for divergent hypotheses, and little chance of any certain 
 
 1 ' Thucvd. .. 10. 
 
 Conclusion. :; ^ *k^ 
 
 » One or two Pericekic officers appear in military command tt^aros tos 
 
 public offices. These men had neither time, nor taste even, fo? 
 cuhivation of the land, still less for trade or handicraft : such 
 occupations were inconsistent with the prescribed training, even if 
 *hey had not been positively interdicted. They were maintained 
 from the lands round the city, and from the large proportion of 
 Laeonia which belonged to them ; the land being tilled for them 
 by Helots, who seem to have paid over to them a fixed propor- 
 tion of the produce ; in some cases, at least, as much as one- 
 half.^ Each Spartan retained his qualification, and transmu- 
 ted it to his children, on two conditions, — first, that of sub- 
 mitting to the prescribed discipline ; next, that of paying, 
 each, his stipulated quota to the public mess, which was only 
 maintained by these individual contributions. The multiplication 
 of children in the poorer families, after acquisitions of new terri- 
 tory ceased, continually augmented both the number and the 
 proportion of citizens who were unable to fulfil the second of 
 these conditions, and who therefore lost their franchise : so that 
 there arose towards the close of the Peloponnesian war, a dis- 
 tinction, among the Spartans themselves, unknown to the eariier 
 times, — the reduced number of fully qualified citizens bein^ 
 called The Equals, or Peers, — the disfranchised poor. The Infe- 
 riors. The latter, disfranchised as they were, nevertheless, did 
 not become Perioeki : it was probably still competent to them 
 to resume their qualification, should any favorable accident 
 enable them to make their contributions to the public mess. 
 
 The Pericekus was also a freeman and a citizen, not of Sparta, 
 but of some one of the hundred townships of Laeonia.^ Both lie 
 
 end of the Peloponnesian war (Thucyd. viii. 6, 22), but these seem rare 
 exceptions, even as to foreign service by sea or land, while a Peria^kus, as 
 magistrate at Sparta, was unheard of ,, . 
 
 'One half was paid by the enslaved Messenians (Tyrtaius, irag. 4, 
 
 Berck): ^/xiffi- ^"^', <"7<^o^ <"P^«^ "P^^'P" '^^^^'- , , . j 
 
 ' Strabo riii. p. 362. Stephanus Byz. alludes to this total of one hundred 
 townships in his notice of several different items among them,- 'Avt^ara- 
 rroTicc AaKovcKr, f.ia ruv Uarov ; also, v. 'A<ipo(5.cTmf, Bo?a^ Av/^/Sa.t^oy, etc: 
 but he probably copied Strabo, and, therefore, cannot pass for a distinct 
 authority. The total of one hundred townships belongs to the maximum 
 of Spartan power, after the conquest and before the severance of Messe- 
 nia; for Anion, Boi«, and Methone (the extreme places) are included among 
 them. 
 
 ■i 
 
 .v^-M.ii^'^m*^- 
 
i'ERKEKl. 
 
 J66 
 
 364 
 
 illS-rvRY OF GREECE. 
 
 Mid the community to which he belonged received their orderj 
 only from Sparta, having no political sphere of their own, and nc 
 share in determining the movements of tlie Spartan authorities. 
 In the island of Kythera,' which formed one of the Periockic 
 townships, a Spartan bailitl' resided as administrator. But whether 
 the same was the ciise with otliers, we cannot affirm: nor is it 
 cafe to reason from one of these townships to all, — there may 
 have been considerable differences in the mode of dealing with 
 one and another. For they were spread through the whole of 
 Laconia, some near and some distant from Sparta : the free inhabi- 
 tants of Amyklaf! must have been Perioeki, as well as those of Ky- 
 thera, Thuria, JEtheia, or Aulon : nor can we presume that the 
 feeling on the part of the Spartan authorities towards all of them 
 was the same. Between the Spartans and their neighbors, the 
 numerous Periaki of Amyklae, there must have subsisted a degree 
 of intercourse and mutual relation in which the more distant 
 Perioeki did not partake, — besides, that both the religious edifices 
 and the festivals of Amyklai were most reverentially adopted by 
 the Spartans and exalted into a national dignity : and we seem to 
 perceive, on some occasions, a degree of consideration manifested 
 for the Amyklaian hoplites,^ such as perhaps other Perioeki 
 might not have obtained. The class-name, Perioeki, 3 — circum- 
 
 Mr. Clinton (Fast Hellen. ii. p. 401) has collected the names of above 
 sixty out of the one hundred. 
 
 ' Thucyd. iv. 53. 
 
 • Xenophon, Hellen. iv. 5, 1 1 ; Herod, ix. 7 ; Thucyd. v. 18-23. The Amyk- 
 lajan festival of the Hyacinthia, and the Amyklajan temple of Apollo, seem 
 to stand foremost in the mind of the Spartan authorities. Avtoi koI ol 
 tyyvrara tuv nepio'Ktiv (Thucyd. iv. 8), who are ready before the rest, and 
 march against the Athenians at Pylus, probably include the Amyklaians. 
 
 Laconia generally is called by Thucydides (iii. 16) as the ■KepioiKic of 
 Sparta. 
 
 ^ The word TTfpiocKoi is sometimes used to signify simply " surrounding 
 neighbor states," in its natural geographical sense: see Thucyd. i. 17, and 
 Aristot. Polit. if* 7, 1. 
 
 But the more usual employment of it is, to mean, the unprivileged or Icsa 
 privileged members; of the same political aggregate living without the city, 
 in contrast with the full-privileged bui^hers who lived within it. Aristotle 
 ues it to signify, in Kretc, the class corresponding to the Lacedeemoniaa 
 Helots (Pol. ii. 7, 3) : there did not exist in Krete any class corresponding 
 Id tiw LacedeBmonifin Perioeki. In Krete, there were not two stages of i«fo 
 
 fesldents, or dwellers around th3 city, — usually denoted native 
 inhabitants of inferior political condition as contrasted with the 
 
 riority, — there was only one, and that one is marked by the word TreploiKm; 
 while the Lacedaimonian Periuikus had the Helot below him. To an Athen- 
 ian the word conveyed the idea of undefined degradation. 
 
 To understand better the status of the Perioekus, we may contrast him 
 with the Metoekus, or Metic. The latter resides in the city, but he is an 
 alien resident on sufferance, not a native: he pays a special tax, standi 
 excluded from all political functions, and cannot even approach the magis- 
 trate except through a friendly citizen, or Prostates) errl Tzpoarurov oUelv^ 
 Lycurgus cont. Lcocrat. c 21-53): he bears arms for the defence of the 
 state. The situation of a Metic was, however, very different in different cities 
 of Greece. At Athens, that class were well-protected in person and prop- 
 erty, numerous and domiciliated: at Sparta, there were at first none, — the 
 Xenelasy excluded them ; but this must have been relaxed long before the 
 
 days of Agis the Third. 
 
 The Pericekus differs from the Metic, in being a native of the soil, subject 
 
 by birth to the city law. 
 
 M. Kopstadt (in his Dissertation above cited, on Lacedaemonian affairs, 
 sect. 7, p. 60) expresses much surprise at that which I advance in this note 
 respecting Krete and Lacedcemon, — that in Krete there was no class of men 
 analogous to the Lacedaanionian Perioeki, but only two classes, — i. e. free 
 citizens and Helots. He thinks that this position is " prorsus ftilsum ** 
 
 But I advance nothing more here than what is distinctly stated by Aristo 
 tie, as Kopstadt himself admits (pp. 60, 71 ). Aristotle calls the subject class 
 in Krete by the name of nepioiKoi. And in this case, the general presump- 
 tions go far to sustain the authority of Aristotle. For Sparta was a domi- 
 nant or capital city, including in its dependence not only a considerable 
 territory, but a considerable number of inferior, distinct, organized townships. 
 In Krete, on the contrary, each autonomous state included only a town with 
 Its circumjacent territory, but without any annexed townships. There was, 
 therefore, no basis for the intermediate class called, in Laconia, Periieki : 
 just as Kopstadt himself remarks (p. 78) about the Dorian city of Megara. 
 There were only the two classes of free Kretan citizens, and serf-cultiva- 
 tors in various modifications and subdivisions. 
 
 Kopstadt (following Hocck, Kreta, b. iii. vol. iii. p. 23) says that the 
 authority of Aristotle on this point is overborne by that of Dosiadas and 
 Sosikrates, — authors who wrote specially on Kretan affairs. Now if we 
 were driven to make a choice, I confess that I should prefer the testimony 
 of Aristotle, — considering that we know little or nothing respecting the other 
 two. But in this case I do not think that we are driven to make a choice: 
 Dosiadas (ap. Athenae. xiv. p. 143) is not cited in terms, so that we cannol 
 affirm him to contradict Aristotle : and Sosikrates (upon whom Hoeck and 
 Kopstadt rely) says something which d^es not nesessarily contradict hiiD, 
 
 I, , * I 
 
366 
 
 iUSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUrPOSED ORIGIN OK THE PERICEKI. 
 
 367 
 
 full-privileged bif.ghers who lived in the city, but it did not mark 
 any precise or unitbnii degree of inferiority. It is eonietiinea 
 so used by Aristotle as to imply a condition no better than that 
 of the Helots, s«;) that, in a large sense, all the inhabitants of 
 Laconia (Helots as well as the rest) might have been included in 
 it But wlien u^ed in reference to Laconia, it bears a technical 
 .5ense, whereby it is placed in contraposition with the Spartan on 
 one side, and with the Helot on the other: it means, native free- 
 men and proprietors, grouped in subordinate communities ' with 
 more or less power of local management, but (like the subject 
 towns belonging to Bern, Zurich, and most of the old thirteen 
 cantons of Switzerland) embodied in tlie Lacedaemonian aggre- 
 gate, which was governed exclusively by the kings, senate, and 
 citizens of 8]»arta. 
 
 When we come to (h'soribe the democracy of Athens after the 
 revolution of Kkisthcncs, we shall find the denies, or local town- 
 ships and villages of Attica, incor])orated as equal and constituent 
 fractions of the integer called The Deme (or The City) of 
 Athens, so that a demot of Acharnaj or Sphettus is at the same 
 time a full Athenian citizen. But the relation of the Perioekic 
 townships to Sparta is one of inequality and obedience, though 
 both belong to the same jKiliti^al aggregate, and make up together 
 the free Laceda^nonian community. In like manner, Orneie and 
 other [)laces were townships of men personally free, but politically 
 dependent on Argos, — Akroephite on Thebes, — Chreroneia on 
 Orchomenus, — and various Thessalian towns on l*harsalus and 
 Laiissa.^ Such, moreover, was, in the main, the state into which 
 
 but admits of being exphiined so as to place the two witnesses in harmony 
 wilh each other. 
 
 Sosikrates says (ap. Athenae. vi. p. 263), T^i' /^ev koiv^v SovXeiav ol Kp^rcf 
 Ka^oi'Oi fivoiai>. n/v <5f u^iav u(l>afiiuTac, Toix di: Trepio'iKOvg VnTjKoov^, Now 
 the word TreptoUov^ ^ecms to be here used just as Aristotle would have used 
 *t, to comprehend the Kretan serfs universally : it is not distinguished from 
 jLvuirai and a^a^fwrat, but comprehends both of them as different species 
 ander a generic tenri The authority of Aristotle affords a reason for pre- 
 ferring to construe tiie passajre in this manner, and the words appear to nn« 
 Co admit of it fairly. 
 
 ' The T67.eiq of the Lacedaemonian Perioeki are often noticed: see Xeno 
 phon ( Apesilaus, ii. 24 : Laced. Repub. xv. 3; Hellenic, vi 5, 21). 
 
 ^ Herod, viii. 73-135 j Xenoph. Helien. vi, 1, 8; Thucyd. iv. 7ft-94. 
 
 Athens would have brought her allies, and Thebes the free Boeo- 
 tian communities,' if the policy of either of these cities had 
 [)ermanently prospered. This condition carried with it a sentiment 
 of degradation, and a ])ainful negation of that autonomy for which 
 every Grecian community thirsted ; while being maintained 
 through superior force, it had a natural tendency, perliaps without 
 the deliberate wish of the reigning city, to degenerate into prac- 
 tical oppression. Hut in addition to this general tendency, the 
 peculiar education of a Spartan, while it imparted force, fortitude, 
 and regimental precision, was at the same time so rigorously 
 peculiar, that it rendered him harsh, unaccommodating, and 
 incapable of sympathizing with the ordinary march of Grecian 
 feeling, — not to mention the rapacity and love of money, which 
 is attested, by good evidence, as belonging to the Spartan charac- 
 ter,'^ and which we should hardly have expected to find in the 
 pui)ils of Lykurgus. As Harmosts out of their native city ,3 and 
 in relations with inferiors, the Spartans seem to have been more 
 unpopular than other Greeks, and we may presume that a similar 
 liaughty roughness pervaded their dealings with their own 
 Perioeki ; who were bound to them certainly by no tie of affection, 
 and who for the most part revolted after the battle of Leuktra, as 
 soon as the invasion of Laconia by Epameinondas enabled them 
 to do so with safety. 
 
 Isokrates, taking his point of departure from the old Herakleid 
 legend, with its instantaneous conquest and triple partition of 
 all Dorian Peloponnesus, among the three Herakleid brethren, 
 deduces the first origin of the Perioekic townships from internal 
 seditions among the conquerors of Sparta. According to him, 
 the period immediately succeeding the conquest was one of fierce 
 
 * Xenoph. Helien. vi. 3, 5, 9, 19. Os, writing in the days of The- 
 
 ban power, after the battle of Leuktra, characterizes the Boeotian towns ai 
 irtf/ioiKoi of Thebes (Or. viii. De Pace, p. 182); compare Orat. xiv. Plataicw 
 pp. 299-303. Xenophon holds the same language, Helien. v. 4, 46 : com 
 pare Plutarch, Agesilaus, 28. 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 23. 
 
 ' Thucyd. i. 77-9.5 ; vi. 105. Isokrates (Panathenaic. Or. xii. p. 283), 
 inapTtuTag 6e vTCEpoiTTiKoi)^ Kal 7ro?.efiiKoi>g Kal TrXeovf/crac, oiovq -rep avroi)^ 
 dvai nuvTeg vnei'k7i<paaL. Compare his Oratio de Pace (Or. viii pp. 180- 
 IW); Oratio Panegyr. (Or. iv. pp. 64-67). 
 
S68 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 TREATMENT OF THE PERIQ.KL 
 
 369 
 
 intestirK; waitare in newly-conquered Sparta, between the Few 
 and the Many, — the oligarchy and the demu8. Tlie fumier 
 bein«' victorious, two important measures were the consequences 
 of their victory. They banished th3 defeated Many from Spaiia 
 into Laconia, reUiining the residence in Sparta exclusively for 
 themselves ; they assigned to them the smallest and least fertile 
 half of Laconia, monopolizing the hirger and better for them- 
 selves ; and they tlisseminated them into many very small town- 
 ships, or subordinate little communities, while ihey concentrated 
 themselves entirely at Sparta. To these precautions for insuring 
 dominion, they added another not less important. They estah- 
 lished among their own Spartan citizens equality of legal privi- 
 lege and democratical government, so as to tjike the greatest 
 securities for internal harmony ; which harmony, according tc 
 the judgment of Isokrates, had been but too etl'ectually perpetu- 
 ated, enabling the Si>artans to achieve their dominion over 
 oppressed Greece, — like the accord of pirates' for the spolia- 
 tion of the peaceful. The reriu^'kic townships, he tells us, 
 while deprived of all the privileges of freemen, were exposed to 
 all the toils, as wvW iis to an imfair share of the dangers, of war. 
 The Spartan autliorities [mt them in situations and upon enter- 
 prises which the}' deemed too dangerous for their own citizens : 
 and, what was still worse, the ephors possessed the power of 
 putting to death, without any form of preliminary trial, as many 
 Feriojki as they pleased.- 
 
 The statemeni, here delivei*ed by Isokrates, resjHJcting the 
 first origin of the distinction of Spartans and Periceki, is nothing 
 better than a conjeiture, nor is it even a probable conjecture, 
 eince it is basevl on the liistoricul truth of the old Herakleid 
 legend, and transports the disputes of his own time, between the 
 oligarchy and the demus, into an early period, to which such dis- 
 
 • I>okr;itC-s Paiiataenaii- Or. xii. p 280. uxrre ovSdg &v alror^c Sia ye 
 rifi ii^ovoiav 6iKan.»; evratvtotui', oin^ti' fidX^ov fj rovg KaranovTiaTu.^ k(u 
 /i^'crrat nal Tovg nepi raf u/.Xa^ «(5i«/af ovrac Koi yap Ik£ivoi a<ftiatv airroii 
 6uovoi)vre^ roi)^ u'aaov^ airoAAvovni. 
 
 "Isokrates, Orat. Kii. (Pauathenaic.) pp. 270-271. The statement in tha 
 •ame oration (p. 246), that the Lacedaemonians " had put to death without 
 trial more Greeks {■^'Xdovq tC>v 'EAa^vwv) than had ever been trie i at Athens 
 ■ince Athens was a cdty. refers to their allies or dependents out \f Laconia 
 
 potes do not belong. Nor is there anything, so far as our knowl- 
 edge of Grecian history extends, to bear out his assertion, that 
 the Spartans took to themselves the least dangerous post in the 
 field, and threw undue peril upon their Perioeki. Such dastardly 
 temper was not among the sins of Sparta ; but it is undoubtedly 
 true that, as the number of citizens continually diminished, so the 
 Perioeki came to constitute, in the later times, a larger and larger 
 proportion of the Spartan force. Yet the power which Isokrates 
 represents to have been vested in the ephors, of putting to death 
 Perioeki without preliminary trial, we may fully believe to be 
 !eal, and to have been exercised as often as the occasion seemed 
 to call for it. We shall notice, presently, the way in which these 
 ma«'^istrates dealt with the Helots, and shall see ample reason 
 from thence to draw the conclusion that, whenever the ephora 
 believed any man to be dangerous to the public peace, — whether 
 an inferior Spartan, a Periockus, or a Helot, — the most sum- 
 mary mode of getting rid of him would be considered as the 
 best. Towards Spartans of rank and consideration, they were 
 doubtless careful and measured in their epplication of punish- 
 ment, but the same necessity for circumspection did not exist 
 with regard to the inferior classes : moreover, the feeling that the 
 exigences of justice required a fair trial before punishment was 
 inflicted, belongs to Athenian associations much more than to 
 Spartan. How often any such summary executions may have 
 taken place, we have no information. 
 
 We may remark that the account which Lsokrat^s has here 
 given of the origin of the Laconian Perioeki is not essentially 
 irreconcilable with that of Ephorus,' who recounted that Eurys- 
 thenes and Prokles, on first conquering Laconia, had granted to 
 the preexisting population equal rights with the Dorians, — but 
 that Agis, son of Eurysthenes, had deprived them of this equal 
 position, and degraded them into dependent subjects of the latter. 
 At least, the two narratives both agree in presuming that the 
 Perioeki had once enjoyed a better position, from which they had 
 beer, extruded by violence. And the policy which Isokrat^ 
 ascribes to the victorious Spartan oligarchs, — of driving out the 
 demus from concentrated rtisidence in the city to disseminated 
 
 ' Ephorus, Fragm. 18 ed. Marx; ap. Strabo, viii. p. 365. 
 VOL. 11. 16* 2400. 
 
 1 
 
870 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 residence in many separate and insignificant townships, — se* nil 
 to be the expression of that proceeding which in his time was 
 numbered among the most etFu-ient precautions against refractory 
 subjects, — the Dioekisis, or breaking up of a town-aggregate 
 into villages. We cannot assign to the statement any historical 
 authority.' Moreover, the division of Laconia into six districts, 
 together with its distribution into townships (or the distribution 
 of settlers into preexisting townshi|)s), which p:phorus ascribed 
 to the first Dorian kings, are all deductions from the primitive 
 legendary account, which described the Dorian concpiest as 
 •i^hieved by one stroke, and must all be dismissed, if we sup- 
 pose it to have been achieved gradually. This gradutU conquest 
 is admitted by 0. Muller, and by many of the ablest subsequent 
 inquirers, — who, nevertheless, seem to have the contrary suppo- 
 eition involuntarily present to their minds when they criticize 
 the early Spartan history, and always unconsciously imagine the 
 Spartans as masters of all Laconia. We cannot even assert that 
 Laconia was ever under one government before the consumma- 
 tion of the successive conquests of Sparta. 
 
 Of the assertion of O. Muller — repeated by Schomann^ — 
 «* that the ditierence of races was strictly preserved, and that 
 
 ' Dr. Arnold (in his Dissertation on the Spartan Constitution, appended 
 to the tirst volume of his Thucydides, p. 643) places jjrcater confidence in 
 the historical value of this narrative of Isokrates than I am inclined to do. 
 On the other hand, Mr. G. C Lewis, in his Review of Dr. Arnold's Disser- 
 tation (Philological Mu>eum, vol. ii. p. 45), considers the " account of Iso- 
 krates as completely inconsistent with that of Ephorus ;' which is saying 
 rather more, perhaps, than the tenor of the two strictly warrants. In Mr. 
 Lewis's excellent article, most of the difficult points respecting: the Spartan 
 constitution will be found raised and discussed in a manner highly instruc 
 
 tive. 
 
 Another point in the statement of Isokrates is, that the Dorians, at the 
 tbne of the original conquest of Laconia, were only two thousand in number 
 (Or. xii. Panath. p 286). Mr. Clinton rejects this estimate as too small, 
 and observes, '• I suspect that Isokrates. in describing the numbers of the 
 Dorians at the original conquest, luis adapted to the description the actual 
 Munbers of the Spartans in his own time.' (Fast. Hellen. ii. p. 408.) 
 
 This seems to rae a probable conjecrire, and it illustrates as viell th« 
 absence of data under which Isokrates or his informants labored, aa tbf 
 method which they took to supply the deficiency 
 
 • 8<'homann, Artiq. Jurisp. Grsecorum, iv 1, 5, p. 112. 
 
 Vol. -2 12 
 
 DISTINCTIONS OF RA'JE IN LACONIA. 
 
 371 
 
 the Periocki were always considered as Acha^ans,"— I find no 
 proof, and I believe it to be erroneous. Respecting Pharis, 
 Gero'nthne, and Amyklie, three Perioekic towns, Pausanias gives 
 us to understand that the preexisting inhabitants either retired 
 or were expelled on the Dorian conquest, and that a Dorian pop- 
 ulation replaced them.' Without placing great laith in this 
 gtatement, for which Pausanias could hardly have any good 
 authority, we may yet accept it as representing the probabilities 
 of. the case, and as counterbalancing the unsupported hypothesis 
 of Muller. The Perioekic townships were probably composed 
 either of Dorians entirely, or of Dorians incorporated in greater 
 or less proportion with the preexisting inhabitants. But what- 
 ever ditference of race there may once have been, it was eHaced 
 before the historical times,"^ during which we find no proot o* 
 
 • Pausan iii. 2, 6 ; iii. 22, 5. The statement of Muller is to be found 
 (History of the Dorians, iii. 2, 1) : he quotes a passage of Pausanias, which 
 
 is noway to the point. 
 
 Mr. G. C. Lewis (Fhilolog. Mus. ut. sup. p. 41) is of the same opinion ai 
 
 ^^^rKopstadt (in the learned Dissertation which I have before alluded to, 
 De Rerum Laconicarum Constitutionis Lycurgeie Origine et Indole, cap. ii 
 i> .31) controverts this position respecting the Perioeki. He appears to un- 
 derstand it in a sense which my words hardly present, -at least a sense 
 which I did not intend them to present : as if the majority of inhabitants 
 in each of the hundred Perioekic towns were Dorians,- "ut per centum 
 Laconise oppida distributi ubique nuijorem incolarum numerum eflficercnt, ( p 
 32 ) I meant only to affirm that some of the Perioekic towns, such as Amyk- 
 l«, were wholly, or almost wholly, Dorian; many others of them part.a ly 
 Dorian But what may have been the comparative numbers (probably dif- 
 ferent m each town) of Dorian and non-Dorian inhabitants, — there are no 
 means of determining. M. Kopstadt (p. 35) admits that Amyklie Phar.s, 
 utul Geronthne, were Perioekic towns peopled by Dorians ; and if this bo 
 t;ue it negatives the general maxim on the faith of which he contradicts 
 what I affirm: his maxim is — ''nunquam Dorienses a Donensibus nm 
 hello victi erant, civitate tequoque jure privati sunt," (p. 31.) It is very un- 
 safe to lay down such large positions respecting a supposed uniformity of 
 Dorian rules and practice. The high authority of O. Muller has been ex- 
 ti»3mely misleading in this respect. 
 
 It is plain that Herodotus (compare his expression, viii. 73 and i. 145) 
 conceived all the free inhabitants of Laconia not as Achseans, but as Dorians 
 He believes in the story of the legend, that the Aehaeans, driven out of Laoo- 
 aia by the invading Dorians and Herakleidae, occupied the teiTitory m tfal 
 
872 
 
 HISTOKY of GREECE. 
 
 nt 
 
 Achasans, known as such, in Laoonia. The Hcrakleids, the 
 .^geids, and the Talthybiads, all of wliom belong tc Sparta, 
 seem to be the only exampies of separate races, partially dis* 
 ting-uishable from Dorians, known after the beginning of au- 
 thentic history. The Spartans and the Perioeki constitute one 
 political aggregate, and that too so completely melted together in 
 the general opinion (speaking of the times before the battle of 
 Leuktra), that the peace of Antalkidas, which guaranteed au- 
 tonomy to every separate Grecian city, was never so construed 
 as to divorce the Periockic towns from Sf)arta. Both are known 
 as Laconians, or Lacediemonians, and Sparta is regarded by 
 Herodotus only as tlie first and bravest among the many and 
 brave Laccdti'monian cities.' The victors at Olympia are pro- 
 claimed, not as S[)artans, but as Laconians, — a title alike borne 
 by the Periceki. And many of the numerous winners, whose 
 names we read in the Olympic lists as I^aconians, may proba- 
 bly have belonged to Amyklrr? or other l*enaokic towns. 
 
 The Perifckic hoplitcs constituted always a large — in later 
 times a prejvondcrant — numerical proportion of the Lacediemo- 
 nian army, and must undoubtedly have been trained, more or less 
 perfectly, in the j)eculiar military tactics of Sparta ; since they 
 were called upon to obey the same orders as the Spartans in the 
 field,*- and to perfonn the same evolutions. Some cases appear, 
 though rare, in which a Pericokus has high command in a foreign 
 expedition. In the time of Aristotle, the larger proportion of 
 Laconia (then meaning only the country eastward of Taygetus, 
 
 north wesf of Peloponncsas which was afterwards called Acliiua. — expel- 
 liny from it the lonianA. Whatever may 1)€ the truth a!)ont this lejrcndary 
 eratt'moMt. — and wifiatever may have been the oriirinai proportions of Dorians 
 and Achuiuis in Laronia, — these two races had (in the fifth century b. cj 
 t>ecomo confoundeil in one undistinpuishable ethnical and political agpre- 
 pate rallc<l Iiiuonian,or Lacedsemonian, — comprising hotn Spartans and Pe- 
 rioeki, though with \'ery unequal political franchises, and very material differ 
 encca in individual training and habits. The case was different in Thessaly, 
 where the Thessalians held in dependence Magnetes, Perrhaebi. and Achteans • 
 iie separate nationality of these latter was never lost. 
 
 ' Herod, vii. 234. 
 
 • Thucyd. viii. 6-22. They did not, however, partake in the Lykurgean 
 dlncipHne ; but they seem to be named oi ek r^f x^Pf'^C TaZ(^ef, as contrwted 
 «:th nt kx '£ ayuryf (Sosibius ap. Athens, xv. p. 674). 
 
 HELOTS IN THE VILLAGES. 
 
 878 
 
 smce the foundation of Messen^ by Epameinondas had been con 
 Bumraated) belonged to Spartan citizens,» but the remaining 
 smaller half must have been the property of the Perifiki, who 
 must besides have carried on mcst of the commerce of export 
 and import,— the metallurgic enterprise, and the distribution of 
 internal produce, — which the territory exhibited ; since no Spar- 
 tan ever meddled in such occupations. And thus the peculiar 
 training of Lykurgus, by throwing all the^e employments into 
 the hands of the Perioeki, opened to them a new source of im- 
 portance, which the dependent townships of Argos, of Thebes, 
 or of Orchomenus, would not enjoy. 
 
 The Helots of Laconia were Ck>loni, or serfs, bound to the soil, 
 who tilled it for the benefit of the Spartan proprietors certainly, 
 — probably, of Perioekic proprietors also. They were the niaic 
 population of the country, who dwelt, not in towns, but either id 
 small villages 2 or in detached farms, both in t he district imme . 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 23. dia yap rd ruv ^irapriaruv elvai rnv nkeiat^ 
 
 Mr G C. Lewis, in the article above alluded to (Philolog. Mus. ii. p. 54) 
 .uvs, about the Perioeki : " They lived in the country or in small towns of 
 th^ Laconian territorv, and cultivated the land, which they did no hold of 
 onv individual citizen, but paid for it a tribute or rent to the state; being 
 exactly in the same condition as the ;x>s.mare. of the Roman domain or the 
 K vets' in Hindostan, before the introduction of the Permanent Settlement 
 It' may be doubted, I think, whether the Perioeki paid any such r^nt or 
 tribute as that which Mr. Lewis here supposes. The passage jus cited from 
 Aristotle seems to show that they paid direct taxation '^^'J^^^^^y. a"d JU'I 
 upon the same principle as the Spartan citizens who are ^^-'-^-^^^^^^^^^ 
 hv being larger landed-proprietors. But though the principle f. taxation be 
 1 sll there was practical injustice (according to ^^^^f ) ^J^^^,;^^, 
 nf isscssimr it. "The Spartan citizens (he ohserves) being the largest 
 an^d rop'^^^^^^ car'e not to canv.ss strictly eoc. o^-'!^^-- f 
 
 vro^ertltax^-i. e. thev wink mutually at each others evasions. If the 
 i;^l had been the ^/, persons who paid .>o,., or V^V^y^^^e'^^ 
 observation of Aristotle would have had no meaning. In P";^P»^; ^^^^^^^^ 
 was assessed, both on their larger properties and on the smaller f^o^^^^ 
 Tf the pTri-ki : in practice, the Spartans helped each other to evade the due 
 
 '" TrfvW-character of the Helots is distinctly marked by ^-7, -xi v 
 27 in desc ibfng the inflictions of the despot Nabis : " Hotarum q-^a™ j^' 
 !!;; jam inde antiquitus castellani, agr^ste genus) transfugere vduisse ins.m* 
 iMt, per omnes vicos sub verberibus acti necantur. 
 
 ]^ 
 
 •I 
 \\ 
 
 jl 
 
 i 
 
 
 '11 
 
874 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 nFXOTS IN THE VILLAGES. 
 
 375 
 
 m 
 
 diately surromul ng Sparta, and round the Periijekic Laconian 
 towns also. Of course, there were also Helots who lived in Sparta 
 and other towns, and did the work of domestic slaves, — but such 
 Uras not the ji;eneral character of the class. We cannot doubt 
 that the Dorian conquest from Sparta found this class in the 
 condition of villa^'<'rs and detached rustics; but whether they 
 were dependtiut upon preexisting Acluvan proprietors, or inde- 
 pendent, like much of the Arcadian village population, is a ques- 
 tion which we cannot answer. In either case, however, it is 
 eafly to wnceive that the village lands (with the cultivators upon 
 them) were the most easy to appropriate for the benefit of masters 
 resident at Sparta; while the towns, with the district immediate- 
 ly around tliem, furnished both dwelling and maintenance to the 
 outgoing detachments of Dorians. If the Spartans had succeeded 
 in their attempt to enlarge their territory by the conquest of 
 Arcadia,' they might very probably have converted Tegea and 
 Mantineia into Pericekic towns, with a diminished territory inhab- 
 ited (either wholly or in pnvt) by Dorian settlers, — while they 
 would have made over to })roprietors in Sparta much ot tlu^ 
 village lands of the Mamalii, Azanes, and Parrhasii, Ilelotizing 
 the inhabitants. The distinction between a town and a village 
 population seems the main ground of the ditlerent treatment of 
 Helots and I'ericeki in Laconia. A considerable proportion of 
 the Helots were of genuine; Dorian race, being the Dorian Messe- 
 nians west of Mount Taygetus, subsequently conquered and ag- 
 gregated to this chiss of (le})endent cultivators, who, as a class, 
 must have b<'gun to exist from the \ cry lirst establishment of the 
 invading Dorians in the district round Sparta. From whence 
 the name of Helots arose, we do not clearly make out : Ephorus 
 deduced it from the town of Helus, on the southern coast, which 
 the Spartans are said to have taken after a resistance so obstinate 
 as to provoke them to deal very rigorously with the captives. 
 There are many reasons for rejecting this story, and another 
 etymology has been proposed, according to which Helot is synon- 
 ymous with captive: this is more plausible, yet still not convinc- 
 ing.2 The Helots lived in the rural villages, a s adscripti yleb<B, 
 
 "' Herodot. i 66. ixpnc'^Vpi^sOVTo Iv AfA<^omt inl rraffT? r^ \\pKa()o>v X'^^PV' 
 ^ See O. Miiller, Dorians, iii. 3, 1 ; J'.phorus ap. Strabo, viii. p 365 : Har 
 pocration, v. Fu^dtrec 
 
 cultivating their lands and paying over their rent to the niast«t 
 at Sparta, but enjoying their homes, wives, families, and mutual 
 neighborly feelings, apart from the master's view. They were 
 never sold out of the country, and probably never sold at all ; 
 belonging, not so much to the master as to the state, which con- 
 stantly called ui)on them for military service, and recompensed 
 their bravery or activity with a grant of freedom. Meno, the 
 Thessalian of Pharsalus, took out three hundred Peuestae of hid 
 own, to aid the Athenians against Amphipolis : these Thessalian 
 Penestaj were in many points analogous to the Helots, but no 
 individual Spartan possessed the like power over the latter. The 
 Helots were thus a part of the state, having their domestic and 
 social sympathies developed, a certain power of acquiring prop- 
 erty,^ and the consciousness of Grecian lineage and dialect,— 
 points of marked superiority over the foreigners who formed the 
 Blave population of Athens or Chios. They seem to have been 
 noway inferior to any village population of Greece ; while the 
 Grecian observer sympathized with them more strongly than with 
 the bought slaves of other states, — not to mention that their 
 homogeneous aspect, their numbei-s, and their employment in 
 military service, rendered them more conspicuous to the eye. 
 
 The service in the Spartan house was all performed by mem^ 
 bers of the Helot class ; for there seem to have been few, if any, 
 other slaves in the country. The various anecdotes which are 
 told respecting their treatment at Sparta, betoken less of cruelty 
 than of ostent°atious scorn,2_a sentiment which we are noway 
 surprised to discover among the citizens at the mess-table. But 
 the great mass of the Helots, who dwelt in the country, were 
 objects of a very different sentiment on the part of the Spartan 
 ephors, who knew their bravery, energy, and standing discontent, 
 
 » Kleomenes the Third, offered manumission to every Helot, who could pay 
 down five Attic mina; : he was in preat immediate want of money, and he 
 raised, bv this means, five hundred talents. Six thousand Helots must thus 
 have been in a condition to find five minue each, which was a very consider- 
 able sum (Plutarch, Kleomenes, c. 23). ^ 
 
 » Such is the statement, that Helots were compelled to appear m a sta e 
 of drunkenness, in order to excite in the youths a sentiment of repuixnanci 
 •l^ainst intoxication (Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 28 j also, Adversos ..toico. dt 
 CJommun. Notit. c t9, p. 1067). 
 
 \ 
 
976 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECL. 
 
 ')/! 
 
 and yet were forced to employ thorn as an essential portion ci 
 the state army. Tlie Helots commonly served as light-armed, in 
 which capacity the Spartan hoplites could not dispense with iheii 
 attendance. At the battle of Plataea, every Spartan hoplite had 
 ieven Helots,' and every Pericekic hoplite one Helot, to attend 
 him:^ but, even in camp, the Spartan arrangements were framed 
 to guard against any sudden mutiny of these light-armed compan- 
 ions, wMle, at home, the citizen habitually kept his shield dis- 
 joined from its holding-ring, to prevent the possibihty of its being 
 •natched for the like; purpose. Sometimes, select Helots were 
 clothed in heavy armor, and thus served in tlie ranks, receiving 
 manumission fi-om the state as the reward of distinguished bravery .3 
 But Sparta, even at the maximum of her power, was moj-e 
 than once endangered by the reality, and always beset with the 
 apprehension, of Helotic revolt. To prevent or suppress it, the 
 ephors subi&itled to insert express stipulations for aid in their 
 treaties with Atliens, — to invite Athenian troops into the heart 
 of Laconia, — and to practice combinations of cunning and ati'ocity 
 which even yet stand without parallel in the long list of precau- 
 tions for fortifying unjust dominion. It was in the eighth year 
 of the Peloponnesian war, after the Helots had been called upou 
 for signal military elfort^j in various ways, and when the Athen- 
 ians and Messenians were in possession of Pylus, that the ephors 
 felt especially apprebensive of an outbreak. Anxious to single 
 
 * Ueirod. ix. 29. The Spartans, at Thermopylai, seem to have been 
 attended each by only one Helot (vii. 221)). 
 
 O. MUller seems to consider that the lij^ht-urnied. who attended the Peri- 
 «kic hoplites at Plataea, were not Helots (Dor. iii. 3, 6). Herodotus does not 
 distinctly say that they >vere so, hut I see no reason for admitting two differ 
 ent classes of light-armed in the Spartan military force. 
 
 The calculation which Miiller gives of the number of Teria-ki and Helots 
 altogether, proceeds upoi very untrustworthy data. Among them is to be 
 noticed his supposition that noliriKfj ;fwpa means the district of Sparta a« 
 distinguished from Laconia, which is contrary to the passage in Polybiud 
 (vi. 45) : tzoXltlktj x*^P^^ i" Polybius, means the territory of the state gene- 
 rally. 
 
 * Xenophon, Rep. Lac. c. 12, 4; Kritias, De Lacedaem Kepub. ap. Liba^ 
 Qiam, Orat de Serritute, t. ii. p. 85, Reisk. uf unarLc^ ii^tAu r;)f Trpdf r«^ 
 KZAc^roc i^aipel fiev STra^jrtanyf o'lkol tm uairtdoj ttjv TrourroiiO, etc 
 
 * Thucyd. i. 101 ; iv. »l" v 14-23. 
 
 SPARTAN CRUELTY. 
 
 37T 
 
 out the most forward and daiing Helots, as the men from whom 
 they had most to dread, they issued proclamation that every 
 mtimher of that class who had rendered distinguished services 
 should make his claims known at Sparta, promising liberty to 
 tbe i.iost deserving. A large number of Helots came forward 
 to < laiiii the boon : not less than two thousand of them were 
 ai^proved, formally manumitted, and led in solemn procession round 
 tbe teiiiides, with garlands on their heads, as an inauguration to 
 their coining life of freedom. But the treacherous garland only 
 marked them out as victims for the sacrifice : every man of them 
 forU with disappeared, — the manner of their death was an un- 
 told mystery. , 
 
 For tbis dark and bloody deed, Thucydides is our witness,* 
 and Thucydides describing a contemporary matter int» which he 
 bad inquired. Upon any less evidence we should have hesitated 
 to believe the statement ; but standing as it thus does above all 
 suspicion, it speaks volumes as to the inhuman character of the 
 Lacedemonian government, while it lays open to us at the same 
 time the intensity of their fears from the Helots. In the assassi- 
 nation o\ this fated regiment of brave men, a large number^ of 
 auxiliaries and instruments must have been concerned: yet Thu- 
 cydides, with all his inquiries, could not find out how any of them 
 peri.shed : he tells us, that no man knew. We see here a fact 
 wbicb demonstrates uneqiiivocally the impenetrable mystery in 
 which the proceedings of tbe SparUm governmeiltwere wrapped, 
 — tbe absence not only of public discussion^ but of pubUe curio- 
 sity, and the perfection with which the ephors reigned over 
 
 the will, the hands, and the tongues, of their Spartan subjecta. 
 The Venetian Council of Ten, with all the facilities for nocturnal 
 drowning which their city presented, could hardly have accom- 
 plished so vast a coup-d'etai with such invisible means. And 
 we may judge from hence, even if we had no other evidence, 
 Ik>w little the habits of a public assembly could have suited either 
 the temper of mind or the march of government at Sparta. 
 
 Other proceedings, ascribed to the ephors against the Helots, 
 are conceived in the same spirit as the incident just recounted 
 
 \ 
 
 » Thocyd. iv. 80. 61 6h ov '7ro?iX<;t l(rt.M>v rj^viadv re airoit «i •liMl 
 
 II 
 
MANl'MITTED HELOTS. 
 
 879 
 
 V 
 
 178 
 
 HISroKY OF CKKKCr 
 
 from ThucyditU'f', tliouojli they do not cjirry with tliem the riam# 
 certain attestation. It wa.s a part of th«' institutions of L\ l<nr<^u9 
 iac<H)r<ling to a statement whith Thitarch professes to have hor- 
 rowo<l from Aristotle) that the e[>h(>rs shouKl every year deehire 
 war against the Helots, in onI<'r that thr niurder of them mi^ht 
 be ren<U're<l innocent; and that aetivr younjr Spartans siiouM he 
 armed witli da«;«^ers and >ent about La«*oni{i, in nvdov that tliey 
 might, either in solitude or at ni«rht, assassinate sucli of the Helot- 
 as were considered formidahle.' This la>t larasure passes by 
 the name of the Kry}»teia, yet we lind some «lifn«-ulty in deter- 
 raining to what extent it was ever reah/ed. That the ephors, 
 indeed, would not be restrained by any scrnphs of justiee <»r 
 humanity, is plainly shown by the murder of the two thousand 
 Helots above noticed; but this latter incidi-nt really answered its 
 purpose, while a standing practice, such as that of the Krypteia, 
 and a formal notic* <»f war given beforehand, would provok«' the 
 reaction of despair rather than enforce tranquillity. There seems, 
 indeed, good evidence that the Kryi)teia was a real practice;*' — 
 that the ephors k«^pt up a system of p(dice or es]>ionag(^ throu^di- 
 out Laconia, by the em[)loyment of acti\<' youui,' citizens, who 
 lived a hard and scditary lite, and suft'ered their motions to b«' a- 
 little detected as possible. The ephors might naturally enough 
 take this metho<l of keeping watcli both over the Pericekic town- 
 shi|»s and the Helot villages, and the assassination of individual 
 Helots by these jiolice-men, or Kryj>ts, would probably pass un- 
 noticed. But it is impossible to believe in any standing murder. 
 ous order, or deliberate annual assassination of Helots, for th* 
 pur^X)se of intimidation, as Aristotle is alleged to have represent- 
 ed. for we may well <loubt whether he really did make such a 
 
 representation, whi^i we see that hv takes no notite of this mea- 
 gnre in his Politics, where he speaks at some length both of the 
 Spartan constitution and of the Helots. The well-known hatred 
 and fear, entertained by the Spartans towards their Helots, lias 
 probably colored I*Iutarch*s description of the Krypteia, so a« lo 
 
 ' Plutarch, Lycurp. c 28; Heraclides Pontic, p. 504, ed. Crap 
 * Plato. Lepp. i. p. 633 : the words of the Lacedflemonian Megillus desig 
 ■ate an existing Spartan custom. Compare the same tr^ati'C, vi. p. 768, when 
 Am suspects, without ^ea^on, tht genuineness of the word KpvnToL 
 
 «ap"eru.e tl.o.e unpunished murders which occasionally hap 
 S into a constant phenomenon with express d-S"- ^ --^ 
 
 Z deduction i. to he made from ''"r -~V"* f/rJ. 
 i> • 1 wlm jille«'ed that they were beaten every yeai 
 
 ""' J f.>ult Crder to put them in n.ind of their slavery. 
 ■"'^ X t ie lo whose superior beauty or stature placed 
 
 ^rr et: ;::iue' .amp o thei . ;^^;;i::zx::^ 
 
 a...Lth • while such masters as neglected to keip clo^n ^ 
 
 • . n Helots were punished. That secrecy, ior A^hich 
 
 of then- vigorou- Helot.-. W( re pun refute 
 
 „„. ,.,,l.ors were so rotnarkahle, seems enough »^''^ ' ° ™ 
 . alsertio., .hat tl.y publicly proclaimed war -^"^l^'^"^ 
 
 .i.">.'-- «<= y 7" t:: '::x'^^^^^'--^ 
 
 "-' ' " ;;":;;,;;;.'''■'';;:.;:;; ..ave ..en ... tr,.a.u,..n. 
 
 'I''"""' " . i. is -.t all .•vents hardly to l>e 
 
 „, „„. „,.lo,s .u laler tunes il . " ^4,„„„d 
 
 1 f^Mt iinv re«ndat on hostde to them (an n.ivt 
 
 (,,„„ Lyku,t,..s. Messenian «ar, - nor, m.h-.-d. 
 
 ;::;:;■ :;.:":i:t!m:tion.- the. ..r of spa... cit. 
 
 ,..„s bad '■--'« f;'';;;';;,^ ,,,, „.„ ,,, i,,,., „,.. .-lass of I'erio^ki, 
 
 Tbe .nanunntled ""''""'".""•' ,,,.„,„ v„.,.dom of some 
 
 _for this purpose '^ H*«^^'"\ ^7"'; ''' l:,,,,, _ but nm-t.- 
 
 l...no..kic town^hip, wouM probably be 2"':1, J,,,.-ian war 
 
 •""•'• " '••-^ '^••^'^' ^T rV H-'^l- ns w rLd ,.arned 
 ,,, „.e .uune of Neodamoaes ■"; V-^ ^^^^^^ „„ „y 
 
 ,1„ ir liberty by signal brav ry, tn. y possible, employed 
 
 ,„„ ..,,„ors with peculiar ^-^^'^^^ ^I^ -.oi, .s settlers. 
 
 "" '■--«" --'t:; t'ien e^ Toyld themselves, we iind 
 I„ what manner these frccdmen J y ^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ 
 
 „o distinct intormafon; ''"'^f Z^" ^ ^i,,. ^he rural cos- 
 
 quitted ^'^^^'f'^^^':;i:f:^Z^Z. the Hdot com- 
 tume (the leather cap and ^heepsKi > suspicion, 
 
 .only wore, a..d the ^-^^f ^ ^s mTtl ProbablT they. 
 l::urre1;r;rd S^ar^tanciti.. («^ed Hy^^ 
 
 > Myron, ap. Athen». xiv. p^ oj<. » 
 f^ctly mean " to put to death." 
 « Thucyd. v. 34. 
 
LYKITRGEAN DISCIPLINE. 
 
 8H1 
 
 i 
 
 u .1 
 
 rao 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 or Inferiors), became congregated at Sparta, and found cmpl'?y 
 ment crther in various trades or in the service of the governnuM.t 
 It has been necessary to give this short sketch of the ordt ra 
 of men who inhabited Laconia, in order to enable us to under- 
 stand the statements given about the legislation of Lykurgus. 
 The arrangements ascribed to that lawgiver, in the way that 
 Plutarch describes them, presuppose, and do not create, the 
 Ihree orders of Spartans, Perioeki, and Helots. We are told by 
 Plutarch that the disorders which Lykurgus found existing in 
 the state arose in a great mf osure from the gross inequality of 
 property, and from the luxurious indulgence and unprincipled 
 rapacity of the rich, — who had drawn to themselves the greater 
 proportion of the lands in the country, leaving a large body of 
 poor, without any lot of land, in hopeless misery and degrada- 
 tion. To this inequality (according to Plutarch) the retbrming 
 legislator applied at once a stringent remedy. He redistributed 
 the whole territory iielonging to Sparta, as well as the remainder 
 ot* L<aeonia ; the former, in nine thousand equal lots, one to each 
 Spartan citizen ; the latter, in thirty thousand equal lots, one to 
 each Perioekus: of this alleged distribution, I shall speak farther 
 presently. Moreover, he banished the use of gold and silver 
 money, tolerating nothing in the shape of circulating medium 
 but }>ieces of iron, heavy and scarcely portable ; and he forbade' 
 to the Spartan citi?;en every species of industrious or money- 
 seeking occupation, agriculture included. He farther constituted, 
 — though not without strenuous opposition, during the course of 
 which his eye is said to have been knocked out by a violent 
 youth, named Alkander, — the Syssitia, or public mess. A cer- 
 tain number of joint tables were provided, and every citizen was 
 required to belong to some one of them, and habitually to take his 
 meals at ii,"- — no rew member being admissible without an 
 unanimous ballot in his favor by the previous occupants. Ea**h 
 provided from his lot of land a specified quota of barley -meal, 
 wine, cheese, and tigs, and a small contribution of money for con- 
 diments : game wa> obtained in addition by hunting in the 
 
 C: 
 
 ' Xenophon, Rep. Lao. c. 7. 
 
 *Pti)'.arch, Lykorg. c. 15; substantially confirmed by Xenopbon, Bap 
 IJK. c. 1, S. 
 
 r .%, ...»« wliilc every one who sacrificed to th« 
 public foreste of the state, while evej p 
 
 L.,' sent to his mess-table a part of the ^^^^J ' ^^ 
 
 K-^ ri^:';:::irre;=:t;rrinctio. 
 
 :;• X k'ifd'XeriLp. on ..na. occ.ions of service re. 
 
 dered by an individual to the state. 
 
 ^., .Ki;,. Svssitia under the management of the roie- 
 
 Ihese pubhc Sy;«''"^ "" ;,; distribution, the co*. 
 
 marchs, were connected ^fJ^ri-oZs discipline of detail. 
 
 stant gymnastic trammg, ^"'i j^^ J'°°~"* J ^even year^ 
 
 !• A Vvxr T vlriiro-us. From the eariy <igt3 ui o j 
 
 c^ntorced by ^y^^'Y^' ^ ^^ less than as boy, 
 
 M- a rule partly miUtary, partly "'<""^".'=' - ^f ^ d„ri„„ th« 
 
 ^aepende^of a ^^^ X^T^^^ :1^^^^ 
 
 Hrst vears after marriage, onl} t)y steaiui, a. 
 
 lust yearis ^ n rpj^ supervision, not onl> oi 
 
 nominated by the state wa« •-.'T«'-^y^J/ Jf^ghU in the 
 day was passed in public exerc.ses and ~^ f ^^/ ^iculac 
 public barrack to which he ^^'^^f^J'^^^^J^ ^equired 
 military drill, whereby the -7l;?f^^t„ The fi^ld were made 
 
 from a body of ^-^trTuth -t l^betm; subject to 
 familiar to h.m from his you n, ■ , . j^^ ,„ impart 
 
 .evere bodily discipline of other k-ds, J^^.^ -ted I^^ 
 
 ..ength, -tivity -d -du--^ Jir boli,; tonu^ u. 
 ,ug„^.us sp.nt - to pm^ thirsl heat, cold, and fatigue,^ - 
 moved, — to enaure nu g garment 
 
 - tre^l the --' f ""^ t^'e^e-^^ LanifestaLs of 
 
 winter and ="™7.'' -. ^ jrwhen action was not called for, 
 feeling, and to exhibit in public, wne ^^^ 
 
 a bea^ng shy, silent, and motionless « a statue a^ 
 0» virtues of the accomplished Spartan youth, i w h ^ ^ 
 
 
 1 
 
 
!; 
 
 ! 
 
 882 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 were often matched aj^ainst each other to contend (^^itl.out arms) 
 m the little insular circumscription called the PlatanistuM, and 
 these contests were cjirried on, under the eye of the authorities, 
 with the utmost extremity of fury. Nor was the competition 
 amoncr them less obstinate, to bear without murmuring the cruel 
 Bcour^ings inflicted before the altar of Artemis Orthia, supposed 
 to be^ highly acceptable to the goddess, though they sometimes 
 terminated even in the death of the uncomplaining sufferer.' 
 Besides the various descriptions of gymnastic contests, the youths 
 weis instructed in the choric dances employed in festivals of the 
 
 •33; Xenophon, De Laced. Repub. ii. 9, with the references in Schneider's 
 Bote, — likewise Cragius, De Republica Laced, iii. 8, p. 325. 
 
 » It is remarkable that these violent contentions of the youth, wherein 
 kicking, biting, gouging out each other's eyes, was resorted to, — as well as 
 the (^tanaaTiyuai^, or scourging-match, before the altar of Artemis, — lasted 
 down to the closing days of Sparta, and were actually seen by Cicero, 
 Plutarch, and even Pausimias. Plutarch had seen several persons die under 
 the suffering (Plutarch, Lykurg. c. 16, 18-30; and Instituta Laconica, p 
 239; Pausan. iii. 14, 9, 16, 7 ; Cicero, Tuscul. Disp. ii. 15). 
 
 The voluntary tortures, undergone by the young men among the Mandan 
 tribe of Indians' at their annual religious festival, in the presence of the elders 
 of the tribe, — afford a striking illustration of the same principles and ten- 
 dencies as this Spartan diafiaffTiyum^. They are endured partly under the 
 Influence of religious feelings, as an acceptable offering to the Great Spirit, 
 
 — partly as a point of emulation and glory on the part of the young men, to 
 •how themselves worthy and unconquerable in the eyes of their seniors. The 
 intensitv of these tortures is, indeed, frightful to read, and far surpasses in that 
 respect anything ever witnessed at Sparta. It would be incredible, were it 
 Dot attested by a trustworthy eye-witness. 
 
 See Mr. Catlin's Letters on the North American Indians, Letter 22, vol. i. 
 
 p. 157, seij. 
 
 " These religious ceremonies are held, in part, for the purpose of conduct- 
 ing all the young men of the tribe, as they annually arrive at manhood, 
 throoc^h an ordeal of privation and torture; which, while it is supposed to 
 harden their muscles and prepare them for extreme endurance, —enables 
 the chiefs who are spectsitors of the scene, to decide upon their comparative 
 bodily strength and ability, to endure the extreme privations and sufferings 
 that often fall to the lot of Indian warriors ; and that they may decide whc 
 is the most hardy and best able to lead a war-party in case of emergency." 
 
 — Again, p. 173. etc. , v u r a 
 The Kaprepia or j^owe]' of endurance ( Aristot. Pol. ii. 6, 5-16) which formed 
 
 one of the prominent objects of the Lycurgean training, dwindles into nothing 
 comnared to that of the Ma/\dan Indians. 
 
 ■^-' 
 
 SPARTAN WOMEN. 
 
 883 
 
 -,d», which contributed to impart to them methodized ajid har. 
 ^nious movements. Hunting in the woods and mount^ns of 
 Laconia was encouraged, as a means of inuring them to fi^igue 
 and privation. Tlie nourishment supplied to the youthful Spar- 
 tans was purposely kept insufficient, but they were allowed to 
 make up the deficiency not only by hunting, but even by stealmg 
 whatever they could lay hands upon, provided they could do so 
 without being detected in the fact; in which latter case they 
 were severely chastised.' In reference simply to bodily results,' 
 the training at Sparta was excellent, combining strength and 
 agility with universal aptitude and endurance, and steering clear 
 ^ that mistake by which Thebes and other cities impaired the 
 elVect of their gymnastics, - the attempt to create an athletic 
 habit, suited for the games, but suited for nothing else. _ 
 
 Of all the attributes of this remarkable commumty, there is 
 none moi-e difficult to make out clearly than the condition and 
 character of the Spartan women. Aristotle asserts that, in hi. 
 time, they were imperious and unruly, without being really so 
 brave and useful in moments of danger as other Grecian females ■? 
 that they possessed great influence over the men and even ex- 
 ercised much ascendency over the course of public a ffairs ; and 
 
 ^ . XenophoTAi^ "■ «• '*' '^^^ »'= K^P"''- 1^"!^- '■ '' '•',^"*!'""t'n«" 
 xii (PanLth ) p. 277. It is these licensed expeditions for nevmg. I pre- 
 
 ™m to whi h'lsokrates alludes, .hen he speaks of r« ..16.. avrovo,^ 
 
 It Splrta, which, in its natural sense, would be the reverse of the tru.1. 
 
 *''« Ariitot Polit viii.3,3,-the remark is curious,- v»v ,iiv oi. al^fuar, 
 
 ralV %oix ^/-.P"- riiv W"-. etc. Compare the rer»ark in Plato, 
 
 ^Ariir Polit. ii. 6, 5, Plutarch, Agesilaus. c. 31 . Aristotle alludes t. 
 the fonduct of the Sparta^ women on the occasion of the invas.on of La». 
 lia by the Thebans, L an evidence of his opinion respecting their want of 
 Tur^e His judgment in this respect seems hard upon them, and he prob- 
 ZTZi fomid tf himself exaggerated notions of what their courage unde, 
 sa^I cr^umstances ought to have been, a, the result of their peculiar tram 
 ^ We may add that their violent demonstrations on that trying ocoasio, 
 Z wTll have arisen quite as much from .he agony of wounded honor « 
 Z Tear, when we consider what «> event the appear«iee of a copquenn, 
 tnnv in Sparta was. 
 
■' I 
 
 iM 
 
 USrORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SOCIAL REGULATIONS AT SPARTA. 
 
 881 
 
 that nearly half (he landed property of Laconia liad come U 
 belonty to tiiem. The exemption of the women from all controi, 
 formed, in hin eye, a pointed contrast with the rigorous discipline 
 im[K)sed upon the men, — and a contrast hardly less pointed 
 with the condition of women in other Grecian cities, where 
 they were habitually confined to the interior of the house, and 
 seldom appeared in public. While the Spartan husband went 
 through the hard details of his ascetic life, and dined on the 
 plainest fare at the Pheidition, or mess, the wife (it api)ears) 
 maintained an ample and luxurious establishment at home ; and 
 the desire to provide for such outlay was one of the causes of that 
 love of money which prevailed among men forbidden to enjoy it 
 in the ordinary ways. To explain this antithesis between the 
 treatment of the two sexes at Sparta, Aristotle was informed 
 that Lykurgms had tried to bring the women no less than the 
 men under a system of discipline, but that they made so obsti 
 nate a resistance as to compel him to desist.' 
 
 The view here given by the philosopher, and deserving of 
 course carefid attention, is not easy to reconcile with that of 
 Xenophon and Plutarch, who look upon the Spartan women 
 fmni a different side, and represent them as worthy and homo- 
 geneous companions to the men. The Lykurgean system (a^ 
 these authors describe it) considering the women as a part of 
 the state, and not as a part of the house, placed them under 
 training hardly less than the men. Its grand purpose, the maiii- 
 ttnancc of n vigorous breed of citizens, determined both the 
 treatment of the younger women, and the regulations as to the 
 intercourse of the sexes. " Female slaves are good enough 
 (Lykurgus thought) to sit at home spinning and weaving, — but 
 who can expect a splendid offspring, the appropriate mission and 
 duty of a free Spartan woman towards her country, from mothers 
 brought up in such occupations ?"=2 Pursuant to these views, the 
 Spartan damsels underwent a bodily training analogous to that 
 of the Spartan youth, — being formally exercised, and contend 
 ing with each other in running, wrestling, and boxing, agreeably 
 lo the forms of the Grrecian agdnes. They seem to have worn a 
 
 > Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 5, 8, 11. 
 
 • Xenoph. Rep. Lac. i. 3-4 ; Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 19-14. 
 
 \\pi\i ^nic, cut open at the skirts, so as to leave the limbs botk 
 free And exposed to view, — hence Plutarch speaks of them ai 
 comnuHely uncovered, while other critics, in different quarters of 
 Greece, heaped similar reproach upon the practice, as if it had 
 been -yerfect nakedness.i The presence of the Spartan youths, 
 and even of the kings and the body of citizens, at these exercises, 
 lent animation to the scene. In like manner, the young wo- 
 men marched in the religious processions, sung and danceor at 
 particular festivals, and witnessed as spectators the exercises and 
 contentions of the youths ; so that the two sexes were perpetually 
 intermingled with each other in public, in a way foreign to the 
 habits, as well as repugnant to the feelings, of other Grecian 
 states. We may well conceive that such an education imparted 
 to the women both a demonstrative character and an eager inter- 
 est in masculine accomplishments, so that the expression of their 
 praise was the strongest stimulus, and that of their reproach the 
 bitterest humiliation, to the youthful troop who heard it. 
 
 The age of marriage (which in some of the unrestricted cities 
 of Greece was so early as to deteriorate visibly the breed of 
 citizens)^ was deferred by the Spartan law, both in women and 
 men, until the period supposed to be most consistent with the 
 perfection of the offspring. And when we read the restriction 
 which Spartan custom imposed upon the intercourse even 
 between married persons, we sliall conclude without hesitation 
 that the public intermixture of the sexes, in the way just de- 
 scribed, led to no such liberties, between persons not married, as 
 might be likely to arise from it under other circumstances.3 
 
 . Eurip. Androm. 598; Cicero, Tuscul. Quaest. ii. 15. The epithet <l>aivo- 
 uvpiSec, as old as the poet Ibykus, shows that the Spartan women were no* 
 uncovered (see Julius Pollux, vii. 55). . ,, /^ .j j 
 
 It is scarcely worth while to notice the poetical allusions of Ovid and 
 
 Fropertius. . . 
 
 How completely the practice of ^rymnastic and military training for young 
 women, analogous to that of the other sex, was approved by Plato, may be 
 seen from the injunctions in his Republic. 
 
 • Aristot. Polit. vii. 14, 4. , , ^ -a 
 
 * '' It is certain (observes Dr. Thirl wall, speaking of the Spartan unmarried 
 women) that in this respect the Spartan morals were as pure as those of any 
 •ncient, perhaps of any modem, people." (History of Greece, eh. na. vol 
 
 ^ ' -- 2100. 
 
 YOI.. XL 
 
 •T 
 
{ 
 
 ill 
 
 ,' 
 
 d86 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Marriage was almo.4 universal among the citizens, enforced bj 
 general opinion at least, iF not by law. The young Spartan 
 carried away his bride by a simulated abduction, but she still 
 seems, for some time at least, to have continued to reside witn 
 her family, visiting her husband in his barrack in the disguise of 
 male attire, and on short and stolen occasions.' To some married 
 couples, according to Plutarch, it hapi>ened, that they had been 
 married long enough to have two or three children, while they 
 had scarcely seen each other apart by daylight. Secret intrigue 
 on the part of married women was unknown at Sparta ; but to 
 bring together the finest couples was regarded by the citizens 
 as desirable, and by the lawgiver as a duty. No personal feeling 
 or jealousy on the part of the husband found sympathy from any 
 one, — and he permitted without difficulty, sometimes actively en- 
 couraged, compliances on the part of his wife, consistent with 
 this generally acknowledged object. So far was such toleration 
 carried, that there were some married women who were recog- 
 nized mistn^sses of two houses,- and mothers of two distinct 
 families,— a sort of bigamy strictly forbidden to the men, and never 
 permitted, except in the remarkable case of king Anaxandrides, 
 when the royal Herakleidan line of Eurysthenes was in danger 
 of becoming extinct. The wife of Anaxandrides being childless, 
 the ephors strongly urged him, on grounds of public necessity, to 
 repudiate her and marry another. But he refused to dismiss a 
 wife who had given him no cause of complaint ; upon which, 
 when they found him inexorable, they desired him to retain her, 
 but to marry another wifebesides, in order that at any rate there 
 might be issue to the Eurystheneid line. '^ He thus (says 
 
 » Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 15; Xenoph. Rep. Lac. i. 5. Xenophon does not 
 make any allusion to the abduction as a general custom. There occurred 
 ca.ses in which it was real and violent: see Herod, v. 65. Demaratus carried 
 ofl' and married the betrothed bride of Leotychides. 
 
 2 Xenoph. Rep. Lac. i. 9. El 6i rii- av }viaiKc fitu avvoiKelv fif) (iovloLTv, 
 tmvuv de u^io?MyL)i' em&Vfioiri, Km rovru) vufxov kTto'ujnev, jjvriva av evrtK- 
 vov Koi revvaiav ufH^r}, Tzdaavra Tin' tx"^''^- ^'^ ravrjjq rtKroTrouiai^ai. Koi 
 WoXAa ^iv Toiavra {n»i'f V'Jpf *• Al re ; d p yvvaiKec () i r ro v g ol k ovi 
 3o V A V r a / k i r f \ t- 1 v, ol re th'rfptf adtA<j>oi>(: role '^aiai npoa'Xau3uvei¥t 
 §1 Tov ftev 1*1 ' ; vci r' f ('rva^*fa>i Ki^.yuvovc , tuv de xpn/i^Tuv ovk avriiroi 
 
 GYMNASTIC TttAININQ- 
 
 S8f 
 
 Herodotus) married two wives, and inhabited two fan .ly-hearth^ 
 f receding unknown at Sparta - yet the same pnvdege .J^h^ 
 LolrdL^ to Xenophon, some Spaitan women enjoyed without 
 Telti: fron. any one, and with pexfect harmony between he 
 
 nLtes of both their houses. O. Mullet^ --^ItTo^f mar! 
 evidence as tar as we know it, bears hmi out -that love-mar 
 ^^ITIT^^^^ aifection towards a wife were more famdiar 
 rip^-ta than to Athens; though in the former, mantal 
 ^loisy was a sentiment neither indulged nor recogmzed,- 
 while in the latter, it was intense and universal.'^ 
 
 To reconcile the careful gymnastic training, winch Xenophon 
 and Plutarch mention, with that uncontrolled luxury and relaxa- 
 I .hich Aristotle condemns in the Spartan women, we may 
 erhaps suppose that, in the time of the latter, the womei. of gh 
 pLition and wealth had contrived to emancipate themselves irom 
 ZZ^^ obligation, and that it is of such particular cases tha 
 he chiefly speaks. He dwells especially ui^n the increasing 
 tendency to accumulate property in the hands of the women,^ 
 whfc eems to have been still more conspicuous a century after- 
 waS in the reign of Agis the Third. And we may readi^ 
 • ::'; that one%f the employments of wealth thus acquired 
 w^ull be to purchase exemption from laborious ~?' J ^ 
 object more easy to accomplish in their case than in that of the 
 niett whose services were required by the state as soldier . By 
 : i;:; steps so ^ge a proportion as two-Hfths of the lan^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 erty of the state came to be possessed by women, he paitially 
 explains to us. There were (he says) many sole heiresses, - 
 hf d" wries given by fathers to their daughters were very large^ 
 ^Tardthe^^ 
 
 izoiiuu oidaua ^TrapririrtKa. recounted by Plutarch, 
 
 ,; *'"'1o"Kieolnrc''37-''38 ; of TLI^ of Age.. J and K™- 
 
 ?r- ,h; w'veT of igi. and Kleomenes, and of the wife of Pantcu. 
 
 rt r;:rdeCr:rrcer;L3e^o « wi* herh...n. 
 
 •^t 'st Z^ "or rSl>e O^e EratChen.. Or., i. p. .*• ^ 
 ♦ Plutarch, Aejis, c. 4. 
 
oo9 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 which he was disposed to use to the advantage ot* his daughter 
 over his son. In conjunction with this last circunastance, w« 
 have to notice that peculiar sympathy and yielding disposition 
 towards women in the Spartan mind, of which Aristotle also 
 speaks,' and which he ascribes to the warlike temper both of the 
 citizen and the state, — Ares bearing the yoke of Aphrodite. 
 But, apart from such a consideration, if we suppo&e, on the part 
 of a wealthy Spartaai father, the simple disposition to treat sona 
 and daughters alikr as to bequest, — nearly one half of the in- 
 herited mass of property would naturally be found in the hands 
 of the daughters, since on an average of families the number of 
 the two sexes born is nearly equal. In most societies, it is the 
 men who make new acquisitions : but this seldom or never hap- 
 pened with Spartan men, who disdained all money-getting occu- 
 pations. 
 
 Xcnophon, a warm |)anegyrist of Spartan manners, points with 
 some pride to the tall and vigorous breed of citizens which the 
 Lykurgic institution-; had produced. The beauty of the Lacedae- 
 monian women was notorious throughout Greece, and Lampito, 
 the Lacedaimonian woman introduced in the Lysistrata of Aris- 
 tophanes, is made to receive from the Athenian women the loud- 
 est compliments upon her fine shape and masculine vigor."- We 
 may remark that, on this as well as on the other points, Xeno- 
 phon emphatically insists on the peculiarity of Spartan institu- 
 tions, contradicting thus the views of those who regard them 
 merely as something a little Hyper-Dorian. Indeed, such pecu- 
 liarity seems never to have been questioned in antiquity, either 
 by the enemies or by the admirers of Sparta. And those 
 who censured the ])ublic masculine exercises of the Spartan 
 maidens, a< well as the liberty tolerated in married women, al- 
 lowed at the same time that the feelings of both were actively 
 identified with the state to a degree hardly known in Greece ; 
 that the patriotism of the men greatly depended uj>on the sym<» 
 pAthy of the other sex, which manifested itself publicly, in a 
 
 * Aristot Polit. ii. 6, 6 ; Plutarch, Agis, c. 4. Toi>g AoKedaifioviov^ KanjKO 
 •Vf 6v'ag u€i t€>v yvvaiiiLJv, Kai nkelov kKeiva:^ tuv dfjfwcL(,yVf ^ rCnf IdUn 
 •A ©if, iToAvirpay/Liovelv Sitiovra^. 
 
 ' Aiistophan Lysistr. 80. 
 
 LAWS AND DISCIPUNE OF LYKUROIUS AT SrARTA. 38^ 
 
 manner not compatible with the recluse life of Grecian wom^n 
 generally, to the exaltation of the brave as well as to the abase- 
 ment of the recreant ; and that the dignified bearing ui' the Spar- 
 tan matrons under private family loss seriously assisted the state 
 in the task of bearing up against public reverses. " Return 
 either with your shield or upon it," was their exhortation to their 
 sons when departing for foreign service : and after the fatal day 
 of Leuktra, those mothers who had to welcome home their sur- 
 viving sons in dishonor and defeat, were the bitter sufferers; 
 while those whose sons had perished, maintained a bearing com- 
 
 paratively cheerful.^ 
 
 Such were the leading points of the memorable Spartan disci- 
 pline, strengthened in its effect on the mind by the absence of 
 communication with strangers. For no Spartan could go abroad 
 without leave, nor were strangers permitted to stay at Sparta 
 they came thither, it seems, by a sort of sufferance, but the un 
 courteous process called xenelasy^ was always available to re 
 move them, nor could there arise in Sparta that class of resident 
 metics or aliens who constituted a large part of the population of 
 4then8, and seem to have been found in most other Grecian 
 towns. It is in this universal schooling, training, and di'ilhng, 
 imposed alike upon boys and men, youths and virgins, rich and 
 poor, that the distinctive attribute of Sparta is to be sought, — 
 not in her laws or political constitution. 
 
 Lykurcrus (or the individual to whom this system is owing, 
 whoever he was) is the founder of a wariike brotherhood rather 
 than the lawgiver of a political community ; his brethren live 
 tocrether like bees in a hive (to bonow a simile from Plutarch), 
 
 *^ — 
 
 ' See the remarkable account in Xenophon, llellen. iv. 16; Plutarch, 
 Agesilaus, c. 29 ; one of the most strikin- incidents in Grecian history. 
 Compare, also, the string of sayings ascribed to Lacedaemoman women, in 
 Plutarch, Lac. Apophth. p. 241,8^7. ,^„„«« 
 
 « How offensive the Lacedemonian xenfelasy or expulsion of 8ti^°ge« 
 appeared in Greece, we may see from the speeches of Perikles m Thucydi- 
 dfis (i. 144 ; ii. 39). Compare Xenophon, Rep. Lac. xiv. 4; Plutarch, Agia, 
 c 10 Lvkurgus, c. 27 ; Plato, Protagoras, p. 348. 
 
 No Spartan left the country without permission : Isokratfes, Urat. xi 
 
 (Bnsiris), p. 225 ; Xenoph. ut sup. ^ ^ , , ,u^ Vpln 
 
 Both these regulations became much relaxed after the close of the Peto 
 
 ponnesian war. 
 
S90 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 with all their feelings implieated in the commonwealth, and di 
 ▼orced from hous<; and homeJ Far from contemplating the 
 society as a whol<.', with its multifarious wants and liabilities, 
 he interdicts beforehand, by one of the three primitive Rhetra?, 
 all written laws, that is to say, all formal and premeditated enact- 
 ments on any special subject. When disputes are to be settled 
 or judicial interference is required, the magistrate is to decide 
 from his own sense, of equity ; that the magistrate will not de- 
 part from the established customs and recognized purposes of 
 the city, is presumed from the personal discipline which he and 
 the select body to whom he belongs, have undergone. It is this 
 select body, maintained by the labor of others, over whom Lykur- 
 gus exclusively walches, with the provident eye of a trainer, for 
 the purpose of disciplining them into a state of regimental prep- 
 aration,2 single-minded obedience, and bodily elRciency and 
 endurance, so that they may be always fit and ready for defence, 
 for conquest and for dominion. The parallel of the Lykurgean 
 institutions is to be found in the Republic of Plato, who approves 
 the Spartan princijple of select guardians carefully trained and 
 administering the community at discretion; with this momentous 
 difference, indeed, that the Spartan character^ formed by Lykur- 
 
 ' riutarch, Lykurg. <;. 25, 
 
 ' Plutarcli observes justly about Sjnirta, under the discipline of Lykurgus, 
 tliat it was • not the polity of a rity, hut the life of a trained and skilful 
 man," — or Tc/.fwf h Sn-a^r;/ iro'/.tretar, uAA' uvdpdg uaKijTov kqI ooipoii fSiov 
 ixovaa (Plutarch, Lyk. c. 30). 
 
 About the perfect habit of obedience at Sparta, see Xenophon, Memorab. 
 Ui. 5, 9, 15-iv. 4. 15, the grand attributes of Sparta in the eyes of its ad- 
 mirers (Isokrates, Pandthen. Or. xii. pp. 256-278), irei^apxia — aux^poavvrj 
 — ra )Vfivdaia runei Ka^earijTa kqI npoc tijv u<tktj(tiv Tfjq uvdpiag kqI npb^ 
 TTjv uuiivoiav Ko'i <7rrfi/<jf ttjI' rrepl tuv rro^efxov ifiireipiav. 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. viii % 3. 01 Aunuvec T^TjpcuSeic unepyuCovTai Toi( 
 
 Tliat the Spartans were absolutely ignorant of letters, and could not read, 
 IB expressly stated by Isokrates (Panathen. Or. xii. p. 277). ovtoi de roaoV' 
 rov urroXeXei/iftevot rr]^ Koivt/^ naideiac kol <f>ikoao(ltcag elalv^ tJor' ovSe 
 ypufifiara fxav&uvovaiv, etc. 
 
 The preference of rh» toric to accuracy, is so manifest in Isokrat^s, that we 
 oa^ht to understand \\\^ expressions with some reserve ; but in this ease it is 
 erident that he means liierallv what he says, for in another part of the sama 
 diseoarse, there is an o.pression dropped, almost unconsciously, which con 
 
 LAWS AND DISCIPLINE OF LYKURGUS AT SPARTA. 891 
 
 gus is of a low type, rendered savage and fierce by exclusive and 
 overdone bodily discipline, — destitute even of the elements 
 of letters, — immersed in their own narrow specialities, and 
 taught to despise all that lay beyond,— possessing all the quali^ 
 ties requisite to procure dominion, but none of those calculated 
 to render dominion popular or salutary to the subject ; while the 
 habits and attributes of the guardians, as shadowed forth by 
 Plato, are enlarged as well as philanthropic, qualifying them not 
 >imply to govern, but to govern for purposes protective, concilia- 
 tory, and exalted. Both Plato and Aristotle conceive as the per 
 fecti'on of society something of the Spartan type, — a select body 
 of equally privileged citizens, disengaged from industrious pur- 
 suits, and subjected to public and uniform training. Both admit 
 (with Lykurgus) that the citizen belongs neither to himself nor 
 to his family, but to his city ; both at the same time note with 
 regret, that the Spartan training was turned only to one portion 
 of\uman virtue, — that which is called forth in a state of war ;i 
 the citizens being converted into a sort of garrison, always under 
 drill, and always ready to be called forth either against Helots at 
 home or against enemies abroad. Such exclusive tendency will 
 appear less astonishing if we consider the very early and inse- 
 cure period at which the Lykurgean institutions arose, when 
 none of those guarantees which afterwards maintained the peace 
 of the Hellenic worid had as yet become effective, — no constant 
 habits of intercourse, no custom of meeting in Amphiktyony 
 from the distant parts of Greece, no common or largely fre- 
 quented festivals, no multiplication of proxenies (or standing 
 tickets of hospitality) between the important cities, no pacific or 
 industrious habits anywhere. When we contemplate the general 
 insecurity of Grecian life in the ninth or eighth century before the 
 Christian era, and especially the precarious condition of a small 
 band of Dorian conquerors in Sparta and its district, with sub- 
 dued Helots on their own lands and Achaeans unsubdued all 
 around them, — we s hall not be surprised that the language 
 
 ftms it"«Tlie most rational Spartans (he says) will appreciate thia 
 discourse, if they^in^ any one lo read it to themr - ¥ U3u<Ji rd, avayvuao- 
 
 Hisvov (p. 285). „, _. , 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 22 ; vii. 13, U ; viu. 1, 8 ; viU. 3, 3. Plato. Legg. I 
 
 pp. 626-629. Plutarch, Solon, c. 22. 
 
992 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECR 
 
 which Brasiilas in the Pelo|X)nnesian war addresses to his ariiij 
 in reference to the original Spartan settlement, was still more 
 powerfully present to the mind of Lykurgus four centuries 
 earlier — " We are a few in the midst of many enemies ; wc 
 can only maintain ourselves by fighting and conquering."' 
 
 Under such circumstances, the exclusive aim which Lykurgus 
 proposed to himself is easily understood ; but what is truly sur- 
 prising, is the violence of his means and the success of the 
 result. He realized his project of creating, in the eight thousand 
 or nine thousand Spartan citizens, unrivalled habits of obedience, 
 hardihood, self-denial, and military aptitude, — complete subjec- 
 tion on the part of each individual to the local public opinion, 
 snd preferen.^ of death to the abandonment of Spartan maxims. 
 intense ambition on the part of every one to distinguish himself 
 within the prescribed sphere of duties, with little ambition for 
 anything else. In what manner so rigorous a system of indi- 
 vidual training can have been first brouglit to bear upon any 
 community, mastering the course of the thoughts and action.^ 
 from boyhood to old age, — a work far more difiicult than any 
 political revolution, — we are not permitted to discover. Nor 
 does the influence of an earnest and energetic Herakleidman, — 
 seconded by the still more powerful working of the Delphian 
 god behind, upon the strong pious susceptibilities of the Spartan 
 mind, — sutficiently explain a phenomenon so remarkable in the 
 history of mankind, unless we suppose them aided by some com- 
 bination of cooperating circumstances which history has not 
 transmitted to us,"^ and preceded by disorders so exaggerated as 
 to render the citizens glad to escape from them at any price. 
 
 Res|)ecting the ante-Lykurgean Sparta we possess no positive 
 information whatever. But although this unfortunate gap cannot 
 be filled up, we may yet master the negative probabilities of the 
 
 ' Thucyd. iv. 126. Ol ye fajdE uTrd noXiTeiuv toiovtov fjKere^ kv oZf ov 
 roAXot hXiyuv apxwat, dAAd nXeiovuv fidTiXov iXdaaovc ovk aX^t riv 
 KTijadf^evoi ttjv Avvaareiav ij rv» fiaxofievoi Kparelv. 
 
 The most remarkable circumstance is, that these words are addreaafid by 
 Brasidas to an army composed, in large proportion, of maniMsitted Haloti 
 (Thncjd. iv. 81 ). 
 
 •Plato treatf of the system of Lykurgus, as emanadni; fiom *hm OelphiM 
 Apollo and Lykurgus as his missionary (Legg. i. p. 632) 
 
 PARTITION OF LANDS. 
 
 398 
 
 gufliiciently to see that, in what Plutarch has told us (and 
 from Plutarch the modern views have, until lately, been de 
 rived), there is indeed a basis of reality, but there is also a iarg« 
 superstructure of romance, — in not a few particulars essentially 
 misleading. For example, Plutarch treats Lykurgus as intro- 
 ducing his reforms at a time when Sparta was mistress of La- 
 conia, and distributing the whole of that territory among the 
 Periceki. Now we know that Laconia was not then in possession 
 of Sparta, and that the partition of Lykurgus (assuming it to he 
 real) could only have been applied to the land in the immediate 
 vicinity of the latter. For even Amykla;, Pharis, and Geron 
 thrae, were not conquered until the reign of Teleklus, posterior 
 to any period which we can reasonably assign to Lykurgus : Tior 
 can any such distribution of Laconia have really occurred. 
 Farther, we are told that Lykurgus banished from Sparta coined 
 gold and silver, useless professions and frivolities, eager pursuit 
 of gain, and ostentatious display. Without dwelling upon th« 
 improbability that any one of these anti-Spartan characteristics 
 should have existed at so early a period as the ninth century 
 before the Christian era, we may at least be certain that coined 
 silver was not then to be found, since it was first introduced into 
 Greece by Pheidon of Argos in the succeeding century, as has 
 been stated in the preceding section. 
 
 But amongst all the points stated by Plutarch, the most sus- 
 picious by far, and the most misleading, because endless calcula- 
 tions have been built upon it, is the alleged redi vision of landed 
 property. He tells us that Lykurgus found feari'ul inequality in 
 the landed possessions of the 8f)artans; nearly all the land in 
 the hands of a few, and a great multitude without any land ; 
 that he rectified this evil by a redivision of the Spartan district 
 into nine thousiuid equal lots, and the rest of Laconia into thirty 
 rhousand, giving to each citizen as much as would j)rodu(e a 
 given quota of barley, etc. ; and that he wished, moreover, to 
 have divided the movable property upon similar principles of 
 equality, but was deterred by the difiiculties of carrying his 
 design into execution. 
 
 Now we shall find on consideration that this new and equal 
 partition c lands by Lykurgus is still more at variance with 
 
 17* 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 Ml 
 
n 
 
 ill 
 
 9d4 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PARTITION OF LAND&. 
 
 39S 
 
 feet and probability than the two former alleged proceedings 
 All the historical evidences exhibit decided inequalities of prop- 
 trty among the Spartans, — inequalities which tended constantly 
 to increase ; moreover, the earlier authors do not conceive thia 
 evil as having grown uj) by way of abuse out of a primeval 
 lystem of peHl-ct equality, nor do they know anything of the 
 triginal equal redivision by Lykurgus. FLven as early as the 
 poet Alkaius (b. c 600-580) we find bitter complaints of the 
 oppressive ascendency of wealth, and the degradation of the 
 poor man, cited as having been pronounced by Aristodemus at 
 Si)arta: '' WcmIiIi (said he) makes the man,— no poor person is 
 either accounted good or honored."' Next, the historian Hella- 
 Bikus certainly knew nothing of the Lykurgean redivision,— for 
 he ascribed th.i whole Spartan polity to Eurysthenes and Pro- 
 kles, the original founders, and hardly noticed Lykurgus at all. 
 Again, in the brief, but im{)ressive description of the Spartan 
 lawgiver by H«jrodotus, several other institutions are alluded to, 
 but nothing is said about a redivision of the lands ; and this 
 latter point is in itself of such transcendent moment, and was so 
 recognized among all Grecian thinkers, that the omission is 
 almost a dem«)nstration of ignorance. Thucydides certainly 
 could not have believed that eiiuality of property was an origi- 
 nal feature in tlie Lykurgean system ; for he says that, at Lace- 
 diBmon, -the rich men assimilated themselves greatly in respect 
 of clothing antl general habits of life to the sinqdicity of the 
 poor, and thus set an example which was partially followed in 
 the rest of Greece :" a remark which both implies the existence 
 of unequal property, and gives a just appreciation of the real 
 working of Lykurgic institutions.- The like is the sentiment of 
 Xenophon :3 he observes that the rich at Sparta gained little by 
 
 . 4 
 
 Aksei Fragment. 41, p. 279, ed. Schneidewin :~ 
 
 Or yap fi^nor' 'ApiaroSauov ipiu<y" m'K urrulafivov h iTraprcji 16yc\ 
 
 Einfiv^Xpv aar' uvrip' Tzevixoo^ d' ovdelq TrcXer' ka^lb^ ovSe rlfiio^. 
 Cimpare the Sihol. ad Pindar. Isthm. ii. 17, and Diogen. LaCrt. i. 31. 
 
 « Thucydid.i. 6. fierpia ^ ah ka^f]TL nai eg rdv vvv rpoirov npuToi Aa<edai 
 Movioi tx'pr}<^avTo, kqI ff ra aO.a npo^ Tovg 7roXAot)f oi ril ^£<Cw KEKtTjfievo 
 hodiairoi fidXiara Kareffrrjaav. See, also, Plutarch, Apophthegm. Lacon. } 
 tlO, A.— F. 
 
 ■ Xenoph. Republ. Laced, c. 7. 
 
 their wealth in point of superior comfort ; but he never glances 
 at any original measure carried into eftect by Lykurgus for 
 equalizing possessions. Plato too,i while he touches u[)on the 
 great advantage possessed by the Dorians, immediately after 
 their conquest of Peloponnesus, in being able to apportion land 
 suitably to all, — »ever hints that this original distribution had 
 degenerated into an abuse, and that an entire subsequent redi- 
 vision had been resorted to by Lykurgus: moreover, he is him. 
 self deeply sensible of the hazards of that formidable proceeding. 
 Lastly, Aristotle clearly did not believe that Lykurgus had re- 
 divided the soil. For he informs us first, that, " both in Lacedie- 
 mon and in Krete,^ the legislator had rendered the enjoyment 
 of property common through the establishment of the Syssitiji, 
 or public mess." Now this remark (if read in the chapter of 
 which it forms a part, a refutation of the scheme of Communism 
 for the select guardians in the Platonic Republic) will be seen 
 to tell little for its point, if we assume that Lykurgus at the 
 same time equalized all individual possessions. Had Aristotle 
 known that fact, he could not have failed to notice it : nor could 
 he have assimilated the legislators in Lacedicmon and Krete, 
 seeing that in the lattei no one pretends that any such equaliza- 
 tion was ever brought about. Next, not only does Aristotle 
 dwell upon the actual inequality of property at Sparta as a 
 serious public evil, but he nowhere treats this as having grown 
 out of a system of absolute ;'quality once enacted by the law- 
 giver as a part of the primitive constitution : he expressly notices 
 inequality of property so far back as the second Messenian war. 
 Moreover, in that valuable chapter of his Politics, where the 
 scheme of equality of possessions is discussed, Phaleas of Chal- 
 kedon is expressly mentioned as the first author of it, thus indi- 
 rectly excluding Lykurgus.^ The mere silence of Aristotle is in 
 
 * Plato, Legg. iii. p. 684. 
 
 * Aristotel. Politic, ii. 2, 10. uaTrep tu nepl tuq KTrjaeii iv AaKeSal/xovi Kal 
 Kpr/Trj Tolc ffvoaiTtotc 6 vo/ao^irrig tKoivoae. 
 
 ' Aristot. Politic, ii. 4, 1, about Phaleas; and about Sparta and Krete, 
 generally, the whole sixth and seventh chapters of the second book ; alio^ 
 
 r. 6, 2-7. 
 
 Theophrastus (apud Plutanh, Lycurg. c. 10) makes a similar observation, 
 tibat the public mess, and the general simplicity of habits, tended to rcnde? 
 
 ■ 
 
 *» 
 
 
 \ 
 
396 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 PARTITION OF LANDS. 
 
 397 
 
 this discussion a negative argument of tlie greatest weight. Im 
 krates,' too, sp<iaks much about Sparta for good and for evil, — 
 mentions Lykiirgus as having established a political constitution 
 much like thafc of the earliest days of Athens, — praises the 
 gymnasia and the discipline, and compliments the Spartans upon 
 the many centuries which they have gone through with t 
 violent sedition, extinction of debts, and redivision of the land, 
 — those " monstrous evils," as he terms them. Had he con- 
 ceived Lykurgus as being himself the author of a complete 
 redivision of land, he could hardly have avoided some allusion 
 to it. 
 
 It ap[)ears, tlien, that nmie of the authors down to Aristotle 
 ascribe to Lykurgus a redivision of the lands, either of Sparta or 
 of Laconia. The statement to this effect in Plutarch, given in 
 great detail and with precise specification of number and produce, 
 must have been borrowed from some author later than Aristotle ; 
 and I think we may trace the source of it, when we study Plu- 
 tarch's biography of Lykurgus in conjunction with that of Agis and 
 Kleomenes. The statement is taken from authors of the century 
 after Aristotle, either in, or shortly before, the age when both 
 those kings trie«i extreme measures to renovate the sinking state : 
 the former by a thorough change of system and property, yet 
 proposed and accepted according to constitutional forms ; the 
 latter by projects substantially similar, with violence to enforce 
 them. The accumulation of landed property in few hands, the 
 multiplication of poor, and the decline in the number of citizens* 
 which are depic^ted as grave mischiefs by Aristotle, had become 
 
 wealth of little service to the j)0.ssessor: rdv tt^-ovtov dn'Aovrov ii'Ktpyanao- 
 ^at ry KotvonjTt t>jv dnrvuv, kol ry irepl r^ diairav evTe}na. Compare 
 Phitarch. Apo[)hthegni Laeon. p. 226 E. The wealth, therefore, was not 
 formally done away with in the opinion of Theophrastus : there was no 
 positive equality of j)Ossessions. 
 
 Both the Spartan kinj^s dined at the public mess at the same pheiditioii 
 (Plutarch, Agesilaus, c. 30). 
 
 Hcrakleides Ponticus mentions nothing, either ahout equality of Spaitaa 
 lots or fresh partition of lands, by Lykurgus (ad calcem Cragii, De Sparta- 
 aorum Repub. p. 504), though he speaks about the Spartan lot? and law of 
 «iioc€S8ion as well as about Lykurgus. 
 
 ' Isokrates, Panathen. Or. xii. pp. 266, 270, 278 : ov6i ^-^ijv aTrcxordf 
 •hiU yiji avadaanbi' ov6' dAX' ovdev tC>v ov^ksotuv KQxiv 
 
 greatly aggravated during the century between him and Agis. 
 The number of citizens, reckoned by Herodotus in the time of thtj 
 Persian invasion at eight thousand, had dwindled down in the 
 time of Aristotle to one thousand, and in that of Agis to seven 
 hundred, out of which latter number one hundred alone possessed 
 most of the landed property of the state.^ Now, by the ancient 
 rule of Lykurgus, the qualification for citizenship was the ability 
 to furnish the prescribed quota, incumbent on each individual, at 
 the public mess : so soon as a citizen became too poor to answer 
 to this requisition, he lost his franchise and his eligibility to 
 ofiices.2 The smaller lots of land, though it was held discredit- 
 able either to buy or sell them,^ and though some have asserted 
 
 * Plutarch, Agis, c. iv. 
 
 ' Aristot Polit. ii. 6, 21. Tlapu de rotf \uKiJaiv iKaarov die i^epcLv^ koX 
 (j(^')6pa TTFVTiTUiv hfluv ovTuVj Kal TOVTO Td uvu?njfia ov dvvafiivuv danav^. 
 
 'Opof 6e T^c noXiTeia<: ovrog kariv 6 iruTpioc^ rdv 
 
 arj Svvafievov tovto rb reXoq ^epEiv, fx^ /nerex^tv ahrfjt. 
 So also Xenophon, Rep. Lac. c. vii. laa (ilv ^ipeiv dg rd. emT^deiOy 6/ioiuc 
 (Ve diatrdcr^ai ru^ac. 
 
 The existence of this rate -paying qualification, is tlie capital fact in the 
 history of the Spartan constitution ; especially when we couple it with tlw 
 other fact, that no SparUin acquired anything by any kind of industry. 
 
 ^ Herakleides Ponticus, ad calcem Cragii De Repub. Laced, p. 504. Com- 
 pare Cragius, iii. 2, p. 196. 
 
 Aristotle Cii* 6i ^0) states that it was discreditable to buy or sell a lot of 
 land, but that the lot might be either given or bequeathed at pleasure. He 
 mentions nothing about the prohibition to divide, and even states what con- 
 tradicts it, — that it was the practice to give a large dowry when a rich 
 man's daughter married (ii. 6. 11). The sister of Agesilaus, Kyniska, was 
 a person of large property, which apjiarently implies the division of his 
 father's esLote (Plutarch, Agesilaus, 30). 
 
 Whether there was ever any law prohibiting a father from dividing his 
 lot among his children, may well l)e doubted. The Rhetra of the ephor 
 Epitadeus (Plutarch, Agis, 5), granted unlimited power of testamentary 
 disposition to the possessor, so that he might give away or bequeathe his land 
 to a stranger if he chose. To this law great effects are ascribed : but it is 
 evident that the tendency to accumulate property in few hands, and the 
 tendency to diminution in the number of qualified citizeDs, were powerfully 
 manifested before the time of Epitadeus, who came after Lysander. Plutarch, 
 in another place, notices Hesiod, Xenokrates, and Lykurgus, as having con- 
 curred witn Plato, in thinking that it was proper to leave only one single 
 heir {iva fiSvov K^ripdvofiov KaTa?uTreiv^ {'TnofivrffxaTa elg 'HatoJov, Fragm 
 roL V. p. 777, Wyttenb.). But Hesiod does not lay down this as a net^ssitj 
 
 
 1 
 
 \ i 
 
 I 
 
 ,1 V 
 
'\ 
 
 398 
 
 HISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 DECLINE OF SPARTAN INS 1 iTl'TIONS. 
 
 a99 
 
 (without frnmnd, I thinky that it was forbidden to divide them, — ^ 
 became inMitVicicnt for numerous families, and seem to have been 
 alienated in some indirect manner to the rich ; while every indus- 
 trious occupation being both interdicted to a S{)artan citizen and 
 really inconsistent witli his ngorous personal discipline, no other 
 means of furnishing his quota, exce|)t the lot of land, was open to 
 him. The difficulty felt with regard to these smaller lots of land 
 may be judged of from the fact stated by Polybius,' that three or 
 four Spiu'tan brothers had often one and the same wife, the 
 paternal land being just sufficient to furnish contributions for all 
 to the public mess, and thus to keep alive the citizen-rights of all 
 the sons. Tlie tendency to diminution in the number of Spartan 
 citizens seems to have gone on uninterruptedly from the time of 
 the Persian war, and must have been aggravated by the founda 
 lion of Messene, with its independent territory around, after the 
 battle of Leuktrji, an event which robbed the S[>artans of a large 
 portion of their [)roperty. Apart from these special causes, more- 
 over, it has been observed often as a statistical fact, that a close 
 corporation of citizens, or any small number of families, inter- 
 
 or as a universal rule : he only says, that a man is better off who has only 
 one son (<>pp. Di- 374). And if Plato had been able to cite Lykurgus as 
 an authority for th-it system of an invariable number of separate k?.t/()oi, or 
 lots, which he »cts forth in his treatise De Legibus (p. 740), it is highly 
 I»robable that he would have done so. Still less can Aristotle have supposed 
 that Lyknrtrus or the Spartan system either insured, or intended to insure, 
 the maintenance of an unalterable number of distinct proprietary lots; for 
 he expressly notices that scheme as a peculiarity of Philolaus the Corinthian, 
 ia his laws for the Thcbuns (Polit. ii. 9, 7). 
 
 • Polybius, Fragm. ap. Maii. Collect. Vett, Scrip, vol. ii. p. 384. 
 
 Perhaps, as O. Miiller remarks, this may mean only, that none except the 
 eldest brother could afford to marry ; but the feelings of the Spartans in 
 respect to marriage were, in many other points, so different from ours, that we 
 are hardly authorized to reject the literal statement ( History of the Dorians, iii. 
 10, 2), — which indeed, is both illustrated and rendered credible by the per- 
 mission granted in the laws of Solon to an kiriK^^rjpog who had been claimed 
 la marriage by ,i relative in his old age, — av 6 Kparuv koI Kvpiog yeyovd( 
 Kcru rdv vofiov avrbg fif) dvvaTo^ ^ nTijjaiu^eiv vnd rCtv iyytara tov av^^t 
 ^v'.ss^ai (Plutarch, Solon, c. 20). 
 
 I mar observ<j that of O. Miiller's statements, respecting the lots of land 
 as S|>ArU, several are unsupported and some incorrect. 
 
 Biarrying habitually among one another, and not reinforced from 
 without, have usually a tendency to diminish. 
 
 Tlie present is not the occasion to enter at length into that 
 
 combination of causes which j)artly sapj)ed, partly overthrew, both 
 
 the institutions of Lykurgus and the power of Sparta. But taking 
 
 the condition of that city as it stood in the time of Agis the Third 
 
 (say about 250 p. c), we know that its citizens had become few 
 
 in number, the bulk of them miserably poor, and all the land in 
 
 a small number of hands. The old discipline and the public 
 
 mess (as far as the rich were concerned) had degenerated intu 
 
 mere forms, — a numerous body of strangers or non-citizens (the 
 
 old xenelasy, or prohil)ition of resident strangers, being long dis 
 
 continued) were domiciled in the town, forming a powerful 
 
 moneyed interest ; and lastl}-, the dignity and ascend«'ncy of the 
 
 state amongst its neighbors were altogether ruined. It was 
 
 insupportable to a young enthusiast like king Agis, a- well as to 
 
 many ardent spirits among his contemporaries, to contrast ^lis 
 
 degradation with the previous glories of their country : nor did 
 
 they see any other way of reconstructing the old Sparta except 
 
 by again admitting the disfranchised poor citizens, redividing the 
 
 lands, cancelling all debts, and restoring the j)ublic mess and 
 
 military training in all their strictness. Agis endeavored tc 
 
 caiTy through these subversive measures, (such as no demagogue 
 
 in the extreme democracy of Athens would ever have ventured 
 
 to glance at,) with the consent of the senate and public assembly, 
 
 and the acquiescence of the rich. His sincerity is attested by 
 
 the fact, that his own i)roperty, and that of his female relatives, 
 
 among the lar^rest in the state, was cast as the first sacrifice into 
 
 the common stock. But he became the dupe of unprincipled 
 
 coadjutors, and perished in the unavailing attempt to realize hia 
 
 scheme by persuasion. His successor, Kleomenes, afterwards 
 
 accomplished by violence a change substantially similar, though 
 
 the intervention of foreign arms speedily overthrew both himself 
 
 and his institutions. 
 
 Now it was under the state of public feeling which gave birth 
 to these projects of Agis and Kleomenes at Sparta, that the bid- 
 tone fancy, unknown to Aristotle and his predecessors, first gain- 
 ed ground, of the absolute equality of property as a primitive 
 institution of Lykurgus. How much such a belief would favoi 
 
 ^ 
 
 1 
 > 
 
 , ^ t 
 
400 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 HYPOTHESIS REGARDING LTKUKOtM. 
 
 401 
 
 the schemes of innovation is too obvious to require notice ; an^ 
 without su[)i)osing any deliberate imposture, we cannot be aston- 
 isheii that the predispositions of enthusiastic patriots interpreted, 
 accoKhng to their own partiahties, an old unrecorded legislation 
 troin which they were separated by more than five centuries. 
 The Lykurgean discipline tended forcibly to suggest to men's 
 minds the idea of equality among the citizens, — that is, the nega- 
 fion of all inequality not founded on seme personal attribute,— 
 Inasmuch as it assimilated the habits, enjoyments, and capacities 
 f>f the rich to those of the poor; and the equality thus existing 
 in idea and tendency, which seemed to proclaim the wish of the 
 founder, was strained by the later reformers into a pasitive insti- 
 tution which he had at first realized, but from which his degene- 
 rate followiiis had receded. It was thus that the ilincies, longings, 
 Riid indirect suggestions of the present assumed the character of 
 recollections out of the eai'ly, obscure, and extinct historical past. 
 Perhaps the philosopher Sphaerus of Borysthenes (friend and 
 companion of Kleomenes,i disciple of Zeno the Stoic, and author 
 ol works now lost, both on Lykurgus and Socrates, and on the 
 constitution of Si)arUi) may have been one of those who gave 
 currency to such an hypothesis. And we shall readily believe 
 that, if advanced, it would find easy and sincere credence, when 
 we recollect how many similar delusions have obtained vogue in 
 
 ' PliitHrch. Kleomenes cap. 2-11, with the note of Schomann, p. 175; 
 also, Lveur-;. cap. 8 ; Athenaj. iv. p. 141. 
 
 Phyliirchus, also, described the proceedings of Kleoraenes, seemingly with 
 favor (Atheiuv. ib) ; compare Plutarch, Agis, c. 9. 
 
 PolyMus Wlievetl, that Lykurgas had introduced equality of landed pos- 
 session, both in the district of Sparta, and throaghout Laconia : his opinion 
 is. probably, J.orrowed fron these same authors, of the third century before 
 i:u> (Miristian era. For he expresses his great surprise, how the best-informed 
 mivient authors {ol AoyiuraroL tC>v upxaiuv <rvyypa(pEuv), Plato. Xenophon, 
 Ki)horus, KallisthenSs, .«Hn compare the Kretan polity to the old Lacedamo- 
 nian, the main features of the two being {as he says) so different, — equality 
 of property at Sparta, jrreat inequality of property in Krete, among other 
 ililferences (Pol vb.vi. 45-48). 
 
 This remark of Polybius, exhibits the difference of opinion of the earlier 
 nrriteis, as compared with those during the third century before the Christian 
 em. The former compared Spart».n and Kretan institutions, because they 
 iSd ml conceive equaUty of landed property as a feature in old Sparta. 
 
 modern times, far more favorable to historical accuracy, — hon 
 much false coloring has been attached by the political feeling of 
 recent days to matters of ancient history, such as the Saxon 
 AMtenagemote, the Great Charter, the rise and growth of the 
 Knglish House of Commons, or even the Poor Law of Elizabeth. 
 When we read the division of lands really proposed by king 
 Agis, it is found to be a very close copy of the original division 
 ascribed to Lykurgus. He parcels the lands bounded by the 
 lour limits of Pellene, Sellasia, Malea, and Taygetus, into four 
 thousand five hundred lots, one to every Spartan ; and the lands 
 beyond these limits into fifteen thousand lots, one to each Peri- 
 oikus ; and he proposes to constitute in Sparta fifteen pheiditia, 
 or public mess-tables, some including four hundred individuals, 
 others two hundred, — thus providing a place for each of his four 
 thousand five hundred Spartans. With i-espect to the division 
 originally ascribed to Lykurgus, different accounts were given. 
 Some considered it to have set out nine thousand lots for the 
 district of Sparta, and thirty thousand for the rest of Laconia; ^ 
 others affirmed that six thousand lots had been given by Lykur- 
 gus, and three thousand added afterwards by king Polydorus ; a 
 third tale was, that Lykurgus had assigned four thousand five 
 hundred lots, and king Polydorus as many more. This last 
 scheme is much the same as what was really proposed by Agis. 
 
 In the preceding argument respecting the redivision of land 
 ascribed to Lykurgus, I have taken that measure as it is described 
 by Plutarch. But there has been a tendency, in some able 
 modern writers, while admitting the general fact of such redivi- 
 sion, to reject the account given by Plutarch in some of its mam 
 circumstances. That, for instance, which is the capital feature 
 in Plutarch's narrative, and which gives soul and meaning to his 
 picture of the lawgiver — the equality of partition — is now re- 
 iected by many as incorrect, and it is supposed that Lykurgus 
 made some new agrarian regulations tending towards a general 
 equahty of landed property, but not an entirely new partition ; 
 that he may have resumed from the wealthy men lands which 
 they had unjustly taken from the conquered Achseans, and thofl 
 
 Respecting Sphaerus, see Plutarch, Lycurg. c. 8 ; Kloomeu. c. 2 j Atheiui 
 r. p 141 ; Diogen. Lafirt. rii. sect. 137 
 
 VOL. ij. 26oc 
 
 i 
 
 11' 
 
 fas 
 
102 
 
 HlSrORY OF GREECE. 
 
 STATEMENT Of PLU FARCH. 
 
 403 
 
 \ 
 
 provided allCments both for the poorer ctjzons and fo the sub- 
 ject LaconUns. Sucl, i, .h- opinion ot Dr. llurlwall «do al 
 the .ame time- admits that the exaet proportion ot the Lvkiugean 
 diistribiilioii can liardly be a^^certaiiied.' 
 
 I cannot but take a diUerent view of the statement made by 
 Pklareh. The moment that we .Upart from that rule ot e<|uahty, 
 which stands so prominently marked i » his biography ot Lyk ur- 
 
 ' Hist pf Greece, ch. viii.vol. i. rP- ■'44-.!47. 
 
 C F 1 'r-.u.n, o. .he .ontrary, considers tl.c .,...1 ,".r....on of Laoou.r. 
 i„,^ U ,s in livisil,i; „nd inalienai.lo, as - ..„ essential con.l„u,n" e.ne wese , 
 «ehe lLdi„,ung) of .he whole Lyknrgean systen. (Lchrl.u.h der e.ne.h. 
 
 Chen Slaatsalterthiimer, sect. 28). -„o .nfii „,.,„,. and sctuis 
 
 Tittinann { ( jrieehisehe Staatsverfassungen, w- ;,88-..!)f.) -.tatc, and 
 to adnnt the e.,ual ,K.r.i,iu„ as a fa,., wUhou. any commentary. 
 
 Waehsmuth (Ilelleniseh. Alterthum.kundo, v. 4, 42, p. 21 ) suppose. 
 - tha e best land was already pareelled, before the f"-/ ^ykurg-s d 
 lot8 of equal magnitude, corresponding to the nun.ber of Spartans «h.U. 
 ^.^mbcr alWrds inercLsed to nine thoasand." For this assertion, 1 know 
 ^ e videnee it departs from I'latarch, without substi.utntg anythmg bene 
 ^thentleated or more plausible. Waehsmu.h notices the part.t.on of Laconu 
 •mon" "he Periceki /thirty thousand equal lots, without any comment, and 
 weminglv as if then! were no doubt of it (p. 218). 
 
 Manlo. also, supposes that there had once been an e,ual ^^-^ »L 1;^^ 
 wior to Lykurgus, - that it had degenerated into abuse, - and that Lj km 
 Tu, cwre ted i., r. storing, not absolute equality, but something near to 
 gus orrc'ttu .1, -• ,10-121). This is the same gratuitous 
 
 equality (Manso, bparta, %ol. i. pp. ii"-*-*/ 
 •imnnsiiiun as that of ^V'achsmuth. 
 
 n H n r admits the division as stated by riutareh, though he says tha 
 the whole number of nine thousa.id lots cannot have been set out before the 
 MesTnian wTr; and he adheres to the idea of equality as contained m 
 Plu'rch; but be savs that the equality consisted in •• equal estimate of 
 .»™rodcce,"--not in equal acreable dimensions. He goes so fitr as to 
 Lll us tha?" the lots of the Spartans, which supported twice as many men 
 « tl" lotof the P rLki, Jst, upon the whole, have been twice as ex.en- 
 rive (.■ "in the aggre-ate) : each lot must, therefore, have been seven nmes 
 la tr ••■ compare History of the Dorians, iii. .3, 6 ; iii. 10, 2.) He also sup- 
 ^"'h..t° similar partitions of land had been made from the time of the 
 «^t occupation of Laconia bv the Dorians." Whoever compares h« vanou 
 ^lt?::rrh the evidence- bro«gh, to support them, will hnd a painful 
 A^ ^^^^\r.r, Vw^tween the basis and the superstructure. 
 X'vtws oTs 5IL, as far a. I collect frotn expressions somewha, 
 va^^e leem to coincide with those of Dr. Thirlwall. He admits, however 
 
 21 of Plato (Schomann, Antiq. Jur. Pub. ir 1, 7, note 4 p. 116) 
 Vol. ^ ^^ 
 
 gus, we step into a boundless field of possibility, in which tbere is 
 nothing to determine us to one point more than to another. The 
 surmise started by Dr. Thirlwall, of lands unjustly taken from the 
 conquered Achaeans by wealthy Spartan proprietors, is altogether 
 gratuitous ; and granting it to be correct, we have still to explain 
 how it happened that this correction of a partial injustice came 
 to be transformed into the comprehensive and systematic measure 
 which Plutarch describes ; and to explain, farther, from whence 
 it arose that none of the authors earlier than Plutarch take any 
 notice of Lykurgus as an agrarian equalizer. These two difficul- 
 ties will still remain, even if we overlook the gratuitous nature 
 of Dr. Thirlwall's su|>position, or of any other supposition which 
 can be proposed respecting the real Lykurgean measure which 
 Plutarch is affirmed to have misrepresented. 
 
 It appears to me that these ditficulties are best obviated by 
 adopting a different canon of historical interpretation. We can- 
 not accept as real the Lykurgean land division described in the 
 life of the lawgiver; but treating this account as a fiction, two 
 modes of proceeding are open to us. We may either consider 
 the fiction, as it now stands, to be the extiggeration and distortion 
 of some small fact, and then try to guess, without any assistance, 
 what the small fact was. Or we may regard it as fiction from 
 first to last, the expression of some large idea and sentiment so 
 powerful in its action on men's minds at a given time, as to 
 induce them to make a place for it among the realities of the 
 past. Now the latter supposition, applied to the times of Agii 
 the Third, best meets the case before us. The eighth chat)ter 
 of the life of Lykurgus by Plutarch, in recounting the partition 
 of land, describes the dream of king Agis, whose mind is full of 
 two sentiments, — grief and shame for the actual condition of iiia 
 country, — together with reverence for its past glories, as well a^ 
 for the lawgiver from whose institutions those glories had eman- 
 ated. Absorbed with this double feeling, the reveries of Agis go 
 back to the old ante-Lykurgean Sparta, as it stood more than 
 five centuries before. He sees, in the spirit, the same mischiefs 
 and disorders as those which afflict his waking eye, — gross in 
 equalities of property, with a few insolent and luxurious rich, a 
 crowd of mutinous and suffering poor, and nothing but fierce 
 ftutipathy reigning between the two. Into the midst of thi* fro- 
 
 > ^. 
 
 i. 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 ll^ii 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 twma^rt 
 
404 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PLUTARCH'S STORY OF tIPITADEl ^. 
 
 40S 
 
 ward, lawless, and distempered community, steps the venerable 
 missionary from Deljjlii, — breathes into men's minds new im- 
 pulses, and an impatience to shake off the old social and political 
 Adam, — and [?ersuades the rich, voluntarily abnegating their 
 temporal advantages, to welcome witli satisfaction a new system, 
 wherein no distinction shall be recognized, except that of good 
 or evil desert J Having thus regenerate i the national mind, he 
 parcels out the territory of Laconia into equal lots, leaving no 
 luperiority to any one. Fraternal harmony becomes the reign- 
 ing sentiment, while the coming harvests present the gratifying 
 ipectacle of a jaternal inheritance recently distributed, with the 
 brotherhood contented, modest, and docile. Such is the picture 
 with which '• mischievous Oneirus " cheats the fancy of the pa- 
 tnotic Agis, whispering the treacherous message that tlie gods 
 have promised him success in a similar attempt, and thus seduc- 
 ing him into that fatal revolutionary course, which is destined to 
 bring himself, his wife, and his aged mother, to the dungeon and 
 the hangman's ro[)e.'^ 
 
 That the golden dream just described was dreamed by some 
 Spwtan patriots is certain, because it stands recorded in Plu- 
 tarch ; that it was not dreamed by the authors of centuries 
 preceding Agis, I have already endeavored to show ; that the 
 earnest feelings, of sickness of the present and yearning fir a 
 better future under the colors of a restored j)ast, which filled the 
 noul of this king and his brother-reformers, — combined with the 
 levelling tendency between rich and poor which really was inhe- 
 rent in the Lykurgean discipline, — were amjdy sufficient to beget 
 Bucli a dream, and to [)rocure for it a place among the great deeds 
 of the old lawgiver, so much venerated and so little known, — 
 this too I hold to lu- unquestionable. Had there been any evi- 
 dence that Lykurgus had interfered witli jirivate property, to the 
 limited extent which Dr. Thirl wall and otlier able critics imag- 
 ine, — that he liad resumed certain lands unjustly taken by the 
 
 * Plvtarch, Lykarg. c. 8. avveireiae rriv x<^pov uTraonv «f fisaov ^evrof, H 
 ^X^ 4bvada(T«Kn^ai;, koi Cyv [ut^ aXkrjXuiv uTravroc, ouoAftf kcu iaoKW^fjovi 
 TMf ^ioi/Q yevofievm)^^ to 6e TrpuiTslov apery /leTLovra^ ■ «f iiKkij^ krepift wpoi 
 irtpop oi'K ova^s ^'.a^opdf, oid' uvLaorrfrog. ttA^v oarjv alaxp<^v ^oy-x Of*Cf^ 
 ami KoXuv hrawog. ^Eiruyuv de t<^ 2.6y(f> rd epyov^ diivei/iEj etc 
 
 •Plutarch, Agis, c. 19-20 
 
 nch from the Achoeans, — I should have been glad to lecord it} 
 but, finding no such evidence, I cannot think it necessary tt 
 presume the fact, simply in order to account for the story la 
 Plutai'ch.J 
 
 The vai'ious items in that story all hang together, and must ba 
 understood as forming parts of the same comprehensive fact, or 
 comprehensive fancy. The fixed total of nine thousand Spartanj 
 and tliirty thousand Laconian lots,^ the equality between thenii 
 
 ' I read with much satisfiiction, in M. Kopstadfs Dissertation, that the g«!i 
 eral conclusion whirh I have endeavored to establish respecting the allegc4 
 Lykurgean redivision of property, appears to him successfully proved. 
 (Dissert. De Reruni Liioooic. Connt. sect. 18, j». 138.) 
 
 He supposes, with perfect truth, that, at the time when the first edition ot 
 ihese volumes was pu!>lishod. I was ignorant of the fact, that Lachmann &dJ 
 KortOm had both called in question the reality of the Lykurgean redivisioik 
 In regard to Professor Kortiim, the fan was first brought to my knowledge, 
 by his uoiice rjf these two volumes, in the HcideH>erger Jahrbiicher, 1846^ 
 No. 41, p. 6-1 3. 
 
 Since the tirst edition, I have read the treatise of Lachmann (Die Spar 
 lanische Staats Vcrfassung in ihrer Entwicklung und ihrera Verfklle, sect. 
 10, p. 170) wheriin the redivision ascribed to Lykurgus is canvassed. He, 
 loo, attributes the origin of the talc, as a portion of history, to the social and po- 
 litical feelJLgs current in the days ui' Agis the Third, and Kleomenes the Tliird. 
 He notices, also, that it is in contradiction with Plato and Isokrates. But • 
 large projioition of the aigunicnts which he brings to disprove it, are con- 
 nected with ideas of his own respecting the social and political constitution 
 of Sparta, which I think cither untrue or uncertified. Moreovor, he believei 
 in the inalienability as well as the indivisibility of the srparate lots of land, 
 — which I believe to l>e just ns little correct as their supposed Cijuality. 
 
 Kopstadt (p. 139) thinks that I have gone too far in rejecting cA'cry middle 
 opinion. He thinks that Lykurgus must have done something, though 
 much less than what i.s affirmed, tending to realize equality of indrvidud 
 property. 
 
 I .shall not say that this is impossible. If we had ampler evidence, per- 
 haps such facts might appear. But as the evidence stands now, there is 
 nothing whatever to show it. Nor are we entitled (in my judgment) to 
 presume that it was so, in the absence of evidence, simply in order to make 
 out that the Lykurgean mytlie is only an exaggeration, and not entire 
 Action. 
 
 •Aristotle (Polit. ii. 6, 11) remarks that the territory of the SpartaiM 
 irould maintain fifteen hundred horsemen and thirty thousand hoplites. while 
 the number of citizens was, in point of fact, less than one thousand. Dr. 
 Thirlwall seems to prefer the reading of Gottling, — three thousand instead 
 
 lit 
 
 f \ 
 
 
 
^/! 
 
 406 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 and the rent accruing from each, represented by a given quaniiij 
 of moist and dry produce, — all these particulars are alike true 
 or aHke uncertified. Ui>on the various numbeis iiere given, many 
 authors have raised calculations as to the population and produce 
 of Laconia, which appear to me destitute of any trustworthy 
 foundation. Those who accept the history, that Lykurgus eon- 
 itituted the abov(;-mentioned numbers both of citizens and of lots 
 of land, and that he contemplated the maintenance of both num- 
 bers in unchang«;able projjortion, — are perplexed to assign the 
 means whereby ttiis adjustment was kept undisturbed. Nor are 
 they much assisted in the solution of this embarrassing problem 
 by the statement of Plutarch, who tells us that the number re- 
 mained fixed of itself, and that the succession ran on from father 
 to .'*on, without either consolidation or multiplication -of parcels, 
 down to the period when foreign wealth flowed into Sparta, as a 
 consequence of the successful (•o^^clusion of the Peloponnesian 
 war. Shortly after that period (he tells us) a citizen named 
 Epitadeus became ephor, — a vindictive and malignant man, who, 
 having had a quarrel with his son, and wishing to oust him from 
 the succession, introduced and obtained sanction to a new lihetra, 
 Thereby power was granted to avinj fatlier of a family either to 
 make over during life, or to bequeathe after death, his house and 
 hi^ estate to any one whom he chose.i But it is plain that this 
 story (whatever be the truth about the family (piarrel of Epita- 
 deus) does not help us out of the difficulty. From the time of 
 Lykurgus to thai; of this disinlieriting ephor, more than four 
 centuries must be reckoned : now, had there been real causes at 
 work sufficient to maintain inviolate the identical number of lots 
 and famines during this long i)eriod, we see no reason why his 
 new law, simply permissive and nothing more, .^liould have over- 
 thrown it. We are not told by Plutarch what was the law of 
 succession prior to Epitadeus. If the whole estate went by law 
 to one sou in the family, what became of the other sons, to whom 
 industrious acquisition in any shape waj repulsive as well as 
 ioterdicted? If, on the other hand, the estate was divided be- 
 
 of thirty thou.sand ; but the latter seems better supported by MSS, 
 most suitable. 
 
 ' Pltttarch, Agis, c. 5. 
 
 INEQUALITY OF LANDED PROPERTY. 
 
 407 
 
 tween the sons equally (as it was by the law of succession al 
 Athens), how can we defend the maintenance of an unchanged 
 aggregate number of parcels ? 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall, after having admitted a modified interference 
 with private property by Lykurgus, so as to exact from the 
 wealthy a certain sacrifice in order to create lots for the poor, and 
 to bring about something approaching to equi-producing lots for 
 all, observes: " The average amount of the rent, paid by the cul- 
 tivating Helots from each lot, seems to have been no more than 
 was required for the frugal maintenance of a family with six 
 persons. The right of transfer was as strictly confined as that 
 of enjoyment ; the patrimony was indivisible, inalienable, and 
 descended to the eldest son ; in default of a male heir, to the 
 eldest daughter. The object seems to have been, after the number 
 of the allotments became fixed, that each should be constantly 
 represented by one head of a household. But the nature of de 
 means employed for this end is one of the most obscure points of 
 the Spartan system .... In the better times of the commonwealth, 
 this seems to have been principally effected by adoptions and 
 marriages with heiresses, which provided for the marriages of 
 younger sons in families too numerous to be supported on their 
 own hereditary property. It was then probably seldom necessary 
 for the state to interfere, in order to direct the childless owner of 
 an estate, or the father of a rich heiress, to a proper choice. But 
 as all adoption required the sanction of the kings, and they had 
 also the disposal of the hand of orphan heiresses, there can be 
 little doubt that the magistrate had the power of interposing on 
 such occasions, even in opposition to the wishes of individuals, to 
 relieve poverty and check the accumulation of wealth." (Hist 
 Gr. ch. 8, vol. i. p. 367). 
 
 I cannot concur in the view which Dr. Thirlwall h»re takes 
 ■>f the state of property, or the arrangements respecting its trans 
 mission, in ancient Sparta Neither the equal modesty of pes 
 session which he supposes, nor the precautions for perpetuating 
 it, can be shown to have ever existed among the pupils of Ly- 
 kurgus. Our earliest information intimates the existence of rich 
 men at Sparta : the story of king Aristo and Agetus, in Herodo 
 tu8, exhibits to us the latter as a man who cannot be supposed to 
 bave had only just " enough to maintain six persons frugally," — 
 
 a »! 
 
 '. '! 
 
 I -^ -j-i-rn 
 
 ^^^T^'^SISS'IB 
 
mb 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 while his beautiful wife, whom Aristo coveted and entrappai 
 from him, is expressly described as the daughter of opulent pareati* 
 Sperthies and Bulis, the Talthybiads, are designated as belonging 
 to a distinguished race, and among the wealtliiest men in Sparta. i 
 Demaratus was the oialy king of Sparta, in the days of Herodo- 
 tus, who had ever gained a chariot-victory in the Olympic games ; 
 but we know by the case of Lichas, during the Peloponnesiao 
 war, Evagoras, and others, that private Spartans were equally 
 successful; 2 and for one Spartan who won the prize, there must 
 of course have been many who bred their horses and started 
 their chariots unsuccessfully. It need hardly be remai'ked, that 
 chariot-competition at 01ym{)ia was one of the most significant 
 evidences of a wealthy house: nor were there wanting Spartans 
 who kept horses and dogs without any exclusive view to the 
 games. We know from Xenophon that, at the time of the battle 
 of Leuktra, ** the very rich Spartans " provided the horses to be 
 mounted for the state- cavalry.^ These and other proofs, of the 
 existence of rich men at Sparta, are inconsistent with the idea of 
 a body of citizens eacli possessing what was about enough for the 
 frugal maintenance of six persons, and no more. 
 
 As we do not find that such was in practice the state of prop- 
 erty in the Spartan community, so neither can we discover that 
 llie lawgiver ever tried either to make or to keq) it so. Wliat 
 he did was to impose a rigorous public discipline, with simple 
 ?lothing and fare, incumbent ahke upon the rich and the poor 
 (this was his special present to Greece, according to Thucydidet^,'* 
 and his great point of contact with democracy, according to Aris- 
 totle) ; but he took no pains either to restrain the enrichment of 
 the former, or to prevtmt the impoverishment of the latter. He 
 meddled little with the distribution of property, and such negleei 
 is one of the capital deficiences for which Aristotle censures him 
 That philosopher tells us, indeed, that the Spartan law had made 
 it dishonorable (he do<2s not say, peremptorily forbidden) to buj 
 cr sdU iasided propert} , but that there was the fullest liberty belh 
 
 * Herod, ri. 61. oia dv^iJuTrorv re bTifiiutv iBvyaripOf etc ; vii. 134. 
 ■ Herod, vi. 70-103 ; Thncyd- v. 50. 
 
 ' Xenoph. HeUen. vL 4, 11 ; Xenoph. de Rt/p. Lac v. 3; Molpk ap. 
 W. p. 141 ; Aristot. Polit ii 2, 5. 
 
 * Thttcyd. i. 6 ; Aristot. PoUt iv. 7, 4, 5 ; viii. 1, I. 
 
 FANCY RESPECTING SPARTAN PROPERTY, 
 
 409 
 
 of donation and bequest : and the same results, he justly obeervea, 
 ensued from the practice tolerated as would have ensued from 
 the practice discountenanced, — since it was easy to disguise a 
 real sale under an ostensible donation. He notices pointedly the 
 tendency of property at Sparta to concentrate itself in fewer 
 hands, unopposed by any legal hindrances : the fathers married 
 their daughters to whomsoever they chose, and gave dowries 
 according to their own discretion, generally very large : the rich 
 tainilies, moreover, intermarried among one another habitually, 
 and without restriction. Now all these are indicated by Aristotle 
 as cases in which the law might have interfered, and ought to 
 have interfered, but did not, — tbr the great purpose of dissemi- 
 nating the benefits of landed property as much as possible among 
 the ma^s of the citizens. Affain, he tells us that the law en- 
 couraged the multiplication of progeny, and granted exemptions 
 to such citizens as had three or tour children, — but took no 
 thought how the numerous families of poorer citizens were to 
 live, or to maintain their qualification at the public tables, most 
 of the lands of the state being in the hands of the rich.i His 
 notice, and condemnation, of that law, which made the franchise 
 of the Spartan citizen dependent upon his continuing to furnish 
 bis quota to the public tabic, — has been already adverted to ; as 
 well as the potent love of money '^ which he not^s in the Spartan 
 character, and which must have tended continuaUy to keep together 
 the richer families among themselves : while amongst a commu- 
 nity where industry was unknown, no poor citizen could ever 
 
 become rich. 
 
 If we duly weigh these evidences, we shall see that equality 
 of possessions neither existed in fact, nor ever entered into the 
 scheme and tendencies of the lawgiver at Sparta. And the pic 
 ture which Dr. TliirlwalP has drawn of a body of citizens each 
 
 » Aristot. PoliL ii 6, 10-lb ; v. G, 7. 
 
 « The panegyrist Xenophon acknowledges much the same respecung the 
 Sparta which he witnessed ; but he maintains that it had been better in 
 former times (Repub. Lac. c. 14). t^ ,, m, j 
 
 ■■* The view of Dr. ThirlwaU agrees, in the main, with that of Manao and 
 0. Mailer (Manso, Sparta, vol i. pp. 118-128 ; and vol. ii BeUage, 9, p. 129; 
 «nd Miiller, History of the Dorians, vol. ii. b. iii. c. 10, sect. 2, 3). 
 
 Both these authors maintain the proposition stated by Plutarch (Agii o 
 
 Vjl 
 
 \ 
 
 VOL. U. 
 
 IH 
 
 ii i"" ii i ' III j f ^-'--^-- I'i ii ' 
 
no 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 { 
 
 possessing a lot of land about adequate to the frugal malntenAuce 
 of six persons, — of adoptions and marriages of heiresses arranged 
 
 5, in his reference to ihc ephor Epitadeus, and the new law carried hv i 
 ephor), that the number ^J Spartan lots, nearly equal and rigorously indi- 
 risible, remained with little or no change from the time of the original 
 diTision, down to the return of Lysander, after his victorious close of the 
 Peloponnesian war. Both acknowledge that they cannot understand b^ 
 what regulations this ong unalterability, so improbable in itself, was main 
 tained : but both affirm the fact positively. The period will be more than 
 four hundred years if the original division be referred to Lykurgus : moro 
 than three hundred yui.rs, if the nine thousand lots are understood to date 
 from the Messenian war. 
 
 If this alleged fact be really a fact, it is something almost without a 
 parallel in the history of mankind : and before we consent to believe it, Me 
 ought at least to be satisfied that there is considerable show of positive evi- 
 dence in its favor, and not much against it. But on examining Manso and 
 MuUer, it will be seen that not only is there very slender evidence in its 
 favor, — there is a decided balance of evidence against it. 
 
 The evidence produced to prove the indivisibility of the Spartan lot, is a 
 passage of Herakleides Pontic us, c. 2 (ad. calc. Cragii, p. 504). Tuleiv 6e 
 yfjv AaKeSaifioviotc aiaxpowevo^taTai. — Tfjq ufixaiag fioipac avivt ^:m^ai (or 
 vevenricr&aL) ovdev i^ecri. The first portion of this assertion is jonhrmed 
 by, and probably borrowed from, Aristotle, who says the same thing, nearly 
 in the same words : the second portion of the sentence ought, accordinp- to 
 all reasonable rules of -onstruction, to "^e understood with reference to the 
 first part ; that is, to the sale of the original lot. " To sell land, is held 
 disgraceful among the Laced«monians, nor is it permitted to sever off any 
 portion of the original lot," i. e./or sale. Herakleides is not here speaking 
 of the law of succession to property at Lacedaemon, nor can we infer from 
 his words that the whole; lot was transmitted entire to one son. No evidence 
 except this very irrelc> ant sentence is produced by Muller and Manso to 
 justify their positive assertion, that the Spartan lot of land was indivisible 
 in respect to inheritance. 
 
 Having thus determined the indivisible transmission of lots to one son of 
 a family, Manso and Midler presume, without any proof, that that son mu»t 
 be the eldest : and Muller proceeds to state something equally unsupported 
 by proof. ''The extent of his rights, however, was perhaps no farther than 
 that he was considered master of the house and property ; while the other 
 
 members of the family had an equal right to the enjoyment of it The 
 
 master of the family wan. therefore, obliged to contribute for all these to the 
 syssitia, without which contribution no one was admitted." — pp. 199, 200. 
 
 All this is completely irratuitous, and will be found to produce at many 
 iifliciilties in one way as it removes in another. 
 
 The next law as to the transmission of property, which Manso states to 
 •art prevailed, is, that a!/ daughters nerc to marry without receiring an^ 
 
 LYKURGEAN REGULATIONS ABOUT PROPERTY. 
 
 411 
 
 with a deliberate view of ju-oviding for the younger children of 
 numerous families, — of interference on the part of the kings M 
 
 5owry, — the case of a sole daughter is here excepted. For this proposition 
 he cites Plutarch, Apophtheg. Laconic, p. 227 ; Justin, iii. 3 ; ^lian. V. H. 
 vi, 6. These authors do certainly affirm, that there was such a regulation, 
 and both Plutarch and Justin assign reasons for it, real or supposed. " Ly- 
 kurgus, being asked why he directed that maidens should be married without 
 dowry, answered, — In order that maidens of poor families might not remain 
 unmarried, and that character and virtue might be exclusively attended to 
 in the choice of a wife." The same general reason is given by Justin. Now 
 the reason here given for the prohibition of dowry, goes, indirectly, to prove 
 that there existed no such law of general succession, as that which had been 
 before stated, namely, the sacred indivisibility of the primitive lot. For had 
 this latter been recognized, the reason would have been obvious why daughters 
 could receive no dowry ; the father's whole landed property (and a Spartan 
 could have little of any other property, since he never acquired anything by 
 industry) was under the strictest entail to his eldest son. Plutarch and 
 Justin, therefore, while in their statement as to the matter of fact, thej 
 warrant Manso in affirming the prohibition of dowry (about this matter of 
 fact, more presently), do, by the reason which they give, discountenance hii 
 forrner supposition as to the indivisibility of the primitive family lots. 
 
 Thirdly, Manso understands Aristotle (Polit. ii. 6, 11), by the use of the 
 adverb vvv, to affirm something respecting his own time specially, and to im 
 ply at the same time that the ancient custom had been the reverse. I cannot 
 think that the adverb, as Aristotle uses it in that passage, bears out such a 
 construction : vvv dt, there, does not signify present time as opposed to past, but 
 the antithesis between the actual custom and that which Aristotle pronounces 
 to be expedient. Aristotle gives no indication of being aware that any 
 material change had taken place in the laws of succession at Sparta : this is 
 one circumstance, for which Ixjth Manso and Muller, who both believe in th« 
 extraordinary revolution caused by the permissive law of the ephor Epita- 
 
 deus, censure him. , , /. 
 
 Three other positions are laid down by Manso about the laws of property 
 at Sparta. 1. A man might give away or bequeathe his land to whomsoever 
 he pleased. 2. But none except childless persons could do this. 3. They 
 could only give or bequeathe it to citizens who had no land of their own. 
 Of these three regulations, the first is distinctly affirmed by Aristotle, and 
 mav be relied upon : the second is a restriction not noticed by Aristotle, and 
 supported by no proo^ except that which arises out of the story of the ephor 
 Epitadeus, who is said to have been unable to disinherit his son without 
 causing a new law to be passed : the third is a pure fancy. 
 
 So much for the positive evidence, on the faith of which Manso and 
 Holler affirm the startling fact, that the lots of land in Sparta remamed dis 
 tinct, indivisible, ani unchanged in number, down to the close of the Pelo 
 poonesian war. I venture to say that such positive evidence is far too weak 
 
( 
 
 lis 
 
 HlSrORY Of GKICKCK. 
 
 H 
 
 iDAore this object, —of a fixed number of lots of land, each repre- 
 •ented by one heiid of ji household, — this [)icture is one, of which 
 
 to sustain an affirmation in itself so improbable, even if there were no evi 
 dence on the other side for contradietion. But in this case there is powerful 
 contradictory evidence. 
 
 First, the assertions of these authors are distinctly in||je teeth of Aristotle, 
 Whose authority they try to invalidate, by saying that he s^oke altogether 
 mth reference to his own time at Sparta, and that he misconceived the prim- 
 itive Lykurgean constitution. Now this might form a reasonable gronfid of 
 preaumption against the competency of Aristotle, if the witnesses produced 
 on the other side were old«jr than he. But it so happens, that evertf one of 
 the witnesses produced by Manso and Miiller, are younfjer than Aristotle : 
 Herakleides Ponticus, Plutarch, Justin, ^lian, etc. Nor is it sliown that 
 these authors copied from any source earlier than Aristotle, — for his testi- 
 mony cannot be contradicted by any inferences di;iwn from Herodotus, 
 Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, Isokrates, or p]phorus. None of these writers, 
 anterior to, or contemporary with, Aristotle, countenance the fancy of equal, 
 indivisible, perpetual lots, or prohibition of dowry. 
 
 The fact is, that Aristotle is not only our best witness, but also our oldcht 
 witness, respecting the laws of property in the Spartan commonwealth. I 
 could have wished, indeed, that earlier testimonies hud existed, and I admit 
 that even the most sagacious observer of 340-330 b. c. -s liable to mistake 
 when he speaks of one or two centuries before. But if Aristotle h to be 
 discredited on the ground of late date, what are we to say to Plutarch ? 
 To insist on the intellectual eminence of Aristotle would be superfluous: 
 end on this subject he is a witness the more valuable, as he had made care- 
 ful, laborious, and personal inquiries into the Grecian governments generally, 
 and that of Sparta among them, — the great point de mire for ancient spccu 
 lative politicians. 
 
 Now the statements of Aristotle, distinctly exclude the idea of equal, 
 mdivisible, inalienable, perpetual lots, — and prohibition of dowry. He par- 
 ticularly notices the habit of giving very large dowries, and the constimt 
 tendency of the lots of land to become consolidated in fewer and fewer 
 hands. He tells us nothing upon the subject wbicli is not perfectly consist 
 em, intelligible, and uncontradicted by any known statements belonging to 
 his own, or to earlier times. But the reason why men refuse to believe him. 
 and either set aside or explain away his evideiuc, is, that they sit down to 
 the study with their minds full of the division of landed property ascribed 
 to Lykurgus by Plutarch. I willingly concede that, on this occasion, we 
 bave to choose between Pli;itarch and Aristotle. We cannot reconcile them 
 except by arbitrary suppositions, everyone of which breaks up the simplicity, 
 Deauty, and symmetry of Plutarch's agrarian idea, — and everyone of which 
 still leaves the perpetuity o" the original lots unexplained. And I have no 
 oesitation in prefemng the authority of Aristotle (which is in perfect conso- 
 ■eace with what we indirectly gather from other authors, his eoDtemporariei 
 
 I 
 
 LYKURGEAN REGULATIONS ABOUT PROPERTY. 
 
 413 
 
 tiie reiility must not be sought on the banks of the Enrotaa 
 The " better times of the oommonwealth," to which he refers, 
 
 and predecessors) as a better witness on every ground ; rejecting the stale* 
 ment of Plutarch, and rejecting it altogether, with all its consequences. 
 
 But the authority of Aristotle is not the only » gument which may be 
 arged to refute this supposition that the distinct Spartan lots remained 
 unaltered in number down to the time of Lysander. For if the number of 
 distinct lots remained undiminished, the number of citizens cannot hwt 
 greatly diminished. Now the conspiracy of Kinadon falls during the life <rf 
 Lysander, within the first ten years after the close of the Peloponnesiao 
 war: and in the account which Xenophon gives of that conspiracy, the 
 paucity of the number of citizens is brought out in the clearest and most 
 emphatic manner. And this must be before the time when the new law of 
 Epitadeus is said to have passed, at least before that law can have had room 
 to produce any sensible effect.s. If, then, the ancient nine thousand lots 
 still remained all separate, without either consolidation or subdivision, how 
 are we to account for the small number of citizens at the time of the con- 
 spiracy of Kinadon ? 
 
 This examination of the evidence, for the purpose of which I have been 
 compelled to prolong the present note, shows — 1. That the hypothesis of 
 indivisible, inalienable lots, maintained for a long period in undiminished 
 number at Sparta, is not only sustained by the very minimum of affirmative 
 evidence, but is contradicted by very good negative evidence. 2. That the 
 hypothesis which represents dowries to daughters as being prohibited by 
 law, is, indeed, affirmed by Plutarch, jElian, and Justin, but is contradicted 
 by the better authority of Aristotle. 
 
 The recent edition of Herakleides Ponticus, published by Schneidewin, in 
 1847, since my first edition, presents an amended text, which completely 
 bears out my interpretation. His text, derived from a fuller comparison of 
 existing MSS., as well as from better critical judgment (see his Prolegg, c. 
 lii. p. liv.), stands — YiaTielv de yrjv AaKedaifiovioi^ ahxpf^v vevo/xiarai ' rfi^ 
 6e apxaiac fioipa^ oi'de l^eariv (p. 7). It is plain that all this passage relates 
 to sale of land, and not to testation, or succession, or division. Thus much 
 negatively is certain, and Schneidewin remarks in his note (p. 53) that it contra- 
 diets Mailer, Hermann, and Schcimann, — adding, that the distinction drawn 
 is, between land inherited from tlie original family lots, and land otherwise 
 acquired, by donation, bequest, etc. Sale of the former was absolutely 
 illegal : sale of the latter was discreditable, yet not absolutely illegal. Aris- 
 totle in the Politics (ii.6, 10) takes no notice of any such distinction, between 
 Und inherited from the primitive lots, and land otherwise acquired. Nor 
 was there, perhaps, any well-defined line of distinction, in a country of 
 Ijnwritten customs, like Sparta, between what was simply disgraceful and 
 what was positively illegal. Schneidewin, in his note, howe- tr, assumes the 
 original equality of the lots as certain in itself, and as bein£ jie cause of *kt 
 prohibition : neither of which appears to me true. 
 
 
414 
 
 HISTOirr OF GREECE. 
 
 LIKURGEAN REGULA-n ^NS ABOUT PROPERTY 
 
 41d 
 
 may have existed in the glowing retrospect of Agis, but are not 
 acknowledged in the sober appreciation of Aristotle. That the 
 citizens were far more numerous in early times, the i)hiloiiopher 
 tells us, and that the community had in his day greatly declined 
 in power, we also know : in this sense, the times of Sparta had 
 doubtless once been b(itter. We may even concede that during 
 the three centuries succeeding Lykurgus, when they were con- 
 tinually acquiring new territory, and when Aristotle had been 
 told that they had occasionally admitted new citizens, so that the 
 aggregate number of c;itizens had once been ten thousand, — we 
 may concede that in these previous centuries the distribution of 
 land had been less unequal, so that the disproportion between 
 the great size of the territory and the small number of citizens 
 was not so marked as it had become at the period which the 
 philosopher personally witnessed ; for the causes tending to aug- 
 mented inequality wen; constant and uninterrupted in their work- 
 ing. But this admissiijn will still leave us far removed from the 
 sketch drawn by Dr Thirlwall, which depicts the Lykurgean 
 Sparta as starting from a new agrarian scheme not far removed 
 from equality of landed property, — the citizens as spontaneously 
 disposed to uphold th s equality, by giving to unprovided men 
 the benefit of adoptions and heiress-marriages, — and the magis- 
 trate as interfering to enforce this latter purpose, even in cases 
 where the citizens werti themselves unwilling. All our evidence 
 exhibits to us both decided inequality of possessions and inclina- 
 tions on the part of rich men, the reverse of those which Dr 
 Thirlwall indicates ; nor will the powers of interference which ho 
 
 I speak of this confused compilation still under the name of Herakleides 
 Fonticus, by which it is commonly known: though Schneidewin, in the 
 •econd chapter of his Prolegomena, has shown sufficient reason for believing 
 that there is no authority for connecting it with the name of Herakleides. 
 He tries to establish the work as consisting of Excerpta from the lost treatise 
 of Aristotle's Tzeol Uo/ureiuv : which is well made out with regard to son^i 
 parts, but not enough to justify his inference as to the whole. The article 
 wherein Welcker vindicate*! the ascribing of the work to an Excerptor of 
 Herakleides, is unsatisfactory (Kleine Schriften, p. 451). 
 
 Beyond this irrelevant passage of Herakleides Ponticus, no farther evidoBce 
 IS produced by Miiller and Manso to justify their positive assertion, that Ihff 
 8p«rtan lot of land was indivisible in respect to inheritance; 
 
 ■Bcribes to the magistrate be found sustained by the chapter of 
 Herodotus on which he seems to rest them.* 
 
 ' Herod, vi. 57, in enumerating the privileges and perquisites of the kings 
 -—diKu^eiv 6e fiovvovg tuv^ iiaaiXi/a^ rooade fioiiva- iraTpovxov re nap^tvov 
 vipL, Ic Tov Uvierai ixeiv, ^v fir/Trep 6 KUTr/p avTfjv tyyvrjarf kqI uduv 
 6T}fioauuv TTtpi ' Kal r/v rig T&erdv naida nouecr&ai i^eXr/, ^aaLlrjuv evavnov 
 
 It seems curious that Trarpov^of nup^evog should mean a damsel who has 
 V father (liteially, lucus a nan lucendo) : but I suppose that we must accept this 
 jpon the authority of Julius Pollux and Timaeus. Proceeding on this intr. 
 jiretation, Vakkenaer gives the meaning of the passage very justly : " OrU"" 
 iuptias, necdum a patre dcsponsata;, si plures sibi vindicarent, lieretque i 
 'xikXtjpoc, ut Athenis loquebantur, eKidiKor^ Spartae lis ista dirimebatur a 
 iftgibus solis." 
 
 iVow the judicial function here described, is something very different from 
 the language of Dr. Thirlwall, that '• the kings had the disposal of the hand 
 of orphan heiresses in cases where the father had not signiHed his will." 
 Such uisposal would approach somewhat to that omnipotence which Aristo- 
 phanes {\esp. ;i85) makes old Philokleon claim for the Athenian dikasts (an 
 exaggeration well calculated to serve the poet's purpose of making the 
 dikasts appear monsters of caprice and injustice), and would be analogous 
 to the powei wnich English kings enjoyed three centuries ago as feudal 
 guardians over wards. But the language of Herodotus is inconsistent with 
 the idea that tae kings chose a husband for the orphan heiress. She wa* 
 claimed, as or right, by persons in certain degrees of relationship to he. 
 Whether the luw about uyx'taTeLa, affinity carrying legal rights, was the 
 same as at Aiheus, we cannot tell ; but the question submitted for adjudication 
 at Sparta, to ihe kings, and at Athens to the dikasteries, was certainly the 
 same, agreeably lo the above note of Valckenaer, — namely, to whom, among 
 the various clainiiints for the marriage, the best legal title really belonged. 
 It is, indeed, probable enough, that the two royal descendants of Herakles 
 might abuse their judicial function, as there are various instances known in 
 which they take bribes j but they were not likely to abuse it in favor of an 
 unprovided youth. 
 
 Next, as to adojHion : Herodotus tells us that the ceremony of adoption 
 was performed betor<r the kings : probably enough, there was some fee paid 
 with it. But this aft'ords no ground for presuming that they had any hand 
 in determining whom the childless father was to adopt. According to the 
 Attic law about adoption, there were conditions to be fulfilled, consents to 
 be obtained, the absence of disqualifying circumstances verified, etc ; and 
 some authority before which this was to be done was indispensable (see 
 Meier und Schomann, Attisch. Prozess, b. iii. ch. ii. p. 436). At Spartii, 
 such authority wai vested by ancient custom in the king : l»ut we are not 
 told, nor is it prol able, " that he could intei7>ose, in opposition to the wishes 
 of individoals. to relieve poTerty,"as Dr. Thirlwall supposes 
 
416 
 
 HISIORY OF GRKfeCK. 
 
 To coiiceive correctly, then, the Lykurgean system, aa far a* 
 obscurity and want of evidence will permit, it seems to me that 
 there are two current misconceptions which it is essential to dis- 
 eard. One of these is, that tlie system included a repartition of 
 landed property, upon principles of exact or approximative 
 equality (distinct from tliat appropriation which belonged to the 
 Dorian conquest and settlement), and provisions for perpetuating 
 Ihe number of distinct and equal lots. The other is, that it was 
 irst brought to bear when the Spartans were masters of all 
 Laconia. The; .llusions created by the old legend, — which 
 depicts Laconia as all one country, and all conquered at one 
 stroke, — yet survive after the legend itself has been set aside aj 
 bad evidence : we cannot conceive Sparta as subsisting by itself 
 without dominion over Laconia; nor Amykltie, Pharis, and 
 Geronthrui, as really and truly independent of S[)arta. Yet, 
 if these towns were independent in the time of Lykurgus, much 
 more confidently may the same independence be affirmed of the 
 portions of Laconia which lie lower than Amykl® down the 
 valley of the Eurotas, as well as of the eastern coast, which 
 Herodotus expressly states to have been originally connected 
 
 with Argos. 
 
 Discarding, then, these two suppositions, we have to consider 
 the Lykurgean system as brought to t)ear upon Sparta and 
 its immediate (circumjacent district, apart from the rest of Ijaco- 
 nia, and as not meddling systematically with the partition of 
 property, whatever that may have been, which the Dorian con- 
 querors established at their original settlement. Lykurgus does 
 not try to make the poor ricli, nor the rich poor ; but he imposes 
 upon both the same subjugating drill,i — the same habits of life, 
 gentlemanlike idleness, luid unlettered strength, — the same fare, 
 clothing, labors, privations, endurance, punishments, and subordi- 
 nation. It is a lesson instructive at least, however unsatisfactory, 
 to political students, — that, with all this equality of dealing, h*? 
 encU in creating a community in whom not merely the love of 
 preeminence, but even the love of money, stands powerfully and 
 specially developed.^ 
 
 * Sirapra r^a/- a(T/>/?poror, SimonidOs, apud Plutarch. Agesilau9,c. 1 
 
 * ArUtotel. Polit ii. 6, 9, 19, 23. rd Qi?Mrifior — ri> i^i/Mxpfiiftm^m 
 
 GRADUAL CONQIT.STS OF SPARIA. 
 
 ill 
 
 How far the peculiar of the primitive Sparta extended w« 
 Imve no means of determining ; but its limits down the valley of 
 the Eurotas were certainly narrow, inasmuch as it did not reacb 
 so far as ^Vmykla?. Nor can we tell what principles the Dorian 
 conquerors may have followed in the original allotment of landi 
 witliin the limits of that peculiar. Equal apportionment is not 
 probable, because all the individuals of a conquering band art 
 seldom regarded as possessing equjd claims; but whatever th« 
 original apportionment may have been, it remained without any 
 general or avowed disturbance until the days of Agis the Thir^ 
 and Kleomenes the Third. Here, then, we have the primitiv* 
 Sparta, including Dorian warriors with their Helot subjects, hit 
 no Perioeki. And it is upon these Spartans separately, perhapi 
 after the period of aggravated disorder and lawlessness noticel 
 by Herodotus and Thucydides, that the painful but invigorating 
 disci [)line, above sketched, must have been originally brought 
 to bear. 
 
 The gradual conquest of Laconia, with the acquisition of 
 additional lands and new Helots, and the formation of the order 
 of Perioeki, both of which were a consequence of it, — is to bi 
 considered as posterior to the introduction of the Lykurgeai 
 system at Sparta, and as resulting partly from the increased 
 force which that system imparted. The career of conquest went 
 on, beginning from Teleklus, for nearly three centuries, — witk 
 some interruptions, indeed, and in the case of the Messenia* 
 war, with a desperate and even precarious struggle, — so that ia 
 the time of Thucydides, and for some time previously, the Spar> 
 tans possessed two-fifths of Pelojionnesus. And this series of 
 new acquisitions and victories disguised the really weak point 
 of the Spartan system, by rendering it possible either to plant 
 the poorer citizens as Periceki in a conquered township, or ttt 
 <»^pply them with lots of land, of which they could receive the 
 produce without leaving the city, — so that their numbers an4 
 their military strength were prevented from declining. It is 
 even affirmed by Aristotle, ^ that during these early times they 
 augmented the numbers of their citizens by fresh admissionsd 
 which of course implies the acquisition of additional lots of 
 
 fOI»IL 
 
 > Aristot PoUt iL 6, 12. 
 
 18» 
 
 27oc. 
 
I 
 
 t 
 
 } 
 
 418 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 DISTRIBLMON OF LACONIA. 
 
 419 
 
 land. Bui successful war, to use an expression subsUntially 
 borrowed from the same philosopher, was necessary :o their 
 salvation : the establishment of their ascendency, and of their 
 maximum of territory, was followed, after no very long interval, 
 by symptoms of decline.^ It will hereafter be seen that, at the 
 period of the conspiracy of KinadOn (305 b. c), the full citiztng 
 (called Homoioi, or Peers) were considerably inferior in number 
 to the Hypomeirtnes, or Spartans, who could no longer furnish 
 their qualification, and had become disfranchised. And the 
 loss thus sustained was very imperfectly repaired by the ad- 
 mitted practice, sometimes resorted to by rich men, of asso- 
 ciating with their own children the children of poorer citizens, 
 And paying the contribution for these latter to the public 
 tables, so as°to enable them to go through the prescribed course 
 of education and discipline, — whereby they became (under the 
 title or sobriquiit of Mothakes'^) citizens, with a certain taint 
 of inferiority, yet were sometimes appointed to honorable 
 
 commands. 
 
 Laconia, the state and territory of the Lacediemonians, was 
 allirmed, at the time of its greatest extension, to have compre- 
 hended a hundi-ed cities,^ — this ai\er the conquest of Messenia; 
 
 » Aristot. Polit. ii. 6, 22. Toiyapovv tod^ovTO :TuAefiuvvTt^, uttuIovto di 
 Ap^nvTfg, etc. Compare ulso vii. 13, 15. 
 
 * Plutarch, Kleoinen. c. 8; Phylarch. ap. Athenaj. vi. p. 271. 
 
 The strangers called Tp6<f>ifioL, and the illegitimate sons of Spartans, whom 
 Xenophon mentions with culocry, as " having partaken in the honorable 
 training of the city," must probably have been introduced in this same way, 
 by private support from the rich (Xenoph. Hellen. v. 3, 9). The xenelasy 
 must have then become practically much relaxed, if not extinct. 
 
 » Strabo, viii. p. 362 ; Steph. Byz. AWeia. 
 
 Construing the vrord ^oXeig extensively, so as to include townships small 
 as well as considerable, this estimate is probably inferior to the truth ; since, 
 even during the deipressed times of modern Greece, a fraction of the ancieni 
 Laconia (including in that term Messenia) exhibited much more than one 
 
 hundred l)ourgs. 
 
 In reference merely to the territory called La Majjne, between Calamaia 
 in the Messenian gulf and Capo di Magna, the lower part of the peninsula 
 of Tienarus, see a curious letter, addressed to the Due de Nevers, in 1618, 
 (on occasion of a projected movement to libwate the Morea from the Turks, 
 and to insure to him the sovereignty of it, as descer lant of the Palaeologi,) 
 ky a coutideulial ai-eni whom he despatched thither. — M.Chateaurenaud, - 
 
 10 thhx it would include all the southern portion of Peloponn©. 
 BUS, Ar-.tm Thyrea, on the Argolic gulf, to the southern bank of 
 the river Nedon, in its course into the Ionian sea. But Laconia, 
 more strictly so called, was distinguished from Messenia, and 
 was understood to designate the portion of the above-mentioned 
 territory which lay to the east of Mount Taygetus. The con- 
 quest of Messenia by the Spartans we shall presently touch 
 upon ; but that of Laconia proper is very imperfectly narrated 
 to us. Down to the reign of Teleklus, as has been before re- 
 marked, Amykla3, Pharis, and Geronthra?, were still Achaean: 
 in the reign of that j)rince they were first conquered, and the 
 Aclueans either expelled or subjugated. It cannot be doubted 
 that Amyklai had been i)reviously a place of consequence : in 
 point of heroic antiquity and memorials, this city, as well as 
 Therapnae, seems to have surj)assed Sparta. And the war of 
 the Spartans against it is represented as a struggle of some mo- 
 ment, — indeed, in those times, the capture of any walled city 
 was tedious and difficult. Timomachus, an iEgeid from Thebes,' 
 
 who sends to liim " une sorte de tableau statistiquc du Magne, ou sont dnu- 
 mcre's 125 bourgs ou villages renfermans 4,913 feux, et pouvans fournir 10,- 
 00<) combattans, dont 4,000 arnie's, et 6,000 sans armes (between Calamata 
 and Capo di Magna)." (Me'moires de rAcade'mie des Inscriptions, tom. xv. 
 1842, p. 329. Me'moire de M. Bcrger Xivrey.) 
 
 This estimate is not far removed from that of Colonel Leake, towards the 
 lie^inning of the present century, who considers that there were then in 
 Mani (the same territory) one hundred and thirty towns and villages; and 
 this too in a state of society exceedingly disturbed and insecure, — where 
 private feuds and private towers, or pyrghi, for defence, were universal, 
 and in parts of which, Colonel Leake says, " I see men preparing die ground 
 for cotton, with a dagger and pistols at their girdles. This, it seems, is the 
 ordinary armor of the cultivator when there is no particular suspicion of 
 
 danger: the shepherd is almost always armed with a musket." " The 
 
 Maniotes reckon their population at thirty thousand, and their muskets at 
 ten thousand." (Leake, Travels in Morea, vol. i. ch. vii. pp. 243, 263-266.) 
 
 Now, under the dominion of Sparta, all Laconia doubtless enjoyed com- 
 plete internal security, so that the idea of the cultivator tilling his land ia 
 arms would be unheard of. Reasoning upon the basis of what has just beea 
 rtated about the Maniote population and number of townships, one hundred 
 r6?.e<f, for all Laconia, is a very moderate computation. 
 
 * Aristot. AaKuv. UoXireia, ap. Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vii. 18. 
 
 I Agree with M. Boeckh, that Pindar himself identifies this march of the 
 

 I* 
 
 It 
 
 Ih 
 
 420 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ftt the bead of a body of his countrymen, is said to ^lave ren- 
 dered essential service to the Spartans in the conquest of the 
 Achaeans of Amykl »> ; and the brave resistance of the latter was 
 commemorated by a monument erected to Zeus Tropaius, at 
 Sjiarta, whi<^h was j?till to be seen in the time of Pausanias.' 
 The Aehaeans of Pharis and Geronthnr, ahirmed by the fate of 
 Amykla^, are said to have surremh-red their towns with little or 
 m> resistance : after which the inhabitants of ail the three cities, 
 either wholly or in part, went into (?xile beyond sea, giving place 
 to colonists from Si)arta/^ From this time forward, according to 
 Pausanias, Araykhe continued as a village.3 But as the Amy- 
 kliian hoplites constituted a valuable jmrtion of the Spartan 
 army, it must hav« been numbered among the cities of the 
 Periaki, as one of the hundred;'* the distinction between a 
 dependent city and a village not being very strictly drawn. 
 The festival of the Ilyacinthia, celebrated at the great temple 
 of the Amykla^iin Apollo, was among the most solemn and 
 venerated in the Spartan calendar. 
 
 It was in the time of Alkamenes, the son of Teleklus, that 
 the Spartans conqucTed Helus, a maritime town on the left bank 
 of the Eurotas, and reduced its inhabitants to bondage, — from 
 whose name,^ according to various authors, the general title 
 Beiofs, l^longing to all the serfs of Laconia, was derived. But 
 of the conquest of the other towns of Laconia, — Gytheium, 
 Akria^, Tlk'jrapna\ etc, — or of the eastern land on the coast 
 of the Argolic gulf including Brtisia' and Epidaurus Limera. or 
 the island of Kythera, all whieh at one time belonged to the 
 Argeian confederacy, we have no accounts. 
 
 Scanty as our inibrmation is, it just enables us to make out a 
 progressive increase of force and dominion on the part of the 
 Spartans, resulting from the orgauization of Lykurgus. Of thia 
 
 jEjreids to Amyklae wii:h the ori^xinal Herakleid conquest of Peloponnesus 
 (Notae Criticae ad Pindtw. Pyth. v. 74, p. 479.) 
 
 » Pausan. iii. 2, 6 ; iii. 12, 7. * Pausan. iii. 22, 5. 
 
 * Paasan. iii. 19, 5. * Xenoph. Hellen. iv. 5, 11. 
 
 » Pausan. iii. 2, 7 ; iii. 20. 6. Strabo, viii. p. 36.3. 
 
 If it be true, as Pausanias states, that the Arjxeians aided Helus to re8ist^ 
 their ossistance must probablv have been piven by soa; perhaps from EfW* 
 iiTirn.s Limera, or Prasi«. when they forT»^*l part of the Arpeian fedenUioa 
 
 
 ' FIRST AND SECOND ME3SE:NIAN WARS. 
 
 421 
 
 progress, a farther manifestation is found, besides the conqueit 
 of the Aehaeans in the south by Teleklus and Alkamenes, in 
 their successful opposition to the great power of PheidoD the 
 Argeian, related in a previous chapter. We now approach the 
 long and arduous etforts by which they accomplished the Bvh 
 jugation of their brethren the Messenian Dorians. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 FIRST AND SECOND MESSENIAN WARS. 
 
 That there were two long contests between the Lacedaemo- 
 nians and Messenians, and that in both the former were com- 
 pletely victorious, is a fact sufficiently attested. And if we could 
 trust the statements in Pausanias, — our chief and almost only 
 authority on the subject, — we should be in a situation to recount 
 the history of both these wars in considerable detail. But unfor- 
 tunately, the incidents narrated in that writer have been gathered 
 from sources which are, even by his own admission, undeserving 
 of credit, — from Rhianus, the poet of Bene in Krete, who had 
 composed an epic poem on Aristomenes and the second Messe- 
 nian war, about b. c. 220, — and from Myron of Priene, a prose 
 author whose date is not exactly known, but belonging to the 
 Alexandrine age, and not earlier tlian the third century before 
 the Christian era. From Rhianus, we have no right to expect 
 trustworthy information, while the accuracy of Myron is much 
 depreciated by Pausanias himself, — on some points even too 
 much, as wUl presently be shown. But apart from the mental 
 habits either of the prose writer or the poet, it does not seem that 
 any good means of knowledge were open to either of them, ex- 
 cept the poems of Tyrtaeus, which we are by no means sure that 
 they ever consulted. The account of the two wars, extracted from 
 these two authors by Pausanias, is a string of tableaux, several 
 of them, indeed, highly poetical, but destitute of historical crhet* 
 
i 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 
 ■ !■ 
 
 492 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 ence or sufficiency: and O. Muller has justly observed, that 
 «absolut3ly no reason is given in them for the subjection of Mes- 
 senia."! They are accounts unworthy of being transcribed in 
 detail into the pages of genuine history, nor can we pretend to 
 do anytliing more than verify a few leading foots of the war.^ 
 
 The poet Tyrtaeus was himself engaged on the side of the 
 Spartans in the s*:cond war, and it is from him that we learn the 
 few indisputable facts respecting both the first and the second. 
 If the Messenians had never been reestablished in Peloponnesus, 
 we should probably never have heard any farther details respect- 
 ing these early contests. That reestablishment, together with 
 the first foundation of the city called Messene on Mount Ithome, 
 was among the caj.ital wounds inflicted on Sparta by Epamei- 
 nondas, in the year b. c. 369, — between three hundred and two 
 hundred and fifty y«iars after the conclusion of the second Messe- 
 Dian war. The descendants of the old Messenians, who had 
 remained for so long a period without any fixed position in Greece, 
 were incorporated in the new city, together with various Helots 
 and miscellaneous settlers who had no claim to a similar geneal 
 (try. The gods and heroes of the Messenian race were i-everen- 
 lially invoked at tikis great ceremony, especially the great Hero 
 Aristomenes;2 and the site of Mount Ithome, the ardor of the 
 newly established citizens, the hatred and api>rehension of Sparta, 
 operating as a powerful stimulus to the creation and multiplica- 
 tion of what are called traditions, sufficed to expand the few facts 
 known respecting the struggles of the old Messenians into a varie- 
 ty of details. In almost all these stories we discover a coloring 
 unfavorable to Sparta, contrasting forcibly witli the account given 
 by Isokrates, in his Discourse called Archidamus, wherein we 
 
 ' History of the Dorians, i. 7, 10 (note). It .seems that Diodorus had 
 given i\ history of tlie Messenian wars in considerable detail, if we may 
 judge from a fragment of the last seventh book, containing the debate be- 
 tween Kleonnis and Aristomenes. Very probably it was taken from Ephorus, 
 — though this we do not know. 
 
 For the statements of Pausanias respecting Myron and Rhianus, see iv. 6. 
 Besides Myron and Rhianus, however, he seems to have received oral state- 
 ments from contemporiiry Messenians and Lacedaemonians ; at least on sooM 
 occa.sions he states and contrasts the two contradictory stories (iv. 4, 4; w 
 
 », I). 
 • Vaiisan. iv. 27, 2-3 ; Diodor. xv. 77. 
 
 FIRST AND SECOND MESSENIAN WAKS. 
 
 428 
 
 read the view which a Spartan might take of the ancient con- 
 quests of his forefathers. But a clear proof that these Messe* 
 nian stories had no real ba<is of tradition, is shown in the contra- 
 dictory statements respecting the principal Hero Aristomenes ; 
 for some place him in the first, others in the second, of the two 
 wars. Diodorus and Myron both placed him in the first ; Rhia- 
 nus, in the second. Though Pausanias gives it as his opinion 
 that the account of the latter is preferable, and that Aristomenei 
 really belongs to the second Messenian war, it appears to mt 
 that the one statement is as much worthy of belief as the other, 
 and that there is no sufficient evidence for deciding between 
 them, — a conclusion which is substantially the same with that 
 of Wesseling, who thinks that there were two persons named 
 Aristomenes, one in the lirst and one in the second war.^ This 
 inextricable confusion respecting the greatest name in Messenian 
 antiquity, shows how little any genuine stream of tradition can 
 here be recognized. 
 
 Pausanias states the first Messenian war as beginning in B. c. 
 743 and lasting till b. c. 724, — the second, as beginning in b. c. 
 685 and lasting till b. c. CG8. Neither of these dates rest upon 
 
 ' See Diodor. Fragm. lib. viii. vol. iv. p. 30 : in his brief summary of 
 Messenian events (xv. 66), he represents it as a matter on which authorf 
 differed, whether Aristomenes belonged to the first or second war. Clcmeng 
 Alexand. (Prot. p 36) places him in the Jirst, the same as Myron, by men- 
 tioning him as having killed Theopompus. 
 
 Wesseling observes (ad Diod. I c ), " Duo fuerunt Aristomenes, uterque 
 :n Messeniorum contra 8partanos bello illustrissimus, alter posteriore, priore 
 alter bello.'* 
 
 Unless this duplication of homonymous persons can be shown to ho 
 probable, by some collateral evidence, I consider it only as tantamount to 
 a confession, that the difficulty is insoluble. 
 
 Pausanias is reserved in his manner of giving judgment, — 6 fxevroi 'Ap«7- 
 TOfievfjc 66^^ ye kfi^ yeyov^v eTri tov TrnAiijov tov v(tte/wv {'iv.6). Mid- 
 ler (Dorians, i. 7, 9) goes much too far when he affirms that the statement 
 of Myron was " in the teeth of all tradition." Miiller states incorrectly the 
 :Uation from Plutarch, Agis, c. 21 (see his Note h). Plutarch there sayg 
 not-ung about 7\(rt(eu8: he says that the Messenians affirmed that their here 
 Aristomenes had Idtled the Spartan king Theopompus, whereas the Laced» 
 monians said, that he had only wounded the king. According to both a4> 
 counts, then, it would appear that Aristomenes belonged to the Jirst Me.^M» 
 !Uan war, not to the second. 
 
4m 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 li 
 
 I* 
 
 
 any assignable jDOsitive authoritj ; but the time aasigned to tbfi 
 first war" seems probable, while that of the second is apparently 
 too early. Tyrtaeus authenticates both the duration of the first 
 war, twenty yciirs, and the eminent services rendered in it by 
 the 'spartan king Theopompus.* He .says, moreover, speaking 
 during the seccmd war, " the fathers of our fathers conquered 
 Mess^ne;" thus loosely indicating tlie relative dates of the two. 
 
 The Spartans (as we learn Irom Isokrates, whose words date 
 from a time when the city of Me.<sene was only a recent founda- 
 tion) protessed to have seized the territory, partly in revenge for 
 the impiety of the Messenians in killing their own king, the Ilera- 
 kleid Kresphontes, whose relative had appealed to S|)arta for aid, 
 — partly by sentence of the Delphian oracle. Such were the 
 causes which had induced them iirst tu invade the country, and 
 they had conquered it after a struggle of twenty yeai-s."^ The 
 Lacedaemonian explanations, as given in Fausanias, seem for the 
 most part to be counter-statements arranged after the time when 
 the Messenian version, evidently the interesting and popular 
 account, had become cii'culated. 
 
 It has already been stated that the Lacediemonians and Mes- 
 senians had a loint border temple and sacritiee in honor of Arte- 
 mis Limnatis, dating from the earliest times of their establish- 
 ment in Peloponnesus. The site of this temple, near the upper 
 course of the over Nedon, in the mountainous territory north-east 
 of Kalamata, but west of the highest ridge of Taygetus, has 
 recently been exactly verified, — and it se ems in these early day s 
 
 » Tvrtiiiu^ Fra-.n. 6, Gaisford. But Tyi taeus ou-ht not to be understood 
 to affirm distinctly (as Pausanias, Mr. Clinton, and Muller, all think) that 
 Theopompus survived and put a close to the war : his language mig^* 
 consist with the supposition that Theopompus had been slain in the war, •- 
 •Ov 6ia (Theopompus). iAeaai]VTiv elXofitv evpvxopov. 
 
 For we surely might be authorized in saying — " It was throu^.. Epa- 
 ineinondas that the Spartans were conquered and humbled ; or it was through 
 Lord Nelson that the French fleet was destroyed in the last war," Ihough 
 both of them perished in the accomplishment 
 
 Tyrtasus, ther.;fore, does not contradict the assertion, that Theopompui 
 was slain by Aristomenes, nor can he be cited as a witness to prove thai 
 Aristomenes did not live during the Jl$t Messenian war ; which is the pur 
 for which Fausanias quotes him (iv 6). 
 
 'laokrates (Archidamus), Or. vi. pp. 121-122. 
 
 ■I 
 
 HOSTILITIES COMMENCED BY THE SPABTANS. 
 
 129 
 
 to have belonged to Sparta. That the quarrel began at one of 
 these border sacrifices was the statement of both parties, Laced»- 
 monians and Messenians. According to the latter, the Lacedse- 
 monian king Teleklus laid a snare for the Messenians, by dressing 
 up some youthful Spai-tans as virgins, and giving them daggers; 
 whereu|>on a contest ensued, in which the Spartans were worsted 
 and Teleklus slain. That Teleklus was slain at the temple bj 
 the Messenians, was also the account of the Spartans, — but thejr 
 ftilirined that he was slain in attempting to defend some young 
 Liiceda^monian maidens, who were sacrificing at the temple, against 
 outrageous violence from the Messenian youth.1 In spite of the 
 death of this king, however, the war did not actually break out 
 
 ' Strabo (vi. p. 257) gives a similar account of the sacrilege and murder- 
 ous conduct of the Messenian youth at the temple of Artemis Limnatis. 
 His version, substantially agreeing with that of the Lacedtemonians, seemt 
 to be borrowed from Antiochus, the contemporary of Thucydid^s, and is 
 therefore earlier than the foundation of Messene by Epamcinondas, from 
 which event the philo-Messenian stiitements tjike their rise. Antiochus, writ- 
 ing during the plenitude of Lacedaemonian power, would naturally look 
 upon the Messenians as irretrievably prostrate, and the impiety here nar^ 
 rated would in his mind be the natural cause why the divine judgmenti 
 overtook them. Ephorus gives a similar account (ap. Strabo. vi. p. 280). 
 
 Compare Heraklcides Ponticus (ad calccm Cragii De Hop. Laced, p. 528) 
 and Ju5tin, iii. 4. 
 
 The possession of this temple of Artemis Limnatis, — and of the Ager 
 Dcntheliates, the district in which it was situated, — was a subject of con 
 ^tant dispute between the Laced;enionians and Messenians after the founda- 
 lion of the city of Messene, even down to the time of the Roman emperor 
 Tiberius (Tacit. Annal. iv. 43). See Stephan. Byz. v. Ae/.'&uvioL •, Pausaa 
 iii. 2, 6; iv. 4, 2; iv. 31, 3. Strabo, viii. p. 362. 
 
 From the situation of the temple of Artemis Limnatis, and the description 
 of the Ager Dcntheliates, see Professor Ross, Reisen im Peloponnes. i. pp. 5- 
 11. He discovered two boundary-stones with inscriptions, dating from the 
 time of the early Roman emperors, marking the confines of Laccdsemon and 
 Messene; both on the line of the highest ridge of Taygetus, where the wateri 
 separate ea.st and west, and considerably to the eastward of the temple of 
 Artemis Limnatis, so that at that time the Ager Dentheliates was considered 
 a part of Messenia. 
 
 I now tind that Colonel Leake (Pcluponnesiaca, p. 181) regards these 
 Inscriptions, discovered by Professor Ross, as not proving that the temple oi 
 Artemis Limnatis was situated near the spot where they were found. Hif 
 authority weighs much with me on such a point though the argument* which 
 he here employs do not seem to me c(/nclusivv* 
 
* 
 
 426 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECL. 
 
 i| 
 
 
 ontil some little tine after, when Alkamenes and TheopomjHM 
 were kings at Sparta, and Antiochus and Androkles, sons of Phin- 
 tas, kings of Messenia. The immediate cause of it was a private 
 altercation between the Messenian Polychares (victor ar the fourth 
 Olympiad, b. c. 764) and the Spartan Eua^phnus. Polychares, 
 having been grossly injured by Eu^phnus, and his claim for 
 redress having been rejected at Sparta, took revenge by aggres- 
 sions upon other Lacedaemonians ; the Messenians refused to give 
 him up, though one of the two kings, Androkles, strongly insisted 
 u})on doing so, and maintained his opinion so earnestly against 
 the opposite sense of the majority and of his brother Antiochus, 
 that a tumult arose, and he was slain. The Laceda?monians, 
 now resolving ui>on war, struck the first blow without any formal 
 declaration, by surprising the border town of Amiiheia, and put- 
 ting its defenders to the sword. They farther overran the Messe- 
 nian territory, and attacked some other towns, but without success. 
 Euphaes, who had now succeeded his father Antiochus as king 
 of Messenia, summoned the forces of the country and carried on 
 the war against them w ith energy and boldness. For the first 
 four years of the war, the I.acedirnionians made no i)rogress, and 
 even incurred the ridicule of the old men of rtieir nation as faint- 
 hearted warrior? : in the fifth year, however, they undertook a 
 more vigorous irvasion, under their two kings, Theopompus and 
 Polydorus, who were met by Euphaes with the full force of the 
 Messenians. A desperate battle ensued, in wliich it does not 
 Beem that either side gained much advantage : nevertheless, the 
 Messenians found themselves so much enfeebled by it, that they 
 were forced to take refuge on the fortified mountain of Ithomg, 
 ibandoning the rest of tlie country. In their distress, they sent 
 to solicit counsel and protection from Delphi, but their messenger 
 brought back the appalling answer tliat a virgin, of the royal 
 race of ^pytus, must be sacrificed for their salvation : in the 
 tragic scene which ensues, Aristodemus puts to death his own 
 daughter, yet without satisfying the exigencies of the oracle. The 
 war still continued, and in the thirteenth year of it another hard- 
 fought battle took place, in which the brave Euphae*^ was slain, 
 but the result wiis agam indecisive. Aristodemus, being elected 
 king in hi« place, prosecuted the war strenuously : the fifth year 
 if his reign is signalized by a third general battle, wherein the 
 
 A 
 
 lit 
 
 END or THE tTRST WAR. 
 
 427 
 
 Corinthians assist the Spartans, and the Arcadians and Sikyon- 
 ians are on the side of Messenia ; the victory is here decisive 
 on the side of Aristodemus, and the Lacedemonians are driven 
 back into their own territory.i It was now their turn to send 
 envoys and ask advice from the Delphian oracle ; while the re- 
 maining events of the war exhibit a series, partly of stratagems 
 to fulfil the injunctions of the priestess, — partly of prodigies in 
 which the divine wrath is manifested against the Messenians. 
 The king Aristodemus, agonized with the thought that he has 
 slain his own daughter without saving his country, puts an end 
 to his own life.2 In the twentieth year of the war, the Messe- 
 nians abandoned Ithome, which the Lacedaemonians razed to the 
 ground : the rest of the country being speedily conquered, such 
 of the inhabitants as did not flee either to Arcadia or to Eleusis, 
 were reduced to complete submission. 
 
 Such is the abridgment of what Pausanias^ gives as the nar- 
 rative of the first Messenian war. Most of his details bear the 
 evident stamp of mere late romance ; and it will easily be seen 
 that the sequence of events presents no plausible explanation of 
 that which is really indubitable, -- the result. The twenty years' 
 war, and the final abandonment of Ithome, is attested by Tyrtiruii 
 beyond all doubt, as well as the harsh treatment of the con- 
 quered. " Like asses, worn down by heavy burdens,"^ says the 
 
 ' It is, perhaps, to this occasion that the story of the Epeunakti. in 
 Theopompus, referred (ap. Athenae. vi. p. 271), — Helots adopted into the 
 Bleeping-place of their masters, who had been slain in the war, and Avho were 
 subsequently enfranchised. 
 
 The story of the Partheniae, obscure and unintelligible as it is, belongs to 
 the foundation of the colony of Taras, or Tarentum (Strabo, vi. p 279) 
 
 ■•' See Plutarch, De Superstitione, p. 168. 
 
 ^ See Pausan. iv. 6-14. 
 
 An elaborate discussion is to be seen in Manso's Sparta, on the authorities 
 whom Pausanias has followed in his History of the Messenia»i Wars, 18te 
 Beilage, torn. ii. p. 264. 
 
 ** It would evidently be folly (he observes, p. 270), to suppose that in the 
 history of the Messenian wars, as Pausanias lays them before us, we possesi 
 the tnte history of these events." 
 
 * Tyrtseus, Fragm. .5, 6 (Schneidewin). 
 
 C. F. Hermann conceives the treatment of the Messenians atter the first 
 '. as mild, in comparison with what it became after the second iL^l^iimA 
 
'! 
 
 » 
 
 \i 
 
 428 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Spartan po«t, « they were compelled to make over to their ma* 
 ters an entire half of the produce of their fitlds, and to come in 
 ^Ui garb of wo€ to Sparta, themselves and their wives, as mourn, 
 ers at the decease of the kin^s and princij.al persons." The 
 revolt of their descendants against a yoke so oppressive, goes 
 by the name of the second Mfssenian war. 
 
 Had we po-;s('ss<'d tlie account of the first Messenian war as 
 given by Myron imd Dio<ionis, it would evidently have been 
 very ditferent from the iiho\o, because they included Aristome- 
 nes in it, and to him the leadinn; parts would be assigned. As 
 the narrative now stands in Pausanias, we are not introduced to 
 that great M(;ssenian hero, — the Achilles of the epic of Rhi- 
 anus, ' — until the second war, in which his gigantic proportions 
 stand prominently forward. He is the great champion of his 
 country in the three battles which are represented as takinj^ 
 place during this war: the first, with indecisive result, at Dera' ; 
 the second, °a signal victory on the part of the Messenians, at the 
 Boar's Grave ; the third, an equally signal defeat, in consequence 
 of the traitoi-ous flight of Aristokrates, king of the Arcadian 
 Orchomenus, who, ostensibly embracing the alliance of the Mp- 
 senians, had received bribes from Sparta. Thrice did Aris- 
 tomenes sacrifice to Zeus Ithomates the sacrifice called Heka- 
 tomphonia,2 reserved for those who had slain with their own 
 hands a hundred enemies in battle. At the head of a chosen 
 band, he canied his incursions more than once into the heart of 
 the Lacedremimian territory, surprised Arayklae and Pharis, an<l 
 even penetrated by night into the imfortified precinct of Sparta 
 itself, where he suspended his shield, as a token of defiance, in 
 the temple of Athene Chalkioekus. Thrice was he taken pris- 
 oner, but on two occasions inarvellously escaped before he could 
 be conveyed to Sparta: the third occasion was more fatal, and 
 he was cast by order of the Spartans into the Keadas, a deep, 
 rocky cavity in Mount Taygetus, into which it was their habit to 
 precipitate criminals. But even in this emergency the divine 
 
 der Griech. StuatsalterthQmer, sect 31 ), a auDnosidon which the emptiaae 
 words of Tyrtseus render inadmissible. 
 
 * This is the express comparison introduced bv Paasaiuaa. w. $. %. 
 ^utanh, Sept. Sapient. Convivium. p. 159. 
 
 SECOND MESSENIAN WAR. 
 
 429 
 
 «di trto not v^ilhheld from him. While the fifty Messeniam 
 who shared his punisnrnent, were all killed by the shock he 
 alone was both Svspported by the gods so bs to reach the bottom 
 unhurt, and enabled to find an unexpected means of escape. 
 For when, abandoning all hope, he had wrapped him^^elf up in his 
 cloak to die, he perceived a fox creeping about among the dead 
 bodies : waiting unt31 the animal approached him, he grasped it« 
 tail, defending himfii^lf from its bites as well as he could by 
 means of his cloak ; and being thus enabled to find the aperture 
 by which the fox had entered, enlarged it eutticiently for crawl- 
 ing out himself. To the surprise both of friends and enemies, 
 he again appeared, alive and vigorous, at Eira. That fortified 
 mountain on the banks of the river Nedon, and near the Ionian 
 sea, had been occupief: by the Messenians, after the battle in 
 which they hod been ba rayed by Aristokrates, the Arcadian ; it 
 was there that they had concentrated their whole force, as in the 
 former war at Ithome, abandoning the rest of the country. 
 Under the conduct of Ai istomenes, assisted by the prophet Theo- 
 klus, they maintained this strong position for eleven years. Ai 
 length, they were compelled to abandon it ; but, as in the case of 
 Ithome, the final determining circumstances are represented to 
 have been, not any superiority of bravery or organization on the 
 part of the Lacedaemonians, but treacherous betrayal and strata- 
 gem, seconding the fatal decree of the gods. Unable to main- 
 tain Eira longer, Aristomenes, with his sons, and a body of his 
 countrymen, forced his way through the assailants, and quitted 
 the country, — some of them retiring to Arcadia and Eiis, and 
 finally migrating to Rhegium. He himself passed the remaii*. 
 der of his days in Rhodes, where he dwelt along with his son-in- 
 law, Damagetus, the ancestor of the noble Rhodian family, 
 called the Diagorids, cekbrpted for its numerous Olympic 
 victories. 
 
 ' Pausan. iv. 18, 4. 'ApctTTouivvP Ai ^f re rd uUa »ewv r^r, Kai S^ xal rdrt 
 
 Plutarch (De Herodot Ma'i^T7iv»\ p. 856) states that Hcrodotas had me». 
 tioned AristomcDes hh havinflr bwu made prisoner by the Laced leraoniaiii . 
 bat Plutarch mwt here have been deceived by his memory, for HeiodoCW 
 ioe« not meatWa AvistcptieBes. 
 
430 
 
 HJ STORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Such are th(j main features of what Pausanias callsi the 
 iecond Messenian war, or of what ought rather to be called 
 the Aristomeneis of the poet Khianus. That after the fouiida- 
 tiou of Messene, and the recall of the exiles hy Ei)ameinoiida , 
 favor and credence was found for many tah-s respecting the 
 prowess of the ancient hero whom they invoked'^ in their liba- 
 tion.>, — tales well calculated to interest the fancy, to vivify the 
 patriotism, and to intlarae the anti-Spartan anti[)athies, of the new 
 inhabitants, — there can be little doubt. And the Messenian 
 maidens of that day may well have sung, in their public proces- 
 fciunal sacritices,Miow "Arrstomenes pursued the Hying Laceduc 
 monians down to the mid-plain of Stenyklerus, and up to the 
 very summit of the mountain." From such stories, traditions 
 they ought not lo be denominated, Rliianus may doubtless have 
 borrowed ; but if i)roof were wanting to show how completely 
 lie looked at his materials from the point of view of the pwn, 
 and not from tliat of the historian, we should find it in tlte re- 
 markable fact noticed by Pausanias. Khianus represented Leo- 
 tychides as having been king of Sparta during the second Mes- 
 senian war ; now Leotychides, as Pausanias observes, did nut 
 reign until near a century and a half afterwards, during the 
 Persian invasion.^ ^ 
 
 ' The iiunutivc in Pausanias, iv. 15-24. 
 
 Acconiing to an incidental notice in Herodotus, the Samians affirmed ihal 
 they had aided Laccdaemon in war against Messene, — at what period we do 
 not know (Herodot. iii. 56). 
 
 * Tovg de MeaaTjviov^ oida avrbc tnl rale airovdalc 'Apiaroutvnv ^iKOfirj- 
 dovg ^aAouvraf (Ptiusan. ii. 14, 5). The practice still continued in his time. 
 
 Compare, also, I'ausan. iv. 27, 3 ; iv. 32, 3-4. 
 
 » Pausanias heard the song himself (iv. 16, 4)—'E7raEyov ^a/xa rd koI et 
 ifftd^ en qdofievov : — 
 
 'Ef re fJteaov nidiov IrevvKlnfuov Ir r' bpo^ uKf)ov 
 EfTTcr' 'ApLaTOfitvTj^ Toi^ XaKedaLfiovioLq. 
 According to one story, the Lacedaemonians were said to have got posses- 
 lion of the^erson of AristomenOs, and killed him : they found in him a 
 hairy heart (Steph. Byz. v. WvdavLa). 
 
 * Pausan. iv. 15, 1. 
 
 Perhaps Leotychides was king during the last revolt of the Helots, or Mes- 
 •enians. in 464 b. c, which is called the third Messenian war. He seems to 
 have Vwen then in exile, in consequence of his venality during the Thessalian 
 •xpedition, — but not yet dead (Herodot. vi. 72J. Of the reality of whal 
 
 iiKT.EUS. 
 
 4^1 
 
 To the great champion of Messenia, during this war we hut 
 appose, on the side of Sparta, another remarkable person, ij, 
 itnkmg as a character of romance but more interesting in 
 many w-ays, to the historian, - 1 mean, the poet TyrUPuI I 
 native of Aphidnae in Attica, an inestimable ally of the LaceL 
 momans during most part of this second struggle. According 
 o a story, - which, however, has the air partly of a boast of 
 the later Attic orators, -the Spartans, disheartened at the first 
 successes of the Messenians, consulted the Delphian oracle and 
 were directed to ask tor a leader from Athens. The Athenians 
 complied by sending Tyrtjeus, whom Pausanias and Justin 
 represent as a lame man and a schoolmaster, despatched with 
 a view of nominally obeying the oracle, and yet rendering no 
 real assistance.' This seems to be a coloring put upon^the 
 s ory by later writers, but the intervention of the Athenians in 
 the matter, m any way, deserves little credit.2 It seems more 
 probable that the legendary connection of the Dioskuri with 
 Aphidn^e, celebrated at or near that time by the poet Alkman 
 brought about, through the Delphian oracle, the presence of the' 
 Aphidnjean poet at Sparta. Respecting the lameness of Tyr- 
 tieus, we can say nothing: but that he was a schoolmaster (if we 
 are constrained to employ an unsuitable term) is highly probable 
 — for in that day, minstrels, who composed and sung poems' 
 w ere the only persons from whom the y outh received any men-' 
 
 Mr. Clinton calls the third Messenian war, in 490 b. c, I see no adequate 
 I.roof (see Fast. Hell. vol. i. p. 257). ^ 
 
 The poem of Khianus was entitled U,aar]vcaKa. He also composed Qea- 
 oaX^Ku, Hxm.a, 'A^a^.i. See the Fragments, - they are very few,- iu 
 Duntzer's Collection, pp. 67-77. 
 
 He seems to have mentioned Nikoteleia, the mother of AristomenSs iYx 
 ii. p. 73) : compare Pausan. iv. 14, 5. 
 
 I may remark, tJiat Pausanias, throughout his account of the second Mes- 
 senian war, names king Anaxander as leading the Lacediemonian troops • 
 but he has no authority for so doing, at we see by iv. 15, 1. It is a ZA 
 calculation of his own, from the Tzaripuv narepec of Tyrt«us 
 
 ' Fausan. iv. 15, 3 ; Justin, iii. 5, 4. Compare Plato, Legg. ii. p. 630 
 D.odor. XV. 66 ; Lycurg. cont. Leokrat. p. 162. Philochorus and KaLthc' 
 n^8 also represented h.m as a native (f Aphidn* in Attica, which StraU 
 controverts upon slender grounds (viii. p. 362) ; Philochor. Fr. 56 (Didot) 
 
 Piatarch, Theseus, c. 33; Pausan i.41,5; Welcker, AlkmwL FrJtm 
 p. 80. 
 
HISIORY OP OHEECE. 
 
 Ud training. Moreover, his sway over the youthful mind is p« 
 Sculariy noted in the compliment paid to him, in after^days, by 
 tog Llnidaa: "Tyrta^us was an adept in tickling the souls of 
 TOuih'i We see enough to satisfy us that he was by birth a 
 rtranser, though he became a Spartan by the subsequent recom- 
 pense of citizenshiv- conferred upon him, _ that he was sen 
 trough the Delphian oracle, - that he was an .mpress.ve a.>d 
 efficacious minstrel, and that he had, moreover sagac.ty enough 
 to employ his talents for present purposes and diverse need.; 
 being able, not merely to reanimate the languishmg courage ol 
 Sriafflei warrior, but also to soothe the discontents ol the 
 mutinous. That his strains, which long maintamed un<hm.mshed 
 Zlrity among . he Spartans,'^ contributed much to detennme 
 S^ uUinlte issue of this war, there is no re^on to.<ioubt^ -- 
 his name the only one to attest the susoepttbdUy ot the Spartan 
 mind in that day towards music and poetry. The farst esl^bh.h^ 
 ment of the Kameian festival, with its mus.o^ oompeUtK«, W 
 Sparta, falls during the period assigned by Pausan.as to the 
 rS^Messenian war: the Lesbian harper, Terpander, who 
 puned the first recorded prize at this solemnity, ts affirmed to 
 tare been sent for by the Spartans pursuant to a mandate from 
 the Delphian oracle, and to have been the means ol appeasmg 
 a sedition. In Uke manner, the Kretan Thaletas was tnv.ted 
 thither during a pestilence, which his ar^ as it is P^t^"-;^- !»"- 
 .ributed to heal (about 020 B.C.); ^d/"^'";"''/7,^"'^^' 
 PolymiKtstus, and Sakada., all foreigners by b.rth, found favora- 
 ble reception, and acquired ,«>pularity, by their mus.c and poetrj^ 
 With tte exception of Sakadas, who i» a lutle lat^^'^' ^;- 
 names fall in the same century as Tyrtieus, between 660 b c_ - 
 610 B C. The fashion which the Spartan mus.c continued tor 
 , long time to maintain, is ascribed chieriy tx> the genius of 
 
 ■^TrSning in which a Spartan P^-\^\^\^'%'^, 
 exercises wariike, social, and religious, blended ^-Sf-^'^^'^ 
 the indiviJnal, strengthened by gjranast.cs, went through hu 
 
 . Philochoru8, Fr»K. 56, ed. Didot ; Lycargas cont. Leokrat p. 1». 
 ' See Plutarch, De Mas c4, pp. 1134, 1142, 1146 
 
 o«An7.AN MUSICAL SfSCEPTIBILITV. 
 
 439 
 
 ,v.unfal lessons of fatigue, endurance, and a-<rre«ior ih. :■ 
 rens collectively were kent in tl.» . . ■'"f^^'S'or . — the ctli- 
 
 and regulated Lvcr„ent' ." r;;^ m ^eh' "' T'^'T^' 
 dance, and in the social pn>oe.sLn M .' '" "" "'^'^'"' 
 
 -fy employed to direct Z^Z.^^:^ l^^ S";^ : 
 
 Spartan permitted toli.e, 1^ d L,> cia 1,H h"''''"""" "' " 
 
 of artistical merit and s„.«.rL 7 T^^' "'°"«'' destitute 
 -ted combinat oi, ra^/X'Thtw 'r^^^^^ ^'"°" •""""'- 
 
 acter; it wrought 'mud To e,t'ntCnT ''''?'" ^•''"'■- 
 resolutinns nf .1... 1 ■ I'°'^*^"""y on (he impulses and 
 
 resolutions ot tlie hearers, though it tickl«H tho ^„- i 
 fullv than »i.» „„• .c " ""^'"ea the ear less grate- 
 
 tuny, tJian the scientific compositions of after-dav«. vZ.i 
 each part cular style of mu,i,.Wi •. "' """^"^ a^ys. farther, 
 effect. — the Phrv^ music had its own appropriate mental 
 
 Slus • .L ^^^ ""^' '™P""'^ » '^"'' »"«! maddonin. 
 rl"r. ' ^"''" ""^"^ '""^"^ a *«"led and dcliber-.te 
 
 resolution, exempt alike from the des,K>ndin.T and from , .n^r 
 |>e.uous sentiment... What is called {he IWian mo^se ms ,o 
 ttmVfph' "" Tr ''"^'' '""''' - eontnulir-ti:; ™ ,J 
 
 whLh^r'first^'" '"'• ."•™l"''«d only in Uter times, with 
 « hich the firs Grecian musicians became convereant. It nrob- 
 ably acquu-ed lU title of Dorian from the musical celeb i.y of 
 
 AC .*ans as to the Spartans and Argeians. And the marked 
 
 eMucal effects, produced both by the dorian and the Pi™;!.; 
 
 »^e in ancient times, are facts perfectly well-at.ested, howeC 
 
 •^CMlt^heyma^^beu^plai,^^^ any general theory of mu.ic. 
 
 ' Thucyd. V. 69 ; Xenoph. ll^i^H^Zl^. 
 
 Oee the treatise of Platarch Dc Mnci..^ .,, • 
 etc- .11 T, ii.li V, .° ";"* '"''■*"-^' passim, especially c. 17,p.ll36 
 
 «iJio: f p oX Trrof' f "^ '""^'' "^'""^ '^y «• »-'-•» •■- 
 
 wMuuu Ol i-iDOar, IS full of instnjcuon upon thLi as wpII n« ..r^r, «n *k 
 points connected wi.h the Grecian music (see Ub il c Jp J 
 
434 
 
 lilSTORY OF GREFCE. 
 
 That the impiession produced by Tyrtii^us at Sparta, thrre 
 fore with his martial music, and emphatic exhortations to bravery 
 in the field, as well as union at home, should have been very con- 
 .iderable, is perfectly consistent with the character both of the age 
 and of the people; especially, as lie is represented to have ap- 
 IMjared pursuant to the injunction of the Delphian oracle. From 
 Ihc scanty fragments remaining to us of his elegies and anap^sts, 
 however, we can satisfy ourselves only of two tacts: first, that 
 the war was long, obstinately contested, and dange.vus to Sparta 
 ,Ls well as to the Messenians ; next, that other parties m Pelo- 
 ponnesus took part on both sides, especially on the side ol .he 
 M..senians. So frequent and harassing were the aggressions ot 
 the latter upon the Spartan territory, that a large portion of the 
 border land wa. left uncultivated: scarcity ensued, and the pio- 
 prietors of the deserted farms, driven to despair, pressed tor a re- 
 division of the landed property in the state. It was in appeasing 
 these discontents that the poem of Tyrtauis, called Eunomia, 
 u Lecal order," ^^-.^ found signally beneficial.^ It seems certain 
 that I considerable portion of the Arcadians, together with the 
 Pisata. and the Triphylians, took part with the Messenians ; 
 there are also some statements numbering the Eleians among 
 their allies, but this appears not probable. The state ot the 
 case rather seems to have been, that the old quarrel between he 
 Eleians and the Pisata-, respecting the right to preside at the 
 Olympic games, which had already bur.t forth dunng he pre- 
 ceding century, in the reign of the Argeian Pheidon, stdl con- 
 Luel UnwiUing dependents of Elis, the Pisat. and Tripli);- 
 lians took part with the subject Messenians, while the ma.teis 
 at Elis and Sparta made common cause, as they ha.1 before done 
 against PheidcVn.^i PantaleOn, king of Pisa, revolting from Eli., 
 acted as commander of his countrymen in co:>peration with the 
 Messenians; and he is farther noted for having at the period 
 Of the 34th Olvmpiad (r>44 b. c), marched a body of troop, to 
 Olympia, and thus dispossessed the Eleians, on that occasion 
 Of the presidency : that particular festival, - as well as the 8tb 
 
 •Paosan. vi. 12, 2; Strabo vui. p. 355, where tne i^ ar ^.^ 
 netn the Pyhans of Tryphylij 
 Vol. 2 1-^ 
 
 1>ATE OF THE SECOND WAR. 
 
 43^ 
 
 Olympiad, in which Pheidon interfered, — and the 104th Olym. 
 piad, in which the Arcadians marched in, — were always marked 
 on the Eleian register as non-Olympiads, or informal celebra- 
 tions. We may reasonably connect this temporary triumph of 
 the Pisatans with the Messenian war, inasmuch as Ihey were no 
 match for the Eleians single-handed, while the fraternity of 
 Sparta with Ehs is in perfect harmony with the scheme of 
 Peloponnesian politics which we have observed as prevalent 
 nen before and during the days of Pheidon.i The second 
 
 ' Respecting the position of the Eleians and Pisatae during the second 
 Messenian war, there is confusion in the different statements : as they can 
 not all be reconciled, we are compelled to make a choice. 
 
 That the Eleians were allies of Sparta, and the Pisatans of Messenia, and 
 that the contests of Sparta and Messenia were mixed up with those of Elis 
 and Pisa about the agonothesia of the Olympic games, is conformable to one 
 distinct statement of Strabo (viii. pp. 355, 358), and to the passage in Phavori- 
 nus V. Auyetacy and is, moreover, indirectly sustained by the view given in 
 Pausanias respecting the relations between Elis and Pisa (vi. 22, 2), whercbv 
 It clearly appears that the agonothesia was a matter of standing dispute 
 between the two, until the Pisatans were finally crushed by the Eleians in 
 the time of Pyrrhus, son of Pantaleon. Farther, this same view is really 
 conformable to another passage in Strabo, which, as now printed, appears 
 to contradict it, but which is recognized by Mailer and others as needing 
 correction, though the correction which they propose seems to me not the 
 Dcst. The passage (viii. p. 362) stands thus: HAfova/czf 6' kTroXEnrjoax' 
 (Messenians and Lacedaemonians) 6iu rag inroaTdaeig rcjv M.e<T<T7jvlu)v. T//i' 
 uev ovif TTpcjTjjv KaraKTYiaiv avruv <pijai Tvpraioc kv toic noirjfiaaL kotiI tovq 
 ruv naTepo>v narepag yevea^ai- ttjv 6e Sevripav, Ka^' tjv iXofievoi avfifidxovg 
 HXeiovg Kal 'Apyeiovg koI niaaruc uirearT^aav, 'kpKudov fiev *ApiaTOKpu- 
 -Tjv Tbv 'Opxofievov fiaaiXea napexofievuv arparTjydv, Uiaaruv de Tlavra- 
 KeovTa rbv ^OfopaXiuvoc- rjviKa (pyjatv avrbg arpaTrtyrjaai rdv noXefiov role 
 XaKedaifiovioiq, etc. Here it is obvious that, in the enumeration of allies, 
 he Arcadians ought to have been included; accordingly, both O. MUller 
 ind Mr. Clinton (ad annum 672 b. c.) agree in altering the passage thus: 
 hey insert the words Kal 'kpKa6ag after the word 'Wksiovg, so thp . 
 loth Eleians and Pisatans appear as allies of Messenia at once. I submit 
 that this is improbable in itself, and inconsistent with the passage of Strabo 
 previously noticed : the proper way of altering the passage is, in my judg- 
 nie.'t, to substitute the word A^/carfaf in place of the word *HAcfoir, 
 Mhith makes the two passages of Strabo consistent with each other, mi 
 hardl/ does greater violence to the text. 
 
 As apposed to the view here adopted, there is, undoubtedly, the passagt 
 of Pauiinias (iv. 15, 4) which numbers the Eleians among the allies of Mm 
 
<!J6 
 
 mSTORV OF GKEECE. 
 
 SUBJUGATION OF THE MESSENIA.lft. 
 
 4SI 
 
 Mef^senian war will thus stand as beginniug soraewliere about 
 the 33d Olympiad, or 648 ji. c, between seventy and ei^rhty 
 years after the close of the liiit, and lasting, according to Pau- 
 aanias, seventeen years; according to Plutarch, more than 
 twenty yeais.* 
 
 ■cnia, and takes no notice of the I'isiittc. Tlu- aairmatioii ofjnlius AfncancM 
 («p. Kuscbium Chronic, i. p. 145, that the l^isata revohcd from Elis in tho 
 y)*h Oljmpiju], ar.d celebrated the Olympic ^ames themselves until OI. 52. 
 (itr twenty-two su •cossivti ceromoiiics) is in ((.uiiiuliction, — Mist, with Tau- 
 ianias (vi. 22, 2), which appears to nic a clear and valuable statement, IVom 
 it« particular reference to the thrt^e non-Olympiads. — brcondly, with I'ansa- 
 nias (v. 9, 4), whci the Eleians in the 50th Olympiad determine the numlK-r 
 of IlcUanodikaj. I agree with Corsini (Fasti Attici, t. iii. p. 47) in settin.,' 
 I'iide the passnrrf of Jul us Afiicanus: Mr. Clinton (F. IT. p. 253) is di^' 
 pleased with Corsini for this suspicion, but he himself virtn.slly does the 
 fame thing; for, in order to reconcile Jul. Africnnus with I'aiVsanias, ho 
 intjodaces a supposition quite diflVront from wliat is as>crted by either of 
 them; i.e. a joint affonothesia by Klcians ami I'is.tt.ins to^^^ctlicr. Tliis 
 hypothesis of Mr. Clinton appears to me gratuiti.us and inndmWible: Afri- 
 fannOdmRclf meant to state something (juite diflerent, and I imac^ine him 
 to have been misl d bj an crroneona authority. Sec Mr. Clinton. F. If. ad. 
 ann. 6G0 b. c. to 580 n. c. 
 
 I riuturch, De Sen\ Num. Vinrl. p. 548 ; ^au^an. iv. 15, i ; iv. 17, .3; iv. 9.'}, 2. 
 The date of the second Mcssonian war, and the inrerval between t'lic 
 •rc.;nd and tho UiSt, are j.oints rcsj.cctinj; ^hich :dso there is ineconcih'.M- 
 discix-pancy of statement ; we <an only choose the i.iost probable: see the 
 pav.n.^a«s collected and canvassed in 0. Miiller (Dorians, i, 7, II, and in Mr. 
 Clinton, Fast. Hellen. vol. i. Apj.endix 2, p. 257). 
 
 ^ Accordini; to I'ausanias, the second war lasted from ii.c. G85-0GS, and 
 there was an interval between the lirst and the second war of f hirtv nine years. 
 Jiistia (iii. 5) reckons an intcpAal of eiirhty years: Kuscbin^ an interval of 
 ninety years. The main cvidfjice is the passaire'of Tvrtjens, wherein that 
 poet, gpeakinjr durin- the second Mar, says, " 'J'hc fathers of our fathers 
 cfmquered Mes.sGne." 
 
 Mr Clinton adheres very nearly to the view of IViusanias; he 8up|>oses 
 that tlie real date is only si.x years lowei (079-G<i2). But I agree with 
 Ciarier (Uistoiro des Premiers Temps dc la Grece, t ii. p. 233) and 0. 
 Mnller (I c.) in thinkin- tliat an interval of thirty-nine vears is too short to 
 suit the phrase of fath<Ts\fnthrr!;. Speakin;: in i\\c prt^ent vcar(l84C) it 
 would not be held j^roj.er to say, - 'VW faithers of our fathers carried on the wiir 
 between 1793 and the peace of Amiens:^' we should rather say, '^ The fathei-s 
 of our fathers carried on the American t>ar and the Seven Years' war." Ad 
 •iTc i? uairkxdhy it mature and even elderly mtmbeis, — by tlio.s( between 
 ife'ity-fire and fiftyfive yeai^ pf age 
 
 "«f ■ 
 
 Many of the Mcssrniaiis who abandoned their country after 
 this second conquest are said to have found shelter and sympathy 
 amonj; the Arcadians, who ndmitted them to a new home and 
 pave tliem their daughters in marriage; and who, moreover, 
 nunishcil .'Jcvcrely the treason of Aristol-^ratcs, king of Orcho- 
 incnus, in ahandoning the ]\lePPeni;ui.s at th'i battle of the Trench, 
 That jierfidiou.s leader was put to death, niid Ids race dethroned, 
 while the crime aa well as the punishm*nt was farther com- 
 nienioratcd by an inscrij)tion, which was to be seen near the 
 iilfar of Z«Mi« T^yUnMiM, in An-adiiu 'J'hc inscripfif>M donhtlcsn 
 cxi.^ted in the days of Kaliisthenes, in tht generation after the 
 restoration of Messene. But whether it had any existence prior 
 to that event, or what degree of truth there may be in the story 
 of Aristokrate?, we nre unable to determine:' the son of Aristo- 
 krate.^, named ArislodOmus, is alleged in another authority to 
 have reigned afterwards at Orchoinenns.'2 That which stands 
 strongly marked is, the sympathy of Arcadians and Mcsseniana 
 against Sparta, — a scntinnint which was in its full vigor at tho 
 time of the restoration of Messene. 
 
 The second Messenian war was thus terminated by the complete 
 subjugation of the Meseenians. Such of them as remained in 
 the country were reduced to a servitude probably not less hard 
 than that which Tyrt:eus described them as having endured bo» 
 tween the first wiir and the second. In after-times, the whole 
 
 Aiirccin;^ ns I do here with O. Mnller, nj,'ainst Mr. Clinton, I also a^ree 
 with him in thinkinj^ lluit the best mark which we pos.sess of the date of tho 
 second Mcssenian war is the stntemcn i respecting Tantaleon : the 34th Olyn*- 
 piad, which Fantaleon celebrated, piobably fell within the time of the war; 
 •vhich would thus be broufiht down much later than the time assigned by 
 'Pausania.<«, yet not so far down as that named t>y Eu.sebius and Jastin: the 
 exact year of its commencement, however, wo have no means of fixinji^. 
 
 Krebf, in his diHcussions on the Kraf^ments of the l(jst RooUb of Diodorui. 
 thinks that that histoiian placed the beginning of the second Mcsscnian war 
 in the 35th Olymjdad (n. c. 640) (Krebs, Ixjctiones Diodoreac, pp. 254-260). 
 
 * Diotlor. XV 66 ; Polyb. iv. 33, who quotes Knllisthenes ; Pans* viii. 6, 8. 
 Neither the Inscription, as cited by Polybius, nor the allusion in Plutarch 
 {De SerA Nnmin. Vindicui, p. 54 R), appear to fit the narrative of pAumniu, 
 for both of them imply secret and lonj^-concealed treason, tardily broaght to 
 light by the inter]>08ition of the pods; whereas, Pansaniaa dcwcrihcs the 
 treason of Aristokrates, at the battle of the Trench, as palpable unc* ftagraBt 
 
 * Herakleid. Ponti :. ap Diog, Laert. i. 94. 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 ,:.;••;•.•.'.. »;♦»♦.?. '.:♦♦.•/;•.;..•; 
 
 ^Jw.^'.^t»- -^ » 
 
 ~\ 1 i»Si^ Vii' .l; ^iSC - 
 
438 
 
 mSTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 nSA AKD KLIS. 
 
 4S9 
 
 Krritory which figures ou he map as Messenia, — south of the 
 river Nedon, and westward of tiie suininit of Taygetus, — ap. 
 pears as subject to Sparta, and as forming the western portion of 
 Laconia ; distributed, in what proportion we know not, between 
 Porioekic towns and Helot villages. By what steps, or after 
 what degree of farther resistance, the Spartans conquered this 
 country, we have no information ; but we arc told that tiicy made 
 over Asine to the exjjclled Dryopes from the Argolic peninsula 
 and Mothone to the fugitives from NaupliaJ Nor do we hear 
 of any serious revolt fiom Sparta in tliis icnitory until one hun- 
 dred and fifty years afterwards,-' subsetpicnt to the Persian inva- 
 sion, — a revolt which Sparta, after serious ellbrts, succeeded in 
 crushing. So that the territory remained in her power until her 
 defeat at Leuktra, which led to the foundation of iMessene by 
 Epameinondas. Tiie fertility of the plains, — especially of the 
 central portion near tlie river Tamisus, so much extolled by ob- 
 servers, modern as well as ancient, — ren<lcred it an acquisition 
 highly valuable. At ^oHle time or other, it must of course have 
 been formally partitioned among the Spartans, but it is probable 
 that different and successi\ c allotments were made, accordin^^ as 
 the various portions of territory, both to the exst and to the west 
 of Taygetus, were conquered. Of all this we have no in- 
 formation.^ 
 
 Imperfectly as these two ]\Iessenian wars are known to us, we 
 may see enough to warrant us in making two remarks. lioth 
 were tedious, protracted, and painful, showing how slowly the 
 results of war were then gathered, and adding one additional 
 illustration to prove how much tlie rapid and instantaneous con- 
 quest of Laconia and Messenia by the Dorians, which the llern- 
 kleid legend sets forth, is contradicted by historical analogy- 
 Both were chai-acterized by a similar defensive proceeding ou 
 
 » Pausan. iv. 24, 2 ; iv. 34, 6 ; iv. 35, 2. » Thucyd. i. lOI. 
 
 ^ Pausanias says, tt^v fih* dA^r/y ^UaaTjviav, nXt/v rz/f 'kai'vaiuv, airol 
 ^teh'iyxavov^ etc (iv. 24, 2.) 
 
 In an apophthegm ascribed to king Polydorus, leader of the Simrtann 
 daring the flret Messenian war, he is asked, whether he is ronllv takinj^ anna 
 atjainst his brethren, to which he replies, "No; I am only marchinp"to the 
 nnullotted portion of the territory." (Plutarch, Apophthegm Lnkonic p 
 Wl.) — (fT? rhv aK?.ripuTov x^fxn; 
 
 I 
 
 the part (A the Messenians, — the occupation of a mountai* 
 difficult of access, and the fortification of it for the special pur- 
 pose and resistance, — Ithome (which is said to have had ah-eady 
 a smnll town upon it) in the first war, Eira in the second. 
 It is reasonable to infer from hence, that neither their principal 
 town Sienyklerus, nor any other town in their country, was 
 strongly fortified, so as to be calculated to stand a siege; that 
 there were no walled towns among them analogous to Myken» 
 nnd Tiryns on the east (;rn portion of Pelo|)onnesus ; and that, per- 
 haps, what were called towns were, like Sparta itself, clustert- 
 of unfortified villages. The subsequent state of Helotism into 
 which they were reduced is in consistency with this dispersed 
 village residence during their period of freedom. 
 
 'Die rrlalion^ of Tin and Klis form a suitable eountcrpart 
 and seijuel to those (»f Messenia and Sparta. Unwilling sub* 
 jects t'nemselves, the Pisatans had lent their aid to the Messe* 
 
 nian=5, and their king, Pantaleon, one of the leaders of this 
 
 combined force, had gained so great a temporary success, as 
 to dispossess th-? Kleians of the agonothesia or administration 
 of the games for one Olympic ceremony, in the 34th Olym- 
 piad. Though again reduced to their condition of subjects, 
 they manifested dispositions to renew their revolt at the 
 48th Olympiad, under Damophon, the son of Pantaleon, and 
 the Eleians marched into their country to put them down, but 
 were persuaded to retire by protestations of submission. At 
 length, shortly afterwards, under Pyrrhus, the brother of Damo- 
 phOn, a serious revolt broke out. The inhabitants of Dyspon- 
 tium, and the other villages in the Pisatid, assisted by those of 
 Makistus, Skillus, and the other towns in Triphylia, took up 
 arms to throw off the yoke of Klis ; but their strength was in- 
 adequate to the undertaking. They were completely conquered j 
 Dyspontium was dismantled, and the inhabitants of it obliged to 
 flee the country, from whence most of them emigrated to the 
 colonies of Efndamnus and Apollonia, in Epirus. The inhabi- 
 tants of Makistus and Skillus were also chased from their abodes, 
 while the territory became more thoroughly subject to Elia than 
 it had been before. These incidents seem to have occurred 
 about the 50th Olympiad, or b. c. 580 ; and the dominion of 
 Rlis ovfti her Periockic territory was thus as well assured a« that 
 
 1 
 
4i0 
 
 msroin' or gi;i:ece. 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 of Sparta.' Tlie separate denominations both of Pisa Bnd Tri- 
 phylia became moie and more nivr'^rd In il.f^ sovcr^ i-ri n.-imo of 
 Elis: the town of Leprcnm alone, in Tiiph^ylia, seems to have 
 mainUiined a separate name and a sort of half-autonomv down 
 to the time of the Peloponnesian war, not witliout peVpi^tiial 
 strugnrles against the Ehinns.:-' But towards the perio.l of the 
 Pdoi)Onnesian war, the poliiieal interests of Lacednrr.on ha<! be- 
 come consideralilj chan-c.i,and it was to her advanta-e u> m.iin- 
 aiin the independence of ihe subordinate states ai:ain>t the 
 fiuperior: accordingly, we lind her at that time uphold. n- the 
 autonomy of Lepreum. J'lum what cause the devaMatimi of 
 the Triphyh'an towns by Jllis, which Ilnodetus mentions as hav- 
 ing happened in his time, juo.e, we (\u mo! know; the fact seems 
 to indicate a continual yearning fur their ori-inal in(k'pendenc<', 
 winch was still commemoialcd, down |,j a miirli la(<r jieriod, by 
 the ancient Amj)hiktyony, at 8amikum, in Tj .phvlla, in honor of 
 Poseidon, — a common religious festival fi< ,{i„-nUMli)y all iho 
 Triphylian towns and celebrated by the inhai^itaats of 5laki<tu«, 
 who sent round proclamali<»n of a furnial truce Ibr iIh- liolv p< i UnV 
 The Lacedamio dans, after the close of the iMoponn*- ian war, 
 Juid left them undisputed heads of Gniece, formnily uph( Id l!ie' 
 independence of the Triphylian towns against Kli. ,'an.l ymn to 
 have countenanced their endeavors to attach them . lv( i,. tli'? 
 Arcadiim aggregate, which, however, was n-over fully :irrom. 
 plished. Their dependence on Elis becauje loose and unceitain, 
 but wa.s never wholly shaken oiTJ 
 
 » rausan. vi. 2l\ !>; v. 6, 3 ; y. 10, 2 ; StrMho, viii. pp. nr,5-n57. 
 Tho temple in honor of Zeus at Olympia, was tirst ericletl hy the Klelan«», 
 out of the spoils of this expcdiiion (i'tiusan. v In, 2). 
 
 * Thncyd. v. 31. Even Lcprcnni is characterized as Eleian, however ( Aris- 
 toph. Aves, 149): compare also Slcph. Ryz. v. T/. oi//a, ;} '\\?ir. 
 
 Kven in tho 6lh Olympiad, an inhabitant of Dyspontiam U proclaimed 
 as victor at the stadiiun, under the denomination of »«ri KUianfrom iJyf^jxm- 
 :ium;" proclaimed hy the Eleians of course, — the hke in the 27th Olym- 
 piad : see Stcphan. Byz. v. Ai-aTorr/oi-, which shows that the inhabitants of 
 the Pisatid cannot have rcnderc 1 themselves independent of Eli? in the 26tli 
 Olympiad, as Stral)o alleges (vi i. p. 355 J. 
 
 ' Hcrodot iv. 149; Strabo, viii. p. 343. 
 
 * Diodor. xiv. 17; xv. 77; Xcnoph. Hellen. iii. 2, 23, 2G. 
 
 It was about this period, probably, that the idea of the Joral eDonna-ir 
 Triphylus, son of .'uka-v was fust introduced (Polyb. iv. 77>. 
 
 i 
 
 ARCADIA. 
 
 M 
 
 ClIAPTEll VIII. 
 
 CONOUESrs OK SPAKTA TOWARDS ARCADIA AND AROOLIS. 
 
 1 HAVE described in the last two chapters, as far as our im- 
 perfect evidence permits, how Sparta came into possession both 
 of the southern portion of Laconia along the coast of the Euro- 
 tjB down to its mouth, and of the Messenian territory westward. 
 Her progress towards Arcadia and Argolis is now to be sketched, 
 so as to conduct her to that jxjsition which she occupied during 
 the reijrn of Peisistratus at Athens, or about 560-540 B. C^ — a 
 time when she had reached the maxiinuin of her territorial poft. 
 sessions and when .she was confessedly the commanding state 
 
 in Hellas. 
 
 The ccutral rej^'ion of Peloponnesus, chilled Arcadia, had never 
 received auy emigrants fVoui without. Its indigenous inhabitants, 
 — a strong and lianly race of mountaineers, the most numerous 
 Hellenic tribe in th*-. prniusula, and the constant hive for merce- 
 nary troops,' — were among the rudest and poorest of Greeks, 
 retaining for the longca period their origifial subdivision into 
 a number of i>ctty liill-villages, each indeiK'udent of the other; 
 while tlie union of all who bore the Arcadian name, — though 
 they ha*l some connuon sacrifices, such as the testival of the Ly- 
 kaan Zeus, of l)c^p<.iiia, daughl(;r of i*o.^cid«'>n and DiMucl.'r, 
 and of Artemis liymiua- — was more loose and ineHeetivc lluui 
 tliat of Greeks generally, either in or out of Peloj)Onuesus. 
 The Arcadian villagers were usually denominated by the naniea 
 
 ' Hermippus ap. All., lux i p. '-'T. 'Ar V"^"'"^" '"'• "JV"';'«fi '-'' '^^ 'Ap^"J''rtf 
 KZiKovpov^. Also, Xcnoph. lleikn vii. 1, 23. :r?iiaTov ^s <pvMv tuv 'K?2n' 
 viKt'bi/ Td WoKadiKhi' e'.Tj, etc. 
 
 " Pausan! viii. 6, 7 ; viii. 37, G ; viii. 38, 2. Xenias, one of the jrenerals ol 
 Creek mercenaries in the service of Cyru.s the younjrcr, a native of the 
 Parrhapian district in Arcadia, celebrates with preat solemnity, during th« 
 march tipward. the festivnl and t;ames of tne Lykiea (Xenoph. Anabas. L S 
 10; compare Pindar, Olymp. ix. 142). 
 
 Many of the forests in Arcadia contained not only wild boars, bat 
 !■ the days of Pav^anias (viii. 23, 4) 
 
iA2 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of regions, coincident witFi certain ethnical subdiTisions, — the 
 Azanes, the Parrliasii. the Marmlii (adjoining Mount Mamalus), 
 the Eutresii, tlie JE^ryUx^, the Skirita', etc.^ Some considerable 
 towns, however, there were, — aggregations of viUages or deraes 
 which had been once autonomous. Of tlieso, the principal were 
 Tegea and Mantineia, bordering on Laconia and Argolis, — Or- 
 chomenus, Pheneus, and Stjmphalus, towards the north-east, 
 bordering on Achaia and Phlius, — Kleitor and Ileraa, west- 
 ward, where the country is divided from Elis and Triphylia by 
 the wootly mountains of Pholoe and Erymanthus, — and Phiga- 
 leia, on the south-western border near to Messenia. Thi' most 
 powerful of all were Tegea and Mantineia,- — conterminous 
 towns, nearly equal in force, dividing between them the cold and 
 high plain of Tripolitzi, and separated by one of tliose capricious 
 torrents which only escapes through katabothra. To regulate 
 the efllux of this water was a dillicult task, requiring friendl} 
 cooperation of both tht towns : and when their frequent jealousies 
 brought on a quarrel, the more aggressive of the two inundated 
 the territory of its neiglibor as one means of annoyance. The 
 j)Ower of Tegea, which had grown up out of nine constituent 
 townships, originally separate,'* appears to have been more an- 
 cient than that of its rival ; as we may judge from its splendlil 
 heroic pretensions connected with the name of Echemus, and 
 from the post conceded to its hoplites in joint Peloponnesian 
 
 ' Pausan. viii. 26, 5 ; Strabo, viii. p. 388. 
 
 Some geographers distributed the Arcadians into three siihdivision>, 
 Azanes, Parrhasii, and Tmpezuntii. Azan passed for the son of Areas, and 
 his lot in the division of the paternal inheritance was said to have contained 
 seventeen towns (uf E?.axfv 'AC//v). Stephan. Byz. v. 'ACar/'a — Tia^hfyaaia, 
 Kleitor seems the chief place in Azania, as far as we can infer from geneal- 
 ogy (Pausan. viii. 4, 2, 3). Paeos, or Paos. from whence the Azanian suitor 
 of the daughter of Kleisthenes presented h mself, was between Kleitor and 
 Psophis (Herod, vi. 127: Paus. viii. 23, 6y. A Delphian oracle, however, 
 reckons the inhabitants of Phigaleia, in the south-western corner of Arcadia, 
 among the Azanes (Pjwis. \\\\. 42. 3). 
 
 The burial-place of Areas was supposed to be on Mount Maenalas (Paua. 
 riii. 9, 2). 
 
 * Thucyd. v. 65. Compare the descriptioQ cf the ground in Protesao' 
 Ros.«» (Reisen im Peloponnes. iv. 7). 
 
 * Sirabo. viii. p. 337. 
 
 TEGKA AND MANTINEIA. 
 
 148 
 
 armaments, which was second in distinction only to that of tb« 
 Laceda^monians.1 If it be correct, as Strabo asserts,^ that the 
 mcorporation of the town of Mantineia, out of its five separate 
 denies, was brought about by the Argeians, we may conjecture 
 that the latter adopted this proceeding as a means of providing 
 some check upon their pow^erful neighbors of Tegea. The plain 
 common to Tegea and Mantineia was bounded to the west by 
 tlie wintry heights of MaMialus,3 beyond which, as fjir as the 
 boundaries of Laconia, Messenia, and Triphylia, there was noth- 
 ing in Arcadia but small and unimportant townships, or villages 
 — without any considerable town, before the important step taken 
 by p:paraeinondas in founding Megaloi)olis, a short time after the 
 battle of Leuktra. The mountaineers of these regions, who 
 joined p:pameinondas before the battle of Mantineia, at a time 
 when Mantineia and most of the towns of Arcadia were opi)Osed 
 to him, were so inferior to the other Grnks in eciuipment, (hat 
 they still carried as tlieir chief weapon, in place of the spear, 
 nothing better than the ancient club.^ 
 
 ' Herodot. ix. 27. 
 
 2 Strabo, 1. c. Mantineia is reckoned among the oldest cities of Arcadia 
 {Polyb. ii. 54). Both Mantineia and Onhonienus bad oripnally occupied 
 very* lofty hill-sites, and bad been rebuilt on a hu-cr scale, lower down, 
 nearer to the plain (Pausan. viii. S, 3 ; 12, 4 ; 1 i. -l). 
 
 In re.Mi-d to the relations, during the early hi.iurical period, l^etwecn 
 Sparta, Argos, and Aivadia. there is a new fniumcut of l)i(Hloru> (among 
 those recently pul^lisbed bv Didot out of the Kxcerpta in the K>runal library, 
 a.rment. Historic. Gra>cor vol. ii. p. viii.). Tbo Ai-vians bad espoused 
 the cau.se of the Arcadians against Sparta; and at th- cxpci)>c of consider- 
 able loss and surtering. had regained such portion. ..f Arcadia as she had 
 conciuered. The king of Argos restori'd this recovered territory to the 
 Arcadians: but the Argeians generally were angry that be did not retain it 
 end distribute it among them as a reward for their losses in the contest. 
 Thev rose in insurrection against the king, who \va.s lurced to flee, and take 
 
 rcfuire at Tegea. v. i • 
 
 We have nothing to illustrate this fragment, nor do we know to what king, 
 
 iate. or events, it relates. 
 
 a Wairn'/.ni (b-rrtf/z/^.^nr (Deljdiian Oracle, aj). Pans. viii. 9, 2). 
 
 * Xenophon in describing the ardor with which Epameinondas inspired 
 his soldiers before this final battle, says (vii. 5, 20), ^po^vfii^>c. fiev UevKovvrt 
 oi irrrag rn Kpavt), keaevovto^ tKeivov • k :r ey (ju(I>ov t o dt koI rojv 'ApKu- 
 6uv dnXlTai. ^oTroXa Ixovrec, o>C OvlSatoi ovrey Tavfff « 
 ♦«oy(ivTO KolAoyxaq kuI (iaxalpaq, Kal aa/xiTf>vvovTo ^ac uairidof. 
 
444 
 
 IflSrORY OF GREECK 
 
 Both Tegea and Mantineia held several of these smaller Arca- 
 dian townships near them in a sort of dependence, and were 
 anxious to extend this empire over others : during the Pelopon 
 nesian war, we find the Mantineians estabUshing and garrisoning 
 a fortress at Kjpsela among the Parrhasii, near the site in which 
 Megalopolis was afterwards built. » But at this period, Sparta, 
 as the political chief of Hellas, — having a strong interest in 
 keeping all the Grecian towns, small and great, as much isolated 
 from each other as possible, and in checking all schemes for the 
 formation of local confederacies, — stood forward as the pro- 
 tectress of the autonomy of these smaller Arcadians, and drove 
 back the Mantineians within their own limits.2 At a somewhat 
 later period, during the acme of her power, a few years before 
 tli'j battle of Leuktra, she even proceeded to the extreme length 
 of breaking up the unity of Mantineia itself, causing the walls to 
 be razed, and the inhabitants to be again parcelled into their five 
 original demes, — a violent arrangement, which the turn of po- 
 litical events very soon reversed.^ It was not until after the 
 battle of Leuktra and the depression of Sparta that any mea- 
 sures were taken tor the formation of an Arcadian political 
 coniederacy ;» and even then, the jealousies of the separate 
 cites rendered it inconnlete and short-hved. The great perma- 
 nent ch[uige, the establishment of Megalopolis, was accomplished 
 
 MEGALOr )LIS 
 
 44fi 
 
 It is hardly conceivable tliat these Arcadian clubmen should have pos- 
 sessed a sliield and a full panoply. The language of Xenophon in calling 
 thorn hoi)lites, and tlie term i~t}f)uoin'To, properly referring to the inscription 
 on the shield, appear to be . onceived in a spirit of contemptuous sneering, 
 proceeding from Xenophon s niiso-Theban tendencies: ''The Arcadian hop- 
 litcs, witii tlicir clubs, put themselves forward to be as good as the Thebans." 
 'J'luir these tendencies of Xenophon show themselves in expressions very 
 nnbccoiiiiuLr to the dignity of history (though curious as evidences of the 
 time), may be srin by vii. ;*>. !i>, wliere he says of the Thebans, — evrav^a 
 cJ;/ 1 Tf'p rr r ^ o J' r.' f, vt iMM/y/corff rot-f AaKsdaifioviovg, oi r^ Tzavii 
 ▼?,/"/■.'{*. etc. 
 
 • ThneyJ. v. 33, 47. 81. 
 
 ■ Qftocyd. 1. e. Compare the instructive speech of Kleigenes, the envoj 
 from Akanthus, addressed to the Lacedaimonians. b. c. 382 (Xen. HeUev 
 ▼. 2, 15-16). 
 
 * Xenoph. Hellen. v. 2, 1-6 ; Diodor. xv. 19. 
 *XenoDh. Hellen. vi. 5, 10-11 ; vii. 1. 23-25. 
 
 >w the ascendency of Epameinondas. Forty petty Arcadian 
 townships, among those situated to the west of Mount Maenalus, 
 were an^n^re^ated into the new city: the jealousies of Tegea, 
 
 OC* O 1131*4. 
 
 Mantineia, and Kleitor, were for a while suspended; and (Pkists 
 came from all of them, as well as from the districts of the Mae- 
 nalii and Parrhasii, in order to impart to the new establishment 
 a'.renuine Pan- Arcadian character.^ It was thus there arose for 
 the first time a powerful city on the borders of Laconia and Mes- 
 genia, rescuing the Arcadian townships from their dependence on 
 Sparta, and imparting to them political interests of their own, 
 which rendered them, both a check upon their former chief 
 and a support to the reestablished Messenians. 
 
 It has been necessary thus to bring the attention of the reader 
 for one moment to events long posterior in the order of time 
 (Me-alopolis was foimded in 370 b. c), in order that he may 
 understand, by contrast, the general course of those incidents of 
 the earlier time, where direct accounts are wanting. The north- 
 ern boundary of the Spartan territory was formed by some of 
 the many small Arcadian townships or districts, several of which 
 were successively conquered by the Spartans and incorporated 
 with their dominion, though at what precise time we are unable 
 to say We are told that Charilaus, the reputed nephew and 
 ward of Lykurgus, took iEgys, and that he also invaded the 
 territory of Tegea, but with singular ill-success, for he was de- 
 feated and taken prisoner :2 we also hear that the Spartans took 
 Phi-aleia by surprise in the 30th Olympiad, but were driven out 
 again by the neighboring Arcadian Oresthasians.3 During the 
 second Messenian war, the Arcadians are represented as cor- 
 dially seconding the Messenians : and it may seem perhaps 
 Bin-ular that, while neither Mantineia nor Tegea are mentioned 
 
 i Pausan viii 27, 5 No oekist 18 mentioned from Orchomenus, though 
 three of the petty townships contributing (^vr.lovvra) to Orchomenus werj 
 ^bodied in' the' new city. The feud between the ne.ghbormg cme^ ^ 
 Orchomenus and Mantineia was bitter (Xen. Hellen. vi. 5, 11-22) Orcho- 
 menus and Her^a both opposed the political confederation of Arcadia 
 
 The oration of Demosthenes, i.ep M.yaXo.oX.ra,v, strongly attest. ^ 
 impo^nce of this citv, especially c. 10, - k^v ,lv avacpe^uc. Kac c5.o..tcn>a 
 «.., /rrrrpotf XaKedatfiovioi^ ei^vC e<niv elvoi, etc 
 
 9-n •• o A. «; 7 ^- viii 48 3 « Pausan. viii. 8», 1 
 
 2 Pausan. iii. 2, 6 ; iii. 7, o, vui. *o. *■ 
 
 4 
 
 V 
 
 VJ 
 
 ); 
 
 i 
 
I. 
 
 446 
 
 HISTORV OF GREKCE. 
 
 BONES OF ORESTES. 
 
 447 
 
 in this war, the more distant town of OrchomeniK, with u< kin^ 
 Aristokrates, takes the lead. liut tint facts of the t'ontest amm 
 before us with so poetical a eolorino^, that we cannot veiiluie to 
 draw any positive inference as to thr times to wliich they are 
 referred. 
 
 Oiinusi and Karystun seem to have belono^ed to the Spartans 
 in the days of Alkman : moreover, the district caHed Skiritis, 
 bordering on the territory of Tegea, — a> u^ll as Beleruina and 
 Maleatis to the westward, and Karyae to the eastward mid south- 
 eastward, of Skiritis, — forming altogether the entire nortiieiii 
 frontier of Sparta, and all occupied by Arcadian inhabitants. — 
 had been conquered antl made part of the Spartan territor\ - be- 
 fore 600 B. C. And Herodotus tells us, tliat at this period the 
 Spartan kings Leon and Hegesikles conteui[)lated nothing less 
 than the conquest of <intire Arcadia, and smt to ask from tlie 
 Delphian oracle a blessing on thcii- enterprise.^ Tiie priestess 
 dismissed their wishes as extravagant, in nt'erence to the whoUi 
 of Arcadia, but encouraged tliem, thougli with the usual equivo- 
 cations of language, to try their fortune against Tegea. Flushed 
 with their course of previous success, not less than by the favora- 
 ble construction which they put upon the words of the oracle, 
 the Lacedamonians marched against Tegea with such entire con- 
 fidence of success, as to carry with them chains for the purpose 
 
 » Alkman, Fr. 15, Welcker; Strabo, x. p. 446. 
 
 ■That the SkiritaB were Arcadians is well known (Thuc. v. 47. Stcph, 
 Byz. V. ^K/'nor) ; the possession of Belemina was disputed with Sparta, in 
 the days of her comparative humiliation, hy the Arcadians : see Plutarch, 
 Kleomenes, 4 ; Pausan. viii. 35, 4. 
 
 Respecting Karyae (the V>order town of Sparta, where the dcatSarrjfjui were 
 ©acrifieed, Thuc. v. 55), see Pliotitis Ktntvursia — toprr/ 'Apre/iiJ^or rd( 
 
 The readiness with whieli Karyae and tlie Maleatcs revolted a^ain-t Sparta 
 after the battle of Leuktra, even before the invasion of Laconia by the The* 
 bans, exhibits them apparently as conquered foreign dependencies of Sparta 
 without any kindred of race (Xenoph. Ilellen. vi. 5, 24-26; vii. 1. 28^ 
 Leuktron, in the Maleatis, seems to have formed a part of the territory ol 
 Megalopolis in the days of Kleomenes the Thinl (Plutarch. Kleomenes, 6); 
 in the Peloponnesian war it .vas the frontier town of Sparta towards Moaiit 
 Lykieum ('rhui'. v. 53). 
 
 • Heroil. i. GG. Kara<ppovria'ji'r.i; ' X^Kuduv Kpt(7aQve<; that. txprjciTijpiall^op'm 
 h> AiX^iai t r I :: uay r r) 'Apm'i6 w v x<^(HI- 
 
 of binding their expected prisoners. But the result was disap- 
 point mem and defeat. They were repulsed with loss, and the 
 prisoners whom they left behind, bound in the very chains which 
 their own army had brought, were constrained to servile labor 
 on the plain of Tegea, — the words of the oracle being thus 
 literally fulfilled, though in a sense difterent from that in which 
 the Lacedemonians had first understood themJ 
 
 For one whole genei^ation, we are told, they were constantly 
 unsuccessful in their campaigns against the Tegeans, and this 
 strenuous resistance probably prevented them from extending 
 their conquests farther among the petty states of Arcadia. 
 
 At len^Tth, in the reign of Anaxandrides and Aristo, the suc- 
 cessors of" Leon and Hegesikles (about ;)60 b. c), the Delphian 
 oracle, in reply to a question from the S|>artans, — which of the 
 goiU thev ought to propitiate in order to become victorious,— 
 enjoined^hem to find and carry to Sparta the bones of Orestes, 
 son of Agamemnon. After a vain search, since they did not 
 know where the body of Orestes was to be found, they applied 
 to the oracle for more specific directions, and were told that 
 the son of Agamemnon was buried at Tegea itself, in a place 
 ''where two blasts were blowing under powerful constraint,— 
 where there was stroke and counter-stroke, and destruction upon 
 destruction." These mysterious words were elucidated by a lucky 
 accident. During a truce with Tegea, Lichas, one of the chiefs 
 of the three hundred Spai.an chosen youth, who acted as the 
 movable police of the country under the ephors, visited the place, 
 and entered the Ibrge of a blacksmith, — who mentioned to him, 
 in the course of conversation, that, in sinking a well in his outer 
 court, he had recently discovered a cotlin containing a body 
 eeven cubits long ; astounded at the sight, he had left it there 
 undisturbed. It struck Lichas that the gigantic relic of afore- 
 time could be nothing else but the corpse of Orestes, and he felt 
 assured of this, when he reflected how accurately the indications 
 of the oracle were verified ; for there were he " two blasts blow- 
 ing by rx)nstraint," in the two bellows of the blacksmith : there 
 
 I 
 
 « Herod, i. 67 ; Pausan. iii. 3, 5 ; viii. 45, 2. , ^ a a a ^ 
 
 Herodotus saw the identical chains suspended in the temple of AtMnC 
 
 Aka at Tegea. 
 
 i 
 
 
 \ 
 
 [\ 
 
 
 m 
 
COMBAT AT THYREA 
 
 441 
 
 44! 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 was the " stroke and counter-stroke," in his hammer and anvil, 
 as well a8 th • •' (lestruclion upon destruction," in the murderous 
 weapons wliich he wa>s forging. LicluLS said nothing, but re- 
 turned to Sparta witii his discovery, whicl:. he communicated to 
 the authorities, who, by a concerted scheme, bani?ihed liim under 
 a pretended criminal accusation. lie then returned again to 
 Tegea, under the guise oi' an exih', prevailed upon tlie black- 
 smith to let to him the premises, iunl wlien h»' found himself in 
 possession, dug up and curried off to Sparta the bones of the 
 venerated hero.i 
 
 From and after tiiis fortunate accjuisition, the cliaracter of the 
 contest was changed ; the Spartans found themselves constantly 
 victorious over the Tegeans. But it does not seem that these 
 victories led to any positive result, though they miglit j)erhaps 
 serve to enforce the [inictical conviction of Spartan superiority ; 
 for the territory of Tegea remained unini[)aired, and its auto- 
 nomy noway restrained. During the Persian invasion, Tegea 
 appears as the willing ally of Lacediemon, and as the second 
 military power in the Feloix»nnesus ;-* and we may fairly pre- 
 sume that it was chiefly the strenuous resistance of the Tegeans 
 which })revented the Lacedaemonians from extending their em- 
 pire over the larger portion of the Arcadian communities. These 
 latter always maintaine<l their independence, though acknowledg- 
 ing Sj)arta as the presiding power in Felo})onnesus, and obeying 
 her orders implicitly a.s to the disposal of their military force. 
 And the influence which Sparta thus possessed over all Arcadia 
 was one nuiin item in h(*r j>ower, never seriously shaken until the 
 battle of IxHiktra; wliich took away her previous means of 
 insurinir success and i>lunder to her minor followers.^ 
 
 Having thus related tlie extension of the j>ower of Sparta on 
 her northern or Arcadian frontier, it remains to mention her 
 acquisitions on the easti^rn and north-eastern side, towards Argos. 
 Originally, as has been before stated, not merely the province of 
 Kynuria and the Thyreatis, but also the whole coast down to tha 
 
 ^ Herod, i. 69-70. ' Herod, ix. 26. 
 
 * Xenoph. Hellen. v. 2, 11>. 'HffKip 'ApKwh':, orav fit^" vfiuv loat^ ra t« 
 avTuv acj^oviJi Kal rd, u?^X6TfHa dpTruCovat, etc. 
 
 This was said to the LacedaemoniaQs about ten years before the battle of 
 ^••aktra. 
 
 proir»ontory of Malea, had either been part of the tfcrritory of 
 Argos or belonged to the Ar*,'eian confederacy. We learn fron 
 Herodotus,^ that before the time when the embassy from CrcKSU^ 
 king of Lydia, came to solicit aid in Greece (about 547 B. c.\ 
 the whole of this territory had fallen into the power of Sparta; 
 but how long before, or at .»^hat i)recise epoch, we have no in- 
 formation. A considerable victory is said to have been gaine* 
 by the Argeians over the Spartans in the 27th Olympiad or 6GI 
 B. c, at Hysiai, on the road between Argos and Tegea.^ M 
 that time it does not seem probable that Kynuria could have 
 been in the possession of the Spartans, — so that we must refej 
 the acquisition to some period in the following century ; though 
 Pausanias places it much earlier, during the reign of Theopom- 
 
 I us,^ and Eusebius connects it whh the first establishment of 
 
 L'.ie festival called Gymnopa^dia, at Sparta, in G78 B. c. 
 
 About the year 547 b. c, the Argeians made an effort t« 
 econquer Thyrea from Sparta, which led to a combat lon« 
 memorable in the annals of Grecian heroism. It was agreel 
 between the two j)owers that the possession of this territory 
 should be determined by a combat of three hundred sele<5 
 -hampions on each side ; the armies of both retiring, in ordei 
 to leave the field clear. So undaunted and so equal was thf 
 valor of these two chosen companies, that the battle terminatel 
 by leaving only three of them alive, — Alkenor and Chromiui 
 among the Argeians, Othryades among the Spartans. The twt 
 Argeians warriors hastened home to report their victory, but 
 Othryades remained on the field, carried off the arms of the 
 enemy's dead into the Spartan camp, and kept his position unti 
 he was joined by his countrymen the next morning. Botk 
 Argos and Sparta claimed the victory for their respective cham- 
 pions, and the dispute after all was decided by a general conflicV 
 in which the Spartans were the conquerors, though not withoi* 
 much slaughter on both sides. The brave Othryades, ashamel 
 to return home as the single survivor of the three hundred, fel 
 upon his own sword on the field of battle.4 
 
 This defeat decided the possession of Thyre*^, which did iMf 
 
 * Herod. i..82. * Pnusan. ii. 25, 1. 
 
 * Herod. i.'82 , Strab . viii. p. 376. 
 VOL. U. 
 
 * Paasan. iii. 7, 5. 
 
 29oa 
 
 s I 
 
 i 
 
 
400 
 
 HISTORY Of GREECE. 
 
 Agao pass, until a very late period of Grecian hisloiy, und«^»' lli« 
 power of Argos. The preliminary duel of three hundred, with 
 its uncertain issue, though well established as to the general fact, 
 was rej)resented by tlie Argeians in a manner totally different 
 from the above story, which seems to have been current among 
 the Lacedamonians.! But the most remarkable circumstance is, 
 that more than a century afterwards. — when the two lowers 
 were negotiating for a renewal of the tlien expiring truce, the 
 Arireians, still hankering after this their ancient territorv, de- 
 sired the Lacediemonians to submit (lie (piestion to arbitration ; 
 which being refused, they next stipulated tor the privilege of 
 trying the point in dispute by a duel similar to the fonn<M\ at 
 any time except during the prevalence of war or of ej)idennc 
 disease. The historian tt-lls us that the La<'e<la'monians ac- 
 quiesced in this pro[>osition, though tli<'y tliought it absurd,- in 
 consequence of their nnxiety to keep their n'lations with Argos 
 at that time smooth jaid pacific Uut tht'ir is no reason to 
 ima«T^ine that the real duel, in whirh Otlirvadi s contended, was 
 considered as absurd at tlu* time wIhmi it took phue, or during 
 (he asre immediatelv succeetling. It fell in with a .-ort of chival- 
 
 ' The Argeians shuwcl iit Ar;j:()S a statue of IVrilaiis, son of Alkeiior, 
 killing Othryades (Pausar;. ii. 20.6: ii. .is, .') : compare x. H. »'.. and ihe 
 references in Larcher a<l H rodot. i. 82). The narrative of ("Inyscrnius, ip 
 TpiTu) Wf'/n-ovvriainK' 1 (a- <:iven in Plutarch, Parallel, lellcnic. |i 30G). is 
 different in many respects. 
 
 Pausanias found the Thyreatis in possession of th' Arircians (ii. 38, 5). 
 rhev told him that they had recovered it l>y adjudication ; when or by 
 whom we do not know : it -leems to have passed lick to Ar;:os before the 
 close of the reign of Kleomencs the Third, at j»parta (220 it. c ), Polyb. 
 
 iv. 36. 
 
 Strabo even reckons Prasi.x as Argeian. to the .south of Kynuria (viii. p. 
 S68), though in his other passage (p. 374^ emingly cited froiri Ephorus, it 
 19 treated as Lacedaemonian. Compare 4anso, Sparta, vol. ii. Beilage i. 
 
 p. 48. 
 
 Eusebius, placiuir this duel at a niucli earlier period (Ol. 27. 3, 878 B. c), 
 •scribes the first foundation of the Gymno{)aedia at Sparta to the desire of 
 commemorating the event. Pausanias (iii. 7, 3) places it still farther back 
 In the reign of Theopom/as 
 
 ' Thucvd. r. 41. To f '^f XaK^^atfAuvieig rb /aev Ttpurov eSokci jiiupia etv<u 
 rairCy ^ireiTaiiKe^vfiovv )up nuvTu^ rd'Xpyoc <^i^ov ixen>) ^vvexcjpTi<T» 
 
 PROPOSITION OF A SIMILAR COMBAT. 
 
 451 
 
 
 I 
 
 fous [)Ugnacity which is noti'^ed among the attributes of the early 
 Greeksji and also with various legendary exploits, such as thtt 
 single combat of Echemus and Hyllus, of Melanthus and Xan- 
 thus, of Menelaus and Paris, etc. Moreover, the heroism of 
 Othryades and his countrymen was a popular theme for poets, 
 not oidy at the Spartan gymnopaidia,^ but also elsewhere, and 
 aj)pears to have been frequently celebrated. The absurdity at- 
 tached to this pro}X)sition, then, during the Peloponnesian war, — 
 in the minds even of the Si)artans, the most old-fashioned and 
 unchanging })eople in Greece, — is to be ascribed to a change in 
 the Grecian inditical nind, at and after the Persian war. The 
 hal)it of political calculation had made such decided progress 
 among them, that the leading states especially had become 
 familiarized with something like a statesmanlike view of their 
 resources, their dangers, and their obligations. How lamentably 
 deficient this sort of sagacity was during the Persian invasion, 
 will appear when we come to describe that imminent crisis of 
 Grecian independence : but the events of those days were 
 well calculated to sharpen it for the future, and the Greeks of 
 'the Peloponnesian war had become far more refined political 
 schemers than their forefathers. And thus it happened that the 
 pro[)osition to settle a territorial dispute by a duel of chosen 
 cliamj)ions, admissible and even becoming a century before, came 
 afterwards to be derided as childish. 
 
 The inhabitants of Kynuria are stated by Herodotus to have 
 been lonians, but completely Dorized through their long sub- 
 jection to Argos, by whom they were governed as Periocki. 
 Pausanias gives a different accoiuit of their race, which he traces 
 to the eponymous hero Kynurus, son of Perseus : but he does 
 not connect them with the Kynurians whom he mentions in 
 another place as a portion of the inhabitants of Arcadia.^ It is 
 evident that, even in the time of Herodotus, the traces of their 
 primitive descent were nearly effaced. He says they wer© 
 ** Omeates and Perioeki " to Argos ; and it appears that th© 
 
 • Herodot vii. 9. Compare the challenge which Herodotus alleges to haTe 
 been proclaimed to the Spartans by Mardonius, through a herald, jiut befora 
 ttie battle of Platcea (ix. 48). 
 
 » Athenaj. xv. p. 678. 
 
 ' Herod, riii. 73 ; Fausan. iiL 2, 2 } viii. 27, S 
 
 m 
 
 I 
 
 
4&9 
 
 mSTORY OF GREKCl!.. 
 
 ifiliabitants of Orneje also, whom Argos had redured tr the same 
 dependent condition, traced their eponymous hero to an Ionic 
 stock, —- Orneus was the son of the Attic ErechtHeus.i Straho 
 seems to have conceived the Kynurians as (.ccupying originall} , 
 not only the frontier district of Argolis iind I.aci.iiia, wherein 
 Thyrea is situated, but also the northwestern portion of Argolis, 
 under the ridge called Lyrkeium, which s« panites the latter from 
 the Arcadian territory of Stimphahis.-' This ridge was nejir the 
 town of Ornea?, which lay on th*^ horder of Argolis n<'ar the euu- 
 fines of Phlius ; so that Strabo thus helps lo eonfirni the state- 
 ment of Herodotus, that the Orneatcs wrr.- [i portion of Kvnu- 
 rians, held by Argos along with the other Kynnrians in the 
 condition of dependent allies and Perhekl, and mtv prol>ahly 
 
 also of Ionian origin. 
 
 The conquest of Thyrea (a district vahiahh.' to the Laeedanio- 
 nians, as we may presume i'n)m the largr l>o<»ty wliieh the AiL^e- 
 ians got from it (Irrire.- the l%-lop<>niu'>ian war) "^ was th.' l:i>t 
 territorial acquisition iiia<le by Sparta. Sh<^ was now p(>^>c^ -o 
 of a continuous dominion. <'0!n[. rising tii<' whide •^oiithciii porlion 
 of the Teloponnesus, from the southern hank el" th<' river Nedon 
 on the western coast, to the n«»rth.'rii hoinidary of Thyreaii> o.i 
 the eastern coast. The area of h<r i«Trlt<>ry, including as it <!i.? 
 both Laconia and Messenia, wa< e([ual to two-liftlis of the en;iif 
 peninsula, all governed from the single eity, an<l for the ex li!- 
 pive j)uri.ose an<l Iwuelit of the citizens of Sparta. Within ail 
 this wide area liter' was not a single eonmiunity pretendinii te 
 independent agency. The townshii)s of the Peri<i'ki, and ih. 
 villages of the Ileiots, were each individiuilly unimportant; nor 
 do we hear of any one of them presuming to treat with a foreign 
 
 U*aasan. ii. 25, 5. Mannert ((Ifo-rjiphic dvr (Jiicihcn uiul Kojut 
 Grierhenland, book ii. -h. xix. p. tUS) connects the Kvnurians of Ana.ii.i 
 and Argolis, though Herodotus tells us tluit the huter were lonians: ho-r..- 
 to this name much greater importance and extension than the evia.iue hear^ 
 
 »ut. 
 
 « Strabo, viii. p. 370 — o 'Ivaxoc h'^v rue ^^/>"C ^'^ At7)/.f/oi' -.-e kc.i 
 Kwovpiav bpovc r^f 'Ap/cadmf. Corny and Grosskurd gain nothing ^' .<• I'V 
 the conjectural reading of 'Apyrmf in place of 'A, ^a.^*«r. for the rnh-v oi 
 Lyrkeium ran between the two, and might, therefa-a i>c conn'jcted with euitei 
 without impropriety 
 
 • Thucvd. vi 95. 
 
 STRONG POSITION OF SPARTA. 
 
 453 
 
 late : hoth consider themselves as nothing else but subjects of 
 the vSpartan ephors and their subordinate otficers. They are 
 indeed discontented subjects, hating as well as fearing their mas- 
 ters, and not to be trusted if a favorable opi)ortunity for secure 
 revolt presents itself. But no individual township or district is 
 strong enough to stand up for itself, while combinations among 
 tliem are prevented by the habitual watchfulness and unscrupu- 
 lous precautions of the ephors, especially by that jealous secret 
 [lolice called the Krypteia, to which allusion has already been 
 made. 
 
 Not only, therefore, was the Spartan territory larger and its 
 j)0{)ulation more numerous than that of any other state in Hellas, 
 but its government was also more completely centralized and 
 more strictly obeyed. Its source of weakness was the discontent 
 of its Perioeki and Helots, the latter of whom v. ere not — like 
 the slaves of other states — imported barbarians from different 
 countries, and speaking a broken Greek, but genuine Hellens, — 
 of one dialect and lineage, sympathizing with each other, and as 
 much entitled to the protection of Zeus Hellanius as their mas- 
 ters, — from whom, indeed, they stood distinguished by no other 
 line except the perfect training, individual and collective, which 
 was peculiar to the Spartans. During the period on which Ave 
 are at present dwelling, it does not seem that this discontent 
 comes sensibly into operation ; but we shall observe its manifes- 
 tations very unequivocally after the Persian and during the Pelo- 
 ponnesian war. 
 
 To such auxiliary causes of Spartan predominance we must 
 add another, — the excellent milit^iry position of Sparta, and the 
 unassailable character of Laconia generally. On three sides that 
 territory is washed by the sea,' with a coast remarkably danger- 
 ous and destitute of harbors ; hence Sparta hau nothing to ap- 
 prehend from this quarter until the Persian invasion and its 
 consequences, — one of the most remarkable of which was, the 
 astonishing development of the Athenian naval force. The city 
 of Sparta, far removed from the sea, was admirably defended by 
 an almost impassable northern frontier, composed of those districts 
 which we have observed above to have been conquered from 
 
 I 
 
 » Xencphon, Helleu iv. 8, 7 : ^o^ovjuevof t^v dAi/zevorjyra T^f x(^>P<K 
 
.iy 
 
 t 
 
 454 
 
 HIMORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Arcadia, — Karyatis, Skintis, Maleatis, aiul BeleminJltis. The 
 difficulty as weli as dan^'er of marohini,' intu Laconia by ihese 
 mountain passes, noticed by Euripides, wa> keenly felt by every 
 enemy of the Laceda nionians, and ha> be.n pc.wertully stated by 
 a first-rate modern observer, Colonel Leake. » No site could be 
 better chosen for holdin- the key of all the penetrable i>asses 
 than that of Sparta. This well-proteeted fn.ntier Avas a substi- 
 tute more than sufficient for fort iti eat ions to Spaita itself, which 
 always maintained, down to the times of the despot Nabis, its 
 
 » Xenoph. Hellcn. v. 5. 10: Eurip. ;ip. Si.af.u nil. p. 366 : Lcakc. Travels 
 
 in Morea, vol. iii. c. xxii. p. 2J. 
 
 «lt is to the strciife'th of tho frontiers, and the eoniparatively large extent 
 of country inclosed within then., that sve must traee the primary cause ot 
 the Lacedemonian power. TIksc enabled the peoph-. when strengthened 
 bv a rigid miUtary discipline, and put in n.oti..n hy an am)).r.ous spnit, tn'st 
 to triumph over their weaker nei-hhors of Me><enia. hy tins additional 
 strength to overawe the disunited repnhlie< ..f Areudia, au.l at leuL^h for 
 centuries to hold an acknowledged military Miperiority over every other 
 
 state in Greece. • , i »^ „„^ 
 
 «lt is remarkable tl:ai all the prineipnl ,.a-,- into La<on,a lead to on« 
 point: this point is Sparta: a tact whieh shows at on. e how w.l the posi- 
 lion of that city wius chosen for the defc.u>e of the pn.vnue, and how well a 
 was a.lapted, especially as lon<c a. it <ontnnu-d n. he nnwalUd. to nuuntain a 
 perpetual vigilance and readines> for .lefener. which are the Muvst means ot 
 
 offensive success. . ,i „ 
 
 - The natural openings into the plain oi Sparta are only two : one hy the 
 opper Eurotas, as the course of that riv.r above Sparta may b,- termed : the 
 other by its onlv large branch (Enn. n..w the Kel- tina. whuh. as I have 
 already stated, joins the Eurotas opiH,>ite to the north-eastern extrenuty ot 
 Sparta. All the natural approaches to Sparta Iron, tne northward lead o 
 oL or the other of the^- two valleys. ( >n the side ot Messema, the n.n-therly 
 prolongation of Mount Taygetum, which joins Mount Lyceutn at the pas. 
 of Andania, now the pass of Makryplai, furnishes a cotitmued barrier o the 
 loftiest kind, admitting only of route< easily defensible j -nd -huh -- 
 whether from the Cromitis uf Arcadia to the soutli-westward of the modem 
 Londari, from the Stenykleric plain, from the plain of the Pamisus or t.om 
 Phere, now Kalamata -all descend into the valley of the upper Eurotas. 
 and conduct to Sparta by Pellana. There was, indeed, a branch of the last- 
 mentioned route, whi( h descended into the Spartan plain at the modem 
 Mistra and which must have been a very frequent communication between 
 Sparta and the lower part of Messenia; but, like the other direct pa.^ 
 ovel Taygetum, it was much more difficult and defensible than those wmck 
 1 have called the natural entrances of the provmce." 
 
 ACQUIRED ASCENDENCY OF SPARTA. 
 
 455 
 
 primitive aspect of a group of adjacent hill-villages rather than a 
 renrnlar city. 
 
 When, along with such territorial advantages, we contemplate 
 the personal training peculiar to the Spartan citizens, as yet 
 undiminished in their numbers, — combined with the effect of 
 that training upon Grecian sentiment, in inspiring awe and ad- 
 miration, — we shall not be surprised to find that, during the 
 half-century which elapsed hetween the year 600 B. c. and the 
 final conquest of Thyreatis from Argos, Sparta had acquired and 
 begun to exercise a recognized ascendency over all the Grecian 
 states. Her military force was at that time superior to that of 
 any of the rest, in a degree much greater than it afterwards caine 
 to be ; for other states had not yet attained their maximum, and 
 Athens in particular was far short of the height which she after- 
 wards reached. In respect to discipline as well as number, tlie 
 Spartan nrilitary force had even at this early period reached a 
 point which it did not subsequently surpass; while in Athens, 
 Thebes, Argos, Arcadia, and even Elis (as will be hereafter 
 .shown), the military training in later days received greater at- 
 tention, and improved considerably. The Spartans (observes 
 Aristotle) i brought to perfection their gynmastic training and 
 their military discipline, at a time when other Greeks neglected 
 both the one and the other : their early superiority was that of 
 the trained men over the untrained, and ceased in after-days, 
 when other states came to subject their citizens to systematic 
 exercises of analogous character or tendency. This fact, — the 
 early period at whicli Sparta attained her maximum of discipline, 
 power, and territory, — is important to bear in mind, when we 
 are explaining the general acquiescence wliich her ascendency 
 met with in Greece, and which her subsequent acts would cer- 
 tainly not have enabled her to earn. That acquiescence first 
 began, and became a habit of the Grecian mind, at a time vv]ien 
 Sparta had no rival to come near her, — when she had complete- 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. viii. 3, 4. 'En (Je avrovg rove AuKU)vag 'idfin', ic.,^^ ^t^ 
 avToi irpoffrjdpevov rale (!>iXorroinaig, vTrepexovrac tuv u7iXu)V vvv iVt, kuI tm^ 
 yvfAvaaioL^ nai role noXefiiKoi^ uytjat, 'Aenrofiev0V( krepcjv • ov yii^ r.p tov^ 
 viovc yvfivd'^eiv tov Tponov tovtov duipepov, (iAXd - ^ fiovov firj Trpdf uokovv- 
 
 Tttf aoKeiv 'ki'Tayuviard'- yiip rrj^ 7Tai6eia( vvv I;f0t;ffi* npiurtdH)* M 
 
 ate 9t\ov. 
 
 1 I 
 
45e 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SPARTAN DRILLFNG. 
 
 457 
 
 ly shot ahead of Ar-^os, — and when the vi-or oi' the LykurgeaB 
 discipline had been manifested in a lung >ciie^ of conquosts, made 
 during the stationary period of other states, arid ending only, to 
 use the somewha. i.-xaggerated phrase of Herodotus, when she 
 had subdued the graiter part of Feloi)onnesus.i 
 
 Our accounts of tlie memorable military organization of Sparta 
 are .-canty, and insutheient to place the details uf it clearly before 
 us. The anus of the Spartans, as to all material points, were 
 not different from tliose of other Greek lioplites. Dut one grand 
 peculiarity is observable from the beginning, as an item in the 
 Lykurgean instituti»)ns. Tliat lawgiver established military divi- 
 sions quite distinct Irom the civil divisions, whereas in the other 
 states of Gree(«e, until a period much later than that which we 
 have now reached, tlie two were eonfounded, — the hoi)lite.- or 
 horsemen of the >aine tribf or ward being marshalled together 
 on the field of l)attl% Every La.MMLemonian was bouri<l to mili- 
 tary service from the age of twenty to sixty, and the ephois. 
 when they sent forth an expedhion, called to arms all the m. ii 
 within some given limit of age. Herodotus tells us that Lykur- 
 gus established both the syssitia, or i^ublic mess, and th.^ enoniu- 
 ties and triakads, or the military subdivisions peculiar to S[»arta.^ 
 The triakads are not mentioned elsewhere, nor ean we distinctly 
 make out what they were; but the enumoty was the sp. cial 
 characteristic of the system, and the pivot upon which all its 
 arrangements turned. It wa> a >inall company of men, the num- 
 ber ot" whom was variable, being given differently at twxMity-five, 
 thirty-two, or thirt\-six men, — drilled and practised together in 
 military evolutions, and bound to . ; h other by a common oath.3 
 
 ' Herodot. i. 68. r/di) M apt Km // --'A/ y r;;j- lUyM-uvv/tGov ijv Karearpafi- 
 
 uh'Tj 
 
 * Herodot. i. 67 : compare Lanher's note. 
 
 Concerning the obs( ure and diffieult subject of the niilitary arrangements 
 of Sparta, see C^agiu^, Repub Laced, iv. 4; Manso, Si)arta, ii. Beilage 18, 
 p. 224; O. MiiUer, lli-.t. Dorians, iii. 12, Dr. Arnold's note on Thucvdides, 
 F 68 •, and Dr. Thirhvall, History of Greece, vol. i. A{)pendix 3, p. 520. 
 
 * Pollnx. i. 10 129. 'hUuc fiifTOi ruv Xanei^ai^oviun', h'uuoria, Kal fiopa: 
 compare Suidas and Hesych. v. 'Ei-w/vona ; Xenoph. Rep. Lacon. c. 11} 
 Thucyd. V. 67-68; Xenoph. Hellen. vi. 4, 12 
 
 Saidas states the enomoty at twenty-five men: in the Lacedamonim 
 ■nny which fought at iK- Hr t battle of Mantineia (418 B.C.), it seeou U 
 
 Each enomoty had a separate captain, or enomotarch, the strong- 
 est and ablest soldier of the company, who always occupied the 
 front rank, and led the enomoty when it marched in single file, 
 giving the order of march, as well as setting the example. If 
 the enomoty was drawn up in three, or four, or six tiles, the 
 enomotarch usually occupied the front post on the left, and'care 
 was taken that both the front-rank men and the rear-rank men, 
 of each file, should be soldiers of particular merit.' 
 
 It was upon these small companies that the constant and se- 
 vere Lacedaemonian drilling was ])rought to act. They were 
 taught to march in concert, to change rapidly from line to file, to 
 wheel right or left in sucli manner as that the enomotarch and 
 the other protostates, or front-rank men, should always be the 
 persons immediately opposed to the enemy.a Their ste^) was 
 
 have consisted of about thirty-two men (Thuc. /. c.) : at the battle of Leuktra 
 of thirty-six men (Xen. Hellen. /. c). But the language of Xenojihon and 
 Thucydides does not imply that the number of each enomoty was equal. 
 
 * O. Muller states that the enomotarch, after a irapayayff, or deployment 
 into phalanx, stood on the right hand, which is contrary to Xenoph. Rep. Lac. 
 11, 9. — 'Ore 6e 6 upx^v evuvvfxo^ ylyverai, oW iv tovto finarenrnv 
 vyovvrai &\V iariv bre Kal TrAe ove/cra v, — the apxcov was the first enomo- 
 tarch of the lochus, the TrpuroffruTTjc (as appears from 11, 5), when the 
 enomoty marched in single file. To put the vyefidv on the right flank, wa8 
 done occasionally for special reason, —ijv de ttotc Ivexa rtvo^ doK^ ^vfi- 
 <l>ep€iv, Tdv vyefx6va di^iov Kepac txew, etc. I understand Xenophon's de- 
 scription of the Trapayoyf), or deployment, differently from Muller, — it rather 
 seems that the enomoties which stood first made a side-movement to the 
 left, 80 that the first enomotan h still maintained his place on the left, at the 
 same time that the opportunity was created for the enomoties in the rear to 
 come up and form equal front, rw IvufioTapxv JrapeyyvuTai etc fierunov Trap' 
 aarrlda Ka^laraa^ac, —the words Trap' aairida have reference, as I ima- 
 gine, to the proceeding of the first enomotarch, who set the example of 
 side-movement to the left-hand, as it is shown by the words which follow,— 
 Kal Sid, TravTdc ovtoc ^ot' uv ij (f^'tlay^ havria Karaar^. The pha- 
 lanx was constituted when all the lochi formed an equal and continuous 
 front, whether the sixteen enomoties, of which each lochus was composed, 
 might be each in one file, in three files, or in six files. 
 
 ' See Xenoph. Anab. iv. 8, 10, upon the advantage of attacking the enemy 
 with bp^ioL Uxoi, in which case the strongest and best soldiers all came first 
 into conflict. It is to be recollected, however, that the practice of the Cyr©. 
 ian troops cannot be safely quoted as authority for the practice at Sparta. 
 Xenophon and his colleagues established lochi, pcntekosties, and enomotioi 
 TOL. II. 20 
 
 H 
 
 t m 
 
458 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SYSTEMATIC DRILLING RARE VA GREECE. 
 
 reffulated by the fife, which played in martial measures peculiar 
 ♦o Sparta, and was employed in actual battle as well as m mill- 
 tary practice ; and ^o perfectly were they habituated to the movo- 
 ments of the enomoty, that, if their order was deranged by any 
 adverse accident, scattered soldiers could spontaneously fonu them- 
 selves into the same order, each man knowing perfectly the du- 
 tie. belon-ing to tlie place into which chance had thrown him.i 
 Above tl»e e'nomotv were several larger divisions, — the pente- 
 kostys, the lochus, and the mora,"^ of which latter there seem to 
 
 459 
 
 in the Cvreian army ; the lochus consisted of one hundred men, hut tho 
 numUers of the othtr two divisions arc not stated (Anab. iii. 4, 21 ; iv. 3, 26: 
 
 compare Arrian. Tactic, cap. 6). r .u t 
 
 » The words of Thuevdides indicate the peculiar marshalhng of the Lace 
 d«;monians. as distinguished both from their enemies and from their alhes 
 at the battle of Mantineia,-/coZ euT^t-f t'rrd a^ovdrjc Ka^iaravro ig koohov 
 rhv kavrC. v, 'Ayd^K rov (iamliuc iKaata ^^nyovfievov Kara vouov : apain, 
 
 * About the music of the flute or fife, Thucyd. v. 69; Xen Hep Lac K3, 9, 
 
 Plutarch, Lvcurt;. c. 22. i • * .• i • 
 
 » Meursius Dr. Arnold, and Rachetti (Delia Mihzia dei Grechi Antuhi, 
 Milan 1807 'p. 166) all think that lochus and mora were different names 
 for the same division but if this is to be reconciled with the statement of 
 Xcnophon in Kepub Lac. c. 11, we must suppose an actual change of 
 nomenclature after th.3 Peloponnesian war, which appears to be Dr. Arnold s 
 opinion, — vet it is not easy to account for. 
 
 There is' one point in Dr. Thirlwall's Api.endix which is of some impor 
 fmc-e and in which I cannot but dissent fnMii his opinion. He says, after 
 .tuin- the nomenclature and classification of the Spartan military force as 
 civenW Xenophon, ' Xenophon speaks only of Spartans, as appears by the 
 epithet 'TToA^r^Ml^r," p 521 : the words of Xenophon are, 'KKuarri 6e ruv tto- 
 hriKuv uopui' exec rrolifiapxov iva, etc. (Hep. Lar. 11.) 
 
 It appears to me that Xenophon is here speakinu^ of the aggrej^ate Lace- 
 djFmonian heavv-armed force, including both Spartans and lenceki -not 
 of Spartans alone The word no?urc.un> does not mean Spartaiis as distin- 
 cui^l.ed from I Vriceki, but Laced.nemonians as distin^rmshed from alhes^ Thus^ 
 when A^^esilaus returns home from the blockade of Phl.us, Xenophon tells 
 „s that "rarra rmuina, rab, f^kv cvfi^axovc u<l>r,Ke, to 6. noAiUKov OiKade 
 ar//ynvMHellen. V. .1,25). .. , , u„ 
 
 O MviUer also, thinks that the whole number of five thousand seven hun- 
 rtrcd a,.l forrv men. who fouj:ht at the first battle of Mantineia m the th^- 
 teeri. v.ar of the IVloponnesian war. were furnished by the city of Sparta 
 iteelf (Hist, of Dorians, ili. 12. 2): and to prove this, he refers to the very 
 y#. age iust c.tcd fn.m the Hell, nica of Xenophon, which, as far as itproTW 
 
 have been six in all. Respecting the number of each division, 
 and the proportion of the larger to tlie smaller, we find state- 
 ments altogether different, yet each resting upon good authority, 
 — so that we are driven to suppose that there was no peremp- 
 tory standard, and that the enomoty comprised twenty-five, thirty- 
 two, or thirty-six men ; the pentekostys, two or four enomoties ; 
 the lochus. two or four pentekosties, and the mora, four hiuidred, 
 five hundred, six hundred, or nine hundred men, — at different 
 times, or according to the limits of age which the ephors might 
 prescribe for the men whom they called into the field.' 
 
 What remains fixed in the system is, first, the small nmnher, 
 though varying within certain limits, of the elementary comj)any 
 called enomoty, trained to* act together, and composed of men 
 nearly of the same age,^ in which every man knew his place ; 
 secondly, the scale of divisions and the hierarchy of officers, each 
 rising above the other, — the enomotarch, the pentekonter, the 
 lochage, and the ix>lemarch, or commander of the mora, — each 
 having the charge of their respective divisions. Orders were 
 
 anything, proves the contrary of his position. He gives no other evidence 
 to support it, and I think it in the highest degree improbable. I have al- 
 rej' ^y remarked that he understands the expression ttoIltlkt] x<^p(i (in Poly- 
 bi-as, vi. 45) to mean the district of Sparta itself as contradistinguished from 
 Laconia, — a construction which seems to me not warranted by the passage 
 in Polybius. 
 
 ' Aristotle, Aokuvuv noXtrem, Fragm. 5-6, ed. Neumann : Fhotius v. 
 AoxoC' Harpokration, Mopa. Etymologic. Mag. Mopa. The statement of 
 Aristotle is transmitted so imperfectly that we cannot make out clearly what 
 it was. Xenophon says that there were six morae in all, comprehending all 
 Ihe citizens of military age {Rep. Lac. 11, 3). But Ephorus stated the mora 
 at five hundred men, Kallisthenes at seven hundred, and Polybius at nine 
 hundred (Phitarch, Pelopid. 17 ; Diodor. xv. 32). If all the citizens compe- 
 tent to bear arms were comprised in six morse, the numbers of each mora 
 must of course have varied. At the battle of Mantineia, there were seven 
 Lacedaemonian lochi, each lochus containing four pentekosties, and ea< h 
 pentekosty containing four enomoties : Thucydides seems, as I before 
 remarked, to make each enomoty thirty-two men. But Xenophon tells us 
 that each mora had four lochi, each lochus two pentekosties, and each pen- 
 tekosty two enomoties (Rep. Lac. 11, 4). The names of these divisiont 
 remained \he same, hut the numbers varied. 
 
 ' This is implied in the fact, that the men under thirty or under thirty- 
 five years of age, were often detached in a battle to p Irsae the light troopa 
 of the enemy (Xen. Hellen. iv. 5, 15-16). 
 
 c 
 
 ♦ 
 
H 
 
 INCREASING TENDENCY 10 COOPERATION. 
 
 461 
 
 4b0 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECa 
 
 tmsmitted from the king, as commander-in-ciief, through thi 
 polemarchs to the lochages, — from the lochages to the peiite 
 konters, and then from the latter to the enomotarchs, each of 
 whom caused them :o be executed by his enomoty. As all these 
 men had been previously trained to the duties of their respective 
 stations, the Spartan infantry possessed the arrangements and 
 a[)titudes of a standing army. Originally, they seem to have 
 had no cavalry at all,' and when cavalry was at length introduced 
 into their system, it was of a very inferior character, no provi- 
 sion having been made for it in the Lykurgean training. But 
 the military force of the other cities of Greece, even down to the 
 close of the Peloponnesian war, enjoyed little or no special train- 
 ing, having neither any small company like the enomoty, consist- 
 ing of particular men drilled to act together, — no fixed and 
 disciplined officers, — nor triple scale of subordination and sub- 
 division. Gymnastics, and the use of arms, made a part of 
 education everywhere, and it is to be presumed that no Grecian 
 iioplite was entirely without some practice of marching in line 
 and military evolutions, inasmuch as the obligation to serve was 
 universal and often enforced. But such practice was casual and 
 unequal, nor had any individual of Argos or Athens a fixed miU- 
 tary j)lace and duty. The citizen took arms among his tribe, 
 under a taxiarch, chosen from it for the occasion, and was placed 
 in a rank or line wherein neither liis place nor his immediate 
 neighbors were predetermined. The tribe appears to have been 
 the only military cbifisification known to Athens,^ and the taxi- 
 
 ^ III I III ■ —" ■' .1.11 .—.i — — I-..— — — -.I—. 1.1— -1.1 11 — — .1 ■ ■ .1 ■ — H-l — .1111— — ■ I, 11 .1 — . 
 
 * Xenoph. HeUen. vi. 4, 12. 
 
 « Herodot vi. Ill ; Thucyd. vi. 98 ; Xenoph. Hellen. iv. 2, 19. 
 
 The same marshalluig of hoplites, according to the civil tribes to which 
 they belonged, is seen in the inhabitants of Messeue in Sicily as well as of 
 Syrakuse (Thucyd. iii. !>0; vi. 100). 
 
 At Argos, there was a body of one tliousand hoplites, who, during the 
 Peloponnesian war, reocnved training in military manoeuvres at the cost of 
 !h<- <!ty (Thucyd. v. 67), but there is reason to believe that this arrangement 
 '\A- not introduced until about the period of the peace of Nikias in the tenth or 
 eleventh year of the Peioponnesiiui war, when the truce between Argos and 
 Sjjarta was just expiring, and when the former began to entertain schemes 
 of am In Hon. The Epat-iti in Arcadia began at a much later time, after th< 
 ^ttle of Lcnktra (Xenoph. Uellen. vii. 4, 33). 
 
 About the Athenian taxiarchs, one to each tribe, see JEschines de Fait 
 
 4rch the only tribe officer for infantry, as the phylarch was foi 
 cavalry, under the general-in-chief. Moreover, orders irom the 
 general were proclaimed to the line collectively by a herald of 
 loud voice, not communicated to the taxiarch so as to make him 
 responsible for the proper execution of them by his division. 
 With an arrangement thus perfunctory and unsystematized, we 
 ■hall be surprised to find how well the military duties were often 
 performed : but every Greek who contrasted it with the symmet- 
 rical structure of the Lacedtemonian armed force, and with the 
 laborious preparation of every Spartan for his appropriate duty, 
 felt an internal sentiment of inferiority, which made him willing- 
 ly accept the headship of " these professional artists in the busi- 
 ness of war," 1 as they are often denominated. 
 
 It was througli the concurrence of these various circumstancef 
 that the willing acknowledgment of Sparta as the leading state 
 of Hellas became a part of Grecian habitual sentiment, during 
 the interval between about GOO b. c. and 547 b. c. During tliij 
 period too, chiefly, Greece and her colonies were ripening intc 
 a sort of recognized and active partnership. The common 
 religious assemblies, wliich bound the parts together, not only 
 acquired greater formality and more extended development, but 
 also became more numerous and frequent, — while the Pythian, 
 Isthmian, and Nemean games were exalted into a national im- 
 portance, a|)|)roaching to tlu-it of the Olympic. The recognized 
 superiority of Sparta tl.r.e formed part and parcel of the first his- 
 torical aggregation of the Grecian states. It was about the 
 year 547 b. c, that Croesus of Lydia, when j)ressed by Cyrus 
 and the Persians, solicited aid from Greece, addressing himself 
 
 Leg. c. 5.1, p. aoo H. ; Lysias, pro Mantithco, Or. xvi. p. 147 ; Demosth. adv. 
 BoBotum pro nomine, p. 999 R. Philippic, i. p. 47. 
 
 See the advice given by Xenojjhon (in his Treatise De OflScio Magistrl 
 Equitum) for the remodelling of the Athenisin cavalry, and for the introdnc- 
 tion of small divisions, each with its special commander. The dirision into 
 tribes is all that he finds recognized (Off. M. E. C. ii. 2-iv. 9) ; be strongly 
 recommends giving orders, — ^lu napayyeAaeuq, and not anb icfipvKog. 
 
 * Plutarch, Pelopid. c. 23. IIuvtuv uKpoi rexvlTCL koI ao^L<rral tuv iroXe* 
 mtcuv bvTeg ol IvrapTiurat, etc. (Xenoph. Rep. Lac. c. 14) vyritjalo ov, rot)f 
 Ifiv &XXov^ avToffxediatrr^ elvai tuv arpariuTiKijv, AaKeSaifioviovc ^ fiovovf 
 
 rp 5vTi rexvlrac tCjv TroXeficKCJv 'Qare tuv deofirvuv yiyvefr^ci oidh 
 
 wm^iTai ' ovdkv yap aTzpoaKenrov kcmv. 
 
 iCl 
 
 ^k. 
 
462 
 
 HISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 SPARTA AND ARGOS. 
 
 468 
 
 to th« Spartans as confessed presidents of the whole Hellenic 
 body.i And the tendencies then at work, towards a certain de- 
 gree of increased intercourse and cooperation among the dis- 
 persed members of the Hellenic name, were doubtless assisted 
 by the existence of a state recognized by all as the first, — a 
 state whose superiority was the more readily acquiesced in, be- 
 cause it was earned by a painful and laborious discipline, which 
 all admired, but none chose to copy .2 
 
 Whether it be true, as O. MuUer and other learned men con- 
 ceive, that the Homeric mode of fighting was the general prac- 
 tice in Peloponnesus and the rest of Greece anterior to the 
 invasion of the Dorians, and that the latter first introduced the 
 habit of fighting with close ranks and protended spears, is a 
 point which cannot be determined. Throughout all our histori 
 (ill knowledge of Greece, a close rank among the hopHtes, charg 
 lug with spears always in himd, is the prevailing practice ; though 
 tliere are cases of exception, in which the spear is hurled, when 
 troops seem afraid of coming to close quarters.^ Nor is it by any 
 moans certain, that the Homeric manner of fighting ever really 
 piwailed in Peloponnesus, which is a country eminently inton- 
 venient for the use of war-chariots. The descriptions of the bard 
 may i)erhaj)S have been founded chiefly upon what he and hia 
 auditors witnessed on the coast of Asia Minor, where chariots 
 
 ' 'Yfiiac }up -in&avouai irpoiaravat rr/g 'E'A?.udog (Herodot. i. 69) : com 
 pure i. 152 ; v. 49 ; vi. b4, about Spartan hegemony. 
 
 * Xeiioph. Kcpub. Lac. 10, 8. kTzatvovat /liv nuvTec tu Toiavra kiriTrjSiv 
 ftnra. fu/ieicFT^ai de avril ovde/xia noXic t^iTiet. 
 
 The magnitieent funeral discourse, pronounced by Perikles in the early 
 part of the Peloponnesian war over the deceased Athenian warriors, includea 
 a remarkable contrast «>f the unconstrained patriotism and braverv of the 
 Athenians, with the austere, repulsive, and ostentatious drilling to which the 
 Spartani: were subject from their earliest youth ; at the same time, it attests 
 the powerful effect which that drilling produced upon the mind of Greece 
 (Thucyd. ii. 37-39;. mrrevovrt; ov ralg irapaaKeval^ rd irXiov Kai inraTatg^ 
 ^ T<fi d^' rifiuv avTuv ic tu ipya iinfjvx(t>' Kai kv rale naideiaic oi ftev (the 
 Spartans) iTrtirovifi aaKrjjei ei&vg vioi ovreg fb avdpeiov fierepxovrai, etc. 
 
 The impression of the light troops, when they firs^ began to attack the 
 Lacedamonian hoplites in the island of Sphakteria, is strongly expressed by 
 Thacydides (iv. 34), — iy yvCtfi^ 6 edovXufievo «f iirl AnKedaiuovt 
 ©vr, etc. 
 
 ' TKenoph. Hcllen v. 4 52 ; compare iii. 5, 20 
 
 were more employed, and where the country was much more 
 favorable to them.J We have no historical knowledge of any 
 military practice in Peloponnesus anterior to the hoplites with 
 ♦^lose ranks and protended spears. 
 
 One Peloponnesian state there was, and one alone, which 
 disdained to acknowledge the superiority or headship of Lace- 
 da3mon. Argos never forgot that she had once been the chief 
 power in the peninsula, and her feeling towards Sparta was that 
 oi' a je«Jous, but impotent, competitor. By what steps the de- 
 cline of her power had taken place, we are unable to make out, 
 nor can we trace the succession of her kings subsequent to Phei- 
 don. It has been already stated that, about 6G9 b. c, the Ar- 
 geians gained a victory over the Spartans at Hysise, and that 
 they expelled from the port of Nauplia its preexisting inhabi- 
 tants, who found shelter, by favor of the Lacedaemonians, at the 
 l)ort of MothOne, in Messenia i'^ Damokratidas was then king of 
 Argos. Pausanias tells us that Meltas, the son of Lakides, was 
 the last descendant of Temenus who succeeded to this dignity ; 
 he being condemned and deposed by the people. Plutarch, 
 however, states that the family of the Herakleids died out, and 
 that another king, named JEgon, was chosen by the people at 
 the indication of the Delphian oracle.3 Of this story, Pausanias 
 appears to have known nothing. His language implies that the 
 kingly dignity ceased with Meltas, — wherein he is undoubtedly 
 mistaken, since the title existed,«thorigh probably with very lim- 
 ited functions, at the time of the Persian war. Moreover, there 
 is some ground for presuming that the king of Argos was even 
 at that time a Herakleid, — since the Spartans oflTered to him a 
 third part of the command of the Hellenic force, conjointly with 
 
 ' Xcnoph. Hellen. iii. 4, 19. « Pausan. ir. 24, 2 ; iv. 35, 2. 
 
 ' Pausan. ii. 19, 2 ; Plutarch (Cur Pythia nunc non reddat oracula, etc. c. 
 5, p. 396 ; De Fortuna Alexandri, c. 8, p. 340). Lakides, king of Argos, is 
 also named by Plutarch as luxurious and effeminate (De capicndd ab hosti- 
 bus utilitate, c. 6, p. 89). 
 
 O. Muller (Hist, of Dorians, iii. 6, 10) identifies Lakides, son of Meltaa, 
 named by Pausanias, with Leokedes son of Pheidon, named by Ilcrodotua 
 88 OHc of the suitors for the daughter 01 Kleisthenes tlie Sikyonian (vi 
 127); and he thus infers that Meltas must have been deposed and 8acc(«ded 
 by ^gon, about 560 b. c. This conjecture seens to me not much to ht 
 trusted. 
 
464 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 their own two iings.' The conquest of Thyreatis by the Spar 
 tans deprived the Argeians of a valuable portion of their Pence- 
 kis, or dependent territory ; but Omeae, and the remaining 
 portion of Kynuria,^ still continued to belong to them ; the plain 
 round their city was very productive ; and except Sp^ta, there 
 was no other power in Peloponnesus superior to them. Mykenae 
 and Tiryns, nevertheless, seem both to have been independent 
 ftates at the time of the Persian war, since both sent contingents 
 to the battle of Plataea, at a time when Argos held aloof and 
 rather favored the Persians. At what time Kleonas became the 
 ally, or dependent, of Argos, we cannot distinctly make out. 
 During the Peloponnesian war, it is numbered in that character 
 along with Omeae ;^ but it seems not to have lost its autonomy 
 about the year 470 b. c, at which period Pindar represents the 
 Kleonieans as presiding and distributing prizes at the Ne- 
 mean games.'' The grove of Nemea was less than two miles 
 from their town, and they were the original presidents of 
 this great festival, — a function of which they were subsequently 
 robbed by the Argtiians, in the same manner as the Pisatans had 
 been treated by the Eleians with reference to the Olympic Agon. 
 The extinction of the autonomy of Kleonse and the acquisition 
 of the presidency of the Nemean festival by Argos, were doubt- 
 less simultaneous, but we are unable to mark the exact time ; for 
 the statement of Eusebius, that the Argeians celebrated the 
 Nemean festival as early as the 53d Olympiad, or 508 B. c, is 
 contradicted by the more valuable evidence of Pindar.^ 
 
 » Herodot. vii. 149. 
 
 * Herodot. viii. 73. 
 
 Strabo distinguishes two places called Orneae ; one a village in the Argeian 
 territory, the other a town between Corinth and Sikyon : but I doubt whether 
 there ever were two plnces so called : the town or village dependent on Argot 
 leenis the only place (Strabo, viii. p. 376). 
 
 » Thacyd v. 67-vi. 95. 
 
 The Kleonaeans are also said to have aided the Argeians in the destruction 
 of MykensB, conjointly with the Tcgeatans : from hence, however, we cannot 
 infer anything as to their dependence at that time (Strabo, viii. p. 377). 
 
 * Pindar, Nem. x. 42. KAewva wv npog uvdpuv rerpuKig (compare Nem. iv. 
 17). K?.euvaiov r' drr' dywvof, etc. 
 
 * See Corsini Dissertation. Agonistictt, iii. 2. 
 
 ihe tenth Nemean Ode of Pindar is on this point peculiarly good evh 
 
 CONQUESTS CF SPARTA FROM ARGOS. 
 
 4es 
 
 Of Corinth and Sikyon it will be more convenient to speak 
 when we survey what is called the Age of the Tyrants, or Des- 
 pots ; and of the inhabitants of Achaia (who occupied the soulli- 
 ern coast of the Corinthian gulf, westward of Sikyon, as far aa 
 Cape Araxus, the north-western point of Peloponnesus), a few 
 words exhaust our whole knowledge, down to the time at which 
 we are arrived. These Achaeans are given to us as representing 
 the ante-Dorian inhabitants of Laconia, whom the legend affirms 
 to have retired under Tisamenus to the northern parts of Pelo- 
 j)onnesus, from whence they expelled the preexisting lonians 
 and occupied the country. The race of their kings is said to 
 have lasted from Tisamenus down to Ogygus,^ — how long, we 
 do not know. After the death of the latter, the Achaian towns 
 formed each a separate republic, but with periodical festivals and 
 sacrifice at the temple of Zeus Homarius, affording opportunity 
 of settling differences and arranging their common concerns. 
 Of these towns, twelve are known from Herodotus and Strabo, 
 — Pellene, ^gira, JEgx. Bura, Helike, ^gium, Rhypes, Pa- 
 trae, Pharae, Olenus, Dyme, Tritaea.2 But there must originally 
 have been some other autonomous towns besides these twelve 
 for in the 23d Olympiad, Ikarus of Hyperesia was proclaimed 
 as victor, and there seems good reason to believe that Hyperesia, 
 an old town of the Homeric Catalogue, was in Achaia.3 It is 
 affirmed that, before the Achaean occupation of the country, the 
 lonians had dwelt in independent villages, several of which were 
 
 dence, inasmuch as it is composed for, and supposed to be sung by Theiaeug, 
 a native of Argos. Had there been any jealousy then subsisting between 
 Argos and Kleonae on the subject of the presidency of this festival, Pindar 
 would never, on such an occasion, have mentioned expressly the Kleonieans 
 as presidents. 
 
 The statements of the Scholia on Pindar, that .he Corinthians- at ^e iim« 
 celebrated the Neraean games, or that they were of old celebrate J ttt iSik'von 
 seem unfounded (Schol. Pind. Arg. Nem., and Nem. x. 49). 
 
 * Polyb. ii. 41. « Hcroilct i'. 145 ; S.'rabe, ^i^. p. .ses. 
 
 ' Pausan. iv. 15, 1 ; Strabo, viii. p. 38S : Homei, Eiiid, iJ 57b Par.8ai:iaa 
 seems to have forgotten this statement, when he tells us that the name of 
 Hyperesia was exchanged for that of ^geira, during the ti-ne of the Ionian 
 occupniion of the country (vii. 26, 1 ; Stcuh. B/z. ' wipi^s him, '•:. AJ)ieipa), 
 It is doubtful whether the two names designate ih'e same plhce, no; ' doea 
 Strabo conceive that they did. 
 
 YOL. II. 20« 30oo 
 
 I A 
 
4«6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 •ubsequcntly aggregated into towns thus Patrae was formed b} 
 A coalescence of seven villages, Dyme from eight (one of which 
 wfis named Ttiuthea), and .Egium also from seven or eight. 
 But all these towns were small, and some of them underwent a 
 farther junction one with the otlier ; tlius JEgixt was joined with 
 .Egeira,and Olenus with Dyme.i All the authors seem disposed 
 k) recognize twelve cities, and no more, in Achaia ; for Polybius, 
 itill adhering to that number, substitutes Leontium and Keryneia 
 in place of JEgx and Rhypes ; Pausanias gives Keryneia in 
 place of Patrj3e.'2 We hear of no facts respecting these Achivan 
 towns until a short time before the Peloponnesian war, and even 
 then their part was inconsiderable. 
 
 The greater portion of the territory comprised under the 
 name of Achaia was mountain, forming tVie northern descent of 
 those high ranges, passable only through very difficult gorges, 
 which separate the country from Arcadia to the south, and which 
 throw out various spurs approaching closely to the gulf of Co- 
 rinth. A strip of flat land, with white clayey soil, often very 
 fertile, between these mountains and the sea, formed the plain 
 of each of the Acha?an towns, which were situated for the most 
 part upon steep outlying eminences overhanging it. From th€ 
 mountains between Achaia and Arcadia, numerous streams flow 
 into the Corinthian gulf, but few of them are perennial, and th< 
 whole length of coast is represented as harborless.^ 
 
 » Strabo, riii. pp. 337, 342, 386. 
 
 * See Leake's TrnveU in Morea. c. xxvii. and xsmL 
 
 • Poljh. iL 41 
 
 Vol. 2 
 
 15 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 
 This book is due on the date indicated below, or at the 
 expiration of a definite period after the date of borrowing, as 
 provided by the library rules or by special arrangement with 
 the Librarian in charge. 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0025984691 
 
 OATC 80RR0WC0 
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 DATE BORROWED 
 
 DATE DUB 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *U0 1*50 
 
 
 • II 1 II 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C2S(U49)lOOM 
 
 
 
 
 664 
 
 G3»r 
 
 t 
 
 OCT 25 1937 
 
 i<ii«ii «»#p iii M MWiii | i ia i ii!iP« 
 
'ii 
 
 . liV. 
 
 »>■>' 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 'i 
 
 'i.r 
 
 - >. 
 
 ^ 
 
■•'*'-ft 
 
 »:.' i 
 
 n 
 
 1' 
 
 ll 
 
 '■J-: 
 
 *\i 
 
 p^^-'5 - 
 
Columbia WLnimHtv 
 
 intfjeCitpofiietBtorb 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIVEN BY 
 
THE LAOrOOX CROIP 
 
 J''rontis/>ieLe, iirft\t\ roL thru. 
 
 GREECE 
 
 1. UQFNDARY GREECE 
 
 ....•■ 
 
 II. GRECIAN" HisfOR'Y TO THE REIGN 
 •O'.iPE IS 1 STRATUS AT ATHENS 
 
 • • •♦ 
 
 • ^Y. 
 
 George Grote, Esq. 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION 
 
 ILLUSTRATED 
 
 VOLUME III 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 PETER FENELON COLLIER & SON 
 
 MCAII 
 
 ♦^oee/^r s 
 
 ^n, 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 VOL. EL 
 
 PART II. 
 
 COKTINUATION OF HISTORICAL OEIBCil< 
 
 ROBEFrr B- rRCEDMAN BEQUEST 
 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 CORINTH, MKTON, ANI, MEGABA.-AGS OF TUB GmEClAH DOPOTt. 
 
 Earlv commerce and enterprise of the Cormthtans.-- Ol^cly oj the 
 Baechiadfie. — Earlv condition of Meprara. — Larly femfrtwi •f tJifcron. 
 -Rise of the des'pots.- Kurliest chanj^res of govermncnt m i^re***-- 
 Peculiaritv of Sparta. — Discoutmuance of kin-ship m Greece ?«»«raMy. 
 Lcomparison with the Middle Ages of Ku:?^!- - Ant.^onar^K^a^ 
 lentiment of Greece- Mr. Mrtford. - Causes w^ioh led to the growth of 
 
 tha sentiment. -Change to oligarchical g^X^'^"?^/^"' ^"!h tt nU^ 
 
 indicates an advance in the Greek mind. -Di.'isatisfaction with the oU- 
 
 -archies — modes bv which tlie despots acquired power. — Examples. - 
 
 &ency towards a better organized citizenship - Character and work- 
 
 in- of the despots. - The demagogue-despot of the earlier times compared 
 
 wfth the demagogue of later times. - Contrast between the despot and 
 
 Sie earlv heroic king. - Position of the despot. - Good government 
 
 impossible to him. - Conflict between oligarchy and despotism preceded 
 
 Zt between oliganrhv and democracy. - Early oligarchies m-'l«ded . 
 
 mStiplicity of diflPerent sections and associations. - Government of 
 
 Se Geom^i-a close order of present or past pronnctors.-CUs.es 
 
 rf the people. -Militarv force of the early oligarcUes consist^ of 
 
 Tavalrv-^Rise of the heavy-armed infantry and of the free mihtory 
 
 LarinT-^both nnfavoiabte to oligarchy -fconan ^^*^-^^^^»^X 
 
 non-Dorian inhabitants. - Dynasty of despots at Sikyon-the Ortha- 
 
 ^aT^ Violent prx,ceeding; of Kleisthen^s. - Classes of Hje S|kyonian 
 
 Somilation.-Fall of the OrthagoridaB- state of S^yon^^^'i*--^^ 
 
 ^kvoni^m despots not pat down by fparta. - Despots at Connth -K^^^^ 
 
 neliis. - Periander.- Great power of Connth under Penander. - Fall of 
 
 the Kvpselid dvnasty. - M^ra - Theag«nes the despot. -Disturb^ 
 
 goTemment at " Megara - The poet Theogms. - Analogy ^fCor nth 
 
 Skyon, and Megara *«=«» *"*^ 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 lOKlC POBTIO!. or HELLAB. — AT1IEK8 BEFORE 80IX>ir. 
 
 n- .«„ of Athens before l)rnko — only a list of names.— No king nftoi 
 KoZms - Life archom. -- Decennial 'archons. - Annual arehon, nine m 
 :^r.^r:^-Uonsl.ip <. K.o.^ 
 
 SeSX ^h ^:nri^::o^.;;uT?o"n.^:!:s^:'. i^at;Pe^ ^ 
 
 U^htfind ohhfrZtlons of the gentile and phratnc brethren. -The gens 
 
 Zm'i.nrr^resin-ce';::^^^^^^^ 
 
 his age with that of Plato 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 80LONIAN LAWS AND CONSTITUTION. 
 
 S^„"'!!Difre^nt "ato'n.!:.nts afterwards as to the nature and exten o th 
 Tu^SUlno suWnt complaint as to private debts - respect fc 
 
 CONTKNTS. 
 
 ▼i 
 
 contracts unbroken under the democracy. — Distinction made m an early 
 •ocietv between the principal and the interest of a loan -- interest disap- 
 nroved of in fofo. — This opinion was retained by the philosophers afterit 
 ha.l ceased to prevail in the community generally. — Soloman seisachtheia 
 never imitated at Athens — money-standard honestly mamtained after- 
 wards — Solon is empowered to modify the political constitution. — Hii 
 census — four scales of property. — Graduated liability to income-tax, of 
 the three richest classes, one compared with the other. — Admeasurement 
 of political ri<'hts and franchises according to this scale — a Timocracy. 
 — Fourth or poorest class — exercised powers only in assembly — chose 
 mairistratcs and held them to accountability. — Pro-boulcutic or pre-con- 
 Mdering Senate of Four Hundred. - Senate of Areopagus - its powers 
 enlarL-ed — Confusion frequently seen between Soloman and post-Solonian 
 institutions. — Loose language of the Athenian orators on this point. - 
 Solon never contemplated the future change or revision of his own 
 ]«ws — Solon laid the foundation of the Athenian democracy, but his in- 
 stituiions are not democratical. - The real Athenian democracy begins 
 with Kleisthenes. - Athenian government after Solon still oligarchical, 
 but miticated. — The archons still continue to be judges until after the 
 time of Kleisthenes. -After-changes iu the Athenian constitution over- 
 looked by the orators, but understood bv Aristotle, and strongly felt at 
 Athens during the time of Perikles.-6er.tes and Phratnes under th« 
 Solonian constitution - status of persons n^t included in them. --Laws 
 of Solon — The Drakonian laws about homicide retained ; the rest abro^ 
 "ttted -Multifarious character of the laws of Solon: no appearance of 
 classification. — He prohibits the export of landed produce from Attica, 
 exceot oil — The prohibition of little or no effect. - Encouragement to 
 artisans and industry. - Power of testamentary bequest --hrst sanctioned 
 bv Solon. — Laws relating to women. — Regulations about funerals. - 
 About evil-speaking and abusive language. - Rewards to the victors at 
 ttrsacred cames. — Theft. - Censure pronounced hj Solon upon citizens 
 neutral in a sedition. -Necessity, under the Grecian city-governments, of 
 some positive sentiment on the part of the citizens. - Contrast in this;^re- 
 snect between the age of Solon and the subsequent democracy. - The 
 sLe idea followed out in the subsequent Ostracism. --Sentiment of So- 
 frtowards the Homeric poems and the drama. - D.fficult;^.s of Solon 
 Xr the enactment of the laws.- He retires t.om Attica - Visits Egypt 
 3 rvnnis - Alle-ed interview and conversation of Solon with Crresus 
 arSar^fs - Moral Tesson arising out of the narrative. - State of Attua 
 after the Solonian legislation. - Return of Solon to Athens - Rise ot 
 Peisistratus - His memorable stratagem to procure a guard from the 
 neoDTe -Peisistratus seizes the Akropclis and becomes despot- courafre- 
 Sus resistance of Solon. - Death of Solon - his Sl'^l'^^I^^- " J^P^^^^ 
 on the procedure of the Roman law respecting principal and ^^^^^^^'^ 
 ft loan of money 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 EUBCEA. — CTCLADE8. 
 
 The islands called Cyclades -Euboea -Its «i\?V'hXf Setrift.^!SS 
 Bwtria, etc. - How peopled. - Eariy power of Chalkis, Eretnft. Wixo* 
 
 
wA 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 etc -Early Ionic festiral at Delos ; crowded and wealil»y. - Its decline 
 jLZ^^I c - causes thereof. — Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apol o 
 !^eWde^ce as to eX Ionic life- - War between Chalkis and Eretna m 
 ;iriy times 1 extensive alliances of each. ^ Commerce and cobn^so< 
 Chalk s and Eretna - Euloic scale of money and weight - Three differ. 
 Si o'edan scales -^iaean, EulK>ic, and ^^'J^^ ^ ^^^f |'. •*.^.^. ^^3^^^ 
 other 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 ASIATIC lONIANi. 
 
 Twelve Ionic cities in Asia. - Lepe^darr ^*r^^^ '^J^^^^l 
 Fmtirrants to these cities — diverse Greeks. — trreat amcrences ui 
 ]jr.W^omr the twelve cities. - Ionic cities really fonnded by different 
 ™?iSlior-ConscqW^^^^^ of the mixtare of inhabitants in these colo- 
 ni^more aethritv-more instabilitv. - Mobility ascribed to the Ionic 
 Dies — more a^^^T ' -. . •• f ^^is cause. — Ionic ciUes 
 
 TaZ-t::^::^ X^«.i"bau;;r_wo«hipo^ Apo.io «.d 
 
 A,«m«-«i9Md on th.- AMatic coast prior to the (ireek emigrant. - 
 ^^ed brth^- Pan-Ionic festival and AmphilttTony on the proraon- 
 Sf^'^rf lJyS-ara«iion of MiKtos-of the other lon.c at.es. - 
 JKUtoriM'toerspo^ed with Asiatic Tillages.- Magnesia on the Maan- 
 ^M^LK Mount Sipvlns. - Ephesus _ Androkto the CM»t- 
 
 tet ««lement and distriLntion.- I"T"»* r^J^rnl^'int Ifa^^T^^r 
 Kolonhon its oriein and hstorv. — Temple of Apollo at Klar«, ne.ir 
 
 ISK'- itsTgends -- Lel>edns, Jeos K, -^-' (^i K^ol 
 distribution of the inhah.tunts of Teoe. - Erythne and CTuoa. nw«o^ 
 inen«— Phokasa. — Smjma 
 
 CHAPTER XIV- 
 
 jBOLIC CREEKS IN ASIA. 
 
 Uhfohn.Tnrf i. ho region of Mount Ida. - Continental setUetnents of 
 
 •£el, and Tenedos.-^^me.Hellenic inhabitant 
 
 Ida- Mvsians and Tenkrians. - Tenkrians of G*-^'- - M^"e"« "^ 
 
 tes in'Tnte^^^^ poUtics. - Pittakus is created ^symnete, or Dictatoi 
 rf MitylfinC. ** 
 
 ; 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER X7 
 
 ABIATIC DOBIANS. 
 
 AaUiir Dorians— thei- Hoxapolis. — Other Dorians, not included in the 
 Hexapolis. — Exclnsion of Halikamassus from the Hexapolis. 201-208 
 
 CHAPTER XVL 
 
 NATIVES OF ASIA MIHOR WITH WHO.M THE GREEKS BECAME COWNBCTEH. 
 
 Indigenous nations of Asia Minor - Homeric geography. -Features of th« 
 country. - Names and situations of the different people. -Not originally 
 ag^n^gated into large kingdoms or ^'i^es. - River Halys - the eAno. 
 ^raohical l)oundary — Syro- Arabians eastward of that nver. — Thracian 
 face-hi the north of Asia Minor. - Ethnical affinities and migrations. 
 L Partial identitv of legends. - Phrygians. - Their influence upon the 
 eariy Greek colonists. - Greek musical scale - partly borrowed from the 
 Phrygians. — Phrygian music and worship among the Greeks in Asia 
 Minor - Character of Phrygians, Lydians, and Mysiaa.. - Primitive 
 Phrygian king or hero Gordius — Midas zuj--:h» 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 LTDIAMS. — MEDE8. — CIMMERIAK8. — SCTTHIAN8. 
 
 Lydians- their music and instruments. - They and their capital Sardis un- 
 ^known to Homer.- Early Lydian kings. -Kanuaules »°d ^yggs. - T!u^ 
 Merranad dvnasty succeeds to the Herakleid. — Le^nd of Gyffw w 
 Plato. — Feniinine influence running through the legends of Am* Minor. 
 -Distribution of Lydia into two parts — Lydia and Torrbcbia. — Pro- 
 ceedines of Gyges.— His son and successor Ardys. — Aseynans and 
 S^"^- First^Median king - Detokes. - His history compo^d of Gre- 
 cian materials, not Oriental. - Phraortgs - K.vax«^^-- ?^^,^^^^"1' 
 veh — invasion of the Scythians and Cimmerians. -The Cimmenans.- 
 The Scvthians. — Grecian settlements on the coast of the Euxine. — scytn- 
 i as described by Herodotus. - Tribes of Scythian.,. - Mann^ and 
 worship.- Scythians formidable from numbers and courage. -^rma- 
 tiaiis - Tribes east and north of the Palus Maeotis. - Tauri in the Cn- 
 mea-Massagctae.- Invasion of Asia by Scvthians and Cimmcnans - 
 Cimmerians driven out of their country by the Scythians - Djffif 1^ t'ci 
 in the narrative of Herodotus. — Cimmerians m Asia Minor. -~ Scvthians 
 in Upper Asia.- Expulsion of these Nomads, after a tern porarv occupa- 
 tion. -Lydian kings Sadyattis and Alyattes - war against Miletus^ 
 Bacrilege'committ^d by Alyattes - oracle - he makes peace with MUettw. 
 -TLoni reign - death - and sepulchre, of Alyattes. - Cr^us. - He 
 i^acks and conquers the Asiatic Greeks. — Want of cooperation ainoil| 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 *k/. Tnnir rities — UnavaiHne suggestion of Thalfts — to merge the twelT« 
 S^L cities into one Pan-Ionic city at Teds. - Capture of Ephesus. - 
 CrcSus becomes Idng of all Asia westward of the Halys -New and im- 
 ^^m era for the Hellenic world - commencing with the conquests of 
 Trlisus. - Action of the Lydian empire continued on a «^ I'^g2'l9-.2W 
 by the Persians.. . 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 PHENICIAMB. 
 
 Fk.nici.n. and Assyrians - memher, of the S^^j^VS 1« - rtS 
 «in*. — Fftrlv Dresence of Phenician ships in the lirecian seas — in in» 
 H^m^c 5mL - SUuat on and cities of Phenicia. - Phenician comui^rce 
 flourished more in the e«riier than in the later times of Greece - Phem- 
 STn colon^riutca, Carthage, GadSs, etc.- Commerce of the Phem- 
 daL of Gad€s -towards Afrka on one side and Britain on the other^-^ 
 SSductire region round Gades, called Tartessus - Phenicians and 
 c2thSn«-^^^^ establishments of the latter combined views ot em- 
 irTi^th views of commerce. — Phenicians and Greeks in Sicily and 
 P^ms-Ihe latter partially supplant the former. - Iberia and Tartessus 
 ^Zl^X theXeks b^efore^'about 630 b. c. - Memorable voyage of 
 the Samhm K^l«us to Tartessus. - Exploring voyages of the Phokieans, 
 STtweenTa^STO b. c- Important addition to Grecian geographical 
 to^Tedgca^d stimulus to Grecian fancy, thus communicated. -Circum- 
 S^Tation' of Africa bv the Phenicians. - This circumnavigation wa* 
 ^Yirromplithed-cfoubts of critics, ancient, and modem, examined 
 -Tciravan-trade by land carried on by the Phenicians 264-289 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 ASSYRIANS. — BABYLON. 
 
 Assyrians - their name rests chietiy on Nineveh and Babylon. - Chaldaeans 
 arSibylon- order of priests. - Their astronomica observations. - 
 Babylonia -its laborious cultivation and fertility. -City of Babylon - 
 to tensions and walls. - Babylon -only known during he time of "s 
 degradation — yet even then the tirst city m Western Asia. -Immense 
 wS^TnTof human labor possessed by the Babylonian kmgs^- Collcctn^ 
 
 dvilization in Asia, without in<iividual ^^^.^^^ Vh.Sn ''"^nS G^e^ks - 
 AtPd contrast between Egvptians, Assy nuns, Phenicmns, and Ureeks — 
 fctr^d predatory trfbeLurrounding the Babylonians. - Append,^ 
 « Nineveh and its Remains," by Mr. Layard iyiwu/ 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 EGYPTIANS. 
 
 ft«udans-the link of commerce between Egypt »"^^ ^«^y "^ Zl^S 
 ^1 — earliest Greciwi informant about Egypt. - The Nile in ttie time 01 
 
 CONTENTS. *» 
 
 &rs^;^r sf f =f Sk '^^^^^^ 
 
 Sfferent parts of *« <^°"»'T 7 J^'ITmedchas"' - First introducUo. 
 
 gjyptian Wy -« „^"dTpsamme i h""!! «oriL co„:?cted with it- 
 «r Greeks into Egypt under rsamranic v-„„_,ia„ kings — caste of 
 
 Importance of Greaan '"^ir^^'^XiX^^^Tiht fie to Greek 
 
 toterpreters. - Ope^^^g buLmLt^'Xkra^t - Discontents and mutinr 
 commerce — Greet estaDiisnmui psammetichus— hi» 
 
 rf the Egyptian "••'■'»|7J^'»«J_-NXhare«ar at Carchemisch.- 
 
 Sroi:i^''girb?£SLhr-x;Sd by fi%oeckh 30«4, 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 ^« *««. PMirwiCIANS.— GROWTH OF CARTHAGB. 
 DECLINE OF THE PHENIClAiNa. 
 
 Decline of the Phenicians - growth of Gre^^^^^^^ 
 
 Effect of Phenicians, Assyrians and LgyP^^a^^^^^ gnomon -and 
 
 The alphabet.- The scale of monejjindwe^^^^^^ ^ 
 
 the division of the day. - ^^^'^^^^^jij^tJ^ ^f Greek?and Carthaginian* 
 "^^MiSIiil-lmiTabirrel'^^^^^^ Tyre and Carthage. . 342-348 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 WKBT.BN COLONIES OF GREECE - IN EPIRUS, ITALY, SICILY, AND OAUI. 
 
 Early unauthenticated emigration ^-^ .p^-^,;:,^,^^^^^^ 
 
 of^ Sicily - Sikels - Sikans - E^"^^' ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ r;thnically cog- 
 -Pelasgi in My-T-Latins-CEnotnan^ J^piro ^ _(^recian 
 
 nate.- Analogy of ^^.^g"*^,^/ ";„ sldlv -^om^^^ in 735 b.c- 
 colonization of ascertained date ^" /^^^^[^^^""^Prosperity of Cum« 
 Cum« in Campania -earlier- date unknojn^ 5OO B.C. - Revolution 
 
 between 700-500 b. <^- " ^^f '" Vvafirof C^m« by Tuscans and Sam- 
 -despotism of Anstodemus.-Invas on ot^^^ ^^^^^.^^ .^ 
 
 nites from the i^t^nor. - Rapid multiplicatimiot^ ^^ ^^^^^ .^ 
 
 Sicily and Italy beginning -^^ '3o b^c. i^^o^^ ^^^^^^ .^ 
 Sicily by Theokles - ^pot jhere tne V ^ gj^^ _ poundi^ 
 
 memorable afterward^. -" Ante-HeUenic dismou^ Sicily. -Gela.- 
 
 tk>n of Syracuse. - I^^^^'^I/f^eS" - SuTco^onies -^Ak«E, Kas- 
 ZanklS, afterwards Messene (^*^s''°«Jjj.„fH:n.era, etc. — Prosperity 
 
- CONTENTS. 
 
 ^ X. cv^io ^r^A «;;kftn«i eraduallv Hellenized. — Difference bciwtcil 
 »w UreeKS ID 01J.UJ become form liable to the Greek settlers. 
 
 fltieTUre UuUr - Gredan colonies ia southern Italy -Nat. v, 
 ^p^^uT"::^ territory - Svbaris and Kn..«n - ^emtory -d c^ o-e 
 J? SThMis »nd Kroton— Epizephynan Lokri. — l)nj,nnjl settlers oi 
 ll>kri-?heir character ao.l circumstktices. - Treachery towards the mdi- 
 «noas SikeU- Mixture of SikeU in their temtory - Stkel customs 
 SoXd - l^krian lawgiver Zaleukus. - Rigor of h.s laws - govern- 
 ment of Lokri. - Rhegium. - Chalkidic scttlemetits m Italy and S.c.l^ 
 " RhteimS Zankle,Nax.», Katana, Leontini. - Kaulonia and SkyUe- 
 Z™ Sirii or Herakleia - Mctapoutium. — Tarentum — circumstances 
 i?"tsIut^datro« -1 The^art the a.kist - Kitua.ton 
 
 „d teVritoT of Tarentum. -lapygi.u.s. - Messaptans. - Prosoenty of 
 "e iS^reeks tetween 700-500 "• <=— A?ecndency over U.e fco- 
 fcian DODulation — Kroton and Svbaris -at their maximum from 560-..10 
 tnan population luxury - their org..nizat.on mdusUv, and 
 
 ^wer- Grecian world about 560 B.C. -Ionic and Italic Greets are 
 I'hen the most prominent among Greeks. - Consequences of the fall of 
 Syharis-Krotoniates -their salubrity, strength, success .n the Olympic 
 games, etc. — Massalia 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 OBECULN COLONIES IN AND NEAK EPIKU8- 
 
 karkvra.- Early foundation of Korkyra from Corinth. -Relations of 
 Korkvra with torinth. - Relations with Epirus.-Ambrak.a founded by 
 CorintT- Joint settlements by Corinth and Korkyra. -Leukas and 
 inXoiwm -^ApoUonia and ^Epidamnus. - Relations bctween^^tJ.^ese 
 colonies — Commerce 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 402-410 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 GREECE 
 
 VOL. III. 
 Frontispiece— T\iQ Laocoon Group . 
 
 Venus of Milo 
 
 Venus of Medici . . • • 
 The Wooden Horse of Troy . 
 
 M 
 
 
 « 
 
 AKAUN ANIAN8. EPIROTS. 
 
 Akamanians —Their sociia and political condition. — Epirots — comprisinj? 
 ^reit^ibes, with Uttle or nrethnical J^-d'^?. - Some of these mbe« 
 
 ethnically connected with those of ^o^^t""^ ^^'^^^ ' "TpJ^'^rTdLtriK 
 Macedonians — impossible to mark the boundaries. — Territory dwtnb- 
 m^into^lages-no considerable cities. - Coast of Epinisd,8CK>ar- 
 !Sir to gS colonization. -Some Epirotic tribes gorerned l^ kings. 
 
 •cng 
 «d>«i not 
 
 411-419 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE, 
 
 PART II. 
 
 CONTINUATION OF HISTORICAL GREECE 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 SOKINTH, SIKYON, AND MEGAR.V-AGE OF THE GBECIAM 
 
 DESPOTS. 
 
 The preceding volume brought down the history of Sparta to 
 the period marked by the reign of Peisistratus at Athens; at 
 which time she had attained her maximum of territory, was con- 
 fessedly the most powerful state in Greece, and enjoyed a pr» 
 portionate degree of deference from the rest. 1 now proceed to 
 touch upon the three Dorian cities on and near to the Isthmus, - 
 Corinth, Sikyon, and Megara, as they existed at this same penod. 
 
 Even amidst the scanty information which has reached us, we 
 trace the marks of considerable maritime energy and commerce 
 among the Corinthians, as far back as the eighth century B. C. 
 The tbundation of Korkyra and Syracuse, in the 11th Olympiad, 
 or 734 B. c. (of which I shall speak farther in connection wiOi 
 Grecian colonization generally), by expeditions from Connth, 
 affords a good proof that they knew how to turn to account the 
 excellent situation which connected them with the sea on both 
 rides of Peloponnesus : and Thucydides, ■ while he notices them 
 «s the chief Uberators of the sea, in early times, fr om pirat es, alag 
 
 voim m. 
 
 ' Thucyd. i, 13. 
 1 
 
 loo- 
 
 If 
 
• HISTORY OF GKEF.CE. 
 
 tMlsusthat the first great improvement in ship-b .ilding, - th« 
 construction of the trir-.-me, or ship of war, with a full deck and 
 triple banks for the rt,wers, - was the fruit of Connth.aninge- 
 nuity. It was in the year 703 b. C, that the Cormth.an Ame.- 
 nokles built four triremes for the Samians, the first which those 
 islanders had ever possessed: the notice of this &<=' «"«^'"^ 
 well the imiH)rtance attached U. the new invention, as the humble 
 .cale on which the naval force in those early days was equipped. 
 And it is a fact of not less moment, in pr<x.f of the man time 
 vi..or of Corinth in the seventh century b. C, that the earliest 
 na^val battle known to Tbucydides was one which took place be- 
 tween the Corinthians and the Korkyra^ans b. c. 604. 
 
 It has already been stated, in the preceding volume, that he 
 line of Herakleid kings in Corinth subsides gradually, through a 
 series of empty names, into the oligarchy denomin.atod Baeclnadx, 
 or Bacchiads, under whom our first historical knowkdge ot the 
 city begins. The persons so named wore all accounted descend- 
 ants of Herakles,and formed the governin- caste in the city; 
 intermarrying usually among themselves, and choosing from their 
 own number an annual prytanis, or ,,resiaent, for the administra- 
 tion of affairs. Of their mtemal government we have no ac- 
 counts, except the tale respecting Archias the founder of byra- 
 cuse,2 one of their number, who had made himself so detested 
 by an act of brutal violence terminating in the death of the beau- 
 tiful youth Akueon, as to be forced to expatriate. That such a 
 man should have been placed in the distinguished post of cckisi 
 of the colony of Syracuse, gives us no favorable idea of the Bao- 
 chiad oligarchy : we do not, however, know upon what original 
 authority"the story depends, nor can we be sure that it is accurately 
 recounted. But Corinth, under their government, was already a 
 powerful commercial and maritime city, as has already be-D 
 
 stated. , . 
 
 Megara, the last Dorian state in t hU direction eastward, and 
 
 « Plutarch, Amator. Narrat. c. 2, p. 772; Diodor. Fmrm. lib v.u, p. 2^ 
 AlexandT, Mu>\m (Frngm. i, 5, ed. Schneidowin) aod the Scholiast ad 
 ApoU<». Bhod. iv, 1212, seem to connect this act of outrage with the ex- 
 pS^on of Om BaochiadiiJ from Corinth, irhich did not take place until .oii« 
 
 
 SIKYON.- MEGARA. 
 
 s 
 
 I 
 
 
 eonta-mmous with Attica at the point where the mountaiiii 
 caUed Kerata descend to Eleusis and the Thracian plain, is a^ 
 firmed to have been originally settled by the Dorians of Corint^ 
 and to have remained for some time a dependency of that city 
 It is farther said to have been at tirst merely one of five sej^ratc 
 vilkges, — Megara, Heraea, Peinea, Kynosura, Tripodiskus, — in- 
 habited by a kindred population, and generally on friendly terms, 
 yet sometimes distracted by quarrels, and on those occasions 
 carrying on war with a degree of lenity and chivalrous confi- 
 dence which reverses the proverbial affirmation respecting the 
 sanguinary character of enmities between kindred. Both these 
 two statements are transmitted to us (we know not from what 
 primitive source) as explanatory of certain current plirases : • 
 the author of the latter cannot have agreed with the author of 
 the former in considering the Corinthians as masters of the Me- 
 garid, because he represents them as fomenting wars among these 
 five villages for the purpose of acquiring that territory. What- 
 ever may be the truth respecting this alleged early subjection 
 of Megara, we know it 2 in the historical age, and that too m 
 eariy as the 14tli Olympiad, only as an independent Dorian city, 
 
 ' The first account seems referred to Demon (an author of about 280 b c, 
 and a collector of Attic archfEology, or what is called 'AnJfdoypa^of. Set 
 Phanod6mi, Demonis, Clitodemi, atque Istri, 'An^tJwv, Frajrmenta, ed. 
 Siebclis, Prarfdtio, pp. viii-xi), and is given as the explanation of the locution 
 — 6 ^loc Kopiv^og. Sec Schol. ad Pindar. Nem. vii, ad finem ; Schol. 
 Aristophan. Ran. 440: the Corinthians seem to have represented their 
 eponymous hero as son of Zeus, though other Greeks did not believe them 
 (Pausan. ii, 1, 1). That the Megarians were compelled to come to Corinth 
 for demonstration of mourning on occasion of the decease of any of the 
 members of the Bacchiad oli]?archy, is, perhaps, a story copied from the 
 regulation at Sparta regarding the Perioeki and Helots (Herod, vi, 57; 
 Pausan. iv, 14,3; Tyrtaeus, Frapm.). Pausanias conceives the victory of 
 the Megarians over the Corinthians, which he saw commemorated in 
 the Megarian ^^(Javpbg at Olympia, as having taken place before the Ist 
 Olympiad, when Phorbas was life-archon at Athens : Phorbas is placed by 
 chronologers fifth in the series from Medon, son of Codrus (Pausan. i, 39, 
 4- vi, 19, 9). The early enmity between Corinth and Megara is alluded to 
 in Plutarch, De Malignitate Herodoti, p. 868, c. 35. 
 
 The second story noticed in the text is given by Plutarch, Quastion. 
 Graec. c. 17, p. 295, in illustration of the meaning of the word Aopif^evoc. 
 
 • Pausanias, i, 44, I, and the epigram upon Orsippus in Boeckh, Corpuf 
 Inscnot, Or. No. 1050, with Boeckh's conmentarf. 
 
I 
 
 . IIIHTOBY OK GREECE. 
 
 mainUining the integrity of its territory under i^^ J<f^ 
 Orsippus, tlie famous Olympic nmner, against some powerful en- 
 emies probably the Corinthians. It was of no mean <-o->'J-«; '^^ 
 ««8essing a territory which extended across Mount Ge.aneia 
 rZ C^rin.hian Ji', on which the fortihed to«. an ,.r of 
 Peg», belonging .o .he Megarians. w.us sm.a.ed ; -t ^J-^' "'»';' 
 of early and distant col.>ni-s. -and con.pctcnt, dunng the t.me 
 nf Solon to carry on a protrac.cd .oulest with the Athenians, 
 o?tl plsse:!^ of Sulmis. wherein. aUhongh the latter were 
 iTlast vi^orions, it was not withont an intermediate per.od ot 
 
 ill-success and despair. • , i .„ ;, 1,0 
 
 Of the early history of Sikyo... from the period when be 
 
 .-ame Dorian down to tl.e seventh century B. C., we know notlnng. 
 
 Our first information r..<pe..ting it. concerns the establ.s^nnen of 
 
 he despotism of Or.ha.oras, about CSf-OTO n C. And tt i 
 
 1 point'^eserving of notice, .ha. "•'-''« '''--'^''^-.—^i 
 towns,- Corinth, Siky.n., and Megan^ - underwent durmg the 
 course of this same cen.n.y a Mmilar change ot gov.rnment. In 
 ~eh of them a desiK,, es.aidished himself; O.-.hagoras ,n b.ky- 
 on ; Kypselus in Corimh ; Theagenes n. Megara. 
 
 Unfor'tunately, we have .00 li..le evidence as to the state of 
 things by which .his .l.ange of g,.v erntncnt was prec^'ded and 
 brou^ht'about, .0 be able ,0 apprcia.e f.dly ;•^l'e->;g• ^ 
 wha. draws our a.ten.ion to it more par.tcularly ts. .1 at he like 
 phenomenon seems .0 .uve occurred ..„n.e,nporaneously hro.jgh 
 L a large .mmber of cities, con.inen.al, insular, and colonial, m 
 manv different parts o.' .he Grecian worid. The ,,enod between 
 Co.. and 500 B. c, witnessed .he rise a.id downtall of many des- 
 pots and despotic dynasties, each it. its own separa.e city. Uur- 
 C the succeeding interval between 500 and 350 B. C, new 
 de''s,K>.s. though occasionally springing up, become more rare ; 
 political dispu.e .ake. ano.her .urn, and .he 'in-J-on .s .aised 
 directly and ostensibly be. ween the many and the 'e'^. - ''^ 
 people and .he oligarchy. Bu. in the still la.cr .imes wh.ch Mow 
 L battle of Cha-roneia. in pro,>ortion .as Greece, declining m 
 eiyic not less than in mili.a.y s,,iri,. is driven to .he cons.an. era^ 
 ployment of mercenarv „•..,,<, and hnn.bled by the overruhng 
 rZrferenee of foreigners. -, he des,.. wi.h ^^^^'^^^^J^ 
 body-guard becomes again a chan.clcri^t.c of >l.me ; a Undeucy 
 
 
 EARLIEST GOVERNMENTS IN GREECE. • 
 
 partially counteracted, but never whoUy subdued, by AratiM. 
 and th. Ach:ean league of the third century B. c. 
 
 It would have been instructive if we had possessed a faithful 
 record of these changes of government in some of the more con- 
 siderable of the Grecian towns; but in the absence of such evi- 
 dence we can do little more than collect the brief sentences of 
 Aris.o.le and others respecting the causes which produced them. 
 For as the like change of government was common, near about 
 the same time, to cities very different in locality, in race of m- 
 habi..ants, in tastes and habits, and in wealth, it must partly have 
 depended upon certain general causes which admit ot being 
 
 assigned and explained. 
 
 In the preceding volume, I tried to elucidate the heroic govern- 
 ment of Greece, so far as it could be known from the epic poems, 
 _a government founded (if we may employ modem phraseolo- 
 gy) upon divine right as opposed to the sovereignty of the people, 
 but requiring, a-s an essential condition, that the king shall pos- 
 sess force, both of body and mind, not unworthy of the exalwd 
 breed to which he belongs.' In this government, the authority 
 which pervades the whole society, all resides in the king ; but on 
 important occasions it is exercised through the forms of publi- 
 oi. V ; he consults, and even discusses, with the council of chiefs or 
 elders —he communicates after such consultation with the as- 
 sembled agora,- who hear and approve, perhaps hear and mui-- 
 mur, but are not understood to exercise an option or to reject. 
 In -iving an account of the Lykurgean system, I remarked that 
 .heboid primitive Rhetr», or charters of compact, indicated the 
 existence of these same elements ; a king of superhuman lineage 
 (in this particular case two coordinate kings), - a senate of twen- 
 y-ei»ht old men, besides the kings who sat in it, -and anekkl^ 
 4 or public assembly of citizens, convened for the Purpose "f 
 approving or rejecting propositions submitted to them, with little 
 or no liberty of discussion. The elements of the heroic govern- 
 ment of Greece are thus found to be substantially the same- 
 those existing in the primitive Lykurgean constitution :m boO. 
 cases the predominant force residing in the kmgs, — and the tune. 
 
 "T^ a striking parage in PluUrch, Pr»cept EeipubL Germ*, c k 
 f. 801. 
 
 e 
 
I 
 
 I i 
 
 l| HISTORY OF GBEECB. 
 
 lions of the senate, Jtill more those of the public assembly, bein^ 
 comparatively narrow and restricted; in both cases the regal 
 authonty being upheld by a certain religious sentiment, which 
 tended to exclude rivalry and to insure submission in the people 
 up to a certain point, in spite of misconduct or deficiency in the 
 reigning individual. Among the principal Epirotic tribes, this 
 government subsisted down to the third century B. c', though some 
 of them had passed out of it, and were in the habit of electing 
 annually a president out of the gens to which the king belonged. 
 Starting from these points, common to the Grecian heroic 
 government, and to the original Lykurgean system, we Hnd that 
 in the Grecian cities generally, the king is rei)hiced by an oli- 
 garchy, consisting of a limited number of families, — while at 
 Sparta, the kingly authority, though greatly curtailed, is never 
 abolished. And the different turn of events at Si)arta admits 
 of being partially exi>lained. It so happencMl that, for five 
 centuries, neither of the two coordinate lines of Spartan kings 
 was ever without some male representatives, so that the sentiment 
 of divine right, upon which their preeminenc*' wiis Ibnnded, 
 always proceeded in an undeviating channel. Tliat sentiment 
 never wholly died out in the tenacious mind of Sparta, but it 
 became sutliciently enfeebled to occasion a demand tor guarantees 
 against abuse. If llie senate had been a more numerous body, 
 composed of a few principal families, and comprising men of all 
 ages, it might, perhaps, have extended its powers so much as to 
 absorb those of the kin;:: but a council of twenty-eight very old 
 men, chosen indiscriminately from all Spartan families, w:is 
 essentially an adjunct and secondary force. It wa^ insuilicient 
 even as a restraint upon the king, — still less was it competent to 
 become his rival ; and it served indirectly even as a support to 
 him, by preventing the formation of any other privUeged order 
 powerful enough to ha an overmatch for Ids authority. Tliis 
 insufficiency on the p:irt of the senate was one of the causes 
 which occasioned the formation of tlie annually-renewed Council 
 of Fi-e, called the Ephors ; originally a defensive board, like the 
 Roman Tribunes, intended as a restraint ui>on abuse of power 
 in the kings, but afterwards expandiuL' into a paramount and 
 
 > Plutarch, IPyrrh c. 5. A;.-: 't. I'oUt. v, y, 1 
 
 GOVERNMENT OF SPAR i' A. 7 
 
 unres>ponsible Executive Directory. Assisted by endless dissen- 
 sions between the two coordinate kings, the ephors encroached 
 upon their power on every side, limited them to certain speciai 
 functions, and even rendered them accountable and liable to 
 punishment, but never aspired to abolish the dignity. That 
 which the regal authority lost in extent (to borrow the just 
 remark of kmg Theoi>ompus)» it gained in durability: the 
 descendants of the twins Eurysthenes and Prokles continued in 
 possession of their double sceptre from the eariiest historic:d 
 times down to the revolutions of Agis the Third, and Kleomenes 
 the Third, — generals of the military force, growing richer and 
 riclier, and reverenced as well as influential in the state, though 
 the directory of ephors were their superiors. And the ephors 
 became, in time, quite as desi)otic, in reference to intenial 
 aflairs, as the kings could ever have been before them ; for the 
 Sjxartan mind, deeply jHJSsessed with the feelings of command 
 and obedience, remained comparatively insensible to the ideas of 
 control and resj>onsibility, and even averse to that open discussion 
 and censure of public measures, or officers, which such idea.^ 
 imply. We must recollect that tlte Spartan }>olitical constitution 
 was both simplified in its chaiacter, and aided in it^ working, by 
 the comprehensive range of the Lykurgean disci] line, with its 
 rigorous equal pressure upon rich and poor, which averted man^ 
 of the causes elsewhere productive of sedition, — habituating the 
 proudest and most refractory citizen to a life of undeviating 
 obedience, — satisfying such demand as existed for system and 
 regularity, — rendering Spartan personal habits of life much 
 more equal than even democrat ical Athens could parallel; but 
 contributing, at the same time, to engender a contempt for 
 talkers, and a dislike of methodical and prolonged speech, which 
 of itself sufficed to exclude all regular interference of the collective 
 citizens, either in political or judicial affiairs. 
 
 Such were the facts at Sparta ; but in the rest of Greece the 
 primitive heroic government was modified in a very different 
 manner : the people outgrew, mucn more aecidedly, that feeling 
 of divine right and personal reverence which originally gave 
 iuthority to the king. Willing submission ceased on the pnf* 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. v, 9, I 
 
 I 
 
8 
 
 HISiUKY OF GRKKCL 
 
 of the people, and still more on the part of the inferior chiefs, and 
 with it ceased the heroic royalty. Something like a syitem or 
 constitution came to be demanded. 
 
 Of this discontinuance of kingship, so universal in the political 
 march of Hellas, the i»rime cause is, doubtless, to be gought in 
 the smallness and concentrated residence of each distinct 
 Hellenic society. A single chief, perpetual and unresponsible, 
 was noway essential for the maintenance of union. In modern 
 Europe, for the most part, the different political societies which 
 grew up out of the extinction of the Ruman empire embraced 
 each a considerable population and a wide extent of territory 
 and the monarchical form presented itself as the only known 
 means of union iKtwetn the parts: the only visible and imposing 
 .ymbol of a national identity. Both the military character of the 
 Teutonic invaders, as well as the traditions of the Roman empire 
 which they dismembered, tended towards the establishment of a 
 monarchical chief, the alKjlition of whose dignity would have 
 t ten looked .ipon as ecpiivalent, and would really have been 
 W|uivalent, to the breaking \i\y of the nation, since the maintenance 
 of a collective union by means of general assemblies was so 
 burdensome, that the kings themL.elves vainly tried to exact it by 
 force, and representative government was then unknown. 
 
 The history of the Middle Ages, though exhibiting constant 
 resistance on the part of powerfui subjects, frequent deposition 
 of individual kings, and occasional changes of dynasty, contains 
 few instances of any attempt to maintain a large political aggre- 
 gate united without a king, either hereditary or elective. Even 
 towards the close of the last century, at the period when the 
 federal constitution of the United States of America was first 
 formed, many reasoners regarded ' as an impossibility the appli- 
 cation of any other system than the monarchical to a territory 
 of large size and pop dation, so as to combine union of the whole 
 
 See this subject discussed in the admirable collection of letters, called 
 the Federalist, written in 1787, during the time when the federal constitution 
 of the United States of America was under discussion. — Letters 9, 10, 14, 
 
 by Mr. Madison. 
 
 "II est de la nature d'une republique (says Montesquieu, Esprit des Loix, 
 Tiii, 16) de n'avoir qu'nn petit territoire : sans cela, elle ne pent gufew 
 rabeifiter." 
 
 LARGE AND SMALL STATES. $ 
 
 with equal privileges and securities to each of the parts . and H 
 might, perhaps, be a real impossibility among any rude people, 
 witli strong local peculiarities, difficult means of communication, 
 and habits of representative government not yet acquired. 
 Hence, throughout all the larger nations of medieval and modem 
 Europe, with few exceptions, the prevailing sentiment has been 
 favorable to monarchy ; but wherever any single city, or district, 
 or cluster of villages, whether in the plains of Lombardy, or in 
 the mountains of Switzerland, has acquired independence,— 
 wherever any small fraction has severed itself from the aggre- 
 
 gate, the opposite sentiment has been found, and the natural 
 
 tendency has been towards some mollification of republican 
 government ;i out of which, indeed, as in Greece, a despot has 
 often been engendered, but always through some unnatural mix- 
 ture of force and fraud. The feudal system, evolved out of the 
 disordered state of Europe between the eleventh and thirteenth 
 centuries, always presumed a permanent suzerain, vested with 
 large rights of a mixed personal and proprietary character over his 
 
 » David Hume, in his Essay xii (vol. i, p. 159, ed. 1760), after remarking 
 « that all kinds of government, free and despotic, seem to have undergone 
 in modem times {i. e. as compared with ancient) a great change for the better, 
 with regard both to foreign and domestic management," proceeds to say : — 
 
 "But though all kinds of government be improved in modern times, yet 
 monarchical government seems to have made tlic greatest advances towards 
 perfection. It may now be atfirmcd of civilized monarchies, what was form- 
 eriy said in praise of republics alone, that they are a government of laws, 
 not of men. They are found susceptible of order, method, and constancy 
 to a surprising degree. Property is there secure; industry encouraged ; the 
 arts flourish ; and the prince lives secure among his subjects, like a father 
 among his children. There are, perhaps, and have been for two centuries, 
 near two hundred absolute princes, great and small, in Europe ; and allow- 
 ing twenty years to each reign, we may suppose that there have been • 
 whole two thousand monarchs, or tyrants, as the Greeks would hav 
 them ; yet of these there has not been one, not even Philip the Seco 
 Spain, so bad as Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, Domitian, who were four in 
 twelve amongst the Roman emperors. It must, however, be confessed, 
 that though monarchical governments have approached nearer to popular 
 ones in gentleness and stability, they are still much inferior. Our modem 
 education and customs instil more humanity and moderation than the ancieat, 
 but have not as yet been able to overcome entirely the disadvantage! of thr4 
 fonn of government." • 
 
 
10 
 
 1 : 1ST OR Y OF GKKECfc. 
 
 ra«8al9, though subject, also, to certain obligations to Kards ibem 
 tbe immediate va»sal)» of the king had subordinate vassaU cl 
 their own, to whom they stood in the same relation : and in thia 
 hierarchy! of power, property, and territory blended together, 
 the rights of the chief, whether king, dnke, or baron, were always 
 conceived as constituting a status apart, and neither conferred 
 ori^nally by the grant, nor revocable at the please re, of thoMj 
 over whom they were exercised. This view of the essential 
 nature of political authority was a point in which the three great 
 elements of modem European soiieTy, — the Teutonic, the Ro- 
 man, and the Christian, — all concurred, though ea^h in a ditler- 
 ml way and with diflerent modifications ; and tfie result was, a 
 variety of attempts on the part of subyt^ets to compromise with 
 their chief, without any idea of substimting a delegated executive 
 in his place. On pjirticular points of these feudid monarcliies 
 there grew up, gradually, towns with a concentrated population, 
 among whom was seen the remarkable combination of a republi- 
 can feeling, demanding collective and resi)onsible rnxinagement in 
 their ownlocal affairs with a necessity of union and subordinar 
 tioo towards the great monarchical whole ; and hence again arose 
 a new force tending l>oth to maintain the form, an.l to predeter 
 mine the march, of kingly govemment,^^ And it has been found in 
 
 » See the Lectures of M. Guizot, Cours d'llLstoire Moderne, Leqon 30, vol. 
 
 iii.p 187, edit. 1829. 
 « M. AogusUn Thierry observes, Lcttrcs sur lllistoire de France, Lettre 
 
 xri, p. 235 : — . ^ - 
 
 " Sans aocun sonvenir de riiistoire Grewiue on Romaine, les bourgeois 
 des onzieme et douzieme si^clcs, soil que leur ville fut sous la seigneurie 
 d'un roi, d'un comte, dun due, d'une eveque ou d'uTie abbaye, allaient droit 
 k la republique : mais la reaction du pouvoir euil.U les rejetait souvent en 
 arriere. Du balanccmcnt de ces deux forces opposees resuitait pour la 
 ville une sort de gouvemement mixte, et e'est ce qai arriva, en jrenerai, dans 
 Ic nord de la France, comme le prouvent les chartes de coraniune." 
 
 Even amoniET the Italmn cities, which became practically self-governing, 
 and produced despots a« many in number and as unprincipled in character 
 •8 the Grecian (I shall touch upon this comparison more largely hereafter) 
 Mr. Hallam observes, that "the sovereignty of the emperors, thoui?h not 
 ▼ery eflfective, was in th^jory always admitted : their name was used in pub- 
 lie acts and appeared upon the coin." — View of the Middle Ages, part i, dk 
 
 S) p. 346, sixth edit v ». •« 
 
 See also M. Raynouard, Histoire du Droit Municipal en France, book i^ 
 
 AMfl-MONARCraCAL SENTIMENT OF GREFX-R 
 
 11 
 
 practice possible to attain this latter object, — to comtiine regal 
 government with fixity of administration, equal law impartially 
 executed, security to }>erson and pronerty, and freedom of dis- 
 cussion under representative forms, — in a degree which the 
 wisest ancient Greci would have deemed hopeless.' Such an 
 improvement in the practical working of this species of govern- 
 ment, speaking always comparatively with the kings of ancient 
 times in Syria, Egypt, Judaea, the Grecian cities, and Rome, — 
 coupled with the increased force of all established routine, and 
 the greater durability of all institutions and creeds which have 
 once obtained footing throughout any wide extent of territory 
 and people, has caused the monarchical sentiment to remain pre- 
 dominant in the European mind, though not without vigorous 
 occasional dissent, throughout the increased knowledge and the 
 enlarged political experience of the last two centuries. 
 
 It is important to show that the monarchical institutions and 
 monarchical tendencies prevalent throughout mediaeval and 
 modern Europe have been both generated and perpetuated by 
 causes peculiar to those societies, whilst in Hellenic societies such 
 causes had no place, — in order that we may approach Hellenic 
 phenomena in the proper spirit, and with an impartial estimate 
 of the feeling universal among Greeks towards the idea of a king. 
 The primitive sentiment entertained towards the heroic king died 
 
 ch. 12, vol. ii, p. 156: " Cette se'paratiou essentielle et fondaraentale cntre 
 les actes, les agens, du gouvemement — et les actes, les agcns de Tad minis- 
 tration locale pour les affaires locales — cette demarcation j)cUtique, dont 
 I'empire Romain avoit donn^ Texemple, et qui concilioit le gouvemement 
 monarchique avec unc administration populaire — continua plus ou rnoins 
 expressement sous les trois dynasties." 
 
 M. Kaynouard presses too far his theory of the continuous preservaiion 
 of the municipal powers in towns from the Roman empire down to the thud 
 French dynasty ; but into this question it is not necessary for my purpose 
 
 to enter. 
 
 * In reference to the Italian republics of the Middle Ages, M. Sisniondi 
 observes, speaking of Philip della Torre, denominated siynor by the people of 
 Como, Vercelli, and Bergamo, " Dans ces villes, non plus que dans celles 
 que son frere s'^tait auparavant assujetties, le peuple ne croyoit point renon- 
 cer it sa liberty : il n'avoit point voulu choisir un maitre, mais seulement un 
 protecteiu- centre les nobles, un capitainc des gens de guerre, et un chef de 
 la justice. L'exp^rience lui apprit trop tard. que ces prerogatives r^unies 
 constitnoient un souverain." — Republiques Italiennes, vol. iii, ch. 20, p. 271 
 
12 
 
 MISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 mm 
 
 cut, pwsing first into indifforence, next, — after experience of the 
 jMDOts. — into determined antipathy. 
 
 To an historian like Mr. Mitlord, full of English ideas respect- 
 ;„„ government, thi. anti-.nonarchical feeling appears of the 
 nawre of insanity, and the Grecian communities hke madmen 
 without a keeper: -vhile the greatest of all benefactors is tl^ 
 hereditary king, who conquers them from without, -the .second- 
 best is the home-despot. «h« -iz-s the acropolis and puts liH 
 fellow-citizens under coercion. There cannot W a n.ore certa.- 
 wav of misinterpreting and distorting- Grecian phenomena tua„ 
 to read them in this spirit, which reverses the max.ms both oi 
 prudence and morality current in the ancient world. The haired 
 of kin-s as it stoo.1 among .he Greeks, whatever may be thought 
 a.«>ut ; similar feeling now, was a preeminent virtue, flowmg 
 directly from the noblest and wisest part of thcr nature: it «a, 
 a consequence of their deep conviction of the necessity of un.ver- 
 Ll le J restrain, -.t was a direct expression of that regu a.ed 
 Lialhy which required the cn.rol of individual pass.on frotn 
 Tery one without exception, and nu.t of all frotr, Ian. to whotn 
 Lwer was confided. The co,.cep.io.. whi.h the Greeks fonned 
 rf an unresponsible One, or of a king who could do no w.-onj^ 
 may I« expVessed in the p.-egnant words of Herodotus :' He 
 subverts the customs of the country: he v.olates women: h 
 puts men to death without trial." xNo ,.,hcr conception of the 
 J^Lble tendencies of kingship was jus.iti.a cither by a genend 
 knowledge of human nature, or by ,K,litical experience as .t stood 
 from Solon downward: no other feeling than "'^horrence «.uld 
 be entertained for the character so c-onceivcd : no other ban a 
 man of unprincipled ambition would ever seek to invest himself 
 
 ""our" larger political experience has taught us to modify this 
 opinion by showing that, und,-,- the ..nditions '•' "---»'y '^J^ 
 Lt governments of mo.lern ICmope, the ''""""""=! f '^^"''^2,^ 
 Herltus do not ..ke place -and .hat ,. is ,M.s.ible, by mean 
 of representative institutions acting under a ^'.'""1^,2 
 ■uutners, customs, andjns^onca^^ 
 
 ' ~~Z~ - ... ^,«fL vaToia, Kai Btdrai yvvaUaf, Kreivti rt 
 
 * Herod, iii, 80. No^atu re kiv€i narpia, ru* 
 
 ' 
 
 HATRED OF MONARCHS AMONG THE GREEKS. 
 
 IS 
 
 the miscliiefs likely to flow from proclaiming the duty of peremp^ 
 tory obedience to an hereditary and unresjwnsible king, who 
 cannot be changed without extra-constitutional force. But such 
 lart^er observation was not open to Aristotle, the wisest as well 
 as the most cautious of ancient theorists ; nor if it had been open, 
 could he have applied with assurance its lessons to the govern- 
 ments of the single cities of Greece. The theory of a constitu- 
 tional king, especially as it exists in England, would have 
 appeared to him impracticable : to establish a king who will reign 
 without governing, — in whose name all government is carried 
 on, yet whose personal will is in practice of little or no effect,— 
 exempt from all responsibility, without making use of the exem|>. 
 
 tion, receiving from every one unmeasured demonstrations of 
 
 homage, which are never translated into act except within the 
 bounds of a known law, — surrounded with all the paiapher- 
 nalia of power, yet acting as a passive instrument in the hands 
 of ministers marked out for his choice by indications which he is 
 not at liberty to resist. This remarkable combination of the 
 fiction of superhuman grandeur and license with the reality of an 
 invisible strait-waistcoat, is what an P^ngli-^hman has in his mind 
 when he speaks of a constitutional king : the events of our history 
 have brought it to pass in England, amidst an aristocracy the 
 most powerful that the world has yet seen, — but we have still to 
 learn whether it can be made to exist elsewhere, or whether the 
 occurrence of a single king, at once able, aggressive, and tesolute, 
 may not suffice to break it up. To Aristotle, certainly, it could 
 not have appeared otherwise than unintelligible and impractica- 
 ble : not likely even in a single case, — but altogether inconceiv- 
 able as a permanen* system a>id with all the diversities of temper 
 inherent in the successive members of an hereditary dynasty 
 When the Greeks thought of a man exempt from legal responsi- 
 bility, they conceived him as really and truly such, in deed as 
 well as in name, with a defenceless community exposed to his 
 oppressions ;• and their fear and hatred of him was measured by 
 
 "Euripides (Suppiices, 429) states plainly the idep of a -toa»'vof, a| 
 
 wceived in Greece the antithesis ^> laws : — 
 
 Ovd'ev Tvpiivvov 6vafieviaTepov iroXei' 
 'Ottov, rd fiEV npojTiaToVf ovk elatv vofioi 
 Kcivof, Kparel d' e/f. fbv vofiov KEKTrjfievnr 
 AvTd<: nap' airu. Compare Soph. Antij^'j^. 737. 
 
 BK^aaMO! 
 
14 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 their reverence for a crovemraent of equal law and free speech, 
 with the ascendency of which their whole hopes of security were 
 ijgaociated, — in the democracy of Athens more perhaps than in 
 Miy other' portion of Greece. And tliis feeling, as it was one of 
 the best in the Greek mind, so it was also one o( the most widely 
 spread, — a point of unanimity highly valuable amidst so many 
 points of dissension. We cannot construe or criticize it by 
 reference to the feelings of modem Europe, still less to the very 
 peculiar feelings of England, i-especting kingship : and it is the 
 application, sometimes explicit and sometimes tacit, of this un- 
 suitable standard, v, liich renders Mr. Mitford's appreciation of 
 Greek poUtics so often incorrect and unfair. 
 
 When we tr>' to explain the (X)urse of Grecian affairs, not from 
 the circumstances of other societies, but from those of the Greeks 
 themselves, we shall see good reason for the discontinutmce as 
 well as for the dislike of kingship. Had the Greek mind been 
 as stationary and unimproving as that of the Orientals, the di*- 
 content with individual kings might have led to no other change 
 than the deposition of a bad king in favor of one who promised 
 to be better, without ever extending the views of the people to 
 any higher conception than that of a personal govemmenL But 
 the Greek mind was of a progressive character, capable of 
 conceiving and gradually of reaUzing amended social combina- 
 tions. Moreover, it is in the nature of things that any govern- 
 ment, — regal, oligiuxjliical, or democratical, — which compnsea 
 only a single city, i« far less stable than if it embraced a wider 
 purtBce and a larger population : and when that semi-religious and 
 mechanical submission, which made up for the personal deficiencies 
 of the heroic king, beca me too feeble to serve as a workin g 
 
 S^^d^the" d"i^s7ioirin^VHstot. PoUt. iii, sect. 10 and 11, in which the 
 rule of tJie kinj? is discussed in comparison with the govemment of laws ; 
 compare also iv, 8. 2-3. The person called " a king according- to law " is, in 
 bis jud-meat, no king at «11 : 'O fiiv ydp Kara vofiov ?iey6fievoc f^aoiA^vi ovk 
 koriv ddo^ naT^unep dvrn^rv i3a<Ji?^iac (iii, 11, !)• 
 
 BtMHJCting hovofiiv, larn'm'h ^ap(yrfaia, — equal laws and equal speech, 
 ^M«ppo«5d to moii««-hT, sec Herodot. iii, 142, v. 78-92 ; Thucyd. iii, 62; 
 Demoithen. ad Leptin. c. 6, p. 461 -, Kurip. Ion. 671 . ^ . . . 
 
 Of Timoleon it was steled, as a part of the grateful rote passed after hn 
 death by the Svracusan. ossembly,— 6ri rove rvpawovc KaTakvaa^,-^ aneiutu 
 ro^f pofiov'i role ^iteXi^Tatc (Plutarch. Timoleon. c. 39). 
 
 See Karl Fried. Hermann, Griech. Staate AUerihQmer, sect 61-65. 
 
 rilE hi: KOIC MONAKCHY PASSES INTO AN OMGARClll. 
 
 li 
 
 principle, the petty prince was in too close contact with Lii 
 people, and too humbly furnished out in every way, to get up a 
 prestige or delusion of any other kind : he had no means cf over- 
 awing their imaginations by that combination of pomp, seclusion, 
 and mystery, which Herodotus and Xenophon so well appreciate 
 among the artiticea of kiagcrafui As there was no new feeling upon 
 which a perpetual chief could rest his |)ower, so there was nothing 
 in the circumstances of the community which rendered the main- 
 tenance of such a dignity necessary for visible and eflfectivo 
 union :2 in a single city, and a small circumjacent community, 
 collective deliberation and general rules, with temporary and 
 responsible luagistrates, were practicable without difficulty* 
 
 To maintain an unresjjonsible king, and then U» contrive 
 accompaniments wliich shall extract Ijrom him the benefits of 
 If sponsible government, is in reality a highly complicated system, 
 1' ou'di, as h;k5 been remarked, we have become lamiliar with it 
 ill modern Europe ; tlie more simple and obvious change is, to 
 substitute one or more temporary ami rec^ponaible magistrates in 
 place of the Ling himself. Such was the course which aftaim 
 tt»ok in Greece. The inferior chiefs, who had originally served 
 ;ln council to the king, fo*md it jiostekble to sujKirsede him, and to 
 jiiterjiate the functions of administration among themselves; 
 rt!taining probably the occasional convocation of the general 
 assembly, as it had existed b lore, and with as little practical effi- 
 cacy. Such wius in substance tlie character of that mutation 
 which occurred generally throughout the Grecian stales, with the 
 exception of Si)arta : kingship was alx)lished, and an oligarchy 
 took its place, — a council deliberating collectively, deciding gen- 
 eral matters by the majority of voices, and selecting some individ- 
 uals of their own body as temporary and accountable adminis- 
 
 » See the account of Deiokes, the first Median king, iii Herodotm.. , —, 
 'videatly an outline drawn by Grecian imagination : also, the Cyropaedia 
 
 of Xenophon, viii, 1, 40; viii, 3, 1-14; vii, 5, 37 ov rovn,) /z6vv> ho- 
 
 fuCe (Kiipof) XP^^^ ^^^^ upxovTOQ tQv upxofjievuv dia^efietv t<^ j3e?iTixnfa( 
 avTuv eivai, aXAa Kal KarayoTjTtveiv (^to XPVvai avToi)c, etc. 
 
 « David Hume, Essay xvii, On the Ri.se and Progress of the Arts and 
 Sciences, p. 198, ed. 1760. The effects of the greater or less extent of ter- 
 ritory, apon the nature of the government, are also well discussed in Destult 
 Tiacy Commentaire sur I'Esprit des Lt>ix de Montesquiea, ch. viii 
 
16 
 
 lIKSrORY JF GKEFXE. 
 
 EARLY OLIGARCHIES IN GREECE 
 
 IJ 
 
 tmtore. It was always an oligarchy which arose on the defeat 
 ftnre of iIk' hfroic kiiigtioni : tlie age of democratical movemenl 
 was yet far distant, and tho condition of the people — the general 
 l.u.lv of tV«MinrM — was not inmudiately altered, either for bett*?r 
 ir wur-f, l»v tli»- revolution; the small number of j)rivileged 
 j»-rsons, among whom the kingly attributes were distributed and 
 ijiit in rotation, U'lui: tlio>r nearest in rank to the king himself, 
 perhaps member> ot the -ame large gens with him, and pretend- 
 in" to a common divine or heroic descent. As far as we can make 
 out, this change >eems to have taken place in the natural course 
 of events and without violence. Sometimes the kingly lineage 
 died out and was rK»t replaced ; sometimes, on the death of a 
 king, his son and successor was acknowledged i only as arohon, 
 or perhaps set aside altogether to make room for a j»rytanis, t»r 
 president, out of the men of rtuik around. 
 
 At Athens, we are told that Kodrus was the last king, and 
 that hi> descendants were recognized only as archons for life ; 
 after some vears, tlie archons for life were replaced by archons 
 for ten years, taki-n trom the body of Eupatrid;e, or nobles ; sub- 
 sequently, the duration of the archonship was farther shortened 
 to one year. At Corinth, the ancient kings are said to have 
 pa->e«l in like manner into the oligarchy of the liacchiada\ out 
 of whom an annual prytanis was chosen. We are only able to 
 make out the general fact of such a change, without knowinj^ 
 how it w:us brought about, — our first historical actpiaintance with 
 the Grecian cities l)eginning with these oligarchies. 
 
 ' Aristot. Tolit. iii, *.», : . in. !•>. 7-S. 
 
 M. Au«;ustin Thit'iry rtinarks, in a similar spirit, that the <;roat political 
 (h:int;o. oommon to so liuiro a portion of nudia'val Europe in the twelfth 
 aiid thirteenth centuries, wherehy the many ditVerent commntus or city eon 
 stimtions were form* <l. was aceomplished uiuler «rreat varieties of manner 
 and < itrumstance ; sometimes by violencr. -ometime^^ by hannonious accord. 
 
 " ('\>t utio oontrovi-rs.' qui doit tinir, .lue celle des fraiiehi-^es munieipales 
 obienues par rinsurreeiirn et des franchises munieipales aeeordees. Quelque 
 face du probleme <in on tivisage. il reste bien entendu que les constitutions 
 ttfbaines du \ii et du xiti sieele. eomme toute cspece d'institutions politiques 
 dans tous les temps, ont )u >'etablir i\ force ouvcrte, s'octroyer de guerre lassa 
 on de plein pre. eire arraehees ou soUieitees. vendues ou donnees pratuite- 
 ment; les prandes n^olutions sociales s'accomplissent par tous ces moyeni 
 Il la fois. — I Aug. Thieny, Reeits des Temps Merovingien?, Preface, p. 19 
 2^ eVn.\ 
 
 Suck oligarchical governments, varying in their details but 
 analogous in general features, were common tlironghout the citief 
 of Greece proper as well as of the colonies, throughout the seventh 
 century B. c. Though they had little immediate tendency to 
 benelit the mass of the freemen, yet when we compare them with 
 the antecedent heroic government, they indicate an important ad- 
 vance. — the first adoption of a deliberate and preconceived sys* 
 tern in the management of public affairs. i They exhibit the first 
 evidences of new andim}>ortant political ideas in the Greek mind, 
 — the separation of legislative and executive powers ; the former 
 vested in a collective body, not merely deliberating but also final- 
 ly deciding, — while the latter is confided to temporary individual 
 magistrates, responsible to that body at the end of their period 
 v\' otlice. We are first introduced to a community of citizens, 
 according to the definition of Aristotle, — men qualified, and think- 
 ing themselves qualified, to take turns in command and obedience : 
 t!\e collective sovereign, called The City, is thus constituted. It 
 i< true tiiat tliis first community of citizens comprised only a small 
 proportion of the men personally free, but the ideas upon which it 
 was foimded began gradually to dawn upon the minds of all. 
 Political power had lost its heaven-appointed character, and had 
 become an attribute legally communicable as well as determined 
 to certain definite ends ; and the ground was thus laid for those 
 thousand questions which agitated so many of the Grecian cities 
 during the ensuing three centuries, })artly respecting its apportion- 
 ment, partly respecting its employment, — questions sometimes 
 raised among the members of the privileged oligarchy itself, 
 sometimes betw»iMi that order as a whole and the non-privileged 
 Many. The seeds of those |)Oi)ular movements, wliich called 
 forth so much profound emotion, so much bitter antipathy, so 
 much energy and talent, throughout the Grecian world, with 
 ditierent modifications in each particular city, may thus be traced 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. iii, 10, 7. 'Errri 6e {i. e. after the early kings had had 
 their day) avve^Saive yiyvecr&ii ttoXXov^ dfioiovq Trpdg uperriv, ovKeri vnifievav 
 {rr/v ^3aai'KeLav)y d/./.' k^i]Tcvv hoivov t i, kol noXireiav Ka^iffTaaav. 
 
 Koivov n, a commune, the ^jreat object for which the European towns in 
 the Middle Ages, in the twrifth century, struggled with so much energy, 
 and ultimately obtained : a charter of incorporation, and a qualified privilc^ 
 tif interna! self-government. 
 
 VOL. IIL 2oti. 
 
 % 
 
 1 til 
 
ift 
 
 UJISrORY OF GREECE 
 
 ulFFKKKNT WAYS IN WHICH THE DESPOTS AROSE. 
 
 19 
 
 tttuk to that early revolution which erected the primitive oligai 
 diy upon the ruins of the heroic kingdom. 
 
 How these fir.-<t olipjarchies were administered we have m direct 
 information; but the narrow and anti-j>opular interests naturally 
 belonging to a privileged few, together with the general violence 
 r«f private manners and passions, leave us no ground for presuming 
 favorably respecting either their prudence or their good feeling ; 
 and the facts which we learn respecting the condition of Attica 
 ^.rior to the Solonian legislation (to be recourrted in the next chap- 
 ter) rai:.e inferences all of an unfavorable character. 
 
 The first shock which they received, and by which so many of 
 I iiem were subverted, aro^e from the usur|>ers called Despots, who 
 employed the prevalent discontents both as pretexts and as aids 
 for their own personal ambition, while their very frequent success 
 r«ems to imply that such discontents were wide-spread as wt^ll as 
 lerious. These despots arose out of the bosom of the oligarchies, 
 but not all in the same manner.' Sometimes the executive mag- 
 'tttrate, upon whom the oligarchy themselves had devolved im 
 |K>rtAnt administrative powers for a certain temporary period, 
 became unfaithful to his choosers, and acquired sufficient a^cen- 
 iency to retain his dignity permanently in spite o^ them, — per- 
 ^ps even to transmit it to his son. In other places, and seem- 
 Hipjly more oft^n, there arose that noted character called the 
 Oemaffosrue, of whom historians both ancient and modem com- 
 Mionly draw so repulsive a picture :- a man of energy and ambition, 
 »=i>metimes even a member of the oligarchy itself, who stood for- 
 wani as champion of the grievances and sufferings of the non- 
 iirtvileged Many, acquired their favor, and employed their 
 
 ' The (leiiiiition of a de*{>ot is g:iven in Cornelius Nepos, Vit. Miltiadis, 
 •*, 8 : " Omnes habentur e( dicuntur tyranni, qui potestate sunt perpctuA in 
 <i& civitate, quae libertate usa est : '' compare Cicero de Republic^, ii, 26, 27 ; 
 
 The word rvpawoc was said by Hippias the soi)hi.st to have first found its 
 "Way into the Greek lan^juage atH>ut the time of Archilochus (b. c. 660): 
 Boisckh thinks that it came from the Lydians or Fhyrgians (Comment, ad 
 Corp. Inscrip. No. 3439). 
 
 ■ Ariatot. Polit. v, 8, 2, 3, 4. Tvpawoc — U TrpoffrariKij^ ^'C'/f i^«ti »i'« 
 aJOo&ev iKJSXaffravet (Plai», Repub. viii, c. 17, p. 565). OMevi yap Mi aSr,- 
 \oiff 6ri vdf Tvpavvo^ Ik drjfioKo'kaKO^ (^verai (Dionys. Halic. vi, 60): J 
 j^pcsition decidedly too general. 
 
 Strength so effectively as to put down the oligarchy by force, and 
 constitute himself despot, A third form of despot, some pre- 
 BumptuoLS wealthy man, like Kylon at Athens, without even the 
 pretence of popularity, was occasionally emboldened by the suc- 
 cess of similar adventures in other places to hire n troop of re- 
 tainers and seize the acropolis ; and there were examples, though 
 rare, of a fourth variety, — the lineal descendant of the ancient 
 kings, — who, instead of suffering himself to be restricted or 
 placed under control by the oligarchy, found means to subjugate 
 them, and to extort by force an ascendency as great as that which 
 his forefathers had enjoyed by consent. To these must be added, 
 in several Grecian states, the -^symnete, or Dictator, a citizen 
 formally invested with supreme and unresponsible power, placed 
 in command of the military force, and armed with a standing 
 body-guard, but only for a time named, and in order to deal with 
 some urgent peril or ruinous internal dissension.^ The person 
 thus exalted, always enjoying a large measure of confidence, and 
 generally a man of ability, was sometimes so successful, or made 
 himself so essential to the community, that the term of his office 
 was prolonged, and he became practically despot for life ; or, even 
 if the community were not disposed to concede to him this per- 
 manent ascendency, he was often strong enough to keep it against 
 their will. 
 
 Such were the different modes in which the numerous Greek 
 iespots of the seventh and sixth centuries b. c. acquired their 
 power. Though we know thus much in general terms from the 
 brief statements of Aristotle, yet, unhappily, we have no contem- 
 porary picture of any one of these communities, so as to give us 
 the means of appreciating the change in detail. Of those per- 
 sons who, pa^sessing inherited kingly dignity, stretched their 
 paternal fK)wer so far as to become despots, Aristotle gives in 
 ±*heid6n of Argos as an example, whose reign has been already 
 nftT-ated in the preceding volume : of those who made themselves 
 
 * Aristot. iii, 9, 5; iii, 10, 1-10; iv, 8, 2. Alffv/iVTirai — avroKptiTopet 
 .ovapxoi kv Tolq upxaioic 'EkXriai — aiperf/ TvpavAg : compare Theophrastua, 
 .'ragment nepl Baai7.eia^, and Dionys. Hal. A. R. v, 73-74 ; Strabo, xiii, p. 
 
 •11 \ aad Arifltot. Fragment. Rerum Publicarum, ed. Neumann, p. Idl^ 
 
 K^KiM uv lloXiTeia, 
 
» 
 
 HISTORY OF oBEFXE 
 
 CHARACTER AND WORKING OF THE DESPOTS. 
 
 ■21 
 
 despota by n>a«s of official power previously held under an ob. 
 Sy he nwnes Phalaris, at Agrigentum, and the despots at 
 Ctu and other cities of the Ionic Greeks : of those who raised 
 Semselv "s by becoming demagogues, he specifies Pan^tms m the 
 San tow/of Leontini. Kypselus at Corinth and Pe.s,stratu» 
 a A tens-' of ^symnetes, or chosen despots, P.t.akus ot M.ty- 
 at Athens, o .7 -pi^g military and aggressive 
 
 lene is the P-^-": ^"^W which had degraded and iU- 
 :eTS\:S - c-^el deV for seve^ yea.., and at 
 W dethroned and slain, is farther depicted by D.onys.us of Hal- 
 rarnlsurin the history of Aristodemus of .he Ita .an Cum..= 
 F^m the general statement of Thucydides a. well as of Ans 
 JeTe lea^ that the seventh and sixth centunes b C. were 
 ^utnZ of progress for the Greek cities generally, .n weal h 
 i„C"e Id In population ; a.,.l .ho nM.ner.,us co on.es founded 
 IrinriLineriod, of which 1 shall speak i.. a future chap er, 
 w U furnth fertho'r illustnt.ion of such progressive tcdences. 
 Now the ch,«.Kes just n,en.io..ed in the Grec.an governments, 
 STer^Sly asTe know them, are on the whole decided evidcces 
 ^^Idvling citizenship. For the heroic governmen , w.th 
 whicJ Grecian communit'ies begin, is the rudest and most .n an- 
 Le of all governments; destitute even of the pretence of sys 
 eri or security, incapable of being in any way toreknown and 
 delnd in" only upon the accidental variations h, the character of 
 fhe rSng individual, who, in most cases, far from seTV.ng as a 
 'i:::Z l the poor against the rich and great, - 'ke y^^^^^^^^ 
 dulge his passions in the same unrest ra.ned «ay as the latter, and 
 
 "'Xhf d^;:r.tTsI-y .owns succeeded and supplant^-d 
 this oli.-arch.cal government, though they governed on prmcples 
 Isua^W n^row L selfish, and often oppressively cruel, "taking 
 rthou-hT-to use the emphatic words of Thucydides -except 
 for theifown body and their ^wnJamUy^--ye^^ 
 TI-;;rx;;,i7;:r^4 i v, ^ 5 Ans,otle refers .0.. of .he son^^ 
 
 no B c Vol. 3 
 
 1 
 
 noi &U -^ng enough to crush the Greek mind, imprinted upon it a 
 painful but improving political lesson, and contributed much to 
 enlar^»- the range of experience as well as to determine the sub- 
 sequent cast of feeling.i They partly broke down the wall of 
 distinction between the people — properly so called, the general 
 mass of freemen — and the oligarchy ; indeed, the demagogue- 
 despots are interesting, as the first evidence of the growing im- 
 f)ortance of the people in political affairs. The demagogue stood 
 forward as representing the feelings and interests of the people 
 against the governing few, probably availing himself of some 
 special cases of ill-usage, and taking pain.s to be conciliatory and 
 generous in his own personal behavior; and when the people, by 
 their armed aid, had enabled him to overthrow the existing rulers, 
 they had thus the satisfaction of seeing their own chief in pos- 
 session of the supreme power, but they acquired no political rights 
 and no increased securities for themselves. What measure of 
 positive advantage they may have reaped, beyond that of seeing 
 their previous oppressors humiliated, we know too little to deter- 
 mine ;2 but even the worst of despots was more formidable to the 
 rich than to the poor, and the latter may jxjrhaps have gained by 
 the change, in comparative importance, notwithstanding their 
 Bhare in the rigors and exactions of a government which had no 
 f»ther permanent foundation than naked fear. 
 
 A remark made by Aristotle deserves esjiecial notice here, as 
 illustrating the political advance and education of the Grecian 
 communities. He draws a marked distinction between the eaily 
 demagogue of the seventh and sixth centuries, and the later 
 demagogue, such as he himself and the generations immediately 
 preceding had witnessed : the former was a military chief, daring 
 wnd full of resource, who took arms at the head of a body of pop- 
 
 ' Thucytl. i, 17. Tvpawoi de uaot fjaav h ralg 'E?.?iTjviKalc 'noTieat, rb 
 t<p' lavTuv fiovov irpoopijficvoi ff re rd aufia Kal tg rd rdv idiov oIkov av^tti 
 
 * Wachsmuth ( Helleni.sche Alterthumskunde, sect. 49-51) and Tittmann 
 (Griechisch. Staatsverfassungen, pp. 527-533) both make too much of the 
 •upposed friendly connection and mutual good-will between the despot and 
 ihe poorer freemen. Community of antipathy against the old oligarchy wai 
 8 bond essentially temporary, dissolved as soon as that oligarchy was pot 
 
 \i 
 
 8 
 
 
tt 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 nlar insurgents, put down the government by force, and ma* 
 himself the master both of those whom he deposed and of tho»e 
 by whose aid he deposed them ; while the latter was a speaker 
 possessed of all the talenls necessary for moving an audience, but 
 neither inclmed ,.,, „or qualified for, armed attack, - accomplish- 
 ing all his purpos.- by pacific and constitutional methods. This 
 valuable change, — substituting discussion and the vote of an 
 assembly m place of an appeal to arms, and procuring for the 
 pronounced decision of the assembly such an influence over men's 
 minds as to rend.-r it final and respected even by dissentients, - 
 arose from the continued practical working of democratical insti- 
 tutions. I shall haxe occasion, at a later period of this history tc 
 estimate the value of that unmeasured obloquy which has been 
 heapedon the Athenian demagogues of the Peloponnesian war 
 - Kleon and HyporMus ; but, assuming the whole to be well- 
 founded, it will not. be the less true that these men were a 
 matenal improvement on the earlier demagogues, such as Kyp- 
 selus and Peisistralus, who employed the armed agency of the 
 people for the purpose of subverting the established government 
 and acquiring despotic authority for themselves. The dema-o-ue 
 was essentially a leader of opposition, who gained his influence 
 by denouncing the men in real ascendency, and in actual execu- 
 live functions. Now, under tlie early oligarchies, his opposition 
 could be shown only by armed insurrection, and it conducted him 
 either to personal sovereignty or to destniction ; but the growth 
 of .lemocratical institutions insured bo.h to him and tahis political 
 opponents full liberty of speech, and a paramount assembly to 
 •Iwermme between ,hem ; whilst it both limited the ran^e of his 
 a.nb.tion, and sot aside the appeal to armed force. The railin- 
 demagogue of Athens, at .he time of .he Peloponnesian war (even 
 If we accept literally the representations of his worst enetnies) 
 WM thus a far less mischievous and .lan^^erous person than the 
 fighting demagogue of the earlier centuries ; and the " -rowth of 
 habiu^t public speaking,", to use Aristotle's expression, was 
 
 JJj^T ^'"" '• '•-' ''^^ 'E^^^^^" 'W«.W, ire ^eVo,ro 6 airir 
 Pea*^ pvrii ^i) or, ror, ^.. ol S,^y,,yoi i,.av U ruv crpar^yoLL- 
 
 OPPRESSIVE RULE OF THE DESPOT!*. 30 
 
 the cause of the difference : the opposition of the tongue was a 
 beneficial substitute for the opposition of the sword. 
 
 The rise of these despots on the ruins of the previous oli- 
 garchies was, in appearance, a return to the principles of the 
 heroic age, — the restoration of a government of personal will in 
 |)Uice of that systematic arrangement known as the City. But 
 the Greek mind had so far outgrown those early p inciples, thai 
 no new government founded thereupon could meet with willing 
 acquiescence, except under some temporary excitement. At first, 
 doubtless, the popularity of the usurper, — combined with the 
 fervor of his partizans and the expulsion or intimidation of 
 opponents, and farther enhanced by the punishment of rich 
 oppressors, — was sufficient to procure for him obedience ; and 
 prudence on his part miglit prolong this undisputed rule for a 
 considerable period, perhaps even throughout his whole life. 
 But Aristotle intimates that these governments, even when they 
 oegan well, had a constant tendency to become worse and worse • 
 discontent manifested itself, and was aggravated rather than 
 i-epressed by the "violence employed against it, until at length the 
 despot became a prey to mistrustful and malevolent anxiety, 
 losing any measure of equity or benevolent sympathy which 
 might once have animated him. If he wai* fortunate enough to 
 bequeathe his authority to his son, the latter, educated in a corrupt 
 atmosphere and surrounded by parasites, contracted dispo.sitioi>t> 
 yet more noxious and unsocial : his youthful appetites were mor^ 
 ungovernable, while he was deficient in the prudence and vigor 
 which had been indispensable to the self-accomplished rise of his 
 father.' For such a position, mercenary guards and a fortified 
 acropolis were the only stay, — guards fed at the expense of the 
 citizens, and thus requiring constant exactions on behalf of that 
 which was nothing better than a hostile garrison. It was essential 
 to the security of the despot that he should keep down the spirit 
 
 '/Jyeiv fiTjfiayuyovaL fiev, Si' aneipiav de tuv iroXefitKCyv oix iTriri^evraif n'/.^it 
 el irov ^paxv tl yeyove tolovtov. 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. v, 8, 20. The whole tenor of this eighth chapter (of the 
 fifth book) shows how unrestrained were the personal passions, — the lost ai 
 »rell as the anger, — of a Grecian riipawo^. 
 
 Tov Toi Tvpavvov einrefielv oi p^diov (Sophokles ap. SchoL Anstides, vol 
 iii. p. 291, ed. Dindorf ). 
 
 'A 
 
 HI 
 
94 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of the free people whom he governed; that he should isoUte 
 them from each other, aiid prevent those meetings and mutual 
 communications which Grecian cities habitually presented in the 
 school, the lesche, or the palaistra ; that he should strike off the 
 overtopping ears of corn in the field (to use the Greek locution) 
 or crush the exalted and enterprising minds.^ Nay, he had even 
 to a certain extent an interest in degrading and impoverishing 
 Ihem, or at least in debarring them from the acquisition either of 
 wealth or leisure : and tlie extensive constructions undertaken 
 by Polykrates at Samos, as well as the rich donations of Peri- 
 ander to the teniplt! at Olympia, are considered by Aristotle to 
 have been extortr'd by these des[)ot3 with the express view of 
 engrossing the time and exhausting the means of their subjects. 
 
 It is not to be imagined that all were alike cruel or unprinci- 
 pled ; but the perpetual supremacy of one man and one family 
 had become so offensive to the jealousy of those who felt them- 
 selves to be his equals, and to the general feeling of the people, 
 that repression and severity were inevitable, whether originally 
 intended or not. And even if an usurper, having once entered 
 u[>on this career of \ iolence, grew sick and a\ rrse to its continu- 
 ance, abdication only left him in imminent peril, exposed to the 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. iii, 8.3; v, 8, 7. Herodot. v, 92. Ilerodotiw gives the 
 story as; if Thrasybulus had been the person to sug*,'est this hint by conduct- 
 inj,' the messenger of Ptriander into a cornfield and there striking oti" the 
 tallest ears with his stick : Aristotle reverses the two, and makes Periander 
 the adviser: Livy (i, 54) transfers the scene to Gabii and Rome, with Sextua 
 Tanpiinius as the person sending for counsel to his father at Rome. Com- 
 pare Plato, Republ. viii, c. 17, p. 565 ; Eurip. Siipplic. 444-455. 
 
 The discussion which Herodotus ascril)es to the Persian conspirators, after 
 the assassination of the Magian king, whether they should constitute the 
 Persian government as a monarchy, an oligarchy, or a democracy, exhibits 
 a vein of ideas purely Grecian, and altogether foreign to the Oriental con- 
 ception of government : hut it sets forth, — briefly, yet with great i)erspicuity 
 and penetration, — the advantages and disadvantages of all the three. Thv 
 rase made out against monarchy is by far the strongest, while the counsel on 
 Ik half of monarchy assumes as a part of his case that the individual mon- 
 arch is to be the best man in the state. The anti-monarchical champion 
 Otanes concludes a long string of criminations against the despot, with these 
 irords above-noticed : " He subverts the customs of the country : he rio 
 tetefl women: he puts men to death untried.** (Herod, iii, 80-82.) 
 
 rmLOSOPHERS' \Vts\ OF DESPOTS. 
 
 29 
 
 vengeance ' of those whom he had injured, — unless, indeed, hi 
 could clothe himself with the mantle of religion, and stipulate 
 with the people to become priest of some temple and deity ; in 
 which case his new function protected him, just as the tonsure 
 and the monastery sheltered a dethroned prince in the Middle 
 A'T'es.'- Several of the desi>ots were patrons of music and poetry, 
 and courted the good-will of contem{X)rary intellectual men by 
 invitation as well as by reward ; and there were some cases, such 
 as that of Peisistratus and his sons at Athens, in wliich an attempt 
 was made (analogous to that of Augustus at Rome) to reconcile 
 ♦ he reality of personal omnipotence with a certain respect for 
 preexisting forras.^ In such instances the administration, though 
 
 ' Thucyd. ii, 63. Compare again the speech of Kleon, iii, 37-40, — wf 
 Tv^Japl•l^a yap l^cre avTTjv, /}r AQfitiv fikv uSikov doKei elvai^ a^eivai 6i 
 IrriKtvdvx'ov. 
 
 The bitter sentiment against despots seems to be as old as Alkseus, and 
 we find traces of it in Solon and Theognis (Thcognis, 38-50; Solon, 
 Fragm. vii, p. 32, ed. Schneidewin). Phanias of Eresus had collected in a 
 book the "Assassinations of Despots from revenge." {Tvpuvvotv uvaipea€i( 
 U Tiuuplag, — Athenaeus, iii, p. 90; x, p. 438.) 
 
 * See the story of Miuandrius, minister and successor of Pol3'krates of 
 Samos, in Herodotus, iii, 142, 143. 
 
 ' Thucyd. vi, 54. The epitaph of Archedike, the dauirhter of Hif)pias 
 (which wivs inscribed at Lampsakus, where she died), though written by a 
 t:reat friend of Hippias, conveys the sharpest implied invective against lh« 
 u.'ual proceedings of the despots : — 
 
 'H Trarpof re kol avSpo^ a6e?i(}nl)v r' ovaa rvpuvvuv 
 
 VLai6C)v t\ oi'X VP'^V vovv l^ uTaa'&aXiTjv (Thuc. vi, 59). 
 
 The position of Augustus at Rome, and of Peisistratus at Athens, may 
 l>e illustrated by a passage in Sismondi, Republiques Italiennes, vol. iv, ch. 
 26, p. 208 : — 
 
 " Les petits monarques de chaque ville s'opposaient eux-memcs a ce que 
 leur pouvoir fiU attribue', a un droit hereditaire, parceque I'he'redite aurait 
 presque toujours ete retonjue' contre cux. Ceux qui avaient succe'd^ a une 
 r^publique, avaient abaissd des nobles plus anciens et plus illustres qu'eux: 
 ceux qui avaient succede a d'autres seigneurs n'avaient tenu aucnn compte 
 du droit de leurs prede'cesseurs, et se sentaient inte'resse's k le nier. lis sc 
 iisaient dont mandataires du peuple : ils ne prenaient jamais le commande- 
 ment d'une ville, lors meme qu'ils I'avaient soumise par les armes, sans 9e 
 faire attribner par les anciens ou par Tassembl^e du peuple, selon que les aof 
 cm les autres se montraient plus dociles, le titre et les pouvoirs de seigneoi 
 giii^ral pour im an. pour cinq ans, on pour toate lear vie, avec an paie flz^ 
 m^ devoit etre prise sur les denirrs de la communaut^.** 
 
 WOL. III. 2 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE- 
 
 noC unstained by guilt, never otherwise than unpopular, and 
 carried on by means of foreign mercenaries, was doubtless practi- 
 cally milder. But cases of this character were rare, and the 
 maxims usual with Grecian despots were personified in Periander, 
 the Kypselid of Corinth., — a harsh and brutal person, but not 
 destitute either of vigor or intelligence. 
 
 The [X)sition of a Grecian desjxot, as depicted by Plato, by 
 Xenophon and by Aristotle,' and farther sustained by the indi- 
 cations in Herodotus, Thucydides, luid Isokrates, though always 
 coveted by ambitious men, reveals clearly enough '* those wounds 
 
 * Consult, especially, the treatise of Xenophon, called HierOj or Tvpavin- 
 ic^f, in which the interior life and feelinps of the Grecian despot are strikingly 
 Bet forth, in a supposed diaicpne with the poet SimonidvS. The tenor of 
 Plato's remarks in the eighth and ninth books of the Repablic, and those of 
 Aristotle in the tifth book (ch 8 an<l 9) of the Politics, display the same pic 
 tare, tboagh not with such fulness of detail. The speech of one of the 
 assassins of Eui)hr6n (despot of Sikyon) is remarkable, as a specimen of 
 Orecian feeling (Xcnoph. Hellen. vii, 3, 7-12). The expressions both of 
 Plato and Tacitus, in re^rard to the mental wretchedness of the despot, are 
 the strongest which the language affords : Km irevijc ry aXrj'deKji ^oiverai, 
 kiiv TIC 6^nv tlfvxr/v IniaTT/Tai ti^ea(7a<rt^ai, Kai ^^ov yeuuv dia iravrd^ rot 
 
 B'lov^ a<padaanC)v re Kai oJuruiv TvXfjprjc ^AvdyKT) Kai etvai, Kal irt fuLAkot 
 
 yi-yve(rdac avrtf) rj Ttporepov Std^ rfiv «p;f^v, ^oveptii, uiricrTtf)^ a6iK<f), a^/A^, 
 ivoaicf), Kal naaijc kokioc travSoKel re xai rpo^l, Kal i^ dtravruv toxituv 
 ituXiffTc uev «y»Tw dvffTvxfi elvai, iiztira 6i koI to^c irX^aiov avrov roiovrov^ 
 ^weftynCea^ai (Republic, ix, p 580). 
 
 And Tacitus, in the well-known passage (Annal. vi, 6): "Neqne frustra 
 prKstamtissinius sapiential tinnare solitus est, si recludantur tyrannoruni 
 menfcs, posse aspici laniatus et ictus : quando ut corpora verberibus, ita 
 •«vitir». libidinc. malis consultus, animus dilaceretur. Quippe Tibcrium non 
 fortuna. non solitudines, proU.'gebant, quin tormenta pectoris suasqne ipse 
 pcenas fatcrctur." 
 
 It is not easy to imagine power more completely surrounded with all cir- 
 cumst.inccs calculated to rentier it repulsive to a man of ordinary benevo- 
 lence: the Grecian despot had large means of doing harm, — scarcely any 
 means of doing good. Yet the acquisition of power over others, under any 
 conditions, is a motive so all-absorbing, that even this precarious and anti- 
 social sceptre was always intensely coveted, — Tvpavvlc, XPVf^a at^aXepov 
 irokXoi dt avriiQ kpaaral eiai (Herod, iii, 53). See the striking Unes of Solon 
 (Fragment, vii, ed. Schneidewin), and the saying of Jason of Pherae, who 
 used to declare that he felt inoesMUit hunger until he became despot, — 
 Ketv^, dTe u^ Tvpavvoi' <I>f ovk iiriardfievoc idiurijc elvai (Aristot Polit. iii 
 t 61. 
 
 SHORT DURATION OF DESPOTIC GOVERNMENT. 
 
 fl 
 
 and lacerations of mind," wliereby the internal Erinnys avenged 
 the community upon the usurper who trampled them down. Far 
 from considering success in usurpation as a justification of the 
 attempt (according to the theories now prevalent respecting 
 Cromwell and Bonaparte, who are often blamed because they 
 kept out a legitimate king, but never because they seized an 
 unauthorized power over the people), these philosophers regard 
 tlie des|x>t as among the greatest of criminals: the man who 
 a^^sassinated him was an object of public honor and reward, 
 and a virtuous Greek would seldom have scrupled to carry his 
 sword concealed in myrtle branches, like Harmodius and Aristo- 
 geiion, for the execution of the deed J A station which over- 
 lopped the restraints and obligations involved in citizenship, was 
 understood at the same time to forfeit all title to the common 
 sympathy and protection,- so that it was unsafe for the despot to 
 visit in person those great Pan-Hellenic games in which his own 
 chariot might perhaps have gained the prize, and in which the 
 theors, or sacred envoys, whom he sent as representatives of hie 
 Hellenic city, appeared with ostentatious pomp. A government 
 carried on under these unpropitious circumstances could nevei 
 
 ' See the beautiful Skolion of Kallistratus, so popular at Atiicns, xxvii, p. 
 456, apud Schneidewin, Poet. Graec. — 'Ev fiiprov xXadl rd ^i<poc <j>opf/au^ 
 etc. 
 
 Xenophon, Hiero, ii, 8. 0/ rvpcvvoi iruvreg Travrax^ ^f ^f" noXefiiar 
 iropevovTai. Compare Isokrates, Or. v iii (Do Pace), p. 182; Polyb. ii, 59; 
 Cicero, Orat. pro Milone, c. 29 
 
 Aristot Polit. ii, 4, 8. *ETf< ufltKomi ye rd fiiyiara Sid, r<if imepfioTiuCt 
 dAA' 9v dia TuvayKaia • oiov rvpavvovaiv, ovx Iva fxr^ {tiyCtoi • did Kai al 
 Tifial /itiyaXai, av cnroKTeivy ri^, ov KXiirr^v, uXXa rvpavvov. 
 
 There cannot be a more striking manifestation of the sentiment enter- 
 tained towanis a despot in the ancient world, than the remarks of Plutarch 
 on Timoleon, for his conduct in assisting to put to death his brother, the 
 despot Tiraophanes (Plutarch, Timoleon, c. 4-7, and Comp. of Timoleon 
 with Paulus Emilias, c. 2). See also Plutarch, Comparison of Dion and 
 Brutus, c. 3, and Plutiirch, Praecepta Rcipuhlic* Gerendye, c. 11, p. 805 ; c. 
 17, p. 813; c 32, p. 824, — he speaks of the putting down of a despot 
 {Tvpawiduv Karulvaig) as among the most splendid of human exploits, — 
 and the account given by Xenophon of the assassination of Jason of Fherc, 
 Hellenic vi, 4, 32. 
 
 * Livy, xxxviii, 50. " Qui jus sequnm pati non possit, in earn vim haorf 
 inja«itam esse." 
 
TTISIOKY OF GKEECE. 
 
 be otherwise than short-lived. Though the individual daring 
 enough to seize it, often found means to preserve it for the term 
 of his own life, yet the sight of a despot living to old age was 
 rare, and the transmission of his power to his son still more so J 
 
 Amidst the numerous points of contention in Grecian political 
 morality, this rooted antipathy to a permanent hereditary ruler 
 stood iipart as a sentiment almost unanimous, in which the thirst 
 for preeminence felt by the wealthy few, and the love of equal 
 freedom in the bosoms of the many, alike concurred. It i\v>t 
 began among the oligarchies of the seventh and sixth centurie-i 
 B. c, a complete reversal of that pronounced monarchical senti- 
 ment which we now read in the Iliad ; and it was transmitted by 
 them to the democracies, which did not arise until a later period. 
 .The conflict between oligarchy and despotism preceded tliat 
 between oligarchy and <lemocracy, the Lacedaemonians standing 
 forward actively on both occasions to uphold the oligarchical 
 principle: a mingled sentiment of fear and repugnance led them 
 to put down despotism in several cities of Greece during thb 
 sixth ct'utury b. c, just as, during their contest with Athens in 
 
 ' riutarch, Sept Sapient. Conviv. c 2, p. 147, — ug fpuTijT^el^ vtu Mo? 
 nayopov rov 'Iwrof, ti Trapcu^o^orarnv tlrjg icjpaKiog, u~OKp(vaio, "^vpavvou 
 yipovra. — Compare the answer of Thales, in tlie sume treatise, c. 7, p. 152. 
 
 The orator Lysias, present at the Olympic games, and seeing the theors 
 of the Synictisun despot Dionysius also present, in tents with gilding and 
 purple, adthe-Jsed an haran<;ue, inciting the assembled Greeks to demolish 
 the tents (Lysia; \nyoc 'O/.vfnriaKoc, Fragm. p. 911, ed. Ileisk. ; Dionys. 
 Ilaii^ar. I)e Lysia Judicium c. 29-30). Thcoi)hrastus ascribed to Themis- 
 tokli'-: ;i similar recommendation, in reference to the theors and the prize- 
 chaiiots of the Syracusan despot Hiero (Plutarch, Themistokles, c. 25). 
 
 The common-places of the rhetors afford the best proof how unanimous 
 was the sentiment in the Greek mind to rank the despot among the moiit 
 odious criminals, and the man who put him to death among the benefactors 
 of humanity. The rhetor Theon, treating upon common-places, says : Tottoc 
 ioTt ?.o}0( ai'^rfTiKd^ 6fio7ioyov^evov npuyfiarog, tjtol upapriifiaToq^ 7 
 avdpaya^T/fiaTog . 'Ecn y^p ^ittoc 6 totto^ • 6 fiev Tig, Kara tuv ireirovj]- 
 pevfiivuVj olov Kara Tvpuvvov, tt po6 otov, avdpo(f>6vov, aau» 
 rov 6 de rig, imep riJv xPV<^t6v ti diancTrpayfiEvtiv • olov vnep rvpav- 
 voKTovov, apiariuCf vofio'^eTov. (Theon, Progymnasmata, c. rii, 
 »p. Walz. Coll. Rhett. vol. i, p. 222. Compare Aphthonius, Progyran. c. TJi 
 p. 82 of the same volume, and Dionysius Halikarn. Ars Rhetorica, x, 15, p 
 S90, ed Rr!sk^) 
 
 EARLY OLIGARCHIES. 99 
 
 the follo\\ing («ntury, they assisted the oligarchical party, where- 
 ever they could, to overthrow democracy. And it was thus 
 that the demagogue-despot of these earlier times, bringing out 
 the name of the people as a pretext, and the arms of the people 
 as a means of accomplishment, for his own ambitious designs, 
 served as a preface to the reality of democracy, which mani- 
 fested itself at Athens a short time before the Persian war, as a 
 development of the seed planted by Solon. 
 
 As far as our imperfect information enables us to trace, the 
 early oligarchies of the Grecian states, against which the first 
 usurping^'desi^ots contended, contained in themselves far more 
 repulsive elements of inequality, and more mischievous barriers 
 between the component parts of the population, than the oligar- 
 chies of later days. What was true of Hellas as an aggregate, 
 was true, though in a less degree, of each separate community 
 which went to compose that aggregate : each included a variety 
 of clans, orders, religious brotherhoods, and local or professional 
 sections, which were very imperfectly cemented together; and 
 the oligarchy was not, like the government so denominated in 
 subsequent times, the government of a rich few over the less rich 
 and the poor, but that of a peculiar order, sometimes a patrician 
 order, over all the remaining society. In such a case, the subject 
 Many might number opulent and substantial proprietors as well 
 as the governing Few ; but these subject Many would themselves 
 be broken into ditferent heterogeneous fractions, not heartily sym- 
 pathizing with each other, perhaps not intermarrying together, 
 nor partaking of the same religious rites. The country-popula- 
 tion, or villagers, who tilled the land, seem in these early times 
 to have been'' held to a painful dependence on the proprietors who 
 lived in the fortified town, and to have been distinguished by a 
 dress and habits of their own, which often drew upon them an 
 unfriendly nickname. These town proprietors seem to have 
 often composed the governing class in early Grecian states, 
 while their subjects consisted,— 1. Of the dependent cultivators 
 living in the district around, by whom their lands were tilled. 2. 
 Of a certain number of small self-working proprietors {avtovQyoi) 
 whose possessions were too scanty to maintain more than them 
 selves by the labor of their onm hands on their own plot of 
 grouP'i — residini? either in the country or the town, as tho case 
 
mSTORY OF GREK CE. 
 
 might be. 3. Of those who lived in the town, having no land 
 but exercising handicraft, arts, or commerce. 
 
 The governing proprietors went by the name of the Gamori. 
 »r Geomori, according an the Doric or Ionic dialect might l)e 
 ised in describing them, since thej were found in states belong- 
 ng to one race as well as to the other. Thej appear to have 
 instituted a close order, transmitting their privileges to their 
 
 ihildren, but admitting no new members to a participation, tor 
 
 /he principle called by Greek thinkers a timocracy, the appoint- 
 ment of political rights and privileges according to comparative 
 property, appears to have been little, if at all, applied in the 
 earlier times, and we know no example of it eariier than Solon. 
 So that, by the natural multiplication of families and mutation of 
 property, there would come to be many individual gamori pos- 
 sessing no land at all, and perhaps worse off than those small 
 freeholders who did not belong to the order ; wliile some of these 
 latter freeholders, and some of the artisans and traders in the 
 towns, might at the same time be rising in wealth and impor- 
 tance. Under a political classification such as this, of which the 
 repulsive inequality was aj,'gravated by a rude state of manners, 
 and which had no flexibility to meet the changes in relative posi- 
 tion amongst individual inhabitants, discontent and outbreaks 
 were unavoidable, and the eariiest despot, usually a wealthy man 
 of the disfranchised class, became champion and leader of the 
 malcontents.^ However oppressive his rule might be, at least it 
 was an oppression which bore with indiscriminate severity upon 
 all the fractions of the population ; and when the hour of reaction 
 against him or against his successor arrived, so that the common 
 enemy was expelled by the united efforts of all, it was hardly 
 possible to revive the preexisting system of exclusion and 
 inequality witliout some considerable abatements. 
 
 As a general rule, every Greek city-community included in 
 its population, independent of bought slaves, the three elements 
 above noticed, — considerable land proprietors with rustic de- 
 pendents, small self-working proprietors, and town-artisans,— tho 
 three elements being found everywhere in different proportions. 
 BatAe progress of events in Greece, from the seventh century 
 
 ' Thacyd. i, 13. 
 
 CLASSES 01 THE PFOPLE. 
 
 dl 
 
 a C. downwards, tended continually to elevate the comparative 
 iftiportance of the two latter, while in those eariy days tho as- 
 cendency of the former was at its maximum, and altered only to 
 decline. The military force of most of the cities was at first in 
 the hands of the great proprietors, and formed by them ; it con- 
 sisted of cavalry, themselves and their retainers, witli liorses fed 
 upon their lands. Such was the primitive oligarchical militia, aa 
 it was constituted in the seventh and sixtii centuries b c, at 
 Chalkis and Eretria in Euboea, as well as at Kolophon and other 
 cities in Ionia, and as it continued in Thessaly down to the fourth 
 century B. c. ; but the gradual rise of the small proprietors and 
 town-artisans was marked by the substitution of heavy-armed 
 infantry in place of cavalry ; and a farther change not less im- 
 portant took place when the resistance to Persia led to the great 
 multiplication of Grecian ships of war, manned by a host of sea- 
 men who dwelt congregated in the maritime towns. All the 
 chano^es which we are able to trace in the Grecian communities 
 tended to break up the close and exclusive oligarchies with which 
 our first historical knowledge commences, and to conduct them 
 either to oligarchies rather more open, embracing all men of a 
 certain amount of property, or else to democracies. But the 
 transition in both cases was usually attained through the inter- 
 lude of the despot. 
 
 In enumerating the distinct and unharmonious elements of 
 which the population of these early Grecian communities was 
 made up, we must not forget one farther element which was to 
 be found in the Dorian states generally, — men of Dorian, as 
 ^ntrasted with men of non-Dorian race. The Dorians were in 
 all cases emigrants and conquerors, establishing themselves along 
 with and at the expense of the prior inhabitants. Upon what 
 terms the cohabitation was established, and in what proportions 
 invaders and invaded came together, we are without information ; 
 and important as this circumstance is in *he history of these 
 Dorian communities, we know it only as a general fact, and are 
 unable to follow its results in detail. But we see enough to 
 satisfy ourselves that in those revolutions which overthrew the 
 
 * Aristot Poht. iv, 3, 2 ; 11, 10 Aristot. Beram Public. Fragm. ed. N«« 
 Fragm. v, Eif^oeuv iroXireiai^ p. 112 ; Strabo, x, p. 447 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 oligarchies both at Corinth and Sikyon, — perhaps ali-o at Mo 
 gara, — the Dorian and non-Dorian elements of the community 
 came into conflict more )r less direct. 
 
 The desjK)ts of Sikyon are the earliest of whom we have any 
 distinct mention : their dynasty lasted one hundred years, a 
 longer period than any other Grecian despots known to Aris- 
 totle ; they are said, ' moreover, to have governed with mildness 
 and with much practical respcvt to the preexisting laws. Ortha- 
 goras,2 the beginner of tlie dynasty, raised himself to the 
 position of despot about r>7G b. c, subverting the preexisting 
 Dorian oligarchy ; but the cause and circumstances of this rev- 
 olution are not preserved He is said to have been originally a 
 cook. In his line of successors we find mention of Andreas, 
 Myron, Aristonymus, and Kleisthenes ; but we know nothing ot 
 any v," them until the la>t, except that Myron gained a chariot 
 victory at Olynipia in the 33d Olympiad (648 b. c), and built, 
 at the same holy place, a thesaurus containing two ornamented 
 alcoves of copper for the reception of commemorative offerings 
 from himself and his family.-^ Respecting Kleisthenes (whose 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. V, 9, 21. An oracle is said to have predicted to the Sikvo 
 nians that they would be suhiected for the period of a century to the hand 
 of the scourfjer (Diodor. Fra};ni. lih. vii-x ; Fragm. xiv, ed. Maii). 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 126; Pausan. ii. 8, 1. There is some confusion about the 
 names of Orthagoras and Andreas ; the latter is called a oook in Diodorus 
 (Frajzment. Excerpt. Vatic, lib. vii-x, Frafjm. xiv). Compare Libanius in 
 Sever, vol. iii, p. 251, Reisk. It has been supposed, with some probability, 
 that the same person is desij^nated un<ler both names : the two names do 
 not seem to occur in the same author. See Plutarch, Ser. Numin. Vind. c 
 7, p. 553. 
 
 Aristotle (Polit. v. 10, 3) seems to have conceived the dominion as having 
 pas«;cd direct from Myron to Kleisthenes, omitting Aristonymus. 
 
 ^ Pansan. vi, 19. 2 The Klcians informed Pausanias that the brass If 
 these alcoves came from Tartessus (the south-western coast of Spain frow 
 the Strait of Gibraltar to \\ °. territory beyond Cadiz): he declines to 
 ernarantee the stiUement. Bui O. MQlIer treats it aa a certainty: "Two 
 apartments inlaid with Tartessian brass, and adorned with Doric and Ionic 
 colamns. Both the architectural orders employed in this building, and the 
 Tartessi«n brass, which the Phocaeans had then brought to Greece in large 
 quantities from the hospitable king Arganthonins, attest the intercourse of 
 Ifyron with the Asiatics.** (Dorians, i, 8, 2.) So also Dr. Thirlwalf states 
 the fact .- " Copper of Tartessus, which had not long been introdu'^ into 
 
 KLEISTHENES -DESPOT OF SIKYOl*. 
 
 33 
 
 age must be placed between 600-560 b. c, but can hardly be 
 determined accurately,) some facts are reported to us highly 
 curious, but of a nature not altogether easy to follow or verify. 
 We learn from the narrative of Herodotus that the tribe to 
 which Kleisthenes ^ himself (and of course his progenitors 
 Orthagoras and the other Orthagoridae also) belonged, was dis- 
 tinct from the three Dorian tribes, who have been already named 
 in my previous chapter respecting the Lykurgean constitution at 
 Sparta, — the Hylleis, Pamphyli, and Dy manes. We also learn 
 that these tribes were common to the Sikyonians and the Argei- 
 ans ; and Kleisthenes, being in a state of bitter hostility with 
 Argos, tried in several ways to abolish the points of community 
 between the two. Sikyon originally Dorized by settlers from 
 Argos, was included in the *'lot of Temenus," or among the 
 towns of the Argeian confederacy : the coherence of this confed- 
 eracy had become weaker and weaker, partly without doubt 
 through the influence of the predecessors of Kleisthenes ; but 
 the Argeians may perhaps have tried to revive it, thus placing 
 themselves in a state of war with the latter, and inducing him to 
 disconnect, palpably and violently, Sikyon from Argos. There 
 were two anchors by which the connection held, — first, legendary 
 and religious sympathy ; next, the civil rites and denominations 
 current among the Sikyonian Dorians : both of them were torn 
 up by Kleisthenes. He changed the names both of the thre: 
 Dorian tribes, and of that non-Dorian tribe to which he himself 
 belonged : the last he called by the comj)limentary title of ar- 
 chelai (commanders of the people) ; the first three he styled by 
 the insulting names of hyatae, oneatoe, and choereatie, from the 
 three Greek words signifying a boar, an ass, and a little pig. 
 The extreme bitterness of this insult can only be appreciated 
 when we fancy to ourselves the reverence with which the tribes 
 
 Greece." (Hist. Gr. ch. x, p. 483, 2d ed.) Yet, if we examine the chronol- 
 ogy of the case, we shall see that the 33d Olympiad (648 b. c.) must have 
 been earlier even than the first discovery of Tartessus by the Greeks, — 
 before the accidental voyage of the Samian merchant Kolaeus first made the 
 region known to them, and more than half a century (at least) earlier thap 
 the commerce of the Phocaeans with Arganthonias. Compare Hertxl. iv 
 152; i, 163, 167. 
 * Herodot. v, 67. 
 
 VOL. III. 2* 3cy 
 
4 
 "" 
 
 84 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 in a Git^cian city reiTarded the hero from whom their name waa 
 borrowed. That th<}se new denominations, given by Kleisthtnes, 
 involved an intentional degradation of the Dorian tribes as well a« 
 an assumption of suporiority for his own, is atlirmed by Herodotus, 
 and seems well-deserving of credit. 
 
 But the violence of which Kleisthenes was capable in his anti 
 Argeian antipathy, is manifested still more plainly in his pro- 
 ceedings with respect to the hero Adrastus and to the legendary 
 sentiment of the people. Something has already been said, in 
 my former volume,' about this remarkable incident, which must, 
 however, be here again briefly noticed. The hero Adrastus, whose 
 chapel Herodotus himself saw in the Sikyonian agora, was com- 
 mon both to Argos and to Sikyon, and was the object of special 
 reverence at both : lie figures in the legend as king of Argos, 
 and as the grandson and heir of Poly bus, king of Sikyon. He 
 wjis the unhappy leader of the two sieges of Thebes, so famous 
 in the ancient epic, — and the Sikyonians listened with delii^ht 
 both to the exploits of the Argeians against Thebes, as cele- 
 brated in the recitations of the epical rhapsodes, and to the mourn- 
 ful tide of Adrastus and his family mi^Ortunes, as sung in the 
 tragic chorus. KHeisthen^s not only forbade the rhapsodes to 
 come to Sikyon, but farther resolved to expel Adrastus himself 
 from the country, — such is the literal Greek expression,*^ the 
 hero himself being btdieved to be actually present and domiciled 
 among the people. He first applied to the Delphian oracle for 
 permission to carry this banishment into direct effect, but the 
 
 Pythian j)riestess returned an answer of indignant refusal, 
 
 «* Adrastus is king of the Sikyonians, but thou art a ruffian." 
 Thus baffled, he put in practice a stratagem calculated to induce 
 Adrastus to depart of his own accord.3 He sent to Thebes to 
 beg that he might be allowed to introduce into Sikyon the hero 
 Melanippus, and the [lermission was granted. Now Melanippus 
 was celebrated in the legend as the puissant champion of Thebes 
 against Adrastus and the Argeian besiegers, and as having slain 
 
 • See above, vol. ii, p. 129, part i, ch. 21. 
 
 • Herod, v, 67. Tovrov knE^vjitioe 6 KTieia^iv^g, idpTa 'Apyelov, iicpaXeh 
 
 • Herod, v, 67. ^E^vT.;e fi7]xavriv tj ovrdf 6 'Adpnaro^ knaXXdiem. 
 
 DORIANS AND iiON-DORIANS OF SIKYON. 
 
 35 
 
 t.)di Mekisteus the brother, and Tydeus the son-in-law, of 
 Adrastus ; and he was therefore preeminently odious to tht> 
 latter. Kleisthenes brought tliis anti-national hero into Sikyon, 
 assigning to him consecrated ground in the prytaneium, or 
 government-house, and even in that part which was most strongly 
 fortified ^ (for it seems that Adrastus was conceived as likely 
 to assail and do battle with the intruder) ; — moreover, he took 
 away both the tragic choruses and the sacrifice from Adrastus, 
 assigning the fonner to the god Dionysus, and the latter to 
 JSIelanippus. 
 
 The religious manifestations of Sikyon being thus transferred 
 from Adrastus to his mortal foe, and from the cause of the Argei- 
 ans in the siege of Thebes to that of the Thebans, Adrastus was 
 pi^sumed to have voluntarily retired from the place, and the pur- 
 pose which Kleisthenes contemplated, of breaking the community 
 of feeling between Sikyon and Argos, was in part accomplished. 
 
 A ruler who could do such violence to the religious and legend- 
 ary sentiment of his community may well be supposed capable of 
 inflicting that deliberate insult upon the Dorian tribes which is 
 implied in their new appellations. As we are uninformed, how- 
 ever, of the state of things which preceded, we know not how 
 far it might have been a retaliation for previous insult in the op- 
 fK)8ite direction. It is plain that the Dorians of Sikydn main- 
 tained themselves and their ancient tribes quite apart from the 
 remaining community, though what the other constituent portions 
 of the population were, or in what relation they stood to these 
 Dorians, we are not enabled to make out. We hear, indeed, of a 
 dependent rural population in the territory of Sikyon, as well as in 
 that of Argos and Epidaurus, analogous to the Helots in Laconia. 
 In Sikyon, this class was termed the Korynephori (club men), 
 or the Katonakophori, from the thick woollen mantle which they 
 wore, with a sheepskin sewn on to the skirt : in Argos, they were 
 called Gymnesii, from their not possessing the military panoply 
 or the use of regular arms : in Epidaurus, Konipodes, or the dusty- 
 footed.3 We may conclude that a similar class existed in Cor- 
 
 ' ^Eirayayo/ievoc 6k 6 KXeur&evT^c rdv MeAawrrTrov, rifirvoc ol u7:i6e^e kv 
 uvT^ T^ irpwavfiUfiy itai fuv hr&avra Idpvai h rift laxvporartf). (Herod. t&.) 
 ' Jalins Pollux, iii, 83 ; Plutarch, Qaiest. Gr«c c 1, p. 291 ; Theopompfn 
 
 % 
 
d6 
 
 fflSTORl OF GREECE. 
 
 =,iKYON AFTER KLEISTHENE3. 
 
 87 
 
 faith, in Megara, and in each of the Dorian towns of tie Argalit 
 Akte. But besides the Dorian tribes and these rustics, there 
 must probably have existed non-Dorian proprietors luid town 
 residents, and upon them we may suj){)ose that the power of the, 
 Ortha'^oridiB and of Kieisthenes was founded, perhaps more friendly 
 ■nd indulgent to the rustic serfs than that of the Dorians liad 
 been })reviously. The moderation, which Aristotle ascribes to 
 the OrthagoridjB generally, is belied by the proceedings of Kleis- 
 thenes : but we may probably believe that his i)redecessors, con- 
 tent with maintaining the real predominance of the non-Dorian 
 over the Dorian |>opi;ilation, meddled very little with the separate 
 position and civil habits of the latter, — while Kleisthenes, pro- 
 voked or alarmed by some attempt on their part to strengthen 
 alliance with the Argeians, resorted both to repressive mcju^ures 
 and to that offensive nomenclature which has been above cited. 
 Tl»e ])reservation of ihe power of Kleisthenes w;is due to his mil- 
 itary energy (according to Aristotle) even more than to his mod- 
 eration and popular conduct ; it was aided, probably, by his 
 majrnificent displays at the public games, for he was victor in the 
 chariot-race at the Pythian games 582 b. c, as well as at the 
 Olympic games besides. Moreover, he was in fact the last of the 
 race, nor did he transmit his power to any successor.' 
 
 The reigns of the early Orthagoridie, then, may be considered 
 as marking a predominance, newly acquired but quietly exercised 
 of the non- Dorians over the Dorians in Sikyon : the reign of 
 Kleisthenes, as displaying a strong explosion of antipathy 
 from the former towards the latter; and though this antipathy, 
 and the application of those oi>probrious tribe-names in which it 
 was conveyed, stand ascribed to Kleisthenes personally, we may 
 flee that the non- Dorians in Sikyon shared it generally, because 
 these same tribe-nam<\s continued to be applied not only during 
 the reign of that despot, but also for sixty years longer, after his 
 death. Of course, it is needless to remark that such denomina- 
 
 ap. Athenaeum, vi, p. 271; Welcker, Prolegomen. ad Theognid. c. 19, p 
 ixxiv. 
 
 As an analogy to this name of Konipodes, we may notice the ancierl 
 coorts of justice called Courts of Pie-powder in England, Pieds PwidrA. 
 
 » Aristot Polit. V, 9, 21 ; Pauaan. x, 7, 3. 
 
 1 
 
 tiuns could never have been acknowledged or employed amcng 
 the Dorians themselves. After the lapse of sixty years from the 
 death of Kleisthenes, the Sikyonians came to an amicable adjust- 
 ment of the feud, and placed the tribe-names on a footing satisfac- 
 tory to all parties ; the old Dorian denominations (Hylleis, Pam- 
 pliyli, and Dymanes) were reestablished, and the name of the 
 fourth tribe, or non-Dorians, was changed from Archelai to ^gia- 
 leis, — jEgialeus son of Adrastus being constituted their epony- 
 mus.^ This choice of the son of Adrastus for an eponymus, seems 
 to show that the worship of Adrastus himself was then revived 
 in Sikyon, since it existed in the time of Herodotus. 
 
 Of the war which Kleisthenes helped to conduct against Kir- 
 rha, for the protection of the Delphian temple, I shall speak ia 
 another place. His death and the cessation of his dynasty seem 
 to have occurred about 650 B. c, as far as the chronology can be 
 made out.2 That he was put down by the Spartans, as K. F. 
 
 ' Herod, v, 68. Tovroim Tolai ovvofiaai tuv <pvXeuv kxpio>vTo ol Iikvu^ 
 vioi Kal M^Kleia^iveog apxovroc, Kal Ueivov te&veuto^ In kn' Hea t^if 
 Kovra ' f^erenecTa fxevTot Uyov a^piffc dcwrec, f^^re^aXov ic rot)f TAAeaf Koi 
 UafM<pv?.ovc Kal Avfiavdrar reraprovc 6e avrolai npoae^evTO M rov 'kdpva- 
 rov raaV^f Xlyia?Joc r^v eiruvvfiirjv ttoiev^ievol KEK^ff^ai Aiyialeag. 
 
 8 The chronology of Orthagoras and his dynasty ia perplexing. The 
 commemorative offering of Myron at Olympia is marked for 648 b. c., and 
 this mu^t throw hack the beginning of Orthagoras to a penod between 
 680-670 Then we are told bv Aristotle that the entire dynasty lasted one 
 hundred vears ; but it must have lasted, prohably, somewhat longer, for the 
 deith of kleisthenes can hardly be placed earlier than 560 b. c. The war 
 a-unst Kirrha (595 b. C.) and the Pythian victory (582 b. c.) fall withm 
 h?s rei-n • but the marriage of his daughter Agariste with Megakles can 
 hndlvl>e put earlier than 570 b. c, if so high ; for Kleisthenes the Athenian, 
 the son of that marriage, effected the democratical revolution at Athens in 
 509 or 508 B. c.: whether the daughter, whom Megakles gave in mamag» 
 to Peisistratus ahout 554 b. c, was also the offspring of that marriage, M 
 I ixrcher contends, we do not know. ^ , , 
 
 Megakles was the son of that Alkra«on who had assisted the depntiee 
 sent bv Croesus of Lydia into Greece to consult the different oracles, and 
 whom' Croesus rewarded so liberally as to make his fortune reompare Herod. 
 L 46- vi 125): and the marriage of Megakles was in the next gencratiM 
 nfter'thii enrichment of Alkm»on, - fiera c5e, yeviv devripy iartpov (Herod, 
 ▼i 126). Now the reign of Croesus extended from 560-546 B. C, and Ui 
 de'pnution to the oracles in Greece appears to have taken place abont SM 
 B. c. • and if this chronology be admitted, the marriage of Megakles willi 
 
*. 
 
 HH 
 
 HISTOBY OF GREECK. 
 
 KYPSELUS AND fflS DYNASTY AT CORINTH. 
 
 39 
 
 t; 
 
 Hermann., O. Miller, and Dr. Thirlwall suf^vose, can be hm\{ly 
 admitted consistently with the narrative of Herodotus, who mer.. 
 tioDS the continuance of the insulting names imposed bj him 
 upon the Dorian tribes for many years after his death. Now, had 
 the Spartans forcibly interfered for the suppression of his dynasty, 
 we may reasonably presume that, even if they did not restore 
 the decided prejmnderance of the Dorians in Sikyon, they would 
 at leai:t havf itM-ued t lie Dorian tribes from this obvious i«mo 
 mii:y. But it seems doubtful whether Kleisthenes had anv fou : 
 and the extraordinary importance attached to the marriage ot his 
 daughter, Agariste, whom he bestowed upon the Athenian Mc- 
 gakles of the great family of Alkma;6nida3, seems rather to evince 
 that she was an lieiress, — not to his power, but to his weakh. 
 There can be no doubi as to the fact of that marriage, irom which 
 was born the Athenian l(;ader Kleisthenes, afterwards the author 
 of the great deniocratical revolution at Athens after the expul- 
 sion of the Peisistratida; ; but the lively and amusing details 
 ^ith which Herodotus has surrounded it, bear much more the 
 stamp of romance than of reality. Dressed up, apparently, by 
 some ingenious Athenian, as a comjdiment to the Alkmaonid 
 lineage of his city, which comprised both Kleisthenes and Peri- 
 kle-, the narrative commemorates a marriage-rivcby between 
 that lineage and another noble Athenian house, and at the same 
 
 the daujrliter of the Sikyoniaii Kleisthenes cannot have taken place until 
 considerably after 556 u. o. See the long, but not very sati&factorv, note of 
 I>archer, ad Herodot. v, 66. 
 
 Bat I shall show giouiids for Neiitvinj;, when I recount the interview 
 between Solon and Crcesus. that Plerodotus in his conception of events mis- 
 dates very considcrahly the reiijn and proceed in<:s of Croesus as well as of 
 Peisivtratus : this is a conjectare of Niebuhr which I think very just, and 
 which is rendered still more pi-ohable hy what we tind here stated alK)ut the 
 succession of the Alkmaeonidai. For it is evident that Herodotus here con- 
 ceives the adventare between Alkmyeon and Crcesus as having oct urred one 
 generation (alwut twenty-five or thirty years) anterior to the marriage be- 
 tween Me^^akles and the daughter of Kleisthenes. That adventure will thos 
 ttand about 590-585 b. c., which would be about the time of the supposed 
 ioterview (if real) between Solon ami Cru^us, describing the maximum of 
 the power aad prosperity of the latter. 
 
 • Miiller, Doiians, book i, 8, 2 ; ThI.I-.vall, IlUt. of Gr^ce, vol. i, ch. x, v 
 
 &, Sded 
 
 time gives a mythical explanation of a phrase seemingly provei 
 bial at Athens — " Hippokleides don't care, "' 
 
 Plutarch numbers ^schines of Sikyon^ among the despoti 
 put down by Sparta : at what period this took place, or how it is 
 to be connected with the history' of Kleisthenes as given in Her 
 odotns, we are unable to say. 
 
 Contemporaneous with the Orthagoridas at Sikydn, — but 
 beginning a little later and closing somewhat earlier, — we find 
 the despots Kypselus and Periander at Corinth. The former 
 appears as the subverter of the oligarchy called the Bacchiadaj. 
 Of the manner in which he accomplished his object we find no 
 information : and this historical blank is inadequately filled up by 
 
 ' Herod, vi, 127-131. The locution explained is, — Oi» ^povWf 'iTrjro/tActdy : 
 compare the allusions to it in the ParoKmiographi, Zenob. v, 31 ; Diogenian. 
 vii, 21 ; Suidas, xi, 45, ed. Schott 
 
 The convocation of the suitors at the invitation of Kleisthenes from all 
 parts of Greece, and the distinctive mark and character of each, is prettily 
 told, as well as the drunken freak whereby Hippokleides forfeits both tho 
 tavor of Kleisthenes, and tne hand of Agariste, which he was on the point 
 of obtaining. It seems to be a story framed upon the model of various inci- 
 dents in the old epic, especially the suitors of Helen. 
 
 On one point, however, the author of the story seems to have overlooked 
 both the exigencies of chronology and the historical position and feelings of 
 his hero Kleisthenes. For among the suitors who present themselves at 
 Sikyon in conformity with the invitation of the latter, one is Leokedes, son 
 of Pheidon the despot of Argos. Now the hostihty and vehement antipathy 
 towards Argos, which Herodotus ascribes in another place to the Sikyonian 
 Kleisthenes, renders it all but impossible that the son of any king of Argos 
 could have become a candidate for the hand of Agariste. I have already 
 recounted the violence which Kleisthenes did to the legendary sentiment of 
 his native town, and the insulting names which he put upon the Sikyonian 
 Dorians, — all under the influence of a strong anti- Argeian feeUng. Next, 
 as to chronology : Pheidon king of Argos lived some time between 760-730 ; 
 an<l his son can never have been a candidate for the daughter of Kleisthenes, 
 whose reign falls 600-560 b. c. Chronologers resort here to the usual 
 resource in cases of difficulty : they recognize a second and later Pheidon. 
 whom they affirm that Herodotus has confounded with the first ; or they 
 alter the text of Herodotus, and in place of ♦' son of Pheidon," read " de- 
 scendant of Pheidon." But neither of these conjectures rests upon anj 
 tMsis : the text of Herodotus is smooth and clear, and the second Pheidon ii 
 nowhere else authendcated. See Larcher and Wesseling, ad Utc. ; compfl ■ 
 alio vol. ii, p. 419, part ii, ch. 4, of this History. 
 
 * PlutarcK De Herod. Malign, c. 21, p. 859. 
 
 HP 
 
 MWi 
 
 mm 
 
40 
 
 inSTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 * 
 
 ▼arious religious prognostics and oracles, foreshadowing the nsc, 
 the harsh rule, and the dethronement, after two generations, of 
 these powerful despots. 
 
 According to an idea deeply seated in the Greek mind, tha 
 destruction of a great prince or of a great power is usually signi 
 fied to him by the gods beforehand, though either through hard- 
 ness of heart or inadvertence, no heed is taken of the warning. 
 In reference to Kypselus and the Bacchiadae, we are informed 
 that Melas, the ancestor of the former, was one of the original 
 settlers at Corinth who accompanied the first Dorian chief Ale- 
 tes, and that Aletes was in vain warned by an oracle not to 
 admit him ;' again, too, immediately before Kypselus was born, 
 the Bacchiadie received notice that his mother was about to give 
 birth to one who would prove their ruin : the dangerous infant 
 escaped destruction only by a hair's breadtli, being preserved 
 from the intent of his destroyers by lucky concealment in a chest. 
 Labba, the mother of Kyj)selus, was daughter of Amphion, who 
 belonged to the gens, or sept, of the Bacchiadiu ; but she was 
 lame, and none of the gens would consent to marry her with that 
 deformity. Eetion, son of Echekrates, who became her husband, 
 belonged to a different, yel hardly less distinguished heroic gene- 
 alogy : he was of the Lapithie, descended from Kicneus, and dwell- 
 ing in the Corinthian dtme culled Petra. We see thus that 
 Kypselus was not only a high-born man in the city, but a Bacchiad 
 by half-birth ; both of the^e circumstances were likely to make 
 exclusion from the government intoh'rable to him. He rendered 
 himself highly popular with the people, and by their aid over- 
 threw and expelled the Bacchiadae, continuing as despot at Cor 
 inth for thirty years until his death (b. c. 655-625). According 
 to Aristotle, he maintained throughout life the same conciliatory 
 behavior by which liis power had first been acquired ; and hii 
 popularity was so effectually sustained that he had never any oc 
 casi<m for a body-guard. But the Corinthian oligarchy of th€ 
 century of Herotlotus, — whose tale that historian has embodied 
 in the oration of the Corintliian mvoj Sosikles^ to the Spartans. 
 
 • Pdusan. ii, 4, 9. 
 
 ■ Aristot. Polit. V, 9, 22 ; Hcrodot. v, 92. The tale respecting Kypselus, 
 his wholesale exaction from the people, contained in the sparioos second 
 
 
 i 
 
 PERIAXDER DESPOT AT CORINTH. 
 
 
 — gave a very different description, and depicted Kypselus aa t 
 cruel ruler, who banished, robbed, and murdered by wholesale. 
 
 His son and successor Periander, though energetic as a warrioFi 
 distinguished as an encourager of poetry and music, and even 
 numbered by some among the seven wise men of Greece, — is, 
 nevertheless, uniformly represented as oppressive and inhuman 
 in his treatment of subjects. The revolting stories which are 
 told respecting his private life, and his relations with his mother 
 and his wife, may for the most part be regarded as calumnies sug- 
 gested by odious associations with his memory ; but there seems 
 gfK)d reason for imputing to him tyranny of the worst character, 
 ind the sanguinary maxims of precaution so often acted upon by 
 Grecian despots were traced back in ordinary belief to Periander,* 
 and his contemporary Thrasybulus, des]>ot of Miletus. He main- 
 tained a powerful body-guard, shed much Idood, and was exorbi- 
 tant in his exactions, a part of which was employed in votive 
 offerings at Olympia ; and this munificence to the gods was con- 
 sidered by Aristotle and others as part of a deliberate system, 
 with the view of keepini; his subjects both hard at work and poor. 
 f )n one occasion, we are told that he invited the women of Cor- 
 inth to assemble for the ceh'bration of a religious festival, and 
 then stripped them of their rich attire and ornaments. By some 
 later writers, he is painted tis the stern foe of everything like 
 luxury and dissolute habits, — enforcing industry, compelling 
 every man to render account of his means of livelihood, and 
 causing the procuresses of Corinth to be thrown into the sea.^ 
 Though the general features of his character, his cruel tyranny 
 no less than his vigor and ability, may be sufficiently relied on, 
 yet the particular incidents connected with his name are all ex- 
 tremely dubious : the most credible of all seems to be the tale of 
 his inexpiable quarrel with his son, and his brutal treatment ci 
 many noble Korkyraean youths, as related in Herodotus. Peri- 
 book of the (Economica of Aristotle, coincides with the general view of 
 Herodotus (Aristot. CEconom. ii, 2) ; but I do not trust the statements of 
 this treatise for facts of the sixth or seventh centuries b. c. 
 
 • Aristot. Polit v, 9, 2-22 ; iii, 8, 3 ; Herodot. v, 92. 
 
 • Ephoms, Frag. 106, ed. Marx. ; Herakleides Potticus, Frag, v, ed 
 Kohler ; Nicolaus Damasc. p. 50, ed. OrelL ; Diogeo. Itaert- i, 96-98 \ 8afr 
 las, T, Kv^e^Aduv dvin^iifia. 
 
i^l 
 
 42 
 
 HISTORY OF OREKCK. 
 
 GREAT POWER OF PERIANDKR. 
 
 V- 
 
 s 
 
 K 
 J 
 
 » 
 
 1^ 
 
 Ander is said to ha\'e put to death his wife, Melissa, daughter of 
 Prokles, despot of P^pidaurus ; and his son Lykophron, informed 
 of this deed, contracted an incurable antipathy against him. 
 After vainly trying, both by rigor and by conciliation, to conquer 
 this feeling on the part of his son, Periander sent him to reside 
 at Korkyra, then dcipendent upon his rule ; but when he found 
 himself growing old and disabled, he recalled him to Corinth, in 
 order to insure the continuance of the dynasty. Lykophron still 
 obstinately deckned all personal communication with his father, 
 upon which the latter desired him to come to Corinth, and engaged 
 himself to go over to Korkyra. So terrified were the Korkyne- 
 ans at the idea of a visit from this formidable old man, that they 
 put Lykophron to death, — a deed which Periander avenged by 
 seizing three hundred youths of their noblest families, and 
 sending them over to the Lydian king, Alyattes at Sardis, in 
 order that they might be castrated and made to serve as eunuchs. 
 The Corinthian vessels in which the youths were dispatched for- 
 tunately touched at Samos in the way ; where the Samians and 
 Knidians, shocked at a proceeding which outraged all Hellenic 
 sentiment, contrived to rescue the youths from the miserable fate 
 intended for them, a.nd, after the death of Periander, sent them 
 back to their native island.' 
 
 While we turn with displeasure from the political life of thia 
 man, we are at the sjune time made acquainted with the great ex- 
 lent of his power, — greater than that which was ever possessed 
 hv Corinth after the extinctico of his dynasty. Korkyra, Ambra- 
 kia, Leukas, and Anaktorium, all Corinthian colonies, but in the 
 next century independent states, appear in his time dependencies 
 of Corinth. Ambrakia is said to have been under the rule of 
 another despot named Periander, probably also a Kypselid by 
 birth. It seems, indeed, that the towns of Anaktorium, Leukas, 
 and ApoUonia in the Ionian gulf, were either founded by the 
 Kypselids, or received reinforcements of Corinthian colonists, 
 during their dyt.ast}', though Korkyra was established consider- 
 ably earlier.^ 
 
 4d 
 
 BtoTf. Com 
 
 Herodot iii, 47-54. He details at some length this 
 fm9 Plutarch, De Herodoti Malignitat. c. 22, p. 86C. 
 • ArisUit Polit T, 3, ft ; 8, 9. Plutarch, Amatoritti, c. aS, p. 768, and Di 
 
 The reign of Periander lasted for forty r ears (b. c. 625-585) : 
 Psammetichus son of Gordius, who succeeded him, reigned three 
 years, and the Kypselid dynasty is then said to have closed, after 
 having continued for seventy-three years. i In respect of power, 
 magnificent display, and wide-spread connections both in A^ia and 
 m Italy, they evidently stood high among the Greeks of their time. 
 Their offerings consecrated at Olympia excited great admiration, 
 especially the gilt colossal statue of Zeus, and the large chest of 
 cedar-wood dedicated in the temple of Here, overlaid with vari- 
 ous figures in gold and ivory : tJie figures were borrowed from 
 mythical and legendary story, and the chest was a commemora- 
 tion both of the name of Kypselus and of the tale of his mar- 
 vellous preservation in infancy .^ If Plutarch is correct, this 
 powerful dynasty is to be numbered among the despots put down 
 by Sparta ;3 yet such intervention of the Spartans, granting it to 
 have been matter of fact, can hardly have been known to Herod- 
 otus. 
 
 Coincident in point of time with the conmiencem«nt of Perian- 
 
 Sera Nurainis VindictA, c. 7, p. 553. Strabo, vii, p. 325 ; x, p. 452. Scym- 
 nns Chios, v, 454, and Antonians Liberalis, c. iv, who quotes the lost work 
 called ^Xfi^paKiKu of Athanadas. 
 
 ' See Mr. Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, ad ann. 625-585 b. c. 
 « Pausan. r, 2, 4 ; 17, 2. Strabo, viii, p. 353. Compare Schneider, Epime 
 triim ad Xenophon. Anahas. p. 570. The chest was seen at Olympia, both 
 by Pausanias and by Dio Chrysostom (Or. xi, p. 325, Heiske). 
 
 =♦ Plutarch, De Herodot. Malitrn. c. 21, p. 859. If Herodotus had known 
 or believed that the dynasty of the Kypselids at Corinth was put down by 
 Sparta, he could not have failed to make allusion to the fact, in the long 
 harangue which he ascribes to the Corinthian Sosikles (v. 92). Whoever 
 reads that speech, will perceive that the inference from silence to ignorance 
 is in this case almost irresistible. 
 
 O. Mailer ascribes to Periander a policy intentionally anti-Dorian,— 
 " prompted by the wish of utterly eradicatint: the peculiarities of the Doric 
 race. For this reason he abolished the public tables, and prohibited tht 
 •ncient education." (0. Muller, Dorians, iii, 8, 3.) 
 
 But it cannot be shown that any piibiic tables {(nxrcriria), or any peculiar 
 edacation, analoprous to those of Sparta, ever existed at Corinth. If nothin|; 
 more be meant by these avaairia than public banquets on particular festive 
 occasions (see Welcker, Prolegom. ad Theognid. c. 20, p. xxxvii), these ere 
 ooway peculiar to Dorian cities. Nor does The<^ni8, v, 270, beer ottt 
 Whicker in affirming ** syssitionLai vetus institatam " at Me^^utu 
 
44 
 
 mSTOBY OF GREECE 
 
 
 
 der's rei-n at Corinth, we find Theagenes despot at Megara, wh« 
 is also slid to liare acquired his power by demagogic arts, as well 
 as by violent aggressions against the rich proprietors, whose cattle 
 he destroyed in th.M.- pastures by the side of the nver. We are 
 not told by what previous conduct on the part ot the rich this 
 hatred of the people had been earned, but Theagenes earned the 
 popular feeling completely along with him, obtained by public 
 vote a body of guard, ostensibly for his personal safety, and em- 
 ployed them to overthrow the oligarchy.i But he did not main- 
 Iain his power, even lor his own life : a second revolution dethroned 
 and expelled him ; on which occasion, after a short interval of 
 temperate government, the people are said to have renewed ma 
 still more marked way their antii>athies against the rich ; bamsh- 
 in- some of them with confiscation of property, intruding into 
 th^ houses of others with demands for forced hospitahty, and 
 even passing a formal palintokia, or decree, to require from the 
 rich who had lent money on interest, the refunding ot all pa^t 
 interest paid to them by their debtors;^ To appreciate correctly 
 Buch a demand, we must recollect that the practice ot taking in- 
 terest for money lent was regarded by a large pro,>ort.on of early 
 ancient society with feelings of unqualified reprobation ; and it 
 will be seen, when we come to the legislation of Solon, how much 
 such violent reactionary feeling against the creditor wa. provoked 
 by the antecedent working of the harsh law determining his 
 
 ""We hear in gent nil terms of more than one revolution in the 
 government of Me, ^ira,- a disorderly democracy, subverted by 
 returning oligarchical exiles, and these again unable long to mam- 
 tain themselves ;3 Uut we are alike uninformed as to dates and 
 details. And in respect to one of tl.ese struggles we are admitted 
 to the outi)Ourings of a contemporary and a sufferer, — the Me- 
 carian iK>et Theognis. Unfortunately, his elegiac verses, as we 
 possess them, are in a state so broken, incoherent, and mterpolated 
 Ihat we make out no distinct conception of the events which call 
 them forth,- still less, can we discover in the verses oi Theogmi 
 
 ' Ari?tot. Polit. v, 4, 5 ; Rhetor, i, 2. 7. 
 
 • Plnlarch, Qunest. Graec. c. 18, p. 295. 
 
 • Aristot Polit. iv, 12, 10 ; V. 2. 6 ; 4, 3. 
 
 GOOD AND BAD -AS UNDERSTOOD BY THEOGNIS. 
 
 45 
 
 «hat strength and peculiarity of pure Dorian feeling, which, 8inc€ 
 the publication of O. Muller s History of the Dorians, it has been 
 the fashion to look for so extensively. But we see that the poet 
 was connected with an oligarchy, of birth and not of wealth, 
 which had recently been subverted by the breaking in of the 
 rustic population previously subject and degraded, — uhat these 
 Bubjects were contented to submit to a single-headed despot, in 
 order to escape from their former rulers, — and that Theognis had 
 himself been betrayed by his own friends and companions, strip- 
 ped of his property, and exiled, through the wrong doing '' of 
 enemies whose blood he hopes one day to be permitted to drink."' 
 The condition of the subject cultivators previous to this revolution 
 he depicts in sad colors ; — they " dwelt without the city, clad in 
 goatskins, and ignorant of judicial sanctions or laws : " ^ after it, 
 they had become citizens, and their importance had been im- 
 mensely enhanced. And thus, according to his impression, the 
 vile breed has trodden down the noble, — the bad have become 
 masters, and the good are no longer of any account. The bitter- 
 ness and humiliation which attend upon poverty, and the undue 
 ascendency which wealth confers even upon the most worthless of 
 mankind,-^ are among the prominent subjects of his complaint, 
 and his keen personal feeling on this point would be alone suffi- 
 cient to show that the recent revolution had no way overthrown 
 the influence of property; in contradiction to the opinion of 
 Welcker, who infers without ground, from a passage of uncertain 
 meaning, that the land of the state had been formally redivided. * 
 
 \1 
 
 Theognis, vv, 682, 715, 720, 750, 816, 914, Welcker's edition: — 
 
 Tuv eiTj fiiXav al/jia irtelv, etc. 
 
 • Theognis, v, 20. — 
 
 Ki'pve, TToAtf fiev ?i>' ^(5e TroAff, Xaol 6e dr} aXXoit 
 
 or irpoff^' ovre dUag ifdeaav ovre vofiovg, 
 'AA,A* ufi<f>l ■rr?.evp^fft dopiig aiyuv KarerpifSoVy 
 
 'Efw (5' uaT^ l?M<l>oi TT/ff^ kvefiovro TroAeof. 
 
 ' See, especially, the lines from 500-560, 816-830, in Welcker's edition. 
 
 * Consult tbo Prolegomena to Welcker's edition of Theognis ; also, thosa 
 <*' Schneidewin (Delectus Elegiac. Poetar. pp. 46-55). 
 
 The Prolegomena of Welcker are particularly valuable and full of instmc- 
 uon. He illustrates at great length the tendency common to Theognis, with 
 ether early Greek j oets, to apply the words good and bad, not with reference 
 
 \S 
 
46 
 
 HiSTORi \jf gi:eece. 
 
 r f 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 4 
 
 The Mugarian revolution, so far as we appiehcnd it from 
 Theognis, appears to have improved materially the condition of 
 the cultivators aroiind the town, and to have strengthened a 
 certain class whom he considers " the bad ricli," — while it extin- 
 guishcd the privileges of that governing order, to which he him 
 self belonged, denominated in his language " the good and the 
 virtuous," with ruinous cfffct upon his own individual fortunes. 
 How far this governing order was exclusively Dorian, we hav# 
 no means of determining. The political change by which Theog- 
 
 to any ethical standard, hut to wealth as contrasted with poverty, — nobilitj 
 with low birth, — strength with weakness, — conservative and oligarchical 
 politics as opposed to innovation (sect. 10-18). The ethical meaning of these 
 words is not absolutely unknown, yet rare, in Theognis: it gradually grew 
 •p at Athens, and became popularized by the Socratic school of philosophen 
 as well as by the orators. But the early or political meaning always 
 remained, and the fluctuation between the two has been productive of fre- 
 qncnt misunderstanding. Constant attention is necessary when we read the 
 expressions ol aya^ol, t<r&'kol, ISeXtuttoi, Ka7.0Kuya^ol, xpvtrrol, etc., or on 
 the other hand, ol kokoI, SetXoi, etc., to examine whether the context is such 
 as to give to them the ethical or the political meaning. Welcker seems to 
 go a step too far, when he gays that the latter sense " fell into desuetude, 
 through the influence of the Socratic philosophy." (Proleg. sect. 11, p. xxv.) 
 The two meanings both remained extant at the same time, as we see by 
 Aristotle (Polit. iv, 8, 'Ij.-^axeddv yup wapd. role irXeitrroic ol evnopoi, tuv 
 Ka'/uv Kuym'^uv (h\oh(n Karixnv x^opav. A careful distinction is sometimet 
 found in Plato and Thoicydides, who talk of the oligarchs as " the persons 
 Cftfled super-excellent," — Toi>f /caAoOf /tayadwf ovo/iaCofuvovc (Thucyd. viii, 
 48), — i-rrd tuv irXovrriuv re xai koXuv Kuya^uv Xeyofievuv hv ry rroXei 
 (Plato, Hep. viii, p. 569). 
 
 The same double sen .e is to be found equally prevalent in the Latin Ion* 
 puaire '• fiy///(jue et mnli lives appellati, non ob merita in rtjmpublicam, 
 omnibus j):uitor cornifiti-j : sed uti quisqne locupletissimas, et injurii validior, 
 (|ui:i prajsontia dtfrndebiu, pro bono habebatur." (Sailust, Hist. Fragment, 
 lib. i, p y.}5, Cort I And atrain, Cicero (De Republ. i, 34): "Hoc errore 
 vulgi tuMi rcnii»uL»;iiani opes pauoorum, non virtutes, tenere coej^erunt, 
 noincii illi principes of4i,nutium ncordicus tenent, re autem carent eo nomine." 
 In Citcj-o's Oration pro Sextio (c. 45) the two meanings are intentionally 
 confounded together, whim he gives his deanition of optimus quisque. Welcker 
 , Proleg. s. 12) produces several other examples of the like equivocal mean- 
 h^. Nor are there wandng instances of the same use of language in the 
 laws and customs of the early Germans, — boni homines, probi homines, 
 Kachinburgi, Gudemanner. See Savigny, Geschichte des Romisrh. Rechti 
 im Mittelalte;-, vol. i, p. 184; vol. ii, p xxii 
 
 CHARACTER AND INFLUENCE OF ItiE DESPOTS. If 
 
 nis suffered, and the new despot whom he indicates as either 
 actually installed or nearly impending, must have come consider- 
 ably after the despotism of Theagenes ; for the life of the poet 
 seems to fall between 570-490 b. c, while Theagenes must have 
 ruled about 630-600 b. c. From the unfavorable picture, there- 
 fore, which the poet gives as his own early experience of the 
 condition of the rural cultivators, it is evident that the despot 
 Theagenes had neither conferred upon them any permanent 
 benefit, nor given them access to the judicial protection of the 
 city. 
 
 It is thus that the despots of Corinth, Sikyon, and Megara 
 serve as samples of those revolutionary influences, which towards 
 the beginning of the sixth century B. c, seem to have shaken 
 or overturned the oligarchical governments in very many cities 
 throughout the Grecian world. There existed a certain sympathy 
 and alliance between the despots of Corinth and Sikydn :^ how 
 far such feeling was farther extended to Megara, we do not 
 know. The latter city seems evidently to have been more popu- 
 lous and powerful during the seventh and sixth centuries B. c, 
 than we shall afterwards find her throughout the two brilliant 
 centuries of Grecian history : her colonies, found as far distant 
 as Bithynia and the Thracian Bosphoms on one side, and as 
 Sicily on the other, argue an extent of trade as well as naval 
 force once not inferior to Athens : so that we shall be the lest 
 surprised when we approach the life of Solon, to find her in pos- 
 session of the island of Salamis, and long maintaining it, at ^me 
 time with every promise of triumph, against the entire forced 
 the Athonians. 
 
 
 Vt 
 
 . ri. 138. 
 
HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 IONIC PORTION OF HELLAS. -ATHENS BEFORE SOLON 
 
 » , 
 
 ,i 
 
 Having traced in the preceding chapters the scanty sireaor. 
 of Peloponnesian history, from the first commencement of an 
 authentic chronolo]^ in 776 b. c. to the maximum of Spartan 
 territorial acquisiticm, and the general acknowledgment of Spar- 
 tan primacy, prior to 547 b. c, I proceed to state as mucli as 
 can be made out respecting the Ionic portion of Hellas during 
 the same period. This portion comprehends Athens an<l Euboea 
 — the Cyclades Islands, — and the Ionic cities on tlie coast of 
 Asia Minor, with their different colonies. 
 
 In the case of Peloponnesus, we have been enabled to discern 
 Bomething like an order of real facts in the period alluded to, — 
 Sparta makes great strides, while Argos falls. In the case of 
 Athens, unfortunately, our materials are less instructive. Tlie 
 number of historical facts, anterior to the Solonian legislation, i? 
 very few indeed; — the interval between 77G b. c. and 624 b. c«, 
 the epoch of Drake's legislation a short time prior to Kylon's at- 
 tempted usurpation, gives us merely a list of archons, denuded 
 of all incident. 
 
 In compliment to the heroism of Kodrus, who had sacrificed 
 his life for the safety of his country, we are told that no person 
 after him was permitted to bear the title of king :' his son Medon. 
 and twelve successors, — Akastus, Archippus, Tliersippus, Phor- 
 has, Megakles, Dioirnetus, Pherekles, Ariphron, Tliespieus, Ag 
 amestor, jEschvlus. and Alkma'on. — were all arciions for life. 
 In the second year of Alkm;eon (752 b. c), the dignity of archon 
 was restricted to a duration of ten years : and seven of thesf 
 decennial archons are numbered, — Charops, yEsimides, Kleidi- 
 kus, Hippomenes, I^okrates, Apsandrus, Eryxias. With Kreoii 
 who succeeded Kryxias, the archonship was not only made ai 
 
 ' Jtt: til ii. 7. 
 
 
 ATHENS BEFORE SOLON. 
 
 49 
 
 nual, but put into commission and distributed among nine persons 
 and these nine archons, annually changed, continue throughout 
 all the historical i)eriod, interrupted only by the few intervals of 
 political disturbance and foreign compression. Down to Kleidi- 
 kus and Hipporaenf3s (714 b. c), the dignity of archon had con- 
 tinued to belong exclusively to the Medontida? or descendants of 
 IMedon and Kodrus:' at that period it was thrown open to all 
 the Eupatrids, or order of nobility in the state. 
 
 Such is the series of names by which we step down from the 
 level of legend to that o£ history. All our historical knowledge 
 of Athens is confined to the period of the annual archons; 
 which series of eponymous archons, from Kreon downwards, is 
 perfectly trustworthy .^ Above 683 b. c, the Attic antiquaries 
 have provided us with a string of names, which we must take as 
 we find them, without being able either to warrant the whole or 
 to separate the fiilse from the true. There is no reason to doubt 
 the general fact, that Athens, like so many other communities ot 
 Greece, was in its primitive times governed by an hereditary line 
 of kings, and that it passed from that form of government into a 
 commonwealth, first oligarchical, afterwards democratical. 
 
 We are in no condition to determine the civil classification and 
 political constitution of Attica, even at the period of the archon- 
 ship of Ki-eon, 683 b. c, when authentic Athenian chronology 
 first commences, — much less can we pretend to any knowledge 
 of the anterior centuries. Great political changes were intro- 
 duced first by Solon (about 594 b. c), next by Kleisthenes (503 
 B. c), afterwards by Aristeides, Perikles, and P^phialtes, between 
 the Persian and Peloponnesian wars : so that the old ante-Solon- 
 ian, — nay, even the real Solonian, — polity was thus put more 
 and more out of date and out of knowledge. But all the informa- 
 tion which we possess respecting that old polity, is derived from 
 authors who lived after all or most of these great changes, — and 
 
 ' Pausan. i, 3, 2; Suidas, 'iTnrofiivric ; Diogenian. Centur. Proverb, iii, I. 
 ^ kae.Sfarepov 'InTzo^ivovq. 
 
 *See Boetkh on the Parian Marble, in Corp. Inscrip. Graec part 12, f€Cf. 
 6, pp. 307, 3iO, 332. 
 
 From the beginning of the reign of Medon son of Kodms, to the first 
 •anual archon Kreun, the Parian Marble compates 407 years, EnsciMn 
 ift7. 
 
 V^ 
 
 \\ 
 
 ▼ OL. III. 
 
 Z 
 
 4o# 
 
1 
 
 I ■! 
 
 ». 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 who, finding no records, nor anything better than current legends 
 explained the foretini(» as well as they could by guesses more or 
 less ingenious, generally attached to the dorainanl legendary 
 names. They were sometimes able to found their conclusions 
 upon religious usages, periodical ceremonies, or common sacri- 
 fices, still subsisting in their own time; and these were doubtless 
 the best evidences to be found respecting Athenian antiquit)', 
 since such practices often continued unaltered tliroughout all the 
 political changes. It is in this way alone that we arrive at some 
 partial knowledge of the ante-Solonian condition of Attica, 
 though as a whole it still remains dark and unintelligible, even 
 af^er the many illustrations of modern commentators. 
 
 Philochorus, writing in the third century before the Christiaiw 
 era, stated that Kekrops had originally distributed Attica into 
 twelve districts,— Kekropia, Tetrapolis, Epakria, Dekeleia, Eleu- 
 sis, Aphidnie, Thoriku.s Brauron, Kytherus, Sphettus, Kephisia, 
 Phalerus, — and that these twelve were consolidated into one 
 political society by Theseus.' This partition does not comprise 
 the Megarid, which, ac<x)rding to other statements, is represented 
 &s united with Attica, and as having formed part of the distribu- 
 tion made by king Pandion among his four sons, Nisus, .^geus, 
 Pallas, and Lykus,— a story as old as Sophokles, at least.2 Li 
 other accounts, again, a quadruf)le division is applied to the 
 tribes, whicli are stated to have been four in number, beginning 
 from Kekrops,— called in his time Kekrdpis, Autochthon, Aktaa, 
 and Paralia. Under king Kraiiaus, these tribes, we are told, re- 
 ceived the names of Kmnais, Atihis, Mesogiea, and Diakria,^ — 
 under Erichthonius, those of Dias, Athenais, Poseidonias, Heph- 
 Kstias : at last, sliortly after Erechtheus, they were denominated 
 after the four sons of I5n (son of Kreusa, daughter of Erech- 
 theus, by Apollo), Geleontes, Hopletes, ^gikoreis, Argadeis. 
 The four Attic or Ionic tribes, under these last-mentioned names, 
 
 FOUR EARLY TRIBES OF ATTICA. 
 
 51 
 
 Philochorus ap. Strabo, ix, p. 396. See Schomann, Antiq. J. I Gr«c. 
 >. ▼, sect 2-6. 
 
 * Strabo, ix, p. 392. Philcchorus and Andron extended the kingdom of 
 Nisus from the isthmus of Corinth as far as the Pythium (near CEaoe) ami 
 Flousis (Str. i'6.) ; but there were many different tales. 
 
 ' Pollux, viii, c 9, 109-111. 
 
 continued to form the classification of the citizens until the revo. 
 lution of Kleisthenes in 509 b. c, by which the ten tribes were 
 introduced, as we tind tliem down to the period of Macedonian 
 ascendency. It is affirmed, and with some etymological plausi- 
 bility, that the denominations oi' these four tribes must originally 
 have had reference to the occupations of those who bore them,^ 
 the Hopletes being the warrior-clasSy the jEgikoreis goatherds, the 
 Argadeis artisans, and the Geleontes (Teleontes, or Gedeontes) 
 cultivators : and hence some authors have ascribed to the ancient 
 inhabitants of Attica' an actual primitive distribution into hered- 
 itary professions, or castes, similar to that which prevailed ir. 
 India and Egypt. If we should even grant that such a division 
 into castes might originally have prevailed, it must have grown 
 obsolete long before the time of Solon : but there seem no suf- 
 licient grounds for believing that it ever did prevail. The names 
 of the tribes may have been originally borrowed from certain 
 professions, but it does not necessarily follow that the reality cor- 
 responded to this derivation, or that every individual who be- 
 longed to any tribe was a member of the profession from whence 
 the name had originally been derived. From the etymology of 
 the names, be it ever so clear, we cannot safely assume the his- 
 torical reality of a classification according to professions. And 
 this objection (which would be weighty, even if the etymology 
 had been clear) becomes irresistible, when we add that even the 
 etymology is not beyond dispute ;^ that the names themselves are 
 written with a diversity which cannot be reconciled : and that 
 the four professions named by Strabo omit the goatherds and 
 
 * Ion, the father of the four heroes jifter whom these tribes were named, 
 was affirmed by one story to l>e the primitive civilizing legislator of Attica, 
 like Lykurgus, Numa, or Dcukalion (Plutarch, adv. Koloten, c. 31, p. 1125). 
 
 * Thus Euripides derives the A/yiKopei^, not from at^, a goat, but from 
 MylCi the ^gis of Athene (Ion. 1581 ) : he also gives Teleont^x, derived from 
 an eponymous Telfdn, son of Ion, while the inscriptions at Kvzikus concur 
 with Herodotus and others in giving Geleontes. Plutarch (Solon, 25) gives 
 Gredoontes. In an Athenian inscription recently puMished by Professor 
 Ross (dating, seemingly, in the first century after the Christian era), the 
 worship cf Zens Greleon at Athens has been for the first time verified,— 
 Afdf TeArovroc UpoKTjpv^ (Hoss, Die Attischen Demen pp. vii-ix, llalia 
 1840). 
 
I 
 
 \\ 
 
 I 
 
 Vi 
 
 HISTORT dF GREECE. 
 
 Include the priesto ; while those specified 1 7 Plutarch leave cit 
 the latter and include the former.^ 
 
 All that seems certain is, tliat these were the four ancient Icinic 
 tribes — analogous to the Ilylleis, Pamphyli, and Dymanes among 
 the Dorians — which prevailed not only at Athens, but among 
 several of the Ionic cities derived from Athens. The Geleontes 
 •re mentioned in inscriptions now remaining belonging to Teus 
 in Ionia, and all the four are named in those of Kyzikus in the 
 Propontis, which was a foundation from the Ionic Miletus.'2 The 
 four tribes, and the four names (allowing for some variations of 
 reading), are therefore historically verified; but neither the tinnj 
 of their introduction nor their primitive import are ascertainal»hi 
 matters, nor can any faith be put in the various constructions of 
 the legends of Ion, ICrechtheus, and Kekrops, by modern cor.i< 
 mentators. 
 
 These four tribes may be looked at either as religious and social 
 aggregates, in which capacity each of them comprised three phra- 
 tries and ninety gentes ; or as political aggregates, in which point 
 of view each included three trittyes and twelve naukraries. 
 Each phratry contained thirty gentes ; each irittys comprised 
 four naukraries : the total numbers were tnus three hundred 
 and sixty gentes and forty-eight naukraries. Moreover, each 
 gens is said to have contained thirty heads of families, of whom 
 therefore there would be a total of ten thousand eight hundred. 
 
 Comparing these two distributions one with the other, we may 
 remark that they are distinct in their nature and proceed in oppo- 
 site directions. The Irittys and the naukrary are essentially frac- 
 tional subdivisions of the tribe, and resting upon the tribe as 
 their higher unity ; the naukrary is a local circumscription, com- 
 
 * Plutarch (Solon, c. :^5); Stmbo, viii, p. 383. Compare Tlato, Kiitiiis, 
 p. lie. 
 
 * Boeckh, Corp. Inscr. Nos. 3078, 3079, 3665. The elaborate commentary 
 on this last-mentioned inscription, in which Boeckh vindicates the early 
 historical reality of the classitication by professions, is noway satisfactory to 
 my mind. 
 
 K. F. Hermann (Lehrhach der Griechischen Staats Alterthiiraer, sect. 
 91-96) gives a summary of all that can be known respecting these old Athe- 
 nian tribes. Compare Hgen, De Tribubus Atticis, p. 9, s&j.; Tittmann, 
 Griechische Staats Verfassungen, pp. 570-582; Wachsmuth, HellenisclM 
 Alterthumsknnde, sect. 43, 44. 
 
 2 Vol. 3 
 
 \" 
 
 TRir.KS, PHKATRIES, GENTES, ETC. 
 
 S8 
 
 posed of the naukrars, or principal householders (so the etymology 
 seems to indicate), who levy in each respective district the quotA 
 of public contributions which belongs to it, and superintend the 
 disbursement, — provide the military force incumbent upon the 
 district, being for each naukrary two horsemen and one ship, — 
 and furnish the chief district-otTicers, the prytanes of the naukra- 
 ri.' A certain number of foot soldiers, varying according to the 
 demand, must probably be understood as accompanying these 
 horsemen, but the quota is not specified, as it was [)erhap8 thought 
 unnecessary to limit precisely the obligations of any except the 
 wealthier men who served on horseback, — at a period w hen oli- 
 garchical ascendency was paramount, and when the bulk of the 
 [>eople was in a state of comparative subjection. The forty-eight 
 naukraries are thus a systematic subdivision of the four tribes, 
 embracing altogether the whole territory, j)opulation, contributions, 
 and military force of Attica. — a subdivision framed exclusively 
 for purposes connected with the entire state. 
 
 But the phratries and gentes are a distribution completely differ- 
 ent from this. They seem aggregations of small primitive unities 
 into larger ; they are independent of, and do not presuppose, the 
 tribe ; they arise separately and spontaneously, without precon- 
 certed uniformity, and without reference to a common political pur» 
 
 ' About the naukraries, see Aristot. Fragment. Rerum Public, p. 89, ed 
 Neumann ; Harpokration, vv, Arjfiapxoc, !^avKpapiKu j Photius, v, NavKpo 
 pla\ Pollux, viii, 108; Schol. ad Aristoph. Nubes, 37. 
 
 Oi irpvTuveic ruv 'SavKpupuv, Herodot. v, 7 1 : they conducted the military 
 proceedings in resistance to the usurpation of Kylon. 
 
 The statement that each naukrary was obliged to furnish one ship can 
 hardly be true of the time before Solon : as Pollux states it, we should b« 
 led to conceive that he only infers it from the name vavKpapo^ (Pollux, viii, 
 108), though the real etymology seems rather to be from vai<j (Wachsmuth, 
 Hellen. Alt. sect. 44, p. 240). There may be some ground for believing that 
 the old meaning, also, of the word vavrrj^ connected it with vaiu ; such a 
 supposition would smooth the difficulty in reg-ard to the functions of the 
 ■^avTodiKaL as judges in cases of illicit admission into the phratores. See 
 Ilesychius and Harpokration, v, Naurodt/cat ; and Baumstark, De Curatori- 
 bus Emporii, Friburg, 1828, p. 67, seq.: compare, also, the fragment of the 
 cktionian law, fj Upuv opyiuv rj vavTai, which Niebuhr conjecturally corrects. 
 Horn. Gesch. V, i, p. 323, 2d ed. ; Hesychius, fiavariipi^ — oi oUirai 8e« 
 PoUnx, Nav?.ov, and Lobeck, 'FrifiariKdv, sect 3, p. 7; 'keivavrai vaph 
 MiAjyff/otf 1 Plutarch, Qusest. Graec. c. 32, p. 298. 
 
b^ 
 
 HISTORY OF G.{i:i:CK. 
 
 i 
 
 poTO ; the legislator finds tl.em preexistiDnr, and adapts or modifiwi 
 fhem to answ^ir some national sdieino. ^^^. rnnst distinguish the 
 peneral fact of tlie classification, and tlie successive subordination in 
 the scale, of the families to th.' gens, of the gentes to the jihratry 
 and of the ,>hratrics to the tribe,- fron. the precise numerical sym-' 
 metry with wliieh this >ubordination is invested, as we read it, — 
 thirty families foagen«*„ thirty gentes to a phratry, three phratrie.'j 
 to eacli tribe. Jf such nice e(|uality of numbers could ever have 
 been |)ro<Mjre,i, by legislative constraint' o|)era(ing upon [.reexist- 
 mt natural (elements, the pro|Kirtions could not have been i)er. 
 manently maintained. But we may reasonably doubt whether it 
 dul ever so exist: it appears more like the fancy of an author 
 who pleased himself by sup|K>8ing an original sy>tematic creation 
 m times anterior to records, by multiplying together the number 
 of days m the month and of months in the year. That every 
 r>hratry containe.j an equal mimber of gentes, and every gens an 
 equal number of families, is a supj>osition hardly admissible with- 
 out l>etter eviden<.e than we possess. liut apart from this question- 
 able precision of numerical scale, the f)hratnes and gentes them- 
 selves were real, ancient, and .lurable Jtssociations among the 
 Athenian |HH)ple, hi-bly impoi ta*it to be understood.'-' The bj^is of 
 the wliole was the house , hearth, or tkmily, _ a number of which, 
 
 • Meier, Dc tientiliute A:ticA, pp. 22-24, conceive, that this numeriral 
 rompleteness waw enacted hy St.lon ; hut of tfiis tfiere is no proof, nor is ,f 
 in harmony with the jjcneml tendencies of Solon's lepshition 
 
 » So m reference to the Ant^Io-Saxon /yMim/. and Hundreds, ^r^d to the 
 •till more wulely-sprcad division of the Hundred, which seems to t,ervaik 
 the whole of Teutonic and Scandinavian anti.juitv, much more extensivply 
 than the /jkA,„,,..-_ there is no ijround for iH'liovinj,^ that these precise numer- 
 ical proportions were in general practice realized : the systematic nomencla- 
 ture served lU purpose hy .nnrkin^,^ the idea of graduation and the type to 
 wlneh a certain approach w.ts .u-toally made, Mr. Thorpe observes, rispec t- 
 m- the Hundred, in his (ilo.sary to the '' Ancient Laws and Instit, tes of 
 Kngland,- v, Hundred, T^thinrf, Frid-Bor<j^ etc. - In the Dialopus d< Sc^tc- 
 cancit IS said that a Hundred 'ex hydarum aliquot ccntenariis, sod non 
 determioaus, constat: quidam enim ex pluribus, quidam ex panciorihus 
 eoMlat Some accounts make it consist of precisely a hundred hydes others 
 Of a hundred tythin^, others of a hundred free families. Certain it is that 
 whatever may have been its orijrinal organization, the Hundred, at the'time 
 when It becomes known to as, diifered grwoly t extent in varioof Darts of 
 Cnglaml.'* "^ 
 
 Ui:\i. CHARACTER OF THE Al flC GEN TKS. 
 
 greater or less, composed the gens, or genos. This gens wai 
 there^yi'O a clan, sept, or enlarged, and partly factitious, brother 
 hood, bound together by, — 1. Common religious ceremonies, and 
 exclusive privilege of priesthood, in honor of the same god, 8U|>- 
 |K>sed to be tlie primitive ancestor, and chanicterizfjd by a speciiil 
 Burname. 2. By a common burial-place. 3. By mutual rights 
 o*' succession to property. 4. liy reciprocal obligations of help, 
 defence, and redress of injuries. 5. By mutual right and obligiir 
 tion to intermarry in certain determinate ciises, especially where 
 there was an orpliaii daughter or heiress. 6. By possession, ia 
 some cases at least, of common pro|*erty, an archon and a treas- 
 urer of their own. Such were the rights and obligations charac- 
 terizing the gentile union :' the phratric union, binding together 
 several gentes, was less intimate, but still included some mutual 
 rights and obligations of an analogous t^aracter, and especially a 
 communion of particular sacred rites and mutual privileges of 
 prosecution in the event of a phrator being slain. Each phratry 
 was considered as belonging to one of tbe four tribes, and all the 
 phratries of the same tribe enjoyed a certain periodical oomuui- 
 uion of sacred rites, under the presidency of a magistrate called 
 the phylo-basileus, or tribe-king, selected from the Eupatrid.s; 
 Zeus GeleOn was in this manner the patron-god of the tribe Ge- 
 leontes. Lastly, all the four tribes were linked together by the 
 common worship of Apollo Patrous, as their divine father and 
 guardian ; for Apollo was the father d I6n, and the eponyms of 
 all the four tribes were reputed sons of Ido. 
 
 Such was the primitive religious and social union of the popu- 
 Lat ion of Attica in its gradually ascending scale, — as distin- 
 gui^hed from the political union, probably of later introductioo, 
 represented at first by the trittyes and naukraries, and in ai'tei 
 times by the ten Kleisthenean tribes, subdivided into trittyes and 
 demes. The religious and family bond of aggregation is the ear« 
 lier of the two : but the political bond, though beginning later. 
 
 ' See the instructive inacription in Professor Rosses work (Uber die Die- 
 men von Attika, p. 26) of the ytvoq *kfivvav6pidCtVf commemorating tht 
 archon of that gens, the priest of Kckrops, the TofiioQ^ or treasurer, and tht 
 names of the members, wi^ the deme and tribe of each individual Coia- 
 paie Bossier, De Gent. Atticis, p. 53. About the peculiar religious rites <d 
 the gens called Gephyrtei, tee Uerodou v, til. 
 
 ^W. -^ 
 
 jU~^. 
 
$6 
 
 HISTORY OF GBEFXE. 
 
 / 
 
 will be found to acquire constantly increasing influence throurt. 
 out the greater part of this history. I„ the former, personal re. 
 tolion IS the essential and predominant characteristic' — local re- 
 lation being subordinate : in the latter, property and residence 
 become the chtef connderations, and the personal element counts 
 only as measured by these accomj.animents. All these phratric 
 and gentile associations, the larger as well as the smaller, were 
 founded upon the same principles and tendencies of the Grecian 
 inmd,2-a coalescence of the idea of worship with that of ances- 
 try, or of communion in certain special religious rites with com- 
 munion of blood, real or supposed. The god, or hero, to whom 
 the assembled members offered their sacrifices, was conceived as 
 the pnmuive ancestor, to whom they owed their origin ; often 
 through a ong list of intermediate nanus, a. in the case of the 
 MUesuui llekataus. so often before adverted to.3 Each family 
 
 lT,'u''''°' ^""'"''' "''''""'''' '" •'■'■'"' '■"^'«'"' - r>io".vs. Hnl. Ant. Ron,. 
 
 Plato, Eu,l,v.l.m.,,.3.Wj Aristot. ap. S.hol. in PI..ton. A.xjoch, p. 465, 
 «1 Bet Apmror^w ?,a< • roC. oAou -X^ov; 6,r,p„^ivov •A^.vyaJ dc rl 
 ro.V yt^croot «<» Toi( i„^,ovpy«i,,, ^.x^( avrCv eiva, ri„oapa(. tCv i^ 
 
 m i^ rofr.v rp.,.o,ra .na, ,„'7, r„ .!. ,„or U rp^..o.ra u.fp^ <,..,,. 
 
 irp,c,,oyrr( iK 6, r,x cvvoSov oiru, ,rpoaarop.v6^„ot : compare also iii 52- 
 Jlcfns AtiKist. p. 108. ' ' 
 
 Etlllirxr' '' 'r""''^" ""'^^'' ^^"'"'^^' ^■•- - ■ '^>?--r, etc 
 then com T>^ /'"'"' ^-^--- '^ V:--.r; Pollux, viii, 85 ; Demos- 
 then. com. Enbuhd. p. 1319, ./-a o,uro,e,. dm '.N - .o, rarp^Jof .al 
 A.^c U^K.ov yn.^r<u- ami cont. Xcram. p. 1365. Na .. uses :...rure, « 
 ynonvn^us wuh >. : - ... t >,«, j, ,p. ,,, ,o-28. e,l B.KX Schornann 
 ^Anti.,. J. 1 . Gra'c. « xxm, considers the two as cssenti.n- distinct ^nh- 
 rp, and oi.o^■ hoth occur in the Iliad, ii. 362. See tb.'Di^sertati^ of 
 Buttmann Lber den Boj^riff von o,>ar,na (Mnhoio-us, c 94. n. 305) ■ and 
 that of Meier, De Gentiluate Attica, where the poinds of know^e iltl 
 aide respecting the -entcs are well put to^^ther and dis<.>ussed 
 
 In the Ther»an Inscription (No. 2448 ap. Boeckh. Porp. In^r nee his 
 comnieat, page 310) containing the .^starr.ent of Epiki4u, wberebv a L^-uesI 
 b made to oz cv.:rrd,-o uv6pelo, r^. at.>Hv<iv,~thi« latter 'wed d^ 
 not mean kindred or bloud relations, but a variety of ^e gentile vJ0^>. • 
 ** thixsus," or '• sodalitium." Boeckh. is *• 
 
 • Herodot. i, 143. 'E«arm^ - ^ev^jioyiycavn n ^>vTdv Kai ava&nff^ * 
 
 FACTITIOUS BROTHERTTOon. 
 
 51 
 
 had its own sacred rites and funereal commemoration of ancestors, 
 celebrated by the master of the house, to which none but mem- 
 bers of the family were admissible : the extinction of a family, 
 carrying with it the suspension of these religious rites, was held 
 by the Greeks to be a misfortune, not merely from the loss of the 
 citizens compo^^ing it, but also because the family gods and the 
 manes of deceased citizens were thus deprived of their honors,' 
 and might visit the country with displeasure. The larger associ- 
 ations, called gens, phratry, tribe, were formed by an extension 
 of the same principle, — of the family considered as a religious 
 brotherhood, worshipping some common god or hero with an ap- 
 propriate surname, and recognizing him as their joint ancestor; 
 and the festivals Theoenia and Apaturia^ — the first Attic, the 
 
 TT]%' TrarpiTiv t^ kKKaideKarov ^eov. Again, yeverjloyijaavrL iuvrdv, Kal uva- 
 firioavTL /f tnKaideKarov ^eov. The Attic expression, — dy;f/crrfm iepwv Kai 
 6<7iu}i', — illustrates the intimate association between family relationship and 
 common religious privileges. — Isseus, Orat. vi, p. 89, ed. Bek. 
 
 ' Isaeus, Or. vi, p. 61 ; ii, p. 38 ; Demosth. adv. Makartatum, pp. 1053- 
 1075; adv. Leochar. p. 1093. Respecting this perpetuation of the family 
 sacred rites, the feeling prevalent among the Athenians is much the same as 
 what is now seen in China. 
 
 Mr. Davis observes : '* Sons are considered in this country, where the 
 power over them is so absolute through life, as a sure support, as well as a 
 jirobable source of wealth and dignities, should thev succeed in learning. 
 But the grand object is, the perpetuation of the race, to sacrifice at the 
 fiimily tombs. Without sons, a man lives without honor or satisfaction, and 
 dies unhappy ; and as the only remedy, he is permitted to adopt the sons of 
 his younger brothers. 
 
 '• It is not during life only, that a man looks for the service of his song. 
 It is his consolation in declining years, to think that they will continue the 
 performance of the prescribed rites in the hall of ancestors, and at the family 
 tombs, when he is no more : and it is the absence of this pro-^pect which 
 makes the childless doubly miserable. The superstition derives influence 
 from the importance attached by the government to this species of posthu- 
 mous duty : a neglect of which is punishable, as we have seen, by the laws. 
 Indeed, of all the subjects of their care, there are none which the Chinese so 
 religiously attend to as the tombs of their ancestors, conceiving that anj 
 neglect is sure to be followed by worldly misfortune." — (The Chinese, bj 
 John Francis Davis, chap, ix, pp. 131-134, ed. Knight, 1840.) 
 
 Mr. Mill notices the same state of feeling among the Hindoos. — (History 
 of British India, book ii, chap, vii, p. 381, ed. 8vo.) 
 
 • Xenoph. Ilellen. i, 5, 8; Herodot i, 147* Suidas, 'AiraTovpia^ Z*M 
 
 3* 
 
68 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE 
 
 second common to all the Ionic race, — annually brought togethei 
 the members of theso phratries and gentes for worship, festivity, 
 and maintenance of special syiiipathies ; thus strengthening the 
 larger ties without effacing the smaller. 
 
 Such were the manitesuitions of Grecian sociality, as we read 
 them in the early constitution, not merely of Attica, but of other 
 Grecian states bc>idr.. To Aristotle and D.k^archus, it was an 
 interesting inquiry to trace back all rx)litical society into cer- 
 tarn assumed elementary atoms, and to show by what motives 
 and means the original families, each having its separate meal- 
 bm and fireplace," had been brought together into larger aggre- 
 gates. But the historian must accept as an ultimate facrthe 
 earliest state of things which his witnesses make known to him- 
 and m the case now before us, the gentile and phratric unions arc* 
 matters mto the beginning of which we cannot pretend to pene- 
 trate. 
 
 Pollux — probably from Aristotle's last work on the Constitu- 
 tions of Greece— infomis us distinctly, that the members of the 
 same gens at Athens were not commonly related by blood,— and 
 even without any express testimony we might have concluded 
 8uch to be fact: to what extent the gens, at the unknown epoch 
 of Its first formation, was based upon actual relationship, we have 
 no means of determining, either with regard to the Athenian or 
 the Roman gentes, which were in all main points analogous. 
 Gentil.sm is a tie by itself; distinct from the family ties, but 
 presupposing their existence and extending them by an artificial 
 analogy, partly fouiKled on religious belief and partly on positive 
 compact, so as to comprehend strangers in blood. All the mem- 
 bers of one gens, or even of one phratry, believed themselves to 
 be sprung, not, indeed, from the same grandfather or great- 
 
 Plfr^'rl'^'*'''"'''' '^^"'"^''"^ '^^ P''"^^^'"^ P^ «f ^h« phratric union. - 
 Plato, Eathydem. e 28, p. m2 ; Demosth. adv. Makart. p. 1054. See Meier, 
 De Gentihtate AtncA, pp. 1 1-14. ' 
 
 The rrurpcai at Byzantinm, which vrere diflferent from ^inaot, and which 
 possessed corporate property (m re ^iarrurcKCl Kal rd narpcurcKli, Aristot 
 CEconom.c. n, 4), are uonbtte the parallel of the Athenian phratries. 
 
 Dik»archu8 ap. Stephan. Byz. v, II«rp.; Aristot. Polit. i, 1, 6: ^Ouoo.. 
 ^TTT and buoKanxovi are the old words cited by the lattei from Charondai 
 tM Lpiiremdeg 
 
 COMMON DIMNE ANCESTOR OF THE tiENS. 
 
 59 
 
 grandfather, but from the same divine or heroic ancestor: all the 
 contemporary members of the phratry of Hekatanis ha<l a 
 common god for their ancestor in the sixteenth degree ; and this 
 fundamental belief, into which the Greek mind passed with sc 
 m'ich facility, was adopted and converted by po-itiv»- comj>act 
 into the gentile and phratric principle of union. It is be cinise 
 such a transfusion, not recognized by Christianity, is at va- 
 riance with modern habits of thought, and becau-e we do not 
 n a lily understand how such a legal and religious fiction can 
 lia\e sunk deep into the Greek feelings, that tlie phratries and 
 gciites appear to us mysterious : but they are in harmony with 
 all the legendary genealogies which have been set Ibrth in the 
 preceding volume. Doubtless Niebuhr, in his valuable discus- 
 sion of the ancient Roman gentes, is right in sup[)osing that they 
 were not real families, procreated from any common historicnl an- 
 i('-tor : but it is not the less true, tliough he seems to suppose of her- 
 \\ ise, that the idea of the gens involved the heh'tfm a common first 
 father, divine or heroic, — a genealogy which we inav projierly 
 call fabulous, but which was consecrated and accredited arnon<» 
 the members of the gens itself, and served as one important 
 bond oi unioa between them.' And though an analytical mind 
 
 ' Nicbuiir, Komische Geschichtc, vol. i, pp. 317-337. Varro's language 
 nn that point is clear: '' Ut in hominibus quadam sunt cognationea et gen- 
 filitates, sic in verbis. Ut enim ah ^milio homines orti ^Emilii et gentiles, 
 sic ah ^Eniilii nomine deciinatai voces in gcntilitate nominali." Paul. 
 Diacon. p. 94. *' Gentilis dicitur ex eodeni genere ortus, et is qui simili nora- 
 itip appellatur," etc. See Becker, Handbuch der Rtimischen Alterthumer, 
 fart 2, abth. 2, p. 36. 
 
 The last part ot the definition ought to be struck out for the Grecian 
 piiires. The passage of Varro does not prove the historical reality of the 
 C'liiriitive father, or genarch, JEmilius, but it proves that the members of the 
 ^u'ii> Relieved in him. 
 
 Dr. Wilda, in his teamed work, "Das Deutsche Sirafrecht," (Halle, 1842,) 
 dissents from Niebuhr in the opposite direction, and seems to maintain thai 
 the Grecian and Roman gentes were really distant blood relations (p. 123). 
 How tills can be proved, I do not know : and it is inconsistent with the opin- 
 ion which he advances in the preceding page (p. 122), very justly, — that 
 the«e qvum families are primordial facts in early human society, bcyood 
 which we cannot carry our researches. " The farther we go back in history, 
 the more does the community exhibit the form of a family, though in reality 
 it is nor a mere family. This is the limit of historical ^search, which M 
 ■tan can transj^ss with impunity," (p. 122 ) 
 
/ 
 
 / 
 
 60 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 WIDE DIFFUSION OF THE GENTILE TIE. 
 
 61 
 
 Kke Aristotle might discern the difference between the gens and 
 the family, so as to distinguish the former as the offspring of 
 some special compact, still, this is no fair test of the feeUns^^ 
 usual among early (Greeks ; nor is it certain that Aristotle him- 
 self, son of the physician Nikomachus, who belonged to the gens 
 of the Asklepiads,' Mould have consented to disallow the pro- 
 creative origin of «// these religious families without any ex- 
 ception. The natural families of course changed from generation 
 to generation, some extending themselves while others diminished 
 or died out ; but the gens received no alterations, except tlirough 
 the procreation, extinction, or subdivision of these component 
 families ; accordingly, tlie relations of the families with the gens 
 were in perpetual course of fluctuation, and the gentile ances- 
 torial genealogy, adajjlcd as it doubtless was to the early condi- 
 tion of the gens, became in process of time partially obsolete and 
 unsuitable. We hea- of tliis genealogy but rarely, because it is 
 only brought before the public in certain cases preeminent and 
 venerable. But the humbler gent< s had tlieir common rites, and 
 common superhuman ancestor and genealogy, as well as the more 
 celebrated : the scheme and ideal basis was the same in all. 
 
 Analogies, borro\v( d froni vt-ry different people and parts of 
 the worid, prove how readily these (-nlarged and factitious family 
 U!iions assort with the ideas of an eariy stage of society. The 
 Highlan d clan, the Irish sept,-2 the ancient legally constituted 
 
 ' i>io«:en, Lat-rt. v, 1, 
 
 - Slc Colonel Leakt's TravcLs in Northern Greece, eh. 2, p. 85 (the Greek 
 word ippurniai seoni> to he a.luj.ted in Albania); Boud, La Turquie en 
 Eun.pe, vol. ii. ch. I, pp. I.-i-i7 ; (Jkij.. 4. p. o.iO ; Sf.enser's View of the State 
 of Ireland Ivu]. vi. j.p. 1.-,-^ 2-154.T .,f Tons..n's edition of Spenser's Works, 
 1-15) ; Cvpri 11 Kohert. lie Slaven in riiikey, h. 1. chs. 1 and 2. 
 
 So, too. in the law. of kini: Alfred in En^d'and, cr. the subject of murder 
 the -udd-brethren, or meriihers cf the same ^uild, are made to rank in the 
 position of distant relatives, if there happen to be no blood relatives : — 
 
 • If a man, kinless of pnternal relatives, Hjxht and .slav a man. then, if he 
 hare matemal relatives. 1». them pay a third of the wer : his guild-brethren 
 a third part: for a third let him Hee. If he have no maternal relatives, let 
 his guild-brethren pay half for half let him flee .... If a man kill a man thus 
 circumstanced, if he have no relatives, let half be paid to the king, half to 
 his guild-brethren." (Thorpe, Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, vol 
 I, pp. 79-81.) Again, in the same work, Leges Henrici Primi, vol. i, p 5% 
 :fa« ideas of the kindred and the ^juild run together in the most intimate mam 
 
 families in Friesland and Dithmarsch, the phis, or phura, among 
 the Albanians, are examples of a similar practice :i and the 
 
 ner: " Si quis hominem occidat, — Si eum tunc cognaiio sua deserat, et pro 
 eo qildare nolit," etc. In the Salic law, the members of a contubemium were 
 invested with the same rights and obligations one towards the other (Rogge, 
 Gerichtswesen der Germanen, ch. iii, p. 62). Compare Wilda, Deutsches 
 Strafrecht, p. 389, and the valuable special treatise of the same author (Das 
 Giidenwesen im Mittelalter. Berlin, 1831), where the origin and progress of 
 the guilds from the primitive times of German heathenism is unfolded. He 
 shows that these associations have their basis in the earliest feelings and hab- 
 its of the Teutonic race, — the family was, as it were, a natural guild, — the 
 guild, a factitious family. Common religious sacrifices and festivals,- mutual 
 defence and help, as well as mutual responsibility, — were the recognized 
 bonds among the congildones: they were tororitates as well as fratemitates, 
 comprehending both men and women (deren Genosser wie die Glieder einer 
 Familie eng unter einander verbunden waren, p. 145). Wilda explains how 
 this primitive social and religious phratry (sometimes this very expression 
 fratria is used, see p. 109) passed into something like the more political 
 tribe, or phylS (see pp. 43, 57, 60, 116, 126, 129, 344). The sworn commune, 
 which spread so much throughout Europe in the beginning of the twelfth 
 century, partakes both of the one and of the other,— conjuratio^-'amicitia 
 jurata (pp. 148, 169). 
 
 The members of an Albanian phara are all jointly bound to exact, and 
 each severally exposed to suffer, the vengeance of blood, in the event of 
 homicide committed upon, or by, any one of them (Boue', ut supra). 
 
 » See the valuable chapter of Niebuhr, Rom. Gesch. vol. i, pp. 317, 350, 
 
 2d edit. 
 
 The Alberghi of Genoa in the Middle Ages were enlarged families created 
 by voluntary compact: " De tout temps (observes Sismondi) les families 
 puissantes avaient e'te dans I'usage, J» Genes, d'augmenter encore leur puis- 
 sance en adoptant d'autres families moins riches, moins illustres, ou moins 
 nombreuses, — auxquelles elles communiquoient leur nom et leurs armes, 
 qu'elles prenoient ainsi I'engagement de prote'ger, — et qui en retour s'asso- 
 cioient a toutes leurs qu^relles. Les maisons dans lesquelles on entroit ainsi 
 par adoption, ^toient nomme'es des alberghi (auberges), et il y avoit peu de 
 maisons illustres qui ne se fussent ainsi re'crutees k I'aide de quelque familie 
 ^trangere." ( Re'publiques Italiennes, t. xv, ch. 120, p. 366.) 
 
 Eichhom (Deutsche Staats und Rechts-Geschichte, sect. 18, vol. i, p. 84, 5th 
 edit.) remarks in regard to the ancient Germans, that the German "familia 
 et propinquitates," mentioned by Tacitus (Germ. c. 7), and the "gentibuA 
 ognationibusque hominum" of Caesar (B. G. vi. 22), bore more analogy to 
 the Roman gens than to relationship of blood or wedlock. According to 
 the idea of some of the German tribes, even blood-relationship might be 
 fonnally renounced and broken off, with all its connected rights and obliga 
 ^QDs, at the pleasure of the individual: he mighi dr<Mi*^ binpyUf UnoivrH 
 
62 
 
 HISTORY OF GBKECE. 
 
 «dopt,on of prisoners hj the North American Indians, as «el! a, 
 the un,ver«U prevalence and efficacy of the ceremony of adoption 
 m the Grecian and Roman world, .-xhihit to „. u s«I,.mn formal- 
 ity under certam circum.tanc.s, ori^rina.in^- an nnl.,,, and alfl-, u„ns 
 similar to those of kindred. Of ,l,is ...„„,. „a„„v were .he 
 phratnes and gentes at A-he,,., the curi.,- and genfs at 
 Kome, but they wt-re pecuharly n.odifie,! by the religious ima.^- 
 nation of the anci.-nt world, which always tracd l>a,.k the p^., 
 time to go<ls and heroes: and religion thus supplied both the 
 common genealogy u- ,hcir basis, and the privilege,! communion 
 of speca sa,T..d rite, as means of commemoration and perpot- 
 uity. 1 he genles. both at Athens and in other parts of Greec." 
 bore a pa.ronytni,- name, the stamp of their believed commo-i 
 paternity : we find the Asklepiada- in many parts of Greece _ 
 the Aleua,he in The>saly._,he Mi.lylidn., Psalychida-. Blepsia.' . 
 tuxen.da.. at .T..gina, — ,he I$ranchidte at Miletus, — the ^fe^'i' 
 tv at Kos.— tbe laini.la- ami Klytiad;e at Olympia, — the Aie 
 Wornhe .,t Arg.^, _ ,1.. Kmyrada, in Cyprus, -the Penthilid.e 
 .t M„ylene.._the r,l,hybiad»e at Sparta. -not less than the 
 Kodrtda. Kumolpida . Phytali.I.-e, Lykomeda-, Uut.ada., Euneida, 
 Hesychida., Hryiiada., &c., in Attiea.9 To each of these corre- 
 
 Professor Koutorpi of St. iVtcrsl.urtr (in his Fssai siir l'(lr.,o«- ♦• ', 
 Uk Trihii ilinc p \r,»; •♦ ' . I , . ^ J-S!>ai sur 1 Urbanisation dc 
 
 l..ns, 18.9) has raced out and illa„ra,ed the fundamental a„alo..y l,et« n 
 Ih<. social classification, in carlv rimes nf f:r„..L-. i> ""'' "^y "C"*"! 
 D ■ y . ^-111^ umt^, or Ureeks. lionians, Germans m.! 
 
 Kussians (see e.spenallv. pp. 47. .,3). Kespecting the earlv fZ ; ^f 
 A.noa, however man V of his positions are advanced upon vx-ry unnu^t 
 wrthy evidence (see p. 123, s^.). * ^ ""hum 
 
 • Pindar Pyth. viii, 53; Isthni. vi, 92; Xem. vii, 103; Strabo, ix p 4^1 • 
 Stephan Byz. V, k.,: Herodot. v. 44; vii, 134; ix, 3 ; Pausan x i i ^ 
 
 V, 8, 13, A?.nna^uv rovr rporoi-f, Phito, Menon. 1, which marlcs them «. « 
 numerous gens. See Buttmann, l)i..sert. on the Xleuadl in the MyThl 
 
 S^l ', ^ ^hennstokles, 1 ; Demosth. eont. Nc»r. p. 1365; Polemo ap 
 Bchol ad Soph. (Edip. Kol. 489; Plutarch, Vit. x, Orator, pp. 841-s!J 
 ««e the Dissertation of O. Muller De Minerva PoUade c 2 
 
 GEXTES AND DEMES IN ATTICA. 
 
 69 
 
 «ponded a mythical ancestor more or less known, and passing for 
 tlie first father as well as the eponymous hero of the gens, — 
 Ko<lrus, Eumolpus, Butes, Phytalus, Hesychus, &c 
 
 Tlie revolution of Kleisthenes in 509 B. c. abolished the old 
 tribes for civil pur})Oses, and created ten new tribes, — leaving 
 the phratries and gentes unaltered, but introducing the local dis- 
 tribution according to demes, or cantons, as the foundation of his 
 new ix)litical tribes. A certain number of demes belonged to 
 each of the ten Kleisthenean tribes (the demes in the same tribes 
 Avere not usually contiguous, so that the tribe was not coincident 
 \vith a definite circumscription), and the deme, in which every 
 individual was then registered, continued to be that in which his 
 descendants were also registered. But the gentes had no con- 
 nection, as such, with these new tribes, and the members of the 
 .'ume gens might belong to demes. ' It deserves to be remarked, 
 however, that to a certain extent, in the old arrangement of 
 Attica, the division into gentes coincided with the division into 
 demes ; that is, it happened not unfrequently that the gennetes or 
 members of the same gens lived in the same canton, so that the 
 name of the gens and the name of the deme was the same: 
 moreover, it seems that KIei.«^thenes recognized a certain number 
 of new demes, to which he gave names derived from some im- 
 portant gens resident near the spot. It is thus that we are to 
 explain the large number of the Kleisthenean demes which beat 
 patronymic names.- 
 
 ' Demosth. cont. Neajr. p. 1365. Tittmann (Griechische Staatsverfass, p. 
 277) thinks that every citizen, after the Kleisthenean revolution, was of 
 necessity a member of some phratr}-, as well as of some deme : but the evi- 
 dence which he produces is, in my judgment, insulHcient. The ideas of the 
 phratry and the tribe are often confounded together ; thus the ^geidae of 
 Sparta, whom Herodotus (iv, 149) calls a tribe, are by Aristotle called a 
 phratry of Thebans (ap. Schol. ad Pindar. Isthm. vii, 18). Compare 
 Wachsmuth, Hellenische Alterthumskunde, sect. 83, p. 17. 
 
 A great many of the demes seem to have derived their names from the 
 Bhrubs or plants which grew in their neighborhood (Schol. ad Aristophan. 
 Platus, 586, y[vppivov^^ 'Pa/ivovc, etc.). 
 
 • For example, ^thalidse, Butad«, Kothokidae, Daedalidae, Eiresidae, Epiei- 
 kids, Eroeadae, Eupyridae, Echelidae, Keiriadae, Kydantidae, Lakiadae, Pam- 
 botads, Perithoidae, Persidae, Scmachidae, Skambonidae, Sybridae, Titakid«, 
 Thyrgonidae, Hybadae, Thymoetadw, Paeonidae, Philaidae, Chollidje: all thete 
 
 V 
 
 

 UlSluiiV OF GREtCE. 
 
 Tliere is one remarkable difference between the lioman awd 
 the Grecian gen.^ arisln- from the different practice in regard to 
 naming. A lioman patrician bore habitually three names, — 
 thi' geufile name, with one name following it to denote his family, 
 an<l anoihcr prectnling it peculiar to himself in that family. But 
 in Athrns, at ha-t after the revolution of Kleisthenes, the gentile 
 nainr wa^ not employed : a man was described by his own single 
 name, followed lir^t by the name of his father, and next by that 
 of the deme to which he belonged,— as ^Eschinis, son of Atrom- 
 
 Duncs of ilt-mcs, I.eariu;: :hc patronyiiiic form, ure found in Harpokration 
 •'.i«l StCfibanjis Byz. alone. 
 
 Wo do nut know rlmr tlie Kefxiuetc ever constituted a yii-o<:, hut the name 
 •f tlic deme Ktf>nufi^ is ('vi<lently piven, upon the same principle, to a phue 
 chicHy ocnipird hy potters The gens Koipuvidac are said to have been called 
 *'''''">" * ■ ' :">'! II^'Mf»^"/'Vu as well as Koipuvidai : the names of gcntes 
 
 and thosr ot .1, nio seem nor always distinguishable. 
 
 The Ilut.ida-. thouu'h a I ighly vent ral.le i:vu<, also ranked as a deme (see 
 Ih.- I'sephisin .il.out I.yku -us in IMutarch, Vit. x. Orator, p. 852): yet we 
 d(. not know that there was any locality called Butadw. Perhaps some of 
 the namrs abovt- noticed may be simply names of gentes, enrolled as denies, 
 but without meaning to imply any community of abode among the mcm- 
 
 bcl^ 
 
 Til' members of tlie Konian gens occupied adjoining residences, on somo 
 occasions — to what extent we do not know (Ileiberg, De Familiari Patri - 
 ciorum Xexu, ch. 24. 25 Sleswic, 1829). 
 
 We tind the same patronymic names of demes and villages elsewhere : in 
 Kos and Khotles ( Hoss. Ins<r. dr. ineil., Xos. 15-26. Halle. 1846); Lestadct 
 in Xa.xos (Aristotle ap. Athena-, viii, p. 348) ; Botachidce at Tegea (Steph. 
 Byz. ia vh liranrhuhi. near Miletus, etc: and an interesting illustration ig 
 afforded, in other times and other places, by the frequency of the ending ikon 
 m villages near Zurich in Switzerland, — Mezikon. Nennikon, Wezikon, etc. 
 Bluntschli, in his history of Zurich, shows that these terminations are 
 •bridgmcnts of imjhovtn, including an original patronymic element. — indU 
 eating tlie primary settlement of mem^•ers of a family,' or of a band bearing 
 the name of its captain, on the same spot (Bluntschli, Staats und Rechu 
 Geschiihte der Stadt /uriel , vol i. p. 26). 
 In other lnscri,,tions from the island of Kos, published by Professor Ross. 
 
 have a deme mentioned (without name), composed of three coalescing 
 gwitea, •• In hoc et sequente titulo alium jam deprehendimus demum Coum, 
 e tribas gentibus appellatione patronymicd conflatura, Antimachidarum, 
 JEgiliensium, Archidarum." (Ross, Inscript. Graec. Ine<f. Fascic. iii. No 
 »7, p. 44. BerUn, 1845.) This \» a specimen of the process systematiaUlj 
 iDtrtMiaced by Kleisthenes in Attica. 
 
 lENTILE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS. 
 
 itus, a Kothokid, Such a difference in the habitual system of 
 naming, tended tD make the gentile tie more present to ever/ 
 one's mind at Rome than in the Greek cities. 
 
 Before tlie pecuniary classification of the Atticans introduced 
 by Solon, the phratries and gentes, and the trittyes and nauk- 
 raries, were the only recognized bonds among them, and the 
 only basis of legal rights and obligations, over and above the 
 natural family. The gens constituted a close incorporation, both 
 as to property and as to persons. Until the time of Solon, ne 
 man had any i)ower of testamentary disposition : if he died 
 without children, his gennetes succeeded to his property,^ and so 
 they continued to do even after Solon, if he died intestate. An 
 orphan girl might be claimed in marriage of right by any mem- 
 ber of the gens, the nearest agnates being preferred -? if she was 
 poor, and he did not choose to marry her himself, the law o^ 
 Solon compelled him to provide her with a dowry proportional to 
 his enrolled scale of property, and to give her out in marriage 
 to another ; and the magnitude of the dowry required to be 
 given, — large, even as fixed by Solon, and afterwards doubled, 
 — seems a proof that the lawgiver intended indirectly to enforce 
 actual marriage.3 If a man was murdered, first his near rela- 
 tions, next his gennetes and phrators, were both allowed and 
 required to prosecute the crime at law ;4 his fellow demots, or 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 21. We find a common cemetery exclusively belong- 
 ing to the gens, and tenaciously preserved (Demosth. cont. Eubulid. p. 1307; 
 Cicero, Legg. ii, 26). 
 
 2 Demosth. cont. Makartat. p. 1068. See the singular additional proviso 
 in Plutarch, Solon, c. 20. 
 
 * Sec Meursius, Themis Attica, i, 13. 
 
 * That this was the primitive custom, and that the limitation /if.YpfC avf^i^ 
 adC)v (Meier, De Bonis Damnat. p. 23, cites avetpiaduv Koi tpparopuv) waa 
 subsequently introduced (Demosth. cont. Euerg. et Mnesib. p. 1161 ), we may 
 gather from the law as it stands in Demosth. cont. Makartat. p. 1069, whicli 
 includes the phrators, and therefore, d. fortiori^ the gennetes, or gentiles. 
 
 The same word yevo^ is used to designate both the circle of nameabU 
 relatives, brothers, first cousins [ayxioTel^, Demosth. cont. Makartat. c. 9, p. 
 1058), etc., going beyond the oIko^, — and the quasi-family, or gens. As the 
 gentile tie tended to become weaker, so the former sense of the word became 
 more and mure current, to the extinction of the latter. 01 kv yivei, or ol 
 irpoaf/KovTc^y would have borne a wider sense in the days of Drako than in 
 
 VOL. III. 50C. 
 
 % 
 
 \ 
 
66 
 
 V 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 inkabitants oi /he same deme, did not possess the liko right of 
 prtxsecutiii'^. All that we hear of the most ancient Athenian 
 laws is ha^ed uj)on tlie gentile and phratric divisions, which are 
 treated throughout as extensions of the fainilj. It is to be oh- 
 Berved that this division is completely independent of any prop- 
 erty qualitication, — ricli men as well as poor being compre- 
 hended in the same gens.^ Moreover, the difierent gentes were 
 very unequal in dignity, arising chiefly from the religious cere- 
 iiioni«»s of which each possessed the hereditary and exclusive 
 administration, and wliich, being in some cases considered as of 
 preeminent sanctity in reference to the whole city, were theic- 
 lore nationalized. Tluis the Eumolpidie and Kerykes, who 
 supplied the Iliorophant, and superintended the mysteries of the 
 Eleusinian Dimeter. — and the liutadae, who furnished tiie 
 |>riestes3 of Athene Polias iis well as the priest of I'oseidon 
 KnM^htheus in the acrojiolis, — seem to have been reverenot'd 
 R'»ove all the other gentesZ-i When the name Butadui wai 
 
 I ),t' of Dcniostheneji: Syyv^v^^ usually belongs to ytvo^ in the narrower 
 ». iiM', .J 1 --/zr to ytvorm the wider sense j but Iscxus sometimes uses tho 
 f »r!n«'r wui.l as iin exact equivalent of the latter (Urat. vii, pp. 95, 99, 102, 
 ItKi Bekkcr ). TfuaKtir appear? to 1)0 noted in Pollux as the equivalent of yevor, 
 in- i;« 11-^ ( viii, 111), but the word does not occur in the Attic orators, and we 
 rinnot make out its meaning: with certainty: the Inscription of the Deme 
 i>f IVira^eus given in Boeckh (Corp. Insc. No. 101, p. 140,) rather adds to the 
 roafuMon by revealing the existence of a rp/a/caf con.stituting the fractional 
 |. t of a dome, an<l not connected with a gens: compare Boeckh's Com- 
 tv.'ut. ad Ax* and his Addenda and Corrigenda, p. 900. 
 
 Dr Thirl wall translates > .of. hoiist' ; which I cannot hut think incon- 
 venient, Itecause that word is the natural equivalent of oi/cof, a very 
 
 important word in refereme h> Attic f. clings, and quite different from yivK 
 \H\>i. of Creece. vol. ii, p. U ch. 11). It will Iw found impossible to tran.H- 
 late it by any known English word which does not at the same time suggest 
 t-nmcous ideas : which I trust will be accepted as my excuse for adopting it 
 antran 'ated into this Hi.story 
 
 ' Demosthen. cont. Makar^t /. c. 
 
 » Se.^ ^::schiues de Falsa Legat p. 292, c. 46 ; Lysias cont. Andokid. p. 
 108; Andokid. de Mysteriis, p. 63, Reiske j Deinarchus and Hellacikus ap. 
 ^arjokration. v, 'Ittio^avrr]^. 
 
 Id ca«e of crimes of impiety, particularly in offences against the sanctity 
 •r the Mjiteries, the Eumolpid« had a peculiar tribunal of their own nnm- 
 ber, before which offenders were brought by the king archon. Whether il 
 
 ~ oft#D used, seems doubtful ; they had also certain unwritten cnstomg of 
 
 ATTICA NOT AT FIRST UNITED AS ONE STAT:::, 
 
 C7 
 
 adopted in the Kleisthenean arrangement us the name of a deme, 
 the ho\y gens so called adopted the distinctive denomination of 
 Eteobiiuidie, or " The True Butadai."! 
 
 A great many of the ancient gentes of Attica are known to ug 
 by name ; but there is only one phratry (the Achniadae) whose 
 title has come down to us.2 These phratries and gentes probably 
 never at any time included the whole [>opulation of the country, 
 — and the proportion not included in them tended to become 
 larger and hirger, in the times anterior to Kleisthenes,^ as well 
 as afterwards. They remained, under his constitution, and 
 throughout tlie subseciuent history, as religious quasi-families, or 
 cor})orations, conferring rights and imposing liabilities which 
 were enforced in the regular dikasteries, but not directly con- 
 nected with the citizenship or with political functions : a man 
 
 
 great antiquity, according to which they pronounced (Dcraosthen. cont. 
 Androtion. p. 601; Schol. ad Demosth. vol. ii, p. 137, Reiske: compare 
 Meier and Schoraann, Dcr Attische Prozess, p. 117). The Butadee, alao, 
 bad certain old unwritten maxims (Androtion ap. Athen«. ix, p. 374). 
 
 Compare Bossier, De Gentibus et Familiis Atticse, p. 20, and Ostermano, 
 De Praeconibus Graecor. sect. 2 and 3 (Marburg, 1845). 
 
 ' Lykurgus the orator is described as rdv dfjfiov BovrudT^g^ yhovg rov rCn 
 ^EreoiSovTaSijv (Plutarch. Vit. x, Orator, p. 841). 
 
 ' In an inscription (apud Boeckh. Corpus Inscrip. No. 465). 
 
 Four names of the phratries at the Greek city of Neapolis, and six names 
 out of the thirty Roman curiae, have been preserved (Becker, Handbuch der 
 Romischen Alterthiimer, p. 32 ; Boeckh, Corp. Inscript. ii, p. 650). 
 
 Each Attic phratry seems to have had its own separate laws and customs, 
 distinct from the rest, Toig cppuTopcn, Kara rovg iKelvuv vn/aovg (Isseus, Or. 
 viii, p. 115, ed. Bek. ; vii, p. 99; iii, p. 49). 
 
 Bossier (De Gentibus et Familiis Atticse, Darmstadt, 1833), and Meier 
 (De Gentilitate Atticci, pp. 41-54) have given the names of those Attic 
 gentes that are known : the list of Meier comprises seventy-nine in number 
 (see Koutorga, Organis. Trib. p. 122). 
 
 ' Tittmann (Griech. Staats Alterthiimer, p. 271) is of opinion that Kleis* 
 thenes augmented the number of phratries, but the passage of Aristotle 
 brought to support this opinion is insufficient proof (PoHt. vi, 2, 11). Still 
 less can we agree with Platner (Beytrage zur Kenntniss des Attischeft 
 Recbts, pp. 74-77), that three new phratries were assigned to each of tht 
 new Kleisthenean tribes. 
 
 Allusion is made in Hesychius, ^ArpiaKaaroL, 'E^u rpiaKuSoc, to persoof 
 not included in any gens, but this can hardly be understood to refer to timet 
 tDterior to Kleisthen^s, as Wachpmath woald argue (p. 238 K 
 
HISTORY OF liREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 might be a citizen without being enrolled in any gem. 1 he 
 forty-eight naukranea ceased to exist, for any important pur- 
 poses, under his constitution : the deme, instead of the naukrary, 
 became the elementary political division, for military and financial 
 objects, and the demarch became the working local president, in 
 place of the chief of the naukrars. The deme, liowever, was 
 not coincident with a naukrary, nor the demarch with the pre- 
 vious chief of the naukrary, though they were analogous and 
 constituted for the like purpose.' While the naukraries had 
 been only forty-eight in number, the denies formed smaller subdi> 
 visions, and, in lat jr times at least, amounted to a hundred and 
 »eventy-four.'^ 
 
 But though this early quadruple division into tribes is toler- 
 ably intelligible in itself, there is much difficulty in reconciling it 
 with that severalty of government wiiich we learn to have origi- 
 nally prevailed among the inhabitants of Attica. From Kekroj)s 
 down to Theseus, says Thucydides, theiv \\ tie many different cities 
 in Attica, each of tliem autonomous and .-elf-governing, with its 
 own prytaneium and its own archons ; and it was only on occa- 
 sions of some common danger that these distinct communities 
 look counsel together under tlie authority of the Athenian kings, 
 whose city at that time comprised merely the holy rock of 
 Athene on the plain,^ — afterwards so eonspicuous as the acropolis 
 of the enlarged Athens, — together with a narrow area under it 
 
 ' The language of Photi is on this matter (v, SavKimpia fiev onolov ri 
 il avfxfiopia Kai b drjuo^ vwnpafwr rU u-olov tl 6 ih,ti(u>\i>i:) \i. more exact 
 than that of Harpokration, \\\\i> iik-ntifk's the two ((^111)10101/, — v, Ah/^apx^i;. 
 If it be true that the nauknirir^ wvn: oMitimicd under the Kleisthenean con- 
 stitution, with the alterutiofi that ttu y were au;:mented to fifty in number, 
 five to every Kleisthenean trik". tliey must probably have been continued in 
 name alone without any real cthciency or function. Klcidemus makes this 
 statement, and Hoeikli follows it (Public Kconomy of Athens, 1. ii, ch. 21, 
 p. 256) : yet I cannot but doubt its iorrc<tiicss. For the T,>irTv^ (one-third 
 of a Kleisthenean tribe) wa< certainly retained and was a working and avail- 
 able division (see Defliostlienes de Symmoriis, c. 7, p. 184), and it seems 
 hardly probable that there should be two coexistent dinsions, one represent- 
 ing the third part, the other the fifth part, of the same tribes. 
 
 « Strabo, ix, p. 396. 
 
 • Strabo, ix, p. 396, yreTpn iv ~e6icj TreptoiKOVfihrrj kvkXu Eoripid. 
 If78, axoireXov ol vaiova* u'ov (Athenf) 
 
 TWELVE tOCAL SUBDIVISIONS OF ATTICA 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 OD the southern side. It was Theseus, he states, who effectdl 
 that fTcat revolution whereby the whole of Attica was consoli- 
 dated into one government, all the local raagistraeies and council! 
 bein*' made to centre in the prytaneium and senate oi Athens: 
 his combined sagacity and power enforced upon all the inhabi- 
 tants of Attica the necessity of recognizing Athens as the one 
 city in the country, and of occupying their own abodes simply as 
 constituent portions of Athenian territory. This important 
 move, which naturally produced a great extension of the central 
 city, was commemorated throughout the historical times by the 
 Athenians in the periodical festival called Synoekia, in honor of 
 the goddess Athene.^ 
 
 Such is the account which Thucydides gives of the original 
 severalty and subsequent consolidation of the different portions 
 of Attica. Of the general fact there is no reason to doubt, 
 though the operative cause assigned by the historian, — the power 
 and sagacity of Theseus, — belongs to legend and not to history. 
 Nor can we pretend to determine either the real steps by which 
 such a cliange was brought about, or its date, or the number of 
 portions which went to constitute the full-grown Athens, — far- 
 ther enlarged at some early period, though we do not know when, 
 by voluntary junction of the Boeotian, or semi-Boeotian, town 
 Eleutherce, situated among the valleys of Kithu^ron between 
 Eleusis and Platiea. It was the standing habit of the population 
 of Attica, even down to the Peloponnesian war,- to reside in 
 their several cantons, where their ancient festivals and temples 
 yet continued as relics of a state of previous autonomy : their 
 visits to the city were made only at sj)ecial times, for purpos(ts 
 
 ■ Thucyd. ii, 15; Theophrast. Charact. 29, 4. Plutarch (Theseus, 24) 
 gives the proceedings of Theseus in greater detail, and with a stronger ting* 
 of democracy. 
 
 « Pausan. i, 2, 4 ; 38, 2 ; Diodor. Sicul. iv, 2 ; Schol. ad Aristophan. Acham 
 
 242 
 
 The Athenians transferred from Eleutherae to Athens both a venerable 
 statue of Dionysus and a religious ceremony in honor of that god. Tho 
 junction of the town with Athens is stated by Pausanias to have taken 
 place in consequence of the hatred of its citizens for Thebes, and must hare 
 oecnned before 509 b. c, about which period we find Hysi» to be the frontier 
 of Attica (Herodot. v, 72 j vi, lOd). 
 
ro 
 
 HlSrOBY UF GREECF 
 
 I 
 
 religious or i^oliticAl, and they yet looked upon the country re«i 
 dence as their real home. How deei^seated this eaitonal feeling 
 was among them, we may see by the fact that k survived the 
 temporary exile forced upon them by the Persiai invasion, and 
 was resumed when the expulsion of that destroying host enabled 
 them to rebuild th.ir ruined dwellings in Attica.' 
 
 How many of the denies recogniz'ed by Klelsthenes had origi- 
 nally separate go\'ernments, or in what local aggregates they 
 stood combined, u .• cannot now make out ; it will be recollected 
 that the city of Athens itself contained s( n rral demes, and Pei- 
 raseus also formed a denic ajiart. Some of the twelve divisions, 
 which Philochorus ascribes to Kekrops, present probable marks 
 of an ancient substantive existence, _ Kekropia, or the region 
 surroundmg and inchnling the city and acropolis; the tetrai>olis, 
 imposed of CEno.\ Trikorythus, Probalinthus, and Marathon ;a 
 Lleusis; Aphidme and Drkeleiu,* both distinguished by their 
 peculiar mythical comiection with 8parta and the Dioskuri. But 
 It is difficult to iman:ine that Phalerum, which is one of the sepa- 
 rate divisions named by Pliiiochorus, can ever have enjoyed an 
 autonomy apart from Athens. Moreov er, we find among some 
 af the demes which Philochorus does not notice, evidences of 
 
 ELEUSIS. 
 
 71 
 
 > Thucyd. ii, 15, 16. ovSkv uUo r; :r6?av r,> iavrov d^oAnK<.v iKaaroc ^ 
 respecting: the Athenians from the (.mntry who were driven in^o Athens at 
 the tirst invasion durinj,' the Peloponne^ian war 
 
 b;':;tSX''^'"- ^' ''^^"^"'^ ^^'^"^ '"''-'-^'''^ '• ^^^ «^^^^"^- 
 
 The TirpnK^^^wt comprised the four demos, netpautu ^aXnpec, Zvirenu. 
 vec, evf.ocra,^ac (Pollux, iv, 105): nhethcr this is an old division however 
 has been douhted (see I%en, De Trihuhus Atticis, p. 51 ). 
 
 The 'ETraKfuuv rpirri)^ i^ mentioned in an inscription apud Koss (Die 
 Demen von Attika, p. vi). Compare Boeckh ad Corp. Inscr. No. 1 9 : anionif 
 other demes, it comprised the dome Plotheia. Me.soj^iea also (or -ather the 
 Meso^re,, o/ M,ao^aoc) nppears n> a communion for sacrifice and reliLMous 
 purposes, and as containing the dome Hate. See Inscriptiones Atf>« nupcr 
 repertae duodecim, hy Em. Curtins ; BeHin, 1843; Inscript. i. p 3. The 
 rxact site of the dome HatO in Attica is unknown (Koss, Die Denen von 
 
 ,1'?'*?' ^^' """^ respectin-r the (piestion, what portion of Attica wag 
 called Mesog«a, very diiferont conjectures have been started, which tb^r. 
 ttl»pears to be no rreans of tostinj;. Compare Schomann de duniihn 
 343, and Wordsworth, Athene and Attica, p. 229, 2d edit 
 
 ' Dik:earchus. Frao-m p. 109, ed. Fuhr; Plutiirch, Theseus, c. 33. 
 
 Btanding antipathies, and prohibitions of intermarriage, which might 
 P€'ein to indicate that these had once been separate little states.' 
 Though in most cases we can infer little from the legends and 
 religious ceremonies which nearly every deme^ had peculiar to 
 itself, yet those of Kleusis are so remarkable, as to establish the 
 probable autonomy of that township down to a comparatively late 
 pf'riod. The Homeric Hymn to Demeter, recounting the visit 
 of that goddess to Eleusis after the abduction of her daugliter, 
 and the first establishment of the Eleusinian ceremonies, specifies 
 the eponymous jirince Eleusis, and the various chiefs of the place, 
 — Keleos, Triptoleraus, Dioklcs, and Eumolpus ; it also notices 
 the Rharian plain in the neighborhood of Eleusis, but not the 
 least allusion is made to Athens or to any concern of the Atheni- 
 ans in the presence or worship of the goddess. There is reason 
 to believe that at the lime when this Hymn was composed, Eleusis 
 was an independent town : what that time was we have no ineana 
 of settling, though Voss puts it as low as the 30th Olympiad.3 
 And the proof hence derived is so much the more valuable, be- 
 cause the Hymn to Dcmeter presents a coloring strictly special 
 and local; moreover, the story told by Solon to Crojsus, res])ect- 
 ing Tellus the Athenian, who perished in battle against the neigh- 
 boring townsmen of Eleusis,^ assumes, in like manner, the 
 independence of the latter in earlier times. Nor is it unimpor- 
 tant to notice that, even so low^ as 300 b. c, the observant visitor 
 Dikiearchus professes to detect a difference between the native 
 
 * Such as that between the Pallen»ans and Agnusians (Plutarch, Theseus, 
 12). 
 
 Achamae was the larj^est and most populous dome in Attica (see Ross, 
 Die Demen von Attika, p. 62; Thucyd. ii, 21 ) ; vol Philochorus docs not 
 mention it as having ever constituted a >ahstantive TroA/f. 
 
 Several of the demes seem to have stood in repute for peculiar qualities, 
 good or r)ad: see Aristophan. Acham. 177, with Elmsley's note. 
 
 * Strabo, ix, p. 396; Plutarch, Theseus, 14. Polemo had written a book 
 expressly on the eponymous heroes of the Attic demes and tribes CPrellcr. 
 Polemonis Fragm. p. 42)* *he Atthidographers were all rich on the same 
 sabject: see the Fragments of the Atthis of Hellanikus (p 24, ed. Preller), 
 also those of Istrus, Philochorus, etc. 
 
 ' J. H. Voss, Erlaiiterungen, p. 1 : see the Hymn, 96-106, 151-475 
 pare Hermesianax ap. Athen. xiii, p. 597. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 30. 
 
72 
 
 HISTORY OF GRP:KCt. 
 
 Athenians and the Atticans, sls well in physiognomy as n dm* 
 acter and ta.^teJ 
 
 In the history set forth to us of the pruoetvjinur-. of Theseua, 
 no mention is made of these four Ionic tribes ; but another and a 
 totally different distribution of the people into eupatridie, cr^~ 
 mori, and demiurgi, v\ liich he is said to liave tirst introduced, is 
 brought to our notice ; Dionysius of Halikarnassus gives only a 
 double division, — eupatridte and dependent cultivators; corre- 
 ■ponding to his idea of the patricians and clients in eaily Rome.a 
 As far as we can und.nstand this tri])le distinction, it seems to bo 
 disparate and unconnected with the four tribes above mentioned. 
 The eupatridai are tlic wealthy and powerful men, belonging to 
 the most distinguished families in all the various gentes,°and 
 principally living in the city of Athens, after the consolidation 
 of Attica : from them are distinguished the middling and lower 
 people, roughly classified into husbandmen and artisans. To the 
 eupatrida*, is ascribed a religious as well as a i»olitical and social 
 ascendency ; they are represented as tlie source of all authority 
 on matters both sacred and profane ;3 they doubtless comprised 
 those gentes, such as the Butadie, whose sacred ceremonies were 
 looked upon with the greatest reverence by the people : and we 
 may conceive Eumolpus, Keleos, Diokles, etc., as they are de- 
 scribed in the Homenc Hymn to Demeter, in the character of 
 eupatridie of Kleusis. The humbler gentes, and the humbler 
 members of each gens wouhl ai)pear in this classification con- 
 founded with that i)ortit>n of the people who belon;?ed to no <^ens 
 at all. ' 
 
 From these eupatridie exclusively, and doubtless by their 
 selection, tlie nine annual archons ~ probably also the prytanes 
 
 ' Dikjeareh. Vita Griecia;, p. 141, Fraf^m. ed. Fuhr. 
 
 « Plutarch, Theseus, o. 2fi : Dionys. Hal. ii, 8. 
 
 ' Etymologic. Mac,Mi. Evrarpidat—oi avro to aarv oUovvtec, Kat fierexov^ 
 
 -ff Tov i3cai?.iKov yevovc, Kai rriv tC>v iepuv knifiaetav noLovnevoi. The 
 
 QaoLltKdv yh'oc includes not only the Kodrids, but also the Erechtheida, 
 
 Pandionids, Pallantid^s etc. See also Plutarch, Theseus, r. 24 ; Hesychius, 
 
 'AypoiQTai, 
 
 Yet Isokratds seems to speak of the great family of the Alkmaeonida 
 %s not iucluied among the eupatrid*. (Orat. xvi, De Bigis, p. 351, p 50fi, 
 Bek.) 
 
 StT^ArE or AREOPAGUS. 
 
 73 
 
 af the naukrari — were taken. That the senate of areopagua 
 was formed of members of the same order, we may naturally 
 presume : the nine archons all passed into it at the expiration of 
 their year of office, subject only to the condition of having duly 
 passed the test of accountability ; and they remained members 
 for life. These are the only political authorities of whom we 
 hear in the earliest imperfectly known period of the Athenian 
 government, after the discontinuance of the king, and the adop- 
 tion of the annual change of archons. The senate of areopagus 
 Beeras to represent the Homeric council of old men ;i and there 
 were doubtless, on particular occasions, general assemblies of 
 the people, with the same formal and passive character as the 
 Homeric agora, — at least, we shall observe traces of such assem 
 blies anterior to the Solonian legislation. Some of the writers 
 of antiquity ascribed the first establishment of the senate of 
 areopagus to Solon, just as there were also some who con 
 eidered Lykurgus as having first brought together the Spartan 
 gerusia. But there can be little doubt that this is a mistake, 
 and that the senate of areopagus is a primordial institution, of 
 immemorial anticjuity, though its constitution as well as its 
 functions underwent many changes. It stood at fii-st alone as a 
 permanent and collegiate authority, originally by the side of the 
 kings and afterwards by the side of the archons : it would then 
 of course be known by the title of I'he Boule, — The Senate, or 
 council ; its distinctive title, " Senate of Areopagus, " borrowed 
 from the place where its sittings were held, would not be bestow- 
 ed until the formation by Solon of the second senate, or council, 
 from which there was need to discriminate it. 
 
 This seems to explain the reason why it was never mentioned 
 in the ordinances of Drako, whose silence supplied one argument 
 in favor of the ojjinion tliat it did not exist in his time, and that 
 it was first constituted by Solon.2 We hear of the senate of 
 areopagus chiefly as a judicial tribunal, because it acted in this 
 character constantly throughout Athenian history, and because 
 
 • Meier und Schomann, Der Attische Prozess. Einleitung, p. 10. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, c. 19; Aristotle, Polit. ii^ 9, 2; Cicero, De Offic. i. 22 
 Pollux seems to follow the opinion that Solon first instituted the senate of 
 areopagus (viii, 1^). 
 
 TOL. III. 4 
 
 I ijiiBiiiHuaBiMiij ' ■ 
 
 RIIIP 
 
 ■sdi 
 
71 
 
 insiOKV OF GREECE. 
 
 t": 
 I 
 
 1. 
 
 the oratori Lave most frequent ocoAsion to allude to its decision. 
 
 on matters of trial. But its functions were ori^^inally of th*? 
 
 widest senatojial rharacter, directive generally as ux'li a j judicial. 
 
 And althougfi the gradual increase of dvinornu:y at Atlieii>, a.-i 
 
 will be hereafter cxi^lained, I>oLh aliridgcd its powers and con- 
 tributed still farther comjaiativelv to lower it, hy enlar-lng the 
 direct working of the people in a^.einbly and judicaturerits" weU 
 as that of the s.^nate c.f Imvo Hundred, which was a permanent 
 adjuiict and adminich^ of the public a.sseniblj, — y.,t it ..eems to 
 have been, even di>wn o the time of Perikl.s, the most import^uil 
 bu<ly HI the state. And after it had been cast into the back- 
 ground by the political reforms of that gnuit man, we stUl tiud it 
 OM particular occasions stepping forward to reassert it^ ancient 
 I)owers, and to itssume for the moment that undeiined interference 
 which it had enjoyed without dispute in antiquity. The attach- 
 ment of the Athenians to their ancient institutions gave to the 
 senate of arcopagus a constant and iK>werful hold on their 
 rninds, and this feeling was rather strengthened than weakened 
 when it cejised to be an object of popular jealousy, — when it 
 cnnhl no longer be employed as an auxiliary of oligarchical pre- 
 t<'nsions. 
 
 Of the nine archoiw, whose number continued unaltered from 
 G:}8 b. c. to the end of the free democracy, three bore special 
 titles, — the archon epoiiymus, from whose name the designation 
 of the year was derived, and who was spoken of as T/ie Anhon; 
 the archon basileus (king), or more frequently, the basileus ; and 
 the polemareh. The reruaining six passe<l by the general title of 
 Thesniothetie. Of the tirst three, each possessed exclusive 
 judicial competence in regard to cert^iin special matters : the 
 thesmothetie were in this respect all on a par, acting sometime* 
 as a l)oard, sometimes individually. The archon eponymus de- 
 termined all disputes relative to the family, the gentile, and the 
 phratric lelations: he was the legal protector of orphans and 
 widows.' The archon basileus, or king archon, enjoyed compe- 
 tence in complaints respecting offences against the religioua 
 i»p.ntiment and respecting homicide. The polemarch, speaking of 
 times anterior to Kleist henes, was the leader of the military 
 
 * Poilaz, via, 89-91. 
 
 .SINE ^RCHONS AT ATHENS. 
 
 /• 
 
 force and judge in disputes between citizens and non-i itizens. 
 Moreover, each of these three archons had particular religious 
 festivals assigned to him, which it was his duty to superintend and 
 conduct. The six thesmothetie seem to have been judges in 
 disputes and complaints, generally, against citizens, saving the 
 special matters reserved for the cognizance of the first two 
 archons. According to the proper sense of the word thesmotheta^ 
 all the nine archons were entitled to be so called,' though the 
 first three had especial designations of their own: the'^word 
 thesmoi, analogous to the themistes'^ of Homer, includes in iti 
 meaning both general laws and particular sentences, — the two 
 ideas not being yet discriminated, and the general law being con- 
 ceived only in its apj)Iication to some particular case. Drako 
 was the first thesmothet who was called upon to set down his 
 thesmoi in writing, and thus to invest them essentially with a 
 character of more or less generality. 
 
 In the later and better-known times of Athenian law, we find 
 fiiese archons deprived in great measure of their powers of 
 
 ' We read the ^tofio-deTuv avuKpiai^ in Deraosthen. cont Euhuiidcrn, c 
 17, p. 1319, and Pollux, viii, 85 ; a scries of questions which it was necessary 
 for them to answer before they were admitted to occupy their office. Similar 
 questions must have been put to the archon, the basileus, and the polemarch 
 80 that the words ^eofio'&eTuv uvuKpimc may reasonably be understood to 
 apply to all the nine archons, as, indeed, we find the words Toi^^ipvia upxovTa{ 
 uuaKplvETe shortly afterwards, p. 1320. 
 
 ' Respecting the word ^ifiiarec in the Homeric sense, see above, vol. ii. 
 ch. XX. ' ' 
 
 Both Aristotle (Polit. ii, 9, 9) and Demostlienes (contr. Euerg. o,t Mnesi- 
 bttl. c. 18, p. 1161) call the ordinances of Drako vofwi, not <^eafxoL Ando- 
 kidSs distinguishes the ^ea/ioi of Drako and the udfiot of Solon ( De Mysteriis 
 p. 11). This is the adoption of a phrase comparatively modern; Solon 
 called his own laws ^tofxai The oath of the nepinoAoi l<prj^iuL (the youth 
 who formed the ai-med police of Attica during the first two vears of their 
 military age), as given in Pollux (viii, 106), seems to contain 'at least many 
 ancient phrases : this phrase, — «a^^ toI^ ^Eoiiolg role f^pvfievoic nei^ova,, — 
 is remarkable, as it indicates the ancient association of religions sanction 
 which adhered to the word ^etjfxoi- for idpiea^aat is the word employed in 
 reference to the estoblishment and domiciliation of the gods who protected 
 the conntry, — ^ea^ai v6fxovc is the later expression for making laws. Com- 
 pare Stobaeos De Repnblic. xliii, 48, ed Gaisford, and Dvraosth'-n (tmt 
 Mftkartat. c. 13, p. 1069. 
 
LI 
 7 
 
 7(1 
 
 rrrsTOKY of Greece. 
 
 judging and deciding, and restricted to the task of first hearipj/ 
 
 the parties and collec^ting the evidence, next, of introducing tlie 
 
 matter for trial into the appropriate dikastery, over which thej 
 
 presided. Originally, there was no separation of powers: the 
 
 archons hoth judged and administered, sharing among themselves 
 
 those privileges vvhicli had once been united in the hands of the 
 
 king, and probably acoountable at the end of their year of ofRce to 
 
 tlie senate of areopagus. It is probable also, that the functions of 
 
 that senate, and thos*' oi' the prytanes of tiie naukrars, were of 
 
 the same double and confused nature. AH of these functionaries 
 
 bt'longed to the eupatrids, and all of them doubtless acted more 
 
 or less in the narrow interest of their order : moreover, there was 
 
 ample room for favoritism, in the way of connivance as well aa 
 
 antipathy, on the part of the archons. That such wiis decidedly 
 
 the case, and that di-content began to be serious, we may infer 
 
 from the duty inipost'd on the thesmothet Drako, B. c. (j'liy to put 
 
 in writing the thesmoi, or ordinaiKcs, so that they might be 
 
 "shown publicly, " an<l known beforehand.' He did not meddle 
 
 with the political eoiHtitution, and in his ordinances Aristotle 
 
 finds little worthy of leniark except the extreme severity'-^ of the 
 
 punishments awarded i)etty thefts, or even proved idleness of 
 
 life, being visited with death or disfranchisement. 
 
 But we are not to construe this remark as demonstrating any 
 special inhumanity in the character of Drako, who was not in> 
 vested with the large jiower which Solon afterwards enjoyed, and 
 caimot be imagined to have imposed upon the community severe 
 laws of his own invention. Himself of course an eupatrid, he 
 set forth in writing such ordinances as the eupatrid archons had 
 before been accustomed to enforce without writing, in the partic 
 ular case,H which came before them ; and the general spirit of 
 
 • 'Ore ^eff^dc ki^avr} o r' f , — such is the exact expression of Solon's luw 
 (Plutarch, Solon, c. 19); the wonl i^fcr/iof is found in Solon's own poems, 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. ii, 9, 9; Rhetoric, ii. 25, I; Aulas Gcll. N. A. xi, 18; 
 Pausaniaa, ix, 36,4; Plutarch, Solon, c. 19; though Pollux (viii, 4\) doet 
 not agre« with him. Taylor, Lectt. Lysiaciie, ch. 10. 
 
 Respecting the ^ea/xni of Drako, see Kuhn. ad ^lian. V. H. viii, 10. The 
 preliminary sentence which Porphyry (De AbstincntiS, iv, 22) ascribes 10 
 Drako ran hardly h# ^ennin«. 
 
 TRIAL OF H()\nCIDE AT ATHENS. 
 
 77 
 
 penal legislation had become so much milder, during the two 
 centuries which followed, that these old ordinances a[)peared to 
 Aristotle intolerably rigorous. Probably neither Drako, nor the 
 Lokrian Zaleukus, who somewhat preceded him in date, were 
 more rigorous than the sentiment of the age : indeed, the few 
 fragments of the Drakonian tables which have reached us, tar 
 from exhibiting indiscriminate cruelty, introduce, for the lirst time, 
 into the Athenian law, mitigating distinctions in respect to homi- 
 cide ; ' founded on the variety of concomitant circumstances. 
 He is said to have constituted the judges called Epheta*, fifty-one 
 elders belonging to some respected gens or possessing an exalted 
 position, who held their sittings for trial of homicide in thref 
 different spots, according to the difference of the cases submitted 
 to them. If the accused party, admitting the fact, denied any 
 culpable intention and pleaded accident, the case was tried at the 
 place called the palladium ; when found guilty of accidental 
 homicide, he was condemned to a teraj)orary exile, unless he 
 could appease the relatives of the deceased, but his property was 
 left untouched. If, again, admitting the fact, he defended him- 
 self by some valid ground ot justification, such as self-defence, or 
 flagrant adultery wiih his wife on the part of the deceased, the 
 trial took place on ground consecrated to Apollo and Artemis, 
 called the Delphinium. A }>articular spot called the Phreattyr 
 close to the seashore, was also named for the trial of a person, 
 who, while under sentence of exile for an unintentional homicide, 
 might be charged with a second homicide, committed of course 
 without the limits of the territory : being considered as impure 
 from the effects of the former sentence, he was not permitted to 
 set foot on the soil, but stood his trial on a boat hauled close in 
 siiore. At the prytaneium, or government-house itself, sittings 
 were held by the four j>hylo-basileis, or tribe-kings, to try any 
 inanimate object (a piece of wood or stone, etc.) which had 
 cau.>5ed death to any one, without the proved intervention of a 
 human hand : the wood or stone, when the fact was verified, waa 
 
 * Pausanias, ix, 36, 4. ApuKovroc 'A^ijvaloic •&Eauo-&TiTvanvTo^ Ik rCu 
 iKeivav KaT^arr, vofiuv ovg iypa<l>ev eirl ttj^ cipxv^i dXAwi' re diroccjv uisLav 
 tivai xp^> "Oi ^'/ «af Tifi(jpla(; fjtoixov: compare Derosthen.coiit. Aristolrral 
 p. €87; Lysias de C«ede Eratosthen. p. 31. 
 
7 
 
 la 
 
 lilSiOlCi' OF GREECE. 
 
 ] 
 
 iinnally cast bejond the borderJ All these distinctions of a)urs« 
 imply the preliminary investigation of the ca>e, called anatri.is, 
 by tiie Kn,-arch(>j., in oider that it might be known what wa.s 
 the irisue, and where the sittings of tiie ephelui were to be held. 
 So Hitimately wa.s the njode of dealing with homicide connect- 
 
 llarfokranon, vv, 'K-^. r<a. KkI ^a<l>ivl^, ^Erri llaUadlc^, Eu *pmrr.>r 
 Pollux vm, 119, 1:24, 1.5; Photius, v, 'f>r..; Ilesychius, i, ^an. ;' 
 
 . nul vi^r'" t'i"'"^'"'- " '^"'^^ *^P- ^^^-^-^^i cont. Mukartat. c. l.>. 
 p. 008 When roll ttx speak, of the live courts in which the e..iat;f 
 jadgcd, he probably inch.des the areopagus (see Den.osth. cont. Ari.K.ki.a 
 C. 14, p. 641). 
 
 About the ju.i^^'s ^v 4>,teaTToi, see Aristot. Polit iv, 13. 2. On tl»e l- !.■■ - I 
 falyect of this ancient and obscure criminal procedure, sec Martin;. 1; 
 Jud.cs Athcniensiun. (in Miscellan. I'hilologie, vol. i. p. u.i, .vy ) a!., 
 fii-homann, Antiq. Jur. Pub. Att. sect 61, p. 288; I'lutner, Proles u>h1 
 Khi^^'n bey den Attikern, b. i, .-b. i ; and K. W. Weber, Con.mer.t. ad 
 Demosdien. cont. Aristokrat. pp.G27.G4l; Meier und fcichomann, Aui. 1. 
 rroze.s.s, pp. 14-19. 
 
 i cannot consider the ephetae as jud^a^s in up,.eal, and I a;,ree with tlune 
 (bchoniann, Antiq. Jur. I'ub. (>. p. 171; Meier und S h..:nann. Atti. h 
 Prozc8.s p. 16 ; Platner, I'roze.vs ut.d Kla^.en, t. i, p. ISj who distrust the 
 etymolo^fy which connects this word with l<p.ac^nc. The active sense of 
 Uk- word, akm to ^^.V^a. (,,i,,^. Pr^^, 4^ ^^,,j .>. rp,. meets the ca-. i,,:- 
 ^r: see (). Muller, Prole^^g ad Mythol. p. 424 (though there is no re.ison 
 for behevn.^^ the ephetae to be older than Drako) : compare, however, K. F 
 Hei mann^ Lehrbuch der Griechiichen Staats Alterthumer, sects. 103, J04. who 
 Iniiiks (lifferently. 
 
 The trial condemnation, and banishment of inanimate object, which had 
 bcvH the cause of death, was founded on feelin^^ widelv diliused throughout 
 the Grecmn world (see Pausan. vi, H, 2; and Theokr'itus, Idyll, xxiii, 60) • 
 analogous ,n priruiple to the English law respecting, deodand, and to the 
 
 rLiL^r; r^*"r ''^'■"^"'^ ^^^^ generally (see Dr. 6. Trummer 
 Die Lehre von der Znrechnung, c. 28-38. Hamburg, 1845). 
 
 J he Germ:unc co<le. do not content themselves with imposing a zeneral 
 Obh.at.on to appcu^e the relatives and gentile.s of the slain partv bufdete^ 
 mine beforehan.1 the sum which shall be sufficient to the pu'rpoTe, « Ich Tn 
 
 t^Z: ZTT7 ''"' k'" ' '''' " ''' ^"^^••^••"^ -'«^-^ - ^ -- 
 
 St .rl oh ^ 1' '"" '^' '^"'^•■'^^ ''''''''' ^^ Wilda, Das D ..tsche 
 Strafrecht, eh. v„,, pp. 544-559, whose doctrine, however, is disrutecr ov Dr 
 Trarnmer, id the treatise above noticed ' 
 
 ^J.l P ^ ^'^'^ ^^ "^ •^'■^^^ «^ ^ ^^"^ (Walter, Geichiw^ta a^ 
 Bomisch. Reohts, sect. 7681. "iw-wi «» 
 
 KPHErTiE. AREOPAGUS, ETC. 
 
 79 
 
 ed with the religious feelings of the Athenians, that these old reg- 
 ulations were never formally abrogated throughout the historical 
 times, and were read engraved on their column by the contempo- 
 raries of Demosthenes.' The areopagus continued injudicial 
 operation, and the ephetae are spoken of as if they were so, even 
 through the age of Demosthenes; though their functions were 
 tacitly usurped or narrowed, and their dignity impaired,^ by tlie 
 more popular dikasteries afterwards created. It is in this way 
 that they have become known to us, while the other Drakonian 
 institutions have perished: but there is much obscurity respecting 
 them, particnlariy in regard to the relation between the ephetie 
 and the areopagites. Indeed, so little was known on the subject, 
 even by the historical inquirers of Athens, that most of them 
 supposed the council of areopagus to have received its first 
 origin from Solon: and even Aristotle, though he contradicti 
 this view, expres.ses himself in no very positive language.3 That 
 judges sat at the areopagus for the trial of homicide, previous to 
 Drako, seems imi)lied in the arrangements of that lavvriver 
 respecting the ephetae, inasmuch as he makes no new j)rovisioii 
 for trying the direct issue of intentional homicide, which, accord- 
 ing to all accounts, fell within the cognizance of the areopagus : 
 but whether the ephetae and the areopagites were the same persons, 
 wholly or partially, our information is not sufficient to discover. 
 Before Drako, there existed no tribunal for trying homicide, 
 except the senate, sitting at the areopagus, and we may conjecture 
 that there was something connected with that spot, — legends, 
 
 ' Deraosthen. cont. Euerg. et Mmisib p. 1161. 
 
 « Demosthen. cont. Aristokrat. p. 647. toctovtoic diKacrifpioic, « ^eol Kare- 
 hi^av, Kal/ieTu ravra uv^fM^iroi xpuvTai Truvra top xfx^vov, p 643. — ot Taitr' 
 i^apxnc ra vofiifia dia'&evTEQ, olrivig rrot?' i}aav, el^' jfpuec, elre ^eoL See 
 also the Oration cont. Makartat. p. 1069; iEschin. cont. Ktesiphon. p. 63b| 
 Antiph. De Caede Herodis, c. 14. 
 
 The popular dikastery, in the ag« of Isokrates and Demosthenes, held 
 sittings kiri UaA?M6l(^ for the trial of charges of unintentional homicide,— 
 ft striking evidence of the special holiness of the place for that puri>ose (sea 
 Isokrat. cont. Kallimachnm, Or. xviii, p. 381 ; Demosth. cont. Near. p. 
 1348). ^ 
 
 The statement of Pollux (viii, 125), that the ephetae became despised, Tt 
 dot confirmed by the lan^age of Demosthenes. 
 ^ rintarch, Solon, c. 19; Aristot. Polit. ii, 9, 2. 
 
 (J 
 
80 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECK. 
 
 CONSPIRACY OF KVT.ON. 
 
 81 
 
 ceremonies, or religious feelings — which compelled judges there 
 sitting to condemn every man proved guilty of homicide, and 
 forbade them to take account of extenuating or justifying circum- 
 stances.' Di-ako a[)pointed the ephetfp to sit at different places; 
 and these place-; are so \yo'uited\y marked, and were so unalterably 
 maintained, that we may see in how peculiar a manner those 
 special issues, of homicide under j)articular circumstances, which 
 he assigned to each, were adapted, in Athenian belief, to the new 
 sacred localities chosoi^-i each having its own distinct ceremonial 
 and procedure aijpointed by the gods themselves. That the 
 religious feelings of the Greeks were associated in the most inti- 
 mate manner with particular localities, has already been often 
 remarked ; and Drako |)roceeded agreeably to them in his 
 arrangements for mitigating the indiscriminate condemnation of 
 every man found guilty of homicide, which was unavoidable so 
 long as the areopagu^^ remained the only place of trial. The 
 man who either confessed, or was proved to have shed the blootl 
 of anotlier, could not be acquitted, or condemned to less than the 
 full penalty (of death or perpetual exile, with confiscation of 
 property) by the judges on the hill of Ares, whatever excuse he 
 might have to offer: but the judges at the palladinm and del 
 [)iunium might hear him, and even admit his pl^a, without 
 contracting the taint of irreligion. Drako did not directly meddl#» 
 with, nor indeed ever mention, the judges sitting in ar^^opagus. 
 
 In respect to homicide, then, the Drakonian ordinances were 
 partly a reform of the narrowness, partly a mitigation of the 
 rigor, of the old |)rocedure ; and tfiese are all that have come 
 down to us, having been preserved unchanged from the r-lio-ious 
 respect of the Athenians for antiquity on this peculiar /natter 
 The rest of his ordinances are said to have been repealed by 
 Solon, on account of their intolerable severity. So they doubt- 
 less appeared, to the Athenians of a later day, who had come to 
 
 Kead on this subject the maxims laid down by Plato (Leg;;, xii, p 941). 
 Nevertheless, Phito copies, to a great degree, the arrangements of the ephetic 
 tribunals, in his provisions for homicide (Legg. ix, pp. 865-873). 
 
 * I know no place in which the special aptitude of particular locaJ'*k» 
 fonsccrated each to its owii purpose, is so powerfully set forth, as v t^ 
 ipeech of Camillas against the transfer of Rome to Veii (Livy, v, 52^ 
 
 measure offences by a different scale ; and even to Solm, whc 
 had to calm the wrath of a suffering people in actual mutiny. 
 
 That under this eupatrid oligarchy and severe legislation the 
 people of Attica were sufficiently miserable, we shall presently 
 see, when I recount the proceedings of Solon : but the age of 
 democracy had not yet begun, and the government received ita 
 first shock from the hands of an ambitious eupatrid who aspired 
 to the despotism. Such was the phase, as has been remarked la 
 the preceding chapter, through which, during the century now 
 under consideration, a large j)roportion of the Grecian govern- 
 ments passed. 
 
 KylOn, an Athenian patrician, who superadded to a great 
 family position the personal celebrity of a victory at Olympia, 
 as runner in the double stadium, conceived the design of seizing* 
 the acropolis and constituting himself despot. AVhether any spe- 
 cial event had occurred at home to stimulate this project, we do 
 not know : but he obtained both encouragement and valuable aid 
 from his father-in-law Theagenes of Megara, who, by means of 
 his popularity with the people, had already subverted tlie Mega 
 rian oligarchy, and become despot of his native city. Previouj> 
 to so hazardous an attempt, however, Kylon consulted the Del- 
 phian oracle, and was advised by the god in reply, to take the 
 opportunity of " the greatest festival of Zeus " for seizing the 
 acropolis. Such expressions, in the natural interpretation put 
 upon them by every Greek, designated the Olympic games in Pel- 
 oponnesus, — to Kylon, moreover himself an Olympic victor, that 
 interpretation came recommended by an apparent peculiar pro- 
 priety. But Thucydides, not indifferent to the credit of the oracle, 
 reminds his readers that no question w^as asked nor any express 
 direction given, where the intended ** greatest festival of Zeus " 
 was to be sought, — whether in Attica or elsewhere, — and that the 
 public festival of the Diasia, celebrated periodically and solemnly 
 in the neighborhood of Athens, was also denominated the " great- 
 est festival of Zeus Meilichius." Probably no such exegetical 
 •cruples presented themselves to any one, until after the misera- 
 ble failure of the conspiracy ; least of all to Kylon himself, who, 
 at the recurrence of the next ensuing Olympic games, put him- 
 self at the head of a force, partly furnished by Theagenes, partly 
 
 VOL. III. 4* 6oc 
 
 i1 
 i 
 
 iitfHii 
 
1^2 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECK. 
 
 coraiiosedf of his frif nd^ at home, and took sudden possession of thtj 
 sacTod rock of Athens. 15ut the attempt excited general indijma. 
 tion among the Athenian people, who crowded in from the euun- 
 Iry to assist the a -chons and the prytanes of the naukrari in 
 putting it down. Kylon and liis companions were blockaded in 
 the acrcpolis, when; they soon found themselves in straits fur 
 want of water and provisions; and though many of the Atheni- 
 ims w<'n( f)ack to their homes, a sufrieient besieging force was left 
 to reduce the consfirators to the last extremity. After Kylon 
 liimself had escaped by stealth, and several of his companions 
 had died of hunger, the remainder, renouncing all hope of de^ 
 fence, sat down as suppliants at the altar. The archon Megakles, 
 on regaining the citadel, found these suppliants on the point of 
 expiring with hunger on the sacred ground, and to prevent such 
 a Hlution, engage,! them to quit the spot by a promise of sparing 
 their lives. No >ocuer, however, had they been removed into 
 profane ground, tlian the promise was violated and they were put 
 I" ih'ath : some even, who, seeing the fate with which they were 
 I naced, contrived to throw themselves upon the altar of the 
 venerable goddesses, or eumenides, near the areupagus, received 
 Iheir death-wounds in spite of that inviolable protection. i 
 
 Though the consj.iracy was thus put down, and the govern- 
 ment upheld, th. ».e deplorable incidents left behind them a long 
 iniin of calamity .— profound religious remorse mingled with ex- 
 ti i-erated politi al antipathies. There still remained, if not a 
 tonsideralde Ky Ionian party, at least a large body of persons who 
 resented the way in which the Kylonians had been put to deatli, 
 a:ul who became in consequence bitter enemies of Megakles the 
 archon, iuid of the great femily of the Alkm(e6nida>, to which ho 
 bilonged. Not only Megakles himself and his personal assistants 
 were denounced as smitten with a curee, but the taint was sup, 
 I osed to be transmitted to his descendants, and we shall hereafter 
 Imd the wound reopened, not only in the second and third .venera- 
 tion, but also two centuries after the original event.2 When we 
 see that the impression left by the proceeding was so very serious, 
 
 BarmtiTe ifl giren in Thac.d. i, 126 ; Herod. v, 71 ; Platafdi, Solm^ 
 
 IS* 
 
 • Aristophan. Equit. 445, ar>f the Scholia; Herodot. v, 70. 
 
 TKIAL OF THE ALKM.EONIDS. 
 
 98 
 
 even after the length of time which had elapsed, we may weD 
 believe that it was sutlicient, immediately afterwards, to poison 
 altogether the tranquillity of the state. The Alkm.-eonids and 
 their partisans long detied their opponents, resisting any public 
 trial, — and the dissensions continued without ho})e of termination, 
 until Solon, then enjoying a lofty reputation for sagacity and 
 patriotism, as well as for bravery, persuaded them to submit to 
 judicial cognizance,-- at a moment so far distant from the event, 
 that several of the actors were dead. They were accordingly 
 tried before a special judicature of three hundred eupatrids, My- 
 ron, of the deme Phlyeis, being their accuser. In defending 
 themselves against the charge that they had sinned against the 
 reverence due to the gods and the consecrated right of asylum, 
 they alleged that the Kylonian suppliant^s, when persuaded to 
 quit the holy ground, had tied a coixi round the statue of the god- 
 dess and clung to it for protection in their march ; but on ap- 
 proaching the altar of the eumenides, the cord accidentally broke, 
 — and this critical event, so the accused persons argued, proved 
 that the goddess had herself withdrawn from them her protect- 
 ing hand and abandoned them Uj their fate.J Their argument, 
 remarkable as an illustration of the feelings of the time, was not, 
 however, accepted as an excuse : they were found guilty, and 
 while such of them as were alive retired into banishment, those 
 who had already died were disinterred and cast beyond the borders. 
 Vet their exile, continuing as it did only for a time, was not held 
 sufficient to expiate the impiety for which they had been con- 
 demned. The Alkmieonids, one of the most powerful families in 
 Attica, long continued to be looked upon as a tainted race,^and in 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, c. 12. If the stor}- of the breaking of the cord had 
 been true, Thucydides could hardly have failed to notice it; hut there is no 
 reason to doubt that it was the real defence urged by the Alkmaeonids. 
 
 When Ephesus wiis besieged by Croesus, the inhabitants .vni«;ht proteetioa 
 •r» their town by dedicating it to Artemis : they carried a cord from the walla 
 of the town to the shrine of the goddess, which was situated without the walls 
 (Herod, i, 26). The Samian despot Polykrates, when he consecrated to iia 
 Helian Apollo the neighboring island of RhSneia, connected it with tht 
 island of Delos by means of a chain (Thnoyd. iii, 104). 
 
 These analo^es illustrate the powerful effect of visible or material wntin 
 uity on the Grecian imagination. 
 
 ^Herodot i 61 
 
 am 
 
84 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EPIMENIDES OF KREVE. 
 
 m 
 
 cases of public calamity were liable to be singled out as having by 
 their sacrilege drawn down the judgment of the gods upon theii 
 countrvmenJ 
 
 Nor was the banishment of the guilty parties adequate in otheF 
 rocpects to restore tranquillity. Not only did pestilential disor- 
 ders prevail, but the religious susce{>tibiiiti<*s and apprehensions of 
 the Athenian community also n'niaiiie<l deplorably excited : they 
 were oppressed with sorrow and despondt-ncy, saw pliantoms and 
 heard supernatural menaces, and felt the curse of the gods upon 
 them without abatement/- In particular, it appears that the 
 minds of the women — whose religious impulses wrre recognized 
 generally by the ancient legislators as requiring watchful control 
 — wero thus disturl>ed and frantic. The sacrifices otfered at Athens 
 did not succeed in dissipating the epidemic, nor could the proph- 
 ets at hom'^, though they recognized that s[)e(ial purifications 
 were required, discover what were the new ceremonies capable 
 of appeasing the divine wrath. The Delj)hian oracle directed 
 them to invite a higher spiritual influence from abroad, and this 
 produced the memorable visit of the Kretan |)rophet and sage 
 Epimenides to Athens. 
 
 The century between 620 and 500 b. c. appears to have been 
 remarkable for the first diffusion and potent influence of distinct 
 religious brotherhoods, mystic rites, and expiatory ceremonies, 
 none of which, as I have remarked in a former chapter, find any 
 recognition in the Homeric epic. To this age belong Thaletas. 
 Aristeas, Abaris, Pythagoras, Onomakritus, and the earliest 
 provable agency of the Orphic se<'t.^ Of the class of men 
 here noticed, Epimenides, a native of Phaestus or Knossus in 
 Krete,* was one of the most celebrated, — and the old legendary 
 connection between Athens an<l Krete, which shows itself in the 
 tales of Theseus and Minos, is here again manifested in the re- 
 course which the Athenians had to this island to supply their 
 spiritual need. Epimenides seems to have been connected with 
 
 • See Thucyd. v, 16, and his languaj^e respecting rieistoaimx of Sparta. 
 
 = Plutarch, Solon, c. 12. Kal (po,ioi rtvtg U deiffLdaifioviac hfia kqI ipaafiara 
 MiTtlxf fffv iro^.iv^ etc 
 » Lobeck, Aglaophamus, ii, p. 313 ; Hoockh, Kreta, iii, 2, p. 252. 
 
 * The statements rcjjpecting Epimenides are collected and discoMed in thi 
 of Heinrich, Epimenides aus Kreta. Leipsic, 1801 
 
 d Vol. 3 
 
 the worship of the Kretan Zeus, in whose lavor he slo^td so h.gh 
 as to receive the denomination of the new Kurete' — the Kuretw 
 having been the primitive ministers and organizers of that wor- 
 ship. He was said to be the son of the nymph Balte ; to be 
 supplied by the nymphs with constant food, since he was never 
 seen to eat ; to have fallen asleep in his youth in a cave, anc' \o 
 have continued in this state without interruption for iifiy-sevta 
 yeiirs ; though some asserted that he remained all tfiis time a 
 wanderer in the mountains, collecting and studying medicinal 
 botany in the vocation of an latromantis, or leech and prophet 
 combined. Such narratives mark the idea entertained by an- 
 tiipiity of Epimenides, the Purifier,'- who was now called in to 
 l:eal both the epidemic and the mental aflliction prevalent among 
 the Athenian people, in the same manner as his countryman and 
 contemporary Thaletas had been, a few years before, invited to 
 Sparta to appease a pestilence by the effect of his music and 
 religious hymns.3 The favor of Epimenides with the gods, Wn 
 knowledge of propitiatory ceremonies, and his power of working 
 upon the religious feeling, wtis completely successful in restoring 
 both health and mental tranquillity at Athens. He is said to 
 have turned out some black and white sheep on the areopagus, 
 directing attendants to follow and watch them, and to erect new 
 altars to the appropriate local deities on the spots where the 
 animals lay down.'* He founded new chai)els and establishel 
 
 ^ Diogen. LaCrt. i, 114, 115. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, c. 12; Diogen. Latrt. i, 109-115; Pliny, H. N. vii, 5£ 
 ^{:o<pt?J/g Kal ao(pd^ Trepl ru ^ela Trjv Iv^ovoiaarLKJ/v kol Te?i,£aTiKTjv ao<pi' 
 3v, etc. Maxim. Tyrius, xxxviii, 3, deivu^ tu iJfZa, ov /im^uv u'AA' vttvov 
 >ivT(^ dLrjyelTo fiaKpov Kal oveipov diduOKaAov. 
 
 'larpofxavTi^, JEschyl. Supplic. 277; Kai?aprr/f, lamblichus, Vit. Pythagor. 
 c. 28. 
 
 Plutarch (Sept. Sapient. Conviv. p. 157) treats Epimenides simply oa 
 having lived up to the precepts of the Orphic life, or vegetable diet *. lo thtt 
 circumstance, I presume, Plato (Legg. iii, p. 677) must be understood Ui 
 refer, though it is not very clear. See the Fragment of the lost KrCiei or 
 Earipidcs, p. 98, ed. Dindorf. 
 
 Karmanor of Tarrha in Krete had purified Apollo himself for the slaofrhtet 
 •f Pytho (Pausan. ii, 30, 3). 
 
 • Plutarch, De MusicA, pp. 1134-1146 ; Pausanias, i, 14, 3. 
 
 ♦ Cicero (Legg. ii U) states that Epimenides directed a temple •n bt 
 
 Ll»^ 
 
86 
 
 niSrORY OF GREECK. 
 
 1 
 
 ^ 
 
 Tarioua lustral ceremonies ; and more e-?pecially, he regulated th« 
 worship i>aid by the women, in such a manner as to calm the 
 violent imjmlses which had before agitated lln'm. We know 
 hardly anything of tlie details of his i)roceeding, but the general 
 fact of hi:^ visit, and the salutary effects })roduced in reraovin*^ 
 the religious despondency wliich op|)ressed the Athenians, are 
 well attested : consoling assurances and new ritual precepts, iVora 
 the lips of a person supposed to stand high in the favor of Zeus, 
 were the remedy whicli this unhappy disorder required. More- 
 over, Epimenides had the prudence to associate himself with 
 Solon, and while he thus doubtless obtained much valuable 
 advice, he assisted indirectly in exalting the reputation of Solon 
 himself, whose career of constitutional reform was now fast aj)- 
 proa^hing. He remained long enough at Athens to restore 
 completely a more comfortable tone of religious feeling, and then 
 departed, carrying with him universal gratitude and admiration, 
 but refusing all other reward, except a branch from the sacred 
 olive-tree in the acropohsJ Ilis life is said to have been pro- 
 longed to the unusual period of one hundred and fifty-four years, 
 according to a statement which was current during the time of his 
 younger contemporary Xenophanes of Kolophon ;2 and the Kre- 
 tans even ventured to aliinn that he lived three hundred years. 
 They extolled him not merely as a sage and a spiritual purifier, 
 but also as a poet, — very long compositions on religious and myth- 
 
 envte.l at Athens to 'T/^p/f and 'AvaUhia (Violence and Impudence): 
 Clemens snid that he hud erected altars to the same two goddesses (Protrep- 
 ti'on, p 22): Theophrastiis said that th«re were a/tars at Athens (without 
 mentioninir Kpimenides) to these same (ap. Zenobium, Proverb. Cent, iv, 
 3fii Ister sju.ke of a iqym. Wiuwhiac at Athens (Istri Fragm. ed. Siebelis,' 
 p. f»i) 1 (juesticjn whether this ^torr has any other foundation than the fact 
 stilt .1 by Pausjinias. »hat the stones which were placed before the tribunal of 
 ai eopajrus, for the acr n>er tnd the accused to stand uf»on, were called by these 
 names, — 'r^prcr, that of the accused ; 'AvaiAFta^, that of the accuser (i, 28, 
 5) The ronftt-^ion Wtwccn Moncs and altars is not difficult to be under- 
 8too<l. The other story, told by Neanthes of Kyzikus, respecting Epimeni- 
 des. that he had otfcrcl two young men as human sacrifices, \ras distincti* 
 pronfHinced to be untrue by Polemo : and it reads completely like a 
 lAthenieus, xiii, p. 602). 
 > Plutarch. Prjpcept. Pei|mbl. Gerend. c. 27, p. 830 
 • T)iopen Lat»rt /. c. 
 
 EPIMENIDES OF KRETE 
 
 Bl 
 
 iTl 
 
 ical subjects being ascribed to him ; according to some accounts, 
 they even worshipped him as a god. Both Plato and Cicero con- 
 sidered Epimenides in the same light in which he was regarded 
 by his contemporaries, as a prophet divinely inspired, and foretell- 
 ing the future under fits of temporary ecstasy : but according to 
 Aristotle, Epimenides himself professed to have received from 
 the ^i^ods no higher gift than that of divining the unknown phe- 
 nomena of the past. I 
 
 Tlie religious mission of Epimenides to Athens, and its effica- 
 cious as well as healing influence on the public mind, deserve 
 notice as charactj-ristics of the age in which they occurred.- If 
 we transport ourselves two centuries forward, to the Peloponne- 
 sian war, when rational influences and positive habits of thought 
 h.id acquired a durable hold upon the superior minds, and when 
 practical discussions on political and judicial matters were familiar 
 to every Athenian citizen, no such uncontrollable religious misery 
 rould well have subdued the entire public ; and if it had, no 
 living man could have drawn to himself such universal venera- 
 tion as to be capable of effecting a cure. Plato,'* admitting the 
 real healing influence of rites and ceremonies, fully belitwed in 
 Epimenides as an ins[)ired prophet during the past; but towards 
 those who preferred claims to supernatural power in his own 
 day, he was not so easy of faith. He, as well as Euripides and 
 Theophrastus, treated with indifference, and even with contempt, 
 the orpheotelestic of the later times, who advertised themselves 
 as possessing the same patent knowledge of ceremonial rites, 
 and the same means of guiding the will of the gods, as Epimeni- 
 tles had wielded before them. These orpheotelestae unquestion- 
 Ebly numl>ered a considerable tribe of believers, and speculated 
 rith great effect, as well as with profit to themselves, npon the 
 
 , J} 
 
 * Plato, Le«;:g. i, p. 642. Cicero. De Divinat. i 18 ; Aristot. Rhet. iii, 17. 
 Plato places Epimenides ten years before the Persian invasion of Greece 
 
 frhereas bis real date is near npon 600 b c. ; a remarkable example of 
 earelessness as to chronology. 
 
 * Respecting the characteristics of this age, 9^ .he second chapter of the 
 treatise of Heinrich, above alluded to, Ereta nnd Griechenland in Uinsicbi 
 anf Wunderglaa])en. 
 
 ' Plato, Kratyius, p. 405 j Phaedr. p. 244. 
 
88 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 SOLON 
 
 69 
 
 timorous consciences of rich men : ^ but they enjoyed no itr 
 spect with the general public, or with those to whose authority 
 the pubhc habitually looked up. Degenerate as they wene, 
 however, they were the legitimate representatives of the prophet 
 and purifier from Knossus, to whose presence the Athenians had 
 been so much indebted two centuries before : and their altered 
 position was owing less to any falling off in themselves, than to 
 an improvement in the mass upon whom they sought to operate. 
 Had Epimenides himself come to Athens in those days, his visit 
 would probably have been as much inoperative to all public 
 purposes as a repetition of the stratagem of Tliye, clothed and 
 equipped as the goddess Athene, which had succeeded so com- 
 pletely in the days of Peisistratus, — a stratagem which even 
 Herodotus treats as incredibly absurd, although, a century belbre 
 his time, both the city of Athens and the denies of Attica had 
 obeyed, as a divine mandate, i\ui orders of this magniiicent and 
 stately woman, to restore Pcisistratus.2 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 SOLONIAN LAWS AND CONSTITUTION. 
 
 We now approach a new era in Grecian history, — the first 
 known example of a genuine and disinterested constitutional 
 reform, and the first foundation-stone of that great fabric, which 
 afterwards became the type of democracy in Greece. The ar- 
 ehonship of the eupatrid Solon dates in 594 b. c, thirty years 
 %fter that of Drako, and about eighteen years after the conspir- 
 acy of Kylon, assuming the latter event to be correctly placed 
 B. c. 612. 
 
 The life of Solon by Plutarch and by Diogenes, especially tha 
 
 former, are our principal sources of information respecting thia 
 remarkable man ; and while we thank them for what they have 
 told us, it is impossible to avoid expressing disappointment that 
 they have not told us more. For Plutarch certainly had befor© 
 him both the original poems, and the original laws, of Solon, and 
 the few transcripts which he gives from one or the other form the 
 principal charm of his biography : but such valuable materials 
 ouf^ht to have been made available to a more instructive result 
 than that which he lias brought out. There is hardly anything 
 more to be deplored, amidst the lost treasures of the Grecian 
 mind, than the poems of Solon ; for we see by the remaining 
 fragments, that they contained notices of the public and social 
 phenomena before him, which he was compelled attentively to 
 ptudv, — blended with the touching expression of his own 
 personal feelings, in the post, alike honorable and difficult, to 
 which the confidence of his countrymen had exalted him. 
 
 Solon, son of Exekestides, was a eupatrid of middling fortune, 
 but of the purest heroic blood, belonging to the gens or family of 
 the Kodrids and Neleids, and tracing his origin to the god Po- 
 seidon. His father is said to have diminished his substance hj 
 prodigality, which compelled Solon in his earlier years to have 
 recourse to trade, and in this pursuit he visited many parts of 
 Greece and Asia. He was thus enabled to enlarge the si)herc 
 of his observation, and to provide material for thought as well as 
 for composition : and his poetical talents displayed themselves at 
 a very early age, first on light, afterwards on serious subjects. 
 It will be recollected that there was at that time no Greek prose 
 writing, and that the acquisitions as well as the effusions of an 
 intellectual man, even in their simplest form, adjusted themselves 
 not to the limitations of the period and the semicolon, but to 
 those of the hexameter and pentameter : nor in point of fact do 
 tlie verses of Solon aspire to any higher effect than we are ac- 
 customed to associate with an earnest, touching, and admonitory 
 prose composition. The advice and appeals which he frequently 
 addressed to his countrymen 2 were delivered in this easy metre, 
 doubtless ftir less difficult than the elaborate prose of subaequenl 
 
 le 
 
 > Earip. Hippolyt 957 ; Plato, Republ. u, p 364 ; Theophrast. Chamct e 
 
 * Herodot i 6o. 
 
 • Plutarch, Solon, i ; Diogen. Lafirt iii, 1 ; Aristot PoUt. iv. 9, la 
 
 * Platarch, Solon, v. 
 
96 
 
 HISI OKV OF GREECE 
 
 i 
 
 writers or speakers, ?u<h as Tliucydidrs Isokrates or Demosthe- 
 nes. His poetry ami his reputation became known througlioul 
 maiiy parts of Greece and lie was cliissed along with Thales of 
 Miletus, Bias of Prii m^ Pittakus of Mytilene, Periander of Cor- 
 inth, Kleobulus of Lindus, Cheilun «»f Lacedieraon, — altogether 
 ibrrning the constellation afterwards renowned tkj the Seven wise 
 men. 
 
 The first particular event in respect to which Solon ai)pears ;lj 
 an active politician, is the [msscssion of the island of Salamis, 
 then disputed betwettn Megara and Athens. Megara was at that 
 time able to contest with Athens, and for sometime to contest 
 with success, the occupation of this important island, — a re- 
 markable fact, which perhaps may be explained by supposing 
 that the inhabitants of Athens and its neighborhood carried on 
 the struggle with onl^ partial aid from the rest of Attica. How- 
 ever this may be, it appears that the Mcgarians had actually es- 
 tablished themselves in Salamis, at the time when Solon began 
 his political career, and that the Athenifins had experienced so 
 much loes in the straggle, as to have formally prohibited any 
 citizen from ever sabmitting a pro[x>sition for its reconquest. 
 8tung with this dishonorable abnegation, Solon counterfeited a 
 •tate of ecstatic excit<'ment, rushed into the agora, and there, on 
 the stone usually occupied by the official herald, pronounced t«i 
 the crowd around a sliort elegiac poem," which he had previously 
 composed on the subject of Salamis. He enforced upon them 
 the dis^ace of abandoning the island, and wrought so powerfully 
 upon their feelings, that they resHnded the prohibitory law: 
 •^Ratlier (he exclaime 1) would I fort*eit my native city, and be- 
 come a citizen of Phoh-i^andrus, than be still named an Athenian, 
 branded with the shame of surrendered Salamis!'* The Athe- 
 nians again entered into the war, and conferred upon him the 
 coinmand of it, ~ pwi ly, as we are tohl, at the instigation of 
 
 ' PIntarch, Solon, vui. It was a poem of one hundred lines, x'lpikvry^ 
 » '.vv 'Xt'rniTifih'uv. 
 
 Diog^es tells ns, that " Solon read the verses to the people throojrh the 
 me<linm of the herald." — a statement not less deficient in taste than in acco- 
 racy, and which gpoils the whole effect of the vigorous exordiom, Avtin 
 C90«f ^/Xi^oi d<J' luepTr;^ laXafiivof:, et« 
 
 SALAMIS ACQUIRED BY ATHENS. 
 
 91 
 
 Peisistratus, though the latter must have been at this time (600- 
 594 B. c.) a very young man, or rather a boy.' 
 
 The stories in Plutarch, as to the way in which Salamis waa 
 recovered, are contradictory as well as apocryphal, ascribing t» 
 Solon various stratagems to deceive the Megarian occupiers ; un- 
 fortunately, no authority is given for any of them. According 
 to that which seems the most plausible, he was directed by the 
 Delphian god, lirst to propitiate the local heroes of the island ; 
 and he accordingly crossed over to it by night, for the purpose 
 of sacrificing to the heroes Periphemus and Kychreus, on the 
 Salamiuian shore. Five hundred Athenian volunteers were 
 then levied for the attack of the island, under the stipulation that 
 if they were victorious they should hold it in property and citi- 
 zenship.'2 They were safely landed on an outlying promontory, 
 while Solon, having been fortunate enough to seize a ship which 
 the Megarians had sent to watch the proceedings, manned it with 
 Athenians, and sailed straight towards the city of Salamis, to 
 which the five hundred Athenians who had landed also directed 
 their march. The Megarians marched out from the city to repel 
 the latter, and during the heat of the engagement, Solon, with 
 his Megarian ship, and Athenian crew, sailed directly to the 
 city : the Megarians, interj)reting this as the return of their own 
 crew, permitted the ship to approach without resistance, and the city 
 was thus taken by surprise. Permission having been given to the 
 
 ' Plutarch, /. c; Dioj^cu. Lat rt. i, 47. Both Herodotus (i, 59) and some 
 authors read by Plutarch ascrihed to ]*eisistratus an active part in the war 
 against the Megarians, and even the capture of Nisaa, the port of Megara. 
 Now the first usurpation of IVisistratus was in 560 b. c, and we can hardly 
 believe that he can have been prominent and renowned in a war no less than 
 forty years before. 
 
 It will be seen hereafter — seethe note on the interview between Solon 
 and Krcesus, towards the end of this chapter — that Herodotus, and perhaps 
 other authors also, conceived the Solonian legislation to date at a period 
 later than it really does ; instead of 594 b. c, they placed it nearer to the 
 usurpation of Peisistratus. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, Kvplovc ehai rov TroXiTtifiaroc. The strict meuiiog of 
 these words refers only to the government of the island ; but it seems almost cer- 
 tainly implied that they would be established in it as kleruchs, or fm^rietors 
 of land, not meaning necessarily that all the preexisting proprietors woold 
 ie expelled. 
 
 .«] 
 
 I 
 
 Wf ii il il . l UJM ' 
 
HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 Megarians to quit t)w islan«l, Solon took possession of it for the 
 Athenians, erecting a temple to Enyalius, the god of war, on 
 Cape Skiradium, near the city of SuhimlsJ 
 
 The citizens of IVlegara, howcvtr, nuulo various etforts for the 
 recovery of so vahiable a possession, so that a war ensued long 
 as well as disastrous to both parties. At hist, it was agreed be- 
 tween them to ret'er tlie di>pute to tlie aiMtratlon of Sparta, and 
 five Spartans were appointed to decide it, — Kritolaidas, Amom- 
 pharetus, Hypsechidik<, Anaxlla-, and Kh'onu iics. The verdict 
 in favor of Atliens was founded on evlihnce which it is some- 
 what curious to trace. Both |.artits attempted to show that the 
 dead bodies buried in the i>latH] conlbrmed to their own peculiar 
 mode of interment, and both parties are said to have cited verses 
 from the catalogue of the Iliad,- — each accu-ing the other of error 
 or interpolation. JJur the Athenians l.'ad the advantage on two 
 points; Urst, there were onules iVuni Del[>hi, wherein Salamii 
 was mentioned with tlie epithet Ionian ; next, riiiheus and Kury- 
 sak^ eons of the Telamonian AJax, the great hero of the island, 
 had accepted the cifizenshi[) ot" Athens, made ovrr Salamis to the 
 Athenians, and transterred their own re-i.lenees to Brauron and 
 Mehte in Attica, where the denie or gens PhilaiJa> still wor- 
 shipped Philaius as its e[)onymous ancestor. Such a title was 
 held sufficient, and Salamis was adjudged by the live Spartan^ to 
 Attica,"^ with which it ever afterwards remained incorporated 
 
 ' riutarch, Solon, 8, 9 10. Datmachus of Plat;v;i, however, tlenied to 
 Solon any personal share in the Salaminian war (I'lutareh, comp. i^olon and 
 TuMie c'. 4). 
 
 rolyjrnus (i, 20) ascribes a different stratagem to Solon : compare .Elian, 
 V. H. vii, 19. It is hordly necessary to say that the account which the 
 Mcgarians gave of the way in which they lost the island was totally dillVr- 
 ent : they imputed it to the treachery of some exiles (Pausan. i, 40,4): 
 compare Justin, ii. 7. 
 
 * Aristot. Rhet. i, 16, 3. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, 10: compare Aristot. Rhet. i, 16. Alkihiades traced up 
 his >MOf to Eurysakcs (Plutiirch, Alkibiad. c. 1); Miltiades traced up his to 
 Phila'us (Ilerodot. vi, 35). 
 
 According to the statement of Hereas the Megarian, both his countrymen 
 and the Athenians had the same way of interment : both interred the dead 
 mth their faces towards the west. This statement, therefore, aftbrds no 
 proof of any peculiarity of Athenian custom in burial. 
 
 The Knrvsukeium. or precinct sacred ro the hero EurysaktM, stoc«i in tJM 
 
 AfWKNS BEFORE SOLON. 
 
 98 
 
 
 oiitil the days of Macedonian supremacy. Two centuries and a 
 half later, when the orator ^Eschines argued the Athenian right 
 to Amphipolis against Philip of Macedon, the legendary element* 
 of the title were indeed put forward, but more in the way of 
 preiaceor introduction to the substantial political grounds.^ But 
 in the year GOO b. c, the authority of the legend was more 
 deep-seated and operative, and adequate by itself to determine a 
 favorable verdict. 
 
 In addition to the conquest of Salamis, Solon increased his 
 reputation by espousing the cause of the Delphian temple against 
 the extortionate proceedings of the inhabitants of Kirrha, of 
 which more will be said in a coming chapter; and the favor of 
 the oracle was i)robably not without its effect in procuring for 
 him that encouraging prophecy with which his legislative career 
 
 opened. 
 
 It is on the occasion of Solon's legislation, that we obtain our 
 lirst glimpse — unfortunately, but a glimpse — of the actual state 
 of Attica and its inhabitants. It is a sad and repulsive picture, 
 presenting to us political discord and private suffering combined. 
 
 Violent dissensions prevailed among the inhabitants of Attica, 
 who were separated into three factions, — the pedicis, or men of 
 the plain, comprising Athens, Eleusis, and the neighboring terri- 
 tory, among whom the greatest number of rich families were 
 included ; the mountaineers in the east and north of Attica, called 
 diakrii, who were on the whole the poorest party ; and the pa- 
 ralii in the southern portion of Attica, from sea to sea, whose 
 means and social position were intermediate between the twa^ 
 Upon what particular j)oints these intestine disputes turned we 
 are not distinctly informed ; they were not, however, peculiar to 
 the period immediately preceding the archontate of Solon ; thej 
 had prevailed before, and they reappear afterwards prior to the 
 
 deme of Melite (Harpokrat. ad v), which forme I a portion of the city of 
 
 AtliL-iis. 
 
 - iEschin. Fals. Legat. p. 250, e. 14. 
 
 * Plutarch Solon, c. 13. The language of Plutarch, in which he talks of 
 the pedieis as representing the oligarchical tendency, and the diakrii as rep- 
 r*»senting the democratical. is not quite accurate when applied to the dajf 
 ol 8<»lon. Democratical pretensions, as such, can hardly be said to havi 
 liicn existed. • 
 
 h- 
 
 \ 
 1* 
 
94 
 
 mSTOn* Of GREECE. 
 
 despotism of Peisistratus, the latter standing forward as the leaiiei 
 of the diakrii, and as champion, real or pretended, of the poorer 
 population. 
 
 But in the time of Solon the«^e intestine quarrels were aggra 
 vatedbj^ somethin;_r „H,<h more difReuIt to deal with, — a°gen- 
 eral mutiny of tlie looivr iKjpuhition against the rich, resulting 
 from misery comhimd with oppression. The thetes, whose cont 
 dition we have aln^-idy contemphited in the j^oemsof Homer and 
 Hesiod, are now ])re>entcd to u^ a^ terming tlie bulk of the pop- 
 ulation of Attica, — tlie cultivating tenants metayers, and small 
 proprietors of the country. Tliey are exhibited as weiglied 
 down by debts and dependence, and <Iriven in large numbers'" out 
 of a state of freedom into .shivery, — the whole mass of them, 
 we are Udd, being in *lvbt to the rich, who are proprietors of the 
 greater part of the soil.i They ha«l either borrowed money for 
 their own necessities, or they tilled the huids of the rich as de- 
 pendent tenants, paying a stipulated portion of the produce, and 
 in thi3 capacity they wi're largely in arrear. 
 
 All the calamitous eflects were here seen of the old harsh law 
 of debtor and creditor, — once prevalent in Greece, Italy, Asia, 
 and a large portion of the world, — combined with the recogni- 
 tion of slavery as a legitimate status, and of the right of one 
 
 Plutarch, Solon, 13. 'jLrac fiiv yUp 6 %/of ^v f.T%pfuf niv nXovmui" 
 # yy eyeupyavv Udvocg Ura ruv yLvof^ivuv reXor.rec, Urri^dpLOL npoaa)o- 
 p^vofievoL Kai ^r^rer h XP^<^ la^^Uvovre^ irrl rolg auf^amv, ay6ycuoL roU 
 dave.vW.v f,cav' oi f,h> avrov chvXevoure,, ol 6r ire r^ c^.r, n^npacKOf^evo. 
 UoXloidi Kal xaMcf /d/orf }}vayKu^ovTo truArlv. kuI r^r :ruhv <pevyeiv 6u} 
 
 nat rrnpeKuT^ovv ua'atj/.ov^ ^fJ Tepiopdv, qXq. 
 
 Re^pootiTiq- these hektemori. " tenants payinir one-sixth portion," we find 
 mtlc or no information: they are just notiee.l in Hesvchius (v, 'E^ny^opot. 
 ^TTuiopro,) and in Pollux, v,i, 151 ; from wht.m we lt;irn that kni^opro^ y7j 
 was an expression whieh occurred in one of the Solonian laws Whether 
 they paid to the landlord one-sixth, or retained for themselves only one-sixth 
 has been doubted (see Photiiis. m/AiTai). 
 
 Dionysius Hal (A. R. ii, g) compares the thetes in Attica to the Roman 
 chents : that both agreed in beiuir relations of personal and proprietary 
 dependence is certain : but we can hardly carry the comparison farther nor 
 to there any evidence in Atti< a of that sanctity of obligation which is said t« 
 ■•▼© Wmnd the Roman patron to his client 
 
 i 
 
 LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. 
 
 man to sell him.^elf as well as that of another man to buy him. 
 Every debtor nimble to fulfil his contract was liable to be ad* 
 judged as the slave of his creditor, until he could lind means eitlier 
 of paying it or working it out ; and not only he himself, but his 
 minor sons and unmarried daughters and sisters also, whom the 
 law gave him the power of selling.' The poor man thus borro.ved 
 U[M>n the security of his body, to translate literally the Greek 
 phrase, and U})on that of the persons of his family ; and so se- 
 verelv had these 0})pressive contracts been enforced, tliat many 
 debtors had been reduced from freedom to slavery in Attica 
 itself, — many others had been sold for ex})orlation, — and some 
 had only hitherto preserved their own freedom by selling their 
 children. Moreover, a great number of the smaller properties 
 in Attica were under mortgage, signified, — according to the for- 
 mality usual in the Attic law, and continued down throughout the 
 historicid times, — by a stone pillar ei*ected on the land, inscribed 
 with the name of the lender and the amount of the loan. The 
 pi*oi)rietors of these mortgaged lands, in case of an unfavorable 
 turn of events, had no other prospect except that of irremediable 
 slavery for themselves and their families, either in tlieir own 
 native country, robbed of all its delights, or in some barbarian 
 reirion where the Attic accent would never meet their ears. 
 Some had fled the country to escape legal adjudication of their 
 persons, and earned a miserable subsistence in foreign parts by 
 degrading occui)ations : upon several, too, this deplorable lot had 
 fallen by unjust condemnation and corrupt judges ; the conduct 
 of the rich, in regard to money sacred and ])rofane, in regard to 
 matters public as well as private, being thoroughly unprincipled 
 and rapacious. 
 
 The manifold and long-continued suffering of the poor undcf 
 this system, plunged into a state of debasement not more tolera- 
 ble than that of the Gallic plebs, — and the injustices of the 
 rich, in whom all political power was then vested, are facts well 
 
 ' S« the Frisii, when unable to pay the tribute imposed by the Roman 
 empire, " primo boves ipsos, mox agros, postremo corpora conjugum et liber- 
 onun, servitio tradebant" (Tacit. Annal. iv, 72.) About the selling of 
 children by parents, to pay the taxes, in the later times of the Roman empire 
 ZosiiBUfi, ii, 38; Libaniofl, t ii, p. 427, ed. Paris, 1627. 
 
 
96 
 
 HISIORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Attested bj the poeiii:^ ui Solon himself, even iu tlie -Iiort frag^ 
 meiitrt preserved to us :> and it iipjH'ars that inuuediately preced- 
 ing the time of his archoiKshi[), the evils hatl ripnicd to such a 
 point, — and the determination vi' the mass of suHerers, to extort 
 for themselves some mode of relief, had lueonie so pronounced 
 — that the existing laws could no lon^^^or be ent'on-ecl. Accord- 
 ing to the profound remark of Aristotle, — that seditions are i(en- 
 erated by great causes but out uf small inci<lents,- — we may 
 conceive that some recent events had occurred as immediate 
 stimulants to the outl)reak of the debtors, — like those which 
 lend so striking an interest to the early Konian annals, as the in- 
 flaming sparks of vioh*nt popular movements for which the train 
 had long before been laid. Condemnations by the arohons, of 
 insolvent debtors, nuiy have been unusually numerous, or the mah 
 treatment of some particular debtor, once a respected freeman, 
 in his condition of slavery, may ha\e been brought to act vividly 
 upon the public sympathies, — like the case of the old plebeian 
 centurion at Home,' — first im[H)verished by the plunder of tlie 
 tnemy, then reduced to borrow, and lastly adjudged to his credi* 
 
 ' See tho Fragment Trpi r;/f W^rivcuuv ToA/r^mf, No. 2, Schnoidewin. 
 
 "T/?p<of tK (UfvuXvi (lAyra tto^^H Tradelv. 
 ...Oril:^' lefitjv Kredvui' ovrt- ti (h/fiocrltji' 
 
 Oi'f'f <pvXa(7(7in'Tai aefiva ^tnrjt; ^efw&Aa. 
 TavTa fitv iv d^/i^ (rrptiptrai Kasd ■ rutv 6e rreviifH^ 
 
 'iKvn'irai 7to\2.oi ;,^.;i' i^ dXAo6a-r}v 
 n/)ai?nrff, (^ifrrnoiat r' I'uiKrXioiai dfi^tvTe^ 
 
 Anstot. Polit. ('f III rrarrti^ ov wepi fiiKpun', (z/.A' ^K ^UKpuv 
 
 ^Livy, ii, 23; Dionys Hal. A. K vi, 26: wmpare Livy, vi, 34-.36. 
 "An pluoerct, toBnorc cir umventam plehem, potius ijuam sorte creditiim 
 lolvaf, corpus in ncrvuni \r supplicia dare ? et j^ropuini quotidie de foro 
 •ddlctos duei, et repleri vinctis nohik-s domos ? ct ul.i( un.iue patricius habi- 
 let, ibi carcerem privatum esse ' " 
 
 The exposition of Niehuhr, nspectinj: the old Koman law of debtor and 
 creditor (Rom. Gesch. i. p. -.02. s,.i. .- Arnold's Roman Hist., eh. viii. vol. i, p 
 135), and the explanation whieh he there gives of the nexi, as distinguished 
 from the addicti, have been shown to he incorrect hy M. von Savigny, in an 
 excellent Dissertation Uber dsis Alt-Homisehe Sehuldrecht (Abhandlungen 
 Berlin Academ. 1833, pp. 70-73), an abstract of which will be found in as 
 Appendix, at the close of tliis chapter 
 
 "il'il 
 
 ! 
 
 ARcnONSHIP OF SOLON. 
 
 97 
 
 tor aa an insolvent, — who claimed the protection of the people in 
 the forum, rousing their feelings to the highest pitch by the marks 
 of t je slave-whip visible on his person. Some such incidents had 
 proliably happened, though we have no historians to recount thera ; 
 njoreover, it is not unrea^^onable to imagine, that that public men- 
 tal affliction which the purifier Epimenides had been invoked to 
 appea^ie, as it sprung in part from pestilence, so it had its cau»se 
 partly in years of sterihty, which must of course have aggravated 
 the distress of the small cultivators. However this may be, such 
 was the condition of things in 594 b. c, through mutiny of the 
 j>oor freemen and thetes, and uneasiness of the middling citizens, 
 that the governing oligarchy, unable either to enforce their pri- 
 vate debts or to maintain their political power, were obliged to 
 invoke the well-ktiown wisdom and integrity of Solon. Though 
 his vigorous protest — which doubtless rendered him acceptable 
 to the nuiss of the people — against the iniquity of the existing 
 system had already been proclaimed in his poems, they still hoped 
 that he would serve as an auxiliary, to help them over their ditli- 
 culties, and they therefore chose him, nominally, as archon along 
 with Philombrotus, but with jiower in substance dictatorial. 
 
 It had happened in several Grecian states, that the governing 
 oligarchies, cither by quarrels among their own members or by 
 the general bad condition of the people under their government, 
 were deprived of that hold u|)on the })ublic mind which was es- 
 sential to their power; and sometimes, as in the case of Pittakua 
 of Mitylene, anterior to the archonship of Solon, and often in the 
 factions of the Italian republics in the Middle Ages, the collision 
 of opposing forces had rendered society intolerable, and driven 
 all parties to acquiesce in the choice of some reforming dictator. 
 Usually, however, in the early Greek oligarchies, this ultimate 
 crisis was anticipated by some ambitious individual, who availed 
 himself of the public discontent, to overthrow the oligarchy, and 
 usurp the powers ^of a despot ; and so, probably, it might have 
 happened in Athens, had not the recent failure of Kylon, with 
 all its miserable consequences, operated as a deterring motive 
 It is curious to read, in the words of Solon himself, the temper 
 in which his appointment was construed by a large portic«i of the 
 oornmiiiity, but most especially by his own friends : ard we are 
 
 VOL IIL 5 70G 
 
 I 
 
 r 
 
 
98 
 
 HISToRV OF GRKECE. 
 
 SEISACHTHEIA, C'R RELIEF-LAW. 
 
 99 
 
 to bear in mind that at this early day, so far as our knowled*" 
 goes, dcinocratical governmeMt was a thing unknown in Gre'K^e, 
 — all Grecian governmeutrf were either oligarehieal or desjjotic, 
 the mass of the freemen having not yet ta>ted of* constitutional 
 privilege. His own friends and supporters were the first to urge 
 him, while redressing the prevalent discontents, to niultiply par- 
 tisans for himself personally, and seize tlie supreme ]K>wer: they 
 even '* chid him a- a madman, for declining to haul up the net 
 when the tish were already enmeshed." i The ma>s oi" the 
 people, in despair wiih their lot, would gladly have seconded him 
 in such an attempt, and many even among the oligarchy might 
 have acquiesced in his j)ersonal government, from the mere 
 apprehension of something worse, if they resisted it. That 
 Solon might easily have made himself despot, admits of liitU 
 doubt; and though the position of a Greek despot was alwav.^ 
 perilous, he would have had greater facility for maintaining him- 
 self in it than Peisistratus possessed after him; so that nothing 
 but the combination of prudence and virtue which marks his 
 lofty character, restricted him within the trust specially confided 
 to him. To the suqu'ise of every one, — to the dissatisfaction of 
 his own friends, — und.T the ••omj)laints alike, as he says, of various 
 extreme and dissentient parties, who required him to adopt 
 measures fatal to the pra<'«' of society,- — he set himself lionestly 
 to solve the very ditrKuh and « riiical problem submitted to him. 
 
 Of all grievances, the most urgent was the condition of thu 
 poorer j'lass of <lebtor> ; and to tht^r relief Solon'^ lirst measure^ 
 the memorable seisachtheiii, or shaking off of burdens, wta 
 
 ' Ste riutanh, Solon, 4 ; nwi ahovc all tho Trorhuic tetrameters of ^oloT 
 Himself, udJressctl to rhokus, Fr. '2A~'2i), Schnoiilewin : — 
 
 'EoT^Aa yuf) iftov StAovro^, avroc ovk idt^aro. 
 nepilSaXdv (5' uypav, uyaffT^elg ovk dvea-Karrev fxey9 
 AiKTi'try^ \H'uoif 1?' uftaprr/ Kai t^pevuv airo(T<f^a?ieif 
 
 • Aristides, Uein t)v Uapa^ifeyftaio^y ii, p. 397 ; and Fragm. 29, Sdm..al 
 iM Iambics of Soloo : — 
 
 el y^p ^i^eXov 
 
 *A Toig evavTiocaiv fjvdavev rore^ 
 Avj^it; i5* (i Toiatv drtpoic 6paaai. .... 
 
 directed. The relief which it affoided was complete and imiii^' 
 diate. Xt_eancelled at once all those contracts in which tlie debtcn 
 had borrowed on the security of either his person or of his land : it 
 forbade all future loans or contracU in which the person of thf 
 debtor was i)ledged as security : it deprived the creditor in futurt 
 of all power to imprison, or enslave, or extort work from hi« 
 flebtor, and confined him to an effective judgment at law, author 
 izing the seizure of the property of the latter. It swept off all 
 the numerous mortgage pillars from the landed properties in 
 Attica, and left the land free from all past claims. It liberated^ 
 and restored to their full rights, all those debtors who wenj 
 actually in slavery under previous legal adjudication ; and it even 
 Ijrovided the means — we do not know how — of repurchasing 
 in foreign lands, and bringing back to a renewed life of liberty 
 in Attica, many insolvents who had been sold for ex{K)rtation.» 
 And while Solon forbade every Athenian to pledge or sell hia 
 ow n person into slavery, he took a step fiirther in the same direc- 
 tion, by forbidding him to pledge or sell his son, his daughter, 
 or an unmarried sister under his tutelage, — excepting only the 
 case in which either of the latter might be detected in unchastity.« 
 
 ' See the valaahlc fmirment of his Limbics, presened by Plutarch an4 
 Aristides, the expression of which is rendered more emphatic by the appeal 
 to the persomil Earth, :\s having passed by his measures from slarery int« 
 freedam (compare Plato, Legg. v, pp. 740-741): 
 
 IvpuaprvpoiTj ravf uv tv dUrf Kpovov 
 Mt/tt/p, fieyioTT) daifinvuv 'OXv/nricjv, 
 'Apiara, Fr) pt?.aiva, r^f l:ycj noTe 
 'Opov( uveiXov iroX?.axJj neTr^yorac, 
 Up6(r&ev de Sovlevovaa, vvv k7i,ev&epa. 
 IloAAot'f J' 'Ai^f/vaf, narpid* elg ^euKTirov 
 ^Avi/yayov 77pa^tvTaCi u/iXov EKdiKi^^ 
 'A.?,?jv diKaicjg • rov^ 6* uvayKah/g (im 
 XpTjOfidv Xeyovra^, y^.uaaav ovket 'Arri«i^ 
 'Ifvrar, (ij- uv TroXXaxv nTiavu/ie^'ov^' 
 Toijc (5' iv&ud' ai)Tov SovTiiriv ueiKea 
 'ExovTaCf t)6t} deanora^ Tpofitvuivov^^ 
 
 tiao Plutarch, Solon, c. 15. 
 
 •Ptatarch, Solon, c. 23 : compare c. 13. The statement in Sextus Em- 
 pMcos (Pyrrhon. Hypot. iii. 24. 211), that Solon enacted a law permitting 
 fcthers to kill (^ovevftv) their cinldren, cannot be true, and must be topied 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 A 
 
100 
 
 insioKV OF GKi:i:cE. 
 
 Whether this last onliinance was contemporaneous with the seisach 
 Iheia, or followi.Mi a-; one of his subsequent reforms, seems doubtful 
 By this extensivr inoa^nre the poor debtors, — the thrtes, 
 email tenants, and proprietors, — together with their families, tvere 
 rescu<'d from sutFeriu;^ and j)eril. lint these wer^ not the only 
 d'^litors in the state: the creditors and landlords of the exoner- 
 ated Ihetes were doubtless in their turn debtors to others, and 
 mere less able to discharge their obligations in conse<pien(e of 
 tlie loss inflicted upon them by the seisachtheia. It was to 
 a-!^ist these wealthier debtors, whose bodies wt're in no dan"-er, — 
 yet without exonerating them entirely, — that Solon re sorted to 
 the additional ex[)edient of debasing the money standard ; he 
 lowered the standard of the drachma in. a proportion soniethint^ 
 more than twenty-tive per cent., so that one hundred drachmas 
 of the new standard (ontained no more silver than seventv-thiee 
 ot the old, or one hundred of tlie old were etpiivalent to one 
 hundnMl and thirty-eight of th«' new. liy tliis chan<^e, the credi- 
 tor^ of tlu'se more substantial debtors were obliged to submit to a 
 loss, while the debtors a(({uired an exemption, to the extent of 
 about twenty-seven ptr cent.' 
 
 from some untrustworthv authority : compart' Dionys. Hal. A. 11. ii, 26, 
 where he contrasts the prodigious extent of the putria jwkstas among the 
 •arly Romans, with the restrictions whicli all the Greek legislators alike,— 
 Solon, Pittakus, Charomhis, — either found or introduced : he says, however, 
 that the Athenian father \\ as permitted to disinherit legitimate male children, 
 i^'hich does not seem to he correct. 
 
 Meier (I)er Attisehe IVo/ess, iii. 2, p. 427) rejects the above-mentioned 
 itatement of Sextus Kmfiiricus, and farther contends that the exj)08ure of 
 new-horn infants was not only rare, hut discountenanced as well by law aa 
 by opinion ; the evidence in the Latin comedies to the contrary, he con.sideri 
 as manifestations of Koman, and not of Athenian, manners. In this latter 
 0|>inion I do not think that he is borne out, and I agree in the statement of 
 Schomunn (Ant. J. P. fir8?c. sect. 82), that the practice and feeling of Athens 
 as well as of (Jreece generally, left it to the discretion of the father whether 
 He would consent, or refusi', to bring up a new-born child. 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, c. 15. See the full exposition given of this debasement 
 •f the coinage, in Boeckh's Metrologie, ch. ix, p. 115, 
 
 M. Boeckh thinks (ch. >.v, s. 2) that Solon not only debased the coin, but 
 also altered the weights and measures. I dissent from his opinion on thii 
 latter point, and have given my reasons for so doing, in a review of his val 
 vable treatise in the Classical Museum, No. 1. 
 
 SEISAClITIiElA, OR RELIEF-LAW. 
 
 101 
 
 Lastly, Solon decreed that all those who had been coudenmed 
 D) the^arehons to atimy (civil disfranchisement) should be restored 
 to their full privileges of citizens, — excepting, however, from 
 this indulgence those who had been condemned by the ephetaB,or 
 by the areopagus, or by the phylo-basileis (the four kings of the 
 tribes), after trial in the prytaneium, on charges either of murder 
 or treason.! So wholesale a measure of amnesty affords strong 
 giounds for believing that the previous judgments of the archona 
 liad been intolerably harsh ; and it is to be recollected that tht 
 Dnikonian ordinances were then in force. 
 
 Such were the measures of relief with which Solon met the 
 dangerous discontent then prevalent. That the wealthy men and 
 leaders of the people, whose insolence and iniquity he has him 
 self so sharply denounced in his poems, and whose views in nom- 
 inating him he had greatly disappointed,^ should have detested 
 propositions which robbed them without compensation of so many 
 of their legal rites, it is easy to imagine. But the statement of 
 Plutarch, that the poor emancipated debtors were also dissatisfied, 
 from having expected that Solon would not only remit their 
 debts, but also redivide the soil of Attica, seems utterly incredi- 
 ble ; nor is it confirmed by any passage now remaining of the 
 Solonian poems.^ Plutarch conceives the poor debtors as having 
 in their minds the comj)arison with Lykurgus, and the equality 
 of property at Sparta, wliich, as I have already endeavored to 
 show,'^ is a fiction ; and even had it been true, as matter of history 
 long past and antiquated, would not have been likely to work 
 upon the minds of the multitude of Attica in the forcible way 
 that the biographer supposes. The seisachtheia must have ex- 
 asperated the feelings and dimininished the fortunes of many 
 persons ; but it gave to the large body of thetes and small pro- 
 prietors all that they could possibly have hoped. And we are 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, c. 19. In the general restoration of exile* throughoat 
 the Greek cities, proclaimed first by order of Alexander the Great, after- 
 Ira rds by Polysperchon, exception is made of men exiled for sacrilege 01 
 homicide (Diodor. xvii, 109; xviii, 8-46 j. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, c. 15. ovde fiaXaKuc, oiS^ irreiKuv Toi( dwofuvoif oift 
 r^ Ti6ovrjv rCiv ekofievuv t&ero Toi>( v6/iovCy etc. 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, c. 16. 
 
 * See above vol ii, part ii, ch. fi 
 
 1 
 
 " "'^'''''"f j 
 
102 
 
 HISrORY OF CKKKCK. 
 
 lolil tliat after a sliorf interval it became eminently aeceptab.e iri 
 Ihe general publir mind, and procured for Solon a great inereai>6 
 of popularity, — all ranks eoncnrring in a eonimon sacrifice of 
 thanksgiving and harmony.' One inrident there was wh.'ch oc- 
 casioned Ml outery of indignation. Tluvc rich friends of Solon, 
 all men of great firmly in the staf<-, and bearing nanirs which 
 will h.rcafter nappcjir in this history ;ls bonir by their descend- 
 ants, — Konon, KhMnias J»hI ni{)ponikns, — bavin;; obtained 
 from Solon some [)revions hint of his designs, prolnr,! by it, 
 first, to b.MTow nion<-v, and next, to make purcluiM-^ of lands ; 
 and (his selti>h breuvh of conliihrice would have disgraced Sohui 
 himself, had it not be.ri founii that In; was jiersonallv a gnat 
 loser, having lent money to the extent of five talenls. W(^ 
 fthouhi have been glad to h'arn what authority IMntarch had f( i 
 this anecdot*', which couhl hardly have been re...rd<'d in S(,!oij'>t 
 own poems.'^ 
 
 In regard to the whole measure of the m i achtheia, inde.d, 
 though the [Mxrns ot" Solon were open to everv om". ancient 
 authors ga\ e dilferent >tatements, both of its purjx.n and of its 
 extent. Most of tin nt con-trued it as having cancelled indis- 
 criminately all money contracts; while Andioti«»n and others, 
 thought that it tb'd nothing more than lower the rate of interest 
 and depreciate the currency to the extent of twenty-sev.-n pei 
 cent., leaving the letter of the contracts unchanged.' How An- 
 drotion came to maintain such an o|)inion w.- cannot ea-ily 
 understauii, tor the fragments now ninaining tVom S(.Ion >rem 
 distinctly to refute it, though, on the other hand, thev do not «'0 
 so fai' as to substantiate the full extent of the uj»j.o.>ite view 
 entertained by many writers, — that all mom-y contra, ts indis- 
 criminately were re>cinde<i -' against which there is also a 
 
 » Tlio anc. .lofi« i-. au'iun noti.o,!. hut without ^poriHration of tho tiames of 
 lh« friends, in Autarch, Heipuh. Ciorcnd. rraci(.. p. 807. 
 
 'Flutart-h, Solon, c. 15. Tho .statenuni of I)iony>ius of Hal., in rt'j^ard 
 Id the ^H^arinp of the soisachlhcia, is in the main aciurate,— r^fc^i' nOian, 
 ffjifna aufvrji^ roe ,: - . • r ( v. 65). — ro the dchtors who were liable on the 
 ■•rarity of their tmdies and their ha^ds, and who wore chiefly jXHyrT^not to 
 at/ dehtors. 
 
 HerakhMdcs Pontic (Ih/A^r. c. 1) and Die Chrysostom (Or. zxxi, p. 331) 
 express themselves loosely. 
 
 SElSAClirilKIA, OU i:i:LlKl- LAW 
 
 103 
 
 Girther reason, that, if the fact had been -o, Solon could havfl 
 had no motive to debase the money standard. Such deba>cmenl 
 ..uppoc-es that there nmst have been some <h btors, at least, who.-vO 
 contracts remained valid, and whom, nevertheless, he desired 
 partially to assist. His poems dislim-tly mention three things: 
 1. The removid of the mortgage pillars. 2. The eidranclii>e- 
 nient of the land. 3. The ju-otection, Iil)eration, and restoration 
 of ihu persons of endangered or enslavi'd debtors. All these 
 expressions point distinctly to the thete- and .-mall proprietors, 
 whose suiferings and peril were the nio.-l urgent, and whose case 
 rc({uired a remedy immediate as well as complete: we find that 
 his rei)udiation «»f debts was carried far enough to exonerate 
 tliem, Init no farther. 
 
 It seems to have been the respect entertained for the cliaractcr 
 of Solon which partly occiisioned thee various misconceptions 
 of his ordinances for the relief of debtors : Androtion in ancient, 
 and some eminent critics in modern times, aie anxious to make 
 out that he gave relief without loss or injustice to any one. But 
 this opinion is altogether inadmissible: the loss to creditors, by 
 the wholesale abrogation of mnnt-rous j)reexisting contracts, and 
 i)y the partial dei)reciation of the coin, is a fact not to be dis- 
 «niise<l. The seisachtheia of Solon, unjust so far as it rescinded 
 previous agreements, but highly salutary in il.> conse<piences, is 
 to be vindicated by showing that in no other way could the l>ondd 
 
 Both Wuchsmuth (Hell Alterth. v. i, p. 249) and K. F. Hermann ((Jr. 
 St;'at.s A her. c s. lOG) quote the heliastic oath, and its cnerwetie protest 
 a-ainst rci)udiation, as evidence of the heaiirj^- of tlie Soloiii-oi Mi>a(litheia. 
 Hut that oath is referal.h' only to a later period ; it cannot he jiTiKluced in 
 proof of any matter .'ipplieahie to ttie time of Solon; thtr mere mention of 
 the senate of Five Hnndnd in it, shows that it Udonirs to times suh.sccjuen*. 
 lo the Kh'i.-thenean revolution. Nor does the pa.ssa^e from J'lato ( Le^j;. iii 
 
 p t>S4) apply to the ease. 
 
 lioih Waehsmuth and Hermann appear to me to narrow too much the 
 eittenl of Solon's measure in reference to the clearing of debtors. But on 
 the other hand, they cnlar^'e the effect of his mea.sures in another way, with- 
 out any sufficient evidence, — they think tlnit he raised the mllein tenants into 
 free jrrQjirietars. Of this I see no proof, and think it improbable. A lar^nj 
 proportion of the small dehtors whom Solon exon<rated were prohahl}- fre« 
 proprietors before ; the existence of the upoi, or mortgage pillars, upon tijt.ii 
 land proves this. 
 
■'.J 1 1 
 
 104 
 
 HISTORY OF ORKrrT'.. 
 
 of goremmpnt hiwo hoou hoh\ tojrpthpr, or tlio misprv of th# 
 multitiulo allpviafod. Wv '.wo to .on^jdi.r, fir^t, flio rzmit nf»^ 
 P<mal (Turlty of tlws*' prrcxi^tinir oontrart^. wliirli corKlorniuMl 
 the \hm\\ (»f tlio tVrf .Irhfor ari«l ]\\< fainilv to >lav«rv ; nrxf, the 
 profonml <lrfrsfMf i<»u < rrji(«'«l l<v snrli a "^vsU-rn in tin- lariTP ina<^ 
 of tin' iMx.r, a<:aiii<t I) )th tlio jinl«rf's ami tlir cnMlitor^ I v \vl»(»ta 
 it lia«l Imm'h I'nfonN'.l, whifh nMi<l<'nM! their frtdin^^^s nrmianair«'al)l»% 
 so scxm aj« th<^y r.nnr ton^etluM- uiuhn- tlw sentirnont nf a coininoii 
 daiijX'T, and vvitlith«> dcterniination to insun> t<» racli (^hrr miifDal 
 pn)t<M-tion. Moreover, the law whieh vests a rreditor with 
 [»o\ver o\i\- \\\r person of his del»tor, <o as to eonv.-rt hitn into a 
 plav.\ i- likely to «ii\e rise to a ela^s of Ioan<, uhicli inspire 
 notliini: hut ahhorrenoe, — money lent with tin- for«'kn<.\\ JcdLMi 
 that the horrowrr will ho intahh' to n*pav it, hut also in thr con- 
 vieti<»n that th«' \ahje of his p.T-on a- a <lave will inakr 'jood 
 the Ions; tlin^ rodnrii ir him to a eondition of r\tioin<' misery, 
 for thf piiriH. r -i»m«tiines of a«in^randizini:, sometimes (»t rnrieh- 
 in-:, thr hrider. Now the foundation orj whieh the n'spect for 
 eonfrai'ts rests, under a ^rood law of drhtor and rirditor, is ilie> 
 very reverse of this ; it rests on tin- tirm eonvietion that su<'h 
 eontraets an* advantageous to !)oth parti(v< a^ a class, and that to 
 break up the eontitleiiee essential to their existen<-e would pro- 
 duer' extensive mis<'hief throuijhout all society. The man whose 
 reverence for the ohlio^ation of a contract i< now the mo<t pro- 
 found, would have ent<'rtaine«| a very dillerent sentinient if he 
 ha»l witnesse«i the «lealini«rs ot" lender and horrower at Atlu'us, 
 nnd<M- the old ante-Solonian law. Tlic olitrarchv lia<l trieil their 
 best to enforce this law of dehtor and «'reditor. with it< disastrous 
 series of contracts, and the only reason why thev consented to 
 invoke the aid of Soloti, was hecau-e ilu^v had lo<t the power 
 of cnforoinjif it any lonorer, in i-onseijuence ot the newly awaken- 
 ed courage and eomhination of the people. That which they 
 could not do for themselves, Solon could not have done for them, 
 even had he been willin*;; nor had he in his p(.ssession th6 
 means either of exemptini; or compensating those creditors, who, 
 separately taken, were ,,p<.n u} no reproach ; indeed, in following 
 his pnv^eedings, we see jdaiidy that he thought compensation due, 
 not to the creditors, l»ut to the past sufferings of the enslaved 
 debtors, since he redeemed several of them from foreign ca[^ 
 
 SEISACnTHEIA, OH REUKF-LAVV. 
 
 105 
 
 livity, and brought them back to their home. It is certain that 
 no meiisure, simply and exclusively prospective, would have 
 riulhced for the emergency : there was an absolute necessity for 
 overruling all that class of preexisting rights whieh had pro- 
 duced so violent a social fever. While therefore, to this extent, 
 the seisachtheia caimot be acquitted of injustice, we may confi- 
 dently ainrni that the injustic*: inlllcted was an indispensablo 
 price, paid for the maintenance of the jMiue of society, and for 
 the (irjal abrogation of a disastrous system as regarded inscdvents.l 
 And the feeling as well tis the legislation universal in the mcMlern 
 Kuropean world, by interdicting beforehand all contracts for 
 fuelling a man's person or that of his children into slavery, g<K«8 
 far to sanction practically the Solonian repudiation. 
 
 One thing is never to be forgotten in regard to this measure, 
 combined with the concurrent amendments introduced by Solon 
 in the law, — it settled fiiuilly the (pn'stion to which it referred. 
 Never again do we hear of the law of (hhtoi- and creditor Jia 
 disturbing Athenian trampiillity. TIm* general .sentiment which 
 grew up at Athens, uiwhM- flu' Solonian money-law, and inMler 
 the democrat ical government, wjus one of high resj>ect for the 
 Hanctity of contracts. Not oidy was there n(;ver any demand in 
 h<' Athenian democracy for new tablf^s or a depr<'ciatiun of the 
 money standard, btit a formal abnegation of any such ]>rojects 
 was inserted in tin' solemn oath taken anmially by the numerous 
 diakasts, who formed the popular jndleial Ixxly, called heliaa, 
 or the heliaslic jurors, — the same oath wl/uh jdedged them to 
 
 ' That which Sohm <li<l for the Allu'iiiati ]»<•(, pie in ic^^anl to il< lits, !<* l.-r^s 
 than what wils promised to the Hornai; }»lel>^ (at tin' time of its >r(»-s>i(m to 
 the Moiis Saeer in 4!»1 n e.) hy Mcneniiis A^^rippa, the envoy of the senate, 
 to appease them, hut which does not seem to have f»een ever r<a//»x/ (Dionys. 
 ilal. vi, 8.'t). He j)i()mised an ahro^ration of all ilie (lebts of del)tors unahle 
 to pay, without exception, — if the lun;,Mia^e of Dionysiu.s i.s to he trusted, 
 which probably it cannot be. 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall justly observes rcs|»eetin^ Solon, " lie must be conaidered 
 as nn arbitrator, to whom all the parties interested .submitted their clainui, 
 with the avowed intent that they should be decided by him, not upon th« 
 footing of legal right, but according to his own view of the public interest. 
 It wa.s in this light that he himself regarded his otliee, and he appoan to 
 have discharged it faithfully and discreetly." (History of Greece, eh. xi. vol 
 ll,p.42) 
 
106 
 
 Hf.SIOUY OF GRK1':CK 
 
 Uphold tin* ticiiKM'raiical constitution, also bound them to repu- 
 diate all proposals eiiiuT for an al)ro;zation of delits or for a re- 
 division of tin- lands.' Tlu're can be little doubt that under the 
 Solonian law, which « nal»h'd tlic creditor to sci/e the jiroperty of 
 hi-< debtor, but "lavc h'mi no pow«'r over the jn-rson, liic system 
 it inonev-lendin'T a.->>unied a more l)enrlieial character: the old 
 noxious contracts, nie e -nare- tor the liberty of a }uH>r ireemnn 
 Anil his children, disa{>i)eared, and loans of money took their 
 place, founded on the j>roperty and prospective earninirs of the 
 debtor, which were in the main usefid to both parties, and there- 
 fore maintained their place in the moral sentiment of the [uiblic. 
 And th(.u^h Solon had found himself compelled to rescind all the 
 inortjia^es on land subsisting in his time, we see money freely 
 li'Ut upon this >ame security, throni::hout the historical times of 
 
 ' I)5mo8tlien. cont. Timokmt. p. 746. ovii tuv xpfwv rutv ISluv aTroxoTdf, 
 t^'i^t }^r ('iva^nnuut' T!,r \\^r/iatun\ ov& oiKHJf ( ^'//^zoiyiaf ) : conipuro Dio 
 Chrysosioin, (hat. xxxi, ]>. :^'i2, who also ilwi-Ils upon tlio anxiotv of various 
 Greriaii «itios to fix u cur-e upon all pro;u)-.uuuiN lor \.'i >.n' a-oKo-f/ and } ',( 
 ttt(i(%i(TffK;. Wliat is nut lt>s rcmarkal>li' is. that Dio seems not to !>c aware 
 of .mv oMc wfll-auth. ii:i 'itetl • a-r i:i (Jr.. ian liistorv. in which a redivision 
 of huul-i lia.l ever a<tu:il \ taken yl-Acc ~- b fAt/d' <''?u<; 'tn^iev t'l iroTt (Tvvt,h/ 
 
 For the law of deltti>r and ere(htor, a> it stood durin^r the times of the 
 Oraloi'S at Atlien>, mi' Ueraldiis. Aniniadv ad Salnia>iuin, pp. 174-'J8r.; 
 Miier nnd S'luiniann. Dir Attischr Pn)/e><, I>. iii. < 2. p. 4«>7. stytj. (tliouijh 
 J doubt the (h>timMion whieh ihev there <ha\v between i,.*."^- and (5ai'f<oe); 
 I !.i:ner, IVozess nnd Kia.zen, h. ii. ahseh. 11, p{». 'UO, 'M\\. 
 
 There was one exeeptii nal ease, in whieh the Attie law always eontinued 
 to the ereditor that power over the person «>f the insolvent debtor whieh all 
 erithiors had pos.sesse<l i)rii;inally, — it nas when the ereditor had lent 
 i.ioiHV lor the express purpose of ransomin*:^ the debtor from eaptivity 
 'Heinosthen. tont. Nikosir. p. 1249), — analogous to the actio depcnsi in 
 il .>;d Koman law. 
 
 Any litizen who owed! money to the public treasury, and whose debt 
 became overdue, was deprived for the time of all civfl rightij until he had 
 cleared it off. 
 
 Diodonw (i, 79) gives iis an alleged law of the Egyptian king Bocchoris, 
 releasing the persons of debtors and rendering their properties only liable, 
 whien is affirmtd to have served as an example for Solon to copy. If we caa 
 trust this historian, lawgivers in other part^ of Greece still retained the ol4 
 severe law enslaving the debtor's person : rompare a passage in Isokrat^ 
 lOrat. xiv. Plataicus, p. 305; p 414, BeH 
 
 DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. 107 
 
 Athens, and the evidentiaiy mortgage pillars remaining ever 
 afler undisturbed. 
 
 In the sentiment of an early society, as in the old Roman law, 
 II distinction is commonly made between the principal and the 
 interest of a loan, though the creditors have sought to blend them 
 indissolubly together. If the borrower cannot fulfil his promise 
 to repay the principal, the public will regard him as having 
 committed a wrong which he must make good by his person; but 
 there is not the sjame unanimity as to his promise to pay interest: 
 on the contrary, the very exaction of interest will be regarded 
 by many in the same light in which the English law considers 
 usurious interest, as tainting the whole transaction. But in the 
 modern mind, principal, and interest within a limited rate, have 
 so grown together, that we hardly understand how it can ever 
 have been pronounced unworthy of an honorable citizen to lend 
 money on interest ; yet such is the declared opinion of Aristotle, 
 and other superior men of anti(juity ; while the Roman Cato, 
 the censor, went so far as to denounce the practice as a 
 heinous crime." It was comprehended by them among the 
 worst of the tricks of trade, — and they held that all trade, or 
 prolit derived from interchange, was unnatural, as being made 
 by one man at the exjiense of another: such pursuits, therefore, 
 could not be commended, though they might be tolerated to a 
 •certain extent as matrer of necessity, but they belonged essen- 
 tially to an inferior order of citizens.-^ What is remarkable in 
 
 ' Ari^tot. Polit. i, 4, 2i] : < aio ap. Ciecro. de Ollie. ii, 25. Plato, in lug 
 Treatise do Lcgg. (v, p. 742) forhids all lending on interest: indeed, lie for- 
 bids any private eiti/en to possess lither gold or silver. 
 
 To illustrate the marked dilferenee made in the eaily Roman law, hetween 
 the elaim for the principal an»l that for the interest, I in.sert in an Appendix, 
 at the end of this chapter, the exjilanation given by M. von Savigiiy, of the 
 treatment of the nexi and addieti. — eonneeted a.s it is by analogy with the 
 Solonian seisachtheia. 
 
 '^ Aristot. Polit. i, 4, 23. Tt/g St fieTa37,T]TLKfig feyopiivric SiKaluc (o* 
 yap Kara ^vaiv^ <i/./.' utt" u/,a^Auv lartu), ev^oyurara fiiffeirat ij o^oXoar*. 
 ukt'ij etc. Compare Ethic. Nikom. iv, 1. 
 Plutarch borrows from Aristotle the quibble derived from the word ro/cof 
 Jie Greek expression for interest), which has given birth to the well-known 
 iiictnm of Aristotle, — that money being naturally barren, to extract offspring 
 finom it must necessarily be contrary to nature ( see Plutarch, De Vit Mr. Al 
 
106 
 
 Hl&lORY OF GREECE. 
 
 J I 
 
 Greece is, that the antipathy of a verj early state of societj 
 against traders and money-lenders lasted longer among the phi- 
 losophers than among the mass of the people, — it harmonized 
 more with the social idfal of the former, than with the practical 
 instincts of the latter. 
 
 In a rude condition, such as that of the ancient Germans de- 
 t^cribed by Tacitus, loins orj intere>t are unknown : habitually care- 
 k>s of the future, tin. Germans were gratified botli in giving and 
 receiving presents, but without any idea that they thereby either 
 in4)osed or contracted an obligation.' To a people in this state 
 of feeling, a loan <>n interest presents the re{>ulsive idea of mak- 
 ing profit out of tht distress of the borrower; moreover, it is 
 worthy of remark, tliat the first borrowers must have been for 
 the most part in«'n driven to this necessity by the pressure of 
 want, and contracting debt as a desperate resource, without any 
 fair prospect of ability to repay : debt and famine run together, 
 in the mind of the ])oet IIesiod.2 The borrower is, in this un- 
 
 • Tacit. Germ. 26. ' Fci'mis ajritare et in usuras extendorc, i^notum '• 
 ideoque magia servatur luarn si vetituin esset," (o. 21.) " Ciuudent niuiier 
 ibus : sed nee data iinpiiUuit, hoc acceptts obli;^amur." 
 
 ' llet>iud, Opp. l>i. 647, 404. hnv'/.tjaL x^na re irpo<l>vyeh', kuc /Afidv 
 uTtfjrr}/. Some good observations on this suliject are to be found in tho 
 excellent treatise of M. Turgot, written in 1763, '' Mc'moire sur Ics Preta 
 d'Argent:" — 
 
 "Les causes (jui avoient autrefois rendu odieux le pret i\ inte'ret, ont eess^ 
 d'agir avec tant de force. . . . Dc toutc< cos circonstanccs rounies, il est result^ 
 que les emprunts fails par lo j)auvro j)our subsister nc sont plus qu'un objet 
 k peine son^iMo dans la •jomnio totalo tl'emprunts : (jue la plus grande partir 
 des prets .<o font ;» Thomme riche, ou du moins a rhonime indu-strieux, (jui 
 espi're se procurer de grinds profits j)ar Teniploi de I'argent qu'il empruntc. 
 
 . . .Les preteurs sur gage a gros interet, les seals qui i)retent veritiiblement 
 an pauvre pour ses be>oins joumaliers et non pour le mettre en etat de 
 gagner, ne font point lo mome mal (juc les anciens usuriers qui conduisoient 
 par degro's .t la misere et i Tesclavage les pauvres citoyens auxquels ils 
 avoient procure des secours funestes . . . ,Le creancicrqui pouvait rdduire son 
 dehiteur en esclavage y trou\ ait un profit : c'e'toit un esclave qu'il acquerair : 
 niAis aujourd'hui le cre'ancicr salt qu'en privant son debiteur de la liberie', il 
 ny gagnera autre chose que d'etre oblige' de le nourrir en prison : aussi ne 
 8'avise-t-on pas de faire contracter a un homme qui n'a rien, et qui est reduit 
 k emprunter pour vivre,. des engageniens qui emportent la contrainte par 
 corps. La seule sftrete vraimein solide eontrc Thomme pauvre est le g&ge : 
 d ["homme pauvre s'estime heurcux de trouver un secours pour le momenl 
 
 LOANS ON INTEREST. 
 
 109 
 
 happy state, rather a distressed man soliciting aid, than a solvent 
 man capable of making and fulhlling a contract ; and if he can- 
 not find a friend to niiike him a free gift in the former character, 
 he will not, under the latter character, obtain a loan from a 
 stranger, except by the promise of exorbitant interest,^ and by the 
 fullest eventual power over his j)erson which he is in a condition 
 to grant. In process of time a new class of borrowers rise up, 
 
 tans autre danger que de perdre cc pigc. Aussi le peuple a-t-il plfttot de ."a 
 reocnnoissance pour ces petits usuriers qui le sccourcnt dans son besuin, 
 quoi([u'ils lui vendent asse/ cher ce secours." (Menioire sur les I'rets 
 d'Argent, in the collection of CEuvres de Turgot, by l)u[>ont de Nemours, 
 vol. V, sects. XXX, xxxi, pp. 326, .$27, 329, written in 1763.) 
 
 * " In Bengal (observes Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, b. i, ch. 9, p 
 143, cd. 1812) money is freijuently lent to the farmers at 40, 50, and 60 per 
 cent.. an<l the succeeding crop is mortgaged for the payment." 
 
 liespecting this commerce at Florence in the Middle Ages, M. Depping 
 observes : '* II sembliiit (jue fesprit comnurcial flit inne' chez les Florentins : 
 dej.i aux 12u»c et 13«"e sieclcs, on les voit tenir des banques et preter de 
 Targent aux princes. lis ouvrinnl partout des niaisons de pret, marchercnt 
 de |)air avec les I..ombards, ot, il faut le dire, ils furent souvent maudits, 
 comme ceux-ci, par leurs debiteurs, a cause de lour rapaeite'. Vingt pour 
 cent par an etait le taux ordinaire des preteurs Florentins : et il n'etait j)U!» 
 rare qu'ils en prissent trentc et quarante." Depping, Ilistoirc du Commercw 
 cntre le Levant et I'Kurope, vol. i, p. 235. 
 
 Boeckh (Public Economy of Athens, book i, ch. 22) gives from 12 to \d 
 per cent, per annum as the common rate of interest at Athens in the time of 
 the orators. 
 
 The valuable Inscription (No. 1845. in his Corpus Inscr. Pars viii, p. 23 
 sect. 3) proves, that at Korkyra a rate of 2 per cent, per month, or 24 pei 
 cent, per annum, might l>c obtained from perfectly solvent and responsible bor 
 rowers. For this is a decree of the Korkyra'an government, pre.scribing wbal 
 shall be done with a sum of money given to the state for the Dionysiac fes- 
 tivals, — placing that money under the care of certain men of property and 
 character, and directing them to lend it out exactly at 2 per cent, per monlh, 
 neither mare nor less, until a given sum shall be accumulated. This Inscrip 
 tion dates about the third or second century b. c., according to Boeckh s 
 conjecture. 
 
 The Orchomenian Inscription, No. 1569, to which Boeckh refers in the 
 pissage above alluded to, is unfortunately defective in the words determining 
 the rate of interest payable to P^nbulus : but there is another, the Thera-an 
 Inscription (No. 2446), containing the Testament of Epikteta, wherein me 
 annual sum payable in lieu of a principal sum bequeathed, is ralculated a 7 
 per cent ; a rate which Boeckh justly regards as moderate jonnideret m 
 reference to ancient Greece. 
 
!10 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 who demand money for temporar/ convenience or profit, but \vitli 
 full prospect of repayment, — a relation of lender and borrower 
 quite different from that of the earlier period, when it presented 
 itself in the repul>ive form of misery on the one side, set a^^ainst 
 ihf prospect of vijvy large profit on the other. If the Germana 
 of the time of Tacitus had looked to the condition of the poor 
 debtors in Gaul, reduced to servitude under a rich creditor, and 
 Bwelling by hundreds the crowd of his attendants, tiiey would not 
 Lave been disposed to regret their own ignorance of the practice 
 of money-Iending.i How much the interest of money was then 
 regarded as an undue profit extorted from distress, is i)owerfully 
 
 ' Ca >ar, B. G. i, 4, rcsi)«otin;; the Gallic chiefs luul plebs: " Die coiistitutd 
 lausiB dicflonis. Orfretorix ad jutlitium oinneni suam fuinihain, ad hoininum 
 nillia dc(»iii, undique eo(;;it: ct ornnes cHentcs, o/>*//y/^AS(}iie suos, quorum 
 magnum iiumerum haheluu, eodem couduxit : j.er cos, iic caussam diccret, 
 »e eripuit." Ibid, vi, 13: '^ rieriiiue, cum aut are ulicho, aut ina<,Miitudiae 
 tributorum, aut injuria poteiuiorum, premuiitur, sese iu servitutem dicant 
 nohilibus. In lies eadem omnia sunt jura, quui dominis in servos." The 
 WiMihliy Komans cultivate] their large possessions ])artly by the hands of 
 iitfjiid^red debtors, in the time of Columella (i, 3, 14) : *■ More prajpotentiura, 
 
 qui f)0ssident fines gentium, quos aut oecujmtos nexu civium, aut ergas- 
 
 fuli>. tenent." 
 
 Aeeordin*,' to the Teutonic codes also, drawn up several centuries subse- 
 qu 'Uily to Tacitus, it seems that the insolvent debt4)r falls under the power 
 of his creditor and is subject to personal fitters and chastisement (Grimm, 
 l>jutschc Kechts Alterthumcr, pp. 612-CI5): both he and Von Savigny 
 fcsimilate it to the terrible process of pcr>oual execution and addiction in 
 the old law of Home, a^Min^t the iTisolvent debtor on loan. King Alfred 
 exhorts the creditor to leuisy (Laws of King Alfrcd, Thorpe, Ancient Laws 
 of Kn<;land, vol. i, p. :>;{, law .'i:)) 
 
 A striking: evidence of the alteration of the character and circumstances 
 of debtors between the ::^, of Solon and that of IMutarch, is atlorded by 
 the treatise of the latter, " De V'itando yKre Alieno, ' wherein he sets forth 
 in the most vchenui.t niiimcr the miserable consequences of tretting into 
 debt. '• T/ie }H)or;' he says, '^/o w>t n-t into (lit, for no one iri/I In.d them money 
 {Tui<: yup unopott; ov 6apt,^ovaiv uAAu fiui/uutioir tvmjpmv riva iavroi^ 
 UTacr&ai <.al fiapTvpa didum ha, .hJaiur;ji' uuoi\ 6n exet mareiea^a.) : the 
 borrowers are men who ha- e >till >oine property and some security to otler 
 bat who wish to keep up a rate of expenditure beyond what they can aflord 
 •Dd become utterly ruined by contracting debts." (Plut. pp. 827, 830.) This 
 •hows how intimately the multiplication of poor debtors was connected with 
 the liability of their persons to enslavement Compare Plutarch, De Cupi 
 ilBe Divitiarum, c 2, p. 52;J. 
 
 LOANli ON INTEREST 
 
 111 
 
 dlust rated by the old Jewish law ; the Jew being permitted to 
 take interest from tbreigners (whom the lawgiver did not think 
 himself obliged to protect), but not from his own countrymen J 
 
 ' Levitic. 25: 35-3«i j Deuteron. 23: 20. This enactment seems sufficiently 
 inteIli!:,Mble; yet M. Salvador (Ilistoire des In.vtitutions de Moise, liv. iii. ( h. 
 6) j'uzzles himself much to assi;,rn to it some far-siyhted commercial pur- 
 pose. " Unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury, but unto a strati-cr 
 thou mayst lend uf)on usury r'' — it is of more injportance to remark tluil 
 the word here translattnl uttur^ jeally means any iutertst for money, j^rcat k t 
 small; — see the opinion of the Sanhedrim of seventy Jewish doctor,s 
 assembled at Paris iu 180". cited in M. Salvador's work, /. c. 
 
 The Mosaic law, therefore, (as between Jew and Jew, or even as between 
 Jew and the /if ro^xof, or resident s^ram/e;-, distinjruished from the foreif/nn.) 
 Went ;i.s far as the Koran in prohibiting,' all taking of interest. That its 
 enactments were not mm h observed, any more than those of the Koran, we 
 have one proof at least in the proceeding of Nehemiah at the building,' of 
 the second temple, — which presents so curious a parallel in many respects 
 to the Solonian seisachtheia, that I transcribe the account of it from Prideaux, 
 Connection of Sacred and I'rofanc History, part i, b. 6, p. 290: — 
 
 '' llie burden which the peojde underwent in the carrying on of this work, 
 ajid the incessant labor which they were enforced to undergo to bring it to so 
 
 speedy a conclusion, beinjj: very great, care was Uikeu to relieve them 
 
 from a much greater burden, the oppression of usurers • which they then in 
 great misery lay under, and had much greater reason to omplain of For 
 the rich, taking advantage of the necessities of the meanei .'^ort, had exacted 
 heavy usury of them, making them pay the ccntesima for all moneys lent 
 them; that is, 1 per cam. for every month, which amounted to 12 per cent. 
 for the whole year ; so that they were forced to mortgage their Iandf», and 
 sell their children info strvitudc. to have wherewith to buy bread for the suj). 
 port of themselves an«l their families; which being a manifest breach of the 
 ^nw of God, given them by Moses ( for that forltids all the race of Israel to take 
 asorv of any of their brethren). Xehemiah, on his hearing hereof, resolved 
 forthwith to rcmcne so great an ini^juity ; in order whereto he called a gen- 
 eral assembly of all the people, where having set forth unto them the nature 
 of the offence, how irreat a breach it was of the divine law, and how heavy 
 an oppression upon their brethren, and how much it might provoke the 
 wrath of God against them, he caused it to be enacted by the general suf- 
 frage of that whole assembly, that all should return to their brethren whaU 
 soever had been exacted of them upon nsury, and also release all the land^ 
 nruyards, oiive-ynrds, and houses^ which had been taken of them upon mortgage 
 on the account hereof" 
 
 The measure of Nehemiah appears thus to have been not merely a 
 •cisachtheia such as that of Solon, but also a TraTitvroKia, or refunding of 
 Interest paid by the debtor in past * me, — analogous to the proceedii^ol 
 
I" V ! 
 
 112 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LOANS ON INTEREST. 
 
 lis 
 
 The Koran follows out this point of view consistently, and pro 
 hibits the taking of interest altogether. In most otiier nations, 
 laws have been made to limit the rate of interest, and at Rome, 
 especially, the legal rate was successively lowered,— though it 
 seems, as might have been exj)ected, that the restrictive ordi- 
 nances were constantly eluded. All such restrictions have been 
 intended for the protection of debtors ; an effect which large ex- 
 perience proves them never to produce, unless it be called pro- 
 tection to render iUt obtaining of money on loan impracticable 
 for the most distressed borrowers. But there was another effect 
 which they did tend to produce, — they softened down the primi- 
 tive antipathy against the j)ractice generally, and confined the 
 odious name of usury to loans lent above the fixed legal rate. 
 
 In this way alone could they operate beneficially, and their ten- 
 dency to counterwork the previous feeling was at that time not 
 unimportant, coinciding as it did witli other tendencies arising 
 out of the industrial ]»rogress of society, which gradually exhib- 
 ited the relation of kuder and borrower in a light more recip- 
 rocally beneficial, and less repugnant to the sympathies of the 
 bystander.' 
 
 At Athens, the more favorable point of view prevailed through- 
 out all the historical times, — the march of industry and com- 
 merce, under the mitigated law which prevailed subsequently 
 to Solon, had been sufficient to bring it about at a very early 
 period, and to supi)ress all public antipathy against lenders at in- 
 terest.-^ We may remark, too, that this more equitable tone of 
 opinion grew up spontaneously, without any legal restriction on 
 
 the Megarians on emancipating themselves from their oligarchy, as recounted 
 above, chapter ix, p. 44. 
 
 * In every law to limit the rate of interest, it is of course imiilied that the 
 law not only ought to fix, but can fix, the maximum rate at which money if 
 to be lent. The tribunes at Rome followed out tliis proposition with perfect 
 consistency : they passed successive laws for the reduction of the rate of inter- 
 est, until at length they made it illegal to take any interest at all : '' Gemeci- 
 um, tribunum plebis, tulisse ad populum, ne foenerari liceret." (Liv. vii, 42. > 
 History shows that the law, though passed, was not carried into execution. 
 
 * Boeckh (Public Econ. of Athens, b. i, eh. 22, p. 128) thinks differently, 
 — in my jodgment, contrary to the evidence: the passages to which ha 
 Nfers, especiallj that of Theophrastus, are not sufficient to sustaiu hif 
 •puiidi, and there are other passages which go far to contradict it. 
 
 the rate of interest, — no such restriction having evei been im- 
 posed, and the rate being expressly declared free by a law ascribed 
 to Solon himself 1 The same may probably be said of the com- 
 munities of Greece generally, — at least there is no information 
 to make us suppose the contrary. But the feeling against lend- 
 ing money at interest remained in the bosoms of the philosophical 
 men long after it had ceased to form a part of tlie practical mo- 
 rality of the citizens, and long after it had ceased to be justi- 
 fied by the appearances of the case as at first it really had been. 
 Plato, Aristotle, Cicero,- and Plutarch, treat the practice as a 
 branch of that commercial and money-getting spirit which they are 
 anxious to discourage ; and one consequence of this was, that they 
 were less disposed to contend strenuously for the inviolability of 
 existing money-contracts. The conservative feeling on this point 
 was stronger among the mass than among the philosophers. Plato 
 even comjdains of it as inconveniently preponderant,^ and as 
 arresting the legislator in all comprehensive projects of reform. 
 I'or the most part, indeed, schemes of cancelling debts and redi 
 viding lands were never thought of except by men of desperate 
 and selfish ambition, who made them stepping-stones to despotic 
 power. Such men were denounced alike by the practical sense 
 of the comnmnity and by the speculative thinkers; but when 
 we turn to the case of the Spartan king Agis the Third, who pro- 
 posed a complete extinction of debts and an equal redi vision of 
 
 ' Lysias cont. Theomnest. A. c. 5, p. 360. 
 
 ^ Cicero, De Officiis, i, 42. 
 
 ^ Plato, LcjjTg. iii, p. 684. wf l-Ttxeipovin 6/) vofio^irr/ Kivetv ruv toiovtup 
 Ti TTuc u-aira, ?Jycjv, firj kiveIv ^u uKtvijray Koi knaparaL yfjQ re uva6aafioi>( 
 elaqyovfitvov kol xP^^^ uTroKorrur, Cxyr' el^ uKopiav Ka^laroadai navra uvSpa^ 
 etc : compare also v, pp. 736-737, where similar feelings are intimated not 
 less emphatically. 
 
 Cicero lays doMm very good principles about the mischief of destroying 
 faith in contracts ; but his admonitions to this effect seem to be accompanied 
 with an impracticable condition : the lawgiver is to take care that debts shall 
 not be contracted to an extent hurtful to the state: " Quamol)rem ne sit sm 
 alienum, quod reipublica noceat, providendum est (quod multis rationibm 
 caveri potest) : non. si fuerit, ut locupletes suum perdant, debitores lucrentur 
 alienum," etc. What the multce rationes were, which Cicero had in hif 
 mind, I do not know : compare his opinion about faneratores^ Offic. i, 4S 
 U, 25. 
 
 VOL. III. 8o&> 
 
 , 
 
114 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 Ili*> landed pi-operty of the state, not with any selfish or personal 
 vit?ws, l)iit upon piirf! ideas of patriotisna, well or ill understood, 
 and for tlie purpose of renovating the lost ascendency of Sparta, 
 — we find Plutjirch' expressing the most unqualified admiration 
 of this young king and his projects, and treating the opposition 
 made to him as originating in no better feelings than meanness 
 and cupidity. Tlie philosophical thinkers on politics conceived — 
 an<I to a great degree justly, as I shall show hereafter — that the 
 conditions of seeurity, in the ancient world, imposed uj)on the citi- 
 zens generally tli«' absolute necesMty of keeping up a militai-y 
 ppirit and willingnr<s to brave ;it all times personal hard..hip and 
 discomfort; so that increase of wealth, on account of the habits 
 of self-indulgence wliich it commonly introduces, wiis rcgjuxled 
 by them v.ith more or less of disfavor. If in their estimation 
 any (Irecian community had become corrupt, they were willing 
 to sanction great inteiference with i»reexisting rights for the pui" 
 pose of bringing it back nearer to their ideal standard; and the 
 real sr^-urity for the maintenance of these rights lay in the con- 
 servative feelings of i:he citizens generally, much more than in 
 the opinions which sujjerior minds imbibe from the philosophers. 
 Tliose conservative feelings were in the subsequent Athenian 
 democracy peculiarly deci)-rooted ; tlie mass of the Athenian 
 peoi>le identified inseparably the maintenance of property, in 
 all its various shapes, with that of their laws ami constitution. 
 And it is a remarkable fact, that though the admiration enter- 
 tained at Athens for Solon, was universal, the principle of his 
 Sw aclitheia, and of his money-dcjireciation, was not only never 
 imiuted, but found tlie strongest tacit reprobation; whereas at 
 K4jme, as well as in most of the kingdoms of modern Europe, we 
 know that one deba-^eonent of the coin succeedeil another,—' the 
 temptation, of thus partially eluding the pressure of financial 
 embarrassments, proved, after one successful trial, too itrong to 
 be resisted, and brought down the coin by successive deprecia- 
 ticQ3 from the full pound of twelve ounces to the standard of half 
 ^- ounce. It is of some importance to take notice of this fact, 
 
 See Plutarch's Life of Agis, especially ch 13, about the bonfire in which 
 the KUpia, or mortgage-deeds, of the creditors were all burnt, in the agora rf 
 Bpaia: compare also the comparison of Agis with Gracchus, c. 2. 
 
 PERMANENCE OF ATHENIAN MONEY-STANDARD. nj 
 
 when we reflect how nmch " Grecian faith " has been degraded 
 by the Roman writers into a byword for duplicity in pecuniary 
 dealings.i The democracy of Athens, - and, indeed, the cities 
 of Greece generally, both oligarchies and democracies, — stands 
 far above the senate of Rome, and far above the modern khi<r. 
 doms of France and England, until comparatively recent timel, 
 in respect of honest dealing with the coinage :2 moreover, while 
 
 1 ( 
 
 CniHu fide men.ari." Polyhius puts the Greeks greatly below th« 
 IJoimms in point of veracity and good faith (vi, 56); in anotlier' passage, h« 
 ^I.raks not quite so confidently (xviii, 17). Even the testimony of the 
 Konian writers is sometimes given in favor of Attic good faith, not a-ain^t it 
 -- '; ut semper ct in omni re, quicquid sinceni fide gcreretur, id Roniani. 
 Atttcd Jim, rra?dicarent." ( Velleius Paterc. ii, 23.) 
 
 The language of Ileflter (AtJicnaische Gerichts Verf^issuna p 406) 
 f^^l)ec.ally, degrades very undeservedly the state of good faith and credit at 
 Athens. 
 
 The wliole tone and argument of the Oration of Demosthenes againat 
 Lcptmes is a remarkable proof of tlie respect of the Athenian dikastcry for 
 /ested interests, even under less obvious forms than that of pecuniair pos- 
 session. We may add a striking passage of Demosthenes cont. Timokrat 
 wherein he denounces the rescinding of past transactions (ru rreTrpayuiva 
 ^''oai, contrasted with prospective legislation) as an injustice peculiar to aa 
 oh-an hy, and roj.ugnant to the feelings of a democracy (cont. Timokrat c 
 -». p. 724; c. 36, 747). 
 
 '•• A simihir credit, in respect to monetary probity, may be claimed for th« 
 npu],l,c of Horence. M. Sismondi says, « Au milieu dJs revolutions mon^. 
 t.ures de tous les pays voisins et tandis que la manvaise foi des gouvern©- 
 nuns alteroit le numeraire d'anc extremite a I'autre de I'EuroiK' le floria 
 Du .e<iuin de Florence est toujours reste le meme: il est du meme poids da 
 meme titre: il i>orte la meme empreinte que celui qui fut hattu en 1252." 
 (licpul)liques Italicnncs, vol. iii, ch. 18. p. 176.) 
 
 M Boeckh (Public Econ. of Athens, i, 6; iv, 19), while affirming, jusdy 
 and decidedly, that the Athenian repuhlic always set a high value on main- 
 taming the integrity of their silver money, — yet thinks that the gold pieces 
 which w^re coined in Olymp. 93, 2, (408 b. c.) under the archonship of And- 
 ^an^s (out of the golden ornaments in the acropolis, and at a time of public 
 embaiTaiii,ments) were debased and made to pa^s for more than their value. 
 The only evidence in support of this position appears to he the passace ia 
 Aristophanes (Ran. 719-737) with the Scholia; but this veiy passage seean 
 tome rather to prove the contrary. "The Athenian people (savs Aristo- 
 phanes) deal with their public servants as they do with their coins • the? 
 prefer the new and bad to the old and good." If the people were so exceed 
 ingly, and e>en extravagantly, desirous of obtaining the new coins this is a 
 
116 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SOLO NI ATT CEi^SUS AND LIABILITY. 
 
 IIT 
 
 there occurred at Rome several political changes which brought 
 
 about new tables,' or at least a partial depreciation of contracts, 
 
 DO phenomenon of the same kind ever happened at Athens, 
 
 during the three centuries between Solon and the end of the free 
 
 working of the democracy. Doubtless there were fniuduhrit 
 
 debtor-; at Athens, and the administration of j)rivate law, thou"-b 
 
 it did not in any way conr»i\e at tlieir [iroceedings, was far too 
 
 imperfect to represM them as effectually as miglit have been 
 
 wished. But the |>ublic sentiment on tlie point was just and 
 
 decided, and it may be asserted with confidence, that a loan of 
 
 money at Athens ^\{i.s quite as secure a^ it ever was at any 
 
 time or place of the ancient world, — in spite of the great and 
 
 important superiority of Rome with respect to the accumulation 
 
 of a body of authoritative legal precedent, the source of what 
 
 was ultimately shaped into the Koman jurisprudence. Among 
 
 the various causes of sedition or mischief in the Grecian com- 
 
 munities,^ we hear little of the pn ~<nre of private debt. 
 
 By the measure^ of relief above (bscribed,'' Solon had accom- 
 plished results surj)assing his own best hopes. lie had healed 
 the prevailing discontents ; and such was the confidence and 
 gratitude which he had inspired, that he was now called upon to 
 draw up a constitution and laws for the better working of the 
 
 itronj,' proof that tlioy W( re not depreciated, an<l that no lo«<< was incurred by 
 giving' the old coins in exchange for them. 
 
 ' " Sane vetus Urbi fcenebre malum (says Tacitus, Ann. vi, 16) et seditio- 
 num discordiarumquc creberrima «au>a, ' t tc: compare Appian, Bell. Civil 
 l*r.Tefat. ; and Montesquieu, Esprit des Lois. 1. xxii, c 22. 
 
 The constant hopes and intrijxues of debfors at Rome, to get rid of their 
 debts by some political movement, are nowhere more forcibly brought out 
 than in the second Catiliuarian Oration of Cicero, c. 8-9: read also the 
 8trikin.L' hai:u.<:ue of Ca iline to his fellow-conspirators (Sallust, B. Catilin. 
 C. 20-21). 
 
 * The insolvent debtor, in some of the Boeotian towns, wag condemned to 
 sit publicly in the apora with a basket on his head, and then disfranchised 
 (Nikolaus Damaskenus, Fra^'. p. 152, ed. Orelli). 
 
 Accoi ding: to Diodorus, the old severe law against the body of a aebtor, 
 long after it had been abrogated by Solon at Athens, otill continued ia 
 Oarts of Greece (i, 79). 
 
 ' fiolon, Frag. 27, ed. Schneid. — 
 
 'A fikv aeATrru aiv ■Qcolaiv ^vva\ dAAa * ob li&T^ 
 'Ep6ov, 
 
 govcjmment m Aiture. His constitutional changes were great and 
 valuable : respecnng his laws, what we hear is rather curious 
 than important. 
 
 It has been already stated that, down to the time of Solon, the 
 cliissitication received in Attica was that of the four Ionic tribes, 
 comprising in one scale the phratries and gentes, and in another 
 scale the three trittyes and forty-eight naukraries, — while the 
 eupatridte, seemingly a few specially respected gentes, and per 
 haps a few distinguished families in all the gentes, had in their 
 hands all the powers of government. Solon introduced a new 
 principle of classillcation, called, in Greek, the timocratic prin 
 ciple. He distributed all the citizens of the tribes, without any 
 reference to their gentes or phratries, into four classes, according 
 to the amount of their property, which he caused to be assessed 
 and entered in a public schedule. Those whose annual income 
 was equal to five hundred medimni of corn (about seven hundred 
 imperial bushels) and upwards, — one medimnus being considered 
 e(|uivalent to one drachma in money, — he ]daced in the highest 
 class ; those who received between three hundred and five hun- 
 Ired medinmi, or drachms, formed the second class ; and those be 
 .ween two hundred and three hundred, the third.' The fourth 
 •iud most numerous class comprised all those who did not possess 
 land yielding a produce equal to two hundred medimni. The 
 iirst class, called pentakosiomedimni, were alone eligible to the 
 archonship and to all commands ; the second were called the 
 knights or horsemen of the state, as possessing enough to enable 
 them to keep a horse and perform military service in that ca- 
 pacity : the third class, called the zeugita}, formed the heavy- 
 urmed infantry, and were bound to serve, each with his ful) 
 \>anoply. Each of these three classes was entered in the public 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 18-23; Pollux, viii. 130; Aristot. Polit. ii, 9,4; Ariv 
 tot. Fragm. nein IloMTeitJv, P>. 51, ed. Neumann; Harpokration and Pho« 
 tms, V. 'iTTTuf ; Etymolog. Mag. Zevylaiov, Oijtikov, the Etym. Mag. Zev- 
 "^iatov, and the Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 627, recognize only three classes. 
 
 He took a medimnus (of wheat or barley?) as equivalent to a drachm, and 
 a sheep at the same value (ib. c. 23). 
 
 The medimnus seems equal to about 1 2-5 1 1*4) English imperial bushel 
 oonseqaently 500 medimni = 700 English imperial bushels, or b7i qiiarterii 
 
 Vol. .3 
 
118 
 
 HIS I OK Y OF GHKECE. 
 
 UKADUATKD POLITICAL PRlVlLEUlcJ. 
 
 119 
 
 •cbedule as fiosses'tp*! of a taxal)lc capital, calculated with a 
 certain reference to ins aiimjal inconic, hut in a proportion dimia- 
 ishin^^ according to llie scale of that income,— -and a man paid taxea 
 10 the state acconling to the sum for whicii he stood rated in the 
 schedule ; so that this direct taxation acted really liRe a gradu- 
 mted inconn*-tax. The ratable property of the citizens belonging 
 to the richest clas-j, the [»enrakosiuiiKHlimnus, Wiis calculated and 
 entered on the sfafe-xhcdule at a sum of capital e(]ual to twelve 
 limes iiis annual iii< unc : that of the hippeiis, or knight, at a sum 
 equal to ten times his annual income : that of the zcugite, at a 
 sum equal to live tirues his annual income. Thus u j)cntak()sio- 
 medimnus, whose income wjus exactly live hundred drachms, the 
 minimum (pialificaticm of his class, stood rated in the schedule tor 
 a taxable property of six thousand drachms, or one talent, being 
 twelve times his income, — if his anmial income were one thou- 
 sand drachms, he would stand rated for twelve thousand drachms, 
 or two talents, beinp' the same proportion of inc(»mc io ratable 
 eapital. lint when we pa>s to the second class, or knights, the 
 proj)ortion of the two is changed, — the knight possessing an 
 income of just three htmdred drachms, or three hundred medimni, 
 would stand rated for three thousand drachms, or ten times his 
 real income, and so in the same j)roportion for any income above 
 three hnndred and below live hmidred. Again, in the third class. 
 or below three hundred, th<^ proportion is a second time altered, 
 — the zengite possessing exactly two himdred drachms of income, 
 was rated open a still lower calculation, at one thousand drachms, 
 ■)r a sum equal to live times his inct>:ne ; and all incomes of this 
 -lass, between two hundred and three hundred drachms, would in 
 like manner be midtif»He(l hy live in order to ol)tain the amount 
 d^ ratable capital. Upon these re-pective sums of scheduled 
 capital, all direct taxation was levied: if the state required one 
 p«r cenL oi' direct tax, the pfiorest pentakosiomedimnus v add 
 fwiy (upon six thousand drachms) sixty drachms; the ^oor 
 est bippeus would |»ay (uj)on three thoasand drachms) thirty} 
 the {)Oorest zeugile would [wiy (u|>on one thousand drachms) ten 
 Lnichm*. And thus this mode of assessment would operate lika 
 ^ (paduated income-tax, looking af it in reference to the three 
 ajfppi^nt classes, — but as an equal income-tax, looking at it iq 
 
 
 leference to the ditferent individuals comprised in one and tiM 
 lame class.' 
 
 All |)ersons in the state whose annual income amounted to leaf 
 
 • Tiie excellent explanation of tlie 8olonian (n^r//za) property-scheduli 
 and frraduati'd qualiiication, first given by Boeckh, in his Slaatshaushaltung 
 der Aihener (b. iii, c. 5), has elucidated a subject which was, before hiin, 
 nothing but darkness and mystery. The statement of Pollux (viii, 130 J, 
 given in very Ioobc language, had been, before Boeckh, erroneously appro- 
 hen<led; avij'kLaiiov dq to dijfioaiov^ does not mean the sums which the pco- 
 t^kosiomcdimnus, the hippcus, or the zcugit^i, actually paid to the state, but 
 the sums for which each was rated, or which each was liable to pay, if called 
 rpon : of course, the state does not call for Oie whole of a roan's rated j»n»|»- 
 ertv, but exacts an cijual proportion of it from each. 
 
 On one point I cannot concur with Boeckh. lie lixcs tlic pocuniaiy 
 qualification of the third class, or zcugites, at one hundred and lifty drachms, 
 not at two hundred. All the positive testimonies (as he hiuLself allows, p, 
 31) agree in fixing two hundred, and not one hundred and tifty ; and the in- 
 f»;rencc drawn from the old law, quoted in Demosthenes (cont. Makuriat. p. 
 1067) is too uncertain to outweigh this concurrence of authorities. 
 
 Moreover, tlie whole Solonian schedule becomes clearer and more sym 
 metrical if we adhere to the statement of two hundred draehius. and iiol 
 Gue. riuttdred and fifty, as the lowest scale of zcugite income ; for the scbed- 
 nlcd capital is then, in all the three .scales, a definite and exact multiple of 
 the inr>ome returned, — in the richest class it is twelve times, — in tiie 
 middle class, ten times, — in the poorest, five times the income. But this 
 corre-'nondence ceases, if we adopt the supposition of Boeckh, that the low- 
 est zecgite income was one hundred and fifty drachms; for the sum of one 
 thousand drachms (at which the lowest zcugite was rated in the schedule) if 
 no exact multiple of one hundred and fifty drachms. In order to evade this 
 difficulty, Boeckh supposes that the adjustment of income to scheduled cap- 
 ital was effected in a way both roundabout and including nice fractions : he 
 thinks that the income of each was converted into capital by maltiplying by 
 twelve, and that, in the case of the richest class, or pcntakosiomedimni, the 
 tf/tulf sum so obtained was entered in the schedule, — in the case of the 
 second class, or hippeis, five-sixths of the sum, — and in the case of the third 
 class, or zcugites, five-ninths of the sum. Now this process seems to rae 
 rather complicated, and the employment of a fraction such as five-ninths 
 (both difTicult and not much above the simple fraction of one-half) very im- 
 probable: moreover, Boeekh's own table, p. 41, gives fractional sams in the 
 thrd clasp, when -»ne appear in the first or second. 
 
 Such objections, of course, would not be admissible, if there were any 
 positive evidence to prove the point. But in this case they are in harmonj 
 with all the positive evidence, and are amply sufficient, in my judgment, to 
 countervail the presumption arising from the old law on which Boeckll 
 •elifis. 
 
W) 
 
 msTORr OF GKFECF 
 
 rOlTlTH OR POOREST CLASS. 
 
 than two hundred inedimni, or drachms, were j)la(('d in the fourth 
 class, and they must have constituted th» laiL^.' inaloritv of th« 
 community. Thcv were nut liable to any dinct taxation, and, 
 p'-rliaps, were not at first even entered upon the taxable schedule, 
 more especially as we do not know that any ta\c> were actually 
 levied upon this schedule during tin' Solonian times. It is said 
 that thry were all tailed thetes, but this appellation is not 
 well -u-tained, aFi«l raimot be admitted: the iburth compartment 
 in the dc-^ccmlinir ^-ale was indeed termed the theti«* census, l)e- 
 cause it contained all the ihete-, ami because most of its members 
 were of that hund»le d<'scripti(»n ; but it is not conceivable that a 
 proprietor whose 1 uid yielded to him a clear amuial return of 
 one hundred, one liinnlred and twenty, one Imndred and foi'tv, or 
 one himdred and ''ighty drachm-, could ever have be«ii desig- 
 nated by that naujeJ 
 
 Such were the livisi(njs in tht^ political scale estal)lishe.l by 
 Solon, called by Aii-toile a timoci-acv, in vvhi<-li the li-dit-, hon- 
 ors, functions, and liabilities of ilie *iti/ens wne measured out 
 according to the a— -M-d property of eacli. Though the >cah' is 
 Stated as if nothing but lamled properly were measured bv it, 
 yet we may rather {)reMimc that projH'rty of oih. r kind- was 
 intended to b<' inclmled, since it >er\ed a-^ the ba>i> of every 
 m.-ui's lial>ility to a\aiion. The liiglu'st honors <»t' the >tate, — 
 that is, the |)lace- nt' the nine archoiis annually cho-fii. as well as 
 those in the -.iia; ..i anopagus, into wliich the pa>t archotis 
 always entered. — perhaj»- al-o the po-t- of prManes of the 
 naukrari, — were r -ei-vr'd l<)r the first cla» : tlie p,,or enpatrids 
 became ineligible ; while rich men, not eupatrid-, were admitted. 
 Other po<ts of inleior distinction wer-e lilh-d hv the second and 
 third ela>ses, wiio v.ere, moreover, bound to nMlitar\ service, the 
 
 ' See Bocckfj, Staatsliau^hultunu <1<t Ath.iier, uf suj>ia. i'oliux Li\i'> :m 
 Inscription dcsoriMng Authctnion son of Diphilus, — Oi/r;^o; ,[ - /juf 
 iTTTTud' dfieixliiifieioc. The word TfAtiv docs nut necessarily mean 'n-tnul pav- 
 Bicnt, but " the being included in ii class with a certain a;:;;repite of (Umea 
 and liabilities," — equivalent to censeri (Boeckh, p. 'M). 
 
 Plato, in his treatise De Le^'ibus, admits a quadripartite census of ciiizens, 
 tccording to more or less of property (Legg. v, p. 744 ; vi, {». ToG). Coaa- 
 pare Tiltmann, Griechische Staats Verfassungen pp. 648,65'i ; K. F. Hermuniv 
 Tv«hrbuch der Gr. Staato Alt. ^ 108 
 
 191 
 
 ^ce on horsebacJc, the other as heavy -armed soldiers on foot. 
 Moreover, the liturgies of the state, as they were called, — un- 
 paid iunctions, such as the trierarchy, choregy, gymnasiarchy, 
 etc., which entailed expense and trouble on the holder of them, 
 
 were distributed in some way or otlier between the members 
 
 of the three classes, though we do not know how the distribution 
 was made in these early times. On the other hand, the mem- 
 bers of the fourth or lowest class were disqualitied from holding 
 any individual office o{ dignity, — performed no liturgies, served 
 in case of war only as light-armed, or with a ])anoply provided 
 by the state, and j)aid nothing to the direct property-tax, or 
 eisphora. It would be incorrect to say that they paid wo taxes; 
 for indirect taxes, such as duties on imports, fell upon them in 
 common with the rest ; and we must recollect that these latter 
 were, throughout a long period of Athenian history, in steady 
 operation, while the direct taxes were only levied on rare oc- 
 casions. 
 
 But though this fourth class, constituting the great numerical 
 majority of the free peoi)le, were shut out from individual office, 
 their collective importance was in another way greatly increased 
 They were invested with the right of choosing the annual arch- 
 oiis, out of the class of pentakosiomedimni ; and what was of 
 more importance still, the archons and the magistrates generally, 
 after their year of office, instead of being accountable to thf 
 senate of areopagus, were made formally accountable to the 
 public assembly sitting in judgment upon their past conducL 
 They might be impeached and called upon to defend themselves, 
 punished in case of misbehavior, and debarred from the usual 
 honor of a seat in the senate of areoj)agus. 
 
 Had the public assembly been called upon to act alone, without 
 aid or guidance, this accountability woidd have proved only nom- 
 inal. But Solon converted it into a reality by another new insti- 
 tution, which will hereafter be found of great moment in the 
 working out of the Athenian democracy. He created the pro* 
 bouleutic or })reconsidering senate, with intimate and especial 
 reference to the public assembly, — to prepare matters for its 
 discussion, to convoke and superint ;nd its meetings, and to insure 
 the execution of its decrees. This senate, as first coostituted by 
 
 VOL. III. ^ 
 
 7 
 
 
122 
 
 HISTUBY OF GREECE. 
 
 Solon, comprised four hiuidred members, taken iu eijuaJ pro[JOi' 
 tions from the four tribes, — not choeen by lot, as they will^be 
 found to be in the more advanced stage of the demorra* ' . but 
 elected by the people, in the same way as the archons then w cn\ 
 — {)er.soiKs of the fourth or poorest class of the censuj^, though 
 contributing to elect, not being themselves eligible. 
 
 But while Solon thus created the new preconsidering senate, 
 i'lentihed with and subsidiary to the po[>alar assembly, he mani- 
 fested no jealousy of the preexisting areojiagitic senate : on the 
 contrary, he enlarged its powers, gave to it an ample supervision 
 over the execution of the laws generally, and inij>osed upon it the 
 censorial duty of inspecting the lives and occupations of the 
 citizens, as well as of [)unishing men of idle and dissolute habits. 
 lie was himself, as past arehon, a member of this ancient senate, 
 and he is said to have ronteniplated that, by means of the two 
 Penates, the stjite would be held fast, as it were with a double 
 anchor, against all shocks and storms.' 
 
 Such are the only new political institutions, apart from the 
 laws to be noticed presently, which there are grounds for ascrib- 
 ing to Solon, when we take pro|>er care to discriminate what 
 really belongs to Solon ami his age, from the Athenian constitu- 
 tion as afterwards remodelled. It has been a practice common 
 with many able expositors of Grecian affiiirs, and followeil 
 partly, even by Dr. Thirlwall,'^ to connect the name of Solon with 
 the whole political and judicial state of Athens as it stood be- 
 tween the age of Perikles and that of Demosthenes, — the reg- 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 18, lt>, 23; Philochoru:?, Frag. CO, ed. Ditlot. Athcnieas, 
 iv, p. ItiB; Valer. Maxim, ii, (1. 
 
 * Mciirsius, Solon, fHissim : Si<;on5us, Dc Republ. Athen. i, p. 39 (thouuh 
 in some passages he makes a marked distinction between the time before and 
 after Klei^rhenes, p. 28). Sec Wachsmath, Hellenisohe Aherthiimsknnde. 
 Tol. i, sects 46.47; Tittmnnn, Griechische Staatsverfassimiren, p. 146; Plat- 
 ■er, Der Attischc Process, book ii, ch. 5, pp 28-38; Dr. Thirhvall, History of 
 Greece, vol. ii. eh. xi, pp. 46-57. 
 
 Niebiihr, in hi.s brief alhisions to the legislation of Solon, keeps duly in 
 view the material difference between Athens as constituted by Solon, and 
 Athens as it came to be after Klei^thones : but he presumes a closer analogy 
 between the Roman )\tricians and the Athenian eapatridae than we are en 
 #»'ed to count qdoq. 
 
 I 
 
 ANALYSIS Of SOLONIAN INSTITUTIONS. 
 
 189 
 
 ulations of the senate of five hundred, the numerous public 
 dikasts or jurors taken by lot from the people, as well as the 
 body annually selected for law-revision, and called nomotheta, 
 and the j)rosecution, called the graphe paranomc)n, open to be 
 instituted against the i)roj>oser of any measure illegal, unconsti- 
 tutional, or dangerous. There is, indeed, some countenance for 
 this confusion between Solonian and post-Solonian Athens, in the 
 ura'^e of the orators themselves ; for Demosthenes and jEschinei 
 employ the name of Solon in a very loose manner, and treat him 
 a> the author of institutions belonging evidently to a later age 
 for example, the striking and characteristic oath of the heliastic 
 j irors, which Demosthenes^ ascribes to Solon, proclaims itself in 
 
 * Deiuosthen. cunt Timokrat. p. 746. jEschincs a.scribes this oath to 6 
 vr ■o'&tTTi^ (c. Ktesiphon. p. 389). 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall notices the oath as prescribed by Solon (History of Oreece, 
 vo!. ii, ch. xi, p. 47). 
 
 So again Demosthenes and iEschiiies, in the orations against Leptines (c. 
 21, p 486) and against Timokrat. pp. 706-707,— comjiare ^^schin. c. Ktcsiph. 
 p 429^ — in commenting upon the formalities ciijoincd for rfpealin;^ an ex- 
 i^ting law and enacting a new one, while ascribing the whole to Solon,— say, 
 among other things, that Solon directed the proposer 'Mo post up his project 
 of law before the ej»onymi," {tK^^tlvai irfioG^tv tuv 'ETurf/vwr :) now tha 
 ejionvmi were fthc statues of) the heroes from whom the ten Kleisthencan 
 ti ibcs drew their names, and the law making jncntion of these statues, pro- 
 ( !:\ims itself as of a date snb^eqncnt to Kleisihenes. hven the law dotining 
 the treatment of the condemned murderer who returned from exile, which 
 both Demosthenes and Doxopnter (a]). Walz Collect. Rhetor, vol. ii, p. 223) 
 call a law of Drako, is n-ally later than Solon, a> rnny he seen by its men- 
 tion of the "i'.>i' (Demosth. cont. Aristok. p. G29). 
 
 AndokidCs is not less liberal in his emy)loyment of the name of Solon (see 
 Orat. i, Dc Mysteriis, p. 13). where he eites as a law of Solon, an enactment 
 whi< h contains the mention of the tribe -Mantis and the senate of five hun- 
 dred (obviously, therefore, subsequent to the i-evolution of Kleisthenes), be- 
 sides other matters which j)rove it to have been pa.sscd even subsequent to 
 the oligarchical revolution of the f<uir hundred, towards the close of the Pe- 
 loponn'csian war. The prytanes, the proOdri, and the division of the yeai 
 into ten portions of time, each called by the name of a prytany, — so inter- 
 woven with all the public proceedings of Athens,— do notl)elong to the So- 
 lonian Athens, but to Athens as it stood after the ten tribes of Kleisthenes. 
 
 Schomann maintains emphatically, that the sworn nomothetae, as they 
 stood in the days of Demosthenes, were instituted by Solon; but he admit* 
 ftC the same time that all the allusions of the orators to this institution in 
 
 ill 
 
 i/J 
 
124 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 many ways as belonging to the age after Kleistlienes, espet ialiy 
 by tlie mention of the senate of five hundred, and not of four 
 b indred. Among the citizens who served as jurors or dikasts, 
 Solon was venerated generally as the author of tlie Athenian 
 law*? ; and the orator, therefore, might well employ his name for 
 the purpose of emphasi?:, without provoking any critical inquiry 
 whether the particular institution, which he ha[)pened to be then 
 impressing upon his audience, belonged really to Solon himself 
 or to the subsequent periods. Many of tliose institutions, which 
 Dr. Thirhvall mentions in conjunction with the name of Solon, 
 are among tlie hist refiiK-ments and elaborations of the democrat- 
 ical mind ot* Athens, — gradually prepared, doubtless, during the 
 interval between Kleisthenrs and Perikles, but not brought into 
 full operation until the period of the latter (400-429 n. c.) ; for 
 it is hardly pos>il>le to conceive these numerous dikasteries and 
 a.>scinhlies in regular, frccjuent, and long-standing operation, 
 without an assinrd payment to the dikasts who composed them. 
 Now such jjaymcnt first began to be made about the time of 
 Pcriklcs, if nut by his actual proposition;' and Demosthenes had 
 good reason for contending that, if it were suspended, tlie judicial 
 as \\v\\ lis the administrative system of Athens would at once 
 
 cliith* l.orh words and matters essentially post-Solonian, so that modifications 
 8ul>se*|ii< lit to Solon must have he*;n introduced. This admission seems to 
 me fatal to the cofreiK y of his proof: see Schomann, De Comitiis, ch. vii, pp. 
 2< />-2(iS ; and the same author, Antiij. J. P. Att. sect, xxxii His opinion is 
 i»h;ncd \>y K. F. Ikrniann, Lehrhuch der Griech. Staats Alterth. sect. 131 ; 
 and FMatiicr, Attisrhcr I'ro/X'S, vol. ii, p. 38. 
 
 .Meier, De Honis Damnatoaim, p. 2, remarks upon the laxity with which 
 tht' orators use the name of Solon : " Oratores Solonis nomine saepe utuntur, 
 ol»i omiiino lei^islatorem quemquam signiHcare volunt, etiamsi a Solone ipsa 
 lex lata uoii est." Herman Srhelling, in his Dissertation De Solonis Legibus 
 ap. Oratt. Attic. (Berlin, 1842), has collected and discus.«ed the references Ui 
 Solon and to his laws in the orators. He controverts the opinion just cited 
 from Miicr, l»ut iinon arirunienis no way satisfactory to me (pp. 6-8) ; the 
 more so, as he Iiiin?.clf admit.s that the dialect in which the Solonian laws ap 
 pear in the citati()n of the orators can never have been the original dialect ol 
 Solon himself (pp. 3-5), and makes also substantially the sarae admission ai 
 Schomann, in regard to the ))resence of post-Solonian matters in the RqK 
 posed Solonian laws (pp. 23-27). 
 
 ' i>eo Boeckh, Put>lic Economy of Alliens, book ii, c. 15. 
 
 SOLON FOUNDER OF ATHLNIAN DEMOCRACY. 
 
 11. 
 
 fall to piecesJ And it would be a marvel, such as nothing short of 
 Btrong direct evidence would justify us in believing, that in an age 
 when°even partial democracy was yet untried, Solon should con- 
 ceive the idea of such institutions : it would be a marvel still 
 greater, that the half-emancipated thetes and small proprietors, 
 for whom he legislated, — yet trembling under the rod of the 
 eupatrid archons, and utterly inexperienced in collective business, 
 — should have been found suddenly competent to fulfil these as- 
 cendent functions, such as the citizens of conquering Athens in 
 the days of Perikles, — full of the sentiment of force and actively 
 identifying themselves with the dignity of their community, — 
 became gradually competent, and not more than competent, to 
 exercise with eftect. To suppose that Solon contemplated and 
 provided for the periodical revision of his laws by establishing a 
 nomothetic jury, or dikastery, such as that which we find in ope- 
 ration during the time of Demosthenes, would be at variance, m 
 my judgment, with any reasonable estimate cither of the man or 
 of the age. Herodotus says that Solon, having exacted from the 
 Athenians solemn oaths that they would not rescind any of his 
 laws for ten years, quitted Athens for that period, in order that 
 he mi<rht not be compelled to rescind them himself: Plutarch in- 
 forms °us that he gave to his laws force for a century absolute-^ 
 Solon himself, and Drako before him, had been lawgivers, evoked 
 and empowered by the special emergency of the times ; the idea 
 of a frequent revision of laws, by a body of lot-selected dikasts, 
 belonnrs to a far more advanced age, and could not well hare 
 been "present to the minds of either. The wooden rollers of 
 Solon, like the tables of the Roman decemvirs,3 were doubtless 
 intended as a pennanent " fons omnis publici privatique juris." 
 
 If we examine the facts of the case, we shall see that nothing 
 more than the bare foundation of the democracy of Athens as it 
 stood in the time of Perikles, can reasonably be ascribed to 
 Solon. " I gave to the people," Solon says, in one of his short 
 
 ' Demosthen. cont. Tiraokrat. e. 26, p. 731 : compare Aristophanes Ekklo- 
 
 siaeus. 302. 
 
 « Herodot. i, 29; Plutarch, Solon, c. 25. Aulas Gullius affirms that ttM 
 Athenians swore, under strong religious penalties, to obserre them for«T« 
 
 (ii 12). 
 
 * Livy iii, 34. 
 
i2e 
 
 HISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 remaining fragments, '"as much strength as sufficed for thcii needs, 
 without either enlargin;^ or diminishing their dignitj : for those 
 too who possessed power and were noted for weahh, I took c;ire 
 that no unworthy treatment should be reserved. I stood with 
 the strong shield <at < ver both parties, so a.> nut to allow an 
 unjust triumph to either." Again, Aristotle tells us that Solon 
 bestowed upon the people no greater niejisiire of power thun \M\a 
 barely necessary,' — to elect their nKigi>:nites and to hold them 
 to accountability : if the people had ha<l less tlian this, tliey could 
 not have been expected to remain tnmquil, — they would have 
 been in slavery and hostile to the onstitntion. Not less distinctly 
 does Herodotus speak, when lie describes the revohjtion siib- 
 Bequently operated by Kieisthenes — the latter, he tells us, found 
 
 ' SoloD, Fragm. ii, 3, ed. Sthneidewin: — 
 
 ^V^(t> fxiv yup h^uKci t6(jov KpuTor^ oaamr Hafmii, 
 
 TifiTjr^ oi'T a(f.€AutVy ovf hrope^ufitvoc' 
 Oi d' eixov dvvauiv kqI xpv^atjiv i/aav dyrftol, 
 
 Kai Tol^ ei^ftajufi^v fxrjdev atim^ Ixeiv. 
 'Ear^v 6' dfni>if3<iXuv Kparepdv autco^ ufn^Ttpotaty 
 
 The reading iirapKtl in tht first line is not universally approved : BruncK 
 idopts fTap/cfU', which Niefmhr ap|>ioves. The hitter construes it to mean, 
 •*! j:avc to the people only .so much power as coald not he withheld from 
 them." (Rom. Geschicht. t. ii, p. 34G. 2d ed ) Taitin/^- the first two lines 
 topether, I think Niebuhr's nieaninfj; is substantially correct, thouj:h I give a 
 more literal translation myself. Solon seems to be vindicating himself 
 against the reproach of having been too <!eiiio. ratical, which was, doubtless, 
 •♦Idrcssed to liim in every variety of language. 
 
 * Aristot. Polit ii. H 4 'Errd In/jjv f iruKr t},i^ dvayKatordrrfv uTroth/',- 
 fat T<p .%u iHvofxn; m r:.r rpi,}^ aUlen^ai Kai el&vveiv fi^Se y<ip tovtov 
 Ki'pioc uv 6 dfifio^^ doi'/.o^ dv tlri nai rroAtfiio^. 
 
 In this passage respecting Solon (containing sections 2, fJ, 4 of the edition 
 of M. Barthelemy St. Ililaire). Anstotle first gives the opinion of certain 
 critics who praised Solon, with the reasons upon which it is ffiund.d : next, 
 the opinion of certain critics who blametl him, with fheir reasons ; thirdly, 
 hi3 own judgment. The first of these three cont.iins <«( t. 2 (from iy?u.Ja 
 •i' huoi, down to rd diKaorijfia Tzoi^aaq h 'uvtcjv). The second contains 
 che greater part of sect. 3 (from ^id kql fieii<l>ovral nvec ai r^, down to tt^v 
 vvv drifioKpaTtav. The remainder is his own judgment. I notirt; this, 
 because secrions 2 and 3 are not to be taken as the opinion of Aristotle hira-' 
 •elf, but of those upon whom b" was commenting, who considered Solon m 
 tfit ttathor cf the dikasteriei .velected by lot. 
 
 SOLON FOITNDER OF ATTTKNTAN DEMOCtiAOY. 
 
 197 
 
 •• the Athc nian people excluded from everything."* These pas- 
 Bages seem positively to contradict the supposition, in itself 
 pufficieTitly improbable, that Solon is the author of the peculiar 
 democratical institutions of Athens, such as the constant and 
 numerous dikasts for judicial trials and revision of laws. The 
 genuine and forward democratical movement of Athens begins 
 only with Kieisthenes, from the moment when that distinguished 
 Alkmieonid, either spontaneously, or from finding himself worsted 
 in his party strife with Isagoras, purchased by large popular con- 
 cessions the hearty cooperation of the multitude under very 
 dangerous circumstances. While Solon, in his own statement as 
 well as in that of Aristotle, gave to the people as much power as 
 was stricilv needftd, but no more, — Kieisthenes (to use the sig- 
 nificant phrase of Herodotus),*' being vanquished in the party 
 contest with his rival, tonh the people into partnership.**^ It was 
 thus to the interests of the weaker section, in a strife of contend- 
 in<» nobles, that the Athenian people owed their first admission 
 to j)olitical ascendency, — in part, at least, to this cause, though 
 the proceedings of Kieisthenes indicate a hearty and spon 
 taneous popular sentiment. But such constitutional admission of 
 the people would not have been so astonishingly fruitful in positive 
 results, if the course of public events for the half-century after 
 Kieisthenes had not been such as to stimulate most powerfully 
 their energy, their self-reliance, their mutual sympathies, and 
 their ambition. I shall recount in a future chapter those his- 
 torical causes, which, acting upon the Athenian character, gave 
 Buch efficiency and expansion to the great democratical impulse 
 communicated by Kieisthenes : at present, it is enough to remark 
 tliat that impulse commences properly witli Kieisthenes, and not 
 with Solon. 
 
 * Herodot v, 69. rov ^k^Tjvaiuv 6r/fiov, frporepov diruxjfievov ttuvtcjv, etc. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 66-69 Ovroi ol &vdpt (Kieisthenes and Isagorai) Iffra" 
 aiaaav izepl dwdfieuc' taaovfievoq 6h tiXeta'^ivijg rbv 6f/fiov npoaeraipU 
 
 Cerai 
 
 'Of ydp 6^ rbv ^A^Tjvaiuv S^fiov, nporepov diroxj/ievov Tvdvruv, rort 
 
 irpdc "f^v kuvTov fjLoiptjv TTpoar&rjKaro, (Kieisthenes) rac ^v^^f fieruvofuun 
 ^v Si, rbv df]fiov Trpocr&ifiEvoc, TroAA^ Karvirep^e ruv uvtKJTamCreuv 
 
 As to the marked democratical tendency of the proceedings of Kleisthente^ 
 IOC Aristot. Polit vi, 2, 11 ; iii, I, 10. 
 
 i! 
 
128 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 But the Solonian constitution, though only the foundation, wai 
 yet the indispensable foundation, of the subsecjuent democracy j 
 and if the discontents of the miserable Athenian population, in- 
 stead of experiencing his disinterested and healing management, 
 had fallen at once into the hands of selfish power-seekers, like 
 Kylon or Peisistratus, the memorable expansion of the Athenian 
 mind during the ensuing century would never have taken place, 
 and the whole subsequent history of Greece would probably have 
 taken a different course. Solon left the essential powers of the 
 state still in the hands of the oligarchy, and the party combats 
 — to be recounted hereafter — between Peisistratus, Lykurgus, 
 and Megakles, thirty years after his legislation, which ended in 
 the despotism of Peisistratus, will appear to be of the same purely 
 oligarchical character as they had been before he was a|)pointed 
 archon. But the oligarchy which he established was very dif- 
 ferent from the unmitigated oligarchy wliich he found, so teeming 
 with oppression and so <lestitute of redress, as his own poems 
 testify. 
 
 It was he who first gave both to the citizens of middling 
 property and to the general mass, a locus standi against the 
 eupatrids ; he enabled the people partially to protect themselves, 
 and familiarized them with the idea of protecting themselves, by 
 the peaceful exercise of a constitutional franchise. The new 
 force, through which this [>rott'(tio!i was carried into effect, was 
 the public assembly called hcliaa,' regularized and armed with 
 
 ' Lysias cent Theomnest. A. c. 5. p 357, who ^^ives kdv jnf) Triwarijufiari }} 
 lUkiaia as a Solonian phrase ; thouj.'h we arc led to donbt whether Solon 
 can ever have employed it, when we tind Pollux (vii, 5, 22) distinctly 
 Stating that Solon used the word Irrairia to signify what the orators called 
 irpoaTiii^^ara. 
 
 The original and proper meaning of the word 'HXiata is, the public assem* 
 My (see Tittmann, Griech. Staatsverfsiss. pp. 215-216); in subsequent times 
 we find it signifying at Athens — 1 . The aggregate of »ix thousand dikasta 
 chosen by lot annually and sworn, or the assembled people considered as 
 exercising judicial functions ; 2. Each of the separate fractions into which 
 this aggregate body was in practice subdivided for actual judicial business. 
 *EKKXriaia became the term for the public deliberative assembly properly so 
 called, which could never be held on the same day that the dikasteries sat 
 (I>€mo9then cont. Timokrat c. 21, p 726) : every dikastery i* in f.»ct 
 
 MITIGATED OLIGARCHY. 
 
 I2d 
 
 enlarged prerogatives, and farther strengthened by its indispen- 
 Bable ally, — the pro-boulcutic or pre-considering senate. Under 
 the Solonian constitution, this force was merely secondary and 
 defensive, but after the renovation of Kleisthenes, it became 
 paramount and sovereign ; it branched out gradually into those 
 numerous popular dikasteries which so powerfully modified both 
 public and private Athenian life, drew to itself the undivided 
 reverence and submission of the people, and by degrees rendered 
 the single magistracies essentially subordinate functions. The 
 popular assembly as constituted by Solon, ai>i>earing in modified 
 efli( iency, and trained to the otlice of reviewing and judging the 
 general conduct of a past magistrate, — f)rnis the intermediate 
 sta"-e between the j»assive Homeric agora, and those omnipotent 
 assemblies and dikasteries which listened to Perikles or Demos- 
 thenes. Compared with these last, it has in it but a faint streak 
 of democracy, — and so it naturally appeared to Aristotle, who 
 wrote with a practical experience of Athens in the time of the 
 orators ; but compared with the lirsl, or with the ante-Solonian 
 constitution of Attica, it must doubtless have appealed a con- 
 cession eminently democratical. To imijose upon the eui>atrid 
 archon the necessity of being elected, or i)Ut upon his trial of 
 after-accountability, by the riMle of freemen (such would be the 
 jdirase in eupatrid society), would be a bitter humiliation to 
 those among whom it was tirst introduced ; for we must recollect 
 that this was the most extensive scheme of constitutional reform 
 yet propounded in Greece, and that despots and oligarchies shared 
 between them at that time the whole Grecian world. >^i.- it ap- 
 pears that Solon, while con>tituting the popular assembly with 
 its pro-bouleutic senate, had no jealousy of the senate of areopa- 
 
 always addressed as if it were the assembled j)eople engaged in a specific 
 
 duty. 
 
 I imagine the term 'HMata in the time of Solon to have been used in its 
 original meaning, — the public assembly, perhaps with a connotation of 
 employment in judicial proceeding. The fixed number of six thousand 
 does not date before the time of Kleisthenes, because it is essentially con- 
 nected with the ten trit es ; while the subdivision of this body of six thou- 
 sand into various bodies of jurors for different courts and purposes did not 
 commence, probably, until after the first reforms of Kleisthenes. I shall 
 revert to this point when I touch upon the latter, and bis times. 
 
 VOL. IIL ^ •^ 
 
130 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 'JKADUAL CHANGE IN THE LAWS OF SOLON. 
 
 ISl 
 
 gas, and indeed even enlarged its powers, — we may infer that 
 his grand ol)ject wm, not to weaken the oligarchy generally, bat 
 to improve the administiation and to repress the misconduct anJ 
 irregularities of the individual archons ; and that too, not h\ 
 dimirishing their jiowers, l)ut by making some degree of jx>pu- 
 larity the condition botli of their entry into ollice, and of their 
 feaftty or honor atter it. 
 
 It is, in ray judgment, a mistake to suppose that Solon trans- 
 ff rred the judicial power of the archons to a popular dika-stery ; 
 these magistrates i^till continued self-acting judges, deciding and 
 condemning without ajipeal, — not mere presidents of an as- 
 sembled jury, as they afterwards came to be during the next 
 centurv.' For the general exercise of such power they were ac- 
 countable after their year of ollice; and this accountability wat 
 the security again>! abuse, — a very insufficient security, yet not 
 wholy inoperative. It will be seen, however, [)re>ently, that 
 llieso archons, though strong to coerce, and [)erhaps to opj)ie.ss, 
 -mall and poor men, — had no means of keeping down rebellious 
 
 ' The stattniont of t'lutiirch, that Solon gave an a])})eal from the dec ision 
 of the arehoii to the judgment of the popular dikastery (Plutarch, Solon, 
 18), is distrusted by most of the expositors, though Dr. Thirlwull seems to 
 admit it, justifyinf^ it by the analogy of the ephet«, or judges of appeal, 
 fonstituttd by Drako (Hist, of Greece, vol. ii, ch. xi, p. 46). 
 
 To me it appears that the Drakonian ephctae were not really judges in 
 jpi>tal : hut be that as it may, the supposition of an appeal from the judg- 
 ment of the archon is inconsistent with the known course of Attic procedure, 
 and has ai>parently arisen in Plutarch's mind from confusion with the Roman 
 jn»r(Hiilio, which really was an appeal from the judgment of the con-sul to 
 th;it of the people. Plutarch's comparison of Solon with Pulilicola leads to 
 this suspicion, — Kal ^ol^ tpevyovni SiKrjv, iTTiKaTiela^ai rov d/jfiov, uarre,' u 
 iioAun' Tuv^ diKaoTuq, it^uKe (Publicola). The Athenian archon was tirst a 
 Jti.jge without appeal . and afterwards, ceasing ;o be a iudge, he oecarae 
 presiilent of a dikastery, performing only those preparatory steps which 
 brought the cjuse to an issue fit for decision : but he does not seem ever to 
 liare been a judge subject to appeal. 
 
 It is hardly just to Plutarch to make him responsible for the absurd 
 rfmark that Solon rendered his laws intentionally obscure, in order that the 
 d!ka.st5 might have more to do and greater power: he gives the rem»u-k, 
 hhnself, only with the saving expression lejerat, " it is said;" and we may 
 well doubt whether it was ever seriously intended even by ita author, wIk> 
 ever he may have been. 
 
 nobles of their own rank, such as Peisistratus, Lykurgus, and 
 Megalxles, each with his armed follow^ers. When we compare 
 the drawn swords of these ambitious competitors, ending in the 
 despotism of one of them, with the vehement parliamentary strifo 
 between Themistokles and Aristeides afterwards, peaceably de 
 cided by the vote of the sovereign people, and never disturbing the 
 public tranquillity, — we sliall see that the democracy of the en- 
 suing century fultilled the conditions of order, i\s well as of pro- 
 gress, better than the Solunian constitution. 
 
 To distinguish this Solonian constitution from the democracy 
 which followed it, is essential to a due comprehension of the 
 progress of the Greek mind, and especially of Athenian afiaira. 
 That democracy was achieved by gradual steps, which will be 
 hereafter described : Demosthenes and -^schines lived under it 
 as a system consummated and in full activity, when the stages of 
 its previous growth were no longer matter of exact memory; 
 and the dikasts then assembled in judgment were pleased to 
 hear the constitution to which they were attached identilied 
 with the names either of Solon, or of Theseus, to which they 
 v. ere no less partial. Their inquisitive contemporary Aristotle 
 was not thus misled : but even the most common-place Atheni- 
 ans of the century preceding would have escaped the same delu- 
 sion. For during the whole course of the denuK'ialicjd movement 
 i'l'om the Persian invasion down to the Peloponnesian war, and 
 especially during the changes proposed by Perikles and Ephial- 
 tes, there was always a strenuous party of resistance, who would 
 not suffer the people to forget that they had already forsaken, 
 and were on the point of forsaking still more, the orbit marked 
 out by Solon. The illustrious Perikles imdeiwent innumerable 
 attacks both from the orators in the assembly and from the comic 
 writers in the theatre ; and among these sarcasms on the political 
 tendencies of the day, we are probalily to number the complaint 
 breathed by the poet Kratinus, of the desuetude into which both 
 Solon and Drako had fallen. " I swear,' said he, in a fragment 
 
 * KratinoA ap. Plutarch. Solon. 25. -=- 
 
 Tlpdc Tov ^oXuvog Kol ApuKovToc, olai vi'V 
 ^pvyovffiv fjdji TUQ Kuxpvc Talc Kvp^emv. 
 Iiokrat^i praises the mod' irate democracy in early Athecn, as com parte 
 
132 
 
 HISTORY OK GREECE. 
 
 of one of his comedies, by Solon and Drako, whose wooden 
 tablets (of laws) are now employed by people to roa^t their 
 barley." The lawr. of Solon respecting penal offences, respect* 
 ing inheritance and adoption, respecting the private relations 
 generally, etc., remained for tlie most part in force ; his quadn- 
 partite census also continued, at least for financial purposes until 
 the archonship of Nausinikus in 377 B, c. ; so that Cicero and 
 others mit'ht be warranted in affirming that his laws still pre- 
 vailed at Athens : but his i>olitical and judicial arrangements had 
 undercrone a revolution^ not less complete and memorable than 
 the character and spirit of the Athenian people generally. The 
 choice, by way of lot, of archons and other magistrates, and the 
 distribution by lot of the general body of dikasts or jurors into 
 pannels for judicial business, may be decidedly considered as not 
 belonging to Solon, but adopted after the revolution of Kleis- 
 thenes;-^°probably, the choice of senators by lot also. Tlie lot 
 was a symptom of i)ronounced democratical spirit, such as we 
 must not seek in the Solonian institutions. 
 
 It is not easy to make out distinctly what was the political iK>. 
 sition of the ancient gentes and phratries, as Solon left them. 
 The four tribes consisted altogether of gentes and phratries, in- 
 somuch that no one could be included in any one of the tribes 
 who was not also a member of some gens and phraty. Now the 
 new pro-bouleutic or pre-considerate senate consisted of four hun 
 dred members, — one hundred from each of the tribes : persons not 
 
 with that under whir! h. livnl : Lit in the Omt. vn ( Are<.i.a^atie. he con- 
 neot« the former with the names of Solon and Kleisrhenes, while in he 
 Orvvt.xii (Panathenaie.), }.e .on>i.kTs the former to have histed from the 
 davs of Theseus to those of Solon and Peisistratu.. In this latter oration 
 hedeserihes prettv exactly the i>ow.r whieh the people possessed under the 
 Solonian constitution. - ro. mc a^.^uf Kararrr}j<ya,^ Kac AaJeiv dcK.v napH 
 Tu, i^afzapravuvruv, which coincides with 'he phrase of Anstotle-rof 
 clptuf aipelai)ai Kcii i ^.>«u'ea^ - suj.posin- a xo^tu>v to he understood as the 
 iuhstantive of k^afiaprnvovri^v. 
 
 Compare Isokrates Or. vii, P- 143 {p. 192 Bek.) and p. 150 (202 Bek.) 
 and Orat. xii, pp. 260-264 (3.'S1-:156 Bek ). 
 
 ' Cicero, Orat. pro Sext. Koscio. c. 25 ; ^.lian, V. H. viii, 10. 
 
 • This seems to h « the opinion of Dr. Thirlwall, ac^amst Waehommb , 
 thouph he speaks with douht. (Historj' of Greece, vol. ii, eh. 11, p. 4» 
 9ded.) 
 
 I 
 
 
 VENUS OF MILO 
 
 Greece^ toL three. 
 
THE LAWS OF SOLON. 
 
 133 
 
 included in any gens or pbratry could therefore have had no 
 cess to it. The conditions of eligibility were similar, according 
 to ancient custom, for the nine archons, — of course, also, for the 
 senate of areopagus. So that there remained only the public as- 
 sembly, in which an Athenian not a member of these tribes could 
 take part : yet he was a citizen, since he could give his vote for 
 aichons and senators, and could take part in the annual decision 
 of their accountability, besides being entitled to claim redress for 
 wrong from the archons in his own jierson, — while the alien 
 could )nly do so tlirough the intervention of an avouching citi- 
 zen, OF prostates. It seems, therefore, that all persons not included 
 in the four tribes, whatever their grade of fortune might be, were 
 on the same level in respect to political privilege as the fourth 
 and poorest class of the Solonian census. It has already been 
 remarked that, even before the time of Solon, the number of Athe- 
 nians not included in the gentes or jihratries was probably con- 
 siderable : it tended to become greater and greater, since tliese 
 bodies were close and unexpansive, while the policy of the new 
 lawgiver tended to invite industrious settlers from other parts of 
 Greece to Atliens. Such great and increasing inequality of poli- 
 tical privilege helps to explain the weakness of the government 
 in re[)elling the aggressions of Peisistratus, and exhibits the im- 
 portance of tlie revolution afterwards wrought by Kleisthen^ 
 when he abolished (for all political purposes) the four old tribes, 
 and created ten new comprehensive tribes in place of them. 
 
 In regard to the regulations of the senate and the assembly of 
 the people, as constituted by Solon, we are altogether without in- 
 formation : nor is it safe to transfer to the Solonian constitution 
 the information, comparatively ample, which we possess respecting 
 these bodies under the later democracy. 
 
 The laws of Solon were inscribed on wooden rollers and trian- 
 gular tablets, in the species of writing called boustrophedon (lines 
 alternating first from left to right, and next from right to left, 
 like the course of the ploughman), and preserved first in the 
 acropolis, subsequently in the prytaneium. On the tablets, called 
 kyrbeis, were chiefly commemorated the laws respecting sacred 
 rites and sacrifices :> on the pillars, or rollers, of which there w&m 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 23-25. He particularly mentions the sixteenth - 
 
 : 
 
 
J34 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECK. 
 
 at least sixteen, were placed the regulations respecting mattere 
 profane. So small are the fragnients which have come down to 
 us, and so much has been ascribed to Solon by the orators, which 
 belongs really to the suh^eqiient times, that it is hardly possible 
 to form any critical jinlirinent respecting the legislation as a 
 whole, or to discover by what general }>rinciplcs or purposes hn 
 was guided. 
 
 lie left unchanged all the previous laws and practices respect- 
 ing the crime of iioiniride, connected a< they w<ire intimately 
 with the religious feelings of the people. The laws of Drako on 
 this subject therefore remained, but on other subj<ct>, according 
 to Plutarch, they were aitogetlier abrogated :' tliei'e is, however, 
 room for supposing, that the repeal cannot have been so sweep- 
 ing as this biographer represents. 
 
 The Solonian laws seem to have borne more or less upon all 
 the great departments of human interest and duty. We find 
 regulations poliiie;i! and religious, public and private, civil and 
 criminal, commercial, agricultural, sumjHuary, and disciplinarian. 
 Solon provides punishment for crimes, restricts the profession and 
 status of the citizen, jjrescribes detailed rules for marriage as 
 Well as for burial, for the common use of springs and wells, and 
 for the mutual interest of conterminous farmers in planting- or 
 hedging their properties. As far as we can judge, from the im- 
 
 wc learn, also, that the thirtcaih ..;u;r tontaint'd the ei^'hth law (c. li<) : the 
 twenty-first law is alludecl to i i llarpokration, v, "On oi ttui^toL 
 
 Some remnants of thesi \V(K.<l«.n rollers existed in the days of I'lutiuvh, in 
 ihe Athenian prytaneiuin. S, o Ilaij.okration and Photius, v, KvptSu^'^ 
 Aristot. -repl IloAiTefCov, Vr.v^ 35, ».{ Xnimann; Euphorion ap. Harpokrat! 
 'O KuTutT^ev vofio^. Bekker, Anecdota. p 413. 
 
 What we read respectinj: the u^oveg and the mi>.hii docs not convey • 
 clear idea of them Besides Aristotle, both Seleukus and Didymus ara 
 named as having written eommentaries expressly about them (Plutarch, 
 Solon, i ; Suidas, v, 'OpjtuiVff; compare also Meursius, Solon, c. 24 ; Vit 
 Aristotelis ap Wesiermann. Vitanim Scriptt. Graee. p. 404), and the colleo- 
 tion in Step' an. Thesaur. p. 1095. 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, c. 17; Cyrill. cont. Julian, v, p. 16y» ed. Spanheim 
 The enumeration of the dirterent admitted Justifications for homicide, which 
 we find in Demosth. cont. Aristokrat. i». 637, seems rather too copious and 
 iystematic for the age of Drako; it mi\\ have t>een amended by Solon, or 
 perhaps, in an ajje subsequent to Solon 
 
 I 
 
 'Kr 
 
 PROHIBITIONS OF SOLoN 
 
 perfect manner in which his laws come before us, there does nu 
 ueem to have been any attempt at a systematic order or classifi- 
 cation. Some of them are mere general and vague directions, 
 while others again run into the extreme of speciality. 
 
 By far the most imjxjrtant of all was the amendment of the 
 law of debtor and creditor which has already been adverted to, 
 and the abolition of the power of fathers and brothers to s^ell 
 their daughters and sisters into slavery. The prohibition of all 
 contracts on the security of the body, was itself sufficient to j)ro- 
 duce a vast improvement in the character and condition of the 
 poorer population, — a result which seems to have been so sen- 
 sibly obtained from the legislation of Solon, that Boeckh and 
 Bome other eminent authors supi>ose him to have abolished villen- 
 age and conferred upon the poor tenants a property in their lands, 
 annulling the seignorial rights of the landlord. But this opinion 
 rests upon no positive evidence, nor are we warranted in ascribing 
 to him any stronger measure in reference to the land, than the 
 aimulment of the previous mortgages.' 
 
 The first pillar of his laws contained a regulation respecting 
 exportable produce. lie forbade the exportation of all produce 
 of the Attic soil, except olive-oil alone, and the sanction employed 
 to enforce observance of this law deserves notice, as an illustra- 
 tion of the ideas of the time ; — the archon was bound, on pain 
 of foifeiting one hundred dra<"hms, to pronounce solemn curses 
 against every offender.- We are prol)ably to take this prohi- 
 
 ' See Boeckh, Public Economy of the Athenians, look iii, sect. 5, Titt- 
 mann (Griechisch. Staatsverfass. p. 651) and others have supposed (from 
 Aristot. Polit. ii, 4, 4) that Solon enacted a law to limit the quantity of land 
 which any individual citizen might acquire. But the passage does not seem 
 to me to bear out such an opinion. 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, 24. The Jirst law, however, is said to have related 
 to the insuring of a maintenance to wives and orphans (Harpokration, v 
 Sirof). 
 
 By a law of Athens ( which marks itself out as belonging to the century 
 after Solon, by the fulness of its provisions, and by the nimiber of steps and 
 official persons named in it), the rooting up of an olive-tree in Attica wai 
 forbidden, under a penalty of two hundred drachms for each tree so de- 
 stroyed, — except ;or sacred purposes, or to the extent of two trees jiei 
 aoiMim for the convenience of the f roprietor (D^mosthen. cont Makanat c 
 16, p. 1074 > 
 
 i 
 
136 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEKCK. 
 
 bitiun in conjunction with other objects said to have been contem- 
 plated by Solon, especiaJIy the encouragement of artisans and 
 manufacturers at Athens. Observing, we are told, that many 
 new emigrants were just then Hocking into Attica to seek an 
 establishment, in conseqaence of its greater security, he was 
 anxious to turn them nith«'r to nianufacturing industry than to 
 the cultivation of a soil naturally i>oor.' lie forbade the grant- 
 ing of citizenship to any emigrants, except such as had quitted 
 irrevocably their former abodes, and come to Athens for the pur- 
 pose of carrying on some industrious protV'ssion ; and in order to 
 prevent idleness, he directed the senate of areopagus to keep 
 watch over the lives of tlie citizens generally, and punish every 
 f/iie who had no course of rfguhir labor to support him. If a 
 father had not tauglit his .--on some art or j>rofession, Solon relieved 
 the son from all obligation to maintain him in his old age. And 
 it was to encourage the multiplication of these artisans, that he 
 insured, or sought to insure, to the residents in Attica a monop- 
 oly of all its landed produce except olive-oil, which was raised in 
 abundance more than sutlicient for their wants. It was his wish 
 that tlie trade with foreigners should be carried on by exporting 
 the produce of ai'tisan labor, instead of the produce of land.- 
 
 This commerci:il prohibition is founded on principles substan- 
 tially similar to those which were acted upon in the early history 
 of England, with reference both to corn and to wool, and in other 
 European countries also. In so far as it was at all operative, it 
 tended to lessen the total quantity of produce raised upon the 
 Boil of Attica, and thus to keep the price of it from rising, — a 
 purpose less objectionable — if we assume that the legislator is 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, 22. rate -ixvaic uliutfia rrepiei^yKe, 
 
 * Plutarch, Solon, 22-24 According to Herodotus, Solon had enacted 
 that the authorities should punish every man with death who could not show 
 m regular mode of industrious life (Herod, ii, 177 ; Diodor. i, 77). 
 
 So ftever« a punishment is not credible ; nor is it hkely that Solon bor- 
 rcweil *5i«« idea from Egypt. 
 
 According to Pollux (viii, 6) idleness was punished by atimy (civil dis 
 franchisement) under Drako : under Solon, this pnnishment only took effect 
 •gainst the person who had been convicted of it on three successive occa* 
 «ons. See Meursius, Solon, c. 17 ; and the "Areopagus" of the saiDt 
 author, c. 9 and 9 \ and Taylor, Lectt. Lyslac. cap. 10. 
 
 SOLON'S ENCOURAGKMENT OF INDUSTKr 
 
 187 
 
 to interfere at all — than that of our late Corn Laws, which were 
 destined to prevent the price of grain from falling. But the law 
 of Solon must have heen altogether inoperative, in reference to 
 the great articles of human subsistence; for Attica imported, both 
 largely and constantly, grain and salt provisions, — probably, 
 also, wool and flax for the spinning and weaving of the women, 
 and certainly timber for building. Whether the law was ever 
 enforced with reference to figs and honey, may well be doubted ; 
 at least these productions of Attica were in after-times generally 
 consumed and celebrated throughout Greece. Probably also, in 
 the time of Solon, the silver-mines of Laureium had hjirdly 
 begun to be worked : these afterwards became highly productive, 
 and furnished to Athens a commodity for foreign payments not 
 less convenient than lucrative.' 
 
 It is interesting to notice the anxiety, both of Solon and of Drako, 
 to enforce among their fellow-citizens industrious and self-main- 
 taining habits ;'^ and we shall find the same sentiment proclaimed 
 by Perikles, at the time when Athenian power was at its maxi- 
 mum. Nor ought we to pass over this early manifestation in 
 Attica, of an opinion equitable and tolerant towards sedentary 
 industry, which in most other parts of Greece was regarded as 
 comparatively dishonorable. The general tone of Grecian sen- 
 timent recognized no occupations as perfectly worthy of a free 
 citizen except arms, agriculture, and athletic and musical exer- 
 cises ; and the proceedings of the Spartans, who kept aloof even 
 from agriculture, and left it to their Helots, were admired, though 
 they could not be copied throughout most part of the Hellenic 
 »irorld. Even minds like Plato, Aristotle, and Xenophon con- 
 curred to a considerable extent in this feeling, which they justified 
 on the ground that the sedentary life and unceasing house-work 
 of the artisan was inconsistent with military aptitude : the town- 
 occupations are usually described by a word which carries with 
 it contemptuous ideas, and though recognized as indispensable to 
 the existence of the city, are held suitable only for an inferior and 
 •emi-privileged order of citizens. This, the received sentiment 
 
 ' Xenophon, De Vcciigalibus, iii, 2. 
 
 • Thucyd. ii, 40 (the funeral oration delivered by Perikles), — nal ri 
 ■reversal ovx ouoXoyelv tivi al<Txpdv, dXX' oi dia^evyeiv ipy<t) alaxi<>». 
 
186 
 
 HISTORY OF GKKECE. 
 
 amoD^ Greeks, a.« well as foreigners, found a strt n^ and growing 
 opposition at Athens, as I have already said, — corroborated 
 ilso by a similar feeling at Corinth. 1 The trade of Corinth, as 
 well as of Chalkis in Euba?a, was extensive, at a time when that 
 of Athens had s» jirce any existence. But while the despotism 
 of Periander ran hardly liave failed to oi>erate as a discourage- 
 ment to industry it Corinth, the contemporaneous legislation of 
 Solon provided for traders and artisans a new home at Athens, 
 gfiving the first encouragement to that numerous town-population 
 both in the city and in the Feirieeus, which we find actually 
 residing there in the succeeding century. The multiplication of 
 such town-residents, both citizens and raetics, or non-freemen, was 
 A capital fact in tl»e onward march of Athens, since it determined 
 not merely the extension of her trade, but also the preeminence 
 of her naval force, — and thus, as a farther consequence, lent ex 
 traordinary vigor to her democ^ratical government. It seems, 
 moreover, to have been a departure from the primitive temper of 
 Atticism, which tended both to cantonal residence and rural oc- 
 cu[>ation. We have, therefore, the greater interest in noting the 
 first mention of it as a consequence of the Solonian legislation. 
 
 To Solon is tintt owing the admission of a power of testamen- 
 tary bequest at Athens, in all cases in which a man had no le- 
 gitimate children. According to the preexisting custom, we may 
 rather presume that if a deceased j>erson left neither children 
 nor blood relations, his property descended, as at Rome, to his 
 gens and phratry."* Throughout most rude states of society, the 
 power of willing is unknown, as among the ancient Germans, — 
 among the Romans prior to the twelve tables, — in the old lawf 
 of the Hindus,** etc. Society limits a man's interest or power of 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 167-177 : compare Xenophon, (Economic, iv, 3. 
 
 The unbounded derision, however, which Aristophanes heapj< upon Kledn 
 1^ a tanner, and upon Hyperbolas as a lamp-maker, proves that, if any man- 
 •facturer engaged in politics, his party opponents found enough of the old 
 sentiment remaining to turn it to good account against him. 
 
 • This seems the just meaning of the words, iv ry jevet roi rci^viy/torof 
 idet Td xp^M^Ta Kal rdv oIkov Kara/xhfeiv, for that early day (Plutarch, Solon, 
 SI ) • compare Meier, De Oentilitate AtticA, p. 33. 
 
 * Tacitus, German, c. 20 ; Halhed, Preface to Gentoo Code, p. i, iii; llill'i 
 Hutory of British India, b. ii, ch. iv, p. SU. 
 
 TESTAMENTARY BEQUESTS ALLOWED BY fiOLOiq. ISf 
 
 enjoyment to his life, and considers his relatives as having joint 
 reversionary claims to his property, which take effect, in certain 
 determinate proportions, after his death ; and this view was the 
 more likely to prevtiil at Athens, inasmuch as the perpetuity of 
 the family sacred rites, in which the children and near relatives 
 partook of right, was considered by the Athenians as a matter of 
 public as well as of private concern. Solon gave permission to 
 every man dying without children to bequeathe his property by will 
 as he should think lit, and the testament was maintained, unless 
 it could be shown to have been procured by some compulsion or 
 improper seduction. Speaking generally, this continued to be 
 the law throughout the historical times of Athens. Sons, wher- 
 ever there were sons, succeeded to the property of their father in 
 equal shares, with the obligation of giving out their sisters in 
 marriage along with a certain dowry. If there were no sons, 
 then the daughters succeeded, though the father might by will, 
 within certain limits, determine the person to whom they should 
 be mai'ried, with their rights of succession attached to them ; or 
 might, with the consent of his daughters, make by will certain 
 other arrangements about his property. A person who had no 
 children, or direct lineal descendants, might bequeathe his prop- 
 erty at pleasure : if he died without a will, first his father, then 
 his brother or brother's children, next his sister or sister's child- 
 ren succeeded : if none such existed, then the cousins by the 
 father's side, next the cousins by the mother's side, — the male 
 line of descent having preference over the female. Such was the 
 principle of the Solonian laws of succession, though the particu- 
 lars are in several ways obscure and doubtful.' Solon, it appears, 
 was the first who gave power of superseding by testament the 
 rights of agnates and gentiles to succession, — a proceeding in 
 consonance with his plan of encouraging both industrious occu|>» 
 
 * See the Dissertation of Bunsen, De Jure Hercditario Atheniensium, pp. 
 28, 29; and Hermann Schelling, De Solonis Legibus ap. Oratt. Atticos, 
 chu xvii. 
 
 The adopted son was not allowed to bequeathe by will that property of 
 which adoption had made him the possessor : if he left no legitimate chil 
 dren, the heirs at law of the adopter cla/med it as ©f right ( Demosthen 
 esttt Leochar p. 1100; cont. Stephan. B. p. 1133,- Bunsen, itt sup. pa 
 
140 
 
 HISTORY OF GRLECE. 
 
 tiou and the consequent multiplication of individual acquisi 
 
 lions.' 
 
 It has been already mentioned that Solon forbade tlie sale of 
 daughters or sisters into slavery, by fathers or brothers,— a prohi- 
 bition which shows how much females had before been looked upon 
 as articles of property. And it would seem that before his time 
 the violation of a free woman must have been punished at the 
 discretion of the magistrates; for we are told that he was the 
 first who enacted a penalty of one hundred drachms against the 
 otl'ender, and twenty drachms against the seducer of a free 
 woman 2 Moreover, it is said that he forbade a bride when 
 given in marriage lo carry with her any personal ornaments and 
 appurtenances, except to the extent of three robes and certain 
 matters of furniture not very valuable.3 Solon farther imposed 
 upon women several restraints in regard to proceedings at tlie 
 obsequies of decca-sed relatives : he forbade profuse demonstra- 
 tions ot sorrow, singing of composed dirges, and costly sacrifices 
 and contributions; he limited strictly the quantity of meat and 
 drink ailinissible for the funeral banquet, and prohibited nocturnal 
 exit, except in a car and with a light. It appears that both in 
 Greece and Rome, the feelings of duty and affection on the part 
 of surviving relatives prompted them to ruinous expense in 
 a funeral, a" well Jis to unmeasured effusions both of grief and 
 conviviality; and the general necessity experienced for inter- 
 ference of tlie law is attested by the remark of Plutarch, that 
 similar prohibitions to those enacted by Solon were likewise in 
 force at his native town of ChxMoneia.^ 
 
 » Plutarch, Solon. 21, tu ;rpi7/iara, KrfffiaTa tuv ixovru^ iiroivaev. 
 « Accordincr to ^:s,hines (cont Timarch. pp. 16-78), the punishment 
 enacted by Solon against the rrpoayu>df, or procurer, in such cases of seduc 
 
 uon, *ras death. r i. j r 
 
 a Plutarch, Solon, 20. These <l>epval were independent of the dowry of 
 the hriile, for which the husband, when he received it, commonly gave secu- 
 rity, and repaid it in the event of his wife's death : see Bunsen, De Jure 
 
 Hered. Ath. p. 43. r ^l. ^ 
 
 * Plutarch, /. c The Solonian restrictions on the subject of funerals wero 
 to a jrreat decree copied in the twelve tables at Rome : see Cicero, De Legg. 
 IL 23 24 He esteems it a right thing to pat the rich and the poor on a 
 Itvel'in respect to funeral ceremonies. Plato follows an opposit-5 idea, and 
 
 SOLON S REWARDS TO THE OLYMPIC VICTORS. 
 
 141 
 
 Other penal enactments of Solon are yet to be mentioned. He 
 forbade absolutely evil-speaking with respect to the dead: he for- 
 bade it likewise with respect to the living, either in a temple or 
 before judges or archons, or at any public festival, — on paia 
 of a forfeit of three drachms to the person aggrieved, and iwa 
 more to the public treasury. How mild the general character of 
 his punishments was, may be judged by this law against foul 
 language, not less tlian by the law before mentioned against 
 rape : both the one and the other of these offences were much 
 more severely dealt with under the subsequent law of democrat- 
 ical Athens. The peremptory edict against speaking ill of a 
 deceased person, though doubtless springing in a great degree 
 from disinterested repugnance, is traceable also in part to that 
 fear of the wrath of the departed which strongly possessed the 
 early Greek mind. 
 
 It seems generally that Solon determined by law the outlaj 
 for the public sacrifices, tliough we do not know what were hia 
 particular directions : we are told that he reckoned a sheep and a 
 medimnus (of wheat or barley?) as equivalent, either of them, to 
 a drachm, and tliat he also prescribed the prices to be paid for 
 first-iate oxen intended for solemn occasions. But it astonishes 
 us to see the large recompense which he awarded out of the 
 public treasury to a victor at the Olympic or Isthmian games: 
 to the former five hundred drachms, equal to one year's iueoine 
 of the highest of the four classes on the census ; to the latter 
 
 limits the expense of funerals upon a graduated scale, according fo the ctnsua 
 of the deceased (Legg. xii, p. 959). 
 
 Demosthenes (cont. Makartat. p 1071 ) gives what he calls the Solonian 
 law on funerals, different from Plutarch on several points. 
 
 Ungovernable excesses of grief among the female sex are sometimes 
 :nentioned in Grecian towns : see the luaviKov Trevi^og among the Milesiao 
 women (Polyaen. viii, 63): the Milesian women, however, had a tinge ot 
 Karian feeling. 
 
 Compare an instructive inscription, recording a law of the Greek city of 
 Gambreion in JEolic Asia Minor, wherein the dress, the proceedings, and' th« 
 time of allowed mourning, for men, women, and children who had lost tlieif 
 relatives, are strictly prescribed under severe penalties (Franz, FOnf In:ichrit- 
 ten and funf Stadte in Kleinasien, Beriin, 1840, p. 17). Expensive cere 
 monies in the celebration of marriage are forbidden by some of the oU 
 Scandinavian laws (Wilda, Das Gilde \wesen im Mittelalter, p. 18j. 
 
142 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SOLON'S CENSURE OF MEUTBALITY. 
 
 143 
 
 one hundred drachms. The marrnitude of tlie.-c n; wards strike., 
 u.s the more when we compare tliem with the fines on rape and 
 evil sfieaking ; and we cannot be surprised that the philo^u^>he^ 
 Xeno])hanes noticed, with >ome degree of severity, the extrava- 
 gant estimate of this j^pecies of excellence, current among the 
 Grecian citiesJ At the same time, we must remember both 
 that these Fan-Hellenic sacred games presented the chiet" vi>ib!e 
 evidenct; of peace and .sympathy among the numerous commu- 
 nities of Greece, and thai in the time of Solon, factitious rewaid 
 was still needful to encourage them. In respect to land and 
 agricultui-e, Solon proclaimed a public reward of five drachms 
 for every wolf brought in, and one drachm for every wolf's cub : 
 the extent of wild land has at all times been considerable in 
 Attica. He also provided rules respecting the use of wells be- 
 tween neighbors, and respecting tlie planting in conterminous 
 olive-grounds. Wliether any of these regulations continued in 
 operation during the better-known period of Athenian history 
 caimot be safely athrmed.- 
 
 In respect to tlieft, we hnd it stated that Solon repealed the 
 punishment of deatli whicli Drako had annexed to that crime, and 
 enacteil as a }H*iialt\, com|>ensation to an amount double the value 
 of the property stub n. The simplicity of this law perhaps affords 
 grouuil tor |)resuming that it really does belong to Solon, but the 
 hiw which [)revailed diirinir the time of the oi*ators respecting 
 theft*' must have been iniro<luced at some later period, since it 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 23. XenojiluuK-s, Fnig. 2, c<i. Schneidewin. If Dioge- 
 nes i> to l»e tru.-^ted, the rewanls were even larger anterior to Solon : he 
 redncc<l them (Dio;;. 1. i, 55). 
 
 ' Pluturch, Solon, e. 23. See Suidas. v, ^itoofiv&a. 
 
 * See the laws in Denio.sihen. eont. Tiinokrat. pp. 733-736 Notwith- 
 •landinj; the ojiiniou l*oth of Heraldus (Animadversion, in Salmas. i^-, 8) 
 «nd of Meier ( Atti.><cher Prozess, p. 356), I ciiniiot imagine anything more 
 than the hasis of these law.s to ho Solonian. — they indicate a state of Attic 
 procedure too much elaiwrated for that day (Lysias c. Theoran. p. 356). The 
 word TToiSoKuKKij belongs to Solon, and probably the penalty of tive days' 
 oonfinemcnt ia the stfxks, for the thief who had not restored what he liad 
 stolen. 
 
 Aulus (icU. (xi, 18) mentions the simple /xena dujAi : in the authors fr<»i 
 whom he copied, it is evident that Solon was stated to have enacted this la^ 
 ^%*rally for cdl thefts: we cannot tell from whom he copied, but in anothei 
 
 enters into distinctions and mentions both places and forms of 
 procedure, which we cannot reasonably refer fo the 46th Olym- 
 piad. The public dinners at the prytaneium, of which the 
 archons and a select few partook in common, were also eithei 
 first established, or perhaps only more strictly regulated, by 
 Solon: he ordered barley cakes for their onlinary meals, and 
 wheaten loaves for festival days, prescribing how often each per 
 son should dine at the table.i The honor of dining at the table 
 ^f the prytaneium was maintained throughout as a valuable re- 
 ward at the disposal of the government 
 
 Among the various laws of Solon, there are few which have 
 attracted more notice than that which pronounces the man, who in 
 a sedition stood aloof and took part with neither side, to be dis- 
 honored and disfranchised.^ Strictly speaking, this seems more 
 in the nature of an emphatic moral denunciation, or a religious 
 curse, thaii a legal sanction capable of being formally applied in 
 an individual case and after judicial trial, — though the sentence 
 ot atimy, under the more elaborated Attic procedure, was both 
 definite in its penal consequences and also judicially delivered. 
 We may, however, follow the course of ideas under which Solon 
 was induced to write Uiis sentence on his tables, and we may trace 
 the influence of similar ideas in later Attic institutions. It is 
 obvious that his denunciation is confined to that special case in 
 which a sedition has alreaily broken out: we must suppose that 
 Kylon has seized the acropolis, or that Peisistratus, Megakies, 
 and Lykurgus are in arms at the head of their partisans? As-' 
 suming these leaders to be wealthy and powerful men, which 
 
 part of liis work, he copies a Solonian law from the wooden a^nve^ on the 
 authority of Aristotle (ii, 12). 
 
 Plato, in his Laws, prescribes the p<jena dufdi in all cases of theft, withoat 
 distinction of circumstances (Legg. ix, p. 857; xii, p. 941); it was also 
 the pnminre law of Rome: '• Posnerunt fnrem duplo c-ondemnari fcenera- 
 torem (luadruplo." (Cato, De Re Rustica, Procemium), — that is to say, in 
 rases of furtum nee mmifh^tum (Walter, Geschichtc des Rumisch. ReLhts. 
 sect. 757). 
 
 • Plutarch. Solon, 24; Athena, iv, p. 137; Diogen. Lacrt. i, 58: Kal npC 
 Tog rriv avvayuy^v tuw Ivvia apxovTuv trroiTimv, eif to avvei'neiv,~-.whtr^ 
 perhaps, ovvdffTTj'fZi; is the proper reading. 
 
 • Plutarch, Solon, 20, and De Sera Naminis VindictA, p. 550: Aaliu GelT 
 U. lii. 
 
 I 
 
144 
 
 niSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUBSEQri-^ DEM0C7RACY CONTRASTED. 
 
 145 
 
 would in all probability be the fact, the constituted authoritj — 
 Kuch as Solon >a\v before him in Attica, even after his own or- 
 ganic alnf'rl<l^ll'nt^ — was not strong enougli to maintain the 
 fH-ace ; it becanu', in fact, itself one of the contending parties. 
 Under such given «'ircumstances, the sooner every citizen publicly 
 declared his adherence to some one of them, the earlier this sus- 
 j)ension of legal authority was likely to terminate. Nothing wag 
 >>o mischievous as the indifference of the mass, or their disposi- 
 tion to let the combatants fight out the matter among themseh es. , 
 and then to submit to the victor :' nothing was so likely to en- 
 courage aggression on the part of an ambitious malcontent, as the 
 conviction that, if he could once overpower the small amount of 
 physical force winch surrounded the archons and exhibit himself 
 in armed possession of the prytaneium or the acropolis, he might 
 immediately count upon passive submission on the part of all the 
 freemen without. Under the state of feeling which Solon incul- 
 eates, the insurgent leader w^ould have to calculate that every 
 man who wjts not actively in his favor would be actively against 
 him, and this wouhl render his enterprise much more dangerous ; 
 indeed, he could th<^n never hope to succeed except on the double 
 8up[)Osition of extraordinary popularity in his own person, and 
 universal detestation of the existing government. He would thus 
 be placed under th<; influence of powerful deterring motives, and 
 mere ambition would be far less likely to seduce him into a course 
 which threatened nothing but ruin, unless under such encoura"-e- 
 ments from th*- preexisting public opinion as to make his success 
 a result desirable for the community. Among the small political 
 societies of Greece, — and es{)ecially in the age of Solon, when the 
 number of despots in other parts of Greece seems to have been at 
 its maximum, — rsrry government, whatever might be its form, 
 wa- siiflitientiy wink to make its overthrow a matter of compara- 
 tive tacility. riiKss upon the supf)osition of a band of foreign 
 mercenaries, — which would render it a goveniment of naked force, 
 and which the Athenian lawgiver would of course never contem- 
 plate, — there w;is no other stay for it except a positive and pro- 
 Dounced feeling of attachment on the part of the mass of citizens; 
 
 • See a case of siuli inditforencc manifested by the people of Argot, in 
 Plutarch's Life of Aracus, c. 27. 
 
 indifference on their part would render them a prey to every daring 
 man of wealth who chose to become a conspirator. That they 
 should be ready to come forward not only with voice but with arms, 
 — and that they should be known beforehand to be so, — was es- 
 sential to the maintenance of every good Grecian government. 
 It was salutary in preventing mere personal attempts at revolution, 
 and pacific in its tendency, even where the revolution had actually 
 broken out, — because, in the greater number of cases, the pro- 
 portion of partisans would probably he very unequal, and the 
 inferior party would be romi)elled to renounce their hopes. 
 
 It will be observed that in this enactment of Solon, the exist- 
 ing government is ranked merely as one of the contending parties. 
 The virtuous citizen is enjoined not to come forward in°its sup- 
 port, but to come forward at all events, either for it or against 
 it: positive and early action is all that is prescribed to hhn as 
 matter of duty. In the age of Solon, there was no political idea 
 or system yet current which couM he assumed as an unquestion- 
 able datum, — no conspicuous standard to which the citizens could 
 be pledged under all circumstances to attach themselves. The 
 option lay only between a mitigated oligarchy in possession and 
 a despot in possibility ; a contest when^in the affections of the 
 people could rarely be counted u]>on in favor of the established 
 government. But this neutrality in respect to the constitution wa« 
 at an end after the revolution of ICleisthenes, when the idea of 
 the sovereign j)eople and the democratical institutions became 
 both familiar and precious to every individual citizen. We shall 
 hereafter find the Athenians binding themselves by the most sin- 
 cere and «olemn oaths to uphold their democracy against all 
 attempts to subvert it; we shall discover in them a sentiment not 
 less positive and uncompromising in its direction, than energetic 
 in its inspirations. But while we notice this very important 
 change in their character, we shall at the same time perceive that 
 the wise precautionary recommendation of Solon, to obviate se- 
 dition by an early declaration of the impartial public between 
 two contending leaders, was not lost upon them. Such, in point 
 of fact, was the purpose of that salutary and protective institu- 
 tion which is called Ostracism. When two party-leaders, in the 
 aftrly stages of the Athenian democracy, each powerful in adhe- 
 VOL. III. " looc. 
 
 ■^^ 
 
14f$ 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 SOLON QUITS HIS NATIVE CITY 
 
 rents and inHuence, had become passionately embarked in bitter 
 and |nolon_n'<l opposition to each other, such opposition Mas likely 
 to <*onduct one or othrT o violent measures. Over and abovr* the 
 hopes of party triumpli, eacli mi^ht well fear that if he liini>elf 
 continued within the Ix)unds of legality, he might fall a victim to 
 aggi'essive [)roceedings on the part of h\> ...itagonists. To ward 
 off this formidable danger, a public vote was called for to deter- 
 mine which of the two should go into temporary banishment, 
 retaining his property and unvisite<l by any disgrace. A number 
 if citizens, not less than six thousand, voting secretly and there- 
 liire in<lependently, were reipiind to take part, proiK)uncing upon 
 one or other of these ernlufrit ri\alsa sentence of exile for ten 
 years: the one who rtinaintd iH-rame of course more powerful, 
 y»'t less in a situation to be driven into ami-constitutional courses, 
 titan he wa< before. I shall in a future chapter speak again of this 
 wise precaution, and vindicate it against ^oiiir erroneous inter{)reta- 
 tions to which it has given rise ; at present, 1 uu rely notice its anal- 
 O'jv with the previous Solonian law, and its t« ndency to accomplish 
 (he same [)ur[)Ose of terminating a fierce })arty-feud by artificially 
 willing in the votes of the mass of impartial citizens against one 
 or other of the leaders, — with this important dilference, that 
 while Solon assumed the hostile [)arties to be actually in arms, 
 the ostracism averted that grave public calamity by applying itd 
 remedy to the premonitory symptoms. 
 
 1 liave already considered, in a previous chapter, the directions 
 given by Solon for the more orderly recital of the Homeric 
 poems; and it is curious t<> ('(Kifrast his reverence for the old epic 
 with the nnqualitied repugnance which he raanifeste«l toward.^ 
 Thespis and the drama, — then just nascent, and holding out 
 little promise of its subsiipient excellence. Tragedy and comedy 
 were now beirinniu'' to be j'rafted on the lyric and choric song. 
 First, one actor was provided to relieve the chorus, — subst. 
 quently, two actors were intrmluced to sustain lictitiou- cliaracters 
 and carry oa a dialogue, in . jch manner that the songs of thu 
 chorus and the interlo<nition of the actors formed a continuous 
 piece. Solon, after having heard Thespis acting (as all the early 
 composers did, both tragic and comic) in his own comedy, asked 
 him afterwards if he was not ashamed to pronounce such false- 
 hoods before so large an audience. And when Thespis answered 
 
 147 
 
 £hat there was no harm in saying and doing such thmgs merely 
 tor amusement, Solon indignantly exclaimed, striking the ground 
 with his stick,' " If once we come to j)raise and esteem such 
 amusement as this, we shall quickly fmd the effects of it in our 
 daily transactions." For the authenticity of tliis anecdote it 
 would be rash to vouch, but we may at least treat it as the pro- 
 test of some early j)hilosophcr against the deceptions of the 
 drama ; and it is interesting, as marking the inci])ient struggles 
 of that literature in which Athens afterwards attained such°un- 
 ri vailed excellence. 
 
 It would appear that all the laws of Solon were proclaimed, 
 inscribed, and accepted without either discus>ion or resistance. 
 He is said to have described them, not as the best laws which he 
 could himself have imagined, but as the best which he could 
 have induced the people to accept ; he gave them validity for the 
 space of ten years, for which period^ both the senate collectively 
 and the archons individually swore to observe them with fidelity, 
 imder i)enalty, in case of non-observance, of a golden statue, as 
 large as life, to be erected at Delphi. But though the acceptance 
 of the laws was accomplished without difficulty, it Wfts not found 
 60 easy either for the people to understand and obey, or for the 
 framer to explain them. Every day, persons came to Solon 
 either with i)raise, or criticism, or suggestions of various improve- 
 ments, or questions as to the constmction of particular enact- 
 ments ; until at last he became tired of this endless process of 
 reply and vindication, which was seldom successful either in re- 
 moving obscurity or in satisfying complainants. Foreseeing that, 
 if he remained, he would be compelled to make changes, he obrained 
 leave of absence from his countrymen for ten years, trusting that 
 before the expiration of that period they would have become ac 
 customed to his laws. He quitted his native city, in the full 
 certainty that his laws would remain unrepealed until his return ; 
 for, says Herodotus, " the Athenians could not repeal them, since' 
 tiiey were bound by solemn oaths to observe them for ten years." 
 The unqualified manner in which the historian here speaks of aa 
 iMth, as if it created a sort of physical necessity, and shut out aU 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 29 ; Diogen. LaCrt. i, 59. 
 * Plutarch, Solon, 15. 
 
 
148 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SOLON AND CRCESUS. 
 
 149 
 
 possibility of a contrary result, deserves notice as illustrating 
 Grecian sentiment.' 
 
 On departing from Athens, Solon first visited Egypt, where he 
 communicated largely with Psenophis of Heliopolis and Sonchia 
 of Sais, Egyptian priests, who had much to tell respecting their 
 ancient history, and from whom he learned matter>, real or pre- 
 tended, far transcending in alleged antiquity the oldest Grecian 
 genealogies, — especially the history of the vast submerged isl- 
 and of Atlantis, and the war which the ancestors of the Athenians 
 had successfully carried on against it, nine thousand years before. 
 Solon is said to have commenced an epic poem ui)on this subject, 
 but he did not live to finish it, and nothing of it now remains. 
 From Egypt he went to Cyprus, where he visited the small town 
 of ^reia, said to have been originally founded by Demojihun, 
 eon of Theseus ; it was then under the dominion of the prince 
 Philokyprus, — each town in Cyprus having its own petty prince. 
 It was situated near the river Klarius, in a position precipitous 
 and secure, but inconvenient and ill-supplied; and Solon per- 
 nuaded Philokyprus to quit the old site, and establish a new town 
 down in the fertile plai.i beneatli. He himself stayed and became 
 oekist of the new establishment, making all the regulations 
 requisite for its safe and prosperous march, which was indeed so 
 decisively manifested that many new settlers flocked into the new 
 plantation, called by Philokyprus Soli, in honor of Solon. Ta 
 our deep regret, we are not permitted to know what these regu- 
 lations were ; but the general fact is attested by the poems of 
 Solon himself, and the lines, in which he bade farewell to Phila 
 kyprus on quitting the island, are yet before us. On the dispo- 
 sitions of this prince, his poem bestowed unqualified commen- 
 dation.2 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 29. SoAwi^ dv^p 'Ai^T/va^of, 6f 'A^vvaioiai vofiov^ KeXevaaoi 
 wotrfaacy uned^fiijae irea dUa^ iva 6t] fXTj nva rdv vufiuv uvayicua^Tf Xvaai 
 tCw l^ero* avrol yap ovk oloi re rjcrav avrh iroif/cac 'k-drivaloL 
 6pKioiai ydp fieya'koiai Kartixovro, StKa Irea xpV^^^^ vofto^Ji 
 rodf av o<pi SoAov ^^Tcu. 
 
 One hundred years is the term stated by Platarch (Sokm, 25). 
 
 'Flatareh, Solon, 26; Herodot. v, 113. The statements of Diogenfe 
 iM Solon founded Soli in Kilikia, and that he died in Cyjtriis, are Ml 
 IR>rthy of credit (Diog. Lraert. i, 51-62). 
 
 5 Vol.3 
 
 Besides his visit to Egypt and Cyprus, a story was also current 
 of his having conversed with the Lydian king Croesus, at Sardis ; 
 and the communication said to have taken place between them, 
 tias been woven by Herodotus into a sort of moral tale, which 
 tbrms one of the most beautiful e[>isodes in his whole history. 
 Though this tale has been told and retold as if it were genuine 
 history, yet, as it now stands, it is irreconcilable with chronology, 
 — although, very possibly, Solon may at some time or other ha\ a 
 visited Sardis, and seen Croesus as hereditary prince.^ 
 
 • Plutarch tells us thiit several authors rejected the reality of this interview 
 MS beinj:,' chronologically impossible. It is to ho recollected that the question 
 all turns upon the interview as described by lltrixlutus and its alleged sequel; 
 •or that there may have been an interview between Solon and CrcBsus at 
 Sardis, at some period between b. c 594 and 560, is possible, though not 
 
 shown. 
 
 It is evident that Solon made no mention of any interview with C'roesu» 
 in his poems ; otherwise, the dispute would have been settled at once. 
 Now this, in a man like Solon, amounts to negative evidence of some value 
 for he noticed in his i)oems both Egypt and the prince Philokyprus in 
 Cvi»rus, and had there been an} conversation so impressive as that whith 
 Ilerodotus relates, between him and Crcesus, he could hardly have failed tn 
 
 mention it. 
 
 Wesseling, Larcher, Volney, and Mr. Clinton, all try to obviate the chrr- 
 nological difficulties, and to save the historical character of this interview. 
 Sut in my judgment unsuccessfully. See Mr. Clinton's F. H. ad aim. 546 
 B.C., and Appendix, c. 17, p. 298. The chronological data are the.«=e, — 
 Crcesus was born in 595 b. c, one year before the legislation of Solon : he 
 succeeded to his father at the age of thirty-five, in 560 b. C- : he was over- 
 thrown, and Sardis captured, in 546 b. c, by Cyrus. 
 
 Mr. Clinton, after Wesseling and the others, supposes that Croesus was 
 king jointly with his fiUher Halyattes, during the lifetime of the latter, and 
 that Solon visited Lvdia and conversed with Crcesus during this joint rei^n 
 in 570 H c. " We may suppose that Solon left Athens in b. C. 575, about 
 twenty years after his archonship, and returned thjther in b c. 565, about 
 five years before the usurpation of Peisistratus." (p. 300.) Upon which 
 hypothesis we may remark : — 
 
 1 The arguments whereby Wesseling and Mr. Clinton endeavor to show 
 that CrcEsus was king jointly with his father, do not sustain the conclusion 
 The passage of Nikolaus Damaskenus, which is produced to show that it was 
 Halyattes (and not Croesus) who conquered Karia, only attests that Halyat- 
 tes marched with an armed force into Karia {t-xl Kaplan arparevuv): this 
 same author states, that Croesus was deputed by Halyattes to govern 
 Adramyttiun and tJie plain of Thtbi (upx^^'^ urroSedeiyfiivor), but Mr. Clintor 
 
 
IdG 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 But even if no cbronological objections existed, the moral piir 
 pose of the tale is so prominent, and pervades it so systemat« 
 
 itrctches this testimony to an inadmissible extent when he makes it tunta^ 
 mount to a concjuost of ^^Jo/is by Halyattes, {'^so that ^olis is already am- 
 ^vered*') Notliinu^ at all is said about ^olis. or the cities of the Tl-^olic 
 Greeks, in this })a8sage of Nikolaus, which represents Croesus as governing • 
 iort of satrapy under his father Plalyattes, just as Cyrus the younger did in 
 ifter-times under Artaxerxes. And the expression of Herodotus, irrei re, 
 iovToc Tov rrarpdr, hpurritTe r^f upxvc o Kpolao^, appears to me, when taken 
 tlong with the context, to indicate a bequest or nomination of successor, and 
 not a donation during life. 
 
 2. The hypothesis, therefore, that Croesus was king 570 b. c, during the 
 lifetime of his father, is one purely gratuitous, resorted to on account of the 
 chronological difficulties f onnected with the account of Herodotus. But it 
 is quite insufficient for such a purpose ; it does not save us from the neces- 
 Bity of contradicting Herodotus in most of his particulars ; there may, per- 
 haps, have been an interview between Solon and Crcesus in b. c. 570, but it 
 cannot be the interview described by Herodotus. That interview takes place 
 within ten years after the promulgation of Solon's laws, — at the maximun: 
 of the power of Croesus, and after numerous conquests effected by himself 
 as king, — at a time when Croesus had a son old enough to be married and 
 to command armies (Herod, i, 35), — at a time, moreover, immediately pre 
 ceding the turn of his fortunes from prosperity to adversity, first in the 
 death of his son succeeded by two years of mourning, which were put an 
 end to {iTtv&eo^ u-xtTravoe^ Herod, i, 46) by the stimulus of war with the Pei 
 fians. That war, if we n-ad the events of it as described in Herodotus, 
 cannot have lasted more ban three or four years, — so that the interview 
 between Solon and Croesus, as Herodotus conceived it, may be fairly stated to 
 have occurred within seven years before the capture of Sardis. 
 
 If we put together all ttiese conditions, it will appear that the interview 
 recounted by Herodotus is ;i chronological impossibility : and Niebuhr (Ron% 
 jesch. vol. i, p. 579) is right in saying that the historian has fkllen into 4 
 misrako of ten olympiads, or forty years ; his recital would consist witli 
 chronology, if we suppose that the Solonian legislation were referable to 554 
 B. c, and not 594. 
 
 In my judgment, this is an illustrative tale, in which certain real charac. 
 ters, — Croesus and Solon ; and certain real facts, — the great power and 
 succeeding ruin of the former by the victorious arm of Cvrus, — together 
 with certain facts probably altogether fictitious, such as the two sons of 
 CrcBsus, the Pliyrgian Adrastus and his history, the hunting of the mis 
 chievoas wild boar on Mount Olympus the ultimate preservation of Croesus, 
 etc., are pat together so «jj to conve> an impressive moral lesson. The 
 whole adventure of Adrastus and tht son of Crcesus is depicted in language 
 eminently beautifiil and pocjtical. 
 Plutarch treats *be impmssiveness and suitableness of this nam are af 
 
 SOLON AND CR(ESUS. 
 
 151 
 
 jcally, from bejpnning to end, that these internal grounds are of 
 themselves sufficiently stroncr to impeach its credibility as a 
 matter of fact, unless such doubts hapi>en to be outweighed — 
 whicii in this case they are not — by good contemporary t^ti- 
 mony. The narrative of Solon and Crojsus can be taken for 
 nothing else but an illustrative fiction, borrowed by Herodotus 
 from some philosopher, and clothed in his own peculiar beauty of 
 exprxission, which on this occasion is more decidedly poetical than 
 is habitual with him. I cinnot transcribe, and I hardly dare to 
 abridge it. The vainglorious Croesus, at the summit of his con- 
 quests and his riches, endeavors to win from his visitor Solon an 
 opinion that he is the happiest of mankind. The latter, after 
 having twice preferred to him modest and meritorious Grecian 
 citizens, at length reminds him that his vast wealth and power 
 are of a tenure too precarious to serve as an evidence of happi- 
 ness,— that the gods are jealous and n>eddlesome, and often 
 make tlie show <^ happiness a mere prelude to extreme disaster, 
 — and that no man's life can be called happy until the whole of 
 it has been played out, so that it may be seen to be out of tb-^ 
 reach of reverses. Croesus treats this opinion as absurd, but 4 
 great judgment from God fell upon him, aft«r Solon was ^epart- 
 ed, — probably (observes Herodotus) because he fancied himself 
 the happiest of all men.** First, he k)St his favorite son Atys, a 
 brave and intelligent youth, — his only ottier son being dumb. 
 For the Mysians of Olympus, being ruined by a destructive aad 
 
 the l)est proof of it^ historical truth, and puts aside the chronological tablet 
 as unworthy of trust Upon which reasoning Mr. Clinton has the following 
 very just remarks: " Plutarch must have had a very imperfect idea of the 
 nature of historical evidence, if he could imagine that the suitableness of a 
 story to the character of Solon was a better argument for its authenticity 
 than the number of witnesses by whom it is attested. Those who 'n>^e«it«d 
 the scene (assuming it to be a fiction) would surely have had the skill to 
 adapt the discourse to the character of the actors." (p. 300 ) .. y^ 
 
 To make this remark quite complete, it would be necessary to add the 
 word-: " tmstuxn-thiuess and means of hwwkdger in addition to the " iitfmftcr, 
 ^f attesting witnesses. And it is a remark the more worthy of nctict, 
 inasmuch as Mr. Clinton here pointedly adverts to the existence of j^an^ikU 
 fiction, as being completely distinct from attested matter of fact,- «t d«»tiiic- 
 tion of which he look no account in his vindication of the histm;-! 
 credibility of th»^ ea\ly Greek legends 
 
152 
 
 msrOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 formidable wild boar which they were unable to subdue, applied 
 for aid to Croesus, who sent to the spot a eliosen hunting force, 
 and oermitted, though witli great reluctance, in consequence of 
 an alarming dream, — that his favorite son should accompany 
 them. The young prince was unintentionally slain by the Phry- 
 gian exile Adrastus, whom Croesus had sheltered and protected ;• 
 and he had hardly ret^overed from the anguish of this misfortune, 
 when the rapid growth of Cyrus and the Persian power induced 
 him to go to war with them, against the advice of his wisest 
 counsellors. After a struggle of about three years he was com- 
 [)h'tely defeated, his capital Sardis taken by storm, and himself 
 made i)risoner. Cyrus ordered a large pile to be prepared, and 
 phtced upon it Croesus in fetters, together with fourteen young 
 Lydians, in the intention of burning them alive, either as a re- 
 ligious otlering, or in fulfilment of a vow, " or perhaps (says Ile- 
 ro<lotus) to see whether some of tlie gods would not interfere to 
 rescue a man so preeminently pious as the king of Lydia."^ In 
 ihis sad extremity, Croesus bethought him of the warning which 
 lie had before despised, and thrice pronounced, with a deep groan, 
 the name of Solon. Cyrus desired the interpreters to inquire 
 whom he was invoking, and learned in reply the anecdote of the 
 Athenian lawgiver, together with the solemn memento which he 
 had otiered to Crte.-ii- during more prosperous days, attesting the 
 frail tenure of all human greatness. The remark sunk deep into 
 the Persian moiuireh, as a token of what might happen to him- 
 self: he repented of 1 is purpose, and directed that the pile, which 
 had already been kindled, should be immediately extinguished. 
 liut the orders came too late ; in spite of the most zealous etibrts 
 
 RETURN OF SOLON TO ATHENS. 
 
 159 
 
 ' Herod, i, 32. 'i2 K^oitre, tTiaTufievov fie rb ^liov, irdv iov <p^ovtp6v re Kal 
 Ta^an^dtf, eTreiftuTdi fir a 'i^pwrr/yiwi- -f)ayfiuTuv irepi. i, 34. Mera 6e loAcjva 
 olxofievov, IXaStv U ^eoi rt/utoic fieyukf] Kpolaov, wf eUaaai on ho/niae 
 icivrnv ftvai uv&pi.rT(j>' wnurruv o/ huraroi'. 
 
 The huntinfT-miitch. an»l the terrible wild hoar with whom the Mvsians 
 pimnot cope, appear to he borrowed from the le},'cnd of Kalydon. The whole 
 •eene of Adrastus, returniDjr :iftcr the accident in a state of desperate 
 remorse, praying for death with outstretched hands, spared hy Crcesus, and 
 then killing himself on ihe tomb of the young prince, is r eeply tra^r 
 I Herod, i, 44-45). 
 
 * Herodot i, 85. 
 
 of the bystanders, the flame was found unquenchable, and Croesus 
 would still have been burned, had he not implored with prayers 
 Mid tears the succor of Apollo, to whose Delphian and Theban 
 temples he had given such munificent presents. His prayers 
 were heard, the lair sky was immediately overcast, and a profuse 
 min descended, sutficient to extinguish the flames.^ The life of 
 L nrsus was thus saved, and he became afterwards the confiden- 
 tial friend and adviser of his conqueror. 
 
 Such is the brief outline of a narrative which Herodotus has 
 given with full development and with impressive effect. It would 
 have served as a sliow-lecture to the youth of Athens, not less 
 admirably than the well-known fable of the Choice of Herakles, 
 svliich the philosopher Prodikus,^ a junior contemporary of He- 
 rodotus, delivered with so much popularity. It illustrates forcibly 
 the religious and ethical ideas of antiquity ; the deep sense of 
 the jealousy of the gods, who would not endure pride in any one 
 except themselves ;3 the impossibility, for any man, of realizing 
 to himself more than a very moderate share of happiness ; the 
 danger from reactionary nemesis, if at any time he had over- 
 passed such limit ; and the necessity of calculations taking in the 
 whole of life, as a basis for rational comparison of different indi 
 viduals ; and as a practical consequence from these feeHngs, a 
 constant protest on the part of the moralists against vehement 
 nnpulses and unrestrained aspirations. The more valuable this 
 narrative appears, in its illustrative character, the less can we 
 presume to treat it as a history. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that we have no information respect- 
 xntr events in Attica immediately after the Solonian laws and 
 constitution, which were promulgated in 594 b. c, so as to under- 
 hand better the practical effect of these changes. What we next 
 hear respecting Solon in Attica refers to a period immediate^ 
 preceding the first usurpation of Peisistratus in 5G0 B. c, and 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 86, 87 : compare Plutarch, Solon, 27-28. See a similaf 
 Btory about Gyges king of Lydia (Valerius Maxim, vii, 1, 2). 
 
 * Xenoph. Memorab. ii, 1, 21. UpodiKoc o tro^df h rip avyypafifMTL t# 
 jrepi 'Hpa/cAeovf, oirep d9f Kal nXeiffroiQ iirideiKwrai, etc. 
 
 ^ Herodot vii, 10. <pi?i€ei yap 6 tJedf rd virepexovra iravra KoX(nti9,,,m» 
 »i; yap i^ <l>povieiv fiiya 6 ^ed^ ak7ov // iutvrbv. 
 
 t * 
 
154 
 
 mSTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 STRATAGLM OF PEISISTRATUS. 
 
 155 
 
 after the return of Solon from his long absence. We are her« 
 again introduced to the same oligarchical dissensions as are re- 
 ported to have prevailed before the Solon ian legislation : the 
 pedieis, or opulent proprietors of the plain round Athens, under 
 Lykurgus ; the parali of the south of Attica, under Megakles : 
 and the diakrii, or mountaineers of tlie eastern cantons, the poor- 
 ear^ of the three classes, under Peisistratus, are in a state of 
 viilent intestine dispute. The account of Plutarch represents 
 Solon as returning to Athens during the height of this sedition. 
 lie was treated with respect by all parties, but his recommenda- 
 tions were no longer obeyed, and he was disqualified by age 
 from acting with effect in public. He employed his best efforts 
 to mitigate party animosities, and applied liimself particularly to 
 restrain the ambition of Peisistratus, whose ulterior projects he 
 quickly detected. 
 
 The future greatness of Peisistratus is said to have been first 
 portended by a miracle which happened, even before his birth, 
 lo his father IIij>j>okrates at the Olympic games. It was realized, 
 partly by his bravery and conduct, which had been displayed in 
 the capture of Nisyea from the Megarians,i — partly by his pop- 
 
 • Hcrodot i, 59. I rer-ord this allusion to Nisaea and the Megarian war, 
 because I find it distinctly stated in Herodotus; and because it may possibly 
 refer to some other Uite^r war between Athens and Megara than that which is 
 mentioned in Plutarch's Lite of Solon as having taken place before the 
 Solonian legislation (that is, before 594 b. c), and therefore nearly forty 
 years before this movement of Peisistratns to acquire the despotism. Pei- 
 •istratus must then have lieen so young that he could not with any propriety 
 be said to have "captured Nisaea" {Nioaiav re kTujv) : moreover, the public 
 reputation, which was foand useful to the ambition of Peisistratus in 5f.O 
 B. c, must have rested npon something more recent than his bravery dis- 
 played about 597 B. c. ; just as the celebrity which enabled Napoleon to 
 play thft game of successful ambition on the 18th Bruraaire (Nov. 1799) wsis 
 obtained by victories gained within the preceding five years, and conld not 
 have been represented by any historian as resting npon victories gained in 
 the Seven Years' war, between 1756-1763. 
 
 At the same time, my belief is that the words of Herodotus respectins 
 Peisistratus do really refer to the Megarian war mentioned in Plutarch's 
 Life of Solon, and that Herodotus supposed that Megarian war to have 
 been much more near to the despotism of Peisistratus than it really was. Id 
 the conception of Herodotus, and by what (after Niebuhr) I venture to call 
 • mistake in lis chronology, the interval between 600-560 b c. shrinks fron' 
 
 utarity of speech and manners, his championship of the poor,* 
 Riul his ostentatious disavowal of all selfish pretensions, -^ partly 
 by an artful mixture of stratagem and force. Solon, af\er having 
 addressed fruitless remonstrances to Peisistratus himself, publicly 
 denounced his designs in verses addressed to the people. The 
 deception, whereby Peisistratus finally accomplished his design, 
 is memorable in Grecian tradition.a He appeared one day in 
 the agora of Athens in his chariot with a pair of mules: he had 
 intenrionally wounded both his person and the mules, and in this 
 condition he threw himself ui)on the compassion and defence oi 
 the people, pretending that his political enemies had violently 
 attacked him. He implored the people to grant him a guard, 
 and at the moment when their sympathies were freshly aroused 
 both in his favor and against his supposed assassins, Aristo pro- 
 
 forty vears to little or nothing. Such mistake appears, not only on the 
 present occasion, but also upon two others : first, in regard to the alleged 
 dialogue between Solon and Croesus, described and commented upon a feif 
 nates above; next, in regard to the poet Alkaeus and his inglorious retreat 
 before the Athenian troops at Sigeium and Achilleium, where he lost his 
 shield when the Mitylencans were defeated. The reality of this incident is 
 indisputable, since it was mentioned by Alkieus himself in one of his songs; 
 but Herodotus represents it to have occun-ed in an Athenian expedition 
 dherted by Peisistratus. Now the war in which Alkaeus incurred this misfor- 
 tunc, and which was brought to a close by the mediation of Permnder of 
 Corinth must have taken place eariier than 584 b. c . and probably tc«* 
 place before the legislation of Solon; long before the time when Peisistratus 
 had the direction of Athenian affairs, - though the latter may have carried 
 on and probablv did carry on, another and a later u^ar against the Mityle 
 neans in those regions, which led to the introduction of his illegitimate son, 
 Hegesistratus. as despot of Sigeium (Herod, v. 94-95). 
 
 If we follow the representation given by Herodotus of these three differ- 
 ent strings of events, we shall see that the same chronological mistake per- 
 vades all of them, — he jumps over neariy ten olympiads, or forty years. 
 Alkceus is the contemporary of Pittakus and Solon. 
 
 I have already remarked, in the previous chapter respecting the despots 
 of Sikyon (ch. ix.), another instanc^e of confused chronology in Hero«lotiii 
 respecting the events of this period,-respecting Croesus, Megakles, AlkmaH>n 
 and Kleisthenes of Sikyon. 
 
 ' Aristot. Politic, v, 4, 5 ; Plutarch, Solon, 29. ,,_;^ 
 
 « Plato, Republic, viii, p. 565. rd rvpavviKdv oLrjina rb Tro?ive(yvJ.Xrrr^ 
 
 alTElv Tbv drjfiov tpv^KOQ TLvaq rov ffufiaroc, Iva acJc abroic v o rr* 
 
 \] 
 
166 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 poeed formally to tin; ekklesia, — the pro-bouleutic senate, bein| 
 composed of friends of Peisistratus, had previously authorized 
 the proposition,' — tliat a company of fifty club-men should be 
 assigned as a |)erm;inc!it body-guard for the defence of Peisistra- 
 tus. To this motion Solon opposed a strenuous resistance,'- but 
 found himself overborne, and even treated as if he had lost his 
 senses. The poor were earnest in favor of it, while the rich were 
 afraid to express their dissent ; and he could only comfort himself, 
 after the fatal vcle had been passed, by exclaiming that he was 
 wiser than the former and more determined than the latter. Such 
 was one of the first known instances in which this memorable 
 Ptratagem was phiyed off against the liberty of a Grecian com- 
 munity. 
 
 The unbounch'd poj)ular favor which had procured the passing; 
 of this grant, was still fartlifr manifested by the absence of all 
 precautions to [irevcnt the limits of the grant from being exceed- 
 ed. The number of the bodv-guard was not lonj? confined to 
 fifty, and probably their dubs were soon exchanged for sliarpei 
 weajmns. Peisistratus thus Ibund himself stronj^ enouijh to throw 
 ort' the mask and seize the acropolis. His leading opponents, 
 Megakles and the Alkmieonids, immediatelv fied the citv, and it 
 \xa* left to the venerable ajre and undaunted patriotism of Solon 
 to stand forward almost alom; in a vain attempt to resist the 
 usurpation. He publicly presented himself in the market-place, 
 employing encourajrcnient, remonstrance, and reproach, in order 
 to rouse the spirit of tlie peo|)le. To prevent this despotism from 
 coming, he told them ivcjidd have been easy ; to shake it olF now 
 was more difficult, yet at the same time more glorious.'' But he 
 spoke in vain ; for all who were not actually favorable to Peisis- 
 tratus listened only to their fears, and remained passive ; nor 
 did any one join Solon, when, as a last appeal, he put on his 
 armor and planted himself in military posture before the door of 
 his house. " I have ilone my duty, he exclaimed at length ; 1 
 have sustained to the best of my power my country and the 
 
 * Wog. Lat'ft. i, 49. f/ fhi'?Ji, UnijfjTpaTidai uvTt^, etc. 
 
 • I'lotarch, Solon. 29-30 ; Diog LaOrt. i, .'>0-51. 
 
 ' Plutarch, Solon, 30 ; Diogen. Laert. i, 49 ; Diodor. Excerj)'*, lib- vii-a 
 ad- Mail. Fr. xix-xxiv. 
 
 DEATH Of SOLON. 
 
 157 
 
 laws" and he then renounced all farther hope of opposition, - 
 hou<^h resisting the instances of his friends that he should flee 
 «.d returning f^r answer, when they asked him on what he rehed 
 for protection, " On my old age." Nor did he even think it nec- 
 essary to repress the inspirations of his Muse : some verse* ye 
 remain, composed seemingly at a moment when the strong hand 
 If the new despot had begun to make itself sorely felt, in which 
 h- f-lls his countrymen :" If ye have endured sorrow from your 
 own baseness of soul, impute not the fault of this to the gods. 
 Ye have yourselves put force and dominion into the hands ot 
 these men, and have thus drawn upon yourselves wretched 
 
 *'*U T trratifyin.' to learn that Peisistratus, whose conduct 
 throughout his despotism was comparatively mild, left Solon un- 
 touched. How long this distinguished man survived the prac- 
 tical subversion of his own constitution, we cannot cert^nly 
 determine ; but according to the most probable statement he died 
 the very next ye.ar, at the advanced age of eighty. 
 
 We have only to regret that we are deprived of the means of 
 following more in detail his noble and exemplary character. He 
 ^Xnts the best tendencies of his age, combined with much 
 that is personally excellent ; the improved ethical sensibility ; the 
 thirst for enlarged knowledge and observation, not less potent m 
 old age than in youth ; the conception of reguUinzed P«P»lj^ '"- 
 stitutions, departing sensibly from the type and spirit of the gov- 
 erlents aro'und htm, and calculated to found a new charac^r in 
 the Athenian people ; a genuine and reflectmg sympathy with the 
 mass of the ,U anxious not merely to rescue thetn from the op- 
 pressions of the rich, but also to create m them hab.ts of seU- 
 relyin- industry; lastly, during his temporary possession of. 
 Swer'altogether arbitrary, not merely an absence of all selhsh 
 Smbition, but a rare discretion in seizing the mean between con- 
 flicting exigencies. In reading his poems we must always recoU 
 lect that what now appears common-place was once new. so that to 
 his comparatively unlettered age, the social P'<='"f^^'",«:\'^* 
 draws were still fresh, and his exhortations calculated to hve n 
 the memory. The poems composed on moral subjects generally 
 
 inculcate a spirit of gentleness towards ^'^^^ r"" ^^^"^^^Z 
 personal objecU ; they represent the gods as irresistible, retnb,* 
 
153 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ROMAN LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDIIOR. 
 
 159 
 
 tive, favoring the gc»o(l and punishing the bad, though sometimea 
 very tardily. But his compositions on special and present occa- 
 sions are usually conceived in a niore vigorous spirit; denounc- 
 •jig the oppressions of' the rich at one time, and the timid submission 
 k> Peisistratus m anoilier, — and expressing, in emphatic language, 
 feis own [)roud consciousness of having stood forward as champion 
 cf the mass of the people. Of his early poems hardly anything 
 i:* preserved; the few lines which remain seem to manifest a jo- 
 vial temperament, which we may well conceive to have been over- 
 laid by the political difficulties against which he had to contend, 
 — difficulties arising successively out of the Megarian war, the 
 Ky Ionian sacrilege, the public despondency healed by Epimenides, 
 and the task of arbiter between a rapacious oligarchy and a suf- 
 fering people. In one of his elegies, addressed to Mininernius, 
 he marked out the sixtieth year as the longest desirable period of 
 life, in preference to the eightieth year, which that poet had ex- 
 pressed a wish to attain ;i but his own life, as far as we can judge, 
 rseems to have reachtd the longer of the two periods, and not the 
 least honorable part of it — the resistance to Peisistratus — oc- 
 curs immediately before his death. 
 
 There prevailed a story, that his ashes were collected and scat- 
 tered around the island of Salamis, which Plutarch treats as 
 absurd, — though he tells us at the same time that it was believed 
 both by Aristotle, and by many other considerable men: it is at 
 least as ancient as thti poet Kratinus, who alluded to it in one of 
 his comedies, and I do not feel inclined to reject it.2 The inscrip- 
 tion on the statue of Solon at Athens described him as a Salani- 
 oian : he had been the great means of acquiring the island for his 
 country, — and it seems highly probable that among the new 
 Athenian citizens who went to settle there, he may have received 
 a lot of land and become enrolled among the Salarainian demots. 
 The dispersion of his ashes in various parts of the island connects 
 him with it as in some sort the oekist; and we may construe tluu 
 
 ' Solon, Fragment 22, ed Bergk. Isokrates affirms that Solon was the 
 first person to whom the appellation Sophist — in later times carrying with 
 it ati much obloquy — was applied, (Isokrates, Or. xv, De Permutatione, p 
 944; p. 496, Bek.) 
 
 ' Plutaicli, Solon, 32; Kratinus ap. Diogen. Lacrt i, 62. 
 
 incident, if not as the expression of a public vote, at least as a 
 piece of affectionate vanity on the part of his surviving friends.i 
 We have now reached the period of the usurpation of Peisis- 
 tratus (B. C. 5G0), whose dynasty governed Athens — with two 
 temporary interruptions during the life of Peisistratus himself — 
 for fifty years. The history of this despotism, milder than Gre- 
 cian despotism generally, and productive of important cense- 
 quences to Athens, will be reserved for a succeeding chapter. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The explanation which M. von Saviguy gives of the Nexi and Addicti 
 under the old Roman law of debtor and creditor (after he has refuted the 
 elucidation of Niebuhr on the same subject), while it throws great light 
 on the historical changes in Roman legislation on that important subject, 
 Bets forth at the same time the marked difference made in the procedure of 
 Rome, between the demand of the creditor for repayment of principal, and 
 the demand for payment of interest. 
 
 The primitive Roman law distinguished a debt arising from money lent 
 (jyecunia certa credita) from debts arising out of contract, delict, sale, etc., or 
 any other source : the creditor on the former ground had a quick and easy 
 process, by which he acquired the fullest power over the person and property 
 of his debtor. After the debt on loan was either confessed or proved before 
 the magistrate, thirty davs were allowed to the debtor for payment : if pay- 
 ment was not made' within that time, the creditor laid hold of him (manu* 
 injectio) and carried him before the magistrate again. The debtor was now 
 again required either to pay or to fmd a surety (vindex); if neither of these 
 demands were complied with, the creditor took possession of him and car 
 ried him home, where he kept him in chains for two months; during which 
 interval he brought him before the prtetor publicly on three successive nun- 
 dinse. If the debt was not paid within these two months, the sentence of 
 addiction was pronounced, and the creditor became empowered either to put 
 his debtor to death, or to sell him for a slave (p. 81 ), or to keep him at forced 
 work, without any restriction as to the degree of ill usage which might bo 
 inflicted upon him. The judgment of the magistrate authorized him, be- 
 sides, to seize the property of his debtor wherever he could find any, within 
 
 ' Aristides, in noticing this story of the spreading of the ashes of Solon io 
 Salamis, treats him as 'Apxvyervc of the island (Orat. xlvi, 'YTrep tuv rerra. 
 pwv, p. 172 ; p. 230, Dindorf ). The inscription on his statue, which descnhoi 
 kirn' as born in Salamis, can hardly have been literally true; for when h« 
 was born, Salamis was not incorporated in Attica ; hut it may have been 
 true by a sort of adoption (see Diogen. LaCrt. i, 62). The statue seems to 
 have been erected by the Salaminiana fasmselves, a long time after Solon 
 lee Menage ad Diogen. Laert. L c. 
 
/ A 
 
 160 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the limits sufficient for }.ayment: this was one of the points which Niebuhi 
 had denied. 
 
 Such was the old law of Rome, with respect to the consequences of an 
 action for money had and received, for more than a century after the Twelve 
 Tables. But the law did not apply this stringent personal execution to any 
 debt except that arising from loan, — and even in that debt only to the princi- 
 pal money, not to the inttTcst, —which latter had to be claimed by a process 
 both more gentle and less efficient, applying to the property only and not to 
 the perion of the debtor. Accordingly, it was to the advantage of the creditor 
 to devise some means for bringing his claim of interest under the same 
 stringent process as his olnim for the principal ; it was also to his advantage, 
 if his claim arose, not out of money lent, but out of sale, compensation for 
 mjury, or any other source, to give it the form of an action for money lent. 
 Now the nexura, or nexi obligatio, was an artifice - a fictitious loan- 
 whereby this purpose was accomplished. The severe process which legally 
 belonged only to the recovery of the principal monev, was extended by the 
 nexum so as to comprehend the interest ; and so as to comi)rehend,'also, 
 claims for money arising from all other sources (as well as from loan). 
 wherein the law gave no direct recourse except against the propertv of a 
 debtor. The debitor nexus was made liable by this legal artifice to p.iss 
 mto the condition of an addictus, either without having borrowed money 
 at all, or for the interest as well as for the princi])al of that which he had 
 borrowe<l. 
 
 The Lex Peetelia, passed a out b. c. 325, liberated all the nexi then under 
 Uability. and interdicted the nexi obligatio forever afterwards {Cicero. Do 
 Republ. ii, 34; Livy, viii, 28). Here, as in the seisachtheia of Solon, the 
 ex.stmg contracts were cancelled, at the same time that the whole class of 
 similar contracts were forbidden for the future. 
 
 But though the nexi obligatio was thus abolished, the old stringent rem 
 edy still continued against the debtor on loan, as far as the principal sum 
 torroued, apart from mtcrest. Some mitigations were introduced : by a Lex 
 Julia, the still more important provision was added, that the debtor by 
 means of a cessio bonorum might save his person from seizure. But this 
 cessio bonorum was coupled with conditions which could not always b^ 
 fulfilled, nor was the debtor admitted to the benefit of it, if he had been 
 guilty of carelessness or dishonesty. Accordingly, the old stringent process, 
 and the addiction in which it ended, though it became less frequent, stiU 
 continued throughout the course of Imperial Rome, and even down to the 
 time of Justinian. The private prison, with adjudicated del)tors working in 
 it, was still the appendage to a Roman money-lender's house, even in the 
 third and fourth centuries after the Christian era, though the practice seems 
 to have become rarer and rarer. The status of the addictus debitor, with its 
 peculiar rights and obligations, is discussed by Quintilian (vii, 3) ; and Aulua 
 Gellius observes: " Addici namque nunc et vinciri multos videmus, quia vin- 
 culorum poenam deterrimi liomines contemnunt," (xx, 1.) 
 
 If the addictus debitor was adjudged to several creditors, they wer« 
 Hlloued by the Twelve Tables to divide his body among them No exampli 
 
 ROMAN LAW OF DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. 
 
 161 
 
 was known of this power having been ever carried into effect, but the law 
 was understood to give the power distinctly. 
 
 It is useful to have before us the old Roman law of debtor and creditor, 
 partly as a point of comparison with the ante-Solonian practice in Attica, 
 partly to illustrate the difference drawn in an early state of society between 
 the claim for the principal and the claim for the interest. 
 
 See the Abhandlung of Von Savigny in the Transactions of the Berlin 
 Academy for 1833, pp. 70-103; the subject is also treated by the same 
 admirable expositor, in his System des heutigcn Romischen Rechts, vol. t, 
 sect. 219, and in Beilage xiv, 10-11 of that volume. 
 
 The same peculiar stringent process, which was available in the case of 
 an action for pecuina ccrta credita, was also specially extended to the surety, 
 who had paid down money to liquidate another man's debt ; the debtor, if 
 solvent, became his addictus, — this was the actio depensi. 1 have already 
 remarked in a former note, that in the Attic law, a case analogous to this 
 vas the only one in which the original remedy against the person of the 
 debtor was always maintained. When a man had paid money to redeem a 
 citizen from captivity, the latter, if he did not repay it, became the slave of the 
 pa''ty who had advanced the money. 
 
 Walter (Geschichte des Romischen Rechts, sects. 583-715, 2d ed.) calls in 
 question the above explanation of Von Savigny, on grounds which do not 
 appear to me sufficient. 
 
 How long the feeling continued, that it was immoral and irreligious to 
 receive any interest at all for money lent, may l)e seen from the following 
 notice respecting the state of the law in France even down to 1789 : — 
 
 "Avant la Re'volution Franijaise (de 1789) le pret a inte'ret n'e'tait pas 
 egalement admis dans les diverses parties du royaume. Dans les pays de 
 droit ^crit, il ^tait permis de stipuler I'int^ret des de'niers pretes : mais la 
 jurisprudence des parlemens resistait souvent k cet usage. Suivant Ic droit 
 commun des pays coutumiers, on ne pouvait stipuler aucun interet pour le 
 pret appele' en droit mutuum. On tenait pour maxime que I'argent ne pro- 
 duisant rien par lui-meme, un tel pret devait etre gratuit : que la perception 
 d'inte'rets dtait une usure : h cet e'gard, on admettait assez ge'neralement les 
 principes du droit canonique. Du reste, la legislation et la jurisprudence 
 variaient suivant les localite's et suivant la nature des contr^ts et des obliga- 
 tions." { Carette, Lois Annote'es, ou Lois, De'crets, Ordonnances, Paris 1 843 ; 
 Note sur le De'cret de I'Assemble'e Nationale concernant le Pret et Intt^ret, 
 Aoat 11, 1789.) 
 
 The National Assembly declared the legality of all loans on interest, 
 "stiivant le taux de'termine par la loi," but did not then fix any special rate. 
 "I/e de'cret du 11 Avril, 1 793, de'fendit la vente et I'achat du nume'raire." 
 " La loi du 6 flore'al, an in, declara que Tor et I'argent sont marchandises ; 
 mais elle ftit rapportee par le decret du 2 prairial suivant. I^es articles 1905 
 et 1907 du Code Civil permcttent le pret a inte'ret, mais au taux fix^ oa 
 •uteris^ par la loi. La loi du 3 Scf t. 1807 a fixe' le taux d'inte'ret a 5 pet 
 cent, en mati^re civile et ii 6 per cent en matier^ commerciale." 
 
 VOL. III. ll^'C. 
 
162 
 
 HISTORY CF GREECE 
 
 The articli on Leidinj^-houses, in Becitraann's History of Inventions (vol 
 iii, pp. 9-50), is liijj:lil,v intercstinjj and instructive on the same subject. It 
 traces the gradual calling in question mitigation, and disappearance, of the 
 Micient antipathy against taking mtereist for money, an antipathy long sane- 
 tioned by tlie ecclesiastics as well as by the jurists. Leuding-houses, or 
 Monts de Piete, were first commenced in Italy about the middle of the 
 ffteenth century, by some Franciscan monks, for the pur})osc of rescuing 
 poor borrowers from tJae exorbitant exactions of the Jews : Pope Pius th« 
 Bcc( nd (^^neas Silviits, one of the ablest of the popes, al)Out 1458-I4*)4), 
 was the first who a}>provcd of one of them at Perugia, but even the jiapal 
 •anction wa^ long combated by a large proportion of ecclesiastics. At first, 
 it was to be purely charitable ; not only neither giving interest to those who 
 contributed money, nor taking interest from the borrowers, — but not even 
 providing fixed pay to the administrators : interest was tacitly taken, but the 
 popes were a long time; before they would formally approve of such a prac- 
 tice. " At Viecnza, in order to avoid the reproach of usury, the artifice was 
 employed of not demanding any interest, but admonishing the borrowers that 
 they should give a remuneration according to their pieiy and ability," (p. 
 31 ) The Dominican-, partisans of the old doctrine, called these establish- 
 ments Montes Impktatts. A Franciscan monk Bemardinus, one of the most 
 active promoters of the Monts de Piete, did not venture to defend, but only 
 to excuse as an unavoi iable evil, the payment of wages to the clerks and 
 administrators : " Speciosius et religiosius fatebatur Bernardinus fore, si 
 absque ullo penitas obolo et pretio mutoum daretur et commodaretur libere 
 pecunia, sed pium opus et paupcrum subsidium exiguo sic duraturum 
 lemf)ore. Non enim (Inquit) tantus est ardor hominum, ut gubernatores et 
 officiales, Montium ministerio necessarii, relint laborem hunc omnem gratis 
 Bubire : quod si remuncrandi sint ex sorte principali, vel ipso deposito, sen 
 exili Montium aerario brevi exhaurietur, et commodum opportunumque 
 IBtud pauperum refugium ubic}ue peribit^" (p. 33.) 
 
 The Council of Trent, during the following century, pronounced in favor 
 of the legality and usefulness of these lending-houses, and this has since 
 been understood to be the sentiment of the Catholic church generally. 
 
 To trace this gradual change of moral feeling is highly instructive, — the 
 more so, as that general basis of sentiment, of which the antipathy against 
 lending money on interest is only a particular case, still prevails largely in 
 loeiety and directs the urrcnt of ntoral npproijation and disapprob;>tion. In 
 •ome nations, as aniom: the ancient Persians l>efore Cyras, this sentment 
 has been carried so far as to repudiate and <lespise all buying and selling 
 (Herodot i, 153). With many, the j)rinciple of reciprocity in human deal* 
 tags appears, when conceived in theory, odious and contemptible, and goes 
 by some bad name, such sis egoism, selfishness, calculation, political econo 
 mj, etc : the only sentument which they will admit in theory, is, that the 
 nan who has, ought to be ready at all times to give away what he has to 
 him ^ho has not; while the latter is encouraged to expect and reqvin 
 h gratuitous <ionntion 
 
 EUB(EA. — CYCLADES. 
 
 163 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 EUB(E A. - CYCLADES. 
 
 Among the Ionic portion of Hellas are to be i^eckcned (beside* 
 Athens) P^ubcea, and the numerous group of islands included be- 
 tween the southernmost Euboean promontory, the eastern coast of 
 Peloponnesus, and the north-western coast of Krete. Of these 
 islands some are to be considered as outlying prolongations, in a 
 south-easterly direction, of the mountain-system of Attica ; others, 
 of that of Euboea ; while a certain number of them lie apart from 
 either system, and seem referable to a volcanic origin.^ To the 
 first cla>^s belong Keos, Kythnus, Senphus, Pholegandrus, Sikinus, 
 Gyarus, Syra, Paros, and Antiparos ; to the second class, Andros, 
 Tenos, Mykono?, Delos, Naxos, Amorgos ; to the third class, 
 Kimolus, Melos, Thera. These islands passed amongst the an- 
 cients by the general name of the Cyclades and the Sporades ; 
 the former denomination being commonly understood to comprise 
 those which immediately surrounded the sacred island of Delos, 
 
 the latter being given to those which lay more scattered and 
 
 apart. But the names are not applied with uniformity or steadi- 
 ness even in ancient times : at present, the whole group are usu 
 ally known by the title of Cyclades. 
 
 The population of these islands was called Ionic, — with the ex- 
 ception of Styra and Karystus in the southern part of Euboea, 
 and the island of Kythnus, which were peopled by dryopes,^ the 
 j^ame tribe as those who have been already remarked in the Ar- 
 <»olic peninsula ; and with the exception also of Melos and Thera, 
 which were colonies from Spcarta. 
 
 The island of Euboea, long and narrow like Krete, and exhibit- 
 ing a continuous backbone of lofty mountains from north-west to 
 south-east, is separated from Boeotia at one point by a strait so 
 Darrow (celebrated in antiquity under the name of the Eurfpofl), 
 
 ' See Fiedler, Puisen durch Griechenland, vol. ii, p. 87. 
 '* Herodot. viii, 46 ; Thncyd. vii, 57. 
 
164 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 i.i 
 
 ' ! 
 
 »M 
 
 that the two were connected bj a bridge for a large |)ortion oi 
 the historical period of Greece, erected during the later times of 
 the Peloponnesian war by the inhabitants of Chalkis.i Its gen« 
 f^ral want of breadth leaves little room for plains: the area o^ 
 thp island consists principally of mjuntain, rock, dell, and ravine, 
 suited in many parts for pasture, but rarely convenient for grain- 
 culture or town habitations. Some plains there were, however, 
 of great fertility, especially that of Lelantum,- bordering on the 
 sea near Chalkis, and continuing from that city in a southerly di- 
 rection towards Eretria. Chalkis and Kretria, both situated on 
 the western coast, and both occupying parts of this fertile plain, 
 were the two princi()al places in the island: the domain of each 
 seems to have extended across the island from sea to sea.^ 
 Towards the northern end of tlie island were situated Histiosa, 
 afterwards called Oreus, — as well as Kerinthus and Dium, Athe- 
 nie Diades, j^depsiiis, iEga3, and Orobiie, are also mentioned on 
 the north-western ccast, over against Lokris. Dystus, Styra. and 
 Karystus are made known to us in the portion of the island south 
 of Eretria, — the two latter opposite to the Attic demes Halie, 
 Araphenides, and Prasi:r.» The large extent of the island of 
 Euboea was thus distributed between six or seven cities, the 
 larger and central portion belonging to Chalkis and Eretria. But 
 the extensive mountain lands, applicable only for pastures in the 
 summer, — for the most part public lands, let out for pasture to 
 such proprietors as had the means of providing winter sustenance 
 elsewhere for their cattle, — were never visited by any one ex- 
 cept the shepherds ; and were hardly better known to the citizeof 
 
 * Diodur. xiii, 47. 
 
 ' Kullimucluis, Hymn, ad Delum, 289, with Spanheira's note; TheogniSi 
 ' S88; Thcophnist. Hist. Plant. 8, 5. 
 
 See Leake, Travels in Northern Greece, vol. ii, ch. 14, p. 254, seq. The 
 pas>^age of TheofrTiis leads to the belief that Kerinthus formed ji part of th« 
 Urritory of Chalkis. 
 
 ' Skylax (c. 59) treais the island of Skyms as opposite to Eretria, the 
 territory of which mnsi,, therefore, have included a portion of the eastern 
 coast of Euboea, as well as the western. He recognizes only four cities in 
 the island, — Karystus, Eretria, Chalkis and Hestiaea. 
 
 * Mannert. Geograph. Gr. Rom psxrt viii, book i, c 16, p. 248; Strabo. T, 
 up. 445-449. 
 
 CHALKIS. FRETRIA. NAXOS, ETC. 
 
 16ft 
 
 resident in Chalkis and Eretria than if they had been situated 
 on the other side of the M^e&nJ 
 
 'ITie towns above enumeratea in Euboea, exceptmg Athena 
 Diades, all find a place in the Iliad. Of their history we know 
 no particulars until considerably after 776 B. C, and they are first 
 introduced to us as Ionic, though in Homer the population are 
 -ailed Abantes. The Greek authors are never at a loss to give 
 u= the etymology of a name. While Aristotle tells us that the 
 Abantes were Thracians who had passed over into the island 
 from Abae in Phokis, Hesiod deduces the name of Euboja from 
 tlie cow 16.2 Hellopia, a district near Histaea, was said to have 
 been founded by Hellops, son of Ion : according to others, ^klus 
 and Kothus, two Athenians,:* were the founders, the former of 
 Eretria, the latter of Chalkis and Kerinthus : and we are told, 
 that among the demes of Attica, there were two named HistiaBa 
 and Eretria, from whence some contended that the appellations 
 of the two Eub^an towns were derived. Though Herodotus 
 represents the population of Styra as Dryopian, there were others 
 
 ' The seventh Oration of Die Chrysostoni, which describes his shipwreck 
 near Cape Kaphareus, on the island of Euboea, and the shelter and kmdnes. 
 which he experienced from a poor mountain huntsman, presents one of the 
 most interestinj,^ pictures remaining, of this purely rustic portion of the 
 Greek population (Or. vii, p. 221, se^) -men who never entered the c.ty. 
 and were strangers to the habits, manners, and dress there prevailing, - 
 nien who drank milk and were clothed in skins iya^aKro^rorac avi)p, ovpei. 
 Surac, Eurip. Elektr. 169), yet nevertheless (as it seems) possessing right 
 of citizenship (p. 238) which they never exercised. The industry of the 
 poor men visited by Dion had brought into cultivation a little garden and 
 field in a desert spot near Kaphareus. . ^ r u 
 
 Two-thirds of the territory of this Euboic city consisted of barren moan- 
 tain (p 232) ; it mast probably have been Karystus. 
 
 The high lands of Euboea were both uninhabited and difficult of approach, 
 OTon at the time of the battle of Marathon, when Chalkis and Eretna hijd 
 not greatly declined from the maximum of their power: the inhabitante of 
 Eretria looked to ra uKpa rf/g Ei3om as a refuge against the Persian foroe 
 ander Datis (Herod, vi, 100). 
 t Strabo x X) 445. 
 * Plutarch,' Qu^st. Gr«c. p. 296 ; Strab. x, p. 446 (whose statement. «« 
 
 rery perplexed) ; Velleius Patercul. i, 4. ^ , ^ u t> ^ 
 
 Recording to Skymnus the Chian (v. 572), Chalkis was founded by P« 
 dftnis son of Erechtheus, and KSrinthus by Kotlon, from Athens 
 
 
 .y:^GMt>et7^ 
 
%65 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 wIk) contended that it had originally been pet pled from Marathon 
 and the tetrapolis of Attica, partly from the demo called steireis. 
 The principal writers whom Strabo consulted seem to trace (he 
 population of Euboea, by one means or other, to an Attic origin, 
 though there were peculiarities in the Eretrian dialect which g^ve 
 rne to the supposition that they had been joined by settlers from 
 Klis, or from the Triphylian Makistus. 
 
 Our earliest historical intimations represent Chalkis and Ere- 
 tria as the wealthiest, most powerful, and most enterprising Ionic 
 cities in Euro[)ean Greece, — apparently surpassing Athens, and 
 not inferior to S imos or Miletus. Besides the fertility of the 
 plain Lelantum, Chalkis possessed the advantage of copper and 
 iron ore, obtained in immediate proximity both to the city and 
 to the sea, — which her citizens smelted and converted into arms 
 and other implements, with a very profitable result : the Chalki- 
 dic sword acquired a distinctive renown. • In this mineral source 
 of wealth several of the other islands shared: iron ore is found 
 in Keos, Kythnus, and Seriphus, and traces are still evident in 
 the latter island of extensive smelting formerly practised.^ 
 Moreover, in Siphnus, there were in early times veins of silver 
 and gold, by which the inhabitants were greatly enriched ; though 
 their large acqui^tions, attested by the magnitude of the tithe3 
 \^hich tlicy oH'ered at the Delphian temple, were only of tempo- 
 rary duration, and belong particularly to the seventh and sixth 
 centuries betbre the Christian era. The island of Naxos too, 
 was at an early day wealthy and populous. Andros, Tenos! 
 Keos, and several other islands, were at one time reduced to 
 
 EARLY IONIC FESTIVAL AT DELOS. 
 
 167 
 
 ' Straho, X, p. 44f, — riap de XaTiKidiKai (rnd'&ai (Alka^us, Fra<'^m. 7. 
 Schneidewin), — Xa/.<if(5f/coi' norijpiov (Aristophun Eqnit 2.37), — certainly 
 belonjrs to the Euh.jno Chalkis, not to the Thrakian Chalkidike. Boeckh, 
 Stnatshaushalt. der Athener, vol. ii, p. 284, App. xi, cites XaAKcdLKu norr/pia 
 in an inscription: compare Steph. Bjz. XaA/c/f fiavmKXeiTTjc EiikHr.r 
 /lomer, Hymn. Apoll. 219. 
 
 * See the mineralogical account of the islands in Fiedler (Reiscn vol ii 
 pp. 88, 118, 562). 
 
 The copper and iron ore near Chalkis had cea.sed to be worked eren is 
 the time of Strabo: Fiedler indicates the probable site (vol. i. p. 44,3). 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 57. The Siphnians, however, in an evil hoor. committed 
 the wrcng of withholding this tithe : the sea .soon rushed in and rendered 
 ihe minefl ever afterwardj! unworkable {Pausan. x, 11. 2). 
 
 dependence upon Eretria .1 other islands seem to have been m 
 like manner dependent upon Naxos, which at the time immedi- 
 ately preceding the Ionic revolt possessed a considerable maritirao 
 force, and could muster eight thousand heavy-armed citizens,2 — 
 a very large force for any single Grecian city. Nor was the mili- 
 tary force of Eretria much inferior ; for in the temple of the 
 Amarynthian Artemis, neaHy a mile from the city, to which the 
 Eretrians were in the habit of marching in solemn procession to 
 celebrate the festival of the goddess, there stood an ancient col- 
 umn setting forth that the procession had been performed by no 
 less than three thousand hoplites, six hundred horsemen, and sixty 
 chariots.3 The date of this inscription cannot be known, but it 
 can hardly be earlier than the 45th Olympiad, or 600 B. C, — 
 near about the time of the Solonian legislation. Chalkis wM 
 Btill more powerful than Eretria ; both were in early times gov- 
 erned by an oligarchy, which among the Chalkidians was called 
 hippoboto, or horse-feeders, — proprietors probably of most part 
 of the plain called Lelantum, and employing the adjoining moun- 
 tains as summer pasture for their herds. The extent of theif 
 property is attested by the large number of four thousand kle- 
 ruchs, or out-freemen, whom Athens quartered upon their lands, 
 aft«r the victory gained over them when they assisted the ex- 
 pelled Hippias in his efforts to regain the Athenian sceptre.* 
 
 Confining our attention, as we now do, to the first two centunes 
 of Grecian" history, or the interval between 776 b. c. and 560 
 B. C, there are scarce any facts wliich we can })roduce to ascer- 
 tain the condition of these Ionic islands. Two or three circum- 
 
 ' Strabo, X, p. 448. - , j • »u 
 
 « Herodot. v, 31. Compare the accounts of these vanous islands m the 
 recent voyages of Professor Ross, Reisen auf den Gricchischen Inseln, vol 
 
 i, letter 2; vol. ii, letter 15. , ^ , *u„» «r 
 
 The population of Naxos is now al)Out eleven thousand souls ; that of 
 
 Andros fifteen thousand (Ross, vol. i, p. 28 ; vol. ii, p. 22). ^ , . . 
 
 But the extent and fertility of the Naxian plain perfectly suffice for thai 
 aggregate population of one hundred thousand souls, which seems imphe.l m 
 the account of Herodotus. 
 
 ' Strabo, I.e. , ■, •» — 
 
 * Herodot. v, 77 ; Aristoteles, Fragment, ^epl u^^reiCrv, ed. Nciimaaa 
 
 pa 111-112: compare Aristot. Polit. iv, 3, 8. 
 
 t If 
 
 !l. 
 
168 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EARLY TONIC FESTIVAL AT DELC»S 
 
 160 
 
 Btanoe , ho wever, may be named, which go to confirm our idei 
 of tht'ir early weahh aiul importance. 
 
 J. The ilonierio- Hymn tu Apollo presents to us the island of 
 Delos as the centre of a great periodical festival in honoi- of 
 A|Xillo, celebrated by all the cities, insular and continental, of 
 the Ionic name. What the date of this hymn is, we have no 
 means of determining : Thucydides quotes it, without hesitation, as 
 Ihe production of Homer, and, doubtless, it was in his time univer- 
 sally accepted as such, — though modern critics concur in re^ardina 
 both that and the other hymns as much later than the Ilhid and 
 Ody.>>.'y : it ctuniot probably be later than 600 b. c. The de- 
 ecri[»tion of the Ionic visitors presented to us in this hymn is 
 Bplendid and imposing : the number of their ships, the display of 
 their tinery, the beauty of their women, the athletic exhibitions as 
 well as the matches of song and dance, — all these are represented as 
 milking an ineffaceable impression on the spectator :' *« the assem- 
 bled lonians look as if they were beyond the reach of old age or 
 death." Such was the magnificence of which Delos waJ the 
 [)erio(lical theatre, and which called forth the voices and poetical 
 genius not merely of itinerant bards, but also of the Delian 
 maidens in the temple of Apollo, during the century preceding 
 560 B. c. At that time it was the great central festival of the 
 lonians in Asia and Europe; frequented by the twelve Ionic 
 cities, in and near Asia Minor, as well as by Athens and Chalkis 
 in Europe : it had not yet been superseded by the Ephesia as 
 the exclusive festival of the former, nor had the Fanathena?a of 
 Athens reached the im[)ortance which afterwards came to belon^ 
 to them during the plenitude of the Athenian power. 
 
 We find both Tolykrates of Samos, and Peisistratus of Athens, 
 taking a warm interest in the sanctity of Delos and the celebrib 
 of this festival.-' But it was partly the rise of these two great 
 
 * Horn. Hymn. ApoU. Del. 146-176; Thucyd. iii, 104 : — 
 
 ^airj k' u%}avuTovf Kal uy^pu^ lufxevai aiei, 
 "Of Tor' iiravTiuaei* 6t* 'laover u-&pooi elev- 
 XlavTuv yap kcv IdoiTo XiiptVy reprpatro 6e ^ftdm, 
 'Avdpac r' eiaopocjVy Ka}.Xi^uvov^ re yvvaiKOtf 
 N^av r' uKeiaCf V^ avTdv xprjfiara noXXd. 
 " Th;icv<l iij, 104, 
 
 Ionian despots, partly the conquests of the Persians in Asia 
 Minor, which broke up the independence of the numerous petty 
 Ionian cities, during the last half of the sixth century before the 
 Christian era ; hence the great festival at Delos gradually de- 
 clined in importance. Though never wholly intermitted, it was 
 phorn of much of its previous ornaments, and especially of that 
 which constituted the first of all ornaments, — the crowds of joyous 
 visitors. And Thucydides, when he notices the attempt made by 
 the Athenians during the Peloponnesian war, in the height of 
 their naval supremacy, to revive the Delian festival, quotes the 
 Homeric Hymn to Apollo, as a certificate of its foregone and 
 long-forgotten splendor. We perceive that even /le could find 
 no better evidence than this hymn, for Grecian transactions of a 
 century anterior to Peisistratus, — and we may, therefore, judge 
 how imperfectly the history of this period was known to the men 
 who took part in the Peloponnesian war. The hymn is exceed- 
 ingly precious as an historical document, because it attests to us 
 a transitory glory and extensive association of the Ionic Greeks 
 on both sides of the JEgean sea, which the conquests of the 
 Lydians first, and of the Persians afterwards, overthrew, — a 
 time when the hair of the wealthy Athenian was decorated with 
 golden ornaments, and his tunic made of linen,' like that of the 
 Milesians and Ephesians, instead of the more sober costume and 
 woollen clothing which he subsequently copied from Sparta and 
 Peloponnesus, — a time too when the Ionic name had not yet 
 contracted that stain of effeminacy and cowardice, which stood 
 imprinted upon it in the time of Herodotus and Thucydides, and 
 which grew partly out of the subjugation of the Asiatic lonians 
 by Persia, partly out of the antipathy of the Peloponnesian Do- 
 rians to Athens. The author of the Homeric Hymn, in describ- 
 ing the proud lonians who thronged, in his day, to the Delian 
 festival, could hardly have anticipated a time to come, when the 
 Dftfne Ionian would become a reproach, such as the European 
 Greeks, to whom it really belonged, were desirous of disclaiming.^ 
 
 * Thucyd. i, 6. Sia to ii^podiaL-^ov^ etc. 
 
 » Herodot. i, 143. 01 fxev vvv dAXot 'Icjvef kcI ol W^Tjvalot l<f>v}Ov rd 
 nvvofxa. ov (3ov?.6nevoi 'luvff KeKXr/a^ai, — an assertion quite unquestionable 
 irjth reference to the times immediately preceding Herodotus, but not equally 
 
 >. tl 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 r- 
 
 I 
 
170 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EUBOIC SCALE OF MONEY AND WEIGHT. 
 
 17) 
 
 2 Another illustrative fact, in reference both to the lonians 
 generally, and to Chalkis and Eretria in particular, during tiie 
 century anterior to Peisistratus, is to be found in the war between 
 these two cities respecting the fertile [)lain Lelantum, which lay 
 oetween them. In general, it appears, these two important 
 towns maintained harmonious relations ; but there were some oc- 
 ca.sions of dispute, and one in particular, wherein a formidable 
 war ensued betw«.*cn them. Several allies joined with each, and 
 it is remarkable that this was the only war known to Thucydides, 
 anterior to tlie Persian conquest, which had risen above the dig- 
 nity of a mere quarrel between neighbors; and in which so many 
 different states manifested a disposition to interfere, as to impart 
 to it a semi-Hellenic character.^ Of the allies of each party on 
 this occasion we know only that the Milesians lent assistance to 
 Eretria, and the Samians, as well as the Thessalians and the 
 Chalkidic colonies in Thrace, to Chalkis. A column, still visible 
 during the time of Strabo, in the temple of the Amarynthian 
 Artemis near Eretria, recorded the covenant entered into mu- 
 tually by the two bellii^e rents, to abstain from missiles, and to 
 employ nothing but hand- weapons. The Eretrians are said to 
 have been superior in horse, but they were vanquished in the 
 battle ; the tomb of Kleomachus of Pharsalus, a distinguished 
 warrior who had j)erished in the cause of the Clialkidians, was 
 erected in the agoira of Chalkis. We know nothing of the date, 
 the duration, or the particulars of this war ;- but it seems that 
 
 admissiblo in regard to the earlier times. Compare Thucyd. i, 124 (with 
 the Scholium), and also v, 9; viii. 25. 
 
 * Thucyd. i, 15. The second Me8.<?enian war cannot have appeared 
 to Thucydides as having enlisted so many allies on each side as Pausanias 
 represents. 
 
 * Straho, viii, p. 448; Herodot. v, 99 j Piatarch, Amator, p. 760, — valua 
 ble by the reference to Aristotle. 
 
 Hesiod passed over from Askra to Chalkis. on the occasion of the funeral 
 pames celebrated by the sons of Amphidamas in honor of their deceased 
 father, and gained a tripod as prize by his 8ong or recital (Opp. Di. 656) 
 Acconling to the Schc4ia, Amphidamas was king of Chalkis, who perished 
 •n the war against Eretria respecting Lelantum. But it appears that Plu 
 tarch threw out the lines as spurious, though he acknowledges Amphidamai 
 08 a vigorous champion of Chalkis in this war. See Scptem Sapient 
 Conviv. c. 10, p. 153. 
 
 This visit of Hesiod to Chalkis was represented as the scene of his poetic J 
 
 the Eretrians were worsted, though their city always maintained 
 its dignity a^ the second state in the island. Chalkis was de« 
 cidcdly the first, and continued to be flourishing, populous, and 
 commercial, long after it had lost its political importance, through 
 out all the period of Grecian independent history.' 
 
 3. Of the impoitance of Chalkis and Eretria, during tht 
 tfev( a- h and part of the eighth century before the Christian era, 
 n c gather other evidences, — partly in the numerous colonies 
 founded by them, whicll 1 shall advert to in a subsequent chap- 
 ter, — partly in the prevalence throughout a large portion of 
 Greece, of the Euboic scale of weight and money. What the 
 (quantities and proportions of ^s scale were, has been first shown 
 by M. Boeckh in his " Metroloffie." It was of Eastern origin, 
 and the gold collected by DareiuB in tribute throughout the vast 
 Persian empire, was ordered to be delivered in Euboic talents. 
 Its divisions, — the talent equal to sixty minaj, the mina equal to 
 one hundred drachms, the drachm eq«al to six obols, — were the 
 same as those of the scale called Mgir^pan, introduced by Phei- 
 dOn of Argos ; but the six obols of the Euboic drachm contained 
 a weight of silver equal only to five JEgiv3d»n\ obols, so that the 
 Euboic denominations, — drachm, mina, and talent, — were 
 equal only to five-sixths of the same denominations in the -^gi- 
 naian scale. It was the Euboic scale which pref wled at Athens 
 before the debasement introduced by Solon ; whU* debasement, 
 — amounting to about twenty-seven per cent., as h>» been men- 
 tioned in a previous chapter, — created a third scale, called the 
 Attic, distinct both from the JEginaean and Euboic, — 3*<uiding to 
 the former in the ratio of 3 : 5, and to the latter, in the ratio of 
 18 : 25. It seems plain that the Euboic scale was adopted by the 
 lonians through their intercourse with the Lydians,'"^ and ciher 
 Asiatics, and that it became naturalized among their cities uni^ 
 the name of the Euboic, because Chalkis and Eretria were tl 
 most actively commercial states in the ^gean, — just as the su 
 perior commerce of ^gina among the Dorian states, had given 
 
 competition with and victory over Homer. (See the Certaraen Hom. et He* 
 p. 315, ed. Gottl.) 
 
 ' See the striking description of Chalkis given by DikwarchuB in the Bioj 
 'E^.laSo^ (Fragment, p. 146, ed. Fohr). 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 94. 
 
 
 i 
 
172 
 
 HrSTORr OF GREECE. 
 
 EMIGRANTS TO IONIA. 
 
 178 
 
 lo the scale introduced by Pheidon of Argos, the name of ^gin. 
 eaii. The fact of its being so called indicates a time when t iese 
 two Euboean cities surpassed Athens in maritime power and ex- 
 tended commercial relations, and when they stood among the 
 foremost of the Ionic cities througliout Greece. The Euboic 
 scale, after having been debased by Solon, in reference to coinage 
 and money, still continued in use at Athens for merchandise: th# 
 Attic mercantile miua retained its primitive Euboic weight.^ 
 
 CHAPTER XIII, 
 
 ASIATIC lONIANS. 
 
 There existed at the (jonmiencement of historical Greece, in 
 776 B. c, besides the lonians in Attica and the Cyclades, twelve 
 Ionian cities of note on or near tlie coast of Asia Minor, besides 
 a few others les^ important. Enumerated from south to north, 
 they stand,— Miletus, Myus, Priene, Samos, Ephesus, Kolophon, 
 Lebedus, Teos, ICrythruB, Chios, Klazomenaj, Phok^ea. 
 
 That these cities, the great ornament of the Ionic name, were 
 founded by emigrants from European Greece, there is no reason 
 to doubt. How, or when, they were founded, we have no history 
 to tell us ; the legend, which luis ah-eady been set forth in a pre- 
 ceding chai)ter, j.:ives us a great event called the Ionic migration, 
 referred by chronologists to one special year, one hundred and 
 forty years after the Trojan war. This massive grouping belongs 
 to the cliaracter of legend, — the ^olic and Ionic emigrations, as 
 well as the Dorian conipiot of Peloponnesus, are each invested 
 with unity, and imprinted upon the imagination as the results of 
 a siniile great impulse. But such is not the character of the 
 historical colonies : when we come to relate the Italian and Sici- 
 lian emigrations, it will appear that each colony has its own sep- 
 arate nativity and causes of existence. In the case of the Ionia 
 
 emigration, this large scale of legendary conception is more ihan 
 usi'ally conspicuous, since to that event is ascribed the foundation 
 or repeopling both of the Cyclades and of the Asiatic Ionian 
 
 cities. 
 
 Euripides treats Ion,' the son of Kreusa by Apollo, as the 
 planter of these latter cities : but the more current form of the 
 legend assigns that honor to the sons of Kodrus, two of whom 
 are especially named, corresponding to the two greatest of the 
 ten continental Ionic cities : Androklus, as founder of Ephesus, 
 Neileus of Miletus. These two towns are both described as 
 founded directly from Athens. The others seem rather to be 
 separate settlements, neither consisting of Athenians, nor emanat- 
 in«' from Athens, but adopting the characteristic Ionic festival 
 of the Apaturia, and, in part at least, the Ionic tribes, — and re- 
 ceivinty princes from the Kodrid families at Ephesus or Miletus, 
 as a condition of being admitted into the Pan-Ionic confederate 
 festival. The poet Mimnermus ascribed the foundation of his 
 native city Kolophon to emigrants from Pylus, in Peloponnesus, 
 under Andriemon : Teos was settled by Minyie of Orchomenus, 
 under Athanias : Klazoraenne by settlers from KleOnae and Phli- 
 us, Pliokiea, by Phocians, Priene in hirge i)ortion by Kadmeians 
 from Thebes. And with regard to the powerful islands of Chios 
 and Samos, it does not appear that their native authors, — the 
 Chian poet Ion, or the Samaian poet Asius, — ascribed to them a 
 population emanating from Athens : Pausanias could not make 
 out from the poems of Ion how it happened that Chios came to 
 form a part of the Ionic federation.- Herodotus, especially, 
 dwells upon the number of Grecian tribes and races, who con- 
 tributed to supply the population of the twelve Ionic cities, — 
 MinyL€, from Orchomenus, Kadmeians, Dryopians, Phocians, 
 Molossians, Arkadian Pelasgians, Dorians from Epidaurus, and 
 " several other sections" of Greeks. Moreover, he particularly 
 
 Se« Boeckh's Metrologie, c. 8 and 9. 
 
 • Euripid. Ion, 1546. KTiarop' "Xouidoc x^^^^^- 
 
 * Pausan. vii. 4, 6. Toaavra eipTjKora Ic X/ouc 'l(jva evpiaKW oh fttnoi 
 iiceivoc ye dprjKf:. xai?' r/vTiva alriav Xloi teaovoiv kg 'Idvar. 
 
 Respecting Samos, and its primitive Karian inhabitants, displaced by P« 
 lrokl^> and Tembrion at the head of Grecian emicrants, see Et;,^ol. ^Blag. f 
 
ir4 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MIXED POPULATION OF IONIC CITIES. 
 
 176 
 
 •ingles out the Milesians, as claiming for themselves the tiuest 
 Ionic blood, and as having started from the prytaneium, at 
 Athens; thus plainly implying his belief that the majority, at 
 least, of the remaining settlers did not take their departure from 
 
 the same heartli.' 
 
 But the mo^t striking information which Herodotus conveys to 
 us i.^, the difference of language, or dialect, which marked these 
 twelve cities. Miletus, Myiis, and Pri.'ne, all situated on the 
 5oil of the Karians, had one dialect : Ephesus, Koloi>h6n, Lebe- 
 dus, Teus, Klazomeniv, and Phukiea, had a dialect common to 
 all, but distinct from that of the three preceding: Chios and 
 Erythra3 exhibited a third dialect, and Samos, by itself, a fourth. 
 Nor does the historian content himself with simply noting such 
 quadruple variety of speech; he employs veiy strong terms to 
 express the degree of dissimilarity."^ The testimony of Herodo- 
 tus as to these dialects is, of course, indisputable. 
 
 Instead of ooe great Ionic emigration, then, the statements 
 
 ' Ilerod. i 146. fTe/,Mf ye eri (xaAXov ouroi {i. e. the inhabitants of the 
 Pan-Ionic Dodekiij olis) 'luvig eiai tuu uXXuv 'luvuv, >) kk/M6v tl yeyovaai, 
 uupiv i^oIXti Xeyeiv tQv 'XSavrec H Ei)(3oi7}g ehlv ovk aaxiffrrj {xoipa, rolm 
 •luvtiyc /"fT* «^'^^ '''^' ''"''^/^«™f oifSev' Wwai Se 'Opxofievioi avafiefiixarai^ 
 Kal Ka^fieloi, koI ^fWOTre^, kcu ^uKhc uiro^ucrfMtoi, ko). Uo/ioaaol, Kal 'Ap/cddtf 
 ne'Aarryoi^ xal Aupih^ 'EiriSavpm, uXla re li?vea rro'A.Aa uvafxefuxaraL. Of 
 dk avTEU)V, utt6 to') Upwavrjlov rov 'A-&T/vaiuv bpfirj-^evreiy Kal vo/xl^ovTet 
 yevvaioTUToi elvai luvuv, ovtui 6e ov yvva'iKa^ ijyayov el^ atroLKtriv, uAXd 
 Kaetpcf kaxov, tuv Uovtvaav roi^r ynrfaq Tavra 61 fjv yivofiEva h Mf- 
 
 The polemical tone in whirh this remark of Herodotus is delivered is ex 
 plained by Dahlminn on the supposition that it was destined to confute 
 certain boastful pretensions of the Milesian llckat»us (see Bahr, cwf /oc., and 
 Kiuuscn ad Uekata i Frap. 225). 
 
 The test of Jonisn, aicordin^ to the statement of Herodotus, is, that a city 
 should derive its ori-in from Athens, and that it should celebrate the solem 
 nity of the Apaturia (i. 147). But we must construe both these testa with 
 indulgence. Ephesus and Kolophon were Ionic, though neither of them 
 celebrated the Apaturia. And the colony might be formed under the auspices 
 of Athens, though the settlers were neither natives, nor even of kindred race 
 
 irith the natives, of Attica. 
 
 ■ Herod, i, 142. Ephesus, Kolophon, Lebedus, Teos, Klazomema, Phokju 
 — o*ra< al rroAftf ryai Ttporepov Xex^einriai dfiO?.oy£OV(n Kard, ylCteaav oidev 
 
 above cited conduct us rather to the supposition of many separate 
 and successive settlements, formed by the Greeks of different 
 sections, mingling with and modified by preexisting Lydiana 
 and Karians, and subsequently allying themselves with Miletus 
 and Ephesus into the so-called Ionic amphiktyony. As a con- 
 dition of this union, they are induced to adopt among their 
 chieis princes of the Kodrid gens or family ; who are called sons 
 of Kodrus, but who are not for that reason to be supposed neces- 
 garily contemporary with Androklus or Neileus. 
 
 The chiefs selected by some of the cities are said to have been 
 Lykians' of the heroic family of Glaukus and Bellerophon : in 
 Borae causes, the Kodrids and the Glaukids were chiefs con- 
 jointly. Respecting the dates of these separate settlements, wc 
 cannot give any account, for they lie beyond the commencement 
 of authentic history : there is ground for believing that most of 
 them existed for some time previous to 776 B. c, but at what 
 date the federative solemnity uniting the twelve cities was com- 
 menced, we do not know. 
 
 The account of Herodotus shows us that these colonies were 
 composed of mixed sections of Greeks, — an important circum- 
 stance in estimating their character. Such wa^j usually the case 
 more or less in respect to all emigrations, and hence the estab- 
 lishments thus planted contracted at once, genei-ally speaking, 
 both more activity and more instability tlian was seen among 
 those Greeks who remained at home, and among whom the old 
 habitual routine had not been counterworked by any marked 
 change of place or of social relations. For in a new colony it be- 
 came necessary to adopt fresh classifications of the citizens, to 
 rano-e them tos:ether in fresh military an<l civil divisions, and to 
 adopt new characteristic sacrifices and religious ceremonies as 
 bonds of union among all the citizens conjointly. At the first 
 outset of a colony, moreover, there were inevitable difficulties to 
 be surmounted, which imposed upon its leading men the necessity 
 of energy and forethought, — more especially in regard to mari- 
 time affairs, on which not only their connection with the country- 
 men whom they had left behind, but also their means of establish* 
 mg advantageous relations with the population of the interior, 
 
 
 , M 
 
 » Herodot. i, 146. 
 
J 76 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 I'AN-IONIC FKSTIVAL. 
 
 177 
 
 depended. At the same time, the new arrangements indis{»ens 
 able among the colonists were far from working always harmo. 
 niously : dissension and partial secessions were not unfrequent 
 occurrences. And what has been called the mobility of the 
 Ionic race, as compared with the Doric, is to be ascribed in a 
 great measure to this mixture of races and external stimulus 
 arising out of e repatriation: for there is no trace of it in Atticii 
 anterior to Solon ; and on the other hand, the Doric colonies of 
 Korkyra and Syracuse exhibit a population not less excitable 
 than the Ionic towns generally,' and much more so than the 
 Ionic colony of Massalia. The remarkable commercial enter- 
 prise, which will be seen to characterize Miletus, Samos, and 
 Phokaea, belongs but little to anything connected with the Ionic 
 temperament. 
 
 All the Ionic towns, except Klazomenae and Phokcea, are rep- 
 resented to have been founded on some preexisting settlements 
 of Karians, Lelegians, Kretans, Lydians, or Pelasgians.'^ In 
 some cases these previous inhabitants were overcome, slain, or 
 expelled ; in others they were accepted as fellow-residents, and 
 the Grecian cities thus established acquired a considerable tinge 
 of Asiatic customs and feelings. What is related by Herodotus 
 res|)ecting the first establishment of Neileus and his emigrants at 
 Miletus is in this point of view remarkable. They took out with 
 them no women from Athens (the historian says), but found 
 wives in the Karian women of the place, whose husbands and 
 fathers they overcame and put to death ; and the women, thus 
 violently seized, manifested their repugnance by taking a solemn 
 oath among themselves that they would never eat with their new 
 husbands, nor ever call them by their personal names. This 
 same pledge they imposed upon their daughters ; but how long 
 the practice lasted, we are not informed: it rather seems from 
 the Ianf!:uao^e of the historian that traces of it were visible even 
 in h's day in the family customs of the Milesians. The popula- 
 tion of this greatest of the Ionic towns must thus have been 
 hak' of Karian breed. It is to be presumed that what is true 
 
 • Thncyd. \-i, 17, about the Siciliiin Greeks — o;fAoff re yap ^nfiiKTolq ko 
 }^v<'*>^ioov<Jl^ al noXtig, Kal ^adiac exovai tuv noXiTeiiJv rag fi€Tal3oXdg Koi 
 
 ^ See Raoul Rochette. Histoire des Colonies Grecques, b. iv, c 10, p. 93 
 
 of'lSeileus and his companioni; would be found true, als^i, respert 
 ing most of the maritime colonies of Greece, and tiiat the vessels 
 whinh took them out would be scantily })rovicled with women. 
 But on this point, unfortunately, we are left without infoi-mation 
 
 The worship of Apollo Didymaeus, at Branchidir, near Miletus, 
 — that of Artemis, near Ephesus, — and that of the Apollo 
 Klarius, near Kolophon, — seems to have exi>ted anion*'- the 
 native Asiatic population before the establishment of either of 
 these three cities. To maintain these preexisting local rites 
 was not less congenial to the feelings, than beneficiul to the 
 interests, of the Greeks: all the three establishments acquired 
 increased celebrity under Ionic administration, and contributed in 
 their turn to the prosperity of the towns to which they were 
 attached. Miletus, Myus, and Priene were situated on or near 
 the productive plain of the river Ma?ander ; while Ephesus was, 
 in like manner, planted near the mouth of the Kaister, thus 
 immediately communicating with the productive breadth of land 
 separating Mount Tmolus on the north from Mount Messogis 
 on the south, through which that river runs: Kolophon is only 
 a very few miles north of the same river. Possessincr the 
 best means of communication with the interior, these three 
 towns seem to have thriven with greater rapidity than the rest ; 
 and they, together with the neighboring island of Samos, con- 
 stituted in early times the strength of the Pan-Ionic anijjhikty- 
 ony. The situation of the sacred precinct of Poseidon (where 
 this festival was celebrated), on the north side of the promontory 
 of Mykale, near Priene, and between Ephesus and Miletus, 
 Beems to show that these towns formed the primitive centre to 
 which the other Ionian settlements became gradually aggregated. 
 For it was by no means a centrical site with reference to all the 
 twelve ; so that Thales of Miletus, — who at a subsequent period 
 recommended a more intimate political union between the twelve 
 Ionic towns, and the establishment of a common government to 
 manage their collective affairs, — indicated Teos,' and not Priend, 
 as the suitable place for it. Moreover, it seems that the Pan 
 Ionic festival,'2 though still formally continued, had lost itf 
 
 ii 
 
 Ki 
 
 *Herodot. i, 170. 
 
 • Both Diodorus (xv, 49) and Dionysias of Halikamassus (A. R. W, 251 
 
 VOL. III. 8* ISor 
 
178 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MAGNESIA. 
 
 importance beforii the time of Thucydides, and had becoma 
 practically superseded by the more splendid festival of the 
 Ephesia, near Ewhesus, where the cities of Ionia found a more 
 attractive place «>t" meeting. 
 
 An island clo^ • adjoining to the coast, or an outlying tongue of 
 land connected vv ith the c»ontinent by a narrow isthmus, and pre- 
 senting some hiU suthcient for an acropolis, seems to have been 
 COij0idered as the most favorable situation for Grecian colonial 
 settlement. To one or other of these descriptions most of the 
 Ionic cities, conlorm.i The city of Miletus at the height of its 
 power had four separate liarbors, formed probably by the aid of 
 the island of Lade and one or two islets which lay close off against 
 it : the Karian or Kretan establislmient, which the Ionic colonista 
 found on their arrival and conquered, was situated on an eminence 
 overhanging the sea, and became afterwards known by the name 
 of Old Miletus, at a time when the new Ionic town had been 
 extended down lo the water-side and rendered miiritime.'^ The 
 territory of this important city seems to have comprehended both 
 the southern promontory called Foeeidium and the greater part of 
 the northeni pi-omontory of Mykale,-^ reaching on both sides ui^ the 
 river Meander : the inconsiderable town of Myus"* on the southern 
 bank of the Mieander, an otfset seemingly formed by the secession 
 of some Milesian malcontents under a member of the Neleid gens 
 named Kydrelus, maintained for a long time its autonomy, but wa"^ 
 
 179 
 
 speak as if the convocation or festival had been formally transferred to Ephe. 
 BUS, in consequence of the insecnrity of the meetings near MykalS : Strabc 
 on the contrary speaks of the Pan-Ionia as if they still in his Urae celebrated 
 in the oripnalspot (xiv, pp. 636-638), under the cure of the Prieneans. The 
 formal transfer is not probable: Tbiu-ydides (iii. 104) i)roves that in his time 
 the festival of Ephesia was practically the Pan- Ionic rendeavons, thouj^h 
 Hero<lotus does not seem to hare conceired it as such. See Gnhl, Epheiiaca, 
 part iii, p. 1 17 , and K. F. Hermann, Gotteadicnstlichc Altcrthumcr der Grie- 
 
 chen c. 66, p. 343. 
 
 ' The site of Miletus i* best iwlicated by Arrian, i, 1^20; see that of 
 Phoksea. Erythrie. Myonne^us, Klazomenae. Koloi)h6n, Teos (Strabo, xiv, j p 
 S44-645 ; Pausan. vii, 3, 2; Livy, xxxvii, 27-31 ; Thncyd. viii, 31). 
 
 * Stmbo. xir, p. §35. 
 
 » Strabo, xiv, p. 633 ; Herwi. ix, 97-99. To Yloaeidtot. rutt M/A^^mm 
 
 Btrabo, xiv, p. 651. 
 
 « Strabo, xiv, p- 636 i Vitruviui. iv, I ; Poly«n. riii, 3*. 
 
 at length absorbed into the larger unity of Miletus ; its swampy 
 territory iiaving been rendered uninhabitable by a plague of irnata. 
 Priene acquired an im|)ortance greater than naturally belonged 
 to it, by its immediate vicinity to the holy Pan-Ionic temple and 
 its function of administering the sacred rites,' — a dignity which 
 it probably was only permitted to enjoy in consequence of the 
 jealousies of its greater neighbors Miletus, P^jdiesus, and Sanios/^ 
 The territories of these Grecian cities seem to have been inter- 
 spersed with Karian villages, probably in the condition of subjects 
 It is rare to find a genuine Greek colony established at any 
 distance from the sea ; but the two Asiatic towns called Magnesia 
 form exce})tion3 to this position, — one situated on the south side 
 of the Mteander, or rather on the river Letha?us, which runs into 
 the Maeander; the other more northerly, adjoining to the iEolic 
 Greeks, on the northern declivity of Mount Sipylus, and near lo 
 the plain of the river Harmus. The settlement of both these 
 towns dates before the period of history : the tale^ which we read 
 alfirms them to be settlements from the JNIagnetes in Thessaly, 
 formed by emigrants who had first passed into Krete, under the 
 orders of the Delphian oracle, and next into Asia, where they are 
 said to have extricated the Ionic and JEolic colonists, then recently 
 arrived, from a position of danger and calamity. By the side of 
 tliis story, which can neither be verified nor contradicted, it ii 
 |)roper to mention the opinion of Niebuhr, that both these towns of 
 Magnesia are remnants of a primitive Pelasgic iwpulation, akiq 
 to, but not emigrants from, the Magnetes of Thessaly, — Pelas- 
 gians whom he supposes to have occu[)ied both the valley of the 
 Mermus and that of the Kaister, anterior to the JEolic and Ionic 
 migrations. In support of this opinion, it may be stated that ther« 
 were towns bearing the Pelasgic name of Larissa, both near the 
 Hermus and near the Marauder : Menekrates of Elrea considered 
 the Pelasgians as having once occupied most part of that coast; 
 
 •Tlmcyd. i, 116. 
 
 ' Strabo, xiv, pp. 636-638. 
 
 ^ Conon, Narrat. 29 ; Strabo, xiv, pp. 636-647. 
 
 The Btory in Parthenias about Leukippus, leader rC/v deKarevdevruv U 
 4>ipT]c vtt' 'k6firjTov, who came to the Ephcsian territory and acquired pos* 
 session of the place called Kretinaeon, by the treachery of Leukc phrye, daugh- 
 ter of Mandrolytos, whether truth or romance, is one of the notices of Tke» 
 «**lian mi;;ration into those parts (Parthen. Narrat. 6). 
 
 'W 
 
 ,'•!■ 
 
 i 
 
 ^I ) 
 
 ) 
 
3R0WTH OF EPHESUS. 
 
 lao 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 181 
 
 and 0. Miiller even conceives the Tyrrhenians to have been 
 Pelasgians from Tyrrha, a town in the interior of Lydia south 
 of Tmolus. The point is one upon which we have not sutficient 
 evidence to advance beyond conjecture. ^ 
 
 Of the Ionic towns, with wliich our real knowledge of Asia 
 Minor begins, ^Jiletus^ was the most powerful; and its celebrity 
 was derived not merely from its own wealth and population, but 
 also from the extraordinary number of its colonies, established 
 pnncipally in the Propontis and Euxine, and amounting, as we 
 are told by some authors, to not less than seventy-five or eighty. 
 Uespecting these colonies I shall speak presently, in treating of 
 the general colonial expansion of Greece during the eighth and 
 seventh centuries b. c. : at present, it is sufficient to notice that 
 the islands of Ikarus and Lerus,'< not far from Samos and the 
 Ionic coii.-t generally, were among the places planted with 
 Milesian settlers. 
 
 The colonization of Ephesus by Androklus a[)pears to be con 
 nectcd with the Ionic occupation of 8amos, ^o tar as the confused 
 8latements which we find enable us to discern. Androklus is said 
 
 ' Strabo, xiii, p. 621. See Niebuhr. Kleine Historische SchrlAen, p. 371 , 
 O. Miiller, Etrusker, Einleitung ii, 5, p. 80. The evidence on which Miilkra 
 conjecture is built seems, however, unusunlly slender, and the identity of 
 Tyrrhenos and Torrhebos, or the sujiposed ( onfasion of the one with the 
 other, is in no way made out }'elas;.'ian> un- spoken of in Tralles and 
 Aphrodisias as wel as in Ninoe (8tei)h. Byz. v. Swar/). but this name seems 
 destined to present nothing but problems and (K'lnsi()ii>;. 
 
 Respectinj; Ma<;nesiu on the Mjcander. eonsult Aristot. ap. Athen. iv. p. 
 173, who calls the lown a colony fioin Delfthi. lint the intcrnu'diatc settle- 
 ment of these colonists in Kretc. or even the reality of any town called 
 Magnesia in Kretc, appear** very ((Utstionable ■ Plato's statement (Lcirg. 
 iv, 702 ; xi, 919) can hardly l>e taken as any evi<lence. Compare O. Miiller. 
 History of the l)or ans, book ii, ch. '> : Hoeckh, Kreta. book iii. vol. ii. p. 4!3. 
 Miiller gives these ■ Sif/in " too much in the style of real facts : the worship 
 of Apollo at Magnesia on the Maander (Pans, x, 32, 4) cannot be thought 
 to prove much, considering how extensively that god was worshipped along 
 the Asiatic coast, from Lykia to Troas. 
 
 The great antiquity of this Grecian establishment was recognized in the 
 fime of the Roman emperors; see Inscript No. 2910 in Boeckh, Corp. Ins. 
 
 • ^luviric 'rrp6(Txvf''<i (Herodot. ▼, 28). 
 
 • Strabo, xiv, p. 635. Ikams, or Ikaria, however, appears in later times a» 
 belonging' to Samo*, and used only for pasture (Strabo. p. 639; x, p. 488). 
 
 6 Vol. 3 
 
 to have lingered upon that island for a long time, until the oracle 
 vouchsafed to indicate to him what particular spot to occupy on 
 the continent ; at length the indication wtis given, and he planted 
 his colonists at the fountain of Hypela^on and on a portion of the 
 hill of Koressus, within a short distance of the temple and sanc- 
 tuary of Artemis ; whose immediate inhabitants he respected 
 and received as brethren, while he drove away for the most part 
 the surrounding Lelegians and Lydians. The population of the 
 new town of Ephesus was divided into three tribes, — the pre- 
 existing inhabitants, or Ephesians proper, the Bennians, and the 
 P^uoiiymeis, so named (we are told) from the deme Euonymus in 
 Attica.' So much did the power of Androklus increase, that he 
 was enabled to conquer Samos, and to expel from it the prince 
 Leogorus : of the retiring Samians, a part are said to have gone 
 to Samothrace and there established themselves, while another 
 portion ac(|uired possession of Marathesium near Ephesus, on the 
 adjoining continent of Asia Minor, from whence, after a short 
 time, they recovered their island, compelling Androklus to return 
 to Ephesus. It seems, however, that in the compromise and treaty 
 which ensued, they yielded possession of Marathesium to Andro- 
 klus,2 and confmed themselves to Anaa, a more southerly district 
 farther removed from the E])hesian settlement, and immediately 
 opposite to the island of Samos. Androklus is said to have per- 
 ished in a battle fought for the defence of Priene, which town he 
 had come to aid against an attack of the Karians. His dead 
 body was brought from the field and buried near the gates of 
 Ephesus, where the tomb was yet shown during the days of Pau- 
 sanias ; but a sedition broke out against his sons after him, and 
 the malcontents strengthened their party by inviting reinforce- 
 ments from Teos and Karina. The struggle which ensued termi- 
 nated in the discontinuance of the kingly race and the establish- 
 ment of a republican government, — the descendants of Androklus 
 being allowed to retain both consi<lerab e honorary privileges and 
 the hereditary priesthood of the Eleusinian Demeter. The newl}'- 
 re^.ived inhabitants were enrolled in two new tribes, making in 
 
 • Kreophylus ap. Athen. viii, p. 361 ; Ephor. Fragm. 32, ed Marx ; Stt 
 pnan. Byz. v. Beiva: see Guhl, Ephesiaca, p 29 
 
 * Pftusan. vii, 4, 3. 
 
 
It2 
 
 mSTORY OF GhEECE. 
 
 KOLOPHON. 
 
 185 
 
 idl five tribes, which appear to have existed throughout the hw- 
 torical times at EphesusJ It appears too tliat a certain niimbei 
 of fugitive proprietors from Sanios found admission among th« 
 Ephesians and received the freedom of the city ; and the part of 
 the city in which the}' resided acquired the name of Samorna, oi 
 Smyrna, by which n;ime it was still known in the time of the 
 sntirical poet Hipponax, about iJoO b. c.^ 
 
 Such are the stori«is which we find respecting the infancy of 
 ihe Ionic Ephesus. I'he fact of its increase and of its considerable 
 Requisitions of territory, at the expense of the neighboring Lydi- 
 ans,^ i> at le.i-r indis[)utable. It does not appear to have hvon 
 ever very powerful or enterprising at sea, and few mai-Itinie colo- 
 nies owed their origin to its citizens; but its situation near the 
 mouth and the fertile jilain of the Kaister was favorable both to 
 the multiplii-ation of its inland dependencies and to its trade w ilh 
 t!ie interior. A des|»ot named Fythiigoias is said to have sub- 
 verted by stratagem the previous government of the town, at some 
 periw! before Cyrus, and to have exercised power for a ct rtaia 
 rime witli great cruelty.' It is worthy of remark, that w«' lindno 
 trace of the existence of ihe four Ionic tribes at Ephesus ; and 
 this, when coupled witii tiic fact that neither Ej)hesus nor Kola- 
 phon solemnized th»' peculiar Ionic tesfival of the Apaturia, is one 
 among other indica;ioij.> tiiat tlie Ephcsian population had little 
 
 ■ The iuvouiit of Ephoru- ap. Stcph. By/,, v. Btvia, attests at lea.st tljo 
 existence of the Hvc tri'M- at Ejihesus, wheiher hi«! acrount of their ori^'in 
 and luimitive histt)ry l»e wvU founded or not. Sue also Strubo, xiv, p. 633; 
 Steph Hyz. v, Kiui'vij.ia. K.irC'ne or Karine is in .Eolis, near Titana and 
 Gryneiuni (Heroil. vii, 4 2 Sreph. By/. Kapf/i'i,). 
 
 - Steplian By/,. V, i] lu < m j ; IL-ysch. lau>ii>:a ; Athenam.^, vi, p. 26"^ 
 IIij»p6nax, Fra^rni. 32, Schneid. ; Strabo. xiv. p. 633. Some, however, said 
 that th<' rims of Ephesus, called Smyrna, tlerived its nam'.' from an Atn:v">n. 
 
 ^ t'fraho, xiv, p 620. 
 
 * U:ilo ap. Snid js, v. Ilin^ayofiac. In this article of Suidas, however, it 10 
 sti.t'Ml that 'til. Ki.hesian Pythagoras f.ut down, by means of a crafty plot, 
 ih.L ;iovernmenc of tho^e who were called tlie Busilidtb.'" Now Ari^Jtotle 
 talks {Polit. V, 5, 4) of the oiijjarchv of the Basilidae at Ervthrae. It ia 
 hardly likely that there should have been an oli.<:archy called by that sarat 
 name ^K)th at Erythrae and Ephesus ; there is here some confusion between 
 Erythrjc and Ephesui' wh;<h we are unable to clear up. Bato of SinopA 
 ■rroU; a ^)o«A t ^pl tujv u' K^cCTy rvpuvvuv ( AthenjBus, vii, p. 289). 
 
 eommunity of race with Athens, though the oekist may have 
 
 boen of heroic Athenian family. Guhl attempts to show, on mis- 
 laken grounds, that the Greek settlers at Ephesus were mostly of 
 Arkadian origin.' 
 
 Kolophon, about fifteen miles nortli of Ephesus, and divided 
 from the territory of the latter by the precipitous mountain rangi 
 called Gallesium, though a member of the Pan-Ionic ampliik- 
 tyony, seems to have had no Ionic origin : it recognized neither 
 ttQ Athenian oekist nor Athenian inhabitants. The Kolophonian 
 poet Mimnermus tells us that the oekist of the place was the 
 Pylian Andrtemon, and that the settlers were Pylians from Pelo- 
 ponnesus. '' We quitted (he says) Pylus, the city of Neleus, and 
 f)a<sed in our vessels to the much-desired Asia. There with the 
 insolence of superior force, and employing from the beginning 
 cruel violence, we pknted ourselves in the tempting Kolophon.'** 
 This description of tl%e primitive Kolophonian settlers, given with 
 Homeric simplicity, forcibly illustrates the account given by He 
 rodotus of the proceedings of Neileus at Miletus. The establish- 
 ment of Andnvraon must have been effected by force, and by the 
 dispossession of previous inhabitants, leaving probably their wivea 
 and diujghters as a prey to the victors. The city of Kolophon 
 §eems to have been situated about two miles inland, but it had u 
 fortified i>ort called Notium, not joined to it by long walls as the 
 Peirseeus was to Athens, but completely distinct There were 
 
 ' Guhl, Ephesiaca, cap. ii, s. 2, p 28. The passage which he cites in 
 Aristeides (Or. xlii, p. 523) refers, not to Ephesus, hut to Pergamus, and to 
 the mythe of Auge and Telephus: compare Und. p. 251 
 * Mimnerm. Fragm. 9, Schneid. ap. Strab. xiv, p. 634 : — 
 •H//tf~f ^ alnv Wvlov Nij/LTiiov uaru Xinovrec 
 
 'Ifieprr/v ^kairjv vrjvaiv inpLKOfie^a' 
 'Ef 6" kparfjv KoAo^tJva, /?f>v iiripoTrXov Ix^vre^^ - 
 'E^ofie^' apyaXiijc v^pior f/yefiove^, 
 Bfimnermus, in his poem called NanM, named Andraemon as foandct 
 (Strabo, p. 633). Compare this behavior with the narrative of Odysseus io 
 nomer (Odyss. ix, 40) : — 
 
 ^Xia&ev fie ^t'pwv dvefio^ KiKoveaai niXaoaev 
 'lafiupo) • h>^a 6' iyd irnXiv Hpa-^ov^ uXeaa 6' avTov^ • 
 'E/c TroAiof 6" u'koxovg koI KTr/fiara noXXa Xa(36vrei 
 ^aaaaixe^\ etc. 
 Ifimnormos comes in point of time a little before Solon, b. c. 620-600 
 
 II 
 
 '41 
 
 I 
 
184 
 
 HISTUUY OF CRKECi- 
 
 timers in which tltis |)ort served the Kolophonians as a refuge^ 
 when their uj)per lowu was a--:iil«Ml by Per.sians from the interior; 
 but the inhabitants t))i Nutiiun occasionally manifested inclinations 
 to act a^ a separate cuniniunity, and dissensions thus occurred 
 between them and the people in Kolophon,' — so ditlicult w;is it 
 in the Greek mind to keep up a permanent feeling of political 
 gmal^amation beyond the circle of tiie town walls. 
 
 ?t is much to bo reijretted that nothing beyontl a few lines of 
 Minmermus, an<i nothing at all of the long poem of Xenophanes 
 (composed seemingly near a c«'ntu ry after Mimnernuis) on the 
 foundation of Kolophon, hiis rcatlud us. The short statements 
 of Pausanias omi all notice of that violence which the native 
 Kolophonian poet .^ocmpiuitically signalizes in liis ancestors : they 
 are derived more from the tein|>le legends of the adjoining Kla- 
 rian A|>olloand fn)m morsels of ejiic poetry referring to that holy 
 place, which connected itself with the worship of Apollo in Krete, 
 at Delphi, ami at Thebes. The old Homeric j)oem, called The- 
 lais, reported that iMant«j, daughter of the Theban prophet Tei- 
 resiiis, had been presented to Ap<jlloat Delphi as a votive otfering 
 by the victorious e|)igoni : the god directed her to migrate to Asia, 
 and she thus arrived at Klarus, where she married the Kretan 
 Khakius. The oflspring of this marriage was the celebrated 
 prophet Mopsus, whom the llesiodic epic described as having 
 gaincil a victory in prophetic skill over Kalchas ; the latter having 
 come to Klaru- after the Trojan war in company with Amphilo- 
 chus son of Amphiaraus.-* vSucii tales evince the early importance 
 of tlie tem|>le and oracle of Apollo at Klarus, which appears to 
 have been in some >ort au emanation from the great sanctuary of 
 Branchida' near Miletus ; for we are told that the high priest of 
 K!arnL> wtv-s named by the Milesians.** Pausanias states that 
 Mofjsus expelL'd tiie indigenous Karians, and established the city 
 of Kolophon ; and that the Ionic settlers under Promethus and 
 Damasichthon, sons of Kodrus, were admitted amicably as addi- 
 tional inhabitants :* a story probably emanating from the temple, 
 
 » Aristot. Polit. V, 2, 12; Thucyd iii. 34. 
 
 • Hesiod. ap. Strab. xiv, p. 643 ; Coiion, Narrat. 6 ; Argument of the poea 
 railed Nojro, (apud Diintzer), Epicc. Grajc. Frag. p. 23; Pausan. ix, 35, * 
 '* Tacit An.:al. ii, 54. * Pausan. vii, 3, 1. 
 
 LEBEDUS, TEOS, KLAZOMEN.E, ETC 
 
 185 
 
 and very different from that of the Kolophonian townsmen in the 
 time of Mimnermus. It seems evident that not oidy the Apollinic 
 uanctuary at Klarus, but also the analogous establishments on the 
 Bouth of Asia Minor at Phaselis, Mallus, etc., IkuI their own foun- 
 dation legends (apart from those of the various bands of emigrant 
 settlers), in which they connected themselves by the best thread 
 which they could devise with the epic glories of Greece.* 
 
 Passing along the Ionian coast in a north-westerly direction from 
 Kolcphon, we come first to the small but independent Ionic settle- 
 ment of Lebedus — next, to Teos, which occupies the southern 
 face of a nariow isthmus, Kla/omenae being placed on the north- 
 ern : this isthmus, a low narrow valley of about six miles across, 
 forms the eastern boundary of a very considerable peninsula, 
 containing the mountainous and woody regions called Mimas and 
 Korykus. Teos is said to have been first founded by Orchome- 
 nian Minyie under Athamas, and to have received afterwards by 
 consent various swarms of settlers, Orchomenians and others, under 
 the Kodrid leaders A})Gekus, Nauklus, and Damasus.2 The valu- 
 able Teian inscri{)tions published in the large collection of Boeckh, 
 while they mention certain names and titles of honor which con- 
 nect themselves with this Orchomenian origin, reveal to us at the 
 same time some particulars respecting the internal distribution 
 of the Teian citizens. The territory of the town was distributed 
 amon"^st a certain number of towers, to each of which corresponded 
 a symmory or section of the citizens, having its common altar and 
 Bacred rites, and often its heroic eponymus. How many in num* 
 ber the tribes of Teos were, we do not know : the name of the 
 Geleontes, one of the four old Ionic tribes, is preserved in an 
 inscription ; but the rest, both as to names and number, are un- 
 known. The symmories or tower-fellowships of Teos seem to be 
 analogous to the phratries of ancient Athens, — forming each a 
 factitious kindred, recognizing a common mythical ancestor, and 
 bound together by a communion at once religious and politicaL 
 The individual name attached to each tower is in some casea 
 Asiatic rather than Hellenic, indicating in Teos the mixture doC 
 
 » See Welcker, Epischer Kyklus, p 285. 
 * Stept Byz. v, Tfwf ; Pausan. vii 3, 3 ; Strabo, xir, p. 633. 
 aU»i the town ^X^afiavrida Teu. (Strab. J. c.) 
 
 
186 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 merely of" Ionic ami ..Eolif. but also of Karian or Lydian itihab- 
 itaats, of which Pausaiua^ .sj>eaks.i Gerrhieidie, or Cherraeidaj, 
 
 » Pausan. vii, 3, .'J. See the Inscrip. No. 3064 in Boeckh's Corp Iim^ 
 •rhich enumerates twenty-ei;^du separate Trvpyot : it is a list of iu<lions, with 
 the name and civil ilesignation of cu( fi : I do not observe that the name of 
 the same Trvpyng ever oec-urs twice. — Wprifnov^ roi ^LXaiov irvpyov^ ^i/.aldyfi, 
 ftc : there are two nvpyoi, the names of which are effaced on the inscription. 
 
 In two other inscriptions (Nos. 3065, .JOGG) there occur 'Ex^vov avfifiopia 
 
 "Exiva^ai — as the title of a civil division without any specification of an 
 ^E\ivov nvpyoc ; but it is reasonable to prcoume that the irvpyo^ and the avfM^ 
 fiopia are coincideni divisions. The ^lAaiov ripyog occurs also in another 
 Insc. No. 3081 Phiiajiis is the Athenian hero, son of Ajax, and eponym of 
 the dome or ^'ens I'hilaidae in Attica, who existed, as we here see, in Teos 
 riso. In Ins(ri})tioii, No. .3082, a citizen is complimented asveov 'k-Qufiavra, 
 irftcr the name of the old \finyan hero. In No. 3078, the Ionic tribe of the 
 VeAeovre^ is numeti its existmjj at Teos. 
 
 Among the titles of the towers we find the followinir, — rov Kidvo^ Triip- 
 yov, rov Kiva3u>,>< rzvpyov, rov 'Ituwoc m',, o»-, r- , ^uAoov nvpyov^ tov 
 TtvTvoc Trvp}ov: tlicse names seem to he rather foreip-n than Hellenic 
 C/(Jvf, 'iipvr. llvTic, AuSdog, are Asiatir, pcriiap^ Kjirian or Lyd i an : re 
 •pcctinp the name la'Mof, compare Stcph. Byz. v. Tjn^Laaoq where Ari(5«f 
 appears as a Kariijn name: Bocekh (p. 651) expresses his opinion that Arid- 
 »5«M- is Kirian i»r Lydiaii. Then Kfya^aAof seems plainly not Hellenic : it m 
 rather Fhasnician {.Vnni//.//. AsdruW, etc.), thouL'ii Boeckh (in his Inrrodnc- 
 lory Comment to rf e Sijrmatian Inscriptions, part xi. p 109) tells us that 
 i^o/of i-^ also Thiae an or Getic, — " /^a/.oc haiui dubie Thracica aut Getica 
 fwt radix finalis. «i lam tenes in Dacico nomine Decebalus, et in nomine 
 populi Tiiballornm " The name rov Ko^nv vvpyov, Ko^U^rjc, is Ionic: 
 iEklns ami Kothus are represented as Ionic oekists in Euboea. Another name 
 — Ha/iu/f, rar i;) r./oj; Tzvpyov, XaAATtJfiof — affords an instance in which 
 the lo<-al or f^enri!" cjiithet is not derived from the tower; for Xd/Kiddt; or 
 \n'/Ki(^tvq was the denomination of a village in the Teian territory. Ir 
 rrtrard to some persons, the jrcntile epithet is derived from the tower, ~ rot 
 ^uaiov TTvnyov, <¥/Aaidij^ — rov TaXainov Trvpyov, TaAaiaidrjg — tov Ad66o\ 
 wip}ov, AnAfinoc — rov irvpyov rov K<C<:jj»fif. K/^wv : in other cases not- 
 Tw'EKa^iov :ri>pyov, 'S.Kri^r,Ur)(: — rov Miypariorf Trvpyov, BpvtrKidrjc — rov 
 "lar'^nl'w rep; ov, Afji /(5)?f, etc. In the Inscrip. 306.5. 3066, there is a formal 
 vote of the 'E\7»'oi' (rr/jfinpia or Exivadai (both names oceur): mention is 
 ■Iso made of the ^^'^iwr r;,c cvfi^oplac ; also the annual solemnity called 
 Lcukathea, seeminprly a pentile solemnity of the Echinada, which connects 
 itself with the mythical family of Athamas. As an analofjy to these Teian 
 towers, we may compare the ^rvpyoi in the Greek fettlement of Olbia ia the 
 Caxine (Boeckh, Inser. 2058 \, rrvpyo^ Uoaioc, nvpyoc 'ETriiavpov, — theyweia 
 oc>rtions of the fortifications See also Dio Chrysostom, Orat. xxxvi, pp 
 
 ERYTHRA: AND CHlf S 
 
 167 
 
 the i*ort on (he west i-ide of the town of Teos, had for its epony- 
 mous iicro Geres the Ba?otian, who was said to hav accoinpanie<l 
 the Kodi'ids in their settlement. 
 
 The worship of Athene Polias at P>ythra3 may probably l)e 
 traceable to Athens, and that of the Tyrian Herakles (of which 
 Pausanias recounts a singular legend) would seem to indicate an 
 intermixture of Phoenician inhabitants. But the close neighbor- 
 hood of Erytlirae to the island of Chios, and the marked analogy 
 of dialect which Herodotus' attests between them, show that tlie 
 elements of the population must have been much the .same in 
 bofli. Tlie Chian poet Ion nientioned the establishment of Alian- 
 tes from Euba?a in his native island, under Am}»hiklus, intermixed 
 with the preexisting Karians : liektor, the fourth descendant from 
 Amphiklus, was said to have incori)orated this island in the Pan- 
 Ionic amphiktyony. It is to Pherekydes that we owe the men- 
 tion of the name of Egertius, as liaving conducted a miscellaneous 
 colony into Chios ; and it is through Egertius (though Ion, the 
 native poet, does not af)pear to have noticed him) that this logo- 
 grapher made out the connection between the Chians and the 
 other group of Kodrid settlements.- In Erythrae, Knopus or 
 Kleopus is noted as the Kodrid cekist, and as having procured 
 for himself, i>artly by force, partly by ct)nsent, the sovereignty of 
 the preexisting settlement of mixed inhabitants. The Erytari an 
 historian Hippia^ recounted how Knopus had been treacherously 
 put to death on shi[>board, by Ortyges and some other false adhe 
 rents ; who, obtaining some auxiliaries from the Chian king Am 
 [)hikiu», made themselves masters of Erythrui and established in 
 it an oppressive oligarchy. They maintained the government, 
 with a temper at once licentious and cruel, for some time, admit- 
 ting none but a chosen few of the population within the walls of 
 the town ; until at length Hipfwtes the brother of Knopus, arriving 
 from without at the head of some troops, found sufficient supiK)rt 
 from the discontents of the Erythmeans to enable him to overthrow 
 thr; tyranny. Overpowered in the midst of a public festival 
 
 76-77 A lar«;e tower. I^elonjjincr to a private individual luimed Aglomachu 
 ii mentioned in Kyrene (Herod, iv, 164). 
 
 > Herod, i, 142 : compare Thucyd viii, 5. 
 
 « Strabo, xiv, p 633. 
 
 1! 
 
 |5 
 
188 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 Ortyges and his companions were put to death with cruel tortures 
 and the same tortures were inflicted upon their innocent wives 
 and children,' — a degree of cruelty wliich would at no time have 
 found phice amidst a community of European Greeks : even in 
 the murderous party dissensions of Korkyra during the Pelopon- 
 nesian war, death was not aggravated by preliminary tortures. 
 Aristotle- raeiit.ous the oligarchy of the Basilids as having existed 
 in ErythnL, and as having been overthrown by a democratical 
 revolution, although prudently managed : to what period this is 
 to be referred we do not know. 
 
 Klazomenai is said to have been founded by a wanderhig party, 
 either of loniaos or of inhabitants from Kleonie and Phlius, 
 under Parphurus or Paralus : and Ph6ka?a by a band of Phoki- 
 ans under Philogenes and Damon. This last-mentioned town 
 was built at tli*' end ot' h j>eninsula which formed part of the ter- 
 ritory of the iEolic Kyme : the Kymicans were induced to cede it 
 amicably, and to permit the building of the new town. The 
 Phokicans a.-^ked and obtained permission to enrol themserves in 
 the Pan-Ionic amphiktyony ; but the permission is said to have 
 been granted only on condition that they should adopt members 
 of the Kodrid family as their oekists ; and they accordingly invited 
 from Erythraj and Teos three chiefs belonging to that family or 
 gtiis, — Decetes, Penklus, and Abartus.3 
 
 Smyrna, originally an JEolic colony, established from Kyme 
 fell subsequently into the hands of the lonians of Kolophon. A 
 piirty of exiles from the latter city, expelled during an intestine 
 dispute, were admitted by the Smyrmeans into their city, — a 
 favor which they repaid by shutting the gates and seizing the 
 
 ' IIi[>|iias ap Athen. vi, p. 259 ; Polyxn. viii, 44, -ives another story about 
 Knupus. Erythrji', railed KtwTot/TroAic. (Steph. Bvz. v.) 
 
 The story told by Polyaenus about the dictum of the oracle, and the con- 
 »e(|aent stratai;em, wherehy Knopus made himself master of Erythra, 
 represents that town as powerful anterior to the Ionic occupation (Polyan. 
 ▼iii, 43). 
 
 • Aristot. Polit. v, 5, 4. 
 
 ' Paasan. vii, 3, 3. In Pausanias the name stands Abartu$; bat it 
 probably ought to he Abarmis. the eponymus of Cape Abamis in the Pho* 
 k«hn territory : sec Stephan. Byz. v. 'A(3apvic. Raoul Rochette pots Abar 
 BOS without making any remark (Histoire des Colonies Grecqaes, b. iv, c 
 13, p. 95). 
 
 SMYRNA. 
 
 189 
 
 place for themselves, at a moment when the Smymaeans had 
 gone forth in a body to celebrate a religious festival. The other 
 JEolic towns sent auxiliaries for the purpose of reestablishing 
 their dispossessed brethren ; but they were compelled to submit 
 to an accommodation, whereby the lonians retained possession of 
 the iown, restoring to the prior inhabitants all their movablea. 
 Thests exiles were distributed as citizens among the other ^olic 
 
 cities ' 
 
 Smyrna after this became wholly Ionian ; and the inhabitanla 
 in latLf times, if we may judge by Aristeides the rhetor, appear 
 to hav<5 forgotten the iEolic origin of their town, though the fact 
 is attested both by Herodotus and by Mimnermus.2 At what 
 time the change took place, we do not know ; but Smyrna ap- 
 pears to have become Ionian before the celebration of the 23d 
 Olympiad, when Onomastus the Smyrnjean gained the prize.3 
 Nor have we information as to the period at which the city was 
 received as a member into the Pan-Ionic amphiktyony, for the 
 assertion of Vitruvius is obviously inadmissible, that it was ad- 
 mitted at the instance of Attains, king of Pergamus, in place of 
 a previous town called Melite, excluded by the rest for misbeha- 
 vior.4 As little can we credit the statement of Strabo, that the 
 city of Smyi-na was destroyed by the Lydian kings, and that the 
 Inhabitants were compelled to live in dispersed villages until its 
 restoration by Antigonus- A fragment of Pindar, which speaks 
 of "the elegant city of the Smyrnaians," indicates that it must 
 have existed in his time.^ The town of ErjB, near Lebedus, 
 though seemingly autonomous,^ was not among the contributor! 
 to the Pan-Ionian : Myonnesus seems to have been a deperidency 
 of Teos, as Pygela and Marathesium were of p:pht;- us. Notium, 
 after itL recolonization by the Athenians during the Peloponne- 
 sian war, seems to have remained separate from and independent 
 of Kolophon : at least the two are noticed by Skylax as distinct 
 towns." _^____ 
 
 ' Herod, i, 150; Mimnermus. Fragm.— 
 
 Qetjv (iovT^y ^/xvpvTjv eiXofiev AloXteJa. 
 « See Raoul Rochette, Histoire des Colonies Grecques, b. iv. ch. 5, p. 4S 
 Aristeides, Orat xx-xxi, pp. 260, 267. . . , 
 
 » Paasan. v, 8, 3. * Vitmvius, it, 1. 
 
 * Strabo, xiv, p. 646; Pindar, Frag. 155, Dissen. 
 
 • Thucydid viii. 19. ' Skylax, c. 97 • Thucyd. m. 34, 
 
 tr 
 
 ii 
 
190 
 
 flISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 KYSIE. 
 
 191 
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 
 JEOUC GREEKS IN ASIA. 
 
 On the ('(Mkit of Asia Minor to the north of the twelve Ionic 
 confederated cities, were situated the twelve iEolic cities, appar- 
 ently united in a similar manner. Besides Smyrna, the fate of 
 
 which has already been described, the eleven others were, 
 
 Temnos, Larissa, Neon-Teichos, Kyme, vEgae, Myrina, Gryneiurn, 
 Killa, Notium, ^Egiro-ssa, Pitane. These twelve are especially 
 noted by Herodotus a> the twelve ancient continental iEolic 
 cities, and distinguished on the one hand from the insular ^olic 
 Greeks, in Lesl)os, Tenedos, and Hekatonnesoi, — and on the 
 other hand from the JEoVic establishments in and about Mount 
 Ida, which seem to have been subsequently formed and derived 
 from Lesbos and KjTneJ 
 
 Of these twelve ^olic town-, eleven were situated very near 
 toL't.iier, clustered round the Elaeitic gulf: their territories, all of 
 moderate extent, seem also to have been conterminous with each 
 other. Smyrna, the twelfth, was situated to the south of Mount 
 Sipylus, and at a greater distance from the remainder, — one 
 reason why it was so soon lost to its primitive inhabitants. 
 These towns occupied chiefly a narrow but fertile strip of terri- 
 tory lying between the base of the woody mountain-range called 
 Sardene and the sea.-* Gryneium, like Kolophon and Miletus, 
 [possessed a venerated sanctuary of Apollo, of older date than the 
 /Eolic emigratioij. Larissa, Temnos, and ^gfe were at some 
 little distance from the sea: the tirst at a short distance north of 
 the Hermus, by which its territory was watered and occasionally 
 inundated, so as to render embankments necessary ;3 the last two 
 
 ' Horodot. i. 149. Herodotus does not name Elaia, at the mouth of the 
 Kfi^kus: on the other hand, no other author mentions ^^droC'ssa (see Man- 
 cert, (icoirr. der Gr. und Romer, b.viii, p 396). 
 
 •Herod-, nt snp. : Pseudo-Hcrodot Vit Homeri c. 9. lupdififf voi^ 
 
 ' Ktraho, xiii, p. 621. 
 
 upon rocky mountain-.-^iles, so inaccessible to attack that the in- 
 habitants were enabled, even during the height of the Persian 
 power, to maintain constantly a substantial independence.^ EUea, 
 situated at the mouth of the river Kaikus, became in later timed 
 the port of the strong and flourishing city of Pergamus; while 
 Pitana, the northernmost oi' the twelve, was placed between the 
 mouth of the Kaikus and the lofty promontory of Kane, which 
 closes in the Ela-itic gulf to the northward. A small town 
 Kame, close to that promontory is said to have once existed.'^ 
 
 It has already been stated that the legend ascribes the origin 
 of these colonies to a certain special event called the ^Eolic emi 
 gration, of which chronologers profess to know the precise date, 
 telling us how many years it happened after the Trojan war, con- 
 siderably before the Ionic emigration.^ That the ^olic as well 
 as Ionic inhabitants of Asia were emigrants from Greece, we may 
 reasonably believe, but as to the time or circumstances of their 
 emigration we can pretend to no certain knowledge. The name 
 of the town Larissa, and perhaps that of Magnesia on Mount 
 
 ' Xcnoph. Hellen iv, 8, 5. The rhetor Aristeides (Orat. Sacr. xxvii, p. 
 347, p. 535 D) describes in detail his journey from Smyrna to Fergamus. 
 crossing the Hennus, and passing throu},-h Larissa, Kyme, Myrina, Gryneium, 
 El»a ''He seems not to have passed through Temnos, at least he does not 
 name if moreover, we know from Pausanias (v, 13, 3) that Temnos was on 
 the north bank of the Hermus. In the best maps of this district it is i)laced, 
 erroneously, both on the south bank, and as if it were on the high road from 
 Smyrna to Kyme. We may infer from another passage of Aristeides (Or. 
 xlviii, p. 351, p. 468 D.) that Larissa was nearer to the mouth of the Her- 
 mus than the maps appear to place it. According to Strabo (xiii, p. 622), it 
 would seem that Larissa was on the south bank of the Hermus ; but the 
 better testimony of Aristeides proves the contrary ; Sky lax (c. 94) does not 
 name Temnos, which seems to indicate that its territory was at some dutance 
 
 from the sea. v i r u. 
 
 The-investigations of modern travellers have, as yet, thrown little light 
 
 upon the situation of Temnos or of the other ^Eolic towns : sec Arund , 
 Discoveries in Asia Minor, vol. ii, pp. 292-298. 
 
 « Plinv, H. N. V, 30. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii, pp. 582-621, compared with Pseudo-Herodotus, Vit. Utneei 
 c 1-38, who says that Lesbos was occupied by the ^olians one hundred and 
 tfiirty years after the Trojan war : Kyme, twenty years after Lesbos ; Smyrna 
 eighteen years after Kyme. 
 
 The chronological statements of different writers are ciUected i» Mr 
 
 Clinton's Fast Hellen. c. 5, pp. 104. 105. 
 
 ■ A 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
192 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECE 
 
 I, 
 
 Sipylus (according to what has been observed in the preceding 
 passage), has given rise to the sui)position that the anterior in 
 habitants were Pelasgians, who, having once occupied the fertile 
 banks of the IltTmus, as well as those of the Kaister nec\r Eph- 
 esus, employed their industry in the work of erabankment.i 
 Kyme was the earliest as well as the most powerful of the twelve 
 iEolic towns, Neon-Teichos having been originally established 
 by the Kymieans as a fortress for the purpose of capturing the 
 Pelasgic Larissa. Both Kyme and Larissa were designated by 
 the epithet of Phrikonis : by some this was traced to the moun- 
 tain Phrikium in Lokris, from whence it was alleged that the 
 JEoUc emigrants had started to cross the ^gean ; by others it 
 seems to have been connected with an eponymous hero Phrik6n.-3 
 It was probably from Kyme and its sister cities on the Elajitic 
 gulf that Hellenic inhabitants penetrated into the smaller towns 
 in the inland plain of the Kaikus,— Pergamus, Halisarna, Gam- 
 breion, etc-^ In the more southerly plain of the Heimus, on the, 
 northern declivity of Mount Sipylus, was situated the city of 
 Magnesia, called Magnesia ad Sipylum, in order to distinguish it 
 from Magnesia on the liver Micander. Both these towns called 
 Magnesia were inland, — the one bordering upon the Ionic Greeks, 
 the other upon the yEolic, but seemingly not included in any 
 amphiktyony either with the one or the other. Each is referred 
 to a separate and early emigration either from the Magnetes 
 in Thessaly or fn)m Krete. Like many other of the early towns. 
 Magnesia ad Sipylum appears to have been originally established 
 higher up on the mountain, — in a situation nearer to Smyrna, 
 from which it wias separated by the Sipylene range, — and to 
 have been subseqjiently brought down nearer to the plain on the 
 north side as well as to the river Hermus. The original site, 
 PalaB-Magnesia,* was still occupied as a dependent township, even 
 
 " Strabo, xiii, p 621. 
 
 « Strabo, xiii, 621 ; Pseudo-Herodot c. 14. Amtf ^pUuvo^, compared with 
 C> 38. 
 
 tpUuv appears, in later times, as an ^tolian proper name ; ^piKo^ as a 
 Lokrian. See Anecdota Delphica, by E Curtias, Inscript, 40, p. 75 (Berlic 
 
 * Xenoph. Hellen. iii, l, 6; Anabas. vii, 8, 24. 
 
 • There is a valuable inseripUon in Boeckh's collection, Ho. 3137, con 
 
 LESBOS. 
 
 193 
 
 aurin«» the times of the Attalid and Seleukid kings. A likt 
 transfer of situation, from a height difficult of access to some 
 lower and more convenient position, took place with other town? 
 in and near this region ; such as Gambreion and Skepsis, which 
 had their Palie-Gambreion and Palae-Skepsis not far distant. 
 
 Of these twelve ^olic towns, it appears that all except Kymft 
 were small and unimportant. Thucydid^s, in recapitulating the 
 dependent allies of Athens at the commencement of the Pelo- 
 ponnesian war, does not account them worthy of being enumer- 
 ated.! Nor are we authorized to conclude, because they bear 
 the general name of iEolians, that the inhabitants were all of kin- 
 dred race, though a large proportion of them are said to have 
 been Bccotians, and the feeling of fraternity between Boeotians 
 und Lesbians was maintained throughout the historical times; 
 .>ne etymology of the name is, indeed, founded upon the supposi- 
 tion that they were of miscellaneous origin.2 We do not hear, 
 moreover, of any considerable poets produced by the ^olic con- 
 tinental towns ; in this respect Lesbos stood alone, — an island 
 eaid to have been the eariiest of all the ^olic settlements, ante- 
 rior even to Kyme. Six towns were originally estabUshed in 
 Lesbos, — Mitylene, Methymna, Eresus, Pyrrha, Antissa, and 
 Arisbe : the last-mentioned town was subsequently enslaved and 
 destroyed by the Methymnteans, so that there remained only five 
 towns in all.3 According to the political subdivision usual in 
 Greece, the island had thus, first six, afterwards five, independent 
 governmentB, of which, however, Mitylene, situated in the south 
 eastern quarter and facing the promontory of Kane, was by far 
 the first, while Methymna, on the north of the island over against 
 
 taining the convention between the inhabitants of Smyrna and Magnesia. 
 Pal«- Magnesia seems to have been a strong and important post. 
 
 - Magnetes a Sipylo." Tacit. Annal. ii, 47 ; Pliny, H. N. v, 29 ; Pausan. nt 
 24, 2. ■n-p^C popltav tov lnrv?ov. 
 
 Stephan. Byzantinus notices only Magnesia ad Maeandrum, not Magndsia 
 
 ad Sipylum. 
 
 1 Xhucyd ii 9 
 
 •Strabo, ix,' p. 402; Thncyd. viii, 100; Pseudo-Hcrodot. Vit. Homer, I 
 •ETrei yap n ^aXac AioTiLurcc Kvf^v iKT^ero, avvfjUm h ravr<^ iravrodairi 
 l^vea 'EUvviKu, Kal dr, Kal U Mayvvciac, etc. Etymalog. Magn. ▼ 
 
 4loXetf. 
 * Herodot. i, 151 ; Strabo, xiii, p. 590. 
 
 VOL. III. 9 
 
 \i 
 
 it ''i 
 
 il 
 
 
194 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MVIAC GKEEKfJ ^^AR MOUNT il>A. 
 
 195 
 
 Cape Lekton, was the second* Like so many other Grecian i<»Io» 
 nies, the original city of Mitylene was founded upon an islet divided 
 from Lesbos by a naiTow strait ; it was subsequently extended 
 on to Lesbos itself, so that the harbor presented two distinct lii- 
 t ranees J 
 
 It appears that the native poets and fabulists who professed 
 to deliver the archaeology of Lesbos, dwelt less u[X)n the yEulic 
 settlers than upon the various heroes and tribes who were al- 
 leged to have had possession of the island anterior to that settie- 
 ment, from the deluge of Deukalion downwards, — just jis itie 
 Chian and Saraian jsoets seem to have dwelt principally upon tlie 
 ante-Ionic antiquities of their respective islands. After the Pe- 
 lasgian Xanthus so i of Triopas, comes Makar son of Kxinalar*, 
 tlie great native hero of the island, supposed by Plehn to be trie 
 eponym of an occupying race called the Makares : the Home ric 
 Hymn to Aj>ollo brings Makar into connection with the iEoIic 
 inhabitants by calling him son of jEoIus, and the native historian 
 Myrsihis also seems to have treated him as an y^olian.^ To 
 dwell upon such narratives suited the disposition of the Greeks ; 
 but when we come to inquire for the history of Lesbos, we find 
 ourselves destitute of any genuine materials, not only for tii- 
 period prior to the JEoWc occupation, but also for a long tim*i 
 after it : nor can we pretend to determine at what date that occu- 
 pation took place. We may reasonably believe it to have occurred 
 l)efore 776 B. c, and it therefore becomes a part of the earlie^t 
 manifestations of real Grecian histor}' : both Kyme, with i's 
 <'leven sister towns on the continent, and the islands Lesbos and 
 Ten edos, were then^olic; and I have already remarked tluii 
 the migration of the father of Hesiod the poet, from the JEoWq 
 Kvme to Askra in Boeotia, is the earliest authentic fact known to 
 !is on contemporary testimony, — s€semingly between 776 and 7(^0 
 n. c. 
 
 1 Dioaar. xiii. 79; Stmbo, xiii, p. 617 ; Thucyd. iii, 6. 
 
 » T(vmn. ad Apollin. v, 37. Aetr/Jof r' rjya&eij, MuKopoc iSoc MoXicjvoc. 
 Myrsilna ap. Clemen. Alexandr. Protreptie. p. 19 ; Diodor. v, 57-82 ; Dioaya. 
 Halik. A R. i, 18; Stephan. Byz. r, MvriX^. 
 
 Plehn (I^iesbiacas c. 2. pp. 25-37) baa collected all the principal fables re» 
 ipectincr this I^shian prrhjvfiocr: compare also Raonl Rochette (HiBtoin 
 lea Coloniea Grecqaes, i:. i, c 5, p. If 2 etc.) 
 
 But besides these islands, and the strip of the continent between 
 Kyme and Pitane (which constituted the territory properl/ called 
 >^lis), there were many other ^olic establishments in the region 
 near Mount Ida, the Troad, and the Hellespont, and even in 
 European Thrace. All these establishments seem to have ema- 
 nated from Lesbos, Kyme, and Tenedos, but at what time they 
 were formed we have no information. Thirty different towns are 
 said to have been established by these cities,' and nearly all the 
 region of Mount Ida (meaning by that term the territory west of 
 a line drawn from the town of Adramyttion northward to Priapos 
 on the Propontis) came to be ^olized. A new ^olis^ was thus 
 formed, quite distinct from the ^olis near the Elaeitic gulf, and 
 severed from it partly by the territory of Atarneus, partly by the 
 portion of Mysia and Lydia, between Atarneus and Adramyttium, 
 including the fertile plain of Thebe : a portion of the lands on this 
 coast seem indeed to have been occupied by Lesbos, but the far 
 larger part of it was never .^Eolic. Nor was Ephorus accurate 
 when he talked of the whole territory between Kyme and Abydos 
 as knowTi under the name of jEolis.^ 
 
 The inhabitants of Tenedos possessed themselves of the strip 
 of the Troad opposite to their island, northward of Cape Lekton, 
 
 those of Lesbos founded Assus, Gargara, LampOnia, Antan- 
 
 drus,-* etc., between Lekton and the north-eastern corner of the 
 Adramyttian gulf, — while the Kymaeans seem to have established 
 themselves at Kebren and other places in the inland Idaean dis- 
 
 ' Strabo, xiii, pp 621, 622. MiyiaTov de iari tCjv AIoTukcjv koI apiarn 
 ^v/itf, ittfi cxed^v fivrpdiroXLc: ahrrj re kol t} Aea^og tuv uXkuv izoleuv rpid- 
 Kovrd TTOO rdv upi^fibv, etc. 
 
 » Xenophon, Hellen. iii, 1, 10. (lexpi ttjc *apva/3aCou AloXidoc — v ^lo^k 
 avTTi )]v fi£v ^apvalSuCov. 
 
 Xenophon includes the whole of the Troad nnder the denomination of 
 .iEolis. Skylax distinguishes the Troad from JEoVis : he designates as the 
 Troad the coast towns from Dardanus seemingly down to Lekton : under 
 iEolis he includes Kebren, Skepsis, Neandreia, and Pityeia, though how 
 these four towns are to be called i-n-l ^a'/iuaari it is not easy to »ee ( Skylax, 
 94-95). Nor does Skylax notice either the Peraea of Tenedos, or Assos and 
 Gargara. 
 
 » Strabo. xiii, p. 583. 
 
 * Thucyd. iv, 52 ; viii, 108 ; Strabo, xiii, p. 610 ; Stephan. Byz. 'Aocac 
 
 Pansan. vi. 4. 5. 
 
 \ 
 
i 
 
 196 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 TEUKRIANS OF GERGIS.-MITYLENK. 
 
 197 
 
 trict.^ As far as we can make out, this north-western corner 
 (west of a line drawn from Smyrna to the eastern corner of tiie 
 Propontis) seems to have been occupied, anterior to tlie Hellenic 
 settlements, by Mysians and Teukrians, — who are mentioned 
 together, in such manner as to show that there was no gi*eat ethni- 
 cal difference between them.^ The elegiac poet Kallinus, in the 
 middle of the seventh century b. c, was the first who mentioned 
 the Teukrians : he treated them as emigrants from Kn'te, though 
 other :iuthors represented them as indigenous, or as having eonie 
 from Attica : however the fact may stand as to their origiii, we 
 may gather that, in the time of Kallinus, they were still the great 
 occupants of the Troad •' Gradually, the south and west coasts, 
 as well as the interior of this region, became penetrated by suc- 
 cessive colonies of .^'^olic Greeks, to whom the iron and ship timber 
 of Mount Ida were valuable acquisitions ; and thus the small 
 Teukrian townships (for llnre were no considerable cities) became 
 iEolized ; while on tli<* coast nortliward of Ida, along the Ilelles- 
 jK>nt and Propontis, Ionic establishments were formed from Miletus 
 and l*haka;a, and Milesian colonists were received into the inland 
 tt)wn of Skepsis.' In tiie time of Kallinus, the Teukrians seem 
 to have been in [wssession of Ilamaxitus and Kol6na% with the 
 worship of the Sniinthian Apollo, in the south-western region of 
 the Troad : a century and a half afterwards, at the time of the 
 Ionic revolt, Herodotus notices the inhabitants of Gergis, occu- 
 pying a portion of the northern region of Ida in the line eastward 
 from Dardanus and Ophrynion, as " the remnant of the ancient 
 1 eukrians."^ We also find the Mityleneans and Athenians oon- 
 
 ' Pseudo- Herod. Vit. Horn c. 20: — 
 
 'Id/jc tv Kopvpjai TToXvnrvxov rjvefjLoeaarj^, 
 'Ev^a (Ti.6i}poc 'kpTjOc eirix^ovioiat fSpoToiat 
 'Effaerat, fvr* uv /aiv KeS^ifjviQi uvdpe^ ex^^'-' 
 Tii df Ke^p'rjvm tovtov rov xpovov kt'l^elv napeaKevd^ovTO ol Kvualai irpdf 
 "J7 'I«^, Kol yivKTat av'o^i aidijpo^. 
 « Herodot. vii, 20. 
 
 ^ Kallinus an. Strabo, xiii, p 604: compare p. 613, ovf r puroc frapi- 
 d^Kt KaXXlvoc, etc 
 
 * Strabo, xiii, pp. 607-635. 
 
 • Herodot. v, 122, die fiev XloXeag Trdvraf, otjoi rrfv ^IXidda viftQvrait elXt 
 k Tipyi^Oi, roirg VTTu'/.eiO^^evTa^ tuv dpx'^''^^ TevKpuv, etc 
 
 tendin«^ by arms about 600-580 b. c, for the ix)ssession of Si- 
 eeium at the entrance of the Hellespont :i probably the Lesbian 
 settlements on the southern coast of the Troad, lying as they do 
 BO much nearer to the island, as well as the Tenedian settlements 
 on the western coast opposite Tenedos, had been formed at some 
 time prior to this epoch. We farther read of ^olic inhabitants 
 as possessing Sestos 6n the P:uropean side of the Hellespont.^ 
 The name Teukrians gradually vanished out of present use, and 
 came to belong only to the legends of the past ; preserved either 
 in connection with the worship of the Sminthian Apollo, or by 
 writers such as Hellanikus and Kephalon of Gergis, from whence 
 it passed to the later poets and to the Latin epic. It appears that 
 the native place of Kephalon was a town called Gergis or Ger- 
 githes near Kyme : there was also another place called Gergetha 
 on the river Kaikus, near its sources, and therefore higher up m 
 M vsia. It was from Gergithes near Kyme (according to Strabo). 
 that the place called Gergis in Mount Ida was settled :3 probably 
 the non-Hellenic inhabitants, both near Kyme and in the region 
 of Ida, were of kindred race, but the settlers who went from Kyme 
 to Gergis in Ida were doubtless Greeks, and contributed m this 
 manner to the conversion of that place from a Teukrian to an 
 Hellenic settlement. In one of those violent dislocations of mhab- 
 itants which were so frequent afterwards among the successors 
 of Alexander in Asia Minor, the Teukro-Hellenic population of 
 the Idiran Gergis is said to have been carried away by Attalus 
 of Pergamus, in order to people the village of Gergetha near the 
 
 river Kaikus. ^ i i • 
 
 We are to regard the iEolic Greeks as occupymg not only their 
 twelve cities on the continent round the Elaeitic gulf, and the 
 neighboring islands, of which the chief were Lesbos and Tenedos, 
 - but also as gradually penetrating and Hellenizing the Idaean 
 re-ion and the Troad. This la*c process belongs probably to a 
 period subsequent to 776 B. c, but Kyme and Lesbos doubtless 
 count as .Siolic from an earlier period. 
 
 The Teukrians, in the conception of Herodotus, were Ae Trojans djj- 
 bribed in the lUaa, -the TevKpk yV seems the same as Utdf y^ (ii, U8). 
 
 I H J * „ Qi ' Herodot. ix, llo. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 94. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii, 589-616. 
 
 i 
 
 f^ i 
 
 \ 
 
 s 
 
 ! 
 
198 
 
 HlSiOHY OF GREECE. 
 
 ALK.EUS AND PITTAKUS. 
 
 199 
 
 Of MilyleJie, the chief city of Lesbos, we hear some fact^ bty 
 tween th«i 40th and r>Otli Olympiad (620-i>8() b. c), which un- 
 fortunat(^Iy reach us only in a faint echo. That city then num- 
 bered as it^ own the distin«ruished names of Pittakus, Sappho, 
 and Alkieus: like many other Grecian communities of that time, 
 it suffered mucli from intestine commotion, and experienced more 
 thai one violent revolution. The old oligarchy called the Pen- 
 fhilidf (seemingly a gens with heroic origin), rendered tiiemselvea 
 intolerably obnoxious by misrule of the most reckless character; 
 their brutal use of the bludgeon in the public streets was avenged 
 by Megakles and his friends, who slew them and put down 
 their government.^ About the 42d Olympiad (612 b. c.) we 
 iiear of Melanchrus, as despot of Mitylene, who was slain by the 
 conspiracy of Pittakus, Kikis, and Antimenides, — the last two 
 being brothers of Alkieus the poet. Other despots, Myrsilus, 
 Megalagyrus, and the Kleanaktida% whom we know only by 
 name, and who appear to have been immortalized chiefly by the 
 hitter stanzas oi' Alkieus, acquired afterwards the sovereignty of 
 Mitylene. Among all the citizens of the town, however, the most 
 fortunate, and the most deserving, was Pittakus the son of Hyrr- 
 hadus, — a champion trusted by his countrymen alike in foreign 
 war and in intestine broils.'^ 
 
 The foreign war in which the Mityleneans were engaged, and 
 in which Pittakus commanded them, was against the Athenians 
 on the continental coast opposite to Lesbos, in the Troad, near 
 Sigeium. The Mityleneans had already established various settle- 
 ments along the Troad, the northernmost of which was Achilleium : 
 I hey laid claim to the possession of this line of coast, and when 
 Athens (about the 43d Olympiad, as it is said') attempted to pknt 
 
 ' Aristot. I'olit v, 8, 13. 
 
 'Diorren. La it. i. 74; Suidas, v, KUig, Il/rra/cof; Strabo, xiii, p. 617. 
 
 Two lines of Alk«us arc preserved, exulting in the death of Myrsilus (Al- 
 
 kxufu Frairin. 12. o<\ Schncidewin) Melanchrus also is named (Fragm. 13), 
 
 li I'ittukus, in :. third fraorment (73, ed. Schneid.), is brought into conncc- 
 
 ' ' ' with Myrsilus. 
 
 . . regard to the chronology of thi.s war, see a note near tl« end of niy 
 I revious chapter on the Solonian legislation. I have there noticed what I 
 Velieve to be a chronoIo«;ical mistake of Herodotus in regard to tl e period 
 ftetween 600-560 b, c. Hermlotus consi.lers this war between the Mitylene* 
 (as and Afh"!iian«». in whir h Pi-.iku^ and Alkaus were concerned, to haTf 
 
 A <*ettiement at Sigeium, they resisted the establishment by force. 
 Ai the head of the Mitylenean troops, Pittakus engaged in siugU 
 combat with the Athenian comioander Phrynon, and had the gix>d 
 fortune to kill him. The general struggle was, however, cairied 
 on with no very decisive result. On one memorable occasion the 
 Mityleneans fled, and Alkaeus the poet, serving as an hoplite in 
 their ranks, commemorated in one of his odes both his flight and 
 :he humiliating loss of his shield, which the victorious Athenians 
 suspended as a trophy in the temple of Athene at Sigeium. His 
 predecessor Archilochus, and his imitator Horace, have both been 
 frank enough to confess a similar misfortune, which Tyrtajua 
 perhaps would not have endured to survive.' It was at length 
 agreed by Mitylene and Athens to refer the dispute to Periander 
 of Corinth. While the Mityleneans laid claim to the whole line 
 of coast, the Athenians alleged that inasmuch as a contingent 
 fjom Athens had served in the host of AgamemuOu against Troy, 
 their descendants had as good a right as any other Greeks to share 
 in the conquered ground. It appears that Periander felt unwilling 
 t<j decide this delicate question of legendary law. He directed 
 that each party should retain what they possessed, and his verdict^ 
 was still remembered and ai)pealed to even in the time of Aris- 
 totle, by the inhabitants of Tenedos agamst those of Sigeium. 
 
 Tliough Pittakus and Alkaeus were both found in the same line 
 of hoplites against the Athenians at Sigeium, yet in the domestic 
 politics of their native city, their bearing wa^ that of bitter ene- 
 mies. Alka3U8 and Anthnenidas his brother were worsted in tbia 
 purty-feud, and banished : but even as exiles they were strong 
 
 been directed by Peisistratus, whose government did not commence untU 56f 
 B. c. (Herod. V, 94, 95). 
 
 My suspicion is, that there were two Athenian expedmons to these regiooi 
 - one in the time of Alkieus and Pittakus ; a second, much afterwards, un- 
 dertaken by order of Peisistratus, whose illegitimate son Hegesistratus be- 
 came, in consequence, despot of Sigeium. Herodotus appears to me to hare 
 
 mereed the two into one. , « , -^ • > ^ 
 
 ' See the difficult fragment of Alkaeus (Fr.24,ed. Schneidewin),preserv^ 
 in Strabo, xiii, p. 600; Herodot. v, 94, 95; Archilochus, Eleg. Fr. i, 5, ed. 
 Schneidewin; Herat Carm.ii, 7, 9 ; perhaps also Anakreon, but not certain- 
 ly (see Fr. 81. ed. Schneidewin), is to be regarded as having thrown aw.y 
 
 bis shield. . . ^u j a 
 
 » Aristot. Rhetoric 1, 16, 2, where ivayxoc nuuti the date. 
 
 1 
 
 u 
 
 I 
 
200 
 
 HISTORY Of GKEECE. 
 
 m 
 f 
 
 enough seriously to alarm and afflict their fellow-citizens, while 
 their party at home, and the general dissension within the walls, 
 reduced Mityleoe to despair. In this calamitous condition, the 
 Mityleneans had recourse to Pittakus, who with his great rank 
 in the state (his wife belonged to the old gens of the Penthilids), 
 courage in the lield, and reputation for wisdom, inspired greater 
 confidence than any other citizen of his time. lie was by uni- 
 versal consent named ^symnete or dictator for ten years, with 
 unlimited powers :' and the apf>ointment proved eminently suc- 
 cessful. How f flfectually he repelled the exiles, and maintained 
 domestic tranquillity, is best shown by the angry 'effusions of Al- 
 kaeus, whose songs (unfortunately lost) gave vent to the political 
 hostility of the time, in the same manner as the speeches of the 
 Athenian orators two centuries afterwards, and who in his visror- 
 ous invectives against Pittakus did not spare even the coarsest 
 nicknames, founded on allepMl i)ersonal deformities.'^ Respecting 
 the proceedings of this eminent dictator, the contemporary and 
 reported friend of Solon, we know only in a general way, that he 
 succeeded in reiislablishing security and [»eace, and that at the 
 end of his term he voluntarily laid down his authority ."^ — an evi- 
 dence not only of probity superior to the lures of ambition, but 
 also of that conscious moderation during the period of his dicta- 
 torship which left him without fear as a private citizen afterwards 
 He enacted various laws for Mitylene, one of which was sufficiently 
 curious to cause it to be pres(>rved and commented on, — for it 
 prescribed double penalties against offences committed by men in 
 a state of intoxication.^ But he did not (like Solon at Athens) 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. i i. 9, 5, 6; Dionys Ilalik Ant. Horn, v, 73; Plehn, I^h- 
 biaca, pp. 46-50. 
 
 ' Diogen. La»rt. i, 81. 
 
 • Straho, xlii, p. 617 ; Dioq-cn. L;urt. i, 75; Valer. Maxim, vi, 5. I 
 
 ♦ Aristot. I'olit. ii, 9, 9 ; Kla-toric ii, 27, 2. 
 
 A ditty is said to have been sunj; hy the female grindin«r-9laves in Lesbos, 
 when the mill went heavily : 'AAf <, fivAa, uXei • nal yup IlirTOKdc d'Aei, Tdc 
 ifjuXaf MiTvUvat: ^aaiXevuv, — '' Grind, mill, grind; for Pittakus also 
 pnds, the master of great Mitylene." This has the air of a genuine com- 
 position of the time, set forth by the enemies of Pittakus, and imputing to 
 him (through a very intelligible metaphor) tyrannical con .iuct ; though botb 
 Plotarch (Sept Sap. Conv. c. 14, p. 157\ ^d Diogenes La(?rt. (i, 8i) cob 
 
 1' 
 
 ASIATIC DORIANS. 
 
 80t 
 
 intpoduce any constitutional changes, nor provide any new formal 
 Becqrities for public liberty and good government :^ which illus- 
 trates the remark previously made, that Solon in doing this waa 
 beyond his age, and struck out new lights for his successors, — 
 since on the score of personal disinterestedness Pittakus and he 
 arc equally unimpeachable. What was the condition of Mitylene 
 afterwards, we have no authorities to tell us. Pittakus is said, if 
 the chronological computers of a later age can be trusted, to have 
 died in the 52d Olympiad (b. c. 572-568). Both he and Solon 
 are numbered among the Seven Wise Men of Greece, respecting 
 whom something will be said in a future chapter. The various 
 anecdotes current about him are little better than uncertified 
 exemplifications of a spirit of equal and generous civisra: but his 
 songs and his elegiac compositions were famiHar to literary Grei k§ 
 in the age of Plato. 
 
 I i 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 { t 
 
 ASIATIC DORIANS. 
 
 The islands of Rhodes, Kos, Syme, Nisyros, Kasus, and Kt^ 
 pathus, are represented in the Homeric Catalogue as furnishing 
 troops to the Grecian armament before Troy. Historical Rhodes, 
 toid historical Kos, are occupied by Dorians, the former with its 
 three separate cities of Lindus, Jalysus, and Kameirus. Two 
 other Dorian cities, both on the adjacent continent, are joined with 
 these four so as to constitute an amphiktyony on the Triopian 
 promontory or south-western corner of Asia Minor, — thus con- 
 stituting an hexapolis, including Halikarnassus, Knidus, Kds, 
 Lindus, Jalysus, and Kameirus. Knidus was situated on the 
 
 Btme it literally, as if Pittakus had been accujstomed to take bodily exerdst 
 §X the hand-mill. 
 
 * Aristot. Polit. ii, 9, 9. tyevero Si koX YlirraKb^ vofiuv dTifjuovpybf, <ttA* •! 
 .To> tTcicf . 
 
 9» 
 
 { I 
 
902 
 
 liiSTOKV OF GEEKCK. 
 
 I. ' 
 
 ' /, 
 
 I \ 
 
 i..' 
 
 Tiiopian promoritorj itself; Ilalikarnassas more to the norttiward 
 on the northern coast of the Ke ramie gutf: neither of the twc 
 are named in Homer. 
 
 The legendary account of the origin of these Asiatic Doriaiu 
 lias already been given, and we are compelled to acce[)t their 
 bexapolis as a portion of the eai-liest Grecian liistory, oi which 
 no previous account can be rendered. Tiie circumstance of Rhodes 
 and Kos being included in the Catalogue of the Iliad leads us Lc 
 suppose that they were Greek at an earlier period than the Ionic 
 or JEaAic settlements. It may be remarked that both the broUiera 
 Antiplius and Pheidippus from Kos, and Tlepolemub from lihodes, 
 are llerakleids, — the only Herakleids who figure in the Iliad: 
 and the deadly combat between Tlepolemus and Sarpcdou may 
 perhaps be an heroic copy drawn from real contests, whidi doubt- 
 less often took {)hife between the Rhodians and their neighbors 
 the Lykians. That Rtiodes and Kos were already Dorian at the 
 period of the Homeric Catalogue, I see no reason for doubting. 
 They are not calltid Dorian in tliat Catalogue, but we may well 
 suppose that the name Dorian had not at that early })eriod come 
 to be employed as a great distinctive class-name, as it was after- 
 wards used in cont iist with Ionian and il^olian. In relating the 
 history of Pheidoii of Argos, I have mentioned various reasons 
 for suspecting that the trade of the Dorians on the eastern coast 
 of the Peloponnesus was considerable at an early period, and there 
 may well have been. Doric migrations by sea to Krete and Rhodes, 
 anterior to the timi! of the Iliad. 
 
 Herodotus tells us that the six Dorian towns, which had estab- 
 lished their amphiktyony on the Triopian })romontory, were care- 
 ful to admit none of the neighboring Dorians to partake of it. Of 
 these neighboring Dorians, we make out the islands of Astypalae, 
 and Kalymnte,' Nisyrus, Karpathus, Syme, Telus, Kasus, and 
 Chalkia, — on the continental coiist, Myndus, situated on the same 
 peninsula with Halikarnassus, — Phaselis, on the eastern coast 
 of Lykia towards Pamphylia. The strong coast-rock of lasus, 
 midway between Miletus and Halikarnassus, is said to have beea 
 
 * Seo the Inscriptions in Boeckh's collection, 2483-2671 : the latier is ai| 
 lasian Inscription, reciting a Doric decaee by the inhabitants of Kalymna 
 •l»o Ahreas, \>ii DiAle«:to Dorica, pp. 1j, 553; Diodor. v, 53-54 
 
 NATIVES OF ASIA MINOM. 
 
 originally founded by Argeians, but was compelled in consequence 
 of destructive wars with the Karians to admit fresh settlers and 
 a Neleid oekist from Miletus. * Bargylia and Karyanda seem 
 to have been Karian settlements more or less Hellenized. There 
 probably were other Dorian towns, not specially known to us, 
 upon whom this exclusion from the Triopian solemnities was 
 brought to operate. The six amphiktyonized cities were in course 
 of time reduced to five, by the exclusion of Halikarnassus : the 
 reason for which (as we are told) was, that a citizen of Halikar- 
 nassus, who had gained a tripod as prize, violated the regulation 
 which required that the tripod should always be consecrated aa 
 an offering in the Triopian temple, in order that he might carry 
 it off to decorate his own house.2 The Dorian amphiktyony was 
 thus contracted into a pentapolis : at what time this incident took 
 place, w^e do not know, nor is it perhaps unreasonable to conjec- 
 ture that the increasing predominance of the Karian element at 
 Halikarnassus had some effect in producing the exclusion, as well 
 as the individual misbehavior of the victor Agasikles. 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 NATIVES OF ASIA MINOR WITH WHOM THE GREEKS BECAME 
 
 CONNECTED. 
 
 r II 
 
 From the Grecian settlements on the coast of Asia Minor, and 
 >n the adjacent islands, our attention must now be turned to those 
 Don-Hellenic kingdoms and people with whom they there came 
 m contact. 
 
 Our information with respect to all of them is unhappily very 
 scanty. Nor shall we improve our narrative by taking the cata- 
 logue, presented in the Iliad, of allies of Troy, and construing it 
 •fl if it were a chapter of geography : if any proof were wanting 
 
 * Polyb. xvi, 5. 
 
 2 Herodot i, 144. 
 
 I 
 
 i I 
 
 ♦. 
 
 ]\ 
 
t04 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 Df (he unpromising results of such a proceeding, Me may find it 
 in the confusion which darkens so much of the work of Strabo, 
 
 who perpetually turns aside from the actual and ascertainable 
 
 condition of the countries which he is describing, to conjecturea 
 on Homeric antiquity, often announced as if they were unques- 
 tionable facts. Where the Homeric geography is confirmed by 
 other evidence, we note the fact with satisfaction ; where it stands 
 unsupported or difficult to reconcile with other statements, we 
 cannot venture to reason upon it as in itself a Substantial testi- 
 mony. The author of the Iliad, as he has congrejiated together 
 a vast body of the different sections of Greeks for the attack 
 of the consecrated hill of Ilium, so he has also summoned all the 
 various inhabitants of Asia Minor to cooperate in its defence, and 
 he has planted portions of the Kilikians and Lykians, wh«se his- 
 torical existence is on the southern coast, in the immediate vicinity 
 of the Troad Those only will complain of this who have accus- 
 tomed themselves to regard him as an historian or geographer : 
 if we are content to read him only as the first of poets, we shall 
 no more cpiarrel with liim for a geographical misplacement, than 
 with his successor Arktinus for bringing on the battle-field of 
 Ilium the Amazons or the itUhiopians. 
 
 The geography of Asia Minor is even now very imperfectly 
 known,' and the matters ascertained respecting its ancient divis- 
 ions and boundaries relate almost entirely either to the later periods 
 of the Persian empire, or to times after the Macedonian and even 
 after the Roman conquest. To state them as they stood in the 
 time of Cra^sus king of Lydia, before the arrival of the conquer- 
 iwfr Cvrus, is a task in which we find little evidence to sustain us. 
 The great mountain chain of Taurus, which begins from the Che- 
 lidonian promontory on tlie southern coast of Lykia, and strikes 
 
 ' For the general }xeo};raphy of Asia Minor, see Albert Forbig«r, Hand- 
 huch der Alt. Geogr. part ii, sect. 61. and an instructive little treatise, Fiinf 
 Inschriften und fnnf Stadte in Klein Asien, by Franz and Kiepert, Berlin, 
 1840. with a map of Phrygia annexed. The latter is particularly valuable 
 as showing us how mitch yet remains to be made out : it is too often the 
 practice with the compilers of geographical manuals to make a show of foil 
 knowledge, and to disguise the imperfection of their data. Nor do they 
 •Iways keep in view the; necessity of distinguishing between the territorial 
 ■amee and divisions of one age and those of another. 
 
 !"' 
 
 NATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 
 
 205 
 
 Doith-eastward as far as Armenia, formed the most noted boundary^ 
 line during the Roman times, — but Herodotus does not onc8 
 mention it ; the river Halys is in his view the most important 
 geographical limit. Northward of Taurus, on the upper portion* 
 of the rivers Halys and Sangarius, was situated the spacious an4 
 lofty central plain of Asia Minor. To the north, west, and soutk 
 <#f this central plain, the region is chiefly mountainous, as it ap- 
 proaches all the three seas, the Euxine, the ^]gean, and the 
 Pamphylian, — most mountainous in the case of the latter, per 
 mitting no rivers of long course. The mountains Kadmus, Messo- 
 gis, Tmolus, stretch westward towards the ^gean seji, but leaving 
 extensive spaces of plain and long valleys, so that the course of 
 the Mieander, the KaVster, and the Hermus is of considerablo 
 length. The north-western part includes the mountainous regions 
 of Ida, Temnus, and the Mysian Olympus, yet with much admix- 
 ture of fertile and productive ground. The elevated tracts near 
 the Euxine appear to have been the most wooded, — especially 
 Kytorus : the Parthenius, the Sangarius, the Halys, and the Iris, 
 are all considerable streams flowing northward towards that seat 
 Nevertheless, the plain land interspersed through these numerouw 
 elevations was often of the greatest fertility ; and as a whole, the 
 peninsula of Asia Minor was considered as highly productive by 
 the ancients, in grain, wine, fruit, cattle, and in many parts, oil ; 
 though the cold central plain did not carry the ohve.i 
 
 Along the western shores of this peninsula, where the various 
 bands of Greek emigrants settled, we hear of Pelasgians, Teu- 
 krians, Mysians, Bithynians, Phrygians, Lydians or Maeonians, 
 Karians, Lelegians. Farther eastward are Lykians, Pisidians, 
 Kilikians, I'hrygians, Kapadokians, Paphlagonians, Mariandyn- 
 ians, etc. Speaking generally, we may say that the Phrygians, 
 Teukrians, and Mysians appear in the north-western portion, 
 between the river Hermus and the Propontis, — the Karians and 
 Lelegians south of the river Maeander, — and the Lydians in the 
 central region between the two. Pelasgians are found here and 
 
 » Cicero, Pro Lege Manili^, c. 6; Strabo, xii, p. 572; Herodot. v, 32. Set 
 the instructive account of the spread and cultivation of the olive-tree, is 
 Bitter. Erdkunde, West- Asien, b iii, Abtheilung iii: Abschn. i, s. 50, pp 
 622-537 
 
106 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 NATIONS IN ASIA MINOR. 
 
 207 
 
 ! i. 
 
 
 there, seemingly both in the valley of the Hermus and in that o* 
 the Kaister: even in the time of Herodotus, there were Pela-^^iar 
 Bettlements at Plakia and Skylake on the Fropontis, westward ol 
 Kyzikus : and O. Miiller would even trace the Tyrrhenian Pelas- 
 gians to Tyrrha, an inland town of Lydia, from whence he imajr- 
 ines, though without much probabihty, the name Tyrrhenian tt 
 be derived. 
 
 One important fact to remark, in respect to the native popula- 
 tion of Asia Minor at the first opening of this history, is, that 
 tliey were not aggregated into great kingdoms or confeder- 
 ations, nor even into any large or populous cities, — but distrib- 
 uted into many inconsiderable tribes, so as to present no over- 
 whelming resistance, and threaten no tbrniidable danger, to the 
 successive bodies ot Greek emigrants. The only exception to 
 this is, the Lydian monarchy of Sardis, the real strength of which 
 begins with Gyges ati<l the dynasty of tlie Mermnada^ about 700 
 B. C. Though the increasing force of this kingdom ultimately 
 extinguished the independence of the Greeks in Asia, it seem^^ 
 to have noway impeded their development, as it stood when they 
 first arrived, and for a long time afterwards. Nor were either 
 Karians or Mysians united under any one king, so as to possess 
 facilities for aggression or conquest. 
 
 As far as can be made out from our scanty data, it aj)peaia 
 that all the nations of Asia Minor west of the river Halys, were, 
 in a large sense, of kindred race with each other, as well as with 
 the Thracians on the European side of the Bosphorus and Hel- 
 lespont. East of the Halys dwelt the people of Syro- Arabian 
 or Semitic race, — Assyrians, Syrians, and Kappadokians, — as 
 well as Kilikians, I'amphylians, and Solymi, along its up)>eT 
 course and farther southward to the Pamphylian sea. West- 
 ward of the Halys, the languages were not Semitic, but bWonging 
 to a totally different family,' — cognate, yet distinct one from an- 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 72 : Heerijn, Ideen flber den Verkchr tier Alten Welt, part i 
 ihth. i, pp. 142-145. It may be remarked, however, tliat the Armenians, eaat- 
 ward of the Halys, are treated by Herodotus as colonists from the Phrygians 
 (vii, 73) : Stephanas Bys. says the same, v, ^Apfieiia, adding also, Kal rf 
 ^v^ iroXXii <ppvyt!^ov<Tc, The more careful researches of n odem linguists 
 after much groundless assertion on the part of those whc preceded them 
 Wive shown that the Armenian language belongs in its structure to the Iiido 
 
 .ther, perhaps not mutually intelligible. The Karians, LydiaM, 
 and Mysians recognized a certain degree of brotherhood with 
 each other, attested by common religious sacrifices in the temple 
 of Zeus Karios, at Mylasa.i But it is by no means certain that 
 each of these nations mutually comprehended each other's speech ; 
 and Herodotus, from whom we derive the knowledge of these com- 
 mon sacrifices, acquaints us at the same time tiiat the Kaunians in 
 the south-western corner of the peninsula had no share in them, 
 though speaking the same language as the Karians ; he does not, 
 however, seem to consider identity or difference of language as a 
 test of national affinity. 
 
 Along the coast of the Euxine, from the Thracian Bosphorus 
 eastward to the river Halys, dwelt Bithynians or Thynians, M^ri- 
 andynians and Paphlagonians, — all recognized branches of the 
 widely-extended Thracian race. The Bithynians especially, in the 
 north-western portion of this territory, and reaching from the 
 Euxine to the Propontis, are often spoken of as Asiatic Thra- 
 cians, — while on the other hand various tribes among the 
 Thracians of Europe, are denominated Thyni, or Thynians,2 — so 
 little difference was there in the population on the two sides of 
 the Bosphorus, alike brave, predatory, and sanguinary. The 
 Bithynians of Asia are also sometimes called Bebrykians, under 
 which denomination they extend as far southward as the gulf of 
 Kios in the Propontis.3 They here come in contact with Myg- 
 
 Germanic family, and is essentially distinct from the Semitic: see Kilter, 
 Erdkunde, West-Asien, b. iii, abth. iii; Abschn. i, 5, 36, pp. 577-582. He- 
 rodotus rarely takes notice of the language spoken, nor does he on this 
 occasion, when speaking of the river Halys as a boundary. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 170-171. 
 
 2 Strabo, vii, pp. 295-303 ; xii, pp. 542, 564, 565, 572 ; Herodot. i, 28 ; vii, 
 74-75; Xenophon. Hellenic, i, 3, 2 5 Anabasis, vii, 2» 22-32. Manncrt, 
 Geofrraphie der Gr. und Komer, b. viii, ch. ii, p. 403. 
 
 ^ Dionys. Perieget. 805 ; Apollodorus, i, 9, 20. Theokritus puts the 
 Bebrykians on the coast of the Euxine — Id. xxii, 29 ; Syncell. p. 340, Bonn. 
 The story in Appian, Bell. Mithridat init. is a singular specimen of Grecian 
 fancy, and anxiety to connect the antiquities of a nation with the Trojan 
 war: the Greeks whom he followed assigned the origin of the Bithynians to 
 Thracian followers of Khesus, who fled from Troy after the latter had been 
 killed by Diomedes : Dolonkus, eponym of the Thracians in the Chersonesii^ 
 Is called brother of Bithynus (Steph. Byz. Ao/.oy/cof — Bi^vvla). 
 
 The name M.auiav-6vvoi, like Bi-i^vvoij may probably be an extension of 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ETHNICAL AFFINITIES AND MIGRATIONS. 
 
 209 
 
 donians, Mysians, and Phrygians. Along t'ae southern coast of 
 the Propontis, between the rivers Rhyndakus and -^sepus, in 
 immediate neighborhood with the powerful Greek colony of Ky- 
 zikus, a[)pear the Doliones ; next, Pelasgians at Plakia and 
 Sky lake ; then again, along the coast of the Hellespont near 
 Abydus and Larapsakus, and occupying a portion of the Troad, 
 we find mention made of other BebrykiansJ In the interior of 
 the Troad. or the region of Ida, are Teukrians and Mysians: the 
 hitter seem to extend southward down to Pergamus and the 
 region of Mount Sipylus, and eastward to the mountainous re- 
 gion called the Mysian Olympus, south of the lake Askanius, 
 near which they join with the Phrygians.- 
 
 As far as any positive 0|)inion can be formed respecting nation^ 
 
 of whom we know so little, it would appear that the Mysians and 
 
 Phrygians are a sort of connecting link between Lydians and 
 
 Karians on one side, and Thracians (European as well as 
 
 Asiatic) on the other, — a remote etlinical affinity pervading the 
 
 whole. Ancient migrations are spoken of in both directions 
 
 across the Hellespont and the Thracian Bosphorus. It was the 
 
 opinion of some that Phrygians, Mysians, and Thracians had 
 
 emigrated into Asia from Europe, and the Lydian historian Xan- 
 
 thus referred the arrival of the Phrygians to an epoch subsequent 
 
 to the Trojan war.3 On the other hand, Herodotus speaks of a 
 
 vast body of Teukrians and Mysians, who, before the Trojan 
 
 war, had crossed the strait from Asia into Europe, expelled many 
 
 of the Euroj>ean Thracians from their seats, crossed the Stry- 
 
 mon and the Mac<?donian rivers, and penetrated as far southward 
 
 :is tlie river Peneus in Thessaly, — as far westward as the Ionic 
 
 (Oinpourid of the primitive Ovvoi; perhaps, also, BifSpvKec stands in the 
 same relation to Bp^ff, or 4>fjvy4^. Hellanikus wrote Qvfif3piov AvfxiSpcov 
 (Steph. Byz. in v). 
 
 Kios is Mysian in Herod itus, v, 122 : accorain«^ to Skylax, the coast from 
 the gulf of Astakus to that of Kios is Mysia (c. 93). 
 
 ' Charon of Lamp<akus, Fr. 7, ed. Didot. Xupuv 6e (pjjal koX t^v Aafirpa- 
 
 "iryvwv x^pf^^ npor^paj BeiSpvKiav Kakelay^ai and rwv KuroiKijaavrDv avr^v 
 
 beSpvKuv ' rd de yevo: avruv rji^tuviaTai did roi)f yevoftevovg noXifiov^. Six » h^. 
 
 xiii, p. ."ise; Conon, Narr. 12; Dionys. Hal. i, 54. 
 
 « Hekataeus, Frag. 204, ed. Dido j Ap<aio<i3r. i, 9, 18; Strabo, xk p» 
 564-575. 
 
 ' Xaath. Fragra. 5, ed Didot. 
 
 gulf. This Teukro-Mysian migration, he tells us, brought about 
 two consequences : first, the establishment near the river Strymon 
 of the Paeonians, who called themselves Teukrian colonists ;' 
 next, the crossing into Asia of many of the dispossessed Thracian 
 tribes from the neighborhood of the Strymon, into the north- 
 western region of Asia Minor, by which the Bithynian or Asiatic 
 I'hracian people was formed. The Phrygians also are supi)Osed 
 by some to have originally occupied an European soil on the 
 borders of Macedonia, near the snow-clad Mount Bermion, at 
 which time they were called Briges, — an appellative name m 
 the Lydian language equiralent to freemen, or Franks: 2 while 
 the Mysians are said to have come from the north-eastern portions 
 of European Thrace south of the Danube, known under the 
 Roman empire by the name of Moesia.3 But with respect to the 
 Mysians there was also another story, according to which they 
 were described as colonists emanating from the Lydians ; put 
 forth according to that system of devoting by solemn vow a tenth 
 of the inhabitants, chosen by lot, to seek settlements elsewhere, 
 which recurs not unfrequently among the stories of early emi- 
 grations, as the consequence of distress and famine. And tliia 
 Uist opinion was supported by the character of, the Mysian lan- 
 guage, halt Lydian and half Phrygian, of which both the Lydian 
 historian Xanthus, and Menekrates of Ehea,'* — by whom the 
 oj)inion was announced, — must have been very competent 
 judges. 
 
 From such tales of early migration both ways across the 
 Hellespont and the Bosphorus, all that we can with any certainty 
 infer is, a certain measure of affinity among the population of 
 Thrace and Asia Minor, — especially visible in the case of the 
 Phrygians and Mysians. The name and legends of the Phrygian 
 hero Midas are connected with different towns throughout the 
 
 ' Herodot. vii, 20-75. 
 Strabo, vii, p. 295 ; xii, p. 550 ; Herodot. vii, 73 ; Hesycfi. v, Bpiya. 
 
 ' Sirabo, vii, p. 295; xii, pp. 542, 564, 571, where he cites the geographei 
 Ajtemidorus. In the pa.ssage of the Iliad (xiii, 5), the Mvaoi dyxi/iaxo, 
 appear to be conceived by the poet in European Thrace ; but Apollodomi 
 does not seem to have so construed the passag^e. Niebuhr (Kleine Schriftea 
 p. 370) expresses himself more confidently than the evidence warracta 
 
 * Strabo, xii, p. 572 ; Herodot vii, 74. 
 
 VOL. III. lioc 
 
 
 - . -tT-VU t-<t 
 
710 
 
 HISTORY OK GREECE. 
 
 PHRYGIANS. 
 
 211 
 
 extensive rej^ion of Asiatic Phrygia, — Kelicnrr, Pessinus, A». 
 kyra,i Gordii nt, — as well as with the neighborhood of Mount 
 iiermion in Miicetlonia : the adventure whereby Midas got pos- 
 session of Silenur;, mixing wine with the spring of which he 
 tirank, was localized at the latter place as well as at the town of 
 Thymbrion, nearly at the eastern extremity of Asiatic Phrygia.'^ 
 The name Mygdonia, and the eponymous hero Mygdon, belong 
 ::jt less to tlie Kuropean territory near the river Axius, — after- 
 wards a part of Macedonia, — than to the Asiatic coast of the 
 eastern Pro[)Oiitis, between Kios and the river lihyndakus.3 
 Otreus and Mygdon are the pomraanders of the Phiygians in 
 the Iliad; and the river Odrysvs, wliich flowed through the terri- 
 tory of the Asiatic Mygdoniuns, into the liliyndalvus, atfords an- 
 other example of homonymy with the Odrjsian Thracians^ in 
 Europe. And as these coincidences of names and legends con- 
 duct us to the idea of analogy and affinity between Thracians and 
 Phrygians, so we find Arcliilochus, the earliest poet remaining to 
 us who mentions them as contemporaries, coupling the two in the 
 6^ue simile.'* To this early Parian lambist, the population on 
 
 ' Diodor. iii, 51» ; Aniiin, ii, 3, 1 ; Quint. Curt, iii, 1, 12; Athcnie .\, p. 
 415. We may also iioiioe the town of Korvt^ioi' near Midueiov in Phrygiit, 
 fts connected with the name of the Thrarian goddess Kot^s (Strabo, x, p. 
 ♦70; xii, p. 576). 
 
 " Herodot. viii, 138; Thcopom})Us, Frag. 74, 75, 76, Didot (he introduced 
 ft long dialogue iMjtwcen Midas and Silenus, — Dionys. Halik. Vett. Script 
 Censur, p. 7U: Theon. rrogymna.s. c. 2); Stralx), xiv, p. 680; Xenophoa, 
 AiKibas. i, 2, 13. 
 
 ^Strabo. xii. pp. 575-576: Steph. Byz. Mvyrfovm; Thocyd. ii, 99. The 
 territory Mvirdonia and tJie Mygdonians, in the distant region of Mcsopota- 
 mil, castwaril of the river Chaboran (Plutarch, Lncnllus, 32; Polyb. v, 51 ; 
 Xenophon, Anab iv, 3. 4) is didicult to understand, since it is surprising to 
 find a branch of these more westerly Asiatics in the midst of the Syro- 
 Arabian population. Strabo (xv, p. 747) supposes it to date only from the 
 times of the Mact donian conquest of Asia, which is disproved by the men 
 tion of the name in Xenophon ; tliough this reading in the text of Xenophon 
 is by some called in question. See Forbigcr, Handbach der Alten Geogra- 
 phic, part ii, sect. 98. p. 62S 
 
 * Iliad iii, 188 ; Strabo. xii, p. 551. The town of Otrooa, of which Otrcur 
 i«enis to be the eponymus, was situated in Phrygia, jast on the borders of 
 Bithynia (StralK), xii, p. 566). 
 
 » Arihiloch. Fragm. 28 Schncid., 26 Gaisf. — 
 
 "H *Di»^ iPpv^ey etc. 
 
 fhe two sides of the Hellespont appears to have presented simi- 
 larity of feature and custom.s. 
 
 To settle with any accuracy the extent and condition of these 
 Asiatic nation.s during the early days of Grecian settlement 
 among them is impracticable ; the problem was not to be solved 
 even by the ancient geographers, with their superior means of 
 knowledge. The early indigenous distribution of the Phrygian 
 |)opulation is unknown to us, and the division into the Greater 
 and Lesser Phrygia belongs to a period at least subsequent to 
 the Persian conquest, like most of the recognized divisions of 
 Asia Minor ; it cannot, therefore, be applied with reference to 
 the period earlier than Croesus. It appears that the name Phry- 
 gians, like that of Thracians, was a generic designation, and 
 comprehended tribes or separate communities who had also spe- 
 cific names of their own. We trace Phrygians at wide distances: 
 on the western bank of the river Halys, — at Keltence, in the 
 interior of Asia Minor, towards the rise of the river Maiander, — • 
 Aiid on the coast of the Propontis near Kios ; — in both of these 
 latter localities there is a salt lake called Askanius, which is the 
 name both of the leader of the Phrygian allies of Troy, and of 
 the country from whence they are said to come, in the Iliad.^ 
 They thus occupy a territory bounded on the south by the Pisid- 
 ian mountains, on the west by the Lydians (indicated by a termi- 
 nal pillar set up by Cra3sus at Kydrara),^ — on the east by the 
 river Halys, on the other side of which were Kappadokians or 
 Syrians, on the north by Paphlagonians and Mariandynians. 
 But it seems, besides this, that they must have extended fartlier 
 to the west, so as to occupy a great j)ortion of the region of 
 Mount Ida and the Troad. For A{)ollo<]6rus considered that 
 
 Tbe jNissage is too corrupt to support any inference, except the near approx 
 imation in the poet's mind of ThMcians and Phrygians. 
 
 ' Iliad, ii, 873; xiii, 792; Arrian, i, 29; Herodot. vii, 30. The boundary 
 ->{* the Phrygians southward towards the Pisidians, and westward as well as 
 north-westward towards the Lydians and Mysians, could never be disiinclT 
 traced (Strabo. xii, pp. 564, 576, 628): the volcanic region called Katake 
 kaumene is referred in Xenophon's time to Mygia (Anabas. i, 2, 10): com- 
 pare the remarks of Kiepert in the treatise above referred to, Fiinf Inschriftefl 
 end fijnf Stadte, p. 27. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 72 ; rii, 30. 
 
212 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 UTTSIC OF PHRYGIA. 
 
 S^S 
 
 both the Dolion<is and the Bebrykians were included in the grea 
 Phrygian name ;' and even in the ancient poem called " PhoixV 
 nis.** which can liardly be placed later than GOO b. c, the Dak- 
 tyls of Mount Ida, the great discoverers of metallurgy, are 
 expressly named Phrygian.'^ The custom of the Attic tragic 
 poets to call the inhabitants of the Troad Phrygians, does not 
 aecessarily ini[>ly any translation of inhabitants, but an employ- 
 mont of the general name, as better known to the audience whom 
 they addressed., in preference to the less notorious specific name, 
 — just as the inhabitants of Bithynia might be described either 
 as Bithynians or as Asiatic Thracians. 
 
 If, as the language of Herodotus and Ephorus3 would seem 
 to imply, we suppose the Phrygians to be at a considerable dis- 
 tance from the coast and dwelling only in the interior, it will be 
 difficult to explain to ourselves how or where the eai'ly Greek 
 colonists came to be so much influenced by them ; whereas the 
 supposition that the tribes occui>ying the Troad and the region 
 of Ida were I*hrygians elucidates this point. And the fact is 
 incontestable, that both Phrygians and Lydians did not only 
 modify the religious manifestations of the Asiatic Greeks, and 
 through them of the Grecian world generally, — but also ren- 
 dered important aid toward^ the first creation of the Grecian 
 musical scale. Of this tlic denominations of the scale afford a 
 pnx)f 
 
 Three primitive musical modes were employed by the Greek 
 poets, in the earliest times of uhicli later authors could find any 
 account, — the Lydian, wliich was the most acute, — the Dorian, 
 which was the most grave, — and the Phrygian, intennediate 
 between the two; the highest note of the Lydijui being one tone 
 higher, that of the Dorian one tone lower, than the highest note 
 of the Phrygian scale.^ Such were the three modes or scales, 
 
 ' Strabo, xiv, [•. 678: compare xiii, j> 58t*». The legend makes Dolion 
 son of Sil^nus, who is so luurh oonnecteti with the Phrygian Midas (Alex- 
 snd. -^tolus ap. Strabo, xiv, p f.si ). 
 
 • Phoronis, Fraj^. 5, ed. Diintz* r, u. 57 ■ 
 
 fv^n yoTjTec 
 
 *I(JoiO' ^fjvyeg uvdfjei:^ opearrf/oi. ohcaiV ivaiov^ etc. 
 
 ' Ephonis ap. Strabo, xiv, 078: ilerodut. v, 49. 
 
 * See the learne 1 and valuable Dissertation of Boeckh, De Metrifl Pindan. 
 Hi, 8, pp. 235-239 
 
 7 Vol. 3 
 
 Buch including only a tetrachord, upon which the earliest G:^ek 
 ma.<ters worked : many other scales, both higher and lower, were 
 subsequently added. It thus appears that the earliest Greek 
 music was, in large proportion, borrowed from Phrygia and 
 Lydia : and when we consider that, in the eighth and seventh 
 centuries before the Christian era, music and poetry conjoined 
 — often also with dancing or rhythmical gesticulation — wa» 
 the only intellectual manifestation known among the Greeks,— 
 and moreover that, in the belief of all the ancient writers, every 
 musical mode had its own peculiar emotJDnal influences, power- 
 fully modified the temper of hearers, and was intimately con 
 nected with the national worship, — we shall see that this 
 transmission of the musical modes implies much both of com- 
 munication and interchange between the Asiatic Greeks and the 
 indi-enous population of the continent. Now the fact of com 
 munication between the Ionic and ^olic Greeks, and ther 
 eastern neighbors, the Lydians, is easy to comprehend generally, 
 thoucrh we have no details as to the way in wiiich it took place ; 
 but we do not distinctly see where it was that the Greeks came 
 so much into contact with the Phrygians except in the region of 
 Ida, the Troad, and the southern coast of the Propontis. To 
 this reo-ion belonged those early Phrygian musicians (under Uie 
 heroic "names of Olympus, Hyagnis, Marsyas), from whom the 
 Greeks borrowed.^ And we may remark that the analogy be- 
 tween Thracians and Phrygians seems partially to hold in re- 
 .pect both to music and religion, since the old mythe in the Ihad, 
 
 ' Plutarch, De Musicci, c. 5, 7, p. 1132; Aristoxenus ap. Athen«. xiv. p. 
 624; Alkman, Frag. 104, ed.Bergk. 
 
 Aristoxenus seems to have considered the Phrygian Olympus as the great 
 inventive genius who gave the start to Grecian music (Plutarch rb. pp. 
 1135-1141) : his music was employed almost entirely for hymns to the gr.l», 
 religious worship, the Metroa, or ceremonies, in honor of the Great Mother 
 (1,1140). Compare Clemen. Alexand. Strom. 1, p. 306. 
 
 yiapava^ may perhaps have its etymology in the Karian or Lyd.an Ian- 
 truatre. ^ova^ was in Karian equivalent to Ta<po^ (see Stcph. By/ ^^ ^'>ta>e- 
 Xa)T Ma was one of the various name« of Rhea (Steph. Bj^. v, Maaravpa) 
 The word would have been written Mupo jiac by an ^.olic Greek. 
 
 Marsvas is represented by Telesles the lithyrambist as a satyr, son of « 
 ajmph!-vvfi<l>ayevelxetpoKrvKv <l>vpc Mapava aeof (Telest^B ap. Athcn* 
 liT. p 6171. 
 
214 
 
 IirsrORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I'! 
 
 T ;■ J 
 
 wherein the Thracian bard Tliamyris, rashly contending in song 
 with tho Muses, is conquered, blinded, and stripped of his art, 
 seems to be the prototy[)e of the very similar story respecting the 
 contention of Apollo with the Phrygian Marsyas,' — the eithara 
 agjiinst the flute; while the Phrygian Midas is farther charac- 
 terized as the religious disciple of Thracian Or[»lieus. 
 
 In ray previous chapter relating to the legend of Troy ,-2 men- 
 tion has been already made of the early fusion of tlie JEoIic 
 Greeks with the indigenous [wpulation of the Ti oad ; and it is from 
 hence probably that the Phrygian music with the flute as its instru- 
 ment, — employed in the orgiastic rites and worship of the Great 
 Mother in Mount Ida, in the Mysian Olympus, a.nl other moun- 
 tain regions of the country, and even in the Greek city of Lam- 
 psakus,3 — passed to the Greek composers. Its introduction is 
 coeval with the earliest facts respecting Grecian music, and 
 mu^t have taken place during the first century of the recorded 
 Olympiads. In the Homeric poems we find no allusion to it, but 
 it may probably have contributed to stimulate that developmen! 
 of lyric and elegiac composition which grew up among the |K)st- 
 Homeric ^olians and lonians, to the gradual displacement of 
 tlie old epic. Another instance of the fusion of Phrygians witl 
 Greeks is to be found in the religious ceremonies of Kyzikus, 
 Kins, and Pi-usa, on the southern and south-eastern coasts of tho 
 Propontis; at the first of the three places, the woi-ship of the 
 Great Mother of the gods was celebrated with much solemnity on 
 the hill of Dindymon, bearing the same name as that mountain 
 in the interior, near Pessinus, from whence Cybele derived hei 
 
 • Xenoph. Anab. i, 2, 8 ; Homer, Iliad. H. 595; Stralx), xii, p. 578: the 
 latter connects Olympus with KeliBniB as well as Miirsvas. Justin, xi, 7 '. 
 " Mida, qai ab Orpheo sacrortim solcmnibus initiatus, Phr\ niam reliirionibM 
 mpievit. 
 
 The coins of Midaeion, Kadi, and PrymnCssns, in the more northerly 
 portion of Piirypa, l)ear the impress of the Phrygian hero Midsis (Eckhel, 
 Dortrina Nuramorum Vet. iii, pp. 143-168). 
 
 " Part i, eh. xv, p. 453. 
 
 ' The fnnraent of Hipi)6nax mentioninqr an eunuch of Lampsakae, ric!> 
 and well-fed, reveals to us the Asiatic worship ir. that place (Fragm 26 ei 
 Bergk)! — 
 
 Gvwav re icai fivrrurbv f/fiipag Traacf 
 LaLvvfievo^^ tjOTvp Aofi^oKijvoc evvovxo^, etc 
 
 PHRYGIANS, LYDIANS, MYSIANS. 
 
 8IA 
 
 principal surname of Dindymcn^J The analogy between tht, 
 Kretan and Phrygian religious practices has been often noticed, 
 and confusion occui-s not unfrequently between Mount Ida m 
 Krete and the mountain of the same name in the Troad ; white 
 the Teukrians of Gergis in the Ti-oad, — who were not yet Hel- 
 Icnized even at the time of the Persian invasion, and who were 
 aihrmed by the elegiac poet Kallinus to have emigratcni t.x>m 
 Krete, — if they were not really Phrygians, — differed bo little 
 from them as to be called such by the poets. 
 
 The Phrygians are celebrated by Herodotus for the abundance 
 both of theirlfiocks and their agrieuUural produce :^ the excellent 
 wool for which Milfetus was always renowned came in part from 
 the upper valley of the river Maeander, which they inhabited. 
 He contrasts them in this respect with the Lydians, among whom 
 the attributes and capacities of persons dwelling in cities are 
 chiefly brou-ht to our view : much gold and silver, retail trade, 
 indigenous ^games, unchastity of young women, yet combmed 
 with thrift and industry.3 Phrygian cheese and salt-provisions, 
 Lvdian un-uents,4 carpets and colored shoes, acquired notoriety, 
 p/oth Phrygians and Lydians are noticed by Greek authors sub- 
 ^(.uent to the establishment of the Persian empire as a people 
 timid, submissive, industrious, and useful as slaves, — an attribute 
 not ascribed to the Mysians,^ who are usually descnbed as brave 
 and hardy mountameers, difficult to hold in subjection : nor even 
 true respecting the Lydians, during the earlier times anterior to 
 the complete overthrow of Croisus by Cyrus ; for they were then 
 esteemed for their warlike pro wess, Nor was the different char - 
 
 ' Strabo, xii, pp. 564-f>75 ; Herodot. iv, 76. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 49. 7ro/w7rpo/3arwrarof Kal TroXvKopiroTaTOL 
 
 ^ Herodot i, 9.3-94. ^, • u ^ 
 
 *TapLxo^ ^pvytov (Eupolis, Marik. Fr. 23, p. 506, Uemcke)--rvpO,, 
 Athene, xii, 516.-i^.r"c5ef. Alexis ap. Athene, iii, 75 : «>m. Phrygiaam 
 however, had never seen a fig-tree (Cicero pro Flacco, c. »7). 
 
 Carpets of Sardis (Athenae. v, 197); <pocvLKi6e<: lapJitavcKal (Plato, Coiii. 
 iciw ap. Athene, ii, 48); 'Aa <l>LX6,ivpov irdv rb lupd.uv yevoc (Alew ap. 
 Athene. XV, p. 691, and again *. p. 690); Uo^acje no^K^K f^<^^^i 
 huXv^. AvSiov Kokbv ipyov (Sappho, Fragm. 54, ed. bchneidewm; Sebol 
 
 ^•rn'ophon; Has. i, 6, 7 ; iii, 2, 23; Meroorab. in. 5, 2. c^r.r^ 
 Uvaol; jEschyl. Pers. 40. iSooiiaini Avioi. 
 
 <] 
 
I( 
 
 ( 
 
 • f 
 
 { 
 
 fl6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 acter of the-e two Asiatic people yet effaced evtn ia the second 
 century after the Christian era. For the same Mysiaiis, who in 
 the time of Herodotus and Xenophon gave so much trouble to 
 the Persian satraps, are described by the rhetor Aristeides aa 
 ieizin<' and plundering his property at Laneion near Hadriani, 
 — while on tlie contrary iie mentions the Plirygians as habitually 
 wminf' from the interior t<»wards tlie coast-regions to do the work 
 df tlie olive-gatiiering.i During tlie times ot Grecian autonomy 
 tnd ascendency, in the fifth century u. C, tlie conception of a 
 Phrygian or a Lydian wjts associated in the Greek mind with 
 ideas of contem|)t and servitude,- to which unquestionably these 
 Asiatics became iii>hion<id, since it was habitual with them under 
 the Roman empire to sell their own children into slavery,- — 
 a {iractice certainly very rare among the Greeks, even when they 
 too had become confounded among the mass of subjects of imi)e- 
 rial Rome. But we may fairly assume that this assotiation of 
 contenijit with the name of a Phrygian or a Lydian did not i)re- 
 vail during the early period of Grecian Asiatic settlement, or 
 even in the time of Aikman, Mimnermus, or Sappho, down to 
 600 B. c. We first trace evidence of it in a fragment of Ilippo- 
 nax, and it began with the subjection of Asia Minor generally. 
 
 ' Aristeid. Oral, xxvi, p. 346 The ?.6(^oc 'Atvoc was very near to this 
 pl;i<o r.aneion, which shows the identity of the religious names throughout 
 Lydiu and Mysia (Or. xxv, p. 318). Abou* the Phrygians, Aristeides, Onit. 
 xivi, p. 308, Tuv de TzXovaiuv I eKa eig Ttjv vTzepopiav uTzaipovacv, uxjnep oi 
 4>,ii")ef rtjv e?.aC)V iveKO rr/g (jv/.Xoyriq. 
 
 The declamatory prolixities of Aristeides offer little reward to the reader, 
 except these occasional valual)lf! evidences of existing custom. 
 
 • Hermij):>us ap. A'henie. i. p. 27. 'SvdpaKoiV U <i>pvyiac, etc., the saying 
 ■vi'ribed to Sokrates in JElian, V. H. x, 14; Euripid. Alccst. 691 ; Strabo, 
 vii, p. 304; Polyh iv. 38. The Tlinuians sold their children into slavery, 
 — (Herod, v, C) as the Circassians do at present (Clarke's Travels, vol. i, p. 
 
 378). 
 
 Anl'trFpor >/;(,. 4»/)»}% wa^ a Greek proverb 'Straho, i, p. 36: compap* 
 
 Cicero pro Flacco, c. 27). 
 
 3phiIo8trat. Vit. ApoUon. viii. 7, 12, p. 346. The slave-merchants setin 
 to have visited Thessaly, and to have bouj^ht slaves at Pugasae ; these wer« 
 either Penests sold by their masters out of the country, or perhaps nou- 
 Greeks procured from the borderers in th'i interior (Aristoph. Plutus, 521 j 
 Bermippns ap Athenae. i, p. 27. At ilcyaacu dovhtvi ko* ariyuartv 
 waoixovci). 
 
 \ 
 
 MIDAS. 
 
 217 
 
 first under Croesus^ and then under Cyrus, and with the sentiment 
 of comparative pride which grew up afterwards in the minda 
 of European Greeks. The native Phrygian tribes along the 
 Propontis, with whom the Greek colonists came in contact, - 
 Bebrykiaiis, Doliones, Mygdonians, etc,— seem to have been 
 agricultural, cattle-breeding and horse-breeding, yet more vehe- 
 n^ent and warlike than the Phrygians of the interior, as far at 
 least as can be made out by their legends. l}he brutal but 
 gigantic Amykus son of Poseidon, chief of the Bebrykians, with 
 whom Pollux contends in boxing, and his brother Mygdon to 
 whom Herakles is opposed, are samples of a people whom the 
 Greek poets considered ferocious, and not submissive ;*2 while 
 the celebrity of the horses of Erichthonius, Laomedon, and 
 Asius of Arisbe. in the Iliad, shows that horse-breeding was a 
 distinguishing attribute of the region of Ida, not less in the mind 
 of Homer than in that of Virgil.3 
 
 According to the legend of the Phrygian town of Gordium on 
 the river Sangarius, the primitive Phrygian king Gordius waa 
 originally a poor husbandman, upon the yoke of whose team, 
 as he one day tilled his field, an eagle perched and posted him- 
 .^elf. Astonished at this j)ortent, he consulted the Telraissean 
 augurs to know what it meant, and a maiden of the prophetic 
 breed acquainted him that the kingdom was destined to his family. 
 He espoused her, and the offspring of the marriage was Midas. 
 Seditions afterwards breaking out among the Phrygians, they 
 were directed by an oracle, as the only means of tranquillity, to 
 choose for themselves as king the man whom they should first 
 
 ' Phrygian slaves seem to have been numerous at Miletus in the time of 
 Hipponax, Frag. 36, ed. Bergk : — 
 
 Kat Tovc ao'/MiKovq, ^v /la/3un, Trepvuaiv^ 
 <t»pi>)af fikv Iq WiArjTov ultpiTevaovrag. 
 "Theocrit. Idyll, xxii, 47-13.3; Apollon. Rhod. i, 937-954; ii, 5-140 
 Valer. Flacc. iv, 100; ApoUodor. ii, 5. 9. 
 ■ Diad, ii, 138 ; xii, 97 ; xx, 219 : Virgil, Georgic, iii, 270: — 
 "lUas ducit amor (equas) trans Gargara, transque sonantwu 
 Ascanium," etc. 
 Klaosen (^neas und die Penatcn, vol. i, pp. 52-56, 102-107) has pm 
 together with great erudition all the legendary indication8 respecting theM 
 regions. 
 
 «roL. ni. 10 
 
 { ; 
 
 • I 
 
 ' t 
 
 MWi 
 
I 
 
 » 
 
 I 
 
 I. 
 
 I', 
 
 f18 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 •ee approaching in a wagon. Gordius and Midas happened 
 to be then coming into the town in their wagon, and the crown 
 wa>? conferred upon them : their wagon was consecrated in the 
 citadf'l of Gordiiim to Zeus Basileus, and became celebrated 
 from the insolubh^ kfiot wherel)y the yoke was attached, and the 
 severance of it afterwards by the sword of Alexander the Great. 
 Whosoever could untie the knot, to him the kingdom of Asia was 
 |K)rtended, and Alexander was the first whose sword both fulfilled 
 tjbe condition and reaiiz^'d the prophecy.' 
 
 2f{ these legendary Phrygian names and anecdotes we can 
 make no use for historical purposes. We know nothing of any 
 Phrygian kings, durin** the historical times, — but Herodotus 
 •ells us of a certain Midas Kon of Gordius, king of Phrygia, who 
 waf the first foreign sovereign that ever sent offerings to the 
 Delphian tenifile, anterior to Gyges of Lydia, This Midas ded- 
 icated to the Delphian god the throne on which he was in the 
 iMbit of sitting to administer justice. Chronologers have referred 
 tfie incident to a Phrygian king Midas placed by Eusebius in 
 ihe 10th Olympiad, — a supposition which there are no means of 
 ▼erifying.2 There may have been a real Midas king of G^rdium ; 
 ^ut that there was ever any great united Phrygian monarchy, 
 we have not the least ground for supposing. The name Gordius 
 ■an of Midas agam appears in the legend of Croesus and Solon 
 irid by Herodotus, as part of the genealogy of the ill-fated prince 
 Adrastus : here too it seems to represent a legendary rather than 
 m real person .3 
 
 Of the Lydians, I nhall speak in tlie following chapter. 
 
 * Arrian, ii. .3 ; Jastin, xi, 7. 
 
 Accordinj^ to another tale, Midas was son of the (jreat Mother hen^ 
 (Platarch, Caesar, 9; Hypn. fab 191). 
 
 * Herodot i, 14, with Wesseling's note. 
 Herodot. i, 34> 
 
 LTDiANS. ^lEDEN, CIMMERIANS. SCYTfflANS. 
 
 819 
 
 { 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 LYDIANS. - MEDES. - CIMMERIANS. - SO VTUIANS. 
 
 The early relations between the Lydians and the Asiatic 
 Greeks anterior to the reign of Gyges, are not better known to 
 U3 than those of the Phrygians. Their native music became 
 partly incorporated with the Greek, as the Phrygian music was ; 
 to which it was very analogous, both in instruments and in char- 
 acter, though the Lydian mode was considered by the a.icieuts 
 as more effeminate and enervating. The flute was used alike by 
 Phrygians and Lydians, passing from both of them to the Greeks ; 
 but the magadis or pectis (a harp with sometimes as many ai 
 twenty strings, sounded two together in octave) is said to hav« 
 been borrowed by the Lesbian Terpander from the Lydian ban- 
 quets.i The flute-players who acquired esteem among the early 
 Asiatic Greeks were often Phrygian or Lydian slaves ; and even 
 the poet Alkman, who gained for himself permanent renown 
 among the Greek lyric poets, thougli not a slave born at Sardis, 
 as is sometimes said, was probably of Lydian extraction. 
 
 It has been already mentioned that Homer knows nothing of 
 Lydia or Lydians. He names Maeonians in juxtaposition with 
 Karians, and we are told by Herodotus that the people once called 
 Miijonian received the new appellation of Lydian from Lydua 
 son of Atys. Sardis, whose almost inexpugnable citadel was 
 situated on a precipitous rock on the northern siae of the ridge 
 of Tmolus, overhanging the plain of the river Hermus, was the 
 capital of the Lydian kings r it is not named by Homer, though 
 he mentions both Tmolus and the neighboring Gygajan lake; 
 the fortiflcation of it was ascribed to an old Lydian king named 
 Meles, and strange legends were told concerning it.-2 Its posses- 
 sors were enriched by the neighborhood of the river Paktolua, 
 
 I 'I 
 I 
 
 * Pindar, ap. Athena, xiv, p. 635 : compare Telestes ap. AtheniB. xir. 9- 
 626 ; Pausan. iy . 5, 4. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 84. 
 
 I 
 
 )! 
 
 
I 
 
 / 
 
 HISTORT OF tiREKCE. 
 
 which flowed down from Mount Traolus towards the Hermus, 
 and brought with it considerable quantities of gold in its sands. 
 To this cause historians often ascribe the abundant treasure be« 
 longing to Croesus and his predecessors ; but Croesus possessed, 
 besides, other mines n(;ar Pergamus ;* and another cause of wealth 
 is also to be found in the general industry of the Lydian people, 
 which the circumstances mentioned respecting them seem to attest. 
 They were the first people, according to Herodotus, who ever 
 carried on retail trade ; and the first to coin money of gold and 
 silver.^ 
 
 The archaeologists of Sardis in the time of Herodotus, a century 
 after the Persian conquest, carrnMl very far back the antiquity 
 of the Lydian monarchy, by means of a series of names which 
 are in great j*art, if not altogether, divine and heroic. Herodotus 
 gives us first. Manes, Atys:, and Lydus, — next, a line of kings 
 beginning witii Herakles, twemy-two in number, succeeding each 
 other from father to son and lasting for 505 years. The first of 
 this line of Herakleid kings wa< Agron, descended from Herakles 
 in the fourth generation, — Herakles, Alkteus, Ninus, Belus, and 
 Agron. The twenty-second [>rinee of this Herakleid family, after 
 an uninterrupted succession of father and son during 505 years, 
 was Kandaules, called by the Greeks Myrsilus the son of Myr- 
 Bus : with him the dynasty ended, and ended by one of those 
 curious incidents which Herodotus has narrated with his usual 
 dramatic, yet unafiected, emphasis. It was the divine will that 
 Kandaules should be destroyed, and he lost his rational judgment: 
 liaving a wife the most beautiful woman in Lydia, his vanity could 
 not be satisfied without exhibiting her naked person to Gygea 
 son of Daskylus, his f)rincipal confidant and the commander of his 
 guards. In spite of tlie vehement repugnance of Gyges, this reso- 
 lution was executed ; but the wife became aware of the inexpiable 
 aflTront, and took her measures to avenge it. Surrounded by her 
 most faithful domestics, she sent for Gyges, and addressed him : 
 " Two ways are now open to thee, Gyges : take which thou wilt. 
 Either kill Kandaules, wed me, and acquire the kingdom of Lydia, 
 — or else thou must at once perish. For thou hast seen forbidden 
 things, and either thou, or the man who contrived it for thee must 
 
 Aristot Mirabil. Ausciiltat 52. 
 
 » Herodot. i. 9^. 
 
 GYGES. 
 
 221 
 
 die " Of ges in vain entreated to be spared so terrible an a.eerna. 
 tive • he was driven to the option, and he chose that which prom- 
 ised safety to himself.' The queen planted him in ambush behind 
 the bed-chamber door, in the very spot where Kandaules had 
 placed him as a spectator, and armed him with a dagger, which 
 he plunged into the heart of the sleeping king. 
 
 Thus ended the dynasty of the Herakleids ; but there was a 
 lar^e party in Lydia who indignantly resented the death of Kan- 
 daules, and took arms against Gyges. A civil war ensued, which 
 both parties at length consented to termmate by reference to the 
 Delphian oracle. The decision of that holy referee was given m 
 favor of Gyges, and the kingdom of Lydia thus passed to his 
 dynasty, called the Mermnadaj. But the oracle accompanied its 
 verdict with an intimation, that in the person of the fifth descend- 
 ant of Gyges, the murder of Kandaules would be avenged, — a 
 warnincr of which, Herodotus innocently remarks, no one took 
 any notice, until it wa^ actually fulfilled in the person of Croesus.* 
 In this curious legend, which marks the commencement of the 
 dynasty called Mermnadae, the historical kings of Lydia, — we 
 cannot determine how much, or whether any part, is historical. 
 Gy-es was probably a real man, contemporary with the youth 
 of tlie poet Archilochus ; but the name Gyges is also an heroic 
 name in Lydian archaeology. He is the eponymus of the Gygaean 
 lake near Sardis ; and of the many legends told respecting him, 
 Plato has preserved one, according to which Gyges is a mere 
 herdsman of the king of Lydia : after a terrible storm and earth- 
 quake, he sees near him a chasm in the earth, into which he 
 descends and finds a vast horse of brass, hollow and partly open, 
 wherein there lies a gigantic corpse with a golden ring. This 
 ring he carries away, and discovers unexpectedly that it possesses 
 the miraculous property of rendering him invisible at pleasure. 
 Being sent on a message to the king, he makes the ma^c nng 
 available to his ambition : he first possesses himself of the persoo 
 
 » Herodot. i, 11. alpeerai ahrbq irepuivai, — a phrase to which Gibhon hM 
 ggcribed an intended irony, which it is difficult to discover in Herodotus. 
 • Herodot. i, 13. rovrov rov Hm "^^yov oidiva knoLevvro, irpiv « 
 
 
 
 1} 
 
! 
 
 I 
 
 y' 
 
 222 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of the queen, then with her aid assassinates the king, and finally 
 seizes the sceptre.^ 
 
 The legend thus recounted by Plato, diflTerent in almost all 
 points from the Herodotean, has this one circumstance in common, 
 that the adventurer Gyges, through the favor and help of th6 
 queen, destroys the king and becomes his successor. Feminine 
 preference and patronage is the cause of his prosperity. Klausen 
 has shown- that this '* aphrodisiac influence " runs in a peculiar 
 manner through many of the Asiatic legends, both divine and 
 heroic. The Phrygian Midas, or Gordius, as before recounted, 
 acquires the throne by marriage with a divinely privileged maid- 
 en : the favor shown by Aphrodite to Anchises, confers upon the 
 ^neadoB sovereignty in the Troad : moreover, the great Phrygian 
 and Lydian goddess Rhea or Cybele has always her favored and 
 self-devoting youth Atys, who is worshipped along with her, and 
 who serves as a sort of mediator between her and mankind. T\w 
 feminine element appears predominant in Asiatic mythes : Midas, 
 Sardanapalus, Sandon, and even Herakles,3 are described as cloth- 
 ed in women's attire and working at the loom ; while on ihc^ 
 other hand the Amazons and Semiramis achieve great conquests. 
 
 Admitting therefore the historical character of the Lydian kings 
 called Mermnadie, beginning with Gyges about 715-600 b. c, 
 and ending with Croesus, we find nothing but legend to explain 
 to us the circumstances which led to their accession. Still h ss 
 can we make out an}'thing respecting the preceding kings, or 
 determine whether Lydia was ever in former times connected 
 with or dependent upon the kingdom of Assyria, as Ktesias 
 affirmed.4 Nor can we certify the reality or dates of the old 
 Lydian kings named by the native historian Xanthus, — Alki- 
 nous, Kambles, Adramytes.^ One piece of valuable information. 
 
 * Phito, Republ. ii, p 360 ; Cicero, Offic. iii, 9 Plato (x, p. 612* ?ompare.i 
 Ten- suitably the ring of G'Vjres to the helmet of Hades. 
 
 * Sec Klausen, ^Eneas und die Penaten. pp. 34, 110, etc: compare Menke 
 Lydiaca, ch. 8, 9. 
 
 ' See the article of O. Muller in the Rheinisch. Museum flir Philologie 
 Jahrgang, iii, pp. 22-38 ; also Movers. Die Phonizier, ch. xii, pp. 452-470 
 
 * Diodor. ii, 2. Niebuhr also conceives that Lydia was in early days a 
 portion of the Assyrian empire (Kleine Schriften, p. 371). 
 
 •Xanthi Frajrment. 10, 12, 19, ed. Didot ; Athenae. x, p. 415; Nikolaoi 
 Damasc. p. 36, Orelli. 
 
 GYGES. 
 
 228 
 
 however, we acquire from Xanthus, — the distribution of I-ydii 
 Into two' parts, Lydia proper and Torrhebia, which he traces to 
 the two sons of Atys, — Lydus and Torrhebus ; he states that the 
 dialect of the Lydians and Torrhebians differed much in the same 
 degree as that of Doric and Ionic Greeks.i Torrhebia appears 
 to have included the valley of the Kaister, south of Tmolus, and 
 near to the frontiers of Karia. 
 
 With Gyges, the Mermnad king, commences the series of ag- 
 gressions from Sardis upon the Asiatic Greeks, which ultimately 
 ended in their subjection. Gyges invaded the territories of Mi- 
 letus and Smyrna, and even took the city, probably not the citar 
 del, of Kolophon. Though he thus, however, made war upon th« 
 Asiatic Greeks, he was munificent in his donations to the Greciaa 
 .rod of Delphi, and his numerous as well as costly offerings were 
 seen in the temple by Herodotus. Elegiac compositions of the 
 poet Mimnermus celebrated the valor of the Smyrnaeans in their 
 battle with Gyges.2 We hear also, in a story which bears the 
 impress of Lydian more than of Grecian fancy, of a beautiful 
 youth of Smyrna named Magnes, to whom Gyges was attached, 
 and who incurred the displeasure of his countrymen for havmg 
 composed verses in celebration of the victories of the Lydians 
 over the Amazons. To avenge the ill-treatment received by thia 
 youth, Gyges attacked the territory of Magnesia (probably Mag- 
 nesia on Sipylus) and after a considerable struggle took the city.' 
 How far the Lydian kingdom of Sardis extended during the 
 reign of Gyges, we have no means of ascertaining. Strabo 
 alleges that the whole Troad^ belonged to him, and that the 
 Greek settlement of Abydus on the Hellespont was established 
 by the Milesians only under his auspices. On what authority 
 this statement is made, we are not told, and it appears doubtful, 
 especiaUy as so many legendary anecdotes are connected with the 
 name of Gyges. This prince reigned (according to Herodotus) 
 thirty-eight years, and was succee<ied by his son Ardys,who reign- 
 ed forty-nine years ^aftout b. c. 678-629). We learn that b> 
 
 » Xanthi Fra^m. 1, 2; Dionys. Halik. A. R. i, 28; Stephan. Byz- v, To^ 
 Hj,/8of. The whole ^nealogy given by Dionysius is probably borrowed froH 
 Xanthus, - Zeas, Man§s, Kotys, Asies and Atys, Lydus and Torrh^bui. 
 • Herod, i, 14; Pausan. ix, 29, 2. , „ ^ ... ^^ 
 
 » Nikolaus Damasc. p. 52, ed. OreUi * Strabo. xui p. 6» 
 
 
 ( 
 
 
 a 
 
 1' 
 
\ I 
 
 
 \l 
 
 224 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 attacked the Milesians, and took the Ionic city of Pnene, but 
 this possession cannot have been maintained, for the city appears 
 afterwards as autonomous.' His long reign, however, was signal- 
 ized by two events, both of considerable moment to the Asiatic 
 Greeks; the invasion of the Cimmerians, — and the first ap- 
 proach to collision, at least the first of which we have any his- 
 torical knowledge, between the inhabitants of Lydia and those of 
 Upper Asia under the Median kings. 
 
 It is affirmed by all authors that the Medes were originally 
 numbered among the subjects of the great Assyrian empire, of 
 which Nineveh — or Ninos,as the Greeks call it — was the chief 
 town, and Babylon one of the principal portions. That the pop- 
 ulation and power of these two great cities, as well as of several 
 others which the Ten Thousand Greeks in their march found 
 ruined and deserted in those same regions, is of high antiquity,"^ 
 there is no room for doubting ; but it is noway incumbent upon a 
 historian of Greece to entangle himself in the mazes of Assyrian 
 chronology, or *o weigh the degree of credit to which the conflict- 
 ing statements of Hf^rodotus, Ktesias, Berosus, Abydenus, etc- 
 are entitled. With the A syrian empire,:* — which lasted, accord- 
 in*' to Herodotus, fiv.3 hundred and twenty years, according to 
 Ktesias, thirteen hundred and sixty years, — the Greeks have no 
 ascertainable connection : the city of Nineveh appears to have 
 been taken by the Medes a little before the year GOO B. C (in so 
 far as the chronology can be made out), and exercised no influence 
 
 * Hcrodot. i, 15. ^ Xenophon, Anabas. iii, 4, 7 ; 10, 1 1. 
 
 * Hcrodot. i, 95; Ktesias, Fragm. Assyr. xiii, p. 419, ed. Bahr ; Diodor. ii, 
 21. Ktesias gives thirty generations of Assyrian kings from Ninyas to Bar- 
 danapalus : Velleius, 33 ; Eusebius, 35 ; Syncellus, 40 ; Castor, 27 ; Cepha- 
 Hon, 23. See Bahr ad Ctesiam, p. 428. The Babylonian chronology of 
 Berosus (a priest of Belus about 280 b. c.) gave 86 kings and 34,000 years 
 from the Deluge to the Median occupation of Babylon ; then 1,453 years 
 down to the reign of Phul king of Assyria (Berosi Fragmenta, p. 8, ed. 
 
 Bichter). 
 
 Mr. Clinton sets forth the chief statements and discrepMicies respecting 
 Assyrian chronology in hi^ Appendix, c. 4. But the suppositions to which 
 he resorts, in order to bring them into harmony, appear to me ancertified and 
 gratnitoos. 
 
 Compare the different, but not more successful, track followed by LarcbflC 
 
 ICbronologie, c. 3, pp. 145-157). 
 
 ASSYRIANS AND MEDES. 
 
 225 
 
 upon Grecian affairs. Those inhabitants of Upper Asia, witb 
 whom the early Greeks had relation, were the Medes, and the 
 Assyrians or Chaldoeans of Babylon, — both originally subject to 
 the Assyrians of Nineveh, — both afterwards acquiring independ- 
 ence, and both ultimately embodied in the Persian empire. 
 
 At what time either of them became first independent, we do 
 not know :i the astronomical canon which gives a list of kings of 
 
 Here again both Larcher and Mr. Clinton represent the time, at >\hich 
 tl* Medes made themselves independent ut Assyria, as perfectly ascertained, 
 though Larcher places it in 748 b. 0., and Mr. Clinton in 711 b. c. ' L'e'po- 
 que ne me paroit pas dou.euse," (Chronologic, c. iv, p. 157,) says Larcher. 
 Mr. Clinton treats the epoch ot 711 b. c. for the same event, as fixed upon 
 * the authority of Scripture" and reasons upon it in more than one place as a 
 fact altogether indisputable (Appendix, c. iii, p. 259) : " We may collect from 
 Scripture that the Medes did not become independent till after the death of 
 Sennacherib; and accordingly Josephus (Ant. x, 2), having related the 
 death of this king, and the miraculous recovery of Hezekiah from sickness 
 
 adds h TOVT(f) ri^ XP^"^^ (rvvtiSri t^v tljv 'Kaavpiuv upxvv v-rrb M//(Jwy Kara- 
 
 'Av&fivai. But the death of Sennacherib, as will be shown hereafter, is de- 
 termined to the beginning of 711 b. C- The Median revolt, then, did not 
 occur before b. c. 71 1 ; which refutes Conringius, who raises it to b. c. 715. 
 and Valckenaer, who raises it to b. c. 741. Herodotus, indeed, implies an 
 interval of some space between the revolt of the Medes and the election of 
 Deiokes to be king. But these anni dfiaal?.€vroi could not have l)een prior 
 to the fifty-three years of Defokes, since the revolt is limited by Scri/>tur« 
 to b. c. 711." Again, p. 261, he says, respecting the four Median kings men- 
 tioned by Ensebiii«5 before Defokes : " If they existed at all, they governed 
 Media during the empire of the Assyrians, as we know from Scripture:^ And 
 again, p. 280 : " The precise date of the tcrminjition (of the Assyrian empire) 
 in B. c. 711 is fjiven by Scripture, with which Herodotus agrees," etc. 
 
 Mr. Clinton here treats, more than once, the revolt of the Medes as fixed 
 to the year 711 b. c. by Scripture; but he produces no ymssage of Scripture 
 to justify his allegation : and the passage which he cites from Josephug 
 alludes, not to the Median revolt, but to the destruction of the A^^syrian 
 enpire by the Medes. Herodotus represents the Medes as revolting from 
 the Assyrian empire, and maintaining their independence for some time 
 (f'.ndefined in extent) before the election of Defokes as king; but he gives 
 ;w no means of determining the date of the Mfdian revolt; and when IIi. 
 ('linton says (p. 280, Note O.): "I suppose Herodotus to place the revolt 
 cf the Medes in Olymp. 17, 2, since he jdaces the accession of Defokes in 
 Olymp. 17, 3," — this is a conjecture of his own: and the narrative «f 
 Herodotus seems plainly to imply that he conceived an interval far greaiei 
 than one year between these two events. Diodorus gives the same interr* 
 111 lasting "for many generations." (Diod. ii, 32.) 
 
 VOL. III. 10* 150Q. 
 
 r! 
 
 t 
 
 I' 
 
 V 
 
 \ 
 
 (f 
 
 f 
 
i 
 
 )i 
 
 V26 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Babylon, beginning with what is called the (!ra of Nabonassaf, 
 or 747 B. c., does not prove at what epoch these Babylonian 
 
 We kuow — both from Scripture and from the Phoenician annals, as oitcd 
 bv Josephus — that the Assyrians of Nineveh were powerful conquerors in 
 Syria. JudtEa and Phoenicia, daring the reigns of Salmaneser and Sennach- 
 erib : the statement of Joseph as farther implies that Media was suhject to 
 Salmaneser, who took the Israelites from their country into Media and 
 Persis and brought the Cuthaans out of Media and Persis into the landi of 
 th« Israelites (Joseph, ix, U, 1 ; x, 9, 7). We know farther, that after Sen 
 Dacherib, the Assyrians of NineYeu «re no more mentioned as invaders or 
 di>iurbers of Syria or Judaea ; the Chaldaeans or Babylonians become then 
 the enemies whom those countries have to drea«^ Josephus tells us, that at 
 thi* eiwch the Assyrian empire was destroyed by the Medes, — or, as he 
 myn in another place, by the Medes and Babylonians (x, 2, 2-, x, 5, 1). 
 Tltis is good evidence for believing that the Assyrian empire of Nineveh 
 soHiained at this time a great shock and diminution of power; but as to the 
 na-.ure of this diminution, and the way in which it was brought about, it ap- 
 peal's to me that there is a discrepancy of authorities which we have no means 
 of i-ceonciling, — Josephus follows the same view as Ktesias, of the destruc- 
 tion of the empire of Nineveh by the Medes and Babylonians united, while 
 Hirodotus conceives successive revolts of the territories dependent upon 
 Nineveh, be«;inning with that of the Medes, and still leaving Nineveh 
 flor.iirihing and jxiwerful in its own territory : he farther conceives Nineveh 
 as taken by Kyaxares the Mede, about the year 600 b. c, without any men- 
 tis \ of Babylonians, — on the contrary, in his representation, Nitokris the 
 qn-cn of Bibvlon is afiaitl of the Medes (i, 185), partly from the general 
 innvase of their power, but especially from their having taken Nineveh 
 (though Mr. Clinton tells us. p 275, that "Nineveh was destroyed b. c. 606, 
 as wc have seen from the united testimonies of the Scripture and Herodotus, 
 bm the yMfS and Ikthtfhmidns.''''] 
 
 Construing fairiv the text of Herodotus, it will appeal that he conceived 
 the relations^'of these Oriental kingdoms between 800 and 560 b- c. differently 
 on manv material points from Ktesias, or Bero^us, or Josephus : and he 
 himself expressly tells us, that he heard ''four different ta es" even respecting 
 Cyrus (i, 95) ; much more, respecting events anterior to C}tus by more than 
 
 ft ccnturv. 
 
 The chronology of the Metles, Babylonians, Lydians, and Greeks in Asia, 
 when we come to the seventh century b. c, acquires some fixed j)oints which 
 give us assurance of correi r:i ;ss within certain limits ; but above the year 
 700 B. c. no such fixed points can be detected. We cannot liscriminate the 
 historical from the mythical in our authorities, — we cannot reconcile them 
 with each other, except by violent changes and conjectures, — nor can we 
 determine which of them onirht to be set asidejn favor r f the other. The 
 names and dates of the B »b"loni.ui kinirs down from Nahonassar, in tha 
 rjuion of Ptolemy, arc doubtless authentic, hot they aje names and datef 
 
 MEDIANS.- FIRST KING DIOKLES. 
 
 227 
 
 ehiefs became independent of Nineveh: and the catalogue of 
 Median king?, >vbieh Ilrrodotus begins with Deiok^s, about 709- 
 7 1 1 M. c, is coiumenced by Ktesias more than a century earlier, 
 moreover, the names in the two lists are different almost from 
 
 first lo last. 
 
 For the historian of Greece, the Medes first begin to acquire 
 importtmce al)out G56 B. c, under a king whom Herodotus calls 
 Phntorles son of Deiokes. Respecting Deiokes himself, He- 
 rodotus recounts to us how he came to be first chosen king.' The 
 seven tribes of Medes dwelt disi)ersed in separate villages, with- 
 out any common authority, and the mischiefs of anarchy were 
 painfully felt among them : Deiokes having acquired great repu- 
 tation in his own village as a just man, was invoked gradually 
 !)v all the adjoining villages to settle their disputes. As soon as 
 his efficiency in this vociition, and the improvement which he 
 brought about, had become felt throughout all the tribes, he art- 
 tuUy threw up his post and retired again into privacy, — upon 
 u Inch the evils of anarchy revived in a manner more intolerable 
 than before. The Medes had now no choice except to elect a 
 jiing,__the friends of Deiokes expatiated warmly upon his 
 virtiies, and he was the person chosen.2 The first step of the 
 
 f.nly : when we come to apply them to illustrate real or supposia matters of 
 (•wt. drawn from other sources, they only create a new embarrassment, for 
 even the names of the kings as reported by different authors do not agree, 
 and Mr. Clinton informs us ( p. 277 ): " In tracing the identity of Eastern kings, 
 the times and the transactions are better guides than the names ; for these, 
 from many well-known causes (as the changes which they undergo in passing 
 through the Greek langua-e, and the substitution of a title or an epithet for 
 the name), are variouslv reported, so that the same king frequently appean 
 under many different appellations:' Here, then, is a new problem : we are to 
 smploy " the times and transactions" to identify the kings : but unfortunately 
 ^he times are marked onlv by the succession of kings, and the transactions are 
 known only bv statements always .^canty and often irreconcilable with each 
 other. So thit our means of identifying the kings are altogether insufficient, 
 and whoever will examine the process of identification as it appears in Mr. 
 Clinton's chapters, will see that it is in a high degree arbitrary ; more arbi- 
 trarv still are the processes which he employs for bringing about a forced 
 harmony between discrepant authorities. Nor is Volney (Chronologie d- 
 H^Ddote. vol. i, pp. 383-429) more saUsfactory in his chronological resolta 
 • Herodot. i, 96-100. , .., ^ ^ 
 
 » Herodot. i, 97. cif -3* ^yw oo.it'j, ,ua/.icTa lleyw oi rov ^hIokco ^tAot etc 
 
 (^ 
 
 :l, 
 
 •/] 
 
! 
 
 1 
 
 \ I 
 
 338 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECL. 
 
 new king was to exact from the people a body of guards 8electe(i 
 by himself; next, he commanded them to build the city of Ekba* 
 tana, upon a hill surrounded with seven concentric circles ol walls, 
 hia own palace being at the top and in the innermost. He farther 
 organized the scheme of Median despotism ; the king, though his 
 person was constantly secluded in his fortitied palace, inviting 
 written communications from all aggrieved persons, and admin- 
 istering to each the decision or the redress which it required, — 
 informing himself, moreover, of passing events by means of ubi- 
 quitous spies and officials, who seized all wrong-doers and brought 
 them to the palace for condign punishment. Deiokes farther co-n- 
 Btrained the Medes to abandon their separate abodes and concun- 
 tracC themselves in Ekbatana, from whence all the powers of 
 government branched out ; and the seven distinct tbrtitied circles 
 in the town, coinciding as they do with the number of the Me- 
 dian tribes, were probably conceived by Herodotus as intended 
 each for one distinct tribe, — the tribe of Deiokes occupying the 
 innermost along with himself.* 
 
 Except the successive steps of this well-laid political plan, we 
 hear ot no other acts ascribed to Deiokes : he is said to have 
 held the government tor tifty-three years, and then dying, was 
 succeeded by his son Phraortes. Of the real history of Deiokes, 
 we cannot be said to know anything. For the interesting narra- 
 tive of Herodotus, of which tlie above is an abridgment, )>resent8 
 to us in all its points Grecian society and ideas, not Oriental : it 
 is like the discussion which the historian ascribes to the seven 
 Persian conspirators, previous to tlie accession of Daiius, — 
 whether they shall adopt an oligarchical, a democratical, or a 
 monarchical form of }j:overnment ;'- or it may be compared, per- 
 Laps more aptly still, to the Cyropa'idia of Xeno[)hon, wlio beau- 
 tifully and elaborately works out an ideal which UerodotuH 
 
 * Herodot. i, 98, 99, lOCJ. OlKodo/iTj^evruv 6e irdvTuv, Koofiov t6v6e Atjio^ 
 Kyic "^(^i^Toq ECTTiv 6 Karan-^rirfufiEvo^' fiffve ecrievat -rrapd j^aaiXia firjdeva, 6i 
 ay yeXuv 6i rravra ;^fpef ffi^at, opucr&aL 6e (3aai2.ia virb fiij^evoc ' Trpdf dt- rov- 
 TOieri in ye?.^v re xal irrvetv avriov, Kal unaai elvai tovto ye ahxpov, etc 
 and . . . .oi KaTuffKOTToi re Koi kot^kooi ijaav avu rruaav ttjv x^PV^ •'^f hf-X^- 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 80-82. Herodotus, while he positively asserts the genuiiM 
 aess of these deliberations, lets drop the intimatior that many of his contea 
 porahes regarded tb«m ait of Grecian coinage. 
 
 Ill 
 
 '41 
 
 VENUS OF MEDICI 
 
 Greece^ 7wL thrte. 
 
 %\ 
 
MEDIANS -FIRST KING DEIOKES. 
 
 329 
 
 
 /' 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 f 
 
 ^'1 
 
 \ 
 
 t 
 
 exhibits in brief outline. The stoiy of Ddiokes describes what 
 may be railed the despot's progress, first as candidate, and after- 
 wards as fully established. Amidst the active political discussion 
 carried on by intelligent Greeks in the days of Herodotus, there 
 were doubtless many stories of the successful arts of ambitious 
 despots, and much remark as to the probable means conducive ta 
 their success, of a nature similar to those in the Politics of Aris- 
 totle, one of these tales Herodotus has employed to decorate the 
 birth and infancy of the Median monarchy. Ilis Deiokgs begim 
 like a clever Greek among other Greeks, equal, free, and disor- 
 derly. He is athirst for despotism from the beginning, and m 
 forward in manifesting his rectitude and justice, " as beseems a 
 candidate for command ;"' he passes into a despot by the public 
 vote, and receives what to the Greeks was the great symbol and 
 instrument of such transition, a personal body-guard ; he endi 
 by organizing both the machinery and the etiquette of a despot- 
 ism in the Oriental fashion, like the Cyrus of Xenophon,^ only 
 that both these authors maintain the superiority of their Grecian 
 ideal over Oriental reality by ascribing both to T/^okes and Cy- 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 96. 'Eovrwv 6^ avTovofujv ttuptuv uva rrjr ' irripoVyCtde avrtf 
 ic Tvpavvidac -nepLTjWov. 'kvtjp h rolat fA^doiai iyiuei v aot^dg, r<^ ovvofia 
 ffv ^i}'ioKrii. . . .Ovrof 6 Atjiokti^^ ^pacr&dq Tvpavvidoc, ^iroiee roiade, etc.. . . 
 'O (5c (Sr/, ola fjveijfievog upx^v, l^vq re kqI diKaio^ ijv. 
 
 - Compare the chapters above referred to in Herodotus with the eighth 
 tK)ok of the Cyropffidia, wherein Xenophon describes the manner in which 
 the Median despotism was put in effective order and turned to useful accouot 
 by Cyrus, especially the arrangements for imposing on the imagination of 
 his subjects (KaTayoTjreveiv^ viii, 1, 40) — (it is a small thing, but marks the 
 connate plan of Herodotus and Xenophon). Dulokes forbids his subjects to 
 laugh or spit in his presence. Cyrus also directs that no one shall spit, or 
 wipe his nose, or turn round to look at anything, when the king is present 
 (Herodot i, 99 ; Xen. Cyrop. viii, 1, 42). Again, viii, 3, 1, about the pom- 
 pous procession of Cyrus when he rides out, — Kui yup avr^c t^C k^ekaaeotf 
 if (Tefivor/fC r/fxh> doKel fila tCjv rexvuv elvai ruv fiefiTJxavf]/A€vuv, rqv upx^ 
 K37 evKara(pp6v7iTov elvai — analogous to the Median D^Tok^ in HerodotW 
 
 — TnOra 6e irept tuvrbv kaefivvve ruvSe elviKev, etc. Cj/nu kfi<^aviCuv 6i 
 
 %cl Tovro on irepl ttoXAoi) iirouiro, fiifSeva ftrjTi ^ikov ddiKetvpi^re aififiaxov, 
 iXTui Tb dUaiov laxvpu^ opdv (Cyrop. viii, 1, 26;. DSrgket-^ffv rd dUaio* 
 p^XdfftTcjv xaXerrog (Herodot. i, 100). Ojfnu provides nnmerons persons whi 
 mrre to him as eyes and ears throughoat the coantry (Cyrop. viii. 2, 191 
 Diickis has many KaTaanonoi aud KarijKooi, (Heiodot. A.) 
 
 c> 
 
 \\ 
 
 IV} 
 
 Jl 
 
 iiirillillllll— 
 
I 
 
 
 
 >\ 
 
 t 
 
 230 
 
 I11:>T0RY OF GliKKCK. 
 
 ni* a just, systeintitic, and laborious administration, sucli a> their 
 own ex[>erience did not present to them in Asia. Viohably He- 
 rodotus had visited Ekbatana (which he describes and measures 
 like an eye-witness, comparing its circuit to that of Athens), and 
 there heard that Deiokes was the buihi^r (;{' ilii* city, the earliest 
 known Median kinjr, and the first author ui' tlio v j^ublic customs 
 which struck him as peculiar, after the revuh tVoiu Assyria : the 
 interval might then be easilv lilled up. 1m. twocii Med'an auton- 
 omy and Median des[)otisui, by ijiierniediate incidents, -uch as 
 would have ace'ornpanied tliat transition in the longitude of 
 Greece. The features of these irdiabitants of Up[)er Asia, ibr a 
 thousand years forward from the time at which we are now ar- 
 rived, — under the descendants of Deiokes, of Cyrus, of Arsakes, 
 and of Ardshir, — are .-o unvarying,' that we are much assisted 
 in detecting those occasions in which Herodotus or others iisfuse 
 uito their history indigenous Grecian ideas. 
 
 Phraortes (G58-Go<*» b. c), having extended the dominion of 
 the Me<les over a large portion of Upper Asia, and con(piered 
 both the Persians and several other nations, was uhimately de- 
 feated and slain in a war against tiie Assyrians of Nineveh : who, 
 though deprived of tlieir external dependencies, were yet brave 
 and [powerful by themselves. His son Kyaxares ((j.'>G-o95 b. c.) 
 followed u|> with still greater energy the same plans of conquest, 
 and is said to have been the first who introduced any organiza- 
 tion into the military force; — before his time, archers, spearmen, 
 and cavalry had been confounded together indiscriminately, until 
 this monarch established sef)arate divisions for each. He ex- 
 tended the Median dominion to the eastern bank of the Halys, 
 which river at^terwards, by the conquests of the Lydian king 
 Crcesus, became the boundary between the Lydian and Median 
 empires; and he carried on war for six years with Alyattes king of 
 Lydia, in consequence of the refusal of the latter to give up a 
 
 ' When the Roman emperor Claudius sends the young Parthian prince 
 Meherdates. who had been an hostage at Rome, to occupy the kingdom 
 which the Parthian envoys tendered to him. he gives him some j;ood advice, 
 conceived in the school of Greek and Roman politics : " Addidit prus 
 cepta, ut non dominationem ac servos. «»ed rectorom or vivos, cosritaret : clem 
 •ntiaraq '6 ac jastitiam qaanto ignara barbaris, tanto toleratiora, capesseret. 
 (Tacit Annal. xii, II.) 
 
 
 PHRAORTES. -KYAXARES 
 
 2d] 
 
 bind of Scythian nomads, who, having quitted the territory of 
 Kvaxares in order to escape severities with which they were 
 menaced, had sought refuge as suppliants in Lydia.* The war, 
 indecisive as respects success, was brought to its close by a re- 
 markable incident : in the midst of a battle between the Median 
 and Lydian armies, there happened a total eclipse of the sun, 
 which occasioned equal alarm to both parties, and induced them 
 immediately to cease hostilities.'- The Kilikian prince Syennesis, 
 and the Babylonian prince Labynetus, interposed their mediation, 
 and effected a reconciliation between Kyaxares and Alyattes, one 
 of the conditions of which was, that Alyattes gave bis daughter 
 Aryenis in marriage to Astyii^es son of Kyaxares. In this man- 
 ner began the connection between the Lydian and Median kings 
 which afterwards proved so ruinous to Croesus. It is affirmed 
 that the Greek philosopher Thales foretold this eclipse ; but we 
 may reasonably consider the supposed prediction as not less apo- 
 cryphal than some others ascribed to him, and doubt whether at 
 that time any living Greek possessed either knowledge or scientific 
 capacity sutiicient for such a calculation.^ The eclipse itself, and 
 
 ' The passage of such nomadic hordes from one government in the East 
 to another, has been always, and is even down to the present day, a frequent 
 rause of dispute between the different governments : they are valuable both 
 as tributaries and as soldiers. The Turcoman Hats — so these nomadic tril)es 
 are now called — in the north-east of Persia frequently pass backwards and 
 forwards, as their convenience suits, from the Persian territory to the Usbeks 
 of Khiva and Bokhara: wars between Persia and Russia have been in like 
 manner occasioned by the transit of the Hats across the frontier from Persia 
 into Geor!i,Ma : so also the Kurd tribes near Mount Zagros have caused by 
 their movements quarrels between the Persians and the Turks. 
 
 See Morier, Account of the Iliyats, or Wanderinjij Tribes of Persia, in the 
 Journal of the Geographical Society of London, 1837, vol. vii, p. 240, and 
 Cari Ritter, Erdkunde von Asien, West-Asien, Band ii, Abtheilung ii. 
 Abschnitt ii, sect. 8, p. 387. 
 
 « Herodot. i, 74-103. 
 
 * Compare the analogous case of the prediction of the coming olirc crop 
 ascribed to Thales (Aristot. Polit. i, 4, 5 ; Cicero, De Divinat. i, 3). Anax 
 agoras is asserted to have predicted the fall of an aiiroliihe (Aristot. Meteorol 
 i, 7 ; Pliny, H. N. ii, 58; Plutarch, Lysand. c. 5). 
 
 ThalSs is said by Herodotus to have predicted that the eclipse \fould take 
 place " in the year in which it actually did occur." — a statement so vague 
 that it strengthens the grounds of doabi 
 
 The fondness of the lonians for exhibiting the wisdom of their eminent 
 
 
 V 
 
 \' 
 
 IV, 
 
.1 
 
 
 
 232 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 its terrific working upon the minds of the combatants, are fact* 
 not to be called in question ; though the diversity of opinion 
 among chronologints, respecting the date of it, is astonishing.i 
 
 philosopher Thales, ri conjunction with the history of th^' Lydian kings, 
 may be seen farther n the story of Thales and Cra'sus at tl;e river Halj-s 
 (Herod, i, 75), — a stary which Herodotus himself disbelieves. 
 
 * Consult, for the chronological views of these events, Larchcr ad Herodot. 
 i, 74 ; Volney, Recherches sur I'Histoire Ancienne, vol. i, pp. 330-355 ; Mr. 
 Fynes Clinton, Fast; Hellenici, vol. i, p. 418 (Note ad B.C. 617,2); Dei 
 Vignoles, Chronologic de I'Histoire Sainte, vol. ii, p. 245 ; Ideler, Handbucli 
 der Chronologic, vol. i, p. 209. 
 
 No less than eight different dates have been assigned by different chronol* 
 ogists for this eclipse. — the most ancient 625 b. c, the most recent 583 b. c. 
 Volney is for 625 b. c\ ; Larcher for 597 b. c. ; Des Vignoles for 585 b. c. ; 
 Mr. Clinton for 603 u. c. Volney observes, with justice, that the eclipse on 
 thi ) occasion ' n'est pas I'accessoire, la broderie du fait, mais le fait princi/Mil 
 lui-meme," (p. 347 :) the astronomical calculations concerning the eclipse 
 are, therefore, by far ihe most important items in the chronological reckon- 
 ing of this event. Now in regard to the eclipse of 625 b. c, Volney is 
 obliged to admit that it does not suit the case ; for it would be visible only 
 at half-past five in the morning on February 3, and the sun would hardly l)e 
 risen at that hour in the latitude of Media and Lydia (p. 343). He seeks to 
 escape from this ditKcuhy by saying that the data for the calculation, accord- 
 ing to the astronomer I'ingre, are not quite accurate for these early 6vlipse8 ; 
 bat after all, if then* l)e error, it may just as well be in one direction as in 
 another, /. e. the true hour at which the eclipse would be visible for thom 
 latitudes is as likely to have been earlier than half-past five a. m. as to havt 
 been later, which would put this eclipse still more out of the (question. 
 
 The chronology of that period presents difficulties which our means of 
 knowledge hardly enable us to dear up. Volney remarks, and the language 
 of Herodotus is with him, that not merely the war between Kyaxares and 
 Alyattes (which lasted five years, and was terminated by the eclipse), but 
 also the conquest made by Kyaxares of the territory up to the river Hnlys 
 took place anterior (Herodot. i, 103: compare i, 16) to the Jirst sieqe of 
 Nineveh by Kyaxares, — that siege which he was forced to raise bv the 
 inroad of the Scythians. This constitutes a strong presumption in favor of 
 Volney's date for the <.Mlipse (625 b. c.) if astronomical considerations would 
 admit of it, which thty will not. Mr. Clinton, on the other hand, puts the 
 ftret siege of Nineveh m the very first year of the reign of Kyaxares, which is 
 not to be reconciled with the language of Herodotus. In placing the eclipse, 
 therefore, in 603 b. c , we dejiart from the relative arrangement of events 
 which Herodotus conceived, in deference to astronomical reasons: and 
 Herodotus is our only authority in regard to the general chronolog}'. 
 
 According to Ideler, however (and his authority upon f uch a point is con- 
 shuive, in my judgment), astronomical ccnsiderationa decisively fix tfaii 
 
 1 
 
 THE SCYTHIANS. 
 
 238 
 
 It was after this peace with Alyattes, as far as we can make 
 out the series of events in Herodotus, that Kyaxares collected all 
 his forces and laid siege to Nineveh, but was obliged to desist by 
 the unexpected inroad of the Scythians. Nearly at the same 
 time that Upper Asia was desolated by these formidable nomads, 
 Asia Minor too was overrun by other nomads, — the Cimmeri- 
 ans, — Ardys being then king of Lydia; and the two invasions, 
 both spreading extreme disaster, are presented to us as indirectly 
 connected together in the way of cause and effect. 
 
 The name Cimmerians appears in the Odyssey, — the fable 
 describes them as dwelling beyond the ocean-stream, immersed in 
 darkness and unblessed by the rays of Helios. Of this people as 
 existent we can render no account, for they had passed away, or 
 lost their identity and become subject, previous to the commence- 
 ment of trustworthy authorities : but they seem to have been the 
 chief occupants of the Tauric Chersonesus ^Crimea) and of the 
 territory between that peninsula and the river Tyras ,^ Dniester), 
 at the time when the Greeks first commenced their permanent 
 settlements on those coasts in the seventh century b. c. The 
 
 eclipse for the 30th September 610 b. c, and exclude all those other eclipsea 
 which have been named. Recent and more trustworthy calculations made 
 by Oltmanns, from the newest astronomical tables, have shown that the 
 eclipse of 610 b. c. fulfils the conditions required, and that the other eclipses 
 named do not. For a place situated in 40° N. lat. and 36° E. long, this 
 eclipse was nearly total, only one-eightieth of the sun's disc remaining 
 luminous : the darkness thus occasioned would be sufficient to cause great 
 terror. (Ideler, Handbuch, /. c.) 
 
 Since the publication of my first edition, I have been apprized that the 
 late Mr. Francis Baily had already settled the date of this eclipse to the 30th 
 of September 610 b. c, in his first contribution to the Transactions of the 
 Ru/al Society as long ago as 1811, — much before the date of the publica- 
 tion of Meier's Handbuch der Chronologic. Sir John Herschel (in hit 
 Memoir of Mr. Francis Baily, in the Transactions of the Royal Astronom- 
 ical Society, vol. xv. p. 311), after completely approving Mr. Rally's calcula- 
 tions, and stating that he had been the first to solve the disputed question, 
 expresses his surprise that various French and German astronomers, writing 
 on the same subject afterwards, have taken no notice of " that remarkable 
 paper." Though a fellow-countryman of Mr. Baily, I am sorry that I have 
 to plead guilty to a similar ignorance, until the point was specially brought 
 to my notice by a friend. Had I been aware of the paper and the Memoir 
 it woald have been unnecessary to cite any other authority than that of Mr 
 Daily and Sir John Herschel. 
 
 I] 
 
 % 9\ 
 
fyw 
 
 }' 
 
 3a4 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 nnncerous localities which bore their name, evea in the time o1 
 Herodotus,' after thej^ had ceased to exist as a nation, — a> vveli 
 an the tombs of" the Cimnurian kings then shown neai' the T} ras, 
 
 sufficiently attest this fact ; and there is reason to believe that 
 
 they were — like their conquerors and successors the Scytliians — 
 a nomadic people, mare-milkers, moving about with their tents an(i 
 herds, suitably to the nature of those unl)roken steppes which th^'ii 
 territory presented, and which oftered little except herbage in pro- 
 fusion. Stralx) tells is- — on what authority \\c do not know — 
 that they, as well as the Trcres and othei- Thracians, had des- 
 olated Asia Minor more than once before tlie time of Ardys, and 
 even earlier than Iloiiier. 
 
 The Cimmerians tlius belong pai'tly to legend partly to history ; 
 but the Scythians formed for several centuries an important 
 section of the Greciim contemporary world. Their name, un- 
 noticed by Homer, occurs for the first time in tlie Hesiodic poeini. 
 Wh'Mi the Homeric Zeus in the Iliad turns his eye away from 
 Trov towards Thrace;, he sees, besides the Thracians and My- 
 sians, other tribes, whose names cannot be made out, but whom 
 the poet knows as milk-eaters and mare-milkers ;^ and the same 
 characteristic attributes, coupled with that of " having wagons 
 for their dwelling-houses," appear in Hesiod connected with the 
 name of the Scythians.'* The navigation of the Greeks into the 
 Euxine, gratlually became more and more frequent, and during 
 the last half of the seventh century B. c. their firet settlements 
 Ml its coasts were established. The foundation of Byzantium, m 
 
 ' Herodot. iv. 11-12. Hekataeus aUo spoke of a town Kififiepiq (Stiabo 
 
 fii, p. 294). 
 
 Respecting the Cimmerians, consnlt Ukert, Skythien, p. 360, t€qq 
 « Strabo, i, pp. 6, .59.61. 
 
 • Homer, Iliad, xiii, 4. — 
 
 Avrd^ 6e kuXiv rperrev oaae tpaeivCi^ 
 
 N6a<^iv i^* lirrroiro^uv QfyijKuv Ko&oftCtfievo^ alcn 
 Mvffuv r' ayxefiax'^i '^°^ ayavdv 'lirinjiito^yCJv^ 
 rAa«ro^yuv, 'AfSiuv re, iiKaioraTotv av&pCuKum 
 
 Chmpare Strabo, xii, p. 553. 
 
 • Hesiod, Fragm. 63-64, Marktscheffel : — 
 
 kWioirag, \iyvac re, I6i Ikv^oc linnifto^yofK* 
 ClTftbo, rii, pp. 300-302. 
 
 \ 
 
 GRECIAN SETTLEMENTS ON THE EUXINE. 
 
 285 
 
 leell as of the Pontic Herakleia, at a short distance to the east of 
 the Thracian Bosphorus, by the Megarians, is assigned to the 30th 
 Olympiad, or 6o8 b. c. ;1 and the succession of colonies founded 
 by the enterprise of Milesian citizens on the western coast of the 
 Euxine, seem to fall not very long after this date, — at least 
 within the following century. Istria, Tyras, and Olbia, or 
 Borysthenes, were planted respectively near the mouths of the 
 three great rivers Danube, Dniester, and Bog: Kruni, Odessus, 
 Tomi, Kallatis, and Apollonia, were also planted on the south- 
 western or Thracian coast, northward of the dangerous land of 
 Salmydessus, so frequent in wrecks, but south of the Danube.^ 
 According to the turn of Grecian religious faith, the colonists 
 took out with them the worship of the hero Achilles (from whom, 
 |)erhaps, the cekist and some of the expatriating chiefs professed 
 to be descended), which they established with great solemnity 
 both in the various towns and on the small adjoining islands : and 
 the earliest proof which we find of Scythia, as a territory fa- 
 miliar to Grecian ideas and feeling, is found in a fragment of the 
 poet Alkaeus (about B. c. 600), wherein he addresses Achilles^ as 
 " sovereign of Scythia." There were, besides, several other Mi- 
 lesian foundations on or near the Tauric Chersonese (Crimea) 
 which brought the Greeks into conjunction with the Scythians, 
 
 ' Raonl Rochette, Histoire des Colonies Grecques, torn, iii, eh. xiv, p. 297. 
 The dates of these Grecian settlements near the Danube are very vague and 
 ouinistworthy. 
 
 ' Skymnus Chius, v, 730, Fragm. 2-25. 
 
 ^ Alkacus, Fragm. 49, Bergk ; Eusiath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 306.— 
 'Axi/i?^€v, ru<: (>dc, Schneid.) Ikvt^ikuc fiiSei^. 
 Alkman, somewhat earlier, made mention of the Issedones (Alkm. Frag. 
 129, Bergk : Steph. Byz. v. 'I^T^^dot^tf, — he called them Assedones) and of 
 the Rhipaean mountains (Fr. 80). 
 
 In the old epic of Arktinus, the deceased Achilles is transported to an 
 elysium in the ?.evK7f vf/ao^ (see the argument of the ^thiopis in Duntzer'i 
 Collection of Epicc. Poet. Graec. p. 15), but it may well be doubted whether 
 kevKTf vfjffoc in his poem was anything but a fancy, — not yet localized upon 
 the little island off the mouth of the Danube. 
 
 For the early allusions to the Pontus Euxinus and its neighboring inhab- 
 Itants, found in the Greek poets, see Ukert, Skythien, pp. 1 5-1 8, 78 ; though 
 lie puts the Ionian colonies in the Pontus nearly a century too early, in my 
 judgment. 
 
 I 
 
 i\< 
 
 \ 
 
 \l 
 
 )J 
 
 r 
 
V ! 
 
 236 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 — Herakleia, Chersoaesus, and Theodosia, on the southern coast 
 And south-western corner of the peninsula, — Pantikapaiuui and 
 the Teian colony of Plumagoria (these two on the European 
 and Asiatic sides of the Cimmerian Bosphorus respectively), 
 and Kepi, Hermonassa, etc. not far from Phanagoria, on the Asi- 
 atic coast of the Euxine: last of all, there was, even at the 
 extremity of the Palus Ma^otis (Sea of Azof), the Grecian set- 
 tlement of Tanais.i All or most of these seem to have been 
 founded during the course of the sixth century b. c, though the 
 precise dates of nio.^i of them cannot be named ; probably sev- 
 eral of them anterior to the time of the mystic poet Aristeas of 
 Prokonnesus, about 540 B. C. His long voyage from the Palus 
 Mieotis (Sea of Azof) into the interior of Asia as far as the 
 country of the Issedones (described in a [)oem, now lost, called 
 the Arimaspian verses), implies an habitual intercourse between 
 Scythians and Greeks which could not well have existed without 
 Grecian establishments on the Cimmerian Bosphorus. 
 
 Hekataius of Miletus,-' api>ears to have given much geograph- 
 ical information respecting the Scythian tribes; but Herodotus, 
 who personally visited the town of Olbia, together with the 
 inland regions adjoining to it, and i)robably other Grecian settle- 
 ments in the Euxine (at a time which we may presume to have 
 been about 450-440 b. c), — and who conversed with both Scy- 
 thians and Greeks competent to give him information, — has left 
 
 h 
 
 • Compare Dr. Clarke's description of the present commerce between 
 Taganrock — not far from the ancient Greek settlement of Tanais — and 
 the Archipelago : besides exportinj^: salt-fish, corn, leather, etc. in exchanj;o 
 for wines, fruit, etc. it is the preat deposit of Siberian productions : from 
 Orenburg it receives tallow, furs, iron, etc; this is, doubtless, as old as 
 Herodotus (Clarke's Trivels in Russia, ch, xv, p. 330). 
 
 ' Hekatai Fragment. Fr. 153, 168, ed. Klausen. Hekatajus mentioned 
 the Issedones (Fr. 168; Steph. Byz. v, 'Iflraz/dover) ; both he and Damastes 
 seem to have been familiar with the poem of Aristeas : see Klausen, ad }oc.\ 
 Steph. Byz. v, 'XrcepSopetoi. Compare also ^schyl. Prometh. 409, 710, 
 805 
 
 Hellanikus, also, seems to have spoken about Scythia in a manner geu- 
 erally conformable to Herodotus (Strabo, xii, p. 550). It does Utile credit 
 to the discernment of Strabo that he treats with disdain the valuable Scythiao 
 chapter of Herodotus, — tt/rep 'EAAavtwof kqI 'Hp6(Jorof /cot Ei'dofof Kare 
 
 TRIBES OF SCYTHIANS. 
 
 »37 
 
 us tar more valuable statements respecting the Scythian people, 
 dominion, and manners, as they stood in his day. His conception 
 of the Scythians, as well as that of Plippokrates, is precise 
 and well-defined, — very different from that of the later authors, 
 who use the word almost indiscriminately to denote all barbarous 
 nomads. His territory, called Scythia, is a square area, twenty 
 days' journey or four thousand stadia (somewhat less than five 
 hundred English miles) in each direction, — bounded by the Dan- 
 ube (the course of which river he conceives in a direction from 
 N. W. to S. E.), the Euxine, and the Palus Ma?otis with tlie 
 river Tanais, on three sides respectively, — and on the fourth or 
 north side by the nations called Agathyrsi, Neuri, Androphagi, 
 and Melanchlaeni.i However imperfect his idea of the figure of 
 this territory may be found, if we compare it with a good modern 
 map, the limits which he gives us are beyond dispute: from the 
 lower Danube and the mountains eastward of Transylvania to the 
 lower Tanais, the whole area was either occupied by or sub- 
 ject to the Scythians. And this name comprised tribes differing 
 materially in habits and civilization. The great mass of the 
 people who bore it, strictly nomadic in their habits, — neither 
 sowing nor planting, but living only on food derived from an- 
 imals, especially mare's milk and cheese, — moved from place to 
 place, carrying their families in wagons covered with wicker and 
 leather, themselves always on horseback with their flocks and 
 herds, between the Borysthencs and the Palus Ma?otis; they hardly 
 even reached so far westward as the Borysthenes, since a river (not 
 
 * Ilerodot. iv, 100-101. See, respecting the Scythia of Herodotus, the 
 excellent dissertation of Nicbuhr, contained in his Kleinc Historische 
 Schriften, " Ueber die Geschichte der Sky then, Geten, und Sarmaten," p. 
 360, alike instructive both as to the geography and the history. Also the 
 two chapters in Volcker's Mythische Geographic, ch. vii-viii, sects. 23-26, 
 respecting the geographical conceptions present to Herodotus in his dcHcrip- 
 tion of Scythia. 
 
 Herodotus has much in his Scythian geography, however, which no cuin- 
 ment can enable us to understand. Compared with his predecessors, hig 
 geographical conceptions evince very great improvement ; but we shall have 
 occ&aion, in the course of this history, to notice memorable examples of 
 extreme misapprehension in regard to distance and bearings in these remote 
 regions, common to him not only with his contemporaries, but also with hii 
 iBCcessors. 
 
 f 
 
 < Iv 
 
 rl 
 
 vjl 
 
 It 
 
2SS 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 t t 
 
 \ 
 
 easily identified) which Herodotus calls Pantikapes, flowing into 
 the Borysthenes from the eastward, formed their boundary. 
 These nomads were the genuine Scythians, possessing the 
 marked attnbutes of tlie race, and including among their number 
 the regal Scythians,' — hordes so much more |X)pulous and more 
 effective in war than the rest, as to maintain undisputed a«icen- 
 dency, and to account all other Scythians no better than their 
 slaves. It was to these that the Scythian kings belonged, by 
 whom the religious and political unity of the name was main- 
 tained, — each horde having its separate chief, and to a certain 
 extent separate worshi]> and customs. But besides these nomads, 
 there were also agricultural Scythians, with fixed abodes, living 
 more or less upon breiid, and raising corn for exportation, along 
 llie banks of the Borysthenes and the Hypanis.^ And such had 
 
 ' Herodot. iv, 17-21, 46-56; Hippokrates. De At}re, Locis et Aquis. c. vi 
 /lischyl Prometh. 709; Justin, ii. 2. 
 
 It is unnecessary to multiply citations respecting- nomadic life, the same 
 nndcr such wide differences l)oth of time and of latitude, — the same with the 
 * armentarius Afer" of Virgil (Georgic, iii, 343) and the " campestres 
 Srythae" of Horace (Ode iii. 24, 12), and the Tartars of the present day; 
 see Dr. Clarke's Travels in Russia, eh. xiv, p. 310. 
 
 The fourth book of He-odotus, the Tristia and Epistolae ex l*onto of 
 Ovid, the Toxaris of Lucian (see c 36, vol. i, p. 544 Hemst.), and the 
 hiscription of Olbia (No. 2058 in Boccklrs Collection), convey a genuine 
 picture of Scythian manners as seen hy the near observer and resident, 
 very different from the pleasing fantics of the distant poet respecting 
 the innocence of pastoral life. The poisoned arrows, which Ovid so much 
 complains of in the Sarmatians and Getae (Trist. iii, 10, 60, among other 
 passages, and Lucan, iii, 270), are not noticed by Herodotus in the Scythians. 
 
 The dominant Golden Horde among the Tartars, in the time of Zinghis 
 Khan, has been often spoken of; and among: the different Arab tribes now 
 in Algeria, some are noble, others enshived ; the latter habitually, and by 
 inheritance, servants of the former, following wherever ordered (Tableau 
 de la Situation des Etablisientens Fran<;ais en Algerie, p. 393, Paris, Mar. 
 1846). 
 
 ' Ephorus placed the Karpidse immediately north of the Danube (Fragm 
 78, Marx; Skymn. Chius, 102). 1 a«:ree with Niebuhr that this is probably 
 ■n inaccurate reproduction of the Kallippidae of Herodotus, though Boeekfa 
 is of a different opinion (Irtroduct. ad Inscriptt. Sarmatic. Coryius Inscript 
 part xi, p. 81 ). The vague and dreamy statements of Ephorus, so far as wfl 
 know them from the fragments, contrast unfavorably with the comparatiTO 
 precision of Herodottis. I'he latter expressly separates the Androphag: 
 
 A 
 
 MANNERS OF THE SCYTHIAISS. 
 
 239 
 
 been the influence of the Grecian settlement of Olbia at the moatb 
 of the ^atter river in creating new tastes and habits, that two 
 tribes on its western banks, the Kallippidie and the Alazones, had 
 l»ecome ojinpletely^ accustomed both to tillage and to vegetable 
 food, and had in other respects so much departed from their 
 Scythian rudeness as to be called Hellenic-Scythians, many 
 Gr'^eks being seemingly domiciled among them. Northward of 
 ths Alazones, lay those called the agricultural Scythians, who 
 sowed corn, not for food but for sale J 
 
 Such stationary cultivators were doubtless regarded by the 
 predominant mass of the Scythians as degenerate brethren ; anu 
 some historians maintain that they belonged to a foreign race, 
 standing to the Scythians merely in the relation of subjects,- — an 
 
 f 
 I 
 
 « Iv 
 
 from the Scythians, — fi^toc eov iSinv Kat ovSa^Ctg ^kvOikov (iv, 18), whereat 
 when we compare Strabo vii. p. 302 and Skymn. Chi. 105-115, we see that 
 Ephorus talked of the Androphjigi as a variety of Scythians, — i'&vo^ 
 rvSpo(j>uyiJV Xkvt^uv. 
 
 The valuable inscription from Olbia (No 2058 Boeckh) recognizes Mf^cA- 
 ?.riveg near that town. 
 
 ' Herod, iv, 17. We may illustrate this statement of Herodotus by an 
 extract from Heber's journal as cited in Dr. Clarke's Travels, ch. xv, p. 337 : 
 '' The Nagay Tartars begin to the west of Marinopol : they cultivate a good 
 deal of corn, yet they dislike bread as an article of food.** 
 
 * Niebuhr (Dissertat. ut sup. p. 360), Boeckh (Introd. Inscrip. ut sup. p. 
 110), and Ritter (Vorhalle der Geschichte, p. 316) advance this opinio* 
 But we ought not on this occasion to depart from the authority of Herodotus . 
 Avhose information respecting the people of Scythia, collected by himself oj 
 the spot, is one of the most instructive and precious portions of his whole 
 work. He is very careful to distinguish what is Scythian from what is not: 
 and these trilxjs, which Niebuhr (contrary to the sentiment ol Herodotus) 
 imagines not to l>e Scythian, were the tribes nearest and best known to him; 
 probably he had personally visited them, since we know that he went up the 
 fiver Hypanis (Bog) as high as the Exampaeus, four days' journey from th« 
 Fca (.V, 52-81). 
 
 That some portions of the same ^i^vof should be u/^or^pcc, and other por- 
 tions vo/zaf^e^, is far from being without parallel ; such was the case with the 
 Persians, for example (Herodot. i. 126), and with the Il)erians between tht 
 Enxine and the Ctispian (Strabo, xi, p. 500). 
 
 The Pontic Greeks confounded Agathyrsus, Gelonns, and Scyth^g m th« 
 same genealogy, as being three brethren, sons of Herakles by the uiioirap- 
 i^fvof 'Exi^va of the Hylaea (iv, 7-10). Herodotus is more precW hi 
 distinguishes both the Agathyrsi and Geloni from Scythians. 
 
 1^ 
 
 m 
 
 .1' 
 
 M 
 
 T 
 
 •! 
 
240 
 
 HISTORY or GREECL. 
 
 fi'^ 
 
 I 
 
 \ 
 
 hypothesis contradicted implicitly, if not directly, by tlie woid« 
 of Herodotus, and no way necessary in the present case. It is 
 not from them, however, tliat Herodotus draws his vivid picture 
 of tlie people, with their inhuman rites and repulsive personal 
 features. It is the purely nomadic Scythians whom he depicts 
 the earliest specimens of the Mongolian race (so it seems proba 
 Me)' known to history, and prototypes of the Iluns and Bulga 
 
 ' Both Nichuhr and Boeckh account the antient Scythians to he of Mon- 
 golian race (Niehuhr in the Dissertation above mentioned, Untersuchungen 
 Uber die Geschichte der Sky then, Cieten, und Sarrnaten, among the Ivleine 
 Uistorische Sehriften, p. 362; Boeckh, Corpus Inscriptt. Graicarum, Iniro- 
 ductio ad Inscriptt. Sarraatic. part xi, p. 81). Paul Jose[>h Schafarik, in his 
 elaborate examination of the ethnography of the ancient people described as 
 inhabiting northern Europe and Asia, arrives at the same result (Slavischc 
 AlterthOmer, Prag. 1843, vol. i, xiii, 6, p. 279). 
 
 A striking illustration of this analogy of race is noticed by Alexander von 
 Humboldt, in speaking of the burial-place and the funeral obsequies of the 
 Tartar Tchinghiz Khan — 
 
 '' Les cruaute's lors de la pompe funebre des grands-khans resserablent 
 entierement k celles que nous trouvons decrites par Herodote (iv, 71) environ 
 17(X) ans avant la mort de Tchinghiz. et 6.5° de longitude plus a I'ouest, chez 
 les Scythes du Gerrhus «'t du Borysthene." (Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. 
 i, {.. 244 ) 
 
 Nevertheless, M, Humboldt dissents from the opinion of Niebuhr and 
 Boeckh, and considers tlie Scythians of Herodotus to be of Indo-Germanie, 
 not of Mongolian race : Klaproth seems to adoj)t the same view (sec Hum- 
 boMt, Asie Centrale, vol. i, p. 401, and his valuable work, Kosmos, p. 491 
 note 383). He a.ssamc> it as a certain fact, upon what evidence I do not 
 distinctly see, that no tribe of Turk or Mongol race migrate<l westward out 
 of Central Asia until considerably later than the time of Herodotus. To 
 make out such a negative, seems to me impossible : and the marks of ethno- 
 graphical analogy, so far as they go, decidedly favor the opinion of Niebuhr 
 llkert also (Skythien, pjt. 266-280) controverts the o])iiiion of Niebuhr. 
 
 At the same time it must be granted that these marks are not very conclu- 
 ■ive, and that manv nomadic hordes, whom no one would refer to the same 
 race, may yet have exhibited an analogy of manners and characteristics 
 equal to that between the Scythians and Mongols. 
 
 The principle upon which the Indo-European family of the human race is 
 defined tud parted off, appears to me inapplicable to any particular case 
 irherein the language of the people is unknown to us. The nations consti- 
 tuting that family have no other point of affinity except in the roots and 
 Btrocture of their langua^^e ; on every other point there is the widest difference. 
 To enable us to affirm that the Massagctae, or the Scythians, or the Alani, 
 
 N 
 
 MANNERS OF THE SCYTHIANS. 
 
 241 
 
 rians of later centuries. The sword, in the literal sense of the 
 word, was their chief god,'— an iron scymetar solemnly elevated 
 upon a wide and lofty platform, which was supported on masses 
 of fagots piled underneath, — to whom sheep, liorses, and a i)Oiv 
 tion of their prisoners taken in war, were offered uj) in sacrifice: 
 Herodotus treats this sword as the image of the god Ares, thus 
 putting an Hellenic interpretation upon that which he describes 
 literally as a barbaiic rite. The scalps and the skins of slain en- 
 emies, and sometimes the skull formed into a drinking-cup, con- 
 stituted the decoration of a Scythian warrior: whoeve'^r had not 
 slain an enemy, was excluded from participation in the annual 
 festival and bowl of wine prepared by the chief of each separate 
 horde. The ceremonies which took place during the sickness 
 and funeral obsequies of the Scythian kings (who were buried 
 at Gerrhi, at the ej^treme point to which navigation extended up 
 the Borysthenes), partook of the same sanguinary disposition. It 
 was the Scythian practice to put out the eyes of all their slaves ; 
 and the awkwardness of the Scythian frame, often overloaded with 
 tat, together with extreme dirt of body, and the absence of aU 
 discriminating feature between one man and another, complete 
 the brutish portrait.-^ Mare's milk (with cheese made from it) 
 
 belonged to the Indo-European family, it would be requisite that we should 
 know something of their language But the Scythian language may bo 
 said to be wholly unknown ; and the very few words which are brought to 
 our knowledge do not tend to aid the Indo-European hypothesis. 
 
 ' Sec the story of the accidental discovery of this Scythian sword when 
 lost, by Attila, the chief of the Huns (Priscus ap. Jomandem do Rebua 
 (jeticis, c. 35, and in Eclog. Legation, p. 50). 
 
 Lucian in the Toxaris (c. 38, vol. ii, p. 546, Hemst.) notices the worship 
 uf the akmakes, or scymetar, by the Scythians in plain terms without inter- 
 posmg the idea of the god Ares: compare Clemen. Alexand. Protrept. p. 
 25. Syl Ammianus Marcellinus, in speaking of the Alani (xxxi, *>) a* 
 well as Pomponius Mela (ii, 1) and Solinus (c. 20;, copy Herodotus. Am- 
 mianus is more literal in his description of the Sarmatian sword-worship 
 (xvii, 12), "Educti.sque mucronibus. quos pro numinibus colunt," etc 
 
 'Hcrodot. iv, 3-62. 71-75; Sophokles, CEn^maus, - ap. Athen*. ix, p. 
 410; Hippokrates, De Acre, Locis et Aquis, ch. vi, s. 91-99, etc. 
 
 It is seldom that we obtain, in reference to the modes of life of an ancient 
 population, two such excellent witnesses as Herodotus and Hippokrat^ 
 libout the Scythians. ^ 
 
 Hippokrates wsis accustomed to see the naked figure in its highest per- 
 
 VOL. III. 21 i6oc. 
 
 
 ! I 
 
 'ii 
 
 ' u 
 
 
 \ 
 
 t 
 
f42 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ! > 
 
 l) 
 
 » 
 
 \ 
 
 Beems to have been their chief luxury, and probably 8«rved the 
 same purpose of j)rocuring the intoxicating drink called kumiss^ 
 as at present amoiig the Bashkirs and the Kalmucks^ 
 
 If the habits ot the Scythians were such as to create in the 
 near observer no other feeling than re[;ugnance, their force at 
 least inspired terror. They appeared in the eyes of Thucydides 
 so numerous and so formidable, that he pronounces them irresist- 
 ible, if they could but unite, by any other nation within his knowl- 
 edge. Herodotus, too, conceived the same idea of a race among 
 whom every man was a wairior and a practised hoi-se-bowman, 
 and who were placed by their mode of life out of all reach of an 
 enemy's attack.^ Moreover, Herodotus does not s[)eak meanly 
 of their intelligence, contrasting them in favorable terms witii the 
 general stupidity of the other nations bordering on the Euxine. 
 Li this respect Thucydides seems to differ from him. 
 
 On the east, th<j Scythians of the time of Herodotus were sep- 
 arated only by the river Tanais from the Sarniatians, who occu- 
 pied the territory for several days' journey north-eaf^t of the 
 Palus Maeotis : on the south, they were divided by fhe Danube 
 from the section of Thracians ciilled Getie. Both these nations 
 were nomadic, analojjrous to the Scythians in habits, military 
 efficiency, and fierceness : indeed, Herodotus and Hippokrates 
 distinctly intimate that the Sarmatians were nothing but a branch 
 of Scythians,"^ speaking a Scytliian dialect, and distinguished 
 
 fcition at the Grecian jramt»8: hence, perhaps, he is led to dwell more 
 emphatically on the corporeal defects of the Scythians. 
 
 * See Pailas, lleise durch Russlund, and Dr. Clarke, Travels in Russia, 
 ch. xii, p. 238. 
 
 * Thucyd. ii, 95; lierodot. ii, 46-47 : his idea of the fbrmidablc power of 
 the Scythians seems also to be implied in his expression (c. 81 ), Koi oTiiyovg^ 
 uc Zx7'i9ac clvai. 
 
 Herodotus holds the same lan^roa^ about the Tnracians, nowever, aa 
 Thucydides about the Scythians, — irresistible, if they could but act with 
 union (v, .3). 
 
 - The testimony of Herodotus to this effect (iv, 110-117) seems clear and 
 positire, especially a* to the languagre Hippokrates also calls the Sanromata 
 li>vof iKvxhKov (De Acre, Locis et Aquis, c, vi, seCv. 89, Petersen ). 
 
 I cannot think that there is any sufficient ground for the marked ethnica] 
 distinction which several authors draw (contrary to Herodotu«s) between the 
 Scythians and the Siu*matians. Bocckh considers the latter to be of Median 
 
 SARMATIANS. 
 
 243 
 
 Iroiii their neighbors on the other side of the Tanais, chiefly by 
 Ibis peculiarity, — that the women among them were warriors 
 hardly less daring and expert than the men. This attribute of 
 Sarmatian women, as a matter of fact, is w:ll attested, — thoujrh 
 Herodotus has thrown over it an air of suspicion not properly be- 
 longing to it, by his explanatory genealogical mythe, deducing 
 (he Sarmatians from a mixed breed between the Srytliians and 
 the Amazons. 
 
 The wide extent of steppe eastward and noith-eastward of 
 the Tanais, between the Ural mountains and the Caspian, and 
 beyond the possessions of the Sarmatians, was tiavcrsed by Gre- 
 cian traders, even to a good distance in the (linction of the 
 Altai mountains, -- the rich produce of gold, both in Altai and 
 I'ral, being the great temptation. First, according to Herodotii-s 
 lame the indigenous nomadic nation called Budiiri, who dwelt to 
 ihe northward of the Sarmatians,' and among whom were es- 
 
 or IVrsian ori,<>in, but to be, also, the progenitors of the modern Sclavoinan 
 timily: " Sarmatae, Slavorum baud duhie parentes," (Introduct. ad Inscr 
 .Sarmatic. Corp. Inscr. part xi, p. 83.) Many other authora have shared this 
 nniruon, which identifies the Sarmatians with the Slavi ; but Paul Josq.li 
 Scliafarik (Slavische Alterthumer, vol. i, c. 16) has shown i>owcrful reasons 
 au:ain>t it. 
 
 N.^vertheless, Schafarik admits the Sarmatians to be of Median oritriit, up..l 
 radically distinct from the Scythians. But the pa.ssaire8 which are (|uotc.<i to 
 prove this point from Diodorus (ii, 43), from Mela (i. 19), and from ]>linv 
 (11. N. VI. 7), appear to me of much less authority than the assertion of 
 llL-rodotus. In none of these authors is there anv'trace of inquiries made 
 m or near the actual spot from neighlwrs and competent informants, such 
 as we find in Herodotus. And the chapter in Diodorus, on which l)oth 
 Bocckh and Schafarik lay especial stress, appears to me one of the most 
 ontrustworthy in the whole book. To believe in the existence of Scvtbinn 
 kings who reigned over all Asia from the eastern ocean to the Caspian, and 
 lent out large colonies of Metlians and Assyrians, is .urelv impossible; and 
 VVcssehug speaks much within the truth when he savs, " Verum hxc dubia 
 idmodum atque incerta." It is remarkable to see B'oeckh treating this pas- 
 lage as conclusive against Herodotus and Hippokrates. M. Bocckh has 
 »l80 given a copious analysis of the names found in the Greek inscriptions 
 fit>m Scythian, Sarmatian, and Masotic localities {tU sup. pp. 107-117), and 
 Je endeavors to establish an analogy between the two latter classes and 
 Median names. But the analogy holds just as much with regard to th«t 
 fecythian names. 
 
 ' The locality which Herodotus assigns to the budini creates difficulty 
 
 I. 
 
 n 
 
244 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 I 
 
 ) 
 
 P. 
 
 ] 
 
 tftblislied a colony of Pontic Greeks, intermixed with natives, and 
 called Geloni ; these latter inhabited a spacious town built 
 entirely of wood. Beyond the Budini eastward dwelt the Thys 
 
 Accoriling to his own statement, it would seem that they ought to be near to 
 the Ncuri (iv, 10f»), and so in i'.nt Ptolemy places them (v, 9) near about 
 Volhyiiia and the sources of the Dniester. 
 
 Maniiert (Geographic dcr Griech. und Homer, Der Norden der Erde, v, 
 iv, p. 1.J8) conceives the budini to be a Teutonic tribe; but Paul Joseph 
 Sthafarik (Slavis(he AlterthOmer, i, 10, pp. 185-195) has shown more plau- 
 iiblc grounds for helieving both them and tlic iieuri to be of Slavic family. 
 If 8ee!n« that the names budini and neuri are traceable to Slavic roots; that 
 the wooden town described by Herodotus in the midst of the budini is an 
 exact |»arallel of the primitive Slavic towns, down even to the twelfth cen- 
 tury ; and that the description of the country around, with its woods and 
 mar^hcs containing beavers, otters, etc. harmonizes better with southern 
 Polan.l and Russia than with the neighborhood of the Ural mountain;,. 
 From the color a.scribed to the budini. no certain inference can be drawn: 
 }?mvk6v re nuv laxvpuc fnr} Kai Trvp^ov (iv. 108). Mannert construes it in 
 favor of Teutonic family. Schafarik in favor of Slavic ; and it is to l>c 
 remarked, that H ppokratcs Utlks af the Scythians generally as extremely 
 rtft^oi (Dc Atire, Locis et Aquis, c. vi : compare Aristot. Prob. xxxviii, 2). 
 
 These reasonings are plausible ; yet we can hardly venture to niter the 
 position of the badini as Herodotus describes it, eastward of the Tanais. 
 For he states in the most explicit manner that the route as far as the Argip- 
 |Mei is thoroughly known, traversed both by Scythian and by Grecian 'raders, 
 and all the nation?} in the way to it known (iv, 24) : fiexpi H-ev tovtuv iToXAfi 
 irepiipuveia Trtq x^P^^ ^<^^^ '^^'- ^<*'^ ifirrpoctT^ev id^viuv Kai yap ^Kvdiuv rivt^ 
 uiriKvtovTai ef avrovc^ tCjv ov ;faAe7rov iarl izv&ea^ai, Kai 'EA/.r/vwi' rdv U 
 Bopvn^tveng re ifnropiov Kai tCav ii/Jmv HovtikCjv kfiiropiuv. These Greek 
 and Scythian traders, in their journey from tlie Pontic seaports into the inte- 
 rior, employed se\en different languages and as many interpreters. 
 
 Viilcker thinks that Herodotus or his informants confounded the Don with 
 the Volga (Mytlische Geographic, sect. 24, p. 190), supposing that the 
 higher parts of the latter belonged to the former; a mistake not unnatural, 
 since the two rivurs approach pretty near to each other at one particular 
 point, and since the lower parts of the Volga, together with the northern 
 shore of the Caspian, where its embouchure is situated, appear to have been 
 Kttle visited and almost unknown in antiquity. There cannot be a more 
 striking evidence how unknown these regions were, than the persuasion, so 
 general in antiquity, that the Caspian sea was a gulf of the ocean, to which 
 Herodotus, Aristotle, and Ptolemy are almost the only exceptions. Alex- 
 ander von Humholdt has some valuable remarks on the tract laid down by 
 Herodotus from ihe Tanais to the Argippaei (Asie Centrale, vol. i, pp 
 ft9O-400). 
 
 8 Vol. 3 
 
 TAURIC CHERSONESE. 
 
 24ft 
 
 sagetse and the Jurkap, tribes of hunters, and even a Ix ly of 
 Scythians who had migrated from the territories of the regal 
 Scythians. The Issedones were the easternmost people respect* 
 ing whom any definite information reached the Greeks ; beyond 
 them we find nothing but fable,' — the one-eyed Arimaspiana, 
 the gold-guarding Grypes, or Griffins, and the bald-headed Argip- 
 pai. It is impossible to fix with precision the geography of thesa 
 different tribes, or to do more than comprehend approximatively 
 their local bearings and relations to each other. 
 
 But the best known of all is the situation of the Tauri (per- 
 haps a remnant of the expelled Cimmerians), who dwelt in the 
 southern portion of the Tauric Chersonesus (or Crimea), and who 
 iminolaied human sacrifices to their native virgin goddess, — 
 identified by the Greeks with Artemis, and serving as a basis for 
 the afiecting legend of Iphigeneia. The Tauri are distinguished 
 by Herodotus from Scythians,- but their manners and state of 
 civilization seem to have been very analogous. It appears also 
 that the p'^werful and numerous Massageta?, who dwelt in Asia 
 on the plains eastward of the Caspian and southward of the 
 Issedones, were so analogous to the Scythians as to be reckoned 
 as members of the same race by many of the contemporaries of 
 llerodotus.3 
 
 This snort enumeration of the various tribes near the Euxine 
 and tiie Caspian, as well as we can make them out, from the 
 seventh to the fifth century b. c, is pecessary for the comprehen- 
 sion of that double invasion of Scythians and Cimmerians which 
 laid waste Asia between 630 and GIO b. c. We are not to 
 expect Irom Herodotus, born a century and a half afterwards, any 
 very clear explanations of this event, nor were all his informanta 
 unanimous respecting the causes which brought it about. But it 
 is a fact perfectly within the range of historical analogy, that 
 accidental aggregations of number, development of aggressive 
 
 * HerouOt. iv, 80. 
 
 ' Hf odot. iv, 99-101. Dionysius Periegetes seems to identify Cimme- 
 rians and Tauri (v, 168: compare v, 680, where the Cimmerians are placed 
 on the A.siatic side of the Cimmerian Bosphorus, adjacent to the Sindi). 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 202. Strabo compares the inroads of the Sakse, which wai 
 the na.Te applied by the Persians to the Scythians, to those of th« Ciikiait 
 rians and the Treres (xi, pp. ^11-512). 
 
 
 ''iKMlMWMlillUhiiMK ...mAml^hMWIiu 
 
246 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 '\ 
 
 
 > 
 
 spirit, or failure in the means of subsistence, among the nomadic 
 tribes of the Asiatic plains, have brought on the civilized nations of 
 southern Europe calamitous invasions, of which the prime moving 
 cause was remote and unknown. Sometimes a weaker tribe, 
 flying before a stronger, has been in this manner precipitated upon 
 the territory of a richer and less military population, so that an 
 impulse originating in the distant plains of Central Tartary hag 
 been propagated until it reached the southern extremity of 
 Europe, through successive intermediate tribes, a phenomenon 
 especially exhibited during the fourth and fifth centuries of the 
 (/hristian era, in the declining years of the Roman empire. A 
 pressure so transmitted onward is said to have brought down the 
 Cimmerians and Scythians upon the more southerly regions of 
 Asia. The most ancient story in explanation of this incident 
 seems to have been contained in the epic poem (now lost) called 
 AruiKupia, of the mystic Aristeas of l*rokonnesus, composed 
 apparently about 510 b. c. This poet, under the inspiration of 
 Apollo,' undertook a pilgrimage to visit the sacred Hyperbore- 
 ans (especial votaries of tliat god) in their elysium beyond the 
 Rhipaean mountains ; but he did not reach farther than the Isse- 
 dones. According to him, the movement, whereby the Cimme- 
 rians had been expelled from their possessions on the Euxine sea, 
 began with the Grypes or Grillins in the extreme north, — the 
 sacred character ot the Hyperboreans beyond wtis incompatible 
 with aggression or Idoodshed. The Grypes invaded the Arimas- 
 pians, who on their part assailed their neighbors the Issedones -^ 
 tliese latter moved southwaid or westward and drove the Scythi- 
 ans across the Tanais, while the Scythians, carried forward b/ 
 this onset, expelled the Cimmerians from their territories along 
 the Palus M.eotis and the Euxine. 
 
 We see thus that Aristeas referred the attack of the Scythians 
 upon the Cimmerians to a distant impulse proceeding in the first 
 instance from the (irypes ur Griffins ; bui Herodotus had heard 
 It explained in another way, which he seems to think more cor- 
 rect, — the Scythians, originally occupants of Asia, or the regiooa 
 M6t of the Caspian, had been driven across the Araxes, io 
 
 ' Herodot. iv, 13. ^uio^afiKTog yevo/ievcf. 
 ■ Uerodo:. iv, 13. 
 
 i\ 
 
 CIMMERIANS EXPELLED BY SCYTHIANS. 
 
 247 
 
 consequence of an unsuccessful war with the Massagetas, and 
 precipitated upon the Cimmerians in Europe.' 
 
 Wlien the Scythian host approached, the Cimmerians were 
 not agreed among themselves whetlier to resist or retire: the 
 majority of tiio people were dismayed and wished to evacuate 
 the territory, while the kings of the different tribes resolved to fight 
 and perish at home. Those who were animated with this fierce 
 despair, divided themselves along with the kings into two equal 
 bodies and perished by each other's hands near the river Tyras, 
 where the sepulchres of the kings were yet shown in the time of 
 Herodotus.2 The mass of the Cimmerians fled and abandoned 
 their country to the Scythians; who, however, not content witli 
 possession of the country, followed the fugitives across the Cim- 
 merian Bosphorus from west to east, under the command of their 
 |)iince Madyes son of Prototliyes. The Cimmerians, coasting 
 along tlie east of the Euxine sea and passing to the west ot 
 Mount Caucasus, made their way first into Kolchis, and next into 
 A-ia Minor, where they established themselves on the peninsuhi 
 on the northern coast, near the site of the subsequent Grecian city 
 ot Sinope. But the Scythian pursuers, mistaking the course 
 taken by the fugitives, followed the more circuitous route east of 
 Mount Caucasus near to the Caspian sea;^ which brought them, 
 not into Asia Minor, but into Media. Both Asia Minor and 
 Media became thus exposed nearly at the same time to the rav- 
 ages of northern nomades. 
 
 These two stories, representing the belief of Herodotus and 
 Aristeas, involve the assumption that the Scythians were com- 
 pai-atively recent emigrants into the territory betwen the Ister 
 and the Palus Maeotis. But the legends of the Scythians them- 
 selves, as well as tliose of the Pontic Greeks, imply the contrary 
 of this assumption ; and describe the Scythians as primitive and 
 indigenous inhabitants of the country. Both legends are so 
 framed as to explain a triple division, which probably may have 
 prevailed, of the Scythian aggregate nationality, traced up to 
 three heroic brothers : both also agrae in awarding the predomi- 
 
 ' Herodot. iv, 1 1 . 'Eota de kqI u7^?iOQ Tioyo^t Ix**^ ^^» '"^ fiaXurra Xeyofiiv^ 
 ov'Of irpoaKdfiai. 
 * Herodot. iv, 11. ' Herodot iv, 1-18. 
 
 
 hi 
 
248 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 nance to the youngest brother of the three,^ tl ough in other t^ 
 •pects, the names and incidents of the two are ahogether different 
 The Scythians call tliemselves Skoloti. 
 
 Such material differences, in the various accounts given to He- 
 rodotus of the Scjthian and Cimmerian invasions of Asia, are by 
 no means wonderful, seeing that nearl)' two centuries had elapsed 
 between that event and his visit to the Pontus. That the Cim- 
 menans — perliajis the northernmost portion of the great Thra- 
 cian name, and conterminous with the Getixi on the Danube — 
 were the previous tenants of much of the territory between the 
 Ister and the Palus Mieotis, and that they were expelled in the 
 Beventh century b. c, by the Scythians, we may follow Herodo- 
 tus in believing ; but Niebuhr has shown that there is great in- 
 trinsic imj)robability in his narrative of the march of the Cimme- 
 rians into Asia Minor, and in the pursuit of these fugitives by 
 the Scythians. That the latter would ])ursue at all, when an ex- 
 tensive territory was abaiidoiKMl to them without resistance, is 
 hardly su]>posable : that they .-hould pursue and mistake their 
 way, is still more ditHcult to believe : nor can we overlook the 
 great difficulties of the road and the Caucasian i)asses, in the 
 route ascribed to the Cimmerians.- Niebuhr su])poses the latter 
 
 ' Iltnxlot. iv, 5-9. At tliis tl:iy, tlie three L^reat tri!>cs of the nomadic 
 Tun omaiis, on the Tiorili-castern bonk-r of Persia near the Oxus, — the 
 Yainud, the Gokhi. and the Tuka, — assert for themselves a legendary 
 genealogy dedueed from three hrotliers ( Frazer, Narrative of a Journey iu 
 Khorasan, p. 258;. 
 
 * Read the descriptimj of the diffieuh esea]>c of Mithridates Euj)ator. with 
 a mere handful cf ni- n. from Pontus to I?os|>horus hy this route, hetwcen 
 the western edge o ( itneasus and the Kuxine (Straho, xi, pp. 495-4'J6). — 
 r/ T'.':' Av"'" '■ '»' ^ft' 'H/vofwr rrn^ ././a. — all piratical and barbar- 
 
 ous tribes. — r;} -ra,>i: ' •; \<iA^- .^ rjti.-rn 7ro>/.a iii.iaivuv tirl riji' tiuAaaoav: 
 compare Phuareh, Pompeius, c. 34. Pompey thought the route unlit for his 
 march. 
 
 To sn|>pose tfie Cinimerian tribes with tluir wagons passing along such a 
 tra» k would re<iairo strong positive evidence. According to Ptolemy, how- 
 e>tr, there were two pusses over the range of Caucasus, — the Caucasian or 
 Albanian gates, near Derbend and the Caspian, and the Sarmatian gates, 
 considerably more to the westward (Ptolemy, Geogr. v, 9 ; Forbiger, Hand- 
 buch der Alten Gecgraphie. vol. ii. sect. 56, p. 55). It is not impossible that 
 the Cimraerians may have followed the westernmost, and the Scythians th« 
 
 CIMMERIANS IN ASIA MINOR. 
 
 fo have marched into Asia Minor by the western side of the 
 Euxip'*, and across the Thracian Bosphorus, after havin» been 
 defeated in a decisive battle by the Scythians near the river 
 Tyras, where their last kings fell and were interred.^ Though 
 this 13 both an easier route, and more in accordance with the 
 analogy of other occupants expelled from the same territory, we 
 must, HI the absence of positive evidence, treat the point as un- 
 auther^icated. 
 
 Th^ inroad of the Cimmerians into Asia Minor was doubtless 
 connected with their expulsion from the northern coast of the 
 Euxine by the Scythians, but Ave may well doubt whether it was 
 Rt al! -connected, as Herodotus had been told that it was, with the 
 invasion of Media by the Scythians, except as happening near 
 about the same time. The same great evolution of Scythian 
 powe», or pro])ulsion by other tribes behind, may have occasioned 
 both events, — brought about by different bodies of Scythians, 
 Ijut nearly contemporaneous. 
 
 Herodotus tells us two facts respecting the Cimmerian emi- 
 grants into Asia Minor. They committed destructive, thou'^h 
 transient, ravages in many parts of Paphlagonia, Phrygia, Lydia, 
 ana Ionia, — and they occupied permanently the northern penin- 
 sula,2 whereon the Greek city of SinOpe was afterwards planted. 
 Had thd elegies of the contemporary Ephesian poet Kallinus 
 beei oreserved, we should have known better how to appreciate 
 the.«-e trying times : he strove to keep alive the energy of his 
 countrymen against the formidable invaders.^ From later au- 
 
 easternni'^st, of these two passes ; but the whole story is certainly very 
 im'-.x)hah'e. 
 
 • *'M^e Niebuhr's Dissertation above referred to, pp. 366-367. A reason for 
 cupo'jsing that the Cimmerians came into Asia Minor from the west and not 
 Iron the east, is, that we find them so much confounded with the Thracian 
 Trt»*-es, indicating seemingly a joint invasion. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 6-15; iv, 12. <pau'Ovrai di oi Kififiepioi, (j>evyovrec cf tt^p 
 'A(T t}v Tovc "SKVT&ac, Koi T7JV XepaovTjaov KTtaavr eg, kv ry vvv "Livunij 7r6A*f 
 'E^ «7r?C oiKiarai. 
 
 ' Kallinus, Fragment. 2, 3, ed. Bergk. Nvv d' iTrl Ki/ifiepiuv trrpardf 
 Ipx ^ai u3pi/wtpyo)v (Strabo, xiii, p. 627; xiv, 633-647). 0- MOller (His- 
 tory of the Literature of Ancient Greece, ch. x, s. 4) and Mr. Clintoi 
 (Farti Hellenici, b. c. 716-635) may be consulted about the obscure chnK 
 nol-^gy of these events. The Scythico- Cimmerian invasion of Asia, tl 
 
 11* 
 
mSTOBY OF GREECTE. 
 
 MAGNESIA SACKED BY THE CIMMERIANS. 
 
 251 
 
 thors, whvV probably, had these poems before them, we learn thU 
 the Cimmerian host, having occupied the Lydian chief town 
 
 iwnich Herodotus alludes, apj.)ears tixed for some date in the reign of Ardys 
 the Lydian, 640-6:29 b. c, and may stand for 635 b. c. as Mr. Clinton puta 
 it ] and I agree with O. Muller that the fragment of the poet Kallinus 
 above cited ailudes to this invasion ; for the supposition of Mr. Clinton, that 
 Kallinus here alludes to an invasion past and not present, appears to be 
 excluded by the word vvv. Mr. Clinton places both Kallinus and Archilo- 
 chus (in my judgment) half a century too high; for i agree with O. Mulier 
 in disbelieving the story toid by Pliny of the picture sold by Bularchus to 
 Kandaules. O. Mailer follows Strabo (i, p. 61) in calling Madys a Cimme- 
 rian prince, who drove the Treres out of Asia Minor ; whereas Herodotus 
 mentions him as the Scythian prince, who drove the Cimmerians out of their 
 own territory into Asia Minor (i, 103). 
 
 The chronology of Herodotus is intelligible and consistent with itself: 
 that of Strabo we cannot settle, when he speaks of many different invasions. 
 Nor does his language give us the smallest reason to suppose that he was in 
 possession of any means of determining dates for these early times, — nothing 
 at all calculated to justify the positive chronology which Mr. Clinton deduces 
 from him: compare his Fasti Hellenici, b. c. 635, 629, 617. Strabo says, 
 after affirming that Homer knew both the name and the reality of the Cim- 
 merians (i, p. 6; iii, p. 149), — kqi yap Ka^' 'OfiTjpovy // npb avrov fiLKpbv 
 Xiyovai t^v tcjv Kififiepiuv i<podov yeverr&aL Ti]v fiexpi ttic AIoTliSoc koI r^f 
 Mwviaf. — "which places the first appearance of the Cimmerians in Asia 
 Minor a century at least before the Olympiad of Coroebus," (says Mr. Clin- 
 ton.) Bat what means could Strabo have had to chronologize events aa 
 happening at or a little f)efore the time of Homer ? No date in the Grecian 
 world was so contested, or so indeterminable, as the time of Homer ; nor 
 will it do to rea-son, as Mr Clinton does, i. e. to take the latest date fixed for 
 Homer among many, and tlien to say that the invasion of the Cimmerians 
 must be at least b. c. 876 : thus assuming it as a certainty that, whether the 
 date of Homer be a century earlier or later, the invasion of the Cimmerians 
 must be made to fit it. \VTien Strabo employs such untrustworthy chrono 
 logical standards, he only shows us — what everything else tx)nfirms — that 
 there existed no tests of any value for events of that early date in the 
 Grecian world. 
 
 Mr. Clinton announces this ante- Homeric calculation as a chronological 
 certainty : *' The Cimmerians first appeared in Asia Minor about a century 
 before b. c. 776. An irruption is recorded in b. v. 782. Their last inroad was 
 in b. c. 635. The settlement of Ambron (the Milesian, at Sinope) may be 
 placed at about b. c. 782, twenty-six yej.rs before the era assigned to (th« 
 Milesian or Sinopic settlement of) Trapezus.** 
 
 On what authority does Mr. Clinton assert that a Cimmerian irruption 
 was recorded in B. c. 782? Simply on the following passage of Orosius, 
 
 Sardis (its inaccessible acropolis defied them), poured with th«ii 
 wagons into the fertile valley of the Kai'ste^, took and sacked 
 Magnesia on the Mteander, and even threatened the temple of 
 Artemis at Ephesus. But the goddess so well protected her own 
 town and sanctuary,' that Lygdamis the leader of the Cimme- 
 
 which he cites at b. c. 635 : " Anno ante urbem conditam tricesimo, — Tunc 
 etiain Amtizonum gentis et Cimmeriorum in Asiam repentinus incursus pluri- 
 mum diu lateque vastationem et stragem intulit." If t* Ss authority of 
 Orosius is to be trusted, we ought to say that the invasion of the Amazons 
 was a recorded fact. To treat a fact mentioned in Orosius, an author of the 
 fourth century after Christ, and referred to b. c. 782, as a recorded fact, con- 
 founds the most important boundary-lines in regard to the appreciation of 
 historical evidence. 
 
 In fixing the Cimmerian invasion of Asia at 782 b. c, Mr. Clinton has 
 the statement of Orosius, whatever it may be worth, to rest upon ; but in 
 fixing the settlement of Ambron the Milesian (at Sinope) at 782 b. c, I 
 know not tliat he had any authority at all. Eusebius does, indeed, place the 
 foundation of Trapezus in 756 n. c, and Trapczus is said to have been a 
 colony from Sinope; and Mr. Clinton, therefore, is anxious to find some 
 (late for the foundation of Sinope anterior to 756 b, c. ; but there is nothing 
 to warrant him in selecting 782 b. c , rather than any other year. 
 
 In my judgment, the establishment of any Milesian colony in the Euxine 
 at so eariy a date as 756 b. c is highly improbable : and when we find that 
 the same Eusebius fixes the foundation of Sinope (the metropolis of Trape- 
 rus) as low down as 629 b. c, this is an argument with me for believing that 
 the date which he assigns to Trapezus is by far too early. Mr. Clinton treat! 
 fhe date which Eusebius assigns to Trapezus as certain, and infers from it, 
 that the date which the same author assigns to Sin6p6 is one hundnxl and 
 Ihirty years later than the reality : I reverse the inference, considering the 
 date which he assigns to Sindpe as the more trustworthy of the two, and 
 Icducing the conclusion, that the date which he gives for Trapezus is one 
 hundred and thirtv vears at least earlier than the reality. 
 
 On all grounds, the authority of the chronologists is greater with regard 
 to the later of the two periods than to the earlier, and there is, besides, the 
 additional probability arising out of what is a suitable date for Milesiaa 
 settlement. To which I will add, that Herodotus places the settlement of 
 the Cimmerians near "^that spot where Sinope is now settled,** in the reign 
 of Ardys, soon after 635 b. c. Sinope was, therefore, not founded at the timi 
 when the Cimmerians went there, in the belief of Herodotus. 
 
 ' Strabo '. p. 61 ; Kallimachns, Hymn, ad Dianam, 251-260 
 
 Tj'^.aivDV ukatriisep.ev T^TreiXriae ('E^fffov) 
 
 Avydafitg v^piarT/^, enl 6e arparov lizTrrjfioXyuv 
 "Hyaye Kififxepiuv^ "^aficc&ij laov^ ol f>a nap* airrdv 
 KeKkiuevoi valovac (iod( tropov 'iva^uay^f. 
 
 \ 
 
252 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 nans, nhose name marks him for a Greek, after a season of proa- 
 perous depredation in Ljdia and loniii, oondueting Ins host intc 
 the mountainous regions of Kilikia, was there overwhelmed and 
 slain. lint thoui^h these marauders perished, the Cimmerian 
 settlers in the territory near Sinope remained ; and Ambmn, the 
 first Milesian cekist who tried to colonize that spot, was slain by 
 them, if we may l)'*li«'v e Skymnus. They are not mentioned af- 
 terwards, but it seem- lot unreasonable to believe that they ap- 
 pear under the name o " the Chalybes, whom Herodotus mentions 
 aIon«^ that eoa.-t between the Mariandynians and Paphlagonians. 
 and whom Mela notices as adjacent to Sinope and Amisus.' 
 Oilier authors plae« t le Chalybes on several different points, 
 more to the east, though along the same parallel of latitude, — 
 between the Mosyna'ki and Tibareni, — near the river Thermo- 
 (ion, — and on the northern boundary of Armenia, near the 
 sources of the Araxes ; but it is only Herodotus and Mela who 
 recognize Chalybes westward of the river Halys and the Paph- 
 lygonians, near to Sin<»i>e. These Chalybes were brave moun 
 taineers, though sav;i^( in manners ; distinguished as producer: 
 and workers of the iron wliieh tlieir mountains attbrded. In the 
 conceptions of the (ireeks. a- manifested in a variety of fabulous 
 notices, they are plainly connected with Scythians or Cimmerians; 
 whence it seems probable that this connection was present to the 
 mind of Herodotus in regard to the inland population near 
 Sinope.- 
 
 VARIOUS INVASIONS OF ASIA MINOR. 
 
 253 
 
 'A dei2.bc l3aoi?Juv on.r,- t'ALTiv oh yap f//e?.Ae 
 
 OiV «(Vdf 1,iiv&ir]i>(h KaAifiKereg, ovre nf u/lAof 
 
 'Oaauv kv ?,e uC^vi KaiffTpiif) i^aav u/na^ai, 
 
 *AV' n^Tovoornaeiv 
 
 In the explanation of the f»rovcrb Ikvt^uv ^prjtna, allusion is made to a sud- 
 den pank- an.l fli<;ht of S^ifthians from Ephesus (Ilesychius, v, il/crt^un' fpj?//m), 
 — protiably this must rcfor to some story of interference on the part of 
 Artemis to protect the town against these Cimmerians. The confusion 
 between Cimmerians and Scythians is very fre({uent. 
 
 • Herodot. i, 28; Mela, i, 19, 9; Skymn. Chi. Fragm. 207. 
 
 * The ten thousand Greeks in their homeward mareh passed through a 
 people called Chalybes between Armenia and the town of Trapezus, ani 
 also again after eight days' march westerly from Trapezus, between the 
 Tibareni anrl Mosynrnki : compare Xenophon, Anabas. iv, 7, 15; v, 5, Ij 
 probably ditlerent sections of the same people The la»t-mentioncd Cha- 
 
 Herodotus seems to have conceived only one invasion of A^it 
 by the Cimmerians, during the reign of Ardys in Lydia. Ardys 
 was succeeded by his son Sadyattes, who reigned twelve years ; 
 and it was Alyattes, son and successor of Sadyattes, according to 
 Herodotus, who expelled the Cimmerians from Asia.^ But 
 Strabo seems to speak of several invasions, in which the Treres, 
 a Thracian tribe, were concerned, an^ which are not clearly dis- 
 criminated; while Kallisthenes affirmed that Sardis had been 
 taken by the Treres and Lykians."^ We see only that a large 
 and fair portion of Asia Minor was for much of this seventh 
 century b. C. in possession of these destroying nomads, who, 
 while on the one hand they afflicted the Ionic Greeks, on the 
 other hand indirectly befriended them by retarding the growth 
 of the Lydian monarchy. 
 
 The invasion of Upper Asia by the Scythians appears to have 
 been nearly simultaneous with that of Asia Minor by the Cim- 
 merians, but more ruinous and longer protracted. The Media n 
 
 Ivbe. seem to have been the best kno^^^l, from their iron works, and theii 
 greater vicinity to the Greek ports: Ephorus recogni/.ed them (see Ephori 
 Fracrm 80-82; ed. Marx); whether he knew of the more easterly Chalybes, 
 north of Armenia, is less certain: so also Dionysius PeriegC-tes, v, 768: 
 
 compare Eustathius, od lo<\ . , , 
 
 The idea which prevailed among ancient writers, of a connection between 
 the Chalvbcs in these regions an.l the Scythians or Cimmerians {XalvM 
 ^KV^C>v'a7rotKO^,Mschy\. Sept. ad Thebas, 729; and Hesio<i. ap. Clemen. 
 Alex *=^ i p 132) and of which the suj-posed residence of the Amazong 
 on the'^^iver ThermodOn seems to be one of the manifestations, is discussed 
 in Hoeckh, Kreta, book i, pp. 294-305; and Mannert, Geographie der 
 Griechen und Homer, vi, 2, pp. 408-416 : compare Stephan. By/., v, XuMec 
 Mannert believes in an early Scythian emi<:ration into these -^^'on^^ Th« 
 ten thousand Greeks passed thron-h the territory ot a people called Skythi- 
 ni, immediatelv borderinfr on the Chalybes to the north ; which region some 
 identify with the Sakasene of Strabo (xi, 511) occupied, according to that 
 ceoera'pher, by invaders from Eastern Scythia. 
 
 It seems that Sinope was one of the most considerable pl^^es for »»• 
 export of the iron used in Greece : the Sinopic as well as the Chalybdic (off 
 Chalybic) iron had a special reputation (Stephan. Byz. v, AaK,<^aif.uv). 
 About the Chalybes, compare Ukert, Skythien, pp. 521-523. 
 • Herodot. i, 15-16. 
 
 » Strabo, xi, p. 511 ; xii, p. 552 ; xiii, p. 627. ' /ir o q .J 
 
 The poet Kallinus mentioned both Cimmerians and Treres (J?r. 2, 3. M 
 Bergk Strabo, xiv, pp. 633-647). 
 
 t' 
 
 
 w 
 
 r 
 
 i 
 
t 
 
 S54 
 
 HISTORY OF ^REECt 
 
 EXPULSION OF NOMADS FROM ASIA MINOR. 
 
 25d 
 
 r m 
 
 I' 
 
 king K} axares, called away from the siege of Xineveli to oppose 
 them, was totally defeated ; and the Scythians became i'uU mas- 
 ters of the country. "^Chey spread themselves over the whole of 
 Upper Asia, as far as Palestine and the borders of Egypt, where 
 Psammetichus the Egyptian king met them, and only redeemed 
 his kingdom from invasion by prayers and costly presents. In 
 their return, a detachment of them sacked the temple of Aphrodite 
 at Askalon ; an act of sacrilege which the goddess avenged both 
 upon the plunderers and their descendants, to the third and fourth 
 generation. Twenty-eight years did their dominion hi Upper Asia 
 continue,! with intolerable cruelty and oppression ; until, at length, 
 Kyaxares and the Medes found means to entrap the chiefs into a 
 banquet, and slew them in the hour of intoxication. The Scyth- 
 ian host once expelled, the Medes resumed their empire. He- 
 rodotus tells us that these Scythians returned to the Tauric Cher- 
 sonese, where they found that, during their long absence, their 
 wives had intermarried with the slaves, while the new offspring 
 which had grown up refused to readmit them. A deep trench 
 had been drawn across a line - over which their march lay, and 
 the new-grown youth defended it with bravery, until at length, — 
 BO the story runs, — the returning masters took up their whips 
 instead of arms, and scourged the rebellious slaves into sulj- 
 mission. 
 
 Little as we know about the particulars of these Cimmerian 
 and Scythian inroads, ihey deserve notice as the first — at least 
 the first historically known — among the numerous inva^ons of 
 cultivated Asia and Europe by the iioniades of Tartary. Huns, 
 Avars, Bulgarians, Magyars, Turks, Mongols-, Tartars, etc., aie 
 
 * Herodot. i, 105. The aocount given by Herodotus of the punislni;ent 
 iDflicted by the oftcnded Aphrorlite on the Scythian j>lunderers, and on t!ieir 
 children's children down to liis time, becomes es})ecially interesting when we 
 oombine it with the statement of Hippokrutes respecting the peculiar inca- 
 pacities which were so apt to alfect the Scythians, and the religious interpre- 
 tation pat upon them by the sufferers (De Acre, Locis, et Aquis, c. vi, s. 
 106-109). 
 
 * See, in reference to the direction of this ditch, Volcker, in the work 
 above referred to on the Scjthia of Herodotus (Mvthische Geographie, ch. 
 ▼ii, p. 177). 
 
 That the tlitch existed, there can be no reasonable doubt ; tI\ongh the tale 
 liven by Herodotus is highl)' improbable. 
 
 j&und in subsequent centuries repeating the same infliction, and 
 establishing a dominion both more durable, and not less destruc- 
 tive, than the transient scourge of tne Scythians during the 
 reign of Kyaxares. 
 
 After the expulsion of the Scythians from Asia, the full ex- 
 tent and power of the Median empire was reestablished ; and 
 Kyaxares was enabled again to besiege Nineveh. He took that 
 great city, and reduced under his dominion all the Assyrians ex- 
 cept those who formed the kingdom of Babylon. This conquest 
 was acliieved towards the close of his reign, and he bequeathed 
 tiie Median empire, at the maximum of its grandeur, to hia son 
 Astyages, in 595 b. c.i 
 
 As the dominion of the Scythians in Upper Asia lasted twenty 
 eit^ht years before they were expelled by Kyaxares, so aiso the 
 inroads of the Cimmerians through Asia Minor, which had be- 
 gun during the reign of the Lydian king Ardys, continued 
 through the twelve years of the reign of his son Sadyattes (620- 
 C17 B. c), and were finally terminated by Alyattes, son of the 
 latter.2 Notwithstanding the Cimmerians, however, Sadyattes 
 was in a condition to prosecute a war against the Grecian city of 
 Miletus, which continued during the last seven years of his reign, 
 and which he bequeathed to his son and successor. Alyattea 
 continued the war for five years longer. So feeble was the sen- 
 timent of union among the various Grecian towns on the Asiatic 
 coast, that none of them would lend any aid to Miletus except 
 the Chians, who were under special obligations to Miletus for 
 previDus aid in a contest against Erythrae : and the Milesians un- 
 assisted were no match for the Lydian army in the field, though 
 their great naval strength placed them out of all danger of a 
 blockade; and we must presume that tne erection of those 
 mounds of earth against the walls, whereby the Persian Harpar 
 gus vanquished the Ionian cities half a century aft,erwards, waa 
 
 ^ Herodot. i, 106. Mr. Clinton fixes the date of the capture of Nineveh at 
 606 B. c. (F. H. vol. i, p. 269), upon grounds which do not appear to dm 
 conclusive : the utmost which can be made out is, that it was taken donag 
 the last ten years of the reign of Kyaxares. 
 
 • From whom Polyaenus borrowed his statement, that Alyattte emplojei 
 with effect savage dogs against the Cimmerians, I do not know (Polyaa 
 Tii, 2,1). 
 
 < 
 
 A I 
 
 I 
 
256 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CRCESUS, SON OF ALYATTES. 
 
 257 
 
 then unknown to the Lydians. For twelve successive y<?ar8 the 
 Milesian territory was annually overrun and ravaged, previous to 
 the gathering in of the crop. The inhabitants, after having been 
 defeated in two ruinous battles, gave up all hope of resisting the 
 devasiatiun, so that the task of the invaders became easy, and 
 the Lydian army pursued their destructive march to the sound 
 of flutes and harps. They ruined the crops and the fruit-treea, 
 but Alyattes would not allow the fkrm- buildings or country-houses 
 to be burnt, in order that the means of production might still be 
 preserved, to be again destroyed during the following season. 
 By such unremitting deviistation the Milesians were reduced to 
 distress and famine, in spite of their command of the sea; and 
 the fate which afterwards overtook them during the reign of 
 CiXESus, of becoming tributary subjects to the throne of Sardis, 
 would have begun half a century earlier, had not Alyattes unin- 
 tentionally committed a profanation against the goddess Athene. 
 Her temple at Assessus accidentally took fire, and was consumed, 
 when his soldiers on a windy day were burning the Milesian 
 standing com. Though no one took notice of this incident at the 
 time, yet Alyattes on his return to Sardis was smitten with pro 
 longed sickness. Unabh; to obtain relief; he despatched envoys 
 to seek humble advice from the god at Delphi ; but the Pythian 
 priestess refused to furnish any healing suggestions until he 
 should have rebuilt the Imrnt temple of Athene, — and Perian- 
 der, at that time desi>ot of Corinth, having learned the tenor of 
 this re[>ly, transmitted private information of it to Thrasybulus, 
 despot of Milrtus, with whom he was intimately allied. Presently 
 there arrived at Miletu^^ a herald on the part of Alyattes, pro- 
 posuig a truce for the special purpose of enabling him to rebuild 
 the destroyed temple, — the Lydian monarch believing the Mile- 
 sians to be so ]HX)v\y furnished with subsistence that they would 
 gladly embrace this temporary relief. But the herald on his ar- 
 rival found abundance of corn heaped up in the iiiroviu and the 
 citizens engaged in feasting and enjoyment ; for Thrasybulus had 
 caused all the provision in the town, both public and private, to 
 be brought out, in order that the herald might see the Milesians 
 in a condition of apparent plenty, and carry the news of it to his 
 master. The stratagem succeeded. Alyattes, under the persua- 
 sion that his repeated devastations inflicted upon the Milesians nc 
 
 aensible privations, abandoned his hostile designs, and concluded 
 with them a treaty of amity and alliance. It was his first pro- 
 ceeding to build two temples to Athene, in place of the one which 
 had been destroyed, and he then, forthwith, recovered from hi* 
 protracted malady. His gi'atitude for the cure was testified by 
 the transmission of a large silver bowl, with an iron footstand 
 welded together by the Chian artist Glaukus, — the inventor of 
 the art of thus joining together pieces of iron.i 
 
 Alyattes is said to have carried on other operations against 
 some of the Ionic Greeks : he took Smyrna, but was defeated in 
 an inroad on the territory of Klazomenie.^ But on the whole, 
 his long reign of fifty-seven years was one of tranquillity to the 
 Grecian cities on the coast, though we hear of an expedition which 
 he undertook against Karia.^ He is reported to have been during 
 youth of overweening insolence, but to have acquired afterwards 
 a just and improved character. By an Ionian wife he became 
 father of Croesus, whom, even during his lifetime, he appointed 
 satrap of the town of Adramyttium, and the neighboring plain 
 of Thebe. But he had also other wives and other sons, and one 
 of the latter, Adramytus, is reported as the founder of Adramyt- 
 tium.'' How far his dominion in the interior of Asia Minor ex- 
 tended, we do not know, but very probably his long and compar- 
 atively inactive reign may have favored the accumulation of those 
 treasures which afterwards rendered the wealth of Croesus so 
 proverbial. His monument, an enormous pyramidal mound upon 
 a stone base, erected near Sardis, by the joint efibrts of the 
 whole Sardian population, was the most memorable curiosity in 
 Lydia during the time of Herodotus ; it was inferior only to tht 
 gigantic edifices of Egypt and Babylon.^ 
 
 ' Hcrodot. i, 20-23. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 18. Polysenus (vii, 2, 2) mentions a proceeding of Alyatt^ 
 Against the Kolophonians. 
 
 ' Nikolaus Daraasken. p. 54, ed. Orelli ; Xanthi Fragment, p. 245 
 Creuzer. 
 
 Mr Clinton states Alyattes to have conqtiered Karia, and also .^k>li% 
 for neither of which do I find sufficient authority {F*^sti Hellen. ch. xvii, f> 
 398). 
 
 * Aristoteles ap Stephan. Byz. v, ^kdpafixTTeiov. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 92-93. 
 
 VOL. III. J/OU 
 
 ^A 
 
 \^' 
 
 i 
 
 ^lA 
 
S5B 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CrcDSUs obtaiiiei] the throne, at the death of his father, by ap- 
 pointment from the latter. But there was a party among the 
 Lydians who had favored the pretensions of Lis broth*\r Paifta- 
 leoii ; one of the richest chiefs of which party was put to death 
 afterwards by the new king, under the cruel torture of a spiked 
 carding machine, — his property confiscated.' The aggressive 
 reign oi Croesus, listing fourteen years (559-545 B. c), formed a 
 marked contrast to the long quiescence of his father during a 
 reign of fifty-seven years. 
 
 Pretences being easily found for war against the Asiatic Greeks, 
 Crossus attacked them one after the other. Unfortunately, we 
 know neither the f»articulars of these successive aggressions, nor 
 the previous history of the Ionic cities, so as to be able to explain 
 how it was that the fifth of the Mermnad kings of Sardis met 
 with such unqualified success, in an enterprise which his prede- 
 cessors had attempted in vain. Miletus alone, with the aid of 
 Chios, had resisted Alyattes and Sadyattes for eleven yeai's, — 
 and Crtesus possessed no naval force, any more than his father 
 and grandfather. But on this oc<;asion, not one of the towns can 
 have displayed the like individual energy. In regard to the Mi- 
 lesians, we may perhaps suspect that the period now under con- 
 sideration was comprised in that long duration of intestine con- 
 flict which Herodotus represents (though without defining exactly 
 when) to have crippled the forces of the city for two generations, 
 and which was at length appeased by a memorable decision of 
 Rome arbitrators invited from Paros. These latter, called in by 
 mutual consent of the exhausted antagonist parties at Miletus, 
 found both the city and her territory in a state of general neglect 
 and ruin. But on surveying the lands, they discovered some 
 which still appeared to be tilled with undiminished diligence and 
 skill ; to the proprietors of these lands they consigned the gov- 
 ernment of the tonn, in the belief that they would manage t?he 
 public affairs with us much success as their own.^ Such a state 
 
 * Herodot. i, 92. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 28. Karifirepde de tovteuv^ knl dvo ysviag avdpm vorrjoaaa 
 fd iiakiara araaei. 
 
 Alyattes reigned fifty-seven years, and the vigorous resistance irhich the 
 MMesians offered to him took place in the first six years of his reign. Th« 
 * (two generations of intestine dissension " may well have succeeded after th« 
 
 CRCESUS CONQUERS THE ASIATIC GREEKS. 
 
 of intestine weakness would partly explain the easy subjugation 
 of tie Milesians by Croesus ; while there was little in the habits 
 of the Ionic cities to present the chance of united efforts against 
 a common enemy. These cities, far fn>m keeping up any effec- 
 tive political confederation, were in a state of habitual jealousy of 
 each other, and not unfrequently in actual war.i The common 
 religious festivals, — the Deliac festival as well as the Pan-Ionia, 
 and afterwards the Ephesia in place of the Delia, — seem to 
 have been regularly frequented by fill the cities throughout 
 the worst of times. But these assemblies had no direct political 
 function, nor were they permitted to control that sentiment of 
 separate city-autonomy which was paramount in the Greek mind, 
 — though their influence was extremely precious in calling forth 
 social sympathies. Apart from the periodical festival, meetings 
 lor special emergencies were held at the Pan-Ionic temple ; but 
 from such meetings any city, not directly implicated, kept aloof.2 
 As in this case, so in others not less critical throughout the his- 
 torical period, the incapacity of large political combination was 
 the source of constant danger, and ultimately proved the cause of 
 ruin, to the independence of all the Grecian states. Herodotus 
 warmly commends the advice given by Thales to his Ionic 
 countrymen, — and given, to use his remarkable expression, "be- 
 fore the ruin of Ionia," 3 — that a common senate, invested with 
 authority over all the twelve cities, should be formed within the 
 walls of Teos, as the most central in position ; and that all the 
 other cities should account themselves mere demes of this aggre- 
 
 reijin of Thrasybulus. This, indeed, is a mere conjecture, yet it may be ob- 
 served that Herodotus, speaking of the time of the Ionic revolt (500 B. c), 
 and intimating that Miletu.-^, though then peaceable, had been for two gener- 
 ations at an earlier period torn by intestine dissension, could hardly have 
 meant these "two generations " to apply to a time earlier than 617 B. c. 
 
 > Herodot. i, 17; v, 99; Athenae. vi, p. 267. Compare K. F. Hermann, 
 Lehrbuch der Griech. Staats Alterthiimer. sect. 77, note 28. 
 
 * See the remarkable case of Miletus sending no deputies to a Pan-Ionif 
 meeting, being safe herself from danger (Herodot. i, 141). 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 141-170. XPV<JT^ <5^ i^oX irplv ij dia^^apfivai 'luvirjv^Qaktu 
 dvdpdg y[i2,T]aLov yvojfirj iyevero, etc. 
 
 About the Pan-Ionia and the Ephesia, see Thucyd. iii, 104 ; Dionys. Halit 
 b, 25; Herodot. i, 143-148. Compare also Wbjtte, De Rebua Cliorum 
 Publicis, sect, vii, pp. 22-26. 
 
 if! 
 
 r 
 
 ■I 
 
260 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 gate commonwealth, or polis. Nor can we doubt that such vai 
 the unavailing a.-«])i ration of many a patriot of Miletus or Ej)hesus, 
 even before the tinal operations of Croesus were opened a<^ainst 
 Ihem. 
 
 That prince attacked the Greek cities successively, finding or 
 making diflerent pretences for hostility against each. He began 
 with Ephesus, which is said to have been then governed by a 
 de>pot of harsh and oi»])ressive character, named Pindarus, whose 
 father Melas had married a daughter of Alyattes, and who was, 
 therefore, himself nephew of Cro'susJ The latter, having in 
 vain invited Pindarus and the Ephesians to surrender the town, 
 brought up his forces and attacked the walls : one of the towers 
 being overthrown, tlie Ephesians abandoned all liope of defend- 
 ing their town, and sought safety by placing it under tlie guard- 
 ianship of Artemis, to whose temple they carried a rope from the 
 walls, — a distance not less than seven furlongs. They at the 
 same time sent a message of sup{)liratioM to Cnjcsus, who is said 
 to have granted them the preservation of tlieir liberties, out of 
 reverence to the protection of Artemis ; exacting at the same 
 time that Pindarus .^hould quit the place. Such is the tale of 
 which we find a confused mention in iElian and Polva-nus ; but 
 Herodotus, while he notices the fact of the long rope whereby 
 the Ephesians sought to i)lace themselves in contact with their 
 divine protectress, does not indicate that Cn^sus was induced to 
 treat them more favorably. Ephesus, like all the other Grecian 
 towns on the coast, was brought under subjection and tribute to 
 him.2 How he dealt with them, and what degree of coercive 
 
 ' If we may believe tl e narrative of Nikolaus Damaskomis. Cravsus had 
 been in relations with Ephesus an<l with the Eplicsians durins; the time wlien 
 he was hereditary prince, and in the lifetime of Alyattrs. lie had borrowed 
 a large sum of money from a rich Kj»hesian nam* fl Paniphaes. which waa 
 essentia] to enable him f«t fHiforni :i military dutv imposed upon liim by his 
 lather. The story i-; -i > n it -onie detail by JSikolaus, Fragm. p. 54, ed. 
 Orell., — I knoM- not U|H)n wiiat autliority. 
 
 * H^rodot. i. 26; Lilian. V. H. iii. 26; i*olya'n. vi, 50. The story con- 
 tftined in ^.lian and Po!y«nus seems to lome from Baton of Sinupe; see 
 Guhl, Ephesiaca. ii, 3, p 26, and iv, 5, p 150. 
 
 The article in Suidas. v, ' \fn(7Taf)X(^, is far too vague to be interwoven at 
 • potiitive fact into E{>hesian history, as Guhl ic 'Tweaves ii, immediAtaly 
 •onseqoent on the retirement of Tindarus 
 
 iONIC GREEKS. 
 
 261 
 
 precautioi> he employed either to insure subjection or collect 
 tribote, the brevity of the historian does not acquaint U9. But 
 they were required partially at least, if not entirely, to raze their 
 fortifications ; for on occasion of the danger which supervened a 
 few years afterwards from Cyrus, they are found practically un- 
 
 fortified.^ 
 
 Thus completely successful in his aggressions on the continen- 
 tal Asiatic Greeks, Croesus conceived the idea of assembling a 
 fleet, for the purpose of attacking the islanders of Chios and Sa- 
 mos, but was convinced, — as some said, by the sarcastic remark 
 of one of the seven Greek sages. Bias or Pittakus —of the im- 
 practicability of the project. He carried his arms, however, with 
 full success, over other parts of the continent of Asia Minor, un- 
 til he had subdued the whole territory within the river Ilalys, 
 excepting only the Kilikians and the Lykians. The Lydian 
 rmpire thus reached the ma.ximum of its i>ower, comprehending, 
 besides the ^olic, Ionic, and Doric Greeks on the coast of Asia 
 Minor, the Phrygians, Mysians, Mariandynians, Chalybes, Papb- 
 lagoiiians, Thynian and Bithynian Thracians, Karians, and 
 Pamphylians. And the treasures amassed by Croesus at Sardis, 
 derived partly from this great number of tributaries, partly from 
 mines in various places as well as the auriferous sands of the 
 Paktolus, exceeded anything which the Greeks had ever before 
 
 known. 
 
 We learn, from the brief but valuable observations of Herod- 
 otus, to appreciate the great importance of these conquests of 
 Croesus, with reference not merely to the Grecian cities actuallj 
 subjected, but also indirectly to the whole Grecian world. 
 
 " Before the reign of Croesus, observes the historian, all the 
 Greeks were free ; it was by him first that Greeks were subdued 
 into tribute." And he treats this event as the initial phenom- 
 enon of the series, out of which grew the hostile relationa 
 
 In reference to the rope reaching from the city to the artemision, we may 
 quote an analogous case of the Kylonian suppliants at Athens, who sought 
 to maintain their contact with the altar by means of a continuous cord, — 
 ■nfortunately, the cord broke (Plutarch, Solon, c. 12). 
 
 * Herodot. i, 141 'luieg lie, utr j^Kovnav — Tf/;feri re TTtpiESaTJ^vro iKOO 
 foi etc : compare also the statement respecting Phokaea, c. 168. 
 
 'ii 
 
 t 11 
 
 ■( 
 
 
 \ 
 
I* 
 
 2C3 
 
 HJSTOBy OF GREECE. 
 
 between the Greeks on one side, and Asia as represented by (1m 
 Persians on the other, which wer^ uppermost in the miud. of 
 himseli and his contemporaries. 
 
 It was in the ciise of Croesus that the Greeks were first called 
 upon to deal with a tolerablj large barbaric aggregate under a 
 warlike and enterprising prince, and the result was such as to 
 manifest the inherent weakness of their political system, from its 
 incapacity of large combination. The separated autonomous 
 Cities could only maintain their independence either throu-h sim- 
 ilar disunion on the part of barbaric adversaries, or by superior- 
 ity on their own side of military organization as well as of 
 geographical pasition. The situation of Greece proper and of 
 the islands was favorable to the maintenance of such a system 
 
 ~ "^,' '"? ^^^ '^'''''' ''^' ^''^ ^^^^ ^ ^»^« "'^^ri^'- ^Oixntry behind! 
 Ihe Ionic Greeks were at this time different from what they be- 
 came during the ensuing century, little inferior in ener-y to 
 Athens or to the general body of European Greeks, and couU 
 doubtless have maint^uned their independence, had they cordially 
 cambmed. But it will be seen hereafter that the Gre-ek colonies 
 -planted as isolated settlements, and indisposed to political 
 un.on, even when neighbors, - all of them fell into der>endence 
 so soon as attack from the interior came to be powerfully or- 
 ganized ; especially if that organization w.»s conducted by leaders 
 partially improved through contact with the Greeks themselves, 
 bmall autonomous cities maintain themselves so Ion- as they 
 have only enemies of the hke strength to deal with: but to resist 
 larger aggregates requires such a concurrence of favorable cir- 
 cumstances as can hardly remain long without interruption. And 
 the ultimate subjection of entire Greece, under the kin-s of Mac 
 edon, was only an exemplification on the widest scale of this 
 same principle. 
 
 The Lydian monarchy under Croesus, the largest with which the 
 trreeks had come into contact down to that moment, was very 
 soon absorbed into a still larger,-, he Persia..; of which the 
 Ionic Greeks, after luiavailing -esLstance, became the subjects. 
 rhe partial sympathy and aid which thev obtained from the in- 
 dependent or Europe=u, Greeks, their western neighbors, tbl 
 lowed by the fruitl..ss attempt on the part of the Persian king to 
 •od the.... latter to his empire, gave an entirely new turn to (Ire- 
 
 ALTERATION OF THE HELI.EXIC WORLD. 
 
 S6a 
 
 I 
 
 dan history and proceedings. First, it necessitated a degree of 
 oent-al action against the Persians which was foreign to Greek 
 political instinct ; next it opened to the noblest and most enter- 
 prising section of the Hellenic name, — the Athenians, — an 
 opportunity of placing themselves at the head of this centraliz- 
 ing tendency : while a concurrence of circumstances, foreign and 
 domestic, imparted to them at the same time that extraordinary 
 mkI many-sided impulse, combining action with organization, 
 which gave such brilliancy to the period of Herodotus and Thu- 
 tydides. It is thus that most of the splendid phenomena of 
 Grecian history grew, directly or indii-ectly, out of the reluctant 
 dependence in which the Asiatic Greeks were held by the inland 
 barbaric powers, beginning with Croesus. 
 
 These few observations will suffice to intimate that a new 
 phase of Grecian history is now on the point of opening. Down 
 to the time of Croesus, almost everything which ic done or suffered 
 by the Grecian cities bears only upon one or other of them 
 separately : the instinct of the Greeks repudiates even the mod- 
 ified forms of political centralization, and there are no circum- 
 stances in operation to force it upon them. Relation of power 
 and subjection exist, between a strong and a weak state, but 
 no tendency to standing political coordination. From this time 
 forward, we shall see partial causes at work, tending in this di- 
 rection, and not without considerable influence ; though alwayg 
 at war with the indestructible instinct of the nation, and fre- 
 quently counteracted by selfishness and misconduct on the ^^ 
 of tlie leading dtiea. 
 
 
 H 
 
 > ^ 
 
 ^j 
 
 I 
 
'H 
 
 864 
 
 mSTORY OF GBEECI. 
 
 PHEXICIANS. 
 
 265 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 PHENICIANS. 
 
 Op the Phenicians, Assyrians, and Egyptians, st is necessary 
 for me to speak so far as they acted u[)on the condition, or occu- 
 pied the thoughts, of the early Greeks, without undertaking to 
 investigate thoroughly their previous history. Like the Lydi- 
 ans, all three became absorbed into the vast mass of the Persian 
 empire, retaining, however, to a gre;it degree, their social char- 
 acter and pecuharities after having been robbed of their political 
 independence. 
 
 The Persians and IMedcs, — portions of the Arian race, and 
 members of what has ]}vvn classified, in respect of language, as 
 the great Indo-Europtan family, — occupied a part of the vast 
 8|)ace comprehended between the Indus on the east, and the line 
 of Mount Zagros (running eastward of the Tigris and nearly 
 parallel with that river) on the west. The Phenicians as well as 
 the Assyrians belonged to the Semitic, Aramiean, or Syro- Arabian 
 family; com[)rising, besides, the Syrians, Jc\v>. Arabians, and in 
 part the Abyssinians. To what established family of the human 
 race the swartliv and curlv-haired Eirvntians are to be assitrned, 
 has been much disftiite I : we caimot reckon tliem as members of 
 either of the two precrding, and the most careftd inquiries 
 render it probable that their physical type was something purely 
 African, approximating in many i>oints to that of the negro.^ 
 
 ' See the discussion in Dr. Pri.hanl. Nutunil History of Man, secU xvii, 
 p. 152. 
 
 U€?.ayxpoFC Kai ovhWfyix^i ( Herodot. ii. 104 : coni[.:ire Ammian. Marcell. 
 xxii, 16, "subfusculi. atrati." etc.) are certain attributes of the ancient 
 Egryptian-s, (iependin«j upon the evidence of an eye-witness. 
 
 '* In their complexion, ard in many of their physical peculiarities (observes 
 Di- Prichard, p. 138), the ICgyptians were an African race. In the eastern, 
 and e\ en in the central par w of Africa, we shall trace the existence of variooa 
 tribes in physical characters nearly resemblinir the Ejryptians ; and it would 
 «ot be difficult to observe a mong many nations of that continent a gradual 
 
 It has already been remarked that the Phenician merchant and 
 trading vessel figures in the Homeric poems as a well-known 
 visitor, and that the variegated robes and golden ornaments fabri- 
 cated at Sidon are prized among the valuable ornaments belong- 
 ing to the chiefs." We have reason to conclude generally, that 
 in these early times, the Phenicians traversed the ^gean sea 
 habitually, and even formed settlements for trading and mining 
 purposes upon some of its islands: on Thasos, especially, near the 
 coast of Thrace, traces of their abandoned gold-mines were vis- 
 ible even in the days of Herodotus, indicating both persevering 
 labor and considerable length of occupation. But at the time 
 when the historical era opens, they seem to have been in 
 course of gradual retirement fix)m these regions,^ and their com- 
 merce had taken a dit^erent direction. Of this change we can 
 
 deviation from the physical type of the Egyptian to the strongly-marked 
 character of the negro, and that without any very decided break or interrup- 
 tion. The Egyptian language, also, in the great leading principles of iu 
 grammatical construction, bears much greater analogy to the idioms of Africa 
 than to those prevalent among the people of other regions." 
 » Homer, Iliad, vi, 290 : xxiii, 740 ; Odyss. xv, 1 16 : — 
 TfTrAru -xafinoiKiloi, Ipya yvvaiKuv 
 
 Tyre is not named either in the Iliad or Odyssey, though a passage in 
 Probus (ad Virg. Georg. ii, 115) seems to show that it was mentioned in 
 one of the epics which passed under the name of Homer : " Tyrum Sarram 
 appellatam esse. Homerus docet : quern etiam Ennius sequitur cum dicit 
 Pcenos Sana oriundos." 
 
 The Hesiodic catalogue sceais to have noticed both Byblus and Sidon : 
 see Hesiodi Fragment, xxx, ed. Marktschcffel, and Etymolog. Magnum, 
 
 V, Bi7?/lof. 
 
 » The name Adramyttion or Atramyttion —very like the Africo-Phenician 
 name Admmttum — is said to be of Phenician origin (Olshausen, De 
 Origine Alphabet!, p. 7, in Kieler Philologische Studien, 1841). There 
 were valuable mines afterwards worked for the account of Croesus near 
 Pergamus. an.l these mines may have tempted Phenician settlers to thosa 
 regions (Aristotel. Mirab. Auscult. c. 52). 
 
 The African Inscriptions, in the Monumenta Phoenic. of Gescniu?, recog- 
 nize Makar as a cognomen of Baal : and Movers imagines that the hero 
 Makar, who figures conspicuously in the mythology of Lesbos, Chios, 
 Samos, Koe, Rhodes, etc, is traceable to this Phenician god and Pheniciai 
 eariy settlements in those islands (Movers, Die Religion der PhQiiikar 
 p. 420) 
 
 VOL. m. 12 
 
 ^11 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
i .^ 
 
 2ee 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SITUATION OF THK PHEXICIAN TOWNS. 
 
 2C7 
 
 fiimish no particulars ; but we maj easily understand tliat the in 
 
 crease of the Grecian marine, both warlike and commercial, 
 
 would render it inconvenient for the Phenicians to encounter 
 
 ?uch enterprising rivals, — ])irac7 («^ private war at sea) being 
 
 then an habitual proceeding, especially with regard to foreigners. 
 
 The Phenician towns occupied a narrow t^trip of the coast of 
 
 Syria and Palestine, about one hundred and twenty miles in 
 
 length, never more, and generally much less, than twenty miles 
 
 in breadth, — between Mount Libanus and the sea. Aradus — on 
 
 an islet, with Antaradus and Marathus over against it on the 
 
 main land — was the northernmost, and Tyre the southernmost 
 
 (also upon a little island, with Pala'-Tyrus and a fertile adjacent 
 
 plain over against it). Between the two were situated Sidon, 
 
 Berytus, Tripolis, and Byblus, besides some smaller towns^ at- 
 
 ' Strabo, xiv, pp. 754-758 ; Skylax, Peripl. c 104 ; Justiu, xviii, 3 ; Arrian, 
 Exp. Al. ii, 16-19 ; Xenophon, Anah. i, 4, 6. 
 
 Unfortunately, the text of Skylax is here extremely defective, and Straho'a 
 •ccoaiit is in miuiy points perplexed, from his not having travelled in person 
 throu;,'h Phenicia, Coelo-Syria, or Judaea : see Groskurd's note on p. 755 
 tnd the Einleitung to his Translation of Stralx), sect. 6 
 
 Respecting the original relation between Palae-Tyrus and Tyre, there is 
 Bome difficulty in reconciling all the information, little as it is, which W9 
 po.s9css. The name Palae-Tynis (it has been assumed as a matter of course.' 
 compare Justin, xi, 10) marks that town as the original foundation from 
 which the Tyrians subsequently moved into the island : there was, aiso, on 
 the main land a place named Palaj-Byblos (Plin. H. N. v, 20 ; Ptolem. v, 15) 
 which was in like manner construed as the original seat from whence the 
 town properly called Byblus was derived. Yet the account of Herodotus* 
 plainly represents the insular Tyrus, with its temple of Herakles, as the 
 ori^'inal foundation (ii, 44), and the Tyrians are described as living in an 
 Ldand even in the time of their king Hiram, the contemporary of Solomon 
 (Joseph. Ant Jud. viii, 2, 7). Arrian treats the temple of Herakles in the 
 island-Tyre as the most ancient temple within the memory of man (Exp, AL 
 ii, 16). The Tyrians also lived on their island during the invasion of Salma- 
 neser king of Nineveh, and their position enabled them to hold out against 
 him A-hile Pal«-Tyrus on the terra firma was obliged to yield itself (Joseph. 
 ib. ix, 14, 2). The town taken (or reduced to capitulate), after a lonqr siego, 
 by Nebuchadnezzar, was the insular Tyrus, not the continental or PalsB- 
 Tyrus, which had surrendered without resistance to Salmaneser. It is not 
 correct, therefore, to say — with Volney (Recherches sur I'Hist. Anc. ch. xir, 
 p. 249), Heeren (Idisen fiber den Verkehr der Alten Welt, part i, abth. 2, p. 
 11 ], aud ethers — tb^t the insular Tyre was called new Tjre, and that ^ 
 
 tMciied to one or other of these last mentioned, and several islan«Ja 
 dose to the coast occupied in like manner; while the colony ol 
 Myriandrus lay farther north, near the borders of Kihkia. 
 Whetlier Sidon or Tyre was the most ancient, seems not determi- 
 lial>le : if it be true as some authorities allirmed, that Tyre v/as 
 originally planted from Sidon, the colony must have grown so 
 
 tite of Tyre was changed from continental to insular, in consequence of the 
 taking of the continental Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar: the site remained 
 unaltered, and the insular Tyrians became subject to him and his successors 
 until the destruction of the Chaldasan monarchy by Cyrus. Hengstonberg's 
 Dissertation, De Rebus Tyriorum (Berlin, 1832), is instructive on many of 
 these points: he shows sutlicicntly that Tyre was, from the earliest times 
 traceable, an insular city ; but he wishes at the same time to show, that it 
 Was also, from the beginning, joined on to the main land by an isthmus (pp. 
 10-25), which is both inconsistent with the former position and unsup- 
 ported by any solid proofs. It remained an island strictly so called, until 
 the siege by Alexander : the mole, by which that conqueror had stormed it, 
 continued after his day, perhaps enlarged, so as to form a permanent von- 
 nection from that time forward between the island and the main land (Plin. 
 H. N. V, 19 ; Strabo, xvi, p. 757), and to render the insular Tyrus capable of 
 being included by Pliny in one computation of circumference jointly with 
 Palae-Tyrus, the mainland town. 
 
 It may be doubled whether we know the true meaning of the word which 
 the Greeks called lla/.ai-Tvpoc. It is plain that the Tyrians themselves did 
 not call it by that name : perhaps the Phenician name which this continental 
 adjacent town bore, may have been something resembling Pala;-Tyrus in 
 sound, but not coincident in meaning. 
 
 The strength of Tyre lay in its insular situation ; for the adjacent main- 
 land, whereon Pahe-Tyrus'was placed, was a fertile plain, thus described by 
 William of Tyre during the time of the Crusaders : — 
 
 "Erat praedicta civitas non solum munitissima, sed etiam fertilitate pr«- 
 cipua et amoenitate quasi singularis : nam licet in medio mari sita est. et in 
 moduni insula tola Huctibus cincta; habet tamen pro foribus latifundiura 
 per omnia commendabile, et planitiem sibi continuam <livitis glebae et oi)irai 
 Boli, mulias civibus ministrans commoditates. Qura licet modica videatuf 
 respectu aliarum regionum, exiguitatem suam multa redimit ubertatc, et 
 infinita jugera multiplici foeeunditate compensat. Nee tamen tantis arctatur 
 angustiis. Protenditur enim in Austrum versus Ptolemaidcm us([ue ad cum 
 locum, qui hodie vulgo dicitur districtum Seandarionis, milliaribus quatuor 
 aut quinque: e regione in Septentrionem versus Sareptara et Sidoncm 
 itemm porrigitur totidem milliaribus. In latitudinem vero ubi minirrum ad 
 duo, ubi plurimum ad tria, habens milliaria." (Apud Hengstenberg, m uip. 
 p. 5.) Compare Maandrell, Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem, p. 50. cd. 
 1749 i And Volney, Travels in Egypt and Syria, voL u, pp. 210-22R. 
 
 ' i 
 
 I- 
 - • 
 
 v,li 
 
 'fi 
 
 I 
 
 'i 
 
268 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFXk. 
 
 rapidly as to surpass its metropolis in power and consideratiou, 
 for it became the chief of all the Phenician townsJ Aradus, the 
 next in importjince after these two, was founded by exiles from 
 Sidon, and all (he rest either by Tyrian or Sidonian settlers. 
 Within this confined territory was concentrated a greater degree 
 of coramercial wealth and enterprise, and manufacturing ingenuity, 
 than could be found in any other portion of the contemporary world 
 Each town was an independent community, liavinir its own sur- 
 rounding territory and politiral cun>tiiuliunand its own hereditary 
 prince,-^ though tlie annal> of Tym display many instances of 
 princes assassinated by nvn who succeeded them on the throne. 
 Tyre appears to have enjoyed a certain presiding, perhaps a con' 
 trolling authority, over all of them, which was not always will- 
 ingly submitted to; and examples occur in which the inferior 
 towns, when Tyre was i)ressed by a foreign enemy,' took the op 
 portunity of revolting, or at least stood aloof. The same ditliculty 
 of managing satisfactorily the relations between a j)residing town 
 and its confederates, which Grecian history manifests, is found 
 al-o to prevail in Phenicia, and will be hereafter remarked in 
 regard to Carthage ; while the same effects are also perceived, 
 of the autonomous city polity, in keeping alive the individual en- 
 ergies and reguhited aspirations of the inhabitants. The i)re. 
 dominant sentinn nt of jealous town-isolation is forcibly illustrated 
 l»y tiie circumst.inces of Tripolis, established ^jointly by Tyre, 
 Sidon, and Aradus. It consisted of three distinct towns, each 
 one furlong apart from tlie other two, and each with its own sep- 
 arate walls; though probably constituting to a certain extent one 
 politicid community, and >erving as a place of common meeting 
 an<l deliberation for the entire Phenician name.'* The outlying 
 
 'Justin (xviii, :j ^tatos tliat Si.lon \va> tin' metropolis of Tyre, but the 
 series of events w}ii< d he nMouiits is eonfused and unintelligible. Strabo 
 rIso. in one plaee, c ills Sidon the //;?- »nro/./f tCw ^oivikuv (i, p. 40); in 
 another place he states it as a point disputed between the two cities, which 
 of them was the urjTooTo'Ai^ tuv 'Poivikcjv (xvi, p. 756). 
 
 Quintus Curtius atfirms both Tyre and Sidon to have been founded b/ 
 A^enor (iv. 4, 15) 
 
 ' See the interestint: citations of Josephus from Dius and Menander, who 
 had access to the Tyrian uvaypa<;>zi, or chronicles (Josephus cont. Afion. i 
 e. 17, 18. 21; Antiq. J. x. 11, !. 
 
 ' Joseph. Anticj. J. ix, 14, 2 * Diodar. xvi, 4. ; Sky lax, c. . 04. 
 
 TYRIAN HERAKLES. 
 
 269 
 
 promontories of Libanus and Anti-Libanus touched the sea along 
 tlie Phenician coast, and those mountainous ranges, while thej 
 rendered a large portion of the very confined area unfit for cul- 
 tivation of corn, furnished what was perhaps yet more indispen 
 gal^le, — abundant supplies of timber for ship-building; the 
 entire want of all wood in Babylonia, except the date-palm, 
 restricted the Assyrians of that territory from maritime tratiicon 
 tiie Persian gulf. It appears, however, that the mountains of 
 Lebanon also atforded shelter to tribes of predatory Arabs, who 
 continually infested both the Phenician territory and the rich 
 neighboring plain of Coelo-Syria.i 
 
 The splendid temple of that great Phenician god (Melkarth) 
 w horn the Greeks called Herakles,'- was situated in Tyre, and the 
 Tyrians atlirmed that its establishment had been coeval with the first 
 foundation of the city, two thousand three hundred years before the 
 time of Herodotus. This god is the companion and protector of 
 tiieir colonial settlements, and the ancestor of the Phoenico-Lib- 
 van kin«^- : w^e find him especially at Carthage, Gades, and Tha- 
 SOS. ^ Some supposed that they had migrated to their site on the 
 Mediterranean coast, from previous abodes near the mouth of the 
 Euphrates, i or on i^lands (named Tylus and Aradus) of the 
 
 * Str'''0. xvi, J). 756. 
 
 - A ivlaltcse inscription identities the Tyrian Melkarth with 'Hpa«A;/v 
 ((;e>enius. Monument. Phoenic. tab. vi). 
 
 ^ Ilerodot. ii, 44; Sallust, Bell. Ju^^ c. 18; Pausan. x, 12, 2 ; Arrian, Exp. 
 Al. ii, 16; Justin, xliv, 5 : Appian, vi, 2. 
 
 < ilerodot. i, 2 ; Ephorus, Frajj:m. 40, ed. Marx ; Strabo, xvi, pp. 766-784 ; 
 Justin, xviii, 3: In the animated discussion carried on among the Homeric 
 critics and the great geographers of antiquity, to ascertain where it waa 
 that Menelaus actually went during' his eight years' wandering (Odysa 
 
 iv. 85) — 
 
 ri -jUp TTo7.Aa tu^uv kol noAAl' kna'kTj'&ElQ 
 
 ^HyayofiTjv iv vrjvat, kol oydouru Irei ^AiJov, 
 
 Ki'Tpov, ^oLVLKTjV Tf, KOL KlyvnTLOV^ iiraXij^elg^ 
 
 AlT^ioTrac "»•' lkoiii^v, Kal ^idoviovg^ Koi 'Epefi^ovSt 
 
 Kal Aij3vTjv, etc. 
 
 one idea started was, that he had visited these Sidonians in the Persian gulf, 
 
 »r in the Erythrsean sea (Strabo, i. p. 42). The various opinions which 
 
 Btrabo quotes, including those of Eratosthenes and Kratcs, tm well as hij 
 
 own comments, are very curious. Krat6s supposed that Menelaus had 
 
 Dassed the straits of Gibraltar and circumnavigated Libya to ^Ethiopia and 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 V. 
 
 LI 
 
270 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFXE. 
 
 Persian gulf, while others treated the Mediterranean Pheniciani 
 as original, and the others as colonists. Whether such be tha 
 fact or not, history knows them in no other portion of Asia earlier 
 than in l*henicia proper. 
 
 Tliougii the invincible industry and enterprise of the Pheni- 
 uiuns maintained them as a people of importance down to the 
 period of the Homan empire, yet the period of their widest 
 range and greatest efficiency is to be >ought much earlier, —an- 
 terior to 700 B. 0. In these remote times they and their colonists 
 were the exclusive navigators of the Mediterranean : the rise of 
 the Greek maritime settlements banished their commerce to a 
 great degree from the JSgean sea, and embarrassed it even in 
 the more westerly waters. Their colonial establishments were 
 formed in Africa. Sicily, Sardinia, the Balearic Isles, and Spain: 
 the greatness a^ v ell as the antiijuity of Carthage, Utica,and Gades, 
 attest the long-sighted plans of Phenieian traders, even in days 
 anterior to the Ut Olympiad. We trace the w^ealth and industry 
 
 lIl.^i;^ which voya^'i would ^uHice, he thought, to fill up the eight years 
 Others supposed that Menelaus had sailed first up the Nile, and then into 
 the Red sea, by means of the canal ((f/cj/n.;) which existed in the time of the 
 Alexandrine critics between the Nile and that sea; to which Straho replies 
 that this canal was not made until after the Trojan war. Eratosthenes 
 started a still more remarkable idea : he thought that in the time of Homer 
 the strait of Gibraltiu- had not yet been burst open, so that the Meditemi- 
 ncan was on that side a closed sea ; but, on the other hand, its level was 
 then so mnch higrhur that it covered the isthmus of Suez, and joined the 
 Red sea. It was, he thought, the disruption of the strait of Gibraltar which 
 first lowered the level of the water, and left the isthmus of Suez dry ; 
 though Menelaus, in his time, had sailed from the Mediterranean into the 
 Red sea without diflkulty. This opinion Eratosthenes had imbibed from 
 Straton of Lampsakas, the successor of Theophrastus : Hipparchus contro- 
 verted it, together with many other of the opinions of Eratosthenes (see 
 gtrabo, i, pp. 38, 49, 56 ; Seidel, Fragmenta Eratosthenis, p. 39). 
 
 In reference to the view of Krates, — that Menelaus had sailed round 
 Africa, — it is to be it?marked that all the geographers of that day formed to 
 tliemselyes a very imnfficient idea of the extent of that continent, believing 
 that it did not even raach so far southward as the equator. 
 
 Strabo himself adopts neither of these three opinions, but construes the 
 Homeric words describing the wanderings of Menelaus as applying only to 
 lie coasts of Egypt, Libya, Phenicia, etc ; he suggests various reasons, mora 
 eurious than cooTincing, to prove that Menelaus may easily have speo^ 
 tiglit vears m these visits of mixed friendship and piracy. 
 
 UTIC A. - CARTHAGE. - GADES. 
 
 271 
 
 V 
 
 of Tyre, and the distant navigation of her vessels through tltf 
 lied sea and along the coast of Arabia, back to the days of David 
 and Solomon. And as neither Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, nor 
 Indians, addressed themselves to a seafaring life, so it seems thiif 
 both the importation and the distribution of the products of India 
 and Arabia into Western Asia and Europe, was performed by 
 the Idumaean Arabs, between Petra and the Red sea, — by the 
 A-rabs of Gerrhaon the Persian gulf, joined as they were in later 
 iimes by a body of Chakhtan exiles from Babylonia, — and by 
 the more enterprising Phenicians of Tyre and Sidoii in these two 
 seas as well as in the Mediteri-iuiean.* 
 
 The most ancient Phenieian colonies were Utica, nearly on the 
 northernmost point of the coast of Africa, and in the same guH 
 (now known as the gulf of Tunis) as Cartluige, over against 
 cape Lilyboeum in Sicily, — and Gades, or Gadeira, on the 
 south-western coiist of Spain ; a town which, founded perhaps near 
 one thousand years before the Christian era,'-^ has maintained a con- 
 tinuous prosperity, and a name (Cadiz) substantially unaltered, 
 lon'^er than any town in Europe. How well the site of Uticft 
 was suited to the circumstances of Phenieian colonists may bo 
 inferred from the fact that Carthage was afterwards established 
 in the same gulf and near to the same spot, and that both the two 
 cities reached a high pitch of prosperity. The distance of Grades 
 from Tyre seems surprising, and if we calculate by time instead 
 of by space, the Tyrians were separated from their Tartessian 
 colonists by an interval greater than that which now divides an 
 Englislnnan fromBombay ; for the ancient navigator always coasted 
 along the land, and Sky lax reckons seventy-five days^ of voyag9 
 
 ' See Ritter, Erdkunde von Asien, West-Asien, Buch iii, Abtheilung iii, 
 Abschnitt i, s. 29, p. 50. 
 
 * Strabo, speaks of the earliest settlements of the Phenicians in Africa 
 and Iberia as ^AiKpov ruv TpuiKuv varEpov (i, p. 48). Utica is affirmed to 
 have been two hundred and eighty-seven years earlier than Carthage ( Aristot 
 Mirab. Auscult. c. 134) : compare Velleius Paterc. i, 2. 
 
 Archaleus, son of Phoenix, was stated as the founder of Gades m ths 
 !?henieian history of Claudius Julius, now lost (Etymolog. Magn. v, Vadeipa)' 
 Archaleus is a version of the name Hercules, in the opinion of Movers. 
 
 ' Skylax, Periplus, c. 110. " Carteia, ut quidam putant, aUquando Tar 
 lessas ; et quam transvecti ex Africa Pha-nices habitant, atque unde nof 
 ■umus, Tingentera." (Mela, ii, 6, 75.) The expression, transvecti ex AJritm 
 
 SI 
 
 If* 
 
 M 
 
 }'p> 
 
 \ 
 
 Si 
 
 w 
 
 1 
 
V 
 
 <tf 
 
 272 
 
 HISTORV OF GREtTCE. 
 
 UTICA. — CARTHAGE. — G ADES. 
 
 278 
 
 
 from the Kanopic (westernmost) mouth of the Nile to the Pill&n 
 of Herakles (strait of GibruUar) ; to which some more dajs must 
 be added to represent the full distance between Tjre and Gades. 
 But the enterjjrise of these early mariners surmounted all ditfi. 
 culties consistent with the principle of never losing sight of tlie 
 coast. Proceeding along the northern coast of Libya, at a time 
 when the moutlis of the Nile were still closed by Egyptian jeal- 
 ousy against all foreign ships, they appear to have found little 
 temptation to colonize* on the dangerous coast near to the two 
 gulfs called the great and little Syrtis, — in a territory for the 
 most part destitute of water, and occupied by rude Li})\an no- 
 rnad< s who were thinly sj>read over the wide .^paee between tlu' 
 we.-lern Nile- and eape llerma'a, now called eaj^e l»ona. The 
 'lubM'finent Giecian towns of Kyrene and Barca, whose wt'll- 
 <;ho.-«en sit«* formed an excej>tion to the general character of 
 the region, were not planted w itli any view to commerce,^ and 
 the Phenician town of Leptis, near the gulf called the great 
 Syrtis, w;is tuiinded by exiles from Sidon, and not by deliberate 
 *'oIonization. The .site of Utiea and Carthage, in the gulf im- 
 
 appliesas much iw tlit- Plienicians as to the Carthaginians: ^'■iiterque Pamus'' 
 Ilorat. ()d. ii, 11) nuiins the Carthaginians, and the riienicians of Gades. 
 ' hitrabo, xvii. |» 8"{G. 
 
 ^ Cape Soloeis. fonsidored hy Herodotus as the westernmost headland of 
 l.ihya, coincides in name with the Phenician town Soloeis in western Sicilv, 
 also, seemingly, with the I'heniciaii settlement Swl ^Mela, ii, 6, 65) iij 
 southern Iberia t> Tartessus. Cape Ilermaa was the name of the north- 
 eastern headland of the gulf of Tunis, and also the name of a cape in Libya, 
 two days' sail westward of the Pillars of Herakles (Skylax. c. 111). 
 
 IVohably, all ihi remarkable headlands in these seas received their names 
 from the Pheniciars. Both Manncrt (Geogr. d. Gr. und Kom. x, 2, p. 495) 
 and Furbiger (Altc Geogr. sect. Ill, p. 867) identify cape Soloeis with what 
 i- nu\v called (aj»e Cantin ; Hceren considers it to be the same as cape 
 Blanco; Bougainville as cape Boyador. 
 
 •* Sallust. Bcli. J ig. c. 78. It was termed Leptis Magna, to distinguish it 
 fnHL another Leptts, more to the westward and nearer to Carthage, called 
 L»:ptis Parva; but this latter seems to have been generally known by the 
 came Leptis (For.iger, Alte Geogr. sect. 109, p. 844). In Leptis Magna, 
 tlie proportion of I'hcnician colonists was so inconsiderable that the Pheni- 
 cian language had been lost, and that of the natives, whoin Sallust calli 
 Numidians, spoken : but these people had embraced Sidonian institutiorj 
 ftod civilization. (Sail, ib.) 
 
 mediately westward of cape Bona, was convenient for commerce 
 with Sicily, Italy, and Sardinia ; and the other Phenician colonies, 
 Adrumetum, Neapolis, Hippo (two towns so called), the lesser 
 Leptis, etc., were settled on the coast not far distant from the 
 eastern or western promontories which included the gulf of Tunis, 
 common to Carthage and Utica. 
 
 These early Phenician settlements were planted thus in the 
 territory now known as the kingdom of Tunis and the western 
 portion of the French province of Constantine. From thence to 
 the Pillai-s of Herakles (strait of Gibraltar), we do not hear ot 
 any others ; but the colony of Gades, outside of the strait, form- 
 ed the centre of a flourishing and extensive comirerce, which 
 reached on one side iar to the south, not less than thirty days* 
 sail along the western coast of Africa,^ — and on the other side 
 to Britain and the Scilly Islands. There were numerous Pheni- 
 cian factories and small trading-towns along the western coast of 
 what is now the empire of Morocco ; and the island of Kerne, 
 twelve days' sail along the coast from the strait of Gibraltar, 
 formed an established depot for Phenician merchandise in trading 
 with the interior. There were, moreover, towns not far distant 
 from the coast, of Libyans or Ethiopians, to which the inhabitants 
 of the central regions resorted, and where they brought their 
 leopard skins and elephants' teeth, to be exchanged against the 
 unguents of Tyre and the jjottery of Athens.''^ So distant a trade, 
 
 ' Strabo, xvii, pp. 825-826. He found it stated by some autliors that there 
 had once been three hundred trading establishments along this coast, reach- 
 ing thirty days* voyage southward from Tingis or Lixus (Tangier); bat 
 that they had been chiefly ruined by the tribes of the interior, — the Phani- 
 sians and Nigritse. He suspects the statement of being exaggerated, but 
 there seems nothing at all incredible in it. From Strabo's language we 
 gather that Eratosthenes set forth the statement as in his judgment a true 
 
 one. 
 
 * Compare Skylax, c. Ill, and the Periplus of Hanno, ap. Hudson, 
 Geogr. Graee. Min. vol i, pp. 1-6. I have already observed that the rapixof 
 (salt provisions) from Gadeira was currently sold in the markets of Athene 
 from the Peloponnesian war downward. — Eupolis, Fragm. 23; Mopticdf, p 
 506, ed. Meincke, Comic. Graee. 
 
 Uorep' fjv TO Tiipixoq ; ^pvyiov v TadeipiKov ; 
 Compare the citat.ocs from the other comic writers, Antiphanfis and Kiko9 
 
 TOL. ni. 12* I-^»'- 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 \\ 
 
 
274 
 
 HISTORY 01- GREECE 
 
 i'iii:nicians supplanted by GKEKKS. 
 
 27* 
 
 with the limited navigation of that daj, could not be made to em- 
 brace very bulky gocxis. 
 
 But this trade, though seemingly a valuable one, constituted 
 only a small part of the sources of wealth open to the Pheni, 
 cians of Gades. The Turditanians and Turduli, who occupied 
 the south-western portion of Spain, between the Anas river 
 (Guadiana) and the Mediterranean, seem to have been the most 
 -iiilized and improvable section of the lUirian tribes, well suited 
 to commercial relations with the settlers who occupied the isle o* 
 Leon, and who established the temple, afterwards so rich and fre- 
 quented, of the Tyrijin Herakles. And the extreme [jroductive- 
 ness of the southern region of Si>ain, in corn, fish, cattle, and wine, 
 :is well as in silver tuid iron, is a topic upon which we find but 
 one language ainon;» ancient writers. The territory round Ga- 
 des, Carteia, and the other Fhenician settlements in this district, 
 was known to the Greeks in the sixth century b. c. by the name 
 of Tartessus and re^rded by them somewhat in the same liglit 
 as Mexico and Peni appeared to the Spaniards of tlie sixteenth 
 century. For three or four centuries the Phenicians had pos- 
 sessed the entire moc»o|)oly of this TartAssian trade, without any 
 rivalry on tlie [nirl of the Greeks ; probably, the metals there pro- 
 (••ir(Mi were in thi>se days their mo.<t [>nvious acquisition, and the 
 tribes who occupied the mining regions oi' the interior found a 
 new market and valu:able demand, for produce then obtained with 
 a degree of facility exaggerated into table.' It was from Gade- 
 as a centre that these enterprising traders, piisiiing their coasting 
 voyage yet farther, established relations with the tin-mines of 
 Cornwall, perhaps al?o with amber-«(atherers from the coasts of 
 the Baltic. It re4uir( s >ome ti^'art to carry back our imagiruitions 
 to the time when, along all this vast length of country, from Tyre 
 and Sidon to the coa.st of Cornwall, there was no merchant-ship 
 to buy or sell goods except these Phenicians. The rudest tribea 
 find advantage in such visitors ; and we cannot doubt, that the 
 men, whose resolute love of gain braved so many hazards and dif- 
 
 ap. Athenae. iii, p. U8. The Plienician merchants bought in exchang« 
 Attic pottery for their African trade. 
 
 • Aboat the productiveness of the Spanish mines, Polybins (xxxiv, 9. 8 
 ap. 8trabo, iii p. 147 ; Aiistot. Miiub. A use. c 135. 
 
 iculties, must have been rewarded with profits on the larfiresi 
 scale of monopoly. 
 
 The Phenician settlers on the coast of Spain became gradually 
 more and more numerous, and appear to have been distributed, 
 either in separate townships or intermingled with the native pop- 
 ulation, between the mouth of the Anas (Guadiana) and the town of 
 Malaka (Malaga) on the Mediterranean. Unfortunately, we are 
 very little informed about their precise localities and details, but we 
 find no information of Phenician settlements on the Mediterranean 
 coast of Spain northward of Malaka ; for Cai'thagena, or New Car- 
 thage, was a Carthaginian settlement, founded only in the third cen- 
 tury B. c, after the first Punic war.' The Greek word Pheni- 
 cians being used to signify as well the inhabitants of Carthage as 
 those of Tyre and Sidon, it is not easy to distinguish what belongs 
 to each of them ; nevertheless, we can discern a great and important 
 difierence in the character of their establishments, especially in 
 Iberia. The Carthaginians combined with their commercial pro- 
 jects large schemes of conquest and empire : it is thus that the 
 independent Phenician establishments in and near the gulf of 
 Tunis, in Africa, were reduced to dependence upon them, — while 
 many new small townships, direct from Carthage itself, wer« 
 planted on the Mediterranean coast of Africa, and the whole of 
 that coast from the great Syrtis westward to the Pillars of Her- 
 akles (strait of Gibraltar) is described as their territory in the 
 Periplus of Skylax (b. c. 360). In Iberia, during the third cc-i»- 
 tury B. C, they maintained large armies,*2 constrained the inland 
 tribes to subjection, and acquired a dominion which nothing but 
 the superior force of Rome prevented from being durable : in 
 Sicily, also, the resistance of the Greeks prevented a similar con- 
 summation. But the foreign settlements of Tyre and Sidon were 
 formed with views purely commercial. In tlie region of Tartes- 
 sus as well as in the western coast of Africa outside of the strait 
 of Gibraltar, we hear only of pacific interchange and metallurgy ; 
 and the number of Phenicians who acquired gradually settle- 
 ments in the interior was so great, that Strabo describes these 
 — not less than two hundred in number — as altogethef 
 
 
 • fcjtrabo, iii, pp. 156, 158. 161 ; Polyhiua, iii, 10. 3-10 
 
 * Polyb. i, 10 ; ii, 1 
 
276 
 
 iUSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SPREAD OF GREEK SETTLEMENTS. 
 
 277 
 
 Phenicized.* In his time, the circumstancea favorable to new 
 Phenician emigrations had been long past and gone, and there 
 can be little hesitation in ascribing the preponderance, which this 
 foreign element bad then acquired, to a period several centuries 
 earlier, beginning at a time when Tyre and Sidon enjoyed both 
 undisputed autonomy at home, and the entire monopoly of Ibe- 
 rian commerce, without interference from the Greeks. 
 
 The earliest Grecian colony founded in Sicily was that of 
 Naxos, planted by the Chalkidians in 735 b. c. : Syracuse fol- 
 lowed in the next year, and during the succeeding century many 
 flourishing Greek cities took root on the island. These Greeks 
 found the Phenicians already in possession of many outlying 
 islets and promontories all around the island, which served them 
 in their trade with the Sikels and Sikans who occupied the inte 
 rior. The safety and facilities of this established trade were to 
 80 great a degree broken up by the new-comers, that the Pheni- 
 cians, relinquishing their numerous petty settlements round the 
 island, concentrated themselves in three considerable towns at 
 the south-western angle near Lilybu-uni,-' — Motye, Soloeis, and 
 Panormus, — and in the island of Malta, where they were least 
 widely separated from Utica and Carthage. The Tyrians of that 
 day were hard-pressed by the Assyrians under Salmaneser, and 
 the power of Cartilage had not yet reached its height ; otherwise 
 probably this retreat of the Sicilian Phenicians before the Greeks 
 would not have taken place without a struggle. But the early 
 Phenicians, superior to the Greeks in mercantile activity, and not 
 disposed to content!, except under circumstances of very superior 
 force, with warlike adventurers bent on permanent settlement, 
 took the prudent course of circumscribing their sphere of opera- 
 tions. A similar change appears to have taken place in Cyprus, 
 the other island in which Greeks and Phenicians came into close 
 eontact. If we may trust the Tyrian annals consulted by the his- 
 torian Menander, Cyprus was subject to the Tyrians even in the 
 time of Solomon.^* We do not know the dates of the establish- 
 
 * Strabo, iii, pp. 141-150. Ovroi )ap '^owl^lv ovtu^ h/evovro VTroxtipioif 
 Aere rdf n?.eiov(: ruv ,h rrf TovpSircvia -rzoAtcov Kal ruv irXriaiov tottuv I'Tt* 
 hteilfuv vvv oUelcr^ai. 
 
 » Thacyd. vi, 3 ; Diodor. v, 12. 
 See the reference in Joseph. Antiq. Jud. viii, 5, 8, and Joseph, cont 
 
 • Vol. 3 
 
 ment of Paphos, Salamis, Kitium, and the other Grecian citici 
 there planted, — but there can be no doubt that they were poste- 
 rior to this period, and that a considerable portion of the soil and 
 trade of Cyprus thus passed from Phenicians to Greeks ; who on 
 their part partially embraced and diffused the rites, sometimes 
 criel, sometimes voluptuous, embodied in the Phenician religion.^ 
 in Cilicia, too, especially at Tarsus, the intrusion of Greek set- 
 tiers appears to have gradually Hellenized a town originally Plie- 
 uician and Assyrian ; contributing, along with the other Grecian 
 settlements — Phaselis, Aspendus, and Side — on the southera 
 ocast cf Asia Minor, to narrow the Phenician range of adventure 
 in that direction.- 
 
 Such was the maimer in which the Phenicians found theiu- 
 selves affected by the spread of Greek settlements ; and if the 
 lonians of Asia Minor, when first conquered by Harpagus and 
 the Persians, had followed the advice of the Prienean Bias to 
 emigrate in a body, and found one great Pan-Ionic colony in tlie 
 i.<land of Sardinia, these early merchants would have experienced 
 the like hinderance^ carried still farther westward, — perhaps, 
 indeed, the whole subsequent history of Carthage might have 
 been sensibly moditied. But Iberia, and the golden region of 
 Tartessus, remained comparatively little visited, and still less 
 colonized, by the Greeks ; nor did it even become known to them 
 until more than a century after their first settlements had been 
 formed in Sicily. Easy as the voyage from Corinth to Cadiz 
 may now appear to us, to a Greek of the seventh or sixth centu- 
 ries B. C. it was a formidable undertaking. He was under the 
 
 Apion. i 18 ; an allusion is to be found in Virgil, ^neid, i, 642, in Uie mouth 
 of Dido — 
 
 " Genitor turn Bel us opiinara 
 Vastabat Cyprum, el late ditione tencbat." (t. v.) 
 
 » Kespecting the worship at Salamis (in Cyprus) and Paphos, see Lac 
 tant. i, 21 ; Strabo, xiv, p. 683. 
 
 » Tarsus is mentioned by Dio Chrysostom as a colony from the Phenician 
 Aradus ;Orat. Tarsens. ii, p. 20, ed. Reisk), and Herodotus makes KilU 
 brother of Phoenix and son of Agenor (vii, 92). 
 
 Phenician coins of the city of Tarsus are found, of a date t iwards the enrf 
 of the Persian empire : see Movers, Die Fionizier, i, p. 13. 
 
 ^Herodot. i. 170. 
 
 1 <i 
 
 If 
 
 i^" 
 
 
278 
 
 HISTOKV uF GREECr.. 
 
 FIRST ACCIDENTAL VJYAGE BY KOL^Ub 
 
 273 
 
 neceggity of first coast incr along Akarnania and Epirus, then 
 crossing, firet to tlie inland of Korkyra, and next to the gulf of 
 Tarentura ; he then doubled the southernnaost cape of Italy and 
 followed the sinuosities of the Mediterranean coast, by Tyrr- 
 henia, Liguria, southern Gaul, and eastern Iberia, to the Pillars 
 of Herakles or strait of Gibraltar : or if he did not do this, he 
 had the alternative of crossing the open sea from Krete or Peloj)- 
 onnesus to Libya, and then coasting westward along the perilous 
 coast of the Syrtes until he arrived at the same point. Both 
 voyages presented difficulties hard to be encountered; but the 
 most serious hazard of all, was the direct transit across the 0})en 
 sea from Krete to Libya. It was al)out the year 030 B. c. that 
 the inhabitants of the island of Thera, starved out by a seven 
 years' drought, were enjoined by the Delphian god to found a 
 colony in Libya. Nothing short of the divine command would 
 have induced them to obey so terrific a sentence of banishment ; 
 for not only was the region named quite unknown to them, but they 
 could not discover, by the most careful inquiries among practised 
 Greek navigators, a single man who had ever intentionally made 
 
 (he voyage to LibyaJ One Kretan only could (hey find, a 
 
 fisherman named Korubius, — who had been driven thither acci- 
 dentally by violent gales, and he served them as guide. 
 
 At this juncture, Egypt had only been recently opened to 
 Greek commerce, — Psarametichus having been the first king 
 who partially relaxed the jealous exclusion of ships from the en- 
 trance of the Nile, enforced by all his predecessors; and the in- 
 citement of so profitable a traffic emboldened some Ionian traders 
 to make (he direct voyage from Krete to the mouth of thai river. 
 It was in the prosecution of one of these voyages, and in connec- 
 tion with the foundation of Kyrene (to b<? recounted in a future 
 chapter), that wc arr made acquainted with the memorable ad- 
 venture of the Sami-Hi mt^rchant Koliinjs. While bound for 
 Egypt, he had been tlriven out of his course by contrary winds, 
 and had found shelter on an uninhabited islet called Platea, off 
 the coast of Libya, — the spot where the emigrants intendetl for 
 Kyrene first established themselves, not long afterwards. Fix>m 
 hence he again started to proceed to Egypt, hut a^in withonl 
 
 success ; violent and continuous east winds drove him continually 
 to the westward, until he at length passed the Pillars of Herakles, 
 and found himself, under the providential guidance of the gods,i 
 an unexpected visitor among the Phenicians and Iberians of Tar- 
 tessus. What the cargo was which he was transporting to Egypt, 
 we are not told ; but it sold in this yet virgin market for the most 
 exorbitant prices: he and his crew (says Herodotus)'^ "realized 
 a profit larger than ever fell to the lot of any known Greek ex- 
 cept SostrtTtus the ^ginetan, with whom no one else can com- 
 pete." The magnitude of their profits may be gathered from the 
 votive offering which they erected on their return, in the sacred 
 precinct of Here at Samos, in gratitude for the protection of that 
 goddess during their voyage, — a large bronze vase, ornamented 
 with projecting gritfins' heads, and supported by three bronze 
 kneeling figures of colossal stature : it cost six talents, and rep- 
 resented the tithe of their gains. The aggregate of sixty talents3 
 (about sixteen thousand pounds, speaking roughly), corresi>onding 
 to this tithe, was a sum which not many even of the rich men of 
 Athens in her richest time, could boast of possessing. 
 
 To the lucky accident of this enormous vase and tlie inscrip- 
 tion doubtless attached to it, which Herodotus saw in the Hera^on 
 at Samos, and to the impression which such miraculous enrich- 
 
 * Herodot iv. 15| 
 
 » Herodot iv, 152. Qeiy irofiiry ;j^pec:»/ifvoc. 
 
 « Herodot. iv, 152. To 6e tinrdpiov tovto (Tartessus) //v aKTjparov tovtov 
 rdv xpovov Cjore u -ovoarrjaavreg ovroi bniau fiiyiara &rj 'EIavvuv itavruv, 
 Tuv'vfielg hrpEKEioQ Ufiev, U ipopr'nov Hipdriaav, fieru ye Z^arparov rdv 
 AaoddfiavTog, AlyivnTyv rovru yap ovk ola rr tpiaai uXkov. 
 
 Allusions to the prodijrious wealth of Tartessus in Anakreon, Fragm. 8, 
 eJ. Berjxk ; Stephan Byz. Taprz/aa^f ; Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg«t. 332, 
 Tap-?/<7(7<H-, vv Kal o ' hvuKpiuv <pTfal navev^aifiova ; Hiraerius ap. Photium, 
 Cod. 243, p. 599, — T(7pr)7<7CToi> (3iov, 'AfiaWeiac «fpaf, ttuv baov evdaifxoviac 
 
 Ke<paAalov. 
 
 3 These talents cannot have been Attic talents ; for the Attic talent first 
 arose from the debasement of the Athenian money-standard by Solon, which 
 did not occur until a generation after the voyage of Kolaeus. They may 
 have been either Euboic or ^ginaean talents •, probably the former, seeing 
 that the case belongs to the island of Samos. Sixty Euboic talents would be 
 about equivalent to the sum stated in the text. For the proportif ffi of th« 
 rsaiom Greek monetary scales, see above, vol. ii, part 2, ch. iv, p 425 ani 
 ch wn p 227 in the present volume. 
 
 
 \ 
 
 h 
 
280 
 
 mSToRY OF GREECE. 
 
 WEALTH OF TARTESSUS. 
 
 281 
 
 merit made upon his imagination, — we arc indebted for out 
 
 knowledge of tlie precise period at wliicli the secret of Pheniciati 
 fommerce at Tartcssus tirst became known to the Greeks. The 
 ▼oyage of K61:eii.s o{>ened to the Greeks of that day a new world 
 kardly less impon ant— regard being had to their previous aggre- 
 gate of knowledge — than the discovery of America to the Eu- 
 ropeans of the last half of the fifteenth century. But KoLtus 
 did little more than make known the existence of this distant and 
 lucrative region : he cannot be said to have shown the way to it : 
 nor do we find, in spite of the foundation of Kyrcne and Barka, 
 which made the Greeks so much more familiar with the coast of 
 Libya than they had been before, that tlie route by whicli \ui had 
 been carried against his own will was ever deliberately pursued 
 by Greek traders. 
 
 Probably the Carthaginians altogether unscrupulous in j)ro- 
 ceedings against commercial rivals,' would have aggravated its 
 natural maritime difficulties by talse information and hostile pro- 
 ceedings. The simple report of such gains, however, was well 
 calculated to act n> a stimulus to other enterjirising navi"-ators ; 
 and the Phoka'ans, during the course of the next half-century, 
 pushing their exploring voyages both along the Adriatic and 
 tlong the Tyrrhenian coast, and founding Massalia in the year 
 ()(»0 B. c, at length reached the Pillars of Ilerakles and Tartes- 
 «us along the easteiii coast of S|)ain. These men were the most 
 adventurous mariners-^ that Greece had yet })roduced, creatin<T a 
 jealous uneasiness even among their Ionian neighbors :3 their 
 Toyages were mad.*, not with round and bulky merchant-ships, 
 calculated only for tlie maximum of cargo, but with armt^d pen- 
 tekonters, — and they were thus enabled to defy the jjrivateers of 
 the Tyrrhenian cities on the Mediterranean, which had long de- 
 terred the Greek trader from any habitual traffic near the strait 
 
 * Strabo, xvii, p. 802 , Aristot. Mirab. Ausc. c. 84-132. 
 Herodot. i, 163. Oi 6e <^o)Kau€c ovroi vavruir/tn fiaKpyoL rrpuroi 'EAAj;- 
 »o» kxpnaavTo, koi tov kfipirjv kqi tt/v Tvpariviriv Kai ttjv 'liSrip'njv Kai rbp 
 Taprrjaabv ovroi elaiv oi KaradeiiavTec ' havriXlovTo 6h ov oTpoyyvkfOi 
 ¥rivah\ dAXci nevrrfKovrt-poimv, — the expressions are remarkable. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 164-165, gives an example of the jealousy of the Chiaiw ii 
 Mfpect to the islands called CEnussse. 
 
 of Messina.1 There can be little doubt that the progress of th« 
 Phokipans was very slow, and the foundation of Massaha (Mar- 
 seilles), one of the most remote of all Greek colonies, may for a 
 time have absorbed their attention : moreover, they had to pick 
 up inturmation as they went on, and the voyage was one of dis- 
 covery in the strict sense of the word. The time at which 
 they reached Tartessus may seemingly be placed between 570- 
 560 B. C. They made themselves so acceptable to Arganthonius, 
 
 king of Tartessus, ar at least king of part of that region, — 
 
 that he urged them to relinquish their city of PhoksKa and estab- 
 lish themselves in his territory, offering to them any site which 
 they chose to occupy. Though they declined this tempting 
 offer, yet he still continued anxious to aid them against dangers 
 at liome, and gave them a large donation of money, — whereby 
 they were enabled at a critical moment to complete their fortifi 
 cations. Arganthonius died shortly afterwards, having lived, we 
 are told, to the extraordinary age of one hundred and twenty years, 
 of which he had reigned eighty. The Phokaeans had probably 
 reason to repent of their refusal, since in no very long time their 
 town was taken by the Persians, half their citizens became ex- 
 iles, and were obliged to seek a precarious abode in Corsica, in 
 place of the advantageous settlement which old Arganthonius 
 Lad offered to them in Tartessus.- 
 
 By such steps did the Greeks gradually track out the lines of 
 Phenician commerce in the Mediterranean, and accomplish that 
 vast improvement in their geographical knowledge,— the circum- 
 navigation of what Eratosthenes and Strabo termed " our sea," 
 as di°tingui.»hed from the external ocean.3 Little practical ad- 
 vantage,'however, was derived from the discovery, which was 
 only made during the last years of Ionian independence. The 
 Ionian cities became subjects of Persia, and Phokaea especially, 
 was crippled and half-depopulated in the struggle. Had the 
 period of Ionian enterprise been prolonged, we should probably 
 have heard of other Greek settlements in Iberia and Tartessus, 
 over and above Emporia and Rhodus, formed by the Massalioti 
 
 ?:}. horns, Fragm. 52, ed. Marx ; Strabo, vi, p. 267. 
 ' Herodot. i, 165. 
 « 'H Ka^' vnac ^dXaaaa /Strabo) ; rrjade tt/c ^aXuTTTjg (Herod iv, 41) 
 
 )i 
 
 
 Vi 
 
283 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 between tlie "Pyrenees and the Ebro, — as well as of increasing 
 Grecian traffic with those regions. The misfortunes of Phokjea 
 and the other Ionic towns saved the Phenicians of Tartessus from 
 Grecian interference and competition, such as that which their 
 fellow-countrymen in Sicily had been experiencing for a century 
 mnd a half 
 
 But though the Ephesian Artemis, the divine protectress of 
 Phokiean emigration, was thus prevented from becoming conse 
 crated in Tartessus along with the Tyrian Herakles, an impulse 
 not the less powerful was given to the imaginations of philoso- 
 phers like Thales and poets like Stesichorus, — whose lives cover 
 Ihe interval between the supernatural trans|)ort of Kolaius on the 
 wings of the wind and the persevering, well-{»lanned explora- 
 tion which emanated from Phokaea. Wliile, on tlie one hand, 
 the Tyrian Herakles with his venerated temple at Gades fur- 
 nished a new locality and details for mythes respecting the Gre- 
 cian Herakles, — on the other hand, intelligent Greeks learned 
 for the first time that the waters surrounding their islands and 
 the Peloponnesus formed part of a sea circumscribe<l by assign- 
 able boundaries ; continuous navigation of the Pliokieans round 
 the coasts, first of the Adi-iatic, next of the gulf of Lyons to the 
 Pillars of Herakles and Tartessus, first brought to light this im- 
 portant fact. The hearers of Archilochus, Simonides of Amorgus, 
 and Kallinus, living before or contemporary with the voyage of 
 Kolicus, had known no sea-limit either north of Korkyra or west of 
 Sicily : those of Anakreon and Hippunax, a century afterwards, 
 found the Euxine, the Palus MiBotis, the Adriatic, the western 
 Mediterranean, and the Libyan Syrtes, all so far surveyed as to 
 pres^Jit to the mind a definite conception, and to admit of being 
 visibly represented by Anaxiraanderon a map. However familiar 
 SQcu knowledge has now become to us, at the time now under 
 discussion it was a prodigious advance. The Pillars of Hera- 
 kles, especially, remained deeply fixed in the Greek mind, as a 
 terminus of human adventure and aspiration : of the ocean be- 
 yond, men were for the most part content to remain ignorant. 
 
 It has ah'eady been stated, that the Phenicians, as coast ex- 
 plorers, were even more enterprising than the Phokieans ; but 
 their jealous commercia. spirit induced them to conceal their 
 
 CIRCUMNAMGATION OF AFRICA. 
 
 289 
 
 track, — to give information designedly false,' respecting dangers 
 and ditficuUies, — and even to drown any commercial rivals 
 when they could do so with safety.'^ One remarkable Phenician 
 achievement, however, contemporary with the period of Phoks^an 
 exploration, must not be passed over. It was somewhere about 
 f,()() B. c. that they circumnavigated Africa; starting from the Red 
 gea, by direction of the Egyptian king NekOs, son of Psammet- 
 iehiis, — going round the cape of Good Hope to Gades, — and 
 from thence returning to the Nile. 
 
 It appears that Nekos, anxious to procure a water communica- 
 lion between the Red sea and the Mediterranean, began digging 
 a canal from the former to the Nile, but desisted from the un- 
 dertaking after having made considerable progress. In prosecu- 
 tion of The same object, he despatched these Phenicians on an 
 experimental voyage round Libya, which was successfully ao- 
 pomidished, though in a time not less than three years; for 
 during each autumn, the maiiners landed and remained on shore 
 a sufficient time to sow their seed and raise a crop of corn. 
 They reached Egypt again, through the strait of Gibraltar, in 
 the course of the third year, and recounted a tale, — "which 
 (says Herodotus) others may believe if they choose, but I cannot 
 believe,"— that, in sailing round Libya, they had the sun on their 
 right hand, i, e. to the north.^ 
 
 The reality of this circumnavigation was confirmed to Henni- 
 otus by various Carthaginian informants,'' and he himself fully 
 
 » The geoj^rapher Ptoletny, with frenuine scientific zeal, complains hitterly 
 of the resene and fraiuls ronnnon with the old traders, respecting the coun- 
 tries which they visited (Ptolem Geojrr. i, H). 
 
 « Straho, iii.'pp. 175-176 ; xvii, p. 802. 
 
 3 Herodot. iv, 42. Kal lAsyov, tfxnl titv ov iriffTu, aU^ di di] Tt(f), (jf rt ^pt- 
 n-A<;>ovrfc TTjv AifSvijv, rov ife/uov Iffxov ef tu St^ia. 
 
 * Herodot. Ovtu fiev avrrj h/vua^v roirpuTov • (i. e. v \i(3vti kyvutv'fTi 
 hvca nEpil>l>vTor) fieru (5c, Kapxri^ovi'^i nniv oi Xeyovre^. These Cartha- 
 ginians, to whom Herodotus here alludes, told him that Libya was circumnav- 
 i^ablc ; but it does not seem that they knew of any other actual circumnavi. 
 gation except that of the Phenicians sent by Nekos ; otherwise, Hero<loluj 
 would have maiie some allusion to it, instead of proceeding, as he docs 
 immediatelv, to tell the story of the Persian Sataspes, who tried and failed. 
 
 The testimony of the Carthagini.-xns is so far valuable, as it declares theif 
 persuasion of the truth of the statement made by those Phenicians. 
 
284 
 
 HISTORY OF GRi?t:«?E- 
 
 CIRCUMNAVIGATION OF AFRICA. 
 
 285 
 
 f 
 
 believes it. There seems good reason ibr sharing in his Xiehet, 
 though several able critics reject the tale as incredible. Ihe 
 Phenicians were expert and daring masters of coast navi«?fttion, 
 and in going round Africa they had no occasion ever to lose 
 eight of land : we may presume that their vessels were am{)lj 
 stored, so that they could take their own time, and lie by in bad 
 weather; we may nl>o t;ike for granted tliat the reward conse- 
 quent upon success was considerable. For any other mariners 
 then existing, indeed, the undertaking miglit ha\e been too hard, 
 but it was not so foi them, and that was the r,-ason why Nekos 
 chose them. To such reasons, wliich show the story to present 
 no intrinsic incredibility (that, indeed, is hardly alleged even by 
 Mannert and others who disbelieve it), we may add one other, 
 which goes far to prove it positively true. They stated that, in 
 the course of their (circuit, tliey had the sun on their right Inxml 
 (i. e, to the northward); and this phenomenon, observal)lo accord- 
 ing to the season even when they were within the tropics, could 
 not fail to force itself on their attention as constant, after they 
 had reached the southern temperate zone. But Herodotus at 
 once pronounces this part of the story to be incredible, and so it 
 would probably a[)pear to every Greek', PheniiMan, or Egyptian, 
 not only of the age of Nekos, but even of the time of Herodotus, 
 who heai-d it; sinee none of them possessed either actual experi- 
 ence of the phenouienon of a >outli«'ni latitude, or a sutliciently 
 correct theory of the relation between sun and rarth, to under- 
 Stand the varying direction of the shadows; and few men woukl 
 consent to set aside the received ideas with reference to the solar 
 motions, from pure contidence in the veracity of tliese Phenician 
 narrators. Now that under such circumstances the latter should 
 invent the tale, is highly improbable ; and if they were not in- 
 Some critics have construed the words, in which IIero(hirus alludes to the 
 Carthaginians as his informants, as if what they told him was the story of the 
 fruitless attempt made hy Sataspes. But this is evidently not the nieaninj^ 
 of the historian : he hrinu'S forward the opinion of the Carthat;inians as con" 
 firmatory of the statement made hy tht* Phenicians employed hy Nekos. 
 
 * Diodorus (iii, 40) talks correct lan^'uaixe al>out the direction ct the 
 ■hadows southward of the tropic of Cancer (compare Pliny, H. N. vi. 29). 
 — one mark of the extension of geographical and astronomical observationi 
 daring the four intervening centuries between him and Herodotus. 
 
 y^nU>rs, they mast have experienced the phenomenon during th« 
 louthern portion of their transit. 
 
 Some critics disbelieve this circumnavigation, from supposing 
 that if so remarkable an achievement had really taken place 
 once, it must have been repeated, and practical application must 
 have been made of it. But though such a suspicion is not 
 unnatural, with those who recollect how great a revolution was 
 operated when the passage was rediscovered during the htteenth 
 e;,,turv,-yetthe reasoning vviU not be found applicable to the 
 sixth century before the Christian era. 
 
 Pure scientific curiosity, in that age, counted for nothing: the 
 motive of NekOs for directing this enterprise was the saine as 
 that which had prompted him to dig his cana., -- in order that he 
 nn.ht proctu-e the best communication between the Mediterranean 
 a.id the Red sea. But, as it has been with the north-west pa^ 
 .a.re in our time, so it was with the circumnavigation of Africa 
 i,\is, - the proof of its practicability at the same time showed 
 that it was not available for purposes of traffic or communication, 
 lookincr to the resources then at the command ot navigators, - 
 a fact,\o^ve^ er, which could not be known until the experiment 
 Was made. To pass from the Mediterranean to the Red sea by 
 means of the Nile still continued to be the easiest way ; either by 
 aid of the land-journey, which in the times of t^^^ -inolemies was 
 „.ually made from Koptos on the Nile to Berenike on the Red 
 sea, -or by means of the canal of Nekos, which Darius at ter- 
 wa;ds hnished, though it seems to have been neglected during 
 the Persian rule in Egypt, and was subsequently repaired and 
 put to service under the Ptolemies. Without any doub the sue 
 cessful Phenician mariners underwent both severe Imrdship and 
 great real perils, besides those still greater supposed perils, the 
 apprehension of which so constantly unnerved the minds even of 
 experienced and resolute men in the unknown ocean Such waa 
 the force of these terrors and difficulties, to which there was no 
 known termination, upon the mind of the Ach^memd Sataspes 
 (upon whom the circumnavigation of Africa was imposed a. a 
 peralty" worse than death" by Xerxes, i^^^^^^^^^/f * 
 ^pit.l sentence), that he returned without having fi-^J^^J^ 
 rircuit. though by so doing he forfeited his life. He affirmed 
 that he had sailed "until his vessel stuck fast, and could mov 
 
286 
 
 UlSTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 TERRORS OF THE UNKNOWN OCEAN. 
 
 287 
 
 f 
 
 on no farther," — a persuasion not uncommon in ancient times, 
 and even down to Columbus, tliat there was a point, beyond 
 which the ocean,— either from mud, sands, shallows, fogs, or 
 accumulations of sea-weed, — was no longer navigable.* 
 
 ' Skylax, after follow ng the line of coast from tlie Mediterranean ouUulc 
 of the strait of Gihnilt;u. an-l then south-westward along Afriea as fur Us the 
 iHland of Kern^^ goes ot, to say, that " hevond Kerno the sea is no longer 
 navigable from shallows, and mud, and sea-wee,l :" Tiye Si Kepv^i- vh<Jov 
 ra ,ir,Knva ovKiri ian fXiord itd tipax6rr,Ta ^aXarrrig Kai ^t,\op kcu <pvKo<:. 
 tnri dt TO ipvKog rng CoxMg rb tcXutoq kuI dvi^'^ti> o^v, wars KiVTHP {Sky. 
 lax, c. 109). Nearchus, en undertaking his voyage down tlie Indus, and from 
 thence into the Persian ^ruif, jg not certain whether the external sea will be 
 found navigable-..' S^ ^\iOT6g y/ l^rtu 6 ravry ttovtoc (Searchi Periplus 
 |. 2: compare p. 4«), ap. Geogr. Minor, vol. i, e<i. Hudson). Pjtheas de' 
 scribed the neighlH>rh.x)d of Thule as a sort of chaos— a niedlev of earth 
 sea, and air, in which you could neither walk nor sail : ovre yn ku^ avri,l 
 innpxev ovre ^dXaaaa ovre ci^p, iUd ovyKpijua n U tovtov TtXevuovc i9a- 
 Aaamu>nuKuc,h u ^n^l rifv yijv Kai ttjv ^uAaaaav alupela^ai Kal rd gv^.. 
 ravra, Kai tovtov d^ av Seaf^dv ehac ruv 6U>v, f^i/re nopevrbv uijTe nXurbv 
 ^nPxovra' ro f^ev ovv t.o nlevf^ovt iocKOr avrb, (Pytheas) ecpaKhac, rdUa 
 ie leye^v t^ uKof,, (Strab.3, ii, p. 104). Again, the priests of Memphis told 
 Herodotus that their conquering hero Sesostris had equipped a fleet in the 
 Arabian gulf, and made a voyage into the Erythro^m sea. suhju<rating people 
 everywhere, " until he came to a sea no longer navigable from^'shallows " - 
 ovK.rc ^^ry. ir,,, ^^,„^,^^. ^jj^.,.^,^j .. j^^^ j,j^^^^ represents the'sea 
 without the Pillars of Herakles as impenetrable and nnfit for navigation iq 
 consequence of the large admixture of earth, mud. or vegetable covering 
 which had arisen in it from the disruption of the great island or continent 
 Atlantis (Timaeus, p. 25 ; and Kritias. p. 108) ; which passages are well il- 
 lustrated by the SchoIia>t who seern< to have read geographical descriptions 
 of the character of this outer sea : rovro Kai ol rove Uelvrf roirovq laropoiv- 
 Ttc Aeyovmv, u^ iruvra revay^Sii r..v tKn eivat xC>pov • revayoc ^e karlv Iav^ 
 rif, ^TT^TToXaCovroc Uaro^ 'u- iroUoi\ kui Sordvn^ k7rL<i>aivo,iivric rovTo> See 
 also Plutarch's fan< y of the dense, earthy, and viscous Kronian sea (somi* 
 days to the westward of Britain), in which a ship could with difficulty ad- 
 vance, and only by means of severe pulling with the oars (Plutarch De 
 Facie in Orbe Lun*, ,-. 26, p 941 ). So again in the two geographical pro- 
 ductions in verse by Rufns Festu< Avien.is f Hudson, Geogr. Minor, vol iv 
 Descnptio Orbis Terr«, v, 57. an<l Ora Maritima. v, 406-415)- in the Hrst 
 -yf these two, the density of the water of the western ocean is ascribed to its 
 being saturated with salt.- in the second, we have shallows, large quantitie. 
 of sea-weed, and wild bea.Kts swimming about, which the Carthaginian Hi» 
 iloo affirmed himself to have seen : — 
 
 •• Plerumqu.i porro tenue tenditur salum, 
 Vt vix arenas subjacentes ocrulat; 
 
 Now we learn from hence that the enterprise, even by thoM 
 who believed the narrative of Nekos's captains, was regarded a i 
 
 Exsuperat autem gurgitem fucus frequeos 
 Atque impeditur aestus ex uligine : 
 Vis vel ferarum pelagus omne intcrnatat, 
 Mutusque terror ex feris habitat freta. 
 Hajc olim Himilco Poenus Oceano saper 
 Spectasse seraet et probasse rettulit : 
 HsBC nos, ab imis Punicorum annalibus 
 Prolata lougo tempore, edidimus tibi." 
 r^mnare also V 115-130 of the same poem, where the author again quott. 
 S^^a voyS of Himilco, who had been four months in the ocean o«tsi<k 
 of the Pillars of Hercules : — 
 
 » Sic nulla late flabra propellnnt ratem, 
 Sic segnis humor lequoris pigri stupet 
 Adjicit et illud, plurimum inter gurgites 
 Extare fucum, et SKpe virgulti vice 
 Betinere puppim," etc. 
 The dead calm, mud, and shallows of the external ocean are touched apo» 
 hy^rist: Metcorolog! ii, 1, U, and seem to have been a favorite subjec^ 
 declamation with the rhetor, of the Augustan age. See Seueca, Su...on«-. 
 
 '• Even the companions and contemporaries of Columbus, -^^^--^^^ 
 had made such comparative progress, still rctamed much of these fea« re 
 seeing the dangers and difficulties of the unknown ocean rJL* tables 
 eWrl(observcs A.von Humboldt, Examen Critique de ''H-to- de ta 
 ^Zrraohie t iii p 95) que la ruse dcs Ph(!niciens avait traci des difficulnS. 
 ^opposl'nt L la'navigltion au del.>. des Colonnes d'Hercule, de Ceme, et 
 Z nTc Sacre-e (leme), if fucus, le limon, le manque de fond, et le calme p^ 
 pftuelde lamer, assemble d'une manicre frappante aux «!c.ts ammds de. 
 
 Tolrmbrrtrat '':IT:L ......^ *« sea of S^r^, or a«. «r 
 
 the Atlantic ocean south of the Azores, when, it is cove«d by '«-"'«"•• 
 mass of sea-weed for a space six or seven times as la^ "fj"^^^ 
 alarm of his crew at this unexpected spectacle was considerable. "Phe^ 
 wLTis sometimes so thickly accumulated, that it requires a consider*, 
 wind to impel the vessel through it. The remarks and comparisons of M. Ton 
 Humboldt, in reference to ancient and modem navigation, are highly uHerw 
 
 •Mtinff. (Examen, ut sup. pp. 69, 88, 91, etc.) „ ,. .. 
 
 J M. Gesner (Dissertkt. de Navigationibus ext™ Cohimna. Her«.l.M«* 
 8 and 7) has a good defence of the story told by Herodotus Major RenneU 
 riso adopts the same view, and shows by many arguments how much e«Kr 
 St^ciZmnavigation was from the Ea«t than fi^m the West (Geograph. Sy. 
 ^T^rodc^us. p. 690) ; compare Ukert, Geograph. der Gneehen ^ 
 
288 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CARAVAN-TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 
 
 289 
 
 '< 
 
 At once desperafe and unprofitable ; but doubtless many penoiM 
 treated it as a mere '' Phenician lie, "' (to use an expressioo pf^>. 
 
 Riimer. vol. i, p. 61 ; Mnnnert, Geog. d. G. and Romer, vol. i, pp. 19-26. 
 Gosacllin ( Kecherches .sur la Ge'o-r. des Anc. i, p. 149) and Mannert both 
 feject the story as not worthy of belief: Heercn defends it (Ideen (iber den 
 Verkehr der Alien Welt, i, 2, pp. 86-95). 
 
 A{,'atharehide.s, in the second century b. c. pronounces the eastern coast 
 of Africa, southward of the Red .ca. to be us yet unexamined : he treats it 
 as a matter of certainty, however, that the .^ea to the south-westward is con- 
 tinuous with the Western ocean (De Rubro Mari, Geog. Minores ed Huds 
 ▼, i, p. 11). 
 
 ' Strabo, iii, p. 170. Sataspes (the unsuccessful Persian circumnavi.rator 
 of Lil)ya, mentioned juM above) had violated the (lau<,rhter of anotherVer- 
 8ian nobleman, Zopyrus son of Megabyzus. and Xerxes had j,nven orders 
 that he should be crucified for this act; his mother beg^,'ed hira off by su^- 
 gersting that he should be condemned to something - worse tAan dmtli "_ the 
 circumnavigation of Libya (Herod, iv, 4.')). Two things are to be remarked 
 m respect to his voyage: 1. He took with him a ship and seamen from 
 Egypt; we are not told that they were I'lienician : probably no other man- 
 ners than Phenicians were competent to such a vovage, — and even if the 
 crew of Sataspes had bc«m Piienicians, he could not oVer rewards for success 
 equal to those at the disposal of xVekos. 2. He began his enterprise from the 
 Btniit of Gibraltar instead of from the Red sea ; now it seems that the cur- 
 fent between Madagascar and the eastern coast of xVfrica sets very strongly 
 towards the cape of Good Hope, so that while it greatly assists the southerly 
 foyage, on the other hand, it makes return by the same wav verv difficult 
 fSee Humboldt. Examcn Criti.jue de I'Histoire de la Geographic, t i, p' 
 S43.) Strabo, ' -iwevcr, affirms that all those who had tried to circumnlvi-'atc 
 Afnca, both ..om the Red sea and from the strait of Gibraltar, had been 
 forced to return without success (i, p. 32), so that most people believed that 
 there was a continnons i.^thraus which rendered it impracticable to go by sea 
 from the one point to the other : he is himself, however, persuaded that the 
 Atlantic is avpf^ov^ o« both sides of Africi^ and therefore that circumnavigation 
 18 possible. He as well as Poseidonius (ii, pp. 98-100) disbelieved the tale of 
 the Phenicians sent by Xekos. He must have derived his complete convic- 
 tion, that Libya might be circumnavigated, from geographical theory, which 
 led hira to contract the ilimensions of that continent southward,— inasmuch 
 as the thing in his belief never had been done, though often attempted 
 Mannert (Geog. d. G. und Rom. i, p. 24) erroneouslv savs that Strabo and 
 others founded their belief on the narrative of Herodotus. 
 
 It is worth while remarking that Strabo cannot have read the story in He 
 rodotus with much attention, since he mentions Darius as the king who ^ent 
 the Phenicians round Africa, not Nekos ; nor does he take notice of the re 
 ■larkable statement of these navigators respecting the position of the sua 
 There were doubtless maay apocryphal narratives current in his time re 
 
 verbial in ancient times). The circumnavigation of Libya u 
 raid to ha\e been one of the projects conceived by Alexander 
 the Great,' and we may readily believe that if he had lived longer, 
 it would have been confided to Nearchus, or some other ofhcer 
 of the like competence : nor can there be any reason wliy it 
 should not have succeeded, especially since it would have been 
 undertaken from the eiu^tward, to the great profit of geograph- 
 ical knowledge among the ancients, but with little advantage 
 to their comnierce. There is then adequate reason for admitting 
 that these Phenicians rounded the cape of Good Hope from the 
 East about 600 b. c, more than two thousand years earlier than 
 Vasco de Gama did the same thing from the West : though the 
 discovery was in the first instance of no avail, either for com- 
 merce or for geographical science. 
 
 Besides the maritime range of Tyre and Sidon, their trade b> 
 land in the interior of Asia was of great value and importance. 
 They were the speculative merchants who directed the march of 
 the caravans laden with Assyrian and Egyptian products across 
 the deserts which separated them from inner Asia,*-' — an operar 
 tion which presented hardly less difficultie.s considering the 
 Arabian depredators whom they were obliged to conciliate and 
 even to employ as carriers, than the longest coast-voyage. They 
 eeem to have stood alone in antiquity in their willingness to brave, 
 and their ability to surmount, the perils of a distant land-tralfic ?» 
 and their descendants at Carthage and Utica were not less active 
 in pushing caravans far into the interior of Africa. 
 
 .pectiug attempts, successful and unsuccessful, to circumnavigate Africa, at 
 we may see by the tale of Eudoxus ( Strabo, ii, 98 ; Cornel. Nep. ap. Pirn 
 H. N. ii, 67, who gives the story very differently ; and Pomp. Mela, iii, 9). 
 » Arrian, Exp.Al. vii, 1, 2. , . , , 
 
 •Herodot. i, 1. '^olvLKa^ — tLnayivhvTaq <i>6fjTia 'Kaavpiu re ml kr/vrt- 
 
 Tta, 
 
 » See the valuable chapter in Heeren (Ueber den Verkehr der Alten Welt 
 i, 2, Abschn. 4, p. 96) about the land trade of the Phenicians. 
 
 The twanty-seventh chapter of the prophet Ezekiel presents a strikini 
 picture of the general commerce of Tjrre. 
 
 VOL. lU. 
 
 13 
 
 19oc 
 
2»0 
 
 fflSTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX 
 
 ASSY HI ANS. -BABYLON. 
 
 
 Tub name of the A.ssjrians, who formed one wing of thil 
 early system of intercourse and coiuruerce, rests chiefly upon 
 the n^eat cities of Nineveh and Babylon. To the Assyrians of 
 Nineveh (as lias l)een already mentioned) is ascnbed in early 
 times a very extensive empire, covering much of Upper Asia, aa 
 well as Me»oix>tanjia or the country between the Euphrates and 
 tlu- Tigris. Respecting this empire, — its commencement, its ex- 
 tent, or even the mode in which it was put down, — nothing 
 certain can be atlii med ; but it seems unquestionable that many 
 great and flourishiii*^ cities, — and a population inferior in enter- 
 prise, but not in industry, to the Phenicians, — were to be found 
 on the Euphrates and Tigris, in times anterior to the first Olym- 
 piad. Of these ciiies, Nineveh on the Tigris and liabylon or 
 tlie Euphrates wen; the chief ;• the latter being in some sort of 
 dej>endence, probably, on the sovereigns of Nineveh, yet gov- 
 erned by kings or chiefs of its own, and comprehending an here- 
 ditary order of priests named Chaldieans, masters of all the 
 icience and literature as well as of the religious ceremonies cur- 
 rent among the pf.ople, and devoted, from very eai-ly times, to 
 that habit of astronomical observation which their brilliant sky so 
 much favored. 
 
 The people called Assyrians or Syrians — for among the Greek 
 authors no constant distinction is maintained between the two^ — 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 178. Tr/c 6e ^Aaavpirj^ kari fitv kw kuc aXla TroXitTfiarc fU- 
 yaXa rroAAa • rb 6i bvoftaoToraTov Kal hx^poTarof, Kai tvi^a a(pi, rfjQ Niroi? 
 avnardTov yevofievi)c, tu ^aai^ia KareaTf/Kte, i,v BajivAuv. 
 
 The existence of these and several other greut cities is an important ilem 
 to be taken in, in our djnception of the old Assyria : Opis on the Tigris, and 
 Sittake on one of the canals very near the Tigris, can be identified (Xenopb 
 Anab. ii, 4, 13-25) : compare Diodor. ii, 11, 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 72 ; iii, 90-91 ; vii, 63 ; Strabo, xvi, p. 736, al.so ii, p. 84, i» 
 which he takes exceptktn to the distribution of the oUovfievj] (inhabited por 
 
 ASSYRIANS. - BABYLON. 
 
 291 
 
 were distributed over the wide territory bounded on the east by 
 Mount Zagros and its north-westerly continuation toward Mount 
 Anirat, by which they were separated from the Medes, — and 
 extending from thence westward and soutliward to the Euxine sea, 
 the river Halys, the Mediterranean sea, and the Persian gulf, — • 
 thus covering the whole course of the Tigris and Euphrates 
 louth of Anuenia, as well as Syria and Syria-Palaestine, and the 
 territory eastward of the Halys called Kappadokia. But th« 
 Chaldiean order of priests appear to have been peculiar to Bab- 
 ylon and other towns in its territory, especially between that city 
 and the Persian gulf. Tiie vast, rich, and lofty temple of Belus 
 in that city, served them at once as a place of worship and an as 
 tronomical observatory ; and it was the }>aramount ascendency 
 of this order which seems to have caused the Babylonian people 
 generally to be spoken of as Chaldaians, — though some writers 
 have supposed, without any good proof, a conquest of Assyrian 
 Babylon by barbarians called Chaldieans from the mountains 
 near the Euxine.^ 
 
 tion of the globe) made by Eratosthenes, because it did not include in the 
 same compartment (ai^payig) Syria proper and Mesopotamia: he calls Ninas 
 *nd Semiramis, Syrians. Herodotus considers the Armenians as colonists 
 from the Phrygians (vii, 73). 
 
 The Homeric names 'Apf/zot, 'EpefiSol (the first in the Iliad, ii, 783, the 
 second in the Odyssey, iv, 84) coincide with the Oriental name of this race 
 Aram ; it seems more ancient, in the Greek habits of speech, than Syrians (see 
 
 Strabo, xvi, p. 785). 
 
 The Hesiodic Catalogue too, as well as Stesichorus, recognized Arabus as 
 the son of Hermes, by Thronie, daughter of Belus (Hesiod, Fragm. 29, ed. 
 Marktscheffel : Strabo, i, p. 42). 
 
 » Heeren, in his account of the Babylonians (Ideen aber den Verkehr der 
 Alten Welt, part i. Abtheilung 2, p. 168), speaks of this conquest of Baby- 
 lon by Chaldaean barbarians from tlie northern mountains as a certain fact, 
 explaining the great development of the Babylonian empire under Nabopo- 
 lasar and Nebuchadnezzar from 630-580 b. c ; it was, he thinks, the new 
 Chaldflean conquerors who thus extended their dominion over Judasa and 
 Phenicia. 
 
 I agree with Volney (Chronologie des Babyloniens, ch. x, p. 215) in 
 thinking this statement both unsupported and improbable. Mannert seems 
 to suppose the Chaldaeans of Arabian origin (Geogr. der Gr. und Rom., part 
 r, s. 2, ch. xii, p. 419). The passages of Strabo (xvi, p. 739) are more fa 
 Torable to this opinion than to that of Heeren ; but we make out nothing 
 iistinct respecting the Chaldaeans except that they were the priestly crrtef 
 
 i 
 
It 
 
 292 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 Tliere were exaggerated statements respecting the antiquity of 
 their astronomical ohservations, which cannot be traced as of 
 definite and recorded date higher than the era of Nabonassar' 
 
 amon^ the Assyrians of Babylon, as tliey are expressly teniifd i»y Ilciodo- 
 tos — t^f '/^t)c,vaL ol Xa/.da/'oi, iovreg Ipieg tuvtuv tuu i^fot- (cf Zeus Buius) 
 (Hcrodot. i, 181). 
 
 The ChalylM^s and Chaldaei of the northern mountains seem to he known 
 only throu^'h Xenophon (Anab. iv. 3, 4 ; v, 5, 17 ; Cyrop. iii, 2, 1) ; they are 
 rude barbarians, and of their exploits or history no particulars reach u>. 
 
 * The earliest Chaldiean astronomical observation, known to the astrono- 
 mer Ptolemy, both precise and of ascertained date to a dey;ree sutHcient for 
 scientific use, was a lunar eclipse of the 19th March 721 b. c. — the 27th 
 year of the era ot Nabonassar (Ideler, Uel)er die Astronomisclien Bcobach- 
 tuufjen der Alten, p. ] 9, Berlin, 1806). Had I'tolemy known any older ob- 
 servations conforminj^r to these conditions, he would not have omitted to 
 notice them : his own words in the Almagest testify how much he valued iho 
 knowledge and compinrison of ob-ervatiun.s taken at distant intervals (Ahna 
 gest, b. 3, p. 62, ap. Weler, I. c. p. 1), and at the same time im])ly that he had 
 none more ancient than the era of Nabonassar (Aim. iii, p. 77, ap. Idel. p. 
 169). 
 
 That the Chaldaean ; had been, long before this period, in the habit of ob 
 serving the heavens, tiiere is no reason to doubt ; ami the exactness of those 
 observations cited Ity Ptolemy imi»lies (according to the judgment of Ideler 
 ib. p. 1 67 ) long previous j)ractice. The period of two hundred and twenty- 
 Ihree lunation*;, after which tlie moon reverts nearly to the same positions in 
 reference to the apsides and nodes, and after which eclipses return nearly in 
 the same order and magnitude, appears toliave been discovere<l by the Chal- 
 di^ans (•* Defectus ducentis viginti tribus mensibus redire in suos orbes certum 
 est," riiny. H. N. ii, 13), and tiiey de<liiced from hence the mean dailv mo- 
 tions of the moon witli a (b'giee of accuracy wjiirh differs onlv bv four 
 seconds from modern lunar tables (Geminu^, Isniroge in Arati Phanoinena, 
 c. 15; Ideler. /. c. pp. 15:3, l.")l. and in his Handbueh der Chronologic, vol. i, 
 Absch. ii. p. 207). 
 
 There seem to have been Chaldiean observations, l)oth made and recorded, 
 of much greater antirjuity than tlie era of Nabonassar : though we cannot 
 lay much stress on the date of 1903 years anterior to AK-xander the Great, 
 which is mentioned by Simplicius (ad Aristot. de Cielo, p. 123) as being the 
 earliest period of the (;!halda?an observations sent from Babylon by Kallis- 
 thenes to Aristotle. Meier thinks that the Chaldi«an observations anterior 
 to the era of Nabonassar weie useless to astronomers from the want of some 
 fixed era, or definite cycle, to identify the date of each of them. The com- 
 mor. civil year of the Ghaldwans had been from the beginning (like that of 
 the Greeks) a lunar yeir, kept in a certain degree of harmony with the sou 
 by cycles of lunar yeais and intercalation. Down to the era of Nabonassar. 
 the calender was in confusion, and there was nothing to vaifv either the time 
 
 M 
 
 I 
 
 CHALDAEAN PRIESTS AT BABYLON. 
 
 2de 
 
 (7A7 B. c), as well as respecting the extent of their acquired 
 knowled-e, so largely blended with astrological fancies and occult 
 influence! of the heavenly bodies on human attairs. But however 
 ircomplete their knowledge may appear when judged by the 
 standard of after-times, there can be no doubt, that compared 
 with any of their contemporaries of the sixth century B. C- 
 either Egyptians, Greeks, or Asiatics - they stood preemuient, 
 and had much to teach, not only to Thales and Pytliagoras, but 
 
 of accession of the kings, or that of astronomical phenomena observed, ex 
 .e,.t the davs and months of this Uinar year. In the reign of Nabonassar. 
 ihe astronomers at Babylon introduced (not into civil use but for their own 
 purposes and records) the Egyptian solar year,- of three hundred and sixty 
 five davs, or twelve monUis of thirty days each, with five added days, begm- 
 ning with the first of the month Thoth, the commencement of the Egyptian 
 year - and thev thus first obtained a continuous and accurate mode of mark- 
 L^ the date of 'events. It is not meant that the Chaldeans then for the first 
 time obtained from the Egyptians the knowledge of the solar year of thrca 
 hun<lred an.l sixtv-five days, but that they then for the first time adopted it in 
 their notation of 'time for astronomical purposes, fixing the precise moment 
 at which thev began. Nor is there the least reason to suppose that the era 
 of Nabonassar coincided with any political revolution or change of dynasty. 
 Ideler discusses this point (pp. 146-173, and Handbueh der Chronol. pp. 
 91 vooo) Svncellus might correctly say - 'X:rb Na,3ovaaapov rov^ xpovov^ 
 r,v r.:.r aarpiov iraparrjpvm-u^ \aUaloL vKplfSuaav (Chronogr. p. 207). 
 
 We need not dwell upon the back reckonings of the Chaldaeans for pe- 
 riods of 720,000, 490 000.470,000 years, mentioned by Cicero, Diodoru.s, and 
 Pliny (Cicero, De Divin. ii, 46; Diod. ii, 31; Pliny, H. N. vu, 57 , and 
 seemingly presented by Berosus and others as the preface of Babyloni,.n 
 
 ''''iTiJ to be noted that Ptolemy always cited the Chaldaean observations a. 
 made bv " the Chaldaans;' never naming any individual ; though m all the 
 other observations to which he alludes, he is very scrupulous in particulanz- 
 i„. the name of the observer. Doubtless he found the Chald«an observa- 
 ti:ns registered just in this manner ; a point which illustrates what is said 
 in the text respecting the collective character of their civilization, and tha 
 want of individual development or prominent genius. 
 
 The superiority of the Chaldean priests to the Egyptian, as astronomic* 
 observers, is shown by the fact that Ptolemy, though living at Alexandria 
 never mentions the latter as astronomers, and cites no Egyptian observations 
 while he cites thirteen Chaldaean observations in the years b. c. 721, 720 
 523 502,491,383,382,245,237,229: the first ten being obsenrations oT 
 lunar eclipses : the last three, of conjunctions of planets and fixed suu» 
 (Ideler, Handbueh der Chronologic, vol. i, Ab. ii, pp. 195-199 J. 
 
 u 
 
294 
 
 insionv OF (jkeece. 
 
 BABYLON. - CANALS. .- FORTIFICATIONS 
 
 295 
 
 I 
 
 4 I 
 
 f 
 
 even to later inquirers, such as Eudoxus and Aristotle. The 
 conception of the revolving celestial sphere, the gnomon, and the 
 division of the da) into twelve parts, are afnriued by Herodotus» 
 to have been first taught to the Greeks bj the Babylonians ; and 
 the continuous observation of the heavens both by the Egyptian 
 and Chalda*an pnesls, had deternnned witli considerable exact- 
 ness both the duration of the solar year and other longer periods 
 of astronomical recurrence ; llius ini[)ressing upon intelligent 
 Greeks the imperfection of their own calendars, and furnishing 
 them with a basis not only for enlarged observations of their own^ 
 but also for the ilhvowvy and at>f);ication of those mathematical 
 theories whereby aslrunoniy first bccaine a science. 
 
 Nor was it only tlic a -tronotuical ac(|uisitions of the priestly 
 caste whicli tlistii-uished the early Babylonians. Tlie social 
 condition, the fertility of the couiury, the dense population, and 
 the persevering industry of the inliabitants, were not less remark- 
 able. Res pecting N'ineveh,^ once the greatest of the Assyrian 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 109. 
 
 ' Tlu- ancient Ninus or Nineveh w.is situated on the eastern hank of th« 
 Ti-ris, nearly opposite the modern town of Mousul or MosnI. Herodotus (i 
 11^.5) an<l Straho (xvi, p 737) both speak of it a.s being destroyed ; but Ta-' 
 cmis (Ann. xii. 1.5) and Amniian. Mareell. (xviii, 7) mention it as subsisting 
 Its rnins ha.l been Ion- renuirkeil (see Thcvenot, Voya^a's, lib. i, eh. xi 
 p. 170, ari.l Niebuhr, Reisen, vol. ii, p. m)), but have never been examined 
 carehilly until recently by Ri<'h. Ainsworth. and others: see Kittcr, West- 
 Asien, b. iii, Abtheil. iii, Absehn i, s. 45. [)p. 171-221. 
 
 Ktesias, aceordin- to Diodorus (ii. 3). plaeed Ninus or Ni!.ev,-h on the 
 Euphrates, which we n u-,t presume to be an inadvertence,— probably of Di- 
 odorus himself, for Ktesiais would W- less likely than he to confound the Eu- 
 phratos and the Ti-ris. Compare Wesseling ad Diodor. ii, 3, and Bah. ad 
 litesia; tragm. n, A^-yr. j>. 392. 
 
 Mannert (Geographic der Gr. und Riim. part v, c. 14, pp. 439-448) dis- 
 pates the identity of these ruins with the ancient eity of Nirms or Ninweh 
 because, if this had been the fact, Xenophon and the Ten Thousand Greeks 
 must have passed directly over them in the retreat along the eastern bank of 
 the Tigns upward: and Xenophon, who particularly notices the deserted 
 cincs of Larissa and Mespila, says nothing of the great ruin of this onco 
 flounshmg Assyrian eapital. This argument onee appeared to me so foni- 
 ble, that I came to the same negative conclusion as Mannert, thou-h his eon- 
 jccture:,. as to the real site of the city, never appeared to me satisfactory 
 But R.tter has removed the difficulty, by showing that the ruins oppo.jui 
 Mostil exactly correspond to the situation of that deserted city which Xeno 
 
 cities, we have no good information, nor can we safely reason 
 from the analogy of Babylon, inasmuch as the peculiarities of the 
 latter were altogether determined by the Euphrates, while Nine- 
 veh was seated considerably farther north, and on the east bank 
 of the Tigris : but Herodotus gives us valuable particulars re- 
 specting Babylon as an eye-witness, and we may judge by his ac- 
 count respecting its condition after much suffering from the Per- 
 sian conquest, what it had been a century earlier in the days of 
 
 its full splendor. 
 
 The neighboring territory receiving but little rain,i owed its 
 fertility altogether to the annual overflowing of the Euphrates, on 
 which the labor bestowed, for the purpose of limiting, regularizing, 
 and ditfusing its supply of water, was stupendous. Embankments 
 along the river, — artificial reservoirs in connection with it, to re^ 
 ceive an excessive increase, — new curvilinear channels, dug tor 
 the water in places where the stream was too straight and rapid, 
 
 — broad and deep canals crossing the whole space between the 
 Euphiates and the Tigris, and feeding numerous rivulets2 or 
 ditches which enabled the whole breadth of land to be irrigated, 
 
 — all these toilsome applications were requisite to insure due 
 moisture for the Babylonian soil ; but they were rewarded with 
 an exuberance of produce, in the various descriptions of grain, 
 
 ohon calls Mespila: the difference of name in this ca.<;e is not of very great 
 importance (Ritter, ut sup. p. 175). Consult also Forbiger, Handbueh der al- 
 leu Geographic, sect. 96, p. 612. 
 
 The situation of Nineveh here pointed out is exactly what we should ex- 
 pect in reference to the conquests of the Median kings : it lies in that part 
 of Assyria bordering on Media, and in the course of the conquests which 
 the king Kyaxares afterwards extended farther on to the Ilalys. (See Ap- 
 pendix at the end of this chapter.) 
 
 > Herodot. i, 193. 'H yrj tuv Waavpiuv verai fiev bXiytp — yvhWe he speaks 
 of rain falling at Thebes in Egypt as a prodigy, which never happened ex- 
 oept just at the moment when the country was conquered by Cambyses, — ot 
 ydp dfl verai tu uvu Tf/g XlyvnTov to irapuTiav (iii, 10) It is not unimpor- 
 tant to notice this distinction between the litde rain of Babylonia, and the m 
 rain if Upper Egypt, — as a mark of measured assertion in the historian 
 from whom so much of our knowledge of Grecian history is derived. 
 
 It chanced to rain hard during the four days which the traveller Niebtir.1 
 •pent in going from the ruins of Babylon to Bagdad, at the end ol Nov^::4 
 ber 1763 (Reisen, vol. ii, p. 292). 
 
 • Herodot. i, 193 ; Xenophon, Anab. i, 7 15 ; ii, 4, 13-22. 
 
296 
 
 HISTOKY OF GKEECE. 
 
 I 
 
 .: I 
 
 A I 
 
 ^uch as Herodotus hardly dares to particularize. The o^ur.ti^ 
 produced no trees except the date-palm, whidi was turned to ao 
 count in many difi'erent ways, and from the fruit of which, both 
 copious and of extraordinary size, wine iis well as bread were 
 made.i Moreover, Babylonia was still more barren of stone than 
 of wood, so that buildings as well as walls were constructed al- 
 most entirely of brick, for which the earth was well adai)ted ; 
 while a flow of mineral bitumen, found near the town and river 
 of Is, higher up ihe Euphrates, served for cement. Such perse- 
 vering and systematic labor, applied for the purpose of irriga- 
 tion, excites our astonishment; yet the description of what was 
 done for defence is still more imposing. Babylon, traver>ed in 
 the middle by the Euphrates, was surrounded by walls three 
 hundred feet in height, seventy-five feet in thickness, and compos- 
 ing a s(pKuc of which eacli side was one hundred and twenty 
 stadia (or nearly fifteen English miles) in length: around the 
 outside of the walls was a broad and deep moat from whence the 
 material fbr the bricks composing them had been excavated; 
 while one hundred brazen gates served for ingress and egress. 
 Besides, there was an interior wall less thick, but still verv strong; 
 and as a still farther obstruction to invaders from the north and 
 north-ea.<t, another high and thick wall was built at some miles 
 from the city, acru>s much of the space between the Euphrates 
 and the Tigris, — called the wall of Media, seemingly a little to 
 the north of that point where the two rivers mo>t nearly a[>proach 
 to each other, and joining the Tigris on its west bank. Of the 
 houses many were three or four stories high, and the broad and 
 Straight streets, unknown in a Greek town until tJie distribution 
 
 'About the aatc-iuilins {6oiviKec) i„ the ancient Bahvlonia, ^ce Thee 
 phrastus. Hist. Phinl. ii, 6, 2-6; Xenoph. C'vrop. vii, ',, 12 : Anab. ii. 3, 5 
 Diodor. ii. 53 : there nere some which bore no fruit, but which afforded ffooi 
 wood for liouse-purposes and furniture. 
 
 Theophrastn. ,uive= the same -eneral i-lea of the fertilitv and protluoe of 
 the soil in BabyUniia a. Herodotus, thou-h the two hundred-fold, and -ome. 
 times three hundred-f .Id. which was stated to the latter m the produce of the 
 land m pram, appears in his statement cut down to fifty-fold, or one hundred- 
 fold (Hist. Plant, viii 7, 4). 
 
 Respecting the numerous useful pui-poses for which the date-palm wai 
 made to serve (a Pei^ian son- enumerated three hundred and sixty) 
 Btrabo, xir, p. 742; Amraian Marcell. xxiv, 3. ' 
 
 ■! I 
 
 I 
 
 TEMPLK OF BELUS. 
 
 297 
 
 of the peira^eus by Hippodamus, near the time of the Pelopon- 
 nesian war, were well calculated to heighten the astonishment 
 raised by the whole spectacle in a visitor like Herodotus. The 
 royal palace, with its memorable terraces or hanging gardens, 
 formed thft central and commanding edifice in one half of the 
 city, — -the temple of Belus in the other half. 
 
 riiat celebrated temple, standing upon a basis of one square 
 stadium, and inclosed in a precinct of two square stadia in di- 
 mension, was composed of eight solid towers, built one above the 
 other, and is alleged by Strabo to have been as much as a stadium 
 or furlong high (the height is not specified by Herodotus) :' it waa 
 full of costly decorations, and possessed an extensive landed 
 property Along the banks of the river, m its passage through 
 the cii) , were built spacious quays, and a bridge on stone piles, 
 for the placing of which — as Herodotus was told — Semiramia 
 had caused the river Euphrates to be drained off into the large 
 Bide reservoir and lake constructed higher up its course.^ 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 178, Strabo, xiv, p. 738; Arrian, E. A. vii, 17, 7. Strabo 
 does not say that it was a stadium in perpendicular height : we may suppose 
 that the stadium represents the endre distance in upward march from the 
 bottom to the top He as well as Arrian say that Xerxes destroyed both 
 the temple of Belus and all the other temples at Babylon (/cai^eZAcv, Kare- 
 7/caV/n', iii, 16, 6; vii, 17, 4); he talks of the intention of Alexander to 
 rebuild it, and of his directions given to level new foundations, carrying 
 awav the loose earth and ruins. This cannot be reconciled with the narra- 
 tive of Herodotus, nor with the statement of Pliny (vi, 30), nor do I believe 
 it to be true. Xerxes plundered the temple of much of its wealth and 
 ornaments, but that he knoekcd down the vast building and the other 
 Babylonian temples, is incredible. Babylon always continued one of tho 
 chief cities of the Persian empire. 
 
 2 What is stated in the text respecting Babylon, is taken almost eiitirely 
 from Herodotus: 1 have given briefly the most prominent points in hif 
 interesting narrative (i, 178-193), which well deserves to be read at length. 
 
 Herodotus is in fact our only original witness, speaking from his own 
 observation and going into details, respecting the marvels of Babylon. 
 Ktesias, if his work had remained, would have been another original witness; 
 but we have onlv a few extracts from Idm by Diodorus. Strabo seems nol 
 to have visited Babylon, nor can it be affirmed that Kleitorchus did so. 
 Arrian had Aristobu'lus to copy, and is valuable as far as he goes ; but ho 
 does not enter into many particulars respecting the magnitude of the city of 
 its appurtenances. Berosus also if we possessed his book, would hAve been 
 eye-witness of the state of Babvlon more than a centurv and a half lata* 
 
 13* 
 
2V»8 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Besideo this gniat town of Babylon itself, there were through 
 out the neighborliood, between the canals which united the Eu- 
 
 than Hpro<l«)tus, but the few frapnents remaining are hardly at all descriprive 
 (see Bcrosi Frajrm. [.p. 64-67, cd. Uichter). 
 
 'I'hc maiinitudc of the works described by IIero<lotu3 naturally provokes 
 iu^pifions of exa^xirn-ation ; but there are <;ood iciounds for trusting him, ia 
 ray judgment, on all points which fell under his own vision and means of 
 veriHea'ion, as distinguished from i.ast faets, on whi. h he could do no mora 
 ihun give what he heard. He had bestowed mucii attention on Assyria and 
 its phenomena, as is evident from the fact that he ha<l written (or prepared to 
 write, if the suspicion be admissible that the work wa> never completed,— 
 Fabricius, Biblioth. tirsec. ii, 20, 5) a special Assyrian history, which has not 
 reached us ('AnaviuoLm Aoyotm, i, 106-184). He i-^ vny precise in the 
 measures of which he speaks ; thus having described the dimensions of the 
 walls in '' royal cubits," he goes on immediately to tell us how much that 
 nuasure differs from an ordinary cubit. He dc>signedly suppresses a part 
 of what he had lieard respecting the produce of the Babylonian soil, from 
 the mere apprehension of not bein<r believed. 
 
 To these reasons for placing faith in Herodotus we may add another, not 
 IcNS deserving of attention. That which seems incredible in the construc- 
 tions wliich he describes, arises >in.ply from their enormous bulk, and the 
 friuhtful (juantitv of human labor which must have been employed to execute 
 thrm. He does" not tell us, like licrosus (Fragm. p. 60). that these wonder- 
 ful fortifications weie completed in fifteen days, — nor like Quintus Curtins, 
 that the length of one stadium w;i< .ompleted on each successive day of the 
 yt .u (v. 1, 26). To bring to pass all that HenHlotu^ has .lescribed, is a mere 
 question of time, patience, number of laborers. an<l cost of maintaining them, 
 — for the materials were both <losc at hand and inexhaustible. 
 
 Now what would be the limit imposc<l uiK-n the power and will of the old 
 kings of Babylonia on these points? We can hardly assign that limit with 
 go much confidenct as to venture to pronounce a statement of Herodotus 
 incredible, when he tells us something which lie has seen, or verified from 
 eye-witnesses. The Pyramids and other works in Kgypt are (piite sufficient 
 to iiKike us mistrustful of our own means of appreciation ; and the great 
 wall of China (ext»'inling for twelve hundred English miles along what was 
 once the whole northern frontier of the Chinese empire, — from twenty to 
 twenty-five feet high, — wide enough for six hor>e.^ to run abreast, and 
 furnished with a suitable number of gates and bastioi»s) rontdins more material 
 than all the buildings of the Britis/i tmpire put toijether, according to Barrow's 
 estimate (Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. i, p. 7, t. v.; and 
 Meier, Ueber die Zeitrechnung der Chinesen, in the Abhandlungen of the 
 Berlin Academy for 1837, ch. 3, p. 291 ). 
 
 Kt^sias gave the circuit of the walls of Babylon as three hundred and 
 iixty stadia; Kleii>archus, three hundred and sixty-five stadia; Qnintui 
 Cartius, three hundred and sixly-eight stadia ; and Strabo, three hundred 
 
 BABYLONIAN ..^DUSTRY. 
 
 2i)9 
 
 ph rates and the Tigris, many rich and populous villages, whik 
 Borsippa and other considerable towns were situated lower down 
 
 ind eighty-five stadia; all different from Herodotus, who gives four hundred 
 tnd eighty stadia, a square of one hundred and twenty stadia each iide. 
 Grosskurd (ad Stralmn. xvi, p. 738), Letronne, and Heeren, all presume that 
 the smaller number must be the truth, and that Herodotus must have been 
 misinformed; and Grosskurd further urges, that Herodotus cannot have»een 
 the walls, inasmuch as he himself tells us that Darius caused them to be 
 razed after the second siege and reconquest (Herodot. iii, 159). But upon 
 tliis we may observe : First, the expression (rd relxo^ 'KeptelTi.e) does not 
 imply that the wall was so thoroughly and entirely razed by Darius a.s to 
 leave no part standing, — still less, that the great and broad moat wa.s in all 
 its circuit filled up and levelled. This would have been a most laborious 
 operation in reference to such high and bulky masses, and withal not neces- 
 sary for the purpose of rendering the town defenceless ; for which purpose 
 '.he destruction of certain portions of the wall is sufficient. Next, Herodotus 
 speaks distinctly of the walls and ditch as existing in his time, when he saw 
 the place, which does not exclude the possibility that numerous breaches may 
 have been designedly made in them, or mere openings left in the walls with- 
 out any actual gates, for the purpose of obviating all idea of revolt. But, 
 however this latter fact may be, certain it is that the great walls were either 
 continuous, or discontinuous only to the extent of these designed breaches, 
 when Herodotus saw them. He describes the town and it« phenomena in the 
 present tense: ke erai h Tredlif) pEyu'k(^^ p.eya^og kovaa piruirov iKaarov 120 
 aradicjv, iovaijc Terpayuvov • ovroi aradioi r^f nepioiov rfj^ iroXio^ yivovrai 
 avvuTravTsg 480. To pev vvv peya^og roaovrov kari rov uareog rov Ba(3v' 
 ?.o)vlov. ''Y.KtKoaprjTO 6e wf ovdev a'k'X.o rcoT^iapa tCjv rjpelg Idpev • Ta<f>pbc pfv 
 irpuTu piv ISu^ea te koI Evpsa Kal ttXetj vSarog irEpi^iei' pETci d^, teIxo^ 
 irEVT^Kovra piv Trrixei^v (3a(n?.f/to)V idv rd Evpog, vipog df, SirjKomuv ttt/x^^-'V. 
 Xy 6e ^aaiArjiog tttjx^Q tov perpiov iarl 7rf/xf:(^C pH^^v rpiffi daKTvXioiai (c. 
 178). Again (c. 181), — Tovto piv drj rd teIxoc i^wpr/^ iari' ivEpov di 
 iaw&EV TEcxog TV ep 11^ El, o'j noTiXip riif) aa'&EVEaTEpov tuv iripov reixovg^ 
 OTELvoTEpov 6e . Thcn he describes the temple of Zeus Belus, with its vast 
 dimensions, — koI ig ipi tovto Iti tdv, 6vo aTadiuv ttuvttj, tov TETpayuvov^-^ 
 in the language of one who had himself gone up to the top of it. After 
 having mentioned the striking present phenomena of the temf)le, he specifics 
 a statue of solid gold, twelve cubits high, which the Chaldaeans told him had 
 once been there, but which he did not see, and he carefully marks the dis- 
 tinction in his language, — rjv di kv rip TEpivE'i Tovnp Irt rdv xpovov ekeivov 
 Kal dvdpiag dvoidEKa nf/xECJV, xP^^^og aripEog. 'Eyw piv piv ovk Eidav ' ra 6i 
 kiyETai iirb Xa/da/wv, Tavra Xiyo) (c 183). 
 
 The argument, therefore, by which Grosskurd justifies the rejection of the 
 statement of Herodotus is not to be reconciled with the language of the 
 historian: Herodotus certainly saw both the walls and the ditch. Ktesiai 
 law them too, and his statement of the circuit, as three hundred and sixtj 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 J ' . M 
 
[pi:| 
 
 ;oo 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECR 
 
 on the Euphrates itgelf. And the industry, aorrioultural as weLi 
 as manufacturiniT, of the collective population, was not less per- 
 Beverinjr than productive: tli^ir lin*Mi, cotton, and woollen fabrics, 
 and their richlv ornamented carpets, w«*re celebrated throughout 
 ail the Eastern n «,nons. Their cotton was broujrht in part from 
 islands in the Persian jrulf, while the Hocks of slieep tended by 
 the Arabian nomads supplied them with wool tiner even than that 
 of Miletus or Tarentum. ]k\sides the Chaldnaii order of priests,, 
 there peem to have been among them certain otiier tribes with 
 peculiar hereditary customs : thus there were three tribes, proi)- 
 ablv near the mouth of the river, who restricted themselve-^ to 
 the eating of fish alone ; but we have no evidences of a military 
 caste (like that in Egypt) nor any other hereditary profession. 
 
 MUilia, staiuls oj>[)onc(1 to tluit of four huntlnd ami ei^^hty stadia, which apj-cars 
 in Herodotus, lint the authority of Ilcro(lotu> is, in my judgment, so much 
 superior to that of Kte-sias. that I aecci»t th.- hiro:er ii^xure as more worthy of 
 credit than the .<;misiller. Sixty English miles of circuit is, doul)tk^s<. a won 
 tier, but forty-five miles in circuit is a wonder also: grantinjr means and will 
 to execute the lesser of these two, tlie Babylonian kings can hardly he 
 suj»poscd inadequate to the greater. 
 
 To me the height of these artiticial mountains, called walls, apj^ears even 
 more astonishing than their length or breadth. Yet it is curious that on this 
 point the two eye-witne.sse.s. Herodotus and Ktesia^. Loth agree, witli only the 
 dit!erence between royal culiit.s and common cubits. Herodotus states the 
 liei«>ht at two hundred roval cubii.«i : Ktesias, at lifty fathoms, which are 
 equal to two hundred common cubits (l)iod. n, 7), — rr- (V- i i-"[-. ,.,r fiti 
 Kr/jaiac <pr/al -n 'a ofVjViot', <> ot ti'ioi rwr reurifjuv hjpail'Civ, 7r//^tii 
 
 TTFvrijKovTa. Oleaius (ad Philostratum Yit. Apollon. Tyan. i. 25) shows 
 plausible reason for believing that the more recent writers {vidtrefioi) cut 
 down the dimensions stated ]>y Ktesias simply because they thought such a 
 vast height incredible. The difference between the n.yal cubit and the com- 
 mon cubit, as Herodotus on this oceasi<.n informs u-. was three digits in 
 favor of the formci ; his two hundred royal cubit< are thus equal to three 
 hundred and thirty-seven feet eight inches : Ktesias has not attended to the 
 difference between royal cubits and common cnl»its. and his estimate, there- 
 fore, is lower than that of Hcrod<.tus by thirty-seven feet eight inches. 
 
 On the whole. I oannot think that we are justitied, either br the authority 
 of such counter-testimony as can be produced, or by the intrinsic wonder c: 
 the case, in rejecting the dimensions of the walls of Babylon as given hj 
 
 Herodotus. 
 
 Quintus Curtius states that a large proportion of the inclosed sj>fice wai 
 ntt occupied by dwellings, but sown und planted (v, 1, 26: compare Diodor 
 u,9». 
 
 BABYLON AS SEEN BY HERODOTUS 
 
 doi 
 
 In order to present any conception of what Assyria was, in th« 
 early days of Grecian hisiory, and during the two centuries pre- 
 cedinff the conquest of liabylon by Cyrus in o36 B. C, we un- 
 fortunately have no witness earlier than Herodotus, who did not 
 Bee Babylon until near a century after that event, — about 
 seventy years after its still more disastrous revolt and second 
 subjugation by Darius, Babylonia had become one of the twenty 
 t»atrapies of the Persian empire, and besides paying a larger reg- 
 ular tribute than any of the other nineteen, supplied from its ex- 
 uberant soil provision for the Great King and his countless host 
 of attendants during one-tliird part of the year.i Yet it waa 
 then in a state of comparative degradation, having had its im- 
 m<iise walls breaclied by Darius, and having afterwards inider- 
 <r(,jM! the ill usajre of Xerxes, who, since he stripped its temples, 
 and especially the venerated temple of Belus, of some of their 
 richest ornaments, would probably be still more reckless in his 
 mode of dealing with the civil editices.*^ If in spite of such in- 
 liictions, and in spite of that manifest evidence of poverty and 
 suflV^-ing in the peoide which Herodotus expressly notices, it con- 
 tinued to be what he describes, still counted as almost the chief 
 city of the Persian empire, both in the time of the younger Cy- 
 rus and in that of Alexandeiv* — we may judge what it um-t 
 once have been, without either foreign satrap or foreign tribute, » 
 under its Assyrian kings and ChahUean priests, during tlie last 
 of the two centuries wiiich intervened between the era of Naboti- 
 a-^;ir and the capture of the city by Cyrus the Great. Though 
 several of the kings, during the first of these two centuries, had 
 contiibuted much to the great works of Babylon, yet it wa- during 
 the second century of the two, after the capture of Nineveh by 
 the Medes, and under Nebuchadnezzar and Nitokris, that the 
 kings attained the maximum of their power, and the city it.-^ 
 greatest enlargement. It was Nebuchadnezzar who constructed 
 
 ' t, 
 
 ' Ilerodot. i, 196. 
 
 - Arrian. Exp. Al. iii, 16, 6; vii, 17, 3; Quint. Curtius, iii, 3, 16. 
 
 3 Xenoph. Anab. i, 4, 11 ; Arrian. Exp. Al. iii, 16, 3. luu a/ui tov iroAifxov 
 vo uxVaov 1i ^aSv/.tov Kai rd 2oicra i<paiveTo. 
 
 * See the statement of the large receipts of the satrap Tritantajchmea 
 and his immense establishment of horses and Indian dogs (Ilerodot. i 
 1»2). 
 
 'A 
 
\\ 
 
 302 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 POWER OF BABYLONIAN KINGS 
 
 soa 
 
 llie seaport Tertidon, at the mouth of the Euphrates, and who 
 probably excavated the long ship canal of near four hundred 
 miles, which joined it, — which was perhaps formed partly from a 
 natural western l>ranchofthe Euphrates.' The brother of the poet 
 Alkicu-, — Antimenidas, who served in the Babylonian army, 
 and distinguished himself by his personal valor (600-580 b. c), 
 — would have seen it in its full glory :2 he is the earliest Greek 
 of whom we hear individually in connection with the Babylo- 
 nians. It marks^ strikingly the contrast between the Persian 
 kings and the Babylonian kings, on whose ruin they rose, tliat 
 while the latter incurred immense expense to facilitate the com- 
 munication between Babylon and the sea, the former artificially 
 impeded the lower course of the Tigris, in order that their resi- 
 dence at Susa might be out of the reach of assailants. 
 
 That which strikes us most, and which must have struck the 
 first Grecian visitors much more, both in Assyria and Egypt, is 
 tlie unbounded command of naked human strength possessed by 
 these early king.^, and the effect of mere mass £.nd indefatigable 
 perseverance, unaided either by theory or by artifice, in the ac- 
 
 ' There is a valuable examination of the lower course of the Euphrates, 
 with the changes which ii has undergone, in Ritter, West-Asien, b. iii. Ab- 
 tlicil. iii, Abschnitt i, seci. 29, pp. 45-49, and the passage from Abydenus in 
 tlie latter page. 
 
 For the distance between Ter^don or Diridotis, at the month of the Eu- 
 j)hrates (which remained separate from that of the Tigris until the first 
 century of the Christian era), to Babylon, see Strabo, ii, p. 80; xvi, p. 
 739). 
 
 It is important to keep in mmd the warning given by Ritter, that none of 
 the maps of the course of tne river Euphrates, prepared previously to the 
 publication of Colonel Chesney's expedition in 1836, arc to be trusted. That 
 expetli. on pive the first complete and accurate survey of the course of the 
 river, and led to the detection of many mistakes previously committed by 
 Manncrt, Reichanl, and other able p^og^raphcrs and chartographers. To 
 the immense mass of information contained in Ri tier's comprehensive and 
 lal)oriou.s work, i< to he added the farther merit, that he i> always careful in 
 pointing out where the geographical data are insufficient and fall short of 
 certainty. See West-Asien, B. iii, Abtheilung iii, Abichnitt i, sect. 41, p 
 159. 
 
 * Strabo, xiii, p. 617, with the mutilated fragment of Alkaeus, which 
 IffiUer has so ingeniously corrected (Rhenisch. Museum, i, 4, p. 287). 
 
 • fttrabo, xvi, p. 740. 
 
 oonipli8hment of gigantic results.' In Assyria, the results were 
 in great part exaggerations of enterprises in themselves useful to 
 the people for irrigation and defence : religions worship was min- 
 istered to in the like manner, as well as the personal fancies and 
 pomp of their kings : while in Egypt the latter class prclomi- 
 nates more over the former. We scarcely trace in either of tl.em 
 the hi.'her sentiment of art, which owes its first marked develop, 
 ment To Grecian susceptibility and genius. But the human mind 
 is in every stage of its progress, and most of all in its rude and 
 unreflecting period, strongly impressed by visible and tangible 
 magnitude, and awe-struck by the evidences of great power. To 
 this feeling for what exceeded the demands of practical conve- 
 nience and security, the wonders both in Egypt and Assyri. 
 chiefly appealed ; while the execution of such colossal works de- 
 monstrates habits of regular industry, a concentrated populatioo 
 under one government, and above all, an implicit submission to 
 the regal and priestly sway, - contrasting forcibly with the small 
 autonomous communities of Greece and western Europe, where- 
 in the will of the individual citizen was so much more energetic 
 and uncontrolled. The acquisition of habits of regular industrj', 
 BO foreign to the natural temper of man, was brought about m 
 E-ypt and Assyria, in China and Hindostan, before it had ac- 
 qilired any footing in Europe ; but it was purchased either by 
 prostrate obedience to a despotic rule, or by imprisonment within 
 the chain of a consecrated institution of caste. Even during the 
 Homeric period of Greece, these countries had attained a certain 
 civilization in mass, without the acquisition of any high menial 
 iualities or the development of any individual genius : the reh- 
 eious and political sanction, sometimes combined and sometimes 
 separate, determined for every one his mode of life, h.s creed, hi. 
 duties, and his place in society, without leaving any scope for the 
 will or reason of the agent himself. Now the Phen.c.ans and 
 Carthaginians manifest a degree of individual impulse and energy 
 which puts them greatly above this type of civilization, though 
 in their tastes, social feelings, and religion, they are still As.at,<i 
 
 ■ Diodo.. (i, 31) suites this point justly with regard to the ^''^o^'J^^ 
 TOVTOf, u^Uvara r^( iavrCv <!»'« KaraXmetv imofivitiiaTa. 
 
 t 
 
 H 
 
 •II 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
\1 
 
 304 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 And erei. the Babylonian community, though their Chaldajan 
 priests are the parallel of the Egyptian priests, with a les- mea^ 
 jre of ascendency, combine with their industrial aptitude and 
 constancy of purj)08e something of that strenuous ferocity of 
 character which marks so many people of the Semitic race, — 
 Jews, Plienicians, and Carthaginians. Tliese Semitic i)eople 
 stand distinguished as well from the Egyptian life, — enslaved by 
 childish caprices and antipathies, and by endless frivolities of 
 ceremonial detail, — as from the flexible, many-sided, and self- 
 Ofauizing Greek ; not only capable of opening both for himself 
 and for the human race the highest walks of intellect, and the 
 fijll creative agency of art, but also gentler by far in his j)rivate 
 sympathies and <lealings tlian his contemporaries on the Euphra- 
 tes, the Jordan, or the Nile, — for we are not of course to com- 
 pare him with the exigencies of western Europe in the eighteenth 
 and nineteenth centuries. 
 
 Both in Babylonia and in Egypt, the vast monuments, em- 
 bankments, anil canals, executed by collective industry, appeared 
 the more remarkable to an ancient traveller by contrast with the 
 desert regions and predatory tribes immediately surrounding 
 them. West of the Euphrates, the sands of Arabia extended 
 northward, with little interruption, to the latitude of the gulf of 
 Issus ; they ever covered the greater part of Mesoi>otamia,i or 
 the country between the Euphrates and the Tigris, beginning a 
 few days' journ.iy northward of the wall called the wall of 
 Media above mentioned, which — extending westward from the 
 Tigris to one of the canals joining the Eupli rates — had been 
 erected to protect Babylon, against the incursion of the Medes.^ 
 
 ' See the desirii)tu)n of this desert in Xcnoph. AnaVi. i, 5, 1-8. 
 
 ^ The Ten Thousand Greeks passed from the outside to the inside of the 
 wall of Media : it vi'as one hundred feet high, twenty feet wide, and was r i- 
 ported to them as extending twenty panisangs or six hundred stadia (= sev- 
 enty mUes) in length (Xenoph. Anah. ii, 4, 12). Eratosthenes called it 
 T" '-. . f^of fiiarelxta/ua (Strabo, ii, p. IBO) : it was seemingly ahoat twen 
 
 ty-five miles north of Bagdad. 
 
 There is some confusion about the wall of Media : Mannert (Geogr. der 
 G. uiid R. V, 2, p. 280) and Forbigcr also (Alte Georg. sect. 97, p. 616, note 
 94) appear to have confounded the diteh dug by special order of Artaxerx^ 
 to oppose the march of the younger Cyrus, with the Nahar-Malcha or Br^* 
 
 ^•1NEVEH AXD ITS REMAINS. 
 
 305 
 
 Eastward of the Tigris again, along the range of Mount Zagroa, 
 but at no great distance from the river, were found the Elymtei, 
 Kossa^i, Uxii, Panvtakeni, etc., — tribes which, to use the ex 
 pression of Strabo,i '^as inhabiting a poor country, were under 
 the necessity of living by the plunder of their neighbors." Such 
 rude bands of depredators on the one side, and such wide tracts 
 of sand on the two others, without vegetation or water, contrast- 
 ed powerfully with the industry and productiveness of Babylonia. 
 Babylon itself is to be considered, not as one continuous city, but 
 as a city together with its surrounding district inclosed within 
 immense walls, the heiglit and thickness of which were in them- 
 selves a sutiicient defence, so that the place was assailable only 
 at its gates. In case of need, it would serve as shelter for the 
 persons and property of the village inhabitants in Babylonia; 
 ind we shall see hereafter how useful under trying circumstances 
 such a resource wiis, when we come to review the invasions of 
 Attica by the Peloponnesians, and the mischiefs occasioned by a 
 temporary crowd pouring in from the countr}', so as to overcharge 
 the intra-mural accommodations of Athens. Sj)acious as Baby- 
 lon was, however, it is atfirmed by Strabo that Ninus or Nineveh 
 was considerably larger. 
 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Since the first edition of these volumes, the interesting work of Mr. Laj- 
 ftid, — •' Nineveh and its Remains," together with his illustrative Drawings, 
 — " The Monuments of Nineveh," — have l>een published. And through hii 
 unremitting valuable exertions in surmounting all the difficulties connected 
 with excavations on the spot, the British Museum has been enriched with a 
 valuable collection of real Assyrian sculptures and other monuments. A 
 
 al canal between the Tigris and the Euphrates : see Xenoph. Anab. i, 7, 
 15. 
 
 It is singalar that Herodotus makes no mention of the wall of Media, 
 though his subject (i, 185) naturally conducts him to it: he seems to hav« 
 sailed down the ICuphrates to Babylon, and must, therefore, have seen it, if 
 it had really extended to the i^uphrates, as some authors have imagined 
 Probably, however, it was not kept up with any care, even in his time, seeing 
 that its original usefulness was at an end, after the whole of Asia, from ^^% 
 Euxine to the Persian gulf, became subject to the Persians 
 
 ' Strabo, xvi, p. 744. 
 
 VOL. III. 20oa. 
 
,t 
 
 806 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 iwmbcr of similar rel ca of Assyrian antiquity, obtained by M. Botta and 
 Others, have also bet n dej^osited in the museum of the Louvre at Paris. 
 
 In respect to Assyrian irt, indeed to the history of art in general, a new 
 world has thus been opened, which promises to be fruitful of instruction 
 fspet ially when wc consider that the ground out of which the recent acqui 
 sifTons have been obtained, has been yet most imperfectly examined, aud 
 may he expected to yield a much ampler harvest hereafter, assumin;^ <"ir 
 rv.mstances tolerably favorable to investigation. The sculptures to which 
 f»c are now introduced, with all their remarkable peculiarities of style an<i 
 idea, must undoubtedly date from the eighth or seventh century b. c, a* 
 the latest, — and may be much earlier. The style which they display 
 forms a parallel and subject of comparison, though in many points ex- 
 tremely dirterent, to that of early Egypt, — at a time when the ideal com 
 liipaiions of the Greeks were, as far as we know, embodied only in epic and 
 Ijric poetry. 
 
 But in respect to t urly Assyrian history, we have yet to find out whether 
 much new information can be safely deduced from these interesting monu- 
 ments. The cuneiform inscriptions now brought to light are indeed vers 
 numerous : and if they can be deciphered, on rational and trustworthy 
 principles, we can liardly fail to acquire more or less of positive knowledge 
 rt^.-ipecting a period now plunged in total darkness. But from the monn 
 nicnts of art alone, it would be unsafe to draw historical inferences. For 
 example, when we liiid sculptures representing a king taking a city by as 
 saiilt, or receiving captives brought to him, etc., we are not to conciud*- that 
 thi' commemorates any real and positive conquest recently made by the As- 
 Kvii iiH. Our knowledge of the sufyects of Greek sculpture on temples is 
 quite sutHcient to make us disallow any such inference, unless there be some 
 corrol)orative proof Soni<' means must first be discovered, of discriminat 
 ing historical from mythical subjects : a distinction which I here notice, the 
 rather, Injcause Mr. l^yard shows occasional tendency to overlook it in hi 
 interesting remarks and explanations : see, especially, vol. ii, ch. vi, p. 409. 
 From the rich and abundant discoveries made at Nimroud, combined with 
 those at Kouyunjik and Khorsabad, Mr. Layard is inclined to comprehend 
 all these three within the circuit of ancient Nineveh ; admitting for that cir 
 cuit the prodigious sf>ace alleged by Diodonis out of Ktesias, four hundred 
 and eighty stadia or near sixty English miles. (See Nineveh and its Re- 
 mains, vol. ii, ch. ii, pp 242-253.) Mr. Layard considers that the northwest 
 portion of Nimroud exhil»its monuments more ancient, and at the same time 
 better in style and execution, than the south-west portion, — or than Kouy- 
 ■njik and Khorsabad (vol. ii, ch. i. p. 204 ; ch. iii, p. 305). If this hypothe- 
 iis, as to the ground covered by Nineveh, be correct, probably future exca- 
 vations will confirm it — or, if incorrect, refute it. But I do not at all reject 
 the supposition on the simple ground of excessive magnitude : on the con- 
 trary, I should at once believe the statement, if it were reported by Herodo- 
 tus after a visit to the spot, like the magnitude of Babylon. The testimony of 
 Ktesiis is. indeed, very inferior in value to that of Herodotus : yet it ought 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 NINEVEH AND ITS REMAINS. 
 
 807 
 
 nurdly to be outweighed by the supposed improbability of so great a walled 
 space, when we consider how little wc know where to set bounds to the pow- 
 er of the Assyrian kings in respect to command of human labor for an> 
 process merely simple and toilsome, with materials both near and inexhaust- 
 ible. Not to mention the great wall of China, we have only to look at tho 
 Picts Wall, and other walls built by the Romans in Britain, to satisfy our 
 Hclvcs that a great length of fortification, under circumstaiiecs much less fa 
 vorable than the position of the ancient Assyrian kings, is noway incredible 
 in itself. Though the walls of Nineveh and Babylon were much /«r^^ than 
 those of Paris as it now stands, yet when wc conijiare the two not merelv in 
 size, but in respect of costliness, elaboration, and contrivance, the latter will 
 be found to represent an infinitely greater ainuunt of work. 
 
 Larissa and Mespila, those deserted towns and walls wliieh Xenophon s:i^» 
 in the retreat of the Ten Thousand (Anal>as. iii. 4, (i-lo), coincide in j)oint 
 of distance and situation with Nimroud and Kouyunjik, according to Mr. 
 Layard's remark. Nor is his supposition improbable, that both of them wera 
 formed by the Medes out of the ruins of the concpicred city of Nineveh. 
 Neither of them singly seems at all adequate to the reputation of that an- 
 rientcity, or rather walled circuit. According to the account of Herodotus 
 I'hraortes the second Median king had attacked Nineveh, but had been him 
 self ilain in the attempt, and lost nearly all his army. It was partly to re 
 venge this disgrace that Kyaxares, son of Piiraortes assailed Nineveh (He- 
 rod, i, 102-103) : we may thus see a special reason, in addition to his own 
 violence of temper (i, 73), why he destroyed the city after having taken it 
 ^NtJ■ov avaaruTov yevofievrjg, i, 178). It is ea.sy to conceive that this va.«»t 
 walled space may have been broken up and converted into two Median 
 towns, both on the Tigris. In the subsequent change from Median to Per 
 >ian dominion, these towns also became depopulated, as far as the strange 
 tales which Xenophon heard in his retreat can be trusted. The interposition 
 of these iwo Median towns doubtless contrilnited, for the time, to put out of 
 -iu^ht the traditions respecting the old Niims which had before stood upon 
 tfieir site. But these traditions were never extinct, and a new town beorinL' 
 the old name of Ninus must have subsecjuently arisen on the spot. Thic 
 second Ninus is recognized by Tacitus, Ptolemy, and Ammianus, not only 
 ft-} existing, but as pretending to uninterrupted continuity of succession from 
 the ancient " caput Assyria." 
 
 Mr. Layai-d remarks on the facility with which edifices, such as those is 
 Assyria, built of s mburnt bricks, perish when neglected, and crumble uww 
 Intf) earth, leaving little or no trace. 
 
 Il 
 
 '.\ 
 
 I 
 
 / V 
 
 StaSSrS 
 
 ill 
 
8oe 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CHAPTER XX 
 
 F('rYPTIANS. 
 
 Ir, on one side, tho Phenicians were separated fl-om the produo 
 live Babylonia hy tlu' Arahian desert; on the other side, the 
 western portion of the same desert divided them from the no less 
 productive valley of the Nile. In those early times which pre- 
 ceded the rise of Greek civilization, their land trade emhraced 
 both regions, and they served as the sole agents of international 
 traffic between the two. Conveniently as their to\vn> were 
 Bituat.Ml for nuiritinie commerce with the Nile, Egy{)tian jealousy 
 had exclude*! Pheniciau vc.sel.-^ not less than those of the Greeks 
 from the muuih^ of that river, until the rei-u of Psammetichus 
 (072-GlS B. r.); and thus rwn the merchants of Tyre could 
 then reach Meiiiphis only l)y means of caravans, employing as 
 their instrument,;, as I have alnady o!..^t rved, the Arabian tribes,i 
 alternately plunuercrs and carri* r<. Respecting Egypt, as respect- 
 ing Assyria, since tlie works of Ilekatanis aic unfortunately lost, 
 ou'r earliest information is derived from Herodotus, wlio visited 
 E"vi)t about two centuries after the reign of Psammetichus, 
 when it formed [lart of one of the twenty Persian satrapies, ihe 
 Egyptian marvels and peculiarities which he recounts, are more 
 numerous, as well as more diversified, than the Assyrian, and 
 had the vestiges been etfaced a^ completely in the former as 
 in the latter, his narrative would })robal)ly have met with an 
 equal degree of suspicion. But the hard >tone, combined with 
 the dry climate of Upper Egypt (where a show er of rain counted 
 
 » 8traho, xvi, pi'. TOG, 776. 778 : Pliny, H. N. vi. .TJ. "Anil.os, mirum dictu, 
 ex innumeris i>oi>ulis pars icqua in oommerciis aut latrociniis dot;unt: in 
 nniversum gentes ditissiniir, ut apud quas nuvxini;f opes Ronianoram 
 Parthonimque sahgistant. — vcndentibus quae a mari am sylvis caj iunt, nihil 
 invioem redimentilius/ 
 
 The latter part of this passage of Pliny presents an enunciation sufficietitly 
 distinrt, thouL'li (•> implication only, of what has been called the merQJfitik 
 theory in politu hI economy. 
 
 10 Vol. 3 
 
 RIVER NILE AND CANALS. 
 
 309 
 
 .8 . prodipy), have given such permanence to the monumen^ m 
 ^vaUey of the Nifo, that enough has .emained to bear out he 
 father ot" Greoia.^ history, and to show that, m desenb.ng « hat 
 he p ofesses to have seen, he is a guide perfectly trustworthy. 
 For that which he heard, he appears only in the character o . 
 reporter, and often an incredulous reporter ; but though this d.s- 
 "n'c° on between his hearsay and his ocular evidence ts not o.dy 
 obvious, but of the most capital moment,' - it has been too otten 
 neglected by those who depreciate him as a witness. 
 
 The myLrious river Nile, a god^ in the eyes of anc.erit 
 Egyptians, and still preserving both its volume atid Us useful- 
 nets undiminished amidst the general degradat.o.i of the coun ry, 
 reached the sea in the thne of Herodotus by five n..tural .nou.h^ 
 besides two others artiBcially dug ; - the Pelus.ac branch formed 
 the eastern boundary of Egypt, the Kanopic branch _ one hun- 
 dred and seventy miles distant - the western; while the beben- 
 nytic branch was a continuation of the straight line ot the upper 
 river: from this latter branche.l oH' the Saitic and the Mendesian 
 arms.3 Its overflowings are far more fertilizing than those of 
 
 . To give ov. example: llcroauti.s mentions an opinion given to him 1,, 
 
 the ZLar^ar,, (comptroller) of the property of Athene at fea.., o th. 
 
 fl „, Z, ,h,. sourees of the Nile were at a.i immeasurable uepth m the 
 
 l: t aXbeteen SyCnC and Elephantine, and that mmmet. 
 
 In, hid vainly tried to sound them with a rope many thousand fathoms .« 
 
 rih ii 28). m mentioning thi. tale (perfeetly deserving of being r.count.d 
 atlel because it eame from a person of considerable station in the conn, 
 t) itrodotns expressly says : " This comptroller seemed to ine to be only 
 lanlerng" though h^e professed to know accurately," - oi™C <S^ Z'-) ^ -';«•; 
 mT"%evo(ui.L arp«e.f. Now Straho (xvii. p. 819), m alluding to 
 !his stirt-introduees it just as if Herodotus had told it for a fact,- Ilo.^ 
 d' Hoa(5or6f re Kal aX/.oi QAvapovmv, oiov, etc. ,™,pr« 
 
 iLy other instances might be cited, both from ancient and modern writers. 
 of similar carelessness or injustice towards this admirable author. 
 
 * Ot loiec Tov NctAov, Herod, ii. 90. . . * „^« 
 
 3 Thrseven mouths of the Nile, so notorious in -'XtrrC -« 
 formable to the modem geography of the country : see Manner,, togr. a« 
 
 ^rbrth^of 'tlfe bTe of the Delta, between Pelusium -^ ^^-^P-^ 
 overstated by Herodotus (ii, 6-9) at three thousand six ""<1':»'' «f » ' 
 Diodorus (i,34) and Strabo, .t thirteen hundred ^t^-' ™'-^;4^";;\^ 
 With, though the text of Strabo in various passages i. not uniform on thx 
 
 ; t 
 
 ■\ m 
 
flO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 FIRST OPENING OF EGYPT TO THE GREEKS. 
 
 311 
 
 the Euphrates in Assyria, — partly from their more uniforuk reciii'>- 
 rence both in time and quantity, partly from the rich silt tvhich it 
 brings down and deposits, whereas the Euphrates served only as 
 a moisture. The pati*Rnce of the E<^yptians had excavated, in 
 Qjiddle Egypt, the vast reservoir — partly, it seems, natural and 
 preexisting — called the lake of Mfrris : and in the Delta, a 
 network of numerous canals ; yet on the whole the hand of man 
 had been le^s tasked than in Babylonia; whilst the soil annually 
 enriched, yielded its abundant produce without either plough or 
 spade to assist the seed cast in by the liusbandman.' That under 
 
 niattcr, and requires correction. See Grosskurd s note on Strabo, ii, [>. 6h 
 (note 3, p. 101), and xvii, p. 18«i (note 9, p. 332). Pliny gives the distance 
 at one hundred and seventy miles (II. N. v, 9). 
 
 ' Herod, i, 193. UnpayiveTat 6 mrog (in Bahylonia) ov, Karurrfjp ii^ 
 A/}V~ru, avTov roi- ttoth/io ■ i' \ <i3niv(n>T0(; /r rnr apnvpnr. u'/'/.a X^P^^- "'"^ ^'^^ 
 KjfkwvfitoiOL upSofin'Oc • fj y'l,^ Unih'hji'lrj x^H*'! ''^•''^d, KaruTTtp ij kiyvnTU]^ 
 KnraTeTfijjTai /f iSiupvx'i' , ♦• <". 
 
 Herodotus was inforined that the canals in Efj^yjjt had been dug by the 
 lafx)r of that host of prisonn - whom tlie vi(!tonou.s Seso-stns brought home 
 from his conquests (ii, 108). The canals in Eirypt served the purpose partly 
 of communication between flic different cities, i)artly of a constant supply 
 of water to those towns w lieh were not immediately on the Nile: "that 
 v;ust river, so constantly at work/' (to use tlie lanjxuatre of Herodotus — vnb 
 mmii'Tov rt nomuov Kai ol'-njr ipyiriKuv, ii. 11). spared tlie Egyptians all 
 the toil of irrigation wliit h the Assyrian cultivator underwent (ii, 14). 
 
 Lower Egypt, as Ik-rodotus s.nv it. thuugh a continued flat, was unfit 
 either for horse or car, fiom the mnnlter of intersecting canals, — rv/7r7rof 
 Km ava^u^evToc (ii, 108). Hut lower Egypt. <is Volncy saw it, was among 
 the countries in the world best suited to the action of cavalry, so that he pro- 
 nounces the native populatiofi of the country to have no chance of contend 
 ing against the Mamelukes (Volney. Travels in Egypt and Syria, vol. i, ch. 
 12, sect 2, p. 199). The country has revcncl to the state in which it wai 
 {iTTKaaifiT) Kai aua^evoftfrt/ rnna) before the cnnals were made. — one of th6 
 many striking illustrations r>f the difference between the Egypt which a 
 mo<iom traveller visits, and that winch Herodotus and even Strabo saw, — 
 6Atjv iT^wTffv dujpiiyuv etri diutpv^i Tfuj^^eiaCjv (Strabo. xvii, p. 788). 
 
 Considering the early age of Herodotus, his remarks on the geological 
 character of Egypt as a deposit of the accumulated niud by the Nile, appear 
 to me most remarkable (ii, 8-14). Having no fixed number of years included 
 in his religious belief as mesisuring the past existence of the earth, he car- 
 ries his mind back without difficulty to what may have beATi effected by this 
 river in ten or twenty thousand yearjf, or '' in the whole space of time elaptttf 
 before I was bom," (ii, 11.) 
 About the lake of Mtxris. tiee a note a little farther oil 
 
 these circumstances a dense and regularly organized population 
 should have been concentrated in fixed abodes along the valley 
 occupied by this remarkable river, is no matter of wonder; the 
 marked peculiarities of the locality seem to have brought about 
 such a result, in the earliest periods to which human society can 
 be traced. Along the five hundred and fifty miles of its undivided 
 course from Syene to Memphis, where for the most part the moun 
 tains leave only a comparatively narrow strip on each bank, as 
 well as in the broad expanse between Memphis and the Mediter 
 raiiean, there prevailed a peculiar form of theocratic civilization, 
 from a date which even in the time of Herodotus was immemo 
 rially ancient. But when we seek for some measure of this 
 antiquity (earlier than the time when Greeks were first admitted 
 iiito Egypt in the reign of Psammetichus), we find only the com- 
 j»utations of the priests, reaching back for many thousand years, 
 first, of government by immediate and present gods, next, ot 
 human kings. Such computations have been transmitted to us 
 by Herodotus, Manctho, and Diodorus,i — agreeing in their 
 essential conception of the fore-time, with gods in the first part of 
 the series, and men in the second, but differing materially in 
 events, names, and epochs : probably, if we possessed lists from 
 other Egyptian temples, besides those which Manetho drew up 
 at IIeliopolis,or which Herodotus learned at Memphis, we should 
 find discrepancies from both these two. To compare these lists, 
 and to reconcile them as fiir as they admit of being reconciled, is 
 interesting, as enabling us to understand the Egyptian mind, 
 but conducts to no trustworthy chronological results, and forms 
 no part of the task of an historian of Greece. 
 
 To the Greeks, Egypt was a closed worid before the reign of 
 Psammetichus, though after that time it gradually became an 
 important part of their field both of observation and action. 
 The astonishment which the country created in the mind of the 
 eariiest Grecian visitors may be learned even from the narrative 
 of Herodotus, who doubtless knew it by report long before he 
 went there. Both the physical and moral features of Egypt 
 Btood in strong contrast with Grecian experience : " not only 
 (says Herodotus) does the climate differ from all other climates 
 
 ' See note in Appendix to this chanter. 
 
 
 I 
 
 !f 
 
 
 ii 
 
 iV 
 
sit 
 
 HJSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 UPPER AND LO-WER EGYPT. 
 
 S19 
 
 and the river from all other rivers, but Egyptian hiws and cu». 
 toms ai-e opposed on almoit all points to those of other men. "^ 
 riie delta was at that time full of large and {wpulous cities,^ 
 built on artificial elevations of ground, and seemingly not much 
 inferior to Memphis itself, which was situated on the left bank of 
 the Nile (oi)posit(; to the site of the modern Cairo), a little 
 higher up than the spot where the delta begins. From the time 
 when the Greeks tii-st became cognizant of Egypt, to the buihh 
 ing of Alexandria and the reign of the Ptolemies, Memiihis wa? 
 the first city in Egypt, but it seems not to have been always so,— 
 there had been an earlier period when Thebes was the seat of 
 Egyptian power, and upper Egypt of far more consequence than 
 middle Egypt. Vicinity to the delta, which must always have 
 contained the largest number of cities and the widest surface of 
 productive territory, probably enabled Mem()his to usurp thia 
 honor from Thebes, and tlu^ predumluiince of lower Egypt waa 
 still farther contirnted w hen l*sammetichus intro«lnc(d Ionian and 
 Karian troops as liis auxiliaries in the government of the country. 
 But the stupendous magnitude of the temples and palaces, the 
 profusion of ornamental sculpture and painting, the immeasurable 
 range of sculptures hewn in the rocks still remaining as attesta- 
 tions of the grandeur of Thebes, — not to mention Ombi, Edfu, 
 and Elejdiantine, — show that upper Egypt was once the place to 
 which the land-tax from the productive delta was paid, and where 
 the kings and pries' s who employed it resided. It has been even 
 contended that Thebes itself was originally settled by emigrants 
 from still higher regions of the river, and the remains yet 
 
 ' Herotlot. ii, n.'). AtjtTrrtoi -/«a r."* oiparu Tut Kara <T<p£ag lovTt irepoiiftj 
 uai T;.! ~ * ... . 'ii' uX?,oiTfV rrapf \<>^fv<.) i/ ol aXXoi noTafioi, rd. tto^Xu Truvra 
 IfiiraMv Tolai aXloiai {ivdpuTroiot iaTiirnn-ro /]^ea Kai vo^iovc. 
 
 • Theokritus (Idyll, xvii, 83) celebrates Ptolemy Philadelphus king of 
 Egypt as raling over thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three 
 eities : the manner in which he strings these figures into three hexameter 
 ▼erses is somewhat ingenious. The priests, in describing to Herodotus the 
 unrivalled prosperity which they affirmed Egypt to have enjoyed under 
 Amasis, the last king before the Persian conquest, said that there were then 
 tificenty thousand citie;* in the country (ii, 177). Diodorus tells us that 
 eighteen thousand different cities and considerable villages were registered 
 in the Egyptian avaypa^ai (i, 31) for the ancient times, but that thirty 
 ^aaand were numbered under the Ptolemies. 
 
 found along the Nile in Nubia are analogous, both in style and 
 Jn grandeur, to those in Thebais.i What is remarkable is, that 
 both the one and the other are strikingly distinguished from the 
 Pyramids, which alone remain to illustrate the site of the an- 
 cient Memphis. There are no pyramids either in upper Egypt 
 or in Nubia ; but on the Nile, above Nubia, near the Ethiopian 
 Meroe, pyramids in great number, though of inferior dimensions, 
 are again found. From whence, or in what manner, Egyptian 
 institiTtions first took their rise, we have no means of determin- 
 ing : but there seems little to bear out the supposition of Heeren,^ 
 
 » Respecting the monuments of ancient Egyptian art, see the summary of 
 O Mailer, Archaologie der Kunst, sects. 215-233, and a still better account 
 and appreciation of them in Carl Schnaase, Geschichte der Bildenden Kdnste 
 bey den Alten, Dusseldorf. 1843, vol. i, book ii, chs. 1 and 2. 
 
 In regard to the credibility and value of Egyptian history anterior to 
 Psammetichus, there are many excellent remarks by Mr. Kenrick, in the 
 preface to his work, " The Egypt of Herodotus," (the second book of He 
 rodotus. with notes.) About the recent discoveries derived from the lii.TO 
 glvphics, he says : '• We know that it was the custom of the Egyptian kingi 
 to' inscribe the temples and obelisks which they raised with their own names 
 or with distinguishing hieroglyphics •, but in no one instance do these names, 
 as read by the modern decipherers of hieroglyphics on monuments said to 
 have been raised by kings before Psammetichus, correspond with the namei 
 given bv Herodotus." (Preface, p. xliv.) He farther adds in a note, "A 
 name which has been read phonetically Mena, has been found at Thebes, and 
 Mr. Wilkinson supposes it to be Menes. It is remarkable, however, that the 
 names which follow are not phonetically written, so that it is probable that 
 Ihis is not to be read Mcna. Besides, the cartouche, which immediately 
 follows, is that of a king of the eighteenth dynasty ; so that, at all events, 
 it cannot have been engraved till many centuries after the supposed age of 
 Menes ; and the occurrence of the name no more decides the question of 
 historical existence than that of Cecrops in the Parian Chronicle." 
 
 '' Heeren, Idecn uber den Verkehr der Alten Welt, part ii, 1, p. 403. The 
 opinion given by Parthey, however (De Philis InsuU, p. 100, Berlin, 1830), 
 may perhaps be just: *" Antiquissima setate eundem populum, dicamui 
 JEgypfiacum, Niii ripas inde a Meroe insuU usque ad ^gyptum inferioreni 
 occupasse, e monumentorum congnientia apparet : posteriore tempore, tab- 
 alis et annalibus nostris longe superiors alia stirps ^thiopica interiora terra 
 usque ad cataractam Syenensem obtinuit. Ex qua aetate cerU rerum notitia 
 id DOS pervenit, ^.gyj/tiorum et ^thiopum segregatio jam facta e«t. Hero- 
 dotus -jeterique scriptores Grseci populos acute discernunU" 
 
 At tlr^ moment, Syen6 and its cataract mark the boundary of two people 
 
 VOL m. 1^ 
 
 ii 
 
 
 Nt;'i| 
 
 il 
 
 
 I • 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
014 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CASTES IN EGYPT. 
 
 815 
 
 and other eminent authors, that they were transmitted dowi th« 
 Nile by Ethiopian colonists from Mcro^. Herodotus certainly 
 conceived Egyptians and Ethiopians (who in his time jointly 
 occupied the border island of P21ei)hjintine, which he had him.^olf 
 visited) as completely distinct from each other, in race and 
 customs not less than in language, — the latter being generally 
 of the rudest habits, of great stature, and still greater physical 
 Btrcngth, — the chief part of them subsisting on meat and milk, 
 and blest with unusual longevity. He knew of Meroe, as the 
 Ethiopian metropolis and a considerable city, fifty-two days* 
 journey higher up the river than Elc{)hantine, but his informants 
 had given him no idea of analogy between its institutions and 
 those of Egypt ;» it was the migration of a large number of 
 the Egyptian military caste, during the reign of Psammetichus, 
 into Ethiopia, which first communicated civilized customs, in his 
 judgment, to these southern barbarians. If there be really any 
 coimection between the social phenomena of Egypt and tliose of 
 Meroc, it seems more reasonable to treat the latter as derivative 
 from the former.'^ 
 
 The |)opulation of Egypt was classified into certain castes or 
 hereditary professions, of w hich the number was not exactly de- 
 fined, and is represented differently by different authors. The 
 priests stand clearly marked out, as the order richest, most pow- 
 
 and two languages, — Iv;;yptian.s and Arabic language to the north, Nubians 
 and Berber language to the south. (Parthey, ibid.) 
 
 » Compare Herodot. ii, 30-.32 ; iii, 19-25 ; Strabo, xvi, p. 818. Herodotus 
 irives the description of their armor and appearance as part of the army of 
 Xerxes (vii, 69); they ]>aintcd their bodies: compare Plin. H. N. xxxiii, 36, 
 How little Ethiopia wa< visited in his time, may be gathered fVom the tenor 
 of his statements : according to Diodorus (i, 37), no Greeks visited it earliei 
 than tlie expedition of Ptolemy iniiladclphns, — orror u^eva \v ra irepl rove 
 Tu-orr Toi'Tovr, Hal TrtiT ' ' ■ ~i Klr>^rvn. Diodorus, however, is incorrect 
 in savinc? that no Gre««k had ever irone as far southward as the frontier 
 of Ivn-nt^: Herodotus (crtainlv visited P^lephantine, probably other Greeks 
 
 also 
 
 The statements respectinir the theocratical state of Meroe and its superior 
 civilization come from Piodorus (iii, 2, 5, 7), Strabo (xvii, p. 822), and Pliny 
 (H N vi, 29-33), much later than Herodotus. Diodorus seems to have had 
 no older informants before him, about Ethiopia, than Apatharctiid^ and 
 Artcmi<lorus, both in the second century b. c (Diod. iii, 10.) 
 
 ' Wv^-iolsn;! ad Diodor. iii. 3. 
 
 erful and most veuL^rated, — distributed all over ihe country, and 
 possessing exclusively the means of reading and writing,i besides 
 a vast amount of narrative matter treasured up in the memory, 
 the whole stock of medical and physical knowledge then attaina- 
 ble, and those rudiments of geometry, or rather land-measuring, 
 which were so often culled into use in a country annually inun- 
 dated. To each god, and to each temple, throughout Egypt, 
 lands and other properties belonged, whereby the numerous band 
 of priests attached to him were maintained : it seems, too, that a 
 fa It her portion of the lands of the kingdom was set apart for them 
 in individual property, though on this point no certainty is attain- 
 able. Their ascendency, both direct and indirect, over the mindfl 
 of the people, was immense ; they prescribed that minute ritual 
 under which the life of every Egyptian, not excepting the king 
 himself,- was passed, and which was for themselves more full of 
 harassing particularities than for any one else.^ Every day in 
 the year belonged to some particular god, and the priests alona 
 knew to which. There were different gods in every nome, 
 though Isis and Osiris were common to all, — and the priests of 
 each god constituted a society apart, more or less important, ac- 
 cording to the comparative celebrity of the temple : the high 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 37. QeoaifSeeg 6t nepiaaug kovreq tiuXiaTa nuvruv av^pCtnup, 
 etc. He is astonished at the retentiveness of their memory ; some of them 
 h:i«l more stories to tell than any one whom he had ever seen (ii, 77-109; 
 
 Diodor. i, 73). 
 
 The word priest conveys to a modem reader an idea very different from 
 that of the Egyptian upeic, who were not a profession, but an order com- 
 prising many occupations and professions, — Josephus the Jew was in liku 
 manner an lepevg Kara yevog (cont. Apion. c. 3). 
 
 ' Diodorus (i, 70-73) gives an elaborate description of the monastic strict- 
 ness with which the daily duties of the Egyptian king were measured out by 
 the priests: compare Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. p. 353, who refers tm 
 llekatajus (probably Hekatwus of Abdera) and Eudoxus. The prierti 
 re|)resented that rsammetichus was the first Egyptian king who brokt 
 through the priestly canon limiting the royal allowance of wine : compars 
 Strabo, xvii, p, 790. 
 
 The Ethiopian kings at Merod are said to have been kept in the like pupil- 
 lage by the priestly order, until a king named Ergamenes, daring the reig« 
 of Ptolemy Philadelphus in Egypt, emancipated himself and put tho cfaM 
 priests to death (Diodor. iii, 6). 
 
 3 Herodot. ii. 82-83. 
 
 
 ' * 
 
 I 
 
 
lie 
 
 H1&T0RY OF GRKECE. 
 
 MISGELLAXEOUS CASTES IN EGYPT. 
 
 317 
 
 priests of Hephae?t09, whose dignity was said to have been trans- 
 mitted from father to son through a series of three hundred and 
 forty -one generations' (commemorated by the like number of 
 colossal statues, v hich Herodotus himself saw), were second in 
 importance only to the king. The property of each temple in- 
 cluded troops of ilependents and slaves, who were stamped with 
 " holy marks,"- and who must have been numerous in order to 
 suffice for the large buildings and their constant visitors. 
 
 Next in importance to the sacerdotal caste were the military 
 caste or order, whose native name^ indicated that they stood on 
 the left hand of the king, while the priests occupied the right. They 
 were classified into Kala^iries and Herraotybii, who occupied 
 lands in eighteen particular nomes or provinces, principally in 
 lower Egypt. The kalasiries had once amounted to one hundred 
 and sixty thousand men, the hermotybii to two himdred and fifty 
 thousand, when at the maximum of their population ; but the 
 highest point had long been past in the time of Herodotus. To 
 each man of this soldier caste was assigned a |)ortion of land 
 equal to about six and a half English acres, free from any tax ; 
 what measures were taken to keep the lots of land in suitable 
 harmony with a fluctuating number of holders, we know not. 
 The statement of Herodotus relates to a time long past and gone, 
 and describes what was believed, by the priests with whom he 
 talked, to have been the primitive constitution of their country 
 anterior to the Persian conquest : the like is still more true re- 
 gpecting the statement of Diodorus.4 The latter says that the 
 territory of Egypt was divided into three parts, — one part 
 belonging to the king, another to the priests, and the remainder to 
 the soldiei's ;^ his language seems to intimate that every nome 
 was so divided, and even that the three portions were equal, though 
 he does not expressly say so. The result of these statements, 
 oombined with the history of Joseph in the book of Genesis, seem- 
 to be, that the lands of the priests and the soldiers were regarded 
 as privileged property and exempt from all burdens, while the 
 remaining soil was considered as the property of the king, who, 
 
 » Herodot ii, 143 
 » Herodot ii, 30. 
 • DIodor. i, 73 
 
 * Herodot ii, 113 ; aTlyfiaTa Ipa. 
 
 * Herodot. i. 165-166: Diodor. i, 7*. 
 
 howeier, received from it a fixed proportion, one-fifth of thf 
 total produce, leaving the rest in the hands of the cultivators.* 
 We are told that Sethos, priest of the god Phtha [- Hephajstos) 
 at Memphis, and afterwards named king, oppressed the military 
 caste and deprived them of their lands, in revenge for which they 
 withheld from him their aid when Egypt was invaded by St?nna 
 cherib, — and also that, in the reign of Psammetichus, a larg« 
 number (two hundred and forty thousand) of these soldiers mi 
 grated into Ethiopia from a feeling of discontent, leaving their 
 wives and children behind them.2 It was Psammetichus who 
 first introduced Ionian and Karian mercenaries into the country, 
 and began innovations on the ancient Egyptian constitution ; so 
 that the'^disaflTection towards him, on the part of the native soldiers, 
 no longer permitted to serve as exclusive guards to the king, i« 
 not difficult to explain. The kalasiries and hermotybii were 
 hiterdicted from every description of art or trade. There can be 
 little doubt that under the Persians their lands were made sub- 
 ject to the tribute, and this may partly explain the frequent 
 revolts which they maintained, with very considerable bravery, 
 against the Persian kings. 
 
 Herodotus enumerates five other races (so he calls them), or 
 castes, besides priests and soldiers,3 — herdsmen, swineherds, 
 tradesmen, interpreters, and pilots ; an enumeration which per- 
 plexes us, inasmuch as it takes no account of the husbandmen, 
 who must always have constituted the majority of the population. 
 It is, perhaps, for tliis very reason that they are not comprised in 
 the list, — not standing out specially marked or congregated 
 together, like the five above named, and therefore not seeming to 
 constitute a race apart. The distribution of Diodorus, who spec 
 ifies (over and above priests and soldiers) husbandmen, herdsmen, 
 and artificers, embraces much more completely the whole popula- 
 
 > Besides this general rent or land-tax received by the Egyptian king* 
 there seem, also, to have been special crown-lands. Strabo mentions aa 
 island in the Nile (in the Thebaid) celebrated for the extraordinary excellenw 
 of its date-palms; the whole of this Island belonged to the kings, without 
 any other proprietor: it yielded a large revenue, and i)asscd into the hwidf 
 of the Roman government in Strabo's time (xvii, p. 818). 
 
 « Herodot a, 30-141. ' HeroAoi. i-. 164 
 
 '4 
 
 k 
 
 ( H 
 
 II \ 
 
 >/ 
 
 i 
 
flI3 
 
 HISTOKT OF GREKCE. 
 
 TEADESMEK - ARTISANS. - EMBALMING. 
 
 Sl« 
 
 ton It seems more the statement of a reflecting man, pusb.n, 
 out the pnnciple o. hereditaiy occpations to its coDsequcnc.^ 
 (and the comments which the historian so abundantly interweaves 
 with his narrativ^ show that such was the character of ,i,e 
 authonties which he followed; ;- while the list given by Herod- 
 otus comprise* that which struck his observation. It seems that, 
 certain proportion of the soil of the delta consisted of marsh lan.L 
 .ncludmg pieces ot habitable g^und, but impenetrable to an in- 
 rading enemy, and favorable only to the growth of papyrus and 
 other aquatic plants: other portions of the delta, as well as ,l.e 
 upper valley, in parts where it widened to the eastward, were too 
 wet for the culture of grain, though producing ,he richest herb- 
 ^o,and eminently suitable to the race of Egyptian herdsmen, 
 who thus divided the soil with the husbandmen.^ irerdsinen 
 generally were held reputable, but the race of swineherds were 
 hated and despised, from .he extreme antipathy of all other Eoyu. 
 ttans ,0 the pig, -which animal yei could not be altogether mo! 
 .cnbed, because there were certain peculiar occasions on which 
 It was imperative t<, offer him in sacri.ice lo Selene or Dionysus 
 Herodotus acquaints us that the swinel„..rds were interdicted 
 from all the temples, and that they always intern,.,Tied among 
 tfiemselves, other Egyptians disdaining such an alliance, -a 
 .tatement which indirectly intimates that there wa.s no standing 
 objection .gainst intermarriage of the remaining castes with 
 «ich other Ihe c:iste or race of interpreters began only with 
 he reign of Psammetichus, from the admission of Greek settler^ 
 then for the Rrst time tolerated in the country. Though they 
 were half Greeks, ilie historian does not note them as of Inferior 
 •ccount, except as mnpared with the two ascendant castes of 
 soldiers and priests ; moreover, the creation of a new caste show8 
 •hat^re was^ioconseorate.1 or unchangeable total number. 
 
 ^])iodor.i 74. AI,oiu iho Kcvpiiaa casius Ken^alljr^Hccreirridcfn 
 Iberden Verkehr der Al«„ Welt, part ii. 2, pp.^72-595: 
 
 M0^,o Vorevt,°T™'", ^'"T'" ,'^""'='' '" ^^yf"' '" «— W-». P- 
 •w, also Volneys Travels, vol. i. ch. 6, p. 77. *^ 
 
 The expression of Herodotus — o/ rrrm rhv nr-..r. 
 
 Tlioso whom Herodotus denominates tradesmen (xajxtjloi) are 
 doubtless identical with the artisans {leivhat) speciEed by Diod- 
 
 ^jrus, the town population generally as distinguished from that 
 
 of the country. During the three months of the year when 
 Eo-ypt was covered with water, festival days were numerous, — 
 tlH3 people thronging by hundreds of thousands, in vast barges, to 
 one or other of the many holy phices, combining worship and 
 enjoyment.1 In Egypt, weaving was a trade, whereas in Greece 
 it was the domestic occupation of females ; and Herodotus treats 
 it as one of those reversals of the order of nature which were seen 
 o.ily in Egypt,'^ that the weaver stayed at home plying his web 
 v.hile his wife went to market. The process of embalming 
 bodies was elaborate and universal, giving employment to a large 
 !-pecial class of men : the profusion of editices, obeUsks, sculpture 
 and painting, all executed by native workmen, required a large 
 body of trained sculptors,^ who in the mechanical branch of their 
 busuiess attained a high excellence. Most of the animals in 
 Errypt werc objccts of religious reverence, and many of them 
 woie identified in the closest manner with particular gods. The 
 orJer of priests included a large number of hereditary feeders 
 
 ' llerodot. ii, 59-60. 
 
 - lieiodot. ii, 35; Sophokl. CEdip. Colon. 332: where the passage cited hy 
 the Scholiast out of Nymphodorus is a remarkable example of the habit of 
 ingenious Greeks to represent all customs which they thought worthy of 
 notice, as having emanated from the design of some great sovereign : here 
 Nymphodorus introduces Sesostris as the author of the custom in questioo, 
 in order that the Egyptians might be rendered effeminate. 
 
 =» The process of embalming is minutely described (Herod, ii, 85-90) ; the 
 word which he uses for it is the same as that for salting meat and fish, — 
 Tapix^vaiQ : compare Strabo, xvi, p. 764. 
 
 Perfect exactness of execution, mastery of the hardest stone, and undevi- 
 •ting obedience to certain rules of proportion, are general characteristics of 
 Egyptian sculpture. There are yet seen in their quarries obelisks not severed 
 from the rock, but having three of their sides ah-eady adorned with hier». 
 glyphics ; so certain were they of catting off the fourth side with precision 
 (Schnaase, Gesch. der Bild. Kunste, i, p. 428). 
 
 All the nomes of Egypt, however, were not harmonious in their feeUngl 
 respecting animals: particular animals were worshipped in some nom« 
 which in other nomes were objects even of antipathy, especially the crocodik 
 (Herod, ii, 69 ; Str%bo, xvii, p. 817 : see particularly the fifteenth Satire d 
 #a venal) 
 
 
 ik 
 
 
 ' I- 
 
 i 
 
d20 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 aiid tenders of tlio- -ctcred animalsJ Among the sacerdotai 
 order were also t'oiind the computers of genealogies, the infinitely 
 subdivided practitiun -rs in the art of healing, etc.,- who enjoyed 
 good reputation, and were sent for as surgeons to Cyrus and 
 Dariut. The Egyptian city po}>ulation was thus exceedingly 
 numerous, so that king Sethon, when called upon to resist an 
 invasion without the aid of the military caste, might well be sup- 
 posed to have formed an army out of '' the tradesmen, the 
 artisans, and the mai-ket-people :"3 and Alexandria, at the com- 
 mencement of the dynasty of the Ptolemies, acquired its numer- 
 ous and active inhabitants at the expense of Memphis and the 
 an«ient towns of lower Egypt. 
 
 The mechanical obedience and fixed habits of the mas.s of the 
 Egy[)tian population (not priests or soldiers) was a point which 
 made much impression upon Grecian observers ; so that Solon is 
 said to have introduced at Athens a custom prevalent in Egypt, 
 whereby the nomarch or chief of each nome was required to in- 
 vestigate every man's means of living, and to punish with death 
 those who did not furnish evidence of some recognized occupation.* 
 It does not seem that the institution of caste in Egypt, though 
 insuring unapproachable ascendency to the priests and much con- 
 sideration to the soldiers, was attended with any such profound 
 deba:>ement to the rest as that which falls upon the lowest caste 
 or sudras in India, — no such gulf between them as that between 
 the twice-born and the once-born in the religion of Brahma. Yet 
 those stupendous works, which form the permanent memorials of 
 the country, remain at the same time as proofs of the oppressive 
 exactions of the kings, and of the reckless caprice with which 
 the lives as well as the contributions of the people were lavished. 
 One hundred and twenty thousand Egyptians were said to have 
 perished in the digging of the canal, which king Nekos began but 
 
 » Herodot. ii, 65-7l> ; Diodor. i, 83-90 : Plutarc!i, Isid. et Osir. p. 380. 
 
 HHsselquist identified all th( birds carved on the obelisk neai Matarea 
 (HdHopolis). (Travels in Egypt, p. 99.) 
 
 •Herodot. ii, 82-83; iii, 1, 129. It is one of the points of distinction 
 between Egyptians and Bal)ylonians, that the latter had no snrpeons or 
 larpoi: they brought ont ihe sick into the market-place, to pre fit by th« 
 lympathy and advice of the passers-by (Herodot. i, 197). 
 
 * Herodot. ii, HI. ' 4 Herodot. iii, 1 77. 
 
 GREAT MONUMENTS IN EGYPT. 
 
 321 
 
 did not finish, between the Pelusian arm of the Nile and the Red 
 eea-» while the construction of the two great pyramids, attributed 
 to the kings Cheops and Chephren, was described to Herodotus 
 by the priests as a period of exhausting labor and extreme suffer- 
 in- to the whole Egyptian people, — and yet the great Labynnth,* 
 eaTd to have been built by the dodekarchs, appeared to him s 
 more stupendous work than the Pyramids, so that the toil em 
 ployed upon it cannot have been less destructive. The moving of 
 Buch vast masses of stone as were seen in the ancient edifices 
 both of upper and lower Egypt, with the imperfect mechanical 
 resources then existing, must have tasked the efforts of the people 
 yet more severely than the excavation of the half-finished canal 
 of Nekos. Indeed, the associations with which the Pyramids 
 were connected, in the minds of those with whom Herodotus con- 
 versed were of the most odious character. Such vast works, 
 Aristotle observes, are suitable to princes who desire to consume 
 the strength and break the spirit of their people. With Greek 
 despots, perhaps, such an intention may have been sometimes 
 deliberately conceived ; but the Egyptian kings may be presumed 
 to have followed chietly caprice, or love of pomp, — sometimes 
 
 ' Herodot ii, 158. Read the account of the foundation of Petersburg by 
 Peter the Great : " Au milieu de ces rcformes, grandes et petites, qui fatsaient 
 les amusemens du czar, et de la guerre terrible qui I'occupoit contre Charle. 
 XI ilieta les fondemens de I'importante ville et du port de Petersbourg, 
 ;n ml dans un marais oC il n'y avait pas une cabane. P.erre travadla d« 
 es mai^s k la premiere maison : rien ne le rebuta : des ouvners furent forc^ 
 de Tnir sur ce bord de la mer Baltique, des frontieres d'Astrachan, de. 
 bords de la Mer Noire et de la Mcr Caspicnne. II peril plus de cent mille 
 Lme dans les travaux qu'il fallut faire, et dans les fatigues et la disett. 
 nu"n essuya: mais enfm la ville existe." (Voltaire, Anecdotes sur Pierre le 
 Grand en (Euvres Completes, ed. Paris, 182.5, torn, xxxi, p. 491.) 
 
 « Herodot. ii, 124-129. rov liov Terpvfzivov krb kaxarov kckov. (Diodor 
 
 *' nJpfrL nvpaui6<.v (Diodorus observes) ovSev oA.>g oifie napd. role ^yX^' 
 oioL,%m napa roic ovyypa<pevacv, avf.<l>uveLac. He then alludes to som. 
 Of the discrepant stories about the date of the Pyramids, and the names of 
 Lir constructors. This confession, of the complete want of trustworthy 
 information respecting the most remarkable edifices of lower Egypt>rms • 
 striking contrast with the statement which Diodorus had given (c. 44). that 
 the priests possessed records, "continually handed down from reign to rei|pi 
 respecting four hundred and seventy Egyptian kings. 
 
 VOL. III. 1^* **^^ 
 
 \/| 
 
 
 I /I 
 
 Hi 
 
 f 
 
322 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 views of a permanent benefit to be achieved, — as in the canal 
 of Nekos and the vast reservoir of Moeris,* with its channel join- 
 ing the river, — when they thus expended the physical strengtli 
 ind even the lives of their subjects. 
 
 8an<'tity of animal life generally, veneration for particular ani- 
 mals in particular nomes, and abstinence on religious grounds 
 from certain vegetables, were among the marked features of 
 Egyptian life, and served preeminently to impress upon the 
 country that air of singularity which foreigners like Herodotus 
 remarked in it. The two specially marked bulls, called apis at 
 Memphis, and mnevis at Heliopolis, seem to have enjoyed a sort 
 of national worship :"- the ib^5, the cat, and the dog were through- 
 out most of the nomes venerated during life, embalmed like men 
 after death, and if killed, avenged by the severest punishment of 
 the offending party : but i\ e veneration of the crocodile was 
 confined to the neighl>orhood of Thebes and the lake of Mteris. 
 Such veins of religious sertiment, which distinguished Egypt 
 from Phenicia and Assyria, not less than from Greece, were ex- 
 plained by the native }>riests afler their manner to Herodotus, 
 though he declines from pious scruples to communicate what was 
 told to him.3 They seem remnants continued from a very early 
 
 ' It appears that the lake of Mceris is, at least in great part, a natural 
 reservoir, though improvitd by art for the purposes wanted, and connectcti 
 with the river by an artificial canal, sluices, etc. (Kenrick ad Herodot 
 ii, 149.) 
 
 '* The lake still exist*^, of diminished magnitude, being about sixty miles 
 in circumference, but the ^communication with the Nile has ceased." Herodo- 
 tus gives the circumfererce as three thousand six hundred stadia, = between 
 four hundred and four haodred and fifty miles. 
 
 I incline to believe that there was more of the hand of man in it than Mr. 
 Kenrick supposes, though doubtless the receptacle was natural. 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 38-46, 65-72 ; iii, 27-30 : Diodor. i, 83-90. 
 
 It is surprising to find Pindar introducing into one of his odes a plain 
 mention of the monstrous circumstances connected with the worship of the 
 goat in the Mendesian nome (Pindar, Fragm. Inc. 179, ed. Bergk). Pindiir 
 had also dwelt, in one of his Prosodia, upon the mythe of the gods having 
 disguised themselves as animals, when ueeking to escape Typhon ; which was 
 one of the tales told aa an explanation of the consecration of animals in 
 Egypt: 8«e Pindar, Fragra. Inc. p. 61, ed. Bergk; Porphyr. de Abstinent 
 Si, p. 251, ed. Rhoer. 
 
 ' Herodot ii, 65. Diodoms dow not feel the aanw reluctance to mentior 
 aT^^fTS il, 86). 
 
 II 
 
 NUMEROUS DYNASTIES OF KINGS. 
 
 323 
 
 ttage of Fetic\iism, — and the attempts of different persons, 
 noticed in Diodorus and Plutarch, to account for their origin, 
 partly by legends, partly by theory, will give little satisfaction tc 
 
 any one.^ 
 
 Though Thebes first, and Memphis afterwards, were undoubt- 
 edly the principal cities of Egypt, yet if the dynasties of Mane- 
 tho are at all trustworthy, even in their general outline, the 
 Egyptian kings were not taken uniformly either from one or the 
 other. Manetho enumerates on the whole twenty-six different 
 dynasties or families of kings, anterior to the conquest of the 
 country by Kambyses, — the Persian kings between Kambysea 
 and the revolt of the Egyptian Amyrtaeus, in 405 b. c. constitut- 
 ing his twenty-seventh dynasty. Of these twenty-six dynas- 
 ties, beginning with the year 5702 b. c. , the first two are Thin- 
 ites, — the third and fourth, Memphites, — the fifth, from the 
 island of Elephantine, — the sixth, seventh, and eighth, again 
 Memphites, — the ninth and tenth, Herakleopolites, — the el«v- 
 enth, twelfth, and thirteenth, Diospolites or Thebans, — the four- 
 teenth, Choites, — the fifteenth and sixteenth, Hyksos, or shep- 
 herd kings, — the seventeenth, shepherd kings, overthrown and 
 succeeded by Diospolites, — the eighteenth (b. c. 1655-1327, in 
 which is included Rameses, the great Egyptian conqueror, identi- 
 fied by many authors with Sesostris, 1411 b. c), nineteenth, and 
 twentieth, Diospolites, — the twenty-first, Tanites, — the twenty- 
 second, liubastites, — the twenty-third, again Tanites, — the 
 twenty-fourth, Saites, — the twenty-fifth, Ethiopians, beginning 
 with Sabakon, whom Herodotus also mentions, — the twenty- 
 sixth, Saites, including Psammetichus, Nekos, Apries or Uaphris, 
 and Amasis or Amosis. We see by the.«e lists, that, according to 
 the manner in which Manetho construed the antiquities of his 
 country, several other cities of Egypt, besides Thebes and Mem- 
 phis, furnished kings to the whole territory ; but we cannot trace 
 any correspondence between the nomes which furnished kings, 
 and those which Herodotus mentions to have been exclusively 
 occupied by the military caste. Many of the separate nomea 
 were of considerable substantive importance, and had a marked 
 Vocal character each to itself, religious as well as political ; though 
 
 11 
 
 (•. 
 
 » Diodor. i, 86-87 \ Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. p. 377, »eQ. 
 
 IpM 
 
•S4 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the whole of Egypt, from Elephantine to PelLsiuci and Kan6pii8| 
 is said to have always constituted one kingdom, from the earhe^* 
 times which th«j native priests could conceive. 
 
 We are to consider this kingdom as engaged, long before the 
 time when Greeks were admitted into it,' in a standing caravan- 
 commerce with Phenicia, Palestine, Arabia, and Assyria. An- 
 cient Egypt having neither vines nor olives, imported both wine 
 and oil,2 while it also needed especially the frankincense and 
 aicmatic products peculiar to Arabia, for its elaborate religious 
 ceremonies. Towards the last quarter of the eighth century b. c. 
 (a little before the time when the dynasty of the Mermnadae 
 in Lydia was commencing in the person of Gyges), we trace 
 events tending tu alter the relation which previously subsisted 
 between these countries, by continued aggressions on the part 
 of the Assyriaji monarchs of Nineveh, — Salmaneser and Sen- 
 nacherib. The former having conquered and led into captivity 
 the ten tribes of Israel, also attacked the Phenician towns on the 
 adjoining coiust : Sidon, Pal*-Tyrus, and Ake yielded to him, but 
 Tyre itself resisted, and having endured for five years the hard- 
 ships of a blockade with partial obstruction of its continental aque- 
 ducts, was enabled by means of its insular position to maintain 
 independence. It was just at this period that the Grecian estab- 
 lishments in Si('ily were forming, and I have already remarked 
 that the pressure of the Assyrians upon Phenicia, probably had 
 some effect in determining that contraction of the Phenician oc- 
 cupations in Sicily, which really took place (b. c. 730-720). 
 Respecting Sennacherib, we are informed by the Old Testament, 
 that he invaded Judasa, and by Herodotus (who calls him king 
 of the Assyrians and Arabians), that he assailed the pious king 
 Sethos in Egypt : in both cases his army experienced a miracu- 
 lous repulse and destruction. After this, the Assyrians of Nine- 
 
 * On this early trade between Egyj)!, Phenicia, and Palestine, anterior to 
 •iiT acquaintance with the Greeks, see Josephus cont. Apion. i, 12. 
 
 • Herodotus novices the large importation of wine into Egypt in his day, 
 from all Greece a< well as from Phenicia as well as the employment :£ th« 
 MUthen vessels in which it was hrouj^ht for the transport of water, in thd 
 joameys across the desert (iii. 6). 
 
 In later times, Alexandria was supplied with wine chiefly from Laodikei% 
 In Syria, near the mouth of the OroHtes (Strabo, xvi, p. 751). 
 
 •^HE WOODEN HORSE OF TROY 
 
 Crt-ece, vol. three. 
 
I' 
 
 PSAMMETICHUS ADMITS GREEKS INTO EG^PT 
 
 32C 
 
 veh, either torn by intestine dissension, or shaken by the attadu 
 of the Medes, appear no longer active ; but about the year 630 
 B. Cm the Assyrians or Chaldaeans of Babylon manifest a formida« 
 ble and increasing power. It is, moreover, during this century 
 that the old routine of the Egyptian kings was broken through, 
 and a new policy displayed towards foreigners by Psamraetichus, 
 — which, while it rendered Egypt more formidable to Judaea and 
 Phenicia, opened to Grecian ships and settlers the hitherto inao- 
 c:ssible Nile. 
 
 Herodotus draws a marked distinction between the history of 
 Egypt before Psammetichus and the following period : the former 
 he gives as the narration of the priests, without professing to 
 guarantee it, — the latter he evidently believes to be well ascer- 
 tained.' And we find that, from Psammetichus downward, Hero- 
 dotus and Manetho are in tolerable harmony, whereas even for 
 the sovereigns occupying the last fifty years before Psammeti- 
 chus, there are many and irreconcilable discrepancies between 
 them ;2 but they both agree in stating that Psammetichus reigned 
 fifty-four years. So important an event as the first admission of 
 the Greeks into Egypt, was made, by the informants of Herodo- 
 tus, to turn upon two prophecies. After the death of Sethos, 
 king and priest of Hephaestos, who left no son, Egypt became 
 divided among twelve kings, of whom Psammetichus was one: 
 it was under this dodekarchy, according to Herodotus, that the 
 niarvellous labyrinth near the lake of Moeris was constructed. 
 The twelve lived and reigned for some time in perfect harmony, 
 but a prophecy had been made known to them, that the one who 
 should make libations in the temple of Hephaestos out of a brazen 
 goblet would reign over all Egypt. Now it happened that one 
 day, wLen they all appeared armed in that temple to offer sacri- 
 fice, the high priest brought out by mistake only eleven golden 
 goblets instead of twelve, and Psammetichus, left without a goblet, 
 made use of his brass helmet as a substitute. Being thus con- 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 147-154. arch ira/ifiijTtxov, — navra Kal rd, larepov lirLOTO' 
 us^a uTpEKeu)^. 
 
 * See these differences stated and considered in Boeckh, Manetho and di« 
 Hundstem Periode, pp. 326-336, of which some account is given ip tk* 
 Appendix to this chapter. 
 
 „ii 
 
 f 
 
 . 
 
 \ 
 
 '. V 
 
 l\l 
 
 . 
 
 1 
 
1 
 
 326 
 
 HISTORY OK GREECE. 
 
 Bidered, though unintentionally, to have fulfilled the condition of 
 the prophecy, by making libations in a bra2en goblet, he became 
 an object of terror to his eleven eolleagaes, who united to de- 
 spoil him of his dignity, and drove him into the inaccessible 
 marshes. In this extremity, he sent to seek counsel from the 
 oracle of Leto at Buto, and received for answer an assurance, 
 that « vengeance would come to him by the hands of brazen men 
 showing themselves from the seaward." His faith was for the 
 moment shaken by so stainling a conception as that of brazen 
 men for his allies : but the prophetic veracity of the priest at 
 Buto was speedily shown, when an astonislied attendant came to 
 acquaint him, in his lurking-place, that brazen men were ravaging 
 the sea-coast of the delta. It was a body of Ionian and Karian 
 soldiers, who had landed tor pillage, and the messenger who came 
 to inform Psammetichus had never before seen men in an entire 
 suit of brazen armor. That prince, satisfied that these were the 
 allies whom the oracle had marked out for him, immediately 
 entered into negotiation with the lonians and Karians, enlisted 
 them in his service, and by their aid in conjunction with his other 
 partisans overpowered the other eleven kings, — thus making 
 himself the one ruler of Egypt. ^ 
 
 Such was the tale by which the original alliance of an Egyp- 
 tian king with Grecian mercenaries, and the first introduction of 
 Greeks into Egypt, was accounted for and dignified. What fol- 
 lowed is more authentic and more important. Psammetichus 
 provided a settlement and lands for his new allies, on the Pelu- 
 8iac or eastern branch of the Nile, a little below Bubastis. The 
 lonians were planted on one side of the river, the Karians on 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 149-152. This narrative of Herodotus, however little satis- 
 factory in an historical point of view, bears evident marks of being the 
 genuine tale which he heard from the priests of Hephiestos. Diodorus gives 
 an account more liistorioally plausible, but he could not well have had anj 
 positive authorities for that period, and he gives us seemingly the ideas of 
 Greek authors of the days of the Ptolemies. Psammetichus (he te\U us), as 
 one of the twelve kini:s, ruled at Sais an<l in the neighboring part of the 
 1<'lta: he opened a tr;ide, previously unknown in Egypt, with Greeks and 
 t'henicians, so profitable that his eleven colleagues became jealous of his 
 riches and combined to attack him. He raised an army of foreign merce- 
 naries and defeated them (Diodor. i. 66-67). Polysenus gives a /liffereol 
 •tory about Psammetichus and the Karian mercenaries (vii 3J. 
 
 OPENING OF THE NILE. -NAUKR .MIS 
 
 52: 
 
 Ihe other ; and the place was made to serve as a military position, 
 not only for the defence of the eastern border, but also for the 
 support of the king himself against malcontents at home : it was 
 called the Stratopeda, or the Camps.' He took pains, moreover, to 
 facilitate the intercourse between them and the neighboring in- 
 habitants, by causing a number of Egyptian children to be domi- 
 ciled with them, in order to learn the Greek language; and hence 
 sprung the interpreters ; who, in the time of Herodotus, consti- 
 tuted a permanent hereditary caste or breed. 
 
 Though the chief purpose of this first foreign settlement in 
 E""ypt, between Pelusium and Bubastis, was to create an inde- 
 pendent military force, and with it a fleet for the king, yet it was 
 of course an opening both for communication and traffic to all 
 Greeks and to all Phenicians, such as had never before been 
 available. And it was speedily followed by the throwing open of 
 the Kanopic or westernmost branch of the river for the purposes 
 of trade specially. According to a statement of Strabo, it was in 
 the reign of Psammetichus that the Milesians with a fleet of 
 thirty ships made a descent on that part of the coast, first built 
 a fort in the immediate neighborhood, and then presently founded 
 the town of Naukratis, on the right bank of the Kanopic Nile. 
 There is much that is perplexing in this affirmation of Strabo ; 
 but on the whole I am inclined to think that the establishment of 
 the Greek factories and merchants at Naukratis may be consid- 
 ered as dating in the reign of Psammetichus,^ — Naukratis being 
 
 • Herodot. ii, 154. 
 
 * Strabo, xvii, p. 801. koI to iAiXtjaiuv reixoc tTlevaavTEg yap enl irofi- 
 ftriTix&v rpiuKovTa vavalv l/LiXr/aioi Kara Kvn£;upr] {ovtoc de tuv 
 D/Liiduv) KUTEOxov eif t6 orofia rd hoXfhTivov ■ iIt* iKjSuvTeg kreixtffav ^6 
 Xt'X^^v KTiafia ■ X9^'*'^ ^' avan'kevaavTer e/f tov ^diTLKbv vofibv, Kara- 
 </avfiaxv<^avTe^ 'Ivapov, koXiv iKTiaav fiavKpariv oi noXi) r^f 2;ff<J/ai 
 
 vntp^ev. 
 
 What is meant by the allusion to Kyaxares, or to Inarus, in this passage, 
 I do not understand. We know nothing of any relations either between 
 Kyaxares and Psammetichus. or between Kyaxares and the Milesians, 
 moreover, if by Kara Kva^dpn be meant in the time of KyaxariSy as the trans- 
 lators render it, we have in immediate succession knl irafifirfrixov, — Ko-r^ 
 Kva^upv, with the same meaning, which is, to say the leas of it, a ven- 
 awkward sentence. The words ovroc di ruv Mtfduv Iotk not onlike a 
 tomment added hv some early reader of Strabo, who could not understand 
 
 ■ 
 
 'I 
 
 ; »' 
 
82S 
 
 HISTORY OF (iREECE. 
 
 NEKOS. 
 
 329 
 
 a city of Egyptian origin, in which these foreigners were pkit 
 mitted to take up their abode, — not a Greek colony, as Strabo 
 wouKl have us beHeve. The hinguage of Herodotus seems rather 
 to imply that it was king Amasis — betwtcn whom and the death 
 of Fsamraetichus tliere intervened nearly half a century — who 
 first allowed Greeks to :*ettle at Naukratis ; but on comp{i.ring 
 what the historian t<'lls us respecting the courtezan RhodOpis 
 anu the brother of Sa(»pho the l*o<*te^s, it is evident that there 
 must have been both (Jreek trade and Greek establishments in 
 that town long before Amasis came to the throne. We nuiy con- 
 sider, then, that hot i tlw rastern and western mouths of the Nile 
 became open to the Greeks in the days of Psammetiehus ; the 
 former as leading to the headnjuarters of the mercenary Greek 
 troops in Egyptian pay, — the latter for jnirposes of trade. 
 
 While this event atl'orded to the Greeks a valuable enlarge- 
 ment both of their trallie and of their fie'ld of observation, it 
 seems to have occasioned an internal revolution in Egypt. The 
 nome of Bubastis, in which the new military settlement of for- 
 eigners was planted, is numbered among those occupied by the 
 Egy[)tian military caste :' whether their lands wen' in part taken 
 away from them, we do not know ; hut the mere introduction of 
 such foreigners must have appeared an abomination, to the strong 
 conservative feeling of ancient Egypt. And Psammetiehus 
 
 why Kyaxare.s shouM )o here mentioned, and who noted his difficulty in 
 words which have sul»se.|uently found their way into the text. Then again, 
 Inarus hclon<,'s to the pe riod between the Persian and Peloponnesian wars ; 
 at least we know no other person of that name tlian the chief of the Egyp- 
 tian revolt ag;ainst Persia (Thucyd. i, 114) who is spoken of as a ''Libyan, 
 the son of Psammeticlius." The mention of Kyaxares, therefore, here 
 appears unmeaning, while that of Inarus is an anachronism : possibly, the 
 story that the Milesians founded Naukratis " after having worsted Inarus in 
 ft sea-tight," may have jirown out of the etymology of the name Naukratis, 
 in the mind of one who found Inarus the son of Psammetiehus mentioned 
 two centuries afterward.-, and identitied the two Psarametichuses with each 
 other. 
 
 The statement of Strabo has been copied by Steph. Byz. v, NavKpan^. 
 Eusebius also announces (Chron. i. p. 168) the Milesians as the founders of 
 Naukratis, but puts the event at 753 b. c, during what he calls the Milesian 
 thalassokraty : see Mr. Fynes Clinton ad ann. 732 b. c. in the Fasti 
 Hillenici. « Herod ^t ii, 166 
 
 treated the native soldiers in a manner which showed of how 
 much less account they had become since the '* brazen helmets ** 
 had got footing in the land. It had hitherto been the practice to 
 distribute such portions of the military as were on actual service 
 in three dift'erent posts : at Daphne, near Pelusium, on the north- 
 eastern frontier, — at Marea, on the north-western frontier, near 
 the spot where Alexandria was afterwards built, — and at Ele- 
 phantine, on the southern or Ethiopian boundary. Psammeti- 
 ehus, having no longer occasion for their services on the eastern 
 frontier, since the formation of the mercenary camp, accumulated 
 them in greater number and detained them for an unusual time 
 at the two other stations, especially at Elephantine. Here, as 
 Herodotus tells us, they remained for three years unrelieved, and 
 Diodorus a<lds that Psammetiehus assigned to those native troops 
 who fought conjointly with the mercenaries, the least honorable 
 jK)st in the line ; until at length discontent impelled them to emi- 
 grate in a body of two hundred and forty thousand men into 
 Ethiopia, leaving their wives and children behind in Egypt, — 
 nor could they be induced by any instances on. the part of Psam- 
 metiehus to return. This memorable incident,' which is said to 
 have given rise to a settlement in the southernmost regions of 
 Ethiopia, called by the Greeks the Automoli (though the emigrant 
 soldiers still called themselves by their old Egyptian name), at- 
 ests the effect produced by the introduction of the foreign mer- 
 cenaries in lowering the position of the native military. The 
 number of the emigrants, however, is a point noway to be relied 
 upon: we shall presently see that there were enough of them left 
 behind to renew effectively the struggle for their lost dignity. 
 
 It was probably with his Ionian and Karian troops that Psam- 
 metiehus carried on those warlike operations in Syria which 
 filled so large a proportion of his long and prosperous reign of 
 fifty-four years.- He besieged the city of Azotus in Syria for 
 twenty-nine years, until he took it, — the longest blockade which 
 the historian had ever heard of: moreover, he was in that coun- 
 Iry when the destroying Scythian nomads, who had defeated the 
 
 Uerodo . ii, 30 : Diodor. i, 67. 
 ■ ^Airpiijc — Of fiercl "irafi/jL^Tcxov rdv iuvrov vpondropa kyevtr . i^daiiutvis 
 r»r#f ruv nporepov fSaciXiov (Herodot. ii, 161). 
 
 i' 
 
 V 
 
 i: 
 
830 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 NEKOS.- HIS CANAL. -HIS NAVY. 
 
 Median king Kyax&res and possessed themselves of Upper Asia, 
 tdvanced to invade Egypt, — an undertaking which rsammeti- 
 chus, by large presents, induced them to abandon.' 
 
 There were, however, more powerful enemies than the Scyth- 
 ians, against whom lie and his son Nekos — who succeeded him, 
 seemingly about 604 B. c- — had to contend in Svria and the 
 lands adjoining. It is just at this period, during the reigns of 
 
 ' Herodut. i, 105; ii, 157. 
 
 « The chronology of ihe Egyptian kings from I'sumnietiihus to Aniasis ig 
 l-iveii in gome points dUFerontly hy Herodotus and hy Manetho : — 
 
 Arcording to Ik-rodotus, 
 
 Fsammetichus reigned 54 years, 
 
 Nekos '• 16 " 
 
 Psammig ... '* 6 " 
 
 Apries '• 25 " 
 
 Arnasis 44 '^ 
 
 According to Manetho ap. African. 
 Fsatninetiehus reigned 54 years. 
 
 Nechao II. . . . 
 Psannnathis. 
 Uaphris .... 
 Amosis .... 
 
 (( 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 19 
 
 44 
 
 u 
 
 Diodorus gives 22 years for Apries and 55 years for Amajiis (i, 68). 
 
 Now the end of the reign of Ainasis stands fixed for 526 b. c, and, there- 
 fore, the beginning of his reign (according to both Herodotus and Maneiho) 
 to 570 B. c. or 569 b. c. According to the chronology of the Old Testa- 
 ment, the battles of Mej^iddo and C:areherniscli, fought hy Nekos, fall from 
 609-605 B. c, and this coincides with the reign of Nekos as dated hy 
 Herodotus, but not as dated l»y Manetho. On the other hand, it appears 
 from the evidence of certain Egyptian inscriptions recently discovered, that 
 the real interval from the beginning of Nechao to the end of Uaphris is only 
 forty years, and not forty -seven years, us tlie dates of Herodotus would make 
 it (Boeckh, Manetho und die Hundstern-I'eriode, pp. 341-348), which would 
 place the accession of Nekos in 610 or 609 b c. Boeckh discusses at some 
 Jength this discrepancy of dates, and inclines to the supposition that Nekoa 
 reigned nine or ten years jointly with his father, and that Herodotus hag 
 counted these nine or ten years twice, once in the reign of Fsammetichus, 
 once in that of Nekos. Certainly, Fsammetichus can hardly have been very 
 young when his reign began, and if he reigned fifty-four years, he must have 
 reached an extreme old age, and may have been prominently aided by his 
 son. Adopting the suppositions, therefore, that the last ten years of the 
 reign of Fsammetichus may be reckoned both for him and for Nekos, —that 
 ftu* Nekos separately only six years are to be reckoned, — and that the nam- 
 ber of years from the lieginning of Nekos's separate reign to the end of 
 Uaphris is forty, — Boeckh places the beginning of Fsammetichus in 654 
 B. c, and not in 670 B. c, as the data of Herodotus would make it ((&. pp 
 •42-350). 
 
 Mr. Clinton, Fast. Hellen. b. c. 616, foUoirs Herodotot. 
 
 I 
 
 2^1 
 
 Nabopolassar and his son Nebuchadnezzar (b. c. 625-561) that 
 the Chaldaeans or Assyrians of Babylon appear at the maximum 
 of their power and aggressive disposition, while the Assyrians of 
 Ninus or Nineveh lose their substantive position through the 
 taking of that town by Kyaxares (about b. c. 600), — the great- 
 est height which the Median power ever reached. Between the 
 Egyptian Nekos and his grandson Apries — Pharaoh Necho and 
 Pharaoh Hophra of the Old Testament — on the one side, and 
 the Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar on the other, Judaea and Phe- 
 nicia form the intermediate subject of quarrel : and the political 
 independence of the Phenician towns is extinguished never 
 again to be recovered. At the commencement of his reign, it 
 appears, Nekos was chiefly anxious to extend the Egyptian com- 
 merce, for which purpose he undertook two measures, both of 
 ai^tonishing boldness for that age, — a canal between the lower 
 part of the eastern or Pelusiac Nile, and the inmost corner of 
 the Red sea, — and the circumnavigation of Africa ; his great ob- 
 ject being to procure a water-communication between the Medi- 
 terranean and the Red sea. He began the canal — much about 
 the same time as Nebuchadnezzar executed his canal from Bab- 
 ylon to Teredon — with such reckless determination, that one 
 hundred and twenty thousand Egyptians are said to have perished 
 in the work ; but either from this disastrous proof of the difficul- 
 ty, or, as Herodotus represents, from the terrors of a menacing 
 prophecy which reached him, he was compelled to desist. Next, 
 he accomplished the circumnavigation of Africa, already above 
 alluded to; but in this way too he found it impracticable to pro- 
 cure any available communication such as he wished.' It is plain 
 that in both these enterprises he was acting under Phenician and 
 Greek instigation ; and we may remark that the point of t he 
 Nile from whence the canal took its departure, was close upon 
 the mercenary camps or stratopeda. Being unable to connect 
 the two seas together, he built and equipped an armed naval 
 force both upon the one and the other, and entered upon aggres- 
 sive enterprises, naval as well as military. His army, on march- 
 
 » .. I— ■■! — - — , . I ^, 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 158. Respecting the canal of Nekos, see the explanation of 
 Mr. Kenrick on this chapter of Herodotus. From Bubastis to Suez the 
 tongtb would be about ninety miles. 
 
 
 it 
 
dS2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ing into Syria, was met at Megiddo — Herodotus says Magdolum 
 — by Josiah king of Judah, who was himself slain and so com- 
 pletely worsted, that Jerusalem fell into the power of the con- 
 queror, and became tributary to Egypt. It deserves to be 
 noted that Nekos sent the raiment which he had worn on the day 
 of his victory, as an offering to tlie holy temple of Apollo at 
 Braiichidie near Miletus,' — the first recorded instance of a do- 
 nation from an Egyptian king to a Grecian temple, and a proof 
 that Hellenic airinities were be;^inning to take effect upon him: 
 probably we may conclude that a large proportion of his troops 
 were Milesians. 
 
 But the victorious career of Nckus was completely checked by 
 the defeat wliich he experienced at Carchemisch, or Circesium, 
 on the Eupliratcs, from Ne))ii(*hadnezzar and the Babylonians, 
 who not only drove hiiu out of Judaa and Syria, but also took 
 Jerusalem, and cairied away the king and the principal Jews 
 into ca[>tivity.- Nei»ueliadm*zzar farther attacked the Phenician 
 cities, and the sieg'" •>■" Tvre alone cost him severe toil for thirteen 
 years. After this long and gallant resistance, the Tyrians were 
 forced to submit, and underwent the same fate as the Jews : their 
 princes and chiefs were dragged cajitive into the Babylonian ter- 
 ritory, and the Phenician cities became numbered among the 
 tributaries of Nebuchadnezzar. So they seemed to have remain- 
 ed, until the overihrew of Babvlon by Cyrus: for we find anions 
 those extracts, unhapiiily, \ ery brief, wliich Josephus has pre- 
 
 ' Herodot ii, 159 Diodorus miikes no mention of Nekos;. 
 
 The account of Ih.'ro lotus coincides in the main with the history of the 
 Old Testament about P} araoh Neoho and Josiah. The great city of Syria 
 which he calls Kd^vrit seems to be Jerusalem, though Wesseling (ad 
 Herodot. iii, 5) and otlier able critics dispute the identity. See Volney, 
 Recherches sur I'Hist. Anc vol. ii. rh. 1.3, p. 239: ' Les Arabes ort conserv^ 
 Thabitude d'appcler Jtrisalem la Sainte par excellence, el Qpds. Sans 
 doute les Chaldeens ct les Syriens lui donnerenf le meme nom, qui dans leur 
 dialecte est Qiuhuta, don! He'rodote rend bien I'orthographie quand il ^cril 
 
 'Jeremiah, xlvi. 2; 2<1 book of Kings, xxiii and zxiv; Josephus, Ant 
 J. X, 5, 1 ; X, 6, 1. 
 
 Al)OUt Nel»U(}ia(hiez/ar. see the Frasrment of Berosus ap. Joseph, confc 
 Apion. i, I'J-JO, und Aiitiqq. J. x. II, 1 and Bcrosi Fragment, ed. Ritchet 
 pp. 65-CT 
 
 I ■■ I - 
 
 NEBUCHADNEZZAR. - PSAMMIS. 
 
 38S 
 
 served out of the Tyrian annals, that during this interval there were 
 disputes and irregularities in the government of Tyre,' — judges 
 being for a time substituted in the place of kings ; while Merbal 
 and Hirom, two princes of the regal Tyrian line, detained captive 
 in Babylonia, were successively sent down on the special petition 
 of the Tyrians, and reigned at Tyre; the former four years, the 
 latter twenty years, until the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus. 
 The Egyptian king Apries, indeed, the son of Psaramis, and 
 grandson of Nekos, attacked Sidon and Tyre both by land and 
 sea, but seeiuingly without any result.- To the Persian empire, 
 as soon as Cyrus had conquered Babylon, they cheerfully and 
 spontaneously submitted,-^ whereby the restoration of the captive 
 Tyrians to their home was probably conceded to them, like that 
 of the captive Jews. 
 
 Nekos in Egypt was succeeded by his son Psammis, and he 
 again, after a reign of six years, by his son Apries ; of whose 
 power and prosperity Herodotus speaks in very high general 
 
 * Menander ap. Joseph. Antiq. J. ix, 14, 2. 'Ett^ Ei^ufSaXov tov f^aaihui 
 ejToTitopKijae Nat3ovxo(hv6nnpo^ ttjv Tvpov in* Irrj ihKuTpia. That this siege 
 of tliinteen years ended in the storming, capitulation, or submission (we 
 know not which, and Volney goes beyond the evidence when he says, •' Les 
 Tyriens furent emporte's (Tussaut par le roi de Bahylone," Recherches sur 
 I'Histoire Ancienne, vol. ii, ch. 14, p. 250) of Tyre to the Chaldiean king, is 
 ([uite certain from the mention which afterwards follows of the Tyrian priuccs 
 being detained captive in Babylonia. Hengstenberg (De Rebus Tyrio- 
 rum, pp. 34-77) heaps up a mass of arguments, most of them very incon- 
 clusive, to prove this point, about which the passage cited by Josephus from 
 Menanr'er leaves no doubt. What is not true, is, that Tyre was destroyed 
 ahu laid desolate by Nebuchadnezzar: still less can it be believed that that 
 king conquered Egypt and Libya, as Megasthencs, and even Berosus, so far 
 as Egypt is concerned, would have us believe, — the argum'jut of Larcher ad 
 Herodot. ii, 168, is anything but satisfactory. The defeat of the Egyptian 
 king at Carchemisch, and the stripping him of his foreign possessions in Jm- 
 dasa and Syria, have been exaggerated into a conquest of Egypt itself. 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 161. He simply mentions what I have stated in the text; 
 while Diodorus tells us (i, 68) that the Egyptian king took Sidon by as* 
 laalt, terrified the other Phenician towns into submission, and defeated 
 the Phenicians and Cyprians in a great naval battle, acquiring a rast 
 spoil. 
 
 What authority Diodorus here followed, I do not know ; but the measured 
 •tatement of Herodotus is far the most worthy of credit. 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 19. 
 
 'i i 
 
 • I 
 
 ' 1.1 
 '1; 
 
 h\ 
 
 M 
 
334 
 
 IIISDRY OF GREECE. 
 
 terms, though the few particulars which he recounts are of a coiti 
 trary tenor. It vva.s not till after a reign of twenty-five years, 
 that Apries undertook that expedition against the Greek colonies 
 in Lihya, — Kyrene and Barca, — which proved liis ruin. The 
 native Lihyan tribes near those cities, having sent tu surrender 
 themselves to him, and entreat his aid against the Greek settlers, 
 Apries despatched to them a large force comjwsed of native 
 Egyptians ; who, as has been before mentioned, were stationed on 
 the north-western frontier of Egypt, and were, therefore, most 
 available for the march against Kyrene. The Kyrenean citizens 
 advanced to oppose them, and a battle ensued in which the Egyp- 
 tians were completely routed with severe loss. It is affirmed 
 that they were thrown into disorder from want of practical knowl- 
 edge of Grecian warfare,' — a remarkable proof of the entire iso- 
 lation of the Grecian mercenaries (who had now been long in the 
 service of Psammetichus and his successors) from the native 
 Egyptians. 
 
 This disastrous reverse provoked a mutiny in Egypt againsi 
 Apries, the soldiers contending that he had despatched them on 
 the enterprise with a deliberate view to their destruction, in order 
 to assure his rule over the remaining Egyptians. The malcon- 
 tents found so much sympathy among the general population, that 
 Aniasis, a SaVtic Egyptian of low birth, but of considerable in- 
 telligenee, whom Aprie> had sent to conciliate them, was either 
 persuaded or constrained to become their leader, and prepared to 
 march immediately against the king at Sais. Unbounded and 
 reverential submission to the royal authority was a habit so deeply 
 rcwted in the Egyptian mind, that Apries could not believe there^ 
 8istance to be serious. He sent an officer of consideration named 
 Patarbemis to bring Ania^is before him, and when the former re- 
 turned, bringing back from the rebel nothing better than a con- 
 temptuous refusal to ap[>ear except at the head of an army, the 
 exasperated king ordered his nose and ears to be cut off. This 
 act of atrocity caused such indignation among the Egyptians 
 round him, that most of them deserted and joined the revolters, 
 who thus became irresistibly formidable in point of numbers! 
 There yet remained to Apries the foreign mercenaries, — thirty 
 
 ' Tferodot. ii, 161 ; iv. 159 
 
 AMASIS. 
 
 33$ 
 
 thousand lonians and Karians, — whom he summoned from then 
 Btratopeda on the Pelusiac Nile to his residence at SaVs ; and 
 this force, the creation of his ancestor Psammetichus, and th« 
 main reliance of his family, still inspired him with such unabated 
 confidence, that he marched to attack the far superior numbers 
 under Amasis at Momemphis. Though his troops behaved with 
 * ravery, the disparity of numbers, combined with the excited 
 feeling of the insurgents, overpowered him : he was defeated and 
 carried prisoner to Sais, where at first Amasis not only spared 
 his life, but treated hira with generosity.' Such, however, was 
 the antipathy of the Egyptians, that they forced Amasis to sur- 
 render his prisoner into their hands, and immediately strangled 
 him. 
 
 It is not difficult to trace in these proceedings the outbreak of 
 a long-suppressed hatred on the part of the Egyptian soldier- 
 caste towards the dynasty of Psammetichus, to whom they owed 
 llieir comparative degradation, and by whom that stream of Hel- 
 lenism had been let in upon Egypt, which doubtless was not wit- 
 nessed without great repugnance. It might seem, also, that this 
 dynasty had too little of pure Egyptianism in them to find favor 
 with the priests. At least Herodotu does not mention any reli- 
 gious edifices erected either by NekAs or Psammis or Apries, though 
 he describes much of such outlay on the part of Psammetichus, 
 — who built magnificent propylaea to the temple of Hephaestos at 
 Memphis,^ and a splendid new chamber or stable for the sacred 
 bull Apis, — and more still on the part of Amasis. 
 
 Nevertheless, Amasis. though he had acquired the crown by 
 this explosion of native antipathy, found the foreign adjunct* 
 both already existing and eminently advantageous. He not only 
 countenanced, but extended them ; and Egypt enjoyed under him 
 a degree of power and consideration such as it neither before ])os- 
 eessed, nor afterwards retained, — for his long reign of forty-four 
 years (570-526 b. c.) closed just six months before the Persian 
 conquest of the country. He was eminently phil-Hellenic, and 
 the Greek merchants at Naukratis, — the permanent settlers, af 
 well as the occasional visitors, — obtained from him valuable en 
 
 ' Herodot ii, 162-169 ; Diodor. i, 68. 
 » Herodoi. iL 153. 
 
 \ ..1 
 
 t 
 
 »i > 
 
 ft • 
 
 III 
 
 t « 
 
 I 
 
33d 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 COMMERCE AND FACTORIfc.S AT NAUKRATIS. 
 
 837 
 
 laigement of their privileges. Besides granting permission to 
 various Grecian towns, to erect religious establishments for such 
 of their citizens as visited the place, he also sanctioned the ccn 
 Btitution of a formal and organized emporium or factory, invest- 
 ed with commercial privileges, and armed with authority exer- 
 cised by presiding otFicers regularly chosen. This factory was 
 connected with, an 1 probably grew out of, a large religious edi- 
 fice and precinct, built at the joint cost of nine Grecian cities: 
 four of them louif, — Chios, Teos, Phoka^a, and Klazomenie ; 
 four Doric, — Rhodes, Knidus, Ilalikarniussus, and Phaselis ; and 
 one JEolic, — Mitvlene. By these nine cities the joint temple 
 and factory was kept up and its presiding magistrates chosen ; 
 but its destination, for the convenience of Grecian conmierce gen- 
 erally, seems revealed by the imposing title of Tlie IkUcnion. 
 Samos, Miletus, and ^gina hud each founded a separate temple 
 at Naukratis, for tlie worship of such of their citizens as went 
 there ; probably connected — as the Ilellenion was — with protection 
 and facilities for commercial purposes. But though these three 
 powerful cities had thus constituted each a factory for itself, as 
 guarantee to the miirchandise, and as responsible for the conduct, 
 of its own citizens sepai-ately, — the corporation of the Helleni- 
 on served both as protection and control to all other Greek mer- 
 chants. And such was the usefulness, the celebrity, and proba- 
 bly the pecuniary ])rotit, of the corporation, that other Grecian 
 cities set up claims to a share in it, and falsely pretended to have 
 contributed to the original foundation.' 
 
 Naukratis was for a long time the privileged i)ort for Grecian 
 <'ommerce with Egypt. No Greek merchant was permitted to 
 deliver goods in any other part, or to enter any other of the 
 
 ' Herodot. ii, 178. The few words of the historian about these Greek es- 
 tablishments at Naukratis are highly valuable, and we can only wish that he 
 had told us more : he speaks of them in the present tense, from personal 
 knowledge — r.) p.\v vvv fieytcrov avriiov rifiEVog kol ovvofiaaTdraTov kbv 
 nal xpiriaLfitiTnTov, Ka'kevfAevov de 'EAA^vtov, aMf TroAtf elaiv al napexovaai 
 ~ Tovriotv juev kcrt rovro Td reaevoc, kol TrpocTTurac tov ifinopiov avral al 
 rokL^ elolv ai naprxovcai. 'Oacu de dX'AaL ttoXlq fier aTtoievv rai^ oiShf 
 a(^i fiFTedv fieTarroievvTat 
 
 We are here let into a vein of commercial jealousy between the Grock 
 cities about which we should have been glad to be farther informed. 
 
 mouths of the Nile except the Kanopic. If forced into any of 
 them by stress of weather, he was compelled to make oath that 
 his arrival was a matter of necessity, and to convey his goods 
 round by sea into the Kanopic branch to Naukratis ; and if the 
 weather still forbade such a proceeding, the merchandise was put 
 into barges and conveyed round to Naukratis by the internal ca- 
 nals of the delta. Such a monopoly, which made Naukratis in 
 Egypt, something like Canton in China, or Nangasaki in Japan, 
 no longer subsisted in the time of Herodotus.i But the fiictory 
 of the Ilellenion was in full operation and dignity, and very 
 probably he himself, as a native of one of the contributing cities, 
 Ilalikarnassus, may have profited by its advantages. At what 
 r-recise time Naukratis first became licensed for Grecian trade, 
 we cannot directly make out ; but there seems reason to believe 
 that it was tlm port to which the Greek merchants first went, so 
 soon as the general Hberty of trading with the country was con- 
 ceded to them ; and this would put it at least as far back as the 
 foundation of Kyrene, and the voyage of the fortunate Kolajus, 
 who was on his way with a cargo to Egypt, when the storms 
 overtook him, — about 630 b. c, during the reign of Psammeti- 
 chus. And in the time of the poetess Sappho, and her brother 
 Charaxus, it seems evident that Greeks had been some time es- 
 fablislied at Naukratis.^ But Amasis, though his predecessors 
 
 ' Ilerodot. ii, 179. 'H r (Je Tona/.aiov fioivij tj NavKpanc ifi'jr6piov,Kal 
 u/'Ao of(5fv A'tyvTTTov. . . .Oi)rw f^^ Nauxpanf kreTipTiTo. 
 
 ^ The beautiful Thracian courtezan, Rhodopis, was purchased by a Samian 
 merchant named Xanthes, and conveyed to Naukratis, in order that he might 
 make money by her (/car' kpyaair/v). The speculation proved a successful 
 one, for Charaxus, brother of Sappho, going to Naukratis with a cargo of 
 wine, became so captivated with Rhodopis, that he purchased her for a very 
 large sum of money, and gave her her freedom. She then carried on her profes- 
 sion at Naukratis on her own account, realized a handsome fortune, the tithe 
 of which she employed in a votive offering at Delphi, and acquired so much 
 renown, that the Egyptian Greeks ascribed to her the building of one of the 
 pyramids, — a supposition, on the absurdity of which Herodotus make* 
 proper comments, but which proves the great celebrity of the name of Rho- 
 dopis (Herodot. ii, 134). Athenaeus calls her D6riche,and distinguishes her 
 from Rhodopis (xiii, p. 596, compare Suidas, v,To(5(j7rf(5of avai>J7//a). When 
 Charaxus returned to Mitylene, his sister Sappho composed a song, in which 
 
 VOL. IIL 1*^ 22oc. 
 
 1*^' 
 
 \llj 
 
 u 
 
 ♦ 
 
 
 I d 
 
 h^< 
 
 \ i 
 
 ■ -- ^. 
 
 Wm 
 
BSS 
 
 HISIORV OF GREECE. 
 
 MANETHO AND THE SOTHIAC PERIOD. 
 
 38) 
 
 had permitted sikIi establishment, may doubtless be regarded a4 
 having given organization to the factories, and as having placed 
 the Greeks on a more comfortable footing of security than they 
 had ever enjoyed before. 
 
 This Egyptian king manifested several other evidences of his 
 phil-Hellenic disposition, by donations to Del{)hi and other Gre- 
 cian temples, and he even married a Grecian wife from the city 
 of Kyrene.* Moi'eover, he was in intimate alliance and relations 
 of hospitality botli. with Polykrates des[)ot of 8amos, and with 
 Croesus king of Lydia.- He comjucrcd the island of Cyprus, 
 and rendered it tributary to the Egyptian throne: his fleet and 
 anny were maintained in good condition, and the fureign merce- 
 naries, the great strength ot" the dynasty which he had supplant- 
 ed, were not only preserved, but even removed from their camp 
 near Pelusium to ihe diief town Memphis, where they served as 
 the special guards of Amasls. ' Egypt enjoyed under him a de- 
 gree of i)0wer abroad, and prosperity at home — the river having 
 been abundant in its overilowing — which was the more tena 
 ciously remembertd on account oi' the period of disaster and sub- 
 jugation immediately following his death. And his contributions 
 in architecture and sculpture, to the temples of Sais-* and Mem- 
 phis, were on a scale of vastness suqiassing eveiything before 
 known in lower Egypt. 
 
 she greatly (leri(ied him for this proceedini;, — a son;; which doubtless He- 
 rodotus knew, and which gives to the whole arH-tduro a complete autlicn- 
 tiH ty. 
 
 Now we can hartUy put the age of Sappho lower than 600-580 n. c. (see 
 Mr. Clinton, Fasti Hellen a<i ann. 505 b. c, and Ulrici, Geschichte der 
 Oriech. Lyrik, ch. xxiii, p. 360): Alkceus, too. her eontcniporary, had hira- 
 scll" visited Ecrypt, (Alcaei Fragra. 103, ed. 15er«:k ; Stra!>o. i, p. 63). The 
 Greek settlement at ISaukratis, therefore, must he (le< idedly older than Ama- 
 sis, who hegan to reit;n in 570 d. c, and the residenc e of Rhodopis in thai 
 town must have begun earlier than Ama.sis. though Herodotus calls her kot' 
 'Afxaaiv uKfiuCovtra (ii, 134). Nor can we construe the language of Herodo 
 tas strictly, when he says that it was Araasis who permitted the residence ol 
 Greeks at Naakratis (ii, 178). 
 
 » Herodot ii, 181. * Herodot i, 77 ; iii, 39. 
 
 ■ Herodot ii, 182, 154. KaToUiae k^ Mif*(^iVf fvhiK^v [uvroi xroievuev 
 irodf klyvntiuv. 
 
 «H«rodot.ii, 175-177. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The archaeology of Egypt, as given in the first book of Diodorus, is eo 
 much blended with Grecian mythes, and so much colored over with Grecian 
 motive, philosophy, and sentiment, as to serve little purpose in illustrating the 
 native Egyptian turn of thought. Even in Herodotus, though his stories are in 
 the main genuine Egyptian, we find a certain infusion of Hellenism which the 
 priests themselves had in his day acquired, and which probably would not 
 have been found in their communications with Solon, or with the poet Al- 
 kaus, a century and a half earlier. Still, his stones (for the tenor of which 
 Diodorus unduly censures him, i, 69) are really illustrative of the national 
 mind ; but the narratives coined by Grecian fancy out of Egyptian materials 
 and idealizing Egyptian kings and priests so as to form a pleasing picture 
 for the Grecian reader, are mere romance, which has rarely even the merit 
 of amusing. Most of the intellectual Greeks had some tendency thus to 
 dress up Egyptian history, and Plato manifests it considerably ; but the 
 Greeks who crowded into Egypt under the Ptolemies carried it still further. 
 Hekataeus of Abdera, from whom Diodorus greatly copied (i, 46), is to be 
 numbered among them, and from him, perhaps, come the eponymous king* 
 JEgyptus (i, 51) and Neileus (i, 63), the latter of whom was said to have 
 jriven to the river its name of Nile, whereas it had before been called -^«7yp- 
 tiis (this to save the credit of Homer, who calls it Alyvirro^ irorafidc, Odyss. 
 xiv, 258) : also Macedon, Prometheus, Triptolemus, etc., largely blended with 
 Egyptian antiquities, in Diodorus, (i, 18, 19, etc.) It appears that the nam* 
 of king Neilos occurred in the list of Egyptian kings in Diksearchus (aj. 
 S^.•hol. ApoU. Rhod. iv, 272 ; Dikaearch. Fragment, p. 100, ed. Fuhr). 
 
 That the uvaypa<pal in the temples of Egypt reached to a vast antiquity 
 and contained a list of names, human, semi-divine, and divine, very long 
 indeed, — there is no reason to doubt. Herodotus, in giving the number of 
 years between Dionysus and Aaiasis as 1500, expressly says that "the priesti 
 told him they knew this accurately, since they always kept an account, and 
 always wrote down the number of years," — Kal ravra AiyvnTcoi arpeKeuf 
 (ftamv emaTaa-&ai aiel re ?.oyi(6fMevoi Kai alel anoypaipouevoi to. irea (ii. 145): 
 compare Diodor. i, 44. He tells us that the priests read to him out of a 
 manuscript of papyrus {U jSv^Aov, ii, 100) the names of the 330 successive 
 kings from father to son, between Men or Menes and Moeris ; and the 341 
 colossal statues of chief priests, each succeeding his father, down to Sethos 
 prie-stof HephsBstos and king Cii, 142), which were shown to him in the tern- 
 pie of Hephaestos at Memphis, afford a sort of monumental evidence anal- 
 ogous in its nature to a written list. So also the long period of 23,000 years 
 given by Diodorus, from the rule of Helios down to the expedition of Alex 
 auder against Asia, 18,000 of which were occupied by the government of 
 gods and demigods (i, 26, 24 4 4,— his numbers do not all agree with one 
 •nother), may probably be drawn from an uvaypa(p7j. Many temples in 
 
 ) 
 I 
 
 n 
 
840 
 
 HISTORY or GREECE. 
 
 Egypt probably had such tablets or inscriptions, some differing from others 
 But this only shows us that such avaypa(pal or other temple monuments do 
 not of themselves carry any authority, unless in cases where there is fail 
 reason to presume them nearly contemporary with the facts or persons which 
 they are produced to avouch. It is plain that the temple inscriptions repre- 
 sent the ideas of Egyptian priests (of some unknown date anterior toHerod- 
 oi is) respecting the entire range of Egyptian past history and chronology. 
 
 What the proportion of historical items may be, included in this aggre- 
 e;ate, we have no means of testing, nor arc the monuments in Egyptian tem 
 ^ -es in themselves a proof of the reality of the persons or events which thoy 
 are placed to commemorate, any more than the Centauromachia or Amazon- 
 omachia on the frieze of a Grecian temple proves that there really existed 
 Centaurs or Amazons. But it is interesting to penetrate, so far as we are 
 enabled, into the scheme upon which the Egyptians themselves conceived 
 and constructed their own past history, of which the gods form quite as es- 
 •ential an element as the human kings ; for we depart from the Egyptian 
 Qoint of view when we treat the gods as belonging to Egyptian religion 
 tnd the human kings to Egyptian history, — both are parts of the same 
 
 jeries. 
 
 It is difficult to tnire the information which Herodotus received from the 
 Egyptian priests to tiny intelligible scheme of chronology ; but this may bo 
 done in regardto Manetho with much plausibility, as the recent valuable and 
 elaborate analysis of Boeckh (Manetho und die Hundsternperiode, Beriin, 
 1845) has shown. He gives good reason for believing that the dynasties of 
 Manetho have been so arranged as to fill up an exact number of Sothiac cy- 
 cles (or periods of the star Sirius, each comprehending 1460 Julian years — 
 1461 Egyptian years) The Egyptian calender recognized a year of 36.5 
 days exactly, taking no note of the six hours additional which go to make 
 up the solar year : they had twelve months of thirty days, with five epago- 
 mens or additional days, and their year always began with the first of the 
 month Thoth (Solh, Sothis). Their year being thus six hours shorter (or 
 one day for every four years) than the Julian year with its recurrent leap 
 year, the first of the Egyptian month Thoth fell back every four years ono 
 day in the Julian calender, and in the course of 1460 years it fell successive- 
 ly on every day of the Julian year, coming back again to the same day from 
 which it had started. This period of 1460 years was called a Sothiac period, 
 and was reckoned from the year in which the first of the Egyptian month 
 Thoth coincided with the heliacal rising of Sirius in Egypt; that is. (for an 
 interval from 2700 h. c. down to the Christian era) on the 20th July of 
 the Julian year. We know from Censorinus that the particular revolu- 
 tion of the Sothiac period, in which both Herodotus and Manetho were in- 
 cluded, ended in the year 139 after the Christian era, in which year the first 
 of the Egyptian month Thoth fell on the 20th July, or coincided with the 
 heliacal rising of Sirius in Egypt : knowing in what year this period ended, 
 we also know that it must have begun in 1322 b. c, and that the period im- 
 mediately preceding it must have begun in 2782 b. c (Censorinus, De Di« 
 
 Q Vol 3 
 
 MANETHO AND THE SOTHIAC PERIOD. 
 
 8il 
 
 I. 
 
 Katali, c. 21 ; Ideler, Hundbuch der Chronologic, vol. i, Absohn. 1, pp. 125- 
 138.) The name Sothis, or Thoth, was the Egyptian name for Sirius or th« 
 Dog-star, the heliacal rising of which was an important phenomenon in that 
 country, as coinciding nearly with the commencement of the overflowing of 
 
 the Nile. 
 
 Boeckh has analyzed, with great care and ability, the fragmentary, par 
 tial, and in many particulars conflicting, versions of the dynasties of Manetho 
 which have come down to us : after all, we know them very imperfectly, 
 and it is clear that they have been much falsifit-tl and interpolated. He pre- 
 fers, for the most part, the version reported as that of Africanus. The 
 number of years included in the Egyptian chronology has been always a 
 difficulty with critics, some of whom have eluded it by the supposition that 
 the dynasties mentioned as successive were really simultaneous, — while 
 others have supposed that the years enumerated were not full years, but 
 years of one month or three months ; nor have there been wanting other 
 eflbrts of ingenuity to reconcile Manetho with the biblical chronology. 
 
 Manetho constructs his history of the past upon views purely Egyptian, 
 applying to past time the measure of the Sothiac period or 1460 Julian years 
 (= i461 Egyptian years), and beginning both the divine history of Egypt, 
 und the huinan history which succeeds it, each at the beginning of one of 
 these Sothiac periods. Knowing as we do from Censorinus that a Sothiiu; 
 period ended in 139 a. d., and, of course, began in 1322 B.C. — we also 
 know that the third preceding Sothiac period must have begun in 5702 3. c. 
 (1322-1- 1460 4- 1460 -h 1460 == 5702). Now the year 5702 b. c. coincides 
 with that in which Manetho places Menes, the first human king of Egypt ; 
 ."or his thirty-one dynasties end with the first year of Alexander the Great, 
 332 B. c, and include 5366 years in the aggregate, giving for the beginning 
 of the series of dynasties, or accession of Menes, the date 5702 b. c. Prior 
 to Menes he gives a long series of years as the time of the government of 
 gods and demigods ; this long time comprehends 24,837 years, or seventeen 
 Sothiac periods of 1461 Egyptian years each. We see, therefore, that Man- 
 etho (or perhaps the sacerdotal uvaypaipal which he followed) constructed a 
 system of Egyptian history and chronology out of twenty full Sothiac [.c- 
 riods, in addition to that fraction of the twenty-first which had elapsed down 
 to the time of Alexander, — about three-quarters of a century anterior to 
 Manetho himself, if we suppose him to have lived during the lime of Ptole- 
 my Philadelphus, which, though not certain, is yet probable (Boeckh, p. 11). 
 These results have not been brought out without some corrections of Mane- 
 tho's figures, — corrections which are, for the most part, justified on reasona- 
 ble grounds, and, where not so justified, are unimportant in amount; so that 
 the approximation is quite sufficient to give a high degree of plausibility to 
 Boeckh's hypothesis : see pp. 142-145. 
 
 Though there is no doubt that in the time of Manetho the Sothiac period 
 was familiar to the Egyptian priests, yet as to the time at which it first be- 
 came known we have no certain information : we do not know the time al 
 which they first began to take notice of the fact that their year of 365 dayi 
 
 a 
 
 !t 
 
 \\ 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 • 
 
 1 
 
 ' mj m i \ 
 
842 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 six hoars too short According to the statement of Herodotus (ii, 4), 
 the priests of Heh'opolis represented the year of 365 days (which they said 
 that the Egyptians had lir«t discovered) as if it were an exact recurrence of 
 the seASons, without any reference to tlie remaining six hours. This passage 
 of Herodotus; our oldest informant, is perplexing. Geminus (Isagoge in 
 Arati Phanomena, c. 6) says that the Egyptians intentionally refrained from 
 putting in the six houi> by any intercalation, because they preferred that 
 their months, and the relij^ious ceremonies connected with them, should from 
 •jme to time come round iit different season.s, — which has much more the 
 air of an ingenious after- thought, than of a determining reason. 
 
 Respecting the princi{)le on which the Egyptian chronology of Herodotus 
 is put together, see the remarks of M. Bunsen, ..^^yptens Stellung in der 
 Welt-gcschichte, vol. i, p. 145. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 DECLINE OF THE FHENICIANS.- GROWTH OF CARTHAGE. 
 
 The pref^diri": sketch of that important system of foreign 
 nations, — Phenician-, Assyrians, and Egyptians, — who occu- 
 pied the south-t'iisterii portion of the {olxov^itprj) inhabited world 
 of an early Greek, brings tliem down nearly to the time at 
 which they wt-re all absorbed in Jo the mighty Persian empire. 
 In tracing tlie seri<*s of events vvliicli intervened between 700 
 B. c, and 530 u. c, we observe a material increase of power both 
 in the Chaldaans and Egyptians, and an immense extension of 
 Grecian maritime activity and commerce, — but we at the same 
 time notice the decline? of Tyre and Sidon, both in power and 
 trat&c. The arms of Nebuchadnezzar reduced the Phenician 
 cities to the same state of dependence tis that which the Ionian 
 cities underwent half a century later from Croesus and Cyrus, 
 while the ships of Miletus, Phokaea, and Samos gradually spread 
 over all those waters of the Levant which had once been exclu- 
 •ively Phenician. In the year 704 b. c, the Samians did not yet 
 f '*"^sess a single trireme,' down to the year 630 b. c. not a single 
 
 J n 
 
 fhucyd. i, 13. 
 
 ALPHABET. - SCALE OF WEIGRT. 
 
 Sis 
 
 Greek vessel had yet visited Libya; but when we reach 5.50 3. c^ 
 we find the ionic ships predominant in the jEgean, and those 
 af Corinth Pud Korkyra in force to the west of Peloponnesus, 
 — we see the flourishing cities of Kyrene and Barka already 
 rooted in L'bya, and the port of Naukratis a busy emporium of 
 Grecian commerce with Egypt. The trade by land, which is all 
 that Egypt 'aad enjoyed prior to Psammetichus, and which was 
 exclusively conducted by Phenicians, is exchanged for a trade by 
 sea, of whicli the Phenicians have only a share, and seemingly a 
 smaller share than the Greeks ; and the conquest by Amasis of 
 the island of Cyprus, half filled with Phenician settlements and 
 on'^:e the tributary dependence of Tyre, affords one mark of the 
 comparative decline of that great city. In her commerce with 
 the Red sea and the Persian gulf she still remained without a com- 
 [>etitor, the schemes of the Egyptian king Nekos having proved 
 abortive ; &ud even in the time of Herodotus, the spices and 
 frankincense of Arabia were still brought and distributed only 
 by the Phencian merchant.' But on the whole, both her polit- 
 ical and industrial development are now cramped by impedi- 
 ments, and kept down by rivals, not before in operation ; and the 
 [)art which she will be found to i)lay in the Mediterranean, through- 
 out the whole course of this history, is one subordinate and of 
 reduced impjrtance. 
 
 The course of Grecian history is not directly affected by these 
 countries, y<.t their effect upon the Greek mind was very consid- 
 erable, and the opening of the Nile by Psammetichus constitutes 
 an epoch ia Hellenic thought. It supplied their observation 
 with a large and diversified field of present reality, while it was 
 at the same dme one great source of those mysticizing tendencies 
 which corrupted so many of their speculative minds. But to 
 Phenicia and Assyria, tlie Greeks owe two acquisitions well 
 deserving special mentiDn, — the alphabet, and the first standard 
 and scale of weight, as well as coined money. Of neither of 
 these acquisitions can we trace the precise date. That the Greek 
 alphabet is derived from the Phenician, the analogy of the two 
 proves beyond dispute, tliough we know not how or where tlie ines- 
 timable present was handed over, of which no traces are to be found 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 107. 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 4'^ 
 
S44 
 
 HISTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 in the Homeric poems. i The Latin alphabet, which is nearlj 
 identical with the mo:st ancient Doric variety of the Greek, was 
 derived from the same source, — also the Etruscan alphabet, 
 tlioiigh — if O. Mtillcr is correct in his conjecture — only at 
 iecond-hand, through the intervention of the Greek.'- If we can- 
 not make out at wlia: time the Phenicians made this valuable 
 communication to the Greeks, much less can we determine when 
 01 how they accjuired it themselves, — whether it be of Semitic 
 invention, or derived fj*om improvement upon the phonetio hiero- 
 glypliics of the Egyptmns.^ 
 
 Besides the letters of the alphabet, the scale of weight and 
 that of coined money passed from Phenicia and Assyria into 
 Greece. It has been fhown by Boeckh, in his " Metrologie," that 
 
 • Tlic variDiis statements or conjectures lo be found in Greek authors (all 
 comparatively recent) respecting the orij:in of the Greek alphabet, ani 
 collected In- Franz, Epig^riphice Grieca, s. iii, pp. 12-20 : " Oranino Gravel 
 alphabet! ut certa primordia sunt in orii^ine Pha'nicia, ita cerms terminus in 
 HtteraturA lonica seu Simonidea. Quae inter utruraq.*e a veterihus ponuntur, 
 
 hicerta omnia et fabulosa Non comnn^famur in iis quae de littera- 
 
 rum oriji:ine ct propagatione ex faliulosa re-asgorura historia (cf. Kniglit, 
 pp. 119-123; Kaoul Kochette, pp. 67-87) nvque in iis qusa do Cadmo nar- 
 
 raiirur quern unquam fuisse hodie jam nemo crediderit Alphalieti 
 
 Ph'enicii omncs 22 literas cum antiquis Graecis congruere. hodie nemo 
 est qui ignoret." (pp. 14-15.) Franz gives valuable information respecting 
 the changes gradually introduced into the Greek alphabet, and the erroneous 
 §tatcments of the Grammatici as to what letters were original, and what 
 were subsequently added. 
 
 Kruse also, in his • Hellas," (vol. i, p. 13, and in the first Beylage, annexed 
 to that volume.) presents an instructive comparison of the Greek, Latin, and 
 Phenician alphabets. 
 
 The Greek authors, as might be expected, were generally much more fond 
 of referring the origin of letters to native heroes or gods, such as Palamedes, 
 Prometheus, Musaeus, Orpheus, Linus, etc., than to the Phenicians. The 
 oldest known statement (that of Stesichoras, Schol. ap. Bekker. Anecdot ii, 
 p 786) a.scribes them to Pulamedes. 
 
 Both Franz and Kruse contend strenuously for the existence and habit 
 of ^Tiling among the Greeks in times long anterior to Homer : in which I 
 dissent from them. 
 
 * See O. Miiller, Die Etrosker (iv, 6), where there is much instruction ?■ 
 the Tuscan alphabet 
 
 » This question is raised and discussed by Justus Olshausen, Ueber den Drs 
 K«ng 1«^ Alphabetes (pp 1-10), in the Kieler Philologische Studien, 1841. 
 
 THE GNOMON. 
 
 345 
 
 «he j£ginaean scale,^ — with its divisions, talent, mna, aiid oboluS| 
 — is identical with the Babylonian and Phenician : and that the 
 word mnoy which forms the central point of the scale, is of Chal* 
 duRan origin. On this 1 have already touched in a former chap- 
 ter, while relating the history of Pheidon of Argos, by whom 
 what is called the ^ginaean scale was first promulgated. 
 
 In tracing, therefore, the effect upon the Greek mind of early 
 intercourse with the various Asiatic nations, we find that, as the 
 Greeks made up their musical scale, so important an element of 
 their early mental culture, in part by borrowing from Lydians 
 and Phrygians, — so also their monetary and statical system, 
 their alphabetical writing, and their duodecimal division of the 
 day, measured by the gnomon and the shadow, were all derived 
 from Assyrians and Phenicians. The early industry and com- 
 merce of these countries was thus in many ways available to 
 Grecian advance, and would probably have become more so, if 
 the great and rapid rise of the more barbaro'is Persians had not 
 reduced them all to servitude. The Phenicians, though unkind 
 rivals, were at the same time examples and stimulants to Greek 
 maritime aspiration ; and the Phenician worship of that goddess 
 whom the Greeks knew under the name of Aphrodite, became 
 communicated to the latter in Cyprus, in Kythera, in Sicily, — 
 perhaps also in Corinth. 
 
 The sixth century b. c, though a period of decline for Tyre 
 and Sidon, was a period of growth for their African colony 
 Carthage, which appears during this century in considerable 
 traffic with the Tyrrhenian towns on the southern coast of Italy, 
 and as thrusting out the Phokaean settlers from Alalia in Corsica. 
 The wars of the Carthaginians with the Grecian colonies in Sicily, 
 so far as they are known to us, commence shortly after 500 b. c, 
 and continue at intervals, with fluctuating success, for two cen- 
 turies and a half. 
 
 The foundation of Carthage by the Tyrians is placed at differ- 
 ent dates, the lowest of which, however, is 819 b. c. : other 
 authorities place it in 878 b. c, and we have no means of decid- 
 ing between them. I have already remarked that it is by no 
 
 * See Boeckh, Metrologie, chs. iv, v, vi ; also the preceding volume of thii 
 Fiistory 
 
 15* 
 
 ,, 
 
 %' 
 
 I 
 
if 
 
 846 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 means the oldest of the Tyrian colonies; but though Utica and 
 Gades may have been more ancient thiin Carth.igcJ the latter 
 greatly outstripped th« m in wealth and power, and acquired a 
 sort of iedenil precrain^nce over all the Phenician colonies on tlie 
 coa«*t of Africa. Ii^ those later times when the dominion of tlie 
 Cnrthap:inians had reached its maximum, it comprised the towns 
 of Uti«a, Hip{)o, Adiumetum, and Leptis, — all orijrinal Phenician 
 foundations, and enjoying probably, even as def>en<lent« of Car- 
 thage, a certain qualified autonomy, — besides a great number of 
 smaller towns planted by themselves, and inliabited by a mixed 
 population called Liby-Phenicians. Three hundred such towns, 
 — a dependent territory covering half the space between the 
 lesser and the greater Syrtis, and in many parts remarkably fer- 
 tile, — a city said to contain seven hundred thousand inhabitants, 
 active, wealthy, and seemingly homogeneous, — and foreign de- 
 pendencies in Sicily, Sai'dinia, the Balearic isles, and Spain, — 
 all this aggregate of power, under one political management, was 
 Buliicient to render the contest of Carthage even with Eome for 
 some time doubtiul. 
 
 But by what steps the Carthaginians raised themselves to 
 such a pitch of greatness we have no information, and we are 
 even left to guess how much of it had already been acquired in 
 the sixth century B. c. As in the case of so many other cities, 
 
 ' Uiica is said to have Itevn foanded 287 years earlier than Carthage ; th« 
 author who states this, professing to draw his information from Phenician 
 histories (Aristot. Mirab. Auscult. c. 134). Velleius Paterculus states Gades 
 to be older than Utic.i, and places the foundation of Carthage B. G. 81 S 
 (i. 2, 6). He seems to follow in the main the same authority as the com 
 posir of the Aristoteli ' compilation above cited. Other statements place 
 the foundation of Carthage in 878 B. c. (Heeren, Ideen uber den Verkehr, 
 etc., part ii, h i, p. 29). Ap])ian states the date of the foundation as fifty 
 yenrs before the Trojan war (De Reb. Punic, c. 1 ) ; Philistus, as twenty-one^ 
 years l.tfore the same event (Philist. Fragm 50, ed. Goller) ; TimsBus, as 
 thirty -eight years earlier than the Ist Olympiad (Tiraaei Fragm. 21. ed. 
 Didot); Justin, sevonrytwo years earlier than the foundation of Rome 
 (xviii, 6). 
 
 The citiition which Josephus gives from Menander's work, extracted from 
 Tyrian t'naypa^ni, ])laced the foundation of Carthage 143 years after th« 
 btiilding of the tem[)le of Jerusalem (Joseph, cont. Apion. i, c. 17-18) 
 Apion said that Carthage was founded in the first year of Olympiad 7 (a. « 
 *48), (Joseph, c. Apion. ii, 2.^ 
 
 GROWTH OF CARTHAGE. 
 
 847 
 
 ire have a foundation-legend, decorating the moment of birth, an^ 
 then nothing farther. The Tyrian princess Dido or Elisa, daugh- 
 ter of Belus, sister of Pygmalion king of Tyre, and wife of the 
 wealthy Sichceus priest of Herakles in that city, — is said to have 
 been left a widow in consequence of the murder of Sichaeus by 
 Pygmalion, who seized the trea^^ures belonging to his victim. 
 But Dido found means to disappoint him of his booty, possessed 
 herself of the gold which had tempted Pygmalion, and secretly 
 emigrated, carrying with her the sacred insignia of Herakles ; a 
 considerable body of Tyrians followed her. She settled at Car- 
 thage on a small hilly peninsula joined by a narrow tongue of 
 land to the continent, purchasing from the natives as much land 
 as could be surrounded by an ox*s hide, which she caused to be 
 cut into the thinnest strip, and thus made it sufficient for the site 
 of her first citadel, Byrsa, which afterwards grew up into the 
 great city of Carthage. As soon as her new settlement had ac- 
 quired footing, she was solicited in marriage by several princes of 
 the native tribes, especially by the Gaetulian Jarbas, who threat- 
 ened war if he were refused. Thus pressed by the clamors of 
 her own people, who desired to come into alliance with the natives, 
 yet irrevocably determined to maintain exclusive fidelity to her 
 first husband, she escaped the conflict by putting an end to her 
 life. She pretended to acquiesce in the proposition of a second 
 marriage, requiring only delay sufficient to offer an expiatory 
 sacrifice to the manes of Sichaeus : a vast funeral pile was erected, 
 and many victims slain upon it, in the midst of which Dido 
 pierced her own bosom with a sword, and perished in the flames- 
 Such is the legend to which Virgil has given a new color by inter- 
 weaving the adventures of jEneas, and thus connecting the foun- 
 dation Ipjrends of Carthajje and Rome, careless of his deviation 
 from the received mythical chronology. Dido was worshipped 
 as a goddess at Carthage until the destruction of the city :' and it 
 
 ' ''Quamdiu Carthago invicta fuit, pro Dea culta est" (Justin, xviii, 6; 
 Virgil, iEneid, i, 340-370.) We trace this legend about Dido up to Timsoa 
 (Timsei Frag. 23, ed. Didot): Philistus seems to have followed a different 
 gfory ; — he said that Carthage had been founded by Azor and Karchedon 
 (Philist Fr. 50). Appian notices both stories (De Reb. Pun. 1): that of 
 Dido was current both among the Romans and Carthaginians : of Zdroi 
 {or Ezorus) and Karchedon, the second is evidently of Greek coinage, the 
 first seems genuine Phenician : see Josephus coot. Apion. i, c. 18-21 
 
 iN 
 
 f . 
 
 I 
 
 li:' 
 
348 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 WESTERN COLONIES OF GREECE. 
 
 348 
 
 
 has been imagined with some probability that she is identical 
 with Astarte, the divine patroness under whose auspices the 
 colony was originally established, as Gades and Tarsus were 
 founded under those of Herakles, — the tale of the funeral pile 
 and self-burning appearing in the religious ceremonies of other 
 Cilician and Syrian towns.' Phenician religion and worship was 
 diffused along with the Phenician colonies tliroughout the larger 
 portion of the Mediterranean. 
 
 The Phokieans of Ionia, who amidst their adventurous voyage? 
 ifiestward established the colony of Massalia, (as early as 600 b. c.) 
 were only enabled to accomplish this by a naval victory over the 
 Carthaginians, — the earliest example of Greek and Carthaginian 
 collision which has been preserved to us. The Carthaginians 
 were jealous of commercial rivalry, and their traffic with the Tus- 
 cans and Latins in Italy, as well as their lucrative mine-working 
 in Spain, dates from a period when Greek commerce in those 
 regions was hardly known. In Greek authors, the d«Miomination 
 Phenicians is often used to designate the Carthaginians, a>» well 
 as the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon, so that we cannot always 
 distinguish which of the two is meant ; but it is remarkable that 
 tlie distant establishment of Gades, and the numerous settlements 
 planted for commercial pur[)oses along the western coast of Africa, 
 and without the strait of Gibraltar, are expressly ascribed to the 
 Tyrians.- Many of the other Phenician establishments on the 
 southern coast of S[»ain seemed to have owed their origin to Car- 
 thage rather than to Tyre. But the relations between the two, 
 so far as we know them, were constantly amicable, and Carthage, 
 even at the period of her highest glory, sent Theori with a trib- 
 ute of religious recognition to the Tyrian Herakles : the visit of 
 these envoys coincided with the siege of the town by Alexander 
 the Great. On that critical occasion, the wives and children of 
 the Tyrians were sent to find shelter at Carthage : two centuries 
 before, when the Persian empire was in its age of growth and 
 expansion, the Tyrians had refused to aid Kambyses with their 
 fleet in his plans for conquering Carthage, and thus probably pr» 
 «erved their colony from subjugation.^ 
 
 ' See Movers, Die Phonizier, pp. 609-616. 
 * Strabo, xvii, p. 826. 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 19. 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 WESTERN COLONIES OF GREECE -IN EPIRUS, ITALY, SICILY, 
 
 AND GAUL. 
 
 The stream of Grecian colonization to the westward, as far M 
 we can be said to know it authentically, with names and dates, be- 
 gins from the 11th Olympiad. But it is reasonable to believe 
 that there were other attempts earlier than this, though we must 
 content ourselves with recognizing them as generally probable. 
 There were doubtless detached bands of volunteer emigrants ox 
 marauders, who, fixing themselves in some situation favorable to 
 commerce or piracy, either became mingled with the native tribes, 
 or grew up by successive reinforcements into an acknowledged 
 town. Not being able to boast of any filiation from the prytan- 
 eium of a known Grecian city, these adventurers were often die- 
 posed to fasten upon the inexhaustible legend of the Trojan war, 
 and ascribe their ongin to one of the victorious heroes in the 
 host of A-amemnon, alike distinguished for their valor and for 
 their ubiquitous dispersion after the siege. Of such alleged 
 settlements by fugitive Grecian or Trojan heroes, there were 
 a crreat number, on various points throughout the shores of the 
 Mediterranean ; and the same honorable origin was claimed even 
 by many non-Hellenic towns. 
 
 In the eighth century b. c, when this westeriy stream of Gre- 
 cian colonization begins to assume an authentic shape (735 b. c), 
 the population of Sicily — as far as our scanty information per. 
 mits us to determine it — consisted of two races completely dis- 
 tinct from each other — Sikels and Sikans - besides the Elymi, 
 a mixed race apparently distinct from both, and occupying Eryx 
 and E^^esta, near the westernmost comer of the island, — and the 
 Phenician colonies and coast establishments formed for purposes 
 of trade. According to the belief both of Thucydides and Ph*. 
 listus, these Sikans, though they gav^ themselves out as indigen- 
 
BftO 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECK 
 
 
 WIS, were yet of Iberian origin' and emigrants of earlier date 
 than the Sikels,— by whom they had been invaded and restricted 
 to the smaller western half of the island, and who were said to 
 have crossed over originally from the south-western corner of the 
 Calahrian peninsula, where a portion of the nation still dwelt in 
 the time of Thuc>dides. The territory known to Greek writera 
 of the fifth century it. c. by the names of CEnotria on the coast 
 of the Mediterninean, and Italia on that of the gulfs of Taren- 
 turn and Squillace, included all that lies south of a line drawn* 
 iicross the breadtli of the country, from the gulf of PoseidOnia 
 (Paestum) and the river Silarus on the Mediterranean sea, to 
 the north-west comer of the gulf of Tarentutn ; it was ako 
 funded northwards by the lapygians and M(^ssapians, who oc- 
 cupied the Salentine peninsula, and the country immediately a<U 
 joining to Tarentum, and by the Peuketians on the Ionic gulf. 
 According to the logographers Pherekydes and Hellanikus,2 
 (Enotrus and Peuketius were sons of Lykaon, grandsons of Pe- 
 la^^gus, and emigrants in very eariy times from Arcadia to this 
 territory. An important statement in Stephanus Byzantinus^ ao 
 quaint^ us that the serf-population, whom the great Hellenic cities 
 in this portion of Italy employed in the cultivation of their lands, 
 were called Pelasgi, seemingly even in the historical times : it is 
 upon this name, probably, that the mythical genealogy of Phere- 
 kydes is constructed. This (Enotrian or Pelasgian race were 
 the population whom the Greek colonists found tliere on their ar- 
 rival. They were known apparently under otner names, such as 
 the Sikels, — menti(med even in the Odyssey, though their exact 
 locality in that poiem cannot be ascertained — the Italians, or 
 Itali, properly so called, — the Morgetes, — and the Cha^ nes, — 
 
 ' Thucyd. vi, 2; Philistus, Fraf,'m. 3, ed. Goller, ap. Diodor. v, 6. Timaui 
 adopted the opposite opinion (Diodor. /. c), also Ephorus, if we may jud^e 
 by an indistinct passage of Strabo) vi, p. 270). Dionysius of Halikarnassus 
 f>IIow6 Thucydides (A. R. i, 22). 
 
 The opinion of PhiU.-tas is of much value on this point, since he was, or 
 mipht have been, personally cognizant of Iberian mercenaries in the service 
 of the elder Dionysius. 
 
 'Pherekyd. Frapm 85, ed. Didot; Hellanik. Fr. 53, ed. Didot ; Dionyi 
 fiftlik. A. R i. 11. 13, 22; Skymnus Chius, v, 362; Paasan. viii, 3, 5. 
 • Stephan Byz. v, Kin. 
 
 !' 
 
 (ENOTRIANS. 
 
 891 
 
 sll of them names of tribes either cognate or subdivisional.' 
 The Chaones or Chaonians are also found, not only in Italy, but 
 in Epirus, as one of the most considerable of the Epirotic tribes, 
 — while Pandosia, the ancient residence of the Gi^notrian kings in 
 the southern corner of Italy,- was also the name of a township 
 or locality in Epirus, with a neighboring river Acheron in both, 
 from hence, and from some other similarities of name, it has 
 been imagined that Epirots, Oiinotrians, Sikels, etc, were all 
 names of cognate people, and all entitled to be comprehended 
 under the generic appellation of Pelasgi. That they belonged to 
 the same ethnical kindred, there seems fair reason to presume, 
 and also that in ^int of language, manners, and character, they 
 were not very widely separated from the ruder branches of the 
 
 Hellenic race. 
 
 It would appear too, as far as any judgment can be formed on a 
 point essentially obscure, that the CEnotrians were ethnically 
 ftkin to the primitive population of Rome and Latiura on ont 
 side,3 as they were to the Epirots on the other ; and that tribes 
 
 ^ Aristot. Folit. vii, 9, 3. 'Hkovv de to irpdg rffv 'loTrvyiav kcU tov 'Iov/oi- 
 Xuvff (or Xdoveg) rfiv KaAov^ivrjv llpiv rjaav 6k Kai oi X<ivcf Olvurpol t6 
 
 yevo^. 
 Antiochus Fr. 3, 4, 6, 7, ed. Didot; Strabo, vi, p. 254 ; Hesych. v, X6vifv , 
 
 Dionys. Hal. A. R i, 12. 
 
 * Livy, viii, 24. 
 
 3 For the early habitation of Sikels or Siculi in Latium and Campania, 
 Bee Dionys. Hal. A. R. i, 1-21 : it is curious that Siculi and Sicani, whether 
 the same or different, the primitive ante- Hellenic population of Sicily, aiv 
 also numbered as the ante-Roman population of Rome : see Virgil, JEndd, 
 viii, 328, and Servins ad ^neid. xi, 317. 
 
 The alleged andent emigration of Evander from Arcadia to Latium form« 
 a parallel to the emigration of GEnotrus from Arcadia to southern Italy aa 
 recounted by Pherekydes : it seems to have been mentioned even as early as 
 in one of the Hesiodic poems (Servius ad Virg. JEn. viii, 138) : compare 
 Steph. Byz. v, UaXXavriov. The earliest Latin authors appear all to have 
 recognized Evander and his Arcadian emigrants : see Dionys. Hal. i, 31-32, 
 ii, 9, and his references to Fabius Pictor and Mlias Tubero, i, 79-80; also 
 Cato ap. Solinum, c. 2. If the old reading 'Ap«d(5wv, in Thucyd. vi, S 
 (which Bekker has now altered into 2t/ceAwv), be retained, Thncydid^s would 
 also stand as witness for a migration from Arcadia into Italy. A third 
 •migration of Pelasgi, from Peloponnesus to the river Samns n Boatheri 
 Italy (near Pompeii), was mentioned by Conon (ap. Senriom tf Virg. "" 
 Hi, 730). 
 
 I 
 
 % 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 i< 
 
 
ll 
 
 352 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of this race, comprising Sikels, and Itali properly so called, as 
 Bections, had at one time occupied most of the territory from the 
 left bank of the river Tiber southward between the Apennines 
 and the Mediterannean. Both Herodotus and his junior cou^ 
 temporary, the Syracusan Antiochus, extend CEnotria as far 
 northward as the river Silarus,' and Sophokles includes the 
 whole coast of the Mediterranean, from the strait of Messina to 
 the gulf of Genoa, under the three successive names of (Eno- 
 tria, the Tyrrhenian gulf, and Liguria.'^ Before or during the 
 fifth century b. c, however, a differ int population, called Opi- 
 cians, Oscans, or Ausonians, had descended from their original 
 seats on or north of the Apennines,-' and had conquered theater- 
 
 'Herodotus (i, 24-:67) includes Elea (or Velia) in Oinotna, - and 
 Tarentum in Italia; while Antiochus considers Tarentum as in lapv-ji 
 and the southern boundary of the Tarentine territory as the northern 
 boundary of Italia: Dionysius of Halikarnassus (A. R. ii, i) seems to copy 
 from Antiochus when he extends the CEnotrians along the whole south- 
 western corner of Italy, within the line drawn from Tarentum to Poseidoni u 
 or P»stum. Hence the appellation 0/ra>r^,i% vtjgol to the two islands 
 opposite Elea (Strabo, vi, p. 253). 8kymnus Chius (v. 247) reco^'nizes the 
 same boundaries. * 
 
 Twelve CEnotrian cities are cited by name (in Stephanus Bvzantinus^ 
 from the Ei-p^^rr^ of Hekataus (Frag. 30-39, ed. Didot) : Skviax in his 
 Penplus does not name CEnotrians ; he enumerates Campanians, Samnites 
 and Lucanians (cap. 9-13). The intimate connection between Miletus and 
 Sybaris would enable Hekataeus to inform himself about the interior 
 CEnotrian country. 
 
 CEnotria and Italia together, as conceived by Antiochus and Herodotus 
 comprised what was known a century afterwards as Lucania and Bruttium' 
 see Mannert, Geographi<j der Griech. und Romer, j)art ix, b. 9 ch i p 86 
 Livy, speaking with reference to 317 b. c, when the Lucanian nation as well" 
 as the Bruttians were in full vigor, describes only the sea-coast of the lower 
 •ea as Grecian, — '• cum omni ora Graecorum inferi maris a Thuriis Neapolim 
 et Cumas," (ix, 19.) Verrius Flaccus considered the Sikels as Greed (Festus 
 V, Major Gnecia, with Muller's note). 
 
 ' Sophokles, Triptoleni. Fr. 527. ed. Dindorf. He places the lake Avernus 
 which was close to the Campanian Cum*, in Tvrrhenia: see Lexicon' 
 Sophocleum, ad calc. ed. Brunck, v, 'Aopvof. Euripides (Medea 1310- 
 1326) seems to extend Tyrrhenia to the strait of Messina. 
 
 \ Aristot. Polit. vii, 9, a. <;>Kovv 6i Tb filv npdc Tf,v Tvpf>rfpcav 'OmKoi, koI 
 irporepov Kal vvv KaXavf^evoi rrjv imKlrjatv Alaovec Festas: ^^ Ausoniam 
 •ppellavit Auson, Ulyssis et CalypsAs filius, earn priraam partem Itah« in 
 «aa ium urbes Beneventum et Cales : deinde paulatim tota quoque Italia 
 
 (ENOTRIANS. - OSCANS. 
 
 358 
 
 ritory between Latium and the Silarus, expelling or subjugating 
 the CEr^otrian inhabitants, and planting outlying settlements even 
 down to the strait of Messina and the Lipariean isles. Hence the 
 more precise Thucydides designates the Campanian territory, in 
 which Cumae stood, as the country of the Opici; a denomination 
 which Aristotle extends to the river Tiber, so as to comprehend 
 within it Rome and Latium. i Not merely Campania, but in earlier 
 times even Latium, originally occupied by a Sikel or CEnotrian 
 population, appears to have been partially overrun and subdued 
 by fiercer tribes from the Apennines, and had thus received 
 a certain intermixture of Oscan race. But in the regions south 
 of Latium, these Oscan conquests were still more overwhelming ; 
 and to this cause (in the belief of inquiring Greeks of the fifth 
 century b. c.)2 were owing the first migrations of the CEnotrian 
 
 (luie Apennino finitur, dicta est Ausonia," etc. The original Ausonia would 
 thus coincide nearly with the territory called Samniura, after the Sabint 
 emigrants had conquered it: see Livy, viii, 16; Strabo, v, p. 250 ; Virg. JEn. 
 vii, 727, with Servius. Skymnus Chius (v, 227) has copied from the same 
 source as Festus. For the extension of Ausonians along various parts of 
 the more southern coast of Italy, even to Rhegium, as well as to the Lipa- 
 riean isles, see Diodor. v, 7-8 ; Cato, Origg. Fr. lib. iii, ap. Probum ad Virg. 
 Bucol. V, 2. The Pythian priestegs, in directing the Chalkidic emigrants to 
 Rhegium, says to them, — 'Evi^a noXiv oiKtCe, didol 6e aoi Avffova ;^:a>pav 
 (Diodor. Fragm. xiii, p. 11, ap Scriptt. Vatic, ed. Mali). Temesa is Ansa- 
 nian in Strabo, vi, p. 255. 
 
 ' Thucyd. vi, 3 ; Aristot. ap. Dionys. Hal. A. R. i, 72. 'A;^^^'*'*' Tivag ruv 
 rnrd Tpoirjc avaKOfiLi^ofiiviJV^ — k'k'&Elv etc rdv tottov tovtov ttj^ ^OniKfj^ of 
 KaXelTai Adriov. 
 
 Even in the time of Cato the elder, the Greeks comprehended the Romana 
 under the general, and with them contemptuous, designation of Opici (Cato 
 ap. Plin. H. N. xxii, 1 : see Antiochus ap. Stnib. v, p. 242). 
 
 2 Thucyd. vi, 2. IiksXoI de i^ 'IraA/af (pevyovrec 'O7ri«oi>f du^rjaav ef 
 liKe/.iav (see a Fragment of the geographer Menippus of Pergamus, in 
 Hudson's Geogr. Minor, i, p. 76). Antiochus stated that the Sikels were 
 driven out of Italy into Sicily by the Opicians and aj:notrians ; but the 
 Sikels themselves, according to him, were also CEnotrians (Dionys. H. i, 
 12-22). It is remarkable that Antiochus (who wrote at a time when the 
 name of Rome had not begun to exercise that fascination over men's minds 
 which the Roman power afterwards occasioned), in setting forth the mythical 
 antiquity of the Sikels and CEnotrians, represents the eponymous Sikela.? aa 
 an exile from Rome, who came into the s« uth of Italy to the king Morges, 
 luccessor of Italus, — 'End Se 'IraTiog Kareyripa^ Uooyijc k^aaiXEvaev. 'Eir^ 
 
 VOL. ITL 23oC 
 
 
354 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 I 
 
 race out of southern Italy, which wrested the larger portion of 
 Sicily from the pree jcisting Sikanians. 
 
 This imperfect acr.ount, representing the ideas of Greeks of 
 the Mh century b. c. as to the early jiopulation of southera 
 Italy, is borne out by the fullest comparison which can be made 
 between the Greek, Latin, and Oscan language, — the fii-st two 
 certainly, and the thi rd probably, sisters of the same Indo-Euro- 
 pean family of languages. While the analogy, structural and 
 radical, between Greek and Latin, establishes completely such 
 community of family — and while comparative philology proves 
 that on many points the Latin departs less from the supposed 
 common type and mother-language than the Greek — there ex- 
 ists also in the former a non-Grecian element, and non-Grecian 
 classes of words, which appear to imply a confluence of two 
 or more different people with distinct tongues ; and the same 
 non-Grecian element, thus traceable in the Latin, seems to pre- 
 sent itself still more largely developed in the scanty remains of 
 the OscanJ Moreo^'er, the Greek colonies in Italy and Sicily 
 
 rovTov Sf uvf)p uipiKeTo ix 'Poifiij^ ^vyc/f, liKe'Adg ovofia avr^ (Antiochus ap. 
 Dionys. H. i, 73 : compare c. 12). 
 
 Philistus considered Sikehis to be a son of Italus : both he and Hellanikus 
 believed in early mi},Taiions from Italy into Sicily, but described the enii^ 
 grants differently (Philintus, Frag 2, cd. Didot). 
 
 ' See the learned observations upon the early languages of It^y and 
 Sicily, which Mo Her has prefixed to his work on the Etruscans (Einleitung, 
 i. 1 2). I transcribe the following sunaniary of his views respecting the early 
 Italian dialects and races : '• The notions which we thus obtain respecting 
 the early languages of Ituly are as follows : the Sikel, a sister language, nearly 
 allied to the Greek or Pelasgic ; the Latin, compounded from the Sikel and 
 from the rougher dialect of the men called Aborigines ; the Oscan, akin to the 
 Latin in both its two elements ; the language spoken by the Sabine emigrants 
 in their various conquered territories, Oacan ; the Sabine ;>roper, a distinct 
 and peculiar language, jet nearly connected with the non-Grecian element 
 in Latin and Oscan, as well as with the language of the oldest Ausoniami 
 nnii Aborigines.** 
 
 [n. b. This last statement, respecting the original Sabine language, is 
 very imperfectly made out : it seems equally probable that the Sabellians 
 may have differed from the Oscans no more than the Dorians from the 
 [onians : see Niebuhr, R«3m. Gesch. tom. i, p. 69.] 
 
 '' Such a comparison of languages presents to us a certain view, which I 
 •hall here briefly unfold, of the earliest history of the ItaUan races. At a 
 period anterior to all ret^ords, a single peoplet akin to the GreekS| dwelling 
 
 OSCANS.- SIKELS. 
 
 35$ 
 
 caught several peculiar words from their association with the Si- 
 kels, which words approach in most cases very nearly to the 
 Latin, — so that a resemblance thus appears between the language 
 of Latium on the one side, and that of CEnotrians and Sikels (in 
 southern Italy and Sicily) on the other, prior to the establish- 
 ments of the Greeks. These are the two extremities of the 
 Sikel population ; between them appear, in the intermediate 
 country, the Oscan or Ausonian tribes and language ; and these 
 latter seem to have been in a great measure conquerors and in- 
 truders from the central mountains. Such analogies of language 
 countenance the supposition of Thucydides and Antiochua, that 
 these Sikels had once been spread over a still larger portion of 
 southern Italy, and had migrated from thence into Sicily in conse- 
 quence of Oscan inviisions. The element of affinity existing be- 
 tween Latins, CEnotrians, and Sikels — to a certain degree also 
 between all of them together and the Greeks, but not extending 
 
 extended from the south of Tuscany down to the straits of Messina, occu- 
 pies in the upper part of its territory only the valley of the Tiber, — lower 
 down, occupies the mountainous districts also, and in the south, stretchei 
 across from sea to sea, — called Sikels, CEnotrians, or Peucetians. Other 
 mountain tribes, powerful, though not widely extended, live in the northern 
 Abruzzo and its neighborhood : in the east, the Sabines, southward from 
 them the cognate Marsi, more to the west the Aborigines, and among them 
 probably the old Ausonians or Oscans. About 1000 years prior to the 
 Christian era, there arises among these tribes — from whom almost all 
 the popular migrations in ancient Italy have proceeded — a movement 
 whereby the Aborigines more northward, the Sikels more southward, are 
 precipitated upon the Sikels of the plains beneath. Many thousands of the 
 great Sikel nation withdraw to their brethren the CEnotrians, and by degreei 
 still farther across the strait to the island of Sicily. Others of them remain 
 stationary in their residences, and form, in conjunction with the Aborigines, 
 the Latin nation, — in conjunction with the Ausonians, the Oscrn nation: 
 the latter extends itself over what was afterwards called Samniura and 
 Campania. Still, the population and power of these mountain tribes, 
 especially that of the Sabines, goes on perpetually on the increase : as they 
 pressed onward towards the Tiber, at the period when Rome was only 8 
 single town, so they also advanced southwards, and conquered, — first, the 
 mountainous Opica; next, some centuries later, the Opician plain, Cam» 
 pania ; lastly, the ancient country of the CEnotrians, afterwards denominated 
 Lucania.** 
 
 Compare Niebuhr, Romisch. CJeschicht. vol. i, p. 80, 2d edit., and the firrt 
 di ap tc r of Mr. Donaldson's Varronianus. 
 
 ! 
 
 V 
 
d66 
 
 HISTORY Of GREECE. 
 
 to the Opicians or Oscans, or to the lapygians — may be called 
 Pelasgic, for want of a better name ; but, by whatever name it be 
 called, the recognition of its existence connects and explains 
 many isolated circumstances in the early hi:?tory of Rome as well 
 as in that of the Italian and Sicilian Greeks. 
 
 The earliest Grecian colony in Italy or Sicily, of which we 
 know the precise date, ix placed about 73J b. c, eighteen years 
 subsequent to the Varronian era of Rome ; so that the causes, 
 tending to subject and Hellenize the Sikel population in the south- 
 ern region, begin their operation nearly at the same time as 
 those which tended gradually to exalt and aggrandize the modi- 
 fied variety of it which existed in Latium. At that time, ac- 
 cording to the information given to Thucydides, the Sikels had 
 been established for three centuries in Sicily: Hellanikus and 
 Pliilistus — who b'jih recognized a similar migration into that 
 island out of Italy, though they give diifercnt names, both to the 
 emigrants and to those who expelled them — as-ign to the mi- 
 gration a ilate three generations before the Trojan war.' Earlier 
 than Too b, c, however, though we do not know the i)recise era 
 of its commencement, there existed one solitary Grecian estab- 
 lishment in tlie Tyrrlienian sea, — the Cam panian Cumui, near 
 ca{>e Misenum ; which the more common opinion of chronologists 
 supposed to have been founded in 1050 b. c, and which lias even 
 b»'cn carried back by fionie authors to 1139 B. c- Without re- 
 posing any faith in this early chronology, we may at least feel 
 certain that it is the most ancient Grecian establishment in an) 
 [)art of Italy, and thai a considerable time elapsed before an) 
 other Greek colonists were bold enough to cut themselves off 
 from the Hellenic world by occupying seats on the other side of 
 
 ' Thucyd. vi, 2; PliiHstiH, Frap:- 'i, cmI. Didot. 
 
 * Strabo, V, p. 24.'i , \'rl . in^ I'atercul. i, 5 ; Euseliius, p 121. M. Raoul 
 Rochette, assumin;; a dirtV- ent computation of the dale of the Trojan war, 
 pushes the date of Cum;c still farther back to 1139 b. c. (Histoire des 
 Colonies Grecques, book iv, c. 12, p. 100 ) 
 
 The mythes of CunuL- extended to a period preceding the Chalkidic 
 •ettlement. See the stories of Aristieus and Daedalus ap. Sallust. FragW£nt 
 Ineert. p. 204, cd. Delphin. ; and Servius ad Virgil. JEneid. vi, 17. TY^t 
 fbbulous Thespiadiv, or primitive Greek settlers in Sardinia, were suppo»€i 
 ii early ages to have left thai island autl retireil to ^-umaB (l)iodor. v, Ift). 
 
 CUMiE IN ITALY. 
 
 957 
 
 tiie strait of Messina, ^ with all the hazards of Tyrrhenian piracy 
 as well as of Scylla and Charybdis. The Campanian Cumae ^^ 
 knojvn ali^ost entirely by this its Latin designation — received ita 
 name and a portion of its inhabitants from the ^olic Kyme in 
 Asia Minor. A joint band of settlers, partly from this latter 
 town, partly from Chalkis in Euboea, — the former under the 
 Kymican Hippokles, the latter under the Chalkidian Megasthe- 
 Qes, — having combined to form the new town, it was settled by 
 agreement that Kyme should bestow the name, and that Chalkia 
 should enjoy the title and honors of the mother-city .2 
 
 Cumae, situated on the neck of the peninsula which terminates 
 in cape Misenum, occupied a lofty and rocky hill overhanging the 
 sea,3 and difficult of access on the land side. The unexampled 
 fertility of the Phlegra^an plains in the immediate vicinity of the 
 city, the copious supply of fish in the Lucrine lake,^ and the gold 
 mines in the neighboring island of Pithekusae, — both subsisted 
 and enriched the colonists. They were joined by fresh settlers 
 from Chalkis, from Eretria, and even from Samos ; and became 
 numerous enough to form distinct towns at Dika3archia and Nca- 
 polls, thus spreading over a large portion of the bay of Naples. 
 In the hollow rock under the very walls of the town was situated 
 the cavern of the prophetic Sibyl, — a parallel and reproduction 
 of the Gergithian Sibyl, near Kyme in iEolis : in the immediate 
 neif'hborhood, too, stood the wild woods and dark lake of Aver- 
 nus, consecrated to the subterranean gods, and offering an estab- 
 lishment of priests, with ceremonies evoking the dead, lor pur- 
 poses of prophecy or for solving doubts and mysteries. It was 
 here that Grecian imagination localized the Cimmerians and the 
 fable of Odysseus ; and the Cumasans derived gaino *rom the nu- 
 
 ' Ephorus, Frag. 52, ed. Didot. 
 « Strabo, v, p. 243 ; Velleius Paterc. i, 5. 
 
 ' See the site of Cumae as described by Agathias (on occasion of the siegt 
 of the place by Narses, in 5.52 a. d.), Histor. i, 8-10 ; also by Strabo, ▼, p. 
 
 144 
 
 • Diodor. iv, 21, v, 71 ; Polyb. iii, 91 ; Pliny, H. N. iii, 5 ; Livy, viii, 2S. 
 ** In Baiano sinu CampanisB contra Puteolanam civitatem lacns sunt dn<^ 
 Avernus et Lucrinus : qui olim propter piscium copiam vectigaiia magna 
 I riBstabant," (Servius ad Virg. Georgic. ii, 161.) 
 
 ■ 
 
 : 
 
 I: 
 
 fi--^ 
 
 \w 
 
 1^1 
 
tbS 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 meroua visitors to this holj spot,^ perhaps hardly less than thc^e 
 o:" the inhabitants of Kiissa from the vicinity of Delphi. Of the 
 relations of these Cuniaeans with the Hellenic world general!; , we 
 unfortunately know nothing ; but they seem to have been i:i inti- 
 mate connection with Rome during tho time of the kings, and 
 e>pecially during that of the last king Tarquin,- — forming the 
 intermediate link between the Greek and Latin world, whereby 
 the feelings of tht: Teukrians and Gergithians near the iEolic 
 Kyme, and the b^gendary stories of Trojan as well as Greciaa 
 heroes — ^lilneas and Odysseus — pass(^ into the antiquarian im- 
 agination of Romt; and Latium.'^ The writers of the Augustan 
 age knew Cuma^ only in its decline, and wondered at the vast ex- 
 tent of its ancient walls, yet remaining in their time. But durin<» 
 the two centuries prior to 500 b. c, these walls inclosed a full 
 and thriving population, in the plenitude of prosperity, — with a 
 surrounding territory extensive as well as fertile,"* resorted to by 
 purchasers of corm from Rome in years of scarcity, and unassail- 
 ed as yet by formi-iable neighbors, — and with a coast and harbors 
 well suited to maritime commerce. At that period, the town of 
 Capua, if indeed it existed at all, was of very inferior impor- 
 tance, and the chief part of the rich plain around it was in- 
 
 ' Strabo, V, p. 243. Kal eiaenXeov ye oi npo^vaofievoi xal l2.aa6fievoi rot- 
 KaTax^^fnnofr daifiova.;, 6vtuv tuv v<pT/yovfjiiv(jv rd ToiaSe lepeuv, T/pyoXafir, 
 KOTui' TOP Torrov. 
 
 * Dionys. H. iv, 61-62, vi, 21 ; Livy, ii, 34. 
 
 * See, respecting tfie transmi.ssion of ideas and fables from the jEolic 
 Kyme to Cumse in Campania, the lirst volume of this History, chap, xv, 
 p. 457. 
 
 The father of Hesiod was a native of the ^olic Kyme: we find in the 
 Hesiodic Theopony (odjin.) mention of Latinns as the son of Odysseus and 
 Circe: Servius cites the same from the 'AtTTra^orroim of Hesiod (Servius ai 
 Vir^r ^n. xii. 162 ; compare Cato, Fragment, p. 33, ed. Lion). The great 
 family of the Mamilii at Tusculum, also derived their origin from Odysseus 
 ftnd Circe (Livy, i, 49). 
 
 The tomb of Elpenor, the lost companion of CJysseus, was shown 
 H Circeu in the dayii of Theophrastus (Hist. Plant v, 8, 3) and Skylax 
 (c. 10). 
 
 Hesiod notices the i)romontory of Pelorus, the strait of Messina, and th« 
 iilet of Ortygia near Syracuse (Diodor. iv, 85 j Strabo, i, p. 23J 
 * Livy, ii, 9. 
 
 ARISTODEMUS OF CUILE. 
 
 WSQ 
 
 duded in the possessions of Cumae' — not unworthy probably, in 
 the sixth century B. c, to be numbered with Sybaris and Kroton. 
 The decline of Cumae begins in the first half of the fifth cen- 
 tury B. c. (500-450 B. c), first, from the growth of hostile 
 powers in the interior, — the Tuscans and Samnites, — next, 
 from violent intestine dissensions and a destructive despotism. 
 The town was assailed by a formidable host of invaders from the 
 interior, Tuscans reinforced by Umbrian and Daunian allies ; 
 which Dionysius refers to the 64th Olympiad (524-520 b. c.)» 
 though upon what chronological authority we do not know, and 
 though this same time is marked by Eusebius as the date of the 
 foundation of Dikaearchia from Cumae. The invaders, in spite 
 of great disparity of number, were bravely repelled by the Cu- 
 mseans, chiefly through the heroic example of a citizen then first 
 known and distinguished, — Aristodemus Malakus. The govern- 
 ment of the city was oligarchical, and the oligarchy from that day 
 became jealous of Aristodemus ; who, on his part, acquired ex- 
 traordinary popularity and influence among the people. Twenty 
 years afterwards, the Latin city of Aricia, an ancient ally of 
 Cumae was attacked by a Tuscan host, and intreated succor from 
 the Cumaeans. The oligarchy of the latter thought this a goo<? 
 opportunity to rid themselves of Aristodemus, whom they de- 
 spatched by sea to Aricia, with rotten vessels and an insufficient 
 body of troops. But their stratagem failed and proved theix 
 ruin ; for the skill and intrepidity of Aristodemus sufficed for tht 
 rescue of Aricia, and he brought back his troops victorious and 
 devoted to himself personally. Partly by force, partly by 
 stratagem, he subverted the oligarchy, put to death the principal 
 rulers, and constituted himself despot : by a jealous energy, by 
 disarming the people, and by a body of mercenaries, he main- 
 tained himself in this authority for twenty years, running his 
 career of lust and iniquity until old age. At length a conspiracy 
 of the oppressed population proved successful against him ; Lo 
 was slain, with all his family and many of his chief partisans, and 
 the former government was restored.2 
 
 • Ntebuhr, Romisch. Geachicht. vol. i, p 76, 2d edit 
 ' The hif tory of Aristodemus Malakas is given at some length bj Vm 
 nynns of Halikamassas (viii, 3-10). 
 
 I 
 
 i; 
 
 if * 
 
 i ' 
 
900 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 The despotism of Ariitodemus falls during the exile of tiio 
 expelled Tarquini (to whom he gave shelter) from Rome, and 
 during the government of Gelon at Syracuse ; and this calamit- 
 ous period of dissension and misrule was one of the ^reat causes 
 of the decline of Cumje. Nearij at the same time, the Tuscan 
 power, both by land and sea, appears at its maximum, and the 
 Tuscan establishment at Capua begins, if we adopt tiie era of 
 the town as given by Cato.'^ There was thus created at the ex- 
 pense of Cumae a powerful city, which was still ftirther aggran- 
 dized afterwards when conquered and occupied by the Samnites ; 
 whose invading tribes, under their own name or that of Lucani- 
 «ns, extended themselves during the fifth and fourth centuries 
 B. c, even to the shores of the gulf of Tarentum.^ Cumie waa 
 also exposed to formidable dangers from the sea-side : a fleet, 
 either of Tuscans alone, or of Tuscans and Carthaginians united, 
 assailed it in 474 b. c, and it was only rescued by the active in- 
 terposition of Iliero, despot of Syracuse ; by whose naval force 
 the invaders were repelled with slaughter.4 These incidents go 
 partly to indicate, partly to explain, the decline of the most an- 
 cient Hellenic settlement in Italy,— a dechne from which it never 
 recovered. 
 
 After briefly sketching the history of Cumte, we pass naturally 
 to that series of |)owerful colonies which were established in 
 Sicily and Italy, beginning with 735 b. c. — enterprises in which 
 Chalkis, Corinth, Megara, Sparta, ihe Achteans in Peloponnesus, 
 and the Lokrians out of Peloponnesus, were all concerned. 
 Chalkis, the metropolis of Cumje, became also the metropolis of 
 Naxos, the most ancient Grecian colony in Sicily, on the eastern 
 coast of the island, between the strait of Messina and Mount 
 -^tna. 
 
 The great number of Grecian settlements, from different colo- 
 nizing towns, which appear to have taken effect within a few 
 years upon the east.3rn coast of Italy and Sicily — from the lapy- 
 gian cape to cape Pachynus — leads us to suppose that the ex- 
 
 ' Livy, ii, 21. 
 
 • Compare Strabo, v. p. 250; vi, p. 264. 
 
 •Ays Vcllcius, /. /'. 
 
 ' Dicxlor. xi, v. ; Pinrlar, Pyth. i, 71. 
 
 * Velleius Patercol. i, 5. 
 Camanos Osca mntarit yidiiiA,' 
 
 COLONIES IN SICILY. -NAXOS. 
 
 361 
 
 
 traordinary capacities of the country for receiving new settles 
 had become known only suddenly. The colonies follow so close 
 upon each other, that the example of the first cannot have been 
 the single determining motive to those which followed. I 
 shall have occasion to point out, even a century later (on the 
 occasion of the settlement of Kyrene), the narrow range of Gre- 
 cian navigation ; so that the previous supposed ignorance would 
 not be at all incredible, were it not for the fact of the preexisting 
 .colony of Cuma3. According to the practice universal with Gre- 
 cian ships — which rarely permitted themselves to lose sight of 
 the coast except in cases of absolute necessity — every man, who 
 navigated from Greece to Italy or Sicily, first coasted along the 
 shores of Akarnania and Epirus until he reached the latitude of 
 Korkyra ; he then struck across first to that island, next to the 
 lapygian promontory, from whence he proceeded along the east- 
 ern coast of Italy (the gulfs of Tarentum and Squillace) to the 
 southern promontory of Calabria and the Sicilian strait; he 
 would then sail, still coastwise, either to Syracuse or to Cumje, 
 according to his destination. So different are nautical habits now, 
 that this fact requires special notice ; we must recollect, moreorer, 
 that in 735 b. c., there were yet no Grecian settlements either in 
 Epirus or in Korkyra : outside of the gulf of Corinth, the worid 
 was non-Hellenic, with the single exception of the remote Cumje. 
 A rule before the last-mentioned period, Theokles (an Athenian 
 or a Chalkidian — probably the latter) was cast by storms on the 
 coast of Sicily, and became acquainted with the tempting char- 
 acter of the soil, as well as the dispersed and half-organized con- 
 dition of the petty Sikel communities who occupied it.i The 
 oligarchy of Chalkis, acting upon the information which he 
 brought back, sent out under his guidance settlers,2 Chalkidian 
 and Naxian, who founded the Sicilian Naxos. Theokles and his 
 companions on landing first occupied the eminence of Taurus, im- 
 
 * Thucyd. vi, 3 ; Strabo, vi, p. 267. 
 
 * The admixture of Naxian colonists may be admitted, as well upon the 
 presumption arising from the name, as from the statement of Hellanikus, ap. 
 Stephan. Byz. v, XaA/c/f . 
 
 Ephonis put together into one the Chalkidian and the Megarian migra- 
 tions. which Thucydides represents as distinct (Ephorus ap. Strabo. vi n 
 167). '*^ 
 
 VOL. III. 16 
 
 i |i 
 
 ; \ 
 
 i 
 
dC2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 FOUNDATION OF SYRACUSE. 
 
 868 
 
 mediately overhanging the sea (whereon was established four 
 centuries afterwards the town of Tauronienium, after Naxos liad 
 been destroyed by the Syracusan despot Dionysius) ; for they had 
 to make good their position against the Sikels, who were in occu- 
 pation of tlie neighborhood, and wliom it was requisite either to 
 dispossess or to subjugate. After they had acquired secure pos- 
 se sion of tlie territory, the site of the city was transferred to a 
 convenient spot adjoining ; but the hill first occupied remained 
 ev«.'r memorable, l>oth to Greeks and to Sikels. On it was erect- 
 ed the altar of A[)ollo Archegetes, the divine patron who (through 
 his oracle at Delplii) had sanctioned and determined Hellenic 
 colonization in the island. The altar remained permanently as a 
 sanctuary common to all the Sicilian Greeks, and the Theors or sa- 
 cred envoys from their various cities, when they visited the Olympic 
 and other festivals of Greece, were always in the habit of offer- 
 ing sacrifice upon it immediately before their departure. To the 
 autonomous Sikels, on the otlier hand, the hill was an object of 
 durable but odious recollection, as the spot in which Grecian con 
 quest and intrusion liad first begun; and at the distance of thre^ 
 centuries and a haif from the event, we find them still animated 
 by this sentiment ia obstructing the foundation of TauromeniumJ 
 At the time when Tlieokles landed, the Sikels were in pos- 
 session of the largj.^r lialf of the island, lying chiefly to the east 
 of the Ilerx'an mountains,- — a chain of hills stretching in 9 
 southerly direction from that principal chain, called the Neurode 
 or Nebrode mountains, which runs from east to west for the most 
 part piirallel with the northern shore. West of the Heraian hills 
 v/ere situated the Sikans ; and west of these latter, Eryx and 
 E^esta, the possessions of the Elymi : along the western portion 
 of the northern coast, also, were placed Motye, Soloeis, and Pan- 
 ormus (now Palermo), the Phenician or Carthaginian seaports. 
 The formation, or* at least the extension, of these three last- 
 mentioned ports, liowever, was a consequence of the multiplied 
 
 • Thucyd. vi, 3 ; Diodor. xiv, 59-88. 
 
 ^ Mannert places the boundary of Sikels and Sikaos at these moantaina 
 Otto Siefert (Akragas und sein Gebiet, Uamborg, 1846, p. 53) places it at 
 tlie Gemelli CoUes, rather more to the westward, «- thas contracting tht 
 domain of the Sikans . compare Diodor. iv, 82-83. 
 
 Grecian colonies ; for the Phenicians down to this time had not 
 founded any territorial or permanent establishments, but had con* 
 tented themselves with occupying in a temporary way various 
 capes or circumjacent islets, for the purpose of trade with the in- 
 terior. The arrival of formidable Greek settlers, maritime like 
 themselves, induced them to abandon these outlying factories, 
 and to concentrate their strength in the three considerable towns 
 above named, all near to that comer of the island which ap- 
 proached most closely to Carthage. The east side of Sicily, and 
 most part of the south, were left open to the Greeks, with no 
 other opposition than that of the indigenous Sikels and Sikans, 
 who were gradually expelled from all contact with the sea-shore, 
 except on part of the north side of the island, — and who were 
 indeed, so unpractised at sea as well as destitute of shipping, 
 that in the tale of their old migration out of Italy into Sicily, the 
 Sikels were affirmed to have crossed the narrow strait upon rafts 
 at a moment of favorable wind.i 
 
 In the very next year- to the foundation of Naxos, Corinth 
 began her part in the colonization of the island.. A body of set- 
 tlers, under the oekist Archias, landed in the islet Ortygia, farther 
 southward on the eastern coast, expelled the Sikel occupants, and 
 laid the first stone of the mighty Syracuse. Ortygia, two Eng- 
 lish miles in circumference, was separated from the main island 
 only by a narrow channel, which was bridged over when the city 
 was occupied and enlarged by Gelon in the 72d Olympiad, if 
 not eai-lier. It formed only a small part, though the most 
 secure and best-fortified part, of the vast space which the city 
 afterwards occupied ; but it sufficed alone for the inhabitants 
 during a considerable time, and the present city in its modern 
 decline has again reverted to the same modest limits. Moreover, 
 Ortygia offered another advantage of not less value; it lay across 
 the entrance of a spacious harbor, approached by a narrow 
 mouth, and its fountain of Arethusa was memorable in antiquity 
 both for the abundance and goodness of its water. We should 
 have been glad to learn something respecting the numbers, char* 
 
 I 
 
 
 iV 
 
 !A 
 
 I 
 
 I I 
 
 > Thucyd. vi, 2. 
 
 * Mr. Fynes Clinton discusses the era of Syracuse, Fasti Hellenici, a4 
 
 O. 734, and the same work, vol. ii. Appendix xi, p. 264. 
 
 \*i 
 
864 
 
 fflSTORY 01 GREECK. 
 
 GEL A. — ZANKLE. 
 
 icter, pofjiion, natjwity, etc. of these primitiTe emigi-ants, th« 
 founders of a city frhich we shall hereafter find comprising a 
 vast walled circuit, which Strabo reckons at one hundred and 
 eighty stadia, but jfhich the modern observations of Colonel 
 Leake announce as fourteen English miles,' or about one hundred 
 and twenty-two stadia. We are told only that many of them 
 came from the Corinthian village of Tenea, and that one of them 
 Bold to a comrade on the voyage his lot of land in prospective, 
 for the price of a honey-cake : the little which we hear about the 
 determining motives^ of the colony refers to the personal charac- 
 ter of the oekist. Archias son of Euagetus, one of the governing 
 gens of the Bacchijiiae at Corinth, in the violent prosecution of 
 unbridled lust, had caused, though unintentionally, the death of a 
 free youth nameti Aktaeon, whose father Melissus, after having 
 vainly endeavored to procure redress, slew himself at the Isth- 
 mian games, invoking the vengeance of Poseidon against the 
 aggressor.3 Such were the destructive effects of this paternal 
 curse, that Archias was compelled to expatriate, and the Bacchi- 
 tdae placed him at the head of the emigrants to Ortygia, in 73i 
 B. c. : at that time, probably, this was a sentence of banishment 
 to which no man of commanding station would submit except 
 under the pressure of necessity. 
 
 There yet remained room for new settlements between Naxoa 
 and Syracuse : and Theokles, the oekist of Naxos, found himself 
 in a situation to occupy part of this space only five years after 
 the foundation of Syracuse : perhaps he may have been joined 
 by fresh settlers. He attacked and expelled the Sikels^ from 
 the fertile spot called Leontini, seemingly about half-way down 
 on the eastern coast between Mount ^tna and Syracuse ; and 
 also from Katana, immediately adjoining to Mount ^Etna, which 
 still retains both its name and its importance. Two new Chalki- 
 dic colonies were thus founded, — Theokles himself becoming 
 oekist of Leontini, and Euarchus chosen by the Katanajan settlers 
 themselves, of Katana. 
 
 * See Colonel Leake, notes on the Topography of Syracuse, p. 41. 
 
 • Athenae. iv, 167 ; Strabo, ix, p. 380. 
 
 • Diodor. Frag. Lit. viii, p. 24 ; Plutarch, Narrat. Amator. p. 772 ; Schol 
 ApoIloQ. Rhod. iv, 1212. 
 
 * Polv«nus (v, 5, 1) describes the stratagem of Theokles on this occaskNi 
 
 dM 
 
 The city of Megara was not behind Corinth and Chalkis in 
 fiirliishing emigrants to Sicily. Lamis the Megarian, having 
 now arrived with a body of colonists, took possession first of a 
 new spot called Trotilus, but afterwards joined the recent Chal- 
 kidian settlement at Leontini. The two bodies of settlers, how- 
 ever, could not live in harmony, and Lamis, with his companions, 
 va.s soon expelled; he then occupied Thapsus,i at a little dis- 
 Umee to the northward of Ortygia or Syracuse, and shortly after- 
 wards died. His followers made an alliance with Hyblon, king 
 of a neigliboring tribe of Sikels, who invited them to settle in 
 his territory ; they accepted the proposition, relinquished Thap 
 sus, and founded, in conjunction with Hyblon, the city called the 
 HybLTan Megara, between Leontini and Syracuse. This inci- 
 dent is the more worthy of notice, because it is one of the 
 instances which we find of a Grecian colony beginning by 
 amicable fusion with the preexisting residents; Thucydides 
 seems to conceive the prince Hyblon as betraying his people 
 against their wishes to the Greeks.^ 
 
 It wa^ thus that, during the space of five years, several distinct 
 bodies of Greek emigrants had rapidly succeeded each other in 
 Sicily : for the next forty years, we do not hear of any fresh ar- 
 rivals, which is the more easy to understand as there were during 
 that interval several considerable foundations on the coast of Italy, 
 which probably took off the disposable Greek settlers. At length, 
 forty-five years after the foundation of Syracuse, a fresh body of 
 settlers arrived, partly from Rhodes under Antiphemus, partly 
 from Krete under Entimus, and founded the city of Gela on the 
 south-western front of the island, between cape Pachynus and 
 Lilybicum (b. c. 690) — still on the territory of the Sikels, 
 tiiough extending ultimately to a portion of that of the Sikans.^ 
 Tlie name of the city was given from that of the neighboring 
 river Gela. 
 
 One other fresh migration from Greece to Sicily remains Ic 
 
 ' Polyaenus details a treacherous stratagem whereby this expulsion is said 
 to have been accomplished (v. 5. 2). 
 
 • Thucydid. vi, 3. 'T3?,uvoc roi 3a(ji?.Euc rrpoSovToc TTfv x^pav Ka2 Ka^tj 
 }ijffafj.evov. 
 
 * Thucydid. vi, 4 ; Diodor. Excerpt Vatican, ed. Maii, Fragm. xiii, p. 19 
 Paosanios, viii, 46, 2 
 
 i 
 
 ' i'U 
 
 i 
 
 i ,1 
 
S66 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFXE. 
 
 AGRIGENTUM. - SELINUS. - HIMERA. 
 
 367 
 
 be mentioned, though we cannot assign the exact date of it. The 
 town of Zankle (now Messina), on the strait between Italy and 
 Sicily, was at first occupied by certain privateers or pirates from 
 Cumae, — the situation being eminently convenient for their ope- 
 rations. But the success of the other Chalkidic settlements im- 
 parted to this nest of {)i rates a more enlarged and honorable 
 character : a bo«ly of new settlers joined them from Chalkis and 
 other towns of Eulxea, the land was regularly divided, rnd two 
 joint (jekists were provided to qualify the town as a member of 
 tiie Hellenic communion — Perieres from Chalkis, and Kratai- 
 nienes from Cumje. The name Zankle had been given by the prim- 
 itive Sikel occupants of the place, meaning in their language a 
 sickle; but it was Jifterwards changed to Messene by Anaxilas, 
 despot of Rhegium, who, when he conquered the town, intro- 
 duced new inhabitants, in a manner hereafter to be noticed. • 
 
 Besides tliese emigrations direct from Greece, the Hellenic 
 (olonies in Sicily became themselves the founders of sub-colo- 
 nies. Thus the Sjracusans, seventy years after their own settle- 
 ment (b c. 664), founded Akrne — Kasmenie, twenty years after- 
 wards (B. c. 644), and Kamarina forty-five years after Kasmenae 
 (b. c. 599) : Daskon and Menekolus were the oekists of the lat- 
 ter, which became in process of time an independent and consid- 
 erable town, while Akne and Kasmenae seem to have remained 
 Bubject to Syracuse. Kamarina was on the south-western side 
 of the island, forming the boundary of the Syracusan territory 
 towards Gela. Kallipolis was established from Naxos, and Eu- 
 boea (a town so called) from Leontini.2 
 
 Hitherto, the Greeks had colonized altogether on the territory 
 of the Sikels ; the three towns which remain to be mentioned 
 were all founded in that of the Sikans,-' — Agrigentum or Akra- 
 gas, Selinus, and Himera. The two tormer were both on the 
 Bouth-wesiern coast, — Agrigentum bordering upon Gela on the 
 one side, and upon Selinus on the other. Himera was situated 
 
 * lliucjdid. vi, 4. * Strabo, vi, p. 272. 
 
 • Stephanus Byz. "StKavia^ rj leepixt^po^ ^AKpayavrtvuv. Herodot. vii, 170i 
 I>H>dor. iv, 78. 
 
 Vessa, the most considerable among the Sikanian townships or villageE^ 
 with its prince Teutus, is said to have been conquered by Phalaris despot ol 
 AjH^gentum, through a mixture of cral't and force (i^olyjeo. f, 1^ 4>. 
 
 un the westerly portion of the northern coast, — the single 
 Hellenic establishment in the time of Thucydides which that lo'iig 
 line of coast presented. The inhabitants of the Hybhean Me- 
 gara were founders of Selinus, about 630 b. c, a century after 
 their own establishment : the oekist Pamillus, according to the 
 usual Hellenic practice, was invited from their metropolis Me- 
 gara in Greece proper, but we are not told how many fresh set- 
 ilers cimie with him : the language of Thucydides leads us to 
 Buppose that the new town was peopled chiefly from the Hyblrean 
 Megarians themselves. The town of Akragas, or Agrigentum, 
 called after the neighboring river of the former name, was found- 
 ed from Gela in b. c. 582. Its oekists were Aristonous and Pys- 
 tilus, and it received the statutes and religious characteristics of 
 Gela. Himera, on the other hand, was founded from Zankle, 
 under three oekists, Eukleides, Simus, and Sakon. The chief 
 part of its inhabitants were of Chalkidic race, and its legal and 
 religious characteristics were Chalkidic; but a portion of the 
 settlers were Syracusan exiles, called Myletidse, who had been 
 expelled from home by a sedition, so that the Himeraean dialect 
 was a mixture of Doric and Chalkidic. Himera was situated 
 not far from the towns of the Elymi, — Eyrx and Egesta. 
 
 Such were the chief establishments founded by the Greeks in 
 Sicily during the two centuries afler their first settlement in 
 735 b. c. The few particulars just stated respecting them are 
 worthy of all confidence,— for they come to us from Thucydides, 
 - but they are unfortunately too few to afford the least satisfac 
 lion to our curiosity. It cannot be doubted that these first two 
 centuries were periods of steady increase and prosperity among 
 the Sicilian Greeks, undisturbed by those distractions and calam- 
 ities which supervened afterwards, and which led indeed to the 
 extraordinary aggrandizement of some of their communities, but 
 also to the ruin of several others : morwver, it seems that the 
 Carthaginians in Sicily gave them no trouble until the time of 
 Gelon. Their position will indeed seem singularly advantageous, 
 if we consider the extraordinary fertility of the soil in this fine 
 island, especially near the sea, — its capacity for corn, wine, and 
 oil, the species of cultivation to which the Greek husbandman 
 had been accustomed under less favorable circumstances, — its 
 abundant fisheries on the coast, so important in Grecian diet, ard 
 
 i 
 
 i i 
 
 \ 
 
 [\ 
 
 l^ 
 
 <' 
 
 
868 
 
 IlISTORi OF GREECE. 
 
 I'll 
 
 continuing un«liiiiinished even at the present day, together with 
 ehcep, cattle, hides, wool, and timber from the native population 
 in the interior. These natives seem to have been of rude pastoral 
 habits, disperse<l either among petty hill-villages, or in caverns 
 hewn out of the rock, like the primitive inhabitants of the Ba- 
 b-uric i>I;»nds and Saidinia ; so that Sicily, like New Zealand in 
 oui- century, wa> now for the first time approached by organized 
 industry and tillage.^ Their progress, though very great, during 
 thi> most prosperous interval (between the foundation of Naxos, 
 ill l:)') li. c. to the reign of Gelon at Syracuse in 485 b. c), is not to 
 be compared to that of the English colonies in America ; but it 
 wa^ nevertheless very great, and appears greater from being con- 
 centrated as it was in and around a few cities. Individual spread- 
 ing and separation of residence were rare, nor did they consist 
 eith.'i with the security or the social feelings of a Grecian colon- 
 ist. The city to which he belonged was the central point of hig 
 existence, where the jiroduce which he raised was brought home 
 to be stored or sold, and where alone his active life, political, do- 
 mestic, reMgious, recreative, etc., was carried on. There were 
 dispersed throughout the territory of the city small fortified places 
 and garrisons,- serving as temporary protection to the cultivators 
 in case of sudden inroad ; but there was no })ermanent resi- 
 dence for the free citizen except the town itself. This was, per 
 haps, even more the case in a colonial settlement, where every- 
 thing began and spread from one central point, than in Attica, 
 where the separate villages had once nourished a population 
 
 ' Of these Sikel or Sikan caverns many traces yet remain : see Otto 
 ©iefert, Akragas und sein Gebiet, pp. 39, 45, 49, 55, and the work of Captain 
 W H. Smyth, — Sicily and its Islands, London, 1824, p. 190. 
 
 '• These cryptic (observes the latter) appear to have been the earliest effort 
 of a primitive and i)astoral people towards a town, and are generally with- 
 out regularity as to shape and magnitude : in after-ages they perhaps served 
 •8 a retreat in time of danger, and as a place of security in case of extraor- 
 dinaiy alarm, for women, children, and valuables. In this light, I was 
 partionlarly struck vdth the resemblance these rude habitations bore to th< 
 caves I had seen in Owhyhee, for similar uses. The Troglodyte villages o* 
 Northern Africa, of which I saw several, are also precisely the same " 
 
 About the earl} cave-residences in Sardinia and the Balearic islands, co» 
 tnh Diodor. v, 15-17. 
 
 * Thucydid. vi, 45. rci Tep»nr6Xm rd kv ry X'^P? (of Syracuse). 
 
 MIXKD RACES OF INHABITANTS. 
 
 8«9 
 
 politically independent. It was in the town, therefore, that the 
 aggregate increase of the colony palpably concentrated itself, — 
 property as well as population, — private comfort and luxury nol 
 less than public force and grandeur. Such growth and improve- 
 ment was of course sustained by the cultivation of the territory, 
 but the evidences of it were manifested in the town ; juid the 
 large population which we shall have occasion to notice as be- 
 longing to Agrigentum, Sybaris, and other cities, will illustrate 
 this position. 
 
 There is another point of some importance to mention in re- 
 gard to the Sicilian and Italian cities." The population of the 
 town itself may have been principally, though not wholly, Greek ; 
 but the population of the territory belonging to the town, or of 
 the dependent villages which covered it, must have been in a 
 great measure Sikel or Sikan. The proof of this is found in a cir- 
 cumstance common to all the Sicilian and Italian Greeks, — the 
 peculiarity of their weights, measures, monetary system, and 
 language. The pound and ounce are divisions and denominations 
 belonging altogether to Italy and Sicily, and unknown originally 
 to the Greeks, whose scale consisted of the obolus, the drachma, 
 the mina, and the talent : among the Greeks, too, the metal first and 
 most commonly employed for money was silver, while in Italy and 
 Sicily copper was the primitive metal made use of. Now among 
 all the Italian and Sicilian Greeks, a scale of weight and money 
 arose quite different from that of the Greeks at home, and form- 
 ed by a combination and adjustment of the one of these systems 
 to the other; it is in many points complex and difficult to under- 
 .>iand, but in the final result the native system seems to be pre- 
 dominant, and the Grecian system subordinate. ^ Such a conse- 
 
 ' Respecting the statical and monetary system, prevalent among the Italian 
 and Sicilian Greeks, see Aristot. Fragment, ntpl llohreicjv^ed. Neumann, p. 
 102 ; Pollux, iv, 174, ix, 80-87 ; and above all, Boeckh, Metrologie, ch. xviii, 
 p. 292, and the abstract and review of that work in the Classical Museum, 
 No. 1 ; also, O. Mtiller, Die Etrusker, vol. i, p. 309. 
 
 The Sicilian Greeks reckoned by talents, each consisting of 120 litrae of 
 librae : the ^ginaean obolus was the equivalent of the litra, having been the 
 value in silver of a pound-wsight of copper, at the time when the valuatioo 
 was taken. 
 
 The common denominations of money and weight — with the exceptioB 
 
 VOL. III. le* .^^^orv 
 
 I'm 
 
 I- 
 
 H 
 
 it' 
 
 
9i0 
 
 HJSTORT OF GREECE. 
 
 THE SIKELS ARE GRADUALLY HELLEXIZED. 
 
 S7l 
 
 Buence as this could not have ensued, if the Greek settlers in 
 Italy and Sicily had kept themselves apart as communities, and 
 had merely carried on commerce and barter with communities of 
 Sikels : it implies a fusion of tlie two races in the same commu 
 nity, though doubtless in the relation of superior and subject, and 
 not in that of equals. The Greeks on arriving in the country 
 expelled the natives from the town, perhaps also from the hind* 
 immediately round the town ; but when they gradually extended 
 their territory, this was probably accomplished, not by the ex pul- 
 sion, but by the subjugation of those Sikel tribes and villages, 
 much subdivided and each individually petty, whom their aggrea- 
 sions successively touched. 
 
 At the time when Theokles landed on the hill near Naxos, 
 and Archias in the islet of Ortygia, and when each of them ex- 
 pelled the Sikels from that particular spot, there were Sikel vil- 
 lages or little communities spread through all the neighboring 
 country. By the gradual encroachments of the colony, some of 
 these might be dispossessed and driven out of the plains near the 
 coast into the more mountainous regions of the interior, but many 
 of them doubtlc^ss found it convenient to submit, to surrender a 
 [portion of their lands, and to hold the rest as subordinate villagers 
 of an Hellenic city-community 'A and we find even at the time of 
 the Athenian iavasion (414 b. C.) villages existing in distinct 
 identity as Sikels, yet subject and tributawy to Syracuse. More- 
 over, the intluence which the Greeks exercised, though in the 
 first instiuice essentially compulsory, became also in part self- 
 oi>erating, — the ascendency of a higher over a lower civilization. 
 It was the working of cont^entrated townsmen, safe among one 
 another by their walls and by mutual confidence, and surrounded 
 by more or Ic-s of ornament, public as well as private, — upon 
 dispersed, unprotected, artless villagers, who could not be insen- 
 sible to the charm of that superior intellect, imagination, and or- 
 
 of the talent, the meuniug of which was altered while the word was retained 
 — seem to have bisen all borrowed by the Italian and Sicilian Greeks from 
 the Sikel or Italic scale, not from the Grecian, — vovfifioi, Tilrpa^ deKaMTfM*», 
 
 TtVTTJKOVTuXlTpOV, ITeVTOtfyKlOV, t^U^, TETpuq, TpiUC, TffilVO, ^/XtXlTplOV (sM 
 
 Fnigmeats of Epicharmua and Sophron, ap. Ahrena de Dialect© DoricA, 
 Appendix, pp 435, 471, 472, and Athenae. xi, p. 479). 
 » Thucyd vi. 88. 
 
 ganization, which wrought so powerfully upon the whole contem- 
 jwraneous world. To understand the action of these superior 
 emigrants upon the native but inferior Sikels, during those three 
 earliest centuries (730-430 b. c.) which followed the arrival of 
 Archias and Theokles, we have only to study the continuance of 
 the same action during the three succeeding centuries which pre- 
 ceded the age of Cicero. At the period when Athens undertook 
 *he siege of Syracuse (b. c. 415), the interior of the island was 
 occupied by Sikel and Sikan communities, autonomous, and re- 
 taining their native customs and language ;' but in the time of 
 Verres and Cicero (three centuries and a half afterwards) the 
 interior of the island, as well as the maritime regions had become 
 Hellenized : the towns in the interior were then hardly less Greek 
 ilian those on the coast. Cicero contrasts favorably the character 
 of the Sicilians with that of the Greeks generally (u e. the 
 Greeks out of Sicily), but he nowhere distinguishes Greeks in 
 Sicily from native Sikels ;2 nor Enna and Centuripi from Katana 
 and Agrigentum. The little Sikel villages became gradually 
 semi-Hellenized and merged into subjects of a Grecian town 
 during the first three centuries, this change took place in the re- 
 gions of the coast, — during the following three centuries, in the 
 regions of the interior ; and probably with greater rapidity and 
 efiect in the earlier period, not only because the action of the 
 Grecian communities was then closer, more concentrated, and 
 
 ' Thucvd. vi, 62-87; vii, 13. 
 
 * Cicero in Verrem, Act ii, lib. iv, c. 26-51 ; Diodor. v, 6. 
 
 Contrast the manner in which Cicero speaks of A^ryrium, Centuripi, ani 
 Enna, with the description of these places as inhabited by autononious 
 Sikels, B. c. 396, in the wars of the elder Dionysius (Diodor. xiv, 55, 58, 78). 
 Both Sikans and Sikels were at that time completely distinguished from tlie 
 Greeks, in the centre of the island. 
 
 O. Mailer states that "Syracuse, seventy years after its foundation, colonized 
 Akra;, also Enna, situated in the centre of the island," (Hist, of Dorians, i, 
 6, 7). Enna is mentioned hy Stephanus Byz. as a Syracusan foundation, 
 but without notice of the date of its foundation, which must have been much 
 'ater than Miiller here aflSrms. Serra di Falco (Antichita di Sioilia, Intro<l. 
 t. L, p. 9) gives Enna as having been founded later than Akrae, but earlier 
 than Kasmenae ; for which date I find no authority. Talaria (see Steph 
 Byz. ad voc.) is also mentioned as another Syracusan city, of which we dr 
 not know either the date or the particulars of foundation. 
 
 
 V 
 
 K\ 
 
H 
 
 572 
 
 HISTORl OF GREECE 
 
 more compulsory, but because also the obstinate tribes could then 
 retire into the interior. 
 
 Tlie Greeks in Sicily are thus not to be considered as purely 
 
 Greeks, but as modified by a mixture of Sikel and Sikan Ian- 
 
 guage, customs, and character. Each town included in its non- 
 
 privUeged population a number of serai-Hellenized Sikels (or Si- 
 
 kans, as the case might be), who, though in a state of dependence, 
 
 contributed to mix the breed and influence the entire mass. We 
 
 have no reason to suppose that the Sikel or CEnotrian language 
 
 ever became written, like Latin, Oscan, or Umbrian :i the in- 
 
 Bcriptions of Segesta and Ilalesus are all in Doric Greek, which 
 
 supplanted the native tongue for public purposes as a separate 
 
 language, but not without becoming itself modified in the con- 
 
 fluelice. In fallowing the ever-renewed succession of violent 
 
 political changes, the inferior capacity of regulated and pacific 
 
 popular goveniraent, and the more unrestrained and voluptuous 
 
 license, which the Sicilian and Italian Greeks^ exhibit as compared 
 
 with Athens aid the cities of Greece proper, — we must call to 
 
 mind that we are not dealing with pure Hellenism ; and that the 
 
 native element, though not unfavorable to activity or increase of 
 
 wealth, prevented the Grecian colonist from partaking fully in 
 
 that improved organization which we so distinctly trace in Athens 
 
 from Solon downwards. How much the taste, habits, ideas, reli- 
 
 gion, and local mythes, of the native Sikels passed into the minds 
 
 of the Sikeliots or Sicilian Greeks, is shown by the character ot 
 
 their literature and poetry. Sicily was the native country of that 
 
 rustic mirth and village buffoonery which gave birth to the prim- 
 
 itive comedy, — politicized and altered at Athens so as to suit men 
 
 of the market-place, the ekklesia, and the dikastery, — blending, 
 
 in the comedies of the Syracusan Epicharmus, copious details 
 
 about the indulgences of tlie table (for which the ancient Sicilians 
 
 were renowned) with Pythagorean philosophy and moral maxim.^, 
 
 — but given with all the naked simplicity of common life, in a 
 
 Bort of rhvthmical prose, without even the restraint of a fixed 
 
 metre, by 'the Syracusan Sophron in his lost Mimes, and after- 
 
 Ahrens, De Dialecto Dorica, >> - r. i. p 3. 
 • Plato, Epistol vii, p. 326 ; Plaatus, Rudens, Act i, So. 1, 56 j Act u, »• 
 
 V2 ^''^- ^ 
 
 SICILIAN COMEDY. 
 
 373 
 
 wards polished as well as idealized in the Bucolic poetry of The^ 
 okritus.i That which is commonly termed the Doric comedy wai 
 in great part at least, the Sikel comedy taken up by Dorian com- 
 posers, — the Doric race and,dialect being decidedly predominant 
 in Sicily : the manners thus dramatized belonged to that coarser 
 vein of humor which the Doric Greeks of the town had in com- 
 mon with the semi-Hellenized Sikels of the circumjacent villages. 
 Moreover, it seems probable that this rustic population enabled 
 the despots of the Greco-Sicilian towns to form easily and cheap- 
 ly those bodies of mercenary troops, by whom their power wai 
 sustained,^ and whose presence rendered the continuance of pop- 
 ular government, even supposing it begun, all but impossible. 
 
 It was the destiny of most of the Grecian colonial establish 
 ments to perish by the growth and aggression of those inland 
 powers upon whose coast they were planted, — powers which 
 gradually acquired, from the vicinity of the Greeks, a military and 
 political organization, and a power of concentrated action, such 
 as they had not originally possessed. But in Sicily, the Sikels 
 were not numerous enough even to maintain permanently their 
 own nationality, and were ultimately penetrated on all sides by 
 Hellenic ascendency and maimers. We shall, nevertheless, come 
 
 » Timokreon, Fragment. 5 ap. Ahrens, De Dialecto DoricA, p. 478, — 
 
 Bernhardy, Grandriss der Geschichte der Griech. Litteratur, vol. ii, ch. 
 120, sects. 2-5; Grysar, De Doriensiura Comoedia, Cologne, 1828, ch. i, pp. 
 41, 55, 57, 210; Boeckh, De Grascae Tragced. Princip. p. 52; Aristot. ap. 
 Athense. xi, 505. The KOTtapoq seems to have been a native Sikel fashion, 
 borrowed by the Greeks (Athenaeus, xv, pp. 666-668). 
 
 The Sicilian (iovKoliaanbq was a fashion among the Sicilian herdsmen 
 earlier than Epicharmus, who noticed the alleged inventor of it, Dioraus, 
 the l3ovKoJiog IikeXiuttjc (Athenae. xiv, p. 619). The rustic manners and 
 speech represented in the Sicilian comedy are contrasted with the towii 
 manneri and speech of the Attic comedy, by Plautns, Persae, Act iii 
 Sc. 1, V, 31: — 
 
 " Librorum eccillum habeo plenum soracum. 
 Dabuntur dotis tibi inde sexcenti logi, 
 Atque Attki omnes, nullum Siculum acccperis.'* 
 Compare the beginning of the prologue to the Menaechmi of Plautas. 
 
 The comic /iv-&o{ began at Syrat'use with Epicharmm and Phoraui 
 jAristot. Poet V 5). 
 
 •Zenobins, Proverb, v, 84, — StteAdc oTpaTiurti:. 
 
 M 
 
 I 
 
 r 1 
 
 .1 
 
 \ 1 1 
 
 v 1 
 
 )9l 
 
374 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECE. 
 
 PRODUCTIVE TERRITORY OF (ENOTKIA. 
 
 375 
 
 to one reraarkal>Ie attempt, made bj a native Sikel prince in th« 
 82d Olympiad (455 b. c), — the enterprising Duketius, — to group 
 many petty Sikel villages into one considerable town, and thus u. 
 raise his countrymen into the Grecian stage of polity and orga,^ 
 ization. Had there been any Sikel prince endowed with thests 
 8ui>erior idea^ at the time when the Greeks first settled in Sicily, 
 the subsequent history of the island would probably have been 
 very different ; but Duketius had derived his projects from the 
 spectacle of the Grecian towns around him, and these latter had 
 acquired much too great power to permit him to succeed. The 
 description of his abortive attempt, however, which we find in 
 Diodorus,i meaj^re as it is, forms an interesting point in the 
 history of the island. 
 
 Grecian colonization in Italy began nearly at the same time as 
 in Sicily, and was marked by the same general circumstances. 
 Placing ourselves at Rhegium (now Reggio) on the Sicilian 
 strait, we trace (Jreek cities gradually planted on various points of 
 the coast as far jis Cumaj on the one sea, and Tarentum (Taranto) 
 on the other. Between the two seas runs the lofty chain of the 
 Apennines, calcareous in the upper part of its course, through- 
 out middle Italy, — granitic and schistose in the lower part, 
 where it traversed the tei-ritories now called the hither and the 
 farther Calabria. The plains and valleys on each side of the Cal- 
 abriaii Apennines exhibit a luxuriance of vegetation extolled by 
 all oboervers, and surpassing even that of Sicily ;- and great as 
 
 * Diodor. xi, 90-91 ; xii, 9. 
 
 * See l>olomieu, Dissertation on the Earthcjuakes of Calabria Ultra, in 
 1 7P»3, in Pjnkerton, Collection of Voyages and Travels, vol. v, p. 280. 
 
 **lt is impossible {he observes) to form an adequate idea of the fertility 
 of *J!alabri* Ultra, particularly of that part called the Plain (south-west of 
 tho Apennines, Ik'Iow the gulf of Sl Eufcmia). The fields, productive of 
 oliYe-trces of larger growth than any st-en elsewhere, are yet productive of 
 gnin. Vines load with their branches the trees on which they grow, yet 
 len-^n not their crops. All things grow there, and nature seems to anticipate 
 the wishes of the husbandman. There is never a sufficiency of hands to 
 gather the whole of the olives, which finally fall and rot at the bottom of tht 
 trees that bore thern, in the months of February and March. Crowds of 
 Ihreigners, principally Siciliaiu, come there to help to gather them, and share 
 Ac produce with the grower. Oil is their chief article of exportation : ia 
 •very quarter their ivinea are good and precious.** Compare pp 278-262. 
 
 Ihe productive powers of this territory are now, there is full 
 reason for believing that they must have been far greater in 
 ancient times. For it has been visited by repeated earthquakes, 
 each of which has left calamitous marks of devastation : those 
 of 1638 and 1783 —especially the latter, whose destructive 
 effects were on a terrific scale, both as to life and property^ — 
 are of a date sufficiently recent to admit of recording and 
 measuring the damage done by each ; and that damage, in many 
 parts of the south-western coast, was great and irreparable. An- 
 imated as the epithets are, therefore, with which the modern 
 traveller paints the present fertility of Calabria, we are war- 
 ranted in enlarging their meaning when we conceive the country 
 as it stood between 720-320 b. c, the period of Grecian occupa- 
 tion and independence; while the unhealthy air, which now 
 desolates the plains generally, seems then to have been felt 
 only to a limited extent, and over particular localities. The 
 founders of Tarentum, Sybaris, Kroton, Lokri, and Rhegium, 
 planted themselves in situations of unexampled promise to the 
 industrious cultivator, which the previous inhabitants had turned 
 to little account : since the subjugation of the Grecian cities, these 
 once rich possessions have sunk into poverty and depopulation, 
 especially during the last three centuries, from insalubrity, indo- 
 lence, bad administration, and fear of the Barbary corsairs. 
 
 The Otinotrians, Sikels, or Italians, who were in possession of 
 these territories in 720 B. c, seem to have been rude petty com- 
 munities,— procuring for themselves safety by residence on lofty- 
 eminences, — more pastoral thtin agricultural, and some of them 
 consuming the produce of their fields in common mess, on a prin- 
 ciple analogous to the syssitia of Sparta or Krete. King Ita- 
 lus was said to have introduced this peculiarityS among the 
 southernmost portion of the G!:notrian population, and at the 
 ^ame time to have bestowed upon them the name of Italians, 
 though they were also known by the name of Sikels. Through- 
 
 I 
 
 ' Mr Keppel Craven observes (Tour through the Sonthem Provinces of 
 Naples, ch xiii, p. 254), "The earthquake of 1783 may be said to havt 
 altered the face of me whole of Calabria Ultra, and extended ita ravages af 
 far northward as Cosenza." 
 
 • Aristot. Polit vii, 9, 3. 
 
 
 i; 
 
 n 
 
 j^^.— 
 
876 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE 
 
 out the centre of Calabria between sea and sea, tlie high chain at 
 the Apennines afforded protection to a certain extent both to their 
 independence and to their pastoral habits. But these heights are 
 made to be enjoyed in conjunction with the plains beneath, so as to 
 alternate winter and summer pasture for the cattle : it is in thia 
 manner that tht richness of the country is rendered available, 
 Bince a large {M)rtion of the mountain range is buried in snow 
 during the winter months. Such remarkable diversity of soil 
 And climate rendered Calabria a land of promise for Grecian set- 
 tlement : the plains and lower eminences being as productive of 
 corn, wine, oil, and flax, as the mountains in summer-pasture and 
 timber, — and abundance of rain falling upon the higher ground, 
 which requires only industry and care to be made to impart the 
 maximum of fertility to the lower : moreover, a long line of sea- 
 coast, — though not well furnished with harbors, — and an abun- 
 dant supply of fish, came in aid of the advantages of tlie soil. 
 While the poorer freemen of the Grecian cities were enabled to 
 obtain small lots of fertile land in the neighborhood, to be culti- 
 vated by their own hands, and to provide for the most part their 
 own food and clothing, the richer }>roprietors made i)rofitable use 
 of the more distant portions of the territory by means of their 
 cattle, sheep, and slaves. 
 
 Of the Grecian towns on tliis favored coast, the earliest a^ 
 will as the mo^t prosperous were Sybaris and Kroton: lx)th in 
 tiie gulf of Tarentum, — botii of Achaan origin, and conter- 
 minous with each other in respect of territory. Kroton was 
 idaced not far to the west of the south-eastern extremitv of the 
 gulf, called in ancient times the Lakinian cape, and ennobled by 
 the temple of tho Lakinian Here, which became alike venerated 
 and adorned by the Greek resident as well as l)y tlie passing 
 navigator: one solitary colnnin of tlie temple, th«' humble rem- 
 nant of its past magniticence, yet marks the extremity of this once 
 celebrated promontory. Sybaris seems to have been planted in 
 the year 720 n. c., Kroton in 710 b. c. : Iselikeus was oekist oi' 
 the former,' Mvskellus of the latter. This lar":e Achaean emi- 
 
 * Strabo, vi, p 26S. Kramer, in his new edition of Strabo follows Koray 
 in saspectiiig the correctness of the name *It* liKev^. which certainly departi 
 irom the usual analogy of Grecian names. Assuming it to be incorrec5 
 
 ■J' 
 
 SYBARIS AND KROTON. 
 
 377 
 
 gration seems to have been connected with the previous expulsion 
 of the Acha?an population from the more southerly region OC 
 Peloponnesus by the Dorians, though in what precise manner we 
 are not enabled to see : the Acha3an towns in Peloponnesus ap- 
 pear in later times too inconsiderable to furnish emigrants, but 
 probably in the eighth century b. c. their population may have 
 been larger. The town of Sybaris v/aj? planted between two 
 rivers, the Sybaris and the Krathis,' the name of the latter bor- 
 rowed from a river of Achaia, — the town of Kroton about twenty- 
 five miles distant, on the river ^sarus. The primitive settlers 
 of Sybaris consisted in part of Troezenians, who were, however, 
 subsequently expelled by the more numerous Achajans, — a deed 
 of violence which was construed by the religious sentiment of 
 Antiochus and some other Grecian historians, as having drawn 
 down upon them the anger of the gods in the uUimi^te de- 
 St ruction of the city by the Krotoniates.2 
 
 The fatal contest between these two cities, which ended in the 
 ruin of Sybaris, took place in 510 b. c, after the latter had sub- 
 sisted in her prosperity for two hundred and ten years. And the 
 astonishing prosperity to which both of them attained is a sufficient 
 proof that during the most of this period they had remained in 
 peace at least, if not in alliance and common Achaean brotherhood. 
 Unfortunately, the general fact of their great size, wealthy and 
 power, is all that we are permitted to know. TJie walls of Syb- 
 aris embraced a circuit of fifty stadia, or more than six miles, 
 while those of B[rot6n were even larger, and comprised not less 
 than twelve miles .-3 a large walled circuit was advantageous for 
 sheltering the movable property in the territory around, which 
 was carried in on the arrival of an invading enemy. Both cities 
 
 however, there are no means of rectifying it : Kramer prints, — oIkktttjs 6i 
 
 avT^C ^ 'Ity 'EXiKevg: thus making 'EXikcv^ the ethnicon of the Ach»an 
 
 town Helike. 
 
 There were also legends which connected the foundation of Kroton mth 
 Uemkles, who was affirmed to have been hospitably sheltered by thf 
 iporymous hero Kroton. Herakles was oUeiog at Kroton : see Ovid 
 Metaniorph. xv, l-«0 ; Jamblichus, Vit. Pythagor. c. 8, p. 30, c 9, p. 37, ed 
 Kuster. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 145. « Aristot. Polit. v, 2, 10 
 
 * fttv^ho, vi, p. 262 ; Livy, xxiv, 3 
 
 
 i 
 
 
378 
 
 HISTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 pos9.3ssed an extensive dominion across the Calabrian peninsula 
 rVora sea to sea; but the territorial range of Sybaris seems to 
 have been greater and her colonies wider and more distant, — 
 a fact which may, perhaps, explain the smaller circuit of the 
 citv. 
 
 The Sybarites were founders of Laus and Skidrus, on the 
 Mediterranean sea in the gulf of Policastro, and even of the 
 more distant Poseidonia, — now known by its Latin name of Pjes- 
 tuin, as well as by the temples which still remain to decorate its 
 deserted site. They possessed twenty-five dependent towns, and 
 ruled over four distinct native tribes or nations. What these 
 nations were we are not told,' but they were probably differ- 
 cnt sections of the ai:notrian name. The Krotoniates also 
 reached across to the Mediterranean sea, and founded (upon the 
 gulf now called St. Euphemia) the town of Terina, and seemingly 
 also that of Lametini.a The inhabitants of the Epizephyrian 
 Lokri, which was situated in a more southern pai't of Calabria 
 Uhra, near the modern town of Gerace, extended themselvea 
 in like maimer across the peninsula, and founded upon the Medi- 
 terrancfui coast the towns of Hipponium, Medma, and IVlataurum,^ 
 fts well as Mehe and Itoneia, in localities not now exactly ascer- 
 lained. 
 
 Myskellus of Rhypes in Achaia, the founder of Kroton under 
 the express indication of the Delphian oracle, is said to have 
 thought the site of Sybaris preferable, and to have solicited per- 
 mission from the oracle to plant his colony there, but he was ad- 
 monished to obey strictly the directions first given.4 It is farther 
 
 » Stralw, vi, p. 263, v, p. 2;>1 ; Skymn. Chi. v, 244 ; Herodot. vi, 21. 
 
 * Stephan. Byz. v, TipLva— Aafi^rlvoi • Skymn. Chi. 305. 
 
 3 Thucydid. V, 5 j Strabo, vi, p. 256 ; Skymn. Chi. 307. Steph. Byz. calU 
 Matanrara 7r62.i^ St/ceA/af. 
 
 * Herodot viii, 47. KpoTuvif/Tai, yevo^ eialv 'Axaioi : the date of the 
 foundation is given by Dionysius of Halikamassus (A. R. ii, 59). 
 
 The oracular commands delivered to Myskellus are found at length in thf 
 *Vaj,'ments of Diodorus, published by Maii (Scriptt Vet Fragm. x, p. 8): 
 eompare Zenob. Proverb. Centur. iii, 42. 
 
 Thoujrh Myskellus is thus given as the oekist of Kroton, yet we find u 
 Krotonidtic coin wiih the icscriptioc 'Hpa/tA^f OiKlarar ( Eckbel, Doctrin. 
 Nnmm. Vet. vol. i, p. 172): Lhe nrorship of Herakles at Kroton under thii 
 
 PRnnTIVE COLONISTS OF LOKBI. 
 
 879 
 
 affirmed that the foundation of Kroton was aided by Archias, then 
 l)assing along the coast with his settlers for Syracuse, who is also 
 brought into conjunction in a similar manner with the foundation 
 of Lokri : but neither of these statements appears chronologically 
 admissible. The Italian Lokri (called Epizephyrian, from the 
 neighborhood of cape Zephyrium) was founded in the year 683 
 B. c. by settlers from the Lokrians,— either the Ozolian Lokrians 
 in the Krissjean gulf, or those of Opus on the Euboean strait. 
 This point was disputed even in antiquity, and perhaps both the 
 one and the other may have contributed : Euanthus was the oek- 
 ist of the place.i The first years of the Epizephyrian Lokri are 
 said to have been years of sedition and discord. And the vile 
 character which we hear ascribed to the primitive colonists, as 
 well as their perfidious dealing with the natives, are the more to 
 be noted, as the Lokrians, of the times both of Aristotle and of 
 Polybius, fully believed these statements in regard to their own 
 'tncestors. 
 
 The original emigrants to Lokri were, according to Aristotle, a 
 body of runaway slaves, men-stealers, and adulterers, whose only 
 legitimate connection with an honorable Plellenic root arose from 
 a certain number of well-bom Lokrian women who accompanied 
 them. These women belonged to those select families called the 
 Hundred Houses, who constituted what may be called the no- 
 bility of the Lokrians in Greece proper, and their descendanU 
 continued to enjoy a certain rank and preeminence in the colony, 
 even in the time of Polybius. The emigration is said to have 
 been occasioned by disorderly intercourse between these noble 
 Lokrian women and their slaves, — perhaps by intermarriage 
 with persons of inferior station, where there had existed no re- 
 
 title is analogous to that of 'Airo2,XC)v OkiaTtjc kui AufiarirTjc at ^.gina 
 (PythflBnetus ap. Schol. Pindar. Nem. v, 81). There were various legends 
 respecting Herakles, the Eponymus Kroton, and Lakinius. Herakleidei 
 Ponticus, Fragm. 30, ed. Koller ; Diodor. iv, 24 ; Ovid, Metamorph. xv, 
 
 ' Strabo, vi, p. 259. Euantheia, Hyantheia, or CEantheia, was one of th« 
 towns of the Ozolian Lokrians on the north side of the Krisswan gulf, fron 
 which, perhaps, the emigrants may have departed, carrying with them the 
 name and patronage of its eponymous oekist (Plutarch, Qusest. Griec. c. i 
 Skylax, p. 14). 
 
 V 
 
 i 
 
 
 1 I 
 
 ;i 
 
 X 
 
 ""■"" ' :r"'7^7ffiJH!p..'3C 
 
t f. 
 
 880 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 cognized connuhium ,' a fact referred, by the informants of An* 
 totle, to the long duration of the first Messenian war, — the Lo- 
 krian warriors having for the most part continued in the Messe- 
 nian territory as auxiliaries of the Spartans during the twenty 
 years of that war. permitting themselves only rare and short 
 visits to their homes. This is a story resembling that which we 
 shall find in explanation of the colony of TarentunL It comes 
 to us too imperfectly to admit of criticism or verification ; but the 
 unamiable charactei- of the first emigrants is a statement deserv- 
 ing credit, and very unlikely to have been invented. Their first 
 proceedings on settling in Italy display a perfidy in accordance 
 with the chani(t( r ; scribed to them. They found the territory in 
 this .souihcni portion of the Calabrian peninsula possessed by 
 native Siktls, who, alarmed at their force, and afraid to try the 
 hazard of resistanci-, agreed to admit them to a participation and 
 joint residence. The covenant was concluded and sworn to by 
 both parties in th( followiriii; terms: "There shall be friend- 
 ship between us, an I we will enjoy the land in common, so long 
 as we stand upon this oarth an<l have heads upon our shoulders." 
 At the time when the oath was taken, the Lokrians had put earth 
 into their shoes and concealed lieads of garlic upon their shoul- 
 ders ; so that, when they had divested themselves of these ap- 
 pendages, the ojith nas considered as no longer binding. Avail- 
 ing themselvrs of tlie tirst convenient opportunity, they attacked 
 the Sikels by surprise and drove them out of the territory, of 
 wiiich they thus acquired the exclusive possession.^ Their first 
 establishment was forme<l upon the headland itself, cape Zepliy- 
 rium (now Bruzzano) ; but after three or four years the site of 
 the town was moved to an eminence in the neighboring plain, in 
 whirh the Svracu.-aas are said to have aided them.-* 
 
 ' Tolyh. xii. 5. 8, f> . Hionys Perie^-et. v, 365. 
 
 ' This f.u I in.iy toimcct the foundation of the colony of Lokri with 
 8f>ar:a ; hut the titatenient of Pausanias (iii, 3, I), that the Spartans in the 
 rei^n of kinj^ Polydcru.'j founded both Lokri and Kroton, seems to belong to 
 * ditferent historical conception. 
 
 'Polyb. xii, 5-12. 
 
 * Strabo, vi, p. 259. We find that, in the accounts given of the foundation 
 of Koikyra. Kroton. and Lokri, reference is made to the Syracusan settlera 
 either as contemporary in the way of companionship, or as auxiliaries 
 
 ZALEUKUS THE LOKRIAN. 
 
 381 
 
 In describing the Grecian settlers in Sicily, I have already 
 stated that they are to be considered as Greeks with a consider- 
 able infusion of blood, of habits, and of manners, from the native 
 Sikels : the case is the same with the Italiots, or Italian Greeks, 
 and in respect to these Epizephyrian Lokrians, especially, we find 
 it expressly noticed by Polybius. Composed as their band was 
 of ignoble and worthless men, not bound together by strong tribe- 
 feelings or traditional customs, they were the more ready to 
 adopt new practices, as well religious as civil,i from the Sikels. 
 One in jjarticular is noticed by the historian, — the religious dig- 
 nity called the Phialephorus, or censer-bearer, enjoyed among the 
 native Sikels by a youth of noble birth, who performed the duties 
 belonging to it in their sacrifices ; but the Lokrians, while they 
 identified themselves with the religious ceremony, and adopted 
 both the name and the dignity, altered the sex, and conferred it 
 upon one of those women of noble blood who constituted the or- 
 nament of their settlement. Even down to the days of Poly- 
 bius, some maiden descended from one of these select Hundred 
 Houses, still continued to bear the title and to perform the cere- 
 monial duties of Phialei)horus. We learn from these statements 
 how large a portion of Sikels must have become incorporated as 
 dependents in the colony of the Ei)izephyrian Lokri, and how 
 strongly marked was the intermixture of their habits with those 
 of the Greek settlers ; while the tracing back among them of all 
 eminence of descent to a few emigrant women of noble birth, is 
 a peculiarity belonging exclusively to their city. 
 
 That a body of colonists, formed of such unpromising materials, 
 should have fallen into nmch lawles^ness and disorder, is noway 
 surprising ; but these mischiefs appear to have become so utterly 
 intolerable in the early years of the colony, as to force ufK»n 
 every one the necessity of some remedy. Hence arose a phe- 
 nomenon new in the march of Grecian society, — the first pro- 
 
 perhaps the accounts all come from the Syracusan historian Antiochus, who 
 exaggerated the intervention of his own ancestors. 
 
 » "Nil patrium, nisi nomen, iiabet Romanus alumnus," observes Propertiiw 
 (iv, 37) respecting the Romans: repeated with still greater bitterness in th« 
 tpistle in Sallust from Mitliridates to Arsaces, (p. 191, Delph. ed.) Th» 
 remark is well- applicable to Lokri. 
 
 
 t 'If I .i"f^ ' 
 
382 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 
 
 mulgatioM of written laws. Tlie Epizephyrian Lokrian:., havin(^ 
 applied to the Delphian oracle lor some healing suggestion under 
 their distress, were directed to make laws for themselves ;> and 
 received the ordinances of a shepherd named Zaieukus, which he 
 I>rofes>«Ml to liave learned from the goddess Athene in a dream. 
 J lis laws are said to have been put in writing and promulgated 
 in G64 B. c, forty years earlier than those of Drako at AthJ'ns. 
 
 That these first of all Grecian written laws were few and sim- 
 ple, we may be suliiciiintly assured. The only tact certain re- 
 specting them is their extraordinary rigor :'-^ they seem to have 
 enjoined the ai)plication of the lex talionis as a punishment for 
 pei-sonal injuries. In this general character of his laws, Zaieukus 
 was the counterpart of Drako. But so little wiis certainly known, 
 and so much falsely asserted, respecting him, that Timjeus thj 
 historian went so far as to call in question his real existence,* — 
 against the authority not only of Kphorus, but also of Aristotle 
 and Theophrastus. llie laws must have remained, however, 
 for a long time, fonmilly unchanged ; tor so great was the avei-- 
 fiion of the Lokrians, we are told, to any new law, tluit the man 
 who ventured to proj^ose one appeared in public with a rope 
 round his neck, which was at once tightened if he failed to con- 
 vince the assembly of the necessity of his proposition, i Of the 
 government of the Epizephyrian Lokri we know ordy, that in 
 
 ' Aristot. a|). Srfiol. rindir. Olyrnj). x, 17. 
 
 « Proverb. Zenob. Centur. iv. 20. Zuaevkov vo«of, l^ri tuv n-nrrmuv. 
 
 •^Stniho, vi, p. 259; Skyranus Chius, v, 313; Cicero de Lt-. n g and 
 Epist. ad Atticum, vi, 1. "'' ' ' 
 
 Heyne, Opuscula, vol. ii, Epimetrum ii, pp. 60-68; Goiier ad Tini«i 
 Fra-nient. pp. 220-259. Bentley {on the Epistles of Phalaris, ch. xii p 
 274) seems to countenance, without adcpiate reason, the doubt of TimaMH 
 about the existence of Zaieukus. Bur. the statement of Ephorus th it 
 Zaieukus had collected his ordinances from the Kretan. Laconian and 
 Areiopa-mc customs, when contrasted with the simple and far mmv .mlible 
 statement al)ove cited from Aristotle, shows how loose were the atHrmations 
 respectmg the Lokrian lawoiver (ap. Strabo, vi. p. 260). Other statements 
 also, concernini? him, alluded to by Aristotle (Politic, ii. 9, 3), were distinctly 
 at variance with chronolotrv 
 
 Charondas, the law^^iver of the Chalkidic towns in Italy and Sl<ily as far 
 as we can jud<?e amidst much confusion of testimony, seems to helong to an 
 age much later than Zaieukus: I shall speak of him hereafter. 
 * Demosthcn. cent Timokrat. p. 744 ; Polyb xii, 10. 
 
 RHEGIlBf. 
 
 dds 
 
 later times it included a great council of one thousand members, 
 and a chief executive magistrate called Kosmopolis : it is spoken 
 of also as strictly and carefully administered. 
 
 The date of Rhegiura (Reggio), separated from the territory 
 of the Epizephyrian Lokri by the river Halex, must have been 
 not only earlier than Lokri, but even earlier than Sybaris, — if 
 the statement of Antiochus be correct, that the colonists were 
 joined by those Messenians, who, prior to the first Messenian 
 war, were anxious to make reparation to the Spartans for (he 
 outrage offered to the Spartan maidens at the temple of Artemis 
 Limnatis, but were overborne by their countrymen and forced 
 into exile. A different version, however, is given by Pausanias 
 of this migration of Messenians to Rhegium, yet still admitting 
 the fact of such migration at the close of the first Messenian 
 war, which would place the foundation of the city earlier than 
 720 B. c. Though Rhegium was a Chalkidic colony, yet a portion 
 of its inhal>itants seem to have been undoubtedly of Messenian 
 origin, and amongst them Anaxilas, despot of the town between 
 50O470 B. c, who traced his descent through two centuries to a 
 Messenian emigrant named Alkidamidas.^ The celebrity mid 
 power of Anaxilas, just at the time when the ancient history of 
 the Greek towns was beginning to be set forth in prose, and witl 
 Gorae degree of system, caused the Messenian element in the 
 population of Rhegium to be noticed prominently ; but the town 
 was essentially Chalkidic, connected by colonial sisterhood with 
 the Chalkidic settlements in Sicily, — Zankle, Naxos, Katana, and 
 Leontini. The original emigrants departed from Chalkis, as a 
 tenth of the citizens consecrated by vow to Apollo in consequenca 
 of famine ; and the directions of the god, as well as the invito 
 tion of the Zankla^ans, guided their course to Rhegium. The 
 *'^wn was flourishing, and acquired a considerable number of 
 dependent villages around,^ inhabited doubtless by cultivators of 
 the indigenous population. But it seems to have been often al 
 variance with the conterminous Lokrians, and received one severe 
 defeat, in conjunction with the Tarentines, which will be here- 
 after recounted. 
 
 ' Strabo, vi, p. 257 ; Pansan. iv, 23, 2. 
 
 ' Strabo, ri, p. 258. laxvoe de uaXiara ii ruv Tvyivuv iroXic, koI irepuHKi 
 Sof i(Tx^ ot/;tv"f» etc. 
 
 A: 
 
 ."■,lil 
 
 lf\ 
 
 I 
 
 i\- 
 
884 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 u 
 
 h 
 
 ! i 
 
 Between Lokri and the Lakinian cape were situated the Achte* 
 an colony of Kaulonia, and Skylletium ; the latter seemingly in- 
 cluded in the domain of Kroton, though pretending to have been 
 originally founded by Menestheus, the leader of the Athenians at 
 the siege of Troy : Petilia, also, a hill-fortress north-west of the 
 Lakinian cape, as well as Makalla, both comprised in the territory 
 of Kroton, were atfirraed to have been founded by Philoktetes. 
 Along all this coast of the gulf of Tarentum, there were various 
 
 establishments ascrib<id to the heroes of the Trojan war, ^ 
 
 Epeius, Philoktetes, Nestor, — or to their returning troops. Of 
 these establishments, probably the occupants had been small, 
 miscellaneous, unacknowledged bands of Grecian adventurers,'^ 
 who assumed to themselves the most honorable origin which they 
 could imagine, and who became afterwards absorbed into the 
 larger colonial establishments which followed ; the latter adopt- 
 ing and taking upon themselves the heroic worship of Philok- 
 tetes or other warriors from Troy, which the prior emigrants had 
 begun. 
 
 During the flourishing times of Sybaris and Kroton, it seems 
 that these two great cities divided the whole length of the coast 
 of the Tarentine gulf, from the spot now called Roeca Imperiale 
 down to the south of the Lakinian cape. Between the point 
 where the dominion of Sybaris terminated on the Tarentine side, 
 and Tarentum itself, there were two considerable Grecian settle- 
 ments, — Siris, afterwardo called Herakleia, and Metapontium. 
 The fertility and attraction of the territory of Siris, with its two 
 rivers, Akiris and Siris, were well known even to the poet Ar- 
 chilochus^ (660 b. c), but we do not know the date at which it 
 passed from the indigenous Chonians or Chaonians into the 
 hands of Greek settlers A citizen of Siris is mentioned among 
 the suitors for the daughter of the Sikyonian Kleisthencs, (580- 
 660 B. c.) We are told that some Kolophonian fugitives, emi- 
 grating to escape the dominion of the Lydian kings, attacked 
 
 ' Strabo, vi, p. 263 ; AriKtot. Mirah. Ausc. c. 106 ; Athenfe. xii, p. 523. It 
 is to these reputed Khodian companions of Tlepolemus before Troy, that 
 the allusion in Strabo refers, to Khodian occupants near Sybaris ( wt, p 
 
 » See Mannert, Geographie, part ix, b. 9, eh. 11, p. 234. 
 • Archiloth. Fragra 1 7, «d. Schneidewin. 
 
 METArONTIUM. 
 
 S8d 
 
 and possessed themselves of the spot, giving to it the name Po- 
 lieion. The Chonians of Siris ascribed to themselves a Trojan 
 orio-in, exhibiting a wooden image of the Ilian Athene, which 
 they affirmed to have been brought away by their fugitive an- 
 cestors after the capture of Troy. When the town was stormed 
 by the lonians, many of the inhabitants clung to this relic for 
 protection, but were dragged away and slain by the victors, ' 
 whose sacrilege was supposed to have been the cause that their 
 settlement was not durable. At the time of the invasion of 
 Greece by Xerxes, the fertile territory of Siritis was considered 
 as still open to be colonized ; for the Athenians when their affairs 
 appeared desperate, had this scheme of emigration in reserve as 
 a possible resource ;- and there were inspired declarations from 
 some of the contemporary prophets, which encouraged them to 
 undertake it. At length, after the town of Thurii had been 
 founded by Athens, in the vicinity of the dismantled Sybaris, the 
 Thurians tried to possess themselves of the Siritid territory, but 
 were opposed by the Tarentines.3 According to the compromise 
 concluded between them, Tarentum was recognized as the me- 
 tropolis of the colony, but joint possession was allowed both to 
 Tarentines and Thurians. The former transferred the site of 
 the city, under the new name Herakleia, to a spot three miles 
 from the sea, leaving Siris as the place of maritime access to it.^ 
 About twenty-five miles eastward of Siris, on the coast of the 
 Tarentine gulf, was situated Metapontium, a Greek town which 
 was afBrmed by some to draw its origin from the Pylian compan- 
 ions of Nestor, — by others, from the Phocian warriors of Epe- 
 
 vl 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 127; Strabo, vi, p. 263. The name Polieion seems to be 
 read Tllelov in Aristot. Mirab. Auscult. 106. 
 
 Niebuhr assigns this Kolophonian settlement of Siris to the reign of Gyges 
 in Lydia; for which I know no other evidence except the statement that 
 Gyges took rwv KoAoi^uviuv to uarv (Herodot. i, 14) ; but this is no proof 
 that the inhabitants then emigrated ; for Kolophon was a very flourishing and 
 prosperous city afterwards. 
 
 Justin (xx, 2) gives a case of sacrilegious massacre committed near the 
 statue of Athene at Siris, which appears to be totally different from the tale 
 respecting the Kolophonians. 
 
 * Herodot. viii, 62. ' Strabo, fi, p. 264. 
 
 * Strabo, vi, p. 264. 
 
 TOir. in. 17 i5oc 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
886 
 
 I.ISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 // 
 
 ius, on their return from Troy. The proofs of the iormer wera 
 exhibited in the worship of the Neleid heroes, — the proofs of 
 the latter in the preservation of the reputed identical tools with 
 which Epeius had constructed the Trojan horse. > Metapontium 
 was planted on the territory of the Chonians or CEnotrians, 
 but the first colony is said to have been destroyed by an 
 attack of the Samnites,"2 at what period we do not know. It had 
 boeu founded by some Achajan settlers, — under the direction of 
 the oekist Daulius, despot of the Phocian Krissa, and invited by 
 the inhabitants of Sybaris, who feared that the place might be 
 ai)propriated b)' the neighboring Tarentines, colonists from Sparta 
 and hereditary enemies in Pelo{>onnesus of the Achaean race. 
 Before the new settlers arrived, however, the place seems to have 
 been already ap{)ropriated by the Tarentines ; for the Achcean 
 Leukippus only obtained their permission to land by a fraudulent 
 promise, and, after all, had to sustain a forcible struggle both with 
 them and with the neighboring (Enotrians, which was cora])ro- 
 mised by a d vision of territory. The fertility of the Meta- 
 pontine territory was hardly less celebrated than that of the 
 Siritid.3 
 
 Farther eastward of Metapontium, again at the distance of 
 about twenty-five miles, was situated the great city of Taras, or 
 
 
 •!' 
 
 
 ' Strabo, /. c; Justin, xx, 2; Velleius Paterc. i, 1; Aristot. Mirab. Aus- 
 cttlt. c. 108. Thii» story respecting; the presence and implements of Epeius 
 may have arisen throi^ifh tlie Fliocian settlers from Krissa. 
 
 * The words of Strabo — r/ipavimfTj d' v~>) l.nvviri.>v (vi, p. 264) can hardly 
 be connected witli the immediately followini;^ narrative, which he j^ives out 
 of Antiochus, resjiectinjr the revival of the place by new Acha;an settlers, 
 invited by the Achaeans of Sybaris. For the latter place was reduced to 
 impotence in 510 b. c. : invitations by the Achaeans of Sybaris must, there- 
 fore, be anterior to that date. If Daulius despot of Krissa is to be admitted 
 as the oekist of Metapontitim, the plantation of it must be placed early in 
 the first half of the sixth century b. c. ; but there is preat difficulty in 
 admitting the ext<msion of Saranite conquests to the gulf of Tarentum at so 
 eurlv a period u- this. I therefore construe the words of Antiochus as 
 referring to the original settlement of Metapontium by the Greeks, not to 
 the reriyal of the town alter its destruction by the Samnites. 
 
 ' Strabo, /. c ; Stephanus Byz. (v, ^eraKovnov) identifies Metapontium 
 and Siris in a perplexing manner. 
 
 Livy Cxxv, 15) recognizes Metapontium as Achaean: compare Heynt 
 Upuscula, rol. ii, Prolus xii, p. 207. 
 
 TARENTU!!!. 
 
 387 
 
 Tarentum, a colony from Sparta founded aller the first Messe* 
 nian war, seemingly about 707 b. c. The oekist Phalanthus, 
 paid to have been an Herakleid, was placed at the head of a body 
 of Spartan emigrants, — consisting principally of some citizeni 
 called Epeunaktae, and of the youth chilled Partheniag, who had 
 been disgraced by their countrymen on account of their origin, 
 and were on the point of breaking out into rebellion. It waa 
 out of the Messenian war that this emigration is stated to have 
 arisen, in a manner analogous to that which has been stated 
 respecting the Epizephyrian Lokrians. The Lacedaemonians, 
 before entering Messenia to carry on the war, had made a vow 
 not to return until they should have conipleted the conquest ; a 
 vow in which it appears that some of them declined to take part, 
 t^tanding altogether aloof from the expedition. When the absent 
 Foldiers returned after many years of absence consumed in the 
 war, they found a numerous progeny which had been born to 
 their wives and daughters during the interval, from intercourse 
 with those (Epeunaktic) who had stayed at home. The Epeu- 
 naktae were punished by being degraded to the rank and servi- 
 tude of Helots ; the children thus born, called Partheniae,' were 
 also cut off from all the rights of citizenship, and held in dis- 
 honor. But the parties punished were numerous enough to make 
 tliemselves formidable, and a conspiracy was planned among 
 them, intended to break out at the great religious festival of the 
 Hyacinthia, in the temple of the Amyklaean Apollo. Palanthug 
 was the secret chief of the conspirators, who agreed to com- 
 mence their attack upon the authorities at the moment when he 
 should put on his helmet. The leader, however, never intending 
 that the scheme should be executed, betrayed it beforehand, stip- 
 idating for the safety of all those implicated in it. At the com- 
 mencement of the festival, when the multitude were already 
 assembled, a herald was directed to proclaim aloud, that Phalan- 
 thus would not on that tl.:iy put on his helmet, — a proclamation 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 m 
 
 ' Partheniae, i. e. children of virgins : the description given by Varro of 
 the Illyrian virgines illustrates this phrase : " Quas virgines ibi appellant, non- 
 nunquam annorum xx, quibus mos eorum non denegavit, ante nuptias ut 
 fiuccumberent quibus vellent, et incomitatis ut vagari liceret, et liberos habertt.^ 
 (Varro, De Re RusticA, ii, 10, 9.) 
 
B9» 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 All 
 
 which at once revealed to the conspirators that they were be- 
 trayed. Some of them sought safety in flight, others assumed 
 the posture of suj)pliants ; but they were merely detained in con- 
 finement, with assurance of saft'ty, while Phalanthus was sent to 
 the Delphian oracle to ask advice respecting emigration. He ig 
 gaid to have inquired whether he might be permitted to appropri- 
 ate the fertile plain of Sikyon, but the Pythian priestess emphat- 
 ically dissuaded him, and enjoined him to conduct his emigrants 
 to Satyrium and Tarentum, where he would be " a mischief to 
 the lapygians." Phalanthus obeyed, and conducted the detected 
 ccnspirators as emigrants to theTarentine gulf,' which he reached 
 a few years after the foundation of Sybaris and Kroton by the 
 Achaeans. Accoi'ding to Ephorus, he found these prior emigrants 
 at war with the natives, aided them in the contest, and received 
 in return their aid to accomplish his own settlement. But this can 
 hardly have consisted with the narrative of Antiochus, who re- 
 presented the Achaeans of Sybaris as retaining, even in their 
 colonies, the hatred against the Dorian name which they had con 
 tract ed in Pelo[»onnesus.2 Antiochus stated that Phalanthus 
 and his colonists were received in a friendly manner by the indi- 
 genous inhabitants, and allowed to establish their new town in 
 tranquillity. 
 
 If such was really the fact, it proves that the native inhabitants 
 ^f the soil mast have been of purely inland habits, making no 
 use of the sea either for commerce or for fishery, otherwise they 
 
 ' For this story respecting the foundation of Tarentum, see Strabo, vi, pp 
 178-280 (who gives the versions both of Antiochus and Ephorus); Justin 
 iii, 4; Diodorus, xv, 66; Excerpta Vatican, lib. vii-x, ed. Mail, Fr. 12 j 
 Servius ad Virgil. JFIneid. iii, 531. 
 
 There are several points of difference between Antiochus, Ephorus, and 
 Servius ; the story given in the text follows the former. 
 
 The statement of Hesychius (v, Uap-devtlai) seems on the whole some 
 what more intelligible than that given by Strabo, — 01 Kara tov MeaayviaKot 
 vo/.efiov avTolg yevofzevKH Ik tuv -Qeparraivuv • Kai ol i^ uvekSotov ^uT^pa 
 ytvvufievoL iraldet:. Justin translates Partheniae. Spurii. 
 
 The local eponymous heroes Taras and Satyrus (from Satyrium) iteie 
 celebrated and worshipped among the Tarentines See Cicero, Verr. iv, 60, 
 IS; Servius ad Virg. Gcorg. ii, 197; Zumpt. ap Orelli, OnomasticoB 
 Tnllian. ii. p. 570. 
 
 • Compare Strabo, vi, p. 264 and p. 280. 
 
 .J 
 
 i: 
 
 HARBOR AND FISHERY OF TARENTUM. 
 
 889 
 
 would hardly have relinquished such a site as that of Tarentum, 
 ^ which, while favorable and productive, even in regard to the 
 adjoining land, was with respect to sea-advantages without a par- 
 allel in Grecian Italy.i It was the only spot in the gulf which 
 possessed a perfectly safe and convenient harbor, — a spacious 
 inlet of the sea is there formed, sheltered by an isthmus and 
 an outlying peninsula, so as to leave only a narrow entrance. 
 This inlet, still known as the Mare Piccolo, though its shores 
 and the adjoining tongue of land appear to have undergone much 
 chan<^e, affords at the present day a constant, inexhaustible, and 
 varied supply of fish, especially of shell-fish ; which furnish both 
 nourishment and employment to a large proportion among the 
 inhabitants of the contracted modern Taranto, just as they once 
 served the same purpose to the numerous, lively, and jovial pop- 
 ulation of the mighty Tarentum. The concentrated population 
 of fishermen formed a predominant element in the character of 
 the Tarentine democracy.^ Tarentum was just on the borders 
 
 « Strabo, vi, p. 278 ; Polyb. x, 1. 
 
 « Juvenal, Sat. vi, 297. "Atque coronatum et petulans raadidumque 
 Tarentum : '' compare Plato, Legg. i, p- 637 ; and Ilorat. Satir. ii, 4, 34. 
 Aristot. Tolit. iv, 4, 1. o/ a^Atlq h Tapavri Kal B<avri(^. " Tarentina ostrea, 
 Varro, Fragm. p. 301, ed. Bipont. 
 
 To illustrate this remark of Aristotle on the fishermen of Tarentum, as 
 
 the predominant class in the democracy, I transcribe a passage from Mr. 
 
 Keppel Craven's Tour in the Southern Provinces of Naples, ch. x, p. 182. 
 
 '' Swinburne gives a list of ninetv-threc different sorts of shell-fish which are 
 
 found in the gulf of Taranto ; but more especially in the Mare Piccolo. 
 
 Amonc. these, in ancient times, the murex and purpura ranked foremost lo 
 
 value ;''in our degenerate davs, the mussel and oyster seem to have usurped 
 
 a preeminence as acknowledged but less dignified ; but there are numeroui 
 
 other tribes held in proportionate estimation for their exquisite flavor, and at 
 
 preedily sought for during their respective seasons. The appetite for shell. 
 
 fish of all sorts, which seems peculiar to the natives of these regions, is such 
 
 as to appear exaggerated to a foreigner, accustomed to consider only a few 
 
 of ihem as eatable. This taste exists at Taranto, if possible, in a stronger 
 
 de;rree than in ary other part of the kingdom, and accounts for the com- 
 
 parativelv large revenue which government draws from this particular 
 
 branch of commerce. The Mare Piccolo is divided into several portions, 
 
 which are let to different societies, who thereby become the only privileged 
 
 fishermen ; the lower classes are almost all employed by these corporations. 
 
 w every revolving season of the year affords occupation for them, so that 
 
 nature herself jeems to have afforded the exclusive trade most suited to the 
 
 I" 
 
 i 
 
 
 i\i 
 
11 " 
 <■ 
 
 ^ 
 
 <t 
 
 I 
 
 
 390 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of the country orio:inally known as Italy, within which Herodotui 
 includes it, while Antiochus considers it in lapyg-ia, anil re^^'ards 
 Metapontium as tho last Greek town in Italy. 
 
 Its immediate neighbors were the lapygians, who, under vari- 
 ous subdivisions of name and dialect, seem to have occupied the 
 greater part of south-eastern Italy, including the peninsula de- 
 Doniiuated after them, — yet sometimes also called the Salentine, 
 — between the Adriatic and the Tarentine gulf, — and who are 
 even stated at one time to have occupied some territory on th<j 
 hj\Hh east of that gulf, near the site of Krotun. The lapygian 
 name appears to have euinpreh<'nded Messapians, Salentirn-s, and 
 Kalabrians ; according to some, even Peuketians and Daunians, 
 as far along the Adriatic as Mount Gargamis, or Drion ; Sky lax 
 notices in his time (about of>0 b. c.) five dititrcnt tongues in the 
 country which he calls lapygia.i The Messapians and Salen- 
 
 inhaltitants of Taranto. Both seas abound with varieties of testacra. hut 
 the inner ^'ulf (the Mare Piccolo) is esteemed raost favorahle to their frrowth 
 and flavor ; the sandy hcd is literally blackened by the mussels that cover 
 it ; the boats that g:lide over its curface are laden with them ; thev emboss 
 the rocks that border tlie strand, and appear equally af)undant on the .shore, 
 piled up in heaps." Mr. Craten goes on to illustrate still farther the 
 wonderful a!>undance of this fishery; but that which ha.s been already 
 transcribed, while it illustrates the above-noticed remark of Aristotle, will at 
 the same time help to explain the prosperity and physical abundance of the 
 ancient Tarentum. 
 
 For an elaborate account of the state of cultivation. es{K?cially of the 
 olive, near the degenerate modern Taranto, see the Travels of M. De Salis 
 Marschlins in the Kinjjrdom of Naples (translated by Aufrere, London, 1795), 
 iect. 5, pp. 82-107, 163-178. 
 
 ' Skylax does not mention at all the name of Italy; he gives to the whole 
 coast, from Rhegium to Poseidonia on the Mediterranean, and from tho 
 same }>oint to the limit l)etween Thurii and Herakleia on the gulf of Taren- 
 tum, the name of Lucania (c. 12-13). From thi.-, point he extends Inpvuia 
 to the Mount Drion. or Gar«:anHs, so that he includes not only Metapontium, 
 bit also Herakleia in lapygia. 
 
 Antiochus draws the line between Italy and Itpygia at the extiemity of 
 Ihe Metapontine territory; comprehending Metapontium in Italy, and 
 Tarentum in lapygia Antiochus, Frag. 6, ed. Didot; ap. Strabo, vi, p 
 S54). 
 
 Herodotus, however, speaks not only of Metapontium but also of Taren 
 Icm, as being: in Italy (i, 24 ; iii, 1.16: iv. 15). 
 I Dotsce this discrepancy of geographic£.l speech, between the two coft 
 
 lAPYGlANS AND TARENTINS. 
 
 991 
 
 lines are spoken of as emigrants from Kr^te, akin to the MinoM 
 or primitive Kretans ; and we find a national genealogy which 
 recognizes lapyx son of Daedaius, an emigrant from Sicily. But 
 the story told to Herodotus was, that the Kretan soldiers who 
 had accompanied Minos in his expedition to recover Da?dalua 
 from Kamikus in Sicily, were on their return home cast away on 
 the shores of lapygia, and became the founders of Hyria and other 
 Messapian towns in the interior of the country.* Brundusium 
 also, or Brentesion, as the Greeks called it,-2 inconsiderable in the 
 days of Herodotus, but famous in the Roman times afterwards, 
 %s the most frequented seaport for voyaging to Epirus, was a 
 iilessapian town. Tlie native language spoken by the lapygian 
 Messapians was a variety of th^ Oscan : the Latin poet Ennius, 
 a native of Rudiie in the lapygian peninsula, spoke Greek, Latin, 
 and Oscan, and even deduced his pedigree from the ancient 
 national prince or hero Messapus.3 
 
 We are told that during the lifetime of Phalanthus, the Taren- 
 tine settlers gained victories over the Messapians and Peuketians, 
 which they commemorated afterwards by votive offerings at Del- 
 phi, — and that they even made acquisitions at the expense of 
 the inhabitants of Brundusium,'* — a statement difficult to believe, 
 if we look to the distance of the latter place, and to the circum- 
 stance that Herodotus, even in his time, names it only as a harbor. 
 Phalanthus too, driven into exile, is said to have found a hospit- 
 able reception at Brundusium, and to have died there. Of the 
 history of Tarentum, however, during the first two hundred and 
 
 temporaries Herodotus and Antiochus, the more especially, because Niebuhr 
 has fallen into a mistake by exclusively following Antiochus, and by saying 
 that no writer, even of the davs of Plato, would have spoken of Tarentum ai 
 being in Italy, or of the Tarentines as Italiots. This is perfectly true 
 respecting Antiochus, but is certainly not true with respect to Herodotus j 
 nor can it be shown to be true with respect to Thucydides, — for the passage 
 of the latter, which Niebuhr produces, does not sustain his inference. 
 'Niebuhr, Romische Geschichte, vol. i, pp. 16-18, 2d edit.) 
 ' 1 Herodot. vii, 170; Pliny, H. N. iii, 16 ; Athenae. xii, p. 523; ServicJ ■« 
 Virgil. jEneid. viii, 9. 
 
 « Herodot. iv, 99. 
 
 » SerA-ius ad Virgil, ^.neid. vii, 691. Polybius distinguishes lapygi 
 
 ftun Messapians (ii, 24). 
 
 * Paasaniaa, x, 10, 3 ; x, 13, 5 ; Strabo, vi, p 282 ; Justin, iii, 4. 
 
 i 
 
i 
 
 I 
 
 992 
 
 UISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 thirty years of itn existence, we possess no detaik ; we hare 
 reason to believe that it partook in the general prosperity ci' the 
 Italian Greeks durng those two centuries, though it remained in* 
 ferior both to Sybaris and to Kroton. About the year 510 b. c, 
 these two latter republics went to war, and Sybaris was nearly 
 destroyed ; while in the subsecjurnt half-century, the Krotoniates 
 goffered the terrible defeat uf S:igra from the Lokrians, and the 
 1'arentines experienced an equally ruinous defeat from tlie lapy- 
 gian Messapians. From these reverses, however, the Tarentines 
 apjx-ar to have recovered more completely than the Krotoniates ; 
 for the former stand lirst among the Italiots, or Italian Greeks, 
 from the year 400 b. c. down to the supremacy of the Kunians, 
 and made better bead against the growth of the Lucanians and 
 Bruttians of the interior. 
 
 Sucli were the chief cities of the Italian Greeks from Taren- 
 tum on the upper s<'a to I'oseidonia on the lower; fjid if we take 
 them (luring the period preceding the ruin of Sybaris (in 510 
 B. c), they will ap}>ear to have enjoy«'<I a degre^j of prosperity 
 even surpassing that of the Sicilian Greeks. The dominion of 
 Sybaris, Kroton, and Lokri extended across the peninsula from 
 sea to sea, and the mountainous regions of the interior of Cahi- 
 bria were held in amicable connection with the cities and cultiva- 
 tors in the {)lain an<l valley near tlie sea, — to the reciprocal ad- 
 vantage of both. The petty native tribes of CEnotrians, Sikels, 
 or Italians, properly so called, were partially Ilellenized, and 
 brought into the condition of village cultivators and shepherds, 
 dependent upon Sybaris and its fellow cities ; a portion of them 
 dwelling lu the town, probably, as domestic slaves of the rich 
 men, but most of them remaining in the country as serfs, penes- 
 tie, or coloni, intermingled with Greek settlers, and paying ov^ 
 parts of their produce to Greek proprietors. 
 
 But this de{)endence, though acctjmplitJied in the first instance 
 by force, was yet md ui)held exclusively by force, — it wa* to a 
 great degree the result of an organized march of life, and of more 
 productive cultivation brought within their reach, — of new wants, 
 both created and supplied, — of temples, festivals, ships, walls, 
 chariots, etc., which imposed u{)on the imagination of the rude 
 landsman and shepherd. Against mere force the natives coui<^ 
 
 * , 
 
 li \ 
 
 ASCENDENCY OF ITALIAN GREEKS. 
 
 893 
 
 have found shelter in the unconquerable forests and ravines of 
 the Calabrian Apennines, and in that vast mountain region of the 
 Sila, lying immediately behind the plains of Sybaris, where even 
 the French army, with its excellent organization, in 1807, found 
 so much difficulty in reaching the bandit villagers.^ It was not by 
 arm* alone, but by arms and arts combined, — a mingled influ- 
 ence, such as enabled imperial Rome to subdue the fierceness of 
 the rude Germans and Britons, — that the Sybarites and Kroton- 
 iates ac juired and maintained their ascendency over the natives 
 of the interior. The shepherd of the banks of the river Sybaris 
 or Krathis not only found a new exchangeable value for his cattle 
 and other produce, becoming familiar with better diet and cloth- 
 ing, and improved cultivation of the olive and the vine, — but he 
 was also enabled to display his prowess, if strong and brave, in 
 the public games at the festival of the Lakinian Here, or even at 
 ^lie Olympic games in Peloponnesus.^ It is thus that we have to 
 ex[)lain the extensive dominion, the great population and the 
 wealth and luxury of the Sybarites and Krotoniates, — a pojju- 
 lation of which the incidental reports as given in figures are not 
 trustworthy, but which we may well believe to have been very 
 numerous. The native CEnotrians, while unable to combine in 
 resisting Greek force, were at the same time less widely distin- 
 guished from the Greeks, in race and language, than the Oscans 
 of middle Italy, and therefore more accessible to Greek pacific 
 influences ; while the Oscan race seem to have been both fiercer 
 in repelling the assaults of the Greeks, and more intractable aa 
 to ilieir seductions. Nor were the lapygians modified by the 
 neighborhood of Tarentum, in the same degree as the tribes ad- 
 joining to Sybaris and Kroton were by their contact with those 
 cities. The dialect of Tarentum,^ as well as of Herakleia, 
 
 ■ I 
 
 I'i 
 
 ' See a description of the French niiiitury operations in these almost inac- 
 cessible regions, contained in a valuable publication by a French general 
 oflBcer, on service in that country for three years, " Calabria during a Military 
 Residence of three years," London, 1832, Letter xx, p. 201. 
 
 The whole picture of Calabria contained in this volume is both interesting 
 and instructive : military operations had never before been carried on, probar 
 bly, in the mountmns of the Sila. 
 
 ' See Theokritus, Idyll, iv, 6-35, which illustrates the point here stated. 
 
 * Saidas, v, 'Fiv^uv ; Stephan. Byz. v, Tiipac : compare Bemhardy, Gnm 
 
 17» 
 
 .1 
 
 T 
 
 i 
 
a94 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE 
 
 
 though a marked Doric, admitted many local pecaliarities, and 
 the farces of the Tarentine poet Rliinthon, like the Syracusan 
 Sophron, seem to have blended the Hellenic with the Italic in 
 language as m ell as in character. 
 
 About the yeai' 5(j0 b. c, tlie time of the accession of Peisis« 
 tratus at Athens, the close of what may propei-ly be called the 
 firnt period of Grecian history, Sybaris and Kroton were at the 
 maximum of their power, which each maintained for half a century 
 afterwards, until the fatal dissension between them. We are 
 tokl that tlie Sybarites, in that final contest, marched against Kro- 
 ton with an aimy of three hundred thousand men: fabulous as 
 this number doubtk*.-> is, we cannot doubt that, for an irruption 
 of this kind into an adjoining territory, their lai-ge body of semi- 
 llellenized native subjects might be mustered in prodigious force. 
 Tiie few statements which have reached us respecting them 
 touch, unfortunately, upon little more than their luxury, fantastic 
 8elf-indulgenc<% and extravagant indolence, for whicli qualities 
 they have beoome proverbial in modern times as well as in an- 
 cient. Anecdotes illustrating tliese qualities were current, and 
 eerved more than one purpose, in antiquity. The philosopher 
 recounted them, in order to discredit and denounce the character 
 whicli they exemplified, — while among gay companies, " Syb- 
 aritic tales," oi- tales respecting sayings and doing of ancient Syb- 
 arites, formed a separate and special class of excellent stories, to be 
 |>ld simply for amusement, ^ — with which view witty romancers 
 
 4iii-s (I'T Komischeii Litteratur, Ahschnitt ii, jtt. 2, j*}). 185-1 80, alx)ut tlie 
 aii;ilo':v of tliese ^XvaKfr of llhiiithon with the native Italic Mimes. 
 
 The dialect of the other cities of Italic Gretce is very little kno\vn : the 
 ancient Inscription of Petilia is Doric : see Ahrons, Dc Dialecto Doric.^, 
 sect 49, p. 418. 
 
 ' Aristophan. Vesp. 1200. AlauiriKdv ye?Mlov,7/ IvlSapntKov. What i.s 
 meant by Ivt^apiriKov ychnuv is badly explained by the Scholiast, but is 
 porfectly well illustrated by Aristophanes himself, in subsequent verses of th€ 
 Nime play (1427-1436). where Philokleon tells two good stories respecting 
 •' a Sybaiitan man," and a "woman in Sybaris:" 'Av^p Ivf^apirric k^eTttaev 
 I; -'s, etc. — tv IvjSupet yvvfj ttote Karea^ exlvoVy etc. 
 
 The^e ^vJnpia eTrKp^eyfiara are as old as Epicharmus, whose mind waa 
 much imbued \\ith the Tythan^orean philosophy. See Etymolog. Magn. 
 2< -a^jf^ttr, jEtian amused himself also with the laTopuu I,v(3apiTiKai 
 (V. H. xif , 20) : compare Hesychius, IvfiapLtiKol Xoyoi, and Suidas, 2v/3a 
 
 I 
 
 [ *m m t 
 
 h 
 
 '■■*« 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE SYBARITES. 
 
 39f 
 
 multiplied tliem indefinitely. It is probable that the Pythagoreaa 
 philosophers (who belonged originally to Kroton, but maintained 
 th< -nisei ves permanently as a philosophical sect in Italy and Si- 
 cily, with a strong tinge of ostentatious asceticism and mysticism), 
 in their exhortations to temperance and in their denunciations of 
 hixiirious habits, might select by preference examples from Syb- 
 aris, the ancient enemy of the Krotonians, to point their moral, — 
 and that the exaggerated reputation of the city thus first became 
 the subject of common talk throughout the Grecian world; for 
 Httle could be actually known of Sybaris in detail, since its hu- 
 miliation dates from the first commencement of Grecian contem- 
 j.(»taiieous history. Hekata^us of Miletus may perhaps have 
 visited it in its full splendor, but even Herodotus knew it onlj 
 by }>ast report, and the principal anecdotes respecting it are cited 
 from authors considerably later than him, who follow the tona 
 of thought so common in antiquity, in ascribing the ruin of the 
 Sybaiites to their overweening corruption and luxury.^ 
 
 Making allowance, however, for exaggeration on all these ao- 
 counts, there can be no reason to doubt that Sybaris, in 5G0 b. c, 
 was one of the most wealthy, populous, and powerful cities of the 
 Hellenic name; and that it also presented both comfortable 
 abundance among the mass of the citizens, arising from the easy 
 
 ' Thus Herodotus (vi, 127) iiiform.s us that, at the time when Kleisthenes 
 of Sikyoii invited from all Greece suitors of proper di£,^nity for the hand of 
 his dau<.4itor, Smindyrides of Sybaris came among the number, "the most 
 '1 'i.-ate and luxurious man ever known,'' (i~i zAeiarov iMj ;);/lu5//f dq uv/jp 
 ■ 7(1 — Herodot. vi. 127), and Sybaris was at that time (u. c. 580-560) ia 
 its greatest prosperity. In Chamaileon, Timaeus, and other writers subse- 
 (juent to Aristotle, greater details were given. Smindyrides was said to hava 
 taken with him to the marriage one thousand domestic servants, fishermen, 
 liird-catchers, and cooks (Athena, vi. 271 ; xii, 541). The details of Syb- 
 aritic luxury, given in Athenajus, are chiefly borrowed from writers of this 
 posr-Aristotclian age, — Herakleid^s of Pontus, Phylarchus, Klearchus, 
 TimiEus (Athenae. xii, 519-522). The best-authenticated of all the exam- 
 ples of Sybaritic wealth, is the splendid ligured garment, fifteen cuHts ia 
 length, which Alklmenes the Sybarite dedicated as a votive offering in the 
 t<?mple of the Lakinian Here. Dionysius of Syracuse plundered that tern 
 pie, got possession of the garment, and is said to have sold it to the Cartha- 
 ginians for the price of one hundred and twenty talents : Polemon, tha 
 Periegetes, seems to have seen it at Carthage (Aristot. Mirab. Ausc. 96; 
 Athenae xii, 541). Whether the price be correctly stated, we are not ii • 
 
 fu^llAliAn rn dfttermina. 
 
 * 
 
 I 
 
896 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 ' 
 
 attainment of fresh lots of fertile land, and excessive indulgences 
 amon- the rich, — to a degree forming marked contrast with 
 Ilella" proper, of which Herodotus cliaracterized poverty as tlie 
 foster-sisterJ The extraordinary productiveness of the neighbor- 
 in^ territory, - alleged by Varro,in his time, when the culture 
 must have been much worse than it had been under the old Syb- 
 aris to yield an ordinary crop of a hundred-fold,-^ and extolled 
 by modem travellers, even in its present yet more neglected cul- 
 ture - has been already touched ui>on. The river Krathis, — 
 Btill'the most considerable river of that region, — at a time when 
 there was an industrious population to keep its water-course in 
 order, would enable the extensive fields of Sybai'is to supply 
 abundant nourishment for a i»opulation larger perhaps than any 
 other Grecian city could parallel. But though nature was thus 
 bountiful, industry, good management, and well-ordered govern- 
 ment were reciuired to tuni her bounty to account : where these 
 are wanting, later experience of the same territory shows that lU 
 
 "Microdot, vri, 102. rij 'EXhuU Tvevii, fiev alei Kore (7vvTpo(f,6g iari. 
 
 « Varro l>e \U^ Kiisii(M. i, 44. "In Syharitano dicunt etiam cum ccntu- 
 «inio reclire solitum." The hm.l of the Italian Greeks stands first for wheaten 
 bread and beef; that of Syracuse for pork and cheese (Hermippus ap. 
 Athena, i, p. 27): al,out the rx. .llent wheat of Italy, compare Sophokles, 
 Triptolcui. Fra^on. 529, cd. Dindoif. 
 
 Theophrastus dwelU upon the excellence of the land near Mylai, in the 
 territory of the Sicilian Mcssene, which produced, according to him, thirty- 
 fold (IIi>t riant, ix, 2, 8, j.. 2.VJ, ed. Schneid.) This affords some measure 
 of comparison, both for the real excellence of the ancient Sybaritan territory, 
 and for the estimation in which it was held ; its estimated produce being 
 more than three times that of Myla\ 
 
 See in Mr. Keppel Craven's Tour in the Southern Provinces of Naples 
 (chapter* xi. xii, pp. 212-218), the description of the rich and productive 
 plain of the Krathis (in the midst of which stood the ancient Sybaris), 
 extending: about s xteen miles from Cassano to Cori«,'liano, and about twelve 
 miles from the former town to the sea. Compare, also, the picture of the 
 same country, in the work by a French officer, referred to in a previous note, 
 •* Calabria durin<r a Military liesidence of three years," London, 1832, Letter 
 
 »xii, pp. 2l9-22ti. 
 
 Hekatajus (c. 39, ed. Klausen) calls Cosa. — Ko^raa, tt^A^c Olvurpuv ^ 
 ItecToyaca. Cosa is considered to be identical, seemingly on good grounds, 
 with the modern Cassano (Caesar, Bell. Civ. iii, 22) : assuming this to b« 
 correct, there muHt have been an (Enotrian dependent town within eighl 
 iBiles of the ancient city of Sybaris. 
 
 ♦ s* 
 
 FERTILE LANDS OF SYBARIS, 
 
 897 
 
 inexhaustible capacities may exist in vain. That luxury, which 
 Grecian moralists denounced in the leading Sybarites, between 
 560 and 510 b. c, was the result of acquisitions vigorously and 
 industriously pushed, and kept together by an orderly central 
 force, duniig a century and a half that the colony had existed. 
 Though the Troezenian settlers who formed a portion of the orig- 
 inal emigrants had been expelled when the Achneans became 
 more numerous, yet we are told that, on the whole, Sybaris was 
 liberal in the reception of new emigrants to the citizenship, i and 
 tlut this was one of the causes of its remarkable advance. Of 
 these additional comers, we may presume that many went to form 
 its colonies on the Mediterraneim sea, and some to settle both 
 among its four dependent inland nations, and its twenty-live sub- 
 ject towns. Five thousand horsemen, we are told, clothed in 
 showy attire, formed the processional march in certain Sybaritic 
 festivals, — a number which is best appreciated by comparison 
 with the fact, that the knights or horsemen of Athens, in her best 
 days, did not exceed twelve hundred. The Sybaritic horses, if 
 we are to believe a story purporting to come from Aristotle, 
 were taught to move at the sound of the flute ; and the garments 
 of these wealthy citizens were composed of the finest wool from 
 Miletus in lonia,^ — the Tarentine wool not having then acquired 
 the distinguished renown which it possessed five centuries after- 
 wards towards the close of the Roman republic. Next to the 
 great abundance of home produce, — corn, wine, oil, flax, cattle, 
 fish, timber, etc., — the fact next in importance which we hear 
 respecting Sybaris is, the great traffic carried on with Miletus ; 
 these two cities were more intimately and affectionately connect- 
 ed together than any two Hellenic cities within the knowledge of 
 Herodotus.3 The tie between Tarentum and Knidus was also 
 of a very intimate character,^ so that the great intercourse, per- 
 sonal as well as commercial, between the Asiatic and the Italic 
 
 * Diodor xii, 9. * Athenacus, xii, j). 519. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 2L Respecting tie great abundance of .^^hip-timber iu tht 
 ierritory of the Italicts (Italian Greeks), see Thucyd. vi, 90; vii, 2.5. 
 
 The pitch from the pine forests in the Sila was also abundant and 
 brated (Strabo, vi, p. 261). 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 138. 
 
 
898 
 
 inSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 ! 
 
 Greeks, appear^? as a marked fact in the history of the giith 
 century before the Christian era. 
 
 In this res]>ect, as well as in several others, the Hellenic worlj 
 wears a very different aspect in 560 b. c. from that which it as- 
 fumed a century afterwards, and in which it is best known to 
 modem readers. At the former period, the Ionic and Italic 
 Greeks are the great ornaments of the Hellenic name, and car- 
 ried on a more lucrative trade with each other, than either of 
 lh«'m maintained with Greece proper ; wliich both of them re 
 co:rnized as their mother-country, though without admitting any- 
 lliing in the nature of established headsliip. The military jx)wer 
 of Sparta is indeed at this time great and preponderant in Pelo- 
 ponnesus, but she has no navy, and she is only just essaying 
 her strength, not without reluctance, in ultramarine interference. 
 After the lapse of a century, these circumstances change ma- 
 terially. The independence of the Asiatic Greeks is destroyed, 
 and the power of the Italic Greeks is greatly broken ; while 
 Sj>arta and Athens not only become the prominent and leading 
 Hellenic states, but constitute themselves centres of action for the 
 kfsser cities, to a degree previously unknown. 
 
 It was during the height of their prosperity, seemingly, in the 
 sixth century B. c, that the Italian Greeks either acquired for, or 
 bestowed u{M>n, their territory the appellation of Magna Graecia, 
 which at that time it well deserved ; for not only were Sybaris 
 and Kroton then the greatest Grecian cities situated near togeth- 
 er, but the whole peninsula of Calabria may be considered as at- 
 tached to the (jrrecian cities on the coast. The native CEnotrians 
 and Sikels occupying the interior had become Hellenized, or 
 6emi-Helleniz(?d, with a mixture of Greeks among them, — com- 
 mon subjects of these great cities ; so that the whole extent of 
 the Calabrian peninsula, within the line which joins Sybaris with 
 Poseidonia, might then be fairly considered as Hellenic territory. 
 Sybaris maintained much traffic with the Tuscan towns in the 
 Mediterranean, and the communication between Greece and 
 Rome, across the Calabrian isthmus,' may perhaps have been 
 easier during tlie time of the Roman kings — whose expulsion 
 was nearly contemporaneous with the ruin of Sybaris — than it 
 
 * Athenaeus, xii, p. 519. 
 
 KBOTON. 
 
 399 
 
 became during the first two centuries of the Roman republic 
 But all these relations underwent a complete change after the 
 breaking up of the power of Sybaris in 510 b. c, and the 
 gnwlual march of the Oscan population from middle Italy towards 
 the south. Cumae was overwhelmed by the Samnites, Poseido- 
 nia by the Lucanians ; who became possessed not only of these 
 
 maritime cities, but also of the whole inland territory now 
 
 called the Basilicata, with part of the hither Calabria — across 
 from Poseidonia to the neighborhood of the gulf of Tarentum : 
 while the Bruttians, — a mixture of outlying Lucanians with the 
 Greco-CEnotrian population once subject to Sybaris, speaking 
 both Greek and Oscan,' —became masters of the inland moun- 
 tains in the farther Calabria, from Consentia nearly to the Sici- 
 lian strait. It was thus that the ruin of Sybaris, combined with 
 the spread of the Lucanians and Bruttians, deprived the Italian 
 Greeks of that inland territory which they had enjoyed in the 
 ?ixth century b. c, and restricted them to the neighborhood of 
 the coast. To understand the extraordinary power and prosper- 
 ity of Sybaris and Kroton, in the sixth century b. c, when th« 
 whole of this inland territory was subject to them, and before the 
 rise of the Lucanians, and Bruttians, and when the name Mag- 
 na GraBcia was first given, it is necessary to glance by contrast at 
 these latter periods ; more especially since the name still contin- 
 aed to be applied by the Romans to Italian Greece after the 
 contraction of territory had rendered it less appropriate. 
 
 Of Krotdn at this early period of its power and prosperity we 
 know even less than of Sybaris. It stood distinguished both for 
 the number of its citizens who received prizes at the Olympic 
 games, and for the excellence of its surgeons or physicians. And 
 what may seem more surprising, if we consider the extreme 
 present insalubrity of the site upon which it stood, it was in an- 
 cient times proverbially healthy,2 which was not so much the case 
 with the more fertile Sybaris. Respecting all these cities of 
 Italian Greeks, the same remark is apphcable as was before made 
 in reference to the Sicilian Greeks, — that the intermixture of 
 the native population sensibly affected both their character and 
 habits. We have no information respecting their government 
 
 * Festas, v, bilingues Brutales. 
 
 ■ Strabc, vi, p. 263. 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 ) 
 
 ] 
 
 i 
 
400 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 !^ 
 
 ? 
 
 /-; 
 
 during this earlj period of prosperity, except that we find men- 
 tion at Kroton, as at the Epizephyrian Lokri, of a senate of one 
 tliousand members, yet not excluding occasionally the ekklesia, or 
 general assembly.* Probably, the steady increase of their domin- 
 ion in the interior, and the facility of providing maintenance for 
 new j)opulati<m, tended much to make their political systems, 
 whatever they may have been, work in a satisfactory manner. 
 1 he attempt of Pythagoras and his followers to constitute them- 
 uelves a ruling faction as well as a philosophical sect, will be re- 
 counted in a subsequent chapter. The proceedings connected 
 with that attempt will show that there was considerable analogy 
 and sympathy between the various cities of Italian Greece, so as 
 to render them liable to be acted on by the same causes. But 
 though the festivals of the Lakinian Here, administered by the 
 Krotoniates, formed from early times a common point of religious 
 assemblage to all,'^ — yet the attempts to institute periodical meet- 
 ings of deputi<;s, for the express purpose of maintaining political 
 harmony, did not begin until after the destruction of Sybaris, nor 
 were they ever more than partially successful. 
 
 One other city, the most distant colony founded by Greeks in 
 t'le western rei^ions, yet remains to be mentioned ; and we can do 
 no more than mention it, since we have no facts to make up its 
 history. Massalia, the modem Marseilles, was founded by the 
 Ionic Phoka?ans in the 45th Olympiad, about 597 b. c.,3 at the 
 time when Sybaris and Kroton were near the maximum of their 
 power, — when the peninsula of Calabria was all Hellenic, and 
 when Cumae also had not yet been visited by those calamities 
 which brought; about its decline. So much Hellenism in the 
 eouth of Italy doubtless facilitated the western progress of the 
 
 ' Jamblichus, Vit. Pythagor. c. 9, p. 33 ; c. 35, p. 210. 
 
 ' Athenaeus, xii, 541. 
 
 ^ This date depends upon Tiraaeus (as quoted by Skymnus Chins, 210) 
 and Solinns ; there seems no reason for distrusting it, though Thucydides 
 (i, 13) and Isoki-ates (Archidamns, p. 316) seem to conceive Massalia ai 
 founded by the Fhokaeans about 60 years later, when Ionia was cr nquered by 
 Harpagus (see Itmckner, Hfstoria Reip. Massiliensinm, sect. 2, p. 9, Kaoal 
 Bochette, llistoire des Colonies Grecqnes, vol. iii, pp. 405-413, who, how* 
 trer, puts the arrival of the Fhoksans, in these regions and at Tart^w 
 too aarlj). 
 
 rOUTICAL CHARACTER OF THE MASSAUOT». 
 
 40) 
 
 adventurous Phoka^an mariner. It would appear that Massalia 
 was founded by amicable fusion of Phokrean colonists with the 
 indigenous Gauls, if we may judge by the romantic legend of the 
 Protiadae, a Massaliotic family or gens existing in the time of 
 Aristotle. Euxenus, a Phokiuan merchant, had contracted 
 friendly relations with Nanus, a native chief in the south of 
 Gaul, and was invited to the festival in which the latter was about 
 lo celebrate the marriage of his daughter Petta. According to 
 tiie custom of the country, the maiden was to choose for herself 
 a husband among the guests, by presenting him with a cup: 
 through accident, or by i)reference, Petta presented it to Euxe- 
 nus, and became his wife. Protis of Massalia, the offspring of 
 this marriage, W£is the primitive ancestor and eponym of the 
 Protiadae. According to another story respecting the origin of 
 the same gens, Protis was himself the Phokiean leader who mar 
 ried Gyptis, daughter of Nannus king of the Segobrigian Gauls.^ 
 Of the history of Massalia we know nothing, nor does it ap- 
 l)ear to have been connected with the general movement of the 
 Grecian world. We learn generally that the Massaliots admin- 
 istered their affairs with discretion as weU as with unanimity, and 
 exhibited in their private habits an exemplary modesty, — that 
 although preserving alliance witii the people of the interior, they 
 were scrupulously vigilant in guarding their city against surprise, 
 permitting no armed strangers to enter, — that they introduced 
 the culture of vines and olives, and gradually extended the Greek 
 alphabet, language, and civilization among the neighboring 
 Gauls, — that they possessed and fortified many positions along 
 the coast of the gulf of Lyons, and founded five colonies alont' 
 the eastern coast of Spain, — that their government was oligar- 
 chical, consisting of a perpetual senate of six hundred pera.ns, 
 yet admitting occasionally new members from without, and a 
 small council of tifteen members, — that the Delphinian Apollo 
 and the Ephesian Artemis were their chief deities, planted as 
 (Guardians of their outlying posts, and transmitted to their colo- 
 Eies.2 Although it is common to represent a deliberate march 
 
 * Aristotle, MaaaaX/wrwv 7ro?uTeia, ap. Athenaeum, xiii, p. 576; Justin, 
 Xiiii, 3. Plutarch (Solon, c 2) seems to follow the same sto-y as Justin. 
 » Strabo. iv, pp. 179-182: Justin, xliii, 4-5; Cicero, Pro Flacco. 26- U 
 
 TOL. III. 
 
 yfino. 
 
 \\ 
 
 ,9 -~ 
 
it 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 and steady supremacy of the governing few, with contented 
 obedience on the part of the many, as the characteristic of Dorian 
 ■tates, and mutability not less than disturbance as the prevalent 
 tendency in Ionia, — yet there is no Grecian community to whom 
 Hie former attributes are more pointedly ascribed than the Ionic 
 Messalia. The commerce of the Massaliots appears to liave 
 keen extensive, and their armed maritime force sufficiently pow- 
 erful to defend it against the aggressions of Carthage, — tbeif 
 principal enemy in the western Mediterranean. 
 
 
 /< 
 \ 
 
 { 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 GRECIAN COLONIES IN AND NEAR EPIRUS. 
 
 Om the eastern side of the Ionian sea were situated the Gre 
 cian colonies of Korkyro, Leukas, Anaktorium, Ambrakia, Apol 
 
 Ionia, and Epidamnus. 
 
 Among these, by far the most distinguished, for situation, for 
 •realth, and for power, was Kork yra, — now known as Corfu, tlie 
 •ame name belonging, as in antiquity, both to the town and the 
 island, which is separated from the coast of Epirus by a strait 
 ▼arying from two to seven miles in breadth. Korkyra was found- 
 ed by The Corinthians, at the same time, we are told, as Syracuse. 
 Chersikrates, a Bacchiad,is said to have accompanied Archias on 
 his voyage from Corinth to Syracuse, and to have been left with 
 a company of emi},T^nts on the island of Korkyra, where he 
 founded a settlement.' What inhabitants he found there, or how 
 
 father appears from Aristotle (Polit v, 5, 2 ; vi 4-5) that the senate was 
 originally a body completely close, which gave rise to discontent on the part 
 of wealthy men not included in it: a mitigation took place by admitting 
 iQto it, occjJ^ionallv, m.;n selected from the latter. 
 
 Some anthors seem to have accused the Massaliots of luxurious and 
 •ffeminate habits (see Athenaeus, xii, p. 523). 
 
 » Strabo, vi, p. 269 : compare Timaeos, Fragm. 49, ed. GoUer j Fr. 5a, ed 
 
 IMdot 
 
 KORKYRA. 
 
 403 
 
 ehey were dealt with, we cannot clearly make out. The islac J 
 was generally conceived in antiquity as the residence of the Ho- 
 meric Pha3akians, and it is to this fact that Thucydides ascribes 
 in part the eminence of the Korkyra^an marine. > According to 
 another story, some Eretrians from Euboia had settled there, and 
 were compelled to retire. A third statement represents the Li- 
 burnians-^ as the prior inhabitants, — and this perhaps is the 
 most probable, since the Liburnians were an enterprising, mari- 
 time, piratical race, who long continued to occupy the more north- 
 erly islands in the Adriatic along the Illyrian and Dalmatian 
 coast. That maritime activity, and number of ships, both war- 
 like and commercial, which we find at an early date among the 
 Korkyraeans, and in which they stand distinguished from the 
 Italian and Sicilian Greeks, may be plausibly attributed to their 
 partial fusion with preexisting Liburnians ; for the ante-llellenic 
 natives of Magna Grjecia and Sicily, as has been already no- 
 ticed, were as unpractised at sea as the Liburnians were 
 expert. 
 
 At the time when the Corinthians were about to colonize Sic- 
 ily, it was natural that they should also wish to plant a settlement 
 at Korkyra, which was a post of great importance for facilitating 
 the voyage from Peloponnesus to Italy, and was farther conveni- 
 ent for traffic with Epirus, at that period altogether non-Hellenic 
 Their choice of a site was fully justified by the j)rosperity and 
 power of the colony, which, however, though sometimes in com- 
 bination with the mother-city, was more frequently alienated from 
 her and hostile, and continued so from an early period throughout 
 most part of the three centuries from 700-400 b. c.3 Perhaps 
 also Molykreia and Chalkis,< on the south-western coast of jEto- 
 lia, not far from the mouth of the Corinthian gulf, may have 
 been founded by Corinth at a date hardly less early than Kor- 
 kyra. 
 
 It was at Corinth that the earliest improvements in Greek 
 ehip-building, and the first constructijn of the trireme or war- 
 
 » Thucyd. i, 25. 
 
 * Strabo, /. c; Plutirch, Quaest. Griec. c. 11 ; a different fable in Conau 
 Karrat. 3, ap. Photiuir. Cod. 86. 
 " Herodot. iii. 49. * Thucyd. i, 108 ; iii, lOi. 
 
 /, 
 
404 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 '»■- 
 
 If 
 
 
 ' I 
 
 ship with a triple bank of oars, was introduced, and it was prob- 
 ably from Corinth that this 'mprovcment passed to Korkyra, as 
 it did to Samos. In early times, the Korkyraean navy was in a 
 condition to cope with the Corinthian, and the most ancient naval 
 battle known to Thucydides^ was one between these two states, 
 in 6G4 B. c. As far as we can make out, it appears that Korky- 
 ra maintained her independence, not only during the government 
 of the Bacchiads at Corinth, but also throughout the long reign 
 of the despot Kypselus, and a part of the reign of his son Peri- 
 ander. But towards the close of this latter reign, we find Kor- 
 kyra subject to Corinth ; and the barbarous treatment inflicted 
 by Periander, in revenge for the death of his son, upon three 
 hundred Korkyraean youths, has already been recounted in a 
 former chapter.*^ After the death of Periander, the island seems 
 to have regain(jd its independence, but we are left without any 
 particulars res[)ecting it, from about 585 b. c. down to the period 
 shortly preceding the invasion of Greece by Xerxes, — nearly a 
 century. At this later epoch the Korkyra?ans possessed a naval 
 force hardly inferior to any state in Greece. The expulsion of 
 Kypselids froai Corinth, and the reestablishment of the previous 
 oligarchy, or something like it, does not seem to have reconciled 
 the KorkyraaiH to their mother-city ; for it was immediately pre- 
 vious to the Peloponnesian war that the Corinthians preferred 
 the bitterest complaints against them,3 of setting at nought those 
 obligations which a colony was generally understood to be oblig 
 ed to render. No place of honor was reserved at the public 
 festivals of Korkyra for Corinthian visitors, nor was it the prac 
 tice to offer to the latter the first taste of the victims sacrificed, — 
 observances which were doubtless respectfully fulfilled at Ambra 
 kia and Leuka.- . Nevertheless, the Korkyneans had taken part 
 conjointly with the Corinthians in favor of Syracuse, when that 
 city was in imminent danger of being conquered and enslaved by 
 Hippokrates* despot of Gela (about 492 b. c), — an incident 
 which shows that they were not destitute of generous sympathy 
 with sister stai:es, and leads us to imagine that their aUenation 
 
 » , — r 
 
 » Thucyd. i, 13. 
 
 ■ Herodot. iii, 41J-51 : see above, chap, ix, p. 42 of this volame. 
 
 • Thucjd. i, 25-37. < Hcrodct. vii. 15S 
 
 13 Vol. 3 
 
 A»IBRAKIA, LEUKAS, ANAKTOBIUM. 
 
 40JI 
 
 from Corinth was as much the fault of the mother-city as theii 
 
 The grounds of the quarrel were, probably, jealousies of 
 trade, - especially trade with the Epirotic and lUyrian tribes, 
 (therein both were to a great degree rivals. Safe at home, and 
 mdustrious in the culture of their fertile island, the Korkyraeans 
 were able to furnish wine and oil to the Epirots on the mam-land 
 in exchanc^e for the cattle, sheep, hides, and wool of the latter, — 
 more easily and cheaply than the Corinthian merchant. And for 
 the purposes of this trade, they had possessed themselves of a 
 neriEa or strip of the main-land immediately on the other side 
 of the intervening strait, where they fortified various posts for 
 the protection of their property.' The Corinthians were person- 
 ally more popular among the Epirots than the Korkyra^ans ;2 but 
 it was not until long after the foundation of Korkyra that they 
 established their first settlement on the mam-land, — Ambrakia, 
 on the north side of the Ambrakiotic gulf, and near the mouth ot 
 the river Arachthus. It was during the reign of Kypselus, and 
 under the guidance of his son Gorgus, that this settlement was 
 planted, which afterwards became populous and considerable. 
 We know nothing respecting its growth, and we hear only of a 
 despot named Periander as ruling in it, probably related to the 
 despot of the same name '^t Corinth.3 Periander of Ambrak.a 
 waJ overthrown by a private conspiracy, provoked by his own 
 brutality, and warmly seconded by the citizens, who hved con- 
 fcCuntly afterwards under a popular government.4 
 
 Notwithstanding the long-continued dissensions between Kor- 
 kv^ and Corinth, it appears that four considerable settlemoits 
 on Ihis same line of coa^t were formed by the joint enterprise of 
 |K>th,-Leukas and Anaktorium, to the south of the mouth of 
 the Ambrakiotic gulf, - and Apollonia and Epidamnus, both m 
 the territory of the Illyrians, at some distance to the north of the 
 \kfokeraunian promontory. In the settlement of the two lat.er. 
 
 » Thucyd. iii, 85. These fortifications are probably alluded to also i, 
 4S-54. V k "^^^ kKELVQV Ti ;f<jpiwv. 
 
 ^ sSvii*p. 825, X, p. 452 ; Skyma Chi 458 . E»onl BocheWe. HiH 
 leg Colon. Grecq. vol. iii p. 294. 
 * Aristot PoUt. V, 3, 5 , V, 8, 9. 
 
 / 
 
 if 
 
 >» • 
 
 \ 
 
 • It 
 
I, 
 
 'I 
 
 406 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the Korkyracans seem to have been the principals, in that ot 
 
 the two former, they were only auxiliaries ; and it i)roba!)Iv did 
 not suit their fwliry to favor the estabHshment of any new 
 colony on the internicdiate coast op})Oe^ite to their own island, be- 
 tween the promontdiy and the ^nilf above mentioned. Leu'kas, 
 Anaktorium, and Ambrakia are all referred to the agency of 
 Kypselus the Corinthian, and the tranquillity which Aristotle 
 ascribes to his reign may be in part ascribed to the new liomes 
 thus provided for poor or discontented Corinthian citizens. 
 Leukas was situated near the mo<iern Santa Maura : the present 
 island was originally a peninsula, and continued to be so until 
 the time of Thucydides ; but in the succeeding half-century, tlie 
 Leukadians cut through the isthmus, and erected a bridge across 
 the narrow strait connecting them with the main-land.'' It had 
 been once an Akamanian settlement, named Epileukadii, the in- 
 habitants of which falling into civil dissension, invited one thousand 
 Corinthian settlers to join them. The new-comers choosing their 
 opportunity for attack, slew or expelled those who had i°ivited 
 them, made themsehes masters of the place with its lands, and 
 converted it from an Akarnanian village into a Grecian town.i 
 Anaktorium wa^ situated a short distance within the mouth of 
 theAmbrakian gulf, —founded, like Leukas, upon Akarnanian 
 ijoil, and with a mixture of Akarnanian inhabitants, by colonists 
 
 ' About Leukas, see Strabo, x, p. 452 ; Skylax, p. 34 ; Steph. Byz. v, 
 
 Strabo seems to ascribe the cutting through of the isthmus to the original 
 colonists. But Thucydides speaks of this isthmus in the plainest manner 
 (iii, 81), and of the Corinthian ships of war as being transported across it. 
 The Dioryktos, or intervenino^ factitious canal, was always shallow, only 
 deep enough for boats, se that ships of war had still to be carried across by 
 hand or machinery (Polyb. v, 5): both Plutarch (De Serd Num. Vind. p. 
 5.')2) and Pliny treat Leukadia as having again become a peninsula, from the 
 •ecnmulation of sand (H. N. iv, 1): compare Livy, xxxiii, 17. 
 
 Mannert (Geograph. der Gr. und Rom. part viii, b. 1, p. 72) accepts the 
 •tatement of Strabo, and thinks that the Dioryktos had already been dag 
 before the time of Thuc}diJes. But it seems more reasonable to suppose 
 that Strabo was misinformed as to the date, and that the cut took place «t 
 •ome time between the age of Thucydides and that of Skylax. 
 
 Boeckh (ad Corp. Inscriptt. Gr. t. i, p. 58) and W. C. Muller (De Coiry 
 *»or Republic^, Getting 1835, p. 18) agre* with Mannert 
 
 APOLLOXIA AND EPIDAMUS. 
 
 407 
 
 under the auspices of Kypselus or Periander. In both these 
 establishments Korkyraean settlers participated ;' in both, also, 
 the usual religious feelings connected with Grecian emigration were 
 displayed by the neighborhood of a venerated temple of A|)ollo 
 overlocking the sea, — A])ollo Aktius near Anaktorium, and 
 Apollo Le'jkatas near Leukas.^ 
 
 Between these three settlements, — Ambrakia, Anaktorium, and 
 LeukaS) — and the Akarnanian population of the interior, there 
 were standing feelings of hostility ; perhaps arising out of the 
 violence which had marked the tirst foundation of Leukas. 
 The Corinthians, though popular with the Epirots, had been in- 
 different or unsuccessful in conciliating the Akarnanians. It 
 rather seems, indeed, that the Akarnanians were averse to the 
 presence or neighborhood of any powerful seaport ; for in spite 
 of their hatred towards the Ambrakiots, they were more appre- 
 hensive of seeing Ambrtdiia in the hands of the Athenians than 
 in that of its own native citizens.^ 
 
 The two colonies, north of the Akrokeraunian promontory, and 
 on the coast-land of the Illyrian tribes, — Apollonia and Eju- 
 damnus, — were formed chiefly by the Korkyraeans, yet with 
 some aid and a portion of the settlers from Corinth, as well as 
 from other Doric towns. Especially it is to be noticed, Lliat 
 the oekist was a Corinthian and a Herakleid, Phalius the son of 
 Eratokleides, — for, according to the usual practice of Greece, 
 whenever a city, itself a colony, founded a sub-colony, the oekist 
 of the latter was borrowed from the mother-city of the former.* 
 Hence the Corinthians acquired a partial right of control and in- 
 teiference in the affairs of Epidamnus, which we shall find here- 
 after leading to important practical consequences. Epidamnus, 
 — better known under its subsequent name Dyrrhachium, — was 
 situated on an isthmus on or near the territory of the Illyrian 
 tribe called Taulantii, and is said to have been settled about 627 
 
 • Skymn. Chius, 458 ; Thucyd. i, 55; Plutarch, Themistokles, c. 24. 
 
 ' Thucyd. i, 46 ; Strabo, x, p. 452 Before 220 B. c, the temple of Apolb 
 Aktius, which in the time of Thucydides belonged to Anaktorium, had come 
 to belong to the Akarnanians ; it seems, also, that the town itself had been 
 merged in the Akamanian league, for Polybius docs not mention it separate!* 
 (Polyb. iv, 63). 
 
 • Thucvd. iii 94 95. 115. * Thucyd. i. 24-26. 
 
 i' 
 
408 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 APOLLONIA AND EPIDAMNUS. 
 
 409 
 
 / 
 
 hi 
 
 B. c. Apollonia, jf which the god Apollo himself seem 3 to have 
 been recognized as oekist,i was founded under similar ciicum- 
 8tances, during the reign of Periander of Corinth, on a maritime 
 plain both extensi\e and fertile, near the river Aous, two days' 
 journey south of Epidamnus. 
 
 Both the one and the other of these two cities seem to have 
 flourished, and to have received accession of inhabitants from 
 Tri[)hylia in Peloponnesus, when that country was subdued by 
 the Eleians. Respecting Epidamnus, especially, we are told that 
 it ac(iuired great weuhh and population during the century pre- 
 ceding the Pelopoiinesian war.2 A few allusions wliich we find 
 in Aristotle, too brief to afford much instruction, lead us to sup- 
 pose that the govenmients of both began by being close oligar- 
 chies, under the raanagement of the primitive leaders of the 
 colony, — that in It.pidamnus, the artisans and tradesmen in the 
 town were considered in the light of slaves belonging to the 
 public, — but tliat in process of time, seemingly somewhat be- 
 fore the Peloponnesian war, intestine dissensions broke up this 
 olfgaichy,3 substituted a periodical senate, with occasional public 
 
 ' The rhetor Aristeiies pays a similar compliment to Kyzikus, in his 
 PaiiCgyrical Address at that city, — the god Apollo had founded it person 
 •II) and directly himself, not through any human oekist, as was the case with 
 •ther colonies (Aristeides, Adyog rrepl Kv^ikov, Or. xvi, p. 414; vol. i, p, 384, 
 Dindorf ). 
 
 *Thucyd. i, 24. eyevero fxeyuXr} kqI ^oAt;«vi?pw7rof ; Strabo, vii, p. 316, 
 viii, p. 357; Steph. By:'., v, ' AnolAuvia \ Platiirch, De Sera Numin. Vind. 
 p. 553 ; Pausan. v, 22, 2. 
 
 Respecting the j)lain near the site of the ancient Apollonia, Colonel Leake 
 ohserves : " The cultivation of this noble plain, capable of supplying grain 
 to all lUyria and Epinis, with an abundance of other productions, is con- 
 fined to a few patches of maize near the villages," /Travels in Northern 
 Greece, vol. i, ch. vii, p. 367.) Compare c. ii, p. 70. 
 
 The country surrounding Durazzo (the ancient Epidamnus) is described 
 by another excellent observer as highly attractive, though now unhealthy. 
 See the valuable topographical work, "Albanicn, Rumclicn, und die 
 Oesterreichisch-mootenegrinische Griinze," von Dr. Joseph Mailer (Prag. 
 1844), p. 62, 
 
 •Thucyd. 1, 25; Aristot Polit. ii, 4, 13; iu, 11, 1 ; iv, 3, 8; v, 1, 6 j 
 T,3,4. 
 
 The allusions of the philosopher are so brief, as to convey little or no 
 knowledge : see O. Mullcr, Dorians, b. iii. 9, 6 j Tittmann, Griech. StaatA 
 <T»rfas8. p. 491. 
 
 iu!semblies, in place of the permanent phylarchs, 01 chiefs of 
 ti-ibes, and thus introduced a form more or less democratical, yet 
 Btill retaining the original single-headed archon. The Epidam- 
 nian government wiis liberal in the admission of metics, or resi- 
 dent aliens, — a fact which renders it probable that the alleged 
 public slavery of artisans in that town was a statjs carrying 
 with it none of the hardships of actual slavery. . It was through 
 an authorized selling agent, or poletes, that all traffic between 
 Epidamnus and the neighboring Illyrians was carried on, — indi- 
 ridual dealing with them being interdicted.' Apollonia was io 
 one respect pointedly distinguished from Epidamnus, since she 
 excluded metics, or resident strangers, with a degree of rigor 
 hardly inferior to Sparta. These few facts are all that we are 
 permitted to hear respecting colonies both important in them- 
 selves and interesting as they brought the Greeks into connection 
 with distant people and regions. 
 
 The six colonies just named, — Korkyra, Ambrakia, Anakto- 
 rium, Leukas, A])orionia, and Epidamnus, — form an aggregate 
 lying apart from the rest of the Hellenic name, and connected 
 with each other, though not always maintained in harmony, by 
 analogy of race and position, as well as by their common origi- 
 nal from Corinth. That the commerce which the Corinthian 
 merchants carried on with them, and through them with the 
 tribes in the interior, was lucrative, we can have no doubt ; and 
 Leukas and Ambrakia continued for a long time to be not merely 
 faithful allies, but servile imitators, of their mother-city. The 
 commerce of Korkyra is also represented as very extensive, and 
 carried even to the northern extremity of the Ionic gulf. It 
 would seem that they were the first Greeks to open a trade and 
 to establish various settlements on the Illyrian and Dalmatian 
 coasts, a's the Phokaeans were the first to carry their traffic along 
 the Adriatic coast of Italy : the jars and pottery of Korkyra en- 
 joyed great reputation throughout all parts of the gulf.2 The 
 
 ' Plutarch, Qnast. Graec. p. 297, c. 29; AIWslw, V. H. xiii, 16. 
 
 » W. C. Mullen De Corcyi aior. Kcpub. ch 3, pp. 60-63 ; Aristot. Mirab 
 Ausc. c. 104 , Hesychins, v, KefKvpalot d^Kpopth ; Ilcrodot. i, 145. 
 
 The story givcB in the ab^^ve passage of the T. cudo-Ari»itotle is to bt 
 token in connective.! with thj succeeding chapter of the same work (105), 
 irherein the statement, largely credited in antiquity, is given, that the rivef 
 
 VOL. in. 1ft 
 
410 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 general trade of the island, and the encouragement for its ship 
 ping, must probably have been greater during the sixth century 
 B. c, while the cities of Magna Gnecia were at the maximum 
 of their prosperity, than in the ensuing century, when they had 
 comparatively declined. Kor can we doubt that the visitors and 
 presents to the oracle of Dodona in Epirus, which was distant 
 two days* journey on landing from Korkyra, and the importance 
 of which was most sensible during the earlier periods of Grecian 
 history, contributed to swell the tratlic of the Korkyneans. 
 
 It is worthy of notice that the monetary system established at 
 Korkyra was thorouglily Grecian and Corinthian, graduated on 
 the usual scale of obols, drachms, minue, and talents, without in- 
 cluding any of thoso native Italian or Sicilian elements which 
 were adopted by the cities in Magna Gra^cia and Sicily. The 
 type of the Corinthian coins seems also to have passed to those 
 of Leukas and Arabi-akia.' 
 
 Of the islands of Z^ikynthus and Kephallenia, Zante and 
 Cephalonia, we hear very little: of Ithakii, so interesting from 
 the story of the Odyssey, we have have no historical information 
 at all. The inhabitants of Zakynthus were Achseans from 
 Peloponnesus : Kephallenia was distributed among four separate 
 city govemmer ts.'-J Neither of these islands play any part in 
 Grecian history until the time of the raaiitime empire of Athens, 
 after the Persian war. 
 
 Danube forked at a certain point of its course into two streams, one flowing 
 into the Adriatic, the other into the Euxine. 
 
 See the Inscriptions No. 1838 and No. 1845, in the collection of Boeckh, 
 •nd Boeckh's Metrolojjio, vii, 8, p. 97. Respecting the Corinthian colDaga 
 oar information is confased and imperfect. 
 • Thncyd u. 30-^. 
 
 AKARNANIANS. - EPIROTS. 
 
 411 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 AKARNANIANS. - EPIROTS. 
 
 Soma notice must be taken of those barbarous or non-Hel 
 lenic nations who formed the immediate neighbors of Hellas, west 
 of the range of Pindus, and north of that range wliich connects 
 Pindus with Olympus, — as well as of those other tribes, who, 
 though lying more remote from Hellas proper, were yet brought 
 into relations of traffic or hostility witli the Hellenic colonies. 
 
 Between the Greeks and these foreign neighbors, the Akarna- 
 nians, of whom I have already spoken briefly in my preceding 
 volume, form the proper link of transition. They occupied the 
 territory between the river Acheloiis, the Ionian sea, and the Ani- 
 brakian gulf: they were Greeks, and admitted as such to contend 
 at the Pan-Hellenic games,i yet they were also closely connected 
 with the Amphiloohi and Agraii, who were not Greeks. In man- 
 ners, sentiments, and intelligence, they were half-Hellenic and 
 half-Epirotic, — like the -^Etolians and the Ozolian Lokrians. 
 Even down to the time of Thucydides, these nations were subdi- 
 vided into numerous petty communities, lived in unfortified vil- 
 lages, were frecjuently in the habit of plundering each other, and 
 never permitted themselves to be unarmed: incase of attack, 
 they withdrew ilieir families and their scanty stock, chiefly cattle, 
 to the shelter of difficult mountains or marshes. They were for 
 the most part light-armed, few among them being trained to the 
 panoply of the Grecian hoplite ; but they were both brave and 
 skilful in their own mode of warfare, and the sling, in the hands 
 of the Akarnanian, was a weapon of formidable efficiency .2 
 
 Notwithstanding this state of disunion and insecurity, however, 
 the Akarnanians maintained a loose political league among them* 
 
 * See Aristot. Fragm. irepl JloTnTeid'Vf ed. Neumann: Fragm. 2, *XKapv9 
 
 * Pollux, i, 150 ; Thucyd. ii, 81 
 
412 
 
 HTSTOKr OF GREECK. 
 
 gelves, and a hill n(;ar the Amphilochian Argos, on the shores of 
 the Ambrakian gulf, had been fortified to serve as a judgmen^ 
 Beat, or place of m«jeting, for the settlement of disputes. And . 
 seems that Stratus and Oi^niadae had both become fortified .ii 
 some measure towards the commencement of the Peloponnesian 
 war. The former, the most considerable township in Akarnania, 
 was situated on the Achelous, rather high up its course, — the 
 latter was at the mouth of the river, and was rendered dilficult 
 of Approach by its inundations.^ Astakus, Solium, Falterus, and 
 Alyzia, lay on or near tlie coast of the Ionian sea, between 
 CEniadaj and Leukas ; Fhytia, Koronta, Medeon, Limna^a, and 
 Thyrium, were between the southern shore of the Ambrakian 
 gult and the river Achelous. 
 
 The Akamanians ai»[)ear to have produced many pro{>hets. 
 They traced up their mythical ancestry, as well as that of their 
 Deiglibors the Amphilochians, to the most renowned prophetic 
 family among the Grecian heroes, — Amphiaraus, with his sons 
 Alkmaon and Amphilochus : Akaman, the eponymous hero of 
 the nation, and other eponymous heroes of the sepai-ate towns, 
 were supposed to be the sons of Alkmojon.s They are spoken 
 of, together witli tlie iEtoHans, as mere rude shepherds, by the 
 lyric poet Alkman, and so they seem to have continued with little 
 alteration until tht beginning of the Peloponnesian war, when 
 we hear of them, for the first time, as allies of Athens and as 
 bitter enemies of the Corinthian colonies on their coast. The 
 contact of those colonies, however, and the large spread of Akar- 
 nanian accessible (!oast, could not fail to f)ruduce some effect in 
 socializing and improving the j)eople. And it is probable that 
 this effect would have been more sensibly felt, had not the Akar- 
 nanians been kept back by the fatal neighborhood of the ^tolians, 
 with whom they were in perpetual feud, — a people the most 
 unprincipled and unimprovable of all who bore the Hellenic 
 
 ' Thucyd. ii, 102 j iii, 105 
 
 ' Thucyd. ii, 68-102 ; Stephan. Eyz. v. «t»oiruu. bee the discussion in 
 Brrabo (x, p. 462), whether the Akiirnanians did, or did nut, take part in thfl 
 ••xpedition against Tn)y ; Ephc-us niaiiitaininj; the nc«;ative, and stringing 
 together a plausible narrative to explain icliy they did not. The time cam* 
 rhen rlic Akarnanians gained creuit with Rome lor this suppos^cd absence (rf 
 
 %\. 
 
 n'-^. 
 
 EPIROTS. 
 
 418 
 
 name, and whose habitual faithlessness stood in marked contrasi 
 with the rectitude and steadfastness of the Akarnanian character.' 
 It was in order to strengthen the Akarnanians against these ra- 
 pacious neighbors, that the Macedonian Kassander urged them 
 to consolidate their numerous small townships into a few con- 
 siderable cities. Partially, at least, the recommendation was 
 carried into effect, so as to aggrandize Stratus and one or two 
 other towns ; but in the succeeding century, the town of Leukas 
 seems to lose its original position as a separate Corinthian colo- 
 ny, and to pass into that of chief city of Akamania,^ which is 
 lost only by the sentence of the Roman conquerors. 
 
 Passinty over the borders of Akarnania, we find small nations 
 or tribes not considered as Greeks, but known, from the fourth 
 century B. c. downwards, under the common name of Epirots. 
 This word signifies properly, inhabitants of a continent, as ojv 
 posed to those of an island or a peninsula, and came only gradually 
 to be applied by the Greeks as their comprehensive denomination 
 to designate all those diverse tribes, between the Ambrakian 
 gidf on the south and west, Pindus on the east, and the Illyrians 
 und Macedonians to the north and north-east. Of these Ej)irots, 
 the principal were, — the Chaonians, Thesprotians, Kassopians, 
 and Molossians,3 who occupied the country inland as well as 
 maritime along the Ionian sea, from the Akrokeraunian moun- 
 tains to the borders of Ambrakia in the interior of the Ambra- 
 kian gulf. The Agrceans and Amphilochians dwelt eastward of 
 the iLt-mentioned gulf, bordering upon Akarnania : the Atha- 
 manes, the Tymph^ans, and the Talares, lived along the western 
 skirts and high range of Pindus. Among these various tribes it 
 is difficult to discriminate the semi-Hellenic from the non-HeUen- 
 ic • for Herodotus considers both Molossians and Thesprotians aa 
 Hellenic, — and the oracle of Dodona, as well as the Nekyoman- 
 teion, or holy cavern for evoking the dead, of Acheron, were 
 both in the territory of the Thesprotians, and both, in the time 
 of the historian, Hellenic. Thucydides, on the other hand, treats 
 both Molossians and Thesprotians as barbaric, and Strabo sajf 
 
 » Polyb. iv, 30 : compare also ix, 40. 
 
 « Diodor. xix, 67 ; Livy, xxxiii, 16-17 ; xlv, 3!. 
 
 ' Skylax, c 2S-32. 
 
414 
 
 fflSTORY UF GREECE. 
 
 Ihe same respecting the Athamanes, whom Plato numbers afl 
 Hellenic' As the Epirots were confounded with the Hellenic 
 communities towards the south, so they become blended with the 
 Macedonian and lllyrian tribes towards the north. The Macedo- 
 nian Orestae, north of the Cambunian mountains and east of Pin- 
 dus, are called by Hekataeus a Molossian tribe ; and Strabo even 
 extends the designation Epirots to the lUyriiin Paroraiia and 
 Atintanes, west of Pindus, nearly on the same parallel of lati- 
 tude with the Orestae.2 It must be remembered, as observed 
 above, that while the designations Illyrians and Macedonians are 
 properly ethnical, given to denote analogies of language, habits, 
 feeling, and supposed origin, and probably acknowledged by the 
 people themselves, — the name Epirots belongs to the Greek 
 language, is given by Greeks alone, and marks nothing except 
 residence on a particular portion of the continent. Theopompus 
 (about 340 b. c.) reckoned fourteen distinct Ej)irotic nations, 
 among whom the Molossians and Chaonians were the principal. 
 It is possible that some of these may have been semi-Illyriaii, 
 others semi-Macedonian, though all were comprised by him 
 under the common name Epirots.^ 
 
 Of these various tribes, who dwelt between the Akrokerau 
 flian promontory and the Ambrakian gulf, some, at least, appear 
 to have been of ethnical kindred with portions of the inhabitants 
 of southern Italy. There were Chaonians on the gulf of Taren- 
 tum, before the arrival of the Greek settlers, as well as in Epirus; 
 we do not find the name Tiiesprotians in Italy, but we find there 
 a town named Pandosia, and a river named Acheron, the same as 
 
 •Herodot. ii, 56, v, 92, vi, 127; Thucyd. iL 80; Plato, Minos, p. 315. 
 The Chaonians and Thesprotians were separated by the river Thyamis 
 (now Kalamas), — Thucyd. i, 46; Stephanas Byz. v, Tpma. 
 
 * Hekataus, Fr. 77, ed. Klausen ; Stralx), vii, p. 326 ; Appian. Iliyric. c. 7. 
 In the time of ThacvdidSs, the Molossi and the Atint mes were under the 
 same king (ii, 80). The name "HTreipurai, with Thn< ydides, means only 
 inhabitants of a continent, — ol ravrr) rjireipCoTat (i, 47; ii, 80) includes 
 .^tolians and Akamanians (iii, 94-95), and is applied to inhabitants of 
 Thrace (iv, 105). 
 
 Epirus is used in its special sense to«!esignate the territory west of Pindug 
 fcy Xcnophon, Hellen. vi, 1, 7. 
 
 Compare Manncrt, Geographic der Griech. und Romer, part vii, bock S 
 p. 883. ^ Snubo, vii, p. 324.. 
 
 EPIROTS. - MACEDONIANS. 
 
 415 
 
 umoTi^ the Epirotic Thesprotians : the ubiquitous name Pelasgiaq 
 is connected both with one and with the other. This ethnical 
 aflinity, remote or near, between CEnotrians and Epirots, which 
 we must accept as a fact without being able to follow it into 
 iotail, consists at the same time with the circumstance, — that 
 both seem to have been susceptible of Hellenic influences to an 
 unusual degree, and to have been moulded, with comparatively 
 little diffi2ulty, into an imperfect Hellenism, like that of the 
 4^tolians and Akanianians. The Thesprotian conquerors of 
 Thessaly passed in this manner into Thessalian Greeks, and the 
 Amphilochians who inhabited Argos on the Ambrakian gulf, 
 were Hellenized by the reception of Greeks from Ambrakia, 
 though the Amphilochians situated without the city, still re- 
 mained barbarous in the time of Thucydides i^ a century after- 
 wards, probably, they would be Hellenized, like the rest, by a 
 longer continuance of the same influences, — as happened with 
 the Sikels in Sicily. 
 
 To assiffn the names and exact boundaries of the different 
 tribes inhabiting Epirus, as they stood in the seventh and sixth 
 centuries b. c, at the time when the western stream of Grecian 
 colonization was going on, and when the newly established Am- 
 brakiots must have been engaged in subjugating or expelling the 
 prior occupants nf their valuable site, — is out of our power. 
 We have no inf-^rmation prior to Herodotus and Thucydides, 
 and that which thsy tell us cannot be safely applied to a time 
 either much earlier or much later than their own. That there 
 was great analogy between the inland Macedonians and the Epi 
 rots, from Mount Bermius across the continent to the coast oppo- 
 site Korkyra, in military equipment, in the fashion of cutting the 
 hair, and in speech, we are apprized by a valuable passage of 
 Strabo ; who farther tells us, that many of the tribes spoke two 
 different languages,2 — a fact which at least, proves very close 
 
 > Thucyd. ii, 68. 
 
 • Strabo, vii, p. 324. In these same regions, under the Turkish govern 
 ment of the present day, such is the mixture and intercourse of Greelu^ 
 Albanians, Bulgaric Sclavonians, Wallachians, and Turks, that most of tht 
 natives find themselves under the necessity of acqiuring two, sometime! 
 three, languages : see Dr. Grisebach, Reise durch Rumelieo and nach BnasMl 
 ch. xii, vol. ii, p. 68. 
 
41 a 
 
 HISTORV OF viKEECE. 
 
 intercommunion, if not a double origin and incorporation. Wars, 
 or voluntary secessions and new alliances, would alter the boun- 
 daries and relative situation of the various tribes. And this 
 would be the more easily effected, as all Epirus, even in the fourth 
 century b. C, ^^ns parcelled out among an aggregate of villages, 
 without any gi-eat central cities; so that the severance of a vil- 
 lage from the Molossian union, and its junction with the Thespro- 
 tian (abstracting from the feelings with which it might bp 
 connected), would make little practical difference in its conditior 
 or proceedings. The gradual increase of Hellenic intlucr. e 
 tended partially to centralize this political dispersion, enlarging 
 some of the villages into small towns by the incorporation ot 
 some of their neighbors ; and in this way, probably, were tormcd 
 the seventy p:i)irotic cities which were destroyed and given up to 
 plunder on the same day, by Paulus Emilius and tlie Ronuin 
 senate. The Tliesprotian Ephyre is called a city, even by Thu- 
 cydides.J Nevertheless, the situation was unfavorable to the 
 formation of considerable cities, eitlier on the coast or in the 
 interior, since the physical character of the territory is an exag- 
 geration of that of Greece, — almost throughout, wild, rugged, and 
 mountainous. The valleys and low grounds, though frequent, are 
 never extensive. — while the soil is rarely suited, in any contin- 
 uous spaces, for the cultivation of corn : insomuch that the flour 
 for the consumption of Janina, at the present day, is transported 
 from Thessaly over the lofty ridge of Pindus, by means of asses 
 and mules f^ while the fruits and vegetables are brought from 
 Arta, the territory of Ambrakia. Epirus is essentially a pastoral 
 country : its cattle as well as its shepherds and shepherd's dogs 
 were celebrated throughout all antiquity ; and its population then, 
 as now, found divided village residence the most suitable to their 
 means and occupations. In spite of tliis natural tendency, how- 
 ever, Hellenic influences were to a certain extent efficacious, and 
 
 ' Livy, xlv, 34 ; Thucyd. i. 47. I'hanote. in the more northerly part of 
 Epirus, is cailcd only a'castellum, though it was an important military post 
 
 (Livy, xliii, 21). 
 
 » Leake's Travels in Northern Greece, ch. xxxviii, vol. iv, pp. 207, 21C, 
 M3; ch. ix, Tol. i, p. 411 ; Cyprien Robert, Les Slaves de Turquie, book it, 
 
 vh 2 
 
 ' Bm>aerac ^oC^Pig i^oxoi - Tindar. Nom. iv, 81 ; Caesar, Bell. Civil, iii, 4ff 
 
 TERRITORY OF EPIRUS. 
 
 417 
 
 it is to them that we are to ascribe the formation of towns lik« 
 Phoenike, — an in'and city a few miles removed from the sea, in 
 a latitude somewhat north of the northernmost point of Korkyra, 
 which Polybius notices as the most flourishing' of the Epirotic 
 cities at the time when it was plundered by the Illyrians in 23C 
 B. c. Passaron, the ancient spot where the Moloesian kings were 
 accustomed on their accession to take their coronation-oath, had 
 grown into a considerable town, in this last century before tb« 
 Roman conquest ; while Tekmon, Phylake, and Horreum also 
 became known to us at the same period.2 But the most impor- 
 tant step which those kings made towards aggrandizement, was 
 the acquisition of the Greek city of Ambrakia, which became the 
 capital of the kingdom of Pyrrhus, and thus gave to him the 
 only site suitable for a concentrated population which the 
 country afforded. 
 
 If we follow the coast of Epirus from the entrance of the Am- 
 brakian gulf northward to the Akrokeraunian promontory, we 
 shall find it discouraging to Grecian colonization. There are 
 none of those extensive maritime plains which the gulf of Taren- 
 tum exhibits on its coiist, and which sustained the grandeur of 
 Sybaris and Kroton. Throughout the whole extent, the moun- 
 tain-region, abrupt and affording little cultivable soil, approaches 
 near to the sea,^ and the level ground, wherever it exists, must be 
 commanded and possessed, as it is now, by villagers on Iiill-sites, 
 always difficult of attack and often inexpugnable. From hence, 
 and from the neighborhood of Korkyra, — herself well situated 
 for traffic with Epirus, and jealous of neighboring rivals, — we 
 may understand why the Grecian emigrants omitted this unprofit- 
 able tract, and passed on either northward to the maritime plains 
 of Illyria, or westward to Italy. In the time of Herodotus and 
 Thucydides, there seems to have been no Hellenic settlement 
 between Ambrakia and ApoUonia. The harbor called Glykya 
 Limen, and the neighboring valley and plain, the most consider- 
 able in Epirus, next to that of Ambrakia, near the junction of 
 
 * Polybius, ii, 5, 8. 
 
 ■ Plutarch, Pyrrh. c. i ; Livy, xlv, 26. 
 
 * See the description of the geographical fcRtures of Epinis in Bond, La 
 Turquie en Europe, Gr^ographie G^nerale, vol. i, p. 57. 
 
 VOL. III. 18* 27wi. 
 
418 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the lake and river of Acheron with the sea, were possessed by 
 the Thesprotian town of Ei>hyre, situated on a neighboring emi- 
 nence ; perhaps also, in part, by the ancient Thesprotian town of 
 Pandosia, so poiniedly connected, both in Italy and Epirus, with 
 the river Acheron.i Amidst the almost inexpugnable mountains 
 «nd gorges which mark the course of that Thesprotian river, was 
 situated the raem(»rable recent community of Suli, »— -h held in 
 dependence many surrounding villages in the lower grounds and 
 in the plain, — the counterpart of primitive Epirotic rulers in 
 situation, in fierceness, and in indolence, but far superior to them 
 m energetic brav(!ry and endurance. It ai)pears that after the 
 time of Thucydides, certain Greek settlers must have found ad- 
 mission into the Epirotic towns in this region. For Demosthenesa 
 mentions Pandosia, Buchetia, and Elaea, as settlements from Elis, 
 which Philip of Macedon conquered and handed over to his 
 brother-in-law the king of the Molossian Epirots ; and Strabo tells 
 us that the name of Ephyre had been changed to Kichyrus, which 
 8pi)ears to imply an accession of new inhabitants. 
 
 Both the Chaonians and Thesprotians appear, in the time of 
 Thucydides, as having no kings : there was a privileged kingly 
 race, but the presiding chief was changed from year to year. 
 The Molossians, however, had a line of kings, succeeding from 
 father to son, which professed to trace its descent through lifieen 
 generations downward, from Achilles and Neoptolemus to Tha- 
 rypas about the year 400 b. c. ; they were thus a scion of the 
 great iEakid race. Admetus, the Molossian king to whom The- 
 mistokles presented himself as a suppliant, appears to have lived 
 Id the simplicity of an inland village chief But Arrybas, his 
 
 ' See the account f>f this territory in Colonel Leake's Travels in Northern 
 Greece vol. i. ch. v ; his journey from Janina, throu-h the district of Soli 
 and the course of the Acheron, to the plain of Glyky and the Acherusiwi 
 Iftke and marshes near the sea. Compare, also, vol. iv, ch. xxxv, p. 73. 
 
 «To the ancieiu sites (observes Colonel Leake) which are so numerous in 
 the great vallejs watered by the lower Acheron, the lower Thyamis, and 
 Iheir tributaries, it i.^ a mortifying disappointment to the geographer not to 
 ke able to apply a single name with absolute certainty." 
 
 The number of these sites affords one among many presumptions tbH 
 Mch mast have been individually inconsiderable. 
 
 « Demosthenes, 1).' Haloneso, ch. 7, p. 84 R ; Strabo, vii, p. 324. 
 
 CHAONIANS, THESPROTIANS, MOLOSSIANS. 
 
 419 
 
 Bon or grandson, is said to have been educated at Athens, and t« 
 have introduced improved social regularity into his native coun- 
 try : while the subsequent kings both imitated the ambition and 
 received the aid of Philip of Macedon, extending their dominion' 
 over a large portion of the other Epirots : even in the time of 
 Skylax, they covered a large inland territory, though their por- 
 tion of sea-coast was confined. From the narrative of Thucydi- 
 des, we gather that all the Epirots, though held together by no 
 political union, were yet willing enough to combine for puri)Osei 
 of aggression and plunder. The Chaonians enjoyed a higher 
 military reputation than the rest, — but the account which Thu- 
 cydides gives of their expedition against Akarnania exhibits a 
 blind, reckless, boastful impetuosity, which contrasts strikingly 
 with the methodical and orderly march of their Greek allies and 
 companions.2 We may here notice, that the Kassopaeans, whom 
 Skylax places in the south-western portion of Epirus between the 
 Acheron and the Ambrakian gulf, are not noticed either by He- 
 rodotus or Thucydides : the former, indeed, conceives the river 
 Acheron and the Thesprotians as conterminous with the Ambra- 
 kiotic territory. 
 
 To collect the few particulars known respecting these ruder com- 
 munities adjacent to Greece, is a task indispensable for the just 
 comprehension of the Grecian world, and for the appreciation of 
 the Greeks themselves, by comparison or contrast with their con- 
 temporaries. Indispensable as it is, however, it can hardly be 
 rendered in itself interesting to the reader, whose patience I have 
 to bespeak by assuring him that the facts hereafter to be recounted 
 of Grecian history would be pnly, 'half understood .without thia 
 preliminary survey of the lands .a^ouo/i. : \ .* ' : 1"'. ; . .* 
 
 * Skylax, c. 32; Pausanias, i, 11 , JTastii}, ?c\ii, 5.^ * * ** •**..* * • *. .' 
 That the Arrhybas of Justin is tile §a?Tlf;8J} tu<^ S^arjj^ .cT\Pau^aiu9ii,<-M 
 
 perhaps, also, the same as Tfiaryps in ThticydiHes* who was a minor at tbt 
 beginning of the Peloponnesiaa war, r- see.ma grobfible. 
 
 • ThBcjd. ii, 81. 
 
Vol. 3 
 
 14 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0025984705 
 
 664- 
 
 5 
 
 ' f : 
 
 i 
 
 OCT 2 5 1937 
 
 .*???!^ffr 
 
Vii- 
 
 
 
 .■,'5.1. 'J • ;. 
 
 i'vi 
 
 f* f 
 
 '*'< 
 
 
 
 :.^P 
 
 iS-i^V 
 
 
 M 
 
 s 
 
 
 
 
 
 He, 
 
 
 r; 
 
 
 
 
 1 , > 
 
 
 ■'* 'if*!*- kT . 
 
 
 *',■*»'*. "'1 1»* 
 
 I* to 
 
 
 
 
 '^•, . 8- 
 
 ': K 
 
.*•)« 
 
 ,t t <> ■• i 
 
 >v. 
 
 
 * , 4 
 
 *-j<^ j 
 
 
 
 V** *, 
 
 b 
 
ii 
 
 Columbia ©nibersiitp 
 
 intJjeCitpof^etogorb 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIVEN BY 
 
 T(obert S. Freed man 
 
 I 
 
 / 
 
i 
 
 II. 
 
 GREECE 
 
 1, LEGEM DAR-Y GREECE 
 
 < > » " 
 
 GRECIAN HISTORY' TO THE REIGN 
 Or PEISiSTRATUS AT .ATHENS 
 
 » * 
 
 BY 
 
 George Grote, Esq. 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION 
 
 ILL USTRA TED 
 
 VOLUME IV 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 PETER FENELON COLLIER & SON 
 
 MCM 
 
 CRCKSrs ON THE FUNERAL PYRE 
 
 i^'roHtis^iece^ Greece^ vol. Jour. 
 
 M4M -^^ ' 
 
 '^'"^•=n- S FTT^mMAM 
 
t * • 
 
 CONTENTS, 
 
 VOL. IV. 
 
 PART II. 
 
 009ff9UATI0N OF HISTORICAL GHiiiKOti. 
 
 nOBSRT*. WBBEJDMAN BEQUESTT 
 
 CHAPTKR XXV. 
 
 ILLTRIANH, MACKI»ONIAN8, rJSONIANS. 
 
 Drf fe pe iit tribes of Illyrians. — Conflicts and contrast of lllvrians with 
 Greeks. — Kpidamnas and Apolloriia in relation to the )llynanH. — 
 Early Macedonians. — Their orij^inul Beats. — (icneral view of the coun- 
 try which they occupied — eastward of I'indus and iSkardus, — Distri* 
 botion and tribes of the Ma<'e<ionians. — Maecdunians round K(ies.sa — 
 the leading {)ortion of the nation. — ricrians and Bottia'ans — originsiUy 
 placed on the Thermaie ^ulf, between the Macedonians and the sea.— 
 Faeonians. — Arp'ian (Jreeks who estal»Iished the dynasty of I^Mcssn — 
 Perdikkas. — Talents for cnrnrnand manifested by (ireek chieftains orer 
 barbaric tribes. — A^f^randi7,« inrnt of the dynasty of Edessa — conquests 
 as far as the Thermaic gulf, as well as over the interior Macedonians. *«> 
 Friendship between king Ainyntas and the Peisistratids iP^f^ l—lf 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 ^%4 
 
 THBACIANS AND OKKEK COLONIB8 IN THRAOEB. 
 
 Thraclans — their numbers and aljode. — Many distinct tribes, yet little <fi* 
 ▼ersity of character. — Their cruelty, rapacity, and military efficiency.— 
 Thracian worship and character Asiatic. — Karly date of the Chalkidio 
 colonies in Thrace. — Methonfi the earliest — about 720 B.O.— Several 
 other small settlements on the Chalkidic peninsula and its three project- 
 ing headlands. — Chalkidic peninsula — Mount Athos. — Coloniea fai 
 Palling, or the westernmost of the three headlands. — In Sithonia, or 
 the middle headland. — In the headland of Athos — Akanthos, Stageira, 
 etc — Greek settlements east of the Strymdn in Thrace. — Island of 
 Thasos. — Thracian Chersonesus. — Perinthus, Selymbria, and Byzan- 
 tium. — Grecian settlements on the Euxine, south of the Danube. — 
 Lemnos and Imbros. , 20-9S 
 
CONTENrs. 
 
 CHAPTER XXViI 
 
 KYULNL. 
 
 BAltKA. — HESPER DE8. 
 
 First »oyajj:es of rlu (jrccks lo Libya. — Foundation of KyTen§. — I Dundcd 
 hy IJattus from tUe isluuil of Thura. — Colony tirsl settled in the island 
 -it' IMiittu — afiriwards nnioved to Kyrene. — Situation of K}Tene. — 
 t'ertiiity, })ro<lii«< , and pros|>erity. — LU»yan tribes near Kyrene. — Ex- 
 tensive doniinioM of Kyrene and Barka over the Libyans. — Connection 
 of the Greek colonies with the Nomads of Libya. — Manners of the Libyan 
 jNoniads. — Mixture oftineks and Libyan inhabitants at Kyrene. — Dyn* 
 u.sty of liattu>, Arkesilau.s, Battu.s the Second, at Kyrenfi — fresh colonists 
 from (ireecr. — I»i-;(mtes with tlie native Libyans. — Arkesilaus the Sec- 
 ond, i)rinee of Kyrene — misfortunes of the city — foundation of Barka. 
 
 — Battus tilt Third, a lame man — reform by licraonax, who takes away 
 the su|)remf jujwer from t lie Battiads. — New emigration — restoration 
 of the Battiad Arkesilaus the Third. — Oracle limiting the duration of 
 the Battiad dyna>ty — Violences at Kyrene under Arkesilaus the Third. 
 
 — Arkoilaus sends his sul)mission to Kambyses, king of Persia. — Per 
 sian ixpedition from P^gypt against Barka — Pheretime, mother of 
 Arke>ilans. — Capture of Barka by perfidy — cruelty of Pheretime. — 
 Battus the Fourth and Arkesilaus the Fourth — final extinction of tha 
 dynasty about 460-450 B.C. — Constitution of Demonax not durable. 
 29-49 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 iX-IIELLEVIC FESTIVALS — OLYMPIC, PYTHIAN, NEMEAN, AND ISTHMIAIT. 
 
 > ii\n\ of grouping and unity in the early period of Grecian history. — New 
 causes, tending to favor union, l)egfti after 560 B.C. — no general war 
 iMjtwecn 776 and 560 B.C. known to Thucydides. — Increasing disposition 
 to religious, intellectual, and social union. — Reciprocal admission of 
 cities to the religious festivals of each other. — Early splendor of the 
 Ionic festival at 1 )elos — its decline. — Olympic games — their celebrity 
 and long eontinuance. — Their gradual mcrease — new matches intro- 
 duced. — Olympic festival — the first which passes from a local to a Pan- 
 Hellenie character. — Pythian games, or festival. — Early state and site 
 of Delphi. — Phocian town of Krissa. — Kirrha, the seaport of Krissa. 
 — (irowth of Delfthi and Kirrha — decline of Krissa. — Insolence of the 
 Kirrhajans punished by the Araphiktyons. — First Sacred War, in 595 
 B.C. — Destruction of Kirrha. — Pythian games founded by the Ara- 
 phiktyons. — Nemean and Isthmian games. — Pan- Hellenic character 
 acquired by all the four festivals — 01}Tnpic, Pythian, Nemean, and Isth- 
 mian. — Increased frequentation of the other festivals in most Greek 
 dties. — All other Greek cities, except Sparta, encouraged such visits. — 
 Meet c^ th^e festivals upon the Greek mind. 50"78 
 
 CONTENTa 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 LTRIC POETRY. — THE SEVEN WISE MEN. 
 
 Age and diuMion of the Greek lyric poetry. — Epical age pit ceding tht 
 lyrical. — 'Vider range of subjects for poetry — new metres — enlarged 
 musical scale. — Improvement of the harp by Terpander — of the flaU 
 by Olympus and others. — Archilochus, Kalhnns, Tyrtaeus, and Alkman 
 ---670-600 B.C. — New metres superadded to the Hexameter — Elegiac, 
 Iambic, Trochaic. — Archilochus. — Simonides of Amorgos, Kallinus, 
 Tyrtaeus. — Musical and poetical tendencies at Sparta. — Choric training 
 «— Alkman, Thaletas. — Doric dialect employed in the choric composi* 
 tions. — Arion and Stesichorus — substitution of the professional in 
 place of the popular chorus. — Distribution of the chorus by Stesichomi 
 
 — Strophe — Antistrophe — Epodus. — Alka»us and Sappho. — Gnomic 
 or moralizing poets. — Solon and Theognis. — Subordination of musical 
 and orchestrical accompaniment to the words and meaning. — Seven 
 Wise Men. — They were the first men who acquired an Hellenic reputa- 
 tion, without political genius. — Early manifestation of philosophy — in 
 the form of maxims. — Subsequent growth of dialectics and discussion. 
 
 — Increase of the habit of writing — commencement of prose composi- 
 tions. — First beginnings of Grecian art. — Restricted character of earl/ 
 art, from religious associations. — Monumental ornaments in the cities — 
 begin in the sixth century B.C. — Importance of Grecian art as a meani 
 of Hellenic union 73-101 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 eRECIilN AFFAIRS 
 
 DURING THE GOVERNMENT 
 HIS SONS AT ATHENS. 
 
 OF PEISISTRATUS AMD 
 
 Pcisistratus and his sons at Athens — B.C. 560-510 — uncertain chronology 
 as to Pcisistratus. — State of feeling in Attica at the accession of Pcisis- 
 tratus. — Retirement of Pcisistratus, and stratagem whereby he is rein* 
 stated. — Quarrel of Pcisistratus with the Alkmaeonids — his second retire- 
 ment. — His second and final restoration. — His strong government — 
 mercenaries — purification of Delos. — Mild despotism of Pcisistratus. — 
 His sons Hippias and Hipparchus. — Harmodius and Aristogeiton. — 
 They conspire and kill Hipparchus, B.C. 514. — Strong and lasting senti- 
 ment, coupled with great historical mistake, in the Athenian public — 
 Hippias despot alone — 514-510 B.C. — his cruelty and conscious inse- 
 curity. — Connection of Athens with the Thracian Chersonesus and the 
 Asiatic coast of the Hellespont. — First MiltiadSs — oekist of the Cherso- 
 nese. — Second Miltiades — sent out thither by the Peisistratids. — Pro- 
 ceedings of the exiled Alkmseonids against Hippias. — Conflagration and 
 rebuilding of the Delphian temple. — The Alkmaeonids rebuild the tem- 
 pk with magnificence. — Gratitude of the Delphians towards them — they 
 procure from the oracle directions to Sparta, enjoining the expulsion of 
 Hippias. — Spartan expeditions into Attica. — Expulsion oi Hippias, 
 and liberation of Athens 102*191 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 JONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 •BBCIAN AFFAIRS AFTER HIE EXPULSION OP THE PEI819THATIDS. -* 
 aKVOLHTIOy OF KIJilSTUKNES AND ESTABLISHMENT OF DEMOCRAOf 
 AT ATHENS, 
 
 State of Athens after the expulsion of Hippias. — Opposinj^ party-leaden 
 — Kleisthene3 — Isadoras. — Deraocratical revc iution headed by Kleit* 
 thends. — Rearrangement and extension of tlie political franchise.— 
 Suppression of the four old tribes, and formation of ten new tribes, in- 
 chiding an increased nurater of the population. — Imperfect description 
 of this event in Herodotus — its real bearing. — Grounds of opposition to 
 it in ancient Athenian feeling. — Names of the new tribes — their rela- 
 tion to the demes- — Demes belonging to each tribe usually not adjacent 
 to each other. — Arrangemtmts and functions of the demc. — Solonian 
 constitution preserved, with modifications. — Change of military arrange- 
 ment in the state.— The ten strat^gi, or generals. — The judicial assem- 
 bly of citizens, or Heliaea, subsequently divided into fractions, each judg^ 
 mg separately. — The political assem?)ly, or ekklesia. — Financial ar- 
 rangements. — Senate of Five Hundred. — ekklesiae, or political assem- 
 bly. — Kleisthen6s the real author of the Athenian democracy. — Judicial 
 attributes of the people — their gradual enlargement. — Three points ia 
 Athenian constitntional law, hanging together: — Universal admissibility 
 of citizens to magistracy — choice by lot — reduced functions of the 
 magistrates chosen by lot. — Universal admissibility of citizens to the 
 archonship — not introduced until after the battle of Platae. — Constitu- 
 tion of Klcisthenes retained the Solonian law of exclusion as to individ- 
 ual office. — Difference between that constitution and the political state 
 of Athens after Periklfis. — Senate of Areopagus. — The ostracism. — 
 Weakness of the public force in the Grecian governments. — Past vio- 
 lences of the Athenian nobles. — Necessity of creating a constitntional 
 morality. — Purpose and working of the ostracism. — Securities against 
 its aluise. — Ostracism necessary as a protection to the early democracy 
 
 — afterwards dispensed with. — Ostracism analogous to the exclusion of a 
 known pretender to the thnme in a monarchy. — Effect of the long as- 
 cendency of Perikles, in stnmgthening constitutional morality. — Ostra 
 eisra in other Grecian cities, — Striking effect of the revolution of Kleis- 
 thends on the minds of the citizens.— -Isagoras calls in Kieomenes and 
 the Lacedaemonians against it. — Kieomenes and Isagoras are expelled 
 from Athens. — Recall of Kleisthene* — Athens solicits the alliance of 
 the Persians. — First connection l)etween Athens and Plataea. — Disputes 
 between I'latiea and Thebes — decision of Corinth as arbitrator. — Sec- 
 ond march of Kieomenes against Athens — desenion of his allies. — 
 First appearance of Sparta as acting head oi Peloponnesian allies. — 
 Signal successes of Athens against Boeotians and Chalkidians. — Plan 
 tation of Athenian settlers, or kleruchs, in the temtory of Chalkis. - 
 Distress of the Thebans — they ask assistance from' .^Egina. — The 
 .^inetans make war on Athens. — Preparations at Sparta to attack 
 Athens anew — the Spartan allies are sammoned, together with Hippias. 
 
 — First formal convocation at Sparta — advance of Greece towards a 
 political system. — Proceedings of the convocation — animated protest of 
 Corinth against any interference in ft vor of Hippias — the Spaitan alliet 
 refoae to interfere. — Aversion to sir ^le-headed rule — now predominanl 
 
 bi Greece. — Striking development of Athe:iian energy after the revolo- 
 tion of Kleisthenes — language of Herodotus. — Eflfect of the idea ot 
 theory of democracy in exciting Athenian sentiment. — Patriotism of ai 
 Athenian between 500-400 B.C. — combined with an eager spirit of per. 
 Bonal military exertion and sacrifice. — Diminution of this active senti- 
 ment in the restored democracy after the Thirty Tyrants. . . 126-181 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 mSE OP THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. — CTBU8. 
 
 Btnte of Asia before the rise of the Persian monarchy. — Great power and 
 aUiauces of Croesus. — Rise of Cyrus — uncertainty of his early history. 
 
 Story of Astvages. — Herodotus and Ktesias. — Condition of the native 
 
 Persians at the first rise of Cyrus. — Territory of Iran — between Tigria 
 and Indus. — War between Cyrus and CroBsus. — Croesus tests the oracles 
 
 — triumphant reply from Delphi — munificence of CrcESus to the oracle. 
 
 — Advice given to' him by the oracle. — He solicits the alliance of Spar- 
 ta. — He crosses the Halys and attacks the Persians. — Rapid march of 
 Cyrus to Sardis. — Siege and capture of Sardis. — Crcesus becomes 
 prisoner of Cyrus — how treated. — Remonstrance addressed by Crcesns 
 to the Delphian god. — Successful justification of the oracle. — Fate of 
 Croesus impressive to the Greek mind. — The Moerae, or Fates. — State 
 of the Asiatic Greeks after the conquest of Lydia by Cyrus. — They m>- 
 ply in vain to Sparta for aid. — Cyrus quits Sardis — revolt of the Lydi- 
 ans suppressed. — The Persian general Mazar^s attacks Ionia — the 
 Lydian Paktyas. — Harpagus succeeds Hazards — conquest of Ionia by 
 the Persians. — Fate of Phokaea. — Emigration of the Phokajans 
 vowed by all, executed only by one half. — Phokaean colony first at 
 Alalia, then at Elea. — Proposition of Bias for a Pan-Ionic emigration 
 not adopted. —Entire conquest of Asia Minor by the Persians. 182-208 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 GROWTH OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. 
 
 Conquests of Cyrus in Asia. — His attack of Babylon. — Difficult approach 
 to Babylon — no resistance made to the invaders. — Cvrus distributes 
 the river Gyndes into many channels. — He takes Babylon, by drawing 
 off for a time the waters of the Euphrates. — Babylon left in undimin- 
 ished strength and population. — Cyrus attacks the Massagetae — is de- 
 feated and slain. — Extraordinary stimulus to the Persians- from tha 
 conquests of Cyrus. — Character of the Persians. — Thirst >r foreign 
 conquest among the Persians, for three reigns after Cyrus. — Kamhys^ 
 succeeds his father Cyrus — his invasion of Egypt. — 'Death of Amaais, 
 king of Egypt, at the time when the Persian expedition was preparing — 
 his son Psammenitus succeeds. — ( bnquest of Egypt by Kambvses. — 
 Submirsion of Kyrine and Barka to Kambyses — his projects for con- 
 quering Libya and Ethiopia disappointed. — Insults of Kambys^ to tbf 
 
YIU 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Egrptian reliprion. — Mndnes<? of Kambvfs^s — he puts to death his 
 younger brother, Sinerdis. — Conspiracy of the Ma^'iaii Patizeithes who 
 sets up his brother as kin^ under the name of Smerdis. — Death of Kane 
 bys^s. — Reifjn of the false Smerdis — conspirary of the seven Persian 
 noblemen against liira — he is shiin — Darius succeeds to the throne. — 
 Political bearing; of this conspiracy — Smerdis represents Median pru» 
 ponderance, wliich is ajjain put down by Darius. — Revolt of the Afcdes 
 — suppressed. — Discontents of the satraps. — Revolt of Babylon. — Re- 
 conquered and dismantled by Darius. — (>r;rani/.ation of the i'ersiaii em- 
 pire by Darius. — Twenty satrapies with a tixed iriliute apiHjrtioned to 
 each. — Imposts upon the different satrapies. — Drirani/.ini,'^ tendency of 
 Darius — first imperial coinajje — impenal roads and posts. — Island of 
 8amos — its condition at the accession of Darius. — Polykii;--^ — Poly 
 krat^s breaks with Amasis, kin<; of E^rypt. and allies himself with Karn- 
 bvs^s. — The Samiaii exiles, ex{>elled by Polykrates, apply to Sparta for 
 aid. — The Lacedajmonians attack Samos, but are repulsed. — Attack on 
 Sijthnos by the Saraian exiles. — Prosperity of Polykrates. — He is slain 
 by the Persian satrap ( >r(etes. — Maeaiulrius, lieutenant of Polykrates in 
 Samos — he desires to establish a free government after the death of 
 Polykrates — conduct of the Samians. — Ma^andrius becomes despot. — 
 Contrast between the Athenians and the Samians. — Syloson. brother of 
 Polykrates, lands with a Persian army in ^amos — his history. — Maian- 
 drius agrees to evacuate the island. — Many Persian officers slain — 
 plniif^hter of the Samians — Syloson despot at Samos. — Application of 
 M«andrius to Sparta for aid — refused 2()9-2.)2 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 DEMOKETyE*.. 
 
 DARIl'S INVADES SrYTHIA. 
 
 Conquering dispositions of Darius. — Influence of his wife, Atossa.— 
 Dt^nokedes. the Krotoni«te surgeon — his adventures — he is < arried as 
 a slave to Susa. — He cures Darius, who rewanls him munificently. —• 
 He [)rocures permission f»y artifice, and through the influence of Atoss*, 
 to rcrum to Greece. — Atossa suggests to Darius an expedition against 
 (Jreecc. — Demokedes, with some Persians, is sent to procure information 
 for him. — Voyage of DeniokOdes along the coa>t of Greece — he stays 
 at Kroton — fate of his Persian companions. — Consequences which 
 might have been expected to happen if Darius had then undertaken his 
 expedition against Greece. — Darius marches against Scythia. — His 
 naval force fonued of iVsiatic and insular Greeks. — He directs the 
 Gre»'ks to throw a bridge over the Danube and crosses the river. — He 
 marches into Scythia — narrative of his march impossible and unintelligi- 
 ble, considered as history. — The description of his march is rather to l)e 
 looked upon as a fancy-])i^ture, illustrative of ScAthian warfare. — Poeti- 
 cal grouping of the S ythians and their neighbors by Herodotus. — 
 Strong impression produced upon the imagination of Herodotus by the 
 Scythians, — Orders given by Darius to the lonians at the bridge ovei 
 the Danube. — The lonians are left in guard of the bridge; their conduct 
 when Daritis's return is delayed. — The Ionian despots preserve the 
 bridge and enable Darius to recross the river, as a means of support to 
 Iheir own dominion at home. — Opportunity lost of emancipation from 
 
 CONTENTS. lA 
 
 the Persians — Conquest of Thrace by the Persians as far as the rivm 
 Strymon — Myrkinus near that river given to Histiaeus. — MacedoniaiM 
 and Pajonians are conquered by Megaba? as. — Insolence of the Persian 
 envoys in Macedonia — they are murdered. — Histiajus founds a prosper- 
 ous colony at Myrkinus— Darius sends for him into Asia. — Otana 
 Persian general on the Hellespont — he conquers the Pelasgian popula 
 tion of Lemuos, Imbros, etc. — Lemnos and Imbros captured by tlif 
 A\heuiaus and Miltiades io^—'JaU 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 IONIC RfiYOLT. 
 
 Danus carries Histiaeus to Susa. — Ai)])lication of the banished Hip]>ias to 
 Artaphernes, satrap of Sardis. — State of the island of Naxos — Naxian 
 exiles solicit aid from Aristagoras of Miletus. — Expedition against 
 Naxos, undertaken by Aristagoras with the assistance of Artaphernes 
 flie satrap. — Its failure, through dispute between Aristagoras and the 
 Persian general, Megabates. — Ahirm of iVristagoras — - he determinet 
 to revolt against Persia — instigation to the same effect from His- 
 tiajus. — Revolt of Aristagoras and the Milesians — the despott 
 in the various cities deposed and seized. — Extension of the revolt 
 throughout Asiatic Greece — Aristagoras goes to solicit aid from 
 Sparta. — Refusal of the Spartans to assist him. — Aristagoras appliet 
 to Athens — obtains aid both from Athens and Eretria. — March oi 
 Aristagoras up to Sardis with the Athenian and Eretrian allies - 
 burning of the town — retreat and defeat of these Greeks by the Per- 
 sians.— The Athenians abandon the alliance. — Extension of the revolt 
 to Cyprus and Byzantium. — Phenician fleet called forth by the Persians 
 
 — Persian and Phenician armament sent against Cyprus — the lonians 
 send aid thither — victory of the Persians — they reconquer the island. 
 
 — Successes of the Persians against the revolted coast of Asia Mhior. — 
 Aristagoras loses courage and abandons the country. — Appearance of 
 Histiajus, who had obtained leave of departure from Susa. — Histiaeus is 
 susjiected l»y Artaphernes — flees to Chios. — He attempts in vain to 
 procure adn'iissiou into Miletus — puts himself at the head of a small 
 piratical scpiadron. — Large Persian force assembled, aided by the Pheni- 
 cian fleet, for the siege of Miletus. — The allied Grecian fleet mustered 
 at Lade. — Attempts of the Persians to disunite the allies, by means of 
 the exiled despots. — Want of command and discipline in the Grecian 
 fleet. — Energy of the Phokaean Dionysius — he is allowed to assume the 
 rxjmmand. — Discontent of tlie Grecian crews — they refuse to act under 
 Dionysius. — Contrast of this incapacity of the Ionic crews with the sub- 
 sequent severe discipline of the Athenian seamen. — Disorder and rais- 
 trtist grow up in the fleet — treachery of the Samian captains. — Com- 
 plete victory of the Persian fleet at Lade — ruin of the Ionic fleet — se- 
 vere loss of the Chians. — Voluntary exile and adventures of Dionysius. 
 
 — Siege, capture, and ruin of Miletus by the Persians. — The Phenician 
 fleet reconquers all the coast-towns and islands. — Narrow escape of 
 Miltiades from their pursuit. — Cruelties cf the Persians after the recon- 
 
 3 nest. — Movements and death of Histiitus. — Sympathy and terror of 
 je AtheniaviS at the capture of Miletus — the tragic writer Phrvnichus 
 is fined 280-3IC 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI 
 
 FBOM THE IONIC REYOLT TO THE BATTLE OF MAXATHOH. 
 
 Proceeding's of the satrap Artaphernds after the reconquest of Ionia, — 
 Mardonius comes with an army into Ionia — he puts down the despoti 
 in the Greek cities. — He marches into Thrace and Macedonia — his tleet 
 destroyed by a terrible stoi-m near Mount Athos — he returns into Asia. 
 
 — Island of Thasos — prepares to revolt from the Persians — forced to 
 iubmit. — Preparations of Darius for invading Greece — he sends her- 
 alds round the Grecian towns to demand earth and water — many of 
 them submit. — ^gina among those toi^Tis which submitted — state and 
 relations of this island. — Heralds from Darius are put to death, both at 
 Athens and Sparta. — Eril'octs of this act in throwing Sparta into a state 
 of hostility against Persia. — The Athenians appeal to Sparta, in conse- 
 onence of the medism (or submission to the Persians) of j-Egina. — Interw 
 wrencc of Sparta — her di »tinct acquisition and acceptance of the leader- 
 ship of Greece. — One condition of recognized Spartan leadership was, 
 the extreme weakness of Argos at this moment. — Victorious war of 
 Sparta against Argos. — Destruction of the Argeians by Kleomenes, in 
 the grove of the hero Arj;:u8. — Kleomenes returns without having at- 
 tacked the city of Argos. — He is tried — his peculiar mode of defence 
 
 — acquitted. — Argos unable to interfere with Sparta in the aft'air of 
 .£gina and in her presidential power. — Kleomenes goes to M^tla t« 
 •eize the medizing leaders — resistance made to him, at the instigatioi 
 of his colleague Demaratus. — Demaratus is deposed, and Leotychidef 
 chosen king, by the intrigues of Kleomenes. — Demaratus leaves Sparta 
 and goes to Darius. — Kleomenes and Leotychides go to ^gina, seize 
 ten hostages, and convey them as prisoners to Athens. — Important effect 
 of this proceeding upon the result of the first Persian invasion of Greece. — 
 Assemblage of the vast Persian armament under Datis at Samos. — He 
 crosses the iEgean — carries the islan»i of Naxos without resistance — 
 respects Delos. — He reaches Euboea — siege and capture of Eretria.— 
 Datis lands at Marathon. — Existing condition and character of the 
 Athenians. — Miltiades — his adventures — chosen one of the ten gen- 
 erals in the year in which the Persians landed at Marathon. — Themisto- 
 kl^s and Aristeides. — Miltiades. Aristeides, and perhaps Themistoklls, 
 were now among the ten strategi, or generals, in 490 B.C. — The Athe- 
 nians ask aid from Sparta — delay of the Spartans. — Difference of opin- 
 ion among the ten Athenian generals — five of them recommend an im- 
 mediate battle, the other live are adverse to it. — Urgent instances of 
 Miltiades in favor of an immediate battle — casting-vote of the polemarch 
 detenu ines it. — March of the Athenians to Marathon — the Plataeans 
 spontaneously join them there. — Numbers of the armies.-— Locality of 
 Marathon. — Battle of Mnrathon — rapid charge of Miltiades — defeat 
 of the Persians. — Loss on both sides. — Ulterior plans of the Persians 
 against Athens— party in Attica favorable to them. — liapid march of 
 Miltiades back to Athens on the day of the battle.— The Persians aban- 
 don the enterprise, and ireturn home. — Athens rescued through the 
 ipeedy battle brought on bv Miltiades. — Change of Grecian feeling ai 
 to the Persians — terror which the latter insp red at the time of the battle 
 •f Marathon. — Immense effect of the Marathonian ^ctory on the ferl- 
 ings of the Greeks - - especially of the Athenians. — Who were the 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 tors that invited the Persians to Athens after the battle — false imputatiov 
 on the Alkmieonids. — Supernatural belief connected with the battle — 
 commemorations of it. — Return of Datis to Asia — fate of the Eretriai 
 captives. — Glory of Miltiades — his subsequent conduct — unsucccssfn] 
 expedition against Paros — bad hurt Oi Miltiades. — Disgrace of Miltia* 
 dts on his return. — He is fined — dies of his wound — the fine is paid 
 by his son Kimon. — HetlectiDns on the closing adventures of the life of 
 Miltiades. — Fi.'kleness and ingratitude imputed to the Athenians — Low 
 far they deserve the charge. — Usual temper of the Athenian dikasts in 
 estimating previous ser\'ices. — Tendency of eminent Greeks to be cor- 
 rupted by success. — In what sense it is apparently true that fickleness 
 was an attribute of the Athenian democracy 31 1-378 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII 
 
 IONIC PHILOSOPHERS. — PTTUAGOR.VS. 
 
 KROTON AXD 8TBARIS. 
 
 Phalaris despot of Agrigentum. — Thales. — Tonic philosophers — not* 
 school or succession. — Step in philosophy commenced by Thal^'s. — 
 Vast problems with scanty means of solution. — One cause of the v<*rii 
 of skepticism which nins through Grecian philosophy. — Thalfis — pri- 
 meval element of water, or the fluid. — Anaximandcr. — Problem of the 
 One and the Many — the Permanent and the Variable. — Xenophanes — 
 bis doctrine the opposite of that of Anaximandcr. — The Eleatic school, 
 Parmenides and Zeno, springing from Xenophands — their dialectics ~ 
 their great influence on Cirocian speculation. — Pherekydes. — History 
 of Pythagora.s. — His character and doctrines. — Pythagoras more a 
 missionary and schoolmaster than a politician — his political efficiency 
 exaggerated by later witnesses. — His ethical training — probably not 
 applied to all the members of his order. — Decline and subsequent reno- 
 vation of the Pythagorean order. — Pythagoras not merely a borrower, 
 but an original and ascendent mind. — He passes from Samos to Kroton. 
 — State of Kroton — oligarcliical government — excellent gymnastic 
 training and medical skill. — Rapid and wonderfnl effects said to have 
 been produced by the exhortations of Pythagoras. — He forms a power- 
 ful club, or society, consisting of three hundred men taken from the 
 wealthy classes at Kroton. — Political influen<e of Pythagoras — was an 
 indirect result of the constitution of the order. — Causes which led to 
 the subversion of the Pythagorean order. — Violences which accompanied 
 its subversion. — The Pythagorean order is reduced to a religious and 
 philosophical sect, in which character it contiuTies. — War between S>'l>- 
 aris and Kroton. — Defeat of the Sybarites, and destruction of their 
 city, partly through the aid of the Spartan prince Dorieus. — Sensation 
 excited in the Hellenic world by the destruction of Sybaris. — Gradual 
 decline of the Greek power in Italy. — Contradictory statements and ar 
 g^ments respecting the presence of Dorieus. — Herodotus does not men 
 tion the Pythagoreans, when he alludes to the war between Sybaris and 
 Kroton. ^Charondas, lawgiver of Katana, Naxos, Zankl^ Rhegium.etc. 
 378-411 
 
) 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 GREECE 
 
 VOL. IV. 
 
 Frontispiece — Croesus on the Funeral Pyre 
 
 Death of Socrates 
 
 The Return of the 10,000 under Xenophon 
 Aristoteles and his Pupil, Alexander . 
 
 . 
 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PART n. 
 
 CONTINUATION OF HISTORICAL GREECE. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 ILLYRIANS, MACEDONIANS, P.F.ONTAXS. 
 
 Northward of the tribes called Epirotic lay those more nu- 
 merous and widely extended tribes who bore the general nam€ 
 of Illyrians; bounded on the west by the Adriatic, on the east by 
 the mountain-range of Skardus, the northern continuati^ui of Pin- 
 dus, — and thus covering what is now called Middle and T pper Al- 
 bania, together with the more northerly mountains of Montenegro, 
 Herzegovina, and Bosnia. Their limits to the north and north-ea-t 
 cannot be assigned, but the Dardani and Autariatie must have 
 readied to (he north-east of Skardus and even east of the Ser- 
 vian plain of Kossovo ; while along the Adriatic coast, Sky lax 
 extends the race so far nortiiward as to include Dalmatia, treating 
 the Liburnians and Istrians beyond them as not lUyrian : yet Ap- 
 pian and others consider the Liburnians and Istrians as Illyrian, 
 and Herodotus even includes under that name the Eneti, or Ven- 
 eti, at the extremity of the Adriatic gulf.i The Bulini, accwrd- 
 
 ' Ih'ro<lot. i, 196; Skylax, c. 19-27; Appian, Illyric. c. 2, 4, 8. 
 
 The g^eog:raphy of the countries occupied in ancient times by the Illyri- 
 ans, Macedonians, Paeonians, Thracians, etc., and now possessed by a great 
 diversity of races, among whom the Turks and Albanians retain the prim 
 
 VOL. IV. 1 loC 
 
A HISTORY OF (KEECE. 
 
 log to Skylax, were the northernmost Illjrian tribe: the Amantini, 
 immediately northward of the Ki»iroLic Chaonians, were the 
 
 itive barbarism wllliout mitigation, is still verj imperfectlj understood, 
 though the researches of Colonel Leake, of Boue, of (irisebacli, and othen 
 (especially the valuable travels of the latter), have of late thrown much 
 Bghl upon it. How much our knowledge is extended in this direction, may 
 be seen by comparing the map pretixed to Mannert's Geographic, or to O. 
 Miillor's Dissertation on the Macedonians, with that in Bou^s Travels, 
 lint the extreme deJiciency of the maps, even as they now stand, is emj.hat- 
 icaliy noticed by Bou^ himself (see his Critique des Cartes de la Turquic in 
 the fourth volume of his Voyage),— by Paul Joseph Schaflarik, the learned 
 historian of the S..lavonic race, in the i>reface attached by him to Dr 
 Joseph Miiller's Topographical Account of Albania, — and by Uriscbach, 
 who in his surveys, taken from the summits of the mountains Peristcri and 
 Ljubatrin, found the map diifering at every step from the bearings which 
 presented themselves to his eye. It is only since Bond and Grisebach that 
 the idea has been completely dismissed, derived originally from Strabo, of » 
 straight line of mountains {ev^da ypafinv, Strabo, lib. vii, Fragm. 3) run- 
 ning across from the Adriatic to the Enxine, and sending forth other lateral 
 chains in a direction neariy southeriy. The mountains of Turkey in 
 Kurope, when examined with the stock of geological science which M 
 Viquesnel (the companion of Bou^) and Dr. Grisebach bring to the task 
 are found to belong to systems very ditferent, and to present evidences ot 
 conditions of formation often quite independent of each other. 
 
 The thirteenth chapter of Grisebach's Travels presents the best account 
 which has yet been given of the chain of Skardus and Pmdus : he has been 
 the first to prove clearly, that the Ljubatrin, which immediately overhangs 
 the plain of Kossoto at the southern border of Servia and Bosnia, is the 
 north-eastern extremity of a chain of mountains reaching southward to th* 
 frontiers of ^tolia, in a direction not very wide of N-S^ — with the smgk 
 interruption (tirst Irought to view by Colonel Leake) of the Klissoura of 
 Devol, — a complete gap, where the river Devol, rising on the eastern side, 
 crosses the chain and joins the Apsus, or Beratino, on the western, — (it is 
 remarkable that both in the map of Bou^ and in that annexed to Dr. Joseph 
 Mailer's Topographical Description of Albania, the river Devol is made to 
 •om the Genussus, or Skoumi, considerably north of the Apsus, though 
 Colonel Leake's map gives the correct course.) In Grisebach's nomenclature 
 Skardus is made to reach from the Ljubatrin as its north-eastern extremity, 
 ionth-westward and southward as far as the Klissoura of Devol: south 
 of that point Pindus commences, in a continuation, however, of the same 
 
 axis. 
 
 In reference to the seats of the ancient Illyrians anl Macedonians 
 Grisebach has ma*ie another observation of great importance (vol. ii, p 
 1«1). Between tlie north-eastern extremity. Mount Ljubatrin, and th« 
 KliMoaia of DeTo!, there are in the mis^ and continaoos chain of Ska» 
 
 I I 
 
 ILLYBLVNS, MACEDONIANS, P^ONIANS. 
 
 southernmost. Among the southern Illyrian tribes are to be 
 numbered the Taulantii, — originally the possessors, aflciwardi 
 the immediate neighbors, of the territory on which Epidaranut 
 was founded. The ancient geographer Hekat^usi (about 500 
 
 ius (above seven thousand feet high) only two passes fit for an army to 
 cross : one near the northern extremity of the chain, over which Grisebach 
 himself crossed, from Kalkandele to Prisdren, a very high oo/, not less than 
 five thousand feet above the level of the sea; the other, considerably to the 
 southward, and lower as well as easier, nearly in the latitude of Lychnidus, 
 or Ochrida. It was over this last pass that the Roman Via Egnatia 
 travelled, and that the modem road from Scutari and Durazzo to Bitolia 
 now travels. With the exception of these two partial depressions, the 
 long mountain-ridge maintains itself undiminished in height, admitting, 
 indeed, paths by which a smaU company either of travellers or of Alba- 
 nian robbers from the Dibren, may cross (there is a path of this kind which 
 connects Stmga with Ueskioub, mentioned by Dr. Joseph Moller, p. 70, 
 and some others by Bou^ vol. iv, p. 546), but nowhere a/Imitting the passage 
 of an army. 
 
 To attack the Macedonians, therefore, an Illyrian army would have to go 
 through one or other of these passes, or else to go round the noith-eastem 
 pass of Katschanik, beyond the extremity of Ljubatrin. And we shall find 
 that, in point of fact, the military operations recorded between the two 
 nations carry us usually in one or other of these directions. The military 
 proceedings of Brasidas (Thucyd. iv. 124), — of Philip the son of Amyntaa 
 king of Macedon (Diodor. xvi, 8),— of Alexander the Great in the tirst year 
 of his reign (Arrian, i, 5), all bring us to the pass near Lychnidus (com- 
 pare Livy, xxxii, 9 ; Plutarch, Flaminin. c. 4) ; while the Illyrian Dardaui 
 and Autariatae border upon Paeonia, to the north of Pelagonia, and threaten 
 Macedonia from the north-east of the mountain-chain of Skardus. Tlje 
 Autariatae are not far removed from the Paeonian Agrianes, who dwelt near 
 the sources of the Strymon, and lK)th Autariatae and Dardani threatened 
 the return march of Alexander from the Danube into Macedonia, after 
 his successful campaign against the Getse, low down in the course of that 
 great river (Arrian, i, 5). Without being able to determine the precise Hue 
 of Alexander's march on this occasion, we may see that these two Illyrian 
 tribes must have come down to attack him from Upper Moisia, and on the 
 eastern side of the Axius. This, and the fact that the Dardani were the 
 immediate neighbors of the Paeonians, shows us that their seats could not 
 have been far removed from Upper Moesia (Livy, xlv, 29): the fauces 
 Pelagoniae (Livy, xxxi, 34) are the pass by which they entered Macedonia 
 from the north. Ptolemy even places the Dardani at Skopiffi (Ueskioub) 
 (hi, 9) ; his information about these countries seems better than that of 
 Btrabo. 
 
 » Hekataei Fragm. ed. Klausen, Fr. 66-70 ; Thucyd. i, 26. 
 
 Skylax places the Encheleis north of Epidamnus and of the Taulantii 
 
f 
 
 I' < 
 
 4 HISTORY OP (iKKECE. 
 
 B.C.), ift sufficiently well acquainted with them to specify their 
 town Sesarethus : he also named the Clielidonii as their northern, 
 the Eneheleis as tlieir southern neighbors ; and the Abri also as 
 A tribe nearly adjoining. AVe hear of the Illyrian Parthini, 
 nearly in tlio same regions, — of the Dassaretii,' near Lake Lych- 
 nidus, — of the Penestae, with a fortified town Uscana, north 
 of the Dassaretii, — of the Ardiai-ans, the Autariatoc, and the 
 Durdanians, throughout U|)i>er Albania eastward a> far as Upper 
 Mcusia, including the range of Skardns itself; so that there were 
 some Illyrian tribes conterminous on the east with Macedonians, 
 and on the south with Macedonians as well a- with Pa^onians. 
 Strabo even extends some of the Illyrian tribes much farther 
 uoilhward, n<'arly to the Julian Alps.2 
 
 With the excc] lion of some j)ortions of what i.^ now called 
 Middle Albania, the territory of these tribes consisted principally 
 of mountain pasture- with a certain proportion of fertile valley, 
 but rarely expanding into a plain. Tlie Autariatic had the rep- 
 utation of bein^r unwarlike, but the Illyrian^ generally were poor, 
 rapacious, lien* , u\u\ iornndable in battle. They shared with 
 the remote Thracian tribes the custom of tattooing^ their bodies 
 and of oflering In man sacrilices : moreover, they were always 
 ready to sell their military service for hire, like the modern Al 
 
 Ir inav )..' nin.\rkr.| that Ib-katau-: sn-ms to have communicated much 
 information resjn:Mtin«r thr Adriatic: In- iiuticrd the city of Adria at the 
 I'xtremitv of the tiulf, and the tVrtiliiv and abundance of the territoi? 
 uround it (Fr. 58: coiriparf Skyiiu)us (hius. 384). 
 
 ' IJvy. xliii. U-1^. .Maniiv rt ( < n o-raj.h. der (iriech. und Romer, part vii 
 f!i. 9, p. 386. s"/.) ( oll'cts tlie points and sli()\v> how little can be ascertained 
 re<pertin^ the hxaliti •> of thr>e Illyrian tribes. 
 
 * Strabo, iv, p. 2t)G. 
 
 ' Strabo, vii, ]•. 31.") , Airian, i, '). 4-11. So impracticable is the territory, 
 and so narrow the ni»an^ of ihr inhabitant^, in the region called Upper 
 Albania, that most of its rcsidmt tril.r. ( vcn now arc considered as free, 
 ind pay no tribute to the Turkish ^ovennnent : the Tachas cannot extori 
 't without greater expense and difficulty than the sura gained would repay. 
 The same was the rase in Epirus, or Lower Albania, previous to the time 
 oi AH Pacha: in Middle Albania, the country does not present the like 
 difficulties, and no such exemptions are allowed (Boue', Voyage en Turquie, 
 ▼ol. iii, p. 192). These free Albanian tribes arc in the same condition with 
 regard to the Saltan as the Mysians and Pisidians in Asia Minor witt 
 R|mrd to the king: of Persia in ancient times (Xenophon, Anab. iii, 2, 23). 
 
 ^ 
 
 KMENT AND CHARACTER OF THE ILLYRIANS. f 
 
 banian Schkipetars, in whom probably their blood yet flows, 
 though with considerable admixture from subsequent emigrations. 
 Of the Illyrian kingdom on the Adriatic coast, with Skodra (Scu- 
 tari) for its capital city, which became formidable by its reckless 
 piracies in the third century B.C., we hear nothing in the flourishing 
 period of Grecian history. The description of Skylax notices in 
 his day, all along the northern Adriatic, a considerable and 
 standing tralTic between the coast and the interior, carried on by 
 Liburnians, Istrians, and the small Grecian insular settlements 
 of Pharus and Issa. l>ut he does not name Skodra, and prob- 
 ably this strong post — together with the Greek town Lissus, 
 founded by Dionysius of Syracuse — was occupied after his time 
 by conquerors from the interior,' the predecessors of Agron and 
 Gentius,— just as the coast-land of the Thermaic gulf was con- 
 quered by inland Macedonians. 
 
 Once during the Peloponnesian war, a detacliment of hired 
 lllyrians, marching into Macedonia Lynkestis (seemingly over 
 the pass of Skardus a little east of Lychnidus, or Ochrida), tried 
 the valor of the Spartan Brasidas ; and on that occasion — as in 
 the expedition above alluded to of the Epirots against Akarnania 
 — we shall notice the marked superiority of the Grecian chara<ter, 
 even in the case of an armament chiefly comjiosed of helots 
 newly enfranchised, over both Macedonians and lllyrians, — 
 we shall see the contrast between brave men acting in concert 
 and obedience to a common autliority, and an assailing host of 
 warriors, not less brave individually, but in whi(»h every man is 
 his own master,'^ and fights as he pleases. The rapid and impet- 
 uous rush of the lllyrians, if the first shock failed of its effect, 
 was succeeded by an equally rapid retreat or flight. We hear 
 nothing afterwards respecting these barbarians until the time of 
 Philip of Macedon, whose vigor and military energy first repress- 
 ed their incursions, and afterwards partially o nquered them. It 
 seems to have been about thie period (400-350 B.C.) that the 
 
 » Diodor. xv, 13; Polyb. ii, 4. 
 
 « See the description in Thucydides (iv. 124-128); especially the exh<»- 
 tation which he puts into the mouth of Brasidas, — B*ro<pdr6^ /mx^ 
 CODtrasted with the orderly array of Greeks. 
 
 " Dlyriorum velocitas ad excursiones et impetus subitos.** 
 
 (Livy, xxxl, S§.* 
 
e 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ARTICLES EXCHANGED 
 
 great movement of th(! Gauls from west to east took place, wLich 
 brouglit the Gallic Skordiski and other tribes into the re"ioDS be- 
 tween the Danube and the Adriatic sea, and which probably dis- 
 lodged some of the northern Illyrians so as to drive them upon 
 new enterprises and fresh abodes. 
 
 What is now called Middle Albania, the Illyrian territory imme- 
 diately north of P^piru^, is much superior to the latter in produc- 
 tiveness.1 Though moimtainous, it possesses more both of low hill 
 and valhjy, and ampler as well as more fertile cultivable spaces. 
 Epidamnus and Apollonia formed the seaports of this territory, 
 and the commerce witl. the southern Illyrians, less barbarous than 
 the northern, was one of the sourct s-* of their great prosperity 
 during the first century of their existence, — a prosperity inter 
 ru|)ted in the cjise of the Kpidamnians by internal dissensions, 
 which impaired their ascendency over their Illyrian neighbors, 
 and ultimately placed them at variance with their mother-city 
 Korkynu The commerce between these Greek seaports and the 
 interior tribes, when once the former became stronjr enoujrh to 
 rentb'i violent attack from the latter hopeless, was reciprocally 
 beneficial tc l>oth of them. Grecian oil and wine were introduced 
 among these barbarians, whose chiefs at the same time learned 
 to ap{)re<iate the woven fabrics,3 the polished and carved me- 
 tallic work, the tt*m[»ered weai)ons, and the pottery, which issued 
 from (JnciiiM artisans. Moreover, the importation sometimes of 
 Palt-fish, luid always that of salt itself, was of the greatest impor- 
 tance to these inland residents, especially for such localities as 
 possessed lakes abounding in fish, like that of Lychnidus. We 
 hear of wars between the Autariatag and the Ardi«i, respecting 
 ialt-springs near their boundaries, and also of other tribes whon 
 the privation of salt reduced to the necessity of submitting t. 
 
 lh» Romans.^ On the other hand, these tribes possesstjd two artictet 
 of exchange so precious in the eyes of the Greeks, that Polybiui 
 reckons tliem as absolutely indispensable,^ — cattle and slaves ; 
 
 'Sec PoiKiueville, Voyau-e en Grece, vol. i, chs. 23 and 24 j Gri«Hihach, 
 Reise durch Hunulien und nach Bnissa, vol ii, pp. 138-139; Bou^ La 
 Tarquie en Europe, (f€o«;raphie Ge'ne'rale, vol. i, pp. 60-65. 
 
 ■ Skyinnu.s Chins, v, 41S-425. 
 
 * Thncydid^s mentions the v^avrri koI leia, koi /} uXXtf KaraoKevr/, which 
 the Greek settlements on the Thracian coast sent up to king Seuthes (ii, 98): 
 •imilar to the t-^aa/ior^' ieptl, and to the ,tcp/a^dy tcktovuv SaiSa^a,' offeroi 
 m presents to the Delphiau go^' 'Eurip. Ion. 1141 ; Pindar, Pyth. v, 46) 
 
 » Strabo, vii, p. 317 ; Appian, lUyric. 17 ; Aristot. Mirab. Ausc. c. 138. For 
 the extreme importance of the trade in salt, as a bond of connection, Bee 
 the regulations of the liomans when they divided Macedonia into four 
 provinces, with the distinct view of cutting off all connection between one 
 and the other. All commercium and coiinubium were forbidden between 
 them : the fourth region, whose capital was Pelagonia (and which included 
 all the primitive or Upper Macedonia, east of the range of Pindus and 
 Skardus), was altof^ther inland, and it was expressly forbidden to draw its 
 salt from the third region, or the country between the Axius and the 
 Peneius ; while on the other hand the Illyrian Dardani, situated northward 
 of Upper Macedonia, received express permission to draw their salt from 
 this third or maritime region of Macedonia : the salt was to be conveyed 
 from the Thermaic gulf along the road of the Axius to Stobi in Paeonia, 
 and was there to be sold at a fixed price. 
 
 The inner or fourth region of Macedonia, which included the modern 
 Bitoglia and Lake Castoria, could easily obtain its salt from the Adriatic, 
 by the communication afterwards so well known as the Roman Egnatian 
 way ; but the communication of the Dardani with the Adriatic led through 
 a country of the greatest possible difficulty, and it was probably a great 
 convenience to them to receive their supply from the gulf of Therma by 
 the road along the Vardar (Axius) (Livy, xlv, 29). Compare the route of 
 Grisebach from Salonichi to Scutari, in his Reise durch Rumelien, vol. ii. 
 
 * About the cattle in Illyria, Aristotle, I)e Mirab. Ausc. c. 128. There ia 
 a remarkable passage in Polybius, wherein he treats the importation of 
 slaves as a matter of necessity to Greece (ir, 37). The purchasing of the 
 Thracian slaves in exchange for salt is noticed by Menander, — Qpai 
 tvyevrj^ el, ""P^ «^of Tjyopaafievog : see Proverb. Zenob. ii, 12, and Dioge- 
 
 nian, i, 100. 
 
 The same trade was carried on in antiquity with the nations on and near 
 Caucasus, from the seaport of Dioskurias at the eastern extremity of tha 
 Euxine (Strabo, xi, p. 506). So little have those tribes changed, that the 
 Circassians now carry on much the same trade. Dr. Clarke's statement 
 carries us back to the ancient worid : " The Circassians frequently seU their 
 'Jiildren to strangers, particularly to the Persians and Turks, and their 
 princes supply the Turkish seraglios with the most beautiful of the prison- 
 ers of both sexes whom they take in war. In their commerce with the 
 Tchemomorski Cossacks (north of the river Kuban), the Circassians bring 
 considerable quantities of wood, and the delicious honey of the mountains, 
 •ewed up in goats' hides, with the hair on the outside. These articles they 
 exchange for salt, a commodity found in the neighhorinp lakes, of a very 
 excellent quality. Salt is more precious than any other kind of wealth ta 
 
HlSiJRY OF GREECE. 
 
 which latter were doubtless procured from Dlyria, oflen in ex 
 change for salt, as they were from Thrace and from the Euxine 
 mnd from Aquileia in the Adriatic, through the internal wars of 
 one tribe with another. Silver-mines were worked at DamastiuH. 
 in lllyria. Wax and honey were probably also articles of ex- 
 port, and it is a proof that the natural products of lUyria were 
 carefully sought out, wlien we find a species of iris peculiar to the 
 country collected an«l sent to Corinth, where its root was employ- 
 ed to give the special flavor to a celebrated kind of aromatic un- 
 guent.' 
 
 Nor Wii.-i tlie iiit« r uiir-e between the Hellenic ports and 
 Illyrians inland exclusively commercial. Grecian exiles also 
 found their way into lUyria, and Grecian mythes became lt»- 
 talized there, as may In- seen by the tale of Kadmus and Har- 
 monia, from whom the chiefs of the lllyrian Encheleis professed 
 to trace tlicir <lcsc«'nt."- 
 
 T\ui Macedonians uf the fourth century B.C. acquired, frorc 
 the ability and enterprit^e of two successive kings, a great per- 
 fection in (jrcek military organization without any of the loftier 
 llcilcuic qualities. Their career in Greece is purely destructive, 
 extinguishing the free movement of tlie separate cities, and dis- 
 
 the Circassian.^, and it ronstitutis the most at(tj>taMc present which can 
 l»e ottered to thein. Tiiey weave mats of very <:reat Iteanty, which find ii 
 ready market both in Turkey an<l Kus>ia. They are aiso inj^enious in the 
 art of workin^r silver and «ither metals, and in the fabrication of guns, 
 pistols. ;nid >abn's. Some, wliieh they ottered us fi.f >ale. we suspected had 
 been procured in 'I'urkey i i exehauLa' for shives. 'llieir bows and arrows 
 are made wifli inimitubU' skill, and the arrows bt-in^^ tipped with iron, and 
 otherwise exipiisitely wrou;:ht, are considered by the Cossacks and Russians 
 as intiictinir incurable wounds." (Clarke's Travels, vol. i, ch. xvi. \>. 378.) 
 
 ' Theophrast. Hist. Plan', iv. .0. 2; ix. 7. 4: I'liny, II. N. xiii, 2; xxi, 19. 
 Strabo, vii, p. .'J2G. Coins of Kpidamnus and Apollonia are found not only 
 in Macedonia, but in Thrace and in Italy: the trade of th»>^c two cities 
 probably extended acro>s fioiu xa tt» sea. even befort' tiie con.-.truction of 
 the Egnatian war; and tht inscription 205t) in the Corpu- of Ikxckh pro- 
 claims the pratitude of Odessus (Vania) in the ICuxinc >«ea t(»wards o 
 citizen of Epidainnus (Bar !i, Corinthiorum Mercatur. lli-t ]>. 4'.' ; Arisioi 
 Mirab. Auscult. c. 104). 
 
 • llerodot. v, 61 ; viii, 137 : Strabo. vii, p. 326. Skylax {>laces the /.i\>o 
 of Kadmus and Harmonia among the lllyrian Manii, north of the £n<-hd 
 Ids (Diodor. xix, 53; Pausan. ix, 5, 3). 
 
 mac1':donians. 
 
 arming the ciiizeii-soldier to make room for the foreign mero» 
 nary, whose sword was unhallowed by any feelings s)f patriotism^ 
 
 yet totally incompetent to substitute any good system of central 
 
 or pacific administration. But the Macedonians of the seventh 
 and sixth centuries B. c. are an aggregate only of rude inland 
 tribes, subdivided into distinct petty principalities, and separated 
 from the Greeks by a wider ethnical difference even than the 
 Epirots since Herodotus, who considers the Epirotic Molossiana 
 and Thesprotians as children of Ilellen, decidedly thinks the 
 contrary respecting the Macedonians.^ In the main, however, 
 they seem at this early period analogous to the Epirots in char- 
 acter and civilization. They had some few towns, but were 
 chiefly village residents, extremely brave and pugnacious. The 
 customs of some of their tribes enjoined that the man who had 
 not yet slain an enemy should be distinguished on some occasions 
 hvfi badse of discredit.^ 
 
 The original seats of the Macedonians were in the regions east 
 of the chain of Skardus (the northerly continuation of Pindus) 
 — north of the chain called the Cambunian mountains, which 
 connects Olympus with Pindus, and which forms the north-west- 
 ern boundary of Thessaly. But they did not reach so far east- 
 ward as the Thermaic gulf; apparently not farther eastward than 
 Mount Bermius, or about the longitude of Edessa and Berrhoia. 
 They thus covered the upper portions of the course of the rivers 
 Ilaliakmon and Erigon, before the junction of the latter with the 
 Axius ; while the upper course of the Axius, higher than this 
 IK)int of junction, appears to have belonged to Pjeonia, — though 
 the boundaries of Macedonia and Paeonia cannot be distinctly 
 marked out at any time. 
 
 The large space of country included between the above-men- 
 tioned boundaries is in great part mountainous, occupied by 
 lateral ridges, or elevations, which connect themselves with the 
 main line of Skardus. But it also comprises three wide alluvial 
 basins, or plains, which are of great extent and well-adapted to 
 
 Herodot v, 22. 
 • Aristot. Polit. vii, 2, 6. That the Macedonians were chiefly village 
 residents, appears from Thucyd. ii, 100, iv, 124, though this does not excludt 
 •ome towns. 
 
10 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SECTIONS OF THE MACEDONIAN NAME. 
 
 11 
 
 cultivation, — the [Jain of Tettovo, or Kalkandele (nortliemmosi 
 of the three), which contains the sources and early course of the 
 Axius, or Vardar, — that of Bitolia, coinciding to a great degree 
 with the ancient Pela^onia, wherein the Erigon flows towards the 
 Axius, — and the larger and more undulating basin of Greveno 
 and Anaselit2a>, containing the upper lialiakmon with its con- 
 fluent stream-. This latter region is separated from the ba^sin of 
 Thessaly by a mountainous line of considerable length, but pre- 
 senting numerous easy jiassesJ Reckoning the basin of Thes- 
 saly as a fourth, here ai-e four distinct inclosed plains on the east 
 Bide of this long range of Skardus and Hindus, — each generally 
 bounded by mountains which rise j)reci[>itously to an alpino 
 height, and each leaving only one cleft tor drainage by a single 
 river, — the Axius, the Erigon, the Ilaliakmun, and the Peneius 
 respectively. All four, moreover, though of high level above 
 the sea, are yet for the most part of distinguished fertility, espe- 
 cially the plains of Tettovo, of Bitolia, and Thessaly. The fat, 
 rich land to the east of Findus and Skardus is described as form- 
 ing a marked contrast with the light calcareous soil of the Alba- 
 nia plains an*i valleys on the western side. The basins of Bitolia 
 and of the Haliakmon, with the mountains around and adjoining, 
 were |)Ossessed by the original Macedonians ; that of Tettovo, on 
 the north, by a portion of the Paeon ians. Among the four, 
 Thessaly is the mast spacious ; yet the two comprised in the 
 primitive seats of the Macedonians, both of them very consider- 
 able in magnitude, formed a territory better calculated to nourish 
 and to genei-ate a considerable population, than the less favored 
 home, and smaller breadth of valley and plain, occupied by 
 E[>irots or Illyrians. Abundance of corn easily raised, of pasture 
 tor catth?, and of new fertile land 0[>en to cultivation, would 
 Buliice to incrciise the numbers of hardy villagers, indili'creut to 
 luxury as well as to accumulation, and exempt from that oppres- 
 «ive extortion of rulers which now hai-asses the same fine 
 regions.3 
 
 'Bon^, Voyage en Turquie, vol. i, p. 199: "Un boii iiombre de ocli 
 ^iig4s da nord au sud, comme pour inviter les habitans de passer d'une it 
 provinces dans I'autre." 
 ' For the general physical character of the region, both e ist and west oi 
 
 I 
 
 The inhabitants of this primitive Macedonia doubtless differed 
 much in ancient times, as they do now, according as they dwelt 
 on mountain or plain, and in soil and climate more or less kind ; 
 but all acknowledged a common ethnical name and nationality, 
 and the tribes were in many cases distinguished from each other, 
 not by having substantive names of their own, but merely by 
 local epithets of Grecian origin. Thus we find Elymiotae Mace- 
 donians, or Macedonians of Elymeia, — Lynkestae Macedonians, 
 or Macedonians of Lynkus, etc. Orestae is doubtless an adjunct 
 
 Skardus, continued by Pindus, see the valuable chapter of Grisebach'i 
 Travels above referred to (Reisen, vol. 11, ch. xiii, pp. 125-130-, c. xiv, p. 
 175; c. xvi, pp. 214-216; c. xvii, pp. 244-245). 
 
 Respecting the plains comprised in the ancient Pelagonia, see also th« 
 Journal of the younger Pouqueville, in his progress from Travnik in Bos- 
 nia to Janina. He remarks, in the two days' march from Prelepe (Prilip) 
 'through Bitolia to Fiorina, " Dans cctte route on parcourt des plaines lux- 
 uriantes couvertes de moissons, de vastes prairies remplies de treflo, del 
 plateaux abondans en pAturages in^puisablcs, ou paissent d'innombrablei 
 
 troupeaux de bojufs, de chbvres, et de menu be'tail Le ble', le niiiis, et 
 
 les autres grains sont toujours k tr^s bas prix, a cause de la ditliculte' dea 
 d^ouch^s, d'oil Ton exporte une grande quantitie de hiines, de cotons, da 
 peaux d'agneaux, de buffles, et de chevaux, qui passent par le moyen dea 
 caravanes en Hongrie." (Pouqueville, Voyage dans la Gr^ce, torn, ii, ch. 
 62, p. 495.) 
 
 Again, M. Boue remarks upon this same plain, in his Critique des Cartes 
 de la Turquie, Voyage, vol. iv, p. 483, " La plaine immense de Prilip, de 
 Bitolia, et de Fiorina, n'est pas representee (sur les cartes) de manicre a ce 
 
 qu'on ait une idee de son etendue, et surtout de sa largeur La plaine 
 
 de Sarigoul est changee en valle'e," etc. The basin of the lialiakmon he 
 remarks to be represented equally imperfectly on the maps : compare also 
 his Voyage, i, pp. 211, 299, 300. 
 
 I notice the more particularly the large proportion of fertile plain and 
 valley in the ancient Macedonia, because it is often represented (and even 
 by O. Miiller, in his Dissertation on the ancient Macedonians, attached to 
 his Histon.' of the Dorians) as a cold and rugged land, pursuant to the 
 statement of TAvj (xlv, 29), who says, respecting the fourth region of Ma- 
 cedonia as distributed by the Romans, "Frigida haec omnis, duraque cnltn, 
 et aspera plaga est : cultorum quoqne ingenia terrae similia habet : ferociorei 
 eoset accolse barbari faciunt, nunc bello cxercentes, nunc in pace miscen 
 its rltns suos." 
 
 This is probably true of the mountaineers included in the region, but, it 
 ifi too much generalized. 
 
If 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Batne of the same chara^-ter. The inliabilants of the mor« 
 northerly tracts, called Pclagcjiila and Deurio[)is, were also {K>r» 
 t»t>ns of the Macedonian aggregate, though neighbors of th6 
 Pi«(>nian>, to wIk.iu they hore much alfmity : whether the Eordi 
 and Almojdans were of Macedonian race, it is more difficult tc 
 my. Th<' ^Macedonian language was different from lUyrian,' 
 from Thraciafi, and seemingly also from Pieonian. It '^vas also 
 different from Greek, yet apparently not more widelj distincl 
 Ihan that of tli< l']j)irots, — fo that the acquisition of Greek was 
 comparatively cjisy to the cliiefs and jxople, though there were 
 always some Greek letters which they ^\erc inca}>able of pro- 
 nouncing. And when we follow their hi-tory, we shall fuid in 
 tlieni more of the regular waiii(jr, contpiering in order to main- 
 tain dominion and tribute, and less oi' the armed })lunderer, — 
 than in tli«' Illyrians, Thracians, or Kpirots, by whom it was 
 their mi.^lortiine to be .>urruunded. They ap}>roach nearer to the 
 The^salians,- and to tlie other ungifted members of the Hellenic 
 iamily. 
 
 I'Ijc large an«l comparativ«ly productive region covered by 
 the \arious sections of Macedonians, helps to explain that in- 
 crease of ascen«lencv winch thev succe-sively acquired over all 
 
 •- *■' * 1 
 
 their neighbors. It was not, liowever, until a hite j)eriod that 
 the\ l»«(ani»' unili d under one fi<nernnient. At first each sectioi^, 
 how many we do not know, had it.s own j>rince, or chief The 
 Elvmiots, or inlial)itaiU.> ot" Klvmeia, the southernmost ])ortion of 
 Maet'donia, were tlius originally distinct and independent; also 
 the Ui e>ta', in mountain->eats somewhat north-west of the Ely- 
 
 ' Polyh. xxviii, s. '.>. Tliis is the most ilistinot tt'stimony which we 
 po-^^oss. aii'I it nppcars to iiic to contradicr the opinion l»oth of Mannert 
 ((Joo_:r iltr (Ir, nn<l Kiim. vol vii. p. 492) and of O. Miiller (On the 
 Macedonians, sects. 28-36). that the native Macedonians were of Ulyrian 
 dc-cent. 
 
 The Macetlonian military array seems to have been very like that of 
 the Thcs^alians. — lior-^enien well-mounted and armed, and maintaining 
 ^ood order (Thu(\vtl. ii, 101): of their infantry, before tlie time of Philip 
 t.m of Amyntas, we do not hear nnich. 
 
 • Macedoniani, qiiie tantis barbaronim jrentibus attinjiitur, ut ?empei 
 Macedonicis imperatorihus iidem tines imperii fuerint (jui gladioriijg I'qul 
 pilorum." (Cicero, in Fison. c. xvi.) 
 
 SECTIONS OF THE MACEDONIAN NAME. 
 
 Id 
 
 miots, — the Lynkestie and Eordi, who occupied portions of 
 territory on the track of the subsequent Egnatian way, between 
 Lychnidus (Ochrida) and Edessa, — the Pelagonians,* with a 
 town of the same name, in the fertile plain of Bitolia, — and the 
 more northerly Deuriopians. And the early political union was 
 usually so loose, that each of these denominations probably in- 
 cludes many petty independencie."?, small towns, and villages. 
 That section of the Macedonian name who afterwards swallowed 
 up all the rest and became known as The Macedonians^ had their 
 original centre at iEgae, or Edessa, — the lofty, commanding, and 
 picturescpie site of the modern Vodhena. And though the resi- 
 dence of the kings was in later times transferred to the marshy 
 Pella, in the maritime plain beneath, yet Edessa was always re- 
 tained as the regal burial-place, and as the hearth to which the 
 religious continuity of the nation, so much reverenced in ancient 
 times, was attached. This ancient town, which lay on the Ro- 
 man Egnatian way from Lychnidus to Pella and Thessalonika, 
 formed the pass over the raountain-ridge called Bermius, or that 
 prolongation to the northward of Mount Olympus, through which 
 the Ilaliakmon makes its way out into the maritime plain at 
 Verria. by a cleft more precipitous and impracticable than that 
 of the Peneius in the defile of Tempe. 
 
 This mountain-chain called Bermius, extending from Olympus 
 considerably to the north of Edessa, formed the original eastern 
 boundary of the Macedonian tribes ; who seem at first not to 
 have r« ached the valley of the Axius in any part of its course, 
 and who certainly did not reach at first to the Thermaic gulf. 
 Between the last-mentioned gulf and the eastern counterforts of 
 Olympus and Bermius there exists a narrow strip of plain land 
 or low hill, which reaches from the mouth of the Peneius to the 
 head of the Thermaic gulf. It there widens into the spacious 
 and fertile plain of Salonichi, comprising the mouths of the Ha- 
 Jiaknion, the Axius, and the Echeidorus : the river Ludias, which 
 flows from Edessa into the marshes surrounding Pella, and which 
 in wtiquity joined the Haliakmon near its mouth, has now altereJ 
 its cx»urse so as to join the Axius. This narrow strip, between 
 
 » Straho, lib. vii. Fragm. 20. cd. Tafel. 
 
X 
 
 14 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PJIONIANS. 
 
 15 
 
 the mouths of the Peneius and the Haliakmon, was the origioa] 
 Abode of the Pierian Thracian?, who dwelt close to tht foot <rf 
 Olympus, and among whom the worship of the Muses seems to 
 have been a primitive characteristic; Grecian poetry teems with 
 local allusions and epithets which appear traceable to this early 
 fact, though we are unable to follow it in detail. North of the 
 Pierians, from the mouth of the Haliakmon to that of the Axius, 
 dwelt the Bottia^ans.^ Beyond the river Axius, at the lower 
 
 * I have followed Herodotus in stating the original series of occupants on 
 the Thermaic gulf, anterior to the Macedonian conquests. Thucydides in- 
 troduces the Paiouiuns between Bottiaeans and Mygdonians : he says that 
 the I'ajoniana possessed " a narrow strip of land on the side of the Axius, 
 down to Pella and the sea," (ii, 96.) If this were trae, it would leave hardly 
 any room for the Bottiaians, whom, nevertheless, Thueydidds recognizes oo 
 the coast ; for the whole space between the mouths of the two rivers, Axius 
 and Hahakmdn, is inconsiderable; moreover, I cannot but suspect that 
 Thucydides has been led to believe, by finding in the Iliad that the P«o- 
 aian allies of Troy came from the Axius, that there must have been old Pseo- 
 nian settlements at the mouth of that river, and that he has advanced the 
 inference as if it were a certified fact. The case is analagous to what he 
 gays about the Boeotians in his preface (upon which O. Miiller has already 
 commented) ; he stated the emigration of the Boeotians into Bceotia as 
 having taken place nfler the Trojan war, but saves the historical credit of 
 the Homeric catalooue by adding that there had been a fraction of them in 
 Bceotia before, from whom the contingent which went to Troy was furnish 
 ed («7roJa<T/^6c, Thucyd. i, 12). 
 
 On this occasion, therefore, having to choose between Herodotus and 
 Thucydidt^s, I prefer the former. O. Mailer (On the Macedonians, sect. 11) 
 would strike out just so much of the assertion of Thncydid^ as positively 
 contradicts Herodotus, and retain the rest ; he thinks that the Paonians 
 came down very near to the mouth of the river, but not quite. I confess that 
 this does not satisfy me ; the more so as the passage from Livy by which 
 he would support his view will appear, on examination, to refer to P^eonia 
 high up the Axius, — not to a supposed portion of Paeonia near the month 
 (Livy, xlv, 29). 
 
 Again, I would remark that the original residence of the Pierians be- 
 tween the Peneius and the Haliakmon rests chiefly upon the authority of 
 Thucydides : Herodotus knows the Pierians in theu- seats between Mount 
 PangsBus and the «», but he gives no intimation that they had before 
 dwelt south of the Haliakmon ; the tract between the Haliakmon and the 
 Peneius is by him concsived as Lower Macedonia, or Macedonis, reaching 
 10 the borders of Thessaly (vii, 127-173). I make this remark in reference 
 10 sects 7-17 of O. Miiller's Dissertation, wherein the conception of Herod- 
 
 part of its course, began the tribes of the great Thracian race^ — 
 Mygdonians, Krest6nians, Edonians, Bisaltae, Sithonians : the 
 Mygdoui'uis seem to have been originally the most powerful, 
 since the country still continued to be called by their name, Myg- 
 donia, even after the Macedonian conquest These, and varioui 
 other Thracian tribes, originally occupied most part of the coun- 
 try between the mouth of the Axius and that of the Strymon j 
 together with that memorable three-pronged peninsula which de- 
 rived from the Grecian colonies its name of Chalkidike. It will 
 thus appear, if we consider the Bottia^ans as well as the Pieriani 
 to be Thracians, that the Thracian race extended originally south- 
 \rard as far as the mouth of the Peneius : the Bottia?ans pro- 
 fessed, indeed, a Kretan origin, but this pretension is not noticed 
 by either Herodotus or Thucydides. In the time of Sky lax, t 
 seemingly during the early reign of Philip the son of Amyntas, 
 Macedonia and Thrace were separated by the Strymon. 
 
 We have yet to notice the Paionians, a numerous and much- 
 divided race, — seemingly neither Thracian nor Macedonian nor 
 Illyrian, but professing to be descended from the Teukri of Troy, 
 — who occupied both banks of the Strymon, from the neighbor- 
 hood of Mount Skomius, in which that river rises, down to the 
 lake near its mouth. Some of their tribes possessed the fertile 
 plain of Siris (now Seres), — the land immediately north of 
 Mount Pangaeus, — and even a portion of the space through 
 which Xerxes marched on his route from Akanthus to Therma. 
 Besides this, it appears that the upper parts of the valley of the 
 Axius were also occupied by Paeonian tribes ; how far down tiie 
 river they extended, we are unable to say. We are not to sup- 
 pose that the whole territory between Axius and Strymon wa« 
 continuously peopled by them. Continuous population is not the 
 character of the ancient world, and it seems, moreover, that 
 while the land immediately bordering on both rivers is in very 
 
 otus appears incorrectly apprehended, and some erroneous inferences found- 
 ed upon it That this tract nras the original Pieria, there is sufficient reason 
 for believing i com pare Strabo, vii. Frag. 22. with Tafel's note, and ix, p 
 ♦10; Livy, xliv, yj ; hut Herodotus notices it only as Macedonia. 
 
 * Skylax, c. 67 The conquests of Philip extenled the boundary beycnd 
 the Strymon to the Nesius (Strabo. lib. viL Frag''" *S 3d. TafeH. 
 
16 
 
 rilSTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 many places of t he richest quality, the s{)aces between the twc 
 are t*ither mountaiu or barren low hill, — forming a marked 
 contrast with the rich alluvial basin of the Macedonian river 
 Erigot.' The Paonians, in their north-western tribes, thus 
 bordered upon the Macedonian Pelagonia, — in their nortliern 
 tribes upon tlut Illyrian Dardani and Autariata), — in their 
 ta-itin, southern, and south-eastern tribes, upon the Thraciana 
 wid Pierians ; - tliat is, upon the second seats occupied by the 
 expelled Pierian- under Mount Pangieus. 
 
 Such was, as lai- as we can make it out, the j)osition of the 
 Macedonians ami their immediate neighbors, in the seventh 
 century B.C. It w a- first altered by the enterprise and ability 
 of a family of exiled Greeks, who conducted a section of the 
 Macedonian peojple to those conquests which their descendants, 
 Philip and Alexander the Great, afterwards so marvellously 
 nmltiplied. 
 
 Respecting the primitive ancestry of these two princes, there 
 were different ^tories, but all concurred in tracing the origin of 
 the family to the llerakleid or Temenid race of Argos. Accord- 
 ing to one story (which apparently cannot be traced higher than 
 Theopompus), Karanus, brother of the despot Pheidon, had 
 migrated from Argos to Macedonia, and established himself as 
 conqueror at Edessa ; according to another tale, which we find 
 in Herodotus, tliere were three exiles of the Temenid race, 
 (iauanes, Aeropus, and Perdikkas, who fled from Argos to 
 lllyria, from whence they pas^ed into Upper Macedonia> in such 
 
 * See this ooiitru..t iiotired in Grisebach, especially in reforcpce to the 
 wide but barren region called the plain of Mustapha, no great distance from 
 tlie left bank of the Axius (Grisebach, Keisen, v, ii, p. 225} Bouc', Voyage, 
 Tol. i, p 168). 
 
 For the description of the hanks of th«' Axius ( Vardar) and the Strymon, 
 gee Boue, Voyajire en Turqnie. vol. i, pj». 19()-190. "La plaine ovale de 
 Seres est un des diamans de la couronne de Bvzance," etc. He remarks 
 how incorrectly the course of the Strjmon is dej)icted on the maps (vol. ir 
 |>.482) 
 
 ■The expression of Strabo or his Epitomator — tt/v Waioviav fiixp* 
 Vit'kayovia^ kqI Uuplaq kKTEru(r&ai^ — seems quite exact, though T&fel fmdf 
 ft diflBculty in it. S( e his Note on the Vatican Fragments of the seventh 
 book of Strabo, Fr. ^>7 The Fragment 40 is expressed much more loosely 
 Compare Herodot. v, 13-16, vii, 124 ; Thucjd. ii, 96 Diodor. »*, I ft. 
 
 TEMENID KINGS OF MACEDONIA. 
 
 17 
 
 poverty as to be compelled to serve the petty king of the town 
 l]eba3a in the capacity of shepherds. A remarkable prodigy 
 happening to Perdikkas, foreshadows the future eminence of his 
 family, and leads to his disriissal by the king of Lebiea, — fiora 
 whom he makes his escape with difficulty, by the sudden ri.se of 
 a river immediately after he had crossed it, so as to become 
 impassable by the horsemen who pursued him. To this river, as 
 to the saviour of the family, solemn sacrifices were still offered 
 bv the kings of Macedonia in the time of Herodotus. Perdik 
 kas with his two brothers having thus escaped, established him 
 self near the spot called the Garden of Midas on Mount Bermius, 
 and from the loins of this hardy young shepherd sprang the 
 dynasty of Edessa.' This tale bears much more the marks of 
 a genuine local tradition than that of Theopompus. And the 
 origin of the Macedonian family, or Argeadae, from Argos, 
 appears to have been universally recognized by -Grecian inquir- 
 ers,-2 _ so that Alexander the son of Amyntas, the contemporary 
 of the Persian invasion, was admitted by the Ilellanodikaj to 
 contend at the Olympic games as a genuine Greek, though hia 
 competitors sought to exclude him as a Macedonian. 
 
 The talent for command was so much more the attribute of 
 the Greek mind than of any of the neighboring barbarians, that 
 we easily conceive a courageous Argeian adventurer acquiring 
 to himself great ascendency in the local disputes of the Macedo- 
 nian tribes, and transmitting the chieflainship of one of those 
 tribes to his off*spring. The influence acquired by Miltiades 
 among the Thracians of the Chersonese, and by Phormion among 
 the Akarnanians (who specially requested that, after his death, 
 bis son, or some one of his kindred, might be sent from Athens to 
 command them) ,3 was very much of this chai*acter: we may add 
 the case of Sertorius among the native Iberians. In like man- 
 ner, the kings of the Macedonian Lynkestae professed to be 
 descended from the Bacchiadae* of Corinth; and the neighbor- 
 
 Herodot. viii, 137-138. 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 22. Argeadae, Strabo, lib. vii, Fragm. 20, ed. Tafel, whicfc 
 may probably have been erroneously changed into iEgeadae (Justin, vii, 1). 
 
 » Thucyd. iii, 7 j Herodot vi, 34-37 ; compare the story of Zalmozk 
 imong *he Thracians (iv, 94), 
 
 < Strau:, ni, p. 326. 
 
 VOL. rr. 2oc. 
 
18 
 
 WKTORY OP GREECE. 
 
 AMYNTAS AND ALEXANDER. 
 
 It 
 
 hood of Epidamnus and Apollonia, in both of wiiich doabtlew 
 members of that great gens were domiciliated, renders this tale 
 even more plausible than that of an emigration from Argos. 
 The kings of the Epirotic Molossi pretended also to a descent 
 from the heroic -^akid race of Greece. In fact, our means of 
 knowledge do not enabl»3 us to discriminate the cases in which 
 these reigning families were originally Greeks, from those ip 
 which they were Hellenized natives pretending to Grecian 
 blood. 
 
 After the foundation-legend of the Macedonian kingdom, we 
 have nothing but a long blank until the reign of king Amyntas 
 (about 520-f)00 B.C.), and his son Alexander, (about 480 B.C.) 
 Herodotus gives us five successive kings between the founder 
 Perdikka.-^ and Amyntas, — Perdikkas, Arga3us, Philippus, AewK 
 pus, Alketas, Amyntas, and Alexander, — the contemporary and 
 to a certain extent the ally of Xerxes.' Though we have no 
 means of estahlishing any dates in this early series, either of 
 names or of facts, yet we see that the Temenid kings, beginning 
 from a humble origin, extended their dominions successively on 
 all sides. They conquered the Briges,*^ originally tlieir neigh- 
 bors on Mount Bermius, — the Eordi, bordering on Edessa to 
 the westward, who were either destroyed or expelled from the 
 country, leaving a small remnant still existing in the time of 
 Thucydides at Physka between Strymon and Axius, — theAlmo- 
 pians, an inland tribe of unknown site, — wnd many of the inte- 
 rior Macedonian tribes who bad been at first autonomous. Be* 
 «des these inland conquests, they Imd made the still more 
 impoiiant acquisition of Fieria, the territory which lay between 
 Mount Bermius and the sea, from whence they expelled the 
 original Pierians, who found new seats on the eastern bank of 
 the Strymon between Mount Panga^us and the sea. Amyntas 
 king of Macedon was thus master of a very considerable territory, 
 
 ' Herodot viii, 139. Thucydides agrees in the number of kings, but does 
 not give the names (ii, 100). 
 
 for the divergent lists of the early Macedonian kings, see Mr. Clinioii'g 
 FlMti Hellenici, voL ii, p. 221. 
 
 • This may be gathered, I think, ftom Herodot vii, 73 and viii, 138. Tht 
 alleged migration of the Briges into Asia, and the change of their naoM tr 
 Phryges, is a statement which I do not venture to repeat as ci«dibl« 
 
 eomj rising the coast of the Thermaic gulf as far north as the 
 mouth of the Ilaliakmon, and also some other territory on the 
 ^aiHH gulf from which the Bottia^ans had been expelled ; but not 
 comprising the coast between the mouths of the Axius and the 
 Ilaliakmon, nor even Pella, the subsequent capital, which were 
 t-till in the hands of the Bottiaans at the period when Xerxes 
 passed through.' He possessed also Anthemus, a town and terw 
 ritory in the peninsula of Chalkidike, and some parts of Mygdo- 
 nia, the territory eju^t ol" the mouth of the Axius ; but how much, 
 we do not know. We shall iind the Macedonians hereafter ex- 
 t4;nding their dominion still farther, during the period between 
 the Persian and Peloponnesian war. 
 
 We hear of king Amyntas in friendly connection with the 
 Peisistratid princes at Athens, whose dominion was in part sus- 
 tained by mercenaries from the Strymon, and this amicable 
 sentiment was continued between his son Alexander and the 
 emancipated Athenians.^ It is only in the reigns of these two 
 princes that Macedonia begins to be implicated in Grecian affairs: 
 the regal dynasty had become so completely Macedonized, and 
 had so far renounced its Hellenic brotherhood, that the claim of 
 Alexander to run at the OIymi)ic games was contested by his 
 competitors, and he was called upon to prove his lineage before 
 the Ilellanodikae. 
 
 ' Herodot. vii, 123. Herodotus recognizes both Bottiaeans between the 
 Axius and the Ilaliakmon, — and Bottiaeans at Olynthus, whom the Mace- 
 donians had expelled from the Thermaic gulf, — at the time when Xerxes 
 passed (viii, 127). These two statements seem to me compatible, and both 
 admissible : the former Bottifleans were expelled by the Macedonians subse- 
 ^uently, anterior to the Peloponnesian war. 
 
 My view of these facts, therefore differs somewhat from tliat of O. M(d 
 kr (Macedonians, sect. 16). 
 
 « Herodot. i, 59 , v, »i ; viii, lag. 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THRACIANS AND GREEK COLONIES IN THRACE. 
 
 2\ 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 THRACIANS AND GREEK COLONIES IN THRACE. 
 
 That vast space com{)rise(l between the rivers Strjinon and 
 Danube, and bounded to the west by the easternmost Illyrian 
 tribes, norttiwaixl of the Stryraon, was occupied by the innumer- 
 able subdivisions of the race called Thracians, or Threicians 
 They were the most numerous and most terrible race known to 
 Herodotus: could they by possibility act in unison or under one 
 dominion (he says), they would be irresistible. A conjunction 
 thus formidable once seemed impending, during the first years 
 of the Peloponnesian war, under tlie reign of Sitalkes king of 
 the Odrysa?, who reigned from Abdcra at the mouth of the 
 Nestus to the Euxme, and compressed under his sceptre a large 
 proportion of these ferocious but warlike plunderers ; so that the 
 Greeks even down to Thermopylic trembled at his expected af/- 
 proach. But the abilities of that prince were not found adequate 
 to bring the whole force of Thrace into effective cociperation and 
 aggression against others. 
 
 Numerous as the tribes of Thracians were, their customs and 
 cuai-acter (according to Herodotus) were marked by great uni- 
 formity: of the Getae, the Trau>i, and others, he tells us a few 
 particularities. And the large tract over which the race were 
 spread, comj)risii g as it did the whole chain of Mount Hajraus 
 and the still loftier chain of Rhodope, together with a portion of 
 the mountains Orbelus and Skomius, was yet partly occupied by 
 level and fertile surface, — such as the great plain of Adrianople, 
 and the land towards the lower course of the rivers Nestus and 
 Robrus. The Thracians of the plain, though not less warlike, 
 were at least more home-keeping, and less greedy of foreifm 
 plunder, than tho:<e of the niountains. But the general character 
 of the race presents an aggregate of repulsive features unre 
 deemed by the presence of even the commonest domestic affeo 
 
 V^ol. 4 A 
 
 tionsJ The Thracian chief deduced his pedigree frona a god 
 called by the Greeks Hermes, to whom he offered up worship 
 apart from the rest of his tribe, sometimes with the acceptabk 
 present of a human victim. He tattooed his body ,2 and that of 
 tlie women belonging to him, as a privilege of honorable descent, 
 he bought his wives from their parents, and sold his children foi 
 exportation to the foreign merchant : he held it disgraceful to 
 cultivate the earth, and felt honored only by the acquisitions of 
 war and robbery. The Thracian tribes worshipped deities whom 
 the Greeks assimilate to Ares, Dionysus, and Artemis: the great 
 sanctuary and oracle of their god Dionysus Avas in one of the 
 lottirst summits of Rhodope, amidst dense and fo^^^gy thickets, — 
 the residence of the fierce and unassailable Satne. To illustrate 
 the Thracian character, we may turn to a deed perpetrated by 
 the king of the Bisalta?, — perhaps one out of several chiefs of 
 that extensive Thracian tribe, — whoso territory. Ixtween Stry 
 mon and Axius, lay in the direct march of Xerxes into Greece, 
 and who fled to the desolate heights of Rhodope, to escape tiie 
 ignominy of being dragged along amidst the compulsory auxiliaries 
 of the Persian invasion, forbidding his six sons to take any part 
 in it. From recklessness, or curiosity, the sons disobeyed his 
 commands, and accompanied Xerxes into Greece; they returned 
 unhurt by the Greek spear ; but the incensed father, when they 
 again came into his presence, caused the eyes of all of tliem to 
 be put out. Exultation of success manifested itself in the 
 Thracians by increased alacrity in shedding blood ; but as w ar- 
 riors, the only occupation which they esteemed, they were not 
 less biave than patient of hardship, and maintained a good front, 
 under their own peculiar array, against forces much superior id 
 all military eilicacy.-^ It appears that the Thynians and Bithy- 
 
 
 ' JVrniHicrt assimilates the civilization of the Thracians to that of t!ie 
 Oauls when Julius Ca?sar iuA'aded th(>m, — a ^^rcat injustice to the hittir, 
 in my judi^mcnt (Geo;j:raph. Gr. und Kom. vol. vii, p. 23). 
 
 'Cicero. De Offieils, ii, 7. "Barhanim compunctum notis Threiciis.'* 
 Plutarch (De SerA Numin. Vindict. c. 13, p. 558) speaks as if the women 
 only were tattooed, in Thrace: he puts a singular interpretation upon it, bm 
 a continuous punishment on the sex for having slain Orpheus. 
 
 ' For the Thracians generally, see Herodot. v, 3-9, vii, 110, viii, 116, ix, 
 119 1 Thucyd. ii, 100, vii, 29-30; Xenophon, Anabas. vii, 2, 38, and tht 
 
 ^ 
 
 i 
 
22 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 iiians,! on the Asiatic side of the Bospliorus, perhaps also tho 
 Mysians, were nieml.ers of this great Thracian race, which was 
 more remotely <oiiiuHted, also, with the Phrygians. And the 
 whole race niay he said to present a character more Asiatic than 
 Euroi.ean, es|)e<'ially in tho<e ecstatic and maddenin"- relitWoua 
 rites, which i)re\ idled not less among the Edonian Thracians than 
 in the mouniaiii- of Ida and Dindymon of Asia, though with 
 some imj>ortant .Jitierences. I he Thracians served to furnish 
 the Greeks with mercenary tr<x)ps and slaves, and the number 
 of Grecian coloiiies planted on the coast had the effect of par- 
 tially softening the tribes in the immediate vicinity, between 
 whose chiefs and the Greek leaders intermaniages were not 
 unfrecpient. But the tribes in the interior seem to have retained 
 their savage habits with little mitigation, so that the language in 
 which Tacitus'-' describes them is an apt continuation to that oi 
 Herodotus, though coming more than five centuries after. 
 
 To note the sitiiution of each one among these many different 
 tribesj in the lar^e territory of Thrace, which is even now so 
 imperfectly known and badly mai)pe.l, would be unnecessary, 
 and, indeed, impracticable. 1 shall proceed to mention the i)rin- 
 eipal Grecian colonies which were formed in the country, 
 noticing occasionally the [)articular Thracian tribes with which 
 they came in contact. 
 
 The Grecian colonies established on the Thermaic gulf, as well 
 as in the peninsula of C'halkidike, emanating principally from 
 C'lialkis and Eretria, though we do not know their precise epoch, 
 appear to have been of early date, and ])robably preceded the 
 time when the Macedonians of Edessa extended their conquests 
 to the sea. At that early period, they would find the Pierians 
 gtill between the J'eneius and Haliakmon, — also a number of 
 petty Tliracian iril es throughout the broad i)art of the Chalkidic 
 peninsula; tliey wt»uld lind Pydna a Pierian town, and Therma, 
 Anthemus, C'hahi>tra, etc. Mygdonian. 
 
 The most ancient Grecian colony in these regions seems to 
 
 ■eventh book of tfie Vnahasis p^'ncraliy, which describes the relations of 
 Xenophon and the 'fen Thousand Greeks with ISeuthes the Tliracia» 
 prince. 
 
 » XenopK Anah. vi, 2, 17; Herotlot. vii. 75. 
 
 • Tadl. Annul, ii, 6(i ; iv, 46. 
 
 cthes on the chalkidic it.ninsula 
 
 2S 
 
 hare been Melhone, founded by the Eretrians in Piena; neai-ly 
 at the same time (if we may trust a statement of rather suspicious 
 character, though the date itself is noway improbable) as Korkyra 
 M'-i^ .(ttled by the Corintliians, (about 7^30-720 B.C.)^ It was a 
 little to the north of the Pierian town of Pydna, and separated 
 by about ten miles from the liottiiran town of Alcinis, which lay 
 north of the Haliakmon.-^ We know very little about Methon^ 
 except that it preserved its autonomy and its HeHenism until th« 
 time of Philip of Macedon, who took and destroyed it. But 
 though, wlien once established, it was strong enough to main- 
 tain Itself in spite of conquests made all around by the Mactnlo- 
 nians of Edessa, we may fairly i>resunte that it could not have 
 been originally plant<-<l on Macedonian territory. Nor in ponit 
 of fact was the situation peculiarly advantageous for Grecian 
 colonists, inasmuch as there were other maritime towns, not 
 (Jrecian, in its neighborhood, — Pydna, Alorus, Therma, Chalas- 
 tra; whereas the point of advantage for a Grecian colony was, 
 to become the exclusive seaport for inland indigenous people. 
 
 The colonies, founded by Chalkis and Eretria on all the three 
 I>rojections of the Chalkidic peninsula, were numerous, though 
 for a long time inconsiderable. We do not know how far these 
 projecting headlands were occupied before the arrival of the 
 settlers from Eubcna, — an event which we may probably place 
 at some [jeriod eariier than 600 B.C.; for after that period 
 Chalkis and Eretria seem rather on the decline,— and it aj^peara 
 too, that the Chalkidian colonists in Thrace aided their mother- 
 city Chalkis in her war against Eretria, which cannot be mucF 
 later than 600 B.C., though it may be considerably earlier. 
 
 The range of mountains which crosses from the Thermaic to 
 the Strymonic gulf, and forms the northern limit of the Chalki- 
 die peninsula, slopes down towards the southern extremity, so a3 
 t-o leave a considerable tract of fertile land between the Toronaic 
 niul the Thermaic gulfs, including the fertile headland called 
 Pjillene. — the westernmost of those three prongs of ChalkidikS 
 which run out into the -^gean. Of the other two prongs, or pro- 
 jeetions, the easternmost is terminated by the sublime Mouirf 
 Athos, which rises out of the sea a8 a precipitous rock six thou 
 
 '•^ 
 
 » I'lutarch, Quaest. Gr»c p -iQa. 
 
 « Skylax, c %7. 
 
 ( 
 
n 
 
 HLSTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 sand four hundrf «1 feet in height, connected with tlie mainland 
 by a ridge not more than half the height of the mountain ii.^elf, 
 yet still high, rugged, and woody from sea to sea, leaving only 
 little occasional spaces fit to be occupied or cultivated.'' The 
 intermediate or Sithonian headland is also hilly and woody, though 
 in a less degree, — both less inviting and less productive than 
 PalleneJ 
 
 ^ ilMieia, near tliat cape wliich marks the entrance of the inner 
 Thcrmaic gulf,-— and Potidii^a, at the narrow isthmus of Pallene, 
 — were lK)th foundod by Corinth. Between these two towns lay 
 the fertile territory called Krusis, or Krossa^a, forming in after- 
 times a part of the domain of Olynthus, but in the sixth century 
 B.C. occupied by petty Thracian townships.^ AVithin Pallene 
 were the towns of Mende, a colony from Eretria, — Skioiie, 
 which, having no legitimate mother-city traced its origin to IVlle- 
 liian warriors returning from Tioy, — Aphytis, Neaj.olis, ^>e 
 llierambos, and Sane,-' citi.er wliolly or partly colonies from 
 Ivctria. In the Sithonian peiiiiisula were Assa, PilOrus, Singus, 
 Sarte, Torone, Galepsus, Sermyle, and Mekyberna; all or n°ost 
 of these seem to have been of Cbalkidic origin. But at (he 
 head of the Tor6n;iic gnlf (whicli lies between Sithoiiia and Pal- 
 h^ne) was placed Olynthus, s.irruunded bv an extm ivc and 
 i^Ttde plain. Orioinally a Bottia'an town, Olynthus will !>; seen 
 k: the time of tlie Persian invasion to jkiss into the han<l< ul the 
 C'halkidian Greeks,i and gradually to incorporate with itself sever- 
 al of tlie petty neighboring estal)li>hments belonging to that race ; 
 whereby the Chalkidians ac«iuire(l that marked preponderance 
 i:> the peninsula whieli they retaine.l, even a-ainst the elfoils of 
 Athens, until the days of Philij) of Macedon. 
 
 ' Fn:- the .lesrrij.tion nf riialkMlike. <.>r ( ;risr!.a.h\ j^.i.,.n. vol. ilTHTTo 
 PI'. ».-!•.. and Lciike, '1 ravels in Norrhcni (uvo.v. voi. iii. di. 24, p.i'r2. 
 
 It ^yr r a.l attentive y the description of Ci.alkidike a> -iven In- Skvlax 
 (c. 67). wo shall see that he did not <-oneeive it as three-prontred, hut as 
 t€nnmaiin^. only in the peninsula of Pallene. with Potidiea at its isthmua 
 
 *lierodot. vii, 123 ; Skyranus Chius, v, 627. 
 
 'Sn-aho. X, p. 447; Thucyd. iv. 120-123; Pompon. Mela, ii, 2; ITerodot, 
 
 ^Herodot. vii, 122 f viu, 127. Stephanus Bvz. (v, Ua?.hjvv) gives of 
 »me idea of the mythcs of the lost Greek writers, He-esippus and Theaff. 
 ■D^ alwut Pallene. * 
 
 AKANTHUS, STAGEIKA, ETC. 
 
 25 
 
 On the scanty spaces, admitted by the mountainous promontory, 
 or ridge, ending in Athos, were [danted some Thracian and some 
 PelasiWc settlements of the same inhabitants as those who occu- 
 pied Lemnos and Imbros ; a few Chalkidic citizens being domici- 
 liated with them, and the people speaking both Pelasgic and 
 Hellenio. But near the narrow isthmus which joins this promon- 
 turv to Thrace, and along the north-western coast of the Strymo- 
 nic gulf, were Grecian towns of considerable importance, — 
 Sane, Akanthus, Stageira, and Argilus, all colonies from Andros, 
 which had itself been colonized from Eretria.' Akanthus and 
 Staneira are said to have been founded in 654 B.C. 
 
 Following the southern coast of Thrace, from the mouth of the 
 river Strymon towards the east, we may doubt whether, in the 
 year 5 GO B.C., any considerable independent colonies of Greeks 
 Lad yet been formed upon it. The Ionic colony of Abdera, east- 
 ward of the mouth of the river Nestus, formed from Teos in 
 Ionia, is of more recent date, though the Klazomenians-2 had 
 be"^un an unsuccessful settlement there as early as the year 651 
 B.C. ; while Dikiea — the Chian settlement of Maroneia — and 
 the Lesbian settlement of ^nus at the mouth of the Hebrus, 
 are of unknown date.^ The important and valuable territory 
 near the mouth of the Strymon, where, after many ruinous fail- 
 ures,4 the Athenian colony of Amphipolis afterwards maintained 
 itself, was at the date here mentioned possessed by Edonian 
 Thracians and Pierians : the various Thracian tribes, — Satrae, 
 I'.donians, Dersoeans, Sa})a?ans, Bistones, Kikones, Pietians, etx^ 
 — were in force on the principal part of the tract between Stry- 
 mon and Hebrus, even to the sea-coast. It is to be remarked, 
 however, that the island of Thasus, and that of Samothrace, 
 eacli possessed what in Greek was called a Peraja,"* — a strip of 
 the adjoining mainland cultivated and defended by means of for- 
 
 ' Thve yd. iv, 84, 103, 109. See Mr. Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, ad ann. 
 6.'>4 R.c. 
 
 " Solinus, X, 10. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 168- vii, 58-59, 109 ; Skymnus Chius, v, 675. 
 
 * Thueyd. i, 100, iv 102; Herodot. v, 11. Large quantities of com are 
 now exported from this territorj to Constantinople (Leake, North. Gr. vol 
 Hi, ch. 25, p. 172). 
 
 * Herodot. vii, 108-109 ; Thucj I. i, 101. 
 
 VOL. IV. <3| 
 
S6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tified posts, or small towns: probably, these 0(!Cupations arc of 
 very ancient date, Miwe they seem almost indispensable as a 
 means of sui)[)ort to the islands. For the barren Thasus, espe- 
 cially, merits even at this day the uninviting description applied 
 to it by the poet Ar<*hilochus, in the seventh century B.C., — '* an 
 ass's backbone, overspread with wiM wood :"' so wholly is it com- 
 posed of moimtain, naked or wooded, and so scanty are the 
 patches of cultivabhi soil left in it, nearly all close to the sea- 
 nbore. This island was ori<]rinally occupied by the Phenicians, 
 who worked the i;old mines in its mountains with a degree of in- 
 dustry which, even in its remains, excited the admiration of Her- 
 odotus. How and ^^ hen it was evacuated by them, we do not 
 know ; but the p(iet Archilochus'^ formed one of a body of 
 Parian colonists who planted themselves on it in the seventh 
 century B.C., and <airied on war, not always successful, again.-t 
 the Thracian tribe called Saians : on one occasion, Archilochus 
 found himself foinptli^Ml to throw away his shield. By tlK'ir 
 mines and their possesi-ions on the mainland (which contained 
 even richer mine-. ■■■<■ Skapte llvle, and elsewhere, than those in 
 tli<' i.-lan«l), f'.!*' i'hasiiin (Jneks rose to eonsiderable power and 
 po|iMlatioii. And a- they seem to ha\e }>een the only Greeks, 
 until the settlement of the Milesian Histijcus on the Strymon 
 aliout r*lO ji.i ., \v!i.) '.ctively concerned themselves in the raining 
 districts of Tii opposite to their isUuul, we cannot be sur- 
 
 An!ii!u»li. Fia;:!u. 17-r<. til. Sciiiieidewin. 
 
 Tiu- -rriLiii- j.nti.ri.- y of th!> (lescription, t'vtn after the lapse of two 
 ch.»u-;u;.i i;.i' huiulit'tl y mi-. ; -» ni in tlu- 'i'nivols of Grisebach, voL 
 
 i. eh. 7. jiji. I'i i-Jl-. ii, in Proke-th. l)»'!ikwuniigkeiten des Orients, Tli. 
 3, ]>. B12. i'husTis frfrn rlir sea ju!<rifics the title 'He/wr/ ((Eno- 
 
 luaus ;i{i. Kr, ■ 1> . \n, p. 256; Steph. Byz. Oacraor). 
 
 Thasus (now I Mtniijs at present a [)opuhition of about six thou- 
 
 ?aiid Greeks, tli-pir-i a i i twelve small villages; it exports some px)d ship- 
 timber, priiu'ijially lir, ol' whieli there is abundanee on the island, to^-ethef 
 \\ir?i some olive oil and wax ; but it cannot grow com enough even for this 
 small population. No mines either are oow, or have been for a long time, 
 in work. 
 
 • Archiloeh. Fragm. Ty. ed. Schneidewin; Aristophan. Pac. 12^*8, with tht 
 Bcholia; Strabo, x. p. 4H7, xii, p. 549; Thncyd.iv. 104. 
 
 l.SLAND OF THASUS. 
 
 2T 
 
 prised to hear that their clear surplus revenue before the Persian 
 c onquest, about 41)3 B. c, after defraying the charges of theif 
 .overmnent without any taxation, amounted to the large sum of 
 Iwo hundred talents, sometimes even to three hundred talents, in 
 r.ich year (from forty-six thousand to sixty-six thousand pounds). 
 
 On the long peninsula called the Thracian Chersonese there 
 may probably have been small Grecian settlements at an early 
 date, though we do not know at what time either the Milesian 
 settlement^of Kardia, on the western side of the isthmus of that 
 peninsula, near the iEgean sea, — or the iEolic colony of Sestus on 
 the Hellespont, — were founded; while the Athenian ascendency 
 in the peninsula begins only with the migration of the first Milti- 
 a.les, during the reign of Peisistratus at Athens. The Samian 
 c.lony of Perinthus, on the northern coast of the Propontis,J is 
 spuki'n of as ancient in date, and the Megarian colonies, Selym- 
 bria and Byzantium, belong to the seventh century B.C.: the 
 latter of these two is assigned to the 30th Olympiad (G57 B.C.), 
 and its neighbor Chalkedon, on the opposite coast, was a few 
 years earlier. The site of Byzjuitium in the narrow strait of 
 the Bos}>horus. with its abundant thunny-fishery,^ which both 
 employed and nourished a large proportion of the poorer freemen, 
 was alike convenient either for maritime tratfic, or for levying 
 contributions on the numerous corn shifjs which passed from the 
 Kuxine into the yEgean ; and we are even told that it held 
 a considerable number of the neighboring Hithynian Thracians 
 as tributary Peria;ki. Such dominion, though probably main- 
 tained during the more vigorous period of Grecian city life, 
 became in later times impracticable, and we even find the Byzan- 
 tines not always competent to the defence of their own small 
 surrounding territory. The place, however, will be found to 
 possess considerable importance during all the period of this 
 history.3 
 
 The Grecian settlements on the inhospitable south-western 
 coast of the Euxine, south of the Danube, appear never to hav« 
 
 Skymnus Chius, 699-715 ; Plutarch, Quaest. Graec. c. .57. See M. RaouJ 
 Rochette, llistoire des Colonies Grecques chs. xi-xiv, vol. iii, pp. 273-298 
 
 • Aristot. Polit. iv, 4, 1. 
 
 • Polyb. iv, 39 , Phylarch. Fragm. 10, ed. Dido* 
 
28 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKrE. 
 
 attained an^ consideration : the principal traffic of Greek ships 
 in that sea tended to more northerly ports, on the banks of the 
 Borysthenes and in the Tauric Chersonese. Istria was founded 
 by the Milesians near the southern embouchure of the Danube. 
 — Apollonia and Odessus on the same coast, more to the south, — 
 all probably between G()0-560 b. c. T\u^ Me;iarian or Byzan- 
 tine colony of Mesambria, seems to have been later than the 
 Ionic revolt ; of Kallatis ihe age is not known. Tomi, north of 
 Kallatis and south of Istria, is renowned a> the place of Ovid's 
 banishment.i The picture which he gives of that uninviting 
 Fpot, which enjoyed but little truce from the neighborhood of the 
 munlerous Get*, explains to us sufficiently why these towns 
 Rcipiired little or no im{»ortance. 
 
 The islands of Lemiios and Imbros, in the ^Egean, were at 
 this early period occupied by Tyrrhenian Pelasgi, were con- 
 quered by the Pci>iaiis al)ont ;j08 b.c, and seem to have passed 
 into the power of the Athenians at tlie time when Ionia revolted 
 from the Persians. If the mythical or poetical stories respectinf^ 
 these Tyrrhenian I'elasgi contain any basis of truth, they nui.-^ 
 have been a race of buccaneers not less rapacious tlian cruel. 
 At one time, these Pelasgi seem also to have possessed Samo- 
 thrace, but how or when they were supj)lanted by Greeks, we 
 find no trustworthy account ; the population of Samothrace at 
 the time of the Persian war was lonic.'^ 
 
 ' Skymnus Chius, 720-740; licrodot. ii, 33, vi, 33; Strabo, vii, p. 319; 
 8kylax, c. 68; Mannert, Geograph. Gr. Kom. vol. vii. ch. 8, pp. 126-140. 
 
 An iuscription in Boeckh's Collection proves the existence of a pentapo- 
 lis, or union, of five Grecian cities on this coast. Tomi, Kallatis, Mesam- 
 bria, and Apollonia, arc iiresumed hy Blaraniberg to have belonged to th'u 
 onion. See Inscript. No. 2()r)t) r. 
 
 SynceUus, however (p. 218), places the foundutioa of Ltria Donsiderablt 
 earlier, in 651 u.c. 
 ' Uerodot riii, 90i. 
 
 EYRENE AND B AREA. - HESPEKIDES. 
 
 2d 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 KYREXE AND BARKA.-HESPERIDES. 
 
 It has been already mentioned, in a former chapter, that 
 pimmichus king of^Egypt, about the -^f^f the seventh 
 ^Tturv U.C., hrst removed those prohibitions wh.ch ^a^ e- ^^^^^^^^ 
 Grecian commerce from his country. In his reign Grecian mer- 
 c n ie. were lirst established in Egypt, and Grecia.. traders ad. 
 nt Sunder certain regulations, into the Nile. The openin, 
 of this new market emboldened them to traverse the direct .<ea 
 >vhich senarates Krete from Egypt, - a dangerous voyage with 
 ve^^cls M rarely ventured to lose sight of land, - and seems 
 to have lii^t made them acquainted with the neighboring coast ot 
 Lihva, )>etween the x\ile and the gulf called the Great ^yrtis 
 Hence arose the foundation of the imi)ortant colony called 
 
 ^'^\' hi the case of most other Grecian colonies, so in that of 
 Kvrcnc both the ibundation and the early history are very im- 
 ,hVi-i1v known. The date of the event, as far as can be made 
 out aniid>t much contradiction of statement, >va^ about G30 B.c.:i 
 Tlieni was the mother-city, herself a colony from Lacediemon ; 
 and the settlements formed in Libya became no inconsiderable 
 ornaiiKMits to the Dorian name in Hellas. 
 
 AccurdiiH' to the account of a lost historian, Menekles,^ — 
 r.oliiical di.^ension among the inhabitants of Thera led to that 
 emigration which founded Kyrene ; and the more ample legend- 
 ary ''details which Herodotus collected, partly from Theraean, 
 partly from Kvrenaan iniormants, are not positively inconsistent 
 with this statement, though they indicate more particularly bad 
 sea«^uns, distress, and over-population. Both of them dweU em- 
 phatically on the Deli>hian oracle a^ the instigator as well as the 
 
 ~^Se^7dliJ^u..sion of the era of Kyrene in Thrige, Historia Cyrfin^ 
 .hd 22, 23, 24, where the ditlerent statements are noticed and compared. 
 • Schol. ad rindar. Pytli. iv. 
 
m 
 
 HISTORY OF GHEECE. 
 
 SITUATION OF KYRENE. 
 
 81 
 
 director oJ th<- first emigrants, who>o apprelicnsions of a dan-^r- 
 ous vo)a-« and an unknown country were very ditlicult to over- 
 come. Both of them affirmed that the original oikist Battus was 
 Bcleored and consecrated to the work by the divine command 
 hoth called Battus the .m of Polymnestus, of the mythical breed 
 called Minyie. But on other points there was complete divergence 
 between tiie two .stories, and the Kyrena^ans themselves, vvlio^e 
 5own was partly peopled by emigrants from Krete, described tiie 
 mother of Battus as daughter of Etearchus, prince of the Kretan 
 town ot Axus.i Battus had an impediment in his speecli, and it 
 was on his intreatin- from the Delphian oracle a cure for this in- 
 hrmity that he received directions to go as ''a cattle-breedin<r 
 t^^kist to Libya/' The suffering Thera'ans were directed to 
 a<-i>t hmi, but ntitl.cr he nor they knew where Libya was, nor 
 ^onl,l ilivy lind an^ resident in Krcte who had ever visited it 
 Such was the linntcd reach of Grecian navigation to the soutli 
 of tlie yEgean sea, even a century after the foundation of Svra- 
 I'ii.e. At length, 1m prolonged in(piir^, they disco^^lv,l a man 
 employed in catcliiug the purple shellfish, named Kon->bi.,s,— 
 who said that he bad been once forced by stnss of urath.r to 
 ^he islaml of Piatea, close to the shores of Libya, and on tiic side 
 not far icmoved from the western hmit of Egypt. Some Thene- 
 IS being sent along with Korobius to inspect this island, left him 
 there with a stock of provi>ions, and returned to Thera to con- 
 duct the emigrants. From the seven districts into which Thera 
 Wii.s divided, emigrants were drafted for the colony, one brother 
 b<'.ng singled out by lot from the different numerous families 
 But so long was tlieir return to Piatea deferred, that the provis. 
 ions of Korobms wei-e exJiausted, and h(3 was onlv saved from 
 itarvation by the accidental arrival of a Samian ship, driven bv 
 contrary winds out of her <-ourse on the vova-r^ t(, F-rypt K(> 
 lieus,tlie master of tlis ship (whose immen:e proiits iii^de'by the 
 tirst ^uyage to Tartessus have been noticed in a former chapter) 
 supplied him with provisions for a year, - an act of kindness^ 
 which IS said to Inive laid the first foundation of the alliance and 
 good feeling afterwards prevak'nt between Thera, Kyrene and 
 bamo8. At length (he expected emigrants n-ached the island, 
 
 bavm^' found the voyage so perilous and difficult, that they oii« 
 returned in despair to Thera, where they were only pre veniad 
 by force fix>m relanding. The band which accompanied Battu. 
 wa. all conveyed in two pentekonters, — ai-med ships, with httjr 
 rowers each. Thus humble w.is the start of the mighty Kyrene, 
 which, in the days of Heix>dotus, covered a city-area equal to 
 the entire island of PUitea.i 
 
 That island, however, though near to Libya, and supposed by 
 the colonists to be Libya, was not so in reality : the commaadi, 
 of the oracle had not been literally fulhlled. Accordingly, the 
 settlement carried with it nothing but hardship for the space oi 
 two years, and Battus returned with his comi)aiiions to Delphi, to 
 .xnnplain tlmt the pmmised land had proved a bitter disappomt. 
 ment. The god, through his priestess, returned lor answer, " It 
 von who have never visited the cattle-breeding Libya, know it 
 better than I, who have, I greatly admire youi- cleverness. 
 A-ain the inexorable mandate forced them to return ; and this 
 liiue they planted themselves on the actual continent ot Libya, 
 uearly over against the island of Piatea, in a district called Aziris, 
 surrounded on both sides by fine woods, and with a running 
 stream adjoining. After six years of residence in this spot, they 
 were persuaded by some of the' indigenous Libyans to abandon 
 It under the promise that they should be conducted to a better 
 situation : and their guides now brought them to the actual site of 
 Kyrene, saying, - Here, men of Hellas, is the place for you to 
 ivvell, tor here the sky is peribrated."^ The road through which 
 Ihey passed had led through the tempting region ot Irasa with lU 
 fountain Theste, and their guides took the precaution to carry 
 them through it by niglit, in order that they might remain igno- 
 
 rant of its beauties. 
 
 Such were the preliminary steps, divine and human, which 
 brouc^ht Battus and his colonists to Kyrene. In the time of Her- 
 odotns, L-asa was an outlying portion of the eastern territory of 
 Ihis powerful city. But we trace in the story just related m 
 
 ' Ibrodot. iv, 150-lM. 
 
 * Herodot. iv, Ibb. . 
 
 « Horodot. iv, 158. h^avra yap 6 oipavdi rirp^rai. Compare tlie jest 
 scribed to the Byzantian envoys, on occasion of the vaunts of LybimacUui 
 .Plutarch, De Fortuna Alexandr. Magn. c. 3, p. 338). 
 
 ^ 
 I I 
 
82 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 FERTILITY OF THE KYRENAIC REGION. 
 
 88 
 
 opinion prevalent among his Kyrenaean int'orraants, that Irasa 
 with its fountain Theste was a more inviting position than K}- 
 rene with its f'ouiitiiin of Apollo, and ought in prudence to have 
 been originally i-hctsen ; out of which opinion, according to the 
 general habit of thj Greek mind, an anecdote is engendered and 
 accredited, explaining how the su[)posed mistake was committed. 
 What may have been the recommendations of Irasa, we are not 
 permitted to know : but descriptions of modern travellers, no less 
 than the subsequent history of Kyrene, go far to justify the 
 choice actually made. The city was placed at the distance of 
 about ten miles iiom the sea, having a sheltered port called 
 AjJoUonia, itself afterwards a considerable town, — it was about 
 twenty miles from the promontory Phykus, which forms the 
 Doithernmost projection of the African coast, nearly in the long- 
 itude of the Peloponnesian Cape Tienarus (Matapan). Kyrene 
 was situated about eighteen hundred feet above the level of the 
 Mediterranean, of which it cominaiid«Ml a tine view, and from 
 which it was conspicuously visible, on the edge of a range of 
 hills which slope by succ 'ssive terraces down to the port. The 
 Boil immediately around, partly calcareous, partly sandy, is de- 
 scribed by Captain Beechey to present a vigorous vegetation and 
 remarkable fertility, though the ancierits considered it inferior in 
 this respect both to Harka' and Hes{)erides, and still more infe- 
 rior to the more westerly region near Kinyps. But the abun- 
 dant periodical rains, attracted by the lofty heights around, and 
 justifying the expression of tlie " })erforated sky," were even of 
 greater imporlance, under an African sun, than extraordinary 
 richness of soil.- The maritime regions near Kyrene and Barka, 
 
 ' Herodot iv, 198. 
 
 • Sec, about the proiluctivc powers of Kyrene and its surroundingr rcfrion, 
 flerodot. iv, 199; Kallimachus (himself a Kyrena?an), H^min. ad ApoU. 
 66, with the note of Spanheim ; Pindar. Pyth. iv, with the Scholia jxissim : 
 IHodor iii, 4\>; Arrian. Indica, xliii, 13. Strabo (xvii, p. 837) saw Kyrenfe 
 firom the sea in sailintr by, and was struck with the view : he ices not 
 (Appear to have landed. 
 
 The results of modern observation in tl at country are pven in the Viaj:- 
 fio of Delia Cella and in the exploring expedition of Captain Beechey ; see 
 an interesting summary in the History of the Barbary States by Dr. Kossell 
 (Edinburgh, 1835), ch. v, pp. 160-171' The chapter on this subject (c. 6^ 
 
 and Hesperides, pix)duced oil and wine as well as com, while th« 
 extensive district between these towns, composed of alternat* 
 mountain, wood, and plain, was eminently suited for pasture and 
 cattle-breeding; and the ports were secure, presenting conve- 
 niences for the intercourse of the Greek trader with Northern 
 Africa, such as were not to be found along all the coasts of the 
 Great Syrtis westward of Hesperides. Abundance of applioa- 
 ble land, — great diversity both of climate and of productive 
 fcu^son, between the sea-side, the low hill, and the upper moun- 
 tain, within a small space, so that harvest was continually going 
 on, and fresh produce coming in from the earth, during eight 
 months of the year, — together with the monopoly of the valua- 
 ble plant called the Silphium, which grew nowhere except in the 
 Kvienaic region, and the juice of which was extensively de- 
 manded throughout Greece and Italy, — led to the rapid growth 
 t>f Kyrene, in spite of serious and renewed political troubles. 
 And even now, the immense remains w Inch still mark its desolate 
 site, the evidences of past labor and solicitude at the Fountain of 
 
 iu Thrigc's Historia Cyrends is defective, as the authi>r st- lus never to have 
 M'cn the careful and Valuable observations of Captain Beo.hey, and pro- 
 cit'ds chiefly on the statements of Delia Cella. 
 
 I refer briefly to a few among the many interesting notices of Captain 
 Ikrchey. For the site of the ancient Hesperides (Bengazi), and the " beau- 
 tiful fertile plain near it, extending to the foot of a Ion- chain of mountams 
 al.out fourteen miles distant to the south-eastward,"— see Beechey, Expedi. 
 tion.ch.xi, pp. 287-315; "a great many datepalm-trees m the neighbor- 
 
 hood," (ch. xii, pp. 340-345.) ,,, , • 
 
 The distance between Bengazi (Hesperides) and Ptolemeta (Ptolemai^ 
 the port of Barka) is tifty-seven geographical miles, along a ftTtile and 
 beautiful plain, stretching from the mountains to the sea. Between thes« 
 two was situated the ancient Teucheira (/6. ch. xii, p. 347), about thirty- 
 ei-ht miles from Hesperides (p. 349). in a country highly productive 
 wherever it is cultivated (pp. 350-355). Exuberant vegetation exists ne^r 
 ♦he deserted Ptolemeta, or Ptolemais, after the winter rams (p. 364). Ihe 
 ( ircuit of Ptolemais, as measured by the ruins of its walls, was about three 
 and a half English miles (p. 380). , r • ♦ 
 
 The road from Barka to KvrenS presents continued marks ot ancient 
 c*iariot.wheels (ch. xiv, p. 406) ; after passing the plain of Merg^, it be- 
 comes hilly and woodv, "but on approaching Grenna (Kyrene) it becomes 
 more clear of wood ; the valleys produce fine crops of barley., and the hilli 
 excellent pasturage for cattle," (p. 409.) Luxuriant vegetation after tht 
 winter rains iu the vicinity of Kyrene (ch. xv, p. 465). 
 
 VOL. IV. ^* ^ 
 
 ^'i 
 
 1 
 
 41 
 
 I 
 
9v 
 
 IlISTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 INDIGENOUS LIBYAN TRIBES. 
 
 8i 
 
 Apollo, and elsewhere, tojrether with the profusion of excavated 
 and ornamented tombs, - attest sutticiently what the grandeur of 
 the place must have been in tlie days of Herodotus and Pindar. 
 So much did tlie Kyrenaans pride themselves on the Silphium, 
 found wild in their back country, from the ishmd of Platea on 
 the east to the inner recess of the Great Syrtis westward, ■— the 
 leaves of which were highly salubrious for cattle, and the stalk 
 fci man, while the root furnished the peculiar juice for export,— 
 tliat they maintained it to have first appeai'ed seven years inior 
 to the arrival of the first Grecian colonist in their city.' 
 
 But it wa.^ nut only the properties of the soil which promoted 
 the i)rosi)erity of Kyrene. Isokrates ^ praises the well-chosen 
 Bite of that colony because it was planted in the midst of indi- 
 genous natives apt for subjection, and far distant from any formi- 
 dable enemies. That the native Libyan tribes were made con- 
 ducive in an eminent degree to the growth of the Greco-Libyan 
 cities, admits of no doubt; and in reviewing the history of the.-t' 
 cities, we must bear in mind that their population was not pure 
 Greek, but more or less mixed, like that of the colonies in Italy, 
 Sicily,'or Ionia. Though our information is very imperfect, we 
 see enougli to prove that the small force brought over by Battus 
 the Stainmcrer was enabled first to fraternize with the indigenous 
 Libyans, — next, i-einforced by additional colonists and availing 
 themselves of the power of native chiefs, to overawe and subju- 
 gate tlu^m. Kyrene — combined with Barka and Hesperides, 
 lx>th of thciu .-^i.rung from her root •' — exercised over the Libyan 
 tribes between the borders of Egypt and the inner recess of tl;e 
 Great Syrtis, for a space of three degrees of longitude, an ascea- 
 
 ' Theoi.tirast. Hist. V\. xl 3, 3; ix, 1, 7 ; Skylax. c. 107. 
 
 ^ Isokrates, Or. v, a<l rhilipp. p. 84, (i>. 107, ed. Bck.) Thera being a 
 colony of La< cMlaMiiou, and Kyrene of Thera, Isokrates speaks of Kyr^nfi 
 Bs a colony of Laoedaimon. 
 
 > Pindar, Pyth. iv, 26. Kvpi}V7iv — uaTtuv ^i^av In the time of Herodo- 
 CSi the<e three cties may possibly have been spoken of as a Tripohs ; ba\ 
 ao one bi^fore Alexander the Great would have understood the expression 
 Pentapohs, used under the Romans to denote Kyrene, Apollonia. Ptcte- 
 mais, Teucheira, and Bcrenike, or Hesperides. 
 
 Ftolemais, orii;inally the port of Barka lidd become autonomcas, aoi til 
 jfi«ater importance than the latter. 
 
 dency similar to that which Carthage possessed over the more 
 westerly Libyans near the Lesser Syrtis. Within these Kyre- 
 naan limits, and further westward along the shores of the Great 
 Svrtis, the Libyan tribes were of pastoral habits ; westward^ 
 beyond the Lake Tritonis and the Lesser Syrtis,' they began to 
 le agricultural Immediately westward of Egypt were the 
 Advrinachida?, bordering upon Apis and Marea, the Egyptian 
 frontier towns ;'^ they were subject to the Egyptians, and had 
 atlopted some of the minute ritual and religious observances 
 whitli characterized the region of the Nile. Proceeding west- 
 ward from the Adyrmachida^ were found the Giligammae, the 
 Asbysta', the Auschisai, the Kabales, and the Na.<am6nes, — the 
 latter of whom occupied the south-eastern corner of the Great 
 <^ V It is ; — next, the Maka?, Gindanes, Lotophagi, Machlyes, as 
 tar as a certain river and lake called Triton and Tritonis, which 
 >t' .a.^ to have been near the Lesser Syrtis. These last-men- 
 lioucd tribes were not dependent either on Kyrene o: on Car- 
 tilage, at the time of Herodotus, nor probably during the proper 
 p.-iiod of free Grecian history, (600-300 B.C.) In the third 
 i» ntuiy B.C., the Ptolemaic governors of Kyrene extended their 
 doiniiiiou westward, while Carthage pushed her colonies and 
 lastles eastward, so that the two powers embraced between them 
 the whole line of coast between the Greater and Lesser Syrtis, 
 ir.»<tinir at the spot called the Altars of the Brothers Philaini, — 
 v() c. h brated for its commemorative legend.^ But even in the 
 sixtii century B.C., Carthage was jealous of the extension of 
 Greciim colonies along this coast, and aided the Libyan Makaa 
 
 ' The accounts respecting the lake called in ancient times Tritonis arc, 
 !.( wevcr, very uncertain : see Dr. Sliaw's Travels in Barbary, p. 127. Strain) 
 Kicmions a lake so called near Hesperides (xvii, p. 836); Pherekydes talks 
 of it as near Irasa (Pherekyd. Fragm. 33 d. ed. Didot). 
 
 ^ Eratosthenes, bom at Kyrene and resident at Alexandria, estimated the 
 liud-jouniey hetween the two at five hundred and twenty-five Roman milei 
 iriiny, H. N. V, 6). 
 
 ^ Sallust, Bell. Jugurth. c. 75 ; Valerius Maximus, v, 6. Thripe (Histor. 
 i'yr. c. 49) places this division of the Syrds between Kyrene and Carthag* 
 at some period between 400-330 B.C., anterior to the loss of the independ- 
 ence of Kyrene ; but I cannot think that it was earUer than the Ptolemtot! 
 ccmpare Strabo, xvii, p 836 
 
 I' 
 
 t. 
 
 I 'I 
 
36 
 
 HlSiURY OF GREECE. 
 
 TERRITORY NEAR THE SYRTIS. 
 
 ^ 
 
 fl 
 
 (about 510 B.C.) to expel the S})artan prince Dorieus from na 
 settlement near the river Kiiiyps. Near that spot was after- 
 wards planted, by Phenician or Cartliaginian exiles, the town of 
 Ltptis Magna ' (now Lebida), which does not seem to have 
 existed in the time of Herodotus. Nor does the latter historian 
 notice the Marmaridic, who appear as the |)rincipal Libyan trilje 
 near the west of Egypt, between the age of Sky lax and the third 
 century of the Christian era. Some migration or revolution 
 subsequent to tlie time of Hero<lotus must have brought this 
 name into predoioinanc*. - 
 
 The interior country, stretching westward from Egyj>t along 
 the thirtieth and thirtv-first i)arallel of latitude, to the Great 
 Syrtis, and then along the southcni slioreof that gulf, is to a great 
 df'"ree low and sandv, and «juite destitute of trees ; yet allord- 
 in*^ in many parts water, herbiige, and a fertile soil.^ But the 
 
 • The Ciirthajj;iniau estuhlislimint Ntiipolis is inontioncd l>y Skyhix 
 ( •. 109). and Stnil»<» states that L(>i>ti.s was anotlicr nanic for the same phieQ 
 
 (XV ii, p. 835). 
 
 2 Skylax, c. 107; Voi)iHUs, Vit. IVoh. e. 9; Strabo, xvii, p. 83S ; Pliny, 
 H. N. V, 5. From the Libyan tril)e Mannaridae was derived the name 
 Marmarika, appUed to that ie*_Mim. 
 
 ih^r (llerodot. iv, 191); Sallust, Bell. Jugtu'thin. 
 
 3 -^/T -* 
 
 e. 17. 
 
 t'aptain Becchey points ont the mistaken eoneeptions which have l)een 
 
 enivrtaincd of this n'uion: — 
 
 •■ It i^ not onlv in the works of <'aiiy \vntfv< tliat we find the nature of 
 the Svrtis misunderstood; for the \vh(»l<' ot" the spare between Mesurata 
 (/. .. thi' cape which fonns the w.'^ii rn extremity of the (ireat Syrtis) and 
 Alexandria is described by Leo Afri<anus, un<ler the title of Barka, as a 
 wihl and desert cotmtry. where th.re is neither water nor land capable of 
 cultivation. Me tt lis us fliat the most powerful amone the Mohammedan 
 invader^ possessed thomsihfs of the fertile i>arts of the coast, leaving; the 
 oiher- onlv the des-rt for their abode, exjiosed to all the miseries and pri- 
 vations attendant upon it: for this desert (he continues) is far removed 
 from any habitations, and nothin*,' is produced there whatever. So that if 
 thfse poor people wouhl have a supply of urain. or of any other artieloa 
 occes«iary to their existence, they are oblii^ed to pledse their children to the 
 Sicilians who vi>it the coast : who. on })rovidinLr them with these things, 
 carry otf the children they liave re* 'ivcd 
 
 "it ai^pears to l)e chiefly from L( o Africanus that modern historians hav9 
 deiived their idea of what they term the district and desert of Barka. Yt< 
 tfad whole of tlie Cvreiiuica is corny reheuded within the limits which they 
 
 axaritime region north of this, constituting the projecting boFX>m 
 of the African coast from the island of Platea (Gult of Bomba) 
 on the east to Hesperides (Bengazi) on the west, is of a totally 
 different character; covered with mountains of considerable 
 elevation, which reach their highest point near Kyrene, inter 
 spersed with productive plain and valley, broken by frequent 
 nivines which carry off the winter torrents into the sea, and 
 never at any time of the year destitute of water. It is thia 
 latter advantage that causes them to be now visited every sum- 
 mer by the Bedouin Arabs, who flock to the inexhaustible I oun- 
 tain of Apollo and to other parts of the mountainous region from 
 Kvrene to Hesperides, when their supply of water and herbage 
 fails in the interior :i and the same circumstance must have 
 
 •v^.i-u to it; and the authority of Herodotus, without citing any other, 
 'would be amply sutiicient to prove that this tract of country not only waa 
 no desert, but was at all times remarkable for its fertility ...... The im 
 
 p,e-ion l.ft upon our minds, after reading the account of Herodotus, 
 would be much more consistent with the appearance and peculiarities of 
 Loth, in their actual state, than that which would result from the description 
 
 of anv succeeding writer The district of Barka, including all the 
 
 eountVy between Mesurata and Alexandria, neither is, nor ever was, so des- 
 titute and barren as has been represented: the part of it which coiistitutea 
 the Cyrenaica is capable of the hi-hest degree of cultivation, and many 
 p irts of \hc Smis alford excellent pasturage, while some of it is not onl, 
 Lianted to caltivation, l)Ut does actually produce good crops of barley an 
 dhurra." (Captain Beechey, Expedition to Northern Coast of Africa, ch. i 
 i.p. :>G.'}, 265, 267, 269 : comp. ch. xi, p. 32L) „ r. . -. 
 
 ' Justin, xiii, 7. " Amoenitateni loci et fontium ubertatem. Captaia 
 Beechev notices this annual migration of the Bedouin Arabs : — 
 
 - Teicheira (on the coast between Hesperides and Barka) abounds in 
 wells of excellent water, which are reserved by the Arabs for their summer 
 consumption, and onlv resorted to when the more inland supplies are 
 exhausted : at other times it is uninhabited. Many of the excavated tombs 
 are occupied as dwelling-houses by the Arabs during their summer visits to 
 that part of the coast." (Beechey, Exp. to North. Afric. ch. xii, p. 354 , 
 
 And about the wide mountain plain, or table-land of Merge, the site of the 
 ancient Barka, " The water from the mountains inclosing the plain settles 
 in pools and laV.es in different parts of this spacious valley ; and affords a 
 <-n'\ant supply, during the summer months, to the Arabs who frequent it. 
 (ch xiii. p. 390.) The red earth which Captain Beechey observed in this 
 plain is noticed bv Herodotus in regard to Libya (ii, 12). Stephan. Byt. 
 notices also th« bricks used in building (v. Bdp/c^yJ Dema, too, to thfl 
 
 r 
 (I 
 
 r 
 
 ** 1 
 
 Ii 
 
38 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 jnXTURE OF GREEKS AND LIBYANS. 
 
 39 
 
 opei-ated In ancient times to hold the nomadic Libyans in a eort 
 ot' dependentre on Kyrene and Barka. Kyrene appropriated the 
 Haritime portion of the territory of the Libyan Asbystie ; • the 
 Auschisaj occupied tiie region south of Barka, touching the sea 
 near Ilesperides, — the Kabales near Teucheira in the territory 
 af Barka. Over the interior .spaces the^e Libyan Nomads, with 
 their cattle and twisted tents, wandered unrestrained, amply fed 
 upon meat and milk,'- clothctl in goatskins, and enjoying better 
 heahh than any people known to Herodotus. Their bic-d ot 
 horses was excellent, and their chariots or wagons with four 
 horses could perft»rm feats admired even by Greeks : it was to 
 th< Mj horses that the princes^ and magnates of Kyrene and 
 Barka often owt-d the success ot' tl»cir chariots in the games of 
 GrtM'cc. The Libyjin Xasamonr-, leavinir their eattle n<.'ar the 
 sea, were in the habit of making an aiinual journey up the 
 country to the Oasi> of Augila, for the jmrpu-e ot' gathering the 
 
 «a.-twaiJ ot" Cyrcnc on tiie sva-coa^t. i.> ain}>ly pruviiU'J with water (eh. xvi, 
 p. 471). 
 
 Aixmi Kyreiie it>elf Cujitaiii Beeclicy siait - : '• During; the time, about a 
 turtniu'at, of our al-« n. t- fVum KyrcUf. the ihaii-fs wliich had taken j)l:iio 
 in the iippeiirr.ncr ut' t'lr tountry about it wvw n iiiarkable. We fmiiid the 
 hills on our return iOA»'re(l with Arabs, tbrir iainrl>, flocks, and herds; the 
 •careity of water in tiie interior at this time havin;^' dnvou tlie Beilouiiia 
 to tli«- nic>uiitaitis. and particularly to Kyrene, where the springs artbr 1 at 
 ail tiiiic> an af>nndant supply. The corn was all cut, and the hiuh ^iu>s 
 and luxuri.mt v. ■.■vta;i'.n. whit h %\< dad found it so diliirult to wade ihn>!i;.di 
 on ft>rmer occa-^ions. had ' ■< n * ateu d.)wii to t!ie roots bv the catilc." 
 (eh. xviii. pp. 51 7 t2(>.) 
 
 The winter rain- d-o abundant, between January and NFareh, at 
 
 Ben^azi (tlie ancient Hesjjerides) : -weet sprin^r^ (»f water near the towi 
 (eh. xi. [•{>. 2S2. :]\:>. :v>7). Ab..ut Ptolemeta, or Ptoleniais, the port of t).". 
 ancient Barka, /A. eh. \ii, p. :u'.:]. 
 
 ' Ilerodot. iv, 17(>-1 71. r:a(M/Ja a^in^pa rvdaiuuv. Strabo, ii, p. 131. 
 "no'vufihiv Kdi ' \af.-:y>r(irac y'^o''"". Pindar. l*vth. ix, 7. 
 
 ' Herodot. iv. lsf». 1S7. 189. 190. \<iuu(^tr KpfoOuyoL Ka) ] nAaKTonoTat 
 Pindar, Pyth. ix, 127. --fi-al Souadtc Pompon. Mela, i. 8. 
 
 * See the fourth, ti th. and ninth Pythian Odes of Pindar. In the 
 dei«cription given by Sophokles (Eleetra, 695) of the Pythian contests, in 
 which pretence is made that Orestes has perished, ten contending chaiiots 
 ws supposed, of whi< !i two are Liljvau, from Barka: of the remaiajn^ 
 eiijnf, one only comes from each place named. 
 
 date-harvest,' or of purchasing dates, — a journey which the 
 Bedouin Arabs from Bengazi still make annually, oai-rymg up 
 their wheat and barley, for the same puri)Ose. Each of the 
 Libyan tribes was distinguished by a distinct mode of cuttmg 
 the hair, and by some peculiarities of religious worship, though 
 generally all worshipped the Sun and the Moon.=2 But in the 
 3ei<diborhood of the Lake Tritonis (seemingly the western ex- 
 tremity of Grecian coasting trade in the time of Herodotus, who 
 knows little beyond, and begins to appeal to Carthaginian au- 
 thorities), the Grecian deities Poseidon and Athene, together 
 with the legend of Jason and the Argonauts, had been local- 
 ized. There were, moreover, current prophecies announcmg 
 that' one hundred Hellenic cities were destined one day to be 
 founded round the lake, — and that one city in the island Phla 
 surrounded by the lake, was to be planted by the Laeeduemo- 
 nians.3 These, indeed, were among the many unfulfilled prophe- 
 cies which from every side cheated the Grecian ear, — i)roceed. 
 incr in this ca.se probably from Kyrenajan or Ther^ean traders, 
 who thought the spot advantageous for settlement, and circulated 
 their own hopes under the form of divine assurances. It was 
 about the year 510 b.c.^ that some of these Theraeans conducted 
 the Spartan prince Dorieus to found a colony in the fertile region 
 of Kinyps, belonging to the Libyan Makae. But Carthage, 
 interested in preventing the extension of Greek settlements 
 westward, aided the Libyans in driving him out. 
 
 The Libyans in the immediate neighborhood of Kyrene were 
 materially changed by the establishment of that town, and con^ 
 stituted a large part -at first, probably, far the largest part- 
 of its constituent population. Not possessing tliat fierce tenacity 
 of habits which the Mohammedan religion has impressed upoii 
 the Arabs of the present day, they were open to tlie mingled 
 influence of constraint and seduction apphed by Grecian settlers ; 
 BO that in the time of Herodotus, the Kabales and the AsbystaJ 
 
 » Ilerodot. iv, 172-182. Compare Horneinann's Travels in Africa r 
 ♦8. and Heeren, Verkehr und Handel der Alten Welt, Th. u, Abtk ! 
 
 A.bs( huitt vi, p. 226. . mo i-q iQ«i iqa 
 
 « HercdoL iv, 175-1 S8. ' Hi'Todot. iv, 178, 1.9.^ 95. 196 
 
 Herodot. iv, 42. 
 
 ! i 
 
<iO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 of the interior had come to copy Kyrenaean ttistes an J customs.' 
 Tlic Theraian colonists, having obtained not merely the consent 
 but even the guidance of the natives to their occupation of Ky- 
 rene, constituted themselves like privileged Spartan citizens in the 
 midst of Libyan Perioeki.'^ Tliey seem to have married Libyan 
 wives, whence Hen^dotus describes the women of Kyrene and 
 Barka as following, even in his time, religious observances indig- 
 enous and not Hellenic.-* Even the descendants of the primitive 
 cekist Battus were semi-Libyan. For Herodotus gives us the 
 curious information that Battu- was the Libyan word for a king, 
 deducing from it the just inference, lliat the name Battus \v;i> not 
 originally personal ro the a^kist, but acquired in Libya first as a 
 title,^ — and that i: afterward- pa-s^d to his dt-rendants as a 
 proper name. For eight generations the reigning princes Avere 
 called llalliis and Arkesilau-, llie Libvan dr-nomination alternat- 
 ing with the Greek, until the tiiinily was linally de[)rivL'd of its 
 power. Moreover, we tind the ciiiet" of Barka, kinsman of Ar- 
 kesilaus of Kyrene l>earing the name of Ala/ir ; a name (•♦'rtainly 
 not Hellenic, and probably Libyan.'' We are, therefore, to con- 
 ceive the first Thera^an colonists as established in tiieir lofty tor- 
 tilled j)Ost Kyrene, in the centre of Libyan Periceki, till then 
 strangers to walls, o Jirts, and perhaps even to cultivated land. 
 Probably these Periceki were alw.ays subject and tril)utary, in a 
 greater or less degree, thougli they contiinied for half a century 
 to retain their own king. 
 
 To these rude mm ilie Theraims communicated the elements 
 of Hellenism an<l <'ivilization, not witliont reetix ing themselves 
 much that was non-ITelh;nic in return; an<l perliaps the reaction- 
 ary influence of the Libvan element airainst the Hellenic mijjht 
 have proved the stronger of the two, ha<l they not been rein 
 forced by new-come is from (Treece. After forty years of Battus 
 
 ' Herodot. iv. 1 7(» '"if (Vt roi'^ rz/.tLurov^ uiueta\::^ac e-mrrjdevovai Tot){ 
 Kvprjvalur. 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 161 {)aoa uv Kal rui' TtpioiKuv, etc. 
 
 * Herodot. iv. 186-1 89. Compare, nlso, the story in Pindar, Pjtti. ix, 
 109-126, al)cnt Alexidunus, the ancestor of Telesikrates the Kyren»an 
 how the fonner won. l»y !ii^ .- vifnic-s in ranninL% a Libyan maiden, daugk^ 
 ler ot' AntauH cf Ira-;' — ;.nd Kullimachus. Hymn. Apoll. 86. 
 
 * Herodot iv, 1').) * Herodot. iv, 164. 
 
 BATTIAD PRINCES AT KYRENE. 
 
 41 
 
 the oekist (about 630-590 B.C.), and sixteen years of his son 
 Arkesilaus (about 590-574 B.C.), a second Battus' succeeded, 
 called Battus the Prosperous, to mark the extraordinary increase 
 of Kyrene during his presidency. The Kyrenieans under him 
 took pains to invite new settlers from all parts of Greece with 
 out distinction, — a circumstance deserving notice in Grecian 
 ^Ionization, which usually manifested a preference for certain 
 races, if it did not positively exclude the rest. To every new- 
 comer was promised a lot of land, and the Delphian priestess 
 strenuously seconded the wishes of the Kyrenaeans, proclaiming 
 that " whosoever should reach the place too late for the land- 
 division, would have reason to repent it." Such promise of new 
 land, as well as the sanction of the oracle, were doubtless made 
 public at all the games and meetings of Greeks, and a large 
 number of new colonists embarked for Kyrene. The exact num- 
 ber is not mentioned, but we must conceive it to have been very 
 great, when we are told that during the succeeding generation, 
 not less than seven thousand Grecian hoplites of Kyrene perished 
 by the hands of the revolted Libyans, — yet leaving both the 
 city itself and its neighbor Barka still powerful. The loss of so 
 «ireat a number as seven thousand Grecian hoplites has very few 
 parallels throughout the whole history of Greece. In fact, this 
 second migration, during the government of Battus the Prosper- 
 ous, which must have taken place between 574-554 B.C., ought 
 to be looked upon as the moment of real and effective coloni- 
 zation for Kyrene. It was on this occasion, probably, that the 
 port of Apollonia, which afterwiirds came to equal the city itself 
 in importance, was first occupied and fortified, — for this second 
 swarm of emigrants came by sea direct, while the original colo- 
 nists had reached Kyrene by land from the island of Platea 
 through Irasa. The fresh emigrants came from Peloponnesus, 
 Krete, and some other islands of the TEgean. 
 
 To furnish so many new lots of land, it was either necessary, or 
 it was deemed expedient, to dispossess many of the Libyan Peri- 
 ceki, who found their situation in other respects also greatly 
 
 I 
 
 '«f 
 
 ' Respecting the chronology of the Battiad princes, see Boeckh, iA 
 Pindar Pyth. iv, p. 265. and ThirgCj Histor. Cyrenes, p. 127, seq 
 
Mj9K 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 cftaiige<l for the worse. The Libyan king Adikran, himseU^ among 
 the sufferers, implored aid from Apries king of Eg} l)t, then in the 
 hei'^ht of his power; sending to declare himself and his people 
 Eijyptian subjects, like their neighbors the Adyrmacliidu^ Tha 
 Egyptian prince, accepting the otFer, despatched a laige militiiry 
 ftjn'e of the native soldier-caste, who were constantly in stiiiiou 
 at the western frontier-town Marea, by the route along shore to 
 attack Kyrene. They w.re met at Irasa by tiit^ Greeks of Ky- 
 reiie, and, being totally ignorant of Grecian anus and tactics, 
 experienced a defeat so complete that few of them reached home.> 
 The consequenct;s of this disaster in Egypt, uiiere it caused the 
 transfer of the tlirone from Apries to Amasis, have been noticed 
 in a tbrmer chapter. 
 
 ( )t course the Libyan Perioeki were i>ut down, and the redivi- 
 sion of lands ntar Kyrene among the Greek settlers accomplislied, 
 to llie great incivaM- of the power of the city. And the r.'ign of 
 Baltus the rrosjM-rous mark- a llourishing era in the touu, and 
 a lai'ge ac<piisition of hind-tlominloiu antecedent to years of dis- 
 BeM>ion and distre.-s. The Kyrenieans came into intimair alli- 
 ance with Amasis king of Egypt, who encouraged Grecian 
 connection in vmvx .vay, and who even took to wife Ladike, a 
 woman of the Uattiad family at Kyrene, so that the Libyan Pcri- 
 aki lost all chance o!" Egyptian aid against the Greeks.'^ 
 
 New prospects, however, were opened to them during the 
 reign of Arke^ laus the Second, son of Battus the Prosperous, 
 (about :):>4-5M b.< .) Tlie behavior of this prince incensed and 
 alienated his ovn brothers, who raised a revolt against him, se- 
 ceded with a p(»rtiou of the citizens, and induced a number of 
 the Libyan Periieki to take part with them. They founded the 
 Greco-Libyan city of Barka, in the territoiy of the Libyan Aus- 
 chisa^ about twelve miles from the coast, distant from Kyrene by 
 sea about seveiuy miles to the westward. The space between 
 the two, and even beyond Barka, as far as the more westerly 
 Gi-ecian colony called Hesperides, was in the days of Sky lax 
 jrovided with commodious iKwts for refuge or landing :3 at whal 
 
 ARKESILAUS THE SECOND. . 48 
 
 time Hesperides was founded we do not know, but it existed 
 
 ttbout .310 B.c.^ Whether Arkesilaus obstructed the foundation 
 of Barka is not certain ; but he marched the Kyreniean forces 
 against those revolted Libyans who had joined it. Unable to 
 re-ist, the latter fled for refuge to their more easterly brethren 
 near the borders of Egypt, and Arkesilaus pursued them. At 
 length, in a district called Lcukon, the fugitives found an oppor- 
 Umity of attacking him at such prodigious advantage, that they 
 almo>t destroyed the Kyrena?an army, seven thousand hoplites (as 
 has been betbre intimated) being left dead on the tield. Arkesi- 
 laus did not long survive this disaster. He was strangled during 
 vickness by his brother Learchus, who aspired to the throne ; but 
 I^ryxO, widow of the deceased prince,*^ avenged the crime, by 
 causinsr Learchus to be assassinated. 
 
 That tlie credit of the Battiad princes was impaired by such 
 a s< ries of disasters and enormities, we can readily believe. But 
 it received a still greater shock from the circumstance, that Bat- 
 tus the Third, son and successor of Arkesilaus, was lame and 
 dcrormed in his I'eet. To be governed by a man thus personally 
 disabled, was in the minds of the Kyrenaeans an indignity not to 
 he borne, as well as an excuse for preexisting discontents ; and 
 the resolution was taken to send to the Delphian oracle for 
 advice. They were directed by the priestess to invite from 
 !\Iantiiieia, a moderator, empowered to close discussions and 
 f)iovide a scheme of gov^ernment, — the Mantineans selecting 
 Denionax, one of the wisest of their citizens, to solve the same 
 problem which had been committed to Solon at Athens. By 
 liis arrangement, the regal prerogative of the Battiad line was 
 t« rminated, and a republican government estaldished seemingly 
 about 543 B.C. ; the dispossessed prince retaining both the 
 
 llerodot. iv, 1 59. 
 « Uerodot. ii. lHO-181 
 » lierodoi. iv, IiiO; Skj-lax, c. 107 ; Hekataeus, Fiagin. 300, ed. Khissen. 
 
 ' lit rodot. iv, 204. 
 
 ^ Herodot. iv, 160. Plutarch (De Virtutibus Mulier. p. 261) and Polyae- 
 nus (viii, 41) give various details of this stratagem on the part of Eryxoj 
 Learchus being in love with her. Plutarch also states that Learchus main- 
 tained himself as despot for some time by the aid of Egyptian troops from 
 Amasis, and committed great cruelties. His story has too much the aif 
 of a romance to be transeri) ed into the text, nor do I know from what 
 aathority it is taken. 
 
 1 
 
s4 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 KESTORATION OF ARKESILAUS THE THIRD. 
 
 45 
 
 landed domains ' and the various sacerdotal functions which hna 
 belonged to his predecessors. 
 
 Respecting th«,* government, as newly framed, however, Herod- 
 otus unfortunately gives us hardly any particulars. DemOnax 
 clasr-ified tlie inhikbitants of Kyn-ne into three tribes ; composed 
 of: 1. Theraan- with their Libyan Perioiki ; 2. Greeks who 
 had come from l*cluponnc-us and Krete ; 3. Such Greeks as 
 had come t'rom all oth«'r i>I;in<l- in the iEgean. It appears, tco, 
 that a senate wa> cuiistituttd, taken doubtless from these three 
 tribes, and we may j)resume, in cijual pro])orti<jn. It seems 
 probable that theri,' had been before no constitutional classilica- 
 tion, nor })olitit'al privilege, •xfcpt what was vested in the The- 
 ra^ans, — that tlie-^e latter, the descendants ot" the original colo- 
 nists were the ordy persons hitherto lii'twit to the constitution^ — 
 and that the remaining < iieek<, though free landed proju-ietors 
 and hojdites, were not p<rmitted to act as an integral j>art of the 
 body politic, nor distributed in tribes at all.'- The whole powers 
 
 * Ilerodot iv. i*'>l. I '/ Wums) rtun>ea fzf/j'.n- Km ijuaavva^^ rd 
 
 I construe the woT'I Ttnti-m as Mn-aiiiii^' all tJu* (loinaiiis, (loul)tloss lurj^e, 
 whirh had helougrd to tlif liattiad }>iiii<t- ; coiitrary to Tliri^e (Ilistoria 
 Cyrenes, oh. 38. j*. 1. '•();, who ri'>tricts the ('X])ressioii to revenues di?rived 
 from sacred projuitv. The reference of Wcsseling to Ih'syrh. — Burrov 
 7i?(!^'i>v — is of no aviil for illu<tratini: this ]>assage. 
 
 The sup|>osition of (). MiiUer. that the })reoedin^^ kin^ liad made himself 
 despotic by means of ICiryptian soldiers, ajjpears to me neither probable in 
 itself nor adnus>il)h' upon tlie >iiii]ile authtirity of Plutarch's romantic 
 story, when we take into « on->ideration the silenei' of Herodotus. Nor is 
 Miillcr eorreet in afliriniiiL' that Demon, x restored tlie suj)reniaey of the 
 comraTinity :" that le|jfi>lator «;upersedeil the old kintjly j>olitical privileges, 
 and framed a new < on-titntion (see (>. Miiller, History of Dorians, h. iii, 
 ch. 9. s. 13.) 
 
 • Both (). MuUer (Dor. b. iii. 4. .')). and Thrige (Hist. C\Ten. c. 38, p. 
 148), speak of Deniimax as luivinir abolished the old tril)es and created 
 ii<"v ones. I do not conceive the change in this manner. Demonax did 
 net €ibolish any tribes, but distributed for the first time the inhabitants into 
 tribes. It IS jvossible indeed that, before his time, the Therasans of Kvr^nA 
 may have been divided amonir themselves into distinct tribes; but the 
 other inhabitant^, having emigrated from a great number of different 
 places, had never before been thrown into tribes at all. Some form J 
 
 ol government, — up to this time vested in the Battiad pnnce» 
 subject only to such check, how elective we know not, which the 
 citizens of Thenvan origin might be able to interpose, — were 
 now transferred from the prince to the people ; that is, to certain 
 individuals or assemblies chosen somehow from among all the 
 citizens. There existed at Kyrene, as at Thera and Sparta, a 
 board of Ephors, and a band of three hundred armed policed 
 analoo^ous to those who were called the Hippeis, or Horsemen, ai 
 Si>arta: whether these were instituted by Demonax, we do not 
 know, nor does the identity of titular office, in different state?*, 
 aflbrd safe ground for inferring identity of power. This is par- 
 ticularly to be remarked with regard to the Periceki at Kyrene, 
 who were perhaps more analogous to the Helots than to tlie 
 Periceki of Sparta. The fact that the Periieki were considered 
 in the new constitution as belonging specially to the Theraan 
 branch of citizens, shows that these latter still continue<l a privi- 
 leged order, like the Patricians with their Clients at Uonie i:i 
 relation to the Plebs. 
 
 That the rearrangement introduced by Demonax was wise, 
 consonant to the general current of Greek feeling, and calcidated 
 to work well, there is good reason to believe : and no discontent 
 within would have subverted it without the aid of extraneous 
 force. Battus the Lame acquiesced in it peaceably during hi^ 
 life ; but his widow and his son, Pheretime and Arkesilau^, 
 raised a revolt after his death, and tried to regain by force the 
 kingly privileges of the family. They were worsted and obliged 
 to flee, — the mother to Cyprus, the son to Samos, — where 
 both employed themselves in procuring foreign arms to invade 
 and conquer Kyrene. Though Pheretime could obtain no eflec- 
 tive aid from Euelthon prince of Salamis in Cyprus, her son was 
 more successful in Samos, by inviting new Greek settlers to 
 Kyrene, under promise of a redistribution of the land. A large 
 
 enactment or regulation was necessary for this purpose, to define and sanc- 
 tion that religious, social, and political communion, which went to make 
 np tjve idea of the Tribe. It is not to be assumed, as a matter of course 
 that there must necessarily have been tribes anterior to Demonax, among 
 R population so miscellaneous in its origin. 
 
 * Hcsychius, Tpia^cartof ; Eustath. ad Horn. Odyss. p. 303; Her.itK''^ 
 FcHitic. De Polit. c. 4. 
 
m 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKECK. 
 
 THE BATTIAUS SLbSUT TO PEUSIA. 
 
 47 
 
 body of erain^rants joined him on this promise ; tlie period seem- 
 injscly being favorable to it, since tlie Ionian ciiies Iiad not loog 
 before become subject to Persia, and were diseonrented with the 
 yoko. Kut belijre he conducted this numerous band against hid 
 intive city, lie thoight proper to ask the advice of tlie Delphian 
 oracle. Succf^ss in tlie undertaking was promised to him, but 
 moderation ainl n crcy after success was emphatically enjoined, 
 on pain of losing Jiis life; and the Battiad race was declared bj 
 the go<l \i) be desrjned to rule at Kyrene for eight generations, 
 but no longer, — as far as four princes named Battus and four 
 iKinK'd Arkesilaus.i "More than such eight generations (said 
 the Pytlii[i), Ai)ollo forbids the Battiads even to aim at." This 
 c» Tide was doubtless told to Herodotus by Kyrenaean informants 
 V. ht 11 he visited their city after the final deposition of the Bat- 
 tiad {)rinces, which took place in the person of the fourth Arke- 
 Eslaus, between 460- 1 />() b.c. ; the invasion of Kyrene by Ar- 
 kesilaus the Third, sixth prince of the Battiad race, to which 
 the oracle professed to refer, having occurred about 530 B.C. 
 The words placed in the mouth of the priestess doubtless date 
 from the later of these two periods, and afford a specimen of the 
 way in which pretended prophecies are not only made up by 
 antedating after-knowledge, but are also so contrived as to serve 
 a present purpose. For the distinct prohibition of the god, *»not 
 e\on to aim at a longer lineage than eight Battiad princes," 
 seems plainly intended to deter the partisans of the dethroned 
 family from endeavoring to reinstate them. 
 
 Arkesilaus the Third, to whom this pro})hecy pur[>orts to have 
 been addressed, returned with his mother Pheretime and his 
 army of new colonists to Kvrene. He was stronj; enouirh to 
 carry all before him, — to expel some of his chief op[X)nents and 
 8eizt upon others, whom he sent to Cypress to l)e destroyed; 
 though tbe vessels were <lriven out of tlieir course by storms to 
 the peninsula of Knidus, where the inhabitants rescued the 
 prisoners and sent them to Thera. Other Kyrena^ans, opposed 
 to the Battiads, took refuge in a lofty private tower, the piopertj 
 
 * Ilerodot. iv, 1»).'$. ^EttI fxiv riaaepoi Buttov^, kuI ^ ApKeaiAeuc reaaepof 
 StSoi vfiiv Aoiiric fiaaikeveiv KvpifVfj<: • irkiov uevToi rovrov ox6e neioifr&a 
 tttoa '.vf$ t 
 
 of Aglomachus, wherein Arkesilaus caused them all to be burned, 
 
 heaping wood around and setting it on fire. But after this career 
 of triumph and revenge, he became conscious that he had de- 
 parted from the mildness enjoined to him by tbe oracle, and 
 sought to avoid the punishment which it had threatened by 
 retiring from Kyrene. At any rate, he departed from Kyrene 
 to Barka, to the residence of the Barkiean prince, hi.: kinsman 
 Alazir, whose daughter he had married. But he found in Barka 
 pome of the unfortunate men who had lied from Kyrene to 
 escape him: these exiles, aided by a fesv Barkieans, watched i.r 
 a suitable moment to assail him in the market-place, and slev 
 him, together with his kinsman the prince Alazir.i 
 
 The victory of Arkesilaus at Kyrene, and his a^^a^sination at 
 Barka, are doubtless real facts ; but they seem to liave b<n':i 
 lompressed together and incorrectly colored, in order to giv e to 
 the death of the Kyrenaean prince the appearance of a divine 
 judgment. For the reign of Arkesilaus cannot have l>een very 
 short, since events of the utmost importiuice occurrid witliin it. 
 The Persians under Kambyses conquered li^^yvi, and both iho 
 Kyrenaean and the Barksean prince sent to Memphis to make 
 their submission to the conqueror, — ofl'ering presents and impos- 
 ing upon themselves an annual tribute. The presents of the 
 Kyrenaians, five hundred mina^ of silver, were considered by 
 Kambyses so contemptibly small, that he took hohl of them at 
 once and threw them among his soldiers. And at the moment 
 when Arkesilaus died, Aryandes, the Persian satrap after the 
 death of Kambyses, is found established in Egypt.2 
 
 During the absence of Arkesilaus at Barka, his mother Phere- 
 time had acted as regent, taking her place at the discussions in 
 the senate; but when his death took place, and the feehng 
 against the Battiads manifested itself strongly at Barka, she did 
 not feel powerful enough to put it down, and went to Egypt to 
 solicit aid from Aryandes. The satrap, being made to believe 
 that Arkesilaus had met his death in consequence of steady 
 devotion to the Persians, sent a herald to Barka to demand the 
 men whc had slain him. The Barkaeans assumed the collective 
 
 n 
 
 lierodot. iv, 163-164. 
 
 s Herodot. ii' 13 ; iv, l65-.16e 
 
m 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 <JOXSTITUTIOK OF DEMONAX NOT DURABLE. 
 
 49 
 
 responsihility of the act, saying that he had done them injunes 
 both numerous and severo, — a farther proof that his reign 
 cannot liave been rery sliort. On receiving this reidy, the 
 <afrap immediatiily des|)atclied a poweiful Persian armament, 
 land-force as well as sea-force, in fulfilment of the de^^igns of 
 Pheretime against Barka. They besieged the town for nine 
 months, trying to storm, to batter, and to undermine the walh ; '-? 
 but their etibrts wi-nt vain, and it Avas taken at last only by an 
 act of the grossest perlidy. Pretending to relinquish the attempt 
 in despair, the Persian general concluded a treaty with the 
 liarkieans, wherein it was stipulated that the latter should con- 
 tinue to pay tribute to the Gr.'at King, but that the army should 
 retire without farther hostilities : 'I swoar it (said the Persian 
 general), and my oath shall hold gcxxl as long as this earth shall 
 keep its [)la(e." But the s[)ot on which the oaths were ex 
 changed had be.Mi fraudulently }>repared : a ditch had been 
 ex. avated and covered with hurdles, uj)on wliieh again a surface 
 ot earth had hovn laid. The Barka^ans, confiding in the oath, 
 and overjoyed at their liberation, immediately opened their 
 pates and relaxed their guard ; while the Persians, breaking 
 down the hurdles and letting fall the superimposed earth, so 
 that they might eom})ly with the letter of their oath, assaulted 
 the city and took it without difficulty. 
 
 Miserable was the fate whicii Pheretime had in reserve for 
 these entrapjM'd j n^oii.-rs. She crucified the chief opponents of 
 herself and her late son around the walls, on which were also 
 affixed the l)reasts of their wives : then, with the exception of 
 Buch of the inhabitants a< were Battiads, and noway concerned in 
 the death of Arkesilaus, slie consigned the lest to slavery in 
 Persia. They v.ere carried away captive into the Persian 
 empire, where Darius assigned to them a village in Baktria as 
 their place of abotle, which still bore the name of Barka, even in 
 the days of Ileioditus. 
 
 During the eoi; rse of this expedition, it appears, the Persian 
 •nny advanced a^ far as Hes|)erides, and reduced many of the 
 L.i)yau tribes to subjection: these, together with Kyrene and 
 
 • rolyanu (Strnrcir. vii, 28) gi^es a narrative in many respects lifferenl 
 ^m this of Herodotiii, 
 
 Barka, figure among the tributaries and auxiliaries of Xerxes in 
 his expedition against Greece. And when the army returned to 
 Kgvpt, by order of Aryandes, they were half inclined to seize 
 Kyrene itself in their way, though the opportunity was missed 
 and the purpose left unaccomplished.' 
 
 Pheretime accompanied the retreating army to Egypt, where 
 she died shortly of a loathsome disease, consumed by worms; 
 thus showing, says Herodotus,- that " excessive cruelty in re- 
 veu'^e brings down upon men the displeasure of the gods." It 
 ^\ill Ije recollected that in the veins of this savage woman the 
 Libyan blood was intermixed with the Grecian. Political en- 
 mity in Greece j»roper kills, but seldom if ever mutilates or 
 sheds the blood, of women. 
 
 We thus leave Kyrene and Barka again subject to Battiad 
 [princes, at the same time that they are tributaries of Persia. 
 Another Battus and another Arkesilaus have to intervene before 
 :he "^lass of this worthless dynasty is run out, between 460-450 
 r..C. I shall not at present carry the reader's attention to this 
 last Arkesilaus, who stands honored by two chariot victories in 
 Greece, and two fine odes of Pindar. 
 
 The victory of the third Arkesilaus, and the restoration of the 
 Battiads, broke up the CJiuitable constitution established by De- 
 iiionax. His triple classification into tril>e< must have been 
 'jompletely remodelled, though we do not know how. For the 
 number of new colonists whom Arkesilaus introduced must have 
 necessitated a fresh distribution of land, and it is extremely 
 doubtful whether the relation of the Theraan class of citizens 
 ^vith their Periocki, as established by Demonax, still continnd 
 <> subsist. It is necessary to notice this fact, because the ar- 
 .•aiigcments of Demonax are spoken of by some authors as if 
 hey formed the j)ermanent constitution of Kyrene ; whereas 
 hey cannot have outlived the restoration of the Battiads, nof 
 }an they even have been revived after that dynasty was finally 
 3X})elled, since the number of new citizens and the large change 
 if property, introduced by Arkesilaus the Third, would render 
 hem inapplicable to the sjbsequent city. 
 
 '■x\ 
 
 ■t 
 
 » Herodot. iv, 203-204. 
 *Ol,. IV. 
 
 « Herodot. iv. 205. 
 4oc. 
 
50 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 POLITICAT, ISOLATION CF TIIR cniES. 
 
 51 
 
 CHxVPTER XXVIII. 
 
 PAN-HELLENIC FESTIVALS - OLYMPIC, PYTHIAN, NEMEAN, 
 
 AND ISTHMIAN. 
 
 Is the preceding chapters I have been under the necessity of 
 presenting to the reader a picture altogether incoherent and 
 destitute of central effect, — to specify briefly each of the two or 
 three hundred towns which agreed in bearing the Hellenic 
 name, and to recount its birth and early lite, as far as our 
 evidence "•oe.'^, — but without being able to point out any action 
 and reaction, exploits or sufferings, prosperity or misfortune, 
 glory or disgrace, «!omnion to all. To a great degree, this is 
 a characteristic inseparable from the history of Greece from its 
 beginning to its end, for the only political unity which it ever 
 receives is the melancholy unity of subjection under all-conquer- 
 ing Rome. Nothing short of force will etface in the mind of a 
 i'vvv Greek the idea of his city as an autonomous and separate 
 organization; the village is a fraction, but the city is an unit, — 
 and the highest of all political units, not admitting of being con- 
 solidated with orhers into a ten or a hundred to the sacrifice of 
 its own s*'parate and individual mark. Sucli is tlie character 
 of the ra«'e, both in their [>ri!nitive country and in their colonial 
 settlements, — in their early as well as in their late history, — 
 eplitting by natural fracture into a muliitiide of self-administer- 
 ing, indivisible cities, liut th:it wliiih marks the early histori- 
 cal period before Peisistratu<, aud which im{>re.«>ses upon it an 
 incoherence at once so fatiguing and so irremediable, is, that as 
 yet no causes have arisen to counteract this political isolation. 
 Each city, whetlier progres-i\e or stationary, prudent or adven 
 turons, turbulent or trancpiil, follows out its own thread of exist- 
 ence, having no partnership or common purposes with the rest, 
 and not yet constrai led into any active partnership with them by 
 extraneous force.>. In like maimer, the races which on every 
 Bide -urround the Hellenic world appear distinct and uncon- 
 neiited. not yet taken up into any cooperating mass or sy^rem. 
 
 Contemporaneously with the accession of Peisistratus, thi^ 
 state of things becomes altered both in and out of Hellas, — the 
 former as a consequence of the latter: for at that time begins 
 the formation of the great Persian empire, which absorbs into 
 itM'lf not only Upper Asia and Asia Minor, but also Phenicia, 
 K^iypU Thrace, Macedonia, and a considerable number of the 
 Grev'ian cities themselves ; and the common danger, threatening 
 ihe greater states of Greece pro[)er from this vast aggregate, 
 drives them, in spite of great reluctance and jealousy, into ac- 
 tive union. Hence arises a new impulse, counterworking the 
 natural tendency to political isolation in the Hellenic cities, 
 and centralizing their proceedings to a certain extent for the two 
 centuries succeeding oGO B.C.; Athens and S])arta both availing 
 themselves of the centralizing tendencies which had grown out 
 of the Persian war. But during the interval between 77G-'>GO 
 n.c, no such tendency can be traced even in commencement, 
 nor any constraining force calculated to bring it about. Even 
 Tliucydides, as we may see by his excellent preface, knew of 
 nothing during these two centuries except separate city-politics 
 and occasional wars between neighbors : the only event, accord- 
 ing to him, in which any considerable number of Grecian cities 
 were jointly concerned, was the w^ar between Chalkis and 
 Kretria, the date of which Me do not know. In this war, several 
 cities took part as allies; Samos, among others, with Eretria, — 
 Miletus with Chalkis : i how far the alliances of either may 
 ha\e extended, we have no evidence to inform us, but the 
 l)resumi)tion is that no great number of Grecian cities was 
 comprehended in them. Such as it was, however, this war 
 between Chalkis and Eretria was the nearest approach, and the 
 only approach, to a Pan-Hellenic proceeding which Thucydidea 
 mdicates between the Trojan and the Persian wars. Both he 
 and Herodotus present this early period only by way of preface 
 and contrast to that which follows, — when the Pan-Hellenic 
 sf)irit and tendencies, though never at any time predominant, 
 yet counted for a powerful element in history, and sensibly 
 modified the universal instinct of city-isolation. They tell lu 
 little about it, either because they could find no trustworthy 
 
 • Thucvd. i, 15. 
 
 
 \\ 
 
52 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS. 
 
 53 
 
 informant?, or bf Ccau>e tliere was nothing in it to captivate tlifl 
 imagination in the -ariif- nianiier as the Persian or the Pelopon- 
 nesian wars. From whatever cause their silence arises, it is 
 deeply to be regretted, since tlie phenomena of the two centuries 
 from 776-/if;0 b. .. though not susceptible of any central groujv 
 ing, must have presented the most instructive matter for study, 
 had they been preserved. In no period of history have there 
 ever been formed a greater number of new political communities, 
 under such variety of circumstances, personal as well as local. 
 And a few chronicler, however destitute of {)hilosophy, reporting 
 the exact march of .-ome of the.-e colonies from tlieir commence- 
 ment, amidst all the ditliculties attendant on amalgamation 
 
 with strange natives, a^ well as on a fresh distribution of land, 
 — would have added greatly to our knowledge both of Greek 
 chaiacter and Greek social existence. 
 
 Taking th.' t a o <enturies now under review, then, it will 
 appear that tliere i< not only no growing political unity among 
 the Grecian >ia:e.s but a tendency even to the contrary, — to 
 di--emination ar»l mutual estrangement. Not so, how( vr, in 
 reirard to the otl er feelings of unity capable of subsisting between 
 men who acknow hduc no <'ommon political authority, — sympa- 
 thies toutided . n common religion, language, belief of race, 
 legend-, ta-tt - ind customs, intellectual a[>petencies, sense of 
 proportion and artistic excellence, recreative enjoynunts, etc. 
 On all these p.Mtits the manifestations of Hellenic unity become 
 more and more |»ronounced and comprehensive, in spite ol 
 increa.-ed political dissemination, throughout the same period. 
 The breadth of common sentiment and symjiathy between Greek 
 EJid (ireek, together with the conception of nuiUitudinous 
 periodical meetings as an indisi)ensable portion of existence, 
 appears decidedly greater in T^GO b.c. than it had been a century 
 before. It war fostered by the increased conviction of the 
 euperiority of Greeks as compared with foreigners, — a convic- 
 tion gradually more and more justitied as Grecian art and intel- 
 lect improved, uid as the survey of foreign countries became 
 extended, — as .veil as by the many new etibrts of men of genius 
 in the field of music, poetry, statuary, and architecture, each of 
 whom touched chords of feeling belonging to other Greeks 
 hardly less than to his own peculiar city. At the same time, !he 
 
 life of each peculiar city continues distinct, and even gathers tc 
 itself a t^reater abundance of facts and internal interests. Si» 
 that during the two centuries now under review there was in the 
 mind of every Greek an increase both of the city-feeling and of 
 the Pan-Hellenic feeling, but on the other hand a decline of the 
 old sentiment of separate race, — Doric, Ionic, ^Eolic. 
 
 I have already, in my former volume, touched upon the many- 
 sided character of the Grecian religion, entering as it did into 
 all the enjoyments and sufferings, the hopes and fears, the aft'ec- 
 (ions and antipathies, of the people, — not simply imposing 
 restraints and obligations, but protecting, multiplying, and diver- 
 sifvin"- all the social pleasures and all the decorations of exist- 
 ence. Each city and even each village had its peculiar religious 
 festivals, wherein the sacrifices to the gods were usually followed 
 bv public recreations of one kind or other, — by feasting on the 
 victims, processional marches, singing and dancing, or competition 
 in strong and active exercises. The festival was originally local, 
 but friendship or communion of race was shown by inviting 
 others, non-residents, to partake in its attractions. In the case 
 of a colony and its metropolis, it was a frequent practice that 
 citizens of the metropolis were honored with a privileged seat at 
 the festivals of the colony, or that one of their numbei Avaa 
 presented with the first taste of the sacrificial victim.^ Recipro- 
 cal frequentation of religious festivals was thus the standing 
 evidence of friendship and fraternity among cities not poliiically 
 united. That it must have existed to a certain degree from the 
 earliest days, there can be no reasonable doubt ; though in 
 Homer and Hesiod we find only the celebration of I'uneral 
 games, by a chief at his own |)rivate exi)ense, in honor of his 
 deceased father or friend, — with all the accompanying recrea- 
 tions, however, of a public festival, and with strangers not only 
 
 ' Thucyd. i, 26. See the tale in Pausanias ( v, 25, 1 ) of the ancient chorna 
 sent annually from Messene in Si^-ily across the strait to Rhegiura, to a 
 local festival of the Rhegians, — thirty-five boys with a chorus-master 9id 
 a flute-player: on one unfortunate occasion, all of them perished in croas 
 ing. For the Theory (or solemn religious deputation) periodically sent by 
 the Athenians to Delos, see Plutarch, Nicias, c. 3 ; Plato, Phfledon, c. I, f 
 *•. Compare also Strabo, ix, p. 419, on the general subject. 
 
 ( 
 
 if^ 
 
 Vol. 4 
 
 B 
 
fi4 
 
 HISTORY or GRKECh. 
 
 OLYMPIC FESTIVAL. 
 
 §1 
 
 prasent, but also contending for valuable pnzes.' Passing to 
 historical G -c^ce during the seventli century b. c, wc find 
 evidence of two festivals, even then very ron-ideiable, and 
 frequented by Gneks from many different rlik-^ and districts — 
 the festival at D^lo-:, in honor of Apollo, the great place of 
 meeting for loniaiis throughout the yEgean, — and tlie Oh mpic 
 {fames. The Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, whieh must 
 be placed earlier than COO b.c., dwells with emphasis on the 
 f[)lendor of the Delian festival, — unrivalled throu«j:hout Greece, 
 as it would appear, during all the first perio<l of this historv, for 
 wealtli, finery of attire, and variety of exhibition- as well in 
 poetical genius jis in bodily activity,- — equalling ju'obablyat that 
 time, if not surj)a.' >ing, the Olympic games. The complete aiid 
 undiminished grai deur of this Delian Pan-Ionie fe'Jtival i^ one 
 of our chief marks of the first })eriod of Grecian history, before 
 the comparative prostration of the Ionic Greeks through the rise 
 of Persia: it was «'elebrated periodically in e\<'ry fourth year, to 
 the honor of Aj)ollo and Artemis. It was distinguished from 
 the Olympic games by two circumstances both deserving of 
 notice, — first, by including solemn matches not only of gymnas- 
 tic, but also of musical and poetical excellence, whereas the 
 latter had no plaee at Olympia ; secondly, by the admission of 
 men, women, and ( hildren indiscriminately as spectators, whereas 
 women were formally excluded from the 01ymj)ic ceremony.3 
 Such exclusion may have depended in part on the inland situa- 
 tion of Olympia, hss easily ai)proachable by females than the 
 island of Delos ; l)ut e\ en making allowance for this circum- 
 stance, both the one distinction and the other mark the rougher 
 character of the 3]tolo-Dorians in Peloponnesus. The Delian 
 festival, which greatly dwindled away during the subjection of 
 tlie Asiatic and insular Greeks to Persia, was revived after- 
 wards by Athens during the period of her empire, when she was 
 Feeking in eiery way to strengthen her central ascendency in the 
 
 * Homer, Iliad, xi, S79. xxiii. 079; Hesiod, 0pp. Di. '351 
 
 * Homer, Hymn. Ai>oIl. 150; Thucyd. iii, 104. 
 
 •Pausan. v, 6. 5; ^Elian, N. H. x, 1 ; Thucyd. iii, 104. \M)en Ephesug, 
 tad the festival culled Ephesia, had become the great place of Ionic 
 ■eettng, the presence of women was still continued (Dionys. Hal. A & 
 It. 2M 
 
 Mseim. But though it continued to be ostentatiously celebrated 
 under her management, it never regained that commanding 
 sanctity and crowded frequentation which, we find attested in the 
 Homeric Hymn to Apollo for its earlier period. 
 
 Very ditferent was the fate of the Olympic festival, — on the 
 banks of the Alpheius' in Peloponnesus, near the old oracular 
 temple of the Olympian Zeus, — which not only grew up unin- 
 terruptedly from tmall beginnings to the maximum of Pan- 
 Hellenic importance, but even preserved its crowds of visitors 
 and its celebrity for miuiy centuries after the extinction of 
 (; reek freedom, and only received its tinal abolition, after more 
 than eleven hundreil years of continuance, from the decree of 
 the Christian emperor Theodosius in 394 a.d. I have already 
 recounted, in the preceding volume of this history, the attempt 
 made by Pheidon, despot of Argos, to restore to the Pisatans, or 
 to acquire for himself, the administration of thi- festival, — an 
 event which proves the importance of the festival in Pelopon- 
 nesus, even so early as 740 B.C. At that time, and for some 
 years afterwards, it seems to have been frequented ehiefly, if not 
 exclusively, by the neighboring inhabitants of central and wes- 
 tern Peloponnesus, — Spartans, Messenians, Arkadians, Tripliy- 
 lians, Pisatans, Eleians, and Achaans,^ — and it forms an 
 important link connecting the Etolo-Eleians, and tlndr privileges 
 as A<Tonothets to solemnize and preside over it, with Sparta. 
 From the year 720 B.C., we trace positive evidences of the grad- 
 ual presence of more distant Greeks, — Corinthians, Megarians, 
 liceotians, Athenians, and even Smyrnaeans from Asia. 
 
 We observe also another proof of growing im[)ortance, in the 
 increased number and variety of matches exhibited to the specta- 
 tors, and in the substitution of the simple crown of olive, an hon- 
 orary reward, in place of the more substantial present which the 
 Olympic festival and all other Grecian festivals began by confer- 
 ring upon the victor. The humble constitution of the Olympic 
 games presented originally nothing more than a match of nmnera 
 
 » Strabo, vni. p. 353 ; Pindar, Olymp. viii, 2 ; Xenophon, Hellen. iv, 7, 
 
 2 . iii, 2, 22. 
 ^ See K. F Hermann, Lehrbuch tier Griechischen StaatsAlterthiinni 
 
 bCCL 10 
 
 u 
 
 1: 
 
 (. 
 
 ♦ M 
 
be 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKFCE 
 
 PROGRESS OF THE OLYMPIC FESTIVAL. 
 
 sr 
 
 in the measured course called the Stadium : a continuous series 
 of the victorious runners was formally inscri]>ed and preserved 
 by tlu; Elcian>, beginning with Kordibus in 770 B. C, and 
 was made to serve by chronological inquirers from tlie tliird 
 ccnturv u.C. doninvards, as a means of measuring the chron- 
 ological se(jii<'nr»' of (irccian events. It was on th»' occasion of 
 the 7th Olympiad afler Konehus, that Daikl's tlie ]\Iessenian 
 fir>t received tor his vietorv in tlie >ta<liuni no iarther recom|)en«f! 
 tlian a wreath from the sacred olive-tree near Olympia :' the 
 honor of being proclaimed victor was foinid siillieient, without any 
 peniniary addititm. But until the 1 1th Olympiad, there was no 
 other match for the spectators to witness be-ide tliat of simple 
 runners in th«* stadium. On that occasion a second race was lirst 
 introduced, of runners in the double stadium, or up and down the 
 course; in the nt'xt, or l.')th 01yinj)iad (720 li.c), a third match, 
 the lonsr course for runners, or several times up and down the 
 8ta<lium. There were thus three races, — the simple stadium, 
 the double stadium, or diaulos, and the long course, ordolichos, 
 all for runners, — which continued without addition until the 18th 
 Olvmpiad, when the wrestling-match and the complicated pen- 
 tathlon — including jumping, running, the quoit, the javelin, and 
 wrestling — were l)Oth added. A farther novelty appears in the 
 *2-hI Olympiad (<)88 n.c), the boxing-match; and another, still 
 more important, in the 2r»th (()80 B.C.), the chariot with four full- 
 grown horses. This last-mentioned addition is deserving of special 
 notice, not merely as it diversitied the scene by the introduction 
 of horses, but also as it brought in a totally new class of comj)et- 
 itors, — rich men and women, who possessed the finest horses and 
 could hire the most skilful drivers, without any personal superi- 
 ority, or power <• bodily display, in themselves.^ The prodigious 
 
 ' Dioiivs. Ilalikam. Ant. Horn, i, 71 ; PhU^jron, Tie Olympiad, p. 140. Fol 
 an illustration of the stress hud hy the (trcck.'? on the purely honorary 
 rewards of Olympi.i, and on the credit whieh they took to thenisclves aS 
 com|ietitors, not for money, lait for glory, see Herodot. viii, 26. Compare 
 the Scliolia on riadar, Nim, and Isthm. Argument, pp. 425-514, ed. 
 Botckh. 
 
 ■ See the sentiment of Agesilaus. sorcswhat contemptuous, respecting 
 the chariot-race, as described by Xenophon (AgeMIaus, ix, 6) ; the general 
 foelirjf of Greece, hp'^ever, is more in conforp'it^ with wliat Thueydid^ 
 
 Bxhibition of wealth in which the chariot proprietors indulged, if 
 not only an evidence of growing importance in the Olympic games, 
 but also served materially to increase that importance, and to 
 heiirhten the interest of spectators. Two farther matches were 
 fiddid in the 33d Olympiad (G48 B.C.), — the pankration, or box- 
 ink' and wrestling conjoined,' with the band unarmed or divested 
 af that hard leather cestus^ worn by the pugilist, which rendered 
 the blow of the latter more terrible, but at the same time pre- 
 vented him from grasping or keeping hold of his adversary, — 
 and the single race-horse. Many other novelties were introduced 
 one after the other, which it is unnecessary fully to enumerate, — 
 the race between men clothed in full panoply, and bearing each 
 his shield, — the different matches between boys, analogous to 
 those between full-grown men, and between colts, of the same 
 nature as between full-grown horses. At the maximum of its 
 attraction the Olympic solemnity occupied live days, but until the 
 77th Olympiad, all the various matches had been compressed into 
 one, — beginning at daybreak and not always closing before 
 dark.*^ The 77th Olympiad follows immediately after the success- 
 
 (vi, 16) puts into the mouth of Alkihiades, and Xenophon into that of 
 Simonides (Xenophon, Hiero, xi, 5). The great respect attached to a 
 family which had gained chariot victories is amply attested : see Herodot 
 vi. 35, 36, 103, 126, — oUir] re^&pimrdrpo^ocj — and vi, 70, about Demaratus 
 king of Sparta. 
 
 ' Antholog. Palatin. ix, 588 ; vol. ii, p. 299, Jacol)S. 
 
 * The original Greek word for this covering (which surrounded the 
 middle hand and upper portion of the fingers, leaving both the ends of the 
 tingers and the thumh exposed) was ///af, the word for a thong, strap, or 
 whip, of leather : the special word fivp/urj^ seems to have been aftenvards 
 introduced (Hesychius, v, 'l//af) : see Homer, Iliad, xxiii, 686. Cestus, or 
 Ctestu-s. is the Latin word (Virg. ^n. v, 404), the Greek word KEarbr is an 
 adjective annexed to Ifia^ — Kearhv Ifiavra — 7ro?.f/cf(7rof //zuf (Iliad, xiv, 
 '14; iii, 371). See Pausan. viii, 40, 3, for the description of the incident 
 rhieh caused an alteration in this hand-covering at the Nemean games . 
 altimately, it was still fiirther hardened by the addition of iron. 
 
 ' 'Afi?A«jv TTe/xirafiepovc ufiiXXa^^ — Pindar, Olymp. v, 6: compare Schd. 
 »d Pindar. Olymp. iii, 33. 
 
 See the facts respecting the Olympic Agon collected by Corsini (Disser* 
 tationei Agonisticae, Dissert, i, sects. 8, 9, 10), and still more amply ««• 
 forth with a valuable commentary, by Krause (Olympia, oder Darstellang 
 •I'if grossen Olympischen Spiele, Wien, 1838, sects. 8-11 espe<iallvK 
 
 3* 
 
 (\ 
 
 f Si 
 
 I 
 
 
fflSrORY OF GREFXE. 
 
 fill expulsion of the Persian invaders from Greece, when th« 
 Pan-Hellenic feeling had been keenly stimulated by resistance to 
 a common enemy; and we may easily wnceive that this was a 
 suitable moment for imparting additional dignity to the chief 
 national fe-tival. 
 
 We are thu.« enabled partially to trace the steps by which, 
 during the two <enturie.> succeeding 770 B.C., the festival of the 
 Olympic Zeus in the Pisatid gradually passed from a local to a 
 national character, and acquired an jittractive force capable of 
 bringing together into temporary union the di-pci'sed fra"-ments 
 of Hellas, from Marseilles to Tiehizond. lu this important 
 function it did not long stand alone. During the sixtii century 
 B.C., three oth'*r festivals, at first local, beeame suec«'ssively 
 nationalized, — the Pythia near Delphi, tlie jMhmia, near Cor, 
 inth, the Neniej,; near Kleona-, between Sikynn and Ai-gos. 
 
 In regard to ihe Pythian festival, we find a short notice of the 
 particular incidents and individuals by whom its reconstitution 
 and enlargement were brought about, — a notice the more inter- 
 esting, inasmucli as these very incidents are themselves a mani- 
 festation of something like Pan-Hellenic patriotism, standing 
 almost alone in an age which presents little ehe in operation 
 except distinct city-interests. At the time when the Homeric 
 Hymn to the Delphinian A})ollo was coui]»osed (probably in the 
 seventh centurv b.c), the Pythian festival had as yet acquired 
 little eminene«\ The rich and holy temple of Apollo was then 
 purely oracuhir, » -tal^lished for the purpose of communicating to 
 pious inquirers •• the coun-els of the immortals." Multitudes of 
 visitors came to consult it. as well as to sacriiice victims and to 
 deposit costly offerings ; but while the god delighted in the 
 sound of the harp as an accompaniment to the singing of pa-ans, 
 he was by no means anx-ious to encourage horse-races and chariot- 
 races in the neighborhood, — nay, this psalmist considers that the 
 noise of horses ivould be " a nuisance." the drinking of mules a 
 desecration to the sacred fountains, and the ostentation of fine- 
 built chariots objectionable,' m tending to divert the attention of 
 spectators away from the great temple and its wealth. 
 
 ' ' ~~"^ "^ — — I * — III ^11 HI « l| 
 
 * Horn Hjnnn. ApoH. 262. 
 
 rirjfK.vtei a alel ktvtto^ ittttojv C)Keuiu>v, 
 
 GROUND NEAR THE DELPHIAN TEMPLh. 
 
 69 
 
 From such inconveniences the god was protected by placiag 
 his sanctuary '^ in the rocky Pytho," — a rugged and uneven 
 rt^cess, of no great dimensions, embosomed in the southern 
 d^'clivity of Parnassus, and about two thousand feet above the 
 level of the sea, while the topmost Parnassian summits reach a 
 hei<^ht of near eight thousand feet. The situation was extremely 
 imposing, but unsuited by nature for the congregation of any- 
 considerable number of spectators, — altogether impracticable for 
 chariot-races, — and only rendered practicable by later art and 
 outlay for the theatre as well as for the stadium ; the original 
 tttadium, when first established, was placed in the plain l)eneath. 
 Tt furnished little means of subsistence, but the sacrifices and 
 [)resents of visitors enabled the ministers of the temple to live in 
 tibundance,' and gathered together by degrees a village around 
 It. Near the sanctuary of Pytho, and about the same altitude, 
 WHS situated the ancient Phocian tow^n of Krissa, on a projecting 
 >j)ur of Parnassus, — overhung above by the line of rocky 
 j»recipice called the Phtdriades, and itself overhanging below 
 the deep ravhie through which Hows the river Pleistus. On the 
 other .side of this river rises the steep mountain Kirphis, which 
 i.t-MJects southward into the Corinthian gulf, — the river reaching 
 that f^nilf through the t/oad Krissa^an or Kirrha?an plain, which 
 btreK hes westward nearly to the Lokrian town of Amphissa; a 
 plain for the most part fertile and productive, though least so iu 
 
 'EvT?a TLQ uvT^pcjiTov ^ov^^TjOETai eitTopuarr&ai 
 'Apfiard t' eintoirjTa koi. UKvnoSuv KTvndv iTTKUtf^ 
 "H vr]bv re fieyav kqi KT/jfiara itokV eveovra. 
 
 Also V, 288-394. yva?.o)V vizh Uapvijaoio — 484. vird tttvxI TlapvrjffOiC ~ 
 Pnidar, Pyth. viii, 90. UviL^cjvog tv yvd'koiq — Strabo, ix, p. 418. Trtrpurffj 
 H.>nim> Koi ■&EaTpoEifieq — Ileliodorus, ^thiop. ii, 26 : compare Will. Gtitt*, 
 Da^ Delphische Orakel (Leipzig, 1839), pp. 39-42. 
 
 * Bu/foi /z' iipepiSov, ovniuv r' ueI ^evoc, says Ion (in Euripides, Ion. 334) 
 the sluve of Apollo, and the verger of bis Delphian temple, who waters it 
 from the Kastalian spring, sweeps it with laurel boughs, and keeps off with 
 his bow and arrows the obtrusive birds (Ion, 105, 143, 154). Whoever 
 reads the description of Professor Ulrichs (Reisen und Forschungen in 
 Gpechenland, ch. 7, p. 110) will see that the birds — eagles, vultures, and 
 <frows — are quite numerous enough to have been exceedingly troublesomeL 
 The whole play of Ion conveys a lively idea of the Delphian temple and 
 it^ aoonery, vith which Euripides was doubtless familiar. 
 
 f 
 
 a 
 
 ■ i\ 
 
60 
 
 HISTORY or GREECK. 
 
 it8 eastern part immediately under the Kirphis, where the sea- 
 port Kirrha was placed. i The temple, the oracle, and the weahb 
 of Pyrho, belong to the rery earliest [>eriods of Grecian antiquity ; 
 but the octeimial solemnity in honor of the god included at lirst 
 no otlier cHjmpetition excejit that of bards, who sang each a pieau 
 with the harp. It has been already mentioned, in my preceding 
 volume, that the Amphiktyonic assembly held one of its hall- 
 yearly meetings near the temple of Pytho, the other at Ther- 
 mopylte. 
 
 In those early times when the Homeric Hymn to Apollo was 
 composed, the town of Krissa a{)pears to have been great and 
 powerful, possessing all the broad [»hiin between Parnassus, 
 Kirphis, and the gulf, to which latter it ga\c its name, — and 
 possessing also, what was a property not less valuable, the 
 
 ' There is considerable perplexity respecting Krissa ami Kirrha, and it 
 still remains a que.-tion among scholars whether the two names denote the 
 earae place or ditlerent places; the former is the opinion of O. Miiller 
 (Orchomenos,.p. 495). Straho distinguishes the two, Tausanias identifies 
 them, conceiving no other town to have ever existed except the seaport 
 (x, 37, 4). Mannert (Geogr. Gr. Rura. viii, p. 148) follows Straho, and 
 represents them as different. 
 
 I consider the latter to be the correct opinion, npon the grounds, and 
 partly, also, on the careful topographical examination of Professor Ulrichs, 
 which affords an excellent account of the whole scenery of Delphi (Reisen 
 mnd Forschungen in Griecheidand, Bremen, 1840, chaftters 1, 2, 3). Tlie 
 rains described by him on the high ground near Kastri. (ailed the Forty 
 Saints, may fairly be considered as the niins of Krissa ; the ruins of Kirrha 
 are on the sea-shoi*e near the mouth of the Pleistus. The plain beneath 
 might without impropriety be called either the Krissiean or the Kirrhaian 
 olain (Herodot. vii , 32 5 IStrabo, ix, [•. 419). Though IStrabo was right in 
 distinguishing Kri>sa from Kirrha, and right al.-o in the position of the 
 latter under Kirjihi*, he conceived incorrectly the situation of Krissa; and 
 his representation that there were two wars, — in the first of which, Kirrha 
 was destroyed by the Krissieans, while in the second, Krissa itself was 
 conquered by the Amphiktyons, — is not confirmed by any other authority. 
 
 The mere circumstance that Pindar gives us in three separate passages, 
 Kpia{i, Kpiaalov, Kptaaioic (Isth. ii, 26; i^yth. v, 49, vi, 18), and in five 
 other passages, Kt/&,A^, K//5/iaf, Ki/)ftaT^ev (Pyth. iii, 33, vii. 14, viii, 26, x, 24, 
 n, 20), renders it almost certain that the two names belong to difTerenl 
 places, and are noc merely two different names for the same piace ; the 
 poet could not in tliis case have any metrical reason for varying tkc denom 
 inatioa, as the metre of the two words is similar. 
 
 KRISSA --KIRRHA. 
 
 ei 
 
 adjoining sanctuary of Pytho itself, which the Hymn identifie* 
 wi'h Krissa, not indicating Delphi as 9 separate place. The 
 Kri^stBans, doubtless, derived great proiits from the number of 
 visitors who came to visit Delphi, both by land and by sea, and 
 Kirrha was originally only the name for their seaport. Gradu- 
 lilly however, the port appears to have grown in importance al 
 the expense of the town, just as Apollonia and Ptolemais came 
 to equal Kyrene and Barka, and as Plymouth Dock has swelled 
 into Devonport ; while at the same time, the sanctuary of Pytho 
 with its administrators expanded into the town of Delphi, and 
 came to claim an independent existence of its own. The origmal 
 relations between Krissa, Kirrha, and Delphi, were in this man- 
 ner at length subverted, the first declining and the two latter 
 ri^n^r The Krissa^ans found themselves dispossessed of the 
 management of the temple, which passed to the Delphians, m 
 well as of the profits arising from the visitors, whose disburse- 
 mt'ius went to enrich the inhabitants of Kirrha. Krissa was a 
 primitive city of the Phocian name, and could boast of a place 
 as such in the Homeric Catalogue, so that her loss of importance 
 was not likely to be quietly endured. Moreover, in addition to 
 the above facts, already sufficient in themselves as seeds of quar- 
 rel we arc told that the Kirrhreans abused their position as 
 masters of the avenue to the temple by sea, and levied exorbit- 
 ant tolls on the visitors who landed there, — a number constantly 
 increasing from th€ multiplication of the transmarine colonies, 
 and from° the prosperity of those in Italy and Sicily. Besides 
 such ofience against the general Grecian public, they had also 
 incurred the enmity of their Phocian neighbors by outrages 
 upon women, Phocian as well as Argeian, who were returnmg 
 
 from the temple.' 
 
 Thus stood the case, apparently, about 595 B.C., when the 
 Amphiktyonic meeting interfered - either prompted by the 
 
 » Athen^ns, xiii, p. 560 ; iEschines cont. Ktesiphont. c. 36, p. 406i 
 BtraV>o ix p. 418. Of the Akragallidse, or Kraugallidae, whom iEschmfes 
 mentions along with the Kirrhoeans as another impious race who dwelt in 
 the neighborhood of the god, -and who were overthrown along with the 
 Kirrh«ans,- we have no farther information. 0. Miiller's conjecturt 
 would identify them with the Dryopes (Dorians, i, 2, 5, and his Orchome 
 nos, p. 496) ; Harpokration, v, Kpavya/iriSai 
 
 I 
 
& HISTORY OF GREhCE. 
 
 Phocians, or perhaps on their own spontaneous imj»ulse, out of 
 regard to the temple — to punish the Kirrhseans. Aftcra wai 
 of ten jears, the first Sacred War in Greece, this object was 
 completely accompUshed, by a joint force of Thessalians under 
 Eurylochus, Sikyonians under Kleisthenes, and Allif^nians under 
 AlkuKeon ; the Athenian Solon }>cing the person who origin:!:* d 
 and enforced, in the Amphiktyonic council, the pro])Ositioh of 
 interference Kiirha a[)pears to have made a strenuous resist 
 ance until its supplies from the sea were intercepted by the naval 
 force of the Sikyonian Kleistlicnis ; and even after the town 
 wa.s taken, its inhabitants defended thenixhcs fur some time 
 on the heights of Kir[»hisJ At leno^tli, however, tiny were 
 thoroughly subdued. Their town was destroyed, or left to 
 subsist merely mi a landing-place ; and the whole adjoining plain 
 was consecrated to the D«'lphian god, whose domains thn.s 
 touched the sea. Under this sentene<-, pronounced by the 
 religious feeling of Greece, uud sanctihed by a solemn oath 
 publicly sworn and inscribed at Delphi, the lail^d was condemned 
 to remain untilled and unplanted, without any sp.cies of human 
 care, and serving only for the pasturage of 'cattle. The latter 
 circumstance wa> convenient to the temf»le, in;ismuch as it 
 furnished abundance of victims for the pilgrims who landed and 
 came to sacrifice, — for without preliminary sacrifice no man 
 could consult the oracle:-^ while the entire prohibition of til- 
 lage was the only means of obviating the growth of juiother 
 troublesome nei^-hbor on the sea-board. The fate of Kirrha 
 in this war is .iscniaine.l : that of Krissa is not so cleai-, 
 DOr do we know whether it was destroyed, or left subsisting 
 in a position of inferiority with regard to I)elf)hi. From thi-i 
 time forward, however, the Delphian community apj)ears as 
 substantive and autonomous, exercising in their own right the 
 management of the temple ; though we shall find, on more than 
 one occasion, that the Phocians contest this right, and lay claim 
 
 SACRED WAR.- DESTRUCTION OF KIRRHA. 
 
 69 
 
 Schol. ad Pindar. Pyih. Introduct. ; Schol. ad Piiidur. Nem. ix, 2- 
 /lutarch, Solon, c. 11 ; Pausan. ii, 9, 6. Pausanias (x, .'U, 4) and P<.Jv« 
 BOS (Strateg. iii, 6) relate a stratagem of Solon, or of Eur rlechus, to poisoi 
 Utt water of the Kiithwaus with hellebore. 
 • Eurip. loa- 23C. 
 
 to the management of it for themselves,' — a remnant of thai 
 early period when the oracle stood in the domain of the Phc 
 cian Kri..sa. There seems, moreover, to have been a standing 
 antipathy between the Delphians and the Phocians. 
 
 The Sacred War just mentioned, emanating^ from a solemn 
 Amphiktyonic decree, carried on jointly by troops of different 
 Bfiies whom we do not know to have ever before cooperated, and 
 directed exclusively towards an object of common interest, is ir. 
 itself a fact of high importance as manifesting a decided growth 
 of' Fan-Hellenic feeling. Sparta is not named as inteifering, — 
 a circumstance which seems remarkable when we consider both 
 her power, even as it then stood, and her intimate connection 
 with the Delphian oracle, — while the Athenians appear as the 
 prime movers, through the greatest and best of their citizens: 
 ihe credit of a large-minded patriotism rests prommently upon 
 
 Tut if this Sacred War itself is a proof that the Pan-Hellenic 
 .pirit was growing stronger, the positive result in which it ended 
 reinforced that spirit still farther. The spoils of K.rrha were 
 eini>loyed by the victorious allies in founding the Pythian games. 
 The octennial festival hitherto celebrated at Delphi in honor of 
 the .xod, including no other competition except in the harp and 
 tlie pa an, was expanded into comprehensive games on the model 
 of the Olympic, with matches not only of music, but also ot 
 crymnastics and chariots, - celebrated, not at Delphi itself, but 
 on the maritime plain near the ruined Kirrha, -and under the 
 direct superintendence of the Amphiktyons themselves. I have 
 already mentioned that Solon provided large rewards for such 
 Athenians as gained victories in the Olympic and Isthmian 
 games, thereby indicating his sense of the great value of the na. 
 tional games as a means of promoting Hellenic intercomniunior. 
 It wa.. the same feeling which instigated the foundation of the iiew 
 games on the Kirrha^an plain, in commemoration of the vindicated 
 honor of Apollo, and in the territory newly made over to him. 
 They were celebrated in the latter half of summer, or first halt ot 
 every third Olympic year,— the Amphiktyons being the ostensible 
 agonothets, or administrators, and appointing persons to discharge 
 
 TkocFd. i, 112. 
 
 ' 
 
M 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 NEMEAN AKD ISTHMIAN GAMES. 
 
 0b 
 
 tlie duty in their names.' At tks first Pythian ceremony (in 
 586 B.C.), valuable rewarcU were given to the different victors ; 
 It the second (o82 B.C.), nothing was conferred but wreaths of 
 laurel, — the rapidly attained celebrity of the games being such 
 as to render any farther reward superfluous. The Sikyonian 
 des|)Ot Kleisthenes himself, one of the leaders in tlie conquest of 
 Kirrha, gained the prize at the chariot-race of the second Pythia. 
 We find other great personages in Greece frequently mentioned 
 as competitors, and the games long maintained a dignity second 
 only to the Olympic, over which, indeed, they had some advan- 
 tages ; first, that they were not abused for the purpose of pro- 
 moting petty jealousies and antipathies of any administering 
 state, as the 01} mpic gtunes were perverted by the Eleians, on 
 more than one occasion ; next, that they comprised music and 
 poetry as well as bodily display. From the circumstances 
 attending their foundation, the Pythian games deserved, evt^a 
 more than the Olympic, the title bestowed on them by Demos* 
 thenes, — " The common Agon of the Greeks." - 
 
 ' Mr. Clinton thinks that the Pythian jranies were celebrated in the 
 autumn: M. Boeekh refers the celebration to the spring: Kran>v agrees 
 with r.nt rkh. (Clinton, Fast. Hell. vol. ii. p. lMk), Aj.pcndix ; Boeekh, ad 
 Corp. Iiiscr. Xr.. I»iss, p. si;?; Kransc. Pic Pythicn, Neineen und Isthmien, 
 vol. ii, pp. 21)-*J.3.) 
 
 Mr. Clinton's opinion appears to me nearly the truth ; the real time, as 
 I conceive it, being about the beginning of August, or end of July. Boeekh 
 admits that, with the exrc[»ti<»n of Thucydides (v, 1-19), the other authori 
 lies uo to sustain it ; but he relies on Thucydides to outweiirh them. Now 
 the pa>>age of Thucydides, properly understood, seems to me as much 
 again>t Boeckli's vi-'w as the rest. 
 
 I may remark, as a certain additional reason in the case, that the Isthinia 
 appear to have been celebrated in the third year of eaili ( >iympiad, and in 
 the spring (Krause, j). li<7). It seems improbable that these two great 
 festivals should have <()iue <>ne iinint-diarely af%'r the other, wliich, ne"\er- 
 iheless, must iu- <u{)po><.Ml. it wc ad )})t the opinion of Boeekh and Krause. 
 
 The Pythian games would be >oiijctimes a little earli<'r, sometimes a httlo 
 later, ir, conse(iuence of the time of full moon : notice being always sent 
 lunnd by the administrators beforehand of the commencement of the 
 •acred month. St e the references in K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch def 
 gottesdienstl. Alterth. dcr Griechen, eh. 49, not. 12. — This note has been 
 •oii>»-what moditied since my tirst edition — see the note vol. vi, ch. lir 
 
 • i>eruosthen. Philipp ii:, p. 119. 
 
 The Olympic and Pythian games continued always to be th« 
 most venerated solemnities in Greece : yet the Nemea and Isth- 
 niia acquired a celebrity not much inferior; the Olympic prize 
 foanting for the highest of all.^ Both the Kemea and the Isth- 
 niia wer.3 distinguished from the other two festivals* by occurring, 
 not once in four years, but once in two years ; tluJ former in the 
 Bccond and fourth years of each Olympiad, the latter in the first 
 and third years. To both is assigned, according to Greek custom, 
 an origin connected with the interesting persons and circum- 
 stances°of Grecian antiquity : but our historical knowledge of both 
 begins with the sixth century B.C. *The first historical Nemead 
 is presented as belonging to Olympiad 52 or 53 (572-5G8 B.C.), 
 a lew years subsequent to the Sacred War above mentioned and 
 to the origin of the Pythia. The festival wiis celebrated ni 
 honor of the Nemean Zeus, in the valley of Nemea, between 
 Phlius and Kleona^ — and originally by the Kleomeans them- 
 selves, until, at some period after 4G0 B.C., the Argeians deprived 
 them of that honor and assumed the honors of administration to 
 themselves.2 The Nemean games had their Ilellanodikai ^ to 
 biiperintend, to keep order, and to distribute the prizes, as well ad 
 the Olympic. Respecting the Isthmian festival, our first histori- 
 cal information is a little earlier, for it has already been stated 
 
 » Pindar, Nem. X, 28-33. 
 
 « Strabo, viii, p. 377 ; Plutarch, Arat. c. 28 ; Mannert, (,eogr. Gr. Rom. 
 ,,t. viii, p. 650. Compare the second chapter in Krause, Die 1 ythien. 
 Kemeen und Isthmien, vol. ii, p. 108, seq. 
 
 That the Kleona^ans continued without interruption to admnnster the 
 Kemean festival down to Olympiad 80 (460 B.C.), or thereabouts, is the 
 rational inference from Pindar, Nem. x, 42 : compare Nem. iv, 17. Kuse- 
 bius, indeed, states that the Argeians seized the administration for thein- 
 Kclves in Olympiad 53, and in order to reconcile this statement with the 
 above passage in Pindar, critics have concluded that the Argeians lost it 
 airain, and that the Kleona^ans resumed it a little before Olympiad 80 I 
 mke a different view, and am disposed to reject the statement of Luseb.u. 
 altogether ; the more so as Pindar's tenth Nemean ode is addressed to 
 an Argeian citizen named Theiaeus. If thrre had been at that time a 
 itanding dispute between Argos and Kleonai on the subject of the adminia- 
 tration of the Nemea, the poet would hardly have introduced the mention 
 of the Nemean prizes gained by the ancestors of Theiaeus, under the ant^ 
 ward designation of " prizes received from lOe Jnsean men. ' 
 
 * See Boeekh, Corp Inscript. J? 3. U26. 
 
 VOL. IV 
 
 /, 
 
rAN-llKLLENlC FESTIVALS. 
 
 e? 
 
 *6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 that Solon conferred a premium ujion eveiy Athenian cinzen 
 who gained a prize at that festival a- well as at the Olympian, — 
 in or after 504 B.c. It Nvas celebrated by the Corinthians at 
 their isthmus, in honor of Poseidon ; and if we may diaw any in- 
 ference from the legends respecting its foundation, which is 
 ascribed sometimes to Theseus, the Athenians a{>pear to have 
 identified it with tlie antiquities of their o^vn state.i 
 
 > K. F. Hermann, in his Lehrbiich der Griechisrlien St:iat-ahort!uinH r 
 (ch. 32, not. 7, and ch. 65, not. 3), ninl a«^ain in K'< more n'(<cnt work 
 JLehrbueh der gottesdiensdi'Iu n Altorthumcr der f^e'htn, part iii. ch. 49, 
 also not. 6), both hij^ily vahiahk pabhrations. maintains,— !. That tho 
 exaltation of the Istl mian and Nemcan pxnies into Paii-Ilellenio imjM)r- 
 tance arose directly after and out of the fall of the «lc>j)ots of Corinth and 
 Sikyon. 2. That it was l>rought al:>out by th(^ paranitnint infiuonce of the 
 Dorians, especially by Sparta. 3. That the Sp:ut;.M^ j.-it .hnvn the >]"<pnfH 
 of both these two eiti's. 
 
 The last of these three profiositions appears to ttv nninic in n-sj-M t to 
 Sikyon, — improhahU in respect to Corinth: m; n-; for tliinkinj; so 
 
 have been given in a former chapter. And if tliis ho so, t)i>^ reason for pre- 
 goming Spartan intervention as to tlie Isthmian and NenvMn frames falls 
 to the ground ; for there is no other proof of it. nor iloc^ Sparta apjjcar to 
 have interested herself in any of the four national festivals cxce])t th«! 
 Olympic, with which she was from an early period peculiarly connected. 
 
 Nor can I think that the first of Hermann's three {>ropositions is at all 
 tenable. No connection whatever can he sliown Itetwpon Sikyon and the 
 Neraean games ; and it is the more improbable in this ca^e that the Sikyo- 
 nians should have been active, inasmuch as they had under Kleisthen§s a 
 little before contributed to nationalize the Pnhian pames: a second inter- 
 ference for a similar purpose ought not to be j)resnmed without some evi- 
 dence. To prove hi; point about the Istlunia, Hermann cites only a 
 passage of Solinus (vii, U), "Hoc spectaculum, per Cyp^clum tyrannom 
 intermissum, Corinth i Olynip. 49 solemnitati pristinrr reddidenmt." To 
 render this passa<;e at all credible, we mu*t read Cfipsrjhlm instead of Q/p'''*- 
 im, which deducts frt m tlie value of a witness whose testimony can ncvei 
 under any circumstances be rated hiirh. Bnt jrrantint]^ the alteration. 
 there are two reasons afjjainst the assertion of Solinus. One, a po><itive 
 reason, that Solon oflercd a larire reward to Athenian victors at the Isth- 
 mian games: his lejrislation fiills in 594 n.c., ten years before the time 
 when the Isthmia are said by Solinus to have been renewed after a long 
 Intermission. The other reason (negative, thoufrh to my mind also power- 
 fU) is the silence of Herodotus in that long invective which he puts into 
 the month of Sosiklcs ajrainst the Kypselids (v, 92). If Kvpselns had 
 VMdl'/ been guilty of no great an insult to the feelings of the people u M 
 
 We thui perceive that the interval between 600-560 B.C. ex- 
 hibits the tirst historical manifestation of the Pythia, Isthmia, 
 and Nemea, — the first expansion of all the three from local into 
 Pan-Hellenic festivals. To the Olympic games, for some time the 
 only great centre of union among all the widely dispersed Greeks, 
 are now added three other sacred agones of the like public, 
 open, national character; constituting visible marks, as well as 
 tutelary bonds, of collective Hellenism, and insuring to every Greek 
 who went to compete in the matches, a safe and inviolate transit 
 even through hostile Hellenic states.i These four, all in or near 
 Peloponnesus, and one of which occurred in each year, formed 
 the period, or cycle, of sacred games, and those who liad gained 
 prizes at aU the four received the enviable designation of period- 
 onikes r^ the honors paid to Olympic victors on their return to 
 their native city were prodigious, even in the sixth century B.C., 
 and became even more extravagant afterwards. We may remark 
 that in the Olympic games alone, the oldest as well as the most 
 ilkLstrious of the four, the musical and intellectual element was 
 wanting : all the three more recent agones included crowns for 
 exercises of music and poetry, along with gymnastics, chariots, 
 
 and horses. 
 
 Nor was it only in the distinguishing national stamp set upon 
 tb.-e four great festivals that the gradual increase of Hellenic 
 family-feeling exhibited it.^elf, during the course of this eariiest 
 jieriod of our history. Pursuant to the same tendencies, reli- 
 .rious festivals in all the considerable towns gradually became more 
 and more open and accessible, and attracted guests as well aq 
 
 Mippre<s their most solemn festival, the fact would hardly have been 
 omitted in the indictment which Sosikles is made to urge against him. 
 Ari«*totle, indeed, representing: RvT'^dus as a mild and popular despot, 
 introduces a contrai-v view of his character, which, if we admitted it, would 
 of itself suffice to negative the supposition that he had suppressed the 
 
 Isthmia. r 4 ♦ \ 
 
 » Plutarch, Arat. c. 28. Kal ffvvexi'^V tote irptbrov (hy order of Aratosj 
 i} dtdau^vr, Tolc uyuvLaraig iiavXia kol arnpdlEia, a deadly stain on the char- 
 acter of Aratus. . 
 « Faatus, v, Perihodos, p. 217, ed. MuUer. See the animated protest ol 
 tli» uhilosopher Xenophan^s against the great rewards given to OhTnr«« 
 tirN«a 1^40-5 20 B.C.), Xenophan. Fragment. 2, p 3.57. ed Bergk. 
 
88 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFX'L. 
 
 competitors from beyond the border ; the dignity of the state, as 
 well as the honor rendered to the presiding god, being measured 
 by numbers, admiration, and ei ^y, in tlie frequenting visitors.- 
 There is no positive evidence, mdeed, of such expansion in the 
 Attic festivals earlier than the reign of Peisistratus, who first 
 added the quadrennial or greater Panathenaa to the ancient an- 
 nual or lesser Panatheniea; nor can we trace the stci)S of prog- 
 ress in regard t<j Thebes, Orchomenus, Thespiic, ]Me«xara, Sikyon, 
 Pcll^ne, il'^gina. Argos, etc., but we find full reason for believing 
 that such was the ijeneral reality. Of the Olympic or Isthmian 
 victors whom Pindar and Simonides celebrated, many derived 
 a i)ortion of their renown from previous victories acquired at 
 s( veral of these l)cal contests,'2 — victories sometimes so num- 
 erous, as to prove how wide-sj)read tlie habit of mutual fre- 
 quentation had become ;3 though we lind, even in the third 
 century B.C., treaties of alliance between ditferent cities, in which 
 it is thou«.dit neces^.iry to confer this mutual right by express stip- 
 ulation. Temptation was offered, to the distinguished gymnastic 
 or musical competitor-;, by prizes of great value ; and Timanig 
 even asserted, as a proof of the overweening pride of Kroton and 
 SySar'.s, that these cities tried to supplant the preeminence of the 
 
 » Thucyd. vi, 16. Alkibiades says, kqI baa ah h tF/ irolei xop7>''atf V 
 d/L.:^ tC) lafiTTpvvofiat. roig fth' uarol^ (pi^ovelrai (pifffei, npdc <5t rov^ ^tvovi 
 Kal ai'-^rj hxH ^aiverui. 
 
 The profiter PanatlieniPa arc ascril'cd to Pcisistratus liy the Scholiast on 
 Aristeides, vol. iii, p. 323, ed. Dindorf : jiulu'ing by what immediately pre- 
 cedes, the statement seems to come from Aristotle. 
 
 « Simonides, Fragm. 154-1.'>S, ed. Ber-k ; Pindar, Nem. x, 45 ; Olymp. 
 
 xiii, 107. 
 
 The distinj^ished athlete Theagcnes is affirmed to have gained twelve 
 handred prizes in these various agones: according to some, fourteen 
 hundred prizes (Pansan. vi. 11. 2; mutarcli. I'r.vcci.t. Kei}). Ger. c. IS 
 
 p. 811,. 
 
 An athlete namt d .\{>ollonius arrived too late for the OlvTnpic games, 
 having staye-i away too long, from his anxiety to get money at vario:ii 
 agones in Ionia (Pansan. v. 21, 5). 
 
 * See, paiticnlarlv. rhe treatv between the inhabitants of Latus and thoM 
 of Olfts in Krrre. in Boeckh s Cor\\ Inscr. No. 25.54. wherein this red- 
 |>r*Kity is expressly stinnlated. Boeckh places this Inscription in the third 
 cf nturj' B-C 
 
 GROWTH OF THE ELEUSINIAN FESTIVAL. 
 
 69 
 
 SLX 1 d u;re.wded ga.es. At the time w,.eu 
 
 " HoTeHc Hn. to D.m.t.r was -POse',, the wo^h.^^^^^^ 
 
 1 , „oa.le'!3 seems to have been purely local at Kleus.s , but 
 
 f fit PerTn war, the festival celebrated by the Athemans 
 
 before the 1 er-''^" «» Eieu^iuian Demeter, admitted Greeks 
 
 rSS^rLuii'Irwas .tended by vast crowds of 
 
 "Twas thus that the simplicity and strict local application of 
 
 rin.. into an elaborate and regulated senes of exhibitions 
 ring, into an t ,o,i^i,i„„ the fraternal presence of all 
 
 not merely adm tting, ■ "^ ^ 'j^ ^^,^, to have formed 
 
 Hellenic spectators. In tins i e pect »p ^^^ |^^^_ 
 
 \ ZZ softened'cven at the Karneia,3 or Hyakinthia, or Gym- 
 matenally «« JJ"^ .j,^ A,,;, Dionysia were gradually 
 
 :XtfroS"l:^-ln:i ntde spontaneous outburst of village 
 
 „„,„,>er of victors both .« the Olymp^ an to .he^Py.h ^^. ^^^l .^^^ ^^ 
 viii 47; Pausan. x, 5, 5-x, 7, J, xvuius , j 
 
 Perikl^s (Thucyd. u, 39). treating hospitably thi 
 
 I^iehas the Spa«an ^^^^^^^j:T^X (^^.^o^U.^or... 
 
 tkw from the general character of Spartans. 
 
 'Hi 
 
 # 
 
 1 
 
70 
 
 HISTOHY OF GREECi: 
 
 iceling in t .^nktulness to the gi^, followed by song, dance, and rev 
 elry of vaiious kinds, — into costly and diversified perfbi mances, 
 first, by a trained chorus, next, by actors sujoradded to it ;> and th« 
 dramatic conifiositions thus produced, as tlicy embodied the per- 
 fection of Grecian art, so they were eminently calculated to invite 
 a Pan-Hellenic audience and to encoiira-*- the .>»*ntim(.ri: of Hel- 
 lenic unity. The dramatic literature of Athens, however, belom^a 
 properly to a later period; previous to the year 5G0 B.C., we see 
 only those coniniencements of innovation which drew upon Thes- 
 pis-* the rebuke of Solon, who himself contributed to impart to 
 the Panathenaic festivjil a more solemn atid attractive character, 
 by checking the license of the rhapsodo, and insuring to those 
 present a full, orderly recital of the Iliad. 
 
 The sacred games and festivals, hcie alluded to as a class, 
 took hold of the Greek mind by so great a variety uf feel in "-s,:' as 
 to counterbalance iii a high degree th.' {Kjlilieal disseverance, and 
 to keep alive among tlieir wide-spread cities, in the midst of con- 
 stant jealousy and frequent quarrel, a feeling of br^.therhood and 
 congenial sentiment such as must otherui.-e ha\e died away. 
 The Theors, or ^acred envoys, who came to Olympia oi- Delphi 
 from so many different points, all sacrificed to the same god and 
 at the same altar, witnessed the same sports, and contributed by 
 their donatives to enrich or adorn one respected scene. Nor 
 must we forget that the festival afforded opportunity for a sort 
 
 .1 
 
 ' Aristot. Poetic, c. 3 and 4: Maxiimis Tvrius. I)i>s. xxi, p. 215; Plu- 
 tarch, De Cupidine Divitiaruin. v. s. },. 527 : eompare the rreati^t'. -Quod 
 Don potest siiaviter rivi secuiKium Epieurum." v. 16. p. 109S. Tlie^ old 
 Dracles <]uotc<I by Demosthent's, cont. Meidiam (c. 15. p. 5,31, and cont. 
 Makartat. p. 1072: v^e also Buttniann's note on the fonner passage), convey 
 the idea of the ancient simple Athenian festival. 
 
 ■Plutarch, Solon, e. 29: see above, ihaj.. xi. vol. iii, p. 195. 
 
 ' The orator Lysias, in a frairineiu of hi.s lost PancyATical OratioQ. 
 preserved by Dionvsius of HalikarnasMis (vol. v. p. 520* R.), deseribei 
 the influence of tin -anies with great foree and simplicity. Herakld-. 
 the founder of them, uyuva fikv auifiuruv frroh/ne, <:>iAoTi^lav I'e rcAoin-^ 
 yvufiTjc d' imdei^iv h tu KaUloru rz/f 'E/auJcc * Iva tovtwj hTrUnu- 
 hftKa er Td avrb eMu^ev, tu fiev vfofievoi, tu cf- a/toyao/zejoi. 'Hyffffait 
 ydp rdv hMde (yvlloyov upxhv yevia^ai - )tc 'EDr^ai tt^ rrpo^ 
 
 niPORTANT KIFECT OF THF.SE lESTlVALS. 
 
 71 
 
 of fair, including m,u-h traiTu- nraid so large a mass of spectators," 
 .nd bo^dos the exhibitions of the games themselves, there were 
 recitations and lectures in a spacious council-room for those who 
 cho^e to listen to them, by poets, rhapsodes, philosophers, and n.- 
 tonnw -amons which lust, the history of Herodotus .s saul to 
 Lave blon publicly n-ad by its author.^ Of the wcahhy and .n>;Mt 
 •nen in the various cities, m,iny contended simply tu,- the cl.arK.t 
 ".iHorics and horse victories. But there were others whose am- 
 l,i,ionwas of a character more strictly personal, and who stnp- 
 ,„.d naked as runners, wrestlers, boxers, or pankr.inusts, lun :n^ 
 Irone through the extreme fatisue of a eon>plcie previous tn;::;- 
 r„.r Kylon, whose unfortunate attempt to usurp the scep.rc . . 
 Aa^ens has been recounted, had gained the pri.e in the Ol.vn,,,.. 
 idium: Alexander son of Amyn.as, ''- l'''-\- «* f j!;:' :'; 
 had run for itJ' The great family of the D. agon.he at Rh...l. ^. 
 
 T^iccro Tuse. Qua^.n. v, 3."7w^"m e«m. qui l;.;'-et"r .n:-xi;"<, 
 
 f..^tiv'il bv the name mrrcatus. /o i i 
 
 Thc'e «erc lK>o.hs all round the Ahis. or sacre.l pro.-inc, of Z.us (S.I.ol 
 Pindvr Olvnin. xi, 55), during the time of the games. , . , 
 
 "^it^T^l^^ of the HernUleia, celehrnted |.y the comnnnnor 
 
 catt «>. or a certain numher of ^'^^ :X'^^^^ 
 recttlar market-due, or ,\yopa<,T,Knv, was levied "l^"" " "% Cui-tiu- np 
 ^nods to sell (Inscriptiones Attic* nupor r^pertce 12, hy T.. Cun.u . , P 
 
 ^ Ik ,, . 5i -dor. - 10.^^^^^^^ Lurian Q-- -- 
 
 "^ T:;:;:rri :.;; tJ;:. vT.-n. Ku^a.^ of An.os ,He,.dot. ^ 
 
 92); Philippus and Phayllus of K'Oton (v 47; vni, 47), tu^llode. 
 Pi*.trW (v 1021- Hermolvlcus of Athens (ix, 105). ,, a ,._ 
 
 the Kleonymida. of Thebes - n^a.vr.f cip^a^ev npo^.evo^ r ..-.u^ 
 ITflthm. ui, 25) 
 
 I: 
 
 'i 
 
if, 
 
 72 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LYRIC POETRY. -THE SE^^N WISE MEN. 
 
 73 
 
 who furnished magist rates and generals to their native citj, sap 
 plied a still greater number of successtul boxers and pankratiasu 
 at Olympia, while oilier instances also occur of generals named by 
 various cities from the lists of successful Olympic gymnasts ; and 
 the odes of Pindar, always dearly purchased, attest how many of^ 
 the great and wealtliy were found in that list.' The perfect popu- 
 larity and equality of persons at these great games, is a feature not 
 less remarkable than the exact adherence to predetermined rule, 
 and the self-imposed submission of the immense crowd to a hand- 
 ful of servants armel with sticks,- who executed the orders of the 
 Eleian IIelIanodika\ The ground upon which the ceremony took 
 place, and even tin- territory of the administering state, was pro- 
 tected by a '' Truce of (Jo( 1," during the month of the festival, the 
 commencement of which was formally announced by heralds sent 
 round to the ditlVrcnt states. Treaties of peace between differ- 
 ent cities were often formally commemorated by pillars there 
 erected, and the general im])ression of tlir s.-ciic >UL'^Lr,'>ted nothin» 
 but ideas of jjcace and brotherho^jd among Greeks.* And I may 
 
 Rospecting the cxtre lie celeKrity of DiajLiuras and his sous, of the Rho- 
 dian frens Eratidie, Damagetus, Akusilaus, and Doricus, sec I'indar, Olvmp. 
 vii, 10-145. with the Scholia; Thucyd. iii, 11: Pausaii. vi, 7, 1-2; Xeiio- 
 phon, Hellenic, i, 5, 19: conqKin- Stra!><>, xiv, i*. »;:>:>. 
 
 ' The Latin writ<r-; i rnark it as a pfouliarity of (iieriaii frolint:, as dis- 
 tinpiishcd from Roman, that men of preat station accounted it an honor to 
 contend in the jiamf. ; rr. as a spt-cimen, Tacitus, I)ia!o-::us de Orator, c 
 •. "'Ac si in Grajeiii natus esses, u\n ludieras <iuo(jue artcs cxorcere hones- 
 tum est, ae tihi Nieostrati rol)ur Dii dedissent, non paterer iinmanes illos et 
 «d pu^'nam natos laoerios levitate jaeuli vanescere." Airain, Cieero, pro 
 Flacco, c. 13, in his sarcastic style: " Quid si etiam occisus est a piratis 
 Adramyttenus, homo no*>ilis, cujus est fere no])is omnibus nomen auditum, 
 Atinas pu<ril, Olympionices ? hoc e>t apud (ira'cos (quoniam de eorum 
 gravitate dieimus) propc aiajus 1 1 trioriosius, (|uam Ronue triumfjliasse " 
 
 * Lichas, one of the chief men of Sparta, and moreover a chariot-victor, 
 received actual chastisement on the *iround, from these staff-hearers, for an 
 infringement of the regulations (Thucyd. v, 50). 
 
 ' Thucyd. v, 18-47. and the curious ancient Inscription in Boeckh's Cor- 
 fW Inscr. No. 11, p. 2^, r: ording the convention between the Eleians and 
 lie inhabitants of the Arcadian town of Hera;a. 
 
 The comparison of various passa^^es referring; to the 01ymj>ia, Isthmia. 
 and Nemea (Thucydides iii, 1 viii, 9-10, v, 49-51, and Xenophon, Hellenic 
 H, 7, J«j v. 1, 29) shows that ' )rious political business was often disciuaed 
 
 remark that the impression of the games as belonging to ill 
 Greeks, and to none but Greeks, was stronger and clearer during 
 the interval between 600-300 B.C., than it came to be afterwards. 
 For the Macedonian conquests had the effect of diluting and cor- 
 ruptincr Hellenism, by spreading an exterior varnish of Hellenic 
 tastes and manners over a wide area of incongruous foreignei-s, 
 who were incapable of the real elevation of the Hellenic char- 
 acter ; so that although in later times the games continued undi- 
 minished, both in attraction and in number of visitors, the spirit 
 of Pan-Hellenic communion, which had once animated the scene, 
 was gone forever. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 LYRIC POETRY. -THE SEVEN WISE MEN. 
 
 The interval between 776-560 B.C. presents to us a remarka- 
 ble expansion of Grecian genius in the creation of their elegiac, 
 iambic, lyric, choric, and gnomic poetry, which was diversified 
 in a great many ways and improved by many separate masters. 
 The creators of all these different styles — from Kallinus and 
 Archilochus down to Stesiohorus — fall within the two centuries 
 here included ; though Pindar and Simonides, " the proud and 
 high-crested bards," i who carried lyric and choric poetry to the 
 maximum of elaboration consistent with full poetical effect, lived 
 in the succeeding century, and were contemporary with the tra- 
 gedian iEschylus. The Grecian drama, comic as well as tragic, 
 of the fifth century B.C., combined the lyric and choric song 
 
 at these games, - that diplomatists made use of the intercourse for the pur- 
 pose of detecting the secret designs of states whom they suspected, and 
 Aat the administering state often practised manceuvres in respect to tht 
 jbligations of truce for the Hieromenia, or Holy Month. 
 » Himerius. Orat. iii, p. 426, Wemsdorf- ayfpc^Afo* ical ii;avxev€C. 
 
 fOL. IV ^ 
 
 ■'I 
 
 !i 
 
 
 If 
 
 \i 
 
 u 
 
74 
 
 HISTORY OF GRELCE. 
 
 r.OMMENCEMENT 01- i^rKlC POETRY. 
 
 76 
 
 with the living action of ianiljic dialogue, — thus ooristitutiLg the 
 kist ascending nioNcinent iu liie })oetical genius of the race. 
 Reserving this i'or m future time, and for the history of Athens, 
 iu which it more particularly belongs, I now {)ropose to speak 
 only of the poetical movement of the two <arli<'r ctinturies, 
 wherein Athens hatl little or no part. So scanty aro the rem- 
 nants, unfortunatel), of these earlier poets, that \\r can offer 
 Httle except crilici.>nis horrowctl at second-hand, and a few gen- 
 erai considerations tin their workings and tendency.' 
 
 Archilochus aiul Kallinus both a[)|)ear to fall about the middle 
 of the se\*nth ccnti ry ii.c, and it is with them that the innova- 
 tions in Grecian |)( ciry coininence. Before thcin, we are tohl 
 thei-e existed nothin/ but the t'j)os, or daktylic hexameter poetry, 
 of which much has b<'<'ii said in my fornier volume, — being 
 lemMidarv stories or adventures narrated, together with ad- 
 dresses or hymns to the gods. We nuist recollect, too, that this 
 wius not only the whole poetry, but the whole literature of the 
 age : prose composition was altogether unknown, juid writing, if 
 beginning to be employed as an aid to a few superior men, was 
 at any rate generally unused, and found no reading public. The 
 voice was the only comnumicant, and the ear the only recipient, 
 of all tiiose ideas and feelings which productive minds in the 
 community I'ound themselves imj)elhMl to |)our out ; both voice 
 and ear being accusujnied to a mu^ical recitation, or chant, appa' 
 rently something be ween song and speech, with simple rhythm 
 and a still simpler occasional accompaniment from the primitive 
 four-stringed harp. Such habits and requirements of the voice 
 aad ear were, at that time, inseparably associated with the suc- 
 cess and popularity of the poet, and contributed doubtless to 
 rijtrict the range of subjects with which he could deal. The 
 
 * For tilt' whole subject of this chapter, the eleventh, twclftli, thirteenth, 
 •nd fourteenth chapters of O. Miiller's History of the Literature of Ancient 
 Greece, wherein the lyre poets are handled with greater length than con 
 lists with the limits of this work, will be found highly valuable, — chapters 
 aboaading in erudition and ingenuity, but not always within the hmits of 
 the evidence. 
 
 The learned work of Ulrici ( Geschichte der Griechischen Poesie — £fril 
 b still more open to the same remark. 
 
 /pe was to a certain extent consecrated, like the primitive 
 statues of the gods, from which men only ventured to deviate by 
 gradual and almost unconscious innovations. Moreover, in the 
 first half of the seventh century B.C., that genius which had oiice 
 created an Iliad and an Odyssey was no longer to be found, and 
 the work of hexameter narrative had come to be prosecuted by 
 less gifted persons, — by those Cyclic poets of whom I have 
 spoken in the preceding volumes. 
 
 Such, as far as we can make it out amidst very uncertain 
 evidence, was the state of the Greek mind immediately before 
 elegiac and lyric poets appeared ; while at the same time its 
 experience was enlarging by the formation of new colonies, and 
 the communion among its various states tended to increase by 
 the freer reciprocity of religious games and festivals. There 
 arose a demand for turning the literature of the age — I UvSe thia 
 word as synonymous w ith the })oetry — to new feelings and 
 purposes, antl for applying the rich, plastic, and musical lan- 
 guage of the old epic, to j)resent passion and circumstance, 
 social as well as individual. Such a tendency had become ob- 
 vious in Ilesiod, even within the range of hexameter verse ; 
 but the same causes which led to an enlargement of the subjects 
 of poetry inclined men also to vary the metre. 
 
 In regard to this latter point, there is reason to believe that 
 the expansion of Greek music was the immediate determining 
 cause ; for it has been already stated that the musical scale imd 
 instruments of the Greeks, originally very narrow, were ma- 
 terially enlarged by borrowing from Phrygia and Lydia, and 
 these acquisitions seem to have been first realized about the 
 beginning of the seventh century B.C., through the Lesbian 
 harper Terpander, — the Phrygian (or Greco-Phrygian) thii*- 
 player Olympus, — and the Arkadian or Boeotian fiute-pfayer 
 Klonas. Terpander made the important advance of exchanging 
 the original four-stringed harp for one of seven strings, embrac- 
 ing the compass of one octave or two Greek tetrachords, and 
 Olympus as well as Klonas taught many new pomes, or tunc?, 
 on the flute, to which the Greeks had before been strangers, — i 
 probably also the use of a flute of more varied musical compass. 
 Terpander is said to have gained the prize at the first recorded 
 celebration of the Lacedaemonian festival of the Karneia. in 671 
 
 IV 
 
f6 
 
 mSTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 EARLY GRECIAN MI^SIC.-TERPANDKR. 
 
 77 
 
 I 
 
 B.C.: this i;» one of the best-ascertained points among the cbeoojre 
 dmwiolo^y oi' the seventh century ; and there seem grounds for 
 assifrning Olvmpus and Klonas to nearly the same period, a 
 little before Archilochus and Kallinus.i To Terpander, Olym- 
 pus, and Klonas, are ascribed the formation of the earliest musi- 
 cal nomes known to the inquiring Greeks of later times: to the 
 first, numes on tlie harp ; to the two latter, on the Hute, — every 
 tkome bein"- the general scheme, or basis, of which the airs ac- 
 tually performed constituted so many variations, within certain 
 
 ' These early innovators iu (irccian niu-ic, rliythm, metre, and poetry 
 belonginj: to the seventh century u.c, wvrv vtrv imperfectly known, even tc 
 tliose contemporaries of Tlato and Ari>totle who tried to get together 
 facts for a consecutive history of music. The treatise of Plutarch, De 
 Musica, shows wliat vry contradictory statcint'm-; lie found. He quotes 
 from four ditferent au.hors, — Hcraklcides, (ilauku^, Alexander, and Aris- 
 toxenus, who hv no means a<^reed in their scries of names and tacts. The 
 first three of them Mend to<;ethcr mythe and history ; while even the Ana- 
 irrajihe or inscription ut Sikyon. which professed to frive a continuous list 
 of sucli poets and musii ians us had contended at the Sikyonian games, 
 hcpan with a larjre st xk of mytlii<al names, — Amphion, Linus, Pierius, 
 etc. (Plutarch, Music p. l\:\-2.) Sotne authors, accordin-: to IMutarch (p. 
 1133), made the <rrcat elironolo-ical mistake of jdacinfj Terpander as con- 
 temporarv with Ilii)pona\; a proof how little of chronological evidence 
 was then ac*essih!le. 
 
 That Terj.ander wa^ victor at the Sjtartan festival of the Karnoia, in 676 
 B.C., mav well have b<-en derived l.y llellanikus from the Spartan registers: 
 the name of the Lcs lian harper Pcrikleitas, as having gained the same 
 prize at some suhseipx iit period (Plutarch, De ^lus. p. 1 1 .33 ), prohably rests 
 un the same authority. That Archilochus was rather later than Terpan- 
 oer, and Thaletas ra' her later than Archilochus, was the statement oi 
 Ijlaokus (Plutarch, De Mus. p. 1134). Klonas and Polymnestus arc 
 placed later than Terpander ; ^Vrchiloehus later than Klonas : Alkmai-. 
 18 said to have mentioned Polymnestus in one of his songs (pp. 1133-1135). 
 It can hardly be true that Teqiander gained four Pythian prizes, if the 
 festival was octennial prior to its reconstitution by the Amphiktyons (p. 
 i;32). Sakadas gained three Pythian prizes aj}er that period, when the 
 festival was quadrennial (p. 1134). 
 
 Compare the confused indications in Pollux, iv, 65-66, 78-79. The 
 •t)6tract given by Photius of certain parts of the Chrestomathia of Proclnj 
 ;^*abli.shed in ciaisfonrs edition of Hephajstion, pp. 375-389), is also ex 
 tremelv valuable, in spite of its brevity and obscurity, about the lync and 
 enoric i>octi7 of Greece. 
 
 defined limits.t Terpander employed his enlarged instrumental 
 power as a new accompaniment to the Homeric poems, as well 
 as to certain epic proocmia or hymns to the gods of his own 
 composition. But he does not seem to have departed from tht 
 hexameter verse and the daktylic rhythm, to which the new 
 , accompaniment was probably not quite suitable ; and the idea 
 may thus have been suggested of combining the words also 
 according to new rhythmical and metrical laws. 
 
 It is certain, at least, that the age (670-600) immediately 
 succeeding Terpander, — comprising Archilochus, Kallinus, Tyr- 
 taius, and Alkman, whose relations of time one to another we 
 have no certain means of determining,'^ though Alkman seems to 
 have been the latest, — presents a remarkable variety both of 
 new metres and of new rhythms, superinduced upon the previ- 
 
 • The diflference between No/iof and MfAof appears in Plutarch, De 
 Mnsicd, p. 1132 — Kal rdv Teprravdpov, Kt^apcjSiKUJV noiTjrfjv bvra vofiuv^ 
 Kara vofiov SKaarov toic Ineai Tolq kavTov Kal toIc 'OfiTjpov jneTnj nepLTi'&ivTa^ 
 ^eiv kv TOLQ aydai' inrotprjvaL 6e tovtov "kiyei bvofxara npuTov role Ki^ap<j' 
 
 AlKOlg VOpLOLQ. 
 
 The nomes were not many in number; they went by special names ; and 
 there was a disagreement of opinion as to the persons who had composed 
 them (Plutarch, Music, p. 1133). They were monodic, not choric, — in- 
 tended to be sung by one person (Aristot. Problem, xix, 15). Herodot. i, 
 23, about Arion and the Nomus Orthius. 
 
 2 Mr. Clinton (Fasti Hellen. ad ann. 671, 665, 644) appears to me noway 
 satisfactory in his chronological arrangements of the poets of this century. 
 I agree with O. Miiller (Hist, of Literal, of Ancient Greece, eh. xii, 9) in 
 thinking that he makes Terpander too recent, and Thaletas too ancient ; 
 I also believe both Kallinus and Alkman to have been more recent than 
 the place which Mr. Clinton assigns to them ; the epoch of Tyrtaeus will 
 depend upon the date which we assign to the second Messenian war. 
 
 How very imperfectly the chronology of the poetical names even of the 
 sixth century b.c — Sappho, Anakreon, Hipponax — was known even to 
 writers of the beginning of the Ptolemaic age (or shortly after 300 B.C.), 
 we may see by the mistakes noted in Athenasus. xiii, p. 599. Hermesiana.x 
 of Kolophon, the elegiac poet, represented Anakreon as the lover of Sap 
 pho ; this might perhaps be not absolutely impossible, if we supposed in 
 Sappho an old age like that of Ninon de I'Enclos ; but others (even earlier 
 than Hermesianax, since they are quoted by Chamajleon) represented 
 Anakreon, when in old age, as addressing verses to Sappho, still young 
 Again, the comic writer Diphilus introduced both Aichilochas and Hip 
 ponax as the lovers of Sappho. 
 
 f 
 
 It 
 
 i i :| 
 
 • I 
 
If 
 
 7S 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ous daktylic hexameter. The first departure from this latter it 
 found in the eh*;^iar; verse, employed seerainjrly more or less by 
 all the four above-mentioned poets, hut cliiefly by the first two, 
 and even ascribed Ijy some to the invention of KaHinus. Tvr- 
 ta3us in his military march-songs employed th(» auapustic metre, 
 ^ut in Archilochus as well as in Alkman we find traces of a 
 cmch larger range of metrical variety, — i;imbic, trochaic, an- 
 -ipiKstic, ionic, etc., — sometimes even asynartetic or compound 
 metres, anapaestic or dai^tylic, blended with trochaic or ianibic. 
 What we have remaining from MimnernuH, who comes about 
 tie close of the preceding four, is elegiac; lii< contemporaries 
 Alkanis and Sappho, besides em[>loying most of those metres 
 which they found existing, invented each a peculiar stanza of 
 tlieir own, whicli is familiarly known un.hr a name derived 
 from each. In Solon, the younger contemporary of Minuiermus, 
 we have the elegiac, iambic, and trochaic: in Thcognis, yet later, 
 the elegiac only. But botli Arion and St<sic!ioru> appear to 
 have been innovators in this department, the Ibrnier by liis im- 
 provement in the diihyrambic chorus or circular song and dance 
 in honor of Dionysus, — the latter hy his more elaborate choric 
 compositions, containing not only a strophe and antistrophe, but 
 aho a third division or epode succeeding them, |>ronounced by 
 tlie chorus standing still. Both Anakreon and Ibykus likewise 
 ftdded to the stock of existing metrical viu'ieties. And we thus 
 see that, within the century and a half succeeding Terpauder, 
 Greek poetry (or (>re«^k literature, which was then the same 
 thing) be»»ame greatly enriched in matter as well as diversified 
 in form. 
 
 To a certain extent there seems to have been a real connection 
 between the two: new forms were essential for the expression 
 of new wants and feelings, — though the assertion that elegiac 
 metre is especially a.lapted for one set of feelings,' trochaic for 
 
 * The Latin poets and the Alexandrine critics seem to have both insisted 
 on the natural raoumfiilness of the elegiac metre (Ovid, Heroid. xv, 7,- 
 Uorat. Art Poet. 75) : see also the ftinciful explanation given by Didymng 
 bi the Etymologicon Maj^nuin, v, 'EAeyof. 
 
 We learn from Hephaestion (c. viii, p. 45, Gaisf.) that the anajaestie 
 feMTch-metrc of TyrtiBus was employed hv the comic writers also, fo • f 
 
 m 
 
 IXSrFFiriENCY OF THE HEXAMETER VERSE. 
 
 V9 
 
 A second, and iambic for a third, if true at all, can only hi 
 admitted with great latitude of exception, when we find so many 
 of them employed by the poets for very different subjects, — gay 
 or melancholy, bitter or complaining, earnest or sprightly, — 
 seemingly with little discrimination. 
 
 But the adoption of some new metre, different from the per- 
 petual series of hexameters, was required when the poet desired 
 to do something more than recount a long story or Iragraent oi 
 heroic legend, — when he sought to bring liimself, his friends, his 
 enemies, his city, his hopes and fears with regard to matters 
 recent or impending, all before the notice of the hearer, and that, 
 too, at once with brevity and animation. The Greek hexameter, 
 like our blank verse, has all its limiting conditions bearing upon 
 each separate line, and presents to the hearer no predetermined 
 resting-place or natural pause beyond.^ In reference to any 
 long compasition, either epic or dramatic, such unrestrained 
 license is found convenient, and the case was similar for Greek 
 epos and drama, — the single-lined iambic trimeter being gen- 
 erally used for the dialogue of tragedy and comedy, just as the 
 daktvlic hexameter had been used for the epic. The metrical 
 changes introduced by Archilochus and his contemj)oraries may 
 be compared to a change from our blank vei-se to the rhymed 
 couplet and quatrain : the verse was thrown into little systems 
 of two, three, or four lines, with a pause at the end of each ; 
 and the halt thus assured to, as well as expected and relished by, 
 the ear, was generally coincident with a close, entire or partial, 
 
 totally different vein of feeling. See the Dissertation of Franck, CalUnus, 
 pp. 37-48 (Leips. 1816). 
 
 Of the remarks made by O. Miiller respecting the metres of these early 
 poets f History of the Literature of Aneient Greece, ch. xi, s. 8-12, etc.; eh. 
 xii, s. 1-2, etc.), many appear to he uncertified and disputahle. 
 
 For some jrood remarks on the fallibihty of men's impressions respecting 
 the natural and inherent r/i?of of particular metres, see Adam Smith (The- 
 ory of Moral Sentiment, part v, ch. i, p. 329), in the edition of his works 
 hy Dugald Stewar'. 
 
 ' See the observations in Aristotle (Rhetor, iii, 9) on the Xe^^c elfjofiivri 
 m compa/ed with At t^c KaTEcrrpaiJL^tvri ■ — Ac^tf ei()Ofxtvr), r/ ovSev §x^i T€?Mf 
 nirt] Kod^ avrifv, av fir/ rd irpuyfia to Xeyofievov rr/eiu-dr/- — naTearpanfievn 
 iJi, T] €v irepiodoic Xeyio de neploAov, li^iv Ixovaav upxvv koI r*A»vri^ 
 cir^v Kord^ avTTiv koX fitye^og evcvvonroi . 
 
 '1 
 
 Hi 
 
 If! 
 
 I 
 
 
 ii 
 
 i: 
 
80 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 in the sense, which thus came to be distributed with greater poin! 
 and effect. The "legiac verse, or common hexameter and pen 
 tameter (tliis second line being an hexameter with the third and 
 gixth tliesisj or ihe last half of the third and sixth foot, sup- 
 prt— «m1, and a i»au-e h'ft in place of it), as well as the epode (or 
 iambic trimeter followed by an iambic dimeter) and some other 
 binary combinations of verse which we trace among the frag- 
 ments of Archilochus, are conceived with a view to such increase 
 of effect both on the car and tlie mind, not less than to the direct 
 I)leasures of novelty and variety. 
 
 The iambic m<3tre, built upon the primitive iambus, or coarse 
 and licentious jesting,'2 which formed a part of some Grecian 
 
 ' I employ, howevr un\villiii<,dy, tlio word tfu-sis here (arsis and thesis) in 
 the sense in which it i^ used l»y G. Ilcnntinn ("Illud tempus, in quo ictu-s 
 est, arsin ; ea tempera, qiim carent ictn, thetiin votamus," Element. Doctr. 
 Metr. sect. 15), and foHowed fiy Roeckh, in hi.-* Di-^sertation on the Metres 
 of Pindar (i, 4), thou<;h I ULrrrr with Dr. Barhaui (in the vahialde Preface 
 to his edition of Hcphsestion, Carahridj^e, 1843, pp. 5-8) that the opposite 
 sense of the words would be the preferable one, just as it was the original 
 sense in which tliey were used by the best Greek musical writers : Dr. Bar- 
 ham's Preface is very instructive on the ditiicult su})ject of ancient rhythm 
 
 gen<rally. 
 
 'Homer, Hymn, ad Cererem. 202; Hesychius, v, Tedvpl^] Herodot. v, 
 83 ; Diodor. v, 4. There were various gods at whose festivals scurrility 
 {Tu)-&aafih(;) was a onsecrated practice, seemingly different festivals in 
 ditferent places (Aristot. Politic, vii, !,">, 8). 
 
 The reader will understand better what this consecrated scurrihty mean3 
 bv comparing tlie description of a modern traveller in the kingdom of 
 Naples (Tour through the Southern Provinces of the Kingdom of Naples, 
 by Mr. Keppel Craven, London, 1821, ch. xv, p. 287) : — 
 
 "I returned to Gerace (the site of the ancient Epizephyrian Lokri) by 
 one of those moonlights which are known only in these latitudes, and which 
 no pen or pencil cin portray. My path lay along some cornfields, in 
 which the natives were employed in the last labors of the har\'est, and I 
 was not a Uttle surjirised to tind myself saluted with a volley of opprobri- 
 ous epithets and abtisive language, uttered in the most threatening voice, 
 and accompanied with the most insulting gestures. This extraordinary 
 custom is )f the most remote antiquity, and is observed towards all stran- 
 gers during the harvest and vintage seasons ; those who are apprized of it 
 will keep their temper as well as their presence of mind, as the loss of 
 either would only ser\'e as a signal for still louder invectives, and prolong a 
 sen test in which success would l)e as hopeless as undesirable." 
 
 ARCHILOCHrS. 
 
 81 
 
 ( i 
 
 festivals (especially of the festivals of Demeter as well in Attica 
 as in Paros, the native country of the poet), is only one amongst 
 many new paths struck out by his inventive genius ; whose 
 exuberance astonishes us, when we consider that he takes his 
 start from little more than the simple hexameter,' in which, too, 
 lie was a distinguished composer, — for even of the elegiac verse 
 he is as likely to have been the inventor as Kallinus, just as he 
 was the earliest popular and successful composer of table-songs, 
 or Skolia, though Terpander may have originated some such 
 before him. The entire loss of his poems, excepting some few 
 fragments, enables us to recognize little more than one character- 
 istic, — the intense personality wiiich pervaded them, as well as 
 tliat coarse, direct, and out-spoken license, which afterwards lent 
 such terrible effect to the old comedy at Athens. His lampoons 
 are said to have driven Lykambes, the father of Neobule, to 
 hang himself: the latter had been promised to Archilochus in 
 marriage, but that promise was broken, and the poet assailed both 
 father and daughter with every species of calumny.- In addi- 
 tion to this disa})pointinent, he was poor, the son of a slave- 
 mother, and an exile from his country, Paros, to the unpromising 
 colony of Thasos. The desultory notices respecting him betray 
 a state of suffering combined with loose conduct which vented 
 itself sometimes in complaint, sometimes in libellous assault ; and 
 he was at last slain by some whom his muse had thus exasper- 
 ated. His extraordinary {)oetical genius finds but one voioe of 
 encomium throughout antiquity. His triumphal song to Hera- 
 
 ' The chief evidence for the rhythmical and metrical changes introduced 
 by Archilochus is to be found in the 28th chapter of Plutarch, De Musica, 
 pj>. 1140-1141, in words very difficult to understand completely Set 
 ri.-ici. Geschichte der Ilellenisch. Poesie, vol. ii, p. 381. 
 
 The epigram ascribed to Th<'okritus (No. 18 in Gaisford's Poetas Mino- 
 res) shows that the poet had before him hexameter compositions of Archil- 
 ochus, as well as lyric : — 
 
 wf Efifie'kTj^ r' iyevTO Kuiride^ioc 
 ETTEu. re noieiVy Trpof "kvpav r' uEideiv. 
 See the article on Archilochus in Welcker's Kleine Schriften, pp. 71-Bl, 
 which has the merit of show ing that iambic bitterness is far from being thi 
 •nly marked feature in his character and genius. 
 
 » See Meleager, Epigram cxix, 3; Horat. Epist. 19, 23, and Epod, ri, If 
 With the Scholiast; vElian, V H. x, 13. 
 
 TOL. IV 4* fioe, 
 
82 
 
 mSTORY OF GREKCK. 
 
 kles was still i)0|»ularly sung by the victors at Olyuipia near 1*^0 
 v^entuiies ath-r his death, in tlie days of Pindar ; but that majes- 
 tic and coniplinH ntary poet at once denounce- the malignity, and 
 rtttests the retributive sufleriiig, of the great Parian iambistJ 
 
 Amidst the multifarious veins in whicli Arehihx'hus displayed 
 hi-^ griiiu>, moralizing or gnomic |ioetry is not v»antiug, while Lis 
 contemponiry Simonides, of Amorgo-, <1<. voles tlie iambic metre 
 e^|>ecially to thi.-. de>tination, afterward^ followed out by Solcn 
 and Theognis. liut Kallinus, the earliest celebrated elegiac 
 poet, so fai- as w«? can judge from his f * w fragmeiits, employed 
 the elegiac metre for exhortations of warlike j)a:riotism ; and 
 tlie more ample remains which we post -s ui' Tyrtaus are ser- 
 mons in the same strain, jn-eaching to the Spartans bravery 
 against the foe, ;.nd unanimity as well a> obedience to the law at 
 home. They ar,' patriotic effusions, called forth by the circum- 
 stances of tlie t nie, and sung by single voice, with accompani- 
 ment of the llutc,- to those in whose bosoms the flame of courage 
 was to be kindle.l. For thougii what we p( ruse is in verse, we 
 fti- still in the tide of real and })resent life, and we must suppose 
 ourselves rather listening to an orator addressing the citizens 
 when danger or dissension is actually impending. It is only in 
 the hands of Miinnermus that elegiac versa comes to be devoted 
 to soft and amatory subjects. Ilis few fragments present a vein 
 of passive and tender sentiment, illustrated by appropriate 
 matter of legend, such as would be cast into poetry in all ages, 
 and (juite ditfereiit from the rhetoric of Kallinus and Tyrtaeus. 
 
 The poetical career ot" Alkman is again distinct from that of 
 any of his abov<'-mentioned contemporaries. Their compositions, 
 besides liymns to the gods, were principally expressions of feel- 
 ing intended to be sung by individuals, though sometimes also 
 suited for the komus, or band of festive volunteers, assembled ou 
 80me occasion of common interest : those ot" Alkman were prin« 
 d)>ally choric, intended for the song and accompanying dance of 
 
 4 
 
 • Pindar, Pyth. ii, 55; Ulymp. ix, 1, with the Scholia; Eunf.id. Hercul 
 Furens, 583-683. The eighteenth epigram of Theokritus (above alluded 
 lo) conveys a striking tribute of admiration to An hilochus : compari 
 (^nintilian, x, 1, and Liebel, ad Archiloclii Fragmenta. sevts. 5, 6. 7 
 
 * Athenaeus, xiv, p. 630 
 
 ■■aMiaaliiiiuilliiitw 
 
 .*»^»- 
 
 CnORIC PERFORMAXCES AT SPARTA. 
 
 83 
 
 the chorus. He was a native of Sardis in Lydia, or at least hU 
 family were so ; and he appears to have come in early life to 
 Si)arta, though his genius and mastery of the Greek language 
 discountenance the story that he was brought over to Sparta as a 
 slrwve. The most ancient arrangement of music at Sparta, gener- 
 ally ascribed to Terpander,' underwent considerable alteration, 
 not only through the elegiac and anapaestic measures of Tyrtrrus, 
 but also through the Kretan Thaletas and the Lydian Alkman 
 The harp, the instrument of Ter{>ander, was rivalled and in part 
 ruperseded by the flute or pipe, which had been recently rendered 
 more effective in the hands of Olympus, Klonas, and Polymnestus, 
 and which gradually became, for compositions intended to raise 
 gtrong emotion, the favorite instrument of the two, — being em- 
 ployed as accompaniment both to the elegies of Tyrtjeus, and to 
 the hyporcheraata (songs, or hymns, combined with dancing) of 
 Tlialeta- : also, as the stimulus and regulator to the Spartan mil- 
 itary march.2 
 
 These* elegies (as has been just remarked) were sung by one 
 person, in the midst of an assembly of listeners, and there were 
 doubtless other compositions intended for the individual voioe. 
 liut in general such was not the character of music and poetrj 
 at Sparta ; everything done there, both serious and recreative, 
 was public and collective, so that the chorus and its performances 
 received extraordinary development. It has been already stated, 
 that the chorus usually, with song and dance combined, consti- 
 tuted an important part of divine service throughout all Greece, 
 and was originally a public manifestation of the citizens gener- 
 
 \4 
 I 
 
 .1' 
 
 ir 
 
 \ d 
 
 if 
 
 'Plutarch, De Music&. pp. 1134. 1135; Aristotle, De Laced aemon. Ro- 
 piiblicA, Fragra. xi, p. 132, ed. Neumann; Plutarch, De Ser^ Numin 
 Vindict. o. 13, p. 558. 
 
 • Thucyd. v, 69-70, with the SchoHa, — fierd rwv TroTie/niKuv vofiuv 
 
 \aKeSatfi6vtoi de jSpaSetJC Kal virb av'krjTuv TTo/iXdv vofiij byKa'^effTCtruv, oh 
 Tov ^eiov x^^P^^'y «^^' tva 6^aXC)^ fierd. l>t>'&fiov Paivoiei', Kal {xtj ^taa^^a(r&t^^ 
 
 Cicero, Tuscul. Qu. ii, 16. " Spartiatarum quorum procedit Mora adl 
 tibiftm, neque adhibetur ulla sine anapaestis pedibus hortatio." 
 
 The flute was also the instrument appropriated to Komus, or the excited 
 tnorement of half-intoxicated revellers (Hesiod, Scat. Hercul. 280 ; A'jieiis 
 Jtiv, p}». G! 7-61 8). 
 
 
 ■ I 
 
 ;i 
 
84 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 '' 1 ' 
 
 ijly, _ a large proportion of them being actively engaged n it,* 
 and receiving some training for the purpose as an ordinary 
 branch of education. Neither the song nor the dance, under 
 fiuch conditions, could be otherwise than extremely simple. But 
 in process of time, the performance at the chief festivals tended 
 to become more elabonitc, and to fall into the hands of persona 
 expressly and professionally trained,— the mass of the citizenfi 
 gradually ceasing to take active part, and being present merely 
 a:^ spectators. Such was the practice which grew up in mosi 
 parts of Greece, and especially at Athens, where the dramatic 
 chorus acquired its highest perfection. But the drama nevei 
 found admission at Sparta, and the peculiarity of Spartan life 
 tended much to keep up the popular chorus on its ancient footing. 
 It formed, in fact, one element in that never-ceasing drill to which 
 the Spartans were subject from their boyhoo<l, and it scivc«l a 
 purpose analogous to their military training, in accustoming them 
 to simultaneous and regulated movement, — insomuch that the 
 comparison between the chorus, especially in his Pyrrhic, or war- 
 dances, and the military enomoty, seems to have been often dwelt 
 upon.'2 In the singing of the solemn piean in lionor of Apollo, at 
 the festival of the Hyakinthia, king Agesilaus was under the or- 
 ders of the chorus-master, and sang in the place allotted to him ;^ 
 while the whole body of Spartans without exception, — the old, 
 
 » Plato, Leg^^ vii, p. 803. ^vovra Kal (^(hvra Kai opxoi-fievov, uote mvq 
 ftev ^f^oi}g IXiuq avrCj TzapaaKEVu^eiv dwarbv thai, otc. : compare p. 799 ; 
 Maximus Tyr. Diss, xxxvii, 4 ; Aristophan. Han. 950-975 ; Athen^iis, xiv, 
 p. 626; Polyb. iv, ao ; Lucian, De Saltationc, c. 10, 11, 16, 31. 
 
 Compare Aristotle (Problem xix, 15) about the primitive character and 
 •nbscquent change of the chorus; and the last chapter of the eighth book 
 of his PoUtica: also, a striking passage in Plutarch (De Cupidine Divitia- 
 rem, c. 8, p. 527) about the transformation of the Dionysiac festival at 
 Chaeroneia from simplicity to costliness. 
 
 •Athenffius, xiv, p. 628; Suidas, vol. iii, p. 715, ed. Kuster; Plutarch, 
 Instituta Laconica, c. 32, — Kufiifji'iiag koc r^taytfjdiac; ovk t]kp6ui'to,6tt(j^ nijTi 
 iv anovd^, fif/re h vaidiq, ukovuxtl t<jv uvriAeyovTuv role rouoic, — which 
 exactly correspond? with the ethical view implied in the alleged conversa- 
 tioD between Solon and Thespis (Plutarch, Solon, c. 29 : see above, ch. xi, 
 ?ol. ii, p. 195), and with Plato, Legg. vii, p. 817. 
 
 •Xenophon, Agesilaus. ii, 17. o'xaSe uTeX^^uv etc rd, "XaKh^LCU d«we 
 
 Vol. 4 
 
 C 
 
 VARIED GEXirS OF ALKMAN. 
 
 85 
 
 the middle-aged, and the youth, the matrons, and the virgins, — 
 were distributed m various choric companies,^ and trained to 
 harmony both of voice and motion, wiiich was publicly exhibited 
 at the solemnities of the Gymnop«di;ie. The word dancing must 
 be understood in a larger sense than that in which it is now em- 
 ployed, and as conii>rising every variety of rhythmical, accentu- 
 ated, conspiring movements, or gesticulations, or postures of tliQ 
 t>ody, from the slowest to the quickest ;'2 cheironomy, or the dec- 
 orous and expressive movement of the hands, being especially 
 practised. 
 
 We see thus that both at Sparta and in Krete (which ap- 
 proached in respect to publicity of individual life most nearly to 
 Sparta), the choric aptitudes and manifestations occupied a larger 
 space than in any other Grecian city. And as a certain degree of 
 musical and rhythmical variety was essential to meet this want 3 
 w hile music was never taught to Spartan citizens individually, — 
 we farther understand how^ strangers like Terpander, Polymnes- 
 tus, Thalctas, Tyrtirus, Alkman, etc., were not only received, but 
 acquired great influence at Sparta, in spite of the preponderant 
 spirit of jealous seclusion in the Spartan character. All these 
 masters appear to have been effective in their own special voca- 
 tion,— the training of the chorus, — to which they imparted 
 new rhythmical action, and for which they composed new music. 
 But Alkman did this, and something more; he possessed iho 
 genius of a poet, and his compositions were read afterwards 
 
 » Plutarch. LykurJ,^ c. 14, 16, 21 ; Athena^us. xiv, pp. 6.31-632. xv, p. 67«: 
 Xenophon, Ilellen. vi, 4, 15; De Republic. Lacedffim. ix, 5; Pindar. Ilypor- 
 chemata, Fraf^m. 78, ed. Bergk. 
 
 AuKaiva fiev nap-dhuv uyeXa. 
 Also, Alkman, Frajrm. 13, ed. Bergk ; Anti)-on. Caryst. Hist. Mirab. e. 27. 
 
 ^ How extensively pantomimic the ancient orch^sis was, may be seen by 
 the example in Xenophon, Svmposion, vii, 5, ix, 3-6, and Plutarch, Syn- 
 posion ix, 15, 2: see K. F. Hermann, Lehrbach der gottesdienstlichet 
 Alterthiimer der Griechen, ch. 29. 
 
 " 8»ne ut in religionibus saltaretur, haec ratio est : quod nullam majorei 
 Qostri partc-m corporis esse voluenmt, quae non sentiret religionem : nam 
 cantns ad animum, saliatio ad mobilitatem corporis pertinet." (Serviu-. afl 
 Virgil. Eclog. v, 73.) 
 
 'Aristot. Politic, viii, 4, 6. 0/ \aK*jvEe — oh /lav^avovrec 6fiut 
 ivvavTai Kpiveiv 6pi?a)f, wf (pam, tu xpn<^T^ ««* "^^ "^ ''"^ hBmv, 
 
 (I 
 
 M 
 
 ! 
 
 
§1 HISTOKr OF GREECE. 
 
 with pleasure by thase m ho could not hear them sung or see them 
 danced. In tlie little of his poems which remains, we recojrnize 
 that variety of rhythm and metre for which he was celebrated. 
 In this respect he (togetlier with the Kretan Tlialetas, who is said 
 to liave introduced a more vehement stvle both of music and 
 dance, with the Kretic and l*;«'onic rhythm, into Sparta') sur- 
 passed Archilodius, and |>repared the way for the complicated 
 choric movements of Stesichorus and Pindar ; some of the frag- 
 ments, too, manifest that fresh outpouring of individual sentiment 
 and emotion which constitutes so much of the cliarm of popular 
 l^oetry. Besides his touching address in old age to the Sj)artaQ 
 virgins, over whose 'Ong and dance he had been accustomed to 
 presid<i, — he is not afraid to speak of his hearty appetite, satis- 
 fied with sim}>le i'mA and relishing a bowl of waini biotli at the 
 winter tro])ic.- And he has attached to the spring an epithet, 
 which comes home to the real feelings of a poor country more 
 than those ca[)tivating pictures which abound in \^r« . ancient as 
 well as modern: he calls it '"the season of short fare," — the crop 
 of the previous ytar being then nearly consumed, the husband- 
 man is compelled to pinch himself until his new harvest comes 
 
 DORIC DIALECT EMPLOYED IN THE CHORUS. 
 
 91 
 
 ' Homer, Ilyinn. Ajto'I. 340. Oloi tf KpriTiliV rraii/ovfc, etc.: see Boeckh. 
 I>e Mctris Pindari, ii, 7, p. 143 ; Ephorus ap. Strabo, x, i>. 480; I'hitarch, De 
 MusicA, p. 1142. 
 
 Rcspcctinj]^ Tlialetas, and the jrradual alterations in the character of 
 music at Sparta, Iloeckl has given much instructive niatier ^Kreta, vol. iii 
 pp. 340-377). llesj)eetiiifr Nympliaius of Kydonia, wJiom ^Elian (V. II. xii, 
 60) puts in juxta[)osition with Thaletas and Terpander. nothing; is known. 
 
 After what is called the second fashion of music (KaTuarnoic} liad thus 
 been introduced by Thaletas and his contemporaries. — the tirst fashion 
 being that of Terpand«.T, — no farther innovations were allowed. The 
 ephors employed violent means to prohibit the hitended innovations of 
 Phrynis and Timotheu*;, after the Persian war: see Plutarch Agis, c. 10. 
 
 • Alkman, Fra^m. 13-17, ed. Bergk, 6 TzufKhayo^ 'X/.Kfiav: compare Fr. 
 ••3. Aristides calls him 6 tuv nafy-divuv tnawhri^ koI av/i^ovlo^ (Or. xlv, 
 n>L ii, p. 40, Dindorf ). 
 
 Of the Partneneia of Alkman (songs, hymns, and dances, com|>oscd tot 
 A chorus of maidens) there were at least two books (Stephanus Byzant t, 
 ISpvaixv)' He was the earliest poei who acquired renown in this species 
 •f composition, afterwanis much pursued by Pindar, Bacchylides, an! 
 ftmoiudes of Keos: see Welcker, Alkman. Fragment, p. 10. 
 
 in.* Those who recollect that in earlier periods of our history, 
 and in all countries where there is little accumulated stock, an 
 exorbitant difference is often experienced in the price of corn 
 before and after the harvest, will feel the justice of Alkraan's 
 
 description. 
 
 Judging from these and from a few other fragments of this poet, 
 AlkmiTn api)ears to have combined the life and exciting vigor of 
 Archilochus in the song properly so called, sung by himself individ- 
 rtally, — with a larger knowledge of musical and rhythmical elfect 
 iu regard to the choric performance. He composed in the Laco- 
 Dian dialect, -a variety of the Doric with some intermixture of 
 .Toli.ms. And it was irom him, jointly with those other compos- 
 er, who figured at Sparta during the century after Terpander, as 
 well as fi^m the simultaneous develoi>ment of the choric muse* 
 in Argos, SikyOn, Arcadia, and other parts of Peloponnesus, 
 that the Doric dialect aapiired permanent footing in Greece, as 
 the only proper dialect for choric compositions. Contiiuied by 
 Stesichorus and Pindar, this habit passed even to the Attic dram- 
 ati^ts, whose choric songs are thus in a great measure Done, 
 while their dialogue is Attic. At Si>arta, as well as m other 
 parts of Peloi)onnesus,3 the musical and rhythmical style appears 
 to have been fixed by Alkman and his contemporaries, and to 
 have been tenaciously maintained, for two or three centuries, 
 with little or no innovation ; the more so, as the Hute-players at 
 Sparta formed an hercilitary profession, who followed the routine 
 of their fathers.^ 
 
 » Alkman, Frag. 64, ed. Bergk. 
 
 'Qpag (5' kar/Ke rpcif, ^epo^ 
 Kal x^^f^^ '^' wTTwpav rpirav • . 
 Kat Terparov to yp, oko 
 
 OvK kari, 
 « Plutarch, De MusicA, c. 9, p. 1134. About the dialect of Alkman, 866 
 Ahrens, De Dialecto ^.olicft, sects. 2, 4 ; about his different metres, Welcker, 
 
 Alkman. Fragm. pp. 10-12. 
 
 •Plutarch, De MusicA, c. 32, p. 1142, c. 37, p. 1144 ; Athenaeus, xiv, p. 
 632. In Krete, also, the popula .ty of the primitive musical composers wa« 
 maintained, though along vith the innovator Timotheus : see Inscnption 
 No. 3053, ap. Boeckh, Corp. Ins. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 60. They were probably a yho^ with an heroic p/ogeuMT 
 Uko the heralds, to whom the historian compares them. 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 * I 
 
 t 
 
 :fl 
 
 II 
 
16 
 
 niSrORY OF GRKhUlL-. 
 
 Alknian was the la^t poet who addressed liimself to the pcpu< 
 lar chorus. Both Arion aiul Stesichorus composed for a body of 
 trained men, with a df*gree of variety and involution such aa 
 eouUl not he attained hy a mere fraction of tlie peojde. Tho 
 primitive dithyrambus was a round clioric (huice and song in 
 lienor of Dionysus,' common to Naxos, Thelxs, and seemingly 
 lo many other places, at the Dionysiac festival, — a spontaneous 
 ffFusion of drunken in«n in the hour of revelry, wherein the j)oet 
 Archilochus, " with tiie thunder of wine full ujion his mind," had 
 often taken the chief i)art.'- Its exciting character approached to 
 the worship of the Great Mother in Asia, and >tood in contrast with 
 the solemn and stately pa^an addressed to Aj>ollo. Arion intro- 
 duced into it an alteration su<*h as Archilochus had himself brought 
 about in the scurrilous iambus. He converted it into an elaborate 
 eomjX)sition in honor of the god, sung and danced by a chorus of 
 fifty persons, not only sober, but trained with great strictness; 
 though its rhythm and movements, and its ecpiipment in the 
 character of .-atyr>, presented more or less an imitation of the 
 primitive license. Horn at Methymna in Lesbos, Arion appears 
 as a harper, singer, and composer, much favored by Periander at 
 Corinth, in which city lie tirst '• composed, denominated, and 
 taught the dithyramh." earlier than any one known to Herodo- 
 tus.^ He did not, boss ever, remain permanently there, but trav- 
 elled from city to city, exhibiting at the festivals for money, — 
 especitiUy to Sicilian and Italian Greece, where he acquired large 
 gains. We may her*' again remark how the })Oefs as well as the 
 festivals served to promote a sentiment of unity among the dis- 
 persed Greeks. Such transfer of the ditliyramb, from the field 
 
 • Pindar, Frajxni- 44, e<l. IJerjrk : Schol. ad Pindar. Olymp. xiii, 25; Pro- 
 flus, Chrcstomathia, c. 12-14, ad calc. IIe{)liast. Ciaisf. p. 382: compare 
 W. M. Schmidt. In Dithyrambum Poetarumque Dithyrambicorum Re> 
 liquia-s pp. 171-183 (Berlin, 1845). 
 
 • Archiloch. Fra^nn. 72, cd. Bcrgk. 
 
 Ol6a (h^ii>a/ir^ov, olvtf) ^vyKepavvu^efc <Ppevac. 
 
 The old oracle quoted in Demosthen. cent. Meidiam, about the Dionjviff 
 •t Athens, enjoins — Afoi-t'o-w drifioTeXfj lepd reAeh% <a\ Kpar^ca icecit 
 90 i, Kal ^opoi'f iaruvai. 
 
 • llcn>dot i, 23 ; Suidas, v, 'Ap/uv; Pindar, 01ym|. xiii, 25. 
 
 ARION. - STESICHORUS. 
 
 of spontaneous nature into the garden of art,i constitutes the first 
 sta-e in the refinement of Dionysiac worship ; which wdl here- 
 after be found still farther exalted in the form of the Attic 
 
 drama. ^^ ^ ^ c aw. 
 
 The date of Arion seems about COO B.C., shortly alter Alk- 
 man : that of StesichomTS is a few years later. To the latter the 
 Greek chorus owed a high degree of improvement, and m par 
 ticula the last finished distribution of its performance mto the 
 Btrophe, the antistrophe, and the epodus : the turn, the return, 
 and the rest, — the rhythm and metre of the song during each 
 strophe corresponded with that during the antistrophe, but was 
 varied during the epodus, and again varied during the following 
 strophes Until this time the song had been raonostrophic, con- 
 sisting of nothing more than one uniform stanza, repeated from 
 the be-innin- to the end of the composition ;2 so that we may 
 easily '^ee how vast was the new complication and difficulty intro- 
 duced by Stesichorus, — not less for the performers than for the 
 composer, himself at that time the teacher and trainer of per- 
 formers. Both this poet and his contemporary the flute-player 
 Sakadas of Argos,-who gained the prize at the first three 
 Pythian games founded after the Sacred War, - seem to have 
 <urpassed their predecessors in the breadth of subject which they 
 embraced, borrowing from the inexhaustible province of ancient 
 k-end, and expanding the choric song into a well-sustained 
 eirical narrative.3 Indeed, these Pythian games opened a new 
 
 ' A^i^ Poetic, c. 6, ly^av rrjv ^oirjacv U ruv ahroaxe6caaf.aTuv : 
 
 icain, to the same eftect, ibid. c. 9. . 
 
 '' Alkman slightly departed from this rule: in one of h.s compoMUons o 
 fourteen strophes, "the last seven were in a different metre from Ute first 
 seven (HephLti^n, e. xv, p. 134, Gaisf, ; Hennann, Elementa Doct m. 
 Metriea., e. xvii, seet. 595). •A«^a««/ «a«oro/.,a ™< 2T5«j;op«of (1 lu- 
 
 tarch, De Musical, p. 1135). ^ . , ^ ^ 
 
 3 Pau,anias, vi, 14, 4; x, 7, 3. Sakadas, as well as Stesichorus, composed 
 
 wa'Uwv nepmg (Athenaeus, xiii, p. 609). 
 
 ^' Stesichorum (observes Quintilian, x, 1) quam sit ingenio vahdus, ma. 
 leh» quoque ostendunt, maxima bella et clarissimos canentem duces, et 
 •pici carminis onera lyrft sustinentem. Heddit enim personis m agendo 
 >imul loquendoque debitam dignitatem : ac si tenuisset modum ndetof 
 iemulari proximus Homenim potuisse : sed redundat, a/^ue etfaaditur 
 ^rod, ut est reprehendendum, ita copia; vitium est. 
 
 u 
 
 it 
 
 y 
 
 7 
 
HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 career to musical composers just at the time when Sparta hegas 
 to be closed against musical novelties. 
 
 Alkauis and Sapfdio, both natives of Lesbos, appear about con- 
 temporaries with Arion, r.c. fJlO-oSO. Of their once celebrated 
 lyric composition^, M-areely anything remains. But the criti- 
 cisms vvliieh are pi«'-erved on l)Oth of them place them in strong 
 contrast with Allui uui, who Ilvd and comjjosed under the more 
 restri';tivc atnio-plierc of Sparta, - and in considerable analogy 
 with the turbul'ii' vrhcnienee ui" Aichilochus,' though without 
 his intense pri\at< malignity. Boih composed for their own If/- 
 cal audience, and in their own Lesbian ^Eolic dialect ; not be- 
 cause there was it.ny p<^culiar fitness in that dialect to express 
 their vein of s^ntiiiient, but because it was more familiar to their 
 heurers. Sappho herself boasts of the prcmiuence of the Les- 
 bian l>ard> ;' and the celebrity of Terpander, Perikleitas, and 
 Arion, permits us lo suj>po>e that there may have been before 
 her many popular l)ards in the island who did nut attain to Ilel- 
 lenii- (•< lebrity. Aikieus included in his songs the fiercest bursts 
 vi' political feeilM.i;, the >tirring alternations of war and exile, and 
 all the ardent relish of a susceptibh- man for wine and love.^ 
 The love-song seems to have formed the principal theme of Sap- 
 pho, who, however, also composed odes or songs* on a great vari- 
 
 ojsO^nrc ruETS. 
 
 91 
 
 Siiiiuniiit's (A Klos ( Fra^. 19, vA. Bertz:k.) puts Ilonu r and Stcsichonis 
 lo}i;etht.'r : see the epiL^nirn of Antipater in the Antholo<:;ia, t. i, p. 328, ed Ja- 
 cobs, ami Dio Chiyso^tom, Or. 55, vol. ii, p. 284, Ileisk. Compare Kleine, 
 8tesi( hori Era<rnient. pp. .'}t)-:i4 (Berhn 1828), and O.Miiller, History of the 
 Literature of AiM-ietit (Ireece, ch. xiv, se<'t. 5. 
 
 'Vlit Hiusieal eoin{»i)-ers of Argo.s are affirmed by Herodotus to have been 
 fhc- nuist renowned in Greece, half a century after Sakadas (Her. iii, 131) 
 
 » Horat. Epistol. i, 1 9, 23. 
 
 * Sappho, Frat;m. 93, ed. Bertrk. See also Plehn, Leshiaca, pp. 145-165. 
 Respecting the poetesses, two or three of whom were noted, contemporary 
 with Sappho, see Ulriei. Gesch. der Hellen. Poesie, vol. ii, p. 370. 
 
 ' Dionys. Hal. Ant. Rom. v, 82; Horat. Od. i, 32, ii, 13 ; Cicero, De Nat 
 Door, i 2S, the striking; passage in Plutarch, Symposion iii, 1, 3, ap. Bergk. 
 IVigm 42. In the vew of Dionysius, the iEolic dialect of Alkaess and 
 Sapph diminished the value of their compositions : the jEolic accent, 
 •nalogous to the Latin, and acknowledging scarcely any oxyton words, 
 lanst have rendered them much less agreeable in recitation or song. 
 
 • See Plutarch, De Music, p. 1136 ; Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb, c SO 
 
 «ly of other subjects, serious as well as satirical, and is said fia^ 
 ther to have first employed the Mixolydian mode in music It 
 displays the tendency of the age to metrical and rhythmical nov- 
 elty, that Alkoius and Sappho are said to have each invented the 
 l)eculiar stanza, well-known under their respective names, — com- 
 binations of the dactyl, trochee, and iambus, analogous to the 
 a-vnartetic verses of Archilochus ; they by no means conlined 
 themselves, however, to Alkaic and Sapphic metre. Both the one 
 find the other composed hymns to the gods ; indeed, this is a 
 theme common to all the lyric and choric poets, whatever may 
 be their peculiarities in other ways. Most of their comiK)sition9 
 were songs for the single voice, not for the chorus. The poetry 
 of Alkceul is the more worthy of note, as it is the earliest in- 
 stance of the employment of the Muse in actual political war- 
 fare, and shows the increased hold which that motive was ac(iuir- 
 in"- on the Grecian mind. 
 
 The gnomic poets, or moralists in verse, approach by the tone 
 of their'' sentiments more to the nature of prose. They begin 
 with Simonidcs of Amorgos or of Samos, the contemporary of 
 Archilochus: indeed, the latter himself devoted some composi- 
 tions to the illustrative falde, which had not been unknown even 
 to llesiod. In the remains of Simonides of Amorgos we trace 
 nothing relative to the man personally, though he too, like 
 Archilochus, is said to have had an individual enemy, OrrKloc 
 kides, whose character was aspersed by his m use.^ His on ly 
 
 rK3^ Rcisk, and some striking^ges of Himerius, in respect to Sappho 
 (i 4, 16, 19; Maximus Tyrius, Dissert, xxiv, 7-9), and the encommm of 
 the critical Dionvsius (De Compos. Yerborum, c. 23, p. 1 .3). 
 
 The author of the Parian maride adopts, as one ^^^J^^^ ^S 
 epochs (Epoch 37), the flight of Sappho, or exile, trom Mitylend to feicly, 
 Bomewhere between 604-.^96 B.C. There prohal.ly was something remark- 
 Te which induced him to single out this event ; hut we do not know what, 
 nor can we trust tlie liints suggested by Ovid (Ileroid. xv, 51). 
 
 Nine books of Sappho's songs were collected by the }^''' l^'^^^'^^^ 
 arranged chieflv according to the metres (C. F. Neue, Sapphonis Fra^ . p 
 U Beriin 1827). There were ten books of the songs of Alka«us (Ath^ 
 L!,xi,p.481 ,andboth Aristophanes (^--™-^-) ^/^ ^^^^^^^^ 
 published editions of them. (Heph^stion, c. xv, p. 134, Gaisf.) Dik«arcbui 
 im>t« a commentary upon his songs (Athenaeus, xi, p. 461)^ 
 
 » Welcker, Simonidis Amorgini Iambi qui supersunt, p. 9 
 
 1 4 
 
 (I 
 
 
92 
 
 HISTORY OF GK-:ECK. 
 
 RELATION OF POETRY TO MUSIC. 
 
 93 
 
 eonsiderable poem extant is devoted to a survey of the charge* 
 ters of women, in iambic verse, and by way of comparison with 
 various animals, — the mare, the a><, the bee, etc. It follows 
 out the Hesiodic vein respecting the social and economical mis- 
 chief usually caused by women, with some few honorable excep- 
 tions ; but the poet shows a much lar^^er rantre of observation 
 And illustratiot, if we com[)are him with hi^ jtit (hccssor Ilesiod ; 
 moreover, his illustrations come fresh from life and reality. We 
 tiad in this early iambist the -anif >yin{»athy with industry ani 
 its due rewards which are obser\ahle in Ilesiod, toi^ether with a 
 Ftill more melancholy sense of liie un<ertainty ot' human events. 
 
 Of Solon and Tlieoirnis I haxe spoken in former chaptera. 
 They reproduce in part the moralizint,' vein of Simonides, though 
 with a strong admixture ot" pci'-oiuil feeling and a direct applica- 
 tion to passing event>. The mixture of political with social 
 morality, which we find in hotli, mark< their more advanced age: 
 Solon bears in thi-^ re-pert the same relation to Simonides, as 
 his contemporary Alkjeus bears to Archilochus. His }>oems, as 
 far as we can judge by the fragments remaining, appear to have 
 been short occasional effusions, — with the exception of the ej)ic 
 poem respecting the submerged island of Atlantis ; which he 
 bejran towards tin; close of his life, but never finished. Thev 
 are elegiac, trimeter iambic, and trochaic tetrameter: in hid 
 hands certainly neither of these metres can be said to have any 
 special or separate character. If the poems of Solon are short, 
 those of Theognis are mucli shorter, and are indeed so much 
 broken (as they stmd in our present collection), as to read like 
 separate epigrams or bur^^ts of feeling, which the poet had not 
 taken tlie trouble to incorporate in any definite scheme or series. 
 They form a singilar mixture of maxim and passion, — of gen- 
 eral precept with personal affection towards the youth Kyrnus, 
 — which surprises us if tried by the standard of literary coraiK>- 
 sition, but which seems a very genuine manifestation of an im- 
 poverished exile's complaints and restlessness. What remains to 
 OS of Phokylides, another of the gnomic poets nearly contempo- 
 rary with Solon, is nothing more than a few maxims in verse, — 
 oouplets, with the name of the author in several cases embodied 
 ID them. 
 
 Amidst all the variety of rhythmical and metrical innovationa 
 
 ,hich have been enumerated, the ancient epic continued to ^ 
 recited by the rhapsodes as beibre, and some new ep.c^l -mp^ 
 .itions were added to the existing stock : Eugaunuon ot Ky^en^, 
 about the 50th Olyn.piad, {o80 b. c.) appears to be the l^t oi 
 the series. At Athens, especially, both Solon and Pe.ststra tu. 
 manifested great solicitude as well for the recitation as lor the 
 correct preservation of the Iliad. Perhaps its popularity may 
 have been dinunishe.l by the competition of so much lyric and 
 choric poetry, more showy and striking in its accompaniments, a. 
 well a.s more changeful in its rhythmical character. Whatever 
 secondary erte.^t, however, this newer species of poetry may 
 have derived from such helps, its primary ellect was produced 
 bv real intellectual or poetical excellence, - by the thoughts, 
 sw.liment, and expression, not by the accompannnent. tor a 
 l«n.r time the musical composer and the poet continued generally 
 U, be one and tlie same person ; and besides those who have 
 acquired snflicient distinction to reach posterity, we cannot doubt 
 that there were many known only to their own contemporaries. 
 IJut with all of them the instrument and the melody constituted 
 oidy the inferior part of that which was known by the name ot 
 „,u,ic _alto.ielher subordinate to the "thoughts that breathe 
 an.l words tliat burn."' Exactness and variety of rhythmical 
 „ronu,icialion gave to the latter their full effect upon a delicate 
 .ar ■ but such pleasure of the ear was ancillary to the emotion 
 of mind arising out of the sense conveyed. Complaints are 
 made by the poets, even so early as 500 B.C., that the aecompam- 
 ment was becoming too prominent. But it was not until the age 
 of the comic poet Aristophanes, towards the end of the fifth cen- 
 tury B.C., that .he primitive relation between the instrumentid 
 accompaniment and the words was really reversed, - and loud 
 were the complaints to which it gave rise ;8 the performance of 
 
 • Aristophan. Nubes, 536. .•i"i,.,ac« 
 
 'AAA' avrH Kal role i^emv -mnrevovo tA^/.vt^fV 
 
 ^ See Pratinas ap. Athen.vum. xiv, p. G17, also p. 636, «"d t^^^^"^;*^ 
 
 II 
 
 sasE 
 
94 
 
 HJSTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 the flute or harp tlien became more elaborate, showy, and ove^ 
 ^wering, while the words were so put together as to show off 
 the player's execution. I notice briefly this subsequent revolu- 
 lion for the purpose; of setting forth, by contrast, the truly intel- 
 lectual cliaracter of tlie original lyric and choric poetry of 
 Greece ; and of showing how much the vague sentiment arising 
 from mere musical sound was lost in the more definite emotion, 
 Mid m the more lasting and reproductive combinations, generated 
 by poetical meaning. 
 
 The name and poetry of Solon, and the short maxims, or say- 
 ings, of Phokylide.', conduct us to the mention of the Seven 
 Wise Men of Greeir. Solon was himself one of the seven, and 
 most if not all of them were poets, or eomj)osers in verseJ To 
 most of them is ascribed also an abundance of pithy repartees, 
 together with one short saying, or maxim, peculiar to each, serv- 
 ing as a sort of distinctive motto ;^ indeed, the test of an aeeom- 
 plished man about this time was his talent tor singing or 
 reciting poetry, and tbr making smart and ready answers. lie- 
 specting this constellation of \vi>e men, — who in the next cen- 
 
 Art. IWtic. 20r>:.an<l \V. M. Scfimi.lr. Diutnl./i in Dithyramhum, ck. viil 
 yp. 2JO-:iG5. 
 
 Tdrni^uftdi' Kill TTtjurror —-tlm cli;iraet«'r of the newer music (Plutareh, 
 Aui-;, r. in) — as contrasted with to af^iuv Km K-vpnp^nv of tlie old niu^io 
 (Pliirni'li. I)c Mu-irA. ;</ s)i[>.]: o<rentation and nflected di<jdav, ajiainst 
 serii.u^Mr^ . an<l siniidicify. It is h\ no niiatis c rrain tliat these reproaches 
 a^ain^t the more recn r iiki^.- of the (irt'cks wi re well toundrd -, we mav 
 well i>e reuilered mistrustful of their accuracy wlien we he;ir similar re- 
 liiarks and contrasts ad. am ed with re;i:ar I to ihe mu-ic of our last tliree 
 centum s. The (■h;;r:if in- <.f (ireek j>oetry certainly tended to dej^'t^nerate 
 after Kuripide's. 
 
 * Bias of PrietiO composed a poem of two tliousand versc^, on the condi- 
 tion of Ionia (Diojren. Laf-rt. i. 85). from wiiich, perhaps, Herodotus may 
 nave derived, either directly or indirei tly, the judicious advice which he 
 ascri!)es to that phih.^odier on the (.c.a<ion of tlie first Persian conqncot 
 of Ionia (Herod, i. I 7(t). 
 
 Not merely Xen(»pfianes the phihxopher (l)iogen. Laert. viii, 36, ix, 20), 
 knt lonor after him Parnienidt-s and Kmpedokles, composed iu vcrs«. 
 
 * See the account ^mvcii hv Herodotus (vi, 128-129) of the way iu which 
 Klei-'thenes of Sikyon tested the comparative education {-naidevaLq) of thi 
 rarlou^ suitors who canje to %vuu his dauuhter, — ol 6s fiv^aT7]pfg epiv ei^o* 
 iafl 7 1 uovaiKy Kal Til) / fyoa to uroov. 
 
 THE sevi:n wise men. 
 
 95 
 
 turv of Grecian history, when philosophy came to be a maU^ ol 
 
 discussion and argumentation, were spoken of with great euk>gy, 
 --all the statements are confused, in part even conti-adictory. 
 Neither the number, nor the names, are given by all authoni 
 alike Dika^archus numbered ten, Ilermippus seventeen: the 
 names of Solon the Athenian, Thales the Milesian, Fittakus the 
 Mit3-lenean, and Bias the Prienean, were comprised in all the 
 lists, -and the remaining names as given by Plato were, lUe- 
 obulus of Lindus it. Rhodes, Myson of Chen, attd Chetlot. ol 
 Snarta By others, however, the names are diilerently stated . 
 ^or <.an we certainly distribute among them the sayings, or n.ot- 
 toe. upon which in later days the Amphiktyons conterred the 
 hon;>r of inscription in the Delphian temple : Know thyself, - 
 Nothing too much, - Know thy opportunity, - Suretyslnp is the 
 precursor of ruin. Bias is praised as an excellent judge, and 
 Myson was declared by the Delphian oracle to be the most di^ 
 Jet man among the Greeks, according to the testimoty of the 
 satirical poet Hipponax. This is the oldest testimony (. o b^oO 
 which can be produced in fVwor of any of the seven ; but K^ 
 obulus of Lindus, far from being universal y f ^H^J " ^^^^ 
 nounced by the poet Simonides to be a fool.^ Dikx-archus, 
 however, justly observed, that these seven or ten persons were 
 rii e men,'or philosophers, in the sense which those wor^ 
 Le in his day, but persons of practical discernment m rderenoe 
 rin and sodety,3-of the same turn of mmd as their con- 
 
 .Plato Protagoras^ c 28 p^ 3.3. ^,,^aaaa^a. Biavro, r^ 
 
 •Hipponax, tragra. "7, 34, ea. olt^w 
 
 Kal Mvffwv, bv «f ttoAXwv 
 
 ^Xveinev nv6pCov ffo^ppovitnarov nuvruv. 
 Simonides, Fr. 6, ed. Bergk-,.p- ^r6c a6e ^ovU. Diogen. J^ 
 
 *' e.^' A^. treats Pittakus with morc respect, though questioning u 
 op^tuUTb/C (Fragm. 8, ed. Berg. ; Plato, Protagoras, c. .^ 
 
 Ihwe Seven Wise Men, see Menage ad Diogen. LaCrt. i, 28, p. 17. 
 
 i '»! 
 
 1 1 
 
 i 
 lij 
 
 vll 
 
96 
 
 HISTOia OF GREECE. 
 
 \i 
 
 \ 
 
 temporary the fabulist ^>op. though not employing the same 
 mode of illustration. Their appearance forms an epoch in Gre- 
 cian history, inasmuch as tlu'v are the first {)ersons who ever 
 acquired an Hellenic reputation grounded on mental competency 
 apart tVurii {)oeti^'al genius or effect, — a proof tliat political and 
 Bocial prudence v,a- beginning to be ap[)reeiaf<'(l and admired on 
 its own account. Solon, Pittaku-, Bia>, and Thales, were all 
 men of influence — the first two even men of ascendency,' — in 
 Uieir res[)ective ciiies. Kleobulu< v. a- d» ~[)ot of Lindus, and 
 Periander (by some numbered among th -• ven) of Corinth. 
 Thales stands distinguished a- tiie earliest name in i)]iysical phi- 
 losophv, witli which the other contemporary wi. •■ men are not 
 said to !ia\ <• nteildj.'d ; their celeV)rity rests u[)on moral, social, 
 and political wisdom exclusively, wliich came into greater honor 
 as the ethical teelii ir of the Greeks improved an*l as their expe- 
 rience liecanie enhiiired. 
 
 In tlic-e cehbi'ated names \v<' have .-ocial j»hilo~ni>hy in its early 
 and iidUntine -late, — in the >ha{)e of homely >ayiiigs or admo- 
 nitions, either sup[io-;ed to be -e|t-evi<h'nt, or to rest upon some 
 great authnrify divine or human, but neith«'r accompanied by 
 reasons nor ico^nizinir any appeal to inipiiry and discussion as 
 the proper test of I heir reciifmle. From such unsuspectiuL' ;ic- 
 quioscenee, the sentim<'nt to which tliese admonitions owe their 
 force, we are ' artinllv lilniated «'vi'n in the poet Simonides of 
 K<'ns, who (as \-i-u ,'ln«b«l t<») severely criticizes the >ong of 
 Kleobnbi- a> well a< its author. The lialt-centui"y which fol- 
 lowed thi- a,ij:e of S'M'<.ni(l< ., (the in'erva! l»eiween [ibont 480-430 
 B.C.) broke down that ^enti-rc nf iii<'te and more, by familiarizing 
 the public with a!'jii!nentati\ e e.jntroversy in the public assembly, 
 the popular judicature, and even on the dramatic stage. And the 
 increased >elf-working of the (Grecian mind, thus created, mani- 
 fested itself in Sokrates, who laid open all ethical and social doc- 
 trines to the scrutiny of reason, and who first awakened among 
 his eountrvmen thai love of dialectics which never left them, ^ 
 an analytical interest in the mental process of inquiring out, ver- 
 ifying, proving, and expounding truth. To this capital item of 
 
 • Cicero, De RepuM i. 7 : Pluranh. in Delph. p. 385; Bemhardy, Gmn 
 IriAS ler Griechischen Litterawir, vol. i, sect. 66, not. 3. 
 
 ^t 
 
 UOMMEXCEMENT OF PKOSE-WRITING. 
 
 9? 
 
 human progress, secured through the Greeks — and through 
 them only — to mankind generally, our attention will be called 
 at a later period of the history ; at present, it is only mentioned 
 in contrast with the naked, dogmatical laconism of the Seven 
 Wise Men, and with the simple enforcement of the early poets: 
 a state in which morality has a certain place in the feelings, — but 
 no root, even among the superior minds, in the conscious exerci5<J 
 
 of reason. 
 
 The interval between Archilochus and Solon (600-580 B.C.) 
 seems, as has been remarked in my former volume, to be the 
 period in which writing first came to be applied to Greek poems, 
 
 to the Homeric poems among the number ; and shortly after 
 
 the end of that period, commences the era of compositions with- 
 out metre or prose. The philosopher Pherekydes of Syro^ 
 about 550 B.C., is called by some the earliest prose-writer ; but 
 no prose-writer for a considerable time afterwanls acquired any 
 
 celebrity, seemingly none earlier than Hekata-us of Miletus,' 
 
 about 510-41)0 b.C , — prose being a subordinate and ineffective 
 ipecies of composition, not always even perspicuous, but reiiuir- 
 inir no small practice before the power was acquired of rendering 
 it interesting.^ Down to the generation preceding Sokrates, tlu^ 
 poets continued to be the grand leaders of the Greek mind: until 
 then, nothing was taught to youth except to read, to remember, 
 to recite musically and rhythmically, and to comprehend poetical 
 composition. The comments of preceptors, addressed to their 
 I)upils, may probably have become fuller and more instructive, but 
 the text still continued to be epic or lyric poetry. We must re- 
 collect also that these poets, so enunciated, were the best masters 
 for acquiring a full command of the complicated accent and 
 rhythm of the Greek language, — essential to an educated man 
 in ancient times, and sure to be detected if not properly acquired. 
 Not to mention the Choliambist Hipponax, who seems to have b^en 
 possessed with the devil of Archilochus, and in part also with hlA 
 
 Pliny, H. N. vii, 57. Suidas v, 'E/tara?of. 
 »H. Ritter (Gcscliichte der Philosophic, eh. vi, p. 243; fias some good 
 remarks on the difficulty and obscurity of the early Greek prose-^vTiters, in 
 reference to the darkness of exinession and meanin); aniversally chfurgfA 
 tipon the philosopher Hcrakleitu.s. 
 
 VOL. IV. 5 ^oc. 
 
 V 
 
 i 
 
98 
 
 iHsroKY OF gri:p:ce. 
 
 EARLY SCULPTURE. 
 
 9V 
 
 t 
 
 it 
 
 I 
 
 renius, — Anakreon Ibykus, Pindar, Bacchylides, Siinonides, aiid 
 the dramatists of Alliens, continue the line of eminent poeta 
 without intermission. After the Persimi war, the requirements 
 cf public speaking created a class of rhetorical teachers, while 
 iiie gradual sprea*l of jdivsical philosophy widened the range of 
 instruction; so that i.rose composition, for speech or fur wnting, 
 ©ccujued a larger and larger share of the attention of mei, 
 find was gradually wrought up to high j)erfection. such ai 
 w« M-e for the first time in Herodotus. But before it became 
 thus improved, and acquired that style which was the condition 
 of wide-spread j>opularity, we may be sure that it had been 
 eilfutly used as a means of recording information ; and that 
 neither the large mass of geographical matter contained in the 
 Periegesis of llekaiaiis. nor the map first prepared by his 
 contem[>orary, Anaximander, could have been presented to the 
 world, without the previous lalx)rs of unf)retending })rose writers, 
 who set down the mere results of their own experience. The 
 acquisition of prose- writing, commencing as it does about the age 
 of Peisistratus, is not less remarkable as an evidence of past, 
 than as a means of future, progress. 
 
 Of that s])len<lid genius in sculpture and architecture, which 
 shone forth in (irce<*e after the Persian invasion, the first linea- 
 ments only are discoverable l>etween GOO-560 u. c., in Corinth, 
 iEgina, Sama^, Chios, Ephesus, etc., — enough, however, to give 
 evidence of improvement and progress. Glaukus of Chios ij" 
 said to have discovered the art of welding iron, and Rhoekus, oi 
 his son Theodorus of Samos, the art of casting cop})er or brass in 
 a mould : both thesci discoveries, as far as can be made out, ap- 
 pear to date a little before 600 b.c.' The primitive memonAl, 
 
 ' See O. Miiller, Arohaolojrie der Kunst, sect. 61 ; Sillig, Cataloj:ti; 
 Artificinm, — under Thcodrnis and Trickles. 
 
 Thiersch (Epochon lor Hildenden Kunst, pp. 182-190, 2d edit.) phuc^ 
 Rhoekus near the heginninir of the rerorded Olympiads ; an<l supposes twc 
 artists named Theodorus. one the frrand<;on of the other ; but this seems tc 
 me not sustained Ky aiy adequate authority (for the loose chronolojry of 
 Phny about the Samain school of artists is not more tnistworthv than 
 •boat the Chian school, — compare xxxv, 12, and xxxvi, .3). and, moreover, 
 intrinsically improbable. Hcrodotu-^ fj. .'il) speaks of '■'thf Samian Theo- 
 and seems to have known only or e person so called : Diodoraa 
 
 erected in honor of a god, did not even pretend to be an iinage» 
 but was often nothing more than a pillar, a board, a shapeless 
 stone, a post, etc., fixed so as to mark and consecrate the local- 
 ity, and receiving from the neighborhood respectful care and deo 
 oration, as well as worship. Sometimes there was a real statue, 
 though of the rudest character, carved in wood : and the families 
 of carvers, — who, from lather to son, exercised this profession, 
 re[)resented in Attica by the name of Diedalus, and in the ^gina 
 by the name of Smilis, — adhered long, with strict exactness, to 
 the consecrated tyi)e of each particular god. Gradually, the 
 wish grew up to change the material, as well as to correct the 
 rudeness, of such primitive idols ; sometimes the original wood 
 was retained as the material, but covered in part with ivory or 
 
 crold, in other cases, marble or metal was substituted. Dipoe- 
 
 nus and Skyllis of Krete acquired renown as workers in marble, 
 ;ibout the 50th Olympiad (580 B.C.), and from them downwards 
 m series of names may be traced, more or less distinguished ; 
 moreover, it seems about the same period that the earliest temple- 
 otferings, in works of art, properly so called, commence, — the 
 golden statue of Zeus, and the large carved chest, dedicated by 
 the Kypselids of Corinth at Olympia.^ The pious associations, 
 however, connected with the old type were so strong, that the 
 
 (i, 98) and Pausanias (x, 38, 3) give different accounts of Theodorus, but 
 the positive evidence docs not enable us to verify the genealogies either of 
 Thiersch or O. Miiller. Herodotus (iv, 152) mentions the 'Hpalov at Samoi 
 in connection with events near Olymp. 37 ; but this does not prove that the 
 jrreat temple which he himseif saw, a century and a half later, had been 
 hiHrnii before Olymp. 37, as Thiersch would infer. The statement of O. 
 Mailer, that this temple was beffun in Olymp. 35, is not authenticated 
 (Arch, der Kunst, sect. .53). 
 
 * Pausanias tells us distinctly that this chest was dedicated at Olympia 
 by the Kypselids. descendants of Kypselus ; and this seems credible enough. 
 But he also tells us that this was the identical chest in which the infant 
 Kvpselus had been concealed, believing the story as told in Herodotuf 
 (v, 92). In this latter belief I cannot go along with him, nor do I think 
 th»t there is any evidence for helievinn: the chest to have been of mors 
 ancient date than the persons who dedicated it, — in spite of the opinioni 
 of O. Miiller and Thiersch to the contrary (O. Miiller, Archfiol. der Kanvt 
 iect. 57; Thiersch, Epocheu '.er Griechischen Kunst, p. 169, 2d edit 
 Wasan. v, 17, 2) 
 
lOO 
 
 HISTORY or GREECE 
 
 J 
 
 hand of tlie artist was greatly restrained in dealing with statuea 
 of the gods. It was in statues of men, especially in those of the 
 victors at Olympia and other sacred games, that genuine ideas of 
 beauty were first aimed at and in part attained, from whence 
 they passed afterwards to the statues of the gods. Such statues 
 of the athletes seem to commence somewhere between Olympiad 
 53-r>8, ('iOS-oiS B.C.) 
 
 Nor is it until ;lie same interval of time (between COO-550 
 B.C.) that we fuid uiy traces of these ai-chitectural monuments, 
 by which the more important cities in Greece afterwards at- 
 tracted to themselves so nmch renown. The two greatest tem- 
 ples in Greece known to Herodotus were, the Artemision at 
 Ephesus, and the Hera^on at Samos : the Ibrmer of these seems 
 to have been commenced, by the Samian Tlieodorus, about GOO 
 B.C., — the latter, begun by the Samian Khoekus, can hardly be 
 traced to any higher anti(piity. The lirst attempts to decorate 
 Athens by such a<iditions proceeded fi*om I'eisistratus and his 
 sons, near the same time. As far a.^ we can judge, too, in the 
 ab.-tnce of all direct evidence, the temples of Pa'Stum in Italy 
 and Selinus in Sicily seem to fall in tliis same century. Of 
 painting, during these e;irly centuries, nothing can be allirmed ; 
 it never at any time reached tlie same perfection as scul}>ture, 
 and we may presume that its years of infancy were at least 
 equally rude. 
 
 The immense develoi)ment of Grecian art subsequently, and 
 ihe great perfect ioi of Grecian artists, are facts of great impor- 
 Miicv in the history of the liuman lace. And in regard to the 
 Greeks themselves, they not only acted powerfully on the taste 
 of the people, but were also valuable indirectly as the common 
 Coast of IlellenisuK and as supplying one bond of fraternal sym- 
 pathy as well as of mutual pride, among its widely -dispersed 
 sections. It is the paucity and weakness of these bonds which 
 renders the history of Greece, prior to i>iJU B.C., little better than 
 a series of j)arallel, but isolated threads, each attached to a sep- 
 arate city ; and that increased range of joint Hellenic feeling 
 and action, upon which we shall })resently enter, though arising 
 doubtl(\^s in jirreat measure from new and common dan^rers 
 threatening many cities at once, — also springs in jiart from 
 tliose other causes which have been ecumerated in this chapter 
 
 > 
 
 H 
 X 
 
 c 
 
 C 
 
 r 
 
 X 
 
 > 
 
 pi 
 
 in 
 
 
 V 
 
 ( 
 
 'i 
 
NATIONALIZING EFFECTS OF ART. 
 
 101 
 
 .. acting on the Grecian mind. It proceeds from the stimulm 
 aopted to all the common feelings in religion art and recrea. 
 S -i the gradual formation of national festivals, appeal- 
 r'in various ways to tastes and sentiments M ammated 
 ,?eri Hellenic bosom, -from the inspirations of men of gen.us. 
 "e J mu cians, scuU^ors. architects, who supplied more or les, 
 Tve'y Grecian city, education for the youth tmimng for h« 
 chorus and ornament for the locality, - from the gradual expan- 
 ion o science, philosophy, and rhetoric, durmg the commg 
 period of this Listory, which rendered one city ^e '" ^Uecturf 
 Lpi al of Greece, and brought to Isokrates and P ato pup^ 
 from the most distant parts of the Grecian world. It was this 
 ™ d o common tastes, tendencies, and aptitudes, -1^-h caused 
 he social atoms of Hellas to gravitate to--<»^^f-\°'^^7 ^^J 
 ■hich enabled the Greeks to become somethmg be ter and 
 heater than an aggregate of petty disunited communities like 
 ^ rTl racians or plirygians. And the creation of such common, 
 '; rlS" HellenUm, is the most interesting phenomenon 
 I' idi X Wstorian has to point out in the early penod now 
 ul e ot notice. He is called upon to dwell upon it the more 
 TrZu- because the modern reader has generally no idea of 
 : ; i uZtviihout political union, -an -ociatio" fore.^ 
 ,o tlie Greek mind. Strange as it may seem to hnd a song- 
 vriter P«t forward as an active instrument of union among his 
 •Iw-Hellens. it is not the less true, that those poets, whom we 
 e briefly passed in review, by enriching the common lan- 
 ~ and by circulating from town to town either m person « 
 fn their compositions, contributed to fan the flame of Pan-HeU 
 en c patriotism at a time when there were few circumst^ces to 
 S^te with them, and when the causes t«.dmg to pc.>.ta«. 
 rtdation seemed in the ascendant. 
 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 / f 
 
102 
 
 nISTORY OF GKKKCE. 
 
 ♦.) 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 GPfcClAN AFFAIRS rURlNG THE GOVKRNMKNT OF PEISISTRATU8 
 
 AND HIS SONS AT ATHENS. 
 
 We now arrive at what may be called the second period of 
 Grecian history, b<'f;inning with the rule of Pcisistratus at 
 Athens and of Croesus in Lyditu 
 
 It has been already stated that Peisistratus made himself 
 despot of Athens in .iCO B.C. : he died in o27 B.C., and nas suc- 
 ceeded by his son Hippias, who was depc~(Ml and expelled in 
 510 B.C., thus making an entire space of tifiy years between the 
 first exaltation of the father and the final expulsion of the son. 
 These chronological points are settled on good evidence : but the 
 thirty-three years covered by the reign of Peisistratus are inter- 
 rupted by two periods of exile, — one of them lasting not less 
 than ten years, — the other, live years. And the exact place of 
 the years of exile, being nowhere laid down upon autliority, hai 
 been differently determined by the conjectures of chronologers.^ 
 Partly from tliis half-known chronology, partly from a very 
 icanty collection of facts, the history of the half-century now 
 before us can only be given very imperfectly : nor can we won- 
 der at our ignorance, wlien we find that even among the Athe- 
 nians themselves, only a century afterwards, statements the most 
 incorrect and contradictory respecting the Peisistratids were in 
 circulation, as Thu<*y<lides distinctly, and somewhat reproachfully, 
 acquaints us. 
 
 More than thirty } ears had now elapsed since the promulga- 
 tion of the Solonian constitution, whereby the annual senate of 
 Four Hundred had l)een created, and the public iissembly (pre- 
 ceded in its action as well as aidtd and regulated by this senaUj) 
 invested with a power of exacting responsibility from the magis- 
 
 ' Mr. Fyues Clinton (Fast. Ilellen. vol. ii, Ajipendix, c. 2, p. 201) huj 
 itatcd and discussed the different o|>inions ou the chronology *jf Peisistrb 
 las and his sona. 
 
 DESrOTISM OF PEISISTRATUS. 
 
 103 
 
 trates after their year of office. The seeds of the subsequent 
 democracy had thus been sown, and no doubt the adramistratiOD 
 of the archons had been practically softened by it ; but nothing 
 in the nature of a democratical sentiment had yet been created. 
 A hundred years hence, we shall find that sentiment unanimous 
 and i)Otent among the enterprising masses of Athens and Peir*. 
 eus, and shall be called u{)on to listen to loud complamts of the 
 difficulty of dealing with ** that angry, waspish, intractable little 
 old man, Demus of Pnyx," — so Aristophanes ' calls the Athe- 
 nian people to their iaces, with a freedom which shows that /le 
 at least counted on their good temper. But between 560-510 
 B.C. the people are as passive in respect to political nghts and 
 securities as the most strenuous enemy of democracy could 
 desire, and the government is transferred from hand to hand by 
 bargains and cross-changes between two or three powerful men,^ 
 at tlie head of partisans who echo their voices, espouse their 
 personal quarrels, and draw the sword at their command. It 
 was this ancient constitution — Athens as it stood before the 
 Athenian democracy — which the Macedonian Antipater pro- 
 fessed to restore in 322 B.C., when he caused the majority of the 
 IKwrer citizens to be excluded altogether from the pohtical Iran- 
 
 chise.*^ 
 
 By the stratagem recounted in a former chapter,^ Peisistratiw 
 
 
 I ! 
 
 Mmoq YlvvKiTn^, dioKolov yepovriov. — Aristoph. Equit. 41. 
 I need hardly mention that the Pnj-x was Uie place in which the Athe 
 
 nian nublic assemblies were held. . , tt j . 
 
 •Xarch (De Herodot. Malign, c. 15, p. 858) is angry w,th Hcrodotm 
 
 for imparting so petty and personal a character to the dissensions between 
 
 he TLitonids and Peisistratus; his severe remarks in that trcat.se how- 
 
 r«r tend almost always to strengthen rather than to weaken the cred.l..l.t3r 
 
 "^'pilurthrPhokion, c. 27, a««.».«™ ,aU. U.a^a. ro:, 'K^,.alo^ ..i 
 ;wa;i,a., Mom /.i. ro*f .epl A,^oa^e., «aJ ■r.epdvv.noXnevou.vo., 
 l^Z^ Arpcav M r.^w«-°f no^mia., deia^ivocc ie fpovpuv .<t r»* 
 Movrv;tiav, Jr. 6i xphpara roi KoXi/^ov KcX Cm"" npoceKuaaaiV. CoB- 
 
 '"tw^vc Tho'ul'^d'of the poorer citizens were disfranchised by thi. chang. 
 
 [Plutarch, Phokion, c. 28). 
 < See the preceding volume, ch. xi, p. 1 55. 
 
u 
 
 J 4 
 
 r 1 
 
 104 
 
 HISTORY 0/ GREECE. 
 
 bad obtained from the public assembly a guard which tie had 
 employed to acquire forcible possession of the acropolis. Ha 
 thus became master of the administration ; but lie employed his 
 power honorably and well, not disturbing the existing forms 
 farther than was necessary to insure to himself full mastery. 
 Nevertheless, we ma.y see by the verses of Solun ' (the only con- 
 temporary evidence which we possess), that the prevalent senti- 
 ment was by no means favorable to his recent proceeding, and 
 that there was in many minds a strong feeling both of terror 
 and aversion, which presently manifested itself in the armed 
 coalition of his two rivals, — Megakles at the head of the Parali, 
 or inhabitants of the sea-board, and Lykurgus at the head of 
 those in the neighboring plain. As the conjunction of the two 
 formed a force too powerful for Peisistratus to withstand, he was 
 driven into exile, after no long possession of his despotism. 
 
 But the time came, how soon we cannot tell, when the twt 
 rivals who had expelled him quarrelled, and Megakles made 
 propositions to Peisistratus, inviting him to resume the sover- 
 eignty, promising his own aid, and stipulating that Peisistratus 
 ehould marry his daughter. The conditions being accej)ted, a 
 plan was laid between the two new allies for carrvinjir them into 
 etiect, by a novel sti-atagem, — since the simulated wounds and 
 pretence of personal danger were not likely to be played off a 
 second time with success. The two conspirators clothed a 
 stately woman, six feet high, named Phye, in the panoply and 
 costume of Athene, — surrounded her with the processional ac- 
 companiments belonging to tlie goddess, — and placed her in a 
 chariot with Peisistratus by her side. In this guise the exiled 
 despot and his adherents a{)proached the city and drove up to 
 the acropolis, prec(^ded by heralds, who cried aloud to the peoi)le : 
 "Athenians, receive ye cordially Peisistratus, whom Athene has 
 honored above all other men, and is now brinijinjr back into her 
 own acropolis." The peofde in the city received the reputed 
 goddess with implicit belief and demonstrations of worship, 
 while among the country cantons the report quickly spread 
 
 Solou. Fray:m. 10, ed. Bergk. — 
 
 WjTk i>eoi£- TovTi^v fxo'fjai> inapn^ipETe^ etc. 
 
 .EISlSiKAfUS DISPOSSESSED AND RESTORED. 
 
 106 
 
 Ihat Athene had appeared in person to restore Peisisti-atus 
 who thus found himself, without even a show of resistance, in 
 rx>?session of the acropolis and of the government. His own 
 party, united with that of Megakles, were powerful enough to 
 maintain him, when he had once acquired possession ; and prob- 
 ably all, except the leaders, sincerely believed in the epiphany 
 of the goddess, which came to be divulged as having been a 
 cV3ception, only after Peisistratus and Megakles had quarrelled.^ 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 6U, kol h TijJuaTei nei^ofitvoc t^v yvvaiKa tirai avrt/p Tf)v 
 ^ebv, npoaevxovTo re r/)v uvT^punov kol kdeKovro tov WeioiarpaTOV. A hitef 
 statement (Athcnaius, xiii, p. 609) represents Phye to have become after 
 wards the wife of Hipparchus. 
 
 Of this remarkable story, not the least remarkable part is the criticism 
 with which Herodotus himself accompanies it. He treats it as a proceed- 
 ing infinitely silly (-^pf/yfia Evr/^eararov, a>f t}w evpioKu, fiaKpu)] he caii- 
 no't conceive, how Greeks, so much superior to barbarians,— and even 
 Athenians, the cleverest of all the Greeks, — could have fallen into such a 
 trap. To him the story was told as a deception from the bcginnin*,', and 
 he did not perhaps take pains to put himself into the state of feeling of 
 those original spectators who saw the chariot approach, without any warn- 
 ing or preconceived suspicion. But even allowing for this, his criticism 
 brings to our view the alteration and enlargement which had taken place in 
 the Greek mind during the century between Peisistratus and Perikles. 
 Doubtless, neither the latter nor any of his contemporaries could have suc- 
 ceeded in a similar trick. 
 
 The fact, and the criticism upon it, now before us, are remarkably illus 
 trated by an analogous case recounted in a previous chapter, (vol. ii, p. 421 
 chap, viii.) Nearly at the same period as this stratagem of Peisistratus. 
 the Lacedemonians and the Ai-geians agreed to decide, by a combat of tiiree 
 Imndred select champions, the dispute between them as to the tenitory of 
 Kynuria. The combat actually took place, and the heroism of Othryades, 
 sole Spartan survivor, has been already recounted. In the eleventh year 
 of the Peloponnesian war, shortly after or near upon the period when we 
 may conceive the history of Herodotus to have been finished, the Argciana 
 concluded a treaty with Lacedaemon, and introduced as a clause into it the 
 liberty of reviving their pretensions to Kynuria, and of again deciding the 
 dispute by a combat of select champions. To the Lacedemonians of thai 
 tiane this appeared extreme folly, — the very proceeding which hod been 
 actually resorted to a century before. Here is another case, in which 
 the change in the point of view, and the increased positive tendencies in 
 the Greek mind, are brought to onr notice not less forcibly thj»n by ib§ 
 eriticism of Herodotus upon PhyO- Athene 
 
 5* 
 
 Ii 
 
 III 
 
 t;^ 
 
 'I / 
 
H^ 
 
 106 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Tlie dauj^hter of Megakles, according to agreement, quickly 
 berame the wife of Peisistratus, but she bore him no children ; 
 and it became known that her husband, having already adult 
 Bons by a former marriage, and considering that the Ky Ionian 
 cune rested upon all the Alkmaionid family, did not intend that 
 she should become a mother.' Megakles wa^ so incensed at 
 this behaTior, that he not only renounced his alliance with Peisi* 
 tiatus, but even made his peace with the third party, the adhe- 
 rents of Lykurgus, — and assumed so menacing an attitude, that 
 the despot was obliged to evacuate Attica, lie retired to Ere- 
 tria in Eubcea, where he remained no less than ten years ; but a 
 considerable [)ortion of that time was employed in making prep- 
 arations for a forcible return, and he seems to have exercised, 
 even while in exile, a degree of influence much exceeding that 
 
 Istius (one of the Atthido-frraphcrs of the third century B.C.) ai.l Ami- 
 kle^ published books respecting the personal manifestations or epiphanie.s 
 of the pods, — 'ATroXXufof innpapelai : see Istri Fragment. 33-37, ed. Didot 
 If Peisistratus and Megakles had never quarrelled, their joint strata^^em 
 mijrht have continued to pass for a genuine epiphany, and might hare 
 been included as such in she work of Istrus. I will add, that the real pres- 
 ence of the gods, at the fistivals celebrated in their honor, was an idea con- 
 tinually bron«:ht before the minds of the Greeks. 
 
 The Athenians fully b«»lieved the epiphany of the ^od Pan to Pheidip 
 pjdes the courier, on his march to Si)arta, a little l)efore the battle of Mara- 
 thon (Herodot. vi, 105, /lai ravra 'A^Tjvalni iriaTEvaavrt^ dvai dXjyi^ta), and 
 even Herodotus himself Iocs not controvert it, though he relaxes the posi- 
 tive character of history ^o far as to add — " as Pheidip}»ides himself said 
 and recounted publicly to the Athenians." His informants in this case 
 were doubtless sincere believers ; whereas, in the case of Phye, the stor} 
 was told to him at first art a fabrication. 
 
 At Gela in Sicily, seemingly not long before this restoration of Peisis- 
 tratus, Telines (ancestor of the despot Gelon) had brought back some 
 exiles to Gela, " without any armed force, but merely through the sacred 
 ceremonies and appurtenances of the subterranean goddesses," — ^x^r 
 wMefiiTjv avdpdv dvvafxiv, u?,V Ipu rnvreuv ribv ^eCov — TovTOLcn 6" uv iriav 
 fOf idv, Karriyaye (Herodot. vii, 153). Herodotus does not tell us the de- 
 tails which he had heard of the maniier in which this restoration at GeU 
 was brought about; but his general language intimates, that tSey wen 
 temarkable details, and they might have illustrated the story of Phyt 
 Athene. 
 
 • Herodot. i €1. Peisistratus — kfiix^ ol oi /card vdfMw. 
 
 SECOND EXILE OF PEISISTRATUS. 
 
 a07 
 
 sf R pr'va^s man. He lent valuable aid to Lygdamis of Naxos,! 
 in CO. str^'.ting himself despot of that island, and he possessed, 
 Wr know not how, the means of rendering valuable service to 
 iifterent cities, Thebes in particular. They repaid him by 
 large contributions of money to aid in his reestablishment : 
 mercenaries were hired from Argos, and the Naxian Lygda- 
 mis came himself, both with money and with troops. Thua 
 ejjuipped iuid aided, Peisistratus landed at Marathon in Attica^ 
 I low the Athenian government had been conducted during his 
 ten years' absence, we do not know ; but the leaders of it per- 
 mitted him to remain undisturbed at Marathon, and to assemble 
 his partisans both from the city and from the country : nor was it 
 until he broke up from Marathon and had reached Pallene on 
 his way to Athens, that they took the field against him. More- 
 over, their conduct, even when the two armies were near to- 
 gether, must have been either extremely negligent or corrupt; 
 for Peisistratus I'ouiid means to attack them unprepared, routing 
 their forces almost witiiout resistance. In fact, the proceedings 
 have altogether the air of a concerted betrayal : for the defeated 
 troops, though unpursued, are said to have dispersed and re- 
 turned to their homes forthwith, in obedience to the proclama- 
 tion of Peisistratus, who marched on to Athens, and found him- 
 self a third time ruler.- 
 
 On this third successful entry, he took vigorous precautions 
 for rendering his seat permanent. The Alkmajonid;^ and their 
 immediate partisans retired into exile ; but he seized the chil- 
 dren of those who remained, and whose sentiments he suspected, 
 as hostages for the behavior of their parents, and placed them in 
 Naxos, under the care of Lygdamis. Moreover, he provided 
 himself with a powerful body of Thracian mercenaries, paid by 
 taxes levied upon the people : ^ nor did he omit to conciliate the 
 favor of the gods by a purification of the sacred island of Delos 
 
 ' About Lygdamis, see Athenaeus, viii, p. 348, and his citation fiom th' 
 tost work of Aristotle on the Grecian IIoAiretat; also, Aristot. P 1 uc 
 
 * I:err)dot. i, 63. 
 
 ' herodot. i, 64. eniKovpoial re no7i,h)iai^ Kal xPVl*^'^<^v avvo'Ao., '•> 
 uiv avTo^ev, ruv 6e dTrd ^Tpvfiovoc noTciftov npoaiovTuv. 
 
 * I 
 
» 
 
 108 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ail the dead bodies which had been buried within n«,'ht of th3 
 temple of Apollo were exhumed and reinterred farther otf. At 
 this time the Delian festival, — attended by the Asiatic lonians 
 and the islanders, and with which Athens was of course pecu- 
 liarly connected, — must have been beginning to decline from its 
 pristine magnificence; for the subjugation of the continental 
 Ionic cities by Cyrus had been already achieved, and the power 
 of Samos, though increased under the despot Polykrates, seems 
 to have increased at the expense and to the ruin of the smaller 
 Ionic islands. From the same feelings, in part, which led to the 
 purification of Delos, — partly as an act of party revenge,— 
 Peisistratus caused tlie houses of the Alkm:eonids to be levelled 
 with the ground, and the bodies of the deceased members of that 
 family to be disinterrtMl and c:i<t out of the country.i 
 
 This third and last }>eriud of the rule of Peisistratus lasted 
 peveral years, until his death in 527 b.c : it i> said to have been 
 8f) mild in its character, that he once even M.tl'ered himself to be 
 cited for trial before the Senate of Areoi)agus ; yet a^ we know 
 that he had to maintain a large body of Thracian mercenaries 
 out of the funds of the peoi^le, we shall be inclined to construe 
 this eulogium comparatively rather than positively. Thucy- 
 dides affirms that both he and his sons ,iio\ erned in a wise and 
 virtuous spirit, levving from the people only an income-tax of 
 five per cent/^ This is high praise coming from such an au- 
 
 » Isokrates, Or. xvi. l>c Bi-is, c. 3:)1. 
 
 •For the statement of lioeekh. Dr. ArnoM, aiul Dr. Thirlwall, that 1 ei- 
 Bistratus had levied a tvthe or tax of ten per ec-nt.. an.l that his sons re- 
 duced it to the half, 1 find nu Mitlirif nt warrant : certainly, the spurious 
 letter of Peisistratus to Solon in Diogenes Laertius (i. 5.1) ou-ht not to he 
 considered as proving' .nytlnni:. Boe<kh. l>nhlh- Economy of Athens. B 
 iii c 6 (i.351 German); Dr. Arnold ad Thucyd. vi. 34; Dr. 1 hirlwaU 
 Hist of Gr. eh. xi, pp. :2-74. Idonieneus (ap. Athena-, xu, p. 533) consid- 
 ers the sons of Peisistratus to have indulixed in j.leasures to an extent more 
 costyv and oppressive to the people thati their father, ^^^'l '^^^ ^ l'^"^,;')*^ 
 there is sufficient authority to sustain the statement of Dr. Thirlwall (p. 
 68) "He (Peisistratus) possessed hinds on the Strymon in Thrace, which 
 yielded a lar-e revenue.- Herodotus (i, 64) tells us that Peisistratus 
 brought mercenarA' soldiers from the Strymon, but that he levied the 
 Bonev to pav them in Attica - ipj^^iCoxye Tr,v rvpavvida ImKoi'poiffi rt tto^ 
 Met' Kai xpni^^^^^ ovvodoiGi, tCjv fxtv avrdi^ev, ruv de arzo l^pmcv ^ 
 
 MILD GOVERNMENT OF PEISISTRATUS. 
 
 109 
 
 thority, though it seems that we ought to make some allowar.ce 
 for the circumstance of Tliucydides being connected by descent 
 with the Peisistratid family.^ The judgment of Herodotus is 
 also very favorable respecting Peisistratus; that of Aristotle 
 favorable, yet qualified, — since he includes these despots among 
 the list of those who undertook public and sacred works with the 
 deliberate view of impoverishing as well as of occupying their 
 subjects. This supposition is countenanced by the prodigious 
 Bcale upon which the temple of Zeus Olympius at Athens was 
 begun by Peisistratus, — a scale much exceeding either the 
 Parthenon or the temple of Athene Polias, both of which were 
 erected in later times, when the means of Athens were decidedly 
 larger,2 and her disposition to demonstrative piety certainly no 
 way diminished. It was left by him unfinished, nor was it ever 
 completed until the Roman emperor Hadrian undertook the 
 task. Moreover, Peisistratus introduced the greater Panathe- 
 naic festival, solemnized every four years, in the third Olympic 
 
 norafiov avvLovruv. It is, indeed, possible to eonstrue this passage so as 
 to refer both ruv fiev and ruv dl to xpn^^^^uv, whieh would signify that 
 Peisistratus obtained his funds partly from the river Strymon, and thug 
 serve as basis to the statement of Dr. Thirlwall. But it seems to me that 
 the better way of eonstruing the words is to refer rdv fiiv to xprn^^^^ 
 avvodoiai^Sind tC>v de to eTrt/covpoiff/, — treating both of them as genitives 
 absolute. It is highly improbable that he should derive money from tha 
 Strymon : it is highly probable that his mercenaries came from thence. 
 
 • Hermippus (ap. Marcellin. Vit. Thucyd. p. ix,) and the Scholiast on 
 Thucyd. i, 20, affirm that Thucydides was connected by relationship with 
 the Peisistratid*. His manner of speaking of them certainly lends counte. 
 nance to the assertion ; not merely as he twice notices their history, onc€ 
 briefly (i, 20) and again at considerable length (vi, 54-59), though it doei 
 not lie within the direct compass of his period,— but also as he so emphati- 
 cally announces his own personal knowledge of their family relations,— 
 •On de TrpeaiSvraroc du 'Umag vp^ev, eldug fiev koI uko^ aKpii^EaTtpoit 
 (OJ^uv iaxvpiCop-dL (vi. 55). 
 
 Aristotle (Politic, v, 9, 21) mentions it as a report {4>aaL) that Peisistra 
 tns obeyed the summons to appear before the Areopagus ; Plutarch addf 
 litvt the person who had summoned him did not appear to bring the caoM 
 tc trial (Vit. Solon 31), which is not at all surprising: compare Thacyd 
 
 Tl. 56, 57. 
 •Aristot. Politic. V, 9, 4 Dikaearchus, Vita GraBciae, pp. l^Klftft- •! 
 
 |fuhr ; Pausan. i, 18, 8. 
 
 .< i 
 
 I ) 
 
1 
 
 I 
 
 110 
 
 HISTORY Oi GREECE. 
 
 fear : the annual Panathenaic festival, henceforward called th€ 
 Lesser, was still continued. 
 
 I have already noticed, at considerable length, the care which 
 he bestowed in procuring: full and correct copies of the Homeric 
 poem-;, as well as in improving the recitation of them at the 
 Panathenaic festival — a {)roceeding for which we owe him 
 much gratitude, but which has been shown to be erroneously in- 
 terpreted by various critics. lie probably al>o collected the 
 works of other poets, — called by Aulus Gellius,' in language 
 not well suited to the sixth century B.C., a library thrown open 
 to the public; and the service which he thus rmdered must have 
 been highly valuable at a time when writing and reading were 
 not widely extended. His son Hipparchus followed up the same 
 taste, taking pleasure in the society of \\w mo«;t eminent poets 
 of the day ,2 — Simonides, Anakreon, and Lasus ; not to mention 
 the Athenian mystic Onomakritus, who, though not ])retending to 
 the gift of prophecy himself, passed for tlie i)roprietor and editor 
 of the various prophecies ascribed to the ancient name of Mu- 
 sa'us. The Peisistratids were well versed in thc^e prophecies, 
 and set great value upon them; but Onomakritus, being detected 
 on one occasion in the act of interpolating the prophecies of Mu- 
 eaMis, was banished by Hipparchus in consequence.^ The statues 
 of Hermes, erected by this prince or by his personal friends in 
 various parts of Attica,^ and inscribed with short moral sen- 
 tences, are extolled by the author of the Platonic dialogue called 
 Hipparchus, with an exaggeration which approaches to irony » 
 but it is certain that both the sons of Peisistratus, as well as 
 himself, were exact in fultilling the religious obligations of the 
 state, and ornamented the city in several ways, especially the 
 public fountain Kallirrhoe. They are said to have maintained 
 the preexisting forms ol law and justice, merely taking care 
 always to keep themselves and their adherents in the eflfective 
 
 » Attl. Gell. N. A. vi, 17. 
 
 » Horodot. vii, 6 ; Pseudo-Plato, ilippurehus, p. 229. 
 Hcrodot. T,93, vii, 6. 'OvofiuKptrov, xpV^(*o^oyov xat dtai^errfv rCtv xP^f 
 u^ ruv Movaaiov. See Pausan. i. 22, 7. Compare, about the literary tea 
 landes of tlie Peisistratids, Nitzsch, De Historic Homeri, ch. 30, p. 16%. 
 
 * Philochor Frag. G9, id. Didot } Plato, Ilipparch. p. 230 
 
 HARMODIUS AND ARISTOGEITON. 
 
 Ill 
 
 of state, and in the full reality of power. Tkey were, 
 moreover, modest and popular in their personal demeanor, and 
 charitable to the poor ; yet one striking example occurs of un- 
 scrupulous enmity, in their murder of Kimon, by night, through 
 the agency of hired assassins.' There is good reason, however, 
 for believing that the government both of Peisistratus and of liis 
 bono was in practice generally mild until after the death of Hip- 
 partihus by the hands of Harmodius and Ai'istogeiton, afte- 
 which event the surviving Hippias became alarmed, cruel, and 
 oppressive during his last four years. And the harshness of this 
 concluding period left upon the Athenian mind - that profound 
 and imperishable hatred, against the dynasty generally, which 
 Thucydides attests, — though he labors to show that it was not 
 deserved by Peisistratus, nor at first by Hippias. 
 
 Peisistratus left three legitimate sons, — Hippias, Hipparchus, 
 and Thessalus : the general belief at Athens among the contem- 
 poraries of Thucydides was, that Hipparchus was the eldest of 
 the three and had succeeded him ; but the historian emphatically 
 pronounces this to be a mistake, and certifies, upon his own re- 
 sponsibility, that Hippias was both eldest son and successor. 
 Such an assurance from him, fortified by certain reasons in them- 
 selves not very conclusive, is sufficient ground for our belief, — 
 the more so as Herodotus countenances the same version. But 
 we are surprised at such a degree of historical carelessness in thj 
 Athenian public, and seemingly even in Plato,^ about a matter 
 both interesting and comparatively recent. In order to abate 
 this surprise, and to explain how the name of Hipparchus came 
 to supplant that of Hippias in the popular talk, Thucydides re- 
 counts the memorable story of Harmodius and Aristogeiton. 
 
 Of these two Athenian citizens,^ both belonging to the ancient 
 
 » Hcrodot. vi, 38-103 ; Theopomp. ap. Athcnae. xii, p. 533. 
 
 « Thucyd. vi, 53 ; Pseudo-Plato, Hippan-h. p. 230; Pausan. i, 23, 1. 
 
 » Thucyd. i. 20, about the general beUef of the Athenian public in hii 
 time —'Ai^J/vaiwy yovv rd TrAiyi^of olovrai v<p' 'Apfiodiov kqI ' Apiaroyeirovoc 
 lirrraoxov ripavvov ovra uiro^avelv, kuI ovk laaaiv on 'lirmaf irpefffivrarof 
 ^v }}PX£ Tuv lieiaiaTpdrov naiSuv, etc. 
 
 The Pseudo-Plato in the dialogue called Hipparchus adopts this celie^ 
 and the real Plato in his Symposion (c. 9, p. 182) seems to countenance it 
 
 * Herodot. v. 55-58. Harmodius is affirmed by Plutarch to have been of 
 the deme Aphid nse (Plutarch, Symposiacon, i, 10. p. 628) 
 
 I 
 
i» : 
 
 ti 
 
 IIS 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 gens called Gephyraei, the former was a beautiful youth, attached 
 to the latter by a mutual friendship and devoted intimacy, which 
 Grecian manners did not condemn. Hipparehus made re|)eated 
 propositions to Ilarmodius, which were repelled, b it which, on 
 becorainjr known to Aristogeiton, excited both his jealousy and 
 his fears lest the disappointed suitor should emjdoy force, — fean 
 justified by the proceedings not unusual with Grecian despots,' 
 and by the absence of all legal protection against outrage from 
 such a quarter. Under these feelings, lie began to look about, in 
 the best way that lie could, for some means of putting down the 
 despotism. Meanwhile Hipi)archus, though not entertaining any 
 desi<»ns of violence, nas so incensed at the refusal of Ilarmodius, 
 that'^he could not be satisfied without doing something to insult or 
 huraibate him. In order to conceal the motive from which the 
 insult really proceeded, he offered it, not directly to Harmodius, 
 but to his sister. He caused this young maiden to be one day 
 summoned to take hw station in a religious procession as one of 
 the kanephone, or ba>ket carriers, according to the practice 
 usual at Athens ; but when she arrived at the i)lace where her 
 fellow-maidens were assembled, she was dismissed with scorn as 
 unworthy of so respectable a function, and the summons ad- 
 dressed to her was disavowed.- An insult thus publicly offered 
 
 It is l.> hv rLMolle.ted that he died before the introduction of the Ten 
 Tribes, and l)efore the rcscoguition of the denies as political elements in the 
 commonwealth. 
 
 » For the terrible effects produced by this fear of dSpi^ ek tt^v T]7oLKLav, 
 Sir Phitarch, Kimon, 1 ; Aristot. Polit. v, 9, 17. 
 
 « Thueyd. vi, 56. Tov 6' ovv 'ApfioSiov uizapvn^evra rrjv rreipaffiv, uxrirep 
 dievoeiTO^ npov^jjh'iKinev • uM.<p^v ydp avTov, Kopvv, irrayyei^avTet: fiKeiv 
 Kavovv oiaovaav iv Trourry rivi, arrh'Kaaav, Xiyovre^ ov6e lTrayy£l?MC apxrfV, 
 
 Jiiti rd fi^ u^lav elvai. 
 
 Dr. Arnold, in his note, supposes that this exclusion of the sister ol 
 Harmodius by the Peisistratids may have been founded on the circumstance 
 that she belonged to the gens Gephyraei (Herodot v, 57); her foreign 
 blood, and her being in certain respects artuoc disqualified her (he thinks) 
 from ministering to the worship of the gods of Athens. 
 
 There is no positive reason to support the conjecture of Dr. Arnold, 
 which seems, moreo.'er, virtually discountenanced by the narrative of Thu- 
 cydides. who plainly describes the treatment of tMs young woman as a de- 
 li'j rate, preconcerted insult. Had t} ere existed any assignable ground d 
 
 ASSASSINATION OF HTPPARCHUS. 
 
 118 
 
 filled Harmodius with indignation, and still farther exasperated 
 the feelings of Aristogeiton : both of them, resolving at all haz- 
 ards to put an end to the despotism, concerted means for aggres- 
 sion with a few select associates. They awaited the festival of 
 the Great Panathenwa, wherein the body of the citizens were 
 accustomed to march up in armed procession, with spear and 
 Bhield, to the acropolis ; this being the only day on which ao 
 Armed body could come together without suspicion. The con- 
 spirators appeared armed like the rest of the citizens, but carry- 
 ing concealed daggers besides. Harmodius and Aristogeiton 
 umlertook with their own hands to kill the two Peisistratids^ 
 while the rest promised to stand forward immediately for their 
 protection against the foreign mercenaries ; and though the 
 whole number of persons engaged was small, they counted upon 
 the spontaneous sympathies of the armed bystanders in an effort 
 to regain their liberties, so soon as the blow should once be struck. 
 The day of the festival having arrived, Hippias, with his for- 
 eign body-guard around him, was marshalling the armed citizens 
 for procession, in the Kerameikus without the gates, when Har- 
 modius and Aristogeiton approached with concealed daggers to 
 execute their purpose. On coming near, they were thunder- 
 struck to behold one of their own fellow-conspirators talking 
 f^imiliarly with Hippias, who was of easy access to every man 
 and they immediately concluded that the plot was betrayed. Ex 
 ]>ecting to be .seized, and wrought up to a state of desperation, 
 they resolved at least not to die without having revenged them- 
 selves on Hipparehus, whom they found within the city gates 
 near the chapel called the Leokorion, and immediately slew him. 
 His attendant guards killed Harmodius on the spot ; while Aris- 
 togeiton, rescued for the moment by the surrounding crowd, waa 
 
 exclusion, such as that which Dr. Arnold supposes, leading to the inference 
 that the Peisistratids could not admit her without violating rehgious cus- 
 tom, Thucydides woul i hardly have neglected to allude to it, for it would 
 have lightened the insult; and indeed, on that supposition, the sending 
 of the original summons might have been made to appear as an accidenta/ 
 mistake. I will add, that Thucydides, though no way forfeiting his obligar 
 tions to historical truth, is evidently not disposed to omit anything whicl" 
 can be truly said in favor of the Peisis'r^tids. 
 
 roL. IV. 8c»a 
 
114 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tfterwards taken, an^ perished in the tortures applied to mAk€ 
 him disclose his accomplices.* 
 
 The news Hew quickly to Hippias in the Keraraeikus, who 
 heard it earlier than the armed citizens near him, awaiting his 
 order for the commencement of the procession. With extraor- 
 dinary self-command, he took advantage of this precious instant 
 of foreknowledge, and advanced towards them,— commanding 
 them to drop their anns for a short time, and assemble on an ad- 
 joining ground. They unsuspectingly obeyed, and he immedi- 
 ately directed his guards to take possession of the vacant arms. 
 He was now undisputed master, and enabled to seize the persons 
 of all those citizens whom he mistrusted, — especially all those 
 who had dagcjers about them, which it was not the practice to 
 carry in the Panathenaic procession. 
 
 Such is the memorable narrative of Harraodius and Aristo- 
 geiton, peculiarly valuable inasmuch as it all comes from Thu- 
 cydides.2 To })Ossess great power, — to be abov(i le.:fal restraint, 
 — to inspire extraordinary fear, — is a privilege so much coveted 
 by the giants among mankind, that we may well tak*^ notice of 
 those cases in which it brings misfortune even ui)on themselves. 
 The fear inspired by Hipparchus, — of designs which he did not 
 really entertain, but was likely to entertain, and competent to 
 execute without himlranc^, — was here the grand ca^se of his 
 
 destruction. 
 
 The conspiracy here detailed happened in 514 !'..<., during the 
 thirteenth year of the reign of Ilippias,— wliich lasted four years 
 longer, until 510 B.C. And these last four years, in the belief 
 of the Athenian public, counted for his whole reign ; nay, many 
 of them made the still greater historical mistake of eliding these 
 Ust four years altogether, and of supposing that the conspiracy 
 of Harmodius and Aristogeiton had deposed the Peisistratid gov- 
 
 » Thucyd. vi, 58, oh ^aiUuc duri^v ■ compare Polyaen. i, 22 ; Diodoras, 
 Frtigm. Ub. X, p. 62, vol. iv, ed. Wess. ; Justin, ii, 9. See, also, a good note 
 of Dr. Thirlwall on the passage, Hist, of Gr. vol. ii, eh. xi,p.7/, 2d ed. I 
 •nee with him, that we may fairly construe the indistinct phrase of 1 ha- 
 cydidto by the more precise statements of later authors, who mentu» th€ 
 
 lorture. . . -n i-* - 
 
 • Thucyd. i, 20, vi, 54.-59; Herodot. v, 55, 56, vi, 123 ; Anstot. Pnht. ▼ 
 
 8,9 
 
 GRATEFl'L RF.COI.LECTION OF THE DEED. 
 
 115 
 
 emment and liberated Athens. Both poets and philosophers 
 Bhared this taith. which is distinctly put forth in the beautiful and 
 popular Skolion or song on the subject: the two friends are thera 
 celebrated as the authors of liberty at Athens, — " they slew the 
 despot and gave to Athens equal laws."' So inestimable a pres- 
 ent was alone sufficient to enshrine in the minds of the subse- 
 quent democracy (hose who had sold theii lives to purchase it: 
 and we must fartlicr recollect that the intimate connection be- 
 tw(,'en the two. so repugnant to the modern reader, was re^^arded 
 at Athens with svmnathv, — so that the storv took hold of the 
 Athenian mind by the vein of romance conjointly with that of 
 patriotism. Ilarinodius and Aristogeiton were afterwards com- 
 memorated both as the winners and as the i)rotomartyrs of 
 Athenian liberty. Statues were erected in their honor shortly 
 after the final expulsion of the Peisistratids ; immunity from 
 taxes and public burdens was granted to the descendants of their 
 families ; and the speaker who proposed the abolition of such 
 immunities, at a time when the number liad been abusively mul- 
 tiplied, made his only special exception in favor of this respected 
 lineage.2 And since the name of Hipparchus was universally 
 notorious as the person slain, we discover how it was that he 
 came to be considered by an uncritical public as the predominant 
 member of the Peisistratid family, — the eldest son and successor 
 of Peisistratus, — the reigning de>[)ot, — to the comparative n(^g- 
 lect of Hippias. The same public probably ^l>erished many 
 
 ' See the words of the song — 
 
 On rdv rvpavvov KraverTjv 
 'laovofiovg r' 'Ai?A/vaf t7rofi7ffar7/v — 
 np. Athenajum, xv, p. 691. 
 
 The epigram of the Keian Simonides. (Fragm. 132, ed. Bergk — ap. 
 Hephaestion. c. 14, p. 26, ed. Gaisf ) implies a similar belief: also, the pas- 
 sages in Plato, Sym})osion, p. 182, in Aristot. Polit, v, 8, 21, and Arrian, 
 Exped. Alex, iv, 10, 3. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 1 09 ; Deraosthen. adv. Leptin. c. 27, p. 495 ; cont. Meidiam, 
 c. 47, p. 569 ; and the oath prescribed in the Psephism of Demophantus, 
 Andokides, De Mysteriis, p. 13 ; PHny, H. N. xxxiv, 4-8; Pausan. i, 8, 5. 
 Plutarch, Aristeides, 27. 
 
 The statues were carried away from Athens by Xerx6s, and restored to 
 the Athenians by Alexander after liis conquest of Persia (Arrian. Ex \1 
 Hi, U. 16 ; Pllny, H. N. xxxiv, 4-8) 
 
u*^ 
 
 116 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 Other anecdotes,! not the less eagerly believed because they could 
 not be authenticated, respecting this eventful period. 
 
 Whatever maj have been the moderation of Hippias befort, 
 indignation at the death of his brother, and fear for his own 
 Bafery,a now induced him to drop it altogether. It is attested 
 both by Thucydides and Herodotus, and admits of no doubt, that 
 his power was now employed harshly and cruelly, — that he i)Ut 
 to death a considerable number of citizens. We find also a 
 statement, noway improbable in itself, and affirmed both in Fau- 
 Banias and in Plutarch, — inferior authorities, yet still in this case 
 eufficiently credible, — that he caused Leana, the mistress ot 
 Aristogeiton, to be tortured to death, in order to extort from her 
 a knowledge of the secrets and accomplices of the latter.3 But 
 as he could not bui: be sensible that this system of terrorism was 
 full of peril to himself, so he looked out for shelter and support 
 in case of being expelled from Athens ; and with this view ht 
 sought to connect himself with Darius king of Persia, — a con- 
 nection full of consequences to be hereafter developed. .Ean- 
 tides, son of IIi]>poklus the despot of Lampsakus on the 
 Hellespont, stood high at this time in the lavor of the Persian 
 monarch, which induced Hippias to give him his daughter Arch- 
 edike in marriage; no small honor to the Lampsakene, in the 
 estimation of Tlmcydides.^ To explain how Hippias came to tix 
 upon this town, however, it is necessary to say a few words on 
 the foreign policy of the Feisistratids. 
 
 » One of these stories may be seen in Justin, ii. 9,— who gives the nam« 
 of Dickies to Hipparchus, — " Diodes, alter ex filiis, per vim stupratA vif 
 gine, a fratre puellie interticitur." 
 
 « 'H yap deUia (;>oviKuraT6v iarw iv ralg rvpavv laiv —ohscr\cs I'lutarcti, 
 
 (Artaxerxes, c. 25). ... .c 
 
 » Pausan. i, 23, 2 ; Plutarch, De Garrulitate, p. 897 : Polyaen. ^-m, 45 ; 
 
 Athenaeus, xiii, p. 59»i. 
 
 * We can hardly be mistaken in putting this interiiretation on the word3 
 of Thucydides — 'Ail^jyvatof ui\ \aui>aK7]vu) 16uke (vi, 59). 
 
 Some financial tricks and frauds are ascribed to Hippias by the author 
 of the Pseudo-AristoleUan second book of the (Economica (u 4). I place 
 little reliance on the statements in this treatise respectino: peTsons of early 
 date, such as Kv-pselus or Hippias : in respect to facts of the subsequent 
 period of GrcecJ, between 450-300 B.C., the author s means of mfonktaticr 
 friU doubtless rrtKlcr him a better witness. 
 
 Vol. 4 ^ 
 
 MILTIADES GOES TO THE CHERSONESE. 
 
 117 
 
 It has already heen mentioned that the Athenians, even so far 
 b«ck as the days of the poet Alk»us, had occupied Sigeium in tha 
 Troad, and had there carried on war with the Mityleneans ; &o 
 that their acquisitions in these regions date much before the time 
 of Peisistratus. Owing probably to this circumstance, an ai)pli 
 cation was made to them in the early part of his reign from the 
 Dolonkian Thracians, inhabitants of the Chersonese on the oppo- 
 •ite side of the Hellespont, for aid against their powerful neigh- 
 bors the Absinthian tribe of Thracians ; and opportunity was thus 
 offered for sending out a colony to acquire this valuable peninsula 
 for Athens. Peisistratus willingly entered into the scheme, and 
 Miltiades son of Kypselus, a noble Athenian, living impatiently 
 under his despotism, was no less pleased to take the lead in 
 executing it: his departure and that of other malcontents aa 
 founders of a colony suited the purpose of all parties. Accord- 
 ing to the narrative of Herodotus, — alike pious and picturesque, 
 — and doubtless circulating as authentic at the annual games 
 which the Chersonesites, even in his time, celebrated to the 
 honor of their oekist, — it is the Deli>hian god who directs the 
 scheme and singles out the individual. The chiefs o/ the dis- 
 tressed Dolonkians went to Delphi to crave assistance towards 
 procuring Grecian colonists, and were directed to choose for 
 their oekist the individual who should first show them hospitality 
 on their quitting the temple. They departed and mai'ched all 
 along what was called the Sacred Road, through Phocis and 
 Boeotia to Athens, without receiving a single hospitable invita- 
 tion ; at length they entered Athens, and passed by the house of 
 Miltiades, while he himself was sitting in front of it. Seeing 
 men whose costume and arms marked them out as strangers, he 
 invited them into his house and treated them kindly : they then 
 apprized him that he was the man fixed upon by the oracle, and 
 abjured him not to refuse his concurrence. After asking for him- 
 self personally the opinion of the oracle, and receivir^^ an affirm- 
 ative answer, he consented ; sailing as oekist, at the head of a 
 body of Athenian emigrants, to the Chersonese.^ 
 
 Having reached this peninsula, and having been constituted 
 cksepot of the mixed Thracian and Athenian population, he k>!l 
 
 * Herodot ti 30-3? 
 
118 
 
 ms! ')KV OF GREECE. 
 
 DO tiin« in fortifying the narrow isthmus by a wall reachir j^ all 
 ACIX)6S from Kanlia to Paktya, a distan je of about four miles and 
 a half; so that the Absinthian invaders were for the time effect- 
 aally shut out,' though the protection was not permanently kept 
 up. He also entered into a war with Lam[>sakus, on the Asiatic 
 side of the strait, but was unfortunar«» enough to fall into an ara« 
 huscade and become a prisoner. Nothing preserved his life 
 except the immediate interference of Croesus king of Lydia, 
 coupled with strenuous menaces addressed to the Lampsakenes, 
 who found themselves fompelled to release their prisoner; Milti- 
 ades having acquired much favor with this prince, in what man- 
 ner we are not told. He <lied childlc-s some time afterwards, 
 while his nephew Stesagonis, who succeeded him, perished by 
 assassination, some time subsequent to the death of Peisistratus 
 at Athens.' 
 
 The expedition of Miltiades to the Chersonese must have 
 ocnirred early after the first usurpation of Peisistratus, since 
 even his imprisonment by the Lanqisakenes happened before the 
 ruin of Croisus, (546 B.C.) But it was not till much later, — 
 fiiobably during the third and most powerfid period of Peisistra- 
 t... — that the latter undertook hi^ expedition against Sigeium 
 n the Troad. This ]ilace appears to have fallen into the hands 
 jf the Mitvlencans : Peisistratus retook it,*^ and placed there his 
 illegitimate son Hegesistratus as despot. The Mityleneans may 
 
 ' Thus the Scytliian.s hroke into the Clicrsonese even during the govern 
 incnt of Miltiades son of Kimon, nephew of Miltiades the oekist, ahout 
 forty rears after the wall had been erected (Herodot. vi, 40). Ag^ain, 
 Perikles reestablished the (ross-wall, on sending to the Chersonese a fresh 
 hand of one thousand Athenian settlers flMutarch, Perikl6s, c. 19): lastly, 
 DcrkYllid:is the Laeedtemoiiian built it anew, in consequence of loud com- 
 plaints raised by the inhabitants of their defenceless condition, — about 397 
 B i:. /Xenophon, Hellen. iii, 2, 8-10.) So imperfect, however, did the pro- 
 tection prove, that ahout half a eentury afterwards, during the first years 
 of the conquests of Philip of Macedon, an idea was entertained of digging 
 Ihrongh the isthmus, and eonverting the peninsula into an island (Demcfl* 
 thcnds, Philippie ii, 6, p 92, and De Ilaloneso, c. 10, p. 86) ; an idea, hew- 
 ever, never carrieil into effect. 
 
 • Herodot. vi 38, 39. 
 
 •• Herodot. v, 94. I have already said that I conceive this as a diflferenl 
 » f>^m\ that in which the poet Alkaus wa« engaged. 
 
 ^ 
 
 SECOND MLTIADES Al THE CHERSONKSE. 
 
 119 
 
 have been enfeebled at this time (somewhere between 537-52? 
 B.C.) not only by the strides of Persian conquest on the mainland, 
 but also by the ruinous defeat which they suffered from Polyk- 
 rates and the SamiansJ Hegesistratus maintained the place 
 Against various hostile attempts, throughout all the reign of Hi})- 
 pias, so that the Athenian possessions in those regions compre- 
 hended at this period both the Chersonese and Sigeium.^ To 
 the former of the two, Hippias sent out Miltiades, nephew of 
 the first oekist, as governor, after the death of his brother Ste* 
 sagoras. The new governor found much discontent in the |)enin- 
 sula, but succeeded in subduing it by entrapping and im])risoning 
 the principal men in each town. He farther took into his pay a 
 regiment of five hundred mercenaries, and married Hegesipyle, 
 daughter of the Thracian king Olorus.3 It appears to have been 
 Bbout f)15 B.C. that this second Miltiades went out to the Cher- 
 sionese "^ He seems to have been obliged to quit it for a time, 
 after the Scythian expedition of Darius, in consequence of having 
 iPi Mirred the hostility of the Persians; but he was there from the 
 bo<nnnin2 of the Ionic revolt until about 493 B.C., or two or three 
 years before the battle of Marathon, on which occasion we sliall 
 fiiid him acting commander of the Athenian army. 
 
 Both the Chersonese and Sigeium, though Athenian j)osses- 
 sions were, however, now tributary and dependent on Persia 
 And it was to this quarter that Hipi)ias. during liis last years of 
 alarm, looked for support in the event of being expelled frooi 
 Athens: he calculated upon Sigeium as a shelter, and upon^Ean- 
 tides, as well as Darius, as an ally. Neither the one nor the 
 other failed him. 
 
 ' Ilemdut. iii, 39. * Herodot. vi, 104, 139, 140. 
 
 " Herodot. vi, 39-103. Cornelius Nepos, in his Life of Miltiades, con- 
 r)iinds in one biography the adventures of two persons, — Miltiades son of 
 Ky|>selus, the oekist, — and Miltiades son of Kimon, the victor of Marathon, 
 >— the uncle and the nephew. 
 
 < There is nothing that I know to mark the date except that it wa.s earlier 
 rlian the death of Hipparchu« in .514 B.C., and also earlier than the expedi- 
 tion of Darius against the Scythians, about 516 B.C., in which expedition 
 Miltiades was engaged : see Mr. Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, and J. M. Schnlt •- 
 Beitrag zu genaueren Zeitbestimmungen iler Hellen. Geschichten von dcr 
 ISsteD bis ziu- 7«8ten Olynipiade. p. 165. in the Kieler Philologische Studien 
 1841. 
 

 120 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEcr. 
 
 The same cii3umstances which alarmed Hippias, and rendered 
 his dominion in Attica at once more 0|)pressive and more odious, 
 tended of course to i-aise the hopes of his enemies, the Atlienian 
 exiles, with the powerful Alkmieonids at their head. Believing 
 the favorable moment to be come, they even ventured uj)on an 
 invasion of Attica, and occupied a post called Leipsydrion in the 
 mountain rani::e of Parnes, which separates Attica from Boeotia.* 
 But their schemes altogether failed: Hippias defeated and drove 
 them out of the country. His dominion now seemed confirmed, 
 for the Lacedaemonians were on terms of intimate friendship with 
 him ; and Amyntas king of Macedon, a- wf 11 a- the Thessalians 
 were his allies. Yft the exiles whom he ijad beaten in the open 
 field succeeded in an unexpected maiKjeuvre, which, favored by 
 circumstances, j)rove<l his ruin. 
 
 By an accident which had occurred in tlie year 548 b.c.,^ the 
 Delphian temple was set on fire and burnt. To rc]»air this grave 
 loss was an object of solicitude to all Greece; but the outlay re- 
 quired was exceedinojy heavy, and it apj)ears to have been long 
 before the money could be coIlect«^d. The Amphiktyons decreed 
 that one-fourth of the cost should be borne by the Delphians them- 
 selves, who found themselves so heavily taxed by this assessment, 
 that they sent envoys throughout all Greece to collect subscriptions 
 in aid, and received, among other donations, from the Greek set- 
 tlers in Egypt twenty mina?, besides a large j)resent of alum from 
 the Egyptian king Amasis: their munificent benefactor Croesus 
 fell a victim to the Persians in 516 B.C., so that his treasure was no 
 longer open to them. The total sum required was three hundred 
 talents (equal probably to about one hundred and fifteen thousand 
 pounds sterling),'^ — a prodigious amount to be collected from the 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 62. The unfortunate strujrgle at Leipsydrion became after 
 wards the theme of a popular song (Athenaeus, xv, p. 695) : see Hesycliius, 
 ▼, Aei^vSpiov, and Aristotle, Fragm. ^A^ijvaiuv U.o?i,iTeia, 37, ed. Neumann 
 
 If it be true that Alkibiades. grandfather of the celebrated Alkibiades 
 iook part with Kleisthen<»<» and the Alkmseonid exiles in this struggle (sea 
 Isokrates, De Bigis, Or. xvi, p. 351), he must have been a mere youth. 
 
 • Pan.san. x, 5, 5. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 50, ii, 180. I have taken the three hundred talents of Herodo 
 *i* i# being ^Eginsean talents, which are to Attic talents in the ratio of 5 : S 
 
 KEBUn.l>ING OF THE PKLPHIAN TEMPLE. 
 
 121 
 
 dispersed Grecian cities, who acknowledged no common sov- 
 ereign authority, and among whom the proportion reasonable to 
 ask from each was so difficult to determine with satisfaction to 
 all parties. At length, however, the money was collected, and 
 the Amphiktyons were in a situation to make a contract for the 
 building of the temple. The Alkmceonids, who had been in exile 
 ever since the third and final acquisition of power by Peisistratu3, 
 tool: the contract ; and in executing it, they not only performed the 
 work in the best manner, but even went much beyond the terms 
 stipulated ; employing Parian marble for the frontage, where the 
 material prescribed to them was coarse stone.' As was before 
 remarked in the case of Peisistratus when he was in banishment, 
 we are surprised to find exiles whose property had been confis- 
 cated so amply furnished with money, — unless we are to sup[>ose 
 that Kleisthenes the Alkmaionid, grandson of the Sikyonian 
 Kleisthenes,'3 inherited through his mother wealth independent of 
 Attica, and deposited it in the temple of the Samian Here. But 
 the fact is unquestionable, and they gained signal reputaticTi 
 throughout the Hellenic world for their liberal performance of so 
 important an enterprise. That the erection took considerable 
 time, we cannot doubt. It seems to have been finished, as far as 
 
 The Inscriptions prove that tiiC accounts of the temple were kept by the 
 Amphiktyons on the JEgmxan scale of money : see Corpus Insurip. 
 Boeckh, No. 1688, and Boeckh, Metrologie, vii, 4. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 62. The words of the historian would seem to implv that 
 they only began to think of this scheme of building the temple after tho 
 defeat of Leipsydrion, and a year or two before the expulsion of Hippias; 
 a supposition quite inadmissible, since the temple must have taken some 
 years in building. 
 
 The loose and prejudiced statement in Philochorus, affirming that the 
 Peisistratids caused the Delphian temple to be burnt, and also that they 
 were at last deposed by the victorious arm of the Alkmaeonids (Philorhon 
 Fragment. 70, ed. Didot) makes us feel the value of Herodotus and Thu( y- 
 dides as authorities. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 128; Cicero, De Legg. ii, 16. The deposit here mentioned 
 by Cicero, which ra.iy very probably have been recorded in an inscriptiorr 
 in the t4>mple, must have been made before the time of the Persian con- 
 quest of Samos, — indeed, before the death of Polykrates in 522 e.g., after 
 which period the island fell at once into a precarious situation, and veri 
 K>cii afterwards into the greatest calamities. 
 
 VOL. IT. 6 
 
 y 
 

 'ii 
 
 122 
 
 inSTOKY OF (JIIEKCK. 
 
 we can conjecture, about a year or two after the death of 
 Hippan hu>, — ijl2 B.C., — more than thirty years after the colli 
 
 flagra'i' li. 
 
 To thf I)<lj>hians, especially, the rebuilding of their temple on 
 go superior a >cale was the rao>t c-sential of all .services, aud 
 their jrratitud*^ towards the Alkraaeunids was proportionally 
 great. Partly through such a feeling, partly through pecuniary 
 presents, Kleisthenes was thus enabled to work the oracle for 
 political purposes, aud to call fortli the powerful arm of Sparta 
 against ilippias. Whenever any Spartan proented himself to 
 consult the oracle, either on private or public bu-in(\ss, the answer 
 of the priestess was always in one strain, ''Athens must be liber- 
 ated." The constant repetition of this mandate at length extorted 
 Iroin the piety of the Lacedaemonians a reluctant compliance. 
 Reverence for the god overcame their strong feeling of friendship 
 towards the Peisistratids, and Amliiniolius son of A>ler was 
 despatched by sea to Athens, at the head of a Spartan force to 
 •expel them. On landing at PhaKnim, however, he found them 
 ^Already forewarned and prepared, as well as farther strengthened 
 by one tliousand horse specially demanded from their allies in 
 Thessaly. Upon the }>lain of Phalerum, this latter force was 
 found peculiarly eifec ive, so that the division of Anchimoliu^ 
 wjus driven back to thei* ships with great loss and he himself 
 glain.' The defeated armament had probably been small, and iti 
 repulse only provoked llie Lacediemonians to send a larger, under 
 the command of their king Kleomeues in person, who ou this oc- 
 casion marched into Attica by land. On reacliing the plain of 
 Athens, he was assailed by tlie Thessalian horse, but repelled 
 them in so galhmt a style, that they at once rode otf and returned 
 to their native country; abandoning their allies with a faithless- 
 nsss not unfreqiM'iit in the Thessalian character. Kleomene8 
 marched on to Atlieus without farther resistance, and found 
 himself, together with the Alkmajonids and the malcontent Athe- 
 nians generally, in possession of the town. At that time there 
 was no fortification except around the acropolis, into which Hip- 
 pias retired with his mercenaries and the citizens most faithful to 
 him ; having taken car« to provision it well beforehand, so that it 
 
 GREECE DURING PEiSISTRATUS. 
 
 113 
 
 wns not less secure against famine than against a«j?ault He 
 might have defied the besieging force, which was noway prepared 
 for a long blockade ; but, not altogether confiding in his position, 
 he tried to send his children by stealth out of the country; and in 
 this proceeding the children were taken prisoners. To procure 
 their restoration, Hippias consented to all that was demanded of 
 him, and withdrew from Attica to Sigeium in the Troad within 
 the space of five days. 
 
 Thus fell the Peisistratid dynasty in 510 B.C.. fifty years after the 
 first usurpation of its founder.' It was put down through the aid 
 of foreigners,- and those foreigners, too, v/isliing well to it in their 
 hearts, though hostile from a mistaken feeling of divine injunction. 
 Yet both the circumstances of its fall, and the course of events 
 which followed, conspire to show that it possessed few attached 
 friends in the country, and that the expulsion of Hippias was 
 welcomed unanimously by the vast majority of Athenians. Hij 
 family and chief partisans would accompany him into exile, — 
 probably as a matter of course, without requiring any formal sen- 
 tence of condemnation ; and an altar was erected in the acrop- 
 olis, with a column hard by, commemorating both the past 
 iniquity of the dethroned dynasty, and the names of all its 
 members.3 
 
 '• Ilorodot. V, G4, C5. * Thucyd. vi, 56. .57. 
 
 ^ Tlmryd. vi, 55. <I»f o te ^ufibg aijfianet^ Kal f] crrjAri ~tyi rr,g tuv ivfHi¥ 
 vijv aSiKia^, T] kv T^ * A^Tjvatuv aKpon67.et OTm^eicra. 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall, after mentioning the departure of Hippias, proceeds aft 
 follows : " After his departure many severe measures were taken against hii 
 adherents, who appear to have been for a long time afterwards a formidable 
 party. They were punished or repressed, some by death, others by exile or 
 by the loss of their political privileges. The family of the tyrants waa 
 condemned to perpetual banishment, and appears to have been excepted 
 ^m the most comprehensive decrees of amnesty passed in later times " 
 'Hist, of Gr. ch. xi, vol. ii. p. 81.) 
 
 I o:\nnot but think that Dr. Thirlwall has here been misled by insufficiert 
 authority. He refers to the oration of Andokides de Mysteriis, sects. U>6 
 and 78 (sect. 106 coincides in part with ch. 18, in the ed. of Dobree). Au 
 attentive reading of it will show that it is utterly unworthy of credit in 
 regard to matters anterior to the speaker by one generation or more. Tbi 
 orators often permit themselves great license in speaking of past facts, but 
 Andokidds in this chapter passes the botinds even of rhetorical liceuse 
 Risi, he states something not bearing the least analogy to the narrative d 
 
124 
 
 HISTORY OP GREFX'E. 
 
 Herouotus as to the circurastances preceding the expulsion of the Peiai* 
 Iratids, and indeed tacitly setting aside that narrative ; next, he actually 
 jumbles together the two capital and distinct exploits of Athens, — th« 
 battle of Marathon and the repulse of Xerxes ten years after it. I state 
 this latter charge in the words of Sluiter and Valckenaer, before I consider 
 the former charge: " Verissime ad haec verba notat Valckenaerius — Con 
 fondere videtur Andocides diversissima ; Persica sub Miltiade et Dario et 
 Tictoriam Marathoniam (v, 14) — quaeque evenere sub Themistocle, Xerxia 
 gesia. Hie urbem incendio delevit, non ille (v, 20). Nihil niagis muni 
 ftstum est, quam diversa ab oratore coufundi." (Sluittr, Lection. Andoci 
 de« p 147.) 
 
 The criticism of these commentators is perfectly borne out by the words 
 of the orator, which are too long to find a place here. But immediately 
 prior to those words he expresses himself as follows, and this is the passage 
 which serves as Dr. Thirlwall's authority : 01 yap -rarepeg ol vfiirepoi, yevo 
 fih'Ltv Ty no/.ei KaK<Jv fMeyuAuv, ore ol ripavvoL tlxov ttjv ttoXiv^ 6 61 df;fiog 
 l^ye^ viKTiaavTeg fiaxofjtvoi roif rvpuvvovg em HaA/ljyiuV. orparrj^ovvTo^ 
 lituyopov Tov TcpoTcunTov Tov tnoi\ Kal Xapiov ov CKetvoc; ttjv i^vyaripa elxtv 
 is VC rifierepoc h'^ TraTTOf, KaTF/.^ovreg elg rf/v naTpida rove pitv uKeKTeivai', 
 Tilii' ^£ <f>vy7iv Kcriyvuaav, roir ^e jnneiv Iv rr) ~uAn inaavrrg ^rifiuaav. 
 
 Both Sluiter (Lect. And. p. 8) and Dr. Thirlwall (Hist. p. 80) refer this 
 alleged victory of Leogoras and the Athenian demus to the ;K'tion described 
 bv Herodotus (v, 64) fis having been fought by Kleomcnes of Sparta 
 against the Thessalian < avalr\'. But the two events have not a single cir- 
 cumstance in common, except that each is a victory over the Peisistratidaj 
 or their allies: nor could they well he the same event, described in different 
 tei-ras, seeing that Kleomcnes, marching from Sparta to Athens, could not 
 have fought the Thessalians at Pallcne, which lay on the road from Mara- 
 thon to Athens. PallenO was the place where Peisistratus, advancing from 
 Marathon to Athens, on occasion of his second restoration, gained his com 
 olete victory over the opposing party, and marched on afterwards to Athena 
 withoat farther resistance (Herodot. i, 63). 
 
 If, then, we compare ihe statement given by Andokides of the preceding 
 eircumstances, whereby the dynasty of the Peisistratids was put down, with 
 Ihat given by Herodotus, we shall see tliat tlie two are radically different 
 we cannot blend them together, hut must make our election between them 
 Not less different are the representations of the two as to the circumstances 
 whi'h immediately ensaed on the fall of Hippias: they would scarcely 
 appear to relate to the same event. That " the adherents of the Peisistra- 
 tid^e were punished or represscu, some by death, others by exile, or by the 
 loss of their political pnvileges," which is the assertion of Andokides anr* 
 Dr. Thirlwall, is not only not stated by Herodotus, but is highly improoa- 
 ble, if we accc' 4ie facts which he does state ; for he tells us ths»t Hippias 
 capitulated and agreed to retire while possessing ample means of resistance, 
 — simply from regard to the safety of his children. It is not to be supposed 
 dxftt he would leave his 'ntimate partisans exposed to danger; sucli of them 
 
 GREECE DURING PEISISTKATtS. 
 
 125 
 
 
 u felt tliemselvea obnoxious would naturally retire along wuh luin , «n< 
 if tliiB be what is meant by "many persons condemned to exile here is ..« 
 ,««on to call it in question. But there is little probabiUty that any o« 
 was put to death, and still less probabiUty that any were punished by the 
 loss of their political privileges. Within a year afterwards «»">«";« <^»°'- 
 rhensive constitution of KleisthenJs, to be described in the following 
 chanter, and I consider it eminently unlikely that there were a considerable 
 dJs of residents in Attica left out of this constitution, under the category 
 of partisans of Peisistratus: indeed, the fact cannot be so, if it be true thai 
 the very first person banished under the Kleisthenean ostracism w»s a per- 
 son named Hipparchus, a kinsman of PeisUtratus (Androtion, Fr. S ed^ 
 Didot; Harpokration, T, -I^^rawoc) i and this latter circumstance depends 
 upon eVidence better *an that of Andokid«s. That there were a party in 
 Tttica attached to the Peisistratids, I do not doubt ; but that they were "a 
 powerful party," (as Dr. Thirlwall imagines,) I see nothing to show; and 
 STextraordinarv vigor and unanimity of the Athenian people under the 
 fflei!rhenean constitmion will go far to prove that such could not have been 
 
 'T^riu'add another reason to evince how completely Andokides miscon- 
 ceives the history of Athens between 510-480 B.C. He says that w^^.eu the 
 PesUt ntids we« put down, many of their partisans were banished many 
 othe.^ allowed to stay at home with the loss of .heir pobtical privileges; 
 hu, that ..ftcrwards, when the overwhelming dangers of the f «-- •-- J 
 suDcrvened, the people passed a vote to re .tore the exUes and to remove 
 he exisUng disfLchisements at home. He would thus have ns believe 
 that the exiled partisans of the Peisistratids were all restored, and the d.s 
 franchised partisans of the Peisistratids all enfranchised, mst at the moment 
 I; he Persian invasion, and with the view of enabling Athens better to 
 Lei that grave danger. This is nothing less than a glanng mistake ; for 
 ,7,e firs^ Persian inviion was undertaken with the express view of t^stonng 
 Hippias, and with the presence of Hippias himself at Marathon; while the 
 fecL Persian invasion was also brought on in part by the instigation of 
 hi 1 ly. Persons who had remained in exile or n a state of disfran 
 cMseren^ down to that time, in consequence of their attachment to h. 
 Peisilatids could not in common prudence be called into action at he 
 Loment of ^eril, to help in repelling Hippias himself It is yery true that 
 T^^L and the disfranchised were readmitted, shortly before the^mvasio. 
 rf Xe^ts and under the then pressing calamities of the state^ But tl.s. 
 IfonTwere not philo-Peisistratids ; they were a number gradually accu- 
 Sed from the sentences of exile and (atimy or) disfranchisement ever, 
 ^^ pled at Athens, -for these were punishments applied by the Athe- 
 r„ faw to various crimes and public omissions,-the pemns so .e.tent d 
 were not politically disaffected, and their aid would then be J use .= 
 defending the state against a foreign enemy. , .. ^ 
 
 In tgfrd to "the Leeption of the family of PeUistratus fron. «.e murt 
 „„p,*hensive decrees of amnesty passed in lafer times," I wUl .U4 
 
1S6 
 
 HISTORY OF GEJECE. 
 
 remark ihat, in the decree of amnesty, there is no mention of tliem lij 
 name, nor any special exception made against them : among a list of vaii 
 ons categories excepted, those arc named " who have been condemned tf 
 death or exile either as murderers or as despots," (v adayrfrri- i Tvpavvo/^^ 
 Andokid. c. 13.) It is by no means certain that the il.sc, nd'uts of Peisis- 
 iratus would be rompristd in this exception, which meiinoiiN only the per- 
 ■on himself condemned : but even if this were otherwise, the exception is 
 A mere v\)ntinuance of similar words of exception in the old SoUmian Ls .r, 
 •nterior to Peisistratus ; and, therefore, all'ords no indication of partit ular 
 fceling against the Peisistratids. 
 
 Andokides is a useful authority for the polities of Alliens in his own 
 time (between 420-390 B.C.), but in regard to the previous liisiory of Athena 
 between 510-480 B.C., his assertions are so loose, confused, and unscrupu- 
 lous, that he is a witness of no value. The mere < ireunistance noted by 
 Valckenaer, that he has confounded together Maratiion and Salarais, would 
 be sufficient to show this ; liut when we add to such genuine ignorance his 
 mention of his two great-grandfathers in prominent and victorious leader 
 ihip. which it is hardly credible tliat they could ever have occupied, — 
 when we recollect that the facts which he jilleges to have preceded and 
 accompanied the expulsion of the Peisistratids are not only at variance 
 with those stated by Herodotus, but so contrived as to found a factitious 
 analogy for the cause which he is himself pleading, — we shall hardly b« 
 able to acquit him of something worse than ignorance in his deposition 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 GRFXIAN AFFAIKS AK I'ER THK KXPULSION OF THE ,'EISISTRA- 
 TIDS.- REVOLUTION OF KLEISTHENKS AND ESTABUSH.'^IKXT 
 OF DEMOCRACY AT ATHENS 
 
 With Hippias disappeared the mercenary Thracian garrison, 
 upon which he and his father before him had leaned for defence 
 i8 well as for enforcement of authority ; and Kleomenes with hia 
 Lacedaemonian forces retired also, after stavin*? only loni^ enouojh 
 to establish a personal friendship, productive sub5?equently of 
 important consequences, between the Spartan king and thf 
 Athenian Isagoras. The Athenians were thus left to them 
 
 
 
 REVOLUTION EFFECTED BY KLEISTHl NES. 
 
 127 
 
 selves, without any foreign interference to constrain them in theif 
 political ai rangements. 
 
 It has been mentioned in the preceding chapter, that the Pei- 
 iistratids had for the most part respected the forms of the Soio- 
 nian constitution: the nine archons, and the probouleutic or 
 preconsidering Senate of Four Hundred (both annually changed), 
 still continued to subsist, together with occasional meetings of thd 
 people, — or rather of such portion of the people as was com- 
 prised in the gentes, phratries, and four Ionic tribes. The 
 timocratic classilication of Solon (or quadruple scale of income 
 and admeasurement of political franchises accordmg to it) also 
 continued to subsist, — but all within the tether and subservient 
 to the purposes of the ruling family, who always kept one of 
 their number as real master, among the chief administrators, 
 ind always retained iK)ssession of the acropolis as well as of llio 
 
 mercenary force. 
 
 That overawing pressure being now removed by the expulsion 
 of Hippias, the enslaved forms became at once endued with 
 freedom and reality. There appeared again, what Attica had 
 not known for thirty years, declared political parties, and pro- 
 nounced opposition between two men as leaders, — on one side, 
 Isagoras son of Tisander, a person of illustrious descent, — on 
 the'' other, Kleisthenes the Alkmaionid, not less illustrious, and 
 possessing at this moment a claim on the gratitude of his coun- 
 trymen as the most persevering as well as the most effective foe 
 of the dethroned despots. In what manner such opposition was 
 larried on we are not told. It would seem to have been not 
 Itogether pacific; but at any rate, Kleisthenes had the worst of 
 i, afld in consequence of this defeat, say^ the historian, "he took 
 into partnership the people, who had been before excluded from 
 everything."! His partnership with the people gave birth to 
 the Athenian democracy: it was a real and important revolu- 
 tion. 
 
 The political franchise, or the character of an Athenian citizen, 
 both before and since Solon, had been confined to the primiti\e 
 
 » fTerodot. v, 06^-6? kaaoviievo^ dt 6 KAettn^evjyf top dr/uuv irpoaeraipi^t' 
 rat— u>? yap ^V rdv K^rjvaiutv drjfiov, Tporepov aTTotafievw iravruv rort 
 irpof Ti/% ku wrov uoip^v npoae^Koro, etc. 
 
 r 
 
 i 
 
128 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I 
 
 four Ionic tribes, each of which was an aggregate of so manj 
 close corporations or quasi-families, — the gentes and the phr»- 
 tries. None of the residents in Attica, therefore, except those 
 included in some gens or phratry, had any part in the political 
 fr^inchise. Such non-privilego<l residents were probably at all 
 times numerous, and became more and more so by means ot 
 Iresh settlers: moreover, they tended most to multiply in Athens 
 snd Peira^us, where emigrants would commonly establish them- 
 eolves. Kleisthenes broke down the existing wall of privilege, 
 and imparted the political franchise to the excluded mass. But 
 this could not be done by enrolling them in new gentes or phra- 
 tries, created in addition to the old ; for the gentile tie was found- 
 ed upon old faith and feeling, which, in the existing state of the 
 Greek mind, could not be suddenly conjured up as a bond ot 
 union for comparative strangers : it could only be done by dis- 
 connecting the franchise altogether from the Ionic tribes as well 
 as from the gentes which constituted them, and by redistributing 
 the population into new tribes with a character and purpose ex- 
 clusively political. Accordingly, Klcislhen(^s abolished the four 
 Ionic tribes, and created in their place ten new tribes founded 
 upon a different principle, independent of the gentes and phra- 
 tries. Each of his new tribes comprised a certain number of 
 demes or cantons, with the enrolled proj)rietors and residents in 
 each of them. The demes taken altogether included the entire 
 suriace of Attica, so tluit the Kleisthenean constitution admitted 
 U> the political franchise all the free native Athenians ; and not 
 merely these, but also many Metics, and even some of the supe- 
 fior order of slaves. ^ Putting out of sight the general body of 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. ill, 1, 10, vi, 2, 11. KAfitnl^n'r/c, — ttoaaoiV l^v/.trevae 
 Crvoi'c Kai SovXovc fieroiKOtx. 
 
 Several able critics, and Dr. Thirlwall among the number, consider this 
 passage as affording no sense, and assume some conjectural emendation to 
 be indispensable ; though ihere is no particular emendation which suggest! 
 itself as preeminently plausible. Under these circumstances, I rather pre- 
 fer to make the best of th«} words as they stand ; which, though umuaal, 
 •eem to me not absolutely inadmissible. The expression ^rrof fjiiroiKoc 
 (which is a perfectly good one, as we find in Aristoph. Equit. 347, — e'nrav 
 6iKi6iov eiirac ev Kara ^tror fxerocKov) may be considered as the correlative 
 Id ifoi'Aot'r uernUov^, — the last word being construed both with (JovJlovf and 
 with iivov^. I apprehend that there always must have be€«ii in Attica a 
 
 THE KLEISTHENEAN CONSTITUTION. 
 
 12? 
 
 
 
 
 liavcs, and regarding only the free inhabitants, it was in point of 
 fact a scheme approaching to universal suffrage, both political 
 and judicial. 
 
 The slight and cursory manner in which Herodotus announces 
 this memorable revolution tends to make us overlook its real 
 imjiortance. He dwells chiefly on the alteration in the num* 
 bei and names of the tribes : Kleisthenes, he says, despised 
 jLc lonians so much, that he would not tolerate the continuance 
 in Attica of the four tribes which prevailed in the Ionic cities,' 
 deriving their names from the four sons of Ion, — just as his 
 grandfather, the Sikyonian Kleisthenes, hating the Dorians, had 
 degraded aiul nicknamed the three Dorian tribes at Sikyon. 
 Such is the representation of Herodotus, who seems himself to 
 have entertained some contempt for the lonians,^ and therefore 
 to have suspected a similar feeling where it had no real exis^ 
 ence. But the scope of Kleisthenes was something far more 
 extensive : he abolished the four ancient tribes, not because they 
 were Ionic, but because they had become incommensurate with 
 the existing condition of the Attic people, and because such abo- 
 lition procured both for himself and for his political scheme new 
 as well as hearty allies. And indeed, if we study the circum 
 stances of the case, we shall see very obvious reasons to suggest 
 the proceeding. For more than thirty years — an entire gener- 
 ation — the old constitution had been a mere empty formality, 
 working only in subservience to the reigning dynasty, and strip- 
 ped of all real controlling power. "We may be very sure, there- 
 fore, that both the Senate of Four Hundred and the popular 
 assembly, divested of that free speech which imparted to them 
 
 certain number of intelligent slaves living apart from their masters {x^^pk 
 o'lKovvreg)^ in a state between slavery and freedom, working partly on con- 
 dition of a fixed payment to him, partly for themselves, and perhaps con- 
 tinuing to pass nominally as slaves after they had bought their liberty by in- 
 stalments. Such men would be dov'jioi (ietolkoi : indeed, there are cases in 
 which dovTuoL signifies freedmen (Meier, De Gentihtate Attic^, p. 6) : they 
 most have been industrious and pushing men, valuable partisans to a polit- 
 ical revolution. See K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch der Griech. Staats Alterth 
 cIl HI, not. 15. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 69. KXeia-&ivrj^ — vTrepiddv 'Icjvag, tva .ifj j^iat at aitol 
 ^uci (ffvXal Kal 'luai. 
 
 ■ Such a disposition seems evident in Herodot. i, 143 
 VOL. IT 6* doOi 
 
 'i 
 
THE KIJ:ISTHENE> S COxXSTITUTION. 
 
 181 
 
 130 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE- 
 
 not only all their value but all thiir charm, had come to be of 
 little public estimation, and were probably attended oi ly by a 
 few pariiaans ; and thus the difference between qualititd citizeoa 
 and men not so qualified, — between members of the four old 
 tribes, and men not membere, — became during this period prac« 
 ti3ally eftaced. Tliis in Ikct, was the only species of good which 
 a Grecian despotism ever seems to have done : it confounded the 
 privileged and the non-privileged under one coercive authority 
 common to both, so that the distinction between the two was not 
 easy to revive when the despotism passed away. As soon as 
 Hippias was expelled, the senate and the public assembly re- 
 gained their etficiency. But had they been continued on the old 
 footing, including none except members of the four tribes, these 
 tribes would have been reinvested with a privilege which in re- 
 ality they had so long lost, that its revival would have seemed an 
 odious no\ cjity, aiul the remaining population would probably not 
 have submitted to it.. If, in addition, we consider the political 
 excitement of the moment, — the restoration of one body of men 
 from exile, and the d<^parture of another body into exile, — the 
 outpouring of long-suppressed hatred, partly against these very 
 forms, by the corruption of which the despot had reigned, — we 
 shall see that prudence as well as patriotism dictated the adop- 
 tion of an enlarged scheme of government. Kleisthenes had 
 learned some wisdom during his long exile ; and as he probably 
 continued, for some time after the introduction of his new consti- 
 tution, to be the chit t" adviser of his countrymen, we may con- 
 sider their extraordinary success as a testimony to his prudence 
 and ekill not less than to their courage and unanimity. 
 
 Nor does it seem unreasonable to give him credit for a more 
 generous forward movement than what is implied in the Uteral 
 account of Herodotus. Instead of being forced against his will 
 to purchase popular support by i)ro[)Osing this new constitution, 
 Kleisthenes may have proposed it before, during the discussions 
 which immediately followed the retirement of Hippias ; so thai 
 t)ie rejection of it formed the ground of quarrel — and no other 
 ground is mentioned — between him and Isagoras. The lattei 
 doubtless found sufficient support, in the existing senate and pub- 
 lic assembly, to prevent it from being carried without an actual 
 appeal to the people, and his opposition to it is tiot difficult ta 
 
 I 
 
 
 ■nderstaud. For, necessary as the change had become, it wa* 
 not the less a shock to ancient Attic ideas. It radically altered 
 the very idea of a tribe, which now became an aggregation cl 
 demes, not of gentes, — of fellow-demots, not of fellow-gentiles ; 
 and it thus broke up those associations, religious, social, and po- 
 litical, between the whole and the parts of the old system, which 
 operated powerfully on the mind of every old-fashioned Athe- 
 i;ian. The patriciajis at Rome, who comjK)sed the gentes and 
 curiaj, — and the plebs, who liad no part in these corporations, — 
 formed for a long time two separate and opposing fractions in the 
 same city, each with its own separate organization. It was only 
 Ly slow degrees that the plebs gained ground, and the political 
 value of the patrician gens was long maintained alongside of and 
 apart from the plebeian tribe. So too in the Italian and Ger- 
 man cities of the Middle Ages, the patrician families refused to 
 f)art with their own separate j>olitical identity, when the guilds 
 grew up by the side of them ; even though forced to renounce a 
 portion of their power, they continued to be a separate fraternity, 
 and would not submit to be regimented anew, under an alter( 1 
 category and denomination, along with the traders who hau 
 grown into wealth and importance.' But the reform of Kleis- 
 thenes effected this change all at once, both as to the name and 
 as to the reality. In some cases, indeed, that which had been 
 the name of a gens was retained as the name of a demc, but 
 even then the old gentiles were ranked indiscriminately among 
 the remaining demots ; and the Athenian people, politically con- 
 sidered, thus became one homogeneous whole, distributed for con 
 renience into parts, numerical, local, and politically equal. It is, 
 however, to be remembered, that while the four Ionic tribes were 
 abolished, the gentes and phratries which composed them were 
 left untouched, and continued to subsist a> family and religious 
 associations, though carrying with them no political privilege. 
 
 The ten newly-created tribes, arranged in an established order 
 of precedence, were called, — Erechtheis, ^geis, Pandi5nia, 
 
 ' In illustration of what is here stated, see the account of the motliticar 
 tions of the constitution of Zurich, in Bliintschli, Staats und Rechts Gesch 
 ichte der Stadt Zurich, book iii, ch. 2, p. 322 ; also. KortUm, Entstehangi 
 Giwiihicbte der Freistadtischen Biindc im Mittelalter, ch. 5, pp. 74-75. 
 
 
132 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE:. 
 
 THE DEMES OF EACH TRIBE NOT CONTIGUOUS. 
 
 Idl 
 
 Leontis, Akamantis, CEneh, KekrCpis, Hippothoomis, .Eanti^ 
 Antiochis ; names borrowed chiefly from the respected heroes of 
 Attic If'prnd.' This number remained unaltered until the year 
 30.'> li.c. when it was increased to twelve by the addition of two 
 new tribes, Anti^n)ni!is and Demetrias, afterwards designated 
 anew by the name> of rtuleniais and Attalis. The mere names 
 of thej^e la-t two, borrowed from living kings, and not from legen- 
 iary heroes, betray tlie change from freedom to subservience at 
 Athens. Each tribe com{)rised a certain number of denies, — 
 cantons, parishes, or townships, — in Attica. But the totiU num- 
 ber of thex; denies i. not distinctly ascertained; for though we 
 know that, in the time of Polemo (the third century B.C.), it was 
 on.' hundred and se^'enty-four, we cannot be sure that it had 
 alvvavs remained the same ; and several critics construe the worda 
 of Herodotus to implv that Kleisthenes at first recognized exactly 
 on.' hundred demes, distributed in equal proportion among his 
 ten tribes.3 But such construction of the words is more than 
 doubtAil, while the fact itself is improbable ; partly because if 
 the change of number had been so considerable as the difference 
 letween one -hundred and one hundrcnl and seventy-four, some 
 positive evidence of it would probably be found, — partly lie- 
 cause Kleisthenes would, indeed, have a motive to render the 
 amount of citizen poi»ulation nearly equal, but no motive to ren- 
 der the number of demes eiiual, in each of the ten tribes. It i." 
 well known liowgreal is the force of local habits, and how unal- 
 terable are parochial or cantonal boundaries. In the absence^f 
 
 1 IW.xH-.im^r tho.e Ep.invra^ Heroes of the Ten Tribes, and the legendi 
 .ornuHted with them, see chapter viii of th. Er.ra^.of Aoyof. crroneouslj 
 aMrihed to Demosthenes. 
 
 • Herodot. v, 69. d -/ca ^i koI rnvc Shjuoif^ KarevF/ir h rac <pv?.ac. 
 
 Srluimann contend, that Kleisthenes established exactly one hundred 
 denu'< to tho ten tribes (l)e Comitiis Atheniensium, Praef. p. xv and p. 363, 
 an.1 A.itiquitat. Jur. Pnb. Grac . ch. xxii. p. 260), and K. F. Herma.iD 
 (IrVr'.uch .Km t.m.h. Staats Alt. ch. Ill) thinks that this is what He- 
 r,d<,tu. meaui to atKmi though he does not believe the fact to have reaUy 
 
 itOOd SO. ., . . u^.i .. 
 
 I incline as the least difficulty in the case, to construe (J«a with ^Adf 
 and not ^th dvuotK. as Wachsrauth (i, 1, p. 271) and Dieterich (D« 
 aisthene, a treatise cited by K F Hermann, but which 1 ha^e not M«»n} 
 construe it. 
 
 |m>of tc the contrary, therefore, we may reasonably suppose th« 
 lumber and circumscription of the demes, as found or modified 
 ij Kleisthenes, to have subsisted afterwards with little alteration, 
 at least until the increase in the number of the tribes. 
 
 There is another point, however, which is at once more certain, 
 ftnd more important to notice. The demes which Kleisthenes 
 ftgeigned to each tribe were in no case all adjacent to each other ; 
 a: id° therefore the tribe, as a whole, did not correspond with any 
 ccntinuous portion of the territory, nor could it have any peculiar 
 local interest, separate from the entirf community. Such system- 
 atic avoidance of the factions arising out of neighborhood will 
 appear to have been more especially necessary, when we recollect 
 that the quarrels of the Parali, the Diakrii, the Pediaki, during 
 the preceding century, had all been generated from local feud, 
 though doubtless artfully fomented by individual ambition. More- 
 over^it was only by this same precaution that the local predonii- 
 nanJe of the city, and the formation of a city-interest di>tinct from 
 that of the country, was obviated; which could hardly have 
 failed to arise had the city by itself constituted either one deme 
 or one tribe. Kleisthenes distributed the city (or found it already 
 distributed) into several demes, and those demes among several 
 tribes; while Peinrus and Phalerum, each constituting a sepa- 
 rate deme, were also assigned to different tribes ; so that there 
 were no local advantages either to bestow predominance, or to 
 create a struggle for predominance, of one tribe over the rest' 
 
 > The deme MelitS belonged to the tribe Kekropis ; KoUyius, to the tribe 
 JEg^is; KydathencEon, to the tribe Pandionis; Kerameis, or Keramdkus.to 
 the'' Akamantis ; Shimb6nidcR, to the Leontis. 
 
 All these five were demes within the city of Athens, and all belonged to 
 
 different tribes. ^ ^r^ . v ^^ 
 
 Petrceus belonged to the Hippothoontis ; Phalirum, to the iEantis ; Xyptti, 
 to the Kekropis ; ThymoetadcB, to the Hippothoontis. These four demes, 
 adjoining to each other, formed a sort of quadruple local union, for fef tivalf 
 and other purposes, among themselves ; though three of them belonged t« 
 
 different tribes. - , . , ,... 
 
 See the Ust of the Attic demes, with a careful statement of then- localitici 
 in so far as ascertained, in Professor Ross, Die Deraen von Attika, Halle, 
 X^tB. The distribution of the city-deraes, a*d of Peirseus and Phalftrum, 
 among different tribes, appears to me a clear proof of the intention of the 
 original distributors. It shows that thej wished from the Ir^ginning t« 
 
 d 
 
iU 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 £ach deme had its own local interests to watch over r but tha 
 tribe wan a mere aggregate of demes for political, mihtary, and 
 religious purposes, with no separate hopes or fears, apart from 
 the whole state. Each tribe had a chapel, sacred riles and I'estJ- 
 ▼als, and a common fund for such meetings, in honor of its eponj- 
 nauus hero, administered by members of its own choice ;" and tho 
 statues of all the ten eponymous heroes, fraternal patrons of the 
 democracy, were planted in the most conspicuous part of the agora 
 of Athens. In the future working of the Athenian government, 
 we shall trace no symptom of disquieting local factions, — a capi* 
 tal amendment, compared with the disputes of the preceding 
 century, and traceable, in part, to the absence of border-relations 
 between demes of the same tribe. 
 
 The deme now became the primitive constituent element of the 
 commonwealth, both as to persons and as to property. It had 
 its own demarch, its register of enrolled citizens, its collective 
 property, its public meetings and religious ceremonies, its taxe^ 
 levied and administered by itself. The register of qualified citi 
 zens- was kept by the demarch, and the inscription of new citizen: 
 took place at the assembly of the demots, whose legitimate sons 
 were enrolled on attjiining the age of eighteen, and their adopted 
 sons at any time when presented and sworn to by the adopting 
 citizen. The citizenship could only be granted by a public vote 
 of the people, but wealthy non-freeraen were enabled sometimes 
 to evade this law and purchase admission upon the register of 
 some poor deme, probably by means of a fictitious adoption. At 
 
 make the demes cotistitutiu;.' each tri >e discontinuous, and that they desired 
 to prevent I>oth tho jrrowtli of sepa\ate tribe-interests and ascendency of 
 one tribe over the rest. It contradicts the belief of those who suppose that 
 the tribe was at first coinjjosed of continuous demes, and that the breach 
 of continuity arose from subsequent changes. 
 
 Of course there were many cases in which adjoining demes belonged 
 to the same tribe ; but not one of the ten tribes was made up altogether of 
 Adjoining demes. 
 
 ' See Bocckh, Cori). Inscri[)tt. Nos. 85, 128, 213, etc.: compare DemusChen. 
 eont. Theokrin. c. 4, p. 1326 K. 
 
 • We may remark that this register was called by a special name, the 
 XiCxiarehic register; while the primitive register of phrators and gentiles 
 aJways retained, even in the time of the orators, its original name of thi 
 common register — Harpokration, v. Koivdv ypaftuarelov kqx XtiUopxikov. 
 
 SOLON & i.UJ<STlTUTION MODIFIED. 
 
 136 
 
 tke meetings of the demots, the register was called over, aiid it 
 eometimes happened that some names were expunged, — in which 
 case the party thus disfranchised had an appeal to the populai 
 judicature.1 So great was the local administrative power, how 
 ever, of these demes, that they are described as the substitute, 
 under the Kleisthenean system, for the naukraries under the So- 
 Ionian and ante-Solonian. The trittyes and naukraries, thcJgb 
 nominaUy preserved, and the latter (as some ailirm) augmented 
 in number from Ibrty-eight to fifty, appear henceforward as of 
 little public importance. 
 
 Kleisthenes preserved, but at the same time modified and ex- 
 panded, all the main features of Solon's political constitution ; the 
 public assembly, or ekklesia, — the preconsidering senate, com- 
 posed of members from all the tribes, — and the habit of annual 
 election, as well as annual responsibility of magistrates, by and to 
 the ekklesia. The full value must now have been felt of pos- 
 ft:jssing such preexisting institutions to build upon, at a moment 
 of perplexity and dissension. But the Kleisthenean ekklesia ac- 
 quired new strength, and almost a new character, from the great 
 increase of the number of citizens qualified to attend it ; while the 
 annually-changed senate, instead of being composed of four hun- 
 dred members taken in equal proportion from each of the old four 
 tribes, was enlarged to five hundred, taken equally from each of 
 the new ten tribes. It now comes before us, under the name of 
 Senate of Five Hundred, as an active and indispensable body 
 throughout the whole Athenian democracy : and the practice now 
 seems to have begun (though the i)eriod of commencement cannot 
 be decisively proved), of determining the names of the senators by 
 lot. Both the senate thus constituted, and the public assembly, 
 were far more popular and vigorous than they had been under 
 the original arrangement of Solon. 
 
 The new constitution of the tribes, as it led to a change in 
 the annual senate, so it transformed, no less directly, the military 
 
 ' See Schomann, Antiq. Jur. P. Graec. ch. xxiv. The oration of Demos- 
 thenes against Eubulides is instructive about these proceedings of *>« 
 assembled demots : compare Harpokration, v, Aiaxlfii<pi(xic, and Meier, D« 
 Bonis Damnatonim, ch. xii, p. 78, etc. 
 
 •Aristot. Fragment, de Republ., ed. Neumann, — 'Ai^t/v. iroXir. Fr. 40 
 ^ 88} Schol. ad Aristhophan. Ran. 37 ; Harpokration, v, Arjuapxof — Nm 
 ftpOMKa ; Photius, v, NavKpapia. 
 
 ^' 
 
1S6 
 
 jnSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 arrangements of the state, both as to soldiers and as to officer? 
 The citizens called upon to ser%'e in arms were now marshalled 
 according to tribes, — each tribe having its own taxiarchs as offi- 
 cers for the hoplites, and its own phylarch at the liead of the 
 horsemen. Moreover, there were now created for the first time 
 ten strategi, or generals, one from eaeh tri})e ; and two hipparchs, 
 for the supreme command of the horsemen. Under the prior 
 Athenian constitution it ap|)ears tiiat the com?nand of the military 
 force had been vested in the third archon, or polemarch, no stra- 
 tegi then existing; and aven after the latter had been created, under 
 the Kleisthenean constitution, the pclemarch still retained a joint 
 right of command along with them, — as we are told at the battle 
 of Marathon, where Kallimachus the polemarch not only enjoyed 
 an equal vote in the council of war along with tlie ten strategi, 
 but even occupied the post of honor on the riirht wingJ The 
 ten generals, annually changed, are thus (like the ten tribes) a 
 fruit of the Kleisthenean constitution, which was at the same time 
 powerfully strengthened and jjrotected by sueli remodelling of the 
 military force. The functions of the generals becoming more 
 extensive as the democracy advanced, they seem to have acquired 
 gradually not merely the direction of military and naval affairs, 
 
 but also that of the foreign relations of the city generally, 
 
 while the nine archons, including the polemarch. were bv deo-ree-' 
 lowered down from that full executive and judicial conipetenct* 
 which they had once enjoyed, to the simple ministry of police, 
 and preparatory justice. Encroaclied upon by the strategi on om 
 side, they were also restricted in ethciency by the rise of the pop- 
 ular dikasteries or numerous jury-courts, on the other. We may 
 be very sure that these popular dikasteries had not been permit- 
 ted to meet or to act under the despotism of the Peisistratids, and 
 that the judicial business of the city must then have been con- 
 ducted partly by the Senate of Areopagus, partly by the archons ; 
 perhaps with a nominal responsibility of the latter at the end of 
 their year of office to an acquiescent ekklesia. And if we even 
 assume it to be true, as some writers contend, that the habit of 
 direct popular judicature, over and above this annual trial of re- 
 eponsibility, had been pao-tially introduced by Solon, it raust hava 
 
 ' Herod*, t. vi^ 109-111 
 
 FINANCE. -SENATE OF FIVE TdUNDRED. 
 
 137 
 
 been discontinued during the. long coercion exercised by the super* 
 vening dynasty. But the outburst of popular spirit, which lent 
 force to Kleisthenes, doubtless carried the people into direct action 
 as jurors in the aggregate Ileliaea, not less than as voters in the 
 ekklesia, — and the change »vas thus begun which contributed to 
 degrade the archons from their primitive character as judges, into 
 the LDwer function of preliminary examiners and presidents of a 
 jory. Such convocation of numerous juries, beginning first with 
 the aggregate body of sworn citizens above thirty years of age, 
 and subsequently dividing them into separate bodies or pannels, 
 for trying particular causes, became gradually more frequent and 
 more systematized : until at length, in the time of Perikles, it 
 was made to carry a small pay, and stood out as one of the most 
 prominent features of Athenian life. We cannot particularize 
 the different steps whereby such final development was attained, 
 and the judicial competence of the archon cut down to the mere 
 power of inflicting a small fine ; but the first steps of it are 
 Ibund in the revolution of Kleisthenes, and it seems to have been 
 consummated by the reforms of Perikles. Of the function exer- 
 cised by the nine archons as well as by many other magistrates 
 and official persons at Athens, in convoking a dikastery, or jury- 
 court, bringing on causes for trial, — and presiding over the trial, 
 — a function constituting one of the marks of superior magistracy, 
 and called the Hegemony, or presidency of a dikastery, — I shall 
 ipeak more at length hereafter. At present, I wish merely to bring 
 to view the increased and increasing sphere of action on which the 
 people entered at the memorable turn of afi'airs now before us. 
 
 The financial afiairs of the city underwent at this epoch as 
 complete a change as the military : in fact, the appointment of 
 magistrates and officers by tens, one from each tribe, seems to 
 have become the ordinary practice. A board of ten, called 
 Apodektai, were invested with the supreme management of the 
 ex( hequer, dealing with the contractors as to those portions of 
 the revenue which were farmed, receiving all the taxes from the 
 collectors, and disbursing them under competent authority. The 
 first nomination of this board is expressly ascribed to Kleisthe- 
 nes,' as a substitute for certain persons called Kolakretae, whc 
 
 * UarpokratioQ, v, ^AnodtKTai. 
 
138 
 
 HISrORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 had performed the same function before, and who were now 
 retained only for sulK)rdinate ser\'iees. The duties of the apo- 
 dektse were afterwards limited to receiving the public income, 
 and paying it over to the ten treasurers of the goddess Athene, 
 by whom it was kept in the inner chamber of Uic Parthenon, 
 and disbursed as needed ; but this more comjilicated arrangement 
 cannot be referred to Kleisthenes. From his lime forward too, 
 the Senate of Five Hundred steps far beyond its original duty 
 of preparing matters, for the discussion of the ekklesia : it em- 
 braces, besides, a large circle of administrative and general 
 Fuperintendence, which hardly admits of any definition. Its 
 sittings become consiant, with the exception of special holidays, 
 and the year is distributed into ten portions called Prytanies, — 
 the fifty senators of each tril>e taking by turns tlic duty of con- 
 stant attendance during one prytany, and receiving during that 
 time the title of The Prytanes : the order of precedence among 
 the tribes in these duties was annually determined by lot. In 
 the ordinary Attic year of twelve lunar months, or three hun- 
 dred and fifty-four days, six of the prytanies contained thirty-five 
 days, four of them contained thirty->ix : in the intercalated years 
 of thirteen months, the mmiber of days was tlnrty-eight and 
 thirty-nine respectively. Moreover, a farther subdivision of the 
 prytany into five periods of saxi^n days each, and of the fifty 
 tribe-senators into five bodies of ten each, was recognized : each 
 body of ten presided in the senate for one period of se\en days, 
 drawing lots every day among their number for a new cluiirman, 
 called Epistates, to v'hom during his day of office were confided 
 the keys of the acropolis and the treasury, together with the city 
 seal. The remaining senators, not belonging to the prytanizing 
 tribe, might of course attend if they chose ; but the attendance 
 of nine among them, one from each of the remaining nine tribes, 
 was imperatively necessary to constitute a valid meeting, and to 
 insure a constant representation of the collective people. 
 
 During those later times known to us through the great ora- 
 tors, the ekklesia, or formal assembly of the citizens, was con- 
 voked four times regulariy during each prytany, or oftener if 
 necessity required, — usually by the senate, though the strategi 
 had also the power of convoking it by their own authority. It 
 wa8 prt sided over \>y the prytanes, and questions were put to the 
 
 EKKLESIA, OR PUBLIC ASSEMBLY. 
 
 189 
 
 vote by their epistates, or chairman ; but the nine representativM 
 af the non-pry tanizing tribes were always present a^ a matter of 
 course, and seem, indeed, in the days of the orators, to have ac 
 quired to themselves the direction of it, together with the right 
 of putting questions for the vote,' — setting a^ide wholly or par- 
 tially the fifty prytanes. When we cairy our attention back, 
 however, to the state of the ekklesia, as first organized by Klei.v- 
 thenes (I have already remarked that expositors of the Athe- 
 nian constitution are too apt to neglect the distinction of timer, 
 and to suppose that what was the practice between 400-330 n.c 
 bad been iilvvays the practice), it will appear probable that he 
 provided one regular meeting in each prytany, and no njore ; 
 giving to the senate and the strategi power of convening spc( ial 
 meetings if needful, but establishing one ekklesia during each 
 prytany, or ten in the year, as a regular necessity of state. How 
 often the ancient ekklesia had been convoked during the interval 
 between Solon and Peisistratus, we cannot exactly say, — proba- 
 bly but seldom during the year. But under the Peisistratids, its 
 convocation liad dwindled down into an inoperative formality; 
 and the reestablishment of it by Kleisthenes, not merely with plen- 
 ary determining powers, but also under full notice and prepara- 
 tion of matters beforehand, together with the best securities foi 
 orderly procedure, was in itself a revolution impressive to the 
 mind of every Athenian citizen. To render the ekklesia effi 
 cient, it was indispensable that its meetings should be both fre 
 quent and free. Men thus became trained to the duty both of 
 speakers and hearers, and each man, while he felt that he exer- 
 cised his share of influence on the decision, identified his own 
 safety and happiness with the vote of the majority, and be<am« 
 familiarized with the notion of a sovereign authority whicli he 
 neither could nor ought to resist. This is an idea new to the 
 Athenian bosom ; and with it came the feelings sanctifying free 
 speech and equal law, — words which no Athenian citizen ever 
 afterwards heard unmoved : tjgether with that sentiment of tba 
 entire commonwealth as one and ijidivisible, which always over- 
 
 ' See the valuable treatise of Schcimann, De Comitiis, passim : ilso hij 
 iLntiq. Jur. Publ. Gr. eh. xxxi ; Harpokration, v, Kvpia 'E)c«Ar/(Tta ; IVilaa;, 
 rill, 95. 
 
 W 
 
 ' \ 
 
 1 
 
 'r- 
 
140 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE PEOPLE A* filKASTS, OR HELLEA. 
 
 141 
 
 ruled, though it did not supplant, the local and cantonal special 
 ties. It i3 not too much to say that these patriotic and eniobling 
 impulses were a new product in the Athenian mind, to which 
 nothing analogous occurs even in the time of Solon. Tliey were 
 kindled in pait doubtless by the strong reaction against the Pel 
 Bistratids, but still more by the fact that the opposing leader, 
 Kleisthenes, turned that transitory feeling to the best }>ossible 
 account, and gave to it a vigorous perpetuity, as well as a well- 
 defined j)Ositive object, by the popular elements conspicuous in 
 his constitution. His name makes less figure in history than we 
 should expect, because he passed for the mere renovator of So. 
 Ion's scheme of government after it had been overthrown by 
 Peisistratus. Probably he himself professed this object, since it 
 would facilitate the success of his [)ropositions : and if we con- 
 line ourselves to the letter of the ca>o, the fact is in a great 
 nicasiir<' true, sincf' th<' annual senate ami the ekklesia are both 
 Solonian, — hut botli of thciii under his reform were clothed in 
 totally new circumstances, and swt-llt d into gigantic proportions 
 How vigorous was the burst of Athenian enthusiasm, altering 
 instantaneously the |)osition of Athens among the powers of 
 Greece, we sliall hear presently from the lips of Herodotus, and 
 shall find still more une(]ui vocally marked in the facts of \m 
 history. 
 
 But it was not only the |>eople formally installed in their 
 ekkle-ia, who received from Kleisthenes the real attributes ol 
 sovereignty, — it wa.- by him also that the people were first called 
 into direct action as dikasts, or jurors. I have already re- 
 marke<l, that this custom may be said, in a certain limited senses 
 to have l>egun in the time of Solon, since that lawgiver invested 
 the popular asseml)ly with the power of pronouncing the judg- 
 ment of accountability upon the archons after their year of oflice. 
 Here, again, the building, afterwards so spacious and stately, wm 
 erected on a Solonian foundation, though it was not itself Solcx 
 nian. That the popular dikasteries, in the elaborate form in 
 which they existed from Perikles downward, were introduced all 
 at once by Kleistheiaes, it is impossible to believe ; yet the stepi 
 by which they were gradually wrought out are not distinctly dia* 
 ooverable. It would rather seem, that at first only the aggregate 
 body of citizens 9bo\e thirty years of age exercised judicid 
 
 hinctions, being specially convoked and sworn to try persons ao 
 cused of public crimes, and when so employed bearing the name 
 of the helinea, or heliasts ; private offences and disputes betweei 
 man and man being still determined by individual magistrates in 
 the city, and a considerable judicial power still residing in the 
 Senate of Areopagus. There is reason to believe that this wai 
 the state of things established by Kleisthenes, and which after- 
 wards came to be altered by the greater extent of judicial duty 
 gradually accruing to the heliasts, so that it was necessary to 
 subdivide the collective helia?a. According to the subdivision, 
 as practised in the times best known, six thousand citizens above 
 thirty years of age were annually selected by lot out of the whole 
 number, six hundred from each of the ten tribes : five thousand 
 of these citizens were arranged in ten pannels or decuries of five 
 hundred each, the remaining one thousand being reserved to fill 
 up vacancies in case of death or absence among the former. 
 The whole six thousand took a prescribed oath, couched in very 
 striking words, and every man received a ticket inscribed with 
 his own name as well as with a letter designating his decury. 
 When there were causes or crimes ripe for trial, the thesmothets, 
 cr six inferior archons, determined by lot, first, which decuries 
 should sit, according to the number wanted, — next, in which 
 court, or under the presidency of what magistrate, the decury B 
 or E should sit, so that it could not be known beforehand in what 
 cause each would be judge. In the number of persons who ac- 
 tually attended and sat, however, there seems to have been 
 much variety, and sometimes two decuries sat together.' The 
 arrangement here described, we must recollect, is given to us as 
 belonging to those times when the dikasts received a regular 
 pay, after every day's sitting ; and it can hardly have long con- 
 
 ' See in particular on this subject the treatise of Schomann, De Sorti- 
 tione Judicura (Gripswald, 1820), and the work of the same author, Antiq. 
 Jur. Publ. Graec. ch. 49-55, p. 264, se/jq. ; also HefFter, Die Athenaischo 
 Gterichtsverfassung, part ii, ch. 2, p. 51, seqq. ; Meier und Schomann, Der At- 
 tische Prozess, pp. 127-135. 
 
 The views of Schomann respecting the sortition of the Athenian juron 
 have been bitterly attacked, but in no way refuted, by F. V. Fritzscbe (Dt 
 Bortitione Judicum apud Athenienses Commentatio, Leipsic, 1835). 
 
 Two or three of these dikastic tickets, marking mo luuue and the dsat 
 
 k 
 
IT I 
 
 142 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ADMISSIBILITY TO OFFICE. -THE LOT. 
 
 149 
 
 I 
 
 tinued without Uiat condition, which was not realized before the 
 time of Perikl^s. Each of these decurics sitting in judicature 
 was called 7%e Iflfrff, — a name which belongs properly to th*? 
 collfMti\p assembly of tiie people; this collective as-;(>mbly bav- 
 in" been itself the original judicature. I conceive that tlie prac 
 tice of distributing this collective assembly, or heliira, into sec- 
 tions of jurors for judicial duty, may have begun under one form 
 or another soon after the reform of Kleisthen«^s, sinee the dirci't 
 interference of the peo[)le in public affairs tended more and more 
 to increase . But it 'ould oidy have been matured by deirr* ♦ > 
 into that constant and systematic service which the pay of I'eri- 
 kU'.^ ealled fortli at last in completeness. T^ixler the lan-!n(>n- 
 tioned system the judicial ct>nipelence of the arohons wa^ aimul- 
 led, and the third archon, or polemarch. withdrawn from all 
 military functions. Still, this had not been y«t done at the' time 
 of the battle of Marathon, in which Kallimnchns tlie polcmnrch 
 not only commanded along with the stmt gi, but enjoyed a se;t 
 of preeminence over thera : nor had it been done during the } ear 
 after the battle of Marathon, in which Aristeides was archoii, — 
 fur the magisterial decisions of Aristeides formed one of the prln- 
 fipal foundations of liis honoral)le surname, the Just.' 
 
 With this question, as to the comparative extent of judicial 
 power vested by Kleisthenes in the popular dikastery and the 
 archons, are in reality connected two others in Athenian consti- 
 tutional law ; relating, first, to the admissibility of all citizens 
 for the post of archon, — next, to the choosing of archons by lot. 
 It is well known that, in the time of Perikles, the archons, and 
 
 of the citizen, and the letter of the decury to which duriner that particulai 
 year he beIoii};«'d, have been n^eentl y dug up v^&r Athens : — 
 A. Aiodupc^ E. ^eiviac 
 
 (Boeckh, Corp. Inscrip. Nos. 207-208 ) 
 Pritzsehe (p. 73) considers tliese to be tickets of senators, not of dikasts 
 
 contrary to all probability. 
 For the Heliastic oath, and its remarkable particulars, see Bemosthen 
 
 cont. Timokrat. p. 746. See also Aristophanes, Plutus, 277 (with the val 
 
 uable Scholia, though from different hands and not all of equal correctneat 
 
 «nd 972 -, Ekklesiazusre, 678, se^jq. 
 
 * Pluta'ch, iVrist. 7 ; Herodot. vi, 10^1 11. 
 
 various other individual functionaries, had come to be chosen bj 
 lot, — moreover, all citizens were legally admissible, and might 
 give in their names to be drawn for by lot, subject to what wajs 
 called the dokimasy, or legal examination into their status of 
 citizen, and into vai'ious moral and religious qualifications, be- 
 foi 3 they took olfice ; while at the same time the function of the 
 archon had become nothing higher than preliminary examina- 
 tion of parties and witnesses for the dikastery, and presidence 
 over it when afterwards assembled, together with the power of 
 imposing by authority a fine of small amount upon inferior 
 offenders. 
 
 Now all these three political arrangements hang essentially 
 together. The great value of the lot, according to Grecian 
 democratical ideas, was that it equalized the chance of office 
 between rich and poor. But so long as the poor citizens were 
 legally inadmissible, choice by lot could have no recommenda- 
 tion either to the rich or to the poor ; in fact, it woidd be less 
 democratical than election by the general mass of citizens, be- 
 cause the poor citizen would under the latter system enjoy an 
 important right of interference by means of his suffrage, though 
 he could not be elected himself i Again, choice by lot could 
 
 ^ Aristotle puts these two together ; election of magistrates by the mass 
 of the citizens, hut only out of persons possessing a high pecuniary qualiti- 
 cation ; this he ranks as the least democratical democracy, if one may usr 
 the phrase (Politic, iii, 6-11), or a mean between democracy and oligarchy, 
 — tin apiOTo/cparm, or no?.iTeia, in his sense of the word (iv, 7, 3). He puts the 
 employment of the lot as a symptom of decisive atid extreme democracy, 
 such as would never tolerate a pecuniary qualification of eligibility. 
 
 So again Plato (Legg. iii, p. 692), after remarking that the legislator of 
 
 iparta first provided the senate, next the ephoir, as a bridle upon tht 
 
 kings, says of the ephors that they were "something nearly approachin^f to 
 
 iin authority emanating from the lot," — oiov tpdliov tveftalEv airy rvv rCn 
 
 'ipopuv (]vva/xiv^ i-yyi'C rijq K/.rjpuT^g ayayuv dvvafieu^. 
 
 Upon which passage there are some good remarks in Schomann's edition 
 if Plutarch's Lives of Agis and Kleomenes (Comment, ad Ag. c. 8, p. 119). 
 ii is to be recollected that the actual mode in which the Spartan ephon 
 irere chosen, as I have already stated in ny tirst volume, cannot be clearly 
 iliade out, and has been much debated by critics : — 
 
 " Mihi haec verba, quum illud quidem manifestum faciant, quod ctfam 
 fiiunde constat, sorte captos ephoros non esse, tum hoc alteram, quod Her- 
 wannus stafuit. creationfm sortitioni non absimilem fuisse, nequaquan 
 
144 
 
 HISTOBl Of OREKCh-. 
 
 POINTS OF CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY. 
 
 145 
 
 never under any circurasUinces be applied to those posts v^liere 
 special competence, and a certain measure of attributes pos- 
 sessed only by a few, could not be dispensed with without ob- 
 rious peril, — nor was it ever applied, throughout the whole 
 history of democrat ical Athens, to the strategi, or generals, who 
 were always elected by show of hands of the assembled citiz«ns. 
 Accordingly, we may regard it as certain that, at the time ^hen 
 the arehons first came to be chosen by lot, the superior and 
 resix)nsible duties once attached to that office had been, or were 
 in course of being, detached from it, and transferred either to 
 the popular dikasts or to the ten elected strategi : so that there 
 remained to these arehons only a routine of police and adminis- 
 tration, important indeed to the state, yet such as could be 
 executed by any citizen of average probity, diligence, and 
 capacity. At least there was no obvious absurdity in thinking 
 so ; and the dokimasy excluded from the office men of notori- 
 ously discreditable life, even after they might have drawn the 
 6ucces&ful lot. Perikles,» though chosen strat«^gus, year after 
 year successively, was never archon ; and it may even be 
 doubted whether n.en of first-rate talents and ambition often 
 gave in their names for the office. To those of smaller aspira- 
 tions 2 it was doubtless a source of importance, but it imposed 
 troublesome labor, gave no pay, and entailed a certain degree 
 of peril upon any archon who might have given offence to pow- 
 
 (tenionstrare videntur. Nimirara nihil aliud ni>i i>roi)e iiccedcre ephororum 
 magistratus ad eos dicitur, qui sortito capiantur. Sorfiti.<i autem magistrati- 
 bus hoc maxime propriitm est. nt promiscue — non ex genm\ censu, dignitate — a 
 qiidibei capi possint : .juamobrem quum ephori quoqne fere promiscue fierent 
 ex omni multitudine civium, poterat baud dubie majristratus eorum hyi>^ 
 T//f KXtjpuTr^c (^vvufieuc esse dici, etiamsi alpeTol essent — h. e. suffrairiis 
 creati. Et video Lachmannum quoque, p. 165, not. 1, de Platonis loco sim 
 lliter jndicare." 
 
 The employment of the lot. as Sehomann remarks, implies universal md- 
 r;i^sibilitr of all citizen; to office : though the converse does not hold good, 
 — the latter does not of necessity imply the former. Now. as we know that 
 universal admissibility did not become the law of Athens until after the 
 battle of P.-c«a, so we may conclude that the employment of the lot had 
 no place before that epoch, — i. e. had no place under the constitution ol 
 Kleisthenes. 
 
 ' Plutirch, Perikles, c »-16. 
 
 * Se« a pa.ssage about such characterR in Plato, Repubhc, v, p. 475 ft 
 
 erful men, when he came to pass through the trial of aooounta- 
 bility which followed immediately upon his year of office. There 
 was little to make tlie office acceptable either to very poor men, 
 or to very rich and ambitious men ; and between the middlin<» 
 persons who gave in their names, any one might be taken with- 
 out great practical mischief, always assuming the two guarantees 
 of the dokimasy before, and accountability after, office. This 
 was the conclusion — in my opinion a mistaken conclusion, and 
 6uch as would fmd no favor at present — to which the democrats 
 of Athens were conducted by their strenuous desire to equalize 
 the chances of office for rich and poor. But their sentiment 
 seems to have been satisfied by a partial enforcement of the lot 
 to the choice of some offices, — especially the arehons, as the 
 primitive chief magistrates of the state, — without applying it to 
 all, or to the most res])onsible and difficult. Nor would they 
 have applied it to the arehons, if it had been indispensably 
 necessary that these magistrates should retain their ori^-inal 
 very serious duty of judging disputes and condemning offenders. 
 
 I think, therefore, that these three points: 1. The opening 
 of the post of archon to all citizens indiscriminately ; 2. The 
 choice of arehons by lot; 3. The diminished range of the ar- 
 chon's dutie* and responsibilities, through the extension of those 
 belonging to the popular courts of justice on the one hand and to 
 the strategi on the other — are all connected together, and must 
 have been simultaneous, or nearly simultaneous, in the time of 
 introduction : the enactment of universal admissibility to office 
 certainly not coming after the other two, and probably coming a 
 little before them. 
 
 Now in regard to the eligibility of all Athenians indiscrimi- 
 nately to the office of archon, we find- a clear and positive testi- 
 mony as to the time when it was first introduced. Plutarch 
 tells us J that the oligarchical,*^ but high-principled Aristt ides, 
 was himself the proposer of this constitutional change, — shortly 
 after the battle of Plataea, with the consequent expulsion of the 
 Persians from Greece, and the return of the refugee Athenians 
 
 li 
 
 * Plutarch, Arist. 22- 
 
 * So at least the supporters of the constitution of Kleisthenes were called 
 by the contemporaries of Perikles. 
 
 VOL. TV. '^ llJoc 
 
146 
 
 ITTSTOIIY OF GREErE. 
 
 to their ruined city. Seldom lias it happened in the hi^toiy of 
 mankind, that rich and poor have been so cornpletcly equalized 
 as among the po[)uIation of Athens in that meniorablc expatria- 
 tion and heroic struggle. Nor are we at all surprised to h'-nr 
 that tlie mass of th«> citizens, coming back with freshly-kirdled 
 patriotism as well as with the cons'ionsnrss that their countr^F 
 liad only been recovered by the equal efVort- of all, would no 
 longer submit to be legally dis<pialifie<l from any office of -''Jte. 
 It was on this occasion that the constitution was first made really 
 ♦' common ** to all, and that the archons, strategi, and all func- 
 tionaries, first begar; to l)e chosen from all Athenians without 
 any difference of legal eligibility.' No mention is made of the 
 lot, in this important statement of Plutan-li, whicli a[)pears to 
 me every way worthy of credit, and which teaches us that, down 
 to the invasion of Xerxes, not only had the ('x<*lusive principle 
 of the Solonian law of (jualification coiitiTiucd in force (whereby 
 tl'.c first three clns-«'> on the census wen- alone admitted to all 
 individual otlices and the foiirth or Thetic clas^ excluded), but 
 also the archons had hitherto been elected by the citizens, — not 
 taken by lot. 
 
 Now for financial purposes, the quadruple census of Solon 
 was retained long after this period, even beyond the Peloj^on- 
 nesian war and the oligarchy of Thirty. But we thus learn tha^ 
 Kleisthenes in his constitution retained it for political purpose:, 
 also, in part at least : he recognized the exclusion of the great 
 mass of the citizens from all individual offices, — such as the 
 a-chon, the stratcgu-^, etc. In his time, probably, no complaints 
 were raised on the suhjtct. Hi> constitution gave to the collec- 
 tive bodies — senate, ekklesia, and h crura, or dikastcry — a de- 
 §rree of jiower and importance such as they had ne^cr before 
 known or imagined : and we may well suppose that the Athenian 
 people of that day had no objection even to the proclaimed sys- 
 tem and theory of being exclusively governed by men of wealth 
 and station as individual magistrates, -- es|>ecially since mai'y 
 of the newly-enfranchised citizens had been previously raeticfl 
 md slaves. Indeed, it is to be added that, even under the fuU 
 
 ' Platarch, Arist. uf wp. yp(i<l>et t^7]<^i<Tfia, koiv^v vlvat, r^v 7roA«m«*', kqi 
 
 AliMISSIBILITY LIMITED BY KLEISTHENES. 
 
 147 
 
 democracy of later Athens, though the people had then become 
 passionately attached to the theory of equal admissibility of all 
 citizens to office, yet, in practice, poor men seldom obtained 
 offices which were elected by the general vote, as will appear 
 more fully in the course of this history.' 
 
 The choice of the strategi remained ever afterwards upon the 
 footing on which Aristeides thus placed it. But the lot for the 
 choice of archon must have been introduced shortly after hia 
 proposition of universal eligibility, and in consequence too of the 
 same tide of democratical feeling, — introduced as a farther cor- 
 rective, because the poor citizen, though he had become eligible, 
 was nevertheless not elected. And at the same time, I imagine, 
 that elaborate distribution of the Helia?a, or aggregate body of 
 dikasts, or jurors, into separate pannels, or dikasteries, for the 
 decision of judicial matters, was first regularized. It was thia 
 change that stole away from the archons so important a })art of 
 their previous jurisdiction : it was this change that Periklea 
 more fully consummated by insuring pay to the dikasts. But 
 the present is not the time to enter into the modifications which 
 Athens underwent during the generation after the battle of 
 Platai'a. They have been here briefly noticed for the purpose of 
 reasoning back, in the absence of direct evidence, to Athens as 
 it stood in the generation before that memorable battle, after the 
 reform of Kleisthenes. His reform, though highly democratical, 
 
 * So in the Italian repubUcs of the twelfth and thirteenth century, the 
 Dohles long continued to possess the exclusive right of being elected to the 
 consulate and the great offices of state, even after those offices had come to 
 be elected by the people : the habitual misrule and oppression of the noblef 
 gradually put an end to this right, and even created in many towns a reso- 
 lution positively to exclude them. At Milan, towards the end of the 
 twelfth century, the twelve consuls, with the Podestat, possessed all the 
 powers of government: these consuls were nominated by one hundred 
 electors chosen by and among the people. Sisraondi observes : " Cepen- 
 dant le peuple imposa lui-meme h ces ^ecteurs, la regie fondamentale de 
 ohoisir tons les magistrats dans le corps de la nobleese. Ce n'^toit point 
 encore la possession des magistratures que Ton contestoit aux gentilshom- 
 mei : on demandoit seulement qu'ils fussent les mandataires imm^iats da 
 la nation. Mais plus d'une fois, en d^pit du droit incontestable des cito* 
 j^ens, les consuls regnant s'attribuferent I'^ection de leurs successenn. 
 ISiimondi, Histoire des R^publiques Italiennes, chap, xii, vol 11, p. 240.) 
 
14S 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 KLEISTHENES AND PERIKLES. 
 
 149 
 
 Itopp^ short of the mature democracy which prevailed from 
 Ferikles to Demo»theues, in three ways especially, among vari- 
 ous others ; and it is therefore sometimes considered by the 
 later writers as an aristocralical constitution : ^ 1. It still recoj;- 
 nized the archons as judges to a considerable extent, and the 
 third arcfcon, or polemarch, as joint military commander along 
 with the fitrateg). 2. It retained them as elected annually by 
 Uie body of citizens, not as chosen by lot.- 3. It still excluded 
 
 ' PlatarK«n, Kiiiioii, c. 13. t/jv ItI KAeiC'divovi eyelpeiv upiaTOKpariav 
 mifju^ivov : compare Plutarch, xVristcides, c. 2, and Isokrates, Areopagi- 
 ticus, Or. vii, p. 14.i, p. 192, dl. lick. 
 
 ' Herodotus speaks of Kallimacluis the Polemarch, at Marathon, a? 6 t<^ 
 itvafi(fj Xax(^ n.oAefxnf)xo^ (vi, llU). 
 
 1 cannot 6ut think that in this ca.sc he transfers to the year 490 B.C. the 
 practice ot his own time. The polemarch, at the time of the battle of 
 Marathon, was in a certain sense tlie first .-trute^^us ; and the strategi were 
 never taken by lot, l>ut always chosen by show of hands, even to the end of 
 th« democracy. It seems impossible to believe that the strategi were 
 elected, and that the polemarch, at the time when his functions were the 
 same as theirs, was ohosen by lot. 
 
 Herodotus seems to have conceived the choice of magistrates by lot as 
 l>einj5 of the essence of a democracy (Herodot. iii, 80). 
 
 Phitarch also (Perikles, c. 9) seems to have conceived the choice of 
 archons by lot as a very ancient institution of Athens: nevertheless, it 
 result* f^ora the first chapter of his life of Aristcides, — an obscure chapter, 
 in which conflicting authorities are mentioned without being well discrim- 
 inated, — that Aristcides was chosen <'rchon bi/ the peo/jle, — not drawn by 
 lot : an additional reason for believing this is, that he was archon in the 
 year following the battle of Marathon, at which he had been one of the ten 
 generals. Idomencws distinctly affirme<l this to be the fact. — oc KvafievTov, 
 flA/l' tTiOfiEvuv ^A'&rjvaiuv (Plutarch, Arist. c. 1). 
 
 Isokr»t€s also (Areopagit. Or. vii, p. 144, p. 195, ed. Bekker) conceived 
 the constitution of Kleisthenes as including all the three points noticed in 
 the text: 1. A high pecuniary qualirication of eligibility for individual 
 offices. 2. Election to these otfices I.y all the citizens, and accountability 
 to the same after office. 3. No emplojinent of the lot. — He even contends 
 that this election is more truly democratical than sortition ; since the latter 
 process might admit men attached to oligarchy, which would not happen 
 under the former, — e-retra Kai drifioTiKutripav ivofic^ov ravr^v ttjv Kariia- 
 raatv fj H)tf dia rov ^ayxuveiv yiyvoiiivv,v' kv fiev yup tq KATjputaEi rrjv rvx^/v 
 ^paSevaetv, Kal n-oA^a/ctf "kippea^ai, rdf «p^<if roi-f TTjr 6?.tyapxiac Inn^V' 
 ifovvrof, etc. This would be a good argument if there were no pecuniary 
 limalification for eligibility, — smh pecuniary qualification is a jjrovhioi 
 
 Vol. 4 E 
 
 the fourth class of the Solonian census from all individual office, 
 the archonship among the rest. The Solonian law of exclusion, 
 however, though retained in principle, was mitigated in practice 
 thus far, — that whereas Solon had rendered none but memberji 
 of the highest class on the census (the Pentakosiomedimni) 
 eligible to the archonship, Kleisthenes opened that dignity to 
 all the first three classes, shutting out only the fourth. That he 
 did this may be interred from the fact that Aristcides, assured!/ 
 not a rich man, became archon. 
 
 I am also inclined to believe that the Senate of Five Hundred, 
 as constituted by Kleisthenes, was taken, not by election, but by 
 lot, from the ten tribes, — and that every citizen became eligible 
 to it. Election for this purpose — that is, the privilege of 
 annually electing a batch of fifty senators, all at once, by each 
 tribe — would probably be thought more troublesome thaa 
 valuable ; nor do we hear of separate meetings of each tribe for 
 purposes of election. Moreover, the office of senator was a 
 collective, not an individual office ; the shock, therefore, to the 
 feelings of semi-democratized Athens, from the unpleasant idea 
 of a poor man sitting among the fifty prytanes, would be less 
 than if they conceived him as polemarch at the head of the 
 right wing of the army, or as an archon administering justice. 
 
 A farther difference between the constitution of Solon and that 
 of Kleisthenes is to be found in the position of the Senate of 
 Areopagus. Under the former, that senate had been the princi- 
 pal body in the state, and he had even enlarged its powers; 
 under the latter, it must have been treated at first as an enemy, 
 and kept down. For as it was composed only of all the |>ast 
 archons, and as, during the preceding thirty years, every archoa 
 had been a creature of the Peisistratids, the Areopagites collec- 
 tively must have been both hostile and odious to Kleisthenes and 
 his partisans, — perhaps a fraction of its members might even 
 retire into exile with Hippias. Its influence must have been 
 
 which he lavs down, but which he does not find it convenient to insist npon 
 emphatically. 
 
 I do not here advert to the ypa<p^ irapavofKjv^ the vofiotpv^anec, and th« 
 Bwom vofto-derai, — all of them institutions belonging to the time <jf Pert 
 kles at the eaiiiest \ not to that of Klcistheucti. 
 
 ( 
 
\ 
 
 150 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE OSTRACISM. 
 
 Idl 
 
 sensibly lesseniid by the change of party, until it came to be 
 pradually tilled by fresh arehons springing from the bosom of the 
 Kleisthenean eonstiiiition. But during this imjx)rtant iniervai. 
 the new-modelled Senate of Five Hundred, ai.^ the pO})ular 
 assembly, stepped into that ascendency which tliev ne\er after- 
 wards lost. From tliQ time of Kleisthenes forward, the Areopa- 
 gites cease to be the chief and prominent power in the state: 
 yet they are still cu isiderable ; and when the second fill of the 
 democratical tide took j»lace, after the ])attle of Platica, they 
 became the focus of that which was then considered as the i)arty 
 of oligarchical re>istance. I have already remarked that the 
 archons, during the i itermediate time (about 509-477 B.C.), were 
 all elected by the ekklesia, not chosen by lot, — and that the 
 fourth (or poorest ai d most numerous) ela.-s on the census were 
 by law then ineligible ; while election at Athens, even when 
 every citizen without exception was aii elector and eligible, had 
 a natural temhiu y to fall upon men of wealth and station. We 
 thus see how it happened that the past archons, when united in 
 the Senate of Areopagus, infused into that body the sympathies, 
 prejudices, and interests of the richer classes. It was this which 
 brought them into conflict with the more democratical ])ai-ty 
 headed by Perikles and Ephialtes, in times when portions of the 
 Kleisthenean constitution had come to be discredited as too much 
 imbued with oligarchy. 
 
 One other remarkable institution, distinctlv a-ciibed to Kleis- 
 thenes, yet remains to be noticed, — the Ostracism ; upon which 
 I have already made some remarks,' in touching ui)on the mem- 
 orable Solonian piorlamation against neutrality in a sedition. It 
 is hardly too much t > say that, without this protective process, 
 none of the other institutions would have reached maturity. 
 
 Hy the ostracism, a citizen was banished without special accu- 
 iation, trial, or defen«e, for a term of ten years, — subsequently 
 diminished to five. His ])roi»erty was not taken away, nor hi^ 
 reputation tainted ; so that the i)enalty consisted solely in the 
 banishment from his native city to some other Greek city. Aa 
 to reputation, the ostracism was a compliment rather than other 
 wise; 2 and so it was vividly felt to be, when, about ninety yeaw 
 
 * See al>ove, chup. xi, vol. iii, p. 145. 
 
 • Aristcitles Rhetor. OriU. xlvi. vol ii. v. 317, cd. Diudorf 
 
 gfler Kleisthenes, the conspiracy between Nikias and Alkibiadei 
 fixed it upon Ilyperbolus. The two former had both recom- 
 mended the taking of an ostracizing vote, each hoping to causo 
 the banishment of the other ; but before the day ai'rived, they 
 accommodated the difierence. To fire oW the safety-gun of the 
 republic against a person so httle dangerous as Hyperbolas, waa 
 denounced as the prostitution of a great political ceremony : " it 
 was not against such men as him (said the comic writer, I'lato),' 
 
 ' llatarch (Nikias, c. 11 ; Alkibiad. c. 13; Aristcid. c. 7) : Thucyd. viii, 
 7.3. Plato Comicus said, respecting Hyperbolas — 
 
 Ov yap ToiovTuv ovvek' baT^yax ijipf^ri. 
 
 1 heophrastus had stated that Pbaeax, and not Nikias, was the rival t>f 
 Alkibiades on this occasion, when Ilyperbolus was ostracized; but most 
 autliors, says Plutarch, represent Nikias as the person. It is curious that 
 there should be any difierence of statement about a fact so notorious, and 
 hi the l)e8t-known tinie of Atlieaian history. 
 
 Taylor thinks that the oration which now passes as that of Andokid^ 
 against Alkibiades, is really by Phaax, and was read by Plutarch as tlio 
 oration of Pha;ax in an actual contest of ostracism between Phj»ax, Nikias, 
 and Alkibiades. He is opposed by Ruhnken and Valckenaer (sec Sluiter's 
 preface to that oration, c. 1, and Ruhnken, Hist. Critic. Oratt. Gr«cor. p. 
 135). I cannot af,n-ee with either: I cannot think with him, that it is » 
 real oration of Phaiax ; nor with them, that it is a real oration in any gen- 
 uine cause of ostracism whatever. It appears to me to have l)een composed 
 after the ostracism had fallen into desuetude, and when the Athenians had 
 not only become somewhat ashamed of it, but had lost the familiar con- 
 ception of what it really was. For how otherwise can we explain the fact, 
 Ihat the author of that oration complains that he is af>out to be ostracized 
 without any secret voting, in which the very essence of the ostracism con- 
 sisted, and from whi<li its name was borrowed [ovre diafrjipLaafiEvuv KpinSdfjv, 
 f. 2) ? His oration is framed as if the audience whom he was addressing 
 were about to ostracize one out of the three, by show of hands. But th« 
 process of ostracizing included no meeting and haranguing, — nothing bat 
 simple deposit of the shells in a Ciw»k ; as may be seen by the description of 
 the special railing-in of the agora, and by the story (true or false) of th« 
 unlettered countiy-citizen coming into the city to give his vote, and asking 
 Aristeides, without even knowing his person, to write the name for him on 
 the shell (Plutarch, Aristeid. c. 7). There was, indeed, previous discnssitm 
 in the senate as well as in the ekklesia, whether a vote of ostracism shouJd 
 be entered upon at all ; but the author of the oration to which I alludo 
 does not address himself to that question ; he assumes that the vote if 
 ictcally about to be taken, and that one of the three — himself, Nikias, oi 
 Alkibiades — must be ostracized {c. 1 ). Now, doubtless, in practice, the d« 
 
 ( 
 
 <•] 
 
152 
 
 fflSTORY OF GuXECE. 
 
 that the o/ster-shell (or potsherd) was intended to be used 
 The process of ostracism was carried into effect by writing upon 
 a shell, or potsherd, the name of the person whom a citizen thought 
 it prudent for a time to banish ; which shell when deposited in 
 the proper vessel, counted for a vote towards the sentence. 
 
 I have already observed that all the governments of the 
 Grecian cities, when we compare them with that idea which a 
 modern reader is apt to conceive of the measure of force belong- 
 ing to a government, were essentially weak, the good as welj 
 as the bad, — the democratical, the oligarchical, and the des|X)tic 
 Tlie force in the hards of any government, to cope vvith cons[)ii'a- 
 tors or mutineer-, \v.is extremely small, with the single exception 
 of a despot surrounded by his mercenary troop ; so that no tolera- 
 bly sustained conspiracy or usuiper could be put down except by 
 the direct aid of the people in su|)[x>rt of the government ; which 
 amounted to a dissolution, for the time, of constitutional authority, 
 and was pregnant with reactionary consequences such as no man 
 could foresee. To prevent powerful men from attempting usur- 
 pation was, therefore, of the greatest j»ossible moment ; and a 
 despot or an oligarchy miglit exercise preventi\ e means at jjleas- 
 urej much sharper than the ostracism, such as the jt-.-a.-.-ination 
 of Kimon, mentioned in my last chai)ter, as directed by the Pei- 
 eistratids. At the very least, they might send away any one, 
 from whom they apprehended attack or danger, without incurring 
 .even so much as the imputation of se\ erity. But in a democ- 
 racy, where arbitrary action of the magistrate was the thing of 
 
 cisioB commonly lay between two formidable rivals ; but it was not publicly 
 or formally put so before the people: every citizen mi«,'bt write upon the 
 ihell such name as he chose. Farther, the open denunciation of the injus- 
 tice of ostracism as a system (c. 2), proves an age later than the banishment 
 of Hyperbolus. Moreover, the aathor having begun by remarking that he 
 •tands in contest with Nikias aa well as with Alkibiadds, says nothing more 
 About Nikias to the end of the speech. 
 
 ' See the discussion of the ostracism iu Aristot. I*olitic. iii, 8, where he 
 recognizes the problem »s one common to all governments. 
 
 Compare, also, a good Dissertation —J. A. Paradys, De Ostracismo 
 Atheniensium, Lugduni Batavor. 1793; K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch del 
 Oriechiflchen Staatsalterthiimer, ch, 130 ; and JSchomann, Antiq. Jar. Pufc 
 Gnec ch. xxxv. p. 233 
 
 THE OSTRACISM. 
 
 153 
 
 an others most dreaded, and where fixed laws, with trial and 
 defimce as preliminaries to punishment, were conceived by the 
 ordinary citis^.^tt as the guarantees of his personal security and 
 as the pride of his social condition, — the creation of such an 
 exceptional power presented serious difficulty. If we transport 
 ourselves to the times of Kleisthenes, immediately after the 
 expulsion of the Peisistratids, when the working of the demo- 
 cratical machinery was as yet untried, we shall find this difficulty 
 at its maximum ; but we shall also find the necessity of vesting 
 such a power somewhere absolutely imperative. For the great 
 Athenian nobles had yet to learn the lesson of respect for any 
 constitution ; their past history had exhibited continual strugglea 
 between the armed factions of Megakles, Lykurgus, and Peisis- 
 tratus, put down after a time by the superior force and alliances 
 of the latter. And though Kleisthenes, the son of Megakles, 
 might be firmly disposed to renounce the example of his father, 
 and to act as the faithful citizen of a fixed constitution, — he 
 would know but too well that the sons of his father's companions 
 and rivals would follow out ambitious purposes without any 
 regard to the limits imposed by law, if ever they acquired suffi- 
 cient partisans to present a fair prospect of success. Moreover, 
 when any two candidates hr power, with such reckless disposi- 
 tions, came into a bitter personal rivalry, the motives to each of 
 them, arising as well out of fear as out of ambition, to put down 
 his opponent at any cost to the constitution, might well become 
 irresistible, unless some impartial and discerning interference 
 could arrest the strife in time. " If the Athenians were wise 
 (Aristeides is reported to have said,' in the height and peril of 
 his parliamentary struggle with Themistokles), they would casi 
 both Themistokles and me into the barathrum." 2 And whoever 
 
 * Plutarch, Aristeid. c. 3. 
 
 « The barathrum was a deep pit, said to have had iron spikes at the bot- 
 tom, into which criminals condemned to death were sometimes ca«t. 
 Though probably an ancient Athenian punishment, it seems to have become 
 at the very least extremely rare, if not entu-ely disused, during the timet 
 of Athens historically known to us ; but the phrase continued in spceoh 
 after the practice had become obsolete. The iron spikes depend on tb« 
 evidence of the Schol. Aristophan. Plutus, 431, — a very doubtful aaduw 
 ity when we read the legend which he blends with his statement. 
 
 1* 
 
\0 
 
 154 
 
 inSTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE OSTRACISM 
 
 PRads the sad narrative o^ the Korkyraeaii sedition, in the third 
 book of Thucjdide., tt.^'ether with the reflections of the liiitorian 
 upon it,' will trace the gradual exasperation of these party feuds, 
 beginning even under denioeratical forms, until at length they 
 break down the haniers of public as well as of private morality. 
 Against this chance of hiternal assailants Klei^thenes had to 
 protect the demotiaticiil constitution, — first, by throwing impedi- 
 ments in their way and rendering it difficult fur them to procuie 
 the requisite support ; next, hy eliminating them before any vio- 
 h-nl projects wvn' ripe for execution. To do either the one or 
 the other, it was necessary to provide such a constitution as would 
 not only conciliate tlie good-will, but kindle the passionate attach- 
 ment, of the mtiss of citizens, insomuch that not even any consid- 
 erable minority should be deliberately inclined to alter it by force. 
 It was necessary to create in the multitude, and through them to 
 force upon the leading ambitious men, that rare and difficult sen- 
 timent which we may term a constitutional moralitv ; a para- 
 mount reverence for the forms of the constitution^ enforciiig 
 obedience to the authorities acting under and within those formes 
 yet combined with the habit of open speech, of action subject 
 only to definite legal control, and unrestrained censure of those 
 very authorities as to all their public acts, — cumbined too with 
 a perfect confidence in the bosom of every citizen, amidst the 
 bitterness of party contest, that the forms of the constitution will 
 be not less sacred in the eyes of his op|x>nents than in his own. 
 Tlds coexistence of freedom and self-imposed restraint,— of obedi- 
 ence to authority with uimie^isured censure of the persons exer- 
 cising if, — may be found in the aristocracy of England (since 
 •bout 1G8.S) jis well as m the democracy of the American United 
 States: and because we are familiar with it, we are apt to sup 
 poseit a natural sentiment; though there seem to be few senti 
 ments more <lif}icult to e-<tablish and diffuse among a community, 
 judging by the exfxrience of history. We may see how imper' 
 fectly it exists at this day in the Swiss cantons; and the many 
 violences of the first Fn^nch revolution illustrate, among various 
 Other lessons, the fatal effects arising from its absence, even 
 M^ng a people high in the scale of intelligence. Yet the dif- 
 
 » Thflcyd. iu, 70, 81. 82. 
 
 Ifti 
 
 fusion of such constitutional morality, not merely among the ma* 
 jority of any community, but throughout the whole, is the indis* 
 pcnsable condition of a govei'ument at once free and peaceable; 
 since even any powerful and obstinate minority may render the 
 working of free institutions impracticable, without being strong 
 enough to conquer ascendency for themselves. Nothing less 
 than unanimity, or so overwhelming a majority as to be tanta- 
 mount to unanimity, on the cardinal point of respecting constitu- 
 tional forms, even by those who do not wholly approve of them, 
 can render the excitement of political passion bloodless, and yet 
 expose all the authorities in the state to the full license of pacific 
 criticism. 
 
 At the epoch of Kleisthenes, which by a remarkable coinci 
 dence is the same as that of the regifuge at Rome, such constitu 
 tional morality, if it existed anywhere else, had certainly no 
 |)lace at Athens ; and the first creation of it in any particular 
 society must be esteemed an interesting historical fact. By the 
 •spirit of his reforms, — equal, popular, and comprehensive, far 
 l)eyond the previous experience of Athenians, — he secured the 
 heartv attachment of the bodv of citizens ; but from the first 
 generation of leading men. inider the nascent democracy, and 
 witli such precedents as they had to look back upon, no self-im 
 }X)sed limits to ambition could be expected : and the })roblem re- 
 quired was to eliminate beforehand any one about to transgress 
 these limits, so as to escape the necessity of juitting him down 
 afterwards, with all that bloodshed and reaction, in the midst of 
 which the free working of the constitution would be suspended at 
 least, if not irrevocably extinguished. To acquire such influ- 
 ence as would render him dangerous under democratical forms, a 
 man must stand in evidence before the j>ublic, so as to afford 
 some reasonable means of judging of his character and pur|x>ses , 
 and the security which Kleisthenes provided, was, to call in the 
 positive judgment of the citizens respecting his future promise 
 purely and simply, so that they might not remain too long neu- 
 ti*al between two formidable political rivals, — pursuant in a cer- 
 tam way to the Solonian proclamation against neutrality in a 
 sedition, as I have already remarked in a former chapter. He 
 mcorporated in the constitution itself the principle of privilcyium 
 (to employ the Roman phrase, which signifies, not a pecuL'ax 
 
156 
 
 i::sTORV OF grekce. 
 
 &vor gi-aiited to any one. but a jieculiar inconvenience imposed), 
 yet onlj under circumstances solemn and well deHned, with full 
 notice and discussion beforehand, and by the jiositive secret vot« 
 of a large proportion of the citizens. " No law shall be made 
 against any single citizen, without the same being made against 
 all Athenian citizens ; unless it shall so seem good to six ^'thou- 
 sand citizens voting secretly." i Such wa^ that general princi- 
 ple of the constitution, under which the ostracism was a partic- 
 ular case. Before the vote of ostracism could be taken, a case 
 was to be made out in the senate and the public assembly to jus- 
 tify it. In the sixth prytany of the year, these two bodies de- 
 bated and determined whether the state of the republic was men- 
 acing enough to call for such an exceptional measure/^ If they 
 decided in the affirmative, a day was named, the agoni was railed 
 round, with ten entrances left for the citizens of each tribe, and 
 ten separate casks or vessels for depositing the suffrages, which 
 consisted of a shell, oi- a potsherd, with the name of the person 
 written on it whom each citizen designed to banish. At the end 
 of the day, the numl)er of votes was summed u|), and if six 
 thousand votes were found to have been given against any one 
 person, that person was ostracized; if not, the ceremony ended 
 in nothing.3 Ten days were allowed to him for settling his af 
 
 • Andokides, De Mysteriis, p. 12, c. 13. Ur)6e vdfiov hrr' avdpl k^eivai 
 ^tivai, eav fif/ Tdv avrbv errl ttuoiv 'X^rivaioi^- ^iiv ju^ l^aKtaxi^ioic do^r,, 
 Kpviidf)v fTi<pi^ofi€voic. According to the usual looseness in dealing with thJ 
 name of Solon, this has been called a law of Solon (sec Petit. Leg. Att. p 
 188), though it certainly cinnot be older than Klei^thones. 
 
 "Privilegia ne irroganto," said the law of the Twelve Tables at Rome 
 (Cioero, Legg. iii. 4-19). 
 
 •Aristotle and Philochorus, ap. Photiura, App. p. 672 and 675, ed. 
 Porson. 
 
 It would rather appear hy that passage that the ostracism was never for 
 mally abrogated ; and that even in tiie later times, to which the descriptioi. 
 of Aristotle i-efers, the foma was still preserved of putting the question 
 whether the public safety called for an ostracizing vote, long after it hful 
 passed both out of use and out of mind. 
 
 » Philochorus, M< aupra ; Plutarch, Aristeid. c. 7 j Schol. ad Aristophnp 
 Eqnit. 851 ; PoUux, viii, 19. 
 
 There is a difference of Cipinion among the authorities, as well as among 
 the expositors, whether the mininr.um of six thousand applies to the votet 
 gjren in all, or to the vctes given against any one name. I embrace tht 
 
 PROCESS OF OSTRACISM 
 
 157 
 
 feirs, after which he was required to depart from Attica for tCL 
 years, but retained his property, and suffered no other penalty. 
 
 It was not the maxim at Athens to escape the errors of th« 
 people, by calling in the ditlerent errors, and the sinister interest 
 besides, of an extra-popular or jn-ivileged few ; nor was any 
 third course open, since the principles of representative govern- 
 ment were not understood, nor indeed conveniently applicable to 
 very small communities. Beyond the judgment of the people — 
 BO the Athenians felt — there was no appeal; and tlieir grand 
 Btudy was to surround the delivery of that judgmd.- with the 
 best securities for rectitude and the best preservatives against 
 haste, passion, or private corruption. Whatever neasure of 
 good government could not be obtained in that way, could not, 
 in-theh- opinion, be obtained at all. I shall illustrate the Athe- 
 nian proceedings on this head more fully when I come to speak 
 of the working of their mature democracy : meanwhile, in respect 
 to this grand °i)rotection of the nascent democracy, — the vote of 
 ostracism, — it will be found that the securities devised by Kleis- 
 thenes, for making the sentence effectual against the really dan- 
 gerous man, and against no one else, display not less foresight 
 than patriotism. The main object was, to render the voting an 
 expression of deliberate public feeling, as distinguished from 
 mere ftictious antipathy : the large minimum of votes required, 
 one-fourth of the entire citizen population, went far to insure 
 this effect, — the more so, since each vote, taken as it was in a 
 
 latter opinion, wliich is supported by Philochorus, Pollux, and the SchoL 
 on Aristophanes, though Plutarch countenances the former. Boeckh, in 
 his Public Economy of Athens, and Wachsmuth, (i, 1, p. 272) arc m favof 
 of Plutarch and the former opinion ; Paradys (Dissertat. De Ostr. p. 25), 
 Platner, and Hermann (see K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch der Gr. Staatsalt. eh. 
 130 not. 6) support the other, which appears to me the right one. 
 
 For the purpose, so unequivocally pronounced, of the general law deter- 
 mining the absolute minimum necessary for a jnivilefpiim, would by no 
 means be obtained, if the simple majority of votes, among six thousand 
 ▼oters in all, had been allowed to take effect. A person might then b€ 
 ostracized with a ver>' small uuml)er of votes against him, and withocJ 
 creating anv reasonal.le presumption that he was dangerous to the consti. 
 tution ; which was by no means either the purpose of Kleisthenes, or th« 
 well-unders:ood operation of the ostracism, so lor^ a.s it continued to be ■ 
 reality. 
 
168 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 «ecret mannei, counted unequivocally for the expression of i 
 genuint- and imh-pencfcnt sentiment, and could neither be coerced 
 nor bougia. Tlum again, Kleisthenes did not permit the i)roceM 
 01 o.tracizmg to be ,pened against any one citizen exclusively 
 It opened at all, every one without exception was exposed to 
 the sentence ; so that the friends of Themistokles could not 
 invoke It against Aristeides,' nor those of the latter against th« 
 former, without exposing their own leader to the same chance of 
 cxde. It was not likely to be invoked at all, therefore, until 
 exasperation had prc.cf.ded so far as to render both parties 
 insensible to this chance, - the precise index of that ^rowin« 
 iuternecve hostility, which the ostracism prevented from comin^ 
 to a head. Nor could it even then be ratified, unless a case was 
 shown to convince th. more neutral portion of tlie senate and 
 the ekklesia: moreover, after all, the ekklesia did not it^^elf 
 ostracize, but a future day was named, and the whole body of 
 the citizens were solemnly invited to vote. It was in thi. way 
 that security was takeii not only for making the ostracism effect- 
 ual in protecting the constitution, but to hinder it from bein- 
 employed for any other purpose. And we must recollect tliat il 
 exercised its tutelary influence, not merely on those occasions 
 when It was actually employed, but by the mere knowledge that 
 it might be employed, and by the restraining eflect whi °h that 
 knowledge produced on the conduct of the great men. Ac^ain, 
 the ostracism, though essentially of an exceptional nature was 
 yet an exception sanctiiied and limited by the constitution itself- 
 so that the citizen, in giving his ostracizing vote, did not in any 
 way depart from the constitution or lose his reverence for it. 
 The issue placed before him - ^. Is there any man whom you 
 think vitally dangerous to the state? if so, whom ? " _ thou-h 
 vague, was yet raise<l directly an.l legally. Had there been no 
 Ostracism, It might probably have been raised both indirectly 
 •nd Illegally on the occasion of some special imputed crime of a 
 ^ut^pectedj^o^^ ^ ^^^^^ of justice, 
 
 J The practical working <^^^^J»^^^^i^^^^i^^^ 
 ^contending leaders, accc.npanicd with chance on.anish.n^ttt r 
 
 ^v (Plutarch, PeriklC, c. U ; compar. i>lut. rch, Xikias, c. IX) 
 
 hECURITIES AGAINST ABUSE OF OSTRACISM. 
 
 159 
 
 — a perversion, involving all the mischief of the ostracism, 
 without itr^ protective benefits. 
 
 Care was taken to divest the ostracism of all painful conse- 
 quence except what was inseparable from exile ; and this is not 
 one of the least proofs of the wisdom with which it was devised. 
 Most certainly, it never deprived the public of candidates foi 
 political influence: and when we consider the small amount tf 
 individual evil which it inflicted, — evil too diminished, in the 
 cases of Kimon and Aristeides, by a reactionary sentiment 
 which augmented their subsequent popularity after return,— 
 two remarks will be quite sufficient to offer in the way of justifi- 
 cation. First, it completely produced its intended effect ; for 
 the democracy grew up from infancy to manhood witliout a 
 single attempt to overthrow it by force,' — a result, upon which 
 no "reflecting contemporary of Kleisthenes could have ventured 
 to calculate". Next, through such tranquil working of the 
 democratical forms, a constitutional morality quite sufficiently 
 complete was produced among the leading Athenians, to enable 
 the people after a certain time to dispense with that exceptional 
 security which the ostracism offered.^ To the nascent democ- 
 
 » It is not necessar>' in this -emark to take notice, either of the oligarchy 
 of Four Hundred, or 'that of Thirty, called the Thirty Tyrants, estahlishcd 
 during the closing years of the Peloi)onnesian war, and after the ostraci.im 
 had been discontinued. Neither of these chan-es were hrouo:ht about by 
 the excessive ascendency of any one or few men : both of them j?rew c ut 
 of the embarrassments and dangers of Athens in the latter period of her 
 
 great foreign war. 
 
 « Aristotle (Polit. iii, 8, 6) seems to recognize the political necessity of 
 the ostracism, as applied even to obvious superiority of wealth, connection, 
 etc. (which he distinguishes pointedly from superiority of merit and char- 
 acter), and upon principles of symmetry- only, even apart from danf^erooi 
 desijrns on the part of the superior mind. No painter, he observes, will 
 permit a foot, in his picture of a man, to be of disproportionate size with 
 the eutire bodv, though separately taken it may be finely painted ; nor wiU 
 the chorus-master allow any one voice, however beautiful, to predominate 
 beyond a certain proportion over the rest. 
 
 His final conclusion is, however, that the legislator ought, if possible, so 
 to construct his constitution, as to have no need of such exceptional 
 remedy ; but, if this cannot be done, then the second-best step is to appljp 
 the ostracism, ('ompare also v, 2, 5. 
 
 The last centuiy of the free Athenian democracy realized the fimt ol 
 
 these alternatives. 
 
 I 
 
i ' 
 
 100 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECB. 
 
 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF OSTRACISM. 
 
 161 
 
 ney, it was absolutely indispensable ; to tbe growinc. yet mill 
 tant democracy, it was salutary ; but the full-grown "democracj 
 both could and did stand without it. The ostracism passed upon 
 Ilyperbolus, about ninety years after Kleisthenes, was the last 
 occasion of its employment. And even this can hardly be con- 
 sidered as a serious instance: it was a trick concerted between 
 two distinguished Athenians (Nikias and Alkibiadcs), to turn to 
 their own po'itical account a process already coming to be anti- 
 quated. Nor would such a mananivre have been possible if the 
 contemporary Athenian citizens had been penetrated with the 
 eame serious feeling of the value of ostracism as a safeguard of 
 democracy, as had been once entertained by their fathers and 
 grandfathers. Between Kleisthenes and Hyperbolus, we hear 
 ot about ten different persons as having been banished by ostra- 
 c.sra. l^irst of all, Hipparchus of the deme Cholargus, the son 
 ol Cliannus, a relative of the recently-expelled Peisistratid 
 despots ; ' then Aristeides, Themistokles, Kimon, and Thucy- 
 d.des son ot Meles.as. all of them renowned political leaders; 
 also Alkibiades and M.-akles (the paternal and maternal -rand- 
 fathers of the distinguished Alkibiades), and Kallias, belon-ina 
 to another eminent family at Athens;-^ lastlv, Damun, the pre*^ 
 ceptor ot Perikles in poetry and music, and eminent for his 
 acquisition, in philosophy.:* In this last case comes out the 
 vulgar side of hu,nanii:y, aristocratical as well as democrat i cal ; 
 for with both, the process of philosophy and the persons of 
 philosophers are wont to be alike unpopular. Even Kleisthenes 
 himselt is said to nav<j becFi ostracized under his own law, and 
 Xanthippus ; but both u{)on authority too weak to trust i JVIil- 
 tiades was not ostracized at all, but tried and punished for mis- 
 conduct in his command. 
 
 I should hardly h^vt, said so much about this memorable aiul 
 
 > Plutarch, Nikias, c. 1 1 : llarpokration, v. 'iKTrapxoc 
 Lysias cent. AlkiWad A. c. 11, p. 143 ; Harpokration, v. 'AXK.0,a6,c: 
 ^dokides com. Alkibiad. c. 11-12, pp. 129, 130: this last oration may 
 *fford eridence as to the facts mentioned in it, though I cannot imagine ft 
 to be eiUier genmne or belonging to the time to which it professes to refer 
 ■s has been observed in a previous note. 
 • Ratarch, Perikles, c. 4 ; Plutarch. Aristeid. c. 1. 
 ^lian, V. H. xiii, 24 ; HcrakleidOs, nepl no?ATuuv, c. 1 ed. KCtter 
 
 peculiar institution of Kleisthenes, if the erroneous accusatioM 
 against the Athenian democracy, — of envy, injustice, and ill- 
 treatment of their superior men, had not been greatly founded 
 upon it, and if such criticisms had not passed from ancient times 
 to modern with little examination. In monarchical governments, 
 a pretender to the throne, numbering a certain amount of sup- 
 porters, is, as a matter of course, excluded from the country. 
 The duke of Bordeaux cannot now reside in France, — nor 
 could Napoleon after 1815, — nor Charles Edward in England 
 durij g the last century. No man treats this as any extravagant 
 injustice, yet it is the parallel of the ostracism, — with a stronger 
 case in favor of the latter, inasmuch as the change from one 
 regal dynasty to another does not of necessity overthrow all th« 
 collateral institutions and securities of the country. Plutarct 
 has affirmed that the ostracism arose from the envy and jealousy 
 inherent in a democracy,' and not from justifiable fears, — an 
 observation often repeated, yet not the less demonstrably untrue. 
 Not merely because ostracism so worked as often to increase the 
 influence of that political leader whose rival it removed, — but 
 still more, because, if the fact had been as Plutarch says, this 
 institution would have continued as long as the democracy; 
 whereas it finished with the banishment of Hyperbolus, at a 
 period when the government was more decisively democratical 
 ihan it had been in the time of Kleisthenes. It was, in truth, a 
 product altogether of fear and insecurity,*^ on the part both of 
 the democracy and its best friends, — fear perfectly well- 
 grounded, and only appearing needless because the precau- 
 tions taken prevented attack. So soon as the diffusion of a 
 constitutional morality had placed the mass of the citizens 
 above all serious fear of an aggressive usurper the ostracism 
 was discontinued. And doubtless the feeling, that it might 
 safely be dispensed with, must have been strengthened by the 
 long ascendency of Perikles, — by the spectacle of the great* 
 
 ^ Plutarch, Themistokles, 22 ; Plutarch, Aristeides, 7, napafiv^la (p'^ovov 
 tal Kov(pi(7fi6g. See the same opinions repeated by Wachsmuth, Hellen* 
 Igche Alterthumskunde, ch. 48, vol. i, p. 272, and by Platner, Prozess und 
 Klagen bey den Attikem, vol. i, p. 386. 
 
 • Thucyd. viii, 73, diii duva/xewf Kal u^iufiaroi; ^63ov. 
 
 VOL. IV. \\<»> 
 
 t 
 
las 
 
 HLSTORY OF GREKCR 
 
 EBFEOr OF THE KLEISTHENEAN REVOLUTION. 
 
 IBS 
 
 fif' 'I 
 
 "jp^ 
 
 y 
 
 i». 
 
 •M sialeswun whom Athens ever produced, acting steadily vvithia 
 the limits of the constitution; as well as by the ill-succes* 
 o( his two opponents, Kimon and Thucydides, — aided by nu- 
 merous partisans and by the great comic writers, at a period w'- •. 
 comedy was a power in tlie sute such as it has never been 
 before or since, - in (heir attempts to get him ostracized. Thoy 
 »u«««led m fanning up the ordinary antipatliy of the citizens 
 towards rdiilosophers, so far as to procure the ostracism of his 
 triend and teacher Damon : but Perikles himself, to repeat th.3 
 c«m,da.ntot his bitter enemy, the comic poet Kra.inus,' " was 
 out of the reach of the oyster-shell." If Perikles was not con- 
 ceived to be dangerous to the constitution, none of his successor, 
 were at aU hkely to be so regarded. Damon and Hyperboht^' 
 were the two last persons ostra<:ized : both of them were case- 
 and the only cases, of an unequivocal abuse of the institution' 
 because, whatever the grounds of displeasure against them ma, 
 have been, it is impossible to conceive either of them as mena, 
 n.g to the state, _ whereas all the other known sufferers wer, 
 men of such position and power, that the six or eight thousand 
 cmzens who inscribed each name on the shell, or at least a larj;,. 
 proportion of them, may well have done so under the most con 
 scientious belief .hat they were guarding the constitution against 
 real danger Such a change, in the character of the persons 
 ostracized, plainly evinces that the ostracism had become dissev- 
 er. 1 from that genuine patriotic prudence which originally ren- 
 dered it both legitimate and popular. It had served for tw- 
 generations an inestimable tutelary pur,.ose, - it lived to b.. 
 twice dishonored, -and then passed, by universal acquiescence, 
 mto matter of history. 
 
 A process analogous to the ostracism subsisted at Ar«^o^ 9 at 
 Syracuse, and in some other Grecian democracies. Aristotle 
 ttates that it was abused for factious purposes : and at Syracuse, 
 
 ' Kratinus ap. Tlutiirch, Perikles, 13. 
 
 'O ff^ao/cfiiaAof Zev^ 661 TTpoatpxeraL 
 
 JlepitcXiTjc, Ti^tdeiov ^m tov Kpaviov 
 
 •E^wv, kiteid^ TovarpaKov rrapoixerai. 
 For the attacks of the corai*- writers u{«n Damon, see PluUrch, PM 
 
 ■Arir^tct Polit. iii 8,4 v 2. :> 
 
 irheie it was introduced after the expulsion of the Geloniaa 
 dynasty, Diodorus affirms that it was so unjustly and profusely ap- 
 plied, as to deter persons of wealth and station from taking any part 
 in public aflfiiirs ; for which reason it was speedily discontinued. 
 We have no particulars to enable us to appreciate this general 
 statement. But we cannot safely infer that because the ostracism 
 worked on the whole well at Athens, it must necessarily have 
 worked well in other states, — the more so, as we do not know 
 whether it was surrounded with the sf.me precautionary formalities, 
 nor whether it even required the same large minimum of votes to 
 make it effective. This latter guarantee, so valuable in regard to 
 an institution essentially easy to abuse, is not noticed by Diodo- 
 rus in his brief account of the Petalism, — so the process was 
 denominated at Syracuse.* 
 
 Such was the first Athenian democracy, engendered as well 
 by the reaction against Hippias and his dynasty Jis by the mem- 
 orable partnership, whether spontaneous or compulsory, between 
 Kleisthenes and the unfranchised multitude. It is to be distin- 
 gui.shed, both from the mitigated oligarchy established by Solon 
 before, and from the full-grown and symmetrical democracy which 
 prevailed afterwards from the beginning of the Peloponnesian 
 war towards the close of the career of Perikles. It was, indeed, a 
 striking revolution, impressed u[)on the citizen not less by the 
 sentiments to which it appealed than by the visible change which 
 it made in political and social life. He saw himself marshalled 
 in the ranks of hoplites, alongside of new companions in arms, — 
 he was enrolled in a new register, and his property in a new 
 schedule, in his deme and by his demarch, an officer before 
 unknown, — he found the year distributed afresh, for all legal 
 purposes, into ten parts bearing the name of prytanies, each 
 miirked by a solemn and free-spoken ekklesiii, at which he had a 
 right to be present, — that ekklesia was convoked and presided 
 by senators called prytanes, members of a senate novel both as 
 to number and distribution, — his political duties were now per- 
 formed as member of a tribe, designated by a name not before 
 
 ' Diodor. xi, 55-87. This author describes very imperfectly the Atheciftii 
 ostracism, transferring to it apparently the circumstances of the Syracnf ■■ 
 l^cialisuL 
 
< 4 
 
 164 
 
 HISTORY 01 GREEClL. 
 
 f 
 
 pronoiinceJ in common Attic life, connected with one q{ ten 
 heroes wliose statues lie now for the first time saw in the agora, 
 •nd associating him with fellow-tribemen from all parts of Attica. 
 All the.^e and many others were sensible novelties, felt in thi? 
 daily proceedings of the citizen. But Uie great novelty of ali 
 was, the authentic recognition of the ten new tribes as a sover- 
 eign demos, or people., apart from all specialties of jjhratric or 
 gentile origin, with free speech and equal law ; retaining no dis- 
 tinction except the four classes of the Solonian }>ruperty-schedule 
 with their gradations of elegibility. To a considerable proportion 
 of citizens this great novelty was still farther endeared by the 
 fact that it had raised them out of the degraded po.-ition of inet- 
 ics and slaves ; and to the large majority of all the citizens, it 
 furnished a splendid political idea, profoundly impressive to the 
 Greek mind, — ca[)uble of calling forth the most ardent attach- 
 ment as well as the most devoted sense of active obli;jation and 
 obedience. We have now to see how their newly-created j.atriut 
 ism manifested itself. 
 
 Kleisthem-s and his new constitution carried with thein so 
 comi)letely the popular favor, that Isagoras had no otber way of 
 opposing it except by calling in the interference of Kleomenes and 
 the Lacedicmonians. Kleomenes listened the more readily to 
 this call, as he was reported to have been on an intimate footing 
 with the wife of Isagoriis. He prepared to come to Athens ; but 
 his first aim was to de'prive the democracy of its great leader 
 Kleisthenes, who, as belonging to the Alkmaonid family, was 
 supposed to be tainted with the inherited sin of his great-grand- 
 father Megakles, the destroyer of the usurper Kyhwi. Kleom- 
 enes sent a herald to Athens, demanding the expulsion "of the 
 accursed," — so this family wei-e called by their enemies, and so 
 they continued to be called eighty years afterwards, when the 
 same manwuvre was practised by the Lacedaemonians of that 
 day against Peiikles. This requisition had been recommended 
 by Isagoras, and was sc well-timed that Kleisthenes, not ventur- 
 ing to disobey it, retired voluntarily, so that Kleomenes, though 
 arriving at Athens only with a small force, found himself master 
 of the city. At the instigation of Isagoras, he sent into exil« 
 seven hundred famihe.s selected from the chief partisans of 
 Kleisthenes : his next attempt was to dissolve the new Senate of 
 
 ATTEMPT TO PUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. 
 
 1Ǥ 
 
 Five Hundred and place the whole government in the hands of 
 three hundred adherents of the chief whose cause he espoused. 
 But now was seen the spirit infused into the people by their new 
 constitution. At the time of the first usurpation of Peisistratus, 
 the Senate of that day had not only not Resisted, but even lent them- 
 Beh es to the scheme. But the new Senate of Kleisthenes resolutely 
 refused to submit to dissolution, and the citizens manifested them- 
 selves in a way at once so hostile and so determined, that Kleom- 
 enes and Isagoras were altogether baffled. They were compelled 
 to retire into the acropolis and stand upon the defensive; and 
 this symptom of weakness was the signal for a general rising of 
 the Athenians, who besieged the Spartan king on the holy rock. 
 He had evidently come without any expectation of finding, or 
 any means of overpowering, resistance ; for at the end of two 
 days his provisions were exhausted, and he was forced to capitu- 
 late. He and his Lacedienionians, as well as Isagoras, were 
 allowed to retire to Sparta ; but the Athenians of the party cap- 
 tured along with him were imprisoned, condemned,' and executed 
 
 by the people. 
 
 Kleisthenes, with the seven hundred exiled families, was im- 
 mediately recalled, and his new constitution materially strength- 
 ened by this first success. Yet the prospect of renewed Spartan 
 attack was sufficiently serious to induce him to send envoys to 
 Artaphernes, the Persian satrap at Sardis, soliciting the admis- 
 sion of Athens into the Persian alliance : he probably feared 
 the intri-ues of the expelled Hippias in the same quarter. Arta- 
 phernes,"having first informed himself who the Athenians were, 
 and where they dwelt, - replied that, if they chose to send earth 
 and water to the king of Persia, they might be received as alhes, 
 but upon no other condition. Such were the feelings of alarm under 
 which the envoys had quitted Athens, that they went the length 
 of promising this unqualified token of submission. But their 
 countrymen, on their return, disavowed them with scorn and 
 
 iiidignation.2 
 
 It was at this time that the first connection began between 
 Athens and the little Boeotian town of PlaUea, situated on tlit 
 
 » Uerodot. V, 70-72 : compare Schol. ad Aristophan. Lysistr. 274. 
 • Herodot. v, 73. 
 
 \. 
 
 i 
 
166 
 
 HISTORY OF GREIXi: 
 
 northern slope of the range of Kithaaron, between that ii:ountaiii 
 and the river As6pus, — on the road from Athens to Thebes; 
 and it is upon this lir.t occasion that we b-.-coiue arqua/nted with 
 tLe Boeotians and their polities. In one of my preceding vol- 
 umes,' the Bt£otian federation has already l)een briefly described, 
 as composed of some twelve or thirteen autonomous towns uiuler 
 tiie headship of Thebes, wliich was, or profe.>s< l to have been, 
 their mother-city. Platuia had been, so the Thrhans afrirnud! 
 their latest foundation ;' it was ill-use<l by them, and discont(,'nted 
 urith the alliance. Acordingly, as Kleomenes was on his way 
 back from Atheii^ the Tlata'ans took the 0[>portunity of address- 
 ing themselves to liiin, craved the protection of Sparta against 
 Thebes, and surrendered their town and territory witliout reserve. 
 The Spartan king, having no motive to undertake a trust which 
 promised nothing but trouble, advised them to solicit the protcc- 
 tion of Athens, as nearer and more accessible for them in case of 
 need. lie foresaw that this would embroil the Athenians with 
 Ba'otia; and such ;mticipation was in fact his chief motive for 
 giving the advice, which the Platieans followed. Selecting an 
 occiision of public sacrifice at Athens, they dispatched thkher 
 envoys, who sat down as suppliants at the altar, surrendered their 
 town to Atiiens, and implored protection against Thebes. Such 
 a!i ai)f>eal was not to be resisted, and protection was promised ; it 
 was soon needed, for the Thebans invaded the Platjean territory, 
 and an Athenian force marched to defend it. Battle was about to 
 be joined, when the Corinthians inteipose<l with their me(liation, 
 which was accepted by both parties. They decide.l altoirether 
 in favor of Plataa, pronouncing that the Thebans had no right to 
 employ force against any .. , ,«ling m(Mnl)er of the Bccotian feder- 
 ation.' But the Thebans, finding the decision against them, 
 refused to abide by it, and, attacking the Athenians''on their re- 
 turn, sustained a complete defeat: the latter avenged this breach 
 of faith by joining to Plataia the portion of Theban teriitcry 
 •outh of the Asopus, and making that river the limit between 
 
 * Sec vol. ii. p. 295, part ii, ch.3. « Thucyd. -A, 61. 
 
 ^ Herixlot. vi, 108. lav Or,3a'Lov^ Bnu^rCtv t-^vc ur; (3ov7.ofitvov^ i^ Boio>roi>i 
 fi?Jt:iv. This is an imp^Ttunt tirfurostanw i<» r<^a*xi ♦v Grexiian {•olitical 
 feelin{>: ! shall advert to it Jtare^fier. 
 
 f^ 
 
 ATHENS AND PLAT.EA. 
 
 167 
 
 the two. By such success, however, the Athenians gained 
 nothing, except the enmity of Boeotia, — as Kleomenes had fore- 
 seen. Their alliance with Platiea, long continued, and present- 
 ing in the course of this history several incidents touching ta 
 our .sympathies, will be found, if we except one splendid occasion,* 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 108. Thucydides (iii, 58), when recounting the capture 
 of Plata3a by the Laccd:emonians in the third year of the l*eloponncsian 
 war, states that the alliance between riatiea and Athens was then in its 
 93d year of date ; according to which reckoning it would begin in the year 
 519 H.C., where Mr. Clinton and other chronologers place it. 
 
 I venture to think that the immediate circumstances, as recounted in tho 
 text from Herodotus (whether Thucydides conceived them in the same 
 fray, cannot be determined), which brought about the junction of Tlattea 
 with Athens, cannot have taken place in 519 B.C., but must have happened 
 aj}er the expulsion of Ilippias from Athens in 510 B.C., — for the following 
 reasons : — 
 
 1. No mention is made of Ilippias, who yet, if the event had happened 
 in 519 B.C., must have been the person to determine whether the Athenians 
 Bhould assist Plata;a or not. The Plata;an envoys present themselves at 
 a public sacrifice in the attitude of suppliants, so as to touch the feelings 
 of the Athenian citizens generally : had Ilippias been then despot, hr 
 would have been the person to be propitiated and to determine for or 
 against assistance. 
 
 2. We know no cause which should have brought Kleomenes with a 
 Lacedamonian force near to Platiea in the year 519 B.C.: we know from 
 the statement of Herodotus (v, 76) that no Laccdamonian expedition 
 against Attica took place at that time. But in the year to which I have 
 referred the event, Kleomenes is on his march near the spot upon a knoMrn 
 and assignable object. From the very tenor of the narrative, it is plain 
 that Kleomenes and his army were not designedly in Boeotia, nor meddling 
 v»ith Ba'otian affairs, at the time when the Plata?ans solicited his aid ; he 
 declines to interpose in the matter, pleading the great distance between 
 Sparta and Plataea as a reason. 
 
 3. Again, Kleomenes, in advising the Plataians to .'solicit Athens, docs 
 not give the advice through good-will towaro.3 them, but through a desire to 
 harass and perplex the Athenians, by entangling them in a (pianel with th« 
 Ba'Otiiins. At the ])oint of time to which I have referred the incident, this 
 was a very natural desire : he was angry, and perhaps alanned, at ili« 
 recent events which had brought about his expulsion from Athens. Put 
 what was there to make him conceive such a feeling against Athens during 
 the reign of Hippias ? That despot was on terms of the closest intimacy 
 with Sparta: the Peisistratids were {^f/'vovf — ^eiviovg Tafid?uaTa — Herod 
 r, 63, 90, 91) "the particular guests" of the Spartans, who were onlj 
 Induced to take part against Hippias from a reluctant obedience to tht 
 
 
 i 
 
 '^ 
 
 M 
 
 u 
 
 <i 
 
' ,-' 
 
 168 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 productive only of ourden to the one party, yet insufficient as « 
 protection to the other. 
 
 Meanwhile Kleonienes had returned to Sparta full of resent- 
 ment a^'ainst the Athenians, and resolved on punisljing them, as 
 well as on establishing his friend Isagonts as despot o\ er them. 
 Having been taught, however, by humiliating experience, that 
 this was no easy achievement, he would not make the attempt, 
 witliout having assembled a considerable force ; h.- sununoned 
 allies from all the ^ arious states of Peloponnesus, yet without 
 venturing to inform them what he was about to undertake. He 
 at the same time concerted measures with the Ba^otians, and 
 with the Chalkidians of Eub«a, for a simultaneous invasion of 
 Attica on all sides. It api>ears that he had greater confidence 
 in their hostile dispositions towards Athens than in tiiose of the 
 Peloponnesians, for iie was not afraid to acquaint tliem witii hia 
 
 oracles procured, one after another, by Kleisthenes. The motive, therefore 
 assigned by lleroilotus, for the adviee given by Kleonienes to the Plata-ans, 
 can have no application to the time when Hippias was still despot. 
 
 4. That Herodotus did not conceive the victory gained by the Ath«inian« 
 over Thebes as having taken place before the expulsion of Hippias, is evi 
 dent from his emphatic contrast between their warlike spirit and success 
 when liberated from the despots, and their timidity or backwardness while 
 ander Hip{)ias ('Ai?;/ia'Of rvpavvevofitvoi fikv, ovda/xdv tuv a<piac TTipioi- 
 neuvruv kaav tu noXifAia ufiElvov<;, aTaAAa^i^t'irfc 6i Tvpuvvuv, fiaKpifi 
 rpuTot kyivovTo- drjXol uv ravra, on Karexof^Evot ^iv, k-^eloKUKEOv, etc. v, 
 78). The man who wrote thus cannot have believed that, in the year 519 
 B.C., while Hippias was in full sway, the Athenians gained an important 
 victory over the Thebans, ©ut off a considerable portion of the Theban 
 territory for the purpose of joining it to that of the Plataans, and showed 
 from that time fontvard their constant superiority over Thebes by protecting 
 her inferior neighbor agiiinst her. 
 
 These different reasons, taking them altogether, appear to me to show 
 that the first alliance between Athens and Plataa, as Herodotus conceives 
 and describes it. cannot have taken place before the expulsion of Hippias, 
 in 510 B.C.; and induce me to believe, either that Thucydidcs was mistaken 
 in the date of that event, or that Herodotus has not correctly described the 
 facts. Not seeing any n ason to suspect the description p^iven by the latter, 
 I have departed, though unwillingly, from the date of Thucydides. 
 
 The application of the Platicans to Kleomenes. and his adviee gronnded 
 thereupon, may be conneete<l more suitably with his tirst expedition to 
 Athens. af*er the expulsion of Hippias, than with his second 
 
 'i 
 
 ATTACK UPON ATTICA. 
 
 16tf 
 
 lieeil^Ti, -aiKl probably the Boeotians were incensed with the re- 
 cent interference of Athens in the affair of Plata?a. As .soon aij 
 these preparations were completed, the two kings of Sparta, 
 Kleomenes and Demaratus, put themselves at the liead of the 
 united Peloponnesian force, marched into Attica, and advanced 
 as far as Eleusis on the way to Athens. But when the allies 
 came to know tlie purpose for which they were to be employed, 
 a spirit of dissatisfaction manifested itself among them. They 
 had no unfriendly sentiment towards Athens ; and the Corinthi- 
 ans especially, favorably disposed rather than otherwise towards 
 that city, resolved to proceed no farther, withdrew their contin- 
 gent from the camp, and returned home. At the same time, 
 king Demaratus, either sharing in the general dissatisfaction, or 
 moved by some grudge against his colleague which had not be- 
 fore manifested itself, renounced the undertaking also. And 
 these two examples, operating upon the preexisting sentiment of 
 the allies generally, caused the whole camp to break up and re- 
 turn home without striking a blow.i 
 
 We may here remark that this is the first instance known in 
 w^hich Sparta api>ears in act as recognized head of an obligatory 
 Peloponnesian alliance,- summoning contingents from the cities 
 to be placed under the command of her king. Her headship, 
 previously recognized in theory, passes now into act, but in an 
 unsatisfactory manner, so as to prove the necessity of precaution 
 and concert beforehand, — which will be found not long wanting. 
 
 Pursuant to the scheme concerted, the Boeotians and Chalki- 
 dians attacked Attica at the same time that Kleomenes entered 
 it. The former seized GCnoe and Hysiie, the frontier demes of 
 Attica on the side towards Plata^a, while the latter assailed the 
 northeastern frontier, which faces Eubcca. Invaded on three 
 sides, the Athenians were in serious danger, and were compelled 
 to concentrate all their forces at Eleusis against Kleomenes, 
 leaving the Boeotians and Chalkidians unopposed. But the un- 
 expected breaking up of the invading army from Peloponnesua 
 
 * Herodot. v, 75, 
 
 • Compare Kortiim, Zur Geschichte Hellenischer Staats-Vcrfa»unger., 
 .35 (Heidelberg, 1821). 
 
 ,1 doubt, however, his interpretation of the words in Herodotus (v. 63) — 
 't: Idiu ffT6?i(f), (It£ 6r)fioaiu xpTjaofirvoi. 
 TOL. 2V. d 
 
 
 
 
 '' 
 
♦ i' 
 
 170 
 
 mSTORV OF GRFKCK. 
 
 r 
 
 I) 1^ 
 
 I* f 
 
 k 
 
 
 proved their rescue, and fnabled them to turn the \^hole of tKeif 
 •ttention to the other frontier. They marched into Btcotia to the 
 itrait called Euripu?, which separates it from Kubo-a, intending 
 to prevent the junction of the Ikeotians and Chalkidian^ and to 
 attack the latter first apart. But the arrival of the liu'otiana 
 caused an alteration in theii scheme ; they attacked the Boeotians 
 first, and gained a victory of the most complete character, — kill- 
 ivg a larfre number, and capturing seven hundred prisoners. On 
 the very same day they crossed over to Euboea, attacked the 
 Ohalkidians, and "ained another victory so decisive that it at 
 once terminated the war. Many Chalk idians were taken, as well 
 as Boeotians, and conveyed in chains to Athens, where after a 
 certain detention they were at last ransomed for two mina3 per 
 man ; and the tenth of the sum thus raised was employed in the 
 fabrication of a chariot and four horses in bronze, which was 
 placed in the acro[K)lis to commemorate the victor%% Herodotus 
 saw this trophy when lie was at Athens. He saw too, what was 
 a still more speakinj; tro[»hy, tlie actual chains in which the prison- 
 ers had been fettered, exhibiting in their appearance the damage 
 undergone when the acroi>olis was burnt by Xerxes; an in- 
 scription of four lines described the offerings and recorded the 
 victory out of which they had sprung.' 
 
 Another consequence of some moment arose out of this victory. 
 The Athenians planted a body of four thousand of their citi- 
 zens as kleruchs (lot-holders) or settlers upon the hvnds of the 
 wealthy Chalkidian oligarchy called the Hippobot.e, — proprie- 
 tors probably in the fertile plain of Leiantijm, between Chalkis 
 and Eretriu. This is a system which we shall *ind hereafter ex- 
 tensively followed out by the Athenians in the davs of their 
 power ; partly with the view of providing for their poorer citi- 
 zens, — partly to serve as garrison among a population either 
 hostile or of doubtful fidelity. These Attic kleruchs (I can find 
 no other name by which to speak of them) did not lose their 
 birthright as Athenian citizens : they were not colonists in the 
 Grecian sense, and ihey are known by a totally different name, 
 — but they corresfjonded very nearly to the colonies formally 
 planted out on the conquered lands by Rome. The increaso of 
 
 Herodot. y, 77 j iElian, V. H. vi, 1 j Pausan i, 28, t. 
 
 ir 
 
 THEBES OBTAINS AID FROM J=:GINA. 
 
 in 
 
 Ae poorer population was always more or less painfully felt ia 
 every Grecian city. For though the aggregate population never 
 seems to have increased very fast, yet the multiplication of chil- 
 dren in poor families caused the subdivision of the smaller lott 
 of land, until at last they became insufficient for a maintenance; 
 and the persons thus impoverished found it difficult to obtaia 
 subsistence in other ways, more especially as the labor for the 
 richer classes was so much performed by imported slaves. Doubt- 
 less some families possessed of landed property became extinct ; 
 but this did not at all benefit the smaller and poorer proprietors,* 
 lor the lands thus rendered vacant passed, not to them, but by 
 inheritance, or bequest, or intermarriage, to other proprietors, for 
 the most part in easy circumstances, — since one opulent family 
 usually intermarried with another. I shall enter more fully at a 
 future opportunity into this question, — the great and serioua 
 problem of population, as it affected the Greek communities gen- 
 erally, and as it was dealt with in theory by the powerful minda 
 of Plato and Aristotle. At present it is sufficient to notice that 
 the numerous kleruchies sent out by Athens, of which this to 
 Euboea was the first, arose in a great measure out of the multi- 
 plication of the poorer population, which her extended power 
 was employed in providing for. Her subsequent proceedings 
 with a view to the same object will not be always found so justi- 
 fiable as this now before us, which grew naturally, according to 
 the ideas of the time, out of her success against the Chalkidians. 
 The war between Athens, however, and Thebes with her 
 Bccotian allies, still continued, to the great and repeated disad- 
 vantage of the latter, until at length the Thebans in despair rent 
 to ask advice of the Delphian oracle, and were directed to "so- 
 licit aid from those nearest to them."' '' How (they replied) are 
 we to obey ? Our nearest neighbors, of Tanagra, Koroneia, and 
 Thespiae, are now, and have been from the beginning, lending us 
 all the aid in their power." An ingenious Theban, however, 
 coming to the relief of his perplexed fellow-citizens, dived into 
 the depths of legend and brought up a happy meaning. " Thoso 
 nearest to us (he said) are the inhabitants of ^gina : for Thebe 
 (the eponym of Thebes) and JEgina, (the eponym of that island) 
 
 V 
 
 I 
 
 (^1 
 
 
 * llcrodot. V, 80. 
 
 ■i: 
 
I 
 
 172 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECT. 
 
 I 
 
 were both sisters, daughters of Asopus : let us send to crav« 
 •ssistance from the ^ginetans." If hij subtle interpretation 
 (founded uj)on their descent from the sami legendary progenitors) 
 did not at once comnnce all wlio heard it, at letist no one had any 
 better to suggest ; and envoys were at once sent to the iEgine- 
 tans, — who, in reply to a petition founded on legendary claims, 
 aent to the help of the Thcl)ans a reinforcement of legendary, but 
 venerated, auxiliaries, — the ^Eakid heroes. We are left to sup- 
 pose that their efhgirs are l»ere meant. It was in vain, however, 
 that the glory and the supposed prer^ence of the ^akids Tela- 
 mon and Peleus were introduced into the Theban camp, ^''ic- 
 tory still continued on the side of Athens; and th<* discouraged 
 Tliebans again sent to ^Egina, restoring the heroes.' and praying 
 for aid of a charactt'r more human an<l positive. Their request 
 was granted, and tlie ^l^^ginetans commenced war against Atliens 
 without even tlie d^'cent pnlimiiiary of a herald and dtrhiration.- 
 This remarkable embassy fii-st brings us into acquaintance with 
 the Dorians of .Kgina, — oligar(!hical, wealthy, commercial, and 
 powerful at sea, even in the earliest days ; more analogous to 
 Corinth than to any of the other cities called Dorian. The hos- 
 
 * In the expression of Herodotus, the yEakid heroes are rmJIij sent fiora 
 iEgina, and really sent back by the Theban.s (v. 80-81) — Oi 6e a6i ah ovjt 
 \7TtK0vpii]v Toi'C A/rt/i/<5oc avfiKefiTTciv t(paaai>, airig ol Qr/f3aioi Trt/ufavre^, 
 foi)f fiiv AldKu^ai a6i urrtdidoaav, ruv di arJpwr ideovro 
 Compare a«]^ain v, 75; ^iii,^)4; and Polyb. vii, 9, 2. deuv ruv avcTTpaTevofitvuv. 
 
 Justin gives anarratve of an analogous application from the Ej>izephyrian 
 Lokrians to Sparta (xx, 3) : '• Territi Locrenses ad Spartanos deournint : 
 Aoxilium sappliees de[<reeantur: ilH longintpia militia aravati. auxilium a 
 Castore et Polluee petere eos jubent. Neque legati responsum soeiae url>is 
 iprevenint ; profectique in jtroxiraum templum, facto sacrificio, auxilium 
 deorum implorant. Litatis hostiis, d}t('nto«jm\ nt rebantur, quod jyetebant — 
 kii "/ s- riis la'ti ijnam si deos i/isos Sfcu/n (irtrtiiri (ssenf — j)ulvinaria iis in na>'i 
 ramponunt, faustisque profecti ominibus. solatia snis jiro auriliis deportant" 
 In comparing; the expressions of Herodotus with those of Justin, we see 
 that the former believes the direct literal presence and action of the ^Eakid 
 herces (" the Thebans sent back the heroes, and asked for men"), while the 
 latter explains away the divine intervention into a mere fancy and feeling 
 on tlie part of those to whom it is supposed to be accorded. This was the 
 tone of those later authors whom Justin followed : coTopare aiso Paasaa 
 lu. 19, 2. 
 
 * Herodut. v, 81-ft2 
 
 u 
 
 tl' 
 
 • V 
 
 CONGRESS OF HCLOPOyNESTAN ALLIES. 
 
 173 
 
 tility which they now began without provocation against Athena, 
 — repressed by Sparta at the critical moment of the battle of 
 Marathon, — then again breaking out, — and hushed for a while 
 by the common dangers of the Persian invasion under Xerxes, 
 was appeased only with the conquest of the island about twenty 
 years after that event, and with the expulsion and destruction of 
 it^ inhabitants some years later. There had been indeed, accord- 
 ing to Herodotus,! a feud of great antiquity between Athens and 
 it^gina, — of which he gives the account in a singular narrative, 
 blending together religion, politics, exposition of ancient customs, 
 etc. ; but at the time when the Thebans solicited aid from ^^gina, 
 the latter was at peace with Athens. The iEginetans employed 
 their fleet, powerful for that day, in ravaging Phalerum and the 
 maritime demes of Attica ; nor had the Athenians as yet any 
 fleet to resist them.-^ It is probable that the desired effect was 
 produced, of diverting a portion of the Athenian force from 
 the war against Boeotia, and thus partially relieving Thebes. 
 But the war of Athens against both of them continued for a con- 
 siderable time, though we have no information respecting its 
 details. 
 
 Meanwhile the attention of Athens was called off from these 
 combined enemies by a nion. menacing cloud, which threatened 
 to burst upon her from the side of Sparta. Kleomenes and hia 
 countrymen, full of resentment at the late inglorious desertion 
 of Eleusis, were yet more incensed by the discovery, which 
 appears to have been then recently made, that the injunctions of 
 the Delphian priestess for the expulsion of Hippias from Athena 
 had been fraudulently procured.-^ Moreover, Kleomenes, when 
 shut up in the acropolis of Athens with Isagoras, had found there 
 various prophecies previously treasured up by the Peisistratids, 
 many of which foreshadowed events highly disastrous to Sparta. 
 And while the recent brilliant manifestations of courage, and 
 repeated victories, on the part of Athens, seemed to indicate that 
 such prophecies might perhaps be realized, — Sparta had to 
 reproach herself, that, from the foolish and mischievous conduct 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 83-88. 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 81-89. /juyd^ug *A.^7jvaiovc eaiveovrp, 
 
 • Herodot. v, 90. 
 
 ( 
 
 { .1 
 
174 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 •f ICleomenes, she had undone the effect of her previous aid 
 t«'ainst the Peisistratids, and thus lost tliat return of gratitude 
 which the Athenians would otherwise have testified IJndel 
 •uch impressions, the Spartan authorities took the rtniarkahle 
 Itep of sending for Hippias from his resideiKC at Sigeium to 
 Peloiionnesus, and of summoning deputies from all their allies to 
 mi'ct him at Sparta. 
 
 The convocation thus summoned deserves notice as the com- 
 nifncement of a new era in Grecian politics. The previous 
 ex[)edition of Kleomenes against Attica presents to us the first 
 known example of Spartan headship passing from theory into 
 at : that expedition miscarried because the allies, though willing 
 to follow, would not follow blindly, nor be made the instruments 
 of executing purposes repugnant to their feelings. Sparta had 
 now learned the necessity, in order to insure their hearty con- 
 currence, of letting tln.'m know what she contemplated, so as to 
 Ib^certain at least that slie had no decided opposition to appre- 
 hend. Here, then, is the third stage in the spontaneous move- 
 ment of Greece towards a systematic conjunction, however 
 imperfect, of its many autonomous units. First we have Spar- 
 Ian headship suggested in theory, from a concourse of circum- 
 stances which attract to her the admiration of all Greece, — 
 power, unn vailed training, undisturbed antiquity, etc. : next, the 
 theory passes into act. yet rude and sha{)eless : lastly, the act 
 becomes clothed with formalities, and jireceded by discussion and 
 determination. The first convocation of the allies at Sparta, for 
 the purjxjse of having a common object submitted to their consid- 
 eration, may well be regarded as an important event in Grecian 
 political history. Tlu pioK edings at the convocation are no 
 less important, as an indication of tlie way in which the Greeks 
 ©f that dav felt and acted, and must be borne in mind as a 
 contrast with times hereafter to be described. 
 
 Hippias having beesn presented to the assembled allies, the 
 Spartans expressed their sorrov/ for having dethroned him, — • 
 iheir resentment and alarm at the new-born insolence of Athens,! 
 already tasted by her immediate neighbors, and menacing to 
 tvery state represented in ihe convocation, — and their anxiety to 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 90, 91. 
 
 PROTEST OF THE CORINTHIANS. 
 
 176 
 
 restore Hippias, not less as a reparation for past wrong, than hm 
 a means, through his rule, of keeping Athens low and dependent 
 But the proposition, though emanating from Sparta, was listened 
 to by the allies with one common sentiment of repugnance. 
 They had no sympathy for Hippias, — no dislike, still less any 
 fear, of Athens, — and a profound detestation of the character 
 of a despot. The spirit which had animated the armed contin 
 gents at Eleusis now reappeared among the deputies at Sparli, 
 aud the Corinthians again took the initiative. Their deputy 
 Sosikl4s protested against the project in the fiercest and most 
 hidignant strain : no language can be stronger than that of the 
 long harangue which Herodotus puts into his mouth, wherein the 
 bitter recollections prevalent at Corinth respecting Kypselus and 
 reriaJidcr are poured forth. *' Surely, heaven and earth are 
 about to change places, — the fish are coming to dwell on dry 
 land, and mankind going to inhabit the sea, — when you, Spar- 
 tans, propose to subvert the ])opular governments, and to set up 
 in the cities that wicked and bloody thing called a Despot.* 
 First try what it is, for yourselves at Sparta, and then force it 
 upon otliers if you can : you have not tasted its calamities as we 
 have, and you take very good care to keep it away from your- 
 selves. We adjure you, by the ci^mnion gods of Hellas, — plant 
 not despots in her cities : if you persist in a scheme so wicked, 
 know that the Corinthians will not second you." 
 
 This animated appeal was received with a shout of approba 
 tiun and sympathy on the part of the allies. All wiih one 
 accord united wiih Sosikles in adjuring the Laced;L:K-.oiiiaii» ^ 
 ••not to revolutionize any Hellenic city." No one listened to 
 Hippias when he replied, warning the Corinthians that the tinie 
 would come, when they, more than any one else, would dread 
 imd abhor the Athenian democracy, and wish the PeisistratiduB 
 back again. He knew well, says Herodotus, that this would be, 
 for he was better acquainted with the proj)hecies than any man. 
 But no one then believed him, and he was forced to take hia 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 92 rvpawidag h^ rag Tro/lff Kard/eiv irapaaKtva^etrai 
 
 *W ovTE udiKiJTepoi ovdiv hari kqt* atr^puTzov^ ovre fiiaKpovu-^ipov. 
 • Herodot. v, 93. u^ iroueiv firjdev veurepov Tepl uoalv 'E^Audo.. 
 
 i 
 
 
 V- 1 
 
 \ 
 
 H' 
 
 i: 
 
 I ''I 
 
n 
 
 176 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EFFICACY OF THE DEMOCRATICAL IDEA. 
 
 departure back to Sigeium : the Spartans not venturing io 
 espouse his cause against the determined sentiment of the aH 6.* 
 Tliat determined sentiment deserves notice, because it marki! 
 the })resent period of the Hellenic mind : fifty years later it will 
 be i'ound materially altered. Aversion to single-ht-aded nde, 
 &nd bitter recollection of men like Ky])>elus and l*eriander, are 
 now the chords whi.'h thrill in an assembly of Grecian deputies : 
 the idea of a revolution, im])lying thereby a great and compre- 
 hensive change, of which the party using the word disapproves, 
 consists in substituting a permanent One in place of those peri- 
 otlical magistrates and assemblies which were the common 
 attribute of olijrarcliy and democracy : the antithesis between 
 these last two is us yet in the background, nor does there prevail 
 either fear of Ath.^ns or hatred of the Athenian democracy. 
 But when we turn to the period immediately before the Pelo- 
 ponnesian war, we iud the order of precedence between these 
 two sentiments reversed. The anti-monarchical feeling has not 
 perished, but has been overiaid by other and more recent i)olitical 
 antipathies, — the antithesis between democracy and olio-archy 
 having become, not indeed the only sentiment, but the u])permost 
 sentiment, in the minds of Grecian politicians generally, and the 
 soul of active party-movement. Moreover, a hatred of the most 
 deadly character has grown up igainst Athens and her democracy 
 esi)ecia]ly in the grandsons of those very Corinthians who now 
 stand forward as her sympathizing friends. The remarkable 
 change of feeling here mentioned is nowhere so strikingly exhib- 
 ited as when we contrast the address of the Corintltian Sosikles, 
 jtist narrated, with the speech of the Corinthian envoys at Sparta, 
 innnediately antecedent to the Peloponnesian war, as given to us 
 in Thucydides.'-i It will hereafter be fully explained by tlm 
 intermediate events, by the growth of Atheiiian power, and by 
 the still more miraculous development of Athenian energy. 
 
 Such development, the fruit of the fresh-planted democracy aa 
 IV ell as the seed for its sustentation and aggrandizement, con- 
 tinued |)rogressive during the whole period just adverted to. 
 But the first unexpected burst of it, under the Kleisthenear 
 constitution, and after the expulsion of Hippias, is described b^ 
 
 ' He rod of. v, 93- y4. 
 
 * Thucydid. i, 68-71, 120-12* 
 
 J 71 
 
 I t^'' 1 
 
 Herodotus in terms too emphatic to be omitted. After narrating 
 the successive victories of the Athenians over both Bicotiana 
 and Chalkidians, that historian proceeds : *• Thus did the Athe- 
 nians grow in strength. And we may find proof, not merely in 
 this instance but everywhere else, how valuable a thing freedom 
 is : since even the Athenians, while under a despot, were not 
 superior in war to any of their surrounding neighbors, but, so 
 ioon as they got rid of their despots, became by far the first of 
 all. The^r things show that wiiile kept down by one man, thejr 
 w ere slack and timid, like men working for a master ; but when 
 (hey were liberated, every single man became eager in exertions 
 for his own benefit." The same comparison reappears a short 
 time afterwards, where he tells us, that " the Athenians when 
 free, felt themselves a match for Sparta ; but while kept down 
 by any man under a despotism, were feeble and apt for sub- 
 mission." 1 
 
 Stronger expressions cannot be found to depict the rapid 
 improvement wrought in the Athenian peoj>le by their new 
 lemocracy. Of course this did not arise merely from suspension 
 jf previous cruelties, or better laws, or better administration. 
 These, indeed, were essential conditions, but the active trans- 
 forming cause here was, the })rinciple and system of which such 
 jmiendments formed the detail : the grand and new idea of the 
 ijovereign People, composed of free and equal citizens, — or 
 liberty and equality, to use words which so profoundly moved 
 the French nation half a century ago. It was this comprehen- 
 sive political idea which acted with electric effect upon the 
 Athenians, creating within them a host of sentiments, motives, 
 sympathies, and capacities, to which they had before been stran- 
 gers. Democracy in Grecian antiquity possessed the privilege, 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 78-91. ^k'&rjvatoi fiev vvv rjv^rjvro' fijj?.oi de ov KaT* ip 
 Movov ulXa navraxv, fj IcTfyop'nj ojc eari XPVf^^ a-rrovdalov, el koI 'A'&TfVfuoi 
 rvpavvevofievoi [xev, ovdafiCjv tuv a<{>€ac irepioiKEOVTcjv taav rd TroXefiia ofiei^ 
 »wf, uTraXXax^evTeg de rvpuvvuv, (xaKpip ■KpC>TOL kyevovTO' drj'kol uv ravTO, 
 Hr; Karexonevoi fiev, t&e'koKu.Keov, wf deanory epya^ofievoi, kTiev^^epcji^evrutg 
 de, airdg iKOffro^ euvT<}) Trpo&Vfieero Karepydi^ea'&ai. 
 
 (c. 91.) 0/ XaKedaifiovioi — vow "kal^ovregy dg k'^ei-depcv fikv idv rd >'fW9{ 
 rb ^AvTiKdv, ia6/!>^oTTOv rip iuvTuv av yevoiTO, Karexofievov 6e viro rot* rv/;<v# 
 vWi, doT^fVff Kal TzeiT^apxEStT^cit irolfiov. 
 
 VOL. IV. 8» 12nr 
 
 
 \'i 
 
 r 
 
178 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFX'i:. 
 
 r 
 
 not wily of kindling an earnest and unanimous attachment tt 
 the constitution in the bosoms of the citizens, but also of creating 
 nn energy of public and private action, such as could never be 
 obtained under an oligarchy, where the utmost that could be 
 hoped for was a passive acquiescence and obedience. Mr. Burke 
 has r::fnarked that the mass of tlie people are generally very 
 hid'.iferent about thtories of government ; but such indifTerence 
 — although improvements in the practical working of all goveiii 
 ments tend to foster it — is hardly to be expected among anj 
 people who exhibit decided mental activity and spirit on other 
 matters ; and the reverse was unquestionably true, in the year 
 500 B.C., among the comnumities of ancient Greece. Theories 
 of government were there anything but a dead letter : they w ere 
 connected with emotions of the strongest as well as of the most 
 opposite character. The theory of a i)ermanent ruling One, for 
 example, was universally odious : that of a ruling Few, though 
 acquiesced in, was never positively attractive, unless either 
 where it was associated with the maintenance of peculiar educa- 
 tion and habits, as at Sparta, or where it presented itself as the 
 only antithesis to democracy, the latter having by peculiar cir- 
 cumstances become an object of terror. But the theory of 
 democracy was preeminently seductive ; creating in the mass 
 of the citizens an intense positive attachment, and disposing them 
 to voluntary action and suffering on its behalf, such as no coer- 
 cion on the part of other governments coul«l extort. Herodotus,' 
 in his comparison of the three sorts of government, puts in tbe 
 front rank of the a<] vantage- of deniocracy, " its most splendid 
 name and promi^e/' — its power of eidisting the hearts of the 
 citizens in snpport of their <*onstitution, and of providing for all 
 a common bond of union and fraternity. This is what even 
 democracy did not always do : but it was w bat no otlier govem- 
 meat in Greece could do : a reason alone sufficient to stamp it as 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 80. TlXf/^of 6e apx^^-> ^p<^^« uiv, ovvofia ttuvtuv 
 %jL'^'Ai.aTov l;fe<, Iffoi oficjjv devrepa (Je, tovtcjv tuv 6 fwvapxo^, irouei 
 oiV5t'v • ttaXtfi fiev apxa^ o.px^'-* v'Tev&vvov de apx^ ^X^^^ (iovTiev/uiTa 6e 
 ndvTa if rb Koivdv dva<pepei. 
 
 The demo^ratical speaJcer at Syracuse, Athenagoras, also pats this name 
 nnd promise in the first rank of advantages — (Thucyd. vi. 39) — ty^ i$ 
 tntAi^ irpura fieVj d^ftov ^vfiirav uvofxacr&ai, dXiyapx'iav d?, fiipo^^ etc 
 
 KFFICACV OF THE DKMOCRATICAL IDEA. 
 
 171 
 
 the best government, and presenting the greatest chance of 
 benelicent results, for a Grecian community. Among the Athc 
 nian citizens, certainly, it produced a strength and unanimity of 
 positive jwlitical sentiment, such as has rarelj' been seen in the 
 history of mankind, which excites our surprise and admiratiou 
 the more when we com])are it with the apathy which had pre- 
 ceded, — and which is even implied as the natural state of llio 
 public mind in Solon's famous proclamation against neutrality in 
 a sedition.' Because democracy ha])pens to be un])alatable lo 
 most modern readers, they have been accustomed to look upon 
 the sentiment here described only in its lea>t honorable manifes- 
 tations, — in the caricatures of Aristophanes, or in the empty 
 common-places of rhetorical declaimers. But it is not in this 
 way that the force, the earnestness, or the binding value, of 
 demo, ratical sentiment at Athens is to be measured. We niu^t 
 listen to it as it comes from the lips of Perikles,^ while he is 
 strenuously enforcing upon the people those active duties for 
 which it both implanted the stimulus and sup])lied the courage ; 
 or from the oligarchical Nikias in the harbor of Syracuse, when 
 he is endeavoring to revive the courage of his despairing troops 
 for one last dcjith-struggle, and when he appeals to their demo- 
 crat ictil patriotism as to the only flame yet alive and burning 
 even in that moment of agony.-^ From the time of Kleisthenes 
 downward, tho creation of this new mighty impulse makes an 
 entire revolution in the Athenian character. And if the change 
 still stood out in so prominent a manner before the eyes of 
 Ilejodotus, much more must it have been felt by the contempo- 
 raries among whom it occurred. 
 
 The attachment of an Athenian citizen to his democratical 
 
 constitution comprised two distinct veins of sentiment: first, his 
 
 lights, protection, and advantages derived from it, — next, his 
 
 <bligatior.s of exertion and sacrifice towards it and with reference 
 
 ' See tlie preccfling fiiapter xi, of this History, vol. iii, ]). 145, respecting 
 the Solonian declaration here adverted to. 
 
 * See the two speeches of Perikles in Thucyd. ii, 35-46, and ii, 60-64. 
 Compare the reflections of Thucydides upon the two democracies of Atheni 
 and Syracuse, vi, 69 and vii, 21-55. 
 
 ^ Thucyd. vii, 69. Uarpido^ re rr/g iXtvdepcjTurr/c vTzuuiuv^iaKuv nai r% 
 tv air^ uveniraKTov nactv ef tt^v dicircj i^ovaia^t etc. 
 
 rf 
 
 \ 
 
 J 
 
 1, 
 
 .\ 
 
 - 1' 
 
 1 1 'ft 
 t'lj 
 
 ni 
 
 r i 
 
 t 
 
 
 a 
 
 '"An^a 
 
180 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 EARLIER A.nD LATER DEMOCRACY CONTRASTED. 
 
 181 
 
 to it. Neither of these two veins of sentiment was ever wholl)' 
 absent ; but according a> the one or the other was present at 
 different times in varying proportions, the patriotism of the 
 citizen was a very different feeling. That which Hcjrodotua 
 remarks is, the extraordinary efforts of heart and hand which 
 the Athenians suddenly displayed, — the efficacy of the active 
 sentiment throughout the bulk of the citizens ; and we shall 
 cbserve even more memorable evidences of the same phenomc- 
 ii-on in tracins: down the historv from Kleisthenes to the end of 
 the Pelo|)onnesian war : we shall trace a series of events and 
 motives eminently calculated to stimulate that self-imposed laboi 
 and discipline whi(rh tlie early democracy had first called forth. 
 But when we advance farther down, from the restoration of the 
 democracy after tlie Thirty Tyrants to the time of Demosthenes. 
 — I venture upon this brief anticipation, in the conviction that 
 one period of Grecian history can only be thoroughly understood 
 by contrasting it with another, — we shall find a sensible change 
 in Athenian patriotism. The active sentiment of obligation is 
 eomoaratively ino[»erative, — the citizen, it is true, has a keen 
 sense of the value of the democracy as protecting him ana 
 insuring to him valuable rights, and he is, moreover, willing to 
 perform his ordinary sphere of legal duties towards it ; but he 
 looks upon it as a thing established, and capable of maintaining 
 itself in a due measure of foreign ascendency, without any such 
 personal efforts as those which his forefathers cheerfully imposed 
 upon themselves. The orations of Demosthenes contain melan- 
 choly proofs of such altered tone of patriotism, — of that lan- 
 guor, pjiralysis, and waiting for others to act, which preceded the 
 catastrophe of Chtseroneia, notwithstanding an unabated attach- 
 ment to the democracy as a source of protection and good govern- 
 ment. ^ That same preternatural activity which the allies of 
 Sparta, at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, both de- 
 nounced and admired in the Athenians, is noted by the orator aa 
 now belonging to their enemy Philip. 
 
 ' Compare the remarkable speech of the Corinthian envoys at Spartf 
 (Thucyd. i, 68-71), with the (fn^oTrpayfioavvrj which Demosthenes so em- 
 phatically notices in Philip (Olynthiac :, 6, p. )3) : also Philippic, i, 2, and 
 the Fhilippicp and Ohnthiacs generally. 
 
 Vol. 4 ^ 
 
 Such variations in the scale of national energy pervade his- 
 tory, modern as well as ancient, but in regard to Grecian history, 
 especially, they can never be overlooked. For a certain meas- 
 ure, not only of positive political attachment, but also of active 
 self-devotion, military readiness, and personal effort, was the 
 indispensable condition of maintaining Hellenic autonomy, either 
 in Athens or elsewhere ; and became so more than ever when 
 the Macedonians were once organized under an enterprising and 
 semi-Hellenized prince. The democracy was the first creative 
 cause of that astonishing personal and many-sided energy which 
 marked the Athenian character, for a century downward from 
 Kleisthenes. That the same ultra-Hellenic activity did not 
 longer continue, is referable to other causes, which will be here- 
 after in part explained. /No system of government, even sup- 
 posing it to be very much better and more faultless than the 
 Athenian democracy, can ever pretend to accomplish its legiti- 
 mate end apart from the personal character of the people, or to 
 supersede the necessity of individual virtue and vigor./ During 
 the half-century immediately preceding the battle of Chieroneia, 
 the Athenians had lost that remarkable energy which distin- 
 guished them during the first century of their democracy, and 
 had fallen much more nearly to a level with the other Greeks, 
 in common with whom they were obliged to yield to the pres- 
 sure of a foreign enemy. I here briefly notice their last period 
 of languor, in contrast with the first burst of democratical fervor 
 under Kleisthenes, now opening, — a feeling which will be found, 
 AS we proceed, to continue for a longer period than could have 
 been reasonably anticipated, but which was too high-strung to 
 become a perpetual and inherent attribui t of any community . 
 
 I, 
 
 1 
 
 ' I 'i 
 
 t. , 
 
 ( ti 
 
 *i' 
 
182 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE- 
 
 RISK OF CYRUS. 
 
 188 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 RISE OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. -CYRUS. 
 
 Ik the preceding chapter, I have followed the history of Cen. 
 tral Greece ver/ nearly down to the point at which the history 
 of the Asiatic Greeks becomes blended with it, and after which 
 the two streams be^pn to flow to a great degree in the same 
 channel. I now revert to the affairs of the Asiatic Greeks, and 
 of the Asiatic kings as connected with them, at the point in 
 which they were left in my seventeenth chapter. 
 
 The concluding facts recounted in that chapter were of sad 
 and serious moment to the Hellenic world. The Ionic and 
 -^.olic Greeks on tlie Asiatic coast had been conquered and 
 made tributary' by the Lydian king Cra-sus : "down to that 
 time (says Herodotus) all Greeks had been free.*' Their con- 
 queror Croesus, who ascended the throne in 5 GO B.C., appeared 
 to be at the summit of human prosperity and power in his unas- 
 sailable capital, and with his countless treasures at Sardis. His 
 dominions comprised nearly the whole of Asia Minor, as far as 
 Jie river Halys to the east ; on the other side of that river be- 
 gan the Median monarchy under his brother-in-law Astyages, 
 extending eastward to some boundary which we cannot define^ 
 hut comprising in a southeastern direction Porsis proper, or 
 Farsistan, and separated from the Kissians and Assyrians on 
 the west by the line of Mount Zagros — the present boundary- 
 line between Persia and Turkey. Babylonia, with its won- 
 drous city, between the Euphrates and the Tigris, was occupied 
 by the Assyrians, or Chalda^ans, under their king Labynetus : a 
 territory populous and fertile, partly by nature, partly by prod- 
 igies of labor, to a degree which makes us mistrust even an 
 honest eje-witness who describes it afterwards in its decline, — 
 but which was then in its most flourishing condition. The 
 Chaldiean dominion under Labynetus reached to the borders of 
 Egypt, including, as dependent territories, both Judsea and Pbe 
 
 Bicia in Egypt, reigned the native king Amasis, powerful and 
 afl3uei;t, sustained in his throne by a large body of Grecian mer- 
 cenaries, and himself favorably disposed to Grecian commerce 
 and settlement. Both with Labynetus and with Amasis, Croesua 
 was on terms of alliance ; and as Astyages was his brother-in- 
 law, the four kings might well be deemed out of the reach of 
 calamity. Yet within the space of thirty years or a little more, 
 the whole of their territories had become embodied in one vast 
 empire, under the son of an adventurer as yet not known even 
 by name. 
 
 The rise and fall of Oriental dynasties has been in all times 
 distinguished by the same general features. A brave and adven- 
 turous prince, at the head of a population at once poor, warlike, 
 and greedy, acquires dominion, — while his successors, abandon- 
 ing themselves to sensuality and sloth, probably also to oppres- 
 sive and irascible dispositions, become in process of time victims 
 to those same qualities in a stranger which had enabled their 
 own father to seize the throne. Cyrus, the great founder of the 
 Persian empire, first the subject and afterwards the dethroner 
 of the Median Astyages, corresponds to this general description, 
 as far at least as we can pretend to know his history. For in 
 truth, even the conquests of Cyrus, after he became ruler of 
 Media, are very imperfectly known, whilst the facts which pre- 
 ceded his rise up to that sovereignty cannot be said to be known 
 at all : we have to choose between diflferent accounts at variance 
 with each other, and of which the most complete and detailed ij 
 stamped with all the character of romance. The Cyropsedia of 
 Xenophon is memorable and interesting, considered with refer- 
 ."nee to the Greek mind, and as a philosophical novel : » that it 
 should have been quoted so largely as authority on matters o** 
 history, is only one proof among many how easily authors have 
 been satisfied as to the essentials of historical evidence. The 
 narrative given by Herodotus o1 the relations between Cyrus 
 and Astyages, agreeing with Xenophon in little more than the 
 §B^t that it makes Cyrus son of Kambysfis and Mandand, and 
 
 ' Among the lost productions of Antisthenes, the contemporary of Xeno* 
 phon and Plato, and emanating like them from the tuition of Sokrat^, wat 
 onv Kt'flof, f/ nept Bar.iXeiaq (Diogenes Laert. vi, 15). 
 
 i |1 
 
 ^ ';. 
 
I 
 
 184 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECt. 
 
 grandson of Astyages, goes even beyond the story of Romulai 
 ttiid Remus in resj>ect to tragical incident and contrast. Astyi*- 
 ges, alarmed by a dream, condemns the new-born infant of his 
 daughter Mandane to be exposed : Harpagus, to whom the order 
 is given, delivers the child to one of the royal herdsmen, who 
 exposes it in the mountains, where it is miraculously suckled by 
 a bitch.i Thus preserved, and afterwards brought up as the 
 herdsman's child, ('yrus manifests great superiority botli physi- 
 cal and mental, is chosen king in play by the hoys of the village, 
 and in this capacity severely cha.-tises the son of one of the 
 courtiers; for which offence he is carried before Astvaires, who 
 recognizes him for his grandson, but is assured by the Magi that 
 his dream is out, and that he has no farther danger to apj)reheiid 
 from the boy, — and therefore })ermits him to live. With Har- 
 pagus, however, Astyages is extremely incensed, for not having 
 executed his orders : he causes th«' >(>n of Harpagus to be slain, 
 and served up to l)e eaten by his unconscious lather at a regal 
 banquet. The lather, apprized afterwards of tiie fact, dissembles 
 his feelings, but conceives a deadly vengeance against Astyages 
 for this Thyestean meal. lie i)ersuades Cyrus, who has been 
 sent back to his father and mother in Persia, to head a revolt 
 
 ' That this was the real storv — a close parallel of Romulus and Remus 
 — we may see by Herodotus, i, 122. Some rationalizing Greeks or Per- 
 sians transformed it into a more plausible tale, — that the herdsman's wife 
 who suckled the boy Cyrus was named Kvvd) (Kvul' is a dog, male or 
 female) ; contending that this latter was the real basis of fact, and that the 
 intervention of the bit«;h was an exaggeration built upon the name of the 
 woman, in order that the divine protection shown to Cyrus might be still 
 more manifest, — ot 6e "OKee^ ■rapa'kaPovTe^ rb ovvofia rovro {Iva -BeioTi- 
 ou^ doKETj Toioi TLipariffi rrepieivac. a<l>i 6 •Kal(:),KaTe{ia7.ov (pdriv 
 wf tKKeiuevov Kvpov nvtov i^edpe^pc- ti^^evrev fikv if ^arig avr^ Kexopr/Kee. 
 
 In the first volume of this History, I have noticed various transforma- 
 tions operated by Palajphatus and others upon the Greek mythes, — the 
 ram which carried Phnrxus and Helle across the Hellespont is represented 
 to us as having been in reality a man named Krius, who aided their flight, — 
 the winged horse which carried Bellerophon was a ship named Pegasus, etc, 
 This same operation has here been performed upon the story of the suck- 
 ling of C}'rus; for we shall mn little risk in affirming that the miraculous 
 story is the older of the two. The feelings which welcome a miraculous 
 ■trry are early and primitive ; those which break down the miracle into % 
 commonplace fact are of subsequent gro\^-th. 
 
 ASTYAGES AND HARPAGUS. 
 
 186 
 
 of the Persians against the Medes ; whilst Astyages — to fill up 
 the Grecian conception of madness as a precursor to ruin — 
 sends an army against the revolters, commanded by Harpagus 
 himself. Of course the army is defeated, — Astyages, after a 
 vain resistance, is dethroned, — Cyrus becomes king in his place, 
 — and Harpagus repays the outrage which he has undergone 
 bjr the bitterest insults. 
 
 Such are the heads of a beautiful narrative which is given at 
 some length in Herodotus. It will probably appear to the reader 
 sufficiently romantic, though the historian intimates that he had 
 heard three other nM-ratives different from it, and that all were 
 more full of marvels, as well as in wider circulation, than his 
 own, which he had borrowed from some unusually sober-minded 
 Persian informants.i In what points the other three stories 
 departed from it, we do not hear. 
 
 To the historian of Halikarnassus, we have to oppose the 
 physician of the neighboring town Knidus, — Ktesias, who con- 
 tradicted Herodotus, not without strong terms of censure, on 
 many points, and especially upon that which is the very founda- 
 tion of the early narrative respecting Cyrus; for he affirmed 
 that Cyrus was noway related to Astyages.2 However indig- 
 nant we may be with Ktesias, for the disparaging epithets which 
 he presumed to apply to an historian whose work is to us ines- 
 timable, — we must nevertheless admit that as surgeon, in actual 
 attendance on king Artaxerx^s Mnemon, and healer of the 
 
 * Herodot. i, 95. 'Qc <^v Uepaiuv fieTe^eTcpoi Aeyovatv, ol fiv j^ov- 
 /.ouEVOL ae/ivovv Tu Tzepl Kvpov, uX?.d rbv iovra "ktyeiv Zoyov, /cara ravra 
 ■ypurpw eTTiaTu/nevoc nepl Kvpov koI Tpi(}>aaiag dXXac ^oycjv 66oi>t 
 i^Tjvai. His informants were thus select persons, who differed from the 
 Persians generally. 
 
 The long narrative respecting the infancy and growth of Cyras is con- 
 tained in Herodot. i, 107-129. 
 
 « See the Extracts from the lost Persian History of Ktesias, in Photioi 
 Cod. Ixxii, also appended to Schweighaiiser's edition of Herodotus, vol. It, 
 p 345. *J7<Tt 6e (Ktesias) avrbv tQv TT?.ei6vu)V a iaropei avronrriv yevofxevov, 
 j7 ira^)* avTuv Uepauv {ev^a to bpotv firj htxcjpei) avrr/KOOV KaracfTavTa, 
 o€tuc T^-f loTopiav avyypurpai. 
 
 To the discrepancies between Xenophon, Herodotus, and Ktesi^, on the 
 iubject « f Cyras, is to be added the statement of ^schylus (Pereae, 747), 
 the oldest authority of them all. and that of the Armenian historians : 8M 
 Blhr ad Ktesiam, p. 85 : comp Bihr's comments on the discrepancies, p 87 
 
 ♦3 m 
 
 I 
 '4: 
 
 M 
 
 • i 
 
 i; 
 
 
 \ •'] 
 
 Hi 
 
 ■ 
 
186 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
 wound inflicted on thnt prince at Kunaxa by his brother Cyrus 
 the younger,' he had better opportunities even than Herodotus 
 of conversinir with sober-minded Persians ; and that the discrep- 
 ancies between the two statements are to be taken as a proof of 
 thf^ prevalence of discordant, yet equally accredited, stories. 
 Herodotus himself was in fact compelled to choose one out of 
 tour. So rare and lat«.' a plant is historical authenticity. 
 
 That Cyrus was the first P(irsian conqueror, and that the 
 fpace which he overran covered no less than fifty de«rrees of 
 longitude, from the coast of Asia Minor to the Oxus and the 
 Indus, are facts quite indisputable ; but of the steps by which 
 this was achieved, we know very little. The native Persians 
 whom he conducted to an em|)ire so immense, >vere an aggregate 
 of seven .agricultural and four nomadic tribes, — all of them 
 rude, hardy, and bra\ *%- — dwelling in a mountainous region, 
 clothed in skins, ignorant of wine or fruit, or any of the com- 
 monest luxuries of life, and despising the very idea of purchase 
 or sale. Their tribes were wry unequal in point of dignity, 
 probably also in respect to numbers and powei's, among one 
 another : first in estimation among them stood the Pasargadaj ; 
 and the first phratry, or clan, among the Pasargadie were the 
 Achnemenida% to whom Cyrus himself belonged. Whether his 
 relationship to the Median king whom he dethroned was a mat- 
 ter of fact, or a politic fiction, we cannot well determine. But 
 Xenophon, in noticing the spacious deserted cities, Larissa and 
 Mespila,-* which he saw in his inarch with the Ten Tliousand 
 
 ' Xenophon, Aiuilcis. i. ^ 2t>. 
 
 * Ilerodot. i, 71-1 5:J; Arriaii, v, 4; Straho, xv, p. 727; Plato, Legj;. iii 
 p. 61>5. 
 
 •' Xtiiophon, Anabas. iii, 3, 6; iii, 4, 7-12. Strabo bad read accounts 
 wliioh represented the last battle t>ctween Astyages and Cyrus to have been 
 foight near Pasar<;i:di« (x\ . i>. 730). 
 
 Ii has been rendered probable Uy Ritter, however, that the mined city 
 which Xenophon <aHed Mespila was the ancient Assyrian Nineveh, s,ud 
 the other deserted city which Xenophon calls Larissa. situated as it wa« on 
 the Tigris, must have becm originally Assyrian, and not Median. 6e« 
 About Nineveh, above, — the Chapter on the Babylonians, vol. iii, ch. jdx, 
 p. 305, note. 
 
 The land east of the Tigris, in which Nineveh and Arbela were situated 
 •eems to have been called Aturia, — a dialectic variation of Assyria (Strabo 
 »Ti, p. 737 ; Dio Cass. Ixviii, 28). 
 
 Mfii 
 
 PERSIAN TRIBES. - PASARGAD.E. 
 
 181 
 
 Greeks on the eastern side of the Tigris, gives us to understand 
 that the conquest of Media by the Persians was reported to him 
 as having been an obstinate and protracted struggle. However 
 this may be, the preponderance of the Per&ians was at last com- 
 plete : though the Medes always continued to be the second 
 nation in the empire, after the Persians, properly so called ; and 
 b}' early Greek writers the great enemy in the East is often 
 called " the Mede,' " as well as ^^ the Persian." Ekbatana 
 always continued to be one of the capital cities, and the usual 
 summer residence, of the kings of Persia ; Susa on the Choaspgs, 
 on the Kissian plain farther southward, and east of the Tigri*, 
 being their winter abode. 
 
 The vast space of country comprised between the Indus on the 
 east, the Oxus and Caspian sea to the north, the Persian gulf and 
 Indian ocean to the south, and the line of Mount Zagros to the 
 >\c>i, appeal's to have been occupied in these times by a great 
 variety of ditierent tribes and people, but all or most of them 
 belonging to the religion of Zoroaster, and speaking dialects of 
 the Zend language.^ It was known amongst its inhabitants by 
 the common name of Iran, or Aria : it is, in its central parts at 
 least, a high, cold plateau, totally destitute of wood and scantily 
 supplied with water ; much of it, indeed, is a salt and sandy 
 desert, unsusceptible of culture. Parts of it are eminently fer- 
 tile, where water can be procured and irrigation applied ; and 
 scattered masses of tolerably dense population thus grew up. 
 But continuity of cultivation is not practicable, and in ancient 
 times, as at present, a large proportion of the population of Iran 
 seems to have consisted of wandering or nomadic tribes, with 
 their tents and cattle. The rich pastures, and the freshness of 
 the summer climate, in the region of mountain and valley near 
 Kiv!;atana, are extolled by modern travellers, just as they attracted 
 the Great King in ancient times, during the hot months. Th« 
 
 ' Xiiioi)hanes, Fragm. p. 39, ap. Schneidewin, Delectus Toett Elegiac. 
 Grace. — 
 
 torapare Theognis, v, 775, and Herodot. i, 163. 
 
 * Strabo. XV, p. 724. ofioy'kuTToi napd. fxiKpov. See Heeren, Ueber del 
 Verkehr der Alten Welt, part i, book i, pp. 320-340, and Ritter, Erdkonda 
 West Asien, b iii, Abtheil. ii, sects. 1 and 2, pp. 17-84- 
 
 I '"Wl 
 
 .i 
 % 'Ii 
 
 ( 
 
 i 
 
 
 'fill 
 
 i] 
 \' J 
 
188 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 V 
 
 more southerly province called Persis proper (Farsistan) consisci 
 mlso ill part of mountain land interspersed with valley and plain, 
 •bundantly watered, and ample in pasture, sloping gradually 
 down to low grounds on the sea-coast which are hot and dry. 
 The care bestowed, both by Medes and Persians, on the breed- 
 ing of their horses, was remarkable. • There were doubtless 
 material differences between different parts of the population 
 of this vast plateau of Iran. Yet it seems that, along with tlieir 
 common language and religion, they had also something of a 
 common character, which contrasted with the Indian population 
 east of the Indus, the Assyrians west of Mount Zagros, and the 
 Massagetae and other Nomads of tlie Caspian and the sea of Aral, 
 — less brutish, restless, and bloodthirsty, than the latter, — more 
 fierce, contemptuous, and extortionate, and less capable of sus- 
 tained industry, than the two former. There can be little doubt, 
 at the time of which we are now speaking, when the wealth and 
 cuhivation of Assyria were at their maximum, that Iran also 
 was far better peopled than ever it has been since European ob- 
 servers have been able to survey it ; especially the northeastern 
 portion, Baktria and Sogdiana : so that the invasions of the no- 
 mads from Turkestan and Tartary, which have been so destruc- 
 tive at various intervals since the Mohammedan conquest, were 
 before that period successfully kept back. 
 
 The general analogy among the population of Iran probably 
 enabled the Persian conqueror with comparative ease to extend 
 his empire to the east, after the conquest of Ekbatana, and to 
 become the full heir of the Median kinnrs. And if we mav 
 believe Ktesias, even the distant province of Baktria had been 
 before subject to those kings : it at first resisted Cyrus, but find 
 ing that he had become son-in-law of Astyages as well as master 
 of his person, it speedily acknowledged his authority.^ 
 
 According to the representation of Herodotus, the war between 
 Cyrus and Crcesus of Lydia began shortly after the capture 
 of Astyages, and before the conquest of Baktria.3 Croesus waa 
 
 * About the province of Persis, see Strabo. xv, p. 727: Diodor. xix, 21 ; 
 Quintus Curtius, v, 13. 14, pp. 432-434, with the valuable explanatory note* 
 of Miitzell (Berlin, 1841). Compare, also. Morier's Second Journey in 
 Persia, pp. 49-120, and Ritter, Erdkunde, West Asien, pp. 712-738. 
 
 ■ Kt^siaa, Persica, c. 2. •* Herodot i, 153. 
 
 1VAR BETWEEN CRCESUS AND CYRUS. 
 
 189 
 
 rtie assailant, wishing to avenge his brother-in-law, to arrest th« 
 growth of the Persian conqueror, and to increase his ohn domin- 
 ions : his more prudent councillors in vain represented to ^iin 
 that he had little to gain, and much to lose, by war with a nation 
 alike hardy and poor. He is represented, as just at that time 
 reeoveiing from the affliction arising out of the death of his son. 
 To ask advice of the oracle, before he took any final decision, 
 was a step which no pious king would omit ; but in the present 
 perilous question, Croesus did more, — he took a precaution so 
 extreme., that, if his piety had not been placed beyond all doubt 
 by his extraordinary munificence to the temples, he might have 
 drawn upon himself the suspicion of a guilty skepticism.i Be- 
 fore he would send to ask advice respecting the iiroject itself, he 
 resolved to test the credit of some of the chief surroundmg 
 oracles, — Delphi, DodOna, Branchid.-e near Miletus, Amphiaraua 
 at' Thebes, Trophonius at Lebadeia, and Ammon in Libya. Hia 
 envoys started from Sardis on the same day, and were all directed 
 on the hundredth day afterwards to ask at the respective oracles 
 how Croesus was at that precise moment employed. This was a 
 Fevere trial : of the manner in which it was met by four out of 
 the six oracles consulted, we have no information, and it rather 
 appears that their answers were unsatisfactory. But Amphiaraua 
 mahitained his credit undiminished, and Apollo at Delphi, more 
 omniscient than Apollo at Branchidte, solved the question with 
 Buch unerring precision, as to afford a strong additional argument 
 a-ainst persons who might be disposed to scofl* at divination. Wo 
 Booner had the envoys put the question to the Delphian priestess, 
 on the day named, - Wliat is Croesus now doing? " than she ex- 
 claimed, in the accustomed he'xameter verse,^ ^' I know the num- 
 ber of grains of sand, and the measures of the sea ; I understan^ 
 the dumb, and I hear the man who speaks not. The smeU 
 reaches me of a hard-skinned tortoise boiled in a copper with 
 lamb's flesh, -copper above and copper below." Croesus waa 
 
 »That this point of view should not be noticed ^"H^f "!"''• ,!";/ 
 appear l^ular when we read his story (vi, 86) about the Milesian Glau- 
 toand the iuijrment that overtook him for having tested the orac e; but 
 t^^^nt flr.4d hy Xenophon as constituting part of the puU of C re..- 
 
 (CvTopaed. vii, 2, 17). 
 « Herodot. i, 47 50. 
 
 II 
 
 1 it 
 
 'i 
 
 IV 1 
 
 1 
 
ItO 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 II 
 
 if 
 
 weatrucfc on receiving this reply. It described with the uimom 
 istail that which he bad been really doing, insomuch that he 
 •ccounted the Delphian oracle and that of Amphiaraus the onl> 
 trustworthy orach-s on earth, — following up these feelings with 
 a holocaust of the must munificent character, in order to win the 
 fevor of the Delphian god. Three thousan<l cattle were offered 
 op, and upon a vast sacrificial pile were {)Iaced the most splendid 
 purple robes and tunics, together with couches and censers of 
 gold and silver : besides which he sent to Delphi itself the rich- 
 est presents in gold and silver, — in«;ots, statues, bowls, jugs, etc., 
 the size and weight of whic h we read with astonishment ; the 
 more so as Herodotus himself saw them a century afterwards at 
 Delphi.' Nor was Cnjesus altogether unmindful of Amphiaraus, 
 whose answer had been creditable, though less triumphant than 
 that of the Pythian priestess. He sent to Amphiaraus a spear 
 and shield of pure gold, which were afterwards seen at Thebes 
 by Hero<iotus: this large donative may help the reader to 
 conceive the immensity of those which he sent to Delphi. 
 
 The envoys who conveyed these gifts were instructed to ask, 
 at the same time, whether Croesus should undertake an expe- 
 dition against the Persians, — and, if so, whether he should 
 prevail on any allies to assist him. In regard to the second ques- 
 tion, the answer botli of Apollo and Amphiaraus was decisive, 
 recommending him to invite the alliance of the most powerful 
 Greeks. In regard to the first and most momentous question, 
 their answer was as remarkable for circumspection as it had been 
 before for detective sagacity: they told Cra^sus that, if he in- 
 vaded the Persians, he would subvert a mighty monarchy. The 
 blindness of Croesus interpreted this declaration into an unquali- 
 fied promise of success. He sent farther [)resents to Vie oracle, 
 and again inquired ^\hether his kingdom would be durable! 
 "When a mule shall become king of the Mvdii:^ (rei)lied the 
 priestess), then must thou run away, —be not ar^liaMied."-' 
 
 More assured than ever by such an answer, Cra'>us sent to 
 Spaita, under the kings Anaxandrides and Aristo, to tender 
 presents and solicit their alliance.3 His propositions were f» 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 52-54. 
 • Hcrodot. i, 67-70. 
 
 * litnotlot. i, 5d 
 
 DEFEAT OF CR(ESUS BY CYRDS. 
 
 191 
 
 rorably entertained, — the more so, as he had before gratuitoualy 
 nimished some gold to the Lacedaemonians, for a statue to Apollo 
 The alliance now formed was altogether general, — no express 
 effort being as yet demanded from them, though it soon came to 
 be. But the incident is to be noted, as marking the first plunge 
 of the leading Grecian state into Asiatic politics ; and that too 
 without any of the generous Hellenic sympathy which afterwards 
 induced Athens to send her citizens across the ^Egean. Crcesufl 
 was the master and tribute-exactor of the Asiatic Greeks, and 
 their contingents seem to have formed part of his army for the 
 expedition now contemplated ; which army consisted principally, 
 not of native Lydians, but of foreigners. 
 
 The river Halys formed the boundary at this time between 
 the Median and Lydian empires : and Croesus, marching across 
 that river into the territory of the Syrians or Assyrians of Kap- 
 padokia, took the city of Pteria and many of its surrounding 
 dependencies, infiicting damage and destruction upon these dis- 
 tant subjects of Ekbatana. Cyrus lost no time in bringing an 
 army to their defence considerably larger than that of Croesus, 
 and at the same time tried, though unsuccessfully, to prevail on 
 the lonians to revolt from him. A l)loody battle took place be- 
 tween the two armies, but with indecisive result: and Croesus, 
 seeing that he could not hope to accomplish more with Lis forces 
 as they stood, thought it wise to return to his capital, in order to 
 collect a larger army for the next campaign. Immediately on 
 reaching Sardis, he despatched envoys to Labynetus king of 
 Babylon ; to Amasis king of Egypt ; to the Lacedjemoninns, 
 and to other allies ; calling upon all of them to send auxiliaries 
 to Sardis during the course of the fifth coming month. In the 
 mean time, he dismissed all the foreign troops who had followed 
 him into Kappadokia.^ 
 
 Had these allies appeared, the war might perhaps have beea 
 prosecuted with success ; and on the part of the Lacedamoniaiw 
 at least, there was no tardiness ; for their ships were ready and 
 their troops almost on board, when the unexpected news reached 
 them that Croesus was already ruined.^ Cyrus had foreseen and 
 fevestalled the defensive plan of his enemy. He pushed on witb 
 
 
 t!f |||, 
 
 » Herodot. i, 77. 
 
 « Herodot. i, 80. 
 
192 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 REMONSTRANCE OF CK(ESUS. 
 
 198 
 
 his army to Sardis without delay, compelling the Lydian prinos 
 to give battle with his own unassisted subjects. The open and 
 spacious plain before that town was highly favorable to the 
 Lydian cavalry, which at that time, Herodotus tells us, was supe- 
 rior to the Persian. But Cyrus devised a stratagem whereby tlii» 
 cavalry was rendered luiavailable, — placing in front of his lino 
 the bfiggage camels, which the Lydian liorses could not endure 
 either to smell or to behold. i The horsemen of Croesus were thu3 
 obliged to dismount ; nevertheless, they fought bravely on foot, 
 and were not driven into the town till after a sanguinary combat. 
 Though confined within the walls of his capital, Croesus had 
 still good reason for hoping to hold out until the arrival of his 
 allies, to whom he sent pressing envoys of acceleration: for Sar- 
 dis was considered im{>regnable, — one assault had already beea 
 repulsed, and the Persians would have been reduced to the slow 
 process of blockade. But on the fourteenth day of the siege, 
 accident did for the besiegers that which they could not have ac- 
 complished either by skill or force. Sardis was situated on an 
 outlying peak of the northern side of Tmulus ; it was well-forti- 
 fied every where except towards the mountain; and on that side, 
 the rock, was so precipitous and inaccessible, that fortifications 
 were thought unneccssi.ry, nor did the inhabitants believe assault 
 to be jK)ssible. But Ilyrceadcs, a Persian soldier, having acci- 
 dentally seen one of the garrison descending this precipitous 
 rock to pick up his helmet, which had rolle<l down, watched his 
 opportunity, tried to climb uj), and found it not impracticable. 
 Others followed his example, the strong-hold was thus seized 
 first, and the whole city was s{)ecdily taken by storm.- 
 
 Cyrus had given esp(;cial orders to spare the life of Cr^sus, 
 who was accordingly made prisoner. But preparations were 
 made for a solemn and terrible spectacle. The captive king was 
 destined to be burnt in chains, together with fourteen Lydian 
 youths, on a vast pile of wood : and we are even told that the 
 pile was already kindled and the victim beyond the reach of 
 human aid, when Apollo sent a miraculous rain to preserve him 
 
 ' ' ■! - ■ ■ ■IIMIM ■ llll^— — >^^— ^W ■ .....III M ,1 IM II . Ml MM 1^ 
 
 * The story about the suc< essful empIoyTiient cf the cameb appears also 
 in Xenophon, Cyropaed. vii, 1, 47. 
 ' Herodot. i, 84. 
 
 hs to the gvjneral fiict of supernatural interposition, in one way 
 or another, Herodotus and Kiesias both agree, though they 
 describe differently the particular miracles wrought. • It is cer- 
 tain that Croesus, after some time, was released and well treated 
 by his concjueror, and lived to become the confidential adviser of 
 the latter as well as of his son Kambyses : - Ktesias also ac- 
 quaints us that a considerable town and territory near P^kbatana, 
 called Barene, was assigned to him, according to a practice which 
 we shall find not unfrequent with the Persian kings. 
 
 The prudent counsel and remarks as to the relations between 
 Persians and Lydians, whereby Croesus is said by Herodotus to 
 have first earned this favorable treatment, are hardly worth repeat- 
 ing; but the indignant remonstrance sent by Croesus to the Delphian 
 god is too characteristic to be passed over. He obtained permis- 
 sion from Cyrus to lay upon the holy pavement of the Delphian 
 temple the chains with which he had at first been bound. The 
 Lydian envoys were instructed, after exhibiting to the god these 
 
 ' Compare Herodot. i, 84-87, and Ktesias, Persica, c. 4 ; which latter 
 «eems to have been copied by Polyaeiius, vii, 6, 10. 
 
 It is remarkable that among the miracles enumerated by Ktesias, no men 
 tion is made of fire or of the pile of wood kindled : we have the chains of 
 Croesus miraculously struck off, in the nidst of thunder and lightning, but 
 no Jire mentioned. This is deserving of notice, as illustrating the fact that 
 Ktesias derived his information from Persian narrators, who would not be 
 likely to impute to Cyrus the use of fire for such a purpose. The Persians 
 worshipped fire as a god, and considered it impious to bum a dead body 
 (Herodot. iii, 16). Now Herodotus seems to have heard the story, about the 
 liuming, from Lydian informants {Xeyerai virb AvScjv, Herodot. i, 87) . 
 whether the Lydians regarded fire in the same point of view as the Per- 
 sians, we do not know ; but even if they did, they would not be indisposed to 
 impute to Cyrus an act of gross impiety, just as the Egyptians imputed 
 another act equally gross to Kambyses, which Herodotus himself treats as a 
 Wsehood (iii, 16). 
 
 The long narrative given by Nikolaus Damaskenus of the treatment ot 
 Croesus by Cyrus, has been supposed by some to have been borrowed from 
 the Lydian historian Xanthus, elder contemporary of Herodotus. But it 
 seems to me a mere compilation, not well put together, from Xenophon's 
 CyropaBdia, and from the narrative of Herodotus, perhaps including some 
 particular incidents out of Xanthus (see Nikol. Damas. Fragm. ed. Orell. pp. 
 57-70, and the Fragments of Xanthus in Didot's Historic. Graecor. Fragm, 
 
 p. 40). 
 • Justin (i, 7) seems to copy Ktesias, about the treatment of Croesiw. 
 
 ▼OL. IT. 9 ISoCi 
 
 If! 
 
 i M 
 
 
 f 11 
 
 .11 
 
 ■jfl. 
 
194 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 humiliating raemori&Is, to ask whether it was his custom to do 
 ceive his benefactor., and whether lie was not ashamed to have 
 encouraged the king of Lydia in an enterprise so disii.<trous? 
 The god, condescending to justify himself by the lips ol' the 
 priestess, replied; "Not even a god can escape his destiny 
 Croesus has suffered for the sin of his fifth ancestor (Gyges), 
 who, conspiring with a woman, slew his master and wrongfully' 
 ieized the sceptre. Aj)oUo employed all his influence witli the 
 Moene (Fates) to obtain that this sin might be expiated by tb« 
 children of Croesus, and not by Croesus himself; but the Moera 
 would grant nothing more than a })Ostponement of the judgment 
 for three years. Let Croesus know that Apollo has thu^ pro- 
 cured for him a reign three years longer than liis original des 
 tiny,» after having tried in vain to rescue him altogetlier. Mor'> 
 jver, he sent that rain which at the critical moment extinguished 
 the burning pile. Nor has Croesus any right to eomi)lain''of the 
 prophecy by which he was encouraged to enter on the war ; for 
 when the god told him, that he would subvert a great empire, \\ 
 was his duty to have again inquired which empire the god meant , 
 and if he neither understood the meaning, nor chose°to ask foi' 
 information, he has Limself to blame for the result. Besides 
 Croesus neglected the warning given to him, about the acquisitioi 
 of the Median kingdom by a mule: Cyrus was that mule, —son 
 ^< a Median mother of royaJ breed, by a Persian father, at one« 
 of different race and c»f lower position." 
 
 This triumphant justification extorted even from Croesus him- 
 self a full confession, that the sin lay with him, and not with the 
 god.2 It certainly illustrates, in a remarkable manner, the th^^o- 
 logical ideas of the time; and it shows us how much, in the mind 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 91. Tipo^vfitofiivov 61 Xo^uu Sttoc av KarH roi)f TraZdaj ro^ 
 Kpoloov yivoiTo rd lapdiatv niiM, ^al fir, Kar' avrdv Kpolaoi>, ovk ol6v -« 
 iyev€To rrapayayeiv Molpm • ocrov de iveduKav avrat, r/vvaaro, kqc ixapiacro 
 ol • Tpia ydp irea iiravefSaAero t},v lapdiuv aTiuacv. Kai tovto kmardt-Ni 
 Kpoico^^ 6f larepov Tolai Ireai tovtokti dAot>f r^f Tren-pw/ifViyf. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 91. 'O <Ji aKovaa^ avveyvu it^vrov elvai rfiv dfiapruda, Kaio% 
 rov ^ea9, 
 
 Xeoophon also, in the Cyropedia (vii. 2, 16-25), brings Crce8us to tfw 
 •ame reauU of confession miuI hi miUation, though by steps somewhat ^ 
 ferent. 
 
 FATE OF CRCESUS. 
 
 196 
 
 of Herodotus, the facts of the centuries preceding his own, uft- 
 recorded as they were by any contemporary authority, tended to 
 cast themselves into a sort of religious drama; the threads of th« 
 historical web being in part put together, in part originally spun, 
 for the purpose of setting forth the religious sentiment and doctrine 
 woven in as a pattern. The Pythian priestess predicts to Gygea 
 that the crime which he had committed in assassinating his mas- 
 ter would be expiated by his fifth descendant, though, as Herod- 
 otus tells us, no one took any notice of this prophecy until it 
 was at last fulfilled : ' we see thus that the history of the first 
 Mermnad king is made up after the catastrophe of the last 
 There was something in the main facts of the history of Croesus 
 profoundly striking to the Greek mind : a king at the summit of 
 wealth and power, — pious in the extreme, and munificent towards 
 the gods, — the first destroyer of Hellenic liberty in Asia, — then 
 precipitated, at once and on a sudden, into the abyss of ruin. 
 The sin of the first parent helped much towards the solution of 
 this perplexing problem, as well as to exalt the credit of the 
 oracle, when made to assume the shape of an unnoticed prophecy. 
 In the affecting story (discussed in a former chapter'^) of Solon 
 and Croesus, the Lydian king is punished with an acute domestic 
 aftliction, because he thought himself the happiest of mankind, 
 — the gods not suffering any one to be arrogant except them- 
 selves ; ^ and the warning of Solon is made to recur to Croesus 
 after he has become the prisoner of Cyrus, in the narrative ol 
 Herodotus. To the same vein of thought belongs the story, just 
 recounted, of the relations of Croesus with the Delphian oracle. 
 An account is provided, satisfactory to the religious feelings of 
 the Greeks, how and why he was mined, — but nothing less tlian 
 the overruling and omnipotent Moene could be invoked to ex- 
 plain so stupendous a result. 
 
 It is rarely that these supreme goddesses, or hyper-goddesses — 
 iince the gods themselves must submit to them — are brought 
 into such distinct light and action. Usually, they are kept in the 
 dark, or are left to be understood as the unseen stumbling-block 
 
 * Herodot. i, 13. 
 
 • See above, chap, xi, vol. iii, pp. 149-153. 
 
 ■Herodot. vii, 10. ov yd,p l^ (jtpoveEiv uTlXov uiya d i?edf ^ luvTW 
 
 I III 
 
 I 
 
 t'l 
 
196 
 
 HISTOKY OF OK£ECE. 
 
 FATE OF CRCESUS. 
 
 191 
 
 m cases of extreme incomprehensibility ; and it is difficult clcarljr 
 to determine (as in tlje case of some complicated political consti* 
 tutions) where the Greeks conceived sovereign power to reside, 
 m respect to the guvernment of the world. But here the sover- 
 eignty of the Mcene, and the subordinate agency of the gods, are 
 'inequi vocally set forth.' Yet the gods are still extremely pow- 
 
 * In the oracle reported in lienxlot. vii, 141, as delivered by the Pythian 
 ;»riestess to Athens on occasion of tlie ap})roach of Xcrxu--^, Zeus is repro* 
 Rented in the same supreme position as the present oracle as>i«,Tis to the 
 M'cra;, or Fates: I'allas in vain :itremi>is to propitiate him in favor of 
 Atliens, just as, in this case, Apollo tries to mitigate the Mo^rie in respect to 
 Croesus — 
 
 Oil dvvarat Ua?Jj)g A/' 'OXvfnriov l^ihioaay^a , 
 Aiaaofievr) ro?.?.oL(n \oyoLq koX fiTjTidi nvKir), etc. 
 Compare also viii, 109, and ix, 16. 
 
 O. Miiller (Dissertation on the Eumenides of iEschylus, ]>. 222, Eng. 
 Transl.) says: '• On no occasion does Zeus Soter exert his intiuencc di 
 rectly, like Apollo, Minerva, and the Erinnyes ; hut wiiercas Apollo ia 
 proi)het and exegetes hy virtue of wisdom derived from liim, and Minerva 
 (s indehted to him for her sway over states and asscmhlies, — nay, the very 
 Erinnyes cxerci.se their functions in liis name, — this Zeus stands always in 
 the hackj^round, and h.i> in realitv onlv to stttlc a contlict existiuir within 
 oimself For with ..Fschyhis, as with all men of j>rofound feeling' among 
 the Greeks from the earliest tinirs -Tupiter is the only real god, in the hi.<:her 
 sense of the word. Alrhoujxh he is, in the spirit of anrjent theoloiry, a gen- 
 erated frod, arisen out of ;m imperfect state of thiii-N and not produced till 
 the third stage of a development of nature,— still he is, at the time we 
 are speaking of, the sj)irit that pervades and governs the universe." 
 
 To the same purpose Kl \usen expresses himself (Theologumena .Eschvli, 
 pp. f)-G9). 
 
 It is perfectly true than many j.assages may he produced from Greek 
 authors wliich ascrif»e to Zeus the supreme j)Ower here noted. But it is 
 equally tnic that this conception is not uniformly adhered to, and that 
 •omctimes the Fates, or Mfera', arc represented as supreme; occasionally 
 represented as the stronger and Zeu< n^ the weaker (Prometheus, 515). 
 The whole tenor of that tragedy, in fact. l>rings out the concepticn of a 
 Zeus rcpovvof, — whose power is not supreme, even for the time; and is 
 not destined to continue permanently, even at its existing height. The ex- 
 planations given hy Klausen of this drama appear to me incorrect ; nor do 
 1 understand how it is toS.e reconciled with the above passage quoted from 
 O. Miiller. 
 
 The two oracles here cited from Herodotus exhibit plainly the fluctua- 
 tion of Greek o])inion on this suhject : in the one. the supreme determina- 
 tion, and the inexorahility which accompanies it, arc ascribed to Zens, — in 
 
 eiful, because the Moerie comply with their requests up to a cei> 
 tain point, not thinking it proper to be wholly inexorable ; but 
 their compliance is carried no farther than they themselvea 
 choose. Nor would they, even in deference to Apollo,' alter 
 the original sentence of punishment for the sin of Gyges in the 
 person of his fifth descendant, — a sentence, moreover, which 
 Apollo himself had formally prophesied shortly after the sin waa 
 committed ; so that, if the Moene had listened to his intercession 
 on behalf of Croesus, his own prophetic credit would have been 
 endangered. Their unalterable resolution has predetermined the 
 ruin of Croesus, and the grandeur of the event is manifested by 
 the circumstance, that even Apollo himself cannot prevail upcn 
 them to alter it, or to grant more than a three years' respite. 
 The religious element must here be viewed as giving the form 
 — the historical element as giving the matter only, and not the 
 whole matter — of the story; and these two elements will be 
 found conjoined more or less throughout most of the history of 
 Herodotus, though, as we descend to later times, we shall find the 
 historical element in constantly increasing proportion. His con- 
 ception of history is extremely different from that of Thucydides, 
 who lays down to himself the true scheme and purpose of the 
 
 the other, to the Mara?. This doxMc i^oint of view adapted itself to dif- 
 ferent occasions, and served as a help for the interpretation of different 
 events. Zeus was supposed to have certain sympathies for human beings; 
 misfortunes happened to various men which he not only did not wish to 
 bring on, hut would have been disposed to avert ; here the Moeraj, who had 
 no sympathies, were introduced as an cxplanatorj' cause, tacitly implied aa 
 overruling Zeus. " Cum Funis ^schylus Parcas tantum non ubique con- 
 jungit," says Klausen (Theol. ^sch. p. 39) ; and this entire absence of hu- 
 man sjTnpathies .constitutes the common point of both, — that in which th« 
 Moerje and the Erinnves differ from all the other gods, — Tre^wa rtiv diXem- 
 tHKov ^eav, ov ^eolg ojioiav (^.schyl. Sept. ad Theb. 720) : compare Eumenid. 
 169, 172, and, indeed, the general strain of that fearful tragedy. 
 
 In JEschvlus, as in Herodotus, Apollo is represented as exercising per- 
 ■uasive powers over the Moerae (Eumenid 724), — Motpaf (nuaaq Mirof 
 
 9eivai ppoToi'C. 
 
 • The language of Herodotus deser\'es attention. Apollo tells Crceaua : 
 * I applied to the Mcerffi to get the execution of the judgment postponed 
 lh)m your time to that of your children, — but I could not prevail upon 
 them • but as much as they would \-ield of their own accord, I i>rocured fo« 
 
 I 1 
 
 >'l 
 
 f 
 
 I " ^ 
 
 fOVL. 
 
 {?><jov6e kviduKav airai, exipioarn ol — i,9l.) 
 
Ids 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 historian, common to him with the philosopher, — to recount ahd 
 interpret the past, a. a rational aid towards the prevision of the 
 future.! 
 
 The destruction oi' the Ljdian monarchy, and the establish- 
 ment of the Persians at Sardis — an event pregnant with conse- 
 quences to HeDas generally — took place in 516 b.c:^ Sorely did 
 the Ionic Greeks now repent that they had rejected the proposi- 
 r.ons made to them by Cyrus tor revolting from Croesus,- though 
 ut the time when these propositions wen- made, it would have 
 been highly imprudent to WsUm to them, since the Lydian power 
 nnght reasonably be looked u|>on as the stronger. As soon as 
 Sardis had fallen, th^y sent envoys to the conqueror, entreating 
 that they might be enrolled as his tributaries, on the footing 
 which they had occupied under Croesus. The reply was a stern 
 and angry refusal, with the exception of the Milesians, to whom 
 the terms which they asked were granted : 3 whv this favorable 
 exception was extended to them, we do not know. The othei 
 continental lonians and ^olians (exclusive of MiKtus, and ex- 
 clusive also of the insular cities which the Tcrsians had no 
 means of attacking), seized with alarm, began to put themselves 
 
 ASIATIC GREEKS ATI ACKED BY CYRUS. 
 
 199 
 
 ' Tliiuyd. i, 22. 
 
 * This important date depends upon the evidence of Soliniis (Polyhistor, 
 KU2} and Sosikrates (ap. Diog. Laert. i, 95): see Mr. Clinton's Fasti 
 Hellen. ad ann. 546, and his Appendix, eh. 17, upon tlie Lydian kings. 
 
 Mr. Clinton and most of the chronologists aceept the date without hesi 
 
 Ution, but Volney (Reehcrches surrHistoire Ancienne, vol. i,pp. 306-308- 
 
 Chronologie des Rois Lydicns) rejects it altogether; considering the cap- 
 
 ture of Sardis to have occurred in 5.',7 B.c.,and the reign of Croesus to have 
 
 begun m 571 b.c. He treats very contemptuously the authority of Solinus 
 
 wui Sosikrates, and has ai elaborate argumentation to prove that the date 
 
 Which he adopts is home out by Herodotus. This latter does not appear 
 
 to me at all satisfactory : I adopt the date of Solinus and Sosikrates, 
 
 Ihough agreeing with Volney that such positive authoritv is not very con- 
 
 •iderable, because there is nothing to contradict them, and because the date 
 
 which they give seems in consonance with the stream of the history. 
 
 Volney's arguments suppose in the mind of Herodotus a degree Qf chron- 
 ological precision altogether unreasonable, in reference to events anteriof 
 to contemporary records. He, like other chronologists, exhausts his ing©. 
 ooity to find a proper poini, of historical time for the supposed converei^ 
 Hon between Solon and Cn»sus (p. 320;. 
 ' !'< rodot. i, 141. 
 
 tn a condition of defence : it seems that the Lydian king had 
 caused their fortifications to be wholly or partially dismantled, 
 for we are told that they now began to erect walls ; and the 
 Phokaeans especially devoted to that purpose a present which 
 they had received from the Iberian Arganthonius, king of Tar- 
 tessus. Besides thus strengthening their own cities, they 
 thought it advisable to send a joint embassy entreating aid 
 from° Sparta ; they doubtless were not unapprized that the Spar- 
 tans had actually equipped an army for the support of Croesus. 
 Their deputies went to Sparta, where the Ph6ka3an Pythermu3, 
 appointed by the rest to be spokesman, clothing himself in a 
 purple robe,» in order to attract the largest audience jK>ssible, 
 se*. forth their pressing need of succor against the impending 
 danger. The Lacedaemonians refused the prayer ; nevertheless, 
 they despatclied to Phokiea some commissioners to investigate 
 the state of affairs, - who perhaps, persuaded by the Phokaeans, 
 sent Lakrines, one of their number, to the conqueror at Sardis, 
 to warn him that he should not lay hands on any city of Hellas, 
 ^ for the Lacediemonians would not permit it. " Who are these 
 Lacedemonians r (inquired Cyrus from some Greeks who stood 
 near him) — how many are there of them, that they venture to 
 send me such a notice ? ** Having received the answer, whereir 
 it was stated that the Lacedaemonians had a city and a regulai 
 market at Spaita, he exclaimed: "I have never yet beet 
 afraid of men like these, who have a set place in the middle of 
 their city, where they meet to cheat one another and forsweai 
 themselves. If I live, they shall have troubles of their own to 
 talk about, apart from the lonians." To buy or sell, appeared 
 to the Persians a contemptible practice ; for they carried out 
 consistently, one step farther, the principle upon which even 
 many able Greeks condemned the lending of money on mt^rest ; 
 und the speech of Cyrus was intended as a covert reproach of 
 Grecian habits generally .2 
 
 This blank menace of Lakrines, an insulting provocation to 
 
 ^ Herodot. i, 152. The purple garment, so attractive a spectacle amid 
 the plain clothing universal at Sparta, marks the contrast between Asiatic 
 
 and European Greece. 
 * Herodot. i, 153. ravTa H rot)f TrdvTOf 'EX^.ijvac airiftfu'pe 6 KOpof t* 
 
 ^ea, etc. 
 
 
 I 
 
m 
 
 200 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUvPRESSED BY A PERSIAii ARMY. 
 
 201 
 
 the enemy rather than a real support to the distressed, wa^ th« 
 only benefit which the Ionic Greeks derived from Sparta. They 
 were left to defend tliemselves as best they could against the 
 conqueror; who prcMritlv^ however, quitted Sardis to prosecute 
 in person his conquests in the East, leaving the Persian Tabalua 
 with a garrison in the citadel, but consigning both the large 
 treasure captured, and the authority over the Lydian population, 
 to the Lydian Paktyas. As he carried away Croesus along with 
 him, he probably consi<iered himself sure of the fidelity of those 
 Lydians whom the de»posed monarch recommended. But he 
 had not yet arrived at his own capital, when he received the 
 intelligence that Paktyas had revolted, arming the Lydian popu- 
 lation, and employing the treasure in his charge to hire fresh 
 troops. On hearing this news, Cyrus addressed himself to 
 CrcBsus, according to Herodotus, in terms of much wrath against 
 the Lydians, and even intimated that he should be compelled to 
 sell them all as slave?. Upon which Croesus, full of alarm for 
 his people, contended strenuously that Paktyas alone was in 
 fault, and deserving of punishment ; but he a' the same time 
 a<lvise«l Cyrus to disarm the Lydian population, ar 1 to enforce 
 upon them etleminate attire, together with b r ts ,^ playing on 
 the harp and shopkeeptng. " By this process ^h; said) you will 
 soon see them become women instead of men." i This sugges- 
 tion is said to have been accepted by Cyrus, and executed by his 
 general Mazares. Tlie conversation here reported, and the 
 deliberate plan for enervating the Lydian character supposed to 
 he pursued by Cyrus, is evidently an hyi)Othesi3 imagined by 
 some of the contemporaries or predecessors of Herodotus, — to 
 explain the contrast between the Lydians whom they saw before 
 them, after two or three generations of slavery, and the old irre- 
 sistible horsemen of whom they heard in fame, at the time when 
 Crasus was lord from tlie Ilalys to the ^Egean sea. 
 
 To return to Paktyas,, — he had commenced his revolt, come 
 down to the sea-cotist, and employed the treasures of Sardis hi 
 levying a Grecian mercenary force, with which he invested the 
 place and blocked up the governor Tabalus. But he manifested 
 DO oourage worthy of so dangerous an enterprise ; for no sooncf 
 
 • Herodot. i. 1.55. 
 
 had he heard that ihe Median general Mazares was approaching 
 at the head of an aimy dispatched by Cyrus against him, thai 
 ho disbanded his force and fled to Kyme for protection as a sup- 
 pliant. Presently, arrived a menacing summons from Mazares, 
 demanding that he should be given up forthwith, which plunged 
 the Kym^ans into profound dismay ; for the idea of giving up 
 a suppliant to destruction was shocking to Grecian sentiment. 
 They sent to solicit advice from the holy temple of Apollo, at 
 Branchidie near Miletus ; and the reply directed, that Paktyas 
 should be surrendered. Nevertheless, so ignominious did such 
 a surrender appear, that Aristodikus and some othier KynKean 
 citizens denounced the messengers as liars, and required that a 
 more trustworthy deputation should be sent to consult the god. 
 Aristodikus himself, forming one of the second body, stated the 
 perplexity to the oracle, and received a repetition of the same 
 answer ; whereupon he proceeded to rob the birds'-nests which 
 existed in abundance in and about the temple. A voice from 
 the inner oracular chamber speedily arrested him, exclaiming : 
 "Most impious of men, how darest thou to do such things ? Wilt 
 thou snateh my suppliants from the temple itself? " Unabashed 
 by the rebuke, Aristodikus repUed: '^ Master, thus dost thou 
 help suppliants thyself: and dost thou command the Kymieans 
 to give up a suppliant ? " " Yes, I do command it ' (rejoined 
 the god forthwith), in order that the crime may bring destruction 
 upon you the sooner, and that you may not in future come to 
 consult the oracle upon the surrender of suppliants." 
 
 The ingenuity of Aristodikus completely nullified the oracular 
 response, °and left the Kymajans in their original perplexity. 
 Not choosing to surrender Paktyas, nor daring to protect him 
 against a besieging army, they sent him away to Mitylene, 
 whither the envoys of Mazares followed and demanded him ; 
 offering a reward so considerable, that the Kymaians became 
 fearful of trusting them, and again conveyed away the suppliant 
 to Chios, where he took refuge m the temple of Athene Po- 
 liuchus. But here again the pursuers followed, and the Chians 
 were persuaded to drag him from the temple and surrender him, 
 on consideration of receiving the territory of Atarneus (a Oii 
 
 > Herodot. i, 159. 
 
 \\ 
 
 I '; « 
 
 f ■ .'J 
 
202 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 v. I 
 
 trict on the continent over against the island of Lesbos) as purw 
 chase-money. Taktyas was thus seized and sfiit i)risoner to 
 Cyrus, who had fi^iveu the most express orders for this oa[)ture ; 
 hence the unusual intensity of the pursuit. But it appears that 
 Uie territory of Atai'neus was considered as havinfr l)een iono. 
 miniously acquired by the Chians ; none even of their own 
 citizens would employ any article of its produce for holy or 
 fiacriticial purposes.' 
 
 Mazares next proceeded to the attack and conquest of the 
 Greeks on the coiisi ; an enterprise which, since he soon died of 
 illness, was completed by his successor Harpagus. The towns 
 assailed successively made a gallant but ineffectual resistance; 
 the Persian general by Ida numbers drove the defenders within 
 their walls, against which U piled up mounds of earth, so aa 
 either to carry the phice by storm or to compel surrender. All 
 of them were reduced, one after the other: with all, the terms of 
 subjection were doubdess harder than those which had been im- 
 posed upon them by Croesus, because Cyrus had already refused 
 to grant these terms to them, with the single exception of Mile- 
 tus, and because they had since given additional ot!ence by aid- 
 ing the revolt of Paktyas. The inhabitants of Priene were sold 
 into slavery: they were the first assailed by Mazares, and had 
 perhaps been especially forward in the attack made by Paktyas 
 on Sardis.*2 
 
 Among these unfortunate towns, thus changing their nuister 
 and passing out into a harslier subjection, two deserve especial 
 notice, — Teos and Phokjea. The citizens of the former, so soon 
 
 ' HiTodot. i. If.O The short fnigineut from Charon of Lampsakus. 
 which riutarrh (Do Muliiruitat. Herod, p. 851)) cites here, in support of one 
 among his many unjust censures on Herodotus, is noway inconsistent witfi 
 the statement of the latter, but rather tends to confirm it. 
 
 In writing this treatise on the alleged ill-temper of Herodotus, we see 
 that Plutarch had hefor(i him the history of Charon of Lampsakus, more 
 •ncient by one generation than the historian whom he was assailing, and 
 •leo belonging to Asiatic Greece. Of course, it suited the purpose of his 
 work to produce all the contradictions to Herodotus which he could find in 
 Charon : the fact that he has produced none of any moment, tends to 
 •trengthcn our faith in ths historian of Halikamassus, and to show that in 
 the main his narrative ww in accordance with that of Charon. 
 * Herodot. i, 161-16!^. 
 
 ■iir 
 
 CONQUEST OF PHOILEA. 
 
 200 
 
 us the mound around their walls had rendered farther resistanot 
 impossible, embarked and emigrated, some to Thrace, where they 
 founded Abdera, — others to the Cimmerian Bosphorus, where 
 they planted Phanagoria; a portion of them, however, must have 
 remained to take the chances of subjection, since the town 
 appears in after-times still peopled and still Hellenic.^ 
 
 The fate of Phoktea, similar in the main, is given to us with 
 more striking circumstances of detail, and becomes the more in- 
 teresting, since the enterprising mariners who inhabited it had 
 been the torch-bearers of Grecian gcogra})hical discovery in the 
 west. I have already described their adventurous exploring voy- 
 ages of former days into the interior of the Adriatic, and along 
 the whole northern and western coasts of the Mediterranean as 
 far as Tartessus (the region around and adjoining to Cadiz), — ■ 
 together with the favorable reception given to them by old 
 Arganthonius, king of the country, who invited them to emigrate 
 in a body to his kingdom, offering them the choice of any site 
 which they might desire. His invitation was decHned, though 
 probably the Phoka^ans may have subsequently regretted the 
 refusal ; and he then manifested his good-will towards them by a 
 large present to defray the expen e of constructing fortifications 
 round their town.- The walls, erected in part, by this aid, were 
 
 * Herodot. i, 168; Skymnus Chius, Fragm. v, 153; Dionys. Perieg. r, 
 553. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 163. *0 de nv&ofievo^ Trap' airuv rbu Mz/tJov tif av^oiro^ ISiSov 
 Of^L xpfff^QTO. Teixo^ 7repifiaXe(r&aL tt/v tto/hv. 
 
 I do not understand whv the commentators debate what or who is meant 
 hj Tdv M//(W: it plainly means the Median or Persian power generally: 
 bat the chronological difficulty is a real one, if we are to suppose that 
 there was time between the first alarm conceived of the Median power of 
 the lonians, and the siege of Phokcea by Harpagus, to inform Argantho- 
 nius of the circumstances, and to procure from him this larj^e aid as well ai 
 to build the fortifications. The Ionic Greeks neither actually did cone oive, 
 nor had reason to conceive, any alarm respecting Persian power, until the 
 arrival of Cyrus before Sardis ; and within a month from that time iSardii 
 was in his possession. If we arc to suppose communication with Ar;j:an« 
 thonius, grounded upon this circumstance, at the distance of Tartessus, and 
 nnder the circumstances of ancient navigation, we must necessarily imagine, 
 ftlso, that the attack made by Harpagus upon Phokaja — which city ha 
 assailed before any of the rest — was postponed for at least two or tlirea 
 jrears. Such postponement is not wholly impossible, yet it is not in tilt 
 
 
 
204 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 tM>th extensive and well built ; yet thej could not hinder Harpoi 
 gU3 from raising his mounds of earth up against them, while hfl 
 was politic enough at the same time to tempt them with offers of 
 A moderate capitulation ; requiring only that they should breach 
 their walls in one jilace by pulling down one of the towers, and 
 consecrate one building in the interior of the town as a token of 
 iubjection. To accef»t these terms, was to submit themselves to 
 the discretion of the besieger, for thore could be no security that 
 they would be observed ; and the Phuka^ans, while tiicy asked Cjt 
 one day to deliberate upon their reply, entreated that, during that 
 day, Harpagus should withdraw his troops altogether from the 
 walls. With this demand the latter complied, intimating, at the 
 game time, that he saw clearly through the meaning of it. The 
 Phukccans had determined that the inevitable servitude impend- 
 in'i- over their town sliould not be shared by its inhabitants, and 
 they employed their day of grace in i)reparation for collective 
 exile, })ntting on shipboard their wives and children as well as 
 their furniture and the movable decorations of their temples. 
 They then set sail for Chios, leaving to the conqueror a deserted 
 town for the occupation of a Persian garrison.' 
 
 npirit of the IKrudotciia narrative, nor do I think it hkely. It is much 
 more prohahle that the informants of Herodotus made a slip in chronology, 
 and ascribed tlie donations of Arganthonius to a motive which did not 
 really dictate tli< in. 
 
 As to the fortiticatioTis (whicli Pliukaia and the other Ionic cities are 
 reportdl to have erected after the comjut-st of Sardis hy the Persians), the 
 CISC mav stand thii-. VVliiK' these citifs were all indi'|»enilent. before they 
 were first concpiered by Cra>sus, they must undoubtedly have had fortitica- 
 tions. When Cra-sus tonquered them, he directed the demolition of the 
 fortifications ; ]>ut demolition (h)cs not necessarily mean pulling down the 
 entire walls: when one or a few lireaches are ma<le. the city is laid open, 
 and the jturpose of Crosus would thus be answered. Such may well have 
 beei the state of the Ionian cities at the time when they fir.«t thought it 
 neceAsari' to provide defenceii ajrainst the Persians at Sardis : they repaired 
 and perfecte<l the breached fortiricatiuns. 
 
 The conjecture of Lareher (see the Notes both of Larcher and Wessel- 
 
 jjip)^ Tov Avi^iiv instead of rov M//f^')r, — is not an unreasonable one, if it 
 
 had anv autliority : the donation of Arganthonius would then be transferred 
 lo the period anterior ro the Lydian con(]nest : it would pet rid of the 
 chronological diittculty above adverted to. but it would introduce som« 
 new awkwardness into the narrative. 
 
 * Herodot. i, 164. 
 
 EMIGRATION OF THE PHOK.EANS. 
 
 205 
 
 It appears that the fugitives were not very kindly received al 
 Chios ; at least, when they made a proposition for purchasing from 
 the Chians the neighboring islands of O^nussie as a permanent 
 abode, the latter were induced to refuse by apprehensions of com- 
 mercial rivalry. It was necessary to look farther for a settlement: 
 and Arganthonius their protector, being now dead, Tartessus wai 
 no longer inviting. Twenty years before, however, the colony 
 of Alalia in the island of Corsica had been founded from Pho- 
 ka?a by the direction of the oracle, and thither the general bod/ 
 of Phoka^ans now resolved to repair. Having prepared their 
 ships ^or this distant voyage, they first sailed back to Phoka^a, 
 surprised the Persian garrison whom Harpagus had left in the 
 town, and slew them: they then sunk in the harbor a great lump 
 of iron, and bound themselves by a solemn and unanimous oath 
 never a^^ain to see Phokaea until that iron should come up to the 
 surface. Nevertheless, in spite of the oath, the voyage of exile 
 had been scarcely begun when more than half of them repented 
 of having so bound themselves, — and became homesick.' Tliey 
 broke their vow and returned to Phokaea. But as Herodotus 
 does not mention any divine judgment as having been consequent 
 on the perjury, we may, perhaps, suspect that some gray-headed 
 citizen, to whom transportation to Corsica might be little less 
 than a sentence of death, both persuaded himself, and certitied to 
 his companions, that he had seen the sunken lump of iron 
 raised up and floating for a while buoyant upon the waves. Har- 
 pagus must have been induced to pardon the previous slaughter 
 of his Persian garrison, or at least to believe that it had beea 
 done by those Phokaians who still persisted in exile. He wanted 
 tribute-paying subjects, not an empty military post, and the re- 
 pentant home-seekers were allowed to number themselves among 
 the slaves of the Great King. 
 
 Meanwhile the smaller but more resolute half of the Pho- 
 kaeans executed their voyage to Alalia in Corsica, with their 
 
 * Herodot. i, 165. v-epr/fiiaeag tCjv darcip iXafle TroiJof re Kal ohrof; t7/< 
 Tfo/lfoc ital Tijv r/^tuv rr/c X^PV^' '^evdopmoi re yevofievoi, etc. The collo- 
 quial term which I have ventured to place in the text expresses exactly, af 
 well 83 briefly, the meaning of the historian. A public oath, taken by most 
 of the Greek cities with similar ceremony of lumps of iron thrown into tm 
 lea, is mentioned in Plutarch, Aristid. c. 25. 
 
 If a 
 
206 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 wives and children, in sixty pentekonters, or armed ships, and 
 established themselves along with the previous settlers. Thoy 
 remained there for tive years,i during which time their indiscrim 
 inate piracies had become so intolerable (even at that time, 
 piracy committed against a foreign vessel seems to have been 
 both frequent and practised without much disrepute), that both 
 the Tyrrhenian seaports along the Mediterranean coast of Italy, 
 and the Carthaginians, united to put them down. There sub- 
 sisted particular treaties between these two, for the regulation of 
 the commercial intercourse between Africa and Italy, of which 
 th* ancient treaty preserved by Polybius betwern Rome and 
 Carthage (made in 509 B.C.) may be considered as a specimen.^ 
 Sixty Carthaginian and as many Tuscan ships attacked the sixty 
 Pliokx-an ships near Alalia, and destroyed forty of them, yet not 
 without such severe loss to themselves that the victory was said 
 to be on the side of the latter; who, however, in s})ite of this 
 Kadraeian victory (sO' a battle was denominated in which the vic- 
 tor's lost more than the vanquished), were compelled to carry 
 back their remaining twenty vessels to Alalia, and to retire with 
 their wives and families, in so far as room could be found for 
 them, to Rhegium. At last, these unhappy exiles found a perma- 
 nent home by establishing the new settlement of VAcii, or Velia, 
 in the gulf of Policastro, on the Italian coast (then calle<l (En6- 
 trian) southward from Poseidonia, or Piei^tum. It is jaobable 
 that they were here joined by other exiles from Ionia, in |)artic- 
 ular by the Kolophonian philosopher an<l poet Xenophanes, from 
 whom what was afterwards called the Eleatic school of philosophy, 
 distinjfuished both f(»r Imld consistencv and dialectic acuteness, 
 took its rise. The IJ*h6k{ean ca}>tives, taken prisoners in the 
 naval combat by Tyrrhenians and Carthaginians, were stoned to 
 death; but a divine judgment overttx>k the Tyrrhenian town of 
 Agylla, in consequence of this cruelty ; luid even in the time of 
 Herodotus, a century afterwards, the Agylheans were still expi- 
 ating the sin by a periodical solemnity and agon, j)ursuant to the 
 penalty which the Delphian oracle had imposed upon them.3 
 Such was the fate of the Phuka^an exiles, while their brethren 
 
 * Herodot. i, 166. 
 - Herodot. i, 167. 
 
 * Ariatot. Folit. iii, 5, 1 1 ; Polyb. iii, 32. 
 
 ASIATIC GREEKS UNDER THE PERSIANS. 
 
 231 
 
 it home remained as subjects of Harpagus, in common with all 
 the other Ionic and ^olic Greeks except Miletus. For even 
 the insular inhabitants of Lesbos and Chios, though not assaila- 
 ble by sea, since the Persians had no fleet, thought it better to 
 renounce their independence and enrol themselves as Persian 
 subjects, — both of them possessing strips of the mainland which 
 they were unable to protect otherwise. Samos, on the other 
 hand, maintained its independence, and even reached, shortly 
 after this period, under the despotism of Polykrates, a higher 
 degree of power than ever. Perhaps the humiliation of the 
 other maritime Greeks around may have rather favored the 
 ambition of this unscrupulous prince, to whom I shall revert 
 presently. But we may readily conceive that the public solemni- 
 ties in which the Ionic Greeks intermingled, in place of those gay 
 and richly-decked crowds which the Homeric hymn describes in 
 the preceding century as assembled at Delos, presented scenes of 
 marked despondency : one of their wisest men, indeed, Bias of 
 Priene, went so far as to propose, at the Pan-Ionic festival, a 
 collective emigration of the entire poi)ulation of the Ionic towa* 
 to the island of Sardinia. Nothing like freedom, he urged, wa* 
 now open to them in Asia ; but in Sardinia, one great Pan-Ionic 
 city might be formed, which wovdd not only be free hei-self, but 
 mistress of her neighbors. The proposition found no favor ; the 
 reason of which is sutficiently evident from the narrative just 
 given respecting the unconquerable local attachment on the part 
 of the Phoka'an majority. But Herodotus bestows upon it the 
 roost unqualified commendation, and regrets that it was not acted 
 upon.i Had such been the case, the subsequent history of 
 Carthage, Sicily, and even Rome, might have been sensibly 
 
 111 te red. 
 
 Thus subdued by Harpagus, the Ionic and ^olic Greeks were 
 employed as auxiliaries to him in the conquest of the south- 
 western inhabitants of Asia Minor, — Karians, Kaunians, Ly- 
 kians, and Doric Greeks of Knidus and Halikarnassus. Of the 
 &te of the latter town, Herodotus tells us nothing, though it wai 
 
 * Herodot. i, 170. Rw^dvouac yvijfiT]v Blavra uvSpa Upirjvia uTrode^aa- 
 §m 'luoL xpriOifiuTuTfiVj Ttj el eirei^ovTOj napelxe uv a<f>t tifSaifiovteip '£a^ 
 
208 
 
 HlbTOBY OF GREECE. 
 
 ills native place. The inhabitants of Knidus, a place situated on 
 a long outlying tongue of land, at first tried to cut through the 
 Darrow isthmus which joined them to the continent, but aban- 
 doned the attoni{>t n ith a facility which Herodotus explains by 
 referring it to a prohibition of the oracle:' nor did either the 
 Karians or the Kaunians offer any serious resistance. The 
 Lykians only, in thrir chief town Xanthus, made a desperate 
 defence. Havini; in vain tried to repel the assailants in the 
 open field, and iinding themselves blocked up in their city, they 
 get fire to it with tlu^ir own hand.< ; consuming in the flames their 
 women, children, ami servants, while the armed citizens marched 
 out and perished to i man in combat with the enemy.2 Such an 
 act of brave and even ferocious despair is not in the Grecian 
 character. In recounting, however, the languid defence and 
 easy submission of the Greeks of Knidus, it may sur)>rise us to 
 call to mind that they were Dorians and colonists from Sparta. 
 So that the want of steadfast courage, often imputed to Ionic 
 Greeks as compared to Dorian, ought properly to be charged on 
 Asiatic Greeks as compared with European ; or rather upon that 
 mixture of indigenous with Hellenic population, which all the 
 Asiatic colonies, in common with most of the other colonies, 
 presented, and which in Halikarnassus was particularly remark 
 able ; for it seems to have been half Karian, half Dorian, and 
 was even governed by a line of Karian despots. 
 
 Harpagus and the Persians thus mastered, without any con- 
 siderable resistance, the western and southern portions of Asia 
 Minor ; probably, aho, though we have no direct account of it, 
 the entire territory within the Halys which had before been 
 ruled by Croesus. The tributes of the conquered Greeks were 
 transmitted to Ekbaiana instead of to Sardis. While Harpagus 
 was thus employed, Cyrus himself had been making still more 
 extensive conquests in Upper Asia and Assyria, of which 1 shall 
 •ipeak in the coming chapter. 
 
 1' 
 
 ' Ilcrodot. i, 174. 
 
 ' Ilcrodot. i, 176. The whole population of Xantl u^; perished, except 
 eighty families accidentally absent : the sul>8e<iueut occupants of the town 
 were recruited from strangers. Nearly five centuries afterwards, their 
 descendants in the same city slew themselves in the like desperate and 
 tragical manner, to avoid surrendering to the Ronuin ann ( under Marcuf 
 Brutus ^Plutarcli, Bmtiiis, c. 31). 
 
 GROWTH vF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. 
 
 S09 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 GROWIH OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. 
 
 Ill the preceding chapter an account has been given, the best 
 which we can pick out from Herodotus, of the steps by which 
 the Asiatic Greeks became subject to Persia. And if his narra- 
 tive is meagre, on a matter which vitally concerned not only so 
 many of his brother Greeks, but even his own native city, we 
 can hardly expect that he should tell us much respecting the 
 other conquests of Cyrus. He seems to withhold intentionally 
 various details which had come to his knowledge, and merely 
 intimates in general terms that while Harpagus was engaged on 
 the coast of the iEgean, Cyrus himself assailed and subdued all 
 the nations of Ujjper Asia, " not omitting any one of them." » 
 He alludes to the Baktrians and the Sakae,-' who are also named 
 by Ktesias as having become subject partly by force, partly by 
 capitulation ; but he deems only two of the exploits of Cyrus 
 worthy of special notice, — the conquest of Babylon, and the 
 final expedition against the Massagetje. In the short abstract 
 which we now possess of the lost work of Ktesia.s, no mention 
 appears of the important conquest of Babylon ; but his narra- 
 tive, as far as the abstract enables us to follow it, diverges 
 materially from that of Herodotus, and must have been founded 
 on data altogether different. 
 
 "I shall mention (says Herodotus)3 those conquests which 
 gave Cyrus most trouble, and are most memorable : after he had 
 subdued all the rest of the continent, he attacked the Assyrians." 
 Thosp who recollect the description of Babylon and its surround- 
 ing terntory, as given in a former chapter, will not be surprised 
 lo learn that the capture of it gave the Persian aggressor much 
 Iroubl? their )nly surprise will be, how it could ever have beeo 
 
 » Herodot. i, 177. « Herodot. i, 153. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 177. rd Si ol ndpeaxe iravov re 7r>U<oTov, Kal d^iaTnjyijiQTaTi 
 kuTi, Tovruv iiTLuvr]aofinL, 
 
 VOL, TV. 14oc. 
 
 
 it'i 
 
2ia 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 taken at all, — or, indeed, how a hostile army could have even 
 reached it. Ileiodotus informs us that the Babylonian queen 
 Nitokris — mother of that very Labynetus who was king when 
 Cyrus attacked the place — had been apprehensive of invasion 
 from the Medes after their capture of Nineveh, and had executed 
 many laborious works near the Euphrates for the purpose of 
 cbstioicting their approach. Moreover, there existed what waa 
 called the wall of Media (probably built by her, but certainly 
 built prior to the Persian conquest), one hundred feet high and 
 twenty feet thick,' across the entire space of seventy-five niilei 
 which joined the Tigris with one of the canals of the Euphrates. 
 And the canals themselves, as we may see by the nuirch of 
 tlie Ten Thousand (jl reeks after the battle of Kunaxa, pre- 
 sented means of defence altogether insuperable by a rude army 
 such as that of the Persians. On the east, the territory of 
 Babylonia was defended by the Tigris, which cannot be forded 
 
 ' See Xenophon, Anabns. i, 7, 15 ; ii, 4, 12. For the inextricable diffieul- 
 tifs in which the Ten Thonsand Greeks were involved, after the battle of 
 Kunaxa, and the insurmountable obstacles which impeded their march, 
 assuming any resisting force whatever, see Xenoph. Auab. ii, 1, 11 ; ii, 2, 
 3; ii, 3, 10 ; ii, 4, 12-13. These obstacles, doubtless, served as a protection 
 to them ain;ainst attack, rot less than as an impediment to their advjince} 
 »nd the well-supplied villages enabled them to obtain plenty of provisions : 
 hence the anxiety of the Great King to help them across the Tigris out of 
 Babylonia. But it is not easy to see bow, in the face of such difficalties, 
 aoy invading army could reach Babylon. 
 
 Hitter represents the wii.ll of Media as having reached across from the 
 Eujihrates to the Tigris at the point where they come nearest together, 
 al)Out two hundred stadia or twentv-tive miles across. But it is nowhere 
 stated, so far as I can find, that this wall reached to the Euphrates, — still 
 less that its length was two hundred stadia, for the passages of Strabo 
 cited by Ritter io not prove either point (ii, 80 ; xi, 529). And Xenophon 
 (ii, 4, 12) gives the length of the wall as I have stated it in the text, = 20 
 parasangs = 600 stadia = 75 miles. 
 
 The passage of the Anabasis (i, 7, 15) seems to connect the Median wall 
 with the canals, and not with the river Euphrates. The naiTative oi 
 Herodotus, as I have remarked in a former chapter, leads us to suppose thai 
 he descended that river to Babylon ; and if we suppose that the wall did 
 AOt reach the Euphrates, this would afford some reason wb f he makes no 
 ■ention of it See Ritt€T, West Asien, b iii, Abtheilung iii, Abschn. i, 
 MCt 29, pp. 19-22. 
 
 PERSIAN APPROACH TO BABYLOU 
 
 211 
 
 lower than the ancient Nineveh or tlie modem Mosul.i In j»ddi* 
 Hon to these ramparts, natural as well as artificial, to protect the 
 territory, — populous, cultivated, productive, and offering every 
 motive to its inhabitants to resist even the entrance of an enemy, 
 — w(j are told that the Babylonians were so thoroughly prepared 
 for the inroad of Cyrus that they had accumulated a store of 
 provisions within the city walls for many years. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, we must suj)pose that the king of 
 Babylon, after all the cost and labor spent in providing defences 
 for the territory, voluntarily neglected to avail himself of them, 
 suffered the invader to tread down the fertile Babylonia wilho'it 
 resistance, and merely drew out the citizens to oppose him when 
 he arrived under the walls of the city, — if the statement of 
 Herodotus is correct.'^ And we may illustrate this unaccountable 
 omission by that which we know to have happened in the march 
 of the younger Cyrus to Kunaxa against his brother Artaxerxes 
 Mncmon. The latter had caused to be dug, expressly in prepar- 
 ation for this invasion, a broad and deep ditch, thirty feet wide 
 und eight feet deep, from the wall of Media to the river Euphra- 
 *-es, a distance of twelve parasangs, or forty-five English miles, 
 leaving only a passage of twenty feet broad close alongside of 
 the river. Yet when the invading ai-my arrived at tliis impor- 
 tant pass, they found not a man there to defend it, and all of them 
 marched without resistance through the narrow inlet. Cyrus the 
 younger, who had up to that moment felt assured that his brother 
 would fight, now supposed that he had given up the idea of 
 defending Babylon : •* instead of which, two days afterwards, 
 
 ' 'O Tiyp7/g fiiyac re koI ovSafiov dia/Saroc tf t£ IttI tt)v kKjioXiiv (Arrian, 
 vii, 7, 7). By which he means, that it is not fordable below the ancient 
 Nineveh, or Mosul \ for a little above that spot, Alexander liimscif forded 
 it with his army, a few days before the battle of Arbela — not without very 
 great difficulty (Arrian, iii, 7, 8; Diodor. xvii, 55). 
 
 ■ Herodot. i, 190. k-rrel 6e kyevero elavvuv ayxov rm ttoIio^, avve^a^ov re 
 ».' Ba(3vhl)vioi, Kal eoaco^evrec ry ftdxv, KareiV.rj'&ijaav k^ rb uarv. 
 
 Just as if Babylon was as easy to be approached as Sardis, — ola n 
 hrurrdfievoi In irporepov rdv Kiipov ovk uTpefii^ovra, iikV dpeovrt^ airtw 
 rravrl d/iioitjc E'^vei lirixetp^ovra, Trpoead^avro airia kreuv Kapra -KoTiXibv. 
 
 3 Xenophon, Anabas. i, 7, 14-20; Diodor. xiv, 22; Plutarch, Artaxerxis, 
 c. 7. I follow Xenophon without hesitation, where he differs from thuM 
 tvvf> hitter. 
 
«12 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Artaxerxes attacked him on an open plain of ground, whor« 
 there was no advantage of position on either side ; though the 
 invaders were taken rather unawares in conse(iuence of their 
 extreme confidence, ari.-ing from recent unopposed entrance 
 within the artificial ditch. 
 
 This anecdote is the more valuable as an illustration, because 
 ftll its circumstances are transmitted to us by a discerning eye- 
 witness. And both ihe two incidents liere brought into compari- 
 son demonstrate the, recklessness, changefulness, and incapacity 
 of calculation, belonging to the Asiatic mind of that day, — as 
 well as the great c(»mmand of luinds possessed by these kings, 
 and their prodigal waste of human lal)or.i We shall see, as we 
 advance in this history, farther evidences of the same attributes, 
 which it is essential to bear in mind, for the inirpose of appre- 
 ciating both Grecian dealing with Asiatics, and the comparative 
 absence of such defects in the Grecian character. Vast walls 
 and deep ditches are an inestimable aid to a bra\ e and well com- 
 manded garrison ; but they cannot be made entirely to supply 
 the want of bravery and intelligence. 
 
 In whatever manner the ditliculties of approaching Babylon 
 may have been overcome, the tact that they were overcome by 
 Cyrus is certain. On first setting out for this conquest, he was 
 about to cross the river Gyndes (one of the affluents from the 
 East which joins the Tigris near tiie modern Bagdad, and along 
 which lay the high road crossing the i)ass of Mount Zagros from 
 Babylon to Ekbatana), when one of the sacred white horses, 
 which accompanied liim, insulted the river ^ so far as to march in 
 and try to cross it b}' himself. The Gyndes resented this insult, 
 and the horse was drowned : upon which Cyrus swore in his 
 wrath that he would so break the strength of the river as that 
 women in future should pass it without wetting their knees. 
 Accordingly, he employed his entire army, during the whole 
 immmer season, in digging three hundred and sixty artificial 
 channels to disserainiite the unity of the stream. Such, accord- 
 
 ' Xenophon, Cyropaed. iii, 3, i>6, about the -uAvxeip a of the barbari. 
 
 kings. 
 • Herodot. 189-202. evt^at/ro ol tuv riq Ipuv lttttuv tuv \evKUV ind d^pioi 
 
 ((j/3df kc ^(^v TTOTafiov, ^io^aiveLv eireipdro Kapro re ^;t<»^£7rafvc T<f 
 
 wt^oMV 6 KOpof Tovro vfipiaavri, etc. 
 
 Vol. 4 ^ 
 
 CYRUS ATTACKS BABYLON. 
 
 213 
 
 hig to Herodotus, was the incident which postponed for one year 
 the fall of the great Babylon ; but in the next spring Cyrus and 
 his army were before the walls, after having defeated and driven 
 in the population who came out to fight. But the walls wer«i 
 artificial mountains (three hundred feet high, seventy-five feet 
 tliick, and forming a square of fifteen miles to each side), within 
 which the besieged defied attack, and even blockade, having 
 previously stored up several years' provision. Through the 
 midst of these walls, however, flowed the Euphrates ; and thia 
 river, which had been so laboriously trained to serve for pro- 
 tection, trade, and sustenance to the Babylonians, was now made 
 the avenue of their ruin. Having left a detachment of his army 
 at the two points where the Euphrates enters and quits the city, 
 Cyrus retired with the remainder to the higher part of its course, 
 where an ancient Babylonian queen had prepared one of tlie 
 great lateral reservoirs for carrying oti* in case of need the 
 superfluity of its water. Near this point Cyrus caused another 
 reservoir and another canal of communication to be dug, by 
 means of which he drew otf the water of the Euphrates to such 
 a degree that it became not above the height of a man s thigh. 
 The period chosen was that of a great Babylonian festival, when 
 the whole population were engaged in amusement and revelry; 
 and the Persian troops left near the town, watching their oppor- 
 tunity, entered from both sides along the bed of the river, and 
 took it by surprise with scarcely any resistance. At no other 
 time, except during a festival, could they have done this, saya 
 Herodotus, had the river been ever so low; for both banks 
 throughout the whole length of the town were provided with 
 quays, with continuous walls, and with gates at the end of every 
 street which led down to the river at right angles : so that if the 
 population had not been disqualified by the influences of the 
 moment, they would have caught the assailants in the bed of the 
 river " as a trap," and overwhelmed them from the walls along- 
 side. Within a square of fifteen miles to each side, we are no! 
 iurprised to hear that both the extremities weie already in th« 
 power of the besiegers before the central poi)ulation heard of it, 
 tod while they were yet absorbed in unconscious festivity.^ 
 
 Herodot. i, 191 This latter portion of the story, if we may judge fron 
 
 'T I 
 
 
«u 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Such is the account given by Herodotus of the circnoistancei 
 which placed Babylon — tlie greatest city of western Asia — iu 
 ihe power of the Persians. To what extent the information 
 communicated to him was incorrect, or exaggerated, we cannot 
 now decide ; but the way in which the city was treated would 
 lead us to suppose that it.-^ acquisition cannot have cost the con- 
 queror either much time or much loss. Cyrus conies into the 
 Kst as king of Babylon, and the inhabitants with their whole ter- 
 ritory become tributary to the Persians, forming the richest 
 iatra])y in the empire ; l)ut we do not hear that the people were 
 Otherwise ill-used, and it is certain that the vast walls and gates 
 were left untouched. This was very different from the way in 
 which the Medes had treated Nineveh, which seems to have 
 been ruined and tor a long time absolutely uninhabited, though 
 reoccupied on a reduced scale mider the Parthian empire ; and 
 very different also froni the way in which Babylon itself was 
 treated twenty \ ears afterwards by Darius, when reconquered 
 after a revolt. 
 
 the expression of Ilrr MlotiH. serin?; to excite more doubt in his mind than 
 all the rest, for he thinks it necessary to add, " as the residents at Babylon 
 aav,*' wf HyeraL vno ruv ravTr] otKT/fiivuv. Yet if we assume the size of 
 the place to he what he has affirmed, there seems nothing remarkable in the 
 fact that the people in the centre did not at once hear of the capture ; for 
 the first business of the assailants would be to possess themselves of tho 
 walls and pites. It i.-. a lively illustration of prodij^ious magnitude, and as. 
 such it is given by Aristotle (Polit. iii. 1, 12) ; who, however, exaggerates it 
 by giving as a report ''hat the inhabitants in the centre did not hear of the 
 capture until the tlii d day. No such exaggeration as this appears in 
 Herodotus. 
 
 Xenophon, in the Cyropanlia (vjj, 5. 7-18), following tho story that Cyrus 
 drained off the Euphrates, represents it as effected in a manner ditfcring 
 from Herodotus. According to him, Cyrus dug two vast and deep ditches, 
 one on each side round the town, from the river al>o>e the town to the river 
 below it : watching the opportunity of a festival day in Babylon, he let the 
 water into both of these side ditches, which fell into the main stream again 
 below the town : hen< e the main stream in its passage through the .own 
 became nearly dry. The narrative of Xenophon, however, betrays itself, 
 08 not having been wTitten from information received on the spot, like that 
 of Herodotus ; for he talks of al unpat of Babylon, just as he speaks of th« 
 AKpai of the hill-towns of Karia (compare Cyropadia. vii, 4, I, 7, with vii, 
 1, 34). There were no uKpai on the dead flat )f Babylon. 
 
 DEATH Ot CYRUS 
 
 215 
 
 ITie importance of Babylon, marking as u does one of the 
 peculiar forms of civilization belonging to the ancient world in a 
 state of full development, gives an interest even to the half- 
 authenticated stories respecting its capture; but the other exploits 
 ascribed to Cyrus, — his invasion of India, across tlie desert of 
 Arachosia,! — and his attack upon the Massagetae, nomads ruled 
 by queen Tomyris, and greatly resembling the Scythians, across 
 the mysterious river which Herodotus calls Araxes, — are too 
 little known to be at all dwelt upon. In the latter he is said to 
 have perished, his army being defeated in a bloody battle.- He 
 was buried at Pasargada^, in his native province of Persis proper, 
 where his tomb was honored and watched until the breaking up 
 of tlie empire,-' while his memory was held in profound venera- 
 tion among the Persians. 
 
 Of his real exploits, we know little except their results ; but 
 ill what we read respecting him there seems, though amidst con- 
 stant fighting, very little cruelty. Xenophon has selected hit 
 life as the subject of a moral romance, which for a long time was 
 cited as authentic history, and which even now serves as an 
 authority, expressed or implied, for disputable and even incorrect 
 conclusions. His extraordinary activity and conquests admit of 
 no doubt. He left the Persian empire-* extending from Sogdiana 
 and the rivers Jaxartes and Indus eastward, to the Hellespont 
 and the Syrian coast westward, and his successors made no per- 
 manent addition to it except that of Egypt. Phenicia and Judaja 
 were dependencies of Babylon, at the time when he conquered 
 it, with their princes and grandees in Babylonian captivity 
 They seem to have yielded to him, and become his tributaries,*'' 
 without difficulty ; and the restoration of their captives was con- 
 
 ' Arrian, vi, 24, 4. 
 
 ^ Herodot. i, 205-214; Arrian, v, 4, 14 ; Justin, i, 8 ; Strabo, xi, p. 512. 
 
 According to Ktesias, Cyrus was slain in an expedition against the Der- 
 bikes, a people in the Caucasian regions. — though his army after\vards 
 prove victorious and conquer the country (Ktesioe Persica, c. 8-9), — see th« 
 ycninient of Bahr on the passage, in his edition of KtC'sias. 
 
 * Strabo, xv, pp. 730, 731 ; Arrian, vi, 29. 
 
 * Tlie to^\'n Kyra, or Kyropolis, on the river Sihon, or Jaxartes, was said 
 to have been founded by Cyrus, — it was destroyed by Alexander (Strabo^ 
 li, pp. 517, 518 ; Arrian, iv, 2, 2 ; Cirtius, vii, 6, 16). 
 
 * Herodot iii 19. 
 
 t 
 
 iV 
 
216 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEFXE. 
 
 !4 
 
 ceded to tliem. It was from Cyrus that the habits jf the Per 
 Bian kings took (•oiainenceinent, to dwell at Susa in the winter, 
 and Ekbatana during the summer he primitive territory of 
 P(Mvi<, with its two towns of Perstpolis and Pasargadic, bemg 
 reserved for the burial-place of the kings and the religious sanc- 
 tuary of the empire. How or when the conquest of Susiana waa 
 math', we are not informed; it lay eastward of the Tigris, be- 
 tween Babylonia and Persis proper, and its people, the Kissians, 
 as tar as we can discern, were of Assyrian and not of Arian 
 race. The river Choaspes, near Susa, was supposed to furnish 
 the only water fit for the palate of the Great King, and is said to 
 have been carried about with him wherever he went.i 
 
 While the conquests of Cyrus contributed to assimilate the dis- 
 tinct types of civilization in western Asia, — not by elevating 
 the worse, but by <l'*grading tli(^ better, — upon the native Per- 
 sians themselves they o[)erated as an extraordinary stimulus, 
 provoking alike their pride, nnihiiion, cupidity, and warlike pro- 
 pensities. Not only did the territory of Persis j»roj)er pay no 
 tribute to Susa or Ekbatana, — being the only district so ex- 
 empted between the Jaxartes and the Mediterranean, — but the 
 vast tributes received from the remaining empire were distributed 
 to a great degree among its inhabitants. Em])ire to them meant, 
 — for the great men, lucrative satrapies, or pachalics, with 
 powers altogether unlimited, j)omp interior only to that of the 
 Great King, and standing armies which they employed at their 
 own discretion, sometimes against each other.- — for the common 
 soldiers, drawn from their fields or flocks, constant plunder, abun- 
 dant maintenance, and an unrestrained license, either in the suite 
 of one of the satraps, or in tlie large permanent troop which 
 moved from Susa to Ekbatana with the Great King. And if the 
 entire population of l*ersis {)roper did not migrate from their 
 abodes to occupy some of those more inviting spots which the 
 immensity of the imperial dominion furnished, — a dominion ex- 
 tending (to use the language of Cyrus the younger, before the 
 battle of Kunaxa)^ from the region of insupportable heal to 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 188 ; Plutarch, Artaxerxes, c. ! ] Diodor. xvii, 71. 
 
 * Xenophon, Anabas. i, 1,8. 
 
 '* X«nophon, Anahas. i, 7. 6 ; CvTopaed. viii, ,19. 
 
 CHARACTER OF THE PERSIANS. 
 
 217 
 
 (hat of insupportable cold, — tliis was only because the early 
 kings discouraged such a movement, in order that the nation 
 might maintain its military hardihood,' and be in a situaticn to 
 furnish undiminished supplies of soldiers. 
 
 The self-esteem and arrogance of the Persians was no less re- 
 markable than their avidity for sensual enjoyment. They wen 
 fond of wme to excess ; their wives and their concubines wer 
 both numerous; and they adopted eagerly from foreign natioi 
 new fashions of luxury as well as of ornament. Even to no 
 cities in religion, they were not strongly averse ; for thougli they 
 were disciples of Zoroaster, with magi as their priests, and as 
 indispensable companions of their sacrifices, worshipping Sun, 
 Moon, P2arth, Fire, etc., and recognizing neither image, temple, 
 aor altar, — yet they had adopted the voluptuous worship of the 
 goddess Mylitta from the Assyrians and Arabians. A numerous 
 male offspring was the Persian's boast, and his warlike character 
 and consciousness of force were displayed in the education of 
 these youths, who were taught, from five years old to twenty, 
 only three things, — to ride, to shoot with the bow, and to speak 
 the truth.2 To owe money, or even to buy and sell, was ac- 
 counted among the Persians disgraceful, — a sentiment which 
 they defended by saying, that both the one and the other im- 
 posed the necessity of telling falsehood. To exact tribute from 
 subjects, to receive pay or presents from the king, and to give 
 away without forethought whatever was not immediately wanted, 
 was their mode of dealing with money. Industrious pursuits 
 were left to the conquered, who were fortunate if by paying a fixed 
 contribution, and sending a military contingent when required, 
 they could purchase undisturbed immunity for their remaining 
 concerns.3 They could not thus purchase safety for the family 
 
 *■ ' ' ... I I. .1 -■^ — ■■ ,1 , _, !■■ II ■l__ll. I .1 I — ^11 .^^^^^ 
 
 ' Herodot. ix, 122. 
 
 * The modern Persians at this day exhibit almost matchless ski I in 
 •hooting with the firelock, as well as with the bow, on horseback. See Sir 
 John Malcolm, Sketches of Persia, ch. xvii, p. 201 ; see also Kinneir, Geo- 
 graphical Memoir of the Persian Empire, p. 32. 
 
 ^ About the attributes of the Persian character, see Herodot. i, 131-140: 
 compare i, 153. 
 
 He expresses himself very strongly as to the facility with which th« 
 Persians 'mbibed foreign customs, and especially foreign luxuries (i, 135), 
 
 VOL. IV. 10 
 
» 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 218 
 
 mSTUKY OF GREECE. 
 
 hearth, since we find instances of noble Grecian madens torn 
 from their parents for the harem of the satrap.^ 
 
 To a people of this character, wliose conceptions of political 
 iociety went no farther than personal obedience to a chief, a con- 
 queror like Cyrus would communicate the strongest excitement 
 and enthusia-^m of which they were capable. He had found 
 them slaves, and made them masters ; he was the lirst and 
 greatest of national benefactors,- as well as the most forward 
 of leaders in the field ; they followed him from one conquest 
 to another, during the thirty years of his reign, their love of 
 empire growing with the empire itself. And this impulse of ag- 
 grandizement continued unabated during tlie reigns of his three 
 next successors, — Kambyses, Darius, an<l Xerxes, — until it was 
 at length violently stifled by the humiliating defeats of Plata^a aiul 
 Salamis ; after which the Persians became content with defend- 
 ing themselves at home, and playing a .^ecojidary game. But at 
 the time when Kambyses son of Cyrus succeeded to his lather's 
 Bceptre, Persian spirit was at its highest point, and he was not 
 long in fixing upon a prey loth richer and less hazardous than 
 the Massagetaj, at the opposite extremity of the empire. Phe- 
 nicia and Judaea being alrcjady subject to him, he resolved to 
 invade Egypt, then highly nourishing under the long and pros- 
 perous reign of Amasis. Not much ])retence was needed to color 
 the aggression, and the various stories which Herodotus men- 
 tions as causes of the war, are only interesting inasmuch as they 
 imply a vein of Egyptian party feeling, — aflinning that the in- 
 vasion was brought u])on Amasis by a daughter of Apries, and 
 was thus a judgment upon him for having deposed the latter. 
 As to the manner in which hhe had produced this etFect, indeed, 
 the most contradictory stories were circulated.^ 
 
 Kambyses summoned tlie forces of his empire for this new 
 •Dterprise, and among them both the Pheuicians and the Asiatic 
 
 ^-^eiviKii de vofiata Htfjoa: npoa,evTat dv^purv fia/uaraj — fcai t'VTrai}etaf ti 
 wavToSaTTii^ Trvvt^avo/ievoc e7ziTri6rvovai. 
 
 That rigid tenacity of custom:^ and exclusiveness of tastes, which mari 
 the modem Orientals, appear to be of the growth of Mohammedanism, and 
 lo distinguish them greatly from the old Zoroastrif n Persians. 
 
 * Ilerodot. ix, 76 ; Plutarch, Artarxerx. e. 26. 
 
 • Herodot. i 210 j iii, 159. * Herodot iii. 1-4. 
 
 KAMBYSES INVADES EGYPT. 
 
 S19 
 
 Greeks, -^olic as well as Ionic,' insular as well la continental, — 
 nearly all the maritime force and skill of the JEgean sea. He 
 was apprized by a Greek deserter from the mercenaries in 
 Egypt, named Phanes, of the difficulties of the march, and the 
 best method of surmounting them ; especially the three days of 
 sandy desert, altogether without water, which lay between Egypt 
 €Lix'. Judaja. By the aid of the neighboring Arabians, — with 
 whom he concluded a treaty, and who were requited for this ser- 
 vice with the title of equal allies, free from all tribute, — he was 
 enabled to surmount this serious dilficulty, and to reach Pelusiura 
 at the eastern mouth of the Nile, where the Ionian and Kariao 
 troops in the Egyptian service, as well as the Egyptian military, 
 were assembled to oppose him.2 
 
 Fortunately for himself, the Egyptian king Ama.>^is had died 
 during the interval of the Persian preparations, a few months 
 before the expedition took place, — after forty-four years of un- 
 abated prosperity. His death, at this critical moment, was prob- 
 ably the main cause of the ea.<?y conquest which followed ; his 
 son Psammenitus succeeding to his crown, lut neither to his 
 abilities nor his influence. The result of the invasion was fore- 
 shadowed, as usual, by a menacing prodigy, — rain falling at 
 Thebes in Upper Egypt ; and was brought about by a single 
 victory, though bravely disputed, at Pelusium, — followed by the 
 capture of Memphis, with the person of king Psammenitus, after 
 a siege of some duration. Kambyses had sent forward a 
 Mitylena^an ship to Memphis, with heralds to simmon the city ; 
 but the Egyptians, in a paroxysm of fury, rushed out of the 
 walls, destroyed the vessel, and tore the crew into pieces, — a 
 savage proceeding, which drew ufK)n them severe retribution after 
 the capture. Psammenitus, alter being at first treated with 
 harshness and insult, was at length released, and even allowed to 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 1,19, 44. 
 
 * The narrative of Ktesias is, in respect both to the Egyptian expedition 
 •nd to the other incidents of Persian history, quite different in its details 
 from that of Herodotus, agreeing only in the main events (Ktesias, Persica, 
 c, 7). To blend the two together is impossible. 
 
 Tacitus (Histor. i, 11) notes the difficulty of approach for an invading 
 army to Egypt : " Egyptum, provinciara aditu difficilem, annonse fecundaSi 
 •uperstitione ac lascivi4 discordem et mobilem," etc. 
 
t20 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEC!!:. 
 
 4 
 
 retain his regal dignity as a dependent of Persia. But being 
 soon detected, or at least believed to be concerned, in raising re- 
 volt against the conquerors, he was put to death, and Egypt wa0 
 placed under a satrap.' 
 
 There yet lay beyond Egypt territories for Kumbyses to 
 conquer, — though Kyrene and Barka, the Greek colonies near 
 the coast of Libya, placed themselves at once out of the reach 
 of danger by sending to him tribute and submission at Memphis^ 
 He projected three new enterprises: one against Carthage, 
 by sea ; the other two, by land, against the Ethiopians, far 
 10 the soutliward up the course of the Nile, and against the 
 oracle and oasis of Zeus Aramon, amidst the deserts of Libya. 
 Towards Ethiopia he himself conducted his troops, but was com- 
 pelled to bring them back without reaching it, since they were 
 on the point of perishing with famme ; while the division which 
 he sent against the temple of Amnion is said to have been over- 
 whelmed by a sand-storm in the desert. The expedition against 
 Carthage was given up, for a reason which well deserves to be 
 commemorated. Tlie Phenicians, who formed the most eflicieat 
 part of his navy, refused to serve against their kinsmen and col- 
 onists, pleading the sanctity of mutual oaths as well as the ties 
 both of relationship and tratftc- Even the frantic Kambyses was 
 compelled to accept, and i>orhaps to respect, this honorable re- 
 fusal, which was not imitated by the Ionic Greeks when Darius 
 and Xerxes demanded the aid of their ships against Athens, — 
 we must add, however, that they wore then in a situation much 
 more exj)osed and helpless than that in which the Phenicians 
 stood beibre Kambyses. 
 
 Amon^^ the sacred animals so numerous and so different 
 throughout the various nomes of Egypt, the most venerated of 
 all was the bull Apis. Yet such peculiar conditions were re- 
 quired by the Egyptian religion as to the birth, the age, and the 
 marks of this animal, that, when he died, it was diflficult to fmd 
 A new calf properly qualified to succeed him. Much time waa 
 Bcmetimes spent in the search, and when an unexceptionable suo- 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 10-16. Abaut the Arabians, between Judaea .ind EgypI 
 
 iii, c. 5, 88-91. 
 ■ Herudot. iii, 1 3 
 
 I 
 
 ' 
 
 CONSriRACY AGAINST FAMBYSES. 
 
 XU 
 
 eessor was at last found, the demonstrations of joy in Memphii 
 were extravagant and universal. At the moment when Kam- 
 byses returned to Memphis from his Ethiopian expedition, full of 
 humiliation for the result, it so happened that a new Apis was 
 ju<t discovered ; and as the population of the city gave vent to 
 their usual festival pomp and delight, he construed it into ao 
 intentional insult towards his own recent misfortunes. In vain 
 did the priests and magistrates explain to him the real cause of 
 these popular manifestations ; he persisted in his belief, punished 
 gome of them with death and others with stripes, and com 
 manded every man seen in holiday attire to be slain. Further- 
 more, — to carry his outrage against Egyptian feeling to the 
 uttermost pitch, -he sent for the newly-discovered Apis, and 
 plunged his dagger into the side of the animal, who shortly after 
 wards died of the wound.^ 
 
 After this brutal deed, — calculated to efface in the minds ot the 
 E-yptian priests the enormities of Cheops and Chephren, and 
 do'ubtless unparalleled in all the twenty-four thousand years of 
 their anterior history, - Kambyses lost every spark of reason 
 which yet remained to him, and the Egyptians found in this visi- 
 tation a new proof of the avenging interference of their gods. Not 
 only did he commit every variety of studied outrage against the 
 conquered people among whom he was tarrying, as well as their 
 temples and their sepulchres, - but he also dealt his blows against 
 his Persian friends and even his nearest blood-relations. Among 
 these revolting atrocities, one of the greatest deserves peculiar 
 notice, because the f\ite of the empire was afterwards materially 
 affected by it. His younger brother Smerdis had accompanied 
 him into E-ypt, but had been sent back to Susa, because the 
 kin- became jealous of the admiration which his personai 
 etrencrth and qualities called forth.^ That jealousy was aggra- 
 vated° into alarm and hatred by a dream, portending dominion 
 and conquest to Smerdis ; so that the frantic Kambyses seat to 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 29. , am v ^ i«a Kim 
 
 « Kte.ias rails the brother Tanyoxarkes, and says that Cyrus had left hm 
 
 .ttmp, without tribute, of Baktria and the neighboring regions (Persic*^ 
 
 8). Xenophon, in the C>Top^dia. also calls hin Tan.yoxark€s, but girm 
 
 turn a different satrapy (Cyropa:(?. viii, 7, lU. 
 
II 
 
 ll 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Siisa secretly a col Bdential Persian, Prexaspes, wii h express or 
 ders to get rid of his brother. Prexaspes fulfilled his cominis. 
 ■ioD effectively, burying the slain prince with his own hands,* 
 ■nd keeping the deed concealed from all except a few of the 
 diiefs at the regal residenct;. 
 
 Among the^o few chiefs, however, there was one, the Mediau 
 Patizeithes, belonging to the order of the Magi, who saw in it a 
 convenient stepping-stone for his own personal ambition, and 
 made use of it as a means of covertly supplanting the dynasty 
 of the great Cyrus. Enjo\ ing the full confidence of Kunibyses, 
 he had been left by that prince, on departing for Egypt, in the 
 entire management of the palace and trciusures, with extensive 
 authority.- Moreover, he happened to have a l>r()ther extremely 
 resembling in person the deceased Smerdis ; and as the open 
 and dangerous madness of Kambvses c-ontributtd to alienate 
 from him the minds of the Persians, he rtsohed to proclaim this 
 brother king in his room, a? if it were the younger son of Cyrus 
 succeeding to the disqualified elder. On one important point, 
 the fidse Smerdis differed from the true. He had lost his ears, 
 which Cyrus himself had «*aused to be cut off for an otlence ; 
 but the personal resemblan(;e, after all, was of little importance, 
 since he was seldom or never allowed to show himself to the 
 people.-' Kambyses, having heard of this revolt in Syria on his 
 return from Egypt, was mounting his horse in haste for the pur- 
 pose of going to suppress it, when an accident from his sword 
 put an end to his life. Herodotus tells us that, before his death. 
 iie summoned the Persians around him, confessed that he had 
 been guilty of putting his Ijrother to death, and a{)prizcd them 
 that the reigning Smerdis v-as only a Median pretender, — con- 
 juring thcrn at the same time not to submit to tlic disgrace of be- 
 ini: rult*<l hy any other than a Persian and an Acluvnieiiid. But 
 if \\ be true that he ever made known the facts, no one believed 
 him. For Prexaspes, on his part, was compelled by regard to his 
 own st.leiy, to deny that he had imbrued his hands in the blood 
 
 ' llerodot. iii, 30-G2. * Herodot. iii, 61-63. 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, t^S-69. — • Auribus dcrisis vivere jubet," says T.Kitus, 
 ftbout a case under the ParthiaD government (Annal. xii, 14), — nor h*ve 
 the Turkish authorities given up the infliction of it at the present mcment 
 w lit l":»>t down t<> a very recent period. 
 
 
 DEATH OF KAMBYSES.- SMERDIS. 
 
 223 
 
 ol a son of Cyrus -^ and thus the opportune death of Kambysea 
 placed the false Smerdis without opposition at the head of the 
 Persians, who all, or for the most part, believed themselves to be 
 rulbd by a genuine son of Cyrus. Kambyses had reigned for 
 seven years and five months. 
 
 For seven months did Smerdis reign without opposition, second 
 ed by his brother Patizeithes ; and if he manifested his distrust 
 of the haughty Persians around him, by neither inviting them 
 into his palace nor showing himself out of it, he at the same time 
 studiously conciliated the favor of the subject provinces, by re- 
 mission of tribute and of military service for three years.2 Such 
 a departure from the Persian principle of government was in 
 itself sufficient to disgust the warlike and rapacious Acluemenids 
 at Susa. But it seems that their suspicions as to his genuine 
 character had never been entirely set at rest, and in the eighth 
 month those suspicions were converted into certainty. Accord- 
 in"- to what seems to have been the Persian usage, he had taken 
 to himself the entire harem of his predecessor, among whose 
 wives was numbered Phadyme, daughter of a distinguished Per- 
 sian, named Otanes. At the instance of her father, Phaidyme 
 undertook the dangerous task of feeling the head of Smerdis 
 while he slept, and thus detected the absence of ears.3 Otanes, 
 possessed of the decisive information, lost no time in concerting, 
 with five other noble Achaemenids, means for ridding themselves 
 of a king who was at once a Mede, a Magian, and a man without 
 ears ; 4 Darius, son of Hystaspes, the satrap of Persis proper, 
 arrivin*^ just in time to join the conspiracy as the seventh. How 
 these seven noblemen slew Smerdis in his palace at Susa, — how 
 they subsequently debated among themselves whether they should 
 establish in Persia a monarchy, an oligarchy, or a democracy, — 
 how, after the first of the three had been resolved upon, it was de- 
 termined that the future king, whichever he might be, should be 
 bound to take his wives only from the families of the seven ocn- 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 64-66. * Herodot. iii, 67. » Herodot. iii, 68-69. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 69-73. upxafi^a i^^v iovreg liepaaiy vvd M^Sov avdpdf fuiyoVf 
 
 fa? rovTov ura ovk ix^^'''^- 
 
 Compare the description of th< insupportable repugnance of the Grcclii 
 ^ Kyr^nfi to be governed by the iame Battus (Herodot iv, 16H 
 
 'U 
 
 m 
 
 ■Si 
 
 i 
 
 < 
 
 ^^. 
 
 1 
 '"* I 
 
224 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ■pirators, — how Darius l)*- aine king, from the circumstance of hil 
 horse being the first to neigh among those of the conspirators at a 
 given spot, by the stratjigem of the groom (Ebares, — how Otanes, 
 standing aside beforehand from this lottery for the throne, re- 
 served for himself '\s well as for his descendants perfect freedom 
 and exemption from the rule of the future king, whichsoever 
 might draw the prize, — all these incidents may be found re- 
 counted by Herodotus witli his usual vivacity, but with no small 
 addition of Hellenic ideas as well as of dramatic ornament. 
 
 It was thus that the upright tiara, the privileged head-dress of 
 the Persian kings,' passed away from the lineage of Cyrus, yet 
 without departing from the great phratry of the AchicraenidcT, — 
 to which Darius and his fatlier Hystasp.-s, as well as Cyrus, be- 
 longed. That important fact is unquestionable, and probably the 
 acts ascril)ed to the seven ('ons[»irators are in the main true, apart 
 from their discussions and intentions. But on this as well as on 
 other occasions, we must guard our^olves against an illusion which 
 the historical manner of Herodotus is apt to create. He pre- 
 sents to us with so much descriptive force tlie personal narra- 
 tive, — individual action and speech, with all its accompanying 
 hopes, fears, doubts, and (.a-sions, — that our attention is dis- 
 tracted from the political ij^Miring of what is going on ; which we 
 are compelled often to gather up from hints in the speeches of 
 performers, or from consequences afterwards indirectly noticed. 
 When we put together all the incidental notices which he lets 
 drop, it will be found that the change of sceptre from Smerdis to 
 Darius was a far larger political event than his direct narrative 
 would seem to announce. Smerdis represents preponderance to 
 the Medes over the Persians, and comparative degradation to 
 the latter; who, by the installation of Darius, are again placed in 
 the ascendent. The ^ledes and tlie Magians are in this case 
 identical ; for the Magians, though indispensable in the capacit7 
 of priests to the Persians, w -re essentially one of the seven Median 
 
 Compare Aristophan. Aves, 487, with the Schoha, and Herodot. lii, 61 } 
 Arrian, iv, 6, :il>. The cap of the Persians generally was loose, low, cling- 
 ing aboat the bead in folds ; that of the king was high and eiect above tlM 
 head. See the notes of Wesseling and Schweighaiiser, upon ni},oi a-raykti 
 in litnulot. /. c. 
 
 I 
 
 CONSPIRACY.- DARIUS SUCCEEDS SMERDIS. 
 
 22$ 
 
 tribes.^ It thus appears that though Smerdis ruled as a son of 
 the great Gyrus, yet he ruled by means of Medes and Magian^ 
 depriving the Persians of that supreme privilege and predom- 
 inance to which they had become accustomed.- We see thii 
 by what followed immediately after the assassination of Smerdii 
 and his brother in the palace. The seven conspirators, ex- 
 hibiting the bloody heads of both these victims as an evidence 
 of their deed, instigated the Persians in Susa to a general mas 
 sacre of the Magians, many of whom were actually slain, and 
 the rest only escaped by flight, concealment, or the hour of night. 
 And the anniversary of thid day was celebrated afterward;} 
 among the Persians by a solemnity and festival, called the Ma- 
 gophonia ; no Magian being ever alU^wed on that day to appear 
 in public.3 The descendants of the Seven maintained a privi- 
 leged name and rank,"* even down to the (Extinction of the mon- 
 archy by Alexander the Great. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 101-120. 
 
 * In the speech which Herodotus puts into the momb of Kftmbyses op 
 his deathbed, a<ldressed to the Persians around him in a s*ra.'n of propheti* 
 adjuration (iii, 65), he says : Kai 6^ ifilv rude kni(JK't]nTu), i9^oJ)<* tpijq {^aai'/.ii'i 
 ovf k-mKoXiuv, Kal iruaiv ifilv koI fia/uoTa ^kxai-fitVL^eiJv roiai irnpE^vai, /* 
 'Kepudelv rr/v rjyefioviTjv avriq t^ Mjyt^oi'f izepu'k'&ovaav • aW elre doA^* fjfouo 
 avT7}v KTT)(7ufi€voL (the personification of the deceased son of Cjrus}_ S^h- 
 anaipe'&iivaL VTzd vfituv • elre Kal o^evel reu Karepyaaafievoi^ (r^evel kct^ 
 rd Kuprepov uvaauaaadaL (the forcible opposition of the Medes to Darius. 
 which he put down by superior force on the Persian side) : compare the 
 speech of Gobryas, one of tbe seven Persian conspirators (iii, 73), and that 
 of Prexaspes (iii, 75) ; also Plato, Legg. iii, 12, p. 695. 
 
 Heeren has taken a correct view of the reign of Smerdis the Magian, 
 and its political character (Ideen iibcr den Verkehr, etc., der Alten Welt, 
 part i, abth. i, p. 431). 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 79. 'Lnaau^evoi 6e rd, iyxsipif^ia, tKTeivov okov riva fiuyop 
 EvpLOKov ' el 6e ^Tj v{>f kiTEl'&ovaa ^(TX£, DuTTOv uv ovdeva jxayov • Tavr-qv rifit 
 r/f/ipTjv •Stpu-KEvovoL Uipaai Kotvy fiu7.iaTa TtJv rjfiepeuv • Kai iv avr^ 6pT^ 
 fieyukrjv uvdyovai, r) KeKXijTai rrr^ Tlepaeuv Mayo^ovm. 
 
 The periodical celebration of the Magophonia is attested by Ktlsias,-* 
 on« of the fe\^ points of complete agreement with Herodotus. He farthei 
 agrees in saying that a Magian usurped the throne, through likeness of 
 person to the deceased son of Cyrus, whom Kambyses had slain, — but all 
 iis other statements differ from Herodotus (KtSsias, 10-14). 
 
 * Even at the battle of Arbela, — " Summae Orsines praeerat, a septen 
 
 VOL. IT. 10* 15oc 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 * 'I 
 
"22,6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE 
 
 ORCETES, SATRAP OF LYDIA. 
 
 227 
 
 Furthermore, it appears tliat the autliority of Darius was not 
 readily acknovvled,j?ed througliout tlie empire, and that an inter 
 val of confusion ensued before it became so.' Tlie Medes actu- 
 ally revolted, and tried to maintain themselves by force against 
 Darius, who however found means to subdue them : though, when 
 he convoked his troops from the various provinces, he did not 
 receive from the satrai)s universal obedience. The powerful 
 Onx^tes, especially, who had been appointed by Cyrus satrap of 
 Lydia and Ionia, not only sent no troops to the aid of Darius 
 against the Medes,-^ but even took advantage of the disturl>ed 
 «itate of the government to put to death his private enemy Mitro- 
 bates satrap of Phrygia, and approi»riate that satrapy in addition 
 to his own. Aryandes also, the satrap nominated by Kambys. s 
 in Egypt, comported himself as the equal of Darius rather than 
 a^ hil subject.' The subject provinces generally, to whom Smer- 
 dis had granted remission of tribute and military service for tlie 
 space of'three years, were grateful and attached to liis memory, 
 and noway pleased with the new dynasty; morec»ver, the nvolt 
 of the Babylonians, conceived a year or two before it was exe- 
 cuted, took its rise from the fe.dings of this timeJ But the 
 renewal of the old conflict between tlie two principal sections of 
 the empire, Medes and Persians, is doubtless the most important 
 feature in this political revolution. The false Smerdis with his 
 brother, both of tltem Medes and Magians, had revived the Me- 
 dian nationality to a state of supremac y over the Persian, re- 
 calling the memory of what it had been under Astyages ; wlnle 
 Dariu°, — a i)ure Persian, and not (like the mule Cyrus) half 
 Mede and half Persian, — replaced the Persian nation ality in its 
 
 P,r.\7^m^^^ ad Cynvm .pu.MUC, i.ohihssimum re-em, origiuem sui refer- 
 ens." (Quintus Curtius, iv, 12, 7, or iv, 45, 7, Zumpt :) compare htraho, 
 
 xi, I). 531 ; Flonis, iii, 5, 1. , . . . , 
 
 1 Vicrodot. iii, 127. ^apebK — «^e oiSeovtux oi en ruv npvrfiaruv, etc.,— 
 mention of tlie ra^a;r// (iii. 126, 150). . . „. s 
 
 « Ilerodot iii, 126. Mfra yap top Kafx,3va£u davarov, Kai ruv Mayu>v r^» 
 ^a^AfMv, fievuv h ryd Sapdm: 'Opo.r;/f, u^^^Aa fiiv ovd^.v lUpaau v^rd 
 IXn^uv uirayaipvi^iPOVi: r^v apxr/v b 6i kv ravrrj ry rapaxv ^ar^ 
 ^v iKTiive Mi rooSdtta uXla re e^Vfipiae iravToia, etc. 
 
 » Herodot.iv, 166. 'O (5f 'Apvi'ivdric hv ovrog ttj^ kiyviTTcyv irrapxoi viri 
 i.afi,ivatu Karlareu^. of var.p^ Xf^9 napUfevfievoi Aopeiy duikxUiyn. 
 
 •Herodot. iii, 57-1&0. 
 
 ascendent condition, though not without the necessity of sup 
 pressing by forco a rebellion of the Medes.^ 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 130. 'Acrt?a> ;;f fiiv vvv i3aailsvaag e^r' Irea nevre koX Tpiif» 
 Kovra, ovTu r//f upxili naTeirav^T], M//(iot 6e viriKtnpav Hepayai ^iil rijv roi»» 
 
 Tov TTLKpoTTjTa "XaTip(f> jnevToi xpbv(f) /leTEiiiTiijai re ff(pi Tavra Troi^aaet, 
 
 Kal uTTtaTTjaav uTrb Aapeiov • uToaravrff di^ biriau KaTearpuip^ijaaVf fitiX9 
 vLKrjx'^svTec' tots 6e, lire '\<rrvayeoc, oi H^paai te koI b Kvpoc kTzavaaravre^ 
 Tolai M/jdoKTi, Tjpxov rb inrb tovtov tt/c Walrjg. 
 
 This passage — asserting that the Medes, some time after the deposition 
 of Astyages and the acquisition of Persian supremacy by Cyrus, repented 
 of having sufi'ered their discontent against Astyages to place this suprem- 
 acy in the hands of the Pei-sians, revolted from Darius, and were recon- 
 quered after a contest — appears to me to have been misunderstood by 
 chronologists. Dodwell, Larcher, and Mr. Fynes Clinton (indeed, most, if 
 not all, of the chronologists) explain it as alluding to a revolt of the Medes 
 against the Persian king Darius Nothus, mentioned in the Hellenica of 
 Xenophon i, 2, 12), and belonging to the year 408 B.C. See Larcher ad 
 Herodot. i, 130, and his Vie d'He'rodote, prelixed to his translation (p. 
 Ixxxix) ; also Mr. Clinton, Fasti Ilellenici, ad ann. 408 and 455, and hii 
 Appendix, c, 18, p. 316. 
 
 The revolt of the Medes alluded to by Herodotus is, in my judgment, 
 completely distinct from the revolt mentioned by Xenophon : to identify 
 the two, as these eminent chronolo^'ists do, is an hypothesis not only having 
 nothint? to recommend it, but open to ^rave objection. The revolt men- 
 tioned by Herodotus was against Darius son of Hystaspes, not against 
 Darius is'othus ; and I have set forth with peculiar care the circumstance! 
 connected with the conspiracy and accession of the former, for the purpose 
 of showing that they all decidedly imply that conflict between Median and 
 Persian supremacy, which Herodotus directly announces in the passage now 
 
 l;efore us. 
 
 1. When Herodotus speaks of Darius, without any adjective designation, 
 why should we imagine that he means any other than Darius the son of 
 Hystaspes, on whom he dwells so copiously in his narrative? Once only 
 in the course of his history (ix, 108) another Darius (the young prince, son 
 of Xerxes the First) is mentioned ; but with this exception, Darius son of 
 Hystasjies is uniformly, throughout the work, spoken of under his simpU 
 name : Darius Nothus is never alluded to at all. 
 
 2. The deposition of Astyages took place in 559 B.C. ; the beginning of 
 llie reign of Darius occurred in 520 b.c. ; now repentance on the part of 
 the Medes, for what they had done at the former of those two epochs, might 
 naturally prompt them to try to repair it in the latter. But between the 
 deposition of Astyages in 559 B.C., and the revolt mentioned by Xenophon 
 against Darius Nothus in 408 B.C., the interval is more than one hundred 
 and fifty years. To ascribe a revolt which took place in 408 B.C., to repent 
 
 mi 
 
228 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 It has already been observed tliat the subjugation of the recu- 
 lant Medes was not the only embarrassment of the first years of 
 
 Ance for somethini; wliich had occurred one hundred and fifty years before, 
 ii unnatural and far-fetdied, if not positively iuudmi6sil)le. 
 
 Tlie preceding' arj;umcnts go to show that the natural construction of 
 the passage in Herodotus points to Darius son of Ilystaspes, and not to Da- 
 rius Nothus ; !)ut this is not all. There are yet stronger reasons why the 
 reference to Darius Nothus should he discarded. 
 
 The supposed mention, in Herodotus, of a fact so late as 408 b.c, per- 
 plexes the whole chronolo;;y of his life and authorship. Accordin^^ to the 
 usual statement of i is hioj;raphy, whith every ont admits, and which there 
 is no reason to call in (piestion, he w:ts l>oin in 4S4 n.c. Here, then, is an 
 event alluded to in his history-, which occurred when the historian was sev- 
 enty-six years old, and the allusion to which he must he presumed to have 
 written when ahout eif?hty years old. if not more; for his mention of the 
 fact hy no means implies that it was particularly recent. Those who adopt 
 this view, do not imagine that he wrote his whole histor}- at that age ; hut 
 they maintain that he made later additions, of which they contend that this is 
 one. I do not say that this is impossihle : we know that Isokrates composed 
 his Panathenaic oration at the age of ninety-four; hut it must be admitted 
 to lie highly improhahle, — a supposition which ought not to he advanced 
 without some cogent proof to support it. But here no proof whatever is 
 j.roduced. Herodotus mentions a revolt of the Medes against Darius,— 
 Xenophon also mentions a revolt of the Medes against Darius ; hence, 
 chronologists have t iken it as a matter of course, that both authors must 
 allude to the same event ; though the supposition is unnatural as regards 
 the text, and still more unnatural as regards the biography, of Herodotus. 
 
 In respect to that biography, Mr. Clinton api>ears to me to have adopted 
 another erroneous opinion ; in whicli, however, both Larcher and Wesseling 
 tre against him, thorigh Dahlmann and Heysc agree with him. He maintains 
 that the passage in Hero.lotus (iii. 1.5), wherein it is stated that Pausiris 
 succeeded his father Amyrtanis by consent of the Persians in the govern- 
 ment of Egypt, is to be referred to a fact whii h happened subsequent to the 
 year 414 B.C., or the tenth year of Darius Nothus ; sin.c it was in that year 
 that Amyrta;us acqwired tlic government of Egypt. But this opinion rests 
 altogether ui>on the assumption that a certain Amyrtaius, whose name and 
 date occur in Manetho (see Ensebius. Chronicon), is the same person as the 
 Am>Tta;us mentioned in Herodotus ; which identity is not only not proved, 
 but is extremely improbable, since Mr. Clinton himself admits (F. H. Ap- 
 pendix, p. 317)', while maintaining the identity: '"He (Amyrtieus) had 
 conducted a war against the Persian government more than Ji/iy years be/ore.'' 
 This, though not impossible, is surely very improbable; it is at least 
 equally probable that the Ail yrta>us of Manetho was a different person 
 from (perhaps even the gra^uison of ) that Amyrtaeus in Herodotus, who hwi 
 
 H 
 X 
 
 JO 
 
 w 
 
 H 
 C 
 
 JO 
 
 O 
 % 
 
 H 
 X 
 M 
 
 d 
 
 D 
 W 
 JO 
 
 X 
 
 m 
 2: 
 
 o 
 
 V X 
 5 o 
 
 55 
 
 
 ^■^ 
 
 I 
 

 OR(ETES, SATRAP OF 1 YDIA. 
 
 229 
 
 II 
 
 ) 
 
 Darius. Oroctes, satmp of Plirygia, Lydia, and Ionia, ruling 
 eeeniingly ;he entire western coast of Asia Minor, — possessing 
 a lai'ge niil'tary force and revenue, and surrounded by a body- 
 guard of one thousand native Persians, — maintained a haughty 
 independence. He secretly made away with couriers sent to 
 summon him to Susa, and even wreaked his vengeance upon 
 »ome of the principal Persians who had privately offended him. 
 
 carried on war ajrainst the Persians more than tifty years before ; it appears 
 to me, indeed, that this is the more reasonable h}-pothesis of the two. 
 
 1 have permitted myself to ]nolong this note to an unusual length, be- 
 cause the supposed mention of such recent events in the history of Herod- 
 otus, as those in the reign of Darius Nothus, has introduced very gratuitoui 
 assumptions as to the time and manner in which that history was com 
 posed. It cannot lie shown that there is a single event of precise and as- 
 certained date, alluded to in his liistorj^, later than the capture of the Lao* 
 edainonian heralds in the year 430 B.C. (Herodot. vii, 1.37: see Larcher, 
 A'ie d'He'rodote. p. Ixxxix ) ; and this renders the composition of his history 
 as an entire work much more smooth and intelligible. 
 
 It may be worth while to add, that whoever reads attentively Herod- 
 otus, vi, 98, — and reflects at the same time that the destruction of the 
 Atlienian armament at Syracuse (the greatest of all Hellenic disasters, 
 ('uirdly inferior, for its time, to the Russian campaign of Napoleon, and 
 especially impressive to one living at Thurii, as may be seen by the life of 
 Lysias. Plutarch. Vit. x, Oratt. p. 8.35) happened during the reign of Da- 
 rius Nothus in 413 B.C.. — will not readily admit the hypothesis of additions 
 made to the history during the reign of the latter, or so late as 408 B.a 
 Herodotus would hardly have dwelt so expressly and emphatically upoa 
 mischief done by Greeks to each other in the reigns of Darius son of Hys- 
 taspes, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes, if he had lived to i^itness the greater mis- 
 chiefs so inflicted during the reign of Darius Nothus, and had kept his his- 
 tory before him for the pur]>ose of inserting new events. The destruction 
 of the Athenians before Syracuse would have been a thousand times more 
 striking to his imagination than the revolt of the Medes against Darius 
 Nothus, and would have impelled him with much greater force to alter or 
 enlarge the chapter vi, 98. 
 
 The sentiment too which Herodotus places in the mouth of DemaratiM 
 respecting the Spartans (vii, 104) appears to have been written before thf 
 capture of the Spartans in Sphakteria, in 425 B.C., rather than ajler it : 
 compare Thucyd. iv, 40. 
 
 Dahlraann (Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Geschichte, vol. ii» pp. 41- 
 47) and Heyse (Qusestiones Herodoteae, pp. 74-77, Berlin, 1627) both pro. 
 less to point out six passages in Herodotus which mark events of liUer data 
 than 4.30 b.c. But none of the chronological indications which ihey adi 
 dace appear to me tnistworthv. 
 
 '. 'i 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
1 
 
 Sr30 
 
 HiSTORr OF GREECE. 
 
 Darius, not thinking it prudent to attack him by open h rce, pro* 
 poeed to the chief Persians at Susa, the dangerous problem oi 
 destroying him by stratagem. Tliirty among them volunteered 
 lo undertake it, and Bagiens, son of Artontes, to whom on drawing 
 lots the task devolved, accomplished it by a man«uvre which 
 might serve as a lesson tc» the Ottoman government, in its em- 
 barrassments with contumiicious Pashas. Having proceeded to 
 Sardis, furnished with mamy different royal ordinarK es, foi inally 
 t^et forth and bearing the :^eal of Darius, — he was pn^nted to 
 Urcetes in audience, with the public secretary of the satrai>y r\o<e 
 at hand, and the Persian guards standing around. He presented 
 hid ordinances to be read aloud by the secretary, choosing tir.^t 
 those which related to matters of no great importance; but when 
 he saw that the guards listened with i.rofound reverence, and 
 that the king s name an<l seal imposed upon them irresistibly, he 
 ventured upon the real purport of his perilous mission. An or- 
 dinance was handed to the secretary, and read by him aloud, 
 as follows : ^' Persians, king Darius forbids you to serve any 
 longer as guards to Onrtes." The obedient guards at on.-e drliv- 
 ered up their spears, when BagaMis caused the fmal warrant to 
 be read to them: « King Darius commands the Persians in Sar- 
 dis to kill Ora^tes." The guards drew their swords and killed 
 him on the spot: his large treasure was conveyed to Su^a: 
 Darius became undispute<l miister, and probal)ly Baganis satrap.' 
 Another devoted adhennit, and another yet more memorable 
 piece of cunning, laid prostrate before Darius the mighty walls 
 •nd gates of the revolted Babylon. The inhabitants of that 
 city had employed themselves assi<luously, — both during the lax 
 provincial superintendence of the false Smerdis, and during the 
 period of confusion and conflict which elapsed before Darius 
 became firmly established and obeyed, — in making every prep- 
 aration both for declaring and sustaining their independen<-e. 
 Having accumulated a large store of provisions and other requis- 
 ites for a long siege, without previous detection, they at length 
 proclaimed their independence openly. And such was the inten- 
 lity of their resolution to maintain it, that they had recourse to 
 m proceeding, which, if correctly reported by Herodotus, formi 
 _^ — _— — — — . ■ ■ • ■ — - 
 
 i Ilen>aot. iii, 127, 128. 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 REVOLT OF BABYLON. -ZOPYRUS. 
 
 231 
 
 I 
 
 one of die most frightful enormities recorded in his history. T« 
 make their provisions last out longer, they strangled all the 
 women in the city, reserving only their mothers, and one woman 
 to each family for the purpose of baking.^ We cannot but sup- 
 pose that this has been magnified from a partial into an universal 
 destruction. Yet taking it even with such allowance, it illustrates 
 that ferocious force of will, — and that predominance of strong 
 nationality, combined with antipathy to foreigners, over all the 
 gentler sympathies, — which seems to mark the Semitic nations, 
 and which may be traced so much in the Jewish history of 
 
 Josephus. 
 
 Darius, assembling all the forces in bis power, laid siege to the 
 revolted city, but could make no impression upon it, either by force 
 or by stratagem. He tried to repeat the proceeding by which 
 Cyrus had taken it at first ; but the besieged were found this time 
 on their guard. The siege had lasted twenty months without the 
 smallest progress, and the Babylonians derided the besiegers 
 from the height of their impregnable walls, when a distinguished 
 Persian nobleman Zopyrus, — son of Megabyzus, who had been 
 one of the seven conspirators against Smerdis, — presented him- 
 self one day before Darius in a state of frightful mutilation : his 
 nose and ears were cut off, and his body misused in every way. 
 He had designedly so maimed himself, " thinking it intolerable 
 that Assyrians should thus laugh the Persians to scorn,"-' in the 
 intention which he presently intimated to Darius, of passing into 
 the town as a deserter, w ith a view of betraying it, — for which 
 purpose measures were concerted. The Babylonians, seeing a 
 Persian of the highest rank in so calamitous a condition, readily 
 believed his assurance, that he had been thus punished by the 
 king s order, and that he came over to them as the only means 
 of procuring for himself single vengeance. They intrusted him 
 with the command of a detachment, with which he gained several 
 advantages in different sallies, according to previous concert with 
 Darius, until at length, the confidence of the Babylonians beccm- 
 
 » Herodot. ii:. 150. 
 
 2 Herodot. ii, 155. 6etv6v tl irocevfievoCr 'Affavpiov( liipayai Ka73}e?4¥ 
 Compare the speech of Mardonius, vii, 9. 
 
 The horror of Darius, at the first sight of Zopyrus in this conditioD, M 
 ■^iNDgly dramatized by Herodotus. 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 b 
 
2d2 
 
 HJS TOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 ing unbounded, they plac€ d in his hands the care of the principal 
 gates. At the critical moment these gates were thrown open, 
 and the Persians became masters ot* the city.' 
 
 Thus was the impregnable Babylon a second time reduced,^ 
 and Darius took precautions on this occasion to puc it out of con- 
 dition for resisting a third time. He caused the walls and gates 
 to be demolished, and three thousand of the principal citizens to 
 be crucitied: the remaining inhabitants were left in the dis- 
 mantled city, tifty tliousand women being levied by assessment 
 upon the neighboring provinces, to supply the {)lace of the 
 women strangled when it tirst revolted.^ Zopyrus was ap 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 154-158. 
 
 * Ktesias represents the revolt and recapture of Bahylon to have taken 
 place, not under Darius, bat under his >on ;in.l >ur. o--or Xerxes. He says 
 that the Babylonians, revolting, slew their satrap Zopyrus ; that they were 
 besieged by Xerxes, and that Megabyzus son of Zopyrus caused the ( ity to 
 be taken by practisin*^ that very stratagem whicli Herodotus ascribes to 
 Zopyrus himself (Persica, c. 2«}-22). 
 
 This seems inconsistent with the fact, that Me^^il.yzus was general of tho 
 Persian army in Egypt in the war with the Athenians, about 460 n.c. 
 (Diodor. Sic. xi, 75-77) : he would hardly have been sent on active service 
 bad he been so fearfully mutdated ; moreover, the whole story of Ktesias 
 appears to me far less probable than thar of Herodotus; for on this, as on 
 other occasions, to blend the two together i< iiupossilde. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 159, 160. "From th.' women thus introiluced (says Herod- 
 otus) the present Babylonians are sprung.'' 
 
 To cmcify subdued revolters by thousands !>*, fortunately, so little in 
 harmony with modern European manners, that it nuiy not l»e amiss to 
 Btrengthen the confidence of the reader in the accuracy of Herodotus, by 
 producing an analogous narrative of incidents far more recent. Voltaire 
 gives, from the MS. of General Lefort, one of the principal and confiden- 
 tial otlicers of Peter the Great, the following account of the suppression of 
 the revolted Strelitzes at Moscow, in 1698: these Strelitzes were the old 
 native militia, or Janissaries, jf the Russian Czars, opposed to all the re- 
 forms of Peter. 
 
 " Pour dtouffer ces troubles, le czar part secrfetement de Vienne, arrive 
 enfin h Moscou, et surprend tout le monde par sa pre'sence : il recompense 
 les troupes qui ont vaincu le^ Strelitz: les prisons e'taient pleines de eet 
 malheureux. Si leur crime etait grand, le ch.'ltiment le fut aussi. Leon 
 chefe, plusieurs officiers, et quelques pretres, furent condamne's k k mort 
 qnelques-uns furent roue's, deux femmes enterrees vives. On pendit autour 
 des murailles de la ville et on fit pe'rir dans d'autres supj Uces deux raillt 
 Strelit/ ■ lours coi7>s resteren* deux jours exposes aur les grands cheminft 
 
 ,1 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. 
 
 233 
 
 pointed satrap of the territory for life, with enjoyment of ita 
 entire revenues, receiving besides every additional reward which 
 it was in the power of Darius to bestow, and generous assurances 
 from the latter that he would rather have Zopyrus without 
 wounds than the possession of Babylon. I have already inti- 
 mated in a former cliapter that the demolition of the walls here 
 mentioned is not to be regarded as complete and continuous, nor 
 was there any necessity that it should be so. Partial demolition 
 would be quite sutficient to leave the city without defence ; and 
 the description given by Herodotus of tht state of things as they 
 stood at the time of his visit, proves that portions of the walla 
 yet subsisted. One circumstance is yet to be added in reference 
 to the subsequent condition of Babylon under the Persian em- 
 pire. The city with the territory belonging to it constituted a 
 satrapy, which not only paid a larger tribute (one thousand 
 Euboic talents of silver) and contributed a much larger amount 
 of provisions in kind for the maintenance of the Persian court, 
 than any other among the twenty satrapies of the empire, but 
 furnished besides an annual supply of live hundred eunuch 
 youths.' We may i)resume that this was intended in part as a 
 punishment for the past revolt, since the like obligation was not 
 imposed upon any other satrapy. 
 
 Thus firmly established on the throne, Darius occupied it for 
 thirty-six years, and his reign was one of organization, different 
 from that of his two predecessors ; a diflference which the Per- 
 sians well understood and noted, calling Cyrus the father, Kam- 
 byses the master, and Darius the retail-trader, or huckster.-- In 
 
 et surtout autour du monast^re ou residaient les princesses Sophie et Eu 
 doxe. On e'rigea des colonnes de pierre oil le crime et le chatiment furent 
 prave's. Un tres-grand nombrc qui avaient leurs femmes et leurs enfans 
 furent disperses avec leurs families dans la Sibe'rie, dans le royaume d' As- 
 trakhan, dans le pays d'Azof: par li\ du raoins leur punition fut utile k 
 I'etat : ils servirent k defricher des terres qui manquaient d'habitans et de 
 culture." (Voltaire, Histoire de Russie, part i, eh. x, torn. 31, of the CEuvret 
 Completes de Voltaire, p. 148, ed. Paris, 1825.) 
 
 ^ Herodot. iii, 92. 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 89. What the Persian denomination was, which Herodo- 
 Ri8 or his informants translated kutttjIo^^ we do not knew; but this latter 
 word was used often by Greeks to signify a cheat, or dece ver generally : »e« 
 Btymclogic. Magn p. 490, 11, and Siidas, t Kamj7MQ. 'O 6\Klaxv7.oc -4 
 
 ■ \\ 
 
 
 1 
 
 * 
 
 1 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ) 
 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 ./■ 
 
2d4 
 
 HISTORY OF GRKKCE. 
 
 the mouth of he Per.-iaiis this latter e]>ithet must be consMied 
 IS no insi<niificant compliment, since it intimates that he was the 
 first to introduce some methodical order into the imperial admin- 
 istration and finances. Under the two former kings there was 
 no definite amount of tribute levied upon the subject provinces: 
 which furnished what were called presents, subject to no fixed 
 limit except sucli as might be satisfactory to the satrap in each 
 district. But Darius — succeeding as he did to Smerdis, who 
 had rendered himself po}>ular with the provinces by large linan- 
 cial exemptions, md having farther to encounter jealousy and 
 dissatisfaction from Persians, liis former equals in rank — prob- 
 ably felt it expedient to relieve the provinces from the burden 
 of undefined exactions. He distributed the whole empire into 
 twenty departments, imposing upon each a fixed annual tax,^ and 
 a fixed contribution for the maintenance of the court. Thie 
 must doubtless Imve been a great improvement, though the limi- 
 tation of the sum wliicli the Great King at Susa would recpiire, 
 did not at all prevent the satrajy in his own province from in- 
 definite requisitions beyond it. The latter was a little king, 
 who acted nearly as he i)leased in the internal administration 
 of his province, --subject only to the necessity of sending up the 
 imperial tribute, of keeping off foreign enemies, and of furnishing 
 an adequate military contingent for the foreign enterprises of 
 the Great King. To every satrap was attacbed a royal secre- 
 tary, or comptroller, of the revenue,' who probably managed the 
 imperial finances in the province, and to whom the court of Susa 
 might perliaps look as a watch upon the satrap himself. It is 
 Tiot^'to be supposed that the Persian authorities in any province 
 meddled with the <letails of taxation, or contribution, as they 
 l>ore ui)on indivitluals. The court having tixed the entire sum 
 payable by the satrapy in the aggregate, the satrap or the secre- 
 
 ^6Aia iravra KcAei KurzifAa — " Kurrr/Aa 7rpoa6epo>v rexvvnara:' ( jEschylos, 
 Fm-meni . 328, ed. Dindorf : compare Euripid. Hippolyt. 953.) 
 
 » Hero* ot. iu, 128. This division of power, and double appointment by 
 iho Great King, appears to have been retained until the close of the Pei> 
 sian empire: see Quintus Curtius, v, 1, 17-20 (v, 3, 19-21, Zumpt). The 
 present Turkish goYemment nominates a Defterdar as finance admmist». 
 t ,r in ea -h province, with authority derived direcUy from itself; and fit) 
 (i'ssedlv independent of the Pacha. 
 
 
 ■TP" 
 
 SATRAPIES AND KE7ENUE. 
 
 231 
 
 Uuy apportioned it among the various component districts, towns, 
 or provinces, leaving to the local authorities in each of these 
 latter the task of assessing it upon individual inhabitants. From 
 necessity, therefore, as well as from indolence of temper and 
 political incompetence, the Persians were compelled to respect 
 authorities which they found standing both in town and country, 
 and to leave in their hands a large measure of genuine influence ; 
 frequently overruled, indeed, by oppressive interference m the 
 part of the satrap, whenever any of his passions prompted, — 
 but never entirely superseded. In the important towns and sta- 
 tions, Persian garrisons were usually kept, and against the 
 excesses of the military there was probably little or no protec- 
 tion to the subject people. Yet still, the provincial governments 
 were allowed to continue, and often even the petty kings who 
 had governed separate districts during their state of indepen- 
 dence prior to the Persian conquest, retained their title and dig- 
 nity as tributaries to the court of Susa.^ The empire of the 
 Great King was thus an aggregate of heterogeneous elements, 
 connected together by no tie except that of common fear and 
 subjection, — noway coherent nor self-supporting, nor pervaded 
 by any common system or spirit of nationality. It resembled, in 
 its main political features, the Turkish and Persian empires of 
 the present day,2 though distinguished materially by the many 
 diflferences arising out of Mohammedanism and Christianity, and 
 apparently not reaching the same extreme of rapacity, corruption, 
 and cruelty in detail. 
 
 Darius distributed the Persian empire into twenty satrapies, 
 each including a certain continuous territory, and one or more 
 nations inhabiting it, the names of which Herodotus sets forth. 
 The amount of tribute payable by each satrapy was determined : 
 payable in gold, according to the Euboic talent, by the Indians 
 in the easternmost satrapy, — in silver, according to the Baby- 
 Ionian, or larger talent, by the remaining nineteen. Herodotua 
 computes the ratio of gold to silver as 13 : 1. From the nine- 
 teen satrapies which paid in silver, there was levied annually 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 15. 
 
 • Respecting the administration of the modem Persian empire, see ^i^ 
 neir, Geotjraph. Memoir of Persia, pp. 29. 43 47 
 
 
 w 
 
 I 
 
 'i V 
 
 K 
 
236 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 the sum of seven thoii>an(l seven hundred and forty Ba))yloniaD 
 Udents, equal to something about two million nine lumdred and 
 Bixty-four thousand ]>ounds sterling: from the Indians, who alone 
 paid in gold, there was received a sum equal (at tlie rate of 
 1 . 13) to four thousand six hundred and eighty Euboic talents 
 of silver, or to about one million two hundred and ninety thousand 
 
 pounds sterling.' 
 
 To explain how it happened that this one satrapy was charged 
 with a sum equal to two-lifths of the aggregate charge on the 
 
 » Herodot iii 9.-). llic t.xt of Herodotus contains an erroneous sum 
 mm- up of items, ^vhi^h critics l.ave no means of correcting with certainty. 
 Nor^s it possible to tmst the hir^^e sum which he alleges to have hecD 
 levied from the Indiai s, though all the other items, included m the mne 
 teen silver-pavin- divisions, seem within the probable truth ; and mdeed 
 both Rennelfand Rol>ertson think the total too small: the charges on 
 some of the satrapies are decidedly smaller than the reality. 
 
 The vast sum of tiftv thousand talents i-< said to have been found 
 by Alexander the Great, laid nj. by >u.<essive kin- at Susa alone, besides 
 the treiusures at Persepolis, Pasai-ad*, and clscwlure (Aman, in, lb, ll; 
 Plutarch Alexand. .37). Tresumin- these talents to be Babylonian or 
 ^.ina^an talents (in tie proportion 5 : 3 to Attic talents) fifty thousand 
 talents would l>e equal to nineteen million pounds sterling ; it they were Attic 
 talents it would l>e equal to eleven million six hundred thousand pounds 
 Kterlinc The statements of Diodurus give even much lar-er sums {xvn, 
 66-71 -'compare Curtius. v. 2. 8 ; v, 6. 9 ; Strabo, xv, p. 730) It is plain 
 that the numerical affinnations were ditfcrent in different authors, and one 
 cannot pretend to pronounce on the tru.twortliincss of such large hgtires 
 without knowing more of the original ntnnis on whi.h tliey were founded 
 That there were prodigious sums of gold and silver, i. quite unquestion 
 able. Respecting the statement of the Persian revenue given by Herodotus 
 
 .;ee Rocckh, Metrologie. ch. v. 1-2. , • r ., i^^ p,, 
 
 \medee Jaul>eit, in 1806, estimated the poi)ulation of the modem Per- 
 Bvm empire at al)OUt seven million soul. ; of which about six million were 
 settled population, the rest nomadic: he also estimated the Schah's revenue 
 at about two milUon nine hundred thousand tomans, or one million 
 nve hundred thousand pounds >terling. Others calculated the population 
 hi.^hcr. at nearer twelve million souls. Kinneir gives the revenue at some- 
 thin.' more than three million pounds sterling : he thinks that the whole 
 terrhor>- between the Euphrates and the Indus does r,ot contain »dov€ 
 eighteen millhms of souls (Geogr. Memoir of Persia, pp. 4^-47 : ccxpari 
 Bitter, West Asien, Al»theil. ii. Abschn. iv. pp. 879-889). 
 
 The mo.lern Persian empire contains not so much as the eastern half 
 of Ihe an. iunt. which coveicd aU A-atic Turkev and Eg}Tt besides. 
 
 PERSIAN INDIA 
 
 237 
 
 ocber nineteen, Herodotus dwells upon the vast population, the 
 extensive territory, and the abundant produce in gold, amcng 
 those whom he calls Indians, — the easternmost inhabitants of 
 the earth, since beyond them there was nothing but uninhabit- 
 able sand, — reaching, as far as we can make it out, from Baktria 
 southward along the Indus to its mouth, but how far eastward 
 we cannot determine. Darius is said to have undertaken an 
 expedition against them and subdued them : moreover, he is 
 affirmed to have constructed and despatched vessels down the 
 Indus, from the city of Kaspatyri and the territory of the Pak- 
 tyes, in its upper regions, all the way down to its mouth : then 
 into the Indian ocean, round the peninsula of Arabia, and up 
 the Red Sea to Egypt. The ships were commanded by Skylax, 
 — a Greek of Karyanda on the southwestern coast of Asia 
 Minor ; > who, if this statement be correct, executed a scheme 
 of nautical enterprise not only one hundred and seventy years 
 earlier, but also far more extensive, than the famous voyage of 
 Neai-chus, admiral of Alexander the Great, — since the latter 
 only went from the Indus to the Persian gulf. The eastern 
 portions of the Persian empire remained so unknown and un- 
 visited until the Macedonian invasion, that we are unable to 
 criticize these isolated statements of Herodotus. None of tlie 
 Persian kings subsequent to Darius appear to have visited them, 
 and whether the prodigious sum demandable from them accord- 
 ing to the Persian rent-roll was ever regularly levied, may rea- 
 sonably be doubted. At the same time, we may reasonably 
 believe that the mountains in the northern parts of Persian 
 India — Cabul and Little Thibet — were at that time extremely 
 productive in gold, and that quantities of that metal, such as 
 now appear almost fabulous, may have been often obtained. It 
 appears that the produce of gold in all parts of the earth, as far 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 102, iv, 44. See the two Excursus of Bahr on these two 
 •hapters, vol. ii, pp. 648-671 of his edit, of Herodotus. 
 
 It ceitainlv is singular that neither Nearchus, nor Ptolemv, nor Aristo- 
 bulus, nor Arrian, take any notice of this remarkable voyage distinctl/ 
 asserted by Herodotus to have been accomplished. Such silence, however, 
 affords no sufficient reason for calling the narrative in question. The 
 attention of the Persian kings, successors to Darius, came to be far mon 
 occupied with the western than with the eastern portions of their empire. 
 
 \ 
 
 iy 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
238 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 as hitherto known, is obtained exclusively near the surface ; w 
 that a country once rich in that metal may well have been 
 exhausted of its whole supply, and left at a later period without 
 
 any gold at all. 
 
 Of the nineteen silver-paying satrapies, the most heavily im- 
 posed was Babylonia, which paid one thousand talents: the next 
 in amount of charge was Egypt, paying: seven hundred talent-s 
 besides the produce of the fish from the lake of M<j'ris. The ro- 
 maining satrapies varied in amount, down as low as ono liundred 
 and seventy talenrs, which was the sum charged on the seventh 
 satrapy (in the enumeration of Herodotus), comprising the Sat- 
 lagydic, the Gandarii, the Dodikai, and the Aparyta?. The 
 ionians, iEolians, Magnesians on the Mieander, and on Mount 
 Sipvlus, Karians, Lykians, Milyans, and Pam]»hylians, — includ- 
 in«' the coast of Asia Minor, southward of Kane, and from 
 thence round the southern promontory tu IMiaselis, — were rated 
 as one division, paying four hundred talents. I5ut we may be 
 sure that much more than this was really taken from the people, 
 when we read tha^ Magnesia alone afterwards paid to Themis- 
 tokles a revenue of fifty talents annually.^ The Mysians and 
 Lydians were included, with some others, in another division, 
 and the Hellesj>ontine Greeks in a third, with Phrygians, Bithy- 
 nians, Paphlagonians, Mariandynians, and Syrians, paying three 
 lumdred and sixty talents, — nearly the same as was paid by 
 Syria proper, Pluinicia, and Juda\% with the island of Cyprus. 
 Independent of this regular tribute, and the undefined sums ex- 
 torted over and al>ove it,^ there were some dependent nations, 
 which, though exempt from tribute, furnished occasional sums 
 called presents ; and farther contributions were exacted for the 
 maintenance of tlie vast suite who always personally attended 
 the king. One entire third of this last burden was borne by Baby- 
 lonia alone in consequence of its exuberant fertility.^ It waa 
 paid in produce, as indeed the peculiar productions of every part 
 of the empire seem to have been sent up for the regal consumption. 
 
 ' Thuevd. i, \^S. * Herodot. iii, 117. 
 
 • Herodot. i, 192. Compare the desciiption of the dinner and sapper of 
 Ihe Groat Kinjr, in Polyaenus, iv, 3, 32 also Ktesias and Deinon ap Athi* 
 naura, ii, p. 07. 
 
 COINAGE OF DARIUS. 
 
 2S9 
 
 However imperfectly we are now able to follow the geogniph* 
 ical distribution of the subject nations as given by Herodotus, 
 it is extremely valuable as the only professed statistics remain- 
 ing, of the entire Persian empire. The arrangement of satrapies, 
 which he describes, underwent modification in subsequent times ; 
 at least it does not harmonize with various statements in the An- 
 abasis of Xenophon, and in other authors who recount Persian 
 affairs belonging to the fourth century B.C. But we lind in 
 no other author except Herodotus any entire survey and distri 
 bution of the empire. It is, indeed, a new tendency which now 
 manifests itself in the Persian Darius, compared with his })rede- 
 cessors : not simply to conquer, to extort, and to give away, — 
 but to do all this with something like method and system,' and 
 to define the obligations of the satraps towards Susa. Another 
 remarkable example of the same tendency is to be found in the 
 fact, that Darius was the first Persian king who coined money : his 
 mJ!!. l)oth in gold and silver, the Daric, was the earliest produce 
 of a Persian mint.- The revenue, as brought to Susa in metallic 
 money of various descriptions, was melted down separately, and 
 poured in a fluid state into jars or earthenware vessels ; when 
 the metal had cooled and hardened, the jar was broken, leaving 
 a standing solid mass, from which portions were cut otF as the oe- 
 
 ' Pluto, Lcjrg. iii, 12, p. 695. 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 166; Plutarch. Kimon. 10. 
 
 The tjold Daric, of the weight of two Attic drachnue (Stater Daricus;. 
 equivalent to twenty Attic silver drachmae (Xenoph. Anab. i, 7, 18), wonld 
 be about 16s. 3d. En<,^lish. But it seems doubtful whether that ratio between 
 gold and silver (10:1) can be reckoned upon as the ordinary ratio in the 
 fifth and fourth centuries B.C. Mr. Ilussey calculates the golden Daric aa 
 equal to £1, Is. 3d. English (Husscy, Essay on the Ancient Weights and 
 Money, Oxford, 1836, ch. iv, s. 8, p. 68 ; ch. vii, s. 3, p. 103). 
 
 I cannot think, with Mr. Hussey, that there is any reason for believing 
 either the name or the coin Lkiric to be older than Darius son of Hystaspei 
 Compare Boeckh, Metroloj^ic, i.x, 5, p. 129. 
 
 Particular statements respecting the value of gold and silver, as ex 
 caangcd one against the other, are to be received with some reserve as th* 
 basis of any general estimate, since we have not the means of comparing a 
 great many such statements together. For the process of coinage wm 
 Imperfectly performed, and the different pieces, both of gold and silver, in 
 arcalation, differed materially in weight one with the other. Herodotii 
 gives the ratio of gold to silver as 13:1. 
 
 ' t 
 
240 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 casion required.' And in addition to these administrative, finan- 
 cial, and monetary arrangements, of which Darius was the first 
 originator, we may probably ascribe to him the first introduction 
 of that system of roads, resting-places, and permanent relays of 
 couriers, which connected both Susa and Ekbataiia with the dis- 
 tant portions of the empire. Herodotus describes in considerable 
 detail the imperial road from Sardis to Susa. a journey of ninety 
 days, crossing the Ilalys, the Eujdirates, the Tigris, tlie Greater 
 and Lesser Zab, the Gyndcs, and the Choaspes. And we may 
 pee by this acionnt that in his time it was kept in excellent order, 
 with convenient*' for travellers.- 
 
 It was Darius a'>o who first completed the conquest of the 
 Ionic Greeks by tin aeciuisition of the important island of Samos. 
 That island had maintained its independence, at the time when 
 ill" Persian genen;i TTarpagus effected the conquest of Ionia. It 
 did not yield voluntarily when Chios and Lesbos submitted, and 
 the r«*rsians had no fieet to attack it ; nor had the Phenicians 
 yet been taught to Tound the Triopian cape. Indeed, the depres- 
 eion which overtook the other cities of Ionia, tended rather to 
 the af^izrandizement of Samos, under the energetic and unscru- 
 inilous despotism of Polykrates. That ambitious Samian, about 
 ten years after the conquest of Sardis by Cyrus (seemingly be- 
 twc-ji 536-532 B.C.), contrived to seize by force or fraud the 
 government of his native island, with the aid of his brothers 
 Pantagnotus and Syloson, and a small band of conspirators.'^ At 
 first, the three brothers shared the supreme power ; but presently 
 Polykrates put to death Pantagnotus, banished Syloson, and 
 madsi himself despot alone. In this station, his ambhion, his 
 perfidy, and his good fortune, were alike remarkable. He con- 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 96. 
 
 « Herodot. v, 52-53 ; viii, 98. " It appears to be a favorite idea with all 
 barbarous princes, that the badness of the roads adds considerably to the 
 natural strength of their dominion!?. The Turks and Persians are un- 
 doubtedly of this opinion : the public highways are, therefore, neglected, 
 and particularly so towards the frontiers." (Kinneir, Geog. Mem. cf Pera 
 p. 43.) 
 
 Th 3 description of Herodotus contrasts favorably with the picture h«n 
 gin*n Dy Mr. Kinneir. 
 
 « Hci-odot. iii. 120. 
 
 SAMOS. -THE DPTSPOT POLYKRATES. 
 
 241 
 
 quered several of the neighboring islands, and even some towns 
 on the mainland ; he carried on successful war against Miletus ; 
 and signally defeated the Lesbian ships which came to assist 
 Miletus ; he got together a force of one hundred armed ships 
 called pentekonters, and one thousand mercenary bowmen,— 
 aspiring to nothing less than the dominion of Ionia, with the 
 islands in the ^gean. Alike terrible to friend and foe by his 
 indiscriminate spirit of aggression, he acquired a naval power 
 which seems at that time to have been the greatest in the Grecian 
 world.' He had been in intimate alliance with Amasis, king of 
 Egypt, who, however, ultimately broke with him. Considering 
 his behavior towards allies, such rupture is not at all surprising; 
 but Herodotus ascribes it to the alarm which Amasis conceived 
 at the uninterrupted and superhuman good fortune of Poly- 
 krates, — a degree of good fortune sure to draw down ultimately 
 corresponding intensity of sufl^ering from the hands of the en- 
 vious gods. Indeed, Herodotus, — deeply penetrated with this 
 belief in an ever-present nemesis, which allows no man to be 
 very happy, or long happy, '^^ith impunity, — throws it into the 
 form of an epistolary warning from Amasis to Polykrates, ad- 
 vising him to inflict upon himself some seasonable mischief or 
 sutfering ; in order, if possible, to avert the ultimate judgment, — 
 to let blood in time, so that the plethora of happiness might not 
 end in apoplexy.2 Pursuant to such counsel, Polykrates threw 
 into the sea a favorite ring, of matchless price and beauty ; but 
 unfortunately, in a few days, the ring reappeared in the belly of 
 a fine fish, which a fisherman had sent to him as a present 
 Amasis now foresaw that the final apoplexy was inevitable, and 
 broke off the alliance with Polykrates without delay, — a well- 
 known story, interesting as evidence of ancient belief, and not 
 less to be noted as showing the power of that belief to begef 
 fictitious details out of real characters, such as I have already 
 touched upon in the history of Solon and Croesus, and eUe- 
 where. 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 39 ; Thucyd. i, 13 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 40-42. . . .^v de ^^ kvaXka^ ffdri rCiirh tovtov al evrvxial rot 
 rvtavracoL 'rrd^atat irpoani^Tuaiy Tporru) Tip k^ ifiev viroKei/xevtf) aicio: com- 
 pare vii, 203, and i, 32. 
 
 VOL, IV. 11 i6oc 
 
 ) 
 
 
 II 
 
 i 
 
 it 
 
", I 
 
 242 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 The facts mentioned by Flerodotus rather lead us to behevo 
 that it was Polykrates, who. with characteristic faithlessness, broke 
 off' his friendship with Am:a8i8 ;» finding it suitable to liis policy 
 to cultivate the alliance of Kambyses, when that prince wa->^ pre- 
 paring for his invasion of Egypt. In that invasion, the Ionic 
 Bubjects of Persia were called u|)on to serve, and Polyknitcs, 
 dcrming it a good opportunity to rid himself of some Samian 
 malcontents, sent to the Persian king to tender auxiliaries from 
 himself Kambyses, having eagerly caught at the prospect of 
 aid from the first naval potentate in the ^gean, forty Samian 
 triremes were sent to the Nile, having on board the suspected 
 persons, as well as conveying a secret request to the Persian 
 king that they might never be suffered to return. Either they 
 never went U) Egyj)t, however, or they found means to escape ; 
 very contra<lictory stories luul reached Herodotus. But they 
 certaiidy returned to Samos, attacked Polykrates at home, and 
 were driven off by his superior force without making any impres- 
 sion. Whereupon they repaired to Sparta to entreat assist- 
 ance.2 
 
 We may here notice the gradually increasing tendency in the 
 Grecian world to recogniz. Sparta as something like a head, pro- 
 tector, or referee, in cases either of foreign danger or internal 
 dispute. The earliest authentic instance known to us, of appli- 
 cation to Sparta in this characler, is that of Croesus against 
 Cyrus: next, that of the Ionic Greeks against the latter: the 
 instance of the Samians now before n<. \< the third. The impor- 
 tant events connected with, and conseciuent upon, the exi)ul<ion 
 of the Peisistratid;e from Athens, manifesting yet more formally 
 the headship of Sparta, oeeiir fifteen years after the present 
 event ; they have hetri already recounted in a previous chai)ter, 
 and serve as a fanhei p oof of progress in the same direction. 
 To watch the growth of these new political habits, is essential to 
 a right understanding of (ireeian history. 
 
 On reaching Sparta, the Samian exiles, borne down with de- 
 fvpondency and suffering, entered at large into the particulars of 
 their case. Their long speaking annc yed instead of moving th« 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 44. 
 
 • Hero<?ot. iii. *ii 
 
 SPART^VN EXPEDITION AGAINST POLYKRATES. 
 
 243 
 
 Spartans who said, or are made to say: "We have forgotten 
 the first part of the speech, and the last part is unintelligible to 
 us." Upon which the Samians appeared the next day, simply 
 with an empty wallet, saying : " Our wallet has no meal in it* 
 ** Your wallet is superfluous, " (said the Spartans ;) i. e. the worda 
 would have been sufficient without itJ The aid which they im- 
 plored was granted. 
 
 AVe are told that both tlie Lacediemonians and the Corin* 
 ihians, — who joined them in the expedition now contemplated, 
 — had separate grounds of quarrel with the Samians,^ which 
 operated as a more poweiful motive than the simple desire to 
 aid the suffering exiles. But it rather seems that the subse- 
 quent Greeks generally construed the Lacedemonian interference 
 against Polykrates as an example of standing Spartan hatred 
 igainst despots. Indeed, the only facts which we know, to sus* 
 uin this anti-despotic sentiment for which the Laceda?monians 
 had credit, are, their procee<lings against Polykrates and Hip 
 pias ; there may have been other analogous cases, but we cannot 
 specify them with certainty. However this may be, a joint 
 Lacedaimonian and Corinthian force accomj)anied the exiles 
 back to Samos, and assailed Polykrates in the city. They did 
 their best to capture it, for forty days, and were at one time on 
 the point of succeeding, but were finally obliged to retire with- 
 out any success. " The city would have been taken," says Her- 
 odotus, " if all tlie Lacedaemonians had acted like Archias and 
 Lykopas," — who, pressing closely upon the retreating Samians, 
 were shut within the town-gates, and perished. The historian 
 had heard this exploit in personal conversation with Archias, 
 grandson of the person above mentioned, in the deme Pitana at 
 Sparta, — whose father had been named Sam i us, and who 
 respected the Samians above any other Greeks, because thej 
 had bestowed ui)on the two brave warriors, slain within their 
 town, an honorable and public funeral.'^ It is rarely tliat Herod- 
 otus thus specifies his informants : had he done so more frequently 
 the value as well as the interest of his history would have beei 
 materially increased. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 46. r^ t^v/Iu/ccj nepielpyaai^ai. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 47, 48. 52. 
 
 {'. 
 
 
 ' Herodot. id. 54-^ 
 
DESTRUCTION OF POLYKRATES BY ORCETES. 
 
 144 
 
 HISTORY OF (iREECE. 
 
 245 
 
 On the retirement of the Lacedaemonian force, the Sainian 
 exiles were left destitutt; ; and looking out for some community 
 to plunder, weak as well as rich, they pitched upon the island of 
 Siphnos. The Siphnians of that day were the wealthiest island- 
 ers in the jEgean, from the productiveness of their gold and 
 silver mines, — the produce of which was annually distributed 
 among the citizens, reserving a tithe fur the Deljihian temple.' 
 Their treasure-chamber was among the most richly furnished of 
 which that holy place could boast, and they themselves, probably, 
 in these times of early p'osi)erity, w«i-.' nuiiibenMl among the 
 most brilliant of the lonit visitors at the Dcli.ui festival. The 
 Samians landing at Siphnos, demanded a contribution, under the 
 name of a loan, of ten talents : which being refused, they pro- 
 ceeded to ravage the island, inflicting upon the inhabitants a 
 severe defeat, and ultimately extorting from them one hundred 
 talents. They next purchased from the inhabitants of Ilcrmione, 
 in the Argolic peninsula, the neighboring island of Ilydrea, fa- 
 mous in modern Greek warfare. But it appears that their plans 
 must have been subsequently changed, for, instead of occupyinj^ 
 it, they placed it under the care of the Troezenians, and repaired 
 themselves to Krete, for the purpose of expelling the Zakynthian 
 settlers at Kydonia. In this they succeeded, and were induced to 
 establish themselves in that place. But after they had remained 
 there five years, the Kretans obtained naval aid from ^Egina, 
 whereby the place wast recovered, and the Samian intruders 
 finally sold into slavery.^ 
 
 Such was the melancholy end of the enemies of Polykrates: 
 meanwhile, that despot himself was more powerful and prosperous 
 than ever. Saraos, under him, was '' the first of all cities, Hel- 
 lenic or barbaric :3" and the great works admired by Herod- 
 otus in the island,-* — an aqueduct for the city, tunnelled through 
 B mountain for the length of seven furlongs, — a mole to protect 
 tlie harbor, two furlong? long and twenty fathoms deep, and the 
 ffWt temple of Here, may probably have been enlarged and com 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 57. vfjoiuriw ftdlwra ixlovreov. 
 
 » Herodot. iu, 58, 59. 
 
 ■Herodot. iii, 139. K^Xiuv waaeuv KpCi^7,v 'EAAjyvt'dwv Kai Sap^aputv. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 60. 
 
 Vol. 4 
 
 H 
 
 pleted, if not begun, by him. Aristotle quotes the public worki 
 of Polykrates as instances of the profound policy of despots, to 
 occupy as well as to impoverish their subjects. ^ The earliest of 
 all Grecian thalassokrats, or sea-kings, — master of the o^reatest 
 naval force in the jEgean, as well as of many among its i^.ands, 
 — he displayed his love of letters by friendship to Anakreon, 
 and his piety by consecrating to the Delian Apollo'2 the neighbor- 
 ing island of Rheneia. But while thus outshining all his contem- 
 poraries, victorious over Sparta and Corinth, and projecting 
 farther aggrandizement, he was precipitated on a sudden into the 
 abyss of ruin ;3 and that too, as if to demonstrate unequivocally 
 the agency of the envious gods, not from the revenge of any 
 of his numerous victims, but from the gratuitous malice of a 
 stranger whom he had never wronged and never even seen. The 
 Persian satrap Oroetes, on the neighboring mainland, conceived 
 an implacable hatred against him: no one could tell why, — for 
 he had no design of attacking the island ; and the trifling reasona 
 conjecturally assigned, only prove that the real reason, whatever 
 it might be, was unknown. Availing himself of the notorious 
 ambition and cupidity of Polykrates, Oroetes sent to Samos a 
 messenger, pretending that his life was menaced by Kambysea, 
 and that he was anxious to make his escape with his abundant 
 treasures. He proposed to Polykrates a share in this treasure, 
 sufficient to make him master of all Greece, as far as that object 
 could be achieved by money, provided the Samian prince would 
 come over to convey him away. Masandrius, secretary of Poly 
 krates, was sent over to Magnesia on the Ma^ander, to make 
 inquiries; he there saw the satrap with eight large coffers full of 
 gold, — or rather apparently so, being in reality full of stones, 
 with a layer of gold at the top,^ — tied up ready for departure. 
 The cupidity of Polykrates was not proof against so rich a bait : 
 he crossed over to Magnesia with a considerable suite, and thus 
 came into the power of Oroetes, in spite of the warnings of hif 
 
 ' Aristot. Polit. v, 9, 4. rov irepl 'S.ufiov epya ltO?LVKpaTt a- iravra yOp 
 ravra dvvarai Tavr)v, aaxoXiav koI neviav ruv apxofievcjv. 
 
 • Thucyd. i, 14, m, 104. ^ Herodot. iii, 120. 
 
 * Compare the trick of Hauribal at G>rtyn in Kref — Cornelius Nepoi 
 [Hannibal, c. 91. 
 
 \ 
 
 
S46 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 prophets ind the agony of his terrified daughter, to whom hid 
 approachi.ig fate had heeu revealed in a dream. The satrap 
 Flew him and crucilied his body ; releiising all the Samiaus who 
 &ccom[)anied him, with an intimation that they ought to thank 
 him for procuring tliera a free government, — but retaining both 
 the foreigner:^ and the .slaves as prisoners.^ The death of Orcctes 
 himself, wiiich ensued shortly afterwards, has already been de- 
 scribed It is oon.-idri»'d by Herodotus as a judgment for his 
 flagitious deed in the ca^o of Polykrates.2 
 
 At the departure of the latter from Samos, in anticipation of a 
 Fpeedy return, ^Leandrius had been left as his lieutenant at Samos ; 
 and the unexpected catastrophe of Polykratcs filled him with sur- 
 prise and consternation. Though j)Ossessed of the fortresses, the 
 tioldiers, and the treasures, which had constituted the machinery 
 of his powerful master, he knew the risk of trying to employ 
 them on his own account. Partly from this apprehension, partly 
 Irom the genuine political morality which prevailed with more or 
 less force in every Grt;cian bosom, he resolved to lay down his 
 authority and enfriiuchise the i.-huid. '* He wished (says the 
 historian, in a remarkalle phrase) ' to act like the justest of men ; 
 but he was not allowed to do so." Ilis first proceeding was to 
 erect in the suburbs an altar in honor of Zeus P^leutherius, and 
 to mclose a piece of gruund as a precinct, which still existed 
 in the time of Herodot as : he next convened an assembly of the 
 Samians. " You know (says he) that the whole power of Poly- 
 kraies is now in my hands, nor is there anything to hinder me 
 from continuing to rule over you. Nevertheless, what I condemn 
 in another I will not do myselt^ — and I luive always disapproved 
 of Polykratcs, and otlicrs like him, for seeking to rule over men 
 as (Tootl as themselves. Now that Polykrates luis come to the 
 end of his destiny, I at once lay down the command, and proclaim 
 among you equal law ; reserving to myself as privileges, first, six 
 laleuts out of the treastn-es of Polykrates, — next, the hereditary 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 124, 125. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 126. "Opoirea Ho/luxpareof riaiec fier^Wov. 
 
 ' Herodot. iii, 142. r^^ 6 KaioraTi^ av6pCjv (3ov?.ofiiv(f) yEvtor&ai, ohn 
 l^i^ivero. Compare his remark on Kadmus, who Tolunfarily resigned the 
 despot i-4in at K<>.' ^^i lOi). 
 
 .M.EANDKIUS DESPOT OF SAMOS. 
 
 247 
 
 fric8th(K>d of Zeus Eleutherius for myself and my descendant! 
 forever. To him I have just set apart a sacred precinct, as th« 
 God of that freedom which I now hand over to you." 
 
 This reasonable and generous proposition fully justifies the epi 
 thet of Herodotus. But very diflPerently was it received by the 
 Samian hearers. One of the chief men among them, Telesar-. 
 chus, exclaimed, with the applause of the rest, ^Fou rule ni, 
 low-bom and scoundrel as you are ! you are not worthy to rule: 
 don't think of that, but give us some account of the money which 
 you have been handling. "i 
 
 Such an unexpected reply caused a total revolution in the mind 
 of Maeandrius. It left him no choice but to maintain dominion 
 at all hazards, — which he accordingly resolved to do. Retiring 
 into the acropolis, under pretence of preparing his money-account* 
 tor examination, he sent for Telesarchns and his chief political 
 enemies, one by one,— intimating that they were open to inspec- 
 tion. As fast as they arrived they were put in chains, while 
 Mteandrius remained in the acropolis, with his soldiers and his 
 treasures, as the avowed successor of Polykrates. And thus the 
 Hamians, after a short hour of insane boastfulness, found them 
 selves again enslaved. *«It seemed (says Herodotus) that they 
 were not willing to be free." a 
 
 We cannot but contrast their conduct on this occasion with 
 that of the Athenians about twelve years afterwards, on the ex- 
 pulsion of Hippias, which has been recounted in a previous 
 cliapter. The position of the Samians was far the more favorable 
 of the two, for the quiet and successful working of a free govern- 
 ment ; for they had the advantage of a voluntary as well as a 
 sincere resignation from the actual despot. Yet the thirst for 
 reactionary investigation prevented them even from taking a 
 reasonable estimate of their own power of enforcing it : they 
 passed at once from extreme subjection to overbearing and ruin- 
 ous rashness. Whereas the Athenians, under circumstances far 
 km promising, avoided the fatal mistake of sacrificing the pirit. 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 142. 'AAA' ov& &^uk el ev / i^fzeuv <lp;^nv, yeyovCt u 
 uudc, Kal liov ble^por &nh f^dUov 6ku>c Uyov do^csic rCv hereip-a^u 
 XftrifiaTuv, * f s 
 
 ■ Herodot. iii, 143. oi yelp e^, uc oUaai, ISovlraro eivai iXev^^eaoi 
 
 { 
 
 SI 
 
248 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 peets of the future to recollections of the past ; showed them 
 Belves both anxious to acquire the rights, and willing to perform 
 the obligations, of a free community ; listened to wise counsels, 
 maintaine<I unanimois action, and overcame, by heroic efforts, 
 forces; very greatly superior. If we compare the reflections 
 of Herodotus on the one case and on the other,' we shall be 
 Btnick with the difference which those reflections imply between 
 the Athenians and tlie Samians, — a difference partly referable, 
 doubtless, to the pure Hellenism of the former, contrasted with 
 the half-Asiatized Hellenism of the latter, — but also traceable 
 in a great degree to the preliminary lessons of the Solonian con- 
 ititution, overlaid, but not extinguished, during the despotism of 
 the Peisistratids which followed. 
 
 The events which succeeded in Samos are little better than a 
 ieries of crimes and calamities. The prisoners, whom Miean- 
 drius had detained in the acropolis, were slain during his danger- 
 ous illness, by his brother Lykaretus, under the idea that this 
 would enable him more easily to seize the sceptre. But Ma\an- 
 drius recovered, and must have continued as despot for a year or 
 two : it was, however, a weak despotism, contested morfe or less 
 in the island, and very different from the iron hand of Polykrates 
 In this untoward condition, the Samians were surprised by tlu 
 arrival of a new claimant for their sceptre and acropolis, — and, 
 what was much more formidable, a Persian army to back him. 
 
 Syloson, the brother of Polykrates, having taken part origi 
 nally in his brother's conspiracy and usurpation, had l)een at first 
 allowed to share the fruits of it, but quickly found himself ban- 
 ished. In this exile he remained during the whole life of Poly- 
 krates, and until the accession of Darius to the Persian throne, 
 which followed about a year after tlie death of Polykrates. He 
 happened to be at Memphis, in Egypt, during the time when 
 Kambyses was there with his conquering army, and when Da- 
 rius, then a Persian of little note, was serving among his guards. 
 Syloson was walking in tlie agora of Memphis, wearing a scarlet 
 cloak, to which Danus took a great fancy, and proposed to buy 
 it. A divine inspiration prompted Syloson to reply ,2 *» I caimot 
 
 » Heroddt. v, 78, and iii, 142, 143. 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 139. 'O 6e 1v>,o(tC)v, dpiutv rbv Aapeiov ueya'^wf km^uia -# 
 rijf x^ovidor^ i&ecy rvxfj JCpeuftevo^t ^Jyei, etc 
 
 SAMOS CONQUERED BY THE PERSIANS. ^45 
 
 for any price sell it ; but I give it you for nothing, if it must be 
 yours." Darius thanked him, and accepted the cloak ; and for 
 some years the donor accused himself of a silly piece of good- 
 natureJ But as events came round, Syloson at length heard 
 with surprise that the unknown Persian, whom he had presented 
 with the cloak at Memphis, was installed as king in the palace at 
 Susa. He went thither, proclaimed himself as a Greek, as well ai 
 beneiactor of the new king, and was admitted to the regal pres- 
 ence. Darius had forgotten his person, but periectly remembered 
 the ad.enture of the cloak, when it was brought to his mind,— 
 and showed himself forward to requite, on the scale becoming 
 the Great King, former favors, though small, rendered to the 
 simple soldier at Memphis. Gold and silver were tendered to 
 Syloson in profusion, but he rejected them, -requesting that the 
 island of Samos might be conquered and handed over to him, 
 without slaughter or enslavement of inhabitants. His request 
 was complied with. Otanes, the originator of the conspiracy 
 agamst Smerdis, was sent down to the coast of Ionia with an 
 army, carried Syloson over to Samos, and landed him unexpect- 
 edly on the island.^ 
 
 Ma^andrius was in no condition to resist the invasion, nor were 
 the Samians generally disposed to sustain him. He accordin«rly 
 concluded a convention with Otanes, whereby he agreed to mie 
 way for Syloson, to evacuate the island, and to admit the Per- 
 c^iansat once into the city; retaining possession, however ~ for 
 such time as might be necessary to embark his property and 
 treasures - of the acropolis, which had a separate landing-place, 
 and even a subterranean passage and secret portal for embarka- 
 hon, — probably one of the precautionary provisions of Poly, 
 krates. Otanes willingly granted these conditions, and himself 
 with his principal officers entered the town, the army being 
 quartered around ; while Syloson seemed on the point of ascend- 
 ing the seat of his deceased brother without violence or blood- 
 shed. But the Samians were destined to a fate more calamitous. 
 M^andrius had a brother named Charilaus, violent in his temper, 
 Wdjialf^ madman, whom he was obliged to keep in ocofino.' 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 140. nmarard ol r-rVo a7ro?,Mvai Sr evrj^lvv 
 ' Hergdot. iii, 141-144. 
 
 i 
 
250 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 ment. This m Ji looking out of his chamber-window, saw tha 
 Persian officers seated peaceably throughout the town and even 
 under the gates of the acro{)oHs, unguarded, and relyin^ upon 
 the convention : it yearns that the^e were the chief officers, whose 
 rank gave tlieiu the privilege of being carried about on their 
 seats.* The sight iiiHamed lx>th his wrath and his insane ambi- 
 tion ; he chiHiored foi- liberty and admission to his brother, whom 
 he reviled as a coward no less than a tyrant. " Here ar*- you, 
 worthless man, keeping me, your own brotlier, in a dungeon, 
 though I have done no wrong wortliy of l)onds ; while you do 
 not dart to take you • revenge on the Persians, wh<i are casting 
 you out as a houseless exile, and whom it would be so easy to put 
 down. If you are afraid of them, give me your guards ; I will 
 make the Persians repent of their coming here, and I will send 
 you safely out of the island forthwith." - 
 
 Ma-andrius, on the point of quitting Samos forever, had little 
 personal motive to care what became of the population. He had 
 probably never forgiven them for disappointing his lionorable in- 
 tentions after the death of Polykrates, nor was he disi)leased to 
 hand over to Syloson an odious and blood-stained sceptre, which 
 he foresaw would be the only consequence of his brother's mad 
 project. He therefore sailed away with his treasures, leaving 
 the acro[>oli6 to his brother Charilaus ; who immediately armed 
 the guards, sallied forth from his fortress, and attacked the un- 
 suspecting Persians. Many of the great officers were slain 
 without resistance before the army could be got together ; but at 
 length Otanes collected his troops and drove the assailants b^ck 
 into the acropolis. While he immediately began the siege of 
 that fortress, he also resolved, as Mreandrius had foreseen, to take 
 A siojnal revenge ibr the treacherous slaughter of so many of hia 
 friends and companicns. His army, no less incensed than him- 
 
 ' Hcrorlot. iii, » 46. tui' Uepatuv Toi>^ dtt^popopcvfievovg koI Xoyov TrXeiffTov 
 
 •Herodot. iii, 145. 'E/ie fiev, u kuklote uvdpdv^ kovra aeuvrov u6e7^ei)v. 
 gal udiKTjaavra oWti' u^iov deofiov, dijoa^ yopyvprjq ij^iuaa^' opeuv de rovi 
 Hipaac kKt^akAovTuq re eB Kal uvoikov Trotevvraf, ov roA//^f Tiaatr&ai, ovru 
 Hi Ti iovrac tvTTETEa^ ;j;f .pwi^^vai. 
 
 The highly dramatic manner of Herodotus cannot be melted dcm luff 
 •wroth historical r cital, 
 
 
 SYLOSON DESPOT OF SAMOS. 
 
 2di 
 
 ielf, weit directed to fall upon the Samian people and miissacr* 
 them without discrimination, — man and boy, on ground sacrej 
 as well as profiine. The bloody order was too faithfully executed, 
 and Samos was handed over to Syloson, stripped of its male 
 inhabitants.' Of Charilaus and the acropolis we hear no farther, 
 perhaps he and his guards may have escaped by sea. Lykaretus,* 
 the other brother of Maandrius, must have remained either in 
 •he service of Syloson or in that of the Persians ; for we find 
 him some years afterwards intrusted by the latter with an im 
 portant command. 
 
 Sylosun was thus finally installed as despot of an island peo- 
 pled chielly, if not wholly, with women and children : we may, 
 however, presume, that the deed of blood has been described 
 by the historian as more sweeping than it really was. It seems, 
 nevertheless, to have sat heavily on the conscience of Otanes,' 
 who was induced sometime afterwards, by a dream and by a 
 [Kiinful disease, to tiike measures for repeopling the island.3 
 From whence the new population came, we are not told ; but 
 wholesale translations of inhabitants from one place to another 
 were familiar to the mind of a Persian king or satrap. 
 
 Mieandrius, following the example of the previous Samian exiles 
 under Polykrates, went to Sparta and sought aid for the purjiose 
 of reestablishing liimself at Samos. But the Lacedaemonians 
 had no disposition to repeat an attempt which had before turned 
 out so unsuccessfully, nor could he seduce king Kleomenes by 
 the display of his treasures and finely-wrought gold plate. The 
 king, however, not without fear that such seductions might win 
 over some of the Spartan leading men, prevailed with the^'ephors 
 /o send Ma^andrius away.^ 
 
 Syloson seems to have remained undisturbed at Samos, as a 
 tributary of Persia, like the Ionic cities on the continent: some 
 years afterwards we find his son ^Eakes reigning in the island.^ 
 Strabo states that it was the harsh rule of Syloson which caused 
 the depopulation of the island. But the cause just recounted out 
 af Herodotus is both very different and sufficiently plausible ifl 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 149. eprffiov tovaav avdpC)v. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 27. 
 
 ^ Herodot. iii, 148. 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 149. 
 
 * Herodot. ri, 13. 
 
 7^-" 
 
152 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 itself; and as Strabo seems in the main to have derived his ao 
 count from Herodotus, vre may suppose that on this point he hm 
 incorrectly remembered his authority.^ 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 DKMOKKDES -DAWrS INVADES SCYTHIA. 
 
 Darius ha^l now acquired full authority throughout the Persian 
 empire, having put down the refractory satrap Ora'ttV, as well as 
 the revolted Medes and liabylonians. He had, inureuver, com- 
 pleted the conquest of Ionia, by the imi.ortaiit addition of Samos ; 
 an.l his dominion thu.< comprised all Asia Minor, with its neigh- 
 boring islands. But this was nut sutiicient for the ambition of a 
 Persian king, next but one in succession to the great Cyrus. 
 The comiuering inipuls(; was yet uiud>ated among the Persians, 
 who thought it incumbent upon their king, and whose king 
 thought h incumbent upon himself, to extend the limits of the 
 empil'e. Though not of the lineage of Cyrus, Darius had tcdien 
 pains to connect himself with it by marriage ; he had married 
 Atossa and Artystone, daughters of Cyrus, — and Parmys, 
 daughter of Smerdis, the younger son of Cyrus. Atossa had 
 been first the wife of her brother Kambyses ; next, of the Ma- 
 gian Smerdis, his successor ; and thirdly of Darius, to whom she 
 bore four children."^ Of those children the eldest was Xerxes, 
 respecting whom more will be said hereafter. 
 
 Atossa? mother of tlie oidy Persian king who ever set foot in 
 Greece, the Sultana Validi of Persia during the reign of Xerxes, 
 was a person of commanding intiuence in the reign of hei 
 
 Strabo, xiv, p. 638. Ho gives a proverbial phra.e about th«» d«»popal« 
 tion of the island — 
 
 irhich is perfectly consistent with th^ narrative of HerodotM. 
 * Herodot. iii, 88, vii, 2. 
 
 DEMOKEDES OF KROTON. 
 
 last husband, 1 as well as in that of her son, and filled no inoon- 
 piderable space even in Grecian imagination, as we may see both 
 by iEschylus and Herodotus. Had her influence prevailed, the 
 first conquering appetites of Darius would ha re been directed, 
 not against the steppes of Scythia, but against Attica and Pelo- 
 ponnesus ; at least, so Herodotus assures us. The grand object 
 of the latter in his history is to set forth the contentions of Hellas 
 with the barbarians or non-Hellenic world ; and with an art 
 truly epical, which manifests itself everywhere to the careful 
 reader of his nine books, he preludes to the real dangers which 
 were averted at Marathon and Plata^a, by recounting the first 
 conception of an invasion of Greece by the Persians, — how 
 it originated, and how it was abandoned. For this purpose 
 — according to his historical style, wherein general facts are set 
 forth as subordinate and explanatory accompaniments to the ad- 
 ventures of particular persons, — he give us the interesting, but 
 romantic, history of the Krotoniate surgeon Demokedes. 
 
 Demokedes, son of a citizen of Kroton named Kalliphon, had 
 turned his attention in early youth to the study and practice of 
 medicine and surgery (for that age, we can make no difference 
 between the two), and had made considerable progress in it. His 
 youth coincides nearly with the arrival of Pythagoras at Kroton, 
 (550 - 520,) where the science of the surgeon, as well as the art 
 of the gymnastic trainer, seem to have been then prosecuted more 
 actively than in any part of Greece. His father Kalliphon, 
 however, was a man of such severe temper, that the son ran 
 away from him, and resolved to maintain himself by his talenta 
 elsewhere. He w ent to ^gina, and began to practice in his pro- 
 fession ; and so rapid was his success, even in his first year, — 
 though very imperfectly equipped with instruments and appara- 
 tns,2 — tbat the citizens of the island made a contract with him 
 to remain there for one year, at a salary of one talent (about 
 
 * Herodot. vii, 3. n yap 'kroaaa elxe rb -rrav KpuTor. Compare the de- 
 •iription given of the ascendency of the savage Sultana Parysatis over hef 
 90K Artaxerxes Mnemon (Plutarch, Artaxerxes, c. 16, 19, 23). 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 131. aoKevric ^£p ^o)v, nal hxutv ovSev ruv 6aa -rrtpl rifw 
 rixvTjv effTiv IpyaXvia,— the description refers to surgical rather tiian f 
 tiedical practice. 
 
 That curious assemblage of the cascf of particular patients wf th : emark* 
 
 'I 
 
254 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Ihree liuiidred and eighty-three pouudtj sterling, an ^Eginasan tal- 
 ent). The year afterwards he was invited to come to Athens, theu 
 under the Peisisti*atids.. at a sahiry of one hundred raiiut-, or one 
 and two-tliirds of a talent ; and in the following year, I'olvkratea 
 oi Sumos tempted him by the otter of two talents. With that 
 
 known in the works of Hippokrntes, uiulcr the title ^E:ti6ti^l€u (Notes of 
 visits to ditierent titieis), ijs very illustrative of what Herodotus heie mcn- 
 tious ahout Deiiiokedes. Consult, ;iLso, the valuable Proleg^oniena cf M 
 Littre, in his edition of Hippokrates now in eourse of publication, as to the 
 eharaeter, means of action, and itinerant habit< of the (irecian tarpoi: see 
 particularly the preface to vol, v, {». 12, where he enumerates the various 
 places visited and noted by llippokrates. The ^'nattr nunibn of the Hippo 
 kratic ob«4ervations refer to various parts of Thracr. Mm rdonia. and Thes- 
 •aly; but there are some, also, which refer to patients in tlie islands of 
 Syros and Delo.s, at Athens, Salarais, Elis, Corinrli. ami (Eniaihe in Akar- 
 Diinia. "On voit par lii conibien ctoit juste 1(> iioni de IVriodeutes ou 
 voya^eurs donne's ii ces anciens medecins." 
 
 A;r:nn. M. Littre', in the same preface, p. 25. illustrates the proceeding's 
 and residence of the ancieat iarpoj- : "On se tromperoit si on t^e re])re'sen- 
 toit la denieure d'un medecin d'alors coiume celle d'un me'decin d'aujourd'* 
 hui. La niaison du medecin de I'antiquite', du moins ;iu tciiip> d'Hippocrate 
 ct aux e'po<iues voisines, renfermoit un local destine' a la j)ratique d'un 
 grand nomhre d'operations, cotitcnani Irs machines ct h> iiistrumens neces- 
 ■aires, et de plus c'tant aussi une lK)utiquc \\r phannacic. Ce local se nom 
 mail iarpdov.''' See Plato, Le^^u:. i, p. 64tj, \\\ p. 720. Timieus accused 
 Aristotle of havin<]^ Ih>«;uu as a surgeon, practising to preat protit in surfjery, 
 or larpEiov, and having tjuitted this occupation late in life, to devote him- 
 self to the study of science, — aoOiaTr,v b^iixa^'ti kuI fiia/jrdi' vrrupxoi'Ta, 
 nal TO r:o'/.vriuririn> larpthn' apriuq inroKeKAeiKura (Polyb. xii, 9). 
 
 See, al>^o, the Kemanpu^ Kctrospectives attached l>y M. Littre' to volume 
 iv, of the same work (pp. ^ir.i-t;.jH). where he dwells upon the intimate 
 anion of surgical and medical pnicticc in antiquity. At the same time, it 
 must l»e remarked that a | assagc i:i the remarkable medical oath, published 
 ni the collection of nii)poivrati< nvatisos. recognizes in the plainest manner 
 the distinction between the physician and the operator, — the former binds 
 himself by this oath not to perform the operation - even of lithotomy, but 
 to leave it to the operators, or workmen :" Oy Tfuiu (">,' (n v lu/v / (t^iuvrag^ 
 ihXu>pT/au (^e epyurrjcnv dvdaatn irpij^ioQ rr/ai^r (CEuvn^s d'Hippocrate, vol. iv. 
 p r)W. ed. Littre'). M. Littre' (p. 617) contests this explanation, remarking 
 iIki; i\u' various Hip}>okraTic treatises represent the larpb^ as performing all 
 -•o:t> '»f operations, even ?uch as require violent and mechanicji! dealing. 
 IJut itie words of the oath are so explicit, that it seems more reasonable tf 
 as^iui to the oath itself a later date than the treatises, when the habits ol 
 tr.. :i*i"!t!«r; mav have cli'injred. 
 
 DKMOKEDES SENT UP TO SUSA 
 
 255 
 
 dufi(X)t he reiaained, and accompanied him in his last calamitous 
 risit to the satrap Oroetes : on the murder of Polykrates, being 
 leized among the slaves and foreign attendants, he was left to 
 languish with the rest in imprisonment and neglect. When 
 aiiain, soon after, Orcetes himself was slain, Demokedes was 
 numbered among his slaves and cliattels and sent up to Susa. 
 
 He had not been long at that capital, when Darius, leaping 
 from his horse in the chase, sprained his foot badly, and was car- 
 ried home in violent pain. The Egyptian surgeons, supposed to 
 be the first men in their profession,' whom he habitually em- 
 ployed, did him no good, but only aggravated his torture; for 
 seven days and nights he had no sleep, and lie as well as those 
 around him began to despair. At length, some one who had been 
 iU Sardis, accidentally recollected that he had heard of a Greek 
 Fiirgcon among the slaves of Orootes : search was immediately 
 made, and the miserable slave was brought, in chains as well as 
 in rags,- into the presence of the royal sufferer. Being asked 
 whether he understood surgery, he affected ignorance ; but Da- 
 rius, suspecting this to be a mere artifice, ordered out the scourge 
 and the pricking instrument, to overcome it. Demokekes now 
 saw that there was no resource, admitted that he had acquired 
 some little skill, and was called upon to do his utmost in the case 
 before him. lie was fortunate enough to succeed perfectly, in 
 alleviating the pain, in procuring sleep for the exhausted patient, 
 and ultimately in restoring the foot to a sound state. Darius, 
 who had abandoned all hopes of such a cure, knew no bounds to 
 his gratitude. As a first reward, he presented him with two seta 
 of chains in solid gold, — a commemoration of the state in which 
 Demokedes had first come before him, — he next sent him into 
 the harem to visit his wives. The conducting eunuchs intro- 
 duced him as the man who had restored the king to life, and 
 the grateful sultanas each gave to him a saucer full of golden 
 (joins called staters ; ^ in all so numerous, that the slave Skiton, 
 
 ' About the Persian habit of sending to Egjrpt for surgeons, compart 
 Herodot. iii, L 
 
 • Herodot iii, 129. rdv 6'e 6/5 i^evpov h rolai 'Opoirew avSpairndoim 5««r 
 i^ dinjfie?,7}fiEvov, izapfjyov i^ fieaov, iridac '"f i^Kovra koI (iOKeaiv k(r9ijfievop 
 
 • Herodot. iii, 130. The golden stater was equal to about 1/. Is. 
 Bnglish mou' 7 (Hussey, Ancient Weights, vii, 3, p. 103). 
 
SBS6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREF'.E. 
 
 who followed him, was enriched by merely picking up the piecei 
 which dropped on the floor. Nor was this all. Darius gave him 
 R splendid house and furniture, made him the companion of his 
 table, and showed him ex ery description of favor. He was about 
 to crucify the Egyptian surgeons who had been so unsuccessful 
 ID their attempts to cure him ; but Demokedes had the happiness 
 ©f preservincr their lives, as well as of rescuing an unfortunate 
 companion of his imprisonment, - an Eleian prophet, who had 
 followed the fortunes of Polykrates. 
 
 But there was one favor which Darius would on no account 
 rrant- yet upon this one Dtmokedes had set his heart, — the 
 liberty of returning to Greece. At length accident, combined 
 with his own surgical skill, enabled him to escape from the splen- 
 dor of his second detention, as it had before extricated him from 
 the misery of the first. A tumor formed upon the breast ot 
 Ato^^sa ; at first, she said nothing to any one, but as it became too 
 bad for'concealment, she was forced to consult Demokedes. He 
 promised to cure her, but required from her a solemn oath that 
 Bhe would afterwards do for him anything whicli he should ask, 
 -pledging himself at the same time to ask nothing indecent.i 
 The cure was successful, and Atossa was required to repay it by 
 procuring his liberty. He knew that tlio t;ivor would be re- 
 fused, even to her, if directly solicited, but he taught her a strat- 
 agem' for obtaining under false pretences the consent of Darius. 
 She took an eariy opportunity, Herodotus tells us,^ in bed, ot 
 reminding Darius that the Persians expected from him some 
 positive a°ddition to the power and splendor of tlie empire ; and 
 when Darius, in answer, acquainted her that he contemplated a 
 •peedy expedition against the Scytliians, she entreated him to 
 postpone it, and to turn his forces first against Greece : " I have 
 
 The ladies iu a Persian harem appear to have been less unapproachable 
 and invisible tban tliose in modern Turkey; in spite of the observation of 
 Plutarch, Artaxerxes, c. 27. ... 
 
 » Herodot iii, 133. dEriaea^ai 6i ovdevb^ tuv baa ataxv^W ^ori (^tpovTa. 
 Another Greek Vhysician at the court of Susa, about seventy years after- 
 wards, — ApoUonides of Kc«, — in attendance on a Persian princess, did nfl4 
 impose upon bims^lf the same restraint : his intrigue waa div^ged, and bt 
 Wafi put to death miserably (B>€sia<, Persica, c. 42). 
 
 • Uerodot. iii, 134. 
 
 DEMOKEDES IS SENT TO GREECE. 
 
 25/ 
 
 heard (she said) about the maidens of Sparta, Athens, Argo«^ 
 and Corinth, and 1 want to have some of them as slaves to serv« 
 me — (we may conceive the smile of triumph with which the 
 sons of those whj had conquered at Plata^a and Salamis would 
 hear this part of the history read by Herodotus); — you have 
 near you the best person possible to give information about 
 Sreeje, — that Greek who cured your foot." Darius was in- 
 duced by this request to send some confidential Persians into 
 Greece to procure information, along with Demokedes. Select- 
 ing filYeen of them, he ordered them to survey the coasts and 
 cities of Greece, under guidance of Demokedes, but with per» 
 t'inptory orders upon no account to let him escape or to return 
 without him. He next sent for Demokedes himself, explained 
 to him what he wanted, and enjoined him imperatively to return 
 as soon as the business had been completed ; he farther desired him 
 to carry away with him all the ample donations which he had 
 already received, as presents to his father and brothers, promis • 
 ing that on his return fresh donations of equal value shoula 
 nudie up the loss : histly, he directed that a storeship, " filled 
 with all manner of good things," should accompany the voyage. 
 Demokedes undertook the mission with every appearance of sin- 
 cerity. The better to play his part, he declined to take away 
 what he already possessed at Susa, — saying, that he should hke 
 to find his property and furniture again on coming back, and 
 that the storeship alone, with its contents, would be suflicient 
 both for the voyage and tor all necessary presents. 
 
 Accordingly, he and the fifteen Persian envoys went down to 
 Sidon in Phenicia, where two armed triremes were equipped, 
 with a large storeship in company ; and the voyage of survey 
 into Greece was commenced. They visited and examined all 
 the principal places in Greece, — probably beginning with the 
 Asiatic and insular Greeks, crossing to Euboea, circumnavigating 
 Attica and Peloponnesus, then passing to Korkyra and Italy. 
 They surveyed the coasts and cities, taking memoranda' of 
 eveiything worthy of note which they saw : this Periplus, if it 
 had been preserved, would have been inestimable, as an account 
 
 * Herodot. iii, 136. 
 lO^ uireypcKpovTo 
 
 VOL. IV. 
 
 7rpoaiaxovT£( 6e aiT^f ra ripa^aXuama kd^ijcavn 
 
 17oe. 
 
958 
 
 HI ST OK Y OF GKEECL. 
 
 of the actual gate of the Grecian world about 518 B.C. As 
 as they arrived at Tareiitum, Deraokedes — now within a iiliorf 
 distance of his own home, Krotun — found an opportunity of 
 executincr what he had meditated from the be<^inning. At his 
 request Aristophilides, the king of Tarentuni, seized the liftmen 
 Persians, and detained them as spies at the same time taking 
 the rudders from off their ships, — while Demokrdes himself 
 nm\e his escape to Kroton. As soon as he had arrived tliere, 
 Aristophilides released ihe Persians, and suffered them to pursue 
 their voyage : they went on to KrotOn, found Demokedes m the 
 market-place, and kid hands upon him. But his fellow-eitizens 
 released him, not without opposition from some wlio were atraid 
 of pi-ovoking the Great King, and in spite of remonstrances, en- 
 ergetic and menacing, from tlie Persians themselves : uideed, the 
 Ki'otoniates not only pr.>tected the restored exile, but even robbed 
 tlie Persians of their soreship. The latter, disabled from pro- 
 ceeding farther, as well by this loss as ]»y the secession ot Dem- 
 okedes, commenced tht.ir voyage hoin.ward, but untort.niately 
 Buffered shipwreck near the lai.ygian cai.e, and became slaves m 
 that neicrhborhood. A Tarentine exile, named Gillus, ransomed 
 thera and carried them up to Susa,- a service for which Danus 
 promised him any recompense that he chose. Restoration to Ins 
 native city was all that Gillus a.ked ; and that too, not by force, 
 but by the mediation ot the Asiatic Greeks of Knidus, who wei-e 
 on terms of intimate alliance with the Tarentines. This gener- 
 ous citizen, — an honorable contrast to Demokedes, who had not 
 scrupled to impel the stream of Persian coiuiuest against his 
 country, in order to procure his own release, — wiis unfortunately 
 disappointed of his anticipated recompense. For though the 
 Knidians, at the injunction of Darins, emi)loyed all their intluence 
 at Tarentum to procure a revocation of the sentence of exile, 
 ttiey were unable to succeed, and force was out of the quest^nJ 
 The last words addrts.ed by Demokedes at parting to his Per- 
 sian companions, exhorted them to acquaint Darius that he (Dgm- 
 Okedes) was about V marry the daughter of the Krotoniate Milo, 
 - one of the first men in Krot6n, as well as tb« greatest wrest- 
 ler of \m time. The reputation of Milo was very great with 
 
 DEMOKEDES 
 
 259 
 
 » Herodot. iii, 137, 138. 
 
 Darius, -probably from the talk of Demokfedes himself: more- 
 •ver, gigantic muscular force could be appreciated by men who 
 had no relish either for Homer or Solon. And thus did thi« 
 clever and vainglorious Greek, sending back his fifteen Persian 
 i»mpanions to disgrace, and perhaps to death, deposit in their 
 parting ears a braggart message, calculated to create for himself 
 a factitious name at Susa. He paid a large sum to Milo as the 
 price of his daughter, for this very purpose.' 
 
 Thus finishes the history of Demokedes, and of the « first 
 Persians (to use the phrase of Herodotus) who ever came over 
 from Asia into Greece."^ It is a history well deserving of atten- 
 tion, even looking only to the liveliness of the incidents, intro- 
 ducing us as they do into the full movement of the ancient world, 
 — incidents which I see no reason for doubting, with a reason- 
 able allowance for the dramatic amplification of the historian. 
 Even at that early date, Greek medical intelligence stands out 
 in a surpassing manner, and Demokedes is the first of those 
 many able Greek surgeons who were seized, carried up to Susa,^ 
 and there detained for the Great King, his court, and harem. 
 
 But his history suggests, in another point of view, far more 
 serious reflections. Like the Milesian Histia-us, of whom I shall 
 gpeak hereafter.) he cared not what amount of risk he brought 
 upon his country in order to procure his own escape from a 
 splendid detention at Susa. And the influence which he origi- 
 nated and brought to bear was on the point of precipitating upon 
 Greece the whole force of the Persian empire, at a time'' when 
 Greece was in no condition to resist it. Had the first aggressive 
 
 'Herodot. iii, 137. Kara 6// rovro fiot aTTsvaai doKeu rov ydfxov tovtov 
 reliaa^ Xpitfiara fieyaXa ArnuoKT/ATfc, Iva <pai;) rpdf Aapeiov eu>v kqI h tv 
 iui'Toi) SoKifioc. 
 
 ' Herodot. iii. 138. 
 
 ' Xenophon, Memorah iv, 2, 33. 'AUovg 6e rroGovg ohi (says Sokratfis) 
 Std, aopiav uvap:ra(TTovc n ,dc iSani/Ja yeyovevai, Kal Uel SovAeveiv. 
 
 We shall run httle risk in conjecturing that, among the intelligent and 
 able men thus carried off, surgeons and physicians would be selected as th« 
 first and most essential. 
 
 Apollonides of Kos — whose calamitous end has been alluded to in • 
 previous note— was resident as surgeon, or physician, with Artaxerxef 
 Longimanus (Ktdsias, Persica, c. 30), and Polvkritus of Mende. as wrM ..i 
 Kt^ias himself, with Anaxerxes Mneinori fPltitardi. ArtaxorxCs c 31) 
 
 \ ,. 
 
 il 
 
200 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 expedition of Darius, with his own personal command and fr€«*l 
 mppetite for conquest, been directed against Greece instead of 
 Rgainst Scythia (between 516-514 B.C.), Grecian independence 
 w^ould have perished almost infallibly. For Athens was then 
 still governed by the Peisistratids ; what she was, under them, 
 we have had occasion to notice in a former chapter. She had 
 then no courage for energetic self-defence, and probablv Hippias 
 himself, far from offering resistance, would have found it advan- 
 tageous to accept Persian dominion as a means of strengthening 
 his own rule, like the Ionian despots : moreover, Grecian habit 
 of cooperation was tlien only just commencing. But fortunately, 
 tlie Persian invader did not touch the shoro of Greece until 
 more than twenty yetirs afterwards, in 490 B.C. ; and during that 
 precious interval, tln^ Athenian character had undergone^ the 
 memorable revoluiioii which has been before describe<l. Their 
 energy and their orzanization had been alike imjvroved, and 
 their force of resistance liad become decupled ; moreover, their 
 conduct had so }irovoked the Persian that resistance was then » 
 matter of nere?>ity ^^ith them, and submission on tolerable terms 
 an impossibility. Wb. ii we eome to the grand Persian invasion 
 of Greece, we sh;ill -ee that Athens was the life and soul of all 
 the opposition offered. We shall see farther, that with all the 
 efforts of Athens, the success of the defence was more than once 
 doubtful; and would have been converted into a very different 
 result, if Xerxes had listen.Ml to the best of his own counsellors. 
 But had Darius, at he head of the very same force which he 
 conducted into Scythia, or even an inferior force, landed at Mar- 
 athon in 514 B.C., instead (»f sending Datis in 400 B.O-,— he 
 would have found ti»i men like the victors of Marathon to meet 
 him. As far as we run appreciate the probabilities, he would 
 have met with little resistance except from the Spartans singly, 
 who would have maintained their own very defensible territory 
 Rtrainst all his etfort>, — like the Mysians and Pisidiaiis in Asia 
 Minor, or like the Mainots of Laconia in later days ; but Hellaj 
 jtrenerally would have become a Persian satrapy. Fortunately, 
 Darius, m liile bent m invading some country, had 8et his mind 
 on the attack of Scjthia, alike perilous and unprofitable. U\i 
 personal ar.lor was wasted on those unconquerable regions, 
 ffiieic he narrowly <iscaped the disastrous fate of Cyrus, — noi 
 
 r 
 
 I ERSIAN INVASION OF GREECE POSTPONED 
 
 29i 
 
 1/ 
 
 i 
 i 
 
 id he ever pay a second visit to the coasts of the ^gean. Yd 
 tht amorous influences Df Atossa, set at work by Demokedes 
 migit well have been sufficiently powerful to induce Darius t« 
 assai. Greece instead of Scythia, — a choice in favor of which 
 all otiier recommendati'>ns concurred; and the history of frea 
 Greece would then probably have stopped at this point, without 
 unrolling any of the glories which followed. So incalculably 
 great has been the influence of Grecian development, during the 
 two centuries between 500-300 B.C., on the destinies of man- 
 kind, that we cannot pass without notice a contingency which 
 threatened to arrest that development in the bud. Indeed, it may 
 be remarked that the history of any nation, considered as a se- 
 quence of causes and effects, affording applicable knowledge, 
 requires us to study not merely real events, but also imminent 
 
 contingencies, events which were on the point of occurring, 
 
 but yet did not occur. When we read the waitings of Atossa in 
 the Perste of ^schylus, for the humiliation which her son Xerxes 
 had just undergone in his flight from Greece,i we do not easily 
 persuade ourselves to reverse the picture, and to conceive the 
 game Atossa twenty years earlier, numbering as her slaves at Susa 
 the noblest Herakleid and Alkma^onid maidens from Greece. 
 Yet the picture would really have been thus reversed, — the 
 wish of Atossa would have been fulfilled, and the wailings would 
 have been heard from enslaved Greek maidens in Persia, — if 
 the mind of Darius had not happened to be })reoccupied with a 
 project not less insane even than those of Kambyses against 
 Ethiopia and the Libyan desert. Such at least is the moral of 
 the story of Demokedes. 
 
 That insttne expedition across the Danube into Scythia comes 
 now to be recounted. It was undertaken by Darius for the pur- 
 pose of avenging the inroad and devastation of the Scythians in 
 Media a»\d Upper Asia, about a century before. The lust of 
 conquest imparted unusual force to this sentiment of wounded 
 dignity, which in the case of the Scythians could hardly be con- 
 nected with any expectation of plunder or profit. In spite of 
 (he dis^ading admonition of his brother Artabanus,2 Dariud 
 
 » ^schyl. Pers. 435-145, etc. 
 
 ♦B€r<»dot. iv. 1, 83 There is nothing to mark the precise ycai cf ihi 
 
2d2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 iuramoned the whole force of his empire, army and navy, t> tlw 
 Ihracian Bosphoi us, — a force not less than spven hmdred 
 thousand horse and foot, and six hundred sliips, accoriin- to 
 Herodotus. On these prodigious numbers we can lay no stress. 
 But It appeal's that the names of all the various naHon. compos. 
 mg the host were inscribed on two pillars erected b^ order of 
 Danus on the European side of the Bosphorus, and afterward.^ 
 Been by Herodotus himself in the city of Byzanti.in, — the in^ 
 Bcnptions were bilingual, in Assyrian cnararrers as well as 
 Wk. The Samian architect Mandrokles had been directed to 
 throw a bridge of boats across the Bosphorus. about half-way 
 between Byzantium and the mouth of tlif> Euxinr. So peremp- 
 tory were the Persian kings that their cnlorsfor military service 
 Bhould be punctually obeyed, ari.l so impatient were they of the 
 Idea ot exemptions, that when a Persian father named (Eobazui 
 entreated that one of his three sons, all included in the eonscrip- 
 tion, might be left at ^^Qme^arius replied that all three of them 
 
 Scythian expedition ; but us the acce..sio.i of Darius is fixed to 521 b c and 
 as the expeduiou is connected with the early part of his rei^m, we muv'con- 
 ceive him to have entered upon it as soon as his hands were free : thai is ^ 
 
 ZV'n^f ?"''^'"" '•'" '"'^^'"^ "^^"^P^ ^°^' provinces, Orcetes;;he 
 Modes, Babylonians, et( . Five years seems a reasonable time to allow fo, 
 
 tT^r^'T''"" tu^" '"^^"''^ ""^''^ ^^"''^ ^"'"^' ^he Scythian expedition 
 to 51b-515 B.C. There is reason for supposinj.^ it to have been before 514 
 B.C., for in that year Hipparehu. was slain at Ath, ns an.l llippias the sur- 
 pvm^^ brother, lookin<r out for securities and ailiaiucs ahnud -^nc his 
 
 ^ZtT'"" T'''T ^f ^^"^'^'^'^ ^«" -^ Hippoklus. despot of Lampsakns, 
 perceiving that Hippokln. and his son had ^^reat influence with liarius" 
 (Thucyd. VI, 59.) Now Hippoklns .ouid not well have acquired this infin- 
 ence before the Scnhian expedition ; for Darius came down then for the 
 fi«t time to the western sea ; Hippoklne served upon that expedition 
 (Herodot. iv, 138), and it was probably then that his favor was a! nnll^ 
 .nd farther conhrmed during the time that Darius stayed at Sardis af er hi.' 
 return from Scythia. 
 
 Professor Schultz (Beitr^e zu jrenaueren Zeit-l.estimmunpen der Hellen. 
 
 tolo^'. Studien) places the expedition in 513 «.c. ; bat I think a vear or two 
 earlier is more probable. Larcher, Wesseling, and Bahr (ad Herodot It 
 145) paee it in 508 b.c, which is later than the truth indeed I^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 h^mse f places the reduction of Lemnos and Imbros bv Cranes in SU bc 
 Uau,h that event decid.^ ,„,, ,He Scythian ;xpedition(HeL,^-^^ 
 
 r, 2. . Larcher, Table Chmnologique, Trad. d'H^rodot. l vii, pp. 633-6357 
 
 DARIUS INVADES SCYTillA. 
 
 263 
 
 ihould be left at home, — an answer which the unsuspecting fa- 
 ther Heard with delight. They were indeed all left at home,— 
 for they were all put to death. i A proceeding similar to this is 
 ascribed afterwards to Xerxes ;- whether true or not as matters 
 of fact, both tales illustrate the wrathful displeasure with which 
 the Persian kings were known to receive such petitions for ex- 
 emption. 
 
 The naval force of Darius seems to have con isted entirely of 
 Biibject Greeks, Asiatic and insular ; for the Phtnician fleet was 
 not brought into the ^gean until the subsequent Ionic revolU 
 At this time all or most of the Asiatic Greek cities were under 
 des|X)ts, who leaned on the Persian government for support, and 
 who appeared with their respective contingents to take part in 
 the Scythian expedition.3 Of Ionic Greeks were seen, — Stratiis, 
 despot of Chios; iEakes son of Syloson, di^spot of Samos ; 
 Laodamas, of Phokc^a ; and Histiaeus, of Miletus. From the 
 .^olic towns, Aristagoras of Kyme ; from the Hellespontine 
 Greeks, Daphnis of Abydus, Hippoklus of Lampsakus, Hero- 
 phaiuus of Parium, Metrodorus of Prokonnesus, Aristagoras of 
 Kyzikus, and IMiltiades of the Thracian Chersonese. All these 
 are mentioned, and there were probably more. This large fleet, 
 asMHiuled at the Bosphorus, was sent forward into the Euxine to 
 the mouth of the Danube, — with orders to sail up the river two 
 days' journey, aV>ove the point where its channel begins to divide, 
 and to throw a bridge of boat^ over it ; while Darius, having lib- 
 erally recomi)eiised the architect Mandrokles, crossed the bridge 
 over the Bosphorus, and began his march through Thrace, re- 
 ceiving the submission of various Thracian tribes in his way, 
 and subduing others, — especially the Getie north of Mount 
 Haimus, who were compelled to increase still farther the num 
 bers of his vast army.^ On arriving at the Danube, he found 
 the bridge finished and prepared lor his passage by the lonians : 
 we may remark here, as on so many other occasions, that all 
 operations requiring intelligence are performed for the Persiana 
 either by Greeks or by Phenicians, — more usually by the for- 
 
 ' Herodot. iv, 84. 
 
 • Herodot. iv, 97, 137, 138. 
 
 * Herodot. vii, 39. 
 « Herodot. hr 89-93. 
 
264 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 mer. He crossed this greatest of all earthly rivers,' — for so the 
 Danube was imagiiH<l :a be in the tit'th century B.C., — and di- 
 rected his march int(» Scythia. 
 
 As far as the point now attained, our narrative runs smoothly 
 and intelligibly : we know that Darius marched his army into 
 Scythia, and that he came back with ignominy and severe loss. 
 But as to all which haijpcned between his crossing and recrossing 
 the Danube, we find nothing approaching to authentic statement, 
 — nothing even which we can set forth as the ]>roljable basis of 
 truth on which exag^jcruting fancy has been at work. All is in- 
 explicable mystery. Ktesias indeed says that Darius marched for 
 fifteen days into the Scythian territory, — that he then exchanged 
 bows with the king of Scythia, and discovered the Scythian bow 
 to be the largest, — and that, being intimidated by such discovery, 
 he fled back to the bridge by which he had crossed the Danube, 
 and recrossed the river with the loss of one-tenth part of hia 
 ai-m\-.-' being compelled to break down the bridge before all had 
 passed. The length of march is here the only thing distinctly 
 fitated ; about the direction nothing is said. But the narrative of 
 Ktesias, defective iis it is, is much less perplexing than that of 
 Herodotus, who conducts the immense host of Darius as it were 
 through fairy-land, — heedless of distance, large intervening 
 rivers, want of all cultivation or supj)lies, destruction of the coun- 
 try — in so far as it could be destroyed — by the retreating Scyth- 
 ians, etc. He tells us that the Persian army consisted chiefly 
 of foot, — that there were no roads nor agriculture; yet his nar- 
 rative carries it over about twelve degrees of longitude from the 
 Danube to the country east of the Tanais, across the rivers Tyras 
 
 Herod, iv, 48-50. 'Jar/.of — fieyiffro^ Trorufiui' ttuituv tuv r^/uei^ Ufiev, etc. 
 
 ' Ktesias, Persica, c. 17. Justin (ii, 5 — compare also xxxviii, 7) seems 
 to follow the narrative of Ktesias. 
 
 ^.schylus (Persiv, 864) who presents the deceased Darius as a glorious 
 contrast with the living Xerxes, talks of the splendid conquests which he 
 made by means of others, — '• without crossing the Halys himself, nor leav- 
 Ing his home." We are li-d to suppose, by the language which ^schylos 
 pats into the mouth of the Eidolon of Darius (v, 720-745), that he had for- 
 gotten, or had never heard of the bridge thrown across the Bosphorua by 
 order of Darius ; fo:* the latter is made to condemn severely the impious 
 iasoleocc of Xerxes in bridging over the Hellespont. 
 
 1 
 
 UNINTELLIGIBLE MARCH OF DARIUS. 
 
 265 
 
 (Dniester), Hypanis (Bog), Borysthenes (Dnieper), Hypakyris. 
 Gerrhos, and Tanais. ' How these rivers could have been passed 
 in the face of enemies by so vast a host, we are left to conjecture, 
 since it was not winter time, to convert them into ice: nor doe« 
 the historian even allude to them as having been crossed either 
 in the advance or in the retreat. What is not less remarkable ia, 
 that in respect to the Greek settlement of Olbia, or Borysthenes, 
 and the agricultural Scythians and ^lix-hellenes between the 
 Hypanis and the Borysthenes, across whose country it would 
 seem that this march of Darius must have carried him, — Herod- 
 otus does not say anything; though we should have expected 
 that he would have had better means of informing himself about 
 this part of the march than about any other, and though the Per- 
 sians could hardly have failed to plunder or put in requisition 
 this, the only productive portion of Scythia. 
 
 The narrative of Herodotus in regard to the Persian march 
 north of the Ister seems indeed destitute of all the conditions of 
 reality. It is rather an imaginative description, illustrating the 
 desperate and impracticable character of Scythian warfare, and 
 grouping in the same picture, according to that large sweep of 
 the imagination which is admissible in epical treatment, the 
 Scythians, with all their barbarous neighbors from the Carpathian 
 mountains to the river Wolga. The Agathyrsi, the Neuri, the 
 Andro}>liagi, the Melanchltrni, the Budini, the Geloni, the Sar- 
 matians, and the Tauri, — all of them bordering on that vast quad- 
 rangular area of four thousand stadia for each side, called Scythia, 
 as Herodotus conceives it,- — are brought into deliberation and 
 action in consequence of the Persian approach. And Herodotus 
 
 * Flerodot. iv, 136. ute 6e rov UepffiKuv ttoX^ov Iovto^ ne^ov (jTpaTov, Kal 
 rue bdovq ovk. iniaTafievov, wore ov TeTfi7jfirv(jv rcjv oSuv, tou 6e 2/ci;i9/«ot), 
 iTTTTorfcj, Kal Tu avvTOfia r^f bdov enLara/nevov, etc. Compare c. 128. 
 
 The number and size of the rivers are mentioned by Herodotus as the 
 principal wonder of Scythia, c. 82 — Quvfiucjia de fj X'^PV «^'r^ ovk ^x^t^ 
 X^ph '/ «^'- '^oTufiovr TE 7ro/.Aa> fiEylarov^ Kal api^fidv TrAEiarovg, etc. He 
 ranks the Borysthenes as the largest of all rivers except the Nile and the 
 Danube (c. 53). The Hypanis also (Bog) is irora/noc h bXiyoLCL fiEyag (c. 52) 
 
 But he appears to forget the existence of these rivers when he is discrib- 
 tug the Persian march. 
 
 • Henidot. iv, 101. 
 
 ▼OL. JV. 1^ 
 
 m 
 
 t 
 
 f 
 
266 
 
 ii!^:oRv OF -^ni.'-CK. 
 
 take? that opportunify of communicating valuable particulars re- 
 Bpeciing the habits aiid manners of each. The kincrs of tlicse 
 nations discuss wJictlier Darius is justified in his invasion aud 
 whether it be prudent in them to aid the Scythians. The latter 
 q.iestion is decided in the affirmative by the Sarmatians, the 
 Budini, and the Ge!6ni, all eastward of the Tanais i _ in the 
 ne^^ative by the rest. The Scythians, removing tiieir wagons 
 with rheir wives and children out of the way rortliward, retreat 
 and draw Darius after them from the Danube all across Scythia 
 and Sarmatia to the northeastern extremity of the territory of 
 the Budini,-' several days' journey eastward of the Tanais. 
 Moreover, they destroy the wells and ruin the herbage as much 
 as they can, so that during all this long march, says Herodotus, 
 the Tei ...ans " found nothing to damage, inasmuch as the country 
 was barren ;" ,t is therefore not easy to see what they could lind 
 to live upon. It is in the territory of the Budini, at this eastern- 
 most termmus on the borders of the desert, that the Persian^ 
 perform the only positive acts which an- ascribed to them 
 throughout the whole expedition. They burn tli. wooden wall 
 before occupied, but now deserted, by the Geloni, and they build 
 or begin to build, eight hii'ge fbrtresses near the river Oarus' 
 lor what purpose these fortresses could have been intended 
 Herodotus gives no intimation ; but he savs that the unfinished 
 work was yet to be seen even in his day.^ 
 
 Having thus been carried all across Scythia and the other ter- 
 ntones above mentioned in a northeasterly direction, Darius and 
 his army aie next marched back a i>rodigious distance in a north- 
 westerly direction, through the territories of the Melanchlieni, 
 the Androphagi, and tJie Neuri, all of whom fiee atfri-hted into 
 
 Heroc ot. iv, 118, 119. , Herodot. iv, 1.0-122. 
 
 • Herodot. lv^ 123. 'Oaov ^ev rf,> xp6.ov ol Ue^aac i,iaav c5.a rf^r ^kv^uuk 
 
 jep^ov • t... .. re k, r^v rC>v Bov^i.uv x^p,v kae^a?^ etc. See Ln^ 
 Geo^ph. System of Her.3dotus, p. lU, about the Oarus 
 
 Tho erections whatever they were, which were supposed to mark the a* 
 ^me pomt of the maxch of Darius, may be compared to those evident, 
 ©f the extreme advance of Dionysus, which the Macedonian army saw m 
 
 m. J, 15, (Ml, .ii, 16, Zumpt.) 
 
 UNINTELLIGTBLE MARCH OF DARIUS. 
 
 267 
 
 the northern desert, having been thus compelled against their will 
 to share in the consequences of the war. The Agathyrsi peremp. 
 torily require the Scythians to abstain from drawing the Persians 
 into their territory, on pain of being themselves treated as ene- 
 mies : • the Scythians in consequence respect the boundaries of 
 the Agathyrsi, and direct their retreat in such a manner as to 
 draw the Persians again southward into Scvthia. Durin^r a(i 
 this long march backwards and forwards, there are partial skir- 
 mishes and combats of horse, but the Scythians steadily refuse 
 any general engagement. And though Darius challenges them 
 formally, by means of a herald, with taunts of cowardice, the 
 Scythian king Idanthyrsus not only refuses battle, but explains 
 and defends his policy, and defies the Persian to come and 
 destroy the tombs of their fathers, — it will then, he adds, be 
 Been whether the Scythians are cowards or not.2 The difficulties 
 of l>arius have by this time become serious, when Idanthyrsus 
 sends to him the menacing presents of a bird, a mouse, a frog, 
 and five arrows : the Persians are obliged to commence a rapid 
 retreat towards the Danube, leaving, in order to check and slacken 
 the Scythian pursuit, the least effective and the sick part of their 
 ai-my encamneil, together with the asses which had been brought 
 with them, — animals unknown to the Scythians, and causing great 
 alarm by their braying.^ However, notwithstanding some «lelay 
 thus caused, as well as the anxious haste of Darius to reach the 
 Danube, the Scythians, far more rapid in their movements, arHre 
 at the river before him, and open a negotiation with the loniana 
 left in guard of the bridge, urging them to break it down and 
 leave the Persian king to his late, — inevitable destruction with 
 his whole army.'* 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 125. Hekataeus ranks the Meianchlaeni as a Scythian ti>u«| 
 (Hekat. Fragment. 154, ed. Klausen) : he also mentions several other ?ub- 
 flirisions of Scythians, who cannot be farther authenticated (Fragm. 155- 
 160). 
 
 "Herodot. iv, 126, 127. 
 
 ' Herodot. iv, 128-132. The bird, the mouse, the frog, and the arrowi, 
 are explained to mean : Unless you take to the air like a bird, to the earth 
 like a mouse, or to the water Uke a frog, you will become the victim of thi 
 Bcythian arrows. 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 133. 
 
 f 
 
 
S68 
 
 HISTORV OF GREECE. 
 
 Here we reent(?r the world of reality, at the nortli bank of the 
 Danube, the place where we before quitted it. AH that is re 
 ported to have passed in the interval, if tried by the te^ts of his- 
 torical matter of fact, can be received as nothing better than a 
 perpl'ixing dream. It only acquires value when we consider it 
 as an illustrative fiction, including, doubtless, some unknown 
 matter of fact, but framed chiefly to exhibit in action those un- 
 attackable Nomacls, who formed the northea>t«'ni barbarous 
 world of a Greek, and with whose manners Herodotus was pro- 
 foundly struck. " The Scythiansi (says he) in regard to one of 
 the greatest of human matters, have struck out a i>lan cleverer 
 than any that I kii.)w. In other respects I do not admire them; 
 but they have contrived this great object, that no invader of 
 their country shall ever «'^.ape out of it, or shall ever be able to 
 find out and overtake tliem, unless they themselves choose. For 
 when men have neither walls nor established cities, but are all 
 hous.'-carriers and horse-bowmen, — living, not from the l)lough, 
 but from cattle, and having their dwellings on wagons, — how 
 can they be otherwise than unattackable and impracticable to 
 meddle with?" The protracted and unavailing chase ascribed 
 to Darius, — who can neither overtake his game nor use his arras, 
 and who hardly even escai)es in safety, — embodies in detail this 
 formidable attribute of the Scythian Nomads. That Darius ac- 
 tually marched into the country, there can be no doubt. Nothing 
 else is certain, except his ignominious retreat out of it to the 
 Danube ; for of the many different guesses,-^ by which critics 
 
 Iloroilot. iv, 46. T*'j de iKvdiMjt yh'ti ev ftevrd fit) kjtov tCjv av^po)7Tyio)v 
 r -(.w GO(piOTaTa r-innjv il^ipyra', rwv ijiiei^ i^fiev ru [livTOL alTia ovk 
 
 6}auau T<^ 6k fieyia-n: ../-rj a<*>L urtvpTrai, C'rrre u7ro(l>vyc:tv re fir/deva 
 l-Tf/MvTa eiTi aipeact fii] f3ovkouf'vovc re l^evpe^^i'at, Karalajielv fi^ olov re 
 ilvai. Toiai yap [ifjre aarta fir/re rdxea p UTiofitva, (iUu i^epioLKOt tovrei 
 wavrec, luxJi iTnroTo^orai, (uvre^ fiii ut' dporov, alV tirrd Kr^veuv, oUrj/zara 
 ii ff<^i p lirl Ce^V^u. Ki'oc OVK ui> e'lTjriav ovroi duaxoi re koI uiropoi irpoofiio- 
 
 'KUtp^ra. 6.- rn^. ravTa, r//f re yr/g kovaf)Q kniTfidet)g, Kai rCtv iroraftui 
 Hvruv apL (rvujjuxi-fr, etc. 
 
 Compare this with the oration of the Scythian envoys to Alexander thf 
 Great, as it stands in Quintus Curtius. vii. 8, 22 (vii, 35, 22. Zunipt). 
 
 • The statement of Strabo (vii, p. 305), which restricts the inarch of Da- 
 llM to the country between the Danube and the Tyras (Dniester) is juslly 
 
 THE lONlANS Al THE DANURE. 
 
 269 
 
 have attempted to cut down the gigantic sketch of Herodotut 
 into a march with definite limits and direction, not one rests u[>on 
 any positive grounds, or carries the least conviction. We can 
 Brace the pervading idea in the mind of the historian, but cannot 
 find out what were his substantive data. 
 
 The adventures which took place at the passage of that river, 
 both on the out-march and the home-march, wherein the loniang 
 are concerned, are far more within the limits of history. Hero 
 Herodotus possessed better means of information, and had lesi 
 of a dominant idea to illustrate. That which passed between 
 Darius and the lonians on his first crossing is very curious : I 
 have reserved it until the present moment, because it is par- 
 ticularly connected with the incidents which happened on his 
 return. 
 
 On reaching the Danube from Thrace, he found the bridge of 
 boats ready, and when the whole army had passed over, he or- 
 dered the lonians to break it down, as well as to follow him in 
 his land-march into Scythia;i the ships being left with nothing 
 but the rowers and seamen essential to navigate them homeward 
 
 pronounced by Isiebuhr (Kleine Schriffen, p. 372) to be a mere suppositioa 
 suggested by the probabilities of the case, because it could not be understood 
 how his large army should cross even the Dniester: it is not to he treated 
 as an affirmation restin<; upon any authority. "As Herodotus tells us what 
 is impossible (adds Niel)uhr), we know nothing at all historically respecting 
 the expedition." 
 
 So again the conjecture of Palmerius ( Exercitationes ad Auctorcs Graecos, 
 p. 21) carries on the march somewhat farther than the Dniester, — to the 
 Hypanis, or perhaps to the Borysthenes. Rennell, Klaproth, and Reichard, 
 are not afraid to extend the march on to the Wolga. Dr. Thirlwall stops 
 within the Tanais, admittinjr, however, that no correct historical account 
 can be given of it. Eichwald supposes a long march up the Dniester into 
 Volhynia and Lithuania. 
 
 Compare Ukert, Skythien, p. 26 ; Dahlmann, Historische Forschungen, 
 ii, pp. 159-164 -, Schaffarik, Slavische Alterthiimer, i, 10, 3, i, 13,4-5 ; and 
 Mr. Kenrick, Remarks on the Life and Writings of Herodotus, prefixed to 
 his Notes on the Second Book of Herodotus, p. xxi. The latter is among 
 those who cannot swim the Dniester : he says : " Probably the Dniester 
 (Tyras) was the real limit of the expedition, and Bessarabia, Moldavia, and 
 the Bukovina, the scene of it." 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 97. Aapelog eKeXevce rove 'Iwvaf r^vaxe^ivv Kvaavrof jrf9 
 ^(U Kar' h^eipov iuvr(^, Kai rdv Ik 'uv veotv arparov. 
 
 I 
 
 l|| 
 
270 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 His order was on the point of being executed, when, fortunately 
 for him, the Mityleuaan general Koes \ cntured to call in que»». 
 tion the prudence of it, having first a.^ked whether it was the 
 pleasure of the Persian king to listen to advice. He urged that 
 the inarch on which they were proceeding might prow perilous, 
 and retreat possibly unavoidable; because the Scythian.^ though 
 certain to be defeated if brought to action, might pcrhaf)s not 
 suffer themselves to be approached or even disco\trcd. As a 
 precaution against ail contingencies, it was ])rudent to leave th« 
 bridge standing and watched by tiiose who had constructed it. 
 Far from being otfended at the advice, Darius feh grateful for it, 
 and desired that Koes would ask him after his return for a suit- 
 able reward, — which we shall hereafter find granted. He then 
 altered his resolution, took a cord, and tied sixty knots in it. 
 »' Take this cord (saiii he to the lonians), untie one of the knots 
 in it each day after my advance from the Daimbe into Scythia. 
 Kemain here and guard the bridge until you shall have untied 
 ail the knots ; but it by that time I shall not have returned, then 
 depart and sail home."* After such orders he began his march 
 into the interior. 
 
 This anecdote is interesting, not only as it discloses the simple 
 expedients for numeriiion and counting of time then practised, 
 but also as it ilhistratts the geograf)hical ideas prevalent. Darius 
 did not intend to come back over the Danube, but to march round 
 the Mieotis, and to re; urn into Persia on the eastern side of the 
 Euxine. No other explanation can be given of his orders. At 
 first, confident of success, he orders the bridge to be destroyed 
 forthwith : he wiJl l^eat the Scythians, march through their coun- 
 try, and ret-nter Media from the eastern side of the Euxine. 
 When he is reminded that possibly he may not be able to find 
 the Scythians, and may be obliged to retreat, he still continues 
 persuaded that this must happen within sixty days, if it happens 
 at all ; and that, should he remain absent more than sixty days, 
 such delay will be a cc-nvincing proot that he will take the other 
 road of return instead of repassing the Danube. Tiie reader 
 
 PLAN OF MARCH AS PROI OSED BY DARIUS. 
 
 27 i 
 
 * llerodot. iv, 98. ijv dt h' tovt^) tu xp"V(t) f^r) Trapt'w, uXXd duWuat hfut 
 
 trflo looks at a map of the Euxine and its surrounding terri- 
 tories may be startled at so extravagant a conception. But he 
 should recollect that there was no map of the same or nearly the 
 same accuracy before Herodotus, much less before the contem- 
 poraries of Darius. The idea of entering Media by the north 
 from Scythia and Sarmatia over the Caucasus, is familiar to He- 
 rodotus in his sketch of the early marches of the Scythians and 
 Cimmerians : moreover, he tells us that after the expedition of 
 Darius, there came some Scythian envoys to Spar .a, proposing 
 an offensive alliance against Persia, and offering on their part to 
 march across the Phasis into Media from the north,' while the 
 S|)artans were invited to land on the shores of Asia Minor, and 
 advance across the country to meet them from the west. When 
 we recollect that the Macedonians and their leader, Alexander 
 the Great, having arrived at the river Jaxartes, on the north 
 of Sogdiana, and on the east of the sea of And, supposed that 
 they had reached the Tanais, and called the river by tliaft 
 name,*- — we shall not be astonished at the erroneous estimation 
 of distance implied in the plan conceived by Darius. 
 
 The lonians had already remained in guard of the bridge be 
 yond the sixty days commanded, without hearing anything of the 
 Persian army, when they were surprised by the appearance, not 
 of that army, but of a body of Scythians, who acquainted them 
 that Darius was in full retreat and in the greatest distress, ana 
 that his safety with the whole army depended upon that bridge 
 They endeavored to prevail upon the lonians, since the sixty 
 days included in their order to remain had now elapsed, to break 
 the bridge and retire ; assuring them that, if this were done, the 
 destruction of the Persians was inevitable, — of course, the 
 lonians themselves would then be free. At first, the latter were 
 favorably disposed towards the proposition, which was warmly 
 espoused by the Athenian Miltiades, despot, or governor, of the 
 Thracian Ch jrsonese.^ Had he prevailed, the victor of Marathon 
 
 ' Herodot. i , 84. Compare his account of the marches of the Clmmo- 
 nans and of the Scythians into Asia Minor and Media respectively (llerodot 
 i, 103, 104, iv, 12). 
 
 ■ Arrian, Exp. Al. iii, 6, 15; Plutarch, Alexa-d. c.45; Quint. Curt, fii 
 T, 4, vii, 8. 30 (vii, 29, 5, vii, 36, 7, Zumpt). 
 
 ^ Herodot iv 133, 130, 137. 
 
 I ; 
 
 » i. 
 
272 
 
 HISTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 THRACK TNVADKD BY THE SCYTHIANS. 
 
 278 
 
 — for such we shall hereafter find him — would have thus inflicted 
 A much more vital blow on Persia tliau even that celebrated 
 action, and woiiM liave brought upon Darius the disastrous fate 
 of liis j)redtHe>.>ur Cyrus. But the Ionian princes, though lean- 
 ing at first towards liis suggestion, were s])eedilj converted by the 
 representations of llistiaius of Miletus, who reminded them that 
 the maintenance of his own ascendency over the Milesians, and 
 that of each despot in his respective city, was assured by means 
 of Persian supi)ort Jilone, — the feeling of the population being 
 everywhere against them : consequently, the ruin of Darius 
 would be their ruin also. This argument }>roved conclusive. It 
 was resolved to stay and maintain the bridge, but to pretend 
 compliance with the Scythians, and prevail upon them to depart, 
 by afiecting to destroy it. The northern portion of the bridge 
 was accordingly destroyed, lor the length of a bow-shot, and the 
 Scythians departed under the persuasion tliat they had succeeded 
 in depriving their enemies of the means of crosshig the river.i 
 Jt appears that they missed the track of the retreating host, which 
 was thus enabled, aiYer the severest privation and suffering, to 
 reach the Danube in safety. Arriving during the darkness of 
 the night, Darius was at first terrified to find the bridge no longer 
 joining the northern bank : an Egyptian herald, of stentorian 
 powers of voice, was ordered to call a- loudly as possible the 
 name of Histianis (lie Milesian. Answer l>eing speedily made, 
 the bridge was reestablished, and the Persian army pa<-ed over 
 before tlie Scythians returned to the spot.- 
 
 There can i)e no doubt that the lonians here lost an oj)portu- 
 nity eminently fa\<»rable, such as never again returned, for eman- 
 cipating themselves from the Persian dominion. Their despots, 
 by whom the determination was made, especially the Milesian 
 Histianis, were not induced to preserve the bridge by any honor- 
 able reluctance to betray the trust reposed in them, but simply by 
 sehish regard to the maintenance of their own unpopular domin- 
 ion. And we may remark that the real character of this im- 
 pelling motive, as well as the deliberation accompanying it, may be 
 assumed as resting upon very good evidence, since we are now 
 wrived within the persoial knowledge of the Milesian historiaa 
 
 " Htitxlot. iv, 137-139. 
 
 Hekatceus, who took an active part in the Ionic revolt a few 
 years afterwards, and who may, perhaps, have been personally 
 enirased in this expedition. He will be found reviewing with 
 prudence and sobriety the chances of that unfortunate revolt, and 
 distrusting its success from the beginning; while Histiaeus of M» 
 letus will appear on the same occasion as the fomenter of it, in 
 order to procure his release from an honorable detention at Susa, 
 rear the person of Darius. The selfishness of this despot hav- 
 ing deprived his countrymen of that real and favorable chance of 
 emancipation which the destruction of the bridge would have 
 opened to them, threw them into perilous revolt a few years after- 
 wards against the entire and unembarrassed force of the Persian 
 king and empire. 
 
 Extricated from the perils of Scythian warfare, Darius marched 
 southward from the Danube through Thrace to the Hellespont, 
 where he crossed from Sestus into Asia. He left, however, a 
 considerable army in Europe, under the command of Megabazus, 
 to accomplish the conquest of Thrace. Perinthus on the Pro- 
 pontis made a brave resistance,' but was at length subdued, and 
 it appears that all the Thracian tribes, and all the Grecian colo- 
 nie> between the Hellespont and the Strymon, were forced to 
 submit, giving earth and water, and becoming subject to tribute.' 
 Near the lower Strvmon, was the P^donian town of Myrkinus, 
 which Darius ordered to be made over to Histia^us of Miletus ; 
 for both this Milesian, and Koes of Mitylene, had been desired 
 by the Persian king to name their own reward for their fidelity 
 to him on the passage over the Danube.'* Koes requested that 
 he might be constituted despot of Mitylene, which was accom- 
 plished by Persian authority; but Histiaeus solicited that the 
 territory near Myrkinus might be given to him for the foundation 
 of a colony. As soon as the Persian conquests extended thus 
 far, the site in question was presented to Histiipus, who entered 
 actively upon his new scheme. We shall find the territory 
 near Myrkinus eminent hereafter as the site of Araphipolis. It 
 Dffer.^d great temptation to settlers, as fertile, well wooded, con- 
 renient for maritime commerce, and near to auriferous and 
 
 * Herodot. iv, 140, 141 
 
 » Herodot. iv, 143, 144, v, 1, 2. 
 • Herodot. v, 11. 
 VOL. fV. 
 
 12* 
 
 Herodot. v, 2. 
 
 180C. 
 
 #',i 
 
 I . 
 
i 1 
 
 274 
 
 mS'Hi.tl OF GREECK. 
 
 MACEDONIA CONQUERED BY THE PERSIANS. 
 
 275 
 
 tti 
 
 argentiferous mouintainsJ It seem«, howev t, that tlie Persian 
 •iominion in Thrace was disturbed by an invasion of the Scythi- 
 ans. who, in rpvenjre for the aggression of Darius overran the 
 rountry as far a^ the Thrarian Chersonese, and are even said to 
 liMv*' sent envoys lo Sparta proj)Osing a simultaneous invasion of 
 Persia from different sides by Spartans and Scythians. The 
 xVthenian Mihiades, who was despot, or gov ri nor, of the Cherso- 
 nese, was forced to quit it for some time, and Herodotus ascribe.-* 
 his retirement to ihe incursion of these Nomads. But we may 
 he permitted to su>i)ect that tlie historian has misconceivc^d the 
 real cause of such retirement. Miltiadr-s couhl not remain in the 
 Cliersonese after he had incurred tl»e deadly enmity of Darius 
 by exhorting the lonians to destroy the bridge over th^3 
 Danube. ^ 
 
 * Ilerodot. v, 23. 
 
 • Herodut. vi, 4U-S4. That Mlltiadt-s could have remained in the Chei 
 ionese undisturbed, durinj; the interval between the Scythian expedition 
 of Darius and the Ionic revolt, — when the Persians were complete masters 
 of those rejyions, and when Otanes was pnnishinjr other towns in the neitrh- 
 borhood for evasion of service under Darius, after he had declared sc 
 pointedly afjainst the Persians on a matter of life and deatli to the kin^r and 
 anny, — appears to me, as it does to Dr. Thirhvall (History of Gr. vol. ii, 
 App. ii, p. 480, ch. xiv, pp. 226-249), eminently improbable. So forcibly 
 does Dr. Thirhvall feel the difficulty, that he suspects the reported conduct 
 and exhortations of Miltiades at the bridire over the Danube to have been 
 a filsehood, fabricated by Miltiades himself, twenty years aftenvards, for the 
 pn->(.vc of acquinnj: popularity at Athens durin<r the time immediately 
 ;i -'lin::: the battle of Marathon. 
 
 I cannot think th s hypothesis admissible. It directly contradicts lle- 
 mdotus on a matter <tf '*a< r very conspicuous, and upon which <,'ood nuans 
 of information seem to have been witliin his reach. I have already 
 observed that the historian Hekatiens must luive possessed personal knowi- 
 edf;e of all the relations betAveen the lonians and Darius, and that he very 
 probably may have been even present at the brid<;e . all the information j^iven 
 by Hekataeus upon these points would be open to the inquiries of Herodo- 
 tus. The unbounde<l jjratitude of Darius towards Ilistifeus ?hows tha: 
 some one or more of the Ionic despots present at the bridore must have 
 poverfully enforced the expediency of breaking it down. That the nama 
 of che despot who stood forward as prime mover of this resolution should 
 h*re been forgotten and not mentioned at the time, is highly improbable ; 
 jrct such must have been the case if a fabrication by Miltiades twenty 
 rears aften^-ards could successfully fill up the l»lank with his own name. 
 iTie two most prominent matt- :. ' • ! c f. ;.f! r the retreat of Darius, ia 
 
 Nor did the conquests of Megabazus stop at the western bank 
 of the Strymon. He carried his arms across that riv«r, conquer* 
 
 reference to the bridge, would probably be the name of the leader who 
 urL'cd its destmelon, and the name of Histijeus, who preserved it. Indeed, 
 the mere fact of the mischievous influence exercised by the latter after 
 wards would be p etty sure to keep these points of the case in full view. 
 
 There are me«i.3 of escaping from the difficulty of the case, I think, with 
 out contradicting Herodotus on any matter of fact important and conspic 
 uous, or indeed or any matter of fiict whatever. We sec by vi, 40, that 
 Miltiades did quit the Chersonese between the close of the Scythian expedi- 
 tion of Darius and the Ionic revolt; Herodotus, indeed, tells us that he 
 (juitted it in consequence of an incursion of the Scythians : but without 
 denying the fact of such an incursion, we may reasonably suppose the his- 
 torian to have been mistaken in assigning it as the cause of the flight of 
 Miltiades. The latter was prevented from living in the Chersonese con- 
 tinuously, during the interval between the Persian invasion of Scythia and 
 tlie Ionic revolt, by fear of Persian enmity. It is not necessary for us to 
 believe that he was never there at all, but his residence there must havt 
 been inteiTuj}ted and insecure. The chronological data in Herodot. vi, 40, 
 are exceedingly oliscure and perplexing ; but it seems to me that the sup- 
 position which I suggest introduces a plausible coherence into the series of 
 historical facts, with the slightest possible contradiction to our capital 
 witness. 
 
 The only achievement of Miltiades, between the affair on the Danube 
 and his return to Athens shortly before the battle of Marathon, is the con- 
 quest of Lemnos ; and that must have taken place evidently while the Per- 
 sians were occupied by the Ionic revolt, (between 502-494 B.C.) There is 
 nothing in his recorded deeds inconsistent with the belief, therefore, that 
 between .51.5-502 n.c. he may not have resided in the Chersonese at all, or 
 at least not for very long together : and the statement of Cornelius Nepos, 
 that he quitted it immediately after the return from Scythia, from fear of 
 the Persians, may be substantially true. Dr. Thirlwall observes (p. 487) 
 — • As little would it appear that when the Scythians invaded the Cher- 
 sonese, Miltiades was conscious of having endeavored to render them an 
 important service. He flies before them, though he had been so secure 
 while the Persian arms were in his neighborhood." He has here put hit 
 finger on what I believe to be the error of Herodotus, — the supposition 
 that Miltitvles fled from the Chersonese to avoid the Soythians, whereai 
 he really left it to avoid the Persians. 
 
 The story of Strabo (xiii, p. 591), that Darius caused the Greek citiei 
 on the Asiatic side of the Hellespont to be burnt down, in order to hindw 
 :hem from affording moans of transport to the Scythians into Asia, seemi 
 X) me highly improbable These to^^ms appear in their ordinary condition, 
 ^bydus among them, at le time of the Ionic revolt a few years aftemanil. 
 aerodot. v 117' 
 
 m 
 
 t 
 
 'I 
 
 I' 
 
 A 
 
 
 •^"^ 
 
^ 
 
 
 176 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECfe. 
 
 DARIUS CARRIES HISTLEl'S TO SUSA. 
 
 S7I 
 
 ing the Paeonians, and reducing the Macedonians under Amyn 
 las to tribute. A considerable number of the Pteonians wer« 
 transported across into A.^ia, by express order of Darius ; whose 
 fancy had been struck by seeing at Sardis a beautiful Paionian 
 woman carrying a vessel on her head, leading a horse to water, 
 and spinning flax, all at the same time. This woman had been 
 brought over, we are told, by her two brothers, Pigres and Man 
 tyes, for the express purpose of arresting the attention of the 
 Great King. They hoped by this means to be constituted des- 
 pots of their countrymen, and we may presume that their scheme 
 succeeded, for such part of the Paonians as Megabazus could 
 Bubdue were conveyed across to Asia and planted in some vil- 
 lages in Phrygia. Such violent transportations of inhabitants 
 were in the geniu.-. of the Persian government.' 
 
 From the Piconian lake Prasias, seven eminent Persians were 
 
 ient as envoys into Mart'dunia, to whom Ainyntas readily gave 
 
 the required token of .Nubniis.-ion, inviting them to a splendid 
 
 banquet. Wiieii exhilarated with wine, they demanded to sec 
 
 the women of the j-egal family, who, being accordingly introduced, 
 
 were rudely dealt with by the strangers. At length, the son o£ 
 
 Amyntas, Alexander, resented the insult, and exacted for it t 
 
 signal vengeance. Dismissing the women, under pretence that 
 
 they should return after a bath, he brought back in their place 
 
 youths in female attire, armed with daggers : the Persians, [)ro- 
 
 ceeding to repeat their eares>es, were all j)Ut to death. Their 
 
 retinue and splendid carriages and equipment wiiich they liad 
 
 brought with them disappeared at the same time, without any 
 
 tidings reaching tlie Persian army. And \\\um Bubares, another 
 
 eminent Persian, was sent mU) 3faee(iunia to institute researches, 
 
 Alexander contrived to hush up the proceeding by large bribes, 
 
 and by giving him his sister Gyga-a in marriage.- 
 
 Meanwhile Mepibazus cros^rd ovrr into Asia, carryin"- with 
 him the Paeonians from the river Strvmon. Having been in 
 
 » Herodot. v, 13-16. Nikolaus Damaskenus (Frajrm. p. 36, ed. Orell.) 
 tolls a similar story alyout the means by which a Mysian woman attracted 
 the notice of the Lydian kingr Alyatt4s. Such repetition of a striking 
 •tory, in reference to ditferent peop»e and times, has many parallela ii 
 inckat history. 
 
 • Ilerodot. V. 20. 21 
 Vol. 4 J 
 
 those regions, he had become alarmed at the progress of Histiasuf 
 with his new city of Myrkinus, and communi ;ated his apprehen 
 sions to Darius ; who was prevailed upon to send for Histiaeua, 
 retaining him about his person, and carrying him to Susa aa 
 counsellor and friend, with every mark of honor, but with the 
 secret intention of never letting him revisit Asia Minor. The 
 fears of the Persian general were probably not unreasonable 
 but this detention of Histiaeus at Susa, became in the seijuel an 
 important event.^ 
 
 On departing for his capital, Darius nominated his brother 
 Artaphernes satrap of Sardis, and Otanes, general of the force* 
 on the coast, in place of 3Iegabazus. The new general dealt 
 very severely with various towns near the Propontis, on the 
 ground that they had evaded their duty in the late Scythian ex- 
 pedition, and had even harassed the army of Darius in its retreat. 
 He took Byzantium and Chalkedon, as well as Antandrus in the 
 Troad, and Lamponium ; and with the aid of a fleet from Lesbos, 
 he achieved a new conquest, — the islands of Lemnos and Im- 
 bros, at that time occu})ied by a Pelasgic population, seemingly 
 without any Greek inhabitants at alL 
 
 These Pelasgi were of cruel and piratical character, if we 
 may judge by the tenor of the legends respecting them ; Lem- 
 nian misdeeds being cited as a proverbial expression for atroci- 
 ties.- They were distinguished also for ancient worship of He- 
 phaestus, together with mystic rites in honor of the Kabeiri, and 
 even human sacrifices to their Great Goddess. In their two 
 dties, — Hephiestias on the east of the island, and Myrina on 
 the west, — they held out bravely against Otands, nor did the 7 
 
 * Herodot. v, 23 24. 
 
 ■ Herodot, /i, 138. ^schyl. Choephor. 632 ; Stephan. Byz. v, Xrifivo^. 
 
 The mystic rites in honor of the Kahciri at Lemnos and Imbros are pat 
 ticalarly noticed hy Pherekydes (ap. Straho, x, p. 472) : compare Phctioa, 
 T, Kathi,>oi, and the remarkahle description of the periodical Lemnian 
 ■olemnity in Philostratus (Heroi. p. 740). 
 
 The volcanic mountain Mosychlus, in the nGrtheastem portion of th« 
 bland, was still buminj^ in the fourth century b.c. (Antimach. Fragment 
 'Eviii, p. 103, Diintzer Epicc. Graec. Frapm.) 
 
 Welcksrs Dissertation (Die -^schyhsche Trilogie, p. 248, $etjq.) enlar^ 
 t\\iv'\\ \x\)ox\ tijc Lemniiin and Samothracian worship. 
 
 1 
 
 - 1^^^ -"^''-'•'-MwninMI^^ 
 
275 
 
 HIST OR f OF GREECE. 
 
 submit until they had un lergone long and severe hardship. Ljn 
 karetiis, brother of that Ma^andrius whom we ha\ e already no- 
 tired as despot of Sainos, \n a- named governor of Leinnos ; but 
 he soon after diedJ It is probable that the Pelasgio }>opulation 
 of the islands was gr -ally enfeebled during this struggle, and we 
 even liear that their king Herruon voluntarily emigrated, from 
 f*»ar of Darius. ' 
 
 Lf-ninos and Lii!»ros thus beeame Persian po>>e:^MoiJs, held by 
 • subonlinate prim-.- .is tributary. A few years afterwards their 
 lor was again eliangeil, — they ]>a.-sed into the hands of Athens, 
 the Felasgie inhabitants were expelh-d, and fresh Athenian set- 
 tlers introduced. They were conquere<l by .Miltiades from the 
 Thraeian Chersonese ; from Eheus at the Miiitii of that penin- 
 Fula to Lemnos being within less than one day's sail with a 
 north wind. The Ikpha stieans abandoned their eity and evacu- 
 ated the island with little resistance ; but the inhabitants of My- 
 rina stooil a sieg. , and were not expelled without difficulty: 
 both of them found al>odes in Thrace, on and near the peninsula 
 of Mount Athos. IJoth these islands, together with that of 
 Skyros (which was lu.t taken until after the invasion of Xerxes), 
 remained connected with Athens in a manner peculiarly intimate 
 At the peace of Antalkidas (387 B.C.),— wliich guaranteed 
 universal autonomy to every Grecian city, great and small,— 
 they were specially reserved, and considered as united with 
 Athens.^ The property in their soil was held by men who, with- 
 out losing their Athenian citizenship, became Lemnian kleruchs, 
 and as such were chissitied apart among the military force of the 
 fitate ; while abseme in Lemnos or Imbros seems to have been 
 
 CAPTURE OF LEMNOS AND IMBROS. 
 
 Herodot. v, 26, 27. Th,- tw^ nty-si'voiith tha{»ter is extremely perplex- 
 ing. As the text rejuis at present, we ought to make Lykaretus the sub- 
 iect of certain predieiitious wliieh yet seem properly referable to Otan^ 
 We musl .-onsider the word> from Of fiiv d// Afjfivioi— down to TeXevra — 
 M parenthetical, which is awkward ; but it seems the least diffic ilty in the 
 case, aud the commentators are driven to adopt it. 
 
 • Zenob. Proverl). iii. So. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 140. Charax ap. Stephan. Byz. v. ^Hii^aiaria. 
 
 * Xeuophon, liellen. v, 1, 31. Compare Plato, Menexenas, c. 17, p. 241^ 
 •There the words f/fierfpai drroUtat doubtless mean Lemnog, Imbroa, mI 
 
 279 
 
 tccepted as an excuse for delay before the courts of justice, m 
 m to esi;ape the penalties of contumacy, or departure from the 
 country.' It is probable that a considerable number of poor 
 Atheniim citizens were provided with lots of land in these islands, 
 though we have no direct information of the fact, and are evea 
 obliged to guess the precise time at which Miltiades made the 
 concjuest. Herodotus, according to his usual manner, connects 
 the conquest with an ancient oracle, and represents it as the re* 
 tribution for ancient legendary crime committed by certain Pe- 
 Jasgi, who, many centuries before, had been expelled by the 
 Athenians from Attica, and had retired to Lemnos. Full of thi« 
 legend, he tells us nothing about the i)roximate causes or circum- 
 Btances of the conquest, which must probably have been accom- 
 plished by the etlbrts of Athens, jointly with Miltiades from the 
 Chersonese, during the period that the l*er>ians were occupied 
 in quelling the Ionic revolt, between 502-404 li.c, — since it is 
 hardly to be supposed that Miltiades would have ventured thus 
 to attack a Persian possession during the time that the satraps 
 had their hands free. The acquisition was probably facilitated 
 by the fact, that the Pelasgic population of the islands had been 
 weakened, as well by their former resistance to the Persian 
 Otanes, as by some years passed under the deputy of a Persian 
 satrap. 
 
 In mentioning the conquest of Lemnos by the Athenians and 
 
 ' Tiiueyd. iv, 28, v, 8, vii, 57; Phylarchus ap. Athenueom, vi, p. 255; 
 Deraosthen. Philippic. l,c. 12, p. 17, R. : compare the Inscription, No. 1G86, 
 in the collection of Boeckh, wiih his remarks, p. 297. 
 
 About the strata^ains resorted to before the Athenian dikastcr}', to pro- 
 cure delay by j)retended absence in Lemnos or Skyros, see Isaius, Or. vi, 
 p. 58 (p. 80, Bek.); Pollux, viii, 7, 81; Hcsych. v, 'IftfSptoc; Suidas, y, 
 Ar/uiua dlKTj : compare also Carl Rhode, Res Leranicie, p. 50 (Wratislaw 
 1829). 
 
 It seems as if elc A^fivov Tr?.eiv had come to be a proverbial expression at 
 Athens for getting out of the Way, — evading the performance of duty : thii 
 ieems to be the sense of Demosthenes, Philipp. i, c. 9, p. 14. u'aX' elg fii¥ 
 Muvov Toi ^ap' vfiCiv l-rTapxov del ir'Aeiv, rtJv d' vnep tCjv ttj^ 7:67,eur ktij^ 
 vu'uv uyuviCoficvuv MevtAaov iTnrapx^lv. 
 
 From the passage of Isaeus above alluded to, which Rhode seems to m4 
 to construe incorrectly, it appears that there was a legal connubium betw«€B 
 leuian citizens and Lemnian women. 
 
 A, 
 
 i 
 
 h 
 
 M 
 
I 
 
 asa 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EXPEDITION AGAINST NAXOS. 
 
 281 
 
 Miltiades. I hive anticipated a little on Uig course of events, b»> 
 tause that conqucjst, — though coinciding in j»oint of time with 
 the Ionic revolt (which will be recounted in the following ihap- 
 ier), and indirectly caused by it, in so far as it occupied the atten- 
 tion of the Persians, — lies entirely apart from the operations of 
 tiie revolted lonians. When Miltiades was driven out of the Cher- 
 sonese by the Persians, on the suppression of the Ionic revolt, 
 his fame, derived from having subdued Lemnos,i contributed 
 both to neutralize the eimiity which he had incurred as governor 
 ©f the Chersonese, and to procure his election as one of the ten 
 generals for the year of the Marathonian combat. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 IONIC REVOLT. 
 
 Hitherto, the history of the Asiatic Greeks has flowed in a 
 ftream distinct from that of the European Greeks. The present 
 chapter will mark the period of confluence between the two. 
 
 At the time whei Darius quitted Sardis on his return to Susa, 
 carrying with him the Milesian Histiani>, he left Artaphernes, 
 his brother, as satrap of Sardis, invested with the supreme com- 
 mand of Western Asia Minor. The Grecian cities on the coast, 
 comprehended under his satrapy, ap|)ear to have been chiefly 
 governed by native despots in each : an<l Miletus especially, in 
 the absence of Histiieus, was ruled by his son-in-law Aristagoras. 
 That city was now in the height of power and jn-osperity, — in 
 every respect the ]<'ading city of Ionia. The return of Dariua 
 to Susa may be placed seemingly about 512 B.C., from which 
 time forward the st Ue of things above described continued, with- 
 out disturbance, for eight or ten years, — "a respite from suffer- 
 bg," to use the significant phrase of the hi3torian.2 
 
 * lleroiiot. vi, 13*7. 
 
 • Hercdot. V, 27. Mru Ai o^. :ro)^hf yowor. o r<.>f kokIv r/v — or 6v€Ou 
 
 It was about the year 506 B.C., that the exiled Athenian den* 
 pot Ilippias, after having been repelled from Sparta by the 
 unanimous refusal of the Lacediemonian allies to take part in 
 his cause, presented himself from Sigeium as a petitioner to 
 Artajdiernes at Sardis. He now, doubtless, found the benefit of 
 the alliance which he had formed for his daughter with the des- 
 j)Ot ^Eantides of Lampsakus, whose fav<ir with Darius would 
 stand him in good stead. He made pressing representations to 
 the satrap, with a view of procuring restoration to Athens, on 
 condition of holding it under Persian dominion ; and Artaphernes 
 was prepared, if an opportunity oflTered, to aid him in his design. 
 So thoroughly had he resolved on espousing actively the cause 
 of Hippias, that when the Athenians des])atched envoys to Sar- 
 dis, to set forth the case of the city against its exiled pretender, 
 he returned to them an answer not merely of denial, but of me- 
 nace, — bidding them receive Hippias back again, if they looked 
 for safety.' Such a reply was equivalent to a declaration of war, 
 
 
 KOKuv — if the conjeoture of some critics l)e adopted. Mr. Clinton, with 
 Larcher and otliers (see Fasti liellen. App. 18, p. 314), construe this passage 
 OS if tlie comma were to be placed after fiera df, so that the historian 
 would be made to affirm thit the period of repose lasted only a short time. 
 It appears to me that the comma ought rather to be jilaccd after xpovov. 
 and that the '* short time" refers to those evils which the historian had l)cen 
 describing before. There must have been an interval of eight years at least, 
 if not of ten years, between the events which the historian had been de- 
 scribing—the evils inflicted by the attacks of Otanes — and the breaking 
 out of the Ionic revolt ; which latter event no one places earlier than 504 
 B.C., though some prefer 502 B.C., others even 500 b.c. 
 
 If, indeed, we admitted with Wesseling (ad Herodot vi, 40 ; and Mr. 
 Clinton seems inclined towards the same opinion, see p. 314, trf a?/;?.) that 
 the Scythian expedition is to be placed in 508-507 B.C., then indeed the in- 
 terval l^etween the campaign of Otanes and the Ionic revolt would be con- 
 tracted into one or two years. But I have already observed that I cannot 
 think 508 b.c. a correct date for the Scythian expedition : it seems to me 
 to belong to a}x)ut 515 b.c. Nor do I know what reason there is for deterw 
 mining the date as Wesseling does, except this very phrase oi rroTiXdw 
 Xodvov, which is on every supposition exceedingly vague, and which b« 
 appears to me not to have construed in the best way. 
 
 - Hcfodot. T, 96. 'O de ' ApTa<pepvr,^ iKileve o<^e<n el (SovXoiai • 0^ 
 
 
 
 (t 
 
 lllllilllilHH» iiillif 
 
iS2 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEECE. 
 
 and 8# it was constinied at Athens. It leads us to infer that he 
 was even then revulving in his mind an expedition against At- 
 tica, in conjunction with Ilippias ; but, fortunately tor the Athe- 
 nians, other projects and necessities intervened to postpone for 
 several years the execution ot" the scheme. 
 
 Of these new projects, the first was that of conquering thtj 
 island of Naxos. Here, too, as in the case of Ilippias, the insti- 
 iration arose from Naxian exiles, — a rich oligarchy which had 
 been expelled by a rising of the people. This island, like all the 
 rest of the Cyclades, was as yet independent of the Persians.' It 
 w.»> wealthy, })rosj)erous, possessing a larg<' po[)ulation both of 
 freemen and slaves, .ind defended as well by jirmed ships as by a 
 lorce of eight thousand heavy-ai'mcd infantry. The exiles ap- 
 plied for aid to Aristagoras, who saw that he could turn them 
 into instnunents of dominion for himseh' in the island, provided 
 he could induce Artaf)hernes to endiaik in the [)n>ject along 
 with him, — his own tbrce not being adequate by itself. Accord- 
 ingly, he went to ISardis, and laid his j)roject before the satrap, 
 intimating that as so<3n as the exiles should land with a powerful 
 supi)ort, Naxos wou!<l be reduced with little trouble: that the 
 neighboring islands of Paros, Andros, Tenos, and the other Cy- 
 clades, could not long hold out after the con(pi('st of Naxos, nor 
 even the large and valuable ishuid of Eubu'a. He himself en- 
 gaged, if a fleet of one hundred ships were granted to him, to 
 accomplish all these conquests for the Great King, and to bear 
 the expenses of the armamont !)esides. Artaphernes warmly en- 
 tered into the scheme, loaiied him with praise, and promised him 
 in the ensuing spring two hundred ships instead of one hundred. 
 A nu^ssenger despatched to Susa, having brought back the reaily 
 consent of Darius, a large armament was forthwith equipped, 
 under the comnuuid of the Persian Megabates, to be placed at 
 
 * llerodot. v, 31. IMitt irrh says that Lygdamis, ostahlished as despot at 
 Naxos bv Peisistratus ( Herodot. i, 64), was expelled from this post by 
 Ike Lacedaemonians ( l)«e Herodot, Maligiiitat. c. 21, {>. 859). I confess that 
 I do not place much coiitidenee in the statements of that treatise, as to the 
 many despots expelled by Sparta : we neither know the source from whence 
 Plutarch borrowed them, nor any of the circumstances connected with 
 Ifaem. 
 
 KXTKDITIOX AGAINST NAXOS. 
 
 the disposal of Aristagoras, - composed both of Persians and o# 
 
 aH the ributaries near the coast.' 
 
 With this force Aristagonis and the Naxian exiles set sail fnum 
 Miletus, giving out that they were going to the lIellesj)ont. Oo 
 reaching Chios, they waited in its western harbor of Kaukj48« 
 for a fair wind to carry them straight across to Naxos. No sua 
 picion was entertained in that island of its real pur|)ose, nor was 
 unr preparation made lor resistance, and the success of Aristag- 
 oras would have been complete, had it not been defeated by ao 
 untoward incident ending in dispute. Megabates, with a solici- 
 tude which we are surprised to discern in a Persian general, per^ 
 sonally made the tour of his fleet, to see that every ship waa 
 under proper watch, and discovered a ship from Myndus (an 
 Asiatic Dorian city near llalikarnassus), left without a single 
 man on board. Incensed at this neglect, he called before him 
 Sky lax, the commander of the ship, and ordered liim to be put 
 in chains, with his head projecting outwards through one of the 
 apertures for oars in the ship's side. Skylax was a guest and 
 friend of Aristagoras, who, on liearing of this punishment, intei^ 
 ceded with Megabates for his release ; but finding the request 
 refused, took uj)on him to release the prisoner himself, lie even 
 went so far as to treat the remonstrance of Megabates with dis- 
 dain, reminding him that, according to the instructions of Arta- 
 phcrnes, he was only second and himself (Aristagoras) first. The 
 [»ride of Megabates could not endure such treatment : as soon aa 
 night arrived, he sent a private intimation to Naxos of the com- 
 ing of the fleet, warning the islanders to be on their guard. The 
 warning thus fortunately received was turned by the Naxians ta 
 the best account. They carried in their property, laid up stores, 
 and made every preparation for a siege, so that when the fleet, 
 probably delayed by the dispute between its leaders, at length 
 ai'rived, it was met by a stout resistance, remained on the bhora 
 of the island for four months in j)rosecution of an unavailing 
 siege, and was obliged to retire without accomplishing anything 
 beyond the erection of a fort, as lodgment for the Naxian aKiktw 
 After a large cost incurred, not only by the Persians, but also bt 
 
 tl^l 
 
 Herodot. v, 30, 31. 
 
 II, 
 
 
884 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 IONIC REVOLT. 
 
 285 
 
 Aristagoras himielf, the unsuccessful armament was brought hack 
 
 lo the coast of Ionia.' 
 
 The failure of tliis expedition threatened Aristagoras with 
 entire ruin. He had incensed Megabates, deceived Artaphernos, 
 and incurred an obligation, wliich he knew not how to discharge, 
 of indemnifying the latter for the costs of the fleet. He began 
 to revolve in his mind the scheme of revolting from Persia, 
 when it so happened that there arrived nearly at the same mo- 
 ment a messenger from his father-in-law, IIi>tiaiis, who was 
 detained at the court of Susa, secretly instigating him to this very 
 resolution. Not knowing whom to trust with tliis dangerous 
 message, Histiteus had caused the head of a faithful slave to 
 be shaved, — branded upon it the words necessary, — and 
 then despatched him, so soon as his hair had grown, to Mi- 
 letus, with a verbal intimation to Aristagoras that his head 
 was 'to be again ehaved and examined/^ Histia^us sought to 
 provoke this perilous rising, simply as a means of j.rocuring 
 his own release from Susa, and in the calculation that Darius 
 would send him down to the coast to reestablish order. His 
 message, arriving ac so critical a moment, determined the falter- 
 ing resolution of Aristagoras, who convened his principal parti- 
 Bans at Miletus, and laid before them the formidable project of 
 revolt. All of them ai>proved it, with one remarkable exception, 
 — the historian Hekatieus of Miletus ; who opposed it as alto- 
 gether ruinous, and conten»led that the power of Darius was too 
 vast to leave them any prospect of success. When he found di- 
 rect opposition fruith'ss, he next insisted upon the necessity of at 
 once seizing the large treasures in the neighboring temple of 
 Apollo, at Branchida% for the purpose of carrying on the revolt. 
 By this means alone, he said, could the Milesians, too feeble to 
 carry on the contest with their own force alone, hope to become 
 masters at sea, — w hile, if they did not take these treasures, the 
 victorious enemy surely would. Neither of these reconmienda- 
 tions, both of them indicating sagacity ana foresight in the pro- 
 poser, were listened to. Probably the seizure of the treasures, 
 — though highly useful for the impending struggle, and though 
 
 > Herodot. v, 34, 35. 
 
 ' Herodot. V, So : Loiupare Pc'yaen. i, 24, and Aulus GeWvis, N A.xvii.iJ 
 
 to the end th,y fell into the bands of the enemy as Hekat«ai 
 Mticipated,- would have been insupportable to the pious feel- 
 ing, of the people, and would thus have proved more mjunous 
 than beneficial :> perhaps, indeed, Hekataeus himself ma^ hav. 
 „r..ed it with the indirect view of stilling the whole project. We 
 may remark that he seems to have urged the question as if Mi- 
 letus were to stand alone in the revolt ; not anticipating, as indeed 
 no prudent man could then anticipate, that the Ionic cities gener- 
 ally would follow the example. 
 
 Aristagoras and his friends resolved forthwith to revolt, and 
 their firs^step w.as to conciliate popular favor throughout Asiatic 
 Greece by i-utting down the despots in all the various cities, - 
 U. instruments not less than the supports of Pei^ian ascen. 
 dency, as Histia3us had well urged at the bridge of the Danube. 
 Tl>e opportunity was favorable for striking this blow at once oa 
 a considerable scale. Tlie fleet, recently empWf f ^ax^, 
 had not yet dispersed, but was still assembled at Myus, with 
 iiaiiy of the des ,ots present at the head of their ships. latrag- 
 oras was despatched from Miletus, at once to seize as many of 
 them as he could, and to stir up the soldiers to revolt. This de- 
 cisive in-oceeding was the first manifesto against Danus. lat.ag- 
 oras wL successful : the fleet went along with h.m and many 
 of the des,K.ts fell into liis hands, - among f'f'Ji;^"'""; j» 
 Lcond perlon so named) of Termera, Oliatus of Mylasa (both 
 Kuriaii,-^ Kofis of Mitylene, and Aristagoras (also a secon^ 
 person so named) of Kyme. At the same time the Milesian 
 A,-is,agoras himself, while he formally proclaimed revolt agamst 
 Dariu." and invited the Milesians to follow h.m, laid down nis 
 own authority, and afl-ected to place the goveininent in the handa 
 of the people. Throughout most of the towns of Asiatic Greece, 
 insuL-u- and continental, a similar revolution was brought abou , 
 the despots were expelled, and the feelings ol the citizens were 
 thus wirmly interested in the revolt. Such of these despoU « 
 fell into the hands of Aristagoras were surrendered into the hands 
 rf their former subjects, by whom they were lor the most part 
 quietly dismissed, andjve^lljM^them^ereatt^^ 
 
 : S- Herodotus, v, .21, aud vU, 9S. OUatus wa. son of Ib«^ 
 ai was al99 the Mylasian Ucraklcides racntio.icd m v. 121. 
 
 I 
 
 t 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
286 
 
 SPARTANS REFUSE THEIR ASSISTANCE. 
 
 287 
 
 HISTORY OF GKEIX'E 
 
 iarieg to the Persian:*. To this treatment the cnlj exception 
 mentioned is Koes, who was stoned to death hy the Mityle- 
 iiaeansJ 
 
 By thfise first siiccer^sful steps the Ionic revolt was made to 
 assume an extensive and formidable character ; much more m, 
 probably, than the prudent Hekativus had anticipated as practi- 
 cable. The naval force of the Persians in the jEgeanwas at once 
 taken away from them, and passed to their opponents, who were 
 thus completely masters of the sea; and would in fact have re- 
 mained so, if a secon.I naval tbrce had not been brought up 
 a^'ainst them from I'hfnicia, — a proceeding never before resorted 
 to, and perhaps at ihat time not looked for. 
 
 Having exhorted' all the revolted towns to name their generals, 
 and to put themselves in a state of defence, Aristagoras crossed 
 the ^gean to obtain assistance from Sparta, then under the l'Ov- 
 ernment of king Kleomenes ; to whom he addressed himself, 
 " holding in his hand a brazen tablet, wherein was engraved the 
 circuit of the entire earth, with the whole sea and all the rivers." 
 Probably this was the first map or plan whicli had ever been 
 seen at Sparta, and so profound was the impre-sion which it 
 made, that it was remembered there even in tht; time of Herod- 
 otus.-^ Having emphatically entreated the Spartans to step 
 forth in aid of their Ionic brethren, now engaged in a desperate 
 struggle for freedom, — he proceeded to describe the wealth and 
 
 ' Ilerodot. v, .'{6, 37 ; vi, 9. 
 
 « Herodot. v, 49. T.;. ,^v {K?.rourrn} ff / ■; o^-c v>, ^'-^^ AaK, 6aif,ovcoi 
 
 ^uXaoau re nuan Kal irvrafioi iruvrer. 
 
 The earliest imip of which mention is inadi- was prepared hy Anaximan- 
 der in Ionia, apparently not lon^- before fhi< prriod : see Straho, i, p. 7; 
 Apafheraenis, 1, c. 1 ; DioLren. Laert. ii, 1. 
 
 Grosskiird, in his note on the ahove pa>sai:e of Straho, as well as Larcher 
 and other critics, appear to think, that t!u>n-h this tablet or chart of Anax- 
 imander was the earliest which erabrirt-.i the whole known earth, there 
 were among the Greeks others still earlier, which described particular coun- 
 tnes. There is no proof of this, nor can I think it probable : the passage 
 of Apollonias Rhodius (iv, 279) with the Schoha to it, which is cited ad 
 evidence, appears to me unworthy of attention. 
 
 Anionj: the Roman Aprimensores, it wa« the ancient practice to engrave 
 Ibeir plans, of land sun-cved. upon tablets of brass, which were deposited 
 
 abundance (gold, silver, brass, vestments, cattle, and slaves), 
 together with the ineffective weapons and warfare of the Asiatics. 
 The latter, he said, could be at once put down, and the former 
 appropriated, by military training such as that of the Spartans, 
 — whose long spear, brazen helmet and breastplate, and ample 
 shield, enabled them to despise the bow, the short javelin, the 
 lii'ht wicker target, the turban and trowsers, of a Persian.^ He 
 then traced out on his brazen plan the road from Ephesus to 
 Susa, indicating the intervening nations, all of them affording a 
 booty more or less rich ; but he magnified especially the vast 
 treasures at Susa: "Instead of fighting your neighbors, he con- 
 cluded, Argeians, Arcadians, and Messenians, from whom you 
 get hard blows and small reward, why do you not make yourself 
 ruler of all Asia,2 a prize not less easy than lucrative? " Kleom- 
 enes rephed to these seductive instigations by desiring him to 
 come for an answer on the third day. When that day arrived, 
 he put to him the simple question, how far it was from Susa to 
 the sea? To which Aristagoras answered, with more frankness 
 than dexterity, that it was a three months' journey ; and he was 
 proceeding to enlarge upon the facilities of the road when Kleom- 
 enes interrupted him: "Quit SparUv before sunset, Milesian 
 stranger ; you are no friend to the Lacedsemonians, if you want 
 to carry them a three months' journey from the sea." In spite 
 of this peremptory mandate, Aristagoras tried a last resource, 
 he took in his hand the bough of supplication, and again wen\ 
 to the house of Kleomenes, who was sitting with his diiughter 
 Gorgo, a girl of eight years old. He requested Kleomenes to 
 send^away the child, but this was refused, and he was desired to 
 proceed ; upon which he began to offer to the Spartan king a 
 bribe for compliance, bidding continually higlier and higher from 
 ten talents up to fifty. At length, the little girl suddenly ex- 
 
 in the public archives, and of which copies were made for private asa, 
 though the original was referred to in case of legal dispute (Siculus Flaccoi 
 ap. Rei Agrari® Scriptores, p. 16, ed. Goes: compare Giraud, Recherchci 
 sur le Droit de Propri^t^, p. 116, Aix, 1838). 
 
 » Herodot. v, 49. (5ct«vt>f 61 ravra kXeye *r ^^ m X^ ^repMxJov, rifv i#c 
 ^tro iv T(^ mvQKi kvTeT/irjiiivriv. 
 
 • Herodot. v. 49 irdpexoP * ^ *A<t% n^um ApX^t^ eifirerhff, 6Ua • 
 
 n 
 
 V 
 
 I 
 
 , II 
 
 \ 
 
288 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 claimed, ** Father, the »traiiger will corrupt you, if you do not at 
 
 once »o away." The exclumation so struck Kleomenes. that he 
 
 broke up the interview, and Aristagoras forthwith quitted Sparta.! 
 
 Doubtless Herodotus hoard the account of this interview from 
 
 Lacedaemonian inforraants. But we may be permitted to doubt 
 
 whether any such suggestions were really made, or any such 
 
 hopes held out, as tho-e which he places in the mouth of Aristag- 
 
 ora**, — suggestions and hopes which might well be conceived in 
 
 450-440 B.C., after a generation of victories over the Persians, 
 
 but which have no pertinence in the year 502 B.C. Down even to 
 
 tlie battle of Marathon, the name of the Medes was a terror to 
 
 the Gi-eeks, and the Athenians are highly and justly extolled a3 
 
 the first who dared to look them in the face."^ To talk about an 
 
 easy march up to the treasures of Susa and the empire of all 
 
 Asia, at the time of the Ionic revolt, would have been considered 
 
 as a proof of insanity. Aristagora-; may very probably have 
 
 represented, that the Spartans were more than a match for 
 
 Persians in the field ; but even thus much would have been con- 
 
 Bidered, in 502 B.C., rather as the sanguine hope of a petitioner 
 
 than as the estimate of a sober Icwker-on. 
 
 The Mih'sian chlct Juid made application to Sparta, as the 
 presiding power of Hellas, — a character which we thus find 
 more and more recognized and passing into the habitual feeling 
 of the Greeks. Fifty years previously to this, the Si>artans had 
 been flattered by the circumstance, that Crcesus singled thera 
 out from all other Greeks to invite as allies : now they accepted 
 iuch priority as a matter of course.- 
 
 • Herodot. v, 49, 50, 51. Compare Phuarch, Apophthegm. Laconic, p. 240. 
 
 We may remark, both in this instance and throughout all the life and 
 time of Kleomenes, that the Spartan king has the active management and 
 direction of foreign affairs, — subject, however, to trial and punishment by 
 the ephors in case of mij: behavior (Herodot. vi, 82). We shall hereafter 
 find the ephors gradually taking into their own han Is, more and more, the 
 •ctual management. 
 
 •Herodot. vi, 112. TrpjToi re dviaxovTo ea&r/T i re MijdiK^v opeovre^^ 
 bqI uvdpa^ TavTijv ktr^fiivov^ • rc'wf 6h r)v Toiai 'E?.Xjjai Kal rd ovvofia rh 
 M^Jwv ^/?of uKovaai. 
 
 ' Aristagoras says to thu Spartans (v, 49) — ra Kar^novra yup iari ravrm' 
 luvuv iraidac doi'Xov^ elvci uvt' iXev^epttv, oveido^ xai aAyof ueytarov fut 
 
 THE ATHENIANS ASSIST IONIA. 
 
 280 
 
 V^ 
 
 Rejected at Sparta, Aristagoras proceeded to Athens, now de- 
 cidedly the second power in Greece. And here he found aa 
 easier task, not only as it was the metropolis, or mother-city, of 
 Asiatic Ionia, but also as it had already incurred the pro- 
 nounced hostility of the Persian satrap, and might look to b« 
 attacked as soon as the project came to suit his convenienc^ 
 under the instigation of Hippias : whereas the Spartans had not 
 only no kindred with Ionia, beyond that of common Hellenism, 
 but were in no hostile relations with Persia, and would have 
 been provoking a new enemy by meddling in the Asiatic war. 
 The promises and representations of Aristagoras were accordingly 
 received with great favor by the Athenians: who, over and 
 above the claims of sympathy, had a powerful interest in sus- 
 taining the Ionic revolt as an indirect protection to themselves, 
 and to whom the abstraction of the Ionic fleet from the Per- 
 sians afforded a conspicuous and important relief. The Athe- 
 nians at once resolved to send a fleet of twenty ships, under 
 Melanthius, as an aid to the revolted lonians, — ships which are 
 dt) led by Herodotus, " the beginning of the mischiefs betwecTi 
 Grteks and barbarians," — as the ships in which Paris crossed 
 the yEgean had before been called in the Iliad of Homer. He- 
 rodotus farther remarks that it seems easier to deceive many men 
 togetlier than one, — since Aristagoras, after having failed with 
 Kleomenes, thus imposed upon the thirty thousand citizens of 
 Athens.* But on this remark two comments suggest themselves. 
 First, the circumstances of Athens and Sparta were not the 
 -same in regard to the Ionic quarrel, — an observation which 
 Herodotus himself had made a little while before: the Athe- 
 nians had a material interest in the quarrel, political as well as 
 
 avToloL rjfilv, etl 6k tuv konT(Ji> vfilv, bau TrpoeaTEare rr/g 'EAludo^ (Herod 
 otus, v, 49). In reference to the earlier incident (Herodot. i, 70) — Tov- 
 riuv T€ UP ElvEKEt 01 XttKEdaLfiovioL Tfjv avfifxaxLrjv Eds^avTo, Kal un Ik rruv- 
 TQv a<pEa^ TTpoKpivag 'Eaa^vuv, alpEETO (iti'Kovq (Crcesus). 
 
 An interval of rather more than forty years separates the two events, 
 daring which both the feelings of the Spartans, and the feelings of othen 
 towanis them, had undergone a material change. 
 
 ' Herodot. V, 99. ttoAXouc yap oUe eIvoi EinETE(J7epov 6ial3aX?.Eiv r/ iva, 
 el K?iEO/iEuta uev rdv AaKEdaifiovLov fiovvov ovk olo^ re iyevETO diajSa/Jeiv 
 funic de uvptaoa': * X-&7]vai<JV knoiriTE tovto. 
 
 VOL. *v. 13 lSo<» 
 
 I, 
 
 y 
 <1 
 
 il 
 
290 
 
 iriSluRY OF GREECE. 
 
 iympathetic, while the Spartans had none. Secondly, the ulti- 
 mate result of their interference, as it stood in the time of Herod- 
 otus, though purchased by severe intermediate hard-hip, waa 
 one eminently gainful and glorifying, not less to Athens than to 
 
 Greece.' 
 
 Wh'Mi Aristagoras returned, he seems to have found the Per- 
 sians engaffcd in the siciri' of Miletus. The twenty Athenian 
 ships soon crossed the .E^<'an, and found there iive Eretrian 
 ghips which had also come to the succor of the lonians; the 
 Eretrians generously taking this opportunity to repay assistance 
 formerly rend<.*red to them by the Milesians in their ancient war 
 with Chalkis. On the arrival of these allies, Aristagonv-^ organ- 
 ized an expedition from Epliesus up to Sardis, under the com- 
 mand of his brother Charopinus, with others. The ships wer-e 
 left at Koressus,*- a m«>untain and seajiort five miles from P^phesus, 
 while the troops mai( hcd up un<ler Eidiesian guides, tirst, along 
 the river Kayster, next, across the mountain range of Tmolus to 
 Sardis. Artaphernes had not troops enough to do more than hold 
 the strong citadel, so that the assailants possessed themselves of 
 the town without opposition. But he immediately recalled his 
 force near Miletus,^ and summoned Persians and Lydians from 
 all the neighboring districts, thus becoming more than a match 
 for Charo{»inus ; who found himself, moreover, obliged to c\acii- 
 ate Sardis, owing to an accidental conflagration. Most of tlit^ 
 houses in that city were built in great part with reeds or straw, 
 and all of them had thatched roofs ; hence it happened that a 
 8park touching one of theui set the whole city in tiame. Obliged 
 to al)andon their dwellings by this accident, the population of the 
 town congregated in the market-place, — and as reinforcements 
 were hourly crowding in, the position of the lonians and Athe« 
 
 IKrotlot. V, 98; Homer, Iliad, v, 62. The criticism of Plutarch (Do 
 MKli^iitat. Herodot. j* H61 ) on this passajE:e, is rather more pertinent than 
 tiie criticisms in that ill-tempered composition generally arc. 
 
 • About Koressus, see Diodor. xiv, 99, and Xenophon, Hellen. i, 2, 7. 
 
 • Charon of Lampsakas, and Lysanias in his history of Eretria, ecem to 
 have mentioned this first siege of Miletus, and the fact of its being raised 
 in consequence of the expedition to Sardis ; see Plutarch, de Herodot. 
 Malignit. p. 861, — thoug:h the citation is pren there eonfu ledly, so thai 
 
 cannot make much out of it. 
 
 BURNING OF SARDIS. 
 
 291 
 
 luans became precarious : they evacuated the town, took up 9 
 position on Mount Tmolus, and, when night came, made the best 
 (yf their way to the sea-coast. The troops of Artaphernes pursued, 
 overtook them near Ephesus, and defeated them completely, 
 Eualkides, the Eretrian general, a man of eminence and a cele- 
 brated victor at the solemn games, perished in the action, together 
 with a considerable number of troops. After this unsuccessful 
 commencement, the Athenians betook themselves to their vessels 
 and sailed home, in spite of pressing instances on the part of 
 Aristagoras to induce them to stay. They took no farther part 
 n the struggle ;^ a retirement at once so sudden and so complete, 
 that they must probably have experienced some glaring desertion 
 on the part of their Asiatic allies, similiar to that which brought 
 BO much danger upon the Spartan general Derkyllidas, in 396 B.C. 
 Unless such was the case, they seem open to censure rather for 
 having too soon withdrawn their aid, than for having originally 
 lent it.2 
 
 The burning of a place so important as Sardis, however, in- 
 cluding the temples of the local goddess Kybebe, which perished 
 with the remaining buildings, produced a powerful effect on both 
 sides, — encouraging the revolters, as well as incensing the Per- 
 sians. Aristagoras despatched ships along the coast, northward 
 as far as Byzantium, and southward as far as Cyprus. The 
 Greek cities near the Hellespont and the Propontis were induced, 
 either by force or by inclination, to take part with him : the 
 KaHans embraced his cause warmly ; even the Kaunians, who 
 had not declared themselves before, joined him as soon as they 
 heard of the capture of Sardis ; while the Greeks in Cyprus, with 
 the single exception of the town of Amathus, at once renounced 
 the authority of Darius, and prepared for a strenuous contest. 
 Onesilus of Salamis, the most considerable city in the island, — 
 finding the population willing, but his brother, the despot Gorgus, 
 reluctant, — shut the latter out of the gates, took the command 
 of the united forces of Salamis and other revolting cities, and 
 
 * Herodot. v, 102. 103. It is a curicis fact that Charon of Lampsakos 
 made no mention of this defeat of the united Athenian and Ionian force 
 lee Plutarch, de Herodot. Malign- «< sup. 
 
 ' About DerkyUidas, see Xenophm, Hellen. iii, 2, 17-19. 
 
 I I 
 
 y 
 
 (! 
 
292 
 
 HISTORY i)¥ GRKECE. 
 
 laid siege to Amathus. These towns of Cyprus weie then, and 
 leera always afterwards to have continued, under the government 
 of despots ; who, Iiowever, unlike the despots in Ionia gener- 
 ally, took part along with their subjects in the revolt against 
 Persia.' 
 
 The rebellion had now assumed a character more serious than 
 sver, and the Persians were compelled to put forth their strong- 
 est efforts to subdue it. From the number of different nations 
 comprised in their empire, they were enabled to make use of the 
 antipathies of one against the other ; and the old adverse feeling 
 of Phenicians againn Greeks was now found extremely service- 
 able. After a year spent in getting together forces,- the Pheni- 
 cian fleet was employed to transf>ort into Cyprus the Persian 
 general Artybius with a Kilikian and Egy[)tiim army,^ — while 
 the force under Artaphernes at Sardis was so strenijtheued as to 
 enable him to act at once against all the coast ol Asia Minor, 
 iVuni the Propontis to the Triopian promontory. On the other 
 Bide, the common danger had for the moment brought the loni- 
 ans into a state of union foreign to their usual habit, and we 
 hear now, for the fir>t and the last time, of a tolerably efficient 
 Pan-Ionic authority.'* 
 
 Aj)prized of tli«.' coming of Artybius with the Pheniciau fleet, 
 Onesilus and his Cyprian supporters solicited the aid of the Ionic 
 fleet, which arrived shortly after the disembarkation of the Persian 
 force in the island. Onesilus offered to the lonians their choice, 
 whether they wouM flght the Phenicians at sea or the Persians 
 on land. Their natural determination was in fiivor of the sea- 
 fight, and they engaged with a degree of courage and unanimity 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 103, 104, 108. Compare the proceedings in C}T)rus against 
 Artaxerxes Mnemon, under the energetic Evagoras of Salamis (Diodor. 
 xiv, 9S, XV, 2), about 386 B.C.: most of the petty princes of the island 
 became for the time bin subjects, but in 351 b.c. there were nine of tbem 
 Independent (Diodor. xvi, 42), and seemingly quite as many at the time 
 irhen Alexander besieged Tyre (Arrian, ii, 20, 8). 
 
 • Ilerodot. v, 116. Kvirptoi uev tV), hiavrdv i7uv-&epot yevofievoiy avrtf U 
 »cjyf KaredeSovAiovTO, 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 6. Kikme^ nal klyviTTLoi. 
 
 < Heiodot. V, 109. •Hwfrtf uTrt-Tre^^c rd Koivbv tuv 'I«*tti ^^ilop 
 «r rvv ^uAaaoav, etc. compare vi, 7. 
 
 RECONQUEST OF CYPRDS. 
 
 m 
 
 which procured for them a brilliant victory ; the Samianft being 
 specially distinguished.' But the combat on land, carried on at 
 tie same time, took a different turn. Onesilus and the Salamin- 
 ians brought into the field, after the fashion of Orientals rather 
 than of Greeks, a number of scythed chariots, destined to break 
 the enemy's ranks ; while on the other hand the Persian general 
 Artybius was mounted on a horse, trained to rise on his hind 
 legs and strike out with his fore legs against an opponent on 
 foot. In the thick of the fight, Onesilus and his Karian shield- 
 bearer came into personal conflict with this general and his horse ; 
 and by previous concert, when the horse so reared as to get his 
 fore legs over the shield of Onesilus, the Karian with a scythe 
 severed the legs from his body, while Onesilus with his own hand 
 slew Artybius. But the personal bravery of the Cypriots was 
 rendered useless by treachery in their own ranks. Stesenor, 
 despot of Kurium, deserted in the midst of the battle, and even 
 the scythed chariots of Salamis followed his example. The 
 brave Onesilus, thus weakened, perished in the total rout of his 
 army, along with Aristokyprus despot of Soli, on the north coast 
 of the island : this latter being son of that Philokyprus who had 
 been immortalized more than sixty years before, in the poems of 
 Solon. No farther hopes now remained for the revolters, and 
 tlie victorious Ionian fleet returned home. Salamis relapsed 
 under the sway of its former despot Gorgus, while the remaining 
 cities in Cyprus were successively besieged and taken : not with- 
 out a resolute iefence, however, since Soli alone held out five 
 months.2 
 
 ' Herodot. v 112. 
 
 ' Herodot. v, 112-M5. It is not uninteresting to compare, with this re- 
 conciuest of C\i>rus by the Persians, the conquest of the same island by th6 
 '1 urks in 157o! wlien they expelled from it the Venetians. See the narrative 
 of that conquest (effected in the reign of Selim the Second by the Seraskief 
 l^Iu^rapha-Pasha), in Von Hammer, Geschichte des Osmannischen Reicha, 
 lK)ok xxxvi, vol. iii, pp. 578-589. Of the two principal towns, Nikosia in 
 the centre of the island, and Famagusta on the northeastern coast, the first, 
 after a long siege, was taken by storm, and the inhab'^ants of every sex 
 and age either put to death or carried into slavery ; while the second, afiet 
 a most gallant defence, was allowed to capitulate. But the terms of tbt 
 capitulation were violated in the most flagitious manner by the Seraskieij 
 irho treated -he brave Venetian governor, Bragadino, with frightful cmeUf 
 
 I 
 
> 
 
 294 
 
 HJSTOKY OF GRKECE. 
 
 Meanwhile the principal force of Darius havinrr been assem- 
 bled at Sardis,— Daurises, Hjmea.<, and other generals who had 
 married daughters of the Great King, distributed their efforts 
 Against different parts of the western coji^t. Daurises attacked 
 the towns near the Hellespont,' —Abydu>, Perk^te, Lumpsakus, 
 •nd Paisus, — which made little resistance. He was then oidered 
 southward into Karia, while Hvnuas, who, with another division, 
 had taken Kios on tlw Propontis marched down to the Helles' 
 pont and complettd tiie conquest of the Troad as well as of th« 
 ^:oIic Greeks in the region of Ida. Artaphernes and Otanes 
 attacked the Ionic and JEoHc towns on the coast,— the former 
 taking Klazomena-r' the latter Kvmc. There renjaiued Karia, 
 which, with Miletus in its neighl>orhood, offered a determined re- 
 sistance to Daurises. Forewarned of iiis approacli, the Karians 
 assembled at a spot called the White Pilhirs, near the confluence 
 of the rivers Marauder and Marsyas. Pixodarus, one of their 
 chiefs, reccmmendtd the desperate expedient of fighting with the 
 river at their back, so that all chance of flight might be cut off: 
 
 cuttinrr off his nose and ears, exposing him to all sorts of insuhs, and uiti 
 mately causin- him to he flayed alive. The skin of this unfortunate -eneral 
 wac conveyed to Constantinople as a trophy, hut in after-times found its 
 way to Venice. 
 
 We read of nothing like this treatment of Bra^^adino in the Persian reroti 
 ^est of Cyprus, thouj^h it was u suhjug:ui(jn after revolt ; in.leed, nothing 
 like it in all Persian warfare. 
 
 Von Hammer pvcs a short sketch (not ahvays very aceurato as to ancienl 
 
 times) of the condition of Cyi.rus under its suciessive masters, Persians, 
 
 Gr8Bco-Ej?VT>tians, Roi.ians. Arabians, the dynasty of Lusijrnan. Venetians. 
 and Turks. — the hist seems decidedly the worst of all. 
 
 In reference to the al)Ove-mentioned piece of cruelty, I may mention that 
 the Persian kinj? Kamhyses caused one of the royal judges (according to 
 Hero lotus v, 25), who had taken a bribe to render an iniquitous judgment, 
 to be ffiiyed alive, and his skin to be stretched upon the seat on whieh his 
 •on was placed to succeed him ; as a lesson of justice to the latter. A sim- 
 flar story is told respecting the Persian king Artaxerxes Mnemou ; and 
 what is still more remarkable, the same story is also recounted in the Tiu^k- 
 ish history, as an act of Mohammed the Second ( Von Hammer, Geschichto 
 iea Osmannisch. Reichs, book xvii, vol. ii, p. 209 : Diodorus, xv, lOJ. 
 Ammianus Marcellinus (xxiii, 6) had good reason to treat the reality of 
 the fact as prohhmatieal. 
 
 » Herodol v 1 7. « Herodot. v 122-124. 
 
 SUCCESSES OF THE PERSIANS. 
 
 S95 
 
 but most of *he chiefs decided in favor of a contrary policy,^ — 
 to let the Persians pass the river, in hopes of driving them back 
 into It and thus rendering their defeat total. Victory, however, 
 after a sharp contest, declared in favor of Daurises, chiefly in 
 consequence of his superior numbers : two thousand Persians, 
 and not less than ten thousand Karians, are said to have perished 
 in the battle. The Kai-ian fugitives, reunited after the flight, in 
 the grove of noble jdane-trees consecrated to Zeus Stratius, near 
 Labranda,2 were deliberating whether they should now submit 
 to the Persians or emigrate forever, when the appearance of a 
 Milesian reinforcement restored their courage. A second battle 
 was fought, and a second time they were defeated, the loss on this 
 occasion'' falling chiefly on the Miiesians.3 The victorious Per- 
 sians now proceeded to assault Karian cities, but Herakleides of 
 Mylasa laid an ambuscade for them with so much skill and good 
 fortune, that their army was nearly destroyed, and Daurises with 
 other Persian generals perished. This successful eflfort, follow 
 ing upon two severe defeats, does honor to the constancy of the 
 Karians, upon whom Greek proverbs generally fasten a mean 
 reputation. It saved for the time the Karian towns, which the 
 Persians did not succeed in reducing until after the capture of 
 Miletus.4 
 
 On land, the revolters were thus everywhere worsted, though 
 
 » Herodot. v, 118. On the topography of this spot, as described in Herod- 
 otus, see a good note in Weissenbom, Beytrage zur genauereu Erforschung 
 der alt. Griechischen Geschichte, p. 116, Jena, 1844. 
 
 He thinks, with much reason, that the river Marsyas here mentioned 
 cannot he that which flows through Kelaenae, hut anollier of the same name 
 which flows into the Maander from the southwest. 
 
 * About the village of Labranda and the temple of Zeus Stratius, see 
 Strabo, xiv, p. 659. Labranda was a village in the territory of, and seven 
 miles distant from, the inland town of Mylasa; it was Karian at the time 
 of the Ionic revolt, but partially Hellenized before the year 350 B.C. About 
 this latter epoch, three rural tribes of Mylasa —constituting along with the 
 citizens of the town, the Mylasene community — were, TapKoviapa, 'Oru^ 
 «ov(Ja, Aa/3pav(Ja, — see the Inscription in Boeckh's Collection, No. 2695, 
 ■nd in Franz, Epigraphies Graca, No. 73, p. 191. In the Lydian language 
 Aaflpvf is said to have signified a hatchet (Plutarch, Quast. Gr. c. 46 
 
 p S14). 
 
 • Hewdot. v, 1 18, 119. * Herodot. v, 120, 121 ; vi, a». 
 
 I 
 
 ft-' 
 
 i 
 
ii 
 
 296 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 At sea the lonians still remained masters. But the unwarliki 
 Aristagoras began to despair of success, and to meditate a meal 
 desertion of the companions and countrymen whom he had him. 
 ■elf betrayed into danger. Assembling his chief advisers, ho 
 represented to them the unpromising state of affairs, and the 
 ■ecessity of securing some place of refuge, in case they wer« 
 expelled from Miletus. He then put the question to them, 
 whether the island of Sardinia, or Myrkinus in Thrace, near the 
 Strymon (which Histi;vus had begun some time before to fortify, 
 as I have mentioned in the f>receding chapter), appeared to them 
 best adapted to the purpose. Among the persons consulted was 
 Hekatieus the historian, who approved neither the one nor the 
 other scheme, but suggested the erection of a fortified post in the 
 neighboring islanil of Leros ; a Milesian colony, wherein a tem- 
 porary retirement ini^bt be sought, should it prove impossible to 
 hold Miletus, but wliich permittetl an easy return to that city, so 
 Boon as o[)portunity offered.' Such an opinion niu.-t doubth^ss 
 have been founded vn the assumption, that tliey would be able to 
 maintain superiority at sea. And it is important to note such 
 confident reliance i;[)on this su[)eriority in the mind of a saga- 
 cious man, not given to sanguine hopes, like Hekatieus, — even 
 under circumstances very unjirosperous on land. Emigration to 
 Myrkinus, as proposed by Aristagoras, presented no hope of 
 refuge at all ; since the Persians, if they regained their authority 
 in Asia Minor, would not fail again to extend it to the Strymon. 
 Nevertheless, the consultation ended by adopting this scheme, 
 eince, probably, no lonians could endure the immeasurable dis- 
 tance of Sardinia as a new home. Aristagoras set sail for Myr- 
 kinus, taking with liioi all who chose to bear him company ; but he 
 perished not long after landing, together with nearly all his com- 
 pany, in the siege of a neighboring Thracian town.'- Though 
 making profession to lay down his supreme authority at the com- 
 mencement of the revolt, he had still contrived to retain it in 
 peal measure ; and on departing for Myrkinus, he devolved it on 
 Pythagoras, a citizen in high esteem. It appears however that 
 the Milesians, glad to get rid of a leader who :iad brought then 
 
 '• Herodot. v, 125 ; Strabo, xiv, p. 635. 
 •Herodot v, 126. 
 
 DESERTION OF ARISTAGORAS. 
 
 297 
 
 nothing but mischief,' paid little obedience to his successor, and 
 made their government from this period popular in reality aJ 
 well as in profession. The desertion of Aristagoras, with tbe 
 citizens whom he carried away, must have seriously damped the 
 spirits of those who remained : nevertheless, it seems that the cause 
 of thi Ionic revolters was quite as well conducted without him* 
 
 Not long after his departure, another despot — Histiauis of 
 Miletus, his father-in-law, and jointly with him the fomenter of 
 the revolt — presented himself at the gates of Miletus for ad- 
 mission. The outbreak of the revolt had enabled liim, as he h.'id 
 calculated, to procure leave of departure from Darius. That 
 prince had been thrown into violent indignation by the attack 
 and burning of Sardis, and by the general revolt of Ionia, headed 
 (so the news reached him) by the Milesian Aristagoras, but car- 
 ried into effect by the active cooperation of the Athenians. 
 " The Athenians (exclaimed Darius), who are t/ie^ J " On re- 
 ceiving the answer, he asked for his bow, j)laced an arrow on 
 the string, and shot as high as he could towards the heavens, 
 saying: ''Grant me, Zeus, to revenge myself on the Athe 
 nians." He at the same time desired an attendant to remind him 
 tlirice every day at dinner: "Master, remember the Athe- 
 nians ;" for as to the lonians, he felt assured tliat their hour of 
 retribution would come speedily and easily enough.'- 
 
 This Homeric incident deserves notice as illustrating the epical 
 handling of Herodotus. His theme is, the invasions of Greece 
 by Persia: he has now arrived at the lirst eruption, in the bosom 
 of Darius, of that passion which impelled the Persian Ibrcei 
 towards Marathon and Salarais, — and he marks the beginning 
 of the new phase by act and word both alike signihcant. It may 
 be compared to the libation and prayer addressed by Achilles in 
 the Iliad to Zeus, at the moment when he is sending forth Patro- 
 klus and the Myrmidons to the rescue of the despairing Greeks. 
 
 Herodot. vi, 5. 01 Se MtXijaLoij aafievot aTraXXax^hreg kqI 'ApKi-a- 
 y6^€(t), avdauuc iroi/xoL eaav aXAov rvpavvov 6iK£(r&at Ig rrjv x^P^^y <'"* ^' 
 iXev&epirjQ yevaufievoi. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 105. 'Q ZeD, iK-)£viaT3ai fioL 'k-^rivaiovq riaaadai, Corapara 
 the Thraciau practice of communicating with the gods by shooting arrowt 
 high up iuto the air (Herodot. iv, 94). 
 
 13* 
 
 n 
 
298 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECi:. 
 
 At first, Dariu8 luid been inclined to ascribe the movement ia 
 Ionia to the secret instigation of Histiaeus, whom lie called inw 
 his presence and questioned. But the latter found means to sat- 
 isfy him, and even to make out that no such mischief would have 
 occurred, if he, Histkeus, had been at Miletus instead of l>eing 
 detained at Susa. " Send me down to the -pot, he asseverated, 
 and I engage not mt rely to quell the revolt, and put into your 
 hands the traitor who heads it, l)ut also, not to take of!* this 
 tunic from my body, before 1 shall have added to your em{>ire 
 the great island of Sardinia." An expe<litiou to Sardinia, 
 though never realized, appeal's to have been among the fa- 
 vorite fancies of the Ionic Greeks of that day J By such boasts 
 and assurances he obtained his liberty, and went down to 
 Saixlis, promising to return as soon as he should have accom- 
 plished them."- 
 
 But on reaching Sardis he found tlie sat raj) Artaphernes bet 
 ter informed than tl e Great King at Siisa. Though Histiieus, 
 when questioned as to the catj-es which had brought on the out. 
 break, atiected nothing but ignorance and astonishment, Arta. 
 phernes detected hi^ evasions, and said: '• I will tell you how 
 the facts stand, Hi-t uus : it is you that have stitched this shoe, 
 and Aristagoras has put it on." -^ Such a declaration promised 
 little security to the sus{>ected Milesiiui who heard it; and ac- 
 cordinglv, as soon as night arrived, he took to flight, went down 
 to the coast, and from thence passed over to Chios. Here he 
 found himself seized on the opposite count, as the confidant of 
 Darius and the enemy of Ionia : he was released, however, on 
 proclaiming himself not mei*ely a fugitive e>cai)ing from Persian 
 eustody, but also as ;he |)rime author of the Ionic revolt. And 
 
 fflSTLEUS FLEES TO CHIOS. 
 
 299 
 
 ^ Ilerodot. v, 107, vi, 2. Compare the advice of Bias of PrienS to tho 
 locians, when the Persian compieror C}TUs was approaching;, to found a 
 Pac-Ionic colony in Sardinia (Herodot. i, 170) : the idea started by Aria 
 tagora^ has bren alhuled to just above (Herodot. v, 124). 
 
 Pausanias (iv, 23, 2) puts into the mouth of Mantiklus, son of Aristo- 
 menes, a recommendation to the Messenians, when conquered a second tin $ 
 by the Spartans, to migrate to Sardinia. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 106, 107. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 1. Ovru roi, 'larlaie, ix^t KarH ravra rd irp^yfiara in* • 
 rd t *o6i/fux Iji^ay^'a^ uev oi), iTreSr/naTo de ^ApiaTayop^f. 
 
 te farther added, in order to increase his popularity, that Dariua 
 had contemplated the translation of the Ionian population to 
 Phenicia, as well as that of tho Pheniciau population to Ionia,— 
 to prevent which translation he, Histiieus, had instigated the 
 revolt. This allegation, though nothing better than a pur« 
 fabrication, obtained for him the good-will of the Chians, who 
 carried him back to Miletus. But before he departed, he 
 avenged himself on Artaphernes by despatching to Sardis some 
 false letters, implicating many distinguished Persians in a con- 
 spiracy jointly with himself: these letters were so managed as 
 to fall into the hands of the satrap himself, who became full of 
 suspicion, and put to death several of the parties, to the great 
 uneasiness of all around him.' 
 
 On arriving at Miletus, Histiaeus found Aristagoras no longer 
 jjresent, and the citizens altogether adverse to the return of their 
 old despot. Nevertheless, he tried to force his way by nio-ht 
 into the town, but was repulsed and even wounded in the thi«di. 
 He returned to Chios, but the Chians refused him the aid of any 
 of their ships : he next passed to Lesbos, from the inhabitants of 
 which island he obtained eight triremes, and employed them to 
 occupy Byzantium, pillaging and detaining the Ionian merchant- 
 ships as they passed into or out of the Euxine.2 The few re- 
 maining piracies of this worthless traitor, mischievous to his 
 countrjTnen dowi to the day of his death, hardly deserve our 
 notice, amidst the last struggles and sufferings of the subjugated 
 lonians, to which we are now hasteninsr. 
 
 A vast Persian force, both military and naval, was gradually 
 concentrating itself near Miletus, against which city Artapher- 
 nes had determined to direct his principal efforts. Not only the 
 whole army of Asia Minor, but also the Kilikian and Egyptian 
 troops fresh from the conquest of Cyprus, and even the con- 
 quered Cypriots themselves, were brought up as reinforcements ; 
 while the entire Phenician fleet, no less than six hundred ships 
 Btrong, cooperated on the coast.3 To meet such a land-force in 
 the field, being far beyond the strength of the lonians, the joint 
 P«i-Ionic council resolved that the Milesians should be left Ut 
 
 
 \\ 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 2-5. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 6-9 
 
 ■ Herodot. vi, 5^-SW 
 
^\' 
 
 IONIC FLEET AT LADE. 
 
 301 
 
 80C 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECK. 
 
 defend their own fortifications, while the entire force of the coo- 
 
 federate cities should be mustered on board the ships. At sea 
 
 they had as yet no reason to despair, having been victorious 
 
 over the Phenicians near Cyprus, and having sustained no 
 
 defeat. The combined Ionic fleet, including the jEolic Les- 
 
 bians, amounting in all to the number of three hundred and 
 
 fifty-three ships, wa.s accordingly mustered at Lade, — then a 
 
 little island near Miletus, but now joined on to the coast, by the 
 
 gradual accumulation of land in the bay at the mouth of the 
 
 Mivander. Eighty Milesian ships formed the right wing, ona 
 
 hundred Chian ship, the centre, and sixty Samian ships the left 
 
 wing; while the space between the Milesians and the Chians 
 
 was" occupied by twelve ships from Priene, three from Myus, 
 
 and seventeen from Teos, — the space l>etween tlie Chians and 
 
 Samia!)s was filled by eight ships from Erytlira), three from 
 
 Phuka\% and seventy from Lesbos.' 
 
 The total armament thus made up was hardly inferior in 
 number to that whieh, fifteen years afterwards, gained the battle 
 of Salamis against ;i far larger Persian fleet than the present. 
 Moreover, the courage of the lonians, on ship-board, was equal 
 to that of their contemporaries on the other side of the iEgean ; 
 while in respect of disagreement among the allies, we shall 
 hereafter lind the circumstances preceding the battle of Salamis 
 Btill more menacing than those before the coming battle of Lade. 
 The chances of success, therefore, were at least equal between 
 the two ; and indeed the anticipations of the Persians and Phe- 
 nicians on the prescTit occasion wer<' full of doubt, so that they 
 thought it necessary to m t on foot express means for disuniting 
 the lonians, — it was fortunate for the Greeks that Xerxes at 
 Salamis could not be made to eonctive the prudence of aiming 
 at the same object. There were now in the Persian camp all 
 those various despots whom Ari^tagoras, at the beginning of the 
 revolt, had driven out of their respective cities. At the instiga- 
 tion of Artaphernes, each of these men despatched secret com- 
 munications to their citizens in the allied fleet, endeavoring to 
 detach them severally from the general body, by promises rf 
 gentle treatment in the event of compliance, and by threats ci 
 
 ' Ileroilet. vi. 8. 
 
 extreme infliction from the Persians if they persisted in armed 
 efforts. Though these communications were sent to each with* 
 !>ut the knowledge of the rest, yet the answer from all was on* 
 unanimous negative. ^ And the confederates at Lade seemed 
 more one, in heart and spirit, than the Athenians, Spartans, and 
 ( 'orinthians will hereafter prove to be at Salamis. 
 
 But there was one grand difference which turned the scale, — 
 the superior energy and ability of the Athenian leaders at Sala- 
 mis, coupled with the fact that they were Athenians, — that is, in 
 command of the largest and most hnportant contingent through- 
 out the fleet. 
 
 At Lade, unfortunately, this was quite otherwise : each separ 
 rate contingent had its own commander, but we hear of no join! 
 commander at all. Nor were the chiefs who came from the 
 larger cities — Milesian, Chian, Samian, or Lesbian — men like 
 Themistokles, competent and willing to stand forward as self- 
 created leaders, and to usurp for the moment, with the general 
 consent and for the general benefit, a privilege not intended for 
 them. The only man of sufficient energy and forwardness to do 
 this, was the PhOka^an Dionysius, — unfortunately, the captain of 
 the smallest contingent of the fleet, and therefore enjoying the 
 least respect. For Phokjea, once the daring explorer of the 
 western waters, had so dwindled down since the Persian con- 
 quest of Ionia, that she could now furnish no more than three 
 ships ; and her ancient maritime spirit survived only in the 
 bosom of her captain. When Dionysius saw the lonians assembled 
 at Lade, willing, eager, full of talk and mutual encouragement, 
 but untrained and taking no thought of discipline, or nautical 
 practice, or cooperation in the hour of battle, — he saw the risk 
 which they ran for want of these precautions, and strenuously re- 
 monstrated with them : " Our fate hangs on the razor's edge, men 
 of Ionia : either to be freemen or slaves, — and slaves too, caught 
 after running away. Set yourself at once to work and duty, — • 
 you will then have trouble indeed at first, with certain victory 
 and freedom afterwards. But if you persist in this carelessness 
 ind disorder, there is no hope for you to escape the king's re- 
 venge for your revolt. Be persuaded and commit yourself to 
 
 * Uerodot. vi, 9, 10 
 
 1*1 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 '" i rsgjsang! ' 
 
 ,_ , ^, ^ 'T'TSai 
 
dot 
 
 malOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 INDOLENCE IN THE IONIC FLEET. 
 
 me ; and I pledge myself, if the gods only liold an equal bal* 
 ance, that your enemies either will not fight, or will be severelj 
 
 beaten."' 
 
 The wisdom of this advice was so apparent, that the lonians, 
 quitting their comfortable tents on the shore of Lade and going 
 ou board their ships, submitted themselves to the continuous nau- 
 tl -al labors and manotuvres imposed upon them by Dionysius. 
 The rowers, and the hopHtes on the deck, were exercised in their 
 separate functions, and even when they were not so employed, 
 the shi})S were kept at anchor, and the crews on board, instead of 
 on shore ; so that the HH^rk lasted all day long, under a hot sura- 
 uier's sun. Such labtir, new to the Ionian crews, was endured 
 for seven successive days, after which they broke out with one 
 accord into resolute mutiny and refusal: ** Which of the gods 
 have we offended, to bring upon ourselves such a retribution iis 
 this ? madmen as we are, to put ourseh es into the Iiands of this 
 Phoka^an braggart, who has furnished only three shi|)S !- He 
 has now got us. and i^. ruining us without remedy : many of us 
 are already sick, many others are sickening ; wc had better make 
 up our minds to Persian slavery, or any other mischiefs, rather 
 than go on with these [)resent suiferings. Come, wo will not 
 obey this man any longer." And tiiey forthwith refused to ex- 
 ecute his orders, resuming their tents on shore, with the enjoy- 
 ments of shade, rest, and inactive talk, as before. 
 
 I have not chosen to divest this instructive scene of the dra- 
 matic liveliness with which it is given in Herodotus, — the more 
 §o as it has all the air i>t' reality, and a.-> llekatanis, the historian, 
 was j)robably present in the island of Lade, and may have de- 
 ncribed what he actually saw and heard. When we see the in- 
 
 808 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 11. 'K~; ^f „:r yap anfiij^ Ixerat ijiuv ra TTpT/y^ara, uv6pe( 
 TwVff, V ihai i/.-^viJtpoia: i, doiAoiai, kqi Tovroiat d>f dpiirrtT'gaL' viv u>» 
 ifih^, ijv fiev ihv7.Tja^e 7a?MnTupiaf ivStKKTi^at, to -apaxpf/f^a fiev novo^ 
 iffu%> itrrai, oioi re de eaea^^e, i'TrepiJaAXofxevoi tov^- havTiovg^ elvai e7.ev-&E- 
 »?t, etc. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 2. 0/ 'Iwvcf, ola dirat^fpf hovriic novuv tolovtuv rerpt- 
 fihtoi re TaXaiiru^piifiji re kcU ^eXiipi iXe^av Trpof iuvTovr rdde — Tiva daiuo- 
 VtJ¥ napa^iiVTe^y rude avarrifnrXafiev, oirive^ napa<ppovrjaavTec, kcU f/c7r/.G^ 
 farref ^k tov voov^ uvSpl ^uKceet dXaCovf, napexofiivi^ veof tpei'^ htiTfi^ 
 'farre^ riuea^ avroxn: ^^niiff, crc. 
 
 tolerable hardship which these nautical manoeuvres and labor) 
 imposed upon the lonians, though men not unaccustomed to ordi- 
 nary ship-work, — and when we witness tlieir perfect incapacity 
 to submit themselves to such a discipline, even with extreme 
 danger staring them in the face, — we shall be able to appreciate 
 the >e ere and unremitting toil whereby the Athenian seaman 
 afterwards purchased that perfection of nautical discipline which 
 characterized liim at the beginning of the PelojK)nnesian war. It 
 will ap|)ear, as we proceed with this history, that the full devel- 
 opment of the Athenian democracy worked a revolution in 
 Grecian military marine, chiefly by enforcing upon the citizen 
 seaman a strict contirmous training, such as was only surpassed 
 by the Lacedaemonian drill on land, — and by thus rendering 
 practicable a species of nautical manoeuvring which was un- 
 known even at the time of the battle of Salamis. I shall show 
 this more fully hereafter : at present, I contrast it briefly with 
 the incapacity of the lonians at Lade, in order that it may be 
 understood how painful such training really was. The reader of 
 Grecian history is usually taught to associate only ideas of tur- 
 bulence and anarchy with the Athenian democracy ; but the 
 Athenian navy, the child and champion of that democracy, will 
 be found to display an indefatigable labor and obedience nowhere 
 else witnessed in Greece, and of which even the first lessons, as 
 in the case now before us, prove to others so irksome as to out- 
 weigh the prospect of extreme and imminent peril. The same 
 im{)atience of steady toil and discipline, which the lonians dis- 
 played to their own ruin before the battle of Lade, will be found 
 to characterize them fifty years afterwards as allies of Athens, as 
 I shall have occasion to show^ when I come to describe the Athe- 
 nian empire. 
 
 Ending in this abrupt and mutinous manner, the judicious sug- 
 gestions of the Phoksean leader did more harm than good. Per- 
 ha{)s his manner of dealing may have been unadvisedly rude, 
 but we are surprised to see that no one among the leaders of the 
 larger contingents had the good sense to avail Idmself of the first 
 readiness of the lonians, and to employ his superior influence in 
 iecuring the continuance of a good practice once begun. Not 
 one such superior man did this Ionic revolt throw up. From the 
 day on which the lonians discarded Dionysius, their camp bo 
 
 J!i 
 
 ly 
 
 i 
 
d04 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEJE 
 
 MILETUS TAKEN BY THE PERSIANS. 
 
 SOS 
 
 came a scene of disunion and mistrust. Some of them grew M 
 reckless and unmanageable, that the better portion des])aired of 
 maintaining any orderly battle and the Samians in particular 
 now repented that tliey had declined the secret offers made to 
 them by their expelled despot,' — jEakes, son of Sylusun. They 
 sent privately to renew the negotiation, received a fresh promi«je 
 of the same indulgence, and agreed to desert when the occasion 
 arrived. On the day of battle, when the two fleets were on the 
 point of coming to action, the sixty Samian ships all sailed oif, 
 except eleven, whosi3 captains disdained such treachery. Other 
 lonians followed their example ; yet amidst the reciprocal crimi- 
 nation which Herodotus had heard, he finds it dillicult to deter- 
 mine who was most to blame, though he names the Lesbians as 
 among the earliest Jeserters.-' The hundred ships from Chios, 
 constimting the centre of the fleet — each ship carrying forty 
 chosen soldiers fully armed — formed a brilliant exception to the 
 rest ; they fought with the greatest fidelity and resolution, inflict- 
 ing upon the enemy, and themselves sustaining, heavy loss. Di- 
 onysius, the Phoka^an, also behaved in a manner worthy of his 
 previous language, — capturing with his three ships the like 
 number of Phenicians. But these examples of bravery did not 
 comi)ensate the treachery or cowardice of the rest, and the de- 
 feat of the lonians at Lade was comjdete as well as irrecover- 
 a.,lc. To the faithful Chians, the loss was terrible, both in the 
 battle and after it. For though .^onie of their vessels escaped 
 from the defeat safely to Chios, others were so damaged as to be 
 obliged to run ashore close at hand on the promontory of Mykale, 
 whe're the crews quitted them, with the intention of marching 
 northward, througli the Ephesian territory, to the continent oppo- 
 site their own island. We hear with astonishment that, at that 
 critical moment, the Ephesian women were engaged in solemniz- 
 ing the Thesmophoria, — a festival celebrated at night, in the 
 open air, in some uninhabited portion of tlie territory, and with- 
 out the presence of any male person. As the Chian fugitives 
 entered the Ephesian territory by night, their coming being 
 neither known noi anticipated, — it was believed that they were 
 thieve.* or pirates corning to seize the women, and undor tliia 
 
 llerodot vi, 13. 
 
 error they were attacked by the Ephesians and slain.i It would 
 ieem from this incident that the Ephesians had taken no part ia 
 the Ionic revolt, nor are they mentioned amidst the various con^ 
 tingents. Nor is anything said either of Kolopl on, or Lebedu^ 
 or Era.- 
 
 The Phok^an Dionysius, perceiving that the defeat of Ladd 
 was the ruin of the Ionic cause, and that his native* city waa 
 again doomed to Persian subjection, did not think it prudent even 
 to return home. Immediately after the battle he set sail, not for 
 Phokiva, but for the Phenician coast, at this moment stripped of 
 its protecting cruisers. He seized several Phenician merchant- 
 men, out of which considerable profit was obtained : then setting 
 sail for Sicily, he undertook the occupation of a privateer against 
 the Carthaginians and Tyrrhenians, abstaining from injury to- 
 wards Greeks.'^ Such an employment seems then to have been 
 perfectly admissible. A considerable body of Samians also mi- 
 grated to Sicily, indignant at the treachery of their admirals in 
 the battle, and yet more indignant at the approacliing restoration 
 of their despot ^akes. How these Samian emigrants became 
 established in the Sicilian town of Zankle,-* I shall mention as a 
 part of the course of Sicilian events, which will come here- 
 after. 
 
 The victory of Lade enabled the Persians to attack Miletus bj 
 eea as well as by land ; they prosecuted the siege with the 
 utmost vigor, by undermining the walls, and by various engines 
 of attack : in which department their resources seem to have been 
 enlarged since the days of Harpagus. In no long time the city 
 was taken by storm, and miserable was the fate reserved to it. 
 The adult male population was chiefly slain ; while such of them 
 as were preserved, together with the women and children, were 
 sent in a body to Susa, to await the orders of Darius, — who 
 assigned to them a residence at Ampe, not far from the mouth of 
 the Tigris. The temple at BranchidaB was burned and pillaged, 
 18 HekatJeus had predicted at the beginning of the revolt: the 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 14, IS 
 
 » Herodot. vi, 16. « Thucyd. viii 14. 
 
 ' Herodot vi 17. A^iarr/f KartaTijKee 'EJUiyvwv fzfv ovcJcvdf, Kapxv^t^'i'i* 
 \k Kai TvpcTTjvuv. 
 * Herodot. vi, 22-25. 
 '^-.i.. IV. 20oc 
 
 t 
 
 'i 
 
RI STORA riOX OF PERSIAN DOMINI N. 
 
 806 
 
 HISTORY OF GREEJt. 
 
 ^07 
 
 large treasures therein contained must have gone far to defray 
 the^costs of the Persian army. The Milesian territory is said to 
 kivf been altogether denuded of its former inhabitants, — th« 
 FiTsians retainin<.' for themselves the city with the plain adjoin- 
 ing' to it, and uKiking over the mountainous portions to the Kari- 
 an" of TediisH. S( nie few of the Milesians found a phv among 
 the Simian emignaits to SicilyJ It is certain, however, that 
 new Grecian inhabitants must have been subscciuently admitted 
 into Miletus ; for ii. appears ever afterwards as a Grecian town, 
 though with dimini!*hed power and importance. 
 
 The cai.ture of Miletus, in the sixth year from the com- 
 mencement of the revolt,2 carried with it the rapid submission of 
 
 » HrnMlMr. vi. 18, 19, 20, 22. 
 
 MiliiTo^ (J-ev vvv "SliAiiaii^v hprifiuTO. 
 
 2 Htro<l(»r. vi. 18, a'ltuovai kct' unpr/^, tv tu ^ktC} IteC urrd rf/c ajroardaio^ 
 T^/r'^pi^ray^ptu. This is ahnost the only distinct chronological state- 
 ment which we tind in Herodotus respecting the Ionic revolt. The other 
 evidences of time in his chapters are more or less equivocal: nor is there 
 •uthcient testimony before us to enable us to arran-e the events, between 
 the commeneemen't of the Ionic revolt, and the battle of Marathon, into 
 • the precipe v.ai- to ^vhu•ll thcv bdon;:. The battle of Marathon stimds 
 fixed for Au-ust or Septemher, 49«) B.C.: the sie-e of Miletus may prol>- 
 ablv have b.rn tini^h.d in 496-495 B.C., and the Ionic revolt may have 
 begun in 502-501 B.C. Such are the dates which, on the whole, appear to 
 me most probable, though I am far from considering them as certam. 
 
 Chronological <'riti -s ditVer considerably in their arrangement^ of the 
 events here alluded to among particular years. See Appendix, ^o. d, p. 
 244 in Mr. Clinton's Fasti Hellcuici ^ i'rofessor Schullz, Bcytragc /u gcn- 
 auercn Zeitbestimmiingen von der 63" zur T2a Olympiade, pp. 17.-1 S3, m 
 the Kieler Philologische Studien ; and \Vei.ssenborn, Beytrigc zur genauo- 
 rcn Erforschung der alten Griechischen Geschichte, Jena, 1844, p. 87, sf-qq.: 
 not to mention Kciz and Larcher. Mr. Clinton reckons only ten years 
 from the beginning of the Ionic revolt to the battle of Marathon ; which 
 appears to me too short ; though, on the other hand, the fourteen years 
 reckoned by Larcher — much more the sixteen years reckoned by Kei/, -- 
 Mxe too long. Mr. Clinton compresses inconveniently the latter portion of 
 *M interval, -that portion which elapsed between the siege of Miletus 
 and the battle of Marathon. And the very improbable supposition to 
 which he is obliged to resort, -of a confusion in the language of Herodo 
 tu3 between Attic and Olympic years, -indicates that he is pressing th€ 
 lext of the historian too cIobcIv, when he states. " that Herodotus specifiei 
 a term of three years between the capture of Miletus, and the expedition of 
 Dat.s: " see F H. ad ann. 499 He places *he capture of Miletus m 494 
 
 the neighhoring towns in KariaJ During the next summer, — . 
 the Phenician fleet having wintered at Miletus, — the Persian 
 forces by sea and land reconquered all the Asiatic Greeks, insular 
 as well as continental. Chios, Lesbos, and Tenedos, — the tcwna 
 in the Chersonese, — Selymbria and Periuthus in Thrace,— 
 Prokonnesus and Artake in the Propontis, — all these towns 
 were taken or sacked by the Persian and Phenician fleet.2 The 
 inhabitants of Byzantium and Chalkedon fled for the most part, 
 without even awaiting its arrival, to Mesembria, and the Athe- 
 nian Miltiades only escaped Persian captivity by a rai)id flight 
 from his abode in the Chersonese to Athens. His pursuers were 
 
 B.C.; which I am inclined to believe a year later — if not two years later 
 
 than the reality. Indeed, as Mr. Clinton places the expedition of Aristag- 
 oras against Naxos (which was immediately Iwfore the breaking out of the 
 revolt, since Aristagoras seized the Ionic despots while that tieet yet re- 
 mained congregated immediately at the close of the expedition) in 501 
 B.C., and as Herodotus expressly says that Miletus was taken in the sixth 
 year after the revolt, it would follow that this capture ought to belong to 
 495, and not to 494 B.C. I incline to place it either in 496, or in 495 ; and 
 the Naxian expedition in 502 or 501, leaning towards the earlier of the two 
 dates : Schultz agrees with Larcher in placing the Naxian expedition in 
 504 B.c^ yet he assigns the capture of Miletus to 496 B.C., — whereas, Herod* 
 otus states that the last of these two events was in the sixth year after tho 
 revolt, which revolt immediately succeeded on the first of the two, within the 
 same summer. Weissenltorn jilaces the capture of Miletus in 496 b.c, and 
 the expedition to Naxos in 499, — suspecting that the text in Herodotus 
 — e/crw ETtl — is incorrect, and that it ought to be Terdpri^t erei, the fourth 
 year (p. 125 : compare the chronological table in his work, p. 222). He 
 attempts to show that the particular incidents composing the Ionic revolt, 
 ts Herodotus recounts it, cannot be made to occupy more than four years ; 
 but his reasoning is, in my judgment, unsatisfactory, and the conjecture 
 inadmissible. The distinct affirmation of the historian, as to the entire 
 interval between the two events, is of much more evidentiary value thao 
 our conjectural summing up of the details. 
 
 It is vain, I think, to tiy to arrange these details according to preciat 
 ) ears : this can only be done very loosely. 
 ' Herodot. vi, 25. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 31-33. It may perhaps be to this burning and sacking ot 
 the cities in the Propontis, and on the Asiatic side of the Hellespont, that 
 Strabo (xiii, p. 591 ) makes allusion ; though he ascribes the proceeding te 
 4 different cause, — to the fear of Darius that the Scythians would crow 
 into Asia to avenge themselves upon him for attacking them, and th»t tlu 
 towns on the coast would furnish them with vessels for the passage 
 
808 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCE. 
 
 MOVEMENTS OF HISTLEUS. 
 
 909 
 
 indeed so close upon him, that one cf his ships, with his soil 
 Metiochus on board, fell into their hands. As Miltiades had 
 been strenuous in urging the destruction of the bridge over thi. 
 Danube, on the occasion of the Scythian expedition, the Fheni- 
 cians were particularly anxious to get possession of his person, a« 
 the most acceptable of all Greek prisoners to the Persian king ; 
 who however, when Metiochus the son of Miltiades was brought 
 to S'usa, not only did him no harm, but treated him with great 
 kindness, and gave him a Persian wife with a comfortable mam- 
 
 tenance.^ 
 
 far otherwi^*• did the Persian generals deal with the recon- 
 quered cities on and near the coast. The throats which had been 
 held out before the battle of Lad« were realized to the full The 
 most beautiful Greek youths and virgins were picked out, to be 
 distributed among the Persian grandees as eunuclis, or inmates 
 of the harems ; the cities with their edifice-, ^acred as well as pro- 
 fane, were made a prey to the flames ; and in the case of the 
 islands, Herodotus even tells us, that a line of Persians was 
 formed from slion to shore, which swept each territory from 
 north to south, and drove the inhabitants out of it."^ That much 
 of this hard treatment is well founded, there can be no doubt. 
 But it must be exaggerated as to extent of depopulation and de- 
 struction, for these i.^lands and cities api>ear ever afterwards as 
 occupied by a Grtcian poi)ulation, and even as in a tolerable, 
 though reduced, condition. Samos was made an exception to 
 the rest, and completely spared by the Persians, as a reward to 
 its captains for setting the example of desertion at the battle of 
 Lade ; at the same time, ^Eakes the despot of that island was 
 reinstated in his government.^ It appears that several other des- 
 pots were also replaced in their respective cities, though we are 
 
 not told which. 
 
 Amidst the snflerings endured by so many innocent persons, 
 ©f every age and of both sexes, the fate of Histianis excites but 
 little syraplthy. Having learned, while carrying on his piracies 
 At Byzantium, the surrender of Miletus, he thought it expedient 
 ic sail with his Lesbian vessels to Chios, where admittance wai 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 41. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 25 
 
 Vol. 4 
 
 •Herodot. vi, 31, 32, SS 
 
 J 
 
 fvfused to him. But the Chians, weakened as they had been by 
 the late battle, were in little condition to resist, so that he defeated 
 their troops and despoiled the island. During the present break- 
 up of the Asiatic Greeks, tb .re were doubtless many who, like 
 the Phokjean Dionysius, did not choose to return home to an en- 
 slaved city, yet had no fixed plan for a new abode: of these exiles, 
 a considerable number put themselves under the temporary com- 
 mand of Histiieus, and accompanied him to the plunder of Thasoa.* 
 While besieging that town, he learned the news that the Pheni 
 cian fleet had quitted Miletus to attack the remaining Ionic towns ; 
 and he left his designs on Thasos unfinished, in order to go and 
 defend Lesbos. But in this latter island the dearth of provisions 
 was such, that he was forced to cross over to the continent to 
 reap the standing corn around Atarneus and in the fertile plain 
 of Mysia near the river Kaikus. Here he fell in with a consid- 
 erable Pei-sian force under Harpagus, — was beaten, compelled to 
 flee, and taken prisoner. On his being carried to Sardis, Arta- 
 phernes the satrap caused him to be at once crucified : partly, no 
 doubt, from genuine hatred, but partly also under the persuasion 
 that, if he were sent up as a prisoner to Susa, he might again 
 become dangerous, — since Darius would even now spare his life, 
 under an indelible sentiment of gratitude for the maintenance of 
 the bridge over the Danube. The head of Histiaeus was embalmed 
 and sent up to Susa, where Darius caused it to be honorably 
 buried, condemning this precipitate execution of a man who had 
 once been his preserver.^ 
 
 We need not wonder that the capture of Miletus excited the 
 strongest feehng, of mixed sympathy and consternation, among 
 the Athenians. In the succeeding year (so at least we are led 
 to think, though the date cannot be positively determined) it 
 was selected as the subject of a tragedy, — The Capture of Mi- 
 letus,— by the dramatic poet Phrynichus ; which, when per- 
 formed, so painfully wrung the feelings of the Athenian audi- 
 ence, that they burst into tears in the theatre, and the poet was 
 condemned to pay a fine of one thousand drachma?, as " haying 
 
 » Herodot. vi, 26-28. aycjv 'luvuv Kai Aioleuv avxvovc 
 « U2rodot. vi, 28, 29, 30. 
 
 K 
 
 
 \f 
 
FUTURE GOVERNMENT OF lOiflA. 
 
 311 
 
 aio 
 
 niSTOi^V OF GRErXh. 
 
 recalled to tliein their own misfortunes.''^ The piece was forbid* 
 den to be afterwards jicted, and has not corae down to us. Some 
 critics have supposed tliat Herodotus has not correctly assigned 
 the real motive which determined the Athenians to impose thia 
 line.-^ For it is certain that the subjects usually selected for trag- 
 edy were portions of heroic legend, and not matters of recent 
 history ; so that the Athenians might complain of Phrynichua 
 c-n the double ground, — ior having violated an established canon 
 cf propriety, as well as for touching their sensibilities too deeply. 
 Sfill, I see no reason fjr doubting that the cause as.>igned by He- 
 iidotus is substantially the true one; but it is very i)Ossible that 
 Phrynichus, at an age when tragic poetry had not yet reached its 
 f dl development, might touch this veiy tender subject with a 
 r mgh and offensive hand, before a people who had fair reason to 
 dread the like cruel face for tiiemselves. al^sehylus, in his Persai, 
 v.otild naturally carry with him the full tide of Athenian sympa- 
 tiiV. while dwelling on the victories of Salamis and Plata^a. But 
 to interest the audience in Persian success and Grecian suffer- 
 ing, was a task in which much greater poets than Phrynichus 
 woukl have failed, — and whieh no judicious poet would have 
 undertaken. The sack of Magdeburg, by Count Tilly, in the 
 Thirty Yciirs* war, was not hkely to be exuhired as tiie subject of 
 dramatic representation in any Protestant ^own of Germany. 
 
 rierodot. v. 21, oV nvainnjrtavra oUr/ta KaKu: comDare vii, |52; mIso, 
 IL»liisiluMjes »ip. 8traho, xiv, p. G35, unci inutarch, Pr^i^pi. Bei^ubl G* 
 rsnd. p. «I4. 
 
 * Bee Welcker, Griecliiachfi Tragodioi, voi :, p, £&. 
 
 ] 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVl. 
 
 FROM THE IONIC REVOLT TO THE BATTLE OF MARATHON. 
 
 In the preceding chapter, I indicated the point of confluenca 
 between the European and Asiatic streams of Grecian history, — 
 the commencement of a decided Persian intention to concpier 
 Attica ; manifested first in the form of a threat by Artapherne3 
 the satrap, when he enjoined the Athenians to take back Hippias 
 lis the only condition of safety, and afterwards converted into a 
 passion in the bosom of Darius in consequence of the burning of 
 Sardis. From this time forward, therefore, the affairs of Greec^e 
 and Persia came to be in direct relation one with the other, and 
 (•a{)able of being embodied, much more than before, into one con- 
 tinuous narrative. 
 
 The reconquest of Ionia being thoroughly completed, Arta- 
 pliernes proceeded to organize the fulure government of it, with 
 a degree of prudence and forethought not often visible in Persian 
 proceedings. Convoking deputies from all the different cities, 
 he compelled them to enter into a permanent convention, for the 
 amicable settlement of disputes, so as to prevent all employment 
 of force by any one against the others. Moreover, he caused 
 the territory of each city to be measured by parasangs (each {mr- 
 asang was equal to thirty stadia, or about three miles and a half), 
 and arranged the assessments of tribute according to this meas- 
 urement, without any material departure, however, from the 
 iums which had been paid before the revolt. i 
 
 Unfortunately, Herodotus is unusually brief in his allusion to 
 this proceeding, which it would have been highly interesting to 
 be able to comprehend perfectly. We may, however, assume it 
 as certain, that both the population and the territory of many 
 Among the Ionic cities, if not of all, were materially altered in 
 ooniecjuence of the preceding revolt, and still more in conse* 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 42. 
 
 i 
 
 V 
 
 mim 
 
S12 
 
 HlisTUKY Oi GREECl.. 
 
 qiience of the cruelties with wliich (he suppression of the revolt 
 bud b«en accompanied. In regard to Miletus, Herodotus tells 
 ui iliat the Persians retained lor themselves the city with its cir- 
 ennijacent plain, but gave the mountain portion of the Milesian 
 territory tu the Karians of PedasaJ Such a proceeding would 
 naturally call tor a fresh measurement and assessment of tribute ; 
 and there may have been similar transfers of land elsewhere. I 
 have already observed that the statements which we find in He- 
 rodotus, of utter depopulation and destruction falling upon the 
 cities, cannot be cn-dited in their full extent ; for these cities are 
 all peo})led, and all Hellenic, afterwards. But there can be no 
 doubt that they are partially true, and that tlie miseries of those 
 days, as stated in tlie work of Hekata*us, as well as by contem 
 }>orary informants with wliom Herodotus lja<l j>robably conversed, 
 must have been extreme. New inhabitants would |)robably be 
 admitted in many of them, to supply the loss sustained ; and 
 8uch infusion of fiesh blood would strengthen the necessity for 
 the organization introduced by Artaphernes, in order to deter- 
 mine clearlv the obli,2:ations due from the cities both to the Per- 
 sian government and towards each other. Herodotus considers 
 that the arrangement was extremely beneficial to the lonians, 
 and so it must unijuestionably have ap})eared, coming as it did 
 immediately alter so much previous sutfering. He farther adds, 
 that the tribute then fixed remained unaltered until his own dav, 
 ^ast&lement requiring some comment, which 1 reserve until 
 the time arrives tor describing the condition of the Asiatic Greeks 
 atter the re[)ulse of Xerxes from Greece proper. 
 
 Meanwhile, the intentions of Darius for the conquest of Greece 
 were now etfectivelv manifested : Mardonius, invested with the 
 supreme command, and at the head of a large force, was sent 
 down in the ensuing spring for the purpose. Having reached 
 Kilikia in the course of the march, he himself got on ship-board 
 and went bv sea to Ionia, while his armv marched across Asia 
 Minor to the Hellespont. His proceeding in Ionia surprises us, 
 und seems to have appeared surprising as well to Herodotus 
 himself as to his i*eaders. Mardonius deposed the despots 
 throughout the various Greek cities,'-^ and left the people of each 
 
 ' Herodot. vi. 20. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 4.3. li» rvHoantin;,' this deposition of the Jespots by M«r 
 
 IV 
 
 MARDONIUS COMES TO IONIA. 
 
 819 
 
 to govern themselves, subject to the Persian dominion and iiib* 
 ute. This was a complete reversal of the former policy of Per- 
 sia, and must be ascribed to a new conviction, doubtless wise ard 
 well founded, which had recently grown up among the Persian 
 leaders, that on the whole their unpopularity was aggravated, 
 more than their strength was increased, by employing these des- 
 pots as instruments. The phenomena of the late Ionic revolt 
 were well calculated to teach such a lesson ; but we shall not 
 often find the Persians profiting by experience, throughout the 
 course of this history. 
 
 Mardonius did not remain long in Ionia, but passed on with 
 his fleet to the Hellespont, where the land-force had already ar- 
 rived. He transported it across into Europe, and began his 
 march through Thrace ; all of which had already been reduced 
 by Megabazus, and does not seem to have participated in the 
 Ionic revolt. The island of Thasus surrendered to the fleet 
 without any resistance, and the land-force was conveyed across 
 the Strymon to the Greek city of Akanthus, on the western coast 
 of the Strymonic gulf. From hence his land-force marched into 
 Macedonia, and subdued a considerable portion of its inhabitants, 
 perhaps some of those not comprised in the dominion of Amyn- 
 tas, since that prince had before submitted to Megabazus. Mean- 
 while, he sent hia fleet to double the promontory of Mount 
 Athos, and to join the land-force again at the gulf of Therraa, 
 with a view of conquering as much of Greece as he could, and 
 even of prosecuting the march as far as Athens and Eretria ;* 
 so that the expedition afterwards accomplished by Xerxes would 
 
 doiiius, Herodotus reasons from it as an analogy for the purpose of vindi- 
 cating; the correctness of another of his statements, which, he acquaints us, 
 many persons disputed ; namely, the discu>53ion which he reports to have 
 taken place among the seven conspirators, after the death of the Magian 
 Bmerdis, whether they should establish a monarchy, an oligarchy, or a 
 democracy, — evdavra (leyiarov ^uv/xa ipetj rolai fi^ unodeKO/jtevoiai ruk 
 'EXA?)vwv, TLepaeuv toIol eirra "Ordvea yvu/nrfv uirode^affdai, uc XP^^^ ^^1 
 inuoKpareea^ai Yiepaa^ ' rove yup rvpavvovg rdv 'Icltvwv KaTairavaa^ TvavTOf 
 i Mapduvioc, drffiOKpariac Kariara kq raf noXLag. Such passages as this let 
 OS into the controversies of the time, and prove that Herodotus found 
 many objectors to his story al>out the discussion on theories of govemmenl 
 Bmong the seven Persian conspirators (iii, 80-82). 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 43, 44, knopsvovro 6i kni re 'Eperpiav Kal 'Ai^^vof. 
 
 VOL. IT. 14 
 
 f| 
 
 
 / 
 
 ■ - n 
 
 \V: 
 
 w 
 
814 
 
 HISTORY OF GKllKCE 
 
 have been tried at least by Mardonius, twelve or tbirtepn yeare 
 ,;arlier, had not a terrible storm completely di^abl<^fl tlie fle«'t, 
 Tlie sea near Athos was tbf^i, and is now, full of jxTil to na\ i- 
 gators. One of tlie biirrifanes, so frequent in its neijj^bborhood, 
 overtook the Persian fleet, destroyed three hundred ships, ai'd 
 drowned or cast ashore not less than twenty thousand men : of 
 thone who reached the shore, many died of cold, or wcr*' de- 
 voured by the wild beasts on that inhospitable tongue of land. 
 This disaster checked altojretiier the farther progress of Mardo 
 nius, who also sustained considerable loss with his land-army, 
 and was himself wounded, in a night attack made upon him by 
 the tribe of Thracians called Brygi. Though strong enough to 
 repel and avenge tliis attack, and to subdue the Brygi, he was 
 yet in no condition to advance farther. Both the land-forc<' and 
 the fleet were conveyed bar'k to the Hellespont, and from thence 
 across to Asia, with all the sliame of failure. Nor was Mardo- 
 nius again employed by Darius, though we eannot make out that 
 the fault was imputable to him.' We shall hear of him again 
 under Xerxes. 
 
 The ill-success of Mardonius seems to have inspired the Tha- 
 Bians, so recently subdued, with the idea of revolting. At least, 
 they provoked the suspicion of Darius by making active prepa- 
 rations for defence, building war-ships, and strengthening their 
 fortifications. The Thasians were at this time in great opulence, 
 chiefly from their gold and silver mines, both in their island and 
 in their mainland territory oppoHte. Their mines at 8kapt« 
 Hyle, in Tbra ce, \ielded to them an aiuiual income of eighty 
 talents; and altogether their suryd us revenue — after defraying 
 all the ex])( ri-es of government, so that the inhabitants were en- 
 tirely untaxed — wiis two hundred talents (forty-six thousand 
 pounds, if Attic talents ; more, if either Euboic or ^-itlgina^an). 
 With these large means, they were enabled soon to make prepa- 
 rations which excited notice among their neighbors, many of 
 whom were doubtless jealous of their prosperity, and perhaps 
 mclined to dispute with them possession of the protitable mines 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 44-94. Charon of Lampsakus had noticed the storm neai 
 Mount Athos. and the destraction of the fleet of Mardonius (Chare tie Frag 
 oent. 3 ed Didot; Athenie. ix, p. 394). 
 
 THEBES AND JiGINA SUBMiT TO DARIUS. 
 
 815 
 
 rf Skapte Hyle. As in other cases, so in this : the jealousies 
 wnong subject neighbors ot^en procured revelations to the supe- 
 nor power : the proceedings of the Thasians were made known, 
 and they were forced to raze their fortifications as well as to sur- 
 render all their ships to the Persians at Abdera.^ 
 
 Though dissatisfied with Mardonius, Darius was only the more 
 eagerly bent on his project of conquering Greece, and Hippias 
 was at his side to keep alive his wrath against the Athenians.^ 
 Orders were despatched to the maritime cities of his empire to 
 equip both ships of war and horse-transports for a renewed attempt. 
 His intentions were probably known in Greece itself by this time, 
 from the recent march of his army to Macedonia ; but he thought 
 It advisable to send heralds round to most of the Grecian cities, in 
 order to require from each the formal token of submission, — 
 earth and water ; and thus to ascertain what extent of resistance 
 his intended expedition was likely to experience. The answers 
 received were to a high degree favorable. Many of the conti- 
 nental Greeks sent their submission, as well as all those islanders 
 to whom application was made. Among the former, we are 
 probably to reckon the Thebans and Thessalians, though Herod- 
 otus does not particularize them. Among the latter, Naxos, 
 Eubcca, and some of the smaller islands, are not included ; but 
 ^:gina, at that time the first maritime power of Greece, is ex- 
 
 pressly included.^ 
 
 Nothing marks so clearly the imminent peril in which the liber- 
 ties of Greece, were now placed, and the terror inspired by the 
 Persians after their reconquest of Ionia, as this abasement on the 
 part of the ^ginetans, whose commerce with the Asiatic islands 
 and continent, doubtless impressed them strongly with the melan- 
 choly consequences of unsuccessful resistance to the Great King 
 But on the present occasion, their conduct was dictated as much 
 by antipathy to Athens as by fear, so that Greece was thus 
 threatened with the intrusion of the Persian arm as ally and 
 ftrbitor in her internal contests : a contingency which, if it had 
 
 ' Herodot. ri, 46-48. See a similar case of disclosure arising from je* 
 MWj between Tenedos and I^esboa (Thucyd. iii, 2). 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 94. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 48-49 ; viii. 46. 
 
 f 
 
 f 
 
dl6 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 HEUALDS FROM PAKITS PUT TO PEAIH 
 
 S17 
 
 occurred now in the dispute between iEgina and Ather^, would 
 have led to the certain enslavement of Greece, — though when it 
 did occur nearly a cnitury afterwards, towards the close of the 
 Peloponnesian war, and in consequence of the prolonged strujigle 
 between La<'«*djemon and Athens, Greece had become strong 
 enough in her own force to endure it without the loss of substan- 
 tial indei)cndence. T!ie war between Thebe- and ^Egina on one 
 side, and Athens on tlio other, — begun several years before, and 
 growing out of the conneetion betwer-Ti Ath*'ns and Plataa, — • 
 had never yet been terminated. Tlie .Kgiiu raiis iiad taken part 
 in that war from gratuitous feeling, either of friendship for 
 Thebes, or of enmity to Athens, without any direct ground of 
 quarrel,' and they had begun the war even without tbe formality 
 of notice. Tliounrh a period ap}>arently not less than fourteen 
 years (from about oOG~l!»-2 b.c.) had elap-^-d since it began, the 
 Ftate of hostility still «:ontinued ; and we may well ( oncivf that 
 Hippia.<, the great instigator of Persian attack upon (Greece, 
 would not fail to entbrce upon all thf <-n«*mies of Athens thr' pru- 
 dence of seconding, or at Icnust of not opposing, tlie etforts of tlio 
 Persian to reinstate him in that citv. It wa^ partly under this 
 feelins:, combined with genuine alarm, that Ijorh Thebes and 
 ^Kgina manifested submissive dispositions towards the heraldd 
 of Darius. 
 
 Among these herald-, some had gone both to Athens and to 
 Sparta, for the same purpose of demandinir «'arth and water. 
 The reception given to them at both plact^- wa^ angry in the ex- 
 treme. The Athenians cast tlw^ Iierald info the pit called the 
 barathrum,'- into which they sometimes precipitated public crimi- 
 
 * Hen )( lot. V, 81-89. See above, chapter xxxi. The lc|^endary story 
 there ;;iveu a* the provocation of vEgina to the war is evidently not to be 
 treated as a real and historical cause of war: a state of quarrel causes all 
 nuch stories to be raked u;j, and s^jme probably to he invented. It is like 
 the old alleged quarrel b<?tween the Athenians and the Pelasgi of Lemnos 
 (vi, 137-140). 
 
 • It is to this treatment of the herald that the story in Plutarch's Life of 
 Themistokles must allud', if that story indeed be true ; for the Persian 
 king was not likely to send a second herald, after such treatment of the 
 first. An interpreter accompanied tlie herald, speaking Greek as well aa 
 hia own native language. Themi&tokl^s proposed and carried a vote thai 
 
 naifl the Spartans threw the herald wlio came to them into i 
 well desirincr the unfortunate messenger to take earth and water 
 fyom thence to the king. The inviolability of heralds was so 
 ancient and undisputed in Greece, fr-)m the Homeric tnnes down- 
 ward, that nothing short of the fiercest excitement could have 
 in.ti-ated any Grecian community to such an outrage. But to 
 the Lacedaemonians, now accustomed to regard themselves as the 
 fir-t of all Grecian states, and to be addressed always m the 
 character of superiors, the demand appeared so gross an msult 
 a. to banish from their minds for the time all recollection of 
 established obligations. They came subsequently, however, to 
 r-pent of the act as highly criminal, and to look upon it as the 
 cause of misfortunes which overtook them thirty or forty years 
 afterwards : how they tried at that time to expiate it, I shall 
 
 hereafter recount. ^ /. , o * 
 
 But if on the one hand, the wounded dignity of the Spartans 
 hurried them into the commission of this wrong, it was on the 
 orher band of signal use to the general liberties of Greece, by 
 rou^in- them out of their apathy as to the coming invader, and 
 placin° them with regard to him in the same state of inexpiable 
 
 he should be put to death, for having employed the G-cek language a* 
 medium for hLaric dictation (Plutarch, Themist. e. 6). We should h. 
 clad to know from whom Plutarch copied this story, 
 
 rausanias states that it was Miltiades who proposed the putting to death 
 of the heralds at Athens (iii, 12, 6) ; and that the divine judgment f^ 
 upon his fomily in consequence of it. From whom Pausanias copied tin 
 «a^ement I do not know: certainly not from Herodotus, who does not 
 mention Miltiades in the case, and expressly says that he does not know m 
 r manner the divine judgment overtook the Athenians Jor the enrne^ 
 "except (says he) that their city and country wa. aften^-ards i^'d wast« 
 by Xerxes: 'hut I do not think that this happened on account of the oat- 
 rmee on the heralds." (Herodot. vii, 133.) ^„. .^^ „. 
 
 The belief that there must have been a divme judgment of some sor^ « 
 other presented a strong stimulus to invent or twist some historical fact to 
 rrre;p'ond with it. Herodotus has sufficient regard for truth to resist thi. 
 „.mulus and to confess his ignorance; a circumstance which goes along 
 wilh others, to strengthen our comidence in his ^^^^-^^--^^.«"^^, p"^" 
 .tace weakens the credibility, but does not refute the ^Uegat-n of Pa^^ 
 wnias with regard to Miltiades r- which is certainly not mtnnsicaUt 
 
 improbable. 
 
 » Herodot. vii, 1S3. 
 
 \ 
 
 L 
 
If 
 
 
 B18 
 
 HISTORY Of* GREECE. 
 
 hostility as Atl 3ns and Eretria- We see at once the boodf 
 drawn closer between Athens and Sparta. The Athenians, fm 
 the first time, prefer a complaint at vSparta ajrainst the ^^gine- 
 tans for having given earth and water to Darius, — Hccusing 
 them of having done this with views of enmity to Athens, and 
 in order to invade Attica conjointly with the Persian. This tliey 
 represented "as treason to Helhis," calling u|»on Sparta as head 
 of Greece to inteifcre. And in roii-rfjucuce of their ap]>eal, 
 Kleomenes king of Sparta w< nt over to ^^gina, to take nuasures 
 against the authors of the late proccediiiir, " for the general ben- 
 efit of Helhis."i 
 
 The proceeding now before us is of very great importance in 
 the progress of Grecia.n history. It is the first direct and posi- 
 tive historical manifestation of Hellas as an aggregate body, with 
 Sparta as its chief, and obligations of a certain sort on the part 
 of its members, the n<.*glect or violation of which constitutes a 
 Rpecies of treason. I have already pointed out several eaiiier 
 incidents, showing how the Greek political mind, beginning from 
 entire severance of strifes, became gradually prepared lor this 
 idea of a permanent league with mutual obligations and j)ower 
 of enforcement ve<t«'d in a permanent cliief, — an idea never 
 fully carried into practice, but now <li<tinctly manifest and j^arti- 
 ally operative. First, the great acquired power and territory of 
 Sparta, her military training, her wtidisturbed political traditions, 
 create an unconscious deference towards her, such as was not felt 
 towards any other stale: next, ^he is seen in tlie proceedings 
 against Athens, after the expulsion of Hippias, as summoning 
 and conducting to war a cluster of self-ol)liged Pelopoimesian 
 allies, with certain fomialities whicli gave to the alliance an im- 
 posing permanence and solemnity : thirdly, her position becomes 
 
 ' Herodot. vi. 49. lloti/crcKn tU n<f>t {Myiv^Tai^) Taira Idiu^ 'k^rjvaloi 
 kTtZKtaro, i^oKtovrec k-rrl rroiat Ixoi r«c rove klyivijTa^ St^uKivai {yyv Kttl 
 iSijp), uf &fia TCi UepfT^ e-Ti att^eai arpaTetuvTai. Kal uofievoL 7rpo<l>utTio( 
 hreXuiovTO' poiriovre^ re e^ rrjv X tt apfjjv, Kar-qyo peov tup 
 Aly tvijriuv ru rreTroi^Koiev, rpodovTe^ t^v 'E/.Xu6a. Con- 
 pare viii, 144, ix, 7. tt}v 'E/.Aada deivdv noiovfievoi Trpodovvai — 
 a new and very important phrase. 
 
 rii, 61. Tore dk tov Kkeofievea, iovra. kv ry kiyivy^ Kal ««' «4l T\ 
 KAa«J( aya'&a rrpoaepy a^o/nvoVf etc. 
 
 u 
 
 EXTREME WEAKNESS OF ARG05. 
 
 319 
 
 f^cogm'^f d as first power or president of Greece, both by foreigueii 
 who invite alliance (Croesus), or by Greeks who seek help, sucb 
 as the Plateaus against Thebes, or the lonians against Persia. 
 l>iit Sparta has not been hitherto found willing to ttdie on herself 
 the peiibrmance of this duty of protector-general. She refused 
 the lonians and the Samiau Maiandrius, as well as the Plata^iui% 
 in spite of their entreaties founded on common Hellenic lineage: 
 tie expedition which she undertook against Polykrates of S»» 
 liios, was founded upon private motives ol' displeasure, even in 
 tiie estimation of the Lacedaimonians themselves : moreover, 
 even if all these requests had been granted, she might have 
 si emed to be rather obeying a generous sympathy than perform- 
 ii'g a duty incumbent upon her as superior. But in the case no.v 
 b -tore us, of Athens against ^gina, the latter consideration 
 k^:ands distinctly prominent. Athens is not a member of the clus- 
 ter of Spartan allies, nor does she claim the compassion of Sparta, 
 as defenceless against an overpowering Greciiin neighbor. She 
 I'omplains of a Pan-Hellenic obhgation as having been contra- 
 vened by the ./Eginetans to her detriment and danger, and calls 
 upon Sparta to enforce upon the delinquents respect to these obli- 
 i^itions. For the first time in Grecian history, such a call is 
 made ; for the first time in Grecian history, it is effectively 
 answered. We may reasonably doubt, whether it would have 
 been thus answered, — considering the tardy, unimpressible, and 
 home-keeping character of the Spartans, with their general in- 
 sensibility to distant dangers,' — if the adventure of the Persian 
 herald had not occurred to gall their pride beyond endurance; to 
 drive them into unpardonable hostility with the Great King ; and 
 to cast them into the same boat with Athens for keeping off an 
 enemy who threatened the common liberties of Hella.'v 
 
 From this time, then, we may consider that there exists a re- 
 cognized political union of Greece against the Persians,^ — or at 
 least something as near to a political union as Grecian temper 
 will permit, — with Sparta as its head for the present. To sucb 
 a preeminence of Sparta, Grecian history had been gradualljT 
 
 ' Thucyd. i, 70-118. aoKvoi irpdc vfidf (t. e. the Spartans) fieXXtiTdf 
 ivihhifiijTal TTpdf hdjjfxoTdTovc. 
 * Herodot. vii, 1 i5-148. 0/ awu/torat 'E^^^vuw iirl r^ Uepajf, 
 
 1' 
 
 •y\ 
 
820 
 
 HISTORr OF GREECE. 
 
 f 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 tending ; but the final event which placed it beyond ditpi te, air^ 
 which humbled for t!ie time her ancient and only rival — Argoi 
 — is now to be noticed. 
 
 It was about three or four years before the anival of thests 
 Persian heralds in Greece, and nearly at the time when Miletus 
 was besieged by the Persian generals, that a war broke out be- 
 tween Sparta and Argos,'— on what grounds Herodotus doei 
 BOi inform us. Kleomenes, encouraged by a promise of the 
 oracle that he should take Argos, led the Lacedtemonian troops to 
 the banks of the Erasinus, the border river of the Argeian ter- 
 ritory. But the sacrifices, without which no river could be 
 crossed, were so unftivorable, that he altered his course, extorted 
 some vessels from iEgiiia and Sikyon,^ and carried his troops by 
 iea to Nauplifi, the seaport belonging to Argos, and to the terri- 
 tory of Tiryns. The Argeians having marched their forces 
 down to resist him, the two armies joined battle at Sepeia, near 
 Tiryns : Kleomenes, by a piece of simplicity on the part of his 
 enemies, which we find it difficult to credit in Herodotus, was 
 enabled to attack them unprepared, and obtained a decisive vic- 
 tory. For the Argeians, it is stated, were so afraid of being 
 overreached by stratagem, in the post which their army occupied 
 over against the enemy, that they listened for the commands pro- 
 claimed aloud by the Lacedtemonian herald, and performed with 
 their own army the same order which they thus heard given. 
 
 That which marks the siege of Miletus, and the defeat of the Argeians 
 by KleomeiK's, as oonteraporaneous, or nearly so, is, the common oracu- 
 lar dictum delivered in reference k. both : in the same prophecy of the 
 I^thia, one half alludes to the sufferino^s of Miletus, the other half to those 
 of Argos (Herodot. vi, 19-7:'). 
 
 Xpfca/ifVo.at yap 'Apyecotm h AeUolm rrepc aornpim m ttoIioc rrfc 
 ^permi, Td fiiv i^ avToiJc roi)c 'Apyeiovc 0epov, r^v 6e Trapev^i/Kfjv Hpvet 
 #f yiiATjaiov^. 
 
 I consider this evidence of date to be better than the statement of Paa- 
 ■amas. That author places the enterprise against Argos immediately 
 (oi;nAca - Paus. iii, 4, 1) after the accession of Kleomenes, wlio, as he wa« 
 bng when Maeandrius came from Samos (Herodot. iii, 148), must have 
 •ome to the throne not later than 518 or 517 b.c. This woald be thirtr. 
 leven years prior to 480 B.C. ; a date much too earlv for the w»r beti 
 Kleomenes an«l the Argeians, as we may see by Ferodotus (rii, 149) 
 
 " Herodot. vi. 92. 
 
 VICTORY OF THE SPARTANS OYER ARGOS. 
 
 52t 
 
 This cam<; to the knowledge of Kleomene.s, who communicnted 
 private notice to his soldiers, that when the herald proclaimed 
 orders to go to dinner, they should not obey, but immediately 
 struid to their arms. We are to presume that the Argeian camp 
 was sufficiently near to that of the Lacedaemonians to enable 
 them to hear the voice of the herald, yet not within sight, from 
 thf nature of the ground. Accordingly, so soon as the Argeians 
 hcArd the herald in the enemy's camp proclaim the word to go to 
 dinner,! they went to dinner themselves ; ar d in this disorderly 
 condition they were easily overthrown by the Spartans. Many 
 df them perished in the field, while the fugitives took refuge in a 
 thick grove consecrated to their eponymous hero Argus. Kle- 
 omenes pursued and inclosed them therein ; but thinking it safer 
 to employ deceit rather than force, he ascertained from deserters 
 the names of the chief Argeians thus shut up, and then invited 
 them out successively by means of a herald, — pretending that 
 he had received their ransom, and that they were released. As 
 fast as each man came out, he was put to death ; the fate of these 
 unhappy sufl'erers being concealed from their comrades within 
 the grove by the thickness ol" the foliage, until some one climb* 
 ing to the top of a tree detected and proclaimed the destruction 
 going on, — after about fifty of the victims had perished. Un- 
 able to entice any more of the Argeiiuis from their consecrated 
 refuge, which they still vainly hoped would protect them, Kle- 
 omenes set fire to the grove, and burnt it to the ground, insomuch 
 tliat the persons within it appear to have been destroyed, either 
 by tire or by sword.-^ After the conflagration had begun, he in- 
 quired for the first time to whom the grove belonged, and learnt 
 that it belonged to the hero Argus. 
 
 Not less than six thousand citizens, the flower *nd strength of 
 Argos, perished in this disastrous battle and retreat. And so 
 completely was the city prostrated, that Kleomenes might easily 
 have taken it, had he chosen to march thither forthwith and at- 
 tack it with vigor. If we are to believe later historians whom 
 
 ^f 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 78 5 compare Xenophon, Rep. Laced, xii, 6. Orders for 
 evolutions in the field, in the Lacedaemonian military service, were not 
 proclaimed by the herald, but transmitted through, the various gradation* 
 of officers (Thucyd. v, 66 * Herodot. vi, 79. sa 
 
 VOL. IV 14* 2I0C 
 
\( 
 
 382 
 
 iiLSiOliV OF GKKi.c::. 
 
 Pau8ajiia.s, Polyajnua, and Pliitaifli have <opiefi, ne did marcli 
 diither and attack it, but was repul-^^d hy the valor of the Ar- 
 ^ian women ; who, in tiie deartii ot' warriors occasioned by tho 
 recent defeat, took arms along with tlie ^hiv<->. ht;u!^tl \>y iLi 
 poetess Telesilla, and galhintly defended iht walL.' Tliis ij 
 probably a mytlie, generated by a desire to eiubody in tletail tha 
 dictum of the oracle a little before, aboiii 'Mhe female conijuer- 
 ing the male."- Without meaning ta deny that the Argeian wo» 
 men might liave been (ra|>al>le of achieving so patriotic a deed, if 
 Kleomenes had actually marched to the attack of their city, v.e 
 are compelled, by the distinct statement of Herodotus, to atfii :a 
 that he never did attack it. Immediate! v after the buiniii;: • f 
 the sacred grove of Argos, he dismi>sed the bulk of his arni\ lo 
 Sparta, retaining only one thousand choice troops, — with whom 
 he marched up to the Ileneum, or great temple of Here, between 
 Argos and Mykena-, to offer sacrifice. The priest in attendance 
 forbade him to enter, saying that no stranger was allowed to 
 offer sacrifice in the temple. But Kleomenes had once already 
 forced his way into the sanctuary of Athene, on the Athenian 
 acropolis, in spite of the priestess and her interdict, — and he 
 now acted still more bnitally towards the Argeian priest, for ho 
 directed liin helots to drag him from the altar aod scourge him. 
 
 * Pausan. ii, 20, 7; Polyaen. viii, 33; Phitarch, l)e Virtut. Mulier, ]>. 24.'), 
 8uiilas, V, Te/J(Ji?i?.a. 
 
 Plutarch cites the historian Sokrates of Argos for this story about 
 Telesilla ; an historian, or perhaps composer of a nepirjyrjaL^ 'Afjyov^, of 
 auknowii date : compare ]>iogen. Laert. ii, 5, 47, and Plutarch, Quiestion 
 Homali-, j.j). 270-277. According to his representation, Kleomenes and 
 Dcniuratua jointly ;vssaulte i the town of Argos, and Demaratus, after hav- 
 iii;: jH-nctrated into the to\^n and become master of the Pamphyliakon, was 
 driven out a;j:ain by the women. Now Heroaotus informs us that Kleom- 
 enes and Demaratus were never employed upon the same expedition, aftei 
 the disa^jjreement in their march to Attica (r, 75; vi, 64). 
 
 ' Hcrodot. vi, 77 
 
 'A?.A' 5rav ') i^r/Af/'a rdv lipaeva vLKTjaaaa 
 'E^fAaffjy, Kal kvi^oc ev Wpyeioiffiv upTjraL, etc. 
 
 If this ]»roplie«*y can be said to have any distinct meaning, it probably 
 t<?ff;r8 to Here, as protectress of Argos, repulsing the Spartans. 
 
 IHuisanias (ii, 20. 7) misfht well loubt whether Herodotus understood 
 tkifl oracle in the sauu' <oi:m^ as he di'^ : xt \\ plain t^at Hercdotof coa)4 
 aot htsft 80 understood it. 
 
 SACRILEGE COMMITTEP «i K.LEOMEXKS. 
 
 32J 
 
 Hadng offered sacrifice, Kleomenes returned with his remaining 
 ibrce to Sparta, i 
 
 But the army whom be had sent home returned with a full 
 persuasion that Argos miglit easily have been taken, — that the 
 king alone was to blame for having missed the opportunity. A3 
 soon as he himself returned, his enemies — perhaps his colleague 
 Demaratus — brought him to trial before the ephors, on a charge 
 of having been bribed, against which he defended himself as fol- 
 lows : He had invaded the hostile territory on the faith of an 
 assurance from the oracle that he should take Argos ; but so soon 
 as he had bunit down the sacred grove of the hero Argus, — ■ 
 without knowing to whom it belonged, — he became at once sen- 
 sible that this was all that the god meant by taking Artjos, and 
 therefore that the divine promise had been fully realized. Ac- 
 cordingly, he did not think himself at liberty to commence any 
 fresh attack, until he had ascertained whether the gods would ap- 
 prove it and would grant him success. It was with this view 
 that he sacrificed in the Herseum. But though his sacrifice was 
 fiivorable, he observed that the flame kindled on the altar flashed 
 back from the bosom of the statue of Here, and not from her 
 h(;ad. If the flame had flashed from her head, he would have 
 known at once that the gods intended him to take the city by 
 gtonn ;2 but the flash from her bosom plainly indicated that tho 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 80, 81 : compare v, 72. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 82. el ftev yap kK r^f /if^aA^f tov uyu\y.aToc i^i'^a^t^ 
 alpieiv uv kqt' uKprj^ t^v nokiv iK tCjv arTj^cuv de Xd/x}pa^Toc, rdv ^ 
 ireTwt^atfaL baov 6 ^edg ff&eAc. 
 
 For the expression alpieiv kot" uKp^g, compare Herodot vi, 21, and 
 Damm. Lex. Homer, v, d/cpof. In this ex|>res8ion, as generally used, tin 
 last words kot^ dKpfjg have lost their primitive and special sense, and do 
 little more than intensify the simple alpieiv, — equivalent to something 
 like " de fond en comble : " for Kleomends is accused by his enemies, — 
 ^fievoi fiLv ScjpoSoK^aavTa, ovk e'kieiv to 'Apyof, napiov evneriug fiLV iXttv, 
 Bat in the story recounted by Kleomenes, the words Kar* uKpfig come bai^ 
 to their primitive meaning, and serve as the foundation for his religion! 
 infereiice, from type to thing typified: if the light had shone from the 
 kea4 or top of the statue, this would have intimated that the gods meant 
 hhn to take the city '■'•from top to bottom." 
 
 In regard to this very illustrative story, — which there seems no reason 
 tot mistrusting, — the contrast between the point of view of Herodotus and 
 that of the Spartan ephors deserves notice. The form^.r, while he affinni 
 
 t 
 
 V 
 
V 
 
 824 
 
 LISTOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 topmost success was out of his reach, aiul that he had alreaij? 
 reaped all the glories which they intended for him. We may see 
 tliat Herodotus, though he refrains from criticizing this story, 
 •us])ects it to be a fabrication. Not so the Spartan ephors : to 
 them it appeared not less true as a story than triumphant as a 
 detencr, insuring to Kleomenes an honorable acquittal.' 
 
 Tiiough this Spartan king lost the op{>ortunity of taking 
 Aiu'os, his victories already gained had inflicted upon her a blow 
 Buch as she did not recover tor a generation, aid put her for a 
 time out of all condiiion to dispute tlie primacy of Greece with 
 Lacedaauon. 1 hav(j already mentioned that both in legend and 
 in earliest history, Argos stands forth as the lirst power in 
 Greece, with legendary claims to headship, and decidedly above 
 LacedaMuon ; who gradually usurps from her, tirst the reality ol 
 superior power, next tlie recognition of i>reeminence, — and ia 
 now, at the period whieli we have reached, taking upon herself 
 both the rights and ihe duties of a presiding state over a body 
 of allies who are bound both to her and to each other. Her title 
 to this honor, however, was never admitted at Argos, and it id 
 vcrv probable that ihe war just described grew in some way or 
 other out of the increasing presidential power which circum- 
 stances were tending to throw into her hands. And the comi)lete 
 temporary prostration of Argos was an essential condition to the 
 quiet acquisition of this power by Sparta. Occurring as it did 
 two or three years betbre the above-recounted adventure of the 
 heralds, it removed he only rival at that time botli willing and 
 able to compete with Sparta, — a rival who might well have pre- 
 vented any etfective iniion under another chief, though she could 
 no longer kave secured any Pan-Hellenic ascendency for herself, 
 
 a rival who would have seconded iKgina in her submission to 
 
 the Persians, and \o»uld thus have lamed incurably the defen- 
 
 di<nncilv that it \va> xhv tval >rury t-.ld by Kleouienes, suspects its truth, 
 auil utters a*^ lumh of skepticism as his pious fear will permit him ; thi 
 latter tind it in complete harmony, botli with their canon of belief and 
 irith their reli-ious fe.Minj?, - KAfounv/f 6e a^t D.e^e, ovre d i^n'ddfievoi 
 
 Wbre el u?iv^ya ?f ;ur. f^'-^ (ya6r]vfuc elirai ' tke^e 6' uv Tavra de ^iyt^ 
 
 mard re Kat ohom rAoKie lira^ir r,rr,<7i Tiiyeiv, k<u dni<jW;e Tro7Adv -^ 
 
 * Compare Pmisaaiaii ii, 20, 8 
 
 2 
 
 
 ■A 
 
 •f. 
 
 > 
 
 ft 
 
 / 
 
 
'i 
 
 DISCORD OF KLEOMENES AND I KMARATUS. 
 
 S2h 
 
 live force of Greece. The ships which Kleomenes had obtained 
 troiii the .Eginetans as well as from the Sikyonians, against theif 
 own will, for landing his troops at Nauplia, brought upon bolii 
 these cities the enmity of Argos which the Sikyunians compro- 
 mised by paying a sum of money, while the iEginetans refused to 
 do so.i And thus the circumstances of the Kleomenic war had 
 the etfect not only of enfeebling Argos, but of alienating her 
 irom natural allies and supporters, and clearing the ground for 
 iindisi)iit«'tl Spai-tan primacy. 
 
 Keturnlng now to the complaint preferred by Athens to the 
 Spartans against the traitorous submission of ^^"gina to Darius, 
 we lind that king Kleomenes passed immediately over to that 
 ihland for the i)urpose of intpiiry and punishment. He was pro- 
 ceeding! to seize and carry away as })ri6oners several of the lead- 
 ing' .IVinetans, when Krius and some others among them oppo>ed 
 toliim a menacing resistance, telling him that he came without 
 any regular warrant from Sparta and under the influence of 
 Athenian bribes, — that, in order to carry authority, both the 
 Spaitan kings ought to come together. It was not of their own 
 a<cord that the iEginetans ventured to adopt so dangerous a 
 course. Demaratus, the colleague of Kleomenes in the junior 
 or l^rukleid line of kings, had suggested to them the step and 
 promised to carry them through it safely.2 Dissension between 
 the two coordinate kings was no new phenomenon at Sparta; 
 but in the case of Demaratus and Kleomenes, it had broken out 
 some years previously on the occasion of the march against 
 Attica; and Demaratus, hating his colleague more than ever, 
 entered into the present intrigue with the jEginetans with the 
 deliberate purpose of frustrating his intervention. He succeed- 
 ed, and Kleomenes was compelled to return to Sparta ; not with- 
 out unequivocal menace against Krius and the other iEginetana 
 wiio had repelled him,3 and not without a thorough determination 
 \o depose Demaratus 
 
 It appears that suspicions had always attached to the legiU 
 
 Herodot. ▼!, 92. 
 
 * Herodol vi, 50. YLplo^ — lleye 6e Tavr ^ k^ iTrtaroX^c tt/c Arifiopffr* 
 
 Compare Pausan. iii. 4, 3. 
 
 * Henxiot. vi, 50-61, 64. AnuaovTcx — d^you* kuI uyri xQc^f^tvOf. 
 
 
 / 1. 
 
 
526 
 
 mSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 
 f ♦ 
 
 ■lacy of Demaratus's birth. His rr^puted tatlier Aristo lia.1 ha4 
 BO offspring by two successive wives : at/ast, he became eiiamorod 
 of the wife of his fnend Agetus, — a woiiian of surpassing beauty, 
 — and entrapped hira into an agreement, wliereby cacli ><»leuinly 
 bound himself to surrender anytliing belonging to Inm which tho 
 *»the.r might ask for. That \v\iu-\i Agetus asked fium Aristo wa» 
 at once given : in return, th*- hitter deniajided to hav./ the wife 
 ©f Agetus, who was thunderstruck at the request, and indignantly 
 complained of having been clieated into a sacrilie** of all others 
 the most painful: nrv«.'rthcle-s, the oath was pen-tuptory, and he 
 was forced to coni}>ly. The birth of Dctnaratii^ t(H»k place so 
 soon after this change of hu-bands, that wlien it was tirst made 
 known to Aristo, as lie sat u(K)n a l)efich along witii the ephors, 
 he counted on his lingers the number of montiis since hU mar- 
 riage, and exclaimed with an oath, " The child cannot be mine." 
 He soon, liowrver. n^tracted his opinion, and acknowledged the 
 child, who grew up vvithout any question being j)ul)licly raised as 
 to liis birth, and succeeded his father on the throne. P.ut the 
 original wt)rds of Aristo had never been forgotten, and private 
 guspicions were still cherished that Demaratus was reallv the son 
 of his mother's tirst husbandJ 
 
 Of these suspicions, Kleomenes now resolved to avail iiim- 
 self, exeiting Leotycliides, the next heir in the Prokleid line ot 
 kings, to impugn publicly the legitimacy of Demaratus ; engag- 
 ing to second him with all his intluence a< next in order for the 
 crown, and exacting in return a promise that he would suftport 
 the intervention against ^Kgina. Leotychides was animated not 
 merely by ambition, but also by private enmity again>t Dema- 
 ratus, who had disa{»{.ointed him of his intended bride: he 
 warmly entered into the scheme, arraigned Demaratus as no true 
 Herakleid, and produced evidence to prove the oriLnnal doubts 
 expressed by Aristo. A serious disj.ute was thus raised at 
 Sparta, and Kleomenes, espousing the j»retensions ol' Leolyciii- 
 des, recommended that the (piestion as to the legitimacy of Dema- 
 ratus should be decided by ret'erence to the Delphian oracle. 
 Ihrough the influence of Kob6n, a powerful native of Delphi, 
 ht procured from the Pythian priestess an answer pronou>miiig 
 
 ' Urroaot. vi, 61, 62. 63 
 
 LEOTYCTIIDES CHOSEN KING. 
 
 
 Ihai Dunaraus was not the son of Aristo.^ Leotychides thus 
 heennw king of the Proki-id line, while Demaratus desc<'ndeW 
 hito a private station, and was elected at the ensuing solemnity 
 of the GymnopaMlia to an official function. The new king, un- 
 able to repress a burst of triumjihant spite, sent an attendant tc 
 ask him, in the public theatre, liow he felt as an officer after 
 havin'j once been a king. Stung with this insult, Demaratuj 
 replied that he himself had tried them both, and that Leotychi- 
 des might in time come to try them both also: the question, he 
 aa.led.'ihall bear its fruit, — great evil, or great good, to Sparta. 
 So r:>ving, he covered his face and retired home from the theatre, 
 — oti'ered a solemn farewell sacrilice at the altar of Zeus Her- 
 keios, and solemnly adjured his mother to declare to him who his 
 real lather wa^, — then at once quitted Sparta for I^lie, under 
 pretence of going to consult the Delphian oracle. 2 
 
 Demaratus was well known to be a high-spirited and ambitious 
 man, — not«d, among other things, as the only Lacedaemonian 
 king down to the time of Herodotus who had ever gained a 
 chariot victory at Olympia ; and Kleomenes and Leotychides 
 became alarmed at the mischief which he might do them in exile. 
 Bv the law of Sparta, no Herakleid was allowed to establish hia 
 residence out of the country, on i>ain of death : this marks the 
 sentiment of tlie Lacedaimonians, and Demaratus was not the 
 less likely to give trouble because they had pronounced him ille- 
 gitimate.^ Accordingly they sent in pursuit of hira, and seized 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 6.5, 66. In an analoj^ous case afterwards, where the succes- 
 sion was disputed between Ap^silaus the ))rother, and T.eotychid^s the 
 r»'piited son of the deceased k'mi; Aj;i>, the La/edaenionians appear to 
 have taken upon tliemselves to pronounce Leotychides illegitimate; oi 
 rather to assume tacitly such illegitimacy by choosing Afjesilaus in prefer- 
 ence, without the aid of the oracle (Xenophon, Hellen. iii. 3, 1-4; Plutarch. 
 A-;(-^ihius, c. 3). The previous oracle from Delphi, however, 9uX(i?'af7i»ai 
 ri/v ;fwA^v (SamXetav, was cit«d on the occasion, and the question was, is 
 wlvat manner it should be interpreted. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 68, 69. The answer made by the mother to this appeal •- 
 informing Demaratus that he is the son either of k'mfr Aristo, or of ihi 
 hero Astrabakus — is extremely interesting as an evidence of Grecian man- 
 
 hers and feelinir. 
 
 ■ Plutarch, Agis, c. 1 - tcard ii] riva vofiov TraXaidv, be ovk ed rbv Hpa«- 
 Xeidiiv U ywaiKd^ aXloianm reKvoixT^ai, rnv rf' aTT€}.i»6vTa rfji- liraprm 
 
 
328 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PERSIAN INVASION OF GREECE. 
 
 321 
 
 him in the island of Zakynthus. But the Zakynthians wouM 
 not consent to surrf nrl*-r him, so that he passed unobstructed into 
 Asia, where he jiresented himself to Darius, and was received 
 with abundant fav >r< and presents J We shall hereafter find 
 him the companion of Xerxes, giving to that monarch advice 
 such as, if it had b.-en acted upon, would have proved the ruin 
 of Grecian independence ; to which, however, he would have 
 been even more dangerous, if he had remained at home as king 
 
 of Sparta. 
 
 Meanwhile Kleomenes, having obtained a consentient colleague 
 in Leotychides, went with him over to J^>jrina. eager to revenge 
 himself for the affront whicli had been put upon him. To the 
 requisition and pnscncf" of the two kings jointly, the ^ginetans 
 did not dare to oppose any resistance. Kleomenes made choice 
 of ten citizens, eminent for wealth, station, and inHuence, among 
 whom were Krius and another person named Kasambus, the two 
 most powerful men in the island. Conveying them away to 
 Athens, he deposited them as hostages in the hands of the 
 Athenians.2 
 
 It was in this state that the affairs of Athens and of Greece 
 generally were found by the Persian armament which lan<led at 
 Marat lum, the progress of which we are now about to follow. 
 And the events just recounted were of material importance, con- 
 sidered in their indirect bearinir upon the success of that arma- 
 ment. Sparta had now, on the invitation of Athens, assumed to 
 herself for the first time a formal Pan-Hellenic primary, her an- 
 cient rival Argos b«Mng too much broken to contest it, — lier two 
 kings, at this juncture unanimous, employ their presiding inter- 
 ference in coercing .Kgina. and placing iEginetan hostages in the 
 hands of Athens. The iEginetans would not have been unwill- 
 ing to purchase victory over a neighbor and rival at the cost of 
 Bubmission to Persia, and it was the Spartan interference only 
 which restrained them from assailing Athens conjointly with the 
 Persian invaders ; thus leaving the hands of the latter free, and 
 her courage undiminished, for the coming trial. 
 
 Meanwhile, a vast Persian force, brought together in oonM- 
 quence of the preparation made during the last two years ia 
 
 » Hir7dot. vi, 70. 
 
 «llftiodot vi, 7S 
 
 •very part of the empire, had assembled in the Aleian plain of 
 Kilikia, near the sea. A fleet of six hundred armed triremes, 
 together with many transports, both of men and horses, wai 
 brought hither for their embarkation : the troops were put on 
 board, and sailed along the coast to Samos in Ionia. The Ionic 
 and /Eolic Greeks constituted an important part of this arm«r 
 ment, and the Athenian exile Hippias was on board as guide and 
 auxiliary in the attack of Attica. The generals were Datis, a 
 Aledian,! — and Artaphernes, son of the satrap of Sardis, so 
 named, and nephew of Darius. We may remark that Datis is 
 the fii>t person of Median lineage who is mentioned as appointed 
 to hi'di command after the accession of Darius, which had been 
 preceded and marked, as I have noticed in a former chapter, by 
 an outbreak of hostile nationality between the Medes and Per 
 sians. Their instructions were, generally, to reduce to subjec 
 tion and tribute all such Greeks as had not already given earth 
 and water. But Darius directed them most particularly to con- 
 (|uer Eretria and Athens, and to bring the inhabitants as slaves 
 into his presence.'- These orders were literally meant, and prob- 
 ably neither the generals nor the soldiers of this vast armament 
 doubted that they would be literally executed ; and that before 
 the end of the year, the wives, or rather the widows, of men like 
 Themistokles and Aristeides would be seen among a mournful 
 train of Athenian prisoners, on the road from Sardis to Susa, 
 thus accomplishing the wish expressed by queen Atossa at the 
 instance of Demokedes. 
 
 The recent terrific storm near Mount Athos deterred the Per- 
 sians from following the example of Mardonius, and taking their 
 course by the Hellespont and Thrace. It was resolved to strike 
 straight across the ^gean^ (the mode of attack which intelligent 
 
 ' Herodot. vi. 91. Aar/v re, lovra W/dov yivoq etc. 
 
 Comeliu-s Nepos (Life of Pausanias, c. 1) calls Mardonius a Mode; 
 which cannot be true, since he was the son of Gobryas, one of the seven 
 Persian conspirators (Herodot. vi, 43). 
 
 * Herodot, vi, 94. hreikafifvo^ t^e «7rt'7re/z7rf, i^avt^paTroSiaavrnc 'EpcTfy'ia* 
 isl '\i?//vaf, uyeiv iuvTOj tf orpii' rii uvdpdTzoda. 
 
 According to the Menexenns of Plato (c. 17. p. 245), Darius ordered 
 Datis to fultil this order on peril of his own lu id , no such harshness a}» 
 pears in Herodotus. ' Thueyd. i. 93. 
 
330 
 
 HISTORY OF (iin.KCE. 
 
 THE PERSIANS TAKE NAXOS AND EKETKEIA. 
 
 331 
 
 Gr-eks like Th mistokles mo.-^t feared, even after the repulse ol 
 Xerxes), from Samos to Euba>a, attacking the interiue.liate \bI 
 ands in the way. Among those islands was Naxos, which ten 
 years before had stood a long siege, and gaHantly repelled the 
 Persian Megabates with the Milesian Aristaironus. It was one of 
 the mf.in obje^^ts of Datis to efface this stain on the Persian 
 arms and to take a signal revenge on the Naxians.i Crossing 
 fr^un Sanios to Naxos he landed his army on the island, which 
 ,vas found an ei^sier prize than he had exi)...t. <l The terrified 
 citizens abandoning their town, fled with their families to the 
 hi-he>t summits of their mountains ; while the Persians, seizing 
 a-^">laves a few wh<. had been dilatory in flight, burnt the unde- 
 fended town with its edifices sacre<l and i)rofane. 
 
 Immense, indeed, was the difleniu.' in Grecian sentiment t(> 
 wards the Persians, . r.afed by tlie t.-rror-striking reconq.iest of 
 Ionia and by the exhibition of a large Phenician fleet in the 
 ^:.o.an. The strengtli of Naxos was the same now as it had 
 br.'^n before the L^nic revolt, and the successful resistance then 
 made mi-ht have been supposed likely to nerve the courage of 
 it. inhabitants. Yvi ^uch is the fear now inspired by a Persian 
 armament, that the eight thousand Naxian hoplites abandon their 
 town and their gods without striking a blovv,"^ and think of noth- 
 ing but personal' safety for themselves and their families. A sad 
 au«niry for Athens and Eretria! - 
 
 Fivm Naxos, Datis despatched his fleet round the other Cy- 
 chuh's islands, recpiiring from each, hostages for fidelity and a 
 contingent to increase his army. With the sacred island of 
 Delos," however, he dealt tenderly and respectfully. The De- 
 lians had fied before his ai>proach to Tenos, but Datis sent a 
 herald to invite them back again, promised to preserve their per- 
 Bon. and property inviolate, and proclaimed that he had received 
 express orders from the Great King to reverence the island in 
 which Apollo and Artemis were born. His acts corre9i)onded with 
 Ihis language; for the fleet was not allow ed to touch the island , 
 
 ' ^llerodot. vi^gsT^- ^'^ ^^^-"^v (Naxos) yap drj -purriv ^^elxov crpa 
 Tfvecr&aL oi Wtpaai, nefivrmivoi rdv Tvporepov. 
 
 * The historians of Naxos affirmed that Datis had been repulsed from 
 Ihe island. We find this statement in Plutarch, De Mahgii. Herodot. c 
 W, p. 869, among his violent and unfounded contradictions of Herodotu*. 
 
 and he himself, landing with only a few attendants, olTered a mag 
 nificcnt sacrifice at the altar. A large portion of his armament 
 con.-isted of Ionic Greeks, and this pronounced respect to the 
 island of Delos may probably be ascribed to the desire of satisfy, 
 ing their religious feelings ; for in their days of early free<^oin, 
 this island had been the scene of their solemn ])eriodical festivals, 
 as I have already more than once remarked. 
 
 Pursuing his course without resistance along the islands, and 
 lemanding reinforcements as well as hostages from each, Datis 
 at length touched the southernmost portion of Euboca, — the 
 town of Karystus and its territory.' The Karystians, though at 
 first refusing either to giv;e hostages or to furnish any reinforce- 
 ments against their friends and neighbors, were speedily com- 
 pelled to submission by the aggressive devastation of the invaders. 
 This was the first taste of resistance which Datis had yet expe- 
 rienced ; and the facility with which it was overcome gave him a 
 promising omen as to his success against Eretria, whither he soon 
 arrived. 
 
 The destination of the armament was no secret to the inhabit- 
 ants of this fated city, among whom consternation, aggravated by 
 intestine diflferences, was the reigning sentiment. They made 
 application to Athens for aid, which was readily and conveni- 
 ently afforded to them by means of those four thousand kleruchs, 
 or out-citizens, whom the Athenians had planted sixteen yeara 
 before in the neighboring territory of Chalkis. Notwithstand- 
 ing t}ii> reinforcement, however, many of them despaired of 
 defending the city, and thought only of seeking shelter on the 
 unassailable summits of the island, as the more numerous and 
 powerful Naxians had already done before them ; while another 
 party, treacherously seeking their own profit out of the public 
 calamity, lay in wait for an opportunity of betraying the city to 
 the Persians.- Though a public resolution was taken to defend 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 99. 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 100. Tuv 6e ^EprTpieuv ijv dpa ovSev vyu^ fiovlevfia, ol 
 mereTrifiTrovTo filv 'At^^yvatoi/f, k^poveov de dicpacrlac ideac . ol fikv ydo airi^p 
 kfiovXevovTo eK?U7reiv rrjv ttoIlv er tu uKpa r^f Eiffoirjc, uXkoi de ahrCn 
 Uuk Kepdea TrpoadeKOfzevoi napu rov llipaeu oloea^aL TrpoSoaifjv kaK£Vu(ovTo. 
 
 Allusion to this treason among the Eretrians is to be found in a sftfjjif 
 If Ihemistokles (Plutarch, Themist. c. 11 ). 
 
ad2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE PERSIAN ARMY LANDS AT MARATHON. 
 
 su 
 
 the city, yet so manifest was the absence of that sicutness of 
 keart which could alone avail to save it, lliat a leading Eretrian 
 named iEschines was not ashamed to forewarn the four thousand 
 Athenian allies of the comin- treason, and ur.:<- them to save 
 themselves before it was too late. They foUowc.i his advice and 
 parsed over to Att.ca by way of Oropus ; while the l^ersians dis- 
 embarked their trcK)ps, and even tluir hor^es, in *-x},eetation that 
 the Eretrians would come out and liglit, at Taniyiu.. and other 
 places in the temlory. As the Eretrians did iu.\ come out, they 
 proceeded to lay siege to the city, and for ..om.- <hiys met with a 
 brave resistance, so that the lo>s on both sides was considerable. 
 At length two of the leading citizens, Euphorbus and riiilagrus, 
 with otliers, betrayed Eretria to the besiegers; its temples were 
 burnt, and its inhabitants dragged into shivery.i It is iini»ossible 
 to credit the exaggerated statement of Tlato, which i. applied by 
 him to the Persians at Eretria, as it had been before applied by 
 Herodotus to the Persians at Chios and Samos, - that they 
 swept the territory clean of inhabitants by joining hands and 
 forming a line across its whole breadth.'-^ Evidently, this is an 
 idea illustrating the possible effects of numbers and ruinous 
 oonfiuest, which lias been woven into the tissue of historical state- 
 menls, like so many other illustrative ideas in the writings oi 
 Greek authors. That a large pro})ortion of the inhabitants were 
 carried away as prisoners, there can be no di»ubt. But the 
 traitors who betrayed the town wei-ej^[)ared and rewarded by tho 
 
 'i'lR-'^4^i^^^)M bv Heraklei.les Ponticus (uj.. Ath.-i.;f. xii. p. :>:u>}. of an 
 earlier Persian armament which had assailed Eretria a;:.! faik-a. cannot he 
 at ill undcrstoo.1 ; it rather looks like a mythe to exphiin the origin of tho 
 great wealth i,osseesed hv the family nf Kallias at Ath-us.-the Agkko^ 
 nAovTo^. li.cre is another story, having the same explMiuu..ry ohject, lO 
 Plutarch, Aristeides, c. 5. 
 
 » Herodot. vi, 101. 102. ... 
 
 • Plato Le.-. iii. p. 69S. and Menexen. c. 10. i» 240; Diogen. La^rt. m 
 33; Herodot.Ti, 31 : compare Straho, x. p. 44r>. who ascribes to Herod- 
 otus the statement of Plato about the aayiivevmr of Eretria. Plato savU 
 nothinj; about the l)etrayal of the city. 
 
 It is to be remarked that, in the passage of the Treatise de Legibus, 
 Plato mentions this storv (about the I'ersians having swept the temtor^ 
 of Eretria clean of its inhabitants) with some doubt as to us truth, and ai 
 if it vere a rumor intentionally circulated by Daiis with a view to fri hten 
 the Athenians. But in the Menexenus, the story is given as if it were al 
 •uthentic historical fact. 
 
 Persian.'?,! and we see plainly that either some of the inhabilanti 
 must have been left or new settlers introduced, w hen we find th§ 
 Kretrians reckoned ten years afterwards among the opjionents of 
 Xerxes. 
 
 Datis had thus accomplished with little or no resistanc«r one of 
 the two express objects commanded by Darius, and his army was 
 elated with the confident hope of soon completing the other. 
 After lialting a few days at Eretria, and depositing in the neigh- 
 boring islet of ^]gilia the j)ri.soners recently captured, he reem- 
 barked his army to cross over to Attica, and landed in the 
 memorable bay of Marathon on the eastern coa'^t, — the sjkA 
 indicated by the despot Hippias, who now landed along with the 
 Persians, twenty years after his expulsion from the govemmenL 
 Forty-seven years had elapsed since he had made as a young 
 man this same passage, from Eretria to Marathon, in conjunctit)a 
 with his father Peisistratus, on the occasion of the second restora- 
 tion of the latter. On that previous occasion, the force accom- 
 panying the father had been immeasurably inferior to that which 
 now seconded the .-^on ; yet it had been found amply sufiicient to 
 carry him in triumph to Athens, with feeble opposition from 
 citizens alike irre.-oliite and disunited. And the march of Hip- 
 [)ias from Marathon to Athens would now have been equallj 
 easy, as it was doubtless conceived to be by himself, both in his 
 waking hopes and in the dream which Herodotus mentions, — had 
 not the Athenians whom he found been men radically dilTerent 
 from those whom he had left. 
 
 To that great renewal of the Athenian character, under the 
 democratical institutions which had subsisted since the disposses- 
 sion of Hippias, I have already jwinted attention in a former 
 chapter. The modifications introduced by Kleisthenes in the 
 constitution had now existed eighteen or nineteen years, without 
 any attempt to overthrow them by violence. The Ten Tribe.'S 
 
 • Plutarch, De Garnilitate, c. 15, p. 510. The descendants of Gongylui 
 the Eretrian, who passed over to the Persians on this occasion, are found 
 nearly a century afterwards in possession of a town and district in Mysia, 
 which the Persian king had bestowed upon their ancestor. Herodctofl 
 does not mention Gongylus (Xenoph. Hellen. iii, 1,6). 
 
 This surrender to the Persians drew upon the Eretrians bitter remartu 
 at the time of the battle of Salami.* ^Plutarch, Themistokles, c. 11). 
 
 I] 
 
334 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 / 
 
 each with its constituent denies, had become a part of the estab 
 liahed habits of the country, and the citizens had become accus. 
 toraed to exerci>e a «^enuine and .-elf-deterniined (h-rision in their 
 assemblies, poHti<a as well as judicial; while t umi the senate of 
 Areopagus, renovaied by the nine annual aniions successively 
 chosen who passed into it after their year of otfice, had also be- 
 come identiHed in feeling with the constitution of Kleisthenes. 
 Individual citizens, doubtless, remained partisans in secret, and 
 perhaps correspondents of Ilippias ; but ilie mass of citizens, in 
 every scale of life, rould look u[)OU his return with nothing but 
 terror and aver>i<»n. With what degree of newly-acquired energy 
 the deniocralical Athenians could act in defence of their country 
 »nd institutions, hi^s already been related in a former chapter^ 
 though unfortunately we possess few particulai-^ t f Athenian his- 
 tory during the decade preceding 4D0 B.C., nor cun we follow ia 
 detail the working of the governnn-nt. The new form, however, 
 which Athenian politics had assumed becomes partially maniiest, 
 when we observe the tlu'ee leaders who >tand prominent at thia 
 ira|)ortant ei)och, — Miltiades, Themistokles, and Aristeides. 
 
 The iirst of the three had returned to Athens, three or four 
 years before the ai-proach of Datis, after six or seven years' ab- 
 sence in the Cher^onesus of Thrace, whither he had been origi- 
 nally sent by Hii)pias about the year 517-31 G B.C., to inherit tho 
 property as well a- the supremacy of his uncle the oekist Miltia- 
 des. As despot ol" the Chersonese, and as one of the subjects 
 of Persia, he had been among the lonians who accompanied 
 Darius to the Danube in his Scythian expedition, and he had 
 been tlie author of that memorable recommendation which Histi- 
 a'us and the other despots did not think it their interest to follow, 
 — oi destroying the bridge and leaving the Persian king to perish. 
 Subsequently, he had been unable to remain permanently in the 
 Chersonese, for reasons which have before been noticed; yet he 
 geems to have occupied it during the period of the Ionic revolt' 
 
 ' The chapter of Herodotus (vi, 40) relating to the adventures of MU 
 tiades is extremely perplexing, as I have already remarked in a formef 
 i:ote : and Wesselin^ considers that it involves chronological difficultiel 
 which our present MiSS. do not enable us to clear up. Neither Schweig* 
 hauler, nor the explaoation cited in B'ihfs note, is satis' utory. 
 
 ADVE>m^RES OF MILTIADES 
 
 385 
 
 What part he took in that i-evolt we do not know. But he 
 availed himself of the period while the Persian satraps were 
 employed in suppressing it, and deprived of the mastery of the 
 sea, to expel, in conjunction with forces from Athens, both the 
 Persian garrison and Pelasgic inhabitants from the islands of 
 Lemnos and Imbros. The extinction of the Ionic revolt threat- 
 ened him with ruin ; so that when the Phenician fleet, in the 
 gummer following the capture of Miletus, made its conquering 
 appearance in the Hellespont, he was forced to escape rapidly to 
 Athens with his immediate friends and j)roj)erty, and with a 
 email squadron of five ships. One of these ships, commanded 
 by his son Metiochus, was actually captured between the Cherso- 
 nese and Imbros ; and the Phenicians were most eager to cap- 
 ture himself,! — inasmuch as he was personally odious to Darius 
 from his strenuous recommendation to destroy the bridge over the 
 Danube. On arriving at Athens, after his escape from the Phe- 
 nician fleet, he was brought to trial before the judicial popular 
 assembly for alleged misgovernment in the Chersonese, or for 
 what Herodotus calls '' his despotism " there exercised.2 Nor is 
 it improbable, that the Athenian citizens settled in that peninsula 
 may have had good reason to complain of him, — the more so as 
 he had carried out with him the maxims of government preva- 
 lent at Athens under the Peisistratids, and had in his pay a body 
 of Thracian mercenaries. However, the people at Athens honor- 
 ably ac(piitted him, probably in part from the reputation which 
 he had obtained as conqueror of Lemnos ;3 and he was one of the 
 ten annually-elected generals of the republic, during the year of 
 this Persian expedition, — chosen at the beginning of the Attic 
 year, shortly after the summer solstice, at a time when Datia 
 and Hippias had actually sailed, and were known to be approach- 
 ing. 
 
 The character of Miltiades is one of great bravery and decisiofi, 
 — qualities preeminently useful to his country on the present 
 s7iMs> and the more useful as he was under the strongest motive 
 
 ^ Herodot. vi, 43-104. * Herodot vi, 39-104. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 132. MiXrfa(Jiyf, «ai nftorepov evdonifieuv — i. e. I cfore thi 
 iMttle of Marathon. How much his reputation had been heigl lened bf 
 the ocmqiiest of Lemnos. see Herodot. vi, 136. 
 
 W 
 
 
836 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THEmSTOKLES AND ARISTEIDES. 
 
 887 
 
 to put them forth, from the personal hostility of Darius towarJf 
 bira; but he doe.-^ not peculiarly belong to the democracy of 
 Kleisthenes, like his younger contemporaries Themistokle* and 
 Arr.teides. The two latter are specimens of a class of men new 
 at Athens since the expulsion of Hippias, and contrasting for- 
 ciblywhh Peisistratus Lykurgus, and Megakles, the political 
 leaders of the preceding generation. Themistokles and Aristei- 
 des, different as they were in disposition, agree in being politi- 
 cians of the dem.)cratical stamp, exercising ascendency by and 
 through the people, — devoting their time to the discharge of 
 public duties, and to the frequent discussions in the political and 
 judicial meetings of the people, — manifesting those combined 
 powers of action, comprehension, and persuasive speech, which 
 gradually accustomed the citizens to look to them as advisers as 
 well as leaders, — but Jilways subject to criticism and accusation 
 from unfriendly ri\als, and exercising such rivalry towards eacL 
 other with an asperity constantly increasing. Instead of Attica, 
 disunited and torn into armed factions, as it had been forty years 
 t,efore, — the Diakrii under one man, and the Parali and Pedieis 
 under others, — we have now Attica one and indivisible ; regi- 
 mented into a body of orderly hearers in the Pnyx, appointing 
 and holding to ac(;ountability the magistrates, and open to be ad- 
 dressed bv^ Themistokles, Aristeides, or any other citizen who 
 i'an engage their attention. 
 
 Neither Tliemistokles nor Aristeides could boast of a lineage 
 of gods and heroes, like the iEakid Miltiades : > both were of 
 middling station and circumstances. Aristeides, son of Lysim- 
 achu-, was on both sides of pure Athenian blood. But the wife 
 of Neokles, father of Themistokles, was a foreign woman of 
 Thrace or of Karia : and such an alliance is the less surprising, 
 gince Themistokles must have been born during the dynasty of 
 the Peisistrati<ls, when the status of an Athenian citizen had not 
 yet acquired its political value. There was a marked contrast 
 between these two eminent men, — those points which stood most 
 coaspicuous in the one, being comparatively deficient in the other. 
 Id the description of Themistokles, which we have the adviai- 
 tjige cf finding briefly sketched by Thucydides, the circuxnelwiflt 
 
 • Hflpodot Tu SS 
 
 moBt emphatically brought out is, his immense force of sponti^ 
 oeous invention and apprehension, without any previous aid 
 either from teaching or gradual practice. The might of unas- 
 sisted nature ' was never so strikingly exhibited as in him : he 
 conceived the complications of a present embarrassment, and 
 di\ ined the chances of a mysterious future, with equal sagacity 
 and equal quickness : the right expedient seemed to flash upon 
 his mind extempore, even in the most perplexing contingences, 
 witlkout the least necessity for premeditation. Nor was he less 
 distinguished lor daring and resource in action. When engaged 
 on any joint affairs, his superior competence marked him out as 
 the leader for others to follow, and no business, however foreign 
 to his experience, ever took him by surprise, or came wholly 
 amiss to him. Such is the remarkable picture which Thucyd- 
 ides draws of a countryman whose death nearly coincided in 
 time with his own birth: the untutored readiness and univer- 
 sality of Themistokles probably formed in his mind a contrast to 
 tlie more elaborate discipline, and careful preliminary study, 
 with which the statesmen of his own day — and Perikles es 
 pecially, the greatest of them — approached the consideration 
 and discussion of public affairs. Themistokles had received no 
 teaching from philosophers, sophists, and rhetors, who were the 
 instructors of well-born youth in the days of Thucydides, and 
 whom Aristophanes, the contemporary of the latter, so unmerci- 
 fully derides, — treating such instruction as worse than nothing, 
 and extolling, in comparison with it, the unlettered courage, with 
 mere gymnastic accompUshments, of the victors at Marathon.^ 
 
 * Thucyd. i, 138. i}v yap 6 Qc/^iaroK?.^^ (ieSatoraTa fii^ Oixreuf Icrx-dv 
 (JfXwffaf KQi 6ia<l>ep6vTU)^ tl ^c avrb uCiXkov krepuiv dftof ^avuuaai • olKei^ 
 yap avvetrei Kal ovre irpofia^uv ec avr^v ovSev oir* tni(ia>. 
 ^wv, Tdv Tt napaxpt/fia 6i^ eAaxlffTijc 3ov?.^( KpuTurroc yvufiuv, Kal tup 
 ueXkovTuv knl irXelarov tov yevrjoofiivov uptarot: eUtunii^. Kal a fitv /ueri 
 X^ipac Exoty KOL k^7iyi]aacr&aL oloc re • uv 6e u-nnpo^ elr}, Kplva* kavuc oitK 
 uirij'k'kaKTo. To re ufieivov tj x^i-pov h ri^) uipavel in npoeupa iidliara • koI 
 rd ^vfiirav tlirelvy (ftvaeuc fiev dvvdfiei fiElfrric de 0puxifTtiri^ 
 KptiTiaroc <5^ ovrof avro<7;i;e(J<dC*tv rd deovra kyevero. 
 
 * See the contrast of the old and new education, as set forth in Aris- 
 tophanes, Nubes, 957-1003 ; also Ranae, 1067. 
 
 About the training of Themistokles, compared with that of the content 
 IKWuries of Periklt\ see also Plutarch. Themistokl. c. 2. 
 
 ▼OL. IV. 1.1 22oc 
 
 ii 
 
Bd8 
 
 HISTORY OF (.HHICE 
 
 There is no evidence in the mind of Thucydid^s oi any buca 
 undue contempt towards his own age. Though tl.tt -ame terms 
 of contrast arc tacitly present to his mind, lie m rrn^ t>- treat the 
 great capacity ot Tlu-mistokleri as the more a niaticr ut^ wonder, 
 eince it sprung up without that preliminary cuhivation which 
 had gone to the making of Perikles. 
 
 Tl»e general cliaracter given of Plutarch,^ ihougli many of his 
 anecdotes are both trifling and apociyphal, is i['nU' consistent 
 with the brief sketch just cited from Thucydidcs. Tliemistokles 
 had an unboumled passion, — nut mer.iy for glory, insomuch 
 that the laurels of Miltiadcs acquired at Marathon dci.rived him 
 of rest, — but also for display of every kind. He was eager to 
 vie with men richer than liimscif in showy exhibition, — one 
 great source, though not the only source, of popularity at Athens, 
 — nor was he a! all scrupulous in procuring the means of doing 
 •o. Besides being assiduous in attendance at the ekklesia and the 
 dikastery, he kn«iw most of the citizens by name, and was alwaya 
 ready with advice to them in their private affairs. Moreover, 
 be possessed all the tactics of an expert party-man in conciliat- 
 ing pohtical friends and in defeating poliiical enemies; and 
 though he was in the early part of his life sincerely bent upon 
 the upholding and aggrandizement of his country, and was on 
 some most critical occasions of unspeakable value to it, — yet on 
 the whole his morality was as reckless as his intelligence was 
 eminent. He will be found grossly corrupt in the exercise of 
 power, and employing tortuous means, sometimes indeed for 
 ends in themselves honorable and patriotic, but sometimes also 
 merely for enriching himself. He ended a glorious life by years 
 of deep disgrace, with the forfeiture of all Hellenic esteem and 
 brotherhood, — a rich man, an exile, a traitor, and a pensioner of 
 the Great King, pledged to undo his own previous work of liber 
 ation accomplished at the victory of Salamis. 
 
 Of Aristeides we possess unfortunately no description from 
 the hand of Thucydides ; yet his character is so simple and con 
 nistent, that we may safely accc[>t the brief but unqualified ea- 
 romiura of Herodotus and Plato, expanded as it is in the biog- 
 
 Plvtarch, TheinistokJes. c. 3, 4, 5; Conielias Nepos, T\eiiiiin. c. 1 
 
 AIIISIKIDES. 
 
 3S9 
 
 raphy of Plutarch and Cornelius Nepos,i however little the detailf 
 of the latter can be trusted. Aristeides was inferior to Tliemis- 
 tokles in resource, quickness, flexibility, and power of co{>ing 
 with difhculties ; but incomparably superior to him, as well jus to 
 other rivals and contemporaries, in integrity, public as well ai 
 private ; inaccessible to pecuniary temptations, as well as to other 
 seductive influences, and deserving as well as enjoying the high- 
 est measure of personal confidence. He is described as the pe- 
 culiar friend of Kleisthenes, the first founder of the democracy ,« 
 — as pursuing a straight and single-handed course in political 
 life, with no solicitude for party ties, and with little care either to 
 conciliate friends or to oflend enemies, — as unflinching in the 
 exposure of corrupt practices, by whomsoever committed or up- 
 held, — as earning for himself the lofty surname of the Just, not 
 less by his judicial decisions in the capacity of archon, than by his 
 equity in private arbitrations, and even his candor in political 
 dispute, — and as manifesting throughout a long public life, full 
 of tempting opportunities, an uprightness without flaw and be- 
 yond all suspicion, recognized equally by his bitter contemporary 
 I he [>oet Timokreon,3 and by the allies of Athens, upon whom he 
 tirst assessed the tribute. Few of the leading men in any part 
 of Greece were without some taint on their reputation, deserved 
 or undeserved, in regard to pecuniary probity ; but whoever be- 
 came notoriously recognized as possessing this vital quality, ac- 
 quired by means of it a firmer hold on the public esteem thao 
 even eminent talents could confer. Thucydides ranks conspicuous 
 probity among tlie first of the many ascendent qualities possessed 
 by Perikles ; * and Nikias, equal to him in this respect, though 
 immeasurably inferior in every other, owed to it a still larger 
 proportion of that exaggerated confidence which the Athenian 
 people continued so long to repose in him. The abilities of Aris- 
 teides, though apparently adequate to every occasion on which 
 b*! was engaged, and only inferior when we compare him with so 
 
 * Herodot. viii, 79; Plato, Gorgias, c. 172. ufuffTov avdpa h 'A^ifv^i 
 Kol oiKaiorarov. 
 
 * Plutarch (Aristeides, c. 1-4 ; Themistokles, c. 3 ; An Seni sit gertJT»dl« 
 respublica, c. 12, p. 790; Praecepta Reip. Gerend. c. ii, p. 805 1. 
 
 ' Timokrcon ap Plutarch. Themistokles, c. 21. 
 
 * Thncrd. ii, 65. 
 
 /»! 
 
f/ 
 
 340 
 
 HTST >RY OF GREECE. 
 
 remarkable a man as Thf mistokles, were put in the shade by thii 
 incorruptible probity, which procured for him, however, along 
 with the general esteem, no inconsiderable amount of private 
 enmity from jobbers whom he exposed, and even some jealousy 
 from persons who heard it proclaimed with oftensive ostentation. 
 We are told that a rustic and unlettered citizen gave his ostrar 
 rizing vote, and expressed his dislike against Aristeides,' on the 
 •impfe ground tint he was tired of hearing hirn al\v:iys called the 
 Just. Now the purity of the most honorable inati will not bear 
 to be so boastfully talked of as if he were the oidy honorable 
 man in the country: the less it is obtruded, the more deeply and 
 cordially will it be felt : and the story just alluded to, whether 
 true or false, illustrates that natural reaction of feeling, produced 
 by absurd encomiasts, or perhaps by insidious enemies under the 
 mask of encomiasts, wlio trumpeted forth Aristeides as The Just 
 man at Attica, >o as to wound the legitimate dignity of every 
 DDC else. Neitlier indiscreet friends nor artful enemies, however, 
 could rob him of the lasting esteem of his countrymen ; which 
 he enjoyed, with intervals of their displeasure, to the end of his 
 life. Though he was ostracized during a part of the period be- 
 tween the battle of Marathon and Salamis, — at a time when the 
 rivalry between him and Themistokles was so violent that both 
 could not remain at Athens without peril, — yet the dangers of 
 Athens during the invasion of Xerxes brought him back before 
 the ten years of exile were expired. His fortune, originally 
 very moderate, wa.s still farther diminished during the course ot 
 his life, so that he died very poor, and the state was obliged to 
 lend aid to his chihlren. 
 
 Such were the characters of Themistokies and Aristeides, the 
 two eariiest leaders thrown up by the Athenian democracy. 
 Half a century before, Themistokles would have been an active 
 partisan in the faction of the Parali or the Pedieis, while Aris- 
 teides would probably have remained an unnoticed citizen. At 
 the present period of Athenian history, the characters of the 
 soldier, the maj;istrate, and the orator, were intimately blended 
 together in a citizen who stood forward for eminence, though 
 they tended more and more to divide themselves during the ei> 
 
 ' Plutarch. Aristeires. c " 
 
 VoT. 4 
 
 K 
 
 THE ATHENIANS ASK AID FROM SrAKfA. 341 
 
 lurng century and a half. Aristeides and Miltiades were botli 
 elected among the ten generals, each for his respective tribe, in 
 the year of the expedition of Datis across the jEgean, and prob- 
 ably even after that expedition was known to be on its voyage. 
 Moreover, we are led to suspect from a passage in Plutarch, 
 that Themistokles also was general of his tribe on the same oo 
 casion,^ though this is doubtful ; but it is certain that he fought 
 at Marathon. The ten generals had jointly the command of the 
 army, each of them taking his turn to exercise it for a day : ia 
 addition to the ten, moreover, the third archon, or polemarch, 
 was considered as eleventh in the military council. The pole- 
 march of this year was Kallimachus of Aphidna\-2 Such were 
 the chiefs of the military force, and to a great degree the admin- 
 istrators of foreign affairs, at the time when the four thousand 
 Athenian kleruchs, or settlers planted in Eubcea, — escaping 
 from Eretria, now invested by the Persians, — brought word to 
 their countrymen at home that the fall of that city was impend- 
 ing. It was obvious that the Persian host would proceed from 
 Eretria forthwith against Athens, and a few days afterwards \\\\y- 
 pias disembarked them at Marathon, whither the Athenian army 
 marched to meet them. 
 
 Of the feeling which now prevailed at Athens we have no de- 
 tails, but doubtless the alarm was hardly inferior to that which 
 had been felt at Eretria: dissenting opinions were heard as to the 
 proper steps to be taken, nor were suspicions of treason wanting. 
 Pheidlppides the courier was sent to Sparta immediately to solicit 
 assistance ; and such was his prodigious activity, that he per- 
 formed this journey of one hundred and fifty miles, on foot, in 
 lorty-eight hours.3 He revealed to the ephors that Eretria waa 
 already" enslaved, and entreated their assistance to avert the 
 same fate from Athens, the most ancient city in Greece. The 
 Spartan authorities readily promised their aid, but unforta 
 oately it was now the ninth day of the moon : ancient law or cus- 
 lom forbade them to march, in this month at least, during the 
 
 Plutarch, Aristeides, c. 5. ' Herodot. vi, 109, 110. 
 
 » Mr. Kinneir remarks that the Persian , Cassids, or foot-messengen, will 
 travel for several days successively at the rate of sixty or seventy miles a 
 Uy (Geographical Mimoir of Persia, p 44). 
 
 11 
 
 \ 
 
 <\ 
 
 I 1 1 
 
31S 
 
 raSTO.tY OF GREECE. 
 
 i^tUATE ABOUT FIGHTING AT MARATHON. 
 
 343 
 
 last qiiai-ter before the full moon ; but after the full thej engagtd 
 to march without delay. Five days' delay at this critical mo- 
 ment might prove the utter ruin of the endangered city ; yet the 
 reason assigned seems to have been no pretence on the part of 
 the Spartans. It was mere blind tenacity of ancient habit, 
 which we shall find to abate, though never to disa])pear, as we 
 advance in their history.i Indeed, their delay in marching ta 
 fescue Attica from Mardonius, eleven years afterwards, at the 
 imminent hazard of alienating Athens and ruining the Hellenic 
 Cimse, marks the same selfish dulness. But the reason nowmven 
 cei-tainly looked very like a pretence, so that the Athenians could 
 indulge no certain assurance that the Spartan troops would start 
 even when the full moon arrived. 
 
 In this respect the answer brought by Pheidippides was mis- 
 chievous, as it tend(.*d to increase that uncertainty and indecision 
 which already prevailed among the ten generals, as to the proper 
 steps for meeting tlie invaders. Partly, perhaps, in reliance on 
 this expected Spartan help, five out of the ten generals wero 
 decidedly averse to an immediate engiigement with the Persians ; 
 while Miltiades with the renu^ining four strenuously urged that 
 Dot a moment should be lost in bringing the enemy to action, 
 without leaving time to the timid and the treacherous to establish 
 correspondence with Hippias, and to take some active step for 
 paralyzing all united action on the part of the citizens. This 
 most momentous ddjate, upon which the tate of Athens hung, 
 is represented l)y Herodotus to have occiurcd at Marathon, after 
 the army had marclied out and taken i>ost there within sight of 
 the Persians ; wliih C'oinelius Nepos describes it as having been 
 raised before the army quitted the city, — upon the question^ 
 wh»»ther it was pru<i('nt to mti t the enemy at all in the field, ot 
 to confine the defence to the city and the sacred rock. Inaccu- 
 jiite as this latter author generally is, his statement seems more 
 probable here than that of Herodotus. For the ten generals 
 would scarcely maix h out of Athens to Marathon without having 
 previously res)lvrd to fight: moreover, the question between 
 ighting in the field or resisting behind the walls, which had f\l' 
 ready been raised at Eretria, seems the natural point on wh^cfc 
 
 * llerodu; i.^., 7-iu 
 
 tfie five n istrustful jjenerals would take their stand. And prob- 
 My indeed Miltiades himself, if debarred from immediate ao- 
 tion, would have preferred to hold possession of Athens, and 
 prevent any treacherous movement from breaking out there, — 
 rather than to remain inactive on the hills, watching the Persiani 
 at Marathon, with the chance of a detachment from their numer- 
 ous fleet sailing round to Phalerum, and thus distracting, by • 
 double attack, both the city and the camp. 
 
 However this may be, the equal division of opinion among the 
 ten generals, whether manifested at Marathon or at Athens, if 
 (•ertiSn, — so that Miltiades had to await the casting-vote of the 
 polemarch Kallimachus. To him he represented emphatically 
 the danger of delay, and the chance of some traitorous intrigue 
 occurring to excite disunion and aggravate the alarms of the citi- 
 zens. Nothing could preve^ * such treason from breaking out, 
 with all its terrific consequences of enslavement to the Persians 
 und to Hippias, except a bold, decisive, and immediate attack, — 
 the success of which he (Miltiades) was prepared to guarantee. 
 Fortunately for Athens, the polemarch embraced the opinion of 
 Miltiades, and the seditious movements which were preparing 
 Aid not show themselves until after the battle had been gained. 
 Aristeides and Themistokles are both recorded to have seconded 
 Miltiades warmly in this proposal, — while all the other generals 
 agreed in surrendering to Miltiades their days of command, so 
 as to make him, as much as they could, the sole leader of the 
 army. It is said that the latter awaited the day of his own -eg- 
 alar turn before he fought the battle.' Yet considering the 
 eagerness which he displayed to bring on an immediate and de- 
 ci>'ive action, we cannot suppose that he would have admitted 
 any serious postponement upon such a punctilio. 
 
 Wlnle the army were mustered on the ground sacred to Hej*a. 
 kles near Marathon, with the Persians and their fleet occupying 
 the plain and shore beneath, and in preparation for immediate 
 action, they were joined by tlie whole force of the little town of 
 Plata^a, consisting of about one thousand hoplites, who had 
 marched directly from their own city to the spot, along the soutl*- 
 ern range f Kithaeron and passing through Dekeleia. We am 
 
 •Herodot. vi, no. 
 
 11 
 
 If; 
 
344 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 I i 
 
 
 not told that tliey liad been invited, and very probablj IIm 
 Athenians had never thought of summoning aid from this uiiim 
 portant neighbor, in whose behalf they had taken upon them 
 selves a lasting feud with Thebes and the Ba»otian league J 
 Their coming on thi> important occasion seems to have been a 
 spontaneous effort of gratitude which ought not to be the less 
 commended because their inte-«sts were really wrapped up in 
 those of Athens, — since if the latter had been conquered, noth- 
 ing could have saved Plataa from being subdued by the Thebans, 
 — yet many a Grecian town would have disregarded both gener- 
 ous impulse and rational calculation, in the fear of provoking a 
 Dew and terrific enemy. If we summon up to our imaginations 
 all the circumstances of the case, — which it requires some effort 
 to do, because our authorities come from the subsequent genera- 
 tions, after Greece had ceased to fear the Persians, — we shall 
 be sensible that this volunteer march >f the whole Platican force 
 to Marathon is one of the most affect tg incidents of all Grecian 
 history. Upon Athens generally it produced an indelible im- 
 pression, commemorated ever after\^ards in the public prayers 
 of the Athenian herald,2 and repaid by a grant to the Plata^ans 
 of the full civil rights — seemingly without the political rights — 
 of Athenian citizens. Upon the Athenians then marshalled at 
 Marathon its effect must have been unspeakably powerful and 
 encouraging, as a proof that they were not altogether isolated 
 from Greece, and as an unexpected countervailing stimulus undet 
 circumstances so full of hazard. 
 
 Of the two opposing armies at Marathon, we are told that th<3 
 Atiienians were ten thousand hoplites, either including or besidea 
 the one thousand who came from Plataea.-* Nor is tliis state- 
 
 ' nerodor. vi. 108-112. 
 
 ' Thiicyd. iii, 55. 
 
 ' Ju^Jtin states ten thousand Athenians, besides one thousand Plataeana 
 (>omelins Nepos, Pausanias, and Plutarch give ten thousand as the sum 
 imal of Iwth. Justin, ii. 9; Corn. Nep. Miltiad. c. 4 ; Pausan. iv, 25, j; x, 
 IC, 2: compare also Suidas, v, 'IrrTrmf. 
 
 Heeren (De Fontibus Trogi Pompeii, Dissertat. ii, 7) affirms that Trogiu, 
 or Justin, follows Herodotus in matters concerning the Persian invasions of 
 Greece. He cannot ha ve compared the two very attentively ; for Justin 
 BOC only states several matters which are not to be found in Herodoms, t<«l 
 h at variance with the latter on sotps particulars not unimportant. 
 
 THE PLAT^ANS JOIN THE ATHENIANS 
 
 845 
 
 ment in itself improbable, though it does not come fi-om Herodo- 
 tus, who is our only really valuable authority on the case, and 
 who mentions no numerical total. Indeed, the number named 
 seems smaller than we should have expected, considering that no 
 less than four thousand kleruchs, or out-settled citizens, had just 
 come over from Euboea. A sufficient force of citizens must of 
 course have been left behind to defend the eity. The Humbert 
 of the Persians we cannot be said to know at all, nor is there 
 anything certain except that they were greatly superior to the 
 Greeks." We hear from Herodotus that their armament origi- 
 nally consisted of six hundred ships of war, but we are not told 
 how many separate transports there were ; and, moreover, rein- 
 forcements had been procured as they came across the ^gean 
 from the islands successively conquered. The aggregate crews on 
 board of all their ships must have been between one hundred and 
 afty thousand and two hundred thousand men ; but what propor- 
 tion of these were fighting men, or how many actually did fight 
 at Marathon, we have no means of determining.^ There were a 
 
 ' Justin (ii, 9) savs that the total of the Persian army was six hundred 
 thousand, and that two hundred thousand perished. Plato (Menexen. p. 
 240) and Lvsias (Orat. Funebr. c. 7) speak of the Persian total as five 
 hundred thousand men. Valerius Maximus (v, 3), Pausanias (iv, 25), and 
 I'lutarch (Parallel. Grsec. ad init.), give three hundred thousand men. 
 CorneUus Nepos (Miltiades, c. 5) gives the more moderate total of one 
 hundred and ten thousand men. , u u r. i i 
 
 See the observations on the battle of Marathon, made both by Colonel 
 Leake and by Mr. Finlay, who have examined and described the locality ; 
 Leake, on the Demi of Attica, in Transactions of the Royal Society of 
 Literature, vol. ii, p. 160, seg.; and Finlay, on the Battle of Marathon, in 
 the same Transactions, vol. iii, pp. 360-380, etc. 
 
 Both have given remarks on the probable numbers of the armies assem- 
 bled ■ but there are reallv no materials, even for a probable guess, m respect 
 to the Persians. The silence of Herodotus (whom we shall find hereafter 
 very circumstantial as to the members of the army under Xerxes) seems to 
 ihow that he had no information which he could trust. His account of t.ie 
 battle of Marathon presents him in honorable contrast with the loose ana 
 boastful assertors who followed him ; for though he does not tell ns mut-h, 
 ind falls lamentably short of what we should like to know, yet all that he 
 does say is reasonable and probable as to the proceedings of both armies 
 and the little which he states becomes more trustworthy on that very ac- 
 count. - because it is so little, — showing that he keeps strclly within bM 
 
 nthorities. 
 
 15* 
 
 ) 
 
 \i 
 
 im •"^ 
 
 •Maii 
 
 HDir 
 
d46 
 
 HISTORY OF r.REECh. 
 
 certain propoitiijn of cavalry, and some transports expressly pre- 
 pared for the conveyance of horses : moreover^ Iltrodotus tclla 
 us that Ilippias selected the plain of Marathon for a hmdliig 
 place, because it wa^ che most convenient spot in Attira for cav- 
 alry movements, — though it is singular, that in the battle the 
 cavalry are not mentioned. 
 
 Marathon, situated near to a bay on the eastern vaii-t of At 
 tica, ar.d in a direction E.N.E. from Atliens, is divided by tho 
 hiirh ridjje of Mount Pentelikus from the city, with which it 
 communicated by tw(t roads, one to the north, another to the 
 Foiith of that mountain. Of the-e two road-, the northern, a* 
 once the short<*st and the most difficult, is tweaty-tv.u miles in 
 length : the southern — lunger but more ea^y, and the ordy one 
 practicable for chariots — is twenty--ix mihs in length, or about 
 six and a half hours of computed march. It [»as>c<l between 
 mounts Pentelikus and Flymettus, through the ancient denies of 
 Gargettus and Pallenc", and was the road by which Peisistratua 
 and nip[»ias when they landed at Marathon forty-seven years 
 betore, had marched to Athens. The bay of Marathon, sheltered 
 by a projecting cape from the northward, atfurds both deep wate* 
 and a shore convenient for landing; while ** its plain (says a 
 careftd modem obserTer ') extends in a perfect level along this 
 
 There is iiothini: in the accoimt of Herodotus to nnike u- l>t l.v \ <j that he 
 had ever visitetl the j^ronnd of Marathon. 
 
 ' See Mr. Finlay on tb ' Hattle of MarniJioii. Tran>arti»i!i . (■*<., vol. iii, 
 j»p. .104, 3r»s, 383, ut s'li'fd : compare II»>hhou>o, .Journey in AU>ania, i, 
 p. 432. 
 
 Colonel Leake thinks that the ancient touti of Marathon was not on the 
 exact site of tfie modern Marnthon, hnt at a place callcil Vrand, a little to 
 the south of Marathon (Leake, on the Demi of Attica, in the Transactions 
 of the Royal Society ot' Literature, 1829, vol. ii. p. 166). 
 
 " Below these two points," he ohser\'es, " (the tumuli of VranA and tho 
 hill of Kotroni,) the plain of Marathon expands to the shore of the hay, 
 which is near two miles distant from the opening of the valley of Vran4. 
 It is moderately well cultivated with com, and is one of the most fertile 
 ■T ots in Attica, though rather inconveniently subject to inundations from 
 the two torrer s which cross it, particularly that of Marathona. From 
 Lucian (in learo-Menippo) it appears that the parts about CRno% wert 
 noted for their fertility, and an Egyptian poet of the fifth century has cele 
 brated the vines and olives of Marathon. It is natural to suppose that the 
 tineyards occupied the rising groauds ; and it is probable that the oliT«» 
 
 ^i-iiiiiilHliitaiiiii 
 
 1* 
 
 \ 
 
 PLAIN OF MARATHOs:!. 
 
 8^ 
 
 fine bay, and is in length about six miles, in breadth never lesa 
 than al)Out one mile and a half. Two marshes bound the extrem- 
 ities of the plain : the southern is not very large, and is almost 
 dry at the conclusion of the great heats ; but the northern, which 
 generally covers considerably more than a square mile, offers 
 several parts which are at all seasons imi)assable. Both, however, 
 leave a broad, firm, sandy beach between them and the sea. The 
 uninterrui)ted flatness of the plain is hardly relieved by a single 
 tree; and an amphitheatre of rocky hills and rugged mountains 
 separates it from the rest of Attica, over the lower ridges of 
 which some steep and dilHcult paths communicate with the dis- 
 tricts of the interior." 
 
 The position occupied by Miltiad«''S before the battle, identitied 
 as it was to all subsequent Athenians by the sacred grove of 
 Herakles near Marathon, was probably on some portion of the 
 high ground above this plain, and Cornelius Nepos tells us that 
 he°protected it from the attacks of the Persian cavalry by felled 
 trees obstructing the ai)proach. The Persians occupied a position 
 on the plain ; while their fleet was ranged along the beach, and 
 Hippias himself marshalled them for the battle.^ The native 
 Persians and Saka?, the best troops in the whole army, were 
 placed in the centre, which they considered as the post of honor,* 
 
 trees were chieflv situated in the two valleys, where some are still growing: 
 for as to the plain itself, the circumstances of the battle incline one to \^ 
 lievc that it was anciently as destitute of trees as it is at the present day." 
 (Leake, on the Demi of Attica, Trans, of Roy. Soc. of Literature, vol. ii, 
 
 p. 162.) 
 
 Colonel Leake farther says, respecting the fitness of the Maratlionian 
 ground for cavalry movements : •' As I rode across the plain of Marathon 
 with a peasant of Vrand, he remarked to me that it was a fine place for 
 cavalry to fight in. None of the modem Marathonii were above the rank 
 of laborers : they have heard that a great battle was once fought there, bat 
 ihat is all they know." (Leake, ut sup. ii, p. 175.) 
 
 * Ilcrodot. vi, 107. 
 
 • Plutarch, Sympobiac. i, 3, p. 619; Xenophon, Anabos. i, 8, 21 ; Aniia, 
 
 i, 8, 18; iii, 11, 16. 
 
 We may compare, with this established battle-array of the Persian ar 
 kiies, that* of the Turkish armies, adopted and constantly followed ever 
 •ince the victorious battle of Ikonium, in 1386, gained by Amurath th« 
 First over the Karamanians. The European troops, or those of Rum, 
 occupy the left wing : the Asiatic trooos, or those of Anatoli, the riKhl 
 
 \' 
 
 V 
 
 
 i h 
 
848 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 and which was occupi< d by the Persian king h.m-cJt*, when preft 
 ent at a battle. The right wing was so regarded by the Greeka^ 
 and the |K)lemarch Kallimachus had the command of it ; the 
 hopHtes being arrangccl in the order of their respective tribea 
 from right to left, and at tlie extreme left stood the Plata^ans. It 
 was necessary for Miltiadt-s to present a front equal, or nearly 
 equal, to that of tlie more numerous Pe«ian host, in order to 
 guard himself from being taken in flaiik: and with this view he 
 drew up the central tribes, including the Leontis and Antiochis, 
 In shallow files, and o<' uipying a large breadth of ground ; while 
 eajh of the wings vva? in stronger and deeper order, so as to 
 make his attack etlicitrit on both sides. His whole army con- 
 sisttMl of hoplite<, with some slaves as unarmed or light-armed 
 attendants, but without either bounicii or cavalry. Nor could 
 the Persians have l)een very strong in this latter force, seeing 
 Jiat their horses had to be trun -ported across the -i'Egean. But 
 the elevated position of Miltiades enabled ihem to take some 
 measure of the numbers under his command, and the entire ab 
 eence of cavalry aiiionir their enemies could not but coutirm tho 
 confidence with whit h a long career of uninterrupted victory ha.; 
 impressed their genera s. 
 
 At length the sacrifices in the Greek camp were favorable for 
 battle, and Miltiades, who had everyvhing to :jain by coming im. 
 mediately to close ([uarlers, ordered his army to advance at a 
 running step over the interval of one mile which separated the 
 fcwo armies. This rapid forward movement, accompanied by the 
 war-cry, or pa^an, which always animated the charge of the Greek 
 ■oldier, astounded the I*er?ian army; who construed it as an 
 act of desperate courage, little short of insanity, in a body not 
 only small but destitutt; of cavalry or archers, — but who, at the 
 •ame time, felt their conscious superiority sink within them. It 
 
 ^ iiig : the Janissaries are in the centre. The Suhan, or the Grand Vizii; 
 •urronndcd l>y the national cavalry, or Spahis, is in the central p<)int of 
 •M (Von Hammer, Geschichte des Osraannischen Reichs, book v, vol. i, 
 p. 199). 
 
 About the honor of occupying the right wing in a Grecian army, see iq 
 parcicnlar the animated dispute between the Athenians and the Tegeatei 
 before the battle of Platsea ( Herodot. ix, 27 ) : it is the post assigned to tht 
 heroic kings of legendary warfare (Eurip. Supphces, 657) 
 
 BATTLE ^y MARATHON 
 
 349 
 
 .eems to have been long remembered also among the Gveeks «i 
 fce luliar characteristic of the battle of Marathon and Herod- 
 .Lx2s us that the Athenians were the first Greeks who ever 
 ct;"L^^^ It doubtless ope..ted beneficially in render- 
 
 Z\e Persian cavalry and archers -mp-atively mnocuo^^^ 
 "ul we may reasonably suppose that it also disordered the Ath^ 
 nian ranks and that when they reached the Persian front, they 
 To both otu of breath and unsteady in that line of presented 
 Tp/ar. and shields which constituted their force. On the two 
 wine, where the files were deep, this disorder produced no mis- 
 Ihc:;;^ ffect: the Persians, after a certain resistance were 
 overborne and driven back. But in the centre, where the files 
 were ^^^^llow, and where, moreover, the native Persians and 
 :Z diolc: t'roops of the army were posted the ^^^^^ 
 
 disordered Athenian hoplites ^-^V v ' t^xLiS^ 
 ditficulties. The tribes Leontis and Antiochis, with rhemis^kl^ 
 and Aristei..s among them, were actually ^f^'f^J^^^"^^ 
 
 . Herodot. vi, 112. UpC.ro. ,.v yap 'EVAr^vu. navr.v ruv ii.ei, lS(.e., 
 
 6p6,u H ^o'A¥.ov, ''TZ\^r.e was obviously one of the most remark- 
 The mnnmg pace of ^^.^. ^^^^^^^'^^^ ^ c^^^^^ Leake and Mr. Finlay 
 
 mile. The probal.ility is, that the> '^''"y ^Jf ^^j^ ,^^4 ^ »„ of 
 
 ,.e.. reason of the defeat of the c.„ r. I« - ^ F°ba^^„„„, „, ^Herod- 
 
 ""^ t!^ r l":,r:the th dZce be L.^^y stated, we canno. 
 »tus hi \lh. ihoutl »netn required some steadiness of disci- 
 
 certain". say: '»*"''''>'' f''i*^Xn Zrging, from becoming accel- 
 p,i„c to prevent the s ep o ^"Pl^ ^^f ^ '';^^„% f Kunaxa in Xenoph. 
 
 „.d "-'';;-"-,,f2f^,:^7:';::pa«> Poly«n.ii,2,3. The passage 
 ^^''ulXn^ere^d'lo contrasts'the advantages with the d.s.dvan- 
 
 tages of the runnins charge. ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ 
 
 Both Colonel Leake and Mr. Fmlay "7 «> P° ^ j cannot 
 
 ■ 1 i,„ .ho mn nrniie« : thev differ m the spot caooeu, »u>" 
 Sttat^her^ rsuffi^n. evidence to be had in favor of any spot L^> 
 SXtle Persi^n oo-"-'''- -^ -^^^^Vml^ -d -« 
 --S^r ft tX r ^nir: cr^ayT^ake, Transact, a 
 
 '■.'einxlot. vi. ..... Kara rofro .a r„ U..r 0. /J^P.^apo-, «<•' f'i«^ 
 
 iiit*M0v tc ri^v uean-ainv 
 
850 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 /. 
 
 ■eems to have foreseen the possibility of such a check, wher bo 
 foind himself compelled to diminish so materially the depth of 
 his centre : tor his wings, having routed the enemies opy>o<ed tc 
 them, were stayed from pursuit until the centre was extricated, 
 and the Persians and Sakie put to flight along with the rest. 
 The pursuit then became general, and the Persians were ch:i.-;ed 
 to tLeir ships ranged in line along the shore : some of them be- 
 came involved in tlie impassable marsh and thnc {.»Mi-f - I' The 
 Athenians tried to set the ships on fire, but the d<^f'eiice litre wan 
 both vigorous and successful, — several oi' the forward v/arriore 
 of Athens were slain, — and only seven ships out of the numerous 
 fleet destroyed.'-* This part of the battle terminated to the ad- 
 vanfag*' of the Persian-. They repid>rd tlie Athenians fi-om the 
 •ea-shore, and secured a safe re 'mbarkation ; leaving few or no 
 prisoners, but a ricli spoil of tents and equipments which had 
 been disembarked and could not lie carried away. 
 
 Herodotus estimate^ the number of those who fel^ on the Per- 
 sian side in this memorable action at six thousand four hundred 
 men: th«wmmber of Athenian dead is accurately known, since 
 all were collected for the last solemn obsequies, — they were one 
 hundre<l and ninety-two. How many were wounded, we do not 
 hear. The brave Kallimachus the polemarch, and Stesilaus, one 
 of the ten generals, were among the slain ; together with Kyne* 
 geirus son of Enphorion, who, in laying hold on the poop-staff' of 
 one of the vessels, had his hand cut otf by an axe,' and died of 
 the wound. H«; was brother of the |)oet ^Eschylus, himself pres' 
 ent at the fight ; to whose imagination this battle at the ships 
 must have emphaticallv recalled the fifteenth book of the Iliad. 
 
 HtTodotiis here tells us the wliolc truth without disguise : Piuturck 
 ( Aristi'iflt's. r. 3) only says that tht- I'tT-ian cciitn- rnadt- a longer resist 
 *nro, and ixavv tho tribes in the (Jrerinn centre more trotihle to overthrow 
 
 • Pausan. i, :V2, 6. -^ Ilerodot. vi. 1 1.Vl 15. 
 
 ' Her()(h>t. vi, 114. This ss the statement of Herodotus respectin<: Kyne- 
 ,?*irns. How creditably does his character as an historian contrast with 
 thA* of the subsequent ronumcefs ! Justin tells us that Kvne^eirus first 
 •cized the vessel with his right hand : that was cut ot!*, and he held ihfl 
 ressel with his left : when he had lost that also, he seized the ship with hifl 
 leeth, " like a wild beasr." (Justin, ii, 9^ — Justin seems to have found thi« 
 iiHtcment in many different authors : " Cynegiri mihtis virtus, mnltia 
 icriptoruin laudibus celel^rata.'* 
 
 VICTORS OF THK ATHENIANS 
 
 351 
 
 Both these Athenian generals are said to have perished in the 
 ^sLulf ! the slups, apparently the hottest part o^ the combat 
 Tl^ tatement of L Persian loss as given by Herodotus appears 
 .xodcrate at.d reasonable,^ but he does not specify any dt.tn. 
 iruished individuals as having fallen. 
 
 "^Bu. ,Ue Persians, .hough thus defeated and compelled U, al.an- 
 .SL position of MunUhon. were not yet disposed to rel.nqu..l 
 ^Je^L their chances against Attica. Their fleet was observ d 
 t^T.L direction of Cape Sunlum,-a i-ort.on being sen to 
 ^.u pV Eretrian prisoners and the stores which had been le t 
 n ".he Iw of ^gilL At the same time a shield, dtscenuble 
 •om it l^lthed suH-ace afar off, wa. seen held aloa "pon some 
 high yol of Attica;^ -perhaps on the summ.t of Mount Pet. 
 leUkus a^ Colonel Leake supposes with much plaus.bd.ty. The 
 StrLTs doubtless saw it .s well .s '1- r-'- i^l^^^^ 
 tiades did not fail to put the right interpretat.on upon .t Uken^^ n 
 conju.te.ion with the course of the departn.g fleet, rhe ".dd 
 wns a signal put up by partisans in the country to "vite U.e 
 PersLl round to Athens by sea, while the Marathoman army 
 lr:::..t. Mil.ia..ssaw .hrou^.h the plo, an^ lost not a^™> 
 
 Si-ival of the Persian fleet.3 Datis soon came off the ,x>rt 
 
 J„,in, ii, 9; and S"i^as, v, no«a,^ „.,,«sen,ed a, having been killed 
 
 In the account of 1^"=*'*'; """'.r^' , L Athenians refused to give up 
 
 ,a the battle, and it was farther *-<» t"^" 'h* j''^„\„,3 thereupon Xe««. 
 
 ,ris body for interment; -^-ch w^ on of t.^ fero ^^^ ^^^^^^^..^^ ^^^^ 
 
 rfterwards invaded Greece. It i. «™;^°\; Marathon was rather em- 
 Ktisias followed, the alleged ^^;:'}?' ^^^^\^l"^,Xi,i, the note .f 
 
 s^fi^i^hrtodp/ritr^^^^ ,^ 
 
 r«trewv. ^ „,nLfiT'kuov lovvtov. 'A'»Vvaioi *e, A| 
 
 V 
 
852 
 
 HISTORY OF GREKCU. 
 
 f! 
 
 erf Phalerum, but the partisans of Hippias had been dismayed 
 by th2 rapid return of the Marathonian army, and he did not 
 therefore find those aids and facilities which he had anticipated 
 for a fresh disembarkation in the immediate neighborhood of 
 Athens. Though too late, ho\vev<'r, it seems that he was not 
 m ich too late: the Marathonian army had only just completed 
 their forced return-march. A little less quickness on the part of 
 Miltiades in deciphering the treasonable signal and giving the in- 
 stant order of march.. — a little less energy on the part of the 
 Athenian citizens in superadding a fatiguing raarcli to a no les3 
 fatiguing combat, — and the Persians, with the partisans of Hip- 
 pias, might have betn found in p<)>-»'<sion of Athens. As the 
 facts turned out, Datis, tindinj? at Phalerum no friendlv move 
 nient to encourage him, but, on tlie contrary, the unexpected pres 
 ence of the soldiers vlio had already vanquished him at Mara- 
 thon, — made no attempt again to disembark in Attica, and sailed 
 away, after a short delay, to the Cvclades. 
 
 Thus was Athens rescued, for this time at least, from a danjjer 
 aot less terrible than imminent. Nothing could have rescued her 
 except that decisive and instantaneoijs attack which Miltiades so 
 emj)hatically urged. Tlie riKHiing step on the field of Marathon 
 might cau^e sor.e disorder in the ranks of the hoplites ; but 
 extreme haste in bringing on the conibat was the only means eft 
 preventing disunion Mud distraction in the mind< of the citizens. 
 Imjjerfect as the account is which Herodotus gives of this most 
 interesting crisi>, we -e<' plainly that the partisans of Hippias 
 had actually organize d a con.-|)iiacy, and that it oidy failed by 
 coming a little too late. Th*- biiirht shield uplifted on Mount 
 Pentelikus, apprizing the Persians that matters were prepared 
 for them at Athens, wa>^ intended to have come to their view 
 before any action had taken place at Marathon, and wliile the 
 Athenian army were yet detained there ; .o that Datis might 
 have sent a portion of his fleet round to Phalerum, retaining the 
 
 vpiv fj Tovc jSapfSapov^ fjKUv, kqI effTparonedevaavro amy/ihoi /f 'Hpaxy^T/totr 
 rot) kv yiapai^Ctvi l^ aXXo 'HpaKlijlov rd hv Kvvoffapyei. 
 
 Plutarch (Bellone an Pace clariores fuerint Athenienses, c. 8, p. 350) 
 represents Miltiades as returning :o Athens on the day after the battle ; it 
 ■■Mt have been on the sajne afteraoon, according to the &.:coimt of Henkt 
 
 ' f 
 
 ^n^ .wumwi i* "- ' '>■■■■>*■■ I * . i W 
 
 BLMAKKS ON THE BATTLE. 
 
 353 
 
 I«st for combat with the enemy before him. If it had ooce 
 become known to the Marathonian army that a Persian detach- 
 ment had landed at Phalerum,» — where there was a good plain 
 for cavalry to act in, prior to the building of the Phaleric wall, 
 as had been seen in the defeat of the Spartan Anchimolius by 
 the Thessalian cavalry, in 510 B.C., — that it had been joined by 
 timid or treacherous Athenians, and had perhaps even got pos- 
 session of the city, — their minds would have been so distracted 
 by the double danger, and by fears for their absent wives and 
 children, that they would have been disqualified for any unani- 
 mous execution of military orders, and generals as well a« 
 soldiers would have become incurably divided in opinion,— 
 perhaps even mistrustful of each other. The citizen-soldier of 
 Greece generally, and especially of Athens, possessed in a high 
 degree both personal bravery and attachment to order and disci- 
 pline ; but his bravery was not of that equal, imperturbable, 
 uninquiring character, which belonged to the battalions of Wei- 
 lington or Napoleon, — it was fitful, exalted or depressed by 
 casiial occurrences, and often more sensitive \o dangers absent 
 and unseen, than to enemies immediately in his front. Hence 
 the advantage, so unspeakable in the case before us, and so weU 
 appreciated by Miltiades, of having one undivided Athenian 
 army, — with one hostile army, and only one, to meet in the 
 field When we come to the battle of Salamis, ten years later, 
 it will be seen that the Greeks of that day enjoyed the same 
 Advantage: though the wisest advisers of Xerxes impress^ 
 upon him the prudence of dividing his large force, and of send- 
 \xvf detaxjhments to assail separate Greek states— which would 
 infallibly prmluce the effect of breaking up the combined Gre- 
 cian host, and leaving no central or cooperating force for the 
 defence of Greece generally. Fortunately for the Greeks, the 
 ohildish insolence of Xerxes led him to despise all such advice, 
 as implying conscious weakness. Not so Datis and Hippias. 
 Sensible of"^ the prudence of distracting the attention of the 
 Athenians by a double attack, they laid a scheme, while th-i 
 main army was at Marathon, for rallying the partisans of Hip- 
 pirns with a force to assist them, in the n eighborhood of Athena , 
 
 » Herodot. v, 62, 63. 
 
 VOL. nr. 
 
 23qo. 
 
$H 
 
 HISIOK\ OF GREECE. 
 
 I' 
 
 4i| 
 
 ~- aiid ihe signal was upheld by these partisans as soon as tlieii 
 DLeasures were tai<ea. But the rapidity of Miltiades so preci'pi- 
 tated the battle, that this signal came too late, and was only 
 given, '* when the Persians were already in their ships," ^ after 
 the Marat honian defeat. Even then it might have proved 
 dangerous, had not the movements of Miltiades been as rapid 
 after the victory a-, before it : but if time had been allowed tor 
 ihi Persian movement on Athens before the battle of Marathon 
 had been fouglit, the triumph of the Athenians might well have 
 been exchanged for a calamitous servitude. To Miltiades 
 belongs the credit of having comprehended the emergency 
 from the beginning, and overruled the irresolution of his col- 
 leagues by his own single-hearted energy. The chances all 
 turned out in his favor, — for the unexpected junction of the 
 Platuiaus in the very encampment of Marathon must have 
 wrought up the courage of liis army to the highest pitch : ar d 
 not only did he thus esca|>e all the depressing and distractinj:; 
 accidents, but he vvas fortunate enough to ^nd this extraLeoui 
 encouragement immediately preceding the battle, from a sourc4 
 on which he could not have calculated. 
 
 I have already observed that the phase of Grecian history 
 best known to us, amidst wliich the great authors from whom wo 
 draw our information lived, was one of contempt for the Per- 
 sians in the field. And it requires some etfort of imagination t« 
 call back previous feelings after the circumstances have been 
 altogether reversed: perhaps even ^schylus the poet, at the 
 time when he composed his tragedy of the Persai, to celebrate 
 Ihe disgraceful flight of the invader Xerxes, may have forgot- 
 ten the emotions with which he and his brother Kynegeirus must 
 have marched out from Athens fifteen years before, on the eve 
 of the battle of Marathon. It must therefore be again mei> 
 tioned that, down to the time when Datis landed in the bay ol 
 Marathon, the tide of Persian success had never yet been inter 
 rupted, — and that- especially during the ten years immediately 
 preceding, the high-handed and cruel extinction of the Ionic 
 levolt had aggravated to the highest pitch the alarm of th<j 
 
 * Horodot. vi, 115 Toiai IliiMJyat uvadeiai aanida^ iovifi ^df ih 
 
 - ♦.•<i^|i 
 
 ■llmia 
 
 CHANGE OF FRELING TOWARDS THE PERSIANS 356 
 
 QreeLs. To this must be added the successes of Datis him 
 Belt; and the calamities of Eretria, coming with all the freshness 
 of novelty as an apparent sentence of death to Athens. The 
 extreme effort of courage required in the Athenians, to encoun- 
 ter such invaders, is attested by the division of opinion among 
 the ten generals. Putting all the circumstances together, it ii 
 without a parallel in Grecian history, surpassing even the combat 
 of ThermopyUe, as wiU appear when I come to describe thai 
 memorable event. And the admirable conduct of the five dis- 
 sentient generals, when outvoted by the decision of the pole- 
 march against them, in cooperating heartily for the success of a 
 pclicy which they deprecated, — proves how much the feelings 
 of a constitutional democracy, and that entire acceptance of the 
 pronounced decision of the majority on which it rests, had 
 worked themselves into the Athenian mind. The combat of 
 Marathon was by no means a very decisive defeat, but it was 
 a defeat, — and the first which the Persians had ever received 
 from Greeks in the field. If the battle of Salamis, ten years 
 afterwards, could be treated by Themistokles as a hair-breadth 
 escape for Greece, much more is this true of the battle of Mara- 
 thon ; ' which first afforded reasonable proof, even to discerning 
 and resolute Greeks, that the Persians might be effectually 
 repelled, and the independence of European Greece maintained 
 a<^ainst them, — a conviction of incalculable value in reference 
 to the formidable trials destined to follow. Upon the Atheniana 
 themselves, the first to face in the field successfully the terrific 
 look of a Persian army, the effect of the victory was yet more 
 stirring and profound.-^ It supplied them with resolution for 
 
 • Herodot. viii, 108. Vfielc; Se, cvpijf^a 7'V evprjKOfiev ijfiiac re Koi r^ 
 F.Z/lu«5a, vecpo^ roaovrov av&pdinjv uroxjufievoi. 
 
 "Pausanias, i, 14,4; Thucyd. i. 73. (pafiev yap Uapa&uvi re fiovot 
 fooKivdvvivoai t<^ I3a(i3dp^ etc. 
 
 Herodot. vi, 112. Trpuui re avenxovro kff^rfTu re Uvf^tKr^v bpiovTE^, koI 
 Ivdpag TavTTfv ka^Tjfievovc reug de ^v toiol 'EU.rjaL Kal rb oivofia rb ^Lrjdijy 
 f«3oc (iKOvaai. 
 
 It is not unworthy of remark, that the memorable oath in the oration ol 
 Demosthenes, de Coron;\. wherein he adjures the warriors of Marathoa 
 COpiM the phrase of Thut-ydides, — ov /^a roiir kv yiapa^dvL irpoKivSw 
 pt^0mvTac Tuv TTpoyovuv, etc <Demcsthen. de CoronA, c. 60.) 
 
 A 
 
35 1: 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 EFFECT OF THE BATTLE OF MARATHON. 
 
 dsi 
 
 I! 
 
 i 
 
 the far greater actual sacrifices which they cneerfullj underwent 
 ten years afterward?, at the invasion of Xerxes, without falter- 
 in<y in their Pan-Hellenic fidelity ; and it strengthened thera at 
 borne by swelling the tide of common sentiment and patri,>tio 
 fraternity in the bosom of every individual citizen. It was the 
 exj)loit of Athenians alone, but of all Athenians without dissent 
 or exception, — the boast of orators, repeated until it almost 
 degenerate<l into common-place, though the people seem never 
 to liave b(»come weiry of allusions to their single-handed victory 
 over a host of forty-six nations.' It had been purchased with 
 out a drop of intestine bloodshed, — for even the unknown 
 traitors who raised the signal-shield du Mount Pentelikus, look 
 care not to betray themselves by want of ap|)arent sympathy 
 with the triumph : lastly, it was the final guarantee of theii 
 democracy, barring all chance of restoration of Hippias for the 
 future. Themistokles- is said to have been robbed of his sleep 
 by the trophies of Miltiades, and this is cited in })roof of his 
 ambitious temperament ; but without supposing either jealousy 
 or personal love of glory, the rapid transit from extreme danger 
 to unparalleled triumph might well deprive of rest even the 
 most sober-minded Athenian. 
 
 Who it was that raised the treacherous signal-shield to attract 
 the Persians to Athens was never ascertained : very probably, 
 in the full exultation of success, no investigation was made. Of 
 course, however, the public belief would not be satisfied without 
 eingling out some persons as the authors of such a treason ; and 
 the information received by Herodotus (probably about 450-440 
 B.C., forty or fifty years after the Marathonian victory) ascribed 
 the deed to the Alkmironids ; nor does he notice any other re- 
 ported authors, though he rt^ects the allegation against them 
 npco very sufficient grounds. They were a race religiously 
 
 * So the computation stands in the language of Athenian orators 
 (Herodot. ix, 27.) b would be unfair to examine it critically. 
 
 * IMutarch, Themistokles. c. 3, According to Cicero (Epist. ad Attic, ix, 
 10) and Justin (ii, 9) Hippias was killed at Marathon. Suidas (v, 'iTr-xia^) 
 •ays that he died afterwards at Leranos. Neither of these statementa 
 Wf.ma probable. Hippias would hardly go to Lemnos, which was an 
 A'benian possession: and had he been slain ia the battle, Herodctui 
 WMki have been Hkelj to mention it. 
 
 [' I 
 
 fc>mted, ever since the Kylonian sacrilege, and were therefore 
 co'^venient persons to brand with the odium of an anonymous 
 crime ; while party feud, if it did not originally invent, would at 
 lea«^t be active in spreading and certifying such rumors. At the 
 time when Herodotus knew Athens, the political enmity between 
 Ferikles son of Xanthippus, and Kimon son of Miltiades, was 
 at its hei-ht : Perikles belonged by his mother's side to the Alk- 
 maeonid race, and we know that such lineage was made subser- 
 Tient to political manoeuvres against him by his enemies.^ More- 
 over the enmity between Kimon and Perikles had been mhented 
 by both from their fathers ; for we shall find Xanthippus, not 
 Ion- after the battle of Marathon, the prominent accuser of Mil- 
 tial^^ Though Xanthippus was not an Alkmreonid, his mar 
 ria-e with Agariste connected himself indirectly, and his son 
 Perikles directly, with that race. And we may trace in this 
 standing political feud a probable origin for the false reports as 
 to the treason of the Alkma'onids, on that great occasion which 
 bunded the glory of Miltiades ; for that the reports were false, 
 the intrinsic probabilities of the c^se, supported by the judgment 
 of Herodotus, afford ample ground for believing. 
 
 When the Athenian army made its sudden return-march from 
 Marathon to Atliens, Aristeides with his tribe was left to guard 
 the field and the spoil ; but the speedy retirement of Datis from 
 Attica left the Athenians at full liberty to revisit the scene and 
 di<char<re the last duties to the dead. A tumulus was erected 
 on the Ipof^ — such distinction was never conferred by Athens ex- 
 cept in this case onlv — to the one hundred and ninety-two Athe- 
 nian citizens who hid been slain. Their names were inscribed 
 on ten pillars erected at the spot, one for each tribe : there was 
 also a second tumulus for the slain Plata^ans, a third for the 
 slave, and a separate funeral monument to Miltiades himself. 
 Six hundred years after the battle, Pausanias saw the tumulus, 
 and could still read on the pillars the names of the immortalized 
 warriors ;3 and even now a conspicuous tumulus exists aboul 
 Wf a mUe from the sea-shore, which Colonel Leake believes U 
 
 Thucyd. i, 126. _.. ll^^^y^"'^ 
 
 » Pansan. i, 32, 3. Compare the olegy of Kntias ap. Athenie. i p. M 
 
7 
 
 I 
 
 . t 
 
 I' 
 
 nbs 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 be the same.' The inhabitants of the demt oi Marathon wor- 
 Bhipped these slain warriors as heroes, alon^r with their own 
 eponyraus and witfi HeraklSs. 
 
 So splendid a vi( tory had not been achiived, in the belief of 
 the Athenians, without marked supernatural aid. The n-od Pan 
 had met th3 courier Phei<lippides on Iiis hasty route from Atliens 
 to Sparta, and had (old him that he was much hurt tliat tlie Atiie- 
 niaus had as yet neglected to worship him ;^ in spite of which 
 neglect, however, he promised them effective aid at JVIarathon. 
 The promise was faithfully executed, and the Athenians repaid 
 it by a temple with annual worship and sacrifice. Moreover, the 
 hero Theseus was seen strenuously ass). iing in the battle ; and 
 an unknown warrior, in rustic garb and armed only with a ploiiirh- 
 share, dealt destruction among the Persian rank^ : after the bat- 
 tle he could not be found ; and the Athenians, on asking at 
 Delphi who he was, were directed to worship the hero Echetlus.^ 
 Even in the time of Pausanias, this memorable battle tield was 
 heard to resound every night with the noise of combatants and 
 the snorting of horses. " It is dangerous (observes that pious 
 author) to go to the spot with the express purj)ose of seeing 
 what is i)as«ing ; but if a man finds himself there by accident, 
 witliuut having heard anything about the matter, the gods will 
 not be angry with him." The gods, it seems, could not pardon 
 the inquisitive mortal who deliberately pried into their secrets. 
 Amidst the ornaments with which Athens was decorated duriuj^ 
 the free working of her democracy, the glories of Marathon of 
 course occupied a ccmspicuous place. The battle wa-« [Kiinted on 
 one of the compartments of the portico called P.ekiK-. wherein, 
 amidst several figures of gods and heroes, — Atiirn.\ Jlerakles, 
 Theseus, Pk'hetl us, and the local patron of Marat hoi:, — were seen 
 honored and prominent the polemarch Kallimachus and ihe gen- 
 eral Miltiades, while the Plata^ans were distinguished by thtsir 
 Bceotian leather casipies.- And the sixth of the month Boedro- 
 
 * The tumulus now existino: is about thirty feet hiph. nnd two hundred 
 yards in circumference. (Leake, on the Demi of Attica Transactions o# 
 Boypl Soc. of Literat. i), p. 171.) 
 
 ■ Herodot. vi, 105 ; Pausan. i, 28, 4. 
 
 ' Plutarch, Theseus, <'. 24 ^ Pausan. i, 32, 4. 
 
 ' Pausan. i, 15, 4; Demosthen. cent. Ne»r. c. 25^ 
 
 TARDY ASSISTANCE FROM THE SPARTANS. 
 
 359 
 
 mien, the anniversary of the battle, was commemorated by aa 
 annual ceremony, even down to the time of Plutarch.i ^ 
 
 "V^rodot. vi, 120; Plutarch, Camill. c. 19: De Malignit. Hcrodoti, c 
 26 n 862 ; and De Gloria Athenicnsium, c. 7. 
 
 Boedromiou was the third month of the Attic year, which year began 
 near about the summer solstice. The first three Attic mouths, Hekatom- 
 bieon, Metageitnion, Boedromiou, approach (speaking in a loose maimer) 
 neari; to our Julv, August, September; probably the month Hekatomba^on 
 b«'can usually at some day in the latter half of June. ,, • ♦k 
 
 From the fact that the courier Pheidippides reached Sparta on the nmth 
 day of the moon, and that the two thousand Spartans arrived in Attica on 
 the third day after the full moon, during which interval the battle took 
 place, we see that the sixth day of Boedromiou could not be the sixth day 
 of the moon. The Attic mouths, though professedly lunar mouths d.d 
 not at this time therefore accurately correspond with th^ course of the 
 moon. See Mr. Clinton, Fast. Helleu. ad an. 490 B.C. Plutarch (m the 
 Treatise De Malign. Herodoti, above referred to) appears to have no con- 
 ceptiou of this discrepancy between the Attic month and the course of the 
 mLi. A portion of the censure which he easts on Herodotus is grounded 
 m the assumptiou that the two must coincide. 
 
 M Boeckh, following Frerct and Larcher, contests the statement of Plu- 
 tarch that the battle was fought ou the sixth of the month Boedromion 
 l.ut upon reasons which appear to me insufficient. His clnef argument 
 rests upon another statement of Plutarch (derived from some lost verses of 
 ^schylus), that the tribe Mantis had the right wing or post of honor at 
 the battle and that the pul.lic vote, pursuant to which the anny was led 
 out of Athens, was passed during the prytany of the tnbe Aautis. He 
 assumes that the reason why this tribe was posted on the right wing, 
 n^ust have been, that it had drawn by lot the first prytany in that par- 
 ticular year: if this be granted, then the vote for drawing out the airny 
 must have been passed in the first prytany, or within the farst thirty-fiv6 
 or thirtv-six days of the Attic year, during the space between the first of 
 Hekatomba^on and the fifth or sixth of Metageitnion. But it is certain 
 that the interval, which took place between the army leaving the city and 
 the battle, was much less than one month, -we may even say less than 
 one week The battle, therefore, must have been fought between the sixth 
 •«d tenth of Metageitnion. (Plutarch, Symposiac. i, 10, 3, and Ideler. 
 Handbuch der Chronologic, vol. i, p. 291.) Herodotus (vi HI) says that 
 the tribes were arranged in line u, vpiMovro, - ^^ ^ they were nuic 
 bcred " — which is contended to mean necessarily the arrangement betweea 
 them,' determined by lot for the prytanies of that particular Jear. ''ta 
 aeie instruenda (savs Boeckh, Comment, ad Corp. Inscnpt. p. 299) Athe- 
 aienses non constantem, sed variabilem secundum prytamas ordmem ^ 
 eutos esse, ita ut tribus ex hoc ordine inde a dextro comu disponerentur, 
 docui in Commentatione de pugna Marathonid." Pn>a.mia L«ct. Unir 
 BeroUn. sestiv. a. 181S. 
 
 

 If 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 860 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Two thousand Spartans, starting from their city, immediately 
 after the full moon, reached the frontier of Attica, on the thii^ 
 
 The Proccmia hert referred to I hare not been able to consult, and they 
 may therefore contain additional reasons to prove the point advanced, viz., 
 that the order of the ten tribes in line of battle, beginning from the ri<j;ht 
 wing, was conformable to their order in prytanizing, as drawn by lot for 
 the year; but I think the passages of Herodotus and Plutarch now before 
 cs insufficient to establish this point. From the fact that the tribe TEantis 
 had the right wing at the battle of Marathon, we are by no means war- 
 ranted in inferring tl at that tribe had drawn by lot the earliest prytany in 
 the year. Other reasons, in my judgment eyually probable, may be as- 
 Mgned in explanatior of the circumstance : one reason. I think, decidedly 
 more probable. This reason is, that the battle was fuiiulit during the pry- 
 tany of the tribe .^^antis, which may be coiicluded from the statement 
 vt llutarch, that the vote for marching out the army from Athens was 
 pa.«iiied during the prjtany of that tribe : for tbe interval, between the march 
 of the army out of the city and the battle, must bave been only a very few 
 day?. Moreover, the deme Marathon belonge<l to tlie tribe yEantis (see 
 Boeckh, ad Inscript. No. 172, p. 309) : the battle being fought in their 
 deme, the Marathonians may perhaps have claimed on tbis express ground 
 the post of honor for their tribe ; just as we see that at the tirst battle of Man- 
 tineia against the Lacedaemonians, the Mantineians were allowed to oceupy 
 the right wing or po;>5t of honor, " because the battle was fought in their 
 territory," (Thucyd. v, 67.) Lastly, the deme Ai)bidni« also lielonged to 
 the tribe j^antis (see Boeckh, 1. c.) : now the polemarch Kallimachus was 
 an Aphidnaean (Herodot. vi, 109), and Herodotus expressly tells us, -the 
 law or custom then stood among the Athenians, that the [)olemarch should 
 have the right wing," — 6 yiip vo/xoc Tore ft\f nvru roiai ^K'&Tjvaloiai, rbv 
 iTitXifMapxov I^X^iv Kepac Td di^tov {vi, 111). Where the polemarch stood, 
 there his tribe would be likely to stand : and the language of Herodotus 
 indeed seems directly to imply that he identifies the tribe of the polemarch 
 with the polemarch himself, — ijyto^h'ov 6e tovtov, e^ei^EKovTo uc upi^/itovTo 
 ai il>v7.ai^ txofievai uyAij'kijv, — meaning that the order of tribes began by 
 that of the polemarch being in the leading position, and was then " taken 
 np " by the rest " in isiumerical sequence," — i. e. in the order of their pry 
 tanizing sequence for the year. 
 
 Here are a concun-ence of reasons to explain why the tribe jEantis had 
 the right wing at the battle of Marathon, even though it may not have 
 been first in the order of prytanizing tribes for the year. Boeckh, there- 
 ftsre, is not warranted in inferring the second of these two facts from the 
 trat. 
 
 Ti? concurrence of these three rea.'^ons, all in favor of the same con- 
 elation, and all independent of the reason supposed by Boeckh, appears to 
 me to have great weight ; but I regard the first of the three, even siuglf 
 likeii, as more probable than his reasor If my view of the case be coT" 
 
 TARDY ASSISTANCE FKOM THE SPARTANS. 
 
 361 
 
 day of their march, — a surprising effort, when we consider thai 
 the total distance from Sparta to Athens was about one hundred 
 
 i 
 
 rect, the sixth day of Boedromion, the day of battle as given by Plutareh. 
 is not to be called in question. That day comes in the second prytany of 
 the year, which begins about the sixth of Mctageitnion, and ends about 
 the twelfth of Bocnlromion, and which must in this year have fallen to the 
 lot of the tribe TEantis. On the first or second day of BoCdromion, the 
 vote for marching out the army may have passed ; on the sixth the battle 
 was fought ; both during the prytany of this tribe. 
 
 I Sim not prepared to carry these reasons farther than the particular case 
 J the battle of Marathon, and the vindication of the day of that battle as 
 stated by Plutarch ; nor would I apply them to later periods, such as the 
 Pelopounesian war. It is certain that the army regulations of Athens were 
 considerably modified between the battle of Marathon and the Pelopon- 
 nesian war, as well in other matters as in what regards the polemarch \ 
 and we have not sufficient information to enable us to determine whether 
 in that later period the Athenians followed any known or perpetual rule in 
 the battle-order of the tribes. Milihiry considerations, connected with the 
 Ptutc cf the particular army serving, must have prevented the constant ob- 
 servance of any rule : thus we can hardly imagine that Nikias, command- 
 ing the army before Syracuse, could have been tied down to any invariable 
 order of battle among the tribes to which his hoplites belonged. More- 
 over, the expedition against Syracuse lasted more than one Attic year: can 
 it be believed that Nikias, on receiving information from Athens of the 
 sequence in which the prytanies of the tribes had been drawn by lot during 
 the second year of his exiiedition. would be compelled to marshal his army 
 in a new battle-order conformably to it? As the military operations of 
 the Athenians became more extensive, they would find it necessaiyto leave 
 such dispositions more and more to the general serving in every particular 
 tampaign. It may well be doubted whether during the Peloponnesian 
 war auy established rule was obs3n'ed in marshalling the tribes for 
 
 battle. 
 
 One great motive which induces critics to maintain that the battle was 
 fought in the Athenian month Mctageitnion, is, that that month coincidei 
 with the Spartan month Karneius. so that the refusal of the Spartans to 
 march before the full moon, is construed to apply only to the peculiar sane- 
 tity of this last-mentioned month, instead of being a constant rule for the 
 whole year. I perfectly agree with these critics, that the answer, given by 
 the Spkrtans to the courier Pheidippides, cannot be held to prove a regular, 
 Invariable Spartan maxim, applicable throughout the whole year, not to 
 begin a march in the second quarter of the moon : very possibly, as Boeckh 
 remarks, there may have been some festival impending during the particu 
 lar month in question, upon which the Spartan refusal to march wm 
 fbnnded. But no inference can be deduced from hence to disprove the sivtk 
 
 YOL. IV. 16 
 
86:2 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT OF MTLTIADES. 
 
 368 
 
 and fiftv mihs. Th*y did not arrive, however, until the battle 
 hud been foii'jrlit, and ihit Persians departed ; but curiosity led 
 tliem to the field of Marathon to behold the d«'ad Iwdie? of the 
 Persians, after wliieh they returned home, bestowing well- uieiiutl 
 j)rai-e on the victors. 
 
 Datis and Artanhernes returned across the JEaean with their 
 Kn-trian {)riso^••^^ to Asia ; stop})ing fur a short time at the inland 
 of ISlykonos, wherfi discovery was made of a *,nlt image of Apollo 
 carried off as booty in a Phenician ship. Datis went himself to 
 restore it to Delos, requesting the Delians to carry it back to ttie 
 Delium, or temj)le of Apollo, on the eastern coast of Bceotia: 
 the Delians, however, chose to keep the statue until it was re- 
 claimed from then; twenty years afterwards by the Thebans. On 
 reaching Asia, the Persian generals conducted their prisoners up 
 to the court of Su^a, and into the presence of Darius. Thouirb 
 he had been veh<'mently incensed against them, yet when he 
 saw them in his })ower, his wratii abated, and he manifested no 
 desire to kill or harm them. They were planted at a sj)ot called 
 Arderikka, in the Kis>ian territory, one of the resting-places on 
 the road from Sardis to Susa. and about twenty-six miles distant 
 from the latter })lace : Herodotus seems liimself to have seen 
 their descendants there on his journey between the two capitals, 
 
 of Boitlrouiion a> the djiy of tiie battle of Marathon : for thouj^h the months 
 of every (irecian ( ity were professedly luniir, yet they never coineidtMi with 
 each other exactly or lonj; together, because the systems of intercalation 
 adopietl in ditfercnt < ities were dif!erent : there was great irregularity and 
 confusion (Plutarch, Aristeides, c. 19; Aristoxenus, Harmon, ii. p. 30 
 compare also K. F. Hermann, Ueher die Griechische Monatskunde. p. 'j6 
 27. (iottin;;en, 1844 ; and Boeckh, ad Corj). Inscript. t. i, p. 7^4). 
 
 Granting, therefore that the answer given by the Spartans to Pheidip 
 pides is to be constnied, not as a general rule applicable to the whole year 
 but as referring to the particular month in which it was given. — no infer- 
 ence can be drawn from hence as to the day of the battle of Marathon, 
 becau-e either one of the two following suppositions is possible: 1. The 
 Spartans may have hud solemnities on the day of the full moon, or on tho 
 day before it, in other months besides Kameius ; 2. Or the full moon of thfl 
 Spartan Kameius may actually have fallen, in the year 490 B.C., on thd 
 £fth or sixth of the Attic month Boedromion. 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall appears to adopt the view of Boeckh, but does not add 
 ADjthing material to the reasons in its favor (Hist, of Gr. rol. ii, Append 
 iii, p. 488). 
 
 And to have had the satisfaction of talking to them in Greek, — 
 ivhich we may well conceive to have made some impression upoD 
 him, at a spot distant by nearly three months* journey from the 
 coa>t of Ionia. 1 
 
 Happy would it have been for Milt lades if he had shared the 
 honorable death of the polemarch Kallimachus, — " animam 
 exhalasset opimam," — in seeking to fire the ships of the defeated 
 Per-ians at Marathon. The short sequel of his history will be 
 found in melancholy contrast with the IVIarathonian heroism. 
 
 His reputation had been great before the battle, and after it 
 the admiration and contidence of his countrymen knew no 
 bounds: it appears, indeed, to have reached such a pitch that 
 his head was turned, and he lost both his patriotism and his 
 I rudence. He proposed to his countrymen to incur the cost 
 of equipping an armament of seventy ships, with an adequate 
 ar:nc(l force, and to place it altogether at his discretion ; giving 
 them no intimation whither he intended to go, but merely assur- 
 ing them that, if they would follow him, he would conduct them 
 to a land where gold was abundant, and thus enrich them. Such 
 a j.roinise, from the lips of the recent victor of Marathon, waa 
 gutlic'ient, and the armament was granted, no man except Milti- 
 ades knowing what was its destination. He sailed immediately 
 to the island of Paros, kid siege to the town, and sent in a 
 
 \' 
 
 ' Herodot. vi, 119. Darius — aota^ T?]g KLaalng X'^P^i KaroLKiae t9 
 vra^fiu) iuvrov r^ ovvofxa 'ApdepiKKU — evi^avra rove ^Eperpiiac KaroiKina 
 t^apeloc, 01 Koi fxixpL efieo eixov ttjv X'^PW ravrrjv, (ftvAuaaovTeg tt/v upxaifv 
 fAC>Gaav. The meaning of the word ora^fid^ is explained by Uerodot. «, 
 52. ara'&fib^ euvTov is the same as (TTa^fidg paai?.T/tnc : the particular! 
 which Herodotus recounts about Arderikka, and its remarkable well, or pit 
 of bitumen, salt, and oil, give every reason to believe that he had himself 
 stopped there. 
 
 IStrabo places the captive Eretrians in Gordyene, which would be con 
 lideraldy higher up the Tigris ; upon whose authority, we do not knoir 
 jStrabo, xv, p. 747). 
 
 The many particulars which are given respecting the descendants ot 
 fcese Eretrians in Kissia, by Philostratus, in his Life of Apolloniws o/ 
 Tyana, as they are alleged to have stood even in the fii»t century of the 
 Christian era, cannot be safely quoted. With all the fiction there coa- 
 iMned, some tnith may perhaps be mingled ; but we cannot discriminAle il 
 (Philostratus, Vit. Apollon. i, c. 24-30). 
 
 \ 
 
 {4! 
 
S64 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT OF MILTIADES. 
 
 36^ 
 
 lierald to require from the inhabitants a contribution of OM 
 hundred talents, on pain of entire destruction. His pretence fof 
 this attack was, that the Parians had furnished a trireme to Datis 
 for the Persian fleet at Marathon; but his real motive, so 
 Herodotus assure* us,' was vitidictive animosity against a Parian 
 citizen named Lysagoras, who had exasperated the Persian g<«i.- 
 eral Hydames against him. The Parians amused him at first 
 with evasions, until they had procured a little delay to repair the 
 defective portions of their wall, after which they set liim at 
 defiance; and Miltiades in vain prosecuted hostilities against 
 them for the space of twenty-six days: he ravaged the island, 
 but his attacks made no impression upon the town;<J Beginning 
 to despair of success in his military operations, he entered into 
 some negotiation — such at least was the tale of the Parians 
 themselves — with a Parian woman named Timu, priestess or 
 attendant in the temple of Dem^Her, near the town-gates. This 
 woman, promising to reveal to him a secret which would place 
 Paros in his power, induced him to visit by night a temple to 
 which no male person wiLs admissible. He leaped the exterior 
 fence, and approached the sanctuary ; but on coming near, was 
 seized with a panic terror and ran away, almost out of his senses : 
 on leaping the same fence to get back, he strained or bruised his 
 thi*^h badly, and became utterly disabled. In this melancholy 
 state he was plactMl on ship-board ; the siege being raised, and 
 the whole armameint returning to Athens. 
 
 Vehement was the indignation both of the armament and of 
 the remaining Athenians against Miltiades on his return; 3 and 
 
 • Herodot. vi I."J2. '■~i llufun , 7Tf>uOiirfiv t\uv ux; ol Ylupioi vTziipiav 
 rrporepoi arparevofievoL Tpiffpei /f Mapad^uva afia rw Ilipa^. Tovro fitt 
 d^ irpoaxVM^ '''^^ ^-^yov rjv hrap riva koI hyKorov elx^ roiai Tlapioiat 6iu 
 Avaayopea rdv Tiahu, kovra yt'voc Ildpiov, dtaSalovra (iiv irpd^ 'Tdapvia 
 .dv TMpaijv. 
 
 • Ephorus (Frapni. 107, ed. Didot : ap. Stephan. Byz. v, Ilapof) gave an 
 •pcount of this expedition in several points different from Herodotus, 
 which latter I here follow. The authority of Herodotus is preferable in 
 %xfrx respect ; the more so, since Ephorus gives his narrative as a sort of 
 explanation of the peculiar phrase uvanapta^ecv. Explanatory narrative! 
 of that sort are usually little worthy of attention. 
 
 • Herodot. vi, 136. '\-&T/vaioi <^e U Uupov MiXriadea uirovoarijatnT^ 
 t^tJXOv kv arofjiaai, o, re u?.?.oi, nat /iuAiara ^av^iir'nog 6 ^ ^.pii^povof ' l| 
 
 Xanthippus, father of the great Perikles, became the spokesman 
 of this feeling. He impeached Miltiades btifbre the popular 
 judicature as having been guilty of deceiving the people, and as 
 having deserved the penalty of death. The accused himself, 
 disabled by his injured thigh, which even began to show symp- 
 toms of gangrene, was unable to stand, or to say a word in hia 
 own defence : he lay on his couch before the assembled judges, 
 while his friends made the best case they could in his behalf 
 Defence, it appears, there was none ; all they could do, was to 
 appeal to his previous services : they reminded the people largely 
 and emphatically of the inestimable exploit of Marathon, coming 
 in addition to his previous conquest of Lemnos. The assembled 
 dikasts, or jurors, showed their sense of these powerful appeals 
 by rejecting the proposition of his accuser to condemn him to 
 death ; but they imposed on him the penalty of fifty talents " for 
 his iniquity." 
 
 Cornelius Nepos affirms that these fifty talents represented tlie 
 expenses incurred by the state in fitting out the armament ; but 
 we may more probably believe, looking to the practice of the 
 Athenian dikastery in criminal cases, that fifty talents was th., 
 
 "davarov vnayaydv vtto rdv dr/fxov MiXTinSea, hViuKE rf/Q ' K'&riva'njv dn-ary^ 
 elvcKtv. MiArm(5j7f 6e, ovtoq jjlev napEuv, olk ant/oyhTn- 7]V ytip u^vva- 
 ror, uare arjuofxevov tov fiTjpov. UpoKeijuivov Je avrov kv KAivig, irrtp- 
 arroloyeovTo ol <PlXoi, t^c f^^J-XVC t^ ^^? ^^ "Siapa-^uvi yevofievjjg roAAti kiri' 
 fiefjLVTjuevoi., koI ttjv Ai/fivov alpeaiv uf Dmv X}]fiv6v te Kal riau/nEvo^ voir 
 n.£?.a(yyoi)^^ nape^uKe ^X^jjvaioicn. UpnayEVOfievov Se tov df/fiov avrip Karti 
 
 TTjV U.TTo'kvai.V TOV 'daVU.TOV, (lJ/lluaaVTOC 6e KaTll TTJV uSlKLTIV TTEVTTjKOVra 
 
 ra?iuvToi(n, MiXtcuStjc p-iv pETu TavTa, aipaKsXlaavTog re tov fXTjpov Kal 
 aanivTog, rcAeur^z* to, fie TTEvrf/KOVTa TuAavTa E^irioEV 6 Trai'f avTov Kifiojv. 
 Plato (Gorpias, c. 153, p. 516) says that the Athenians passed a vote to 
 cast Miltiades into the harathrum {k,uia?.Elv hprj(pi<TavTo), and that he 
 would have been actually thrown in, if it had not been for the prjtanis, ». e 
 the president, by turn for that day, of the pr\'tanizinp: senators and of the 
 ekklesia. The prytanis may perhaps have been among those who spoke 
 to the dikastery on behalf of Miltiades. deprecating the proposition made 
 by Xanthippus ; but that he should have caused a vote once parsed to be 
 actually rescinded, is incredible. The Scholiast on Aristeides (cited by 
 Valckenfier ad Herodot. vi, 136| reduces the exaggeration of Plato to 
 •omething more reasonable — 'Ore yap kKpivETo M.iATiu6iig ktrl Ty Ild^, 
 ♦ #eAi7(T«v avrbv KOTaKpijuvtaai • 6 6^ TrpvTaviq elaeX^uv iiiiT^9UT$ 
 mbrw 
 
 i 
 
Ml 
 
 366 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 fi\:e imposed on miltlvdes. 
 
 367 
 
 mirior penalty a tually proposed by the defrndcr? of Miltiadi^ 
 themselves, as a substitute for the punislimeiit of death. Ir 
 tliose penal case?; at Athens, where the punishment was not fixed 
 beforehand by the terms of the law, if tlie person accused wa« 
 found guilty, it was customary to submit to the jurors, subse- 
 (|uently anif sei)arately, the question as to amount of punishment : 
 first, tlie accuser named the [)enalty wliich he thought suitable; 
 next, the accused j)erson was called upon to name an amount of 
 penalty for hirn<« If and the jurors were constrained to take their 
 choice between these two, — no third ^n-adation of penalty being 
 admissible for consideration.^ Of course, under such eircum- 
 
 ' That tliis was the lialtitiuil course of Attic }»rocedure in respect to puh- 
 lie indictments, wh« rover a positive amount of iienalty was not previously 
 doterniined, ajipears certain. See Platner, Prozess iind Khifiren bei den 
 Attikern, Abselm. \i, vol. i, p. 201 ; Heffter, Die Atlieiiaisehe Gerichtsver- 
 fussung, p. 334. Meier and Sehomann (l)er Attisehe I'rozess, b. iv, p. 725) 
 Tiaintain that anyone of the dikasts might propose a third measure of pen- 
 V distinct from that pn>po>rii by the accuser as well as the accused. In 
 respect to public indictments, this opinion appears decidedly incorrect : but 
 vvture the sentence no he i)ronounced invohed a compensation for private 
 u rong and an estimate of damages, we cannot so dearly determine whether 
 there was not somciimes a greater latitude in originating propositions for 
 the dikasts to vole upon. It is to he recollected that these dikasts were 
 f« veral hundred, sometimes even more, in number, — that there was no dis- 
 cussion or deliberation among them, — and that it was absolutely necessary 
 for some distinct proposition to be laid before them to take a vote upon. In 
 regard to some ottimces, the law exj)ressly permitted what was called a 
 -.t/ocTifiTjfia ; that is after the dikasts had pronounced the full penalty die- 
 nianded by the accuser, any other citizen who tliought the penalty so 
 imposed insufficient, might call for a certain limited amount of additional 
 penalty, and require the dikasts to vote upon it, — ay or no. The votes of 
 the dikasts were given, by depositing pebbles in two casks, nndcr certain 
 arrange^nents of detail. 
 
 The uytjv TifirjTo^ fiiKTj Tmr/rd^, or trial including this separate admeas- 
 urement of penalty, — as distinguished from the fJi/o? urifiTjrog, or trial 
 where the penalty was predetermined, and where was no rifir/cn^, or vote ot 
 admeasurement of penalty. — is an important line of distinction in the 
 •object-matter of Attic procedure ; and the practice of calling on the 
 Aociised party, after having been pronounced guilty, to impose upon himself 
 9k mmttej -penalty or ttndet -penalty {avririfiua^ai or vnorifxa^^ai) in contrast 
 with that named by th« accuser, was a convenient expedient for bringing 
 Ihe question to a substantive vote of the dikasts. Sometimes accused per- 
 ions found it couvtuient to name very large penalties on themselves, il 
 
 BiAneea, it was the interest of the accused party to name, even in 
 his own case, some real and serious penalty, — something which 
 the jurors might be likely to deem not wholly inadequate to hid 
 crime just proved ; for if he proposed some penalty only trifling, 
 he drove them to prefer the heavier sentence recommended by 
 his opponent. Accordingly, in the case of Miltiades, liis friends, 
 desirous of inducing th*- jurors to refuse their assent to the 
 [)unishinent of death, proposed a fine of fifty talents as the self- 
 Rssessed penalty of the defendant ; and perhaps they may have 
 stated, as an argument in the case, that such a sum would suflice 
 to defray the costs of the expedition. The fine was imposed, but 
 Miltiades did not live to pay it • his injured limb mortified, and 
 he died, leaving the fine to be paid by his son Kimon. 
 
 According to Cornelius Nepos, Diodorus, and Plutarch, he was 
 put in prison, after havitig been fined, and there died.' But 
 
 order to escape a capital sentence invoked by the accuser (see Demosthen. 
 I'Ont. Timokraf. c. 34, p. 743, R). Nor was there any fear, as Platner 
 imagines, that in the generality of cases the dikasts would be left un<ler 
 the necessity of choosing between an extravagant penalty and something 
 merely nominal; for the interest of the accused party himself would pre" 
 vent this from happening. Sometimes we see him endeavoring by entreaties 
 to prevail upon the accuser voluntarily to al)ate something of the penalty 
 which he had at first named; and the accuser might probablv do this, if he 
 saw that the dikasts were not likely to go along with that first proposition. 
 In one particular case, of immortal memory, that which Platner contem- 
 plates actually did happen ; and the death of Sokrates was the effect of it. 
 Sokrates, having been found guilty, only by a small majority of votes 
 among the dikasts, was called upon to name a penalty upon himself, in 
 opposition to ,hat of death, urged by Meletus. He was in vain entreated by 
 his friends to name a fine of some tolerable amount, which thev would at 
 once have paid in his behalf; but he would hardly be prevailed upon to 
 name any penalty at all, affirming that he had deserved honor rather than 
 punishment : at last, he named a fine so small in amount, as to be really 
 tantamount to an acrpiittal. Indeed. Xenophon states that he would not 
 name any counter-penalty at all ; and in tlie speech ascribed to him, he con- 
 tended that le had even merited the signal honor of a public maintenance 
 in the prytaneium (Plato. Apol Sok. c. 27; Xenoph. Apol. Sok. 23; 
 Diogen. Laert. ii, 41 ). Plato and Xenophon do not agree; but taking the 
 two together, it would seem that he must have named a very small fine. 
 There can be little doubt that this circumstance, together with the tenor of 
 ha defence, caused the dikasts to vote for the proposition of Melitus. 
 
 Cornelius Nepos, Miltiades, c. 7 ; and Kiraon, c. 1 ; Plutarch, Kimon. « 
 
 I 
 
 •^^1 
 
 ♦ > i 
 
368 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 MILTIADES DIEJS OF HIS WOUND. 
 
 369 
 
 Herodotus does not mention this imprisonment, and the tac 
 appears to me improbable: he would hardly have omitted ta 
 notice it, had it come to his knowledge. Immediate imprison 
 mvni of a person fined by the dikastery, until Lis fine was paid, 
 was not the natural and ordinary course of Athenian procedure, 
 though there we-'e particular cases in which such aggravation 
 was added. Usually, a certain time was allowed for payment,' 
 before absolute execution was resorted to, but the person under 
 sentence became disfranchised and excluded from all political 
 rights, from the very instant of his condemnation as a public 
 debtor, until the fine was paid. Now in the instance of Milti- 
 ades, the lamentable condition of his wounded thigh rendered 
 
 4 ; Diodorus, Fragment, lib. x. All these authors probably drew from the 
 same original fountain ; perhaps Ephorus (see Marx ad Ephori Fragments, 
 p. 212) ; but we have no means of determining. Respectinfi^ the alleged 
 imprisonment of Kimon, however, they must have copied from different 
 ftuthorities, for their statements are all different. Diodorus states, that 
 Kiiqpn put himself voluntarily into prison after his father liad died there, 
 because he was not permitted on any other condition to obtain the body of 
 his deceased father for burial. Cornelius Nepos affirms that he was impris- 
 oned, as being legally liable to the state for the unpaid fine of his father. 
 Lastly, Plutarch does not represent him as having been put into prison at 
 All. Many of the Latin writers follow the statement of Diodorus : see the 
 citations in Bos's note on the above })assage of Cornelius Nepos. 
 
 There can be no hesitation in adopting the account of Plutarch as the 
 true one. Kimon neither was, nor could be, in prison, by the Attic law, 
 for an unpaid fine of his father; but after his father's death, he became liable 
 for the fine, in this sense, — that he remained disfranchised {urifxuc) and 
 excluded from his ri^^hts as a citizen, until the fine was paid : see Demostheu. 
 cont. Timokrat. c. 4<1, p. 762, R. 
 
 ' See Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, b. iii, ch. l:i, p. 390, Engl 
 Transl. (vol. i, p. 420, Germ.) ; Meier und Schiimann, Attisch. Prozess, p. 
 744. Dr. Thirlwall takes a different view of this point, with which I cannot 
 Qoncur (Hist. Gr. vol. iii, Append, ii, p. 4,SS) ■, though his general remarku 
 on the trial of Miltiudcs are just anil appropriate (cli. xiv, p. 273). 
 
 Cornelius Nepos i Miltiades, c. 8; Kimon, e. 3) says that the misconduct 
 connected with Paros was only a pretence with the Athenians for punishing 
 Miltiades ; their real motive, he affirms, was envy and fear, the same feel- 
 ings which dictated the ostracism of Kimon. How little there is to justify 
 this fancy, may be seen even from the nature of the punishment inflicted 
 Fear would have prompted them to send away or put to death Miltiadet, 
 not to fine him. The ostracism, which was dictated by fear, wiis a temDO 
 ntf banishment. 
 
 eecHpe impossible, — so that there would be no special motive for 
 departing from the usual practice, and imprisoning him forth- 
 with : moreover, if he was not imprisoned forthwith, he would 
 not be imprisoned at all, since he cannot have lived many days 
 after his trial.i To carry away the suffering general in hia 
 couch, incapable of raising himself even to plead for his own 
 life, from the presence of the dikasts to a prison, would not only 
 have been a needless severity, but could hardly have failed to 
 imprint itself on the sympathies and the memory of all the be- 
 holders ; so that Herodotus would have been likely to hear and 
 mention it, if it had really occurred. I incline to believe there- 
 fore that Miltiades died at home : all accounts concur in stating 
 that he died of the mortal bodily hurt which already disabled 
 him even at the moment of his trial, and that his son Kimon paid 
 the fifty talents after his death. If he could pay them, probably 
 his father could have paid them also. And this is an additional 
 reason for believing that there was no imprisonment, — for noth- 
 ing but non-payment could have sent him to prison; and to 
 rescue the suffering Miltiades from being sent thither, would have 
 been the first and strongest desire of all sympathizing friends. 
 
 Thus closed the life of the conqueror of Marathon. The last 
 act of it produces an impression so mournful, and even shocking, 
 — his descent from the pinnacle of glory to defeat, mean tam- 
 pering with a temple-servant, mortal bodily hurt, undefended 
 ignominy, and death under a sentence of heavy fine, is so abrupt 
 and unprepared, — that readers, ancient and modern, have not 
 been satisfied without finding some one to blame for it : we must 
 except Herodotus, our original authority, who recounts the trans- 
 action without dropping a single hint of blame against any one 
 To speak ill of the people, as Machiavel has long ago observed,* 
 i» a strain in which every one at all times, even under a demo- 
 cratical government, indulges with impunity and without provok- 
 
 ' The interval between his trial and his decease is expressed in Herodoto* 
 (vi, 136) by the difference between the present participle arjTrofiivov and the 
 past participle aanevTo^ tov firjpov. 
 
 ' Machiavel, Discorsi sopra Tito Livio, cap. 58. " L' opinione centre ai 
 popoli nasce, perchd dei popoli ciascun dice male senza paura, e liberamenta 
 ancora mentre che regnano : dei principi si paria sempre con miUe timori • 
 mille rispetti." 
 
 VOL. IV. 16* 24oc« 
 
 • ' .11 
 
 \ 
 
 V 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
370 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 THE ATHENIAN PEOPLE AND mLTiADES 
 
 371 
 
 in^' any opponent lo reply ; and in this instance, the hard fa.e of 
 MUtiades has bi^en i nputed to the vices of the Athenians and 
 their democracy, — it hius been cited in proof, partly of their 
 fickleness, partly of their ingratitude. But however such blame 
 may serve to lighteit the mental sadness arising from a series ot 
 painful facts, it will not be found justilied if we apply to those 
 facts a reasonable criticism. 
 
 What is called the fickleness of the Athenians on this occasion 
 is nothing more than a rapid and decisive change in their estima. 
 tiou of Miltiades ; unbounded admiration passing at once into 
 extreme wrath. To censure them for fickleness is here an abuse 
 of terms ; such a cliange in their opinion was the unavoidable 
 result of his eondu« t. His behavior in the expedition of Paroa 
 was as reprehensibh' as at .Marathon it had been meritorious, and 
 the one .mTced.Ml iininediattly after the other: what else could 
 ensue except an entire revdution in tli" AtJienian feelings? He 
 had emidoyed hi., prodigious ascendency u\ .^r their minds to in- 
 duce them to follow him without knowing whither, in the confi- 
 dence of an unkn.»wn booty: he had ex[.osed thrir lives and 
 wa>ted their substiince in wreaking a private grudge: in addition 
 to the shame of an unprincipled project, comes the constructive 
 ghame of not having succeeded in it. Without doubt, such be- 
 havior, coming from a man whom they admired to excess, must 
 have produced a violent and painful revulsion in the feelings of 
 his countrymen. Tlie i.lca of iiaving hivislied praise and confi- 
 deuce upon a person win) forthwith turns it to an unworthy 
 purpose, is one of he greatot torments of tlie human bosom ; 
 and we may well understand tiiat the iaien.Mty of the subsequent 
 displeasure would be aggravated l>y this reactionary sentiment, 
 without accusing the Athenians of fickleness. If an otficer, 
 whose conduct has l)een such as to merit tlie highest encomiums, 
 comes on a sudden 1:0 betray his trust, and manifests cowardice 
 or treachery in a new and important undertaking confided to 
 him, are we to treat the general in command as fickle, because 
 his opinion as well as his conduct undergoes an instantaneous 
 revolution, — which will be all the more vehement in proportion 
 to his previous esteem ? The (luestion to be determined is, 
 whether there be s«*fficieiit groui d for tudi a change ; ai^l in tha 
 
 case of Miltiades, that question must be answered in the affirm^ 
 ativt. 
 
 In regard to the charge of ingratitude against the Atheniana. 
 this last-mentioned point — suificiency of reason — stands tacitly 
 admitted. It is conceded that Miltiades deserved punishment for 
 his conduct in reference to the Parian expedition, but it is never- 
 theless maintained that gratitude for his previous services at 
 Marathon ought to have exempted him from punishment. But 
 the sentiment upon which, after all, this exculpation rests, will 
 not bear to be drawn out and stated in the form of a cogent or 
 justifying reason. For will any one really contend, that a man 
 who has rendered great services to the public, is to receive in 
 return a license of unpunished misconduct for the future ? Is the 
 general, who has earned applause by eminent skill and important 
 victories, to be recompensed by being allowed the liberty of be- 
 traying his trust afterwards, and exposing his country to peril, 
 without censure or penalty ? This is what no one intends to vin- 
 dicate deliberately ; yet a man must be prepared to vindicate it, 
 when he blames the Athenians for ingratitude towards Miltiades. 
 For if all that be meant is, that gratitude for previous services 
 ought to pass, not as a receipt in full for subsequent crime, but as 
 an extenuating circumstance in the measurement of the penalty, 
 the answer is, that it was so reckoned in the Athenian treatment 
 of Miltiades.' His friends liad nothing whatever to urge, against 
 
 ' Machiavel will not even admit so ranch as this, in the clear and forcible 
 statement which he gives of the question here alluded to: he contends that 
 the man who has rendered services ought to be recompensed for them, but 
 that he ought to be punished for subsequent crime just as if the previous 
 services had not l)een rendered. He lays down this position in discussing 
 the conduct of the Romans towards the victorious survivor of the three 
 Horatii, after the battle with the Curiatii : " Erano stati i meriti di Orazio 
 grandissiml avendo con la sua virtu vinti i Curiazi. Era stato il fallo suo 
 atroce, avendo morto la sorclla. Nondimeno dispiacque tanto taleomicidio 
 ai Komani, che lo condussero a disputare della vita, non ostante che gli 
 meriti suoi fussero tanto grandi e si fresclii. La qual cosa, a chi superficial 
 mente la considerasse, parrcbbe uno csempio d' ingratitudine popolare. 
 Nondimeno chi lo esaminera meglio, e con migliore considerazione ricer- 
 cherk quali debbono essere gli' ordini delle republiche, biasimeark quel 
 popolo piuttosto per averlo assoluto, che per averlo voluto condannare : • 
 ,a ragionc c questa, che nessuna repablica bene ordinata, non mai canceW 
 
 fl 
 
S72 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECfi. 
 
 DISPOSITION'S OF THE DIKAST?:RY. 
 
 873 
 
 III 
 
 the extreme pfjnalty proposed by his accuser, except these pm 
 vious services, — which influenced the dikasts sufficiently to in- 
 duce them to inflict the lighter punishment instead of the heavier. 
 Now the whole amount of punishment inflicted consisted in • 
 fine which certainly was not beyond his reasonable means of 
 [)ayill.^ or of prevailing upon friends to pay for him, since his 
 sou Kimon actually did i)ay it. And those who blame the 
 Athenians for ingratitude, — unless they are prepared to mam- 
 tain the doctrine that previous services are to pass as full ac- 
 quittal for future crime,— have no other ground left except to 
 Bay that the fintt was too high ; that instead of being tifty talents, 
 it ou-ht to have been no more than forty, thirty, twenty, or 
 ten talents. Whether they are right in this, I will not take 
 upon me to pronounce. If the amount was named on behalf of 
 the accused party, the dikastery had no legal power of duninish- 
 in«^ it ; but it is within such narrow Hmits that the question actu- 
 alfy lies, when transferred from the province of sentiment to that 
 of reason. It will be recollected that the death of Miltiades arose 
 neither from his trial nor his fine, but from the hurt in his thigh. 
 The char'-e uf ingratitude against the Athenian popular juries 
 really amounts to this, — that, in trying a person accused of pres- 
 ent crime or fault, they were apt to confine themselves too 
 Btrictly and exclusively to the particular matter of charge, either 
 forcrettin-, or making too little account of, past services which he 
 mi-ht have rendered. Whoever imagines that such was the 
 habit of Athenian dika^sts, must have studied the orators to very 
 little purpose. Their real defect was the very opposite : they 
 were too much disponed to wander from the special issue before 
 them, and to be affected by appeals to previous services and con- 
 
 i dementi con ^\i meriti .ki suoi cittadini : ma avendo ordinati i premi f^ 
 una buona opera, e le pene ad una cattiva, ed avendo premiato uno pe. 
 aver bene operate, se quel .nedesimo opera dipo. male, lo gastiga scnra 
 averc riffnardo alcuno alle sue buone opere. E (luando .piesti ordini sono 
 bene osservati, una cittu vive libera molto tempo : altrimenti sempn. rovi. 
 ■oera preMo IWrM ... ad un cittadino che abbia fatto qualche egregia open 
 per lacinh.si aiNiuim oltre alia ripuuiziane.che quella cosa gli arreca.una ^ 
 4aaaecontidenzadii.>teres.n.x teener t>ena.far <juakhe ^P^^^^^JT'^Z. 
 pe^Uerd in breve tenpo tanto insolerUe, che si nW»w/l ogn^ ctvua. -Macluare* 
 Diicorai sop. Tit Livio, ch. 24. 
 
 Vol . 4 ^ 
 
 duct.' That which an accused person at Athens usially strivei 
 to produce is, an impression in the minds of the dikasts favorable 
 to his general character and behavior. Of course, he meets the 
 particular allegation of his accuser as well as he can, but he 
 never fails also to remind them emphatically, how well he ha6 
 performed his general duties of a citizen, — how many times he 
 las served in military expedit.'ons, — how many trierarchies and 
 liturgies he has performed, and performed with splendid effi- 
 ciency. In fact, the claim of an accused person to acquittal \i 
 made to rest too much on his prior services, and too little upon 
 innocence or justifying matter as to the particular indictment. 
 When we come down to the time of the orators, I shall be pre- 
 pared to show that such indisposition to confine themselves to a 
 gpecial issue was one of the most serious defects of the assem- 
 bled dikasts at Athens. It is one which ve should naturally 
 expect from a body of private, non-professional citizens assem- 
 bled for the occasion, and which belongs more or less to the 
 system of jury-trial everywhere ; but it is the direct reverse of 
 that ingratitude, or habitual insensibility to prior services, for 
 which they have been so often denounced. 
 
 The fate of Miltiades, then, so far from illustrating either the 
 fickleness or the ingratitude of his countrymen, attests their just 
 appreciation of deserts. It also illustrates another moral, of no 
 small importance to the right comprehension of Grecian affairs ; 
 it teaches us the painful lesson, how perfectly maddening were 
 the effects of a copious draught of glory on the temperament of 
 an enterprising and ambitious Greek. There can be no doubt, 
 
 • Machiavel, in the twenty-ninth chapter of his Discorsi sopra T. Livio, 
 examines the question, " Which of the two is more open to the charge of 
 being ungrateful, — a popular government, or a king ? " He thinks that the 
 latter is more open to it. Compare chapter fifty-nine of the same work, 
 where he again supports a similar opinion. 
 
 M. Sismondi also observes, in speaking of the long attachment of the 
 « ity of Pisa to the cause of the emperors and to the Ghibelin party : " Pise 
 montra dans plus d'une occasion, par sa Constance a supporter la cause dei 
 empereurs au milieu des revers, combien la reconnoissance lie un peuple 
 libre d'une manifere plus puissante et plus durable qu'elle ne sauroit lier li 
 peaple gouveme' par un seul homme* (Histoire des Re'publ. Italif-nnaa 
 cb xiii, torn, ii, p. 302.) 
 
 i 
 
o74 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 LEADING GREEKS CORRUPTED BY SUCCESS. 
 
 3«6 
 
 that the rapid transiHon, in the course of about one week, from 
 Athenian tfrror l.if;,?>' the battle to Athenian exultation after it, 
 must have juoducfMi demonstrations towards Miltiades siicli aa 
 were never j)aid towards any other man in the whole history of 
 the fommonw.'alth. Such unmeasured admiration unseated his 
 rational jud-ment, -o that his mind bcrame abaiid.^nrd to the 
 
 reekh'ss impuNe^ cf insolence, and antipathy, and rapacity; 
 
 that disN'nif.ercd stai.% for which (according to Grecian morality) 
 the n^tributivc Ncm.;>is was ever on the watch, and which, in 
 h\< case, she \ isit^-d with a jii(l<iment startling in its rapidity, aa 
 well as terrihh' in its anuHmt. Had Mllliades been the same 
 man before the battle of Marathon a< he became after it, the bat- 
 tle might probably have turned out a defeat instead (.!' a \ ictory. 
 Demosthenes, indeed,' in spewking of the wealth and luxury of 
 political leaders in :'us own time, and the profuse rewards be- 
 stowed upon them })\ the people, pointed in contrast to the house 
 of Miltiades as being noway more ^phndid than that of a private 
 man. But though Miltiades might continue to live in a modest 
 establishment, he received from his countrymen marks of admi- 
 ration and deference such as were never paid to anv citizen be- 
 fore or after him ; and, after all, admiration and deference consti- 
 tute the precious essence of popular reward. No man except 
 Miltiades ever dared to raise his voice in the Athenian assembly, 
 and say : « Give me a fleet of ships : do not ask what I am going 
 to do with them, but only follow me, and I will enrich you." 
 Ilerein we may read the unmeasured confidence which the Athe- 
 nians placed in their victorious general, and the utter incapacity 
 of a leading Greek to bear it without mental depravation ; while 
 we learn from it to draw the melancholy inference, that one re- 
 8ult of success was to make the successful leader one of the most 
 dangerous men in the community. We shaU presently be called 
 upon to observe the same tendency in the case of the Spartan 
 Fausanias, and even in that of the Athenian Themistokles. It 
 is, indeed, fortunate that the reckless aspirations of Miltiades did 
 not take a turn more noxious to Athens than the comparatively 
 ■nimiwrtant enterprise against Paros. For had he sought to 
 ioqaire dominion and gratify antipathies against enemies at 
 
 * Demosthenes, Oljnth. iii, c. 9, p. 35. R 
 
 borne, instead of directing his blow against a Pailan enemy, the 
 peace and security of his country might have been seriouil^ 
 endanjijered. 
 
 Of the despots who gained power in Greece, a considerable 
 proportion began by popular conduct, and by rendering good ser- 
 vice to their fellow-citizens : having first earned public gratitude, 
 they abused it for purposes of their own ambition. There waa 
 far greater danger, in a Grecian community, of dangerous excess 
 of gratitude towards a victorious soldier, than of deficiency in 
 that sentiment : hence the person thus exalted acquired a position 
 such that the community found it ditficult afterwards to shake 
 him off. Now there is a disposition almost universal among 
 writers and readers to side with an individual, especially an emi- 
 nent individual, against the multitude ; and accordingly those 
 who under such circumstances suspect the probable abuse of an 
 ixalted position, are denounced as if they harbored an unworthy 
 /calousy of superior abilities. But the truth is, that the largest 
 analogies of the Grecian character justified that suspicion, and 
 required the community to take precautions against the corrupt- 
 ing effects of their own enthusiasm. There is no feature which 
 more largely pervades the impressible Grecian character, than a 
 liability to be intoxicated and demoralized by success : there was 
 no fault from which so few eminent Greeks were free : there was 
 baldly any danger, against which it was at once so necessary 
 anil so difficult for the Grecian governments to take security, — 
 especially the democracies, where the manifestations of enthu- 
 siasm were always the loudest. Such is the real explanation of 
 those charges which have been urged against the Grecian de- 
 mocracies, that they came to hate and ill-treat previous benefac- 
 tors ; and the history of JVliltiades illustrates it in a manner no 
 less pointed than painful. 
 
 I have already remarked that the fickleness, which htis been 
 60 largely imputed to the Athenian democracy in their dealings 
 with him, is nothing more than a reasonable change of opinion 
 on the best grounds. Nor can it be said that fickleness was in 
 any case an attribute of the Athenian democracy. It is a well- 
 known fact, that feelings, or opinions, or modes of judging, whicli 
 have once obtained footing among a large number of people, are 
 more lasting and unchangeable than those which belong only ^j 
 
 
 .■,.^,.,^-„.„^,M.iwgi 
 
876 
 
 Hlf^TORY OF GREECE. 
 
 one or a few; insomuch that the judgment and actions of th« 
 many admit of being more clearly understood as to the past, and 
 more certainly predicted as to the future. If we are to predicate 
 any attribute of the multitude, it will rather be that of undue 
 tenacity than undue fickleness ; and there will occur nothing in 
 the course of this history to prove that the Athenian people 
 changed their opinions on insufficient grounds more frequently 
 than an unresponsible one or few would have changed. 
 
 But there were two circumstances iii the working of the 
 Athenian democracy which imparted to it an appearance o1 
 greater fickleness, witliout the reality: First, that tlie manifesta- 
 tions and changes of opinion were all open, undisguised, and 
 noisy : the people gave utterance to their present impression, 
 whatever it was, with perfect frankness ; if their opii.ions were 
 really changed, they had no shame or scruple in avowing it. 
 Secondly, — and this is a point of ca})ital importan-je in the 
 working of democracy generally, — the present impression, what- 
 ever it might be, was not merely undisguised in its manifestations, 
 but also had a tendency to be exaggerated in its intensity. This 
 •rose from their habit of treating public affairs in multitudinous 
 •sserablages, the well-known effect of which is, to inflame senti- 
 ment in every man*s bosom by mere contact with a sympathizing 
 circle of neighbors. Whatever the sentiment might be, — fear, 
 ambition, cupidity, wrath, compassion, piety, patriotic devotion, 
 etc,> — and whether well-founded or ill-founded, it was constantly 
 
 ' This is the general truth, which ancient authors often state, both par« 
 tially, and in exaggerated terms as to degree : " Haec est natura roulfitu- 
 dinis (says Livy) ; aut humiliter servit aut superbe doniinatur." Again, 
 TaritUB • " Nihil in vulgo modicum ; terrere, ni paveant ; uM pertimuerint, 
 impunc contemni." (Annal. i, 29.) Herodotus, iii. 81. u^iei de {6 djjuof) 
 kftneaCav ru Trpf/yfiara avev voi\ ;^fc</i«/i/(k.> iroTafiCi helo^. 
 
 It is remarkable that Aristotle, in his Politica, takes little or no notic« 
 of this attribute belonging to every numerous assembly. He seems rathef 
 to reason as if the aggregate intelligence of the multitude was represented 
 bj the sum total of each man's separate intelligence in all the individual! 
 composing it (Polit. iii. 6, 4. 10, 12); just as the property of the multitude. 
 lakon collectively, would be greater than that of the few rich. He takes n« 
 notice of the ditlerence l>etween a number of individuals judging jointly 
 and judging separately : I do not, indeed, observe that such omission leadi 
 hiui iaio any positive mistake, but it occurs m some cases calculated 18 
 
 jiiiMMiiMiK^^ 
 
 FICKLENESS IMPUTED TO THE PEOPLE. 
 
 877 
 
 tofluenced more or less by such intensifying cause. This is ■ 
 defect which of course belongs in a certain degree to all exercise 
 of power by numerous bodies, even though they be representaiive 
 bodies, — especially when the character of the people, instead of 
 bein^ comparatively sedate and slow to move, like the English, is 
 quick, impressible, and fiery, like Greeks or Italians; but it 
 operated far more powerfully on the self-acting Demos assembled 
 in the Pnyx. It wa^ in fact the constitutional malady of the de- 
 mocracy, of which the people were themselves perfectly sensible, 
 — as I shall show hereafter from the securities which they tried 
 to provide against it, — but which no securities could ever wholly 
 eradicate. Frequency of public assemblies, far from aggravating 
 the evil, had a tendency to lighten it. The people thus became 
 accustomed to hear and balance many different views as a prelim- 
 inary to ultimate judgment; they contracted personal interest 
 and esteem for a numerous class of dissentient speakers ; and 
 they even acquired a certain practical consciousness of their own 
 liability to error. Moreover, the diffusion of habits of public 
 speaking, by means of the sophists and the rhetors, whom it has 
 been so°much the custom to disparage, tended in the same direc- 
 tion, — to break the unity of sentiment among the hstening 
 crowd, to multiply separate judgments, and to neutralize the 
 contagion of mere sympathizing impulse. These were important 
 deduc'tions, still farther assisted by the superior taste and intelli- 
 gence of the Athenian peo|.le : but still, the inherent malady 
 remained, — excessive and misleading intensity of present senti- 
 ment. It was this which gave such inestimable value to the 
 ascendency of Perikles, as depicted by Thucydides : his hold on 
 the people was so firm, that he could always speak with effect 
 against excess of the reigning tone of feeling. " When Perikles 
 (says the historian) saw the people in a state of unseasonable 
 and insolent confidence, he spoke so as to cow them into alarm ; 
 when again they were in groundless terror, he combated it, and 
 brought them back to confidence." i We shall find Demosthenes, 
 
 •arVri^-e us, and where the difference here adverted to is important to 
 
 ftotice: see Politic, iii, 10. 5, 6. x f'ir,, 
 
 * Thucyd. ii, 65. 'OTTore yovv al<r»oiTc ri aiTOi>c napH Kaipdv Mp« 
 
 ^apaovvrac, X.'ycav KarMv^^ev na)iLV km rb i^^u(r&ai' Kal d^6.,^<K •< 
 
 /uloywf avTiKa^larri irdXiv Inl rd ^apcelv. 
 
 1'): 
 
 \'- 
 
 'k 
 
 i': 
 » hi 
 
378 
 
 lllblOKY OF GREECE. 
 
 with far inferior ascendency, employed in the same honorabia 
 task : the Athenian people often stood in need of such correction, 
 but unfortunately did not always find statesmen, at once friendly 
 and commanding, to administer it. 
 
 These two attributes, then, belonged to the Athenian democ- 
 racy; first, their sentiments of every kind were manifested 
 loudly and openly ; next, their sentiments tended to a pitch of 
 gxeat present intensity. Of course, therefore, when they changed, 
 the change of sentiment stood prominent, and forced itself upon 
 every one's notrce, — being a transition from one strong sentiment 
 past to another strong sentiment present.' And it was because 
 such alterations, when they did take place, stood out so palpably 
 to remark, that the Athenian people have drawn upon themselves 
 the imputation of fickleness : for it is not at all true, I repeat, 
 that changes of sentiment were more frequently produced in 
 them by frivolous or insufficient causes, than changes of senti- 
 meoi in other governments. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 I0T9IC PUILOSOPHEKS.- PYTHAGORAS. -KROTON AND SYBARIS. 
 
 The history of the powerful Grecian cities in Italy and Sicily, 
 between the accession of Peisistratus and the battle of Marathon, 
 is for the most part unknown to us. Phalaris, despot of Agri- 
 gentum in Sicily, made for himself an unenviable name during 
 this obscure interval. His reign seems to coincide in time with 
 the earlier part of the rule of Peisistratus (about 560-540 B.C.), 
 
 ^ Sue) swing of the imind, from one intense feelinp to another, is alwayi 
 deprecated J»v the Greek moralists, from the earliest to the latest : eveq 
 Demokritas, in the fifth centary B.C., admonishes aguinst it, — A^ H fieyo' 
 kuv SiaOTTjfiaTuv Kivrnuevai tCjv i/;v;fwi' ovtf rvfrra'&eEC ^lolv, ovre e(r&VfiM 
 (]>emocriti Fragroenta, lib. iii, p 1€8, ed. Mallach ap. Stobwam, FlorU«g 
 
 PHALARIS, DESPOT OF AGRIGENTUM. 
 
 879 
 
 ard the few and vague statements which we find respecting it,i 
 merely show us that it was a period of extortion and cruelty, 
 even beyond the ordinary license of Grecian despots. The 
 re^ility of the hollow bull of brass, which Phalaris was accu* 
 iomed to heat in order to shut up his victims in it and burn them, 
 appears to be better authenticated than the nature of the story 
 would lead us to presume : for it is not only noticed by Pindar, 
 but even the actual instrument of this torture, the brazen bull 
 itself,2 — which had been taken away from Agrigentum as a 
 trophy by the Carthaginians when they captured the town, was 
 restored by the Romans, on the subjugation of Cartilage, to its 
 original domicile. Phalaris is said to have acquired the supreme 
 command, by undertaking the task of building a great temple 3 
 to Zeus Polieus on the citadel rock ; a pretence whereby he was 
 enabled to assemble and arm a number of workmen and devoted 
 partisans, whom he employed, at the festival of the Thesmophoria, 
 to put down the authorities. He afterwards disarmed the citizens 
 by a stratagem, and committed cruelties which rendered him so 
 abhorred, that a sudden rising of the people, headed by Telema- 
 chus (ancestor of the subsequent despot, Thero), overthrew and 
 
 The letters of Bentlev against Boyle, discussing the pretended Epistles 
 if Phalaris, — full of acuteness and learning, though beyond measure ex- 
 cursive, — are quite sufficient to teach us that little can be safely asserted 
 about Phalaris. His date is very imperfectly ascertained. Compare Bent- 
 lev pp 82, 83. and Seyfert, Akragas und sein Gsbiet, p. 60: the latter as- 
 BiffJis the reign of Phalaris to the years 570-554 B.C. It is surprising to see 
 Seyfert citing the letters of the pseudo-Phalaris as an authority, after tue 
 
 exposure of Bentley. , i ■» i u 
 
 •Pindar Pyth. 1 oJ /«, with the Scholia, p. 310, ed. Boeckh; Polyb. 
 
 xii 25 ; Diodor. xiii, 99 ; Cicero cont. Verr. iv, 33. The contradiction 
 
 of Timaus is noway sufficient to make us doubt the authenticity of the 
 
 Btory. Ebert (S^Kai^v, part u, pp. 41-84, Konigsl)erg, 1829) collects aU 
 
 the authorities about the bull of Phalaris. He beUeves the matter of fact 
 
 gubstantially. Aristotle (Rhetoric, ii, 20) tells a story of the fable, wherehy 
 
 Stes»chorus the poet dissuaded the inhabitants of Himera from granting a 
 
 im^-^ to Phalaris: Conon (Narrat. 42 ap. Photium) recounts the same 
 
 ■torv with the name of Hiero substituted for that of Phalaris. B«t it m 
 
 not 'likely that either the one or the other could ever have been m 
 
 Idations wii h the citizens of Himera. Compare Polybins, vii, 7, 2. 
 
 » Folyaen. v, 1, 1 ; Cicero de Officii* ii, 7. 
 
 \ 
 
 i ^ 
 
 fi 
 
THALES. 
 
 881 
 
 880 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 \ 
 
 •lew him. A severe revenge was taken on his partisans aftej 
 his fall. I 
 
 During the interval between 540-500 B.C., events of much 
 importance occurred among the Italian Greeks, — especially at 
 Kroton and Sybaris, — events, unhappily, very imperfectly handed 
 down. Between these two periods fall both the war between 
 Sybaris and Kroton, and the career and ascendency of Pythag- 
 oras. In connection witli this latter name, it will be requisite to 
 say a few words re.-pecting the other Grecian ])hilosophers of the 
 sixth century li.r. 
 
 I have, in a tunuer chapter, noticed and characterized those 
 distinguished persons called the Seven Wise Men of Greece, 
 who.-e cilebrity falls in the tirst half of this century, — men not 
 Bt) much marked by scientific genius as by practical sagacity and 
 foresight in the appreciation of worldly affairs, and enjoying a 
 high degree of political respert from their fellow-citizens. One 
 of tliem, however, ihe Milesian Thales, claims our notice, not 
 only on this ground, but also as the earliest known name in the 
 long line of Gn < k cientitic investigators. His life, nearly con- 
 temporary with thai: of Solon, belongs seemingly to the interval 
 about G40-550 I5.c. : the stories mentioned in Herodotus — 
 perhaps borrowed in part from the Milesian Hekata^us — are 
 euthcient to show that his reputation for wisdom, as well as for 
 science, continued lo be very great, even a century after his 
 death, among his ftllow-citizens. And he marks an important 
 ej)och in the progress of the Greek mind, as having been the 
 fir-t man to depart both in letter and spirit from the Hesiodic 
 Theogony, introducing the conception of substances with their 
 transformations and sequences, in place of that string of persons 
 and quasi-human attributes which had animated the old legend- 
 ary world. He is the father of what is called the Ionic philoso- 
 phy, which is considered as lasting from his time down to that of 
 Sokrates ; and writers, ancient as well as modern, have pro- 
 fessed to trace a succession of philosophers, each one the pupil 
 of the preceding, between these two extreme epochs. B it the 
 appellation is, in truth, undefined, and even incorrect, since 
 nothing entitled to the name of a school, or sect, or succession, — • 
 
 ■ Plutarch, Philosophand. cum Principibus, c. 3, p. 778. 
 
 fike tha of the Pythagoreans, to be noticed presently, — can bt 
 made out. There is, indeed, a certain general analogy in the 
 philosophical vein of Thales, Hippo, Anaximenes, and Diogenea 
 of Apollonia, whereby they all stand distinguished from Xeno- 
 phane< of Elea, and his successors, the Eleatic dialecticians, 
 Paimenides and Zeno ; but there are also material differencee 
 between their respective doctrines, - no two of them holding the 
 same And if we look to Ajiaximander, the person next m 
 order of time to Thales, as well as to Herakleitus, we find them 
 dei>arting, in a great degree, even from that character which aU 
 the rest have in common, though both the one and the other are 
 usually enrolled in the list of Ionic philosophers. 
 
 Of the old legendary and polytheistic conception ot namre, 
 which Thales partially discarded, we may remark that it is a 
 M'ite of the human mind in which the problems suggesting 
 iliemselves to be solved, and the machinery for ^olving them 
 bear a fair proportion one to the other. If the problems be ^ast, 
 nuleterminate, confused, and derived rather from the hopes, fears 
 love, hatred, astonishment, etc., of men, than !^'<^^ ^J^'^T 
 desire of knowledge, - so also does the received belief supp y 
 invi.ible agents in^ unlimited number, and with every variety 
 of power aiid inclination. The means of explanation are thus 
 multiplied and diversified as readily as the P/^-™;"-/;^^; 
 exydained. And though no future events or ^^^^^^y^^J^f/;^^ 
 di tedon trustworthy grounds, in such «^--^^''^. i;/^^^^^^^^ 
 scrutiny of subsequent verification, - yet there is little difficulty 
 n miderin. a specious and plausible account of matters pas , of 
 any Id alf things alike ; especially as, at such a period, mattei. 
 rfrrequiring%xpl^^^^^^^ are neither collated nor pres^^^^^ 
 with care And though no event or state, which has not }et oc 
 I^ITL be predic^d, there is little difficulty in rendenng a 
 Z^CLoli of everything which has occurred in the pasU 
 Smogony, and the prior ages of the world, w-e <x^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 a sort of personal history, with intermarriages, fi^^-^^^"' J^^^^^^^^^ 
 and other adventures, of these invisible agents ; among . lorn 
 tome one or more were assumed as unbegotten and sel -exi. ent 
 "Tielatter assumption being a difficulty -— to a^^^^^^^^^ 
 ,f cosmogony, and from which even this flexible and expansive 
 hypothesis is not exempt. 
 
 % 
 
 t' 
 
882 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Now when Thales disengaged Grecian philosoplij from th? 
 old mode of explanation, he did not at tlie same time disen^'age 
 it from the old problems and matters propounded for inquiry. 
 These he retained, and transmitted to his successors, as vagua 
 and vast as they were at first conceived; and so thej remained, 
 though with some transformations and modifications, together 
 with many new questions equally insoluble, substantially present 
 to the Greeks throughout their whole history, as the legitimate 
 problems for philosophical investigation. But these problems, 
 adapted only to the old elastic system of polytheistic explanation 
 and omnipresent personal agency, became utterly disproportioned 
 to any impersonal liypotheses such as those of Thales and the 
 philosophers after him, — whether assumed physical laws, or 
 plausible moral and metaphysical dogmas, open to argumentative 
 attack, and of course requiring the like defence. To treat the 
 risible world as a whole, and inquire when and how it began, as 
 well as into all its past changes, — to discuss the first origin of 
 men, animals, plants, the sun, the stars, etc., — to assign some com- 
 f»rehensive reason why motion or change in general took place in 
 the universe, — to investigate the destinies of the human race, 
 and to lay down some systematic relation between them and the 
 gods, — all these w.-re topics admitting of being conceived in 
 many different ways, and set forth with eloquent plausibility, but 
 not reducible to any solution either resting on scientific evidence, 
 or commanding steady adherence under a free scrutiny.' 
 
 At the time whe'i the power of scientific investigation waa 
 •canty and helj)Ie>s, the problems proposed were thus such as t<l 
 
 SKEPTICISM OF GRECIAN rHlLOSOrHT. 
 
 383 
 
 » The k'ss these proUUins are adapted lor rational sohuioii. the men 
 aobly do they present themselves in the language of u great jh»«* ma ^ a 
 specimen. Euripides, Fragment. 101, ed. Dindoif. 
 
 'Errt Tnffio<jifvrj, /ir/r' tif udiKOV^ 
 
 'AAA' ifdavuTov Ka^opCiv ^nxreac 
 
 Kal cTTTj Kol oiru)^ 
 
 Toif :Je Toioi'Toi^ oiid»7ror* al(T^(pQm 
 
 "^ayi^v fxeXeTfifia irp< ai(ei. 
 
 1 
 
 Ik out of the reach of science in its largest compass. Gradu- 
 aUy indeed, subjects more special and limited, and upon which 
 experience, or deductions from experience, could be brought to 
 be-ir vvvre added to the list of qucBsita, and examined with great 
 profi't and instruction : but the old problems, with new ones, alike 
 unfathomable, were never eliminated, and always occupied a 
 prominent place in the philosophical world. Now it was in. 
 disproportion, between questions to be solved and means of solu- 
 tion which gave rise to that conspicuous characteristic ot Gre- 
 oiaii philosophy, - the antagonist force of suspensive skepticism, 
 passin- in some minds into a broad negation of the attamability 
 of ffeireral truth, - which it nourished from its beginning to it^ 
 eud ; commencing as early a^ Xenophanes, continuing to manifest 
 it.elf seven centuries afterwards in ^nesidemus and Sextua 
 Kmpiricus, and including in the interval between these two 
 extremes some of the most powerful intellects in Greece. The 
 present is not the time for considering these Skeptics, who bear 
 an unpopular name, and have not often been fairly appreciated; 
 the more so, as it often suited the purpose of men, themselves 
 essentially skeptical, like Sokrates and Plato, to denounce pro- 
 fessed skepticism with indignation. But it is essential to bnnf 
 them into notice at the first spring of Grecian philosophy under 
 Thales, because the circumstances were then laid which so soon 
 afterwards developed them. 
 
 Though the celebrity of Thales in antiquity was great and 
 universal, scarcely any distinct facts were known respecting 
 him • it is certain that he left nothmg in writing. Extensive 
 travels in E-ypt and Asia are ascribed to him, and as a gener^ 
 fact these travels are doubtless true, since no other means of 
 acquiring knowledge were then open. At a time whe'i the 
 brother of the Lesbian Alkseus was serving in the Babylonian 
 army, we may easily conceive that an inquisitive Milesian would 
 make his way to that wonderful city wherein stood the temple- 
 observatory of the Chaldean priesthood ; nor is it impossible 
 that he may have seen the still greater city of Ninus, or Nine- 
 veh before its capture and destruction by the Medes. How 
 grelt his reputation was in his lifetime, the admiration expressed 
 by his younger contemporary, Xenophanes, assures us; and 
 Herakleitus, in the next generation, a seyere judge of all othef 
 
 I 
 
 {\ 
 
384 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 HIPPO. - AN AXIMANDER. 
 
 885 
 
 ii 
 
 philosophers, spoke of hiui with similar esteem. To him wws 
 traced, by the Grecian inquirers of the fourth century B.C., the first 
 beginnings of geometry, astronomy, and physiology in its large 
 and really appropriate sense, the scientific study of nature : for the 
 Greek word denoting nature (q^vai^y) first comes into compre- 
 hensive use about this time (as I have remarked in an earlier 
 chapter),' with its derivatives physics and physiology, as distin- 
 guished from the theology of the old poets. Little stress can be 
 laid on those elementary propositions in geometry which are 
 specified as discovered, or as first demonstrated, by Thales, — 
 still less upon the solar eclipse respecting which, according to 
 Herodotus, he dettrmined beforehand the year of occurrence.^ 
 liut the main doctrine of his physiology, — using that word in 
 its larger Greek .^cnse, — is distinctly attested. He stripped 
 Oeeanus and Tetlys, primeval parents of the gods in the 
 Homeric; theogony, of their personality, — and laid down 
 water, or tluid sub>tance, as the single original element from 
 which everything .'ame, and into which everything returned.3 
 The doctrine of one eternal element, remaining always the 
 same in its essence, but indefinitely variable in its manifestations 
 U) sense, was thus Jirst introduced to the discussion of the Gre- 
 cian public. We liave no means of knowing the reasons by 
 which Thales supported this opinion, nor could even Aristotle do 
 more than conjecture what they might have been ; but one of 
 the statements urged on behalf of it, — that the earth itself 
 rested on water,» — we may safely refer to the Milesian himself, 
 for it would hardly have been advanced at a later age. More- 
 over, Thales is reported to have held, that everything was living 
 and full of gods ; and that the magnet, especially, was a living 
 thing. Thus the gods, as far as we can pretend to follow opin- 
 ions so very faintly transmitted, are conceived as active powers, 
 
 ' Vol. i, ch. xvi. 
 
 * Diogeu. Laert. i, 23 ; Herodot. i, 75 ; Apuleias, Florid, iv, p. 144, Bip. 
 Proclas, in his Comnientary on Euclid, specifies several propositions said 
 
 to have been discovered by Thales (Brandis, Handbuch der Gr. PhiloA. 
 fh. xxviii, p. 110). 
 
 » Aristotel. Metaphys. i, 3 ; Plutarch, Placit. Philos. i, 3, p. 876. bi ik 
 %4iiTo^ (pijal ndvra ehai, koI elf vdup Truvra dvaXvea^ai. 
 
 * Aristotel. lU stipra, and De Ccelo, ii. 13. 
 
 and causes of changeful manifestation, attached to the primeval 
 substance : ^ the universe being assimilated to an organized bodj 
 
 or system. _ ^, , ^ 
 
 Respecting Hippo, -wbo reproduced the tlieory of Thale. 
 under a more generalized form of expression, substuutnig, m 
 place of water, moisture, or something common to air and 
 ^ater i - we do not know whether he belonged to the sixth or 
 the fifth century b.c. But Anaximander, Xenophanes, and 
 Pberekydes belong to the latter half of the sixth century. 
 Anaximander, the son of Praxiades, was a native of Miletus, 
 _ Xenophanes, a native of Kolophon ; the former, among the 
 earliest expositors of doctrine in prosed' while the latter com- 
 mitted his opinions to the old medium of verse. Anaximander 
 seems to have taken up the philosophical problem, while he 
 materially altered the hypothesis of his predecessor Thales. 
 Instead of the primeval tluid of the latter, he supposed a 
 primeval principle, without any actual determining qualitiea 
 whatever, but including all qualities potentially, and manifesting 
 them in an infinite variety from its continually self-clianging 
 nature, — a principle, which was nothing in itself, yet had the 
 capacity of producing any and all manifestations, however con- 
 trary to each other,4 _ a primeval something, whose essenc 
 
 > Aristotel. De Anima, i, 2-5; Cicero, De Legg. ii, H; Diogcn. Laert. 
 
 *■ 'Aristotel. De Animi, i, 2 ; Alexander Aphrodis. in Aristotel. Metaphyk 
 
 ' ' Apollodorus, in the second century b.c, had before him some brief ex- 
 pository treatise, of Anaximander (Diogen. Laert. ii, 2): Uepl *r^ec.f. 
 r^f Uepiodov, Uepl tC>v 'X:t?mvuv kol Itpalpau Kai dUa nva. buirtas, t, 
 'Avarif^avdpoc. Themistius. Orat. xxv, p. 317: m^i>rioe Trpurof 6v lofin 
 ^EUnvuv Uyov HeveyKelv Trepl ^vaeug avyyeypai^f^evov. , ^ . ^ 
 
 * Irenaeus ii 19, (14) ap. Brandis, Handl.uch der Geschichte der Griech. 
 Bom Philos. ch. XXXV, p. 133 : " Anaximander hoc quod immensuin est, 
 omnium initium subjecit, seminaliter habens in semetipso omnium gencsm, 
 ex quo immensos mundos constare ait." Aristotel. Physic. Auscult. in 4, 
 n 203 Bek ovre yap /idr^yv avrd oiov re elvai (rd uKsipov), ovre iAAifV 
 imdpxeLV avr^ dvvafiiv, nl^v uf upxvv. Aristotle subjects thil dneipov to 
 an elaborate discussion, in which he says very Utile more about Anaximaa- 
 der who appears to have assumed it without anticipating discussion or 
 tl^^tioas. Whether Anaximander called his direipov divine, or god, ai 
 VOL. IT. ^* 
 
 1"*^ 
 i 
 
886 
 
 HTSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 it was to he eternally productive of different phenomer/, --t 
 Bort of raathematicil point, which counts for nothing in Hje\t, 
 but is vigorous in g<'nerating lines to any extent tluit may l>6 
 desired. In this manner, Anaximander professed to give a com 
 prehensive explanation of change in general, or generation, or 
 destruction, — how it happened that one sensible thiog began and 
 another ceased to exis*. — according to the va^ue problerag 
 which these early inquirers were in the habit of setting to 
 themselves.' He avoided that which the firpt philosophers 
 especially dreaded, the afTinnation that generation could take 
 place out of Nothitsg; yet the primeval Something, which he 
 supposed Wiis only distinguished from no^h'jig by }X>sses8ing 
 tliis ver}' power of generation. 
 
 In his theory, he j>assed from the provinc; of physics into that 
 of metaphysics. He first introduced intc Grecian philosophy 
 that important word which signilies a beginning or a principle,^ 
 fl!i(l tirst opened tliat metaphysical discurwion, which was carried 
 on in various ways throughout the whole period of Grecian phi- 
 iosoj>hy, as to the one and the many — the continuous and the 
 variable — that which exists eternally, ai distinguished from that 
 which comes and passes away in ever- changing manifestations 
 His physiology, or explanation of naure, thus conducted the 
 mind into a differpnf, route from that s^^'gested by the hypothesis 
 of Thales, which w]i8 built upon physical considerations, and was 
 therefore calculated to suggest and stimulate observations of 
 physical phenomena for the purpose of verifying or confuting it, 
 — while the hypothesis of Anaximander admitted only of being 
 
 Tenuemanii (Gesch. Pliilos. i. 2. }>. 07) and Paiizerbieter affirm (ad Diogeuis 
 Apoiloniat. Fragment, c. l.J, p Ki,) 1 think doubtful: this is rather an 
 inference which Aristotle ehcits from his language. Yet in another pas- 
 sage, whicli is difficult to reconcile, Aristotle ascribes to Anaximander the 
 water-doctrine of Thaliis, (Aristotel. de Xenophaue, p. 975. Bek.) 
 
 AnaximandjL'r seems to have followed speculations analogous to those of 
 Thales, in explaining the lii-st production of the himian race (Plutarch 
 Placit. Philos. v, 19, p. 308), and in other matters (ibid, iii, 16, p. 896). 
 
 ' Aristotel. De Generat. et Desiruct. c 3, p. 317, Bek. 6 fidTiiatc ^ 
 fiovf^evoi duriXtaav oi Ttpuroi ijuXoootpijaavTeCt rb kK /itjdevdc yfveai&ai «^ 
 §irapxovroc' compare I'hysic. Aoscnltat. i, 4, p. 187, Bek. 
 
 * Simplicios in Aristotel. Physic. ioL 6. A2. irpJTop a(rrd( *Ap;^ 
 Mr rd i'lroKeifievov. 
 
 XENOPHAXKS.-THl-: ELEATIC SCHOOL. 
 
 887 
 
 discussed dialectically, or by reasonings expressed in general Ian 
 guage ; reasonings sometimes, indeed, referring to experience fol 
 the purpose of illustration, but seldom resting on it, and nevei 
 looking out for it as a necessary support. The physical expla- 
 nation of nature, however, once introduced by Thales, although 
 deserted by Anaximander, was taken up by Anaximenes and 
 others afterwards, and reproduced with many divergences of doc- 
 trine, — yet always more or less entangled ^pd perplexed with 
 metaphysical additions, since the two departments were never 
 clearly parted tliroughout all Grecian philosophy. Of these sub- 
 Bcciuent physical philosophers I shall speak hereafter : at present, 
 I contine myself to the thinkers of the sixth century B.C., among 
 whom Anaximander stands prominent, not as the follower of 
 Thales, but as the author of an hypothesis both new and tending 
 in a different direction. 
 
 It was not merely as the author of this hypothesis, however, 
 that Anaximander enlarged the Greek mind and roused the 
 powers of thought : we find him also mentioned as distinguished 
 in astronomy and geometry. He is said to have been the first to 
 establish a sun-dial in Greece, to construct a sphere, and to ex- 
 plain the obliquity of the ecliptic ;i how far such alleged author- 
 ship really belongs to him, we cannot be certain, — but there ia 
 one step of immen.^e importance which he is clearly affirmed to 
 have made. He was the first to compose a treatise on the geog- 
 raphy of the land and sea within his cognizance, and to construct 
 a chart or map founded thereupon, — seemingly a tablet of brass. 
 Such a novelty, wondrous even to the rude and ignorant, was 
 calculated to stimulate powerfully inquisitive minds, and from it 
 may be dated the commencement of Grecian rational geography, 
 ^ not the least valuable among the contributions of this people 
 to the stock of human knowledge. 
 
 Xenophanes of Kolophon, somewhat younger than Anaximan- 
 der, and nearly contemporary with Pythagoras (seemingly from 
 about 570-480 B.C.), migrated from Kolophon2 to Zankle and 
 Katana in Sicily and Elea in Italy, soon after the time when 
 
 » Dioeen. Laert. ii, 81 2. He agreed with Thales in maintaiiiing that 
 Ihe earth was staucuary. ^ AiU^tel. ^? .^*io. :* -, ?. 295, ed Bekk.) 
 • Diogea. Ij&^iI- .-*»■- 3. 
 
 y 
 
 \ f" 
 
 ! 
 
 (I 
 
588 
 
 HISTORY OF GREIX'E. 
 
 f ( 
 
 Ionia became subject to the Persians, (540-530 B.C.) lie wai 
 the founder of what is called the Eleatic school of philosophers, 
 — a real school, since it a[>pears that Parinenides, Zeno, and 
 Melissus, pursued and developed, in a great degree, the train of 
 speculation which had been begun by XenopliaiiC s, — doubtless 
 with additions and variations of their own, but especially with a 
 diahrtic power which belongs to the age of Perikles, and is un* 
 tnown in the sixth century B.C. He was the author of more 
 than one poem of considerable length, one on the foundation of 
 Kolo[)hon and another on that of Elea ; besides his poem on 
 Nature, wherein his }>hilosoi)hical doctrines w<'re set forth.' His 
 maimer appears to have been controversial and full of asperity 
 towards antagonists ; but what is aio^t remarkable is the plain- 
 spoken manner in which he declared himself against the popuhu 
 religion, and in which he drnoinict'd as abominable the descrip- 
 lions of the g<»<ls given by Homer and Hesiod.- 
 
 He is said to have controverted the doctrin«s bolii of Thales 
 tnd Pythagoras: this is |»rol)al)ie enough; but he seems to have 
 tak<*n his start from the philosoj)hy of Anaximandcr, — not, 
 howev(/r, to adopt it, but to reverse it, — and to set forth an opin* 
 ion which we may fall its contrary. Nature, in the conception of 
 Anaximandt r, consisted of a Something having no other attribute 
 except the unlimited })Ower of generating and cancelling |)he' 
 nomenal changes : in this doctrine, the something or substratum 
 existed only in and for those changes, and could not be said to 
 exist at all in any other sense: the permanent wa- thus m<rged 
 and lost in the variable, — the one in the many. Xenoi)hanes laid 
 down the exact opposite : he conceived Nature as one unchangea- 
 ble and indivisible whole, spherical, animated, endued with reasou, 
 and penetrated by or indeed identical with God : he denied the 
 objective reality of all change, or generation, or destruction, 
 which he seems to have considered as only changes or modifica- 
 tions in the percipient, and perhaps different in one percipient 
 and another. That which exists, he maintained, could not have 
 been generated, nor could it ever be destroyed : there was neither 
 fBfJ generation nor real destruction of anything ; but that whidi 
 
 ' Diojxen. Laert. ix, 2'J ; Stobseus, J^loi:. IMiys. i, p. 294. 
 ■ Sttxtus Empiricas, a Iv. Matheiii. ix, 193. 
 
 XENOPHANES. - THF. ELEATIC SCHOOL. 
 
 389 
 
 men took for such, was the change in their own feelings and 
 ideas He thus recognized the permanent without the variable,! 
 - the one without the many. And his treatment of the received 
 reli-ious creed was in harmony with such physical or metaphys- 
 icarhypothesis ; for while he held the whole of Nature to be 
 God, without parts or change, he at the same time pronounced 
 the popular gods to be entities of subjective fancy, imagined by 
 men after their own model : if oxen or lions were to become re- 
 li.ious, he added, they would in like manner provide tor tl^m- 
 ,,4 vcs -ods after their respective shapes and characters.2 Una 
 hypothesis, which seemed to set aside altogether the study ot the 
 gen^ible world as a source of knowledge, was expounded bnetfy, 
 and as it should seem, obscurely and rudely, by Xenophanes ; at 
 least we may infer thus much from the slighting epithet applied 
 to him by Aristotle.3 But his successors, Parmenides and Zeno, 
 in the succeeding century, expanded it considerably, supported U 
 with extraordinary acuteness of dialectics, and even superadded 
 a second part, in which the phenomena of sense - though con- 
 sidered only as ai>pearances, not partaking in the reality ot the 
 one Ens - were yet explained by a new pliysical hypothesis ; so 
 that they will be found to exercise great influence over the spec- 
 ulations both of Plato and Aristotle. We discover in Xenoph- 
 anes, moreover, a vein of skepticism, and a mournful despair M 
 
 • Aristot. Metaphys. i, 5, p. 986, Bek. Zevo^avvc cJ. rrpuTO^ tovtuw 
 iviaa,. ov^iv 6uaa<pfjv.cev, ovde rr,, <pvceuc rovruv {rov Kararov Aoy«. 
 ho, Kal Tov Kara rf}v olrjv) oideripag hcKS ^p«., aAA' af rd. olov ovpavdp 
 
 Plut:irch. an. Eusebium Pra3parat. Evangel, i, 8. ^evo<pavvg 6e o KoAo- 
 puv.og idlav fiev Tcva 66dv nenopevf^evoc Kal napnUaxviav navTa, roOf Trpoet- 
 
 6^Lv. Compare Timon ap. Sext. Empiric. Pyrrh. Hypotyp. i 224, 225 
 
 elvacTd irav, Kal tov ^ebv ovf.0vn toc, namv • elvac 6e o<pacpoecdr;Kal ana^^ 
 ,al df.eTd3XvTov Kai Aoy.Kov, (Aristot. de Xenoph. c. 3, p. 977, Bek.) Advv^. 
 rdv ^T/^tv (6 Eevo<?dvng) elvac, d tl e<TTlv, yevia^ac, etc. 
 
 One may reasonably doubt whether all tht arguments asenbed to Xen 
 M>hanes, in the short but obscure treatise last quoted, really belong to him 
 
 • Clemens Alexand. Stromat. v, p. 601, vu, p. 711. 
 
 > Aristot. Metaphysic. i, 5, p. 986, Bek. fiiK.bv dypocKOTipct. 
 
 
 \' 
 
 (( 
 
d^O 
 
 HIST UK Y OF GRPIECE. 
 
 lo the attainability of certain knowledge,' wliich the nature of 
 Lis philosophy wa:^ well oaknihited to sugge-^t, and in which th« 
 sinograph Tinmn of the third century B.C., who seems to have 
 spoken of Xenophanes better than of most of the other philoso- 
 phers, powerfully sympathized. 
 
 The cosmogony of Pherekydes of Syrus, contemporary of 
 Anaximander and among the teachers of Pythagoras, seems, 
 according to th« fragments i)reserved, a conihiiiatiun of the old 
 iegendary fancies with Orphic mysticism,- and probably exercised 
 little influence over the subsequent course of Grecian philosophy 
 By what has been said of Thales, Anaximander, and Xenoph- 
 anes, it will be seen that the sixth centurv B.C. witness(»d the 
 opening of seseral of those roa<l- of intellectual speculation 
 which the later philosophers pursued farther, or at least from 
 which they branidieil olf. Before the year oOn p,x'. many inter- 
 esting questions were thus brought into di<cii>.->iun, which Solon, 
 who died about i')5S B.C., had never heard of, — ju-t as he may 
 probably never have seen the map of Anaximander. But neither 
 of these two distinguished men — Anaximander or Xenoj)hanes 
 was anything more than aspectdative iiKpiirer. The third emi- 
 nent name of this century, of whom I am now about to speak, — 
 Pythagoras, combined in his character disparate elements which 
 require rather a lunger development. 
 
 Pythagoras was founder of a brotherhood, originally brought 
 together by a religious iuHuenee, and with observances approach- 
 ing to mouasiir peculiarity, — working in a direction at once 
 religious, political, ami -ci.n'ilic, and exeni-ing for some time a 
 real political ascendenc\, — but alterwards banisiied from govern- 
 aient and star*' utfair- iiito a sectarian privacy with scientilic 
 pursuits, not witliout. However, still pro<lucing some statesmen 
 individually distinguished. Amidst the multitude of false and 
 apocryphal statements which circulated in antiquity respectiiig 
 Ihis celebrated man, we tind a few important facts reasonably 
 •ttested and deserving credence. He wius a native of Samos,3 
 
 ' Xenophanes, Fr. xiv, ed. MulUich ; Sextus Empiric, lulv. Matliematicos, 
 rii, 49-110; and PnThou. Hypotyp. i, 224; Plutarch adv. Coloten, p. 1114? 
 »m|)arc Karsten ad Parmenidis Fragmenta, p. 146. 
 
 • Sec Braiulis. llaudhuch der Griech. Bom. Philosophie, ch. xxii 
 
 • Herodot. iv, 95. The plare of his nativity h certain from Herodotot. 
 
 I 
 
 PYTHAGORAS. 
 
 591 
 
 sou of an opulent merchant named Muesarchus, — or, according 
 to some of his later and more fervent admirers, of Apollo ; born, 
 as far as we can make out, about the 50th Olympiad, or 580 B.C. 
 On the many marvels recounted respecting his youth, it is 
 unnecessary to dwell. Among them may be numbered his wide- 
 reaching travels, said to have been prolonged for nearly thirty 
 years, to visit the Arabians, the Syrians, the Phenicians, the 
 Chaldieans, the Indians, and the Gallic Druids. But there is 
 reason to believe that he really visited Egypti — perhaps also 
 Phenicia — and Babylon, then Chaldajan and independent. At 
 the time when he saw Egypt, between 560-540 B. c, about one 
 century earlier than Herodotus, it was under Amasis, the last of 
 its own kings, with its peculiar native character yet unimpaired 
 by foreign conquest, and only slightly modified by the admission 
 during the preceding century of Grecian mercenary troops and 
 traders. The spectacle of Egyptian habits, the conversation of 
 the priests, and the initiation into various mysteries or secret 
 rites and stories not accessible to the general public, may very 
 naturally have impressed the mind of Pythagoras, and given him 
 that turn for mystic observance, asceticism, and peculiarity of 
 diet and clothing, — which manifested itself from the same cause 
 among several of his contemporaries, but which was not a com- 
 mon phenomenon in the primitive Greek religion. Besides 
 visithig Egypt, Pythagoras is also said to have profited by the 
 teachintr of Thales, of Anaximander, and of Pherekydes of 
 
 but even this fact was differently stated by other authors, who called him a 
 Tyrrhenian of Lemnos or Imbros (Pomhyry, Vit. Pytha<x. c. 1-10), a 
 
 Syrian, a Phliasian, etc. 
 
 Cicero (De Repub. ii, 15: compare Livj. i, 18) censures the chronologi- 
 cal blunder of those who made Pythagoras the preceptor of Numa ; which 
 certainly is a remarkable illustration how much confusion prevailed among 
 Uterary'men of antiquity about the dates of events even of the sixth cen- 
 tury B.C. Ovid follows this story without hesitation: see Metamorph xt, 
 60, with Burmann's note. 
 
 » Cicero de Fin. v, 29 ; Diogen. Laert. viii, 3 ; Strabo, xiv, p. 638 ; Alex- 
 wider Polyhistor ap. Cyrill. cont. Julian, iv, p. 128, ed. Spanh. For thi 
 vast reach of his supposed travels, see Porphyry, Vit. Pythag. 11 ; Jamblir 
 
 14, se^. 
 The same extensive xLrLeya i>it ascribed to Demokritus, Diogen. Laisrt 
 
 IK, 35 
 
 I 
 
 I! 
 
 
 .'■ 
 
992 
 
 fflSTORY OF GRLECE. 
 
 8yro6J Amidst the towns of Ionia, he wculd, moreover, havt 
 an opportunity of conversing with many Greek navijijators who 
 bad visited foreign countries, especially Italy and Sicily. His 
 mind seems to have been acted upon and impelled by this com- 
 bined stimulus, — partly towards an imaginative and reli«Tiou3 
 rein of speculation, with a life of mystic observance, — partly 
 towards that active exercise, both of mind and body, which the 
 genius of an Hellenic community so naturally tended to suggest. 
 Of the personal doctrines or opinions of Pythagoras, whom we 
 must distmguish from Philolaus and the subsequent Pythagoreans, 
 we have little certain knowledge, though doubtless the tirst germ 
 of their geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, etc. must have pro- 
 ceeded from him. But that he believed in the metempsychosis 
 or transmigration of the souls of deceased men into other men, 
 as well as into animals, we know, not only by other evidence, but 
 also by the testimony of his contemporary, the philosopher 
 Xenophanes of Elea. Pythagoras, seeing a dog beaten, ana 
 hearing him howl, desired the striker to desist, saying : '• It ia 
 the soul of a fritjnd of mine, whom I recognized by his voice." 
 This — together with the general testimony of Herakleitus, that 
 Pythagoras was a man of extensive research and acquired 
 instruction, but artful for mischief and destitute of sound iud*'-- 
 
 JO 
 
 ment — is all th it we know about him from contemporaries. 
 Herodotus, two generations afterwards, while he conceives the 
 Pythagoreans as a peculiar religious order, intimates that both 
 Orpheus and Pythagoras had derived the doctrine of the metem- 
 psychosis from ICgypt, but had pretended to it as their own 
 without acknowh dgraent.2 
 
 ' The ronnertion (»f IVthaj^oras with rht'ivkydes is noticed by Aristox- 
 enus ap. Dio^^en. Latirt. i, 118, viii, 2; Cicero de Divinat. i, 13. 
 
 * Xenophanes, Fra^m. 7, ed. Schncidewin ; Diogen. Laert. viii, 36 : com- 
 pare Auliis Gclliii.*, iv, 11 (we must remark that this or a like doctrine ii 
 not peculiar to Pythagoreans, but believed by the poet Pindar, Olymp. ii, 
 68. and Fragment, Thren. x, as well as by the philoso{>!ier Pherekyd^ 
 Porpliyrius ie Antro Nvmpharum, c. 31). 
 
 Kai TTCTe fiiv aTVi^eXi^ofiivov OKvXaKo^ Trapcovri 
 
 ^motv iTToiKTeipai, Kal rode <pu(r&aL iTrof — 
 IIov<rat, fiTjdE /iam^' kireiri tbiTiOv uvFpo^ knri 
 "ivxiU '''Vv iyvuv ip^Ey^auivijc titcjv. 
 OoBflult al!*o Scxtus Empiricus, viii, 286, as to the Koiviovia between gods, 
 
 MIXED CHARACTER OF PYTHAGOHAS. 
 
 398 
 
 Pythagoras combines the character of a sophist (a man of 
 large observation, and clever, ascendent, inventive mind, ~ th€ 
 original sense of the word Sophi?t, prior to the polemics of the 
 Platonic school, and the only sense known to Herodotus') with 
 that of an inspired teacher, prophet, nnd worker of miracles, — 
 approaching to and sometimes even confounded with the gods, — 
 and employing all these gifts to found a new special order of 
 brethren, bound together by religious rites and observances pecu- 
 liar to themselves. In his prominent vocation, analogous to that 
 of Epimenides, Orpheus, or Melampus, he appears as the re- 
 vealer of a mode of life calculated to raise his disciples above 
 the level of mankind, and to recommend them to the favor of the 
 gods ; the Pythagorean life, like the Orphic life,^ being intended 
 
 meo and animals, believed both by Pythagoras and Empedokles. That 
 Herodotus (ii, 123) alludes to Orpheus and Pythagoras, though refraining 
 designedly from mentioning names, there can hardly be any doubt : com 
 pare ii, 81 ; also Aristotle, De Anima, i, 3, 23. 
 
 The testimony of Herakleitus is contained in Diogenes Laertius, viii, 6 ; 
 ix 1. 'HpaKleiTog yovv 6 (pvaiKog fiovovovxl KEKpaye Kai (pTjat • Uv^ayoprji 
 UvTjaapxov laTopirjv 7/(TKT]a€v av^pcinov iLokiGTa ttuvtuv, Kal ^KXe^dfievoi 
 ravrac rug avyypacpuc, eTToirjaaTo iavTov aoipirjv, ttoXv fia-&i7jv, koko- 
 rexvivV' Again, Tiolvfia^in voov oh SiduaKei' 'Haiodov yap av Idlda^t 
 Kal llv^ayopyv, av^tg 6e Bevo6aved re Kal 'EKaralov. 
 
 Dr. Thirlwall conceives Xenophanes as having intended in the passage 
 above cited to treat the doctrine of the metempsychosis " with deserved 
 ridicule." (Hist, of Greece, ch. xii, vol. ii, p. 162.) Religious opinions ar« 
 so apt to appear ridiculous to those who do not believe them, that such a 
 suspicion is not unnatural ; yet I think, if Xenophanes had been so dis- 
 posed, he would have found more ridiculous examples among the many 
 wliich this doctrine might suggest. Indeed, it seems hardly possible to 
 present the metempsychosis in a more touching or respectable point of 
 view than that which the lines of his poem set forth. The particular ani- 
 mal selected is that one between whom and man the sympathy is most 
 marked and reciprocal, while the doctrine is madtf to enforce a practical 
 lesson against cruelty. 
 
 ' Herodot. i, 29 ; ii, 49 ; iv, 95. 'EIXtjvuv ov tu d(j^evearuT(fi aotpKjry 
 Uv^ayopri. Hippokrates distinguishes the ao(piaTT)g from the IrjTpdc, 
 though both of them had handled the subject of medicine,— the general 
 from the special habits of investigation. (Hippokrates, Uepl upxaim 
 LifTQtKffc, c. 20, vol. i, p. 620, Littre'.) 
 
 * See Lobeck's learned and valuable treatise, Aglaophamu?, Orphica, Mh 
 IL pp. 247, 698, 900 } also Plato, Legg. vL 782, and Eunpid. Hippol. 946. 
 
 17» 
 
 11*-, 
 
BH 
 
 HISTOKV OF GREECE 
 
 M the exclusive prerogative of the brotliei hoo<l, — approiiched 
 only hy probation and initiatory ceremonies which were adapted 
 to select enthusiasts rather than to an indiscriminate crowd, — 
 and exacting entire mental devotion to the master.^ In these 
 lofty pretensions the Agrigentine Empedokles seems to have 
 greatly copied him. though with some varieties, about half a cen- 
 tury afterwards.-' While Aristotle tells us that the Krotoniates 
 identified Tythagoras vvitli the Hyperborean Apollo, the satirical 
 Timon pronounced him to have been " a juggler i>f solema 
 speecli, engaged in lishing for men."^ This is tlie same charac- 
 tei-, looked at from the ditlerent points of view of the believer 
 and the unbeliever. There is, however, no reason for regarding 
 Pythagoras as an impostor, because experience seems to show, 
 that while in certa n ages it is not difficult for a man to persuade 
 others that he is inspired, it is still less difficult for him to con- 
 tract the same beliesf himself. 
 
 Looking at the general type of Pythagoras, as conceived by 
 witnesses in and nearest to his own age, — Xenophanes, Herp- 
 kleitus, Herodotus, Plato, Aristotle, Isokrates,^ — we tind in iiim 
 
 ' Plato's coiueption of rytlia<;or:is (Republ. x, p. 600) depicts him as 
 Bonicthin;^ not unlike St. Benedict, or St. Fnuu is, (or St. Elias, as soma 
 Carmelites have tried to make out : see Kuster ad Jamblich. c. 3) — 'AAAd 
 d/;, tl (ATI djjfMoala, idui Tiaiv hyenCjv 'KatSeiag avrdg ^uv Xiyerai 'Opcrjpoc 
 yevia^aif ol ekeivov ijydnuv krzl (rvvovaig. kol Tolg varepoic o66v riva fiiov 
 rtapidooav 'OfiTipLK7)v • uairep liv&ayopac avTog re dia<pEp6vTuc iTi rovrut 
 t^yaiTT/^^, Kai oi varep'W hi Kal vvv TJv^ayopelov rponhv iTrovofiu'^ovrtx rov 
 3iov dia<l>aveic ^»? SoKovaiv eivai tv rol^ uXkoL^. 
 
 The description of Melampus, given in Herodot. ii, 49, very much filla 
 ap the idea of Pythagoras, as derived from ii, 81-123, and iv, 95. Pythag- 
 oni.s, as well as Melampus, was said to have pretended to divination and 
 prophecy ( Cicero, Divinat. i, 3, 46 ; Porphyr, Vit. Pyth. c. 29 : compare 
 Krische, De SocieUite a Pythagor^ in urbe Crotoniataram conditA Com- 
 nentatio, ch. v, p. 72, Gottingen, 1831). 
 
 • Brandis, Handbuch der Gesch/chte der Griechisch. Rom. Philosophie, 
 part i, sect, xlvii, p. 191. 
 
 3 iElian. V. H. ii, 26 ; Jamblichus, Vit. Pyth. c. 31, 140; Porphyry, Vit 
 Pyth. c. 20; Diodoruf, Fragm. lib. x, vol. iv, p. 56, Wess.: Timon ap 
 Diogen. Laert. viii, 36 ; and Plutarch, Noma, c. 8. 
 
 Ylv&ayb(»r}v re yoijro^ airoK^vavr' M do^ap 
 Qilpy i t' dvt?pw7r«v, oefcviiyopifK haputr^. 
 
 • Ifokratds, Busiris, p. 402, ed. Angw. IMayopof i Idutoc, d^cico/ttm 
 
 I 
 
 MIXED CHARACTER OF PYTHAGORAS. 
 
 S95 
 
 dbie^y the religious missionary and schoolmaster, with little of 
 the politician. His efficiency in the latter character, originally 
 subordinate, first becomes prominent in those glowing fancies 
 which the later Pythagoreans communicated to Aristoxenus and 
 Dikjearchus. Tlie primitive Pythagoras inspired by the goils to 
 reveal a new mode of lite, ^ — the Pythagorean life, — and to 
 promise divine favor to a select and docile few, as the recom- 
 pense of strict ritual obedience, of austere self-control, and of 
 laborious training, bodily as well as mental. To speak with con- 
 fidence of the details of his training, ethical or scientific, and of 
 the doctrines which he promulgated, is impossible ; for neither 
 he himself nor any of his disciples anterior to Philolaus — who 
 was separated from him by about one intervening generation — 
 left any memorials in writing.^ Numbers and lines, studied 
 
 «V Alyt'TTTov, Kal fiaiSrjrjig tCjv lepeuv yevofievog^ t^v re uXXjiv (piXoao^iav 
 np€)Toc elf rot)f 'EXX^yvac iKOfiiae, nai tu Trepi riic ^aia^ Kal rug dyiareiof 
 iv Toig iepotq kirKpavearepov tuv d?i,?.uv la7Tov6aae. 
 
 Compare Aristotel. Magn. Moralia, i, 1, about Pythagoras as an ethical 
 teacher. Dcmokritus, bom about 460 B.C., wrote a treatise (now lost) re- 
 •pecting Pythagoras, whom he greatly admired : as far as we can judge, it 
 would seem that he too must have considered Pythagoras as an ethical 
 teacher (Diogen. LaC'rt. xi, 38; Mullach, Democriti Fragmenta, lib. ii, p 
 113; Cicero de Orator, iii, 15). 
 
 * Jamblichus, Vit. P)th. c. 64, 115, 151, 199: see also the idea ascribed 
 to Pythagoras, of divine inspirations coming on men [kmnvoia Trapd, roi 
 dacfioviov). Aristoxenus apud Stobaeum, Eclog. Physic, p. 206; Diogeii 
 LaCrt. viii, 32. 
 
 Meiners establishes it as probable that tlie stories respecting the miracn 
 loos powers and properties of Pytha^^oras got into circulation either during 
 his lifetime, or at least not lonf;: after his death (Geschichte der Wissens- 
 chaften, b. iii, vol. i, pp. 504, 505). 
 
 * Respecting Philolaus, see the valuable collection of his fragments, and 
 commentary on them, by Boeckh (Philolaus des Pythagorecrs Leben, Bcr- 
 lin,1819). That Philolaus was the first who composed a work on Pythag 
 orean science, and thus made it known beyond the limits of the brother- 
 hood — among others to Plato — appears well established (Boeckh, Philo- 
 laus, p. 22; Diogen. Ladrt. viii, 15-55 ; Jamblichus. c. 119). Simmias and 
 Kebes, fellow-disciples of Plato under Sokrates, had held intercourse with 
 Philolaus at Thebes (Plato, Phaedon, p. 61), perhaps about 420 B.C. The 
 Pythagorean brotherhood had then been dispersed in various parts of 
 Greece, though the attachment of its members to each other seems to hati 
 rontinncd long afterwards. 
 
 i 
 ■ 
 
896 
 
 HISTORY OF GREFXZ. 
 
 < 
 
 *'( 
 
 partly il their own mutual relations, partly under varicus sjrm- 
 bolizing fancies, presented themselves to him as the [)rimary con* 
 itituent elements of the universe, and as a sort of magical key 
 to phenomena, physical as well as morah And these mathemat- 
 ical tendencies in his teaching, expanded by Pythagoreans, hia 
 successors, and coinciding partly also, as has been before stated, 
 with the studies of Anaxiraander and Thales, acquired more and 
 more drvelopmeni, so as to become one of the most glorious and 
 profitable manif»'stations of Grecian intellect. Living as Pythag- 
 oras did at a time when the stock of experience was scanty, 
 the license of hypothesis unbounded, and the process of deduc- 
 tion without rule or verifying test, — he was thus fortunate 
 enough to strike into that track of geometry and arithmetic, in 
 which, from data rf experience few, simjde, and obvious, an im- 
 men>i' \'\M of dtMlnciive and verifiable investigation may be 
 travelled over. We iiuist at the same time remark, however, 
 that in his mind this traek, which now seems so straightforward 
 and well defined, was elouded by strange fancies which it is not 
 easy to understan<l, and from which it was but jiartially cleared 
 by his successors. Of his spiritual training much is said, though 
 not upon very good authority. We hear of his memorial disci- 
 pline, his monastic self-scrutiny, his employment of music to 
 Boot he disorderly passions,' his long novitiate of silence, his 
 knowledge of physiognomy, wliich enabled him to detect even 
 without trial unworthy subjects, his peculiar diet, and his rigid 
 care for sobriety a^ well as for bodily vigor. 11'^ is also said to 
 have inculcated abstinence from animal food, and this feeling is 
 80 naturally connected with the doctrine of the metempsychosis, 
 that we may well believe him to have entertained it, as Emijedo* 
 kles also did at^ter him.^ It is certain that there were peculial 
 
 • Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. p. 384, ud tin. Quint ilian, Instit. Oratt 
 
 ix, 4. 
 
 « Empedokles, ap. Aristot. Rhetoric, i, 14, 2 ; Sextus Empiric L\, 127; 
 Plutarch, De Esu Carnium, i>p. 993, 996, 997; whore he puts Pythagcras 
 and Empedokles together, as having both held the doctrine of the me« 
 terapsychosis, and both prohibited the eating of animal food. Esjpodo- 
 klvs supposed that plants had souls, and that the souls of human being8 
 passed after death into plants as well as into animals. '• I have been 
 myself heretofore (said he) a boy, a girl, a shrub, a bird, and a tish oi 
 Ibe tea.' 
 
 DOCTRINES OF PYTHAGOTEAb. 
 
 397 
 
 observances, and probably a certain measure of self-denial em* 
 bodied in the Pythagorean life ; but on the other hand, it seemi 
 equally certain that the members of the order cannot have been 
 all subjected to the same diet, or training, or studies. For Mile 
 the Krotoniate was among them,i the strongest man and the Hn- 
 paralleled wrestler of his age, — who cannot possibly have dis- 
 pensed with animal food and ample diet (even setting aside the 
 tales about his voracious appetite), and is not likely to have bent 
 his attention on speculative study. Probably Pythagoras did not 
 enforce the same bodily or mental discipline on all, or at least 
 knew when to grant dispensations. The order, as it first stood 
 under him, consisted of men ditferent both in temperament and 
 aptitude, but bound together by common religious observances 
 and hopes, common reverence for the master, and mutual attach- 
 ment as well as pride in each other's success ; and it must thus 
 be distinguished from the Pythagoreans of the fourth century 
 B.C., who had no communion with wrestlers, and comprised only 
 ascetic, studious men, generally recluse, though in some cases 
 rising to political distinction. 
 
 The succession of these Pythagoreans, never very numerous. 
 Beems to have continued until about 300 B.C., and then nearly 
 died out ; being superseded by other schemes of philosophy more 
 Biiited to cultivated Greeks of the age after Sokrates. But dur- 
 ing the time of Cicero, two centuries afterwards, the orientalizing 
 tendency — then beginning to spread over the Grecian and Ro- 
 man world, and becoming gradually stronger and stronger — 
 caused the Pythagorean philosophy to be again revived. It was 
 l>[;vived too, with little or none of its scientific tendencies, but with 
 more than its primitive religious and imaginative fanaticism,— 
 
 ^Stj yap ■nor' eyd yevofirjv Kovpo^ re Koprj re, 
 -dufivoq t\ olu^vog re Kal ^f dXdc IfiTvpoq ix^vc;. 
 (Diogen. L. viii, 77 ; Sturz. ad Empedokl. Frag. p. 466.) Pythagoras if 
 •aid to have affirmed that he had been not only Euphorbus in the Grecian 
 army before Troy, but also a tradesman, a courtezan, etc., and various other 
 htuuan characters, before his actual existence ; he did not, however, extend 
 the same intercommunion to plants, in any case. 
 
 The abstinence from animal food was an Orphic precept as weU aa • 
 ^thagorean (Aristophan. Ran. 1032). 
 
 ' Strabo, vi, p. 263 ; Diogen. L. viii, 40 
 
 •1 
 
 I 
 
896 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Apollonius of Tyana constituting himself a living copy of 
 Pythagoras- And thus, while the scientific elements developed by 
 the djaciples of Pythagoras had become disjoined from all pecu- 
 liaritj of sect, and passed into the general studious world, — the 
 ori«nnal vein of mystic and ascetic fancy belonging to the muster, 
 without any of that practical efficiency of body and mind which 
 had marked his first followers, was taken up anew into the 
 pa^an world, along with the disfigured doctrines of Plato. Neo- 
 Pyihagorisra, passing gradually into Neo-Platonism, outlasted 
 the other more positive and masculine systems of pagan philoso- 
 phy, as the contemporary and rival of Christianity. A large 
 proportion of the filse statements concerning Pythagoras come 
 from these Neo-Pythagoreans, who were not deterred by the 
 want of memorials from illustrating, with ample latitude of flmcy, 
 the ideal character of the master. 
 
 That an inquisitive man like Pythagoras, at a time when there 
 were hardly any books to study, would visit foreign countries, 
 and converse with all the Grecian philosophical inquirers within 
 his reach, is a matter which we should presume, even if no one 
 attested it; and our witnesses carry us very little beyond this 
 general presumption. What doctrines he borrowed, or from 
 wliom, we are unable to discover. But, in fact, his whole life 
 and proceedings bear the stamp of an original mind, and not of 
 a borrower, — a mind impressed both with Hellenic and with 
 non-IIellenic habits and religion, yet capable of combining the 
 two in a manner peculiar to himself; and above all, endued with 
 those talents for religion and personal ascendency over others, 
 which told for much more than the intrinsic merit of his ideas. 
 We are informed that after extensive travels and inquiries he 
 returned to Samos, at the age of about forty: he then found his 
 native island un<ier the desj>otism of Polykrates, which rendered 
 it an unsuitable place either for free sentiments or for marked 
 individuals. Unable to attract hearers, or found any school or 
 l?>therhood, in his native island, he determined to expatriate. 
 And we may presume that at this period (about 535-530 B.C.) 
 the recent subjugation of Ionia by the Persians was not without 
 influence on his determination. The trade between the Asiatic 
 and the Italian Greeks, — and even the intimacy between 
 Miletus and Knidus on the one side, and Sybaris and Tarentum 
 
 STATE OF KROTON. 
 
 899 
 
 m the other, — had been great and of long standing, so thai 
 Ihere was more than one motive to determine him to the coast 
 of Italy; in which direction also his contemporary Xenophanes, 
 the founder of the Eleatic school of philosophy, emigrated, 
 seemingly, about the same time, — from Kolophon to Zankle, 
 
 Katana, and Elea.* 
 
 Kroton and Sybaris were at this time in their fullest prospef - 
 ity, — among the first and most prosperous cities of the Hellenic 
 name. To the former of the two Pythagoras directed his course. 
 A council of one thousand persons, taken from among the heirs 
 and representatives of the principal proprietors at its first foun- 
 dation, was here invested with the supreme authority : in what 
 manner the executive offices were filled, we have no information. 
 Besides a great extent of power, and a numerous population, the 
 large mass of whom had no share in the political franchise, 
 Kroton stood at this time distinguished for two things, — the 
 general excellence of the bodily habit of the citizens, attested, 
 in part, by the number of conquerors furnished to the Olympic 
 games, — and the superiority of its physicians, or surgeons.? 
 These two points were, in fact, greatly connected with each 
 other. For the therapeutics of the day consisted not so much of 
 active remedies as of careful diet and regimen; while the 
 trainer, who dictated the life of an athlete during his long and 
 fatiguing preparation for an Olympic contest, and the professional 
 superintendent of the youths who frequented the public gym- 
 nasia, followed out the same general views, and acted upon the 
 tame basis of knowledge, as the physician who prescribed for a 
 
 ' Diofxen. Laert. ix. 18. 
 
 « Hcrodot. iii, 131 ; Strabo, vi, p. 261 : Menander de Encomiis, p. 96, ed. 
 Heeren. W^r/vaiovc,- errt uyaX/^aToiToda re Kai ^uypaipiKij, kuI KpoTuviuTac 
 im iarpiKij, fiiya ^povf/aci, etc. 
 
 The Krotoniate Alkmieon, a younorer contemporary of Pythagoras (Aris- 
 totel. Metaph. i, 5), is amon<: the earliest names mentioned as philosophiz- 
 ing upon physical and medical suV.jects. See Brandis, Handbuch dor 
 Geschicht. der Philos. sect. Ixxxiii, p. 508, and Aristot2l. De Generat 
 Animal, iii, 2, p. 752, Bekker. 
 
 The medical art in Egypt, at the time when Pythsgoras visited that 
 oountry, was sufficiently far advanced to excite the attention of an inqnisi- 
 tire traveller, — the branches of it minutely subdivided and strict rales laM 
 town for practice (Herodot. fi, 84 ; Aristotel. PoHtic. iii. : 0, 4). 
 
 i 
 
400 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECI!:. 
 
 itate of positive bad healthJ Of medical education properly 
 •o culled, especially of anatomy, there was then little or nothing. 
 
 ' See the analogy of thu two strikingly brought out in the treiitisc. ot 
 Hippokrates Ilepi apxairjg lTjT(HKf/c, c. 3, 4, 7, vol. i, p. 580-584, ed. l.ittre. 
 
 'Eti yovv Kol vvv ot tCjv yvfivaaiuv kol uaKtiaiuv kTVi^eXonevoL aiel tl tv^O' 
 ot^fvoiaKovai, Kai t^v avTeijv oSdv ^ijreovTeg 6,ti Huv Kal tt'ivuv kTriKparf/ffei 
 re aiTEuv uaXiara, xal iaxvporepoc avrbc iuvrov larai (p. 580) ; ajrain, p 
 584 : Tf ovv (paivETat tripolov diivor/T^elc d Ka?.evfievo^ iJjTpdg Kai dfioXo- 
 yrffiivcj^ Xeiporexvrfr^ be k^evpt r^v afi<pl roff Kufivovrag Siatrav Kal rpo^7)v, 
 ^ nelvof 6 utt' upxvc Toiai naaiv av-dpuTToiai Tpo(pi]V, ^ vvv ;t:pf(>/xfi?a, ki 
 iKcivrji T7/C aypu]^ i^al ^r}piCi6eoq evpuv re Kal TrapactK^vaaag 6iam)q : com- 
 pare another passage, not less illustrative, in the treatise of Hippokrates 
 Ilfpi diairijg o^euv, c. 3, vol. ii, p. 245, cd. Littre. 
 
 Following the s;ime general idea, that the theory and practice of the 
 physician is a farther development and variety of that of the gymnastic 
 trainer, I transcribe some observations from the excellent Remarquea 
 Re'trospectives of M. Littre', at the end of the fourth volume of his edition 
 of Hippokrates (p. 662). 
 
 After having observed (p. 659) that physiology may be considered aa 
 divided into two parts, — one relating to the mechanism of the functions ; 
 the other, to the effects produced upon the human body by the different 
 influences which act upon it and the media by which it is surrounded ; 
 and after having o )served that on the first of these two branches the an- 
 cients could never make progress from their ignorance of anatomy, —he 
 goes on to state, that respecting the second branch they acquired a large 
 amount of knowledge : — 
 
 " Sur la physiologic des influences exterieures, la Gr^ce du temps d'Hip- 
 pocrate et apr^s lui fut le th^Atre d'expe'riences en grand, les plus impor- 
 tautes et les plus instructives. Toute la population (la population Ubre, 
 B'entend) e'toit soumise a un syst^me regulier d'education physique (n. b. 
 this is a little too strongly stated) : dans quelques cit^s, a Lac^de'mone par 
 exemple, les femmes n'en ^toient pas exempte'es. Ce systeme .sc corapo- 
 soit d'exercices et d'une alimentation, que combin^rent Tempirisme d'abord, 
 puis une th^orie plus savante : il concemoit (comme dit Hippocrate lui* 
 m#me, en ne parlact, il est vrai, que de la partie alimentaire), il concernoit 
 et les malades pour leur retablissemeut, et les gens bien portans pour la 
 conservation de leur sante, et les personnes livrees aux exercices gymnas- 
 liques pour I'accroissement de leurs forces. On savoit an juste ce qufl 
 falloit pour conserver seulement le corps en bon ^tat on pour traiter un 
 malade — pour fonner un militaire ou pour faire un athlete — et en particu- 
 lier, un lutteur, un coureur, un sauteur, un pugiliste. Une classe d'hora- 
 mcs, les maitres des gymnases, ^toiint exclusivement adoin^s k la culture 
 de cet art, auquel les me'decins participoient dans les limites de leur pro- 
 fession , et Hippocrate, qui dans les Aphorismes, invoque Texemple deg 
 •thl^es, nous parle dans le Trait€ des Articulations des personnes maigrea 
 
 ARRIVAL OF PYTHAGORAS AT KROTON. 
 
 401 
 
 t 
 
 The physician acquired his knowledge from observation of men 
 lick as well as healthy, and from a careful notice of the way ia 
 which the human body was acted upon by surrounding agenta 
 and circumstances : and this same knowledge was not less neces 
 Bary for the trainer ; so that the same place which contained the 
 best men in the latter class was also likely to be distinguislied in 
 the former. It is not improbable that this celebrity of Kroton 
 may have been one of the reasons which determined Pythagoras 
 to go thither ; for among the precepts ascribed to him, precise 
 rules as to diet and bodily regulation occupy a prominent place. 
 The medical or surgical celel)rity of Demokedes (son-in-law of 
 the Pythagorean Milo), to whom allusion has been made in a 
 former chapter, is contemporaneous with the presence of Pythag- 
 oras at Kroton ; and the medical men of Magna Graecia main- 
 tained themselves in credit, as rivals of the schools of the As- 
 klepiads at Kos and Knidus, throughout all the fifth and fourth 
 centuries B.C. 
 
 The biographers of Pythagortts tell us that his arrival there, 
 his preaching, and his conduct, produced an effect almost electric 
 upon the minds of the people, with an extensive reform, public as 
 well as private. Political discontent was repressed, incontinence 
 disappeared, luxury became discredited, and the women, hastened 
 to exchange their golden ornaments for the simplest attire. No 
 less than two thousand persons were converted at his first preach- 
 ing; and so eflfective were his discourses to the youth, that the 
 Supreme Council of One Thousand invited him into their assem- 
 bly, solicited his advice, and even offered to constitute him theur 
 
 " - " • " ■--■ - -■— .— ^ — -— i..i., ,,. „„ I, I ^ 
 
 qui n'ayant pas ete amaigris par un procedd regulier de I'art, ont les chairs 
 muqueuses. Les anciens medecins savoient, comme on le voit, procurer 
 Tamaigrissement conforme'ment k I'art, et reconnoitre k ses efFets in 
 amaigrissement irrc^gulier: toutes choses auxquelles nos medecins sont 
 Strangers, et dont ou ne retrouve I'analogue que parmi les entraineurs An- 
 giois. Au reste cet ensemble de connoissances empiriques et theoriques 
 dcit erre mis au rang des pertes fAcheuses qui ont accompagn^ la longue et 
 turouienie transition du monde ancien au monde modeme. Les admit** 
 bles institutions destinies dans I'antiquite' k d^velopper el affermir le corps, 
 ont disparu : I'hygiene publique est d^stitu^e ci cet ^gard de toute directioB 
 icientifique et g^n^rale, et demeure abandoiin<5e completement au hasard." 
 
 S*.e also the remarks of Plato respecting Herodikus, De Republic^, iii, p 
 toe-, Aristotel Folitic. iii, 11, 6; iv, 1, 1 • riii, 4, 1. 
 
 TOL. IT. 260C 
 
 I I 
 
 ||l 
 
 I I' 
 
402 
 
 HLSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 PERSONAL ASCENDhNCY OK PYTHAGORAS. 
 
 403 
 
 prytanis, or jne.-ident, while his wife and daughter were placet 
 at the head of the religious processions of females J Nor was 
 his influence confined to Kroton. Other towns in Italy and 
 Sicily, — Sybaris MetiHiontum, Rhegium, Katana, Himera, etc., 
 all felt the benefit of his exhortations, which extricated some of 
 them even from slavery. Such are the tales of which the biog- 
 raphers of Pytiiagoras are full.- And we see that even the 
 disciples of Aristotle, about the year 300 B.C., — Aristoxenus, 
 Dik»archus, Herakleides of Pontus, etc., are hardly less charged 
 with them than the Neo- Pythagoreans of three or four centurie^i 
 later : they doubtless heard them from their contemporary Py- 
 thagoreans,3 the last members of a declining sect, among whom 
 
 * Valerius Maxim, viii, 15, xv, 1 ; Jamblichus, Vtt. Pyth. c. 45 ; Tiraaeus, 
 Fragm. 78, etl. Didot. 
 
 '^ Porphyry, Vit. Pythag. c. 21-54 ; Jamblicb. 3;j-o5, 106. 
 
 ^ The compilations of Porphyry ami Jamhli'hiiH on the life of I'ydiag- 
 oras, copied from a great variety of authors, will doubtless contain some 
 truth amidst their confused heaji of statements, many incredible, and 
 nearly all unauthenticated. But it is very ditli<ult to single out what 
 these portions of truth really are. Evtn Aristox* uus and Dikiearchus, 
 the best authors from whom thise biogra{diers quote, lived near two 
 centuries after the death of I'ytluigoras, and do not appear to have 
 had anv earlv memorials to consult, nor aiiv l)etter informants than the 
 contemporary Pythagoreans, — the last of an expiring sect, and prob- 
 ably among the least eminent for intellect, since the philosophers of the 
 Sokratic school irk its various branches carried off the acute and aspiring 
 young men of tliat time. 
 
 Mciuers, in his Geschiehtc der Wissensehaften (vol. i, b. iii, p. 191, sui.)^ 
 has given a careful analysis of the various authors from whom the two 
 biographers have Iwrrowed, and a comparative estimate of their trustwor- 
 thiness. It is an excellent piece of historical criticism, though the author 
 txaggerates both the merits and the influence of the first Pythagoreans : 
 Kiessling, in the notes to his edition of Jamblichus, has given some extracts 
 from it. but by no means enough to dispense with the perusal of the orig- 
 inal. I think Meiners allows too much credit, on the whole, to Aristox- 
 enus (see p. 214), rnd makes too little deduction for the various stories, 
 difficult to be believed, of which Aristoxenus is given as the source : of 
 course the latter could not furnish better matter than he heard from his 
 own witnesses. Where Meiners's judgment is more severe, it is also better 
 borne out, especially respecting Porphyry himself, and his scholar Jambli- 
 chus. These later Pythagorean philosophers seem to have set up as a 
 formal canon of credibility, that which many religious men of antiquity 
 ■cied upon from i mere uiuoii^' ..u- sentiment and fear of giving offence 
 
 the attributes of the primitive founder passed for godlike, bu 
 who had no memorials, no historical judgment, and no means of 
 forming a ti-ue conception of Kroton as it stood in 530 B.C.' 
 
 To trace these tales to a true foundation is impossible : but we 
 ma}' entertain reasonable belief that the success of Pythagoras, 
 as a person favored by the gods and patentee of divine secret.s, 
 was very great, — that he procured to himself both the reverence 
 of tlie multitude and the peculiar attachment and obedience of 
 many devoted adherents, chiefly belonging to the wealthy and 
 powerful classes, — that a select body of these jidherents, llirre 
 hundred in number, bound themselves by a sort of vow both to 
 Pythagoras and to each other, and adopted a peculiar diet, ritual, 
 and observances, as a token of union, — though without anything 
 like community of property, which some have ascribed to them. 
 Such aband of men, standing high in the city for wealtli and station, 
 and bound together by this intimate tie, came by almost unconscious 
 tendency to mingle political ambition with religious and scientific 
 pursuits. Political clubs with sworn members, under one form 
 jr another, were a constant phenomenon in the Grecian cities,* 
 
 * I — ■ " --' " ■.■■ ——— II—.. — - .11 ■ I I — ■ , ■ III I .1— — — ■■..lll.l-l — I.-I...I I I — — ^1 — ..^ M l.l.l — I I..III.I. .1. 
 
 10 the gods, — That it was not right to disbelieve any story recounted respect- 
 ing the gods, and wiierein the divine agency was introduced : no one could 
 tell but what it might be true : to deny its truth, was to set bounds to the 
 divine omnipotence. Accordingly, they made no difficulty in believing 
 what was recounted about Aristajus, Abaris, and other eminent subjects of 
 mvthes (Jamblichus, Vit. Pyth. c. 138-148) — Kai rovro ye ttuvtec ol 
 Uv&ayopeLot ufiu^ exovat TnarevTiKu^, olov rrepl ^Apiaralov Kal 'A/?apf(Jof tH 
 fxv&o'koyovfieva Kal baa a/,Aa roiavra ?.eyeTai riJv toiovtuv 6e ruv 
 
 doKOVl'TUV flV&LKdv UT0fiVJ]flOVeVOV<TLV, (Ilf Ovdiv aTTKTTOVVTe^ OTl 
 
 fiv etc rd ^eiov uvuyqT ai. Also, not less formally laid down in 
 Jamblichus, Adhortatio ad Philosophiam, as the fourth Symbolum, p. 324» 
 ed. Kiessling. liepi ^euv fiTjdiv T^avjuaardv uttcotel, fi-qdi tiEpl ^eiuv Soyfiii 
 T(jv. Reasoning from their principles, this was a consistent corollary to 
 lay down ; but it helps us to estimate their value as selectors and discrim* 
 inators of accounts respecting Pythagoras. The extravagant compliments 
 paid by the emperor Julian in his letters to Jamblichus will not suffice to 
 establish the authority of the latter as a critic and witness : see the Epii- 
 tolfie,34, 40, 41, in Heyler's edit, of Julian's letters. 
 
 * Aulus Grell. N. A. iv, II, ApoUonius (ap. Jamblich. c. 262) alludes to 
 rd vrrofiv^fiaTa tQv KporuvLaruv : what the date of these may be, we dc 
 njt know, but there is no reason to oelieve them anterior to Aristoxenus. 
 
 • Thucyd. viii, 54. rag ^vvuyoaiag, alnEp irvy^avov TrptrEoov ovnat iv r| 
 woXei im SiKatc nal upxaic* arruaaQ ^TeXtJwv, etc. 
 
 ' I 
 
 Mifflil*MlMMil 
 
PYTHAGOREANS AS POLITICIANS. 
 
 40» 
 
 404 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 iMid the Pythagorean order at its first formation wa* the most 
 efficient of all dubs ; since it presented an intimacy of attach 
 ment among its members, as well as a feeling of haughty 
 exclu.-iveness against the public without, such as no other frater- 
 nity could panillel.i The devoted attachment of Pythagoreans 
 lowanl- cMch other is not lc<s emphatically set forth than their 
 cuMl<'iii|>t for »'\«M-y one else. In fact, these two attributes of the 
 order seem the best a-<'ertaiiied, as well as the most permanent 
 of all: moreover, we may be sure that the peculiar observances 
 of the order passed for exemplary virtues in the eyes of ita 
 memlxTs, and exalte<l ambition into a duty, by making them 
 sincerely believe that they wen^ the only persons fit to govern. 
 It is no matter of surprise, then, to learn that the Pythagoreans 
 gradually drew to themselves great ascendency in the government 
 of Kroton. And as simihir clubs, not less influential, were formed 
 at Mctai)ontum and other plaees, so the Pythagorean order spread 
 its net and dietated the course of affairs over a large i)ortiou of 
 Ma«,aia Gneei:i. Such ascendency of the Pythagoreans must 
 have procured for the master himself some real, and still more 
 supposed, influence over the march of government at Kroton and 
 elsewhere, of a nature not then possessed by any of his contem- 
 poraries throughout Greece.'^ But his influence was probably 
 exercised in the background, through the medium of the brother- 
 hood who reverenced him : for it is hardly conformable to Greek 
 manners that a stranger of his character should guide personally 
 and avowedly the political affairs of any Grecian city. 
 
 On tliis import:uit passuj^a', in whiih TlmoydidOs i otos the political clubs 
 of Athens as sworn societies, — numerous, notorious, and etJicicnt,— I shall 
 ipcak farther in a future stage of the history. Dr. Arnold has a good note 
 on the passage. 
 
 ' Justin. x\. 4. •' Sed trecenti ex juvenihus cum sodalitii juris Sacra- 
 mento quodam ncxi, separatam a ceteris civibus vitam exercerent, quasi 
 coetum clandestinte conjurationis haberent, civitatem in se converterunt." 
 
 Compare Diogen Lacrt. viii, 3; Apollonius ap. Jamblich. c. 254 ; Por- 
 phyry, Vit. Pyth. c. 33. 
 
 The story of the devoted attachments of the two Pythagoreans Damon 
 «nd Phintias appears to he very well attested : Aristoxenus heard it from 
 the lips of the younger Dionysius the despot, whose sentence had elicited 
 •uch manifestation of friendship ( Porphyry, Vit. Pyth. c. 59-62 , Cicero. 
 Dc Officiig, iii, 10 ; and Davis ad Cicero, Tusc. Disp. v. 22). 
 
 •Plutarch, Phi iosoph cum Principib.c.i,p.777. av 6' upxovrog avdpog na 
 
 Vol. 4 
 
 M 
 
 Nor are we to believe that Pythagoras came originally to Kn> 
 ton with the express design of creating for himself an ascendent 
 political position, — still less that he came for the purpose of 
 realizing a great preconceived political idea, and transforming 
 Kroton into a model-city of pure Dorism, as has been supposed 
 by some eminent modern authors. Such schemes might indeed 
 be ascribed to him by Pythagoreans of the Platonic age, when 
 large ideas of political amelioration were rife in the minds of 
 speculative men, — by men disposed to forego the authorship of 
 their own opinions, and preferring to accredit them as traditions 
 handed down from a founder who had left no memorials ; but it 
 requires better evidence than theirs to make us believe that any 
 real Greek born in 580 B.C. actually conceived such plana. W^ 
 cannot construe the scheme of Pythagoras as going farther thar. 
 the formation of a private, select order of brethren, embracing his 
 religious fancies, ethical ton^, and germs of scientiHc idea, — and 
 manifesting adhesion by those observances which Herodotus and 
 Plato call the Pythagorean orgies and mode of life. And his 
 private order became politically powerful, because he was skilful 
 or fortunate enough to enlist a sulRcient number of wealthy 
 Krotoniates, possessing individual influence which they strength- 
 ened immensely by thus regimenting themselves in intimate 
 union. The Pythagorean orgies or religious ceremonies were 
 not inconsistent with public activity, bodily as well as mental: 
 probably the rich men of the order may have been rendered even 
 more active, by being fortified against the temptations of a life of 
 indulgence. The character of the order as it flrst stood, different 
 from that to which it was afVerwards reduced, was indeed reli- 
 gious and exclusive, but also active and domineering ; not despis- 
 ing any of those boilily accomplishments which increased the 
 efficiency of the Grecian citizen, and which so particularly har- 
 monized with the preexisting tendencies of Kroton.i Niebuhr 
 
 no?.,nKov Kal npaKTiKou Kay^a^^riraL {6 ipi/M(TO(io^) Koi tovtov uvnrr2.Tfari Ka- 
 louiyax^cac, TroXAorf 6l' ii/uc uijtUijaev, w? UvSajopaQ rule npuTevovai rut, 
 ItaAiwrtJv avyyevoixevo^. 
 
 ^ I transcribe here the summary given by Krische, at the close of his Dis- 
 tertation on the Pnhagorean order, p. 101 : " Societatis scopius fuit mer« 
 politicus, ut lapsam optimatium potestatem non modo in pristinura restitu- 
 wnt sed firmaret amplificaretque : "um summo hoc scope duo conjuncll 
 
 ^ I 
 
 i 
 
loe 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 CAUSES OF PYTHAGOREAN SUBVERSION. 
 
 407 
 
 and O. MuUer Ikave even supposed that the select Three Ilan- 
 dred P)'thagoreans constituted a sort of smaller senate at that 
 
 fuerunt ; moralis alter, alter ad literas spectans. Discipulos suos lx>noa 
 prolx)sque homines reddere voluit Pythagoras, et ut civitatem moderaiitea 
 potestate sua nou nbaterciitur ad plebem oppriraendam ; et ut plebs. iiitclli- 
 i;en5 suis cominodis cou3uli, conditione sua contenta esset. Quoniara vero 
 bonum sapienst|ue raoderaraen nisi a prudente literisque exculto viro ex- 
 spectari (non) licei, pliilosophiie studiuin necessarium duxit Samius ii.s, qui 
 ad civitatis clavum tenendum se aceingerent.'' 
 
 This is the general view (coinciding substantially with that of O. Miiller^ 
 — Dorians, iii, 9, 10) given by an author who has gone through the evi- 
 dences with care and learning. It differs on some important points from the 
 idea which I conceive of the primitive master and his contemporary breth- 
 ren. It leaves out the religious ascendency, which 1 imagine to have stood 
 first among the means as well as among the premeditated purposes of Py- 
 thagoras, and sets f >rth a reformatory political scheme as directly contempla- 
 ted by him, of which there is no proof. Though the political ascendency 
 of the early Pythagoreans is the most prominent feature in their earl^ his- 
 tory, it is not to be considered as the manifestation of any peculiar or set- 
 tied political idea, — it is rather a result of their position and means ol 
 nnion. Ritter observes, in my oj»inion more justly : " We must not be- 
 lieve that the mysteries of the Pythagorean order were of a simply political 
 character : the most probalde accounts warrant us in considering that its 
 central point was a mystic religious teaching," (Greschicht. der Philosophic, 
 b. iv, ch. i, vol. i, pj). 365-368 :) compare Hoeck. Krcta, vol. iii, p. 223. 
 
 Krische (p. 32) as well as Boeckh (Philolaus, pp. 39-42) and O. Muller 
 assimilate the Pythagorean life to the Dorian or Spartan habits, and call 
 the I'ythagorean philosophy the expression of Grecian Dorism, as opj)osed 
 to the lonians and the Ionic philosophy. I confess that I perceive no anal- 
 ogy between the fv^o, cither in action or speculation. The Spartans stand 
 completely distinct from other Dorians; and even the Spartan habits of life, 
 though they present some points of resemblance with the bodily training 
 of the Pythagoreans, exhibit still more important points of difference in 
 respect to religious peculiarity and mysticism, as well as to scientific cle- 
 ment embodied witii it. The Pythagorean philosophy, and the Eieatic 
 philosophy, were lM)th equally opposed to the Ionic ; yet neither of them is 
 in any way connected with Dorian tendencies. Neither Klea nor Kroton 
 were Doric cities ; moreover, Xenophan^s as well as Pythagoras were 
 both lonians. 
 
 The general assertions respecting Ionic mobility and inconstancy, con- 
 trasted with Doric 'Constancy and steadiness, will not be found borne out by 
 a etndy of facts. The Dorism of Pythagoras appears to me a complete 
 iUkcy. O. Mullen even turns Kroton into a Dorian city, contrary to all 
 evidence. 
 
 city,^ — an hypothesis no way probable ; we may rather conceive 
 them as a poweiful private club, exercising ascendency in the 
 interior of the senate, and governing through the medium of the 
 constituted authorities. Nor can we receive without great allow, 
 ance the assertion of Varro,2 who, assimilating Pythagoras to 
 Plato, tells us that he confined his instructions on matters of 
 government to chosen disciples, who had gone through a com- 
 plete training, and had reached the perfection of wisdom and 
 virtue. It seems more probable that the political Pythagoreans 
 were those who were most qualified for action, and least for spec- 
 ulation. And we may reasonably suppose in the general of the 
 order that skill in turning to account the aptitudes of individuals, 
 which two centuries ago was so conspicuous in the Jesuits; to 
 whom, in various ways, the Pythagoreans bear considerable re- 
 semblance. All that we can be said to know about their political 
 principles is, that they were exclusive and aristocratical, adverse 
 to the control and interference of the people ; a circumstance no 
 way disadvantageous to them, since they coincided in this respect 
 with the existing government of the city, — had not their own 
 conduct brought additional odium on the old aristocracy, and 
 raised up an aggravated democratical opposition, carried to the 
 most deplorable lengths of violence. 
 
 All the information which we possess, apocryphal as it is, re- 
 specting this memorable club, is derived from its warm admirers ; 
 yet even their statements are enough to explain how it came to 
 provoke deadly and extensive enmity. A stranger coming to 
 teach new religious dogmas and observances, with a tincture of 
 science and some new ethical ideas and phrases, though he 
 would obtain some 'zealous votaries, would also bring upon him- 
 self a certain measure of antipathy. Extreme strictness of ob- 
 servances, combined with the art of touching skilfully the springs 
 of religious terror in others, would indeed do much both to for- 
 tify and to exalt him. But when it was discovered that science, 
 philosophy, and even the mystic revelations of religion, whatevei 
 they were, remained confined to the private talk and practice of 
 
 » Niebuhr, Romisch. Gesch. i, p. 165, 2d edit. ; O. MiiUer, Hut of Dori 
 •US, iii, 9, 16 : Krische is opposed to tliis idea, sect, v, p. 84 
 ■ Varro ap. Augustin. de Ordine, ii. 30 ; Krische, p. 77. 
 
 V 
 
 r\ 
 
408 
 
 HISTORY OF GKKECE. 
 
 the disciples, and were thus thrown into the backgiound, irhSk 
 nil that was seen and feh without, was the j)olitittal pndominanc© 
 of an ambitious fraternity, — we need not wonder that I*vtha;Tor. 
 ism in all its parts became odious to a large portion of the com- 
 munity. Moreover, we find the order represented not merely ^ 
 constituting a devoted and exclusive political party, but also as 
 manifesting an ostentatious self-conceit throughout their personal 
 demeanor,' ~ refusing the hand of fellowship to all except the 
 brethren, and disgusting especially their own familiar friends and 
 kinsmen. So far as we know Grecian philosophy, this is the 
 only instance in v hich it was distinctly abused for political and 
 party objects : th*» early days of the Pythagorean order stand 
 distinguished lor such perversion, which, fortunately for the prog- 
 ress of philosophy, never presented itself afterwards in Greece.^ 
 Even at Athens, however, we shall hereafter see that Sokratos, 
 [hough standing really aloof from all party intrigue, incurred 
 muchof hisunpojiularity from supposed political conjunction with 
 Kritias and Alkibiades,'' to which, indeed, the orator JEscliinea 
 
 • ApoUonius ap. Jumblichum, V. P. c. 254, 255, 256, 257. vyefiover ,M 
 iyevovTO Tij^ 6ia<(fopui ol Talq avy^eveiai^ Kol raic olKeioTTjaiv tyyv'ara 
 iMdetmiKOTec rCtv Uv^ayopeiuv. klriov <J* i]v, 5n to. (ikv ivo'kh\ <u mt 
 UvTTfi rCiv rrparrofihuv^ etc. : compare also the lines descriptive of PvrS.ig 
 OTM, c SJ59. Todf pH traipovc f^yev loov^ fiaKupeaai ^eolat. Tovt; (V uA 
 Aavf ijyeiT* ovr' kv Aoy^, iv api'dfi^. 
 
 That this A|>oUoaius, cited both by Jamblichus and by Porijliyrv, is 
 ApoUonius of Tyana, has been rendered probable by Meiucrs (Gcst 1»! dcr 
 Wissensch. v. i, pp. 239-245) : compare Welcker, Prolegomena ad Tlico-nid 
 pp. xlv, xlvi. 
 
 When we read thf life of Apollonins by Philostratns, we see that the 
 former was himself extremely communicative : he might l>e the rather dis- 
 posed therefore to think that the seclusion and reserve of Pvthag-oras was a* 
 defect, and to ascribe to it much of the miscliief which afterwards overlook 
 the order. 
 
 • Schlcicrmachero )serves, that " Philosophy amonn; the Pythagoreans wae 
 connected with political objects, and their school with a practical brotherly 
 partnership, such as was never on any other occasion seen in Greece." (In- 
 troduction to his Translation of Plato, p. 12.) See also Theopompos, Wr, 
 68, ed. Didot, apud Athcnaium, v, p. 213, and Euripides, Medea, 294 
 
 • Xenophon, Meraorab.i, 2, 12 } ^schinas, cont. Timarch. c. 34. ifickt ^ 
 *A&iivaioLj 2<jKpaTTf top ao<lncTf/v dTe«rf*v«re, oti Kpiriav i^uvj] iretecudeth 
 «^tr. iva rCii r;^u)\oiT>z 
 
 VIOLENT SUBVrreiON OF rYTH.\GOREANS. 
 
 409 
 
 Aitinctly ascribes his condemnation, speaking about sixty yea» 
 after the event. Had Sokrates been known as the founder of • 
 band holding together intimately for ambitious purposes, the r^ 
 Bult would have been emmently pernicious to philosophy, and 
 probably much sooner pernicious to himself. 
 
 It was this cause which brought about the complete and vio 
 lent destruction of the Pythagorean order. Their ascendency 
 had provoked such wide-spread discontent, that their enemies 
 became emboldened to employ extreme force against them. Ky- 
 lon and Ninon — the former of whom is said to have sought ad- 
 miuufice into the order, but to have been rejected on account of 
 hi.- iKid character — took the lead in pronounced opposition to 
 the Pythagoreans; and the odium which the latter had incurred 
 exicfided Ftself farther to the Senate of One Thousand, through 
 the medium of which their ascendency had been exercised. Prop- 
 ositions were made for rendering the government more demo- 
 cratical, and for constituting a new senate, taken by lot from all 
 the people, before which the magistrates should go through their 
 trial of aixouutabiUty after office ; an opportunity being chosen 
 in which the Senate of One Thousand had given signal otfcnce 
 by reiusing to divide among the people the recently couqueied 
 territory of SybarisJ In spite of the opposition of the Pythag- 
 oreans, this change of government was carried through. Ninon 
 and Kylon, their principal enemies, made use of it to exasperate 
 the people still farther against the order, until they provoked 
 actual popular violence against it. The Pytliagoreans were 
 attacked when assembled in their meeting-house near the temjjle 
 of Apollo, or, as some said, in the house of Milo : the building 
 was set on fire, and many of the members perished ;2 none but 
 the younger and more vigorous escaping. Similar disturbances, 
 and the like violent suppression of the order, with destruction of 
 geveral among the leading citizens, are said to have taken placa 
 
 » This is stated in Jamblichus, c. 255 ; yet it is difficult to believe; for it 
 the fart had been so, the destruction of the Pythagoreans would naturally 
 have produced an allotment and permanent occupation of the Sybaritan 
 territory-, — which certainly did not take place, for Svbaris remainctl with- 
 out resident possessors until the foundation rf Thurii. 
 
 • Jamblichus. c. 255-259: Porphyry, c 54-57; Diogen. La^rt. T5ii.3»* 
 Diodor. X, Prajrm vol iv, p. 56, Wcss. 
 VOL. IV. iS 
 
410 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 in other cities of Magna Griecia, — Tarentum, Metapontum, 
 Kaulonia. And we are told that these cities remained Ibr some 
 time in a state of great disquietude and commotion from which 
 they were only njscued by the frienaly mediation of the Pelo 
 ponnesian Acha^aiis, the original founders of Sybaris and Kro> 
 ton, — assisted, indeed, by mediators from other parts of Greece 
 The cities were at length pacified, and induced to adopt an amica-' 
 ble congress, with common religious festivals at a temple founded 
 expressly for the purpose, and dedicated to Zeus HomariusJ 
 
 Thus perished the original Pythagorean order. Respecting 
 Pythagoras himself, there were conflicting accounts ; some rep- 
 resenting that he was burnt in the temple with his disciples ;"- 
 others, that he had died a short time previously ; others again 
 affirmed that he was alive at the time, but absent, and that he 
 died not long afterwards in exile, after forty days of voluntary 
 abstinence from food. His tomb was still shown at Metapontum 
 in the days of Cicero.^ As an active brotherhood, the Pythago- 
 
 ' Polyb. ii, 39; Plutarch, De Geiiio Socratis, c. 13. p. 583; Aristoxenus, 
 •p. Jamblich. c. 250. That the enemies of the order attacked it by set- 
 ting fire to the hoase in which the members were assembled, is the cir 
 comstance in which all accounts a^^ree. On all other points there is preat 
 discrepancy, especially respecting the names and dates of the Pythago- 
 reans who escaped: Boeckh (Philolaus, p. 9, seq.) and Brandis (Hand- 
 buch der Gesch. Philos. ch. Ixxiii, p. 432) try to reconcile these discrep- 
 ncies. 
 
 Aristophanes intrf»daces Strepsiades, at the close of the Nubes, as set. 
 /jip fire to the meetinjr-house (tppovrKTrrfpiov) of Sokrates and his disciples 
 possibly the Pythaj^orean conflagration may have suggested this. 
 
 * '' Pythagoras Samius siispicione dominatfts injust;\ virus in fano con- 
 Orematus est." (Amohius adv. Gentes, lib. i, p. 23, ed. Elmenhorst.) 
 
 • Cicero, De Finib v, 2 (who seems to have copied from Dikaearchas : 
 •ee Fuhr. ad Dikaearchi Fragment, p. 55) ; Justin, xx, 4 ; Diogen. LaCrt. 
 riii, 40 ; Jamblichns, V. P. c. 249. 
 
 O. Miiller says (Dorians, iii, 9, 16). that " the influence of the Pythago- 
 roan league upon tht administration of the Italian states was of the most 
 beneficial kind, which continued for many generations after the dissolution 
 of the league itself." 
 
 The first of these two assertions cannot be made out, and depends only 
 on the statements of later encomiasts, who even supply materials to 
 contradict their own general view. The judjjment of Welcker respecting 
 the influence of the Pythagoreans . much less farnrable, is at the same time 
 ■e probable. ( Pra;fat ad Theognid. p. xlv.) 
 
 LATER PYTHAGOREANS. 
 
 411 
 
 lean? never revived ; but the dispersed memoers came togethei 
 an a sect, for common religious observances and common pursuit 
 ol" science. They were readmitted, after some interval, into the 
 cities of Magna Gnecia,i from which they had been onginally 
 exi)elled, but to which the sect is always considered as partic^,ularly 
 belonging, --though individual members of it are found be- 
 sides "at "'Phebes and other citiee of Greece. Indeed, some of 
 these later Pythagoreans sometimes even acquired great political 
 intiuence, as we see in the case of the Tarentine Archytas, the 
 coiiiemporary of Plato. 
 
 It has already been stated that the period when Pythagoras 
 arrived at Kroton may be fixed somewhere between B.C. 540^ 
 530 ; and his arrival is said to have occurred at a time of great 
 depression in the minds of the Krotoniates. They had recently 
 been defeated by the united Lokrians and Rhegians, vastly infe- 
 rior to themselves in number, at the river Sagra; and the humil- 
 iation thus brought upon them is said to have rendered thtin 
 docile to the training of the Samian missionary.-^ As the birth 
 of the Pythagorean order is thus connected with the defeat of 
 the Krotoniat'es at the Sagra, so its extinction is also connected 
 with their victory over th« Sybarites at the river Traeis, or Tri- 
 onto, about twenty years afterwards. 
 
 The second of the two assertions appears to me <iuite incoiTCCt ; the m- 
 fluence of the Pythagorean order on the government of Magna Graecia 
 ceased altogether, as far as we are able to judge. An individual Pythagc^ 
 rem Hke Archytas might o>)tain intiuence, but this is not the mfluence of 
 the order Nor ought O. Miillcr to talk about the Italian Greeks givmg up 
 the Doric cusf )ms and adopting an Achaean government. There is nothing 
 to prove that Kroton ever had Doric customs. ,. „ a 
 
 I Aristotel. de Coelo, ii, 13. oi nepl ri/v 'Ira/.m., Ka?.ovf.euoLde Uv^ay 
 cpeioL. "Italici philosophi quondam nominati." (Cicero, De benect 
 
 '" « ^Heyne pla<»es the date of the battle of Sagra about 560..B.C. ; but this is 
 very uncertain. See his Opuscula. vol. ii, Prolus. ii. pp. 5.3, and Prolus. x, p. 
 184. See also Justin, xx, 3, and Strabo, vi, pp. 261-263. It will be seen 
 that the latter conceives the battle of the Sagra as having luippencd after 
 Ihc destruction of Sybaris by the Krotoniates ; for he states twice that the 
 Krotoniates lost so many citizens at the Sagra, that the city did not long 
 ror/ive so terrible a blow : he cannot, therefore, have supposed that tht 
 ttjmplete triumph of the Krotoniates over the great Sybans wa* RaineO 
 •Jtorwardft. 
 
4U 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 Of the history of these two great Achaean cities wtJ unfoita- 
 nately know very little. Though both were powerful, yet down 
 to the period of 5]() B.C., Sybaris seems to have been decidedlt 
 the greatest : of it? dominion as well as of its much-denojinced 
 luxury I have spoken in a former chapter.' It was at that tim<j 
 that the war broke out between them which ended in the destinio- 
 tion of Sybaris. It is certain t!uit the Sybaritans were aggres* 
 •ors in the war ; but hy what causes it had been preceded in 
 their own town, or what provocation they had received, we make 
 out very indistinctly. There had been a j)olitical revolution at 
 Sybaris, we are tohl, not long before, in which a poj)ular leader 
 named Telys had headed a rising against the oligarchical gov 
 ernraent, and induced tlie people to banish live hundred of the 
 leading rich men, ft* well as to confiscate their properties. He 
 had acquired the sovereignty and become des|x>t of Sybaris ;2 and 
 it appears tliat he, i>r his rule at Sybaris, was much abhorred at 
 Kroton, — since the Krotoniate Philippus, a man of splendid mus- 
 cular form and an Olympic victor, wiis exiled for havin<' en'>-a<Ted 
 himself to marry the daughter of Telys.^ According to tlie nar- 
 rative given by the later Pythagoreans, those exiles, whom Telys 
 had dri\ ( n from Sybaris, took refuge at Kroton, and cast tliem- 
 selve^ as suj)plianis on the altars for protection. It may well be, 
 ifideed, that they were in part Pythagoreans of Sybari.-. A 
 body of powerful exiles, harbored in a town so close at hand, nat- 
 urally inspired alarm, and Telys demanded that they should be 
 d<'l!vere<l u[>, threatening war in case of refusal This demand 
 excited consternation ;.t Kroton, since the military strength of 
 Sybaris was decidcd!y superior. The suirtiider of the exiles 
 was much debated, md ^loio^t decreed, by the Krotoi»iai/>s, until 
 
 • S»M' ;iIk)vo. vol. iii. -hap. xxIL 
 
 • Dioilor. xii, 9. Herodotus cali* T«lvs in one plnce /Jo'T'/.yfi. in a'«ot]ief 
 rtimtvov of Svbaris (v, 44): thw w not ^t variiuue with the storv (rf 
 Diotlorus. 
 
 The story j:iven by ^Vthenajus, out of Ilerukleides Ponticus, respecting 
 tlie sir!)versiou of the dominion of T^lys. fiinnot be reconciled either v/ith 
 Herodotus or Dioiionis (Athenaus, xii p bi2). Dr. Thirlwall supposes 
 the deposition of Telys to have occurred nut^vecy the defeat at the Tr*eii 
 and the capture of Sybaris; but tlii-s is in(unsA>tiint with tb*, U«K»1'II» ^ 
 Herakleides, and not countenanced by any other kVijAiu» 
 
 • Herudot. v, 47. 
 
 DKSTRrCTTON OF SYBARIS. 
 
 4]« 
 
 al length the persuasion of Pythagoras himself is said to hav€ 
 determined them to risk any hazard sooner than incur the diA- 
 hooor of betraying suppliants. 
 
 On the demand of the Sybsu-ites being refused, lelys marched 
 against Kroton, at the head of a force which is reckoned at tliree 
 hundred thousand men.' He mardied, too, in defiance of the strong- 
 est religious warnings against the enterpri.<^, — lor the sacrifices, 
 offeret' on Ins behalf by the lamid prophet Kallias of Elis, were 
 decisively unfavorable, and the propliet himself fled in terror to 
 Kroton.'^ Near the river Traeis, or Trionto, he was met by the 
 forces of Kroton, consisting, we are inlbrmed, of one hundred 
 thousand men, and commanded by the fpreat aliilete and PytliMg- 
 orean Milo ; who was clothed, we are told, in tlie costume and 
 armed with the club of Herakles. They were farther reinforced, 
 however, by a valuable ally, the Sj)artati lX)rieus, younger 
 brother of king Kleomenes, then coasting along the gulf of Taren- 
 tum with a body of colonists, intending to found a settlement in 
 Sicily. A bloody battle was fought, in which the Syl>arites were 
 totally worsted, with prodigious slaughter; while the victors, 
 fiercely provoked and giving no quarter, followed up the pursmt 
 to warmly that they took the city, dispersed its inhabitants, and 
 crushed its whole power^ in the short space of seventy days. 
 The Sybarites fled in great part to Laus and Skidrus,^ their 
 settlements planted on the Mediterranean coast, across the Cahi- 
 brian peninsula. And so eager were the Krotoniates to render 
 the site of Sybaris untenable, that they turned the course of the 
 river Krathis so as to overwhelm and destroy it : the dry bed in 
 w))i<h the river had originally flowed was still visible in the time 
 of Herodotus,-^ who was among the settlers in the town of Thurii, 
 afterwards founded, nearly adjoining. 
 
 * Diovior. xii, 9.- Strabo, vi, p. 263; Jamblichus, Vit. Pythag. c. 260 
 "^kyrnn. Chi. v, 340. * Herodot. v, 44. 
 
 » Diodor. xii, 9, 10 : Strabo, vi, p. 263. 
 
 * Herodot. vi, 21 ; StraK), vi, p. 253. 
 
 * Herodot. v, 45; DiodoT xii, 9, 10; Strabo, ri, p. 263. Strabo niin 
 tlona expressly the turning of the rirer for the purpose of overwhelm 
 klg the c\ty, — ^?avrec yap i^v iro'kiv hriiyayov rdv ncraf^v Kal k :'( 
 nkvuav. It is to this change m the channel of the river that I refer th2 
 trpression in Herodotus, — refx^vog re xal vijbv iovra irapd rbv in(>9* 
 
 18* 
 
 
 ^\ 
 
 I 
 
414 
 
 HISTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 COLONIZATION OF DOKreUS. 
 
 ^16 
 
 It f^ppears, however, thai the Krotoniates tor a long time kept 
 the site of Sybaris deserted, refusing even to allot the territory 
 among the body of their own citizens : from which circumstances; 
 as has been before noticed, the commotion against the Pythago- 
 rean order is said to have arisen. Thoy may j)erhaps have been 
 afraid of the name and recollections of the city ; wherein no 
 large or permanent establishment was ever formed, until Thurii 
 was established by Athens about sixty-five years afterward*. 
 Nevertheless, the name of the Sybarites did not perish. Hav- 
 ing maintained themselves at Laos, Skidros, and elsewliere, they 
 afterwards formed the privileged Old-citizens among the colonists 
 of Thurii ; but misbehaved themselves in that ca{)acity, and 
 were mostly either slain or expelled. Even after that, however, 
 the name of Sybaris still remained on a reduce<l scale in some 
 portion of the territory. Herodotus recounts wiiat he was told 
 by the Sybarites, and we find subsequent indications of them 
 even as late as Theokritus. 
 
 The conquest and destruction of the original Sybaris — pei 
 haps in 510 B.C. the greatest of all Grecian cities — ap})ears to 
 have excited a strong sympathy in the Hellenic world. In 
 Miletus, especially, with which it had maintained intimate union, 
 the grief was so vehement, that all the Milesians shaved their 
 heads in token of mourning. ^ The event happened just at the 
 time of the expulsion of Hippias from Athens, and mu>t have 
 made a sensible revolution in the relations of the Greek cities on 
 
 Kpddii: It was natural tluit the old de^ertod bed of the river should b<j 
 called •• the dry Krathis .•" whereas, if we suppose tliat there was only one 
 channel, the expression has no appropriate meaning. For I do not think 
 that am- oim' tan he well satistied with the e.xplanation of Bihr : " Vocatur 
 Crathi^ hor loco ^r}pb^ sicnis, ut qui hierae tiuit, aestatis vero tempore exsic- 
 catus est : quod adhuc in multis Italise inferioris tiuviis olxservant.' I doubt 
 whether this be true, as a matter of fact, respecting the river Krathis (see 
 my preceding volume, ch. xxii), but even if the fact were true, the epithet 
 in Bahr's sense has no especial significance for the pmpose contemplated 
 by Herodotus, who merely wishes to describe the site of the temple erected 
 byDorieus. "Near the Krathis," or "near the dry Krathis," would be 
 equivalent expressions, if we adopted Bahr's construction ; whereas to say, 
 * nc*ir the deserted channel of the K -atliis," would be a good local desig 
 ^i^fion ' Herodot. vi, 21. 
 
 Uie Italian coast with the rustic population of the interior. Th« 
 Krotoniates might destroy Sybaris, and disperse its inhabitants, 
 but they could not succeed to its wide dominion over dependent 
 territory; and the extinction of this great aggregate pow^r, 
 stretching across the peninsuUi from sea to sea, lessened the 
 means of resistance against the Oscan movements from the 
 inland. From this time forward, the cities of Magna Grascia, 
 as well as those of Ionia, tend to decline in consequence, while 
 Athens, on the other hand, becomes both more conspicuous and 
 more powerful. At the invasion of Greece by Xerxes, thirty 
 years alter this conquest of Sybaris, Sparta and Athens send to 
 ask for aid both from Sicily and Korkyra, — but not from Magna 
 
 Gnecia. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that we do not possess fuller infor- 
 mation respecting these important changes among the Greco- 
 Italian cities, but we may remark that even Herodotus,— 
 himself a citizen of Thurii, and dwelling on the spot not more 
 than eighty years after the capture of Sybaris, - evidently found 
 no written memorials to consult ; and could obtain from verbal 
 conversation nothing better than statements both meagre and 
 contradictory. The material circumstance, for example, of the 
 aid rendered by the Spartan Dorieus and his colonists, though 
 positively asserted by the Sybarites, was as positively denied by 
 the Krotoniates, who alleged that they had accomplished the 
 conquest by themselves, and with their own unaided forces. 
 There can be little hesitation in crediting the affirmative asser- 
 tion of the Sybarites, who showed to Herodotus a temple and 
 precinct erected by the Spartan prince in testimony of his share 
 in the victory, on the banks of the dry, deserted channel, out of 
 which the Krathis had been turned, and in honor of the Krathian 
 Athene.' This of itself forms a proof, coupled with the positive 
 assertion of the Sybarites, sufficient for the case. But they pro- 
 duoed another indirect argument to confirm it, which deserves 
 notice. Dorieus had attacked Sybaris while i.e was passing 
 along the coast of Italy to go and found a colony in Sicily, under 
 the express mandate and encouragement of the oracle ; and aftei 
 tarrying awhile at Sybaris, he pursued his journey to the soutli' 
 
 * Herodot. r, 45. 
 
 •) 
 
CHAK0NDA5 THE LAWGIVER 
 
 417 
 
 iie 
 
 fflSTOltr OF GREECE. 
 
 wetUirn portion of Si(;ily, where he and nearly all bis cona^miiioin 
 perished in a battle with the Carthaginians and Egest«ans, — 
 though the oracle had promised him that he should at-quire and 
 occupy permanently the neighboring territory near Mount Eryx. 
 Now the Sybarites deduced from tliis fatal disaster of Doricua 
 uLd his expedition, combined with the favorable promise of the 
 uacle beforehand a conlident proof of the correctness of tlieip 
 jwn statement th. t he had fought at Sybarrs. For if lie had 
 gone straight to the territory marked out by the oracle, tlicy 
 argued, without turning aside for any other object, the prophecy 
 on which his hopes wtjre founded would have been unquestionably 
 realized, and he would have succeeded ; but the ruinous disajv 
 pointment which actually overtook him was at once explaine<l, 
 and the truth of prophecy vindicated, when it was recollected 
 that he had turned aside to help the Krotoiiiates against Sybaris, 
 and thus set at nought the conditions prescribed to him. Upon 
 this argument, Herodotus tells us, the Sybarites of his d^y 
 especially insisted." And while we note their pious and literal 
 faith in the communications of an inspired prophet, we must at 
 the same time observe how perfectly that faith su|)plied the plat^e 
 of historical premises, — how scanty their stock was of such 
 le'i-itimate evidence, — and how little they had yet learned to 
 apjjreciate its value. 
 
 It is to be remarktid, that Herodotus, in his brief mention of 
 the fatal war between Sybaris and Kroton, does not make the 
 least allusion to Pythagoras or his brotherhood. The least 
 which we can infer from such silenc<i is, that the part which 
 they played in refenince to the war, and their general ascen- 
 dency in Magna Gracia, was in reality less conspicuous and 
 overruling than the Pythagorean historians set forth. Even 
 making such allowance, however, the absence of all allusion in 
 Herodotus, to the commotions which accom[)auied the subvei-sion 
 of the Pvthagoreans. is a surprising circumstance. Nor can I 
 pass over a perplexing statement in Polybias, which seems to 
 
 Ilerodot v, 45 Tovro <». avroO Autpuoc rdv ^avaTW futpTvptow fdyia- 
 fw rouvvTd: (Si Saplrmy 5ri -rapa rd ueuavrevfiiva iroieuv f'U^i&ap^ 
 
 Xupifv Koi iXuv Kiireozs, iAS av avToc re Kai ^ arpariv di&^opg. 
 
 *|iow that he too must have conceived the history of Sybaris io 
 a way different from that in which it is commonly represented 
 He tells us that after much suffering in Magna Graecia, from the 
 troubles which followed the expulsion of the Pythagoreans, the 
 cities were induced by Achaian mediation to come to an accom- 
 modation, and even to establish something like a permanent 
 league, with a common temple and sacrifices. Now the three 
 cities which he specifies as having been the first to do this, are 
 Ki-oton, Sybaris, and Kaulonia.' But according to the sequence 
 of events and the fatal war, just described, between Kroton and 
 Sybaris, the latter city must have been at that time in ruins ; 
 little, if at all, inhabited. I cannot but infer from this statement 
 of Polybius, that he followed different authorities respecting the 
 eariy history- of JSLigna Graiciii in the beginning of the iifth 
 
 century b. c. 
 
 Indeed, the e^irly history of these cities gives us little moro 
 . than a few isolated facts and names. With n^gard to their legis- 
 * la:()rs, Zaleukus and Charondas, nothing is made out except their 
 existence, — and even that fact some ancient critics contested. 
 Of Zaleukus, whom chronologists place in 664 B.C., I have 
 already spoken ; the date of Charondas cannot be assigned, but 
 we may perhai)S presume that it was at some time betweer 
 600-500 B.C. He was a citizen of middling station, born in the 
 Chalkidic colony of Kalana in Sicily,^ and lie trained laws not 
 only for his own city, but tor the other Chalkidic cities in Sicily 
 
 » Polyb. ii, 39. Heyiie thinks that the a<;rcoment here memioned by Pc 
 lybius took place Olvmp. 80, 3; or, in.li'o.l. after tfie repopulation of the 
 Syharitan.territorv bv the foundation of Thurii (Opuscula, vol. iii Pro- 
 his X p. 189). bi* there seems great difliculty in imagining that the 
 state of violent commotion — wliiih, according to Polyl»ius was only ap- 
 peused by this agreement - can possibly have lasted so long as half a cen- 
 tury -, the received date of the overthrow of the Pythagoreans being about 
 
 504 B.C. ^. , u V 
 
 « Aristot. Politic, ii, 9, 6 ; iv. 9, 10. Hcyne puts Charondas much earlier 
 than the foundation of Thurii, in which, I think, he is undoubtedly right: 
 but without determining the date more exactly (Opuscul. vol.u; Prolus. 
 ix, p. 160). Charondas must ceitainly have been earlier than An^ilas of 
 Bhecium and tbe great SiciUan despots ; which wUl phwic him higher than 
 500 \.c. : but I io not know that a. y more precise mark of t me can h» 
 found. ., g- 
 
 , 
 
418 
 
 fflSTORY OF GREECE. 
 
 and Italy, — Leontini, Naxos, Zankle, and RhSgium. The lawi 
 and the solemn prijamble ascribed to him by Diodorus and 
 Stobseus, belong to a later day,' and we are obliged to content 
 ourselves with collecting the brief hints of Aristotle, who tell.^ 
 as that the laws of Charondas descended to great minuteness of 
 distinction and speciiSca^ion, especially in graduating the fine for 
 offences according to the property of the guilty person fined,'2 — 
 '>ut that there was nothing in his laws strictly original and pecu- 
 liar, except that he was the first to introduce the solemn indictment 
 against perjured witnesses before justice. The perjured witness, 
 in Grecian ideas, was looked upon as having committed a crime 
 half religious, half civil ; and the indictment raised against him, 
 known by a peculiar name, partook of both characters, approach- 
 ing in some respects to the procedure against a murderer. Such 
 distinct form of indictment against perjured testimony — with its 
 approjuiate narae,^ which we shall find maintained at Athens 
 
 » Diodonis, xii. 35; Stobseus, Scrm. xhv. 20-40; Cicero de Legg. ii, G. 
 Sec K. F. Heniiann. I.ehrbuch der Griech. Staatsalterthiimer, ch. 89; He^tie 
 Opusciil. vol. ii, pp. 72-164. Brandis (Geschichtc der Rom. Philosophie, 
 ch. xxvi, p. U)2) seems lo rouceivc these prologues as genuine. 
 
 The raistukes and cunfiisioii made l»y ancient writers respecting t!ie:ie 
 law;;ivcrs — even by writers earlier than ^Vristotle (Politic, ii, 9, 5) — an 
 such as we have no means of clearing up. 
 
 Seneca (Epist. *♦*•• ' -xlU l)Oth Zalcukus and Charondas disciples of 
 Pvthaporas. Tliar the former was so, is not to be believed ; but it is not 
 wholly impossible that the latter may have been so, — or at least that he 
 may have been a companion of the earliest Pythagoreans. 
 
 « Aristotel. Politic, ii, 9, 8. XapuvSov 6' ISiov fxiv ov&ev lari irl^v at dUai 
 ruv ilfevdouapTvpuv TtpiuToc }(ip ^T^olrjae t^v imcKfjfiv ry S* uKpifftig, ruv 
 vofiutv tffTi yhupvpcjTFptn Kal rCtv vvv vofio^eruv. To the fuln^s and pre 
 cision predi( ated respee iny: Cliarondas in the latter part of this passage, I 
 refer the other passajje in Politic, iv, 10, 6, which is not to be construed as 
 if it meant that Charondas had graduated fines on the rich and poor with 
 a distinct view to that political trick (of indirectly elimmating the poor 
 from public duties) which Aristotle had been just advertinj? to, —but mere- 
 ly means that Charondas had U^m nice and minute in graduating pecuniary 
 jvenalties generally, haviag reference to the wealth or poverty of the person 
 
 «enteneed. 
 
 • lipCiTOi ydp hroiijffe -S^ kTziaKTiyptv (Aristot. Politic.ii,9,8). See Har* 
 pokration, v, '^m^Krr^aro, and Pollux, viii, 33 ; Demosthenes cont. Ste- 
 phanum, ii, c. 5; cont. Eucrg. et Mn^sibul. c. 1. The word tTrioKVPc car- 
 nes with it the soJeirjiity of meaning adverted to it in the text, and scemp 
 
 CHKONDAS THE LAWGIVER. 
 
 419 
 
 ttiroughout the best-known days of Attic law — was first enacted 
 by Charondas. 
 
 to have been used speciaUy with reference to an action or indictment 
 Against perjured witnesses: which indictment was permitted to be brought 
 with a less dej^ree of risk or cost to the accuser than most othen in the 
 Attic dikasteries, (D^mosth. cent. Eoerg et Mn. L c.) 
 
Vol. i 
 
 i!^ 
 
'<r« 
 
 fi 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 i f f 
 
 **;r.»\-.--:-;ivi .*^*' 'I.^'/:-'. 
 
 'I?i$^^?Hfl«©eri^^n^4^«HaSl^ 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 0025984713 
 
 I 
 
 664- 
 
 Gc3U4- 
 
 4- 
 
 0CT25l9a7 
 

 1/ 
 
 
 
 
 ^i . 
 
 f ■ 
 
 
 
 
 '*0 
 
 
 i (X '*i»X«J iiiit.*' «bi*-«-S-