many peculiarities of his own style and phraseology. That he was also versed in the compositions of other standard national classics appears from his familiar citation of Hesiod, the Cyclic poems', and the Arimaspea2; of Archilochus3, Alcæus, Sappho3, Solon, Æsop7, Simonides, Pindar", Phrynichus10, Eschylus.11 Hecatæus12 alone is quoted by name among preceding prose authors; but traces also occur of a familiarity with the works of other earlier logographers.13 His mastery of his own language displays itself in every line of his narrative. It is also probable that he had been initiated, to however limited an extent, in those rhetorical and dialectic arts which, in his own time, rose and flourished chiefly in the parts of Hellas where he resided during his maturer years. His philological acquirements appear, however, to have been confined to his native tongue. His text offers no trace of an acquaintance with any foreign language, beyond the few words or phrases with which a visit to the country could hardly fail to render him familiar. Strange as may appear this indifference to a branch of science so peculiarly important to one who was not only a writer of foreign history, but a zealous traveller and geographer, it was a defect inherent in the genius of the age, rather than in that 12 II. 143., VI. 137. alibi. The correspondence between one or two incidental facts or sentiments, in passages of Herodotus and Sophocles, affords no sufficient evidence of a personal acquaintance between the authors, or even of a knowledge of each other's works; the facts or sentiments being themselves precisely of a nature to have obtained popular currency in those days. Antigone, 909., conf. Herod. m. 119.; Edip. Col. 339., conf. Herod. 11. 35. 13 Infra, Ch. v. of the man, and to which attention has frequently been called in these pages. His attainments in natural science, while the result apparently of observation and experience rather than study, do not seem, even as referred to the standard of his day, to have been of a high order. As a practical geographer, indeed, he could have had few rivals; but his allusions to meteorological or astronomical phenomena show little or no advance beyond the popular notions of his age, and no very extended acquaintance with the more subtle but not perhaps better-founded speculations of contemporary philosophers. The general tone of the historian's narrative, here as before our only genuine source of knowledge, indicates a man of amiable and honest heart, and independent spirit; feelingly alive to what is noble and generous, and averse to what is vicious and base in human character and conduct. His disapprobation of folly or vice is occasionally exhibited in a lively or even bitter vein of sarcasm, which seasons, without offensively alloying the prevailing kindliness of his language and sentiment. An example of this sarcastic turn has already been cited in our notice of his predecessor Hecatæus. While severe even to acrimony on that author, on account of his vanity as a man and his blunders as a historian, he does ample justice to his merits as a statesman and a patriot. His satirical humour also broadly displays itself in his judgements of the conduct of the several Greek states during the Persian war; portions of his text which have afforded to hostile critics opening for reasonable, if not valid, charges of partiality and malignity. The deep sense of the fundamental truths of natural religion, which animates every page of his work, is curiously combined with an almost childish subjection to the popular superstition and credulity of his age and country. The cheerfulness of his narrative is also overcast at times by melancholy, or even gloomy, shades of moral sentiment, which imply that he was no stranger to the evils of life, though neither soured nor subdued by his experience of them. Among the passages in which his train of reflexion assumes this morbid tone, one is more especially remarkable', where he assures us, in such emphatic terms as to evince the thought to be his own though placed in the mouth of another, that "in this life, short as it is, there has never sojourned a man, however fortunate he may have appeared, but has had occasion, not once only but many times, to wish himself dead rather than alive." In the case of Herodotus, as in that of Homer, it will be desirable, as the best foundation for a critical analysis of the work, to offer a compendious summary of its contents. CHAP. V. HERODOTUS: HIS WORK, AND ITS MATERIALS. 1. EPITOME OF THE TEXT. 2. RESEARCH OF HERODOTUS. HOW TO BE CRI TICALLY ESTIMATED. DEFINITION OF THE GREEK TERM 'IσTopín, HISTORY. Epitome of the text. BOOK I. 1. THE historian explains the object of his work to be: To preserve the memory of past events; to secure for the great actions of both Greeks and Barbarians their just meed of renown; and to trace the causes and course of the wars waged between the Asiatic and Hellenic races. He first concisely notices the early fabulous adventures to which the popular voice ascribed the origin of those national quarrels ; the Rape of the Argive Io by the Phoenicians; of the Phoenician Europa by the Cretans; of Medea of Colchis by the Argonauts ; and of Helen of Sparta by Paris. Passing on to the realities of more recent history, he describes the conquest of the Greek republics of Asia minor by Croesus king of Lydia, as the first authentically recorded act of aggression by a Barbarian power against the Hellenes. A few details of early Lydian history are subjoined.1 The most antient royal dynasty of that country was founded by 1 1-6. Lydus son of Atys. From the last of his successors the kingdom passed to Agron, son of Belus, and fourth in descent from Hercules. Candaules, the last Heraclid sovereign, was deposed, and his throne usurped by Gyges, chief of the race called Mermnadæ. From this Gyges Croesus was the fourth king in lineal descent.1 Several of the predecessors of Croesus had made war on the Greek states, but with little success. The benefits derived by the Milesians, during their contest with Alyattes father of Croesus, from the wise counsels of Periander of Corinth, are described, and the celebrated maritime adventure of Arion of Lesbos, court musician of Periander, is related.2 Under Ardys son of Gyges, the Cimmerians had invaded Lydia and burnt Sardis. They retained portions of the Lydian territory until finally expelled by Alyattes. Croesus subdues the Hellenic colonies of Asia minor, with the whole of that country west of the river Halys. He is visited by Solon the Athenian legislator, who had voluntarily subjected himself to ten years' exile, after the promulgation of his code in his native city. The prosperity of Croesus is suddenly clouded over by the death of a favourite son.4 He is roused from his grief by alarm at the conquests of Cyrus the Persian, who had already dethroned Astyages sovereign of the neighbouring empire of Media. After consulting the most celebrated oracles of the time, he determines on attacking Cyrus before his power should receive further increase; and courts the alliance of Athens and Lacedæmon, then the two leading states of European Greece.5 Some account is given of the origin and early history of each of these commonwealths. The Athenians, a Pelasgian race and indigenous in their present seats, had lately, in order to escape the turbulence of internal faction, which even the wise legislation of Solon had not sufficed to allay, become willing victims of the tyranny of Pisistratus, chief of the democratic party, who now ruled them with firm, but mild and prudent sway. The Lacedæmonians, a Dorian race of Pindus, governed by a family of Heraclid princes, had, after various wanderings in northern Greece, subdued, in conjunction with other kindred Dorian tribes, the greater part of Peloponnesus. Not long after their settlement in their new territory, they were raised by the wise legislation of Lycurgus from a state of semibarbarous anarchy to a political ascendancy over the neighbouring states. At this time they had 16-13. 2 14-25. 3 26-33. 4 34-45. 5 46-55. |