Chapter XII.

§ 1. Peloponnesian mythology of Hercules. Adventures of Hercules:

his combats with wild beasts. § 2. His martial exploits. § 3. His

establishment of the Olympic games. § 4. Complexity of the

mythology of Hercules. § 5. Worship of Hercules carried from

Sparta to Tarentum and Croton. § 6. Coan fable of Hercules. § 7.

Hercules and Hylas. § 8. Identification of Hercules and Melcart. §

9. Human character of Hercules. § 10. His joviality and love of

mirth.

1. We must now entreat the indulgence of our readers when we enter upon an

obscure and difficult part of our subject, and one lying beyond the limits

of historical record. We allude to the Peloponnesian mythology of

Hercules; a collection of legends doubtless for the most part invented

subsequently to the Doric invasion, and intended by that nation in great

measure to justify their conquest of the peninsula, and to make their

expedition appear, not as an act of wrongful aggression, but as a

re-assertion of ancient right. Some hero (perhaps even of the same name)

must have existed in the Argive traditions in the time of the Persidæ, and

the resemblance may have been sufficiently striking to identify him with

the father of the Doric Hyllus. We shall therefore consider the destroyer

of the Nemean lion as a native Argive hero; but the delay experienced at

his birth, and his consequent exposure to want and toil, evidently belong

to the Doric tradition, as well as the enmity of Here; fables which were

partly borrowed from the worship of Apollo, and may partly have been

intended to indicate the contrast between the ancient worship of Argos and

that of the invading race.(1814)

We shall now proceed without further preface to consider the different

adventures of Hercules, which may be divided into two classes; the first

consisting of his warlike exploits, the second of his combats with wild

beasts. We shall commence with the examination of the latter.(1815)

Nemea was separated from the Argive temple of Here, the most ancient one

in the country, by a chain of mountains and a long rocky ravine. It cannot

be denied that the moon was often invoked in this worship, although it

would not be safe to consider Here as the goddess of the moon. Now Nemea

is called the daughter of the moon,(1816) from which deity the Nemean lion

is also said to have sprung; the antiquity of which fable may be inferred

from the circumstance that Anaxagoras availed himself of it, as being

generally received, to account for the physical hypothesis of the

Antichthon.(1817) Connected with this is Hesiod’s tradition that the

goddess Here had herself brought up the lion, which she is by that poet

represented as having done out of enmity to Hercules. Hence we detect the

symbolical character of the fable, which resembles that of Perseus and

Gorgo, &c.; although we can scarcely attempt to explain the whole legend

in a similar manner. The combat with the Lernæan hydra may also be thus

explained. Hercules is represented as employing in this contest the same

sickle with which Perseus beheaded Medusa.(1818)

Whatever meaning we may attach to these combats, whether we consider them

as symbolical, or as memorials of a remote antiquity, in which it was the

hero’s principal occupation to free Greece from monsters and wild beasts,

it is nevertheless evident that they are as little adapted to the time

assigned to them (shortly previous to the Pelopidæ) as to the character of

the other parts of the fable. A mere consideration of Hercules’ costume

will sufficiently convince us of this fact. It is certain that the

Hercules of the early poets was either a hero armed with a spear and

buckler, as in the poem attributed to Hesiod,(1819) or with a bow and

sword, as in the Odyssey.(1820) The latter description occurs particularly

in the battle of the giants; the former is founded on all the traditions

which represent Hercules as the first of warriors and conquerors. Pisander

and Stesichorus were the first who introduced him as a half-naked savage,

with the lion’s skin round his loins, the jaws covering his head instead

of a helmet, and merely a club in his hand.(1821) There were extant so

late as the time of Strabo some ancient wooden statues of Hercules very

different from this description. Pisander, too, was (as far as we know)

the first who represented in detail the combats of Hercules with wild

beasts, collected from scattered accounts in the Theogony, and who

composed the “Labours of Hercules;” for which he perhaps availed himself

of different local traditions.

2. We now come to the martial exploits of Hercules, which, as it appears,

were intended to represent the conquests of the Dorians in Peloponnesus.

We have only to direct our attention to the account that Hercules, towards

the close of his life, being prince of Mycenæ,(1822) delivered Sparta from

the Hippocontidæ into the hands of Tyndareus, and, after conquering Pylos

from Neleus, transferred, it to Nestor,(1823) in order to perceive the

coincidence of tradition and history. The circumstances which have chiefly

contributed to the formation of these traditions may best be traced in the

combat at Pylos. The share which Hades had in this adventure, when that

god was himself wounded by the bold son of Zeus,(1824) may be considered,

according to the connexion established above, as having been transferred

from Ephyra, where Hades had a greater inducement to the protection of

oppressed cities than at Pylos.(1825) But Hercules is said to have

destroyed Pylos because Neleus would not purify him from the murder of

Iphitus;(1826) an act which Deiphobus afterwards performed in the temple

of Apollo at Amyclæ.(1827) Here it seems to be assumed that Œchalia, the

native city of Iphitus, was situated in Messenia, which, as we have shown

above,(1828) was not the original tradition.

3. The influence of historical facts upon mythology is most clearly

perceivable in the legend of Hercules having founded the Olympic games

when he returned victorious from his expedition against Augeas of

Elis.(1829) Afterwards the same hero celebrates the first Olympiad as a

festival of all Peloponnesus, with various combats, in which heroes from

Tiryns, Tegea, Mantinea, and Sparta were victorious.(1830) It was also

Hercules who fixed the quinquennial period, and established the sacred

armistice.(1831) His bringing the wild olive-tree from the Hyperboreans,

and planting it in the grove of Altis, was probably derived from the

traditions of Northern Greece;(1832) in which Hercules was represented as

more closely connected with Apollo than in the common Peloponnesian

legends. It should, moreover, be remarked that Hercules in his expedition

against Elis is reported to have founded or visited several temples of

Apollo at Pheneus and Thelpusa;(1833) both lying on the road which

connected the isthmus and the north of Greece with Olympia.(1834) It

would, however, involve us in no slight difficulties to date the tradition

of Hercules founding the Olympic games later than the Olympiad of Iphitus;

for as since that period the Eleans conducted the festival, and therefore

showed a particular veneration for Hercules, it is scarcely probable that

a war _against Elis_ should have been considered as the cause of the

establishment of this festival, had not the report been handed down from

an earlier period. The continual claim of Pisa, that the presidency of the

games should be restored to her as an ancient right, is, however, one of

several circumstances which render it probable that she had once enjoyed

this privilege before the festival had acquired its subsequent celebrity;

and that Hercules, to whom a very ancient wooden statue had been erected

at Pisa,(1835) was, even at this early period, regarded as the founder: to

which facts the story of a war against Elis was easily subjoined. The

combat with Augeas, a son of Helius, seems to have been in great part

borrowed from some Epirotan fable respecting Geryon.

4. In tracing the various steps which led to the formation of the

Peloponnesian mythology of Hercules, it has by no means been our aim to

enter minutely into the details of the subject, which would carry us far

beyond the limits of the present inquiry; the distinction between the

ancient and recent parts of the tradition being so undefined that an

accurate separation of the two is almost impossible. Enough has been said

to show how frequently the same legend reappears in different shapes; and

consequently that some original version was variously modified in

different places. We shall once for all remind those who imagine the

northern legend of Hercules to have been of later date than the

Peloponnesian because the latter is mentioned by the early epic poets,

that some higher source must be sought for than a few passages of those

poets which have been accidentally preserved: that it should be looked for

(if anywhere) in some connected mythological tradition, to which the

particular fables owed their rise and development.

The task is comparatively easy to examine the history of fables, the scene

of which lies in colonies or countries with which the Greeks did not

become acquainted till a late period, as the events on which they are

founded took place within the era of our historical knowledge. At the same

time the analogy of these facts, sufficiently ascertained, enables us to

conjecture as to those which are enveloped in fabulous obscurity; we can

reason from what we know to what we do not know.

5. From Sparta the worship of Hercules spread to her colonies,

particularly Tarentum(1836) and Croton. In the latter city Hercules

enjoyed the honours of a founder,(1837) being reported to have established

it on his return from Erythea.(1838) Afterwards the tradition of his

purification and atonement was transferred from Amyclæ in Laconia to

Croton, an event to which the high reputation enjoyed by the worship of

Apollo in the latter town greatly contributed. Hence we perceive on the

coins of this place the youthful hero sitting with a bow, quiver, and

arrows before a blazing altar, on which he scorches a branch of

laurel.(1839) Connected with the above is the tradition of Philoctetes

having deposited the arrows of Hercules in the temple of Apollo Alæus at

Croton, from whence they were said to have been brought by the Crotoniats

into the temple of Apollo within the precincts of their town.(1840) On the

coins of that city Hercules is frequently seen with a goblet in his hand,

either in a recumbent or erect posture. The allusion is explained by the

following story: Hercules, who was always thirsty, had asked for some wine

at Croton; but the woman of the house dissuaded her husband from tapping

the cask for a stranger; on which account the women of that country never

drank wine.(1841)

6. Our readers are, we take for granted, well acquainted with the fable of

Hercules in the island of Cos, as related by Homer.(1842) The events which

contributed to its formation are, in the first place, the existence of

several noble families of Heraclide descent, whose origin, according to

ancient traditions, was connected with the conquest of Ephyra, though they

were afterwards said to have sprung from the supposed residence of

Hercules in the island itself, where the ancestor of these families sprang

from his connexion with a daughter of the king of the Meropians. This

fiction of his abode in Cos took its rise in a mistaken view of certain

ceremonies there practised: for the peculiarity of the worship in

question, in which the priest at the festival ἀντιμαχία, celebrated in the

spring, put on a female dress (as Hercules is said to have disguised

himself in woman’s clothes,)(1843) betrays an Asiatic origin; which

induced the poets of ancient times to consider Hercules of Cos as

identified with the Idæan Dactyli.(1844) This dress was also probably worn

in the Lydian worship of Sandon(1845) (who was called Hercules by the

Greeks); for Omphale is said to have attired the effeminate hero in a

transparent garment dyed with sandyx, a custom which evidently originated

in the practice of some festival. The man described as the slave of a

lascivious woman was a symbolical representation of a soft and voluptuous

elementary religion; while the same allegory was by the Greeks referred to

the servitude of Hercules in the house of Eurystheus. This legend is first

mentioned by Pherecydes, then by Hellanicus of Lesbos (who refers to the

traditions current in the city of Acele),(1846) and also in Herodotus,

whose genealogy of the ancient kings of Lydia—Hercules, Alcæus (from the

Greek mythology, Belus, the god of Babylon), Ninus (Nineveh), Agron, &c.,

refers to the Assyrian origin of the ancient Lydian kings, and agrees

remarkably with the statement that Hercules-Sandon or Sandes, was

originally an Assyrian deity belonging to the same religious system as

Belus.(1847)

7. We now come to a fable of kindred origin, the fable of Hylas. Hylas was

invoked during midsummer at the sides of fountains by the aboriginal

inhabitants of Bithynia,(1848) long before the Greeks founded their city

of Cios; but the latter adopted the story of the boy falling into the

water, connecting it (as they worshipped Hercules as their founder)(1849)

with the fable of that hero. Indeed a legend very similar had previously

existed, the minion of Hercules being (according to Hellanicus)

Theiomenes, the son of Theiodamas the king of the Dryopes.(1850) The death

of Lityerses was in Phrygia the subject of an ancient song; and who else

should have slain him, according to the tradition of the Greeks, than he

whose power was dreaded throughout the countries of the barbarians?(1851)

The Greeks introduced such heterogeneous matter without hesitation into

their mythology. Hercules, even in the spot where his worship originated,

was represented as a hero of great power abroad: he was the protector of

boundaries and (if I may be allowed the expression) of marches:

afterwards, when his worship was adopted by the whole of Greece, he was

considered as the general guardian of the Grecian colonists. Thus he is

represented as contending for the territory of Heraclea on the Pontus,

against the aboriginal Bebryces, and in defence of Cyrene against the

native Libyans. For it seems very probable that the combat with

Antæus,(1852) who derived new vigour from touching the earth, was merely

emblematical of the contests sustained by the Greek colonists against the

Libyan hordes, which, though often conquered, always sallied forth from

the deserts in increased numbers. Thus the fable of Hercules and Busiris

was invented at a time when the Greeks first became known in Egypt, and

had as yet only an imperfect acquaintance with that country; for which

reason Herodotus ridicules it as a silly invention of the Ionians. Busiris

appears to me to have been the name of the principal deity with the

addition of the article. In this story he is described as a ferocious

tyrant, who orders Hercules to be sacrificed, until the latter, recovering

himself suddenly, slays the tyrant and his cowardly retinue.

8. While attempting to reconcile these discordant traditions, and mould

them into one connected story, it was natural that the Greeks should find

some affinity of character between Hercules and the Phœnician god Melcart,

the son of Baal and Astarte (Ἀστερία). It was to the existence of a temple

of Hercules at Gadira that the fable of this hero having there terminated

his voyage after the battle of Geryon, owed its origin; and the

neighbouring pillars of Hercules or Briareus(1853) were originally

considered as the work of Melcart. The Hercules of the Carthaginians was

also represented as a wanderer and conqueror;(1854) his particular

province was the island of Sardinia;(1855) which island became also

included in the Grecian mythology: he is likewise said to have passed

through Spain.(1856) The discoverer of the purple dye, in the Tyrian

tradition, is the same personage;(1857) the quail was sacred to him, the

smell of that bird having resuscitated him from death.(1858) Great as the

confusion soon became between the Doric and Phœnician traditions

respecting Hercules, they may still be easily distinguished from each

other; and the first effect of their union may perhaps be traced in the

wish of Dorieus, the son of Anaxandridas, to found a kingdom near mount

Eryx, because Hercules had formerly conquered that country;(1859) now the

worship and name of the Phœnician Aphrodite (Astarte) existed on mount

Eryx, and probably also that of her son Melcart.

9. Notwithstanding the long digression into which the examination of our

subject has led us, we are afraid that the following positions, attempted

to be established as the result of the preceding investigation, will by no

means carry with them conviction to all readers. We may, however, rest

assured, that whatever traces of an elementary religion can be discovered

in this fable, they were additions totally at variance with its original

structure. The fundamental idea of all the heroic mythology may be

pronounced to be a proud consciousness of power innate in man, by which he

endeavours to place himself on a level with the gods, not through the

influence of a mild and benign destiny, but by labour, misery, and

combats. The highest degree of human suffering and courage is attributed

to Hercules: his character is as noble as could be conceived in those rude

and early times; but he is by no means represented as free from the

blemishes of human nature; on the contrary, he is frequently subject to

wild, ungovernable passions, when the noble indignation and anger of the

suffering hero degenerate into phrensy.(1860) Every crime, however, is

atoned for by some new suffering; but nothing breaks his invincible

courage, until, purified from earthly corruption, he ascends mount

Olympus, and there receives the beauteous Hebe for his bride, while his

shade threatens the frightened ghosts in Hades.(1861) As in the fable of

Apollo, the godhead descends into the circle of human life, so in Hercules

a purely human power is elevated to the gods. Hercules also corresponds to

the last-mentioned deity, in his divine attributes, as an averter of evil

(ἀλεξίκακος and σωτὴρ);(1862) which the Œtæans carried so far as to

worship him as the destroyer of grasshoppers (κορνοπίων), and the

Erythræans as the killer of the vine-worm (ἰποκτόνος).(1863) We cannot,

however, agree with Herodotus, who derives the deification of Hercules

from a combination of the Phœnician or Idæan god, and the hero of Thebes,

since Hercules also enjoyed divine honours at places (as Messene and

Marathon(1864)) where such an amalgamation can scarcely be imagined. But

he is a deity representing the highest perfection of humanity, and

therefore the model and aim of human imitation; and the summit of heroic

energy was seen where the human passed into the divine nature. His life

and actions on earth are in ancient mythology perfectly human; and those

fables, which raise him above humanity, for instance, those alluding to

the combat with the giants,(1865) betray a later origin.

10. How little the ancient mythology was desirous of divesting Hercules of

any feelings of humanity may be collected from various features in his

character. Hercules, whether invited or not invited, is a jovial guest,

and not backward in enjoying himself. This explains the frequent allusions

to him as a great eater (βουθοίνας) and tippler, and also the Herculean

goblets and couches. The original source of all these fictions was the

ancient tradition of the residence of Hercules with Ceyx and Dexamenus:

nay, they may be traced to the ceremonies observed at his worship and

festivals.(1866) The Doric,(1867) like the Athenian comic poets and

satirists, merely adopted the general outline of the story, filling up the

details to suit their own fancy and humour: the latter adding some jokes

upon the gluttony of their Bœotian neighbours.(1868) It was Hercules,

above all other heroes, whom mythology endeavoured to place in ludicrous

situations; and sometimes made the butt of the buffoonery of others. This

was the case in the fable of the Cercopes (treated of in a ludicrous epic

poem ascribed to Homer),(1869) who are represented as alternately amusing

and annoying the hero. In works of art they are often represented as

satyrs, who rob the hero of his quiver, bow, and club.(1870) Hercules,

annoyed at their insults, binds two of them to a pole, in the manner

represented on the bas-relief of Selinus,(1871) and marches off with his

prize. Happily for the offenders, the hinder parts of Hercules had become

tanned by continued labours and exposure to the atmosphere: which reminded

them of an old prophecy, warning them to beware of a person of this

complexion;(1872) and the coincidence caused them to burst out into an

immoderate fit of laughter. This surprised Hercules, who inquired the

reason, and was himself so diverted by it, that he set both his prisoners

at liberty. And in general no company better agrees with the character of

Hercules, even in his deified state, than that of satyrs and other

followers of Bacchus, as might easily be proved by many works of Grecian

art. It also seems that mirth and buffoonery were often combined with the

festivals of Hercules: thus there was at Athens a society of sixty men,

who, on the festival of the Diomean Hercules, attacked and amused

themselves and others with sallies of wit.(1873) We shall hereafter show

how these exhibitions originated in the propensity of the Doric race to

the burlesque and comic.(1874)

APPENDIX I.

_On the settlements, origin, and early history of the Macedonian nation._

_General outline of the country._(1875)

1. In the Thermaic bay, the modern _gulf of Salonichi_, three rivers of

considerable size fall into the sea at very short distances from one

another, but which meet in this place in very different directions. The

largest of the three comes from the north-west, and is now called (as

indeed it was in the time of Tzetzes and Anna Comnena) the _Bardares_ (or

_Vardar_), and was in ancient days celebrated under the name of Axius. Its

stream is increased by large tributary branches on both sides, and chiefly

by the Erigon, which flows from the mountains of Illyria.(1876) The river

next in order runs from the west; it is now called in the interior of the

country _Potova_, and on the coast _Carasmac_: its ancient name, as is

evident from passages in Herodotus and Strabo, was Lydias, or

Ludias.(1877) And, lastly, after many turnings and windings, the

Haliacmon, now called _Bichlista_, flows from the south-west; in the time

of Herodotus it fell into the sea through the same mouth as the Lydias,

probably being widened by marshes; and in modern maps the interval between

the two rivers is represented as very small.(1878) It may be easily

conceived that this whole maritime district must have been low and marshy;

and by this means Pella, as Livy remarks, was of all towns in the country

best fitted for being the fortress of the Macedonian kings, and the place

of deposit for their treasure, since it lay, like an island, in the

morasses and swamps formed by the neighbouring lakes and rivers. These

marshes were called by the expressive name of βόρβορος, or _mud_.(1879)

2. Although the mouths of these rivers were so near together, the extent

of mountains, valleys, and plains which they encompassed in their course

was very considerable, amounting, according to modern maps, to 140

geographical miles from north and south, and more than 60 from east to

west. The Axius, together with its minor branches, runs from the great

Scardian chain, which further on receives the names of Orbelus, Scomius,

and Hæmus; while the course of the Haliacmon is close to the heights of

mount Olympus (part of which ridge in later times was called the Cambunian

mountains), and therefore to the borders of Thessaly. Both ridges run at

right angles from the great mountain-chain which cuts the upper part of

Greece in a direction from north-west to south-east, its southern parts

bearing the name of Pindus, the ridge towards Thessaly and Epirus of

Lacmon,(1880) and further to the north-west it is called the Candavian

chain(1881) and mount Barnus.(1882) It stretches behind the whole of the

district just named, and forms, as it were, the spine, to which the

mountains of Illyria, Epirus, Macedonia, and Thessaly are attached like

ribs. From this chain the two lines of mountains proceed, which separate

the valleys of the Haliacmon and the Axius. The name of the ridge between

the Haliacmon and the Lydias is known by the mention of mount Bermius

above Berœa;(1883) and Berœa is certainly the modern Veria, or Cara

Veria,(1884) near the northern bank of the Haliacmon. It will be shown

presently that Dysorum was the name of the mountain which divided the

Lydias and the Axius.(1885) And the ridge, which, stretching southward

from the Scardian chain, parted the valley of the Axius from the plains to

the east, was called (in one point at least), as we know from

Thucydides’(1886) account of the Odrysian king’s march, Cercine.

3. The valleys beyond the last-mentioned ridge are those of the Strymon

and the Angites. As the Axius falls into the sea in a gulf to the west, so

does the Strymon join the sea to the east of the Chalcidian peninsula. Not

far from its mouth the Strymon forms a lake, into which the Angites runs;

a stream of considerable size, its course lying westward of the Strymon.

For that the eastern stream is the ancient Strymon (notwithstanding the

opinion of most modern geographers) is, in the first place, evident from

its size; secondly, from the name _Struma_, which it now bears; and,

thirdly, from the statement of Herodotus,(1887) that the district of

Phyllis reached southwards to the Strymon, and westward to the Angites; it

lay, therefore, above the confluence of the two rivers and the lake which

they formed by their junction. The ridge which lies to the east of the

Strymon was called, at least where it widens along the coast,

Pangæum.(1888)

Thus much is sufficient to give a general notion of the geographical

structure of the region, the ancient inhabitants of which form the subject

of the present inquiry.

_Ancient names of the several districts._

4. We will now chiefly follow the full and accurate accounts of Herodotus

respecting the districts situated near the mouths of the three rivers just

mentioned. First, MYGDONIA, on the Thermaic bay, and round the ancient

city of Therma, extended, according to Herodotus, to the Axius, which

divided this district from Bottiaïs;(1889) and it agrees with this

statement that the small river Echeidorus (probably the modern _Gallico_),

which fell into the sea at the marshes near the Axius, in the lower part

of its course passed through Mygdonia.(1890) To the east this district

extended still further; lake Bolbe, beyond Chalcidice, was either in or

near Mygdonia.(1891) Thucydides, indeed, makes Mygdonia reach as far as

the Strymon;(1892) but this cannot be reconciled with the account of

Herodotus (who appears to have possessed a very accurate knowledge of this

region), that both the maritime district, west from the Strymon, in which

was the Greek city of Argilus, and the land further to the interior, was

called BISALTIA.(1893) On the other side, above Mygdonia, was situated

(according to Herodotus) the district of CRESTONICA, from which the river

Echeidorus flowed down to the coast.(1894)

5. Beyond the Axius, to the west of the stream, immediately after

Mygdonia, came BOTTIAIS, which district was on the other side bounded by

the united mouth of the Haliacmon and the Lydias;(1895) and thus towards

the sea it terminated in a narrow wedge-shaped strip. On this tongue of

land were the cities of Ichnæ and Pella,(1896) the first of which was

celebrated for an ancient temple;(1897) while Pella became afterwards the

royal residence, situated on the lake of the Lydias, at the distance of

120 stadia from the river’s mouth,(1898) and may now be recognised by

these marks of its position and some ruins. According to Strabo,(1899)

also, the river Axius made the boundary of Bottiæa, and divided it from

the district of Amphaxitis, which was the name of the opposite and more

elevated side of the Axius.(1900) Thucydides also calls this tract of

country Bottiæa;(1901) and distinguishes it from the more recent

settlements of the Bottiæans, near Olynthus, in Chalcidice,(1902) which he

calls _Bottica_.(1903)

6. The united mouth of the Lydias and Haliacmon, according to

Herodotus,(1904) divided Bottiaïs from MACEDONIS; for he can only mean

this common mouth when he says that “the rivers Lydias and Haliacmon

divide the districts of Bottiaïs and Macedonis, uniting their waters in

the same channel.” Further on in the interior the Lydias alone must have

been the boundary of Bottiaïs, since otherwise this district would not end

in a narrow strip of land; Macedonis, therefore, began on the western bank

of the Lydias. In this place nothing more can be said as to the meaning of

the word _Macedonis_, before the precise signification of some other names

has been determined.

7. Proceeding along the coast, PIERIA borders upon Macedonis, the district

under Mount Olympus,(1905) which ridge, where it approaches this coast,

splits into two branches, the one stretching towards the mouth of the

Peneus, the other towards those of the three rivers. Herodotus cannot make

Pieria reach as far as the Haliacmon,(1906) as they are here separated by

Macedonis Proper;(1907) he probably supposes it to begin just at the rise

of mount Olympus, and divides the narrow plain on the sea-coast from the

tracts to the interior. The southern boundary of Pieria is stated by

Strabo(1908) and Livy(1909) to have been the district of Dium;(1910) so

that these writers leave a narrow and mountainous strip of land,

stretching towards Tempe, which belonged neither to Pieria nor Thessaly.

The chief place in Pieria was Pydna, also called Cydna (according to

Stephanus Byz.), and in later times Citron (according to the epitomizer of

Strabo),(1911) which name still remains in the same place.

8. Now that we proceed from the divisions of the coast to the interior, we

are deserted, indeed, by the excellent account of Herodotus; but there are

nevertheless statements sufficiently accurate to determine the ancient

name of each district. The high and mountainous valley of the Haliacmon

was, according to Livy,(1912) called ELIMEIA; the inhabitants Elimiots,

who are included by Thucydides(1913) among the Macedonians: the district

is also called after their name Elimiotis.(1914) From thence proceeds the

road to Thessaly over the Cambunian mountains;(1915) and another almost

impracticable road to Ætolia over the mountainous country to the south of

Elimeia.(1916) To Elimeia succeeded PARAUÆA, a fertile district, near the

sources of the river called Aous, Æas, or Auus;(1917) and to the south

again lay PARORÆA, which was crossed by the river Arachthus at the

beginning of its course from under mount Stympha:(1918) the country near

this mountain was called STYMPHÆA (or Tymphæa), extending to the sources

of the Peneus and the land of the Æthicians.(1919) The ATINTANIANS reached

beyond the country of the Parauæans, and within that of the Chaonians as

far as Illyria.(1920) All these districts are indeed divided from Elimeia

by the great chain of Pindus; but, from their connexion with that region,

some account of them in this place was indispensable.

9. A small valley in the district of Elimeia, which lay to the north

towards the Illyrian Dassaretians,(1921) was inhabited by the Orestian

Macedonians,(1922) who doubtless were so called from the _mountains_ (ὄρη)

in which they dwelt, and not from _Orestes_, the son of Agamemnon. The

valley of Orestis(1923) contained a lake, in which was the town Celetrum,

situated on a peninsula.(1924) Its position coincides with that of the

modern Castoria;(1925) and it cannot be doubted that the wild

mountain-valley near the source of the Haliacmon was the ancient Orestis.

Another valley in Elimeia was called ALMOPIA, or Almonia, an ancient

settlement of the Minyans, situated on the confines of Macedonia and

Thessaly, apparently not far from Pieria.(1926)

10. Elimeia, together with the surrounding highlands, was cold and rugged,

and difficult of cultivation.(1927) The same was the case with the

neighbouring district of LYNCESTIS, the country of the Lyncestæ, who had

received their name, according to a Macedonian inflexion,(1928) from

Lyncus.(1929) Lyncus was the name of the whole district, and not of any

one city, as in early times there were only unfortified villages in this

part.(1930) It was surrounded on all sides by mountains; a narrow pass

between two heights being the chief road to the coast.(1931) The position

of Lyncus is accurately determined by the course of the Egnatian Roman

road from Dyrrachium, which, after crossing the Illyrian mountains at

Pylon (or the gateway), led by Heraclea Lyncestis, and through the country

of the Lyncestæ and Eordians, to Edessa and Pella;(1932) as well as by the

fact that the _mons Bora_ of Livy, _i.e._ the Bermius, lay to the south of

it.(1933) Consequently the Lyncestæ must have inhabited the mountains

south of the Erigon, and a part of the valley in which that river flowed;

which is confirmed by other accounts of ancient writers.(1934) The country

of the EORDIANS is also determined by the direction of the Egnatian way;

viz., to the east of Lyncus and west of Edessa, and therefore in the

valley of the Lydias, to the north of Elimea(1935) and the Bermius.(1936)

In order to go from the valley of the Erigon to Thessaly, the way passed

first through Eordæa and then through Elimiotis.(1937)

11. DEURIOPUS (ἡ Δευρίοπος) was the name of a tract of country along the

Erigon,(1938) which was considered as belonging to Pæonia,(1939) and

probably lay to the east of Lyncestis and north of Eordæa.(1940) In Pæonia

also was situated the rugged district of PELAGONIA, to the north of

Lyncestis,(1941) having on its northern frontiers narrow passes, which

protected it from the incursions of the Dardanians.(1942) As to other

parts of the extensive territory of PÆONIA (in comparison with which

Macedonia was originally very inconsiderable in size), it is only

necessary to observe, that, beginning near the source of the Axius, the

banks of which river had from early times been occupied by Pæonian tribes,

a narrow strip of land extended down to Pella and the coast;(1943) though,

according to Herodotus, it could not have actually reached the edge of the

sea, as the frontiers of Bottiaïs and Mygdonia at this point came into

contact with one another.(1944) Immediately to the north of Lower

Macedonia, _i.e._, to the north of Macedonian Pæonia, Bottiaïs, and

Mygdonia, but without the confines of these provinces, was situated, as we

learn from Thucydides,(1945) the Pæonian city of DOBERUS.(1946) The king

of the Odrysians arrived, according to the same writer,(1947) at this

place after having come from his dominions, which were bounded by the

Strymon, over mount Cercine; in which passage he left the Pæonians to the

right, and to the left the Sintes and Mædi (Thracian races, supposed by

Gatterer to have penetrated hither when the Siropæonians and others

crossed over to Asia).(1948) From which notices I have ventured to set

down the mountain, the city, and nations just mentioned, as may be seen in

the accompanying map.(1949)

_Early history of the kingdom of Macedonia._

12. The subject of this dissertation made it necessary for us to enter

into the above detail as to the several provinces and divisions of Upper

and Lower Macedonia. We must now proceed to inquire into the gradual

extension of the kingdom of Macedon; an investigation in which we are

fortunately assisted by the clear and accurate account of Thucydides, who

lived at no great distance from the country which he describes; and whose

words I now transcribe as follows (II. 99.):

“Accordingly, the subjects of Sitalces mustered at Doberus, and prepared

for a descent into Lower Macedonia, which country was under the rule of

Perdiccas. For to the Macedonians belong(1950) the Lyncestæ and the

Elimiots, and other nations in the upper parts of the country, which are

the allies and subjects(1951) of these Macedonians,(1952) but have

nevertheless princes of their own. The present kingdom of Macedonia,

extending along the sea,(1953) was first occupied by Alexander the father

of Perdiccas, and his ancestors of the family of Temenus, who came

originally from Argos; and ruled over it, having by force of arms expelled

the Pierians from Pieria,(1954) and the Bottiæans from the district called

Bottiæa. They also obtained in Pæonia a narrow tongue of land, extending

along the river Axius down to Pella and the sea: and on the further side

of the Axius they possess the district called Mygdonia, as far as the

Strymon, of which they dispossessed the Edones. They also dislodged the

Eordians from the country still called Eordia, and from Almopia the

Almopians. These Macedonians also subdued those other nations which they

now possess; viz., Anthemus, together with Crestonia and Bisaltia, and a

large part of the Macedonians themselves. The whole of this country

together is called Macedonia; and Perdiccas, the son of Alexander, was

king of it when Sitalces made his invasion.”

13. This chapter has not by any means been exhausted by those who have

written on the growth and size of Macedonia; and therefore it will be

convenient to set down some of the chief inferences which may be drawn

from it.

In the first place, it is plain that the Macedonians, who made the

conquest, and founded the kingdom of Macedon, were _not the whole

Macedonian nation_, but only a part of it. There were in the mountainous

districts Macedonian tribes, which had their own kings, and originally

were not subject to the Temenidæ. These are the Macedonian highlanders of

Herodotus,(1955) from whose district the road passed over mount Olympus

(the Cambunian chain) into the country of the Perrhæbians;(1956) and it

began, as has been already remarked, in Elimeia.(1957) The Elimiots were,

according to Thucydides, one portion of these Macedonians, the Lyncestæ

another; both which appellations were merely local, and the full title was

“_the Macedonians in Lyncus_,” or “the Macedonian Lyncestæ.”(1958) Of the

_remaining_ Macedonian nations in the mountain-districts we only know the

name of the Orestæ;(1959) at least there are no others who can with any

certainty be considered as Macedonians.

14. The name of Macedonia was not therefore, as some have supposed,

confined to the royal dynasty of Edessa, but was a _national appellation_;

so much so, that it is even stated that those very kings subdued, among

other nations, a large portion of the Macedonians. The tribes of Upper

Macedonia were long governed by their own princes; thus Antiochus was king

of the Orestæ at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war;(1960) the

Lyncestæ were under the rule of Arrhibæus, the son of Bromerus,(1961) the

great grandfather, by the mother’s side, of Philip of Macedon, who derived

his descent (not altogether without probability) from the Bacchiadæ, the

ancient rulers of Corinth;(1962) and these kings, though properly

recognising the supremacy of the Temenidæ, were nevertheless at times

their nearest, and therefore most dangerous, enemies.(1963)

15. The Macedonian kingdom of the Temenidæ, on the other hand, began from

a single point of the Macedonian territory, concerning the position of

which there are various traditions. According to Herodotus, three brothers

of the family of Temenus, Gauanes, Aëropus, and Perdiccas, fled from Argos

to Illyria, from thence passed on to _Lebæa_ in Upper Macedonia, and

served the king of the country (who was therefore a Macedonian) as

shepherds. From this place they again fled, and dwelt in another part of

Macedonia, near the gardens of Midas, in mount Bermius (near _Berœa_),

from which place they subdued the neighbouring country.(1964) Thucydides

so far recognises this tradition, that he likewise considers Perdiccas as

the founder of the kingdom, reckoning eight kings down to Archelaus.(1965)

The other account, however, that there were three kings before Perdiccas,

is unquestionably not the mere invention of later historians, but was

derived, as well as the other, from some local tradition. According to

this account the Macedonian kingdom began at _Edessa_,(1966) which had

been taken by Caranus, of the family of the Temenidæ, and by him named

after a goatherd, who rendered him assistance, Ægæ (or Ægeæ).(1967) Both

narrations have equally a traditional character, and were doubtless of

Macedonian origin, only that the latter appears to have been combined with

an Argive legend of a brother of the powerful Phido having gone to the

north. The claim of Edessa is also confirmed by the fact, that, even when

it had long ceased to be the royal residence, it still continued the

burial-place of the kings of Temenus’ race, and, as Diodorus says, the

_hearth_ of their empire.(1968)

16. Edessa and the gardens of Midas were both situated between the Lydias

and the Haliacmon, in the original and proper country of Macedonia,

according to the account of Herodotus.(1969) The manner in which the

dominions of the Temenidæ were extended along the sea-coast, and towards

the interior, we learn from Thucydides, who comprises in one general view

all the conquests of these princes until the reign of Alexander. For to

suppose that Alexander, the son of Amyntas, made _all_ these conquests, is

an error which is even refuted by the words of Thucydides; although it is

very possible that this prince, who began his reign about 488 B.C., at the

time of the Persian power, and was the brother-in-law of a Persian

general,(1970) added considerably to the territory which he had

inherited.(1971) But when Xerxes undertook his great expedition against

Greece, the power of Macedon was as great as it is described by

Thucydides; nor was its territory much enlarged during the interval

between the Persian and Peloponnesian wars.(1972) For at the time of the

Persian war (481 B.C.) the Pierians were already settled in New Pieria,

especially in the fortified towns of Phagres and Pergamus, at the foot of

mount Pangæum,(1973) whither they retired, after having been driven out of

Old Pieria by the Macedonian kings;(1974) in fact, this extension of the

territory of Macedon must have taken place at an early period.(1975)

Moreover, Olynthus was, according to Herodotus,(1976) at least _before_

480 B.C., in the hands of the Bottiæans, who had, as we learn from both

Herodotus and Thucydides, expelled the Macedonians from the ancient

Bottiaïs; consequently this district had been under the rule of the

Macedonians _before_ the expedition of Xerxes. Thirdly, Amyntas the

Macedonian, in 510 B.C., offered Anthemus in Chalcidice to the

Pisistratidæ;(1977) the same argument therefore applies in this case also.

Anthemus, however, could hardly have been obtained without Mygdonia: and

that this district was then a part of the Macedonian dominions is probable

also from the following reasons.(1978) According to Thucydides, the

Macedonians drove out the nation of the Edonians(1979) from Mygdonia,

between the rivers Axius and Strymon; and accordingly we find the Edonians

always mentioned as dwelling to the east of the Strymon, at the foot of

mount Pangæum. Now Ennea Hodoi, situated on the eastern bank of the

Strymon, was, according to Herodotus,(1980) in the possession of the

Edonians in the year 481 B.C.; and Myrcinus, in the same region, was found

by Histiæus, when he visited it, to be an Edonian district,(1981) as it

was at a later period by Brasidas.(1982) The latter argument is not indeed

of itself decisive, as it might be said that the Edonians were only driven

together by the conquests of the Macedonians, and had _previously_ been in

possession of the further side of the Strymon; but when combined with the

former facts, it offers an almost certain proof that the whole country,

from lake Bolbè to within a short distance from the Peneus, was subject to

the Macedonians before the expedition of Xerxes.(1983) Methone(1984) was

on this coast the only interruption to the series of Macedonian

possessions; this Eretrian colony had been, about 746 B.C.,(1985) together

with the numerous Eubœan settlements in Chalcidice,(1986) at a period when

the power of the Macedonians on this line of coast was very insignificant;

and it preserved its independence until the reign of Philip the son of

Amyntas.(1987)

17. From the facts now ascertained, we may deduce a result of some

importance with regard to the language of Herodotus. This historian

clearly and precisely distinguishes between Bottiaïs and Macedonia in the

time of Xerxes,(1988) although it is certain that Bottiaïs was then in the

power of the Macedonians;(1989) Macedonia he classes as a district with

Bottiaïs, Mygdonia, and Pieria. He uses the word, therefore, not in a

_political_, but in a _national_ sense; _i.e._, he restricts it to the

territory originally possessed by the Macedonian nation, not applying it

to countries which had been obtained by conquest or political

preponderance. The Macedonia of Herodotus is consequently the territory of

the Macedonians _before_ all the conquests of the Temenidæ. It extended,

according to Herodotus, in a narrow tongue down to the sea;(1990) a fact

disregarded by Thucydides, when he states that the coast of Lower

Macedonia was first reduced by the Temenidæ.(1991) Further from the sea,

however, the ancient Macedonia had a much wider extent, and included the

districts of Edessa and Berœa, Lyncestis, Orestis, and Elimeia: for

Macedonia is stated by Herodotus to have been on the one side bounded by

mount Olympus (which ridge, where it borders on Pieria,(1992) was called

the Macedonian mountains),(1993) and on the other by mount Dysorum. This

last fact is evident from the statement of the same writer, that a very

short way led from the Prasian lake to Macedonia, passing first to the

mine from which Alexander obtained an immense supply of precious metal;

and then, that having crossed mount Dysorum, you were in Macedonia;(1994)

_i.e._, evidently in the _original_ Macedonia, since he expressly excludes

from it the mine which had been a subsequent accession. The Prasian lake

was in Pæonia;(1995) but in what district of it is not known;(1996) mount

Dysorum, however, can only be looked for to the north of Edessa and to the

west of the Axius, Macedonia Proper not extending so far as that river. In

this manner it is placed in the accompanying map; in which also the

ancient boundaries of the Macedonian race are laid down according to the

results obtained by these researches.

18. On the other conquests of the Macedonians little need be said. The

occupation of Bisaltia and Crestonica was subsequent to the expedition of

Xerxes. The Thracian king of these districts fled away,(1997) and left his

kingdom a prey to the ambition of Alexander, who thus extended his empire

to the mouth of the Strymon, which was the boundary of Macedonia in the

days of Thucydides and of Scylax, and remained so until the time of

Philip. At what time the Macedonian kings reduced that part of Pæonia

which stretched along the Axius, Eordæa, Almopia, and a large part of the

Macedonians themselves, we are nowhere informed; and to infer from

Thucydides that these conquests succeeded that of Mygdonia and preceded

that of Anthemus, would be laying too much weight upon the order in which

he arranges the events; in which, although he doubtless paid some regard

to chronology, the context required that the conquests on the coast should

be mentioned before those of the interior. Eordæa was probably subjugated

at a very early period, since it lay, as it were, in a bay of the

Macedonian territory; and a very credible tradition has been preserved by

Dexippus,(1998) that Caranus had in early times made an alliance with the

Orestæ against the Eordians, and founded his kingdom by the subjugation of

that nation. In fact, the first nation with whom the king of Edessa had to

contend was these Eordians. They were, according to Thucydides, nearly

annihilated by a war of extermination; a small number of them escaped to

Physca in Mygdonia;(1999) which district therefore was not as yet under

the power of the Macedonians.

19. Among those parts of Macedonia Proper which were reduced by the

Temenidæ, Elimeia may be particularly mentioned, as is evident from the

following circumstances. Perdiccas, the son of Alexander, was at war with

his brother Philip, with whom he was to have divided his kingdom,(2000)

and also with Derdas.(2001) The brothers of Derdas, before the beginning

of the Peloponnesian war, in alliance with the Athenians, made a descent

from the highlands, that is, from one of the districts Elimeia, Orestis,

or Lyncus, into the dominions of Perdiccas.(2002) Now Derdas(2003) was the

son of Arrhibæus, and cousin of Perdiccas; and it is plain that the

Temenidæ reduced Elimeia; and a branch of the same family received this

district as their peculiar possession.(2004) A separate king of Elimeia

also existed in the time of Archelaus,(2005) who doubtless belonged to the

same family. For a later Derdas occurs as prince of the Elimiots in the

time of Agesilaus,(2006) who perhaps was the same as, or rather was the

father of, the Derdas, whose sister Phila Philip married.(2007) In like

manner, there was a separate sovereignty in Stymphæa and the neighbouring

Æthicia, which was held by the family of Polysperchon, the general and

guardian of the kingdom.(2008) Although in later times all these separate

sovereignties, both of the Temenidæ and of other princes, were suppressed,

and Upper and Lower Macedonia were equally ruled from the city of Pella;

yet the tribes of the highlands still remained to a certain degree

distinct. Even at the battle of Arbela, the Elimiots, Lyncestæ, Orestæ,

and Tymphæans fought in separate bodies;(2009) and several persons are

denoted in the history of Macedon by the surname of Lyncestes. Perdiccas

came from Orestis, Ptolemy from Eordæa.(2010) Those in the lowlands, on

the other hand, were known by the general name of Macedonians; and it

should be observed, that there were also Macedonians dwelling in Pieria,

Bottiaïs, Mygdonia, Eordæa, and Almopia,(2011) who had, according to

Thucydides, driven out the native inhabitants; while Pæonia and Bisaltia,

together with Anthemus and Crestonica, remained in the possession of those

tribes which had been settled there before the conquest of

Macedonia.(2012)

_On the national affinity of the original Macedonians._

20. From what has been already said it is plain that there was,

independently of the extension of the empire of the Temenidæ, a Macedonian

nation possessing from early times a territory of considerable size, viz.,

the Macedonia of Herodotus; the area of which in the accompanying map

amounts to 2400 geographical square miles.

We now proceed to the most important question to be considered in this

treatise, viz., to what national family these Macedonians belonged.

21. The ancient writers distinguish in these regions the following

nations; and in so marked a manner that it is evident that they differed

from one another in their costume, language, and mode of living.(2013)

First, the THRACIANS. This great nation extended to the north as far as

the Danube, where it included the Getæ;(2014) to the east beyond the sea,

since the Thynians and Bithynians were Thracians;(2015) to the west within

mount Hæmus as far as the Strymon, where it bordered on the Pæonians,

widening still more as it receded from the coast, since it also included

the Triballians.(2016) On the west bank of the Strymon the Sintians and

Mædians were of Thracian origin;(2017) to which nation the Bisaltæ and

Edones must also be referred.(2018) Thrace is often represented as having

in early times extended to Thessaly and Bœotia(2019) but merely in

reference to the settlements of the Pierians at the foot of Olympus and

Helicon; and there are many reasons against considering these Pierians as

of the same race as the _other_ Thracians,(2020) although they were called

Thracians at an early period.(2021) Homer at least distinguishes between

these two nations when he makes Here go from Olympus to Pieria, then to

Emathia, and afterwards to the snowy mountains of the Thracians;(2022) by

which he must mean the mountains of the Bisaltæ to the north of Edessa,

since the goddess next rests her foot on mount Athos and the island of

Lemnos.

Secondly, the PÆONIANS. A numerous race divided into several small

nations,(2023) inhabiting the districts on the rivers Strymon and Axius

and the countries to the north of Macedonia,(2024) together with Pannonia,

according to the Greeks.(2025) This race, according to _their own

tradition_ (if Herodotus’s account is correct),(2026) derived their origin

from the ancient Teucrians in the Troad; in their passage from which

country they had been accompanied, according to Herodotus, by the Mysians,

the same people that afterwards gave their name of Mœsians to a great

province.(2027)

Thirdly, the ILLYRIANS extended southward as far as the Acroceraunian

mountains, eastward to the mountain-chain known in its southern parts by

the name of Pindus, and northward as far as the Save and the Alps, if

Herodotus is correct in considering the Venetians as of Illyrian

origin.(2028)

Fourthly, _Nations of Grecian descent_.

22. Since the Macedonians evidently belonged to some one of these four

races, our present object is to ascertain _which_. Now in the first place

the _Greeks_ may be excluded, since, although it is certain that a large

portion of the Macedonian nation was of Grecian origin, the Macedonians

were always considered by the Greeks as barbarians.—Alexander the

Philhellene,(2029) the father of Perdiccas, represented himself to the

Persians (according to Herodotus)(2030) as a Greek, and satrap over

Macedonians; the same person who was driven off the course at Olympia for

being a barbarian, until he proved his Argive descent.(2031) The mouth of

the Peneus, or the Magnesian mountain of Homolè, was on the eastern side

considered as the boundary of Greece,(2032) unless Magnesia also was

excluded. Fabulous genealogies, representing Macedon as the son of Zeus

and Thyia the daughter of Deucalion, or of a descendant of Æolus, are of

no weight against the prevailing opinion of the Greeks; nor are they

necessarily of greater antiquity than the fortieth Olympiad (620

B.C.),(2033) at which time Danaus and Ægyptus, and other races equally

unconnected, were made the members of the same family, when the Scythians

were derived from Hercules,(2034) and even the whole known world was

comprised in extensive genealogies. It would be unreasonable to suppose,

on the credit of these genealogies, that there was any other migration of

Greeks into Macedonia except that of the Temenidæ.

23. Secondly, with regard to the PÆONIANS: it may be shown that the

Macedonians did not belong to that nation.(2035) The possessions of the

Macedonians in Pæonia are accurately described by ancient writers; these

were, until the time of Perdiccas, only a narrow strip of land;(2036)

Pelagonia and Pæonia on the Axius were subdued at a later date. As the

Pæonian race was not aboriginal in this district, its peculiarities were

probably easy to be recognised in the time of Thucydides, and hence this

national name occurs more frequently than those of the separate provinces.

For this reason great importance should be attached to the circumstance

that the ancients never refer the Macedonians themselves to the Pæonian

race; and it should perhaps be considered as decisive. On the other hand,

with aboriginal races having a large territory and numerous connexions,

such a separation hardly warrants this inference, since otherwise the

Macedonians, whom both Herodotus and Thucydides mention _together with_

Thracians and Illyrians,(2037) could not have belonged to either of those

two tribes, and therefore to no great national division of the human race.

It is, however, plain that the ancients frequently used the national name

in a limited sense, merely for the chief mass of the people, and did not

apply it to particular _portions of it_ which had acquired a character

different from that of the rest of their nation,(2038) without by this

meaning to express a diversity of origin. We have therefore now only to

ascertain whether the Macedonians were of _Thracian_ or _Illyrian_

descent.

24. We shall gain one step towards a conclusion by inquiring in what

region were the original settlements of the Macedonians; a question which

should carefully be distinguished from the former investigation as to the

first station of the Temenidæ. Now in pursuing this inquiry, we soon

perceive that even of Macedonia Proper, from which Bottiæa, Pieria, and

Eordæa were conquered, a large part was not always in the possession of

the Macedonians. Homer, for example, places Emathia, not Macedonia,

between Pieria and Chalcidice.(2039) Several writers state in general that

Macedonia had anciently been called Emathia;(2040) but, as will be

presently shown, they do not so much mean the highlands as the country

about the mouths of the three rivers and near Edessa.(2041) The fabulous

name was renewed in later times; and Ptolemy(2042) even mentions the

district of Emathia, in which were the towns of Cyrrhus,(2043) Eidomenæ,

Gordynia, Edessa, Berrhœa, and Pella. According to Thucydides(2044) and

others, Eidomenæ and Gordynia must have been situated in the region near

the Axius, in the early subdued country of Pæonia;(2045) whence it may be

understood how Polybius(2046) could say that Emathia, at a distance from

the coast, had in early times been called Pæonia. For the ancient name of

Emathia had evidently been extended to a tract of land belonging to

Pæonia, which had, perhaps, previously to the Pæonian conquests, once

borne the name of Emathia.

25. Now although the country round Edessa, and nearer to the sea, was not

originally called Macedonia, yet we find traces of the existence of the

name of the Macedonians under its ancient forms of Μακέται and Μακεδνοὶ,

in the hill-country near the ridge of Pindus. Herodotus says that the

Doric race, having been driven from Hestiæotis, and dwelling under mount

Pindus, was called the _Macedonian nation_.(2047) By this statement he

plainly means that the Dorians were first known by that name in

Peloponnesus;(2048) and indeed his other notions on the progress of this

people are only suited to the childhood of history. But notwithstanding

the erroneous conclusions of the narrator, it is allowable to infer from

his statement that the Macedonians had once dwelt at the foot of

Pindus—_i.e._, probably in one of the districts of Upper Macedonia; of

which provinces Orestis may be considered (on the faith of a conjectural

emendation) as the ancient Maceta.(2049) For it cannot be a Thessalian

district that is alluded to, since Maceta was, as we know from certain

testimony, in fact a part of Macedonia. This hypothesis is also supported

by the ancient patronymic surname of the Macedonian kings, “Argeadæ;” if

it is rightly derived by Appian from Argos in Orestis.(2050)

The fact that the ancient country of the Macedonians was near the ridge of

mountains on the confines of Illyria, and was at a considerable distance

from Thrace, renders it probable that the Macetæ were of Illyrian blood;

but this probability would yield to arguments drawn from the language,

costume, and manners of the three nations. The question therefore is, whom

did the Macedonians in the points most resemble, the _Illyrians_ or the

_Thracians_?

26. There is a passage in Strabo(2051) which, on account of its

importance, I will give nearly at full length, omitting only those parts

which are not necessary to the context. It contains an account of the

population of Epirus.

“Of the nations of Epirus the Chaonians and Thesprotians inhabit the coast

from the Ceraunian mountains to the Ambracian gulf; behind Ambracia is

Amphilochian Argos. The Amphilochians also are Epirots, together with the

tribes lying more in the interior, and joining the mountains of

Illyria—viz., the Molotti, the Athamanes, the Æthices, the Tymphæi, the

Orestæ, the Paroræi, and the Atintanes, some dwelling nearer to the

Macedonians, and others to the Ionian sea. With these the Illyrian nations

were mixed which dwelt to the south of the hill-country, as well as those

beyond the Ionian sea. For between Epidamnus and Apollonia and the

Ceraunian mountains there are the Bylliones,(2052) the Taulantii,(2053)

the Parthini,(2054) and the Brygi,(2055) and at a short distance, about

the silver mines(2056) of Damastium,(2057) the Perisadies have established

their dominion; the Enchelii(2058) and Sesarasii(2059) are also named as

dwelling in these parts; and besides these, the Lyncestæ, the land of

Deuriopus, the Pelagonian Tripolis,(2060) the Eordi, Elimea, and

Eratyra.(2061) Now in early times these tribes had severally rulers of

their own; the Enchelians were governed by the descendants of Cadmus, the

Lyncestæ were under Arrhibæus, and of the Epirots the Molotti were ruled

by Pyrrhus and his descendants, while all the other nations of that tribe

were governed by native princes. In process of time, however, as one

nation obtained the dominion over others, the whole fell into the

Macedonian empire, except a small tract beyond the Ionian sea. Also the

country about Lyncestus, Pelagonia, Orestias and Elimea was once called

Upper Macedonia, and at a later period the Independent. Some persons,

moreover, give to the whole country as far as Corcyra the name of

Macedonia, assigning, as their reason, that the inhabitants nearly

resemble one another in the mode of wearing the hair, in their dialect, in

the use of the chlamys, and in other points of this kind: some of them

likewise speak two languages.”

27. Now, although the historical accounts of Strabo, collected at a time

when these regions had been ravaged by conquest, and had undergone

manifold changes, have not the value which the statements of Herodotus and

Thucydides possess, yet it is possible to extract from them much

information. In the first place it should be observed that the Epirots and

the Illyrians are not considered as two wholly distinct nations. The

Epirots, although in early times allied by blood with the Greeks, were

always considered as barbarians,(2062) and Ambracia as the last city in

Greece;(2063) which fact, since the original inhabitants were the same as

in Arcadia, that is, Pelasgians, can only be explained by supposing that

there had been a mixture of Illyrians. Hence it might be at that late time

difficult to distinguish between the Epirots and the Illyrians; and thus

Strabo includes the Atintanes, who according to Scylax(2064) and

Appian(2065) were Illyrians, among the Epirot nations. It is more singular

that he should consider the Orestæ, whom Polybius(2066) recognises as a

Macedonian people, as Epirots; but it may be probably accounted for by the

circumstance of their separation from the cause of the Macedonian kings,

which procured them their independence in the year of the city 556.(2067)

But the other inhabitants of Upper Macedonia, the genuine Macedonians,

such as the Lyncestæ and Elimiots (who probably, from being mountaineers,

had preserved their national distinctions more than the civilised tribes

of the lowlands), were considered by Strabo, as the context plainly shows,

as original Illyrians; and it can hardly be doubted that they still bore

the characteristic marks of that nation.

28. “Some again,” as Strabo says, “give to the whole country as far as

Corcyra the name of Macedonia.” What country this is, is accurately known

both from the testimony of other writers, and even of Strabo himself. The

Romans called the whole region which opened to them the way to

Macedonia(2068) by the name of Macedonia; and made it reach from Lissus

(now _Alessio_) on the river Drilon (now the _Drin_) either to the

Egnatian road,(2069) which begins between Dyrrhachium (or Epidamnus) and

Apollonia, or, as Strabo states in the passage quoted in the text, for a

short distance beyond.(2070) The inhabitants of this tract of country were

beyond all question Illyrians (Taulantii, Parthini, Dassaretii,

&c.(2071)); and it is of _their_ dress and language that Strabo here

speaks. The importance of these points for the discovery of national

affinity is easily perceived. Indeed, many Grecian tribes might be

distinguished merely by their mode of wearing the hair.(2072) The chlamys

had come to the Greeks from the Thessalians, and Sappho was the first

Grecian writer who mentioned it:(2073) afterwards it became a military

dress, and supplanted the ἱμάτιον, as in Italy the _sagum_ took the place

of the _toga_, which was originally girt up for military use.(2074) From

this passage of Strabo we learn that it was the national habit of the

Illyrian tribes above Epirus. In like manner the broad-brimmed, low, flat

fur-cap, known by the name of _causia_, which was equally unlike the

conical(2075) κυνέη of the Bœotians and the low, tapering(2076) πέτασος,

was worn by these northern nations; it was the ancient dress of state

among the Macedonians, and worn by their kings;(2077) and it was likewise

the dress of the Ætolians(2078) and Molossians.(2079) But the most

remarkable circumstance is, that the same cap which is borne by the riders

on the tetradrachms of the first Alexander also adorns the head of the

Illyrian king Gentius.(2080) Lastly, the similarity of dialect is a

decisive proof. Now that all these things should have been introduced by

the Macedonian kings seems highly improbable, when it is remembered that

their rule did not even extend over the whole of this tract, that it was

also often interrupted, and in general not of a nature to alter the

character, language, and costume of the natives.(2081)

From these facts it may, I think, be safely inferred that the Macedonians,

viz., the people originally and properly so called, belonged to the

ILLYRIAN race.

_On the mixture of the Macedonians with other, particularly Greek, races._

29. It is, however, certain, notwithstanding the result which has been

established, that the Macedonians in their advance from the highlands

dislodged, and partly incorporated other, and particularly Grecian,

tribes.

The first to fall in their hands was the ancient Emathia, near Edessa, and

downwards to the sea, which Herodotus includes in _his_ Macedonia. The

name of the country appears to be Grecian;(2082) and since Justin(2083)

distinctly affirms that the ancient inhabitants of Emathia were

Pelasgians, and as Æschylus, a poet greatly versed in traditional lore,

also makes the kingdom of the Pelasgians extend through Macedonia as far

as the Strymon,(2084) it must be considered that, according to ancient

tradition, the early inhabitants of this country were of the Pelasgic

race. It is likewise fair, by the guidance of several parallel cases in

the Greek mythology, to interpret the legend that Lycaon the Arcadian hero

had once ruled in Emathia, and was the father of Macedon,(2085) as

signifying merely the succession, _according to order of time_, of the

Pelasgians and Macedonians in the occupation of this country; which the

language of mythology expressed by placing the respective races in a

_genealogical_ connexion. So Thessalus is called a son of Jason, although

the Thessalians belonged to a different race from the early rulers of the

country, the Minyæ of Iolcus, of whom Jason was one. Hence it is highly

probable that at the first conquest of this tract of land, viz., of

Macedonia Proper, nations akin to the Greeks were mixed with the

Illyrians.

30. One of the earliest conquests of the Macedonians was the country of

their neighbours(2086) the Phrygians; _i.e._, according to the most exact

statements, the district about mount Bermius, where in the ancient gardens

of king Midas, the son of Gordias (in which Silenus had been once taken

prisoner), the hundred-leaved rose still flourished at the time of

Herodotus.(2087) It is exceedingly probable that, as Herodotus states,

this district had been occupied by the Macedonians before the arrival of

the Temenidæ;(2088) with which the tradition of an ancient migration of

the Phrygians coincides:(2089) yet it is also stated that Caranus the

Temenid expelled Midas.(2090) That the Phrygians or Brygians were entirely

incorporated in the Macedonian nation cannot be supposed, as we hear quite

in late times of a tribe of Brygians (Βρύγοι) in these regions, who then

dwelt near the Illyrian mountains beyond Lychnidus, not far from the

Erigon, together with the Dassaretians.(2091) The tribe of Mygdonians,

which was allied to the Phrygians,(2092) must have been lost in other

nations at an early period, since their territory had been occupied by the

Edones before it became a part of the Macedonian empire.

31. In their further extension the Macedonians fell in with Grecian, with

Pæonian, and with Thracian tribes, which they either subdued or dislodged;

but no expulsion was probably so complete that some part of the former

population was not left behind. Among the tribes thus driven out were the

Bottiæans, who were reported to have come from Athens and Crete;(2093) a

tradition which could hardly have arisen, if they had not been a Grecian

people. Notice should also be taken of the Grecian and Pelasgic names of

the cities on the Axius, viz., Ichnæ, Eidomenæ, Gortynia, Atalante, and

Europus,(2094) which cannot have been given by the Pæonians, and therefore

must be referred to the ancient Greek population of this region. Beyond

the Axius, according to Herodotus,(2095) was Creston, a settlement of

Thessalian Pelasgians, whence they do not appear to have been expelled by

the victorious Macedonians; which fate befell the Almopians, an ancient

branch of the Minyæ.(2096) It has been already shown that the common

population of Leibethrum and Pieria was at least nearly related to the

Greeks: the names of Λείβηθρα, for a well-watered valley, Πίμπλη for a

full fountain, and of Ἑλικὼν for a winding stream, are evidently

Grecian.(2097)

As to the Eordians, the ancient foes of Macedon, it is uncertain whether

they should be considered as belonging to the Illyrian or the Pæonian

race;(2098) of this latter tribe, in earlier times, a small, and, in

later, a considerable portion obeyed the Macedonian kings. And, lastly,

the subjection of the Bisaltæ, who even in the time of Perseus formed one

of the chief parts of the kingdom of Macedon,(2099) joined to that nation

a people of purely Thracian descent; and the Macedonians, in the political

meaning of the word, ceased more and more to be a regular nation, or a

body of men of the same origin and language.(2100)

_On the customs and language of the Macedonians._

32. In order to trace the national character and origin of the

Macedonians, it is necessary to distinguish three things; first, their

Illyrian descent; secondly, their extension over other, for the most part

Grecian countries; and thirdly, the introduction by the ruling family, of

the civilisation and refinements of the Greeks; which must have gained

great ground when Alexander the Philhellene offered himself as a combatant

at the Olympic games, and honoured the poetry of Pindar;(2101) and when

Archelaus, the son of Perdiccas,—the same person who first established

many fortresses and roads in his dominions, and formed a Macedonian

army,(2102) nay, even had it in view to procure a navy,(2103)—had

tragedies of Euripides acted at his court under the direction of that

poet. These changes must have chiefly affected the regions near the sea;

for they could not have equally extended to the Macedonians of Lyncus,

&c., who, even in the time of Strabo, had the greatest resemblance to the

Dassaretians, Taulantians, &c., and, until the overthrow of the Macedonian

monarchy, preserved their ancient savage habits; which Livy only partially

accounts for by their intercourse with neighbouring barbarians.(2104)

33. Since the Illyrian tribes were never distinguished for that original

invention which imagined new gods and established new modes of worship;

while, on the other hand, they readily adopted strange deities;(2105) we

find among the Macedonians more traces of foreign than native religion.

Certain deities which the Greeks compared with the Sileni they called

Sauadæ,(2106) as the Illyrians called them Deuadæ;(2107) a native

Macedonian god of health was named Darrhon;(2108) there was also a god

called Deipatyrus among the neighbouring Stymphæans.(2109) The wide

extension of the worship of Bacchus must be ascribed to the vicinity of,

and early intercourse with Pieria: the Macetian women were celebrated as

wild and raging Bacchantes.(2110) The worship of Zeus appears to have been

early introduced among the Macedonians from mount Olympus.(2111) Hercules,

the heroic progenitor of the royal family, was worshipped in their first

residence at Edessa:(2112) he was called in Macedonia Aretus.(2113) The

worship of Apollo, which was prevalent in Macedonia at an early

period,(2114) probably was introduced from Pythium on mount Olympus:(2115)

that of Pan, at Pella, was perhaps derived from the Pelasgians.(2116)

34. Many barbarous customs of the northern nations, as, for example, that

of tattooing, which prevailed among the Illyrians and Thracians,(2117)

must have fallen into disuse in Macedonia at a very early date: for the

Greeks would not have forgotten to mention such evident proofs of

barbarian descent. Even the usage of the ancient Macedonians, that every

person who had not killed an enemy should wear some disgraceful badge, had

been discontinued in the time of Aristotle.(2118) Yet at a very late date

no one was permitted to lie down at table who had not slain a wild boar

without the nets.(2119) It is greatly to be lamented that we know much

less of the ancient customs of the Illyrians than of the Thracians, of

whose singular and almost Asiatic usages we are sufficiently well

informed. The doctrine of the immortality of the soul in the worship of

Zalmoxis, the lamentations of the Trausi at the birth of a man,(2120) and

the slaughter of the dearest wife on the grave of her husband among the

Sintes and Mædi,(2121) point to a particular view of human life, foreign

to the Grecian character, but familiar to many eastern nations.(2122) The

prevailing custom of polygamy,(2123) the buying and inheriting of women,

the selling of children as slaves,(2124) and the delight in

intoxication,(2125) are traces of a genuine barbarian character; no one of

which, as far as I am aware, can be discovered among the Macedonians: with

whom, moreover, the Thracian names (_e.g._, Cotys, and those ending in

_cetes_ and _sades_) never occur.

35. On the other hand, a military disposition, which still distinguished

the Macedonians in the time of Polybius, personal valour, and a certain

freedom of spirit, were the national characteristics of this people. Long

before Philip organised his phalanx, the cavalry of Macedon was greatly

celebrated, especially that of the highlands, as is shown by the

tetradrachms of Alexander the First. In smaller numbers they attacked the

close array of the Thracians of Sitalces, relying on their skill in

horsemanship and on their defensive armour.(2126) Teleutias the Spartan

also admired the cavalry of Elimea;(2127) and in the days of the conquest

of Asia the custom still remained that the king could not condemn any

person without having first taken the voice of the people or of the

army.(2128)

36. It is difficult to treat of the Macedonian language, as not only the

_ancient_ period of the native dialect must be distinguished from the

_second_, in which the Grecian language was partially introduced, after

Archelaus, Philip, and Alexander made their people acquainted with

Athenian civilisation, but also from a _third_, in which many barbarous

words were adopted from the mixture of the Macedonians with Indians,

Persians, and Egyptians.(2129) Nevertheless it is possible to form a

well-grounded opinion as to the form of the Macedonian language in the

first period. In the first place, they had many barbarous words for very

simple and common objects,(2130) which may be certainly considered as

Illyrian, since among the _very scanty_ relics of the Illyrian and

Athamanian dialects(2131) there are some words which are also mentioned as

Macedonian.(2132) Indeed, without supposing some barbarous foundation of

this kind, we could hardly account for the Macedonian language being still

unintelligible to the Greeks in the time of Alexander the Great.(2133) Yet

it cannot be doubted that the Greek had passed into the Illyrian dialect

_before_ the introduction of Athenian literature, and that their

combination produced the mongrel language which was afterwards called

Macedonian. The nominatives in α, such as ἱππότα, πολῖτα, &c., could not

have been derived from the Athenians; but the Thessalians, the Dryopians,

and probably all the Pelasgians, used that form.(2134) That some mixture

of Greek had taken place at an early period seems also to be proved by the

great and almost inexplicable change which the Grecian words experienced

in the mouth of the Macedonians, who appear to have been unable to

pronounce the letters Φ and Θ, and hence they always substituted Β for the

former, and Δ for the latter,(2135) perhaps from a peculiarity of the

Illyrian nation. On the other hand, the Macedonian language had a

consonant ΟΥ or V, as _Volustana_, the name of the country round

Olympus,(2136) the _Candavian_ mountains,(2137) &c., prove; and thus both

in this and the former respect it approximated to the vocal system of the

Latin.

_Note on the Map of Macedonia._

Since the annexed Map is entirely copied from that of Barbié du Bocage, as

far as the country is concerned, I will only remark some important points

in which Arrowsmith’s great Map of Turkey, which is in part founded on

quite different authorities, differs from it. In this Map the small lake

to the east of Lychnis, or Lychnitis (the lake of Ochrida), is not

connected with any river running to the coast, and the mountains to the

west of it stretch uninterruptedly to the south. (Perhaps this is correct:

see p. 453, note g. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote to

“Candavian chain,” starting “Ptolemy.”]) The Haliacmon rises rather more

to the north than in Barbié du Bocage’s Map. The Cara-Sou, which is

certainly the Erigon, runs into the lake of the Lydias. (Incorrect,

according to Strabo, quoted in p. 451, note b. [Transcriber’s Note: This

is the footnote to “mountains of Illyria,” starting “Its rise in these

mountains.”]) The Lydias has a longer course, and rises in the Illyrian

mountains. The modern river Gallico, which I make the Echeidorus, flows at

some distance from the sea through a lake into the Axius. The tributary

branch of the Achelous, called by the ancients the Inachus, rises further

to the south, under the Pindus-chain (contrary to the authors quoted in p.

452, note f. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote to “Epirus of

Lacmon,” starting “Or Lacmus.”]). Upon the whole, Barbié du Bocage’s Map

is without doubt the more accurate.

APPENDIX II. GENEALOGY OF HELLEN.

There is a particular tendency which may be traced throughout all the

accounts that have come down to us of early Grecian history, viz., of

reducing everything to a _genealogical_ form. It was much encouraged by

the opinion of the later historians, that every town and valley had

received its name from some ancient prince or hero; thus even Pausanias

meets with persons who explained everything by means of genealogies;(2138)

who, for example, out of the Pythian temple at Delphi made a son of

Delphus Pythis, a prince of early times. This tendency, however, is

manifestly founded on the genuine ancient language of mythology. With the

inventors of these fabulous narratives, nations, cities, mountains,

rivers, and gods became real _persons_, who stood to one another in the

relation of human beings, were arranged in families, and joined to one

another in marriage. Now although such fictions are in many cases easily

seen through, and the meaning of the connexion may be readily deciphered,

yet these genealogies, as there was nothing of arbitrary and fanciful

invention in them, in after-times passed for real history; and were, both

by early and late historians, with full confidence in their general

accuracy, made use of for the establishment of a sort of chronology. On

these principles, then, the genealogies which were formed in the age of

the later epic poets, and perhaps even of the early historians, cannot be

considered as pure invention; these too must have been founded on certain

arguments and facts, which were generally believed at that time. We will

endeavour to point this out in the famous genealogy of the chief races of

the Greeks, which was taken from the Ἠοῖαι of Hesiod.(2139)

[Transcriber’s Note: Here are the relationships shown in the table:

Prometheus and Pandora had Deucalion.

Deucalion and Pyrrha had Hellen.

Hellen had Dorus, Xuthus, and Æolus.

Xuthus had Achæus and Ion.]

Now the passage of Hesiod only mentions the three brothers, Dorus, Xuthus,

and Æolus, without naming the sons of Xuthus; but it is evident that in

this series Xuthus must also represent some race or races; and since no

tribe ever bore the title of _Xuthi_, this name must have been used by

Hesiod to signify the Ionians and Achaæns, as in Apollodorus, and other

writers.(2140) According to another tradition, perhaps of equal antiquity,

Zeus, the father of gods and men, was, instead of Deucalion, the husband

of Pyrrha.(2141)

It is evident that the above genealogy was intended to represent the chief

races of the Hellenes, or Greeks, as belonging to one nation; and

consequently could not have been made before the name Hellenes was applied

to the whole nation; which in the Iliad(2142) is only the name of a small

tribe in Phthia.(2143) The more extended use of the name falls in the

period of the poems which went under the name of Hesiod:(2144) it is first

thus used in the “Works and Days” of the real Hesiod,(2145) before which

time, therefore, the above genealogy cannot have been formed. But that the

author of it did not make an arbitrary fiction is evident from the

circumstance that he put Xuthus instead of Achæus and Ion; by which he

greatly deranged the symmetry of his genealogy. It is clear that he

thought himself bound to respect the tradition, that Achæus and Ion were

the sons of Xuthus; which prevented him from making Hellen their father.

As yet, therefore, the other brothers were not recognised in tradition as

having any fathers; and some obscure legends, such as that of Dorus, the

son of Apollo,(2146) had not obtained a general belief. There can be no

doubt that Hellen was recognised in the most ancient tradition. Now in the

fictions of mythology the invention was bound by a sort of fanciful

regularity; and in a fabulous genealogy the part was deduced from the

whole, the species from the genus, as an inferior and subordinate being:

thus in the Theogony the hills are the children of the earth, and the sun

and the moon of light.(2147) Accordingly the poet (or whoever was his

authority) sang of Æolus, Dorus, and Xuthus, the progenitors of nations,

being the sons of Hellen, the son of Zeus, or grandson of Prometheus. It

is possible that before this entire genealogy others had been invented,

_e.g._, that _Dorus_ was a son of Hellen; since, as early as the time of

Lycurgus, the Spartans were commanded by the Pythian oracle to worship

Zeus Hellanius and Athene Hellania;(2148) and since both the judges in the

Spartan army(2149) and the judges of the Olympic games were called

Hellanodicæ. And when I consider the celebrated oracle just quoted, and

the close connexion of Sparta and Olympia with Delphi, the sacred families

of the Delphians (the ὅσιοι), who referred their origin to

Deucalion,(2150) and on the other hand remember that a Bœotian poem,

composed in the neighbourhood of the Pythian oracle, first uses the word

“Hellenes” in this extended sense; I cannot help conjecturing that this

national sanctuary of the Hellenic name had a large share in the formation

of that really beautiful legend; by which all the different races of

Greece, separated for so many centuries by violent and unceasing

contention, were united into the peaceable fellowship of brotherly

affection and concord.

APPENDIX III. THE MIGRATION OF THE DORIANS TO CRETE.

Cnosus,(2151) the Minoian Cnosus, was, even so late as the time of Plato,

the first city in Crete, and the chief domicile of the Cretan laws and

customs: and Plato, in his Treatise on Laws, takes a Cnosian as the

representative and defender of the Cretan laws in general;(2152) although

Cnosus about his time had declined from internal corruption, and the fame

of having preserved the good laws of ancient Crete soon passed from her to

Gortyna and Lyctus.(2153) In earlier times, however, the Cretan laws

(Κρητικοὶ νόμοι), which Archilochus even mentions as being of a distinct

character,(2154) were preserved in the greatest purity at Cnosus. Now when

modern writers admit indeed that the Cretan laws were founded upon the

customs of the Doric race, but affirm that this race did not penetrate

into Crete before the expedition of the Heraclidæ, and that migrations

subsequently took place from Peloponnesus; it is necessary for them first

of all to show that _Cnosus_ received its Doric inhabitants from that

country, that is, probably either from Argos or Sparta. But had such been

the case, the memory of these migrations would assuredly never have been

lost: Argos and Sparta would have been too proud to possess such a colony.

Cnosus must therefore have received its Doric inhabitants at an earlier

date, in the dark ages of mythology; and the subsequent colonies from

Peloponnesus to Lyctus, Gortyna, and other places, helped to increase the

Doric population, which in Homer’s time(2155) was confined to a _part_ of

the island, over the _whole_ of Crete; as was the case in late ages. And

at the time which Homer describes, not only the language, but the customs

and laws were probably also different; whereas Archilochus appears to

mention the Cretan laws as prevalent over the whole island. Upon the

whole, the Dorians in Crete—and this is a fact of great importance—never

seem to stand, with regard to the Dorians of Peloponnesus, in the relation

of a colony to its mother country. In Greece, the parent state—so great

was the pride of higher antiquity—never condescended to take the

institutions of a colony as models for its own, as was the case with

Sparta and Crete; nor did the mother country ever procure priests from its

colony, as was the case when the Pythian Apollo sent Cretan priests to

Sparta.(2156) In short, everything seems to prove that the Doric

institutions were of great antiquity in Crete, and that the distinction

which has lately been taken between the laws of Minos and the Doric

institutions and customs of Crete—a distinction directly opposed to the

unanimous testimony of antiquity—is false and untenable.

But in retaining his conviction respecting a Doric settlement in Crete

before the migration of the Heraclidæ, and in viewing it as the only means

of explaining many facts in the religious and political history of the

Greeks, the Author does not imply that this Doric colony was exactly

similar to a later migration of Dorians from Argos and Sparta. The

condition of the Dorians in Hestiæotis must have been very different from

that to which the same race attained in Peloponnesus. The mixture with

other races, which had gone so far, that the head of the mythical

settlement bears a Pelasgic name (Teutamus), does not agree with the

character of the later Dorians. At that time no line of princes, calling

themselves Heraclidæ, could have stood at the head of the Dorians; for in

Crete, Heraclidæ only occur in cities which were colonised from

Peloponnesus; for example, they do not occur in Cnosus. Moreover, a

maritime, and especially a piratical life (upon which the maritime

supremacy of Minos was founded) does not agree with the principles

followed by the Dorians in Peloponnesus, where they relied upon a tranquil

and secure possession of land. These principles, however, could not be

developed so long as the Dorians were excluded from the rich plain of

Thessaly, and were forced to eke out their scanty means by hunting and

piracy. How different was the rough and perilous life of the ancient

sea-kings of the Normans from the proud and secure existence of the barons

in Normandy! Yet the eye of the observant historian can trace a unity of

national character even in the most different circumstances. By a similar

analogy, this remarkable expedition of Doric adventurers from Hestiæotis

to Crete will explain the zeal of the Cretans for the worship of Apollo,

the ancient connexion of Crete and Delphi, and the early existence in

Crete of notions respecting a strict regulation of public life (κόσμος).

APPENDIX IV. HISTORY OF THE GREEK CONGRESS OR SYNEDRION DURING THE PERSIAN

WAR.

1. In the present article it will be my object to trace the foreign

influence which Sparta possessed at the time of the Persian war, and for

what length of time her supremacy in Greece remained uncontested and

unshaken. This is chiefly seen in the proceedings of the congress of the

allied Greek states: to ascertain which with precision, it will be first

necessary to fix the chronology of the successive stages of the Persian

war.

In the course of the year 481 B.C. (Olymp. 74. 3/4) Xerxes set out from

his residence at Susa (Herod. VII. 20), found the great army assembled in

Cappadocia, and marched to Sardis, from which town he sent ambassadors to

the Greek cities (ib. 32). Having wintered here, the army marched in the

spring of 480 B.C. (Olymp. 74. 4) to Abydos;(2157) when it had reached the

passes of Pieria, the Persian envoys returned (ib. 131). Soon after this

they met at Thermopylæ the Greek forces, which had set out before the 75th

Olympiad and the Carnean games, about June 480 B.C. Battles of Thermopylæ

and Artemisium in μέσον θέρος (VIII. 12.) both perhaps a short time before

the Olympic festival (VIII. 26). Conquest of Attica, four months after the

beginning of the διάβασις τοῦ Ἑλλησπόντου (VIII. 51). Battle of Salamis, a

little after the time of the Ιακχος, after the εἰκὰς of Boëdromion Olymp.

75. 1., as the Etesian winds were either blowing or had ceased to blow

(they last from the summer solstice to the rising of the dog-star), VII.

168. Mardonius winters in Thessaly and Macedonia, the Persian fleet at

Cume and Samos. Battle of Platæa on the 26th or 27th of Panemus

(Metagitnion), Olymp. 75. 2. 479 B.C. at the same time as that of Mycale.

The year ends with the taking of Sestos.

2. The Greeks certainly received early intelligence of the preparations in

Persia (VII. 138), even if the story related by Herodotus (VII. 239.)

about the secret message of Demaratus is not true. They either refused or

gave earth and water to the envoys late in the year 481 B.C. (VII. 138.).

The states which refused to submit held a congress;(2158) and they are now

called by Herodotus, “the Greeks allied against the Persians,” (οἱ

συνωμόται Ἑλλήνων ἐπὶ τῷ Πέρσῃ, VII. 148.). This assembly of course was

formed by deputies from the different cities: the manner of its formation

may be inferred from the place at which it sat; and it will be shown

presently that it first assembled at Corinth, which city belonged to the

Peloponnesian confederacy. It appears therefore that Sparta must have

convened an assembly at Corinth, to which the extra-Peloponnesian states,

which had refused earth and water, sent envoys. This congress first put an

end to the internal dissensions of Greece (VII. 145.), in which good

service Chileus of Tegea and Themistocles are said to have earned the

gratitude of their countrymen (Plutarch Themist. 6.). Secondly, when they

heard that Xerxes was at Sardis, they despatched spies thither, and at the

same time envoys to Argos, Sicily, Corcyra, and Crete. (VII. 145. 199.)

The envoys are stated by Herodotus to have been sent by the Lacedæmonians

and their allies.(2159) They also made a vow to decimate to the Delphian

God all those Greeks who had unnecessarily given earth and water to the

Persians (VII. 132.); the persons who made this vow are called by Diodorus

XI. 3. “the Greeks assembled in congress at the Isthmus,” οἱ ἐν Ἰσθμῷ

συνεδρεύοντες τῶν Ἑλλήνων.

3. In this narrative taken from Herodotus there still remains one

contradiction, viz., that if the Greeks did not assemble till after they

had refused earth and water (as appears from VII. 138. cf. 145.), the

Argives had no longer any option whether they would join the league or

not. Likewise the dismission of the Greek envoys would fall too late in

the unfavourable season for sailing, and there would scarcely be time for

the messages to the oracles (c. 148, 169.), and the other proceedings. It

is therefore probable that this congress was formed _before_ the arrival

of the Persian envoys, which was late in 481 B.C.: and Diodorus seems to

be correct in stating that of the nations some gave earth and water, while

the Persian army was in the valley of Tempe, and others after its

departure (XI. 3.); and therefore none till early in 480 B.C.: previously

the ambassadors were probably in the north; Herodotus in VII. 138. appears

to mean only the ambassadors of Darius. With this the following statements

agree, which he adds in VII. 172. “_As soon as_ the Thessalians had heard

that the Persians wished to invade Europe”—which they must have known in

the winter of 481-80 B.C.—“they sent envoys to the Isthmus.” Ἐν δὲ τῷ

Ἰσθμῷ (_i.e._, in the village which had grown up about the temple of

Neptune), ἔσαν ἁλισμένοι πρόβουλοι (plenipotentiaries, VI. 7.) τῆς

Ἑλλάδος, ἀραιρημένοι ἀπὸ τῶν πολίων τῶν τὰ ἀμείνω φρονεουσέων περὶ τὴν

Ἑλλάδα. Now this assembly, while the Persian king was at Abydos, and

therefore very early in 480 B.C., sent the army to Tempe, which soon

returned (VII. 173.), and indeed returned to the Isthmus, which must

therefore have been the head-quarters of the allied army. When it

returned, the congress was still sitting at the Isthmus.(2160) This

synedrion or assembly (which is again mentioned in this place by Diodorus

XI. 4.) now resolved to defend the passes of Thermopylæ and Artemisium:

and when the intelligence arrived that the Persians were in Pieria,

διαλυθέντες ἐκ τοῦ Ἰσθμοῦ (_i.e._, departing from the Isthmus)

ἐστρατεύοντο αὐτῶν οἱ μὲν ἐς Θερμοπύλας πεζῇ, ἄλλοι δὲ κατὰ θάλασσαν ἐπ᾽

Ἀρτεμίσιον. But that the Isthmus was still the place in which the congress

sat, is evident from the fact, that Sandoces, Aridolis, and Penthylus, who

fell into the hands of the Greeks before the battle of Artemisium, were

sent thither (VII. 195.). At this time indeed the Peloponnesians were

celebrating the Olympiad, and the Spartans the Carnea, at their respective

homes,(2161) after which, as had been previously arranged, they were to

take the field with all their forces (πανδημεὶ, VII. 206. VIII. 26.).

Nevertheless, the decree that the ships which came too late for Artemisium

should assemble in the Trœzenian Pogon (VIII. 42.), as well as the other,

that the Isthmus should be fortified (VIII. 40, 71.), which measure was

not thought of before the battle of Thermopylæ, must have been passed in

this interval. Diodorus (XI. 16.) mentions the synedrion in connexion with

this decree. The fortification began after the Carnea (VIII. 72.). The

fleet was commanded (as is evident from VIII. 2, 9, 56, 58, 74, 108, 111.

IX. 90.) by the Spartan admiral and a council, a συνέδριον of the

στρατηγοὶ or ἐν τέλει ὄντες (IX. 106.), in which the admiral τὸν λόγον

προετίθει (VIII. 59.) put the question to the vote (ἐπεψήφιζε, c. 61.),

and gave out the decree. This commander was armed with very large powers,

and Leotychidas concluded an alliance with the Samians (IX. 92.), and even

the captains of the fleet debated on the projected migration of the

Ionians (IX. 106.). Nor is it ever mentioned that the fleet received

orders from the Isthmus. But the circumstance of the fleet’s sailing to

the Isthmus, after the battle of Salamis, for the decree on the ἀριστεῖα

(VIII. 123.), is a proof that the Isthmus was still the seat of the

confederate assembly. Diodorus likewise represents this decree as

proceeding from the συνέδριον (XI. 55.); probably the “Greeks,” who

refused to confirm the vote of the commanders (VIII. 124.), were the

members of the league. The ships which had been engaged in the battle

returned home without any decision. Late in the year, after the eclipse of

the sun on the 2nd of October, Cleombrotus had led the great allied army

from the Isthmus, and soon afterwards died (IX. 10.). The decree for the

following year, that the fleet should go to Ægina (VIII. 131.), may have

proceeded either from the synedrium of the preceding year, or from

_Sparta_. For that there were no longer any deputies assembled at Corinth

is evident from the circumstance that the Ionian envoys only went to

Sparta and Ægina (VIII. 132.); nor is the Isthmus afterwards mentioned as

the seat of an assembly, although it was fortified until the middle of

summer, till the time of the Hyacinthia (IX. 7.). After this time, Athens,

Platæa, and Megara sent their envoys to Sparta, where there were also

Peloponnesian envoys, as for instance Chileus of Tegea (IX. 9.), who was

mentioned above among the πρόβουλοι; and all these, together with the

ambassadors of the three states just mentioned, are, as it appears, called

by Herodotus οἱ ἄγγελοι οἱ ἀπιγμένοι ἀπὸ τῶν πολίων, IX. 10. There must

probably have been some joint act of the allies,(2162) by virtue of which

Pausanias was able to collect the great Peloponnesian army. After the

battle of Platæa there was in the army a kind of council of war, doubtless

a συνέδριον τῶν ἐν τέλει ὄντων, which regulated the number of the sacred

offerings, divided the booty (IX. 81, 85.), and determined on the

expedition against Thebes (c. 86.): the persons who were given up,

Pausanias seems at Corinth to have ordered to execution on his own

authority (c. 88.).

4. Such is the substance of the narrative of Herodotus; in which we can

only be surprised, that of the most remarkable event, viz., the treaty of

Pausanias, he should say not a word: a silence which can only be explained

by supposing that he had intended to mention it in another passage of his

unfinished work. When Pausanias, with the assistance of the allies, had

won the battle of Platæa, he sacrificed in the market-place of Platæa to

Zeus Eleutherius, and convened an assembly of all the Greeks, in which the

Platæans (who annually performed certain honorary rites to those who had

fallen in the battle, Thuc. III. 58.) were promised that their country and

city should remain independent, and that no one should attack them without

lawful reason, or with intention to reduce them to subjection: and that,

in case these conditions were not observed, all the allies then present

would protect them (Thuc. VI. 71. cf. III. 56, 59.); an engagement which

the Spartans themselves afterwards broke, on the ground that the Platæans

had first unjustly given up τὸ ξυνώμοτον (II. 74.). For in “the ancient

treaty of Pausanias after the Persian war,” it was ordered that the allies

in general, and the Platæans among them, should remain at peace with each

other (Thuc. III. 68. cf. II. 72.). The further conditions of this treaty

may be collected from Thucyd. I. 67, (for it is evidently this treaty

which is in question,) where the Æginetans complain that they are not

independent, “according to the treaty;” for the thirty years’ truce (I.

115.) cannot be meant, as it was not concluded till after the subjection

of Ægina (the former in Olymp. 83. 3. the latter in Olymp. 80. 4.); whence

it is likewise evident that the treaty, which was violated by the siege of

Potidæa, and the exclusion of the Megarians from the market of Attica, (I.

67, 87. cf. c. 144.) was the same ancient act, only renewed by later

treaties. Thus Plutarch states that the latter prohibition was “contrary

to the common principles of justice, and the solemn oaths of _the

Greeks_.”(2163) And in another place he mentions that, in a general

assembly of the Greeks after the battle of Platæa, Aristides proposed a

decree that the Greeks should annually send deputies and sacred messengers

to Platæa, and that the Eleutheria should be solemnised every five

years.(2164) Also, that it was agreed that an allied Greek armament should

be organised against the Persians, consisting of 10,000 heavy-armed

infantry, 1000 cavalry, and 100 ships: and that the Platæans should be

considered sacred and inviolable. From what has been stated above, it is

clear how much of this account is true, and how much added by Athenian

partiality.

5. In the following years, when Sparta still continued the war against the

Persians and their allies by means of Pausanias and Leotychidas, there

must have been a congress, though not constantly sitting; since the

Spartans would not have determined the amount of “the war

contribution”(2165) on their own authority; and there is much probability

in the account of Diodorus (XI. 55.), that the Spartans summoned

Themistocles for his share in the treason of Pausanias before the

common-council of the Greeks, which used at this time to assemble at

Sparta. At least it is not contradicted by Thucydides; indeed his

narrative (I. 135.) perfectly agrees in this point with that of Diodorus.

The words ἐν τῇ Σπάρτῃ, which are omitted in some MSS. of Diodorus, and

suspected by Wesseling (yet, it should be observed, _only_ these words),

cannot be well spared; and, even if they were expunged, the whole chapter

would show that the congress was sitting at Sparta; for it was evidently

under Lacedæmonian influence, and therefore met in the Peloponnese; and,

since the instance mentioned above, it does not appear that any of its

meetings were held at the Isthmus.

This account likewise proves that, after Pausanias had occasioned the

defection of the Ionians and Æolians from Sparta, who were now considered

as the separate allies of Athens, a confederate council, which included

other states besides the Peloponnesians, continued to sit at Sparta; and

affords fresh grounds for supposing that this abandonment of the Spartan

alliance was not considered as a transfer of the chief command to Athens,

but that Sparta only intrusted the Athenians, together with those Greeks

who dwelt in the territory of the Persian king, with the continuation of

the war in Asia, and the management of all affairs connected with it; and

still considered Athens as under her command, until that state revolted in

Olymp. 79. At last the internal wars of Peloponnesus, Olymp. 79-81,

subverted all the relations of Athens and Sparta.

End Of Vol. I.

[Transcriber’s Note: The following images are sections of the large map

attached to the binding of the book. To allow it to be represented in

this e-book, it has been divided into 16 sections. They are laid out in

this manner:]

A1 A2 A3 A4

B1 B2 B3 B4

C1 C2 C3 C4

D1 D2 D3 D4

[Map section A1.]

Map section A1.

[Map section A2.]

Map section A2.

[Map section A3.]

Map section A3.

[Map section A4.]

Map section A4.

[Map section B1.]

Map section B1.

[Map section B2.]

Map section B2.

[Map section B3.]

Map section B3.

[Map section B4.]

Map section B4.

[Map section C1.]

Map section C1.

[Map section C2.]

Map section C2.

[Map section C3.]

Map section C3.

[Map section C4.]

Map section C4.

[Map section D1.]

Map section D1.

[Map section D2.]

Map section D2.

[Map section D3.]

Map section D3.

[Map section D4.]

Map section D4.

FOOTNOTES

1 The map of Northern Greece was not received until that of the

Peloponnese had been engraved; and being intended by the author for

circulation in Germany, as well as in England, the names are given

in Latin. This must serve as an apology for this want of uniformity

in the two maps.

2 See particularly Pouqueville’s list of Albanian words. Compare

Thunmann’s Geschichte der Europäischen Völker, p. 250. Concerning

the Illyrians, see App. 1, § 21, 28.

3 Strabo VII. p. 321 A.

4 Illyrian words in use among the Macedonians: σαυάδαι (_Sileni_) in

Macedonian, δευάδαι in Illyrian; δράμις, _bread_, in Macedonian,

δράμικης among the Athamanes. _Orchomenos_, p. 254. Compare

Hesychius in βατάρα. See the copious collection in Sturz de Dialecto

Macedonica.

5 As this expression is often used in the following pages, I take this

opportunity of stating, that by _an aboriginal people_, I mean one

which, as far as our knowledge extends, first dwelt in a country,

_before_ which we know of no other inhabitants of that country.

6 Justin, VII. 1. Compare Æsch. Suppl. 261.

7 Herod. I. 57. See _Orchomenos_, p. 444.

8 Compare, for example, δαίνειν _to kill_, δάνος _death_, with θανεῖν,

θάνατος; ἐέλδω (ἐέλδωρ in Homer) with ἐθέλω; ἀδραία for αἰδρία, in

which θ loses its aspiration, as φ does in κεφαλὴ (so in German

_haubet_ for _haupt_), ἀφροῦτις for ὀφρὺς (_brow_), Βίλιππος,

Βερενίκη, βαλακρὸς, &c. The aspirate is also frequently lost;

ἐνδομενία or ἐνδυμενία, _furniture_ (in Polybius), with a change of

υ and ο.

_ 9 E.g._ the nominatives ἵπποτα, &c., which are also called

Æolico-Bœotic, Doric, and Thessalian. Sturz _ut sup._ p. 28.

_ 10 E.g._ ζέρεθρα for βάραθρα.

_ 11 E.g._ ταγῶν ἀγὰ, _the leading of the Tagus_, as in Thessaly;

ματτύα, _dainties_, a Thessalian, Macedonian, and also Spartan word.

_ 12 E.g._ βίρροξ, _hirsutus_, _hirtus_; γάρκαν, _virgam_; ἴλεξ, _ilex_.

The want of aspirates also forms a point of comparison.

13 Apollodorus, III. 8, 1.

14 Ap. Constant. Porph. de Themat. II. 2, p. 1453. Sturz Hellan. Fragm.

p. 79. The passage of Hesiod is probably from the Ἠοῖαι, and there

is no reason for supposing it spurious. The second verse should be

read, υἶε δύω Μάγνητα Μάκεδνόν θ᾽ ἱππιοχάρμην.

15 Concerning the Macedonians, see Appendix I.

16 I allude here particularly to the ending of the genitive case of the

second declension in οιο, which the grammarians quote as Thessalian.

17 See Appendix I. § 28. The ancient Macedonian coins represent

precisely the same dress as the Thessalian.

18 Compare Θετταλικὰ πτερὰ in several grammarians, with Didymus in

Ammonius in χλαμύς. More will be found on this subject in book IV.

c. 2, § 4.

19 Compare Theocritus XII. 14, with Alcman quoted in the Scholia, and

b. IV. c. 4, § 6.

20 Hesychius in δεσποίνας. See book IV. c. 4, § 4.

21 According to Ælian, V. H. III. 15, the women of Illyria were present

at banquets and wine-parties; Herod. V. 18, says the contrary of the

Macedonians.

22 Strabo, V. p. 221.

23 See particularly Stephan. Byzant. in Ἔφυρα.

24 Alexander Ephesius ap. Stephan. Byz. in Χαονία.

25 Niebuhr’s Roman History, vol. i. p. 46, ed. 2, English tr. Hence

many names were the same in both countries; as, _e.g._, Pandosia

(Justin, XII. 2), Acheron, Acherontia, &c.

26 Herodotus also says, that the Ionians and Æolians had formerly been

Pelasgians, having, as it were, swallowed up that nation; he must

however assume that they changed their language (μετέμαθον τὴν

γλῶσσαν), as the language of the Pelasgi who dwelt near Creston and

Placia (which was probably nothing more than an ancient dialect)

appeared to him barbarous. Æschylus (Suppl. 911) opposes them, as

genuine Greeks, to the καρβανοι, or barbarians.

27 Thus, _e.g._, the Amphilochians and Chaonians, according to Thucyd.

II. 68, 80. The following ancient Greek forms occur in the Epirot

dialect: γδοῦποσ for δοῦποσ (Maittaire, p. 141), γνώσκω, nosco,

Orion p. 42, 17. Ἄσπετος Achilles, Plut. Pyrrh. 1. (α-ἕπομαι.)—The

account in Strabo VII. p. 327, of two languages being spoken in some

districts, doubtless refers to the coexistence of Grecian and

Illyrian dialects.

28 Polyb. XVII. 5, 8.

_ 29 Orchomenos_, p. 253.

30 According to Hesychius, Βρέκυς (Βερεκύντιος) is the same word as

Βρύξ. _Bruges_ was also used by Ennius, and, as it appears, by

Marcus Brutus (Plutarch, Brut. 45).

31 See the Chrestomathia of Proclus. _Briges_, or _Phryges_, in the

region of Dyrrachium, Appian, Bell. Civ. II., 39.

32 Creuzer Fragment. Histor. p. 171. Strabo XIV. p. 680. Compare Conon

in Photius I.

33 Concerning this point, see Hoeck’s History of Crete, vol. I. p. 109,

sqq.

34 According to the opinion of their colonists, Herod. VII. 73. Eudoxus

ap. Steph. in Ἀρμενία. Compare Heeren _De Linguarum Asiaticarum in

Persarum Imperio Cognatione_, Comment. Gotting. vol. XIII.

35 The Armenians frequently occur in the ancient traditional history of

the oriental kingdoms; _e.g._, in Diod. II. 1 as conquered by Ninus.

They are likewise represented as the original inhabitants in the

native legends collected by Moses of Chorene.

36 Plato, Cratyl. p. 410 A. It is remarkable that these words are also

in the German language. Πῦρ (see Grimm’s Deutsche Grammatik, vol. I.

p. 584, 2d ed.) in ancient High German was _viuri_, in Low German

_für_. Κύων, _canis_, _hund_ (_d_ added as in μὴν, μὰν—Phrygian for

_moon_—and _mahnd_, _mond_). Ὕδωρ, in High German _wazar_, in Low

German _water_; the digamma is present the genuine Phrygian form

βéδυ, which, on account of ancient vicinity, was also a Macedonian

and _Orphic_ word (see Neanth. Cyzicen. ap. Clem. Alexand. Strom. V.

p. 673. Jablonsky de Lingua Phrygia, p. 76), and is sometimes

translated _water_, and sometimes _air_.

Lastly, the Phrygian inscription in Walpole’s Memoirs, especially

the words ΜΙΔΑΙ ΛΑϜΑΓΤΑΕΙ ϜΑΝΑΚΤΕΙ, prove that it had a great

resemblance, both in radical forms and inflexion, with the Greek.

37 Thus the verb _sum_ keeps in the Armenian or Haicanian the same

fundamental form which it has in all the languages allied to the

Greek (_yem_, _yes_, _e_—_sum_, _es_, _est_). And it is remarkable,

that the three Phrygian Greek words noticed in the text have been

likewise preserved in the Haicanian: πῦρ is _hur_ (as πατὴρ _hair_,

πéντε _hink_); ὕδωρ, _tschur_ (as θερμὸς tscherm); κύων is _shun_.

See Klaproth, Asia Polyglotta, p. 99.

38 See Jablonsky de Lingua Lycaon. Opusc. vol. III. p. 119.

39 That is, if the epic poet Chœrilus spoke of Lyctian Solymi in the

well-known passage preserved in Josephus cont. Apion. vol. II. p.

454, ed. Haverc. &c. See Naeke’s Chœrilus, p. 130, sq.

_ 40 E.g._ ἀδαγοὺς, an androgynous deity (Hesych. in v.), from _Dagon_;

the name _Adon_ (Athen. XIV. p. 624); βαλλὴν _king_, (Hesych. in v.

Eustath. ad Od. τ. p. 680. Bas.) from _Baal_, &c. See Blomf. ad

Æsch. Pers. 663.

41 See _Orchomenos_, p. 379-390.

42 Herod. VII. 111.

43 All their words with which we are acquainted are very unlike the

Greek; _e.g._ the word βρία and βρέα for _city_, which frequently

occurs, ζίλα _wine_, πιτῦγες _treasure_, Schol. Apollon. Rhod. I.

933, &c.

44 Herod. V. 13. VII, 20, 75. Compare Hellanicus _ut sup._; where read,

ἐφ᾽ οὖ νῦν Μακεδόνες καλοῦνται μόνοι μετὰ Μυσῶν τότε οἰκοῦντες. This

at the same time probably refers to the tradition, that the Mysians

(as well as the Thynians and others) came from Thrace to Asia,

according to Strabo, and Pliny H. N. V. 32, 41. VII. 57.

45 Homer, Hymn. Ven. 113.

46 Æginetica, pp. 12, 155. Compare also Phavorinus in Ἀχαιοὺς ἄρξωσιν.

In the later times they were probably still in the territory of the

Molossians, who were considered as Greeks, Herod. VI. 127.

47 Il. XVI. 233.

48 See _Orchomenos_, pp. 139, 248, sqq. Buttmann, indeed, in his Memoir

on the Minyæ (Berlin Transactions for 1820, p. 13), denies the

existence of these places; but several of the passages which I have

quoted are decisive.

49 According to the genealogy from the Ἠοῖαι—Dorus, Xuthus (from whom

Achæus and Ion), and Æolus; see Appendix II. The genealogy in

Euripides, Ion 1608. viz. Xuthus, father of Ion, Dorus, and Achæus,

is distorted to suit the national feelings of the Athenians. The

passage from the Ἠοῖαι, however, although in a poetical garb, is

more credible than the testimony of Herodotus, who considers the

Ionians as _aborigines_.

50 Concerning what follows, see Apollonius Rhod. IV. 521, sqq. Schol.

ad 1. et ad IV. 1125, 1149. Apollodorus ap. Stephan. Byzant. in

Ὑλλεῖς (p. 434, ed. Heyn.) Scylax, p. 7. ed. Voss. Scymnus Chius

404, from Timæus (Fragm. 121. ed. Goeller) and Eratosthenes. Dionys.

Perieg. 386, with Eustathius and the Scholia. Etymol. Magn. p. 776.

39, where they are called a Celtic nation (ἔθνος Κελτικον). Compare

Schoenemann Geograph. Argonaut. p. 53, and book III. c. 5.

51 Apollon. Rh. IV. 538, and others. Panyasis appears from the

Scholiast to Apollonius Rhod. IV. 1149, to have mentioned two

Hylluses, viz. the son of Melite and the son of Deianira. Compare

Schol. Soph. Trachin. 53. Vales, ad Harpocrat. p. 126. In the

Scholiast to Pindar Pyth. I. 120, Ὕλλος, ὄς ἑβασίλευσε τῶν περὶ τὴν

Ἰταλίαν οἱκησάντων, where Hemsterhuis reads Οἰχαλίαν, Raoul-Rochette

(Histoire de l’Etablissement des Colonies Grecques, tom. II. p. 280)

proposes, not without some probability, Ἰλλυρίαν.

52 Apollon. Rh. IV. 528.

53 Thucyd. III. 81.

54 Especially the connected chain of Ætolians, Epeans, Locrians

(concerning whose affinity see Boeckh ad Pind. Olymp. IX. 61. p.

191), and Lelegians (Hesiod ap. Strab. VII. p. 322); and if these,

as some say, are the same as the Carian nation, to which the Lydians

and a part of the Mysians belonged, they would seem to compose a

very numerous race.

55 See book II. ch. 7.

56 The ancients frequently say, that the Ionians in Asia ἐλυμήναντο τῆς

διαλέκτου τὸ πάτριον. Photius in v. φαρμακός.

57 Concerning the Doric dialect, see Appendix VI.

58 Herod. I. 56; concerning which passage see Salmasius, de Lingua

Hellenica, p. 276, and Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions, tom.

XXV. p. 11-28. Compare VIII. 43. Ἐόντες Δωρικόν τε καὶ Μακεδνὸν

ἔθνος ἐξ Ἐρινεοῦ τε καὶ Πίνδου καὶ τῆς Δρυοπίδος ὕστατα ὁρμηθέντες.

59 See, on the subject of this genealogy, Appendix II.

60 Apollod. I. 7, 2.

61 Thus Pindar, Olymp. VIII. 30, calls the Myrmidons Δωριεὺς λαὸς, in

order, as I conceive, to oppose them as genuine Greeks to nations of

a different origin.

62 From the circumstance that, in Homer, Achilles the Æacides is

represented as chief of the Hellenes, and that the Æacidæ were also

ancient princes of Ægina, the author has in a former work

(Æginetica, p. 18) explained the name of the temple of Zeus in

Ægina, Ἑλλάνιον, in later times called Πανελλήνιον. For this temple

is assuredly more ancient than the time when all the Greeks were

called Hellenes; and it must therefore be considered as a sanctuary

of the original Hellenes, who also dwelt in Phthia, as an ancient

national temple of the Myrmidons.

63 Appendix I., last note.

64 The height of mount Olympus, according to Bernouille, is 1017

toises, or 6501 English feet; of Ossa, according to Dodwell, about

5000 feet.

65 A more accurate description of this valley than those of Ælian and

Barthélemy is given by Bartholdy, Bruchstücke zur Kentniss

Griechenlands, p. 112; Clarke, Travels, part II. sect. iii. p. 273;

Hawkins, in Walpole’s Memoirs relating to European Turkey, p. 528;

Holland, Albania, p. 291; Dodwell, Travels, vol. I. p. 103; and

Pouqueville, tom. III. c. 73. Among the ancients, Theopompus, in his

Φιλιππικὰ, gave an accurate description of Tempe. See Theo. Sophist.

Progymn. II. p. 19; Frommel, in Creuzer’s Meletemata, III. p. 141,

6.

66 XX. _m. p. in ipsis faucibus saltus_, Livy from Polyb. XVIII. 10, 2,

on the side of Olympus. Meletius mentions here a place called

Goniga.

67 Liv. XXXIX. 25.

68 Il. B. 753.

69 Herod. VII. 128, 173.

70 Liv. XLIV. 6. Polyb. XXVIII. 11. 1. Ἀζορίου μεταξὺ καὶ Δολιχῆς.

71 See, besides Herodotus, Liv. XLIV. 2, and Plutarch, Æmil. 9.

72 Concerning the situation of this place see Liv. XLIV. 2 and 6.

73 Πυθίου Ἀπολλωνος ἱερὸν, τὸ Πύθιον καὶ τὴν Πέτραν Plutarch. Æmil. 15.

_Pythoum_ (Πυθῷον) _et Petra_ Liv. XLIV. 2, 32, 35. XLII. 53. That

there was only _one_ Pythium in this district is evident from an

accurate examination of the marches. Mannert (vol. VII. p. 520, 563)

has placed Pythium on the pass through the Cambunian mountains

(above the modern Alesson and Sarviza), of which it lay far to the

right. His opinion is contradicted by Liv. XLIV. 2. and Plutarch,

ubi sup. Compare Stephanus in Πύθιον, Πυθιεῖς οἱ τὸ Πύθιον

οἰκοῦντες, ἐν ῷ Ἀπόλλωνος ἱερον ἐστι, and in Βάλλα.

74 960 toises. See above.

75 See Plutarch ubi sup. Liv. ubi sup. and XLIV. 7. comp. Polyb.

XXVIII. 11.

76 Liv. XXXI. 41. XXXVI. 10, 13. XLII. 67. XLIV. 2.

77 Ptolemy includes it in Pelasgiotis. Unfortunately we have not the

Greek original of the passage in Livy concerning the Tripolis, XLII.

53.

_ 78 Orchomenos_, p. 126.

79 Liv. XXXII. 15. Strabo IX. p. 438, 440.

80 Concerning Pelinna, see, besides Cellarius, Spanheim de Usu Numm.

IX. p. 902. Salmasius ad Solin. p. 687. Wesseling ad Diodor. XVIII.

11. and Boeckh Comment. ad Pind. Pyth. X. p. 335.

81 Besides Strabo, see Diodorus XVIII. 56. In Polyænus IV. 2, 18,

should be written, Φίλιππος ἐπολιόρκει Φαρκηδόνα πóλιν Θεσσαλικήν.

82 Concerning Tricca (Tricala 12-3/4 leagues from Larissa, according to

Pouqueville) see Mannert, p. 569, and also Eustathius, vol. II. p.

250. ed. Basil. Tzetzes Chil. IX. 28.

83 See II. B. 370, with the Scholia, and Eustathius. Pelinnus, a son of

Œchalieus, Steph. Byzant. in Πέλιννα.

84 Thus Pouqueville: according to Holland twelve miles, according to

Vaudoncourt four hours.

85 See Meletius, Pouqueville, Holland, Cockerell in Hughes’ Travels,

vol. I. p. 504.

86 The latter according to Arrian I. 7; the former according to Liv.

XXXI. 41. XXXII. 15. XXXVIII. 2. Compare Cæsar B.C. III. 80.

87 Tempe was about 500 stadia from Gomphi, Plin. H. N. IV. 8, which

distance should be thus divided: the length of Tempe 40 stadia, then

to Larissa 160, to Tricca about 240, and to Gomphi 60.

88 Strabo IX. p. 437. II. B. 729. Pausan. IV. 9, 1. Meteora cannot be

Ithome; more probably the ruins of Kastraki. But the passage

concerning Curalius and the temple of the Itonian Minerva, is a

confusion of the geographer. Otherwise de la Porte du Theil

Eclaircissemens sur Strabon I. 76, p. 248.

89 Athen. XIV. p. 639, 640.

90 Pouqueville, p. 37.

_ 91 Orchomenos_, p. 126. Here also Acrisius of Argos dwelt. That it is

this Larissa is plain from Schol. Apoll. Rhod. I. 40, compare

Hellanicus fragm. 116. Pausan. II. 16. Tzetzes ad Lycoph. 836.

92 Strabo, IX. p. 439.

93 According to modern travellers. The ancients frequently

misinterpreted Homer. In later times Eurotas, or Europus, as in the

Excerpta of Strabo, _i.e._ the _dark-coloured_.

94 Pouqueville.

95 Thus the writers in Strabo VII. p. 328. Steph. Byzant. in Δωδώνη.

See book II. ch. 11, § 3.

96 Hieronymus, ap. Strab. IX. p. 443.

97 Steph. Byzant. in Γόννος Liv. XXXII. 15.

_ 98 Orchomenos_, pp. 248 sqq.

99 If _Oloosson_ is the modern _Alassona_ on the road from Larissa to

Macedonia, according to the opinion of the bishop of Thessalonica on

Il. B. p. 333. ed. Rom. δοκεῖ δὲ φυλάσσειν καὶ νῦν τὴν κλῆσιν

παραφθειρομένην βαρβαρικῶς, ἴσως γὰρ αὔτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἄρτι λεγομένη

Ἐλασσών.

100 See above, § 1. Andron ap. Strab. X. p. 475 E. τῆς Δωρίδος πρότερον,

νῦν δὲ Ἑστιαιώτιδος λεγομένης. The Dorians also dwelt in Hestiæotis

to the west of Pindus, according to Charax ap. Steph. Byzant. in

Δώριον. According to Schol. Pind. Pyth. I. 124, and Schol. Aristoph.

Plut. 385 (as emended by Hemsterhuis, p. 115), they dwelt in

Perrhæbia; and Perrhæbia nearly coincides with Hestiæotis.

101 See book II. ch. I, § 2.

102 There was a hero named Azorus, Hesychius in Ἄζωρος.

103 Hemsterhuis incorrectly considers them as identical, ubi sup. p.

116.

104 Athen. XI. p. 503 D. καὶ ὁ τὸν Αἰγίμιον ποιήσας, εἴθ᾽ Ἡσιοδός ἐστιν

ἢ Κέρκωψ ὁ Μιλήσιος. The confusion of the names of Hesiod and

Cercops may, as it appears to me, be accounted for as follows. A

verse concerning the desertion of Ariadne by Theseus for the sake of

Ægle, is ascribed by Plutarch (vit. Thes. 20) to Hesiod, and by

Athenæus (XIII. p. 557 A.) to Cercops; it is evidently from the

Ægimius which was attributed to both these names. This verse was

expunged from the poem by Pisistratus, as we learn from Hereas,

quoted by Plutarch. The Ægimius therefore was at that time arranged

and set down in writing, together with other epic poems.

Consequently Cercops, an Orphic Pythagorean, who lived about the

time of Pisistratus, cannot have been the author of it, though he

might have been the διασκευαστὴς who arranged it in the same manner

that Onomacritus did the other poems. Now it might easily happen,

especially if his interpolations could be now and then discerned,

that the _whole_ poem should be attributed to him.

105 Wesseling. ad Diod. IV. 37, p. 282.

106 See Valckenaer ad Eurip. Phœn. p. 735.

107 Schol. Apoll. Rhod. III. 584. IV. 816. The character of the ancient

epic poetry, which never admitted of history arranged in a

chronological order, cannot allow us to suppose that the Ægimius

contained an account of the expedition of the Dorians, and of their

colonies, down to the founding of Cyrene.

108 This is the meaning of the passage in Steph. Byzant. Ἀβαντίς,—ὡς

Ἡσίοδος ἐν Αἰγιμίου δευτέρῳ περὶ Ἰοῦς;

—Νήσῳ δ᾽ ἐν Ἀβαντίδι δίῃ,

τὴν πρὶν Ἀβαντίδα κίκλησκον Θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες

τήν ποτ᾽ ἐπώνυμον Εὔβοιαν βοὸς ὠνόμασε Ζεύς.

These are followed by the four verses concerning Argos and Io quoted

by Schol. Eurip. Phœn. 1151. Apollodorus II. 1, 3, alludes to this

passage. Also what he mentions from this poem in II. 1, 5, belongs

to the Eubœan fables. Apollodorus, in both passages, quotes the

Ægimius under the name of Cercops. Compare Fabric. Bibliothec. vol.

I. p. 592. ed. Harles.

109 See Ephorus ap. Steph. Byzant. in Δυμᾶνες (p. 96. ed. Marx.),

followed by Strabo IX. p. 427.

110 Book III. ch. 1, § 7.

111 Etymol. Magn. Τριχάϊκες.—Ἠσίοδος διὰ τὸ τριχῇ αὐτοὺς οἰκῆσαι, οἷον;

Πάντες γὰρ τριχάϊκες καλέοντο Οὔνεκα τρισσὴν γαῖαν ἑκὰς πάτρης

ἐδάσαντο. Τρία γὰρ Ἑλληνικὰ ἔθνη τῇ Κρήτῃ ἐπῴκησαν, Πελασγοὶ,

Ἀχαιοὶ, Δωριεῖς. The last words must be considered as a mere

ignorant addition; for the Dorians did not divide _their_ territory

into three parts, _because_ two _other_ Greek races went to Crete.

It is, indeed, evident that a threefold division of the land

conquered by the Dorians is here spoken of, which, as is plain from

the fables concerning Ægimius and Hercules, took place according to

the three tribes. According to the present reading, this division

took place at a distance from the native country of the Dorians.

There might seem some difficulty in this, since Hercules is said to

have given Ægimius the third part of the territory as a παρακαταθήκη

in Hestiæotis, the most ancient habitation of the Dorians (Diod. IV.

37, compare Apollodorus II. 7, 3). Hence πάτρῃς for πάτρης might be

read in this sense: “The Dorians divided their territory into three

parts _for the families_ (of which the φυλαὶ or tribes consisted),”

so that they then dwelt separately from one another (similarly

Pindar Olym. p. VII. 74). This alteration, however, appears to be

unnecessary; and the old reading is defended by the following

explanation, viz., that according to the ancient fable Hyllus and

his descendants did not _dwell_ either near mount Œta, or in

Hestiæotis _together_ with the Dorians, but that they first received

in the Peloponnese the third part of the territory, whither they

came as colonists at a distance from their more ancient abodes (ἔκας

πάτρης).

112 Below, ch. 3, § 1.

113 Hom. Od. XIX. 174.

114 Ap. Strab. X. p. 475 D. and Stephan. Byzant. in Δώριον. Diodorus IV.

60. V. 80, gives nearly the same account, on the authority of Cretan

historians, whom he mentions in V. 80.

115 This may be collected from the passage of Dicæarchus (which, indeed,

is much mutilated) cited in Steph. Byz. in Δώριον. It is given most

faithfully in Montfaucon’s Biblioth. Coislin. p. 286, 59.

116 Τεύταμος appears to be the correct name, the same as that of an

ancient prince of Larissa, on which the ancient Dorians bordered.

The princes of the allied nations were doubtless confounded in

tradition. See the author’s _Etrusker_, vol. I. p. 94.

117 The settlements which here come into consideration are, 1. the

immigration, after the death of Minos (in the third generation

before the siege of Troy), of various races, chiefly Hellenes,

according to Herod. VII. 170; this is a mere tradition of the towns

of Polichna and Præsus, and not a very credible one. 2. The colony

of Althæmenes after the expedition of the Heraclidæ from Argos and

Megara, and in connexion with Rhodes. 3. Dorians from Peloponnesus,

Lyctus, Lampe, and other places settled from Sparta; Pharæ a colony

of the Messenians; Gortyna of Amyclæans (Minyans); Phæstus colonized

from Sicyon; other towns from Argos (Scylax, p. 18, Diod. V. 80). 4.

Æginetans in Cydonia.

118 Strabo X. p. 475 C.

119 The Cretan cities were generally considered as Doric; Menander de

Encom. XXXII. 1, p. 81, ed. Heeren. and others.

120 Od. XIX. 175. ἄλλη δ᾽ ἄλλων γλῶσσα μεμιγμένη.

121 On this migration of the Dorians from their early settlements in the

north of Greece to Crete, see Appendix III.

_ 122 Orchomenos_, pp. 233, 234. According to Andron (Strabo X. p. 475)

they came directly from Hestiæotis under mount Parnassus. According

to Diodorus IV. 67, the Cadmeans drove out the Dorians, who then

_returned_ to Doris (Erineus, Cytinium, Boeum). Lycophron v. 1388,

might be quoted in confirmation of Herodotus, since he calls the

Dorians Λακμώνιοι (Λάκμων ὄρος Περραιβίας ἔνθα ῴκουν Δωριεῖς),

Lacmon being the name of the ridge of Pindus and the Cambunian

mountains. But Lycophron only alludes to their settlements in

Hestiæotis.

123 Il. II. 849, XXI. 159. It is to this that Herodotus alludes, when he

says that the Teucrians, to which race he refers the Pæonians, had

penetrated as far as the Peneus (see the Introduction, and Appendix

I. § 4).

124 See Appendix I. § 17.

125 Introduction, § 3; Appendix I. § 25.

126 Amphicæa near Dadja. See Leake in Walpole’s Travels, p. 509. Clarke,

p. 227. Gell, Itinerary, p. 210.

127 I here chiefly follow Dodwell, vol. II. p. 133, and Gell: compare

_Orchomenos_, p. 41. Pouqueville is completely in error. According

to him the Cephisus rises 11-1/2 hours N.E. of Artotina, which he

supposes to be Erineus, and flows from the north into the Pindus,

which river (he says) runs into the Gulph of Corinth, contrary to

all accounts of ancient writers.

128 The old maps are all incorrect; see now Gell’s map to his Itinerary.

According to Strabo the Tetrapolis lay chiefly to the east of

Parnassus, but it extended also round to the west, IX. p. 417. The

river Pindus is now, according to Dodwell, the _Aniani_.

129 See p. 40, note i. [Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote below

to “the Locrians,” that starts with “Thucyd. III. 95”.]

130 See Strabo IX. p. 427. X. p. 476 A. Strabo distinguishes Erineus in

Phthiotis from this town, IX. p. 434. Etymol. Mag. p. 373, 56, ὁ

Ἐρινεὸς is the correct form. Mela however, and the scholiasts to

Pindar and Aristophanes quoted below, call it _Erineum_.

131 Strabo IX. p. 427 B. p. 434. Steph. Byz. Ἀκύφας μία τῆς Δωρικῆς

τετραπόλεως.—Ὁ Ἀκύφας, Gen. Ἀκύφα, _Dorice_, see Bekker’s Anecdota,

vol. III. p. 1313.

132 Scymnus Chius v. 591. Δωριεῖς Ἐρινεὸν, Βοιὸν, Κυτίνιον ἀρχαιοτάτας

ἔχουσι, Πίνδον τ᾽ ἐχομένην. Comp. Conon. hist. 27. In answer to

those who deny that Pindus was situated in this Tetrapolis, it is

sufficient to quote Herod. VIII. 43. Comp. du Theil Eclairc. sur

Strabon IX. tom. III. p. 118. Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 252, IV.

p. 392.

133 Strabo IX. p. 427 C. arranges them in this manner: Ætolians, Locri

Hesperii, Dorians, Ænianes, Locri Epicnemidii; compare pp. 425, 430

B.

134 Thucyd. III. 95, 102. It is the Kakiscala between Stagni and Salona.

Dodwell, vol. I. p. 149, and Gell, p. 206.

135 See Philochorus ap. Dionys. ad Ammæum c. 11. Philoch. Fragm. ed.

Siebelis p. 76.

136 Pausan. X. 33, 2.

137 This road through Camara, Palæochori, and Neuropoli, is described by

Dodwell, vol. II. p. 126. Gell, p. 241.

138 Holland went over this road near Eleutherochori, p. 383, comp.

Dodwell, p. 74. It is also the way alluded to by Procopius de Ædif.

IV. 2.

139 Liv. XXXVI. 15. For a description of Thermopylæ see _Orchomenos_, p.

486. Clarke, ch. 8, p. 240. Holland, ch. 18, p. 315. Gell,

Itinerary, p. 239.

140 See Stephan. Byz. in Ἀμφαναὶ from Theopompus. Eurip. Herc. Fur. 386.

141 Strabo IX. p. 428. Liv. XXXVI. 16.

142 Steph. Byz. in Φρίκιον, and Hellanicus, ibid.

143 Strabo ubi sup.

144 See Lycophron, Hecatæus, Rhianus quoted by Stephanus.

145 Thus Andron in Strabo X. p. 476. Thucyd. I. 107.

146 Æschin. de Fals. Leg. p. 43, 24, τὸν ἤκοντα ἐκ Δωρίου καὶ Κυτινίου.

[Dr. Cramer, Description of Ancient Greece, vol. II. p. 103,

corrects Δωρικοῦ Κυτίνου in Æschines, after Thucydides, who in III.

95, speaks of Κυτίνιον τὸ Δωρικόν. Transl.]

147 Theopompus ap. Steph. Ἀκύφας. Scymnus Chius ubi sup.

148 Strabo VIII. p. 383. Conon. 27. Scymnus. To this also refers the

statement in Apollodorus I. 7, 3. that Dorus the son of Hellen τὴν

πέραν χώραν Πελοποννήσου ἔλαβεν. Vitruvius IV. 1, however, gives a

different account, _Achaia Peloponnesoque tota Dorus Hellenis et

Orseidis nymphæ_ (a mountain nymph) _filius regnavit_.

149 Hecatæus ap. Stephan.

150 In the scholia to Pindar, Pyth. I. 121, in which, however, there is

some transposition and confusion. There is nowhere else any mention

of a city in Perrhæbia named Pindus. In Pindar Πινδόθεν is used

generally for the earlier settlements; for Hestiæotis and Doris both

touch on the chain of Pindus. See Boeckh. Explic. p. 235. These

scholia are probably followed by the scholiast on Aristoph. Plut.

385, and by Tzetzes ad Lycophr. v. 980. comp. v. 741; but without

separating the erroneous parts.

151 Tarphe was near the Doric Tetrapolis between Œta and Parnassus. It

is mentioned in Iliad II. 533, as a Locrian town; according to

Strabo IX. p. 426, it was afterwards called Pharygæ, which Plutarch,

Phocion 33, includes in Phocis, and names near it a hill called

Acrurion. Tarphe and Carphæa may be considered as different forms of

the same name, _t_ and _k_ being often interchanged. Thus the

mythological hero Talaus is sometimes Calaus. (Schol. Soph. Œd. Col.

1320.)

152 Herod. VIII. 31, comp. Plutarch. Themistocl. 9.

153 P. 24. Διμοδωριεῖς.

154 Herod. VIII. 31 and 43. ἐόντες οὗτοι Δωρικὸν καὶ Μακεδνὸν ἔθνος ἐξ

Ἐρινεοῦ τε καὶ Πίνδου καὶ τῆς Δρυοπίδος ὕστατα ὁρμηθέντες. According

to this passage, therefore, Cytinium and Boeum may both have been

inhabited by the Dryopians.

155 According to Strabo IX. p. 434, there was a Dryopian Tetrapolis as

well as a Dorian.

156 Ap. Strab. p. 373. The scholia to Apollon. Rhod. I. 1283, furnish a

genealogy, viz. Lycaon, Dia, Dryops. Followed by Tzetzes ad Lyc.

480, and Etymol. Mag. p. 288, 32. Pherecydes, however, quoted in the

scholia to Apollonius, gives a different account.

157 See book II. ch. 11, § 3.

158 In the neighbourhood of the Malians and Myrmidonian Achæans,

Pherecydes ap. Schol. Apoll. Rh. I. 1823, pp. 93, 107, ed. Sturz.

Aristotle ubi sup. At the foot of Mount Parnassus, Aristotle and

Pausan. IV. 34, 6. Λυκωρείταις ὅμοροι. The μετοίκησις from the

Spercheus to Trachis is merely a confusion of the scholiast to

Apollonius. Callimachus had only mentioned the migration to

Peloponnesus, Schol. Paris. Clavier’s remarks (ad Apollod. p. 323)

are very inaccurate. Dryops, the son of Spercheus, dwelt at the foot

of mount Œta, according to Antoninus Liberalis, 32.

159 Ibid. 4. Κραγαλεὺς ὁ Δρύοπος ᾢκει γῆς τῆς Δρυοπίδος παρὰ τὰ λουτρὰ

τὰ Ἡρακλέους. In this strange account Melaneus, the son of Apollo, a

king of the Dryopes, is represented as taking Epirus and Ambracia.

It is a part of the same history as the migration of the Ænianes and

Neoptolemus to Molossis, _Æginetica_, p. 18.

160 Book II. ch. 3, § 3.

161 Aristot. ap. Strab. ubi sup. Apollod. II. 7, 7. Diod. IV. 37.

Pausan. IV. 34, 6. Servius ad Æn. IV. 146. Πράξεις Ἡρακλέους, p.

152. Marini Ville Albani. comp. _Æginetica_, p. 33. Heyne Exc. ad

Æn. IV. 2, p. 610. Raoul-Rochette, tom. I. p. 434. Herod. VIII. 43,

οἱ δὲ Ἑρμιονέες εἰσὶ Δρύοπες ὑπὸ Ἡρακλέος τε καὶ Μηλιέων ἐκ τῆς νῦν

Δωρίδος καλεομένης χώρης ἐξαναστάντες. A peculiar application of the

tradition in Suidas in Δρύοπες, Κάρπος. The verse of Callimachus

preserved in Etymol. Magn. p. 154, 7, should apparently be thus

written, Δειλαίοις Ἀσινεῦσιν ἐπιτριπτῆρας ὀπάσσας, the explanation

is given by the etymologist himself. See above, p. 45, note k.

[Transcriber’s Note: This is the footnote to “Parnassus,” starting

“In the neighbourhood of the Malians.”]

162 Herodot. VIII. 46. Diodor. IV. 57. Thucydides VII. 57, however,

considers the Styrians as Ionians.

163 Herodot. ubi sup. Diodor. ubi sup. The fabulous war of Amphitryon

against Cythnus is probably connected with it.

164 Herodot. VII. 90. Diodor. ubi sup. Asine in Cyprus, Stephan. Byz.

Also in Cyzicus, according to Strabo XIII. p. 586.

165 See _Orchomenos_, p. 496. In Æschines adv. Ctesiph. p. 68, 40,

according to Didymus and Xenagoras in Harpocration, Κραυγαλλίδαι

should be written.

166 Antonin. Liberal. 4.

167 Book II. ch. 3, § 3.

168 Παράλιοι, Ἱερῆς, Τραχίνιοι Thucyd. III. 92. comp. Dodwell, II. p.

71. I may also remark that Scylax and Diodorus, XVIII. 11, appear to

make a distinction between Melians and Malians; but in both places

ΛΑΜΙΕΙΣ should be written for Μαλιεῖς and Μαλεῖς. Wesseling’s

opinion concerning the last passage is untenable, since there never

was a town of the name of Malea. Diodorus is not quite accurate.

169 Diodor. XII. 59.

170 Aristot. Polit. IV. 13.

171 Thucyd. IV. 100.

172 See Tittmann’s Amphiktyonenbund, p. 41.

173 Strabo IX. p. 434.

_ 174 Æginetica_, p. 17.

_ 175 Orchomenos_, p. 253.

176 Book II. ch. 3, § 12.

177 Thucyd. III. 92.

178 Strab. IX. p. 442.

179 Thucyd. VIII. 3. Concerning the founding of Heraclea, see also

Stephan. Byz. in v. Δώριον, after the hiatus.

180 Book II. ch. 1. § 8, ch. 3. § 5.

_ 181 Orchomenos_, p. 238. Compare in general with this chapter,

Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 249.

182 ἡ τῶν Ἡρακλειδῶν κάϑοδος. Thucydides I. 12, says Δωριεῖς ξὺν

Ἡρακλεíδαις. Isocrates Archidam. p. 119 C. mentions an oracle

enjoining them ἐπì τὴν πατρῴαν ἰέναι χώραν.

183 XIX. 105.

184 See Pausan. VII. 25. 3.

185 Αὐτὸς γὰρ Κρονίων, καλλιστεφάνου πόσις Ἥρης,

Ζεὺς Ἡρακλείδαις τήνδε δέδωκε πόλιν.

Οἷσιν ἅμα προλιπόντες Ἐρινεὸν ἠνεμόεντα,

Εὐρεῖαν Πέλοπος νῆσον ἀφικόμεθα.

τήνδε πόλιν is Laconia. _We_ mean the Dorians: Erineus the

Tetrapolis. Strabo VIII. p. 362 has not correctly understood and

applied these verses. (See below, note to ch. 7. § 10.) Tyrtæus also

calls the Dorians generally Ἡρακλῆος γένος—whence Plutarch de Nobil.

2. p. 388.

186 Herodot. V. 72. According to VI. 53, he might also have said, “I am

an Egyptian.”