ancient traditions preserved in sacred registers, (19) is not unlike his description of the sources from which the Greek logographers drew the materials for their works. His characteristic of their diction is probably also applicable to the class of Roman historians, whom Cicero criticises with so much severity.(20) The marvellous stories collected by the Greek logographers are particularly indicated by Dionysius, and the stories of early Roman history were not dissimilar; it may however be doubted whether, as he supposes, the Greek logographers were reluctant instruments in their publication, and whether the historians did not share the popular belief in the reality of the events which they recounted.(21)

The earliest Greek writer who was a contemporary historian in the strict sense of the word-who narrated events which had occurred since he had reached the age of manhood-was Thucydides. His proper subject was the Peloponnesian war; and he lived through the whole of it (as he himself informs us), an attentive observer of its events;(22) having been forty years of age at its commencement, and sixty-seven at its termination. He was not able to complete his history: the last book is unfinished; and breaks off abruptly in 411 B.C., seven years before the end of the war.(23)

(19) Above, vol. i. p. 89, n. 39.

(20) Above, vol. i. p. 40-1.

(21) See Krüger, Dionysii Historiographica (Hal. Sax. 1823), p. 74. (22) v. 26. See above, p. 266, n. 46. He mentions that he himself was one of the sufferers from the plague of Athens, in 430 B.C.; ii. 48. He also states that he lived in exile for twenty years after 424 B.C. (v. 26), that is to say, until the end of the war. Marcellinus, Vit. Thuc. 19, 20, states that Thucydides married a Thracian wife, who was very wealthy, and possessed mines in Thrace: and that he did not spend this income in luxurious living, but from the beginning of the Peloponnesian war he gave money to Athenian and Lacedæmonian soldiers, and others, to bring him intelligence of the things done and said in different places.

(23) Niebuhr, not considering Herodotus as properly a contemporary historian, makes Thucydides the earliest Greek who wrote history, strictly so called. The first real and true historian (he says), according to our notion, was Thucydides; as he is the most perfect historian among all that have ever written, so he is at the same time the first: he is the Homer of historians; Lect. on Anc. Hist. vol. i. p. 169. In the following passage, he bestows similar praise upon Thucydides, without however denying to

Thucydides prefixes to his history, a digression, or introductory episode, containing an account of the affairs of Greece between the Persian and the Peloponnesian wars, in order that he may explain the causes which led to the formation of the Athenian empire. He describes himself as having inserted this narrative, because all the previous writers had either related the affairs of Greece before the Persian war, or had composed the history of the Persian war itself, and none had descended to the subsequent period, except Hellanicus, who had treated it in his Attic history, but briefly, and without attention to chronology.(24) The narrative which he thus introduces, comprehends the course of events from the battle of Mycale, in 479 B.C., to the surrender of Samos, in 440 B.C.(25) As Thucydides was born in 471 B.C., the chief part of this period fell within his life; but there was only a small portion of which he could be considered as an intelligent witness, and his knowledge of it must have been principally derived from persons of the preceding generation, within whose lifetime the whole interval was included.

Herodotus the appellation of a historian. The Peloponnesian war, which in some respects resembles that against Hannibal, is the most immortal of all wars, because it is described by the greatest of all historians that ever lived. Thucydides has reached the highest attainable point in historiography, both in regard to the positive historical certainty, and to the animated style of the work;' ib. vol. ii. p. 34. It is difficult to speak too highly of Thucydides, or to overrate his excellences as a historian: nevertheless, it must be remembered that he wrote before the age of paper, printing, newspapers, maps, roads, a letter-post, shorthand writing, or a chronological notation; and that all the speeches in his history (which form nearly a fourth part of the entire work), though stated to represent the general effect of what was really said, are avowedly composed by the author himself. When it is affirmed that he stands before all other historians, with respect to positive historical certainty,' the material disadvantages under which he necessarily laboured, as compared with a modern historian, ought to be borne in mind.

(24) ἔγραψα δὲ αὐτὰ καὶ τὴν ἐκβολὴν τοῦ λόγου ἐποιησάμην διὰ τόδε, ὅτι τοῖς πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἅπασιν ἐκλιπὲς τοῦτο ἦν τὸ χωρίον, καὶ ἢ τὰ πρὸ τῶν Μηδικῶν ̔Ελληνικὰ ξυνετίθεσαν ἢ αὐτὰ τὰ Μηδικά· τούτων δὲ ὅσπερ καὶ ἥψατο ἐν τῇ Αττική ξυγγραφή Ελλάνικος βραχέως τε καὶ τοῖς χρόνοις οὐκ ἀκριβῶς ἐπεμνήσθη, i. 97.

(25) i. 88-117. Concerning this portion of the history of Thucydides, see Clinton, F. H. vol. ii. app. c. 8. A detailed account of the treason and death of Pausanias the Spartan (477 to about 470 B.C.), is also given in i. 128-135, as well as of the treason of Themistocles (466-449 B.C.) ib.

§ 5 The continuous historical narrative of Grecian affairs, given by Herodotus, may be considered as commencing with the Naxian war, and the revolt of the Ionians, in 501 B.C., and it is brought down to the surrender of Sestos, in 478 B.C., where it terminates somewhat abruptly. As 484 B.C. is the earliest date assigned for the birth of Herodotus, he was not a contemporary observer of any portion of the period comprised within his history; he was only six years old when the last event related in it took place.(26) The whole of this eventful period of twenty-three years was however comprehended within the lives of the previous generation. A man twenty-five years old at the battle of Marathon, would have only just passed sixty years, when Herodotus had reached the age of thirty; a man twenty-five years old at the Ionic revolt, would have just passed seventy years when Herodotus had reached the same age. It is undoubtedly true that Herodotus would have had a fuller and more accurate knowledge of the Ionic revolt,(27) if, like the historian Hecatæus,

(26) Pliny, after citing some statements of Herodotus concerning ivory, proceeds thus: Tanta ebori auctoritas erat, urbis nostræ trecentesimo decimo anno (= 444 B.C.): tunc enim auctor ille historiam eam condidit Thuriis in Italiâ;' N. H. xii. 8. Lucian, Herod. c. 1, supposes him to have composed his history at Halicarnassus, before he visited Greece. The stories of his recitations, in late Greek writers, imply the belief that parts at least of his work were in existence before he went to Thurii. The arguments of Dahlmann, Herodot. p. 38-52, only prove that the composition of his work, as we have it, was not completed until he was an old man : they prove nothing as to the time when the materials for it were collected, and the composition was commenced.

(27) Niebuhr exaggerates the interval between the time of the events in the history of Herodotus, and the time when he collected the evidence respecting them, by assuming 420 B.c. as the year from which he reckons : in 420 B.C. Herodotus was sixty-four years old, and even if he composed his history at this age (of which there is no proof), it does not follow that his materials had not been previously obtained. When Herodotus wrote (he says), fifteen olympiads, that is, sixty years, had passed away since the expedition of Xerxes, and seventy years since the battle of Marathon. Now if before him no important historical work was written upon these events, pray consider what changes, during so long a period, may have taken place in a tradition which was not fixed by writing, and how many fabulous additions may have been made to it. It is well-known that the account of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt has already assumed, in the mouth of the Egyptian Arabs, such a fabulous appearance that it might seem to have required a century to develop it; and instances of the same kind occur frequently. At a time when an occurrence engrosses the mind of everybody, the account of it undergoes incredible changes; events are

he had taken part in the deliberations of the revolted Ionians; and of the Persian war, if, like Eschylus, he had fought at Marathon, Salamis, and Platea. (2) Nevertheless, many persons who were contemporaries of these events were alive in his time, and he had access to the testimony of actual witnesses.(29) His account of the affairs of Greece, from the Ionic revolt downwards, may therefore be considered as resting on a basis of authentic evidence.(30)

Whether Hellanicus narrated the Ionic revolt and the Persian war with more copiousness, and chronological accuracy, than the period between the Persian and Peloponnesian wars, we are ignorant:(1) but he stood to the history of that epoch in nearly

transposed from an earlier to a later time, and vice versâ ; we can scarcely form an idea of this vivacity and elasticity of traditions, because in our days everything is immediately put upon record;' Lect. on Anc. Hist. vol. i. p. 321. What the legendary accounts of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt which are related by the Arabs may be, I am ignorant; but assuming them to depart widely from the truth of history, this example of an illiterate credulous oriental people is not applicable to Herodotus, a cultivated, intelligent Greek, who, though he might not be a very severe and critical judge of evidence, was nevertheless inquisitive, honest, and desirous of ascertaining the truth, and too judicious to be satisfied with mere popular rumours.

(28) See the Life of Eschylus in Westermann's Biogr. Gr. p. 118. Paus. i. 14, § 5, mentions Marathon, Artemisium, and Salamis. Eschylus was born in 525 and died in 456 B.C.; he was therefore forty-one years older than Herodotus; and he died when Herodotus was twenty-eight years old. Pindar was born a few years after Eschylus.

(29) Herodotus states that he himself received from a certain Thersander, of Orchomenos, an account of a banquet given by Attaginus, of Thebes, to Mardonius and fifty of the most distinguished Persians, and also to fifty Thebans, a short time before the battle of Platea. Thersander described himself as having been invited to this banquet, and as having conversed with the Persian who reclined on the same couch with himself. The Persian (who was able to speak Greek) expressed his fear that a great catastrophe would befal the army of Mardonius, and his regret that prudent counsels met with no attention, as the gods had determined on their ruin. τὰ δὲ ἤδη τὰ ἐπίλοιπα (Herodotus says), ἤκουον Θερσάνδρου, ἀνδρὸς μὲν Ορχομενίου, λογίμου δὲ ἐς τὰ πρῶτα ἐν Ορχομενῷ. Afterwards he adds: ταῦτα μὲν τοῦ ̓Ορχομενίου Θερσάνδρου ἤκουον, καὶ τάδε πρὸς τούτοισι, ὡς αὐτὸς αὐτίκα λέγοι ταῦτα πρὸς ἀνθρώπους πρότερον ἢ γενέσθαι ἐν Πλαταιῇσι τὴν μáxmv, ix. 16. Herodotus likewise intimates that the curious account of the negotiation of Aristagoras with Cleomenes, king of Sparta, was related to him by Lacedæmonian informants; v. 49.

(30) Niebuhr considers the history of the Ionian revolt in Herodotus as 'true and certain;' ib. p. 322.

(31) Only one fragment relative to this period is extant; fragm. 81,

the same relation as Herodotus; inasmuch as he was only a youth of sixteen when the battles of Thermopyla and Salamis were fought; and his account of the contest with Persia must have been derived from the information of his seniors. Phrynichus, however, whose active career on the tragic stage of Athens lasted from 511 to 476 B.C., wrote two historical dramas, relating to events of this period; one, The Capture of Miletus, which described the conquest of that city by the Persians, in 494 B.C. ;(2) the other, The Phoenissæ, which described the defeat of Xerxes.(3) The Persians of Æschylus, the subject of which is stated to have been imitated from that of The Phonissa of Phrynichus, likewise contains the testimony of a contemporary, not only to the defeat of Xerxes at Salamis, and his disastrous retreat through Thessaly and Thrace, but also to the bridge of boats constructed across the Hellespont, and the subsequent battle of Platea. (34) Simonides of Ceos, who was born in 556 and died in 467 B.C., and whose lifetime therefore extended over the entire period of the Persian war, likewise commemorated all the principal feats of Grecian heroism during that conflict, in epigrams, intended for various public monuments in different parts of Greece, as well as in other occasional poems. (35)

§ 6 So much of the relations of Greece and Persia as is subsequent to the Ionic revolt lay completely within the horizon of the generation who preceded Herodotus, and with whom he conversed. This can hardly be said of the earlier portion of the reign of Darius (521–502 B.C.): a man who was twenty-five

see Mure, ib. p. 229. The great majority of the passages cited from Hellanicus relate to the mythical period; see Fragm. Hist. Gr. vol. i. p. 45-69.

(32) Herod. vi. 21. See Grote, vol. iv. P. 416.

(33) See Arg. ad Esch. Pers., where it is said of this play: evouxós ἐστιν ἀγγέλλων ἐν ἀρχῇ τὴν τοῦ Ξέρξου ήτταν στρωννύς τε θρόνους τινὰς τοῖς Tñç aρxns πapéépots. See Blomfield, Præf. ad Pers. p. iii.; Wagner, Poet. Trag. Gr. Fragm. vol. iii. p. 8.

(34) See Esch. Pers. 65-71, 722. 745-8, 803—20. The battle of Marathon is likewise mentioned in v. 475. The Persæ of Eschylus was acted in 472 B.C., eight years after the battle of Salamis.

(35) See fragm. 58, 59, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 165, 166, 167, 187, 188, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 193, 199, 200; ed. Schneidewin.