{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_56342/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_56342","id":"gutenberg_56342","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/56342","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Ancient","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Greece -- History"],"text":"Produced by Henry Flower, Adrian Mastronardi, Ramon Pajares\nBox and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\nhttp://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images\ngenerously made available by The Internet Archive/American\nLibraries.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTRANSCRIBER'S NOTE\n\n  * Italics are denoted by underscores as in _italics_.\n  * Small caps are represented in upper case as in SMALL CAPS.\n  * Letter spaced Greek text is enclosed in tildes as in ~\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\n    \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03ac~.\n  * Footnotes have been renumbered and placed at the end of the\n    paragraph that includes their anchor.\n  * Obvious printer errors have been silently corrected, after\n    comparison with a later edition of this work. Greek text has\n    also been corrected after checking with this later edition and\n    with Perseus, when the reference was found.\n  * Original spelling, hyphenation and punctuation have been kept,\n    but variant spellings were made consistent when a predominant\n    usage was found.\n  * Nevertheless, inconsistent rendition of proper nouns (Acrisios\n    and Akrisios, Myc\u00ean\u00e6 and Myk\u00ean\u00e6, Athos and Ath\u00f4s, D\u00e6dalus and\n    D\u00e6dalos) have been kept, noting that this edition does not follow\n    completely the rules for transcription of Greek names announced\n    in the Preface, pp. xv-xvi.\n  * In most cross-references, target pages do not correspond with\n    pages in this edition.\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: GEORGE GROTE.]\n\n\n\n\n  HISTORY OF GREECE.\n\n  I. Legendary Greece.\n\n  II. Grecian History to the Reign of\n  Peisistratus at Athens.\n\n  BY\n  GEORGE GROTE, ESQ.\n\n  VOL. I.\n\n  REPRINTED FROM THE SECOND LONDON EDITION\n\n  NEW YORK:\n  HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS,\n  329 AND 331 PEARL STREET.\n  1880.\n\n\n\n\nPART I.\u2014LEGENDARY GREECE\n\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f33 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u1f29\u03bc\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u1f10\u03c1\u1fc3 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u1fc3.\u2014HESIOD\n\nPART II.\u2014HISTORICAL GREECE.\n\n    ... \u03a0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\u2014HOMER\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThe first idea of this History was conceived many years ago, at a time\nwhen ancient Hellas was known to the English public chiefly through\nthe pages of Mitford; and my purpose in writing it was to rectify\nthe erroneous statements as to matter of fact which that History\ncontained, as well as to present the general phenomena of the Grecian\nworld under what I thought a juster and more comprehensive point of\nview. My leisure, however, was not at that time equal to the execution\nof any large literary undertaking; nor is it until within the last\nthree or four years that I have been able to devote to the work that\ncontinuous and exclusive labor, without which, though much may be done\nto illustrate detached points, no entire or complicated subject can\never be set forth in a manner worthy to meet the public eye.\n\nMeanwhile the state of the English literary world, in reference to\nancient Hellas, has been materially changed in more ways than one. If\nmy early friend Dr. Thirlwall\u2019s History of Greece had appeared a few\nyears sooner, I should probably never have conceived the design of the\npresent work at all; I should certainly not have been prompted to the\ntask by any deficiencies, such as those which I felt and regretted in\nMitford. The comparison of the two authors affords, indeed, a striking\nproof of the progress of sound and enlarged views respecting the\nancient world during the present generation. Having studied of course\nthe same evidences as Dr. Thirwall, I am better enabled than others\nto bear testimony to the learning, the sagacity, and the candor which\npervade his excellent work: and it is the more incumbent on me to give\nexpression to this sentiment, since the particular points on which I\nshall have occasion to advert to it will, unavoidably, be points of\ndissent oftener than of coincidence.\n\nThe liberal spirit of criticism, in which Dr. Thirwall stands so much\ndistinguished from Mitford, is his own: there are other features of\nsuperiority which belong to him conjointly with his age. For during\nthe generation since Mitford\u2019s work, philological studies have been\nprosecuted in Germany with remarkable success: the stock of facts and\ndocuments, comparatively scanty, handed down from the ancient world,\nhas been combined and illustrated in a thousand different ways: and\nif our witnesses cannot be multiplied, we at least have numerous\ninterpreters to catch, repeat, amplify, and explain their broken\nand half-inaudible depositions. Some of the best writers in this\ndepartment\u2014Boeckh, Niebuhr, O. M\u00fcller\u2014have been translated into our\nlanguage; so that the English public has been enabled to form some\nidea of the new lights thrown upon many subjects of antiquity by the\ninestimable aid of German erudition. The poets, historians, orators,\nand philosophers of Greece, have thus been all rendered both more\nintelligible and more instructive than they were to a student in the\nlast century; and the general picture of the Grecian world may now be\nconceived with a degree of fidelity, which, considering our imperfect\nmaterials, it is curious to contemplate.\n\nIt is that general picture which an historian of Greece is required\nfirst to embody in his own mind, and next to lay out before his\nreaders;\u2014a picture not merely such as to delight the imagination by\nbrilliancy of coloring and depth of sentiment, but also suggestive\nand improving to the reason. Not omitting the points of resemblance\nas well as of contrast with the better-known forms of modern society,\nhe will especially study to exhibit the spontaneous movement of\nGrecian intellect, sometimes aided but never borrowed from without,\nand lighting up a small portion of a world otherwise clouded and\nstationary. He will develop the action of that social system, which,\nwhile insuring to the mass of freemen a degree of protection elsewhere\nunknown, acted as a stimulus to the creative impulses of genius, and\nleft the superior minds sufficiently unshackled to soar above religious\nand political routine, to overshoot their own age, and to become the\nteachers of posterity.\n\nTo set forth the history of a people by whom the first spark was set to\nthe dormant intellectual capacities of our nature,\u2014Hellenic phenomena,\nas illustrative of the Hellenic mind and character,\u2014is the task\nwhich I propose to myself in the present work; not without a painful\nconsciousness how much the deed falls short of the will, and a yet\nmore painful conviction, that full success is rendered impossible by\nan obstacle which no human ability can now remedy,\u2014the insufficiency\nof original evidence. For, in spite of the valuable expositions of\nso many able commentators, our stock of information respecting the\nancient world still remains lamentably inadequate to the demands of an\nenlightened curiosity. We possess only what has drifted ashore from the\nwreck of a stranded vessel; and though this includes some of the most\nprecious articles amongst its once abundant cargo, yet if any man will\ncast his eyes over the citations in Diogenes La\u00ebrtius, Athen\u00e6us, or\nPlutarch, or the list of names in Vossius de Historicis Gr\u00e6cis, he will\nsee with grief and surprise how much larger is the proportion which,\nthrough the enslavement of the Greeks themselves, the decline of the\nRoman Empire, the change of religion, and the irruption of barbarian\nconquerors, has been irrecoverably submerged. We are thus reduced to\njudge of he whole Hellenic world, eminently multiform as it was, from\na few compositions; excellent, indeed, in themselves, but bearing too\nexclusively the stamp of Athens. Of Thucydides and Aristotle, indeed,\nboth as inquirers into matter of fact, and as free from narrow local\nfeeling, it is impossible to speak too highly; but, unfortunately,\nthat work of the latter which would have given us the most copious\ninformation regarding Grecian political life\u2014his collection and\ncomparison of one hundred and fifty distinct town constitutions\u2014has\nnot been preserved: and the brevity of Thucydides often gives us but\na single word where a sentence would not have been too much, and\nsentences which we should be glad to see expanded into paragraphs.\n\nSuch insufficiency of original and trustworthy materials, as\ncompared with those resources which are thought hardly sufficient\nfor the historian of any modern kingdom, is neither to be concealed\nnor extenuated, however much we may lament it. I advert to the\npoint here on more grounds than one. For it not only limits the\namount of information which an historian of Greece can give to his\nreaders,\u2014compelling him to leave much of his picture an absolute\nblank,\u2014but it also greatly spoils the execution of the remainder. The\nquestion of credibility is perpetually obtruding itself, and requiring\na decision, which, whether favorable or unfavorable, always introduces\nmore or less of controversy; and gives to those outlines, which the\ninterest of the picture requires to be straight and vigorous, a faint\nand faltering character. Expressions of qualified and hesitating\naffirmation are repeated until the reader is sickened; while the writer\nhimself, to whom this restraint is more painful still, is frequently\ntempted to break loose from the unseen spell by which a conscientious\ncriticism binds him down,\u2014to screw up the possible and probable\ninto certainty, to suppress counterbalancing considerations, and to\nsubstitute a pleasing romance in place of half-known and perplexing\nrealities. Desiring, in the present work, to set forth all which can be\nascertained, together with such conjectures and inferences as can be\nreasonably deduced from it, but nothing more,\u2014I notice, at the outset,\nthat faulty state of the original evidence which renders discussions of\ncredibility, and hesitation in the language of the judge, unavoidable.\nSuch discussions, though the reader may be assured that they will\nbecome less frequent as we advance into times better known, are\ntiresome enough, even with the comparatively late period which I adopt\nas the historical beginning; much more intolerable would they have\nproved, had I thought it my duty to start from the primitive terminus\nof Deukali\u00f4n or Inachus, or from the unburied Pelasgi and Leleges,\nand to subject the heroic ages to a similar scrutiny. I really know\nnothing so disheartening or unrequited as the elaborate balancing of\nwhat is called evidence,\u2014the comparison of infinitesimal probabilities\nand conjectures all uncertified,\u2014in regard to these shadowy times and\npersons.\n\nThe law respecting sufficiency of evidence ought to be the same for\nancient times as for modern; and the reader will find in this History\nan application, to the former, of criteria analogous to those which\nhave been long recognized in the latter. Approaching, though with a\ncertain measure of indulgence, to this standard, I begin the real\nhistory of Greece with the first recorded Olympiad, or 776 B. C. To\nsuch as are accustomed to the habits once universal, and still not\nuncommon, in investigating the ancient world, I may appear to be\nstriking off one thousand years from the scroll of history; but to\nthose whose canon of evidence is derived from Mr. Hallam, M. Sismondi,\nor any other eminent historian of modern events, I am well assured that\nI shall appear lax and credulous rather than exigent or sceptical. For\nthe truth is, that historical records, properly so called, do not begin\nuntil long after this date: nor will any man, who candidly considers\nthe extreme paucity of attested facts for two centuries after 776 B.\nC., be astonished to learn that the state of Greece in 900, 1000, 1100,\n1200, 1300, 1400 B. C., etc.,\u2014or any earlier century which it may\nplease chronologists to include in their computed genealogies,\u2014cannot\nbe described to him upon anything like decent evidence. I shall hope,\nwhen I come to the lives of Socrates and Plato, to illustrate one of\nthe most valuable of their principles,\u2014that conscious and confessed\nignorance is a better state of mind, than the fancy, without the\nreality, of knowledge. Meanwhile, I begin by making that confession,\nin reference to the real world of Greece anterior to the Olympiads;\nmeaning the disclaimer to apply to anything like a general history,\u2014not\nto exclude rigorously every individual event.\n\nThe times which I thus set apart from the region of history are\ndiscernible only through a different atmosphere,\u2014that of epic poetry\nand legend. To confound together these disparate matters is, in my\njudgment, essentially unphilosophical. I describe the earlier times by\nthemselves, as conceived by the faith and feeling of the first Greeks,\nand known only through their legends,\u2014without presuming to measure how\nmuch or how little of historical matter these legends may contain. If\nthe reader blame me for not assisting him to determine this,\u2014if he ask\nme why I do not undraw the curtain and disclose the picture,\u2014I reply in\nthe words of the painter Zeuxis, when the same question was addressed\nto him on exhibiting his master-piece of imitative art: \u201cThe curtain is\nthe picture.\u201d What we now read as poetry and legend was once accredited\nhistory, and the only genuine history which the first Greeks could\nconceive or relish of their past time: the curtain conceals nothing\nbehind, and cannot, by any ingenuity, be withdrawn. I undertake only to\nshow it as it stands,\u2014not to efface, still less to repaint it.\n\nThree-fourths of the two volumes now presented to the public are\ndestined to elucidate this age of historical faith, as distinguished\nfrom the later age of historical reason: to exhibit its basis in the\nhuman mind,\u2014an omnipresent religious and personal interpretation of\nnature; to illustrate it by comparison with the like mental habit\nin early modern Europe; to show its immense abundance and variety\nof narrative matter, with little care for consistency between one\nstory and another; lastly, to set forth the causes which overgrew and\npartially supplanted the old epical sentiment, and introduced, in the\nroom of literal faith, a variety of compromises and interpretations.\n\nThe legendary age of the Greeks receives its principal charm and\ndignity from the Homeric poems: to these, therefore, and to the other\npoems included in the ancient epic, an entire chapter is devoted,\nthe length of which must be justified by the names of the Iliad and\nOdyssey. I have thought it my duty to take some notice of the Wolfian\ncontroversy as it now stands in Germany, and have even hazarded some\nspeculations respecting the structure of the Iliad. The society and\nmanners of the heroic age, considered as known in a general way from\nHomer\u2019s descriptions and allusions, are also described and criticized.\n\nI next pass to the historical age, beginning at 776 B. C.; prefixing\nsome remarks upon the geographical features of Greece. I try to make\nout, amidst obscure and scanty indications, what the state of Greece\nwas at this period; and I indulge some cautious conjectures, founded\nupon the earliest verifiable facts, respecting the steps immediately\nantecedent by which that condition was brought about. In the present\nvolumes, I have only been able to include the history of Sparta and the\nPeloponnesian Dorians, down to the age of Peisistratus and Cr\u0153sus. I\nhad hoped to have comprised in them the entire history of Greece down\nto this last-mentioned period, but I find the space insufficient.\n\nThe history of Greece falls most naturally into six compartments, of\nwhich the first may be looked at as a period of preparation for the\nfive following, which exhaust the free life of collective Hellas.\n\nI. Period from 776 B. C. to 560 B. C., the accession of Peisistratus at\nAthens and of Cr\u0153sus in Lydia.\n\nII. From the accession of Peisistratus and Cr\u0153sus to the repulse of\nXerxes from Greece.\n\nIII. From the repulse of Xerxes to the close of the Peloponnesian war\nand overthrow of Athens.\n\nIV. From the close of the Peloponnesian war to the battle of Leuktra.\n\nV. From the battle of Leuktra to that of Ch\u00e6roneia.\n\nVI. From the battle of Ch\u00e6roneia to the end of the generation of\nAlexander.\n\nThe five periods, from Peisistratus down to the death of Alexander and\nof his generation, present the acts of an historical drama capable\nof being recounted in perspicuous succession, and connected by a\nsensible thread of unity. I shall interweave in their proper places\nthe important but outlying adventures of the Sicilian and Italian\nGreeks,\u2014introducing such occasional notices of Grecian political\nconstitutions, philosophy, poetry, and oratory, as are requisite to\nexhibit the many-sided activity of this people during their short but\nbrilliant career.\n\nAfter the generation of Alexander, the political action of Greece\nbecomes cramped and degraded,\u2014no longer interesting to the reader, or\noperative on the destinies of the future world. We may, indeed, name\none or two incidents, especially the revolutions of Agis and Kleomen\u00eas\nat Sparta, which are both instructive and affecting; but as a whole,\nthe period, between 300 B. C. and the absorption of Greece by the\nRomans, is of no interest in itself, and is only so far of value as\nit helps us to understand the preceding centuries. The dignity and\nvalue of the Greeks from that time forward belong to them only as\nindividual philosophers, preceptors, astronomers, and mathematicians,\nliterary men and critics, medical practitioners, etc. In all these\nrespective capacities, especially in the great schools of philosophical\nspeculation they still constitute the light of the Roman world; though,\nas communities, they have lost their own orbit, and have become\nsatellites of more powerful neighbors.\n\nI propose to bring down the history of the Grecian communities to\nthe year 300 B. C., or the close of the generation which takes its\nname from Alexander the Great, and I hope to accomplish this in eight\nvolumes altogether. For the next two or three volumes I have already\nlarge preparations made, and I shall publish my third (perhaps my\nfourth) in the course of the ensuing winter.\n\nThere are great disadvantages in the publication of one portion of\na history apart from the remainder; for neither the earlier nor the\nlater phenomena can be fully comprehended without the light which each\nmutually casts upon the other. But the practice has become habitual,\nand is indeed more than justified by the well-known inadmissibility\nof \u201clong hopes\u201d into the short span of human life. Yet I cannot but\nfear that my first two volumes will suffer in the estimation of many\nreaders by coming out alone,\u2014and that men who value the Greeks for\ntheir philosophy, their politics, and their oratory, may treat the\nearly legends as not worth attention. And it must be confessed that the\nsentimental attributes of the Greek mind\u2014its religious and poetical\nvein\u2014here appear in disproportionate relief, as compared with its\nmore vigorous and masculine capacities,\u2014with those powers of acting,\norganizing, judging, and speculating, which will be revealed in the\nforthcoming volumes. I venture, however, to forewarn the reader, that\nthere will occur numerous circumstances in the after political life of\nthe Greeks, which he will not comprehend unless he be initiated into\nthe course of their legendary associations. He will not understand\nthe frantic terror of the Athenian public during the Peloponnesian\nwar, on the occasion of the mutilation of the statues called Herm\u00e6,\nunless he enters into the way in which they connected their stability\nand security with the domiciliation of the gods in the soil: nor will\nhe adequately appreciate the habit of the Spartan king on military\nexpeditions,\u2014when he offered his daily public sacrifices on behalf of\nhis army and his country,\u2014\u201calways to perform this morning service\nimmediately before sunrise, in order that he might be beforehand in\nobtaining the favor of the gods,\u201d[1] if he be not familiar with the\nHomeric conception of Zeus going to rest at night and awaking to rise\nat early dawn from the side of the \u201cwhite-armed H\u00ear\u00ea.\u201d The occasion\nwill, indeed, often occur for remarking how these legends illustrate\nand vivify the political phenomena of the succeeding times, and I have\nonly now to urge the necessity of considering them as the beginning of\na series,\u2014not as an entire work.\n\n  [1] Xenophon, Repub. Laced\u00e6mon. cap. xiii. 3. \u1f08\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03b8\u03cd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bd\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b5\u1f54\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\n  LONDON, March 5, 1846.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION OF VOLUMES I. AND II.\n\n\nIn preparing a Second Edition of the first two volumes of my History,\nI have profited by the remarks and corrections of various critics,\ncontained in Reviews, both English and foreign. I have suppressed, or\nrectified, some positions which had been pointed out as erroneous,\nor as advanced upon inadequate evidence. I have strengthened my\nargument in some cases where it appeared to have been imperfectly\nunderstood,\u2014adding some new notes, partly for the purpose of enlarged\nillustration, partly to defend certain opinions which had been called\nin question. The greater number of these alterations have been made in\nChapters XVI. and XXI. of Part I., and in Chapter VI. of Part II.\n\nI trust that these three Chapters, more full of speculation, and\ntherefore more open to criticism than any of the others, will thus\nappear in a more complete and satisfactory form. But I must at the same\ntime add that they remain for the most part unchanged in substance, and\nthat I have seen no sufficient reason to modify my main conclusions\neven respecting the structure of the Iliad, controverted though they\nhave been by some of my most esteemed critics.\n\nIn regard to the character and peculiarity of Grecian legend, as\nbroadly distinguished throughout these volumes from Grecian history,\nI desire to notice two valuable publications with which I have\nonly become acquainted since the date of my first edition. One of\nthese is, A Short Essay on Prim\u00e6val History, by John Kenrick, M. A.\n(London, 1846, published just at the same time as these volumes,)\nwhich illustrates with much acute reflection the general features\nof legend, not only in Greece but throughout the ancient world,\u2014see\nespecially pages 65, 84, 92, _et seq._ The other work is, Rambles and\nRecollections of an Indian Official, by Colonel Sleeman,\u2014first made\nknown to me through an excellent notice of my History in the Edinburgh\nReview for October 1846. The description given by Colonel Sleeman, of\nthe state of mind now actually prevalent among the native population of\nHindostan, presents a vivid comparison, helping the modern reader to\nunderstand and appreciate the legendary era of Greece. I have embodied\nin the notes of this Second Edition two or three passages from Colonel\nSleeman\u2019s instructive work: but the whole of it richly deserves perusal.\n\nHaving now finished six volumes of this History, without attaining\na lower point than the peace of Nikias, in the tenth year of the\nPeloponnesian war,\u2014I find myself compelled to retract the expectation\nheld out in the preface to my First Edition, that the entire work might\nbe completed in eight volumes. Experience proves to me how impossible\nit is to measure beforehand the space which historical subjects will\nrequire. All I can now promise is, that the remainder of the work shall\nbe executed with as much regard to brevity as is consistent with the\nparamount duty of rendering it fit for public acceptance.\n\n\n  London, April 3, 1849.\n\n\n\n\nNAMES OF GODS, GODDESSES, AND HEROES.\n\n\nFollowing the example of Dr. Thirlwall and other excellent scholars, I\ncall the Greek deities by their real Greek names, and not by the Latin\nequivalents used among the Romans. For the assistance of those readers\nto whom the Greek names may be less familiar, I here annex a table of\nthe one and the other.\n\n  _Greek._               _Latin._\n\n  Zeus,                   Jupiter.\n  Poseid\u00f4n,               Neptune.\n  Ar\u00eas,                   Mars.\n  Dionysus,               Bacchus.\n  Herm\u00eas,                 Mercury.\n  H\u00ealios,                 Sol.\n  H\u00eaph\u00e6stus,              Vulcan.\n  Had\u00eas,                  Pluto.\n\n  H\u00ear\u00ea,                   Juno.\n  Ath\u00ean\u00ea,                 Minerva.\n  Artemis,                Diana.\n  Aphrodit\u00ea,              Venus.\n  E\u00f4s,                    Aurora.\n  Hestia,                 Vesta.\n  L\u00eat\u00f4,                   Latona.\n  D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear,                Ceres.\n\n  H\u00earakl\u00eas,               Hercules.\n  Askl\u00eapius,              \u00c6sculapius.\n\nA few words are here necessary respecting the orthography of Greek\nnames adopted in the above table and generally throughout this history.\nI have approximated as nearly as I dared to the Greek letters in\npreference to the Latin; and on this point I venture upon an innovation\nwhich I should have little doubt of vindicating before the reason of\nany candid English student. For the ordinary practice of substituting,\nin a Greek name, the English C in place of the Greek K, is, indeed, so\nobviously incorrect, that it admits of no rational justification. Our\nown K, precisely and in every point, coincides with the Greek K: we\nhave thus the means of reproducing the Greek name to the eye as well\nas to the ear, yet we gratuitously take the wrong letter in preference\nto the right. And the precedent of the Latins is here against us\nrather than in our favor, for their C really coincided in sound with\nthe Greek K, whereas our C entirely departs from it, and becomes an S,\nbefore _e_, _i_, _\u00e6_, _\u0153_, and _y_. Though our C has so far deviated in\nsound from the Latin C, yet there is some warrant for our continuing\nto use it in writing Latin names,\u2014because we thus reproduce the name\nto the eye, though not to the ear. But this is not the case when we\nemploy our C to designate the Greek K, for we depart here not less\nfrom the visible than from the audible original; while we mar the\nunrivalled euphony of the Greek language by that multiplied sibilation\nwhich constitutes the least inviting feature in our own. Among German\nphilologists, the K is now universally employed in writing Greek names,\nand I have adopted it pretty largely in this work, making exception for\nsuch names as the English reader has been so accustomed to hear with\nthe C, that they may be considered as being almost Anglicised. I have,\nfarther, marked the long _e_ and the long _o_ (\u03b7, \u03c9,) by a circumflex\n(H\u00ear\u00ea) when they occur in the last syllable or in the penultimate of a\nname.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\nVOL. I.\n\n\nPART I.\n\nLEGENDARY GREECE.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nLEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS.\n\n  Opening of the mythical world.\u2014How the mythes are to be\n  told.\u2014Allegory rarely admissible.\u2014Zeus\u2014foremost in Grecian\n  conception.\u2014The gods\u2014how conceived: human type enlarged.\u2014Past\n  history of the gods fitted on to present conceptions.\u2014Chaos.\u2014G\u00e6a\n  and Uranos.\u2014Uranos disabled.\u2014Kronos and the Titans.\u2014Kronos\n  overreached.\u2014Birth and safety of Zeus and his brethren.\u2014Other\n  deities.\u2014Ambitious schemes of Zeus.\u2014Victory of Zeus and\n  his brethren over Kronos and the Titans.\u2014Typh\u00f4eus.\u2014Dynasty\n  of Zeus.\u2014His offspring.\u2014General distribution of the divine\n  race.\u2014Hesiodic theogony\u2014its authority.\u2014Points of difference\n  between Homer and Hesiod.\u2014Homeric Zeus.\u2014Amplified theogony of\n  Zens.\u2014Hesiodic mythes traceable to Kr\u00eate and Delphi.\u2014Orphic\n  theogony.\u2014Zeus and Phan\u00eas.\u2014Zagreus.\u2014Comparison of Hesiod and\n  Orpheus.\u2014Influence of foreign religions upon Greece\u2014Especially\n  in regard to the worship of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear and Dionysos.\u2014Purification\n  for homicide unknown to Homer.\u2014New and peculiar religious\n  rites.\u2014Circulated by voluntary teachers and promising special\n  blessings.\u2014Epimenid\u00eas, Sibylla, Bakis.\u2014Principal mysteries\n  of Greece.\u2014Ecstatic rites introduced from Asia 700-500 B.\n  C.\u2014Connected with the worship of Dionysos.\u2014Thracian and Egyptian\n  influence upon Greece.\u2014Encouragement to mystic legends.\u2014Melampus\n  the earliest name as teacher of the Dionysiac rites.\u2014Orphic\n  sect, a variety of the Dionysiac mystics.\u2014Contrast of the\n  mysteries with the Homeric Hymns.\u2014Hymn to Dionysos.\u2014Alteration\n  of the primitive Grecian idea of Dionysos.\u2014Asiatic frenzy\n  grafted on the joviality of the Grecian Dionysia.\u2014Eleusinian\n  mysteries.\u2014Homeric Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear.\u2014Temple of Eleusis, built\n  by order of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear for her residence.\u2014D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear prescribes the\n  mystic ritual of Eleusis.\u2014Homeric Hymn a sacred Eleusinian\n  record, explanatory of the details of divine service.\u2014Importance\n  of the mysteries to the town of Eleusis.\u2014Strong hold of the\n  legend upon Eleusinian feelings.\u2014Different legends respecting\n  D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear elsewhere.\u2014Expansion of the legends.\u2014Hellenic importance\n  of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear.\u2014Legends of Apollo.\u2014Delian Apollo.\u2014Pythian\n  Apollo.\u2014Foundation legends of the Delphian oracle.\u2014They served\n  the purpose of historical explanation.\u2014Extended worship of\n  Apollo.\u2014Multifarious local legends respecting Apollo.\u2014Festivals\n  and Ag\u00f4nes.\u2014State of mind and circumstances out of which\n  Grecian mythes arose.\u2014Discrepancies in the legends little\n  noticed.\u2014Aphrodit\u00ea.\u2014Ath\u00ean\u00ea.\u2014Artemis.\u2014Poseid\u00f4n.\u2014Stories\n  of temporary servitude imposed on\n  gods.\u2014H\u00ear\u00ea.\u2014H\u00eaph\u00e6stos.\u2014Hestia.\u2014Herm\u00eas.\u2014Herm\u00eas inventor of the\n  lyre.\u2014Bargain between Herm\u00eas and Apollo.\u2014Expository value of the\n  Hymn.\u2014Zeus.\u2014Mythes arising out of the religious ceremonies.\u2014Small\n  part of the animal sacrificed.\u2014Prom\u00eatheus had outwitted\n  Zeus.\u2014Gods, heroes, and men, appear together in the mythes.\n                                                            _pages_ 1-64\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nLEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN.\n\n  Races of men as they appear in the Hesiodic \u201cWorks and Days.\u201d\u2014The\n  Golden.\u2014The Silver.\u2014The Brazen.\u2014The Heroic.\u2014The Iron.\u2014Different\n  both from the Theogony and from Homer.\u2014Explanation of this\n  difference.\u2014Ethical vein of sentiment.\u2014Intersected by the\n  mythical.\u2014The \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d earliest didactic poem.\u2014First\n  Introduction of d\u00e6mons.\u2014Changes in the idea of d\u00e6mons.\u2014Employed\n  in attacks on the pagan faith.\u2014Functions of the Hesiodic\n  d\u00e6mons.\u2014Personal feeling which pervades the \u201cWorks and\n  Days.\u201d\u2014Probable age of the poem.                                 64-73\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nLEGEND OF THE IAPETIDS.\n\n  Iapetids in Hesiod.\u2014Prom\u00eatheus and Epim\u00eatheus.\u2014Counter-man\u0153uvring\n  of Prom\u00eatheus and Zeus.\u2014Pand\u00f4ra.\u2014Pand\u00f4ra in the\n  Theogony.\u2014General feeling of the poet.\u2014Man wretched, but\n  Zeus not to blame.\u2014Mischiefs arising from women.\u2014Punishment\n  of Prom\u00eatheus.\u2014The Prom\u00eatheus of \u00c6schylus.\u2014Locality in which\n  Prom\u00eatheus was confined.                                         73-80\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nHEROIC LEGENDS.\u2014GENEALOGY OF ARGUS.\n\n  Structure and purposes of Grecian genealogies.\u2014To connect the\n  Grecian community with their common god.\u2014Lower members of\n  the genealogy historical\u2014higher members non-historical.\u2014The\n  non-historical portion equally believed, and most valued by the\n  Greeks.\u2014Number of such genealogies\u2014pervading every fraction\n  of Greeks.\u2014Argeian genealogy.\u2014Inachus.\u2014Phor\u00f4neus.\u2014Argos\n  Panopt\u00eas.\u2014I\u00f4.\u2014Romance of I\u00f4 historicized by Persians and\n  Ph\u0153nicians.\u2014Legendary abductions of heroines adapted to\n  the feelings prevalent during the Persian war.\u2014Danaos and\n  the Dana\u00efdes.\u2014Acrisios and Pr\u0153tos.\u2014The Pr\u0153tides cured of\n  frenzy by Melampus.\u2014Acrisios, Dana\u00ea, and Zeus.\u2014Perseus and\n  the Gorgons.\u2014Foundation of Myc\u00ean\u00e6\u2014commencement of Perseid\n  dynasty.\u2014Amphitry\u00f4n, Alkm\u00ean\u00ea, Sthenelos.\u2014Zeus and Alkm\u00ean\u00ea.\u2014Birth\n  of H\u00earakl\u00eas.\u2014Homeric legend of his birth: its expository\n  value.\u2014The H\u00earakleids expelled.\u2014Their recovery of Peloponn\u00easus\n  and establishment in Argos, Sparta, and Mess\u00eania.                80-95\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nDEUKALION, HELLEN, AND SONS OF HELLEN.\n\n  Deukali\u00f4n, son of Prom\u00eatheus.\u2014Phthi\u00f4tis: his permanent\n  seat.\u2014General deluge.\u2014Salvation of Deukali\u00f4n and Pyrrha.\u2014Belief\n  in this deluge throughout Greece.\u2014Hell\u00ean and Amphikty\u00f4n.\u2014Sons\n  of Hell\u00ean: D\u00f4rus, Xuthus, \u00c6olus.\u2014Amphiktyonic assembly.\u2014Common\n  solemnities and games.\u2014Division of Hellas: \u00c6olians, D\u00f4rians,\n  I\u00f4nians.\u2014Large extent of D\u00f4ris implied in this genealogy.\u2014This\n  form of the legend harmonizes with the great establishments of\n  the historical D\u00f4rians.\u2014Ach\u00e6us\u2014purpose which his name serves in\n  the legend.\u2014Genealogical diversities.                           96-105\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nTHE \u00c6OLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF \u00c6OLUS.\n\n  Legends of Greece, originally isolated, afterwards\n  thrown into series.\u2014_\u00c6olus._\u2014His seven sons and five\n  daughters.\u20141. _First \u00c6olid line_\u2014Salm\u00f4neus, Tyr\u00f4.\u2014Pelias\n  and N\u00ealeus.\u2014P\u00ear\u00f4, Bias, and Melampus.\u2014Periklymenos.\u2014Nestor\n  and his exploits.\u2014N\u00ealeids down to Kodrus.\u2014_Second \u00c6olid\n  line_\u2014Kr\u00eatheus.\u2014Adm\u00eatus and Alc\u00eastis.\u2014P\u00ealeus and the wife\n  of Acastus.\u2014Pelias and Jas\u00f4n.\u2014Jas\u00f4n and M\u00eadea.\u2014M\u00eadea at\n  Corinth.\u2014_Third \u00c6olid line_\u2014Sisyphus.\u2014Corinthian genealogy\n  of Eum\u00ealus.\u2014Coalescence of different legends about M\u00eadea and\n  Sisyphus.\u2014Belleroph\u00f4n.\u2014_Fourth \u00c6olid line_\u2014Athamas.\u2014Phryxus\n  and Hell\u00ea.\u2014In\u00f4 and Pal\u00e6m\u00f4n\u2014Isthmian games.\u2014Local root of the\n  legend of Athamas.\u2014Traces of ancient human sacrifices.\u2014Athamas\n  in the district near Orchomenos.\u2014Eteokl\u00eas\u2014festival of the\n  Charit\u00easia.\u2014Foundation and greatness of Orchomenos.\u2014Overthrow by\n  H\u00earakl\u00eas and the Thebans.\u2014Troph\u00f4nius and Agam\u00ead\u00eas.\u2014Ascalaphos and\n  Ialmenos.\u2014Discrepancies in the Orchomenian genealogy.\u2014Probable\n  inferences as to the ante-historical Orchomenos.\u2014Its early wealth\n  and industry.\u2014Emissaries of the lake K\u00f4pa\u00efs.\u2014Old Amphiktyony at\n  Kalauria.\u2014Orchomenos and Theb\u00eas.\u2014Alcyon\u00ea and K\u00eayx.\u2014Canac\u00ea.\u2014The\n  Al\u00f4ids.\u2014Calyc\u00ea.\u2014Elis and \u00c6t\u00f4lia.\u2014Eleian genealogy.\u2014Augeas.\u2014The\n  Molionid brothers.\u2014Variations in the Eleian genealogy.\u2014\u00c6t\u00f4lian\n  genealogy.\u2014\u0152neus, Meleager, Tydeus.\u2014Legend of Meleager in\n  Homer.\u2014How altered by the poets after Homer.\u2014Alth\u00e6a and the\n  burning brand.\u2014Grand Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt.\u2014Atalanta.\u2014Relics of\n  the boar long preserved at Tegea.\u2014Atalanta vanquished in the race\n  by stratagem.\u2014Deianeira.\u2014Death of H\u00earakl\u00eas.\u2014Tydeus.\u2014Old age of\n  \u0152neus.\u2014Discrepant genealogies.                                 105-153\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nTHE PELOPIDS.\n\n  Misfortunes and celebrity of the Pelopids.\u2014Pelops\u2014eponym of\n  Peloponn\u00easus.\u2014Deduction of the sceptre of Pelops.\u2014Kingly\n  attributes of the family.\u2014Homeric Pelops.\u2014Lydia, Pisa, etc.,\n  post-Homeric additions.\u2014Tantalus.\u2014Niob\u00ea.\u2014Pelops and \u0152nomaus,\n  king of Pisa.\u2014Chariot victory of Pelops\u2014his principality at\n  Pisa.\u2014Atreus, Thyest\u00eas, Chrysippus.\u2014Family horrors among the\n  Pelopids.\u2014Agamemn\u00f4n and Menelaus.\u2014Orest\u00eas.\u2014The goddess H\u00ear\u00ea and\n  Myk\u00ean\u00e6.\u2014Legendary importance of Myk\u00ean\u00e6.\u2014Its decline coincident\n  with the rise of Argos and Sparta.\u2014Agamemn\u00f4n and Orest\u00eas\n  transferred to Sparta.                                         153-167\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\nLACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES.\n\n  Lelex\u2014autochthonous in Lac\u00f4nia.\u2014Tyndareus and L\u00eada.\u2014Offspring\n  of L\u00eada.\u20141. Cast\u00f4r, Timandra, Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, 2. Pollux,\n  Helen.\u2014Cast\u00f4r and Pollux.\u2014Legend of the Attic Dekeleia.\u2014Idas and\n  Lynkeus.\u2014Great functions and power of the Dioskuri.\u2014Mess\u00eanian\n  genealogy.\u2014Peri\u00ear\u00eas\u2014Idas and Marp\u00eassa.                         168-173\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\nARCADIAN GENEALOGY.\n\n  Pelasgus.\u2014Lyka\u00f4n and his fifty sons.\u2014Legend of Lyka\u00f4n\u2014ferocity\n  punished by the gods.\u2014Deep religious faith of Pausanias.\u2014His view\n  of past and present world.\u2014Kallist\u00f4 and Arkas.\u2014Azan, Apheidas,\n  Elatus.\u2014Aleus, Aug\u00ea, Telephus.\u2014Anc\u00e6us.\u2014Echemus.\u2014Echemus\n  kills Hyllus.\u2014H\u00earakleids repelled from Peloponn\u00easus.\u2014Kor\u00f4nis and\n  Askl\u00eapius.\u2014Extended worship of Askl\u00eapius\u2014numerous legends.\u2014Macha\u00f4n\n  and Podaleirius.\u2014Numerous Askl\u00eapiads, or descendants from\n  Askl\u00eapius.\u2014Temples of Askl\u00eapius\u2014sick persons healed there.     173-183\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\n\u00c6AKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS.\u2014\u00c6GINA, SALAMIS, AND PHTHIA.\n\n  \u00c6akus\u2014son of Zeus and \u00c6gina.\u2014Offspring of \u00c6akus\u2014P\u00ealeus,\n  Telam\u00f4n, Ph\u00f4kus.\u2014Prayers of \u00c6akus\u2014procure relief for\n  Greece\u2014Ph\u00f4kus killed by P\u00ealeus and Telam\u00f4n.\u2014Telam\u00f4n, banished,\n  goes to Salamis.\u2014P\u00ealeus\u2014goes to Phthia\u2014his marriage with\n  Thetis.\u2014Neoptolemus.\u2014Ajax, his son Phil\u00e6us the eponymous hero of\n  a d\u00eame in Attica.\u2014Teukrus banished, settles in Cyprus.\u2014Diffusion\n  of the \u00c6akid genealogy.                                        184-190\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\nATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES.\n\n  Erechtheus\u2014autochthonous.\u2014Attic legends\u2014originally from\n  different roots\u2014each d\u00eame had its own.\u2014Little noticed by\n  the old epic poets.\u2014Kekrops.\u2014Kranaus\u2014Pandi\u00f4n.\u2014Daughters of\n  Pandi\u00f4n\u2014Prokn\u00ea, Philom\u00eala.\u2014Legend of T\u00eareus.\u2014Daughters\n  of Erechtheus\u2014Prokris.\u2014Kre\u00fcsa.\u2014Oreithyia, the wife of\n  Boreas.\u2014Prayers of the Athenians to Boreas\u2014his gracious\n  help in their danger.\u2014Erechtheus and Eumolpus.\u2014Voluntary\n  self-sacrifice of the three daughters of Erechtheus.\u2014Kre\u00fcsa\n  and I\u00f4n.\u2014Sons of Pandi\u00f4n\u2014\u00c6geus, etc.\u2014Th\u00easeus.\u2014His legendary\n  character refined.\u2014Plutarch\u2014his way of handling the matter\n  of legend.\u2014Legend of the Amazons.\u2014Its antiquity and\n  prevalence.\u2014Glorious achievements of the Amazons.\u2014Their\n  ubiquity.\u2014Universally received as a portion of the Greek\n  past.\u2014Amazons produced as present by the historians of\n  Alexander.\u2014Conflict of faith and reason in the historical critics.\n                                                                 191-217\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\nKRETAN LEGENDS.\u2014MINOS AND HIS FAMILY.\n\n  Min\u00f4s and Rhadamanthus, sons of Zeus.\u2014Europ\u00ea.\u2014Pasipha\u00ea\n  and the Min\u00f4taur.\u2014Scylla and Nisus.\u2014Death of Androgeos,\n  and anger of Min\u00f4s against Athens.\u2014Athenian victims for\n  the Min\u00f4taur.\u2014Self-devotion of Th\u00easeus\u2014he kills the\n  Min\u00f4taur.\u2014Athenian commemorative ceremonies.\u2014Family of\n  Min\u00f4s.\u2014Min\u00f4s and D\u00e6dalus\u2014flight of the latter to Sicily.\u2014Min\u00f4s\n  goes to retake him, but is killed.\u2014Semi-Kr\u00eatan settlements\n  elsewhere\u2014connected with this voyage of Min\u00f4s.\u2014Sufferings of the\n  Kr\u00eatans afterwards from the wrath of Min\u00f4s.\u2014Portrait of Min\u00f4s\u2014how\n  varied.\u2014Affinity between Kr\u00eate and Asia Minor.                 218-230\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\nARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION.\n\n  Ship Arg\u00f4 in the Odyssey.\u2014In Hesiod and Eum\u00ealus.\u2014Jas\u00f4n and\n  his heroic companions.\u2014L\u00eamnos.\u2014Adventures at Kyzikus, in\n  Bithynia, etc.\u2014H\u00earakl\u00eas and Hylas.\u2014Phineus.\u2014Dangers of the\n  Sympl\u00eagades.\u2014Arrival at Kolchis.\u2014Conditions imposed by \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\n  as the price of the golden fleece.\u2014Perfidy of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\u2014flight of\n  the Argonauts and M\u00eadea with the fleece.\u2014Pursuit of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\u2014the\n  Argonauts saved by M\u00eadea.\u2014Return of the Argonauts\u2014circuitous and\n  perilous.\u2014Numerous and wide-spread monuments referring to the\n  voyage.\u2014Argonautic legend generally.\u2014Fabulous geography\u2014gradually\n  modified as real geographical knowledge increased.\u2014Transposition\n  of epical localities.\u2014How and when the Argonautic voyage\n  became attached to Kolchis.\u2014\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and Circ\u00ea.\u2014Return of the\n  Argonauts\u2014different versions.\u2014Continued faith in the voyage\u2014basis\n  of truth determined by Strabo.                                 231-256\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\nLEGENDS OF THEBES.\n\n  Abundant legends of Th\u00eabes.\u2014Amphi\u00f4n and Zethus, Homeric founders\n  of Kadmus and B\u0153\u00f4tus\u2014both distinct legends.\u2014Th\u00eabes.\u2014How Th\u00eabes\n  was founded by Kadmus.\u2014Five primitive families at Th\u00eabes called\n  Sparti.\u2014The four daughters of Kadmus: 1. In\u00f4; 2. Semel\u00ea; 3.\n  Autono\u00ea and her son Act\u00e6\u00f4n; 4. Agav\u00ea and her son Pentheus.\u2014He\n  resists the god Dionysus\u2014his miserable end.\u2014Labdakus, Antiop\u00ea,\n  Amphi\u00f4n, and Z\u00eathus.\u2014Laius\u2014\u0152dipus\u2014Legendary celebrity of \u0152dipus\n  and his family.\u2014The Sphinx.\u2014Eteokl\u00eas and Polynik\u00eas.\u2014Old epic\n  poems on the sieges of Th\u00eabes.                                 256-269\n\n\nSIEGES OF THEBES.\n\n  Curse pronounced by the devoted Oedipus upon his sons.\u2014Novelties\n  introduced by Sophokl\u00eas.\u2014Death of Oedipus\u2014quarrel of Eteokl\u00eas and\n  Polynik\u00eas for the sceptre.\u2014Polynik\u00eas retires to Argos\u2014aid given\n  to him by Adrastus.\u2014Amphiar\u00e4us and Eriphyl\u00ea.\u2014Seven chiefs of the\n  army against Th\u00eabes.\u2014Defeat of the Th\u00eabans in the field\u2014heroic\n  devotion of Men\u0153kus.\u2014Single combat of Eteokl\u00eas and Polynik\u00eas,\n  in which both perish.\u2014Repulse and destruction of the Argeian\n  chiefs\u2014all except Adrastus\u2014Amphiar\u00e4us is swallowed up in the\n  earth.\u2014Kre\u00f4n, king of Th\u00eabes, forbids the burial of Polynik\u00eas\n  and the other fallen Argeian chiefs.\u2014Devotion and death of\n  Antigon\u00ea.\u2014The Athenians interfere to procure the interment of\n  the fallen chiefs.\u2014Second siege of Th\u00eabes by Adrastus with\n  the Epigoni, or sons of those slain in the first.\u2014Victory\n  of the Epigoni\u2014capture of Th\u00eabes.\u2014Worship of Adrastus at\n  Siky\u00f4n\u2014how abrogated by Kleisthen\u00eas.\u2014Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n\u2014his matricide and\n  punishment.\u2014Fatal necklace of Eriphyl\u00ea.                        269-284\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\nLEGEND OF TROY.\n\n  Great extent and variety of the tale of Troy.\u2014Dardanus,\n  son of Zeus.\u2014Ilus, founder of Ilium.\u2014Walls of Ilium\n  built by Poseid\u00f4n.\u2014Capture of Ilium by H\u00earakl\u00eas.\u2014Priam\n  and his offspring.\u2014Paris\u2014his judgment on the three\n  goddesses.\u2014Carries off Helen from Sparta.\u2014Expedition of\n  the Greeks to recover her.\u2014Heroes from all parts of Greece\n  combined under Agamemn\u00f4n.\u2014Achilles and Odysseus.\u2014The Grecian\n  host mistakes Teuthrania for Troy\u2014Telephus.\u2014Detention\n  of the Greeks at Aulis\u2014Agamemnon and Iphigeneia.\u2014First\n  success of the Greeks on landing near Troy.\u2014Bris\u00eais\n  awarded to Achilles.\u2014Palam\u00ead\u00eas\u2014his genius, and treacherous\n  death.\u2014Epic chronology\u2014historicized.\u2014Period of the\n  Homeric Iliad.\u2014Hect\u00f4r killed by Achilles.\u2014New allies of\n  Troy\u2014Penthesileia.\u2014Memn\u00f4n\u2014killed by Achilles.\u2014Death of\n  Achilles.\u2014Funeral games celebrated in honor of him.\u2014Quarrel\n  about his panoply.\u2014Odysseus prevails and Ajax kills\n  himself.\u2014Philokt\u00eat\u00eas and Neoptolemus.\u2014Capture of the\n  Palladium.\u2014The wooden horse.\u2014Destruction of Troy.\u2014Distribution of\n  the captives among the victors.\u2014Helen restored to Menelaus\u2014lives\n  in dignity at Sparta\u2014passes to a happy immortality.\u2014Blindness\n  and cure of the poet Stesichorus\u2014alteration of the legend about\n  Helen.\u2014Egyptian tale about Helen\u2014tendency to historicize.\u2014Return\n  of the Greeks from Troy.\u2014Their sufferings\u2014anger of the\n  gods.\u2014Wanderings of the heroes in all directions.\u2014Memorials of\n  them throughout the Grecian world.\u2014Odysseus\u2014his final adventures\n  and death.\u2014\u00c6neas and his descendants.\u2014Different stories about\n  \u00c6neas.\u2014\u00c6nead\u00e6 at Sk\u00eapsis.\u2014Ubiquity of \u00c6neas.\u2014Anten\u00f4r.\u2014Tale of\n  Troy\u2014its magnitude and discrepancies.\u2014Trojan war\u2014essentially\n  legendary\u2014its importance as an item in Grecian national\n  faith.\u2014Basis of history for it\u2014possible, and nothing\n  more.\u2014Historicizing innovations\u2014Dio Chrysostom.\u2014Historical\n  Ilium.\u2014Generally received and visited as the town of\n  Priam.\u2014Respect shown to it by Alexander.\u2014Successors of\n  Alexander\u2014foundation of Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as.\u2014The Romans\u2014treat Ilium\n  with marked respect.\u2014Mythical legitimacy of Ilium\u2014first called\n  in question by D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis and Hesti\u00e6a.\u2014Supposed Old\n  Ilium, or real Troy, distinguished from New Ilium.\u2014Strabo alone\n  believes in Old Ilium as the real Troy\u2014other authors continue in\n  the old faith\u2014the moderns follow Strabo.\u2014The mythical faith not\n  shaken by topographical impossibilities.\u2014Historical Tr\u00f4as and\n  the Teukrians.\u2014\u00c6olic Greeks in the Tr\u00f4ad\u2014the whole territory\n  gradually \u00c6olized.\u2014Old date, and long prevalence of the worship\n  of Apollo Sminthius.\u2014Asiatic customs and religion\u2014blended with\n  Hellenic.\u2014Sibylline prophecies.\u2014Settlements from Mil\u00eatus,\n  Mityl\u00ean\u00ea, and Athens.                                          284-340\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI.\n\nGRECIAN MYTHES, AS UNDERSTOOD, FELT, AND INTERPRETED BY THE GREEKS\nTHEMSELVES.\n\n  The mythes formed the entire mental stock of the early\n  Greeks.\u2014State of mind out of which they arose.\u2014Tendency to\n  universal personification.\u2014Absence of positive knowledge\u2014supplied\n  by personifying faith.\u2014Multitude and variety of quasi-human\n  personages.\u2014What we read as poetical fancies, were to the Greeks\n  serious realities.\u2014The gods and heroes\u2014their chief agency cast\n  back into the past, and embodied in the mythes.\u2014Marked and\n  manifold types of the Homeric gods.\u2014Stimulus which they afforded\n  to the mythop\u0153ic faculty.\u2014Easy faith in popular and plausible\n  stories.\u2014Poets\u2014receive their matter from the divine inspiration\n  of the Muse.\u2014Meaning of the word _mythe_\u2014original\u2014altered.\u2014Matter\n  of actual history\u2014uninteresting to early Greeks.\u2014Mythical\n  faith and religious point of view\u2014paramount in the Homeric\n  age.\u2014Gradual development of the scientific point of view\u2014its\n  opposition to the religious.\u2014Mythop\u0153ic age\u2014anterior to this\n  dissent.\u2014Expansive force of Grecian intellect.\u2014Transition\n  towards positive and present fact.\u2014The poet becomes the organ\n  of present time instead of past.\u2014Iambic, elegiac, and lyric\n  poets.\u2014Influence of the opening of Egypt to Grecian commerce,\n  B. C. 660.\u2014Progress\u2014historical, geographical, social\u2014from that\n  period to B. C. 500.\u2014Altered standard of judgment, ethical\n  and intellectual.\u2014Commencement of physical science\u2014Thal\u00eas,\n  Xenophan\u00eas, Pythagoras.\u2014Impersonal nature conceived as an\n  object of study.\u2014Opposition between scientific method and the\n  religious feeling of the multitude.\u2014How dealt with by different\n  philosophers.\u2014Socrat\u00eas.\u2014Hippocrat\u00eas.\u2014Anaxagoras.\u2014Contrasted\n  with Grecian religious belief.\u2014Treatment of Socrat\u00eas by\n  the Athenians.\u2014Scission between the superior men and the\n  multitude\u2014important in reference to the mythes.\u2014The mythes\n  accommodated to a new tone of feeling and judgment.\u2014The\n  poets and logographers.\u2014Pindar.\u2014Tragic poets.\u2014\u00c6schylus and\n  Sophokl\u00eas.\u2014Tendencies of \u00c6schylus in regard to the old\n  legends.\u2014He maintains undiminished the grandeur of the\n  mythical world.\u2014Euripid\u00eas\u2014accused of vulgarizing the mythical\n  heroes, and of introducing exaggerated pathos, refinement,\n  and rhetoric.\u2014The logographers\u2014Pherekyd\u00eas, etc.\u2014Hekat\u00e6us\u2014the\n  mythes rationalized.\u2014The historians\u2014Herodotus.\u2014Earnest piety\n  of Herodotus\u2014his mystic reserve.\u2014His views of the mythical\n  world.\u2014His deference for Egypt and Egyptian statements.\u2014His\n  general faith in the mythical heroes and eponyms\u2014yet combined\n  with scepticism as to matters of fact\u2014His remarks upon the\n  miraculous foundation of the oracle at D\u00f4d\u00f4na.\u2014His remarks\n  upon Melampus and his prophetic powers.\u2014His remarks upon\n  the Thessalian legend of Temp\u00ea.\u2014Allegorical interpretation\n  of the mythes\u2014more and more esteemed and applied.\u2014Divine\n  legends allegorized.\u2014Heroic legends historicized.\u2014Limits\n  to this interpreting process.\u2014Distinction between gods and\n  d\u00e6mons\u2014altered and widened by Empedocl\u00eas.\u2014Admission of d\u00e6mons as\n  partially evil beings\u2014effect of such admission.\u2014Semi-historical\n  interpretation\u2014utmost which it can accomplish.\u2014Some positive\n  certificate indispensable as a constituent of historical\n  proof\u2014mere popular faith insufficient.\u2014Mistake of ascribing to an\n  unrecording age the historical sense of modern times.\u2014Matter of\n  tradition uncertified from the beginning.\u2014Fictitious matter of\n  tradition does not imply fraud or imposture.\u2014Plausible fiction\n  often generated and accredited by the mere force of strong and\n  common sentiment, even in times of instruction.\u2014Allegorical\n  theory of the mythes\u2014traced by some up to an ancient priestly\n  caste.\u2014Real import of the mythes supposed to be preserved in\n  the religious mysteries.\u2014Supposed ancient meaning is really\n  a modern interpretation.\u2014Triple theology of the pagan world.\n  Treatment and use of the mythes according to Plato.\u2014His views\n  as to the necessity and use of fiction.\u2014He deals with the\n  mythes as expressions of feeling and imagination\u2014sustained\n  by religious faith, and not by any positive basis.\u2014Grecian\n  antiquity essentially a religious conception.\u2014Application of\n  chronological calculation divests it of this character.\u2014Mythical\n  genealogies all of one class, and all on a level in respect\n  to evidence.\u2014Grecian and Egyptian genealogies.\u2014Value of\n  each is purely subjective, having especial reference to\n  the faith of the people.\u2014Gods and men undistinguishable in\n  Grecian antiquity.\u2014General recapitulation.\u2014General public\n  of Greece\u2014familiar with their local mythes, careless of\n  recent history.\u2014Religious festivals\u2014their commemorative\n  influence.\u2014Variety and universality of mythical relics.\u2014The\n  mythes in their bearing on Grecian art.\u2014Tendency of works of art\n  to intensify the mythical faith.                               340-461\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII.\n\nTHE GRECIAN MYTHICAL VEIN COMPARED WITH THAT OF MODERN EUROPE.\n\n  \u039c\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2\u2014_Sage_\u2014an universal manifestation of the human\n  mind.\u2014Analogy of the Germans and Celts with the\n  Greeks.\u2014Differences between them.\u2014Grecian poetry\n  matchless.\u2014Grecian progress self-operated.\u2014German progress\n  brought about by violent influences from without.\u2014Operation of\n  the Roman civilization and of Christianity upon the primitive\n  German mythes.\u2014Alteration in the mythical genealogies\u2014Odin and\n  the other gods degraded into men.\u2014Grecian Paganism\u2014what would\n  have been the case, if it had been supplanted by Christianity\n  in 500 B. C.\u2014Saxo Grammaticus and Snorro Sturleson contrasted\n  with Pherekyd\u00eas and Hellanikus.\u2014Mythop\u0153ic tendencies in modern\n  Europe still subsisting, but forced into a new channel: 1.\n  Saintly ideal; 2. Chivalrous ideal.\u2014Legends of the Saints\u2014their\n  analogy with the Homeric theology.\u2014Chivalrous ideal\u2014Romances\n  of Charlemagne and Arthur.\u2014Accepted as realities of the\n  fore-time.\u2014Teutonic and Scandinavian epic\u2014its analogy with the\n  Grecian.\u2014Heroic character and self-expanding subject common to\n  both.\u2014Points of distinction between the two\u2014epic of the Middle\n  Ages neither stood so completely alone, nor was so closely\n  interwoven with religion, as the Grecian.\u2014History of England\u2014how\n  conceived down to the seventeenth century\u2014began with Brute the\n  Trojan.\u2014Earnest and tenacious faith manifested in the defence of\n  this early history.\u2014Judgment of Milton.\u2014Standard of historical\n  evidence\u2014raised in regard to England\u2014not raised in regard to\n  Greece.\u2014Milton\u2019s way of dealing with the British fabulous history\n  objectionable.\u2014Two ways open of dealing with the Grecian mythes:\n  1, to omit them; or, 2, to recount them as mythes.\u2014Reasons for\n  preferring the latter.\u2014Triple partition of past time by Varro.\n                                                                 461-489\n\n\n\n\nHISTORY OF GREECE.\n\n\n\n\nPART I.\n\nLEGENDARY GREECE.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\nLEGENDS RESPECTING THE GODS.\n\n\nThe mythical world of the Greeks opens with the gods, anterior as well\nas superior to man: it gradually descends, first to heroes, and next\nto the human race. Along with the gods are found various monstrous\nnatures, ultra-human and extra-human, who cannot with propriety be\ncalled gods, but who partake with gods and men in the attributes\nof free-will, conscious agency, and susceptibility of pleasure and\npain,\u2014such as the Harpies, the Gorgons, the Gr\u00e6\u00e6, the Sirens, Scylla\nand Charybdis, Echidna, Sphinx, Chim\u00e6ra, Chrysaor, Pegasus, the\nCycl\u00f4pes, the Centaurs, etc. The first acts of what may be termed\nthe great mythical cycle describe the proceedings of these gigantic\nagents\u2014the crash and collision of certain terrific and overboiling\nforces, which are ultimately reduced to obedience, or chained up, or\nextinguished, under the more orderly government of Zeus, who supplants\nhis less capable predecessors, and acquires precedence and supremacy\nover gods and men\u2014subject, however to certain social restraints from\nthe chief gods and goddesses around him, as well as to the custom of\noccasionally convoking and consulting the divine agora.\n\nI recount these events briefly, but literally, treating them simply\nas mythes springing from the same creative imagination, addressing\nthemselves to analogous tastes and feelings, and depending upon the\nsame authority, as the legends of Thebes and Troy. It is the inspired\nvoice of the Muse which reveals and authenticates both, and from which\nHomer and Hesiod alike derive their knowledge\u2014the one, of the heroic,\nthe other, of the divine, foretime. I maintain, moreover, fully, the\ncharacter of these great divine agents as Persons, which is the light\nin which they presented themselves to the Homeric or Hesiodic audience.\nUranos, Nyx, Hypnos and Oneiros (Heaven, Night, Sleep and Dream), are\nPersons, just as much as Zeus and Apollo. To resolve them into mere\nallegories, is unsafe and unprofitable: we then depart from the point\nof view of the original hearers, without acquiring any consistent or\nphilosophical point of view of our own.[2] For although some of the\nattributes and actions ascribed to these persons are often explicable\nby allegory the whole series and system of them never are so: the\ntheorist who adopts this course of explanation finds that, after one\nor two simple and obvious steps, the path is no longer open, and he\nis forced to clear a way for himself by gratuitous refinements and\nconjectures. The allegorical persons and attributes are always found\nmingled with other persons and attributes not allegorical; but the\ntwo classes cannot be severed without breaking up the whole march of\nthe mythical events, nor can any explanation which drives us to such\na necessity be considered as admissible. To suppose indeed that these\nlegends could be all traced by means of allegory into a coherent\nbody of physical doctrine, would be inconsistent with all reasonable\npresumptions respecting the age or society in which they arose. Where\nthe allegorical mark is clearly set upon any particular character,\nor attribute, or event, to that extent we may recognize it; but we\ncan rarely venture to divine further, still less to alter the legends\nthemselves on the faith of any such surmises. The theogony of the\nGreeks contains some cosmogonic ideas; but it cannot be considered\nas a system of cosmogony, or translated into a string of elementary,\nplanetary, or physical changes.\n\n  [2] It is sufficient, here, to state this position briefly: more\n  will be said respecting the allegorizing interpretation in a\n  future chapter.\n\nIn the order of legendary chronology, Zeus comes after Kronos and\nUranos; but in the order of Grecian conception, Zeus is the prominent\nperson, and Kronos and Uranos are inferior and introductory precursors,\nset up in order to be overthrown and to serve as mementos of the\nprowess of their conqueror. To Homer and Hesiod, as well as to the\nGreeks universally, Zeus is the great and predominant god, \u201cthe father\nof gods and men,\u201d whose power none of the other gods can hope to\nresist, or even deliberately think of questioning. All the other gods\nhave their specific potency and peculiar sphere of action and duty,\nwith which Zeus does not usually interfere; but it is he who maintains\nthe lineaments of a providential superintendence, as well over the\nph\u00e6nomena of Olympus as over those of earth. Zeus and his brothers\nPoseid\u00f4n and Had\u00eas have made a division of power: he has reserved the\n\u00e6ther and the atmosphere to himself\u2014Poseid\u00f4n has obtained the sea\u2014and\nHad\u00eas the under-world or infernal regions; while earth, and the events\nwhich pass upon earth, are common to all of them, together with free\naccess to Olympus.[3]\n\n  [3] See Iliad, viii. 405, 463; xv. 20, 130, 185. Hesiod, Theog.\n  885.\n\n  This unquestioned supremacy is the general representation of\n  Zeus: at the same time the conspiracy of H\u00ear\u00ea, Poseid\u00f4n, and\n  Ath\u00ean\u00ea against him, suppressed by the unexpected apparition of\n  Briareus as his ally, is among the exceptions. (Iliad, i. 400.)\n  Zeus is at one time vanquished by Titan, but rescued by Herm\u00eas.\n  (Apollod\u00f4r. i. 6, 3).\n\nZeus, then, with his brethren and colleagues, constitute the present\ngods, whom Homer and Hesiod recognize as in full dignity and\nefficiency. The inmates of this divine world are conceived upon the\nmodel, but not upon the scale, of the human. They are actuated by the\nfull play and variety of those appetites, sympathies, passions and\naffections, which divide the soul of man; invested with a far larger\nand indeterminate measure of power, and an exemption as well from\ndeath as (with some rare exceptions) from suffering and infirmity.\nThe rich and diverse types thus conceived, full of energetic movement\nand contrast, each in his own province, and soaring confessedly above\nthe limits of experience, were of all themes the most suitable for\nadventure and narrative, and operated with irresistible force upon the\nGrecian fancy. All nature was then conceived as moving and working\nthrough a number of personal agents, amongst whom the gods of Olympus\nwere the most conspicuous; the reverential belief in Zeus and Apollo\nbeing only one branch of this omnipresent personifying faith. The\nattributes of all these agents had a tendency to expand themselves into\nillustrative legends\u2014especially those of the gods, who were constantly\ninvoked in the public worship. Out of this same mental source sprang\nboth the divine and heroic mythes\u2014the former being often the more\nextravagant and abnormous in their incidents, in proportion as the\ngeneral type of the gods was more vast and awful than that of the\nheroes.\n\nAs the gods have houses and wives like men, so the present dynasty\nof gods must have a past to repose upon;[4] and the curious and\nimaginative Greek, whenever he does not find a recorded past ready\nto his hand, is uneasy until he has created one. Thus the Hesiodic\ntheogony explains, with a certain degree of system and coherence, first\nthe antecedent circumstances under which Zeus acquired the divine\nempire, next the number of his colleagues and descendants.\n\n  [4] Arist. Polit. i. 1. \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nFirst in order of time (we are told by Hesiod) came Chaos; next G\u00e6a,\nthe broad, firm, and flat Earth, with deep and dark Tartarus at her\nbase. Er\u00f4s (Love), the subduer of gods as well as men, came immediately\nafterwards.[5]\n\n  [5] Hesiod, Theog. 116. Apollod\u00f4rus begins with Uranos and G\u00e6a\n  (i. 1.); he does not recognize Er\u00f4s, Nyx, or Erebos.\n\nFrom Chaos sprung Erebos and Nyx; from these latter \u00c6th\u00ear and H\u00eamera.\nG\u00e6a also gave birth to Uranos, equal in breadth to herself, in order to\nserve both as an overarching vault to her, and as a residence for the\nimmortal gods; she further produced the mountains, habitations of the\ndivine nymphs, and Pontus, the barren and billowy sea.\n\nThen G\u00e6a intermarried with Uranos, and from this union came a numerous\noffspring\u2014twelve Titans and Titanides, three Cycl\u00f4pes, and three\nHekatoncheires or beings with a hundred hands each. The Titans were\nOceanus, K\u0153os, Krios, Hyperi\u00f4n, Iapetos, and Kronos: the Titanides,\nTheia, Rhea, Themis, Mn\u00eamosyn\u00ea, Ph\u0153b\u00ea, and T\u00eathys. The Cycl\u00f4pes were\nBront\u00eas, Sterop\u00eas, and Arg\u00eas,\u2014formidable persons, equally distinguished\nfor strength and for manual craft, so that they made the thunder\nwhich afterwards formed the irresistible artillery of Zeus.[6] The\nHekatoncheires were Kottos, Briareus, and Gyg\u00eas, of prodigious bodily\nforce.\n\n  [6] Hesiod, Theog. 140, 156. Apollod. _ut sup._\n\nUranos contemplated this powerful brood with fear and horror; as fast\nas any of them were born, he concealed them in cavities of the earth,\nand would not permit them to come out. G\u00e6a could find no room for them,\nand groaned under the pressure: she produced iron, made a sickle,\nand implored her sons to avenge both her and themselves against the\noppressive treatment of their father. But none of them, except Kronos,\nhad courage to undertake the deed: he, the youngest and the most\ndaring, was armed with the sickle and placed in suitable ambush by the\ncontrivance of G\u00e6a. Presently night arrived, and Uranos descended to\nthe embraces of G\u00e6a: Kronos then emerged from his concealment, cut off\nthe genitals of his father, and cast the bleeding member behind him\nfar away into the sea.[7] Much of the blood was spilt upon the earth,\nand G\u00e6a in consequence gave birth to the irresistible Erinnys, the\nvast and muscular Gigantes, and the Melian nymphs. Out of the genitals\nthemselves, as they swam and foamed upon the sea, emerged the goddess\nAphrodit\u00ea, deriving her name from the foam out of which she had sprung.\nShe first landed at Kyth\u00eara, and then went to Cyprus: the island felt\nher benign influence, and the green herb started up under her soft and\ndelicate tread. Er\u00f4s immediately joined her, and partook with her the\nfunction of suggesting and directing the amorous impulses both of gods\nand men.[8]\n\n  [7] Hesiod, Theog. 160, 182. Apollod. i. 1, 4.\n\n  [8] Hesiod, Theog. 192. This legend respecting the birth of\n  Aphrodit\u00ea seems to have been derived partly from her name (\u1f00\u03c6\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2,\n  _foam_), partly from the surname Urania, \u1f08\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c4\u03b7 \u039f\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, under\n  which she was so very extensively worshipped, especially both in\n  Cyprus and Cyth\u00eara, seemingly originated in both islands by the\n  Ph\u0153nicians. Herodot. i. 105. Compare the instructive section in\n  Boeckh\u2019s Metrologie, c. iv. \u00a7 4.\n\nUranos being thus dethroned and disabled, Kronos and the Titans\nacquired their liberty and became predominant: the Cycl\u00f4pes and the\nHekatoncheires had been cast by Uranos into Tartarus, and were still\nallowed to remain there.\n\nEach of the Titans had a numerous offspring: Oceanus, especially,\nmarrying his sister T\u00eathys, begat three thousand daughters, the Oceanic\nnymphs, and as many sons: the rivers and springs passed for his\noffspring. Hyperi\u00f4n and his sister Theia had for their children H\u00ealios,\nSel\u00ean\u00ea, and E\u00f4s; K\u0153os with Ph\u0153b\u00ea begat L\u00eat\u00f4 and Asteria; the children\nof Krios were Astr\u00e6os, Pallas, and Pers\u00eas,\u2014from Astr\u00e6os and E\u00f4s sprang\nthe winds Zephyrus, Boreas, and Notus. Iapetos, marrying the Oceanic\nnymph Clymen\u00ea, counted as his progeny the celebrated Prom\u00eatheus,\nEpim\u00eatheus, Men\u0153tius, and Atlas. But the offspring of Kronos were the\nmost powerful and transcendent of all. He married his sister Rhea, and\nhad by her three daughters\u2014Hestia, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, and H\u00ear\u00ea\u2014and three sons,\nHad\u00eas, Poseid\u00f4n, and Zeus, the latter at once the youngest and the\ngreatest.\n\nBut Kronos foreboded to himself destruction from one of his own\nchildren, and accordingly, as soon as any of them were born, he\nimmediately swallowed them and retained them in his own belly. In this\nmanner had the first five been treated, and Rhea was on the point of\nbeing delivered of Zeus. Grieved and indignant at the loss of her\nchildren, she applied for counsel to her father and mother, Uranos and\nG\u00e6a, who aided her to conceal the birth of Zeus. They conveyed her by\nnight to Lyktus in Cr\u00eate, hid the new-born child in a woody cavern\non Mount Ida, and gave to Kronos, in place of it, a stone wrapped in\nswaddling clothes, which he greedily swallowed, believing it to be\nhis child. Thus was the safety of Zeus ensured.[9] As he grew up his\nvast powers fully developed themselves: at the suggestion of G\u00e6a, he\ninduced Kronos by stratagem to vomit up, first the stone which had\nbeen given to him,\u2014next, the five children whom he had previously\ndevoured. Hestia, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, H\u00ear\u00ea, Poseid\u00f4n and Had\u00eas, were thus allowed\nto grow up along with Zeus; and the stone to which the latter owed\nhis preservation was placed near the temple of Delphi, where it ever\nafterwards stood, as a conspicuous and venerable memorial to the\nreligious Greek.[10]\n\n  [9] Hesiod, Theog. 452, 487. Apollod. i. 1, 6.\n\n  [10] Hesiod, Theog. 498.\u2014\n\n    \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c1\u03c5\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u1fd6 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f20\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u1fc3, \u03b3\u03c5\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bf,\n    \u03a3\u1fc6\u03bc\u1fbd \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9, \u03b8\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nWe have not yet exhausted the catalogue of beings generated during this\nearly period, anterior to the birth of Zeus. Nyx, alone and without\nany partner, gave birth to a numerous progeny: Thanatos, Hypnos and\nOneiros; M\u00f4mus and O\u00efzys (Grief); Kl\u00f4th\u00f4, Lachesis and Atropos, the\nthree Fates; the retributive and equalizing Nemesis; Apat\u00ea and Philot\u00eas\n(Deceit and amorous Propensity), G\u00earas (Old Age) and Eris (Contention).\nFrom Eris proceeded an abundant offspring, all mischievous and\nmaleficent: Ponos (Suffering), L\u00eath\u00ea, Limos (Famine), Phonos and Mach\u00ea\n(Slaughter and Battle), Dysnomia and At\u00ea (Lawlessness and reckless\nImpulse), and Horkos, the ever watchful sanctioner of oaths, as well as\nthe inexorable punisher of voluntary perjury.[11]\n\n  [11] Hesiod, Theog. 212-232.\n\nG\u00e6a, too, intermarrying with Pontus, gave birth to Nereus, the just\nand righteous old man of the sea; to Thaumas, Phorkys and K\u00eat\u00f4. From\nNereus, and Doris daughter of Oceanus, proceeded the fifty Nereids\nor Sea-nymphs. Thaumus also married Elektra daughter of Oceanus, and\nhad by her Iris and the two Harpies, All\u00f4 and Okypet\u00ea,\u2014winged and\nswift as the winds. From Phorkys and K\u00eat\u00f4 sprung the Dragon of the\nHesperides, and the monstrous Gr\u00e6\u00e6 and Gorgons: the blood of Medusa,\none of the Gorgons, when killed by Perseus, produced Chrysaor and the\nhorse Pegasus: Chrysaor and Kallirrho\u00ea gave birth to Gery\u00f4n as well\nas to Echidna,\u2014a creature half-nymph and half-serpent, unlike both to\ngods and to men. Other monsters arose from the union of Echidna with\nTypha\u00f4n,\u2014Orthros, the two-headed dog of Gery\u00f4n; Cerberus, the dog\nof Had\u00eas, with fifty heads, and the Lern\u00e6an Hydra. From the latter\nproceeded the Chim\u00e6ra, the Sphinx of Th\u00eabes, and the Nemean lion.[12]\n\n  [12] Hesiod, Theog. 240-320. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 2, 6, 7.\n\nA powerful and important progeny, also, was that of Styx, daughter\nof Oceanus, by Pallas; she had Z\u00ealos and Nik\u00ea (Imperiousness and\nVictory), and Kratos and Bia (Strength and Force). The hearty and early\nco\u00f6peration of Styx and her four sons with Zeus was one of the main\ncauses which enabled him to achieve his victory over the Titans.\n\nZeus had grown up not less distinguished for mental capacity than for\nbodily force. He and his brothers now determined to wrest the power\nfrom the hands of Kronos and the Titans, and a long and desperate\nstruggle commenced, in which all the gods and all the goddesses took\npart. Zeus convoked them to Olympus, and promised to all who would aid\nhim against Kronos, that their functions and privileges should remain\nundisturbed. The first who responded to the call, came with her four\nsons, and embraced his cause, was Styx. Zeus took them all four as his\nconstant attendants, and conferred upon Styx the majestic distinction\nof being the Horkos, or oath-sanctioner of the Gods,\u2014what Horkos was to\nmen, Styx was to the Gods.[13]\n\n  [13] Hesiod, Theog. 385-403.\n\nStill further to strengthen himself, Zeus released the other Uranids\nwho had been imprisoned in Tartarus by their father,\u2014the Cycl\u00f4pes and\nthe Centimanes,\u2014and prevailed upon them to take part with him against\nthe Titans. The former supplied him with thunder and lightning, and the\nlatter brought into the fight their boundless muscular strength.[14]\nTen full years did the combat continue; Zeus and the Kronids occupying\nOlympus, and the Titans being established on the more southerly\nmountain-chain of Othrys. All nature was convulsed, and the distant\nOceanus, though he took no part in the struggle, felt the boiling,\nthe noise, and the shock, not less than G\u00e6a and Pontus. The thunder\nof Zeus, combined with the crags and mountains torn up and hurled by\nthe Centimanes, at length prevailed, and the Titans were defeated and\nthrust down into Tartarus. Iapetos, Kronos, and the remaining Titans\n(Oceanus excepted) were imprisoned, perpetually and irrevocably, in\nthat subterranean dungeon, a wall of brass being built around them by\nPoseid\u00f4n, and the three Centimanes being planted as guards. Of the two\nsons of Iapetos, Men\u0153tius was made to share this prison, while Atlas\nwas condemned to stand for ever at the extreme west, and to bear upon\nhis shoulders the solid vault of heaven.[15]\n\n  [14] Hesiod, Theog. 140, 624, 657. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 2, 4.\n\n  [15] The battle with the Titans, Hesiod, Theog. 627-735. Hesiod\n  mentions nothing about the Gigantes and the Gigantomachia:\n  Apollod\u00f4rus, on the other hand, gives this latter in some detail,\n  but despatches the Titans in a few words (i. 2, 4; i. 6, 1). The\n  Gigantes seem to be only a second edition of the Titans,\u2014a sort\n  of duplication to which the legendary poets were often inclined.\n\nThus were the Titans subdued, and the Kronids with Zeus at their head\nplaced in possession of power. They were not, however, yet quite\nsecure; for G\u00e6a, intermarrying with Tartarus, gave birth to a new and\nstill more formidable monster called Typh\u00f4eus, of such tremendous\nproperties and promise, that, had he been allowed to grow into full\ndevelopment, nothing could have prevented him from vanquishing all\nrivals and becoming supreme. But Zeus foresaw the danger, smote him at\nonce with a thunderbolt from Olympus, and burnt him up: he was cast\nalong with the rest into Tartarus, and no further enemy remained to\nquestion the sovereignty of the Kronids.[16]\n\n  [16] Hesiod, Theog. 820-869. Apollod. i. 6, 3. He makes Typh\u00f4n\n  very nearly victorious over Zeus. Typh\u00f4eus, according to Hesiod,\n  is father of the irregular, violent, and mischievous winds:\n  Notus, Boreas, Argest\u00eas and Zephyrus, are of divine origin (870).\n\nWith Zeus begins a new dynasty and a different order of beings. Zeus,\nPoseid\u00f4n, and Had\u00eas agree upon the distribution before noticed, of\nfunctions and localities: Zeus retaining the \u00c6th\u00ear and the atmosphere,\ntogether with the general presiding function; Poseid\u00f4n obtaining\nthe sea, and administering subterranean forces generally; and Had\u00eas\nruling the under-world or region in which the half-animated shadows of\ndeparted men reside.\n\nIt has been already stated, that in Zeus, his brothers and his sisters,\nand his and their divine progeny, we find the _present_ Gods; that\nis, those, for the most part, whom the Homeric and Hesiodic Greeks\nrecognized and worshipped. The wives of Zeus were numerous as well as\nhis offspring. First he married M\u00eatis, the wisest and most sagacious of\nthe goddesses; but G\u00e6a and Uranos forewarned him that if he permitted\nhimself to have children by her, they would be stronger than himself\nand dethrone him. Accordingly when M\u00eatis was on the point of being\ndelivered of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, he swallowed her up, and her wisdom and sagacity\nthus became permanently identified with his own being.[17] His head\nwas subsequently cut open, in order to make way for the exit and\nbirth of the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea.[18] By Themis, Zeus begat the H\u00f4r\u00e6, by\nEurynom\u00ea, the three Charities or Graces; by Mn\u00eamosyn\u00ea, the Muses; by\nL\u00eat\u00f4 (Latona), Apollo and Artemis; and by D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, Persephon\u00ea. Last of\nall he took for his wife H\u00ear\u00ea, who maintained permanently the dignity\nof queen of the Gods; by her he had H\u00eab\u00ea, Ar\u00eas, and Eileithyia. Herm\u00eas\nalso was born to him by Maia, the daughter of Atlas: H\u00eaph\u00e6stos was born\nto H\u00ear\u00ea, according to some accounts, by Zeus; according to others, by\nher own unaided generative force.[19] He was born lame, and H\u00ear\u00ea was\nashamed of him: she wished to secrete him away, but he made his escape\ninto the sea, and found shelter under the maternal care of the Nereids\nThetis and Eurynome.[20] Our enumeration of the divine race, under the\npresidency of Zeus, will thus give us,[21]\u2014\n\n  [17] Hesiod, Theog. 885-900.\n\n  [18] Apollod. i. 3, 6.\n\n  [19] Hesiod, Theog. 900-944.\n\n  [20] Homer, Iliad, xviii. 397.\n\n  [21] See Burckhardt, Homer, und Hesiod. Mythologie, sect. 102.\n  (Leipz. 1844).\n\n1. The twelve great gods and goddesses of Olympus,\u2014Zeus, Poseid\u00f4n,\nApollo, Ar\u00eas, H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, Herm\u00eas, H\u00ear\u00ea, Ath\u00ean\u00ea, Artemis, Aphrodit\u00ea,\nHestia, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear.\n\n2. An indefinite number of other deities, not included among the\nOlympic, seemingly because the number _twelve_ was complete without\nthem, but some of them not inferior in power and dignity to many of\nthe twelve:\u2014Had\u00eas, H\u00ealios, Hekat\u00ea, Dionysos, L\u00eat\u00f4, Di\u00f4n\u00ea, Persephon\u00ea,\nSel\u00ean\u00ea, Themis, E\u00f4s, Harmonia, the Charities, the Muses, the\nEileithyi\u00e6, the M\u0153r\u00e6, the Oceanids and the Nereids, Proteus, Eidothea,\nthe Nymphs, Leukothea, Phorkys, \u00c6olus, Nemesis, etc.\n\n3. Deities who perform special services to the greater gods:\u2014Iris,\nH\u00eab\u00ea, the Hor\u00e6, etc.\n\n4. Deities whose personality is more faintly and unsteadily\nconceived:\u2014At\u00ea, the Lit\u00e6, Eris, Thanatos, Hypnos, Kratos, Bia, Ossa,\netc.[22] The same name is here employed sometimes to designate\nthe person, sometimes the attribute or event not personified,\u2014an\nunconscious transition of ideas, which, when consciously performed, is\ncalled Allegory.\n\n  [22] \u039b\u03b9\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2\u2014_Hunger_\u2014is a person, in Hesiod, Opp. Di. 299.\n\n5. Monsters, offspring of the Gods:\u2014the Harpies, the Gorgons, the Gr\u00e6\u00e6,\nPegasus, Chrysaor, Echidna, Chim\u00e6ra, the Dragon of the Hesperides,\nCerberus, Orthros, Gery\u00f4n, the Lern\u00e6an Hydra, the Nemean lion, Scylla\nand Charybdis, the Centaurs, the Sphinx, Xanthos and Balios the\nimmortal horses, etc.\n\nFrom the gods we slide down insensibly, first to heroes, and then to\nmen; but before we proceed to this new mixture, it is necessary to\nsay a few words on the theogony generally. I have given it briefly as\nit stands in the Hesiodic Theogonia, because that poem\u2014in spite of\ngreat incoherence and confusion, arising seemingly from diversity of\nauthorship as well as diversity of age\u2014presents an ancient and genuine\nattempt to cast the divine foretime into a systematic sequence. Homer\nand Hesiod were the grand authorities in the pagan world respecting\ntheogony; but in the Iliad and Odyssey nothing is found except passing\nallusions and implications, and even in the Hymns (which were commonly\nbelieved in antiquity to be the productions of the same author as the\nIliad and the Odyssey) there are only isolated, unconnected narratives.\nAccordingly men habitually took their information respecting their\ntheogonic antiquities from the Hesiodic poem, where it was ready laid\nout before them; and the legends consecrated in that work acquired\nboth an extent of circulation and a firm hold on the national faith,\nsuch as independent legends could seldom or never rival. Moreover the\nscrupulous and sceptical Pagans, as well as the open assailants of\nPaganism in later times, derived their subjects of attack from the same\nsource; so that it has been absolutely necessary to recount in their\nnaked simplicity the Hesiodic stories, in order to know what it was\nthat Plato deprecated and Xenophan\u00eas denounced. The strange proceedings\nascribed to Uranos, Kronos and Zeus, have been more frequently alluded\nto, in the way of ridicule or condemnation, than any other portion of\nthe mythical world.\n\nBut though the Hesiodic theogony passed as orthodox among the later\nPagans,[23] because it stood before them as the only system anciently\nset forth and easily accessible, it was evidently not the only system\nreceived at the date of the poem itself. Homer knows nothing of Uranos,\nin the sense of an arch-God anterior to Kronos. Uranos and G\u00e6a, like\nOceanus, T\u00eathys and Nyx, are with him great and venerable Gods, but\nneither the one nor the other present the character of predecessors of\nKronos and Zeus.[24] The Cycl\u00f4pes, whom Hesiod ranks as sons of Uranos\nand fabricators of thunder, are in Homer neither one nor the other;\nthey are not noticed in the Iliad at all, and in the Odyssey they are\ngross gigantic shepherds and cannibals, having nothing in common with\nthe Hesiodic Cyclops except the one round central eye.[25] Of the\nthree Centimanes enumerated by Hesiod, Briareus only is mentioned in\nHomer, and to all appearance, not as the son of Uranos, but as the son\nof Poseid\u00f4n; not as aiding Zeus in his combat against the Titans, but\nas rescuing him at a critical moment from a conspiracy formed against\nhim by H\u00ear\u00ea, Poseid\u00f4n and Ath\u00ean\u00ea.[26] Not only is the Hesiodic Uranos\n(with the Uranids) omitted in Homer, but the relations between Zeus\nand Kronos are also presented in a very different light. No mention is\nmade of Kronos swallowing his young children: on the contrary, Zeus\nis the eldest of the three brothers instead of the youngest, and the\nchildren of Kronos live with him and Rhea: there the stolen intercourse\nbetween Zeus and H\u00ear\u00ea first takes place without the knowledge of their\nparents.[27] When Zeus puts Kronos down into Tartarus, Rhea consigns\nher daughter H\u00ear\u00ea to the care of Oceanus: no notice do we find of any\nterrific battle with the Titans as accompanying that event. Kronos,\nIapetos, and the remaining Titans are down in Tartarus, in the lowest\ndepths under the earth, far removed from the genial rays of H\u00ealios; but\nthey are still powerful and venerable, and Hypnos makes H\u00ear\u00ea swear an\noath in their name, as the most inviolable that he can think of.[28]\n\n  [23] See G\u00f6ttling, Pr\u00e6fat. ad Hesiod. p. 23.\n\n  [24] Iliad, xiv. 249; xix. 259. Odyss. v. 184. Oceanus and T\u00eathys\n  seem to be presented in the Iliad as the primitive Father and\n  Mother of the Gods:\u2014\n\n    \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1 \u03a4\u03b7\u03b8\u03cd\u03bd. (xiv. 201).\n\n  [25] Odyss. ix. 87.\n\n  [26] Iliad, i. 401.\n\n  [27] Iliad, xiv. 203-295; xv. 204.\n\n  [28] Iliad, viii. 482; xiv. 274-279. In the Hesiodic Opp. et Di.,\n  Kronos is represented as ruling in the Islands of the Blest in\n  the neighborhood of Oceanus (v. 168).\n\nIn Homer, then, we find nothing beyond the simple fact that Zeus thrust\nhis father Kronos together with the remaining Titans into Tartarus;\nan event to which he affords us a tolerable parallel in certain\noccurrences even under the presidency of Zeus himself. For the other\ngods make more than one rebellious attempt against Zeus, and are only\nput down, partly by his unparalleled strength, partly by the presence\nof his ally the Centimane Briareus. Kronos, like La\u00ebrtes or P\u00ealeus,\nhas become old, and has been supplanted by a force vastly superior to\nhis own. The Homeric epic treats Zeus as present, and, like all the\ninteresting heroic characters, a father must be assigned to him: that\nfather has once been the chief of the Titans, but has been superseded\nand put down into Tartarus along with the latter, so soon as Zeus and\nthe superior breed of the Olympic gods acquired their full development.\n\nThat antithesis between Zeus and Kronos\u2014between the Olympic gods and\nthe Titans\u2014which Homer has thus briefly brought to view, Hesiod has\namplified into a theogony, with many things new, and some things\ncontradictory to his predecessor; while Eum\u00ealus or Arktinus in the\npoem called Titanomachia (now lost) also adopted it as their special\nsubject.[29] As Stasinus, Arktinus, Lesch\u00eas, and others, enlarged the\nLegend of Troy by composing poems relating to a supposed time anterior\nto the commencement, or subsequent to the termination of the Iliad,\u2014as\nother poets recounted adventures of Odysseus subsequent to his landing\nin Ithaka,\u2014so Hesiod enlarged and systematized, at the same time that\nhe corrupted, the skeleton theogony which we find briefly indicated\nin Homer. There is violence and rudeness in the Homeric gods, but the\ngreat genius of Grecian epic is no way accountable for the stories\nof Uranos and Kronos,\u2014the standing reproach against Pagan legendary\nnarrative.\n\n  [29] See the few fragments of the Titanomachia, in D\u00fcntzer, Epic.\n  Gr\u00e6c. Fragm. p. 2; and Hyne, ad Apollod\u00f4r. I. 2. Perhaps there\n  was more than one poem on the subject, though it seems that\n  Athen\u00e6us had only read one (viii. p. 277).\n\n  In the Titanomachia, the generations anterior to Zeus were still\n  further lengthened by making Uranos the son of \u00c6th\u00ear (Fr. 4.\n  D\u00fcntzer). \u00c6g\u00e6on was also represented as son of Pontus and G\u00e6a,\n  and as having fought in the ranks of the Titans; in the Iliad he\n  (the same who is called Briareus) is the fast ally of Zeus.\n\n  A _Titanographia_ was ascribed to Mus\u00e6us (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod.\n  iii. 1178; compare Lactant. de Fals. Rel. i. 21).\n\nHow far these stories are the invention of Hesiod himself is impossible\nto determine.[30] They bring us down to a cast of fancy more coarse\nand indelicate than the Homeric, and more nearly resembling some of\nthe Holy Chapters (\u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9) of the more recent mysteries, such\n(for example) as the tale of Dionysos Zagreus. There is evidence\nin the Theogony itself that the author was acquainted with local\nlegends current both at Kr\u00eate and at Delphi; for he mentions both the\nmountain-cave in Kr\u00eate wherein the new-born Zeus was hidden, and the\nstone near the Delphian temple\u2014the identical stone which Kronos had\nswallowed\u2014\u201cplaced by Zeus himself as a sign and wonder to mortal men.\u201d\nBoth these two monuments, which the poet expressly refers to, and\nhad probably seen, imply a whole train of accessory and explanatory\nlocal legends\u2014current probably among the priests of Kr\u00eate and Delphi,\nbetween which places, in ancient times, there was an intimate religious\nconnection. And we may trace further in the poem,\u2014that which would\nbe the natural feeling of Kr\u00eatan worshippers of Zeus,\u2014an effort to\nmake out that Zeus was justified in his aggression on Kronos, by the\nconduct of Kronos himself both towards his father and towards his\nchildren: the treatment of Kronos by Zeus appears in Hesiod as the\nretribution foretold and threatened by the mutilated Uranos against the\nson who had outraged him. In fact the relations of Uranos and G\u00e6a are\nin almost all their particulars a mere copy and duplication of those\nbetween Kronos and Rhea, differing only in the mode whereby the final\ncatastrophe is brought about. Now castration was a practice thoroughly\nabhorrent both to the feelings and to the customs of Greece;[31] but\nit was seen with melancholy frequency in the domestic life as well as\nin the religious worship of Phrygia and other parts of Asia, and it\neven became the special qualification of a priest of the Great Mother\nCybel\u00ea,[32] as well as of the Ephesian Artemis. The employment of the\nsickle ascribed to Kronos seems to be the product of an imagination\nfamiliar with the Asiatic worship and legends, which were connected\nwith and partially resembled the Kr\u00eatan.[33] And this deduction becomes\nthe more probable when we connect it with the first genesis of iron,\nwhich Hesiod mentions to have been produced for the express purpose of\nfabricating the fatal sickle; for metallurgy finds a place in the early\nlegends both of the Trojan and of the Kr\u00eatan Ida, and the three Id\u00e6an\nDactyls, the legendary inventors of it, are assigned sometimes to one\nand sometimes to the other.[34]\n\n  [30] That the Hesiodic Theogony is referable to an age\n  considerably later than the Homeric poems, appears now to be the\n  generally admitted opinion; and the reasons for believing so are,\n  in my opinion, satisfactory. Whether the Theogony is composed by\n  the same author as the Works and Days is a disputed point. The\n  B\u0153otian literati in the days of Pausanias decidedly denied the\n  identity, and ascribed to their Hesiod only the Works and Days:\n  Pausanias himself concurs with them (ix. 31. 4; ix. 35. 1), and\n  V\u00f6lcker (Mithologie des Japetisch. Geschlechts, p. 14) maintains\n  the same opinion, as well as G\u00f6ttling (Pr\u00e6f. ad Hesiod. xxi.): K.\n  O. M\u00fcller (History of Grecian Literature, ch. 8. \u00a7 4) thinks that\n  there is not sufficient evidence to form a decisive opinion.\n\n  Under the name of Hesiod (in that vague language which is usual\n  in antiquity respecting authorship, but which modern critics\n  have not much mended by speaking of the Hesiodic school, sect,\n  or family) passed many different poems, belonging to three\n  classes quite distinct from each other, but all disparate from\n  the Homeric epic:\u20141. The poems of legend cast into historical and\n  genealogical series, such as the Eoiai, the Catalogue of Women,\n  etc. 2. The poems of a didactic or ethical tendency, such as\n  the Works and Days, the Precepts of Cheir\u00f4n, the Art of Augural\n  Prophecy, etc. 3. Separate and short mythical compositions,\n  such as the Shield of H\u00earakl\u00eas, the Marriage of Keyx (which,\n  however, was of disputed authenticity, Athen\u00e6. ii. p. 49), the\n  Epithalamium of P\u00ealeus and Thetis, etc. (See Marktscheffel,\n  Pr\u00e6fat. ad Fragment. Hesiod. p. 89).\n\n  The Theogony belongs chiefly to the first of these classes, but\n  it has also a dash of the second in the legend of Prom\u00eatheus,\n  etc.: moreover in the portion which respects Hekat\u00ea, it has both\n  a mystic character and a distinct bearing upon present life and\n  customs, which we may also trace in the allusions to Kr\u00eate and\n  Delphi. There seems reason to place it in the same age with the\n  Works and Days, perhaps in the half century preceding 700 B.\n  C., and little, if at all, anterior to Archilochus. The poem\n  is evidently conceived upon one scheme, yet the parts are so\n  disorderly and incoherent, that it is difficult to say how much\n  is interpolation. Hermann has well dissected the exordium; see\n  the preface to Gaisford\u2019s Hesiod (Poet\u00e6 Minor. p. 63).\n\n  K. O. M\u00fcller tells us (_ut sup._ p. 90), \u201cThe Titans, according\n  to the notions of Hesiod, represent a system of things in which\n  elementary beings, natural powers, and notions of order and\n  regularity are united to form a whole. The Cycl\u00f4pes denote the\n  transient disturbances of this order of nature by storms, and the\n  Hekatoncheires, or hundred-handed Giants, signify the fearful\n  power of the greater revolutions of nature.\u201d The poem affords\n  little presumption that any such ideas were present to the mind\n  of its author, as, I think, will be seen if we read 140-155,\n  630-745.\n\n  The Titans, the Cycl\u00f4pes, and the Hekatoncheires, can no more\n  be construed into physical ph\u00e6nomena than Chrysaor, Pegasus,\n  Echidna, the Gr\u00e6\u00e6, or the Gorgons. Zeus, like H\u00earakl\u00eas, or Jas\u00f4n,\n  or Perseus, if his adventures are to be described, must have\n  enemies, worthy of himself and his vast type, and whom it is\n  some credit for him to overthrow. Those who contend with him or\n  assist him must be conceived on a scale fit to be drawn on the\n  same imposing canvas: the dwarfish proportions of man will not\n  satisfy the sentiment of the poet or his audience respecting the\n  grandeur and glory of the gods. To obtain creations of adequate\n  sublimity for such an object, the poet may occasionally borrow\n  analogies from the striking accidents of physical nature, and\n  when such an allusion manifests itself clearly, the critic does\n  well to point it out. But it seems to me a mistake to treat\n  these approximations to physical ph\u00e6nomena as forming the _main\n  scheme_ of the poet,\u2014to look for them everywhere, and to presume\n  them where there is little or no indication.\n\n  [31] The strongest evidences of this feeling are exhibited in\n  Herodotus, iii. 48; viii. 105. See an example of this mutilation\n  inflicted upon a youth named Adamas by the Thracian king Kotys,\n  in Aristot. Polit. v. 8, 12, and the tale about the Corinthian\n  Periander, Herod. iii. 48.\n\n  It is an instance of the habit, so frequent among the Attic\n  tragedians, of ascribing Asiatic or Phrygian manners to the\n  Trojans, when Sophocl\u00eas in his lost play Troilus (ap. Jul.\n  Poll. x. 165) introduced one of the characters of his drama as\n  having been castrated by order of Hecuba, \u03a3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u1fc7 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f44\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2,\u2014probably the \u03a0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f78\u03c2, or guardian\n  and companion of the youthful Troilus. See Welcker, Griechisch.\n  Trag\u00f6d. vol. i. p. 125.\n\n  [32] Herodot. viii. 105, \u03b5\u1f50\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9. Lucian, De De\u00e2 Syri\u00e2, c. 50.\n  Strabo, xiv. pp. 640-641.\n\n  [33] Diod\u00f4r. v. 64. Strabo, x. p. 460. Hoeckh, in his learned\n  work Kr\u00eata (vol. i. books 1 and 2), has collected all the\n  information attainable respecting the early influences of Phrygia\n  and Asia Minor upon Kr\u00eate: nothing seems ascertainable except the\n  general fact; all the particular evidences are lamentably vague.\n\n  The worship of the Dikt\u00e6an Zeus seemed to have originally\n  belonged to the Eteokr\u00eates, who were not Hellens, and were more\n  akin to the Asiatic population than to the Hellenic. Strabo, x.\n  p. 478. Hoeckh, Kr\u00eata, vol. i. p. 139.\n\n  [34] Hesiod, Theogon. 161,\n\n    \u0391\u1f36\u03c8\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03b4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2,\n    \u03a4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03be\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, etc.\n\n  See the extract from the old poem _Phor\u00f4nis_ ap. Schol. Apoll.\n  Rhod. 1129; and Strabo, x. p. 472.\n\nAs Hesiod had extended the Homeric series of gods by prefixing the\ndynasty of Uranos to that of Kronos, so the Orphic theogony lengthened\nit still further.[35] First came Chronos, or Time, as a person, after\nhim \u00c6th\u00ear and Chaos, out of whom Chronos produced the vast mundane egg.\nHence emerged in process of time the first-born god Phan\u00eas, or M\u00eatis,\nor H\u00earikap\u00e6os, a person of double sex, who first generated the Kosmos,\nor mundane system, and who carried within him the seed of the gods.\nHe gave birth to Nyx, by whom he begat Uranos and G\u00e6a; as well as to\nH\u00ealios and Sel\u00eane.[36]\n\n  [35] See the scanty fragments of the Orphic theogony in Hermann\u2019s\n  edition of the Orphica, pp. 448, 504, which it is difficult to\n  understand and piece together, even with the aid of Lobeck\u2019s\n  elaborate examination (Aglaophamus, p. 470, etc.). The passages\n  are chiefly preserved by Proclus and the later Platonists,\n  who seem to entangle them almost inextricably with their own\n  philosophical ideas.\n\n  The first few lines of the Orphic Argonautica contain a brief\n  summary of the chief points of the theogony.\n\n  [36] See Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 472-476, 490-500, \u039c\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\n  \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f28\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd; again, \u0398\u1fc6\u03bb\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f28\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2. Compare Lactant. iv. 8, 4: Suidas, v. \u03a6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2:\n  Athenagoras, xx. 296: Diod\u00f4r. i. 27.\n\n  This egg figures, as might be expected, in the cosmogony set\n  forth by the Birds, Aristophan. Av. 695. Nyx gives birth to an\n  egg, out of which steps the golden Er\u00f4s, from Er\u00f4s and Chaos\n  spring the race of birds.\n\nFrom Uranos and G\u00e6a sprang the three M\u0153r\u00e6, or Fates, the three\nCentimanes and the three Cycl\u00f4pes: these latter were cast by Uranos\ninto Tartarus, under the foreboding that they would rob him of his\ndominion. In revenge for this maltreatment of her sons, G\u00e6a produced of\nherself the fourteen Titans, seven male and seven female: the former\nwere K\u0153os, Krios, Phorkys, Kronos, Oceanus, Hyperi\u00f4n and Iapetos;\nthe latter were Themis, T\u00eathys, Mn\u00eamosyn\u00ea, Theia, Di\u00f4n\u00ea, Ph\u0153b\u00ea and\nRhea.[37] They received the name of Titans because they avenged upon\nUranos the expulsion of their elder brothers. Six of the Titans, headed\nby Kronos the most powerful of them all, conspiring against Uranos,\ncastrated and dethroned him: Oceanus alone stood aloof and took no part\nin the aggression. Kronos assumed the government and fixed his seat\non Olympos; while Oceanus remained apart, master of his own divine\nstream.[38] The reign of Kronos was a period of tranquillity and\nhappiness, as well as of extraordinary longevity and vigor.\n\n  [37] Lobeck, Ag. p. 504. Athenagor. xv. p. 64.\n\n  [38] Lobeck, Ag. p. 507. Plato, Tim\u00e6us, p. 41. In the \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9 of \u00c6schylus, the old attendants of the god Dionysos were\n  said to have been cut up and boiled in a caldron, and rendered\n  again young, by Medeia. Pherecyd\u00eas and Simonid\u00eas said that Jas\u00f4n\n  himself had been so dealt with. Schol. Aristoph. Equit. 1321.\n\nKronos and Rhea gave birth to Zeus and his brothers and sisters. The\nconcealment and escape of the infant Zeus, and the swallowing of the\nstone by Kronos, are given in the Orphic Theogony substantially in\nthe same manner as by Hesiod, only in a style less simple and more\nmysticized. Zeus is concealed in the cave of Nyx, the seat of Phan\u00eas\nhimself, along with Eid\u00ea and Adrasteia, who nurse and preserve him,\nwhile the armed dance and sonorous instruments of the Kur\u00eates prevent\nhis infant cries from reaching the ears of Kronos. When grown up, he\nlays a snare for his father, intoxicates him with honey, and having\nsurprised him in the depth of sleep, enchains and castrates him.[39]\nThus exalted to the supreme mastery, he swallowed and absorbed into\nhimself M\u00eatis, or Phan\u00eas, with all the pre\u00ebxisting elements of things,\nand then generated all things anew out of his own being and conformably\nto his own divine ideas.[40] So scanty are the remains of this system,\nthat we find it difficult to trace individually the gods and goddesses\nsprung from Zeus beyond Apollo, Dionysos, and Persephon\u00ea,\u2014the latter\nbeing confounded with Artemis and Hekat\u00ea.\n\n  [39] Lobeck, p. 514. Porphyry, de Antro Nympharum, c. 16. \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76\n  \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u03b5\u1fd6 \u1f21 \u039d\u1f7a\u03be, \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0394\u03b9\u1fd2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03b4\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\n\n    \u0395\u1f56\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u03b4\u03ae \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f34\u03b4\u03b7\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b4\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f51\u03c8\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\n    \u1f1c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03ac\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03cc\u03bc\u03b2\u03c9\u03bd,\n    \u0391\u1f54\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n    \u1f4b \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f41 \u039a\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u039f\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n  Compare Tim\u00e6us ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 983.\n\n  [40] The Cataposis of Phan\u00eas by Zeus one of the most memorable\n  points of the Orphic Theogony. Lobeck, p. 519.; also Fragm. vi.\n  p. 456 of Hermann\u2019s Orphica.\n\n  From this absorption and subsequent reproduction of all things by\n  Zeus, flowed the magnificent string of Orphic predicates about\n  him,\u2014\n\n    \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74, \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1, \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\u2014\n\n  an allusion to which is traceable even in Plato, de Legg. iv. p.\n  715. Plutarch, de Defectu Oracul. T. ix. p. 379. c. 48. Diod\u00f4rus\n  (i. 11) is the most ancient writer remaining to us who mentions\n  the name of Phan\u00eas, in a line cited as proceeding from Orpheus;\n  wherein, however, Phan\u00eas is identified with Dionysos. Compare\n  Macrobius, Saturnal. i. 18.\n\nBut there is one new personage, begotten by Zeus, who stands\npre\u00ebminently marked in the Orphic Theogony, and whose adventures\nconstitute one of its peculiar features. Zagreus, \u201cthe horned child,\u201d\nis the son of Zeus by his own daughter Persephon\u00ea: he is the favorite\nof his father, a child of magnificent promise, and predestined, if he\ngrow up, to succeed to supreme dominion as well as to the handling\nof the thunderbolt. He is seated, whilst an infant, on the throne\nbeside Zeus, guarded by Apollo and the Kur\u00eates. But the jealous H\u00ear\u00ea\nintercepts his career and incites the Titans against him, who, having\nfirst smeared their faces with plaster, approach him on the throne,\ntempt his childish fancy with playthings, and kill him with a sword\nwhile he is contemplating his face in a mirror. They then cut up his\nbody and boil it in a caldron, leaving only the heart, which is picked\nup by Ath\u00ean\u00ea and carried to Zeus, who in his wrath strikes down the\nTitans with thunder into Tartarus; whilst Apollo is directed to collect\nthe remains of Zagreus and bury them at the foot of Mount Parnassus.\nThe heart is given to Semel\u00ea, and Zagreus is born again from her under\nthe form of Dionysos.[41]\n\n  [41] About the tale of Zagreus, see Lobeck, p. 552, _sqq._ Nonnus\n  in his Dionysiaca has given many details about it:\u2014\n\n    \u0396\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03ad\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03ba\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03bd \u03b2\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2, etc. (vi. 264).\n\n  Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 11, 12, Sylb. The story\n  was treated both by Callimachus and by Euphori\u00f4n, Etymolog. Magn.\n  v. \u0396\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2, Schol. Lycophr. 208. In the old epic poem Alkm\u00e6\u00f4nis\n  or Epigoni, Zagreus is a surname of Had\u00eas. See Fragm. 4, p. 7,\n  ed. D\u00fcntzer. Respecting the Orphic Theogony generally, Brandis\n  (Handbuch der Geschichte der Griechisch-R\u00f6misch. Philosophie,\n  c. xvii., xviii.), K. O. M\u00fcller (Prolegg. Mythol. pp. 379-396),\n  and Zoega (Abhandlungen, v. pp. 211-263) may be consulted with\n  much advantage. Brandis regards this Theogony as _considerably\n  older_ than the first Ionic philosophy, which is a higher\n  antiquity than appears probable: some of the ideas which it\n  contains, such, for example, as that of the Orphic egg, indicate\n  a departure from the string of purely personal generations\n  which both Homer and Hesiod exclusively recount, and a resort\n  to something like physical analogies. On the whole, we cannot\n  reasonably claim for it more than half a century above the age of\n  Onomakritus. The Theogony of Pherekyd\u00eas of Syros seems to have\n  borne some analogy to the Orphic. See Diogen. La\u00ebrt. i. 119,\n  Sturz. Fragment. Pherekyd. \u00a7 5-6, Brandis, Handbuch, _ut sup._ c.\n  xxii. Pherekyd\u00eas partially deviated from the mythical track or\n  personal successions set forth by Hesiod. \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f35 \u03b3\u03b5 ~\u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9~\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 ~\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2~ \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u03a6\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f11\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, etc. (Aristot. Metaphys. N. p. 301, ed. Brandis).\n  Porphyrias, de Antro Nymphar. c. 31, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a3\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a6\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03bc\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03cc\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n  etc. Eud\u00eamus the Peripatetic, pupil of Aristotle, had drawn up\n  an account of the Orphic Theogony as well as of the doctrines of\n  Pherekyd\u00eas, Akusilaus and others, which was still in the hands of\n  the Platonists of the fourth century, though it is now lost. The\n  extracts which we find seem all to countenance the belief that\n  the Hesiodic Theogony formed the basis upon which they worked.\n  See about Akusilaus, Plato, Sympos. p. 178. Clem. Alex. Strom. p.\n  629.\n\nSuch is the tissue of violent fancies comprehended under the title of\nthe Orphic Theogony, and read as such, it appears, by Plato, Isokrat\u00eas\nand Aristotle. It will be seen that it is based upon the Hesiodic\nTheogony, but according to the general expansive tendency of Grecian\nlegend, much new matter is added: Zeus has in Homer one predecessor, in\nHesiod two, and in Orpheus four.\n\nThe Hesiodic Theogony, though later in date than the Iliad and Odyssey,\nwas coeval with the earliest period of what may be called Grecian\nhistory, and certainly of an age earlier than 700 B. C. It appears to\nhave been widely circulated in Greece, and being at once ancient and\nshort, the general public consulted it as their principal source of\ninformation respecting divine antiquity. The Orphic Theogony belongs to\na later date, and contains the Hesiodic ideas and persons, enlarged and\nmystically disguised: its vein of invention was less popular, adapted\nmore to the contemplation of a sect specially prepared than to the\ntaste of a casual audience, and it appears accordingly to have obtained\ncurrency chiefly among purely speculative men.[42] Among the majority\nof these latter, however, it acquired greater veneration, and above all\nwas supposed to be of greater antiquity, than the Hesiodic. The belief\nin its superior antiquity (disallowed by Herodotus, and seemingly also\nby Aristotle[43]), as well as the respect for its contents, increased\nduring the Alexandrine age and through the declining centuries of\nPaganism, reaching its maximum among the New-Platonists of the third\nand fourth century after Christ: both the Christian assailants, as\nwell as the defenders, of paganism, treated it as the most ancient and\nvenerable summary of the Grecian faith. Orpheus is celebrated by Pindar\nas the harper and companion of the Argonautic maritime heroes: Orpheus\nand Mus\u00e6us, as well as Pamph\u00f4s and Ol\u00ean, the great supposed authors\nof theogonic, mystical, oracular, and prophetic verses and hymns,\nwere generally considered by literary Greeks as older than either\nHesiod or Homer:[44] and such was also the common opinion of modern\nscholars until a period comparatively recent. It has now been shown,\non sufficient ground, that the compositions which passed under these\nnames emanate for the most part from poets of the Alexandrine age, and\nsubsequent to the Christian \u00e6ra; and that even the earliest among them,\nwhich served as the stock on which the later additions were engrafted,\nbelong to a period far more recent than Hesiod; probably to the century\npreceding Onomakritus (B. C. 610-510). It seems, however, certain,\nthat both Orpheus and Mus\u00e6us were names of established reputation at\nthe time when Onomakritus flourished; and it is distinctly stated by\nPausanias that the latter was himself the author of the most remarkable\nand characteristic mythe of the Orphic Theogony\u2014the discerption of\nZagreus by the Titans, and his resurrection as Dionysos.[45]\n\n  [42] The Orphic Theogony is never cited in the ample Scholia on\n  Homer, though Hesiod is often alluded to. (See Lobeck, Aglaoph.\n  p. 540). Nor can it have been present to the minds of Xenophan\u00eas\n  and Herakleitus, as representing any widely diffused Grecian\n  belief: the former, who so severely condemned Homer and Hesiod,\n  would have found Orpheus much more deserving of his censure: and\n  the latter could hardly have omitted Orpheus from his memorable\n  denunciation:\u2014\u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03b7 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u00b7 \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd, \u03b1\u1f56\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u039e\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd. Diog. La\u00ebr.\n  ix. 1. Isokrat\u00eas treats Orpheus as the most censurable of all\n  the poets. See Busiris, p. 229; ii. p. 309, Bekk. The Theogony\n  of Orpheus, as conceived by Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius (i. 504) in the\n  third century B. C., and by Nigidius in the first century B.\n  C. (Servius ad Virgil. Eclog. iv. 10), seems to have been on a\n  more contracted scale than that which is given in the text. But\n  neither of them notice the tale of Zagreus, which we know to be\n  as old as Onomakritus.\n\n  [43] This opinion of Herodotus is implied in the remarkable\n  passage about Homer and Hesiod, ii. 53, though he never once\n  names Orpheus\u2014only alluding once to \u201cOrphic ceremonies,\u201d ii. 81.\n  He speaks more than once of the prophecies of Mus\u00e6us. Aristotle\n  denied the past existence and reality of Orpheus. See Cicero de\n  Nat. Deor. i. 38.\n\n  [44] Pindar Pyth. iv. 177. Plato seems to consider Orpheus as\n  more ancient than Homer. Compare The\u00e6t\u00eat. p. 179; Cratylus, p.\n  402; De Republ. ii. p. 364. The order in which Aristophan\u00eas (and\n  Hippias of Elis, ap. Clem. Alex. Str. vi. p. 624) mentions them\n  indicates the same view, Ran\u00e6, 1030. It is unnecessary to cite\n  the later chronologers, among whom the belief in the antiquity\n  of Orpheus was universal; he was commonly described as son of\n  the Muse Calliop\u00ea. Androti\u00f4n seems to have denied that he was\n  a Thracian, regarding the Thracians as incurably stupid and\n  illiterate. Androti\u00f4n, Fragm. 36, ed. Didot. Ephorus treated\n  him as having been a pupil of the Id\u00e6an Dactyls of Phrygia (see\n  Diod\u00f4r. v. 64), and as having learnt from them his \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 and\n  \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1, which he was the first to introduce into Greece. The\n  earliest mention which we find of Orpheus, is that of the poet\n  Ibycus (about B. C. 530), \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u1fc6\u03bd. Ibyci Fragm. 9, p.\n  341, ed. Schneidewin.\n\n  [45] Pausan. viii. 37, 3. \u03a4\u03b9\u03c4\u1fb6\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03ae\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\n  \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c6\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03a4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u1ff3\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c1\u03ba\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7\u00b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f48\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03a4\u03b9\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1, \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f44\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u03a4\u03b9\u03c4\u1fb6\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2. Both\n  the date, the character and the function of Onomakritus are\n  distinctly marked by Herodotus, vii. 6.\n\nThe names of Orpheus and Mus\u00e6us (as well as that of Pythagoras,[46]\nlooking at one side of his character) represent facts of importance\nin the history of the Grecian mind\u2014the gradual influx of Thracian,\nPhrygian, and Egyptian, religious ceremonies and feelings, and the\nincreasing diffusion of special mysteries,[47] schemes for religious\npurification, and orgies (I venture to anglicize the Greek word,\nwhich contains in its original meaning no implication of the ideas\nof excess to which it was afterwards diverted) in honor of some\nparticular god\u2014distinct both from the public solemnities and from the\ngentile solemnities of primitive Greece,\u2014celebrated apart from the\ncitizens generally, and approachable only through a certain course of\npreparation and initiation\u2014sometimes even forbidden to be talked of in\nthe presence of the uninitiated, under the severest threats of divine\njudgment. Occasionally such voluntary combinations assumed the form\nof permanent brotherhoods, bound together by periodical solemnities\nas well as by vows of an ascetic character: thus the Orphic life (as\nit was called) or regulation of the Orphic brotherhood, among other\ninjunctions partly arbitrary and partly abstinent, forbade animal food\nuniversally, and on certain occasions, the use of woollen clothing.[48]\nThe great religious and political fraternity of the Pythagoreans,\nwhich acted so powerfully on the condition of the Italian cities, was\none of the many manifestations of this general tendency, which stands\nin striking contrast with the simple, open-hearted, and demonstrative\nworship of the Homeric Greeks.\n\n  [46] Herodotus believed in the derivation both of the Orphic and\n  Pythagorean regulations from Egypt\u2014\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0392\u03b1\u03ba\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9, \u1f10\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03c5\u03c0\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\n  (ii. 81). He knows the names of those Greeks who have borrowed\n  from Egypt the doctrine of the metempsychosis, but he will not\n  mention them (ii. 123): he can hardly allude to any one but\n  the Pythagoreans, many of whom he probably knew in Italy. See\n  the curious extract from Xenophan\u00eas respecting the doctrine of\n  Pythagoras, Diogen. La\u00ebrt. viii. 37; and the quotation from the\n  Silli of Tim\u00f4n, \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u03bf\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03bd, etc.\n  Compare Porphyr. in Vit. Pythag. c. 41.\n\n  [47] Aristophan. Ran. 1030.\u2014\n\n    \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5, \u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n    \u039c\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03ba\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bd\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72,\n    \u0393\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f65\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f00\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\n    \u1f08\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03bd, \u03c0\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03b8\u1fbd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd,\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2, \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f41\u03c0\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd; etc.\n\n  The same general contrast is to be found in Plato, Protagoras,\n  p. 316; the opinion of Pausanias, ix. 30, 4. The poems of Mus\u00e6us\n  seem to have borne considerable analogy to the Melampodia\n  ascribed to Hesiod (see Clemen. Alex. Str. vi. p. 628); and\n  healing charms are ascribed to Orpheus as well as to Mus\u00e6us. See\n  Eurip. Alcestis, 986.\n\n  [48] Herod. ii. 81; Euripid. Hippol. 957, and the curious\n  fragment of the lost \u039a\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 of Euripid\u00eas. \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03b9, Plato,\n  Legg. vii. 782.\n\nFestivals at seed-time and harvest\u2014at the vintage and at the opening\nof the new wine\u2014were doubtless coeval with the earliest habits of the\nGreeks; the latter being a period of unusual joviality. Yet in the\nHomeric poems, Dionysos and D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, the patrons of the vineyard and\nthe cornfield, are seldom mentioned, and decidedly occupy little place\nin the imagination of the poet as compared with the other gods: nor are\nthey of any conspicuous importance even in the Hesiodic Theogony. But\nduring the interval between Hesiod and Onomakritus, the revolution in\nthe religious mind of Greece was such as to place both these deities\nin the front rank. According to the Orphic doctrine, Zagreus, son of\nPersephon\u00ea, is destined to be the successor of Zeus, and although the\nviolence of the Titans intercepts this lot, yet even when he rises\nagain from his discerption under the name of Dionysos, he is the\ncolleague and co\u00ebqual of his divine father.\n\nThis remarkable change, occurring as it did during the sixth and a\npart of the seventh century before the Christian \u00e6ra, may be traced\nto the influence of communication with Egypt (which only became\nfully open to the Greeks about B. C. 660), as well as with Thrace,\nPhrygia, and Lydia. From hence new religious ideas and feelings were\nintroduced, which chiefly attached themselves to the characters of\nDionysos and D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear. The Greeks identified these two deities with the\ngreat Egyptian Osiris and Isis, so that what was borrowed from the\nEgyptian worship of the two latter naturally fell to their equivalents\nin the Grecian system.[49] Moreover the worship of Dionysos (under\nwhat name cannot be certainly made out) was indigenous in Thrace,[50]\nas that of the Great Mother was in Phyrgia, and in Lydia\u2014together\nwith those violent ecstasies and manifestations of temporary frenzy,\nand that clashing of noisy instruments, which we find afterwards\ncharacterizing it in Greece. The great masters of the pipe\u2014as well as\nthe dythyramb,[51] and indeed the whole musical system appropriated to\nthe worship of Dionysos, which contrasted so pointedly with the quiet\nsolemnity of the P\u00e6an addressed to Apollo\u2014were all originally Phrygian.\n\n  [49] Herodot. ii. 42, 59, 144.\n\n  [50] Herodot. v. 7, vii. 111; Euripid. Hecub. 1249, and Rh\u00easus,\n  969, and the Prologue to the Bacch\u00e6; Strabo, x. p. 470; Schol.\n  ad Aristophan. Aves, 874; Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 1069;\n  Harpocrat. v. \u03a3\u03ac\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9; Photius, \u0395\u1f50\u03bf\u1fd6 \u03a3\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u1fd6. The \u201cLydiaca\u201d of Th.\n  Menke (Berlin, 1843) traces the early connection between the\n  religion of Dionysos and that of Cybel\u00ea, c. 6, 7. Hoeckh\u2019s Kr\u00eata\n  (vol. i. p. 128-134) is instructive respecting the Phrygian\n  religion.\n\n  [51] Aristotle, Polit. viii. 7, 9. \u03a0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u0392\u03ac\u03ba\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f21\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7 \u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd\n  \u1f01\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03a6\u03c1\u03c5\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03b8\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03a6\u03c1\u03cd\u03b3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd. Eurip. Bacch. 58.\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f34\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03a6\u03c1\u03c5\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\n    \u03a4\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1, \u1fec\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f70 \u03b8\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, etc.\n\n  Plutarch, \u0395\u1f30. in Delph. c. 9; Philochor. Fr. 21, ed. Didot,\n  p. 389. The complete and intimate manner in which Euripid\u00eas\n  identifies the Bacchic rites of Dionysos with the Phrygian\n  ceremonies in honor of the Great Mother, is very remarkable. The\n  fine description given by Lucretius (ii. 600-640) of the Phrygian\n  worship is much enfeebled by his unsatisfactory allegorizing.\n\nFrom all these various countries, novelties, unknown to the Homeric\nmen, found their way into the Grecian worship: and there is one amongst\nthem which deserves to be specially noticed, because it marks the\ngeneration of the new class of ideas in their theology. Homer mentions\nmany persons guilty of private or involuntary homicide, and compelled\neither to go into exile or to make pecuniary satisfaction; but he\nnever once describes any of them to have either received or required\npurification for the crime.[52] Now in the time subsequent to Homer,\npurification for homicide comes to be considered as indispensable:\nthe guilty person is regarded as unfit for the society of man or the\nworship of the gods until he has received it, and special ceremonies\nare prescribed whereby it is to be administered. Herodotus tells us\nthat the ceremony of purification was the same among the Lydians and\namong the Greeks:[53] we know that it formed no part of the early\nreligion of the latter, and we may perhaps reasonably suspect that\nthey borrowed it from the former. The oldest instance known to us of\nexpiation for homicide was contained in the epic poem of the Milesian\nArktinus,[54] wherein Achill\u00eas is purified by Odysseus for the\nmurder of Thersit\u00eas: several others occurred in the later or Hesiodic\nepic\u2014H\u00earakl\u00eas, P\u00ealeus, Belleroph\u00f4n, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n, Amphikty\u00f4n, P\u0153mander,\nTriopas,\u2014from whence they probably passed through the hands of the\nlogographers to Apollod\u00f4rus, Diod\u00f4rus, and others.[55] The purification\nof the murderer was originally operated, not by the hands of any priest\nor specially sanctified man, but by those of a chief or king, who goes\nthrough the appropriate ceremonies in the manner recounted by Herodotus\nin his pathetic narrative respecting Cr\u0153sus and Adrastus.\n\n  [52] Schol. ad Iliad, xi. 690\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 \u1f38\u03c6\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u1f21 \u03a0\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f48\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u039d\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\n  \u03bf\u1f34\u03b4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f22 \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n  The examples are numerous, and are found both in the Iliad and\n  the Odyssey. Iliad, ii. 665 (_Tl\u00eapolemos_); xiii. 697 (_Med\u00f4n_);\n  xiii. 574 (_Epeigeus_); xxiii. 89 (_Patroclos_); Odyss. xv.\n  224 (_Theoclymenos_); xiv. 380 (an _\u00c6t\u00f4lian_). Nor does the\n  interesting mythe respecting the functions of At\u00ea and the Lit\u00e6\n  harmonize with the subsequent doctrine about the necessity of\n  purification. (Iliad, ix. 498).\n\n  [53] Herodot. i. 35\u2014\u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b7 \u1f21 \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u039b\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9. One remarkable proof, amongst many, of the deep\n  hold which this idea took of the greatest minds in Greece, that\n  serious mischief would fall upon the community if family quarrels\n  or homicide remained without religious expiation, is to be found\n  in the objections which Aristotle urges against the community of\n  women proposed in the Platonic Republic. It could not be known\n  what individuals stood in the relation of father, son or brother:\n  if, therefore, wrong or murder of kindred should take place, the\n  appropriate religious atonements (\u03b1\u1f31 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2) could\n  not be applied, and the crime would go unexpiated. (Aristot.\n  Polit. ii. 1, 14. Compare Thucyd. i. 125-128).\n\n  [54] See the Fragm. of the \u00c6thiopis of Arktinus, in D\u00fcntzer\u2019s\n  Collection, p. 16.\n\n  [55] The references for this are collected in Lobeck\u2019s\n  Aglaophamos. Epimetr. ii. ad Orphica, p. 968.\n\nThe idea of a special taint of crime, and of the necessity as well\nas the sufficiency of prescribed religious ceremonies as a means of\nremoving it, appears thus to have got footing in Grecian practice\nsubsequent to the time of Homer. The peculiar rites or orgies,\ncomposed or put together by Onomakritus, Methapus,[56] and other men\nof more than the ordinary piety, were founded upon a similar mode\nof thinking, and adapted to the same mental exigencies. They were\nvoluntary religious manifestations, superinduced upon the old public\nsacrifices of the king or chiefs on behalf of the whole society, and\nof the father on his own family hearth\u2014they marked out the details of\ndivine service proper to appease or gratify the god to whom they were\naddressed, and to procure for the believers who went through them his\nblessings and protection here or hereafter\u2014the exact performance of\nthe divine service in all its specialty was held necessary, and thus\nthe priests or Hierophants, who alone were familiar with the ritual,\nacquired a commanding position.[57] Generally speaking, these peculiar\norgies obtained their admission and their influence at periods of\ndistress, disease, public calamity and danger, or religious terror\nand despondency, which appear to have been but too frequent in their\noccurrence.\n\n  [56] Pausanias (iv. 1, 5)\u2014\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039c\u03ad\u03b8\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 (the Eleusinian Orgies, carried by Kaukon from Eleusis\n  into Mess\u00eania), \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f05. \u1f49 \u03b4\u1f72 \u039c\u03ad\u03b8\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f26\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2,\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 ~\u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2~. Again, viii. 37,\n  3, Onomakritus \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u1ff3 ~\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd~ \u1f44\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1, etc. This is another\n  expression designating the same idea as the Rh\u00easus of Euripid\u00eas,\n  944.\u2014\n\n    \u039c\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u1f1c\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5\u03bd \u1f48\u03c1\u03c6\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2.\n\n  [57] T\u00ealin\u00eas, the ancestor of the Syracusan despot Gel\u00f4,\n  acquired great political power as possessing \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f31\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd (Herodot. vii. 153); he and his family became hereditary\n  Hierophants of these ceremonies. How T\u00ealin\u00eas acquired the \u1f31\u03c1\u1f70\n  Herodotus cannot say\u2014\u1f45\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c5\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5, \u1f22 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9. Probably there was a traditional legend, not\n  inferior in sanctity to that of Eleusis, tracing them to the gift\n  of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear herself.\n\nThe minds of men were prone to the belief that what they were suffering\narose from the displeasure of some of the gods, and as they found\nthat the ordinary sacrifices and worship were insufficient for their\nprotection, so they grasped at new suggestions proposed to them with\nthe view of regaining the divine favor.[58] Such suggestions were more\nusually copied, either in whole or in part, from the religious rites\nof some foreign locality, or from some other portion of the Hellenic\nworld; and in this manner many new sects or voluntary religious\nfraternities, promising to relieve the troubled conscience and to\nreconcile the sick or suffering with the offended gods, acquired\npermanent establishment as well as considerable influence. They were\ngenerally under the superintendence of hereditary families of priests,\nwho imparted the rites of confirmation and purification to communicants\ngenerally; no one who went through the prescribed ceremonies being\nexcluded. In many cases, such ceremonies fell into the hands of\njugglers, who volunteered their services to wealthy men, and degraded\ntheir profession as well by obtrusive venality as by extravagant\npromises:[59] sometimes the price was lowered to bring them within\nreach of the poor and even of slaves. But the wide diffusion, and the\nnumber of voluntary communicants of these solemnities, proves how much\nthey fell in with the feeling of the time and how much respect they\nenjoyed\u2014a respect, which the more conspicuous establishments, such\nas Eleusis and Samothrace, maintained for several centuries. And the\nvisit of the Kretan Epimenid\u00eas to Athens\u2014in the time of Sol\u00f4n, and at a\nseason of the most serious disquietude and dread of having offended the\ngods\u2014illustrates the tranquillizing effect of new orgies[60] and rites\nof absolution, when enjoined by a man standing high in the favor of\nthe gods and reputed to be the son of a nymph. The supposed Erythr\u00e6an\nSibyl, and the earliest collection of Sibylline prophecies,[61]\nafterwards so much multiplied and interpolated, and referred (according\nto Grecian custom) to an age even earlier than Homer, appear to belong\nto a date not long posterior to Epimenid\u00eas. Other oracular verses, such\nas those of Bakis, were treasured up in Athens and other cities: the\nsixth century before the Christian \u00e6ra was fertile in these kinds of\nreligious manifestations.\n\n  [58] See Josephus cont. Api\u00f4n. ii. c. 35; Hesych. \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9;\n  Strabo, x. p. 471; Plutarch, \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u0394\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd. c. iii. p. 166; c.\n  vii. p. 167.\n\n  [59] Plato, Republ. ii. p. 364; Demosthen. de Coron\u00e2, c. 79,\n  p. 313. The \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd of Theophrastus cannot be comfortable\n  without receiving the Orphic communion monthly from the\n  Orpheotelest\u00e6 (Theophr. Char. xvi.). Compare Plutarch, \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fb6\u03bd \u1f14\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1, etc., c. 25, p. 400. The comic writer Phrynichus\n  indicates the existence of these rites of religious excitement,\n  at Athens, during the Peloponnesian war. See the short fragment\n  of his \u039a\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, ap. Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 989\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2\u00b7\n    \u0392\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1;\n\n  Diopeith\u00eas was a \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, or collector and deliverer of\n  prophecies, which he sung (or rather, perhaps, recited) with\n  solemnity and emphasis, in public. \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76\n  \u0394\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03b1\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f84\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff7. (Ameipsias ap. Schol.\n  Aristophan. _ut sup._, which illustrates Thucyd. ii. 21).\n\n  [60] Plutarch, Sol\u00f4n, c. 12; Diogen. La\u00ebrt. i. 110.\n\n  [61] See Klausen, \u201c\u00c6neas und die Penaten:\u201d his chapter on the\n  connection between the Grecian and Roman Sibylline collections\n  is among the most ingenious of his learned book. Book ii. pp.\n  210-240; see Steph. Byz. v. \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  To the same age belong the \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 and \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 of Abaris and his\n  marvellous journey through the air upon an arrow (Herodot. iv.\n  36).\n\n  Epimenid\u00eas also composed \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 in epic verse; his \u039a\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n  and \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03c5\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, and his four thousand verses respecting\n  Min\u00f4s and Rhadamanthys, if they had been preserved, would let us\n  fully into the ideas of a religious mystic of that age respecting\n  the antiquities of Greece. (Strabo, x. p. 474; Diogen. La\u00ebrt. i.\n  10). Among the poems ascribed to Hesiod were comprised not only\n  the Melampodia, but also \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 and \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n  Pausan. ix. 31, 4.\n\nAmongst the special rites and orgies of the character just described,\nthose which enjoyed the greatest Pan-Hellenic reputation were attached\nto the Id\u00e6an Zeus in Kr\u00eate, to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear at Eleusis, to the Kabeiri in\nSamothrace, and to Dionysos at Delphi and Thebes.[62] That they were\nall to a great degree analogous, is shown by the way in which they\nunconsciously run together and become confused in the minds of various\nauthors: the ancient inquirers themselves were unable to distinguish\none from the other, and we must be content to submit to the like\nignorance. But we see enough to satisfy us of the general fact, that\nduring the century and a half which elapsed between the opening of\nEgypt to the Greeks and the commencement of their struggle with the\nPersian kings, the old religion was largely adulterated by importations\nfrom Egypt, Asia Minor,[63] and Thrace. The rites grew to be more\nfurious and ecstatic, exhibiting the utmost excitement, bodily as well\nas mental: the legends became at once more coarse, more tragical, and\nless pathetic. The manifestations of this frenzy were strongest among\nthe women, whose religious susceptibilities were often found extremely\nunmanageable,[64] and who had everywhere congregative occasional\nceremonies of their own, apart from the men\u2014indeed, in the case of the\ncolonists, especially of the Asiatic colonists, the women had been\noriginally women of the country, and as such retained to a great degree\ntheir non-Hellenic manners and feelings.[65] The god Dionysos,[66]\nwhom the legends described as clothed in feminine attire, and leading\na troop of frenzied women, inspired a temporary ecstasy, and those who\nresisted the inspiration, being supposed to disobey his will, were\npunished either by particular judgments or by mental terrors; while\nthose who gave full loose to the feeling, in the appropriate season and\nwith the received solemnities, satisfied his exigencies, and believed\nthemselves to have procured immunity from such disquietudes for the\nfuture.[67] Crowds of women, clothed with fawn-skins and bearing the\nsanctified thyrsus, flocked to the solitudes of Parnassus, or Kith\u00e6r\u00f4n,\nor Taygetus, during the consecrated triennial period, passed the\nnight there with torches, and abandoned themselves to demonstrations\nof frantic excitement, with dancing and clamorous invocation of the\ngod: they were said to tear animals limb from limb, to devour the raw\nflesh, and to cut themselves without feeling the wound.[68] The men\nyielded to a similar impulse by noisy revels in the streets, sounding\nthe cymbals and tambourine, and carrying the image of the god in\nprocession.[69] It deserves to be remarked, that the Athenian women\nnever practised these periodical mountain excursions, so common among\nthe rest of the Greeks: they had their feminine solemnities of the\nThesmophoria,[70] mournful in their character and accompanied with\nfasting, and their separate congregations at the temples of Aphrodit\u00ea,\nbut without any extreme or unseemly demonstrations. The state festival\nof the Dionysia, in the city of Athens, was celebrated with dramatic\nentertainments, and the once rich harvest of Athenian tragedy and\ncomedy was thrown up under its auspices. The ceremonies of the Kur\u00eates\nin Kr\u00eate, originally armed dances in honor of the Id\u00e6an Zeus, seem also\nto have borrowed from Asia so much of fury, of self-infliction, and\nof mysticism, that they became at last inextricably confounded with\nthe Phrygian Korybantes or worshippers of the Great Mother; though it\nappears that Grecian reserve always stopped short of the irreparable\nself-mutilation of Atys.\n\n  [62] Among other illustrations of this general resemblance, may\n  be counted an epitaph of Kallimachus upon an aged priestess,\n  who passed from the service of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear to that of the Kabeiri,\n  then to that of Cybel\u00ea, having the superintendence of many young\n  women. Kallimachus, Epigram. 42. p. 308, ed. Ernest.\n\n  [63] Plutarch, (Defect. Oracul. c. 10, p. 415) treats these\n  countries as the original seat of the worship of D\u00e6mons (wholly\n  or partially bad, and intermediate between gods and men), and\n  their religious ceremonies as of a corresponding character: the\n  Greeks were borrowers from them, according to him, both of the\n  doctrine and of the ceremonies.\n\n  [64] Strabo, vii. p. 297. \u1f0d\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u03bf\u1f34\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2.\n  Plato (De Legg. x. pp. 909, 910) takes great pains to restrain\n  this tendency on the part of sick or suffering persons,\n  especially women, to introduce new sacred rites into his city.\n\n  [65] Herodot. i. 146. The wives of the Ionic original settlers at\n  Miletos were Karian women, whose husbands they slew.\n\n  The violences of the Karian worship are attested by what\n  Herodotus says of the Karian residents in Egypt, at the festival\n  of Isis at Busiris. The Egyptians at this festival manifested\n  their feeling by beating themselves, the Karians by cutting their\n  faces with knives (ii. 61). The \u039a\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1 became proverbial\n  for funeral wailings (Plato, Legg. vii. p. 800): the unmeasured\n  effusions and demonstrations of sorrow for the departed, some\n  times accompanied by cutting and mutilation self-inflicted by the\n  mourner was a distinguishing feature in Asiatics and Egyptians\n  as compared with Greeks. Plutarch, Consolat. ad Apoll\u00f4n. c. 22,\n  p. 123. Mournful feeling was, in fact, a sort of desecration of\n  the genuine and primitive Grecian festival, which was a season\n  of cheerful harmony and social enjoyment, wherein the god was\n  believed to sympathize (\u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7). See Xenophanes ap. Aristot.\n  Rhetor. ii. 25; Xenophan. Fragm. 1. ed. Schneidewin; Theognis,\n  776; Plutarch, De Superstit. p. 169. The unfavorable comments\n  of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, in so far as they refer to the\n  festivals of Greece, apply to the foreign corruptions, not to the\n  native character, of Grecian worship.\n\n  [66] The Lydian H\u00earakl\u00eas was conceived and worshipped as a man in\n  female attire: this idea occurs often in the Asiatic religions.\n  Mencke, Lydiaca, c. 8, p. 22. \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f04\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u1fc6\u03bb\u03c5\u03c2. Aristid.\n  Or. iv. p. 28; \u00c6schyl. Fragm. Edoni, ap. Aristoph. Thesmoph. 135.\n  \u03a0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1\u03c0\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bd\u03b9\u03c2; \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1; \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f21 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae;\n\n  [67] Melampos cures the women (whom Dionysos has struck mad for\n  their resistance to his rites), \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b8\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. Apollod\u00f4r. ii.\n  2, 7. Compare Eurip. Bacch. 861.\n\n  Plato (Legg. vii. p. 790) gives a similar theory of the\n  healing effect of the Korybantic rites, which cured vague and\n  inexplicable terrors of the mind by means of dancing and music\n  conjoined with religious ceremonies\u2014\u03b1\u1f31 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03c5\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f30\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 (the practitioners were women), \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u0392\u03b1\u03ba\u03c7\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u1f30\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\u2014\u1f21 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f14\u03be\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70\u03bd\n  \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u2014\u1f40\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b8\u03cd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76\n  \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03bc\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n  [68] Described in the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas (140, 735, 1135,\n  etc.). Ovid, Trist. iv. i. 41. \u201cUtque suum Bacchis non sentit\n  saucia vulnus, Cum furit Edonis exululata jugis.\u201d In a fragment\n  of the poet Alkman, a Lydian by birth, the Bacchanal nymphs are\n  represented as milking the lioness, and making cheese of the\n  milk, during their mountain excursions and festivals. (Alkman.\n  Fragm. 14. Schn. Compare Aristid. Orat. iv. p. 29). Clemens\n  Alexand. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 9, Sylb.; Lucian, Dionysos, c. 3,\n  T. iii. p. 77, Hemsterh.\n\n  [69] See the tale of Skyl\u00eas in Herod. iv. 79, and Athen\u00e6us, x. p.\n  445. Herodotus mentions that the Scythians abhorred the Bacchic\n  ceremonies, accounting the frenzy which belonged to them to be\n  disgraceful and monstrous.\n\n  [70] Plutarch, De Isid. et Osir. c. 69, p. 378; Schol. ad\n  Aristoph. Thesmoph. There were however Bacchic ceremonies\n  practised to a certain extent by the Athenian women. (Aristoph.\n  Lysist. 388).\n\nThe influence of the Thracian religion upon that of the Greeks cannot\nbe traced in detail, but the ceremonies contained in it were of a\nviolent and fierce character, like the Phrygian, and acted upon Hellas\nin the same general direction as the latter. And the like may be said\nof the Egyptian religion, which was in this case the more operative,\ninasmuch as all the intellectual Greeks were naturally attracted to go\nand visit the wonders on the banks of the Nile; the powerful effect\nproduced upon them is attested by many evidences, but especially by\nthe interesting narrative of Herodotus. Now the Egyptian ceremonies\nwere at once more licentious, and more profuse in the outpouring both\nof joy and sorrow, than the Greek;[71] but a still greater difference\nsprang from the extraordinary power, separate mode of life, minute\nobservances, and elaborate organization, of the priesthood. The\nceremonies of Egypt were multitudinous, but the legends concerning them\nwere framed by the priests, and as a general rule, seemingly, known\nto the priests alone: at least they were not intended to be publicly\ntalked of, even by pious men. They were \u201choly stories,\u201d which it was\nsacrilege publicly to mention, and which from this very prohibition\nonly took firmer hold of the minds of the Greek visitors who heard\nthem. And thus the element of secrecy and mystic silence\u2014foreign to\nHomer, and only faintly glanced at in Hesiod\u2014if it was not originally\nderived from Egypt, at least received from thence its greatest\nstimulus and diffusion. The character of the legends themselves was\nnaturally affected by this change from publicity to secrecy: the\nsecrets when revealed would be such as to justify by their own tenor\nthe interdict on public divulgation: instead of being adapted, like\nthe Homeric mythe, to the universal sympathies and hearty interest of\na crowd of hearers, they would derive their impressiveness from the\ntragical, mournful, extravagant, or terror-striking character of the\nincidents.[72] Such a tendency, which appears explicable and probable\neven on general grounds, was in this particular case rendered still\nmore certain by the coarse taste of the Egyptian priests. That any\nrecondite doctrine, religious or philosophical, was attached to the\nmysteries or contained in the holy stories, has never been shown,\nand is to the last degree improbable though the affirmative has been\nasserted by many learned men.\n\n  [71] \u201c\u00c6gyptiaca numina fere plangoribus gaudent, Gr\u00e6ca plerumque\n  choreis, barbara autem strepitu cymbalistarum et tympanistarum\n  et choraularum.\u201d (Apuleius, De Genio Socratis, v. ii. p. 149,\n  Oudend).\n\n  [72] The legend of Dionysos and Prosymnos, as it stands in\n  Clemens, could never have found place in an epic poem (Admonit.\n  ad Gent. p. 22, Sylb.). Compare page 11 of the same work,\n  where however he so confounds together Phrygian, Bacchic, and\n  Eleusinian mysteries, that one cannot distinguish them apart.\n\n  Dem\u00eatrius Phal\u00eareus says about the legends belonging to\n  these ceremonies\u2014\u0394\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2\n  ~\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f14\u03ba\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd~, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03af. (De\n  Interpretatione, c. 101).\n\nHerodotus seems to have believed that the worship and ceremonies of\nDionysos generally were derived by the Greeks from Egypt, brought\nover by Kadmus and taught by him to Melampus: and the latter appears\nin the Hesiodic Catalogue as having cured the daughters of Pr\u0153tus of\nthe mental distemper with which they had been smitten by Dionysos for\nrejecting his ritual. He cured them by introducing the Bacchic dance\nand fanatical excitement: this mythical incident is the most ancient\nmention of the Dionysiac solemnities presented in the same character\nas they bear in Euripid\u00eas. It is the general tendency of Herodotus\nto apply the theory of derivation from Egypt far too extensively to\nGrecian institutions: the orgies of Dionysos were not originally\nborrowed from thence, though they may have been much modified by\nconnection with Egypt as well as with Asia. The remarkable mythe\ncomposed by Onomakritus respecting the dismemberment of Zagreus was\nfounded upon an Egyptian tale very similar respecting the body of\nOsiris, who was supposed to be identical with Dionysos:[73] nor was it\nunsuitable to the reckless fury of the Bacchanals during their state of\ntemporary excitement, which found a still more awful expression in the\nmythe of Pentheus,\u2014torn in pieces by his own mother Agav\u00ea at the head\nof her companions in the ceremony, as an intruder upon the feminine\nrites as well as a scoffer at the god.[74] A passage in the Iliad (the\nauthenticity of which has been contested, but even as an interpolation\nit must be old)[75] also recounts how Lykurgus was struck blind by Zeus\nfor having chased away with a whip \u201cthe nurses of the mad Dionysos,\u201d\nand frightened the god himself into the sea to take refuge in the arms\nof Thetis: and the fact, that Dionysos is so frequently represented in\nhis mythes as encountering opposition and punishing the refractory,\nseems to indicate that his worship under its ecstatic form was a late\nph\u00e6nomenon and introduced not without difficulty. The mythical Thracian\nOrpheus was attached as Eponymos to a new sect, who seem to have\ncelebrated the ceremonies of Dionysos with peculiar care, minuteness\nand fervor, besides observing various rules in respect to food and\nclothing. It was the opinion of Herodotus, that these rules, as well as\nthe Pythagorean, were borrowed from Egypt. But whether this be the fact\nor not, the Orphic brotherhood is itself both an evidence, and a cause,\nof the increased importance of the worship of Dionysos, which indeed is\nattested by the great dramatic poets of Athens.\n\n  [73] See the curious treatise of Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid.\n  c. 11-14. p. 356, and his elaborate attempt to allegorize the\n  legend. He seems to have conceived that the Thracian Orpheus had\n  first introduced into Greece the mysteries both of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear and\n  Dionysos, copying them from those of Isis and Osiris in Egypt.\n  See Fragm. 84, from one of his lost works, tom, v. p. 891, ed.\n  Wyttenb.\n\n  [74] \u00c6schylus had dramatized the story of Pentheus as well as\n  that of Lykurgus: one of his tetralogies was the Lykurgeia\n  (Dindorf, \u00c6sch. Fragm. 115). A short allusion to the story of\n  Pentheus appears in Eumenid. 25. Compare Sophocl. Antigon. 985,\n  and the Scholia.\n\n  [75] Iliad, vi. 130. See the remarks of Mr. Payne Knight _ad loc._\n\nThe Homeric Hymns present to us, however, the religious ideas and\nlegends of the Greeks at an earlier period, when the enthusiastic and\nmystic tendencies had not yet acquired their full development. Though\nnot referable to the same age or to the same author as either the\nIliad or the Odyssey, they do to a certain extent continue the same\nstream of feeling, and the same mythical tone and coloring, as these\npoems\u2014manifesting but little evidence of Egyptian, Asiatic, or Thracian\nadulterations. The difference is striking between the god Dionysos\nas he appears in the Homeric hymn and in the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas.\nThe hymnographer describes him as standing on the sea-shore, in the\nguise of a beautiful and richly-clothed youth, when Tyrrhenian pirates\nsuddenly approach: they seize and bind him and drag him on board\ntheir vessel. But the bonds which they employ burst spontaneously,\nand leave the god free. The steersman, perceiving this with affright,\npoints out to his companions that they have unwittingly laid hands\non a god,\u2014perhaps Zeus himself, or Apollo, or Poseid\u00f4n. He conjures\nthem to desist, and to replace Dionysos respectfully on the shore,\nlest in his wrath he should visit the ship with wind and hurricane:\nbut the crew deride his scruples, and Dionysos is carried prisoner\nout to sea with the ship under full sail. Miraculous circumstances\nsoon attest both his presence and his power. Sweet-scented wine is\nseen to flow spontaneously about the ship, the sail and mast appear\nadorned with vine and ivy-leaves, and the oar-pegs with garlands. The\nterrified crew now too late entreat the helmsman to steer his course\nfor the shore, and crowd round him for protection on the poop. But\ntheir destruction is at hand: Dionysos assumes the form of a lion\u2014a\nbear is seen standing near him\u2014this bear rushes with a loud roar upon\nthe captain, while the crew leap overboard in their agony of fright,\nand are changed into dolphins. There remains none but the discreet\nand pious steersman, to whom Dionysos addresses words of affectionate\nencouragement, revealing his name, parentage and dignity.[76]\n\n  [76] See Homer, Hymn 5, \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f22 \u039b\u1fc6\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\u2014The satirical drama\n  of Euripid\u00eas, the Cycl\u00f4ps, extends and alters this old legend.\n  Dionysos is carried away by the Tyrrhenian pirates, and Sil\u00eanus\n  at the head of the Bacchanals goes everywhere in search of him\n  (Eur. Cyc. 112). The pirates are instigated against him by the\n  hatred of H\u00ear\u00ea, which appears frequently as a cause of mischief\n  to Dionysos (Bacch\u00e6, 286). H\u00ear\u00ea in her anger had driven him mad\n  when a child, and he had wandered in this state over Egypt and\n  Syria; at length he came to Cybela in Phrygia, was purified\n  (\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2) by Rhea, and received from her female attire\n  (Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 5, 1, with Heyne\u2019s note). This seems to have\n  been the legend adopted to explain the old verse of the Iliad, as\n  well as the maddening attributes of the god generally.\n\n  There was a standing antipathy between the priestesses and the\n  religious establishments of H\u00ear\u00ea and Dionysos (Plutarch, \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03a0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u0394\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, c. 2, tom. v. p. 755, ed. Wytt).\n  Plutarch ridicules the legendary reason commonly assigned for\n  this, and provides a symbolical explanation which he thinks very\n  satisfactory.\n\nThis hymn, perhaps produced at the Naxian festival of Dionysos,\nand earlier than the time when the dithyrambic chorus became the\nestablished mode of singing the praise and glory of that god, is\nconceived in a spirit totally different from that of the Bacchic\nTelat\u00e6, or special rites which the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas so abundantly\nextol,\u2014rites introduced from Asia by Dionysos himself at the head of a\nthiasus or troop of enthusiastic women,\u2014inflaming with temporary frenzy\nthe minds of the women of Thebes,\u2014not communicable except to those\nwho approach as pious communicants,\u2014and followed by the most tragical\nresults to all those who fight against the god.[77] The Bacchic Telet\u00e6,\nand the Bacchic feminine frenzy, were importations from abroad,\nas Euripid\u00eas represents them, engrafted upon the joviality of the\nprimitive Greek Dionysia; they were borrowed, in all probability, from\nmore than one source and introduced through more than one channel, the\nOrphic life or brotherhood being one of the varieties. Strabo ascribes\nto this latter a Thracian original, considering Orpheus, Mus\u00e6us, and\nEumolpus as having been all Thracians.[78] It is curious to observe\nhow, in the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas, the two distinct and even conflicting\nideas of Dionysos come alternately forward; sometimes the old Grecian\nidea of the jolly and exhilarating god of wine\u2014but more frequently\nthe recent and imported idea of the terrific and irresistible god\nwho unseats the reason, and whose _\u0153strus_ can only be appeased by a\nwilling, though temporary obedience. In the fanatical impulse which\ninspired the votaries of the Asiatic Rhea or Cybel\u00ea, or of the Thracian\nKotys, there was nothing of spontaneous joy; it was a sacred madness,\nduring which the soul appeared to be surrendered to a stimulus from\nwithout, and accompanied by preternatural strength and temporary sense\nof power,[79]\u2014altogether distinct from the unrestrained hilarity of the\noriginal Dionysia, as we see them in the rural demes of Attica, or in\nthe gay city of Tarentum. There was indeed a side on which the two bore\nsome analogy, inasmuch as, according to the religious point of view of\nthe Greeks, even the spontaneous joy of the vintage feast was conferred\nby the favor and enlivened by the companionship of Dionysos. It was\nupon this analogy that the framers of the Bacchic orgies proceeded\nbut they did not the less disfigure the genuine character of the old\nGrecian Dionysia.\n\n  [77] Eurip. Bacch. 325, 464, etc.\n\n  [78] Strabo, x. p. 471. Compare Aristid. Or. iv. p. 28.\n\n  [79] In the lost _Xantri\u00e6_ of \u00c6schylus, in which seems to\n  have been included the tale of Pentheus, the goddess \u039b\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\n  was introduced, stimulating the Bacch\u00e6, and creating in them\n  spasmodic excitement from head to foot: \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9 \u1f59\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f04\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1, etc. (Fragm. 155, Dindorf). His tragedy\n  called _Edoni_ also gave a terrific representation of the\n  Bacchanals and their fury, exaggerated by the maddening music:\n  \u03a0\u03af\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, \u039c\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f78\u03bd \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd (Fr. 54).\n\n  Such also is the reigning sentiment throughout the greater\n  part of the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas; it is brought out still more\n  impressively in the mournful Atys of Catullus:\u2014\n\n    \u201cDea magna, Dea Cybele, Dindymi Dea, Domina,\n    Procul a me\u00e2 tuus sit furor omnis, hera, domo:\n    Alios age incitatos: alios age rabidos!\u201d\n\n  We have only to compare this fearful influence with the\n  description of Dik\u00e6opolis and his exuberant joviality in the\n  festival of the rural Dionysia (Aristoph. Acharn. 1051 _seq._;\n  see also Plato. Legg. i. p. 637), to see how completely the\n  foreign innovations recolored the old Grecian Dionysos,\u2014\u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03b3\u03b7\u03b8\u1f74\u03c2,\u2014who appears also in the scene of Dionysos and Ariadn\u00ea\n  in the Symposion of Xenoph\u00f4n, c. 9. The simplicity of the ancient\n  Dionysiac processions is dwelt upon by Plutarch, De Cupidine\n  Divitiarum, p. 527; and the original dithyramb addressed by\n  Archilochus to Dionysos is an effusion of drunken hilarity\n  (Archiloch. Frag. 69, Schneid.).\n\nDionysos is in the conception of Pindar the Paredros or companion in\nworship of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear:[80] the worship and religious estimate of the\nlatter has by that time undergone as great a change as that of the\nformer, if we take our comparison with the brief description of Homer\nand Hesiod: she has acquired[81] much of the awful and soul-disturbing\nattributes of the Phrygian Cybel\u00ea. In Homer, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear is the goddess\nof the corn-field, who becomes attached to the mortal man Jasi\u00f4n;\nan unhappy passion, since Zeus, jealous of the connection between\ngoddesses and men, puts him to death. In the Hesiodic Theogony, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear\nis the mother of Persephon\u00ea by Zeus, who permits Had\u00eas to carry off\nthe latter as his wife: moreover D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear has, besides, by Jasi\u00f4n a son\ncalled Plutos, born in Kr\u00eate. Even from Homer to Hesiod, the legend\nof D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, has been expanded and her dignity exalted; according\nto the usual tendency of Greek legend, the expansion goes on still\nfurther. Through Jasi\u00f4n, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear becomes connected with the mysteries\nof Samothrace; through Persephon\u00ea, with those of Eleusis. The former\nconnection it is difficult to follow out in detail, but the latter is\nexplained and traced to its origin in the Homeric Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear.\n\n  [80] Pindar, Isthm. vi. 3. \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2,\u2014the\n  epithet marks the approximation of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear to the Mother of the\n  Gods. \u1f97 \u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f30\u03b1\u03c7\u1f74, \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b2\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u0395\u1f54\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\n  (Homer. Hymn, xiii.),\u2014the Mother of the Gods was worshipped by\n  Pindar himself along with Pan; she had in his time her temple and\n  ceremonies at Th\u00eabes (Pyth. iii. 78; Fragm. Dithyr. 5, and the\n  Scholia _ad l._) as well as, probably, at Athens (Pausan. i. 3,\n  3).\n\n  Dionysos and D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear are also brought together in the chorus of\n  Sophokl\u00eas, Antigon\u00ea, 1072. \u03bc\u03ad\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f18\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u0394\u03b7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2; and in Kallimachus, Hymn. Cerer. 70. Bacchus or\n  Dionysos are in the Attic tragedians constantly confounded with\n  the D\u00eam\u00eatrian Iacchos, originally so different,\u2014a personification\n  of the mystic word shouted by the Eleusinian communicants. See\n  Strabo, x. p. 468.\n\n  [81] Euripid\u00eas in his Chorus in the Helena (1320 _seq._) assigns\n  to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear all the attributes of Rhea, and blends the two\n  completely into one.\n\nThough we find different statements respecting the date as well as\nthe origin of the Eleusinian mysteries, yet the popular belief of\nthe Athenians, and the story which found favor at Eleusis, ascribed\nthem to the presence and dictation of the goddess D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear herself;\njust as the Bacchic rites are, according to the Bacch\u00e6 of Euripid\u00eas,\nfirst communicated and enforced on the Greeks by the personal visit of\nDionysos to Th\u00eabes, the metropolis of the Bacchic ceremonies.[82] In\nthe Eleusinian legend, preserved by the author of the Homeric Hymn,\nshe comes voluntarily and identifies herself with Eleusis; her past\nabode in Kr\u00eate being briefly indicated.[83] Her visit to Eleusis is\nconnected with the deep sorrow caused by the loss of her daughter\nPersephon\u00ea, who had been seized by Had\u00eas, while gathering flowers in\na meadow along with the Oceanic Nymphs, and carried off to become his\nwife in the under-world. In vain did the reluctant Persephon\u00ea shriek\nand invoke the aid of her father Zeus: he had consented to give her to\nHad\u00eas, and her cries were heard only by Hekat\u00ea and H\u00ealios. D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear was\ninconsolable at the disappearance of her daughter, but knew not where\nto look for her: she wandered for nine days and nights with torches in\nsearch of the lost maiden without success. At length H\u00ealios, the \u201cspy\nof gods and men,\u201d revealed to her, in reply to her urgent prayer, the\nrape of Persephon\u00ea, and the permission given to Had\u00eas by Zeus. D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear\nwas smitten with anger and despair: she renounced Zeus and the society\nof Olympus, abstained from nectar and ambrosia, and wandered on earth\nin grief and fasting until her form could no longer be known. In this\ncondition she came to Eleusis, then governed by the prince Keleos.\nSitting down by a well at the wayside in the guise of an old woman, she\nwas found by the daughters of Keleos, who came hither with their pails\nof brass for water. In reply to their questions, she told them that she\nhad been brought by pirates from Kr\u00eate to Thorikos, and had made her\nescape; she then solicited from them succor and employment as a servant\nor as a nurse. The damsels prevailed upon their mother Metaneira\nto receive her, and to entrust her with the nursing of the young\nD\u00eamopho\u00f4n, their late-born brother, the only son of Keleos. D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear was\nreceived into the house of Metaneira, her dignified form still borne\ndown by grief: she sat long silent and could not be induced either to\nsmile or to taste food, until the maid-servant Iamb\u00ea, by jests and\nplayfulness, succeeded in amusing and rendering her cheerful. She would\nnot taste wine, but requested a peculiar mixture of barley-meal with\nwater and the herb mint.[84]\n\n  [82] Sophocl. Antigon. \u0392\u03b1\u03ba\u03c7\u1fb6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n  [83] Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 123. The Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear has been\n  translated, accompanied with valuable illustrative notes, by J.\n  H. Voss (Heidelb. 1826).\n\n  [84] Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 202-210.\n\nThe child D\u00eamopho\u00f4n, nursed by D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, throve and grew up like a\ngod, to the delight and astonishment of his parents: she gave him no\nfood, but anointed him daily with ambrosia, and plunged him at night\nin the fire like a torch, where he remained unburnt. She would have\nrendered him immortal, had she not been prevented by the indiscreet\ncuriosity and alarm of Metaneira, who secretly looked in at night, and\nshrieked with horror at the sight of her child in the fire.[85] The\nindignant goddess, setting the infant on the ground, now revealed her\ntrue character to Metaneira: her wan and aged look disappeared, and she\nstood confest in the genuine majesty of her divine shape, diffusing\na dazzling brightness which illuminated the whole house. \u201cFoolish\nmother,\u201d she said, \u201cthy want of faith has robbed thy son of immortal\nlife. I am the exalted D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, the charm and comfort both of gods and\nmen: I was preparing for thy son exemption from death and old age; now\nit cannot be but he must taste of both. Yet shall he be ever honored,\nsince he has sat upon my knee and slept in my arms. Let the people\nof Eleusis erect for me a temple and altar on yonder hill above the\nfountain; I will myself prescribe to them the orgies which they must\nreligiously perform in order to propitiate my favor.\u201d[86]\n\n  [85] This story was also told with reference to the Egyptian\n  goddess Isis in her wanderings. See Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid.\n  c. 16, p. 357.\n\n  [86] Homer, Hymn. Cerer. 274.\u2014\n\n    \u1f4c\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\n    \u0395\u1f50\u03b1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f15\u03c1\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f31\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5.\n\n  The same story is told in regard to the infant Achilles. His\n  mother Thetis was taking similar measures to render him immortal,\n  when his father P\u00ealeus interfered and prevented the consummation.\n  Thetis immediately left him in great wrath (Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv.\n  866).\n\nThe terrified Metaneira was incapable even of lifting up her child\nfrom the ground; her daughters entered at her cries, and began to\nembrace and tend their infant brother, but he sorrowed and could not\nbe pacified for the loss of his divine nurse. All night they strove to\nappease the goddess.[87]\n\n  [87] Homer, Hymn. 290.\u2014\n\n                  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2,\n    \u03a7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u03ae \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nStrictly executing the injunctions of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, Keleos convoked the\npeople of Eleusis and erected the temple on the spot which she had\npointed out. It was speedily completed, and D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear took up her abode\nin it,\u2014apart from the remaining gods, still pining with grief for the\nloss of her daughter, and withholding her beneficent aid from mortals.\nAnd thus she remained a whole year,\u2014a desperate and terrible year:[88]\nin vain did the oxen draw the plough, and in vain was the barley-seed\ncast into the furrow,\u2014D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear suffered it not to emerge from the earth.\nThe human race would have been starved, and the gods would have been\ndeprived of their honors and sacrifice, had not Zeus found means to\nconciliate her. But this was a hard task; for D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear resisted the\nentreaties of Iris and of all the other goddesses and gods whom Zeus\nsuccessively sent to her. She would be satisfied with nothing less than\nthe recovery of her daughter. At length Zeus sent Herm\u00eas to Had\u00eas, to\nbring Persephon\u00ea away: Persephon\u00ea joyfully obeyed, but Had\u00eas prevailed\nupon her before she departed to swallow a grain of pomegranate, which\nrendered it impossible for her to remain the whole year away from\nhim.[89]\n\n  [88] Homer, H. Cer. 305.\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c5\u03b2\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u03a0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f30\u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  [89] Hymn, v. 375.\n\nWith transport did D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear receive back her lost daughter, and the\nfaithful Hekat\u00ea sympathized in the delight felt by both at the\nreunion.[90] It was now an easier undertaking to reconcile her with\nthe gods. Her mother Rhea, sent down expressly by Zeus, descended from\nOlympus on the fertile Rharan plain, then smitten with barrenness like\nthe rest of the earth: she succeeded in appeasing the indignation of\nD\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, who consented again to put forth her relieving hand. The\nburied seed came up in abundance, and the earth was covered with fruit\nand flowers. She would have wished to retain Persephon\u00ea constantly\nwith her, but this was impossible; and she was obliged to consent that\nher daughter should go down for one-third of each year to the house of\nHad\u00eas, departing from her every spring at the time when the seed is\nsown. She then revisited Olympus, again to dwell with the gods; but\nbefore her departure, she communicated to the daughters of Keleos, and\nto Keleos himself, together with Triptolemus, Diokl\u00eas and Eumolpus, the\ndivine service and the solemnities which she required to be observed in\nher honor.[91] And thus began the venerable mysteries of Eleusis, at\nher special command: the lesser mysteries, celebrated in February, in\nhonor of Persephon\u00ea; the greater, in August, to the honor of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear\nherself. Both are jointly patronesses of the holy city and temple.\n\n  [90] Hymn, v. 443.\n\n  [91] Hymn, v. 475.\u2014\n\n            \u1f29 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\n    \u0394\u03b5\u1fd6\u03be\u03b5\u03bd, \u03a4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b5, \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03ca \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u1ff3,\n    \u0395\u1f50\u03bc\u03cc\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b2\u03af\u1fc3, \u039a\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u1ff3 \u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03b3\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b1\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u0394\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f44\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd\n    \u03a0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3\u03c2 \u039a\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf, etc.\n\nSuch is a brief sketch of the temple legend of Eleusis, set forth at\nlength in the Homeric Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear. It is interesting not less as a\npicture of the Mater Dolorosa (in the mouth of an Athenian, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear and\nPersephon\u00ea were always the Mother and Daughter, by excellence), first\nan agonized sufferer, and then finally glorified,\u2014the weal and woe of\nman being dependent upon her kindly feeling,\u2014than as an illustration\nof the nature and growth of Grecian legend generally. Though we now\nread this Hymn as pleasing poetry, to the Eleusinians, for whom it\nwas composed, it was genuine and sacred history. They believed in the\nvisit of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear to Eleusis, and in the mysteries as a revelation from\nher, as implicitly as they believed in her existence and power as a\ngoddess. The Eleusinian psalmist shares this belief in common with his\ncountrymen, and embodies it in a continuous narrative, in which the\ngreat goddesses of the place, as well as the great heroic families,\nfigure in inseparable conjunction. Keleos is the son of the Eponymous\nhero Eleusis, and his daughters, with the old epic simplicity, carry\ntheir basins to the well for water. Eumolpus, Triptolemus, Diokl\u00eas,\nheroic ancestors of the privileged families who continued throughout\nthe historical times of Athens to fulfil their special hereditary\nfunctions in the Eleusinian solemnities, are among the immediate\nrecipients of inspiration from the goddess; but chiefly does she favor\nMetaneira and her infant son D\u00eamopho\u00f4n, for the latter of whom her\ngreatest boon is destined, and intercepted only by the weak faith of\nthe mother. Moreover, every incident in the Hymn has a local coloring\nand a special reference. The well, overshadowed by an olive-tree near\nwhich D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear had rested, the stream Kallichorus and the temple-hill,\nwere familiar and interesting places in the eyes of every Eleusinian;\nthe peculiar posset prepared from barley-meal with mint was always\ntasted by the Mysts (or communicants) after a prescribed fast, as an\narticle in the ceremony,\u2014while it was also the custom, at a particular\nspot in the processional march, to permit the free interchange of\npersonal jokes and taunts upon individuals for the general amusement.\nAnd these two customs are connected in the Hymn with the incidents,\nthat D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear herself had chosen the posset as the first interruption of\nher long and melancholy fast, and that her sorrowful thoughts had been\npartially diverted by the coarse playfulness of the servant-maid Iamb\u00ea.\nIn the enlarged representation of the Eleusinian ceremonies, which\nbecame established after the incorporation of Eleusis with Athens, the\npart of Iamb\u00ea herself was enacted by a woman, or man in woman\u2019s attire,\nof suitable wit and imagination, who was posted on the bridge over\nthe Kephissos, and addressed to the passers-by in the procession,[92]\nespecially the great men of Athens, saucy jeers, probably not less\npiercing than those of Aristophan\u00eas on the stage. The torch-bearing\nHekat\u00ea received a portion of the worship in the nocturnal ceremonies\nof the Eleusinia: this too is traced, in the Hymn, to her kind and\naffectionate sympathy with the great goddesses.\n\n  [92] Aristophan\u00eas, Vesp. 1363. Hesych. v. \u0393\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c2. Suidas,\n  v. \u0393\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd. Compare about the details of the ceremony,\n  Clemens Alexandr. Admon. ad Gent. p. 13. A similar license of\n  unrestrained jocularity appears in the rites of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear in Sicily\n  (Diod\u00f4r. v. 4; see also Pausan. vii. 27, 4), and in the worship\n  of Damia and Auxesia at \u00c6gina (Herodot. v. 83).\n\nThough all these incidents were sincerely believed by the Eleusinians\nas a true history of the past, and as having been the real initiatory\ncause of their own solemnities, it is not the less certain that they\nare simply mythes or legends, and not to be treated as history,\neither actual or exaggerated. They do not take their start from\nrealities of the past, but from realities of the present, combined\nwith retrospective feeling and fancy, which fills up the blank of\nthe aforetime in a manner at once plausible and impressive. What\nproportion of fact there may be in the legend, or whether there be\nany at all, it is impossible to ascertain and useless to inquire;\nfor the story did not acquire belief from its approximation to real\nfact, but from its perfect harmony with Eleusinian faith and feeling,\nand from the absence of any standard of historical credibility. The\nlittle town of Eleusis derived all its importance from the solemnity\nof the D\u00eam\u00eatria, and the Hymn which we have been considering (probably\nat least as old as 600 B. C.) represents the town as it stood before\nits absorption into the larger unity of Athens, which seems to have\nproduced an alteration of its legends and an increase of dignity in\nits great festival. In the faith of an Eleusinian, the religious as\nwell as the patriotic antiquities of his native town were connected\nwith this capital solemnity. The divine legend of the sufferings of\nD\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear and her visit to Eleusis was to him that which the heroic\nlegend of Adrastus and the Siege of Th\u00eabes was to a Sikyonian, or\nthat of Erechtheus and Ath\u00ean\u00ea to an Athenian grouping together in the\nsame scene and story the goddess and the heroic fathers of the town.\nIf our information were fuller, we should probably find abundance of\nother legends respecting the D\u00eam\u00eatria: the Gephyr\u00e6i of Athens, to whom\nbelonged the celebrated Harmodios and Aristogeit\u00f4n, and who possessed\nspecial Orgies of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear the Sorrowful, to which no man foreign to\ntheir Gens was ever admitted,[93] would doubtless have told stories\nnot only different but contradictory; and even in other Eleusinian\nmythes we discover Eumolpus as king of Eleusis, son of Poseid\u00f4n, and\na Thracian, completely different from the character which he bears in\nthe Hymn before us.[94] Neither discrepancies nor want of evidence, in\nreference to alleged antiquities, shocked the faith of a non-historical\npublic. What they wanted was a picture of the past, impressive to their\nfeelings and plausible to their imagination; and it is important to\nthe reader to remember, while he reads either the divine legends which\nwe are now illustrating or the heroic legends to which we shall soon\napproach, that he is dealing with a past which never was present,\u2014a\nregion essentially mythical, neither approachable by the critic nor\nmensurable by the chronologer.\n\n  [93] Herodot. v. 61.\n\n  [94] Pausan. i. 38, 3; Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 4. Heyne in his\n  Note admits several persons named Eumolpus. Compare Isokrat\u00eas,\n  Panegyr. p. 55. Philochorus the Attic antiquary could not have\n  received the legend of the Eleusinian Hymn, from the different\n  account which he gave respecting the rape of Persephon\u00ea (Philoch.\n  Fragm. 46, ed. Didot), and also respecting Keleos (Fr. 28,\n  _ibid._).\n\nThe tale respecting the visit of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, which was told by the\nancient Gens, called the Phytalids,[95] in reference to another temple\nof D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear between Athens and Eleusis, and also by the Megarians in\nreference to a D\u00eam\u00eatrion near their city, acquired under the auspices\nof Athens still further extension. The goddess was reported to have\nfirst communicated to Triptolemus at Eleusis the art of sowing corn,\nwhich by his intervention was disseminated all over the earth. And thus\nthe Athenians took credit to themselves for having been the medium of\ncommunication from the gods to man of all the inestimable blessings\nof agriculture, which they affirmed to have been first exhibited on\nthe fertile Rharian plain near Eleusis. Such pretensions are not to\nbe found in the old Homeric hymn. The festival of the Thesmophoria,\ncelebrated in honor of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear Thesmophoros at Athens, was altogether\ndifferent from the Eleusinia, in this material respect, as well as\nothers, that all males were excluded, and women only were allowed to\npartake in it: the surname Thesmophoros gave occasion to new legends\nin which the goddess was glorified as the first authoress of laws and\nlegal sanctions to mankind.[96] This festival, for women apart and\nalone, was also celebrated at Paros, at Ephesus, and in many other\nparts of Greece.[97]\n\n  [95] Phytalus, the Eponym or godfather of this gens, had received\n  D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear as a guest in his house, when she first presented mankind\n  with the fruit of the fig-tree. (Pausan. i. 37, 2.)\n\n  [96] Kallimach. Hymn. Cerer. 19. Sophokl\u00eas, Triptolemos, Frag. 1.\n  Cicero, Legg. ii. 14, and the note of Servius ad Virgil. \u00c6n. iv.\n  58.\n\n  [97] Herodot. vi. 16, 134. \u1f15\u03c1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u0394\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u2014\u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\n  \u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac.\n\nAltogether, D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear and Dionysos, as the Grecian counterparts of the\nEgyptian Isis and Osiris, seem to have been the great recipients of the\nnew sacred rites borrowed from Egypt, before the worship of Isis in\nher own name was introduced into Greece: their solemnities became more\nfrequently recluse and mysterious than those of the other deities. The\nimportance of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear to the collective nationality of Greece may be\ngathered from the fact that her temple was erected at Thermopyl\u00e6, the\nspot where the Amphiktyonic assemblies were held, close by the temple\nof the Eponymous hero Amphikty\u00f4n himself, and under the surname of the\nAmphiktyonic D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear.[98]\n\n  [98] Herodot. vii. 200.\n\nWe now pass to another and not less important celestial\npersonage\u2014Apollo.\n\nThe legends of D\u00ealos and Delphi, embodied in the Homeric Hymn to\nApollo, indicate, if not a greater dignity, at least a more widely\ndiffused worship of that god than even of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear. The Hymn is, in\npoint of fact, an aggregate of two separate compositions, one emanating\nfrom an Ionic bard at D\u00ealos, the other from Delphi. The first details\nthe birth, the second the mature divine efficiency, of Apollo; but\nboth alike present the unaffected charm as well as the characteristic\npeculiarities of Grecian mythical narrative. The hymnographer sings,\nand his hearers accept in perfect good faith, a history of the past;\nbut it is a past, imagined partly as an introductory explanation to\nthe present, partly as a means of glorifying the god. The island\nof D\u00ealos was the accredited birth-place of Apollo, and is also the\nplace in which he chiefly delights, where the great and brilliant\nIonic festival is periodically convened in his honor. Yet it is a\nrock narrow, barren, and uninviting: how came so glorious a privilege\nto be awarded to it? This the poet takes upon himself to explain.\nL\u00eat\u00f4, pregnant with Apollo, and persecuted by the jealous H\u00ear\u00ea, could\nfind no spot wherein to give birth to her offspring. In vain did she\naddress herself to numerous places in Greece, the Asiatic coast and the\nintermediate islands; all were terrified at the wrath of H\u00ear\u00ea, and\nrefused to harbor her. As a last resort, she approached the rejected\nand repulsive island of D\u00ealos, and promised that, if shelter were\ngranted to her in her forlorn condition, the island should become the\nchosen resort of Apollo as well as the site of his temple with its\nrich accompanying solemnities.[99] D\u00ealos joyfully consented, but not\nwithout many apprehensions that the potent Apollo would despise her\nunworthiness, and not without exacting a formal oath from L\u00eat\u00f4,\u2014who\nwas then admitted to the desired protection, and duly accomplished her\nlong and painful labor. Though Di\u00f4n\u00ea, Rhea, Themis and Amphitrit\u00ea came\nto soothe and succor her, yet H\u00ear\u00ea kept away the goddess presiding\nover childbirth, Eileithyia, and thus cruelly prolonged her pangs. At\nlength Eileithyia came, and Apollo was born. Hardly had Apollo tasted,\nfrom the hands of Themis, the immortal food, nectar and ambrosia,\nwhen he burst at once his infant bands, and displayed himself in full\ndivine form and strength, claiming his characteristic attributes\nof the bow and the harp, and his privileged function of announcing\nbeforehand to mankind the designs of Zeus. The promise made by L\u00eat\u00f4 to\nD\u00ealos was faithfully performed: amidst the numberless other temples\nand groves which men provided for him, he ever preferred that island\nas his permanent residence, and there the Ionians with their wives\nand children, and all their \u201cbravery,\u201d congregated periodically from\ntheir different cities to glorify him. Dance and song and athletic\ncontests adorned the solemnity, and the countless ships, wealth, and\ngrace of the multitudinous Ionians had the air of an assembly of gods.\nThe Delian maidens, servants of Apollo, sang hymns to the glory of\nthe god, as well as of Artemis and L\u00eat\u00f4, intermingled with adventures\nof foregone men and women, to the delight of the listening crowd. The\nblind itinerant bard of Chios (composer of this the Homeric hymn,\nand confounded in antiquity with the author of the Iliad) had found\nhonor and acceptance at this festival, and commends himself, in a\ntouching farewell strain, to the remembrance and sympathy of the Delian\nmaidens.[100]\n\n  [99] According to another legend, L\u00eat\u00f4 was said to have been\n  conveyed from the Hyperboreans to D\u00ealos in twelve days, in\n  the form of a she-wolf, to escape the jealous eye of H\u00ear\u00ea. In\n  connection with this legend, it was affirmed that the she-wolves\n  always brought forth their young only during these twelve days in\n  the year (Aristot. Hist. Animal. vii. 35).\n\n  [100] Hom. Hymn. Apoll. i. 179.\n\nBut D\u00ealos was not an oracular spot: Apollo did not manifest himself\nthere as revealer of the futurities of Zeus. A place must be found\nwhere this beneficent function, without which mankind would perish\nunder the innumerable doubts and perplexities of life, may be exercised\nand rendered available. Apollo himself descends from Olympus to\nmake choice of a suitable site: the hymnographer knows a thousand\nother adventures of the god which he might sing, but he prefers this\nmemorable incident, the charter and patent of consecration for the\nDelphian temple. Many different places did Apollo inspect; he surveyed\nthe country of the Magn\u00eates and the Perrh\u00e6bians, came to I\u00f4lkos,\nand passed over from thence to Eub\u0153a and the plain of Lelanton. But\neven this fertile spot did not please him: he crossed the Euripus to\nB\u0153otia, passed by Teum\u00eassus and Mykal\u00eassus, and the then inaccessible\nand unoccupied forest on which the city of Th\u00eabes afterwards stood.\nHe next proceeded to Onch\u00eastos, but the grove of Poseid\u00f4n was already\nestablished there; next across the K\u00eaphissus to Okalea, Haliartus,\nand the agreeable plain and much-frequented fountain of Delphusa, or\nTilphusa. Pleased with the place, Apollo prepared to establish his\noracle there, but Tilphusa was proud of the beauty of her own site,\nand did not choose that her glory should be eclipsed by that of the\ngod.[101] She alarmed him with the apprehension that the chariots\nwhich contended in her plain, and the horses and mules which watered\nat her fountain would disturb the solemnity of his oracle; and she\nthus induced him to proceed onward to the southern side of Parnassus,\noverhanging the harbor of Krissa. Here he established his oracle, in\nthe mountainous site not frequented by chariots and horses, and near to\na fountain, which however was guarded by a vast and terrific serpent,\nonce the nurse of the monster Typha\u00f4n. This serpent Apollo slew with an\narrow, and suffered its body to rot in the sun: hence the name of the\nplace, Pyth\u00f4,[102] and the surname of the Pythian Apollo. The plan of\nhis temple being marked out, it was built by Troph\u00f4nios and Agam\u00ead\u00eas,\naided by a crowd of forward auxiliaries from the neighborhood. He now\ndiscovered with indignation, however, that Tilphusa had cheated him,\nand went back with swift step to resent it. \u201cThou shalt not thus,\u201d\nhe said, \u201csucceed in thy fraud and retain thy beautiful water; the\nglory of the place shall be mine, and not thine alone.\u201d Thus saying,\nhe tumbled down a crag upon the fountain, and obstructed her limpid\ncurrent: establishing an altar for himself in a grove hard by near\nanother spring, where men still worship him as Apollo Tilphusios,\nbecause of his severe vengeance upon the once beautiful Tilphusa.[103]\n\n  [101] Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 262.\n\n  [102] Hom. Hymn. 363\u2014\u03c0\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, _to rot_.\n\n  [103] Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 381.\n\nApollo next stood in need of chosen ministers to take care of his\ntemple and sacrifice, and to pronounce his responses at Pyth\u00f4.\nDescrying a ship, \u201ccontaining many and good men,\u201d bound on traffic from\nthe Minoian Knossus in Kr\u00eate, to Pylus in Peloponn\u00easus, he resolved\nto make use of the ship and her crew for his purpose. Assuming the\nshape of a vast dolphin, he splashed about and shook the vessel so\nas to strike the mariners with terror, while he sent a strong wind,\nwhich impelled her along the coast of Peloponn\u00easus into the Corinthian\nGulf, and finally to the harbor of Krissa, where she ran aground.\nThe affrighted crew did not dare to disembark: but Apollo was seen\nstanding on the shore in the guise of a vigorous youth, and inquired\nwho they were, and what was their business. The leader of the Kr\u00eatans\nrecounted in reply their miraculous and compulsory voyage, when Apollo\nrevealed himself as the author and contriver of it, announcing to them\nthe honorable function and the dignified post to which he destined\nthem.[104] They followed him by his orders to the rocky Pyth\u00f4 on\nParnassus, singing the solemn Io-Paian such as it is sung in Kr\u00eate,\nwhile the god himself marched at their head, with his fine form and\nlofty step, playing on the harp. He showed them the temple and site\nof the oracle, and directed them to worship him as Apollo Delphinios,\nbecause they had first seen him in the shape of a dolphin. \u201cBut how,\u201d\nthey inquired, \u201care we to live in a spot where there is neither corn,\nnor vine, nor pasturage?\u201d \u201cYe silly mortals,\u201d answered the god, \u201cwho\nlook only for toil and privation, know that an easier lot is yours. Ye\nshall live by the cattle whom crowds of pious visitors will bring to\nthe temple: ye shall need only the knife to be constantly ready for\nsacrifice.[105] Your duty will be to guard my temple, and to officiate\nas ministers at my feasts: but if ye be guilty of wrong or insolence,\neither by word or deed, ye shall become the slaves of other men, and\nshall remain so forever. Take heed of the word and the warning.\u201d\n\n  [104] Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 475 _sqq._\n\n  [105] Homer. Hymn. Apoll. 535.\u2014\n\n    \u0394\u03b5\u03be\u03b9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u03a3\u03c6\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u03bc\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b1\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c6\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n    \u1f4d\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f00\u03b3\u03ac\u03b3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c6\u1fe6\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nSuch are the legends of D\u00ealos and Delphi, according to the Homeric Hymn\nto Apollo. The specific functions of the god, and the chief localities\nof his worship, together with the surnames attached to them, are\nthus historically explained, being connected with his past acts and\nadventures. Though these are to us only interesting poetry, yet to\nthose who heard them sung they possessed all the requisites of history,\nand were fully believed as such, not because they were partially\nfounded in reality, but because they ran in complete harmony with the\nfeelings; and, so long as that condition was fulfilled, it was not\nthe fashion of the time to canvass truth or falsehood. The narrative\nis purely personal, without any discernible symbolized doctrine or\nallegory, to serve as a supposed ulterior purpose: the particular deeds\nascribed to Apollo grow out of the general preconceptions as to his\nattributes, combined with the present realities of his worship. It is\nneither history nor allegory, but simple mythe or legend.\n\nThe worship of Apollo is among the most ancient, capital, and strongly\nmarked facts of the Grecian world, and widely diffused over every\nbranch of the race. It is older than the Iliad or Odyssey, in the\nlatter of which both Pyth\u00f4 and D\u00ealos are noted, though D\u00ealos is not\nnamed in the former. But the ancient Apollo is different in more\nrespects than one from the Apollo of later times. He is in an especial\nmanner the god of the Trojans, unfriendly to the Greeks, and especially\nto Achilles; he has, moreover, only two primary attributes, his bow and\nhis prophetic powers, without any distinct connection either with the\nharp, or with medicine, or with the sun, all which in later times he\ncame to comprehend. He is not only, as Apollo Karneius, the chief god\nof the Doric race, but also (under the surname of Patr\u00f4us) the great\nprotecting divinity of the gentile tie among the Ionians:[106] he is\nmoreover the guide and stimulus to Grecian colonization, scarcely any\ncolony being ever sent out without encouragement and direction from the\noracle at Delphi: Apollo Arch\u00eaget\u00eas is one of his great surnames.[107]\nHis temple lends sanctity to the meetings of the Amphiktyonic assembly,\nand he is always in filial subordination and harmony with his father\nZeus: Delphi and Olympia are never found in conflict. In the Iliad,\nthe warm and earnest patrons of the Greeks are H\u00ear\u00ea, Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and\nPoseid\u00f4n: here too Zeus and Apollo are seen in harmony, for Zeus is\ndecidedly well-inclined to the Trojans, and reluctantly sacrifices\nthem to the importunity of the two great goddesses.[108] The worship\nof the Sminthian Apollo, in various parts of the Troad and the\nneighboring territory, dates before the earliest periods of \u00c6olic\ncolonization:[109] hence the zealous patronage of Troy ascribed to him\nin the Iliad. Altogether, however, the distribution and partialities\nof the gods in that poem are different from what they become in later\ntimes,\u2014a difference which our means of information do not enable us\nsatisfactorily to explain. Besides the Delphian temple, Apollo had\nnumerous temples throughout Greece, and oracles at Ab\u00e6 in Ph\u00f4kis, on\nthe Mount Pt\u00f4on, and at Tegyra in B\u0153otia, where he was said to have\nbeen born,[110] at Branchid\u00e6 near Mil\u00eatus, at Klarus in Asia Minor, and\nat Patara in Lykia. He was not the only oracular god: Zeus at Dodona\nand at Olympia gave responses also: the gods or heroes Troph\u00f4nius,\nAmphiaraus, Amphilochus, Mopsus, etc., each at his own sanctuary and\nin his own prescribed manner, rendered the same service.\n\n  [106] Harpocration v. \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bf\u03c2 and \u1f19\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u0396\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2. Apollo\n  Delphinios also belongs to the Ionic Greeks generally. Strabo,\n  iv. 179.\n\n  [107] Thucydid. vi. 3; Kallimach. Hymn. Apoll. 56.\u2014\n\n          \u03a6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\n    \u039a\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1 \u03a6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n  [108] Iliad, iv. 30-46.\n\n  [109] Iliad, i. 38, 451; Stephan. Byz. \u1f3d\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u03a4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2. See also\n  Klausen, \u00c6neas und die Penaten, b. i. p. 69. The worship of\n  Apollo Sminthios and the festival of the Sminthia at Alexandria\n  Troas lasted down to the time of Menander the rh\u00eat\u00f4r, at the\n  close of the third century after Christ.\n\n  [110] Plutarch. Defect. Oracul. c. 5, p. 412; c. 8, p. 414;\n  Steph. Byz. v. \u03a4\u03b5\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1. The temple of the Pt\u00f4an Apollo had\n  acquired celebrity before the days of the poet Asius. Pausan. ix.\n  23, 3.\n\nThe two legends of Delphi and D\u00ealos, above noticed, form of course\na very insignificant fraction of the narratives which once existed\nrespecting the great and venerated Apollo. They serve only as\nspecimens, and as very early specimens,[111] to illustrate what\nthese divine mythes were, and what was the turn of Grecian faith and\nimagination. The constantly recurring festivals of the gods caused\nan incessant demand for new mythes respecting them, or at least for\nvarieties and reproductions of the old mythes. Even during the third\ncentury of the Christian \u00e6ra, in the time of the rh\u00eat\u00f4r Menander,\nwhen the old forms of Paganism were waning and when the stock of\nmythes in existence was extremely abundant, we see this demand in\ngreat force; but it was incomparably more operative in those earlier\ntimes when the creative vein of the Grecian mind yet retained its\npristine and unfaded richness. Each god had many different surnames,\ntemples, groves, and solemnities; with each of which was connected\nmore or less of mythical narrative, originally hatched in the prolific\nand spontaneous fancy of a believing neighborhood, to be afterwards\nexpanded, adorned and diffused by the song of the poet. The earliest\nsubject of competition[112] at the great Pythian festival was the\nsinging of a hymn in honor of Apollo: other _agones_ were subsequently\nadded, but the ode or hymn constituted the fundamental attribute of\nthe solemnity: the Pythia at Siky\u00f4n and elsewhere were probably framed\non a similar footing. So too at the ancient and celebrated Charit\u00easia,\nor festival of the Charites, at Orchomenos, the rivalry of the poets\nin their various modes of composition both began and continued as the\npredominant feature:[113] and the inestimable treasures yet remaining\nto us of Attic tragedy and comedy, are gleanings from the once numerous\ndramas exhibited at the solemnity of the Dionysia. The Ephesians gave\nconsiderable rewards for the best hymns in honor of Artemis, to be sung\nat her temple.[114] And the early lyric poets of Greece, though their\nworks have not descended to us, devoted their genius largely to similar\nproductions, as may be seen by the titles and fragments yet remaining.\n\n  [111] The legend which Ephorus followed about the establishment\n  of the Delphian temple was something radically different from\n  the Homeric Hymn (Ephori Fragm. 70, ed. Didot): his narrative\n  went far to politicize and rationalize the story. The progeny of\n  Apollo was very numerous, and of the most diverse attributes; he\n  was father of the Korybantes (Pherekydes, Fragm. 6, ed. Didot),\n  as well as of Askl\u00eapios and Arist\u00e6us (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii.\n  500; Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 10, 3).\n\n  [112] Strabo, ix. p. 421. Menander the Rhetor (Ap. Walz. Coll.\n  Rhett. t. ix. p. 136) gives an elaborate classification of hymns\n  to the gods, distinguishing them into nine classes,\u2014\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76,\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9,\n  \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76, \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03af:\u2014the second class had reference to\n  the temporary absences or departure of a god to some distant\n  place, which were often admitted in the ancient religion. Sappho\n  and Alkman in their _kletic_ hymns invoked the gods from many\n  different places,\u2014\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f0c\u03c1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03bc\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f44\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd,\n  \u03bc\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6,\u2014also Aphrodit\u00ea and\n  Apollo, etc. All these songs were full of adventures and details\n  respecting the gods,\u2014in other words of legendary matter.\n\n  [113] Pindar, Olymp. xiv.; Boeckh, Staatshaushaltung der Athener,\n  Appendix, \u00a7 xx. p. 357.\n\n  [114] Alexander \u00c6tolus, apud Macrobium, Saturn. v. 22.\n\nBoth the Christian and the Mahomedan religions have begun during the\nhistorical age, have been propagated from one common centre, and have\nbeen erected upon the ruins of a different pre-existing faith. With\nnone of these particulars did Grecian Paganism correspond. It took rise\nin an age of imagination and feeling simply, without the restraints,\nas well as without the aid, of writing or records, of history or\nphilosophy: it was, as a general rule, the spontaneous product of many\nseparate tribes and localities, imitation and propagation operating\nas subordinate causes; it was moreover a primordial faith, as far as\nour means of information enable us to discover. These considerations\nexplain to us two facts in the history of the early Pagan mind: first,\nthe divine mythes, the matter of their religion, constituted also\nthe matter of their earliest history; next, these mythes harmonized\nwith each other only in their general types, but differed incurably\nin respect of particular incidents. The poet who sung a new adventure\nof Apollo, the trace of which he might have heard in some remote\nlocality, would take care that it should be agreeable to the general\nconceptions which his hearers entertained respecting the god. He would\nnot ascribe the cestus or amorous influences to Ath\u00ean\u00ea, nor armed\ninterference and the \u00e6gis to Aphrodit\u00ea; but, provided he maintained\nthis general keeping, he might indulge his fancy without restraint in\nthe particular events of the story.[115] The feelings and faith of\nhis hearers went along with him, and there were no critical scruples\nto hold them back: to scrutinize the alleged proceedings of the gods\nwas repulsive, and to disbelieve them impious. And thus these divine\nmythes, though they had their root simply in religious feelings, and\nthough they presented great discrepancies of fact, served nevertheless\nas primitive matter of history to an early Greek: they were the only\nnarratives, at once publicly accredited and interesting, which he\npossessed. To them were aggregated the heroic mythes (to which we shall\nproceed presently),\u2014indeed the two are inseparably blended, gods,\nheroes and men almost always appearing in the same picture,\u2014analogous\nboth in their structure and their genesis, and differing chiefly in the\ncircumstance that they sprang from the type of a hero instead of from\nthat of a god.\n\n  [115] The birth of Apollo and Artemis from Zeus and L\u00eat\u00f4 is among\n  the oldest and most generally admitted facts in the Grecian\n  divine legends. Yet \u00c6schylus did not scruple to describe Artemis\n  publicly as daughter of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear (Herodot. ii. 156; Pausan. viii.\n  37, 3). Herodotus thinks that he copied this innovation from the\n  Egyptians, who affirmed that Apollo and Artemis were the sons of\n  Dionysos and Isis.\n\n  The number and discrepancies of the mythes respecting each god\n  are attested by the fruitless attempts of learned Greeks to\n  escape the necessity of rejecting any of them by multiplying\n  homonymous personages,\u2014three persons named Zeus; five named\n  Ath\u00ean\u00ea; six named Apollo, etc. (Cicero. de Natur. Deor. iii. 21:\n  Clemen. Alexand. Admon. ad Gent. p. 17).\n\nWe are not to be astonished if we find Aphrodit\u00ea, in the Iliad, born\nfrom Zeus and Dion\u00ea,\u2014and in the Theogony of Hesiod, generated from the\nfoam on the sea after the mutilation of Uranos; nor if in the Odyssey\nshe appears as the wife of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, while in the Theogony the latter\nis married to Aglaia, and Aphrodit\u00ea is described as mother of three\nchildren by Ar\u00eas.[116] The Homeric hymn to Aphrodit\u00ea details the legend\nof Aphrodit\u00ea and Anchis\u00eas, which is presupposed in the Iliad as the\nparentage of \u00c6neas: but the author of the hymn, probably sung at one\nof the festivals of Aphrodit\u00ea in Cyprus, represents the goddess as\nashamed of her passion for a mortal, and as enjoining Anchis\u00eas under\nsevere menaces not to reveal who the mother of \u00c6neas was;[117] while\nin the Iliad she has no scruple in publicly owning him, and he passes\neverywhere as her acknowledged son. Aphrodit\u00ea is described in the hymn\nas herself cold and unimpressible, but ever active and irresistible\nin inspiring amorous feelings to gods, to men, and to animals. Three\ngoddesses are recorded as memorable exceptions to her universal\nempire,\u2014Ath\u00ean\u00ea, Artemis, and Hestia or Vesta. Aphrodit\u00ea was one of the\nmost important of all the goddesses in the mythical world; for the\nnumber of interesting, pathetic and tragical adventures deducible from\nmisplaced or unhappy passion was of course very great; and in most\nof these cases the intervention of Aphrodit\u00ea was usually prefixed,\nwith some legend to explain why she manifested herself. Her range of\naction grows wider in the later epic and lyric and tragic poets than in\nHomer.[118]\n\n  [116] Hesiod, Theogon. 188, 934, 945; Homer, Iliad, v. 371;\n  Odyss. viii. 268.\n\n  [117] Homer, Hymn. Vener. 248, 286; Homer, Iliad, v. 320, 386.\n\n  [118] A large proportion of the Hesiodic epic related to the\n  exploits and adventures of the heroic women,\u2014the Catalogue of\n  Women and the Eoiai embodied a string of such narratives. Hesiod\n  and Stesichorus explained the conduct of Helen and Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra\n  by the anger of Aphrodit\u00ea, caused by the neglect of their\n  father Tyndareus to sacrifice to her (Hesiod, Fragm. 59, ed.\n  D\u00fcntzer; Stesichor. Fragm. 9, ed. Schneidewin): the irresistible\n  ascendency of Aphrodit\u00ea is set forth in the Hippolytus of\n  Euripid\u00eas not less forcibly than that of Dionysos in the Bacch\u00e6.\n  The character of Daphnis the herdsman, well-known from the first\n  Idyll of Theocritus, and illustrating the destroying force of\n  Aphrodit\u00ea, appears to have been first introduced into Greek\n  poetry by Stesichorus (see Klausen, \u00c6neas und die Penaten, vol.\n  i. pp. 526-529). Compare a striking piece among the Fragmenta\n  Incerta of Sophokl\u00eas (Fr. 63, Brunck) and Euripid. Troad. 946,\n  995, 1048. Even in the Opp. et Di. of Hesiod, Aphrodit\u00ea is\n  conceived rather as a disturbing and injurious influence (v. 65).\n\n  Adonis owes his renown to the Alexandrine poets and their\n  contemporary sovereigns (see Bion\u2019s Idyll and the Adoniazus\u00e6 of\n  Theocritus). The favorites of Aphrodit\u00ea, even as counted up by\n  the diligence of Clemens Alexandrinus, are however very few in\n  number. (Admonitio ad Gent. p. 12, Sylb.)\n\nAth\u00ean\u00ea, the man-goddess,[119] born from the head of Zeus, without\na mother and without feminine sympathies, is the antithesis\npartly of Aphrodit\u00ea, partly of the effeminate or womanized god\nDionysos\u2014the latter is an importation from Asia, but Ath\u00ean\u00ea is a Greek\nconception\u2014the type of composed, majestic and unrelenting force. It\nappears however as if this goddess had been conceived in a different\nmanner in different parts of Greece. For we find ascribed to her, in\nsome of the legends, attributes of industry and home-keeping; she is\nrepresented as the companion of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, patronizing handicraft, and\nexpert at the loom and the spindle: the Athenian potters worshipped\nher along with Prom\u00eatheus. Such traits of character do not square with\nthe formidable \u00e6gis and the massive and crushing spear which Homer and\nmost of the mythes assign to her. There probably were at first at least\ntwo different types of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and their coalescence has partially\nobliterated the less marked of the two.[120] Ath\u00ean\u00ea is the constant\nand watchful protectress of H\u00earakl\u00eas: she is also locally identified\nwith the soil and people of Athens, even in the Iliad: Erechtheus, the\nAthenian, is born of the earth, but Ath\u00ean\u00ea brings him up, nourishes\nhim, and lodges him in her own temple, where the Athenians annually\nworship him with sacrifice and solemnities.[121] It was altogether\nimpossible to make Erechtheus son of Ath\u00ean\u00ea,\u2014the type of the goddess\nforbade it; but the Athenian mythe-creators, though they found this\nbarrier impassable, strove to approach to it as near as they could,\nand the description which they give of the birth of Erichthonios, at\nonce un-Homeric and unseemly, presents something like the phantom of\nmaternity.[122]\n\n  [119] \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u1fb3 \u03b4\u1ff6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd ... \u1f08\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u1fb3 Simmias Rhodius; \u03a0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c5\u03c2, ap.\n  Heph\u00e6stion. c. 9. p. 54, Gaisford.\n\n  [120] Apollod\u00f4r. ap. Schol. ad Sophokl. \u0152dip. vol. 57; Pausan.\n  i. 24, 3; ix. 26, 3; Diod\u00f4r. v. 73; Plato, Legg. xi. p. 920. In\n  the Opp. et Di. of Hesiod, the carpenter is the servant of Ath\u00ean\u00ea\n  (429): see also Phereklos the \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd in the Iliad, v. 61: compare\n  viii. 385; Odyss. viii. 493; and the Homeric Hymn, to Aphrodit\u00ea,\n  v. 12. The learned article of O. M\u00fcller (in the Encyclop\u00e6dia of\n  Ersch and Gruber, since republished among his Kleine Deutsche\n  Schriften, p. 134 _seq._), _Pallas Ath\u00ean\u00ea_, brings together all\n  that can be known about this goddess.\n\n  [121] Iliad, ii. 546; viii. 362.\n\n  [122] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 4, 6. Compare the vague language of Plato,\n  Kritias, c. iv., and Ovid, Metamorph. ii. 757.\n\nThe huntress Artemis, in Arcadia and in Greece proper generally,\nexhibits a well-defined type with which the legends respecting her\nare tolerably consistent. But the Ephesian as well as the Tauric\nArtemis partakes more of the Asiatic character, and has borrowed the\nattributes of the Lydian Great Mother as well as of an indigenous\nTauric Virgin:[123] this Ephesian Artemis passed to the colonies of\nPhok\u00e6a and Mil\u00eatus.[124] The Homeric Artemis shares with her brother\nApollo in the dexterous use of the far-striking bow, and sudden death\nis described by the poet as inflicted by her gentle arrow. The jealousy\nof the gods at the withholding of honors and sacrifices, or at the\npresumption of mortals in contending with them,\u2014a point of character so\nfrequently recurring in the types of the Grecian gods,\u2014manifests itself\nin the legends of Artemis: the memorable Kalyd\u00f4nian boar is sent by her\nas a visitation upon \u0152neus, because he had omitted to sacrifice to her,\nwhile he did honor to other gods.[125] The Arcadian heroine Atalanta is\nhowever a reproduction of Artemis, with little or no difference, and\nthe goddess is sometimes confounded even with her attendant nymphs.\n\n  [123] Herodot. iv. 103; Strabo, xii. p. 534; xiii. p. 650. About\n  the Ephesian Artemis, see Guhl, Ephesiaca (Berlin, 1843), p.\n  79 _sqq._; Aristoph. Nub. 590; Autokrates in Tympanistis apud\n  \u00c6lian. Hist. Animal. xii. 9; and Spanheim ad Kallimach. Hymn.\n  Dian. 36. The dances in honor of Artemis sometimes appear to\n  have approached to the frenzied style of Bacchanal movement. See\n  the words of Timotheus ap. Plutarch. de Audiend. Poet. p. 22, c.\n  4, and \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u0394\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03b4. c. 10, p. 170, also Aristoph. Lysist. 1314.\n  They seem to have been often celebrated in the solitudes of the\n  mountains, which were the favorite resort of Artemis (Kallimach.\n  Hymn. Dian. 19), and these \u1f40\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 were always causes\n  predisposing to fanatical excitement.\n\n  [124] Strabo, iv. p. 179.\n\n  [125] Iliad, ix. 529.\n\nThe mighty Poseid\u00f4n, the earth-shaker and the ruler of the sea, is\nsecond only to Zeus in power, but has no share in those imperial and\nsuperintending capacities which the Father of gods and men exhibits.\nHe numbers a numerous heroic progeny, usually men of great corporeal\nstrength, and many of them belonging to the \u00c6olic race: the great\nNeleid family of Pylus trace their origin up to him; and he is also\nthe father of Polyph\u00eamus the Cycl\u00f4ps, whose well-earned suffering\nhe cruelly revenges upon Odysseus. The island of Kalaureia is his\nD\u00ealos,[126] and there was held in it an old local Amphiktyony, for the\npurpose of rendering to him joint honor and sacrifice: the isthmus of\nCorinth, Helik\u00ea in Achaia, and Onch\u00eastos in B\u0153otia, are also residences\nwhich he much affects, and where he is solemnly worshipped. But the\nabode which he originally and specially selected for himself was the\nAcropolis of Athens, where by a blow of his trident he produced a\nwell of water in the rock: Ath\u00ean\u00ea came afterwards and claimed the\nspot for herself, planting in token of possession the olive-tree\nwhich stood in the sacred grove of Pandrosos: and the decision either\nof the autochthonous Cecrops, or of Erechtheus, awarded to her the\npreference, much to the displeasure of Poseid\u00f4n. Either on this\naccount, or on account of the death of his son Eumolpus, slain in\nassisting the Eleusinians against Erechtheus, the Attic mythes ascribed\nto Poseid\u00f4n great enmity against the Erechtheid family, which he is\nasserted to have ultimately overthrown: Theseus, whose glorious reign\nand deeds succeeded to that family, is said to have been really his\nson.[127] In several other places,\u2014in \u00c6gina, Argos and Naxos,\u2014Poseid\u00f4n\nhad disputed the privileges of patron-god with Zeus, H\u00ear\u00ea and Dionysos:\nhe was worsted in all, but bore his defeat patiently.[128] Poseid\u00f4n\nendured a long slavery, in common with Apollo, gods as they were,[129]\nunder Laomed\u00f4n, king of Troy, at the command and condemnation of Zeus:\nthe two gods rebuilt the walls of the city, which had been destroyed\nby H\u00earakl\u00eas. When their time was expired, the insolent Laomed\u00f4n\nwithheld from them the stipulated reward, and even accompanied its\nrefusal with appalling threats; and the subsequent animosity of the\ngod against Troy was greatly determined by the sentiment of this\ninjustice.[130] Such periods of servitude, inflicted upon individual\ngods, are among the most remarkable of all the incidents in the divine\nlegends. We find Apollo on another occasion condemned to serve Adm\u00eatus,\nking of Pher\u00e6, as a punishment for having killed the Cycl\u00f4pes, and\nH\u00earakl\u00eas also is sold as a slave to Omphal\u00ea. Even the fierce Ar\u00eas,\noverpowered and imprisoned for a long time by the two Al\u00f4ids,[131] is\nultimately liberated only by extraneous aid. Such narratives attest\nthe discursive range of Grecian fancy in reference to the gods, as\nwell as the perfect commingling of things and persons, divine and\nhuman, in their conceptions of the past. The god who serves is for\nthe time degraded: but the supreme god who commands the servitude is\nin the like proportion exalted, whilst the idea of some sort of order\nand government among these superhuman beings was never lost sight of.\nNevertheless the mythes respecting the servitude of the gods became\nobnoxious afterwards, along with many others, to severe criticism on\nthe part of philosophers.\n\n  [126] Strabo, viii. p. 374. According to the old poem called\n  Eumolpia, ascribed to Mus\u00e6us, the oracle of Delphi originally\n  belonged to Poseid\u00f4n and G\u00e6a, jointly: from G\u00e6a it passed to\n  Themis, and from her to Apollo, to whom Poseid\u00f4n also made over\n  his share as a compensation for the surrender of Kalaureia to\n  him. (Pausan. x. 5, 3).\n\n  [127] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 14, 1; iii. 15, 3, 5.\n\n  [128] Plutarch, Sympos. viii. 6, p. 741.\n\n  [129] Iliad, ii. 716, 766; Euripid. Alk\u00eastis, 2. See Panyasis,\n  Fragm. 12, p. 24, ed. D\u00fcntzer.\n\n  [130] Iliad, vii. 452; xxi. 459.\n\n  [131] Iliad, v. 386.\n\nThe proud, jealous, and bitter H\u00ear\u00ea,\u2014the goddess of the once-wealthy\nMyk\u00ean\u00e6, the _fax et focus_ of the Trojan war, and the ever-present\nprotectress of Jas\u00f4n in the Argonautic expedition,[132]\u2014occupies an\nindispensable station in the mythical world. As the daughter of Kronos\nand wife of Zeus, she fills a throne from whence he cannot dislodge\nher, and which gives her a right perpetually to grumble and to thwart\nhim.[133] Her unmeasured jealousy of the female favorites of Zeus, and\nher antipathy against his sons, especially against H\u00earakl\u00eas, has been\nthe suggesting cause of innumerable mythes: the general type of her\ncharacter stands here clearly marked, as furnishing both stimulus and\nguide to the mythop\u0153ic fancy. The \u201cSacred Wedding,\u201d or marriage of Zeus\nand H\u00ear\u00ea, was familiar to epithalamic poets long before it became a\ntheme for the spiritualizing ingenuity of critics.\n\n  [132] Iliad, iv. 51; Odyss. xii. 72.\n\n  [133] Iliad, i. 544; iv. 29-38; viii. 408.\n\nH\u00eaph\u00e6stos is the son of H\u00ear\u00ea without a father, and stands to her in\nthe same relation as Ath\u00ean\u00ea to Zeus: her pride and want of sympathy\nare manifested by her casting him out at once in consequence of his\ndeformity.[134] He is the god of fire, and especially of fire in its\npractical applications to handicraft, and is indispensable as the\nright-hand and instrument of the gods. His skill and his deformity\nappear alternately as the source of mythical stories: wherever\nexquisite and effective fabrication is intended to be designated,\nH\u00eaph\u00e6stos is announced as the maker, although in this function the\ntype of his character is reproduced in D\u00e6dalos. In the Attic legends\nhe appears intimately united both with Prom\u00eatheus and with Ath\u00ean\u00ea, in\nconjunction with whom he was worshipped at Kol\u00f4nus near Athens. Lemnos\nwas the favorite residence of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos; and if we possessed more\nknowledge of this island and its town H\u00eaph\u00e6stias, we should doubtless\nfind abundant legends detailing his adventures and interventions.\n\n  [134] Iliad, xviii. 306.\n\nThe chaste, still, and home-keeping Hestia, goddess of the family\nhearth, is far less fruitful in mythical narratives, in spite of her\nvery superior dignity, than the knavish, smooth-tongued, keen, and\nacquisitive Herm\u00eas. His function of messenger of the gods brings him\nperpetually on the stage, and affords ample scope for portraying the\nfeatures of his character. The Homeric hymn to Herm\u00eas describes the\nscene and circumstances of his birth, and the almost instantaneous\nmanifestation, even in infancy, of his peculiar attributes; it explains\nthe friendly footing on which he stood with Apollo,\u2014the interchange of\ngifts and functions between them,\u2014and lastly, the inviolate security\nof all the wealth and offerings in the Delphian temple, exposed as\nthey were to thieves without any visible protection. Such was the\ninnate cleverness and talent of Herm\u00eas, that on the day he was born\nhe invented the lyre, stringing the seven chords on the shell of a\ntortoise:[135] and he also stole the cattle of Apollo in Pieria,\ndragging them backwards to his cave in Arcadia, so that their track\ncould not be detected. To the remonstrances of his mother Maia, who\npoints out to him the danger of offending Apollo, Herm\u00eas replies, that\nhe aspires to rival the dignity and functions of Apollo among the\nimmortals, and that if his father Zeus refuses to grant them to him,\nhe will employ his powers of thieving in breaking open the sanctuary\nat Delphi, and in carrying away the gold and the vestments, the\nprecious tripods and vessels.[136] Presently Apollo discovers the loss\nof his cattle, and after some trouble finds his way to the Kyll\u00eanian\ncavern, where he sees Herm\u00eas asleep in his cradle. The child denies\nthe theft with effrontery, and even treats the surmise as a ridiculous\nimpossibility: he persists in such denial even before Zeus, who however\ndetects him at once, and compels him to reveal the place where the\ncattle are concealed. But the lyre was as yet unknown to Apollo, who\nhas heard nothing except the voice of the Muses and the sound of the\npipe. So powerfully is he fascinated by hearing the tones of the lyre\nfrom Herm\u00eas, and so eager to become possessed of it, that he is willing\nat once to pardon the past theft, and even to conciliate besides the\nfriendship of Herm\u00eas.[137] Accordingly a bargain is struck between the\ntwo gods and sanctioned by Zeus. Herm\u00eas surrenders to Apollo the lyre,\ninventing for his own use the syrinx or panspipe, and receiving from\nApollo in exchange the golden rod of wealth, with empire over flocks\nand herds as well as over horses and oxen and the wild animals of the\nwoods. He presses to obtain the gift of prophecy, but Apollo is under\na special vow not to impart that privilege to any god whatever: he\ninstructs Herm\u00eas however how to draw information, to a certain extent,\nfrom the M\u0153r\u00e6 or Fates themselves; and assigns to him, over and above,\nthe function of messenger of the gods to Had\u00eas.\n\n  [135] Homer. Hymn. Mercur. 18.\u2014\n\n    \u1f2c\u1ff3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u1f7c\u03c2, \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u1ff3 \u1f25\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b9\u03b8\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd,\n    \u1f19\u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f11\u03ba\u03b7\u03b2\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, etc.\n\n  [136] Homer. Hymn. Merc. 177.\u2014\n\n    \u0395\u1f30\u03bc\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03a0\u03cd\u03b8\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1, \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd,\n    \u1f1c\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f05\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u03a0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f78\u03bd, etc.\n\n  [137] Homer. Hymn. Merc. 442-454.\n\nAlthough Apollo has acquired the lyre, the particular object of his\nwishes, he is still under apprehension that Herm\u00eas will steal it away\nfrom him again, together with his bow, and he exacts a formal oath by\nStyx as security. Herm\u00eas promises solemnly that he will steal none of\nthe acquisitions, nor ever invade the sanctuary of Apollo; while the\nlatter on his part pledges himself to recognize Herm\u00eas as his chosen\nfriend and companion, amongst all the other sons of Zeus, human or\ndivine.[138]\n\n  [138] Homer. Hymn. Merc. 504-520.\u2014\n\n                          \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c2\n    \u039b\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u0390\u03b4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f72\u03c2, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd, etc.\n       \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u039c\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\n    \u039c\u03ae \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f19\u03ba\u03ae\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n    \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c5\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u1ff3\u00b7 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\n    \u039b\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u0390\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b8\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\n    \u039c\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u039c\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, etc.\n\nSo came to pass, under the sanction of Zeus, the marked favor shown\nby Apollo to Herm\u00eas. But Herm\u00eas (concludes the hymnographer, with\nfrankness unusual in speaking of a god) \u201cdoes very little good: he\navails himself of the darkness of night to cheat without measure the\ntribes of mortal men.\u201d[139]\n\n  [139] Homer. Hymn. Merc. 574.\u2014\n\n    \u03a0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\n    \u039d\u03cd\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f40\u03c1\u03c6\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c6\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nHere the general types of Herm\u00eas and Apollo, coupled with the present\nfact that no thief ever approached the rich and seemingly accessible\ntreasures of Delphi, engender a string of expository incidents cast\ninto a quasi-historical form and detailing how it happened that Herm\u00eas\nhad bound himself by especial convention to respect the Delphian\ntemple. The types of Apollo seem to have been different in different\ntimes and parts of Greece: in some places he was worshipped as Apollo\nNomios,[140] or the patron of pasture and cattle; and this attribute,\nwhich elsewhere passed over to his son Arist\u00e6us, is by our hymnographer\nvoluntarily surrendered to Herm\u00eas, combined with the golden rod of\nfruitfulness. On the other hand, the lyre did not originally belong to\nthe Far-striking King, nor is he at all an inventor: the hymn explains\nboth its first invention and how it came into his possession. And the\nvalue of the incidents is thus partly expository, partly illustrative,\nas expanding in detail the general preconceived character of the\nKyll\u00eanian god.\n\n  [140] Kallimach. Hymn. Apoll. 47.\n\nTo Zeus more amours are ascribed than to any of the other\ngods,\u2014probably because the Grecian kings and chieftains were especially\nanxious to trace their lineage to the highest and most glorious\nof all,\u2014each of these amours having its representative progeny on\nearth.[141] Such subjects were among the most promising and agreeable\nfor the interest of mythical narrative, and Zeus as a lover thus became\nthe father of a great many legends, branching out into innumerable\ninterferences, for which his sons, all of them distinguished\nindividuals, and many of them persecuted by H\u00ear\u00ea, furnished the\noccasion. But besides this, the commanding functions of the supreme\ngod, judicial and administrative, extending both over gods and men, was\na potent stimulus to the mythop\u0153ic activity. Zeus has to watch over\nhis own dignity,\u2014the first of all considerations with a god: moreover\nas Horkios, Xenios, Kt\u00easios, Meilichios, (a small proportion of his\nthousand surnames,) he guaranteed oaths and punished perjurers, he\nenforced the observance of hospitality, he guarded the family hoard\nand the crop realized for the year, and he granted expiation to the\nrepentant criminal.[142] All these different functions created a\ndemand for mythes, as the means of translating a dim, but serious,\npresentiment into distinct form, both self-explaining and communicable\nto others. In enforcing the sanctity of the oath or of the tie of\nhospitality, the most powerful of all arguments would be a collection\nof legends respecting the judgments of Zeus Horkios or Xenios; the more\nimpressive and terrific such legends were, the greater would be their\ninterest, and the less would any one dare to disbelieve them. They\nconstituted the natural outpourings of a strong and common sentiment,\nprobably without any deliberate ethical intention: the preconceptions\nof the divine agency, expanded into legend, form a product analogous to\nthe idea of the divine features and symmetry embodied in the bronze or\nthe marble statue.\n\n  [141] Kallimach. Hymn. Jov. 79. \u1f18\u03ba \u03b4\u1f72 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2, etc.\n\n  [142] See Herodot. i. 44. Xenoph. Anabas. vii. 8, 4. Plutarch,\n  Th\u00easeus, c. 12.\n\nBut it was not alone the general type and attributes of the gods which\ncontributed to put in action the mythop\u0153ic propensities. The rites and\nsolemnities forming the worship of each god, as well as the details\nof his temple and its locality, were a fertile source of mythes,\nrespecting his exploits and sufferings, which to the people who heard\nthem served the purpose of past history. The exegetes, or local guide\nand interpreter, belonging to each temple, preserved and recounted to\ncurious strangers these traditional narratives, which lent a certain\ndignity even to the minuti\u00e6 of divine service. Out of a stock of\nmaterials thus ample, the poets extracted individual collections, such\nas the \u201cCauses\u201d (\u0391\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1) of Kallimachus, now lost, and such as the Fasti\nof Ovid are for the Roman religious antiquities.[143]\n\n  [143] Ovid, Fasti, iv. 211, about the festivals of Apollo:\u2014\n\n                \u201cPriscique imitamina facti\n    \u00c6ra De\u00e6 comites raucaque terga movent.\u201d\n\n  And Lactantius, v. 19, 15. \u201cIpsos ritus ex rebus gestis (deorum)\n  vel ex casibus vel etiam ex mortibus, natos:\u201d to the same purpose\n  Augustin. De Civ. D. vii. 18; Diod\u00f4r. iii. 56. Plutarch\u2019s\n  Qu\u00e6stiones Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 et Romaic\u00e6 are full of similar tales, professing\n  to account for existing customs, many of them religious and\n  liturgic. See Lobeck, Orphica, p. 675.\n\nIt was the practice to offer to the gods in sacrifice the bones of the\nvictim only, inclosed in fat: how did this practice arise? The author\nof the Hesiodic Theogony has a story which explains it: Prom\u00eatheus\ntricked Zeus into an imprudent choice, at the period when the gods and\nmortal men first came to an arrangement about privileges and duties\n(in Mek\u00f4n\u00ea). Prom\u00eatheus, the tutelary representative of man, divided\na large steer into two portions: on the one side he placed the flesh\nand guts, folded up in the omentum and covered over with the skin: on\nthe other, he put the bones enveloped in fat. He then invited Zeus to\ndetermine which of the two portions the gods would prefer to receive\nfrom mankind. Zeus \u201cwith both hands\u201d decided for and took the white\nfat, but was highly incensed on finding that he had got nothing at the\nbottom except the bones.[144] Nevertheless the choice of the gods was\nnow irrevocably made: they were not entitled to any portion of the\nsacrificed animal beyond the bones and the white fat; and the standing\npractice is thus plausibly explained.[145] I select this as one amongst\na thousand instances to illustrate the genesis of legend out of\nreligious practices. In the belief of the people, the event narrated in\nthe legend was the real producing cause of the practice: but when we\ncome to apply a sound criticism, we are compelled to treat the event as\nexisting only in its narrative legend, and the legend itself as having\nbeen, in the greater number of cases, engendered by the practice,\u2014thus\nreversing the supposed order of production.\n\n  [144] Hesiod, Theog. 550.\u2014\n\n    \u03a6\u1fc6 \u1fe5\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c6\u03b8\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u1f7c\u03c2\n    \u0393\u03bd\u1ff6 \u1fe5\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f20\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f70 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f44\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1ff7\n    \u0398\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03bd.\n    \u03a7\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f45\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u00b7\n    \u03a7\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u1f76 \u03c7\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f35\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd,\n    \u1f69\u03c2 \u1f34\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f40\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1 \u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u1f70 \u03b2\u03bf\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u1fc3 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u1fc3.\n\n  In the second line of this citation, the poet tells us that Zeus\n  saw through the trick, and was imposed upon by his own consent,\n  foreknowing that after all the mischievous consequences of the\n  proceeding would be visited on man. But the last lines, and\n  indeed the whole drift of the legend, imply the contrary of this:\n  Zeus was really taken in, and was in consequence very angry. It\n  is curious to observe how the religious feelings of the poet\n  drive him to save in words the prescience of Zeus, though in\n  doing so he contradicts and nullifies the whole point of the\n  story.\n\n  [145] Hesiod, Theog. 557.\u2014\n\n    \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c6\u1fe6\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd\n    \u039a\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f40\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1 \u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u1f70 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b7\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b2\u03c9\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nIn dealing with Grecian mythes generally, it is convenient to\ndistribute them into such as belong to the Gods and such as belong\nto the Heroes, according as the one or the other are the prominent\npersonages. The former class manifests, more palpably than the latter,\ntheir real origin, as growing out of the faith and the feelings,\nwithout any necessary basis, either of matter of fact or allegory:\nmoreover, they elucidate more directly the religion of the Greeks, so\nimportant an item in their character as a people. But in point of fact,\nmost of the mythes present to us Gods, Heroes and Men, in juxtaposition\none with the other and the richness of Grecian mythical literature\narises from the infinite diversity of combinations thus opened out;\nfirst by the three class-types, God, Hero, and Man; next by the strict\nkeeping with which each separate class and character is handled. We\nshall now follow downward the stream of mythical time, which begins\nwith the Gods, to the Heroic legends, or those which principally\nconcern the Heroes and Heroines; for the latter were to the full as\nimportant in legend as the former.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nLEGENDS RELATING TO HEROES AND MEN.\n\n\nThe Hesiodic theogony gives no account of anything like a creation of\nman, nor does it seem that such an idea was much entertained in the\nlegendary vein of Grecian imagination; which commonly carried back\nthe present men by successive generations to some primitive ancestor,\nhimself sprung from the soil, or from a neighboring river or mountain,\nor from a god, a nymph, etc. But the poet of the Hesiodic \u201cWorks and\nDays\u201d has given us a narrative conceived in a very different spirit\nrespecting the origin of the human race, more in harmony with the sober\nand melancholy ethical tone which reigns through that poem.[146]\n\n  [146] Hesiod, as cited in the Etymologicon Magnum (probably\n  the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women, as Marktscheffel considers\n  it, placing it Fragm. 133), gives the parentage of a certain\n  _Brotos_, who must probably be intended as the first of men:\n  \u0392\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0395\u1f50\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u039c\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03ae\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u0392\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7\n  \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u0392\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0391\u1f34\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nFirst (he tells us) the Olympic gods made the golden race,\u2014good,\nperfect, and happy men, who lived from the spontaneous abundance of the\nearth, in ease and tranquillity like the gods themselves: they suffered\nneither disease nor old age, and their death was like a gentle sleep.\nAfter death they became, by the award of Zeus, guardian terrestrial\nd\u00e6mons, who watch unseen over the proceedings of mankind\u2014with the regal\nprivilege of dispensing to them wealth, and taking account of good and\nbad deeds.[147]\n\n  [147] Opp. Di. 120.\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd\n    \u03a4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2\n    \u1f18\u03c3\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u039f\u1f35 \u1fe5\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c7\u03ad\u03c4\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1,\n    \u1f28\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f11\u03c3\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f36\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u03a0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u0390\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nNext, the gods made the silver race,\u2014unlike and greatly inferior, both\nin mind and body, to the golden. The men of this race were reckless and\nmischievous towards each other, and disdainful of the immortal gods,\nto whom they refused to offer either worship or sacrifice. Zeus in his\nwrath buried them in the earth: but there they still enjoy a secondary\nhonor, as the Blest of the under-world.[148]\n\n  [148] Opp. Di. 140.\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c8\u03b5,\n    \u03a4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ac\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u0394\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c0\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f40\u03c0\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6.\n\nThirdly, Zeus made the brazen race, quite different from the silver.\nThey were made of hard ash-wood, pugnacious and terrible; they were\nof immense strength and adamantine soul, nor did they raise or touch\nbread. Their arms, their houses, and their implements were all of\nbrass: there was then no iron. This race, eternally fighting, perished\nby each other\u2019s hands, died out, and descended without name or\nprivilege to Had\u00eas.[149]\n\n  [149] The ash was the wood out of which spear-handles were made\n  (Iliad, xvi. 142): the \u039d\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9 \u039c\u03ad\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 are born along with the\n  Gigantes and the Erinnyes (Theogon. 187),\u2014\u201cgensque vir\u00fbm truncis\n  et duro robore nata\u201d (Virgil, \u00c6neid, viii. 315),\u2014_hearts of oak_.\n\nNext, Zeus made a fourth race, far juster and better than the last\npreceding. These were the Heroes or demigods, who fought at the sieges\nof Troy and Th\u00eabes. But this splendid stock also became extinct: some\nperished in war, others were removed by Zeus to a happier state in the\nislands of the Blest. There they dwell in peace and comfort, under\nthe government of Kronos, reaping thrice in the year the spontaneous\nproduce of the earth.[150]\n\n  [150] Opp. Di. 157.\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f33 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u1f29\u03bc\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nThe fifth race, which succeeds to the Heroes, is of iron: it is the\nrace to which the poet himself belongs, and bitterly does he regret it.\nHe finds his contemporaries mischievous, dishonest, unjust, ungrateful,\ngiven to perjury, careless both of the ties of consanguinity and of the\nbehests of the gods: Nemesis and \u00c6d\u00f4s (Ethical Self-reproach) have left\nearth and gone back to Olympus. How keenly does he wish that his lot\nhad been cast either earlier or later![151] This iron race is doomed to\ncontinual guilt, care, and suffering, with a small infusion of good;\nbut the time will come when Zeus will put an end to it. The poet does\nnot venture to predict what sort of race will succeed.\n\n  [151] Opp. Di. 173.\u2014\n\n    \u039c\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f64\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f22 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f22 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n    \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd....\n\nSuch is the series of distinct races of men, which Hesiod, or the\nauthor of the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d enumerates as having existed down to\nhis own time. I give it as it stands, without placing much confidence\nin the various explanations which critics have offered. It stands\nout in more than one respect from the general tone and sentiment of\nGrecian legend: moreover the sequence of races is neither natural nor\nhomogeneous,\u2014the heroic race not having any metallic denomination,\nand not occupying any legitimate place in immediate succession to the\nbrazen. Nor is the conception of the d\u00e6mons in harmony either with\nHomer or with the Hesiodic theogony. In Homer, there is scarcely any\ndistinction between gods and d\u00e6mons, while the gods are stated to\ngo about and visit the cities of men in various disguises for the\npurpose of inspecting good and evil proceedings.[152] But in the poem\nnow before us, the distinction between gods and d\u00e6mons is generic.\nThe latter are invisible tenants of earth, remnants of the once happy\ngolden race whom the Olympic gods first made: the remnants of the\nsecond or silver race are not d\u00e6mons, nor are they tenants of earth,\nbut they still enjoy an honorable posthumous existence as the Blest of\nthe under-world. Nevertheless the Hesiodic d\u00e6mons are in no way authors\nor abettors of evil: on the contrary, they form the unseen police of\nthe gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the world.\n\n  [152] Odyss. xvii. 486.\n\nWe may trace, I think, in this quintuple succession of earthly races,\nset forth by the author of the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d the confluence of\ntwo veins of sentiment, not consistent one with the other, yet both\nco\u00ebxisting in the author\u2019s mind. The drift of his poem is thoroughly\ndidactic and ethical: though deeply penetrated with the injustice and\nsuffering which darken the face of human life, he nevertheless strives\nto maintain, both in himself and in others, a conviction that on the\nwhole the just and laborious man will come off well,[153] and he\nenforces in considerable detail the lessons of practical prudence and\nvirtue. This ethical sentiment, which dictates his appreciation of the\npresent, also guides his imagination as to the past. It is pleasing\nto him to bridge over the chasm between the gods and degenerate man,\nby the supposition of previous races,\u2014the first altogether pure, the\nsecond worse than the first, and the third still worse than the second;\nand to show further how the first race passed by gentle death-sleep\ninto glorious immortality; how the second race was sufficiently wicked\nto drive Zeus to bury them in the under-world, yet still leaving them\na certain measure of honor; while the third was so desperately violent\nas to perish by its own animosities, without either name or honor of\nany kind. The conception of the golden race passing after death into\ngood guardian d\u00e6mons, which some suppose to have been derived from a\ncomparison with oriental angels, presents itself to the poet partly as\napproximating this race to the gods, partly as a means of constituting\na triple gradation of post-obituary existence, proportioned to the\ncharacter of each race whilst alive. The denominations of gold and\nsilver, given to the first two races, justify themselves, like those\ngiven by Simonid\u00eas of Amorgos and by Phokylid\u00eas to the different\ncharacters of women, derived from the dog, the bee, the mare, the ass,\nand other animals; and the epithet of brazen is specially explained\nby reference to the material which the pugnacious third race so\nplentifully employed for their arms and other implements.\n\n  [153] There are some lines, in which he appears to believe that,\n  under the present wicked and treacherous rulers, it is not the\n  interest of any man to be just (Opp. Di. 270):\u2014\n\n    \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n    \u0395\u1f34\u03b7\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c5\u1f31\u03cc\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n    \u1f1c\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f15\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u00b7\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03cc\u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f54\u03c0\u03c9 \u1f14\u03bf\u03bb\u03c0\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u0394\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  On the whole, however, his conviction is to the contrary.\n\n  Plutarch rejects the above four lines, seemingly on no other\n  ground than because he thought them immoral and unworthy of\n  Hesiod (see Proclus _ad loc._). But they fall in perfectly with\n  the temper of the poem: and the rule of Plutarch is inadmissible,\n  in determining the critical question of what is genuine or\n  spurious.\n\nSo far we trace intelligibly enough the moralizing vein: we find the\nrevolutions of the past so arranged as to serve partly as an ethical\nlesson, partly as a suitable preface to the present.[154] But fourth\nin the list comes \u201cthe divine race of Heroes:\u201d and here a new vein\nof thought is opened by the poet. The symmetry of his ethical past\nis broken up, in order to make way for these cherished beings of the\nnational faith. For though the author of the \u201cWorks and Days\u201d was\nhimself of a didactic cast of thought, like Phokylid\u00eas, or Sol\u00f4n,\nor Theognis, yet he had present to his feelings, in common with his\ncountrymen, the picture of Grecian foretime, as it was set forth in\nthe current mythes, and still more in Homer and those other epical\nproductions which were then the only existing literature and history.\nIt was impossible for him to exclude, from his sketch of the past,\neither the great persons or the glorious exploits which these poems\nennobled; and even if he himself could have consented to such an\nexclusion, the sketch would have become repulsive to his hearers.\nBut the chiefs who figured before Th\u00eabes and Troy could not be well\nidentified either with the golden, the silver, or the brazen race:\nmoreover it was essential that they should be placed in immediate\ncontiguity with the present race, because their descendants, real or\nsupposed, were the most prominent and conspicuous of existing men.\nHence the poet is obliged to assign to them the fourth place in the\nseries, and to interrupt the descending ethical movement in order to\ninterpolate them between the brazen and the iron race, with neither\nof which they present any analogy. The iron race, to which the poet\nhimself unhappily belongs, is the legitimate successor, not of the\nheroic, but of the brazen. Instead of the fierce and self-annihilating\npugnacity which characterizes the latter, the iron race manifests\nan aggregate of smaller and meaner vices and mischiefs. It will not\nperish by suicidal extinction\u2014but it is growing worse and worse, and is\ngradually losing its vigor, so that Zeus will not vouchsafe to preserve\nmuch longer such a race upon the earth.\n\n  [154] Aratus (Ph\u00e6nomen. 107) gives only three successive\n  races,\u2014the golden, silver, and brazen; Ovid superadds to these\n  the iron race (Metamorph. i. 89-144): neither of them notice the\n  heroic race.\n\n  The observations both of Buttmann (Mythos der \u00e4ltesten\n  Menschengeschlechter, t. ii. p. 12 of the Mythologus) and of\n  V\u00f6lcker (Mythologie des Japetischen Geschlechts, \u00a7 6, pp.\n  250-279) on this series of distinct races, are ingenious, and\n  may be read with profit. Both recognize the disparate character\n  of the fourth link in the series, and each accounts for it in a\n  different manner. My own view comes nearer to that of V\u00f6lcker,\n  with some considerable differences; amongst which one is, that\n  he rejects the verses respecting the d\u00e6mons, which seem to me\n  capital parts of the whole scheme.\n\nWe thus see that the series of races imagined by the poet of the\n\u201cWorks and Days\u201d is the product of two distinct and incongruous veins\nof imagination,\u2014the didactic or ethical blending with the primitive\nmythical or epical. His poem is remarkable as the most ancient didactic\nproduction of the Greeks, and as one of the first symptoms of a\nnew tone of sentiment finding its way into their literature, never\nafterwards to become extinct. The tendency of the \u201cWorks and Days\u201d is\nanti-heroic: far from seeking to inspire admiration for adventurous\nenterprise, the author inculcates the strictest justice, the most\nunremitting labor and frugality, and a sober, not to say anxious,\nestimate of all the minute specialties of the future. Prudence and\nprobity are his means,\u2014practical comfort and happiness his end. But\nhe deeply feels, and keenly exposes, the manifold wickedness and\nshort-comings of his contemporaries, in reference to this capital\nstandard. He turns with displeasure from the present men, not because\nthey are too feeble to hurl either the spear of Achilles or some\nvast boundary-stone, but because they are rapacious, knavish, and\nunprincipled.\n\nThe d\u00e6mons first introduced into the religious atmosphere of the\nGrecian world by the author of the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d as generically\ndifferent from the gods, but as essentially good, and as forming the\nintermediate agents and police between gods and men,\u2014are deserving\nof attention as the seed of a doctrine which afterwards underwent\nmany changes, and became of great importance, first as one of the\nconstituent elements of pagan faith, then as one of the helps to its\nsubversion. It will be recollected that the buried remnants of the\nhalf-wicked silver race, though they are not recognized as d\u00e6mons,\nare still considered as having a substantive existence, a name, and\ndignity, in the under-world. The step was easy, to treat them as\nd\u00e6mons also, but as d\u00e6mons of a defective and malignant character:\nthis step was made by Empedocl\u00eas and Xenocrat\u00eas, and to a certain\nextent countenanced by Plato.[155] There came thus to be admitted among\nthe pagan philosophers d\u00e6mons both good and bad, in every degree:\nand these d\u00e6mons were found available as a means of explaining many\nph\u00e6nomena for which it was not convenient to admit the agency of the\ngods. They served to relieve the gods from the odium of physical and\nmoral evils, as well as from the necessity of constantly meddling in\nsmall affairs; and the objectionable ceremonies of the pagan world were\ndefended upon the ground that in no other way could the exigencies of\nsuch malignant beings be appeased. They were most frequently noticed\nas causes of evil, and thus the name (_d\u00e6mon_) came insensibly to\nconvey with it a bad sense,\u2014the idea of an evil being as contrasted\nwith the goodness of a god. So it was found by the Christian writers\nwhen they commenced their controversy with paganism. One branch of\ntheir argument led them to identify the pagan gods with d\u00e6mons in the\nevil sense, and the insensible change in the received meaning of the\nword lent them a specious assistance. For they could easily show that\nnot only in Homer, but in the general language of early pagans, all\nthe gods generally were spoken of as d\u00e6mons\u2014and therefore, verbally\nspeaking, Clemens and Tatian seemed to affirm nothing more against Zeus\nor Apollo than was employed in the language of paganism itself. Yet the\naudience of Homer or Sophokl\u00eas would have strenuously repudiated the\nproposition, if it had been put to them in the sense which the word\n_d\u00e6mon_ bore in the age and among the circle of these Christian writers.\n\n  [155] See this subject further mentioned\u2014_infra_, chap. xvi. p.\n  565.\n\nIn the imagination of the author of the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d the d\u00e6mons\noccupy an important place, and are regarded as being of serious\npractical efficiency. When he is remonstrating with the rulers around\nhim upon their gross injustice and corruption, he reminds them of the\nvast number of these immortal servants of Zeus who are perpetually on\nguard amidst mankind, and through whom the visitations of the gods will\ndescend even upon the most potent evil doers.[156] His supposition that\nthe d\u00e6mons were not gods, but departed men of the golden race, allowed\nhim to multiply their number indefinitely, without too much cheapening\nthe divine dignity.\n\n  [156] Opp. Di. 252. \u03a4\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c5\u03b2\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u1fc3,\n  etc.\n\nAs this poet has been so much enslaved by the current legends as\nto introduce the Heroic race into a series to which it does not\nlegitimately belong, so he has under the same influence inserted in\nanother part of his poem the mythe of Pandora and Prom\u00eatheus,[157] as\na means of explaining the primary diffusion, and actual abundance,\nof evil among mankind. Yet this mythe can in no way consist with his\nquintuple scale of distinct races, and is in fact a totally distinct\ntheory to explain the same problem,\u2014the transition of mankind from\na supposed state of antecedent happiness to one of present toil and\nsuffering. Such an inconsistency is not a sufficient reason for\nquestioning the genuineness of either passage; for the two stories,\nthough one contradicts the other, both harmonize with that central\npurpose which governs the author\u2019s mind,\u2014a querulous and didactic\nappreciation of the present. That such was his purpose appears not only\nfrom the whole tenor of his poem, but also from the remarkable fact\nthat his own personality, his own adventures and kindred, and his own\nsufferings, figure in it conspicuously. And this introduction of self\nimparts to it a peculiar interest. The father of Hesiod came over from\nthe \u00c6olic Kym\u00ea, with the view of bettering his condition, and settled\nat Askra in B\u0153otia, at the foot of Mount Helicon. After his death his\ntwo sons divided the family inheritance: but Hesiod bitterly complains\nthat his brother Pers\u00eas cheated and went to law with him, and obtained\nthrough corrupt judges an unjust decision. He farther reproaches his\nbrother with a preference for the suits and unprofitable bustle of the\nagora, at a time when he ought to be laboring for his subsistence in\nthe field. Askra indeed was a miserable place, repulsive both in summer\nand winter. Hesiod had never crossed the sea, except once from Aulis to\nEub\u0153a, whither he went to attend the funeral games of Amphidamas, the\nchief of Chalkis: he sung a hymn, and gained as prize a tripod, which\nhe consecrated to the muses in Helicon.[158]\n\n  [157] Opp. Di. 50-105.\n\n  [158] Opp. Di. 630-650, 27-45.\n\nThese particulars, scanty as they are, possess a peculiar value, as\nthe earliest authentic memorandum respecting the doing or suffering of\nany actual Greek person. There is no external testimony at all worthy\nof trust respecting the age of the \u201cWorks and Days:\u201d Herodotus treats\nHesiod and Homer as belonging to the same age, four hundred years\nbefore his own time; and there are other statements besides, some\nplacing Hesiod at an earlier date than Homer, some at a later. Looking\nat the internal evidences, we may observe that the pervading sentiment,\ntone and purpose of the poem is widely different from that of the Iliad\nand Odyssey, and analogous to what we read respecting the compositions\nof Archilochus and the Amorgian Simonid\u00eas. The author of the \u201cWorks\nand Days\u201d is indeed a preacher and not a satirist: but with this\ndistinction, we find in him the same predominance of the present and\nthe positive, the same disposition to turn the muse into an exponent of\nhis own personal wrongs, the same employment of \u00c6sopic fable by way of\nillustration, and the same unfavorable estimate of the female sex,[159]\nall of which may be traced in the two poets above mentioned, placing\nboth of them in contrast with the Homeric epic. Such an internal\nanalogy, in the absence of good testimony, is the best guide which we\ncan follow in determining the date of the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d which we\nshould accordingly place shortly after the year 700 B. C. The style\nof the poem might indeed afford a proof that the ancient and uniform\nhexameter, though well adapted to continuous legendary narrative or to\nsolemn hymns, was somewhat monotonous when called upon either to serve\na polemical purpose or to impress a striking moral lesson. When poets,\nthen the only existing composers, first began to apply their thoughts\nto the cut and thrust of actual life, aggressive or didactic, the verse\nwould be seen to require a new, livelier and smarter metre; and out\nof this want grew the elegiac and the iambic verse, both seemingly\ncontemporaneous, and both intended to supplant the primitive hexameter\nfor the short effusions then coming into vogue.\n\n  [159] Compare the fable (\u03b1\u1f36\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2) in the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d v. 200,\n  with those in Archilochus, Fr. xxxviii. and xxxix., Gaisford,\n  respecting the fox and the ape; and the legend of Pand\u00f4ra (v. 95\n  and v. 705) with the fragment of Simonid\u00eas of Amorgos respecting\n  women (Fr. viii. ed. Welcker, v. 95-115); also Phokylid\u00eas ap.\n  Stob\u00e6um Florileg. lxxi.\n\n  Isokrat\u00eas assimilates the character of the \u201cWorks and Days\u201d to\n  that of Theognis and Phokylid\u00eas (ad Nikokl. Or. ii. p. 23).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\nLEGEND OF THE IAPETIDS.\n\n\nThe sons of the Titan god Iapetus, as described in the Hesiodic\ntheogony, are Atlas, Men\u0153tius, Prom\u00eatheus and Epim\u00eatheus.[160] Of\nthese, Atlas alone is mentioned by Homer in the Odyssey, and even he\nnot as the son of Iapetus: the latter himself is named in the Iliad as\nexisting in Tartarus along with Kronos. The Homeric Atlas \u201cknows the\ndepths of the whole sea, and keeps by himself those tall pillars which\nhold the heaven apart from the earth.\u201d[161]\n\n  [160] Hesiod, Theog. 510.\n\n  [161] Hom. Odyss. i. 120.\u2014\n\n    \u1f0c\u03c4\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f40\u03bb\u03bf\u03cc\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u03a0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b2\u03ad\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5, \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2\n    \u039c\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1f70\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f33 \u03b3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ac\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nAs the Homeric theogony generally appears much expanded in Hesiod, so\nalso does the family of Iapetus, with their varied adventures. Atlas is\nhere described, not as the keeper of the intermediate pillars between\nheaven and earth, but as himself condemned by Zeus to support the\nheaven on his head and hands;[162] while the fierce Men\u0153tius is thrust\ndown to Erebus as a punishment for his ungovernable insolence. But the\nremaining two brothers, Prom\u00eatheus and Epim\u00eatheus, are among the most\ninteresting creations of Grecian legend, and distinguished in more than\none respect from all the remainder.\n\n  [162] Hesiod, Theog. 516.\u2014\n\n    \u1f0c\u03c4\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c1\u1f7a\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u1f19\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u1f7c\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1fc7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  Hesiod stretches far beyond the simplicity of the Homeric\n  conception.\n\nFirst, the main battle between Zeus and the Titan gods is a contest of\nforce purely and simply\u2014mountains are hurled and thunder is launched,\nand the victory remains to the strongest. But the competition between\nZeus and Prom\u00eatheus is one of craft and stratagem: the victory does\nindeed remain to the former, but the honors of the fight belong to the\nlatter. Secondly, Prom\u00eatheus and Epim\u00eatheus (the fore-thinker and the\nafter-thinker[163]) are characters stamped at the same mint and by\nthe same effort, the express contrast and antithesis of each other.\nThirdly, mankind are here expressly brought forward, not indeed as\nactive partners in the struggle, but as the grand and capital subjects\ninterested,\u2014as gainers or sufferers by the result. Prom\u00eatheus appears\nin the exalted character of champion of the human race, even against\nthe formidable superiority of Zeus.\n\n  [163] Pindar extends the family of Epim\u00eatheus and gives him a\n  daughter, \u03a0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (Pyth. v. 25), _Excuse_, the offspring of\n  After-thought.\n\nIn the primitive or Hesiodic legend, Prom\u00eatheus is not the creator\nor moulder of man; it is only the later additions which invest him\nwith this character.[164] The race are supposed as existing, and\nProm\u00eatheus, a member of the dispossessed body of Titan gods, comes\nforward as their representative and defender. The advantageous bargain\nwhich he made with Zeus on their behalf, in respect to the partition of\nthe sacrificial animals, has been recounted in the preceding chapter.\nZeus felt that he had been outwitted, and was exceeding wroth. In his\ndispleasure he withheld from mankind the inestimable comfort of fire,\nso that the race would have perished, had not Prom\u00eatheus stolen fire,\nin defiance of the command of the Supreme Ruler, and brought it to men\nin the hollow of a ferule.[165]\n\n  [164] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 7. 1. Nor is he such either in \u00c6schylus, or\n  in the Platonic fable (Protag. c. 30), though this version became\n  at last the most popular. Some hardened lumps of clay, remnants\n  of that which had been employed by Prom\u00eatheus in moulding man,\n  were shown to Pausanias at Panopeus in Phokis (Paus. x. 4, 3).\n\n  The first Epigram of Erinna (Anthol. i. p. 58, ed. Branck) seems\n  to allude to Prom\u00eatheus as moulder of man. The expression of\n  Aristophan\u00eas (Aves, 689)\u2014\u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u2014does not necessarily\n  refer to Prom\u00eatheus.\n\n  [165] Hesiod, Theog. 566; Opp. Di. 52.\n\nZeus was now doubly indignant, and determined to play off a still more\nruinous stratagem. H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, by his direction, moulded the form of\na beautiful virgin; Ath\u00ean\u00ea dressed her, Aphrodit\u00ea and the Charities\nbestowed upon her both ornament and fascination, while Herm\u00eas infused\ninto her the mind of a dog, a deceitful spirit, and treacherous\nwords.[166] The messenger of the gods conducted this \u201cfascinating\nmischief\u201d to mankind, at a time when Prom\u00eatheus was not present.\nNow Epim\u00eatheus had received from his brother peremptory injunctions\nnot to accept from the hands of Zeus any present whatever; but the\nbeauty of Pand\u00f4ra (so the newly-formed female was called) was not to\nbe resisted. She was received and admitted among men, and from that\nmoment their comfort and tranquillity was exchanged for suffering of\nevery kind.[167] The evils to which mankind are liable had been before\nenclosed in a cask in their own keeping: Pand\u00f4ra in her malice removed\nthe lid of the cask, and out flew these thousand evils and calamities,\nto exercise forever their destroying force. Hope alone remained\nimprisoned, and therefore without efficacy, as before\u2014the inviolable\nlid being replaced before she could escape. Before this incident\n(says the legend) men had lived without disease or suffering; but now\nboth earth and sea are full of mischiefs, while maladies of every\ndescription stalk abroad by day as well as by night,[168] without any\nhope for man of relief to come.\n\n  [166] Theog. 580; Opp. Di. 50-85.\n\n  [167] Opp. Di. 81-90.\n\n  [168] Opp. Di. 93. Pand\u00f4ra does not _bring with her_ the cask,\n  as the common version of this story would have us suppose: the\n  cask exists fast closed in the custody of Epim\u00eatheus, or of man\n  himself, and Pand\u00f4ra commits the fatal treachery of removing\n  the lid. The case is analogous to that of the closed bag of\n  unfavorable winds which \u00c6olus gives into the hands of Odysseus,\n  and which the guilty companions of the latter force open, to the\n  entire ruin of his hopes (Odyss. x. 19-50). The idea of the two\n  casks on the threshold of Zeus, lying ready for dispensation\u2014one\n  full of evils the other of benefits\u2014is Homeric (Iliad, xxiv.\n  527):\u2014\n\n    \u0394\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9, etc.\n\n  Plutarch assimilates to this the \u03c0\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 opened by Pand\u00f4ra,\n  Consolat. ad Apoll\u00f4n. c. 7. p. 105. The explanation here given\n  of the Hesiodic passage relating to Hope, is drawn from an able\n  article in the Wiener Jahrb\u00fccher, vol. 109 (1845), p. 220,\n  Ritter; a review of Sch\u00f6mmann\u2019s translation of the Prom\u00eatheus of\n  \u00c6schylus. The diseases and evils are inoperative so long as they\n  remain shut up in the cask: the same mischief-making influence\n  which lets them out to their calamitous work, takes care that\n  Hope shall still continue a powerless prisoner in the inside.\n\nThe Theogony gives the legend here recounted, with some\nvariations\u2014leaving out the part of Epim\u00eatheus altogether, as well as\nthe cask of evils. Pand\u00f4ra is the ruin of man, simply as the mother\nand representative of the female sex.[169] And the variations are\nthus useful, as they enable us to distinguish the essential from the\naccessory circumstances of the story.\n\n  [169] Theog. 590.\u2014\n\n    \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b7\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c9\u03bd,\n    \u03a4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f40\u03bb\u03ce\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u03a0\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, etc.\n\n\u201cThus (says the poet, at the conclusion of his narrative) it is\nnot possible to escape from the purposes of Zeus.\u201d[170] His mythe,\nconnecting the calamitous condition of man with the malevolence of the\nsupreme god, shows, first, by what cause such an unfriendly feeling\nwas raised; next, by what instrumentality its deadly results were\nbrought about. The human race are not indeed the creation, but the\nprotected flock of Prom\u00eatheus, one of the elder or dispossessed Titan\ngods: when Zeus acquires supremacy, mankind along with the rest become\nsubject to him, and are to make the best bargain they can respecting\nworship and service to be yielded. By the stratagem of their advocate\nProm\u00eatheus, Zeus is cheated into such a partition of the victims as is\neminently unprofitable to him; whereby his wrath is so provoked, that\nhe tries to subtract from man the use of fire. Here however his scheme\nis frustrated by the theft of Prom\u00eatheus: but his second attempt is\nmore successful, and he in his turn cheats the unthinking Epim\u00eatheus\ninto the acceptance of a present (in spite of the peremptory interdict\nof Prom\u00eatheus) by which the whole of man\u2019s happiness is wrecked. This\nlegend grows out of two feelings; partly as to the relations of the\ngods with man, partly as to the relation of the female sex with the\nmale. The present gods are unkind towards man, but the old gods, with\nwhom man\u2019s lot was originally cast, were much kinder\u2014and the ablest\namong them stands forward as the indefatigable protector of the race.\nNevertheless, the mere excess of his craft proves the ultimate ruin of\nthe cause which he espouses. He cheats Zeus out of a fair share of the\nsacrificial victim, so as both to provoke and justify a retaliation\nwhich he cannot be always at hand to ward off: the retaliation is, in\nhis absence, consummated by a snare laid for Epim\u00eatheus and voluntarily\naccepted. And thus, though Hesiod ascribes the calamitous condition\nof man to the malevolence of Zeus, his piety suggests two exculpatory\npleas for the latter: mankind have been the first to defraud Zeus of\nhis legitimate share of the sacrifice\u2014and they have moreover been\nconsenting parties to their own ruin. Such are the feelings, as to\nthe relation between the gods and man, which have been one of the\ngenerating elements of this legend. The other element, a conviction\nof the vast mischief arising to man from women, whom yet they cannot\ndispense with, is frequently and strongly set forth in several of the\nGreek poets\u2014by Simonid\u00eas of Amorgos and Phokylid\u00eas, not less than by\nthe notorious misogynist Euripid\u00eas.\n\n  [170] Opp. Di. 105.\u2014\n\n      \u039f\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u1fc6 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nBut the miseries arising from woman, however great they might be,\ndid not reach Prom\u00eatheus himself. For him, the rash champion who\nhad ventured \u201cto compete in sagacity\u201d[171] with Zeus, a different\npunishment was in store. Bound by heavy chains to a pillar, he remained\nfast imprisoned for several generations: every day did an eagle prey\nupon his liver, and every night did the liver grow afresh for the\nnext day\u2019s suffering. At length Zeus, eager to enhance the glory of\nhis favorite son H\u00earacl\u00eas, permitted the latter to kill the eagle and\nrescue the captive.[172]\n\n  [171] Theog. 534. \u039f\u1f55\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03ca \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9.\n\n  [172] Theog. 521-532.\n\nSuch is the Prom\u00eathean mythe as it stands in the Hesiodic poems; its\nearliest form, as far as we can trace. Upon it was founded the sublime\ntragedy of \u00c6schylus, \u201cThe Enchained Prom\u00eatheus,\u201d together with at\nleast one more tragedy, now lost, by the same author.[173] \u00c6schylus\nhas made several important alterations; describing the human race, not\nas having once enjoyed and subsequently lost a state of tranquillity\nand enjoyment, but as originally feeble and wretched. He suppresses\nboth the first trick played off by Prom\u00eatheus upon Zeus respecting\nthe partition of the victim\u2014and the final formation and sending of\nPand\u00f4ra\u2014which are the two most marked portions of the Hesiodic story;\nwhile on the other hand he brings out prominently and enlarges upon\nthe theft of fire,[174] which in Hesiod is but slightly touched. If\nhe has thus relinquished the antique simplicity of the story, he has\nrendered more than ample compensation by imparting to it a grandeur of\n_id\u00e9al_, a large reach of thought combined with appeals to our earnest\nand admiring sympathy, and a pregnancy of suggestion in regard to the\nrelations between the gods and man, which soar far above the Hesiodic\nlevel\u2014and which render his tragedy the most impressive, though not\nthe most artistically composed, of all Grecian dramatic productions.\nProm\u00eatheus there appears not only as the heroic champion and sufferer\nin the cause and for the protection of the human race, but also as\nthe gifted teacher of all the arts, helps, and ornaments of life,\namongst which fire is only one:[175] all this against the will and in\ndefiance of the purpose of Zeus, who, on acquiring his empire, wished\nto destroy the human race and to beget some new breed.[176] Moreover,\nnew relations between Prom\u00eatheus and Zeus are superadded by \u00c6schylus.\nAt the commencement of the struggle between Zeus and the Titan gods,\nProm\u00eatheus had vainly attempted to prevail upon the latter to conduct\nit with prudence; but when he found that they obstinately declined\nall wise counsel, and that their ruin was inevitable, he abandoned\ntheir cause and joined Zeus. To him and to his advice Zeus owed the\nvictory: yet the monstrous ingratitude and tyranny of the latter is\nnow manifested by nailing him to a rock, for no other crime than\nbecause he frustrated the purpose of extinguishing the human race, and\nfurnished to them the means of living with tolerable comfort.[177] The\nnew ruler Zeus, insolent with his victory over the old gods, tramples\ndown all right, and sets at naught sympathy and obligation, as well\ntowards gods as towards man. Yet the prophetic Prom\u00eatheus, in the midst\nof intense suffering, is consoled by the foreknowledge that the time\nwill come when Zeus must again send for him, release him, and invoke\nhis aid, as the sole means of averting from himself dangers otherwise\ninsurmountable. The security and means of continuance for mankind\nhave now been placed beyond the reach of Zeus\u2014whom Prom\u00eatheus proudly\ndefies, glorying in his generous and successful championship,[178]\ndespite the terrible price which he is doomed to pay for it.\n\n  [173] Of the tragedy called \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u039b\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 some few fragments\n  yet remain: \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a0\u03cd\u03c1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 was a satyric drama, according to\n  Dindorf. Welcker recognizes a third tragedy, \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a0\u03cd\u03c1\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2,\n  and a satyric drama, \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a0\u03c5\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2 (Die Griechisch.\n  Trag\u00f6dien, vol. i. p. 30). The story of Prom\u00eatheus had also been\n  handled by Sapph\u00f4 in one of her lost songs (Servius ad Virgil.\n  Eclog. vi. 42).\n\n  [174] Apollod\u00f4rus too mentions only the theft of fire (i. 7. 1).\n\n  [175] \u00c6sch. Prom. 442-506.\u2014\n\n    \u03a0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n  [176] \u00c6sch. Prom. 231.\u2014\n\n          \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c0\u03ce\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\n    \u039f\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u1fbd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03ca\u03c3\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n    \u03a4\u1f78 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c7\u03c1\u1fc3\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c6\u03b9\u03c4\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  [177] \u00c6sch. Prom. 198-222. 123.\u2014\n\n    \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n  [178] \u00c6sch. Prom. 169-770.\n\nAs the \u00c6schylean Prom\u00eatheus, though retaining the old lineaments, has\nacquired a new coloring, soul and character, so he has also become\nidentified with a special locality. In Hesiod, there is no indication\nof the place in which he is imprisoned; but \u00c6schylus places it in\nScythia,[179] and the general belief of the Greeks supposed it to be on\nMount Caucasus. So long and so firmly did this belief continue, that\nthe Roman general Pompey, when in command of an army in Kolchis, made\nwith his companion, the literary Greek Theophan\u00eas, a special march to\nview the spot in Caucasus where Prom\u00eatheus had been transfixed.[180]\n\n  [179] Prometh. 2. See also the Fragments of the Prom\u00eatheus\n  Solutus, 177-179, ed. Dindorf, where Caucasus is specially named;\n  but v. 719 of the Prom\u00eatheus Vinctus seems to imply that Mount\n  Caucasus is a place different from that to which the suffering\n  prisoner is chained.\n\n  [180] Appian, Bell. Mithridat. c. 103.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nHEROIC LEGENDS.\u2014GENEALOGY OF ARGOS.\n\n\nHaving briefly enumerated the gods of Greece, with their chief\nattributes as described in legend, we come to those genealogies which\nconnected them with historical men.\n\nIn the retrospective faith of a Greek, the ideas of worship and\nancestry coalesced. Every association of men, large or small, in whom\nthere existed a feeling of present union, traced back that union to\nsome common initial progenitor; that progenitor being either the common\ngod whom they worshipped, or some semi-divine person closely allied\nto him. What the feelings of the community require is, a continuous\npedigree to connect them with this respected source of existence,\nbeyond which they do not think of looking back. A series of names,\nplaced in filiation or fraternity, together with a certain number of\nfamily or personal adventures ascribed to some of the individuals\namong them, constitute the ante-historical past through which the\nGreek looks back to his gods. The names of this genealogy are, to a\ngreat degree, gentile or local names familiar to the people,\u2014rivers,\nmountains, springs, lakes, villages, demes, etc.,\u2014embodied as persons,\nand introduced as acting or suffering. They are moreover called kings\nor chiefs, but the existence of a body of subjects surrounding them\nis tacitly implied rather than distinctly set forth; for their own\npersonal exploits or family proceedings constitute for the most part\nthe whole matter of narrative. And thus the genealogy was made to\nsatisfy at once the appetite of the Greeks for romantic adventure, and\ntheir demand for an unbroken line of filiation between themselves and\nthe gods. The eponymous personage, from whom the community derive their\nname, is sometimes the begotten son of the local god, sometimes an\nindigenous man sprung from the earth, which is indeed itself divinized.\n\nIt will be seen from the mere description of these genealogies that\nthey included elements human and historical, as well as elements divine\nand extra-historical. And if we could determine the time at which any\ngenealogy was first framed, we should be able to assure ourselves\nthat the men then represented as present, together with their fathers\nand grandfathers, were real persons of flesh and blood. But this is\na point which can seldom be ascertained; moreover, even if it could\nbe ascertained, we must at once set it aside, if we wish to look at\nthe genealogy in the point of view of the Greeks. For to them, not\nonly all the members were alike real, but the gods and heroes at the\ncommencement were in a certain sense the most real; at least, they were\nthe most esteemed and indispensable of all. The value of the genealogy\nconsisted, not in its length, but in its continuity; not (according\nto the feeling of modern aristocracy) in the power of setting out a\nprolonged series of human fathers and grandfathers, but in the sense\nof ancestral union with the primitive god. And the length of the\nseries is traceable rather to humility, inasmuch as the same person\nwho was gratified with the belief that he was descended from a god in\nthe fifteenth generation, would have accounted it criminal insolence\nto affirm that a god was his father or grandfather. In presenting to\nthe reader those genealogies which constitute the supposed primitive\nhistory of Hellas, I make no pretence to distinguish names real and\nhistorical from fictitious creations; partly because I have no evidence\nupon which to draw the line, and partly because by attempting it I\nshould altogether depart from the genuine Grecian point of view.\n\nNor is it possible to do more than exhibit a certain selection of\nsuch as were most current and interesting; for the total number of\nthem which found place in Grecian faith exceeds computation. As a\ngeneral rule, every deme, every gens, every aggregate of men accustomed\nto combined action, religious or political, had its own. The small\nand unimportant demes into which Attica was divided had each its\nancestral god and heroes, just as much as the great Athens herself.\nEven among the villages of Phokis, which Pausanias will hardly permit\nhimself to call towns, deductions of legendary antiquity were not\nwanting. And it is important to bear in mind, when we are reading the\nlegendary genealogies of Argos, or Sparta, or Th\u00eabes, that these are\nmerely samples amidst an extensive class, all perfectly analogous,\nand all exhibiting the religious and patriotic retrospect of some\nfraction of the Hellenic world. They are no more matter of historical\ntradition than any of the thousand other legendary genealogies which\nmen delighted to recall to memory at the periodical festivals of their\ngens, their deme, or their village.\n\nWith these few prefatory remarks, I proceed to notice the most\nconspicuous of the Grecian heroic pedigrees, and first, that of Argos.\n\nThe earliest name in Argeian antiquity is that of Inachus, the son\nof Oceanus and T\u00eathys, who gave his name to the river flowing under\nthe walls of the town. According to the chronological computations of\nthose who regarded the mythical genealogies as substantive history,\nand who allotted a given number of years to each generation, the reign\nof Inachus was placed 1986 B. C., or about 1100 years prior to the\ncommencement of the recorded Olympiads.[181]\n\n  [181] Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 1. Mr. Fynes Clinton does not admit the\n  historical reality of Inachus; but he places Phor\u00f4neus seventeen\n  generations, or 570 years prior to the Trojan war, 978 years\n  earlier than the first recorded Olympiad. See Fasti Hellenici,\n  vol. iii. c. 1. p. 19.\n\nThe sons of Inachus were Phor\u00f4neus and \u00c6gialeus; both of whom however\nwere sometimes represented as autochthonous men, the one in the\nterritory of Argos, the other in that of Siky\u00f4n. \u00c6gialeus gave his\nname to the north-western region of the Peloponn\u00easus, on the southern\ncoast of the Corinthian Gulf.[182] The name of Phor\u00f4neus was of great\ncelebrity in the Argeian mythical genealogies, and furnished both the\ntitle and the subject of the ancient poem called Phor\u00f4nis, in which he\nis styled \u201cthe father of mortal men.\u201d[183] He is said to have imparted\nto mankind, who had before him lived altogether isolated, the first\nnotion and habits of social existence, and even the first knowledge of\nfire: his dominion extended over the whole Peloponn\u00easus. His tomb at\nArgos, and seemingly also the place called the Phor\u00f4nic city, in which\nhe formed the first settlement of mankind, were still shown in the days\nof Pausanias.[184] The offspring of Phor\u00f4neus, by the nymph Teledik\u00ea,\nwere Apis and Niob\u00ea. Apis, a harsh ruler, was put to death by Thelxi\u00f4n\nand Telchin, having given to Peloponn\u00easus the name of Apia:[185] he\nwas succeeded by Argos, the son of his sister Niob\u00ea by the god Zeus.\nFrom this sovereign Peloponn\u00easus was denominated Argos. By his wife\nEvadn\u00ea, daughter of Strym\u00f4n,[186] he had four sons, Ekbasus, Peiras,\nEpidaurus, and Kriasus. Ekbasus was succeeded by his son Ag\u00ean\u00f4r,\nand he again by his son Argos Panopt\u00eas,\u2014a very powerful prince who\nis said to have had eyes distributed over all his body, and to have\nliberated Peloponn\u00easus from several monsters and wild animals which\ninfested it:[187] Akusilaus and \u00c6schylus make this Argos an earth-born\nperson, while Pherekyd\u00eas reports him as son of Arest\u00f4r. Iasus was the\nson of Argos Panopt\u00eas by Ism\u00ean\u00ea, daughter of As\u00f4pus. According to the\nauthors whom Apollod\u00f4rus and Pausanias prefer, the celebrated I\u00f4 was\nhis daughter: but the Hesiodic epic (as well as Akusilaus) represented\nher as daughter of Peiras, while \u00c6schylus and Kastor the chronologist\naffirmed the primitive king Inachus to have been her father.[188] A\nfavorite theme, as well for the ancient genealogical poets as for the\nAttic tragedians, were the adventures of I\u00f4, of whom, while priestess\nof H\u00ear\u00ea, at the ancient and renowned H\u00ear\u00e6on between Myk\u00ean\u00e6 and Argos,\nZeus became amorous. When H\u00ear\u00ea discovered the intrigue and taxed him\nwith it, he denied the charge, and metamorphosed I\u00f4 into a white cow.\nH\u00ear\u00ea, requiring that the cow should be surrendered to her, placed her\nunder the keeping of Argos Panopt\u00eas; but this guardian was slain by\nHerm\u00eas, at the command of Zeus: and H\u00ear\u00ea then drove the cow I\u00f4 away\nfrom her native land by means of the incessant stinging of a gad-fly,\nwhich compelled her to wander without repose or sustenance over an\nimmeasurable extent of foreign regions. The wandering I\u00f4 gave her name\nto the Ionian Gulf, traversed Epirus and Illyria, passed the chain\nof Mount H\u00e6mus and the lofty summits of Caucasus, and swam across\nthe Thracian or Cimmerian Bosporus (which also from her derived its\nappellation) into Asia. She then went through Scythia, Cimmeria, and\nmany Asiatic regions, until she arrived in Egypt, where Zeus at length\nbestowed upon her rest, restored her to her original form, and enabled\nher to give birth to his black son Epaphos.[189]\n\n  [182] Pausan. ii. 5, 4.\n\n  [183] See D\u00fcntzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr\u00e6c. p. 57. The Argeian author\n  Akusilaus treated Phor\u00f4neus as the first of men, Fragm. 14.\n  Didot ap. Clem. Alex. Stromat i. p. 321. \u03a6\u03bf\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2, a synonym for\n  Argeians; Theocrit. Idyll. xxv. 200.\n\n  [184] Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 1, 1; Pausan. ii. 15, 5; 19, 5; 20, 3.\n\n  [185] Apis in \u00c6schylus is totally different: \u1f30\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 or\n  medical charmer, son of Apollo, who comes across the gulf from\n  Naupactus, purifies the territory of Argos from noxious monsters,\n  and gives to it the name of _Apia_ (\u00c6schyl. Suppl. 265). Compare\n  Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03c0\u03af\u03b7; Soph. \u0152dip. Colon. 1303. The name \u1f08\u03c0\u03af\u03b1 for\n  Peloponn\u00easus remains still a mystery, even after the attempt of\n  Buttmann (Lexilogus, s. 19) to throw light upon it.\n\n  Eusebius asserts that Niob\u00ea was the wife of Inachus and mother of\n  Phor\u00f4neus, and pointedly contradicts those who call her daughter\n  of Phor\u00f4neus\u2014\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u039d\u03b9\u03cc\u03b2\u03b7\u03bd \u03a6\u03bf\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1, \u1f45\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c2 (Chronic. p. 23, ed. Scalig.): his positive tone is\n  curious, upon such a matter.\n\n  Hellanikus in his Argolica stated that Phor\u00f4neus had three sons,\n  Pelasgus, Iasus and Ag\u00ean\u00f4r, who at the death of their father\n  divided his possessions by lot. Pelasgus acquired the country\n  near the river Erasinus, and built the citadel of Larissa: Iasus\n  obtained the portion near to Elis. After their decease, the\n  younger brother Ag\u00ean\u00f4r invaded and conquered the country, at the\n  head of a large body of horse. It was from these three persons\n  that Argos derived three epithets which are attached to it in the\n  Homeric poems\u2014\u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f3c\u03b1\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f39\u03c0\u03c0\u03cc\u03b2\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd (Hellanik. Fr.\n  38, ed. Didot; Phavorin. v. \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2). This is a specimen of the way\n  in which legendary persons as well as legendary events were got\n  up to furnish an explanation of Homeric epithets: we may remark\n  as singular, that Hellanikus seems to apply \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 to a\n  portion of Peloponn\u00easus, while the Homeric Catalogue applies it\n  to Thessaly.\n\n  [186] Apollod. _l. c._ The mention of Strym\u00f4n seems connected\n  with \u00c6schylus Suppl. 255.\n\n  [187] Akusil. Fragm. 17, ed. Didot; \u00c6sch. Prometh. 568; Pherekyd.\n  Fragm. 22, ed. Didot; Hesiod. \u00c6gimius. Fr. 2, p. 56, ed. D\u00fcntzer:\n  among the varieties of the story, one was that Argos was changed\n  into a peacock (Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 102). Macrobius (i. 19)\n  considers Argos as an allegorical expression of the starry\n  heaven; an idea which Panofska also upholds in one of the recent\n  Abhandlungen of the Berlin Academy, 1837, p. 121 _seq._\n\n  [188] Apollod. ii. 1, 1; Pausan. ii. 16, 1; \u00c6sch. Prom. v.\n  590-663.\n\n  [189] \u00c6schyl. Prom. v. 790-850; Apollod. ii. 1. \u00c6schylus in the\n  Supplices gives a different version of the wanderings of I\u00f4 from\n  that which appears in the Prom\u00eatheus: in the former drama he\n  carries her through Phrygia, Mysia, Lydia, Pamphylia and Cilicia\n  into Egypt (Supplic. 544-566): nothing is there said about\n  Prom\u00eatheus, or Caucasus or Scythia, etc.\n\n  The track set forth in the Supplices is thus geographically\n  intelligible, that in the Prom\u00eatheus (though the most noticed of\n  the two) defies all comprehension, even as a consistent fiction;\n  nor has the erudition of the commentators been successful in\n  clearing it up. See Schutz, Excurs. iv. ad Prometh. Vinct.\n  pp. 144-149; Welcker, \u00c6schylische Trilogie, pp. 127-146, and\n  especially V\u00f6lcker, Mythische Geographie der Griech. und R\u00f6mer,\n  part i. pp. 3-13.\n\n  The Greek inhabitants at Tarsus in Cilicia traced their origin\n  to Argos: their story was, that Triptolemus had been sent forth\n  from that town in quest of the wandering I\u00f4, that he had followed\n  her to Tyre, and then renounced the search in despair. He and\n  his companions then settled partly at Tarsus, partly at Antioch\n  (Strabo, xiv. 673; xv. 750). This is the story of Kadmos and\n  Eur\u00f4p\u00ea inverted, as happens so often with the Grecian mythes.\n\n  Homer calls Herm\u00eas \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2; but this epithet hardly affords\n  sufficient proof that he was acquainted with the mythe of I\u00f4,\n  as V\u00f6lcker supposes: it cannot be traced higher than Hesiod.\n  According to some authors, whom Cicero copies, it was on account\n  of the murder of Argos that Herm\u00eas was obliged to leave Greece\n  and go into Egypt: then it was that he taught the Egyptians laws\n  and letters (De Natur. Deor. iii. 22).\n\nSuch is a general sketch of the adventures which the ancient poets,\nepic, lyric, and tragic, and the logographers after them, connect\nwith the name of the Argeian I\u00f4,\u2014one of the numerous tales which the\nfancy of the Greeks deduced from the amorous dispositions of Zeus and\nthe jealousy of H\u00ear\u00ea. That the scene should be laid in the Argeian\nterritory appears natural, when we recollect that both Argos and Myk\u00ean\u00e6\nwere under the special guardianship of H\u00ear\u00ea, and that the H\u00ear\u00e6on\nbetween the two was one of the oldest and most celebrated temples\nin which she was worshipped. It is useful to compare this amusing\nfiction with the representation reported to us by Herodotus, and\nderived by him as well from Ph\u0153nician as from Persian antiquarians,\nof the circumstances which occasioned the transit of I\u00f4 from Argos\nto Egypt,\u2014an event recognized by all of them as historical matter of\nfact. According to the Persians, a Ph\u0153nician vessel had arrived at\nthe port near Argos, freighted with goods intended for sale to the\ninhabitants of the country. After the vessel had remained a few days,\nand disposed of most of her cargo, several Argeian women, and among\nthem I\u00f4 the king\u2019s daughter, coming on board to purchase, were seized\nand carried off by the crew, who sold I\u00f4 in Egypt.[190] The Ph\u0153nician\nantiquarians, however, while they admitted the circumstance that I\u00f4\nhad left her own country in one of their vessels, gave a different\ncolor to the whole by affirming that she emigrated voluntarily, having\nbeen engaged in an amour with the captain of the vessel, and fearing\nthat her parents might come to the knowledge of her pregnancy. Both\nPersians and Ph\u0153nicians described the abduction of I\u00f4 as the first of a\nseries of similar acts between Greeks and Asiatics, committed each in\nrevenge for the preceding. First came the rape of Eur\u00f4p\u00ea from Ph\u0153nicia\nby Grecian adventurers,\u2014perhaps, as Herodotus supposed, by Kr\u00eatans:\nnext, the abduction of M\u00eadeia from Kolchis by Jas\u00f4n, which occasioned\nthe retaliatory act of Paris, when he stole away Helena from Menelaos.\nUp to this point the seizures of women by Greeks from Asiatics, and by\nAsiatics from Greeks, had been equivalents both in number and in wrong.\nBut the Greeks now thought fit to equip a vast conjoint expedition to\nrecover Helen, in the course of which they took and sacked Troy. The\ninvasions of Greece by Darius and Xerxes were intended, according to\nthe Persian antiquarians, as a long-delayed retribution for the injury\ninflicted on the Asiatics by Agamemn\u00f4n and his followers.[191]\n\n  [190] The story in Parth\u00eanius (Narrat. 1) is built upon this\n  version of I\u00f4\u2019s adventures.\n\n  [191] Herodot. i. 1-6. Pausanias (ii. 15, 1) will not undertake\n  to determine whether the account given by Herodotus, or that of\n  the old legend, respecting the cause which carried I\u00f4 from Argos\n  to Egypt, is the true one: Ephorus (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii.\n  168) repeats the abduction of I\u00f4 to Egypt, by the Ph\u0153nicians,\n  subjoining a strange account of the Etymology of the name\n  Bosporus. The remarks of Plutarch on the narrative of Herodotus\n  are curious: he adduces as one proof of the \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 (bad\n  feeling) of Herodotus, that the latter inserts so discreditable\n  a narrative respecting I\u00f4, daughter of Inachus, \u201cwhom all Greeks\n  believe to have been divinized by foreigners, to have given name\n  to seas and straits, and to be the source of the most illustrious\n  regal families.\u201d He also blames Herodotus for rejecting Epaphus,\n  I\u00f4, Iasus and Argos, as highest members of the Perseid genealogy.\n  He calls Herodotus \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 (Plutarch, De Malign. Herodoti,\n  c. xi. xii. xiv. pp. 856, 857).\n\nThe account thus given of the adventures of I\u00f4, when contrasted with\nthe genuine legend, is interesting, as it tends to illustrate the\nph\u00e6nomenon which early Grecian history is constantly presenting to\nus,\u2014the way in which the epical furniture of an unknown past is recast\nand newly colored so as to meet those changes which take place in the\nretrospective feelings of the present. The religious and poetical\ncharacter of the old legend disappears: nothing remains except the\nnames of persons and places, and the voyage from Argos to Egypt: we\nhave in exchange a sober, quasi-historical narrative, the value of\nwhich consists in its bearing on the grand contemporary conflicts\nbetween Persia and Greece, which filled the imagination of Herodotus\nand his readers.\n\nTo proceed with the genealogy of the kings of Argos, Iasus was\nsucceeded by Krot\u00f4pus, son of his brother Ag\u00ean\u00f4r; Krot\u00f4pus by\nSthenelas, and he again by Gelan\u00f4r.[192] In the reign of the latter,\nDanaos came with his fifty daughters from Egypt to Argos; and here we\nfind another of those romantic adventures which so agreeably decorate\nthe barrenness of the mythical genealogies. Danaos and \u00c6gyptos were\ntwo brothers descending from Epaphos, son of I\u00f4: \u00c6gyptos had fifty\nsons, who were eager to marry the fifty daughters of Danaos, in spite\nof the strongest repugnance of the latter. To escape such a necessity,\nDanaos placed his fifty daughters on board of a penteconter (or vessel\nwith fifty oars) and sought refuge at Argos; touching in his voyage at\nthe island of Rhodes, where he erected a statue of Ath\u00ean\u00ea at Lindos,\nwhich was long exhibited as a memorial of his passage. \u00c6gyptos and\nhis sons followed them to Argos and still pressed their suit, to which\nDanaos found himself compelled to assent; but on the wedding night he\nfurnished each of his daughters with a dagger, and enjoined them to\nmurder their husbands during the hour of sleep. His orders were obeyed\nby all, with the single exception of Hypermn\u00eastra, who preserved her\nhusband Lynkeus, incurring displeasure and punishment from her father.\nHe afterwards, however, pardoned her; and when, by the voluntary\nabdication of Gelan\u00f4r, he became king of Argos, Lynkeus was recognized\nas his son-in-law and ultimately succeeded him. The remaining\ndaughters, having been purified by Ath\u00ean\u00ea and Herm\u00eas, were given in\nmarriage to the victors in a gymnic contest publicly proclaimed. From\nDanaos was derived the name of Danai, applied to the inhabitants of the\nArgeian territory,[193] and to the Homeric Greeks generally.\n\n  [192] It would be an unprofitable fatigue to enumerate the\n  multiplied and irreconcilable discrepancies in regard to every\n  step of this old Argeian genealogy. Whoever desires to see\n  them brought together, may consult Schubart, Qu\u00e6stiones in\n  Antiquitatem Heroicam, Marburg, 1832, capp. 1 and 2.\n\n  The remarks which Schubart makes (p. 35) upon Petit-Radel\u2019s\n  Chronological Tables will be assented to by those who follow\n  the unceasing string of contradictions, without any sufficient\n  reason to believe that any one of them is more worthy of trust\n  than the remainder, which he has cited:\u2014\u201cVideant alii, quomodo\n  genealogias heroicas, et chronologi\u00e6 rationes, in concordiam\n  redigant. Ipse abstineo, probe persuasus, stemmata vera,\n  histori\u00e6 fide comprobata, in systema chronologi\u00e6 redigi posse:\n  at ore per s\u00e6cula tradita, a poetis reficta, s\u00e6pe mutata, prout\n  fabula postulare videbatur, ab historiarum deinde conditoribus\n  restituta, scilicet, brevi, qualia prostant stemmata\u2014chronologi\u00e6\n  secundum annos distribut\u00e6 vincula semper recusatura esse.\u201d\n\n  [193] Apollod. ii. 1. The Supplices of \u00c6schylus is the commencing\n  drama of a trilogy on this subject of the Dana\u00efdes,\u2014\u1f39\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2,\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, \u0394\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u0390\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2. Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6dien, vol. i. p.\n  48: the two latter are lost. The old epic poem called Dana\u00efs or\n  Dana\u00efdes, which is mentioned in the Tabula Iliaca as containing\n  5000 verses, has perished, and is unfortunately very little\n  alluded to: see D\u00fcntzer, Epic. Gr\u00e6c. Fragm. p. 3; Welcker, Der\n  Episch. Kyklus, p. 35.\n\nFrom the legend of the Dana\u00efdes we pass to two barren names of kings,\nLynkeus and his son Abas. The two sons of Abas were Akrisios and\nPr\u0153tos, who, after much dissension, divided between them the Argeian\nterritory; Akrisios ruling at Argos, and Pr\u0153tos at Tiryns. The families\nof both formed the theme of romantic stories. To pass over for the\npresent the legend of Belleroph\u00f4n, and the unrequited passion which\nthe wife of Pr\u0153tos conceived for him, we are told that the daughters\nof Pr\u0153tos, beautiful, and solicited in marriage by suitors from all\nGreece, were smitten with leprosy and driven mad, wandering in unseemly\nguise throughout Peloponn\u00easus. The visitation had overtaken them,\naccording to Hesiod, because they refused to take part in the Bacchic\nrites; according to Pherekyd\u00eas and the Argeian Akusilaus,[194] because\nthey had treated scornfully the wooden statue and simple equipments of\nH\u00ear\u00ea: the religious character of the old legend here displays itself in\na remarkable manner. Unable to cure his daughters, Pr\u0153tos invoked the\naid of the renowned Pylian prophet and leech, Melampus son of Amytha\u00f4n,\nwho undertook to remove the malady on condition of being rewarded\nwith the third part of the kingdom. Pr\u0153tos indignantly refused these\nconditions: but the state of his daughters becoming aggravated and\nintolerable, he was compelled again to apply to Melampus; who, on the\nsecond request, raised his demands still higher, and required another\nthird of the kingdom for his brother Bias. These terms being acceded\nto, he performed his part of the covenant. He appeased the wrath of\nH\u00ear\u00ea by prayer and sacrifice; or, according to another account, he\napproached the deranged women at the head of a troop of young men,\nwith shouting and ecstatic dance,\u2014the ceremonies appropriate to the\nBacchic worship of Dionysos,\u2014and in this manner effected their cure.\nMelampus, a name celebrated in many different Grecian mythes, is the\nlegendary founder and progenitor of a great and long-continued family\nof prophets. He and his brother Bias became kings of separate portions\nof the Argeian territory: he is recognized as ruler there even in the\nOdyssey, and the prophet Theoklymenos, his grandson, is protected and\ncarried to Ithaca by Telemachus.[195] Herodotus also alludes to the\ncure of the women, and to the double kingdom of Melampus and Bias\nin the Argeian land: he recognizes Melampus as the first person who\nintroduced to the knowledge of the Greeks the name and worship of\nDionysos, with its appropriate sacrifices and phallic processions. Here\nagain he historicizes various features of the old legend in a manner\nnot unworthy of notice.[196]\n\n  [194] Apollod. 1. c.; Pherekyd. ap. Schol. Hom. Odyss. xv. 225;\n  Hesiod, Fragm. Marktsch. Fr. 36, 37, 38. These Fragments belong\n  to the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women: Apollod\u00f4rus seems to refer\n  to some other of the numerous Hesiodic poems. Diod\u00f4rus (iv. 68)\n  assigns the anger of Dionysos as the cause.\n\n  [195] Odyss. xv. 240-256.\n\n  [196] Herod. ix. 34; ii. 49: compare Pausan. ii. 18, 4. Instead\n  of the Pr\u0153tides, or daughters of Pr\u0153tos, it is the Argeian\n  women generally whom he represents Melampus as having cured,\n  and the Argeians generally who send to Pylus to invoke his aid:\n  the heroic personality which pervades the primitive story has\n  disappeared.\n\n  Kallimachus notices the Pr\u0153tid virgins as the parties suffering\n  from madness, but he treats Artemis as the healing influence\n  (Hymn. ad Dianam 235).\n\nBut Dana\u00ea, the daughter of Akrisios, with her son Perseus acquired\nstill greater celebrity than her cousins the Pr\u0153tides. An oracle had\napprized Akrisios that his daughter would give birth to a son by whose\nhand he would himself be slain. To guard against this danger, he\nimprisoned Dana\u00ea in a chamber of brass under ground. But the god Zeus\nhad become amorous of her, and found means to descend through the roof\nin the form of a shower of gold: the consequence of his visits was the\nbirth of Perseus. When Akrisios discovered that his daughter had given\nexistence to a son, he enclosed both the mother and the child in a\ncoffer, which he cast into the sea.[197] The coffer was carried to the\nisle of Seriphos, where Diktys, brother of the king Polydekt\u00eas, fished\nit up, and rescued both Dana\u00ea and Perseus. The exploits of Perseus,\nwhen he grew up, against the three Phorkides or daughters of Phorkys,\nand the three Gorgons, are among the most marvellous and imaginative\nin all Grecian legend: they bear a stamp almost Oriental. I shall\nnot here repeat the details of those unparalleled hazards which the\nspecial favor of Ath\u00ean\u00ea enabled him to overcome, and which ended in his\nbringing back from Libya the terrific head of the Gorgon Medusa, endued\nwith the property of turning every one who looked upon it into stone.\nIn his return, he rescued Andromeda, daughter of K\u00eapheus, who had been\nexposed to be devoured by a sea-monster, and brought her back as his\nwife. Akrisios trembled to see him after this victorious expedition,\nand retired into Thessaly to avoid him; but Perseus followed him\nthither, and having succeeded in calming his apprehensions, became\ncompetitor in a gymnic contest where his grandfather was among the\nspectators. By an incautious swing of his quoit, he unintentionally\nstruck Akrisios, and caused his death: the predictions of the oracle\nwere thus at last fulfilled. Stung with remorse at the catastrophe,\nand unwilling to return to Argos, which had been the principality of\nAkrisios, Perseus made an exchange with Megapenth\u00eas, son of Pr\u0153tos king\nof Tiryns. Megapenth\u00eas became king of Argos, and Perseus of Tiryns:\nmoreover, the latter founded, within ten miles of Argos, the far-famed\ncity of Myk\u00ean\u00e6. The massive walls of this city, like those of Tiryns,\nof which remains are yet to be seen, were built for him by the Lykian\nCycl\u00f4pes.[198]\n\n  [197] The beautiful fragment of Simonid\u00eas (Fragm. vii. ed.\n  Gaisford. Poet. Min.), describing Dana\u00ea and the child thus\n  exposed, is familiar to every classical reader.\n\n  [198] Paus. ii. 15, 4; ii. 16, 5. Apollod. ii. 2. Pherekyd.\n  Fragm. 26, Dind.\n\nWe here reach the commencement of the Perseid dynasty of Myk\u00ean\u00e6. It\nshould be noticed, however, that there were among the ancient legends\ncontradictory accounts of the foundation of this city. Both the Odyssey\nand the Great Eoiai enumerated, among the heroines, Myk\u00ean\u00ea, the Eponyma\nof the city; the former poem classifying her with Tyr\u00f4 and Alkm\u00ean\u00ea, the\nlatter describing her as the daughter of Inachus and wife of Arest\u00f4r.\nAnd Akusilaus mentioned an Eponymus Myk\u00eaneus, the son of Spart\u00f4n and\ngrandson of Phor\u00f4neus.[199]\n\n  [199] Odyss. ii. 120. Hesiod. Fragment. 154. Marktscheff.\u2014Akusil.\n  Fragm. 16. Pausan. ii. 16, 4. Hekat\u00e6us derived the name of the\n  town from the \u03bc\u03cd\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2 of the sword of Perseus (Fragm. 360, Dind.).\n  The Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 1247, mentions Myk\u00eaneus as son of\n  Spart\u00f4n, but grandson of Ph\u00eageus the brother of Phor\u00f4neus.\n\nThe prophetic family of Melampus maintained itself in one of the\nthree parts of the divided Argeian kingdom for five generations, down\nto Amphiaraos and his sons Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n and Amphilochos. The dynasty of\nhis brother Bias, and that of Megapenth\u00eas, son of Pr\u0153tos, continued\neach for four generations: a list of barren names fills up the\ninterval.[200] The Perseids of Myk\u00ean\u00e6 boasted a descent long and\nglorious, heroic as well as historical, continuing down to the last\nsovereigns of Sparta.[201] The issue of Perseus was numerous: his son\nAlk\u00e6os was father of Amphitry\u00f4n; another of his sons, Elektry\u00f4n, was\nfather of Alkm\u00ean\u00ea;[202] a third, Sthenelos, father of Eurystheus.\n\n  [200] Pausan. ii. 18, 4.\n\n  [201] Herodot. vi. 53.\n\n  [202] In the Hesiodic Shield of H\u00earakl\u00eas, Alkm\u00ean\u00ea is distinctly\n  mentioned as daughter of Elektry\u00f4n; the genealogical poet, Asios,\n  called her the daughter of Amphiaraos and Eriphyle (Asii Fragm.\n  4, ed. Markt. p. 412). The date of Asios cannot be precisely\n  fixed; but he may be probably assigned to an epoch between the\n  30th and 40th Olympiad.\n\n  Asios must have adopted a totally different legend respecting the\n  birth of H\u00earakl\u00eas and the circumstances preceding it, among which\n  the deaths of her father and brothers are highly influential. Nor\n  could he have accepted the received chronology of the sieges of\n  Th\u00eabes and Troy.\n\nAfter the death of Perseus, Alk\u00e6os and Amphitry\u00f4n dwelt at Tiryns.\nThe latter became engaged in a quarrel with Elektry\u00f4n respecting\ncattle, and in a fit of passion killed him:[203] moreover the piratical\nTaphians from the west coast of Akarnania invaded the country, and\nslew the sons of Elektry\u00f4n, so that Alkm\u00ean\u00ea alone was left of that\nfamily. She was engaged to wed Amphitry\u00f4n; but she bound him by oath\nnot to consummate the marriage until he had avenged upon the T\u00ealebo\u00e6\nthe death of her brothers. Amphitry\u00f4n, compelled to flee the country\nas the murderer of his uncle, took refuge in Th\u00eabes, whither Alkm\u00ean\u00ea\naccompanied him: Sthenelos was left in possession of Tiryns. The\nKadmeians of Th\u00eabes, together with the Locrians and Phocians, supplied\nAmphitry\u00f4n with troops, which he conducted against the T\u00ealebo\u00e6 and\nthe Taphians:[204] yet he could not have subdued them without the aid\nof Kom\u00e6th\u00f4, daughter of the Taphian king Pterelaus, who conceived a\npassion for him, and cut off from her father\u2019s head the golden lock\nto which Poseid\u00f4n had attached the gift of immortality.[205] Having\nconquered and expelled his enemies, Amphitry\u00f4n returned to Th\u00eabes,\nimpatient to consummate his marriage: but Zeus on the wedding-night\nassumed his form and visited Alkm\u00ean\u00ea before him: he had determined to\nproduce from her a son superior to all his prior offspring,\u2014\u201ca specimen\nof invincible force both to gods and men.\u201d[206] At the proper time,\nAlkm\u00ean\u00ea was delivered of twin sons: H\u00earakl\u00eas the offspring of Zeus,\u2014the\ninferior and unhonored Iphikl\u00eas, offspring of Amphitry\u00f4n.[207]\n\n  [203] So runs the old legend in the Hesiodic Shield of H\u00earakl\u00eas\n  (12-82). Apollod\u00f4rus (or Pherekyd\u00eas, whom he follows) softens\n  it down, and represents the death of Elektry\u00f4n as accidentally\n  caused by Amphitry\u00f4n. (Apollod. ii. 4, 6. Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm. 27,\n  Dind.)\n\n  [204] Hesiod, Scut. Herc. 24. Theocrit. Idyll. xxiv. 4. Teleboas,\n  the Eponym of these marauding people, was son of Poseid\u00f4n\n  (Anaximander ap. Athen\u00e6. xi. p. 498).\n\n  [205] Apollod. ii. 4, 7. Compare the fable of Nisus at Megara,\n  _infra_, chap. xii. p. 302.\n\n  [206] Hesiod, Scut. Herc. 29. \u1f44\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bb\u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3.\n\n  [207] Hesiod. Sc. H. 50-56.\n\nWhen Alkm\u00ean\u00ea was on the point of being delivered at Th\u00eabes, Zeus\npublicly boasted among the assembled gods, at the instigation of the\nmischief-making At\u00ea, that there was on that day about to be born on\nearth, from his breed, a son who should rule over all his neighbors.\nH\u00ear\u00ea treated this as an empty boast, calling upon him to bind himself\nby an irremissible oath that the prediction should be realized. Zeus\nincautiously pledged his solemn word; upon which H\u00ear\u00ea darted swiftly\ndown from Olympus to the Achaic Argos, where the wife of Sthenelos\n(son of Perseus, and therefore grandson of Zeus) was already seven\nmonths gone with child. By the aid of the Eileithyi\u00e6, the special\ngoddesses of parturition, she caused Eurystheus, the son of Sthenelos,\nto be born before his time on that very day, while she retarded the\ndelivery of Alkm\u00ean\u00ea. Then returning to Olympus, she announced the\nfact to Zeus: \u201cThe good man Eurystheus, son of the Perseid Sthenelos,\nis this day born of thy loins: the sceptre of the Argeians worthily\nbelongs to him.\u201d Zeus was thunderstruck at the consummation which he\nhad improvidently bound himself to accomplish. He seized At\u00ea his evil\ncounsellor by the hair, and hurled her forever away from Olympus: but\nhe had no power to avert the ascendency of Eurystheus and the servitude\nof H\u00earakl\u00eas. \u201cMany a pang did he suffer, when he saw his favorite son\ngoing through his degrading toil in the tasks imposed upon him by\nEurystheus.\u201d[208]\n\n  [208] Homer, Iliad, xix. 90-133; also viii. 361.\u2014\n\n    \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03c7\u1fbd, \u1f45\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f11\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03bd \u1f41\u03c1\u1ff7\u03c4\u03bf\n    \u1f1c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ad\u03b8\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nThe legend, of unquestionable antiquity, here transcribed from the\nIliad, is one of the most pregnant and characteristic in the Grecian\nmythology. It explains, according to the religious ideas familiar to\nthe old epic poets, both the distinguishing attributes and the endless\ntoil and endurances of H\u00earakl\u00eas,\u2014the most renowned and most ubiquitous\nof all the semi-divine personages worshipped by the Hell\u00eanes,\u2014a being\nof irresistible force, and especially beloved by Zeus, yet condemned\nconstantly to labor for others and to obey the commands of a worthless\nand cowardly persecutor. His recompense is reserved to the close of\nhis career, when his afflicting trials are brought to a close: he is\nthen admitted to the godhead and receives in marriage H\u00eab\u00ea.[209] The\ntwelve labors, as they are called, too notorious to be here detailed,\nform a very small fraction of the exploits of this mighty being, which\nfilled the H\u00earakleian epics of the ancient poets. He is found not\nonly in most parts of Hellas, but throughout all the other regions\nthen known to the Greeks, from Gad\u00eas to the river Therm\u00f4d\u00f4n in the\nEuxine and to Scythia, overcoming all difficulties and vanquishing\nall opponents. Distinguished families are everywhere to be traced\nwho bear his patronymic, and glory in the belief that they are his\ndescendants. Among Ach\u00e6ans, Kadmeians, and D\u00f4rians, H\u00earakl\u00eas is\nvenerated: the latter especially treat him as their principal hero,\u2014the\nPatron Hero-God of the race: the H\u00earakleids form among all D\u00f4rians a\nprivileged gens, in which at Sparta the special lineage of the two\nkings was included.\n\nHis character lends itself to mythes countless in number as well as\ndisparate in their character. The irresistible force remains constant,\nbut it is sometimes applied with reckless violence against friends as\nwell as enemies, sometimes devoted to the relief of the oppressed. The\ncomic writers often brought him out as a coarse and stupid glutton,\nwhile the Ath\u00eanian philosopher Prodikos, without at all distorting\nthe type, extracted from it the simple, impressive, and imperishable\napologue still known as the Choice of Hercules.\n\nAfter the death and apotheosis of H\u00earakl\u00eas, his son Hyllos and his\nother children were expelled and persecuted by Eurystheus: the fear of\nhis vengeance deterred both the Trachinian king K\u00eayx and the Th\u00eabans\nfrom harboring them, and the Ath\u00eanians alone were generous enough to\nbrave the risk of offering them shelter. Eurystheus invaded Attica,\nbut perished in the attempt by the hand of Hyllos, or by that of\nIolaos, the old companion and nephew of H\u00earakl\u00eas.[210] The chivalrous\ncourage which the Ath\u00eanians had on this occasion displayed in behalf\nof oppressed innocence, was a favorite theme for subsequent eulogy by\nAttic poets and orators.\n\n  [209] Hesiod, Theogon. 951, \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ad\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. Hom.\n  Odyss. xi. 620; Hesiod, E\u0153\u00e6, Fragm. 24, D\u00fcntzer, p. 36,\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  [210] Apollod. ii. 8, 1; Hecat\u00e6. ap. Longin. c. 27; Diod\u00f4r. iv.\n  57.\n\nAll the sons of Eurystheus lost their lives in the battle along with\nhim, so that the Perseid family was now represented only by the\nH\u00earakleids, who collected an army and endeavored to recover the\npossessions from which they had been expelled. The united forces of\nI\u00f4nians, Ach\u00e6ans, and Arcadians, then inhabiting Peloponn\u00easus, met\nthe invaders at the isthmus, when Hyllos, the eldest of the sons of\nH\u00earakl\u00eas, proposed that the contest should be determined by a single\ncombat between himself and any champion of the opposing army. It\nwas agreed, that if Hyllos were victorious, the H\u00earakleids should\nbe restored to their possessions\u2014if he were vanquished, that they\nshould forego all claim for the space of a hundred years, or fifty\nyears, or three generations,\u2014for in the specification of the time,\naccounts differ. Echemos, the hero of Tegea in Arcadia, accepted the\nchallenge, and Hyllos was slain in the encounter; in consequence of\nwhich the H\u00earakleids retired, and resided along with the D\u00f4rians\nunder the protection of \u00c6gimios, son of D\u00f4rus.[211] As soon as the\nstipulated period of truce had expired, they renewed their attempt upon\nPeloponn\u00easus conjointly with the D\u00f4rians, and with complete success:\nthe great D\u00f4rian establishments of Argos, Sparta, and Mess\u00eania were\nthe result. The details of this victorious invasion will be hereafter\nrecounted.\n\n  [211] Herodot. ix. 26; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 58.\n\nSiky\u00f4n, Phlios, Epidauros, and Tr\u0153zen[212] all boasted of respected\neponyms and a genealogy of dignified length, not exempt from the usual\ndiscrepancies\u2014but all just as much entitled to a place on the tablet\nof history as the more renowned \u00c6olids or H\u00earakleids. I omit them here\nbecause I wish to impress upon the reader\u2019s mind the salient features\nand character of the legendary world,\u2014not to load his memory with a\nfull list of legendary names.\n\n  [212] Pausan. ii. 5, 5; 12, 5; 26, 3. His statements indicate how\n  much the predominance of a powerful neighbor like Argos tended to\n  alter the genealogies of these inferior towns.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nDEUKALION, HELLEN, AND SONS OF HELLEN.\n\n\nIn the Hesiodic Theogony, as well as in the \u201cWorks and Days,\u201d the\nlegend of Prom\u00eatheus and Epim\u00eatheus presents an import religious,\nethical, and social, and in this sense it is carried forward by\n\u00c6schylus; but to neither of the characters is any genealogical function\nassigned. The Hesiodic Catalogue of Women brought both of them into the\nstream of Grecian legendary lineage, representing Deukali\u00f4n as the son\nof Prom\u00eatheus and Pand\u00f4ra, and seemingly his wife Pyrrha as daughter of\nEpim\u00eatheus.[213]\n\n  [213] Schol. ad Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 1085. Other accounts of the\n  genealogy of Deukali\u00f4n are given in the Schol. ad Homer. Odyss.\n  x. 2, on the authority both of Hesiod and Akusilaus.\n\nDeukali\u00f4n is important in Grecian mythical narrative under two points\nof view. First, he is the person specially saved at the time of the\ngeneral deluge: next, he is the father of Hell\u00ean, the great eponym of\nthe Hellenic race; at least this was the more current story, though\nthere were other statements which made Hell\u00ean the son of Zeus.\n\nThe name of Deukali\u00f4n is originally connected with the Lokrian towns\nof Kynos and Opus, and with the race of the Leleges, but he appears\nfinally as settled in Thessaly, and ruling in the portion of that\ncountry called Phthi\u00f4tis.[214] According to what seems to have been the\nold legendary account, it is the deluge which transferred him from the\none to the other; but according to another statement, framed in more\nhistoricizing times, he conducted a body of Kur\u00eates and Leleges into\nThessaly, and expelled the prior Pelasgian occupants.[215]\n\n  [214] Hesiodic Catalog. Fragm. xi.; Gaisf. lxx. D\u00fcntzer\u2014\n\n    \u1f2c\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u039b\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u039b\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f21\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03b1\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u03a4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u1fe5\u03ac \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c6\u03b8\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u1f7c\u03c2,\n    \u039b\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b3\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ac\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5 \u0394\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9.\n\n  The reputed lineage of Deukali\u00f4n continued in Phthia down to\n  the time of Dik\u00e6archus, if we may judge from the old Phthiot\n  Pherekrat\u00eas, whom he introduced in one of his dialogues as a\n  disputant, and whom he expressly announced as a descendant of\n  Deukali\u00f4n (Cicero, Tuscul. Disp. i. 10).\n\n  [215] The latter account is given by Dionys. Halic. i. 17; the\n  former seems to have been given by Hellanikus, who affirmed that\n  the ark after the deluge stopped upon Mount Othrys, and not\n  upon Mount Parnassus (Schol. Pind. _ut. sup._) the former being\n  suitable for a settlement in Thessaly.\n\n  Pyrrha is the eponymous heroine of Pyrrh\u00e6a or Pyrrha, the ancient\n  name of a portion of Thessaly (Rhianus, Fragm. 18, p. 71, ed.\n  D\u00fcntzer).\n\n  Hellanikus had written a work, now lost, entitled \u0394\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1:\n  all the fragments of it which are cited have reference to places\n  in Thessaly, Lokris and Phokis. See Preller, ad Hellanitum, p.\n  12 (D\u00f6rpt. 1840). Probably Hellanikus is the main source of the\n  important position occupied by Deukali\u00f4n in Grecian legend.\n  Thrasybulus and Akestod\u00f4rus represented Deukali\u00f4n as having\n  founded the oracle of D\u00f4d\u00f4na, immediately after the deluge (Etm.\n  Mag. v. \u0394\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2).\n\nThe enormous iniquity with which earth was contaminated\u2014as Apollod\u00f4rus\nsays, by the then existing brazen race, or as others say, by the fifty\nmonstrous sons of Lyka\u00f4n\u2014provoked Zeus to send a general deluge.[216]\nAn unremitting and terrible rain laid the whole of Greece under water,\nexcept the highest mountain-tops, whereon a few stragglers found\nrefuge. Deukali\u00f4n was saved in a chest or ark, which he had been\nforewarned by his father Prom\u00eatheus to construct. After floating for\nnine days on the water, he at length landed on the summit of Mount\nParnassus. Zeus having sent Herm\u00eas to him, promising to grant whatever\nhe asked, he prayed that men and companions might be sent to him in\nhis solitude: accordingly Zeus directed both him and Pyrrha to cast\nstones over their heads: those cast by Pyrrha became women, those by\nDeukali\u00f4n men. And thus the \u201cstony race of men\u201d (if we may be allowed\nto translate an etymology which the Greek language presents exactly,\nand which has not been disdained by Hesiod, by Pindar, by Epicharmus,\nand by Virgil) came to tenant the soil of Greece.[217] Deukali\u00f4n on\nlanding from the ark sacrificed a grateful offering to Zeus Phyxios,\nor the God of escape; he also erected altars in Thessaly to the twelve\ngreat gods of Olympus.[218]\n\n  [216] Apollod\u00f4rus connects this deluge with the wickedness of the\n  brazen race in Hesiod, according to the practice general with\n  the logographers of stringing together a sequence out of legends\n  totally unconnected with each other (i. 7, 2).\n\n  [217] Hesiod, Fragm. 135. ed. Markts. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 322,\n  where the word \u03bb\u03ac\u03b1\u03c2, proposed by Heyne as the reading of the\n  unintelligible text, appears to me preferable to any of the\n  other suggestions. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 47. \u1f0c\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u0395\u1f50\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f41\u03bc\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u039a\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u039b\u03b1\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f60\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd. Virgil, Georgic i.\n  63. \u201cUnde homines nati, durum genus.\u201d Epicharmus ap. Schol.\n  Pindar. Olymp. ix. 56. Hygin. f. 153. Philochorus retained the\n  etymology, though he gave a totally different fable, nowise\n  connected with Deukali\u00f4n, to account for it; a curious proof how\n  pleasing it was to the fancy of the Greek (see Schol. ad Pind. 1.\n  c. 68).\n\n  [218] Apollod. i. 7, 2. Hellanic. Fragm. 15. Didot. Hellanikus\n  affirmed that the ark rested on Mount Othrys, not on Mount\n  Parnassus (Fragm. 16. Didot). Servius (ad Virgil. Eclog. vi. 41)\n  placed it on Mount Ath\u00f4s\u2014Hyginus (f. 153) on Mount \u00c6tna.\n\nThe reality of this deluge was firmly believed throughout the\nhistorical ages of Greece: the chronologers, reckoning up by\ngenealogies, assigned the exact date of it, and placed it at the\nsame time as the conflagration of the world by the rashness of\nPha\u00ebt\u00f4n, during the reign of Krot\u00f4pas king of Argus, the seventh from\nInachus.[219] The meteorological work of Aristotle admits and reasons\nupon this deluge as an unquestionable fact, though he alters the\nlocality by placing it west of Mount Pindus, near D\u00f4d\u00f4na and the river\nAchel\u00f4us.[220] He at the same time treats it as a physical phenomenon,\nthe result of periodical cycles in the atmosphere, thus departing from\nthe religious character of the old legend, which described it as a\njudgment inflicted by Zeus upon a wicked race. Statements founded upon\nthis event were in circulation throughout Greece even to a very late\ndate. The Megarians affirmed that Megaros, their hero, son of Zeus by\na local nymph, had found safety from the waters on the lofty summit\nof their mountain Geraneia, which had not been completely submerged.\nAnd in the magnificent temple of the Olympian Zeus at Athens, a cavity\nin the earth was shown, through which it was affirmed that the waters\nof the deluge had retired. Even in the time of Pausanias, the priests\npoured into this cavity holy offerings of meal and honey.[221] In this,\nas in other parts of Greece, the idea of the Deukalionian deluge was\nblended with the religious impressions of the people and commemorated\nby their sacred ceremonies.\n\n  [219] Tatian adv. Gr\u00e6c. c. 60, adopted both by Clemens and\n  Eusebius. The Parian marble placed this deluge in the reign of\n  Kranaos at Athens, 752 years before the first recorded Olympiad,\n  and 1528 years before the Christian \u00e6ra; Apollod\u00f4rus also places\n  it in the reign of Kranaos, and in that of Nyctimus in Arcadia\n  (iii. 8, 2; 14, 5).\n\n  The deluge and the _ekpyrosis_ or conflagration are connected\n  together also in Servius ad Virgil. Bucol. vi. 41: he refines\n  both of them into a \u201cmutationem temporum.\u201d\n\n  [220] Aristot. Meteorol. i. 14. Justin rationalizes the fable\n  by telling us that Deukali\u00f4n was king of Thessaly, who provided\n  shelter and protection to the fugitives from the deluge (ii. 6,\n  11).\n\n  [221] Pausan. i. 18, 7; 40, 1. According to the Parian marble (s.\n  5), Deukali\u00f4n had come to Athens after the deluge, and had there\n  himself founded the temple of the Olympian Zeus. The etymology\n  and allegorization of the names of Deukali\u00f4n and Pyrrha, given by\n  V\u00f6lcker in his ingenious Mythologie des Iapetischen Geschlechts\n  (Giessen, 1824), p. 343, appears to me not at all convincing.\n\nThe offspring of Deukali\u00f4n and Pyrrha were two sons, Hell\u00ean and\nAmphikty\u00f4n, and a daughter, Pr\u00f4togeneia, whose son by Zeus was\nA\u00ebthlius: it was however maintained by many, that Hell\u00ean was the\nson of Zeus and not of Deukali\u00f4n. Hell\u00ean had by a nymph three sons,\nD\u00f4rus, Xuthus, and \u00c6olus. He gave to those who had been before called\nGreeks,[222] the name of Hell\u00eanes, and partitioned his territory\namong his three children. \u00c6olus reigned in Thessaly; Xuthus received\nPeloponn\u00easus, and had by Cre\u00fcsa as his sons, Ach\u00e6us and I\u00f4n; while\nD\u00f4rus occupied the country lying opposite to the Peloponn\u00easus, on\nthe northern side of the Corinthian Gulf. These three gave to the\ninhabitants of their respective countries the names of \u00c6olians, Ach\u00e6ans\nand I\u00f4nians, and D\u00f4rians.[223]\n\n  [222] Such is the statement of Apollod\u00f4rus (i. 7, 3); but I\n  cannot bring myself to believe that the name (\u0393\u03c1\u03b1\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76) Greeks is\n  at all old in the legend, or that the passage of Hesiod, in which\n  Gr\u00e6cus and Latinus purport to be mentioned, is genuine.\n\n  See Hesiod, Theogon. 1013, and Catalog. Fragm. xxix. ed.\n  G\u00f6ttling, with the note of G\u00f6ttling; also Wachsmuth, Hellen.\n  Alterth. i. 1. p. 311, and Bernhardy, Griech. Literat. vol. i. p.\n  167.\n\n  [223] Apollod. i. 7, 4.\n\nSuch is the genealogy as we find it in Apollod\u00f4rus. In so far as\nthe names and filiation are concerned, many points in it are given\ndifferently, or implicitly contradicted, by Euripid\u00eas and other\nwriters. Though as literal and personal history it deserves no notice,\nits import is both intelligible and comprehensive. It expounds and\nsymbolizes the first fraternal aggregation of Hell\u00eanic men, together\nwith their territorial distribution and the institutions which they\ncollectively venerated.\n\nThere were two great holding-points in common for every section of\nGreeks. One was the Amphiktyonic assembly, which met half-yearly,\nalternately at Delphi and at Thermopyl\u00e6; originally and chiefly for\ncommon religious purposes, but indirectly and occasionally embracing\npolitical and social objects along with them. The other was, the public\nfestivals or games, of which the Olympic came first in importance;\nnext, the Pythian, Nemean and Isthmian,\u2014institutions which combined\nreligious solemnities with recreative effusion and hearty sympathies,\nin a manner so imposing and so unparalleled. Amphikty\u00f4n represents\nthe first of these institutions, and A\u00ebthlius the second. As the\nAmphiktyonic assembly was always especially connected with Thermopyl\u00e6\nand Thessaly, Amphikty\u00f4n is made the son of the Thessalian Deukali\u00f4n;\nbut as the Olympic festival was nowise locally connected with\nDeukali\u00f4n, A\u00ebthlius is represented as having Zeus for his father, and\nas touching Deukali\u00f4n only through the maternal line. It will be seen\npresently, that the only matter predicted respecting A\u00ebthlius is, that\nhe settled in the territory of Elis, and begat Endymi\u00f4n: this brings\nhim into local contact with the Olympic games, and his function is then\nended.\n\nHaving thus got Hellas as an aggregate with its main cementing forces,\nwe march on to its subdivision into parts, through \u00c6olus, D\u00f4rus and\nXuthus, the three sons of Hellen;[224] a distribution which is far\nfrom being exhaustive: nevertheless, the genealogists whom Apollod\u00f4rus\nfollows recognize no more than three sons.\n\n  [224] How literally and implicitly even the ablest Greeks\n  believed in eponymous persons, such as Hell\u00ean and I\u00f4n, as the\n  real progenitors of the races called after him, may be seen by\n  this, that Aristotle gives this common descent as the definition\n  of \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (Metaphysic. iv. p. 118, Brandis):\u2014\n\n  \u0393\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd ... \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f57 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f66\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9. \u039f\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72,\n  \u1f3c\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1ff7, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f3c\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nThe genealogy is essentially post-Homeric; for Homer knows Hellas and\nthe Hell\u00eanes only in connection with a portion of Achaia Phthi\u00f4tis.\nBut as it is recognized in the Hesiodic Catalogue[225]\u2014composed\nprobably within the first century after the commencement of recorded\nOlympiads, or before 676 B. C.\u2014the peculiarities of it, dating from\nso early a period, deserve much attention. We may remark, first,\nthat it seems to exhibit to us D\u00f4rus and \u00c6olus as the only pure and\ngenuine offspring of Hell\u00ean. For their brother Xuthus is not enrolled\nas an eponymus; he neither founds nor names any people; it is only\nhis sons Ach\u00e6us and I\u00f4n, after his blood has been mingled with that\nof the Erechtheid Kre\u00fcsa, who become eponyms and founders, each of\nhis own separate people. Next, as to the territorial distribution,\nXuthus receives Peloponn\u00easus from his father, and unites himself with\nAttica (which the author of this genealogy seems to have conceived as\noriginally unconnected with Hell\u00ean) by his marriage with the daughter\nof the indigenous hero, Erechtheus. The issue of this marriage, Ach\u00e6us\nand I\u00f4n, present to us the population of Peloponn\u00easus and Attica\nconjointly as related among themselves by the tie of brotherhood, but\nas one degree more distant both from D\u00f4rians and \u00c6olians. \u00c6olus reigns\nover the regions about Thessaly, and called the people in those parts\n\u00c6olians; while D\u00f4rus occupies \u201cthe country over against Peloponn\u00easus on\nthe opposite side of the Corinthian Gulf,\u201d and calls the inhabitants\nafter himself, D\u00f4rians.[226] It is at once evident that this\ndesignation is in no way applicable to the confined district between\nParnassus and \u0152ta, which alone is known by the name of D\u00f4ris, and its\ninhabitants by that of D\u00f4rians, in the historical ages. In the view of\nthe author of this genealogy, the D\u00f4rians are the original occupants of\nthe large range of territory north of the Corinthian Gulf, comprising\n\u00c6t\u00f4lia, Ph\u00f4kis, and the territory of the Ozolian Lokrians. And this\nfarther harmonizes with the other legend noticed by Apollod\u00f4rus,\nwhen he states that \u00c6tolus, son of Endymi\u00f4n, having been forced to\nexpatriate from Peloponn\u00easus, crossed into the Kur\u00eatid territory,[227]\nand was there hospitably received by D\u00f4rus, Laodokus and Polyp\u0153t\u00eas,\nsons of Apollo and Phthia. He slew his hosts, acquired the territory,\nand gave to it the name of \u00c6t\u00f4lia: his son Pleur\u00f4n married Xanthipp\u00ea,\ndaughter of D\u00f4rus; while his other son, Kalyd\u00f4n, marries \u00c6olia,\ndaughter of Amytha\u00f4n. Here again we have the name of D\u00f4rus, or the\nD\u00f4rians, connected with the tract subsequently termed \u00c6t\u00f4lia. That\nD\u00f4rus should in one place be called the son of Apollo and Phthia,\nand in another place the son of Hell\u00ean by a nymph, will surprise no\none accustomed to the fluctuating personal nomenclature of these old\nlegends: moreover the name of Phthia is easy to reconcile with that of\nHell\u00ean, as both are identified with the same portion of Thessaly, even\nfrom the days of the Iliad.\n\n  [225] Hesiod, Fragm. 8. p. 278, ed. Marktsch.\u2014\n\n    \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2\n    \u0394\u1ff6\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5, \u039e\u03bf\u1fe6\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0391\u1f34\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c0\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2.\n    \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2\n    \u039a\u03c1\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f20\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03af\u03c3\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u03a3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n  [226] Apollod. i. 7, 3. \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039d\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f48\u03c1\u03c3\u03ae\u03ca\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 (?),\n  \u0394\u1ff6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u039e\u03bf\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u0391\u1f34\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2. \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n  \u0393\u03c1\u03b1\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd.\n  \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u039e\u03bf\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03ba \u039a\u03c1\u03b5\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f3c\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1, \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f67\u03bd \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f3c\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n  \u0394\u1ff6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, ~\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0394\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd~. \u0391\u1f34\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u0398\u03b5\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5.\n\n  Strabo (viii. p. 383) and Con\u00f4n (Narr. 27), who evidently copy\n  from the same source, represent D\u00f4rus as going to settle in the\n  territory property known as D\u00f4ris.\n\n  [227] Apollod. i. 7, 6. \u0391\u1f30\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u1f78\u03c2 ... \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f7c\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u039a\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03ae\u03c4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\n  \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03a6\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2,\n  \u0394\u1ff6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039b\u03b1\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5. Again, i. 8, 1. \u03a0\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u1f7c\u03bd (son of \u00c6t\u00f4lus) \u03b3\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c2 \u039e\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u03b7\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u0394\u03ce\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f08\u03b3\u03ae\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1.\n\nThis story, that the D\u00f4rians were at one time the occupants, or\nthe chief occupants, of the range of territory between the river\nAchel\u00f4us and the northern shore of the Corinthian Gulf, is at least\nmore suitable to the facts attested by historical evidence than the\nlegends given in Herodotus, who represents the D\u00f4rians as originally\nin the Phthi\u00f4tid; then as passing under D\u00f4rus, the son of Hell\u00ean,\ninto the Histi\u00e6\u00f4tid, under the mountains of Ossa and Olympus; next,\nas driven by the Kadmeians into the regions of Pindus; from thence\npassing into the Dryopid territory, on Mount \u0152ta; lastly, from thence\ninto Peloponn\u00easus.[228] The received story was, that the great\nD\u00f4rian establishments in Peloponn\u00easus were formed by invasion from\nthe north, and that the invaders crossed the gulf from Naupaktus,\u2014a\nstatement which, however disputable with respect to Argos, seems highly\nprobable in regard both to Sparta and Mess\u00eania. That the name of\nD\u00f4rians comprehended far more than the inhabitants of the insignificant\ntetrapolis of D\u00f4ris Proper, must be assumed, if we believe that they\nconquered Sparta and Mess\u00eania: both the magnitude of the conquest\nitself, and the passage of a large portion of them from Naupaktus,\nharmonize with the legend as given by Apollod\u00f4rus, in which the D\u00f4rians\nare represented as the principal inhabitants of the northern shore of\nthe gulf. The statements which we find in Herodotus, respecting the\nearly migrations of the D\u00f4rians, have been considered as possessing\ngreater historical value than those of the fabulist Apollod\u00f4rus. But\nboth are equally matter of legend, while the brief indications of the\nlatter seem to be most in harmony with the facts which we afterwards\nfind attested by history.\n\n  [228] Herod. i. 56.\n\nIt has already been mentioned that the genealogy which makes \u00c6olus,\nXuthus and D\u00f4rus sons of Hell\u00ean, is as old as the Hesiodic Catalogue;\nprobably also that which makes Hell\u00ean son of Deukali\u00f4n. A\u00ebthlius also\nis an Hesiodic personage: whether Amphikty\u00f4n be so or not, we have no\nproof.[229] They could not have been introduced into the legendary\ngenealogy until after the Olympic games and the Amphiktyonic council\nhad acquired an established ascendancy and universal reverence\nthroughout Greece.\n\n  [229] Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 57. \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f18\u03bd\u03b4\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f28\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n  \u1f08\u03b5\u03b8\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9.... \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72\n  \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bb\u03b1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a6\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039d\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1ff3 \u0391\u1f30\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f18\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u0390\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  Respecting the parentage of Hell\u00ean, the references to Hesiod are\n  very confused. Compare Schol. Homer. Odyss. x. 2, and Schol.\n  Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 1086. See also Hellanic. Frag. 10. Didot.\n\n  Apollod\u00f4rus, and Pherekyd\u00eas before him (Frag. 51. Didot),\n  called Prot\u00f4geneia daughter of Deukali\u00f4n; Pindar (Olymp. ix.\n  64) designated her as daughter of Opus. One of the stratagems\n  mentioned by the Scholiast to get rid of this genealogical\n  discrepancy was, the supposition that Deukali\u00f4n had two names\n  (\u03b4\u03b9\u03ce\u03bd\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2); that he was also named Opus. (Schol. Pind. Olymp. ix.\n  85).\n\n  That the Deukalid\u00e6 or posterity of Deukali\u00f4n reigned in Thessaly,\n  was mentioned both by Hesiod and Hekat\u00e6us, ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n.\n  Rhod. iv. 265.\n\nRespecting D\u00f4rus the son of Hell\u00ean, we find neither legends nor\nlegendary genealogy; respecting Xuthus, very little beyond the tale\nof Kre\u00fcsa and I\u00f4n, which has its place more naturally among the\nAttic fables. Ach\u00e6us however, who is here represented as the son of\nXuthus, appears in other stories with very different parentage and\naccompaniments. According to the statement which we find in Dionysius\nof Halicarnassus, Ach\u00e6us, Phthius and Pelasgus are sons of Poseid\u00f4n and\nLarissa. They migrate from Peloponn\u00easus into Thessaly, and distribute\nthe Thessalian territory between them, giving their names to its\nprincipal divisions: their descendants in the sixth generation were\ndriven out of that country by the invasion of Deukali\u00f4n at the head\nof the Kur\u00eates and the Leleges.[230] This was the story of those who\nwanted to provide an eponymus for the Ach\u00e6ans in the southern districts\nof Thessaly: Pausanias accomplishes the same object by different\nmeans, representing Ach\u00e6us, the son of Xuthus as having gone back\nto Thessaly and occupied the portion of it to which his father was\nentitled. Then, by way of explaining how it was that there were Ach\u00e6ans\nat Sparta and at Argos, he tells us that Archander and Architel\u00eas, the\nsons of Arch\u00e6us, came back from Thessaly to Peloponn\u00easus, and married\ntwo daughters of Danaus: they acquired great influence at Argos and\nSparta, and gave to the people the name of Ach\u00e6ans after their father\nAch\u00e6us.[231]\n\n  [230] Dionys. H. A. R. i. 17.\n\n  [231] Pausan. vii. 1, 1-3. Herodotus also mentions (ii. 97)\n  Archander, son of Phthius and grandson of Ach\u00e6us, who married the\n  daughter of Danaus. Larcher (Essai sur la Chronologie d\u2019H\u00e9rodote,\n  ch. x. p. 321) tells us that this cannot be the Danaus who came\n  from Egypt, the father of the fifty daughters, who must have\n  lived two centuries earlier, as may be proved by chronological\n  arguments: this must be another Danaus, according to him.\n\n  Strabo seems to give a different story respecting the Ach\u00e6ans in\n  Peloponn\u00easus: he says that they were the original population of\n  the peninsula, that they came in from Phthia with Pelops, and\n  inhabited Laconia, which was from them called Argos Achaicum,\n  and that on the conquest of the D\u00f4rians, they moved into Achaia\n  properly so called, expelling the I\u00f4nians therefrom (Strabo, viii\n  p. 365). This narrative is, I presume, borrowed from Ephorus.\n\nEuripid\u00eas also deviates very materially from the Hesiodic genealogy\nin respect to these eponymous persons. In the drama called I\u00f4n, he\ndescribes I\u00f4n as son of Kre\u00fcsa by Apollo, but adopted by Xuthus:\naccording to him, the real sons of Xuthus and Kre\u00fcsa are D\u00f4rus and\nAch\u00e6us,[232]\u2014eponyms of the D\u00f4rians and Ach\u00e6ans in the interior of\nPeloponn\u00easus. And it is a still more capital point of difference, that\nhe omits Hell\u00ean altogether\u2014making Xuthus an Ach\u00e6an by race, the son of\n\u00c6olus, who is the son of Zeus.[233] This is the more remarkable, as\nin the fragments of two other dramas of Euripid\u00eas, the Melanipp\u00ea and\nthe \u00c6olus, we find Hell\u00ean mentioned both as father of \u00c6olus and son of\nZeus.[234] To the general public even of the most instructed city of\nGreece, fluctuations and discrepancies in these mythical genealogies\nseem to have been neither surprising nor offensive.\n\n  [232] Eurip. Ion, 1590.\n\n  [233] Eurip. Ion, 64.\n\n  [234] See the Fragments of these two plays in Matthiae\u2019s edition;\n  compare Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. v. ii. p. 842. If we may\n  judge from the Fragments of the Latin Melanipp\u00ea of Ennius (see\n  Fragm. 2, ed. Bothe), Hell\u00ean was introduced as one of the\n  characters of the piece.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\nTHE \u00c6OLIDS, OR SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF \u00c6OLUS.\n\n\nIf two of the sons of Hell\u00ean, D\u00f4rus and Xuthus, present to us families\ncomparatively unnoticed in mythical narrative, the third son, \u00c6olus,\nrichly makes up for the deficiency. From him we pass to his seven sons\nand five daughters, amidst a great abundance of heroic and poetical\nincident.\n\nIn dealing however with these extensive mythical families, it is\nnecessary to observe, that the legendary world of Greece, in the manner\nin which it is presented to us, appears invested with a degree of\nsymmetry and coherence which did not originally belong to it. For the\nold ballads and stories which were sung or recounted at the multiplied\nfestivals of Greece, each on its own special theme, have been lost: the\nreligious narratives, which the Exeg\u00eat\u00eas of every temple had present\nto his memory, explanatory of the peculiar religious ceremonies and\nlocal customs in his own town or D\u00eame, have passed away: all these\nprimitive elements, originally distinct and unconnected, are removed\nout of our sight, and we possess only an aggregate result, formed by\nmany confluent streams of fable, and connected together by the agency\nof subsequent poets and logographers. Even the earliest agents in this\nwork of connecting and systematizing\u2014the Hesiodic poets\u2014have been\nhardly at all preserved. Our information respecting Grecian mythology\nis derived chiefly from the prose logographers who followed them, and\nin whose works, since a continuous narrative was above all things\nessential to them, the fabulous personages are woven into still more\ncomprehensive pedigrees, and the original isolation of the legends\nstill better disguised. Hekat\u00e6us, Pherekyd\u00eas, Hellanikus, and Akusilaus\nlived at a time when the idea of Hellas as one great whole, composed\nof fraternal sections, was deeply rooted in the mind of every Greek;\nand when the fancy of one or a few great families, branching out widely\nfrom one common stem, was more popular and acceptable than that of a\ndistinct indigenous origin in each of the separate districts. These\nlogographers, indeed, have themselves been lost; but Apollod\u00f4rus and\nthe various scholiasts, our great immediate sources of information\nrespecting Grecian mythology, chiefly borrowed from them: so that the\nlegendary world of Greece is in fact known to us through them, combined\nwith the dramatic and Alexandrine poets, their Latin imitators, and the\nstill later class of scholiasts\u2014except indeed such occasional glimpses\nas we obtain from the Iliad and the Odyssey, and the remaining Hesiodic\nfragments, which exhibit but too frequently a hopeless diversity when\nconfronted with the narratives of the logographers.\n\nThough \u00c6olus (as has been already stated) is himself called the son\nof Hell\u00ean along with D\u00f4rus and Xuthus, yet the legends concerning the\n\u00c6olids, far from being dependent upon this genealogy, are not all even\ncoherent with it: moreover the name of \u00c6olus in the legend is older\nthan that of Hell\u00ean, inasmuch as it occurs both in the Iliad and\nOdyssey.[235] Odysseus sees in the under-world the beautiful Tyr\u00f4,\ndaughter of Salm\u00f4neus, and wife of Kr\u00eatheus, son of \u00c6olus.\n\n  [235] Iliad, vi. 154. \u03a3\u03af\u03c3\u03c5\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, etc. Again Odyss. xi.\n  234.\u2014\n\n    \u1f1c\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03a4\u03c5\u03c1\u1f7c \u1f34\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd ~\u03b5\u1f50\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd~,\n    \u1f2b \u03c6\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf \u03a3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u1fc6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bc\u03cd\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f14\u03ba\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9,\n    \u03a6\u1fc6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u039a\u03c1\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u1f74 \u1f14\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 ~\u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03bf~.\n\n\u00c6olus is represented as having reigned in Thessaly: his seven sons were\nKr\u00eatheus, Sisyphus, Athamas, Salm\u00f4neus, Dei\u00f4n, Magn\u00eas and Peri\u00ear\u00eas: his\nfive daughters, Canac\u00ea, Alcyon\u00ea, Peisidik\u00ea, Calyc\u00ea and Perim\u00ead\u00ea. The\nfables of this race seem to be distinguished by a constant introduction\nof the god Poseid\u00f4n, as well as by an unusual prevalence of haughty and\npresumptuous attributes among the \u00c6olid heroes, leading them to affront\nthe gods by pretences of equality, and sometimes even by defiance. The\nworship of Poseid\u00f4n must probably have been diffused and pre\u00ebminent\namong a people with whom these legends originated.\n\n\nSECTION I.\u2014SONS OF \u00c6OLUS.\n\nSalm\u00f4neus is not described in the Odyssey as son of \u00c6olus, but he is\nso denominated both in the Hesiodic Catalogue, and by the subsequent\nlogographers. His daughter Tyr\u00f4 became enamoured of the river\nEnipeus, the most beautiful of all streams that traverse the earth:\nshe frequented the banks assiduously, and there the god Poseid\u00f4n\nfound means to indulge his passion for her, assuming the character\nof the river god himself. The fruit of this alliance were the twin\nbrothers, Pelias and N\u00ealeus: Tyr\u00f4 afterwards was given in marriage\nto her uncle Kr\u00eatheus, another son of \u00c6olus, by whom she had \u00c6s\u00f4n,\nPher\u00eas and Amytha\u00f4n\u2014all names of celebrity in the heroic legends.[236]\nThe adventures of Tyr\u00f4 formed the subject of an affecting drama of\nSophokl\u00eas, now lost. Her father had married a second wife, named\nSid\u00ear\u00f4, whose cruel counsels induced him to punish and torture his\ndaughter on account of her intercourse with Poseid\u00f4n. She was shorn\nof her magnificent hair, beaten and ill-used in various ways, and\nconfined in a loathsome dungeon. Unable to take care of her two\nchildren, she had been compelled to expose them immediately on their\nbirth in a little boat on the river Enipeus; they were preserved by the\nkindness of a herdsman, and when grown up to manhood, rescued their\nmother, and revenged her wrongs by putting to death the iron-hearted\nSid\u00ear\u00f4.[237] This pathetic tale respecting the long imprisonment of\nTyr\u00f4 is substituted by Sophokl\u00eas in place of the Homeric legend, which\nrepresented her to have become the wife of Kr\u00eatheus and mother of a\nnumerous offspring.[238]\n\n  [236] Homer, Odyss. xi. 234-257; xv. 226.\n\n  [237] Diod\u00f4rus, iv. 68. Sophokl\u00eas, Fragm. 1. \u03a4\u03c5\u03c1\u03ce. \u03a3\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03a3\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u1f7c\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f54\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1. The genius of Sophokl\u00eas is occasionally\n  seduced by this play upon the etymology of a name, even in the\n  most impressive scenes of his tragedies. See Ajax, 425. Compare\n  Hellanik. Fragm. p. 9, ed. Preller. There was a first and second\n  edition of the Tyr\u00f4\u2014\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03a4\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2. Schol. ad Aristoph.\n  Av. 276. See the few fragments of the lost drama in Dindorf\u2019s\n  Collection, p. 53. The plot was in many respects analogous to the\n  Antiop\u00ea of Euripid\u00eas.\n\n  [238] A third story, different both from Homer and from\n  Sophokl\u00eas, respecting Tyr\u00f4, is found in Hyginus (Fab. lx.): it\n  is of a tragical cast, and borrowed, like so many other tales in\n  that collection, from one of the lost Greek dramas.\n\nHer father, the unjust Salm\u00f4neus, exhibited in his conduct the most\ninsolent impiety towards the gods. He assumed the name and title even\nof Zeus, and caused to be offered to himself the sacrifices destined\nfor that god: he also imitated the thunder and lightning, by driving\nabout with brazen caldrons attached to his chariot and casting lighted\ntorches towards heaven. Such wickedness finally drew upon him the wrath\nof Zeus, who smote him with a thunderbolt, and effaced from the earth\nthe city which he had founded, with all its inhabitants.[239]\n\n  [239] Apollod. i. 9, 7. \u03a3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ae\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2. Hesiod, Fragm. Catal. 8. Marktscheffel.\n\n  Where the city of Salm\u00f4neus was situated, the ancient\n  investigators were not agreed; whether in the Pisatid, or in\n  Elis, or in Thessaly (see Strabo, viii. p. 356). Euripid\u00eas in\n  his \u00c6olus placed him on the banks of the Alpheius (Eurip. Fragm.\n  \u00c6ol. 1). A village and fountain in the Pisatid bore the name\n  of Salm\u00f4n\u00ea; but the mention of the river Enipeus seems to mark\n  Thessaly as the original seat of the legend. But the _na\u00efvet\u00e9_ of\n  the tale preserved by Apollod\u00f4rus (Virgil in the \u00c6neid, vi. 586,\n  has retouched it) marks its ancient date: the final circumstance\n  of that tale was, that the city and its inhabitants were\n  annihilated.\n\n  Ephorus makes Salm\u00f4neus king of the Epeians and of the Pisat\u00e6\n  (Fragm. 15, ed. Didot).\n\n  The lost drama of Sophokl\u00eas, called \u03a3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2, was a \u03b4\u03c1\u1fb6\u03bc\u03b1\n  \u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd See Dindorf\u2019s Fragm. 483.\n\nPelias and N\u00ealeus, \u201cboth stout vassals of the great Zeus,\u201d became\nengaged in dissension respecting the kingdom of I\u00f4lkos in Thessaly.\nPelias got possession of it, and dwelt there in plenty and prosperity;\nbut he had offended the goddess H\u00ear\u00ea by killing Sid\u00ear\u00f4 upon her altar,\nand the effects of her wrath were manifested in his relations with his\nnephew Jas\u00f4n.[240]\n\n  [240] Hom. Od. xi. 280. Apollod. i. 9, 9. \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2,\n  etc.\n\nN\u00ealeus quitted Thessaly, went into Peloponn\u00easus, and there founded\nthe kingdom of Pylos. He purchased by immense marriage presents, the\nprivilege of wedding the beautiful Chl\u00f4ris, daughter of Amphi\u00f4n, king\nof Orchomenos, by whom he had twelve sons and but one daughter[241]\u2014the\nfair and captivating P\u00ear\u00f4, whom suitors from all the neighborhood\ncourted in marriage. But N\u00ealeus, \u201cthe haughtiest of living men,\u201d[242]\nrefused to entertain the pretensions of any of them: he would grant his\ndaughter only to that man who should bring to him the oxen of Iphiklos,\nfrom Phylak\u00ea in Thessaly. These precious animals were carefully\nguarded, as well by herdsmen as by a dog whom neither man nor animal\ncould approach. Nevertheless, Bias, the son of Amytha\u00f4n, nephew of\nN\u00ealeus, being desperately enamored of P\u00ear\u00f4, prevailed upon his brother\nMelampus to undertake for his sake the perilous adventure, in spite of\nthe prophetic knowledge of the latter, which forewarned him that though\nhe would ultimately succeed, the prize must be purchased by severe\ncaptivity and suffering. Melampus, in attempting to steal the oxen,\nwas seized and put in prison; from whence nothing but his prophetic\npowers rescued him. Being acquainted with the language of worms, he\nheard these animals communicating to each other, in the roof over his\nhead, that the beams were nearly eaten through and about to fall in.\nHe communicated this intelligence to his guards, and demanded to be\nconveyed to another place of confinement, announcing that the roof\nwould presently fall in and bury them. The prediction was fulfilled,\nand Phylakos, father of Iphiklos, full of wonder at this specimen of\nprophetic power, immediately caused him to be released. He further\nconsulted him respecting the condition of his son Iphiklos, who was\nchildless; and promised him the possession of the oxen on condition of\nhis suggesting the means whereby offspring might be ensured. A vulture\nhaving communicated to Melampus the requisite information, Podark\u00eas,\nthe son of Iphiklos, was born shortly afterwards. In this manner\nMelampus obtained possession of the oxen, and conveyed them to Pylos,\nobtaining for his brother Bias the hand of P\u00ear\u00f4.[243] How this great\nlegendary character, by miraculously healing the deranged daughters of\nPr\u0153tos, procured both for himself and for Bias dominion in Argos, has\nbeen recounted in a preceding chapter.\n\n  [241] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 68.\n\n  [242] \u039d\u03b7\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c5\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b6\u03c9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd (Hom. Odyss. xv.\n  228).\n\n  [243] Hom. Od. xi. 278; xv. 234. Apollod. i. 9, 12. The basis of\n  this curious romance is in the Odyssey, amplified by subsequent\n  poets. There are points however in the old Homeric legend, as\n  it is briefly sketched in the fifteenth book of the Odyssey,\n  which seem to have been subsequently left out or varied. N\u00ealeus\n  seizes the property of Melampus during his absence; the latter,\n  returning with the oxen from Phylak\u00ea, revenges himself upon\n  N\u00ealeus for the injury. Odyss. xv. 233.\n\nOf the twelve sons of N\u00ealeus, one at least, Periklymenos,\u2014besides the\never-memorable Nest\u00f4r,\u2014was distinguished for his exploits as well as\nfor his miraculous gifts. Poseid\u00f4n, the divine father of the race, had\nbestowed upon him the privilege of changing his form at pleasure into\nthat of any bird, beast, reptile, or insect.[244] He had occasion for\nall these resources, and he employed them for a time with success in\ndefending his family against the terrible indignation of H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nwho, provoked by the refusal of N\u00ealeus to perform for him the ceremony\nof purification after his murder of Iphitus, attacked the N\u00ealeids\nat Pylos. Periklymenos by his extraordinary powers prolonged the\nresistance, but the hour of his fate was at length brought upon him\nby the intervention of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, who pointed him out to H\u00earakl\u00eas while\nhe was perched as a bee upon the hero\u2019s chariot. He was killed, and\nH\u00earakl\u00eas became completely victorious, overpowering Poseid\u00f4n, H\u00ear\u00ea,\nAr\u00eas, and Had\u00eas, and even wounding the three latter, who assisted in\nthe defence. Eleven of the sons of N\u00ealeus perished by his hand, while\nNest\u00f4r, then a youth, was preserved only by his accidental absence at\nGer\u00eana, away from his father\u2019s residence.[245]\n\n  [244] Hesiod, Catalog. ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 156; Ovid,\n  Metam. xii. p. 556; Eustath. ad Odyss. xi. p. 284. Poseid\u00f4n\n  carefully protects Antilochus son of Nest\u00f4r, in the Iliad, xiii.\n  554-563.\n\n  [245] Hesiod, Catalog. ap. Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. ii. 336; and\n  Steph. Byz. v. \u0393\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u03b1; Homer, Il. v. 392; xi. 693; Apollod\u00f4r.\n  ii. 7, 3; Hesiod, Scut. Herc. 360; Pindar, Ol. ix. 32.\n\n  According to the Homeric legend, N\u00ealeus himself was not killed\n  by H\u00earakl\u00eas: subsequent poets or logographers, whom Apollod\u00f4rus\n  follows, seem to have thought it an injustice, that the offence\n  given by N\u00ealeus himself should have been avenged upon his sons\n  and not upon himself; they therefore altered the legend upon this\n  point, and rejected the passage in the Iliad as spurious (see\n  Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. xi. 682).\n\n  The refusal of purification by N\u00ealeus to H\u00earakl\u00eas is a genuine\n  legendary cause: the commentators, who were disposed to spread a\n  coating of history over these transactions, introduced another\n  cause,\u2014N\u00ealeus, as king of Pylos, had aided the Orchomenians in\n  their war against H\u00earakl\u00eas and the Th\u00eabans (see Sch. Ven. ad\n  Iliad. xi. 689).\n\n  The neighborhood of Pylos was distinguished for its ancient\n  worship both of Poseid\u00f4n and of Had\u00eas: there were abundant local\n  legends respecting them (see Strabo, viii. pp. 344, 345).\n\nThe proud house of the N\u00ealeids was now reduced to Nest\u00f4r; but Nest\u00f4r\nsingly sufficed to sustain its eminence. He appears not only as the\ndefender and avenger of Pylos against the insolence and rapacity\nof his Epeian neighbors in Elis, but also as aiding the Lapith\u00e6 in\ntheir terrible combat against the Centaurs, and as companion of\nTh\u00easeus, Peirith\u00f6us, and the other great legendary heroes who preceded\nthe Trojan war. In extreme old age his once marvellous power of\nhandling his weapons has indeed passed away, but his activity remains\nunimpaired, and his sagacity as well as his influence in counsel is\ngreater than ever. He not only assembles the various Grecian chiefs\nfor the armament against Troy, perambulating the districts of Hellas\nalong with Odysseus, but takes a vigorous part in the siege itself,\nand is of pre\u00ebminent service to Agamemn\u00f4n. And after the conclusion\nof the siege, he is one of the few Grecian princes who returns to his\noriginal dominions, and is found, in a strenuous and honored old age,\nin the midst of his children and subjects,\u2014sitting with the sceptre\nof authority on the stone bench before his house at Pylos,\u2014offering\nsacrifice to Poseid\u00f4n, as his father N\u00ealeus had done before him,\u2014and\nmourning only over the death of his favorite son Antilochus, who had\nfallen, along with so many brave companions in arms, in the Trojan\nwar.[246]\n\n  [246] About Nest\u00f4r, Iliad, i. 260-275; ii. 370; xi. 670-770;\n  Odyss. iii. 5, 110, 409.\n\nAfter Nest\u00f4r the line of the N\u00ealeids numbers undistinguished\nnames,\u2014B\u00f4rus, Penthilus, and Andropompus,\u2014three successive generations\ndown to Melanthus, who on the invasion of Peloponn\u00easus by the\nHerakleids, quitted Pylos and retired to Athens, where he became king,\nin a manner which I shall hereafter recount. His son Kodrus was the\nlast Ath\u00eanian king; and N\u00ealeus, one of the sons of Kodrus, is mentioned\nas the principal conductor of what is called the Ionic emigration from\nAthens to Asia Minor.[247] It is certain that during the historical\nage, not merely the princely family of the Kodrids in Mil\u00eatus, Ephesus,\nand other Ionic cities, but some of the greatest families even in\nAthens itself, traced their heroic lineage through the N\u00ealeids up to\nPoseid\u00f4n: and the legends respecting Nest\u00f4r and Periklymenos would\nfind especial favor amidst Greeks with such feelings and belief. The\nKodrids at Ephesus, and probably some other Ionic towns, long retained\nthe title and honorary precedence of kings, even after they had lost\nthe substantial power belonging to the office. They stood in the same\nrelation, embodying both religious worship and supposed ancestry,\nto the N\u00ealeids and Poseid\u00f4n, as the chiefs of the \u00c6olic colonies to\nAgamemn\u00f4n and Orest\u00eas. The Athenian despot Peisistratus was named after\nthe son of Nest\u00f4r in the Odyssey; and we may safely presume that the\nheroic worship of the N\u00ealeids was as carefully cherished at the Ionic\nMil\u00eatus as at the Italian Metapontum.[248]\n\n  [247] Hellanik. Fragm. 10, ed. Didot; Pausan. vii. 2, 3; Herodot.\n  v. 65; Strabo, xiv. p. 633. Hellanikus, in giving the genealogy\n  from N\u00ealeus to Melanthus, traces it through Periklymenos and not\n  through Nest\u00f4r: the words of Herodotus imply that _he_ must have\n  included Nest\u00f4r.\n\n  [248] Herodot. v. 67; Strabo, vi. p. 264; Mimnermus, Fragm. 9,\n  Schneidewin.\n\nHaving pursued the line of Salm\u00f4neus and N\u00ealeus to the end of its\nlengendary career, we may now turn back to that of another son of\n\u00c6olus, Kr\u00eatheus,\u2014a line hardly less celebrated in respect of the heroic\nnames which it presents. Alk\u00eastis, the most beautiful of the daughters\nof Pelias,[249] was promised by her father in marriage to the man\nthat could bring him a lion and a boar tamed to the yoke and drawing\ntogether. Adm\u00eatus, son of Pher\u00eas, the eponymus of Pher\u00e6 in Thessaly,\nand thus grandson of Kr\u00eatheus, was enabled by the aid of Apollo to\nfulfil this condition, and to win her;[250] for Apollo happened at that\ntime to be in his service as a slave (condemned to this penalty by Zeus\nfor having put to death the Cycl\u00f4pes), in which capacity he tended the\nherds and horses with such success, as to equip Eum\u00ealus (the son of\nAdm\u00eatus) to the Trojan war with the finest horses in the Grecian army.\nThough menial duties were imposed upon him, even to the drudgery of\ngrinding in the mill,[251] he yet carried away with him a grateful and\nfriendly sentiment towards his mortal master, whom he interfered to\nrescue from the wrath of the goddess Artemis, when she was indignant at\nthe omission of her name in his wedding sacrifices. Adm\u00eatus was about\nto perish by a premature death, when Apollo, by earnest solicitation\nto the Fates, obtained for him the privilege that his life should be\nprolonged, if he could find any person to die a voluntary death in his\nplace. His father and his mother both refused to make this sacrifice\nfor him, but the devoted attachment of his wife Alk\u00eastis disposed her\nto embrace with cheerfulness the condition of dying to preserve her\nhusband. She had already perished, when H\u00earakl\u00eas, the ancient guest and\nfriend of Adm\u00eatus, arrived during the first hour of lamentation; his\nstrength and daring enabled him to rescue the deceased Alk\u00eastis even\nfrom the grasp of Thanatos (Death), and to restore her alive to her\ndisconsolate husband.[252]\n\n  [249] Iliad, ii. 715.\n\n  [250] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 15; Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 711.\n\n  [251] Euripid. Alk\u00east. init. Welcker; Griechisch. Trag\u0153d. (p.\n  344) on the lost play of Sophokl\u00eas called Adm\u00eatus or Alk\u00eastis;\n  Hom. Iliad., ii. 766; Hygin. Fab. 50-51 (Sophokl\u00eas, Fr. Inc.\n  730; Dind. ap. Plutarch. Defect. Orac. p. 417). This tale of the\n  temporary servitude of particular gods, by order of Zeus as a\n  punishment for misbehavior, recurs not unfrequently among the\n  incidents of the mythical world. The poet Panyasis (ap. Clem.\n  Alexand. Adm. ad Gent. p. 23)\u2014\n\n    \u03a4\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1, \u03c4\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03b3\u03c5\u03ae\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n    \u03a4\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03be\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f7c\u03bd\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u03a4\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f40\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n  The old legend followed out the fundamental idea with remarkable\n  consistency: La\u00f4med\u00f4n, as the temporary master of Poseid\u00f4n and\n  Apollo, threatens to bind them hand and foot, to sell them in the\n  distant islands, and to cut off the ears of both, when they come\n  to ask for their stipulated wages (Iliad, xxi. 455). It was a\n  new turn given to the story by the Alexandrine poets, when they\n  introduced the motive of love, and made the servitude voluntary\n  on the part of Apollo (Kallimachus, Hymn. Apoll. 49; Tibullus,\n  Elegii. 3, 11-30).\n\n  [252] Eurip. Alk\u00eastis, Arg.; Apollod. i. 9, 15. To bring this\n  beautiful legend more into the color of history, a new version\n  of it was subsequently framed: H\u00earakl\u00eas was eminently skilled in\n  medicine, and saved the life of Alk\u00eastis when she was about to\n  perish from a desperate malady (Plutarch. Amator c. 17. vol. iv.\n  p. 53, Wytt.).\n\nThe son of Pelias, Akastus, had received and sheltered P\u00ealeus when\nobliged to fly his country in consequence of the involuntary murder of\nEuryti\u00f4n. Kr\u00eath\u00eais, the wife of Akastus, becoming enamored of P\u00ealeus,\nmade to him advances which he repudiated. Exasperated at his refusal,\nand determined to procure his destruction, she persuaded her husband\nthat P\u00ealeus had attempted her chastity: upon which Akastus conducted\nP\u00ealeus out upon a hunting excursion among the woody regions of Mount\nP\u00ealion, contrived to steal from him the sword fabricated and given\nby H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, and then left him, alone and unarmed, to perish by the\nhands of the Centaurs or by the wild beasts. By the friendly aid of the\nCentaur Cheir\u00f4n, however, P\u00ealeus was preserved, and his sword restored\nto him: returning to the city, he avenged himself by putting to death\nboth Akastus and his perfidious wife.[253]\n\n  [253] The legend of Akastus and P\u00ealeus was given in great detail\n  in the Catalogue of Hesiod (Catalog. Fragm. 20-21, Marktscheff.);\n  Schol. Pindar Nem. iv. 95. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 224; Apollod.\n  iii. 13, 2.\n\nBut amongst all the legends with which the name of Pelias is connected,\nby far the most memorable is that of Jas\u00f4n and the Argonautic\nexpedition. Jas\u00f4n was son of \u00c6s\u00f4n, grandson of Kr\u00eatheus, and thus\ngreat-grandson of \u00c6olus. Pelias, having consulted the oracle respecting\nthe security of his dominion at I\u00f4lkos, had received in answer a\nwarning to beware of the man who should appear before him with only\none sandal. He was celebrating a festival in honor of Poseid\u00f4n, when\nit so happened that Jas\u00f4n appeared before him with one of his feet\nunsandaled: he had lost one sandal in wading through the swollen\ncurrent of the river Anauros. Pelias immediately understood that this\nwas the enemy against whom the oracle had forewarned him. As a means\nof averting the danger, he imposed upon Jas\u00f4n the desperate task of\nbringing back to I\u00f4lkos the Golden Fleece,\u2014the fleece of that ram\nwhich had carried Phryxos from Achaia to Kolchis, and which Phryxos\nhad dedicated in the latter country as an offering to the god Ar\u00eas.\nThe result of this injunction was the memorable expedition\u2014of the ship\nArg\u00f4 and her crew called the Argonauts, composed of the bravest and\nnoblest youths of Greece\u2014which cannot be conveniently included among\nthe legends of the \u00c6olids, and is reserved for a separate chapter.\n\nThe voyage of the Arg\u00f4 was long protracted, and Pelias, persuaded\nthat neither the ship nor her crew would ever return, put to death\nboth the father and mother of Jas\u00f4n, together with their infant son.\n\u00c6s\u00f4n, the father, being permitted to choose the manner of his own\ndeath, drank bull\u2019s blood while performing a sacrifice to the gods.\nAt length, however, Jas\u00f4n did return, bringing with him not only the\ngolden fleece, but also M\u00eadea, daughter of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, king of Kolchis,\nas his wife,\u2014a woman distinguished for magical skill and cunning, by\nwhose assistance alone the Argonauts had succeeded in their project.\nThough determined to avenge himself upon Pelias, Jas\u00f4n knew he could\nonly succeed by stratagem: he remained with his companions at a short\ndistance from I\u00f4lkos, while M\u00eadea, feigning herself a fugitive from\nhis ill-usage, entered the town alone, and procured access to the\ndaughters of Pelias. By exhibitions of her magical powers she soon\nobtained unqualified ascendency over their minds. For example, she\nselected from the flocks of Pelias a ram in the extremity of old age,\ncut him up and boiled him in a caldron with herbs, and brought him\nout in the shape of a young and vigorous lamb:[254] the daughters of\nPelias were made to believe that their old father could in like manner\nbe restored to youth. In this persuasion they cut him up with their\nown hands and cast his limbs into the caldron, trusting that M\u00eadea\nwould produce upon him the same magical effect. M\u00eadea pretended that an\ninvocation to the moon was a necessary part of the ceremony: she went\nup to the top of the house as if to pronounce it, and there lighting\nthe fire-signal concerted with the Argonauts, Jas\u00f4n and his companions\nburst in and possessed themselves of the town. Satisfied with having\nthus revenged himself, Jas\u00f4n yielded the principality of I\u00f4lkos to\nAkastus, son of Pelias, and retired with M\u00eadea to Corinth. Thus did\nthe goddess H\u00ear\u00ea gratify her ancient wrath against Pelias: she had\nconstantly watched over Jas\u00f4n, and had carried the \u201call-notorious\u201d Arg\u00f4\nthrough its innumerable perils, in order that Jas\u00f4n might bring home\nM\u00eadea to accomplish the ruin of his uncle.[255] The misguided daughters\nof Pelias departed as voluntary exiles to Arcadia: Akastus his son\ncelebrated splendid funeral games in honor of his deceased father.[256]\n\n  [254] This incident was contained in one of the earliest\n  dramas of Euripid\u00eas, the \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, now lost. Moses of Chor\u00ean\u00ea\n  (Progymnasm. ap. Maii ad Euseb. p. 43), who gives an extract\n  from the argument, says that the poet \u201cextremos mentiendi fines\n  attingit.\u201d\n\n  The \u1fec\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 of Sophokl\u00eas seems also to have turned upon the\n  same catastrophe (see Fragm. 479, Dindorf.).\n\n  [255] The kindness of H\u00ear\u00ea towards Jas\u00f4n seems to be older in\n  the legend than her displeasure against Pelias; at least it is\n  specially noticed in the Odyssey, as the great cause of the\n  escape of the ship Arg\u00f4: \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03b5\u03bd\n  \u1f38\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd. (xii. 70). In the Hesiodic Theogony Pelias stands to\n  Jas\u00f4n in the same relation as Eurystheus to H\u00earakl\u00eas,\u2014a severe\n  taskmaster as well as a wicked and insolent man,\u2014\u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b7\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f40\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2. (Theog. 995). Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius\n  keeps the wrath of H\u00ear\u00ea against Pelias in the foreground, i. 14;\n  iii. 1134; iv. 242; see also Hygin, f. 13.\n\n  There is great diversity in the stories given of the proximate\n  circumstances connected with the death of Pelias: Eurip. M\u00ead.\n  491; Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 27; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 50-52; Ovid, Metam. vii.\n  162, 203, 297, 347; Pausan. viii. 11, 2; Schol. ad Lycoph. 175.\n\n  In the legend of Akastus and P\u00ealeus as recounted above, Akastus\n  was made to perish by the hand of P\u00ealeus. I do not take upon me\n  to reconcile these contradictions.\n\n  Pausanias mentions that he could not find in any of the poets,\n  so far as he had read, the names of the daughters of Pelias, and\n  that the painter Mik\u00f4n had given to them names (\u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f14\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b3\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, etc., Pausan.\n  viii. 11, 1). Yet their names are given in the authors whom\n  Diod\u00f4rus copied; and Alk\u00eastis, at any rate, was most memorable.\n  Mik\u00f4n gave the names Asteropeia and Antino\u00ea, altogether different\n  from those in Diod\u00f4rus. Both Diod\u00f4rus and Hyginus exonerate\n  Alk\u00eastis from all share in the death of her father (Hygin. f. 24).\n\n  The old poem called the \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 (see Argum. ad Eurip. M\u00ead.,\n  and Schol. Aristophan. Equit. 1321) recounted, that M\u00eadea had\n  boiled in a caldron the old \u00c6s\u00f4n, father of Jas\u00f4n, with herbs\n  and incantations, and that she had brought him out young and\n  strong. Ovid copies this (Metam. vii. 162-203). It is singular\n  that Pher\u00eakyd\u00eas and Simonid\u00eas said that she had performed this\n  process upon Jas\u00f4n himself (Schol. Aristoph. _l. c._). Diogenes\n  (ap. Stob\u00e6. Florileg. t. xxix. 92) rationalizes the story,\n  and converts M\u00eadea from an enchantress into an improving and\n  regenerating preceptress. The death of \u00c6s\u00f4n, as described in the\n  text, is given from Diod\u00f4rus and Apollod\u00f4rus. M\u00eadea seems to have\n  been worshipped as a goddess in other places besides Corinth\n  (see Athenagor. Legat. pro Christ. 12; Macrobius, i. 12, p. 247,\n  Gronov.).\n\n  [256] These funeral games in honor of Pelias were among the most\n  renowned of the mythical incidents: they were celebrated in a\n  special poem by Stesichorus, and represented on the chest of\n  Kypselus at Olympia. Kast\u00f4r, Meleager, Amphiaraos, Jas\u00f4n, P\u00ealeus,\n  Mopsos, etc. contended in them (Pausan. v. 17. 4; Stesichori\n  Fragm. 1. p. 54, ed. Klewe; Ath\u00ean. iv. 172). How familiar\n  the details of them were to the mind of a literary Greek is\n  indirectly attested by Plutarch, Sympos. v. 2, vol. iii. p. 762,\n  Wytt.\n\nJas\u00f4n and M\u00eadea retired from I\u00f4lkos to Corinth, where they resided ten\nyears: their children were\u2014Medeius, whom the Centaur Cheir\u00f4n educated\nin the regions of Mount P\u00ealion,[257]\u2014and Mermerus and Pher\u00f4s, born at\nCorinth. After they had resided there ten years in prosperity, Jas\u00f4n\nset his affections on Glauk\u00ea, daughter of Kre\u00f4n[258] king of Corinth;\nand as her father was willing to give her to him in marriage, he\ndetermined to repudiate M\u00eadea, who received orders forthwith to leave\nCorinth. Stung with this insult and bent upon revenge, M\u00eadea prepared\na poisoned robe, and sent it as a marriage present to Glauk\u00ea: it was\nunthinkingly accepted and put on, and the body of the unfortunate bride\nwas burnt up and consumed. Kre\u00f4n, her father, who tried to tear from\nher the burning garment, shared her fate and perished. The exulting\nM\u00eadea escaped by means of a chariot with winged serpents furnished to\nher by her grandfather H\u00ealios: she placed herself under the protection\nof \u00c6g\u00eaus at Athens, by whom she had a son named M\u00eadus. She left her\nyoung children in the sacred enclosure of the Akr\u00e6an H\u00ear\u00ea, relying on\nthe protection of the altar to ensure their safety; but the Corinthians\nwere so exasperated against her for the murder of Kre\u00f4n and Glauk\u00ea,\nthat they dragged the children away from the altar and put them to\ndeath. The miserable Jas\u00f4n perished by a fragment of his own ship Arg\u00f4,\nwhich fell upon him while he was asleep under it,[259] being hauled on\nshore, according to the habitual practice of the ancients.\n\n  [257] Hesiod, Theogon. 998.\n\n  [258] According to the Schol. ad Eurip. M\u00ead. 20, Jas\u00f4n marries\n  the daughter of Hippot\u00eas the son of Kre\u00f4n, who is the son\n  of Lyk\u00e6thos. Lyk\u00e6thos, after the departure of Belleroph\u00f4n\n  from Corinth, reigned twenty-seven years; then Kre\u00f4n reigned\n  thirty-five years; then came Hippot\u00eas.\n\n  [259] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 27; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 54. The M\u00eadea of\n  Euripid\u00eas, which has fortunately been preserved to us, is\n  too well known to need express reference. He makes M\u00eadea the\n  destroyer of her own children, and borrows from this circumstance\n  the most pathetic touches of his exquisite drama. Parmenisk\u00f4s\n  accused him of having been bribed by the Corinthians to give\n  this turn to the legend; and we may regard the accusation as a\n  proof that the older and more current tale imputed the murder of\n  the children to the Corinthians (Schol. Eurip. M\u00ead. 275, where\n  Didymos gives the story out of the old poem of Kreophylos). See\n  also \u00c6lian, V. H. v. 21; Pausan. ii. 3, 6.\n\n  The most significant fact in respect to the fable is, that the\n  Corinthians celebrated periodically a propitiatory sacrifice to\n  H\u00ear\u00ea Akr\u00e6a and to Mermerus and Pher\u00eas, as an atonement for the\n  sin of having violated the sanctuary of the altar. The legend\n  grew out of this religious ceremony, and was so arranged as to\n  explain and account for it (see Eurip. M\u00ead. 1376, with the Schol.\n  Diod\u00f4r. iv. 55).\n\n  Mermerus and Pher\u00eas were the names given to the children of M\u00eadea\n  and Jas\u00f4n in the old Naupaktian Verses; in which, however, the\n  legend must have been recounted quite differently, since they\n  said that Jas\u00f4n and M\u00eadea had gone from I\u00f4lkos, not to Corinth,\n  but to Corcyra; and that Mermerus had perished in hunting on the\n  opposite continent of Epirus. Kin\u00e6th\u00f4n again, another ancient\n  genealogical poet, called the children of M\u00eadea and Jas\u00f4n Eri\u00f4pis\n  and M\u00eados (Pausan. ii. 3, 7). Diod\u00f4rus gives them different names\n  (iv. 34). Hesiod, in the Theogony, speaks only of Medeius as the\n  son of Jas\u00f4n.\n\n  M\u00eadea does not appear either in the Iliad or Odyssey: in the\n  former, we find Agam\u00ead\u00ea, daughter of Augeas, \u201cwho knows all the\n  poisons (or medicines) which the earth nourishes\u201d (Iliad, xi.\n  740); in the latter, we have Circ\u00ea, sister of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, father of\n  M\u00eadea, and living in the \u00c6\u00e6an island (Odyss. x. 70). Circ\u00ea is\n  daughter of the god H\u00ealios, as M\u00eadea is his grand-daughter,\u2014she\n  is herself a goddess. She is in many points the parallel of\n  M\u00eadea; she forewarns and preserves Odysseus throughout his\n  dangers, as M\u00eadea aids Jas\u00f4n: according to the Hesiodic story,\n  she has two children by Odysseus, Agrius and Latinus (Theogon.\n  1001).\n\n  Odysseus goes to Ephyr\u00ea to Ilos the son of Mermerus, to procure\n  poison for his arrows: Eustathius treats this Mermerus as the\n  son of M\u00eadea (see Odyss. i. 270, and Eust.). As Ephyr\u00ea is the\n  legendary name of Corinth, we may presume this to be a thread of\n  the same mythical tissue.\n\nThe first establishment at Ephyr\u00ea, or Corinth, had been founded by\nSisyphus, another of the sons of \u00c6olus, brother of Salm\u00f4neus and\nKr\u00eatheus.[260] The \u00c6olid Sisyphus was distinguished as an unexampled\nmaster of cunning and deceit. He blocked up the road along the isthmus,\nand killed the strangers who came along it by rolling down upon them\ngreat stones from the mountains above. He was more than a match even\nfor the arch thief Autolycus, the son of Herm\u00eas, who derived from his\nfather the gift of changing the color and shape of stolen goods, so\nthat they could no longer be recognized: Sisyphus, by marking his sheep\nunder the foot, detected Autolycus when he stole them, and obliged\nhim to restore the plunder. His penetration discovered the amour of\nZeus with the nymph \u00c6gina, daughter of the river-god As\u00f4pus. Zeus had\ncarried her off to the island of \u0152n\u00f4n\u00ea (which subsequently bore the\nname of \u00c6gina); upon which As\u00f4pus, eager to recover her, inquired of\nSisyphus whither she was gone: the latter told him what had happened,\non condition that he should provide a spring of water on the summit of\nthe Acro-Corinthus. Zeus, indignant with Sisyphus for this revelation,\ninflicted upon him in Had\u00eas the punishment of perpetually heaving up a\nhill a great and heavy stone, which, so soon as it attained the summit,\nrolled back again in spite of all his efforts, with irresistible force\ninto the plain.[261]\n\n  [260] See Euripid. \u00c6ol.\u2014Fragm. 1, Dindorf; Dik\u00e6arch. Vit. Gr\u00e6c.\n  p. 22.\n\n  [261] Respecting Sisyphus, see Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 3; iii. 12, 6.\n  Pausan. ii. 5, 1. Schol. ad Iliad. i. 180. Another legend about\n  the amour of Sisyphus with Tyr\u00f4, is in Hygin. fab. 60, and about\n  the manner in which he overreached even Had\u00eas (Pherekyd\u00eas ap.\n  Schol. Iliad. vi. 153). The stone rolled by Sisyphus in the\n  under-world appears in Odyss. xi. 592. The name of Sisyphus was\n  given during the historical age to men of craft and stratagem,\n  such as Derkyllid\u00eas (Xenoph. Hellenic. iii. 1, 8). He passed\n  for the real father of Odysseus, though Heyne (ad Apollod\u00f4r.\n  i. 9, 3) treats this as another Sisyphus, whereby he destroys\n  the suitableness of the predicate as regards Odysseus. The\n  duplication and triplication of synonymous personages is an\n  ordinary resource for the purpose of reducing the legends into a\n  seeming chronological sequence.\n\n  Even in the days of Eum\u00ealus a religious mystery was observed\n  respecting the tombs of Sisyphus and N\u00ealeus,\u2014the latter had also\n  died at Corinth,\u2014no one could say where they were buried (Pausan.\n  ii. 2, 2).\n\n  Sisyphus even overreached Persephon\u00ea, and made his escape from\n  the under-world (Theognis, 702).\n\nIn the application of the \u00c6olid genealogy to Corinth, Sisyphus, the\nson of \u00c6olus, appears as the first name: but the old Corinthian poet\nEum\u00ealus either found or framed an heroic genealogy for his native city\nindependent both of \u00c6olus and Sisyphus. According to this genealogy,\nEphyr\u00ea, daughter of Oceanus and T\u00eathys, was the primitive tenant of\nthe Corinthian territory, As\u00f4pus of the Siky\u00f4nian: both were assigned\nto the god H\u00ealios, in adjusting a dispute between him and Poseid\u00f4n,\nby Briareus. H\u00ealios divided the territory between his two sons \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\nand Al\u00f4eus: to the former he assigned Corinth, to the latter Siky\u00f4n.\n\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, obeying the admonition of an oracle, emigrated to Kolchis,\nleaving his territory under the rule of Bunos, the son of Herm\u00eas,\nwith the stipulation that it should be restored whenever either he\nor any of his descendants returned. After the death of Bunos, both\nCorinth and Siky\u00f4n were possessed by Ep\u00f4peus, son of Al\u00f4eus, a wicked\nman. His son Marath\u00f4n left him in disgust and retired into Attica,\nbut returned after his death and succeeded to his territory, which he\nin turn divided between his two sons Corinthos and Siky\u00f4n, from whom\nthe names of the two districts were first derived. Corinthos died\nwithout issue, and the Corinthians then invited M\u00eadea from I\u00f4lkos as\nthe representative of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas: she with her husband Jas\u00f4n thus obtained\nthe sovereignty of Corinth.[262] This legend of Eum\u00ealus, one of the\nearliest of the genealogical poets, so different from the story adopted\nby Neophr\u00f4n or Euripid\u00eas, was followed certainly by Simonid\u00eas and\nseemingly by Theopompus.[263] The incidents in it are imagined and\narranged with a view to the supremacy of M\u00eadea; the emigration of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\nand the conditions under which he transferred his sceptre, being so\nlaid out as to confer upon M\u00eadea an hereditary title to the throne.\nThe Corinthians paid to M\u00eadea and to her children solemn worship,\neither divine or heroic, in conjunction with H\u00ear\u00ea Akr\u00e6a,[264] and this\nwas sufficient to give to M\u00eadea a prominent place in the genealogy\ncomposed by a Corinthian poet, accustomed to blend together gods,\nheroes and men in the antiquities of his native city. According to\nthe legend of Eum\u00ealus, Jas\u00f4n became (through M\u00eadea) king of Corinth;\nbut she concealed the children of their marriage in the temple of\nH\u00ear\u00ea, trusting that the goddess would render them immortal. Jas\u00f4n,\ndiscovering her proceedings, left her and retired in disgust to I\u00f4lkos;\nM\u00eadea also, being disappointed in her scheme, quitted the place,\nleaving the throne in the hands of Sisyphus, to whom, according to\nthe story of Theopompus, she had become attached.[265] Other legends\nrecounted, that Zeus had contracted a passion for M\u00eadea, but that she\nhad rejected his suit from fear of the displeasure of H\u00ear\u00ea; who, as\na recompense for such fidelity, rendered her children immortal:[266]\nmoreover M\u00eadea had erected, by special command of H\u00ear\u00ea, the celebrated\ntemple of Aphrodit\u00ea at Corinth. The tenor of these fables manifests\ntheir connection with the temple of H\u00ear\u00ea: and we may consider the\nlegend of M\u00eadea as having been originally quite independent of that of\nSisyphus, but fitted on to it, in seeming chronological sequence, so as\nto satisfy the feelings of those \u00c6olids of Corinth who passed for his\ndescendants.\n\n  [262] Pausan. ii. 1, 1; 3, 10. Schol. ad Pindar, Olymp. xiii. 74.\n  Schol. Lycoph. 174-1024. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 1212.\n\n  [263] Simonid. ap. Schol. ad Eurip. M\u00ead. 10-20; Theopompus,\n  Fragm. 340, Didot; though Welcker (Der Episch. Cycl. p. 29)\n  thinks that this does not belong to the historian Theopompus.\n  Epimenid\u00eas also followed the story of Eum\u00ealus in making \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas a\n  Corinthian (Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. iii. 242).\n\n  [264] \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u039a\u03cc\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f3d\u03c0\u03c0\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f21 \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u0395\u1f54\u03bc\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f4d\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f21 \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u039c\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f38\u03c3\u03b8\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6, \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u1f11\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2. (Schol. Eurip. M\u00ead. 10). Compare also v. 1376\n  of the play itself, with the Scholia and Pausan. ii. 3, 6. Both\n  Alkman and Hesiod represented M\u00eadea as a goddess (Athenagoras,\n  Legatia pro Christianis, p. 54, ed. Oxon.).\n\n  [265] Pausan. ii. 3, 10; Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 74.\n\n  [266] Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xiii. 32-74; Plutarch, De Herodot.\n  Malign. p. 871.\n\nSisyphus had for his sons Glaukos and Ornyti\u00f4n. From Glaukos sprang\nBelleroph\u00f4n, whose romantic adventures commence with the Iliad, and\nare further expanded by subsequent poets: according to some accounts\nhe was really the son of Poseid\u00f4n, the prominent deity of the \u00c6olid\nfamily.[267] The youth and beauty of Belleroph\u00f4n rendered him the\nobject of a strong passion on the part of the Anteia, wife of Pr\u0153tos\nking of Argos. Finding her advances rejected, she contracted a violent\nhatred towards him, and endeavored by false accusations to prevail upon\nher husband to kill him. Pr\u0153tos refused to commit the deed under his\nown roof, but despatched him to his son-in-law the king of Lykia in\nAsia Minor, putting into his hands a folded tablet full of destructive\nsymbols. Conformably to these suggestions, the most perilous\nundertakings were imposed upon Belleroph\u00f4n. He was directed to attack\nthe monster Chim\u00e6ra and to conquer the warlike Solymi as well as the\nAmazons: as he returned victorious from these enterprises, an ambuscade\nwas laid for him by the bravest Lykian warriors, all of whom he slew.\nAt length the Lykian king recognized him \u201cas the genuine son of a\ngod,\u201d and gave him his daughter in marriage together with half of his\nkingdom. The grand-children of Belleroph\u00f4n, Glaukos and Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n,\u2014the\nlatter a son of his daughter Laodameia by Zeus,\u2014combat as allies of\nTroy against the host of Agamemnon.[268] Respecting the winged Pegasus,\nHomer says nothing; but later poets assigned to Belleroph\u00f4n this\nmiraculous steed, whose parentage is given in the Hesiodic Theogony,\nas the instrument both of his voyage and of his success.[269] Heroic\nworship was paid at Corinth to Belleroph\u00f4n, and he seems to have\nbeen a favorite theme of recollection not only among the Corinthians\nthemselves, but also among the numerous colonists whom they sent out to\nother regions.[270]\n\n  [267] Pindar, Olymp. xiii. 98. and Schol. ad 1; Schol. ad Iliad,\n  vi. 155; this seems to be the sense of Iliad, vi. 191.\n\n  The lost drama called _Iobat\u00eas_ of Sophokl\u00eas, and the two by\n  Euripid\u00eas called _Stheneb\u0153a_ and _Belleroph\u00f4n_, handled the\n  adventures of this hero. See the collection of the few fragments\n  remaining in Dindorf, Fragm. Sophok. 280; Fragm. Eurip. p.\n  87-108; and Hygin. fab. 67.\n\n  Welcker (Griechische Trag\u00f6d. ii. p. 777-800) has ingeniously put\n  together all that can be divined respecting the two plays of\n  Euripid\u00eas.\n\n  V\u00f6lcker seeks to make out that Belleroph\u00f4n is identical with\n  Poseid\u00f4n Hippios,\u2014a separate personification of one of the\n  attributes of the god Poseid\u00f4n. For this conjecture he gives some\n  plausible grounds (Mythologie des Japetisch. Geschlechts, p. 129\n  _seq._).\n\n  [268] Iliad, vi. 155-210.\n\n  [269] Hesiod, Theogon. 283.\n\n  [270] Pausan. ii. 2, 4. See Pindar, Olymp. xiii. 90, addressed\n  to Xenoph\u00f4n the Corinthian, and the Adoniazus\u00e6 of the Syracusan\n  Theocritus, a poem in which common Syracusan life and feeling are\n  so graphically depicted, Idyll xv. 91.\u2014\n\n                            \u03a3\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2;\n    \u1f69\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u1fc7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\n    \u1f69\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u0392\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nFrom Ornyti\u00f4n, the son of Sisyphus, we are conducted through a series\nof three undistinguished family names,\u2014Thoas, Damoph\u00f4n, and the\nbrothers Propodas and Hyanthidas,\u2014to the time of the D\u00f4rian occupation\nof Corinth[271], which will be hereafter recounted.\n\n  [271] Pausan. ii. 4, 3.\n\nWe now pass from Sisyphus and the Corinthian fables to another son of\n\u00c6olus, Athamas, whose family history is not less replete with mournful\nand tragical incidents, abundantly diversified by the poets. Athamas,\nwe are told, was king of Orchomenos; his wife Nephel\u00ea was a goddess,\nand he had by her two children, Phryxus and Hell\u00ea. After a certain\ntime he neglected Nephel\u00ea, and took to himself as a new wife In\u00f4, the\ndaughter of Kadmus, by whom he had two sons, Learchus and Melikert\u00eas.\nIn\u00f4, looking upon Phryxus with the hatred of a step-mother, laid a\nsnare for his life. She persuaded the women to roast the seed-wheat,\nwhich, when sown in this condition, yielded no crop, so that famine\noverspread the land. Athamas sent to Delphi to implore counsel and a\nremedy: he received for answer, through the machinations of In\u00f4 with\nthe oracle, that the barrenness of the fields could not be alleviated\nexcept by offering Phryxus as a sacrifice to Zeus. The distress of the\npeople compelled him to execute this injunction, and Phryxus was led as\na victim to the altar. But the power of his mother Nephel\u00ea snatched him\nfrom destruction, and procured for him from Herm\u00eas a ram with a fleece\nof gold, upon which he and his sister Hell\u00ea mounted and were carried\nacross the sea. The ram took the direction of the Euxine sea and\nKolchis: when they were crossing the Hellespont, Hell\u00ea fell off into\nthe narrow strait, which took its name from that incident. Upon this,\nthe ram, who was endued with speech, consoled the terrified Phryxus,\nand ultimately carried him safe to Kolchis: \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, king of Kolchis son\nof the god H\u00ealios and brother of Circ\u00ea, received Phryxus kindly, and\ngave him his daughter Chalciop\u00ea in marriage. Phryxus sacrificed the ram\nto Zeus Phyxios, and suspended the golden fleece in the sacred grove of\nAr\u00eas.\n\nAthamas\u2014according to some both Athamas and In\u00f4\u2014were afterwards driven\nmad by the anger of the goddess H\u00ear\u00ea; insomuch that the father shot\nhis own son Learchus, and would also have put to death his other son\nMelikert\u00eas, if In\u00f4 had not snatched him away. She fled with the boy,\nacross the Megarian territory and Mount Geraneia, to the rock Moluris,\noverhanging the Sar\u00f4nic Gulf: Athamas pursued her, and in order to\nescape him she leaped into the sea. She became a sea-goddess under the\ntitle of Leukothea; while the body of Melikert\u00eas was cast ashore on the\nneighboring territory of Sch\u0153nus, and buried by his uncle Sisyphus, who\nwas directed by the Nere\u00efds to pay to him heroic honors under the name\nof Pal\u00e6m\u00f4n. The Isthmian games, one of the great periodical festivals\nof Greece, were celebrated in honor of the god Poseid\u00f4n, in conjunction\nwith Pal\u00e6m\u00f4n as a hero. Athamas abandoned his territory, and became the\nfirst settler of a neighboring region called from him Athmantia, or the\nAthamantian plain. [272]\n\n  [272] Eurip. M\u00ead. 1250, with the Scholia, according to which\n  story In\u00f4 killed both her children:\u2014\n\n    \u1f3c\u03bd\u03c9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f45\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2\n    \u0394\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1 \u03bd\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c8\u03b5 \u03b4\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u1fc3.\n\n  Compare Valckenaer, Diatribe in Eurip.; Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 1-2;\n  Schol. ad Pindar. Argum. ad Isthm. p. 180. The many varieties of\n  the fable of Athamas and his family may be seen in Hygin. fab.\n  1-5; Philostephanus ap. Schol. Iliad, vii. 86: it was a favorite\n  subject with the tragedians, and was handled by \u00c6schylus,\n  Sophokl\u00eas and Euripid\u00eas in more than one drama (see Welcker,\n  Griechische Trag\u00f6d. vol. i. p. 312-332; vol. ii. p. 612). Heyne\n  says that the proper reading of the name is _Phrixus_, not\n  _Phryxus_,\u2014incorrectly, I think: \u03a6\u03c1\u03cd\u03be\u03bf\u03c2 connects the name both\n  with the story of roasting the wheat (\u03c6\u03c1\u03cd\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd), and also with\n  the country \u03a6\u03c1\u03c5\u03b3\u03af\u03b1, of which it was pretended that Phryxus was\n  the Eponymus. In\u00f4, or Leukothea, was worshipped as a heroine at\n  Megara as well as at Corinth (Pausan. i. 42, 3): the celebrity\n  of the Isthmian games carried her worship, as well as that of\n  Pal\u00e6m\u00f4n, throughout most parts of Greece (Cicero, De Nat. Deor.\n  iii. 16). She is the only personage of this family noticed\n  either in the Iliad or Odyssey: in the latter poem she is a\n  sea-goddess, who has once been a mortal, daughter of Kadmus; she\n  saves Odysseus from imminent danger at sea by presenting to him\n  her \u03ba\u03c1\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd (Odyss. v. 433; see the refinements of Aristid\u00eas,\n  Orat. iii. p. 27). The voyage of Phryxus and Hell\u00ea to Kolchis was\n  related in the Hesiodic Eoiai: we find the names of the children\n  of Phryxus by the daughter of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas quoted from that poem (Schol.\n  ad Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 1123) both Hesiod and Pherekyd\u00eas mentioned\n  the golden fleece of the ram (Eratosthen. Catasterism. 19;\n  Pherekyd. Fragm. 53, Didot).\n\n  Hekat\u00e6us preserved the romance of the speaking ram (Schol. Apoll.\n  Rhod. i. 256) but Hellanikus dropped the story of Hell\u00ea having\n  fallen into the sea: according to him she died at Pacty\u00ea in the\n  Chersonesus (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 1144).\n\n  The poet Asius seems to have given the genealogy of Athamas by\n  Themist\u00f4 much in the same manner as we find it in Apollod\u00f4rus\n  (Pausan. ix. 23, 3).\n\n  According to the ingenious refinements of Dionysius and\n  Pal\u00e6phatus (Schol. ad Apoll. Rhod. ii. 1144; Pal\u00e6phat. de Incred.\n  c. 31) the ram of Phryxus was after all a man named Krios, a\n  faithful attendant who aided in his escape; others imagined a\n  ship with a ram\u2019s head at the bow.\n\nThe legend of Athamas connects itself with some sanguinary religious\nrites and very peculiar family customs, which prevailed at Alos,\nin Achaia Phthi\u00f4tis, down to a time[273] later than the historian\nHerodotus, and of which some remnant existed at Orchomenos even in the\ndays of Plutarch. Athamas was worshipped at Alos as a hero, having\nboth a chapel and a consecrated grove, attached to the temple of Zeus\nLaphystios. On the family of which he was the heroic progenitor, a\nspecial curse and disability stood affixed. The eldest of the race was\nforbidden to enter the prytaneion or government-house; and if he was\nfound within the doors of the building, the other citizens laid hold\nof him on his going out, surrounded him with garlands, and led him in\nsolemn procession to be sacrificed as a victim at the altar of Zeus\nLaphystios. The prohibition carried with it an exclusion from all the\npublic meetings and ceremonies, political as well as religious, and\nfrom the sacred fire of the state: many of the individuals marked out\nhad therefore been bold enough to transgress it. Some had been seized\non quitting the building and actually sacrificed; others had fled the\ncountry for a long time to avoid a similar fate.\n\n  [273] Plutarch, Qu\u00e6st. Gr\u00e6c. c. 38. p. 299. Schol. Apoll. Rhod.\n  ii. 655.\n\nThe guides who conducted Xerx\u00eas and his army through southern Thessaly\ndetailed to him this existing practice, coupled with the local legend,\nthat Athamas, together with In\u00f4, had sought to compass the death of\nPhryxus, who however had escaped to Kolchis; that the Ach\u00e6ans had been\nenjoined by an oracle to offer up Athamas himself as an expiatory\nsacrifice to release the country from the anger of the gods; but that\nKytissoros, son of Phryxus, coming back from Kolchis, had intercepted\nthe sacrifice of Athamas,[274] whereby the anger of the gods remained\nstill unappeased, and an undying curse rested upon the family.[275]\n\n  [274] Of the Athamas of Sophokl\u00eas, turning upon this intended,\n  but not consummated sacrifice, little is known, except from a\n  passage of Aristophan\u00eas and the Scholia upon it (Nubes, 258).\u2014\n\n            \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af \u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd; \u03bf\u1f34\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, \u03a3\u03ce\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\n    \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b8\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n  Athamas was introduced in this drama with a garland on his head,\n  on the point of being sacrificed as an expiation for the death of\n  his son Phryxus, when H\u00earakl\u00eas interposes and rescues him.\n\n  [275] Herodot. vii. 197. Plato, Min\u00f4s, p. 315.\n\nThat such human sacrifices continued to a greater or less extent,\neven down to a period later than Herodotus, among the family who\nworshipped Athamas as their heroic ancestor, appears certain: mention\nis also made of similar customs in parts of Arcadia, and of Thessaly,\nin honor of P\u00ealeus and Cheir\u00f4n.[276] But we may reasonably presume,\nthat in the period of greater humanity which Herodotus witnessed,\nactual sacrifice had become very rare. The curse and the legend still\nremained, but were not called into practical working, except during\nperiods of intense national suffering or apprehension, during which\nthe religious sensibilities were always greatly aggravated. We cannot\nat all doubt, that during the alarm created by the presence of the\nPersian king with his immense and ill-disciplined host, the minds of\nthe Thessalians must have been keenly alive to all that was terrific in\ntheir national stories, and all that was expiatory in their religious\nsolemnities. Moreover, the mind of Xerx\u00eas himself was so awe-struck by\nthe tale, that he reverenced the dwelling-place consecrated to Athamas.\nThe guides who recounted to him the romantic legend, gave it as the\nhistorical and generating cause of the existing rule and practice: a\ncritical inquirer is forced (as has been remarked before) to reverse\nthe order of precedence, and to treat the practice as having been the\nsuggesting cause of its own explanatory legend.\n\n  [276] Plato, Min\u00f4s, c. 5. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f08\u03b8\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f14\u03ba\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f35\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b8\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. As a testimony to the fact still\n  existing or believed to exist, this dialogue is quite sufficient,\n  though not the work of Plato.\n\n  \u039c\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6, \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1fc7, \u1f10\u03bd \u03a0\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u0398\u03b5\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03a0\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a7\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. (Clemens\n  Alexand. Admon. ad Gent. p. 27, Sylb.) Respecting the sacrifices\n  at the temple of Zeus Lyk\u00e6us in Arcadia, see Plato, Republ.\n  viii. p. 565. Pausanias (viii. p. 38, 5) seems to have shrunk,\n  when he was upon the spot, even from inquiring what they were\u2014a\n  striking proof of the fearful idea which he had conceived of\n  them. Plutarch (De Defectu Oracul. c. 14) speaks of \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2. The Schol. ad Lycophron. 229, gives a\n  story of children being sacrificed to Melikert\u00eas at Tenedos; and\n  Apollod\u00f4rus (ad Porphyr. de Abstinenti\u00e2, ii. 55, see Apollod.\n  Fragm. 20, ed. Didot) said that the Laced\u00e6monians had sacrificed\n  a man to Ar\u00eas\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f41 \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\n  \u03b8\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd. About Salamis in Cyprus, see Lactantius, De Fals\u00e2\n  Religione, i. c. 21. \u201cApud Cypri Salaminem, humanam hostiam Jovi\n  Teucrus immolavit, idque sacrificium posteris tradidit: quod est\n  nuper Hadriano imperante sublatum.\u201d\n\n  Respecting human sacrifices in historical Greece, consult a\n  good section in K. F. Hermann\u2019s Gottesdienstliche Alterth\u00fcmer\n  der Griechen (sect. 27). Such sacrifices had been a portion of\n  primitive Grecian religion, but had gradually become obsolete\n  everywhere\u2014except in one or two solitary cases, which were spoken\n  of with horror. Even in these cases, too, the reality of the\n  fact, in later times, is not beyond suspicion.\n\nThe family history of Athamas, and the worship of Zeus Laphystios, are\nexpressly connected by Herodotus with Alos in Ach\u00e6a Phthi\u00f4tis\u2014one of\nthe towns enumerated in the Iliad as under the command of Achilles. But\nthere was also a mountain called Laphystion, and a temple and worship\nof Zeus Laphystios between Orchomenos and Kor\u00f4neia, in the northern\nportion of the territory known in the historical ages as B\u0153otia. Here\nalso the family story of Athamas is localized, and Athamas is presented\nto us as king of the districts of Kor\u00f4neia, Haliartus and Mount\nLaphystion: he is thus interwoven with the Orchomenian genealogy.[277]\nAndreus (we are told), son of the river P\u00eaneios, was the first person\nwho settled in the region: from him it received the name Andr\u00eais.\nAthamas, coming subsequently to Andreus, received from him the\nterritory of Kor\u00f4neia and Haliartus with Mount Laphystion: he gave\nin marriage to Andreus, Euipp\u00ea, daughter of his son Leuc\u00f4n, and the\nissue of this marriage was Eteokl\u00eas, said to be the son of the river\nK\u00eaphisos. Kor\u00f4nos and Haliartus, grandsons of the Corinthian Sisyphus,\nwere adopted by Athamas, as he had lost all his children: but when his\ngrandson Presb\u00f4n, son of Phryxus, returned to him from Kolchis, he\ndivided his territory in such manner that Kor\u00f4nos and Haliartus became\nthe founders of the towns which bore their names. Alm\u00f4n, the son of\nSisyphus, also received from Eteokl\u00eas a portion of territory, where he\nestablished the village Alm\u00f4nes.[278]\n\n  [277] Pausan. ix. 34, 4.\n\n  [278] Pausan. ix. 34, 5.\n\nWith Eteokl\u00eas began, according to a statement in one of the Hesiodic\npoems, the worship of the Charites or Graces, so long and so\nsolemnly continued at Orchomenos in the periodical festival of the\nCharit\u00easia, to which many neighboring towns and districts seem to\nhave contributed.[279] He also distributed the inhabitants into two\ntribes\u2014Eteokleia and K\u00eaphisias. He died childless, and was succeeded\nby Almos, who had only two daughters, Chrys\u00ea and Chrysogeneia. The son\nof Chrys\u00ea by the god Ar\u00eas was Phlegyas, the father and founder of the\nwarlike and predatory Phlegy\u00e6, who despoiled every one within their\nreach, and assaulted not only the pilgrims on their road to Delphi,\nbut even the treasures of the temple itself. The offended god punished\nthem by continued thunder, by earthquakes, and by pestilence, which\nextinguished all this impious race, except a scanty remnant who fled\ninto Phokis.\n\n  [279] Ephorus, Fragm. 68, Marx.\n\nChrysogeneia, the other daughter of Almos, had for issue, by the god\nPoseid\u00f4n, Minyas: the son of Minyas was Orchomenos. From these two was\nderived the name both of Miny\u00e6 for the people, and of Orchomenos for\nthe town.[280] During the reign of Orchomenos, Hy\u00eattus came to him from\nArgos, having become an exile in consequence of the death of Molyros:\nOrchomenos assigned to him a portion of land, where he founded the\nvillage called Hy\u00eattus.[281] Orchomenos, having no issue, was succeeded\nby Klymenos, son of Presb\u00f4n, of the house of Athamas: Klymenos was\nslain by some Th\u00eabans during the festival of Poseid\u00f4n at Onch\u00eastos; and\nhis eldest son, Erginus, to avenge his death, attacked the Th\u00eabans with\nhis utmost force;\u2014an attack, in which he was so successful, that the\nlatter were forced to submit, and to pay him an annual tribute.\n\n  [280] Pausan. ix. 36, 1-3. See also a legend, about the three\n  daughters of Minyas, which was treated by the Tanagr\u00e6an poetess\n  Korinna, the contemporary of Pindar (Antonin. Liberalis, Narr.\n  x.).\n\n  [281] This exile of Hy\u00eattus was recounted in the Eoiai. Hesiod,\n  Fragm. 148, Markt.\n\nThe Orchomenian power was now at its height: both Minyas and Orchomenos\nhad been princes of surpassing wealth, and the former had built\na spacious and durable edifice which he had filled with gold and\nsilver. But the success of Erginus against Th\u00eabes was soon terminated\nand reversed by the hand of the irresistible H\u00earakl\u00eas, who rejected\nwith disdain the claim of tribute, and even mutilated the envoys\nsent to demand it: he not only emancipated Th\u00eabes, but broke down\nand impoverished Orchomenos.[282] Erginus in his old age married a\nyoung wife, from which match sprang the illustrious heroes, or gods,\nTroph\u00f4nius and Agam\u00ead\u00eas; though many (amongst whom is Pausanius\nhimself) believed Troph\u00f4nius to be the son of Apollo.[283] Troph\u00f4nius,\none of the most memorable persons in Grecian mythology, was worshipped\nas a god in various places, but with especial sanctity as Zeus\nTroph\u00f4nius at Lebadeia: in his temple at this town, the prophetic\nmanifestations outlasted those of Delphi itself.[284] Troph\u00f4nius and\nAgam\u00ead\u00eas, enjoying matchless renown as architects, built[285] the\ntemple of Delphi, the thalamus of Amphitry\u00f4n at Th\u00eabes, as well as the\ninaccessible vault of Hyrieus at Hyria, in which they are said to have\nleft one stone removable at pleasure, so as to reserve for themselves\na secret entrance. They entered so frequently, and stole so much gold\nand silver, that Hyrieus, astonished at his losses, at length spread a\nfine net, in which Agam\u00ead\u00eas was inextricably caught: Troph\u00f4nius cut off\nhis brother\u2019s head and carried it away, so that the body, which alone\nremained, was insufficient to identify the thief. Like Amphiaraos, whom\nhe resembles in more than one respect, Troph\u00f4nius was swallowed up by\nthe earth near Lebadeia.[286]\n\n  [282] Pausan. ix. 37, 2. Apollod. ii. 4, 11. Diod\u00f4r. iv. 10. The\n  two latter tell us that Erginus was slain. Klymen\u00ea is among the\n  wives and daughters of the heroes seen by Odysseus in Had\u00eas: she\n  is termed by the Schol. daughter of Minyas (Odyss. xi. 325).\n\n  [283] Pausan. ix. 37, 1-3. \u039b\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u03a4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f18\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70\n  \u03a4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n  [284] Plutarch, De Defectu Oracul. c. 5, p. 411. Strabo, ix.\n  p. 414. The mention of the honeyed cakes, both in Aristophan\u00eas\n  (Nub. 508) and Pausanias (ix. 39, 5), indicates that the curious\n  preliminary ceremonies, for those who consulted the oracle\n  of Troph\u00f4nius, remained the same after a lapse of 550 years.\n  Pausanias consulted it himself. There had been at one time an\n  oracle of Teiresias at Orchomenos: but it had become silent at an\n  early period (Plutarch. Defect. Oracul. c. 44, p. 434).\n\n  [285] Homer. Hymn. Apoll. 296. Pausan. ix. 11, 1.\n\n  [286] Pausan. ix. 37, 3. A similar story, but far more romantic\n  and amplified, is told by Herodotus (ii. 121), respecting the\n  treasury vault of Rhampsinitus, king of Egypt. Charax (ap.\n  Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 508) gives the same tale, but places the\n  scene in the treasury-vault of Augeas, king of Elis, which he\n  says was built by Troph\u00f4nius, to whom he assigns a totally\n  different genealogy. The romantic adventures of the tale rendered\n  it eminently fit to be interwoven at some point or another of\n  legendary history, in any country.\n\nFrom Troph\u00f4nius and Agam\u00ead\u00eas the Orchomenian genealogy passes to\nAscalaphos and Ialmenos, the sons of Ar\u00eas by Astyoch\u00ea, who are named\nin the Catalogue of the Iliad as leaders of the thirty ships from\nOrchomenos against Troy. Azeus, the grandfather of Astyoch\u00ea in the\nIliad, is introduced as the brother of Erginus[287] by Pausanias, who\ndoes not carry the pedigree lower.\n\n  [287] Pausan. ix. 38, 6; 29, 1.\n\nThe genealogy here given out of Pausanias is deserving of the more\nattention, because it seems to have been copied from the special\nhistory of Orchomenos by the Corinthian Kallippus, who again borrowed\nfrom the native Orchomenian poet, Chersias: the works of the latter\nhad never come into the hands of Pausanias. It illustrates forcibly\nthe principle upon which these mythical genealogies were framed, for\nalmost every personage in the series is an Eponymus. Andreus gave\nhis name to the country, Athamas to the Athamantian plain; Minyas,\nOrchomenos, Kor\u00f4nus, Haliartus, Almos and Hy\u00eattos, are each in like\nmanner connected with some name of people, tribe, town or village;\nwhile Chrys\u00ea and Chrysogeneia have their origin in the reputed ancient\nwealth of Orchomenos. Abundant discrepancies are found, however, in\nrespect to this old genealogy, if we look to other accounts. According\nto one statement, Orchomenos was the son of Zeus by Ision\u00ea, daughter\nof Danaus; Minyas was the son of Orchomenos (or rather of Poseid\u00f4n)\nby Hermipp\u00ea, daughter of B\u0153\u00f4tos; the sons of Minyas were Presb\u00f4n,\nOrchomenos, Athamas and Diochth\u00f4ndas.[288] Others represented Minyas as\nson of Poseid\u00f4n by Kallirrho\u00ea, an Oceanic nymph,[289] while Dionysius\ncalled him son of Ar\u00eas, and Aristod\u00eamus, son of Aleas: lastly, there\nwere not wanting authors who termed both Minyas and Orchomenos sons\nof Eteokl\u00eas.[290] Nor do we find in any one of these genealogies the\nname of Amphi\u00f4n, the son of Iasus, who figures so prominently in the\nOdyssey as king of Orchomenos, and whose beautiful daughter Chl\u00f4ris is\nmarried to N\u00ealeus. Pausanias mentions him, but not as king, which is\nthe denomination given to him in Homer.[291]\n\n  [288] Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 230. Compare Schol. ad Lycophron.\n  873.\n\n  [289] Schol. Pindar, Olymp. xiv. 5.\n\n  [290] Schol. Pindar, Isthm. i. 79. Other discrepancies in Schol.\n  Vett. ad Iliad. ii. Catalog. 18.\n\n  [291] Odyss. xi. 283. Pausan. ix. 36, 3.\n\nThe discrepancies here cited are hardly necessary in order to prove\nthat these Orchomenian genealogies possess no historical value. Yet\nsome probable inferences appear deducible from the general tenor of the\nlegends, whether the facts and persons of which they are composed be\nreal or fictitious.\n\nThroughout all the historical age, Orchomenos is a member of the\nB\u0153\u00f4tian confederation. But the B\u0153\u00f4tians are said to have been\nimmigrants into the territory which bore their name from Thessaly; and\nprior to the time of their immigration, Orchomenos and the surrounding\nterritory appear as possessed by the Miny\u00e6, who are recognized in that\nlocality both in the Iliad and in the Odyssey,[292] and from whom\nthe constantly recurring Eponymus, King Minyas, is borrowed by the\ngenealogists. Poetical legend connects the Orchomenian Miny\u00e6 on the one\nside, with Pylos and Tryphylia in Peloponn\u00easus; on the other side, with\nPhthi\u00f4tis and the town of I\u00f4lkos in Thessaly; also with Corinth,[293]\nthrough Sisyphus and his sons. Pherekyd\u00eas represented N\u00ealeus, king\nof Pylos, as having also been king of Orchomenos.[294] In the region\nof Triphylia, near to or coincident with Pylos, a Minyeian river is\nmentioned by Homer; and we find traces of residents called Miny\u00e6 even\nin the historical times, though the account given by Herodotus of the\nway in which they came thither is strange and unsatisfactory.[295]\n\n  [292] Iliad, ii. 5, 11. Odyss. xi. 283. Hesiod, Fragm. Eoiai,\n  27, D\u00fcntz. \u1f3c\u03be\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f48\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03c5\u03ae\u03ca\u03bf\u03bd. Pindar, Olymp. xiv. 4.\n  \u03a0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03c5\u1fb6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9. Herodot. i. 146. Pausanias calls\n  them Miny\u00e6 even in their dealings with Sylla (ix. 30, 1).\n  Buttmann, in his Dissertation (\u00dcber die Miny\u00e6 der \u00c4ltesten Zeit,\n  in the Mythologus, Diss. xxi. p. 218), doubts whether the name\n  Miny\u00e6 was ever a real name; but all the passages make against his\n  opinion.\n\n  [293] Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 1186. i. 230. \u03a3\u03ba\u03ae\u03c8\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2\n  \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f38\u03c9\u03bb\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03cd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9; and i. 763.\n  \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f38\u03c9\u03bb\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c5\u03b1\u03b9 \u1fa4\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03a3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2:\n  also Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 512. Steph. Byz. v. \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03cd\u03b1. Orchomenos\n  and Pylos run together in the mind of the poet of the Odyssey,\n  xi. 458.\n\n  [294] Pherekyd. Fragm. 56, Didot. We see by the 55th Fragment of\n  the same author, that he extended the genealogy of Phryxos to\n  Pher\u00e6 in Thessaly.\n\n  [295] Herodot. iv. 145. Strabo, viii. 337-347. Hom. Iliad, xi.\n  721. Pausan. v. 1, 7. \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03c5\u03ae\u03ca\u03bf\u03bd, near Elis.\n\nBefore the great changes which took place in the inhabitants of\nGreece from the immigration of the Thespr\u00f4tians into Thessaly, of\nthe B\u0153\u00f4tians into B\u0153\u00f4tia, and of the D\u00f4rians and \u00c6t\u00f4lians into\nPeloponn\u00easus, at a date which we have no means of determining, the\nMiny\u00e6 and tribes fraternally connected with them seem to have occupied\na large portion of the surface of Greece, from I\u00f4lkos in Thessaly to\nPylos in the Peloponn\u00easus. The wealth of Orchomenos is renowned even\nin the Iliad;[296] and when we study its topography in detail, we are\nfurnished with a probable explanation both of its prosperity and its\ndecay. Orchomenos was situated on the northern bank of the lake K\u00f4pa\u00efs,\nwhich receives not only the river K\u00eaphisos from the valleys of Ph\u00f4kis,\nbut also other rivers from Parnassus and Helic\u00f4n. The waters of the\nlake find more than one subterranean egress\u2014partly through natural\nrifts and cavities in the limestone mountains, partly through a tunnel\npierced artificially more than a mile in length\u2014into the plain on the\nnorth-eastern side, from whence they flow into the Eub\u0153an sea near\nLarymna:[297] and it appears that, so long as these channels were\ndiligently watched and kept clear, a large portion of the lake was in\nthe condition of alluvial land, pre\u00ebminently rich and fertile. But when\nthe channels came to be either neglected, or designedly choked up by an\nenemy, the water accumulated to such a degree, as to occupy the soil\nof more than one ancient town, to endanger the position of K\u00f4p\u00e6, and\nto occasion the change of the site of Orchomenos itself from the plain\nto the declivity of Mount Hyphanteion. An engineer, Krat\u00eas, began the\nclearance of the obstructed water-courses in the reign of Alexander the\nGreat, and by his commission\u2014the destroyer of Th\u00eabes being anxious to\nre\u00ebstablish the extinct prosperity of Orchomenos. He succeeded so far\nas partially to drain and diminish the lake, whereby the site of more\nthan one ancient city was rendered visible: but the revival of Th\u00eabes\nby Kassander, after the decease of Alexander, arrested the progress of\nthe undertaking, and the lake soon regained its former dimensions, to\ncontract which no farther attempt was made.[298]\n\n  [296] Iliad, ix. 381.\n\n  [297] See the description of these channels or Katabothra in\n  Colonel Leake\u2019s Travels in Northern Greece, vol. ii. c. 15, p.\n  281-293, and still more elaborately in Fiedler, Reise durch alle\n  Theile des K\u00f6nigreichs Griechenlands, Leipzig, 1840. He traced\n  fifteen perpendicular shafts sunk for the purpose of admitting\n  air into the tunnel, the first separated from the last by about\n  5900 feet: they are now of course overgrown and stopped up (vol.\n  i. p. 115).\n\n  Forchhammer states the length of this tunnel as considerably\n  greater than what is here stated. He also gives a plan of the\n  Lake K\u00f4pa\u00efs with the surrounding region, which I have placed at\n  the end of the second volume of this History. See also _infra_,\n  vol. ii. ch. iii. p. 391.\n\n  [298] We owe this interesting fact to Strabo, who is however both\n  concise and unsatisfactory, viii. p. 406-407. It was affirmed\n  that there had been two ancient towns, named Eleusis and Ath\u00ean\u00e6,\n  originally founded by Cecr\u00f4ps, situated on the lake, and thus\n  overflowed (Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 Diogen. La\u00ebrt. iv. 23. Pausan.\n  ix. 24, 2). For the plain or marsh near Orchomenos, see Plutarch,\n  Sylla, c. 20-22.\n\nAccording to the Th\u00eaban legend,[299] H\u00earakl\u00eas, after his defeat of\nErginus had blocked up the exit of the waters, and converted the\nOrchomenian plain into a lake. The spreading of these waters is thus\nconnected with the humiliation of the Miny\u00e6; and there can be little\nhesitation in ascribing to these ancient tenants of Orchomenos,\nbefore it became b\u0153otized, the enlargement and preservation of these\nprotective channels. Nor could such an object have been accomplished,\nwithout combined action and acknowledged ascendency on the part of\nthat city over its neighbors, extending even to the sea at Larymna,\nwhere the river K\u00f4phisos discharges itself. Of its extended influence,\nas well as of its maritime activity, we find a remarkable evidence in\nthe ancient and venerated Amphiktyony at Kalauria. The little island\nso named, near the harbor of Tr\u0153z\u00ean, in Peloponn\u00easus, was sacred\nto Poseid\u00f4n, and an asylum of inviolable sanctity. At the temple\nof Poseid\u00f4n, in Kalauria, there had existed, from unknown date, a\nperiodical sacrifice, celebrated by seven cities in common\u2014Hermion\u00ea,\nEpidaurus, \u00c6gina, Athens, Prasi\u00e6, Nauplia, and the Minyeian Orchomenos.\nThis ancient religious combination dates from the time when Nauplia\nwas independent of Argos, and Prasi\u00e6 of Sparta: Argos and Sparta,\naccording to the usual practice in Greece, continued to fulfil the\nobligation each on the part of its respective dependent.[300] Six\nout of the seven states are at once sea-towns, and near enough to\nKalauria to account for their participation in this Amphiktyony. But\nthe junction of Orchomenos, from its comparative remoteness, becomes\ninexplicable, except on the supposition that its territory reached the\nsea, and that it enjoyed a considerable maritime traffic\u2014a fact which\nhelps to elucidate both its legendary connection with I\u00f4lkos, and its\npartnership in what is called the I\u00f4nic emigration.[301] The mythical\ngenealogy, whereby Pt\u00f4os, Sch\u0153neus and Erythrios are enumerated among\nthe sons of Athamas, goes farther to confirm the idea that the towns\nand localities on the south-east of the lake recognized a fraternal\norigin with the Orchomenian Miny\u00e6, not less than Kor\u00f4neia and Haliartus\non the south-west.[302]\n\n  [299] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 18. Pausan. ix. 38, 5.\n\n  [300] Strabo, viii. p. 374. \u1f2e\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03c5\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n  \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u1f15\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f33 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc\u03b9\u1f7c\u03bd,\n  \u1f18\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u0391\u1f34\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1, \u1f08\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03a0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, \u039d\u03b1\u03c5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f48\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41\n  \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2. \u1f59\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039d\u03b1\u03c5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b9\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03a0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72\n  \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd.\n\n  [301] Pausan. ix. 17, 1; 26, 1.\n\n  [302] See M\u00fcller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, p. 214. Pausan. ix.\n  23, 3; 24, 3. The genealogy is as old as the poet Asios.\n\nThe great power of Orchomenos was broken down, and the city reduced to\na secondary and half-dependent position by the B\u0153\u00f4tians of Th\u00eabes; at\nwhat time, and under what circumstances, history has not preserved. The\nstory, that the Th\u00eaban hero, H\u00earakl\u00eas, rescued his native city from\nservitude and tribute to Orchomenos, since it comes from a Kadmeian\nand not from an Orchomenian legend, and since the details of it were\nfavorite subjects of commemoration in the Th\u00eabian temples,[303]\naffords a presumption that Th\u00eabes was really once dependent on\nOrchomenos. Moreover the savage mutilations inflicted by the hero on\nthe tribute-seeking envoys, so faithfully portrayed in his surname\nRhinokoloust\u00eas, infuse into the mythe a portion of that bitter feeling\nwhich so long prevailed between Th\u00eabes and Orchomenos, and which led\nthe Th\u00eabans, as soon as the battle of Leuctra had placed supremacy in\ntheir hands, to destroy and depopulate their rival.[304] The ensuing\ngeneration saw the same fate retorted upon Th\u00eabes, combined with\nthe restoration of Orchomenos. The legendary grandeur of this city\ncontinued, long after it had ceased to be distinguished for wealth\nand power, imperishably recorded both in the minds of the nobler\ncitizens and in the compositions of the poets; the emphatic language of\nPausanias shows how much he found concerning it in the old epic.[305]\n\n  [303] Herod. i. 146. Pausan. vii. 2, 2.\n\n  [304] Theocrit. xvi. 104.\u2014\n\n    \u1f6e \u1fbf\u0395\u03c4\u03b5\u03cc\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b8\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u1f76, \u03b1\u1f31 \u039c\u03b9\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n    \u1fbf\u039f\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b1 \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  The scholiast gives a sense to these words much narrower than\n  they really bear. See Diod\u00f4r. xv. 79; Pausan. ix. 15. In the\n  oration which Isokrat\u00eas places in the mouth of a Plat\u00e6an,\n  complaining of the oppressions of Th\u00eabes, the ancient servitude\n  and tribute to Orchomenos is cast in the teeth of the Th\u00eabans\n  (Isokrat. Orat. Plataic. vol. iii. p. 32, Auger).\n\n  [305] Pausan. ix. 34, 5. See also the fourteenth Olympic Ode\n  of Pindar, addressed to the Orchomenian Asopikus. The learned\n  and instructive work of K. O. M\u00fcller, Orchomenos und die\n  Minyer, embodies everything which can be known respecting this\n  once-memorable city; indeed the contents of the work extends much\n  farther than its title promises.\n\n\nSECTION II.\u2014DAUGHTERS OF \u00c6OLUS.\n\nWith several of the daughters of \u00c6olus memorable mythical pedigrees and\nnarratives are connected. Alcyon\u00ea married K\u00eayx, the son of E\u00f4sphoros,\nbut both she and her husband displayed in a high degree the overweening\ninsolence common in the \u00c6olic race. The wife called her husband Zeus,\nwhile he addressed her as H\u00ear\u00ea, for which presumptuous act Zeus\npunished them by changing both into birds.[306]\n\n  [306] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 7, 4. A. K\u00eayx,\u2014king of Trachin,\u2014the friend\n  of H\u00earakl\u00eas and protector of the H\u00earakleids to the extent of\n  his power (Hesiod, Scut. Hercul. 355-473: Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 7, 5;\n  Hekat\u00e6. Fragm. 353, Didot.).\n\nCanac\u00ea had by the god Poseid\u00f4n several children, amongst whom were\nEp\u00f4peus and Al\u00f4eus.[307] Al\u00f4eus married Imphim\u00eadea, who became\nenamored of the god Poseid\u00f4n, and boasted of her intimacy with him.\nShe had by him two sons, Otos and Ephialt\u00eas, the huge and formidable\nAl\u00f4ids,\u2014Titanic beings, nine fathoms in height and nine cubits in\nbreadth, even in their boyhood, before they had attained their full\nstrength. These Al\u00f4ids defied and insulted the gods in Olympus; they\npaid their court to H\u00ear\u00ea and Artemis, and they even seized and bound\nAr\u00eas, confining him in a brazen chamber for thirteen months. No one\nknew where he was, and the intolerable chain would have worn him to\ndeath, had not Erib\u0153a, the jealous stepmother of the Al\u00f4ids, revealed\nthe place of his detention to Herm\u00eas, who carried him surreptitiously\naway when at the last extremity; nor could Ar\u00eas obtain any atonement\nfor such an indignity. Otos and Ephialt\u00eas even prepared to assault the\ngods in heaven, piling up Ossa on Olympus and P\u00ealion on Ossa, in order\nto reach them. And this they would have accomplished had they been\nallowed to grow to their full maturity; but the arrows of Apollo put a\ntimely end to their short-lived career.[308]\n\n  [307] Canac\u00ea, daughter of \u00c6olus, is a subject of deep tragical\n  interest both in Euripid\u00eas and Ovid. The eleventh Heroic Epistle\n  of the latter, founded mainly on the lost tragedy of the former\n  called \u00c6olus, purports to be from Canac\u00ea to Macareus, and\n  contains a pathetic description of the ill-fated passion between\n  a brother and sister: see the fragments of the \u00c6olus in Dindorf\u2019s\n  collection. In the tale of Kaunos and Byblis, both children of\n  Mil\u00eatos, the results of an incestuous passion are different but\n  hardly less melancholy (Parthenios, Narr. xi.).\n\n  Makar, the son of \u00c6olus, is the primitive settler of the island\n  of Lesbos (Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 37): moreover in the Odyssey, \u00c6olus\n  son of Hippot\u00eas, the dispenser of the winds, has six sons and\n  six daughters, and marries the former to the latter (Odyss. x.\n  7). The two persons called \u00c6olus are brought into connection\n  genealogically (see Schol. ad Odyss. _l. c._, and Diod\u00f4r. iv.\n  67), but it seems probable that Euripid\u00eas was the first to place\n  the names of Macareus and Canac\u00ea in that relation which confers\n  upon them their poetical celebrity. Sostratus (ap. Stob\u00e6um, t.\n  614, p. 404) can hardly be considered to have borrowed from any\n  older source than Euripid\u00eas. Welcker (Griech. Trag\u00f6d. vol. ii. p.\n  860) puts together all that can be known respecting the structure\n  of the lost drama of Euripid\u00eas.\n\n  [308] Iliad, v. 386; Odyss. xi. 306; Apollod\u00f4r. i. 7, 4. So\n  Typh\u00f4eus, in the Hesiodic Theogony, the last enemy of the gods,\n  is killed before he comes to maturity (Theog. 837). For the\n  different turns given to this ancient Homeric legend, see Heyne,\n  ad Apollod\u00f4r. l. c, and Hyginus, f. 28. The Al\u00f4ids were noticed\n  in the Hesiodic poems (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 482). Odysseus\n  does not see _them_ in Had\u00eas, as Heyne by mistake says; he sees\n  their mother Iphim\u00eadea. Virgil (\u00c6n. vi. 582) assigns to them a\n  place among the sufferers of punishment in Tartarus.\n\n  Eum\u00ealus, the Corinthian poet, designated Al\u00f4eus as son of the god\n  H\u00ealios and brother of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, the father of M\u00eadea (Eum\u00eal. Fragm.\n  2, Marktscheffel). The scene of their death was subsequently\n  laid in Naxos (Pindar, Pyth. iv. 88): their tombs were seen\n  at Anth\u00ead\u00f4n in B\u0153\u00f4tia (Pausan. ix. 22, 4). The very curious\n  legend alluded to by Pausanias from Hegesinoos, the author of\n  an Atthis,\u2014to the effect that Otos and Ephialt\u00eas were the first\n  to establish the worship of the Muses in Helic\u00f4n, and that they\n  founded Ascra along with \u0152oklos, the son of Poseid\u00f4n,\u2014is one\n  which we have no means of tracing farther (Pausan. ix. 29, I).\n\n  The story of the Al\u00f4ids, as Diod\u00f4rus gives it (v. 51, 52),\n  diverges on almost every point: it is evidently borrowed from\n  some Naxian arch\u00e6ologist, and the only information which we\n  collect from it is, that Otos and Ephialt\u00eas received heroic\n  honors at Naxos. The views of O. M\u00fcller (Orchomenos, p. 387)\n  appear to me unusually vague and fanciful.\n\n  Ephialt\u00eas takes part in the combat of the giants against the gods\n  (Apollod\u00f4r. t. 6, 2), where Heyne remarks, as in so many other\n  cases, \u201cEphialt\u00eas hic non confundendus cum altero Al\u00f4ei filio;\u201d\n  an observation just indeed, if we are supposed to be dealing\n  with personages and adventures historically real, but altogether\n  misleading in regard to these legendary characters; for here the\n  general conception of Ephialt\u00eas and his attributes is in both\n  cases the same; but the particular adventures ascribed to him\n  cannot be made to consist, as facts, one with the other.\n\nThe genealogy assigned to Calyc\u00ea, another daughter of \u00c6olus, conducts\nus from Thessaly to Elis and \u00c6t\u00f4lia. She married A\u00ebthlius (the son\nof Zeus by Pr\u00f4togeneia, daughter of Deukali\u00f4n and sister of Hell\u00ean),\nwho conducted a colony out of Thessaly and settled in the territory\nof Elis. He had for his son Endymi\u00f4n, respecting whom the Hesiodic\nCatalogue and the Eoiai related several wonderful things. Zeus granted\nhim the privilege of determining the hour of his own death, and even\ntranslated him into heaven, which he forfeited by daring to pay court\nto H\u00ear\u00ea: his vision in this criminal attempt was cheated by a cloud,\nand he was cast out into the under-world.[309] According to other\nstories, his great beauty caused the goddess S\u00eal\u00eane to become enamored\nof him, and to visit him by night during his sleep:\u2014the sleep of\nEndymi\u00f4n became a proverbial expression for enviable, undisturbed, and\ndeathless repose.[310] Endymi\u00f4n had for issue (Pausanias gives us three\ndifferent accounts, and Apollod\u00f4rus a fourth, of the name of his wife)\nEpeios, \u00c6t\u00f4lus, P\u00e6\u00f4n, and a daughter Eurykyd\u00ea. He caused his three sons\nto run a race on the stadium at Olympia, and Epeios, being victorious,\nwas rewarded by becoming his successor in the kingdom: it was after him\nthat the people were denominated Epeians.\n\n  [309] Hesiod, Akusilaus and Pherekyd\u00eas, ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod.\n  iv, 57. \u1f3c\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03b7\u03c2. The Scholium is very full\n  of matter, and exhibits many of the diversities in the tale of\n  Endymi\u00f4n: see also Apollod\u00f4r i. 7, 5; Pausan. v. 1, 2; Con\u00f4n.\n  Narr. 14.\n\n  [310] Theocrit. iii. 49; xx. 35; where, however, Endymi\u00f4n is\n  connected with Latmos in Caria (see Schol. _ad loc._).\n\nBoth the story here mentioned, and still more, the etymological\nsignification of the names A\u00ebthlius and Endymi\u00f4n, seem plainly to\nindicate (as has before been remarked) that this genealogy was not\ndevised until after the Olympic games had become celebrated and\nnotorious throughout Greece.\n\nEpeios had no male issue, and was succeeded by his nephew Eleios, son\nof Euykyd\u00ea by the god Poseid\u00f4n: the name of the people was then changed\nfrom Epeians to Eleians. \u00c6t\u00f4lus, the brother of Epeios, having slain\nApis, son of Phor\u00f4neus, was compelled to flee from the country: he\ncrossed the Corinthian gulf and settled in the territory then called\nKur\u00eatis, but to which he gave the name of \u00c6t\u00f4lia.[311]\n\n  [311] Pausan. v. 1. 3-6; Apollod\u00f4r. i. 7, 6.\n\nThe son of Eleios,\u2014or, according to other accounts, of the god H\u00ealios,\nof Poseid\u00f4n, or of Phorbas,[312]\u2014is Augeas, whom we find mentioned\nin the Iliad as king of the Epeians or Eleians. Nest\u00f4r gives a long\nand circumstantial narrative of his own exploits at the head of his\nPylian countrymen against his neighbors the Epeians and their king\nAugeas, whom he defeated with great loss, slaying Mulios, the king\u2019s\nson-in-law, and acquiring a vast booty.[313] Augeas was rich in all\nsorts of rural wealth, and possessed herds of cattle so numerous, that\nthe dung of the animals accumulated in the stable or cattle enclosures\nbeyond all power of endurance. Eurystheus, as an insult to H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nimposed upon him the obligation of cleansing this stable: the hero,\ndisdaining to carry off the dung upon his shoulders, turned the\ncourse of the river Alpheios through the building, and thus swept the\nencumbrance away.[314] But Augeas, in spite of so signal a service,\nrefused to H\u00earakl\u00eas the promised reward, though his son Phyleus\nprotested against such treachery, and when he found that he could not\ninduce his father to keep faith, retired in sorrow and wrath to the\nisland of Dulichi\u00f4n.[315] To avenge the deceit practised upon him,\nH\u00earakl\u00eas invaded Elis; but Augeas had powerful auxiliaries, especially\nhis nephews, the two Molionids (sons of Poseid\u00f4n by Molion\u00ea, the wife\nof Akt\u00f4r), Eurytos and Kteatos. These two miraculous brothers, of\ntranscendent force, grew together,\u2014having one body, but two heads and\nfour arms.[316] Such was their irresistible might, that H\u00earakl\u00eas was\ndefeated and repelled from Elis: but presently the Eleians sent the two\nMolionid brothers as _The\u00f4ri_ (sacred envoys) to the Isthmian games,\nand H\u00earakl\u00eas, placing himself in ambush at Kle\u00f4n\u00e6, surprised and killed\nthem as they passed through. For this murderous act the Eleians in\nvain endeavored to obtain redress both at Corinth and at Argos; which\nis assigned as the reason for the self-ordained exclusion, prevalent\nthroughout all the historical age, that no Eleian athl\u00eate would ever\npresent himself as a competitor at the Isthmian games.[317] The\nMolionids being thus removed, H\u00earakl\u00eas again invaded Elis, and killed\nAugeas along with his children,\u2014all except Phyleus, whom he brought\nover from Dulichi\u00f4n, and put in possession of his father\u2019s kingdom.\nAccording to the more gentle narrative which Pausanias adopts, Augeas\nwas not killed, but pardoned at the request of Phyleus.[318] He was\nworshipped as a hero[319] even down to the time of that author.\n\n  [312] Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 5, 5; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 172. In all\n  probability, the old legend made Augeas the son of the god\n  H\u00ealios: H\u00ealios, Augeas and Agam\u00ead\u00ea are a triple series parallel\n  to the Corinthian genealogy, H\u00ealios, \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and M\u00eadia; not to\n  mention that the etymology of Augeas connects him with H\u00ealios.\n  Theocritus (xx. 55) designates him as the son of the god H\u00ealios,\n  through whose favor his cattle are made to prosper and multiply\n  with such astonishing success (xx. 117).\n\n  [313] Iliad, xi. 670-760; Pherekyd. Fragm. 57, Didot.\n\n  [314] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 13. \u1f5d\u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fb6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n  \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f64\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03af\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd,\n  \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, etc. (Pausan. v. 1. 7;\n  Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 5, 5).\n\n  It may not be improper to remark that this fable indicates a\n  purely pastoral condition, or at least a singularly rude state\n  of agriculture; and the way in which Pausanias recounts it goes\n  even beyond the genuine story: \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u1f70 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5. The slaves\n  of Odysseus however know what use to make of the dung heaped\n  before his outer fence (Odyss. xvii. 299); not so the purely\n  carnivorous and pastoral Cycl\u00f4ps (Odyss. ix. 329). The stabling\n  into which the cattle go from their pasture, is called \u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 in\n  Homer,\u2014\u1f18\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f74\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (Odyss. x.\n  411): compare Iliad, xviii. 575\u2014\u039c\u03c5\u03ba\u03b7\u03b8\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\n  \u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5.\n\n  The Augeas of Theocritus has abundance of wheat-land and\n  vineyard, as well as cattle: he ploughs his land three or four\n  times, and digs his vineyard diligently (xx. 20-32).\n\n  [315] The wrath and retirement of Phyleus is mentioned in the\n  Iliad (ii. 633), but not the cause of it.\n\n  [316] These singular properties were ascribed to them both in\n  the Hesiodic poems and by Pherekyd\u00eas (Schol. Ven. ad II. xi.\n  715-750, et ad II. xxiii. 638), but not in the Iliad. The poet\n  Ibykus (Fragm. 11, Schneid. ap. Athen\u00e6. ii. 57) calls them \u1f05\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u1f30\u03c3\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b3\u03c5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f60\u03ad\u1ff3 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03ad\u1ff3.\n\n  There were temples and divine honors to Zeus Moli\u00f4n (Lactantius.\n  de Fals\u00e2 Religione, i. 22).\n\n  [317] Pausan. v. 2, 4. The inscription cited by Pausanias\n  proves that this was the reason assigned by the Eleian athl\u00eates\n  themselves for the exclusion; but there were several different\n  stories.\n\n  [318] Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 7, 2. Diod\u00f4r. iv. 33. Pausan. v. 2, 2; 3,\n  2. It seems evident from these accounts that the genuine legend\n  represented H\u00earakl\u00eas as having been defeated by the Molionids:\n  the unskilful evasions both of Apollod\u00f4rus and Diod\u00f4rus betray\n  this. Pindar (Olymp. xi. 25-50) gives the story without any\n  flattery to H\u00earakl\u00eas.\n\n  [319] Pausan. v. 4, 1.\n\nIt was on occasion of this conquest of Elis, according to the old mythe\nwhich Pindar has ennobled in a magnificent ode, that H\u00earakl\u00eas first\nconsecrated the ground of Olympia, and established the Olympic games.\nSuch at least was one of the many fables respecting the origin of that\nmemorable institution.[320]\n\n  [320] The Armenian copy of Eusebius gives a different genealogy\n  respecting Elis and Pisa: A\u00ebthlius, Epeius, Endymi\u00f4n, Alexinus;\n  next \u0152nomaus and P\u00ealops, then H\u00earakl\u00eas. Some counted ten\n  generations, others _three_, between H\u00earakl\u00eas and Iphitus, who\n  renewed the discontinued Olympic games (see Armen. Euseb. copy c.\n  xxxii. p. 140).\n\nPhyleus, after having restored order in Elis, retired again to\nDulichi\u00f4n, and left the kingdom to his brother Agasthen\u00eas, which again\nbrings us into the Homeric series. For Polyxenos, son of Agasthen\u00eas, is\none of the four commanders of the Epeian forty ships in the Iliad, in\nconjunction with the two sons of Eurytos and Kteatos, and with Di\u00f4r\u00eas\nson of Amarynceus. Meg\u00eas, the son of Phyleus, commands the contingent\nfrom Dulichi\u00f4n and the Echinades.[321] Polyxenos returns safe from\nTroy, is succeeded by his son Amphimachos,\u2014named after the Epeian chief\nwho had fallen before Troy,\u2014and he again by another Eleios, in whose\ntime the D\u00f4rians and the H\u00earakleids invade Peloponn\u00easus.[322] These two\nnames, barren of actions or attributes, are probably introduced by the\ngenealogists whom Pausanias followed, to fill up the supposed interval\nbetween the Trojan war and the D\u00f4rian invasion.\n\n  [321] Iliad, ii. 615-630.\n\n  [322] Pausan. v. 3, 4.\n\nWe find the ordinary discrepancies in respect to the series and the\nmembers of this genealogy. Thus some called Epeios son of A\u00ebthlius,\nothers son of Endymi\u00f4n:[323] a third pedigree, which carries the\nsanction of Aristotle and is followed by Con\u00f4n, designated Eleios,\nthe first settler of Elis, as son of Poseid\u00f4n and Eurypyl\u00ea, daughter\nof Endymi\u00f4n, and Epeios and Alexis as the two sons of Eleios.[324]\nAnd Pindar himself, in his ode to Epharmostus the Locrian, introduces\nwith much emphasis another king of the Epeians named Opus, whose\ndaughter, pregnant by Zeus, was conveyed by that god to the old and\nchildless king Locrus: the child when born, adopted by Locrus and named\nOpus, became the eponymous hero of the city so called in Locris.[325]\nMoreover Hekat\u00e6us the Milesian not only affirmed (contrary both to the\nIliad and the Odyssey) that the Epeians and the Eleians were different\npeople, but also added that the Epeians had assisted H\u00earakl\u00eas in his\nexpedition against Augeas and Elis; a narrative very different from\nthat of Apollod\u00f4rus and Pausanias, and indicating besides that he must\nhave had before him a genealogy varying from theirs.[326]\n\n  [323] Schol. Pindar, Olymp. ix. 86.\n\n  [324] Schol. Ven. ad II. xi. 687; Con\u00f4n, Narrat. xv. ap. Scriptt.\n  Mythogr. West p. 130.\n\n  [325] Pindar, Olymp. ix. 62: Schol. _ibid._ 86. \u1f48\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f20\u03bd\n  \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1 \u1f28\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f23\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u039a\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6.\n\n  [326] \u1f19\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u039c\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f11\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f28\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u0391\u1f50\u03b3\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f2e\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd (Hekat. ap. Strab. viii. p. 341).\n\nIt has already been mentioned that \u00c6t\u00f4lus, son of Endymi\u00f4n, quitted\nPeloponn\u00easus in consequence of having slain Apis.[327] The country\non the north of the Corinthian gulf, between the rivers Eu\u00eanus and\nAchel\u00f4us, received from him the name of \u00c6t\u00f4lia instead of that of\nKur\u00eatis: he acquired possession of it after having slain D\u00f4rus,\nLaodokus and Polyp\u0153tes, sons of Apollo and Phthia, by whom he had been\nwell received. He had by his wife Prono\u00ea (the daughter of Phorbas) two\nsons, Pleur\u00f4n and Kalyd\u00f4n, and from them the two chief towns in \u00c6t\u00f4lia\nwere named.[328] Pleur\u00f4n married Xanthipp\u00ea, daughter of D\u00f4rus, and\nhad for his son Ag\u00ean\u00f4r, from whom sprang Portheus, or Portha\u00f4n, and\nDemonik\u00ea: Eu\u00eanos and Thestius were children of the latter by the god\nAr\u00eas.[329]\n\n  [327] Ephorus said that \u00c6t\u00f4lus had been expelled by Salm\u00f4neus\n  king of the Epeians and Pisat\u00e6 (ap. Strabo. viii. p. 357):\n  he must have had before him a different story and different\n  genealogy from that which is given in the text.\n\n  [328] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 7, 6. D\u00f4rus, son of Apollo and Phthia,\n  killed by \u00c6t\u00f4lus, after having hospitably received him, is here\n  mentioned. Nothing at all is known of this; but the conjunction\n  of names is such as to render it probable that there was some\n  legend connected with them: possibly the assistance given by\n  Apollo to the Kur\u00eates against the \u00c6t\u00f4lians, and the death of\n  Meleager by the hand of Apollo, related both in the Eoiai and the\n  Minyas (Pausan. x. 31, 2), may have been grounded upon it. The\n  story connects itself with what is stated by Apollod\u00f4rus about\n  D\u00f4rus son of Hell\u00ean (see _supra_, p. 136).\n\n  [329] According to the ancient genealogical poet Asius, Thestius\n  was son of Ag\u00ean\u00f4r the son of Pleur\u00f4n (Asii Fragm. 6, p. 413,\n  ed. Marktsch.). Compare the genealogy of \u00c6t\u00f4lia and the general\n  remarks upon it, in Brandst\u00e4ter, Geschichte des \u00c6tol. Landes,\n  etc., Berlin, 1844, p. 23 _seq._\n\nPortheus had three sons, Agrius, Melas and \u0152neus: among the offspring\nof Thestius were Alth\u00e6a and L\u00eada,[330]\u2014names which bring us to a period\nof interest in the legendary history. L\u00eada marries Tyndareus and\nbecomes mother of Helena and the Dioskuri: Alth\u00e6a marries \u0152neus, and\nhas, among other children, Meleager and Deianeira; the latter being\nbegotten by the god Dionysus, and the former by Ar\u00eas.[331] Tydeus also\nis his son, the father of Diom\u00ead\u00eas: warlike eminence goes hand in hand\nwith tragic calamity among the members of this memorable family.\n\n  [330] Respecting L\u00eada, see the statements of Ibykus, Pherekyd\u00eas,\n  Hellanikus, etc. (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 146). The reference to\n  the Corinthiaca of Eum\u00ealus is curious: it is a specimen of the\n  matters upon which these old genealogical poems dwelt.\n\n  [331] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 8, 1; Euripid\u00eas, Meleager, Frag. 1. The three\n  sons of Portheus are named in the Iliad (xiv. 116) as living at\n  Pleur\u00f4n and Kalyd\u00f4n. The name \u0152neus doubtless brings Dionysus\n  into the legend.\n\nWe are fortunate enough to find the legend of Alth\u00e6a and Meleager set\nforth at considerable length in the Iliad, in the speech addressed by\nPh\u0153nix to appease the wrath of Achilles. \u0152neus, king of Kalyd\u00f4n, in the\nvintage sacrifices which he offered to the gods, omitted to include\nArtemis: the misguided man either forgot her or cared not for her;[332]\nand the goddess, provoked by such an insult, sent against the vineyards\nof \u0152neus a wild boar, of vast size and strength, who tore up the trees\nby the root and laid prostrate all their fruit. So terrible was this\nboar, that nothing less than a numerous body of men could venture to\nattack him: Meleager, the son of \u0152neus, however, having got together a\nconsiderable number of companions, partly from the Kur\u00eates of Pleur\u00f4n,\nat length slew him. But the anger of Artemis was not yet appeased, and\nshe raised a dispute among the combatants respecting the possession of\nthe boar\u2019s head and hide,\u2014the trophies of victory. In this dispute,\nMeleager slew the brother of his mother Alth\u00e6a, prince of the Kur\u00eates\nof Pleur\u00f4n: these Kur\u00eates attacked the \u00c6t\u00f4lians of Kalyd\u00f4n in order\nto avenge their chief. So long as Meleager contended in the field\nthe \u00c6t\u00f4lians had the superiority. But he presently refused to come\nforth, indignant at the curses imprecated upon him by his mother: for\nAlth\u00e6a, wrung with sorrow for the death of her brother, flung herself\nupon the ground in tears, beat the earth violently with her hands,\nand implored Had\u00eas and Persephon\u00ea to inflict death upon Meleager,\u2014a\nprayer which the unrelenting Erinnys in Erebus heard but too well.\nSo keenly did the hero resent this behavior of his mother, that he\nkept aloof from the war; and the Kur\u00eates not only drove the \u00c6t\u00f4lians\nfrom the field, but assailed the walls and gates of Kalyd\u00f4n, and were\non the point of overwhelming its dismayed inhabitants. There was no\nhope of safety except in the arm of Meleager; but Meleager lay in his\nchamber by the side of his beautiful wife Kleopatra, the daughter of\nIdas, and heeded not the necessity. While the shouts of expected\nvictory were heard from the assailants at the gates, the ancient men\nof \u00c6t\u00f4lia and the priests of the gods earnestly besought Meleager to\ncome forth,[333] offering him his choice of the fattest land in the\nplain of Kalyd\u00f4n. His dearest friends, his father \u0152neus, his sisters,\nand even his mother herself added their supplications, but he remained\ninflexible. At length the Kur\u00eates penetrated into the town and began to\nburn it: at this last moment, Kleopatra his wife addressed to him her\npathetic appeal, to avert from her and from his family the desperate\nhorrors impending over them all. Meleager could no longer resist: he\nput on his armor, went forth from his chamber, and repelled the enemy.\nBut when the danger was over, his countrymen withheld from him the\nsplendid presents which they had promised, because he had rejected\ntheir prayers, and had come forth only when his own haughty caprice\ndictated.[334]\n\n  [332] \u1f2a \u03bb\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f22 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f00\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1ff7. (Iliad,\n  ix. 533). The destructive influence of At\u00ea is mentioned\n  before, v. 502. The piety of Xenoph\u00f4n reproduces this ancient\n  circumstance,\u2014\u039f\u1f34\u03bd\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b3\u03ae\u03c1\u1fb3 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, etc. (De\n  Venat. c. i.)\n\n  [333] These priests formed the Chorus in the Meleager of\n  Sophokl\u00eas (Schol. ad Iliad. _ib._ 575).\n\n  [334] Iliad, ix. 525-595.\n\nSuch is the legend of Meleager in the Iliad: a verse in the second book\nmentions simply the death of Meleager, without farther details, as a\nreason why Thoas appeared in command of the \u00c6t\u00f4lians before Troy.[335]\nThough the circumstance is indicated only indirectly, there seems\nlittle doubt that Homer must have conceived the death of the hero as\nbrought about by the maternal curse: the unrelenting Erinnys executed\nto the letter the invocations of Alth\u00e6a, though she herself must have\nbeen willing to retract them.\n\n  [335] Iliad, ii. 642.\n\nLater poets both enlarged and altered the fable. The Hesiodic Eoiai,\nas well as the old poem called the Minyas, represented Meleager as\nhaving been slain by Apollo, who aided the Kur\u00eates in the war; and\nthe incident of the burning brand, though quite at variance with\nHomer, is at least as old as the tragic poet Phrynichus, earlier than\n\u00c6schylus.[336] The M\u0153r\u00e6, or Fates, presenting themselves to Alth\u00e6a\nshortly after the birth of Meleager, predicted that the child would\ndie so soon as the brand then burning on the fire near at hand should\nbe consumed. Alth\u00e6a snatched it from the flames and extinguished it,\npreserving it with the utmost care, until she became incensed against\nMeleager for the death of her brother. She then cast it into the fire,\nand as soon as it was consumed the life of Meleager was brought to a\nclose.\n\n  [336] Pausan. x. 31. 2. The \u03a0\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9, a lost tragedy of\n  Phrynichus.\n\nWe know, from the sharp censure of Pliny, that Sophokl\u00eas heightened\nthe pathos of this subject by his account of the mournful death\nof Meleager\u2019s sisters, who perished from excess of grief. They\nwere changed into the birds called Meleagrides, and their\nnever-ceasing tears ran together into amber.[337] But in the hands\nof Euripid\u00eas\u2014whether originally through him or not,[338] we cannot\ntell\u2014Atalanta became the prominent figure and motive of the piece,\nwhile the party convened to hunt the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar was made to\ncomprise all the distinguished heroes from every quarter of Greece.\nIn fact, as Heyne justly remarks, this event is one of the four\naggregate dramas of Grecian heroic life,[339] along with the Argonautic\nexpedition, the siege of Th\u00eabes, and the Trojan war. To accomplish\nthe destruction of the terrific animal which Artemis in her wrath had\nsent forth, Meleager assembled not merely the choice youth among the\nKur\u00eates and \u00c6t\u00f4lians (as we find in the Iliad), but an illustrious\ntroop, including Kast\u00f4r and Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus, P\u00ealeus and\nTelam\u00f4n, Th\u00easeus and Peirithous, Ank\u00e6us and K\u00eapheus, Jas\u00f4n, Amphiaraus,\nAdm\u00eatus, Euryti\u00f4n and others. Nest\u00f4r and Ph\u0153nix, who appear as old men\nbefore the walls of Troy, exhibited their early prowess as auxiliaries\nto the suffering Kalyd\u00f4nians.[340] Conspicuous amidst them all stood\nthe virgin Atalanta, daughter of the Arcadian Sch\u0153neus; beautiful\nand matchless for swiftness of foot, but living in the forest as a\nhuntress and unacceptable to Aphrodit\u00ea.[341] Several of the heroes were\nslain by the boar, others escaped by various stratagems: at length\nAtalanta first shot him in the back, next Amphiaraus in the eye, and,\nlastly, Meleager killed him. Enamoured of the beauty of Atalanta,\nMeleager made over to her the chief spoils of the animal, on the plea\nthat she had inflicted the first wound. But his uncles, the brothers\nof Thestius, took them away from her, asserting their rights as next\nof kin,[342] if Meleager declined to keep the prize for himself: the\nlatter, exasperated at this behavior, slew them. Alth\u00e6a, in deep sorrow\nfor her brothers and wrath against her son, is impelled to produce the\nfatal brand which she had so long treasured up, and consign it to the\nflames.[343] The tragedy concludes with the voluntary death both of\nAlth\u00e6a and Kleopatra.\n\n  [337] Plin. H. N. xxxvii. 2, 11.\n\n  [338] There was a tragedy of \u00c6schylus called \u1f08\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7, of which\n  nothing remains (Bothe, \u00c6schyli Fragm. ix. p. 18).\n\n  Of the more recent dramatic writers, several selected Atalanta as\n  their subject (See Brandst\u00e4ter, Geschichte \u00c6toliens, p. 65).\n\n  [339] There was a poem of Stesichorus, \u03a3\u03c5\u03cc\u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9 (Stesichor.\n  Fragm. 15. p. 72).\n\n  [340] The catalogue of these heroes is in Apollod\u00f4r. i. 8, 2;\n  Ovid, Metamor. viii. 300; Hygin. fab. 173. Euripid\u00eas, in his play\n  of Meleager, gave an enumeration and description of the heroes\n  (see Fragm. 6 of that play, ed. Matth.). Nest\u00f4r, in this picture\n  of Ovid, however, does not appear quite so invincible as in his\n  own speeches in the Iliad. The mythographers thought it necessary\n  to assign a reason why H\u00earakl\u00eas was _not_ present at the\n  Kalyd\u00f4nian adventure: he was just at that time in servitude with\n  Omphal\u00ea in Lydia (Apollod. ii. 6, 3). This seems to have been the\n  idea of Ephorus, and it is much in his style of interpretation\n  (see Ephor. Fragm. 9. ed. Didot.).\n\n  [341] Euripid. Meleag. Fragm. vi. Matt.\u2014\n\n    \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u1fbd, \u1f08\u03c1\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7, \u03ba\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03cc\u03be\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1, etc.\n\n  There was a drama \u201cMeleager\u201d both of Sophokl\u00eas and Euripid\u00eas: of\n  the former hardly any fragments remain,\u2014a few more of the latter.\n\n  [342] Hyginus, fab. 229.\n\n  [343] Diod\u00f4r, iv. 34. Apoll\u00f4dorus (i. 8; 2-4) gives first the\n  usual narrative, including Atalanta; next, the Homeric narrative\n  with some additional circumstances, but not including either\n  Atalanta or the fire-brand on which Meleager\u2019s life depended. He\n  prefaces the latter with the words \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9, etc. Antoninus\n  Liberalis gives this second narrative only, without Atalanta,\n  from Nicander (Narrat. 2).\n\n  The Latin scenic poet, Attius, had devoted one of his tragedies\n  to this subject, taking the general story as given by Euripid\u00eas:\n  \u201cRemanet gloria apud me: exuvias dignavi Atalant\u00e6 dare,\u201d seems\n  to be the speech of Meleager. (Attii Fragm. 8, ap. Poet. Scen.\n  Lat. ed. Bothe, p. 215). The readers of the \u00c6neid will naturally\n  think of the swift and warlike virgin Camilla, as the parallel of\n  Atalanta.\n\nInteresting as the Arcadian huntress, Atalanta, is in herself, she is\nan intrusion, and not a very convenient intrusion, into the Homeric\nstory of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt, wherein another female Kleopatra,\nalready occupied the foreground.[344] But the more recent version\nbecame accredited throughout Greece, and was sustained by evidence\nwhich few persons in those days felt any inclination to controvert.\nFor Atalanta carried away with her the spoils and head of the boar\ninto Arcadia; and there for successive centuries hung the identical\nhide and the gigantic tusks of three feet in length, in the temple\nof Ath\u00ean\u00ea Alea at Tegea. Kallimachus mentions them as being there\npreserved, in the third century before the Christian \u00e6ra;[345] but the\nextraordinary value set upon them is best proved by the fact that the\nemperor Augustus took away the tusks from Tegea, along with the great\nstatue of Ath\u00ean\u00ea Alea, and conveyed them to Rome, to be there preserved\namong the public curiosities. Even a century and a half afterwards,\nwhen Pausanias visited Greece, the skin worn out with age was shown\nto him, while the robbery of the tusks had not been forgotten. Nor\nwere these relics of the boar the only memento preserved at Tegea of\nthe heroic enterprise. On the pediment of the temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea Alea,\nunparalleled in Peloponn\u00easus for beauty and grandeur, the illustrious\nstatuary Skopas had executed one of his most finished reliefs,\nrepresenting the Kalyd\u00f4nian hunt. Atalanta and Meleager were placed in\nthe front rank of the assailants, and Ank\u00e6us, one of the Tegean heroes,\nto whom the tusks of the boar had proved fatal,[346] was represented\nas sinking under his death-wound into the arms of his brother Epochos.\nAnd Pausanias observes, that the Tegeans, while they had manifested\nthe same honorable forwardness as other Arcadian communities in the\nconquest of Troy, the repulse of Xerx\u00eas, and the battle of Dip\u00e6 against\nSparta\u2014might fairly claim to themselves, through Ank\u00e6us and Atalanta,\nthat they alone amongst all Arcadians had participated in the glory of\nthe Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt.[347] So entire and unsuspecting is the faith\nboth of the Tegeans and of Pausanias in the past historical reality\nof this romantic adventure. Strabo indeed tries to transform the\nromance into something which has the outward semblance of history, by\nremarking that the quarrel respecting the boar\u2019s head and hide cannot\nhave been the real cause of war between the Kur\u00eates and the \u00c6t\u00f4lians;\nthe true ground of dispute (he contends) was probably the possession\nof a portion of territory.[348] His remarks on this head are analogous\nto those of Thucydid\u00eas and other critics, when they ascribe the Trojan\nwar, not to the rape of Helen, but to views of conquest or political\napprehensions. But he treats the general fact of the battle between\nthe Kur\u00eates and the \u00c6t\u00f4lians, mentioned in the Iliad, as something\nunquestionably real and historical\u2014recapitulating at the same time a\nvariety of discrepancies on the part of different authors, but not\ngiving any decision of his own respecting their truth or falsehood.\n\n  [344] The narrative of Apollod\u00f4rus reads awkwardly\u2014\u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1 \u039a\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be \u1f08\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, etc. (i. 8, 2).\n\n  [345] Kallimachus, Hymn. ad Dian. 217.\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f54 \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b4\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2\n    \u039c\u03ad\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03ca\u03b1 \u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f40\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n  [346] See Pherekyd. Frag. 81, ed. Didot.\n\n  [347] Pausan. viii. 45, 4; 46, 1-3; 47, 2. Lucian, adv. Indoctum,\n  c. 14. t. iii. p. 111, Reiz.\n\n  The officers placed in charge of the public curiosities or\n  wonders at Rome (\u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd) affirmed that one of the\n  tusks had been accidentally broken in the voyage from Greece: the\n  other was kept in the temple of Bacchus in the Imperial Gardens.\n\n  It is numbered among the memorable exploits of Th\u00easeus that he\n  vanquished and killed a formidable and gigantic sow, in the\n  territory of Krommy\u00f4n near Corinth. According to some critics,\n  this Krommy\u00f4nian sow was the mother of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar\n  (Strabo, viii. p. 380).\n\n  [348] Strabo, x. p. 466. \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u039f\u1f30\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f41 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03a0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1fc7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03b4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2,\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, etc. This remark is also similar to Mr.\n  Payne Knight\u2019s criticism on the true causes of the Trojan war,\n  which were (he tells us) of a political character, independent of\n  Helen and her abduction (Prolegom. ad Homer. c. 53).\n\nIn the same manner as Atalanta was intruded into the Kalyd\u00f4nian hunt,\nso also she seems to have been introduced into the memorable funeral\ngames celebrated after the decease of Pelias at I\u00f4lkos, in which she\nhad no place at the time when the works on the chest of Kypselus were\nexecuted.[349] But her native and genuine locality is Arcadia; where\nher race-course, near to the town of Methydrion, was shown even in\nthe days of Pausanias.[350] This race-course had been the scene of\ndestruction for more than one unsuccessful suitor. For Atalanta,\naverse to marriage, had proclaimed that her hand should only be won\nby the competitor who could surpass her in running: all who tried and\nfailed were condemned to die, and many were the persons to whom her\nbeauty and swiftness, alike unparalleled, had proved fatal. At length\nMeilani\u00f4n, who had vainly tried to win her affections by assiduous\nservices in her hunting excursions, ventured to enter the perilous\nlists. Aware that he could not hope to outrun her except by stratagem,\nhe had obtained by the kindness of Aphrodit\u00ea, three golden apples from\nthe garden of the Hesperides, which he successively let fall near\nto her while engaged in the race. The maiden could not resist the\ntemptation of picking them up, and was thus overcome: she became the\nwife of Meilani\u00f4n and the mother of the Arcadian Parthenop\u00e6us, one of\nthe seven chiefs who perished in the siege of Th\u00eabes.[351]\n\n  [349] Compare Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 9, 2, and Pausan. v. 17, 4. She is\n  made to _wrestle_ with P\u00ealeus at these funeral games, which seems\n  foreign to her character.\n\n  [350] Pausan. viii. 35, 8.\n\n  [351] Respecting the varieties in this interesting story,\n  see Apollod. iii. 9, 2; Hygin. f. 185; Ovid, Metam. x.\n  560-700; Propert. i. 1, 20; \u00c6lian, V. H. xiii. i. \u039c\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2. Aristophan. Lysistrat. 786 and Schol. In the\n  ancient representation on the chest of Kypselus (Paus. v. 19, 1),\n  Meilani\u00f4n was exhibited standing near Atalanta, who was holding a\n  fawn: no match or competition in running was indicated.\n\n  There is great discrepancy in the naming and patronymic\n  description of the parties in the story. Three different persons\n  are announced as fathers of Atalanta, Sch\u0153neus, Jasus and\n  M\u00e6nalos; the successful lover in Ovid (and seemingly in Euripid\u00eas\n  also) is called Hippomen\u00eas, not Meilani\u00f4n. In the Hesiodic poems\n  Atalanta was daughter of Sch\u0153neus; Hellanikus called her daughter\n  of Jasus. See Apollod\u00f4r. _l. c._; Kallimach. Hymn to Dian. 214,\n  with the note of Spanheim; Schol. Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 150; Schol.\n  Theocr. Idyll. iii. 40; also the ample commentary of Bachet de\n  Meziriac, Sur les Ep\u00eetres d\u2019Ovide, vol. i. p. 366. Servius (ad\n  Virg. Eclog. vi. 61; \u00c6neid, iii. 113) calls Atalanta a native of\n  Scyros.\n\n  Both the ancient scholiasts (see Schol. Apoll. Rhod. i. 769) and\n  the modern commentators, Spanheim and Heyne, seek to escape this\n  difficulty by supposing two Atalantas,\u2014an Arcadian and a B\u0153\u00f4tian:\n  assuming the principle of their conjecture to be admissible, they\n  ought to suppose at least three.\n\n  Certainly, if personages of the Grecian mythes are to be treated\n  as historically real, and their adventures as so many exaggerated\n  and miscolored facts, it will be necessary to repeat the process\n  of multiplying entities to an infinite extent. And this is one\n  among the many reasons for rejecting the fundamental supposition.\n\n  But when we consider these personages as purely legendary, so\n  that an historical basis can neither be affirmed nor denied\n  respecting them, we escape the necessity of such inconvenient\n  stratagems. The test of identity is then to be sought in the\n  attributes, not in the legal description,\u2014in the predicates, not\n  in the subject. Atalanta, whether born of one father or another,\n  whether belonging to one place or another, is beautiful, cold,\n  repulsive, daring, swift of foot and skilful with the bow,\u2014these\n  attributes constitute her identity. The Scholiast on Theocritus\n  (iii. 40), in vindicating his supposition that there were two\n  Atalantas, draws a distinction founded upon this very principle:\n  he says that the B\u0153\u00f4tian Atalanta was \u03c4\u03bf\u03be\u03bf\u03c4\u1f76\u03c2, and the Arcadian\n  Atalanta \u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03b1. But this seems an over-refinement: both the\n  shooting and the running go to constitute an accomplished\n  huntress.\n\n  In respect to Parthenop\u00e6us, called by Euripid\u00eas and by so many\n  others the son of Atalanta, it is of some importance to add,\n  that Apollod\u00f4rus, Aristarchus, and Antimachus, the author of the\n  Thebaid, assigned to him a pedigree entirely different,\u2014making\n  him an Argeian, the son of Talaos and Lysimach\u00ea, and brother of\n  Adrastus. (Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 13; Aristarch. ap. Schol. Soph. \u0152d.\n  Col. 1320; Antimachus ap. Schol. \u00c6schyl. Sep. Theb. 532; and\n  Schol. Supplem. ad Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. t. viii. p. 461, ed. Matth.\n  Apollod\u00f4rus is in fact inconsistent with himself in another\n  passage).\n\nWe have yet another female in the family of \u0152neus, whose name the\nlegend has immortalized. His daughter Deianeira was sought in marriage\nby the river Achel\u00f4us, who presented himself in various shapes,\nfirst as a serpent and afterwards as a bull. From the importunity of\nthis hateful suitor she was rescued by the arrival of H\u00earakl\u00eas, who\nencountered Achel\u00f4us, vanquished him and broke off one of his horns,\nwhich Achel\u00f4us ransomed by surrendering to him the horn of Amaltheia,\nendued with the miraculous property of supplying the possessor with\nabundance of any food or drink which he desired. H\u00earakl\u00eas was rewarded\nfor his prowess by the possession of Deianeira, and he made over the\nhorn of Amaltheia as his marriage-present to \u0152neus.[352] Compelled\nto leave the residence of \u0152neus in consequence of having in a fit of\nanger struck the youthful attendant Eunomus, and involuntarily killed\nhim,[353] H\u00earakl\u00eas retired to Trachin, crossing the river Eu\u00eanus at the\nplace where the Centaur Nessus was accustomed to carry over passengers\nfor hire. Nessus carried over Deianeira, but when he had arrived on\nthe other side, began to treat her with rudeness, upon which H\u00earakl\u00eas\nslew him with an arrow tinged by the poison of the Lern\u00e6an hydra. The\ndying Centaur advised Deianeira to preserve the poisoned blood which\nflowed from his wound, telling her that it would operate as a philtre\nto regain for her the affections of H\u00earakl\u00eas, in case she should ever\nbe threatened by a rival. Some time afterwards the hero saw and loved\nthe beautiful Iol\u00ea, daughter of Eurytos, king of \u0152chalia: he stormed\nthe town, killed Eurytos, and made Iol\u00ea his captive. The misguided\nDeianeira now had recourse to her supposed philtre: she sent as a\npresent to H\u00earakl\u00eas a splendid tunic, imbued secretly with the poisoned\nblood of the Centaur. H\u00earakl\u00eas adorned himself with the tunic on the\noccasion of offering a solemn sacrifice to Zeus on the promontory of\nK\u00ean\u00e6on in Eub\u0153a: but the fatal garment, when once put on, clung to him\nindissolubly, burnt his skin and flesh, and occasioned an agony of pain\nfrom which he was only relieved by death. Deianeira slew herself in\ndespair at this disastrous catastrophe.[354]\n\n  [352] Sophokl. Trachin. 7. The horn of Amaltheia was described by\n  Pherekyd\u00eas (Apollod. ii. 7, 5); see also Strabo, x. p. 458 and\n  Diod\u00f4r. iv. 35, who cites an interpretation of the fables (\u03bf\u1f31\n  \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c2) to the effect that it was symbolical\n  of an embankment of the unruly river by H\u00earakl\u00eas, and consequent\n  recovery of very fertile land.\n\n  [353] Hellanikus (ap. Athen. ix. p. 410) mentioning this\n  incident, in two different works, called the attendant by two\n  different names.\n\n  [354] The beautiful drama of the Trachini\u00e6 has rendered this\n  story familiar: compare Apollod. ii. 7, 7. Hygin. f. 36. Diod\u00f4r.\n  iv. 36-37.\n\n  The capture of \u0152chalia (\u039f\u1f30\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f05\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) was celebrated in a\n  very ancient epic poem by Kreophylos, of the Homeric and not of\n  the Hesiodic character: it passed with many as the work of Homer\n  himself. (See D\u00fcntzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr\u00e6cor. p. 8. Welcker, Der\n  Epische Cyclus, p. 229). The same subject was also treated in\n  the Hesiodic Catalogue, or in the Eoiai (see Hesiod, Fragm. 129,\n  ed. Marktsch.): the number of the children of Eurytos was there\n  enumerated.\n\n  This exploit seems constantly mentioned as the last performed by\n  H\u00earakl\u00eas, and as immediately preceding his death or apotheosis on\n  Mount \u0152ta: but whether the legend of Deianeira and the poisoned\n  tunic be very old, we cannot tell.\n\n  The tale of the death of Iphitos, son of Eurytos, by H\u00earakl\u00eas, is\n  as ancient as the Odyssey (xxi. 19-40): but it is there stated,\n  that Eurytos dying left his memorable bow to his son Iphitos (the\n  bow is given afterwards by Iphitos to Odysseus, and is the weapon\n  so fatal to the suitors),\u2014a statement not very consistent with\n  the story that \u0152chalia was taken and Eurytos slain by H\u00earakl\u00eas.\n  It is plain that these were distinct and contradictory legends.\n  Compare Soph. Trachin. 260-285 (where Iphitos dies before\n  Eurytos), not only with the passage just cited from the Odyssey,\n  but also with Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm. 34, Didot.\n\n  Hyginus (f. 33) differs altogether in the parentage of Deianeira:\n  he calls her daughter of Dexamenos: his account of her marriage\n  with H\u00earakl\u00eas is in every respect at variance with Apollod\u00f4rus.\n  In the latter, Mn\u00easimach\u00ea is the daughter of Dexamenos; H\u00earakl\u00eas\n  rescues her from the importunities of the Centaur Euryti\u00f4n (ii.\n  5, 5).\n\nWe have not yet exhausted the eventful career of \u0152neus and his\nfamily\u2014ennobled among the \u00c6t\u00f4lians especially, both by religious\nworship and by poetical eulogy\u2014and favorite themes not merely in some\nof the Hesiodic poems, but also in other ancient epic productions,\nthe Alkm\u00e6\u00eanis and the Cyclic Th\u00eabais.[355] By another marriage, \u0152neus\nhad for his son Tydeus, whose poetical celebrity is attested by the\nmany different accounts given both of the name and condition of his\nmother. Tydeus, having slain his cousins, the sons of Melas, who were\nconspiring against \u0152neus, was forced to become an exile, and took\nrefuge at Argos with Adrastus, whose daughter Deipyl\u00ea he married. The\nissue of this marriage was Diom\u00ead\u00eas, whose brilliant exploits in the\nsiege of Troy were not less celebrated than those of his father at the\nsiege of Th\u00eabes. After the departure of Tydeus, \u0152neus was deposed by\nthe sons of Agrios, and fell into extreme poverty and wretchedness,\nfrom which he was only rescued by his grandson Diom\u00ead\u00eas, after the\nconquest of Troy.[356] The sufferings of this ancient warrior, and\nthe final restoration and revenge by Diom\u00ead\u00eas, were the subject of a\nlost tragedy of Euripid\u00eas, which even the ridicule of Aristophan\u00eas\ndemonstrates to have been eminently pathetic.[357]\n\n  [355] See the references in Apollod. i, 8, 4-5. Pindar, Isthm.\n  iv. 32. \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f18\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03c4\u03c9\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c6\u03b1\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u039f\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u0390\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1f76, etc.\n\n  [356] Hekat. Fragm. 341, Didot. In this story \u0152neus is connected\n  with the first discovery of the vine and the making of wine\n  (\u03bf\u1f36\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2): compare Hygin. f. 129, and Servius ad Virgil. Georgic.\n  i. 9.\n\n  [357] See Welcker (Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. ii. p. 583) on the lost\n  tragedy called \u0152neus.\n\nThough the genealogy just given of \u0152neus is in part Homeric, and\nseems to have been followed generally by the mythographers, yet\nwe find another totally at variance with it in Hekat\u00e6us, which he\ndoubtless borrowed from some of the old poets: the simplicity of the\nstory annexed to it seems to attest its antiquity. Orestheus, son of\nDeukali\u00f4n, first passed into \u00c6t\u00f4lia, and acquired the kingdom: he\nwas father of Phytios, who was father of \u0152neus. \u00c6t\u00f4lus was son of\n\u0152neus.[358]\n\n  [358] Timokl\u00eas, Comic. ap. Athen\u00e6. vii. p. 223.\u2014\n\n    \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6; \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039f\u1f30\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1.\n\n  Ovid. Heroid. ix. 153.\u2014\n\n    \u201cHeu! devota domus! Solio sedet Agrios alto\n      \u0152nea desertum nuda senecta premit.\u201d\n\n  The account here given is in Hyginus (f. 175): but it is in many\n  points different both from Apollod\u00f4rus (i. 8, 6; Pausan. ii.\n  25) and Pherekyd\u00eas (Fragm. 83, Didot). It seems to be borrowed\n  from the lost tragedy of Euripid\u00eas. Compare Schol. ad Aristoph.\n  Acharn. 417. Antonin. Liberal. c. 37. In the Iliad, \u0152neus is dead\n  before the Trojan war (ii. 641).\n\n  The account of Ephorus again is different (ap. Strabo. x. p.\n  462); he joins Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n with Diom\u00ead\u00eas: but his narrative has the\n  air of a tissue of quasi-historical conjectures, intended to\n  explain the circumstance that the \u00c6t\u00f4lian Diom\u00ead\u00eas is king of\n  Argos during the Trojan war.\n\n  Pausanias and Apollod\u00f4rus affirm that \u0152neus was buried at \u0152no\u00ea\n  between Argos and Mantineia, and they connect the name of this\n  place with him. But it seems more reasonable to consider him as\n  the eponymous hero of \u0152niad\u00e6 in \u00c6t\u00f4lia.\n\nThe original migration of \u00c6tolus from Elis to \u00c6t\u00f4lia\u2014and the\nsubsequent establishment in Elis of Oxylus, his descendant in the\ntenth generation, along with the D\u00f4rian invaders of Peloponn\u00easus\u2014were\ncommemorated by two inscriptions, one in the agora of Elis, the other\nin that of the \u00c6t\u00f4lian chief town, Thermum, engraved upon the statues\nof \u00c6t\u00f4lus and Oxylus,[359] respectively.\n\n  [359] Ephor. Fragm. 29. Didot ap. Strab. x.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nTHE PELOPIDS.\n\n\nAmong the ancient legendary genealogies, there was none which figured\nwith greater splendor, or which attracted to itself a higher degree\nof poetical interest and pathos, than that of the Pelopids\u2014Tantalus,\nPelops, Atreus and Thyest\u00eas, Agamemn\u00f4n and Menelaus and \u00c6gisthus, Helen\nand Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, Orest\u00eas and Elektra and Hermion\u00ea. Each of these\ncharacters is a star of the first magnitude in the Grecian hemisphere:\neach name suggests the idea of some interesting romance or some\nharrowing tragedy: the curse which taints the family from the beginning\ninflicts multiplied wounds at every successive generation. So, at\nleast, the story of the Pelopids presents itself, after it had been\nsuccessively expanded and decorated by epic, lyric and tragic poets. It\nwill be sufficient to touch briefly upon events with which every reader\nof Grecian poetry is more or less familiar, and to offer some remarks\nupon the way in which they were colored and modified by different\nGrecian authors.\n\nPelops is the eponym or name-giver of the Peloponn\u00easus: to find an\neponym for every conspicuous local name was the invariable turn of\nGrecian retrospective fancy. The name Peloponn\u00easus is not to be found\neither in the Iliad or the Odyssey, nor any other denomination which\ncan be attached distinctly and specially to the entire peninsula. But\nwe meet with the name in one of the most ancient post-Homeric poems of\nwhich any fragments have been preserved\u2014the Cyprian Verses\u2014a poem which\nmany (seemingly most persons) even of the contemporaries of Herodotus\nascribed to the author of the Iliad, though Herodotus contradicts the\nopinion.[360] The attributes by which the Pelopid Agamemn\u00f4n and his\nhouse are marked out and distinguished from the other heroes of the\nIliad, are precisely those which Grecian imagination would naturally\nseek in an eponymus\u2014superior wealth, power, splendor and regality.\nNot only Agamemn\u00f4n himself, but his brother Menelaus, is \u201cmore of a\nking\u201d even than Nest\u00f4r or Diom\u00ead\u00eas. The gods have not given to the\nking of the \u201cmuch-golden\u201d Myk\u00ean\u00e6 greater courage, or strength, or\nability, than to various other chiefs; but they have conferred upon\nhim a marked superiority in riches, power and dignity, and have thus\nsingled him out as the appropriate leader of the forces.[361] He enjoys\nthis pre\u00ebminence as belonging to a privileged family and as inheriting\nthe heaven-descended sceptre of Pelops, the transmission of which is\ndescribed by Homer in a very remarkable way. The sceptre was made \u201cby\nH\u00eaph\u00e6stos, who presented it to Zeus; Zeus gave it to Herm\u00eas, Herm\u00eas\nto the charioteer Pelops; Pelops gave it to Atreus, the ruler of\nmen; Atreus at his death left it to Thyest\u00eas, the rich cattle-owner;\nThyest\u00eas in his turn left it to his nephew Agamemn\u00f4n to carry, that he\nmight hold dominion over many islands and over all Argos.\u201d[362]\n\n  [360] Hesiod. ii. 117. Fragment. Epicc. Gr\u00e6c. D\u00fcntzer, ix.\n  \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1, 8.\u2014\n\n                \u0391\u1f36\u03c8\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u039b\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2\n    \u03a4\u03b1\u03b0\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03ad\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b8\u1f7c\u03c2,\n    \u1f08\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03b4\u03ad\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u03a4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c9 \u03a0\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n  Also the Homeric Hymn. Apoll. 419, 430, and Tyrt\u00e6us, Fragm. 1.\u2014\n\n    (~\u0395\u1f50\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1~)\u2014\u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03bd \u03a0\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1.\n\n  The Schol. ad Iliad, ix. 246, intimates that the name\n  \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 occurred in one or more of the Hesiodic epics.\n\n  [361] Iliad, ix. 37. Compare ii. 580. Diom\u00ead\u00eas addresses\n  Agamemn\u00f4n\u2014\n\n    \u03a3\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03c7\u03b1 \u03b4\u1ff6\u03ba\u03b5 \u039a\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u00b7\n    \u03a3\u03ba\u03ae\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1ff6\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f54 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1ff6\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f45,\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  A similar contrast is drawn by Nest\u00f4r (Il. i. 280) between\n  Agamemn\u00f4n and Achilles. Nest\u00f4r says to Agamemn\u00f4n (Il. ix. 69)\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b7, \u03c3\u1f7a \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u00b7 \u03c3\u1f7a \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 ~\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2~ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  And this attribute attaches to Menelaus as well as to his\n  brother. For when Diom\u00ead\u00eas is about to choose his companion\n  for the night expedition into the Trojan camp, Agamemn\u00f4n thus\n  addresses him (x. 232):\n\n    \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f15\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd \u03b3\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03bd \u03ba\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\n    \u03a6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03ac\u03b1\u03c3\u03af \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u00b7\n    \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03cd \u03b3\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u1fc7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u1f76, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\n    \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c3\u1f7a \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c7\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f40\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f30\u03b4\u03bf\u1fd6 \u03b5\u1f34\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd\n    \u1f18\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f74\u03bd \u1f41\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd.\n    \u1f69\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f14\u03b4\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u1ff7 \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u1ff3.\n\n  [362] Iliad, ii. 101.\n\nWe have here the unrivalled wealth and power of the \u201cking of men,\nAgamemn\u00f4n,\u201d traced up to his descent from Pelops, and accounted for,\nin harmony with the recognized epical agencies, by the present of\nthe special sceptre of Zeus through the hands of Herm\u00eas; the latter\nbeing the wealth-giving god, whose blessing is most efficacious\nin furthering the process of acquisition, whether by theft or by\naccelerated multiplication of flocks and herds.[363] The wealth and\nprincely character of the Atreids were proverbial among the ancient\nepic poets. Paris not only carries away Hellen, but much property along\nwith her:[364] the house of Menelaus, when T\u00ealemachus visits it in the\nOdyssey, is so resplendent with gold and silver and rare ornament,[365]\nas to strike the beholder with astonishment and admiration. The\nattributes assigned to Tantalus, the father of Pelops, are in\nconformity with the general idea of the family\u2014superhuman abundance\nand enjoyments, and intimate converse with the gods, to such a degree\nthat his head is turned, and he commits inexpiable sin. But though\nTantalus himself is mentioned, in one of the most suspicious passages\nof the Odyssey (as suffering punishment in the under-world), he is\nnot announced, nor is any one else announced, as father of Pelops,\nunless we are to construe the lines in the Iliad as implying that the\nlatter was son of Herm\u00eas. In the conception of the author of the Iliad,\nthe Pelopids are, if not of divine origin, at least a mortal breed\nspecially favored and ennobled by the gods\u2014beginning with Pelops, and\nlocalized at Myk\u00ean\u00e6. No allusion is made to any connection of Pelops\neither with Pisa or with Lydia.\n\n  [363] Iliad, xiv. 491. Hesiod. Theog. 444. Homer, Hymn. Mercur.\n  526-568, \u1f4c\u03bb\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03c9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b1 \u1fe5\u03ac\u03b2\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd. Compare\n  Eustath. ad Iliad. xvi. 182.\n\n  [364] Iliad, iii. 72; vii. 363. In the Hesiodic Eoiai was the\n  following couplet (Fragm. 55. p. 43, D\u00fcntzer):\u2014\n\n    \u1f09\u03bb\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f48\u03bb\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b4\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd,\n    \u039d\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  Again, Tyrt\u00e6us, Fragm. 9, 4.\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f30 \u03a4\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c9 \u03a0\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7, etc.\n\n  [365] Odyss. iv. 45-71.\n\nThe legend which connected Tantalus and Pelops with Mount Sipylus\nmay probably have grown out of the \u00c6olic settlements at Magn\u00easia and\nKym\u00ea. Both the Lydian origin and the Pisatic sovereignty of Pelops\nare adapted to times later than the Iliad, when the Olympic games had\nacquired to themselves the general reverence of Greece, and had come to\nserve as the religious and recreative centre of the Peloponn\u00easus\u2014and\nwhen the Lydian and Phrygian heroic names, Midas and Gyg\u00eas, were the\ntypes of wealth and luxury, as well as of chariot driving, in the\nimagination of a Greek. The inconsiderable villages of the Pisatid\nderived their whole importance from the vicinity of Olympia: they are\nnot deemed worthy of notice in the Catalogue of Homer. Nor could the\ngenealogy which connected the eponym of the entire peninsula with\nPisa have obtained currency in Greece unless it had been sustained\nby pre\u00ebstablished veneration for the locality of Olympia. But if the\nsovereign of the humble Pisa was to be recognized as forerunner of the\nthrice-wealthy princes of Myk\u00ean\u00e6, it became necessary to assign some\nexplanatory cause of his riches. Hence the supposition of his being\nan immigrant, son of a wealthy Lydian named Tantalus, who was the\noffspring of Zeus and Plout\u00f4. Lydian wealth and Lydian chariot-driving\nrendered Pelops a fit person to occupy his place in the legend, both\nas ruler of Pisa and progenitor of the Myken\u00e6an Atreids. Even with the\nadmission of these two circumstances there is considerable difficulty,\nfor those who wish to read the legends as consecutive history, in\nmaking the Pelopids pass smoothly and plausibly from Pisa to Myk\u00ean\u00e6.\n\nI shall briefly recount the legends of this great heroic family as they\ncame to stand in their full and ultimate growth, after the localization\nof Pelops at Pisa had been tacked on as a preface to Homer\u2019s version of\nthe Pelopid genealogy.\n\nTantalus, residing near Mount Sipylus in Lydia, had two children,\nPelops and Niob\u00ea. He was a man of immense possessions and pre\u00ebminent\nhappiness, above the lot of humanity: the gods communicated with him\nfreely, received him at their banquets, and accepted of his hospitality\nin return. Intoxicated with such prosperity, Tantalus became guilty of\ngross wickedness. He stole nectar and ambrosia from the table of the\ngods, and revealed their secrets to mankind: he killed and served up to\nthem at a feast his own son Pelops. The gods were horror-struck when\nthey discovered the meal prepared for them: Zeus restored the mangled\nyouth to life, and as D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, then absorbed in grief for the loss\nof her daughter Persephon\u00ea, had eaten a portion of the shoulder, he\nsupplied an ivory shoulder in place of it. Tantalus expiated his guilt\nby exemplary punishment. He was placed in the under-world, with fruit\nand water seemingly close to him, yet eluding his touch as often as\nhe tried to grasp them and leaving his hunger and thirst incessant and\nunappeased.[366] Pindar, in a very remarkable passage, finds this old\nlegend revolting to his feelings: he rejects the tale of the flesh of\nPelops having been served up and eaten, as altogether unworthy of the\ngods.[367]\n\n  [366] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 77. Hom. Odyss. xi. 582. Pindar gives a\n  different version of the punishment inflicted on Tantalus: a vast\n  stone was perpetually impending over his head, and threatening to\n  fall (Olymp. i. 56; Isthm. vii. 20).\n\n  [367] Pindar, Olymp. i. 45. Compare the sentiment of Iphigeneia\n  in Euripid\u00eas, Iph. Taur. 387.\n\nNiob\u00ea, the daughter of Tantalus, was married to Amphi\u00f4n, and had a\nnumerous and flourishing offspring of seven sons and seven daughters.\nThough accepted as the intimate friend and companion of L\u00eat\u00f4, the\nmother of Apollo and Artemas,[368] she was presumptuous enough to\ntriumph over that goddess, and to place herself on a footing of higher\ndignity, on account of the superior number of her children. Apollo\nand Artemas avenged this insult by killing all the sons and all the\ndaughters: Niob\u00ea, thus left a childless and disconsolate mother, wept\nherself to death, and was turned into a rock, which the later Greeks\ncontinued always to identify on Mount Sipylus.[369]\n\n  [368] Sapph\u00f4 (Fragm. 82, Schneidewin)\u2014\n\n    \u039b\u03b1\u03c4\u1f7c \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039d\u03b9\u03cc\u03b2\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  Sapph\u00f4 assigned to Niob\u00ea eighteen children (Aul. Gell. N. A. iv.\n  \u0394. xx. 7); Hesiod gave twenty; Homer twelve (Apollod. iii. 5).\n\n  The Lydian historian Xanthus gave a totally different version\n  both of the genealogy and of the misfortunes of Niob\u00ea (Parthen.\n  Narr. 33).\n\n  [369] Ovid, Metam. vi. 164-311. Pausan. i. 21, 5; viii. 2, 3.\n\nSome authors represented Pelops as not being a Lydian, but a king\nof Paphlag\u00f4nia; by others it was said that Tantalus, having become\ndetested from his impieties, had been expelled from Asia by Ilus the\nking of Troy,\u2014an incident which served the double purpose of explaining\nthe transit of Pelops to Greece, and of imparting to the siege of\nTroy by Agamemn\u00f4n the character of retribution for wrongs done to his\nancestor.[370] When Pelops came over to Greece, he found \u0152nomaus,\nson of the god Ar\u00eas and Harpinna, in possession of the principality\nof Pisa, immediately bordering on the district of Olympia. \u0152nomaus,\nhaving been apprized by an oracle that death would overtake him if he\npermitted his daughter Hippodameia to marry, refused to give her in\nmarriage except to some suitor who should beat him in a chariot-race\nfrom Olympia to the isthmus of Corinth;[371] the ground here selected\nfor the legendary victory of Pelops deserves attention, inasmuch as\nit is a line drawn from the assumed centre of Peloponn\u00easus to its\nextremity, and thus comprises the whole territory with which Pelops\nis connected as eponym. Any suitor overmatched in the race was doomed\nto forfeit his life; and the fleetness of the Pisan horses, combined\nwith the skill of the charioteer Myrtilus, had already caused thirteen\nunsuccessful competitors to perish by the lance of \u0152nomaus.[372] Pelops\nentered the lists as a suitor: his prayers moved the god Poseid\u00f4n to\nsupply him with a golden chariot and winged horses; or according to\nanother story, he captivated the affections of Hippodameia herself,\nwho persuaded the charioteer Myrtilus to loosen the wheels of \u0152nomaus\nbefore he started, so that the latter was overturned and perished in\nthe race. Having thus won the hand of Hippodameia, Pelops became Prince\nof Pisa.[373] He put to death the charioteer Myrtilus, either from\nindignation at his treachery to \u0152nomaus,[374] or from jealousy on the\nscore of Hippodameia: but Myrtilus was the son of Herm\u00eas, and though\nPelops erected a temple in the vain attempt to propitiate that god,\nhe left a curse upon his race which future calamities were destined\npainfully to work out.[375]\n\n  [370] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 358, and Schol.; Ister. Fragment. 59,\n  Dindorf; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 74.\n\n  [371] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 74.\n\n  [372] Pausanias (vi. 21, 7) had read their names in the Hesiodic\n  Eoiai.\n\n  [373] Pindar, Olymp. i. 140. The chariot race of Pelops and\n  \u0152nomaus was represented on the chest of Kypselus at Olympia: the\n  horses of the former were given as having wings (Pausan. v. 17,\n  4). Pherekyd\u00eas gave the same story (ap. Schol. ad Soph. Elect.\n  504).\n\n  [374] It is noted by Herodotus and others as a remarkable fact,\n  that no mules were ever bred in the Eleian territory: an Eleian\n  who wished to breed a mule sent his mare for the time out of\n  the region. The Eleians themselves ascribed this ph\u00e6nomenon to\n  a disability brought on the land by a curse from the lips of\n  \u0152nomaus (Herod. iv. 30; Plutarch, Qu\u00e6st. Gr\u00e6c. p. 303).\n\n  [375] Paus. v. 1, 1; Sophok. Elektr. 508; Eurip. Orest. 985, with\n  Schol., Plato, Kratyl. p. 395.\n\nPelops had a numerous issue by Hippodameia: Pittheus, Tr\u0153zen and\nEpidaurus, the eponyms of the two Argolic cities so called, are said\nto have been among them: Atreus and Thyest\u00eas were also his sons, and\nhis daughter Nikipp\u00ea married Sthenelus of Myk\u00ean\u00e6, and became the\nmother of Eurystheus.[376] We hear nothing of the principality of\nPisa afterwards: the Pisatid villages became absorbed into the larger\naggregate of Elis, after a vain struggle to maintain their separate\nright of presidency over the Olympic festival. But the legend ran that\nPelops left his name to the whole peninsula: according to Thucydid\u00eas,\nhe was enabled to do this because of the great wealth which he had\nbrought with him from Lydia into a poor territory. The historian leaves\nout all the romantic interest of the genuine legends\u2014preserving only\nthis one circumstance, which, without being better attested than the\nrest, carries with it, from its commonplace and prosaic character, a\npretended historical plausibility.[377]\n\n  [376] Apollod. ii. 4, 5. Pausan. ii. 30, 8; 26, 3; v. 8, 1.\n  Hesiod. ap. Schol. ad Iliad. xx. 116.\n\n  [377] Thucyd. i. 5.\n\nBesides his numerous issue by Hippodameia, Pelops had an illegitimate\nson named Chrysippus, of singular grace and beauty, towards whom he\ndisplayed so much affection as to rouse the jealousy of Hippodameia\nand her sons. Atreus and Thyest\u00eas conspired together to put Chrysippus\nto death, for which they were banished by Pelops and retired to\nMyk\u00ean\u00e6,[378]\u2014an event which brings us into the track of the Homeric\nlegend. For Thucydid\u00eas, having found in the death of Chrysippus a\nsuitable ground for the secession of Atreus from Pelops, conducts him\nat once to Myk\u00ean\u00e6, and shows a train of plausible circumstances to\naccount for his having mounted the throne. Eurystheus, king of Myk\u00ean\u00e6,\nwas the maternal nephew of Atreus: when he engaged in any foreign\nexpedition, he naturally entrusted the regency to his uncle; the\npeople of Myk\u00ean\u00e6 thus became accustomed to be governed by him, and he\non his part made efforts to conciliate them, so that when Eurystheus\nwas defeated and slain in Attica, the Myk\u00ean\u00e6an people, apprehensive\nof an invasion from the H\u00earakleids, chose Atreus as at once the most\npowerful and most acceptable person for his successor.[379] Such\nwas the tale which Thucydid\u00eas derived \u201cfrom those who had learnt\nancient Peloponn\u00easian matters most clearly from their forefathers.\u201d\nThe introduction of so much sober and quasi-political history,\nunfortunately unauthenticated, contrasts strikingly with the highly\npoetical legends of Pelops and Atreus, which precede and follow it.\n\n  [378] We find two distinct legends respecting Chrysippus: his\n  abduction by Laius king of Th\u00eabes, on which the lost drama\n  of Euripid\u00eas called Chrysippus turned (see Welcker, Griech.\n  Trag\u00f6dien, ii. p. 536), and his death by the hands of his\n  half-brothers. Hyginus (f. 85) blends the two together.\n\n  [379] Thucyd. i. 9. \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b5\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9. According to Hellanikus,\n  Atreus the elder son returns to Pisa after the death of Pelops\n  with a great army, and makes himself master of his father\u2019s\n  principality (Hellanik. ap Schol. ad Iliad, ii. 105). Hellanikus\n  does not seem to have been so solicitous as Thucydid\u00eas to\n  bring the story into conformity with Homer. The circumstantial\n  genealogy given in Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 5. makes Atreus and\n  Thyest\u00eas reside during their banishment at Makestus in Triphylia:\n  it is given without any special authority, but may perhaps come\n  from Hellanikus.\n\nAtreus and Thyest\u00eas are known in the Iliad only as successive\npossessors of the sceptre of Zeus, which Thyest\u00eas at his death\nbequeathes to Agamemn\u00f4n. The family dissensions among this fated\nrace commence, in the Odyssey, with Agamemn\u00f4n the son of Atreus, and\n\u00c6gisthus the son of Thyest\u00eas. But subsequent poets dwelt upon an\nimplacable quarrel between the two fathers. The cause of the bitterness\nwas differently represented: some alleged that Thyest\u00eas had intrigued\nwith the Kr\u00eatan Aerop\u00ea, the wife of his brother; other narratives\nmentioned that Thyest\u00eas procured for himself surreptitiously the\npossession of a lamb with a golden fleece, which had been designedly\nintroduced among the flocks of Atreus by the anger of Herm\u00eas, as a\ncause of enmity and ruin to the whole family.[380] Atreus, after a\nviolent burst of indignation, pretended to be reconciled, and invited\nThyest\u00eas to a banquet, in which he served up to him the limbs of his\nown son, and the father ignorantly partook of the fatal meal. Even the\nall-seeing H\u00ealios is said to have turned back his chariot to the east\nin order that he might escape the shocking spectacle of this Thyest\u00eaan\nbanquet: yet the tale of Thyest\u00eaan revenge\u2014the murder of Atreus\nperpetrated by \u00c6gisthus, the incestuous offspring of Thyest\u00eas by his\ndaughter Pelopia\u2014is no less replete with horrors.[381]\n\n  [380] \u00c6schyl. Agamem. 1204, 1253, 1608; Hygin. 86; Attii Fragm.\n  19. This was the story of the old poem entitled Alkm\u00e6\u00f4nis;\n  seemingly also of Pherekyd\u00eas, though the latter rejected the\n  story that Herm\u00eas had produced the golden lamb with the special\n  view of exciting discord between the two brothers, in order to\n  avenge the death of Myrtilus by Pelops (see Schol. ad Eurip.\n  Orest. 996).\n\n  A different legend, alluded to in Soph. Aj. 1295 (see Schol. _ad\n  loc._), recounted that Aerop\u00ea had been detected by her father\n  Katreus in unchaste commerce with a low-born person; he entrusted\n  her in his anger to Nauplius, with directions to throw her into\n  the sea: Nauplius however not only spared her life, but betrothed\n  her to Pleisthen\u00eas, father of Agamemn\u00f4n and son of Atreus.\n\n  The tragedy entitled _Atreus_ of the Latin poet Attius, seems to\n  have brought out, with painful fidelity, the harsh and savage\n  features of this family legend (see Aul. Gell. xiii. 2, and the\n  fragments of Attius now remaining, together with the tragedy\n  called Thyest\u00eas, of Seneca).\n\n  [381] Hygin. fab. 87-88.\n\nHomeric legend is never thus revolting. Agamemn\u00f4n and Menelaus are\nknown to us chiefly with their Homeric attributes, which have not been\nso darkly overlaid by subsequent poets as those of Atreus and Thyest\u00eas.\nAgamemn\u00f4n and Menelaus are affectionate brothers: they marry two\nsisters, the daughters of Tyndareus king of Sparta, Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra and\nHelen; for Helen, the real offspring of Zeus, passes as the daughter of\nTyndareus.[382] The \u201cking of men\u201d reigns at Myk\u00ean\u00e6; Menelaus succeeds\nTyndareus at Sparta. Of the rape of Helen, and the siege of Troy\nconsequent upon it, I shall speak elsewhere: I now touch only upon\nthe family legends of the Atreids. Menelaus, on his return from Troy\nwith the recovered Helen, is driven by storms far away to the distant\nregions of Ph\u0153nicia and Egypt, and is exposed to a thousand dangers\nand hardships before he again sets foot in Peloponn\u00easus. But at length\nhe reaches Sparta, resumes his kingdom, and passes the rest of his\ndays in uninterrupted happiness and splendor: being moreover husband\nof the godlike Helen and son-in-law of Zeus, he is even spared the\npangs of death. When the fulness of his days is past he is transported\nto the Elysian fields, there to dwell along with \u201cthe golden-haired\nRhadamanthus\u201d in a delicious climate and in undisturbed repose.[383]\n\n  [382] So we must say, in conformity to the ideas of antiquity:\n  compare Homer, Iliad, xvi. 176 and Herodot. vi. 53.\n\n  [383] Hom. Odyss. iii. 280-300; iv. 83-560.\n\nFar different is the fate of the king of men, Agamemn\u00f4n. During his\nabsence, the unwarlike \u00c6gisthus, son of Thyest\u00eas, had seduced his\nwife Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, in spite of the special warning of the gods, who,\nwatchful over this privileged family, had sent their messenger Herm\u00eas\nexpressly to deter him from the attempt.[384] A venerable bard had been\nleft by Agamemn\u00f4n as the companion and monitor of his wife, and so long\nas that guardian was at hand, \u00c6gisthus pressed his suit in vain. But he\ngot rid of the bard by sending him to perish in a desert island, and\nthen won without difficulty the undefended Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra. Ignorant of\nwhat had passed, Agamemn\u00f4n returned from Troy victorious and full of\nhope to his native country; but he had scarcely landed when \u00c6gisthus\ninvited him to a banquet, and there with the aid of the treacherous\nKlyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, in the very hall of festivity and congratulation,\nslaughtered him and his companions \u201clike oxen tied to the manger.\u201d His\nconcubine Kassandra, the prophetic daughter of Priam, perished along\nwith him by the hand of Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra herself.[385] The boy Orest\u00eas, the\nonly male offspring of Agamemn\u00f4n, was stolen away by his nurse, and\nplaced in safety at the residence of the Phokian Strophius.\n\n  [384] Odyss. i. 38; iii. 310.\u2014\u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03ba\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf.\n\n  [385] Odyss. iii. 260-275; iv. 512-537; xi. 408. Deinias in his\n  Argolica, and other historians of that territory, fixed the\n  precise day of the murder of Agamemn\u00f4n,\u2014the thirteenth of the\n  month Gam\u00eali\u00f4n (Schol. ad Sophokl. Elektr. 275).\n\nFor seven years \u00c6gisthus and Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra reigned in tranquillity at\nMyk\u00ean\u00e6 on the throne of the murdered Agamemn\u00f4n. But in the eighth year\nthe retribution announced by the gods overtook them: Orest\u00eas, grown to\nmanhood, returned and avenged his father by killing \u00c6gisthus, according\nto Homer; subsequent poets add, his mother also. He recovered the\nkingdom of Myk\u00ean\u00e6, and succeeded Menelaus in that of Sparta. Hermion\u00ea,\nthe only daughter of Menelaus and Helen, was sent into the realm of the\nMyrmidons in Thessaly, as the bride of Neoptolemus, son of Achilles,\naccording to the promise made by her father during the siege of\nTroy.[386]\n\n  [386] Odyss. iii. 306; iv. 9\n\n  Here ends the Homeric legend of the Pelopids, the final act\n  of Orest\u00eas being cited as one of unexampled glory.[387] Later\n  poets made many additions: they dwelt upon his remorse and\n  hardly-earned pardon for the murder of his mother, and upon his\n  devoted friendship for Pylades; they wove many interesting tales,\n  too, respecting his sisters Iphigeneia and Elektra and his cousin\n  Hermion\u00ea,\u2014names which have become naturalized in every climate\n  and incorporated with every form of poetry.\n\n  [387] Odyss. i. 299.\n\nThese poets did not at all scruple to depart from Homer, and to give\nother genealogies of their own, with respect to the chief persons\nof the Pelopid family. In the Iliad and Odyssey, Agamemn\u00f4n is son\nof Atreus: in the Hesiodic Eoiai and in Stesichorus, he is son of\nPleisthen\u00eas the son of Atreus.[388] In Homer, he is specially marked\nas reigning at Myk\u00ean\u00e6; but Stesichorus, Simonid\u00eas and Pindar[389]\nrepresented him as having both resided and perished at Sparta or at\nAmykl\u00e6. According to the ancient Cyprian Verses, Helen was represented\nas the daughter of Zeus and Nemesis: in one of the Hesiodic poems\nshe was introduced as an Oceanic nymph, daughter of Oceanus and\nT\u00eathys.[390] The genealogical discrepancies, even as to the persons of\nthe principal heroes and heroines, are far too numerous to be cited,\nnor is it necessary to advert to them, except as they bear upon the\nunavailing attempt to convert such legendary parentage into a basis of\nhistorical record or chronological calculation.\n\n  [388] Hesiod. Fragm. 60. p. 44, ed. D\u00fcntzer; Stesichor. Fragm.\n  44, Kleine. The Scholiast ad Soph. Elektr. 539, in reference to\n  another discrepancy between Homer and the Hesiodic poems about\n  the children of Helen, remarks that we ought not to divert our\n  attention from that which is moral and salutary to ourselves in\n  the poets (\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f20\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9), in order\n  to cavil at their genealogical contradictions.\n\n  Welcker in vain endeavors to show that Pleisthen\u00eas was originally\n  introduced as the father of Atreus, not as his son (Griech.\n  Trag\u00f6d. p. 678).\n\n  [389] Schol. ad Eurip. Orest. 46. \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u039c\u03c5\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03a3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u1fb3. Pindar, Pyth. xi. 31; Nem. viii. 21. St\u00easichorus\n  had composed an \u1f48\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, copied in many points from a still more\n  ancient lyric Oresteia by Xanthus: compare Athen. xii. p. 513,\n  and \u00c6lian, V. H. iv. 26.\n\n  [390] Hesiod, ap. Schol. ad Pindar, Nem. x. 150.\n\nThe Homeric poems probably represent that form of the legend,\nrespecting Agamemn\u00f4n and Orest\u00eas, which was current and popular among\nthe \u00c6olic colonists. Orest\u00eas was the great heroic chief of the \u00c6olic\nemigration; he, or his sons, or his descendants, are supposed to have\nconducted the Ach\u00e6ans to seek a new home, when they were no longer\nable to make head against the invading D\u00f4rians: the great families at\nTenedos and other \u00c6olic cities even during the historical \u00e6ra, gloried\nin tracing back their pedigrees to this illustrious source.[391] The\nlegends connected with the heroic worship of these mythical ancestors\nform the basis of the character and attributes of Agamemn\u00f4n and his\nfamily, as depicted in Homer, in which Myk\u00ean\u00e6 appears as the first\nplace in Peloponn\u00easus, and Sparta only as the second: the former the\nspecial residence of \u201cthe king of men;\u201d the latter that of his younger\nand inferior brother, yet still the seat of a member of the princely\nPelopids, and moreover the birth-place of the divine Helen. Sparta,\nArgos and Myk\u00ean\u00e6 are all three designated in the Iliad by the goddess\nH\u00ear\u00ea as her favorite cities;[392] yet the connection of Myk\u00ean\u00e6 with\nArgos, though the two towns were only ten miles distant, is far less\nintimate than the connection of Myk\u00ean\u00e6 with Sparta. When we reflect\nupon the very peculiar manner in which Homer identifies H\u00ear\u00ea with the\nGrecian host and its leader,\u2014for she watches over the Greeks with the\nactive solicitude of a mother, and her antipathy against the Trojans\nis implacable to a degree which Zeus cannot comprehend,[393]\u2014and when\nwe combine this with the ancient and venerated H\u00ear\u00e6on, or temple of\nH\u00ear\u00ea, near Myk\u00ean\u00e6, we may partly explain to ourselves the pre\u00ebminence\nconferred upon Myk\u00ean\u00e6 in the Iliad and Odyssey. The H\u00ear\u00e6on was situated\nbetween Argos and Myk\u00ean\u00e6; in later times its priestesses were named and\nits affairs administered by the Argeians: but as it was much nearer\nto Myk\u00ean\u00e6 than to Argos, we may with probability conclude that it\noriginally belonged to the former, and that the increasing power of\nthe latter enabled them to usurp to themselves a religious privilege\nwhich was always an object of envy and contention among the Grecian\ncommunities. The \u00c6olic colonists doubtless took out with them in their\nemigration the divine and heroic legends, as well as the worship and\nceremonial rites, of the H\u00ear\u00e6on; and in those legends the most exalted\nrank would be assigned to the close-adjoining and administering city.\n\n  [391] See the ode of Pindar addressed to Aristagoras of Tenedos\n  (Nem. xi. 35; Strabo, xiii. p. 582). There were Penthilids at\n  Mityl\u00ean\u00ea, from Penthilus, son of Orest\u00eas (Aristot. Polit v. 8,\n  13, Schneid.).\n\n  [392] Iliad, iv. 52. Compare Euripid. H\u00earakleid. 350\n\n  [393] Iliad, iv. 31. Zeus says to H\u00ear\u00ea,\u2014\n\n    \u0394\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b7, \u03c4\u03af \u03bd\u03cd \u03c3\u03b5 \u03a0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03cc \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2\n    \u03a4\u03cc\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f70 \u1fe5\u03ad\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c7\u1f72\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n    \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03cb\u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03b5\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd;\n    \u0395\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03cd \u03b3\u1fbd, \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1f70,\n    \u1f68\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03c1\u03ce\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03a0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03cc \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2,\n    \u1f0c\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03a4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03c7\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03ba\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf.\n\n  Again, xviii. 358,\u2014\n\n                    \u1f26 \u1fe5\u03ac \u03bd\u03c5 \u03c3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\n    \u1f18\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03cc\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03af.\n\nMyk\u00ean\u00e6 maintained its independence even down to the Persian invasion.\nEighty of its heavy-armed citizens, in the ranks of Leonidas at\nThermopyl\u00e6, and a number not inferior at Plat\u00e6a, upheld the splendid\nheroic celebrity of their city during a season of peril, when the more\npowerful Argos disgraced itself by a treacherous neutrality. Very\nshortly afterwards Myk\u00ean\u00e6 was enslaved and its inhabitants expelled by\nthe Argeians. Though this city so long maintained a separate existence,\nits importance had latterly sunk to nothing, while that of the D\u00f4rian\nArgos was augmented very much, and that of the D\u00f4rian Sparta still more.\n\nThe name of Myk\u00ean\u00e6 is imperishably enthroned in the Iliad and Odyssey;\nbut all the subsequent fluctuations of the legend tend to exalt\nthe glory of other cities at its expense. The recognition of the\nOlympic games as the grand religious festival of Peloponn\u00easus gave\nvogue to that genealogy which connected Pelops with Pisa or Elis and\nwithdrew him from Myk\u00ean\u00e6. Moreover, in the poems of the great Athenian\ntragedians, Myk\u00ean\u00e6 is constantly confounded and treated as one with\nArgos. If any one of the citizens of the former, expelled at the time\nof its final subjugation by the Argeians, had witnessed at Athens a\ndrama of \u00c6schylus, Sophokl\u00eas, or Euripid\u00eas, or the recital of an ode\nof Pindar, he would have heard with grief and indignation the city of\nhis oppressors made a partner in the heroic glories of his own.[394]\nBut the great political ascendency acquired by Sparta contributed still\nfarther to degrade Myk\u00ean\u00e6, by disposing subsequent poets to treat the\nchief of the Grecian armament against Troy as having been a Spartan.\nIt has been already mentioned that St\u00easichorus, Simonid\u00eas and Pindar\nadopted this version of the legend: we know that Zeus Agamemn\u00f4n, as\nwell as the hero Menelaus, was worshipped at the D\u00f4rian Sparta,[395]\nand the feeling of intimate identity, as well as of patriotic pride,\nwhich had grown up in the minds of the Spartans connected with the\nname of Agamemn\u00f4n, is forcibly evinced by the reply of the Spartan\nSyagrus to Gel\u00f4n of Syracuse at the time of the Persian invasion of\nGreece. Gel\u00f4n was solicited to lend his aid in the imminent danger of\nGreece before the battle of Salamis: he offered to furnish an immense\nauxiliary force, on condition that the supreme command should be\nallotted to him. \u201cLoudly indeed would the Pelopid Agamemn\u00f4n cry out\n(exclaimed Syagrus in rejecting this application), if he were to learn\nthat the Spartans had been deprived of the headship by Gel\u00f4n and the\nSyracusans.\u201d[396] Nearly a century before this event, in obedience to\nthe injunctions of the Delphian oracle, the Spartans had brought back\nfrom Tegea to Sparta the bones of \u201cthe Lac\u00f4nian Orest\u00eas,\u201d as Pindar\ndenominates him:[397] the recovery of these bones was announced to them\nas the means of reversing a course of ill-fortune, and of procuring\nvictory in their war against Tegea.[398] The value which they set upon\nthis acquisition, and the decisive results ascribed to it, exhibit a\nprecise analogy with the recovery of the bones of Theseus from Skyros\nby the Athenian Cim\u00f4n shortly after the Persian invasion.[399] The\nremains sought were those of a hero properly belonging to their own\nsoil, but who had died in a foreign land, and of whose protection and\nassistance they were for that reason deprived. And the superhuman\nmagnitude of the bones, which were contained in a coffin seven cubits\nlong, is well suited to the legendary grandeur of the son of Agamemn\u00f4n.\n\n  [394] See the preface of Dissen to the tenth Nem. of Pindar.\n\n  [395] Clemens Alexandr. Admonit. ad Gent. p. 24. \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u0394\u03af\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a3\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03a3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6. See also \u0152nomaus\n  ap. Euseb. Pr\u00e6parat. Evangel. v. 28.\n\n  [396] Herodot. vii. 159. \u1f2e \u03ba\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f30\u03bc\u03ce\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2\n  \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78\n  \u0393\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03a3\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd: compare Homer, Iliad, vii. 125.\n  See what appears to be an imitation of the same passage in\n  Josephus, De Bello Judaico, iii. 8, 4. \u1f2e \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b3\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, etc.\n\n  [397] Pindar. Pyth. xi. 16.\n\n  [398] Herodot. i 68.\n\n  [399] Plutarch. Th\u00easeus, c. 36, Cim\u00f4n, c. 8; Pausan. iii. 3, 6.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\nLACONIAN AND MESSENIAN GENEALOGIES.\n\n\nThe earliest names in Lac\u00f4nian genealogy are, an autochthonous Lelex\nand a Naiad nymph Kleochareia. From this pair sprung a son Eur\u00f4tas,\nand from him a daughter Sparta, who became the wife of Laced\u00e6m\u00f4n, son\nof Zeus and Tayget\u00ea, daughter of Atlas. Amyklas, son of Laced\u00e6m\u00f4n,\nhad two sons, Kynortas and Hyacinthus\u2014the latter a beautiful youth,\nthe favorite of Apollo, by whose hand he was accidentally killed\nwhile playing at quoits: the festival of the Hyacinthia, which the\nLaced\u00e6m\u00f4nians generally, and the Amykl\u00e6ans with special solemnity,\ncelebrated throughout the historical ages, was traced back to this\nlegend. Kynortas was succeeded by his son Peri\u00ear\u00eas, who married\nGorgophon\u00ea, daughter of Perseus, and had a numerous issue\u2014Tyndareus,\nIkarius, Aphareus, Leukippus, and Hippokoon. Some authors gave the\ngenealogy differently, making Peri\u00ear\u00eas, son of \u00c6olus, to be the father\nof Kynortas, and \u0152balus son of Kynortas, from whom sprung Tyndareus,\nIkarius and Hippokoon.[400]\n\n  [400] Compare Apollod. iii. 10, 4. Pausan. iii. 1, 4.\n\nBoth Tyndareus and Ikarius, expelled by their brother Hippokoon, were\nforced to seek shelter at the residence of Thestius, king of Kalyd\u00f4n,\nwhose daughter, L\u00eada, Tyndareus espoused. It is numbered among the\nexploits of the omnipresent H\u00earakl\u00eas, that he slew Hippokoon and his\nsons, and restored Tyndareus to his kingdom, thus creating for the\nsubsequent H\u00earakleidan kings a mythical title to the throne. Tyndareus,\nas well as his brothers, are persons of interest in legendary\nnarrative: he is the father of Kast\u00f4r, of Timandra, married to Echemus,\nthe hero of Tegea,[401] and of Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, married to Agamemn\u00f4n.\nPollux and the ever-memorable Helen are the offspring of L\u00eada by Zeus.\nIkarius is the father of Penelop\u00ea, wife of Odysseus: the contrast\nbetween her behavior and that of Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra and Helen became the more\nstriking in consequence of their being so nearly related. Aphareus is\nthe father of Idas and Lynkeus, while Leukippus has for his daughters,\nPh\u0153b\u00ea and Ila\u00ebira. According to one of the Hesiodic poems, Kast\u00f4r and\nPollux were both sons of Zeus by L\u00eada, while Helen was neither daughter\nof Zeus nor of Tyndareus, but of Oceanus and T\u00eathys.[402]\n\n  [401] Hesiod. ap Schol. Pindar, Olymp. xi. 79.\n\n  [402] Hesiod. ap. Schol. Pindar, Nem. x. 150. Fragm. Hesiod.\n  D\u00fcntzer, 58. p. 44. Tyndareus was worshipped as a god at\n  Laced\u00e6m\u00f4n (Varro ap. Serv. ad Virgil. \u00c6neid. viii. 275).\n\nThe brothers Kast\u00f4r and (Polydeuk\u00eas, or) Pollux are no less\ncelebrated for their fraternal affection than for their great bodily\naccomplishments: Kast\u00f4r, the great charioteer and horse-master; Pollux,\nthe first of pugilists. They are enrolled both among the hunters of the\nKalyd\u00f4nian boar and among the heroes of the Argonautic expedition, in\nwhich Pollux represses the insolence of Amykus, king of the Bebrykes,\non the coast of Asiatic Thrace\u2014the latter, a gigantic pugilist, from\nwhom no rival has ever escaped, challenges Pollux, but is vanquished\nand killed in the fight.[403]\n\n  [403] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 1-96. Apollod. i. 9, 20. Theocrit. xxii.\n  26-133. In the account of Apoll\u00f4nius and Apoll\u00f4dorus, Amykus is\n  slain in the contest; in that of Theocritus he is only conquered\n  and forced to give in, with a promise to renounce for the future\n  his brutal conduct; there were several different narratives. See\n  Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 106.\n\nThe two brothers also undertook an expedition into Attica, for the\npurpose of recovering their sister Helen, who had been carried off by\nTh\u00easeus in her early youth, and deposited by him at Aphidna, while\nhe accompanied Perithous to the under-world, in order to assist his\nfriend in carrying off Persephon\u00ea. The force of Kast\u00f4r and Pollux was\nirresistible, and when they re-demanded their sister, the people of\nAttica were anxious to restore her: but no one knew where Th\u00easeus had\ndeposited his prize. The invaders, not believing in the sincerity of\nthis denial, proceeded to ravage the country, which would have been\nutterly ruined, had not Dekelus, the eponymus of Dekeleia, been able to\nindicate Aphidna as the place of concealment. The autochthonous Titakus\nbetrayed Aphidna to Kast\u00f4r and Pollux, and Helen was recovered: the\nbrothers in evacuating Attica, carried away into captivity \u00c6thra,\nthe mother of Th\u00easeus. In after-days, when Kast\u00f4r and Pollux, under\nthe title of the Dioskuri, had come to be worshipped as powerful\ngods, and when the Athenians were greatly ashamed of this act of\nTh\u00easeus\u2014the revelation made by Dekelus was considered as entitling him\nto the lasting gratitude of his country, as well as to the favorable\nremembrance of the Laced\u00e6m\u00f4nians, who maintained the Dekeleians in\nthe constant enjoyment of certain honorary privileges at Sparta,[404]\nand even spared that d\u00eame in all their invasions of Attica. Nor is\nit improbable that the existence of this legend had some weight in\ndetermining the Laced\u00e6m\u00f4nians to select Dekelia as the place of their\noccupation during the Peleponn\u00easian war.\n\n  [404] Diod\u00f4r. ix. 63. Herod. iv. 73. \u0394\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\n  \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9. According to other authors, it was Akad\u00eamus who made the\n  revelation, and the spot called Akad\u00eamia, near Athens, which the\n  Laced\u00e6m\u00f4nians spared in consideration of this service (Plutarch,\n  Th\u00easeus, 31, 32, 33, where he gives several different versions of\n  this tale by Attic writers, framed with the view of exonerating\n  Th\u00easeus). The recovery of Helen and the captivity of \u00c6thra were\n  represented on the ancient chest of Kypselus, with the following\n  curious inscription:\n\n    \u03a4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u0391\u1f34\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\n    \u1f1d\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n      Pausan. v. 19, 1.\n\nThe fatal combat between Kast\u00f4r and Polydeuk\u00eas on the one side, and\nIdas and Lynkeus on the other, for the possession of the daughters of\nLeukippus, was celebrated by more than one ancient poet, and forms the\nsubject of one of the yet remaining Idylls of Theocritus. Leukippus\nhad formally betrothed his daughters to Idas and Lynkeus; but the\nTyndarids, becoming enamored of them, outbid their rivals in the value\nof the customary nuptial gifts, persuaded the father to violate his\npromise, and carried off Phoeb\u00ea and Ila\u00ebira as their brides. Idas and\nLynkeus pursued them and remonstrated against the injustice: according\nto Theocritus, this was the cause of the combat. But there was another\ntale, which seems the older, and which assigns a different cause to the\nquarrel. The four had jointly made a predatory incursion into Arcadia,\nand had driven off some cattle, but did not agree about the partition\nof the booty\u2014Idas carried off into Mess\u00eania a portion of it which the\nTyndarids claimed as their own. To revenge and reimburse themselves,\nthe Tyndarids invaded Mess\u00eania, placing themselves in ambush in the\nhollow of an ancient oak. But Lynkeus, endued with preternatural powers\nof vision, mounted to the top of Taygetus, from whence, as he could see\nover the whole Peleponn\u00easus, he detected them in their chosen place\nof concealment. Such was the narrative of the ancient Cyprian Verses.\nKast\u00f4r perished by the hand of Idas, Lynkeus by that of Pollux. Idas,\nseizing a stone pillar from the tomb of his father Aphareus, hurled\nit at Pollux, knocked him down and stunned him; but Zeus, interposing\nat the critical moment for the protection of his son, killed Idas\nwith a thunderbolt. Zeus would have conferred upon Pollux the gift\nof immortality, but the latter could not endure existence without\nhis brother: he entreated permission to share the gift with Kast\u00f4r,\nand both were accordingly permitted to live, but only on every other\nday.[405]\n\n  [405] Cypria Carm. Fragm. 8. p. 13, D\u00fcntzer. Lycophr\u00f4n, 538-566\n  with Schol. Apollod. iii. 11, 1. Pindar, Nem. x. 55-90.\n  \u1f11\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd: also Homer, Odyss. xi. 302, with the\n  Commentary of Nitzsch, vol. iii. p. 245.\n\n  The combat thus ends more favorably to the Tyndarids; but\n  probably the account least favorable to them is the oldest, since\n  their dignity went on continually increasing, until at last they\n  became great deities.\n\nThe Dioskuri, or sons of Zeus,\u2014as the two Spartan heroes, Kast\u00f4r and\nPollux, were denominated,\u2014were recognized in the historical days of\nGreece as gods, and received divine honors. This is even noticed\nin a passage of the Odyssey,[406] which is at any rate a very old\ninterpolation, as well as in one of the Homeric hymns. What is yet more\nremarkable is, that they were invoked during storms at sea, as the\nspecial and all-powerful protectors of the endangered mariner, although\ntheir attributes and their celebrity seem to be of a character so\ndissimilar. They were worshipped throughout most parts of Greece, but\nwith pre\u00ebminent sanctity at Sparta.\n\n  [406] Odyss. xxi. 15. Diod\u00f4r. xv. 66.\n\nKast\u00f4r and Pollux being removed, the Spartan genealogy passes from\nTyndareus to Menelaus, and from him to Orest\u00eas.\n\nOriginally it appears that Mess\u00ean\u00ea was a name for the western portion\nof Lac\u00f4nia, bordering on what was called Pylos: it is so represented\nin the Odyssey, and Ephorus seems to have included it amongst the\npossessions of Orest\u00eas and his descendants. Throughout the whole\nduration of the Mess\u00eanico-D\u00f4rian kingdom, there never was any town\ncalled Mess\u00ean\u00ea: the town was first founded by Epameinondas, after the\nbattle of Leuctra. The heroic genealogy of Mess\u00eania starts from the\nsame name as that of Lac\u00f4nia\u2014from the autochthonous Lelex: his younger\nson, Polyka\u00f4n, marries Mess\u00ean\u00ea, daughter of the Argeian Triopas, and\nsettles the country. Pausanias tells us that the posterity of this pair\noccupied the country for five generations; but he in vain searched the\nancient genealogical poems to find the names of their descendants.[407]\nTo them succeeded Peri\u00ear\u00eas, son of \u00c6olus; and Aphareus and Leukippus,\naccording to Pausanias, were sons of Peri\u00ear\u00eas. Idas and Lynkeus are\nthe only heroes, distinguished for personal exploits and memorable\nattributes, belonging to Mess\u00eania proper. They are the counterpart of\nthe Dioskuri, and were interesting persons in the old legendary poems.\nMarp\u00eassa was the daughter of Eu\u00eanus, and wooed by Apollo: nevertheless\nIdas[408] carried her off by the aid of a winged chariot which he\nhad received from Poseid\u00f4n, Eu\u00eanus pursued them, and when he arrived\nat the river Lykormas, he found himself unable to overtake them: his\ngrief caused him to throw himself into the river, which ever afterwards\nbore his name. Idas brought Marp\u00eassa safe to Mess\u00eania, and even when\nApollo there claimed her of him, he did not fear to risk a combat with\nthe god. But Zeus interfered as mediator, and permitted the maiden to\nchoose which of the two she preferred. She attached herself to Idas,\nbeing apprehensive that Apollo would desert her in her old age: on the\ndeath of her husband she slew herself. Both Idas and Lynkeus took part\nin the Argonautic expedition and in the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt.[409]\n\n  [407] Pausan. iv. 2, 1.\n\n  [408] Iliad, ix. 553. Simonid\u00eas had handled this story in\n  detail (Schol. Ven. II. ix. p. 553). Bacchylid\u00eas (ap. Schol.\n  Pindar. Isthm. iv. 92) celebrated in one of his poems the\n  competition among many eager suitors for the hand of Marp\u00eassa,\n  under circumstances similar to the competition for Hippodameia,\n  daughter of \u0152nomaus. Many unsuccessful suitors perished by the\n  hand of Eu\u00eanus: their skulls were affixed to the wall of the\n  temple of Poseid\u00f4n.\n\n  [409] Apollod. i. 7, 9. Pausan. iv. 2, 5. Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius\n  describes Idas as full of boast and self-confidence, heedless of\n  the necessity of divine aid. Probably this was the character of\n  the brothers in the old legend, as the enemies of the Dioskuri.\n\n  The wrath of the Dioskuri against Mess\u00eania was treated, even in\n  the historical times, as the grand cause of the subjection of the\n  Mess\u00eanians by the Spartans: that wrath had been appeased at the\n  time when Epameinondas reconstituted Mess\u00ean\u00ea (Pausan. iv. 27, 1).\n\nAphareus, after the death of his sons, founded the town of Ar\u00ean\u00ea, and\nmade over most part of his dominions to his kinsman N\u00ealeus, with whom\nwe pass into the Pylian genealogy.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\nARCADIAN GENEALOGY.\n\n\nThe Arcadian divine or heroic pedigree begins with Pelasgus, whom both\nHesiod and Asius considered as an indigenous man, though Akusilaus the\nArgeian represented him as brother of Argos and son of Zeus by Niob\u00ea,\ndaughter of Phor\u00f4neus: this logographer wished to establish a community\nof origin between the Argeians and the Arcadians.\n\nLyka\u00f4n son of Pelasgus and king of Arcadia, had, by different wives,\nfifty sons, the most savage, impious and wicked of mankind: M\u00e6nalus\nwas the eldest of them. Zeus, in order that he might himself become\na witness of their misdeeds, presented himself to them in disguise.\nThey killed a child and served it up to him for a meal; but the god\noverturned the table and struck dead with thunder Lyka\u00f4n and all his\nfifty sons, with the single exception of Nyktimus, the youngest, whom\nhe spared at the earnest intercession of the goddess G\u00e6a (the Earth).\nThe town near which the table was overturned received the name of\nTrapezus (Tabletown).\n\nThis singular legend (framed on the same etymological type as that of\nthe ants in \u00c6gina, recounted elsewhere) seems ancient, and may probably\nbelong to the Hesiodic Catalogue. But Pausanias tells us a story in\nmany respects different, which was represented to him in Arcadia as\nthe primitive local account, and which becomes the more interesting,\nas he tells us that he himself fully believes it. Both tales indeed go\nto illustrate the same point\u2014the ferocity of Lyka\u00f4n\u2019s character, as\nwell as the cruel rites which he practised. The latter was the first\nwho established the worship and solemn games of Zeus Lyk\u00e6us: he offered\nup a child to Zeus, and made libations with the blood upon the altar.\nImmediately after having perpetrated this act, he was changed into a\nwolf.[410]\n\n  [410] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 8, 1. Hygin. fab. 176. Eratosthen.\n  Catasterism. 8. Pausan. viii. 2, 2-3. A different story\n  respecting the immolation of the child is in Nikolaus Damask.\n  Frag. p. 41, Orelli. Lyka\u00f4n is mentioned as the first founder\n  of the temple of Zeus Lyk\u00e6us in Schol. Eurip. Orest. 1662;\n  but nothing is there said about the human sacrifice or its\n  consequences. In the historical times, the festival and\n  solemnities of the Lyk\u00e6a do not seem to have been distinguished\n  materially from the other ag\u00f4nes of Greece (Pindar, Olymp. xiii.\n  104; Nem. x. 46): Xenias the Arcadian, one of the generals in the\n  army of Cyrus the younger, celebrated the solemnity with great\n  magnificence in the march through Asia Minor (Xen. Anab. i. 2,\n  10). But the fable of the human sacrifice, and the subsequent\n  transmutation of the person who had eaten human food into a wolf,\n  continued to be told in connection with them (Plato, de Republic.\n  viii. c. 15. p. 417). Compare Pliny, H. N. viii. 34. This passage\n  of Plato seems to afford distinct indication that the practice\n  of offering human victims at the altar of the Lyk\u00e6an Zeus was\n  neither prevalent nor recent, but at most only traditional and\n  antiquated; and it therefore limits the sense or invalidates the\n  authority of the Pseudo-Platonic dialogue, Minos, c. 5.\n\n\u201cOf the truth of this narrative (observes Pausanias) I feel persuaded:\nit has been repeated by the Arcadians from old times, and it carries\nprobability along with it. For the men of that day, from their justice\nand piety, were guests and companions at table with the gods, who\nmanifested towards them approbation when they were good, and anger\nif they behaved ill, in a palpable manner: indeed at that time there\nwere some, who having once been men, became gods, and who yet retain\ntheir privileges as such\u2014Arist\u00e6us, the Kr\u00eatan Britomartis, H\u00earakl\u00eas\nson of Alkm\u00eana, Amphiaraus the son of Oikl\u00eas, and Pollux and Kast\u00f4r\nbesides. We may therefore believe that Lyka\u00f4n became a wild beast, and\nthat Niob\u00ea, the daughter of Tantalus, became a stone. But in my time,\nwickedness having enormously increased, so as to overrun the whole\nearth and all the cities in it, there are no farther examples of men\nexalted into gods, except by mere title and from adulation towards the\npowerful: moreover the anger of the gods falls tardily upon the wicked,\nand is reserved for them after their departure from hence.\u201d\n\nPausanias then proceeds to censure those who, by multiplying false\nmiracles in more recent times, tended to rob the old and genuine\nmiracles of their legitimate credit and esteem. The passage illustrates\nforcibly the views which a religious and instructed pagan took of his\npast time\u2014how inseparably he blended together in it gods and men, and\nhow little he either recognized or expected to find in it the naked\nph\u00e6nomena and historical laws of connection which belonged to the world\nbefore him. He treats the past as the province of legend, the present\nas that of history; and in doing this he is more sceptical than the\npersons with whom he conversed, who believed not only in the ancient,\nbut even in the recent and falsely reported miracles. It is true that\nPausanias does not always proceed consistently with this position: he\noften rationalizes the stories of the past, as if he expected to find\nhistorical threads of connection; and sometimes, though more rarely,\naccepts the miracles of the present. But in the present instance he\ndraws a broad line of distinction between present and past, or rather\nbetween what is recent and what is ancient: his criticism is, in the\nmain, analogous to that of Arrian in regard to the Amazons\u2014denying\ntheir existence during times of recorded history, but admitting it\nduring the early and unrecorded ages.\n\nIn the narrative of Pausanias, the sons of Lyka\u00f4n, instead of perishing\nby thunder from Zeus, become the founders of the various towns in\nArcadia. And as that region was subdivided into a great number of small\nand independent townships, each having its own eponym, so the Arcadian\nheroic genealogy appears broken up and subdivided. Pallas, Orestheus,\nPhigalus, Trapezeus, M\u00e6nalus, Mantin\u00eaus, and Tegeat\u00eas, are all numbered\namong the sons of Lyka\u00f4n, and are all eponyms of various Arcadian\ntowns.[411]\n\n  [411] Paus. viii. 3. Hygin. fab. 177.\n\nThe legend respecting Kallist\u00f4 and Arkas, the eponym of Arcadia\ngenerally, seems to have been originally quite independent of and\ndistinct from that of Lyka\u00f4n. Eum\u00ealus, indeed, and some other poets\nmade Kallist\u00f4 daughter of Lyka\u00f4n; but neither Hesiod, nor Asius, nor\nPherekyd\u00eas, acknowledged any relationship between them.[412] The\nbeautiful Kallist\u00f4, companion of Artemis in the chase, had bound\nherself by a vow of chastity. Zeus, either by persuasion or by force,\nobtained a violation of the vow, to the grievous displeasure both of\nH\u00ear\u00ea and Artemis. The former changed Kallist\u00f4 into a bear, the latter\nwhen she was in that shape killed her with an arrow. Zeus gave to the\nunfortunate Kallist\u00f4 a place among the stars, as the constellation of\nthe Bear: he also preserved the child Arkas, of which she was pregnant\nby him, and gave it to the Atlantid nymph Maia to bring up.[413]\n\n  [412] Apollod. iii. 8, 2.\n\n  [413] Pausan. viii. 3, 2. Apollod. iii. 8, 2. Hesiod. apud\n  Eratosthen. Catasterism. 1. Fragm. 182, Marktsch. Hygin. f. 177.\n\nArkas, when he became king, obtained from Triptolemus and communicated\nto his people the first rudiments of agriculture; he also taught them\nto make bread, to spin, and to weave. He had three sons\u2014Azan, Apheidas,\nand Elatus: the first was the eponym of Azania, the northern region\nof Arcadia; the second was one of the heroes of Tegea; the third was\nfather of Ischys (rival of Apollo for the affections of Kor\u00f4nis), as\nwell as of \u00c6pytus and Kyll\u00ean: the name of \u00c6pytus among the heroes of\nArcadia is as old as the Catalogue in the Iliad.[414]\n\n  [414] Homer, Iliad, ii. 604. Pind. Olymp. vi. 44-63.\n\n  The tomb of \u00c6pytus, mentioned in the Iliad, was shown to\n  Pausanias between Pheneus and Stymphalus (Pausan. viii. 16, 2).\n  \u00c6pytus was a cognomen of Herm\u00eas (Pausan. viii. 47, 3).\n\n  The hero Arkas was worshipped at Mantineia, under the special\n  injunction of the Delphian oracle (Pausan. viii. 9, 2).\n\nAleus, son of Apheidas and king of Tegea, was the founder of the\ncelebrated temple and worship of Ath\u00ean\u00ea Alea in that town. Lykurgus and\nK\u00eapheus were his sons, Aug\u00ea his daughter, who was seduced by H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nand secretly bore to him a child: the father, discovering what had\nhappened, sent Aug\u00ea to Nauplius to be sold into slavery: Teuthras,\nking of Mysia in Asia Minor, purchased her and made her his wife: her\ntomb was shown at Pergamus on the river Ka\u00efkus even in the time of\nPausanias.[415]\n\n  [415] Pausan. viii. 4, 6. Apollod. iii. 9, 1. Diod\u00f4r. iv. 33.\n\n  A separate legend respecting Aug\u00ea and the birth of T\u00ealephus was\n  current at Tegea, attached to the temple, statue, and cognomen of\n  Eileithyia in the Tegeatic agora (Pausan. viii. 48, 5).\n\n  Hekat\u00e6us seems to have narrated in detail the adventures of Aug\u00ea\n  (Pausan. viii. 4, 4; 47, 3. Hekat\u00e6. Fragm. 345, Didot.).\n\n  Euripid\u00eas followed a different story about Aug\u00ea and the birth of\n  T\u00ealephus in his lost tragedy called Aug\u00ea (See Strabo, xiii. p.\n  615). Respecting the \u039c\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 of \u00c6schylus, and the two lost dramas,\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03b1\u03b4\u03b1\u1f76 and \u039c\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 of Sophokl\u00eas, little can be made out. (See\n  Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. p. 53, 408-414).\n\nThe child T\u00ealephus, exposed on Mount Parthenius, was wonderfully\nsustained by the milk of a doe: the herdsmen of Korythus brought him\nup, and he was directed by the Delphian oracle to go and find his\nparents in Mysia. Teuthras adopted him, and he succeeded to the throne:\nin the first attempt of the army of Agamemn\u00f4n against Troy, on which\noccasion they mistook their point and landed in Mysia, his valor\nsignally contributed to the repulse of the Greeks, though he was at\nlast vanquished and desperately wounded by the spear of Achilles\u2014by\nwhom however he was afterwards healed, under the injunction of the\noracle, and became the guide of the Greeks in their renewed attack upon\nthe Trojans.[416]\n\n  [416] T\u00ealephus and his exploits were much dwelt upon in the lost\n  old epic poem, the Cyprian Verses. See argument of that poem ap.\n  D\u00fcntzer, Ep. Fragm. p. 10. His exploits were also celebrated by\n  Pindar (Olymp. ix. 70-79); he is enumerated along with Hect\u00f4r,\n  Cycnus, Memn\u00f4n, the most distinguished opponents of Achilles\n  (Isthm. iv. 46). His birth, as well as his adventures, became\n  subjects with most of the great Attic tragedians.\n\nFrom Lykurgus,[417] the son of Aleus and brother of Aug\u00ea, we pass to\nhis son Ank\u00e6us, numbered among the Argonauts, finally killed in the\nchase of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar, and father of Agapen\u00f4r, who leads the\nArcadian contingent against Troy,\u2014(the adventurers of his niece, the\nTegeatic huntress Atalanta, have already been touched upon),\u2014then\nto Echemus, son of A\u00ebropus and grandson of the brother of Lykurgus,\nK\u00eapheus. Echemus is the chief heroic ornament of Tegea. When Hyllus,\nthe son of H\u00earakl\u00eas, conducted the H\u00earakleids on their first expedition\nagainst Peloponn\u00easus, Echemus commanded the Tegean troops who assembled\nalong with the other Peloponn\u00easians at the isthmus of Corinth to repel\nthe invasion: it was agreed that the dispute should be determined\nby single combat, and Echemus, as the champion of Peloponn\u00easus,\nencountered and killed Hyllus. Pursuant to the stipulation by which\nthey had bound themselves, the H\u00earakleids retired, and abstained for\nthree generations from pressing their claim upon Peloponn\u00easus. This\nvalorous exploit of their great martial hero was cited and appealed to\nby the Tegeates before the battle of Plat\u00e6a, as the principal evidence\nof their claim to the second post in the combined army, next in point\nof honor to that of the Laced\u00e6m\u00f4nians, and superior to that of the\nAthenians: the latter replied to them by producing as counter-evidence\nthe splendid heroic deeds of Athens,\u2014the protection of the H\u00earakleids\nagainst Eurystheus, the victory over the Kadmeians of Th\u00eabes, and the\ncomplete defeat of the Amazons in Attica.[418] Nor can there be any\ndoubt that these legendary glories were both recited by the speakers,\nand heard by the listeners, with profound and undoubting faith, as well\nas with heart-stirring admiration.\n\n  [417] There were other local genealogies of Tegea deduced from\n  Lykurgus: B\u00f4tachus, eponym of the D\u00eame B\u00f4tachid\u00e6 at that place,\n  was his grandson (Nicolaus ap. Steph. Byz. v. \u0392\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9).\n\n  [418] Herodot. ix. 27. Echemus is described by Pindar (Ol. xi.\n  69) as gaining the prize of wrestling in the fabulous Olympic\n  games, on their first establishment by H\u00earakl\u00eas. He also found\n  a place in the Hesiodic Catalogue as husband of Timandra, the\n  sister of Helen and Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra (Hesiod, Fragm. 105, p. 318,\n  Marktscheff.).\n\nOne other person there is\u2014Ischys, son of Elatus and grandson of\nArkas\u2014in the fabulous genealogy of Arcadia whom it would be improper to\npass over, inasmuch as his name and adventures are connected with the\ngenesis of the memorable god or hero \u00c6sculapius, or Askl\u00eapius. Kor\u00f4nis,\ndaughter of Phlegyas, and resident near the lake B\u0153b\u00ebis in Thessaly,\nwas beloved by Apollo and became pregnant by him: unfaithful to the\ngod, she listened to the propositions of Ischys son of Elatus, and\nconsented to wed him: a raven brought to Apollo the fatal news, which\nso incensed him that he changed the color of the bird from white, as it\npreviously had been, into black.[419] Artemis, to avenge the wounded\ndignity of her brother, put Kor\u00f4nis to death; but Apollo preserved the\nmale child of which she was about to be delivered, and consigned it to\nthe Centaur Cheir\u00f4n to be brought up. The child was named Askl\u00eapius or\n\u00c6sculapius, and acquired, partly from the teaching of the beneficent\nleech Cheir\u00f4n, partly from inborn and superhuman aptitude, a knowledge\nof the virtues of herbs and a mastery of medicine and surgery, such\nas had never before been witnessed. He not only cured the sick, the\nwounded, and the dying, but even restored the dead to life. Kapaneus,\nEriphyl\u00ea, Hippolytus, Tyndareus and Glaukus were all affirmed by\ndifferent poets and logographers to have been endued by him with a new\nlife.[420] But Zeus now found himself under the necessity of taking\nprecautions lest mankind, thus unexpectedly protected against sickness\nand death, should no longer stand in need of the immortal gods: he\nsmote Askl\u00eapius with thunder and killed him. Apollo was so exasperated\nby this slaughter of his highly-gifted son, that he killed the Cycl\u00f4pes\nwho had fabricated the thunder, and Zeus was about to condemn him to\nTartarus for doing so; but on the intercession of Lat\u00f4na he relented,\nand was satisfied with imposing upon him a temporary servitude in the\nhouse of Adm\u00eatus at Pher\u00e6.\n\n  [419] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 10, 3; Hesiod, Fragm. 141-142,\n  Marktscheff.; Strab. ix. p. 442; Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm. 8; Akusilaus,\n  Fragm. 25, Didot.\n\n    \u03a4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03be, \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2\n    \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u1f7c \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f20\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03b7\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f00\u0390\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\n    \u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03b2\u1ff3 \u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03b5\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u1fc3, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f3c\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b5 \u039a\u03cc\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9\u03bd\n    \u0395\u1f30\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03a6\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cd\u03b1\u03bf \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b3\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03b8\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1. (Hesiod, Fr.)\n\n  The change of the color of the crow is noticed both in Ovid,\n  Metamorph. ii. 632, in Antonin. Liberal. c. 20, and in Servius ad\n  Virgil. \u00c6neid. vii. 761, though the name \u201c_Corvo_ custode ejus\u201d\n  is there printed with a capital letter, as if it were a man named\n  _Corvus_.\n\n  [420] Schol. Eurip. Alk\u00east. 1; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 71; Apollod\u00f4r. iii.\n  10, 3; Pindar, Pyth. iii. 59; Sextus Empiric. adv. Grammatic. i.\n  12. p. 271. Stesichorus named Eriphyl\u00ea\u2014the Naupaktian verses,\n  Hippolytus\u2014(compare Servius ad Virgil. \u00c6neid. vii. 761);\n  Panyasis, Tyndareus; a proof of the popularity of this tale among\n  the poets. Pindar says that \u00c6sculapius was \u201ctempted by gold\u201d to\n  raise a man from the dead, and Plato (Legg. iii. p. 408) copies\n  him: this seems intended to afford some color for the subsequent\n  punishment. \u201cMercede id captum (observes Boeckh. ad Pindar. _l.\n  c._) \u00c6sculapium fecisse recentior est fictio; Pindari fortasse\n  ipsius, quem tragici secuti sunt: haud dubie a medicorum avaris\n  moribus profecta, qui Gr\u00e6corum medicis nostrisque communes\n  sunt.\u201d The rapacity of the physicians (granting it to be ever\n  so well-founded, both then and now) appears to me less likely\n  to have operated upon the mind of Pindar, than the disposition\n  to extenuate the cruelty of Zeus, by imputing guilty and sordid\n  views to Askl\u00eapius. Compare the citation from Dik\u00e6archus,\n  _infr\u00e0_, p. 249, note 1.\n\nAskl\u00eapius was worshipped with very great solemnity at Trikka, at K\u00f4s,\nat Knidus, and in many different parts of Greece, but especially at\nEpidaurus, so that more than one legend had grown up respecting the\ndetails of his birth and adventures: in particular, his mother was\nby some called Arsino\u00ea. But a formal application had been made on\nthis subject (so the Epidaurians told Pausanias) to the oracle of\nDelphi, and the god in reply acknowledged that Askl\u00eapius was his son\nby Kor\u00f4nis.[421] The tale above recounted seems to have been both the\noldest and the most current. It is adorned by Pindar in a noble ode,\nwherein however he omits all mention of the raven as messenger\u2014not\nspecifying who or what the spy was from whom Apollo learnt the\ninfidelity of Kor\u00f4nis. By many this was considered as an improvement in\nrespect of poetical effect, but it illustrates the mode in which the\ncharacteristic details and simplicity of the old fables[422] came to be\nexchanged for dignified generalities, adapted to the altered taste of\nsociety.\n\n  [421] Pausan. ii. 26, where several distinct stories are\n  mentioned, each springing up at some one or other of the\n  sanctuaries of the god: quite enough to justify the idea of these\n  \u00c6sculapii (Cicero, N. D. iii. 22).\n\n  Homer, Hymn ad \u00c6sculap. 2. The tale briefly alluded to in the\n  Homeric Hymn. ad Apollin. 209. is evidently different: Ischys is\n  there the companion of Apollo, and Kor\u00f4nis is an Arcadian damsel.\n\n  Aristid\u00eas, the fervent worshipper of Askl\u00eapius, adopted the story\n  of Kor\u00f4nis, and composed hymns on the \u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 (Orat. 23. p. 463, Dind.).\n\n  [422] See Pindar, Pyth. iii. The Scholiast puts a construction\n  upon Pindar\u2019s words which is at any rate far-fetched, if indeed\n  it be at all admissible: he supposes that Apollo knew the fact\n  from his own omniscience, without any informant, and he praises\n  Pindar for having thus transformed the old fable. But the words\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd seem certainly to imply some informant: to\n  suppose that \u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd means the god\u2019s own mind, is a strained\n  interpretation.\n\nMacha\u00f4n and Podaleirius, the two sons of Askl\u00eapius, command the\ncontingent from Trikka, in the north-west region of Thessaly, at\nthe siege of Troy by Agamemn\u00f4n.[423] They are the leeches of the\nGrecian army, highly prized and consulted by all the wounded chiefs.\nTheir medical renown was further prolonged in the subsequent poem\nof Arktinus, the Iliu-Persis, wherein the one was represented as\nunrivalled in surgical operations, the other as sagacious in detecting\nand appreciating morbid symptoms. It was Podaleirius who first noticed\nthe glaring eyes and disturbed deportment which preceded the suicide\nof Ajax.[424]\n\n  [423] Iliad, ii. 730. The Mess\u00eanians laid claim to the sons of\n  Askl\u00eapius as their heroes, and tried to justify the pretension by\n  a forced construction of Homer (Pausan. iii. 4, 2).\n\n  [424] Arktinus, Epicc. Gr\u00e6c. Fragm. 2. p. 22, D\u00fcntzer. The\n  Ilias Minor mentioned the death of Macha\u00f4n by Eurypylus, son of\n  T\u00ealephus (Fragm. 5. p. 19, D\u00fcntzer).\n\nGalen appears uncertain whether Askl\u00eapius (as well as Dionysus) was\noriginally a god, or whether he was first a man and then became\nafterwards a god;[425] but Apollod\u00f4rus professed to fix the exact\ndate of his apotheosis.[426] Throughout all the historical ages the\ndescendants of Askl\u00eapius were numerous and widely diffused. The many\nfamilies or gentes called Askl\u00eapiads, who devoted themselves to the\nstudy and practice of medicine, and who principally dwelt near the\ntemples of Askl\u00eapius whither sick and suffering men came to obtain\nrelief\u2014all recognized the god not merely as the object of their common\nworship, but also as their actual progenitor. Like Sol\u00f4n, who reckoned\nN\u00ealeus and Poseid\u00f4n as his ancestors, or the Mil\u00easian Hekat\u00e6us, who\ntraced his origin through fifteen successive links to a god\u2014like\nthe privileged gens at P\u00ealion in Thessaly,[427] who considered the\nwise Centaur Cheir\u00f4n as their progenitor, and who inherited from him\ntheir precious secrets respecting the medicinal herbs of which their\nneighborhood was full,\u2014Askl\u00eapiads, even of the later times, numbered\nand specified all the intermediate links which separated them from\ntheir primitive divine parent. One of these genealogies has been\npreserved to us, and we may be sure that there were many such, as\nthe Askl\u00eapiads were found in many different places.[428] Among them\nwere enrolled highly instructed and accomplished men, such as the\ngreat Hippocrat\u00eas and the historian Kt\u00easias, who prided themselves on\nthe divine origin of themselves and their gens[429]\u2014so much did the\nlegendary element pervade even the most philosophical and positive\nminds of historical Greece. Nor can there be any doubt that their\nmeans of medical observation must have been largely extended by\ntheir vicinity to a temple so much frequented by the sick, who came\nin confident hopes of divine relief, and who, whilst they offered\nup sacrifice and prayer to \u00c6sculapius, and slept in his temple in\norder to be favored with healing suggestions in their dreams, might,\nin case the god withheld his supernatural aid, consult his living\ndescendants.[430] The sick visitors at K\u00f4s, or Trikka, or Epidaurus,\nwere numerous and constant, and the tablets usually hung up to record\nthe particulars of their maladies, the remedies resorted to, and the\ncures operated by the god, formed both an interesting decoration of the\nsacred ground and an instructive memorial to the Askl\u00eapiads.[431]\n\n  [425] \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f24\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\n  \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03af (Galen, Protreptic. 9. t. 1. p. 22, K\u00fchn.).\n  Pausanias considers him as \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 (ii. 26, 7). In the\n  important temple at Smyrna he was worshipped as \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2\n  (Aristid\u00eas, Or. 6. p. 64; Or. 23. p. 456, Dind.).\n\n  [426] Apollod\u00f4r. ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 381; see Heyne,\n  Fragment. Apollod\u00f4r. p. 410. According to Apollod\u00f4rus, the\n  apotheosis of H\u00earakl\u00eas and of \u00c6sculapius took place at the same\n  time, thirty-eight years after H\u00earakl\u00eas began to reign at Argos.\n\n  [427] About Hekat\u00e6us, Herodot. ii. 143; about Sol\u00f4n, Diogen.\n  La\u00ebrt. Vit. Platon. init.\n\n  A curious fragment, preserved from the lost works of Dik\u00e6archus,\n  tells us of the descendants of the Centaur Cheir\u00f4n at the town of\n  P\u00ealion, or perhaps at the neighboring town of D\u00eam\u00eatrias,\u2014it is\n  not quite certain which, perhaps at both (see Dik\u00e6arch. Fragment.\n  ed. Fuhr, p. 408). \u03a4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f13\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5\n  \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03a7\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03ba\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u03c5\u1f31\u1ff7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f21 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2\n  \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\n  \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1.\n\n  Plato, de Republ. iii. 4 (p. 391). \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3\n  \u03a7\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2. Compare Xenoph\u00f4n, De Venat. c. 1.\n\n  [428] See the genealogy at length in Le Clerc, Historie de\n  la M\u00e9decine, lib. ii. c. 2. p. 78, also p. 287; also Littr\u00e9,\n  Introduction aux \u0152uvres Compl\u00e8tes d\u2019Hippocrate, t. i. p. 35.\n  Hippocrat\u00eas was the seventeenth from \u00c6sculapius.\n\n  Theopompus the historian went at considerable length into the\n  pedigree of the Askl\u00eapiads of K\u00f4s and Knidus, tracing them up\n  to Podaleirius and his first settlement at Syrnus in Karia (see\n  Theopomp. Fragm. 111, Didot): Polyanthus of Kyr\u00ean\u00ea composed\n  a special treatise \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (Sextus\n  Empiric. adv. Grammat. i. 12. p. 271); see Stephan. Byz. v. \u039a\u1ff6\u03c2,\n  and especially Aristid\u00eas, Orat. vii. _Ascl\u00eapiad\u00e6_. The Askl\u00eapiads\n  were even reckoned among the \u1f08\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 of Rhodes, jointly with\n  the H\u00earakleids (Aristid\u00eas, Or. 44, ad Rhod. p. 839, Dind.).\n\n  In the extensive sacred enclosure at Epidaurus stood the\n  statues of Askl\u00eapius and his wife Epion\u00ea (Pausan. ii. 29, 1):\n  two daughters are coupled with him by Aristophan\u00eas, and he was\n  considered especially \u03b5\u1f54\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 (Plutus, 654); Jaso, Panakeia and\n  Hygieia are named by Aristid\u00eas.\n\n  [429] Plato, Protagor. c. 6 (p. 311). \u1f39\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039a\u1ff6\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd; also Ph\u00e6dr. c. 121. (p. 270). About Kt\u00easias,\n  Galen, Opp. t. v. p. 652, Basil.; and Bahrt, Fragm. Kt\u00easi\u00e6, p. 20.\n  Aristotle (see Stahr. Aristotelia, i. p. 32) and Xenoph\u00f4n, the\n  physician of the emperor Claudius, were both Askl\u00eapiads (Tacit.\n  Annal. xii. 61). Plato, de Republ. iii. 405, calls them \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c8\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n  Pausanias, a distinguished physician at Gela in Sicily, and\n  contemporary of the philosopher Empedokl\u00eas, was also an\n  Askl\u00eapiad: see the verses of Empedokl\u00eas upon him, Diogen. La\u00ebrt.\n  viii. 61.\n\n  [430] Strabo, viii. p. 374; Aristophan. Vesp. 122; Plutus,\n  635-750; where the visit to the temple of \u00c6sculapius is described\n  in great detail, though with a broad farcical coloring.\n\n  During the last illness of Alexander the Great, several of his\n  principal officers slept in the temple of Serapis, in the hope\n  that remedies would be suggested to them in their dreams (Arrian,\n  vii. 26).\n\n  Pausanias, in describing the various temples of Askl\u00eapius which\n  he saw, announces as a fact quite notorious and well-understood,\n  \u201cHere cures are wrought by the god\u201d (ii. 36, 1; iii. 26, 7; vii.\n  27, 4): see Suidas, v. \u1f08\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2. The Orations of Aristid\u00eas,\n  especially the 6th and 7th, _Askl\u00eapius and the Askl\u00eapiad\u00e6_,\n  are the most striking manifestations of faith and thanksgiving\n  towards \u00c6sculapius, as well as attestations of his extensive\n  working throughout the Grecian world; also Orat. 23 and 25, \u1f39\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, 1 and 3; and Or. 45 (De Rhetoric\u00e2, p. 22. Dind.), \u03b1\u1f35 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76, etc.\n\n  [431] Pausan. ii. 27, 3; 36, 1. \u03a4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\n  \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03cc\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1, \u1f45,\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03c3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f30\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7,\u2014the cures are\n  wrought by the god himself.\n\nThe genealogical descent of Hippocrat\u00eas and the other Askl\u00eapiads\nfrom the god Askl\u00eapius is not only analogous to that of Hekat\u00e6us and\nSol\u00f4n from their respective ancestoral gods, but also to that of the\nLaced\u00e6m\u00f4nian kings from H\u00earakl\u00eas, upon the basis of which the whole\nsupposed chronology of the ante-historical times has been built, from\nEratosthen\u00eas and Apollod\u00f4rus down to the chronologers of the present\ncentury.[432] I shall revert to this hereafter.\n\n  [432] \u201cApollod\u00f4rus \u00e6tatem Herculis pro cardine chronologi\u00e6\n  habuit\u201d (Heyne, ad Apollod\u00f4r. Fragm. p. 410).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n\u00c6AKUS AND HIS DESCENDANTS.\u2014\u00c6GINA, SALAMIS, AND PHTHIA.\n\n\nThe memorable heroic genealogy of the \u00c6akids establishes a fabulous\nconnection between \u00c6gina, Salamis, and Phthia, which we can only\nrecognize as a fact, without being able to trace its origin.\n\n\u00c6akus was the son of Zeus, born of \u00c6gina, daughter of As\u00f4pus, whom the\ngod had carried off and brought into the island to which he gave her\nname: she was afterwards married to Akt\u00f4r, and had by him Men\u0153tius,\nfather of Patroclus. As there were two rivers named As\u00f4pus, one\nbetween Phlius and Siky\u00f4n, and another between Th\u00eabes and Plat\u00e6a\u2014so\nthe \u00c6gin\u00eatan heroic genealogy was connected both with that of Th\u00eabes\nand with that of Phlius: and this belief led to practical consequences\nin the minds of those who accepted the legends as genuine history. For\nwhen the Th\u00eabans, in the 68th Olympiad, were hard-pressed in war by\nAthens, they were directed by the Delphian oracle to ask assistance\nof their next of kin: recollecting that Th\u00eab\u00ea and \u00c6gina had been\nsisters, common daughters of As\u00f4pus, they were induced to apply to the\n\u00c6gin\u00eatans as their next of kin, and the \u00c6gin\u00eatans gave them aid, first\nby sending to them their common heroes, the \u00c6akids, next by actual\narmed force.[433] Pindar dwells emphatically on the heroic brotherhood\nbetween Th\u00eabes, his native city, and \u00c6gina.[434]\n\n  [433] Herodot. v. 81.\n\n  [434] Nem. iv. 22. Isthm. vii. 16.\n\n\u00c6akus was alone in \u00c6gina: to relieve him from this solitude, Zeus\nchanged all the ants in the island into men, and thus provided him\nwith a numerous population, who, from their origin, were called\nMyrmidons.[435] By his wife End\u00eais, daughter of Cheir\u00f4n, \u00c6akus had for\nhis sons P\u00ealeus and Telam\u00f4n: by the Nereid Psamath\u00ea, he had Ph\u00f4kus. A\nmonstrous crime had then recently been committed by Pelops, in killing\nthe Arcadian prince, Stymphalus, under a simulation of friendship and\nhospitality: for this the gods had smitten all Greece with famine\nand barrenness. The oracles affirmed that nothing could relieve\nGreece from this intolerable misery except the prayers of \u00c6akus, the\nmost pious of mankind. Accordingly envoys from all quarters flocked\nto \u00c6gina, to prevail upon \u00c6akus to put up prayers for them: on his\nsupplications the gods relented, and the suffering immediately ceased.\nThe grateful Greeks established in \u00c6gina the temple and worship of Zeus\nPanhell\u00eanius, one of the lasting monuments and institutions of the\nisland, on the spot where \u00c6akus had offered up his prayer. The statues\nof the envoys who had come to solicit him were yet to be seen in the\n\u00c6akeion, or sacred edifice of \u00c6akus, in the time of Pausanias: and the\nAthenian Isokrat\u00eas, in his eulogy of Evagoras, the despot of Salamis in\nCyprus (who traced his descent through Teukrus to \u00c6akus), enlarges upon\nthis signal miracle, recounted and believed by other Greeks as well as\nby the \u00c6gin\u00eatans, as a proof both of the great qualities and of the\ndivine favor and patronage displayed in the career of the \u00c6akids.[436]\n\u00c6akus was also employed to aid Poseid\u00f4n and Apollo in building the\nwalls of Troy.[437]\n\n  [435] This tale, respecting the transformation of the ants into\n  men, is as old as the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women. See D\u00fcntzer,\n  Fragm. Epicc. 21. p. 34; evidently an etymological tale from the\n  name Myrmidones. Pausanias throws aside both the etymology and\n  the details of the miracle: he says that Zeus raised men from the\n  earth, at the prayer of \u00c6akus (ii. 29, 2): other authors retained\n  the etymology of Myrmidons from \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2, but gave a different\n  explanation (Kallimachus, Fragm. 114, D\u00fcntzer). \u039c\u03c5\u03c1\u03bc\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c3\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\n  (Strabo, viii. p. 375). \u1f18\u03c3\u03c3\u1f74\u03bd, \u1f41 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2 (Hygin. fab. 52).\n\n  According to the Thessalian legend, Myrmid\u00f4n was the son of\n  Zeus by Eurymedusa, daughter of Kletor; Zeus having assumed the\n  disguise of an ant (Clemens Alex. Admon. ad Gent. p. 25. Sylb.).\n\n  [436] Apollod. iii. 12, 6. Isokrat. Evagor. Encom. vol. ii. p.\n  278, Auger. Pausan. i. 45, 13; ii. 29, 6. Schol. Aristoph. Equit.\n  1253.\n\n  So in the 106th Psalm, respecting the Israelites and Phinees, v.\n  29, \u201cThey provoked the Lord to anger by their inventions, and the\n  plague was great among them;\u201d \u201cThen stood up Phinees and prayed,\n  and so the plague ceased;\u201d \u201cAnd that was counted unto him for\n  righteousness, among all posterities for evermore.\u201d\n\n  [437] Pindar, Olymp. viii. 41, with the Scholia. Didymus did not\n  find this story in any other poet older than Pindar.\n\nP\u00ealeus and Telam\u00f4n, the sons of \u00c6akus, contracting a jealousy of\ntheir bastard brother, Ph\u00f4kus, in consequence of his eminent skill in\ngymnastic contests, conspired to put him to death. Telam\u00f4n flung his\nquoit at him while they were playing together, and P\u00ealeus despatched\nhim by a blow with his hatchet in the back. They then concealed the\ndead body in a wood, but \u00c6akus, having discovered both the act and the\nagents, banished the brothers from the island.[438] For both of them\neminent destinies were in store.\n\n  [438] Apollod. iii. 12, 6, who relates the tale somewhat\n  differently; but the old epic poem Alkm\u00e6\u00f4nis gave the details\n  (ap. Schol. Eurip. Andromach. 685)\u2014\n\n    \u1f1c\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03ca \u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u1ff3\n    \u03a0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03be\u03b5 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03b7\u00b7 \u03a0\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b8\u03bf\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u1f08\u03be\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03b0\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1.\n\nWhile we notice the indifference to the moral quality of actions\nimplied in the old Hesiodic legend, when it imputes distinctly and\nnakedly this proceeding to two of the most admired persons of the\nheroic world\u2014it is not less instructive to witness the change of\nfeeling which had taken place in the age of Pindar. That warm eulogist\nof the great \u00c6akid race hangs down his head with shame, and declines\nto recount, though he is obliged darkly to glance at the cause which\nforced the pious \u00c6akus to banish his sons from \u00c6gina. It appears that\nKallimachus, if we may judge by a short fragment, manifested the same\nrepugnance to mention it.[439]\n\n  [439] Pindar, Nem. v. 15, with Scholia, and Kallimach. Frag. 136.\n  Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius represents the fratricide as inadvertent and\n  unintentional (i. 92); one instance amongst many of the tendency\n  to soften down and moralize the ancient tales.\n\n  Pindar, however, seems to forget this incident when he speaks\n  in other places of the general character of P\u00ealeus (Olymp. ii.\n  75-86. Isthm. vii. 40).\n\nTelam\u00f4n retired to Salamis, then ruled by Kychreus, the son of Poseid\u00f4n\nand Salamis, who had recently rescued the island from the plague of\na terrible serpent. This animal, expelled from Salamis, retired to\nEleusis in Attica, where it was received and harbored by the goddess\nD\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear in her sacred domicile.[440] Kychreus dying childless left his\ndominion to Telam\u00f4n, who, marrying Perib\u0153a, daughter of Alkathoos,\nand grand-daughter of Pelops, had for his son the celebrated Ajax.\nTelam\u00f4n took part both in the chase of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar and in the\nArgonautic expedition: he was also the intimate friend and companion of\nH\u00earakl\u00eas, whom he accompanied in his enterprise against the Amazons,\nand in the attack made with only six ships upon Laomed\u00f4n, king of Troy.\nThis last enterprise having proved completely successful, Telam\u00f4n was\nrewarded by H\u00earakl\u00eas with the possession of the daughter of Laomed\u00f4n,\nH\u00easion\u00ea\u2014who bore to him Teukros, the most distinguished archer amidst\nthe host of Agamemn\u00f4n, and the founder of Salamis in Cyprus.[441]\n\n  [440] Apollod. iii. 12, 7. Euphori\u00f4n, Fragm. 5, D\u00fcntzer, p.\n  43, Epicc. Gr\u00e6c. There may have been a tutelary serpent in the\n  temple at Eleusis, as there was in that of Ath\u00ean\u00ea Polias at\n  Athens (Herodot viii. 41. Photius, v. \u039f\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f44\u03c6\u03b9\u03bd. Aristophan.\n  Lysistr. 759, with the Schol.).\n\n  [441] Apollod. iii. 12, 7. Hesiod. ap. Strab. ix. p. 393.\n\n  The libation and prayer of H\u00earakl\u00eas, prior to the birth of Ajax,\n  and his fixing the name of the yet unborn child, from an eagle\n  (\u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2) which appeared in response to his words, was detailed in\n  the Hesiodic Eoia, and is celebrated by Pindar (Isthm. v. 30-54).\n  See also the Scholia.\n\nP\u00ealeus went to Phthia, where he married the daughter of Euryti\u00f4n,\nson of Akt\u00f4r, and received from him the third part of his dominions.\nTaking part in the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt, he unintentionally killed his\nfather-in-law Euryti\u00f4n, and was obliged to flee to I\u00f4lkos, where he\nreceived purification from Akastus, son of Pelias: the danger to which\nhe became exposed by the calumnious accusations of the enamoured wife\nof Akastus has already been touched upon in a previous section. P\u00ealeus\nalso was among the Argonauts; the most memorable event in his life\nhowever was his marriage with the sea-goddess Thetis. Zeus and Poseid\u00f4n\nhad both conceived a violent passion for Thetis. But the former, having\nbeen forewarned by Prom\u00eatheus that Thetis was destined to give birth to\na son more powerful than his father, compelled her, much against her\nown will, to marry P\u00ealeus; who, instructed by the intimations of the\nwise Cheir\u00f4n, was enabled to seize her on the coast called S\u00eapias in\nthe southern region of Thessaly. She changed her form several times,\nbut P\u00ealeus held her fast until she resumed her original appearance,\nand she was then no longer able to resist. All the gods were present,\nand brought splendid gifts to these memorable nuptials: Apollo sang\nwith his harp, Poseid\u00f4n gave to P\u00ealeus the immortal horses Xanthos and\nBalios, and Cheir\u00f4n presented a formidable spear, cut from an ash-tree\non Mount P\u00ealion. We shall have reason hereafter to recognize the value\nof both these gifts in the exploits of Achilles.[442]\n\n  [442] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 13, 5. Homer, Iliad, xviii. 434; xxiv. 62.\n  Pindar, Nem. iv. 50-68; Isthm. vii. 27-50. Herodot. vii. 192.\n  Catullus, Carm. 64. Epithal. Pel. et Thetidos, with the prefatory\n  remarks of D\u0153ring.\n\n  The nuptials of P\u00ealeus and Thetis were much celebrated in the\n  Hesiodic Catalogue, or perhaps in the Eoiai (D\u00fcntzer, Epic. Gr\u00e6c.\n  Frag. 36. p. 39), and \u00c6gimius\u2014see Schol. ad Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv.\n  869\u2014where there is a curious attempt of Staphylus to rationalize\n  the marriage of P\u00ealeus and Thetis.\n\n  There was a town, seemingly near Pharsalus in Thessaly, called\n  Thetideium. Thetis is said to have been carried by P\u00ealeus to both\n  these places: probably it grew up round a temple and sanctuary of\n  this goddess (Pherekyd. Frag. 16, Didot; Hellank. ap. Steph. Byz.\n  \u0398\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd).\n\nThe prominent part assigned to Thetis in the Iliad is well known,\nand the post-Homeric poets of the Legend of Troy introduced her as\nactively concurring first to promote the glory, finally to bewail the\ndeath of her distinguished son.[443] P\u00ealeus, having survived both his\nson Achilles and his grandson Neoptolemus, is ultimately directed to\nplace himself on the very spot where he had originally seized Thetis,\nand thither the goddess comes herself to fetch him away, in order\nthat he may exchange the desertion and decrepitude of age for a life\nof immortality along with the N\u00eareids.[444] The spot was indicated to\nXerx\u00eas when he marched into Greece by the I\u00f4nians who accompanied him,\nand his magi offered solemn sacrifices to her as well as to the other\nN\u00eareids, as the presiding goddesses and mistresses of the coast.[445]\n\n  [443] See the arguments of the lost poems, the Cypria and the\n  \u00c6thiopis, as given by Proclus, in D\u00fcntzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr. p.\n  11-16; also Schol. ad Iliad. xvi. 140; and the extract from the\n  lost \u03a8\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 of \u00c6schylus, ap. Plato. de Republic. ii. c. 21\n  (p. 382, St.).\n\n  [444] Eurip. Androm. 1242-1260; Pindar, Olymp. ii. 86.\n\n  [445] Herodot. vii. 198.\n\nNeoptolemus or Pyrrhus, the son of Achilles, too young to engage in the\ncommencement of the siege of Troy, comes on the stage after the death\nof his father as the indispensable and prominent agent in the final\ncapture of the city. He returns victor from Troy, not to Phthia, but to\nEpirus, bringing with him the captive Andromach\u00ea, widow of Hect\u00f4r, by\nwhom Molossus is born to him. He himself perishes in the full vigor of\nlife at Delphi by the machinations of Orest\u00eas, son of Agamemn\u00f4n. But\nhis son Molossus\u2014like Fleance, the son of Banquo, in Macbeth\u2014becomes\nthe father of the powerful race of Molossian kings, who played so\nconspicuous a part during the declining vigor of the Grecian cities,\nand to whom the title and parentage of \u00c6akids was a source of peculiar\npride, identifying them by community of heroic origin with genuine and\nundisputed Hell\u00eanes.[446]\n\n  [446] Plutarch, Pyrrh. 1; Justin, xi. 3; Eurip. Androm. 1253;\n  Arrian, Exp. Alexand. i. 11.\n\nThe glories of Ajax, the second grandson of \u00c6akus, before Troy, are\nsurpassed only by those of Achilles. He perishes by his own hand,\nthe victim of an insupportable feeling of humiliation, because a\nless worthy claimant is allowed to carry off from him the arms of\nthe departed Achilles. His son Phil\u00e6us receives the citizenship of\nAthens, and the gens or d\u00eame called Philaid\u00e6 traced up to him its name\nand its origin: moreover the distinguished Athenians, Miltiad\u00eas and\nThucydid\u00eas, were regarded as members of this heroic progeny.[447]\n\n  [447] Pherekyd\u00eas and Hellanikus ap. Marcellin. Vit. Thucydid.\n  init.; Pausan. ii. 29, 4; Plutarch, Sol\u00f4n, 10. According to\n  Apollod\u00f4rus, however, Pherekyd\u00eas said that Telam\u00f4n was only the\n  friend of P\u00ealeus, not his brother,\u2014not the son of \u00c6akus (iii. 12,\n  7): this seems an inconsistency. There was however a warm dispute\n  between the Athenians and the Megarians respecting the title to\n  the hero Ajax, who was claimed by both (see Pausan. i. 42, 4;\n  Plutarch, _l. c._): the Megarians accused Peisistratus of having\n  interpolated a line into the Catalogue in the Iliad (Strabo, ix.\n  p. 394).\n\nTeukrus escaped from the perils of the siege of Troy as well as from\nthose of the voyage homeward, and reached Salamis in safety. But\nhis father Telam\u00f4n, indignant at his having returned without Ajax,\nrefused to receive him, and compelled him to expatriate. He conducted\nhis followers to Cyprus, where he founded the city of Salamis: his\ndescendant Evagoras was recognized as a Teukrid and as an \u00c6akid even in\nthe time of Isokrat\u00eas.[448]\n\n  [448] Herodot. vii. 90; Isokrat. Enc. Evag. _ut sup._; Sophokl.\n  Ajax, 984-995; Vellei. Patercul. i. 1; \u00c6schyl. Pers. 891, and\n  Schol. The return from Troy of Teukrus, his banishment by\n  Telam\u00f4n, and his settlement in Cyprus, formed the subject of the\n  \u03a4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 of Sophokl\u00eas, and of a tragedy under a similar title by\n  Pacuvius (Cicero de Orat. i. 58; ii. 46); Sophokl. Ajax, 892;\n  Pacuvii Fragm. Teucr. 15.\u2014\n\n    \u201cTe repudio, nec recipio, natum abdico,\n    Facesse.\u201d\n\n  The legend of Teukros was connected in Attic arch\u00e6ology with the\n  peculiar functions and formalities of the judicature, \u1f10\u03bd \u03a6\u03c1\u03b5\u03b1\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\n  (Pausan. i. 28, 12; ii. 29, 7).\n\nSuch was the splendid heroic genealogy of the \u00c6akids,\u2014a family renowned\nfor military excellence. The \u00c6akeion at \u00c6gina, in which prayer and\nsacrifice were offered to \u00c6akus, remained in undiminished dignity down\nto the time of Pausanias.[449] This genealogy connects together various\neminent gentes in Achaia Phthi\u00f4tis, in \u00c6gina, in Salamis, in Cyprus,\nand amongst the Epirotic Molossians. Whether we are entitled to infer\nfrom it that the island of \u00c6gina was originally peopled by Myrmidones\nfrom Achaia Phthi\u00f4tis, as O. M\u00fcller imagines,[450] I will not pretend\nto affirm. These mythical pedigrees seem to unite together special\nclans or gentes, rather than the bulk of any community\u2014just as we know\nthat the Athenians generally had no part in the \u00c6akid genealogy, though\ncertain particular Athenian families laid claim to it. The intimate\nfriendship between Achilles and the Opuntian hero Patroclus\u2014and the\ncommunity of name and frequent conjunction between the Locrian Ajax,\nson of O\u00efleus, and Ajax, son of Telam\u00f4n\u2014connect the \u00c6akids with Opus\nand the Opuntian Locrians, in a manner which we have no farther means\nof explaining. Pindar too represents Men\u0153tius, father of Patroclus, as\nson of Akt\u00f4r and \u00c6gina, and therefore maternal brother of \u00c6akus.[451]\n\n  [449] Hesiod, Fragm. D\u00fcntz. Eoiai, 55, y. 43.\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f48\u03bb\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9,\n    \u039d\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  Polyb. v. 2.\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f30\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f20\u03b0\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03af.\n\n  [450] See his \u00c6ginetica, p. 14, his earliest work.\n\n  [451] Pindar, Olymp. ix. 74. The hero Ajax, son of O\u00efleus, was\n  especially worshipped at Opus; solemn festivals and games were\n  celebrated in his honor.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\nATTIC LEGENDS AND GENEALOGIES.\n\n\nThe most ancient name in Attic arch\u00e6ology, as far as our means of\ninformation reach, is that of Erechtheus, who is mentioned both in\nthe Catalogue of the Iliad and in a brief allusion of the Odyssey.\nBorn of the Earth, he is brought up by the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea, adopted\nby her as her ward, and installed in her temple at Athens, where the\nAthenians offer to him annual sacrifices. The Athenians are styled in\nthe Iliad, \u201cthe people of Erechtheus.\u201d[452] This is the most ancient\ntestimony concerning Erechtheus, exhibiting him as a divine or heroic,\ncertainly a superhuman person, and identifying him with the primitive\ngermination (if I may use a term, the Grecian equivalent of which would\nhave pleased an Athenian ear) of Attic man. And he was recognized in\nthis same character, even at the close of the fourth century before the\nChristian \u00e6ra, by the Butad\u00e6, one of the most ancient and important\nGentes at Athens, who boasted of him as their original ancestor: the\ngenealogy of the great Athenian orator Lykurgus, a member of this\nfamily, drawn up by his son Abr\u00f4n, and painted on a public tablet in\nthe Erechtheion, contained as its first and highest name, Erechtheus,\nson of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos and the Earth. In the Erechtheion, Erechtheus\nwas worshipped conjointly with Ath\u00ean\u00ea: he was identified with the\ngod Poseid\u00f4n, and bore the denomination of Poseid\u00f4n Erechtheus:\none of the family of the Butad\u00e6, chosen among themselves by lot,\nenjoyed the privilege and performed the functions of his hereditary\npriest.[453] Herodotus also assigns the same earth-born origin to\nErechtheus:[454] but Pindar, the old poem called the Danais, Euripid\u00eas\nand Apollod\u00f4rus\u2014all name Erichthonius, son of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos and the Earth,\nas the being who was thus adopted and made the temple-companion of\nAth\u00ean\u00ea, while Apollod\u00f4rus in another place identifies Erichthonius\nwith Poseid\u00f4n.[455] The Homeric scholiast treated Erechtheus and\nErichthonius as the same person under two names:[456] and since, in\nregard to such mythical persons, there exists no other test of identity\nof the subject except perfect similarity of the attributes, this seems\nthe reasonable conclusion.\n\n  [452] Iliad, ii. 546. Odyss. vii. 81.\u2014\n\n      \u039f\u1f33 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd ...\n    \u0394\u1fc6\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f45\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\n    \u0398\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u03b5, \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1, \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b6\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f0c\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1,\n    \u039a\u1f70\u03b4 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03ae\u03bd\u1fc3\u03c3\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f37\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f11\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c0\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b7\u1ff7,\n    \u1f18\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03bb\u03ac\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u039a\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n  [453] See the Life of Lykurgus, in Plutarch\u2019s (I call it by\n  that name, as it is always printed with his works) Lives of the\n  Ten Orators, tom. iv. p. 382-384, Wytt. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u1fc6\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0393\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 ... \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74 \u1f21\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, etc. \u1f4b\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c7\u03b5 (pp. 382, 383). Erechtheus\n  \u03a0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 of Ath\u00ean\u00ea\u2014Aristid\u00eas, Panathenaic. p. 184, with the\n  Scholia of Frommel.\n\n  But\u00eas, the eponymus of the Butad\u00e6, is the first priest of\n  Poseid\u00f4n Erichthonius: Apollod. iii. 15, 1. So Kallias (Xenoph.\n  Sympos. viii. 40), \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\n  [454] Herodot. viii. 55.\n\n  [455] Harpokration, v. \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd. \u1f49 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03a0\u03af\u03bd\u03b4\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u0394\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u0390\u03b4\u03b1\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u1f7c\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03be \u1f29\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0393\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n  Euripid\u00eas, Ion. 21. Apollod. iii. 14, 6; 15, 1. Compare Plato,\n  Tim\u00e6us, c. 6.\n\n  [456] Schol. ad Iliad, ii. 546, where he cites also Kallimachus\n  for the story of Erichthonius. Etymologicon Magn. \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2.\n  Plato (Kritias, c. 4) employs vague and general language to\n  describe the agency of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos and Ath\u00ean\u00ea, which the old fable\n  in Apollod\u00f4rus (iii. 14, 6) details in coarser terms. See Ovid,\n  Metam. ii. 757.\n\nWe may presume, from the testimony of Homer, that the first and oldest\nconception of Athens and its sacred acropolis places it under the\nspecial protection, and represents it as the settlement and favorite\nabode of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, jointly with Poseid\u00f4n; the latter being the inferior,\nthough the chosen companion of the former, and therefore exchanging\nhis divine appellation for the cognomen of Erechtheus. But the country\ncalled Attica, which, during the historical ages, forms one social and\npolitical aggregate with Athens, was originally distributed into many\nindependent d\u00eames or cantons, and included, besides, various religious\nclans or hereditary sects (if the expression may be permitted); that\nis, a multitude of persons not necessarily living together in the same\nlocality, but bound together by an hereditary communion of sacred\nrites, and claiming privileges, as well as performing obligations,\nfounded upon the traditional authority of divine persons for whom\nthey had a common veneration. Even down to the beginning of the\nPeloponnesian war, the demots of the various Attic d\u00eames, though long\nsince embodied in the larger political union of Attica, and having no\nwish for separation, still retained the recollection of their original\npolitical autonomy. They lived in their own separate localities,\nresorted habitually to their own temples, and visited Athens only\noccasionally for private or political business, or for the great public\nfestivals. Each of these aggregates, political as well as religious,\nhad its own eponymous god or hero, with a genealogy more or less\nextended, and a train of mythical incidents more or less copious,\nattached to his name, according to the fancy of the local exegetes and\npoets. The eponymous heroes Marath\u00f4n, Dekelus, Kol\u00f4nus, or Phlius, had\neach their own title to worship, and their own position as themes of\nlegendary narrative, independent of Erechtheus, or Poseid\u00f4n, or Ath\u00ean\u00ea,\nthe patrons of the acropolis common to all of them.\n\nBut neither the arch\u00e6ology of Attica, nor that of its various component\nfractions, was much dwelt upon by the ancient epic poets of Greece.\nTheseus is noticed both in the Iliad and Odyssey as having carried\noff from Kr\u00eate Ariadn\u00ea, the daughter of Minos\u2014thus commencing that\nconnection between the Kr\u00eatan and Athenian legends which we afterwards\nfind so largely amplified\u2014and the sons of Th\u00easeus take part in the\nTrojan war.[457] The chief collectors and narrators of the Attic mythes\nwere, the prose logographers, authors of the many compositions called\nAtthides, or works on Attic arch\u00e6ology. These writers\u2014Hellanikus,\nthe contemporary of Herodotus, is the earliest composer of an\nAtthis expressly named, though Pherekyd\u00eas also touched upon the\nAttic fables\u2014these writers, I say, interwove into one chronological\nseries the legends which either greatly occupied their own fancy, or\ncommanded the most general reverence among their countrymen. In this\nway the religious and political legends of Eleusis, a town originally\nindependent of Athens, but incorporated with it before the historical\nage, were worked into one continuous sequence along with those of the\nErechtheids. In this way, Kekrops, the eponymous hero of the portion of\nAttica called Kekropia, came to be placed in the mythical chronology at\na higher point even than the primitive god or hero Erechtheus.\n\n  [457] \u00c6thra, mother of Theseus, is also mentioned (Homer, Iliad,\n  iii. 144).\n\nOgyg\u00eas is said to have reigned in Attica[458] 1020 years before the\nfirst Olympiad, or 1796 years B. C. In his time happened the deluge\nof Deukali\u00f4n, which destroyed most of the inhabitants of the country:\nafter a long interval, Kekrops, an indigenous person, half man and\nhalf serpent, is given to us by Apollod\u00f4rus as the first king of the\ncountry: he bestowed upon the land, which had before been called\nAct\u00ea, the name of Kekropia. In his day there ensued a dispute between\nAth\u00ean\u00ea and Poseid\u00f4n respecting the possession of the acropolis at\nAthens, which each of them coveted. First, Poseid\u00f4n struck the rock\nwith his trident, and produced the well of salt water which existed\nin it, called the Erechth\u00eais: next came Ath\u00ean\u00ea, who planted the\nsacred olive-tree ever afterwards seen and venerated in the portion\nof Erechtheion called the cell of Pandrosus. The twelve gods decided\nthe dispute; and Kekrops having testified before them that Ath\u00ean\u00ea\nhad rendered this inestimable service, they adjudged the spot to\nher in preference to Poseid\u00f4n. Both the ancient olive-tree and the\nwell produced by Poseid\u00f4n were seen on the acropolis, in the temple\nconsecrated jointly to Ath\u00ean\u00ea and Erechtheus, throughout the historical\nages. Poseid\u00f4n, as a mark of his wrath for the preference given to\nAth\u00ean\u00ea, inundated the Thriasian plain with water.[459]\n\n  [458] Hellanikus, Fragm. 62; Philochor. Fragm. 8, ap. Euseb.\n  Pr\u00e6p. Evang. x. 10. p. 489. Larcher (Chronologie d\u2019H\u00e9rodote, ch.\n  ix. s. 1. p. 278) treats both the historical personality and the\n  date of Ogyg\u00eas as perfectly well authenticated.\n\n  It is not probable that Philochorus should have given any\n  calculation of time having reference to Olympiads; and hardly\n  conceivable that Hellanikus should have done so. Justin Martyr\n  quotes Hellanikus and Philochorus as having mentioned Moses,\u2014\u1f61\u03c2\n  \u03c3\u03c6\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f38\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u2014which is still more incredible even than the assertion\n  of Eusebius about their having fixed the date of Ogyg\u00eas by\n  Olympiads (see Philochor. Fragm. 9).\n\n  [459] Apollod. iii. 14, 1; Herodot. viii. 55; Ovid. Metam. vi.\n  72. The story current among the Athenians represented Kekrops as\n  the judge of this controversy (Xenoph. Memor. iii. 5, 10).\n\n  The impressions of the trident of Poseid\u00f4n were still shown\n  upon the rock in the time of Pausanias (Pausan. i. 26, 4). For\n  the sanctity of the ancient olive-tree, see the narrative of\n  Herodotus (_l. c._), relating what happened to it when Xerxes\n  occupied the acropolis. As this tale seems to have attached\n  itself specially to the local peculiarities of the Erechtheion,\n  the part which Poseid\u00f4n plays in it is somewhat mean: that god\n  appears to greater advantage in the neighborhood of the \u1f39\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2\n  \u039a\u03bf\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2, as described in the beautiful Chorus of Sophokl\u00eas (\u0152dip.\n  Colon. 690-712).\n\n  A curious rationalization of the monstrous form ascribed to\n  Kekrops \u03b4\u03b9\u03c6\u03c5\u1f74\u03c2 in Plutarch (Sera Num. Vindict. p. 551).\n\nDuring the reign of Kekrops, Attica was laid waste by Karian pirates\non the coast, and by invasions of the A\u00f4nian inhabitants from B\u0153\u00f4tia.\nKekrops distributed the inhabitants of Attica into twelve local\nsections\u2014Kekropia, Tetrapolis, Epakria, Dekeleia, Eleusis, Aphidna,\nThorikus, Braur\u00f4n, Kyth\u00earus, Sph\u00eattus, K\u00eaphisius, Phalerus. Wishing to\nascertain the number of inhabitants, he commanded each man to cast a\nsingle stone into a general heap: the number of stones was counted, and\nit was found that there were twenty thousand.[460]\n\n  [460] Philochor. ap. Strabo. ix. p. 397.\n\nKekrops married the daughter of Akt\u00e6us, who (according to Pausanias\u2019s\nversion) had been king of the country before him, and had called it by\nthe name of Akt\u00e6a.[461] By her he had three daughters, Aglaurus, Ers\u00ea\nand Pandrosus, and a son, Erysichth\u00f4n. Kekrops is called by Pausanias\ncontemporary of the Arcadian Lyka\u00f4n, and is favorably contrasted with\nthat savage prince in respect of his piety and humanity.[462] Though\nhe has been often designated in modern histories as an immigrant from\nEgypt into Attica, yet the far greater number of ancient authorities\nrepresent him as indigenous or earth-born.[463]\n\n  [461] The Parian chronological marble designates Akt\u00e6us as an\n  autochthonous person. Marmor Parium, Epoch. 3. Pausan. i. 2, 5.\n  Philochorus treated Akt\u00e6us as a fictitious name (Fragm. 8, _ut\n  sup._).\n\n  [462] Pausan. viii. 2. 2. The three daughters of Kekrops were\n  not unnoticed in the mythes (Ovid, Metam. ii. 739): the tale of\n  Kephalus, son of Hers\u00ea by Herm\u00eas, who was stolen away by the\n  goddess E\u00f4s or H\u00eamera in consequence of his surpassing beauty,\n  was told in more than one of the Hesiodic poems (Pausan. i. 3, 1;\n  Hesiod. Theog. 986). See also Eurip. Ion. 269.\n\n  [463] Jul. Africanus also (ap. Euseb. x. 9. p. 486-488) calls\n  Kekrops \u03b3\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f74\u03c2 and \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd.\n\nErysichth\u00f4n died without issue, and Kranaus succeeded him,\u2014another\nautochthonous person and another eponymus,\u2014for the name Kranai was\nan old denomination of the inhabitants of Attica.[464] Kranaus was\ndethroned by Amphikty\u00f4n, by some called an autochthonous man; by\nothers, a son of Deukali\u00f4n: Amphikty\u00f4n in his turn was expelled\nby Erichthonius, son of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos and the Earth,\u2014the same person\napparently as Erechtheus, but inserted by Apollod\u00f4rus at this point of\nthe series. Erichthonius, the pupil and favored companion of Ath\u00ean\u00ea,\nplaced in the acropolis the original Palladium or wooden statue of\nthat goddess, said to have dropped from heaven: he was moreover the\nfirst to celebrate the festival of the Panathen\u00e6a. He married the nymph\nPasithea, and had for his son and successor Pandi\u00f4n.[465] Erichthonius\nwas the first person who taught the art of breaking in horses to the\nyoke, and who drove a chariot and four.[466]\n\n  [464] Herod. viii. 44. \u039a\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, Pindar.\n\n  [465] Apollod. iii. 14. Pausan. i. 26, 7.\n\n  [466] Virgil, Georgic iii. 114.\n\nIn the time of Pandi\u00f4n, who succeeded to Erichthonius, Dionysus and\nD\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear both came into Attica: the latter was received by Keleos at\nEleusis.[467] Pandi\u00f4n married the nymph Zeuxipp\u00ea, and had twin sons,\nErechtheus and But\u00eas, and two daughters, Prokn\u00ea and Philom\u00eala. The two\nlatter are the subjects of a memorable and well-known legend. Pandi\u00f4n\nhaving received aid in repelling the Th\u00eabans from T\u00eareus, king of\nThrace, gave him his daughter Prokn\u00ea in marriage, by whom he had a son,\nItys. The beautiful Philom\u00eala, going to visit her sister, inspired\nthe barbarous Thracian with an irresistible passion: he violated her\nperson, confined her in a distant pastoral hut, and pretended that she\nwas dead, cutting out her tongue to prevent her from revealing the\ntruth. After a long interval, Philom\u00eala found means to acquaint her\nsister of the cruel deed which had been perpetrated; she wove into a\ngarment words describing her melancholy condition, and despatched it\nby a trusty messenger. Prokn\u00ea, overwhelmed with sorrow and anger, took\nadvantage of the free egress enjoyed by women during the Bacchanalian\nfestival to go and release her sister: the two sisters then revenged\nthemselves upon T\u00eareus by killing the boy Itys, and serving him up\nfor his father to eat: after the meal had been finished, the horrid\ntruth was revealed to him. T\u00eareus snatched a hatchet to put Prokn\u00ea to\ndeath: she fled, along with Philom\u00eala, and all the three were changed\ninto birds\u2014Prokn\u00ea became a swallow, Philom\u00eala a nightingale, and\nT\u00eareus an hoopoe.[468] This tale, so popular with the poets, and so\nillustrative of the general character of Grecian legend, is not less\nremarkable in another point of view\u2014that the great historian Thucydid\u00eas\nseems to allude to it as an historical fact,[469] not however directly\nmentioning the final metamorphosis.\n\n  [467] The mythe of the visit of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear to Eleusis, on which\n  occasion she vouchsafed to teach her holy rites to the leading\n  Eleusinians, is more fully touched upon in a previous chapter\n  (see _ante_, p. 50).\n\n  [468] Apollod. iii. 14, 8; \u00c6sch. Supplic. 61; Soph. Elektr. 107;\n  Ovid, Metamorph. vi. 425-670. Hyginus gives the fable with some\n  additional circumstances, fab. 45. Antoninus Liberalis (Narr.\n  11), or B\u0153us, from whom he copies, has composed a new narrative\n  by combining together the names of Pandareos and A\u00ead\u00f4n, as given\n  in the Odyssey, xix. 523, and the adventures of the old Attic\n  fable. The hoopoe still continued the habit of chasing the\n  nightingale; it was to the Athenians a present fact. See Schol.\n  Aristoph. Aves, 212.\n\n  [469] Thucyd. ii. 29. He makes express mention of the nightingale\n  in connection with the story, though not of the metamorphosis.\n  See below, chap. xvi. p. 544, note 2. So also does Pausanias\n  mention and reason upon it as a real incident: he founds upon it\n  several moral reflections (i. 5, 4; x. 4, 5): the author of the\n  \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, ascribed to Demosthen\u00eas, treats it in the same\n  manner, as a fact ennobling the tribe Pandionis, of which Pandi\u00f4n\n  was the eponymus. The same author, in touching upon Kekrops, the\n  eponymus of the Kekropis tribe, cannot believe literally the\n  story of his being half man and half serpent: he rationalizes it\n  by saying that Kekrops was so called because in wisdom he was\n  like a man, in strength like a serpent (Demosth. p. 1397, 1398,\n  Reiske). Hesiod glances at the fable (Opp. Di. 566), \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u03bf\u03b3\u03cc\u03b7\n  \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f66\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf \u03c7\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03b4\u03ce\u03bd; see also \u00c6lian., V. H. xii. 20. The\n  subject was handled by Sophokl\u00eas in his lost T\u00eareus.\n\nAfter the death of Pandi\u00f4n, Erechtheus succeeded to the kingdom,\nand his brother, But\u00eas, became priest of Poseid\u00f4n Erichthonius, a\nfunction which his descendants ever afterwards exercised, the Butad\u00e6\nor Eteobutad\u00e6. Erechtheus seems to appear in three characters in the\nfabulous history of Athens\u2014as a god, Poseid\u00f4n Erechtheus[470]\u2014as a\nhero, Erechtheus, son of the Earth\u2014and now, as a king, son of Pandi\u00f4n:\nso much did the ideas of divine and human rule become confounded and\nblended together in the imagination of the Greeks in reviewing their\nearly times.\n\n  [470] Poseid\u00f4n is sometimes spoken of under the name of\n  Erechtheus simply (Lycophr\u00f4n, 158). See Hesychius, v. \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2.\n\nThe daughters of Erechtheus were not less celebrated in Athenian legend\nthan those of Pandi\u00f4n. Prokris, one of them, is among the heroines seen\nby Odysseus in Had\u00eas: she became the wife of Kephalus, son of Deion\u00eas,\nand lived in the Attic d\u00eame of Thorikus. Kephalus tried her fidelity\nby pretending that he was going away for a long period; but shortly\nreturned, disguising his person and bringing with him a splendid\nnecklace. He presented himself to Prokris without being recognized, and\nsucceeded in triumphing over her chastity. Having accomplished this\nobject, he revealed to her his true character: she earnestly besought\nhis forgiveness, and prevailed upon him to grant it. Nevertheless he\nbecame shortly afterwards the unintentional author of her death: for\nhe was fond of hunting, and staid out a long time on his excursions,\nso that Prokris suspected him of visiting some rival. She determined\nto watch him by concealing herself in a thicket near the place of his\nmidday repose; and when Kephalus implored the presence of Nephel\u00ea (a\ncloud) to protect him from the sun\u2019s rays, she suddenly started from\nher hiding-place: Kephalus, thus disturbed, cast his hunting-spear\nunknowingly into the thicket and slew his wife. Erechtheus interred her\nwith great magnificence, and Kephalus was tried for the act before the\ncourt of Areopagus, which condemned him to exile.[471]\n\n  [471] Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm. 77, Didot; ap. Schol. ad Odyss. xi. 320;\n  Hellanikus Fr. 82; ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 1648. Apollod\u00f4rus\n  (iii. 15, 1) gives the story differently.\n\nKre\u00fcsa, another daughter of Erechtheus, seduced by Apollo, becomes the\nmother of I\u00f4n, whom she exposes immediately after his birth in the cave\nnorth of the acropolis, concealing the fact from every one. Apollo\nprevails upon Herm\u00eas to convey the new-born child to Delphi, where he\nis brought up as a servant of the temple, without knowing his parents.\nKre\u00fcsa marries Xuthus, son of \u00c6olus, but continuing childless, she goes\nwith Xuthus to the Delphian oracle to inquire for a remedy. The god\npresents to them I\u00f4n, and desires them to adopt him as their son: their\nson Ach\u00e6us is afterwards born to them, and I\u00f4n and Ach\u00e6us become the\neponyms of the I\u00f4nians and Ach\u00e6ans.[472]\n\n  [472] Upon this story of I\u00f4n is founded the tragedy of Euripid\u00eas\n  which bears that name. I conceive many of the points of that\n  tragedy to be of the invention of Euripid\u00eas himself: but to\n  represent I\u00f4n as son of Apollo, not of Xuthus, seems a genuine\n  Attic legend. Respecting this drama, see O. M\u00fcller, Hist. of\n  Dorians, ii. 2. 13-15. I doubt however the distinction which he\n  draws between the Ionians and the other population of Attica.\n\nOreithyia, the third daughter of Erechtheus, was stolen away by the god\nBoreas while amusing herself on the banks of the Ilissus, and carried\nto his residence in Thrace. The two sons of this marriage, Z\u00eat\u00eas\nand Kala\u00efs, were born with wings: they took part in the Argonautic\nexpedition, and engaged in the pursuit of the Harpies: they were slain\nat T\u00eanos by H\u00earakl\u00eas. Kleopatra, the daughter of Boreas and Oreithyia,\nwas married to Phineus, and had two sons, Plexippus and Pandi\u00f4n; but\nPhineus afterwards espoused a second wife, Id\u00e6a, the daughter of\nDardanus, who, detesting the two sons of the former bed, accused them\nfalsely of attempting her chastity, and persuaded Phineus in his wrath\nto put out the eyes of both. For this cruel proceeding he was punished\nby the Argonauts in the course of their voyage.[473]\n\n  [473] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 2; Plato, Ph\u00e6dr. c. 3; Sophok. Antig.\n  984; also the copious Scholion on Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 212.\n\n  The tale of Phineus is told very differently in the Argonautic\n  expedition as given by Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius, ii. 180. From\n  Sophokl\u00eas we learn that this was the Attic version.\n\n  The two winged sons of Boreas and their chase of the Harpies were\n  noticed in the Hesiodic Catalogue (see Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii.\n  296). But whether the Attic legend of Oreithyia was recognized in\n  the Hesiodic poems seems not certain.\n\n  Both \u00c6schylus and Sophokl\u00eas composed dramas on the subject of\n  Oreithyia (Longin. de Sublimit. c. 3). \u201cOrithyia Atheniensis,\n  filia Terrigen\u00e6, et a Borea in Thraciam rapta.\u201d (Servius ad Virg.\n  \u00c6neid. xii. 83). Terrigen\u00e6 is the \u03b3\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03c2. Philochorus\n  (Fragm. 30) rationalized the story, and said that it alluded to\n  the effects of a violent wind.\n\nOn more than one occasion the Athenians derived, or at least\nbelieved themselves to have derived, important benefits from this\nmarriage of Boreas with the daughter of their prim\u00e6val hero: one\ninestimable service, rendered at a juncture highly critical for\nGrecian independence, deserves to be specified.[474] At the time of\nthe invasion of Greece by Xerx\u00eas, the Grecian fleet was assembled at\nChalcis and Artemision in Eub\u0153a, awaiting the approach of the Persian\nforce, so overwhelming in its numbers as well by sea as on land. The\nPersian fleet had reached the coast of Magn\u00easia and the south-eastern\ncorner of Thessaly without any material damage, when the Athenians\nwere instructed by an oracle \u201cto invoke the aid of their son-in-law.\u201d\nUnderstanding the advice to point to Boreas, they supplicated his\naid and that of Oreithyia, most earnestly, as well by prayer as by\nsacrifice,[475] and the event corresponded to their wishes. A furious\nnorth-easterly wind immediately arose, and continued for three days\nto afflict the Persian fleet as it lay on an unprotected coast: the\nnumber of ships driven ashore, both vessels of war and of provision,\nwas immense, and the injury done to the armament was never thoroughly\nrepaired. Such was the powerful succor which the Athenians derived, at\na time of their utmost need, from their son-in-law Boreas; and their\ngratitude was shown by consecrating to him a new temple on the banks of\nthe Ilissus.\n\n  [474] Herodot. vii. 189. \u039f\u1f31 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f66\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03af \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f31\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9 \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  [475] Herodot. _l. c._ \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\n  \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f08\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd, \u1f68\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bf\u03c2. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u1fc6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf,\n  \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03af \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, etc.\n\nThe three remaining daughters of Erechtheus\u2014he had six in all[476]\u2014were\nin Athenian legend yet more venerated than their sisters, on account of\nhaving voluntarily devoted themselves to death for the safety of their\ncountry. Eumolpus of Eleusis was the son of Poseid\u00f4n and the eponymous\nhero of the sacred gens called the Eumolpids, in whom the principal\nfunctions, appertaining to the mysterious rites of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear at Eleusis,\nwere vested by hereditary privilege: he made war upon Erechtheus and\nthe Athenians, with the aid of a body of Thracian allies; indeed it\nappears that the legends of Athens, originally foreign and unfriendly\nto those of Eleusis, represented him as having been himself a Thracian\nborn and an immigrant into Attica.[477] Respecting Eumolpus however\nand his parentage, the discrepancies much exceed even the measure of\nlicense usual in the legendary genealogies, and some critics, both\nancient and modern, have sought to reconcile these contradictions\nby the usual stratagem of supposing two or three different persons\nof the same name. Even Pausanias, so familiar with this class of\nunsworn witnesses, complains of the want of native Eleusinian\ngenealogists,[478] and of the extreme license of fiction in which other\nauthors had indulged.\n\n  [476] Suidas and Photius, v. \u03a0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9: Protogeneia and Pand\u00f4ra\n  are given as the names of two of them. The sacrifice of Pand\u00f4ra,\n  in the Iambi of Hipp\u00f4nax (Hipp\u00f4nact. Fragm. xxi. Welck. ap.\n  Athen. ix. p. 370), seems to allude to this daughter of\n  Erechtheus.\n\n  [477] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 3; Thucyd. ii. 15; Isokrat\u00eas (Panegyr.\n  t. i. p. 206; Panathenaic. t. ii. p. 560, Auger), Lykurgus,\n  cont. Leocrat. p. 201, Reiske, Pausan. i. 38, 3; Euripid.\n  Erechth. Fragm. The Schol. ad. Soph. \u0152d. Col. 1048 gives valuable\n  citations from Ister, Akestod\u00f4rus and Androti\u00f4n: we see that\n  the inquirers of antiquity found it difficult to explain how\n  the Eumolpids could have acquired their ascendant privileges in\n  the management of the Eleusinia, seeing that Eumolpus himself\n  was a foreigner.\u2014\u0396\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf\u1f31 \u0395\u1f50\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03be\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. Thucydid\u00eas does _not_ call Eumolpus\n  a Thracian: Strabo\u2019s language is very large and vague (vii.\n  p. 321): Isokrat\u00eas says that he assailed Athens in order to\n  vindicate the rights of his father Poseid\u00f4n to the sovereign\n  patronage of the city. Hyginus copies this (fab. 46).\n\n  [478] Pausan. i. 38. 3. \u1f18\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f05\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03ce\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd. See Heyne ad Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 4. \u201cEumolpi\n  nomen modo communicatum pluribus, modo plurium hominum res et\n  facta cumulata in unum. Is ad quem Hercules venisse dicitur,\n  serior \u00e6tate fuit: antiquior est is de quo hoc loco agitur ...\n  antecessisse tamen hunc debet alius, qui cum Triptolemo vixit,\u201d\n  etc. See the learned and valuable comments of Lobeck in his\n  Aglaophamus, tom. i. p. 206-213: in regard to the discrepancies\n  of this narrative he observes, I think, with great justice (p.\n  211), \u201cquo uno exemplo ex innumerabilibus delecto, arguitur\n  eorum temeritas, qui ex variis discordibusque poetarum et\n  mythographorum narratiunculis, antiqu\u00e6 fam\u00e6 formam et quasi\n  lineamenta recognosci posse sperant.\u201d\n\nIn the Homeric Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, the most ancient testimony before\nus,\u2014composed, to all appearance, earlier than the complete\nincorporation of Eleusis with Athens,\u2014Eumolpus appears (to repeat\nbriefly what has been stated in a previous chapter) as one of the\nnative chiefs or princes of Eleusis, along with Triptolemus, Diokl\u00eas,\nPolyxeinus and Dolichus: Keleos is the king, or principal among these\nchiefs, the son or lineal descendant of the eponymous Eleusis himself.\nTo these chiefs, and to the three daughters of Keleos, the goddess\nD\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear comes in her sorrow for the loss of her daughter Persephon\u00ea:\nbeing hospitably entertained by Keleos she reveals her true character,\ncommands that a temple shall be built to her at Eleusis, and prescribes\nto them the rites according to which they are to worship her.[479] Such\nseems to have been the ancient story of the Eleusinians respecting\ntheir own religious antiquities: Keleos, with Metaneira his wife, and\nthe other chiefs here mentioned, were worshipped at Eleusis, and from\nthence transferred to Athens as local gods or heroes.[480] Eleusis\nbecame incorporated with Athens, apparently not very long before the\ntime of Sol\u00f4n; and the Eleusinian worship of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear was then received\ninto the great religious solemnities of the Athenian state, to which\nit owes its remarkable subsequent extension and commanding influence.\nIn the Atticized worship of the Eleusinian D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, the Eumolpids and\nthe K\u00ear\u0177kes were the principal hereditary functionaries: Eumolpus, the\neponym of this great family, came thus to play the principal part in\nthe Athenian legendary version of the war between Athens and Eleusis.\nAn oracle had pronounced that Athens could only be rescued from his\nattack by the death of the three daughters of Erechtheus; their\ngenerous patriotism consented to the sacrifice, and their father put\nthem to death. He then went forth confidently to the battle, totally\nvanquished the enemy, and killed Eumolpus with his own hand.[481]\nErechtheus was worshipped as a god, and his daughters as goddesses,\nat Athens.[482] Their names and their exalted devotion were cited\nalong with those of the warriors of Marath\u00f4n, in the public assembly\nof Athens, by orators who sought to arouse the languid patriot, or to\ndenounce the cowardly deserter; and the people listened both to one and\nthe other with analogous feelings of grateful veneration, as well as\nwith equally unsuspecting faith in the matter of fact.[483]\n\n  [479] Homer, Hymn, ad Cerer. 153-475.\u2014\n\n         ... \u1f29 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\n    \u0394\u03b5\u1fd6\u03be\u03b5\u03bd \u03a4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b5, \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u0390 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03be\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u1ff3,\n    \u0395\u1f50\u03bc\u03cc\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b2\u03af\u1fc3, \u039a\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u1ff3 \u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03b3\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b1\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u0394\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n  Also v. 105.\n\n    \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f34\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u039a\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u1f18\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03bf \u03b8\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n  The hero Eleusis is mentioned in Pausanias, i. 38, 7: some said\n  that he was the son of Herm\u00eas, others that he was the son of\n  Ogygus. Compare Hygin. f. 147.\n\n  [480] Keleos and Metaneira were worshipped by the Athenians\n  with divine honors (Athenagoras, Legat. p. 53, ed. Oxon.):\n  perhaps he confounds divine and heroic honors, as the Christian\n  controversialists against Paganism were disposed to do.\n  Triptolemus had a temple at Eleusis (Pausan. i. 38, 6).\n\n  [481] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 4. Some said that Immaradus, son of\n  Eumolpus, had been killed by Erechtheus (Pausan. i. 5, 2);\n  others, that both Eumolpus and his son had experienced this fate\n  (Schol. ad Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 854). But we learn from Pausanias\n  himself what the story in the interior of the Erechtheion\n  was,\u2014that Erechtheus killed Eumolpus (i. 27, 3).\n\n  [482] Cicero, Nat. Deor. iii. 19; Philochor. ap. Schol. \u0152dip.\n  Col. 100. Three daughters of Erechtheus perished, and three\n  daughters were worshipped (Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 4; Hesychius,\n  \u0396\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd; Eurip. Erechtheus, Fragm. 3, Dindorf); but\n  both Euripid\u00eas and Apollod\u00f4rus said that Erechtheus was only\n  required to sacrifice, and only did sacrifice, _one_,\u2014the other\n  two slew themselves voluntarily, from affection for their sister.\n  I cannot but think (in spite of the opinion of Welcker to the\n  contrary, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. ii. p. 722) that the genuine legend\n  represented Erechtheus as having sacrificed all three, as appears\n  in the I\u00f4n of Euripid\u00eas (276):\u2014\n\n       I\u00d4N. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c3\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f14\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2;\n    CRE\u00dcSA. \u1f1c\u03c4\u03bb\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03b3\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n       I\u00d4N. \u03a3\u1f7a \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7;\n    CRE\u00dcSA. \u0392\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  Compare with this passage, Demosthen. \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6. p. 1397,\n  Reisk. Just before, the death of the three daughters of Kekrops,\n  for infringing the commands of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, had been mentioned.\n  Euripid\u00eas modified this in his Erechtheus, for he there\n  introduced the mother Praxithea consenting to the immolation\n  of one daughter, for the rescue of the country from a foreign\n  invader: to propose to a mother the immolation of three daughters\n  at once, would have been too revolting. In most instances we find\n  the strongly marked features, the distinct and glaring incidents\n  as well as the dark contrasts, belong to the Hesiodic or old\n  Post-Homeric legend; the changes made afterwards go to soften,\n  dilute, and to complicate, in proportion as the feelings of the\n  public become milder and more humane; sometimes however the later\n  poets add new horrors.\n\n  [483] See the striking evidence contained in the oration of\n  Lykurgus against Leocrat\u00eas (p. 201-204. Reiske; Demosthen. \u039b\u03cc\u03b3.\n  \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6. _l. c._; and Xenophon, Memor. iii. 5, 9): from the two\n  latter passages we see that the Athenian story represented the\n  invasion under Eumolpus as a combined assault from the western\n  continent.\n\nThough Erechtheus gained the victory over Eumolpus, yet the story\nrepresents Poseid\u00f4n as having put an end to the life and reign of\nErechtheus, who was (it seems) slain in the battle. He was succeeded\nby his son Kekrops II., and the latter again by his son Pandi\u00f4n\nII.,[484]\u2014two names unmarked by any incidents, and which appear to be\nmere duplication of the former Kekrops and Pandi\u00f4n, placed there by\nthe genealogizers for the purpose of filling up what seemed to them a\nchronological chasm. The Attic legends were associated chiefly with\na few names of respected eponymous personages; and if the persons\ncalled the children of Pandi\u00f4n were too numerous to admit of their\nbeing conveniently ascribed to one father, there was no difficulty in\nsupposing a second prince of the same name.\n\n  [484] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 5; Eurip. I\u00f4n, 282; Erechth. Fragm. 20,\n  Dindorf.\n\nApollod\u00f4rus passes at once from Erechtheus to his son Kekrops II., then\nto Pandi\u00f4n II., next to the four sons of the latter, \u00c6geus, Pallas,\nNisus and Lykus. But the tragedians here insert the story of Xuthus,\nKre\u00fcsa and I\u00f4n; the latter being the son of Kre\u00fcsa by Apollo, but given\nby the god to Xuthus, and adopted by the latter as his own. I\u00f4n becomes\nthe successor of Erechtheus, and his sons Teleon, Hopl\u00eas, Argad\u00eas and\nAigikor\u00eas become the eponyms of the four ancient tribes of Athens,\nwhich subsisted until the revolution of Kleisthen\u00eas. I\u00f4n himself is\nthe eponym of the I\u00f4nic race both in Asia, in Europe, and in the \u00c6gean\nislands: D\u00f4rus and Ach\u00e6us are the sons of Kre\u00fcsa by Xuthus, so that I\u00f4n\nis distinguished from both of them by being of divine parentage.[485]\nAccording to the story given by Philochorus, I\u00f4n rendered such\nessential service in rescuing the Athenians from the attack of the\nThracians under Eumolpus, that he was afterwards made king of the\ncountry, and distributed all the inhabitants into four tribes or\ncastes, corresponding to different modes of life,\u2014soldiers, husbandmen,\ngoatherds, and artisans.[486] And it seems that the legend explanatory\nof the origin of the festival Bo\u00ebdromia, originally important enough to\nfurnish a name to one of the Athenian months, was attached to the aid\nthus rendered by I\u00f4n.[487]\n\n  [485] Eurip. I\u00f4n. 1570-1595. The Kre\u00fcsa of Sophokl\u00eas, a lost\n  tragedy, seems to have related to the same subject.\n\n  Pausanias (vii. 1, 2) tells us that Xuthus was chosen to\n  arbitrate between the contending claims of the sons of Erechtheus.\n\n  [486] Philochor. ap. Harpocrat. v. \u0392\u03bf\u03b7\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1; Strabo, viii. p.\n  383.\n\n  [487] Philochor. ap. Harpocrat. v. \u0392\u03bf\u03b7\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nWe pass from I\u00f4n to persons of far greater mythical dignity and\ninterest,\u2014\u00c6geus and his son Th\u00easeus.\n\nPandi\u00f4n had four sons, \u00c6geus, Nisus, Lykus, and Pallas, between whom\nhe divided his dominions. Nisus received the territory of Megaris,\nwhich had been under the sway of Pandi\u00f4n, and there founded the seaport\nof Nis\u00e6a. Lykus was made king of the eastern coast, but a dispute\nafterwards ensued, and he quitted the country altogether, to establish\nhimself on the southern coast of Asia Minor among the Termil\u00e6, to\nwhom he gave the name of Lykians.[488] \u00c6geus, as the eldest of the\nfour, became king of Athens; but Pallas received a portion both of the\nsouth-western coast and the interior, and he as well as his children\nappear as frequent enemies both to \u00c6geus and to Th\u00easeus. Pallas is\nthe eponym of the d\u00eame Pall\u00ean\u00ea, and the stories respecting him and\nhis sons seem to be connected with old and standing feuds among the\ndifferent d\u00eames of Attica, originally independent communities. These\nfeuds penetrated into the legend, and explain the story which we find\nthat \u00c6geus and Th\u00easeus were not genuine Erechtheids, the former being\ndenominated a supposititious child to Pandi\u00f4n.[489]\n\n  [488] Sophokl. ap. Strab. ix. p. 392; Herodot. i. 173; Strabo,\n  xii. p. 573.\n\n  [489] Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, c. 13. \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd. Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 6.\n\n\u00c6geus[490] has little importance in the mythical history except as\nthe father of Th\u00easeus: it may even be doubted whether his name is\nanything more than a mere cognomen of the god Poseid\u00f4n, who was (as we\nare told) the real father of this great Attic H\u00earakl\u00eas. As I pretend\nonly to give a very brief outline of the general territory of Grecian\nlegend, I cannot permit myself to recount in detail the chivalrous\ncareer of Th\u00easeus, who is found both in the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt and\nin the Argonautic expedition\u2014his personal and victorious encounters\nwith the robbers Sinnis, Procrust\u00eas, Periph\u00eat\u00eas, Scir\u00f4n and others\u2014his\nvaluable service in ridding his country of the Krommyonian sow and\nthe Marath\u00f4nian bull\u2014his conquest of the Minotaur in Kr\u00eate, and his\nescape from the dangers of the labyrinth by the aid of Ariadn\u00ea, whom he\nsubsequently carries off and abandons\u2014his many amorous adventures, and\nhis expeditions both against the Amazons and into the under-world along\nwith Peirithous.[491]\n\n  [490] \u00c6geus had by M\u00eadea (who took refuge at Athens after her\n  flight from Corinth) a son named M\u00eadus, who passed into Asia,\n  and was considered as the eponymus and progenitor of the Median\n  people. Datis, the general who commanded the invading Persian\n  army at the battle of Marath\u00f4n, sent a formal communication to\n  the Athenians announcing himself as the descendant of M\u00eadus, and\n  requiring to be admitted as king of Attica: such is the statement\n  of Diod\u00f4rus (Exc. Vatic. vii.-x. 48: see also Schol. Aristophan.\n  Pac. 289).\n\n  [491] Ovid, Metamorph. vii. 433.\u2014\n\n                 ... \u201cTe, maxime Theseu,\n    Mirata est Marathon Cret\u00e6i sanguine Tauri:\n    Quodque Suis securus arat Cromyona colonus,\n    Munus opusque tuum est. Tellus Epidauria per te\n    Clavigeram vidit Vulcani occumbere prolem:\n    Vidit et immanem Cephisias ora Procrustem.\n    Cercyonis letum vidit Cerealis Eleusin.\n    Occidit ille Sinis,\u201d etc.\n\n  Respecting the amours of Th\u00easeus, Ister especially seems to have\n  entered into great details; but some of them were noticed both\n  in the Hesiodic poems and by Kekrops, not to mention Pherekyd\u00eas\n  (Athen. xiii. p. 557). Peirithous, the intimate friend and\n  companion of Th\u00easeus, is the eponymous hero of the Attic d\u00eame or\n  gens Perithoid\u00e6 (Ephorus ap. Photium, v. \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9).\n\nThucydid\u00eas delineates the character of Th\u00easeus as a man who combined\nsagacity with political power, and who conferred upon his country the\ninestimable benefit of uniting all the separate and self-governing\nd\u00eames of Attica into one common political society.[492] From the\nwell-earned reverence attached to the assertion of Thucydid\u00eas, it\nhas been customary to reason upon this assertion as if it were\nhistorically authentic, and to treat the romantic attributes which we\nfind in Plutarch and Diod\u00f4rus as if they were fiction superinduced\nupon this basis of fact. Such a view of the case is in my judgment\nerroneous. The athletic and amorous knight-errant is the old version\nof the character\u2014the profound and long-sighted politician is a\nsubsequent correction, introduced indeed by men of superior mind, but\ndestitute of historical warranty, and arising out of their desire to\nfind reasons of their own for concurring in the veneration which the\ngeneral public paid more easily and heartily to their national hero.\nTh\u00easeus, in the Iliad and Odyssey, fights with the Lapith\u00e6 against the\nCentaurs: Th\u00easeus, in the Hesiodic poems, is misguided by his passion\nfor the beautiful \u00c6gl\u00ea, daughter of Panopeus:[493] and the Th\u00easeus\ndescribed in Plutarch\u2019s biography is in great part a continuation\nand expansion of these same or similar attributes, mingled with many\nlocal legends, explaining, like the Fasti of Ovid, or the lost Aitia\nof Kallimachus, the original genesis of prevalent religious and social\ncustoms.[494] Plutarch has doubtless greatly softened down and modified\nthe adventures which he found in the Attic logographers as well as\nin the poetical epics called Th\u00eas\u00eais. For in his preface to the life\nof Th\u00easeus, after having emphatically declared that he is about to\ntranscend the boundary both of the known and the knowable, but that the\ntemptation of comparing the founder of Athens with the founder of Rome\nis irresistible, he concludes with the following remarkable words: \u201cI\npray that this fabulous matter may be so far obedient to my endeavors\nas to receive, when purified by reason, the aspect of history: in those\ncases where it haughtily scorns plausibility and will admit no alliance\nwith what is probable, I shall beg for indulgent hearers, willing to\nreceive antique narrative in a mild spirit.\u201d[495] We see here that\nPlutarch sat down, not to recount the old fables as he found them, but\nto purify them by reason and to impart to them the aspect of history.\nWe have to thank him for having retained, after this purification,\nso much of what is romantic and marvellous; but we may be sure that\nthe sources from which he borrowed were more romantic and marvellous\nstill. It was the tendency of the enlightened men of Athens, from\nthe days of Sol\u00f4n downwards, to refine and politicize the character\nof Th\u00easeus:[496] even Peisistratus expunged from one of the Hesiodic\npoems the line which described the violent passion of the hero for the\nfair \u00c6gl\u00ea:[497] and the tragic poets found it more congenial to the\nfeelings of their audience to exhibit him as a dignified and liberal\nsovereign, rather than as an adventurous single-handed fighter. But the\nlogographers and the Alexandrine poets remained more faithful to the\nold fables. The story of Hekal\u00ea, the hospitable old woman who received\nand blessed Th\u00easeus when he went against the Marath\u00f4nian bull, and whom\nhe found dead when he came back to recount the news of his success, was\ntreated by Kallimachus:[498] and Virgil must have had his mind full of\nthe unrefined legends when he numbered this Attic H\u00earakl\u00eas among the\nunhappy sufferers condemned to endless penance in the under-world.[499]\n\n  [492] Thuc. ii. 15. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1f74 \u03b4\u1f72 \u0398\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2, \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd ... \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u1ff4\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n  [493] Iliad, i. 265; Odyss. xi. 321. I do not notice the\n  suspected line, Odyss. xi. 630.\n\n  [494] Diod\u00f4rus also, from his disposition to assimilate Th\u00easeus\n  to H\u00earakl\u00eas, has given us his chivalrous as well as his political\n  attributes (iv. 61).\n\n  [495] Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, i. \u0395\u1f34\u03b7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u1ff6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f44\u03c8\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03b8\u03b1\u03b4\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1fc7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 ~\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03af\u03be\u03b9\u03bd~, \u03b5\u1f50\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03b1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  [496] See Isokrat\u00eas, Panathenaic. (t. ii. p. 510-512, Auger);\n  Xenoph. Memor. iii. 5, 10. In the Helen\u00e6 Encomium, Isokrat\u00eas\n  enlarges more upon the personal exploits of Th\u00easeus in\n  conjunction with his great political merits (t. ii. p. 342-350,\n  Auger).\n\n  [497] Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, 20.\n\n  [498] See the epigram of Krinagoras, Antholog. Pal. vol. ii. p.\n  144; ep. xv. ed. Brunck. and Kallimach. Frag. 40.\n\n    \u1f08\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd (Kallimachus) \u1f19\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03be\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u1f74\u03bd,\n      \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u1fd6 \u039c\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd \u03bf\u1f53\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n  Some beautiful lines are preserved by Suidas, v. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1,\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 (probably spoken by Th\u00easeus himself, see\n  Plutarch, Theseus, c. 14).\n\n                  \u1f3c\u03b8\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u03b7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f41\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f23\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03b3\u03ad\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u03a0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5\u1fd6\u1fbd, \u1f66 \u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1, \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03be\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c2\n    \u039c\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1\u00b7 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  [499] Virgil, \u00c6neid, vi. 617. \u201cSedet \u00e6ternumque sedebit Infelix\n  Th\u00easeus.\u201d\n\nTwo however among the Th\u00easeian fables cannot be dismissed without\nsome special notice,\u2014the war against the Amazons, and the expedition\nagainst Kr\u00eate. The former strikingly illustrates the facility as well\nas the tenacity of Grecian legendary faith; the latter embraces the\nstory of D\u00e6dalus and Minos, two of the most eminent among Grecian\nante-historical personages.\n\nThe Amazons, daughters of Ar\u00eas and Harmonia,[500] are both early\ncreations and frequent reproductions of the ancient epic\u2014which\nwas indeed, we may generally remark, largely occupied both with\nthe exploits and sufferings of women, or heroines, the wives and\ndaughters of the Grecian heroes\u2014and which recognized in Pallas Ath\u00ean\u00ea\nthe finished type of an irresistible female warrior. A nation of\ncourageous, hardy and indefatigable women, dwelling apart from men,\npermitting only a short temporary intercourse for the purpose of\nrenovating their numbers, and burning out their right breast with\na view of enabling themselves to draw the bow freely,\u2014this was at\nonce a general type stimulating to the fancy of the poet and a theme\neminently popular with his hearers. Nor was it at all repugnant to\nthe faith of the latter\u2014who had no recorded facts to guide them, and\nno other standard of credibility as to the past except such poetical\nnarratives themselves\u2014to conceive communities of Amazons as having\nactually existed in anterior time. Accordingly we find these warlike\nfemales constantly reappearing in the ancient poems, and universally\naccepted as past realities. In the Iliad, when Priam wishes to\nillustrate emphatically the most numerous host in which he ever found\nhimself included, he tells us that it was assembled in Phyrgia, on the\nbanks of the Sangarius, for the purpose of resisting the formidable\nAmazons. When Belleroph\u00f4n is to be employed on a deadly and perilous\nundertaking,[501] by those who indirectly wish to procure his death,\nhe is despatched against the Amazons. In the \u00c6thiopis of Arktinus,\ndescribing the post-Homeric war of Troy, Penthesileia, queen of the\nAmazons, appears as the most effective ally of the besieged city,\nand as the most formidable enemy of the Greeks, succumbing only to\nthe invincible might of Achilles.[502] The Argonautic heroes find\nthe Amazons on the river Therm\u00f4don, in their expedition along the\nsouthern coast of the Euxine. To the same spot H\u00earacl\u00eas goes to attack\nthem, in the performance of the ninth labor imposed upon him by\nEurystheus, for the purpose of procuring the girdle of the Amazonian\nqueen, Hippolyt\u00ea;[503] and we are told that they had not yet recovered\nfrom the losses sustained in this severe aggression when Th\u00easeus also\nassaulted and defeated them, carrying off their queen, Antiop\u00ea.[504]\nThis injury they avenged by invading Attica,\u2014an undertaking (as\nPlutarch justly observes) \u201cneither trifling nor feminine,\u201d especially\nif according to the statement of Hellanikus, they crossed the Cimmerian\nBosporus on the winter ice, beginning their march from the Asiatic\nside of the Paulus M\u00e6otis.[505] They overcame all the resistances\nand difficulties of this prodigious march, and penetrated even into\nAthens itself, where the final battle, hard-fought and at one time\ndoubtful, by which Theseus crushed them, was fought\u2014in the very heart\nof the city. Attic antiquaries confidently pointed out the exact\nposition of the two contending armies: the left wing of the Amazons\nrested upon the spot occupied by the commemorative monument called the\nAmazoneion; the right wing touched the Pnyx, the place in which the\npublic assemblies of the Athenian democracy were afterwards held. The\ndetails and fluctuations of the combat, as well as the final triumph\nand consequent truce, were recounted by these authors with as complete\nfaith and as much circumstantiality as those of the battle of Plat\u00e6a\nby Herodotus. The sepulchral edifice called the Amazoneion, the tomb\nor pillar of Antiop\u00ea near the western gate of the city\u2014the spot called\nthe Horkomosion near the temple of Th\u00easeus\u2014even the hill of Areiopagus\nitself, and the sacrifices which it was customary to offer to the\nAmazons at the periodical festival of the Th\u00easeia\u2014were all so many\nreligious mementos of this victory;[506] which was moreover a favorite\nsubject of art both with the sculptor and the painter, at Athens as\nwell as in other parts of Greece.\n\n  [500] Pherekyd. Fragm. 25, Didot.\n\n  [501] Iliad, iii. 186; vi. 152.\n\n  [502] See Proclus\u2019s Argument of the lost \u00c6thiopis (Fragm. Epicor.\n  Gr\u00e6cor. ed. D\u00fcntzer, p. 16). We are reduced to the first book of\n  Quintus Smyrn\u00e6us for some idea of the valor of Penthesileia; it\n  is supposed to be copied more or less closely from the \u00c6thiopis.\n  See Tychsen\u2019s Dissertation prefixed to his edition of Quintus,\n  sections 5 and 12. Compare Dio. Chrysostom. Or. xi. p. 350,\n  Reiske. Philostratus (Heroica, c. 19, p. 751) gives a strange\n  transformation of this old epical narrative into a descent of\n  Amazons upon the island sacred to Achilles.\n\n  [503] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 966, 1004; Apollod. ii. 5-9; Diod\u00f4r.\n  ii. 46; iv. 16. The Amazons were supposed to speak the Thracian\n  language (Schol. Apoll Rhod. ii. 953), though some authors\n  asserted them to be natives of Libyia, others of \u00c6thiopia (_ib._\n  965).\n\n  Hellanikus (Frag. 33, ap. Schol. Pindar. Nem. iii. 65) said that\n  all the Argonauts had assisted H\u00earakl\u00eas in this expedition: the\n  fragment of the old epic poem (perhaps the \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1) there quoted\n  mentions Telam\u00f4n specially.\n\n  [504] The many diversities in the story respecting Th\u00easeus and\n  the Amazon Antiop\u00ea are well set forth in Bachet de Meziriac\n  (Commentaires sur Ovide, t. i. p. 317).\n\n  Welcker (Der Epische Cyclus, p. 313) supposes that the ancient\n  epic poem called by Suidas \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1, related to the invasion of\n  Attica by the Amazons, and that this poem is the same, under\n  another title, as the \u1f08\u03c4\u03b8\u1f76\u03c2 of Hegesinous cited by Pausanias: I\n  cannot say that he establishes this conjecture satisfactorily,\n  but the chapter is well worth consulting. The epic Th\u00eas\u00eais seems\n  to have given a version of the Amazonian contest in many respects\n  different from that which Plutarch has put together out of the\n  logographers (see Plut. Th\u00eas. 28): it contained a narrative of\n  many unconnected exploits belonging to Th\u00easeus, and Aristotle\n  censures it on that account as ill-constructed (Poetic. c. 17).\n\n  The \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 or \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 of Onasus can hardly have been (as\n  Heyne supposes, ad Apollod. ii. 5, 9) an epic poem: we may infer\n  from the rationalizing tendency of the citation from it (Schol.\n  ad Theocrit. xiii. 46, and Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 1207) that it\n  was a work in prose. There was an \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2 by Possis of Magn\u00easia\n  (Athen\u00e6us, vii. p. 296).\n\n  [505] Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, 27. Pindar (Olymp. xiii. 84) represents\n  the Amazons as having come from the extreme north, when\n  Belleroph\u00f4n conquers them.\n\n  [506] Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, 27-28; Pausan. i. 2, 4; Plato, Axiochus,\n  c. 2; Harpocrati\u00f4n, v. \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd; Aristophan. Lysistrat. 678,\n  with the Scholia. \u00c6schyl. (Eumenid. 685) says that the Amazons\n  assaulted the citadel from the Areiopagus:\u2014\n\n    \u03a0\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b4\u1fbd, \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u03a3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f45\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u0398\u03b7\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n    \u03a3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03bd\u03b5\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\n    \u03a4\u03ae\u03bd\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f51\u03c8\u03af\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c0\u03cd\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5.\n\nNo portion of the ante-historical epic appears to have been more deeply\nworked into the national mind of Greece than this invasion and defeat\nof the Amazons. It was not only a constant theme of the logographers,\nbut was also familiarly appealed to by the popular orators along\nwith Marath\u00f4n and Salamis, among those antique exploits of which\ntheir fellow-citizens might justly be proud. It formed a part of the\nretrospective faith of Herodotus, Lysias, Plato and Isokrat\u00eas,[507] and\nthe exact date of the event was settled by the chronologists.[508] Nor\ndid the Athenians stand alone in such a belief. Throughout many other\nregions of Greece, both European and Asiatic, traditions and memorials\nof the Amazons were found. At Megara, at Tr\u0153zen, in Laconia near Cape\nT\u00e6narus, at Ch\u00e6roneia in B\u0153\u00f4tia, and in more than one part of Thessaly,\nsepulchres or monuments of the Amazons were preserved. The warlike\nwomen (it was said), on their way to Attica, had not traversed those\ncountries, without leaving some evidences of their passage.[509]\n\n  [507] Herodot. ix. 27, Lysias (Epitaph, c. 3) represents the\n  Amazons as \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd: the whole race, according to\n  him, was nearly extinguished in their unsuccessful and calamitous\n  invasion of Attica. Isokrat\u00eas (Panegyric. t. i. p. 206, Auger)\n  says the same; also Panath\u00eanaic. t. iii. p. 560, Auger; Demosth.\n  Epitaph, p. 1391. Reisk. Pausanias quotes Pindar\u2019s notice of the\n  invasion, and with the fullest belief of its historical reality\n  (vii. 2, 4) Plato mentions the invasion of Attica by the Amazons\n  in the Menexenus (c. 9), but the passage in the treatise De Legg.\n  c. ii. p. 804,\u2014\u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, etc.\u2014is\n  even a stronger evidence of his own belief. And Xenophon in the\n  Anabasis, when he compares the quiver and the hatchet of his\n  barbarous enemies to \u201cthose which the Amazons carry,\u201d evidently\n  believed himself to be speaking of real persons, though he could\n  have seen only the costumes and armature of those painted by\n  Mik\u00f4n and others (Anabas. iv. 4, 10; compare \u00c6schyl. Supplic.\n  293, and Aristophan. Lysistr. 678; Lucian. Anachars, c. 34. v.\n  iii. p. 318).\n\n  How copiously the tale was enlarged upon by the authors of the\n  Atthides, we see in Plutarch, Th\u00easeus, 27-28.\n\n  Hekat\u00e6us (ap. Steph. Byz. \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd; also Fragm. 350, 351, 352,\n  Didot) and Xanthus (ap. Hesychium, v. \u0392\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c8\u03af\u03b7) both treated\n  of the Amazons: the latter passage ought to be added to the\n  collection of the Fragments of Xanthus by Didot.\n\n  [508] Clemens Alexandr. Stromat, i. p. 336; Marmor Parium, Epoch.\n  21.\n\n  [509] Plutarch, Th\u00eas. 27-28. Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd. Pausan.\n  ii. 32, 8; iii. 25, 2.\n\nAmongst the Asiatic Greeks the supposed traces of the Amazons were yet\nmore numerous. Their proper territory was asserted to be the town and\nplain of Themiskyra, near the Grecian colony of Amisus, on the river\nTherm\u00f4d\u00f4n, a region called, after their name by Roman historians and\ngeographers.[510] But they were believed to have conquered and occupied\nin early times a much wider range of territory, extending even to the\ncoast of I\u00f4nia and \u00c6olis. Ephesus, Smyrna, Kym\u00ea, Myrina, Paphos and\nSinop\u00ea were affirmed to have been founded and denominated by them.[511]\nSome authors placed them in Libya or Ethiopia; and when the Pontic\nGreeks on the north-western shore of the Euxine had become acquainted\nwith the hardy and daring character of the Sarmatian maidens,\u2014who were\nobliged to have slain each an enemy in battle as the condition of\nobtaining a husband, and who artificially prevented the growth of the\nright breast during childhood,\u2014they could imagine no more satisfactory\nmode of accounting for such attributes than by deducing the Sarmatians\nfrom a colony of vagrant Amazons, expelled by the Grecian heroes from\ntheir territory on the Therm\u00f4d\u00f4n.[512] Pindar ascribed the first\nestablishment of the memorable temple of Artemis at Ephesus to the\nAmazons. And Pausanias explains in part the pre\u00ebminence which this\ntemple enjoyed over every other in Greece by the widely diffused renown\nof its female founders,[513] respecting whom he observes (with perfect\ntruth, if we admit the historical character of the old epic), that\nwomen possess an unparalleled force of resolution in resisting adverse\nevents, since the Amazons, after having been first roughly handled\nby H\u00earakl\u00eas and then completely defeated by Th\u00easeus, could yet find\ncourage to play so conspicuous a part in the defence of Troy against\nthe Grecian besiegers.[514]\n\n  [510] Pherekyd\u00eas ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rh. ii. 373-992; Justin, ii.\n  4; Strabo, xii. p. 547, \u0398\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd;\n  Diod\u00f4r. ii. 45-46; Sallust ap. Serv. ad Virgil. \u00c6neid. xi. 659;\n  Pompon. Mela, i. 19; Plin. H. N. vi. 4. The geography of Quintus\n  Curtius (vi. 4) and of Philostratus (Heroic c. 19) is on this\n  point indefinite, and even inconsistent.\n\n  [511] Ephor. Fragm. 87, Didot. Strabo, xi. p. 505; xiii p. 573;\n  xiii. p. 622. Pausan. iv. 31, 6; vii. 2. 4. Tacit. Ann. iii. 61.\n  Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 965.\n\n  The derivation of the name Sinop\u00ea from an Amazon was given by\n  Hekat\u00e6us (Fragm. 352). Themiskyra also had one of the Amazons for\n  its eponymus (Appian, Bell. Mithridat. 78).\n\n  Some of the most venerated religious legends at Sinop\u00ea were\n  attached to the expedition of H\u00earakl\u00eas against the Amazons:\n  Autolykus, the oracle-giving hero, worshipped with great\n  solemnity even at the time when the town was besieged by\n  Lucullus, was the companion of H\u00earacl\u00eas (Appian, _ib._ c. 83).\n  Even a small mountain village in the territory of Ephesus, called\n  Latoreia, derived its name from one of the Amazons (Athen\u00e6. i. p.\n  31).\n\n  [512] Herodot. iv. 108-117, where he gives the long tale,\n  imagined by the Pontic Greeks, of the origin of the Sarmatian\n  nation. Compare Hippokrat\u00eas, De A\u00ebre, Locis et Aquis, c. 17;\n  Ephorus, Fragm. 103; Skymn. Chius, v. 102; Plato, Legg. vii. p.\n  804; Diod\u00f4r. ii. 34.\n\n  The testimony of Hippokrates certifies the practice of the\n  Sarmatian women to check the growth of the right breast: \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u03b4\u03ad\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. \u03a0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bd\u03b7\u03c0\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03b1\u1f31 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c7\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ad\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n  \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f54\u03be\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f10\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f66\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\n  \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f34\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  Kt\u00easias also compares a warlike Sakian woman to the Amazons\n  (Fragm. Persic. ii. pp. 221, 449, B\u00e4hr).\n\n  [513] Pausan. iv. 31, 6; vii. 2, 4. Dionys. Peri\u00eag\u00eat. 828.\n\n  [514] Pausan. i. 15, 2.\n\nIt is thus that in what is called early Grecian history, as the\nGreeks themselves looked back upon it, the Amazons were among the\nmost prominent and undisputed personages. Nor will the circumstance\nappear wonderful if we reflect, that the belief in them was first\nestablished at a time when the Grecian mind was fed with nothing else\nbut religious legend and epic poetry, and that the incidents of the\nsupposed past, as received from these sources, were addressed to their\nfaith and feelings, without being required to adapt themselves to any\ncanons of credibility drawn from present experience. But the time came\nwhen the historians of Alexander the Great audaciously abused this\nancient credence. Amongst other tales calculated to exalt the dignity\nof that monarch, they affirmed that after his conquest and subjugation\nof the Persian empire, he had been visited in Hyrcania by Thalestris,\nqueen of the Amazons, who admiring his warlike prowess, was anxious to\nbe enabled to return into her own country in a condition to produce\noffspring of a breed so invincible.[515] But the Greeks had now been\naccustomed for a century and a half to historical and philosophical\ncriticism\u2014and that uninquiring faith, which was readily accorded to the\nwonders of the past, could no longer be invoked for them when tendered\nas present reality. For the fable of the Amazons was here reproduced in\nits naked simplicity, without being rationalized or painted over with\nhistorical colors.\n\n  [515] Arrian, Exped. Alex. vii. 13; compare iv. 15; Quint. Curt.\n  vi. 4; Justin, xlii. 4. The note of Freinshemius on the above\n  passage of Quintus Curtius is full of valuable references on the\n  subject of the Amazons.\n\nSome literary men indeed, among whom were D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Skepsis, and\nthe Mitylen\u00e6an Theophan\u00eas, the companion of Pompey in his expeditions,\nstill continued their belief both in Amazons present and Amazons past;\nand when it becomes notorious that at least there were none such on the\nbanks of the Therm\u00f4d\u00f4n, these authors supposed them to have migrated\nfrom their original locality, and to have settled in the unvisited\nregions north of Mount Caucasus.[516] Strabo, on the contrary, feeling\nthat the grounds of disbelief applied with equal force to the ancient\nstories and to the modern, rejected both the one and the other. But\nhe remarks at the same time, not without some surprise, that it was\nusual with most persons to adopt a middle course,\u2014to retain the Amazons\nas historical ph\u00e6nomena of the remote past, but to disallow them as\nrealities of the present, and to maintain that the breed had died\nout.[517] The accomplished intellect of Julius C\u00e6sar did not scruple\nto acknowledge them as having once conquered and held in dominion\na large portion of Asia;[518] and the compromise between early,\ntraditional, and religious faith on the one hand, and established\nhabits of critical research on the other, adopted by the historian\nArrian, deserves to be transcribed in his own words, as illustrating\nstrikingly the powerful sway of the old legends even over the most\npositive-minded Greeks:\u2014\u201cNeither Aristobulus nor Ptolemy (he observes),\nnor any other competent witness, has recounted this (visit of the\nAmazons and their queen to Alexander): nor does it seem to me that the\nrace of the Amazons was preserved down to that time, nor have they been\nnoticed either by any one before Alexander, or by Xenoph\u00f4n, though he\nmentions both the Phasians and the Kolchians, and the other barbarous\nnations which the Greeks saw both before and after their arrival at\nTrapezus, in which marches they must have met with the Amazons, if the\nlatter had been still in existence. Yet _it is incredible to me_ that\nthis race of women, celebrated as they have been by authors so many\nand so commanding, _should never have existed at all_. The story tells\nof H\u00earakl\u00eas, that he set out from Greece and brought back with him the\ngirdle of their queen Hippolyt\u00ea; also of Th\u00easeus and the Athenians,\nthat they were the first who defeated in battle and repelled these\nwomen in their invasion of Europe; and the combat of the Athenians\nwith the Amazons has been painted by Mik\u00f4n, not less than that between\nthe Athenians and the Persians. Moreover Herodotus has spoken in many\nplaces of these women, and those Athenian orators who have pronounced\npanegyrics on the citizens slain in battle, have dwelt upon the victory\nover the Amazons as among the most memorable of Athenian exploits. If\nthe satrap of Media sent any equestrian women at all to Alexander, I\nthink that they must have come from some of the neighboring tribes,\npractised in riding and equipped in the costume generally called\nAmazonian.\u201d[519]\n\n  [516] Strabo, xi. p. 503-504; Appian, Bell. Mithridat. c. 103;\n  Plutarch, Pompeius, c. 35. Plin. N. H. vi. 7. Plutarch still\n  retains the old description of Amazons from the mountains near\n  the Therm\u00f4d\u00f4n. Appian keeps clear of this geographical error,\n  probably copying more exactly the language of Theophan\u00eas, who\n  must have been well aware that when Lucullus besieged Themiskyra,\n  he did not find it defended by the Amazons (see Appian, Bell.\n  Mithridat. c. 78). Ptolemy (v. 9) places the Amazons in the\n  imperfectly known regions of Asiatic Sarmatia, north of the\n  Caspian and near the river Rha (Volga). \u201cThis fabulous community\n  of women (observes Forbiger, Handbuch der alten Geographie,\n  ii. 77, p. 457) was a ph\u00e6nomenon much too interesting for the\n  geographers easily to relinquish.\u201d\n\n  [517] Strabo, xi. p. 505. \u1f3c\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd. \u039f\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u1ff6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ce\u03b4\u03b7, \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 [_Note._ Strabo does not always speak of the \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9 in\n  this disrespectful tone; he is sometimes much displeased with\n  those who dispute the existence of an historical kernel in the\n  inside, especially with regard to Homer.] \u1f21 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c4\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f04\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f22 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f22\n  \u03c3\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd. \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76,\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ce\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c9. \u03a4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd,\n  \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f22 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03b7 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd; \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03b7, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c6\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f38\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2; \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03ac \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\u00b7 ~\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f70\n  \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd~. There are however, other passages in which he\n  speaks of the Amazons as realities.\n\n  Justin (ii. 4) recognizes the great power and extensive conquests\n  of the Amazons in very early times, but says that they gradually\n  declined down to the reign of Alexander, in whose time there\n  were _just a few remaining_; the queen with these few visited\n  Alexander, but shortly afterwards the whole breed became extinct.\n  This hypothesis has the merit of convenience, perhaps of\n  ingenuity.\n\n  [518] Suetonius, Jul. C\u00e6sar, c. 22. \u201cIn Syri\u00e2 quoque regnasse\n  Semiramin (Julius C\u00e6sar said this), magnamque Asi\u00e6 partem\n  Amazonas tenuisse quondam.\u201d\n\n  In the splendid triumph of the emperor Aurelian at Rome after the\n  defeat of Zenobia, a few Gothic women who had been taken in arms\n  were exhibited among the prisoners; the official placard carried\n  along with them announced them as _Amazons_ (Vopiscus Aurel. in\n  Histor. August. Scrip. p. 260, ed. Paris).\n\n  [519] Arrian, Expedit. Alexand. vii. 13.\n\nThere cannot be a more striking evidence of the indelible force with\nwhich these ancient legends were worked into the national faith and\nfeelings of the Greeks, than these remarks of a judicious historian\nupon the fable of the Amazons. Probably if any plausible mode of\nrationalizing it, and of transforming it into a quasi-political event,\nhad been offered to Arrian, he would have been better pleased to\nadopt such a middle term, and would have rested comfortably in the\nsupposition that he believed the legend in its true meaning, while his\nless inquiring countrymen were imposed upon by the exaggerations of\npoets. But as the story was presented to him plain and unvarnished,\neither for acceptance or rejection, his feelings as a patriot\nand a religious man prevented him from applying to the past such\ntests of credibility as his untrammelled reason acknowledged to be\nparamount in regard to the present. When we see moreover how much\nhis belief was strengthened, and all tendency to scepticism shut out\nby the familiarity of his eye and memory with sculptured or painted\nAmazons[520]\u2014we may calculate the irresistible force of this sensible\ndemonstration on the convictions of the unlettered public, at once\nmore deeply retentive of passive impressions, and unaccustomed to the\ncountervailing habit of rational investigation into evidence. Had the\nmarch of an army of warlike women, from the Therm\u00f4d\u00f4n or the Tanais\ninto the heart of Attica, been recounted to Arrian as an incident\nbelonging to the time of Alexander the Great, he would have rejected\nit no less emphatically than Strab\u00f4; but cast back as it was into an\nundefined past, it took rank among the hallowed traditions of divine\nor heroic antiquity,\u2014gratifying to extol by rhetoric, but repulsive to\nscrutinize in argument.[521]\n\n  [520] Kt\u00easias described as real animals, existing in wild and\n  distant regions, the heterogeneous and fantastic combinations\n  which he saw sculptured in the East (see this stated and\n  illustrated in B\u00e4hr, Preface to the Fragm. of Kt\u00easias, pp. 58,\n  59).\n\n  [521] Heyne observes (Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 5, 9) with respect to the\n  fable of the Amazons, \u201cIn his historiarum fidem aut vestigia nemo\n  qu\u00e6siverit.\u201d Admitting the wisdom of this counsel (and I think\n  it indisputable), why are we required to presume, in the absence\n  of all proof, an historical basis for each of those _other_\n  narratives, such as the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt, the Argonautic\n  expedition, or the siege of Troy, which go to make up, along\n  with the story of the Amazons, the aggregate matter of Grecian\n  legendary faith? If the tale of the Amazons could gain currency\n  without any such support, why not other portions of the ancient\n  epic?\n\n  An author of easy belief, Dr. F. Nagel, vindicates the historical\n  reality of the Amazons (Geschichte der Amazonen, Stutgart,\n  1838). I subjoin here a different explanation of the Amazonian\n  tale, proceeding from another author who rejects the historical\n  basis, and contained in a work of learning and value (Guhl,\n  _Ephesiaca_, Berlin, 1843. p. 132):\u2014\n\n  \u201cId tantum monendum videtur, Amazonas nequaquam historice\n  accipiendas esse, sed e contrario totas ad mythologiam pertinere.\n  Earum enim fabulas quum ex frequentium hierodularum gregibus in\n  cultibus et sacris Asiaticis ortas esse ingeniose ostenderit\n  Tolken, jam _inter omnes mythologi\u00e6 peritos constat_, Amazonibus\n  nihil fere nisi peregrini cujusdam cultus notionem expressum\n  esse, ejusque cum Gr\u00e6corum religione certamen frequentibus istis\n  pugnis designatum esse, quas cum Amazonibus tot Gr\u00e6corum heroes\n  habuisse credebantur, Hercules, Bellerophon, Theseus, Achilles,\n  et vel ipse, quem Ephesi cultum fuisse supra ostendimus,\n  Dionysus. Qu\u00e6 Amazonum notio primaria, quum paulatim Euemeristic\u00e2\n  (ut ita dicam) ratione ita transformaretur, ut Amazones pro vero\n  feminarum populo haberentur, necesse quoque erat, ut omnibus\n  fere locis, ubi ejusmodi religionum certamina locum habuerunt,\n  Amazones habitasse, vel eo usque processisse, crederentur.\n  Quod cum nusquam manifestius fuerit, quam in Asi\u00e2 minore, et\n  potissimum in e\u00e2 parte qu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6ciam versus vergit, haud mirandum\n  est omnes fere ejus or\u00e6 urbes ab Amazonibus conditas putari.\u201d\n\n  I do not know the evidence upon which this conjectural\n  interpretation rests, but the statement of it, though it boasts\n  so many supporters among mythological critics, carries no\n  appearance of probability to my mind. Priam fights against the\n  Amazons as well as the Grecian heroes.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\nKRETAN LEGENDS.\u2014MINOS AND HIS FAMILY.\n\n\nTo understand the adventures of Th\u00easeus in Kr\u00eate, it will be necessary\nto touch briefly upon Min\u00f4s and the Kr\u00eatan heroic genealogy.\n\nMin\u00f4s and Rhadamanthus, according to Homer, are sons of Zeus, by\nEurop\u00ea,[522] daughter of the widely-celebrated Ph\u0153nix, born in Kr\u00eate.\nMin\u00f4s is the father of Deukali\u00f4n, whose son Idomeneus, in conjunction\nwith M\u00earion\u00eas, conducts the Kr\u00eatan troops to the host of Agamemn\u00f4n\nbefore Troy. Min\u00f4s is ruler of Knossus, and familiar companion of\nthe great Zeus. He is spoken of as holding guardianship in Kr\u00eate\u2014not\nnecessarily meaning the whole of the island: he is farther decorated\nwith a golden sceptre, and constituted judge over the dead in the\nunder-world to settle their disputes, in which function Odysseus finds\nhim\u2014this however by a passage of comparatively late interpolation into\nthe Odyssey. He also had a daughter named Ariadn\u00ea, for whom the artist\nD\u00e6dalus fabricated in the town of Knossus the representation of a\ncomplicated dance, and who was ultimately carried off by Th\u00easeus: she\ndied in the island of Dia, deserted by Th\u00easeus and betrayed by Dionysos\nto the fatal wrath of Artemis. Rhadamanthus seems to approach to Min\u00f4s\nboth in judicial functions and posthumous dignity. He is conveyed\nexpressly to Eub\u0153a, by the semi-divine sea-carriers the Ph\u00e6acians, to\ninspect the gigantic corpse of the earth-born Tityus\u2014the longest voyage\nthey ever undertook. He is moreover after death promoted to an abode\nof undisturbed bliss in the Elysian plain at the extremity of the\nearth.[523]\n\n  [522] Europ\u00ea was worshipped with very peculiar solemnity in the\n  island of Kr\u00eate (see Dictys Cretensis, De Bello Trojano, i. c. 2).\n\n  The venerable plane-tree, under which Zeus and Europ\u00ea had\n  reposed, was still shown, hard by a fountain at Gortyn in\n  Kr\u00eate, in the time of Theophrastus: it was said to be the only\n  plane-tree in the neighborhood which never cast its leaves\n  (Theophrast. Hist. Plant. i. 9).\n\n  [523] Homer, Iliad, xiii. 249, 450; xiv. 321. Odyss. xi. 322-568;\n  xix. 179; iv. 564-vii. 321.\n\n  The Homeric Min\u00f4s in the under-world is not a judge of the\n  previous lives of the dead, so as to determine whether they\n  deserve reward or punishment for their conduct on earth: such\n  functions are not assigned to him earlier than the time of Plato.\n  He administers justice _among_ the dead, who are conceived as a\n  sort of society, requiring some presiding judge: \u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9, with regard to Min\u00f4s, is said very much like (Odyss.\n  xi. 484) \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f56\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9 with regard to Achilles.\n  See this matter partially illustrated in Heyne\u2019s Excursus xi. to\n  the sixth book of the \u00c6neid of Virgil.\n\nAccording to poets later than Homer, Europ\u00ea is brought over by Zeus\nfrom Ph\u0153nicia to Kr\u00eate, where she bears to him three sons, Min\u00f4s,\nRhadamanthus and Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n. The latter leaves Kr\u00eate and settles in\nLykia, the population of which, as well as that of many other portions\nof Asia Minor, is connected by various mythical genealogies with\nKr\u00eate, though the Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n of the Iliad has no connection with Kr\u00eate,\nand is not the son of Europ\u00ea. Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n having become king of Lykia,\nwas favored by his father, Zeus, with permission to live for three\ngenerations.[524] At the same time the youthful Mil\u00eatus, a favorite\nof Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n, quitted Kr\u00eate, and established the city which bore his\nname on the coast of Asia Minor. Rhadamanthus became sovereign of\nand lawgiver among the islands in the \u00c6gean: he subsequently went to\nB\u0153\u00f4tia, where he married the widowed Alkm\u00ean\u00ea, mother of H\u00earakl\u00eas.\n\n  [524] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 1, 2. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9 \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u03b6\u1fc7\u03bd. This circumstance is evidently imagined by the logographers\n  to account for the appearance of Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n in the Trojan war,\n  fighting against Idomeneus, the grandson of Min\u00f4s. Nisus is the\n  eponymus of Nis\u00e6a, the port of the town of Megara: his tomb\n  was shown at Athens (Pausan. i. 19, 5). Min\u00f4s is the eponym of\n  the island of Minoa (opposite the port of Nis\u00e6a), where it was\n  affirmed that the fleet of Min\u00f4s was stationed (Pausan. i. 44, 5).\n\nEurop\u00ea finds in Kr\u00eate a king Ast\u00earius, who marries her and adopts her\nchildren by Zeus: this Ast\u00earius is the son of Kr\u00eas, the eponym of the\nisland, or (according to another genealogy by which it was attempted to\nbe made out that Min\u00f4s was of D\u00f4rian race) he was a son of the daughter\nof Kr\u00eas by Tektamus, the son of D\u00f4rus, who had migrated into the island\nfrom Greece.\n\nMin\u00f4s married Pasipha\u00ea, daughter of the god H\u00ealios and Perse\u00efs, by\nwhom he had Katreus, Deukali\u00f4n, Glaukus, Androgeos, names marked in\nthe legendary narrative,\u2014together with several daughters, among whom\nwere Ariadn\u00ea and Ph\u00e6dra. He offended Poseid\u00f4n by neglecting to fulfil a\nsolemnly-made vow, and the displeased god afflicted his wife Pasipha\u00ea\nwith a monstrous passion for a bull. The great artist D\u00e6dalus, son of\nEupalamus, a fugitive from Athens, became the confidant of this amour,\nfrom which sprang the Min\u00f4taur, a creature half man and half bull.[525]\nThis Min\u00f4taur was imprisoned by Min\u00f4s in the labyrinth, an inextricable\ninclosure constructed by D\u00e6dalus for that express purpose, by order of\nMin\u00f4s.\n\n  [525] Apollod\u00f4r iii. 1, 2.\n\nMin\u00f4s acquired great nautical power, and expelled the Karian\ninhabitants from many of the islands of the \u00c6gean, which he placed\nunder the government of his sons on the footing of tributaries. He\nundertook several expeditions against various places on the coast\u2014one\nagainst Nisus, the son of Pandi\u00f4n, king of Megara, who had amongst\nthe hair of his head one peculiar lock of a purple color: an oracle\nhad pronounced that his life and reign would never be in danger so\nlong as he preserved this precious lock. The city would have remained\ninexpugnable, if Scylla, the daughter of Nisus, had not conceived a\nviolent passion for Min\u00f4s. While her father was asleep, she cut off\nthe lock on which his safety hung, so that the Kr\u00eatan king soon became\nvictorious. Instead of performing his promise to carry Scylla away\nwith him to Kr\u00eate, he cast her from the stern of his vessel into the\nsea:[526] both Scylla and Nisus were changed into birds.\n\n  [526] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 8. See the Ciris of Virgil, a juvenile\n  poem on the subject of this fable; also Hyginus, f. 198; Schol.\n  Eurip. Hippol. 1200. Propertius (iii. 19, 21) gives the features\n  of the story with tolerable fidelity; Ovid takes considerable\n  liberties with it (Metam. viii. 5-150).\n\nAndrogeos, son of Min\u00f4s having displayed such rare qualities as to\nvanquish all his competitors at the Panathenaic festival in Athens,\nwas sent by \u00c6geus the Athenian king to contend against the bull of\nMarath\u00f4n,\u2014an enterprise in which he perished, and Min\u00f4s made war upon\nAthens to avenge his death. He was for a long time unable to take the\ncity: at length he prayed to his father Zeus to aid him in obtaining\nredress from the Athenians, and Zeus sent upon them pestilence and\nfamine. In vain did they endeavor to avert these calamities by offering\nup as propitiatory sacrifices the four daughters of Hyacinthus. Their\nsufferings still continued, and the oracle directed them to submit to\nany terms which Min\u00f4s might exact. He required that they should send\nto Kr\u00eate a tribute of seven youths and seven maidens, periodically,\nto be devoured by the Min\u00f4taur,[527]\u2014offered to him in a labyrinth\nconstructed by D\u00e6dalus, including countless different passages, out of\nwhich no person could escape.\n\n  [527] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 15, 8.\n\nEvery ninth year this offering was to be despatched. The more common\nstory was, that the youths and maidens thus destined to destruction\nwere selected by lot\u2014but the logographer Hellanikus said that Min\u00f4s\ncame to Athens and chose them himself.[528] The third period for\ndespatching the victims had arrived, and Athens was plunged in the\ndeepest affliction, when Th\u00easeus determined to devote himself as one\nof them, and either to terminate the sanguinary tribute or to perish.\nHe prayed to Poseid\u00f4n for help, and the Delphian god assured him that\nAphrodit\u00ea would sustain and extricate him. On arriving at Knossus\nhe was fortunate enough to captivate the affections of Ariadn\u00ea, the\ndaughter of Min\u00f4s, who supplied him with a sword and a clue of thread.\nWith the former he contrived to kill the Min\u00f4taur, the latter served to\nguide his footsteps in escaping from the labyrinth. Having accomplished\nthis triumph, he left Kr\u00eate with his ship and companions unhurt,\ncarrying off Ariadn\u00ea, whom however he soon abandoned on the island of\nNaxos. On his way home to Athens, he stopped at D\u00ealos, where he offered\na grateful sacrifice to Apollo for his escape, and danced along with\nthe young men and maidens whom he had rescued from the Min\u00f4taur, a\ndance called the Geranus, imitated from the twists and convolutions\nof the Kr\u00eatan labyrinth. It had been concerted with his father \u00c6geus,\nthat if he succeeded in his enterprise against the Min\u00f4taur, he should\non his return hoist white sails in his ship in place of the black\ncanvas which she habitually carried when employed on this mournful\nembassy. But Th\u00easeus forgot to make the change of sails; so that \u00c6geus,\nseeing the ship return with her equipment of mourning unaltered, was\nimpressed with the sorrowful conviction that his son had perished,\nand cast himself into the sea. The ship which made this voyage was\npreserved by the Athenians with careful solicitude, being constantly\nrepaired with new timbers, down to the time of the Phalerian D\u00eam\u00eatrius:\nevery year she was sent from Athens to D\u00ealos with a solemn sacrifice\nand specially-nominated envoys. The priest of Apollo decked her stern\nwith garlands before she quitted the port, and during the time which\nelapsed until her return, the city was understood to abstain from all\nacts carrying with them public impurity, so that it was unlawful to put\nto death any person even under formal sentence by the dikastery. This\naccidental circumstance becomes especially memorable, from its having\npostponed for thirty days the death of the lamented Socrat\u00eas.[529]\n\n  [528] See, on the subject of Th\u00easeus and the Min\u00f4taur, Eckermann,\n  Lehrbuch der Religions Geschichte und Mythologie, vol. ii. ch.\n  xiii. p. 133. He maintains that the tribute of these human\n  victims paid by Athens to Min\u00f4s is an historical fact. Upon what\n  this belief is grounded, I confess I do not see.\n\n  [529] Plato, Ph\u00e6don, c. 2, 3; Xenoph. Memor. iv. 8. 2. Plato\n  especially noticed \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f15\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, the seven youths and\n  the seven maidens whom Th\u00easeus conveyed to Kr\u00eate and brought\n  back safely: this number seems an old and constant feature in\n  the legend, maintained by Sappho and Bacchylid\u00eas as well as by\n  Euripid\u00eas (Herc. Fur. 1318). See Servius ad Virgil \u00c6neid. vi. 21.\n\nThe legend respecting Th\u00easeus, and his heroic rescue of the seven\nnoble youths and maidens from the jaws of the Min\u00f4taur, was thus both\ncommemorated and certified to the Athenian public, by the annual holy\nceremony and by the unquestioned identity of the vessel employed in it.\nThere were indeed many varieties in the mode of narrating the incident;\nand some of the Attic logographers tried to rationalize the fable by\ntransforming the Min\u00f4taur into a general or a powerful athlete, named\nTaurus, whom Th\u00easeus vanquished in Kr\u00eate.[530] But this altered version\nnever overbore the old fanciful character of the tale as maintained by\nthe poets. A great number of other religious ceremonies and customs,\nas well as several chapels or sacred enclosures in honor of different\nheroes, were connected with different acts and special ordinances\nof Th\u00easeus. To every Ath\u00eanian who took part in the festivals of\nthe Oschophoria, the Pyanepsia, or the Kybern\u00easia, the name of this\ngreat hero was familiar, and the motives for offering to him solemn\nworship at his own special festival of the Th\u00easeia, became evident and\nimpressive.\n\n  [530] For the general narrative and its discrepancies, see\n  Plutarch, Th\u00eas. c. 15-19; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 60-62; Pausan. i. 17, 3;\n  Ovid, Epist. Ariadn. Th\u00eas. 104. In that other portion of the\n  work of Diod\u00f4rus which relates more especially to Kr\u00eate, and is\n  borrowed from Kretan logographers and historians (v. 64-80), he\n  mentions nothing at all respecting the war of Min\u00f4s with Athens.\n\n  In the drama of Euripid\u00eas called Th\u00easeus, the genuine story\n  of the youths and maidens about to be offered as food to the\n  Minotaur was introduced (Schol. ad Aristoph. Vesp. 312).\n\n  Ariadn\u00ea figures in the Odyssey along with Th\u00easeus: she is the\n  daughter of Min\u00f4s, carried off by Th\u00easeus from Kr\u00eate, and killed\n  by Artemis in the way home: there is no allusion to Min\u00f4taur, or\n  tribute, or self-devotion of Th\u00easeus (Odyss. xi. 324). This is\n  probably the oldest and simplest form of the legend\u2014one of the\n  many amorous (compare Theognis, 1232) adventures of Th\u00easeus: the\n  rest is added by post-Homeric poets.\n\n  The respect of Aristotle for Min\u00f4s induces him to adopt the\n  hypothesis that the Athenian youths and maidens were not put\n  to death in Kr\u00eate, but grew old in servitude (Aristot. Fragm.\n  \u0392\u03bf\u03c4\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, p. 106. ed. Neumann. of the Fragments of the\n  treatise \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd, Plutarch, Qu\u00e6st. Gr\u00e6c. p. 298).\n\nThe same Athenian legends which ennobled and decorated the character\nof Th\u00easeus, painted in repulsive colors the attributes of Min\u00f4s; and\nthe traits of the old Homeric comrade of Zeus were buried under those\nof the conqueror and oppressor of Athens. His history like that of\nthe other legendary personages of Greece, consists almost entirely of\na string of family romances and tragedies. His son Katreus, father\nof A\u00ebrop\u00ea, wife of Atreus, was apprized by an oracle that he would\nperish by the hand of one of his own children: he accordingly sent them\nout of the island, and Alth\u00e6men\u00eas, his son, established himself in\nRhodes. Katreus having become old, and fancying that he had outlived\nthe warning of the oracle, went over to Rhodes to see Alth\u00e6men\u00eas.\nIn an accidental dispute which arose between his attendants and the\nislanders, Alth\u00e6men\u00eas inadvertently took part and slew his father\nwithout knowing him. Glaukus, the youngest son of Min\u00f4s, pursuing a\nmouse, fell into a reservoir of honey and was drowned. No one knew\nwhat had become of him, and his father was inconsolable; at length the\nArgeian Polyeidus, a prophet wonderfully endowed by the gods, both\ndiscovered the boy and restored him to life, to the exceeding joy of\nMin\u00f4s.[531]\n\n  [531] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. cap. 2-3.\n\nThe latter at last found his death in an eager attempt to overtake and\npunish D\u00e6dalus. This great artist, the eponymous hero of the Attic gens\nor d\u00eame called the D\u00e6dalid\u00e6, and the descendant of Erechtheus through\nM\u00eation, had been tried at the tribunal of Areiopagus and banished for\nkilling his nephew Talos, whose rapidly improving skill excited his\nenvy.[532] He took refuge in Kr\u00eate, where he acquired the confidence of\nMin\u00f4s, and was employed (as has been already mentioned) in constructing\nthe labyrinth; subsequently however he fell under the displeasure\nof Min\u00f4s, and was confined as a close prisoner in the inextricable\nwindings of his own edifice. His unrivalled skill and resource however\ndid not forsake him. He manufactured wings both for himself and for\nhis son Ikarus, with which they flew over the sea: the father arrived\nsafely in Sicily at Kamikus, the residence of the Sikanian king\nKokalus, but the son, disdaining paternal example and admonition, flew\nso high that his wings were melted by the sun and he fell into the sea,\nwhich from him was called the Ikarian sea.[533]\n\n  [532] Pherekyd. Fragm. 105; Hellanik. Fragm. 82 (Didot); Pausan.\n  vii. 4, 5.\n\n  [533] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 79; Ovid, Metamorph. viii. 181. Both Ephorus\n  and Philistus mentioned the coming of D\u00e6dalus to Kokalus in\n  Sicily (Ephor. Fr. 99; Philist. Fragm. 1, Didot): probably\n  Antiochus noticed it also (Diod\u00f4r. xii. 71). Kokalus was the\n  point of commencement for the Sicilian historians.\n\nD\u00e6dalus remained for some time in Sicily, leaving in various parts of\nthe island many prodigious evidences of mechanical and architectural\nskill.[534] At length Min\u00f4s bent upon regaining possession of his\nperson, undertook an expedition against Kokalus with a numerous fleet\nand army. Kokalus affecting readiness to deliver up the fugitive, and\nreceiving Min\u00f4s with apparent friendship, ordered a bath to be prepared\nfor him by his three daughters, who, eager to protect D\u00e6dalus at any\nprice, drowned the Kr\u00eatan king in the bath with hot water.[535] Many\nof the Kr\u00eatans who had accompanied him remained in Sicily and founded\nthe town of Minoa, which they denominated after him. But not long\nafterwards Zeus roused all the inhabitants of Kr\u00eate (except the towns\nof Polichna and Pr\u00e6sus) to undertake with one accord an expedition\nagainst Kamikus for the purpose of avenging the death of Min\u00f4s. They\nbesieged Kamikus in vain for five years, until at last famine compelled\nthem to return. On their way along the coast of Italy, in the Gulf\nof Tarentum, a terrible storm destroyed their fleet and obliged them\nto settle permanently in the country: they founded Hyria with other\ncities, and became Messapian Iapygians. Other settlers, for the most\npart Greeks, immigrated into Kr\u00eate to the spots which this movement\nhad left vacant, and in the second generation after Min\u00f4s occurred\nthe Trojan war. The departed Min\u00f4s was exceedingly offended with the\nKr\u00eatans for co\u00f6perating in avenging the injury to Menelaus, since the\nGreeks generally had lent no aid to the Kr\u00eatans in their expedition\nagainst the town of Kamikus. He sent upon Kr\u00eate, after the return\nof Idomeneus from Troy, such terrible visitations of famine and\npestilence, that the population again died out or expatriated, and was\nagain renovated by fresh immigrations. The intolerable suffering[536]\nthus brought upon the Kr\u00eatans by the anger of Min\u00f4s, for having\nco\u00f6perated in the general Grecian aid to Menelaus, was urged by them to\nthe Greeks as the reason why they could take no part in resisting the\ninvasion of Xerx\u00eas; and it is even pretended that they were advised and\nencouraged to adopt this ground of excuse by the Delphian oracle.[537]\n\n  [534] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 80.\n\n  [535] Pausan. vii. 4, 5; Schol. Pindar. Nem. iv. 95; Hygin. fab.\n  44; Conon, Narr. 25; Ovid, Ibis, 291.\u2014\n\n    \u201cVel tua maturet, sicut Minoia fata,\n        Per caput infus\u00e6 fervidus humor aqu\u00e6.\u201d\n\n  This story formed the subject of a lost drama of Sophokl\u00eas,\n  \u039a\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 or \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2; it was also told by Kallimachus, \u1f10\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2,\n  as well as by Philostephanus (Schol. Iliad, ii. 145).\n\n  [536] This curious and very characteristic narrative is given by\n  Herodot. vii. 169-171.\n\n  [537] Herodot. vii. 169. The answer ascribed to the Delphian\n  oracle, on the question being put by the Kr\u00eatan envoys whether it\n  would be better for them to aid the Greeks against Xerx\u00eas or not,\n  is highly emphatic and poetical: \u1f6e \u03bd\u03ae\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c8\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9\n  \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03ae\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u039a\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03ba\u1ff3 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n  \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03a3\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f01\u03c1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1.\n\n  If such an answer was ever returned at all, I cannot but think\n  that it must have been from some oracle in Kr\u00eate itself, not from\n  Delphi. The Delphian oracle could never have so far forgotten\n  its obligations to the general cause of Greece, at that critical\n  moment, which involved moreover the safety of all its own\n  treasures, as to deter the Kr\u00eatans from giving assistance.\n\nSuch is the Min\u00f4s of the poets and logographers, with his legendary and\nromantic attributes: the familiar comrade of the great Zeus,\u2014the judge\namong the dead in Had\u00eas,\u2014the husband of Pasipha\u00ea, daughter of the god\nH\u00ealios,\u2014the father of the goddess Ariadn\u00ea, as well as of Androgeos,\nwho perishes and is worshipped at Athens,[538] and of the boy Glaukus,\nwho is miraculously restored to life by a prophet,\u2014the person\nbeloved by Scylla, and the amorous pursuer of the nymph or goddess\nBritomartis,[539]\u2014the proprietor of the Labyrinth and of the Min\u00f4taur,\nand the exacter of a periodical tribute of youths and maidens from\nAthens as food for this monster,\u2014lastly, the follower of the fugitive\nartist D\u00e6dalus to Kamikus, and the victim of the three ill-disposed\ndaughters of Kokalus in a bath. With this strongly-marked portrait,\nthe Min\u00f4s of Thucydid\u00eas and Aristotle has scarcely anything in common\nexcept the name. He is the first to acquire _Thalassokraty_, or command\nof the \u00c6gean sea: he expels the Karian inhabitants from the Cyclades\nislands, and sends thither fresh colonists under his own sons; he\nputs down piracy, in order that he may receive his tribute regularly;\nlastly, he attempts to conquer Sicily, but fails in the enterprise and\nperishes.[540] Here we have conjectures, derived from the analogy of\nthe Athenian maritime empire in the historical times, substituted in\nplace of the fabulous incidents, and attached to the name of Min\u00f4s.\n\n  [538] Hesiod, Theogon. 949; Pausan. i. 1, 4.\n\n  [539] Kallimach. Hymn. ad Dian. 189. Strabo (x. p. 476) dwells\n  also upon the strange contradiction of the legends concerning\n  Min\u00f4s: I agree with Hoeckh (Kreta, ii. p. 93) that \u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 in\n  this passage refers to the tribute exacted from Athens for the\n  Min\u00f4taur.\n\n  [540] Thucyd. i. 4. \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f67\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fc7 \u1f34\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd,\n  \u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039a\u03c5\u03ba\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f26\u03c1\u03be\u03ad \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, \u039a\u1fb6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bb\u1fc3\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc4\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2,\n  \u1f10\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f30\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7. See also\n  c. 8.\n\n  Aristot. Polit. ii. 7, 2, \u0394\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f21 \u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 ... \u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41 \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1fa4\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5\u00b7 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u039a\u03ac\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  Ephorus (ap. Skymn. Chi. 542) repeated the same statement: he\n  mentioned also the autochthonous king Kr\u00eas.\n\nIn the fable, a tribute of seven youths and seven maidens is paid\nto him periodically by the Athenians; in the historicized narrative\nthis character of a tribute-collector is preserved, but the tribute\nis money collected from dependent islands;[541] and Aristotle points\nout to us how conveniently Kr\u00eate is situated to exercise empire over\nthe \u00c6gean. The expedition against Kamikus, instead of being directed\nto the recovery of the fugitive D\u00e6dalus, is an attempt on the part of\nthe great thalassokrat to conquer Sicily. Herodotus gives us generally\nthe same view of the character of Min\u00f4s as a great maritime king, but\nhis notice of the expedition against Kamikus includes the mention of\nD\u00e6dalus as the intended object of it.[542] Ephorus, while he described\nMin\u00f4s as a commanding and comprehensive lawgiver imposing his commands\nunder the sanction of Zeus, represented him as the imitator of an\nearlier lawgiver named Rhadamanthus, and also as an immigrant into\nKr\u00eate from the \u00c6olic Mount Ida, along with the priests or sacred\ncompanions of Zeus called the Id\u00e6i Dactyli. Aristotle too points him\nout as the author of the Syssitia, or public meals common in Kr\u00eate as\nwell as at Sparta,\u2014other divergences in a new direction from the spirit\nof the old fables.[543]\n\n  [541] It is curious that Herodotus expressly denies this, and in\n  language which shows that he had made special inquiries about it:\n  he says that the Karians or Leleges in the islands (who were,\n  according to Thucydid\u00eas, expelled by Min\u00f4s) paid no tribute to\n  Min\u00f4s, but manned his navy, _i. e._ they stood to Min\u00f4s much in\n  the same relation as Chios and Lesbos stood to Athens (Herodot.\n  i. 171). One may trace here the influence of those discussions\n  which must have been prevalent at that time respecting the\n  maritime empire of Athens.\n\n  [542] Herodot. vii. 170. \u039b\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b6\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0394\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\n  \u03b2\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3. \u1f08\u03bd\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u039a\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03c6\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, etc.\n\n  [543] Aristot. Polit. ii. 7, 1; vii. 9, 2. Ephorus, Fragm. 63,\n  64, 65. He set aside altogether the Homeric genealogy of Min\u00f4s,\n  which makes him brother of Rhadamanthus and born in Kr\u00eate.\n\n  Strabo, in pointing out the many contradictions respecting Min\u00f4s,\n  remarks, \u1f1c\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd.. By the former he\n  doubtless means Ephorus, though he has not here specified him (x.\n  p. 477).\n\nThe contradictory attributes ascribed to Min\u00f4s, together with the\nperplexities experienced by those who wished to introduce a regular\nchronological arrangement into these legendary events, has led both\nin ancient and in modern times to the supposition of two kings\nnamed Min\u00f4s, one the grandson of the other,\u2014Min\u00f4s I., the son of\nZeus, lawgiver and judge,\u2014Min\u00f4s II., the thalassokrat,\u2014a gratuitous\nconjecture, which, without solving the problem required, only adds\none to the numerous artifices employed for imparting the semblance of\nhistory to the disparate matter of legend. The Kr\u00eatans were at all\ntimes, from Homer downward, expert and practised seamen. But that they\nwere ever united under one government, or ever exercised maritime\ndominion in the \u00c6gean is a fact which we are neither able to affirm\nnor to deny. The Odyssey, in so far as it justifies any inference at\nall, points against such a supposition, since it recognizes a great\ndiversity both of inhabitants and of languages in the island, and\ndesignates Min\u00f4s as king specially of Kn\u00f4ssus: it refutes still more\npositively the idea that Min\u00f4s put down piracy, which the Homeric\nKr\u00eatans as well as others continue to practise without scruple.\n\nHerodotus, though he in some places speaks of Min\u00f4s as a person\nhistorically cognizable, yet in one passage severs him pointedly from\nthe generation of man. The Samian despot \u201cPolykrat\u00eas (he tells us) was\nthe first person who aspired to nautical dominion, excepting Min\u00f4s\nof Kn\u00f4ssus, and others before him (if any such there ever were) who\nmay have ruled the sea; but Polykrat\u00eas is the first of that which is\ncalled _the generation of man_ who aspired with much chance of success\nto govern I\u00f4nia and the islands of the \u00c6gean.\u201d[544] Here we find it\nmanifestly intimated that Min\u00f4s did not belong to the generation of\nman, and the tale given by the historian respecting the tremendous\ncalamities which the wrath of the departed Min\u00f4s inflicted on Kr\u00eate\nconfirms the impression. The king of Kn\u00f4ssus is a god or a hero, but\nnot a man; he belongs to legend, not to history. He is the son as\nwell as the familiar companion of Zeus; he marries the daughter of\nH\u00ealios, and Ariadn\u00ea is numbered among his offspring. To this superhuman\nperson are ascribed the oldest and most revered institutions of the\nisland, religious and political, together with a period of supposed\nante-historical dominion. That there is much of Kr\u00eatan religious ideas\nand practice embodied in the fables concerning Min\u00f4s can hardly be\ndoubted: nor is it improbable that the tale of the youths and maidens\nsent from Athens may be based in some expiatory offerings rendered to\na Kr\u00eatan divinity. The orgiastic worship of Zeus, solemnized by the\narmed priests with impassioned motions and violent excitement, was\nof ancient date in that island, as well as the connection with the\nworship of Apollo both at Delphi and at D\u00ealos. To analyze the fables\nand to elicit from them any trustworthy particular facts, appears to\nme a fruitless attempt. The religious recollections, the romantic\ninvention, and the items of matter of fact, if any such there be, must\nforever remain indissolubly amalgamated as the poet originally blended\nthem, for the amusement or edification of his auditors. Hoeckh, in his\ninstructive and learned collection of facts respecting ancient Kr\u00eate,\nconstrues the mythical genealogy of Min\u00f4s to denote a combination\nof the orgiastic worship of Zeus, indigenous among the Eteokr\u00eates,\nwith the worship of the moon imported from Ph\u0153nicia, and signified by\nthe names Europ\u00ea, Pasipha\u00ea, and Ariadn\u00ea.[545] This is specious as a\nconjecture, but I do not venture to speak of it in terms of greater\nconfidence.\n\n  [544] Herodot. iii. 122. \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f34\u03b4\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f43\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f72\u03be \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u039a\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f26\u03c1\u03be\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2\u00b7\n  ~\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b7\u0390\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fc6\u03c2~ \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u1f38\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n  The expression exactly corresponds to that of Pausanias, ix. 5,\n  1, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd, for the age preceding the \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b7\u0390\u03b7\n  \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b7; also viii. 2. 1, \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n  [545] Hoeckh, Kreta, vol. ii. pp. 56-67. K. O. M\u00fcller also\n  (Dorier. ii. 2, 14) puts a religious interpretation upon these\n  Kreto-Attic legends, but he explains them in a manner totally\n  different from Hoeckh.\n\nFrom the connection of religious worship and legendary tales between\nKr\u00eate and various parts of Asia Minor,\u2014the Tr\u00f4ad, the coast of Mil\u00eatus\nand Lykia, especially between Mount Ida in Kr\u00eate and Mount Ida in\n\u00c6\u00f4lis,\u2014it seems reasonable to infer an ethnographical kindred or\nrelationship between the inhabitants anterior to the period of Hellenic\noccupation. The tales of Kr\u00eatan settlement at Minoa and Engyi\u00f4n on\nthe south-western coast of Sicily, and in Iapygia on the Gulf of\nTarentum, conduct us to a similar presumption, though the want of\nevidence forbids our tracing it farther. In the time of Herodotus, the\nEteokr\u00eates, or aboriginal inhabitants of the island, were confined to\nPolichna and Pr\u00e6sus; but in earlier times, prior to the encroachments\nof the Hell\u00eanes, they had occupied the larger portion, if not the whole\nof the island. Min\u00f4s was originally their hero, subsequently adopted by\nthe immigrant Hell\u00eanes,\u2014at least Herodotus considers him as barbarian,\nnot Hellenic.[546]\n\n  [546] Herodot. i. 173.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\nARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION.\n\n\nThe ship Arg\u00f4 was the theme of many songs during the oldest periods\nof the Grecian epic, even earlier than the Odyssey. The king \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas,\nfrom whom she is departing, the hero Jas\u00f4n, who commands her, and the\ngoddess H\u00ear\u00ea, who watches over him, enabling the Arg\u00f4 to traverse\ndistances and to escape dangers which no ship had ever before\nencountered, are all circumstances briefly glanced at by Odysseus in\nhis narrative to Alkinous. Moreover, Eun\u00eaus, the son of Jas\u00f4n and\nHypsipyl\u00ea, governs Lemnos during the siege of Troy by Agamemn\u00f4n, and\ncarries on a friendly traffic with the Grecian camp, purchasing from\nthem their Trojan prisoners.[547]\n\n  [547] Odyss. xii. 69.\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f34\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fc6\u03c5\u03c2,\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u1f7c \u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u0391\u1f30\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u00b7\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03cd \u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f66\u03ba\u03b1 \u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2,\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03b5\u03bd \u1f38\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  See also Iliad, vii. 470.\n\nThe legend of Halus in Achaia Phthi\u00f4tis, respecting the religious\nsolemnities connected with the family of Athamas and Phryxus (related\nin a previous chapter), is also interwoven with the voyage of the\nArgonauts; and both the legend and the solemnities seem evidently of\ngreat antiquity. We know further, that the adventures of the Arg\u00f4 were\nnarrated not only by Hesiod and in the Hesiodic poems, but also by\nEum\u00ealus and the author of the Naupactian verses\u2014by the latter seemingly\nat considerable length.[548] But these poems are unfortunately lost,\nnor have we any means of determining what the original story was; for\nthe narrative, as we have it, borrowed from later sources, is enlarged\nby local tales from the subsequent Greek colonies\u2014Kyzikus, Herakl\u00eaia,\nSinop\u00ea, and others.\n\n  [548] See Hesiod, Fragm. _Catalog._ Fr. 6. p. 33, D\u00fcntz.;\n  _Eoiai_, Frag. 36. p. 39; Frag. 72. p. 47. Compare Schol. ad\n  Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 45; ii. 178-297, 1125; iv. 254-284. Other\n  poetical sources\u2014\n\n  The old epic poem _\u00c6gimius_, Frag. 5. p. 57, D\u00fcntz.\n\n  _Kin\u00e6th\u00f4n_ in the _H\u00earakl\u00eaia_ touched upon the death of Hylas\n  near Kius in Mysia (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 1357).\n\n  The epic poem _Naupactia_, Frag. 1 to 6, D\u00fcntz. p. 61.\n\n  _Eum\u00ealus_, Frag. 2, 3, 5, p. 65, D\u00fcntz.\n\n  _Epimenid\u00eas_, the Kr\u00eatan prophet and poet, composed a poem in\n  6500 lines, \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f38\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u039a\u03cc\u03bb\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\n  (Diogen. La\u00ebr. i. 10, 5), which is noticed more than once in the\n  Scholia on Apoll\u00f4nius, on subjects connected with the poem (ii.\n  1125; iii. 42). See Mimnerm. Frag. 10, Schneidewin, p. 15.\n\n  _Antimachus_, in his poem _Lyd\u00ea_, touched upon the Argonautic\n  expedition, and has been partially copied by Apoll\u00f4nius Rhod.\n  (Schol. Ap. Rh. i. 1290; ii. 296: iii. 410; iv. 1153).\n\n  The logographers Pherekyd\u00eas and Hekat\u00e6us seem to have related the\n  expedition at considerable length.\n\n  The Bibliothek der alten Literatur und Kunst (G\u00f6ttingen, 1786,\n  2tes St\u00fcck, p. 61) contains an instructive Dissertation by\n  Groddeck, Ueber die Argonautika, a summary of the various\n  authorities respecting this expedition.\n\nJas\u00f4n, commanded by Pelias to depart in quest of the golden fleece\nbelonging to the speaking ram which had carried away Phryxus and\nHell\u00ea, was encouraged by the oracle to invite the noblest youth\nof Greece to his aid, and fifty of the most distinguished amongst\nthem obeyed the call. H\u00earakl\u00eas, Th\u00easeus, Telam\u00f4n and P\u00ealeus, Kast\u00f4r\nand Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus\u2014Z\u00eat\u00eas and Kala\u00efs, the winged sons of\nBoreas\u2014Meleager, Amphiaraus, K\u00eapheus, Laert\u00eas, Autolykus, Men\u0153tius,\nAkt\u00f4r, Erginus, Euph\u00eamus, Ank\u00e6us, P\u0153as, Periklymenus, Augeas, Eurytus,\nAdm\u00eatus, Akastus, K\u00e6neus, Euryalus, P\u00eanele\u00f4s and L\u00eaitus, Askalaphus and\nIalmenus, were among them. Argus the son of Phryxus, directed by the\npromptings of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, built the ship, inserting in the prow a piece of\ntimber from the celebrated oak of Dodona, which was endued with the\nfaculty of speech:[549] Tiphys was the steersman, Idm\u00f4n the son of\nApollo and Mopsus accompanied them as prophets, while Orpheus came to\namuse their weariness and reconcile their quarrels with his harp.[550]\n\n  [549] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 525; iv. 580. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 16.\n  Valerius Flaccus (i. 300) softens down the speech of the ship\n  Arg\u00f4 into a dream of Jas\u00f4n. Alexander Polyhistor explained what\n  wood was used (Plin. H. N. xiii. 22).\n\n  [550] Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius, Apollod\u00f4rus, Valerius Flaccus, the\n  Orphic Argonautica, and Hyginus, have all given Catalogues of\n  the Argonautic heroes (there was one also in the lost tragedy\n  called \u039b\u03ae\u03bc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 of Sophokl\u00eas, see Welcker Gr. Trag. i. 327):\n  the discrepancies among them are numerous and irreconcilable.\n  Burmann, in the Catalogus Argonautarum, prefixed to his edition\n  of Valerius Flaccus, has discussed them copiously. I transcribe\n  one or two of the remarks of this conscientious and laborious\n  critic, out of many of a similar tenor, on the impracticability\n  of a fabulous chronology. Immediately before the first article,\n  _Acastus_\u2014\u201cNeque enim in \u00e6tatibus Argonautarum ullam rationem\n  temporum constare, neque in stirpe et stemmate deducenda ordinem\n  ipsum natur\u00e6 congruere videbam. Nam et huic militi\u00e6 adscribi\n  videbam Heroas, qui per natur\u00e6 leges et ordinem fati eo usque\n  vitam extrahere non potu\u00eare, ut aliis ab hac expeditione\n  remotis Heroum militiis nomina dedisse narrari deberent a\n  Poetis et Mythologis. In idem etiam tempus avos et Nepotes\n  conjici, consanguineos \u00e6tate longe inferiores prioribus ut\n  \u00e6quales adjungi, concoquere vix posse videtur.\u201d\u2014Art. _Anc\u00e6us_:\n  \u201cScio objici posse, si seriem illam majorem respiciamus,\n  hunc Anc\u00e6um simul cum proavo suo Talao in eandem profectum\n  fuisse expeditionem. Sed similia exempla in aliis occurrent,\n  et in fabulis rationem temporum non semper accuratam licet\n  deducere.\u201d\u2014Art. _Jas\u00f4n_: \u201cHerculi enim jam provect\u00e2 \u00e6tate\n  adh\u00e6sit Theseus juvenis, et in Amazoni\u00e2 expeditione socius fuit,\n  interfuit huic expeditioni, venatui apri Calydonii, et rapuit\n  Helenam, qu\u00e6 circa Trojanum bellum maxime floruit: qu\u00e6 omnia si\n  Theseus tot temporum intervallis distincta egit, secula duo vel\n  tria vixisse debuit. Certe Jason Hypsipylem neptem Ariadnes, nec\n  videre, nec Lemni cognoscere potuit.\u201d\u2014Art. _Meleager_: \u201cUnum\n  est quod alicui longum ordinem majorum recensenti scrupulum\n  movere possit: nimis longum intervallum inter \u00c6olum et Meleagrum\n  intercedere, ut potuerit interfuisse huic expeditioni: cum\n  nonus fere numeretur ab \u00c6olo, et plurimi ut Jason, Argus, et\n  alii terti\u00e2 tantum ab \u00c6olo generatione distent. Sed s\u00e6pe jam\n  notavimus, frustra temporum concordiam in fabulis qu\u00e6ri.\u201d\n\n  Read also the articles _Cast\u00f4r and Pollux_, _Nest\u00f4r P\u00ealeus_,\n  _Staphylus_, etc.\n\n  We may stand excused for keeping clear of a chronology which is\n  fertile only in difficulties, and ends in nothing but illusions.\n\nFirst they touched at the island of L\u00eamnos, in which at that time there\nwere no men; for the women, infuriated by jealousy and ill-treatment,\nhad put to death their fathers, husbands and brothers. The Argonauts,\nafter some difficulty, were received with friendship, and even admitted\ninto the greatest intimacy. They staid some months, and the subsequent\npopulation of the island was the fruit of their visit. Hypsipyl\u00ea, the\nqueen of the island, bore to Jas\u00f4n two sons.[551]\n\n  [551] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 17; Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 609-915; Herodot.\n  iv. 145. Theocritus (Idyll, xiii. 29) omits all mention of\n  L\u00eamnos, and represents the Arg\u00f4 as arriving on the third day\n  from I\u00f4lkos at the Hellespont. Diod\u00f4rus (iv. 41) also leaves out\n  L\u00eamnos.\n\nThey then proceeded onward along the coast of Thrace, up the\nHellespont, to the southern coast of the Propontis, inhabited by the\nDoliones and their king Kyzikus. Here they were kindly entertained, but\nafter their departure were driven back to the same spot by a storm; and\nas they landed in the dark, the inhabitants did not know them. A battle\ntook place, in which the chief, Kyzikus, was killed by Jas\u00f4n; whereby\nmuch grief was occasioned as soon as the real facts became known.\nAfter Kyzikus had been interred with every demonstration of mourning\nand solemnity, the Argonauts proceeded along the coast of Mysia.[552]\nIn this part of the voyage they left H\u00earakl\u00eas behind. For Hylas, his\nfavorite youthful companion, had been stolen away by the nymphs of a\nfountain, and H\u00earakl\u00eas, wandering about in search of him, neglected\nto return. At last he sorrowfully retired, exacting hostages from the\ninhabitants of the neighboring town of Kius that they would persist in\nthe search.[553]\n\n  [552] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. 940-1020; Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 18.\n\n  [553] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 19. This was the religious legend,\n  explanatory of a ceremony performed for many centuries by the\n  people of Prusa: they ran round the lake Askanias shouting and\n  clamoring for Hylas\u2014\u201cut littus Hyla, Hyla omne sonaret.\u201d (Virgil,\n  Eclog.) ... \u201cin cujus memoriam adhuc solemni cursatione lacum\n  populus circuit et Hylam voce clamat.\u201d Solinus, c. 42.\n\n  There is endless discrepancy as to the concern of H\u00earakl\u00eas with\n  the Argonautic expedition. A story is alluded to in Aristotle\n  (Politic, iii. 9) that the ship Arg\u00f4 herself refused to take him\n  on board, because he was so much superior in stature and power\n  to all the other heroes\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u1f7c \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd. This was the story\n  of Pherekyd\u00eas (Fr. 67, Didot) as well as of Antimachus (Schol.\n  Apoll. Rhod. i. 1290): it is probably a very ancient portion of\n  the legend, inasmuch as it ascribes to the ship sentient powers,\n  in consonance with her other miraculous properties. The etymology\n  of Aphet\u00e6 in Thessaly was connected with the tale of H\u00earakl\u00eas\n  having there been put on shore from the Arg\u00f4 (Herodot. vii. 193):\n  Ephorus said that he staid away voluntarily from fondness for\n  Omphal\u00ea (Frag. 9, Didot). The old epic poet Kin\u00e6th\u00f4n said that\n  H\u00earakl\u00eas had placed the Kian hostages at Trachin, and that the\n  Kians ever afterwards maintained a respectful correspondence with\n  that place (Schol. Ap. Rh. i. 1357). This is the explanatory\n  legend connected with some existing custom, which we are unable\n  further to unravel.\n\nThey next stopped in the country of the Bebrykians, where the\nboxing contest took place between the king Amykus and the Argonaut\nPollux:[554] they then proceeded onward to Bithynia, the residence of\nthe blind prophet Phineus. His blindness had been inflicted by Poseid\u00f4n\nas a punishment for having communicated to Phryxus the way to Kolchis.\nThe choice had been allowed to him between death and blindness, and he\nhad preferred the latter.[555] He was also tormented by the harpies,\nwinged monsters who came down from the clouds whenever his table\nwas set, snatched the food from his lips and imparted to it a foul\nand unapproachable odor. In the midst of this misery, he hailed the\nArgonauts as his deliverers\u2014his prophetic powers having enabled him\nto foresee their coming. The meal being prepared for him, the harpies\napproached as usual, but Z\u00eat\u00eas and Kala\u00efs, the winged sons of Boreas,\ndrove them away and pursued them. They put forth all their speed, and\nprayed to Zeus to be enabled to overtake the monsters; when Herm\u00eas\nappeared and directed them to desist, the harpies being forbidden\nfurther to molest Phineus,[556] and retiring again to their native\ncavern in Kr\u00eate.[557]\n\n  [554] See above, chap. viii. p. 169.\n\n  [555] Such was the old narrative of the Hesiodic Catalogue and\n  Eoiai. See Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 181-296.\n\n  [556] This again was the old Hesiodic story (Schol. Apoll. Rhod.\n  ii. 296),\u2014\n\n    \u1f18\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f35\u03b3\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f54\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b7\u0390\u1ff3 \u1f51\u03c8\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\n  Apollod\u00f4rus (i. 9, 21), Apoll\u00f4nius (178-300), and Valerius Flacc.\n  (iv. 428-530) agree in most of the circumstances.\n\n  [557] Such was the fate of the harpies as given in the old\n  Naupaktian Verses (See Fragm. Ep. Gr\u00e6c. D\u00fcntzer, Naupakt. Fr. 2.\n  p. 61).\n\n  The adventure of the Argonauts with Phineus is given by Diod\u00f4rus\n  in a manner totally different (Diod\u00f4r. iv. 44): he seems to\n  follow Dionysius of Mityl\u00ean\u00ea (see Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 207).\n\nPhineus, grateful for the relief afforded to him by the Argonauts,\nforewarned them of the dangers of their voyage and of the precautions\nnecessary for their safety; and through his suggestions they were\nenabled to pass through the terrific rocks called Sympl\u00eagades. These\nwere two rocks which alternately opened and shut, with a swift and\nviolent collision, so that it was difficult even for a bird to fly\nthrough during the short interval. When the Arg\u00f4 arrived at the\ndangerous spot, Euph\u00eamus let loose a dove. which flew through and just\nescaped with the loss of a few feathers of her tail. This was a signal\nto the Argonauts, according to the prediction of Phineus, that they\nmight attempt the passage with confidence. Accordingly they rowed with\nall their might, and passed safely through: the closing rocks, held\nfor a moment asunder by the powerful arms of Ath\u00ean\u00ea just crushed the\nornaments at the stern of their vessel. It had been decreed by the\ngods, that so soon as any ship once got through, the passage should\nforever afterwards be safe and easy to all. The rocks became fixed in\ntheir separate places, and never again closed.[558]\n\n  [558] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 22. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 310-615.\n\nAfter again halting on the coast of the Mariandynians, where their\nsteersman Tiphys died, as well as in the country of the Amazons,\nand after picking up the sons of Phryxus, who had been cast away by\nPoseid\u00f4n in their attempt to return from Kolchis to Greece, they\narrived in safety at the river Phasis and the residence of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas. In\npassing by Mount Caucasus, they saw the eagle which gnawed the liver\nof Prometheus nailed to the rock, and heard the groans of the sufferer\nhimself. The sons of Phryxus were cordially welcomed by their mother\nChalciop\u00ea.[559] Application was made to \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, that he would grant to\nthe Argonauts, heroes of divine parentage and sent forth by the mandate\nof the gods, possession of the golden fleece: their aid in return was\nproffered to him against any or all of his enemies. But the king was\nwroth, and peremptorily refused, except upon conditions which seemed\nimpracticable.[560] H\u00eaph\u00e6stos had given him two ferocious and untamable\nbulls, with brazen feet, which breathed fire from their nostrils:\nJas\u00f4n was invited, as a proof both of his illustrious descent and\nof the sanction of the gods to his voyage, to harness these animals\nto the yoke, so as to plough a large field and sow it with dragon\u2019s\nteeth.[561] Perilous as the condition was, each one of the heroes\nvolunteered to make the attempt. Idm\u00f4n especially encouraged Jas\u00f4n to\nundertake it,[562] and the goddesses H\u00ear\u00ea and Aphrodit\u00ea made straight\nthe way for him.[563] M\u00eadea, the daughter of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and Eidyia, having\nseen the youthful hero in his interview with her father, had conceived\ntowards him a passion which disposed her to employ every means for his\nsalvation and success. She had received from Hekat\u00ea pre\u00ebminent magical\npowers, and she prepared for Jas\u00f4n the powerful Prometheian unguent,\nextracted from an herb which had grown where the blood of Prom\u00eatheus\ndropped. The body of Jas\u00f4n having been thus pre-medicated, became\ninvulnerable[564] either by fire or by warlike weapons. He undertook\nthe enterprise, yoked the bulls without suffering injury, and ploughed\nthe field: when he had sown the dragon\u2019s teeth, armed men sprung out of\nthe furrows. But he had been forewarned by M\u00eadea to cast a vast rock\ninto the midst of them, upon which they began to fight with each other,\nso that he was easily enabled to subdue them all.[565]\n\n  [559] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 23. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 850-1257.\n\n  [560] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 320-385.\n\n  [561] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 410. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 23.\n\n  [562] This was the story of the Naupaktian Verses (Schol.\n  Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 515-525): Apoll\u00f4nius and others altered it.\n  Idm\u00f4n, according to them, died in the voyage before the arrival\n  at Kolchis.\n\n  [563] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 50-200. Valer. Flacc. vi. 440-480.\n  Hygin. fab. 22.\n\n  [564] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 835. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 23. Valer. Flacc\n  vii. 356 Ovid, Epist. xii. 15.\n\n    \u201cIsset anhelatos non pr\u00e6medicatus in ignes\n      Immemor \u00c6sonides, oraque adunca boum.\u201d\n\n  [565] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 1230-1400.\n\nThe task prescribed had thus been triumphantly performed. Yet \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas not\nonly refused to hand over the golden fleece, but even took measures for\nsecretly destroying the Argonauts and burning their vessel. He designed\nto murder them during the night after a festal banquet; but Aphrodit\u00ea,\nwatchful for the safety of Jas\u00f4n,[566] inspired the Kolchian king at\nthe critical moment with an irresistible inclination for his nuptial\nbed. While he slept, the wise Idm\u00f4n counselled the Argonauts to make\ntheir escape, and M\u00eadea agreed to accompany them.[567] She lulled to\nsleep by a magic potion the dragon who guarded the golden fleece,\nplaced that much-desired prize on board the vessel, and accompanied\nJas\u00f4n with his companions in their flight, carrying along with her the\nyoung Apsyrtus, her brother.[568]\n\n  [566] The Naupaktian Verses stated this (see the Fragm. 6, ed.\n  D\u00fcntzer, p. 61, ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 59-86).\n\n  [567] Such was the story of the Naupaktian Verses (See Fragm. 6.\n  p 61 D\u00fcntzer ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 59, 86, 87).\n\n  [568] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 23. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 220.\n\n  Pherekyd\u00eas said that Jas\u00f4n killed the dragon (Fr. 74, Did.).\n\n\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, profoundly exasperated at the flight of the Argonauts with his\ndaughter, assembled his forces forthwith, and put to sea in pursuit\nof them. So energetic were his efforts that he shortly overtook the\nretreating vessel, when the Argonauts again owed their safety to the\nstratagem of M\u00eadea. She killed her brother Apsyrtus, cut his body in\npieces and strewed the limbs round about in the sea. \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas on reaching\nthe spot found these sorrowful traces of his murdered son; but while he\ntarried to collect the scattered fragments, and bestow upon the body\nan honorable interment, the Argonauts escaped.[569] The spot on which\nthe unfortunate Apsyrtus was cut up received the name of Tomi.[570]\nThis fratricide of M\u00eadea, however, so deeply provoked the indignation\nof Zeus, that he condemned the Arg\u00f4 and her crew to a trying voyage,\nfull of hardship and privation, before she was permitted to reach home.\nThe returning heroes traversed an immeasurable length both of sea and\nof river: first up the river Phasis into the ocean which flows round\nthe earth\u2014then following the course of that circumfluous stream until\nits junction with the Nile,[571] they came down the Nile into Egypt,\nfrom whence they carried the Arg\u00f4 on their shoulders by a fatiguing\nland-journey to the lake Trit\u00f4nis in Libya. Here they were rescued from\nthe extremity of want and exhaustion by the kindness of the local god\nTrit\u00f4n, who treated them hospitably, and even presented to Euph\u00eamus a\nclod of earth, as a symbolical promise that his descendants should one\nday found a city on the Libyan shore. The promise was amply redeemed\nby the flourishing and powerful city of Kyr\u00ean\u00ea,[572] whose princes the\nBattiads boasted themselves as lineal descendants of Euph\u00eamus.\n\n  [569] This is the story of Apollod\u00f4rus (i. 9, 24), who seems\n  to follow Pherekyd\u00eas (Fr. 73, Didot). Apoll\u00f4nius (iv. 225-480)\n  and Valerius Flaccus (viii. 262 _seq._) give totally different\n  circumstances respecting the death of Apsyrtus; but the narrative\n  of Pherekyd\u00eas seems the oldest: so revolting a story as that of\n  the cutting up of the little boy cannot have been imagined in\n  later times.\n\n  Sophokl\u00eas composed two tragedies on the adventures of Jas\u00f4n and\n  M\u00eadea, both lost\u2014the \u039a\u03bf\u03bb\u03c7\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 and the \u03a3\u03ba\u03cd\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. In the former he\n  represented the murder of the child Apsyrtus as having taken\n  place in the house of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas: in the latter he introduced the\n  mitigating circumstance, that Apsyrtus was the son of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas by a\n  different mother from M\u00eadea (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n Rhod. iv. 223).\n\n  [570] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 24, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03a4\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. Ovid.\n  Trist. iii. 9. The story that Apsyrtus was cut in pieces, is the\n  etymological legend explanatory of the name Tomi.\n\n  There was however a place called Apsarus, on the southern coast\n  of the Euxine, west of Trapezus, where the tomb of Apsyrtus was\n  shown, and where it was affirmed that he had been put to death.\n  He was the eponymus of the town, which was said to have been once\n  called Apsyrtus, and only corrupted by a barbarian pronunciation\n  (Arrian. Periplus, Euxin. p. 6; Geogr. Min. v. 1). Compare\n  Procop. Bell. Goth. iv. 2.\n\n  Strabo connects the death of Apsyrtus with the Apsyrtides,\n  islands off the coast of Illyria, in the Adriatic (vii p. 315).\n\n  [571] The original narrative was, that the Arg\u00f4 returned by\n  navigating the circumfluous ocean. This would be almost certain,\n  even without positive testimony, from the early ideas entertained\n  by the Greeks respecting geography; but we know further that\n  it was the representation of the Hesiodic poems, as well as of\n  Mimnermus, Hekat\u00e6us and Pindar, and even of Antimachus. Schol.\n  Parisina Ap. Rhod. iv. 254. \u1f19\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u039c\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03a6\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u00b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039d\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039d\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd. \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03af\u03bd\u03b4\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bd \u039b\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u039b\u03b9\u03b2\u03cd\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2. Compare\n  the Schol. Edit. ad iv. 259.\n\n  [572] See the fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar, and Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod.\n  iv. 1551-1756.\n\n  The tripod of Jas\u00f4n was preserved by the Euesperit\u00e6 in Libya,\n  Diod. iv. 56: but the legend, connecting the Argonauts with\n  the lake Trit\u00f4nis in Libya, is given with some considerable\n  differences in Herodotus, iv. 179.\n\nRefreshed by the hospitality of Trit\u00f4n, the Argonauts found themselves\nagain on the waters of the Mediterranean in their way homeward. But\nbefore they arrived at I\u00f4lkos they visited Circ\u00ea, at the island of \u00c6\u00e6a,\nwhere M\u00eadea was purified for the murder of Apsyrtus: they also stopped\nat Korkyra, then called Drepan\u00ea, where Alkinous received and protected\nthem. The cave in that island where the marriage of M\u00eadea with Jas\u00f4n\nwas consummated, was still shown in the time of the historian Tim\u00e6us,\nas well as the altars to Apollo which she had erected, and the rites\nand sacrifices which she had first instituted.[573] After leaving\nKorkyra, the Arg\u00f4 was overtaken by a perilous storm near the island of\nTh\u00eara. The heroes were saved from imminent peril by the supernatural\naid of Apollo, who, shooting from his golden bow an arrow which pierced\nthe waves like a track of light, caused a new island suddenly to spring\nup in their track and present to them a port of refuge. The island was\ncalled Anaph\u00ea; and the grateful Argonauts established upon it an altar\nand sacrifices in honor of Apollo \u00c6gl\u00eat\u00eas, which were ever afterwards\ncontinued, and traced back by the inhabitants to this originating\nadventure.[574]\n\n  [573] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 1153-1217. Tim\u00e6us, Fr. 7-8, Didot.\n  \u03a4\u03af\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u039a\u03b5\u03c1\u03ba\u03cd\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6, \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd,\n  \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0391\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff7. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u0392\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad\n  \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1f70\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2. \u1f48\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u039d\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72,\n  \u039d\u03b7\u03c1\u03b7\u0390\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  [574] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 25. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 1700-1725.\n\nOn approaching the coast of Kr\u00eate, the Argonauts were prevented\nfrom landing by Tal\u00f4s, a man of brass, fabricated by H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, and\npresented by him to Min\u00f4s for the protection of the island.[575] This\nvigilant sentinel hurled against the approaching vessel fragments of\nrock, and menaced the heroes with destruction. But M\u00eadea deceived\nhim by a stratagem and killed him; detecting and assailing the one\nvulnerable point in his body. The Argonauts were thus enabled to land\nand refresh themselves. They next proceeded onward to \u00c6gina, where\nhowever they again experienced resistance before they could obtain\nwater\u2014then along the coast of Eub\u0153a and Locris back to I\u00f4lkos in the\ngulf of Pagas\u00e6, the place from whence they had started. The proceedings\nof Pelias during their absence, and the signal revenge taken upon him\nby M\u00eadea after their return, have already been narrated in a preceding\nsection.[576] The ship Arg\u00f4 herself, in which the chosen heroes of\nGreece had performed so long a voyage and braved so many dangers, was\nconsecrated by Jas\u00f4n to Poseid\u00f4n at the isthmus of Corinth. According\nto another account, she was translated to the stars by Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and\nbecame a constellation.[577]\n\n  [575] Some called Tal\u00f4s a remnant of the brazen race of men\n  (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 1641).\n\n  [576] Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 26. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 1638.\n\n  [577] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 53. Eratosth. Catasterism. c. 35.\n\nTraces of the presence of the Argonauts were found not only in the\nregions which lay between I\u00f4lkos and Kolchis, but also in the western\nportion of the Grecian world\u2014distributed more or less over all the\nspots visited by Grecian mariners or settled by Grecian colonists, and\nscarcely less numerous than the wanderings of the dispersed Greeks\nand Trojans after the capture of Troy. The number of Jasonia, or\ntemples for the heroic worship of Jas\u00f4n, was very great, from Abd\u00eara\nin Thrace,[578] eastward along the coast of the Euxine, to Armenia\nand Media. The Argonauts had left their anchoring-stone on the coast\nof Bebrykia, near Kyzikus, and there it was preserved during the\nhistorical ages in the temple of the Jasonian Ath\u00ean\u00ea.[579] They had\nfounded the great temple of the Id\u00e6an mother on the mountain Dindymon,\nnear Kyzikus, and the Hieron of Zeus Urios on the Asiatic point at the\nmouth of the Euxine, near which was also the harbor of Phryxus.[580]\nIdm\u00f4n, the prophet of the expedition, who was believed to have died\nof a wound by a wild boar on the Mariandynian coast, was worshipped\nby the inhabitants of the Pontic H\u00earakleia with great solemnity, as\ntheir Heros Poliuchus, and that too by the special direction of the\nDelphian god. Autolykus, another companion of Jas\u00f4n, was worshipped\nas \u0152kist by the inhabitants of Sinop\u00ea. Moreover, the historians of\nH\u00earakleia pointed out a temple of Hekat\u00ea in the neighboring country of\nPaphlagonia, first erected by M\u00eadea;[581] and the important town of\nPantikap\u00e6on, on the European side of the Cimmerian Bosporus, ascribed\nits first settlement to a son of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas.[582] When the returning ten\nthousand Greeks sailed along the coast, called the Jasonian shore,\nfrom Sinop\u00ea to H\u00earakleia, they were told that the grandson of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas\nwas reigning king of the territory at the mouth of the Phasis, and the\nanchoring-places where the Arg\u00f4 had stopped were specially pointed\nout to them.[583] In the lofty regions of the Moschi, near Kolchis,\nstood the temple of Leukothea, founded by Phryxus, which remained\nboth rich and respected down to the times of the kings of Pontus, and\nwhere it was an inviolable rule not to offer up a ram.[584] The town\nof Dioskurias, north of the river Phasis, was believed to have been\nhallowed by the presence of Kast\u00f4r and Pollux in the Arg\u00f4, and to have\nreceived from them its appellation.[585] Even the interior of M\u00eadea and\nArmenia was full of memorials of Jas\u00f4n and M\u00eadea and their son M\u00eadus,\nor of Armenus the son of Jas\u00f4n, from whom the Greeks deduced not only\nthe name and foundation of the Medes and Armenians, but also the great\noperation of cutting a channel through the mountains for the efflux\nof the river Araxes, which they compared to that of the Peneius in\nThessaly.[586] And the Roman general Pompey, after having completed\nthe conquest and expulsion of Mithridat\u00eas, made long marches through\nKolchis into the regions of Caucasus, for the express purpose of\ncontemplating the spots which had been ennobled by the exploits of the\nArgonauts, the Dioskuri and H\u00earakl\u00eas.[587]\n\n  [578] Strabo. xi. p. 526-531.\n\n  [579] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 955-960, and the Scholia.\n\n  There was in Kyzikus a temple of Apollo under different\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2; some called it the temple of the Jasonian Apollo.\n\n  Another anchor however was preserved in the temple of Rhea on the\n  banks of the Phasis, which was affirmed to be the anchor of the\n  ship Arg\u00f4. Arrian saw it there, but seems to have doubted its\n  authenticity (Periplus, Euxin. Pont. p. 9. Geogr. Min. v. 1).\n\n  [580] Neanth\u00eas ap. Strabo. i. p. 45. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 1125, and\n  Schol. Steph. Byz. v. \u03a6\u03c1\u03af\u03be\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n  Apoll\u00f4nius mentions the fountain called Jasone\u00e6, on the hill\n  of Dindymon. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 532, and the citations from\n  Timosthen\u00eas and Herod\u00f4rus in the Scholia. See also Appian.\n  Syriac. c. 63.\n\n  [581] See the historians of H\u00earakleia, Nymphis and Promathidas,\n  Fragm. Orelli, pp. 99, 100-104. Schol. ad Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 247.\n  Strabo, xii. p. 546. Autolykus, whom he calls companion of Jas\u00f4n,\n  was, according to another legend, comrade of H\u00earakl\u00eas in his\n  expedition against the Amazons.\n\n  [582] Stephan. Byz. v. \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, Eustath. ad Dionys.\n  Peri\u00eag\u00eat. 311.\n\n  [583] Xenoph\u00f4n, Anabas. vi. 2, 1; v. 7, 37.\n\n  [584] Strabo, xi. p. 499.\n\n  [585] Appian, Mithridatic. c. 101.\n\n  [586] Strabo, xi. p. 499, 503, 526, 531; i. p. 45-48. Justin,\n  xlii. 3, whose statements illustrate the way in which men found a\n  present home and application for the old fables,\u2014\u201cJason, primus\n  humanorum post Herculem et Liberum, qui reges Orientis fuisse\n  traduntur, eam c\u0153li plagam domuisse dicitur. Cum Albanis f\u0153dus\n  percussit, qui Herculem ex Itali\u00e2 ab Albano monte, cum, Geryone\n  extincto, armenta ejus per Italiam duceret, secuti dicuntur;\n  quique, memores Italic\u00e6 originis, exercitum Cn. Pompeii bello\n  Mithridatico fratres consalutav\u00eare. Itaque Jasoni totus fere\n  Oriens, ut conditori, divinos honores templaque constituit; qu\u00e6\n  Parmenio, dux Alexandri Magni, post multos annos dirui jussit, ne\n  cujusquam nomen in Oriente venerabilius quam Alexandri esset.\u201d\n\n  The Thessalian companions of Alexander the Great, placed by his\n  victories in possession of rich acquisitions in these regions,\n  pleased themselves by vivifying and multiplying all these\n  old fables, proving an ancient kindred between the Medes and\n  Thessalians. See Strabo, xi. p. 530. The temples of Jas\u00f4n were\n  \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c6\u03cc\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd (_ib._ p. 526).\n\n  The able and inquisitive geographer Eratosthen\u00eas was among those\n  who fully believed that Jas\u00f4n had left his ships in the Phasis,\n  and had undertaken a land expedition into the interior country,\n  in which he had conquered Media and Armenia (Strabo, i. p. 48).\n\n  [587] Appian, Mithridatic. 103: \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u039a\u03cc\u03bb\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ae\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f30\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f43 \u03a0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n  \u039a\u03b1\u03cd\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2. The lofty crag of Caucasus called Strobilus, to\n  which Prom\u00eatheus had been attached, was pointed out to Arrian\n  himself in his Periplus (p. 12. Geogr. Minor vol. i.).\n\nIn the west, memorials either of the Argonauts or of the pursuing\nKolchians were pointed out in Korkyra, in Kr\u00eate, in Epirus near the\nAkrokeraunian mountains, in the islands called Apsyrtides near the\nIllyrian coast, at the bay of Caieta as well as at Poseid\u00f4nia on the\nsouthern coast of Italy, in the island of \u00c6thalia or Elba, and in\nLibya.[588]\n\n  [588] Strabo, i. pp. 21, 45, 46; v. 224-252. Pompon. Mel. ii. 3.\n  Diod\u00f4r. iv. 56. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 656. Lycophron, 1273.\u2014\n\n    \u03a4\u03cd\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03bd\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u1f76 \u039a\u03b9\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bd\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u1f45\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nSuch is a brief outline of the Argonautic expedition, one of the most\ncelebrated and widely-diffused among the ancient tales of Greece. Since\nso many able men have treated it as an undisputed reality, and even\nmade it the pivot of systematic chronological calculations, I may here\nrepeat the opinion long ago expressed by Heyne, and even indicated by\nBurmann, that the process of dissecting the story, in search of a basis\nof fact, is one altogether fruitless.[589] Not only are we unable to\nassign the date or identify the crew, or decipher the log-book, of the\nArg\u00f4, but we have no means of settling even the preliminary question,\nwhether the voyage be matter of fact badly reported, or legend from\nthe beginning. The widely-distant spots in which the monuments of the\nvoyage were shown, no less than the incidents of the voyage itself,\nsuggests no other parentage than epical fancy. The supernatural and the\nromantic not only constitute an inseparable portion of the narrative,\nbut even embrace all the prominent and characteristic features; if they\ndo not comprise the whole, and if there be intermingled along with\nthem any sprinkling of historical or geographical fact,\u2014a question\nto us indeterminable,\u2014there is at least no solvent by which it can\nbe disengaged, and no test by which it can be recognized. Wherever\nthe Grecian mariner sailed, he carried his religious and patriotic\nmythes along with him. His fancy and his faith were alike full of\nthe long wanderings of Jas\u00f4n, Odysseus, Perseus, H\u00earakl\u00eas, Dionysus,\nTriptolemus or I\u00f4; it was pleasing to him in success, and consoling\nto him in difficulty, to believe that their journeys had brought them\nover the ground which he was himself traversing. There was no tale\namidst the wide range of the Grecian epic more calculated to be popular\nwith the seaman, than the history of the prim\u00e6val ship Arg\u00f4 and her\ndistinguished crew, comprising heroes from all parts of Greece, and\nespecially the Tyndarids Kast\u00f4r and Pollux, the heavenly protectors\ninvoked during storm and peril. He localized the legend anew wherever\nhe went, often with some fresh circumstances suggested either by his\nown adventures or by the scene before him. He took a sort of religious\npossession of the spot, connecting it by a bond of faith with his\nnative land, and erecting in it a temple or an altar with appropriate\ncommemorative solemnities. The Jasonium thus established, and indeed\nevery visible object called after the name of the hero, not only served\nto keep alive the legend of the Arg\u00f4 in the minds of future comers or\ninhabitants, but was accepted as an obvious and satisfactory proof that\nthis marvellous vessel had actually touched there in her voyage.\n\n  [589] Heyne, Observ. ad Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 16. p. 72. \u201cMirum in\n  modum fallitur, qui in his commentis certum fundum historicum\n  vel geographicum aut exquirere studet, aut se reperisse, atque\n  historicam vel geographicam aliquam doctrinam, systema nos\n  dicimus, inde procudi posse, putat,\u201d etc.\n\n  See also the observations interspersed in Burmann\u2019s Catalogus\n  Argonautarum, prefixed to his edition of Valerius Flaccus.\n\n  The Persian antiquarians whom Herodotus cites at the beginning\n  of his history (i. 2-4\u2014it is much to be regretted that Herodotus\n  did not inform us who they were, and whether they were the same\n  as those who said that Perseus was an Assyrian by birth and\n  had become a Greek, vi. 54), joined together the abductions of\n  I\u00f4 and of Eur\u00f4p\u00ea, of M\u00eadea and of Helen, as pairs of connected\n  proceedings, the second injury being a retaliation for the\n  first,\u2014they drew up a debtor and creditor account of abductions\n  between Asia and Europe. The Kolchian king (they said) had sent a\n  herald to Greece to ask for his satisfaction for the wrong done\n  to him by Jas\u00f4n and to re-demand his daughter M\u00eadea; but he was\n  told in reply that the Greeks had received no satisfaction for\n  the previous rape of I\u00f4.\n\n  There was some ingenuity in thus binding together the old\n  fables, so as to represent the invasions of Greece by Darius and\n  Xerx\u00eas as retaliations for the unexpiated destruction wrought by\n  Agamemn\u00f4n.\n\nThe epic poets, building both on the general love of fabulous incident\nand on the easy faith of the people, dealt with distant and unknown\nspace in the same manner as with past and unrecorded time. They created\na mythical geography for the former, and a mythical history for the\nlatter. But there was this material difference between the two: that\nwhile the unrecorded time was beyond the reach of verification, the\nunknown space gradually became trodden and examined. In proportion as\nauthentic local knowledge was enlarged, it became necessary to modify\nthe geography, or shift the scene of action, of the old mythes; and\nthis perplexing problem was undertaken by some of the ablest historians\nand geographers of antiquity,\u2014for it was painful to them to abandon any\nportion of the old epic, as if it were destitute of an ascertainable\nbasis of truth.\n\nMany of these fabulous localities are to be found in Homer and Hesiod,\nand the other Greek poets and logographers,\u2014Erytheia, the garden of\nthe Hesperides, the garden of Ph\u0153bus,[590] to which Boreas transported\nthe Attic maiden Orithyia, the delicious country of the Hyperboreans,\nthe Elysian plain,[591] the fleeting island of \u00c6olus, Thrinakia,\nthe country of the \u00c6thiopians, the L\u00e6strygones, the Kykl\u00f4pes, the\nLotophagi, the Sirens, the Cimmerians and the Gorgons,[592] etc. These\nare places which (to use the expression of Pindar respecting the\nHyperboreans) you cannot approach either by sea or by land:[593] the\nwings of the poet alone can carry you thither. They were not introduced\ninto the Greek mind by incorrect geographical reports, but, on the\ncontrary, had their origin in the legend, and passed from thence\ninto the realities of geography,[594] which they contributed much to\npervert and confuse. For the navigator or emigrant, starting with an\nunsuspicious faith in their real existence, looked out for them in\nhis distant voyages, and constantly fancied that he had seen or heard\nof them, so as to be able to identify their exact situation. The most\ncontradictory accounts indeed, as might be expected, were often given\nrespecting the latitude and longitude of such fanciful spots, but this\ndid not put an end to the general belief in their real existence.\n\n  [590] Sophokl. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295.\u2014\n\n    \u1f59\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2,\n    \u039d\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2,\n    \u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u1fc6\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  [591] Odyss. iv. 562. The Islands of the Blessed, in Hesiod, are\n  near the ocean (Opp. Di. 169).\n\n  [592] Hesiod, Theogon. 275-290. Homer, Iliad, i. 423. Odyss. i.\n  23; ix 86-206; x 4-83; xii. 135. Mimnerm. Fragm. 13, Schneidewin.\n\n  [593] Pindar, Pyth. x. 29.\u2014\n\n    \u039d\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b6\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f30\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n    \u1f18\u03c2 \u1f59\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70\u03bd \u1f41\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd.\n    \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2, etc.\n\n  Hesiod, and the old epic poem called the Epigoni, both mentioned\n  the Hyperboreans (Herod. iv. 32-34).\n\n  [594] This idea is well stated and sustained by V\u00f6lcker\n  (Mythische Geographie der Griechen und R\u00f6mer, cap. i. p. 11),\n  and by Nitzsch in his Comments on the Odyssey\u2014Introduct. Remarks\n  to b. ix. p. xii.-xxxiii. The twelfth and thirteenth chapters of\n  the History of Orchomenos, by O. M\u00fcller, are also full of good\n  remarks on the geography of the Argonautic voyage (pp. 274-299).\n\n  The most striking evidence of this disposition of the Greeks is\n  to be found in the legendary discoveries of Alexander and his\n  companions, when they marched over the untrodden regions in the\n  east of the Persian empire (see Arrian, Hist. Al. v. 3: compare\n  Lucian. Dialog. Mortuor. xiv. vol. i. p. 212. Tauch) because\n  these ideas were first broached at a time when geographical\n  science was sufficiently advanced to canvass and criticize them.\n  The early settlers in Italy, Sicily and the Euxine, indulged\n  their fanciful vision without the fear of any such monitor: there\n  was no such thing as a map before the days of Anaximander, the\n  disciple of Thal\u00eas.\n\nIn the present advanced state of geographical knowledge, the story of\nthat man who after reading Gulliver\u2019s Travels went to look in his\nmap for Lilliput, appears an absurdity. But those who fixed the exact\nlocality of the floating island of \u00c6olus or the rocks of the Sirens\ndid much the same,[595] and, with their ignorance of geography and\nimperfect appreciation of historical evidence, the error was hardly to\nbe avoided. The ancient belief which fixed the Sirens on the islands\nof Sirenus\u00e6 off the coast of Naples\u2014the Kykl\u00f4pes, Erytheia, and the\nL\u00e6strygones in Sicily\u2014the Lotophagi on the island of M\u00eaninx[596] near\nthe Lesser Syrtis\u2014the Ph\u00e6akians at Korkyra\u2014and the goddess Circ\u00ea at the\npromontory of Circeium\u2014took its rise at a time when these regions were\nfirst Hellenized and comparatively little visited. Once embodied in the\nlocal legends, and attested by visible monuments and ceremonies, it\ncontinued for a long time unassailed; and Thucydid\u00eas seems to adopt it,\nin reference to Korkyra and Sicily before the Hellenic colonization, as\nmatter of fact generally unquestionable,[597] though little avouched as\nto details. But when geographical knowledge became extended, and the\ncriticism upon the ancient epic was more or less systematized by the\nliterary men of Alexandria and Pergamus, it appeared to many of them\nimpossible that Odysseus could have seen so many wonders, or undergone\nsuch monstrous dangers, within limits so narrow, and in the familiar\ntrack between the Nile and the Tiber. The scene of his weather-driven\ncourse was then shifted further westward. Many convincing evidences\nwere discovered, especially by Asklepiad\u00eas of Myrlea, of his having\nvisited various places in Ib\u00earia:[598] several critics imagined that\nhe had wandered about in the Atlantic Ocean outside of the Strait of\nGibraltar,[599] and they recognized a section of Lotophagi on the\ncoast of Mauritania, over and above those who dwelt on the island of\nM\u00eaninx.[600] On the other hand, Eratosthen\u00eas and Apollod\u00f4rus treated\nthe places visited by Odysseus as altogether unreal, for which\nscepticism they incurred much reproach.[601]\n\n  [595] See Mr. Payne Knight, Prolegg. ad Homer. c. 49. Compare\n  Spohn\u2014\u201cde extrem\u00e2 Odysse\u00e6 parte\u201d\u2014p. 97.\n\n  [596] Strabo. xvii. p. 834. An altar of Odysseus was shown upon\n  this island, as well as some other evidences (\u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1) of his\n  visit to the place.\n\n  Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius copies the Odyssey in speaking of the island\n  of Thrinakia and the cattle of Helios (iv. 965, with Schol.). He\n  conceives Sicily as Thrinakia, a name afterwards exchanged for\n  Trinakria. The Scholiast ad Apoll. (1. c.) speaks of Trinax king\n  of Sicily. Compare iv. 291 with the Scholia.\n\n  [597] Thucyd. i. 25-vi. 2. These local legends appear in the eyes\n  of Strabo convincing evidence (i. p. 23-26),\u2014the tomb of the\n  siren Parthenop\u00ea at Naples, the stories at Cum\u00e6 and Dik\u00e6archia\n  about the \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd of Avernus, and the existence of places\n  named after Baius and Mis\u00eanus, the companions of Odysseus, etc.\n\n  [598] Strabo, iii. p. 150-157. \u039f\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f38\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f38\u03b2\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u1fb3 \u1f48\u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03ba\u03bd\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u1f34\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd (I\n  adopt Grosskurd\u2019s correction of the text from \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd to\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, in the note to his German translation of Strabo).\n\n  Asklepiad\u00eas (of Myrlea in Bithynia, about 170 B. C.) resided\n  some time in Turditania, the south-western region of Spain along\n  the Guadalquivir, as a teacher of Greek literature (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70), and composed a periegesis of the Iberian tribes,\n  which unfortunately has not been preserved. He made various\n  discoveries in arch\u00e6ology, and successfully connected his old\n  legends with several portions of the territory before him. His\n  discoveries were,\u20141. In the temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, at this Iberian\n  town of Odysseia, there were shields and beaks of ships affixed\n  to the walls, monuments of the visit of Odysseus himself. 2.\n  Among the Kall\u00e6ki, in the northern part of Portugal, several of\n  the companions of Teukros had settled and left descendants: there\n  were in that region two Grecian cities, one called Hellen\u00eas,\n  the other called Amphilochi; for Amphilochus also, the son of\n  Amphiaraus, had died in Iberia, and many of his soldiers had\n  taken up their permanent residence in the interior. 3. Many new\n  inhabitants had come into Iberia with the expedition of H\u00earakl\u00eas;\n  some also after the conquest of Mess\u00ean\u00ea by the Laced\u00e6monians. 4.\n  In Cantabria, on the north. coast of Spain, there was a town and\n  region of Laced\u00e6monian colonists. 5. In the same portion of the\n  country there was the town of Opsikella, founded by Opsikellas,\n  one of the companions of Anten\u00f4r in his emigration from Troy\n  (Strabo, iii. p. 157).\n\n  This is a specimen of the manner in which the seeds of Grecian\n  mythus came to be distributed over so large a surface. To an\n  ordinary Greek reader, these legendary discoveries of Asklepiad\u00eas\n  would probably be more interesting than the positive facts\n  which he communicated respecting the Iberian tribes; and his\n  Turditanian auditors would be delighted to hear\u2014while he was\n  reciting and explaining to them the animated passage of the\n  Iliad, in which Agamemn\u00f4n extols the inestimable value of the bow\n  of Teukros (viii. 281)\u2014that the heroic archer and his companions\n  had actually set foot in the Iberian peninsula.\n\n  [599] This was the opinion of Krat\u00eas of Mallus, one of the\n  most distinguished of the critics on Homer: it was the subject\n  of an animated controversy between him and Aristarchus (Aulus\n  Gellius, N. A. xiv. 6; Strabo, iii. p. 157). See the instructive\n  treatise of Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis, c. v. \u00a7 4. p. 251.\n  Much controversy also took place among the critics respecting\n  the ground which Menelaus went over in his wanderings (Odyss.\n  iv.). Krat\u00eas affirmed that he had circumnavigated the southern\n  extremity of Africa and gone to India: the critic Aristonikus,\n  Strabo\u2019s contemporary, enumerated all the different opinions\n  (Strabo, i. p. 38).\n\n  [600] Strabo, iii. p. 157.\n\n  [601] Strabo, i. p. 22-44; vii. p. 299.\n\nThe fabulous island of Erytheia,\u2014the residence of the three headed\nGery\u00f4n with his magnificent herd of oxen, under the custody of the\ntwo-headed dog Orthrus, and described by Hesiod, like the garden of\nthe Hesperides, as extra-terrestrial, on the farther side of the\ncircumfluous ocean;\u2014this island was supposed by the interpreters of\nStesichorus the poet to be named by him off the south-western region\nof Spain called Tart\u00eassus, and in the immediate vicinity of Gad\u00eas. But\nthe historian Hekat\u00e6us, in his anxiety to historicize the old fable,\ntook upon himself to remove Erytheia from Spain nearer home to Epirus.\nHe thought it incredible that H\u00earakl\u00eas should have traversed Europe\nfrom east to west, for the purpose of bringing the cattle of Gery\u00f4n to\nEurystheus at Myk\u00ean\u00e6, and he pronounced Gery\u00f4n to have been a king of\nEpirus, near the Gulf of Ambrakia. The oxen reared in that neighborhood\nwere proverbially magnificent, and to get them even from thence and\nbring them to Myk\u00ean\u00e6 (he contended) was no inconsiderable task. Arrian,\nwho cites this passage from Hekat\u00e6us, concurs in the same view,\u2014an\nillustration of the license with which ancient authors fitted on their\nfabulous geographical names to the real earth, and brought down the\nethereal matter of legend to the lower atmosphere of history.[602]\n\n  [602] Stesichori Fragm. ed. Kleine; Geryonis, Fr. 5. p. 60; ap.\n  Strabo. iii. p. 148; Herodot. iv. 8. It seems very doubtful\n  whether Stesichorus meant to indicate any neighboring island as\n  Erytheia, if we compare Fragm. 10. p. 67 of the Geryonis, and the\n  passages of Athen\u00e6us and Eustathius there cited. He seems to have\n  adhered to the old fable, placing Erytheia on the opposite side\n  of the ocean-stream, for H\u00earakl\u00eas crosses the ocean to get to it.\n\n  Hekat\u00e6us, ap. Arrian. Histor. Alex. ii. 16. Skylax places\n  Erytheia, \u201cwhither Gery\u00f4n is said to have come to feed his oxen,\u201d\n  in the Kastid territory near the Greek city of Apoll\u00f4nia on the\n  Ionic Gulf, northward of the Keraunian mountains. There were\n  splendid cattle consecrated to H\u00ealios near Apoll\u00f4nia, watched\n  by the citizens of the place with great care (Herodot. ix. 93;\n  Skylax, c. 26).\n\n  About Erytheia, Cellerius observes (Geogr. Ant. ii. 1, 227),\n  \u201cInsula Erytheia, quam veteres adjungunt Gadibus, vel demersa\n  est, vel in scopulis qu\u00e6renda, vel pars est ipsarum Gadium, neque\n  hodie ejus form\u00e6 aliqua, uti descripta est, fertur superesse.\u201d To\n  make the disjunctive catalogue complete, he ought to have added,\n  \u201cor it never really existed,\u201d\u2014not the least probable supposition\n  of all.\n\nBoth the track and the terminus of the Argonautic voyage appear in the\nmost ancient epic as little within the conditions of reality, as the\nspeaking timbers or the semi-divine crew of the vessel. In the Odyssey,\n\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and Circ\u00ea (Hesiod names M\u00eadea also) are brother and sister,\noffspring of H\u00ealios. The \u00c6\u00e6an island, adjoining the circumfluous ocean,\n\u201cwhere the house and dancing-ground of E\u00f4s are situated, and where\nH\u00ealios rises,\u201d is both the residence of Circ\u00ea and of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, inasmuch\nas Odysseus, in returning from the former, follows the same course as\nthe Arg\u00f4 had previously taken in returning from the latter.[603] Even\nin the conception of Mimnermus, about 600 B. C., \u00c6a still retained\nits fabulous attributes in conjunction with the ocean and H\u00ealios,\nwithout having been yet identified with any known portion of the\nsolid earth;[604] and it was justly remarked by D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis\nin antiquity[605] (though Strabo vainly tries to refute him), that\nneither Homer nor Mimnermus designates Kolchis either as the residence\nof \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, or as the terminus of the Argonautic voyage. Hesiod carried\nthe returning Argonauts through the river Phasis into the ocean. But\nsome of the poems ascribed to Eum\u00ealus were the first which mentioned\n\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and Kolchis, and interwove both of them into the Corinthian\nmythical genealogy.[606] These poems seem to have been composed\nsubsequent to the foundation of Sinop\u00ea, and to the commencement of\nGrecian settlement on the Borysthen\u00eas, between the years 600 and 500 B.\nC. The Greek mariners who explored and colonized the southern coast of\nthe Euxine, found at the extremity of their voyage the river Phasis and\nits barbarous inhabitants: it was the easternmost point which Grecian\nnavigation (previous to the time of Alexander the Great) ever attained,\nand it was within sight of the impassable barrier of Caucasus.[607]\nThey believed, not unnaturally, that they had here found \u201cthe house of\nE\u00f4s (the morning) and the rising place of the sun,\u201d and that the river\nPhasis, if they could follow it to its unknown beginning, would conduct\nthem to the circumfluous ocean. They gave to the spot the name of \u00c6a,\nand the fabulous and real title gradually became associated together\ninto one compound appellation,\u2014the Kolchian \u00c6a, or \u00c6a of Kolchis.[608]\nWhile Kolchis was thus entered on the map as a fit representative for\nthe Homeric \u201chouse of the morning,\u201d the narrow strait of the Thracian\nBosporus attracted to itself the poetical fancy of the Sympl\u00eagades,\nor colliding rocks, through which the heaven-protected Arg\u00f4 had been\nthe first to pass. The powerful Greek cities of Kyzikus, H\u00earakleia and\nSinop\u00ea, each fertile in local legends, still farther contributed to\ngive this direction to the voyage; so that in the time of Hekat\u00e6us it\nhad become the established belief that the Arg\u00f4 had started from I\u00f4lkos\nand gone to Kolchis.\n\n  [603] Hesiod, Theogon. 956-992; Homer, Odyss. xii. 3-69.\u2014\n\n    \u039d\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f45\u03b8\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f28\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f20\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u039f\u1f34\u03ba\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f20\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf.\n\n  [604] Mimnerm. Fragm. 10-11, Schneidewin; Athen\u00e6. vii. p. 277.\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad \u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03ba\u1ff6\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ae\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f38\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\n      \u1f18\u03be \u0391\u1f34\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f41\u03b4\u1f78\u03bd,\n    \u1f59\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f04\u03b5\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\n      \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u1f35\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u1fe5\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd.\n       \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7\n    \u0391\u1f30\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03bf \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f60\u03ba\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f28\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\n      \u1f08\u03ba\u03c4\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u1ff3,\n    \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c7\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u1fbd, \u1f35\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f64\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f38\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  [605] Strabo, i. p. 45-46. \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03a3\u03ba\u03ae\u03c8\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 ... \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u039d\u03b5\u03ac\u03bd\u03b8\u03b7\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039a\u03c5\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd ~\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2~ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31\n  \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03a6\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f51\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd, \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f38\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76\n  \u039a\u03cd\u03b6\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd ... ~\u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03a6\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u1f38\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd~. Again, p. 46, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1 \u039c\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f43\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f68\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, etc.\n\n  The adverb \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2 reveals to us the municipal rivalry\n  and contention between the small town Sk\u00eapsis and its powerful\n  neighbor Kyzikus, respecting points of comparative arch\u00e6ology.\n\n  [606] Eum\u00ealus, Fragm. \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b1 7, \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1f70 2-5. pp. 63-68,\n  D\u00fcntzer.\n\n  [607] Arrian, Periplus Pont. Euxin. p. 12; ap. Geogr. Minor. vol.\n  i. He saw the Caucasus from Dioskurias.\n\n  [608] Herodot i. 2; vii. 193-197. Eurip. M\u00ead. 2. Valer. Flacc. v.\n  51.\n\n\u00c6\u00eat\u00eas thus received his home from the legendary faith and fancy\nof the eastern Greek navigators: his sister Circ\u00ea, originally his\nfellow-resident, was localized by the western. The Hesiodic and other\npoems, giving expression to the imaginative impulses of the inhabitants\nof Cum\u00e6 and other early Grecian settlers in Italy and Sicily,[609] had\nreferred the wanderings of Odysseus to the western or Tyrrhenian sea,\nand had planted the Cycl\u00f4pes, the L\u00e6strygones, the floating island of\n\u00c6olus, the Lotophagi, the Ph\u00e6acians, etc., about the coast of Sicily,\nItaly, Libya, and Korkyra. In this way the \u00c6\u00e6an island,\u2014the residence\nof Circ\u00ea, and the extreme point of the wanderings of Odysseus, from\nwhence he passes only to the ocean and into Had\u00eas\u2014came to be placed in\nthe far west, while the \u00c6a of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas was in the far east,\u2014not unlike our\nEast and West Indies. The Homeric brother and sister were separated and\nsent to opposite extremities of the Grecian terrestrial horizon.[610]\n\n  [609] Strabo, i. p. 23. V\u00f6lcker (Ueber Homerische Geographie,\n  v. 66) is instructive upon this point, as upon the geography\n  of the Greek poets generally. He recognizes the purely\n  mythical character of \u00c6a in Homer and Hesiod, but he tries to\n  prove\u2014unsuccessfully, in my judgment\u2014that Homer places \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas in\n  the east, while Circ\u00ea is in the west, and that Homer refers the\n  Argonautic voyage to the Euxine Sea.\n\n  [610] Strabo (or Polybius, whom he has just been citing) contends\n  that Homer knew the existence of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas in Kolchis, and of Circ\u00ea\n  at Circeium, as historical persons, as well as the voyage of\n  Jas\u00f4n to \u00c6a as an historical fact. Upon this he (Homer) built\n  a superstructure of fiction (\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1): he invented the\n  brotherhood between them, and he placed both the one and the\n  other in the exterior ocean (\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f14\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u1ff3\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bd, i. p. 20); perhaps also\n  Jas\u00f4n might have wandered as far as Italy, as evidences (\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03ac\n  \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1) are shown that he did (_ib._).\n\n  But the idea that Homer conceived \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas in the extreme east and\n  Circ\u00ea in the extreme west, is not reconcilable with the Odyssey.\n  The supposition of Strabo is alike violent and unsatisfactory.\n\n  Circ\u00ea was worshipped as a goddess at Circeii (Cicero, Nat. Deor.\n  iii. 19). Hesiod, in the Theogony, represents the two sons of\n  Circ\u00ea by Odysseus as reigning over all the warlike Tyrrhenians\n  (Theog. 1012), an undefined western sovereignty. The great\n  Mamilian gens at Tusculum traced their descent to Odysseus and\n  Circ\u00ea (Dionys. Hal. iv. 45).\n\nThe track from I\u00f4lkos to Kolchis, however, though plausible as far as\nit went, did not realize all the conditions of the genuine fabulous\nvoyage: it did not explain the evidences of the visit of these\nmaritime heroes which were to be found in Libya, in Kr\u00eat\u00ea in Anaph\u00ea,\nin Korkyra, in the Adriatic Gulf, in Italy and in \u00c6thalia. It became\nnecessary to devise another route for them in their return, and the\nHesiodic narrative was (as I have before observed), that they came back\nby the circumfluous ocean; first going up the river Phasis into the\ncircumfluous ocean; following that deep and gentle stream until they\nentered the Nile, and came down its course to the coast of Libya. This\nseems also to have been the belief of Hekat\u00e6us.[611] But presently\nseveral Greeks (and Herodotus among them) began to discard the idea of\na circumfluous ocean-stream, which had pervaded their old geographical\nand astronomical fables, and which explained the supposed easy\ncommunication between one extremity of the earth and another. Another\nidea was then started for the returning voyage of the Argonauts.\nIt was supposed that the river Ister, or Danube, flowing from the\nRhip\u00e6an mountains in the north-west of Europe, divided itself into two\nbranches, one of which fell into the Euxine Sea, and the other into the\nAdriatic.\n\n  [611] See above, p. 239. There is an opinion cited from Hekat\u00e6us\n  in Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 284. contrary to this, which is given\n  by the same scholiast on iv. 259. But, in spite of the remarks\n  of Klausen (ad. Fragment. Hekat\u00e6i, 187. p. 98), I think that the\n  Schol. ad. iv. 284 has made a mistake in citing Hekat\u00e6us; the\n  more so as the scholiast, as printed from the Codex Parisinus,\n  cites the same opinion without mentioning Hekat\u00e6us. According\n  to the old Homeric idea, the ocean stream flowed all round the\n  earth, and was the source of all the principal rivers which\n  flowed into the great internal sea, or Mediterranean (see\n  Hekat\u00e6us, Fr. 349; Klausen, ap. Arrian. ii. 16, where he speaks\n  of the Mediterranean as the \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1). Retaining this old\n  idea of the ocean-stream, Hekat\u00e6us would naturally believe that\n  the Phasis joined it: nor can I agree with Klausen (ad Fr. 187)\n  that this implies a degree of ignorance too gross to impute to\n  him.\n\nThe Argonauts, fleeing from the pursuit of \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas, had been obliged to\nabandon their regular course homeward, and had gone from the Euxine\nSea up the Ister; then passing down the other branch of that river,\nthey had entered into the Adriatic, the Kolchian pursuers following\nthem. Such is the story given by Apoll\u00f4nius Rhodius from Timag\u00eatus,\nand accepted even by so able a geographer as Eratosthen\u00eas\u2014who preceded\nhim by one generation, and who, though sceptical in regard to the\nlocalities visited by Odysseus, seems to have been a firm believer in\nthe reality of the Argonautic voyage.[612] Other historians again,\namong whom was Tim\u00e6us, though they considered the ocean as an\nouter sea, and no longer admitted the existence of the old Homeric\nocean-stream, yet imagined a story for the return-voyage of the\nArgonauts somewhat resembling the old tale of Hesiod and Hekat\u00e6us.\nThey alleged that the Arg\u00f4, after entering into the Palus M\u00e6otis, had\nfollowed the upward course of the river Tanais; that she had then been\ncarried overland and launched in a river which had its mouth in the\nocean or great outer sea. When in the ocean, she had coasted along\nthe north and west of Europe until she reached Gad\u00eas and the Strait\nof Gibraltar, where she entered into the Mediterranean, and there\nvisited the many places specified in the fable. Of this long voyage,\nin the outer sea to the north and west of Europe, many traces were\naffirmed to exist along the coast of the ocean.[613] There was again\na third version, according to which the Argonauts came back as they\nwent, through the Thracian Bosporus and the Hellespont. In this way\ngeographical plausibility was indeed maintained, but a large portion of\nthe fabulous matter was thrown overboard.[614]\n\n  [612] Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iv. 287; Schol. ad iv. 284; Pindar, Pyth.\n  iv. 447, with Schol.; Strabo, i. p. 46-57; Aristot. Mirabil.\n  Auscult. c. 105. Altars were shown in the Adriatic, which had\n  been erected both by Jas\u00f4n and by M\u00eadea (_ib._).\n\n  Aristotle believed in the forked course of the Ister, with one\n  embouchure in the Euxine and another in the Adriatic: he notices\n  certain fishes called \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c7\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9, who entered the river (like the\n  Argonauts) from the Euxine, went up it as far as the point of\n  bifurcation and descended into the Adriatic (Histor. Animal.\n  viii. 15). Compare Ukert, Geographie der Griech. und R\u00f6mer, vol.\n  iii. p. 145-147, about the supposed course of the Ister.\n\n  [613] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 56; Tim\u00e6us, Fragm. 53. G\u00f6ller. Skymnus the\n  geographer also adopted this opinion (Schol. Apoll. Rhod.\n  284-287). The pseudo-Orpheus in the poem called Argonautica seems\n  to give a jumble of all the different stories.\n\n  [614] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 49. This was the tale both of Sophokl\u00eas and of\n  Kallimachus (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 284).\n\n  See the Dissertation of Ukert, Beylage iv. vol. i. part 2, p. 320\n  of his Geographie der Griechen und R\u00f6mer, which treats of the\n  Argonautic voyage at some length; also J. H. Voss, Alte Weltkunde\n  \u00fcber die Gestalt der Erde, published in the second volume of the\n  Kritische Bl\u00e4tter, pp. 162, 314-326; and Forbiger, Handbuch der\n  Alten Geographie-Einleitung, p. 8.\n\nSuch were the various attempts made to reconcile the Argonautic\nlegend with enlarged geographical knowledge and improved historical\ncriticism. The problem remained unsolved, but the faith in the legend\ndid not the less continue. It was a faith originally generated at\na time when the unassisted narrative of the inspired poet sufficed\nfor the conviction of his hearers; it consecrated one among the\ncapital exploits of that heroic and superhuman race, whom the Greek\nwas accustomed at once to look back upon as his ancestors and to\nworship conjointly with his gods: it lay too deep in his mind either\nto require historical evidence for its support, or to be overthrown\nby geographical difficulties as they were then appreciated. Supposed\ntraces of the past event, either preserved in the names of places, or\nembodied in standing religious customs with their explanatory comments,\nserved as sufficient authentication in the eyes of the curious\ninquirer. And even men trained in a more severe school of criticism\ncontented themselves with eliminating the palpable contradictions\nand softening down the supernatural and romantic events, so as to\nproduce an Argonautic expedition of their own invention as the true\nand accredited history. Strabo, though he can neither overlook nor\nexplain the geographical impossibilities of the narrative, supposes\nhimself to have discovered the basis of actual fact, which the original\npoets had embellished or exaggerated. The golden fleece was typical\nof the great wealth of Kolchis, arising from gold-dust washed down by\nthe rivers; and the voyage of Jas\u00f4n was in reality an expedition at\nthe head of a considerable army, with which he plundered this wealthy\ncountry and made extensive conquests in the interior.[615] Strabo has\nnowhere laid down what he supposes to have been the exact measure and\ndirection of Jas\u00f4n\u2019s march, but he must have regarded it as very long,\nsince he classes Jas\u00f4n with Dionysus and H\u00earakl\u00eas, and emphatically\ncharacterizes all the three as having traversed wider spaces of ground\nthan any moderns could equal.[616] Such was the compromise which a\nmind like that of Strabo made with the ancient legends. He shaped or\ncut them down to the level of his own credence, and in this waste of\nhistorical criticism, without any positive evidence, he took to himself\nthe credit of greater penetration than the literal believers, while he\nescaped the necessity of breaking formally with the bygone heroic world.\n\n  [615] Strabo, i. p. 45. He speaks here of the voyage of Phryxus,\n  as well as that of Jas\u00f4n, as having been a military undertaking\n  (\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1): so again, iii. p. 149, he speaks of the military\n  expedition of Odysseus\u2014\u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f48\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1, and \u1f21 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n  \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 (_ib._). Again xi. p. 498. \u039f\u1f31 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9, \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f38\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03a6\u03c1\u03af\u03be\u03bf\u03c5. Compare also Justin, xlii. 2-3; Tacit. Annal. vi. 34.\n\n  Strabo cannot speak of the old fables with literal fidelity: he\n  unconsciously transforms them into quasi-historical incidents of\n  his own imagination. Diod\u00f4rus gives a narrative of the same kind,\n  with decent substitutes for the fabulous elements (iv. 40-47-56).\n\n  [616] Strabo, i. p. 48. The far-extending expeditions undertaken\n  in the eastern regions by Dionysus and H\u00earakl\u00eas were constantly\n  present to the mind of Alexander the Great as subjects of\n  comparison with himself: he imposed upon his followers perilous\n  and trying marches, from anxiety to equal or surpass the alleged\n  exploits of Semiramis, Cyrus, Perseus, and H\u00earakl\u00eas. (Arrian, v.\n  2, 3; vi. 24, 3; vii. 10, 12. Strabo, iii. p. 171; xv. p. 686;\n  xvii. p. 81).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\nLEGENDS OF THEBES.\n\n\nThe B\u0153\u00f4tians generally, throughout the historical age, though well\nendowed with bodily strength and courage,[617] are represented as\nproverbially deficient in intelligence, taste and fancy. But the\nlegendary population of Th\u00eabes, the Kadmeians, are rich in mythical\nantiquities, divine as well as heroic. Both Dionysus and H\u00earakl\u00eas\nrecognize Th\u00eabes as their natal city. Moreover, the two sieges of\nTh\u00eabes by Adrastus, even taken apart from Kadmus, Antiop\u00ea, Amphi\u00f4n and\nZethus, etc., are the most prominent and most characteristic exploits,\nnext to the siege of Troy, of that pre\u00ebxisting race of heroes who lived\nin the imagination of the historical Hell\u00eanes.\n\n  [617] The eponym B\u0153\u00f4tus is son of Poseid\u00f4n and Arn\u00ea (Euphorion\n  ap. Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 507). It was from Arn\u00ea in Thessaly\n  that the B\u0153\u00f4tians were said to have come, when they invaded\n  and occupied B\u0153\u00f4tia. Euripid\u00eas made him son of Poseid\u00f4n and\n  Melanipp\u00ea. Another legend recited B\u0153\u00f4tus and Hell\u00ean as sons of\n  Poseid\u00f4n and Antiop\u00ea (Hygin. f. 157-186).\n\n  The Tanagr\u00e6an poetess Korinna (the rival of Pindar, whose\n  compositions in the B\u0153\u00f4tian dialect are unfortunately lost)\n  appears to have dwelt upon this native B\u0153\u00f4tian genealogy: she\n  derived the Ogygian gates of Th\u00eabes from Ogygus, son of B\u0153\u00f4tus\n  (Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. iii. 1178), also the Fragments of Korinna\n  in Schneidewin\u2019s edition, fr. 2. p. 432.\n\nIt is not Kadmus, but the brothers Amphi\u00f4n and Zethus, who are given\nto us in the Odyssey as the first founders of Th\u00eabes and the first\nbuilders of its celebrated walls. They are the sons of Zeus by Antiop\u00ea,\ndaughter of As\u00f4pus. The scholiasts who desire to reconcile this tale\nwith the more current account of the foundation of Th\u00eabes by Kadmus,\ntell us that after the death of Amphi\u00f4n and Zethus, Eurymachus, the\nwarlike king of the Phlegy\u00e6, invaded and ruined the newly-settled\ntown, so that Kadmus on arriving was obliged to re-found it.[618] But\nApollod\u00f4rus, and seemingly the older logographers before him, placed\nKadmus at the top, and inserted the two brothers at a lower point\nin the series. According to them, B\u00ealus and Agen\u00f4r were the sons of\nEpaphus, son of the Argeian I\u00f4, by Libya. Agen\u00f4r went to Ph\u0153nicia and\nthere became king: he had for his offspring Kadmus, Ph\u0153nix, Kilix,\nand a daughter Eur\u00f4pa; though in the Iliad Eur\u00f4pa is called daughter\nof Ph\u0153nix.[619] Zeus fell in love with Eur\u00f4pa, and assuming the shape\nof a bull, carried her across the sea upon his back from Egypt to\nKr\u00eate, where she bore to him Min\u00f4s, Rhadamanthus and Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n. Two out\nof the three sons sent out by Agen\u00f4r in search of their lost sister,\nwearied out by a long-protracted as well as fruitless voyage, abandoned\nthe idea of returning home: Kilix settled in Kilikia, and Kadmus\nin Thrace.[620] Thasus, the brother or nephew of Kadmus, who had\naccompanied them in the voyage, settled and gave name to the island of\nPhasus.\n\n  [618] Homer, Odyss. xi. 262, and Eustath. _ad loc._ Compare\n  Schol. ad Iliad. xiii. 301.\n\n  [619] Iliad, xiv. 321. I\u00f4 is \u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1 of the Th\u00eabans.\n  Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 247-676.\n\n  [620] Apollod\u00f4r. ii. 1, 3; iii. 1, 8. In the Hesiodic poems\n  (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. ii. 178), Ph\u0153nix was recognized as son\n  of Agen\u00f4r. Pherekyd\u00eas also described both Ph\u0153nix and Kadmus as\n  sons of Agen\u00f4r (Pherekyd. Fragm. 40, Didot). Compare Servius\n  ad. Virgil. \u00c6neid. 1. 338. Pherekyd\u00eas expressly mentioned\n  Kilix (Apollod. _ib._). Besides the \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 of Stesichorus\n  (see Stesichor. Fragm. xv. p. 73, ed. Kleine), there were\n  several other ancient poems on the adventures of Europa; one in\n  particular by Eum\u00ealus (Schol. ad Iliad. vi. 138), which however\n  can hardly be the same as the \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b7\u03bd alluded to by\n  Pausanias (ix. 5, 4). See W\u00fcllner de Cyclo Epico, p. 57 (M\u00fcnster\n  1825).\n\nBoth Herodotus and Euripid\u00eas represent Kadmus as an emigrant from\nPh\u0153nicia, conducting a body of followers in quest of Eur\u00f4pa. The\naccount of Apollod\u00f4rus describes him as having come originally from\nLibya or Egypt to Ph\u0153nicia: we may presume that this was also the\nstatement of the earlier logographers Pherekyd\u00eas and Hellanikus. Con\u00f4n,\nwho historicizes and politicizes the whole legend, seems to have found\ntwo different accounts; one connecting Kadmus with Egypt, another\nbringing him from Ph\u0153nicia. He tries to melt down the two into one, by\nrepresenting that the Ph\u0153nicians, who sent out Kadmus, had acquired\ngreat power in Egypt\u2014that the seat of their kingdom was the Egyptian\nTh\u00eabes\u2014that Kadmus was despatched, under pretence indeed of finding\nhis lost sister, but really on a project of conquest\u2014and that the name\nTh\u00eabes, which he gave to his new establishment in B\u0153\u00f4tia, was borrowed\nfrom Th\u00eabes in Egypt, his ancestorial seat.[621]\n\n  [621] Con\u00f4n, Narrat. 37. Perhaps the most remarkable thing of all\n  is the tone of unbounded self-confidence with which Con\u00f4n winds\n  up this tissue of uncertified suppositions\u2014\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u039a\u03ac\u03b4\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u0398\u03b7\u03b2\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f74\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\n  \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fc6\u03c2.\n\nKadmus went from Thrace to Delphi to procure information respecting\nhis sister Eur\u00f4pa, but the god directed him to take no further trouble\nabout her; he was to follow the guidance of a cow, and to found a\ncity on the spot where the animal should lie down. The condition was\nrealized on the site of Th\u00eabes. The neighboring fountain Areia was\nguarded by a fierce dragon, the offspring of Ar\u00eas, who destroyed all\nthe persons sent to fetch water. Kadmus killed the dragon, and at\nthe suggestion of Ath\u00ean\u00ea sowed his teeth in the earth:[622] there\nsprang up at once the armed men called the Sparti, among whom he flung\nstones, and they immediately began to assault each other until all\nwere slain except five. Ar\u00eas, indignant at this slaughter, was about to\nkill Kadmus; but Zeus appeased him, condemning Kadmus to an expiatory\nservitude of eight years, after which he married Harmonia, the\ndaughter of Ar\u00eas and Aphrodit\u00ea\u2014presenting to her the splendid necklace\nfabricated by the hand of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, which had been given by Zeus to\nEur\u00f4pa.[623] All the gods came to the Kadmeia, the citadel of Th\u00eabes,\nto present congratulations and gifts at these nuptials, which seem to\nhave been hardly less celebrated in the mythical world than those of\nP\u00ealeus and Thetis. The issue of the marriage was one son, Polyd\u00f4rus,\nand four daughters, Autono\u00ea, In\u00f4, Semel\u00ea and Agav\u00ea.[624]\n\n  [622] Stesichor. (Fragm. 16; Kleine) ap. Schol. Eurip. Ph\u0153niss.\n  680. The place where the heifer had lain down was still shown in\n  the time of Pausanias (ix. 12, 1).\n\n  Lysimachus, a lost author who wrote Theba\u00efca, mentioned Eur\u00f4pa\n  as having come with Kadmus to Th\u00eabes, and told the story in many\n  other respects very differently (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iii. 1179).\n\n  [623] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 4, 1-3. Pherekyd\u00eas gave this account of\n  the necklace, which seems to imply that Kadmus must have found\n  his sister Eur\u00f4pa. The narrative here given is from Hellanikus;\n  that of Pherekyd\u00eas differed from it in some respects: compare\n  Hellanik. Fragm. 8 and 9, and Pherekyd. Frag. 44. The resemblance\n  of this story with that of Jas\u00f4n and \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas (see above, chap.\n  xiii. p. 237) will strike everyone. It is curious to observe how\n  the old logographer Pherekyd\u00eas explained this analogy in his\n  narrative; he said that Ath\u00ean\u00ea had given half the dragon\u2019s teeth\n  to Kadmus and half to \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas (see Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13).\n\n  [624] Hesiod, Theogon. 976. Leukothea, the sea-goddess, daughter\n  of Kadmus, is mentioned in the Odyssey, v. 334; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 2.\n\nFrom the five who alone survived of the warriors sprung from the\ndragon\u2019s teeth, arose five great families or gentes in Th\u00eabes; the\noldest and noblest of its inhabitants, coeval with the foundation of\nthe town. They were called Sparti, and their name seems to have given\nrise, not only to the fable of the sowing of the teeth, but also to\nother etymological narratives.[625]\n\n  [625] Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 680, with the Scholia; Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm.\n  44; Androti\u00f4n, ap. Schol. Pindar. Isthm. vi. 13. Dionysius (?)\n  called the Sparti an \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u0392\u03bf\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (Schol. Ph\u0153niss. 1. c).\n\n  Even in the days of Plutarch, there were persons living who\n  traced their descent to the Sparti of Th\u00eabes (Plutarch, Ser. Num.\n  Vindict. p. 563).\n\nAll the four daughters of Kadmus are illustrious in fabulous history.\nIn\u00f4, wife of Athamas, the son of \u00c6olus, has already been included among\nthe legends of the \u00c6olids. Semel\u00ea became the mistress of Zeus, and\ninspired H\u00ear\u00ea with jealousy. Misguided by the malicious suggestions of\nthat goddess, she solicited Zeus to visit her with all the solemnity\nand terrors which surrounded him when he approached H\u00ear\u00ea herself.\nThe god unwillingly consented, and came in his chariot in the midst\nof thunder and lightning, under which awful accompaniments the mortal\nframe of Semel\u00ea perished. Zeus, taking from her the child of which she\nwas pregnant, sewed it into his own thigh: after the proper interval\nthe child was brought out and born, and became the great god Dionysus\nor Bacchus. Herm\u00eas took him to In\u00f4 and Athamas to receive their\nprotection. Afterwards, however, Zeus having transformed him into a kid\nto conceal him from the persecution of H\u00ear\u00ea, the nymphs of the mountain\nNysa became his nurses.[626]\n\n  [626] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 4, 2-9; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 2.\n\nAutono\u00ea, the third daughter of Kadmus, married the pastoral hero or god\nArist\u00e6us, and was mother of Akt\u00e6\u00f4n, a devoted hunter and a favorite\ncompanion of the goddess Artemis. She however became displeased with\nhim\u2014either because he looked into a fountain while she was bathing\nand saw her naked\u2014or according to the legend set forth by the poet\nStesichorus, because he loved and courted Semel\u00ea\u2014or according to\nEuripid\u00eas, because he presumptuously vaunted himself as her superior in\nthe chase. She transformed him into a stag, so that his own dogs set\nupon and devoured him. The rock upon which Akt\u00e6\u00f4n used to sleep when\nfatigued with the chase, and the spring whose transparent waters had\ntoo clearly revealed the form of the goddess, were shown to Pausanias\nnear Plat\u00e6a, on the road to Megara.[627]\n\n  [627] See Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 4, 3; Stesichor. Fragm. xvii. Kleine;\n  Pausan. ix. 2, 3; Eurip. Bacch. 337; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 81. The old\n  logographer Akusilaus copied Stesichorus.\n\n  Upon this well-known story it is unnecessary to multiply\n  references. I shall however briefly notice the remarks made upon\n  it by Diod\u00f4rus and by Pausanias, as an illustration of the manner\n  in which the literary Greeks of a later day dealt with their old\n  national legends.\n\n  Both of them appear implicitly to believe the fact, that Akt\u00e6\u00f4n\n  was devoured by his own dogs, but they differ materially in the\n  explanation of it.\n\n  Diod\u00f4rus accepts and vindicates the miraculous interposition\n  of the displeased goddess to punish Akt\u00e6\u00f4n, who, according\n  to one story, had boasted of his superiority in the chase to\n  Artemis,\u2014according to another story, had presumed to solicit the\n  goddess in marriage, emboldened by the great numbers of the feet\n  of animals slain in the chase which he had hung up as offerings\n  in her temple. \u201cIt is not improbable (observes Diod\u00f4rus) that\n  the goddess was angry on both these accounts. For whether Akt\u00e6\u00f4n\n  abused these hunting presents so far as to make them the means\n  of gratifying his own desires towards one unapproachable in\n  wedlock, or whether he presumed to call himself an abler hunter\n  than her with whom the gods themselves will not compete in this\n  department,\u2014in either case the wrath of the goddess against him\n  was just and legitimate (\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f40\u03c1\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f21 \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2). With perfect propriety therefore (\u039a\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u1f72\n  \u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2) was he transformed into an animal such as those he had\n  hunted, and torn to pieces by the very dogs who had killed them.\u201d\n  (Didot. iv. 80.)\n\n  Pausanias, a man of exemplary piety, and generally less inclined\n  to scepticism than Diod\u00f4rus, thinks the occasion unsuitable for\n  a miracle or special interference. Having alluded to the two\n  causes assigned for the displeasure of Artemis (they are the two\n  first-mentioned in my text, and distinct from the two noticed\n  by Diod\u00f4rus), he proceeds to say, \u201cBut I believe that the dogs\n  of Akt\u00e6\u00f4n went mad, without the interference of the goddess: in\n  this state of madness they would have torn in pieces without\n  distinction any one whom they met (Paus. ix. 2, 3. \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f08\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2).\u201d\n  He retains the truth of the final catastrophe, but rationalizes\n  it, excluding the special intervention of Artemis.\n\nAgav\u00ea, the remaining daughter of Kadmus, married Echi\u00f4n, one of the\nSparti. The issue of these nuptials was Pentheus, who, when Kadmus\nbecame old succeeded him as king of Th\u00eabes. In his reign Dionysus\nappeared as a god, the author or discoverer of the vine with all its\nblessings. He had wandered over Asia, India and Thrace, at the head of\nan excited troop of female enthusiasts\u2014communicating and inculcating\neverywhere the Bacchic ceremonies, and rousing in the minds of women\nthat impassioned religious emotion which led them to ramble in solitary\nmountains at particular seasons, there to give vent to violent\nfanatical excitement, apart from the men, clothed in fawn-skins and\narmed with the thyrsus. The obtrusion of a male spectator upon these\nsolemnities was esteemed sacrilegious. Though the rites had been\nrapidly disseminated and fervently welcomed in many parts of Thrace,\nyet there were some places in which they had been obstinately resisted\nand their votaries treated with rudeness; especially by Lykurgus, king\nof the Edonian Thracians, upon whom a sharp and exemplary punishment\nwas inflicted by Dionysus.\n\nTh\u00eabes was the first city of Greece to which Dionysus came, at the\nhead of his Asiatic troop of females, to obtain divine honors and\nto establish his peculiar rites in his native city. The venerable\nKadmus, together with his daughters and the prophet Teiresias, at once\nacknowledged the divinity of the new god, and began to offer their\nworship and praise to him along with the solemnities which he enjoined.\nBut Pentheus vehemently opposed the new ceremonies, reproving and\nmaltreating the god who introduced them: nor was his unbelief at all\nsoftened by the miracles which Dionysus wrought for his own protection\nand for that of his followers. His mother Agav\u00ea, with her sisters, and\na large body of other women from Th\u00eabes, had gone out from Th\u00eabes to\nMount Kith\u00e6r\u00f4n to celebrate their solemnities under the influence of\nthe Bacchic frenzy. Thither Pentheus followed to watch them, and there\nthe punishment due to his impiety overtook him. The avenging touch of\nthe god having robbed him of his senses, he climbed a tall pine for the\npurpose of overlooking the feminine multitude, who detected him in this\nposition, pulled down the tree, and tore him in pieces. Agav\u00ea, mad and\nbereft of consciousness, made herself the foremost in this assault, and\ncarried back in triumph to Th\u00eabes the head of her slaughtered son. The\naged Kadmus, with his wife Harmonia, retired among the Illyrians, and\nat the end of their lives were changed into serpents, Zeus permitting\nthem to be transferred to the Elysian fields.[628]\n\n  [628] Apollod. iii. 5, 3-4; Theocrit. Idyll. xxvi. Eurip. Bacch.\n  _passim_. Such is the tragical plot of this memorable drama. It\n  is a striking proof of the deep-seated reverence of the people\n  of Athens for the sanctity of the Bacchic ceremonies, that they\n  could have borne the spectacle of Agav\u00ea on the stage with her\n  dead son\u2019s head, and the expressions of triumphant sympathy in\n  her action on the part of the Chorus (1168), \u039c\u03ac\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03cd\u03b7! This\n  drama, written near the close of the life of Euripid\u00eas, and\n  exhibited by his son after his death (Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 67,),\n  contains passages strongly inculcating the necessity of implicit\n  deference to ancestorial authority in matters of religion, and\n  favorably contrasting the uninquiring faith of the vulgar with\n  the dissenting and inquisitive tendencies of superior minds: see\n  v. 196; compare vv. 389 and 422.\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n    \u03a0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2, \u1f05\u03c2 \u03b8\u1fbd \u1f41\u03bc\u03ae\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u1ff3\n    \u039a\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2,\n    \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f22\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f04\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  Such reproofs \u201cinsanientis sapienti\u00e6\u201d certainly do not fall in\n  with the plot of the drama itself, in which Pentheus appears as\n  a Conservative, resisting the introduction of the new religious\n  rites. Taken in conjunction with the emphatic and submissive\n  piety which reigns through the drama, they countenance the\n  supposition of Tyrwhitt, that Euripid\u00eas was anxious to repel the\n  imputations, so often made against him, of commerce with the\n  philosophers and participation in sundry heretical opinions.\n\n  Pacuvius in his Pentheus seems to have closely copied Euripid\u00eas;\n  see Servius ad Virg. \u00c6neid. iv. 469.\n\n  The old Thespis had composed a tragedy on the subject of\n  Pentheus: Suidas, \u0398\u03ad\u03c3\u03c0\u03b9\u03c2; also \u00c6schylus; compare his Eumenid\u00eas,\n  25.\n\n  According to Apollod\u00f4rus (iii. 5, 5), Labdakus also perished in a\n  similar way to Pentheus, and from the like impiety,\u2014\u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nPolyd\u00f4rus and Labdakus successively became kings of Th\u00eabes: the latter\nat his death left an infant son, Laius, who was deprived of his throne\nby Lykus. And here we approach the legend of Antiop\u00ea, Z\u00eathus and\nAmphi\u00f4n, whom the fabulists insert at this point of the Th\u00eaban series.\nAntiop\u00ea is here the daughter of Nykteus, the brother of Lykus. She is\ndeflowered by Zeus, and then, while pregnant, flies to Ep\u00f4peus king of\nSiky\u00f4n: Nykteus dying entreats his brother to avenge the injury, and\nLykus accordingly invades Siky\u00f4n, defeats and kills Ep\u00f4peus, and brings\nback Antiop\u00ea prisoner to Th\u00eabes. In her way thither, in a cave near\nEleuther\u00e6, which was shown to Pausanias,[629] she is delivered of the\ntwin sons of Zeus\u2014Amphi\u00f4n and Z\u00eathus\u2014who, exposed to perish, are taken\nup and nourished by a shepherd, and pass their youth amidst herdsmen,\nignorant of their lofty descent.\n\n  [629] Pausan. i. 38, 9.\n\nAntiop\u00ea is conveyed to Th\u00eabes, where, after undergoing a long\npersecution from Lykus and his cruel wife Dirk\u00ea, she at length escapes,\nand takes refuge in the pastoral dwelling of her sons, now grown to\nmanhood. Dirk\u00ea pursues and requires her to be delivered up; but the\nsons recognize and protect their mother, taking an ample revenge upon\nher persecutors. Lykus is slain, and Dirk\u00ea is dragged to death, tied to\nthe horns of a bull.[630] Amphi\u00f4n and Z\u00eathus, having banished Laius,\nbecome kings of Th\u00eabes. The former, taught by Herm\u00eas, and possessing\nexquisite skill on the lyre, employs it in fortifying the city, the\nstones of the walls arranging themselves spontaneously in obedience to\nthe rhythm of his song.[631]\n\n  [630] For the adventures of Antiop\u00ea and her sons, see Apollod\u00f4r.\n  iii. 5; Pausan. ii. 6, 2; ix. 5, 2.\n\n  The narrative given respecting Ep\u00f4peus in the ancient Cyprian\n  verses seems to have been very different from this, as far as we\n  can judge from the brief notice in Proclus\u2019s Argument,\u2014\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c0\u03c9\u03c0\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u039b\u03c5\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 (\u039b\u03cd\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5) \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7: it approaches\n  more nearly to the story given in the seventh fable of Hyginus,\n  and followed by Propertius (iii. 15); the eighth fable of Hyginus\n  contains the tale of Antiop\u00ea as given by Euripid\u00eas and Ennius.\n  The story of Pausanias differs from both.\n\n  The Scholiast ad Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. i. 735. says that there were\n  two persons named Antiop\u00ea; one, daughter of As\u00f4pus, the other,\n  daughter of Nykteus. Pausanias is content with supposing one\n  only, really the daughter of Nykteus, but there was a \u03c6\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\n  that she was daughter of As\u00f4pus (ii. 6, 2). Asius made Antiop\u00ea\n  daughter of As\u00f4pus, and mother (both by Zeus and by Ep\u00f4peus: such\n  a junction of divine and human paternity is of common occurrence\n  in the Greek legends) of Z\u00eathus and Amphi\u00f4n (ap. Paus. 1. c).\n\n  The contradictory versions of the story are brought together,\n  though not very perfectly, in Sterk\u2019s Essay De Labdacidarum\n  Histori\u00e2, p. 38-43 (Leyden, 1829).\n\n  [631] This story about the lyre of Amphi\u00f4n is not noticed in\n  Homer, but it was narrated in the ancient \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7 \u1f10\u03c2 \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b7\u03bd which\n  Pausanias had read: the wild beasts as well as the stones were\n  obedient to his strains (Paus. ix. 5, 4). Pherekyd\u00eas also\n  recounted it (Pherekyd. Fragm. 102, Didot). The tablet of\n  inscription (\u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u1f74) at Siky\u00f4n recognized Amphi\u00f4n as the first\n  composer of poetry and harp-music (Plutarch, de Music\u00e2, c. 3. p.\n  1132).\n\nZ\u00eathus marries A\u00ead\u00f4n, who, in the dark and under a fatal mistake, kills\nher son Itylus: she is transformed into a nightingale, while Z\u00eathus\ndies of grief.[632] Amphi\u00f4n becomes the husband of Niob\u00ea, daughter\nof Tantalus, and the father of a numerous offspring, the complete\nextinction of which by the hands of Apollo and Artemis has already been\nrecounted in these pages.\n\n  [632] The tale of the wife and son of Z\u00eathus is as old as the\n  Odyssey (xix. 525). Pausanias adds the statement that Z\u00eathus died\n  of grief (ix. 5, 5; Pherekyd\u00eas, Fragm. 102, Did.). Pausanias,\n  however, as well as Apollod\u00f4rus, tells us that Z\u00eathus married\n  Th\u00eab\u00ea, from whom the name Th\u00eabes was given to the city. To\n  reconcile the conflicting pretensions of Z\u00eathus and Amphi\u00f4n with\n  those of Kadmus, as founders of Th\u00eabes, Pausanias supposes that\n  the latter was the original settler of the hill of the Kadmeia,\n  while the two former extended the settlement to the lower city\n  (ix. 5, 1-3).\n\nHere ends the legend of the beautiful Antiop\u00ea and her twin sons\u2014the\nrude and unpolished, but energetic, Z\u00eathus\u2014and the refined and amiable,\nbut dreamy, Amphi\u00f4n. For so Euripid\u00eas, in the drama of Antiop\u00ea\nunfortunately lost, presented the two brothers, in affectionate union\nas well as in striking contrast.[633] It is evident that the whole\nstory stood originally quite apart from the Kadmeian family, and so\nthe rudiments of it yet stand in the Odyssey; but the logographers, by\ntheir ordinary connecting artifices, have opened a vacant place for it\nin the descending series of Th\u00eaban mythes. And they have here proceeded\nin a manner not usual with them. For whereas they are generally fond\nof multiplying entities, and supposing different historical personages\nof the same name, in order to introduce an apparent smoothness in\nthe chronology\u2014they have here blended into one person Amphi\u00f4n the\nson of Antiop\u00ea and Amphi\u00f4n the father of Chl\u00f4ris, who seem clearly\ndistinguished from each other in the Odyssey. They have further\nassigned to the same person all the circumstances of the legend of\nNiob\u00ea, which seems to have been originally framed quite apart from the\nsons of Antiop\u00ea.\n\n  [633] See Valckenaer. Diatribe in Eurip. Reliq. cap. 7, p. 58;\n  Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. ii. p. 811. There is a striking\n  resemblance between the Antiop\u00ea of Euripid\u00eas and the Tyr\u00f4 of\n  Sophokl\u00eas in many points.\n\n  Plato in his Gorgias has preserved a few fragments, and a\n  tolerably clear general idea of the characters of Z\u00eathus and\n  Amphi\u00f4n (Gorg. 90-92); see also Horat. Epist. i. 18, 42.\n\n  Both Livius and Pacuvius had tragedies on the scheme of this of\n  Euripid\u00eas, the former seemingly a translation.\n\nAmphi\u00f4n and Z\u00eathus being removed, Laius became king of Th\u00eabes. With\nhim commences the ever-celebrated series of adventures of \u0152dipus and\nhis family. Laius forewarned by the oracle that any son whom he might\nbeget would kill him, caused \u0152dipus as soon as he was born to be\nexposed on Mount Kith\u00e6r\u00f4n. Here the herdsmen of Polybus king of Corinth\naccidentally found him and conveyed him to their master, who brought\nhim up as his own child. In spite of the kindest treatment, however,\n\u0152dipus when he grew up found himself exposed to taunts on the score of\nhis unknown parentage, and went to Delphi to inquire of the god the\nname of his real father. He received for answer an admonition not to\ngo back to his country; if he did so, it was his destiny to kill his\nfather and become the husband of his mother. Knowing no other country\nbut Corinth, he accordingly determined to keep away from that city,\nand quitted Delphi by the road towards B\u0153\u00f4tia and Ph\u00f4kis. At the exact\nspot where the roads leading to these two countries forked, he met\nLaius in a chariot drawn by mules, when the insolence of one of the\nattendants brought on an angry quarrel, in which \u0152dipus killed Laius,\nnot knowing him to be his father. The exact place where this event\nhappened, called the Divided Way[634], was memorable in the eyes of\nall literary Greeks, and is specially adverted to by Pausanias in his\nperiegesis.\n\n  [634] See the description of the locality in K. O. M\u00fcller\n  (Orchomenos, c. i. p. 37).\n\n  The tombs of Laius and his attendant were still seen there in the\n  days of Pausanias (x. 5, 2).\n\nOn the death of Laius, Kre\u00f4n, the brother of Jokasta, succeeded\nto the kingdom of Th\u00eabes. At this time the country was under the\ndispleasure of the gods, and was vexed by a terrible monster, with\nthe face of a woman, the wings of a bird, and the tail of a lion,\ncalled the Sphinx[635]\u2014sent by the wrath of H\u00ear\u00ea and occupying the\nneighboring mountain of Phikium. The Sphinx had learned from the\nMuses a riddle, which she proposed to the Th\u00eabans to resolve: on\nevery occasion of failure she took away one of the citizens and ate\nhim up. Still no person could solve the riddle; and so great was the\nsuffering occasioned, that Kre\u00f4n was obliged to offer both the crown\nand the nuptials of his sister Jokasta to any one who could achieve\nthe salvation of the city. At this juncture \u0152dipus arrived and solved\nthe riddle: upon which the Sphinx immediately threw herself from the\nacropolis and disappeared. As a recompense for this service, \u0152dipus was\nmade king of Th\u00eabes, and married Jokasta, not aware that she was his\nmother.\n\n  [635] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 5, 8. An author named Lykus, in his work\n  entitled _Th\u00eaba\u00efca_, ascribed this visitation to the anger of\n  Dionysus (Schol. Hesiod, Theogon. 326). The Sphinx (or _Phix_,\n  from the B\u0153\u00f4tian Mount Phikium) is as old as the Hesiodic\n  Theogony,\u2014\u03a6\u1fd6\u03ba\u1fbd \u1f40\u03bb\u03cc\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03b5, \u039a\u03b1\u03b4\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f44\u03bb\u03b5\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd (Theog. 326).\n\nThese main tragical circumstances\u2014that \u0152dipus had ignorantly killed\nhis father and married his mother\u2014belong to the oldest form of the\nlegend as it stands in the Odyssey. The gods (it is added in that poem)\nquickly made the facts known to mankind. Epikasta (so Jokasta is here\ncalled) in an agony of sorrow hanged herself: \u0152dipus remained king of\nthe Kadmeians, but underwent many and great miseries, such as the\nErinnyes, who avenge an injured mother, inflict.[636] A passage in the\nIliad implies that he died at Th\u00eabes, since it mentions the funeral\ngames which were celebrated there in honor of him. His misfortunes\nwere recounted by Nest\u00f4r, in the old Cyprian verses, among the stories\nof aforetime.[637] A fatal curse hung both upon himself and upon his\nchildren, Eteokl\u00eas, Polynik\u00eas, Antigon\u00ea and Ism\u00ean\u00ea. According to\nthat narrative which the Attic tragedians have rendered universally\ncurrent, they were his children by Jokasta, the disclosure of her true\nrelationship to him having been very long deferred. But the ancient\nepic called \u0152dipodia, treading more closely in the footsteps of Homer,\nrepresented him as having after her death married a second wife,\nEuryganeia, by whom the four children were born to him: and the painter\nOnatas adopted this story in preference to that of Sophokl\u00eas.[638]\n\n  [636] Odyss. xi. 270. Odysseus, describing what he saw in the\n  under-world, says,\u2014\n\n    \u039c\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fbd \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1\u03bf \u1f34\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd,\n    \u1f2b \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u0390\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf,\n    \u0393\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u1fa7 \u03c5\u1f31\u03b5\u1fd6\u00b7 \u1f41 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f43\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03be\u03b1\u03c2\n    \u0393\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f04\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c0\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9.\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f41 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03b7\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f04\u03bb\u03b3\u03b5\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd,\n    \u039a\u03b1\u03b4\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f24\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5, \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f40\u03bb\u03bf\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c2\u00b7\n    \u1f29 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03b2\u03b7 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b4\u03ac\u03bf \u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bf \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bf\n    \u1f09\u03c8\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b2\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c0\u1f7a\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f51\u03c8\u03ae\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5,\n    \u1f6f \u1f04\u03c7\u03b5\u03ca \u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u00b7 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bb\u03b3\u03b5\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9\n    \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u1fbd, \u1f45\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n  [637] Iliad, xxiii. 680, with the scholiast who cites Hesiod.\n  Proclus, Argum. ad Cypria, ap. D\u00fcntzer, Fragm. Epic. Gr\u00e6c. p. 10.\n  \u039d\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03b2\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 ... \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, etc.\n\n  [638] Pausan. ix. 5, 5. Compare the narrative from Peisander in\n  Schol. ad Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 1773; where, however, the blindness\n  of \u0152dipus seems to be unconsciously interpolated out of the\n  tragedians. In the old narrative of the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs, \u0152dipus\n  does not seem to be represented as blind (Leutsch, Thebaidis\n  Cyclici Reliqui\u00e6, G\u00f6tting. 1830, p. 42).\n\n  Pherekyd\u00eas (ap. Schol. Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 52) tells us that \u0152dipus\n  had three children by Jokasta, who were all killed by Erginus\n  and the Miny\u00e6 (this must refer to incidents in the old poems\n  which we cannot now recover); then the four celebrated children\n  by Euryganeia; lastly, that he married a third wife, Astymedusa.\n  Apollod\u00f4rus follows the narrative of the tragedians, but alludes\n  to the different version about Euryganeia,\u2014\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f35 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, etc.\n  (iii. 5, 8).\n\n  Hellanikus (ap. Schol. Eur. Ph\u0153niss. 59) mentioned the\n  self-inflicted blindness of \u0152dipus; but it seems doubtful whether\n  this circumstance was included in the narrative of Pherekyd\u00eas.\n\nThe disputes of Eteokl\u00eas and Polynik\u00eas for the throne of their father\ngave occasion not only to a series of tragical family incidents,\nbut also to one of the great quasi-historical events of legendary\nGreece\u2014the two sieges of Th\u00eabes by Adrastus, king of Argos. The two\nancient epic poems called the Th\u00eaba\u00efs and the Epigoni (if indeed both\nwere not parts of one very comprehensive poem) detailed these events\nat great length, and as it appears, with distinguished poetical merit;\nfor Pausanias pronounces the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs (so it was called by the\nsubsequent critics to distinguish it from the more modern Th\u00eaba\u00efs of\nAntimachus) inferior only to the Iliad and Odyssey; and the ancient\nelegiac poet Kallinus treated it as an Homeric composition.[639] Of\nthis once-valued poem we unfortunately possess nothing but a few\nscanty fragments. The leading points of the legend are briefly glanced\nat in the Iliad; but our knowledge of the details is chiefly derived\nfrom the Attic tragedians, who transformed the narratives of their\npredecessors at pleasure, and whose popularity constantly eclipsed and\nobliterated the ancient version. Antimachus of Koloph\u00f4n, contemporary\nwith Euripid\u00eas, in his long epic, probably took no less liberties\nwith the old narrative. His Th\u00eaba\u00efd never became generally popular,\nbut it exhibited marks of study and elaboration which recommended it\nto the esteem of the Alexandrine critics, and probably contributed to\ndiscredit in their eyes the old cyclic poem.\n\n  [639] Pausan. ix. 9. 3. \u1f18\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7,\n  \u0398\u03b7\u03b2\u03b1\u0390\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd,\n  \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9. \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f14\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\n  \u03b3\u03b5 \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f48\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03ad\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u1ff6 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1. The name in\n  the text of Pausanias stands \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, an unknown person: most of\n  the critics recognize the propriety of substituting \u039a\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, and\n  Leutsch and Welcker have given very sufficient reasons for doing\n  so.\n\n  The \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u0398\u03ad\u03b2\u03b1\u03c2, alluded to in the\n  pseudo-Herodotean life of Homer, seems to be the description of a\n  special passage in this Th\u00eaba\u00efs.\n\nThe logographers, who gave a continuous history of this siege of\nTh\u00eabes, had at least three pre\u00ebxisting epic poems\u2014the Th\u00eaba\u00efs, the\n\u0152dipodia, and the Alkm\u00e6\u00f4nis,\u2014from which they could borrow. The subject\nwas also handled in some of the Hesiodic poems, but we do not know to\nwhat extent.[640] The Th\u00eaba\u00efs was composed more in honor of Argos than\nof Th\u00eabes, as the first line of it, one of the few fragments still\npreserved, betokens.[641]\n\n  [640] Hesiod, ap. Schol. Iliad. xxiii. 680, which passage does\n  not seem to me so much at variance with the incidents stated in\n  other poets as Leutsch imagines.\n\n  [641] \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f04\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5, \u03b8\u03b5\u1f70, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03b4\u03af\u03c8\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 (see Leutsch,\n  _ib._ c. 4. p. 29).\n\n\nSIEGES OF THEBES.\n\nThe legend, about to recount fraternal dissension of the most\nimplacable kind, comprehending in its results not only the immediate\nrelations of the infuriated brothers, but many chosen companions of the\nheroic race along with them, takes its start from the paternal curse of\n\u0152dipus, which overhangs and determines all the gloomy sequel.\n\n\u0152dipus, though king of Th\u00eabes and father of four children by Euryganeia\n(according to the \u0152dipodia), has become the devoted victim of the\nErinnyes, in consequence of the self-inflicted death of his mother,\nwhich he has unconsciously caused, as well as of his unintentional\nparricide. Though he had long forsworn the use of all the ornaments and\nluxuries which his father had inherited from his kingly progenitors,\nyet when through age he had come to be dependent upon his two sons,\nPolynik\u00eas one day broke through this interdict, and set before him\nthe silver table and the splendid wine-cup of Kadmus, which Laius had\nalways been accustomed to employ. The old king had no sooner seen these\nprecious appendages of the regal life of his father, than his mind was\noverrun by a calamitous phrenzy, and he imprecated terrible curses on\nhis sons, predicting that there would be bitter and endless warfare\nbetween them. The goddess Erinnys heard and heeded him; and he repeated\nthe curse again on another occasion, when his sons, who had always\nbeen accustomed to send to him the shoulder of the victims sacrificed\non the altar, caused the buttock to be served to him in place of\nit.[642] He resented this as an insult, and prayed the gods that they\nmight perish each by the hand of the other. Throughout the tragedians\nas well as in the old epic, the paternal curse, springing immediately\nfrom the misguided \u0152dipus himself, but remotely from the parricide\nand incest with which he has tainted his breed, is seen to domineer\nover the course of events\u2014the Erinnys who executes that curse being\nthe irresistible, though concealed, agent. \u00c6schylus not only preserves\nthe fatal efficiency of the paternal curse, but even briefly glances\nat the causes assigned for it in the Th\u00eaba\u00efs, without superadding any\nnew motives. In the judgment of Sophokl\u00eas, or of his audience, the\nconception of a father cursing his sons upon such apparently trifling\ngrounds was odious; and that great poet introduced many aggravating\ncircumstances, describing the old blind father as having been\nbarbarously turned out of doors by his sons to wander abroad in exile\nand poverty. Though by this change he rendered his poem more coherent\nand self-justifying, yet he departed, from the spirit of the old\nlegend, according to which \u0152dipus has contracted by his unconscious\nmisdeeds an incurable taint destined to pass onward to his progeny.\nHis mind is alienated, and he curses them, not because he has suffered\nseriously by their guilt, but because he is made the blind instrument\nof an avenging Erinnys for the ruin of the house of Laius.[643]\n\n  [642] Fragm. of the Th\u00eaba\u00efs, ap. Athen\u00e6. xii. p. 465, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f03 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2\u00b7\n\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2 \u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u1f78\u03c2 \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2\n    \u03a0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03b6\u03b1\u03bd\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03ad\u03b7\u03bd \u039a\u03ac\u03b4\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf \u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1\n    \u03a7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f25\u03b4\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u00b7\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f45\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f11\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bf\n    \u03a4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1, \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u1ff7.\n    \u0391\u1f36\u03c8\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f11\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70\u03c2\n    \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f20\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c4\u03bf\u00b7 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bd\u03cd\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u1f69\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff7\u03b1 \u03b3\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf,\n    \u0395\u1f36\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5.\n\n  See Leutsch, Thebaid. Cycl. Reliq. p. 38.\n\n  The other fragment from the same Th\u00eaba\u00efs is cited by the Schol.\n  ad Soph. \u0152dip. Colon. 1378.\u2014\n\n    \u1f3c\u03c3\u03c7\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5, \u03c7\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03ad \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u1f6e \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c, \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03ad\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f40\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd.\n    \u0395\u1f50\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf \u0394\u03b9\u1fd2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6\u03ca \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9,\n    \u03a7\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f0c\u03ca\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c3\u03c9.\n\n  \u03a4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0391\u1f34\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f1d\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9 \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b1\u03c2.\n  In spite of the protest of Schutz, in his note, I think that the\n  scholiast has understood the words \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1fb6\u03c2 (Sept. ad\n  Theb. 787) in their plain and just meaning.\n\n  [643] The curses of \u0152dipus are very frequently and emphatically\n  dwelt upon both by \u00c6schylus and Sophokl\u00eas (Sept. ad Theb. 70-586,\n  655-697, etc.; \u0152dip. Colon. 1293-1378). The former continues the\n  same point of view as the Th\u00eaba\u00efs, when he mentions\u2014\n\n                     ... \u03a4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03cd\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n    \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03c8\u03af\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1 (727);\n\n  or, \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bd\u03cd\u03c2 (Soph. Antig. 584).\n\n  The Scholiast on Sophokl\u00eas (\u0152d. Col. 1378) treats the cause\n  assigned by the ancient Th\u00eaba\u00efs for the curse vented by \u0152dipus as\n  trivial and ludicrous.\n\n  The \u00c6geids at Sparta, who traced their descent to Kadmus,\n  suffered from terrible maladies which destroyed the lives of\n  their children; an oracle directed them to appease the Erinnyes\n  of Laius and \u0152dipus by erecting a temple, upon which the maladies\n  speedily ceased (Herodot. iv.).\n\nAfter the death of \u0152dipus and the celebration of his funeral games,\nat which amongst others, Argeia, daughter of Adrastus (afterwards the\nwife of Polynik\u00eas), was present,[644] his two sons soon quarrelled\nrespecting the succession. The circumstances are differently related;\nbut it appears that, according to the original narrative, the wrong and\ninjustice was on the part of Polynik\u00eas, who, however, was obliged to\nleave Th\u00eabes and to seek shelter with Adrastus, king of Argos. Here he\nmet Tydeus, a fugitive, at the same time, from \u00c6t\u00f4lia: it was dark when\nthey arrived, and a broil ensued between the two exiles, but Adrastus\ncame out and parted them. He had been enjoined by an oracle to give his\ntwo daughters in marriage to a lion and a boar, and he thought this\noccasion had now arrived, inasmuch as one of the combatants carried on\nhis shield a lion, the other a boar. He accordingly gave Deipyl\u00ea in\nmarriage to Tydeus, and Argeia to Polynik\u00eas: moreover, he resolved to\nrestore by armed resistance both his sons-in-law to their respective\ncountries.[645]\n\n  [644] Hesiod. ap. Schol. Iliad. xxiii. 680.\n\n  [645] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 5, 9; Hygin. f. 69; \u00c6schyl. Sept. ad Theb.\n  573. Hyginus says that Polynik\u00eas came clothed in the skin of a\n  lion, and Tydeus in that of a boar; perhaps after Antimachus, who\n  said that Tydeus had been brought up by swineherds (Antimach.\n  Fragm. 27, ed. D\u00fcntzer; ap. Schol. Iliad. iv. 400). Very\n  probably, however, the old Th\u00eaba\u00efs compared Tydeus and Polynik\u00eas\n  to a lion and a boar, on account of their courage and fierceness;\n  a simile quite in the Homeric character. Mnaseas gave the words\n  of the oracle (ap. Schol. Eurip. Ph\u0153niss. 411).\n\nOn proposing the expedition to the Argeian chiefs around him he\nfound most of them willing auxiliaries; but Amphiar\u00e4us\u2014formerly his\nbitter opponent, but now reconciled to him, and husband of his sister\nEriphyl\u00ea\u2014strongly opposed him.[646] He denounced the enterprise\nas unjust and contrary to the will of the gods. Again, being of a\nprophetic stock, descended from Melampus, he foretold the certain\ndeath both of himself and of the principal leaders, should they\ninvolve themselves as accomplices in the mad violence of Tydeus or\nthe criminal ambition of Polynik\u00eas. Amphiar\u00e4us, already distinguished\nboth in the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt and in the funeral games of Pelias,\nwas in the Th\u00eaban war the most conspicuous of all the heroes, and\nabsolutely indispensable to its success. But his reluctance to engage\nin it was invincible, nor was it possible to prevail upon him except\nthrough the influence of his wife Eriphyl\u00ea. Polynik\u00eas, having brought\nwith him from Th\u00eabes the splendid robe and necklace given by the\ngods to Harmonia on her marriage with Kadmus, offered it as a bribe\nto Eriphyl\u00ea, on condition that she would influence the determination\nof Amphiar\u00e4us. The sordid wife, seduced by so matchless a present,\nbetrayed the lurking-place of her husband, and involved him in the\nfatal expedition.[647] Amphiar\u00e4us, reluctantly dragged forth, and\nforeknowing the disastrous issue of the expedition both to himself and\nto his associates, addressed his last injunctions, at the moment of\nmounting his chariot, to his sons Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n and Amphilochus, commanding\nAlkm\u00e6\u00f4n to avenge his approaching death by killing the venal Eriphyl\u00ea,\nand by undertaking a second expedition against Th\u00eabes.\n\n  [646] See Pindar, Nem. ix. 30, with the instructive Scholium.\n\n  [647] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 6, 2. The treachery of \u201cthe hateful\n  Eriphyl\u00ea\u201d is noticed in the Odyssey, xi. 327: Odysseus sees her\n  in the under-world along with the many wives and daughters of the\n  heroes.\n\nThe Attic dramatists describe this expedition as having been conducted\nby seven chiefs, one to each of the seven celebrated gates of Th\u00eabes.\nBut the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs gave to it a much more comprehensive character,\nmentioning auxiliaries from Arcadia, Mess\u00ean\u00ea, and various parts of\nPeloponn\u00easus;[648] and the application of Tydeus and Polynik\u00eas at\nMyk\u00ean\u00e6 in the course of their circuit made to collect allies, is\nmentioned in the Iliad. They were well received at Myk\u00ean\u00e6; but the\nwarning signals given by the gods were so terrible that no Myken\u00e6an\ncould venture to accompany them.[649] The seven principal chiefs\nhowever were Adrastus, Amphiar\u00e4us, Kapaneus, Hippomed\u00f4n, Parthenop\u00e6us,\nTydeus and Polynik\u00eas.[650] When the army had advanced as far as the\nriver As\u00f4pus, a halt was made for sacrifice and banquet; while Tydeus\nwas sent to Th\u00eabes as envoy to demand the restoration of Polynik\u00eas to\nhis rights. His demand was refused; but finding the chief Kadmeians\nassembled at the banquet in the house of Eteokl\u00eas, he challenged them\nall to contend with him in boxing or wrestling. So efficacious was the\naid of the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea that he overcame them all; and the Kadmeians\nwere so indignant at their defeat, that they placed an ambuscade of\nfifty men to intercept him in his way back to the army. All of them\nperished by the hand of this warrior, small in stature and of few\nwords, but desperate and irresistible in the fight. One alone was\nspared, M\u00e6on, in consequence of special signals from the gods.[651]\n\n  [648] Pausan. ii. 20, 4; ix. 9, 1. His testimony to this, as he\n  had read and admired the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs, seems quite sufficient,\n  in spite of the opinion of Welcker to the contrary (\u00c6schylische\n  Trilogie. p. 375).\n\n  [649] Iliad, iv. 376.\n\n  [650] There are differences in respect to the names of the\n  seven: \u00c6schylus (Sept. ad Theb. 461) leaves out Adrastus as one\n  of the seven, and includes Eteoklus instead of him; others left\n  out Tydeus and Polynik\u00eas, and inserted Eteoklus and Mekisteus\n  (Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 6, 3). Antimachus, in his poetical _Th\u00eaba\u00efs_,\n  called Parthenop\u00e6us an Argeian, not an Arcadian (Schol. ad\n  \u00c6schyl. Sept. ad. Theb. 532).\n\n  [651] Iliad, iv. 381-400, with the Schol. The first celebration\n  of the Nemean games is connected with this march of the army\n  of Adrastus against Th\u00eabes; they were celebrated in honor of\n  Archemorus, the infant son of Lykurgus, who had been killed by a\n  serpent while his nurse Hypsipyl\u00ea went to show the fountain to\n  the thirsty Argeian chiefs (Apollod. iii. 6, 4; Schol. ad Pindar\n  Nem. 1).\n\nThe Kadmeians, assisted by their allies the Ph\u00f4kians and the Phlegy\u00e6,\nmarched out to resist the invaders, and fought a battle near the\nIsm\u00eanian hill, in which they were defeated and forced to retire within\nthe walls. The prophet Teiresias acquainted them that if Men\u0153keus,\nson of Kre\u00f4n, would offer himself as a victim to Ar\u00eas, victory would\nbe assured to Th\u00eabes. The generous youth, as soon as he learnt that\nhis life was to be the price of safely to his country, went and slew\nhimself before the gates. The heroes along with Adrastus now commenced\na vigorous attack upon the town, each of the seven selecting one of the\ngates to assault. The contest was long and strenuously maintained but\nthe devotion of Men\u0153keus had procured for the Th\u00eabans the protection\nof the gods. Parthenop\u00e6us was killed with a stone by Periklymenus;\nand when the furious Kapaneus, having planted a scaling-ladder, had\nmounted the walls, he was smitten by a thunderbolt from Zeus and\ncast down dead upon the earth. This event struck terror into the\nArgeians, and Adrastus called back his troops from the attack. The\nTh\u00eabans now sallied forth to pursue them, when Eteokl\u00eas, arresting\nthe battle, proposed to decide the controversy by single combat with\nhis brother. The challenge, eagerly accepted by Polynik\u00eas, was agreed\nto by Adrastus: a single combat ensued between the two brothers, in\nwhich both were exasperated to fury and both ultimately slain by each\nother\u2019s hand. This equal termination left the result of the general\ncontest still undetermined, and the bulk of the two armies renewed the\nfight. In the sanguinary struggle which ensued the sons of Astakus on\nthe Th\u00eaban side displayed the most conspicuous and successful valor.\nOne of them,[652] Melanippus, mortally wounded Tydeus\u2014while two others,\nLeades and Amphidikus, killed Eteoklus and Hippomed\u00f4n. Amphiar\u00e4us\navenged Tydeus by killing Melanippus; but unable to arrest the rout of\nthe army, he fled with the rest, closely pursued by Periklymenus. The\nlatter was about to pierce him with his spear, when the beneficence\nof Zeus rescued him from this disgrace\u2014miraculously opening the earth\nunder him, so that Amphiar\u00e4us with his chariot and horses was received\nunscathed into her bosom.[653] The exact spot where this memorable\nincident happened was indicated by a sepulchral building, and shown by\nthe Th\u00eabans down to the days of Pausanias\u2014its sanctity being attested\nby the fact, that no animal would consent to touch the herbage which\ngrew within the sacred inclosure. Amphiar\u00e4us, rendered immortal by\nZeus, was worshipped as a god at Argos, at Th\u00eabes and at Or\u00f4pus\u2014and for\nmany centuries gave answers at his oracle to the questions of the pious\napplicant.[654]\n\n  [652] The story recounted that the head of Melanippus was brought\n  to Tydeus as he was about to expire of his wound, and that he\n  gnawed it with his teeth, a story touched upon by Sophokl\u00eas (apud\n  Herodian. in Rhetor. Gr\u00e6c. t. viii. p. 601, Walz.).\n\n  The lyric poet Bacchylid\u00eas (ap. Schol. Aristoph. Aves, 1535)\n  seems to have handled the story even earlier than Sophokl\u00eas.\n\n  We find the same allegation embodied in charges against real\n  historical men: the invective of Montanus against Aquilius\n  Regulus, at the beginning of the reign of Vespasian, affirmed,\n  \u201cdatam interfectori Pisonis pecuniam a Regulo, appetitumque morsu\n  Pisonis caput\u201d (Tacit. Hist. iv. 42).\n\n  [653] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 6, 8. Pindar, Olymp. vi. 11; Nem. ix.\n  13-27. Pausan. ix. 8, 2; 18, 2-4.\n\n  Euripid\u00eas, in the Ph\u0153niss\u00e6 (1122 _seqq._), describes the battle\n  generally; see also \u00c6sch. S. Th. 392. It appears by Pausanias\n  that the Th\u00eabans had poems or legends of their own, relative\n  to this war: they dissented in various points from the Cyclic\n  Th\u00eaba\u00efs (ix. 18, 4). The Th\u00eaba\u00efs said that Periklymenus had\n  killed Parthenop\u00e6us; the Th\u00eabans assigned this exploit to\n  Asphodikus, a warrior not commemorated by any of the poets known\n  to us.\n\n  The village of Harma, between Tanagra and Mykal\u00eassus, was\n  affirmed by some to have been the spot where Amphiar\u00e4us closed\n  his life (Strabo, ix. p. 404): Sophokl\u00eas placed the scene at the\n  Amphiar\u00e6ium near Or\u00f4pus (ap Strabon. ix. p. 399).\n\n  [654] Pindar, Olymp. vi. 16. \u1f1d\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03bd \u03bd\u03ad\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03a4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03ca\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u0395\u1f36\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03a0\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\n  \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  The scholiast affirms that these last expressions are borrowed by\n  Pindar from the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs.\n\n  The temple of Amphiar\u00e4us (Pausan. ii. 23, 2), his oracle,\n  seems to have been inferior in estimation only to that of\n  Delphi (Herodot. i. 52; Pausan. i. 34; Cicero, Divin. i. 40).\n  Cr\u0153sus sent a rich present to Amphiar\u00e4us, \u03c0\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd (Herod. l. c); a striking proof\n  how these interesting legends were recounted and believed as\n  genuine historical facts. Other adventures of Amphiar\u00e4us in the\n  expedition against Th\u00eabes were commemorated in the carvings on\n  the Thronus at Amykl\u00e6 (Pausan. iii. 18, 4).\n\n  \u00c6schylus (Sept. Theb. 611) seems to enter into the Th\u00eaban view,\n  doubtless highly respectful towards Amphiar\u00e4us, when he places in\n  the mouth of the Kadmeian king Eteokl\u00eas such high encomiums on\n  Amphiar\u00e4us, and so marked a contrast with the other chiefs from\n  Argos.\n\nAdrastus, thus deprived of the prophet and warrior whom he regarded as\n\u201cthe eye of his army,\u201d and having seen the other chiefs killed in the\ndisastrous fight, was forced to take flight singly, and was preserved\nby the matchless swiftness of his horse Arei\u00f4n, the offspring of\nPoseid\u00f4n. He reached Argos on his return, bringing with him nothing\nexcept \u201chis garments of woe and his black-maned steed.\u201d[655]\n\n  [655] Pausan. viii. 25, 5, from the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs, \u0395\u1f35\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03c5\u03b3\u03c1\u1f70\n  \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u1fc3; also Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 6, 8.\n\n  The celebrity of the horse Arei\u00f4n was extolled in the Iliad\n  (xxiii. 346), in the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs, and also in the Th\u00eaba\u00efs of\n  Antimachus (Pausan. l. c.): by the Arcadians of Thelpusia he\n  was said to be the offspring of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear by Poseid\u00f4n,\u2014he, and\n  a daughter whose name Pausanias will not communicate to the\n  uninitiated (\u1f27\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, _l.\n  c._). A different story is in the Schol. Iliad, xxiii. 346; and\n  in Antimachus, who affirmed that \u201cG\u00e6a herself had produced him,\n  as a wonder to mortal men\u201d (see Antimach. Frag. 16. p. 102; Epic.\n  Gr\u00e6c. Frag. ed. D\u00fcntzer).\n\nKre\u00f4n, father of the heroic youth Men\u0153keus, succeeding to the\nadministration of Th\u00eabes after the death of the two hostile brothers\nand the repulse of Adrastus, caused Eteokl\u00eas to be buried with\ndistinguished honor, but cast out ignominiously the body of Polynik\u00eas\nas a traitor to his country, forbidding every one on pain of death to\nconsign it to the tomb. He likewise refused permission to Adrastus to\ninter the bodies of his fallen comrades. This proceeding, so offensive\nto Grecian feeling, gave rise to two further tales; one of them at\nleast of the highest pathos and interest. Antigon\u00ea, the sister of\nPolynik\u00eas, heard with indignation the revolting edict consigning her\nbrother\u2019s body to the dogs and vultures, and depriving it of those\nrites which were considered essential to the repose of the dead.\nUnmoved by the dissuading counsel of an affectionate but timid sister,\nand unable to procure assistance, she determined to brave the hazard\nand to bury the body with her own hands. She was detected in the act;\nand Kre\u00f4n, though forewarned by Teiresias of the consequences, gave\norders that she should be buried alive, as having deliberately set\nat naught the solemn edict of the city. His son H\u00e6m\u00f4n, to whom she\nwas engaged to be married, in vain interceded for her life. In an\nagony of despair he slew himself in the sepulchre to which the living\nAntigon\u00ea had been consigned; and his mother Eurydik\u00ea, the wife of\nKre\u00f4n, inconsolable for his death, perished by her own hand. And thus\nthe new light which seemed to be springing up over the last remaining\nscion of the devoted family of \u0152dipus, is extinguished amidst gloom and\nhorrors\u2014which overshadowed also the house and dynasty of Kre\u00f4n.[656]\n\n  [656] Sophokl. Antigon. 581. \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c7\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u1fec\u03af\u03b6\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\n  \u03c6\u03ac\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, etc.\n\n  The pathetic tale here briefly recounted forms the subject of\n  this beautiful tragedy of Sophokl\u00eas, the argument of which is\n  supposed by Boeckh to have been borrowed in its primary rudiments\n  from the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs or the \u0152dipodia (Boeckh, Dissertation\n  appended to his translation of the Antigon\u00ea, c. x. p. 146); see\n  Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 1.\n\n  \u00c6schylus also touches upon the heroism of Antigon\u00ea (Sep. Theb.\n  984).\n\nThe other tale stands more apart from the original legend, and seems to\nhave had its origin in the patriotic pride of the Athenians. Adrastus,\nunable to obtain permission from the Th\u00eabans to inter the fallen\nchieftains, presented himself in suppliant guise, accompanied by their\ndisconsolate mothers, to Th\u00easeus at Eleusis. He implored the Athenian\nwarrior to extort from the perverse Th\u00eabans that last melancholy\nprivilege which no decent or pious Greeks ever thought of withholding,\nand thus to stand forth as the champion of Grecian public morality in\none of its most essential points, not less than of the rights of the\nsubterranean gods. The Th\u00eabans obstinately persisting in their refusal,\nTh\u00easeus undertook an expedition against their city, vanquished them in\nthe field, and compelled them by force of arms to permit the sepulture\nof their fallen enemies. This chivalrous interposition, celebrated in\none of the preserved dramas of Euripid\u00eas, formed a subject of glorious\nrecollection to the Athenians throughout the historical age: their\norators dwelt upon it in terms of animated panegyric; and it seems\nto have been accepted as a real fact of the past time, with not less\nimplicit conviction than the battle of Marath\u00f4n.[657] But the Th\u00eabans,\nthough equally persuaded of the truth of the main story, dissented\nfrom the Athenian version of it, maintaining that they had given up\nthe bodies for sepulture voluntarily and of their own accord. The\ntomb of the chieftains was shown near Eleusis even in the days of\nPausanias.[658]\n\n  [657] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 1; Eurip. Supp. _passim_; Herodot. ix.\n  27; Plato, Menexen. c. 9; Lysias, Epitaph. c. 4; Isokrat. Orat.\n  Panegyr. p. 196, Auger.\n\n  [658] Pausan. i. 39, 2.\n\nA large proportion both of the interesting persons and of the exalted\nacts of legendary Greece belongs to the female sex. Nor can we on this\noccasion pass over the name of Evadn\u00ea, the devoted widow of Kapaneus,\nwho cast herself on the funeral pile of her husband and perished.[659]\n\n  [659] Eurip. Supplic. 1004-1110.\n\nThe defeat of the seven chiefs before Th\u00eabes was amply avenged by\ntheir sons, again under the guidance of Adrastus:\u2014\u00c6gialeus son of\nAdrastus, Thersander son of Polynik\u00eas, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n and Amphilochus, sons\nof Amphiar\u00e4us, Diom\u00ead\u00eas son of Tydeus, Sthenelus son of Kapaneus,\nPromachus son of Parthenop\u00e6us, and Euryalus son of Mekistheus, joined\nin this expedition. Though all these youthful warriors, called the\nEpigoni, took part in the expedition, the grand and prominent place\nappears to have been occupied by Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n, son of Amphiar\u00e4us. Assistance\nwas given to them from Corinth and Megara, as well as from Mess\u00ean\u00ea and\nArcadia; while Zeus manifested his favorable dispositions by signals\nnot to be mistaken.[660] At the river Glisas the Epigoni were met by\nthe Th\u00eabans in arms, and a battle took place in which the latter were\ncompletely defeated. Laodamas, son of Eteokl\u00eas, killed \u00c6gialeus, son of\nAdrastus; but he and his army were routed and driven within the walls\nby the valor and energy of Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n. The defeated Kadmeians consulted\nthe prophet Teiresias, who informed them that the gods had declared\nfor their enemies, and that there was no longer any hope of successful\nresistance. By his advice they sent a herald to the assailants offering\nto surrender the town, while they themselves conveyed away their\nwives and children, and fled under the command of Laodamas to the\nIllyrians,[661] upon which the Epigoni entered Th\u00eabes, and established\nThersander, son of Polynik\u00eas, on the throne.\n\n  [660] Homer, Iliad, iv. 406. Sthenelus, the companion of Diom\u00ead\u00eas\n  and one of the Epigoni, says to Agamemn\u00f4n,\u2014\n\n    \u1f29\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n    \u1f29\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f15\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f35\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f11\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf,\n    \u03a0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd,\n    \u03a0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03b7\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c9\u03b3\u1fc7\u00b7\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f44\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n  [661] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 4. Herodot. v. 57-61. Pausan. ix. 5, 7;\n  9, 2. Diod\u00f4r. iv. 65-66.\n\n  Pindar represents Adrastus as concerned in the second expedition\n  against Th\u00eabes (Pyth. viii. 40-58).\n\nAdrastus, who in the former expedition had been the single survivor\namongst so many fallen companions, now found himself the only exception\nto the general triumph and joy of the conquerors: he had lost his son\n\u00c6gialeus, and the violent sorrow arising from the event prematurely cut\nshort his life. His soft voice and persuasive eloquence were proverbial\nin the ancient epic.[662] He was worshipped as a hero both at Argos and\nat Siky\u00f4n, but with especial solemnity in the last-mentioned place,\nwhere his Her\u00f4um stood in the public agora, and where his exploits as\nwell as his sufferings were celebrated periodically in lyric tragedies.\nMelanippus, son of Astakus, the brave defender of Th\u00eabes, who had slain\nboth Tydeus and Mekistheus, was worshipped with no less solemnity\nby the Th\u00eabans.[663] The enmity of these two heroes rendered it\nimpossible for both of them to be worshipped close upon the same spot.\nAccordingly it came to pass during the historical period, about the\ntime of the Solonian legislation at Athens, that Kleisthen\u00eas, despot of\nSiky\u00f4n, wishing to banish the hero Adrastus and abolish the religious\nsolemnities celebrated in honor of the latter by the Sikyonians, first\napplied to the Delphian oracle for permission to carry this banishment\ninto effect directly and forcibly. That permission being refused, he\nnext sent to Th\u00eabes an intimation that he was anxious to introduce\ntheir hero Melanippus into Siky\u00f4n. The Th\u00eabans willingly consented, and\nhe assigned to the new hero a consecrated spot in the strongest and\nmost commanding portion of the Sikyonian prytaneium. He did this (says\nthe historian) \u201cknowing that Adrastus would forthwith go away of his\nown accord; since Melanippus was of all persons the most odious to\nhim, as having slain both his son-in-law and his brother.\u201d Kleisthen\u00eas\nmoreover diverted the festivals and sacrifices which had been offered\nto Adrastus, to the newly established hero Melanippus; and the lyric\ntragedies from the worship of Adrastus to that of Dionysus. But his\ndynasty did not long continue after his decease, and the Sikyonians\nthen re\u00ebstablished their ancient solemnities.[664]\n\n  [662] \u0393\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b4\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b9\u03c7\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c1\u03c5\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 (Tyrt\u00e6us, Eleg. 9, 7,\n  Schneidewin); compare Plato, Ph\u00e6dr. c. 118. \u201cAdrasti pallentis\n  imago\u201d meets the eye of \u00c6neas in the under-world (\u00c6neid, vi. 480).\n\n  [663] About Melanippus, see Pindar, Nem. x. 36. His sepulchre was\n  shown near the Pr\u0153tid gates of Th\u00eabes (Pausan. ix. 18, 1).\n\n  [664] This very carious and illustrative story is contained\n  in Herodot. v. 67. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u1f7c\u03bd\n  \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 (Kleisthen\u00eas, returning from Delphi) \u1f10\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1fc7 ~\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f08\u03b4\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9~. \u1f69\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5\u03b5,\n  \u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c8\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c2 \u0398\u03ae\u03b2\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u0392\u03bf\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f08\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u0398\u03b7\u03b2\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f14\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f41 \u039a\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u1f08\u03b4\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3\u00b7 \u1f43\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03b4\u03ad\u03bb\u03c6\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u039c\u03b7\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u03a4\u03c5\u03b4\u03ad\u03b1.\n\n  The Sikyonians (Herodotus says) \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u1f0c\u03b4\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f0c\u03b4\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  Adrastus was worshipped as a hero at Megara as well as at Siky\u00f4n:\n  the Megarians affirmed that he had died there on his way back\n  from Th\u00eabes (Pausan. i. 43, 1; Dieuchidas, ap. Schol. ad Pindar.\n  Nem. ix. 31). His house at Argos was still shown when Pausanias\n  visited the town (ii. 23, 2).\n\nNear the Pr\u0153tid gate of Th\u00eabes were seen the tombs of two combatants\nwho had hated each other during life even more than Adrastus and\nMelanippus\u2014the two brothers Eteokl\u00eas and Polynik\u00eas. Even as heroes\nand objects of worship, they still continued to manifest their\ninextinguishable hostility: those who offered sacrifices to them\nobserved that the flame and the smoke from the two adjoining altars\nabhorred all communion, and flew off in directions exactly opposite.\nThe Th\u00eaban exegetes assured Pausanias of this fact. And though he did\nnot himself witness it, yet having seen with his own eyes a miracle not\nvery dissimilar at Pioni\u00e6 in Mysia, he had no difficulty in crediting\ntheir assertion.[665]\n\n  [665] Pausan. ix. 18, 3. \u03a4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9. Compare Hygin. f. 68.\n\n    \u201cEt nova fraterno veniet concordia fumo,\n      Quem vetus accens\u00e2 separat ira pyr\u00e2.\u201d (Ovid, Ibis, 35.)\n\n  The tale was copied by Ovid from Kallimachus (Trist. v. 5, 38.)\n\nAmphiar\u00e4us when forced into the first attack of Th\u00eabes\u2014against his own\nforeknowledge and against the warnings of the gods\u2014had enjoined his\nsons Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n and Amphilochus not only to avenge his death upon the\nTh\u00eabans, but also to punish the treachery of their mother, \u201cEriphyl\u00ea,\nthe destroyer of her husband.\u201d[666] In obedience to this command, and\nhaving obtained the sanction of the Delphian oracle, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n slew his\nmother;[667] but the awful Erinnys, the avenger of matricide, inflicted\non him a long and terrible punishment, depriving him of his reason,\nand chasing him about from place to place without the possibility of\nrepose or peace of mind. He craved protection and cure from the god at\nDelphi, who required him to dedicate at the temple, as an offering,\nthe precious necklace of Kadmus, that irresistible bribe which had\noriginally corrupted Eriphyl\u00ea.[668] He further intimated to the unhappy\nsufferer, that though the whole earth was tainted with his crime,\nand had become uninhabitable for him, yet there was a spot of ground\nwhich was not under the eye of the sun at the time when the matricide\nwas committed, and where therefore Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n yet might find a tranquil\nshelter. The promise was realized at the mouth of the river Achel\u00f4us,\nwhose turbid stream was perpetually depositing new earth and forming\nadditional islands. Upon one of these, near \u0152niad\u00e6, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n settled,\npermanently and in peace: he became the primitive hero of Akarnania,\nto which his son Akarnan gave name.[669] The necklace was found among\nthe treasures of Delphi, together with that which had been given by\nAphrodit\u00ea to Helen, by the Ph\u00f4kian plunderers who stripped the temple\nin the time of Philip of Maced\u00f4n. The Ph\u00f4kian women quarrelled about\nthese valuable ornaments: and we are told that the necklace of Eriphyl\u00ea\nwas allotted to a woman of gloomy and malignant disposition, who ended\nby putting her husband to death; that of Helen to a beautiful but\nvolatile wife, who abandoned her husband from a preference for a young\nEpirot.[670]\n\n  [666] \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd (Pindar, Nem. ix. 16). A poem\n  _Eryphil\u00ea_ was included among the mythical compositions of\n  Stesichorus: he mentioned in it that Askl\u00eapius had restored\n  Kapaneus to life, and that he was for that reason struck dead\n  by thunder from Zeus (Stesichor. Fragm. Kleine, 18, p. 74). Two\n  tragedies of Sophokl\u00eas once existed, _Epigoni_ and _Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n_\n  (Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. i. p. 269): a few fragments also\n  remain of the Latin _Epigoni_ and _Alphesib\u00e6a_ of Attius: Ennius\n  and Attius both composed or translated from the Greek a Latin\n  _Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n_ (Poet. Scenic. Latin. ed. Both. pp. 33, 164, 198).\n\n  [667] Hyginus gives the fable briefly (f. 73; see also\n  Asclepiad\u00eas, ap. Schol. Odyss. xi. 326). In like manner, in the\n  case of the matricide of Orest\u00eas, Apollo not only sanctions,\n  but enjoins the deed; but his protection against the avenging\n  Erinny\u00eas is very tardy, not taking effect until after Orest\u00eas has\n  been long persecuted and tormented by them (see \u00c6schyl. Eumen.\n  76, 197 462).\n\n  In the _Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n_ of the later tragic writer Thodekt\u00eas, a\n  distinction was drawn: the gods had decreed that Eriphyl\u00ea should\n  die, but not that Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n should kill her (Aristot. Rhetoric.\n  ii. 24). Astydamas altered the story still more in his tragedy,\n  and introduced Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n as killing his mother ignorantly and\n  without being aware who she was (Aristot. Poetic. c. 27). The\n  murder of Eriphyl\u00ea by her son was one of the \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9 which could not be departed from; but interpretations\n  and qualifications were resorted to, in order to prevent it\n  from shocking the softened feelings of the spectators: see the\n  criticism of Aristotle on the _Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n_ of Euripid\u00eas (Ethic.\n  Nicom. iii. 1, 8).\n\n  [668] Ephorus ap. Athen\u00e6. vi. p. 232.\n\n  [669] Thucyd. ii. 68-102.\n\n  [670] Athen\u00e6. _l. c._\n\nThere were several other legends respecting the distracted Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n,\neither appropriated or invented by the Attic tragedians. He went to\nPh\u00eageus, king of Ps\u00f4phis in Arcadia, whose daughter Arsino\u00ea he married,\ngiving as a nuptial present the necklace of Eriphyl\u00ea. Being however\nunable to remain there, in consequence of the unremitting persecutions\nof the maternal Erinnys, he sought shelter at the residence of king\nAchel\u00f4us, whose daughter Kallirho\u00ea he made his wife, and on whose soil\nhe obtained repose.[671] But Kallirho\u00ea would not be satisfied without\nthe possession of the necklace of Eriphyl\u00ea, and Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n went back to\nPs\u00f4phis to fetch it, where Ph\u00eageus and his sons slew him. He had left\ntwin sons, infants, with Kallirho\u00ea, who prayed fervently to Zeus that\nthey might be preternaturally invested with immediate manhood, in order\nto revenge the murder of their father. Her prayer was granted, and\nher sons Amphoterus and Akarnan, having instantaneously sprung up to\nmanhood, proceeded into Arcadia, slew the murderers of their father,\nand brought away the necklace of Eriphyl\u00ea, which they carried to\nDelphi.[672]\n\n  [671] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 5-6; Pausan. viii. 24, 4. These two\n  authors have preserved the story of the Akarnanians and the old\n  form of the legend, representing Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n as having found shelter\n  at the abode of the person or king Achel\u00f4us, and married his\n  daughter: Thucydid\u00eas omits the _personality_ of Achel\u00f4us, and\n  merely announces the wanderer as having settled on certain new\n  islands deposited by the river.\n\n  I may remark that this is a singularly happy adaptation of a\n  legend to an existing topographical fact. Generally speaking,\n  before any such adaptation can be rendered plausible, the legend\n  is of necessity much transformed; here it is taken exactly as it\n  stands, and still fits on with great precision.\n\n  Ephorus recounted the whole sequence of events as so much\n  political history, divesting it altogether of the legendary\n  character. Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n and Diom\u00ead\u00eas, after having taken Th\u00eabes with\n  the other Epigoni, jointly undertook an expedition into \u00c6t\u00f4lia\n  and Akarnania: they first punished the enemies of the old \u0152neus,\n  grandfather of Diom\u00ead\u00eas, and established the latter as king in\n  Kalyd\u00f4n: next they conquered Akarnania for Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n. Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n,\n  though invited by Agamemn\u00f4n to join in the Trojan war, would not\n  consent to do so (Ephor. ap. Strabo. vii. p. 326; x. p. 462).\n\n  [672] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 7; Pausan. viii. 24, 3-4. His remarks\n  upon the mischievous longing of Kallirho\u00ea for the necklace are\n  curious: he ushers them in by saying, that \u201cmany men, and still\n  more women, are given to fall into absurd desires,\u201d etc. He\n  recounts it with all the _bonne foi_ which belongs to the most\n  assured matter of fact.\n\n  A short allusion is in Ovid\u2019s Metamorphoses (ix. 412).\n\nEuripid\u00eas deviated still more widely from the ancient epic, by making\nAlkm\u00e6\u00f4n the husband of Mant\u00f4, daughter of Teiresias, and the father of\nAmphilochus. According to the Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs, Mant\u00f4 was consigned by\nthe victorious Epigoni as a special offering to the Delphian god; and\nAmphilochus was son of Amphiar\u00e4us, not son of Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n.[673] He was the\neponymous hero of the town called the Amphilochian Argos, in Akarnania,\non the shore of the Gulf of Ambrakia. Thucydid\u00eas tells us that he went\nthither on his return from the Trojan war, being dissatisfied with\nthe state of affairs which he found at the Peloponn\u00easian Argos.[674]\nThe Akarnanians were remarkable for the numerous prophets which they\nsupplied to the rest of Greece: their heroes were naturally drawn from\nthe great prophetic race of the Melampodids.\n\n  [673] Th\u00eaba\u00efd, Cy. Reliqu. p. 70, Leutsch; Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod.\n  i. 408. The following lines cited in Athen\u00e6us (vii. p. 317) are\n  supposed by Boeckh, with probable reason, to be taken from the\n  Cyclic Th\u00eaba\u00efs; a portion of the advice of Amphiar\u00e4us to his sons\n  at the time of setting out on his last expedition,\u2014\n\n    \u03a0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c7\u1fbd \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2,\n    \u03a4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03cc\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1fc6\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f35\u03ba\u03b7\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  There were two tragedies composed by Euripid\u00eas, under the\n  title of \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03a8\u03c9\u03c6\u1fd6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, and \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u039a\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\n  (Dindorf, Fragm. Eurip. p. 77).\n\n  [674] Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 7, 7; Thucyd. ii. 68.\n\nThus ends the legend of the two sieges of Th\u00eabes; the greatest event,\nexcept the siege of Troy, in the ancient epic; the greatest enterprise\nof war, between Greeks and Greeks, during the time of those who are\ncalled the Heroes.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\nLEGEND OF TROY.\n\n\nWe now arrive at the capital and culminating point of the Grecian\nepic,\u2014the two sieges and capture of Troy, with the destinies of the\ndispersed heroes, Trojan as well as Grecian, after the second and most\ncelebrated capture and destruction of the city.\n\nIt would require a large volume to convey any tolerable idea of\nthe vast extent and expansion of this interesting fable, first\nhandled by so many poets, epic, lyric and tragic, with their endless\nadditions, transformations and contradictions,\u2014then purged and\nrecast by historical inquirers, who under color of setting aside\nthe exaggerations of the poets, introduced a new vein of prosaic\ninvention,\u2014lastly, moralized and allegorized by philosophers. In the\npresent brief outline of the general field of Grecian legend, or of\nthat which the Greeks believed to be their antiquities, the Trojan\nwar can be regarded as only one among a large number of incidents\nupon which Hekat\u00e6us and Herodotus looked back as constituting their\nfore-time. Taken as a special legendary event, it is indeed of wider\nand larger interest than any other, but it is a mistake to single it\nout from the rest as if it rested upon a different and more trustworthy\nbasis. I must therefore confine myself to an abridged narrative of\nthe current and leading facts; and amidst the numerous contradictory\nstatements which are to be found respecting every one of them, I\nknow no better ground of preference than comparative antiquity,\nthough even the oldest tales which we possess\u2014those contained in the\nIliad\u2014evidently presuppose others of prior date.\n\nThe primitive ancestor of the Trojan line of kings is Dardanus, son of\nZeus, founder and eponymus of Dardania:[675] in the account of later\nauthors, Dardanus was called the son of Zeus by Elektra, daughter of\nAtlas, and was further said to have come from Samothrace, or from\nArcadia, or from Italy;[676] but of this Homer mentions nothing. The\nfirst Dardanian town founded by him was in a lofty position on the\ndescent of Mount Ida; for he was not yet strong enough to establish\nhimself on the plain. But his son Erichthonius, by the favor of\nZeus, became the wealthiest of mankind. His flocks and herds having\nmultiplied, he had in his pastures three thousand mares, the offspring\nof some of whom, by Boreas, produced horses of preternatural swiftness.\nTr\u00f4s, the son of Erichthonius, and the eponym of the Trojans, had three\nsons\u2014Ilus, Assaracus, and the beautiful Ganym\u00ead\u00eas, whom Zeus stole away\nto become his cup-bearer in Olympus, giving to his father Tr\u00f4s, as the\nprice of the youth, a team of immortal horses.[677]\n\n  [675] Iliad, xx. 215.\n\n  [676] Hellanik. Fragm. 129, Didot; Dionys. Hal. i. 50-61;\n  Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 12, 1; Schol. Iliad. xviii. 486; Varro, ap.\n  Servium ad Virgil. \u00c6neid. iii. 167. Kephal\u00f4n. Gergithius ap.\n  Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b2\u03b7.\n\n  [677] Iliad, v. 265; Hellanik. Fr. 146; Apollod. ii. 5, 9.\n\nFrom Ilus and Assaracus the Trojan and Dardanian lines diverge; the\nformer passing from Ilus to Laomed\u00f4n, Priam and Hect\u00f4r; the latter from\nAssaracus to Capys, Anchis\u00eas and \u00c6neas. Ilus founded in the plain of\nTroy the holy city of Ilium; Assaracus and his descendants remained\nsovereigns of Dardania.[678]\n\n  [678] Iliad, xx. 236.\n\nIt was under the proud Laomed\u00f4n, son of Ilus, that Poseid\u00f4n and Apollo\nunderwent, by command of Zeus, a temporary servitude; the former\nbuilding the walls of the town, the latter tending the flocks and\nherds. When their task was completed and the penal period had expired,\nthey claimed the stipulated reward; but Laomed\u00f4n angrily repudiated\ntheir demand, and even threatened to cut off their ears, to tie them\nhand and foot, and to sell them in some distant island as slaves.[679]\nHe was punished for this treachery by a sea-monster, whom Poseid\u00f4n\nsent to ravage his fields and to destroy his subjects. Laomed\u00f4n\npublicly offered the immortal horses given by Zeus to his father Tr\u00f4s,\nas a reward to any one who would destroy the monster. But an oracle\ndeclared that a virgin of noble blood must be surrendered to him, and\nthe lot fell upon Hesion\u00ea, daughter of Laomed\u00f4n himself. H\u00earakl\u00eas\narriving at this critical moment, killed the monster by the aid of a\nfort built for him by Ath\u00ean\u00ea and the Trojans,[680] so as to rescue\nboth the exposed maiden and the people; but Laomed\u00f4n, by a second act\nof perfidy, gave him mortal horses in place of the matchless animals\nwhich had been promised. Thus defrauded of his due, H\u00earakl\u00eas equipped\nsix ships, attacked and captured Troy and killed Laomed\u00f4n,[681] giving\nHesion\u00ea to his friend and auxiliary Telam\u00f4n, to whom she bore the\ncelebrated archer Teukros.[682] A painful sense of this expedition was\npreserved among the inhabitants of the historical town of Ilium, who\noffered no worship to H\u00earakl\u00eas.[683]\n\n  [679] Iliad, vii. 451; xxi. 456. Hesiod. ap. Schol. Lycophr. 393.\n\n  [680] Iliad, xx. 145; Dionys. Hal. i. 52.\n\n  [681] Iliad, v. 640. Menekl\u00eas (ap. Schol. Venet. _ad loc._)\n  affirmed that this expedition of H\u00earakl\u00eas was a fiction; but\n  Dik\u00e6archus gave, besides, other exploits of the hero in the same\n  neighborhood, at Th\u00eab\u00ea Hypoplaki\u00ea (Schol. Iliad, vi. 396).\n\n  [682] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 32-49. Compare Venet. Schol. ad Iliad. viii.\n  284.\n\n  [683] Strabo, xiii. p. 596.\n\nAmong all the sons of Laomed\u00f4n, Priam[684] was the only one who\nhad remonstrated against the refusal of the well-earned guerdon of\nH\u00earakl\u00eas; for which the hero recompensed him by placing him on the\nthrone. Many and distinguished were his sons and daughters, as well by\nhis wife Hekab\u00ea, daughter of Kisseus, as by other women.[685] Among the\nsons were Hect\u00f4r,[686] Paris, D\u00eaiphobus, Helenus, Tr\u00f4ilus, Polit\u00eas,\nPolyd\u00f4rus; among the daughters Laodik\u00ea, Kre\u00fcsa, Polyxena, and Kassandra.\n\n  [684] As Dardanus, Tr\u00f4s and Ilus are respectively eponyms of\n  Dardania, Troy and Ilium, so Priam is eponym of the acropolis\n  _Pergamum_. \u03a0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 is in the \u00c6olic dialect \u03a0\u03ad\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 (Hesychius):\n  upon which Ahrens remarks, \u201cC\u00e6terum ex hac \u00c6olic\u00e2 nominis form\u00e2\n  apparet, Priamum non minus arcis \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd eponymum esse, quam\n  Ilum urbis, Troem populi: \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1 enim a \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1 natum est, \u03b9\n  in \u03b3 mutato.\u201d (Ahrens, De Dialecto \u00c6olic\u00e2, 8, 7. p. 56: compare\n  _ibid._ 28, 8. p. 150, \u03c0\u03b5\u1fe4\u1fe5\u1fbd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9).\n\n  [685] Iliad, vi. 245; xxiv. 495.\n\n  [686] Hect\u00f4r was affirmed, both by Stesichorus and Ibykus, to be\n  the son of Apollo (Stesichorus, ap. Schol. Ven. ad Iliad. xxiv.\n  259; Ibyki Fragm. xiv. ed. Schneidewin): both Euphori\u00f4n (Fr. 125,\n  Meineke) and Alexander \u00c6t\u00f4lus follow the same idea. Stesichorus\n  further stated, that after the siege Apollo had carried Hekab\u00ea\n  away into Lykia to rescue her from captivity (Pausanias, x. 27,\n  1): according to Euripid\u00eas, Apollo had promised that she should\n  die in Troy (Troad. 427).\n\n  By Sapph\u00f4, Hect\u00f4r was given as a surname of Zeus, \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f1d\u03ba\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1\n  (Hesychius, v. \u1f1d\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2); a prince belonging to the regal family\n  of Chios, anterior to the Ionic settlement, as mentioned by the\n  Chian poet I\u00f4n (Pausan. vii. 3, 3), was so called.\n\nThe birth of Paris was preceded by formidable presages; for Hekab\u00ea\ndreamt that she was delivered of a firebrand, and Priam, on consulting\nthe soothsayers, was informed that the son about to be born would prove\nfatal to him. Accordingly he directed the child to be exposed on Mount\nIda; but the inauspicious kindness of the gods preserved him, and he\ngrew up amidst the flocks and herds, active and beautiful, fair of hair\nand symmetrical in person, and the special favorite of Aphrodit\u00ea.[687]\n\n  [687] Iliad, iii. 45-55; Schol. Iliad. iii. 325; Hygin. fab. 91;\n  Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 12, 5.\n\nIt was to this youth, in his solitary shepherd\u2019s walk on Mount Ida,\nthat the three goddesses H\u00ear\u00ea, Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and Aphrodit\u00ea were conducted,\nin order that he might determine the dispute respecting their\ncomparative beauty, which had arisen at the nuptials of P\u00ealeus and\nThetis,\u2014a dispute brought about in pursuance of the arrangement, and in\naccomplishment of the deep-laid designs, of Zeus. For Zeus, remarking\nwith pain the immoderate numbers of the then existing heroic race,\npitied the earth for the overwhelming burden which she was compelled\nto bear, and determined to lighten it by exciting a destructive\nand long-continued war.[688] Paris awarded the palm of beauty to\nAphrodit\u00ea, who promised him in recompense the possession of Helena,\nwife of the Spartan Menelaus,\u2014the daughter of Zeus and the fairest of\nliving women. At the instance of Aphrodit\u00ea, ships were built for him,\nand he embarked on the enterprise so fraught with eventual disaster to\nhis native city, in spite of the menacing prophecies of his brother\nHelenus, and the always neglected warnings of Kassandra.[689]\n\n  [688] This was the motive assigned to Zeus by the old epic poem,\n  the Cyprian Verses (Frag. 1. D\u00fcntz. p. 12; ap. Schol. ad Iliad.\n  i. 4):\u2014\n\n  \u1f29 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03a3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2\u00b7\n\n    \u1f2e\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c6\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 ...\n    ... \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f34\u03b7\u03c2.\n    \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f30\u03b4\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03c5\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\n    \u03a3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c6\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03bd,\n    \u1fec\u03b9\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bf,\n    \u1f4c\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd\u1f76 \u03a4\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u1fc3\n    \u1f2d\u03c1\u03c9\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae.\n\n  The same motive is touched upon by Eurip. Orest, 1635; Helen.\n  38; and seriously maintained, as it seems, by Chrysippus, ap.\n  Plutarch. Stoic. Rep. p. 1049: but the poets do not commonly go\n  back farther than the passion of Paris for Helen (Theognis, 1232;\n  Simonid. Amorg. Fragm. 6, 118).\n\n  The judgment of Paris was one of the scenes represented on the\n  ancient chest of Kypselus at Olympia (Pausan. v. 19, 1).\n\n  [689] Argument of the \u1f1c\u03c0\u03b7 \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 (ap. D\u00fcntzer, p. 10). These\n  warnings of Kassandra form the subject of the obscure and\n  affected poem of Lycophr\u00f4n.\n\nParis, on arriving at Sparta, was hospitably entertained by Menelaus\nas well as by Kast\u00f4r and Pollux, and was enabled to present the rich\ngifts which he had brought to Helen.[690] Menelaus then departed to\nKr\u00eate, leaving Helen to entertain his Trojan guest\u2014a favorable moment\nwhich was employed by Aphrodit\u00ea to bring about the intrigue and the\nelopement. Paris carried away with him both Helen and a large sum\nof money belonging to Menelaus\u2014made a prosperous voyage to Troy\u2014and\narrived there safely with his prize on the third day.[691]\n\n  [690] According to the Cyprian Verses, Helena was daughter of\n  Zeus by Nemesis, who had in vain tried to evade the connection\n  (Athen\u00e6. viii. 334). Hesiod (Schol. Pindar. Nem. x. 150)\n  represented her as daughter of Oceanus and T\u00eathys, an oceanic\n  nymph: Sapph\u00f4 (Fragm. 17, Schneidewin), Pausanias (i. 33, 7),\n  Apollod\u00f4rus (iii. 10, 7), and Isokrat\u00eas (Encom. Helen. v. ii. p.\n  366, Auger) reconcile the pretensions of L\u00eada and Nemesis to a\n  sort of joint maternity (see Heinrichsen, De Carminibus Cypriis,\n  p. 45-46).\n\n  [691] Herodot. ii. 117. He gives distinctly the assertion of\n  the Cyprian Verses, which contradicts the argument of the poem\n  as it appears in Proclus (Fragm. 1, 1), according to which\n  latter, Paris is driven out of his course by a storm and captures\n  the city of Sid\u00f4n. Homer (Iliad, vi. 293) seems however to\n  countenance the statement in the argument.\n\n  That Paris was guilty of robbery, as well as of the abduction of\n  Helen, is several times mentioned in the Iliad (iii. 144; vii.\n  350-363), also in the argument of the Cyprian Verses (see \u00c6schyl.\n  Agam. 534).\n\nMenelaus, informed by Iris in Kr\u00eate of the perfidious return made by\nParis for his hospitality, hastened home in grief and indignation\nto consult with his brother Agamemn\u00f4n, as well as with the venerable\nNest\u00f4r, on the means of avenging the outrage. They made known the\nevent to the Greek chiefs around them, among whom they found universal\nsympathy: Nest\u00f4r, Palam\u00ead\u00eas and others went round to solicit aid in\na contemplated attack of Troy, under the command of Agamemn\u00f4n, to\nwhom each chief promised both obedience and unwearied exertion until\nHelen should be recovered.[692] Ten years were spent in equipping the\nexpedition. The goddesses H\u00ear\u00ea and Ath\u00ean\u00ea, incensed at the preference\ngiven by Paris to Aphrodit\u00ea, and animated by steady attachment to\nArgos, Sparta and Myk\u00ean\u00e6, took an active part in the cause; and the\nhorses of H\u00ear\u00ea were fatigued with her repeated visits to the different\nparts of Greece.[693]\n\n  [692] The ancient epic (Schol. ad Il. ii. 286-339) does not\n  recognize the story of the numerous suitors of Helen, and\n  the oath by which Tyndareus bound them all before he made\n  the selection among them, that each should swear not only to\n  acquiesce, but even to aid in maintaining undisturbed possession\n  to the husband whom she should choose. This story seems to have\n  been first told by Stesichorus (see Fragm. 20. ed. Kleine;\n  Apollod. iii. 10, 8). Yet it was evidently one of the prominent\n  features of the current legend in the time of Thucydid\u00eas (i. 9;\n  Euripid. Iphig. Aul. 51-80; Soph. Ajax, 1100).\n\n  The exact spot in which Tyndareus exacted this oath from the\n  suitors, near Sparta, was pointed out even in the time of\n  Pausanias (iii. 20, 9).\n\n  [693] Iliad, iv. 27-55; xxiv. 765. Argument. Carm. Cypri. The\n  point is emphatically touched upon by Dio Chrysostom (Orat.\n  xi. p. 335-336) in his assault upon the old legend. Two years\u2019\n  preparation\u2014in Dictys Cret. i. 16.\n\nBy such efforts a force was at length assembled at Aulis[694] in\nB\u0153\u00f4tia, consisting of 1186 ships and more than 100,000 men,\u2014a force\noutnumbering by more than ten to one anything that the Trojans\nthemselves could oppose, and superior to the defenders of Troy even\nwith all her allies included.[695] It comprised heroes with their\nfollowers from the extreme points of Greece\u2014from the north-western\nportions of Thessaly under Mount Olympus, as well as the western\nislands of Dulichium and Ithaca, and the eastern islands of Kr\u00eate\nand Rhodes. Agamemn\u00f4n himself contributed 100 ships manned with the\nsubjects of his kingdom of Myk\u00ean\u00e6, besides furnishing 60 ships to the\nArcadians, who possessed none of their own. Menelaus brought with him\n60 ships, Nest\u00f4r from Pylus 90, Idomeneus from Kr\u00eate and Diom\u00ead\u00eas from\nArgos 80 each. Forty ships were manned by the Eleians, under four\ndifferent chiefs; the like number under Meg\u00eas from Dulichium and the\nEchinades, and under Thoas from Kalyd\u00f4n and the other \u00c6t\u00f4lian towns.\nOdysseus from Ithaca, and Ajax from Salamis, brought 12 ships each. The\nAbantes from Eub\u0153a, under Eleph\u00ean\u00f4r, filled 40 vessels; the B\u0153\u00f4tians,\nunder Penele\u00f4s and L\u00eaitus, 50; the inhabitants of Orchomenos and\nAspled\u00f4n, 30; the light-armed Locrians, under Ajax son of Oileus,[696]\n40; the Ph\u00f4kians as many. The Athenians, under Menestheus, a chief\ndistinguished for his skill in marshalling an army, mustered 50 ships;\nthe Myrmidons from Phthia and Hellas, under Achilles, assembled in\n50 ships; Protesilaus from Phylak\u00ea and Pyrasus, and Eurypylus from\nOrmenium, each came with 40 ships; Macha\u00f4n and Podaleirius, from\nTrikka, with 30; Adm\u00eatus, from Pher\u00e6 and the lake B\u0153b\u00eais, with 11;\nand Philokt\u00eat\u00eas from Melib\u0153a with 7: the Lapith\u00e6, under Polyp\u0153t\u00eas,\nson of Peirithous, filled 40 vessels; the \u00c6nianes and Perrh\u00e6bians,\nunder Guneus,[697] 22; and the Magn\u00eat\u00eas under Prothous, 40; these last\ntwo were from the northernmost parts of Thessaly, near the mountains\nP\u00ealion and Olympus. From Rhodes, under Tl\u00eapolemus, son of H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nappeared 9 ships; from Sym\u00ea under the comely but effeminate Nireus,\n3; from K\u00f4s, Krapathus and the neighboring islands, 30, under the\norders of Pheidippus and Antiphus, sons of Thessalus and grandsons of\nH\u00earakl\u00eas.[698]\n\n  [694] The Spartan king Agesilaus, when about to start from Greece\n  on his expedition into Asia Minor (396 B. C.) went to Aulis\n  personally, in order that he too might sacrifice on the spot\n  where Agamemn\u00f4n had sacrificed when he sailed for Troy (Xenoph.\n  Hellen. iii. 4, 4).\n\n  Skylax (c. 60) notices the \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd at Aulis, and nothing else: it\n  seems to have been like the adjoining Delium, a temple with a\n  small village grown up around it.\n\n  Aulis is recognized as the port from which the expedition\n  started, in the Hesiodic Works and Days (v. 650).\n\n  [695] Iliad, ii. 128. Uschold (Geschichte des Trojanischen\n  Kriegs, p. 9, Stutgart 1836) makes the total 135,000 men.\n\n  [696] The Hesiodic Catalogue notices Oileus, or Ileus, with a\n  singular etymology of his name (Fragm. 136, ed. Marktscheffel).\n\n  [697] \u0393\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 is the Heros Eponymus of the town of Gonnus in\n  Thessaly; the duplication of the consonant and shortening of the\n  vowel belong to the \u00c6olic dialect (Ahrens, De Dialect. \u00c6olic. 50,\n  4. p. 220).\n\n  [698] See the Catalogue in the second book of the Iliad. There\n  must probably have been a Catalogue of the Greeks also in\n  the Cyprian Verses; for a Catalogue of the allies of Troy is\n  specially noticed in the Argument of Proclus (p. 12. D\u00fcntzer).\n\n  Euripid\u00eas (Iphig. Aul. 165-300) devotes one of the songs of the\n  Chorus to a partial Catalogue of the chief heroes.\n\n  According to Dictys Cretensis, all the principal heroes engaged\n  in the expedition were kinsmen, all Pelopids (i. 14): they take\n  an oath not to lay down their arms until Helen shall have been\n  recovered, and they receive from Agamemn\u00f4n a large sum of gold.\n\nAmong this band of heroes were included the distinguished warriors\nAjax and Diom\u00ead\u00eas, and the sagacious Nest\u00f4r; while Agamemn\u00f4n himself,\nscarcely inferior to either of them in prowess, brought with him a high\nreputation for prudence in command. But the most marked and conspicuous\nof all were Achilles and Odysseus; the former a beautiful youth born of\na divine mother, swift in the race, of fierce temper and irresistible\nmight; the latter not less efficient as an ally from his eloquence,\nhis untiring endurance, his inexhaustible resources under difficulty,\nand the mixture of daring courage with deep-laid cunning which never\ndeserted him:[699] the blood of the arch-deceiver Sisyphus, through\nan illicit connection with his mother Antikleia, was said to flow in\nhis veins,[700] and he was especially patronized and protected by\nthe goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea. Odysseus, unwilling at first to take part in the\nexpedition, had even simulated insanity; but Palam\u00ead\u00eas, sent to Ithaca\nto invite him, tested the reality of his madness by placing in the\nfurrow where Odysseus was ploughing, his infant son Telemachus. Thus\ndetected, Odysseus could not refuse to join the Ach\u00e6an host, but the\nprophet Halithers\u00eas predicted to him that twenty years would elapse\nbefore he revisited his native land.[701] To Achilles the gods had\npromised the full effulgence of heroic glory before the walls of Troy;\nnor could the place be taken without both his co\u00f6peration and that of\nhis son after him. But they had forewarned him that this brilliant\ncareer would be rapidly brought to a close; and that if he desired a\nlong life, he must remain tranquil and inglorious in his native land.\nIn spite of the reluctance of his mother Thetis, he preferred few years\nwith bright renown, and joined the Ach\u00e6an host.[702] When Nest\u00f4r and\nOdysseus came to Phthia to invite him, both he and his intimate friend\nPatroclus eagerly obeyed the call.[703]\n\n  [699] For the character of Odysseus, Iliad, iii. 202-220; x. 247.\n  Odyss. xiii. 295.\n\n  The Philokt\u00eat\u00eas of Sophokl\u00eas carries out very justly the\n  character of the Homeric Odysseus (see v. 1035)\u2014more exactly than\n  the Ajax of the same poet depicts it.\n\n  [700] Sophokl. Philokt\u00eat. 417, and Schol.\u2014also Schol. ad Soph.\n  Ajac. 190.\n\n  [701] Homer, Odyss. xxiv. 115; \u00c6schyl. Agam. 841; Sophokl.\n  Philokt\u00eat. 1011, with the Schol. Argument of the Cypria in\n  Heinrichsen, De Carmin. Cypr. p. 23 (the sentence is left out in\n  D\u00fcntzer, p. 11).\n\n  A lost tragedy of Sophokl\u00eas, \u1f48\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u039c\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, handled this\n  subject.\n\n  Other Greek chiefs were not less reluctant than Odysseus to take\n  part in the expedition: see the tale of P\u0153mandrus, forming a\n  part of the temple-legend of the Achilleium at Tanagra in B\u0153\u00f4tia\n  (Plutarch, Qu\u00e6stion. Gr\u00e6c. p. 299).\n\n  [702] Iliad, i. 352; ix. 411.\n\n  [703] Iliad, xi. 782.\n\nAgamemn\u00f4n and his powerful host set sail from Aulis; but being\nignorant of the locality and the direction, they landed by mistake in\nTeuthrania, a part of Mysia near the river Ka\u00efkus, and began to ravage\nthe country under the persuasion that it was the neighborhood of Troy.\nTelephus, the king of the country,[704] opposed and repelled them, but\nwas ultimately defeated and severely wounded by Achilles. The Greeks\nnow, discovering their mistake, retired; but their fleet was dispersed\nby a storm and driven back to Greece. Achilles attacked and took\nSkyrus, and there married Deidamia, the daughter of Lycom\u00ead\u00eas.[705]\nTelephus, suffering from his wounds, was directed by the oracle to come\nto Greece and present himself to Achilles to be healed, by applying\nthe scrapings of the spear with which the wound had been given: thus\nrestored, he became the guide of the Greeks when they were prepared to\nrenew their expedition.[706]\n\n  [704] Telephus was the son of Aug\u00ea, daughter of king Aleus\n  of Tegea in Arcadia, by H\u00earakl\u00eas: respecting her romantic\n  adventures, see the previous chapter on Arcadian legends\u2014Strabo\u2019s\n  faith in the story (xii. p. 572).\n\n  The spot called the Harbor of the Ach\u00e6ans, near Gryneium, was\n  stated to be the place where Agamemn\u00f4n and the chiefs took\n  counsel whether they should attack Telephus or not (Skylax, c.\n  97; compare Strabo, xiv. p. 622).\n\n  [705] Iliad, xi. 664; Argum. Cypr. p. 11, D\u00fcntzer; Diktys Cret.\n  ii. 3-4.\n\n  [706] Euripid. Telephus, Frag. 26, Dindorf; Hygin. f. 101;\n  Diktys, ii. 10. Euripid\u00eas had treated the adventure of Telephus\n  in this lost tragedy: he gave the miraculous cure with the dust\n  of the spear, \u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1fe5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9. Diktys softens\n  down the prodigy: \u201cAchilles cum Machaone et Podalirio adhibeutes\n  curam vulneri,\u201d etc. Pliny (xxxiv. 15) gives to the rust of brass\n  or iron a place in the list of genuine remedies.\n\n  \u201cLonge omnino a Tiberi ad Caicum: quo in loco etiam Agamemn\u00f4n\n  errasset, nisi ducem Telephum invenisset\u201d (Cicero, Pro L. Flacco,\n  c. 29). The portions of the Trojan legend treated in the lost\n  epics and the tragedians, seem to have been just as familiar to\n  Cicero as those noticed in the Iliad.\n\n  Strabo pays comparatively little attention to any portion of the\n  Trojan war except what appears in Homer. He even goes so far as\n  to give a reason why the Amazons _did not_ come to the aid of\n  Priam: they were at enmity with him, because Priam had aided\n  the Phrygians against them (Iliad, iii. 188: in Strabo, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f38\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd must be a mistake for \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03a6\u03c1\u03c5\u03be\u03af\u03bd). Strabo can hardly have\n  read, and never alludes to, Arktinus; in whose poem the brave\n  and beautiful Penthesileia, at the head of her Amazons, forms a\n  marked epoch and incident of the war (Strabo, xii. 552).\n\nThe armament was again assembled at Aulis, but the goddess Artemis,\ndispleased with the boastful language of Agamemn\u00f4n, prolonged the\nduration of adverse winds, and the offending chief was compelled\nto appease her by the well-known sacrifice of his daughter\nIphigeneia.[707] They then proceeded to Tenedos, from whence Odysseus\nand Menelaus were despatched as envoys to Troy, to redemand Helen and\nthe stolen property. In spite of the prudent counsels of Anten\u00f4r,\nwho received the two Grecian chiefs with friendly hospitality, the\nTrojans rejected the demand, and the attack was resolved upon. It was\nforedoomed by the gods that the Greek who first landed should perish:\nProtesilaus was generous enough to put himself upon this forlorn hope,\nand accordingly fell by the hand of Hect\u00f4r.\n\n  [707] Nothing occurs in Homer respecting the sacrifice of\n  Iphigeneia (see Schol. Ven. ad Il. ix. 145).\n\nMeanwhile the Trojans had assembled a large body of allies from various\nparts of Asia Minor and Thrace: Dardanians under \u00c6neas, Lykians under\nSarped\u00f4n, Mysians, Karians, M\u00e6onians, Alizonians,[708] Phrygians,\nThracians, and P\u00e6onians.[709] But vain was the attempt to oppose\nthe landing of the Greeks: the Trojans were routed, and even the\ninvulnerable Cycnus,[710] son of Poseid\u00f4n, one of the great bulwarks of\nthe defence, was slain by Achilles. Having driven the Trojans within\ntheir walls, Achilles attacked and stormed Lyrn\u00eassus, P\u00eadasus, Lesbos\nand other places in the neighborhood, twelve towns on the sea-coast\nand eleven in the interior; he drove off the oxen of \u00c6neas and pursued\nthe hero himself, who narrowly escaped with his life: he surprised\nand killed the youthful Tr\u00f4ilus, son of Priam, and captured several\nof the other sons, whom he sold as prisoners into the islands of the\n\u00c6gean.[711] He acquired as his captive the fair Bris\u00eais, while Chrys\u00eais\nwas awarded to Agamemn\u00f4n: he was moreover eager to see the divine\nHelen, the prize and stimulus of this memorable struggle; and Aphrodit\u00ea\nand Thetis contrived to bring about an interview between them.[712]\n\n  [708] No portion of the Homeric Catalogue gave more trouble\n  to D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis and the other expositors than these\n  Alizonians (Strabo, xii. p. 549; xiii. p. 603): a fictitious\n  place called Alizonium, in the region of Ida, was got up to meet\n  the difficulty (\u03b5\u1f36\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03bb\u03b9\u03b6\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 ~\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd~ \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03bb\u03b9\u03b6\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, etc., Strabo, _l. c._).\n\n  [709] See the Catalogue of the Trojans (Iliad, ii. 815-877).\n\n  [710] Cycnus was said by later writers to be king of Kol\u00f4n\u00e6\n  in the Troad (Strabo, xiii. p. 589-603; Aristotel. Rhetoric.\n  ii. 23). \u00c6schylus introduced upon the Attic stage both Cycnus\n  and Memn\u00f4n in terrific equipments (Aristophan. Ran. 957. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd\n  \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u039a\u03cd\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f04\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039c\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2).\n  Compare Welcker, \u00c6schyl. Trilogie, p. 433.\n\n  [711] Iliad, xxiv. 752; Argument of the Cypria, pp. 11, 12,\n  D\u00fcntzer. These desultory exploits of Achilles furnished much\n  interesting romance to the later Greek poets (see Parth\u00eanius,\n  Narrat. 21). See the neat summary of the principal events of the\n  war in Quintus Smyrn. xiv. 125-140; Dio Chrysost. Or. xi. p.\n  338-342.\n\n  Tr\u00f4ilus is only once named in the Iliad (xxiv. 253); he was\n  mentioned also in the Cypria; but his youth, beauty, and untimely\n  end made him an object of great interest with the subsequent\n  poets. Sophokl\u00eas had a tragedy called _Tr\u00f4ilus_ (Welcker,\n  Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. i. p. 124); \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b1,\n  one of the Fragm. Even earlier than Sophokl\u00eas, his beauty was\n  celebrated by the tragedian Phrynichus (Athen\u00e6, xiii. p. 564;\n  Virgil, \u00c6neid, i. 474; Lycophr\u00f4n, 307).\n\n  [712] Argument. Cypr. p. 11, D\u00fcntz. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\n  \u1f08\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c4\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0398\u03ad\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2. A scene which would have been highly\n  interesting in the hands of Homer.\n\nAt this period of the war the Grecian army was deprived of Palam\u00ead\u00eas,\none of its ablest chiefs. Odysseus had not forgiven the artifice\nby which Palam\u00ead\u00eas had detected his simulated insanity, nor was he\nwithout jealousy of a rival clever and cunning in a degree equal, if\nnot superior, to himself; one who had enriched the Greeks with the\ninvention of letters, of dice for amusement, of night-watches, as\nwell as with other useful suggestions. According to the old Cyprian\nepic, Palam\u00ead\u00eas was drowned while fishing, by the hands of Odysseus\nand Diom\u00ead\u00eas.[713] Neither in the Iliad nor the Odyssey does the name\nof Palam\u00ead\u00eas occur: the lofty position which Odysseus occupies in both\nthose poems\u2014noticed with some degree of displeasure even by Pindar,\nwho described Palam\u00ead\u00eas as the wiser man of the two\u2014is sufficient to\nexplain the omission.[714] But in the more advanced period of the\nGreek mind, when intellectual superiority came to acquire a higher\nplace in the public esteem as compared with military prowess, the\ncharacter of Palam\u00ead\u00eas, combined with his unhappy fate, rendered him\none of the most interesting personages in the Trojan legend. \u00c6schylus,\nSophokl\u00eas and Euripid\u00eas each consecrated to him a special tragedy; but\nthe mode of his death as described in the old epic was not suitable\nto Athenian ideas, and accordingly he was represented as having been\nfalsely accused of treason by Odysseus, who caused gold to be buried\nin his tent, and persuaded Agamemn\u00f4n and the Grecian chiefs that\nPalam\u00ead\u00eas had received it from the Trojans.[715] He thus forfeited his\nlife, a victim to the calumny of Odysseus and to the delusion of the\nleading Greeks. In the last speech made by the philosopher Socrat\u00eas to\nhis Athenian judges, he alludes with solemnity and fellow-feeling to\nthe unjust condemnation of Palam\u00ead\u00eas, as analogous to that which he\nhimself was about to suffer, and his companions seem to have dwelt with\nsatisfaction on the comparison. Palam\u00ead\u00eas passed for an instance of\nthe slanderous enmity and misfortune which so often wait upon superior\ngenius.[716]\n\n  [713] Argum. Cypr. 1. 1.; Pausan. x. 31. The concluding portion\n  of the Cypria seems to have passed under the title of \u03a0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\n  (see Fragm. 16 and 18. p. 15, D\u00fcntz.; Welcker, Der Episch. Cycl.\n  p. 459; Eustath. ad Hom. Odyss. i. 107).\n\n  The allusion of Quintus Smyrn\u00e6us (v. 197) seems rather to point\n  to the story in the Cypria, which Strabo (viii. p. 368) appears\n  not to have read.\n\n  [714] Pindar, Nem. vii. 21; Aristid\u00eas, Orat. 46. p. 260.\n\n  [715] See the Fragments of the three tragedians,\n  \u03a0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03ae\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2\u2014Aristeid\u00eas, Or. xlvi. p. 260; Philostrat. Heroic. x.;\n  Hygin. fab. 95-105. Discourses for and against Palam\u00ead\u00eas, one\n  by Alkidamas, and one under the name of Gorgias, are printed in\n  Reiske\u2019s Orr. Gr\u00e6c. t. viii. pp. 64, 102; Virgil, \u00c6neid, ii. 82,\n  with the ample commentary of Servius\u2014Poly\u00e6n. Pro\u0153. p. 6.\n\n  Welcker (Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. v. i. p. 130, vol. ii. p. 500)\n  has evolved with ingenuity the remaining fragments of the lost\n  tragedies.\n\n  According to Diktys, Odysseus and Diom\u00ead\u00eas prevail upon Palam\u00ead\u00eas\n  to be let down into a deep well, and then cast stones upon him\n  (ii. 15).\n\n  Xenoph\u00f4n (De Venatione, c. 1) evidently recognizes the story\n  in the Cypria, that Odysseus and Diom\u00ead\u00eas caused the death of\n  Palam\u00ead\u00eas; but he _cannot_ believe that two such exemplary men\n  were really guilty of so iniquitous an act\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\n  \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  One of the eminences near Napoli still bears the name of\n  _Palamidhi_.\n\n  [716] Plato, Apolog. Socr. c. 32; Xenoph. Apol. Socr. 26; Memor.\n  iv. 2, 33; Liban. pro Socr. p. 242, ed. Morell.; Lucian, Dial.\n  Mort 20.\n\nIn these expeditions the Grecian army consumed nine years, during which\nthe subdued Trojans dared not give battle without their walls for fear\nof Achilles. Ten years was the fixed epical duration of the siege of\nTroy, just as five years was the duration of the siege of Kamikus by\nthe Kr\u00eatan armament which came to avenge the death of Min\u00f4s:[717] ten\nyears of preparation, ten years of siege, and ten years of wandering\nfor Odysseus, were periods suited to the rough chronological dashes of\nthe ancient epic, and suggesting no doubts nor difficulties with the\noriginal hearers. But it was otherwise when the same events came to be\ncontemplated by the historicizing Greeks, who could not be satisfied\nwithout either finding or inventing satisfactory bonds of coherence\nbetween the separate events. Thucydid\u00eas tells us that the Greeks\nwere less numerous than the poets have represented, and that being\nmoreover very poor, they were unable to procure adequate and constant\nprovisions: hence they were compelled to disperse their army, and to\nemploy a part of it in cultivating the Chersonese,\u2014a part in marauding\nexpeditions over the neighborhood. Could the whole army have been\nemployed against Troy at once (he says), the siege would have been much\nmore speedily and easily concluded.[718] If the great historian could\npermit himself thus to amend the legend in so many points, we might\nhave imagined that the simpler course would have been to include the\nduration of the siege among the list of poetical exaggerations, and to\naffirm that the real siege had lasted only one year instead of ten.\nBut it seems that the ten years\u2019 duration was so capital a feature in\nthe ancient tale, that no critic ventured to meddle with it.\n\n  [717] Herodot. vii. 170. Ten years is a proper mythical period\n  for a great war to last: the war between the Olympic gods and the\n  Titan gods lasts ten years (Hesiod, Theogon. 636). Compare \u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3\n  \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 (Hom. Odyss. xvi. 17).\n\n  [718] Thucyd. i. 11.\n\nA period of comparative intermission however was now at hand for the\nTrojans. The gods brought about the memorable fit of anger of Achilles,\nunder the influence of which he refused to put on his armor, and kept\nhis Myrmidons in camp. According to the Cypria, this was the behest of\nZeus, who had compassion on the Trojans: according to the Iliad, Apollo\nwas the originating cause,[719] from anxiety to avenge the injury which\nhis priest Chrys\u00eas had endured from Agamemn\u00f4n. For a considerable\ntime, the combats of the Greeks against Troy were conducted without\ntheir best warrior, and severe indeed was the humiliation which they\nunderwent in consequence. How the remaining Grecian chiefs vainly\nstrove to make amends for his absence\u2014how Hect\u00f4r and the Trojans\ndefeated and drove them to their ships\u2014how the actual blaze of the\ndestroying flame, applied by Hect\u00f4r to the ship of Protesilaus, roused\nup the anxious and sympathizing Patroclus, and extorted a reluctant\nconsent from Achilles, to allow his friend and his followers to go\nforth and avert the last extremity of ruin\u2014how Achilles, when Patroclus\nhad been killed by Hect\u00f4r, forgetting his anger in grief for the death\nof his friend, re\u00ebntered the fight, drove the Trojans within their\nwalls with immense slaughter, and satiated his revenge both upon the\nliving and the dead Hect\u00f4r\u2014all these events have been chronicled,\ntogether with those divine dispensations on which most of them are made\nto depend, in the immortal verse of the Iliad.\n\n  [719] Homer, Iliad, i. 21.\n\nHomer breaks off with the burial of Hect\u00f4r, whose body has just been\nransomed by the disconsolate Priam; while the lost poem of Arktinus,\nentitled the \u00c6thiopis, so far as we can judge from the argument still\nremaining of it, handled only the subsequent events of the siege. The\npoem of Quintus Smyrn\u00e6us, composed about the fourth century of the\nChristian \u00e6ra, seems in its first books to coincide with the \u00c6thiopis,\nin the subsequent books partly with the Ilias Minor of Lesch\u00eas.[720]\n\n  [720] Tychsen, Commentat. de Quinto Smyrn\u00e6o, \u00a7 iii. c. 5-7. The\n  \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 was treated both by Arktinus and by Lesch\u00eas: with\n  the latter it formed a part of the Ilias Minor.\n\nThe Trojans, dismayed by the death of Hect\u00f4r, were again animated\nwith hope by the appearance of the warlike and beautiful queen of the\nAmazons, Penthesileia, daughter of Ar\u00eas, hitherto invincible in the\nfield, who came to their assistance from Thrace at the head of a band\nof her countrywomen. She again led the besieged without the walls\nto encounter the Greeks in the open field; and under her auspices\nthe latter were at first driven back, until she too was slain by the\ninvincible arm of Achilles. The victor, on taking off the helmet of\nhis fair enemy as she lay on the ground, was profoundly affected and\ncaptivated by her charms, for which he was scornfully taunted by\nThersit\u00eas: exasperated by this rash insult, he killed Thersit\u00eas on\nthe spot with a blow of his fist. A violent dispute among the Grecian\nchiefs was the result, for Diom\u00ead\u00eas, the kinsman of Thersit\u00eas, warmly\nresented the proceeding; and Achilles was obliged to go to Lesbus,\nwhere he was purified from the act of homicide by Odysseus.[721]\n\n  [721] Argument of the \u00c6thiopis, p. 16, D\u00fcntzer; Quint. Smyrn.\n  lib. i.; Diktys Cret. iv. 2-3.\n\n  In the Philokt\u00eat\u00eas, of Sophokl\u00eas, Thersit\u00eas survives Achilles\n  (Soph. Phil. 358-445).\n\nNext arrived Memn\u00f4n, son of Tith\u00f4nus and E\u00f4s, the most stately of\nliving men, with a powerful band of black \u00c6thiopians, to the assistance\nof Troy. Sallying forth against the Greeks, he made great havoc among\nthem: the brave and popular Antilochus perished by his hand, a victim\nto filial devotion in defence of Nest\u00f4r.[722] Achilles at length\nattacked him, and for a long time the combat was doubtful between\nthem: the prowess of Achilles and the supplication of Thetis with Zeus\nfinally prevailed; whilst E\u00f4s obtained for her vanquished son the\nconsoling gift of immortality. His tomb, however,[723] was shown near\nthe Propontis, within a few miles of the mouth of the river \u00c6s\u00eapus,\nand was visited annually by the birds called Memnonides, who swept it\nand bedewed it with water from the stream. So the traveller Pausanias\nwas told, even in the second century after the Christian \u00e6ra, by the\nHellespontine Greeks.\n\n  [722] Odyss. xi. 522. \u039a\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f34\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u039c\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\n  \u03b4\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd: see also Odyss. iv. 187; Pindar, Pyth. vi. 31. \u00c6schylus\n  (ap. Strabo. xv. p. 728) conceives Memn\u00f4n as a Persian starting\n  from Susa.\n\n  Kt\u00easias gave in his history full details respecting the\n  expedition of Memn\u00f4n, sent by the king of Assyria to the relief\n  of his dependent, Priam of Troy; all this was said to be recorded\n  in the royal archives. The Egyptians affirmed that Memn\u00f4n had\n  come from Egypt (Diod\u00f4r. ii. 22; compare iv. 77): the two stories\n  are blended together in Pausanias, x. 31, 2. The Phrygians\n  pointed out the road along which he had marched.\n\n  [723] Argum. \u00c6th. _ut sup._; Quint. Smyrn. ii. 396-550; Pausan.\n  x. 31, 1. Pindar, in praising Achilles, dwells much on his\n  triumphs over Hect\u00f4r, T\u00ealephus, Memn\u00f4n, and Cycnus, but never\n  notices Penthesileia (Olymp. ii. 90; Nem. iii. 60; vi. 52. Isthm.\n  v. 43).\n\n  \u00c6schylus, in the \u03a8\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1, introduced Thetis and E\u00f4s, each in\n  an attitude of supplication for her son, and Zeus weighing in his\n  golden scales the souls of Achilles and Memn\u00f4n (Schol. Ven. ad\n  Iliad, viii. 70: Pollux, iv. 130; Plutarch, De Audiend. Poet. p.\n  17). In the combat between Achilles and Memn\u00f4n, represented on\n  the chest of Kypselus at Olympia, Thetis and E\u00f4s were given each\n  as aiding her son (Pausan. v. 19, 1).\n\nBut the fate of Achilles himself was now at hand. After routing the\nTrojans and chasing them into the town, he was slain near the Sk\u00e6an\ngate by an arrow from the quiver of Paris, directed under the unerring\nauspices of Apollo.[724] The greatest efforts were made by the Trojans\nto possess themselves of the body, which was however rescued and borne\noff to the Grecian camp by the valor of Ajax and Odysseus. Bitter\nwas the grief of Thetis for the loss of her son: she came into the\ncamp with the Muses and the N\u00eareids to mourn over him; and when a\nmagnificent funeral-pile had been prepared by the Greeks to burn him\nwith every mark of honor, she stole away the body and conveyed it to\na renewed and immortal life in the island of Leuk\u00ea in the Euxine Sea.\nAccording to some accounts he was there blest with the nuptials and\ncompany of Helen.[725]\n\n  [724] Iliad, xxii. 360; Sophokl. Philokt. 334; Virgil, \u00c6neid, vi.\n  56.\n\n  [725] Argum. \u00c6thiop. _ut sup._; Quint. Smyrn. 151-583; Homer,\n  Odyss. v. 310; Ovid, Metam. xiii. 284; Eurip. Androm. 1262;\n  Pausan. iii. 19, 13. According to Diktys (iv. 11), Paris and\n  Deiphobus entrap Achilles by the promise of an interview with\n  Polyxena and kill him.\n\n  A minute and curious description of the island Leuk\u00ea, or \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2, is given in Arrian (Periplus, Pont. Euxin. p. 21; ap.\n  Geogr. Min. t. 1).\n\n  The heroic or divine empire of Achilles in Scythia was recognized\n  by Alk\u00e6us the poet (Alk\u00e6i Fragm. Schneidew. Fr. 46), \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f43\u03c2\n  \u03b3\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03a3\u03ba\u03c5\u03b8\u03b9\u03ba\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2. Eustathius (ad Dionys. Peri\u00eag\u00eat. 307) gives\n  the story of his having followed Iphigeneia thither: compare\n  Antonin. Liberal. 27.\n\n  Ibykus represented Achilles as having espoused M\u00eadea in the\n  Elysian Field (Idyk. Fragm. 18. Schneidewin). Simonid\u00eas followed\n  this story (ap. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 815).\n\nThetis celebrated splendid funeral games in honor of her son, and\noffered the unrivalled panoply, which H\u00eaph\u00e6stos had forged and wrought\nfor him, as a prize to the most distinguished warrior in the Grecian\narmy. Odysseus and Ajax became rivals for the distinction, when\nAth\u00ean\u00ea, together with some Trojan prisoners, who were asked from which\nof the two their country had sustained greatest injury, decided in\nfavor of the former. The gallant Ajax lost his senses with grief and\nhumiliation: in a fit of phrenzy he slew some sheep, mistaking them for\nthe men who had wronged him, and then fell upon his own sword.[726]\n\n  [726] Argument of \u00c6thiopis and Ilias Minor, and Fragm. 2 of the\n  latter, pp. 17, 18, D\u00fcntz.; Quint. Smyrn. v. 120-482; Hom. Odyss.\n  xi. 550; Pindar, Nem. vii. 26. The Ajax of Sophokl\u00eas, and the\n  contending speeches between Ajax and Ulysses in the beginning of\n  the thirteenth book of Ovid\u2019s Metamorphoses, are too well known\n  to need special reference.\n\n  The suicide of Ajax seems to have been described in detail in\n  the \u00c6thiopis: compare Pindar. Isthm. iii. 51, and the Scholia\n  _ad loc._, which show the attention paid by Pindar to the minute\n  circumstances of the old epic. See Fragm. 2 of the \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2\n  of Arktinus, in D\u00fcntz. p. 22, which would seem more properly to\n  belong to the \u00c6thiopis. Diktys relates the suicide of Ajax, as a\n  consequence of his unsuccessful competition with Odysseus, not\n  about the arms of Achilles, but about the Palladium, after the\n  taking of the city (v. 14).\n\n  There were, however, many different accounts of the manner in\n  which Ajax had died, some of which are enumerated in the argument\n  to the drama of Sophokl\u00eas. Ajax is never wounded in the Iliad:\n  \u00c6schylus made him invulnerable except under the armpits (see\n  Schol. ad Sophok. Ajac. 833); the Trojans pelted him with mud\u2014\u03b5\u1f34\n  \u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fc3 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03ae\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 (Schol. Iliad. xiv. 404).\n\nOdysseus now learnt from Helenus son of Priam, whom he had captured\nin an ambuscade,[727] that Troy could not be taken unless both\nPhilokt\u00eat\u00eas, and Neoptolemus, son of Achilles, could be prevailed\nupon to join the besiegers. The former, having been stung in the\nfoot by a serpent, and becoming insupportable to the Greeks from the\nstench of his wound, had been left at Lemnus in the commencement\nof the expedition, and had spent ten years[728] in misery on that\ndesolate island; but he still possessed the peerless bow and arrows\nof H\u00earakl\u00eas, which were said to be essential to the capture of Troy.\nDiom\u00ead\u00eas fetched Philokt\u00eat\u00eas from Lemnus to the Grecian camp, where\nhe was healed by the skill of Macha\u00f4n,[729] and took an active part\nagainst the Trojans\u2014engaging in single combat with Paris, and killing\nhim with one of the H\u00earakleian arrows. The Trojans were allowed to\ncarry away for burial the body of this prince, the fatal cause of\nall their sufferings; but not until it had been mangled by the hand\nof Menelaus.[730] Odysseus went to the island of Skyrus to invite\nNeoptolemus to the army. The untried but impetuous youth gladly obeyed\nthe call, and received from Odysseus his father\u2019s armor, while on the\nother hand, Eurypylus, son of T\u00ealephus, came from Mysia as auxiliary\nto the Trojans and rendered to them valuable service\u2014turning the tide\nof fortune for a time against the Greeks, and killing some of their\nbravest chiefs, amongst whom was numbered Penele\u00f4s, and the unrivalled\nleech Macha\u00f4n.[731] The exploits of Neoptolemus were numerous, worthy\nof the glory of his race and the renown of his father. He encountered\nand slew Eurypylus, together with numbers of the Mysian warriors: he\nrouted the Trojans and drove them within their walls, from whence they\nnever again emerged to give battle: nor was he less distinguished for\nhis good sense and persuasive diction, than for forward energy in the\nfield.[732]\n\n  [727] Soph. Philokt. 604.\n\n  [728] Soph. Philokt. 703. \u1f6e \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f70, \u1f4b\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f30\u03bd\u03bf\u03c7\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f2d\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, etc.\n\n  In the narrative of Diktys (ii. 47), Philokt\u00eat\u00eas returns from\n  Lemnus to Troy much earlier in the war before the death of\n  Achilles, and without any assigned cause.\n\n  [729] According to Sophokl\u00eas, H\u00earakl\u00eas sends Askl\u00eapius to Troy to\n  heal Philokt\u00eat\u00eas (Soph. Philokt. 1415).\n\n  The subject of Philokt\u00eat\u00eas formed the subject of a tragedy both\n  by \u00c6schylus and by Euripid\u00eas (both lost) as well as by Sophokl\u00eas.\n\n  [730] Argument. Iliad. Minor. D\u00fcntz. _l. c._ \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03a4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03b5\u03c2. See\n  Quint. Smyrn. x. 240: he differs here in many respects from the\n  arguments of the old poems as given by Proclus, both as to the\n  incidents and as to their order in time (Diktys, iv. 20). The\n  wounded Paris flees to \u0152n\u00f4n\u00ea, whom he had deserted in order\n  to follow Helen, and entreats her to cure him by her skill in\n  simples: she refuses, and permits him to die; she is afterwards\n  stung with remorse, and hangs herself (Quint. Smyrn. x. 285-331;\n  Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 12, 6; Con\u00f4n. Narrat. 23; see Bachet de Meziriac,\n  Comment. sur les Ep\u00eetres d\u2019Ovide, t. i. p. 456). The story of\n  \u0152n\u00f4n\u00ea is as old as Hellanikus and Kephal\u00f4n of Gergis (see Hellan.\n  Fragm. 126, Didot).\n\n  [731] To mark the way in which these legendary events pervaded\n  and became embodied in the local worship, I may mention the\n  received practice in the great temple of Askl\u00eapius (father of\n  Macha\u00f4n) at Pergamus, even in the time of Pausanias. T\u00ealephus,\n  father of Eurypylus, was the local hero and mythical king of\n  Teuthrania, in which Pergamus was situated. In the hymns there\n  sung, the poem and the invocation were addressed to T\u00ealephus; but\n  nothing was said in them about Eurypylus, nor was it permitted\n  even to mention his name in the temple,\u2014\u201cthey knew him to be\n  the slayer of Macha\u00f4n:\u201d \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a4\u03b7\u03bb\u03ad\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f55\u03bc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd,\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u1fb4\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03cd\u03c0\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bd\u03b1\u1ff7\n  \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u039c\u03b1\u03c7\u03ac\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  (Pausan. iii. 26, 7).\n\n  The combination of these qualities in other Homeric chiefs is\n  noted in a subsequent chapter of his work, ch. xx. vol. ii.\n\n  [732] Argument. Iliad. Minor. p. 17, D\u00fcntzer. Homer, Odyss. xi.\n  510-520. Pausan. iii. 26, 7. Quint. Smyrn. vii. 553; viii. 201.\n\nTroy however was still impregnable so long as the Palladium, a statue\ngiven by Zeus himself to Dardanus, remained in the citadel; and great\ncare had been taken by the Trojans not only to conceal this valuable\npresent, but to construct other statues so like it as to mislead any\nintruding robber. Nevertheless the enterprising Odysseus, having\ndisguised his person with miserable clothing and self-inflicted\ninjuries, found means to penetrate into the city and to convey the\nPalladium by stealth away: Helen alone recognized him; but she was now\nanxious to return to Greece, and even assisted Odysseus in concerting\nmeans for the capture of the town.[733]\n\n  [733] Argument. Iliad. Minor, p. 18, D\u00fcntz.; _Arktinus_ ap.\n  Dionys. Hal. i. 69; Homer, Odyss. iv. 246; Quint. Smyrn. x. 354:\n  Virgil, \u00c6neid, ii. 164, and the 9th Excursus of Heyne on that\n  book.\n\n  Compare with this legend about the Palladium, the Roman legend\n  respecting the Ancylia (Ovid, Fasti, III. 381).\n\nTo accomplish this object, one final stratagem was resorted to. By\nthe hands of Epeius of Panopeus, and at the suggestion of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, a\ncapacious hollow wooden horse was constructed, capable of containing\none hundred men: the _\u00e9lite_ of the Grecian heroes, Neoptolemus,\nOdysseus, Menelaus and others, concealed themselves in the inside\nof it, and the entire Grecian army sailed away to Tenedos, burning\ntheir tents and pretending to have abandoned the siege. The Trojans,\noverjoyed to find themselves free, issued from the city and\ncontemplated with astonishment the fabric which their enemies had left\nbehind: they long doubted what should be done with it; and the anxious\nheroes from within heard the surrounding consultations, as well as\nthe voice of Helen when she pronounced their names and counterfeited\nthe accents of their wives.[734] Many of the Trojans were anxious to\ndedicate it to the gods in the city as a token of gratitude for their\ndeliverance; but the more cautious spirits inculcated distrust of an\nenemy\u2019s legacy; and Laoco\u00f4n, the priest of Poseid\u00f4n, manifested his\naversion by striking the side of the horse with his spear. The sound\nrevealed that the horse was hollow, but the Trojans heeded not this\nwarning of possible fraud; and the unfortunate Laoco\u00f4n, a victim to\nhis own sagacity and patriotism, miserably perished before the eyes of\nhis countrymen, together with one of his sons,\u2014two serpents being sent\nexpressly by the gods out of the sea to destroy him. By this terrific\nspectacle, together with the perfidious counsels of Sinon, a traitor\nwhom the Greeks had left behind for the special purpose of giving false\ninformation, the Trojans were induced to make a breach in their own\nwalls, and to drag the fatal fabric with triumph and exultation into\ntheir city.[735]\n\n  [734] Odyss. iv. 275; Virgil, \u00c6neid, ii. 14; Heyne, Excurs. 3. ad\n  \u00c6neid. ii. Stesichorus, in his \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, gave the number of\n  heroes in the wooden horse as one hundred (Stesichor. Fragm. 26,\n  ed. Kleine; compare Athen\u00e6. xiii. p. 610).\n\n  [735] Odyss. viii. 492; xi. 522. Argument of the \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2\n  of Arktinus, p. 21. D\u00fcntz. Hydin. f. 108-135. Bacchylid\u00eas and\n  Euphorion ap. Servium ad Virgil. \u00c6neid. ii. 201.\n\n  Both Sinon and Laoco\u00f4n came originally from the old epic poem of\n  Arktinus, though Virgil may perhaps have immediately borrowed\n  both them, and other matters in his second book, from a poem\n  passing under the name of Pisander (see Macrob. Satur. v. 2;\n  Heyne, Excurs. 1. ad \u00c6n. ii.; Welcker, Der Episch. Kyklus, v.\n  97). We cannot give credit either to Arktinus or Pisander for the\n  masterly specimen of oratory which is put into the mouth of Sinon\n  in the \u00c6neid.\n\n  In Quintus Smyrn\u00e6us (xii. 366), the Trojans torture and mutilate\n  Sinon to extort from him the truth: his endurance, sustained\n  by the inspiration of H\u00ear\u00ea, is proof against the extremity of\n  suffering, and he adheres to his false tale. This is probably an\n  incident of the old epic, though the delicate taste of Virgil,\n  and his sympathy with the Trojans, has induced him to omit it.\n  Euphorion ascribed the proceedings of Sinon to Odysseus: he also\n  gave a different cause for the death of Laoco\u00f4n (Fr. 33-36. p.\n  55, ed. D\u00fcntz., in the Fragments of Epic Poets after Alexander\n  the Great). Sinon is \u1f10\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f48\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 in Pausan. x. 27, 1.\n\nThe destruction of Troy, according to the decree of the gods, was now\nirrevocably sealed. While the Trojans indulged in a night of riotous\nfestivity, Sinon kindled the fire-signal to the Greeks at Tenedos,\nloosening the bolts of the wooden horse, from out of which the enclosed\nheroes descended. The city, assailed both from within and from without,\nwas thoroughly sacked and destroyed, with the slaughter or captivity of\nthe larger portion of its heroes as well as its people. The venerable\nPriam perished by the hand of Neoptolemus, having in vain sought\nshelter at the domestic altar of Zeus Herkeios; but his son Deiphobus,\nwho since the death of Paris had become the husband of Helen, defended\nhis house desperately against Odysseus and Menelaus, and sold his life\ndearly. After he was slain, his body was fearfully mutilated by the\nlatter.[736]\n\n  [736] Odyss. viii. 515; Argument of Arktinas, _ut sup._; Euripid.\n  Hecub. 903; Virg. \u00c6n. vi. 497; Quint. Smyrn. xiii. 35-229;\n  Lesch\u00eas ap. Pausan. x. 27, 2; Diktys, v. 12. Ibykus and Simonid\u00eas\n  also represented Deiphobus as the \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 (Schol. Hom.\n  Iliad. xiii. 517).\n\n  The night-battle in the interior of Troy was described with all\n  its fearful details both by Lesch\u00eas and Arktinus: the \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 of the latter seems to have been a separate poem, that of\n  the former constituted a portion of the Ilias Minor (see Welcker,\n  Der Epische Kyklus, p. 215): the \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 by the lyric poets\n  Sakadas and Stesichorus probably added many new incidents.\n  Polygn\u00f4tus had painted a succession of the various calamitous\n  scenes, drawn from the poem of Lesch\u00eas, on the walls of the\n  lesch\u00ea at Delphi, with the name written over each figure (Pausan.\n  x. 25-26).\n\n  Hellanikus fixed the precise day of the month on which the\n  capture took place (Hellan. Fr. 143-144), the twelfth day of\n  Thargeli\u00f4n.\n\nThus was Troy utterly destroyed\u2014the city, the altars and temples,[737]\nand the population. \u00c6neas and Anten\u00f4r were permitted to escape, with\ntheir families, having been always more favorably regarded by the\nGreeks than the remaining Trojans. According to one version of the\nstory, they had betrayed the city to the Greeks: a panther\u2019s skin\nhad been hung over the door of Anten\u00f4r\u2019s house as a signal for the\nvictorious besiegers to spare it in the general plunder.[738] In the\ndistribution of the principal captives, Astyanax, the infant son of\nHect\u00f4r, was cast from the top of the wall and killed, by Odysseus or\nNeoptolemus: Polyxena, the daughter of Priam, was immolated on the tomb\nof Achilles, in compliance with a requisition made by the shade of\nthe deceased hero to his countrymen;[739] while her sister Kassandra\nwas presented as a prize to Agamemn\u00f4n. She had sought sanctuary at\nthe altar of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, where Ajax, the son of Oileus, making a guilty\nattempt to seize her, had drawn both upon himself and upon the army the\nserious wrath of the goddess, insomuch that the Greeks could hardly be\nrestrained from stoning him to death.[740] Andromach\u00ea and Helenus were\nboth given to Neoptolemus, who, according to the Ilias Minor, carried\naway also \u00c6neas as his captive.[741]\n\n  [737] \u00c6schyl. Agamemn. 527.\u2014\n\n    \u0392\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03ca\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1,\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n  [738] This symbol of treachery also figured in the picture of\n  Polygn\u00f4tus. A different story appears in Schol. Iliad. iii. 206.\n\n  [739] Euripid. Hecub. 38-114, and Troad. 716; Lesch\u00eas ap. Pausan.\n  x. 25, 9; Virgil, \u00c6neid, iii. 322, and Servius _ad loc._\n\n  A romantic tale is found in Diktys respecting the passion of\n  Achilles for Polyxena (iii. 2).\n\n  [740] Odyss. xi. 422. Arktinus, Argum. p. 21, D\u00fcntz. Theognis,\n  1232. Pausan. i. 15, 2; x. 26, 3; 31, 1. As an expiation of\n  this sin of their national hero, the Lokrians sent to Ilium\n  periodically some of their maidens, to do menial service in the\n  temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea (Plutarch. Ser. Numin. Vindict. p. 557, with the\n  citation from Euphorion or Kallimachus, D\u00fcntzer, Epicc. Vet. p.\n  118).\n\n  [741] Lesch\u00eas, Fr. 7, D\u00fcntz.; ap. Schol. Lycophr. 1263. Compare\n  Schol. ad. 1232, for the respectful recollection of Andromach\u00ea,\n  among the traditions of the Molossian kings, as their heroic\n  mother, and Strabo, xiii. p. 594.\n\nHelen gladly resumed her union with Menelaus: she accompanied him\nback to Sparta, and lived with him there many years in comfort and\ndignity,[742] passing afterwards to a happy immortality in the Elysian\nfields. She was worshipped as a goddess with her brothers the Dioskuri\nand her husband, having her temple, statue and altar at Therapn\u00e6 and\nelsewhere, and various examples of her miraculous interventions were\ncited among the Greeks.[743] The lyric poet Stesichorus had ventured\nto denounce her, conjointly with her sister Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, in a tone\nof rude and plain-spoken severity, resembling that of Euripid\u00eas\nand Lycophr\u00f4n afterwards, but strikingly opposite to the delicacy\nand respect with which she is always handled by Homer, who never\nadmits reproaches against her except from her own lips.[744] He was\nsmitten with blindness, and made sensible of his impiety; but having\nrepented and composed a special poem formally retracting the calumny,\nwas permitted to recover his sight. In his poem of recantation (the\nfamous palinode now unfortunately lost) he pointedly contradicted the\nHomeric narrative, affirming that Helen had never been to Troy at\nall, and that the Trojans had carried thither nothing but her image\nor _eid\u00f4lon_.[745] It is, probably, to the excited religious feelings\nof Stesichorus that we owe the first idea of this glaring deviation\nfrom the old legend, which could never have been recommended by any\nconsiderations of poetical interest.\n\n  [742] Such is the story of the old epic (see Odyss. iv. 260,\n  and the fourth book generally; Argument of Ilias Minor, p. 20.\n  D\u00fcntz.). Polygn\u00f4tus, in the paintings above alluded to, followed\n  the same tale (Pausan. x. 25, 3).\n\n  The anger of the Greeks against Helen, and the statement that\n  Menelaus after the capture of Troy approached her with revengeful\n  purposes, but was so mollified by her surpassing beauty as\n  to cast away his uplifted sword, belongs to the age of the\n  tragedians (\u00c6schyl. Agamem. 685-1455: Eurip. Androm. 600-629;\n  Helen. 75-120; Troad. 890-1057; compare also the fine lines in\n  the \u00c6neid, ii. 567-588).\n\n  [743] See the description in Herodot. vi. 61, of the prayers\n  offered to her, and of the miracle which she wrought, to remove\n  the repulsive ugliness of a little Spartan girl of high family.\n  Compare also Pindar, Olymp. iii. 2, and the Scholia at the\n  beginning of the ode; Eurip. Helen. 1662, and Orest. 1652-1706;\n  Isokrat. Encom. Helen. ii. p. 368, Auger; Dio Chrysost. Or. xi.\n  p. 311. \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9; Theodect\u00eas ap. Aristot.\n  Pol. i. 2, 19. \u0398\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f14\u03ba\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1fe5\u03b9\u03b6\u03c9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  [744] Euripid. Troad. 982 _seq._; Lycophr\u00f4n ap. Steph. Byz. v.\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c2; Stesichorus ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 239; Fragm. 9 and 10\n  of the \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, Schneidewin:\u2014\n\n    \u039f\u1f55\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03a4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1fe5\u03ad\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f20\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03b4\u03ce\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\n    \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03a4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\n    \u0394\u03b9\u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 ...\n\n  Further\n\n    ... \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f11\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5, etc.\n\n  He had probably contrasted her with other females carried away by\n  force.\n\n  Stesichorus also affirmed that Iphigeneia was the daughter\n  of Helen, by Th\u00easeus, born at Argos before her marriage with\n  Menelaus and made over to Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra: this tale was perpetuated\n  by the temple of Eileithyia at Argos, which the Argeians affirmed\n  to have been erected by Helen (Pausan. ii. 22, 7). The ages\n  ascribed by Hellanikus and other logographers (Hellan. Fr. 74)\n  to Th\u00easeus and Helen\u2014he fifty years of age and she a child of\n  seven\u2014when he carried her off to Aphidn\u00e6, can never have been the\n  original form of any poetical legend: these ages were probably\n  imagined in order to make the mythical chronology run smoothly;\n  for Th\u00easeus belongs to the generation before the Trojan war. But\n  we ought always to recollect that Helen never grows old (\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1\n  \u03c6\u03ac\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03bc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f00\u03b3\u03ae\u03c1\u03c9\u2014Quint. Smyrn. x. 312), and that her chronology\n  consists only with an immortal being. Servius observes (ad \u00c6neid.\n  ii. 601)\u2014\u201cHelenam _immortalem_ fuisse indicat tempus. Nam constat\n  fratres ejus cum Argonautis fuisse. Argonautarum filii cum\n  Thebanis (Thebano Eteoclis et Polynicis bello) dimicaverunt. Item\n  illorum filii contra Trojam bella gesserunt. Ergo, si immortalis\n  Helena non fuisset, tot sine dubio seculis durare non posset.\u201d So\n  Xenophon, after enumerating many heroes of different ages, all\n  pupils of Cheir\u00f4n, says that the life of Cheir\u00f4n suffices for\n  all, he being brother of Zeus (De Venatione, c. 1).\n\n  The daughters of Tyndareus are Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra, Helen, and Timandra,\n  all open to the charge advanced by Stesichorus: see about\n  Timandra, wife of the Tegeate Echemus, the new fragment of the\n  Hesiodic Catalogue, recently restored by Geel (G\u00f6ttling, Pref.\n  Hesiod. p. lxi.).\n\n  It is curious to read, in Bayle\u2019s article _H\u00e9l\u00e8ne_, his critical\n  discussion of the adventures ascribed to her\u2014as if they were\n  genuine matter of history, more or less correctly reported.\n\n  [745] Plato, Republic. ix. p. 587. c. 10. \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2\n  \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03c9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03a3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a4\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u1fc3, \u1f00\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2.\n\n  Isokrat. Encom. Helen. t. ii. p. 370, Auger; Plato, Ph\u00e6dr. c. 44.\n  p. 243-244; Max. Tyr. Diss. xi. p. 320, Davis; Con\u00f4n, Narr. 18;\n  Dio Chrysost. Or. xi. p. 323. \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03a3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f60\u03b4\u1fc7 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 ~\u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u1f21 \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5~.\n  Horace, Od. i. 17, Epod. xvii. 42.\u2014\n\n    \u201cInfamis Helen\u00e6 Castor offensus vice,\n    Fraterque magni Castoris, victi prece,\n    Adempta vati reddidere lumina.\u201d\n\n  Pausan. iii. 19, 5. Virgil, surveying the war from the point\n  of view of the Trojans, had no motive to look upon Helen with\n  particular tenderness: Deiphobus imputes to her the basest\n  treachery (\u00c6neid, vi. 511. \u201c_scelus exitiale Lac\u00e6n\u00e6_;\u201d compare\n  ii. 567).\n\nOther versions were afterwards started, forming a sort of compromise\nbetween Homer and Stesichorus, admitting that Helen had never really\nbeen at Troy, without altogether denying her elopement. Such is the\nstory of her having been detained in Egypt during the whole term of the\nsiege. Paris, on his departure from Sparta, had been driven thither by\nstorms, and the Egyptian king Pr\u00f4teus, hearing of the grievous wrong\nwhich he had committed towards Menelaus, had sent him away from the\ncountry with severe menaces, detaining Helen until her lawful husband\nshould come to seek her. When the Greeks reclaimed Helen from Troy, the\nTrojans assured them solemnly, that she neither was, nor ever had been,\nin the town; but the Greeks, treating this allegation as fraudulent,\nprosecuted the siege until their ultimate success confirmed the\ncorrectness of the statement, nor did Menelaus recover Helen until, on\nhis return from Troy, he visited Egypt.[746] Such was the story told by\nthe Egyptian priests to Herodotus, and it appeared satisfactory to his\nhistoricizing mind. \u201cFor if Helen had really been at Troy (he argues)\nshe would certainly have been given up, even had she been mistress of\nPriam himself instead of Paris: the Trojan king, with all his family\nand all his subjects, would never knowingly have incurred utter and\nirretrievable destruction for the purpose of retaining her: their\nmisfortune was, that while they did not possess, and therefore could\nnot restore her, they yet found it impossible to convince the Greeks\nthat such was the fact.\u201d Assuming the historical character of the war\nof Troy, the remark of Herodotus admits of no reply; nor can we greatly\nwonder that he acquiesced in the tale of Helen\u2019s Egyptian detention, as\na substitute for the \u201cincredible insanity\u201d which the genuine legend\nimputes to Priam and the Trojans. Pausanias, upon the same ground\nand by the same mode of reasoning, pronounces that the Trojan horse\nmust have been in point of fact a battering-engine, because to admit\nthe literal narrative would be to impute utter childishness to the\ndefenders of the city. And Mr. Payne Knight rejects Helen altogether as\nthe real cause of the Trojan war, though she may have been the pretext\nof it; for he thinks that neither the Greeks nor the Trojans could have\nbeen so mad and silly as to endure calamities of such magnitude \u201cfor\none little woman.\u201d[747] Mr. Knight suggests various political causes as\nsubstitutes; these might deserve consideration, either if any evidence\ncould be produced to countenance them, or if the subject on which they\nare brought to bear could be shown to belong to the domain of history.\n\n  [746] Herodot. ii. 120. \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f41\n  \u03a0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, etc. The passage is\n  too long to cite, but is highly curious: not the least remarkable\n  part is the religious coloring which he gives to the new version\n  of the story which he is adopting,\u2014\u201cthe Trojans, though they\n  had not got Helen, yet could not persuade the Greeks that this\n  was the fact; for it was the divine will that they should be\n  destroyed root and branch, in order to make it plain to mankind\n  that upon great crimes the gods inflict great punishments.\u201d\n\n  Dio Chrysostom (Or. xi. p. 333) reasons in the same way as\n  Herodotus against the credibility of the received narrative. On\n  the other hand, Isokrat\u00eas, in extolling Helen, dwells on the\n  calamities of the Trojan war as a test of the peerless value\n  of the prize (Encom. Hel. p. 360, Aug.): in the view of Pindar\n  (Olymp. xiii. 56), as well as in that of Hesiod (Opp. Di. 165),\n  Helen is the one prize contended for.\n\n  Euripid\u00eas, in his tragedy of Helen, recognizes the detention of\n  Helen in Egypt and the presence of her \u03b5\u1f34\u03b4\u03c9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd at Troy, but he\n  follows Stesichorus in denying her elopement altogether,\u2014Herm\u00eas\n  had carried her to Egypt in a cloud (Helen. 35-45, 706): compare\n  Von Hoff, De Mytho Helen\u00e6 Euripide\u00e6, cap. 2. p. 35 (Leyden, 1843).\n\n  [747] Pausan. i. 23, 8; Payne Knight, Prolegg. ad Homer. c. 53.\n  Euphorion construed the wooden horse into a Grecian ship called\n  \u1f3d\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, \u201c_The Horse_\u201d (Euphorion, Fragm. 34. ap. D\u00fcntzer, Fragm.\n  Epicc. Gr\u00e6c. p. 55).\n\n  See Thucyd. i. 12; vi. 2.\n\nThe return of the Grecian chiefs from Troy furnished matter to the\nancient epic hardly less copious than the siege itself, and the more\nsusceptible of indefinite diversity, inasmuch as those who had before\nacted in concert were now dispersed and isolated. Moreover the stormy\nvoyages and compulsory wanderings of the heroes exactly fell in with\nthe common aspirations after an heroic founder, and enabled even the\nmost remote Hellenic settlers to connect the origin of their town with\nthis prominent event of their ante-historical and semi-divine world.\nAnd an absence of ten years afforded room for the supposition of many\ndomestic changes in their native abode, and many family misfortunes and\nmisdeeds during the interval. One of these heroic \u201cReturns,\u201d that of\nOdysseus, has been immortalized by the verse of Homer. The hero, after\na series of long-protracted suffering and expatriation, inflicted on\nhim by the anger of Poseid\u00f4n, at last reaches his native island, but\nfinds his wife beset, his youthful son insulted, and his substance\nplundered, by a troop of insolent suitors; he is forced to appear as\na wretched beggar, and to endure in his own person their scornful\ntreatment; but finally, by the interference of Ath\u00ean\u00ea coming in aid of\nhis own courage and stratagem, he is enabled to overwhelm his enemies,\nto resume his family position, and to recover his property. The return\nof several other Grecian chiefs was the subject of an epic poem by\nHagias, which is now lost, but of which a brief abstract or argument\nstill remains: there were in antiquity various other poems of similar\ntitle and analogous matter.[748]\n\n  [748] Suidas, v. \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. W\u00fcllner, De Cyclo Epico, p. 93. Also a\n  poem \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 (Athen\u00e6. vii. p. 281).\n\nAs usual with the ancient epic, the multiplied sufferings of this\nback-voyage are traced to divine wrath, justly provoked by the sins of\nthe Greeks; who, in the fierce exultation of a victory purchased by so\nmany hardships, had neither respected nor even[749] spared the altars\nof the gods in Troy; and Ath\u00ean\u00ea, who had been their most zealous ally\nduring the siege, was so incensed by their final recklessness, more\nespecially by the outrage of Ajax, son of O\u00efleus, that she actively\nharassed and embittered their return, in spite of every effort to\nappease her. The chiefs began to quarrel among themselves; their\nformal assembly became a scene of drunkenness; even Agamemn\u00f4n and\nMenelaus lost their fraternal harmony, and each man acted on his own\nseparate resolution.[750] Nevertheless, according to the Odyssey,\nNest\u00f4r, Diom\u00ead\u00eas, Neoptolemus, Idomeneus and Philokt\u00eat\u00eas reached\nhome speedily and safely: Agamemn\u00f4n also arrived in Peloponn\u00easus, to\nperish by the hand of a treacherous wife; but Menelaus was condemned\nto long wanderings and to the severest privations in Egypt, Cyprus and\nelsewhere, before he could set foot in his native land. The Lokrian\nAjax perished on the Gyr\u00e6an rock.[751] Though exposed to a terrible\nstorm, he had already reached this place of safety, when he indulged\nin the rash boast of having escaped in defiance of the gods: no sooner\ndid Poseid\u00f4n hear this language, than he struck with his trident the\nrock which Ajax was grasping and precipitated both into the sea.[752]\nKalchas the soothsayer, together with Leonteus and Polyp\u0153t\u00eas, proceeded\nby land from Troy to Koloph\u00f4n.[753]\n\n  [749] Upon this the turn of fortune in Grecian affairs depends\n  (\u00c6schyl. Agamemn. 338; Odyss. iii. 130; Eurip. Troad. 69-95).\n\n  [750] Odyss. iii. 130-161; \u00c6schyl. Agamemn. 650-662.\n\n  [751] Odyss. iii. 188-196; iv. 5-87. The Egyptian city of\n  Kanopus, at the mouth of the Nile, was believed to have taken\n  its name from the pilot of Menelaus, who had died and was buried\n  there (Strabo, xvii. p. 801; Tacit. Ann. ii. 60). \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03ca\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, so called after Menelaus (Dio Chrysost. xi p. 361).\n\n  [752] Odyss. iv. 500. The epic \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 of Hagias placed this\n  adventure of Ajax on the rocks of Kaphareus, a southern\n  promontory of Eub\u0153a (Argum. \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, p. 23, D\u00fcntzer). Deceptive\n  lights were kindled on the dangerous rocks by Nauplius, the\n  father of Palam\u00ead\u00eas, in revenge for the death of his son\n  (Sophokl\u00eas, \u039d\u03b1\u03cd\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03c5\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2, a lost tragedy; Hygin. f. 116;\n  Senec. Agamemn. 567).\n\n  [753] Argument. \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 _ut sup._ There were monuments of Kalchas\n  near Sipontum in Italy also (Strabo, vi. p. 284), as well as at\n  Selg\u00ea in Pisidia (Strabo, xii. p. 570).\n\nIn respect however to these and other Grecian heroes, tales were\ntold different from those in the Odyssey, assigning to them a long\nexpatriation and a distant home. Nest\u00f4r went to Italy, where he\nfounded Metapontum, Pisa and H\u00earakleia:[754] Philokt\u00eat\u00eas[755] also\nwent to Italy, founded Petilia and Krimisa, and sent settlers to\nEgesta in Sicily. Neoptolemus, under the advice of Thetis, marched\nby land across Thrace, met with Odysseus, who had come by sea, at\nMaroneia, and then pursued his journey to Epirus, where he became\nking of the Molossians.[756] Idomeneus came to Italy, and founded\nUria in the Salentine peninsula. Diom\u00ead\u00eas, after wandering far and\nwide, went along the Italian coast into the innermost Adriatic gulf,\nand finally settled in Daunia, founding the cities of Argyrippa,\nBeneventum, Atria and Diom\u00eadeia: by the favor of Ath\u00ean\u00ea he became\nimmortal, and was worshipped as a god in many different places.[757]\nThe Lokrian followers of Ajax founded the Epizephyrian Lokri on\nthe southernmost corner of Italy,[758] besides another settlement\nin Libya. I have spoken in another place of the compulsory exile of\nTeukros, who, besides founding the city of Salamis in Cyprus, is said\nto have established some settlements in the Iberian peninsula.[759]\nMenestheus the Athenian did the like, and also founded both El\u00e6a in\nMysia and Skylletium in Italy.[760] The Arcadian chief Agapen\u00f4r founded\nPaphus in Cyprus.[761] Epeius, of Panopeus in Ph\u00f4kis, the constructor\nof the Trojan horse with the aid of the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea, settled at\nLagaria near Sybaris on the coast of Italy; and the very tools which\nhe had employed in that remarkable fabric were shown down to a late\ndate in the temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea at Metapontum.[762] Temples, altars and\ntowns were also pointed out in Asia Minor, in Samos and in Kr\u00eate, the\nfoundation of Agamemn\u00f4n or of his followers.[763] The inhabitants of\nthe Grecian town of Skion\u00ea, in the Thracian peninsula called Pall\u00ean\u00ea\nor Pell\u00ean\u00ea, accounted themselves the offspring of the Pell\u00eanians from\nAch\u00e6a in Peloponn\u00easus, who had served under Agamemn\u00f4n before Troy,\nand who on their return from the siege had been driven on the spot\nby a storm and there settled.[764] The Pamphylians, on the southern\ncoast of Asia Minor, deduced their origin from the wanderings of\nAmphilochus and Kalchas after the siege of Troy: the inhabitants of the\nAmphilochian Argos on the Gulf of Ambrakia revered the same Amphilochus\nas their founder.[765] The Orchomenians under Ialmenus, on quitting\nthe conquered city, wandered or were driven to the eastern extremity\nof the Euxine Sea; and the barbarous Ach\u00e6ans under Mount Caucasus\nwere supposed to have derived their first establishment from this\nsource.[766] Merion\u00eas with his Kr\u00eatan followers settled at Engyion in\nSicily, along with the preceding Kr\u00eatans who had remained there after\nthe invasion of Min\u00f4s. The Elyminians in Sicily also were composed\nof Trojans and Greeks separately driven to the spot, who, forgetting\ntheir previous differences, united in the joint settlements of Eryx\nand Egesta.[767] We hear of Podaleirius both in Italy and on the coast\nof Karia;[768] of Akamas son of Th\u00easeus, at Amphipolis in Thrace, at\nSoli in Cyprus, and at Synnada in Phrygia;[769] of Guneus, Prothous\nand Eurypylus, in Kr\u00eate as well as in Libya.[770] The obscure poem of\nLycophr\u00f4n enumerates many of these dispersed and expatriated heroes,\nwhose conquest of Troy was indeed a Kadmeian victory (according to\nthe proverbial phrase of the Greeks), wherein the sufferings of the\nvictor were little inferior to those of the vanquished.[771] It was\nparticularly among the Italian Greeks, where they were worshipped with\nvery special solemnity, that their presence as wanderers from Troy was\nreported and believed.[772]\n\n  [754] Strabo, v. p. 222; vi. p. 264. Vellei. Paterc. i. 1;\n  Servius ad \u00c6n. x. 179. He had built a temple to Ath\u00ean\u00ea in the\n  island of Ke\u00f4s (Strabo, x. p. 487).\n\n  [755] Strabo, vi. pp. 254, 272; Virgil, \u00c6n. iii. 401, and Servius\n  _ad loc._; Lycophr\u00f4n, 912.\n\n  Both the tomb of Philokt\u00eat\u00eas and the arrows of H\u00earakl\u00eas which\n  he had used against Troy, were for a long time shown at Thurium\n  (Justin, xx. 1).\n\n  [756] Argument. \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, p. 23, D\u00fcntz.; Pindar, Nem. iv. 51.\n  According to Pindar, however, Neoptolemus comes from Troy by sea,\n  misses the island of Skyrus, and sails round to the Epeirotic\n  Ephyra (Nem. vii. 37).\n\n  [757] Pindar, Nem. x. 7, with the Scholia. Strabo, iii. p. 150;\n  v. p. 214-215; vi, p. 284. Stephan. Byz. \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03b1, \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1.\n  Aristotle recognizes him as buried in the Diomedean islands in\n  the Adriatic (Anthol. Gr. Brunck. i. p. 178).\n\n  The identical tripod which had been gained by Diom\u00ead\u00eas, as victor\n  in the chariot-race at the funeral games of Patroclus, was shown\n  at Delphi in the time of Phanias, attested by an inscription,\n  as well as the dagger which had been worn by Helika\u00f4n, son of\n  Anten\u00f4r (Athen\u00e6. vi. p. 232).\n\n  [758] Virgil, \u00c6neid, iii. 399.; xi. 265; and Servius, _ibid._\n  Ajax, the son of O\u00efleus, was worshipped there as a hero (Con\u00f4n,\n  Narr. 18).\n\n  [759] Strabo, iii. p. 257; Isokrat\u00eas, Evagor. Encom. p. 192;\n  Justin, xliv. 3. Ajax, the son of Teukros, established a temple\n  of Zeus, and an hereditary priesthood always held by his\n  descendants (who mostly bore the name of Ajax or Teukros), at\n  Olb\u00ea in Kilikia (Strabo, xiv. p. 672). Teukros carried with him\n  his Trojan captives to Cyprus (Athen\u00e6. vi. p. 256).\n\n  [760] Strabo, iii. p. 140-150; vi. p. 261; xiii. p. 622. See the\n  epitaphs on Teukros and Agapen\u00f4r by Aristotle (Antholog. Gr. ed.\n  Brunck. i. p. 179-180).\n\n  [761] Strabo, xiv. p. 683; Pausan. viii. 5, 2.\n\n  [762] Strabo, vi. p. 263; Justin, xx. 2; Aristot. Mirab. Ausc.\n  c. 108. Also the epigram of the Rhodian Simmias called \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03cd\u03c2\n  (Antholog. Gr. Brunck. i. p. 210).\n\n  [763] Vellei. Patercul. i. 1. Stephan. Byz. v. \u039b\u03ac\u03bc\u03c0\u03b7. Strabo,\n  xiii. p. 605; xiv p. 639. Theopompus (Fragm. III, Didot)\n  recounted that Agamemn\u00f4n and his followers had possessed\n  themselves of the larger portion of Cyprus.\n\n  [764] Thucydid. iv. 120.\n\n  [765] Herodot. vii. 91; Thucyd. ii. 68. According to the old\n  elegiac poet Kallinos, Kalchas himself had died at Klarus near\n  Koloph\u00f4n after his march from Troy, but Mopsus, his rival in the\n  prophetic function, had conducted his followers into Pamphylia\n  and Kilikia (Strabo, xii. p. 570; xiv.p. 668). The oracle of\n  Amphilochus at Mallus in Kilikia bore the highest character for\n  exactness and truth-telling in the time of Pausanias, \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6. (Paus. i. 34, 2). Another story\n  recognized Leonteus and Polyp\u00e6t\u00eas as the founders of Aspendus in\n  Kilikia (Eustath. ad Iliad. ii. 138).\n\n  [766] Strabo, ix. p. 416.\n\n  [767] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 79; Thucyd. vi. 2.\n\n  [768] Stephan, Byz. v. \u03a3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bd\u03b1; Lycophr\u00f4n, 1047.\n\n  [769] \u00c6schines, De Fals\u00e2 Legat. c. 14; Strabo, xiv. p. 683;\n  Stephan. Byz. v. \u03a3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b4\u03b1.\n\n  [770] Lycophr\u00f4n, 877-902, with Scholia; Apollod\u00f4r. Fragm. p.\n  386, Heyne. There is also a long enumeration of these returning\n  wanderers and founders of new settlements in Solinus (Polyhist.\n  c. 2).\n\n  [771] Strabo, iii. p. 150.\n\n  [772] Aristot. Mirabil. Auscult. 79, 106, 107, 109, 111.\n\nI pass over the numerous other tales which circulated among the\nancients, illustrating the ubiquity of the Grecian and Trojan heroes as\nwell as that of the Argonauts,\u2014one of the most striking features in the\nHellenic legendary world.[773] Amongst them all, the most interesting,\nindividually, is Odysseus, whose romantic adventures in fabulous\nplaces and among fabulous persons have been made familiarly known by\nHomer. The goddesses Kalypso and Circ\u00ea; the semi-divine mariners of\nPh\u00e6acia, whose ships are endowed with consciousness and obey without\na steersman; the one-eyed Cycl\u00f4pes, the gigantic L\u00e6strygones, and\nthe wind-ruler \u00c6olus; the Sirens who ensnare by their song, as the\nLotophagi fascinate by their food\u2014all these pictures formed integral\nand interesting portions of the old epic. Homer leaves Odysseus\nre\u00ebstablished in his house and family; but so marked a personage could\nnever be permitted to remain in the tameness of domestic life: the\nepic poem called the Telegonia ascribed to him a subsequent series of\nadventures. After the suitors had been buried by their relatives, he\noffered sacrifice to the Nymphs, and then went to Elis to inspect his\nherds of cattle there pasturing: the Eleian Polyxenus welcomed him\nhospitably, and made him a present of a bowl: Odysseus then returned\nto Ithaka, and fulfilled the rites and sacrifices prescribed to him by\nTeiresias in his visit to the under-world. This obligation discharged,\nhe went to the country of the Thesprotians, and there married the\nqueen Kallidik\u00ea: he headed the Thesprotians in a war against the\nBrygians, the latter being conducted by Ar\u00eas himself, who fiercely\nassailed Odysseus; but the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea stood by him, and he was\nenabled to make head against Ar\u00eas until Apollo came and parted them.\nOdysseus then returned to Ithaka, leaving the Thesprotian kingdom to\nPolyp\u0153t\u00eas, his son by Kallidik\u00ea. Telegonus, his son by Circ\u00ea, coming to\nIthaka in search of his father, ravaged the island and killed Odysseus\nwithout knowing who he was. Bitter repentance overtook the son for\nhis undesigned parricide: at his prayer and by the intervention of\nhis mother Circ\u00ea, both Penelop\u00ea and T\u00ealemachus were made immortal:\nTelegonus married Penelop\u00ea, and T\u00ealemachus married Circ\u00ea.[774]\n\n  [773] Strabo, i. p. 48. After dwelling emphatically on the long\n  voyages of Dionysus, H\u00earakl\u00eas, Jas\u00f4n, Odysseus, and Menelaus,\n  he says, \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 ~\u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd~,\n  \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9; \u03a3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\n  \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u1ff3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u00b7 \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03bb\u1fc4\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f21\u03c4\u03c4\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 ~\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9~ \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 ~\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd~,\n  \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f45\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c3\u03cc\u03b3\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n  [774] The Telegonia, composed by Eugamm\u00f4n of Kyr\u00ean\u00ea, is lost, but\n  the Argument of it has been preserved by Proclus (p. 25, D\u00fcntzer;\n  Dictys, vi. 15).\n\n  Pausanias quotes a statement from the poem called _Thespr\u00f4tis_,\n  respecting a son of Odysseus and Penelop\u00ea, called Ptoliporthus,\n  born after his return from Troy (viii. 12, 3). Nitzsch (Hist.\n  Homer. p. 97) as well as Lobeck seem to imagine that this is the\n  same poem as the Telegonia, under another title.\n\n  Aristotle notices an oracle of Odysseus among the Eurytanes, a\n  branch of the \u00c6t\u00f4lian nation: there were also places in Epirus\n  which boasted of Odysseus as their founder (Schol. ad Lycophr\u00f4n.\n  800; Stephan. Byz. v. \u0392\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1; Etymolog. Mag. \u1f08\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2;\n  Plutarch, Qu\u00e6st. Gr. c. 14).\n\nWe see by this poem that Odysseus was represented as the mythical\nancestor of the Thesprotian kings, just as Neoptolemus was of the\nMolossian.\n\nIt has already been mentioned that Anten\u00f4r and \u00c6neas stand\ndistinguished from the other Trojans by a dissatisfaction with Priam\nand a sympathy with the Greeks, which is by Sophokl\u00eas and others\nconstrued as treacherous collusion,[775]\u2014a suspicion indirectly\nglanced, though emphatically repelled, by the \u00c6neas of Virgil.[776]\nIn the old epic of Arktinus, next in age to the Iliad and Odyssey,\n\u00c6neas abandons Troy and retires to Mount Ida, in terror at the\nmiraculous death of Laoco\u00f4n, before the entry of the Greeks into the\ntown and the last night-battle: yet Lesch\u00eas, in another of the ancient\nepic poems, represented him as having been carried away captive by\nNeoptolemus.[777] In a remarkable passage of the Iliad, Poseid\u00f4n\ndescribes the family of Priam as having incurred the hatred of Zeus,\nand predicts that \u00c6neas and his descendants shall reign over the\nTrojans: the race of Dardanus, beloved by Zeus more than all his other\nsons, would thus be preserved, since \u00c6neas belonged to it. Accordingly,\nwhen \u00c6neas is in imminent peril from the hands of Achilles, Poseid\u00f4n\nspecially interferes to rescue him, and even the implacable miso-Trojan\ngoddess H\u00ear\u00ea assents to the proceeding.[778] These passages have\nbeen construed by various able critics to refer to a family of\nphilo-Hellenic or semi-Hellenic \u00c6nead\u00e6, known even in the time of the\nearly singers of the Iliad as masters of some territory in or near the\nTroad, and professing to be descended from, as well as worshipping,\n\u00c6neas. In the town of Sk\u00eapsis, situated in the mountainous range of\nIda, about thirty miles eastward of Ilium, there existed two noble and\npriestly families who professed to be descended, the one from Hect\u00f4r,\nthe other from \u00c6neas. The Sk\u00eapsian critic D\u00eam\u00eatrius (in whose time both\nthese families were still to be found) informs us that Skamandrius son\nof Hect\u00f4r, and Ascanius son of \u00c6neas, were the archegets or heroic\nfounders of his native city, which had been originally situated on\none of the highest ranges of Ida, and was subsequently transferred\nby them to the less lofty spot on which it stood in his time.[779]\nIn Arisb\u00ea and Gentinus there seem to have been families professing\nthe same descent, since the same archegets were acknowledged.[780] In\nOphrynium, Hect\u00f4r had his consecrated edifice, and in Ilium both he and\n\u00c6neas were worshipped as gods:[781] and it was the remarkable statement\nof the Lesbian Menekrat\u00eas, that \u00c6neas, \u201chaving been wronged by Paris\nand stripped of the sacred privileges which belonged to him, avenged\nhimself by betraying the city, and then became one of the Greeks.\u201d[782]\n\n  [775] Dionys. Hal. i. 46-48; Sophokl. ap. Strab. xiii. p. 608;\n  Livy, i. 1; Xenophon, Venat. i. 15.\n\n  [776] \u00c6n. ii. 433.\n\n  [777] Argument of \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2; Fragm. 7. of Lesch\u00eas, in\n  D\u00fcntzer\u2019s Collection, p. 19-21.\n\n  Hellanikus seems to have adopted this retirement of \u00c6neas to the\n  strongest parts of Mount Ida, but to have reconciled it with\n  the stories of the migration of \u00c6neas, by saying that he only\n  remained in Ida a little time, and then quitted the country\n  altogether by virtue of a convention concluded with the Greeks\n  (Dionys. Hal. i. 47-48). Among the infinite variety of stories\n  respecting this hero, one was, that after having effected his\n  settlement in Italy, he had returned to Troy and resumed the\n  sceptre, bequeathing it at his death to Ascanius (Dionys. Hal. i.\n  53): this was a comprehensive scheme for apparently reconciling\n  _all_ the legends.\n\n  [778] Iliad, xx. 300. Poseid\u00f4n speaks, respecting \u00c6neas\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03b3\u03ac\u03b3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd,\n    \u039c\u03ae\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b1\u1f34\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2\n    \u03a4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u1fc3\u00b7 \u03bc\u03cc\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9,\n    \u1f4c\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f04\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n    \u0394\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f43\u03bd \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd,\n    \u039f\u1f31 \u1f15\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03ac\u03c9\u03bd.\n    \u1f2c\u03b4\u03b7 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f74\u03bd \u1f24\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc3\u03c1\u03b5 \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u1f74 \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bf \u03b2\u03af\u03b7 \u03a4\u03c1\u03ce\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9,\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u03af \u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  Again, v. 339, Poseid\u00f4n tells \u00c6neas that he has nothing to dread\n  from any other Greek than Achilles.\n\n  [779] See O. M\u00fcller, on the causes of the mythe of \u00c6neas and\n  his voyage to Italy, in Classical Journal, vol. xxvi. p. 308;\n  Klausen, \u00c6neas und die Penaten, vol. i. p. 43-52.\n\n  D\u00eam\u00eatrius Sk\u00eaps. ab. Strab. xiii. p. 607; Nicolaus ap. Steph.\n  Byz. v. \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1. D\u00eam\u00eatrius conjectured that Sk\u00eapsis had been the\n  regal seat of \u00c6neas: there was a village called \u00c6neia near to it\n  (Strabo, xiii. p. 603).\n\n  [780] Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b2\u03b7, \u0393\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2. Ascanius is king of Ida\n  after the departure of the Greeks (Con\u00f4n, Narr. 41; Mela, i. 18).\n  _Ascanius portus_ between Phok\u00e6 and Kym\u00ea.\n\n  [781] Strabo, xiii. p. 595; Lycophr\u00f4n, 1208, and Sch.;\n  Athenagoras, Legat. 1. Inscription in Clarke\u2019s Travels, vol. ii.\n  p. 86, \u039f\u1f31 \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd. Lucian, Deor. Concil.\n  c. 12. i. 111. p. 534, Hemst.\n\n  [782] Menekrat. ap. Dionys. Hal. i. 48. \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03af\u03b7 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c7\u03b5\n  (after the burial) \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ac\u03c7\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f4d\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u1fc3,\n  \u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f11\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9 \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b5\u03c9 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f04\u03c4\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b3\u03b5\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c8\u03b5 \u03a0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd,\n  \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1, \u03b5\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n  Abas, in his _Troica_, gave a narrative different from any\n  other preserved: \u201cQuidam ab Abante, qui _Troica_ scripsit,\n  relatum ferunt, post discessum a Troj\u00e2 Gr\u00e6corum Astyanacti ibi\n  datum regnum, hunc ab Antenore expulsum sociatis sibi finitimis\n  civitatibus, inter quas et Arisba fuit: \u00c6nean hoc \u00e6gre tulisse,\n  et pro Astyanacte arma cepisse ac prospere gest\u00e2 re Astyanact\n  restituisse regnum\u201d (Servius ad Virg. \u00c6neid. ix. 264). According\n  to Diktys, Anten\u00f4r remains king and \u00c6neas goes away (Dikt. v.\n  17): Anten\u00f4r brings the Palladium to the Greeks (Dikt. v. 8).\n  Syncellus, on the contrary, tells us that the sons of Hect\u00f4r\n  recovered Ilium by the suggestions of Helenus, expelling the\n  Atenorids (Syncell. p. 322, ed. Bonn).\n\nOne tale thus among many respecting \u00c6neas, and that too the most\nancient of all, preserved among the natives of the Troad, who\nworshipped him as their heroic ancestor, was, that after the capture\nof Troy he continued in the country as king of the remaining Trojans,\non friendly terms with the Greeks. But there were other tales\nrespecting him, alike numerous and irreconcilable: the hand of\ndestiny marked him as a wanderer (_fato profugus_), and his ubiquity\nis not exceeded even by that of Odysseus. We hear of him at \u00c6nus\nin Thrace, in Pall\u00ean\u00ea, at \u00c6neia in the Thermaic Gulf, in Delus, at\nOrchomenos and Mantineia in Arcadia, in the islands of Kyth\u00eara and\nZakynthus, in Leukas and Ambrakia, at Buthrotum in Epirus, on the\nSalentine peninsula and various other places in the southern region\nof Italy; at Drepana and Segesta in Sicily, at Carthage, at Cape\nPalinurus, Cum\u00e6, Misenum, Caieta, and finally in Latium, where he lays\nthe first humble foundation of the mighty Rome and her empire.[783]\nAnd the reason why his wanderings were not continued still further\nwas, that the oracles and the pronounced will of the gods directed\nhim to settle in Latium.[784] In each of these numerous places his\nvisit was commemorated and certified by local monuments or special\nlegends, particularly by temples and permanent ceremonies in honor of\nhis mother Aphrodit\u00ea, whose worship accompanied him everywhere: there\nwere also many temples and many different tombs of \u00c6neas himself.[785]\nThe vast ascendency acquired by Rome, the ardor with which all the\nliterary Romans espoused the idea of a Trojan origin, and the fact\nthat the Julian family recognized \u00c6neas as their gentile primary\nancestor,\u2014all contributed to give to the Roman version of his legend\nthe preponderance over every other. The various other places in which\nmonuments of \u00c6neas were found came thus to be represented as places\nwhere he had halted for a time on his way from Troy to Latium. But\nthough the legendary pretensions of these places were thus eclipsed\nin the eyes of those who constituted the literary public, the local\nbelief was not extinguished: they claimed the hero as their permanent\nproperty, and his tomb was to them a proof that he had lived and died\namong them.\n\n  [783] Dionys. Halic. A. R. i. 48-54; Heyne, Excurs. 1 ad \u00c6neid.\n  iii.; De \u00c6ne\u00e6 Erroribus, and Excurs. 1 ad \u00c6n. v.; Con\u00f4n. Narr.\n  46; Livy, xl. 4; Stephan. Byz. \u0391\u1f34\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1. The inhabitants of \u00c6neia\n  in the Thermaic Gulf worshipped him with great solemnity as their\n  heroic founder (Pausan. iii. 22, 4; viii. 12, 4). The tomb of\n  Anchis\u00eas was shown on the confines of the Arcadian Orchomenus and\n  Mantineia (compare Steph. Byz. v. \u039a\u03ac\u03c6\u03c5\u03b1\u03b9), under the mountain\n  called Anchisia, near a temple of Aphrodit\u00ea: on the discrepancies\n  respecting the death of Anchis\u00eas (Heyne. Excurs. 17 ad \u00c6n. iii.):\n  Segesta in Sicily founded by \u00c6neas (Cicero, Verr. iv. 33).\n\n  [784] \u03a4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd\n  \u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f35 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, etc. (Dionys. Hal. i. 55).\n\n  [785] Dionys. Hal. i. 54. Among other places, his tomb was shown\n  at Berecynthia, in Phrygia (Festus, v. _Romam_, p. 224, ed.\n  M\u00fcller): a curious article, which contains an assemblage of the\n  most contradictory statements respecting both \u00c6neas and Latinus.\n\nAnten\u00f4r, who shares with \u00c6neas the favorable sympathy of the Greeks,\nis said by Pindar to have gone from Troy along with Menelaus and Helen\ninto the region of Kyr\u00ean\u00ea in Libya.[786] But according to the more\ncurrent narrative, he placed himself at the head of a body of Eneti or\nVeneti from Paphlagonia, who had come as allies of Troy, and went by\nsea into the inner part of the Adriatic Gulf, where he conquered the\nneighboring barbarians and founded the town of Patavium (the modern\nPadua); the Veneti in this region were said to owe their origin to his\nimmigration.[787] We learn further from Strabo, that Opsikellas, one\nof the companions of Anten\u00f4r, had continued his wanderings even into\nIb\u00earia, and that he had there established a settlement bearing his\nname.[788]\n\n  [786] Pindar, Pyth. v., and the citation from the \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 of\n  Lysimachus in the Scholia; given still more fully in the Scholia\n  ad Lycophr\u00f4n. 875. There was a \u03bb\u03cc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd at Kyr\u00ean\u00ea.\n\n  [787] Livy, i. 1. Servius ad \u00c6neid. i. 242. Strabo, i. 48; v.\n  212. Ovid, Fasti, iv. 75.\n\n  [788] Strabo, iii. p. 157.\n\nThus endeth the Trojan war; together with its sequel, the dispersion\nof the heroes, victors as well as vanquished. The account here\ngiven of it has been unavoidably brief and imperfect; for in a work\nintended to follow consecutively the real history of the Greeks, no\ngreater space can be allotted even to the most splendid gem of their\nlegendary period. Indeed, although it would be easy to fill a large\nvolume with the separate incidents which have been introduced into the\n\u201cTrojan cycle,\u201d the misfortune is that they are for the most part so\ncontradictory as to exclude all possibility of weaving them into one\nconnected narrative. We are compelled to select one out of the number,\ngenerally without any solid ground of preference, and then to note\nthe variations of the rest. No one who has not studied the original\ndocuments can imagine the extent to which this discrepancy proceeds;\nit covers almost every portion and fragment of the tale.[789]\n\n  [789] These diversities are well set forth in the useful\n  Dissertation of Fuchs De Varietate Fabularum Troicarum (Cologne,\n  1830).\n\n  Of the number of romantic statements put forth respecting Helen\n  and Achilles especially, some idea may be formed from the fourth,\n  fifth and sixth chapters of Ptolemy H\u00eaph\u00e6stion (apud Westermann,\n  Scriptt. Mythograph. p. 188, etc.).\n\nBut though much may have been thus omitted of what the reader\nmight expect to find in an account of the Trojan war, its genuine\ncharacter has been studiously preserved, without either exaggeration\nor abatement. The real Trojan war is that which was recounted by\nHomer and the old epic poets, and continued by all the lyric and\ntragic composers. For the latter, though they took great liberties\nwith the particular incidents, and introduced to some extent a new\nmoral tone, yet worked more or less faithfully on the Homeric scale:\nand even Euripid\u00eas, who departed the most widely from the feeling\nof the old legend, never lowered down his matter to the analogy\nof contemporary life. They preserved its well-defined object, at\nonce righteous and romantic, the recovery of the daughter of Zeus\nand sister of the Dioskuri\u2014its mixed agencies, divine, heroic and\nhuman\u2014the colossal force and deeds of its chief actors\u2014its vast\nmagnitude and long duration, as well as the toils which the conquerors\nunderwent, and the Nemesis which followed upon their success. And\nthese were the circumstances which, set forth in the full blaze of\nepic and tragic poetry, bestowed upon the legend its powerful and\nimperishable influence over the Hellenic mind. The enterprise was one\ncomprehending all the members of the Hellenic body, of which each\nindividually might be proud, and in which, nevertheless, those feelings\nof jealous and narrow patriotism, so lamentably prevalent in many of\nthe towns, were as much as possible excluded. It supplied them with\na grand and inexhaustible object of common sympathy, common faith,\nand common admiration; and when occasions arose for bringing together\na Pan-Hellenic force against the barbarians, the precedent of the\nHomeric expedition was one upon which the elevated minds of Greece\ncould dwell with the certainty of rousing an unanimous impulse, if not\nalways of counterworking sinister by-motives, among their audience.\nAnd the incidents comprised in the Trojan cycle were familiarized, not\nonly to the public mind but also to the public eye, by innumerable\nrepresentations both of the sculptor and the painter,\u2014those which were\nromantic and chivalrous being better adapted for this purpose, and\ntherefore more constantly employed, than any other.\n\nOf such events the genuine Trojan war of the old epic was for the most\npart composed. Though literally believed, reverentially cherished,\nand numbered among the gigantic ph\u00e6nomena of the past, by the\nGrecian public, it is in the eyes of modern inquiry essentially a\nlegend and nothing more. If we are asked whether it be not a legend\nembodying portions of historical matter, and raised upon a basis of\ntruth,\u2014whether there may not really have occurred at the foot of\nthe hill of Ilium a war purely human and political, without gods,\nwithout heroes, without Helen, without Amazons, without Ethiopians\nunder the beautiful son of E\u00f4s, without the wooden horse, without the\ncharacteristic and expressive features of the old epical war,\u2014like\nthe mutilated trunk of De\u00efphobus in the under-world; if we are asked\nwhether there was not really some such historical Trojan war as this,\nour answer must be, that as the possibility of it cannot be denied,\nso neither can the reality of it be affirmed. We possess nothing but\nthe ancient epic itself without any independent evidence: had it\nbeen an age of records indeed, the Homeric epic in its exquisite and\nunsuspecting simplicity would probably never have come into existence.\nWhoever therefore ventures to dissect Homer, Arktinus and Lesch\u00eas,\nand to pick out certain portions as matters of fact, while he sets\naside the rest as fiction, must do so in full reliance on his own\npowers of historical divination, without any means either of proving\nor verifying his conclusions. Among many attempts, ancient as well as\nmodern, to identify real objects in this historical darkness, that of\nDio Chrysostom deserves attention for its extraordinary boldness. In\nhis oration addressed to the inhabitants of Ilium, and intended to\ndemonstrate that the Trojans were not only blameless as to the origin\nof the war, but victorious in its issue\u2014he overthrows all the leading\npoints of the Homeric narrative, and re-writes nearly the whole from\nbeginning to end: Paris is the lawful husband of Helen, Achilles is\nslain by Hect\u00f4r, and the Greeks retire without taking Troy, disgraced\nas well as baffled. Having shown without difficulty that the Iliad,\nif it be looked at as a history, is full of gaps, incongruities and\nabsurdities, he proceeds to compose a more plausible narrative of his\nown, which he tenders as so much authentic matter of fact. The most\nimportant point, however, which his Oration brings to view is, the\nliteral and confiding belief with which the Homeric narrative was\nregarded, as if it were actual history, not only by the inhabitants of\nIlium, but also by the general Grecian public.[790]\n\n  [790] Dio Chrysost. Or. xi. p. 310-322.\n\nThe small town of Ilium, inhabited by \u00c6olic Greeks,[791] and raised\ninto importance only by the legendary reverence attached to it, stood\nupon an elevated ridge forming a spur from Mount Ida, rather more than\nthree miles from the town and promontory of Sigeium, and about twelve\nstadia, or less than two miles, from the sea at its nearest point.\nFrom Sigeium and the neighboring town of Achilleium (with its monument\nand temple of Achilles), to the town of Rh\u0153teium on a hill higher\nup the Hellespont (with its monument and chapel of Ajax called the\nAianteium[792]), was a distance of sixty stadia, or seven miles and a\nhalf in the straight course by sea: in the intermediate space was a bay\nand an adjoining plain, comprehending the embouchure of the Scamander,\nand extending to the base of the ridge on which Ilium stood. This plain\nwas the celebrated plain of Troy, in which the great Homeric battles\nwere believed to have taken place: the portion of the bay near to\nSigeium went by the name of the Naustathmon of the Ach\u00e6ans (_i. e._ the\nspot where they dragged their ships ashore), and was accounted to have\nbeen the camp of Agamemn\u00f4n and his vast army.[793]\n\n  [791] Herodot. v. 122. Pausan. v. 8, 3: viii. 12, 4. \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\n  \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03a4\u03c1\u1ff4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, the title proclaimed at the Olympic games; like\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u039c\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, from Myrina in the more southerly region of\n  \u00c6olis, as we find in the list of visitors at the Charit\u00easia, at\n  Orchomenos in B\u0153\u00f4tia (Corp. Inscrip. Boeckh. No. 1583).\n\n  [792] See Pausanias, i. 35, 3, for the legends current at Ilium\n  respecting the vast size of the bones of Ajax in his tomb. The\n  inhabitants affirmed that after the shipwreck of Odysseus, the\n  arms of Achilles, which he was carrying away with him, were\n  washed up by the sea against the tomb of Ajax. Pliny gives the\n  distance at thirty stadia: modern travellers make it some thing\n  more than Pliny, but considerably less than Strabo.\n\n  [793] Strabo, xiii. p. 596-598. Strabo distinguishes the \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u039d\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, which was near to Sigeium, from the \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd,\n  which was more towards the middle of the bay between Sigeium and\n  Rh\u0153teium; but we gather from his language that this distinction\n  was not universally recognized. Alexander landed at the \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03bb\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd (Arrian, i. 11).\n\nHistorical Ilium was founded, according to the questionable statement\nof Strabo, during the last dynasty of the Lydian kings,[794] that is,\nat some period later than 720 B. C. Until after the days of Alexander\nthe Great\u2014indeed until the period of Roman preponderance\u2014it always\nremained a place of inconsiderable power and importance, as we learn\nnot only from the assertion of the geographer, but also from the fact\nthat Achilleium, Sigeium and Rh\u0153teium were all independent of it.[795]\nBut inconsiderable as it might be, it was the only place which ever\nbore the venerable name immortalized by Homer. Like the Homeric Ilium,\nit had its temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea,[796] wherein she was worshipped as the\npresiding goddess of the town: the inhabitants affirmed that Agamemn\u00f4n\nhad not altogether destroyed the town, but that it had been reoccupied\nafter his departure, and had never ceased to exist.[797] Their\nacropolis was called Pergamum, and in it was shown the house of Priam\nand the altar of Zeus Herkeius where that unhappy old man had been\nslain: moreover there were exhibited, in the temples, panoplies which\nhad been worn by the Homeric heroes,[798] and doubtless many other\nrelics appreciated by admirers of the Iliad.\n\n  [794] Strabo, xiii. p. 593.\n\n  [795] Herodot. v. 95 (his account of the war between the\n  Athenians and Mitylen\u00e6ans about Sigeium and Achilleium); Strabo,\n  xiii. p. 593. \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03af \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c2.\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u0393\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u1ff3 \u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\n  \u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd, etc.\n\n  Again, \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f43 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76, \u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1fec\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n  [796] Besides Ath\u00ean\u00ea, the Inscriptions authenticate \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2\n  at Ilium (Corp. Inscrip. B\u0153ckh. No. 3599).\n\n  [797] Strabo, xiii. p. 600. \u039b\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf,\n  \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd \u1f20\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f05\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c6\u03b8\u03b7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n  The situation of Ilium (or as it is commonly, but erroneously,\n  termed, _New Ilium_) appears to be pretty well ascertained, about\n  two miles from the sea (Rennell, On the Topography of Troy, p.\n  41-71; Dr. Clarke\u2019s Travels, vol. ii. p. 102).\n\n  [798] Xerx\u00eas passing by Adramyttium, and leaving the range of\n  Mount Ida on his left hand, \u1f24\u03ca\u03b5 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd.... \u1f08\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03a3\u03ba\u03ac\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd ... \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7, \u1f35\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u0398\u03b5\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 ~\u03c0\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1~, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b9 \u1f14\u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7 \u03c7\u03bf\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72\n  \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c7\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.... \u1f0d\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u1fc3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u1fc7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1fec\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f48\u03c6\u03c1\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0394\u03ac\u03c1\u03b4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n  \u1f25\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f08\u03b2\u03cd\u03b4\u1ff3 \u1f45\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b9\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72, \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03c2 \u03a4\u03b5\u03c5\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\n  (Herod. vii. 43).\n\n  Respecting Alexander (Arrian, i. 11), \u1f08\u03bd\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7\n  \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb7 \u03b8\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03b1\u1f78\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03c9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f14\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b1\u03c2. \u0398\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f19\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bc\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b9\u03bd \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7\n  \u039d\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f43 \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc6\u03ba\u03b5.\n\n  The inhabitants of Ilium also showed the lyre which had belonged\n  to Paris (Plutarch, Alexand. c. 15).\n\n  Chandler, in his History of Ilium, chap. xxii. p. 89, seems to\n  think that the place called by Herodotus the Pergamum of Priam\n  is different from the historical Ilium. But the mention of the\n  Iliean Ath\u00ean\u00ea identifies them as the same.\n\nThese were testimonies which few persons in those ages were inclined\nto question, when combined with the identity of name and general\nlocality; nor does it seem that any one did question them until the\ntime of D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis. Hellanikus expressly described this Ilium\nas being the Ilium of Homer, for which assertion Strabo (or probably\nD\u00eam\u00eatrius, from whom the narrative seems to be copied) imputes to him\nvery gratuitously an undue partiality towards the inhabitants of the\ntown.[799] Herodotus relates, that Xerx\u00eas in his march into Greece\nvisited the place, went up to the Pergamum of Priam, inquired with\nmuch interest into the details of the Homeric siege, made libations to\nthe fallen heroes, and offered to the Ath\u00ean\u00ea of Ilium his magnificent\nsacrifice of a thousand oxen: he probably represented and believed\nhimself to be attacking Greece as the avenger of the Priamid family.\nThe Laced\u00e6monian admiral Mindarus, while his fleet lay at Abydus, went\npersonally to Ilium to offer sacrifice to Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and saw from that\nelevated spot the battle fought between the squadron of Dorieus and\nthe Athenians, on the shore near Rh\u0153teium.[800] During the interval\nbetween the Peloponnesian war and the Macedonian invasion of Persia,\nIlium was always garrisoned as a strong position; but its domain was\nstill narrow, and did not extend even to the sea which was so near to\nit.[801] Alexander, on crossing the Hellespont, sent his army from\nSestus to Abydus, under Parmenio, and sailed personally from El\u00e6eus\nin the Chersonese, after having solemnly sacrificed at the El\u00e6untian\nshrine of Pr\u00f4tesilaus, to the harbor of the Ach\u00e6ans between Sigeium and\nRh\u0153teium. He then ascended to Ilium, sacrificed to the Iliean Ath\u00ean\u00ea,\nand consecrated in her temple his own panoply, in exchange for which\nhe took some of the sacred arms there suspended, which were said to\nhave been preserved from the time of the Trojan war. These arms were\ncarried before him when he went to battle by his armor-bearers. It is\na fact still more curious, and illustrative of the strong working of\nthe old legend on an impressible and eminently religious mind, that he\nalso sacrificed to Priam himself, on the very altar of Zeus Herkeius\nfrom which the old king was believed to have been torn by Neoptolemus.\nAs that fierce warrior was his heroic ancestor by the maternal side, he\ndesired to avert from himself the anger of Priam against the Achilleid\nrace.[802]\n\n  [799] Strabo, xiii. p. 602. \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5. Hellanikus had written a work called\n  \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03ac.\n\n  [800] Xenoph. Hellen. i. 1, 10. Skylax places Ilium twenty-five\n  stadia, or about three miles, from the sea (c. 94). But I do not\n  understand how he can call Sk\u00eapsis and Kebr\u00ean \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u1fc3.\n\n  [801] See Xenoph. Hellen. iii. i. 16; and the description of the\n  seizure of Ilium, along with Sk\u00eapsis and Kebr\u00ean, by the chief of\n  mercenaries, Charid\u00eamus, in Demosthen. cont. Aristocrat. c. 38.\n  p. 671: compare \u00c6neas Poliorcetic. c. 24, and Poly\u00e6n. iii. 14.\n\n  [802] Arrian, _l. c._ Dik\u00e6archus composed a separate work\n  respecting this sacrifice of Alexander, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u1ff3 \u03b8\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n  (Athen\u00e6. xiii. p. 603; Dik\u00e6arch. Fragm. p. 114, ed. Fuhr).\n\n  Theophrastus, in noticing old and venerable trees, mentions the\n  \u03c6\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u1f76 (_Quercus \u00e6sculus_) on the tomb of Ilus at Ilium, without\n  any doubt of the authenticity of the place (De Plant. iv. 14);\n  and his contemporary, the harper Stratonikos, intimates the same\n  feeling, in his jest on the visit of a bad sophist to Ilium\n  during the festival of the Ilieia (Athen\u00e6. viii. p. 351). The\n  same may be said respecting the author of the tenth epistle\n  ascribed to the orator \u00c6schin\u00eas (p. 737), in which his visit of\n  curiosity to Ilium is described\u2014as well as about Apoll\u00f4nius of\n  Tyana, or the writer who describes his life and his visit to the\n  Tr\u00f4ad; it is evident that he did not distrust the \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\n  of the Ilieans, who affirmed their town to be the real Troy\n  (Philostrat. Vit. Apoll\u00f4n. Tyan. iv. 11).\n\n  The goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea of Ilium was reported to have rendered\n  valuable assistance to the inhabitants of Kyzikus, when they were\n  besieged by Mithridat\u00eas, commemorated by inscriptions set up in\n  Ilium (Plutarch, Lucull. 10).\n\nAlexander made to the inhabitants of Ilium many munificent promises,\nwhich he probably would have executed, had he not been prevented\nby untimely death: for the Trojan war was amongst all the Grecian\nlegends the most thoroughly Pan-Hellenic, and the young king of\nMaced\u00f4n, besides his own sincere legendary faith, was anxious to\nmerge the local patriotism of the separate Greek towns in one general\nHellenic sentiment under himself as chief. One of his successors,\nAntigonus,[803] founded the city of Alexandreia in the Tr\u00f4ad, between\nSigeium and the more southerly promontory of Lektum; compressing into\nit the inhabitants of many of the neighboring \u00c6olic towns in the region\nof Ida,\u2014Sk\u00eapsis, Kebr\u00ean, Hamaxitus, Kol\u00f4n\u00e6, and Neandria, though the\ninhabitants of Sk\u00eapsis were subsequently permitted by Lysimachus to\nresume their own city and autonomous government. Ilium however remained\nwithout any special mark of favor until the arrival of the Romans in\nAsia and their triumph over Antiochus (about 190 B. C.). Though it\nretained its walls and its defensible position, D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis,\nwho visited it shortly before that event, described it as being then\nin a state of neglect and poverty, many of the houses not even having\ntiled roofs.[804] In this dilapidated condition, however, it was still\nmythically recognized both by Antiochus and by the Roman consul\nLivius, who went up thither to sacrifice to the Iliean Ath\u00ean\u00ea. The\nRomans, proud of their origin from Troy and \u00c6neas, treated Ilium with\nsignal munificence; not only granting to it immunity from tribute,\nbut also adding to its domain the neighboring territories of Gergis,\nRh\u0153teium and Sigeium\u2014and making the Ilieans masters of the whole\ncoast[805] from the Per\u00e6a (or continental possessions) of Tenedos\n(southward of Sigeium) to the boundaries of Dardanus, which had its own\ntitle to legendary reverence as the special sovereignty of \u00c6neas. The\ninhabitants of Sigeium could not peaceably acquiesce in this loss of\ntheir autonomy, and their city was destroyed by the Ilieans.\n\n  [803] Strabo, xiii. p. 603-607.\n\n  [804] Livy, xxxv. 43; xxxvii. 9. Polyb. v. 78-111 (passages which\n  prove that Ilium was fortified and defensible about B. C. 218).\n  Strabo, xiii. p. 594. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd, \u1f43 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u1f26\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1fec\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5. \u03a6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03a3\u03ba\u03ae\u03c8\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2,\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2,\n  \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f60\u03bb\u03b9\u03b3\u03c9\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03c9\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1\u03c2. \u1f29\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03be \u03b4\u1f72, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u0393\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u03c9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1\n  \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c1\u03b8\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd. \u0395\u1f36\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03ac\u03ba\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03a6\u03b9\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, etc.\n\n  This is a very clear and precise statement, attested by an\n  eye-witness. But it is thoroughly inconsistent with the statement\n  made by Strabo in the previous chapter, a dozen lines before, as\n  the text now stands; for he there informs us that Lysimachus,\n  after the death of Alexander, paid great attention to Ilium,\n  surrounded it with a wall of forty stadia in circumference,\n  erected a temple, and aggregated to Ilium the ancient cities\n  around, which were in a state of decay. We know from Livy that\n  the aggregation of Gergis and Rh\u0153teium to Ilium was effected, not\n  by Lysimachus, but by the Romans (Livy, xxxviii. 37); so that the\n  _first_ statement of Strabo is not only inconsistent with his\n  second, but is contradicted by an independent authority.\n\n  I cannot but think that this contradiction arises from a\n  confusion of the text in Strabo\u2019s _first_ passage, and that\n  in that passage Strabo really meant to speak only of the\n  improvements brought about by Lysimachus in _Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as_;\n  that he never meant to ascribe to Lysimachus any improvements in\n  _Ilium_, but, on the contrary, to assign the remarkable attention\n  paid by Lysimachus to _Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as_, as the reason why\n  he had neglected to fulfil the promises held out by Alexander\n  to _Ilium_. The series of facts runs thus:\u20141. Ilium is nothing\n  better than a \u03ba\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7; at the landing of Alexander; 2. Alexander\n  promises great additions, but never returns from Persia to\n  accomplish them; 3. Lysimachus is absorbed in Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as,\n  into which he aggregates several of the adjoining old towns,\n  and which flourishes under his hands; 4. Hence Ilium remained a\n  \u03ba\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7 when the Romans entered Asia, as it had been when Alexander\n  entered.\n\n  This alteration in the text of Strabo might be effected by the\n  simple transposition of the words as they now stand, and by\n  omitting \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76, \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, without introducing a single\n  new or conjectural word, so that the passage would read thus:\n  \u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 (Alexander\u2019s) \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u039b\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u1ff3\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f54\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u00b7 (\u1f14\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1\n  \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u1f72\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f36\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd) \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd 40 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u1ff4\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03cd\u03ba\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\n  ... \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd. If this reading be adopted, the words beginning\n  that which stands in Tzschucke\u2019s edition as sect. 27, and which\n  immediately follow the last word \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, will read quite suitably\n  and coherently,\u2014\u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd, \u1f43 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76, \u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd,\n  \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1fec\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, etc., whereas with the\n  present reading of the passage they show a contradiction, and the\n  whole passage is entirely confused.\n\n  [805] Livy, xxxviii. 39; Strabo, xiii. p. 600. \u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1f78 \u03a3\u03af\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f26\u03bd\n  \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f21 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u0394\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nThe dignity and power of Ilium being thus prodigiously enhanced, we\ncannot doubt that the inhabitants assumed to themselves exaggerated\nimportance as the recognized parents of all-conquering Rome. Partly,\nwe may naturally suppose, from the jealousies thus aroused on the\npart of their neighbors at Sk\u00eapsis and Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as\u2014partly from\nthe pronounced tendency of the age (in which Krat\u00eas at Pergamus and\nAristarchus at Alexandria divided between them the palm of literary\ncelebrity) towards criticism and illustration of the old poets\u2014a\nblow was now aimed at the mythical legitimacy of Ilium. D\u00eam\u00eatrius of\nSk\u00eapsis, one of the most laborious of the Homeric critics, had composed\nthirty books of comment upon the Catalogue in the Iliad: Hesti\u00e6a, an\nauthoress of Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as, had written on the same subject: both\nof them, well-acquainted with the locality, remarked that the vast\nbattles described in the Iliad could not be packed into the narrow\nspace between Ilium and the Naustathmon of the Greeks; the more so,\nas that space, too small even as it then stood, had been considerably\nenlarged since the date of the Iliad by deposits at the mouth of the\nSkamander.[806] They found no difficulty in pointing out topographical\nincongruities and impossibilities as to the incidents in the Iliad,\nwhich they professed to remove by the startling theory that the Homeric\nIlium had not occupied the site of the city so called. There was a\nvillage, called the village of the Ilieans, situated rather less than\nfour miles from the city in the direction of Mount Ida, and further\nremoved from the sea; here, they affirmed the \u201choly Troy\u201d had stood.\n\n  [806] Strabo, xiii. 599. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f19\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03a4\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f43 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03c5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u1f41\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c7\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n  The words \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd are introduced conjecturally by Grosskurd,\n  the excellent German translator of Strabo, but they seem to me\n  necessary to make the sense complete.\n\n  Hesit\u00e6a is cited more than once in the Homeric Scholia (Schol.\n  Venet. ad Iliad, iii. 64; Enstath. ad Iliad, ii. 538).\n\nNo positive proof was produced to sustain the conclusion, for Strabo\nexpressly states that not a vestige of the ancient city remained at\nthe Village of the Ilieans:[807] but the fundamental supposition was\nbacked by a second accessory supposition, to explain how it happened\nthat all such vestiges had disappeared. Nevertheless Strabo adopts the\nunsupported hypothesis of D\u00eam\u00eatrius as if it were an authenticated\nfact\u2014distinguishing pointedly between Old and New Ilium, and even\ncensuring Hellanikus for having maintained the received local faith.\nBut I cannot find that D\u00eam\u00eatrius and Hesti\u00e6a have been followed in\nthis respect by any other writer of ancient times excepting Strabo.\nIlium still continued to be talked of and treated by every one as the\ngenuine Homeric Troy: the cruel jests of the Roman rebel Fimbria, when\nhe sacked the town and massacred the inhabitants\u2014the compensation made\nby Sylla, and the pronounced favor of Julius C\u00e6sar and Augustus,\u2014all\nprove this continued recognition of identity.[808] Arrian, though a\nnative of Nicomedia, holding a high appointment in Asia Minor, and\nremarkable for the exactness of his topographical notices, describes\nthe visit of Alexander to Ilium, without any suspicion that the place\nwith all its relics was a mere counterfeit: Aristid\u00eas, Dio Chrysostom,\nPausanias, Appian, and Plutarch hold the same language.[809] But modern\nwriters seem for the most part to have taken up the supposition from\nStrabo as implicitly as he took it from D\u00eam\u00eatrius. They call Ilium by\nthe disrespectful appellation of _New_ Ilium\u2014while the traveller in the\nTr\u00f4ad looks for _Old_ Ilium as if it were the unquestionable spot where\nPriam had lived and moved; the name is even formally enrolled on the\nbest maps recently prepared of the ancient Tr\u00f4ad.[810]\n\n  [807] Strabo, xiii. p. 599. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f34\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ce\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\u2014\u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f05\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03cd\u03ba\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c8\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n  [808] Appian, Mithridat. c. 53; Strabo, xiii. p. 594; Plutarch,\n  Sertorius, c. 1; Velleius Paterc. ii. 23.\n\n  The inscriptions attest Panathenaic games celebrated at Ilium\n  in honor of Ath\u00ean\u00ea by the Ilieans conjointly with various other\n  neighboring cities (see Corp. Inscr. Boeckh. No. 3601-3602, with\n  Boeckh\u2019s observations). The valuable inscription No. 3595 attests\n  the liberality of Antiochus Soter towards the Iliean Ath\u00ean\u00ea as\n  early as 278 B. C.\n\n  [809] Arrian, i. 11; Appian _ut sup._; also Aristid\u00eas, Or. 43,\n  Rhodiaca, p. 820 (Dindorf p. 369). The curious Oratio xi. of Dio\n  Chrysostom, in which he writes his new version of the Trojan war,\n  is addressed to the inhabitants of Ilium.\n\n  [810] The controversy, now half a century old, respecting Troy\n  and the Trojan war\u2014between Bryant and his various opponents,\n  Morritt, Gilbert Wakefield, the British Critic, etc., seems\n  now nearly forgotten, and I cannot think that the pamphlets on\n  either side would be considered as displaying much ability, if\n  published at the present day. The discussion was first raised by\n  the publication of Le Chevalier\u2019s account of the plain of Troy,\n  in which the author professed to have discovered the true site of\n  Old Ilium (the supposed Homeric Troy), about twelve miles from\n  the sea near Bounarbashi. Upon this account Bryant published some\n  animadversions, followed up by a second treatise, in which he\n  denied the historical reality of the Trojan war, and advanced the\n  hypothesis that the tale was of Egyptian origin (Dissertation on\n  the War of Troy, and the Expedition of the Grecians as described\n  by Homer, showing that no such Expedition was ever undertaken,\n  and that no such city of Phrygia existed, by Jacob Bryant;\n  seemingly 1797, though there is no date in the title-page:\n  Morritt\u2019s reply was published in 1798). A reply from Mr. Bryant\n  and a rejoinder from Mr. Morritt, as well as a pamphlet from G.\n  Wakefield, appeared in 1799 and 1800, besides an Expostulation by\n  the former addressed to the British Critic.\n\n  Bryant, having dwelt both on the incredibilities and the\n  inconsistencies of the Trojan war, as it is recounted in\n  Grecian legend generally, nevertheless admitted that Homer had\n  a groundwork for his story, and maintained that that groundwork\n  was Egyptian. Homer (he thinks) was an Ithacan, descended\n  from a family originally emigrant from Egypt: the war of Troy\n  was originally an Egyptian war, which explains how Memn\u00f4n the\n  Ethiopian came to take part in it: \u201cupon this history, which\n  was originally Egyptian, Homer founded the scheme of his two\n  principal poems, adapting things to Greece and Phrygia by an\n  ingenious transposition:\u201d he derived information from priests\n  of Memphis or Th\u00eabes (Bryant, pp. 102, 108, 126). The \u1f2d\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, mentioned in the second book of the Odyssey (15), is\n  the Egyptian hero, who affords, in his view, an evidence that the\n  population of that island was in part derived from Egypt. No one\n  since Mr. Bryant, I apprehend, has ever construed the passage in\n  the same sense.\n\n  Bryant\u2019s Egyptian hypothesis is of no value; but the negative\n  portion of his argument, summing up the particulars of the Trojan\n  legend, and contending against its historical credibility, is\n  not so easily put aside. Few persons will share in the zealous\n  conviction by which Morritt tries to make it appear that the\n  1100 ships, the ten years of war, the large confederacy of\n  princes from all parts of Greece, etc., have nothing but what\n  is consonant with historical probability; difficulties being\n  occasionally eliminated by the plea of our ignorance of the time\n  and of the subject (Morritt, p. 7-21). Gilbert Wakefield, who\n  maintains the historical reality of the siege with the utmost\n  intensity, and even compares Bryant to Tom Paine (W. p. 17), is\n  still more displeased with those who propound doubts, and tells\n  us that \u201cgrave disputation in the midst of such darkness and\n  uncertainty is a conflict with chim\u00e6ras\u201d (W. p. 14).\n\n  The most plausible line of argument taken by Morritt and\n  Wakefield is, where they enforce the positions taken by Strabo\n  and so many other authors, ancient as well as modern, that a\n  superstructure of fiction is to be distinguished from a basis\n  of truth, and that the latter is to be maintained while the\n  former is rejected (Morritt, p. 5; Wake. p. 7-8). To this Bryant\n  replies, that \u201cif we leave out every absurdity, we can make\n  anything plausible; that a fable may be made consistent, and we\n  have many romances that are very regular in the assortment of\n  characters and circumstances: this may be seen in plays, memoirs,\n  and novels. But this regularity and correspondence alone will not\n  ascertain the truth\u201d (Expostulation, pp. 8, 12, 13). \u201cThat there\n  are a great many other fables besides that of Troy, regular and\n  consistent among themselves, believed and chronologized by the\n  Greeks, and even looked up to by them in a religious view (p.\n  13), which yet no one now thinks of admitting as history.\u201d\n\n  Morritt, having urged the universal belief of antiquity as\n  evidence that the Trojan war was historically real, is met\n  by Bryant, who reminds him that the same persons believed in\n  centaurs, satyrs, nymphs, augury, aruspicy; Homer maintaining\n  that horses could speak, etc. To which Morritt replies, \u201cWhat has\n  religious belief to do with historical facts? Is not the evidence\n  on which our faith rests in matters of religion totally different\n  in all its parts from that on which we ground our belief in\n  history?\u201d (Addit. Remarks, p. 47).\n\n  The separation between the grounds of religious and historical\n  belief is by no means so complete as Mr. Morritt supposes, even\n  in regard to modern times; and when we apply his position to the\n  ancient Greeks, it will be found completely the reverse of the\n  truth. The contemporaries of Herodotus and Thucydid\u00eas conceived\n  their early history in the most intimate conjunction with their\n  religion.\n\nStrabo has here converted into geographical matter of fact an\nhypothesis purely gratuitous, with a view of saving the accuracy of\nthe Homeric topography; though in all probability the locality of the\npretended Old Ilium would have been found open to difficulties not\nless serious than those which it was introduced to obviate.[811] It\nmay be true that D\u00eam\u00eatrius and he were justified in their negative\nargument, so as to show that the battles described in the Iliad could\nnot possibly have taken place if the city of Priam had stood on the\nhill inhabited by the Ilieans. But the legendary faith subsisted\nbefore, and continued without abatement afterwards, notwithstanding\nsuch topographical impossibilities. Hellanikus, Herodotus, Mindarus,\nthe guides of Xerx\u00eas, and Alexander, had not been shocked by them: the\ncase of the latter is the strongest of all, because he had received the\nbest education of his time under Aristotle\u2014he was a passionate admirer\nand constant reader of the Iliad\u2014he was moreover personally familiar\nwith the movements of armies, and lived at a time when maps, which\nbegan with Anaximander, the disciple of Thal\u00eas, were at least known to\nall who sought instruction. Now if, notwithstanding such advantages,\nAlexander fully believed in the identity of Ilium, unconscious of\nthese many and glaring topographical difficulties, much less would\nHomer himself, or the Homeric auditors, be likely to pay attention to\nthem, at a period, five centuries earlier, of comparative rudeness and\nignorance, when prose records as well as geographical maps were totally\nunknown.[812] The inspired poet might describe, and his hearers would\nlisten with delight to the tale, how Hect\u00f4r, pursued by Achilles, ran\nthrice round the city of Troy, while the trembling Trojans were all\nhuddled into the city, not one daring to come out even at this last\nextremity of their beloved prince\u2014and while the Grecian army looked on,\nrestraining unwillingly their uplifted spears at the nod of Achilles,\nin order that Hect\u00f4r might perish by no other hand than his; nor were\nthey, while absorbed by this impressive recital, disposed to measure\ndistances or calculate topographical possibilities with reference to\nthe site of the real Ilium.[813] The mistake consists in applying to\nHomer and to the Homeric siege of Troy, criticisms which would be\nperfectly just if brought to bear on the Athenian siege of Syracuse, as\ndescribed by Thucydid\u00eas;[814] in the Peloponnesian war[815]\u2014but which\nare not more applicable to the epic narrative than they would be to the\nexploits of Amadis or Orlando.\n\n  [811] For example, adopting his own line of argument (not to\n  mention those battles in which the pursuit and the flight reaches\n  from the city to the ships and back again), it might have been\n  urged to him, that by supposing the Homeric Troy to be four miles\n  farther off from the sea, he aggravated the difficulty of rolling\n  the Trojan horse into the town: it was already sufficiently hard\n  to propel this vast wooden animal full of heroes from the Greek\n  Naustathmon to the town of Ilium.\n\n  The Trojan horse, with its accompaniments Sinon and Laoco\u00f4n, is\n  one of the capital and indispensable events in the epic: Homer,\n  Arktinus, Lesch\u00eas, Virgil, and Quintus Smyrn\u00e6us, all dwell upon\n  it emphatically as the proximate cause of the capture.\n\n  The difficulties and inconsistencies of the movements ascribed to\n  Greeks and Trojans in the Iliad, when applied to real topography,\n  are well set forth in Spohn, _De Agro Trojano_, Leipsic, 1814;\n  and Mr. Maclaren has shown (Dissertation on the Topography of the\n  Trojan War, Edinburgh, 1822) that these difficulties are nowise\n  obviated by removing Ilium a few miles further from the sea.\n\n  [812] Major Rennell argues differently from the visit of\n  Alexander, employing it to confute the hypothesis of Chevalier,\n  who had placed the Homeric Troy at Bounarbashi, the site supposed\n  to have been indicated by D\u00eam\u00eatrius and Strabo:\u2014\n\n  \u201cAlexander is said to have been a passionate admirer of the\n  Iliad, and he had an opportunity of deciding on the spot how far\n  the topography was consistent with the narrative. Had he been\n  shown the site of Bounarbashi for that of Troy, he would probably\n  have questioned the fidelity either of the historical part of the\n  poem or his guides. It is not within credibility, that a person\n  of so correct a judgment as Alexander could have admired a poem,\n  which contained a long history of military details, and other\n  transactions that could not physically have had an existence.\n  What pleasure could he receive, in contemplating as subjects\n  of history, events which could not have happened? Yet he did\n  admire the poem, and _therefore must have found the topography\n  consistent_: that is, Bounarbashi, surely, was not shown to him\n  for Troy.\u201d (Rennell, Observations on the Plain of Troy, p. 128).\n\n  Major Rennell here supposes in Alexander a spirit of\n  topographical criticism quite foreign to his real character. We\n  have no reason to believe that the site of Bounarbashi was shown\n  to Alexander as the Homeric Troy, or that any site was shown\n  to him _except Ilium_, or what Strabo calls New Ilium. Still\n  less reason have we to believe that any scepticism crossed his\n  mind, or that his deep-seated faith required to be confirmed by\n  measurement of distances.\n\n  [813] Strabo, xiii. p. 599. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f1d\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u1f74 \u1f21\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f54\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u1fc6 \u1fe5\u03ac\u03c7\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f21 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd.\n\n  [814] Mannert (Geographie der Griechen und R\u00f6mer, th. 6. heft 3.\n  b. 8. cap. 8) is confused in his account of Old and New Ilium: he\n  represents that Alexander raised up a new spot to the dignity of\n  having been the Homeric Ilium, which is not the fact: Alexander\n  adhered to the received local belief. Indeed, as far as our\n  evidence goes, no one but D\u00eam\u00eatrius, Hesti\u00e6a, and Strabo appears\n  ever to have departed from it.\n\n  [815] There can hardly be a more singular example of this same\n  confusion, than to find elaborate military criticisms from the\n  Emperor Napoleon, upon the description of the taking of Troy in\n  the second book of the \u00c6neid. He shows that gross faults are\n  committed in it, when looked at from the point of view of a\n  general (see an interesting article by Mr. G. C. Lewis, in the\n  Classical Museum, vol. i. p. 205, \u201cNapoleon on the Capture of\n  Troy\u201d).\n\n  Having cited this criticism from the highest authority on the\n  art of war, we may find a suitable parallel in the works of\n  distinguished publicists. The attack of Odysseus on the Ciconians\n  (described in Homer, Odyss. ix. 39-61) is cited both by Grotius\n  (De Jure Bell. et Pac. iii. 3, 10) and by Vattel (Droit des Gens,\n  iii. 202) as a case in point in international law. Odysseus is\n  considered to have sinned against the rules of international law\n  by attacking them as allies of the Trojans, without a formal\n  declaration of war.\n\nThere is every reason for presuming that the Ilium visited by Xerx\u00eas\nand Alexander was really the \u201choly Ilium\u201d present to the mind of\nHomer; and if so, it must have been inhabited, either by Greeks or by\nsome anterior population, at a period earlier than that which Strabo\nassigns. History recognizes neither Troy the city, nor Trojans, as\nactually existing; but the extensive region called Tr\u00f4as, or the\nTr\u00f4ad (more properly Tr\u00f4\u00efas), is known both to Herodotus and to\nThucydid\u00eas: it seems to include the territory westward of an imaginary\nline drawn from the north-east corner of the Adramyttian gulf to the\nPropontis at Parium, since both Antandrus, Kol\u00f4n\u00e6, and the district\nimmediately round Ilium, are regarded as belonging to the Tr\u00f4ad.[816]\nHerodotus further notices the Teukrians of Gergis[817] (a township\nconterminous with Ilium, and lying to the eastward of the road\nfrom Ilium to Abydus), considering them as the remnant of a larger\nTeukrian population which once resided in the country, and which\nhad in very early times undertaken a vast migration from Asia into\nEurope.[818] To that Teukrian population he thinks that the Homeric\nTrojans belonged:[819] and by later writers, especially by Virgil and\nthe other Romans, the names Teukrians and Trojans are employed as\nequivalents. As the name Trojans is not mentioned in any contemporary\nhistorical monument, so the name _Teukrians_ never once occurs in the\nold epic. It appears to have been first noticed by the elegiac poet\nKallinus, about 660 B. C., who connected it by an alleged immigration\nof Teukrians from Kr\u00eate into the region round about Ida. Others again\ndenied this, asserting that the primitive ancestor, Teukrus, had come\ninto the country from Attica,[820] or that he was of indigenous origin,\nborn from Skamander and the nymph Id\u00e6a\u2014all various manifestations of\nthat eager thirst after an eponymous hero which never deserted the\nGreeks. Gergithians occur in more than one spot in \u00c6olis, even so far\nsouthward as the neighborhood of Kym\u00ea:[821] the name has no place\nin Homer, but he mentions Gorgythion and Kebriones as illegitimate\nsons of Priam, thus giving a sort of epical recognition both to\nGergis and Kebr\u00ean. As Herodotus calls the old epical Trojans by the\nname Teukrians, so the Attic Tragedians call them Phrygians; though\nthe Homeric hymn to Aphrodit\u00ea represents Phrygians and Trojans as\ncompletely distinct, specially noting the diversity of language;[822]\nand in the Iliad the Phrygians are simply numbered among the allies\nof Troy from the far Ascania, without indication of any more intimate\nrelationship.[823] Nor do the tales which connect Dardanus with\nSamothrace and Arcadia find countenance in the Homeric poems, wherein\nDardanus is the son of Zeus, having no root anywhere except in\nDardania.[824] The mysterious solemnities of Samothrace, afterwards so\nhighly venerated throughout the Grecian world, date from a period much\nlater than Homer; and the religious affinities of that island as well\nas of Kr\u00eate with the territories of Phrygia and \u00c6olis, were certain,\naccording to the established tendency of the Grecian mind, to beget\nstories of a common genealogy.\n\n  [816] Compare Herodot. v. 24-122; Thucyd. i. 131. The \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6 is\n  a part of the Tr\u00f4ad.\n\n  [817] Herodot. vii. 43.\n\n  [818] Herodot. v. 122. \u03b5\u1f37\u03bb\u03b5 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\n  \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd \u03bd\u03ad\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b5\u1f37\u03bb\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u0393\u03ad\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03a4\u03b5\u03cd\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  For the migration of the Teukrians and Mysians into Europe, see\n  Herodot. vii. 20; the P\u00e6onians, on the Strym\u00f4n, called themselves\n  their descendants.\n\n  [819] Herodot. ii. 118; v. 13.\n\n  [820] Strabo, xiii. p. 604; Apollod\u00f4r. iii. 12, 4.\n\n  Kephal\u00f4n of Gergis called Teukrus a Kr\u00eatan (Stephan. Byz. v.\n  \u1f08\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b2\u03b7).\n\n  [821] Clearchus ap. Ath\u00e6ne. vi. p. 256; Strabo, xiii. p. 589-616.\n\n  [822] Homer, Hymn. in Vener. 116.\n\n  [823] Iliad, ii. 863. Asius, the brother of Hecab\u00ea, lives in\n  Phrygia on the banks of the Sangarius (Iliad, xvi. 717).\n\n  [824] See Hellanik. Fragm. 129, 130. ed. Didot; and Kephal\u00f4n\n  Gergithius ap. Steph. Byz. v. \u1f08\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b2\u03ae.\n\nTo pass from this legendary world,\u2014an aggregate of streams distinct and\nheterogeneous, which do not willingly come into confluence, and cannot\nbe forced to intermix,\u2014into the clearer vision afforded by Herodotus,\nwe learn from him that in the year 500 B. C. the whole coast-region\nfrom Dardanus southward to the promontory of Lektum (including the\ntown of Ilium), and from Lektum eastward to Adramyttium, had been\n\u00c6olized, or was occupied by \u00c6olic Greeks\u2014likewise the inland towns\nof Sk\u00eapsis[825] and Kreb\u00ean. So that if we draw a line northward from\nAdramyttium to Kyzikus on the Propontis, throughout the whole territory\nwestward from that line, to the Hellespont and the \u00c6gean Sea, all the\nconsiderable towns would be Hellenic, with the exception of Gergis and\nthe Teukrian population around it,\u2014all the towns worthy of note were\neither Ionic or \u00c6olic. A century earlier, the Teukrian population would\nhave embraced a wider range\u2014perhaps Sk\u00eapsis and Kreb\u00ean, the latter\nof which places was colonized by Greeks from Kym\u00ea:[826] a century\nafterwards, during the satrapy of Pharnabazus, it appears that Gergis\nhad become Hellenized as well as the rest. The four towns, Ilium,\nGergis, Kebr\u00ean and Sk\u00eapsis, all in lofty and strong positions, were\ndistinguished each by a solemn worship and temple of Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and by the\nrecognition of that goddess as their special patroness.[827]\n\n  [825] Sk\u00eapsis received some colonists from the Ionic Miletus\n  (Anaximen\u00eas apud Strabo, xiv. p. 635); but the coins of the place\n  prove that its dialect was \u00c6olic. See Klausen, \u00c6neas und die\n  Penaten, tom. i. note 180.\n\n  Arisb\u00ea also, near Abydus, seems to have been settled from\n  Mityl\u00ean\u00ea (Eustath. ad Iliad. xii. 97).\n\n  The extraordinary fertility and rich black mould of the plain\n  around Ilium is noticed by modern travellers (see Franklin,\n  Remarks and Observations on the Plain of Troy, London, 1800, p.\n  44): it is also easily worked: \u201ca couple of buffaloes or oxen\n  were sufficient to draw the plough, whereas near Constantinople\n  it takes twelve or fourteen.\u201d\n\n  [826] Eph\u00f4rus ap. Harpocrat. v. \u039a\u03b5\u03b2\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1.\n\n  [827] Xenoph. Hellen. i. 1, 10; iii. 1, 10-15.\n\n  One of the great motives of Dio in setting aside the Homeric\n  narrative of the Trojan war, is to vindicate Ath\u00ean\u00ea from the\n  charge of having unjustly destroyed her own city of Ilium (Orat.\n  xi. p. 310: \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1fc7 \u1f00\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd).\n\nThe author of the Iliad conceived the whole of this region as occupied\nby people not Greek,\u2014Trojans, Dardanians, Lykians, Lelegians,\nPelasgians, and Kilikians. He recognizes a temple and worship of Ath\u00ean\u00ea\nin Ilium, though the goddess is bitterly hostile to the Trojans: and\nArktinus described the Palladium as the capital protection of the city.\nBut perhaps the most remarkable feature of identity between the Homeric\nand the historical \u00c6olis, is, the solemn and diffused worship of the\nSminthian Apollo. Chrys\u00ea, Killa and Tenedos, and more than one place\ncalled Sminthium, maintain the surname and invoke the protection of\nthat god during later times, just as they are emphatically described to\ndo by Homer.[828]\n\n  [828] Strabo, x. p. 473; xiii. p. 604-605. Polemon. Fragm. 31. p.\n  63, ed. Preller.\n\n  Polemon was a native of Ilium, and had written a periegesis of\n  the place (about 200 B. C., therefore earlier than D\u00eam\u00eatrius of\n  Sk\u00eapsis): he may have witnessed the improvement in its position\n  effected by the Romans. He noticed the identical stone upon which\n  Palam\u00ead\u00eas had taught the Greeks to play at dice.\n\n  The Sminthian Apollo appears inscribed on the coins of\n  Alexandreia Tr\u00f4as; and the temple of the god was memorable even\n  down to the time of the emperor Julian (Ammian. Marcellin. xxii.\n  8). Compare Menander (the Rhetor) \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, iv. 14; apud\n  Walz. Collect. Rhetor. t. ix. p. 304; also \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, iv.\n  17.\n\n  \u03a3\u03bc\u03af\u03bd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, both in the Kr\u00eatan and the \u00c6olic dialect, meant a\n  _field-mouse_: the region seems to have been greatly plagued by\n  these little animals.\n\n  Polemon could not have accepted the theory of D\u00eam\u00eatrius, that\n  Ilium was not the genuine Troy: his Periegesis, describing the\n  localities and relics of Ilium, implied the legitimacy of the\n  place as a matter of course.\n\nWhen it is said that the Post-Homeric Greeks gradually Hellenized\nthis entire region, we are not to understand that the whole previous\npopulation either retired or was destroyed. The Greeks settled in the\nleading and considerable towns, which enabled them both to protect one\nanother and to gratify their predominant tastes. Partly by force\u2014but\ngreatly also by that superior activity, and power of assimilating\nforeign ways of thought to their own, which distinguished them from\nthe beginning\u2014they invested all the public features and management of\nthe town with an Hellenic air, distributed all about it their gods,\ntheir heroes and their legends, and rendered their language the medium\nof public administration, religious songs and addresses to the gods,\nand generally for communications wherein any number of persons were\nconcerned. But two remarks are here to be made: first, in doing this\nthey could not avoid taking to themselves more or less of that which\nbelonged to the parties with whom they fraternized, so that the result\nwas not pure Hellenism; next, that even this was done only in the\ntowns, without being fully extended to the territorial domain around,\nor to those smaller townships which stood to the town in a dependent\nrelation. The \u00c6olic and Ionic Greeks borrowed from the Asiatics whom\nthey had Hellenized, musical instruments and new laws of rhythm and\nmelody, which they knew how to turn to account: they further adopted\nmore or less of those violent and maddening religious rites, manifested\noccasionally in self-inflicted suffering and mutilation, which were\nindigenous in Asia Minor in the worship of the Great Mother. The\nreligion of the Greeks in the region of Ida as well as at Kyzikus was\nmore orgiastic than the native worship of Greece Proper, just as that\nof Lampsacus, Priapus and Parium was more licentious. From the Teukrian\nregion of Gergis, and from the Gergithes near Kym\u00ea, sprang the original\nSibylline prophecies, and the legendary Sibyll who plays so important\na part in the tale of \u00c6neas: the mythe of the Sibyll, whose prophecies\nare supposed to be heard in the hollow blast bursting out from obscure\ncaverns and apertures in the rocks,[829] was indigenous among the\nGergithian Teukrians, and passed from the Kym\u00e6ans in \u00c6olis, along with\nthe other circumstances of the tale of \u00c6neas, to their brethren the\ninhabitants of Cum\u00e6 in Italy. The date of the Gergithian Sibyll, or\nrather of the circulation of her supposed prophecies, is placed during\nthe reign of Cr\u0153sus, a period when Gergis was thoroughly Teukrian.\nHer prophecies, though embodied in Greek verses, had their root in a\nTeukrian soil and feelings; and the promises of future empire which\nthey so liberally make to the fugitive hero escaping from the flames of\nTroy into Italy, become interesting from the remarkable way in which\nthey were realized by Rome.[830]\n\n  [829] Virgil, \u00c6neid, vi. 42:\u2014\n\n    Excisum Euboic\u00e6 latus ingens rupis in antrum,\n    Quo lati ducunt aditus centum, ostia centum;\n    Unde ruunt totidem voces, responsa Sibyll\u00e6.\n\n  [830] Pausanias, x. 12, 8; Lactantius, i. 6, 12; Steph. Byz. v.\n  \u039c\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2; Schol. Plat. Ph\u00e6dr. p. 315, Bekker.\n\n  The date of this Gergithian Sibyll, or of the prophecies passing\n  under her name, is stated by H\u00earakleid\u00eas of Pontus, and there\n  seems no reason for calling it in question.\n\n  Klausen (\u00c6neas und die Penaten, book ii. p. 205) has worked out\n  copiously the circulation and legendary import of the Sibylline\n  prophecies.\n\nAt what time Ilium and Dardanus became \u00c6olized we have no information.\nWe find the Mitylen\u00e6ans in possession of Sigeium in the time of the\npoet Alk\u00e6us, about 600 B. C.; and the Athenians during the reign of\nPeisistratus, having wrested it from them and trying to maintain their\npossession, vindicate the proceeding by saying that they had as much\nright to it as the Mitylen\u00e6ans, \u201cfor the latter had no more claim to\nit than any of the other Greeks who had aided Menelaus in avenging\nthe abduction of Helen.\u201d[831] This is a very remarkable incident,\nas attesting the celebrity of the legend of Troy, and the value of\na mythical title in international disputes\u2014yet seemingly implying\nthat the establishment of the Mitylen\u00e6ans on that spot must have been\nsufficiently recent. The country near the junction of the Hellespont\nand the Propontis is represented as originally held[832] by Bebrykian\nThracians, while Abydus was first occupied by Milesian colonists in\nthe reign and by the permission of the Lydian king Gyg\u00eas[833]\u2014to whom\nthe whole Tr\u00f4ad and the neighboring territory belonged, and upon\nwhom therefore the Teukrians of Ida must have been dependent. This\nmust have been about 700 B. C., a period considerably earlier than\nthe Mitylen\u00e6an occupation of Sigeium. Lampsacus and P\u00e6sus, on the\nneighboring shores of the Propontis, were also Milesian colonies,\nthough we do not know their date: Parium was jointly settled from\nMiletus, Erythr\u00e6 and Parus.\n\n  [831] Herodot. v. 94. \u03a3\u03af\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd ... \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f37\u03bb\u03b5 \u03a0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c7\u03bc\u1fc7\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u039c\u03b9\u03c4\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd ... \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u0391\u1f30\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f38\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03ae\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f01\u03c1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c2.\n  In \u00c6schylus (Eumenid. 402) the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea claims the land\n  about the Skamander, as having been presented to the sons of\n  Th\u00easeus by the general vote of the Grecian chiefs:\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7,\n    \u1f2b\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\n    \u03a4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03ce\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1,\n    \u1f1c\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76,\n    \u1f18\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03ce\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u0398\u03b7\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  In the days of Peisistratus, it seems Athens was not bold enough\n  or powerful enough to advance this vast pretension.\n\n  [832] Char\u00f4n of Lampsacus ap. Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 2;\n  Bernhardy ad Dionys. Peri\u00eag\u00eat. 805. p. 747.\n\n  [833] Such at least is the statement of Strabo (xii. p. 590);\n  though such an extent of Lydian role at that time seems not easy\n  to reconcile with the proceedings of the subsequent Lydian kings.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI.\n\nGRECIAN MYTHES, AS UNDERSTOOD, FELT AND INTERPRETED BY THE GREEKS\nTHEMSELVES.\n\n\nThe preceding sections have been intended to exhibit a sketch of that\nnarrative matter, so abundant, so characteristic and so interesting,\nout of which early Grecian history and chronology have been extracted.\nRaised originally by hands unseen and from data unassignable, it\nexisted first in the shape of floating talk among the people, from\nwhence a large portion of it passed into the song of the poets, who\nmultiplied, transformed and adorned it in a thousand various ways.\n\nThese mythes or current stories, the spontaneous and earliest growth of\nthe Grecian mind, constituted at the same time the entire intellectual\nstock of the age to which they belonged. They are the common root of\nall those different ramifications into which the mental activity of\nthe Greeks subsequently diverged; containing, as it were, the preface\nand germ of the positive history and philosophy, the dogmatic theology\nand the professed romance, which we shall hereafter trace each in\nits separate development. They furnished aliment to the curiosity,\nand solution to the vague doubts and aspirations of the age; they\nexplained the origin of those customs and standing peculiarities\nwith which men were familiar; they impressed moral lessons, awakened\npatriotic sympathies, and exhibited in detail the shadowy, but anxious\npresentiments of the vulgar as to the agency of the gods: moreover they\nsatisfied that craving for adventure and appetite for the marvellous,\nwhich has in modern times become the province of fiction proper.\n\nIt is difficult, we may say impossible, for a man of mature age to\ncarry back his mind to his conceptions such as they stood when he was a\nchild, growing naturally out of his imagination and feelings, working\nupon a scanty stock of materials, and borrowing from authorities whom\nhe blindly followed but imperfectly apprehended. A similar difficulty\noccurs when we attempt to place ourselves in the historical and\nquasi-philosophical point of view which the ancient mythes present to\nus. We can follow perfectly the imagination and feeling which dictated\nthese tales, and we can admire and sympathize with them as animated,\nsublime, and affecting poetry; but we are too much accustomed to matter\nof fact and philosophy of a positive kind, to be able to conceive a\ntime when these beautiful fancies were construed literally and accepted\nas serious reality.\n\nNevertheless it is obvious that Grecian mythes cannot be either\nunderstood or appreciated except with reference to the system of\nconceptions and belief of the ages in which they arose. We must\nsuppose a public not reading and writing, but seeing, hearing and\ntelling\u2014destitute of all records, and careless as well as ignorant of\npositive history with its indispensable tests, yet at the same time\ncurious and full of eagerness for new or impressive incidents\u2014strangers\neven to the rudiments of positive philosophy and to the idea of\ninvariable sequences of nature either in the physical or moral world,\nyet requiring some connecting theory to interpret and regularize the\nph\u00e6nomena before them. Such a theory was supplied by the spontaneous\ninspirations of an early fancy, which supposed the habitual agency\nof beings intelligent and voluntary like themselves, but superior in\nextent of power, and different in peculiarity of attributes. In the\ngeographical ideas of the Homeric period, the earth was flat and round,\nwith the deep and gentle ocean-stream flowing around and returning into\nitself: chronology, or means of measuring past time, there existed\nnone; but both unobserved regions might be described, the forgotten\npast unfolded, and the unknown future predicted\u2014through particular men\nspecially inspired by the gods, or endowed by them with that peculiar\nvision which detected and interpreted passing signs and omens.\n\nIf even the rudiments of scientific geography and physics, now so\nuniversally diffused and so invaluable as a security against error and\ndelusion, were wanting in this early stage of society, their place was\nabundantly supplied by vivacity of imagination and by personifying\nsympathy. The unbounded tendency of the Homeric Greeks to multiply\nfictitious persons, and to construe the ph\u00e6nomena which interested them\ninto manifestations of design, is above all things here to be noticed,\nbecause the form of personal narrative, universal in their mythes,\nis one of its many manifestations. Their polytheism (comprising some\nelements of an original fetichism, in which particular objects had\nthemselves been supposed to be endued with life, volition, and design)\nrecognized agencies of unseen beings identified and confounded with the\ndifferent localities and departments of the physical world. Of such\nbeings there were numerous varieties, and many gradations both in power\nand attributes; there were differences of age, sex and local residence,\nrelations both conjugal and filial between them, and tendencies\nsympathetic as well as repugnant. The gods formed a sort of political\ncommunity of their own, which had its hierarchy, its distribution of\nranks and duties, its contentions for power and occasional revolutions,\nits public meetings in the agora of Olympus, and its multitudinous\nbanquets or festivals.[834] The great Olympic gods were in fact only\nthe most exalted amongst an aggregate of quasi-human or ultra-human\npersonages,\u2014d\u00e6mons, heroes, nymphs, eponymous (or name-giving) genii,\nidentified with each river, mountain,[835] cape, town, village, or\nknown circumscription of territory,\u2014besides horses, bulls, and dogs,\nof immortal breed and peculiar attributes, and monsters of strange\nlineaments and combinations, \u201cGorgons and Harpies and Chim\u00e6ras dire.\u201d\nAs there were in every _gens_ or family special gentile deities and\nforegone ancestors who watched over its members, forming in each the\ncharacteristic symbol and recognized guarantee of their union, so there\nseem to have been in each guild or trade peculiar beings whose vocation\nit was to co\u00f6perate or to impede in various stages of the business.[836]\n\n  [834] Homer, Iliad, i. 603; xx. 7. Hesiod, Theogon. 802.\n\n  [835] We read in the Iliad that Asterop\u00e6us was grandson of the\n  beautiful river Axius, and Achilles, after having slain him,\n  admits the dignity of this parentage, but boasts that his own\n  descent from Zeus was much greater, since even the great river\n  Achel\u00f4us and Oceanus himself is inferior to Zeus (xxi. 157-191).\n  Skamander fights with Achilles, calling his brother Simo\u00efs to his\n  aid (213-308). Tyr\u00f4, the daughter of Salm\u00f4neus, falls in love\n  with Enipeus, the most beautiful of rivers (Odyss. xi. 237).\n  Achel\u00f4us appears as a suitor of Deianira (Sophokl. Trach. 9).\n\n  There cannot be a better illustration of this feeling than what\n  is told of the New Zealanders at the present time. The chief\n  Heu-Heu appeals to his ancestor, the great mountain Tonga Riro:\n  \u201cI am the Heu-Heu, and rule over you all, just as my ancestor\n  Tonga Riro, the mountain of snow, stands above all this land.\u201d\n  (E. J. Wakefield, Adventures in New Zealand, vol. i. ch. 17.\n  p. 465). Heu-Heu refused permission to any one to ascend the\n  mountain, on the ground that it was his _tipuna_ or ancestor: \u201che\n  constantly identified himself with the mountain and called it\n  his sacred ancestor\u201d (vol. ii. c. 4. p. 113). The mountains in\n  New Zealand are accounted by the natives masculine and feminine:\n  Tonga Riro, and Taranaki, two male mountains, quarrelled about\n  the affections of a small volcanic female mountain in the\n  neighborhood (_ibid._ ii. c. 4. p. 97).\n\n  The religious imagination of the Hindoos also (as described by\n  Colonel Sleeman in his excellent work, Rambles and Recollections\n  of an Indian Official), affords a remarkable parallel to that of\n  the early Greeks. Colonel Sleeman says,\u2014\n\n  \u201cI asked some of the Hindoos about us why they called the river\n  Mother Nerbudda, if she was really never married. Her Majesty\n  (said they with great respect) would really never consent to\n  be married after the indignity she suffered from her affianced\n  bridegroom the Sohun: and we call her _mother_ because she\n  blesses us all, and we are anxious to accost her by the name\n  which we consider to be the most respectful and endearing.\n\n  \u201cAny Englishman can easily conceive a poet in his highest\n  calenture of the brain, addressing the Ocean as a steed that\n  knows his rider, and patting the crested billow as his flowing\n  mane. But he must come to India to understand how every\n  individual of a _whole community of many millions can address\n  a fine river as a living being\u2014a sovereign princess who hears\n  and understands all they say, and exercises a kind of local\n  superintendence over their affairs_, without a single temple in\n  which her image is worshipped, or a single priest to profit by\n  the delusion. As in the case of the Ganges, _it is the river\n  itself to whom they address themselves, and not to any deity\n  residing in it, or presiding over it_\u2014the stream itself is the\n  deity which fills their imaginations, and receives their homage\u201d\n  (Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official, ch. iii. p.\n  20). Compare also the remarks in the same work on the sanctity\n  of _Mother Nerbudda_ (chapter xxvii. p. 261); also of the holy\n  personality of the earth. \u201cThe land is considered as the MOTHER\n  of the prince or chief who holds it, the great parent from\n  whom he derives all that maintains him, his family, and his\n  establishments. If well-treated, she yields this in abundance\n  to her son; but if he presumes to look upon her with the eye of\n  _desire_, she ceases to be fruitful; or the Deity sends down\n  hail or blight to destroy all that she yields. The measuring the\n  surface of the fields, and the frequently inspecting the crops\n  by the chief himself or his immediate agents, were considered by\n  the people in this light\u2014either it should not be done at all,\n  or the duty should be delegated to inferior agents, whose close\n  inspection of the _great parent_ could not be so displeasing to\n  the Deity\u201d (Ch. xxvii. p. 248).\n\n  See also about the gods who are believed to reside in trees\u2014the\n  Peepultree, the cotton-tree, etc. (ch. ix. p. 112), and the\n  description of the annual marriage celebrated between the sacred\n  pebble, or pebble-god, Saligram, and the sacred shrub Toolsea,\n  celebrated at great expense and with a numerous procession (chap.\n  xix. p. 158; xxiii. p. 185).\n\n  [836] See the song to the potters, in the Homeric Epigrams (14):\u2014\n\n    \u0395\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03c9, \u1f66 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7\n    \u0394\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03b5 \u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5.\n    \u0395\u1f56 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b5\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\n    \u03a6\u03c1\u03c5\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f66\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n    ... \u1f2e\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc6 \u1f04\u03c1\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5,\n    \u03a3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f74 \u1fbd\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2\u00b7\n    \u03a3\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1fbd \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2, \u03a3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f0c\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u03a3\u03b1\u03b2\u03ac\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd,\n    \u1f68\u03bc\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd \u03b8\u1fbd, \u1f43\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9, etc.\n\n  A certain kindred between men and serpents (\u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03ac\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f44\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2) was recognized in the peculiar gens of the \u1f40\u03c6\u03b9\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2\n  near Parion, who possessed the gift of healing by their touches\n  the bite of the serpent: the original hero of this gens was said\n  to have been transformed from a serpent into a man (Strabo, xiii.\n  p. 588).\n\nThe extensive and multiform personifications, here faintly sketched,\npervaded in every direction the mental system of the Greeks, and\nwere identified intimately both with their conception and with their\ndescription of phenomena, present as well as past. That which to\nus is interesting as the mere creation of an exuberant fancy, was\nto the Greek genuine and venerated reality. Both the earth and the\nsolid heaven (G\u00e6a and Uranos) were both conceived and spoken of by\nhim as endowed with appetite, feeling, sex, and most of the various\nattributes of humanity. Instead of a sun such as we now see, subject\nto astronomical laws, and forming the centre of a system the changes\nof which we can ascertain and foreknow, he saw the great god H\u00ealios,\nmounting his chariot in the morning in the east, reaching at mid-day\nthe height of the solid heaven, and arriving in the evening at the\nwestern horizon, with horses fatigued and desirous of repose. H\u00ealios,\nhaving favorite spots wherein his beautiful cattle grazed, took\npleasure in contemplating them during the course of his journey, and\nwas sorely displeased if any man slew or injured them: he had moreover\nsons and daughters on earth, and as his all-seeing eye penetrated\neverywhere, he was sometimes in a situation to reveal secrets even to\nthe gods themselves\u2014while on other occasions he was constrained to turn\naside in order to avoid contemplating scenes of abomination.[837] To us\nthese now appear puerile, though pleasing fancies, but to an Homeric\nGreek they seemed perfectly natural and plausible. In his view, the\ndescription of the sun, as given in a modern astronomical treatise,\nwould have appeared not merely absurd, but repulsive and impious.\nEven in later times, when the positive spirit of inquiry had made\nconsiderable progress, Anaxagoras and other astronomers incurred the\ncharge of blasphemy for dispersonifying H\u00ealios, and trying to assign\ninvariable laws to the solar ph\u00e6nomena.[838] Personifying fiction was\nin this way blended by the Homeric Greeks with their conception of\nthe physical ph\u00e6nomena before them, not simply in the way of poetical\nornament, but as a genuine portion of their every-day belief.\n\n  [837] Odyss. ii. 388; viii. 270; xii. 4, 128, 416; xxiii. 362.\n  Iliad, xiv. 344. The Homeric Hymn to D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear expresses it neatly\n  (63)\u2014\n\n    \u1f29\u03ad\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f35\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n  Also the remarkable story of Eu\u00eanius of Apoll\u00f4nia, his neglect\n  of the sacred cattle of H\u00ealios, and the awful consequences of it\n  (Herodot. ix. 93: compare Theocr. Idyll, xxv. 130).\n\n  I know no passage in which this conception of the heavenly bodies\n  as Persons is more strikingly set forth than in the words of\n  the German chief Boiocalus, pleading the cause of himself and\n  his tribe the Ansibarii before the Roman legate Avitus. This\n  tribe, expelled by other tribes from its native possessions,\n  had sat down upon some of that wide extent of lands on the\n  Lower Rhine which the Roman government reserved for the use of\n  its soldiers, but which remained desert, because the soldiers\n  had neither the means nor the inclination to occupy them. The\n  old chief, pleading his cause before Avitus, who had issued\n  an order to him to evacuate the lands, first dwelt upon his\n  fidelity of fifty years to the Roman cause, and next touched\n  upon the enormity of retaining so large an area in a state of\n  waste (Tacit. Ann. xiii. 55): \u201cQuotam partem campi jacere, in\n  quam pecora et armenta militum aliquando transmitterentur?\n  Servarent sane receptos gregibus, inter hominum famam: modo ne\n  vastitatem et solitudinem mallent, quam amicos populos Chamavorum\n  quondam ea arva, mox Tubantum, et post Usipiorum fuisse. Sicuti\n  c\u0153lum Diis, ita terras generi mortalium datas: qu\u00e6que vacu\u00e6,\n  eas publicas esse. _Solem_ deinde respiciens, et _c\u0153tera sidera\n  vocans, quasi coram_ interrogabat\u2014_vellentne contueri inane\n  solum? potius mare superfunderent adversus terrarum ereptores_.\n  Commotus his Avitus,\u201d etc. The legate refused the request, but\n  privately offered to Boiocalus lands for himself apart from the\n  tribe, which that chief indignantly spurned. He tried to maintain\n  himself in the lands, but was expelled by the Roman arms, and\n  forced to seek a home among the other German tribes, all of whom\n  refused it. After much wandering and privation, the whole tribe\n  of the Ansibarii was annihilated: its warriors were all slain,\n  its women and children sold as slaves.\n\n  I notice this afflicting sequel, in order to show that the\n  brave old chief was pleading before Avitus a matter of life and\n  death both to himself and his tribe, and that the occasion was\n  one least of all suited for a mere rhetorical prosopop\u0153ia. His\n  appeal is one sincere and heartfelt to the personal feelings and\n  sympathies of H\u00ealios.\n\n  Tacitus, in reporting the speech, accompanies it with the\n  gloss \u201cquasi coram,\u201d to mark that the speaker here passes into\n  a different order of ideas from that to which himself or his\n  readers were accustomed. If Boiocalus could have heard, and\n  reported to his tribe, an astronomical lecture, he would have\n  introduced some explanation, in order to facilitate to his tribe\n  the comprehension of H\u00ealios under a point of view so new to them.\n  While Tacitus finds it necessary to illustrate by a comment the\n  _personification of the sun_, Boiocalus would have had some\n  trouble to make his tribe comprehend the _re-ification of the god\n  H\u00ealios_.\n\n  [838] Physical astronomy was both new and accounted impious\n  in the time of the Peloponnesian war: see Plutarch, in his\n  reference to that eclipse which proved so fatal to the Athenian\n  army at Syracuse, in consequence of the religious feelings of\n  Nikias: \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f20\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd (Plutarch, Nikias, c.\n  23, and Perikl\u00eas, c. 32; Diod\u00f4r. xii. 39; D\u00eam\u00eatr. Phaler. ap.\n  Diogen. La\u00ebrt, ix. 9, 1).\n\n  \u201cYou strange man, Mel\u00eatus,\u201d said Socrat\u00eas, on his trial, to his\n  accuser, \u201care you seriously affirming that I do not think H\u00ealios\n  and Sel\u00ean\u00ea to be gods, as the rest of mankind think?\u201d \u201cCertainly\n  not, gentlemen of the Dikastery (_this is the reply of Mel\u00eatus_),\n  Socrat\u00eas says that the sun is a stone, and the moon earth.\u201d \u201cWhy,\n  my dear Mel\u00eatus, you think you are preferring an accusation\n  against Anaxagoras! You account these Dikasts so contemptibly\n  ignorant, as not to know that the books of Anaxagoras are\n  full of such doctrines! Is it from me that the youth acquire\n  such teaching, when they may buy the books for a drachma in\n  the theatre, and may thus laugh me to scorn if I pretended to\n  announce such views as my own\u2014_not to mention their extreme\n  absurdity_?\u201d (\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03b1 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, Plato, Apolog.\n  Socrat. c. 14. p. 26).\n\n  The divinity of H\u00ealios and Sel\u00ean\u00ea is emphatically set forth by\n  Plato, Legg. x. p. 886-889. He permits physical astronomy only\n  under great restrictions and to a limited extent. Compare Xenoph.\n  Memor. iv. 7, 7; Diogen. La\u00ebrt. ii. 8; Plutarch, De Stoicor.\n  Repugnant. c. 40. p. 1053; and Schaubach ad Anaxagor\u00e6 Fragmenta,\n  p. 6.\n\nIt was in this early state of the Grecian mind, stimulating so forcibly\nthe imagination and the feelings, and acting through them upon the\nbelief, that the great body of the mythes grew up and obtained\ncirculation. They were, from first to last, personal narratives and\nadventures; and the persons who predominated as subjects of them\nwere the gods, the heroes, the nymphs, etc., whose names were known\nand reverenced, and in whom every one felt interested. To every god\nand every hero it was consistent with Grecian ideas to ascribe great\ndiversity of human motive and attribute: each indeed has his own\npeculiar type of character, more or less strictly defined; but in all\nthere was a wide foundation for animated narrative and for romantic\nincident. The gods and heroes of the land and the tribe belonged, in\nthe conception of a Greek, alike to the present and to the past: he\nworshipped in their groves and at their festivals; he invoked their\nprotection, and believed in their superintending guardianship, even\nin his own day: but their more special, intimate, and sympathizing\nagency was cast back into the unrecorded past.[839] To give suitable\nutterance to this general sentiment,\u2014to furnish body and movement and\ndetail to these divine and heroic pre-existences, which were conceived\nonly in shadowy outline,\u2014to lighten up the dreams of what the past must\nhave been,[840] in the minds of those who knew not what it really had\nbeen\u2014such was the spontaneous aim and inspiration of productive genius\nin the community, and such were the purposes which the Grecian mythes\npre\u00ebminently accomplished.\n\n  [839] Hesiod, Catalog. Fragm. 76. p. 48, ed. D\u00fcntzer:\u2014\n\n    \u039e\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03cc\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9,\n    \u1f08\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n  Both the Theogonia and the Works and Days bear testimony to\n  the same general feeling. Even the heroes of Homer suppose a\n  preceding age, the inmates of which were in nearer contact with\n  the gods than they themselves (Odyss. viii. 223; Iliad, v. 304;\n  xii. 382). Compare Catullus, Carm. 64; Epithalam. Pele\u00f4s et\n  Thetidos, v. 382-408.\n\n  Menander the Rhetor (following generally the steps of Dionys.\n  Hal. Art Rhetor. cap. 1-8) suggests to his fellow-citizens at\n  Alexandria Tr\u00f4as, proper and complimentary forms to invite a\n  great man to visit their festival of the Sminthia:\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1\n  \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u1f21 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03a3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, ~\u1f25\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f10\u03be\u1fc6\u03bd\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2~, \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u1f72 \u1f21 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba. s. iv. c. 14. ap. Walz. Coll.\n  Rhetor, t. ix. p. 304). Menander seems to have been a native\n  of Alexandria Tr\u00f4as, though Suidas calls him a Laodicean (see\n  Walz. Pr\u00e6f. ad t. ix. p. xv.-xx.; and \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, sect. iv.\n  c. 17). The festival of the Sminthia lasted down to his time,\n  embracing the whole duration of paganism from Homer downwards.\n\n  [840] P. A. M\u00fcller observes justly, in his _Saga-Bibliothek_, in\n  reference to the Icelandic mythes, \u201cIn dem Mythischen wird das\n  Leben der Vorzeit dargestellt, wie es wirklich dem kindlichen\n  Verstande, der jugendlichen Einbildungskraft, und dem vollen\n  Herzen, erscheint.\u201d\n\n  (Lange\u2019s Untersuchungen \u00fcber die Nordische und Deutsche\n  Heldensage, translated from P. A. M\u00fcller, Introd. p. 1.)\n\nThe love of antiquities, which Tacitus notices as so prevalent among\nthe Greeks of his day,[841] was one of the earliest, the most durable,\nand the most widely diffused of the national propensities. But the\nantiquities of every state were divine and heroic, reproducing the\nlineaments, but disregarding the measure and limits, of ordinary\nhumanity. The gods formed the starting-point, beyond which no man\nthought of looking, though some gods were more ancient than others:\ntheir progeny, the heroes, many of them sprung from human mothers,\nconstitute an intermediate link between god and man. The ancient epic\nusually recognizes the presence of a multitude of nameless men, but\nthey are introduced chiefly for the purpose of filling the scene,\nand of executing the orders, celebrating the valor, and bringing\nout the personality, of a few divine or heroic characters.[842] It\nwas the glory of bards and storytellers to be able to satisfy those\nreligious and patriotic predispositions of the public, which caused the\nprimary demand for their tales, and which were of a nature eminently\ninviting and expansive. For Grecian religion was many-sided and many\ncolored; it comprised a great multiplicity of persons, together with\nmuch diversity in the types of character; it divinized every vein\nand attribute of humanity, the lofty as well as the mean\u2014the tender\nas well as the warlike\u2014the self-devoting and adventurous as well as\nthe laughter-loving and sensual. We shall hereafter reach a time when\nphilosophers protested against such identification of the gods with\nthe more vulgar appetites and enjoyments, believing that nothing\nexcept the spiritual attributes of man could properly be transferred\nto superhuman beings, and drawing their predicates respecting the gods\nexclusively from what was awful, majestic and terror-striking in human\naffairs. Such restrictions on the religious fancy were continually\non the increase, and the mystic and didactic stamp which marked the\nlast century of paganism in the days of Julian and Libanius, contrasts\nforcibly with the concrete and vivacious forms, full of vigorous\nimpulse and alive to all the capricious gusts of the human temperament,\nwhich people the Homeric Olympus.[843] At present, however, we have\nonly to consider the early, or Homeric and Hesiodic paganism, and its\noperation in the genesis of the mythical narratives. We cannot doubt\nthat it supplied the most powerful stimulus, and the only one which the\ntimes admitted, to the creative faculty of the people; as well from the\nsociability, the gradations, and the mutual action and reaction of its\ngods and heroes, as from the amplitude, the variety, and the purely\nhuman cast, of its fundamental types.\n\n  [841] Titus visited the temple of the Paphian Venus in Cyprus,\n  \u201cspectat\u00e2 opulenti\u00e2 donisque regum, qu\u00e6que _alia l\u00e6tum_\n  antiquitatibus Gr\u00e6corum genus _incert\u00e6 vetustati adfingit_, de\n  navigatione primum consuluit\u201d (Tacit. Hist. ii. 4-5).\n\n  [842] Aristotel. Problem. xix. 48. \u039f\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9. Istros followed this\n  opinion also: but the more common view seems to have considered\n  all who combated at Troy as heroes (see Schol. Iliad, ii. 110;\n  xv. 231), and so Hesiod treats them (Opp. Di. 158).\n\n  In reference to the Trojan war, Aristotle says\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  ~\u1f29\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2~ \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (Ethic. Nicom. i. 9; compare\n  vii. 1).\n\n  [843] Generation by a god is treated in the old poems as an act\n  entirely human and physical (\u1f10\u03bc\u03b9\u03b3\u03b7\u2014\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf); and this was the\n  common opinion in the days of Plato (Plato, Apolog. Socrat. c.\n  15. p. 15); the hero Astrabakus is father of the Laced\u00e6monian\n  king Demaratus (Herod. vi. 66). [Herodotus does not believe the\n  story told him at Babylon respecting Belus (i. 182).] Euripid\u00eas\n  sometimes expresses disapprobation of the idea (Ion. 350), but\n  Plato passed among a large portion of his admirers for the\n  actual son of Apollo, and his reputed father Aristo on marrying\n  was admonished in a dream to respect the person of his wife\n  Periktion\u00ea, then pregnant by Apollo, until after the birth of the\n  child Plato (Plutarch, Qu\u00e6st. Sympos. p. 717. viii. 1; Diogen.\n  La\u00ebrt. iii. 2; Origen, cont. Cels. i. p. 29). Plutarch (in Life\n  of Numa, c. 4; compare Life of Th\u00easeus, 2) discusses the subject,\n  and is inclined to disallow everything beyond mental sympathy\n  and tenderness in a god: Pausanias deals timidly with it, and\n  is not always consistent with himself; while the later rhetors\n  spiritualize it altogether. Meander, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, (towards\n  the end of the third century B. C.) prescribes rules for praising\n  a king: you are to praise him for the gens to which he belongs:\n  perhaps you may be able to make out that he really is the son\n  of some god; for many who seem to be from men, are really _sent\n  down by God_ and are _emanations from the Supreme Potency_\u2014\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1\n  \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u1f26\u03bd \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2. \u039f\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f41 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3\n  \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, etc. (Menander ap. Walz. Collect.\n  Rhetor. t. ix. c. i. p. 218). Again\u2014\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd\u03b8\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd\u2014\u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd ~\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd~ \u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u2014\u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  ~\u1f10\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5~, p. 322-327; compare Hermogen\u00eas, about the story\n  of Apollo and Daphn\u00ea, Progymnasm. c. 4; and Julian. Orat. vii. p.\n  220.\n\n  The contrast of the pagan phraseology of this age (Menander had\n  himself composed a hymn of invocation to Apollo\u2014\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f18\u03b3\u03ba\u03c9\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd,\n  c. 3. t. ix. p. 136, Walz.) with that of Homer is very worthy\n  of notice. In the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women much was said\n  respecting the marriages and amours of the gods, so as to furnish\n  many suggestions, like the love-songs of Sapph\u00f4, to the composers\n  of Epithalamic Odes (Menand. _ib._ sect. iv. c. 6. p. 268).\n\n  Menander gives a specimen of a prose hymn fit to be addressed to\n  the Sminthian Apollo (p. 320); the spiritual character of which\n  hymn forms the most pointed contrast with the Homeric hymn to the\n  same god.\n\n  We may remark an analogous case in which the Homeric hymn to\n  Apollo is modified by Plutarch. To provide for the establishment\n  of his temple at Delphi, Apollo was described as having himself,\n  in the shape of a dolphin, swam before a Kr\u00eatan vessel and guided\n  it to Krissa, where he directed the terrified crew to open the\n  Delphian temple. But Plutarch says that this old statement was\n  not correct: the god had not himself appeared in the shape of\n  a dolphin\u2014he had sent a dolphin expressly to guide the vessel\n  (Plutarch. de Solerti\u00e2 Animal. p. 983). See also a contrast\n  between the Homeric Zeus, and the genuine Zeus, (\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2)\n  brought out in Plutarch, Defect. Oracul. c 30. p. 426.\n\n  Illicit amours seem in these later times to be ascribed to\n  the \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2: see the singular controversy started among the\n  fictitious pleadings of the ancient rhetors\u2014\u039d\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2,\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\n  \u1f00\u03c4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.... \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6, \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03b4\u1fc6 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd; \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b5\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd (Anonymi\n  Scholia ad Hermogen. \u03a3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, ap. Walz. Coll. Rh. t. vii. p. 162).\n\n  Apsin\u00eas of Gadara, a sophist of the time of Diocletian, pretended\n  to be a son of Pan (see Suidas, v. \u1f08\u03c8\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2). The anecdote\n  respecting the rivers Skamander and M\u00e6ander, in the tenth epistle\n  ascribed to the orator \u00c6schines (p. 737), is curious, but we do\n  not know the date of that epistle.\n\nThough we may thus explain the mythop\u0153ic fertility of the Greeks, I am\nfar from pretending that we can render any sufficient account of the\nsupreme beauty of their chief epic and artistical productions. There is\nsomething in the first-rate productions of individual genius which lies\nbeyond the compass of philosophical theory: the special breath of the\nMuse (to speak the language of ancient Greece) must be present in order\nto give them being. Even among her votaries, many are called, but few\nare chosen; and the peculiarities of those few remain as yet her own\nsecret.\n\nWe shall not however forget that Grecian language was also an\nindispensable requisite to the growth and beauty of Grecian mythes\u2014its\nrichness, its flexibility and capacity of new combinations, its vocalic\nabundance and metrical pronunciation: and many even among its proper\nnames, by their analogy to words really significant, gave direct\noccasion to explanatory or illustrative stories. Etymological mythes\nare found in sensible proportion among the whole number.\n\nTo understand properly then the Grecian mythes, we must try to\nidentify ourselves with the state of mind of the original mythop\u0153ic\nage; a process not very easy, since it requires us to adopt a string\nof poetical fancies not simply as realities, but as the governing\nrealities of the mental system;[844] yet a process which would only\nreproduce something analogous to our own childhood. The age was one\ndestitute both of recorded history and of positive science, but full\nof imagination and sentiment and religious impressibility; from these\nsources sprung that multitude of supposed persons around whom all\ncombinations of sensible ph\u00e6nomena were grouped, and towards whom\ncuriosity, sympathies, and reverence were earnestly directed. The\nadventures of such persons were the only aliment suited at once both\nto the appetites and to the comprehension of an early Greek; and the\nmythes which detailed them, while powerfully interesting his emotions,\nfurnished to him at the same time a quasi-history and quasi-philosophy:\nthey filled up the vacuum of the unrecorded past, and explained many of\nthe puzzling incognita of the present.[845] Nor need we wonder that the\nsame plausibility which captivated his imagination and his feelings\nwas sufficient to engender spontaneous belief; or rather, that no\nquestion as to truth or falsehood of the narrative suggested itself to\nhis mind. His faith is ready, literal and uninquiring, apart from all\nthought of discriminating fact from fiction, or of detecting hidden and\nsymbolized meaning; it is enough that what he hears be intrinsically\nplausible and seductive, and that there be no special cause to provoke\ndoubt. And if indeed there were, the poet overrules such doubts by the\nholy and all-sufficient authority of the Muse, whose omniscience is the\nwarrant for his recital, as her inspiration is the cause of his success.\n\n  [844] The mental analogy between the early stages of human\n  civilization and the childhood of the individual is forcibly\n  and frequently set forth in the works of Vico. That eminently\n  original thinker dwells upon the poetical and religious\n  susceptibilities as the first to develop themselves in the human\n  mind, and as furnishing not merely connecting threads for the\n  explanation of sensible ph\u00e6nomena, but also aliment for the\n  hopes and fears, and means of socializing influence to men of\n  genius, at a time when reason was yet asleep. He points out\n  the _personifying instinct_ (\u201cistinto d\u2019 animazione\u201d) as the\n  spontaneous philosophy of man, \u201cto make himself the rule of the\n  universe,\u201d and to suppose everywhere a quasi-human agency as\n  the determining cause. He remarks that in an age of fancy and\n  feeling, the conceptions and language of poetry coincide with\n  those of reality and common life, instead of standing apart as a\n  separate vein. These views are repeated frequently (and with some\n  variations of opinion as he grew older) in his Latin work _De\n  Uno Universi Juris Principio_, as well as in the two successive\n  _r\u00e9dactions_ of his great Italian work, _Scienza Nuova_ (it\n  must be added that Vico as an expositor is prolix, and does not\n  do justice to his own powers of original thought): I select\n  the following from the second edition of the latter treatise,\n  published by himself in 1744, _Della Metafisica Poetica_ (see\n  vol. v. p. 189 of Ferrari\u2019s edition of his Works, Milan, 1836):\n  \u201cAdunque la sapienza poetica, che fu la prima sapienza della\n  Gentilit\u00e0, dovette incominciare da una Metafisica, non _ragionata\n  ed astratta_, qual \u00e8 questa or degli addottrinati, ma _sentita\n  ed immaginata_, quale dovett\u2019 essere di tai primi uomini,\n  siccome quelli ch\u2019 erano di niun raziocinio, e tutti robusti\n  sensi e vigorosissime fantasie, come \u00e8 stato nelle degnit\u00e0 (the\n  _Axioms_) stabilito. Questa fu la loro propria poesia, la qual\n  in essi fu una facult\u00e0 loro connaturale, perch\u00e8 erano di tali\n  sensi e di si fatte fantasie naturalmente forniti, nata da\n  _ignoranza di cagioni_\u2014la qual fu loro madre di maraviglia di\n  tutte le cose, che quelli ignoranti di tutte le cose fortemente\n  ammiravano. Tal poesia incominci\u00f2 in essi divina: perch\u00e8 nello\n  stesso tempo ch\u2019essi immaginavano le cagioni delle cose, che\n  sentivano ed ammiravano, essere Dei, come ora il confermiamo con\n  gli Americani, i quali tutte le cose che superano la loro picciol\n  capacit\u00e0, dicono esser Dei ... nello stesso tempo, diciamo, alle\n  cose ammirate davano l\u2019essere di sostanze dalla propria lor idea:\n  ch\u2019\u00e8 appunto la natura dei fanciulli, che osserviamo prendere tra\n  mani cose inanimate, e transtullarsi e favellarvi, come fussero\n  quelle persone vive. In cotal guisa i primi uomini delle nazioni\n  gentili, come fanciulli del nascente gener umano, dalla lor\n  idea creavan essi le cose ... per la loro robusta ignoranza, il\n  facevano in forza d\u2019una corpolentissima fantasia, e perch\u2019 era\n  corpolentissima, il facevano con una maravigliosa sublimit\u00e0, tal\n  e tanta, che perturbava all\u2019eccesso essi medesimi, che fingendo\n  le si creavano.... Di questa natura di cose umane rest\u00f2 eterna\n  propriet\u00e0 spiegata con nobil espressione da Tacito, che vanamente\n  gli uomini spaventati _fingunt simul creduntque_.\u201d\n\n  After describing the condition of rude men, terrified with\n  thunder and other vast atmospheric ph\u00e6nomena, Vico proceeds\n  (_ib._ p. 172)\u2014\u201cIn tal caso la natura della mente umana porta\n  ch\u2019ella attribuisca all\u2019effetto la sua natura: e la natura loro\n  era in tale stato d\u2019uomini tutti robuste forze di corpo, che\n  urlando, brontolando, spiegavano le loro violentissime passioni,\n  si finsero il cielo esser un gran corpo animato, che per tal\n  aspetto chiamavano Giove, che col fischio dei fulmini e col\n  fragore dei tuoni volesse lor dire qualche cosa.... E si fanno\n  di tutta la natura un vasto corpo animato, che senta passioni ed\n  affetti.\u201d\n\n  Now the contrast with modern habits of thought:\u2014\n\n  \u201cMa siccome _ora_ per la natura delle nostre umane menti troppo\n  ritirata dai sensi nel medesimo volgo\u2014con le tante astrazioni,\n  di quante sono piene le lingue\u2014con tanti vocaboli astratti\u2014e\n  di troppo assottigliata con l\u2019arti dello scrivere, e quasi\n  spiritualezzata con la practica dei numeri\u2014_ci e naturalmente\n  niegato di poter formare_ la vasta imagine di cotal donna che\n  dicono Natura simpatetica, che mentre con la bocca dicono, non\n  hanno nulla in lor mente, perocch\u00e8 la lor mente \u00e8 dentro il\n  falso, che \u00e8 nulla; n\u00e8 sono soccorsi dalla fantasia a poterne\n  formare una falsa vastissima imagine. Cos\u00ec _ora ci \u00e8 naturalmente\n  niegato di poter entrare nella vasta immaginativa di quei primi\n  uomini_, le menti dei quali di nulla erano assottigliate, di\n  nulla astratte, di nulla spiritualezzate.... Onde dicemmo\n  sopra ch\u2019_ora appena intender si pu\u00f2, affatto immaginar non s\u00ec\n  pu\u00f2_, come pensassero i primi uomini che fondarono la umanit\u00e0\n  gentilesca.\u201d\n\n  In this citation (already almost too long for a note) I have\n  omitted several sentences not essential to the general meaning.\n  It places these early divine fables and theological poets (so\n  Vico calls them) in their true point of view, and assigns to them\n  their proper place in the ascending movement of human society:\n  it refers the mythes to an early religious and poetical age, in\n  which feeling and fancy composed the whole fund of the human\n  mind, over and above the powers of sense: the great mental change\n  which has since taken place has robbed us of the power, not\n  merely of believing them as they were originally believed, but\n  even of conceiving completely that which their first inventors\n  intended to express.\n\n  The views here given from this distinguished Italian (the\n  precursor of F. A. Wolf in regard to the Homeric poems, as well\n  as of Niebuhr in regard to the Roman history) appear to me no\n  less correct than profound; and the obvious inference from them\n  is, that attempts to _explain_ (as it is commonly called) the\n  mythes (_i. e._ to translate them into some physical, moral or\n  historical statements, suitable to our order of thought) are,\n  even as guesses, essentially unpromising. Nevertheless Vico,\n  inconsistently with his own general view, bestows great labor and\n  ingenuity in attempting to discover internal meaning symbolized\n  under many of the mythes; and even lays down the position, \u201cche\n  i primi uomini della Gentilit\u00e0 essendo stati semplicissimi,\n  quanto i fanciulli, i quali per natura son veritieri: le prime\n  favole non poterono finger nulla di falso: per lo che dovettero\n  necessariamente essere _vere narrazioni_.\u201d (See vol. v. p. 194;\n  compare also p. 99, Axiom xvi.) If this position be meant simply\n  to exclude the idea of designed imposture, it may for the most\n  part be admitted; but Vico evidently intends something more. He\n  thinks that there lies hid under the fables a basis of matter of\n  fact\u2014not literal but symbolized\u2014which he draws out and exhibits\n  under the form of a civil history of the divine and heroic times:\n  a confusion of doctrine the more remarkable, since he distinctly\n  tells us (in perfect conformity with the long passage above\n  transcribed from him) that the special matter of these early\n  mythes is \u201cimpossibility accredited as truth,\u201d\u2014\u201cche la di lei\n  propria materia \u00e8 _l\u2019impossibile credibile_\u201d (p. 176, and still\n  more fully in the first _r\u00e9daction_ of the _Scienza Nuova_, b.\n  iii. c. 4; vol. iv. p. 187 of his Works).\n\n  When we read the _Canones Mythologici_ of Vico (De Constantia\n  Philologi\u00e6, Pars Posterior, c. xxx.; vol. iii. p. 363), and\n  his explanation of the legends of the Olympic gods, Hercules,\n  Th\u00easeus, Kadmus, etc., we see clearly that the meaning which he\n  professes to bring out is one previously put in by himself.\n\n  There are some just remarks to the same purpose in Karl Ritter\u2019s\n  _Vorhalle Europ\u00e4ischer Volkergeschichten_, Abschn. ii. p. 150\n  _seq._ (Berlin, 1820). He too points out how much the faith of\n  the old world (der Glaube der Vorwelt) has become foreign to our\n  minds, since the recent advances of \u201cPolitik und Kritik,\u201d and how\n  impossible it is for us to elicit history from their conceptions\n  by our analysis, in cases where they have not distinctly laid it\n  out for us. The great length of this note prevents me from citing\n  the passage: and he seems to me also (like Vico) to pursue his\n  own particular investigations in forgetfulness of the principle\n  laid down by himself.\n\n  [845] O. M\u00fcller, in his _Prolegomena zu einer wissenschaftlichen\n  Mythologie_ (cap. iv. p. 108), has pointed out the mistake of\n  supposing that there existed originally some nucleus of pure\n  reality as the starting-point of the mythes, and that upon this\n  nucleus fiction was superinduced afterwards: he maintains that\n  the real and the ideal were blended together in the primitive\n  conception of the mythes. Respecting the general state of mind\n  out of which the mythes grew, see especially pages 78 and 110 of\n  that work, which is everywhere full of instruction on the subject\n  of the Grecian mythes, and is eminently suggestive, even where\n  the positions of the author are not completely made out.\n\n  The short _Heldensage der Griechen_ by Nitzsch (Kiel, 1842, t.\n  v.) contains more of just and original thought on the subject\n  of the Grecian mythes than any work with which I am acquainted.\n  I embrace completely the subjective point of view in which he\n  regards them; and although I have profited much from reading\n  his short tract, I may mention that before I ever saw it, I had\n  enforced the same reasonings on the subject in an article in the\n  Westminster Review, May 1843, on the _Heroen-Geschichten_ of\n  Niebuhr.\n\n  Jacob Grimm, in the preface to his _Deutsche Mythologie_ (p. 1,\n  1st edit. G\u00f6tt. 1835), pointedly insists on the distinction\n  between \u201c_Sage_\u201d and history, as well as upon the fact that the\n  former has its chief root in religious belief \u201cLegend and history\n  (he says) are powers each by itself, adjoining indeed on the\n  confines, but having each its own separate and exclusive ground;\u201d\n  also p. xxvii. of the same introduction.\n\n  A view substantially similar is adopted by William Grimm, the\n  other of the two distinguished brothers whose labors have so much\n  elucidated Teutonic philology and antiquities. He examines the\n  extent to which either historical matter of fact or historical\n  names can be traced in the _Deutsche Heldensage_; and he comes to\n  the conclusion that the former is next to nothing, the latter not\n  considerable. He draws particular attention to the fact, that the\n  audience for whom these poems were intended had not learned to\n  distinguish history from poetry (W. Grimm, _Deutsche Heldensage_,\n  pp. 8, 337, 342, 345, 399, G\u00f6tt. 1829).\n\nThe state of mind, and the relation of speaker to hearers, thus\ndepicted, stand clearly marked in the terms and tenor of the ancient\nepic, if we only put a plain meaning upon what we read. The poet\u2014like\nthe prophet, whom he so much resembles\u2014sings under heavenly guidance,\ninspired by the goddess to whom he has prayed for her assisting\nimpulse: she puts the word into his mouth and the incidents into his\nmind: he is a privileged man, chosen as her organ and speaking from\nher revelations.[846] As the Muse grants the gift of song to whom she\nwill, so she sometimes in her anger snatches it away, and the most\nconsummate human genius is then left silent and helpless.[847] It is\ntrue that these expressions, of the Muse inspiring and the poet singing\na tale of past times, have passed from the ancient epic to compositions\nproduced under very different circumstances, and have now degenerated\ninto unmeaning forms of speech; but they gained currency originally in\ntheir genuine and literal acceptation. If poets had from the beginning\nwritten or recited, the predicate of singing would never have been\nascribed to them; nor would it have ever become customary to employ the\nname of the Muse as a die to be stamped on licensed fiction, unless the\npractice had begun when her agency was invoked and hailed in perfect\ngood faith. Belief, the fruit of deliberate inquiry and a rational\nscrutiny of evidence, is in such an age unknown: the simple faith of\nthe time slides in unconsciously, when the imagination and feeling are\nexalted; and inspired authority is at once understood, easily admitted,\nand implicitly confided in.\n\n  [846] Hesiod, Theogon. 32.\u2014\n\n    ... \u1f10\u03bd\u03ad\u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad (the Muses) \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03b4\u1f74\u03bd\n    \u0398\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1,\n    \u039a\u03b1\u03af \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ba\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f51\u03bc\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, etc.\n\n  Odyss. xxii. 347; viii. 63, 73, 481, 489. \u0394\u03b7\u03bc\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1fbd ... \u1f22 \u03c3\u03ad \u03b3\u03b5\n  \u039c\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5, \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03c3\u03ad\u03b3\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd: that is, Demodocus has\n  either been inspired as a poet by the Muse, or as a prophet by\n  Apollo: for the Homeric Apollo is not the god of song. Kalchas\n  the prophet receives his inspiration from Apollo, who confers\n  upon him the same knowledge both of past and future as the Muses\n  give to Hesiod (Iliad, i. 69):\u2014\n\n    \u039a\u03ac\u03bb\u03c7\u03b1\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f44\u03c7\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n    \u1f4b\u03c2 \u1f94\u03b4\u03b7 \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1, \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n    \u1f2b\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5 \u03a6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  Also Iliad, ii. 485.\n\n  Both the \u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 and the \u1f00\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 are standing, recognized\n  professions (Odyss. xvii. 383), like the physician and the\n  carpenter, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9\u03cc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9.\n\n  [847] Iliad, ii. 599.\n\nThe word mythe (\u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, _fabula_, _story_), in its original meaning,\nsignified simply a statement or current narrative, without any\nconnotative implication either of truth or falsehood. Subsequently the\nmeaning of the word (in Latin and English as well as in Greek) changed,\nand came to carry with it the idea of an old personal narrative,\nalways uncertified, sometimes untrue or avowedly fictitious.[848]\nAnd this change was the result of a silent alteration in the mental\nstate of the society,\u2014of a transition on the part of the superior\nminds (and more or less on the part of all) to a stricter and more\nelevated canon of credibility, in consequence of familiarity with\nrecorded history, and its essential tests, affirmative as well as\nnegative. Among the original hearers of the mythes, all such tests were\nunknown; they had not yet learned the lesson of critical disbelief;\nthe mythe passed unquestioned from the mere fact of its currency, and\nfrom its harmony with existing sentiments and preconceptions. The\nvery circumstances which contributed to rob it of literal belief in\nafter-time, strengthened its hold upon the mind of the Homeric man. He\nlooked for wonders and unusual combinations in the past; he expected\nto hear of gods, heroes and men, moving and operating together upon\nearth; he pictured to himself the fore-time as a theatre in which the\ngods interfered directly, obviously and frequently, for the protection\nof their favorites and the punishment of their foes. The rational\nconception, then only dawning in his mind, of a systematic course of\nnature was absorbed by this fervent and lively faith. And if he could\nhave been supplied with as perfect and philosophical a history of his\nown real past time, as we are now enabled to furnish with regard to\nthe last century of England or France, faithfully recording all the\nsuccessive events, and accounting for them by known positive laws,\nbut introducing no special interventions of Zeus and Apollo\u2014such a\nhistory would have appeared to him not merely unholy and unimpressive,\nbut destitute of all plausibility or title to credence. It would\nhave provoked in him the same feeling of incredulous aversion as a\ndescription of the sun (to repeat the previous illustration) in a\nmodern book on scientific astronomy.\n\n  [848] In this later sense it stands pointedly opposed to \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1,\n  _history_, which seems originally to have designated matter\n  of fact, present and seen by the describer, or the result of\n  his personal inquiries (see Herodot. i. 1; Verrius Flacc. ap.\n  Aul. Gell. v. 18; Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 12; and the\n  observations of Dr. Jortin, Remarks on Ecclesiastical History,\n  vol. i. p. 59).\n\n  The original use of the word \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 was the same as that of\n  \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2\u2014a current tale, true or false, as the case might be;\n  and the term designating a person much conversant with the\n  old legends (\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2) is derived from it (Herod. i. 1; ii. 3).\n  Hekat\u00e6us and Herodotus both use \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 in this sense. Herodotus\n  calls both \u00c6sop and Hekat\u00e6us \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03af (ii. 134-143).\n\n  Aristotle (Metaphys. i. p. 8, ed. Brandis) seems to use \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2\n  in this sense, where he says\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03ce\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f41 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, etc. In the\n  same treatise (xi. p. 254), he uses it to signify fabulous\n  amplification and transformation of a doctrine true in the main.\n\nTo us these mythes are interesting fictions; to the Homeric and\nHesiodic audience they were \u201crerum divinarum et humanarum scientia,\u201d\u2014an\naggregate of religious, physical and historical revelations, rendered\nmore captivating, but not less true and real, by the bright coloring\nand fantastic shapes in which they were presented. Throughout the\nwhole of \u201cmythe-bearing Hellas\u201d[849] they formed the staple of the\nuninstructed Greek mind, upon which history and philosophy were by\nso slow degrees superinduced; and they continued to be the aliment of\nordinary thought and conversation, even after history and philosophy\nhad partially supplanted the mythical faith among the leading men, and\ndisturbed it more or less in the ideas of all. The men, the women,\nand the children of the remote d\u00eames and villages of Greece, to whom\nThucydid\u00eas, Hippocrat\u00eas, Aristotle, or Hipparchus were unknown, still\ncontinued to dwell upon the local fables which formed their religious\nand patriotic antiquity. And Pausanias, even in his time, heard\neverywhere divine or heroic legends yet alive, precisely of the type\nof the old epic; he found the conceptions of religious and mythical\nfaith, co\u00ebxistent with those of positive science, and contending\nagainst them at more or less of odds, according to the temper of the\nindividual. Now it is the remarkable characteristic of the Homeric age,\nthat no such co\u00ebxistence or contention had yet begun. The religious and\nmythical point of view covers, for the most part, all the ph\u00e6nomena\nof nature; while the conception of invariable sequence exists only\nin the background, itself personified under the name of the M\u0153r\u00e6,\nor Fates, and produced generally as an exception to the omnipotence\nof Zeus for all ordinary purposes. Voluntary agents, visible and\ninvisible, impel and govern everything. Moreover this point of view\nis universal throughout the community,\u2014adopted with equal fervor, and\ncarried out with equal consistency, by the loftiest minds and by the\nlowest. The great man of that day is he who, penetrated like others\nwith the general faith, and never once imagining any other system of\nnature than the agency of these voluntary Beings, can clothe them in\nsuitable circumstances and details, and exhibit in living body and\naction those types which his hearers dimly prefigure. Such men were\nthe authors of the Iliad and the Odyssey; embodying in themselves the\nwhole measure of intellectual excellence which their age was capable of\nfeeling: to us, the first of poets\u2014but to their own public, religious\nteachers, historians, and philosophers besides\u2014inasmuch as all that\nthen represented history and philosophy was derived from those epical\neffusions and from others homogeneous with them. Herodotus recognizes\nHomer and Hesiod as the main authors of Grecian belief respecting the\nnames and generations, the attributes and agency, the forms and the\nworship of the gods.[850]\n\n  [849] M. Amp\u00e8re, in his _Histoire Litt\u00e9raire de la France_ (ch.\n  viii. v. i. p. 310) distinguishes the Saga (which corresponds\n  as nearly as possible with the Greek \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2), as a special product of the intellect, not capable of\n  being correctly designated either as history, or as fiction, or\n  as philosophy:\u2014\n\n  \u201cIl est un pays, la Scandinavie, o\u00f9 la tradition racont\u00e9e s\u2019est\n  d\u00e9velopp\u00e9e plus compl\u00e8tement qu\u2019ailleurs, o\u00f9 ses produits ont\n  \u00e9t\u00e9 plus soigneusement recueillis et mieux conserv\u00e9s: dans ce\n  pays, ils ont re\u00e7u un nom particulier, dont l\u2019\u00e9quivalent exact ne\n  se trouve pas hors des langues Germaniques: c\u2019est le mot _Saga,\n  Sage, ce qu\u2019on dit, ce qu\u2019on raconte_,\u2014la tradition orale. Si\n  l\u2019on prend ce mot non dans une acception restreinte, mais dans\n  le sens g\u00e9n\u00e9ral o\u00f9 le prenait Niebuhr quand il l\u2019appliquoit, par\n  exemple, aux traditions populaires qui ont pu fournir \u00e0 Tite Live\n  une portion de son histoire, la Saga doit \u00eatre compt\u00e9e parmi\n  les produits spontan\u00e9s de l\u2019imagination humaine. La Saga a son\n  existence propre comme la po\u00ebsie, comme l\u2019histoire, comme le\n  roman. Elle n\u2019est pas la po\u00ebsie, parcequ\u2019elle n\u2019est pas chant\u00e9e,\n  mais parl\u00e9e; elle n\u2019est pas l\u2019histoire, parcequ\u2019elle est denu\u00e9e\n  de critique; elle n\u2019est pas le roman, parcequ\u2019elle est sinc\u00e8re,\n  parcequ\u2019elle a foi \u00e0 ce qu\u2019elle raconte. Elle n\u2019invente pas, mais\n  r\u00e9p\u00e8te: elle peut se tromper, mais elle ne ment jamais. Ce r\u00e9cit\n  souvent merveilleux, que personne ne fabrique sciemment, et que\n  tout le monde alt\u00e8re et falsifie sans le vouloir, qui se perp\u00e9tue\n  \u00e0 la mani\u00e8re des chants primitifs et populaires,\u2014ce r\u00e9cit, quand\n  il se rapporte non \u00e0 un h\u00e9ros, mais \u00e0 un saint, s\u2019appelle une\n  l\u00e9gende.\u201d\n\n  [850] Herodot. ii. 53.\n\nHistory, philosophy, etc., properly so called and conforming to our\nideas (of which the subsequent Greeks were the first creators), never\nbelonged to more than a comparatively small number of thinking men,\nthough their influence indirectly affected more or less the whole\nnational mind. But when positive science and criticism, and the idea of\nan invariable sequence of events, came to supplant in the more vigorous\nintellects the old mythical creed of omnipresent personification,\nan inevitable scission was produced between the instructed few and\nthe remaining community. The opposition between the scientific and\nthe religious point of view was not slow in manifesting itself: in\ngeneral language, indeed, both might seem to stand together, but in\nevery particular case the admission of one involved the rejection of\nthe other. According to the theory which then became predominant,\nthe course of nature was held to move invariably on, by powers and\nattributes of its own, unless the gods chose to interfere and reverse\nit; but they had the power of interfering as often and to as great an\nextent as they thought fit. Here the question was at once opened,\nrespecting a great variety of particular ph\u00e6nomena, whether they were\nto be regarded as natural or miraculous. No constant or discernible\ntest could be suggested to discriminate the two: every man was called\nupon to settle the doubt for himself, and each settled it according to\nthe extent of his knowledge, the force of his logic, the state of his\nhealth, his hopes, his fears, and many other considerations affecting\nhis separate conclusion. In a question thus perpetually arising, and\nfull of practical consequences, instructed minds, like Perikl\u00eas,\nThucydid\u00eas, and Euripid\u00eas, tended more and more to the scientific\npoint of view,[851] in cases where the general public were constantly\ngravitating towards the religious.\n\n  [851] See Plutarch, Perikl. capp. 5, 32, 38; Cicero, De Republ.\n  i. 15-16, ed. Maii.\n\n  The phytologist Theophrastus, in his valuable collection of facts\n  respecting vegetable organization, is often under the necessity\n  of opposing his scientific interpretation of curious incidents in\n  the vegetable world to the religious interpretation of them which\n  he found current. Anomalous ph\u00e6nomena in the growth or decay of\n  trees were construed as signs from the gods, and submitted to a\n  prophet for explanation (see Histor. Plantar. ii. 3, iv. 16; v.\n  3).\n\n  We may remark, however, that the old faith had still a certain\n  hold over his mind. In commenting on the story of the willow-tree\n  at Philippi, and the venerable old plane-tree at Antandros\n  (more than sixty feet high, and requiring four men to grasp it\n  round in the girth), having been blown down by a high wind, and\n  afterwards spontaneously resuming their erect posture, he offers\n  some explanations how such a ph\u00e6nomenon might have happened, but\n  he admits, at the end, that there may be something extra-natural\n  in the case, \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f34\u03c3\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03c9 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, etc.\n  (De Caus. Plant. v. 4): see a similar miracle in reference to the\n  cedar-tree of Vespasian (Tacit. Hist. ii. 78).\n\n  Euripid\u00eas, in his lost tragedy called \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u03b7 \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u1f74, placed in\n  the month of Melanipp\u00ea a formal discussion and confutation of the\n  whole doctrine of \u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, or supernatural indications (Dionys.\n  Halicar. Ars Rhetoric. p. 300-356, Reisk). Compare the Fables of\n  Ph\u00e6drus, iii. 3; Plutarch, Sept. Sap. Conviv. ch. 3. p. 149; and\n  the curious philosophical explanation by which the learned men of\n  Alexandria tranquillized the alarms of the vulgar, on occasion of\n  the serpent said to have been seen entwined round the head of the\n  crucified Kleomen\u00eas (Plutarch, Kleomen. c. 39).\n\n  It is one part of the duty of an able physician, according to\n  the Hippocratic treatise called Prognosticon (c. 1. t. ii. p.\n  112, ed. Littr\u00e9), when he visits his patient, to examine whether\n  there is anything divine in the malady, \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f14\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9: this, however, does not agree with the\n  memorable doctrine laid down in the treatise, De A\u00ebre, Locis et\n  Aquis (c. 22. p. 78, ed. Littr\u00e9), and cited hereafter, in this\n  chapter. Nor does Galen seem to have regarded it as harmonizing\n  with the general views of Hippocrat\u00eas. In the excellent\n  Prolegomena of M. Littr\u00e9 to his edition of Hippocrat\u00eas (t. i.\n  p. 76) will be found an inedited scholium, wherein the opinion\n  of Baccheius and other physicians is given, that the affections\n  of the plague were to be looked upon as divine, inasmuch as the\n  disease came from God; and also the opinion of Xenoph\u00f4n, the\n  friend of Praxagoras, that the \u201cgenus of days of crisis\u201d in fever\n  was divine; \u201cFor (said Xenoph\u00f4n) just as the Dioskuri, being\n  gods, appear to the mariner in the storm and bring him salvation,\n  so also do the days of crisis, when they arrive, in fever.\u201d\n  Galen, in commenting upon this doctrine of Xenoph\u00f4n, says that\n  the author \u201chas expressed his own individual feeling, but has\n  no way set forth the opinion of Hippocrat\u00eas:\u201d \u1f49 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u1f7c\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f61\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u1f39\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03be\u03b5\u03bd (Galen, Opp. t. v. p. 120,\n  ed. Basil).\n\n  The comparison of the Dioskuri appealed to by Xenoph\u00f4n is a\n  precise reproduction of their function as described in the\n  Homeric Hymn (Hymn xxxiii. 10): his personification of the \u201cdays\n  of crisis\u201d introduces the old religious agency to fill up a gap\n  in his medical science.\n\n  I annex an illustration from the Hindoo vein of thought:\u2014\u201cIt is\n  a rule with the Hindoos to bury, and not to burn, the bodies of\n  those who die of the small pox: for (say they) the small pox is\n  not only caused by the goddess Davey, but is, in fact, _Davey\n  herself_; and to burn the body of a person affected with this\n  disease, is, in reality, neither more nor less than _to burn the\n  goddess_.\u201d (Sleeman, Rambles and Recollections, etc., vol. i. ch.\n  xxv. p. 221.)\n\nThe age immediately prior to this unsettled condition of thought is\nthe really mythop\u0153ic age; in which the creative faculties of the\nsociety know no other employment, and the mass of the society no\nother mental demand. The perfect expression of such a period, in\nits full peculiarity and grandeur, is to be found in the Iliad and\nOdyssey,\u2014poems of which we cannot determine the exact date, but which\nseem both to have existed prior to the first Olympiad, 776 B. C., our\nearliest trustworthy mark of Grecian time. For some time after that\nevent, the mythop\u0153ic tendencies continued in vigor (Arktinus, Lesch\u00eas,\nEum\u00ealus, and seemingly most of the Hesiodic poems, fall within or\nshortly after the first century of recorded Olympiads); but from and\nafter this first century, we may trace the operation of causes which\ngradually enfeebled and narrowed them, altering the point of view from\nwhich the mythes were looked at. What these causes were, it will be\nnecessary briefly to intimate.\n\nThe foremost and most general of all is, the expansive force of Grecian\nintellect itself,\u2014a quality in which this remarkable people stand\ndistinguished from all their neighbors and contemporaries. Most, if\nnot all nations have had mythes, but no nation except the Greeks have\nimparted to them immortal charm and universal interest; and the same\nmental capacities, which raised the great men of the poetic age to this\nexalted level, also pushed forward their successors to outgrow the\nearly faith in which the mythes had been generated and accredited.\n\nOne great mark, as well as means, of such intellectual expansion,\nwas the habit of attending to, recording, and combining, positive\nand present facts, both domestic and foreign. In the genuine Grecian\nepic, the theme was an unknown and aoristic past; but even as early\nas the Works and Days of Hesiod, the present begins to figure: the\nman who tills the earth appears in his own solitary nakedness, apart\nfrom gods and heroes\u2014bound indeed by serious obligations to the gods,\nbut contending against many difficulties which are not to be removed\nby simple reliance on their help. The poet denounces his age in the\nstrongest terms as miserable, degraded and profligate, and looks back\nwith reverential envy to the extinct heroic races who fought at Troy\nand Th\u00eabes. Yet bad as the present time is, the Muse condescends to\nlook at it along with him, and to prescribe rules for human life\u2014with\nthe assurance that if a man be industrious, frugal, provident, just\nand friendly in his dealings, the gods will recompense him with\naffluence and security. Nor does the Muse disdain, while holding out\nsuch promise, to cast herself into the most homely details of present\nexistence and to give advice thoroughly practical and calculating. Men\nwhose minds were full of the heroes of Homer, called Hesiod in contempt\nthe poet of the Helots; and the contrast between the two is certainly\na remarkable proof of the tendency of Greek poetry towards the present\nand the positive.\n\nOther manifestations of the same tendency become visible in the age of\nArchilochus (B. C. 680-660). In an age when metrical composition and\nthe living voice are the only means whereby the productive minds of a\ncommunity make themselves felt, the invention of a new metre, new forms\nof song and recitation, or diversified accompaniments, constitute an\nepoch. The iambic, elegiac, choric, and lyric poetry, from Archilochus\ndownwards, all indicate purposes in the poet, and impressibilities\nof the hearers, very different from those of the ancient epic. In\nall of them the personal feeling of the poet and the specialties of\npresent time and place, are brought prominently forward, while in the\nHomeric hexameter the poet is a mere nameless organ of the historical\nMuse\u2014the hearers are content to learn, believe, and feel, the incidents\nof a foregone world, and the tale is hardly less suitable to one\ntime and place than to another. The iambic metre (we are told) was\nfirst suggested to Archilochus by the bitterness of his own private\nantipathies; and the mortal wounds inflicted by his lampoons, upon the\nindividuals against whom they were directed, still remain attested,\nthough the verses themselves have perished. It was the metre (according\nto the well-known judgment of Aristotle) most nearly approaching to\ncommon speech, and well suited both to the coarse vein of sentiment,\nand to the smart and emphatic diction of its inventor.[852] Simonid\u00eas\nof Amorgus, the younger contemporary of Archilochus, employed the same\nmetre, with less bitterness, but with an anti-heroic tendency not\nless decided. His remaining fragments present a mixture of teaching\nand sarcasm, having a distinct bearing upon actual life,[853] and\ncarrying out the spirit which partially appears in the Hesiodic Works\nand Days. Of Alk\u00e6us and Sapph\u00f4, though unfortunately we are compelled\nto speak of them upon hearsay only, we know enough to satisfy us that\ntheir own personal sentiments and sufferings, their relations private\nor public with the contemporary world, constituted the soul of those\nshort effusions which gave them so much celebrity:[854] and in the\nfew remains of the elegiac poets preserved to us\u2014Kallinus, Mimnermus,\nTyrt\u00e6us\u2014the impulse of some present motive or circumstance is no\nless conspicuous. The same may also be said of Sol\u00f4n, Theognis and\nPhokylid\u00eas, who preach, encourage, censure, or complain, but do not\nrecount\u2014and in whom a profound ethical sensibility, unknown to the\nHomeric poems, manifests itself: the form of poetry (to use the words\nof Sol\u00f4n himself) is made the substitute for the public speaking of the\nagora.[855]\n\n  [852] Horat. de Art. Poet. 79:\u2014\n\n    \u201cArchilochum proprio rabies armavit Iambo,\u201d etc.\n\n  Compare Epist. i. 19, 23, and Epod. vi. 12; Aristot. Rhetor. iii.\n  8, 7, and Poetic. c. 4\u2014also Synesius de Somniis\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f08\u03c1\u03c7\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f33 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 (Alc\u00e6i Fragment. Halle, 1810, p. 205). Quintilian speaks\n  in striking language of the power of expression manifested by\n  Archilochus (x. 1, 60).\n\n  [853] Simonid\u00eas of Amorgus touches briefly, but in a tone of\n  contempt upon the Trojan war\u2014~\u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f55\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u1fbd~ \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n  (Simonid. Fragm. 8. p. 36. v. 118); he seems to think it absurd\n  that so destructive a struggle should have taken place \u201c_pro un\u00e2\n  muliercul\u00e2_,\u201d to use the phrase of Mr. Payne Knight.\n\n  [854] See Quintilian, x. 1, 63. Horat. Od. i. 32; ii. 13.\n  Aristot. Polit. iii. 10, 4. Dionys. Halic. observes (Vett.\n  Scriptt. Censur. v. p. 421) respecting Alk\u00e6us\u2014\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\n  \u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, \u1fe5\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd; and Strabo\n  (xiii. p. 617), \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n  There was a large dash of sarcasm and homely banter aimed at\n  neighbors and contemporaries in the poetry of Sapph\u00f4, apart from\n  her impassioned love-songs\u2014\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03ba\u03ce\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03c1\u03c9\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03b6\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2. \u1f6d\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f22 \u1f04\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u1f05\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n  \u03bb\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2 (D\u00eam\u00eatr. Phaler, De\n  Interpret. c. 167).\n\n  Compare also Herodot. ii. 135, who mentions the satirical talent\n  of Sapph\u00f4, employed against her brother for an extravagance about\n  the courtezan Rhod\u00f4pis.\n\n  [855] Sol\u00f4n, Fragm. iv. 1, ed. Schneidewin:\u2014\n\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03ba\u03ae\u03c1\u03c5\u03be \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u1fbd \u1f31\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03a3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n      \u039a\u03cc\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1fa0\u03b4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, etc.\n\n  See _Brandis_, Handbuch der Griechischen Philosophie, sect.\n  xxiv.-xxv. Plato states that Sol\u00f4n, in his old age, engaged in\n  the composition of an epic poem, which he left unfinished, on the\n  subject of the supposed island of Atlantis and Attica (Plato,\n  Tim\u00e6us, p. 21, and Kritias, p. 113). Plutarch, Sol\u00f4n, c. 31.\n\nDoubtless all these poets made abundant use of the ancient mythes, but\nit was by turning them to present account, in the way of illustration,\nor flattery, or contrast,\u2014a tendency which we may usually detect even\nin the compositions of Pindar, in spite of the lofty and heroic strain\nwhich they breathe throughout. That narrative or legendary poetry still\ncontinued to be composed during the seventh and sixth centuries before\nthe Christian \u00e6ra is not to be questioned; but it exhibited the old\nepical character without the old epical genius; both the inspiration\nof the composer and the sympathies of the audience had become more\ndeeply enlisted in the world before them, and disposed to fasten on\nincidents of their own actual experience. From Sol\u00f4n and Theognis\nwe pass to the abandonment of all metrical restrictions and to the\nintroduction of prose writing,\u2014a fact, the importance of which it is\nneedless to dwell upon,\u2014marking as well the increased familiarity with\nwritten records, as the commencement of a separate branch of literature\nfor the intellect, apart from the imagination and emotions wherein the\nold legends had their exclusive root.\n\nEgypt was first unreservedly opened to the Greeks during the reign of\nPsammetichus, about B. C. 660; gradually it became much frequented by\nthem for military or commercial purposes, or for simple curiosity, and\nenlarged the range of their thoughts and observations, while it also\nimparted to them that vein of mysticism, which overgrew the primitive\nsimplicity of the Homeric religion, and of which I have spoken in a\nformer chapter. They found in it a long-established civilization,\ncolossal wonders of architecture, and a certain knowledge of astronomy\nand geometry, elementary indeed, but in advance of their own. Moreover\nit was a portion of their present world, and it contributed to form in\nthem an interest for noting and describing the actual realities before\nthem. A sensible progress is made in the Greek mind during the two\ncenturies from B. C. 700 to B. C. 500, in the record and arrangement\nof historical facts: an _historical sense_ arises in the superior\nintellects, and some idea of evidence as a discriminating test between\nfact and fiction. And this progressive tendency was further stimulated\nby increased communication and by more settled and peaceful social\nrelations between the various members of the Hellenic world, to which\nmay be added material improvements, purchased at the expense of a\nperiod of turbulence and revolution, in the internal administration\nof each separate state. The Olympic, Pythian, Nemean, and Isthmian\ngames became frequented by visitors from the most distant parts of\nGreece: the great periodical festival in the island of D\u00ealos brought\ntogether the citizens of every Ionic community, with their wives and\nchildren, and an ample display of wealth and ornaments.[856] Numerous\nand flourishing colonies were founded in Sicily, the south of Italy,\nthe coasts of Epirus and of the Euxine Sea: the Phok\u00e6ans explored the\nwhole of the Adriatic, established Massalia, and penetrated even as\nfar as the south of Ib\u00earia, with which they carried on a lucrative\ncommerce.[857] The geographical ideas of the Greeks were thus both\nexpanded and rectified: the first preparation of a map, by Anaximander\nthe disciple of Thal\u00eas, is an epoch in the history of science. We may\nnote the ridicule bestowed by Herodotus both upon the supposed people\ncalled Hyperboreans and upon the idea of a circumfluous ocean-stream,\nas demonstrating the progress of the age in this department of\ninquiry.[858] And even earlier than Herodotus, Xanthus had noticed the\noccurrence of fossil marine productions in the interior of Asia Minor,\nwhich led him to reflections on the changes of the earth\u2019s surface with\nrespect to land and water.[859]\n\n  [856] Homer, Hymn. ad Apollin. 155; Thucydid. iii. 104.\n\n  [857] Herodot. i. 163.\n\n  [858] Herodot. iv. 36. \u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u1ff6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u0393\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f33 \u1f68\u03ba\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n  \u1fe5\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03be \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03c5\u03ba\u03bb\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ad\u03b1 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5,\n  etc., a remark probably directed against Hekat\u00e6us.\n\n  Respecting the map of Anaximander, Strabo, i. p. 7; Diogen.\n  La\u00ebrt. ii. 1; Agathemer ap. Geograph. Minor. i. 1. \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03c4\u03cc\u03bb\u03bc\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  Aristagoras of Mil\u00eatus, who visited Sparta to solicit aid for the\n  revolted Ionians against Darius, brought with him a brazen tablet\n  or map, by means of which he exhibited the relative position of\n  places in the Persian empire (Herodot. v. 49).\n\n  [859] Xanthus ap. Strabo. i. p. 50; xii. p. 579. Compare Creuzer,\n  Fragmenta Xanthi, p. 162.\n\nIf then we look down the three centuries and a half which elapsed\nbetween the commencement of the Olympic \u00e6ra and the age of\nHerodotus and Thucydid\u00eas, we shall discern a striking advance in\nthe Greeks,\u2014ethical, social and intellectual. Positive history and\nchronology has not only been created, but in the case of Thucydid\u00eas,\nthe qualities necessary to the historiographer, in their application to\nrecent events, have been developed with a degree of perfection never\nsince surpassed. Men\u2019s minds have assumed a gentler as well as a juster\ncast; and acts come to be criticized with reference to their bearing\non the internal happiness of a well-regulated community, as well as\nupon the standing harmony of fraternal states. While Thucydid\u00eas\ntreats the habitual and licensed piracy, so coolly alluded to in the\nHomeric poems, as an obsolete enormity, many of the acts described in\nthe old heroic and Theogonic legends were found not less repugnant to\nthis improved tone of feeling. The battles of the gods with the Giants\nand Titans,\u2014the castration of Uranus by his son Kronus,\u2014the cruelty,\ndeceit and licentiousness, often supposed both in the gods and heroes,\nprovoked strong disapprobation. And the language of the philosopher\nXenophan\u00eas, who composed both elegiac and iambic poems for the express\npurpose of denouncing such tales, is as vehement and unsparing as that\nof the Christian writers, who, eight centuries afterwards, attacked the\nwhole scheme of paganism.[860]\n\n  [860] Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empiric. adv. Mathemat. ix. 193. Fragm.\n  1. Poet. Gr\u00e6c. ed. Schneidewin. Diogen. La\u00ebrt. ix. 18.\n\nNor was it alone as an ethical and social critic that Xenophan\u00eas\nstood distinguished. He was one of a great and eminent triad\u2014Thal\u00eas\nand Pythagoras being the others\u2014who, in the sixth century before the\nChristian \u00e6ra, first opened up those veins of speculative philosophy\nwhich occupied afterwards so large a portion of Grecian intellectual\nenergy. Of the material differences between the three I do not here\nspeak; I regard them only in reference to the Homeric and Hesiodic\nphilosophy which preceded them, and from which all three deviated by a\nstep, perhaps the most remarkable in all the history of philosophy. In\nthe scheme of ideas common to Homer and to the Hesiodic Theogony (as\nhas been already stated), we find nature distributed into a variety of\npersonal agencies, administered according to the free-will of different\nBeings more or less analogous to man\u2014each of these Beings having his\nown character, attributes and powers, his own sources of pain and\npleasure, and his own especial sympathies or antipathies with human\nindividuals; each being determined to act or forbear, to grant favor\nor inflict injury in his own department of ph\u00e6nomena, according as\nmen, or perhaps other Beings analogous to himself, might conciliate or\noffend him. The Gods, properly so called, (those who bore a proper name\nand received some public or family worship,) were the most commanding\nand capital members amidst this vast network of agents visible and\ninvisible, spread over the universe.[861] The whole view of nature\nwas purely religious and subjective, the spontaneous suggestion of\nthe early mind. It proceeded from the instinctive tendencies of the\nfeelings and imagination to transport, to the world without, the\nfamiliar type of free-will and conscious personal action: above all, it\ntook deep hold of the emotions, from the widely extended sympathy which\nit so perpetually called forth between man and nature.[862]\n\n  [861] Hesiod, Opp. Di. 122; Homer, Hymn. ad Vener. 260.\n\n  [862] A defence of the primitive faith, on this ground, is found\n  in Plutarch, Qu\u00e6stion. Sympos. vii. 4, 4, p. 703.\n\nThe first attempt to disenthral the philosophic intellect from this\nall-personifying religious faith, and to constitute a method of\ninterpreting nature distinct from the spontaneous inspirations of\nuntaught minds, is to be found in Thal\u00eas, Xenophan\u00eas and Pythagoras, in\nthe sixth century before the Christian \u00e6ra. It is in them that we first\nfind the idea of Person tacitly set aside or limited, and an impersonal\nNature conceived as the object of study. The divine husband and wife,\nOceanus and T\u00eathys, parents of many gods and of the Oceanic nymphs,\ntogether with the avenging goddess Styx, are translated into the\nmaterial substance _water_, or, as we ought rather to say, the Fluid:\nand Thal\u00eas set himself to prove that water was the primitive element,\nout of which all the different natural substances had been formed.[863]\nHe, as well as Xenophan\u00eas and Pythagoras, started the problem of\nphysical philosophy, with its objective character and invariable laws,\nto be discoverable by a proper and methodical application of the human\nintellect. The Greek word \u03a6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, denoting _nature_, and its derivatives\n_physics_ and _physiology_, unknown in that large sense to Homer or\nHesiod, as well as the word _Kosmos_, to denote the mundane system,\nfirst appears with these philosophers.[864] The elemental analysis\nof Thal\u00eas\u2014the one unchangeable cosmic substance, varying only in\nappearance, but not in reality, as suggested by Xenophan\u00eas,\u2014and the\ngeometrical and arithmetical combinations of Pythagoras,\u2014all these were\ndifferent ways of approaching the explanation of physical ph\u00e6nomena,\nand each gave rise to a distinct school or succession of philosophers.\nBut they all agreed in departing from the primitive method, and in\nrecognizing determinate properties, invariable sequences, and objective\ntruth, in nature\u2014either independent of willing or designing agents, or\nserving to these latter at once as an indispensable subject-matter and\nas a limiting condition. Xenophan\u00eas disclaimed openly all knowledge\nrespecting the gods, and pronounced that no man could have any means of\nascertaining when he was right and when he was wrong, in affirmations\nrespecting them:[865] while Pythagoras represents in part the\nscientific tendencies of his age, in part also the spirit of mysticism\nand of special fraternities for religious and ascetic observance, which\nbecame diffused throughout Greece in the sixth century before the\nChristian \u00e6ra. This was another point which placed him in antipathy\nwith the simple, unconscious and demonstrative faith of the old poets,\nas well as with the current legends.\n\n  [863] Aristotel. Metaphys. i. 3.\n\n  [864] Plutarch, Placit. Philos. ii. 1; also Stob\u00e6us, Eclog.\n  Physic. i. 22, where the difference between the Homeric\n  expressions and those of the subsequent philosophers is seen.\n  Damm, Lexic. Homeric. v. \u03a6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2; Alexander von Humboldt, _Kosmos_,\n  p. 76, the note 9 on page 62 of that admirable work.\n\n  The title of the treatises of the early philosophers (Melissus,\n  D\u00eamokritus, Parmenid\u00eas, Empedocl\u00eas, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n, etc.) was frequently\n  \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03a6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 (Galen. Opp. tom. i. p. 56, ed. Basil).\n\n  [865] Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empiric. vii. 50; viii. 326.\u2014\n\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1f72\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f34\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\n    \u0395\u1f30\u03b4\u1f7c\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f05\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7\n    \u0395\u1f30 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u1ff6\u03bd,\n    \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5, \u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c4\u03c5\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  Compare Aristotel. De Xenophane, Zenone, et Georgi\u00e2, capp. 1-2.\n\nIf these distinguished men, when they ceased to follow the primitive\ninstinct of tracing the ph\u00e6nomena of nature to personal and designing\nagents, passed over, not at once to induction and observation, but to a\nmisemployment of abstract words, substituting metaphysical _eide\u00f4la_ in\nthe place of polytheism, and to an exaggerated application of certain\nnarrow physical theories\u2014we must remember that nothing else could be\nexpected from the scanty stock of facts then accessible, and that the\nmost profound study of the human mind points out such transition as an\ninevitable law of intellectual progress.[866] At present, we have to\ncompare them only with that state of the Greek mind[867] which they\npartially superseded, and with which they were in decided opposition.\nThe rudiments of physical science were conceived and developed among\nsuperior men; but the religious feeling of the mass was averse to them;\nand the aversion, though gradually mitigated, never wholly died away.\nSome of the philosophers were not backward in charging others with\nirreligion, while the multitude seems to have felt the same sentiment\nmore or less towards all\u2014or towards that postulate of constant\nsequences, with determinate conditions of occurrence, which scientific\nstudy implies, and which they could not reconcile with their belief\nin the agency of the gods, to whom they were constantly praying for\nspecial succor and blessings.\n\n  [866] See the treatise of M. Auguste Comte (_Cours de Philosophie\n  Positive_), and his doctrine of the three successive stages of\n  the human mind in reference to scientific study\u2014the theological,\n  the metaphysical, and the positive;\u2014a doctrine laid down\n  generally in his first lecture (vol. i. p. 4-12), and largely\n  applied and illustrated throughout his instructive work. It is\n  also re-stated and elucidated by Mr. John Stuart Mill, in his\n  System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, vol. ii. p. 610.\n\n  [867] \u201cHuman wisdom (\u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1), as contrasted with\n  the primitive theology (\u03bf\u1f31 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2),\u201d to take the words of Aristotle (Meteorolog. ii. 1.\n  pp. 41-42, ed. Tauchnitz).\n\nThe discrepancy between the scientific and the religious point of\nview was dealt with differently by different philosophers. Thus\nSocrat\u00eas openly admitted it, and assigned to each a distinct and\nindependent province. He distributed ph\u00e6nomena into two classes: one,\nwherein the connection of antecedent and consequent was invariable\nand ascertainable by human study, and therefore future results\naccessible to a well-instructed foresight; the other, and those, too,\nthe most comprehensive and important, which the gods had reserved\nfor themselves and their own unconditional agency, wherein there was\nno invariable or ascertainable sequence, and where the result could\nonly be foreknown by some omen, prophecy, or other special inspired\ncommunication from themselves. Each of these classes was essentially\ndistinct, and required to be looked at and dealt with in a manner\nradically incompatible with the other. Socrat\u00eas held it wrong to\napply the scientific interpretation to the latter, or the theological\ninterpretation to the former. Physics and astronomy, in his opinion,\nbelonged to the divine class of ph\u00e6nomena, in which human research was\ninsane, fruitless, and impious.[868]\n\n  [868] Xenoph. Memor. i. 1, 6-9. \u03a4\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1 (\u03a3\u03c9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2)\n  \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b2\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf, \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f22 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f22\n  \u03b3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u1f22 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd,\n  \u1f22 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u1fc3 \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1, \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70\n  \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 ~\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9~,\n  \u1f67\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1fc6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.... \u03a4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2\n  \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u1fb7\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u00b7 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u1fb7\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f03 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.... \u1f1c\u03c6\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f03\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76, \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f03 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f66\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f35\u03bb\u03b5\u1ff3, \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. Compare also\n  Memorab. iv. 7. 7; and Cyrop\u00e6d. i. 6, 3, 23-46.\n\n  Physical and astronomical ph\u00e6nomena are classified by Socrat\u00eas\n  among the divine class, interdicted to human study (Memor. i.\n  1,13): \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 or \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1 as supposed to \u03c4\u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1. Plato\n  (Phileb. c. 16; Legg. x. p. 886-889; xii. p. 967) held the sun\n  and stars to be gods, each animated with its special soul: he\n  allowed astronomical investigation to the extent necessary\n  for avoiding blasphemy respecting these beings\u2014\u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u1f74\n  \u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac (vii. 821).\n\nOn the other hand, Hippocrat\u00eas, the contemporary of Socrat\u00eas,\ndenied the discrepancy, and merged into one those two classes of\nph\u00e6nomena,\u2014the divine and the scientifically determinable,\u2014which the\nlatter had put asunder. Hippocrat\u00eas treated all ph\u00e6nomena as at once\nboth divine and scientifically determinable. In discussing certain\npeculiar bodily disorders found among the Scythians, he observes, \u201cThe\nScythians themselves ascribe the cause of this to God, and reverence\nand bow down to such sufferers, each man fearing that he may suffer\nthe like; and I myself think too that these affections, as well as all\nothers, are divine: no one among them is either more divine or more\nhuman than another, but all are on the same footing, and all divine;\nnevertheless each of them has its own physical conditions, and not one\noccurs without such physical conditions.\u201d[869]\n\n  [869] Hippocrat\u00eas, De A\u00ebre, Locis et Aquis, c. 22 (p. 78, ed.\n  Littr\u00e9, sect. 106 ed. Petersen): \u1f1c\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f50\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03c7\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a3\u03ba\u03cd\u03b8\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u0390\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2. \u039f\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03c9\u03cb\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ad\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f15\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f11\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u00b7 \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f65\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9, etc.\n\n  Again, sect. 112. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03b1, \u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03ac \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9, \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n  Compare the remarkable treatise of Hippocrat\u00eas, De Morbo Sacro,\n  capp. 1 and 18, vol. vi. p. 352-394, ed. Littr\u00e9. See this opinion\n  of Hippocrat\u00eas illustrated by the doctrines of some physical\n  philosophers stated in Aristotle, Physic. ii. 8. \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f55\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f41\n  \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c3\u1fd6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03be\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, etc. Some\n  valuable observations on the method of Hippocrat\u00eas are also found\n  in Plato, Ph\u00e6dr. p. 270.\n\nA third distinguished philosopher of the same day, Anaxagoras,\nallegorizing Zeus and the other personal gods, proclaimed the doctrine\nof one common pervading Mind, as having first established order and\nsystem in the mundane aggregate, which had once been in a state of\nchaos\u2014and as still manifesting its uninterrupted agency for wise and\ngood purposes. This general doctrine obtained much admiration from\nPlato and Aristotle; but they at the same time remarked with surprise,\nthat Anaxagoras never made any use at all of his own general doctrine\nfor the explanation of the ph\u00e6nomena of nature,\u2014that he looked for\nnothing but physical causes and connecting laws,[870]\u2014so that in fact\nthe spirit of his particular researches was not materially different\nfrom those of Demokritus or Leukippus, whatever might be the difference\nin their general theories. His investigations in meteorology and\nastronomy, treating the heavenly bodies as subjects for calculation,\nhave been already noticed as offensive, not only to the general public\nof Greece, but even to Socrat\u00eas himself among them: he was tried at\nAthens, and seems to have escaped condemnation only by voluntary\nexile.[871]\n\n  [870] See the graphic picture in Plato, Ph\u00e6don. p. 97-98 (cap.\n  46-47): compare Plato, Legg. xii. p. 967; Aristotel. Metaphysic.\n  i. p. 13-14 (ed. Brandis); Plutarch, Defect. Oracul. p. 435.\n\n  Simplicius, Commentar. in Aristotel. Physic. p. 38. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\n  \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u1f10\u03bd \u03a6\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9 \u03a3\u03c9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u1fb3, \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bd\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03cc\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u1fb3. Anaxagoras thought that the\n  superior intelligence of men, as compared with other animals,\n  arose from his possession of hands (Aristot. de Part. Animal. iv.\n  10. p. 687, ed. Bekk.).\n\n  [871] Xenoph\u00f4n, Memorab. iv. 7. Socrat\u00eas said, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f41\n  \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, etc.\n  Compare Schaubach, Anaxagor\u00e6 Fragment. p. 50-141; Plutarch,\n  Nikias, 23, and Perikl\u00eas, 6-32; Diogen. La\u00ebrt. ii. 10-14.\n\n  The Ionic philosophy, from which Anaxagoras receded more in\n  language than in spirit, seems to have been the least popular\n  of all the schools, though some of the commentators treat it as\n  conformable to vulgar opinion, because it confined itself for the\n  most part to ph\u00e6nomenal explanations, and did not recognize the\n  _noumena_ of Plato, or the \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f13\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd of Parmenid\u00eas,\u2014\u201cqualis\n  fuit Ionicorum, qu\u00e6 tum dominabatur, ratio, vulgari opinione\n  et communi sensu comprobata\u201d (Karsten, Parmenidis Fragment,\n  De Parmenidis Philosophi\u00e2, p. 154). This is a mistake: the\n  Ionic philosophers, who constantly searched for and insisted\n  upon physical laws, came more directly into conflict with the\n  sentiment of the multitude than the Eleatic school.\n\n  The larger atmospheric ph\u00e6nomena were connected in the most\n  intimate manner with Grecian religious feeling and uneasiness\n  (see Demokritus ap. Sect. Empiric. ix. sect. 19-24. p. 552-554,\n  Fabric.): the attempts of Anaxagoras and Demokritus to explain\n  them were more displeasing to the public than the Platonic\n  speculations (Demokritus ap. Aristot. Meteorol. ii. 7; Stob\u00e6us,\n  Eclog. Physic. p. 594: compare Mullach, Democriti Fragmenta, lib.\n  iv. p. 394).\n\nThe three eminent men just named, all essentially different from\neach other, may be taken as illustrations of the philosophical mind\nof Greece during the last half of the fifth century B. C. Scientific\npursuits had acquired a powerful hold, and adjusted themselves in\nvarious ways with the prevalent religious feelings of the age. Both\nHippocrat\u00eas and Anaxagoras modified their ideas of the divine agency\nso as to suit their thirst for scientific research. According to the\nformer, the gods were the really efficient agents in the production\nof all ph\u00e6nomena,\u2014the mean and indifferent not less than the terrific\nor tutelary. Being thus alike connected with all ph\u00e6nomena, they were\nspecially associated with none\u2014and the proper task of the inquirer\nwas, to find out those rules and conditions by which (he assumed)\ntheir agency was always determined, and according to which it might\nbe foretold. And this led naturally to the proceeding which Plato and\nAristotle remark in Anaxagoras,\u2014that the all-governing and Infinite\nMind, having been announced in sublime language at the beginning of\nhis treatise, was afterward left out of sight, and never applied to\nthe explanation of particular ph\u00e6nomena, being as much consistent with\none modification of nature as with another. Now such a view of the\ndivine agency could never be reconciled with the religious feelings\nof the ordinary Grecian believer, even as they stood in the time\nof Anaxagoras; still less could it have been reconciled with those\nof the Homeric man, more than three centuries earlier. By him Zeus\nand Ath\u00ean\u00ea were conceived as definite Persons, objects of special\nreverence, hopes, and fears, and animated with peculiar feelings,\nsometimes of favor, sometimes of wrath, towards himself or his family\nor country. They were propitiated by his prayers, and prevailed upon\nto lend him succor in danger\u2014but offended and disposed to bring evil\nupon him if he omitted to render thanks or sacrifice. This sense of\nindividual communion with, and dependence upon them was the essence of\nhis faith; and with that faith, the all-pervading Mind proclaimed by\nAnaxagoras\u2014which had no more concern with one man or one ph\u00e6nomenon\nthan with another,\u2014could never be brought into harmony. Nor could the\nbeliever, while he prayed with sincerity for special blessings or\nprotection from the gods, acquiesce in the doctrine of Hippocrat\u00eas,\nthat their agency was governed by constant laws and physical conditions.\n\nThat radical discord between the mental impulses of science and\nreligion, which manifests itself so decisively during the most\ncultivated ages of Greece, and which harassed more or less so many\nof the philosophers, produced its most afflicting result in the\ncondemnation of Socrat\u00eas by the Athenians. According to the remarkable\npassage recently cited from Xenoph\u00f4n, it will appear that Socrat\u00eas\nagreed with his countrymen in denouncing physical speculations as\nimpious,\u2014that he recognized the religious process of discovery as a\npeculiar branch, co\u00f6rdinate with the scientific,\u2014and that he laid down\na theory, of which the basis was, the confessed divergence of these\ntwo processes from the beginning\u2014thereby seemingly satisfying the\nexigencies of religious hopes and fears on the one hand, and those of\nreason, in her ardor for ascertaining the invariable laws of ph\u00e6nomena,\non the other. We may remark that the theory of this religious and\nextra-scientific process of discovery was at that time sufficiently\ncomplete; for Socrat\u00eas could point out, that those anomalous ph\u00e6nomena\nwhich the gods had reserved for themselves, and into which science was\nforbidden to pry, were yet accessible to the seekings of the pious man,\nthrough oracles, omens, and other exceptional means of communication\nwhich divine benevolence vouchsafed to keep open. Considering thus\nto how great an extent Socrat\u00eas was identified in feeling with\nthe religious public of Athens, and considering moreover that his\nperformance of open religious duties was assiduous\u2014we might wonder, as\nXenoph\u00f4n does wonder,[872] how it could have happened that the Athenian\ndikasts mistook him at the end of his life for an irreligious man.\nBut we see, by the defence which Xenoph\u00f4n as well as Plato gives for\nhim, that the Athenian public really considered him, in spite of his\nown disclaimer, as homogeneous with Anaxagoras and the other physical\ninquirers, because he had applied similar scientific reasonings\nto moral and social ph\u00e6nomena. They looked upon him with the same\ndispleasure as he himself felt towards the physical philosophers, and\nwe cannot but admit that in this respect they were more unfortunately\nconsistent than he was. It is true that the mode of defence adopted\nby Socrat\u00eas contributed much to the verdict found against him, and\nthat he was further weighed down by private offence given to powerful\nindividuals and professions; but all these separate antipathies found\ntheir best account in swelling the cry against him as an over-curious\nsceptic, and an impious innovator.\n\n  [872] Xenoph\u00f4n, Memorab. i. 1.\n\nNow the scission thus produced between the superior minds and the\nmultitude, in consequence of the development of science and the\nscientific point of view, is a fact of great moment in the history\nof Greek progress, and forms an important contrast between the age\nof Homer and Hesiod and that of Thucydid\u00eas; though in point of fact\neven the multitude, during this later age, were partially modified by\nthose very scientific views which they regarded with disfavor. And\nwe must keep in view the primitive religious faith, once universal\nand unobstructed, but subsequently disturbed by the intrusions of\nscience; we must follow the great change, as well in respect to\nenlarged intelligence as to refinement of social and ethical feeling,\namong the Greeks, from the Hesiodic times downward, in order to render\nsome account of the altered manner in which the ancient mythes came\nto be dealt with. These mythes, the spontaneous growth of a creative\nand personifying interpretation of nature, had struck root in Grecian\nassociations at a time when the national faith required no support\nfrom what we call evidence. They were _now_ submitted, not simply to a\nfeeling, imagining, and believing public, but also to special classes\nof instructed men,\u2014philosophers, historians, ethical teachers, and\ncritics,\u2014and to a public partially modified by their ideas[873] as well\nas improved by a wider practical experience. They were not intended\nfor such an audience; they had ceased to be in complete harmony even\nwith the lower strata of intellect and sentiment,\u2014much more so with\nthe higher. But they were the cherished inheritance of a past time;\nthey were interwoven in a thousand ways with the religious faith,\nthe patriotic retrospect, and the national worship, of every Grecian\ncommunity; the general type of the mythe was the ancient, familiar,\nand universal form of Grecian thought, which even the most cultivated\nmen had imbibed in their childhood from the poets,[874] and by which\nthey were to a certain degree unconsciously enslaved. Taken as a whole\nthe mythes had acquired prescriptive and ineffaceable possession: to\nattack, call in question, or repudiate them, was a task painful even to\nundertake, and far beyond the power of any one to accomplish.\n\n  [873] It is curious to see that some of the most recondite\n  doctrines of the Pythagorean philosophy were actually brought\n  before the general Syracusan public in the comedies of\n  Epicharmus: \u201cIn com\u0153diis suis personas s\u00e6pe ita colloqui fecit,\n  ut sententias Pythagoricas et in universum sublimia vit\u00e6 pr\u00e6cepta\n  immisceret\u201d (Grysar, De Doriensium Com\u0153di\u00e2, p. 111, Col. 1828).\n  The fragments preserved in Diogen. La\u00ebrt. (iii. 9-17) present\n  both criticisms upon the Hesiodic doctrine of a prim\u00e6val chaos,\n  and an exposition of the archetypal and immutable ideas (as\n  opposed to the fluctuating ph\u00e6nomena of sense) which Plato\n  afterwards adopted and systematized.\n\n  Epicharmus seems to have combined with this abstruse philosophy\n  a strong vein of comic shrewdness and some turn to scepticism\n  (Cicero, Epistol. ad Attic. i. 19): \u201cut crebro mihi vafer ille\n  Siculus Epicharmus insusurret cantilenam suam.\u201d Clemens Alex.\n  Strom. v. p. 258. \u039d\u1fb6\u03c6\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd. \u0396\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1ff7\u00b7 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c3\u03ce\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b2\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2. Also\n  his contemptuous ridicule of the prophetesses of his time who\n  cheated foolish women out of their money, pretending to universal\n  knowledge, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 (ap Polluc. ix.\n  81). See, about Epicharmus. O. M\u00fcller, Dorians, iv. 7, 4.\n\n  These dramas seem to have been exhibited at Syracuse between\n  480-460 B. C., anterior even to Chionid\u00eas and Magn\u00eas at Athens\n  (Aristot. Poet. c. 3): he says ~\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff7~ \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, which can hardly\n  be literally exact. The critics of the Horatian age looked upon\n  Epicharmus as the prototype of Plautus (Hor. Epistol. ii. 1. 58).\n\n  [874] The third book of the republic of Plato is particularly\n  striking in reference to the use of the poets in education:\n  see also his treatise De Legg. vii. p. 810-811. Some teachers\n  made their pupils learn whole poets by heart (\u1f45\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd), others preferred extracts and selections.\n\nFor these reasons the anti-mythic vein of criticism was of no effect\nas a destroying force, but nevertheless its dissolving decomposing\nand transforming influence was very considerable. To accommodate the\nancient mythes to an improved tone of sentiment and a newly created\ncanon of credibility, was a function which even the wisest Greeks\ndid not disdain, and which occupied no small proportion of the whole\nintellectual activity of the nation.\n\nThe mythes were looked at from a point of view completely foreign to\nthe reverential curiosity and literal imaginative faith of the Homeric\nman; they were broken up and recast in order to force them into new\nmoulds such as their authors had never conceived. We may distinguish\nfour distinct classes of minds, in the literary age now under\nexamination, as having taken them in hand\u2014the poets, the logographers,\nthe philosophers, and the historians.\n\nWith the poets and logographers, the mythical persons are real\npredecessors, and the mythical world an antecedent fact; but it is\ndivine and heroic reality, not human; the present is only half-brother\nof the past (to borrow[875] an illustration from Pindar in his allusion\nto gods and men), remotely and generically, but not closely and\nspecifically, analogous to it. As a general habit, the old feelings\nand the old unconscious faith, apart from all proof or evidence,\nstill remain in their minds; but recent feelings have grown up which\ncompel them to omit, to alter, sometimes even to reject and condemn,\nparticular narratives.\n\n  [875] Pindar, Nem. vi. 1. Compare Simonid\u00eas, Fragm. 1 (Gaisford).\n\nPindar repudiates some stories and transforms others, because they\nare inconsistent with his conceptions of the gods. Thus he formally\nprotests against the tale that Pelops had been killed and served up at\ntable by his father, for the immortal gods to eat; he shrinks from the\nidea of imputing to them so horrid an appetite; he pronounces the tale\nto have been originally fabricated by a slanderous neighbor. Nor can\nhe bring himself to recount the quarrels between different gods.[876]\nThe amours of Zeus and Apollo are no way displeasing to him; but he\noccasionally suppresses some of the simple details of the old mythe,\nas deficient in dignity: thus, according to the Hesiodic narrative,\nApollo was informed by a raven of the infidelity of the nymph Kor\u00f4nis:\nbut the mention of the raven did not appear to Pindar consistent\nwith the majesty of the god, and he therefore wraps up the mode of\ndetection in vague and mysterious language.[877] He feels considerable\nrepugnance to the character of Odysseus, and intimates more than once\nthat Homer has unduly exalted him, by force of poetical artifice.\nWith the character of the \u00c6akid Ajax, on the other hand, he has the\ndeepest sympathy, as well as with his untimely and inglorious death,\noccasioned by the undeserved preference of a less worthy rival.[878]\nHe appeals for his authority usually to the Muse, but sometimes to\n\u201cancient sayings of men,\u201d accompanied with a general allusion to\nstory-tellers and bards,\u2014admitting, however, that these stories\npresent great discrepancy, and sometimes that they are false.[879]\nYet the marvellous and the supernatural afford no ground whatever for\nrejecting a story: Pindar makes an express declaration to this effect\nin reference to the romantic adventures of Perseus and the Gorgon\u2019s\nhead.[880] He treats even those mythical characters, which conflict\nthe most palpably with positive experience, as connected by a real\ngenealogical thread with the world before him. Not merely the heroes\nof Troy and Th\u00eabes, and the demigod seamen of Jas\u00f4n and the ship Arg\u00f4,\nbut also the Centaur Cheir\u00f4n, the hundred-headed Typh\u00f4s, the giant\nAlkyoneus, Ant\u00e6us, Belleroph\u00f4n and Pegasus, the Chim\u00e6ra, the Amazons\nand the Hyperboreans\u2014all appear painted on the same canvas, and touched\nwith the same colors, as the men of the recent and recorded past,\nPhalaris and Kr\u0153sus; only they are thrown back to a greater distance\nin the perspective.[881] The heroic ancestors of those great \u00c6ginetan,\nThessalian, Th\u00eaban, Argeian, etc. families, whose present members the\npoet celebrates for their agonistic victories, sympathize with the\nexploits and second the efforts of their descendants: the inestimable\nvalue of a privileged breed and of the stamp of nature is powerfully\ncontrasted with the impotence of unassisted teaching and practice.[882]\nThe power and skill of the Argeian The\u00e6us and his relatives as\nwrestlers, are ascribed partly to the fact that their ancestors\nPampha\u00eas in aforetime had hospitably entertained the Tyndarids Kast\u00f4r\nand Pollux.[883] Perhaps however the strongest proof of the sincerity\nof Pindar\u2019s mythical faith is afforded when he notices a guilty\nincident with shame and repugnance, but with an unwilling confession of\nits truth, as in the case of the fratricide committed on Ph\u00f4kus by his\nbrothers P\u00ealeus and Telam\u00f4n.[884]\n\n  [876] Pindar, Olymp. i. 30-55; ix. 32-45.\n\n  [877] Pyth. iii. 25. See the allusions to Semel\u00ea, Alkm\u00eana, and\n  Dana\u00ea, Pyth. iii. 98; Nem. x. 10. Compare also _supra_, chap. ix.\n  p. 245.\n\n  [878] Pindar, Nem. vii. 20-30; viii. 23-31. Isthm. iii. 50-60.\n\n  It seems to be sympathy for Ajax, in odes addressed to noble\n  \u00c6ginetan victors, which induces him thus to depreciate Odysseus;\n  for he eulogizes Sisyphus, specially on account of his cunning\n  and resources (Olymp. xiii. 50) in the ode addressed to Xenoph\u00f4n\n  the Corinthian.\n\n  [879] Olymp. i. 28; Nem. viii. 20; Pyth. i. 93; Olymp. vii. 55;\n  Nem. vi. 43. \u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03b5\u03c2, etc.\n\n  [880] Pyth. x. 49. Compare Pyth. xii. 11-22.\n\n  [881] Pyth. i. 17; iii. 4-7; iv. 12; viii. 16. Nem. iv. 27-32;\n  v. 89. Isthm. v. 31; vi. 44-48. Olymp. iii. 17; viii. 63; xiii.\n  61-87.\n\n  [882] Nem. iii. 39; v. 40. \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f74\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u2014\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2; v.\n  8. Olymp. ix. 103. Pindar seems to introduce \u03c6\u03cd\u1fb3 in cases where\n  Homer would have mentioned the divine assistance.\n\n  [883] Nem. x. 37-51. Compare the family legend of the Athenian\n  D\u00eamocrates, in Plato, Lysis, p. 295.\n\n  [884] Nem. v. 12-16.\n\n\u00c6schylus and Sophokl\u00eas exhibit the same spontaneous and uninquiring\nfaith as Pindar in the legendary antiquities of Greece, taken as a\nwhole; but they allow themselves greater license as to the details. It\nwas indispensable to the success of their compositions that they should\nrecast and group anew the legendary events, preserving the names and\ngeneral understood relation of those characters whom they introduced.\nThe demand for novelty of combination increased with the multiplication\nof tragic spectacles at Athens: moreover the feelings of the Athenians,\nethical as well as political, had become too critical to tolerate the\nliteral reproduction of many among the ancient stories.\n\nBoth of them exalted rather than lowered the dignity of the mythical\nworld, as something divine and heroic rather than human. The\nProm\u00eatheus of \u00c6schylus is a far more exalted conception than his\nkeen-witted namesake in Hesiod, and the more homely details of\nthe ancient Th\u00eaba\u00efs and \u0152dipodia were in like manner modified by\nSophokl\u00eas.[885] The religious agencies of the old epic are constantly\nkept prominent, and the paternal curse,\u2014the wrath of deceased persons\nagainst those from whom they have sustained wrong,\u2014the judgments of\nthe Erinnys against guilty or foredoomed persons, sometimes inflicted\ndirectly, sometimes brought about through dementation of the sufferer\nhimself (like the Homeric At\u00ea),\u2014are frequent in their tragedies.[886]\n\n  [885] See above, chap. xiv. p. 368. on the Legend of the Siege of\n  Th\u00eabes.\n\n  [886] The curse of \u0152dipus is the determining force in the\n  Sept. ad Th\u00eab., \u1f08\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bd\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f21 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c2 (v. 70);\n  it reappears several times in the course of the drama, with\n  particular solemnity in the mouth of Eteokl\u00eas (695-709, 725, 785,\n  etc.); he yields to it as an irresistible force, as carrying the\n  family to ruin:\u2014\n\n    \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2,\n    \u1f3c\u03c4\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f56\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u039a\u03c9\u03ba\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u1f78\u03bd,\n    \u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03b2\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u039b\u03b1\u0390\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n       \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7   \u00b7\n    \u03a6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c7\u03b8\u03c1\u03ac \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b1\n    \u039e\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bb\u03b1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03b6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9, etc.\n\n  So again at the opening of the Agamemn\u00f4n, the \u03bc\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03bd\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (v. 155) and the sacrifice of Iphigeneia are dwelt\n  upon as leaving behind them an avenging doom upon Agamemn\u00f4n,\n  though he took precautions for gagging her mouth during the\n  sacrifice and thus preventing her from giving utterance to\n  imprecations\u2014\u03a6\u03b8\u03cc\u03b3\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u0392\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03cd\u03b4\u1ff3 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\n  (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd), v. 346. The Erinnys awaits Agamemn\u00f4n even at the\n  moment of his victorious consummation at Troy (467; compare\n  762-990, 1336-1433): she is most to be dreaded after great\n  good fortune: she enforces the curse which ancestral crimes\n  have brought upon the house of Atreus\u2014\u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c4\u03b7\u2014\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd (1185-1197, Cho\u00ebph. 692)\u2014the curse imprecated by\n  the outraged Thyest\u00eas (1601). In the Cho\u00ebphor\u00e6, Apollo menaces\n  Orest\u00eas with the wrath of his deceased father, and all the\n  direful visitations of the Erinnyes, unless he undertakes to\n  revenge the murder (271-296). \u0391\u1f36\u03c3\u03b1 and \u1f18\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bd\u1f7a\u03c2 bring on blood\n  for blood (647). But the moment that Orest\u00eas, placed between\n  these conflicting obligations (925), has achieved it, he becomes\n  himself the victim of the Erinnyes, who drive him mad even at\n  the end of the Cho\u00ebphor\u00e6 (\u1f15\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c6\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u1f76, 1026), and who\n  make their appearance bodily, and pursue him throughout the third\n  drama of this fearful trilogy. The Eid\u00f4lon of Klyt\u00e6mn\u00eastra impels\n  them to vengeance (Eumenid. 96) and even spurs them on when they\n  appear to relax. Apollo conveys Orest\u00eas to Athens, whither the\n  Erinnyes pursue him, and prosecute him before the judgment-seat\n  of the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea, to whom they submit the award; Apollo\n  appearing as his defender. The debate between \u201cthe daughters of\n  Night\u201d and the god, accusing and defending, is eminently curious\n  (576-730): the Erinnyes are deeply mortified at the humiliation\n  put upon them when Orest\u00eas is acquitted, but Ath\u00ean\u00ea at length\n  reconciles them, and a covenant is made whereby they become\n  protectresses of Attica, accepting of a permanent abode and\n  solemn worship (1006): Orest\u00eas returns to Argos, and promises\n  that even in his tomb he will watch that none of his descendants\n  shall ever injure the land of Attica (770). The solemn trial and\n  acquittal of Orest\u00eas formed the consecrating legend of the Hill\n  and Judicature of Areiopagus.\n\n  This is the only complete trilogy of \u00c6schylus which we possess,\n  and the avenging Erinnyes (416) are the movers throughout the\n  whole\u2014unseen in the first two dramas, visible and appalling in\n  the third. And the appearance of Cassandra under the actual\n  prophetic fever in the first, contributes still farther to impart\n  to it a coloring different from common humanity.\n\n  The general view of the movement of the Oresteia given in Welcker\n  (\u00c6schyl. Trilogie, p. 445) appears to me more conformable to\n  Hellenic ideas than that of Klausen (Theologumena \u00c6schyli, pp.\n  157-169), whose valuable collection and comparison of passages\n  is too much affected, both here and elsewhere, by the desire to\n  bring the agencies of the Greek mythical world into harmony with\n  what a religious mind of the present day would approve. Moreover,\n  he sinks the personality of Ath\u00ean\u00ea too much in the supreme\n  authority of Zeus (p. 158-168).\n\n\u00c6schylus in two of his remaining pieces brings forward the gods as\nthe chief personages, and far from sharing the objection of Pindar\nto dwell upon dissensions of the gods, he introduces Prom\u00eatheus and\nZeus in the one, Apollo and the Eumenid\u00eas in the other, in marked\nopposition. The dialogue, first superinduced by him upon the primitive\nChorus, gradually became the most important portion of the drama, and\nis more elaborated in Sophokl\u00eas than in \u00c6schylus. Even in Sophokl\u00eas,\nhowever, it still generally retains its ideal majesty as contrasted\nwith the rhetorical and forensic tone which afterwards crept in; it\ngrows out of the piece, and addresses itself to the emotions more than\nto the reason of the audience. Nevertheless, the effect of Athenian\npolitical discussion and democratical feeling is visible in both these\ndramatists. The idea of rights and legitimate privileges as opposed to\nusurping force, is applied by \u00c6schylus even to the society of the gods:\nthe Eumenid\u00eas accuse Apollo of having, with the insolence of youthful\nambition, \u201cridden down\u201d their old prerogatives[887]\u2014while the Titan\nProm\u00eatheus, the champion of suffering humanity against the unfriendly\ndispositions of Zeus, ventures to depict the latter as a recent usurper\nreigning only by his superior strength, exalted by one successful\nrevolution, and destined at some future time to be overthrown by\nanother,\u2014a fate which cannot be averted except through warnings\ncommunicable only by Prom\u00eatheus himself.[888]\n\n  [887] Eumenid\u00eas, 150.\u2014\n\n    \u1f38\u1f7c \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9,\n    \u039d\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9, etc.\n\n  The same metaphor again, v. 731. \u00c6schylus seems to delight in\n  contrasting the young and the old gods: compare 70-162, 882.\n\n  The Erinnyes tell Apollo that he assumes functions which do not\n  belong to him, and will thus desecrate those which do belong to\n  him (715-754):\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f31\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd, ~\u03bf\u1f50 \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u1f7c\u03bd~, \u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n    \u039c\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  The refusal of the king Pelasgos, in the Supplices, to undertake\n  what he feels to be the sacred duty of protecting the suppliant\n  Dana\u00efdes, without first submitting the matter to his people\n  and obtaining their expressed consent, and the fear which he\n  expresses of their blame (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2), are\n  more forcibly set forth than an old epic poet would probably have\n  thought necessary (see Supplices, 369, 397, 485, 519). The solemn\n  wish to exclude both anarchy and despotism from Athens bears\n  still more the mark of political feeling of the time\u2014\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd (Eumenid. 527-696).\n\n  [888] Prom\u00eatheus, 35, 151, 170, 309, 524, 910, 940, 956.\n\nIt is commonly understood that \u00c6schylus disapproved of the march of\ndemocracy at Athens during his later years, and that the Eumenid\u00eas\nis intended as an indirect manifestation in favor of the senate of\nAreiopagus. Without inquiring at present whether such a special\npurpose can be distinctly made out, we may plainly see that the poet\nintroduces, into the relations of the gods with each other, a feeling\nof political justice, arising out of the times in which he lived and\nthe debates of which he was a witness. But though \u00c6schylus incurred\nreproaches of impiety from Plato, and seemingly also from the Athenian\npublic, for particular speeches and incidents in his tragedies,[889]\nand though he does not adhere to the received vein of religious\ntradition with the same strictness as Sophokl\u00eas\u2014yet the ascendency\nand interference of the gods is never out of sight, and the solemnity\nwith which they are represented, set off by a bold, figurative, and\nelliptical style of expression (often but imperfectly intelligible to\nmodern readers), reaches its maximum in his tragedies. As he throws\nround the gods a kind of airy grandeur, so neither do his men or\nheroes appear like tenants of the common earth: the mythical world from\nwhich he borrows his characters is peopled only with \u201cthe immediate\nseed of the gods, in close contact with Zeus, in whom the divine blood\nhas not yet had time to degenerate:\u201d[890] his individuals are taken,\nnot from the iron race whom Hesiod acknowledges with shame as his\ncontemporaries, but from the extinct heroic race which had fought at\nTroy and Th\u00eabes. It is to them that his conceptions aspire, and he is\neven chargeable with frequent straining, beyond the limits of poetical\ntaste, to realize his picture. If he does not consistently succeed in\nit, the reason is because consistency in such a matter is unattainable,\nsince, after all, the analogies of common humanity, the only materials\nwhich the most creative imagination has to work upon, obtrude\nthemselves involuntarily, and the lineaments of the man are thus seen\neven under a dress which promises superhuman proportions.\n\n  [889] Plato, Republ. ii. 381-383; compare \u00c6schyl. Fragment. 159,\n  ed. Dindorf. He was charged also with having divulged in some of\n  his plays secret matters of the mysteries of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear, but is said\n  to have excused himself by alleging ignorance: he was not aware\n  that what he had said was comprised in the mysteries (Aristot.\n  Ethic. Nicom. iii. 2; Clemens Alex. Strom. ii. p. 387); the story\n  is different again in \u00c6lian, V. H. v. 19.\n\n  How little can be made out distinctly respecting this last\n  accusation may be seen in Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 81.\n\n  Cicero (Tusc. Dis. ii. 10) calls \u00c6schylus \u201calmost a Pythagorean:\u201d\n  upon what the epithet is founded we do not know.\n\n  There is no evidence to prove to us that the Prom\u00eatheus Vinctus\n  was considered as impious by the public before whom it was\n  represented; but its obvious meaning has been so regarded by\n  modern critics, who resort to many different explanations of it,\n  in order to prove that when properly construed it is not impious.\n  But if we wish to ascertain what \u00c6schylus really meant, we ought\n  not to consult the religious ideas of modern times; we have no\n  test except what we know of the poet\u2019s own time and that which\n  had preceded him. The explanations given by the ablest critics\n  seem generally to exhibit a predetermination to bring out Zeus\n  as a just, wise, merciful, and all-powerful Being; and all, in\n  one way or another, distort the figures, alter the perspective,\n  and give far-fetched interpretations of the meaning, of this\n  striking drama, which conveys an impression directly contrary\n  (see Welcker, Trilogie, \u00c6sch. p. 90-117, with the explanation\n  of Dissen there given; Klausen, Theologum. \u00c6sch. p. 140-154;\n  Sch\u00f6mann, in his recent translation of the play, and the\n  criticism on that Translation in the Wiener Jahrb\u00fccher, vol. cix.\n  1845, p. 245, by F. Ritter). On the other hand, Schutz (Excurs.\n  ad Prom. Vinct. p. 149) thinks that \u00c6schylus wished by means of\n  this drama to enforce upon his countrymen the hatred of a despot.\n  Though I do not agree in this interpretation, it appears to me\n  less wide of the truth than the forcible methods employed by\n  others to bring the poet into harmony with their own religious\n  ideas.\n\n  Without presuming to determine whether \u00c6schylus proposed to\n  himself any special purpose, if we look at the \u00c6schylean\n  Prom\u00eatheus in reference only to ancient ideas, it will be found\n  to borrow both its characters and all its main circumstances\n  from the legend in the Hesiodic Theogony. Zeus acquires his\n  supremacy only by overthrowing Kronos and the Titans; the Titan\n  god Prom\u00eatheus is the pronounced champion of helpless man, and\n  negotiates with Zeus on their behalf: Zeus wishes to withhold\n  from them the most essential blessings, which Prom\u00eatheus employs\n  deceit and theft to procure for them, and ultimately with\n  success; undergoing, however, severe punishment for so doing from\n  the superior force of Zeus. These are the main features of the\n  \u00c6schylean Prom\u00eatheus, and they are all derived from the legend\n  as it stands in the Theogony. As for the human race, they are\n  depicted as abject and helpless in an extreme degree, in \u00c6schylus\n  even more than in Hesiod: they appear as a race of aboriginal\n  savages, having the god Prom\u00eatheus for their protector.\n\n  \u00c6schylus has worked up the old legend, homely and unimpressive as\n  we read it in Hesiod, into a sublime ideal. We are not to forget\n  that Prom\u00eatheus is not a man, but a god,\u2014the equal of Zeus in\n  race, though his inferior in power, and belonging to a family of\n  gods who were once superior to Zeus: he has moreover deserted his\n  own kindred, and lent all his aid and superior sagacity to Zeus,\n  whereby chiefly the latter was able to acquire supremacy (this\n  _last_ circumstance is an addition by \u00c6schylus himself to the\n  Hesiodic legend). In spite of such essential service, Zeus had\n  doomed him to cruel punishment, for no other reason than because\n  he conferred upon helpless man the prime means of continuance and\n  improvement, thus thwarting the intention of Zeus to extinguish\n  the race.\n\n  Now Zeus, though superior to all the other gods and exercising\n  general control, was never considered, either in Grecian legend\n  or in Grecian religious belief, to be superior in so immeasurable\n  a degree as to supersede all free action and sentiment on the\n  part of gods less powerful. There were many old legends of\n  dissension among the gods, and several of disobedience against\n  Zeus: when a poet chose to dramatize one of these, he might\n  so turn his composition as to sympathize either with Zeus or\n  with the inferior god, without in either case shocking the\n  general religious feeling of the country. And if there ever\n  was an instance in which preference of the inferior god would\n  be admissible, it is that of Prom\u00eatheus, whose proceedings are\n  such as to call forth the maximum of human sympathy,\u2014superior\n  intelligence pitted against superior force, and resolutely\n  encountering foreknown suffering, for the sole purpose of\n  rendering inestimable and gratuitous service to mortals.\n\n  Of the Prom\u00eatheus Solutus, which formed a sequel to the\n  Prom\u00eatheus Vinctus (the entire trilogy is not certainly known),\n  the fragments preserved are very scanty, and the guesses of\n  critics as to its plot have little base to proceed upon. They\n  contend that, in one way or other, the apparent objections which\n  the Prom\u00eath. Vinctus presents against the justice of Zeus were\n  in the Prom\u00eath. Solutus removed. Hermann, in his _Dissertatio\n  de \u00c6schyli Prometheo Soluto_ (Opuscula, vol. iv. p. 256), calls\n  this position in question: I transcribe from his Dissertation one\n  passage, because it contains an important remark in reference\n  to the manner in which the Greek poets handled their religious\n  legends: \u201cwhile they recounted and believed many enormities\n  respecting individual gods, they always described the Godhead in\n  the abstract as holy and faultless.\u201d ...\n\n  \u201cImmo illud admirari oportet, quod quum de singulis Diis\n  indignissima qu\u00e6que crederent, tamen ubi sine certo nomine Deum\n  dicebant, immunem ab omni vitio, summ\u00e2que sanctitate pr\u00e6ditum\n  intelligebant. Illam igitur Jovis s\u00e6vitiam ut excusent defensores\n  Trilogi\u00e6, et jure punitum volunt Prometheum\u2014et in sequente fabul\u00e2\n  reconciliato Jove, restitutam arbitrantur divinam justitiam. Quo\n  invento, vereor ne non optime dignitati consuluerint supremi\n  Deorum, quem decuerat potius non s\u00e6vire omnino, quam placari e\u00e2\n  lege, ut alius Promethei vice lueret.\u201d\n\n  [890] \u00c6schyl. Fragment. 146, Dindorf; ap. Plato. Repub. iii. p.\n  391; compare Strabo, xii. p. 580.\u2014\n\n    ... \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03c7\u03af\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\n    \u039f\u1f31 \u0396\u03b7\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f38\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u1ff3\n    \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b2\u03c9\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9,\n    \u039a\u03bf\u1f54\u03c0\u03c9 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f37\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  There is one real exception to this statement\u2014the Pers\u00e6\u2014which\n  is founded upon an event of recent occurrence; and one apparent\n  exception\u2014the Prom\u00eatheus Vinctus. But in that drama no individual\n  mortal is made to appear; we can hardly consider I\u00f4 as an\n  \u1f10\u03c6\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 (253).\n\nSophokl\u00eas, the most illustrious ornament of Grecian tragedy, dwells\nupon the same heroic characters, and maintains their grandeur, on the\nwhole, with little abatement, combining with it a far better dramatic\nstructure, and a wider appeal to human sympathies. Even in Sophokl\u00eas,\nhowever, we find indications that an altered ethical feeling and a\nmore predominant sense of artistic perfection are allowed to modify\nthe harsher religious agencies of the old epic; occasional misplaced\neffusions[891] of rhetoric, as well as of didactic prolixity, may\nalso be detected. It is \u00c6schylus, not Sophokl\u00eas, who forms the marked\nantithesis to Euripid\u00eas; it is \u00c6schylus, not Sophokl\u00eas, to whom\nAristophan\u00eas awards the prize of tragedy, as the poet who assigns most\nperfectly to the heroes of the past those weighty words, imposing\nequipments, simplicity of great deeds with little talk, and masculine\nenergy superior to the corruptions of Aphrodit\u00ea, which beseem the\ncomrades of Agamemn\u00f4n and Adrastus.[892]\n\n  [891] For the characteristics of \u00c6schylus see Aristophan. Ran.\n  755, _ad fin. passim_. The competition between \u00c6schylus and\n  Euripid\u00eas turns upon \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u1f76, 1497; the weight and majesty\n  of the words, 1362; \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1fe5\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03ac,\n  1001, 921, 930 (\u201csublimis et gravis et grandiloquus s\u00e6pe usque ad\n  vitium,\u201d Quintil. x. 1); the imposing appearance of his heroes,\n  such as Memn\u00f4n and Cycnus, 961; their reserve in speech, 908; his\n  dramas \u201cfull of Ar\u00eas\u201d and his lion-hearted chiefs, inspiring the\n  auditors with fearless spirit in defence of their country,\u20141014,\n  1019, 1040; his contempt of feminine tenderness, 1042.\u2014\n\n     \u00c6SCH. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f25\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1.\n    EURIP. \u039c\u1f70 \u0394\u03af\u1fbd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9.\n     \u00c6SCH.                                             \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad \u03b3\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b7\u00b7\n           \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1fbd\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n  To the same general purpose Nubes (1347-1356), composed so many\n  years earlier. The weight and majesty of the \u00c6schylean heroes\n  (\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u1f72\u03c2) is dwelt upon in the life of \u00c6schylus,\n  and Sophokl\u00eas is said to have derided it\u2014\u1f6d\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f41 \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2\n  \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c7\u1f7c\u03c2 ~\u1f44\u03b3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd~, etc. (Plutarch, De\n  Profect. in Virt. Sent. c. 7), unless we are to understand this\n  as a mistake of Plutarch quoting Sophokl\u00eas instead of Euripid\u00eas,\n  as he speaks in the Frogs of Aristophan\u00eas, which is the opinion\n  both of Lessing in his Life of Sophokl\u00eas and of Welcker (\u00c6schyl.\n  Trilogie, p. 525).\n\n  [892] See above, Chapters xiv. and xv.\n\n  \u00c6schylus seems to have been a greater innovator as to the matter\n  of the mythes than either Sophokl\u00eas or Euripid\u00eas (Dionys. Halic.\n  Judic. de Vett. Script. p. 422, Reisk.). For the close adherence\n  of Sophokl\u00eas to the Homeric epic, see Athena, vii. p. 277;\n  Diogen. La\u00ebrt. iv. 20; Suidas, v. \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd. \u00c6schylus puts into\n  the mouth of the Eumenid\u00eas a serious argument derived from the\n  behavior of Zeus in chaining his father Kronos (Eumen. 640).\n\nHow deeply this feeling, of the heroic character of the mythical\nworld, possessed the Athenian mind, may be judged by the bitter\ncriticisms made on Euripid\u00eas, whose compositions were pervaded, partly\nby ideas of physical philosophy learnt under Anaxagoras, partly by\nthe altered tone of education and the wide diffusion of practical\neloquence, forensic as well as political, at Athens.[893] While\nAristophan\u00eas assails Euripid\u00eas as the representative of this \u201cyoung\nAthens,\u201d with the utmost keenness of sarcasm,\u2014other critics also\nconcur in designating him as having vulgarized the mythical heroes,\nand transformed them into mere characters of common life,\u2014loquacious,\nsubtle, and savoring of the market-place.[894] In some of his plays,\nsceptical expressions and sentiments were introduced, derived from his\nphilosophical studies, sometimes confounding two or three distinct gods\ninto one, sometimes translating the personal Zeus into a substantial\n\u00c6th\u00ear with determinate attributes. He put into the mouths of some of\nhis unprincipled dramatic characters, apologetic speeches which were\ndenounced as ostentatious sophistry, and as setting out a triumphant\ncase for the criminal.[895] His thoughts, his words, and the rhythm\nof his choric songs, were all accused of being deficient in dignity\nand elevation. The mean attire and miserable attitude in which he\nexhibited \u0152neus, T\u00ealephus, Thyest\u00eas, In\u00f4, and other heroic characters,\nwere unmercifully derided,[896] though it seems that their position and\ncircumstances had always been painfully melancholy; but the effeminate\npathos which Euripid\u00eas brought so nakedly into the foreground, was\naccounted unworthy of the majesty of a legendary hero. And he incurred\nstill greater obloquy on another point, on which he is allowed even\nby his enemies to have only reproduced in substance the pre\u00ebxisting\ntales,\u2014the illicit and fatal passion depicted in several of his female\ncharacters, such as Ph\u00e6dra and Sthenob\u0153a. His opponents admitted that\nthese stories were true, but contended that they ought to be kept back\nand not produced upon the stage,\u2014a proof both of the continued mythical\nfaith and of the more sensitive ethical criticism of his age.[897] The\nmarriage of the six daughters to the six sons of \u00c6olus is of Homeric\norigin, and stands now, though briefly stated, in the Odyssey: but the\nincestuous passion of Macareus and Canac\u00ea, embodied by Euripid\u00eas[898]\nin the lost tragedy called _\u00c6olus_, drew upon him severe censure.\nMoreover, he often disconnected the horrors of the old legends with\nthose religious agencies by which they had been originally forced on,\nprefacing them by motives of a more refined character, which carried\nno sense of awful compulsion: thus the considerations by which the\nEuripidean Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n was reduced to the necessity of killing his mother\nappeared to Aristotle ridiculous.[899] After the time of this great\npoet, his successors seem to have followed him in breathing into their\ncharacters the spirit of common life, but the names and plot were still\nborrowed from the stricken mythical families of Tantalus, Kadmus, etc.:\nand the heroic exaltation of all the individual personages introduced,\nas contrasted with the purely human character of the Chorus, is still\nnumbered by Aristotle among the essential points of the theory of\ntragedy.[900]\n\n  [893] See Valckenaer, Diatribe in Euripid. Fragm. capp. 5 and 6.\n\n  The fourth and fifth lectures among the _Dramatische Vorlesungen_\n  of August Wilhelm Schlegel depict both justly and eloquently the\n  difference between \u00c6schylus, Sophokl\u00eas and Euripid\u00eas, especially\n  on this point of the gradual sinking of the mythical colossus\n  into an ordinary man; about Euripid\u00eas especially in lecture 5,\n  vol. i. p. 206, ed. Heidelberg 1809.\n\n  [894] Aristot. Poetic. c. 46. \u039f\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n  \u03bf\u1f35\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  The Ran\u00e6 and Acharneis of Aristophan\u00eas exhibit fully the\n  reproaches urged against Euripid\u00eas: the language put into\n  the mouth of Euripid\u00eas in the former play (vv. 935-977)\n  illustrates specially the point here laid down. Plutarch (De\n  Glori\u00e2 Atheniens. c. 5) contrasts \u1f21 \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21\n  \u03a3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2. Sophokl\u00eas either adhered to the old mythes\n  or introduced alterations into them in a spirit comformable to\n  their original character, while Euripid\u00eas refined upon them. The\n  comment of D\u00eam\u00eatrius Phalereus connects \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd expressly with\n  the maintenance of the dignity of the tales. \u1f0c\u03c1\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd ~\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd~ \u1f40\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd (c. 38).\n\n  [895] Aristophan. Ran. 770, 887, 1066.\n\n  Euripid\u00eas says to \u00c6schylus, in regard to the language employed by\n  both of them,\u2014\n\n              \u1f2e\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u1fc3\u03c2 \u039b\u03c5\u03ba\u03b1\u03b2\u03ae\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n    \u1f4b\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03c2;\n\n  \u00c6schylus replies,\u2014\n\n              \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd, \u1f66 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7\n    \u039c\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f34\u03c3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1fe5\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03af\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n    \u039a\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 ~\u1f21\u03bc\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2~ \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1fe5\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a \u03c3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9.\n    \u1f0b \u1fbd\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9 \u03c3\u03c5.\n    EURIP.                                     \u03a4\u03af \u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2;\n     \u00c6SCH. \u03a0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1fe5\u03ac\u03ba\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f35\u03bd\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u1f76\n           \u03a4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  For the character of the language and measures of Euripid\u00eas,\n  as represented by \u00c6schylus, see also v. 1297, and Pac. 527.\n  Philosophical discussion was introduced by Euripid\u00eas (Dionys.\n  Hal. Ars Rhetor. viii. 10-ix. 11) about the Melanipp\u00ea, where\n  the doctrine of prodigies (\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2) appears to have been argued.\n  Quintilian (x. 1) remarks that to young beginners in judicial\n  pleading, the study of Euripid\u00eas was much more specially\n  profitable than that of Sophokl\u00eas: compare Dio Chrysostom, Orat.\n  xviii. vol. i. p. 477, Reisk.\n\n  In Euripid\u00eas the heroes themselves sometimes delivered\n  moralizing discourses:\u2014\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03ac\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0392\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  (Welcker, Griechisch. Trag\u00f6d. Eurip. Stheneb. p. 782). Compare\n  the fragments of his Belleroph\u00f4n (15-25, Matthi\u00e6), and of his\n  Chrysippus (7, _ib._). A striking story is found in Seneca,\n  Epistol. 115; and Plutarch, de Audiend. Poetis, c. 4. t. i. p.\n  70, Wytt.\n\n  [896] Aristophan. Ran. 840.\u2014\n\n                      \u1f66 \u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bc\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03ac\u03b4\u03b7\n    \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c7\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03c5\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03ac\u03b4\u03b7\u00b7\n\n  See also Aristophan. Acharn. 385-422. For an unfavorable\n  criticism upon such proceeding, see Aristot. Poet. 27.\n\n  [897] Aristophan. Ran. 1050.\u2014\n\n  EURIP. \u03a0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd ~\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd~ \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03a6\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1;\n\n   \u00c6SCH. \u039c\u1f70 \u0394\u03af\u1fbd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd\u00b7 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd,\n           \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n  In the Hercules Furens, Euripid\u00eas puts in relief and even\n  exaggerates the worst elements of the ancient mythes: the\n  implacable hatred of H\u00ear\u00ea towards H\u00earakl\u00eas is pushed so far as to\n  deprive him of his reason (by sending down Iris and the unwilling\n  \u039b\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1), and thus intentionally to drive him to slay his wife and\n  children with his own hands.\n\n  [898] Aristoph. Ran. 849, 1041, 1080; Thesmophor. 547; Nubes,\n  1354. Grauert, De Medi\u00e2 Gr\u00e6corum Com\u0153di\u00e2 in Rheinisch. Museum,\n  2nd Jahrs. 1 Heft, p. 51. It suited the plan of the drama of\n  \u00c6olus, as composed by Euripid\u00eas, to place in the mouth of\n  Macareus a formal recommendation of incestuous marriages:\n  probably this contributed much to offend the Athenian public. See\n  Dionys. Hal. Rhetor. ix. p. 355.\n\n  About the liberty of intermarriage among relatives, indicated in\n  Homer, parents and children being alone excepted, see Terpstra,\n  Antiquitas Homerica, cap. xiii. p. 104.\n\n  Ovid, whose poetical tendencies led him chiefly to copy\n  Euripid\u00eas, observes (Trist. ii. 1, 380)\u2014\n\n    \u201cOmne genus scripti gravitate Trag\u0153dia vincit,\n      H\u00e6c quoque materiam semper amoris habet.\n    Nam quid in Hippolyto nisi c\u00e6c\u00e6 flamma noverc\u00e6?\n      Nobilis est Canace fratris amore sui.\u201d\n\n  This is the reverse of the truth in regard to \u00c6schylus and\n  Sophokl\u00eas, and only very partially true in respect to Euripid\u00eas.\n\n  [899] Aristot. Ethic. Nicom. iii. 1, 8. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0395\u1f50\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 (In the\n  lost tragedy called \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f41 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03a8\u03c9\u03c6\u1fd6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2).\n\n  [900] Aristot. Poetic. 26-27. And in his Problemata also, in\n  giving the reason why the Hypo-Dorian and Hypo-Phrygian musical\n  modes were never assigned to the Chorus, he says\u2014\n\n  \u03a4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u1f70, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1.\n  \u1f18\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03af\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03b5\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03b1\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f67\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2. \u0394\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f01\u03c1\u03bc\u03cc\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03bf\u03b5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21\u03c3\u03cd\u03c7\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f26\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1.\n\nThe tendency then of Athenian tragedy\u2014powerfully manifested in\n\u00c6schylus, and never wholly lost\u2014was to uphold an unquestioning faith\nand a reverential estimate of the general mythical world and its\npersonages, but to treat the particular narratives rather as matter\nfor the emotions than as recitals of actual fact. The logographers\nworked along with them to the first of these two ends, but not\nto the second. Their grand object was, to cast the mythes into a\ncontinuous readable series, and they were in consequence compelled to\nmake selection between inconsistent or contradictory narratives; to\nreject some narratives as false, and to receive others as true. But\ntheir preference was determined more by their sentiments as to what\nwas appropriate, than by any pretended historical test. Pherekyd\u00eas,\nAkusilaus and Hellanikus[901] did not seek to banish miraculous or\nfantastic incidents from the mythical world; they regarded it as\npeopled with loftier beings, and expected to find in it ph\u00e6nomena\nnot paralleled in their own degenerate days. They reproduced the\nfables as they found them in the poets, rejecting little except the\ndiscrepancies, and producing ultimately what they believed to be\nnot only a continuous but an exact and trustworthy history of the\npast\u2014wherein they carry indeed their precision to such a length, that\nHellanikus gives the year, and even the day of the capture of Troy.[902]\n\n  [901] See M\u00fcller, Prolegom. zu einer wissenschaftlichen\n  Mythologie, c. iii. p. 93.\n\n  [902] Hellanic. Fragment. 143, ed. Didot.\n\nHekat\u00e6us of Mil\u00eatus (500 B. C.), anterior to Pherekyd\u00eas and Hellanikus,\nis the earliest writer in whom we can detect any disposition to\ndisallow the prerogative and specialty of the mythes, and to soften\ndown their characteristic prodigies, some of which however still find\nfavor in his eyes, as in the case of the speaking ram who carried\nPhryxus over the Hellespont. He pronounced the Grecian fables to be\n\u201cmany and ridiculous;\u201d whether from their discrepancies or from their\nintrinsic improbabilities we do not know: and we owe to him the first\nattempt to force them within the limits of historical credibility; as\nwhere he transforms the three-headed Cerberus, the dog of Had\u00eas, into\na serpent inhabiting a cavern on Cape T\u00e6narus\u2014and Gery\u00f4n of Erytheia\ninto a king of Epirus rich in herds of oxen.[903] Hekat\u00e6us traced the\ngenealogy of himself and the gens to which he belonged through a line\nof fifteen progenitors up to an initial god,[904]\u2014the clearest proof\nboth of his profound faith in the reality of the mythical world, and\nof his religious attachment to it as the point of junction between the\nhuman and the divine personality.\n\n  [903] Hekat\u00e6i Fragm. ed. Didot. 332, 346, 349; Schol. Apoll\u00f4n.\n  Rhod. 1. 256; Athen\u00e6. ii. p. 133; Skylax, c. 26.\n\n  Perhaps Hekat\u00e6us was induced to look for Erytheia in Epirus by\n  the brick-red color of the earth there in many places, noticed\n  by Pouqueville and other travellers (Voyage dans la Gr\u00e8ce,\n  vol. ii. 248: see Klausen, \u00c6neas und die Penaten, vol. i. p.\n  222). \u1f19\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 \u039c\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2\u2014\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f56\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1, Pausan. iii. 25,\n  4. He seems to have written expressly concerning the fabulous\n  Hyperboreans, and to have upheld the common faith against doubts\n  which had begun to rise in his time: the derisory notice of\n  Hyperboreans in Herodotus is probably directed against Hekat\u00e6us,\n  iv. 36; Schol. Apoll\u00f4n. Rhod. ii. 675; Diod\u00f4r. ii. 47.\n\n  It is maintained by Mr. Clinton (Fast. Hell. ii. p. 480) and\n  others (see not. ad Fragment. Hecat\u00e6i, p. 30, ed. Didot), that\n  the work on the Hyperboreans was written by Hekat\u00e6us of Abd\u00eara, a\n  literary Greek of the age of Ptolemy Philadelphus\u2014not by Hekat\u00e6us\n  of Mil\u00eatus. I do not concur in this opinion. I think it much more\n  probable that the earlier Hekat\u00e6us was the author spoken of.\n\n  The distinguished position held by Hekat\u00e6us at Mil\u00eatus is marked\n  not only by the notice which Herodotus takes of his opinions on\n  public matters, but also by his negotiation with the Persian\n  satrap Artaphernes on behalf of his countrymen (Diod\u00f4r. Excerpt.\n  xlvii. p. 41, ed. Dindorf).\n\n  [904] Herodot. ii. 143.\n\nWe have next to consider the historians, especially Herodotus and\nThucydid\u00eas. Like Hekat\u00e6us, Thucydid\u00eas belonged to a gens which traced\nits descent from Ajax, and through Ajax to \u00c6akus and Zeus.[905]\nHerodotus modestly implies that he himself had no such privilege to\nboast of.[906] Their curiosity respecting the past had no other\nmaterials to work upon except the mythes; but these they found already\ncast by the logographers into a continuous series, and presented as an\naggregate of antecedent history, chronologically deduced from the times\nof the gods. In common with the body of the Greeks, both Herodotus\nand Thucydid\u00eas had imbibed that complete and unsuspecting belief in\nthe general reality of mythical antiquity, which was interwoven with\nthe religion and the patriotism, and all the public demonstrations of\nthe Hellenic world. To acquaint themselves with the genuine details\nof this foretime, was an inquiry highly interesting to them: but the\nincreased positive tendencies of their age, as well as their own habits\nof personal investigation, had created in them an _historical sense_\nin regard to the past as well as to the present. Having acquired a\nhabit of appreciating the intrinsic tests of historical credibility\nand probability, they found the particular narratives of the poets and\nlogographers, inadmissible as a whole even in the eyes of Hekat\u00e6us,\nstill more at variance with their stricter canons of criticism. And we\nthus observe in them the constant struggle, as well as the resulting\ncompromise, between these two opposite tendencies; on one hand a firm\nbelief in the reality of the mythical world, on the other hand an\ninability to accept the details which their only witnesses, the poets\nand logographers, told them respecting it.\n\n  [905] Marcellin. Vit. Thucyd. init.\n\n  [906] Herodot. ii. 143.\n\nEach of them however performed the process in his own way. Herodotus is\na man of deep and anxious religious feeling; he often recognizes the\nspecial judgments of the gods as determining historical events: his\npiety is also partly tinged with that mystical vein which the last two\ncenturies had gradually infused into the religion of the Greeks\u2014for\nhe is apprehensive of giving offence to the gods by reciting publicly\nwhat he has heard respecting them; he frequently stops short in his\nnarrative and intimates that there is a sacred legend, but that he will\nnot tell it: in other cases, where he feels compelled to speak out, he\nentreats forgiveness for doing so from the gods and heroes. Sometimes\nhe will not even mention the name of a god, though he generally\nthinks himself authorized to do so, the names being matter of public\nnotoriety.[907] Such pious reserve, which the open-hearted Herodotus\navowedly proclaims as chaining up his tongue, affords a striking\ncontrast with the plain-spoken and unsuspecting tone of the ancient\nepic, as well as of the popular legends, wherein the gods and their\nproceedings were the familiar and interesting subjects of common talk\nas well as of common sympathy, without ceasing to inspire both fear and\nreverence.\n\n  [907] Herodot. ii. 3, 51, 61, 65, 170. He alludes briefly (c.\n  51) to an \u1f31\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 which was communicated in the Samothracian\n  mysteries, but he does not mention what it was: also about the\n  Thesmophoria, or \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1f74 of D\u00eam\u00eat\u00ear (c. 171).\n\n  \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 (c. 45).\n\n  Compare similar scruples on the part of Pausanias (viii. 25 and\n  37).\n\n  The passage of Herodotus (ii. 3) is equivocal, and has been\n  understood in more ways than one (see Lobeck, Aglaopham. p. 1287).\n\n  The aversion of Dionysius of Halikarnassus to reveal the divine\n  secrets is not less powerful (see A. R. i. 67, 68), and Pausanias\n  _passim_.\n\nHerodotus expressly distinguishes, in the comparison of Polykrat\u00eas with\nMin\u00f4s, the human race to which the former belonged, from the divine or\nheroic race which comprised the latter.[908] But he has a firm belief\nin the authentic personality and parentage of all the names in the\nmythes, divine, heroic and human, as well as in the trustworthiness of\ntheir chronology computed by generations. He counts back 1600 years\nfrom his own day to that of Semel\u00ea, mother of Dionysus; 900 years to\nH\u00earakl\u00eas, and 800 years to Penelop\u00ea, the Trojan war being a little\nearlier in date.[909] Indeed even the longest of these periods must\nhave seemed to him comparatively short, seeing that he apparently\naccepts the prodigious series of years which the Egyptians professed to\ndraw from a recorded chronology\u201417,000 years from their god H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nand 15,000 years from their god Osiris or Dionysus, down to their king\nAmasis[910] (550 B. C.) So much was his imagination familiarized with\nthese long chronological computations barren of events, that he treats\nHomer and Hesiod as \u201cmen of yesterday,\u201d though separated from his own\nage by an interval which he reckons as four hundred years.[911]\n\n  [908] Herod. iii. 122.\n\n  [909] Herod. ii. 145.\n\n  [910] Herodot. ii. 43-145. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b1.\n\n  [911] Herodot, ii. 53. \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f57 \u03c0\u03c1\u03c9\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\n  \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3. \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nHerodotus had been profoundly impressed with what he saw and heard\nin Egypt. The wonderful monuments, the evident antiquity, and the\npeculiar civilization of that country, acquired such preponderance in\nhis mind over his own native legends, that he is disposed to trace\neven the oldest religious names or institutions of Greece to Egyptian\nor Ph\u0153nician original, setting aside in favor of this hypothesis the\nGrecian legends of Dionysus and Pan.[912] The oldest Grecian mythical\ngenealogies are thus made ultimately to lose themselves in Egyptian\nor Ph\u0153nician antiquity, and in the full extent of these genealogies\nHerodotus firmly believes. It does not seem that any doubt had\never crossed his mind as to the real personality of those who were\nnamed or described in the popular mythes: all of them have once had\nreality, either as men, as heroes, or as gods. The eponyms of cities,\nd\u00eames and tribes, are all comprehended in this affirmative category;\nthe supposition of fictitious personages being apparently never\nentertained. Deukali\u00f4n, Hell\u00ean, D\u00f4rus,[913]\u2014I\u00f4n, with his four sons,\nthe eponyms of the old Athenian tribes,[914]\u2014the autochthonous Titakus\nand Dekelus,[915]\u2014Danaus, Lynkeus, Perseus, Amphitry\u00f4n, Alkm\u00eana, and\nH\u00earakl\u00eas,[916]\u2014Talthybius, the heroic progenitor of the privileged\nheraldic gens at Sparta,\u2014the Tyndarids and Helena,[917]\u2014Agamemn\u00f4n,\nMenelaus, and Orestes,[918]\u2014Nest\u00f4r and his son Peisistratus,\u2014As\u00f4pus,\nTh\u00eab\u00ea, and \u00c6gina,\u2014Inachus and I\u00f4, \u00c6\u00eat\u00eas and M\u00eadea,[919]\u2014Melanippus,\nAdrastus, and Amphiar\u00e4us, as well as Jas\u00f4n and the Arg\u00f4,[920]\u2014all\nthese are occupants of the real past time, and predecessors of himself\nand his contemporaries. In the veins of the Laced\u00e6monian kings flowed\nthe blood both of Kadmus and of Danaus, their splendid pedigree being\ntraceable to both of these great mythical names: Herodotus carries the\nlineage up through H\u00earakl\u00eas first to Perseus and Dana\u00ea, then through\nDana\u00ea to Akrisios and the Egyptian Danaus; but he drops the paternal\nlineage when he comes to Perseus (inasmuch as Perseus is the son of\nZeus by Dana\u00ea, without any reputed human father, such as Amphitry\u00f4n\nwas to H\u00earakl\u00eas), and then follow the higher members of the series\nthrough Dana\u00ea alone.[921] He also pursues the same regal genealogy,\nthrough the mother of Eurysthen\u00eas and Procl\u00eas, up to Polynik\u00eas, \u0152dipus,\nLaius, Labdakus, Polyd\u00f4rus and Kadmus; and he assigns various ancient\ninscriptions which he saw in the temple of the Ismenian Apollo at\nTh\u00eabes, to the ages of Laius and \u0152dipus.[922] Moreover, the sieges of\nTh\u00eabes and Troy,\u2014the Argonautic expedition,\u2014the invasion of Attica by\nthe Amazons,\u2014the protection of the Herakleids, and the defeat and death\nof Eurystheus, by the Athenians,[923]\u2014the death of M\u00eakisteus and Tydeus\nbefore Th\u00eabes by the hands of Melanippus, and the touching calamities\nof Adrastus and Amphiar\u00e4us connected with the same enterprise,\u2014the\nsailing of Kast\u00f4r and Pollux in the Arg\u00f4,[924]\u2014the abductions of I\u00f4,\nEur\u00f4pa, M\u00eadea and Helena,\u2014the emigration of Kadmus in quest of Eur\u00f4pa,\nand his coming to B\u0153\u00f4tia, as well as the attack of the Greeks upon Troy\nto recover Helen,[925]\u2014all these events seem to him portions of past\nhistory, not less unquestionably certain, though more clouded over by\ndistance and misrepresentation, than the battles of Salamis and Mykal\u00ea.\n\n  [912] Herodot. ii. 146.\n\n  [913] Herod. i. 56.\n\n  [914] Herod. v. 66.\n\n  [915] Herod. ix. 73.\n\n  [916] Herod. ii, 43-44, 91-98, 171-182 (the Egyptians admitted\n  the truth of the Greek legend, that Perseus had come to Libya to\n  fetch the Gorgon\u2019s head).\n\n  [917] Herod. ii. 113-120; iv. 145; vii. 134.\n\n  [918] Herod. i. 67-68; ii. 113. vii. 159.\n\n  [919] Herod. i. 1, 2, 4; v. 81, 65.\n\n  [920] Herod. i. 52; iv. 145; v. 67; vii. 193.\n\n  [921] Herod. vi. 52-53.\n\n  [922] Herod. iv. 147; v. 59-61.\n\n  [923] Herod. v. 61; ix. 27-28.\n\n  [924] Herod. i. 52; iv. 145; v. 67.\n\n  [925] Herod. i. 1-4; ii. 49, 113: iv. 147; v. 94.\n\nBut though Herodotus is thus easy of faith in regard both to the\npersons and to the general facts of Grecian mythes, yet when he comes\nto discuss particular facts taken separately, we find him applying\nto them stricter tests of historical credibility, and often disposed\nto reject as well the miraculous as the extravagant. Thus even with\nrespect to H\u00earakl\u00eas, he censures the levity of the Greeks in ascribing\nto him absurd and incredible exploits; he tries their assertion by\nthe philosophical standard of nature, or of determinate powers and\nconditions governing the course of events. \u201cHow is it consonant to\nnature (he asks), that H\u00earakl\u00eas, being, as he was, according to the\nstatement of the Greeks, _a man_, should kill many thousand persons?\nI pray that indulgence may be shown to me both by gods and heroes for\nsaying so much as this.\u201d The religious feelings of Herodotus here\ntold him that he was trenching upon the utmost limits of admissible\nscepticism.[926]\n\n  [926] Herod. ii. 45. \u039b\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7 \u03b5\u1f50\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03b4\u03b5 \u1f41 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9.... \u1f1c\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f15\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9\n  \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ae \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9, ~\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9~ \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9;\n  \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7.\n\n  We may also notice the manner in which the historian criticizes\n  the stratagem whereby Peisistratus established himself as despot\n  at Athens\u2014by dressing up the stately Athenian woman Phy\u00ea in the\n  costume of the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea, and passing off her injunctions\n  as the commands of the goddess; the Athenians accepted her with\n  unsuspecting faith, and received Peisistratus at her command.\n  Herodotus treats the whole affair as a piece of extravagant\n  silliness, \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1ff7 (i. 60).\n\nAnother striking instance of the disposition of Herodotus to\nrationalize the miraculous narratives of the current mythes, is to be\nfound in his account of the oracle of D\u00f4d\u00f4na and its alleged Egyptian\norigin. Here, if in any case, a miracle was not only in full keeping,\nbut apparently indispensable to satisfy the exigences of the religious\nsentiment; anything less than a miracle would have appeared tame and\nunimpressive to the visitors of so revered a spot, much more to the\nresidents themselves. Accordingly, Herodotus heard, both from the three\npriestesses and from the Dodon\u00e6ans generally, that two black doves had\nstarted at the same time from Th\u00eabes in Egypt: one of them went to\nLibya, where it directed the Libyans to establish the oracle of Zeus\nAmmon; the other came to the grove of D\u00f4d\u00f4na, and perched on one of the\nvenerable oaks, proclaiming with a human voice that an oracle of Zeus\nmust be founded on that very spot. The injunction of the speaking dove\nwas respectfully obeyed.[927]\n\n  [927] Herod. ii. 55. \u0394\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f31 \u1f31\u03c1\u03b7\u0390\u03b1\u03b9 ... \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1,\n  \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u0394\u03c9\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f31\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n  The miracle sometimes takes another form; the oak at D\u00f4d\u00f4na was\n  itself once endued with speech (Dionys. Hal. Ars. Rhetoric. i. 6;\n  Strabo).\n\nSuch was the tale related and believed at D\u00f4d\u00f4na. But Herodotus had\nalso heard, from the priests at Th\u00eabes in Egypt, a different tale,\nascribing the origin of all the prophetic establishments, in Greece as\nwell as in Libya, to two sacerdotal women, who had been carried away\nfrom Th\u00eabes by some Ph\u0153nician merchants and sold, the one in Greece,\nthe other in Libya. The Theban priests boldly assured Herodotus that\nmuch pains had been taken to discover what had become of these women so\nexported, and that the fact of their having been taken to Greece and\nLibya had been accordingly verified.[928]\n\n  [928] Herod. ii. 54.\n\nThe historian of Halicarnassus cannot for a moment think of admitting\nthe miracle which harmonized so well with the feelings of the\npriestesses and the Dodon\u00e6ans.[929] \u201cHow (he asks) could a dove\nspeak with human voice?\u201d But the narrative of the priests at Th\u00eabes,\nthough its prodigious improbability hardly requires to be stated, yet\ninvolved no positive departure from the laws of nature and possibility,\nand therefore Herodotus makes no difficulty in accepting it. The\ncurious circumstance is, that he turns the native Dodon\u00e6an legend\ninto a figurative representation, or rather a misrepresentation, of\nthe supposed true story told by the Theban priests. According to his\ninterpretation, the woman who came from Th\u00eabes to D\u00f4d\u00f4na was called\na dove, and affirmed to utter sounds like a bird, because she was\nnon-Hellenic and spoke a foreign tongue: when she learned to speak the\nlanguage of the country, it was then said that the dove spoke with a\nhuman voice. And the dove was moreover called black, because of the\nwoman\u2019s Egyptian color.\n\n  [929] Herod. ii. 57. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ad\u1ff3 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03b7\u0390\u1fc3 \u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u1fc7\n  \u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03b3\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf;\n\n  According to one statement, the word \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u1f70\u03c2 in the Thessalian\n  dialect meant both a dove and a prophetess (Scriptor. Rer.\n  Mythicarum, ed. Bode, i. 96). Had there been any truth in this,\n  Herodotus could hardly have failed to notice it, inasmuch as it\n  would exactly have helped him out of the difficulty which he felt.\n\nThat Herodotus should thus bluntly reject a miracle, recounted to him\nby the prophetic women themselves as the prime circumstance in the\n_origines_ of this holy place, is a proof of the hold which habits\nof dealing with historical evidence had acquired over his mind; and\nthe awkwardness of his explanatory mediation between the dove and the\nwoman, marks not less his anxiety, while discarding the legend, to let\nit softly down into a story quasi-historical and not intrinsically\nincredible.\n\nWe may observe another example of the unconscious tendency of\nHerodotus to eliminate from the mythes the idea of special aid from\nthe gods, in his remarks upon Melampus. He designates Melampus \u201cas a\nclever man, who had acquired for himself the art of prophecy;\u201d and\nhad procured through Kadmus much information about the religious\nrites and customs of Egypt, many of which he introduced into\nGreece[930]\u2014especially the name, the sacrifices, and the phallic\nprocessions of Dionysus: he adds, \u201cthat Melampus himself did not\naccurately comprehend or bring out the whole doctrine, but wise men\nwho came after him made the necessary additions.\u201d[931] Though the\nname of Melampus is here maintained, the character described[932] is\nsomething in the vein of Pythagoras\u2014totally different from the great\nseer and leech of the old epic mythes\u2014the founder of the gifted family\nof the Amythaonids, and the grandfather of Amphiar\u00e4us.[933] But that\nwhich is most of all at variance with the genuine legendary spirit, is\nthe opinion expressed by Herodotus (and delivered with some emphasis\nas _his own_), that Melampus \u201cwas a clever man, who had acquired for\nhimself prophetic powers.\u201d Such a supposition would have appeared\ninadmissible to Homer or Hesiod, or indeed to Sol\u00f4n, in the preceding\ncentury, in whose view even inferior arts come from the gods, while\nZeus or Apollo bestows the power of prophesying.[934] The intimation\nof such an opinion by Herodotus, himself a thoroughly pious man, marks\nthe sensibly diminished omnipresence of the gods, and the increasing\ntendency to look for the explanation of phenomena among more visible\nand determinate agencies.\n\n  [930] Herod. ii. 49. \u1f18\u03b3\u1f7c \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bd\u03cd\u03bd \u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9 \u039c\u03b5\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\n  \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u1f78\u03bd, \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f11\u03c9\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n  \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u1f10\u03c3\u03b7\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03b1\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n  [931] Herod. ii. 49. \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f14\u03c6\u1fc3\u03bd\u03b5\u00b7 (Melampus) \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 ~\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76~ \u03bc\u03b5\u03b6\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c6\u1fc3\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n  [932] Compare Herod. iv. 95; ii. 81. \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u1ff3\n  ~\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc7~ \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u1fb3.\n\n  [933] Homer, Odyss. xi. 290; xv. 225. Apollod\u00f4r. i. 9, 11-12.\n  Hesiod, Eoiai, Fragm. 55, ed. D\u00fcntzer (p. 43)\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f14\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f48\u03bb\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9,\n    ~\u039d\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2~, \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f14\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n  also Frag. 34 (p. 38), and Frag. 65 (p. 45); Schol. Apoll. Rhod.\n  i. 118.\n\n  Herodotus notices the celebrated mythical narrative of Melampus\n  healing the deranged Argive women (ix. 34); according to the\n  original legend, the daughters of Pr\u0153tus. In the Hesiodic Eoiai\n  (Fr. 16, D\u00fcntz.; Apollod. ii. 2) the distemper of the Pr\u0153tid\n  females was ascribed to their having repudiated the rites and\n  worship of Dionysus (Akusilaus, indeed, assigned a different\n  cause), which shows that the old fable recognized a connection\n  between Melampus and these rites.\n\n  [934] Homer, Iliad, i. 72-87; xv. 412. Odyss. xv. 245-252; iv.\n  233. Some times the gods inspired prophecy for the special\n  occasion, without conferring upon the party the permanent gift\n  and _status_ of a prophet (compare Odyss. i. 202; xvii. 383).\n  Sol\u00f4n, Fragm. xi. 48-53, Schneidewin:\u2014\n\n    \u1f0c\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03b8\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b1\u03be \u1f11\u03ba\u03ac\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f7c\u03bd,\n      \u1f1c\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n    \u1f6f\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76....\n\n  Herodotus himself reproduces the old belief in the special gift\n  of prophetic power by Zeus and Apollo, in the story of Euenius of\n  Apoll\u00f4nia (ix. 94).\n\n  See the fine ode of Pindar, describing the birth and inspiration\n  of Jamus, eponymous father of the great prophetic family in Elis\n  called the Jamids (Herodot. ix. 33), Pindar, Olymp. vi. 40-75.\n  About Teiresias, Sophoc. \u0152d. Tyr. 283-410. Neither Nest\u00f4r nor\n  Odysseus possesses the gift of prophecy.\n\nWe may make a similar remark on the dictum of the historian respecting\nthe narrow defile of Temp\u00ea, forming the embouchure of the P\u00eaneus and\nthe efflux of all the waters from the Thessalian basin. The Thessalians\nalleged that this whole basin of Thessaly had once been a lake,\nbut that Poseid\u00f4n had split the chain of mountains and opened the\nefflux;[935] upon which primitive belief, thoroughly conformable to\nthe genius of Homer and Hesiod, Herodotus comments as follows: \u201cThe\nThessalian statement is reasonable. For whoever thinks that Poseid\u00f4n\nshakes the earth, and that the rifts of an earthquake are the work of\nthat god, will, on seeing the defile in question, say that Poseid\u00f4n\nhas caused it. For the rift of the mountains is, as appeared to me\n(when I saw it), the work of an earthquake.\u201d Herodotus admits the\nreference to Poseid\u00f4n, when pointed out to him, but it stands only in\nthe background: what is present to his mind is the ph\u00e6nomenon of the\nearthquake, not as a special act, but as part of a system of habitual\noperations.[936]\n\n  [935] More than one tale is found elsewhere, similar to this,\n  about the defile of Temp\u00ea:\u2014\n\n  \u201cA tradition exists that this part of the country was once a\n  lake, and that Solomon commanded two deeves, or genii, named\n  Ard and Beel, to turn off the water into the Caspian, which\n  they effected by cutting a passage through the mountains; and a\n  city, erected in the newly-formed plain, was named after them\n  Ard-u-beel.\u201d (Sketches on the Shores of the Caspian, by W. R.\n  Holmes.)\n\n  Also about the plain of Santa Fe di Bogota, in South America,\n  that it was once under water, until Bochica cleft the mountains\n  and opened a channel of egress (Humboldt, Vues des Cordill\u00e8res,\n  p. 87-88); and about the plateau of Kashmir (Humboldt, Asie\n  Centrale, vol. i. p. 102), drained in a like miraculous manner\n  by the saint K\u00e2syapa. The manner in which conjectures, derived\n  from local configuration or peculiarities, are often made to\n  assume the form of _traditions_, is well remarked by the same\n  illustrious traveller: \u201cCe qui se pr\u00e9sente comme une tradition,\n  n\u2019est souvent que le reflet de l\u2019impression que laisse l\u2019aspect\n  des lieux. Des bancs de coquilles \u00e0 demi-fossiles, r\u00e9pandues\n  dans les isthmes ou sur des plateaux, font na\u00eetre m\u00eame chez les\n  hommes les moins avanc\u00e9s dans la culture intellectuelle, l\u2019id\u00e9e\n  de grandes inondations, d\u2019anciennes communications entre des\n  bassins limitrophes. Des opinions, que l\u2019on pourroit appeler\n  syst\u00e9matiques, se trouvent dans les for\u00eats de l\u2019Or\u00e9noque comme\n  dans les \u00eeles de la Mer du Sud. Dans l\u2019une et dans l\u2019autre de\n  ces contr\u00e9es, elles ont pris la forme des traditions.\u201d (A. von\n  Humboldt, Asie Centrale, vol. ii. p. 147.) Compare a similar\n  remark in the same work and volume, p. 286-294.\n\n  [936] Herodot. vii. 129. (Poseid\u00f4n was worshipped as \u03a0\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2\n  in Thessaly, in commemoration of this geological interference:\n  Schol. Pindar. Pyth. iv. 245.) \u03a4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03c9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b1\u1f50\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 ...\n  \u1fe5\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bb\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2. \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03bd\u03c5\u03bd\n  \u0398\u03ad\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1, \u03b4\u03b9\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f57 \u1fe5\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9 \u1f41\n  \u03a0\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2. \u1f4d\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9 \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd\n  \u03c3\u03b5\u03af\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf \u1f30\u03b4\u1f7c\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03b7 \u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9. \u1f18\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f21 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd. In another\n  case (viii. 129), Herodotus believes that Poseid\u00f4n produced a\n  preternaturally high tide, in order to punish the Persians, who\n  had insulted his temple near Potid\u00e6a: here was a special motive\n  for the god to exert his power.\n\n  This remark of Herodotus illustrates the hostile ridicule cast\n  by Aristophan\u00eas (in the Nubes) upon Socrat\u00eas, on the score of\n  alleged impiety, because he belonged to a school of philosophers\n  (though in point of fact he discountenanced that line of\n  study) who introduced physical laws and forces in place of the\n  personal agency of the gods. The old man Strepsiades inquires\n  from Socrat\u00eas, _Who rains? Who thunders?_ To which Socrat\u00eas\n  replies, \u201c_Not Zeus_, but the Nephel\u00e6, _i. e. the clouds_: you\n  never saw rain without clouds.\u201d Strepsiades then proceeds to\n  inquire\u2014\u201cBut who is it that compels the clouds to move onward?\n  is it not Zeus?\u201d Socrat\u00eas\u2014\u201cNot at all; it is \u00e6thereal rotation.\u201d\n  Strepsiades\u2014\u201cRotation? that had escaped me: Zeus then no longer\n  exists, and Rotation reigns in his place.\u201d\n\n  STREPS. \u1f49 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 (\u039d\u03b5\u03c6\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2), \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f41 \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2,\n            \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9;\n  SOCRAT. \u1f2d\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n  STREPS.                              \u0394\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2; \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03af \u03bc\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u2014\n          \u1f49 \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f62\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0394\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03c5\u03bd\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  To the same effect v. 1454, \u0394\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0394\u03af\u1fbd\n  \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03c2\u2014\u201cRotation has driven out Zeus, and reigns in his\n  place.\u201d\n\n  If Aristophan\u00eas had had as strong a wish to turn the public\n  antipathies against Herodotus as against Socrat\u00eas and Euripid\u00eas,\n  the explanation here given would have afforded him a plausible\n  show of truth for doing so; and it is highly probable that the\n  Thessalians would have been sufficiently displeased with the view\n  of Herodotus to sympathize in the poet\u2019s attack upon him. The\n  point would have been made (waiving metrical considerations)\u2014\n\n    ~\u03a3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2~ \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd ~\u03a0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd\u1fbd~ \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03ce\u03c2.\n\n  The comment of Herodotus upon the Thessalian view seems almost as\n  if it were intended to guard against this very inference.\n\n  Other accounts ascribed the cutting of the defile of Temp\u00ea to\n  H\u00earakl\u00eas (Diod\u00f4r. iv. 18).\n\n  Respecting the ancient Grecian faith, which recognized the\n  displeasure of Poseid\u00f4n as the cause of earthquakes, see Xenoph.\n  Hellen. iii. 3, 2; Thucydid. i. 127; Strabo, xii. p. 579; Diod\u00f4r.\n  xv. 48-49. It ceased to give universal satisfaction even so early\n  as the time of Thal\u00eas and Anaximen\u00eas (see Aristot. Meteorolog.\n  ii. 7-8; Plutarch, Placit. Philos. iii. 15; Seneca, Natural.\n  Qu\u00e6st. vi. 6-23); and that philosopher, as well as Anaxagoras,\n  Democritus and others, suggested different physical explanations\n  of the fact. Notwithstanding a dissentient minority, however,\n  the old doctrine still continued to be generally received: and\n  Diod\u00f4rus, in describing the terrible earthquake in 373 B. C.,\n  by which Helik\u00ea and Bura were destroyed, while he notices those\n  philosophers (probably Kallisthen\u00eas, Senec. Nat. Qu\u00e6st. vi. 23)\n  who substituted physical causes and laws in place of the divine\n  agency, rejects their views, and ranks himself with the religious\n  public, who traced this formidable ph\u00e6nomenon to the wrath of\n  Poseid\u00f4n (xv. 48-49).\n\n  The Romans recognized many different gods as producers of\n  earthquakes; an unfortunate creed, since it exposed them to the\n  danger of addressing their prayers to the wrong god: \u201cUnde in\n  ritualibus et pontificiis observatur, obtemperantibus sacerdotiis\n  caute, ne alio Deo pro alio nominato, cum quis eorum terram\n  concutiat, piacula committantur.\u201d (Ammian. Marcell. xvii. 7.)\n\nHerodotus adopts the Egyptian version of the legend of Troy, founded on\nthat capital variation which seems to have originated with Stesichorus,\nand according to which Helen never left Sparta at all\u2014her _eid\u00f4lon_\nhad been taken to Troy in her place. Upon this basis a new story had\nbeen framed, midway between Homer and Stesichorus, representing Paris\nto have really carried off Helen from Sparta, but to have been driven\nby storms to Egypt, where she remained during the whole siege of\nTroy, having been detained by Pr\u00f4teus, the king of the country, until\nMenelaus came to reclaim her after his triumph. The Egyptian priests,\nwith their usual boldness of assertion, professed to have heard the\nwhole story from Menelaus himself\u2014the Greeks had beseiged Troy, in\nthe full persuasion that Helen and the stolen treasures were within\nthe walls, nor would they ever believe the repeated denials of the\nTrojans as to the fact of her presence. In intimating his preference\nfor the Egyptian narrative, Herodotus betrays at once his perfect and\nunsuspecting confidence that he is dealing with genuine matter of\nhistory, and his entire distrust of the epic poets, even including\nHomer, upon whose authority that supposed history rested. His reason\nfor rejecting the Homeric version is that it teems with historical\nimprobabilities. If Helen had been really in Troy (he says), Priam and\nthe Trojans would never have been so insane as to retain her to their\nown utter ruin: but it was the divine judgment which drove them into\nthe miserable alternative of neither being able to surrender Helen,\nnor to satisfy the Greeks of the real fact that they had never had\npossession of her\u2014in order that mankind might plainly read, in the\nutter destruction of Troy, the great punishments with which the gods\nvisit great misdeeds. Homer (Herodotus thinks) had heard this story,\nbut designedly departed from it, because it was not so suitable a\nsubject for epic poetry.[937]\n\n  [937] Herod. ii. 116. \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ad \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u1f74\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u0390\u03b7\u03bd \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7\n  \u1f11\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u00b7 \u1f11\u03c2 \u1f43 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03ba\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n  Herodotus then produces a passage from the Iliad, with a view to\n  prove that Homer knew of the voyage of Paris and Helen to Egypt;\n  but the passage proves nothing at all to the point.\n\n  Again (c. 120), his slender confidence in the epic poets breaks\n  out\u2014\u03b5\u1f30 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n  It is remarkable that Herodotus is disposed to identify Helen\n  with the \u03be\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f08\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c4\u03b7 whose temple he saw at Memphis (c. 112).\n\nEnough has been said to show how wide is the difference between\nHerodotus and the logographers with their literal transcript of the\nancient legends. Though he agrees with them in admitting the full\nseries of persons and generations, he tries the circumstances narrated\nby a new standard. Scruples have arisen in his mind respecting\nviolations of the laws of nature: the poets are unworthy of trust, and\ntheir narratives must be brought into conformity with historical and\nethical conditions, before they can be admitted as truth. To accomplish\nthis conformity, Herodotus is willing to mutilate the old legend in\none of its most vital points: he sacrifices the personal presence of\nHelena in Troy, which ran through every one of the ancient epic poems\nbelonging to the Trojan cycle, and is indeed, under the gods, the great\nand present moving force throughout.\n\nThucydid\u00eas places himself generally in the same point of view\nas Herodotus with regard to mythical antiquity, yet with some\nconsiderable differences. Though manifesting no belief in present\nmiracles or prodigies,[938] he seems to accept without reserve the\npreexistent reality of all the persons mentioned in the mythes, and\nof the long series of generations extending back through so many\nsupposed centuries: in this category, too, are included the eponymous\npersonages, Hellen, Kekrops, Eumolpus, Pandi\u00f4n, Amphilochus the son\nof Amphiar\u00e4us, and Akarnan. But on the other hand, we find no trace\nof that distinction between a human and an heroic ante-human race,\nwhich Herodotus still admitted,\u2014nor any respect for Egyptian legends.\nThucydid\u00eas, regarding the personages of the mythes as men of the same\nbreed and stature with his own contemporaries, not only tests the acts\nimputed to them by the same limits of credibility, but presumes in them\nthe same political views and feelings as he was accustomed to trace in\nthe proceedings of Peisistratus or Perikl\u00eas. He treats the Trojan war\nas a great political enterprise, undertaken by all Greece; brought into\ncombination through the imposing power of Agamemn\u00f4n, not (according to\nthe legendary narrative) through the influence of the oath exacted by\nTyndareus. Then he explains how the predecessors of Agamemn\u00f4n arrived\nat so vast a dominion\u2014beginning with Pelops, who came over (as he\nsays) from Asia with great wealth among the poor Peloponn\u00easians, and\nby means of this wealth so aggrandized himself, though a foreigner, as\nto become the eponym of the peninsula. Next followed his son Atreus,\nwho acquired after the death of Eurystheus the dominion of Myk\u00ean\u00e6,\nwhich had before been possessed by the descendants of Perseus: here\nthe old legendary tale, which described Atreus as having been banished\nby his father Pelops in consequence of the murder of his elder brother\nChrysippus, is invested with a political bearing, as explaining the\nreason why Atreus retired to Myk\u00ean\u00e6. Another legendary tale\u2014the defeat\nand death of Eurystheus by the fugitive Herakleids in Attica, so\ncelebrated in Attic tragedy as having given occasion to the generous\nprotecting intervention of Athens\u2014is also introduced as furnishing the\ncause why Atreus succeeded to the deceased Eurystheus: \u201cfor Atreus, the\nmaternal uncle of Eurystheus, had been entrusted by the latter with\nhis government during the expedition into Attica, and had effectually\ncourted the people, who were moreover in great fear of being attacked\nby the Herakleids.\u201d Thus the Pelopids acquired the supremacy in\nPeloponn\u00easus, and Agamemn\u00f4n was enabled to get together his 1200 ships\nand 100,000 men for the expedition against Troy. Considering that\ncontingents were furnished from every portion of Greece, Thucydid\u00eas\nregards this as a small number, treating the Homeric catalogue as an\nauthentic muster-roll, perhaps rather exaggerated than otherwise. He\nthen proceeds to tell us why the armament was not larger: many more\nmen could have been furnished, but there was not sufficient money to\npurchase provisions for their subsistence; hence they were compelled,\nafter landing and gaining a victory, to fortify their camp, to divide\ntheir army, and to send away one portion for the purpose of cultivating\nthe Chersonese, and another portion to sack the adjacent towns. This\nwas the grand reason why the siege lasted so long as ten years. For\nif it had been possible to keep the whole army together, and to act\nwith an undivided force, Troy would have been taken both earlier and at\nsmaller cost.[939]\n\n  [938] \u201cUt conquirere fabulosa (says Tacitus, Hist. ii. 50, a\n  worthy parallel of Thucydid\u00eas) et fictis oblectare legentium\n  animos, procul gravitate c\u0153pti operis crediderim, ita vulgatis\n  traditisque demere fidem non ausim. Die, quo Bebriaci\n  certabatur, avem inusitat\u00e2 specie, apud Regium Lepidum celebri\n  vico consedisse, incol\u00e6 memorant; nec deinde c\u0153tu hominum aut\n  circumvolitantium alitum, territam pulsamque, donec Otho se ipse\n  interficeret: tum ablatam ex oculis: et tempora reputantibus,\n  initium finemque miraculi cum Othonis exitu competisse.\u201d\n  Suetonius (Vesp. 5) recounts a different miracle, in which three\n  eagles appear.\n\n  This passage of Tacitus occurs immediately after his magnificent\n  description of the suicide of the emperor Otho, a deed which he\n  contemplates with the most fervent admiration. His feelings were\n  evidently so wrought up that he was content to relax the canons\n  of historical credibility.\n\n  [939] Thucyd. i. 9-12.\n\nSuch is the general sketch of the war of Troy, as given by Thucydid\u00eas.\nSo different is it from the genuine epical narrative, that we seem\nhardly to be reading a description of the same event; still less\nshould we imagine that the event was known, to him as well as to us,\nonly through the epic poets themselves. The men, the numbers, and the\nduration of the siege, do indeed remain the same; but the cast and\njuncture of events, the determining forces, and the characteristic\nfeatures, are altogether heterogeneous. But, like Herodotus, and\nstill more than Herodotus, Thucydid\u00eas was under the pressure of two\nconflicting impulses\u2014he shared the general faith in the mythical\nantiquity, but at the same time he could not believe in any facts which\ncontradicted the laws of historical credibility or probability. He was\nthus under the necessity of torturing the matter of the old mythes\ninto conformity with the subjective exigencies of his own mind: he\nleft out, altered, recombined, and supplied new connecting principles\nand supposed purposes, until the story became such as no one could\nhave any positive reason for calling in question: though it lost the\nimpressive mixture of religion, romance, and individual adventure,\nwhich constituted its original charm, it acquired a smoothness and\nplausibility, and a poetical _ensemble_, which the critics were\nsatisfied to accept as historical truth. And historical truth it would\ndoubtless have been, if any independent evidence could have been found\nto sustain it. Had Thucydid\u00eas been able to produce such new testimony,\nwe should have been pleased to satisfy ourselves that the war of Troy,\nas he recounted it, was the real event; of which the war of Troy, as\nsung by the epic poets, was a misreported, exaggerated, and ornamented\nrecital. But in this case the poets are the only real witnesses, and\nthe narrative of Thucydid\u00eas is a mere extract and distillation from\ntheir incredibilities.\n\nA few other instances may be mentioned to illustrate the views of\nThucydid\u00eas respecting various mythical incidents. 1. He treats the\nresidence of the Homeric Ph\u00e6akians at Corkyra as an undisputed fact,\nand employs it partly to explain the efficiency of the Korkyrean\nnavy in times preceding the Peloponnesian war.[940] 2. He notices,\nwith equal confidence, the story of T\u00eareus and Prokn\u00ea, daughter of\nPandi\u00f4n, and the murder of the child Itys by Prokn\u00ea his mother, and\nPhilom\u00eala; and he produces this ancient mythe with especial reference\nto the alliance between the Athenians and T\u00ear\u00eas, king of the Odrysian\nThracians, during the time of the Peloponnesian war, intimating that\nthe Odrysian T\u00ear\u00eas was neither of the same family nor of the same\ncountry as T\u00eareus the husband of Prokn\u00ea.[941] The conduct of Pandi\u00f4n,\nin giving his daughter Prokn\u00ea in marriage to T\u00eareus, is in his view\ndictated by political motives and interests. 3. He mentions the\nStrait of Messina as the place through which Odysseus is said to have\nsailed.[942] 4. The Cycl\u00f4pes and the L\u00e6strygones (he says) were the\nmost ancient reported inhabitants of Sicily; but he cannot tell to what\nrace they belonged, nor whence they came.[943] 5. Italy derived its\nname from Italus, king of the Sikels. 6. Eryx and Egesto in Sicily were\nfounded by fugitive Trojans after the capture of Troy; also Skion\u00ea,\nin the Thracian peninsula of Pall\u00ean\u00ea, by Greeks from the Ach\u00e6an town\nof Pell\u00ean\u00ea, stopping thither in their return from the siege of Troy:\nthe Amphilochian Argos in the Gulf of Ambrakia was in like manner\nfounded by Amphilochus son of Amphiar\u00e4us, in his return from the\nsame enterprise. The remorse and mental derangement of the matricidal\nAlkm\u00e6\u00f4n, son of Amphiar\u00e4us, is also mentioned by Thucydid\u00eas,[944] as\nwell as the settlement of his son Akarnan in the country called after\nhim Akarnania.[945]\n\n  [940] Thucyd. i. 25.\n\n  [941] Thucyd. ii. 29. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f3c\u03c4\u03c5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b3\u1fc7 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u1f14\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03b7\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u1fc3 \u0394\u03b1\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f21 \u1f44\u03c1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. \u0395\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u1fc6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\n  \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f60\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f48\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f41\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6. The first\n  of these sentences would lead us to infer, if it came from any\n  other pen than that of Thucydid\u00eas, that the writer believed the\n  metamorphosis of Philom\u00eala into a nightingale: see above, ch. xi.\n  p. 270.\n\n  The observation respecting the convenience of neighborhood for\n  the marriage is remarkable, and shows how completely Thucydid\u00eas\n  regarded the event as historical. What would he have said\n  respecting the marriage of Oreithyia, daughter of Erechtheus,\n  with Boreas, and the prodigious distance which she is reported\n  to have been carried by her husband? \u1f59\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f10\u03c0\u1fbd\n  \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2, etc. (Sophokl\u00eas ap. Strabo. vii. p. 295.)\n\n  From the way in which Thucydid\u00eas introduces the mention of this\n  event, we see that he intended to correct the misapprehension\n  of his countrymen, who having just made an alliance with the\n  Odrysian _T\u00ear\u00eas_, were led by that circumstance to think of the\n  old mythical _T\u00eareus_, and to regard him as the ancestor of\n  _T\u00ear\u00eas_.\n\n  [942] Thucyd. iv. 24.\n\n  [943] Thucyd. vi. 2.\n\n  [944] Thucyd. ii. 68-102; iv. 120; vi. 2. Antiochus of Syracuse,\n  the contemporary of Thucydid\u00eas, also mentioned Italus as the\n  eponymous king of Italy: he farther named Sikelus, who came to\n  Morgos, son of Italus, after having been banished from Rome. He\n  talks about Italus, just as Thucydid\u00eas talks about Th\u00easeus, as\n  a wise and powerful king, who first acquired a great dominion\n  (Dionys. H. A. R. i. 12, 35, 73). Aristotle also mentioned Italus\n  in the same general terms (Polit. vii. 9, 2).\n\n  [945] We may here notice some particulars respecting Isokrat\u00eas.\n  He manifests entire confidence in the authenticity of the\n  mythical genealogies and chronology; but while he treats the\n  mythical personages as historically real, he regards them at the\n  same time not as human, but as half-gods, superior to humanity.\n  About Helena, Th\u00easeus, Sarp\u00ead\u00f4n, Cycnus, Memn\u00f4n, Achilles, etc.,\n  see Encom. Helen. Or. x. pp. 282, 292, 295. Bek. Helena was\n  worshipped in his time as a goddess at Therapn\u00e6 (_ib._ p. 295).\n  He recites the settlements of Danaus, Kadmus, and Pelops in\n  Greece, as undoubted historical facts (p. 297). In his discourse\n  called _Busiris_, he accuses Polykrat\u00eas, the sophist, of a gross\n  anachronism, in having placed Busiris subsequent in point of date\n  to Orpheus and \u00c6olus (Or. xi. p. 301, Bek.), and he adds that the\n  tale of Busiris having been slain by H\u00earakl\u00eas was chronologically\n  impossible (p. 309). Of the long Athenian genealogy from Kekrops\n  to Th\u00easeus, he speaks with perfect historical confidence\n  (Panathenaic. p. 349, Bek.); not less so of the adventures\n  of H\u00earakl\u00eas and his mythical contemporaries, which he places\n  in the mouth of Archidamus as a justification of the Spartan\n  title to Messenia (Or. vi. _Archidamus_, p. 156, Bek.; compare\n  Or. v. _Philippus_, pp. 114, 138), \u03c6\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, etc. He condemns the poets in strong language for\n  the wicked and dissolute tales which they circulated respecting\n  the gods: many of them (he says) had been punished for such\n  blasphemies by blindness, poverty, exile, and other misfortunes\n  (Or. xi. p. 309, Bek.).\n\n  In general, it may be said that Isokrat\u00eas applies no principles\n  of historical criticism to the mythes; he rejects such as appear\n  to him discreditable or unworthy, and believes the rest.\n\nSuch are the special allusions made by this illustrious author in\nthe course of his history to mythical events. From the tenor of his\nlanguage we may see that he accounted all that could be known about\nthem to be uncertain and unsatisfactory; but he has it much at heart\nto show, that even the greatest were inferior in magnitude and\nimportance to the Peloponnesian war.[946] In this respect his opinion\nseems to have been at variance with that which was popular among his\ncontemporaries.\n\n  [946] Thucyd. i. 21-22.\n\n  The first two volumes of this history have been noticed in an\n  able article of the Quarterly Review, for October, 1846; as well\n  as in the Heidelberger Jahrb\u00fccher der Literatur (1846. No. 41.\n  pp. 641-655), by Professor Kort\u00fcm.\n\n  While expressing, on several points, approbation of my work, by\n  which I feel much flattered\u2014both my English and my German critic\n  take partial objection to the views respecting Grecian legend.\n  While the Quarterly Reviewer contends that the mythop\u0153ic faculty\n  of the human mind, though essentially loose and untrustworthy,\n  is never creative, but requires some basis of fact to work\n  upon\u2014Kort\u00fcm thinks that I have not done justice to Thucydid\u00eas,\n  as regards his way of dealing with legend; that I do not allow\n  sufficient weight to the authority of an historian so circumspect\n  and so cold-blooded (den kalt-bl\u00fcthigsten und besonnensten\n  Historiker des Alterthums, p. 653) as a satisfactory voucher for\n  the early facts of Grecian history in his preface (Herr G. fehlt\n  also, wenn er das anerkannt kritische Pro\u0153mium als Gew\u00e4hrsmann\n  verschm\u00e4ht, p. 654).\n\n  No man feels more powerfully than I do the merits of Thucydid\u00eas\n  as an historian, or the value of the example which he set in\n  multiplying critical inquiries respecting matters recent and\n  verifiable. But the ablest judge or advocate, in investigating\n  specific facts, can proceed no further than he finds witnesses\n  having the means of knowledge, and willing more or less to tell\n  truth. In reference to facts prior to 776 B. C., Thucydid\u00eas had\n  nothing before him except the legendary poets, whose credibility\n  is not at all enhanced by the circumstance that he accepted them\n  as witnesses, applying himself only to cut down and modify their\n  allegations. His credibility in regard to the specific facts of\n  these early times depends altogether upon theirs. Now we in our\n  day are in a better position for appreciating their credibility\n  than he was in his, since the foundations of historical evidence\n  are so much more fully understood, and good or bad materials\n  for history are open to comparison in such large extent and\n  variety. Instead of wondering that he shared the general faith\n  in such delusive guides\u2014we ought rather to give him credit for\n  the reserve with which he qualified that faith, and for the sound\n  idea of historical possibility to which he held fast as the limit\n  of his confidence. But it is impossible to consider Thucydid\u00eas\n  as a _satisfactory guarantee_ (Gew\u00e4hrsmann) for matters of fact\n  which he derives only from such sources.\n\n  Professor Kort\u00fcm considers that I am inconsistent with myself\n  in refusing to discriminate particular matters of historical\n  fact among the legends\u2014and yet in accepting these legends (in\n  my chap. xx.) as giving a faithful mirror of the general state\n  of early Grecian society (p. 653). It appears to me that this\n  is no inconsistency, but a real and important distinction.\n  Whether H\u00earakl\u00eas, Agamemn\u00f4n, Odysseus, etc. were real persons,\n  and performed all, or a part, of the possible actions ascribed\n  to them\u2014I profess myself unable to determine. But even assuming\n  both the persons and their exploits to be fictions, these very\n  fictions will have been conceived and put together in conformity\n  to the general social ph\u00e6nomena among which the describer and\n  his hearers lived\u2014and will thus serve as illustrations of the\n  manners then prevalent. In fact, the real value of the Preface\n  of Thucydid\u00eas, upon which Professor Kort\u00fcm bestows such just\n  praise, consists, not in the particular facts which he brings out\n  by altering the legends, but in the rational general views which\n  he sets forth respecting early Grecian society, and respecting\n  the steps as well as the causes whereby it attained its actual\n  position as he saw it.\n\n  Professor Kort\u00fcm also affirms that the mythes contain \u201creal\n  matter of fact along with mere conceptions:\u201d which affirmation is\n  the same as that of the Quarterly Reviewer, when he says that the\n  mythop\u0153ic faculty is not creative. Taking the mythes in the mass,\n  I doubt not that this is true, nor have I anywhere denied it.\n  Taking them one by one, I neither affirm nor deny it. My position\n  is, that, whether there be matter of fact or not, we have no\n  test whereby it can be singled out, identified, and severed from\n  the accompanying fiction. And it lies upon those, who proclaim\n  the practicability of such severance, to exhibit some means of\n  verification better than any which has been yet pointed out. If\n  Thucydid\u00eas has failed in doing this, it is certain that none of\n  the many authors who have made the same attempt after him have\n  been more successful.\n\n  It cannot surely be denied that the mythop\u0153ic faculty is\n  _creative_, when we have before us so many divine legends, not\n  merely in Greece, but in other countries also. To suppose that\n  these religious legends are mere exaggerations, etc. of some\n  basis of actual fact\u2014that the gods of polytheism were merely\n  divinized men, with qualities distorted or feigned\u2014would be to\n  embrace in substance the theory of Eu\u00eamerus.\n\nTo touch a little upon the later historians by whom these mythes were\nhandled, we find that Anaximen\u00eas of Lampsacus composed a consecutive\nhistory of events, beginning from the Theogony down to the battle\nof Mantineia.[947] But Ephorus professed to omit all the mythical\nnarratives which are referred to times anterior to the return of the\nHerakleids, (such restriction would of course have banished the siege\nof Troy,) and even reproved those who introduced mythes into historical\nwriting; adding, that everywhere truth was the object to be aimed\nat.[948] Yet in practice he seems often to have departed from his own\nrule.[949] Theopompus, on the other hand, openly proclaimed that he\ncould narrate fables in his history better than Herodotus, or Ktesias,\nor Hellanikus.[950] The fragments which remain to us, exhibit some\nproof that this promise was performed as to quantity;[951] though as\nto his style of narration, the judgment of Dionysius is unfavorable.\nXenoph\u00f4n ennobled his favorite amusement of the chase by numerous\nexamples chosen from the heroic world, tracing their portraits with all\nthe simplicity of an undiminished faith. Kallisthen\u00eas, like Ephorus,\nprofessed to omit all mythes which referred to a time anterior to the\nreturn of the Herakleids; yet we know that he devoted a separate book\nor portion of his history to the Trojan war.[952] Philistus introduced\nsome mythes in the earlier portions of his Sicilian history; but Tim\u00e6us\nwas distinguished above all others for the copious and indiscriminate\nway in which he collected and repeated such legends.[953] Some of\nthese writers employed their ingenuity in transforming the mythical\ncircumstances into plausible matter of history: Ephorus, in particular,\nconverted the serpent Pyth\u00f4, slain by Apollo, into a tyrannical\nking.[954]\n\n  [947] Diod\u00f4r. xv. 89. He was a contemporary of Alexander the\n  Great.\n\n  [948] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 1. Strabo, ix. p. 422, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u1fc7.\n\n  [949] Ephorus recounted the principal adventures of H\u00earakl\u00eas\n  (Fragm. 8, 9, ed. Marx.), the tales of Kadmus and Harmonia\n  (Fragm. 12), the banishment of \u00c6t\u00f4lus from Elis (Fragm. 15;\n  Strabo, viii. p. 357); he drew inferences from the chronology of\n  the Trojan and Theban wars (Fragm. 28); he related the coming\n  of D\u00e6dalus to the Sikan king Kokalus, and the expedition of the\n  Amazons (Fragm. 99-103).\n\n  He was particularly copious in his information about \u03ba\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 and \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 (Polyb. ix. 1).\n\n  [950] Strabo, i. p. 74.\n\n  [951] Dionys. Halic. De Vett. Scriptt. Judic. p. 428, Reisk;\n  \u00c6lian, V. H. iii. 18, \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 ... \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n  Theopompus affirmed, that the bodies of those who went into the\n  forbidden precinct (\u03c4\u1f78 \u1f04\u03b2\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd) of Zeus, in Arcadia, gave no\n  shadow (Polyb. xvi. 12). He recounted the story of Midas and\n  Sil\u00eanus (Fragm. 74, 75, 76, ed. Wichers); he said a good deal\n  about the heroes of Troy; and he seems to have assigned the\n  misfortunes of the \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 to an historical cause\u2014the rottenness\n  of the Grecian ships, from the length of the siege, while the\n  genuine epic ascribes it to the anger of Ath\u00ean\u00ea (Fragm. 112,\n  113, 114; Schol. Homer. Iliad, ii. 135); he narrated an alleged\n  expulsion of Kinyras from Cyprus by Agamemn\u00f4n (Fragm. 111);\n  he gave the genealogy of the Macedonian queen Olympias up to\n  Achilles and \u00c6akus (Fragm. 232).\n\n  [952] Cicero, Epist. ad Familiar. v. 12; Xenoph\u00f4n de Venation. c.\n  1.\n\n  [953] Philistus, Fragm. 1 (G\u00f6ller), D\u00e6dalus, and Kokalus; about\n  Liber and Juno (Fragm. 57); about the migration of the Sikels\n  into Sicily, eighty years after the Trojan war (ap. Dionys. Hal.\n  i. 3).\n\n  Tim\u00e6us (Fragm. 50, 51, 52, 53, G\u00f6ller) related many fables\n  respecting Jas\u00f4n, M\u00eadea, and the Argonauts generally. The\n  miscarriage of the Athenian armament under Nikias, before\n  Syracuse, is imputed to the anger of H\u00earakl\u00eas against the\n  Athenians because they came to assist the Egestans, descendants\n  of Troy (Plutarch, Nikias, 1),\u2014a naked reproduction of genuine\n  epical agencies by an historian; also about Diom\u00ead\u00eas and the\n  Daunians; Pha\u00ebth\u00f4n and the river Eridanus; the combats of the\n  Gigantes in the Phlegr\u00e6an plains (Fragm. 97, 99, 102).\n\n  [954] Strabo, ix. p. 422.\n\nBut the author who pushed this transmutation of legend into history\nto the greatest length, was the Messenian Eu\u00eamerus, contemporary of\nKassander of Maced\u00f4n. He melted down in this way the divine persons\nand legends, as well as the heroic\u2014representing both gods and heroes\nas having been mere earth-born men, though superior to the ordinary\nlevel in respect of force and capacity, and deified or heroified\nafter death as a recompense for services or striking exploits. In\nthe course of a voyage into the Indian sea, undertaken by command of\nKassander, Eu\u00eamerus professed to have discovered a fabulous country\ncalled Panchaia, in which was a temple of the Triphylian Zeus: he there\ndescribed a golden column, with an inscription purporting to have been\nput up by Zeus himself, and detailing his exploits while on earth.[955]\nSome eminent men, among whom may be numbered Polybius, followed the\nviews of Eu\u00eamerus, and the Roman poet Ennius[956] translated his\nHistoria Sacra; but on the whole he never acquired favor, and the\nunblushing inventions which he put into circulation were of themselves\nsufficient to disgrace both the author and his opinions. The doctrine\nthat all the gods had once existed as mere men offended the religious\npagans, and drew upon Eu\u00eamerus the imputation of atheism; but, on the\nother hand, it came to be warmly espoused by several of the Christian\nassailants of paganism,\u2014by Minucius Felix, Lactantius, and St.\nAugustin, who found the ground ready prepared for them in their efforts\nto strip Zeus and the other pagan gods of the attributes of deity. They\nbelieved not only in the main theory, but also in the copious details\nof Eu\u00eamerus; and the same man whom Strabo casts aside as almost a\nproverb for mendacity, was extolled by them as an excellent specimen\nof careful historical inquiry.[957]\n\n  [955] Compare Diod\u00f4r. v. 44-46; and Lactantius, De Fals\u00e2 Relig.\n  i. 11.\n\n  [956] Cicero, De Natur\u00e2 Deor. i. 42; Varro, De Re Rust. i. 48.\n\n  [957] Strabo, ii. p. 102. \u039f\u1f50 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03a0\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0395\u1f50\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd; compare also i. p. 47, and\n  ii. p. 104.\n\n  St. Augustin, on the contrary, tells us (Civitat. Dei, vi. 7),\n  \u201cQuid de ipse Jove senserunt, qui nutricem ejus in Capitolio\n  posuerunt? Nonne attestati sunt omnes Euemero, qui non fabulos\u00e2\n  garrulitate, sed _historic\u00e2 diligenti\u00e2_, homines fuisse\n  mortalesque conscripsit?\u201d And Minucius Felix (Octav. 20-21),\n  \u201cEuemerus exequitur Deorum natales: patrias, sepulcra dinumerat,\n  et per provincias monstrat, Dict\u00e6i Jovis, et Apollinis Delphici,\n  et Phari\u00e6 Isidis, et Cereris Eleusini\u00e6.\u201d Compare Augustin, Civit.\n  Dei, xviii. 8-14; and Clemens Alexand. Cohort. ad Gent. pp.\n  15-18, Sylb.\n\n  Lactantius (De Fals\u00e2 Relig. c. 13, 14, 16) gives copious\n  citations from Ennius\u2019s translation of the Historia Sacra of\n  Eu\u00eamerus.\n\n  \u0395\u1f50\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f41 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f04\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2, Sextus Empiricus, adv. Physicos,\n  ix. \u00a7 17-51. Compare Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 42; Plutarch, De\n  Iside et Osiride, c. 23. tom. ii. p. 475, ed. Wytt.\n\n  Nitzsch assumes (Helden Sage der Griechen, sect. 7. p. 84) that\n  the voyage of Eu\u00eamerus to Panchaia was intended only as an\n  amusing romance, and that Strabo, Polybius, Eratosthen\u00eas and\n  Plutarch were mistaken in construing it as a serious recital.\n  B\u00f6ttiger, in his Kunst-Mythologie der Griechen (Absch. ii. s. 6.\n  p. 190), takes the same view. But not the least reason is given\n  for adopting this opinion, and it seems to me far-fetched and\n  improbable; Lobeck (Aglaopham. p. 989), though Nitzsch alludes to\n  him as holding it, manifests no such tendency, as far as I can\n  observe.\n\nBut though the pagan world repudiated that \u201clowering tone of\nexplanation,\u201d which effaced the superhuman personality of Zeus and the\ngreat gods of Olympus, the mythical persons and narratives generally\ncame to be surveyed more and more from the point of view of history,\nand subjected to such alterations as might make them look more like\nplausible matter of fact. Polybius, Strabo, Diod\u00f4rus, and Pausanias,\ncast the mythes into historical statements\u2014with more or less of\ntransformation, as the case may require, assuming always that there\nis a basis of truth, which may be discovered by removing poetical\nexaggerations and allowing for mistakes. Strabo, in particular, lays\ndown that principle broadly and unequivocally in his remarks upon\nHomer. To give pure fiction, without any foundation of fact, was in his\njudgment utterly unworthy of so great a genius; and he comments with\nconsiderable acrimony on the geographer Eratosthen\u00eas, who maintains the\nopposite opinion. Again, Polybius tells us that the Homeric \u00c6olus, the\ndispenser of the winds by appointment from Zeus, was in reality a man\neminently skilled in navigation, and exact in predicting the weather;\nthat the Cycl\u00f4pes and L\u00e6strygones were wild and savage real men in\nSicily; and that Scylla and Charybdis were a figurative representation\nof dangers arising from pirates in the Strait of Messina. Strabo speaks\nof the amazing expeditions of Dionysus and H\u00earakl\u00eas, and of the long\nwanderings of Jas\u00f4n, Menelaus, and Odysseus, in the same category\nwith the extended commercial range of the Ph\u0153nician merchant-ships:\nhe explains the report of Th\u00easeus and Peirith\u00f6us having descended to\nHad\u00eas, by their dangerous earthly pilgrimages,\u2014and the invocation\nof the Dioskuri as the protectors of the imperiled mariner, by the\ncelebrity which they had acquired as real men and navigators.\n\nDiod\u00f4rus gave at considerable length versions of the current fables\nrespecting the most illustrious names in the Grecian mythical world,\ncompiled confusedly out of distinct and incongruous authors. Sometimes\nthe mythe is reproduced in its primitive simplicity, but for the most\npart it is partially, and sometimes wholly, historicized. Amidst this\njumble of dissentient authorities we can trace little of a systematic\nview, except the general conviction that there was at the bottom of\nthe mythes a real chronological sequence of persons, and real matter\nof fact, historical or ultra-historical. Nevertheless, there are\nsome few occasions on which Diod\u00f4rus brings us back a step nearer\nto the point of view of the old logographers. For, in reference to\nH\u00earakl\u00eas, he protests against the scheme of cutting down the mythes\nto the level of present reality, and contends that a special standard\nof ultra-historical credibility ought to be constituted, so as to\ninclude the mythe in its native dimensions, and do fitting honor to\nthe grand, beneficent, and superhuman personality of H\u00earakl\u00eas and\nother heroes or demi-gods. To apply to such persons the common measure\nof humanity (he says), and to cavil at the glorious picture which\ngrateful man has drawn of them, is at once ungracious and irrational.\nAll nice criticism into the truth of the legendary narratives is\nout of place: we show our reverence to the god by acquiescing in\nthe incredibilities of his history, and we must be content with the\nbest guesses which we can make, amidst the inextricable confusion\nand numberless discrepancies which they present.[958] Yet though\nDiod\u00f4rus here exhibits a preponderance of the religious sentiment over\nthe purely historical point of view, and thus reminds us of a period\nearlier than Thucydid\u00eas\u2014he in another place inserts a series of stories\nwhich seem to be derived from Eu\u00eamerus, and in which Uranus, Kronus,\nand Zeus appear reduced to the character of human kings celebrated\nfor their exploits and benefactions.[959] Many of the authors, whom\nDiod\u00f4rus copies, have so entangled together Grecian, Asiatic, Egyptian,\nand Libyan fables, that it becomes impossible to ascertain how much of\nthis heterogeneous mass can be considered as at all connected with the\ngenuine Hellenic mind.\n\n  [958] Diod\u00f4r. iv. 1-8. \u1f1c\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u1ff3, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae\u03bd. \u039a\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 ~\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd~. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 ~\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u039a\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2~ \u03b4\u03b9\u03c6\u03c5\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u1f11\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u0393\u03b7\u03c1\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, ~\u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2~, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 ~\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03cd\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd~. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f04\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2,\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, ~\u03c3\u03c5\u03ba\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd~ \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, etc.\n\n  This is a remarkable passage: first, inasmuch as it sets forth\n  the total inapplicability of analogies drawn from the historical\n  past as narratives about H\u00earakl\u00eas; next, inasmuch as it suspends\n  the employment of critical and scientific tests, and invokes an\n  acquiescence interwoven and identified with the feelings, as the\n  proper mode of evincing pious reverence for the god H\u00earakl\u00eas.\n  It aims at reproducing exactly that state of mind to which the\n  mythes were addressed, and with which alone they could ever be in\n  thorough harmony.\n\n  [959] Diod\u00f4r. iii. 45-60; v. 44-46.\n\nPausanias is far more strictly Hellenic in his view of the Grecian\nmythes than Diod\u00f4rus: his sincere piety makes him inclined to faith\ngenerally with regard to the mythical narratives, but subject\nnevertheless to the frequent necessity of historicizing or allegorizing\nthem. His belief in the general reality of the mythical history and\nchronology is complete, in spite of the many discrepancies which he\nfinds in it, and which he is unable to reconcile.\n\nAnother author who seems to have conceived clearly, and applied\nconsistently, the semi-historical theory of the Grecian mythes, is\nPal\u00e6phatus, of whose work what appears to be a short abstract has been\npreserved.[960] In the short preface of this treatise \u201cconcerning\nIncredible Tales,\u201d he remarks, that some men, from want of instruction,\nbelieve all the current narratives; while others, more searching and\ncautious, disbelieve them altogether. Each of these extremes he is\nanxious to avoid. On the one hand, he thinks that no narrative could\never have acquired credence unless it had been founded in truth;\non the other, it is impossible for him to accept so much of the\nexisting narratives as conflicts with the analogies of present natural\nph\u00e6nomena. If such things ever had been, they would still continue to\nbe\u2014but they never have so occurred; and the extra-analogical features\nof the stories are to be ascribed to the license of the poets.\nPal\u00e6phatus wishes to adopt a middle course, neither accepting all nor\nrejecting all: accordingly, he had taken great pains to separate the\ntrue from the false in many of the narratives; he had visited the\nlocalities wherein they had taken place, and made careful inquiries\nfrom old men and others.[961] The results of his researches are\npresented in a new version of fifty legends, among the most celebrated\nand the most fabulous, comprising the Centaurs, Pasipha\u00ea, Akt\u00e6\u00f4n,\nKadmus and the Sparti, the Sphinx, Cycnus, D\u00e6dalus, the Trojan horse,\n\u00c6olus, Scylla, Gery\u00f4n, Belleroph\u00f4n, etc.\n\n  [960] The work of Pal\u00e6phatus, probably this original, is alluded\n  to in the _Ciris_ of Virgil (88):\u2014\n\n    \u201cDocta Pal\u00e6phati\u00e2 testatur voce papyrus.\u201d\n\n  The date of Pal\u00e6phatus is unknown\u2014indeed this passage of the\n  _Ciris_ seems the only ground that there is for inference\n  respecting it. That which we now possess is probably an extract\n  from a larger work\u2014made by another person at some later time: see\n  Vossius de Historicis Gr\u00e6cis, p. 478, ed. Westermann.\n\n  [961] Pal\u00e6phat. init. ap. Script. Mythogr. ed. Westermann, p.\n  268. \u03a4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f61\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2\u2014\u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03c5\u03ba\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72\n  \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u00b7 ... \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u1f18\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f37\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b1,\n  \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n  The main assumption of the semi-historical theory is here shortly\n  and clearly stated.\n\n  One of the early Christian writers, Minucius Felix, is astonished\n  at the easy belief of his pagan forefathers in miracles. If ever\n  such things had been done in former times (he affirms), they\n  would continue to be done now; as they cannot be done now, we may\n  be sure that they never were _really_ done formerly (Minucius\n  Felix, Octav. c. 20): \u201cMajoribus enim nostris tam facilis in\n  mendaciis fides fuit, ut temer\u00e8 crediderint etiam alia monstruosa\n  mira miracula, Scyllam multiplicem, Chim\u00e6ram multiformem, Hydram,\n  et Centauros. Quid illas aniles fabulas\u2014de hominibus aves, et\n  feras homines, et de hominibus arbores atque flores? _Qu\u00e6, si\n  essent facta, fierent; quia fieri non possunt, ideo nec facta\n  sunt._\u201d\n\nIt must be confessed that Pal\u00e6phatus has performed his promise of\ntransforming the \u201cincredibilia\u201d into narratives in themselves plausible\nand unobjectionable, and that in doing so he always follows some\nthread of analogy, real or verbal. The Centaurs (he tells us) were a\nbody of young men from the village of Nephel\u00ea in Thessaly, who first\ntrained and mounted horses for the purpose of repelling a herd of bulls\nbelonging to Ixi\u00f4n king of the Lapith\u00e6, which had run wild and done\ngreat damage: they pursued these wild bulls on horseback, and pierced\nthem with their spears, thus acquiring both the name of _Prickers_\n(\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2) and the imputed attribute of joint body with the horse.\nAkt\u00e6\u00f4n was an Arcadian, who neglected the cultivation of his land for\nthe pleasures of hunting, and was thus eaten up by the expense of\nhis hounds. The dragon whom Kadmus killed at Th\u00eabes, was in reality\nDrako, king of Th\u00eabes; and the dragon\u2019s teeth which he was said to\nhave sown, and from whence sprung a crop of armed men, were in point\nof fact elephants\u2019 teeth, which Kadmus as a rich Ph\u0153nician had brought\nover with him: the sons of Drako sold these elephants\u2019 teeth and\nemployed the proceeds to levy troops against Kadmus. D\u00e6dalus, instead\nof flying across the sea on wings, had escaped from Kr\u00eate in a swift\nsailing-boat under a violent storm: Kottus, Briareus, and Gyg\u00eas were\nnot persons with one hundred hands, but inhabitants of the village of\nHekatoncheiria in Upper Macedonia, who warred with the inhabitants of\nMount Olympus against the Titans: Scylla, whom Odysseus so narrowly\nescaped, was a fastsailing piratical vessel, as was also Pegasus, the\nalleged winged horse of Belleroph\u00f4n.[962]\n\n  [962] Pal\u00e6phat. Narrat. 1, 3, 6, 13, 20, 21, 29. Two short\n  treatises on the same subject as this of Pal\u00e6phatus, are printed\n  along with it, both in the collection of Gale and of Westermann;\n  the one, _Heracliti de Incredibilibus_, the other _Anonymi de\n  Incredibilibus_. They both profess to interpret some of the\n  extraordinary or miraculous mythes, and proceed in a track not\n  unlike that of Pal\u00e6phatus. Scylla was a beautiful courtezan,\n  surrounded with abominable parasites: she ensnared and ruined\n  the companions of Odysseus, though he himself was prudent enough\n  to escape her (Heraclit. c. 2. p. 313, West.) Atlas was a great\n  astronomer: Pasipha\u00ea fell in love with a youth named Taurus; the\n  monster called the Chim\u00e6ra was in reality a ferocious queen, who\n  had two brothers called Leo and Drako; the ram which carried\n  Phryxus and Hell\u00ea across the \u00c6gean was a boatman named Krias\n  (Heraclit. c. 2, 6, 15, 24).\n\n  A great number of similar explanations are scattered throughout\n  the Scholia on Homer and the Commentary of Eustathius, without\n  specification of their authors.\n\n  The\u00f4n considers such resolution of fable into plausible history\n  as a proof of surpassing ingenuity (Progymnasmata, cap. 6, ap.\n  Walz. Coll. Rhett. Gr\u00e6c. i. p. 219). Others among the Rhetors,\n  too, exercised their talents sometimes in vindicating, sometimes\n  in controverting, the probability of the ancient mythes. See the\n  Progymnasmata of Nicolaus\u2014\u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1f74 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u039d\u03b9\u03cc\u03b2\u03b7\u03bd,\n  \u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u1f74 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u039d\u03b9\u03cc\u03b2\u03b7\u03bd (ap. Walz. Coll. Rhetor.\n  i. p. 284-318), where there are many specimens of this fanciful\n  mode of handling.\n\n  Plutarch, however, in one of his treatises, accepts Minotaurs,\n  Sphinxes, Centaurs, etc. as realities; he treats them as products\n  of the monstrous, incestuous, and ungovernable lusts of man,\n  which he contrasts with the simple and moderate passions of\n  animals (Plutarch, Gryllus, p. 990).\n\nBy such ingenious conjectures, Pal\u00e6phatus eliminates all the incredible\ncircumstances, and leaves to us a string of tales perfectly credible\nand commonplace, which we should readily believe, provided a very\nmoderate amount of testimony could be produced in their favor. If his\ntreatment not only disenchants the original mythes, but even effaces\ntheir generic and essential character, we ought to remember that this\nis not more than what is done by Thucydid\u00eas in his sketch of the\nTrojan war. Pal\u00e6phatus handles the mythes consistently, according to\nthe semi-historical theory, and his results exhibit the maximum which\nthat theory can ever present. By aid of conjecture, we get out of the\nimpossible, and arrive at matters intrinsically plausible, but totally\nuncertified; beyond this point we cannot penetrate, without the light\nof extrinsic evidence, since there is no intrinsic mark to distinguish\ntruth from plausible fiction.[963]\n\n  [963] The learned Mr. Jacob Bryant regards the explanations of\n  Pal\u00e6phatus as if they were founded upon real fact. He admits,\n  for example, the city Nephel\u00ea alleged by that author in his\n  exposition of the fable of the Centaurs. Moreover, he speaks with\n  much commendation of Pal\u00e6phatus generally: \u201cHe (Pal\u00e6phatus) wrote\n  early, and seems to have been a serious and sensible person; one\n  who saw the absurdity of the fables upon which the theology of\n  his country was founded.\u201d (Ancient Mythology, vol. i. p. 411-435.)\n\n  So also Sir Thomas Brown (Enquiry into Vulgar Errors, Book I.\n  chap. vi. p. 221, ed. 1835) alludes to Pal\u00e6phatus as having\n  incontestably pointed out the real basis of the fables. \u201cAnd\n  surely the fabulous inclination of those days was greater than\n  any since; which swarmed so with fables, and from such slender\n  grounds took hints for fictions, poisoning the world ever\n  after: wherein how far they succeeded, may be exemplified from\n  Pal\u00e6phatus, in his Book of Fabulous Narrations.\u201d\n\nIt remains that we should notice the manner in which the ancient\nmythes were received and dealt with by the philosophers. The earliest\nexpression which we hear, on the part of philosophy, is the severe\ncensure bestowed upon them on ethical grounds by Xenophan\u00eas of\nKoloph\u00f4n, and seemingly by some others of his contemporaries.[964]\nIt was apparently in reply to such charges, which did not admit of\nbeing directly rebutted, that Theagen\u00eas of Rh\u00eagium (about 520 B. C.)\nfirst started the idea of a double meaning in the Homeric and Hesiodic\nnarratives,\u2014an interior sense, different from that which the words\nin their obvious meaning bore, yet to a certain extent analogous,\nand discoverable by sagacious divination. Upon this principle, he\nallegorized especially the battle of the gods in the Iliad.[965] In\nthe succeeding century, Anaxagoras and Metrod\u00f4rus carried out the\nallegorical explanation more comprehensively and systematically;\nthe former representing the mythical personages as mere mental\nconceptions, invested with name and gender, and illustrative of ethical\nprecepts,\u2014the latter connecting them with physical principles and\nph\u00e6nomena. Metrod\u00f4rus resolved not only the persons of Zeus, H\u00ear\u00ea,\nand Ath\u00ean\u00ea, but also those of Agamemn\u00f4n, Achilles, and Hect\u00f4r, into\nvarious elemental combinations and physical agencies, and treated\nthe adventures ascribed to them as natural facts concealed under the\nveil of allegory.[966] Empedokl\u00eas, Prodikus, Antisthen\u00eas, Parmenid\u00eas,\nH\u00earakleid\u00eas of Pontus, and in a later age, Chrysippus, and the Stoic\nphilosophers generally,[967] followed more or less the same principle\nof treating the popular gods as allegorical personages; while the\nexpositors of Homer (such as Stesimbrotus, Glauk\u00f4n, and others, even\ndown to the Alexandrine age), though none of them proceeded to the same\nextreme length as Metrod\u00f4rus, employed allegory amongst other media\nof explanation for the purpose of solving difficulties, or eluding\nreproaches against the poet.\n\n  [964] Xenophan. ap. Sext. Empir. adv. Mathemat. ix. 193. He also\n  disapproved of the rites, accompanied by mourning and wailing,\n  with which the Eleat\u00eas worshipped Leukothea: he told them, \u03b5\u1f30\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b8\u03c1\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u00b7 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b8\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n  (Aristotel. Rhet. ii. 23).\n\n  Xenophan\u00eas pronounced the battles of the Titans, Gigantes, and\n  Centaurs to be \u201cfictions of our predecessors,\u201d \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd (Xenophan. Fragm. 1. p. 42, ed. Schneidewin).\n\n  See a curious comparison of the Grecian and Roman theology in\n  Dionys. Halicarn. Ant. Rom. ii. 20.\n\n  [965] Schol. Iliad. xx. 67: Tatian. adv. Gr\u00e6c. c. 48. H\u00earakleitus\n  indignantly repelled the impudent atheists who found fault\n  with the divine mythes of the Iliad, ignorant of their true\n  allegorical meaning: \u1f21 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03cc\u03bb\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b1\u03c8\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b8\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\u2014\u1f2e \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u1fc3 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c1\u03ad\u03bc\u03c9 \u1f51\u03c8\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd, etc.\n  \u03bb\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f21 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f80\u03b4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u03ad\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b9\u03c2 (Schol. ad Hom. Iliad. xv. 18).\n\n  [966] Diogen. La\u00ebrt. ii. 11; Tatian. adv. Gr\u00e6c. c. 37; Hesychius,\n  v. \u1f08\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1. See the ethical turn given to the stories of\n  Circ\u00ea, the Sirens, and Scylla, in Xenoph. Memorab. i. 3, 7;\n  ii. 6, 11-31. Syncellus, Chronic. p. 149. \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f31\n  \u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03be\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03ce\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0394\u03af\u03b1, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd, etc.\n\n  Uschold and other modern German authors seem to have adopted\n  in its full extent the principle of interpretation proposed by\n  Metrodorus\u2014treating Odysseus and Penelop\u00ea as personifications of\n  the Sun and Moon, etc. See Helbig, Die Sittlichen Zust\u00e4nde des\n  Griechischen Helden Alters, Einleitung, p. xxix. (Leipzig, 1839.)\n\n  Corrections of the Homeric text were also resorted to, in order\n  to escape the necessity of imputing falsehood to Zeus (Aristotel.\n  De Sophist. Elench. c. 4).\n\n  [967] Sextus Empiric. ix. 18; Diogen. viii. 76; Plutarch, De\n  Placit. Philosoph. i. 3-6; De Poesi Homeric\u00e2, 92-126; De Stoicor.\n  Repugn. p. 1050, Menander, De Encomiis, c. 5.\n\n  Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 14, 15, 16, 41; ii. 24-25. \u201cPhysica\n  ratio non inelegans inclusa in impias fabulas.\u201d\n\n  In the _Bacch\u00e6_ of Euripid\u00eas, Pentheus is made to deride the tale\n  of the motherless infant Dionysus having been sewn into the thigh\n  of Zeus. Teiresias, while reproving him for his impiety, explains\n  the story away in a sort of allegory: the \u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 (he says)\n  was a mistaken statement in place of the \u03b1\u1f30\u03b8\u1f74\u03c1 \u03c7\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n  (Bacch. 235-290).\n\n  Lucretius (iii. 995-1036) allegorizes the conspicuous sufferers\n  in Had\u00eas,\u2014Tantalus, Sisyphus, Tityus, and the Dana\u00efds, as well\n  as the ministers of penal infliction, Cerberus and the Furies.\n  The first four are emblematic descriptions of various defective\n  or vicious characters in human nature,\u2014the deisid\u00e6monic, the\n  ambitious, the amorous, or the insatiate and querulous man; the\n  last two represent the mental terrors of the wicked.\n\nIn the days of Plato and Zenoph\u00f4n, this allegorizing interpretation\nwas one of the received methods of softening down the obnoxious\nmythes\u2014though Plato himself treated it as an insufficient defence,\nseeing that the bulk of youthful hearers could not see through the\nallegory, but embraced the story literally as it was set forth.[968]\nPausanias tells us, that when he first began to write his work,\nhe treated many of the Greek legends as silly and undeserving of\nserious attention; but as he proceeded, he gradually arrived at the\nfull conviction, that the ancient sages had designedly spoken in\nenigmatical language, and that there was valuable truth wrapped up in\ntheir narratives: it was the duty of a pious man, therefore, to study\nand interpret, but not to reject, stories current and accredited\nrespecting the gods.[969] And others,\u2014arguing from the analogy of the\nreligious mysteries, which could not be divulged without impiety to any\nexcept such as had been specially admitted and initiated,\u2014maintained\nthat it would be a profanation to reveal directly to the vulgar, the\ngenuine scheme of nature and the divine administration: the ancient\npoets and philosophers had taken the only proper course, of talking\nto the many in types and parables, and reserving the naked truth for\nprivileged and qualified intelligences.[970] The allegorical mode of\nexplaining the ancient fables[971] became more and more popular in\nthe third and fourth centuries after the Christian \u00e6ra, especially\namong the new Platonic philosophers; being both congenial to their\norientalized turn of thought, and useful as a shield against the\nattacks of the Christians.\n\n  [968] \u039f\u1f31 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u2014so Plato calls these interpreters\n  (Kratylus, p. 407); see also Xenoph. Sympos. iii. 6; Plato,\n  Ion. p. 530; Plutarch, De Audiend. Poet. p. 19. \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 was the\n  original word, afterwards succeeded by \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1.\n\n  \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1fe5\u03af\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7\n  \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1fc3 \u1f00\u03bc\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd, ~\u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u1fbd\n  \u1f04\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd~. \u1f49 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u03bf\u1f37\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f45,\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f43 \u03bc\u1f74, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f03 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u1fc3 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03ba\u03bd\u03b9\u03c0\u03c4\u03ac\n  \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 (Plato, Republ. ii. 17. p. 378).\n\n  The idea of an interior sense and concealed purpose in the\n  ancient poets occurs several times in Plato (The\u00e6tet. c. 93. p.\n  180): \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, etc.; also Protagor. c. 20. p. 316.\n\n  \u201cModo Stoicum Homerum faciunt,\u2014modo Epicureum,\u2014modo\n  Peripateticum,\u2014modo Academicum. Apparet nihil horum esse in illo,\n  quia omnia sunt.\u201d (Seneca, Ep. 88.) Compare Plutarch, De Defectu\n  Oracul. c. 11-12. t. ii. p. 702, Wytt., and Julian, Orat. vii. p.\n  216.\n\n  [969] Pausan. viii. 8, 2. To the same purpose (Strabo, x. p.\n  474), allegory is admitted to a certain extent in the fables\n  by Dionys. Halic. Ant. Rom. ii. 20. The fragment of the lost\n  treatise of Plutarch, on the Plat\u00e6an festival of the D\u00e6dala, is\n  very instructive respecting Grecian allegory (Fragm. ix. t. 5. p.\n  754-763, ed. Wyt.; ap. Euseb. Pr\u00e6par. Evang. iii. 1).\n\n  [970] This doctrine is set forth in Macrobius (i. 2). He\n  distinguishes between _fabula_ and _fabulosa narratio_:\n  the former is fiction pure, intended either to amuse or to\n  instruct\u2014the latter is founded upon truth, either respecting\n  human or respecting divine agency. The gods did not like to\n  be publicly talked of (according to his view) except under\n  the respectful veil of a fable (the same feeling as that of\n  Herodotus, which led him to refrain from inserting the \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1f76\n  \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9 in his history). The supreme god, the \u03c4\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd, the \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd, could not be talked of in fables: but the other gods,\n  the a\u00ebrial or \u00e6thereal powers and the soul, might be, and\n  ought to be, talked of in that manner alone. Only superior\n  intellects ought to be admitted to a knowledge of the secret\n  reality. \u201cDe Diis c\u00e6teris, et de anim\u00e2, non frustra se, nec ut\n  oblectent, ad fabulosa convertunt; sed quia sciunt _inimicam\n  esse natur\u00e6 apertam nudamque expositionem sui_: qu\u00e6 sicut\n  vulgaribus sensibus hominum intellectum sui, vario rerum tegmine\n  operimentoque, subtraxit; ita \u00e0 prudentibus arcana sua voluit\n  per fabulosa tractari.... Adeo semper ita se et sciri et coli\n  numina maluerunt, qualiter in vulgus antiquitus fabulata est....\n  Secundum h\u00e6c Pythagoras ipse atque Empedocles, Parmenides quoque\n  et Heraclides, de Diis fabulati sunt: nec secus Tim\u00e6us.\u201d Compare\n  also Maximus Tyrius, Dissert. x. and xxxii. Arnobius exposes the\n  allegorical interpretation as mere evasion, and holds the Pagans\n  to literal historical fact (Adv. Gentes, v. p. 185, ed. Elm.).\n\n  Respecting the allegorical interpretation applied to the Greek\n  fables, B\u00f6ttiger (Die Kunst\u2014Mythologie der Griechen, Abschn. ii.\n  p. 176); Nitzsch (Heldensage der Griech. sect. 6. p. 78); Lobeck\n  (Aglaopham. p. 133-155).\n\n  [971] According to the anonymous writer ap. Westermann (Script.\n  Myth. p. 328), every personal or denominated god may be construed\n  in three different ways: either \u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 (historically, as\n  having been a king or a man)\u2014or \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2, in which theory H\u00ear\u00ea\n  signifies the soul; Ath\u00ean\u00ea, _prudence_; Aphrodit\u00ea, _desire_;\n  Zeus, _mind_, etc.\u2014or \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2, in which system Apollo\n  signifies the _sun_; Poseid\u00f4n, the _sea_; H\u00ear\u00ea, the upper stratum\n  of the air, or _\u00e6ther_; Ath\u00ean\u00ea, the lower or denser stratum;\n  Zeus, the upper hemisphere; Kronus, the lower, etc. This writer\n  thinks that all the three principles of construction may be\n  resorted to, each on its proper occasion, and that neither of\n  them excludes the others. It will be seen that the first is pure\n  Eu\u00eamerism; the two latter are modes of allegory.\n\n  The allegorical construction of the gods and of the divine\n  mythes is copiously applied in the treatises, both of Phurnutus\n  and Sallustius, in Gale\u2019s collection of mythological writers.\n  Sallustius treats the mythes as of divine origin, and the chief\n  poets as inspired (\u03b8\u03b5\u03cc\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9): the gods were propitious to those\n  who recounted worthy and creditable mythes respecting them, and\n  Sallustius prays that they will accept with favor his own remarks\n  (cap. 3 and 4. pp. 245-251, Gale). He distributes mythes into\n  five classes; theological, physical, spiritual, material, and\n  mixed. He defends the practice of speaking of the gods under\n  the veil of allegory, much in the same way as Macrobius (in the\n  preceding note): he finds, moreover, a good excuse even for\n  those mythes which imputed to the gods theft, adultery, outrages\n  towards a father, and other enormities: such tales (he says) were\n  eminently suitable, since the mind _must at once see_ that the\n  facts as told are _not_ to be taken as being themselves the real\n  truth, but simply as a veil, disguising some interior truth (p.\n  247).\n\n  Besides the Life of Homer ascribed to Plutarch (see Gale, p.\n  325-332), H\u00earaclid\u00eas (_not_ H\u00earaclid\u00eas of Pontus) carries out the\n  process of allegorizing the Homeric mythes most earnestly and\n  most systematically. The application of the allegorizing theory\n  is, in his view, the only way of rescuing Homer from the charge\n  of scandalous impiety\u2014\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f20\u03c3\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f20\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd\n  (H\u00earac. _in init._ p. 407, Gale). He proves at length, that the\n  destructive arrows of Apollo, in the first book of the Iliad,\n  mean nothing at the bottom except a contagious plague, caused\n  by the heat of the summer sun in marshy ground (pp. 416-424).\n  Ath\u00ean\u00ea, who darts down from Olympus at the moment when Achilles\n  is about to draw his sword on Agamemn\u00f4n, and seizes him by the\n  hair, is a personification of repentant prudence (p. 435). The\n  conspiracy against Zeus, which Homer (Iliad, i. 400) relates to\n  have been formed by the Olympic gods, and defeated by the timely\n  aid of Thetis and Briareus\u2014the chains and suspension imposed upon\n  H\u00ear\u00ea\u2014the casting of H\u00eaph\u00e6stos by Zeus out of Olympus, and his\n  fall in L\u00eamnus\u2014the destruction of the Grecian wall by Poseid\u00f4n,\n  after the departure of the Greeks\u2014the amorous scene between Zeus\n  and H\u00ear\u00ea on Mount Gargarus\u2014the distribution of the universe\n  between Zeus, Poseid\u00f4n, and Had\u00eas\u2014all these he resolves into\n  peculiar manifestations and conflicts of the elemental substances\n  in nature. To the much-decried battle of the gods, he gives a\n  turn partly physical, partly ethical (p. 481). In like manner,\n  he transforms and vindicates the adventures of the gods in the\n  Odyssey: the wanderings of Odysseus, together with the Lotophagi,\n  the Cycl\u00f4ps, Circ\u00ea, the Sirens, \u00c6olus, Scylla, etc., he resolves\n  into a series of temptations, imposed as a trial upon a man of\n  wisdom and virtue, and emblematic of human life (p. 496). The\n  story of Ar\u00eas, Aphrodit\u00ea, and H\u00eaph\u00e6stos, in the eighth book of\n  the Odyssey, seems to perplex him more than any other: he offers\n  two explanations, neither of which seems satisfactory even to\n  himself (p. 494).\n\n  An anonymous writer in the collection of Westermann (pp. 329-344)\n  has discussed the wanderings of Odysseus upon the same ethical\n  scheme of interpretation as H\u00earaclid\u00eas: he entitles his treatise\n  \u201cA short essay on the Wanderings of Odysseus in Homer, worked\n  out in conjunction with ethical reflections, and rectifying what\n  is rotten in the story, as well as may be, for the benefit of\n  readers.\u201d (\u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c3\u03b1\u03b8\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1.) The author resolves the\n  adventures of Odysseus into narratives emblematic of different\n  situations and trials of human life. Scylla and Charybdis, for\n  example (c. 8. p. 338), represent, the one, the infirmities and\n  temptations arising out of the body, the other, those springing\n  from the mind, between which man is called upon to steer.\n  The adventure of Odysseus with \u00c6olus, shows how little good\n  a virtuous man does himself by seeking, in case of distress,\n  aid from conjurors and evil enchanters; the assistance of such\n  allies, however it may at first promise well, ultimately deceives\n  the person who accepts it, and renders him worse off than he was\n  before (c. 3. p. 332). By such illustrations does the author\n  sustain his general position, that there is a great body of\n  valuable ethical teaching wrapped up in the poetry of Homer.\n\n  Proclus is full of similar allegorization, both of Homer and\n  Hesiod: the third Excursus of Heyne ad Iliad. xxiii. (vol. viii.\n  p. 563), De Allegori\u00e2 Homeric\u00e2, contains a valuable summary of\n  the general subject.\n\n  The treatise De Astrologi\u00e2, printed among the works of Lucian,\n  contains specimens of astrological explanations applied to many\n  of the Grecian \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9, which the author as a pious man cannot\n  accept in their literal meaning. \u201cHow does it consist with\n  holiness (he asks) to believe that \u00c6neas was son of Aphrodit\u00ea,\n  Min\u00f4s of Zeus, or Askalaphus of Mars? No; these were men born\n  under the favorable influences of the planets Venus, Jupiter, and\n  Mars.\u201d He considers the principle of astrological explanation\n  peculiarly fit to be applied to the mythes of Homer and Hesiod\n  (Lucian, De Astrologi\u00e2, c. 21-22).\n\nIt was from the same strong necessity, of accommodating the old mythes\nto a new standard both of belief and of appreciation, that both the\nhistorical and the allegorical schemes of transforming them arose;\nthe literal narrative being decomposed for the purpose of arriving at\na base either of particular matter of fact, or of general physical\nor moral truth. Instructed men were commonly disposed to historicize\nonly the heroic legends, and to allegorize more or less of the divine\nlegends: the attempt of Eu\u00eamerus to historicize the latter was for\nthe most part denounced as irreligious, while that of Metrod\u00f4rus to\nallegorize the former met with no success. In allegorizing, moreover,\neven the divine legends, it was usual to apply the scheme of allegory\nonly to the inferior gods, though some of the great Stoic philosophers\ncarried it farther, and allegorized all the separate personal gods,\nleaving only an all-pervading cosmic Mind,[972] essential as a\nco-efficient along with Matter, yet not separable from Matter. But\nmany pious pagans seem to have perceived that allegory pushed to this\nextent was fatal to all living religious faith,[973] inasmuch as it\ndivested the gods of their character of Persons, sympathizing with\nmankind and modifiable in their dispositions according to the conduct\nand prayers of the believer: and hence they permitted themselves to\nemploy allegorical interpretation only to some of the obnoxious legends\nconnected with the superior gods, leaving the personality of the latter\nunimpeached.\n\n  [972] See Ritter, Geschichte der Philosophie, 2nd edit. part 3.\n  book 11. chap. 4. p. 592; Varro ap. Augustin. Civitat. Dei, vi.\n  5, ix. 6; Cicero, Nat. Deor. ii. 24-28.\n\n  Chrysippus admitted the most important distinction between Zeus\n  and the other gods (Plutarch. de Stoicor. Repugnant. p. 1052.)\n\n  [973] Plutarch. de Isid. et Osirid. c. 66. p. 377; c. 70. p.\n  379. Compare on this subject O. M\u00fcller, Prolegom. Mythol. p. 59\n  _seq._, and Eckermann, Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte, vol. i.\n  sect. ii. p. 46.\n\nOne novelty, however, introduced seemingly by the philosopher\nEmpedokl\u00eas and afterwards expanded by others, deserves notice,\ninasmuch as it modified considerably the old religious creed by\ndrawing a pointed contrast between gods and d\u00e6mons,\u2014a distinction\nhardly at all manifested in Homer, but recognized in the Works and\nDays of Hesiod.[974] Empedokl\u00eas widened the gap between the two,\nand founded upon it important consequences. The gods were good,\nimmortal, and powerful agents, having free-will and intelligence,\nbut without appetite, passion, or infirmity: the d\u00e6mons were of\na mixed nature between gods and men, ministers and interpreters\nfrom the former to the latter, but invested also with an agency\nand dispositions of their own. They were very long-lived, but not\nimmortal, and subject to the passions and propensities of men, so\nthat there were among them beneficent and maleficent d\u00e6mons with\nevery shade of intermediate difference.[975] It had been the mistake\n(according to these philosophers) of the old mythes to ascribe to\nthe gods proceedings really belonging to the d\u00e6mons, who were always\nthe immediate communicants with mortal nature, inspiring prophetic\npower to the priestesses of the oracles, sending dreams and omens,\nand perpetually interfering either for good or for evil. The wicked\nand violent d\u00e6mons, having committed many enormities, had thus\nsometimes incurred punishment from the gods: besides which, their bad\ndispositions had imposed upon men the necessity of appeasing them by\nreligious ceremonies of a kind acceptable to such beings: hence, the\nhuman sacrifices, the violent, cruel, and obscene exhibitions, the\nwailings and fastings, the tearing and eating of raw flesh, which it\nhad become customary to practise on various consecrated occasions, and\nespecially in the Dionysiac solemnities. Moreover, the discreditable\nactions imputed to the gods,\u2014the terrific combats, the Typhonic and\nTitanic convulsions, the rapes, abductions, flight, servitude, and\nconcealment,\u2014all these were really the doings and sufferings of bad\nd\u00e6mons, placed far below the sovereign agency\u2014equable, undisturbed, and\nunpolluted\u2014of the immortal gods. The action of such d\u00e6mons upon mankind\nwas fitful and intermittent: they sometimes perished or changed their\nlocal abode, so that oracles which had once been inspired became after\na time forsaken and disfranchized.[976]\n\n  [974] Hesiod, Opp. et Di. 122: to the same effect Pythagoras and\n  Thal\u00eas (Diogen. La\u00ebr. viii. 32; and Plutarch, Placit. Philos. i.\n  8).\n\n  The Hesiodic d\u00e6mons are all good: Athenagoras (Legat. Chr. p.\n  8) says that Thal\u00eas admitted a distinction between good and bad\n  d\u00e6mons, which seems very doubtful.\n\n  [975] The distinction between \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 and \u0394\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 is especially set\n  forth in the treatise of Plutarch, De Defectu Oraculorum, capp.\n  10, 12, 13, 15, etc. He seems to suppose it traceable to the\n  doctrine of Zoroaster or the Orphic mysteries, and he represents\n  it as relieving the philosopher from great perplexities: for it\n  was difficult to know where to draw the line in admitting or\n  rejecting divine Providence: errors were committed sometimes in\n  affirming God to be the cause of everything, at other times in\n  supposing him to be the cause of nothing. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2\n  \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u1fb3, \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u1f78\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2. \u0395\u1f56 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\n  \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03a0\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u1f7c\u03bd, \u1f43 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f55\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ae\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\u00b7 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bb\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c3\u1ff3 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c5\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 (c. 10). \u1f29 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c0\u03ac\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03bd (c. 13).\n\n  \u0395\u1f30\u03c3\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c8\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n  \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f67\u03bd \u1f34\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03ce\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 (_ib._): compare Plutarch. de\n  Isid. et Osir. 25. p. 360.\n\n  \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 ~\u1f14\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f55\u03bc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f85\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9~, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f01\u03c1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u1f70\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f70\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03af\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, etc. (c. 15):\n  also c. 23; also De Isid. et Osir. c. 25. p. 366.\n\n  Human sacrifices and other objectionable rites are excused, as\n  necessary for the purpose of averting the anger of bad d\u00e6mons (c.\n  14-15).\n\n  Empedokl\u00eas is represented as the first author of the doctrine\n  which imputed vicious and abominable dispositions to many of the\n  d\u00e6mons (c. 15, 16, 17, 20), \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f18\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n  \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2; expelled from heaven by the gods, \u03b8\u03b5\u03ae\u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 (Plutarch, De Vitand. A\u00ebr. Alien. p. 830); followed\n  by Plato, Xenokrat\u00eas, and Chrysippus, c. 17: compare Plato\n  (Apolog. Socrat. p. 27; Politic. p. 271; Symposion, c. 28. p.\n  203), though he seems to treat the \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 as defective and\n  mutable beings, rather than actively maleficent. Xenokrat\u00eas\n  represents some of them both as wicked and powerful in a high\n  degree:\u2014\u039e\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u1f11\u03bf\u03c1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f22 \u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03c2,\n  \u1f22 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u1f70\u03c2, \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u1f70\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f33 ~\u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2~, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 ~\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b8\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9~\n  (Plutarch, De Isid. ut Osir. c. 26. p. 361; Qu\u00e6stion. Rom. p.\n  283): compare Stob\u00e6us, Eclog. Phys. i. p. 62.\n\n  [976] Plutarch, De Defect. Orac. c. 15. p. 418. Chrysippus\n  admitted, among the various conceivable causes to account for\n  the existence of evil, the supposition of some negligent and\n  reckless d\u00e6mons, \u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c5\u03bb\u1f70 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b3\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9 (Plutarch, De Stoicor. Repugnant. p. 1051). A\n  distinction, which I do not fully understand, between \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 and\n  \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, was also adopted among the Locrians at Opus: \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\n  with them seems to have been equivalent to \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2 (Plutarch,\n  Qu\u00e6stion. Gr\u00e6c. c. 6. p. 292): see the note above, pp. 350-351.\n\nThis distinction between gods and d\u00e6mons appeared to save in a great\ndegree both the truth of the old legends and the dignity of the\ngods: it obviated the necessity of pronouncing either that the gods\nwere unworthy, or the legends untrue. Yet although devised for the\npurpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious sensibility, it was\nfound inconvenient afterwards, when assailants arose against paganism\ngenerally. For while it abandoned as indefensible a large portion of\nwhat had once been genuine faith, it still retained the same word\n_d\u00e6mons_ with an entirely altered signification. The Christian writers\nin their controversies found ample warrant among the _earlier_ pagan\nauthors[977] for treating all the gods as d\u00e6mons\u2014and not less ample\nwarrant among the _later_ pagans for denouncing the d\u00e6mons generally as\nevil beings.[978]\n\n  [977] Tatian. adv. Gr\u00e6cos, c. 20; Clemens Alexandrin. Admonit.\n  ad Gentes, pp. 26-29, Sylb.; Minuc. Felix, Octav. c. 26. \u201cIsti\n  igitur impuri spiritus, ut ostensum a Magis, a philosophis, a\n  Platone, sub statuis et imaginibus consecrati delitescunt, et\n  afflatu suo quasi auctoritatem pr\u00e6sentis numinis consequuntur,\u201d\n  etc. This, like so many other of the aggressive arguments of\n  the Christians against paganism, was taken from the pagan\n  philosophers themselves.\n\n  Lactantius, De Ver\u00e2 Philosophi\u00e2, iv. 28. \u201cErgo iidem sunt\n  D\u00e6mones, quos fatentur execrandos esse: iidem Dii, quibus\n  supplicant. Si nobis credendum esse non putant, credant Homero;\n  qui summum illum Jovem D\u00e6monibus aggregavit,\u201d etc.\n\n  [978] See above, Chapter II. p. 70, the remarks on the Hesiodic\n  Theogony.\n\nSuch were the different modes in which the ancient mythes were\ntreated, during the literary life of Greece, by the four classes above\nnamed\u2014poets, logographers, historians, and philosophers.\n\nLiteral acceptance, and unconscious, uninquiring faith, such as they\nhad obtained from the original auditors to whom they were addressed,\nthey now found only among the multitude\u2014alike retentive of traditional\nfeeling[979] and fearful of criticizing the proceedings of the\ngods.[980] But with instructed men they became rather subjects of\nrespectful and curious analysis\u2014all agreeing that the Word as tendered\nto them was inadmissible, yet all equally convinced that it contained\nimportant meaning, though hidden yet not undiscoverable. A very large\nproportion of the force of Grecian intellect was engaged in searching\nafter this unknown base, by guesses, in which sometimes the principle\nof semi-historical interpretation was assumed, sometimes that of\nallegorical, without any collateral evidence in either case, and\nwithout possibility of verification. Out of the one assumption grew a\nstring of allegorized ph\u00e6nomenal truths, out of the other a long series\nof seeming historical events and chronological persons,\u2014both elicited\nfrom the transformed mythes and from nothing else.[981]\n\n  [979] A destructive inundation took place at Pheneus in\n  Arcadia, seemingly in the time of Plutarch: the subterranean\n  outlet (\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd) of the river had become blocked up, and the\n  inhabitants ascribed the stoppage to the anger of Apollo, who had\n  been provoked by the stealing of the Pythian tripod by H\u00earakl\u00eas:\n  the latter had carried the tripod to Pheneus and deposited it\n  there. \u1f0e\u03c1\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f41 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03a6\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bc\u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f41 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03a6\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ae\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5; (Plutarch. de\n  Ser\u00e2 Numin. Vindict\u00e2, p. 577; compare Pausan. viii. 14, 1.)\n  The expression of Plutarch, that the abstraction of the tripod\n  by H\u00earakl\u00eas had taken place 1000 years before, is that of the\n  critic, who thinks it needful to historicize and chronologize the\n  genuine legend; which, to an inhabitant of Pheneus, at the time\n  of the inundation, was doubtless as little questioned as if the\n  theft of H\u00earakl\u00eas had been laid in the preceding generation.\n\n  Agathocl\u00eas of Syracuse committed depredations on the coasts\n  of Ithaca and Korkyra: the excuse which he offered was, that\n  Odysseus had come to Sicily and blinded Polyph\u00eamus, and that\n  on his return he had been kindly received by the Ph\u00e6akians\n  (Plutarch, _ib._).\n\n  This is doubtless a jest, either made by Agathocl\u00eas, or more\n  probably invented for him; but it is founded upon a popular\n  belief.\n\n  [980] \u201cSanctiusque et reverentius visum, de actis Deorum credere\n  quam scire.\u201d (Tacit. German. c. 34.)\n\n  Aristid\u00eas, however, represents the Homeric theology (whether he\n  would have included the Hesiodic we do not know) as believed\n  quite literally among the multitude in his time, the second\n  century after Christianity (Aristid. Orat. iii. p. 25). \u1f08\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u1ff6,\n  \u1f45\u03c0\u03b7 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae \u03bc\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f49\u03bc\u03ae\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6, \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2,\n  \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03c1\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1fe5\u03af\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2\n  \u03b8\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f38\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c7\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2. Compare Lucian,\n  \u0396\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a4\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u1ff6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, c. 20, and De Luctu, c. 2; Dionys. Halicar. A. R.\n  ii. p. 90, Sylb.\n\n  Kallimachus (Hymn. ad Jov. 9) distinctly denied the statement\n  of the Kretans that they possessed in Kr\u00eate the tomb of Zeus,\n  and treated it as an instance of Kretan mendacity; while\n  Celsus did not deny it, but explained it in some figurative\n  manner\u2014\u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 (Origen. cont. Celsum, iii.\n  p. 137).\n\n  [981] There is here a change as compared with my first edition;\n  I had inserted here some remarks on the allegorical theory of\n  interpretation, as compared with the semi-historical. An able\n  article on my work (in the Edinburgh Review, October 1846),\n  pointed out that those remarks required modification, and that\n  the idea of allegory in reference to the construction of the\n  mythes was altogether inadmissible.\n\nThe utmost which we accomplish by means of the semi-historical theory,\neven in its most successful applications, is, that after leaving out\nfrom the mythical narrative all that is miraculous or high-colored or\nextravagant, we arrive at a series of credible incidents\u2014incidents\nwhich _may, perhaps_, have really occurred, and against which no\nintrinsic presumption can be raised. This is exactly the character\nof a well-written modern novel (as, for example, several among the\ncompositions of Defoe), the whole story of which is such as may well\nhave occurred in real life: it is plausible fiction, and nothing\nbeyond. To raise plausible fiction up to the superior dignity of\ntruth, some positive testimony or positive ground of inference must\nbe shown; even the highest measure of intrinsic probability is not\nalone sufficient. A man who tells us that, on the day of the battle\nof Plat\u00e6a, rain fell on the spot of ground where the city of New York\nnow stands, will neither deserve nor obtain credit, because he can\nhave had no means of positive knowledge; though the statement is not\nin the slightest degree improbable. On the other hand, statements in\nthemselves very improbable may well deserve belief, provided they be\nsupported by sufficient positive evidence; thus the canal dug by order\nof Xerx\u00eas across the promontory of Mount Athos, and the sailing of\nthe Persian fleet through it, is a fact which I believe, because it\nis well-attested\u2014notwithstanding its remarkable improbability, which\nso far misled Juvenal as to induce him to single out the narrative\nas a glaring example of Grecian mendacity.[982] Again, many critics\nhave observed that the general tale of the Trojan war (apart from\nthe superhuman agencies) is not more improbable than that of the\nCrusades, which every one admits to be an historical fact. But (even\nif we grant this position, which is only true to a small extent), it\nis not sufficient to show an analogy between the two cases in respect\nto negative presumptions alone; the analogy ought to be shown to hold\nbetween them in respect to positive certificate also. The Crusades\nare a curious ph\u00e6nomenon in history, but we accept them, nevertheless,\nas an unquestionable fact, because the antecedent improbability is\nsurmounted by adequate contemporary testimony. When the like testimony,\nboth in amount and kind, is produced to establish the historical\nreality of a Trojan war, we shall not hesitate to deal with the two\nevents on the same footing.\n\n  [982] Juvenal, Sat. x. 174:\u2014\n\n                                \u201cCreditur olim\n    Velificatus Athos, et quantum Gr\u00e6cia mendax\n    Audet in histori\u00e2,\u201d etc.\n\nIn applying the semi-historical theory to Grecian mythical narrative,\nit has been often forgotten that a certain strength of testimony, or\npositive ground of belief, must first be tendered, before we can be\ncalled upon to discuss the antecedent probability or improbability of\nthe incidents alleged. The belief of the Greeks themselves, without the\nsmallest aid of special or contemporary witnesses, has been tacitly\nassumed as sufficient to support the case, provided only sufficient\ndeduction be made from the mythical narratives to remove all antecedent\nimprobabilities. It has been taken for granted that the faith of the\npeople must have rested originally upon some particular historical\nevent, involving the identical persons, things, and places which the\noriginal mythes exhibit, or at least the most prominent among them.\nBut when we examine the pyschagogic influences predominant in the\nsociety among whom this belief originally grew up, we shall see that\ntheir belief is of little or no evidentiary value, and that the growth\nand diffusion of it may be satisfactorily explained without supposing\nany special basis of matters of fact. The popular faith, so far as\nit counts for anything, testifies in favor of the entire and literal\nmythes, which are now universally rejected as incredible.[983] We have\nthus the very minimum of positive proof, and the maximum of negative\npresumption: we may diminish the latter by conjectural omissions and\ninterpolations, but we cannot by any artifice increase the former: the\nnarrative ceases to be incredible, but it still remains uncertified,\u2014a\nmere commonplace possibility. Nor is fiction always, or essentially,\nextravagant and incredible. It is often not only plausible and\ncoherent, but even more like truth (if a paradoxical phrase may be\nallowed) than truth itself. Nor can we, in the absence of any extrinsic\ntest, reckon upon any intrinsic mark to discriminate the one from the\nother.[984]\n\n  [983] Colonel Sleeman observes, respecting the Hindoo historical\n  mind\u2014\u201cHistory to this people is all a fairy tale.\u201d (Rambles and\n  Recollections of an Indian Official, vol. i. ch. ix. p. 70.) And\n  again, \u201cThe popular poem of the Ramaen describes the abduction\n  of the heroine by the monster king of Ceylon, Rawun; and her\n  recovery by means of the monkey general, Hunnooman. Every word of\n  this poem, the people assured me was written, if not by the hand\n  of the Deity himself, at least by his inspiration, which was the\n  same thing\u2014and it must consequently be true. Ninety-nine out of\n  a hundred, among the Hindoos, implicitly believe, not only every\n  word of the poem, but every word of every poem that has ever been\n  written in Sanscrit. If you ask a man whether he really believes\n  any very egregious absurdity quoted from these books, he replies,\n  with the greatest _na\u00efvet\u00e9_ in the world, Is it not written in\n  the book; and how should it be there written, if not true? The\n  Hindoo religion reposes upon an entire prostration of mind,\u2014that\n  continual and habitual surrender of the reasoning faculties,\n  which we are accustomed to make occasionally, while engaged at\n  the theatre, or in the perusal of works of fiction. We allow the\n  scenes, characters, and incidents, to pass before our mind\u2019s\n  eye, and move our feelings\u2014without stopping a moment to ask\n  whether they are real or true. There is only this difference\u2014that\n  with people of education among us, even in such short intervals\n  of illusion or _abandon_, any extravagance in the acting, or\n  flagrant improbability in the fiction, destroys the charm, breaks\n  the spell by which we have been so mysteriously bound, and\n  restores us to reason and the realities of ordinary life. With\n  the Hindoos, on the contrary, the greater the improbability, the\n  more monstrous and preposterous the fiction\u2014the greater is the\n  charm it has over their minds; and the greater their learning\n  in the Sanscrit, the more are they under the influence of this\n  charm. Believing all to be written by the Deity, or under his\n  inspirations, and the men and things of former days to have\n  been very different from men and things of the present day, and\n  the heroes of these fables to have been demigods, or people\n  endowed with powers far superior to those of the ordinary men\n  of their own day\u2014the analogies of nature are never for a moment\n  considered; nor do questions of probability, or possibility,\n  according to those analogies, ever obtrude to dispel the charm\n  with which they are so pleasingly bound. They go on through\n  life reading and talking of these monstrous fictions, which\n  shock the taste and understanding of other nations, without\n  ever questioning the truth of one single incident, or hearing\n  it questioned. There was a time, and that not far distant, when\n  it was the same in England, and in every other European nation;\n  and there are, I am afraid, some parts of Europe where it is\n  so still. But the Hindoo faith, so far as religious questions\n  are concerned, is not more capacious or absurd than that of the\n  Greeks or Romans in the days of Socrates or Cicero: the only\n  difference is, that among the Hindoos a greater number of the\n  questions which interest mankind are brought under the head of\n  religion.\u201d (Sleeman, Rambles, etc., vol. i. ch. xxvi. p. 227:\n  compare vol. ii. ch. v. p. 51; viii. p. 97.)\n\n  [984] Lord Lyttleton, in commenting on the tales of the Irish\n  bards, in his History of Henry II., has the following just\n  remarks (book iv. vol. iii. p. 13, quarto): \u201cOne may reasonably\n  suppose that in MSS. written since the Irish received the Roman\n  letters from St. Patrick, _some_ traditional truths recorded\n  before by the bards in their unwritten poems may have been\n  preserved to our times. Yet these cannot be so separated from\n  many fabulous stories derived from the same sources, as to obtain\n  a firm credit; it not being sufficient to establish the authority\n  of suspected traditions, that they can be shown not to be so\n  improbable or absurd as others with which they are mixed\u2014_since\n  there may be specious as well as senseless fictions_. Nor can a\n  poet or bard, who lived in the sixth or seventh century after\n  Christ, if his poem is still extant, be any voucher for facts\n  supposed to have happened before the incarnation; though his\n  evidence (allowing for poetical license) may be received on such\n  matters as come within his own time, or the remembrance of old\n  men with whom he conversed. The most judicious historians pay no\n  regard to the Welsh or British traditions delivered by Geoffrey\n  of Monmouth, though it is not impossible but that some of these\n  may be true.\u201d\n\n  One definition of a mythe given by Plutarch coincides exactly\n  with a _specious fiction_: \u1f49 \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1f74\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u1f7c\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u1ff7 (Plutarch, Bellone an pace clariores fuerunt\n  Athenienses, p. 348).\n\n  \u201cDer Grund-Trieb des Mythus (Creuzer justly expresses it) das\n  Gedachte in ein Geschehenes umzusetzen.\u201d (Symbolik der Alten\n  Welt, sect. 43. p. 99.)\n\nIn the semi-historical theory respecting Grecian mythical narrative,\nthe critic unconsciously transports into the Homeric age those habits\nof classification and distinction, and that standard of acceptance\nor rejection, which he finds current in his own. Amongst us, the\ndistinction between historical fact and fiction is highly valued as\nwell as familiarly understood: we have a long history of the past,\ndeduced from a study of contemporary evidences; and we have a body\nof fictitious literature, stamped with its own mark and interesting\nin its own way. Speaking generally, no man could now hope to succeed\npermanently in transferring any striking incident from the latter\ncategory into the former, nor could any man deliberately attempt it\nwithout incurring well-merited obloquy. But this _historical sense_,\nnow so deeply rooted in the modern mind that we find a difficulty\nin conceiving any people to be without it, is the fruit of records\nand inquiries, first applied to the present, and then preserved and\nstudied by subsequent generations; while in a society which has not\nyet formed the habit of recording its present, the real facts of the\npast can never be known; the difference between attested matter\nof fact and plausible fiction\u2014between truth and that which is like\ntruth\u2014can neither be discerned nor sought for. Yet it is precisely upon\nthe supposition that this distinction is present to men\u2019s habitual\nthoughts, that the semi-historical theory of the mythes is grounded.\n\nIt is perfectly true, as has often been stated, that the Grecian epic\ncontains what are called traditions respecting the past\u2014the larger\nportion of it, indeed, consists of nothing else. But what are these\ntraditions? They are the matter of those songs and stories which have\nacquired hold on the public mind; they are the creations of the poets\nand storytellers themselves, each of whom finds some pre\u00ebxisting, and\nadds others of his own, new and previously untold, under the impulse\nand authority of the inspiring Muse. Homer doubtless found many songs\nand stories current with respect to the siege of Troy; he received and\ntransmitted some of these traditions, recast and transformed others,\nand enlarged the whole mass by new creations of his own. To the\nsubsequent poets, such as Arktinus and Lesch\u00eas, these Homeric creations\nformed portions of pre\u00ebxisting tradition, with which they dealt in the\nsame manner; so that the whole mass of traditions constituting the tale\nof Troy became larger and larger with each successive contributor. To\nassume a generic difference between the older and the newer strata of\ntradition\u2014to treat the former as morsels of history, and the latter\nas appendages of fiction\u2014is an hypothesis gratuitous at the least,\nnot to say inadmissible. For the further we travel back into the\npast, the more do we recede from the clear day of positive history,\nand the deeper do we plunge into the unsteady twilight and gorgeous\nclouds of fancy and feeling. It was one of the agreeable dreams of the\nGrecian epic, that the man who travelled far enough northward beyond\nthe Rhip\u00e6an mountains, would in time reach the delicious country and\ngenial climate of the virtuous Hyperboreans\u2014the votaries and favorites\nof Apollo, who dwelt in the extreme north beyond the chilling blasts\nof Boreas. Now the hope that we may, by carrying our researches up the\nstream of time, exhaust the limits of fiction, and land ultimately upon\nsome points of solid truth, appears to me no less illusory than this\nnorthward journey in quest of the Hyperborean elysium.\n\nThe general disposition to adopt the semi-historical theory as to the\ngenesis of Grecian mythes, arises in part from reluctance in critics to\nimpute to the mythop\u0153ic ages extreme credulity or fraud; together with\nthe usual presumption, that where much is believed some portion of it\nmust be true. There would be some weight in these grounds of reasoning,\nif the ages under discussion had been supplied with records and\naccustomed to critical inquiry. But amongst a people unprovided with\nthe former and strangers to the latter, credulity is naturally at its\nmaximum, as well in the narrator himself as in his hearers: the idea\nof deliberate fraud is moreover inapplicable,[985] for if the hearers\nare disposed to accept what is related to them as a revelation from\nthe Muse, the _\u0153strus_ of composition is quite sufficient to impart a\nsimilar persuasion to the poet whose mind is penetrated with it. The\nbelief of that day can hardly be said to stand apart by itself as an\nact of reason. It becomes confounded with vivacious imagination and\nearnest emotion; and in every case where these mental excitabilities\nare powerfully acted upon, faith ensues unconsciously and as a matter\nof course. How active and prominent such tendencies were among the\nearly Greeks, the extraordinary beauty and originality of their epic\npoetry may teach us.\n\n  [985] In reference to the loose statements of the Highlanders,\n  Dr. Johnson observes, \u201cHe that goes into the Highlands with a\n  mind naturally acquiescent, and a credulity eager for wonders,\n  may perhaps come back with an opinion very different from mine;\n  for the inhabitants, knowing the ignorance of all strangers in\n  their language and antiquities, are perhaps not very scrupulous\n  adherents to truth; yet I do not say that they deliberately speak\n  studied falsehood, or have a settled purpose to deceive. They\n  have acquired and considered little, and do not always feel their\n  own ignorance. They are not much accustomed to be interrogated\n  by others, and seem never to have thought of interrogating\n  themselves; _so that if they do not know what they tell to be\n  true, they likewise do not distinctly perceive it to be false_.\n  Mr. Boswell was very diligent in his inquiries, and the result of\n  his investigations was, that the answer to the second question\n  was commonly such as nullified the answer to the first.\u201d (Journey\n  to the Western Islands, p. 272, 1st edit., 1775).\n\nIt is, besides, a presumption far too largely and indiscriminately\napplied, even in our own advanced age, that where much is believed,\nsomething must necessarily be true\u2014that accredited fiction is always\ntraceable to some basis of historical truth.[986] The influence\nof imagination and feeling is not confined simply to the process\nof retouching, transforming, or magnifying narratives originally\nfounded on fact; it will often create new narratives of its own,\nwithout any such preliminary basis. Where there is any general body\nof sentiment pervading men living in society, whether it be religious\nor political\u2014love, admiration, or antipathy\u2014all incidents tending to\nillustrate that sentiment are eagerly welcomed, rapidly circulated\nand (as a general rule) easily accredited. If real incidents are not\nat hand, impressive fictions will be provided to satisfy the demand.\nThe perfect harmony of such fictions with the prevalent feeling stands\nin the place of certifying testimony, and causes men to hear them not\nmerely with credence, but even with delight: to call them in question\nand require proof, is a task which cannot be undertaken without\nincurring obloquy. Of such tendencies in the human mind, abundant\nevidence is furnished by the innumerable religious legends which\nhave acquired currency in various parts of the world, and of which\nno country was more fertile than Greece\u2014legends which derived their\norigin, not from special facts misreported and exaggerated, but from\npious feelings pervading the society, and translated into narrative\nby forward and imaginative minds\u2014legends, in which not merely the\nincidents, but often even the personages are unreal, yet in which the\ngenerating sentiment is conspicuously discernible, providing its own\nmatter as well as its own form. Other sentiments also, as well as the\nreligious, provided they be fervent and widely diffused, will find\nexpression in current narrative, and become portions of the general\npublic belief\u2014every celebrated and notorious character is the source\nof a thousand fictions exemplifying his peculiarities. And if it be\ntrue, as I think present observation may show us, that such creative\nagencies are even now visible and effective, when the materials of\ngenuine history are copious and critically studied\u2014much more are we\nwarranted in concluding that, in ages destitute of records, strangers\nto historical testimony, and full of belief in divine inspiration both\nas to the future and as to the past, narratives purely fictitious\nwill acquire ready and uninquiring credence, provided only they be\nplausible and in harmony with the preconceptions of the auditors.\n\n  [986] I considered this position more at large in an article\n  in the \u201cWestminster Review\u201d for May, 1843, on Niebuhr\u2019s Greek\n  Legends, with which article much in the present chapter will be\n  found to coincide.\n\nThe allegorical interpretation of the mythes has been by several\nlearned investigators, especially by Creuzer, connected with the\nhypothesis of an ancient and highly instructed body of priests, having\ntheir origin either in Egypt or in the East, and communicating to the\nrude and barbarous Greeks religious, physical, and historical knowledge\nunder the veil of symbols. At a time (we are told) when language was\nyet in its infancy, visible symbols were the most vivid means of acting\nupon the minds of ignorant hearers: the next step was to pass to\nsymbolical language and expressions\u2014for a plain and literal exposition,\neven if understood at all, would at least have been listened to with\nindifference, as not corresponding with any mental demand. In such\nallegorizing way, then, the early priests set forth their doctrines\nrespecting God, nature, and humanity\u2014a refined monotheism and a\ntheological philosophy\u2014and to this purpose the earliest mythes were\nturned. But another class of mythes, more popular and more captivating,\ngrew up under the hands of the poets\u2014mythes purely epical, and\ndescriptive of real or supposed past events. The allegorical mythes,\nbeing taken up by the poets, insensibly became confounded in the same\ncategory with the purely narrative mythes\u2014the matter symbolized was no\nlonger thought of, while the symbolizing words came to be construed in\ntheir own literal meaning\u2014and the basis of the early allegory, thus\nlost among the general public, was only preserved as a secret among\nvarious religious fraternities, composed of members allied together\nby initiation in certain mystical ceremonies, and administered by\nhereditary families of presiding priests. In the Orphic and Bacchic\nsects, in the Eleusinian and Samothracian mysteries, was thus treasured\nup the secret doctrine of the old theological and philosophical mythes,\nwhich had once constituted the primitive legendary stock of Greece, in\nthe hands of the original priesthood and in ages anterior to Homer.\nPersons who had gone through the preliminary ceremonies of initiation,\nwere permitted at length to hear, though under strict obligation of\nsecrecy, this ancient religious and cosmogonic doctrine, revealing\nthe destination of man and the certainty of posthumous rewards and\npunishments\u2014all disengaged from the corruptions of poets, as well as\nfrom the symbols and allegories under which they still remained buried\nin the eyes of the vulgar. The mysteries of Greece were thus traced up\nto the earliest ages, and represented as the only faithful depository\nchannels of that purer theology and physics which had originally\nbeen communicated, though under the unavoidable inconvenience of a\nsymbolical expression, by an enlightened priesthood coming from abroad\nto the then rude barbarians of the country.[987]\n\n  [987] For this general character of the Grecian mysteries, with\n  their concealed treasure of doctrine, see _Warburton_, Divine\n  Legation of Moses, book ii. sect. 4.\n\n  _Payne Knight_, On the Symbolical Language of ancient Art and\n  Mythology, sect. 6, 10, 11, 40, etc.\n\n  _Saint Croix_, Recherches sur les Myst\u00e8res du Paganisme, sect. 3,\n  p. 106; sect. 4, p. 404, etc.\n\n  _Creuzer_, Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten V\u00f6lker, sect. 2,\n  3, 23, 39, 42, etc. Meiners and Heeren adopt generally the same\n  view, though there are many divergences of opinion between these\n  different authors, on a subject essentially obscure. Warburton\n  maintained that the interior doctrine communicated in the\n  mysteries was the existence of one Supreme Divinity, combined\n  with the Euemeristic creed, that the pagan gods had been mere men.\n\n  See Clemens Alex. Strom. v. p. 582, Sylb.\n\n  The view taken by Hermann of the ancient Greek mythology is\n  in many points similar to that of Creuzer, though with some\n  considerable difference. He thinks that it is an aggregate\n  of doctrine\u2014philosophical, theological, physical, and\n  moral\u2014expressed under a scheme of systematic personifications,\n  each person being called by a name significant of the function\n  personified: this doctrine was imported from the East into\n  Greece, where the poets, retaining or translating the names, but\n  forgetting their meaning and connection, distorted the primitive\n  stories, the sense of which came to be retained only in the\n  ancient mysteries. That true sense, however, (he thinks,) may be\n  recovered by a careful analysis of the significant names: and\n  his two dissertations (De Mythologi\u00e2 Gr\u00e6corum Antiquissim\u00e2, in\n  the Opuscula, vol. ii.) exhibit a specimen of this systematic\n  expansion of etymology into narrative. The dissent from Creuzer\n  is set forth in their published correspondence, especially in his\n  concluding \u201cBrief an Creuzer \u00fcber das Wesen und die Behandlung\n  der Mythologie,\u201d Leipzig, 1819. The following citation from his\n  Latin dissertation sets forth his general doctrine:\u2014\n\n  Hermann, De Mythologi\u00e2 Gr\u00e6corum Antiquissim\u00e2, p. 4 (Opuscula,\n  vol. ii. p. 171): \u201cVidemus rerum divinarum humanarumque scientiam\n  ex Asi\u00e2 per Lyciam migrantem in Europam: videmus fabulosos\n  po\u00ebtas peregrinam doctrinam, monstruoso tumore orientis sive\n  exutam, sive nondum indutam, quasi de integro Gr\u00e6c\u00e2 specie\n  procreantes; videmus po\u00ebtas, illos, quorum omnium vera nomina\n  nominibus\u2014ab arte, qu\u00e2 clarebant, petitis\u2014obliterata sunt,\n  diu in Thraci\u00e2 h\u00e6rentes, raroque tandem etiam cum aliis\n  Gr\u00e6ci\u00e6 partibus commercio junctos: qualis Pamphus, non ipse\n  Atheniensis, Atheniensibus hymnos Deorum fecit. Videmus denique\n  retrusam paulatim in mysteriorum secretam illam sapientum\n  doctrinam, vitiatam religionum perturbatione, corruptam insciti\u00e2\n  interpretum, obscuratam levitate am\u0153niora sectantium\u2014adeo ut eam\n  ne illi quidem intelligerent, qui h\u00e6reditariam a prioribus po\u00ebsin\n  colentes, quum ingenii pr\u00e6stanti\u00e2 omnes pr\u00e6stinguerent, tant\u00e2\n  illos oblivione merserunt, ut ipsi sint primi auctores omnis\n  eruditionis habiti.\u201d\n\n  Hermann thinks, however, that by pursuing the suggestions of\n  etymology, vestiges may still be discovered, and something like a\n  history compiled, of Grecian belief as it stood anterior to Homer\n  and Hesiod: \u201cEst autem in hac omni ratione judicio maxime opus,\n  quia non testibus res agitur, sed ad interpretandi solertiam\n  omnia revocanda sunt\u201d (p. 172). To the same general purpose\n  the French work of M. Em\u00e9rie David, Recherches sur le Dieu\n  Jupiter\u2014reviewed by O. M\u00fcller: see the Kleine Schriften of the\n  latter, vol. ii. p. 82.\n\n  Mr. Bryant has also employed a profusion of learning, and\n  numerous etymological conjectures, to resolve the Greek mythes\n  into mistakes, perversions, and mutilations, of the exploits and\n  doctrines of oriental tribes long-lost and by-gone,\u2014Amonians,\n  Cuthites, Arkites, etc. \u201cIt was Noah (he thinks) who was\n  represented under the different names of Thoth, Herm\u00eas, Men\u00eas,\n  Osiris, Zeuth, Atlas, Phor\u00f4neus, Prom\u00eatheus, to which list a\n  farther number of great extent might be added: the \u039d\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 of\n  Anaxagoras was in reality the patriarch Noah\u201d (Ant. Mythol. vol.\n  ii. pp. 253, 272). \u201cThe Cuthites or Amonians, descendants of\n  Noah, settled in Greece from the east, celebrated for their skill\n  in building and the arts\u201d (_ib._ i. p. 502; ii. p. 187). \u201cThe\n  greatest part of the Grecian theology arose from misconception\n  and blunders, the stories concerning their gods and heroes were\n  founded on terms misinterpreted or abused\u201d (_ib._ i. p. 452).\n  \u201cThe number of different actions ascribed to the various Grecian\n  gods or heroes all relate to one people or family, and are at\n  bottom one and the same history\u201d (_ib._ ii. p. 57). \u201cThe fables\n  of Prom\u00eatheus and Tityus were taken from ancient Amonian temples,\n  from hieroglyphics misunderstood and badly explained\u201d (i. p.\n  426): see especially vol. ii. p. 160.\n\nBut this theory, though advocated by several learned men, has been\nshown to be unsupported and erroneous. It implies a mistaken view\nboth of the antiquity and the purport of the mysteries, which cannot\nbe safely carried up even to the age of Hesiod, and which, though\nimposing and venerable as religious ceremonies, included no recondite\nor esoteric teaching.[988]\n\n  [988] The Anti-Symbolik of Voss, and still more the Aglaophamus\n  of Lobeck, are full of instruction on the subject of this\n  supposed interior doctrine, and on the ancient mysteries\n  in general: the latter treatise, especially, is not less\n  distinguished for its judicious and circumspect criticism than\n  for its copious learning.\n\n  Mr. Halhed (Preface to the Gentoo Code of Laws, pp. xiii.-xiv.)\n  has good observations on the vanity of all attempts to allegorize\n  the Hindu mythology: he observes, with perfect truth, \u201cThe\n  vulgar and illiterate have always understood the mythology of\n  their country in its literal sense; and there was a time to\n  every nation, when the highest rank in it was equally vulgar and\n  illiterate with the lowest.... A Hindu esteems the astonishing\n  miracles attributed to a Brima, or a Kishen, as facts of the\n  most indubitable authenticity, and the relation of them as most\n  strictly historical.\u201d\n\n  Compare also Gibbon\u2019s remarks on the allegorizing tendencies of\n  the later Platonists (Hist. Decl. and Fall, vol. iv. p. 71).\n\nThe doctrine, supposed to have been originally symbolized and\nsubsequently overclouded, in the Greek mythes, was in reality first\nintruded into them by the unconscious fancies of later interpreters. It\nwas one of the various roads which instructed men took to escape from\nthe literal admission of the ancient mythes, and to arrive at some new\nform of belief, more consonant with their ideas of what the attributes\nand character of the gods ought to be. It was one of the ways of\nconstituting, by help of the mysteries, a philosophical religion apart\nfrom the general public, and of connecting that distinction with the\nearliest periods of Grecian society. Such a distinction was both avowed\nand justified among the superior men of the later pagan world. Varro\nand Sc\u00e6vola distributed theology into three distinct departments,\u2014the\nmythical or fabulous, the civil, and the physical. The first had\nits place in the theatre, and was left without any interference to\nthe poets; the second belonged to the city of political community\nas such,\u2014it comprised the regulation of all the public worship and\nreligious rites, and was consigned altogether to the direction of\nthe magistrate; the third was the privilege of philosophers, but was\nreserved altogether for private discussion in the schools, apart from\nthe general public.[989] As a member of the city, the philosopher\nsympathized with the audience in the theatre, and took a devout share\nin the established ceremonies, nor was he justified in trying what\nhe heard in the one or saw in the other by his own ethical standard.\nBut in the private assemblies of instructed or inquisitive men, he\nenjoyed the fullest liberty of canvassing every received tenet, and\nof broaching his own theories unreservedly, respecting the existence\nand nature of the gods. By these discussions, the activity of the\nphilosophical mind was maintained and truth elicited; but it was such\ntruth as the body of the people ought not to hear, lest their faith in\ntheir own established religious worship should be overthrown. In thus\ndistinguishing the civil theology from the fabulous, Varro was enabled\nto cast upon the poets all the blame of the objectionable points in the\npopular theology, and to avoid the necessity of pronouncing censure on\nthe magistrates, who (he contended) had made as good a compromise with\nthe settled prejudices of the public as the case permitted.\n\n  [989] Varro, ap. Augustin. De Civ. Dei, iv. 27; vi. 5-6. \u201cDicis\n  fabulosos Deos accommodatos esse ad theatrum, naturales ad\n  mundum, civiles ad urbem.\u201d \u201cVarro, de religionibus loquens, multa\n  esse vera dixit, qu\u00e6 non modo vulgo scire non sit utile, sed\n  etiam tametsi falsa sint, aliter existimare populum expediat:\n  et ideo Gr\u00e6cos teletas et mysteria taciturnitate parietibusque\n  clausisse\u201d (_ibid._ iv. 31). See Villoison, De Triplici Theologi\u00e2\n  Commentatio, p. 8; and Lactantius, De Origin. Error. ii. 3. The\n  doctrine of the Stoic Chrysippus, ap. Etymologicon Magn. v.\n  \u03a4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u2014\u03a7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2, \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c7\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f15\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bc\u03c5\u03ae\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c0\u1fb7\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2\u00b7 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f06\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd\n  \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f40\u03c1\u03b8\u1f70, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n  The triple division of Varro is reproduced in Plutarch,\n  Amatorius, p. 763. \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u1ff3, \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u1ff3, \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3, \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\n  \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u00b7 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f35 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nThe same conflicting sentiments which led the philosophers to decompose\nthe divine mythes into allegory, impelled the historians to melt down\nthe heroic mythes into something like continuous political history,\nwith a long series of chronology calculated upon the heroic pedigrees.\nThe one process as well as the other was interpretative guesswork,\nproceeding upon unauthorized assumptions, and without any verifying\ntest or evidence: while it frittered away the characteristic beauty\nof the mythe into something essentially anti-mythical, it sought to\narrive both at history and philosophy by impracticable roads. That the\nsuperior men of antiquity should have striven hard to save the dignity\nof legends which constituted the charm of their literature as well as\nthe substance of the popular religion, we cannot be at all surprised;\nbut it is gratifying to find Plato discussing the subject in a more\nphilosophical spirit. The Platonic Socrat\u00eas, being asked whether he\nbelieved the current Attic fable respecting the abduction of Oreithyia\n(daughter of Erechtheus) by Boreas, replies, in substance,\u2014\u201cIt would\nnot be strange if I disbelieved it, as the clever men do; I might\nthen show my cleverness by saying that a gust of Boreas blew her down\nfrom the rocks above while she was at play, and that, having been\nkilled in this manner, she was reported to have been carried off by\nBoreas. Such speculations are amusing enough, but they belong to men\ningenious and busy-minded overmuch, and not greatly to be envied, if\nit be only for this reason, _that, after having set right one fable,\nthey are under the necessity of applying the same process to a host of\nothers_\u2014Hippocentaurs, Chim\u00e6ras, Gorgons, Pegasus, and numberless other\nmonsters and incredibilities. A man, who, disbelieving these stories,\nshall try to find a probable basis for each of them, will display an\nill-placed acuteness and take upon himself an endless burden, for which\nI at least have no leisure: accordingly, I forego such researches, and\nbelieve in the current version of the stories.\u201d[990]\n\n  [990] Plato, Ph\u00e6dr. c. 7. p. 229:\u2014\n\n  PH\u00c6DRUS. \u0395\u1f36\u03c0\u03ad \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f66 \u03a3\u03ce\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c3\u1f7a \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\n  \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9;\n\n  SOCRATES. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f30 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u1f76, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd \u1f04\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7\u03bd,\n  \u03b5\u1f36\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f66\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\n  \u03bb\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0392\u03bf\u03c1\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.... \u1f18\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f66\n  \u03a6\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5, \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1fbd\n  \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f39\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f56\u03b8\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03a7\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f44\u03c7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u0393\u03bf\u03c1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\n  \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd\u00b7 \u03b1\u1f37\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b2\u03b9\u03b2\u1fb7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd,\n  \u1f05\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u03ba\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76\n  \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03bc\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae.... \u1f4d\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1,\n  \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b8\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f43 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u1ff6 \u03bf\u1f50\n  \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, etc.\n\nThese remarks of Plato are valuable, not simply because they point\nout the uselessness of digging for a supposed basis of truth in the\nmythes, but because they at the same time suggest the true reason\nfor mistrusting all such tentatives. The mythes form a class apart,\nabundant as well as peculiar: to remove any individual mythe from its\nown class into that of history or philosophy, by simple conjecture,\nand without any collateral evidence, is of no advantage, unless you\ncan perform a similar process on the remainder. If the process be\ntrustworthy, it ought to be applied to all; and _e converso_, if it\nbe not applicable to all, it is not trustworthy as applied to any one\nspecially; always assuming no special evidence to be accessible. To\ndetach any individual mythe from the class to which it belongs, is to\npresent it in an erroneous point of view; we have no choice except to\nadmit them as they stand, by putting ourselves approximatively into the\nframe of mind of those for whom they were destined and to whom they\nappeared worthy of credit.\n\nIf Plato thus discountenances all attempts to transform the mythes by\ninterpretation into history or philosophy, indirectly recognizing the\ngeneric difference between them\u2014we find substantially the same view\npervading the elaborate precepts in his treatise on the Republic. He\nthere regards the mythes, not as embodying either matter-of-fact or\nphilosophical principle, but as portions of religious and patriotic\nfaith, and instruments of ethical tuition. Instead of allowing the\npoets to frame them according to the impulses of their own genius,\nand with a view to immediate popularity, he directs the legislator to\nprovide types of his own for the characters of the gods and heroes,\nand to suppress all such divine and heroic legends as are not in\nharmony with these pre\u00ebstablished canons. In the Platonic system, the\nmythes are not to be matters of history, nor yet of spontaneous or\ncasual fiction, but of prescribed faith: he supposes that the people\nwill believe, as a thing of course, what the poets circulate, and he\ntherefore directs that the latter shall circulate nothing which does\nnot tend to ennoble and improve the feelings. He conceives the mythes\nas stories composed to illustrate the general sentiments of the poets\nand the community, respecting the character and attributes of the gods\nand heroes, or respecting the social relations, and ethical duties as\nwell as motives of mankind: hence the obligation upon the legislator to\nprescribe beforehand the types of character which shall be illustrated,\nand to restrain the poets from following out any opposing fancies.\n\u201cLet us neither believe ourselves (he exclaims), nor permit any one to\ncirculate, that Th\u00easeus son of Poseid\u00f4n and Peirith\u00f6us son of Zeus, or\nany other hero or son of a god, could ever have brought themselves to\ncommit abductions or other enormities such as are now falsely ascribed\nto them. We must compel the poets to say, either that such persons were\nnot the sons of gods, or that they were not the perpetrators of such\nmisdeeds.\u201d[991]\n\n  [991] Plato, Repub. iii. 5. p. 391. The perfect ignorance of\n  all men respecting the gods, rendered the task of fiction easy\n  (Plato, Kritias, p. 107).\n\nMost of the mythes which the youth hear and repeat (according to Plato)\nare false, but some of them are true: the great and prominent mythes\nwhich appear in Homer and Hesiod are no less fictions than the rest.\nBut fiction constitutes one of the indispensable instruments of mental\ntraining as well as truth; only the legislator must take care that\nthe fiction so employed shall be beneficent and not mischievous.[992]\nAs the mischievous fictions (he says) take their rise from wrong\npreconceptions respecting the character of the gods and heroes, so the\nway to correct them is to enforce, by authorized compositions, the\nadoption of a more correct standard.[993]\n\n  [992] Plato, Repub. ii. 16. p. 377. \u039b\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78\n  \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2, \u03c8\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f15\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd; \u039d\u03b1\u03af. \u03a0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2,\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 ... \u039f\u1f50 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u03ad \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f45\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c8\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2,\n  \u1f14\u03bd\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6.... \u03a0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f43\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1fe6\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f43\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f02\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74,\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd ... \u1f67\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b2\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd ... \u03bf\u1f53\u03c2\n  \u1f29\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f4d\u03bc\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03af. \u039f\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\n  \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9. \u03a0\u03bf\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f74, \u1f26 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f45\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03bc\u03c6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2;\n  \u1f4d\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1, \u1f26\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c, \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ac\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9. \u03a4\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf; \u1f4d\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u1fc3 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f45\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc7 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n  The same train of thought, and the precepts founded upon it, are\n  followed up through chaps. 17, 18, and 19; compare De Legg. xii.\n  p. 941.\n\n  Instead of recognizing the popular or dramatic theology as\n  something distinct from the civil (as Varro did), Plato\n  suppresses the former as a separate department and merges it in\n  the latter.\n\n  [993] Plato, Repub. ii. c. 21. p. 382. \u03a4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2\n  \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2; \u1f0e\u03c1\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f24\n  \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f04\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1\n  \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c6\u03ac\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03af\u03b3\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9; ~\u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f37\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b5\u1f30\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f45\u03c0\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd,\n  \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c8\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2~, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd;\n\nThe comments which Plato has delivered with so much force in his\nRepublic, and the enactments which he deduces from them, are in the\nmain an expansion of that sentiment of condemnation, which he shared\nwith so many other philosophers, towards a large portion of the Homeric\nand Hesiodic stories.[994] But the manner in which he has set forth\nthis opinion, unfolds to us more clearly the real character of the\nmythical narratives. They are creations of the productive minds in the\ncommunity, deduced from the supposed attributes of the gods and heroes:\nso Plato views them, and in such character he proposes to amend them.\nThe legislator would cause to be prepared a better and truer picture of\nthe foretime, because he would start from truer (that is to say, more\ncreditable) conceptions of the gods and heroes. For Plato rejects the\nmythes respecting Zeus and H\u00ear\u00ea, or Th\u00easeus and Peirith\u00f6us, not from\nany want of evidence, but because they are unworthy of gods and heroes:\nhe proposes to call forth new mythes, which, though he admits them at\nthe outset to be fiction, he knows will soon be received as true, and\nsupply more valuable lessons of conduct.\n\n  [994] The censure which Xenophan\u00eas pronounced upon the Homeric\n  legends has already been noticed: Herakleitus (Diogen. La\u00ebrt. ix.\n  1) and Metrod\u00f4rus, the companion and follower of Epicurus, were\n  not less profuse in their invectives, \u1f10\u03bd \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7\n  \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u1fc7 \u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (Plutarch, Non posse suaviter vivi secundum\n  Epicurum, p. 1086). He even advised persons not to be ashamed\n  to confess their utter ignorance of Homer, to the extent of not\n  knowing whether Hect\u00f4r was a Greek or a Trojan (Plut. _ib._ p.\n  1094).\n\nWe may consider, then, that Plato disapproves of the attempt to\nidentify the old mythes either with exaggerated history or with\ndisguised philosophy. He shares in the current faith, without any\nsuspicion or criticism, as to Orpheus, Palam\u00ead\u00eas, D\u00e6dalus, Amphi\u00f4n,\nTh\u00easeus, Achilles, Cheir\u00f4n, and other mythical personages;[995] but\nwhat chiefly fills his mind is, the inherited sentiment of deep\nreverence for these superhuman characters and for the age to which they\nbelonged,\u2014a sentiment sufficiently strong to render him not only an\nunbeliever in such legends as conflict with it, but also a deliberate\ncreator of new legends for the purpose of expanding and gratifying it.\nThe more we examine this sentiment, both in the mind of Plato as well\nas in that of the Greeks generally, the more shall we be convinced\nthat it formed essentially and inseparably a portion of Hellenic\nreligious faith. The mythe both presupposes, and springs out of, a\nsettled basis, and a strong expansive force of religious, social, and\npatriotic feeling, operating upon a past which is little better than\na blank as to positive knowledge. It resembles history, in so far as\nits form is narrative; it resembles philosophy, in so far as it is\noccasionally illustrative; but in its essence and substance, in the\nmental tendencies by which it is created as well as in those by which\nit is judged and upheld, it is a popularized expression of the divine\nand heroic faith of the people.\n\n  [995] Plato, Republic iii. 4-5. p. 391; De Legg. iii. 1. p. 677.\n\nGrecian antiquity cannot be at all understood except in connection\nwith Grecian religion. It begins with gods and it ends with historical\nmen, the former being recognized not simply as gods, but as primitive\nancestors, and connected with the latter by a long mythical genealogy,\npartly heroic and partly human. Now the whole value of such genealogies\narises from their being taken entire; the god or hero at the top is\nin point of fact the most important member of the whole;[996] for\nthe length and continuity of the series arises from anxiety on the\npart of historical men to join themselves by a thread of descent\nwith the being whom they worshipped in their gentile sacrifices.\nWithout the ancestorial god, the whole pedigree would have become not\nonly acephalous, but worthless and uninteresting. The pride of the\nHerakleids, Askl\u00eapiads, \u00c6akids, N\u00ealeids, D\u00e6dalids, etc. was attached\nto the primitive eponymous hero and to the god from whom they sprung,\nnot to the line of names, generally long and barren, through which the\ndivine or heroic dignity gradually dwindled down into common manhood.\nIndeed, the length of the genealogy (as I have before remarked) was an\nevidence of the humility of the historical man, which led him to place\nhimself at a respectful distance from the gods or heroes; for Hekat\u00e6us\nof Mil\u00eatus, who ranked himself as the fifteenth descendant of a god,\nmight perhaps have accounted it an overweening impiety in any living\nman to claim a god for his immediate father.\n\n  [996] For a description of similar tendencies in the Asiatic\n  religions, see M\u00f6vers, Die Ph\u00f6nizier, ch. v. p. 153 (Bonn, 1841):\n  he points out the same ph\u00e6nomena as in the Greek,\u2014coalescence\n  between the ideas of ancestry and worship,\u2014confusion between\n  gods and men in the past,\u2014increasing tendency to Eu\u00eamerize (pp.\n  156-157).\n\nThe whole chronology of Greece, anterior to 776 B. C., consists of\ncalculations founded upon these mythical genealogies, especially upon\nthat of the Spartan kings and their descent from H\u00earakl\u00eas,\u2014thirty\nyears being commonly taken as the equivalent of a generation, or\nabout three generations to a century. This process of computation\nwas altogether illusory, as applying historical and chronological\nconditions to a case on which they had no bearing. Though the domain\nof history was seemingly enlarged, the religious element was tacitly\nset aside: when the heroes and gods were chronologized, they became\ninsensibly approximated to the limits of humanity, and the process\nindirectly gave encouragement to the theory of Eu\u00eamerus. Personages\noriginally legendary and poetical were erected into definite landmarks\nfor measuring the duration of the foretime, thus gaining in respect to\nhistorical distinctness, but not without loss on the score of religious\nassociation. Both Eu\u00eamerus and the subsequent Christian writers, who\ndenied the original and inherent divinity of the pagan gods, had a\ngreat advantage in carrying their chronological researches strictly and\nconsistently upwards\u2014for all chronology fails as soon as we suppose a\nrace superior to common humanity.\n\nMoreover, it is to be remarked that the pedigree of the Spartan kings,\nwhich Apollod\u00f4rus and Eratosthen\u00eas selected as the basis of their\nestimate of time, is nowise superior in credibility and trustworthiness\nto the thousand other gentile and family pedigrees with which Greece\nabounded; it is rather indeed to be numbered among the most incredible\nof all, seeing that H\u00earakl\u00eas as a progenitor is placed at the head of\nperhaps more pedigrees than any other Grecian god or hero.[997] The\ndescent of the Spartan king Leonidas from H\u00earakl\u00eas rests upon no better\nevidence than that of Aristotle or Hippocrat\u00eas from Askl\u00eapius,[998]\u2014of\nEvagoras or Thucydid\u00eas from \u00c6akus,\u2014of Socrat\u00eas from D\u00e6dalus,\u2014of the\nSpartan heraldic family from Talthybius,\u2014of the prophetic Iamid family\nin Elis from Iamus,\u2014of the root-gatherers in P\u00ealion from Cheir\u00f4n,\u2014and\nof Hekat\u00e6us and his gens from some god in the sixteenth ascending\nline of the series. There is little exaggeration in saying, indeed,\nthat no permanent combination of men in Greece, religious, social, or\nprofessional, was without a similar pedigree; all arising out of the\nsame exigences of the feelings and imagination, to personify as well\nas to sanctify the bond of union among the members. Every one of these\n_gentes_ began with a religious and ended with an historical person.\nAt some point or other in the upward series, entities of history were\nexchanged for entities of religion; but where that point is to be\nfound we are unable to say, nor had the wisest of the ancient Greeks\nany means of determining. Thus much, however, we know, that the series\ntaken as a whole, though dear and precious to the believing Greek,\npossesses no value as chronological evidence to the historian.\n\n  [997] According to that which Aristotle seems to recognize\n  (Histor. Animal. vii. 6), H\u00earakl\u00eas was father of seventy-two\n  sons, but of only one daughter\u2014he was essentially \u1f00\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2,\n  illustrating one of the physical peculiarities noticed by\n  Aristotle. Euripid\u00eas, however, mentions daughters of H\u00earakl\u00eas in\n  the plural number (Euripid. Herakleid. 45).\n\n  [998] Hippocrat\u00eas was twentieth in descent from H\u00earakl\u00eas,\n  and nineteenth from Askl\u00eapius (Vita Hippocr. by Soranus, ap.\n  Westermann, Scriptor. Biographic. viii. 1); about Aristotle,\n  see Diogen. La\u00ebrt. v. 1. Xenoph\u00f4n, the physician of the emperor\n  Claudius, was also an Askl\u00eapiad (Tacit. Ann. xii. 61).\n\n  In Rhodes, the neighboring island to K\u00f4s, was the gens \u1f09\u03bb\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9,\n  or sons of H\u00ealios, specially distinguished from the \u1f09\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76 of\n  mere associated worshippers of H\u00ealios, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f09\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f09\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd (see the Inscription in Boeckh\u2019s Collection, No.\n  2525, with Boeckh\u2019s comment).\n\nWhen Hekat\u00e6us visited Th\u00eabes in Egypt, he mentioned to the Egyptian\npriests, doubtless with a feeling of satisfaction and pride, the\nimposing pedigree of the gens to which he belonged,\u2014with fifteen\nancestors in ascending line, and a god as the initial progenitor. But\nhe found himself immeasurably overdone by the priests \u201cwho genealogized\nagainst him.\u201d[999] They showed to him three hundred and forty-one\nwooden colossal statues, representing the succession of chief priests\nin the temple in uninterrupted series from father to son, through a\nspace of 11,300 years. Prior to the commencement of this long period\n(they said), the gods dwelling along with men, had exercised sway in\nEgypt; but they repudiated altogether the idea of men begotten by gods\nor of heroes.[1000]\n\n  [999] Herodot. ii. 144. \u1f19\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f11\u03c9\u03cb\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd,\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f11\u03ba\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7\n  \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03b5\u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7\n  \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5, etc.\n\n  [1000] Herod. ii. 143-145. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd\n  \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b1.\n\nBut these counter-genealogies, are, in respect to trustworthiness and\nevidence, on the same footing. Each represents partly the religious\nfaith, partly the retrospective imagination, of the persons from whom\nit emanated; in each, the lower members of the series (to what extent\nwe cannot tell) are real, the upper members fabulous; but in each also\nthe series derived all its interest and all its imposing effect from\nbeing conceived unbroken and entire. Herodotus is much perplexed by the\ncapital discrepancy between the Grecian and Egyptian chronologies, and\nvainly employs his ingenuity in reconciling them. There is no standard\nof objective evidence by which either the one or the other of them can\nbe tried: each has its own subjective value, in conjunction with the\nfaith and feelings of Egyptians and Greeks, and each presupposes in the\nbeliever certain mental prepossessions which are not to be found beyond\nits own local limits. Nor is the greater or less extent of duration at\nall important, when we once pass the limits of evidence and verifiable\nreality. One century of recorded time, adequately studded with\nauthentic and orderly events, presents a greater mass and a greater\ndifficulty of transition to the imagination than a hundred centuries of\nbarren genealogy. Herodotus, in discussing the age of Homer and Hesiod,\ntreats an anterior point of 400 years as if it were only yesterday;\nthe reign of Henry VI. is separated from us by an equal interval, and\nthe reader will not require to be reminded how long that interval now\nappears.\n\nThe mythical age was peopled with a mingled aggregate of gods, heroes,\nand men, so confounded together that it was often impossible to\ndistinguish to which class any individual name belonged. In regard\nto the Thracian god Zalmoxis, the Hellespontic Greeks interpreted\nhis character and attributes according to the scheme of Eu\u00eamerism.\nThey affirmed that he had been a man, the slave of the philosopher\nPythagoras at Samos, and that he had by abilities and artifice\nestablished a religious ascendency over the minds of the Thracians,\nand obtained from them divine honors. Herodotus cannot bring himself\nto believe this story, but he frankly avows his inability to determine\nwhether Zalmoxis was a god or a man,[1001] nor can he extricate\nhimself from a similar embarrassment in respect to Dionysus and Pan.\nAmidst the confusion of the Homeric fight, the goddess Ath\u00ean\u00ea confers\nupon Diom\u00ead\u00eas the miraculous favor of dispelling the mist from his\neyes, so as to enable him to discriminate gods from men; and nothing\nless than a similar miracle could enable a critical reader of the\nmythical narratives to draw an ascertained boundary-line between\nthe two.[1002] But the original hearers of the mythes felt neither\nsurprise nor displeasure from this confusion of the divine with the\nhuman individual. They looked at the past with a film of faith over\ntheir eyes\u2014neither knowing the value, nor desiring the attainment, of\nan unclouded vision. The intimate companionship, and the occasional\nmistake of identity between gods and men, were in full harmony with\ntheir reverential retrospect. And we, accordingly, see the poet Ovid\nin his Fasti, when he undertakes the task of unfolding the legendary\nantiquities of early Rome, re-acquiring, by the inspiration of Juno,\nthe power of seeing gods and men in immediate vicinity and conjunct\naction, such as it existed before the development of the critical and\nhistorical sense.[1003]\n\n  [1001] Herod. iv. 94-96. After having related the Euemeristic\n  version given by the Hellespontic Greeks, he concludes with his\n  characteristic frankness and simplicity\u2014\u1f18\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b3\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f66\u03bd \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9 \u03c4\u03b9\n  \u03bb\u03af\u03b7\u03bd, \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03ad\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0396\u03ac\u03bb\u03bc\u03bf\u03be\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03a0\u03c5\u03b8\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03b5\u03c9. \u0395\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u0396\u03ac\u03bb\u03bc\u03bf\u03be\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u1fbd\n  \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u0393\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9. So Plutarch\n  (Numa c. 19) will not undertake to determine whether Janus was a\n  god or a king \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, etc.\n\n  Herakleitus the philosopher said that men were \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76, and\n  the gods were \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 (Lucian, Vitar. Auctio. c. 13.\n  vol. i. p. 303, Tauch.: compare the same author, Dialog. Mortuor.\n  iii. vol. i. p. 182, ed. Tauchn).\n\n  [1002] Iliad, v. 127:\u2014\n\n    \u1f08\u03c7\u03bb\u1f7a\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u03b1\u1f56 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u1fbd \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f15\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f23 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f76\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1fc6\u03b5\u03bd,\n    \u1f4c\u03c6\u03c1\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f56 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u1fc3\u03c2 \u1f20\u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f20\u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1.\n\n  Of this undistinguishable confusion between gods and men,\n  striking illustrations are to be found both in the third book of\n  Cicero de Natur\u00e2 Deorum (16-21), and in the long disquisition of\n  Strabo (x. pp. 467-474) respecting the Kabeiri, the Korybantes,\n  the Dactyls of Ida; the more so, as he cites the statements of\n  Pherekyd\u00eas, Akusilaus, D\u00eam\u00eatrius of Sk\u00eapsis, and others. Under\n  the Roman empire, the lands in Greece belonging to the immortal\n  gods were exempted from tribute. The Roman tax-collectors\n  refused to recognize as immortal gods any persons who had once\n  been men; but this rule could not be clearly applied (Cicero,\n  Nat. Deor. iii. 20). See the remarks of Pausanias (ii. 26, 7)\n  about Askl\u00eapius: Galen, too, is doubtful about Askl\u00eapius and\n  Dionysus\u2014\u1f08\u03c3\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f36\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n  \u1f24\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03af (Galen in Protreptic. 9. tom. i. p.\n  22, ed. K\u00fchn). Xenoph\u00f4n (De Venat. c. i.) considers Cheir\u00f4n as\n  the brother of Zeus.\n\n  The ridicule of Lucian (Deorum Concilium, t. iii. p 527-538,\n  Hems.) brings out still more forcibly the confusion here\n  indicated.\n\n  [1003] Ovid, Fasti, vi. 6-20:\u2014\n\n    \u201cFas mihi pr\u00e6cipue vultus vidisse Deorum,\n      Vel quia sum vates, vel quia sacra cano ...\n       ... Ecce Deas vidi....\n    Horrueram, tacitoque animum pallore fatebar:\n      Cum Dea, quos fecit, sustulit ipsa metus.\n    Namque ait\u2014O vates, Romani conditor anni,\n      Ause per exiguos magna referre modos;\n    Jus tibi fecisti numen c\u0153leste videndi,\n      Cum placuit numeris condere festa tuis.\u201d\n\nTo resume, in brief, what has been laid down in this and the preceding\nchapters respecting the Grecian mythes:\u2014\n\n1. They are a special product of the imagination and feelings,\nradically distinct both from history and philosophy: they cannot be\nbroken down and decomposed into the one, nor allegorized into the\nother. There are indeed some particular and even assignable mythes,\nwhich raise intrinsic presumption of an allegorizing tendency; and\nthere are doubtless some others, though not specially assignable, which\ncontain portions of matter of fact, or names of real persons, embodied\nin them. But such matter of fact cannot be verified by any intrinsic\nmark, nor we are entitled to presume its existence in any given case\nunless some collateral evidence can be produced.\n\n2. We are not warranted in applying to the mythical world the rules\neither of historical credibility or chronological sequence. Its\npersonages are gods, heroes, and men, in constant juxtaposition and\nreciprocal sympathy; men, too, of whom we know a large proportion to\nbe fictitious, and of whom we can never ascertain how many may have\nbeen real. No series of such personages can serve as materials for\nchronological calculation.\n\n3. The mythes were originally produced in an age which had no records,\nno philosophy, no criticism, no canon of belief, and scarcely any\ntincture either of astronomy or geography\u2014but which, on the other hand,\nwas full of religious faith, distinguished for quick and susceptible\nimagination, seeing personal agents where we look only for objects and\nconnecting laws;\u2014an age, moreover, eager for new narrative, accepting\nwith the unconscious impressibility of children (the question of truth\nor falsehood being never formally raised) all which ran in harmony\nwith its pre-existing feelings, and penetrable by inspired prophets\nand poets in the same proportion that it was indifferent to positive\nevidence. To such hearers did the primitive poet or story-teller\naddress himself: it was the glory of his productive genius to provide\nsuitable narrative expression for the faith and emotions which he\nshared in common with them, and the rich stock of Grecian mythes\nattests how admirably he performed his task. As the gods and the heroes\nformed the conspicuous object of national reverence, so the mythes were\npartly divine, partly heroic, partly both in one.[1004] The adventures\nof Achilles, Helen, and Diom\u00ead\u00eas, of \u0152dipus and Adrastus, of Meleager\nand Ath\u00e6a, of Jas\u00f4n and the Arg\u00f4, were recounted by the same tongues,\nand accepted with the same unsuspecting confidence, as those of Apollo\nand Artemis, of Ar\u00eas and Aphrodit\u00ea, of Poseid\u00f4n and H\u00earakl\u00eas.\n\n  [1004] The fourth Eclogue of Virgil, under the form of a\n  prophecy, gives a faithful picture of the heroic and divine past,\n  to which the legends of Troy and the Argonauts belonged:\u2014\n\n    \u201cIlle De\u00fbm vitam accipiet, Divisque videbit\n    Permixtos heroas,\u201d etc.\n\n    \u201cAlter erit tum Tiphys et altera qu\u00e6 vehat Argo\n    Delectos heroas: erunt etiam altera bella,\n    Atque iterum ad Trojam magnus mittetur Achilles.\u201d\n\n4. The time however came, when this plausibility ceased to be complete.\nThe Grecian mind made an important advance, socially, ethically, and\nintellectually. Philosophy and history were constituted, prose writing\nand chronological records became familiar; a canon of belief more\nor less critical came to be tacitly recognized. Moreover, superior\nmen profited more largely by the stimulus, and contracted habits of\njudging different from the vulgar: the god Elenchus[1005] (to use a\npersonification of Menander) the giver and prover of truth, descended\ninto their minds. Into the new intellectual medium, thus altered in its\nelements, and no longer uniform in its quality, the mythes descended by\ninheritance; but they were found, to a certain extent, out of harmony\neven with the feelings of the people, and altogether dissonant with\nthose of instructed men. But the most superior Greek was still a Greek,\nand cherished the common reverential sentiment towards the foretime of\nhis country. Though he could neither believe nor respect the mythes as\nthey stood, he was under an imperious mental necessity to transform\nthem into a state worthy of his belief and respect. Whilst the literal\nmythe still continued to float among the poets and the people, critical\nmen interpreted, altered, decomposed, and added, until they found\nsomething which satisfied their minds as a supposed real basis. They\nmanufactured some dogmas of supposed original philosophy, and a long\nseries of fancied history and chronology, retaining the mythical names\nand generations even when they were obliged to discard or recast\nthe mythical events. The interpreted mythe was thus promoted into a\nreality, while the literal mythe was degraded into a fiction.[1006]\n\n  [1005] Lucian, Pseudol. c. 4. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\n  \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f37\u03c2, \u1f41 \u1f1c\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u1fb3 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7\n  \u1f41 \u1f00\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. (See Meineke ad\n  Menandr. p. 284.)\n\n  [1006] The following passage from Dr. Ferguson\u2019s Essay on Civil\n  Society (part ii. sect. i. p. 126) bears well on the subject\n  before us:\u2014\n\n  \u201cIf conjectures and opinions formed at a distance have not a\n  sufficient authority in the history of mankind, the domestic\n  antiquities of every nation must for this very reason be received\n  with caution. They are, for the most part, the mere conjectures\n  or the fictions of subsequent ages; and even where at first they\n  contained some resemblance of truth, they still vary with the\n  imagination of those by whom they were transmitted, and in every\n  generation receive a different form. They are made to bear the\n  stamp of the times through which they have passed in the form of\n  tradition, not of the ages to which their pretended descriptions\n  relate.... When traditionary fables are rehearsed by the vulgar,\n  they bear the marks of a national character, and though mixed\n  with absurdities, often raise the imagination and move the heart:\n  when made the materials of poetry, and adorned by the skill and\n  the eloquence of an ardent and superior mind, they instruct the\n  understanding as well as engage the passions. It is only in the\n  management of mere antiquaries, or stript of the ornaments which\n  the laws of history forbid them to wear, that _they become unfit\n  even to amuse the fancy or to serve any purpose whatever_.\n\n  \u201cIt were absurd to quote the fable of the Iliad or the Odyssey,\n  the legend of Hercules, Theseus, and \u0152dipus, as authorities\n  in matters of fact relating to the history of mankind; but\n  they may, with great justice, be cited to ascertain what were\n  the conceptions and sentiments of the age in which they were\n  composed, or to characterize the genius of that people with whose\n  imaginations they were blended, and by whom they were fondly\n  rehearsed and admired. In this manner, fiction may be admitted\n  to vouch for the genius of nations, while history has nothing to\n  offer worthy of credit.\u201d\n\n  To the same purpose, M. Paulin Paris (in his Lettre \u00e0 M. H. de\n  Monmerqu\u00e9, prefixed to the Roman de Berte aux Grans Pi\u00e9s, Paris,\n  1836), respecting the \u201cromans\u201d of the Middle Ages: \u201cPour bien\n  conna\u00eetre l\u2019histoire du moyen \u00e2ge, non pas celle des faits, mais\n  celle des m\u0153urs qui rendent les faits vraisemblables, il faut\n  l\u2019avoir \u00e9tudi\u00e9e dans les romans, et voil\u00e0 pourquoi l\u2019Histoire de\n  France n\u2019est pas encore faite.\u201d (p. xxi.)\n\nThe habit of distinguishing the interpreted from the literal mythe\nhas passed from the literary men of antiquity to those of the modern\nworld, who have for the most part construed the divine mythes as\nallegorized philosophy, and the heroic mythes as exaggerated, adorned,\nand over-colored history. The early ages of Greece have thus been\npeopled with quasi-historical persons and quasi-historical events,\nall extracted from the mythes after making certain allowances for\npoetical ornament. But we must not treat this extracted product as\nif it were the original substance; we cannot properly understand it\nexcept by viewing it in connection with the literal mythes out of\nwhich it was obtained, in their primitive age and appropriate medium,\nbefore the superior minds had yet outgrown the common faith in an\nall-personified Nature, and learned to restrict the divine free-agency\nby the supposition of invariable physical laws. It is in this point\nof view that the mythes are important for any one who would correctly\nappreciate the general tone of Grecian thought and feeling; for they\nwere the universal mental stock of the Hellenic world\u2014common to men and\nwomen, rich and poor, instructed and ignorant; they were in every one\u2019s\nmemory and in every one\u2019s mouth,[1007] while science and history were\nconfined to comparatively few. We know from Thucydid\u00eas how erroneously\nand carelessly the Athenian public of his day retained the history\nof Peisistratus, only one century past;[1008] but the adventures of\nthe gods and heroes, the numberless explanatory legends attached to\nvisible objects and periodical ceremonies, were the theme of general\ntalk, and any man unacquainted with them would have found himself\npartially excluded from the sympathy of his neighbors. The theatrical\nrepresentations, exhibited to the entire city population, and listened\nto with enthusiastic interest, both presupposed and perpetuated\nacquaintance with the great lines of heroic fable: indeed, in later\ntimes even the pantomimic dancers embraced in their representations\nthe whole field of mythical incident, and their immense success proves\nat once how popular and how well known such subjects were. The names\nand attributes of the heroes were incessantly alluded to in the way\nof illustration, to point out a consoling, admonitory, or repressive\nmoral: the simple mention of any of them sufficed to call up in every\none\u2019s mind the principal events of his life, and the poet or rhapsode\ncould thus calculate on touching chords not less familiar than\nsusceptible.[1009]\n\n  [1007] A curious evidence of the undiminished popularity of\n  the Grecian mythes to the exclusion even of recent history, is\n  preserved by Vopiscus at the beginning of his Life of Aurelian.\n\n  The pr\u00e6fect of the city of Rome, Junius Tiberianus, took Vopiscus\n  into his carriage on the festival-day of the Hilaria; he was\n  connected by the ties of relationship with Aurelian, who had\n  died about a generation before\u2014and as the carriage passed by the\n  splendid Temple of the Sun, which Aurelian had consecrated, he\n  asked Vopiscus, what author had written the life of that emperor?\n  To which Vopiscus replied, that he had read some Greek works\n  which touched upon Aurelian, but nothing in Latin. Whereat the\n  venerable pr\u00e6fect was profoundly grieved: \u201cDolorem gemit\u00fbs sui\n  vir sanctus per h\u00e6c verba profudit: Ergo _Thersitem, Sinonem,\n  c\u00e6teraque illa prodigia vetustatis, et nos bene scimus, et\n  posteri frequentabunt_: divum Aurelianum, clarissimum principem,\n  severissimum Imperatorem, per quem totus Romano nomini orbis est\n  restitutus, posteri nescient? Deus avertat hanc amentiam! Et\n  tamen, si bene memini, ephemeridas illius viri scriptas habemus,\u201d\n  etc. (Histori\u00e6 August. Scriptt. p. 209, ed. Salmas.)\n\n  This impressive remonstrance produced the Life of Aurelian by\n  Vopiscus. The materials seem to have been ample and authentic; it\n  is to be regretted that they did not fall into the hands of an\n  author qualified to turn them to better account.\n\n  [1008] Thucyd. vi. 56.\n\n  [1009] Pausan. i. 3, 3. \u039b\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f37\u03b1 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f24\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u1f7a\u03c2\n  \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f14\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u1ff3\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, etc.\n  The treatise of Lucian, De Saltatione, is a curious proof how\n  much these mythes were in every one\u2019s memory, and how large the\n  range of knowledge of them was which a good dancer possessed (see\n  particularly c. 76-79. t. ii. p. 308-310, Hemst).\n\n  Antiphan\u00eas ap. Athen\u00e6. vi. p. 223:\u2014\n\n                  \u039c\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u1ff3\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\n    \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd, \u03b5\u1f34 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\n    \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03b1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\n    \u03c0\u03c1\u1f76\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\n    \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd. \u039f\u1f30\u03b4\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f02\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c6\u1ff6,\n    \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u1f34\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f41 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u039b\u03ac\u03ca\u03bf\u03c2,\n    \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1 \u1f38\u03bf\u03ba\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7, \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\u00b7\n    \u03c4\u03af \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u03af \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd. \u1f0a\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\n    \u03b5\u1f34\u03c0\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f08\u03bb\u03ba\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\n    \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c1\u03b7\u03c7\u1fbd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\n    \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u1fbd\u00b7 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f0c\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2\n    \u1f25\u03be\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f04\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, etc.\n\n  The first pages of the eleventh Oration of Dio Chrysostom contain\n  some striking passages both as to the universal acquaintance\n  with the mythes, and as to their extreme popularity (Or. xi. p.\n  307-312, Reisk). See also the commencement of Heraklid\u00eas, De\n  Allegori\u00e2 Homeric\u00e2 (ap. Scriptt. Myth. ed. Gale, p. 408), about\n  the familiarity with Homer.\n\n  The Lyd\u00ea of the poet Antimachus was composed for his own\n  consolation under sorrow, by enumerating the \u1f21\u03c1\u03c9\u03ca\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03ac\u03c2\n  (Plutarch, Consolat. ad Apoll\u00f4n. c. 9. p. 106: compare \u00c6schines\n  cont. Ktesiph. c. 48): a sepulchral inscription in Th\u00eara, on the\n  untimely death of Adm\u00eatus, a youth of the heroic gens \u00c6gidae,\n  makes a touching allusion to his ancestors P\u00ealeus and Pher\u00eas\n  (Boeckh, C. I. t. ii. p. 1087).\n\n  A curious passage of Aristotle is preserved by D\u00eam\u00eatrius\n  Phalereus (\u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f19\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, c. 144),\u2014\u1f4d\u03c3\u1ff3 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u1f76, \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03c5\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1 (compare the passage in the\n  Nikomachean Ethics, i. 9, \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2). Stahr refers this\n  to a letter of Aristotle written in his old age, the mythes being\n  the consolation of his solitude (Aristotelia, i. p. 201).\n\n  For the employment of the mythical names and incidents as\n  topics of pleasing and familiar comparison, see Menander, \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n  \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03c4\u1fd6\u03ba. \u00a7 iv. capp. 9 and 11, ap. Walz. Coll. Rhett. t. ix.\n  pp. 283-294. The degree in which they passed into the ordinary\n  songs of women is illustrated by a touching epigram contained\n  among the Chian Inscriptions published in Boeckh\u2019s Collection\n  (No. 2236):\u2014\n\n    \u0392\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u1f7c \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u1f76\u03c2, \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b7 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b7 (?), \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03b9,\n      \u0391\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b9\u03c7\u03c1\u03b1\u1f76, \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1fc6\u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6.\n    \u1f08\u03bc\u03c6\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9 \u039a\u03ce\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\u2014\u1f66 \u03b3\u03bb\u03c5\u03ba\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f44\u03c1\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2,\n      \u03a0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bb\u03cd\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1fa7 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f94\u03b4\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n  These two poor women were not afraid to boast of their family\n  descent. They probably belonged to some noble gens which traced\n  its origin to a god or a hero. About the songs of women, see also\n  Agathias, i. 7. p. 29, ed. Bonn.\n\n  In the family of the wealthy Athenian D\u00eamocrat\u00eas was a legend,\n  that his primitive ancestor (son of Zeus by the daughter of\n  the Arch\u00eaget\u00eas of the d\u00eame Aix\u00f4neis, to which he belonged) had\n  received H\u00earakl\u00eas at his table: this legend was so rife that the\n  old women sung it,\u2014\u1f05\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f84\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 (Plato, Lysis, p. 205).\n  Compare also a legend of the d\u00eame \u1f08\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, mentioned in Suidas\n  _ad voc._\n\n  \u201cWho is this virgin?\u201d asks Orest\u00eas from Pylad\u00eas in the Iphigeneia\n  in Tauris of Euripid\u00eas (662), respecting his sister Iphigeneia,\n  whom he does not know as priestess of Artemis in a foreign land:\u2014\n\n    \u03a4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21 \u03bd\u03b5\u1fb6\u03bd\u03b9\u03c2; \u1f61\u03c2 ~\u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2~\n    \u1f08\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1\u03b5\u03b8\u1fbd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f38\u03bb\u03af\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n    \u039d\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f08\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u1f78\u03bd\n    \u039a\u03ac\u03bb\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1fbd, \u1f08\u03c7\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f54\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u1fbd, etc.\n    ... \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u1f21 \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n    \u1f18\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd. \u1f08\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, etc.\n\nA similar effect was produced by the multiplied religious festivals\nand processions, as well as by the oracles and prophecies which\ncirculated in every city. The annual departure of the The\u00f4ric ship\nfrom Athens to the sacred island of D\u00ealos, kept alive, in the minds\nof Athenians generally, the legend of Th\u00easeus and his adventurous\nenterprise in Krete;[1010] and in like manner most of the other\npublic rites and ceremonies were of a commemorative character,\ndeduced from some mythical person or incident familiarly known to\nnatives, and forming to strangers a portion of the curiosities of\nthe place.[1011] During the period of Grecian subjection under the\nRomans, these curiosities, together with their works of art and\ntheir legends, were especially clung to as a set-off against present\ndegradation. The Th\u00eaban citizen who found himself restrained from the\nliberty enjoyed by all other Greeks, of consulting Amphiar\u00e4us as a\nprophet, though the sanctuary and chapel of the hero stood in his own\ncity\u2014could not be satisfied without a knowledge of the story which\nexplained the origin of such prohibition,[1012] and which conducted\nhim back to the originally hostile relations between Amphiar\u00e4us and\nTh\u00eabes. Nor can we suppose among the citizens of Siky\u00f4n anything less\nthan a perfect and reverential conception of the legend of Th\u00eabes,\nwhen we read the account given by Herodotus of the conduct of the\ndespot Kleisthen\u00eas in regard to Adrastus and Melanippus.[1013] The\nTr\u0153zenian youths and maidens,[1014] who universally, when on the eve\nof marriage, consecrated an offering of their hair at the Her\u00f4on of\nHippolytus, maintained a lively recollection of the legend of that\nunhappy recusant whom Aphrodit\u00ea had so cruelly punished. Abundant\nrelics preserved in many Grecian cities and temples, served both as\nmementos and attestations of other legendary events; and the tombs\nof the heroes counted among the most powerful stimulants of mythical\nreminiscence. The sceptre of Pelops and Agamemn\u00f4n, still preserved in\nthe days of Pausanias at Ch\u00e6roneia in B\u0153\u00f4tia, was the work of the god\nH\u00eaph\u00e6stos. While many other alleged productions of the same divine hand\nwere preserved in different cities of Greece, this is the only one\nwhich Pausanias himself believed to be genuine: it had been carried\nby Elektra, daughter of Agamemn\u00f4n to Ph\u00f4kis, and received divine\nhonors from the citizens of Ch\u00e6roneia.[1015] The spears of M\u00earion\u00eas\nand Odysseus were treasured up at Engyium in Sicily, that of Achilles\nat Phas\u00ealis; the sword of Memn\u00f4n adorned the temple of Askl\u00eapius at\nNicom\u00eadia; and Pausanias, with unsuspecting confidence, adduces the two\nlatter as proofs that the arms of the heroes were made of brass.[1016]\nThe hide of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar was guarded and shown by the Tegeates\nas a precious possession; the shield of Euphorbus was in like manner\nsuspended in the temple of Branchid\u00e6 near Mil\u00eatus, as well as in the\ntemple of H\u00ear\u00ea in Argos. Visible relics of Epeius and Philokt\u00eat\u00eas\nwere not wanting, while Strabo raises his voice with indignation\nagainst the numerous Palladia which were shown in different cities,\neach pretending to be the genuine image from Troy.[1017] It would be\nimpossible to specify the number of chapels, sanctuaries, solemnities,\nfoundations of one sort or another, said to have been first commenced\nby heroic or mythical personages,\u2014by H\u00earakl\u00eas, Jas\u00f4n, M\u00eadea, Alkm\u00e6\u00f4n,\nDiom\u00ead\u00eas, Odysseus, Danaus, and his daughters,[1018] etc. Perhaps in\nsome of these cases particular critics might raise objections, but the\ngreat bulk of the people entertained a firm and undoubted belief in the\ncurrent legend.\n\n  [1010] Plato, Ph\u00e6do, c. 2.\n\n  [1011] The Philopseudes of Lucian (t. iii. p. 31, Hemst. cap.\n  2, 3, 4) shows not only the pride which the general public of\n  Athens and Th\u00eabes took in their old mythes (Triptolemus, Boreas,\n  and Oreithyia, the Sparti, etc.), but the way in which they\n  treated every man who called the stories in question as a fool\n  or as an atheist. He remarks, that if the guides who showed the\n  antiquities had been restrained to tell nothing but what was\n  true, they would have died of hunger; for the visiting strangers\n  would not care to hear plain truth, even if they could have got\n  it for nothing (\u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd).\n\n  [1012] Herodot. viii. 134.\n\n  [1013] Herodot. v. 67.\n\n  [1014] Euripid. Hippolyt. 1424; Pausan. ii. 32, 1; Lucian, De De\u00e2\n  Syri\u00e2, c. 60. vol. iv. p. 287, Tauch.\n\n  It is curious to see in the account of Pausanias how all the\n  petty peculiarities of the objects around became connected with\n  explanatory details growing out of this affecting legend. Compare\n  Pausan. i. 22, 2.\n\n  [1015] Pausan. ix. 40, 6.\n\n  [1016] Plutarch, Marcell. c. 20; Pausan. iii. 3, 6.\n\n  [1017] Pausan. viii. 46, 1; Diogen. La\u00ebr. viii. 5; Strabo, vi. p.\n  263; Appian, Bell. Mithridat. c. 77; \u00c6schyl. Eumen. 380.\n\n  Wachsmuth has collected the numerous citations out of Pausanias\n  on this subject (Hellenische Alterthumskunde, part ii. sect. 115.\n  p. 111).\n\n  [1018] Herodot. ii. 182; Plutarch, Pyrrh. c. 32; Schol. Apoll.\n  Rhod iv. 1217; Diod\u00f4r. iv. 56.\n\nIf we analyze the intellectual acquisitions of a common Grecian\ntownsman, from the rude communities of Arcadia or Ph\u00f4kis even up to the\nenlightened Athens, we shall find that, over and above the rules of\nart or capacities requisite for his daily wants, it consisted chiefly\nof the various mythes connected with his gens, his city, his religious\nfestivals, and the mysteries in which he might have chosen to initiate\nhimself, as well as with the works of art and the more striking\nnatural objects which he might see around him,\u2014the whole set off and\ndecorated by some knowledge of the epic and dramatic poets. Such was\nthe intellectual and imaginative reach of an ordinary Greek, considered\napart from the instructed few: it was an aggregate of religion, of\nsocial and patriotic retrospect, and of romantic fancy, blended into\none indivisible faith. And thus the subjective value of the mythes,\nlooking at them purely as elements of Grecian thought and feeling, will\nappear indisputably great, however little there may be of objective\nreality, either historical or philosophical, discoverable under them.\n\nNor must we omit the incalculable importance of the mythes as\nstimulants to the imagination of the Grecian artist in sculpture, in\npainting, in carving, and in architecture. From the divine and heroic\nlegends and personages were borrowed those paintings, statues, and\nreliefs, which rendered the temples, porticos, and public buildings,\nat Athens and elsewhere, objects of surpassing admiration; and such\nvisible reproduction contributed again to fix the types of the gods and\nheroes familiarly and indelibly on the public mind.[1019] The figures\ndelineated on cups and vases, as well as on the walls of private\nhouses, were chiefly drawn from the same source\u2014the mythes being the\ngreat storehouse of artistic scenes and composition.\n\n  [1019] \u1f29\u03bc\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, the subjects of the works of Polygnotus\n  at Athens (Melanthius ap. Plutarch. Cim\u00f4n. c. 4): compare\n  Theocrit. xv. 138.\n\nTo enlarge on the characteristic excellence of Grecian art would here\nbe out of place: I regard it only in so far as, having originally drawn\nits materials from the mythes, it reacted upon the mythical faith and\nimagination\u2014the reaction imparting strength to the former as well\nas distinctness to the latter. To one who saw constantly before him\nrepresentations of the battles of the Centaurs or the Amazons,[1020]\nof the exploits performed by Perseus and Belleroph\u00f4n, of the incidents\ncomposing the Trojan war or the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt\u2014the process of\nbelief, even in the more fantastic of these conceptions, became easy\nin proportion as the conception was familiarized. And if any person\nhad been slow to believe in the efficacy of the prayers of \u00c6akus,\nwhereby that devout hero once obtained special relief from Zeus, at a\nmoment when Greece was perishing with long-continued sterility, his\ndoubts would probably vanish when, on visiting the \u00c6akeion at \u00c6gina,\nthere were exhibited to him the statues of the very envoys who had\ncome on the behalf of the distressed Greeks to solicit that \u00c6akus\nwould pray for them.[1021] A Grecian temple[1022] was not simply a\nplace of worship, but the actual dwelling-place of a god, who was\nbelieved to be introduced by the solemn dedicatory ceremony, and whom\nthe imagination of the people identified in the most intimate manner\nwith his statue. The presence or removal of the statue was conceived\nas identical with that of the being represented,\u2014and while the statue\nwas solemnly washed, dressed, and tended with all the respectful\nsolicitude which would have been bestowed upon a real person,[1023]\nmiraculous tales were often rife respecting the manifestation of real\ninternal feeling in the wood and the marble. At perilous or critical\nmoments, the statue was affirmed to have sweated, to have wept, to have\nclosed its eyes, or brandished the spear in its hands, in token of\nsympathy or indignation.[1024] Such legends, springing up usually in\ntimes of suffering and danger, and finding few men bold enough openly\nto contradict them, ran in complete harmony with the general mythical\nfaith, and tended to strengthen it in all its various ramifications.\nThe renewed activity of the god or hero both brought to mind and\naccredited the pre\u00ebxisting mythes connected with his name. When Boreas,\nduring the invasion of Greece by Xerx\u00eas, and in compliance with the\nfervent prayers of the Athenians, had sent forth a providential storm,\nto the irreparable damage of the Persian armada,[1025] the sceptical\nminority (alluded to by Plato), who doubted the mythe of Boreas and\nOreithyia, and his close connection thus acquired with Erechtheus,\nand the Erechtheids generally, must for the time have been reduced to\nabsolute silence.\n\n  [1020] The Centauromachia and the Amazonomachia are constantly\n  associated together in the ancient Grecian reliefs (see\n  the Expedition Scientifique de Mor\u00e9e, t. ii. p. 16, in the\n  explanation of the temple of Apollo Epikureius at Phigaleia).\n\n  [1021] Pausan. ii. 29, 6.\n\n  [1022] Ernst Curtius, Die Akropolis von Athen, Berlin, 1844, p.\n  18. Arnobius adv. Gentes, vi. p. 203, ed. Elmenhorst.\n\n  [1023] See the case of the \u00c6gin\u00eatans lending the \u00c6akids for a\n  time to the Thebans (Herodot. v. 80), who soon, however, returned\n  them: likewise sending the \u00c6akids to the battle of Salamis (viii.\n  64-80). The Spartans, when they decreed that only one of their\n  two kings should be out on military service, decreed at the same\n  time that only one of the Tyndarids should go out with them\n  (v. 75): they once lent the Tyndarids as aids to the envoys of\n  Epizephyrian Locri, who prepared for them a couch on board their\n  ship (Diod\u00f4r. Excerpt. xvi. p. 15, Dindorf). The Thebans grant\n  their hero Melanippus to Kleisthen\u00eas of Siky\u00f4n (v. 68). What was\n  sent, must probably have been a consecrated copy of the genuine\n  statue.\n\n  Respecting the solemnities practised towards the statues, see\n  Plutarch, Alkibiad. 34; Kallimach. Hymn. ad Lavacr. Palladis,\n  init. with the note of Spanheim; K. O. M\u00fcller, Arch\u00e6ologie der\n  Kunst, \u00a7 69; compare Plutarch, Qu\u00e6stion. Romaic. \u00a7 61. p. 279;\n  and Tacit. Mor. Germ. c. 40; Diod\u00f4r. xvii. 49.\n\n  The manner in which the real presence of a hero was identified\n  with his statue (\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b8\u03b5\u1f78\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c3\u03ce\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u03c1\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\u2014Menander, Fragm. \u1f29\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2, p. 71, Meineke),\n  consecrated ground, and oracle, is nowhere more powerfully\n  attested than in the Hero\u00efca of Philostratus (capp. 2-20.\n  pp. 674-692; also De Vit Apoll\u00f4n. Tyan. iv. 11), respecting\n  Pr\u00f4tesilaus at El\u00e6us, Ajax at the Aianteium, and Hect\u00f4r at\n  Ilium: Pr\u00f4tesilaus appeared exactly in the equipment of his\n  statue,\u2014\u03c7\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03cd\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0398\u03b5\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n  \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f04\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf (p. 674). The presence and sympathy of the hero\n  Lykus is essential to the satisfaction of the Athenian dikasts\n  (Aristophan. Vesp. 389-820): the fragment of Lucilius, quoted by\n  Lactantius, De Fals\u00e2 Religione (i. 22), is curious.\u2014\u03a4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f25\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\n  \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd ~\u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2~ (Lycurgus cont.\n  Leocrat. c. 1).\n\n  [1024] Plutarch, Timoleon, c. 12; Strabo, vi. p. 264.\n  Theophrastus treats the perspiration as a natural ph\u00e6nomenon in\n  the statues made of cedar-wood (Histor. Plant. v. 10). Plutarch\n  discusses the credibility of this sort of miracles in his Life of\n  Coriolanus, c. 37-38.\n\n  [1025] Herodot. vii. 189. Compare the gratitude of the\n  Megalopolitans to Boreas for having preserved them from the\n  attack of the Laced\u00e6monian king Agis (Pausan. viii. 27, 4.\u2014viii.\n  36, 4). When the Ten Thousand Greeks were on their retreat\n  through the cold mountains of Armenia, Boreas blew in their\n  faces, \u201cparching and freezing intolerably.\u201d One of the prophets\n  recommended that a sacrifice should be offered to him, which was\n  done, \u201cand the painful effect of the wind appeared to every one\n  forthwith to cease in a marked manner;\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c2\n  \u1f14\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b5 \u03bb\u1fc6\u03be\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\u2014Xenoph. Anab. iv. 5, 3.)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII.\n\nTHE GRECIAN MYTHICAL VEIN COMPARED WITH THAT OF MODERN EUROPE.\n\n\nI have already remarked that the existence of that popular narrative\ntalk, which the Germans express by the significant word _Sage_\nor _Volks-Sage_, in a greater or less degree of perfection or\ndevelopment, is a ph\u00e6nomenon common to almost all stages of society\nand to almost all quarters of the globe. It is the natural effusion\nof the unlettered, imaginative, and believing man, and its maximum\nof influence belongs to an early state of the human mind; for the\nmultiplication of recorded facts, the diffusion of positive science,\nand the formation of a critical standard of belief, tend to discredit\nits dignity and to repress its easy and abundant flow. It supplies to\nthe poet both materials to recombine and adorn, and a basis as well\nas a stimulus for further inventions of his own; and this at a time\nwhen the poet is religious teacher, historian, and philosopher, all in\none,\u2014not, as he becomes at a more advanced period, the mere purveyor of\navowed, though interesting, fiction.\n\nSuch popular stories, and such historical songs (meaning by historical,\nsimply that which is accepted as history) are found in most quarters\nof the globe, and especially among the Teutonic and Celtic populations\nof early Europe. The old Gothic songs were cast into a continuous\nhistory by the historian Ablavius;[1026] and the poems of the Germans\nrespecting Tuisto the earth-born god, his son Mannus, and his\ndescendants the eponyms of the various German tribes,[1027] as they\nare briefly described by Tacitus, remind us of Hesiod, or Eum\u00ealus, or\nthe Homeric Hymns. Jacob Grimm, in his learned and valuable Deutsche\nMythologie, has exhibited copious evidence of the great fundamental\nanalogy, along with many special differences, between the German,\nScandinavian, and Grecian mythical world; and the Dissertation of\nMr. Price (prefixed to his edition of Warton\u2019s History of English\nPoetry) sustains and illustrates Grimm\u2019s view. The same personifying\nimagination\u2014the same ever-present conception of the will, sympathies,\nand antipathies of the gods as the producing causes of ph\u00e6nomena,\nand as distinguished from a course of nature with its invariable\nsequence\u2014the same relations between gods, heroes, and men, with the\nlike difficulty of discriminating the one from the other in many\nindividual names\u2014a similar wholesale transfer of human attributes to\nthe gods, with the absence of human limits and liabilities\u2014a like\nbelief in Nymphs, Giants, and other beings, neither gods nor men\u2014the\nsame coalescence of the religious with the patriotic feeling and\nfaith\u2014these are positive features common to the early Greeks with\nthe early Germans: and the negative conditions of the two are not\nless analogous\u2014the absence of prose writing, positive records, and\nscientific culture. The preliminary basis and encouragements for the\nmythop\u0153ic faculty were thus extremely similar.\n\n  [1026] Jornandes, De Reb. Geticis, capp. 4-6.\n\n  [1027] Tacit. Mor. German. c. 2. \u201cCelebrant carminibus antiquis,\n  quod unum apud eos memori\u00e6 et annalium genus est, Tuistonem Deum\n  terr\u00e2 editum, et filium Mannum, originem gentis conditoresque.\n  Quidam licenti\u00e2 vetustatis, plures Deo ortos, pluresque gentis\n  appellationes, Marsos, Gambrivios, Suevos, Vandaliosque\n  affirmant: eaque vera et antiqua nomina.\u201d\n\nBut though the prolific forces were the same in kind, the results were\nvery different in degree, and the developing circumstances were more\ndifferent still.\n\nFirst, the abundance, the beauty, and the long continuance of early\nGrecian poetry, in the purely poetical age, is a ph\u00e6nomenon which has\nno parallel elsewhere.\n\nSecondly, the transition of the Greek mind from its poetical to its\ncomparatively positive state was self-operated, accomplished by its\nown inherent and expansive force\u2014aided indeed, but by no means either\nimpressed or provoked, from without. From the poetry of Homer, to\nthe history of Thucydid\u00eas and the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle,\nwas a prodigious step, but it was the native growth of the Hellenic\nyouth into an Hellenic man; and what is of still greater moment, it\nwas brought about without breaking the thread either of religious\nor patriotic tradition\u2014without any coercive innovation or violent\nchange in the mental feelings. The legendary world, though the ethical\njudgments and rational criticisms of superior men had outgrown\nit, still retained its hold upon their feelings as an object of\naffectionate and reverential retrospect.\n\nFar different from this was the development of the early Germans. We\nknow little about their early poetry, but we shall run no risk of\nerror in affirming that they had nothing to compare with either Iliad\nor Odyssey. Whether, if left to themselves, they would have possessed\nsufficient progressive power to make a step similar to that of the\nGreeks, is a question which we cannot answer. Their condition, mental\nas well as political, was violently changed by a foreign action from\nwithout. The influence of the Roman empire introduced artificially\namong them new institutions, new opinions, habits, and luxuries, and,\nabove all, a new religion; the Romanized Germans becoming themselves\nsuccessively the instruments of this revolution with regard to such of\ntheir brethren as still remained heathen. It was a revolution often\nbrought about by penal and coercive means: the old gods Thor and Woden\nwere formally deposed and renounced, their images were crumbled into\ndust, and the sacred oaks of worship and prophecy hewn down. But even\nwhere conversion was the fruit of preaching and persuasion, it did not\nthe less break up all the associations of a German with respect to\nthat mythical world which he called his past, and of which the ancient\ngods constituted both the charm and the sanctity: he had now only the\nalternative of treating them either as men or as d\u00e6mons.[1028] That\nmixed religious and patriotic retrospect, formed by the coalescence\nof piety with ancestral feeling, which constituted the appropriate\nsentiment both of Greeks and of Germans towards their unrecorded\nantiquity, was among the latter banished by Christianity: and while\nthe root of the old mythes was thus cankered, the commemorative\nceremonies and customs with which they were connected, either lost\ntheir consecrated character or disappeared altogether. Moreover, new\ninfluences of great importance were at the same time brought to bear.\nThe Latin language, together with some tinge of Latin literature\u2014the\nhabit of writing and of recording present events\u2014the idea of a\nsystematic law and pacific adjudication of disputes,\u2014all these formed\na part of the general working of Roman civilization, even after the\ndecline of the Roman empire, upon the Teutonic and Celtic tribes. A\nclass of specially-educated men was formed, upon a Latin basis and upon\nChristian principles, consisting too almost entirely of priests, who\nwere opposed, as well by motives of rivalry as by religious feeling,\nto the ancient bards and storytellers of the community: the \u201clettered\nmen\u201d[1029] were constituted apart from \u201cthe men of story,\u201d and Latin\nliterature contributed along with religion to sink the mythes of\nuntaught heathenism. Charlemagne, indeed, at the same time that he\nemployed aggressive and violent proceedings to introduce Christianity\namong the Saxons, also took special care to commit to writing and\npreserve the old heathen songs. But there can be little doubt that\nthis step was the suggestion of a large and enlightened understanding\npeculiar to himself. The disposition general among lettered Christians\nof that age is more accurately represented by his son Louis le\nDebonnaire, who, having learned these songs as a boy, came to abhor\nthem when he arrived at mature years, and could never be induced either\nto repeat or tolerate them.[1030]\n\n  [1028] On the hostile influence exercised by the change of\n  religion on the old Scandinavian poetry, see an interesting\n  article of Jacob Grimm in the G\u00f6ttingen Gelehrte Anzeigen, Feb.\n  1830, pp. 268-273; a review of Olaf Tryggvson\u2019s Saga. The article\n  _Helden_, in his Deutsche Mythologie, is also full of instruction\n  on the same subject: see also the Einleitung to the book, p. 11,\n  2nd edition.\n\n  A similar observation has been made with respect to the old\n  mythes of the pagan Russians by Eichhoff: \u201cL\u2019\u00e9tablissement du\n  Christianisme, ce gage du bonheur des nations, fut vivement\n  appr\u00e9ci\u00e9 par les Russes, qui dans leur juste reconnaissance, le\n  personnifi\u00e8rent dans un h\u00e9ros. Vladimir le Grand, ami des arts,\n  protecteur de la religion qu\u2019il prot\u00e9gea, et dont les fruits\n  firent oublier les fautes, devint l\u2019Arthus et le Charlemagne de\n  la Russie, et ses hauts faits furent un mythe national qui domina\n  tous ceux du paganisme. Autour de lui se group\u00e8rent ces guerriers\n  aux formes athl\u00e9tiques, au c\u0153ur g\u00e9n\u00e9reux, dont la po\u00e9sie aime \u00e0\n  entourer le berceau myst\u00e9rieux des peuples: et les exploits du\n  vaillant Dobrinia, de Rogdai, d\u2019Ilia, de Curilo, anim\u00e8rent les\n  ballades nationales, et vivent encore dans de na\u00effs r\u00e9cits.\u201d\n  (Eichhoff, Histoire de la Langue et Litt\u00e9rature des Slaves,\n  Paris, 1839, part iii. ch. 2. p. 190.)\n\n  [1029] This distinction is curiously brought to view by Saxo\n  Grammaticus, where he says of an Englishman named Lucas, that\n  he was \u201cliteris quidem tenuiter instructus, sed historiarum\n  scienti\u00e2 apprime eruditus\u201d (p. 330, apud Dahlmann\u2019s Historische\n  Forschungen, vol. i. p. 176).\n\n  [1030] \u201cBarbara et antiquissima carmina (says Eginhart, in\n  his Life of Charlemagne), quibus veterum regum actus et bella\n  canebantur, conscripsit.\u201d\n\n  Theganus says of Louis le Debonnaire, \u201cPoetica carmina gentilia,\n  qu\u00e6 in juventute didicerat, respuit, nec legere, nec audire, nec\n  docere, voluit.\u201d (De Gestis Ludovici Imperatoris ap. Pith\u0153um, p.\n  304, c. xix.)\n\nAccording to the old heathen faith, the pedigree of the Saxon, Anglian,\nDanish, Norwegian, and Swedish kings,\u2014probably also those of the German\nand Scandinavian kings generally,\u2014was traced to Odin, or to some of\nhis immediate companions or heroic sons.[1031] I have already observed\nthat the value of these genealogies consisted not so much in their\nlength, as in the reverence attached to the name serving as primitive\nsource. After the worship attached to Odin had been extinguished, the\ngenealogical line was lengthened up to Japhet or Noah,\u2014and Odin, no\nlonger accounted worthy to stand at the top, was degraded into one of\nthe simple human members of it.[1032] And we find this alteration of\nthe original mythical genealogies to have taken place even among the\nScandinavians, although the introduction of Christianity was in those\nparts both longer deferred, so as to leave time for a more ample\ndevelopment of the heathen poetical vein\u2014and seems to have created a\nless decided feeling of antipathy (especially in Iceland) towards the\nextinct faith.[1033] The poems and tales composing the Edda, though\nfirst committed to writing after the period of Christianity, do not\npresent the ancient gods in a point of view intentionally odious or\ndegrading.\n\n  [1031] See Grimm\u2019s Deutsche Mythologie, art. _Helden_, p. 356,\n  2nd edit. Hengist and Horsa were fourth in descent from Odin\n  (Venerable Bede, Hist. i. 15). Thiodolff, the Scald of Harold\n  Haarfager king of Norway, traced the pedigree of his sovereign\n  through thirty generations to Yngarfrey, the son of Niord,\n  companion of Odin at Upsal; the kings of Upsal were called\n  Ynglinger, and the song of Thiodolff, Ynglingatal (Dahlmann,\n  Histor. Forschung. i. p. 379). Eyvind, another Scald, a century\n  afterwards, deduced the pedigree of Jarl Hacon from Saming,\n  son of Yngwifrey (p. 381). Are Frode, the Icelandic historian,\n  carried up his own genealogy through thirty-six generations to\n  Yngwe; a genealogy which Torf\u00e6us accepts as trustworthy, opposing\n  it to the line of kings given by Saxo Grammaticus (p. 352).\n  Torf\u00e6us makes Harold Haarfager a descendant from Odin through\n  twenty-seven generations; Alfred of England through twenty-three\n  generations; Offa of Mercia through fifteen (p. 362). See also\n  the translation by Lange of P. A. M\u00fcller\u2019s Saga Bibliothek,\n  Introd. p. xxviii. and the genealogical tables prefixed to Snorro\n  Sturleson\u2019s Edda.\n\n  Mr. Sharon Turner conceives the human existence of Odin to\n  be distinctly proved, seemingly upon the same evidence as\n  Eu\u00eamerus believed in the human existence of Zeus (History of the\n  Anglo-Saxons, Appendix to b. ii. ch. 3. p. 219, 5th edit.).\n\n  [1032] Dahlmann, Histor. Forschung. t. i. p. 220. There is\n  a valuable article on this subject in the Zeitschrift f\u00fcr\n  Geschichts Wissenschaft (Berlin, vol. i. pp. 237-282) by Stuhr,\n  \u201c\u00dcber einige Hauptfragen des Nordischen Alterthums,\u201d wherein\n  the writer illustrates both the strong motive and the effective\n  tendency, on the part of the Christian clergy who had to deal\n  with these newly-converted Teutonic pagans, to Eu\u00eamerize the old\n  gods, and to represent a genealogy, which they were unable to\n  efface from men\u2019s minds, as if it consisted only of mere men.\n\n  Mr. John Kemble (\u00dcber die Stammtafel der Westsachsen, ap. Stuhr,\n  p. 254) remarks, that \u201cnobilitas,\u201d among that people, consisted\n  in descent from Odin and the other gods.\n\n  Colonel Sleeman also deals in the same manner with the religious\n  legends of the Hindoos,\u2014so natural is the proceeding of Eu\u00eamerus,\n  towards any religion in which a critic does not believe:\u2014\n\n  \u201cThey (the Hindoos) of course think that the incarnation of\n  their three great divinities were beings infinitely superior to\n  prophets, being in all their attributes and prerogatives equal\n  to the divinities themselves. _But we are disposed to think that\n  these incarnations were nothing more than great men whom their\n  flatterers and poets have exalted into gods,\u2014this was the way\n  in which men made their gods in ancient Greece and Egypt._\u2014All\n  that the poets have sung of the actions of these men is now\n  received as revelation from heaven: though nothing can be more\n  monstrous than the actions ascribed to the best incarnation,\n  Krishna, of the best of the gods, Vishnoo.\u201d (Sleeman, Rambles and\n  Recollections of an Indian Official, vol. i. ch. viii. 61.)\n\n  [1033] See P. E. M\u00fcller, \u00dcber den Ursprung und Verfall der\n  Isl\u00e4ndischen Historiographie, p. 63.\n\n  In the Leitfaden zur Nordischen Alterthumskunde, pp. 4-5\n  (Copenhagen, 1837), is an instructive summary of the different\n  schemes of interpretation applied to the northern mythes: 1, the\n  historical; 2, the geographical; 3, the astronomical; 4, the\n  physical; 5, the allegorical.\n\nThe transposition above alluded to, of the genealogical root from Odin\nto Noah, is the more worthy of notice, as it illustrates the genuine\ncharacter of these genealogies, and shows that they sprung, not from\nany erroneous historical data, but from the turn of the religious\nfeeling; also that their true value is derived from their being taken\nentire, as connecting the existing race of men with a divine original.\nIf we could imagine that Grecian paganism had been superseded by\nChristianity in the year 500 B. C., the great and venerated gentile\ngenealogies of Greece would have undergone the like modification; the\nHerakleids, Pelopids, \u00c6akids, Askl\u00eapiads, etc., would have been merged\nin some larger aggregate branching out from the arch\u00e6ology of the Old\nTestament. The old heroic legends connected with these ancestral names\nwould either have been forgotten, or so transformed as to suit the new\nvein of thought; for the altered worship, ceremonies, and customs would\nhave been altogether at variance with them, and the mythical feeling\nwould have ceased to dwell upon those to whom prayers were no longer\noffered. If the oak of D\u00f4d\u00f4na had been cut down, or the The\u00f4ric ship\nhad ceased to be sent from Athens to D\u00ealos, the mythes of Theseus and\nof the two black doves would have lost their pertinence, and died away.\nAs it was, the change from Homer to Thucydid\u00eas and Aristotle took place\ninternally, gradually, and imperceptibly. Philosophy and history were\nsuperinduced in the minds of the superior few, but the feelings of\nthe general public continued unshaken\u2014the sacred objects remained the\nsame both to the eye and to the heart\u2014and the worship of the ancient\ngods was even adorned by new architects and sculptors who greatly\nstrengthened its imposing effect.\n\nWhile then in Greece the mythop\u0153ic stream continued in the same course,\nonly with abated current and influence, in modern Europe its ancient\nbed was blocked up, and it was turned into new and divided channels.\nThe old religion\u2014though as an ascendent faith, unanimously and publicly\nmanifested, it became extinct\u2014still continued in detached scraps and\nfragments, and under various alterations of name and form. The heathen\ngods and goddesses, deprived as they were of divinity, did not pass\nout of the recollection and fears of their former worshippers, but\nwere sometimes represented (on principles like those of Eu\u00eamerus) as\nhaving been eminent and glorious men\u2014sometimes degraded into d\u00e6mons,\nmagicians, elfs, fairies, and other supernatural agents, of an inferior\ngrade and generally mischievous cast. Christian writers, such as Saxo\nGrammaticus and Snorro Sturleson, committed to writing the ancient oral\nsongs of the Scandinavian Scalds, and digested the events contained\nin them into continuous narrative\u2014performing in this respect a task\nsimilar to that of the Grecian logographers Pherekyd\u00eas and Hellanikus,\nin reference to Hesiod and the Cyclic poets. But while Pherekyd\u00eas and\nHellanikus compiled under the influence of feelings substantially\nthe same as those of the poets on whom they bestowed their care,\nthe Christian logographers felt it their duty to point out the Odin\nand Thor of the old Scalds as evil d\u00e6mons, or cunning enchanters,\nwho had fascinated the minds of men into a false belief in their\ndivinity.[1034] In some cases, the heathen recitals and ideas were\nmodified so as to suit Christian feeling. But when preserved without\nsuch a change, they exhibited themselves palpably, and were designated\nby their compilers, as at variance with the religious belief of the\npeople, and as associated either with imposture or with evil spirits.\n\n  [1034] \u201cInterea tamen homines Christiani in numina non credant\n  ethnica, nec aliter fidem narrationibus hisce adstruere vel\n  adhibere debent, quam in libri hujus pro\u0153mio monitum est de\n  causis et occasionibus cur et quomodo genus humanum a ver\u00e2 fide\n  aberraverit.\u201d (Extract from the Prose Edda, p. 75, in the Lexicon\n  Mythologicum ad calcem Edd\u00e6 S\u00e6mund. vol. iii. p. 357, Copenhag.\n  edit.)\n\n  A similar warning is to be found in another passage cited by\n  P. E. M\u00fcller, \u00dcber den Ursprung und Verfall der Isl\u00e4ndischen\n  Historiographie, p. 138, Copenhagen, 1813; compare the Prologue\n  to the Prose Edda, p. 6, and Mallet, Introduction \u00e0 l\u2019Histoire de\n  Dannemarc, ch. vii. pp. 114-132.\n\n  Saxo Grammaticus represents Odin sometimes as a magician,\n  sometimes as an evil d\u00e6mon, sometimes as a high priest or pontiff\n  of heathenism, who imposed so powerfully upon the people around\n  him as to receive divine honors. Thor also is treated as having\n  been an evil d\u00e6mon. (See Lexicon Mythologic. ut supra, pp. 567,\n  915.)\n\n  Respecting the function of Snorro as logographer, see Pr\u00e6fat.\n  ad Eddam, ut supra, p. xi. He is much more faithful, and less\n  unfriendly to the old religion, than the other logographers\n  of the ancient Scandinavian Sagas. (Leitfaden der Nordischen\n  Alterth\u00fcmer, p. 14, by the Antiquarian Society of Copenhagen,\n  1837.)\n\n  By a singular transformation, dependent upon the same tone\n  of mind, the authors of the French Chansons de Geste, in the\n  twelfth century, turned Apollo into an evil d\u00e6mon, patron of the\n  Mussulmans (see the Roman of Garin le Loherain, par M. Paulin\n  Paris, 1833, p. 31): \u201cCar mieux vaut Dieux que ne fait Apollis.\u201d\n  M. Paris observes, \u201cCet ancien Dieu des beaux arts est l\u2019un des\n  d\u00e9mons le plus souvent d\u00e9sign\u00e9s dans nos po\u00ebmes, comme patron des\n  Musulmans.\u201d\n\n  The prophet Mahomet, too, anathematized the old Persian epic\n  anterior to his religion. \u201cC\u2019est \u00e0 l\u2019occasion de Naser Ibn\n  al-Hareth, qui avait apport\u00e9 de Perse l\u2019Histoire de Rustem et\n  d\u2019Isfendiar, et la faisait r\u00e9citer par des chanteuses dans\n  les assembl\u00e9es des Koreischites, que Mahomet pronon\u00e7a le vers\n  suivant (of the Koran): Il y a des hommes qui ach\u00e8tent des contes\n  frivoles, pour d\u00e9tourner par-l\u00e0 les hommes de la voie de Dieu,\n  d\u2019une mani\u00e8re insens\u00e9e, et pour la livrer \u00e0 la ris\u00e9e: mais leur\n  punition les couvrira de honte.\u201d (Mohl, Pr\u00e9face au Livre des Rois\n  de Ferdousi, p. xiii.)\n\nA new vein of sentiment had arisen in Europe, unsuitable indeed to\nthe old mythes, yet leaving still in force the demand for mythical\nnarrative generally. And this demand was satisfied, speaking generally,\nby two classes of narratives,\u2014the legends of the Catholic Saints and\nthe Romances of Chivalry, corresponding to two types of character, both\nperfectly accommodated to the feelings of the time,\u2014the saintly ideal\nand the chivalrous ideal.\n\nBoth these two classes of narrative correspond, in character as well\nas in general purpose, to the Grecian mythes\u2014being stories accepted\nas realities, from their full conformity with the predispositions and\ndeep-seated faith of an uncritical audience, and prepared beforehand by\ntheir authors, not with any reference to the conditions of historical\nproof, but for the purpose of calling forth sympathy, emotion, or\nreverence. The type of the saintly character belongs to Christianity,\nbeing the history of Jesus Christ as described in the gospels, and\nthat of the prophets in the Old Testament; whilst the lives of holy\nmen, who acquired a religious reputation from the fourth to the\nfourteenth century of the Christian \u00e6ra, were invested with attributes,\nand illustrated with ample details, tending to assimilate them to\nthis revered model. The numerous miracles, the cure of diseases, the\nexpulsion of d\u00e6mons, the temptations and sufferings, the teachings\nand commands, with which the biography of Catholic saints abounds,\ngrew chiefly out of this pious feeling, common to the writer and\nto his readers. Many of the other incidents, recounted in the same\nperformances, take their rise from misinterpreted allegories, from\nceremonies and customs of which it was pleasing to find a consecrated\norigin, or from the disposition to convert the etymology of a name\ninto matter of history: many have also been suggested by local\npeculiarities, and by the desire of stimulating or justifying the\ndevotional emotions of pilgrims who visited some consecrated chapel or\nimage. The dove was connected, in the faith of the age, with the Holy\nGhost, the serpent with Satan; lions, wolves, stags, unicorns, etc.\nwere the subjects of other emblematic associations; and such modes of\nbelief found expression for themselves in many narratives which brought\nthe saints into conflict or conjoint action with these various animals.\nLegends of this kind, so indefinitely multiplied and so pre\u00ebminently\npopular and affecting, in the Middle Ages, are not exaggerations of\nparticular matters of fact, but emanations in detail of some current\nfaith or feeling, which they served to satisfy, and by which they were\nin turn amply sustained and accredited.[1035]\n\n  [1035] The legends of the Saints have been touched upon by M.\n  Guizot (Cours d\u2019Histoire Moderne, le\u00e7on xvii.) and by M. Amp\u00e8re\n  (Histoire Litt\u00e9raire de la France, t. ii. cap. 14, 15, 16); but\n  a far more copious and elaborate account of them, coupled with\n  much just criticism, is to be found in the valuable Essai sur les\n  L\u00e9gendes Pieuses du Moyen Age, par L. F. Alfred Maury, Paris,\n  1843.\n\n  M. Guizot scarcely adverts at all to the more or less of\n  matter of fact contained in these biographies: he regards them\n  altogether as they grew out of and answered to the predominant\n  emotions and mental exigences of the age: \u201cAu milieu d\u2019un d\u00e9luge\n  de fables absurdes, la morale \u00e9clate avec un grand empire\u201d (p.\n  159, ed. 1829). \u201cLes l\u00e9gendes ont \u00e9t\u00e9 pour les Chr\u00e9tiens de ce\n  temps (qu\u2019on me permette cette comparaison purement litt\u00e9raire)\n  ce que sont pour les Orientaux ces longs r\u00e9cits, ces histoires\n  si brillantes et si vari\u00e9es, dont les Mille et une Nuits nous\n  donnent un \u00e9chantillon. C\u2019\u00e9tait l\u00e0 que l\u2019imagination populaire\n  errait librement dans un monde inconnu, merveilleux, plein de\n  mouvement et de po\u00e9sie\u201d (p. 175, _ibid._).\n\n  M. Guizot takes his comparison with the tales of the Arabian\n  Nights, as heard by an Oriental with uninquiring and unsuspicious\n  credence. Viewed with reference to an instructed European, who\n  reads these narratives as pleasing but recognized fiction, the\n  comparison would not be just; for no one in that age dreamed of\n  questioning the truth of the biographies. All the remarks of M.\n  Guizot assume this implicit faith in them as literal histories:\n  perhaps, in estimating the feelings to which they owed their\n  extraordinary popularity, he allows too little predominance to\n  the religious feeling, and too much influence to other mental\n  exigences which then went along with it; more especially as he\n  remarks, in the preceding lecture (p. 116), \u201cLe caract\u00e8re g\u00e9n\u00e9ral\n  de l\u2019\u00e9poque est la concentration du d\u00e9veloppement intellectuel\n  dans la sph\u00e8re religieuse.\u201d\n\n  How this absorbing religious sentiment operated in generating\n  and accrediting new matter of narrative, is shown with great\n  fulness of detail in the work of M. Maury: \u201cTous les \u00e9crits\n  du moyen \u00e2ge nous apportent la preuve de cette pr\u00e9occupation\n  exclusive des esprits vers l\u2019Histoire Sainte et les prodiges qui\n  avaient signal\u00e9 l\u2019av\u00e8nement du Christianisme. Tous nous montrent\n  la pens\u00e9e de Dieu et du Ciel, dominant les moindres \u0153uvres de\n  cette \u00e9poque de na\u00efve et de cr\u00e9dule simplicit\u00e9. D\u2019ailleurs,\n  n\u2019\u00e9tait-ce pas le moine, le clerc, qui constituaient alors les\n  seuls \u00e9crivains? Qu\u2019y a-t-il d\u2019\u00e9tonnant que le sujet habituel de\n  leurs m\u00e9ditations, de leurs \u00e9tudes, se refl\u00e9t\u00e2t sans cesse dans\n  leurs ouvrages? Partout reparaissait \u00e0 l\u2019imagination J\u00e9sus et ses\n  Saints: cette image, l\u2019esprit l\u2019accueillait avec soumission et\n  ob\u00e9issance: il n\u2019osait pas encore envisager ces c\u00e9lestes pens\u00e9es\n  avec l\u2019\u0153il de la critique, arm\u00e9 de d\u00e9fiance et de doute; au\n  contraire, l\u2019intelligence les acceptait toutes indistinctement\n  et s\u2019en nourrissait avec avidit\u00e9. Ainsi s\u2019accr\u00e9ditaient tous\n  les jours de nouvelles fables. _Une foi vive veut sans cesse de\n  nouveaux faits qu\u2019elle puisse croire_, comme la charit\u00e9 veut de\n  nouveaux bienfaits pour s\u2019exercer\u201d (p. 43). The remarks on the\n  History of St. Christopher, whose personality was allegorized by\n  Luther and Melancthon, are curious (p. 57).\n\nEvery reader of Pausanias will recognize the great general analogy\nbetween the stories recounted to him at the temples which he visited,\nand these legends of the Middle Ages. Though the type of character\nwhich the latter illustrate is indeed materially different, yet the\nsource as well as the circulation, the generating as well as the\nsustaining forces, were in both cases the same. Such legends were\nthe natural growth of a religious faith, earnest, unexamining, and\ninterwoven with the feelings at a time when the reason does not need\nto be cheated. The lives of the Saints bring us even back to the\nsimple and ever-operative theology of the Homeric age; so constantly\nis the hand of God exhibited even in the minutest details, for the\nsuccor of a favored individual,\u2014so completely is the scientific\npoint of view, respecting the ph\u00e6nomena of nature, absorbed into the\nreligious.[1036] During the intellectual vigor of Greece and Rome,\na sense of the invariable course of nature and of the scientific\nexplanation of ph\u00e6nomena had been created among the superior minds, and\nthrough them indirectly among the remaining community; thus limiting\nto a certain extent the ground open to be occupied by a religious\nlegend. With the decline of the pagan literature and philosophy, before\nthe sixth century of the Christian \u00e6ra, this scientific conception\ngradually passed out of sight, and left the mind free to a religious\ninterpretation of nature not less simple and _na\u00eff_ than that which\nhad prevailed under the Homeric paganism.[1037] The great religious\nmovement of the Reformation, and the gradual formation, of critical\nand philosophical habits in the modern mind, have caused these legends\nof the Saints,\u2014once the charm and cherished creed of a numerous\npublic,[1038] to pass altogether out of credit, without even being\nregarded, among Protestants at least, as worthy of a formal scrutiny\ninto the evidence,\u2014a proof of the transitory value of public belief,\nhowever sincere and fervent, as a certificate of historical truth, if\nit be blended with religious predispositions.\n\n  [1036] \u201cDans les prodiges que l\u2019on admettait avoir d\u00fb\n  n\u00e9cessairement s\u2019op\u00e9rer au tombeau du saint nouvellement\n  canonis\u00e9, l\u2019expression, \u2018C\u00e6ci visum, claudi gressum, muti\n  loquelam, surdi auditum, paralytici debitum membrorum officium,\n  recuperabant,\u2019 \u00e9tait devenue pl\u00fbtot une formule d\u2019usage que la\n  r\u00e9lation litt\u00e9rale du fait.\u201d (Maury, Essai sur les L\u00e9gendes\n  Pieuses du Moyen Age, p. 5.)\n\n  To the same purpose M. Amp\u00e8re, ch. 14. p. 361: \u201cIl y a un certain\n  nombre de faits que l\u2019agiographie reproduit constamment, quelque\n  soit son h\u00e9ros: ordinairement ce personnage a eu dans sa jeunesse\n  une vision qui lui a r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9 son avenir: ou bien, une proph\u00e9tie\n  lui a annonc\u00e9 ce qu\u2019il serait un jour. Plus tard, il op\u00e8re un\n  certain nombre de miracles, toujours les m\u00eames; il exorcise des\n  poss\u00e9d\u00e9s, ressuscite des morts, il est averti de sa fin par un\n  songe. Puis sur son tombeau s\u2019accomplissent d\u2019autres merveilles\n  \u00e0-peu-pr\u00e8s semblables.\u201d\n\n  [1037] A few words from M. Amp\u00e8re to illustrate this: \u201cC\u2019est\n  donc au sixi\u00e8me si\u00e8cle que la l\u00e9gende se constitue: c\u2019est alors\n  qu\u2019elle prend compl\u00e8tement le caract\u00e8re na\u00eff qui lui appartient:\n  qu\u2019elle est elle-m\u00eame, qu\u2019elle se s\u00e9pare de toute influence\n  \u00e9trang\u00e8re. En m\u00eame temps, l\u2019ignorance devient de plus en plus\n  grossi\u00e8re, et par suite la cr\u00e9dulit\u00e9 s\u2019accroit: les calamit\u00e9s du\n  temps sont plus lourdes, et l\u2019on a un plus grand besoin de rem\u00e8de\n  et de consolation.... Les r\u00e9cits miraculeux se substituent aux\n  argumens de la th\u00e9ologie. Les miracles sont devenus la meilleure\n  d\u00e9monstration du Christianisme: c\u2019est la seule que puissent\n  comprendre les esprits grossiers des barbares\u201d (c. 15. p. 373).\n\n  Again, c. 17. p. 401: \u201cUn des caract\u00e8res de la l\u00e9gende est de\n  m\u00ealer constamment le pu\u00e9ril au grand: il faut l\u2019avouer, elle\n  d\u00e9figure parfois un peu ces hommes d\u2019une trempe si forte, en\n  mettant sur leur compte des anecdotes dont le caract\u00e8re n\u2019est pas\n  toujours s\u00e9rieux; elle en a us\u00e9 ainsi pour St. Columban, dont\n  nous verrons tout \u00e0 l\u2019heure le r\u00f4le vis-\u00e0-vis de Brunehaut et des\n  chefs M\u00e9rovingiens. La l\u00e9gende auroit pu se dispenser de nous\n  apprendre, comment un jour, il se fit rapporter par un corbeau\n  les gants qu\u2019il avait perdus: comment, un autre jour, il emp\u00eacha\n  la bi\u00e8re de couler d\u2019un tonneau perc\u00e9, et diverses merveilles,\n  certainement indignes de sa m\u00e9moire.\u201d\n\n  The miracle by which St. Columban employed the raven to fetch\n  back his lost gloves, is exactly in the character of the Homeric\n  and Hesiodic age: the earnest faith, as well as the reverential\n  sympathy, between the Homeric man and Zeus or Ath\u00ean\u00ea, is\n  indicated by the invocation of their aid for his own sufferings\n  of detail, and in his own need and danger. The criticism of\n  M. Amp\u00e8re, on the other hand, is analogous to that of the\n  later pagans, after the conception of a course of nature had\n  become established in men\u2019s minds, so far as that exceptional\n  interference by the gods was understood to be, comparatively\n  speaking, rare, and only supposable upon what were called great\n  emergences.\n\n  In the old Hesiodic legend (see above, ch. ix. p. 245), Apollo\n  is apprized by a raven of the infidelity of the nymph Kor\u00f4nis\n  to him\u2014\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u1fbd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5 \u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03be, etc. (the raven appears\n  elsewhere as companion of Apollo, Plutarch, de Isid. et Os.\n  p. 379, Herod. iv. 5.) Pindar, in his version of the legend,\n  eliminated the raven, without specifying _how_ Apollo got his\n  knowledge of the circumstance. The Scholiasts praise Pindar much\n  for having rejected the puerile version of the story\u2014\u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\n  \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03a0\u03af\u03bd\u03b4\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41 \u1f08\u03c1\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\n  \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u1f31\u03b1\u03bd, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1fbd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9 ... \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n  \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u1f10\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03bc\u03cd\u03b8\u1ff3 ~\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03ce\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9~, etc.\u2014compare\n  also the criticisms of the Schol. ad Soph. \u0152dip. Kol. 1378, on\n  the old epic Theba\u00efs; and the remarks of Arrian (Exp. Al. iii. 4)\n  on the divine interference by which Alexander and his army were\n  enabled to find their way across the sand of the desert to the\n  temple of Ammon.\n\n  In the eyes of M. Amp\u00e8re, the recital of the biographer of\n  St. Columban appears puerile (\u03bf\u1f54\u03c0\u03c9 \u1f34\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f67\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\n  \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, Odyss. iii. 221); in the eyes of that biographer,\n  the criticism of M. Amp\u00e8re would have appeared impious. When\n  it is once conceded that ph\u00e6nomena are distributable under two\n  denominations, the natural and the miraculous, it must be left to\n  the feelings of each individual to determine what is and what is\n  not, a suitable occasion for a miracle. Diod\u00f4rus and Pausanias\n  differed in opinion (as stated in a previous chapter) about the\n  death of Act\u00e6\u00f4n by his own hounds,\u2014the former maintaining that\n  the case was one fit for the special intervention of the goddess\n  Artemis; the latter, that it was not so. The question is one\n  determinable only by the religious feelings and conscience of the\n  two dissentients: no common standard of judgment can be imposed\n  upon them; for no reasonings derived from science or philosophy\n  are available, inasmuch as in this case the very point in dispute\n  is, whether the scientific point of view be admissible. Those\n  who are disposed to adopt the supernatural belief, will find\n  in every case the language open to them wherewith Dionysius of\n  Halicarnassus (in recounting a miracle wrought by Vesta, in\n  the early times of Roman history, for the purpose of rescuing\n  an unjustly accused virgin) reproves the sceptics of his time:\n  \u201cIt is well worth while (he observes) to recount the special\n  manifestation (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd) which the goddess showed to these\n  unjustly accused virgins. For these circumstances, extraordinary\n  as they are, have been held worthy of belief by the Romans, and\n  historians have talked much about them. Those persons, indeed,\n  who adopt the atheistical schemes of philosophy (if, indeed, we\n  must call them _philosophy_), pulling in pieces as they do _all_\n  the special manifestations (\u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n  \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd) of the gods which have taken place among Greeks or\n  barbarians, will of course turn _these_ stories also into\n  ridicule, ascribing them to the vain talk of men, as if none of\n  the gods cared at all for mankind. But those who, having pushed\n  their researches farther, believe the gods not to be indifferent\n  to human affairs, but favorable to good men and hostile to\n  bad\u2014will not treat _these_ special manifestations as _more_\n  incredible than others.\u201d (Dionys. Halic. ii. 68-69.) Plutarch,\n  after noticing the great number of miraculous statements in\n  circulation, expresses his anxiety to draw a line between the\n  true and the false, but cannot find where: \u201cexcess, both of\n  credulity and of incredulity (he tells us) in such matters is\n  dangerous; caution, and nothing too much, is the best course.\u201d\n  (Camillus, c. 6.) Polybius is for granting permission to\n  historians to recount a sufficient number of miracles to keep up\n  a feeling of piety in the multitude, but not more: to measure\n  out the proper quantity (he observes) is difficult, but not\n  impossible (\u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f21 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03cc\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5,\n  xvi. 12).\n\n  [1038] The great Bollandist collection of the Lives of the\n  Saints, intended to comprise the whole year, did not extend\n  beyond the nine months from January to October, which occupy\n  fifty-three large volumes. The month of April fills three of\n  those volumes, and exhibits the lives of 1472 saints. Had the\n  collection run over the entire year, the total number of such\n  biographies could hardly have been less than 25,000, and might\n  have been even greater (see Guizot, Cours d\u2019Histoire Moderne,\n  le\u00e7on xvii. p. 157).\n\nThe same mythop\u0153ic vein, and the same susceptibility and facility of\nbelief, which had created both supply and demand for the legends of the\nSaints, also provided the abundant stock of romantic narrative poetry,\nin amplification and illustration of the chivalrous ideal. What the\nlegends of Troy, of Th\u00eabes, of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar, of \u0152dipus, Th\u00easeus,\netc. were to an early Greek, the tales of Arthur, of Charlemagne,\nof the Niebelungen, were to an Englishman, or Frenchman, or German,\nof the twelfth or thirteenth century. They were neither recognized\nfiction nor authenticated history: they were history, as it is felt and\nwelcomed by minds unaccustomed to investigate evidence, and unconscious\nof the necessity of doing so. That the Chronicle of Turpin, a mere\ncompilation of poetical legends respecting Charlemagne, was accepted\nas genuine history, and even pronounced to be such by papal authority,\nis well known; and the authors of the Romances announce themselves,\nnot less than those of the old Grecian epic, as being about to recount\nreal matter of fact.[1039] It is certain that Charlemagne is a great\nhistorical name, and it is possible, though not certain, that the\nname of Arthur may be historical also. But the Charlemagne of history,\nand the Charlemagne of romance, have little except the name in common\nnor could we ever determine, except by independent evidence (which in\nthis case we happen to possess), whether Charlemagne was a real or a\nfictitious person.[1040] That illustrious name, as well as the more\nproblematical Arthur, is taken up by the romancers, not with a view to\ncelebrate realities previously verified, but for the purpose of setting\nforth or amplifying an ideal of their own, in such manner as both to\nrouse the feelings and captivate the faith of their hearers.\n\n  [1039] See Warton\u2019s History of English Poetry, vol. i. dissert.\n  i. p. xvii. Again, in sect. iii. p. 140: \u201cVincent de Beauvais,\n  who lived under Louis IX. of France (about 1260), and who, on\n  account of his extraordinary erudition, was appointed preceptor\n  to that king\u2019s sons, very gravely classes Archbishop Turpin\u2019s\n  Charlemagne among the real histories, and places it on a level\n  with Suetonius and C\u00e6sar. He was himself an historian, and has\n  left a large history of the world, fraught with a variety of\n  reading, and of high repute in the Middle Ages; but edifying and\n  entertaining as this work might have been to his contemporaries,\n  at present it serves only to record their prejudices and to\n  characterize their credulity.\u201d About the full belief in Arthur\n  and the Tales of the Round Table during the fourteenth century,\n  and about the strange historical mistakes of the poet Gower in\n  the fifteenth, see the same work, sect. 7. vol. ii. p. 33; sect.\n  19. vol. ii. p. 239.\n\n  \u201cL\u2019auteur de la Chronique de Turpin (says M. Sismondi,\n  Litt\u00e9rature du Midi, vol. i. ch. 7. p. 289) n\u2019avait point\n  l\u2019intention de briller aux yeux du public par une invention\n  heureuse, ni d\u2019amuser les oisifs par des contes merveilleux\n  qu\u2019ils reconnoitroient pour tels: il pr\u00e9sentait aux Fran\u00e7ais\n  tous ces faits \u00e9tranges comme de l\u2019histoire, et la lecture des\n  l\u00e9gendes fabuleuses avait accoutum\u00e9 \u00e0 croire \u00e0 de plus grandes\n  merveilles encore; aussi plusieurs de ces fables furent-elles\n  reproduites dans la Chronique de St. Denis.\u201d\n\n  Again, _ib._ p. 290: \u201cSouvent les anciens romanciers, lorsqu\u2019ils\n  entreprennent un r\u00e9cit de la cour de Charlemagne, prennent un ton\n  plus \u00e9lev\u00e9: ce ne sont point des fables qu\u2019ils vont conter, c\u2019est\n  de l\u2019histoire nationale,\u2014c\u2019est la gloire de leurs anc\u00eatres qu\u2019ils\n  veulent c\u00e9l\u00e9brer, et ils ont droit alors \u00e0 demander qu\u2019on les\n  \u00e9coute avec respect.\u201d\n\n  The Chronicle of Turpin was inserted, even so late as the year\n  1566, in the collection printed by Scardius at Frankfort of\n  early German historians (Ginguen\u00e9, Histoire Litt\u00e9raire d\u2019Italie,\n  vol. iv. part ii. ch. 3. p. 157).\n\n  To the same point\u2014that these romances were listened to as real\n  stories\u2014see Sir Walter Scott\u2019s Preface to Sir Tristram, p. lxvii.\n  The authors of the Legends of the Saints are not less explicit in\n  their assertions that everything which they recount is true and\n  well-attested (Amp\u00e8re, c. 14. p. 358).\n\n  [1040] The series of articles by M. Fauriel, published in the\n  Revue des Deux Mondes, vol. xiii. are full of instruction\n  respecting the origin, tenor, and influence of the Romances of\n  Chivalry. Though the name of Charlemagne appears, the romancers\n  are really unable to distinguish him from Charles Martel or\n  from Charles the Bald (pp. 537-539). They ascribe to him an\n  expedition to the Holy Land, in which he conquered Jerusalem from\n  the Saracens, obtained possession of the relics of the passion\n  of Christ, the crown of thorns, etc. These precious relics he\n  carried to Rome, from whence they were taken to Spain by a\n  Saracen emir, named Balan, at the head of an army. The expedition\n  of Charlemagne against the Saracens in Spain was undertaken for\n  the purpose of recovering the relics: \u201cCes divers romans peuvent\n  \u00eatre regard\u00e9s comme la suite, comme le d\u00e9veloppement, de la\n  fiction de la conqu\u00eate de J\u00e9rusalem par Charlemagne.\u201d\n\n  Respecting the Romance of Rinaldo of Montauban (describing the\n  struggles of a feudal lord against the emperor) M. Fauriel\n  observes, \u201cIl n\u2019y a, je crois, aucun fondement historique: c\u2019est\n  selon toute apparence, la pure expression po\u00e9tique du fait\n  g\u00e9n\u00e9ral,\u201d etc. (p. 542.)\n\nTo inquire which of the personages of the Carlovingian epic were real\nand which were fictitious,\u2014to examine whether the expedition ascribed\nto Charlemagne against Jerusalem had ever taken place or not,\u2014to\nseparate truth from exaggeration in the exploits of the Knights of the\nRound Table,\u2014these were problems which an audience of that day had\nneither disposition to undertake nor means to resolve. They accepted\nthe narrative as they heard it, without suspicion or reserve; the\nincidents related, as well as the connecting links between them, were\nin full harmony with their feelings, and gratifying as well to their\nsympathies as to their curiosity: nor was anything farther wanting to\ninduce them to believe it, though the historical basis might be ever so\nslight or even non-existent.[1041]\n\n  [1041] Among the \u201cformules consacr\u00e9es\u201d (observes M. Fauriel)\n  of the romancers of the Carlovingian epic, are asseverations\n  of their own veracity, and of the accuracy of what they are\n  about to relate\u2014specification of witnesses whom they have\n  consulted\u2014appeals to pretended chronicles: \u201cQue ces citations,\n  ces indications, soient parfois s\u00e9rieuses et sinc\u00e8res, cela peut\n  \u00eatre; mais c\u2019est une exception et une exception rare. De telles\n  all\u00e9gations de la part des romanciers, sont en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral un pur et\n  simple mensonge, mais non toutefois un mensonge gratuit. C\u2019est\n  un mensonge qui a sa raison et sa convenance: il tient au d\u00e9sir\n  et au besoin de satisfaire une opinion accoutum\u00e9e \u00e0 supposer\n  et \u00e0 chercher du vrai dans les fictions du genre de celles o\u00f9\n  l\u2019on all\u00e8gue ces pr\u00e9tendues autorit\u00e9s. La mani\u00e8re dont les\n  auteurs de ces fictions les qualifient souvent eux-m\u00eames, est\n  une cons\u00e9quence naturelle de leur pr\u00e9tention d\u2019y avoir suivi des\n  documens v\u00e9n\u00e9rables. Ils les qualifient de chansons de _vieille\n  histoire_, de _haute histoire_, de _bonne geste_, de _grande\n  baronnie_: et ce n\u2019est pas pour se vanter qu\u2019ils parlent ainsi:\n  la vanit\u00e9 d\u2019auteur n\u2019est rien chez eux, en comparaison du besoin\n  qu\u2019ils ont d\u2019\u00eatre crus, de passer pour de simples traducteurs,\n  de simples r\u00e9p\u00e9titeurs de l\u00e9gendes ou d\u2019histoire consacr\u00e9e. Ces\n  protestations de v\u00e9racit\u00e9, qui, plus ou moins expresses, sont de\n  rigueur dans les romans Carlovingiens, y sont aussi fr\u00e9quemment\n  accompagn\u00e9es de protestations accessoires contre les romanciers,\n  qui, ayant d\u00e9j\u00e0 trait\u00e9 un sujet donn\u00e9, sont accus\u00e9s d\u2019y avoir\n  fauss\u00e9 la v\u00e9rit\u00e9.\u201d (Fauriel, Orig. de l\u2019Epop\u00e9e Chevaleresque, in\n  the Revue des Deux Mondes, vol. xiii. p. 554.)\n\n  About the Cycle of the Round Table, see the same series of\n  articles (Rev. D. M. t. xiv. pp. 170-184). The Chevaliers of the\n  Saint Graal were a sort of _id\u00e9al_ of the Knights Templars: \u201cUne\n  race de princes h\u00e9ro\u00efques, originaires de l\u2019Asie, fut pr\u00e9destin\u00e9e\n  par le ciel m\u00eame \u00e0 la garde du Saint Graal. Perille fut le\n  premier de cette race, qui s\u2019\u00e9tant converti au Christianisme,\n  passa en Europe sous l\u2019Empereur Vespasien,\u201d etc.; then follows\n  a string of fabulous incidents: the epical agency is similar to\n  that of Homer\u2014\u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u1f10\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae.\n\n  M. Paulin Paris, in his Prefaces to the Romans des Douze Pairs\n  de France, has controverted many of the positions of M. Fauriel,\n  and with success, so far as regards the Proven\u00e7al origin of\n  the Chansons de Geste, asserted by the latter. In regard to\n  the Romances of the Round Table, he agrees substantially with\n  M. Fauriel; but he tries to assign a greater historical value\n  to the poems of the Carlovingian epic,\u2014very unsuccessfully, in\n  my opinion. But his own analysis of the old poem of Garin de\n  Loherain bears out the very opinion which he is confuting: \u201cNous\n  sommes au r\u00e8gne de Charles Martel, et nous reconnaissons sous\n  d\u2019autres noms les d\u00e9tails exacts de la fameuse d\u00e9faite d\u2019Attila\n  dans les champs Catalauniques. Saint Loup et Saint Nicaise,\n  glorieux pr\u00e9lats du quatri\u00e8me si\u00e8cle, reviennent figurer autour\n  du p\u00e8re de P\u00e9pin le Bref: enfin pour compl\u00e9ter la confusion,\n  Charles Martel meurt sur le champ de bataille, \u00e0 la place du roi\n  des Visigoths, Theodoric.... _Toutes les parties de la narration\n  sont vraies_: seulement _toutes s\u2019y trouvent d\u00e9plac\u00e9es_. En\n  g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, les peuples n\u2019entendent rien \u00e0 la chronologie: les\n  ev\u00e8nemens restent: les individus, les lieux et les \u00e9poques, ne\n  laissent aucune trace: c\u2019est pour ainsi dire, une d\u00e9coration\n  sc\u00e9nique que l\u2019on applique indiff\u00e9remment \u00e0 des r\u00e9cits souvent\n  contraires.\u201d (Preface to the Roman de Garin le Loherain, pp.\n  xvi.-xx.: Paris, 1833.) Compare also his Lettre \u00e0 M. Monmerqu\u00e9,\n  prefixed to the Roman de Berthe aux Grans Pi\u00e9s, Paris, 1836.\n\n  To say that _all_ the parts of the narrative are true, is\n  contrary to M. Paris\u2019s own showing: _some_ parts may be true,\n  separately taken, but these fragments of truth are melted down\n  with a large mass of fiction, and cannot be discriminated unless\n  we possess some independent test. The poet who picks out one\n  incident from the fourth century, another from the fifth, and\n  a few more from the eighth, and then blends them all into a\n  continuous tale along with many additions of his own, shows that\n  he takes the items of fact because they suit the purposes of his\n  narrative, not because they happen to be attested by historical\n  evidence. His hearers are not critical: they desire to have their\n  imaginations and feelings affected, and they are content to\n  accept without question whatever accomplishes this end.\n\nThe romances of chivalry represented, to those who heard them, real\ndeeds of the foretime\u2014\u201cglories of the foregone men,\u201d to use the\nHesiodic expression[1042]\u2014at the same time that they embodied and\nfilled up the details of an heroic ideal, such as that age could\nconceive and admire\u2014a fervent piety, combined with strength, bravery,\nand the love of adventurous aggression, directed sometimes against\ninfidels, sometimes against enchanters or monsters, sometimes in\ndefence of the fair sex. Such characteristics wore naturally popular,\nin a century of feudal struggles and universal insecurity, when the\ngrand subjects of common respect and interest were the Church and\nthe Crusades, and when the latter especially were embraced with an\nenthusiasm truly astonishing.\n\n  [1042] Hesiod, Theogon. 100\u2014\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd. Puttenham\n  talks of the remnant of bards existing in his time (1589): \u201cBlind\n  Harpers, or such like Taverne Minstrels, whose matters are for\n  the most part _stories of old time_, as the Tale of Sir Topaze,\n  the Reportes of Bevis of Southampton, Adam Bell, Clymme of the\n  Clough, and such other old Romances or _Historical Rhymes_.\u201d\n  (Arte of English Poesie, book ii. cap. 9.)\n\nThe long German poem of the Niebelungen Lied, as well as the Volsunga\nSaga and a portion of the songs of the Edda, relate to a common\nfund of mythical, superhuman personages, and of fabulous adventure,\nidentified with the earliest antiquity of the Teutonic and Scandinavian\nrace, and representing their primitive sentiment towards ancestors\nof divine origin. Sigurd, Brynhilde, Gudrun, and Atle, are mythical\ncharacters celebrated as well by the Scandinavian Scalds as by the\nGerman epic poets, but with many varieties and separate additions to\ndistinguish the one from the other. The German epic, later and more\nelaborated, includes various persons not known to the songs in the\nEdda, in particular the prominent name of Dieterich of Bern\u2014presenting,\nmoreover, the principal characters and circumstances as Christian,\nwhile in the Edda there is no trace of anything but heathenism. There\nis, indeed, in this the old and heathen version, a remarkable analogy\nwith many points of Grecian mythical narrative. As in the case of the\nshort life of Achilles, and of the miserable Labdakids of Th\u00eabes\u2014so\nin the family of the Volsungs, though sprung from and protected by\nthe gods\u2014a curse of destiny hangs upon them and brings on their ruin,\nin spite of pre\u00ebminent personal qualities.[1043] The more thoroughly\nthis old Teutonic story has been traced and compared, in its various\ntransformations and accompaniments, the less can any well-established\nconnection be made out for it with authentic historical names or\nevents. We must acquiesce in its personages as distinct in original\nconception from common humanity, and as belonging to the subjective\nmythical world of the race by whom they were sung.\n\n  [1043] Respecting the Volsunga Saga and the Niebelungen Lied,\n  the work of Lange\u2014Untersuchungen \u00fcber die Geschichte und das\n  Verh\u00e4ltniss der Nordischen und Deutschen Heldensage\u2014is a valuable\n  translation from the Danish Saga-Bibliothek of P. E. M\u00fcller.\n\n  P. E. M\u00fcller maintains, indeed, the historical basis of the tales\n  respecting the Volsungs (see pp. 102-107)\u2014upon arguments very\n  unsatisfactory; though the genuine Scandinavian origin of the\n  tale is perfectly made out. The chapter added by Lange himself,\n  at the close (see p. 432, etc.), contains juster views as to the\n  character of the primitive mythology, though he too advances\n  some positions respecting a something \u201creinsymbolisches\u201d in the\n  background, which I find it difficult to follow (see p. 477,\n  etc.).\u2014There are very ancient epical ballads still sung by the\n  people in the Faro Islands, many of them relating to Sigurd and\n  his adventures (p. 412).\n\n  Jacob Grimm, in his Deutsche Mythologie, maintains the purely\n  mythical character, as opposed to the historical, of Siegfried\n  and Dieterich (Art. _Helden_, pp. 344-346).\n\n  So, too, in the great Persian epic of Ferdousi, the principal\n  characters are religious and mythical. M. Mohl observes,\u2014\u201cLes\n  caract\u00e8res des personnages principaux de l\u2019ancienne histoire de\n  Perse se retrouvent dans le livre des Rois (de Ferdousi) tels\n  que les indiquent les parties des livres de Zoroaster que nous\n  poss\u00e9dons encore. Kaioumors, Djemschid, Feridoun, Gushtasp,\n  Isfendiar, etc. jouent dans le po\u00e8me \u00e9pique le m\u00eame r\u00f4le que dans\n  les Livres sacr\u00e9s: \u00e0 cela pr\u00e8s, que dans les derniers ils nous\n  apparaissent \u00e0 travers une atmosphere mythologique qui grandit\n  tous leurs traits: mais cette difference est pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment celle\n  qu\u2019on devait s\u2019attendre \u00e0 trouver entre la tradition religieuse\n  et la tradition \u00e9pique.\u201d (Mohl, Livre des Rois par Ferdousi,\n  Preface, p. 1.)\n\n  The Persian historians subsequent to Ferdousi have all taken\n  his poem as the basis of their histories, and have even copied\n  him faithfully and literally (Mohl, p. 53). Many of his heroes\n  became the subjects of long epical biographies, written and\n  recited without any art or grace, often by writers whose names\n  are unknown (_ib._ pp. 54-70). Mr. Morier tells us that \u201cthe\n  Shah Nameh is still believed by the present Persians to contain\n  their ancient history\u201d (Adventures of Hadgi Baba, c. 32). As\n  the Christian romancers transformed Apollo into the patron of\n  Mussulmans, so Ferdousi makes Alexander the Great a Christian:\n  \u201cLa critique historique (observes M. Mohl) \u00e9tait du temps de\n  Ferdousi chose presqu\u2019inconnue.\u201d (_ib._ p. xlviii.) About the\n  absence not only of all historiography, but also of all idea of\n  it, or taste for it among the early Indians, Persians, Arabians,\n  etc., see the learned book of Nork, _Die G\u00f6tter Syriens_,\n  Preface, p. viii. _seqq._ (Stuttgart, 1842.)\n\nSuch were the compositions which not only interested the emotions,\nbut also satisfied the undistinguishing historical curiosity, of the\nordinary public in the middle ages. The exploits of many of these\nromantic heroes resemble in several points those of the Grecian: the\nadventures of Perseus, Achilles, Odysseus, Atalanta, Belleroph\u00f4n,\nJas\u00f4n, and the Trojan war, or Argonautic expedition generally, would\nhave fitted in perfectly to the Carlovingian or other epics of the\nperiod.[1044] That of the middle ages, like the Grecian, was eminently\nexpansive in its nature: new stories were successively attached to the\nnames and companions of Charlemagne and Arthur, just as the legend\nof Troy was enlarged by Arktinus, Lesch\u00eas, and Stesichorus,\u2014that of\nTh\u00eabes, by fresh miseries entailed on the fated head of \u0152dipus,\u2014and\nthat of the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar, by the addition of Atalanta. Altogether,\nthe state of mind of the hearers seems in both cases to have been much\nthe same,\u2014eager for emotion and sympathy, and receiving any narrative\nattuned to their feelings, not merely with hearty welcome, but also\nwith unsuspecting belief.\n\n  [1044] Several of the heroes of the ancient world were indeed\n  themselves popular subjects with the romancers of the middle\n  ages, Th\u00easeus, Jas\u00f4n, etc.; Alexander the Great, more so than any\n  of them.\n\n  Dr. Warton observes, respecting the Argonautic expedition,\n  \u201cFew stories of antiquity have more the cast of one of the old\n  romances than this of Jas\u00f4n. An expedition of a new kind is\n  made into a strange and distant country, attended with infinite\n  dangers and difficulties. The king\u2019s daughter of the new country\n  is an enchantress; she falls in love with the young prince, who\n  is the chief adventurer. The prize which he seeks is guarded by\n  brazen-footed bulls, who breathe fire, and by a hideous dragon,\n  who never sleeps. The princess lends him the assistance of her\n  charms and incantations to conquer these obstacles; she gives him\n  possession of the prize, leaves her father\u2019s court, and follows\n  him into his native country.\u201d (Warton, Observations on Spenser,\n  vol. i. p. 178.)\n\n  To the same purpose M. Ginguen\u00e9: \u201cLe premier mod\u00e8le des F\u00e9es\n  n\u2019est-il pas dans Circ\u00e9, dans Calypso, dans M\u00e9d\u00e9e? Celui des\n  g\u00e9ans, dans Polyph\u00e8me, dans Cacus, et dans les g\u00e9ans, ou les\n  Titans, cette race ennemie de Jupiter? Les serpens et les\n  dragons des romans ne sont-ils pas des successeurs du dragon\n  des Hesperides et de celui de la Toison d\u2019or? Les Magiciens! la\n  Thessalie en \u00e9toit pleine. Les armes enchant\u00e9es imp\u00e9n\u00e9trables!\n  elles sont de la m\u00eame trempe, et l\u2019on peut les croire forg\u00e9es\n  au m\u00eame fourneau que celles d\u2019Achille et d\u2019En\u00e9e.\u201d (Ginguen\u00e9,\n  Histoire Litt\u00e9raire d\u2019Italie, vol. iv. part ii. ch. 3, p. 151.)\n\nNevertheless, there were distinctions deserving of notice, which render\nthe foregoing proposition more absolutely exact with regard to Greece\nthan with regard to the middle ages. The tales of the epic, and the\nmythes in their most popular and extended signification, were the only\nintellectual nourishment with which the Grecian public was supplied,\nuntil the sixth century before the Christian \u00e6ra: there was no prose\nwriting, no history, no philosophy. But such was not exactly the\ncase at the time when the epic of the middle ages appeared. At that\ntime, a portion of society possessed the Latin language, the habit of\nwriting, and some tinge both of history and philosophy: there were a\nseries of chronicles, scanty, indeed, and imperfect, but referring\nto contemporary events and preventing the real history of the past\nfrom passing into oblivion: there were even individual scholars, in\nthe twelfth century, whose acquaintance with Latin literature was\nsufficiently considerable to enlarge their minds and to improve their\njudgments. Moreover, the epic of the middle ages, though deeply imbued\nwith religious ideas, was not directly amalgamated with the religion\nof the people, and did not always find favor with the clergy; while\nthe heroes of the Grecian epic were not only linked in a thousand ways\nwith existing worship, practices, and sacred localities, but Homer and\nHesiod pass with Herodotus for the constructors of Grecian theology. We\nthus see that the ancient epic was both exempt from certain distracting\ninfluences by which that of the middle ages was surrounded, and more\nclosely identified with the veins of thought and feeling prevalent in\nthe Grecian public. Yet these counteracting influences did not prevent\nPope Calixtus II. from declaring the Chronicle of Turpin to be a\ngenuine history.\n\nIf we take the history of our own country as it was conceived and\nwritten from the twelfth to the seventeenth century by Hardyng,\nFabyan, Grafton, Hollinshed, and others, we shall find that it was\nsupposed to begin with Brute the Trojan, and was carried down from\nthence, for many ages and through a long succession of kings, to the\ntimes of Julius C\u00e6sar. A similar belief of descent from Troy, arising\nseemingly from a reverential imitation of the Romans and of their\nTrojan origin, was cherished in the fancy of other European nations.\nWith regard to the English, the chief circulator of it was Geoffrey\nof Monmouth, and it passed with little resistance or dispute into\nthe national faith\u2014the kings from Brute downward being enrolled in\nregular chronological series with their respective dates annexed. In\na dispute which took place during the reign of Edward I. (A. D. 1301)\nbetween England and Scotland, the descent of the kings of England\nfrom Brute the Trojan was solemnly embodied in a document put forth\nto sustain the rights of the crown of England, as an argument bearing\non the case then in discussion: and it passed without attack from the\nopposing party,[1045]\u2014an incident which reminds us of the appeal\nmade by \u00c6schin\u00eas, in the contention between the Athenians and Philip\nof Maced\u00f4n, respecting Amphipolis, to the primitive dotal rights of\nAkamas son of Th\u00easeus\u2014and also of the defence urged by the Athenians\nto sustain their conquest of Sigeium, against the reclamations of the\nMitylen\u00e6ans, therein the former alleged that they had as much right\nto the place as any of the other Greeks who had formed part of the\nvictorious armament of Agamemn\u00f4n.[1046]\n\n  [1045] See Warton\u2019s History of English Poetry, sect. iii. p. 131,\n  note. \u201cNo man before the sixteenth century presumed to doubt\n  that the Francs derived their origin from Francus son of Hector;\n  that the Spaniards were descended from Japhet, the Britons from\n  Brutus, and the Scotch from Fergus.\u201d (_Ibid._ p. 140.)\n\n  According to the Prologue of the prose Edda, Odin was the\n  supreme king of Troy in Asia, \u201cin e\u00e2 terr\u00e2 quam nos Turciam\n  appellamus.... Hinc omnes Borealis plag\u00e6 magnates vel primores\n  genealogias suas referunt, atque principes illius urbis inter\n  numina locant: sed in primis ipsum Priamum pro Odeno ponunt,\u201d\n  etc. They also identified _Tros_ with _Thor_. (See Lexicon\n  Mythologicum ad calcem Edd\u00e6 S\u00e6mund, p. 552. vol. iii.)\n\n  [1046] See above, ch. xv. p. 458; also \u00c6schin\u00eas, De Fals\u00e2\n  Legatione, c. 14, Herodot. v. 94. The Herakleids pretended a\n  right to the territory in Sicily near Mount Eryx, in consequence\n  of the victory gained by their progenitor H\u00earakl\u00eas over Eryx, the\n  eponymous hero of the place. (Herodot. v. 43.)\n\nThe tenacity with which this early series of British kings was\ndefended, is no less remarkable than the facility with which it was\nadmitted. The chroniclers at the beginning of the seventeenth century\nwarmly protested against the intrusive scepticism which would cashier\nso many venerable sovereigns and efface so many noble deeds. They\nappealed to the patriotic feelings of their hearers, represented the\nenormity of thus setting up a presumptuous criticism against the belief\nof ages, and insisted on the danger of the precedent as regarded\nhistory generally.[1047] How this controversy stood, at the time and\nin the view of the illustrious author of Paradise Lost, I shall give\nin his own words, as they appear in the second page of his History of\nEngland. After having briefly touched upon the stories of Samothes son\nof Japhet, Albion son of Neptune, etc., he proceeds:\u2014\n\n  [1047] The remarks in Speed\u2019s Chronicle (book v. c. 3. sect.\n  11-12), and the preface to Howes\u2019s Continuation of Stow\u2019s\n  Chronicle, published in 1631, are curious as illustrating this\n  earnest feeling. The Chancellor Fortescue, in impressing upon\n  his royal pupil, the son of Henry VI., the limited character of\n  English monarchy, deduces it from Brute the Trojan: \u201cConcerning\n  the different powers which kings claim over their subjects, I am\n  firmly of opinion that it arises solely from the different nature\n  of their original institution. So the kingdom of England had its\n  original from Brute and the Trojans, who attended him from Italy\n  and Greece, and became a mixed kind of government, compounded of\n  the regal and the political.\u201d (Hallam, Hist. Mid. Ages, ch. viii.\n  P. 3, page 230.)\n\n\u201cBut now of Brutus and his line, with the whole progeny of kings to the\nentrance of Julius C\u00e6sar, we cannot so easily be discharged: descents\nof ancestry long continued, laws and exploits not plainly seeming to\nbe borrowed or devised, which on the common belief have wrought no\nsmall impression: _defended by many, denied utterly by few_. For what\nthough Brutus and the whole Trojan pretence were yielded up, seeing\nthey, who first devised to bring us some noble ancestor, were content\nat first with Brutus the Consul, till better invention, though not\nwilling to forego the name, taught them to remove it higher into a more\nfabulous age, and by the same remove lighting on the Trojan tales, in\naffectation to make the Briton of one original with the Roman, pitched\nthere: _Yet those old and inborn kings, never any to have been real\npersons, or done in their lives at least some part of what so long hath\nbeen remembered, cannot be thought without too strict incredulity._\nFor these, and those causes above mentioned, that which hath received\napprobation from so many, I have chosen not to omit. Certain or\nuncertain, be that upon the credit of those whom I must follow: _so far\nas keeps aloof from impossible or absurd_, attested by ancient writers\nfrom books more ancient, I refuse not, as the due and proper subject of\nstory.\u201d[1048]\n\n  [1048] \u201cAntiquitas enim recepit fabulas fictas etiam nonnunquam\n  incondite: h\u00e6c \u00e6tas autem jam exculta, pr\u00e6sertim eludens omne\n  quod fieri non potest, respuit,\u201d etc. (Cicero, De Republic\u00e2, ii.\n  10, p. 147, ed. Maii.)\n\nYet in spite of the general belief of so many centuries\u2014in spite of\nthe concurrent persuasion of historians and poets\u2014in spite of the\ndeclaration of Milton, extorted from his feelings rather than from his\nreason, that this long line of quasi-historical kings and exploits\ncould not be _all_ unworthy of belief\u2014in spite of so large a body of\nauthority and precedent, the historians of the nineteenth century begin\nthe history of England with Julius C\u00e6sar. They do not attempt either to\nsettle the date of king Bladud\u2019s accession, or to determine what may\nbe the basis of truth in the affecting narrative of Lear.[1049] The\nstandard of historical credibility, especially with regard to modern\nevents, has indeed been greatly and sensibly raised within the last\nhundred years.\n\n  [1049] Dr. Zachary Grey has the following observations in his\n  Notes on Shakspeare (London, 1754, vol. i. p. 112). In commenting\n  on the passage in King Lear, _Nero is an angler in the lake of\n  darkness_, he says, \u201cThis is one of Shakspeare\u2019s most remarkable\n  _anachronisms_. King Lear succeeded his father Bladud anno mundi\n  3105; and Nero, anno mundi 4017, was sixteen years old, when he\n  married Octavia, C\u00e6sar\u2019s daughter. See Funcii Chronologia, p. 94.\u201d\n\n  Such a supposed chronological discrepancy would hardly be pointed\n  out in any commentary now written.\n\n  The introduction prefixed by Mr. Giles, to his recent translation\n  of Geoffrey of Monmouth (1842), gives a just view both of the\n  use which our old poets made of his tales, and of the general\n  credence so long and so unsuspectingly accorded to them. The\n  list of old British kings given by Mr. Giles also deserves\n  attention, as a parallel to the Grecian genealogies anterior to\n  the Olympiads.\n\nBut in regard to ancient Grecian history, the rules of evidence still\ncontinue relaxed. The dictum of Milton, regarding the ante-C\u00e6sarian\nhistory of England, still represents pretty exactly the feeling now\nprevalent respecting the mythical history of Greece: \u201cYet those old\nand inborn kings (Agamemn\u00f4n, Achilles, Odysseus, Jas\u00f4n, Adrastus,\nAmphiar\u00e4us, Meleager, etc.), never any to have been real persons,\nor done in their lives at least some part of what so long hath been\nremembered, cannot be thought without too strict incredulity.\u201d Amidst\nmuch fiction (we are still told), there must be some truth: but how is\nsuch truth to be singled out? Milton does not even attempt to make the\nseverance: he contents himself with \u201ckeeping aloof from the impossible\nand the absurd,\u201d and ends in a narrative which has indeed the merit\nof being sober-colored, but which he never for a moment thinks of\nrecommending to his readers as true. So in regard to the legends of\nGreece,\u2014Troy, Th\u00eabes, the Argonauts, the Boar of Kalyd\u00f4n, H\u00earakl\u00eas,\nTh\u00easeus, \u0152dipus,\u2014the conviction still holds in men\u2019s minds, that there\nmust be something true at the bottom; and many readers of this work may\nbe displeased, I fear, not to see conjured up before them the Eid\u00f4lon\nof an authentic history, even though the vital spark of evidence be\naltogether wanting.[1050]\n\n  [1050] The following passage, from the Preface of Mr. Price\n  to Warton\u2019s History of English Poetry, is alike just and\n  forcibly characterized; the whole Preface is, indeed, full of\n  philosophical reflection on popular fables generally. Mr. Price\n  observes (p. 79):\u2014\n\n  \u201cThe great evil with which this long-contested question appears\n  to be threatened at the present day, is an extreme equally\n  dangerous with the incredulity of Mr. Ritson,\u2014a disposition to\n  receive as authentic history, under a slightly fabulous coloring,\n  every incident recorded in the British Chronicle. An allegorical\n  interpretation is now inflicted upon all the marvellous\n  circumstances; a forced construction imposed upon the less\n  glaring deviations from probability; and the usual subterfuge\n  of baffled research,\u2014erroneous readings and etymological\n  sophistry,\u2014is made to reduce every stubborn and intractable text\n  to something like the consistency required. It might have been\n  expected that the notorious failures of Dionysius and Plutarch,\n  in Roman history, would have prevented the repetition of an\n  error, which neither learning nor ingenuity can render palatable;\n  and that the havoc and deadly ruin effected by these ancient\n  writers (in other respects so valuable) in one of the most\n  beautiful and interesting monuments of traditional story, would\n  have acted as sufficient corrective on all future aspirants.\n  The favorers of this system might at least have been instructed\n  by the philosophic example of Livy,\u2014if it be lawful to ascribe\n  to philosophy a line of conduct which perhaps was prompted by\n  a powerful sense of poetic beauty,\u2014that traditional record can\n  only gain in the hands of the future historian by one attractive\n  aid,\u2014the grandeur and lofty graces of that incomparable style in\n  which the first decade is written; and that the best duty towards\n  antiquity, and the most agreeable one towards posterity, is to\n  transmit the narrative received as an unsophisticated tradition,\n  in all the plenitude of its marvels and the awful dignity of its\n  supernatural agency. For, however largely we may concede that\n  real events have supplied the substance of any traditive story,\n  yet the amount of absolute facts, and the manner of those facts,\n  the period of their occurrence, the names of the agents, and the\n  locality given to the scene, are all combined upon principles so\n  wholly beyond our knowledge, that it becomes impossible to fix\n  with certainty upon any single point better authenticated than\n  its fellow. Probability in such decisions will often prove the\n  most fallacious guide we can follow; for, independently of the\n  acknowledged historical axiom, that \u2018le vrai n\u2019est pas toujours\n  le vraisemblable,\u2019 innumerable instances might be adduced, where\n  tradition has had recourse to this very probability to confer\n  a plausible sanction upon her most fictitious and romantic\n  incidents. It will be a much more useful labor, wherever it can\n  be effected, to trace the progress of this traditional story in\n  the country where it has become located, by a reference to those\n  natural or artificial monuments which are the unvarying sources\n  of fictitious events; and, by a strict comparison of its details\n  with the analogous memorials of other nations, to separate\n  those elements which are obviously of a native growth, from the\n  occurrences bearing the impress of a foreign origin. _We shall\n  gain little, perhaps, by such a course for the history of human\n  events_; but it will be an important accession to our stock of\n  knowledge on the _history of the human mind_. It will infallibly\n  display, as in the analysis of every similar record, the\n  operations of that refining principle which is ever obliterating\n  the monotonous deeds of violence that fill the chronicle of a\n  nation\u2019s early career, and exhibit the brightest attribute in\n  the catalogue of man\u2019s intellectual endowments,\u2014a glowing and\n  vigorous imagination,\u2014bestowing upon all the impulses of the\n  mind a splendor and virtuous dignity, which, however fallacious\n  historically considered, are never without a powerfully redeeming\n  good, the ethical tendency of all their lessons.\u201d\n\nI presume to think that our great poet has proceeded upon mistaken\nviews with respect to the old British fables, not less in that which\nhe leaves out than in that which he retains. To omit the miraculous and\nthe fantastic, (it is that which he really means by \u201cthe impossible\nand the absurd,\u201d) is to suck the lifeblood out of these once popular\nnarratives,\u2014to divest them at once both of their genuine distinguishing\nmark, and the charm by which they acted on the feelings of believers.\nStill less ought we to consent to break up and disenchant in a similar\nmanner the mythes of ancient Greece,\u2014partly because they possess the\nmythical beauties and characteristics in far higher perfection, partly\nbecause they sank deeper into the mind of a Greek, and pervaded both\nthe public and private sentiment of the country to a much greater\ndegree than the British fables in England.\n\nTwo courses, and two only, are open; either to pass over the mythes\naltogether, which is the way in which modern historians treat the\nold British fables, or else to give an account of them as mythes;\nto recognize and respect their specific nature, and to abstain from\nconfounding them with ordinary and certifiable history. There are good\nreasons for pursuing this second method in reference to the Grecian\nmythes; and when so considered, they constitute an important chapter\nin the history of the Grecian mind, and indeed in that of the human\nrace generally. The historical faith of the Greeks, as well as that\nof other people, in reference to early and unrecorded times, is as\nmuch subjective and peculiar to themselves as their religious faith:\namong the Greeks, especially, the two are confounded with an intimacy\nwhich nothing less than great violence can disjoin. Gods, heroes, and\nmen\u2014religion and patriotism\u2014matters divine, heroic, and human\u2014were\nall woven together by the Greeks into one indivisible web, in which\nthe threads of truth and reality, whatever they might originally have\nbeen, were neither intended to be, nor were actually, distinguishable.\nComposed of such materials, and animated by the electric spark of\ngenius, the mythical antiquities of Greece formed a whole at once\ntrustworthy and captivating to the faith and feelings of the people;\nbut neither trustworthy nor captivating, when we sever it from these\nsubjective conditions, and expose its naked elements to the scrutiny\nof an objective criticism. Moreover, the separate portions of Grecian\nmythical foretime ought to be considered with reference to that\naggregate of which they form a part: to detach the divine from the\nheroic legends, or some one of the heroic legends from the remainder,\nas if there were an essential and generic difference between them, is\nto present the whole under an erroneous point of view. The mythes of\nTroy and Th\u00eabes are no more to be handled objectively, with a view to\ndetect an historical base, than those of Zeus in Kr\u00eate, of Apollo and\nArtemis in D\u00ealos, of Herm\u00eas, or of Prom\u00eatheus. To single out the Siege\nof Troy from the other mythes, as if it were entitled to pre\u00ebminence\nas an ascertained historical and chronological event, is a proceeding\nwhich destroys the true character and coherence of the mythical world:\nwe only transfer the story (as has been remarked in the preceding\nchapter) from a class with which it is connected by every tie both of\ncommon origin and fraternal affinity, to another with which it has\nno relationship, except such as violent and gratuitous criticism may\nenforce.\n\nBy drawing this marked distinction between the mythical and the\nhistorical world,\u2014between matter appropriate only for subjective\nhistory, and matter in which objective evidence is attainable,\u2014we\nshall only carry out to its proper length the just and well-known\nposition long ago laid down by Varro. That learned man recognized three\ndistinguishable periods in the time preceding his own age: \u201cFirst, the\ntime from the beginning of mankind down to the first deluge; a time\nwholly unknown. Secondly, the period from the first deluge down to the\nfirst Olympiad, which is called _the mythical period_, because many\nfabulous things are recounted in it. Thirdly, the time from the first\nOlympiad down to ourselves, which is called _the historical period_,\nbecause the things done in it are comprised in true histories.\u201d[1051]\n\n  [1051] Varro ap. Censorin. de Die Natali; Varronis Fragm. p. 219,\n  ed. Scaliger, 1623. \u201cVarro tria discrimina temporum esse tradit.\n  Primum ab hominum principio usque ad cataclysmum priorem, quod\n  propter ignorantiam vocatur \u1f04\u03b4\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd. Secundum, a cataclysmo priore\n  ad Olympiadem primam, quod quia in eo multa fabulosa referuntur,\n  _Mythicon_ nominatur. Tertium a prim\u00e2 Olympiade ad nos; quod\n  dicitur _Historicon_, quia res in eo gest\u00e6 veris historiis\n  continentur.\u201d\n\n  To the same purpose Africanus, ap. Eusebium, Pr\u00e6p. Ev. xx.\n  p. 487: \u039c\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f48\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c1\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n  \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c7\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n  \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, etc.\n\nTaking the commencement of true or objective history at the point\nindicated by Varro, I still consider the mythical and historical\nperiods to be separated by a wider gap than he would have admitted. To\nselect any one year as an absolute point of commencement, is of course\nnot to be understood literally: but in point of fact, this is of very\nlittle importance in reference to the present question, seeing that the\ngreat mythical events\u2014the sieges of Th\u00eabes and Troy, the Argonautic\nexpedition, the Kalyd\u00f4nian boar-hunt, the Return of the H\u00earakleids,\netc.\u2014are all placed long anterior to the first Olympiad, by those who\nhave applied chronological boundaries to the mythical narratives. The\nperiod immediately preceding the first Olympiad is one exceedingly\nbarren of events; the received chronology recognizes four hundred\nyears, and Herodotus admitted five hundred years, from that date back\nto the Trojan war.","title":"History of Greece, Volume 01 (of 12)","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":208087}