Volume 1 — GREECE BEYOND PELOPONNESUS. (continued 3)

The four or five towns of Euboea, which had formerly been separate states, had each quite a distinct history of its own; but afterwards when the Greek nations united in larger masses, they, too, like the Phocians, are mentioned as a κοινόν, and that, too, as early as the time of Flamininus; they brought about their own ruin by taking part in the unfortunate Achaean war.

Let us now pass on to the northern islands. The nearest to the Thessalian coast, to the north of Oreos, are Sciathos and Scopelos, which were no doubt Dolopian islands; but nothing particular can be said about them.

Scyros is interesting on account of the legends about the youth of Achilles, about Lycomedes and Deïdameia. Theseus, too, is said to have been buried there, and his remains were brought thence to Athens by Cimon. The island remained in the possession of the Pelasgian Dolopians, its ancient inhabitants, until the time when Cimon established an Athenian cleruchia there, that is, a number of Athenian citizens obtained each a certain amount of land, as it were by a lottery. They accordingly became landed proprietors there, but might dwell in Scyros or remain at Athens, if they pleased; in the former case, they did not form an independent state, but only a community under the laws of Athens. Such was the case at Aegina, Naxos, Samos, Melos, Lesbos, and elsewhere. This was the system adopted during the period of the supremacy and tyrannical sway of Athens, and was one of the means of enriching the multitude. Sycros, Lemnos and Imbros in particular became in this manner so completely Athenian, that those who dwelt there, though they had an independent administration, yet did not form a state, but were members of the Attic phylae, and belonged to the number of Athenian citizens. In the Peloponnesian war, the Lacedaemonians expelled the Athenian cleruchi from Scyros and other places, but after the battle of Naxos they were restored. After the peace with Philip, these islands, and especially Scyros, remained under the protection of Athens, at least they were restored to it; even when Rome decided the fate of Greece, Scyros preserved its connection with Athens, and continued to do so until the time of Augustus, and probably even much longer.

The small island of Peparethos, not far from Scyros, was celebrated for its wine.

Halonnesos owes all its importance to the fact, that it was the occasion of the beautiful speech of Demosthenes. It had been taken by the tyrant of Pherae, and the dispute was as to the terms on which it was to be restored to Athens. Otherwise both these small islands shared the fate of Scyros.

Lemnos and Imbros have both the same political history as Scyros. Lemnos, however, is much more interesting to us, on account of its volcanic nature, whence it was sacred to Hephaestus. It is essentially a volcanic island, and the ancients speak of a volcanic mountain having existed there down to the commencement of the historical period, which, however, has now been extinct for upwards of 2000 years. Volcanic productions, as terra sigillata and meerschaum, and several volcanic springs, are of frequent occurrence there. The beautiful fragments of the Philoctetes of Attius, which Hermann has collected and emended, refer to that island. It contained two towns, Hephaestia and Myrina. According to tradition, it was inhabited by Pelasgians, who are also called Tyrrhenians; they are said to have first migrated to Athens, and thence to Lemnos. There is probably no more foundation for the belief that Tyrrhenians migrated to Lemnos, than that they went to the Asiatic coast of Aeolia. Lemnos was taken by the Athenians at the time when they founded their colony in Chersonesus; it was taken from them by Antipater, but after being restored to them, they lost it again. Respecting Imbros, nothing particular need be said.

Samothrace is celebrated in the ancient legends for the worship and the mysteries of the Cabiri, whence it has been much discussed by the moderns: the unfortunate passion to solve all difficulties which cannot be solved, has also extended to Samothrace. Whether and when it received a Greek colony, is not stated by any Greek author. The remark, that it was a Samian colony, seems to have been made merely on account of its name; but it appears to have been a hellenised Pelasgo-Tyrrhenian settlement. The Samothracians had traditions going as far back as the time when the Hellespont and the Bosporus had not yet burst their chains, and when the Aegean was not yet a sea, which it became when the Pontus broke through its barriers. But these are mere speculations. The island was important as a connecting link among ancient nations, and I am convinced that it was the focus from which a great number of ancient traditions proceeded. It seems to have been a resort of pilgrims, like Mecca, or at least a place where the Pelasgians from the most different parts of the world met, and which they regarded as the real centre of their religion. It would be very interesting to know more particulars about the history of the island, but this does not justify the attempts to build castles in the air out of insufficient data.

Thasos, the northernmost of these islands, had a Parian colony, and, as Paros was inhabited by Ionians, it was an Ionian colony. Before the Greeks took possession of it, it was like Cythera, one of the many settlements of the Phoenicians, whence in Cythera the worship of Mylitta, and in Thasos that of Melkarth, continued to exist. We must conceive, that in the very earliest times the Phoenicians were established on the coasts of Greece in settlements as numerous as in the historical ages were those on the African and Spanish coasts and in Cythera. Thasos has quarries of beautiful marble, but is not suited to the growth of corn, and is not a fertile island, whence it is ill spoken of by Archilochus. But Thasian wine was much esteemed. The island had also silver mines, which had been worked even by the Phoenicians, and it possessed still richer ones on the opposite coast of Thrace.

For a time Thasos was powerful and wealthy in consequence of its mines and its commerce; and by this wealth the Thasians established their influence among the sea-faring nations. But when they were forced to submit to the Athenian supremacy, they found it difficult to live in that state of dependence, and twenty years after the Persian, and thirty years before the Peloponnesian war, they revolted, but were subdued by the Athenians. From that time Thasos began to decay.

All these maritime places, though their lands were barren, had a numerous population as long as their navigation was flourishing; but as soon as the current of commerce turned in other directions, the population decreased with extraordinary rapidity. Such was the case at Chalcis and Aegina, and also in Thasos.

The Cyclades.

It is very convenient in treating of such a multitude of islands to consider them in certain groups, which is a great assistance to the memory. It is no trifling matter to impress upon one’s mind geography in such a manner as to know it completely, and it was a happy idea to divide the southern islands of the Aegean into Cyclades and Sporades.

The Cyclades are twelve in number, and in the early times no doubt formed one confederacy, of which, however, we know no particulars. But traces of such a union occur in the Homeric hymn on Apollo. Delos was the centre. These islands, according to Thucydides, were partly inhabited by Phoenicians, but for the most part by Carians. He proves this in the case of Delos in an excellent manner by the fact, that the arms found in the newly opened tombs were Carian. However, these islands were not altogether Carian; for we find that in later times the inhabitants of Cythnos were Dryopians. This is stated by Herodotus, and the Dryopians, as we have seen, were Pelasgians. In this case, we cannot think at all of a migration; the Dryopians were a remnant of the Pelasgians.⁠[70]⁠

The names of the twelve islands, going round the circle in a north-western direction are:—Ceos, Cythnos, Seriphos, Siphnos, Paros, Naxos, Delos, Rhenea, Myconos, Syros, Tenos, and Andros. Delos was the smallest, but at the same time the most illustrious among them. The notion of the ancients was, that it formed the centre, round which the others were grouped in a circle, and that hence they were called Cyclades. But this is erroneous, for Delos rather forms the circle together with the others. In the earliest times, it was the seat of a common panegyris for the twelve islands and of ancient agones, as we see from the hymn on Apollo, of which the first part at least is so ancient that its composition may be regarded as contemporaneous with that of the Iliad and Odyssey. The dissolution of that union is one of the mysteries of ancient Greek history.

The ancient names of Delos are Asteria and Ogygia. The statement that it was at one time a floating island, is of course fabulous, but it is not improbable that it may have been raised above the sea by volcanic agency.

Wherever we meet with notices of the Cyclades in the historical times, they are at first all independent of one another; with the exception of Cythnos, all received Ionian colonists from Athens, whence we there find the relation of masters and serfs, as for example at Naxos, where Lygdamis was tyrant. Wherever we have a trace of history, we catch a glimpse, as it were in the twilight, of an oligarchical relation. After the Persian wars, the Cyclades came under the supremacy of Athens, for each by itself was too weak: even Miltiades had tried to subdue Paros and Naxos, and afterwards the plan succeeded. Naxos, which revolted, received a cleruchia. Delos was changed by the Athenians into a national sanctuary; the ancient inhabitants were expelled, and a colony was sent thither. In obedience to the command of an oracle, the Athenians dug up all the dead bodies in the island, and conveyed them to Rhenea; but even for many years previously it had not been allowed to bury any one there. Although the islands were fertile, yet they were powerless, and after the battle of Naxos, again acknowledged the supremacy of Athens. In the Macedonian period, Delos alone seems to have remained in the hands of the Athenians, and after the war of Perseus, it was given back to them by the Romans; whether the Romans had a right to do so, I know not. During the Roman period, Delos, which had formerly been venerable for religious reasons, acquired a different kind of importance: it became the place of the greatest fair in those parts, being the entrepot between Alexandria and the towns on the Euxine; it was resorted to by merchants from the most distant countries, and even by the Romans so far as they carried on their commerce from Puteoli. To Athens it was of great importance on account of its harbour dues. It was also a central point for the slave-trade, and on one occasion 10,000 slaves are said to have been sold there in one day. From this fact some modern authors have made out, that this was the number of slaves sold there every day all the year round. At a later time Delos lost this importance; the piracy of the Cilicians and Cretans seems to have inflicted on Delos a deadly blow, and in the time of Augustus and Strabo it had lost its commercial importance, trade having taken a different direction.

Paros is celebrated for its white marble, the most beautiful for purposes of sculpture: the Carrara marble which enjoys a great reputation, is of a much inferior kind, containing more lime, while the Parian is more like crystal and precious stone, nor has it the disagreeable suggary whiteness of the Carrara marble, which becomes a little yellowish only by exposure to the air. Opposite to Paros is the small island of Antiparos, remarkable for its grotto with its stalactites, the most celebrated in the world, though the ancients do not mention it. In early times, the town of Paros was one of the most enterprising, and, in a commercial point of view, one of the most important places; besides the island itself, the Parians had colonies extending far into the interior of the Adriatic, and the town of Paros there is said to have been of Parian origin; they also took part in the establishment of a colony on the Liris. Archilochus, one of the greatest poets of Greece, was a native of Paros. Some Greeks whose judgment is of great weight, placed him by the side of Homer: and legendary stories say, that the gods were so favourably disposed towards him as to order Corax, who had murdered him, to quit their sanctuary and not to return to it, until he had propitiated the shade of the poet. Paros also possesses an excellent harbour, suited even to great ships of war; but it is little noticed in ancient history. It may be said in general that those islands were rich in harbours.

Siphnos, remarkable in a mineralogical point of view, is not far distant from Paros; previous to the Persian period, it had silver mines, through which it became wealthy; but when they were exhausted, it sank into the greatest wretchedness, for it is a barren island.

The neighbouring Serīphos (not Serĭphos) is still more barren, being a mere rock; it acts a prominent part in the mythus about Perseus. The Romans in after-times banished their criminals to Seriphos and Cythnos.

Ceos, not far from Attica, was beautiful and populous; it contained four towns, of which I will mention Carthaea and Iulis. The latter was the birth-place of Bacchylides, and probably also of his uncle, the elder Simonides. The site of Carthaea has been ascertained only in modern times by Bröndstedt and Haller of Nürnberg, who caused excavations to be made there and found ruins and inscriptions. I only trust that these inscriptions may not prove to be forgeries; for a friend at Athens sent me them long before they were known in Europe, having probably been copied by some Greek; but those people are too unscrupulous about truth, and you cannot trust them. These inscriptions, however, are very important; a few only belong to the early period during which Athens was free; most of them were made in the Macedonian and Aetolian times. I have supplemented the deficiencies, and Bröndstedt has published them with my emendations and additions, without even intimating that they are only probable conjectures, and he has altered the mistakes in writing without informing his readers as to whether they occur on the stones or not. This is a violation of historical fidelity. The ancient traditions about Ceos contain strange stories. The moral purity and the severity of the Ceans are much praised, and in the descriptions of manners in the comedies of Menander, they are spoken of in the highest terms. The other statement, that they killed their old men, in order to save them from the miseries of decrepitude, is, I hope, founded on some confusion, or is limited to one particular instance. The land is fertile.

Andros and Tenos are large and fertile, but have no history.

Syros is remarkable as the birth-place of the philosopher Pherecydes, the instructor of Pythagoras.

On the one side of Delos was the island of Rhenea, and on the other that of Myconos; the former is insignificant, but Myconos is somewhat larger.

Naxos is the most splendid of all the Cyclades, and was justly regarded as the favourite isle of Dionysus. Its form is like that of most volcanic islands in the south sea, rising from the waters like a cone: it is a mountain with broad sloping sides, and fertile to its very top; it does not indeed produce corn all the way up, but it is clad with vines and olive groves. The island is a real paradise, and even at this day one of the most flourishing in the Archipelago. Its summit was crowned with a temple of Zeus, though the island itself was sacred to Dionysus. In the early times it was powerful, especially during the age of Pisistratus; at the period of transition, it fell into the hands of Lygdamis, who protected the demos against the aristocracy; he became a usurper, but was a mild ruler, and beneficial to his subjects. During the Persian period, Naxos was still important and rich, but soon after came under the supremacy of Athens. It then revolted, but was subdued and received cleruchi, who however were expelled after the Peloponnesian war. During the period which then followed, nothing is known about Naxos. When the power of the Macedonians in Egypt was at its height, that is, in the reigns of Philadelphus and Euergetes, all the Cyclades were governed by the kings of Alexandria. After the fourth king, when the empire was decaying, those islands had no ruler and no protection, for which reason they endeavoured to enter into the relation of sympolity with the Aetolians as early as the time of Euergetes, and those who did not form this relation were infested by Aetolian and Illyrian pirates.

These are the Cyclades as we find them enumerated by Scylax, a highly respectable authority. But wherever a whole consists of a definite number of parts, the same number not unfrequently embraces different parts at different times, new parts being introduced in place of earlier ones; if you remember this, it will help you out of many an historical labyrinth. Such also was the case with the twelve Cyclades; they were not the same at all times, but the southern islands, which are not included by the ancients, were regarded as belonging to them at a time which cannot now be defined, so that some must have been omitted, which, accordingly, had either abandoned the connection or were forgotten on account of their insignificance. The same is the case with the twelve Achaean towns, and the seven hills of Rome, two of which are sometimes regarded as one, so that a new one is added. In this manner we have four more small islands, which are classed among the Cyclades, for which we must suppose that others, such as Seriphos and Rhenea, were omitted from the list. Delos, however, was always regarded as the centre, whence the phrase was, “Delos and the Cyclades.” The number twelve might thus be kept up in a variety of ways. The four islands before alluded to are Melos and Thera, which were Doric, and Ios and Amorgos, which were Ionic; Scylax includes them all among the Sporades.

Melos was a Lacedaemonian colony, but during the Peloponnesian war it was conquered by the Athenians at the instigation of Alcibiades. The discussion of this subject in Thucydides is an ever-memorable masterpiece of the development of conflicting opinions; the transaction itself is a stain upon Athenian history; fortunately the number of such stains is but small. The inhabitants of Melos were sold as slaves; after the Peloponnesian war the island was indeed restored, but it remained insignificant. It is a beautiful volcanic island with hot sulphureous springs and the like, and contains much fertile land. Its modern name is Milo. The ruins of the theatre excite our astonishment, especially considering that it was a Doric place; they are evidence of a numerous and wealthy population. The excellent torso of Aphrodite, which is now in Paris, was found in Melos.

Thera, according to tradition, was colonised in the very earliest times by the guardian of the kings Eurysthenes and Procles, belonging to the family of the Labdacidae. This account, however, is purely mythical; it reads very pleasantly in Herodotus, but has not the least historical foundation. This much only we see from the whole series of Dorian colonies, that they belong to a period, when most of the Dorians, with the exception of Corinth and Aegina, had no maritime power, while Sparta must still have possessed a navy, since without it the colonies could not have subsisted. The most important point in the history of Thera is, that it became the metropolis of Cyrene, which reflected its lustre upon it. Thera had formerly been a Phoenician colony, and the name of Membliaros, whose family resided there, is entirely Phoenician. The island is particularly remarkable in a physical point of view; historically it is of no importance. There is not a spot on the earth that is so much subject to earthquakes as Thera; hence new islands have been formed in its vicinity at different periods. The ancients mention an island of the name of Hiera, which was raised up by volcanic agency, and in this manner three new islands have appeared there, the last of which rose up in the year 1707. This, accordingly, is one of the points where the fire burning in the bowels of the earth shows its direct agency. The name of Anaphe, a small island in the vicinity, also alludes to this.

Ios is known from the very ancient tradition, that Homer was buried there. It was an Ionian colony,like Amorgos, which was celebrated for its textures, for the vestes Amorginae were prized as highly as the Coae; it is very probable that cotton may have been cultivated there, but it is possible also that it was imported from Egypt and Syria.

Crete.

The antiquities of Crete are as much a mystery to us as those of ancient Boeotia and several other countries. Minos is to us a mere name, but we may believe the statement of Thucydides, that the recollection of Crete having once ruled over the Cyclades was connected with the period represented by Minos. But what connection there existed between Minos and the later Cretans, is a question about which we know nothing at all. He can scarcely have been a Greek, and the subsequent Greek population of Crete has no more to do with him than the Tyrrhenians have with the Etruscans. I am convinced that he was connected only with the Eteocretans, as is clearly stated by Herodotus. These earlier Cretans probably continued to live in the island as subjects of the later inhabitants, and only two of their towns, Praesos and Polichna, maintained their independence. All the other towns of Crete are Dorian, Argive, or in general Peloponnesian colonies. What are called the laws of Minos, unquestionably belong to the Greek immigrants, and if the question be raised, as to whether the Spartans obtained their laws from Crete, I do not hesitate for a moment to assert, that the laws of both nations are originally Doric, and that the Dorian immigrants introduced them among the Cretans; though the later inhabitants boasted of having preserved the ancient laws of the conquered original inhabitants. I believe no more in the historical personality of Minos than I do in that of Lycurgus. We must not, however, imagine, that the subsequent Cretans were an entirely new population, for they were in fact only the ruling party. If we compare the history of different nations we find several instances of conquerors adopting the name of the conquered people: thus the Spanish tyrants of Mexico called themselves children of Montezuma; in Peru this is still more common, though nearly all the Peruvians are hybrids. In like manner the Dorian conquerors did not go to Crete with their wives and children, but the later population was descended on the mother’s side from the ancient Cretans. Those whom we call Ionians, were descended in the same manner from the Carians.

I cannot say much that is satisfactory about Crete; in my opinion, this is another of those points in regard to which a sober inquirer must be content with very few results. I feel it my duty to caution you against all those Ogygian inquiries in ancient Greek history; they are very often no inquiries at all, but mere gossip about notions taken up at random and vaguely conceived—things which rouse the indignation of a genuine philologer. I cannot accordingly, in the case of Crete, go back to the earliest times, simply because we have no information. Cnosos and Cydon, according to some obscure account, were Argive colonies; of Lyctos it is certain that it was a Dorian colony, though neither time nor circumstances are mentioned; respecting most of the towns, no information at all has come down to us. The statement in the Odyssey,⁠[71] where Crete is spoken of accidentally, is very singular; it does not afford us much assistance, but only leads us to the conclusion, that all the statements in the Odyssey are much more recent than those in the Iliad, and that the conclusion of the Odyssey is even of much later origin than the rest: the part I allude to must have been composed at a time which we cannot place farther back than the commencement of the Olympiads. Odysseus there says, that he comes from Crete, which was inhabited by the Dorians, Pelasgians, Cydonians, and Eteocretans. The Eteocretans are here mentioned as the most ancient inhabitants; next come the Cydonians, without any remark being made as to their nationality; the Pelasgians are otherwise not mentioned at all in those parts; and the Dorians, of course, are the later immigrants from Peloponnesus. Another and more probable statement, in Herodotus, is, that the Cretans were either Carians or Lycians, or Carians mixed with Lycians. These nations, whom we regard as barbarous, are said to have emigrated from Crete, which implies nothing beyond the fact that they belonged to the same race. The ancient inhabitants, as I have already said, afterwards appear partly in subject places, and partly as serfs in the larger towns.

At no period of our history did Crete form one connected state; it consisted of a number of independent towns which, tradition says, amounted to one hundred; this is at least a proof of a very dense population.

The Eteocratans, as a nation, disappear in history, without there being any definite mention of the immigration of their later rulers, and stories were invented in ancient times to account for this disappearance. According to one tradition, all the old Cretans, with the exception of two tribes, emigrated, in order to avenge the death of Minos, and all perished; while, according to another, they were all carried off by a plague, which occurred after the Trojan war. But all this is foolish.

Crete is a large island, presenting a grave, and not an Ionian aspect, but in many parts it is rich and fertile. The great woody mountain Ida (Ἴδη is the Ionian name of a woody mountain) extends through the whole length of the island. Mythology describes this mountain as the birth-place of Zeus, and the other statement that he was born on mount Ida near Troy arose only from a confusion. The Cretan Ida is covered with most magnificent forests, and furnishes not only timber for shipbuilding, but is also rich in medicinal herbs. The coast contains a number of the most fertile plains. All the promontories of Crete are branches issuing from mount Ida.

In the historical times, the number of Cretan towns, if we gather the names from the different writers, amounts to thirty. How many of them were sovereign and how many subject, is a question which can be answered only approximately.

The greatest towns were Cnosos (better than Cnossos) and Gortyn, or in Latin poets Gortyna, like Cortona and Ancona. The Latin language does not recognise the termination on, whence in names of male persons the Greek ων is shortened into a single o; hence the Romans in the earlier times did not say Solon, but Solo, and the editors of Cicero should always write the name in this manner. In later times this practice was forgotten; and Pliny has Hieron and Solon; but names of towns are generally lengthened by the addition of a. Both Cnosos and Gortyn were very ancient Cretan towns, but were taken possession of by later settlers. The magnitude of the ruins of Gortyn, situated on a beautiful table land, points to a brilliant period, which must have been a very early one. Near them is the labyrinth, the construction of which is ascribed to Minos; it is however not fabulous, but a mighty palace-like building of the heroic age. Cydonia reminds us of the people of the same name in the Odyssey. Lyctos is expressly mentioned as a Spartan colony.

I point out these places to you because they are of some historical importance; I might add a great many others, but they are only empty names.

During the Peloponnesian war, when all Greece was divided between Athens and Sparta, the Cretans sided with neither. There are a tolerable number of Cretan monuments with inscriptions, belonging to the period of the power of the Aetolians; they are for the most part treaties by which they were admitted by the Aetolians into the relation of sympolity.

The Cretan towns are spoken of, especially by Aristotle, as if all of them had had one common constitution (πολιτεία Κρητῶν). Every Cretan town, even the subject places, seems according to the constitution to have been equal to the largest; all had a close aristocracy and ruling houses (a patriciate), and this proves that the country had at one time been conquered. Their highest magistrates, eligible only from among the gentes, were called κόσμοι; they were five in number, and possessed despotic power; they seem to have been elected annually. Insurrection was lawful in Crete, as in Poland, for when the oppression became too severe, the nobles refused obedience to the magistrates, and elected new ones. The greatest anarchy was thus legalised, and this was the consequence of a constitution, which had in itself no organic protection: a proof of the barbarous character of the people. The Cretans were the worst of all the Greek nations; they were an object of detestation and indignation. You remember the expression of St. Paul, in the Epistle to Titus; their character gave rise to the verb κρητίζειν. Polybius confirms this judgment with an undisguised hatred of the Cretans, a hatred which is even stronger than that of the Aetolians. In his time they were completely devoid of all sense of honour; treason and faithlessness towards their superiors being no disgrace among them. Thus they treacherously delivered up the unfortunate Achaeus who had revolted against Antiochus; they shewed, in fact, all the degeneracy which we now find among the unhappy Greeks in their enslavement. The Cretans, however, had no foreign tyranny as a palliation, for no part of Greece remained so free from foreign oppression, and they never were under the supremacy of Macedonia, except in the reign of the last Philip, who was chosen by them as arbitrator; he had, however, no garrison in the island, but exercised only his personal influence. Crete then remained independent, and the Romans were altogether indifferent about it. But the pirates of the Asiatic coasts established themselves among them, and the Cretans even took part in the trade, whence in A.U.C., 685 they were conquered by the Romans. In the earlier times they sold their services as mercenaries, serving as light-armed troops and forming a peculiar kind of infantry. At their conquest by the Romans, they were chastised, and many of their towns were destroyed. After this they are no longer mentioned in Roman history, so that we cannot even say to what province they belonged. It is only occasionally, when disturbances broke out, that a praetor was sent to them.

Carpathos is situated in the north-east of Crete, towards Rhodes; in the same direction we have Astypalaea and Nisyros. All three were Dorian settlements; Carpathos in the end came under the supremacy of Rhodes.

Rhodes.

Rhodes was a state of which the Greeks, in the last period of their history had reason to be proud; its peculiarity was its freedom from all that for which otherwise the Greeks are justly censured. Its character is honesty, conscientiousness, and thoughtful prudence, like that of the Dutch republics, the Swiss cantons, and the free cities of the German empire in their best times; nor was literary and intellectual culture foreign to the Rhodians. Their greatest prosperity belongs to the time when the sun of Greek intellect had already set; but they still had, comparatively speaking, a happy period.

Rhodes was an ancient Dorian settlement, but it is foolish to suppose that it existed even before the time of the Trojan war, as is stated in the Homeric Catalogue in the account about Tlepolemus, for at that time the Dorians did not inhabit any country from which they could have sent a colony to Rhodes. The reason of the interpolation is apparent.⁠[72] The true tradition probably is that the Dorians went thither after the conquest of Peloponnesus; but this too is very obscure, for the period subsequent to the Doric migration is not clearer to us than that which preceded it.

Rhodes had three towns which formed the three tribes in the island; this is expressed in a passage of the Catalogue: τριχθὰ δὲ ᾤκηθεν καταφυλαδόν; these towns were Lindos, Ialysos, and Camiros. The soil of the island is excellent, and the country being equally adapted for agriculture and navigation, we find both from early times. Hence its power had a much more secure basis than, e.g., that of the Aeginetans, who had no agriculture at all, for agriculture is the only foundation of permanent happiness. Until the time of the Peloponnesian war those three towns remained in the same condition; they formed together one state, which, however, was without a common centre. During the war, the Rhodians distinguished themselves by their prudence, remaining faithful to Athens, and not allowing themselves, like the Naxians and others, to be drawn into unfortunate insurrections; but when Athens abused her power and the Lacedaemonians were gaining the upper hand, the Rhodians, accommodating themselves to the change of circumstances, joined the latter, and that the more readily because they were Dorians. Henceforth a consciousness was awakened in them, that they might raise themselves to a higher position, and they determined to remove from their small towns into one great city. They accordingly founded the city of Rhodes on the splendid harbour which the first settlers had overlooked. This place now became the centre of the country, and the other towns καθάπερ δῆμοι, but were not destroyed, and even at this day we hear of villages called Lindo and Camiro. The earliest inhabitants were undoubtedly Carians, who, on receiving a Dorian aristocracy, became at first serfs, but afterwards rose to the rank of free communities; the productive commerce rendered it impossible for the aristocracy to maintain itself for any great length of time. There then followed a period of internal discord, of which only obscure accounts have come down to us. After the war, which was occasioned by the expedition of Cyrus the younger, and in which they joined the Lacedaemonians, they fell, in consequence of their internal divisions, into the hands of the Carian dynasty of Mausolus. The younger Artemisia, the wife of Mausolus, who resided at Halicarnassus, was enabled, by the factions in the island, to take possession of it. One of the first youthful productions of Demosthenes refers to this event. In this manner, Rhodes was for a time connected, through Halicarnassus, with the Persian empire; according to the peace of Antalcidas, this ought not to have been, but that peace was observed only where it was advantageous to the Persians. Before Rhodes came under the rule of Artemisia, it had, in conjunction with Chios and Byzantium, taken part in the Social war against Athens, from which we see that the Rhodians were anxious to throw off the dominion of the Athenians and to establish a maritime power of their own. There now rose among them the family of Mentor and Memnon, which acquired unprecedented influence at the court of Persia; they governed Rhodes nominally as satraps, but in point of fact, as sovereigns, as in the fifteenth century the Medici governed Florence. But they fell with the Persian empire. Both were Greeks, but barbarised in their sentiments and possessing all the passions of barbarians; they had, however, the advantage of Greek intelligence and culture. Memnon, especially, was a distinguished man, and his death alone rendered the success of Alexander’s undertaking possible, and but for this event, it would appear in history as foolhardiness: that which now appears as great and is considered as great, would be looked upon as foolish; Memnon would have cut off Alexander’s return from Persia, and his fate would have been like that of Charles XII. in the Ukraine; nay Memnon would have attacked him in Macedonia and overthrown his power in Greece. I will not decide as to whether this would have been better for the Greeks. After Memnon’s death, Rhodes also submitted to the Macedonians, and it would seem that a republican party there was anxious to bring about this connection with Macedonia. Rhodes now openly showed itself to be what it really was, viz., the connecting link between Europe and Asia, for Tyre was destroyed and Alexandria had not yet risen to greatness. The commerce between the two continents was thus established at Rhodes, which became great soon after Alexander’s death, twenty-eight years after that of Memnon (Olymp. 119). Its siege by Demetrius Poliorcetes is the grandest thing in ancient history: it is as bold as it is distressing and elevating. The inhabitants of a single little island, or rather a small city, had the courage not to allow themselves to be intimidated by the ruler of Asia Minor and Syria, who poured his fleets and his armies upon them, and what is still more, employed against them all the strength of his talent; they resisted him so boldly and so gloriously, that he was obliged to grant them an honourable peace. Rhodes, however, suffered severely on that occasion, and the whole island was fearfully ravaged; but it soon recovered; and, owing to the great confidence which it inspired, and to the obligation which the Egyptian king Ptolemy incurred towards it, the island rose so much in the esteem and respect of all, that, comparatively speaking, it stood as high as Athens did after the Persian wars. From this time, Rhodes, notwithstanding the general confusion, became powerful and respected, not through good fortune, but through the industry and exertions of its inhabitants. It was they who destroyed the Etruscan pirates, and their squadrons sailed as far as the Aegean, securing the freedom of navigation for the good of all Greece. As commerce increased more and more at Alexandria, and as Egypt was not a country fit for shipbuilding, the Rhodians became the freighters for the greater part of the ancient world. Such nations are universal benefactors, and all are concerned in the preservation of their navigation. This accounts for the fact, that at the time when Rhodes suffered from inundations and earthquakes, nations and princes vied with one another in helping and benefitting them. For the good luck which favoured Rhodes did not remain unmixed, for it had to sustain many serious calamities. The city was built in the form of a theatre, but in such a manner that towards the harbour it was protected by a lofty and strong wall. Once during the Macedonian period, when a heavy fall of rain had inundated nearly the whole city, the swollen streams poured down upon it, without finding an outlet into the sea, until in the end they fortunately threw down the mighty wall, and thus ran off. This is one of the most fearful events in Greek history, and was the consequence of an earthquake. The earthquakes by which Rhodes has been visited have been terrible. About the end of Olymp. 138, or at the beginning of Olymp. 139, in the reign of Euergetes, it was almost wholly destroyed by an earthquake, during which the Colossus was overthrown, which was never set up again. In the time of Antoninus Pius, the city was visited by the earthquake, which reduced nearly all the towns on the Asiatic coast to heaps of ruins, and in which Rhodes lost its last splendour, its whole fleet, its arsenals, its trophies and monuments: on that occasion it was thoroughly destroyed. It was then, of course, not restored to what it had been; its navigation henceforth was insignificant, and agriculture formed the principal occupation of its inhabitants.

Rhodes preserved not only its political independence, but also its great importance throughout the Macedonian period. At the time when all the other Greek states were quite servile, and got on only by manoeuvring, the Rhodians stood forth as a princely people, whose friendship was courted by kings, and whose enmity was dreaded. While their state was in this illustrious position, they formed connections with the Romans; they seem to have entered into friendly relations with them as early as the fifth century, not long after Alexander’s death, probably on the occasion of their proceedings against the Etruscan pirates, because both nations aimed at the same objects, but the Rhodians—and this is a proof of their great prudence—never concluded a formal treaty with the Romans; their fleet co-operated with that of Rome, but they undertook no obligations. Their assistance in the war against Antiochus was liberally rewarded by the Romans who gave them Caria and Lycia. But the Romans afterwards harboured ill-feelings towards them, because in their relations with Rome they shewed a spirit of independence and no servility; hence in the war against Perseus the Romans tried to interpret every step taken by them as hostile towards themselves. The Rhodians, it is true, did not wish for the downfall of Perseus, they no doubt wanted to have an equipoise in those parts against the Romans, and some men of influence may have secretly espoused the cause of Perseus; the Romans, moreover, had even before that time taken back a part of the presents they had made to them; they had hurt their feelings and so much offended them, that the Rhodians believed the Romans to be hostile towards them; but they never really did anything that could be laid to their charge. After the fall of Perseus, many Romans were impatient to destroy Rhodes; but Cato, though otherwise not favourably disposed towards the Greeks, was actuated by such respect for their conduct, that he exerted his whole influence with the senate to save them. They retained their independence, but became allies of Rome and lost their subjects; still, however, they shewed prudence, they were free, and had no Roman commander over them. Eighty years later, the Mithridatic war afforded the Romans an opportunity of congratulating themselves for having followed the advice of Cato; for the Rhodians held out faithfully and heroically against Mithridates, and did not allow themselves to be prevailed upon by the Thessalians to enter into an alliance with the king. For this the Romans again rewarded them with territories. After the murder of Caesar, Cassius who was unworthy to be the associate of Brutus, took possession of the town of Rhodes, and treated it very harshly and cruelly. The Rhodians, however, continued to enjoy their freedom and the esteem of the nations until the time of Antoninus Pius. At this period we find, from a speech of Aelius Aristides, that they possessed autonomy, and criminal jurisdiction, and the neighbouring islands as well as the Caunians on the continent recognised as subjects their supremacy. Aristides, in order to cheer them after the terrible earthquake, reminds them of the beautiful story of a Rhodian sailor whose ship perished in a storm, but who clung to the helm to the last, and sunk with the words: “I call upon thee, Poseidon, as my witness, that the ship went down standing upright.”

The arts and literature also were cherished at Rhodes, though in the earlier times there are not many Rhodian names that can be called great. Cleobulus of Lindos is mentioned as one of the seven sages. But Apollonius is a poet who certainly ought not to be despised; we read his work with pleasure and can learn much from it, though he cannot be compared with Callimachus who lived before him. The wealth of the Rhodians and their taste for the beautiful and magnificent gave great encouragement to the arts. When oratory had died away at Athens, and all vital energy had withdrawn from that city, it took refuge in Rhodes; it had indeed already assumed the character of old age, but still at a time when in Greece proper no good speech was heard, when in the towns of Mysia and Caria literature had degenerated into mere bombast, a sanum loquendi genus was preserved in Rhodes, which is no small praise, though the sanum was sometimes a siccum.

The constitution of Rhodes is difficult to make out. The part of Cicero’s work, “De Re Publica,” where he spoke of it, is wanting, so that we can form only conjectures; but it would lead me too far to explain them here. Certain it is, that Rhodes, by the peculiarity of its institutions, was so far democratic, that all its citizens took an active part in the administration, and a large number of them in the council. The manner in which this was done is the obscure point. The magistrates, as Polybius says, had very great powers, both the strategi and the nauarchi. There existed an arcanum imperii, of which the Athenian constitution knows nothing, and to which the Roman state alone presents something analogous: in certain circumstances the nauarchus had the power to conclude treaties, which, however, it would seem were valid only during his term of office, the state not being bound by them for the future. This arose from the fact of the Rhodian fleet being generally very far away from home. Owing to this peculiarity of the constitution, things required by the force of circumstances might be done even contrary to the letter of the law. The republic contrived to make excellent use of this expedient, whenever it wished to enter into a relation without making it permanent. The nauarchus was a kind of plenipotentiary representative of Rhodes with foreign nations.

The language of the Rhodians was Doric. Cicero went to Rhodes to cultivate his intellect, and under the first Roman emperors the young Roman nobles very frequently resorted to Rhodes as they had formerly done to Athens.

According to the Homeric Catalogue the Rhodians dwelt τριχθὰ καταφυλαδόν. When at a later time the phylae appear in the city, they occupy different districts. The Dorians, to whom the division into three was natural, were also in possession of the opposite mainland. This division was the reason why they did not attach to themselves places which were situated at some distance, such as Phaselis. Halicarnassus, Cos, and Cnidos formed the second Dorian triad by the side of the Rhodian.

Among these three places, Halicarnassus is particularly interesting to us as the birth-place of Herodotus. It is strange, however, that he wrote his work in the Ionic dialect, and that, too, in such perfection. Although Halicarnassus was excluded by the Dorians, it lost nothing of its prosperity, nor of its peculiarly Greek character. It was deprived of its freedom like the other Greek towns on the coast of Asia Minor, but it is doubtful whether after the expedition of Xerxes it recovered it, or whether it remained in perpetual dependence upon Persia. Certain it is, that it was the seat of the Carian dynasty, which established itself there, and attached itself to Persia: it was the residence of Mausolus, and afterwards of his widow Artemisia, who there built the famous mausoleum to him. But this Carian family did not introduce barbarous customs at Halicarnassus; for its members spoke Greek, received a Greek education, and had a taste for the beauties of Greek art. But the misfortune was, that through its splendour the city became too large and too influential; it was strongly fortified, thoroughly devoted to the interests of Persia, and one of the chief stations of the Persian forces; for which reason it offered an obstinate defence during the siege of Alexander, who ravaged it in such a manner that it never recovered from the blow, but ever after remained an insignificant place. This defence of Halicarnassus was very brilliant, for there still existed men inspired with a love of freedom, and actively opposed to the dominion of Macedonia. Ephialtes, the friend of Demosthenes, who everywhere tried to thwart Alexander, there fought against him and was killed.

Cnidos was situated on a peninsula which was wholly occupied by the town; the Cnidians once strangely wished to cut through the isthmus which connected it with the main land. The Aphrodite of Praxiteles shed a peculiar lustre over the place, and attracted many strangers, but was afterwards carried away by the Romans.

Cos is the third Dorian place in Asia Minor; it was at once a town and an island, and possessed a considerable navy down to the time of the Romans, though it was not to be compared with that of the Rhodians. In the earlier times it was allied with Rhodes, and remained for a long time in a state of independence. It contained a celebrated temple of Asclepius and the family of the Asclepiadae, who regarded Asclepius as their ancestor.

Rhodes and the opposite continent accordingly had together six Dorian towns, as there were six feudal principalities in Peloponnesus. Let us now pass on from Doris to

Ionia.

According to the universal tradition of the Greeks, Ionia was a δωδεκάπολις, established by Neleus and Androclus, the sons of Codrus, who, after their father’s death, when the royal dignity ceased, emigrated from Athens to Asia Minor. These Ionians, on their arrival, found the coast occupied partly by Carians and partly by Meonians, while Chios and Samos were inhabited by Pelasgians. We must not conceive these colonies as purely Greek in their origin in the same manner as the inhabitants of the states of North America are purely English and German. Herodotus himself says, that four dialects were spoken among the Ionians, and, what is very important, that the Ionians did not go across with their wives and children, but as soldiers; that they conquered the country, and married the captive women, as the Spaniards did in what were afterwards the Spanish colonies of America. But as the Greeks, Carians, and Meonians, although differing from one another, still belonged to the same race, their mixture was no longer discernible in the features and forms of the body of their descendants, and thus the New-Ionians could not be distinguished from the ancient and original ones. The ancient population had not withdrawn as in the states of North America, but remained in the country as subjects. Such was the case especially in Chios: there is an ancient story according to which slavery took its origin in that island; and this is quite natural, for the old Ionians established themselves there, and the ancient inhabitants not being able to get out of the island, were reduced by the new settlers to a state of servitude; and for this reason a completely aristocratic constitution was developed: the towns were the rulers, and the rural population were their subjects. The same may be supposed to have been the case in other islands as well as on the continent. But whether on this account servitude was more ancient there, than, for example, the penestia in Thessaly, cannot be decided.

The division into twelve states here likewise suggests the existence of some regulating power, which, however, cannot be historically demonstrated, and in regard to which we must be on our guard against mere fancies. We know from Herodotus, that in the earliest times the Ionians had kings. The country appears to us remarkable for its misfortunes at an earlier period than any other Greek state, if we except Messene; and this misfortune arose from the extension of the Lydians, a conquering nation from the interior of Asia Minor. This people, conjointly with the Mysians and Carians, expelled the Meonians, for this must be understood when we read that the dynasty of the Mermnadae (that of Gyges) supplanted that of the Heracleidae (that of Candaules). When these Lydians immigrated with the fresh power of conquerors, they subdued the Ionian cities; first (Olymp. 25) Colophon, which, according to unequivocal indications, was at that time the capital of Ionia. In regard to the greatness of Colophon, the Greek authors, whose works have come down to us, contain only vague traditions; but allusion to it is made in the newly discovered fragments from the beginning of the Margites and in the Paroemiographi (Κολοφῶνα ἐπιθεῖναι); the city is said to have been so powerful, that upon its decision everything depended. It was not indeed destroyed by the Lydians, but reduced to a place of no importance. One of the obscure statements is, that about the beginning of the Olympiads, Colophon carried on an obstinate war against Erythrae.

Ionia does not form a compact country, it is only a strip of land, and whatever, therefore, is to be said about its chorography, refers also to the neighbouring countries, especially Lydia.

The Maeander discharges itself into the sea in the south, near Miletus; it is a very muddy river like all others in Ionia, and hence it alone has filled up the whole bay of Miletus, which was several miles in breadth, but the cleaning out of which has been neglected for thousands of years. Accordingly the island of Lade, which Herodotus mentions there, is now only a hill rising in the midst of marshy meadows. Such is the nature of all the rivers of that coast, and the most beautiful countries have thereby been changed into pestilential swamps. In the north, a range of mountains, extending from mount Taurus to the coast opposite to Chios, forms the peninsula on which the towns of Clazomenae and Erythrae are situated. Chios itself is a continuation of those mountains, separated from the rest by the sea. What Herodotus says of the nature of Ionia, holds good also of the greater part of Aeolis: it is the pearl of creation. The present marshes, which have been formed by the deposits of the rivers in consequence of the neglect of barbarous ages, form the only exceptions. Nowhere in all the world is the splendour of a southern climate more thoroughly felt than there; nowhere are the seasons so healthy, and yet the country suffers neither from excessive heat nor drought; and nowhere are fruits, such as grapes, figs, and pomegranates, produced in such perfection. The Scirocco is unknown there (though it exists in Rhodes), but the mildest west winds prevail, and the south winds are not in the least injurious, while at Rome they are very much so. Hence we cannot wonder, that, during the period of the weakness of the states in western Asia, Ionia attained to such prosperity and greatness.

While Colophon is important to us only in legendary history, Miletus is the most illustrious city on the Ionian coast during the period of accredited history. It was itself a great place, and also founded a great number of colonies, which are said to have amounted to eighty. As the maritime states of Greece in their colonisation, as it were, divided the different seas among each other, so that Corinth chose the Adriatic, Chalcis and Eretria the seas about Sicily, and Athens the Hellespont, so we find the Milesians in the Euxine sea. There they founded Cyzicus, from which they exercised their power over the greater part of the Propontis; they then established themselves on all the coasts of the Euxine, and thereby opened to themselves inexhaustible sources of wealth. The commerce in those parts was certainly the most lucrative, and must have yielded them immense riches. The Doric town of Byzantium might have shut them out from the sea, but the Milesians had already become too powerful through their colonies. The large rivers and the shallow sea yielded them the fish which are so necessary for a Greek, and they also were the means of conveying the supplies of corn from the Crimea, the Ukraine, and the Dnieper, that is, from the country which now contains the great corn-market of Odessa. But the inhabitants of those coasts not only sold their own products, but purchased Greek merchandise with native gold from the country of the Arimaspae, where at present gold mines are again worked,—a fact which corroborates the tradition in Herodotus. They took in exchange wine, Greek woollen cloth, Egyptian linen, Persian robes, and many other costly things. Owing to this double commerce, Miletus was wealthy and great during the time of the Lydian kings, and remained so during the first period of the Persian dominion. Then it was plunged into the deepest misery by misfortunes which succeeded one another in rapid succession. Miletus had been obliged to submit to the Lydian kings, but their rule seems to have been limited to the exacting of tribute, and not to have disturbed its autonomy—a relation like that in which Ragusa stood to the Turkish empire, to which it paid tribute, though otherwise it enjoyed many advantages and privileges. This was the period of the greatest prosperity of Miletus. It submitted to the Persians without vehement opposition. Afterwards Aristagoras allowed himself to be tempted by Histiaeus to induce Miletus to rise against the overwhelming power of Persia. This insurrection was commenced without deliberation, and carried out without a well digested design and without character: the city was taken, and its inhabitants carried into Persia as slaves. This event was the subject of the historical drama (Μιλήτου ἅλωσις) of Phrynichus. Afterwards the city was again taken by Alexander, and thenceforth remained an insignificant place; its harbour may have been filled up at an early period.

Miletus was the original home of the Ionian philosophy: Thales, Anaximenes, and Anaximander were born there; it was also the native city of Arctinus, the greatest among the cyclic poets. During the Roman period it is often mentioned on account of the woollen cloths which were manufactured there; when Strabo wrote, it still existed indeed, but as a place of no importance at all.

In its neighbourhood, and within the boundaries of ancient Caria, were situated the two towns of Myus and Priene, the latter of which is known as the birth-place of Bias, who wisely advised the Ionians to unite into one state, that they might be able to resist the barbarians.

The promontory of Mycale is in the neighbourhood of Priene, opposite to Samos; it is a branch proceeding from mount Taurus. There the Athenians, under Xanthippus, gained a victory over the Phoenician fleet of the Persians, on the same day on which the battle of Plataeae was won; whereby the independence of the Greeks, and especially of their Asiatic colonies, was established.

Samos is great in history, and, like Miletus, was for a time mistress of the sea, but its greatness passed away early and quickly. Pythagoras, according to tradition, was a Samian, though little reliance can be placed upon it: Creophilus, the poet of the Οἰχαλίας ἅλωσις, too, is called a Samian, and tradition describes him as a son-in-law of Homer. The island was particularly celebrated at the time of Polycrates, who ruled far and wide over the sea and the islands. After him his brother Syloson attempted with a Persian army to conquer the island: the expedition inflicted the first blow upon it, for the Persians carried off a large number of its inhabitants as slaves. Samos then became connected with Athens, but shortly before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian war it rose against the supremacy of Athens, and being re-conquered after a siege of ten months was severely chastised, and a portion of the island became subject to Athens. During the latter period of the Peloponnesian war, Samos was the head quarters of the Athenian fleet in that part of the sea, and the scene of fearful disturbances caused by the aristocratic or Spartan party as well as by the democratic or Athenian. Although weakened, the Samians afterwards took part in the social war of Rhodes, Chios, Cos, and Byzantium against Athens. I have not been able to make out anything about the part which Samos took in that war, except that the island was conquered and received cleruchi (Olymp. 108); it was a lucrative possession to the Athenians, and therefore of importance to them. After the battle of Chaeronea, Philip left them in the possession of Samos, that they might not be driven to extremes and throw themselves into the arms of Persia, the affairs of which were then managed by the brave Memnon. But after the Lamian war the island was taken from them, and restored to the Samians. Under Ptolemy Philadelphus and Euergetes, a division of the Egyptian fleet was stationed near Samos. The most interesting object in the island was the Heraeon, the temple of Hera, which was rich in the finest works of art, such as statues by Myron, Polycletus, and Praxiteles.

The island of Samos is very fertile, and was celebrated as such in antiquity. It is strange that the wine of Samos was thought bad by the ancients, for it is now valued very highly; no person from our northern countries would consider the wine of Chios bad either.

The nearest city on the coast was Ephesus, in antiquity celebrated for its temple of Artemis, as Samos was for that of Hera. During the great period of Grecian history, it is mentioned as a distinguished city, and in the early times it was rich in great men: it was the native place of the philosopher Heraclitus, the iambic poet Hipponax, and of Apelles and Parrhasius. But notwithstanding its famous temple of Artemis, Ephesus was not of great political importance: it was situated on the Caÿstrus, which is very muddy, and has now changed the whole district into a pestilential marsh. Attalus of Pergamus was well disposed towards the city, and caused a pier to be built there, making the entrance of the harbour quite wide, while towards the interior, it grew narrower and narrower, in order that the current might become stronger; but his plan was ill calculated, for the current became weaker, and the harbour was more and more filled with mud, and only a roadstead remained. Ephesus was situated in three different places: the most ancient town is almost mythical; the second, near the temple, existed until the time of the successors of Alexander; and the third, lastly, which was built by Lysimachus close to the sea, was at a considerable distance from the temple, and the inhabitants of the old town were forced to remove to it. This New-Ephesus was for a long time the capital of Ionia, and was increasing even as late as the time of Augustus and Tiberius; it was an emporium for the whole country far and wide, though it had no longer a harbour. It was commonly the residence of the Roman governor. The origin of Ephesus, like that of most of the Ionian towns, is mythical. Artemis is a genuine Greek goddess, but her temple at Ephesus was specially revered by the Persians, as eastern nations often shewed a partiality towards foreign religions: they altered the ceremonial of the temple, and the employment of eunuchs in its service is of Persian origin. The temple was also known as an asylum: whoever in times of danger wished to protect his property, might deposit it, as we learn from Xenophon’s Anabasis,⁠[73] in the treasury of the temple of Ephesus, whence he might afterwards take it back without loss. This sanctity of the temple also continued, after its restoration, during the Macedonian period and under the Romans. In the time of the Macedonian dominion, the city was one of high rank. When, under Ptolemy Euergetes, the coasts of Ionia and Thrace were in the possession of the Egyptians, the Egyptian governor had his seat at Ephesus. Antiochus Theos and Antiochus the Great also resided there, whence we must infer that the city contained a palace. John the Evangelist lived and died there.

In the neighbourhood of Ephesus, there were several small towns, one of which was Lebedos, which, in the time of Horace, was quite desolate, and more deserted than Gabii and Fidenae, for its inhabitants had been driven by Lysimachus to Ephesus, when he rebuilt that city: still, however, Horace wished to be able to spend his whole life there.

Teos was the native place of Anacreon, and in other respects, too, of comparative importance, as it sent out colonies, such as Abdera. It was situated upon the isthmus.

Colophon was situated between Ephesus and Lebedos. I have already spoken of its ancient greatness. We there meet with the incomparable poet Mimnermus, the loss of whose productions is to us the most deplorable in ancient literature, and who composed his splendid poetry at a time when the rest of Greece was still slumbering. Thucydides, and Aristotle in his politics, mention Notion as the port of Colophon. This place owed its origin to a feud among the citizens of Colophon, in which the democratic party seceded and settled on the sea-coast. At the time of the Peloponnesian war, an implacable enmity existed between the two.

Erythrae on the gulf of Chios, which separates this island from the continent, was in ancient times the seat of a Sibyl. At an early period it carried on protracted wars with Colophon, which shows that it must have been a powerful state.

Clazomenae was situated on an island,⁠[74] whence in the peace of Antalcidas it became independent of Persia. Otherwise it is of no political importance, nor did it found any colonies. It was the birth-place of Anaxagoras.

Phocaea was very far removed from the other towns, Smyrna being situated between them, though the latter did not become an Ionian city until a later period. Phocaea refused to submit to Cyrus, and was, therefore, besieged and finally taken by his general Harpagus. Its inhabitants, however, had escaped to their ships; a great number of them wished to emigrate, but some returned to Phocaea and submitted to the Persians, while others founded Elea in Oenotria. Before this time, the Phocaeans were among the boldest navigators; they visited more especially the coasts of the western seas, Baetica, Tartessus, and the south of Gaul. In the latter country they founded Massilia, which afterwards established other colonies partly by itself, and partly in conjunction with the Phocaeans. The foundation of Massilia has sometimes, but unjustly been connected with the emigration in the time of Cyrus. Phocaea recovered to some extent, and continued to exist down to the middle ages, for it was situated in a fertile territory; but its navigation passed into the hands of the Smyrnaeans.

Chios is one of the most splendid islands in the world, for with the exception of a few desert and rough districts, it combines all the blessings of Ionia: it has excellent wine, and its soil produces in fact everything that agriculture demands of it; it had a beautiful harbour, and its inhabitants have at all times been active and enterprising men. Before the time of the Peloponnesian war, they showed wisdom in their relation to Athens, and took no part in the senseless insurrections of Samos and other islands, but conscientiously adhered to the treaties with Athens and remained quiet, whence they were treated by the Athenians with great respect. While the other towns had to pay money as contributions towards the Athenian fleet, Chios and Lesbos still retained their navy; Lesbos lost its fleet in consequence of its thoughtless revolt in the Peloponnesian war, but Chios remained faithful to Athens till after the Sicilian disaster. The Chians then wanted to place themselves at the head of an Ionian maritime confederation, which, however, was never realised. Afterwards they headed the the Social war (Olymp. 106). During the Macedonian period the Chians behaved with great prudence, and, like the Rhodians, preserved their republican independence. This state of things remained until the war of Mithridates, when they supported him, and were punished by the Romans in consequence. But the island soon recovered again. The great renown of Chios arose out of the belief, that Homer was a native of the island, and had lived there, because a genos of Homerids existed there until a late period. In my opinion, Homer is a mythical hero; the genos of the Homerids must be viewed in the same light as all such γένη, e.g., that of the Asclepiadae and Butadae; a common origin of such a genos from one ancestor is altogether out of the question.⁠[75] The author of a great portion of the Homeric poems, especially of the ground-work of our present Iliad, seems to have belonged to Smyrna; the testimony of those who call him Melesigenes is, in my opinion, entitled to the best consideration, although the author of the Hymn on Apollo calls himself a Chian.

About Smyrna wonderful stories were current in antiquity. According to one of them, it was originally an Ionian settlement, and, considering its situation between Ephesus and Phocaea, this is most probable; afterwards it is stated to have passed into the hands of the Aeolians, from whom it was taken again, according to Herodotus, by the Ionians. It is then scarcely mentioned at all until after the time of Alexander. Antigonus the one-eyed in reality built Smyrna anew; nearly all that is related about its early history is legendary. Its site was so happily chosen, that among all the towns on that coast it was the most imperishable, and continually increased. Its harbour is very excellent, but had been overlooked in an unaccountable manner ever since its destruction by the Lydians. It was, particularly during the period that Ephesus was governed by Egypt, that Smyrna, being under the dominion of Syria, rose to eminence. During the unfortunate times of the Roman wars, the Smyrnaeans behaved with great prudence, as we see particularly from their treaty with the Magnesians. Under the Romans, and that even under the first emperors, Smyrna, alternately with Ephesus, was often the seat of the proconsul. The Romans procured its admission into the Ionian confederacy as the thirteenth town. According to the ancient notions, the Ionians would not have ventured to go beyond the sacred and established number, and in case of emergency, they would have incorporated a smaller town with a larger one, e.g., Lebedos with Ephesus or Colophon; but those scruples were then easily got over, and hence we now find thirteen Ionian towns mentioned in inscriptions, coins, etc. In like manner, Athens, in later times, had thirteen tribes, and a senate of the corresponding number of 650. Smyrna was often destroyed, once in a very fearful manner by Tamerlane, but it soon recovered. The correct orthography of the name, both with the Greeks and the Romans, is Zmyrna, in the same manner as they wrote Zmaragdos.

The meetings of the twelve Ionian towns took place at a spot called Panionium, below the promontory of Mycale, which formed about the central point among them. These meetings gave rise to a permanent town with a prytaneum, in which the meetings were held. This union among the Ionians was not of a political nature, though it seems to have been the original intention that it should be; but the autonomy of the individual states did not permit this, and hence Panionium was only a place for agones.

There were several more small towns in Ionia, which I will pass over here. Mount Mimas, a branch of mount Taurus, rises precipitously above Erythrae (ἠνεμόεις Μίμας in Homer).

Aeolis.

The number of Aeolian towns in Asia Minor and the neighbouring islands amounted to thirty, but they formed several separate groups. One of these groups, the real Αἰολὶς δωδεκάπολις, had Cyme for its capital. There was also an Αἰολὶς ἐν Ἴδῃ in the interior of the country, which probably included Tenedos and Hecatonnesoi. Lesbos contained six towns. These Aeolian towns (the name is applied in its most proper sense to the first group or the dodecapolis) cannot, generally speaking, be compared in importance with the Ionian and Dorian settlements; they were μικρὰ πολίχνια; Smyrna’s importance belongs to the time when it had ceased to be Aeolian. It would lead me too far here to enumerate all the Aeolian towns whose names are mentioned only by one author or another, for they are otherwise unimportant; hence I shall notice only the most celebrated, and in point of fact there are only two out of the eleven (after the separation of Smyrna) that deserve to be noticed.

The first is Cyme, with the surname Phriconis, which cannot be explained. The foundation of this place is assigned to an extremely early period, the report being, that it was built soon after the Trojan war. But not too much value must be attached to this tradition, any more than to most of the things belonging to the time anterior to the beginning of the Olympiads. Cyme is always spoken of as the greatest and most important among the Aeolian towns, but history does not justify this reputation, for the place nowhere appears possessed of power or influence. The historian Ephorus, who was born there, sheds considerable lustre upon it; the loss of his work is irreparable, and perhaps the most serious that we have to lament in ancient history. He cheerfully took the greatest pains to investigate the obscure periods of antiquity, and must be regarded as the first critical inquirer into the early history of Greece. He thoroughly deserves the respect paid to him by his contemporaries, although his style, according to the testimony of Isocrates, was dry and inferior to that of Theopompus: perhaps we should judge differently of him if we had his work. The opinion that Hesiod was a native of Cyme, seems to be a gross delusion, the origin of which, however, is not clear to me.

We must also notice Gryneon with its celebrated temple of Apollo, who is for this reason called Gryneus by Virgil and Ovid.

Temnos remained a somewhat important place even in later times. The other towns are quite insignificant.

The whole history of these Aeolian colonies is involved in singular obscurity. Penthilus, a son of Orestes, is said to have first settled with Aeolians in Lesbos, and Gras, his son or grand-son, is reported to have founded Cyme on the mainland; he was worshipped there as archegetes, which, however, means nothing else, than that the foundation was ascribed to Orestes himself. Gras here is probably nothing but the eponymus to Graecus, standing to the Graeci in the same relation as Helen does to the Hellenes. The matter is so obscure that we ought to approach it with the utmost caution; I for my part cannot understand how Agamemnon’s grand-son should have gone into that country with such a miscellaneous race as the Aeolians, and with a colony which is said to have consisted chiefly of Thessalian Aeolians. I am much more inclined to believe, that after the Trojan war the race of the Pelopids or Agamemnonids remained behind as rulers in those parts; and this is not improbable in itself, since the fact of the Trojan war certainly cannot be doubted: the poetical account of Helen, of the siege, and the wooden-horse, is not historical, but the war and its final issue cannot be denied. I suppose, therefore, that Greeks under the Agamemnonids remained behind in the conquered Teucrian country. If this be so, we here have another instance of that change of the poles of a tradition, to which I have repeatedly drawn your attention: Pelops is transferred from Phrygia to Peloponnesus, and the Pelopids from Peloponnesus to Asia. But the chief point is this, we must regard the Greek inhabitants of that coast as a people of the same race as the western Hellenes, as in fact even in tradition all the country was originally Pelasgian, whence at a later period it likewise became identical with the Hellenic countries. The barbarous tribes on that coast, the Mysians, Lydians and Carians, did not arrive until a latter time. But we must not go too far in tracing this origin of the Aeolian colonies.

The northern part of Aeolis embraced the πολίχνια ἐν Ἴδῃ, in what was properly the Teucrian country; and to it belonged Abydos, Tenedos, and Hecatonnesoi. Although these towns were Greek, yet they were viewed by the ancients in a very different light. Some of them play rather a prominent part in the later wars of the Greeks, as for example Scepsis, the native place of the grammarian Demetrius, an historical commentator of Homer; the town is mentioned in Xenophon’s Hellenica. We must here also mention the Aeolian Ilion, which arose after the destruction of ancient Ilion. Assos was situated at the foot of mount Ida, shut in between the mountains and the sea; some mysterious ruins of it are still extant. Abydos stood on the narrowest part of the Hellespont, where it is only seven stadia, about one mile, in breadth. Tenedos was flourishing in consequence of its situation at the entrance of the Hellespont; it was a commercial place, populous and industrial, and derived advantages from its situation even as late as the time of the Romans. The town in Hecatonnesoi is mentioned only by Herodotus.

That this part of Aeolis was likewise a dodecapolis, is indeed no more than a conjecture, for we cannot make out the names of all the towns; but it is at least very probable partly from analogy, and partly from the words of Strabo; for out of the number of the thirty towns which he calls Aeolian, twelve belong to the southern dodecapolis and six to Lesbos.

Lesbos is the pearl of the Aeolian race; in the Trojan times it is called Pelasgian, but in such a manner that the Pelasgian Macar in Homer is an Aeolian.⁠[76] Lesbos is a blessed country, and excellent for the cultivation of the vine and grain, like Chios; it is only wanting in mastix, and its wine too is somewhat inferior to that of Chios; it has, however, no rough districts like Chios, but only pleasing hills and numerous plains, many excellent harbours, and bays entering far into the country. It had originally six towns, among which, however, Arisba was destroyed at an early period by the Methymnaeans; its name reminds us of the town on the mainland known from Homer; it had disappeared as early as the time of Herodotus. Among the remaining five, two are towns of importance, Mitylene and Methymna; the three others are Pyrrha, Eresos, and Antissa.

Mitylene: the orthography of this name is very uncertain; on coins and inscriptions we find Mytilana,⁠[77] while in Greek MSS. and even in more recent Latin inscriptions, it is invariably written Mitylene. The former is in all probability the more ancient mode of spelling, yet it is difficult to introduce it into printed books. Mitylene rose to the rank of one of the greatest and most splendid cities, and Alcaeus called it ἁ μεγάλα Μιτυλάνα. No place in Greece has produced greater geniuses, for Alcaeus and Sappho are among the most excellent lyric poets in Greek literature. The history of Alcaeus is connected with that of his time, for he fought in behalf of the liberty of his country against usurpation. There, as everywhere else, members of the order of the nobles set themselves up as tyrants, and the demos, supported by Pittacus, rose against these δυναστεῖαι. Alcaeus, belonging to the aristocracy, was opposed to Pittacus, whom he unjustly attacked for his low birth and his usurpation, for Pittacus laid down his dictatorial power as soon as he had given laws to the state. Mitylene, being an insular city, together with the other towns spontaneously submitted to the Persians. Under the Pisistratids, the Mityleneans carried on war with the Athenians for the possession of Sigeum on the Hellespont, and afterwards took part in the insurrection of the Ionians in Asia Minor. After the battle of Salamis, they asserted their independence of Persia, and placed themselves under the protection of Athens. During the Peloponnesian war, they at first yielded to circumstances, but then allowed themselves, by Spartan influence, to be led to insurrection. Paches reduced the city, and Cleon wanted to raze it to the ground; a decree was passed that all its inhabitants should be made slaves and the country laid waste; but the city narrowly escaped the most frightful devastation; and cleruchi were sent into the island to whom the inhabitants had to pay tribute. At the end of the war, the Mityleneans joined Sparta, and in the Macedonian period they were allied with Byzantium, Chios, and Cos against Athens, and throughout the time of the Macedonian ascendancy maintained their republican independence. In the reign of Mithridates they were mad enough to take part in the murder of the Romans, and shewed on that occasion greater cruelty than any other people. After a long resistance on the part of its inhabitants, the Romans took the city, destroyed it, and sold its citizens as slaves; it was, however, restored through the influence of Theophanes, the favourite of Pompey. Mitylene had a double harbour.

Methymna was the only Lesbian town that did not take part in the revolt against Athens, for which reason it was favoured by the Athenians. Otherwise little is to be said of this place, except that Arion, the dithyrambic poet, was born there.

Eresos, or Eressos, was, according to some, the birth-place of Sappho. This, however, is a doubtful point, but certain it is, that Theophrastus, the last genuine Greek classic, was a native of Eresos.

The two Asiatic towns of the name of Magnesia, the one on the Maeander, and the other at the foot of mount Sipylus, have this in common, that their origin is not accounted for in any of the Greek traditions about the migrations into Asia. It is a surprising phenomenon, that a people like the Magnetes should have settled there, far away from the coast and from the other Greek towns. But if we bear in mind, that the Magnetes decidedly belong to the Pelasgian race, and that in other parts of that portion of Asia, too, Thessalian Pelasgians occur, we can scarcely entertain a doubt, that the two Magnesias in Asia must be regarded as remnants of a Pelasgian population in those districts. In the earliest Graeco-Asiatic history, both towns act a prominent part; but we know nothing definite about their fate; one of them, it is uncertain which, is said to have been destroyed during the great migration of the Cimmerians or Treres. Afterwards, during the period of the earliest Ionian traditions, the Magnesians were powerful through their cavalry. Magnesia, near mount Sipylus, was a considerable town as late as the time of the Macedonian and Syrian dominion, and in the war of Antiochus against his brother, it was allied with Smyrna and displayed great vigour and valour.

This may suffice about the Greek settlements in western Asia from Cnidos to the Propontis. Cyprus is isolated, and does not properly belong to the Greek nation; I shall have occasion to speak of it hereafter, as well as of the Greek settlements in Phrygia.

The Kingdom of Pergamus.

On the same coast, we meet with the city of Pergamus, the origin of which is similar to that of Antioch and Alexandria, though Pergamus, in language and manners, was more completely hellenised than Antioch ever could be, because of the predominance of the Syriac population, which was deeply interested in the preservation of its own language. The extent of the ruins still attests the ancient splendour of the place. When Alexander was conquering western Asia, and even during the time when his successor Lysimachus governed those parts, Pergamus was not a town, but only a castle on a precipitous rock, celebrated for its strength; the rock is called στροβιλοειδής, from its resemblance to a pine-cone. After the battle of Ipsus, when Lysimachus had obtained Phrygia on the Hellespont and Lydia, he deposited in that castle his treasures, amounting, it is said, to 9,000 talents, about £1,935,000. During the later years of this unhappy prince, when, owing to the intrigues of his second wife Arsinoë, who wished to secure the throne to her own children, the Furies entered his house, and when he commenced persecuting his children by his first wife, and even ordered Agathocles to be put to death, there arose such a commotion in his dominions, that many parts refused obedience to him, and the whole kingdom fell into a state of disorganisation. Seleucus Nicator attacked it, and Philetaerus, the governor of Pergamus, declared himself independent, and opened the gates to Seleucus. Philetaerus had for a long time been in possession of what had been intrusted to his care, and at first probably with honest intentions towards the house of Lysimachus. But when the whole family of the latter had become extinct, Philetaerus remained the ruler of the country. He was succeeded by his brother Eumenes as dynastes, a title which was then commonly given to those who would in former times have been called tyrants. With the assistance of Gallic mercenaries, he extended his dominions towards Syria, defeated Antiochus Soter, the son of Seleucus Nicator, and founded a regular principality. His son Attalus assumed the title of king, though he had but a small kingdom. But he extended it, and although it was at first reduced by the Romans, they afterwards favoured and raised him to the rank of king of Asia.

The city of Pergamus, or Pergamum (for both forms occur, the Greeks commonly preferring Πέργαμον, and the Romans Pergamus), arose under the successor of Philetaerus, at the foot of the rock on which the castle continued to exist. The city seems to have been an open place; the inhabitants probably felt the inconvenience of a fortified town, and owing to the progress which the art of besieging had then made, not much confidence was placed in the protection of walls. The city was beautiful and wealthy, and remained prosperous until the Pergamenian dynasty became extinct, and the kingdom was made over to the Romans as a province. During the rebellion of Aristonicus, the city suffered but was not destroyed; thenceforth, however, it became deserted and dull, though it still remained a respectable provincial city. During the period of its kings, literature was flourishing at Pergamus, and there existed a rivalry between it and Alexandria, as well as between their grammatical and poetical schools: but those of Pergamus were not able to equal their rivals. They must, however, be mentioned with respect, especially the grammatical school, and Pergamus during the best period took an active part in grammatical studies. Nicander belongs to the Pergamenian school; he is indeed a poet of an inferior order, but still ought not to be despised. Julius Caesar transferred the library of Pergamus to Alexandria as a compensation for the one destroyed by fire in the latter place. It is strange that even a man like Caesar was not free from a certain barbarism, and that he did not carry those literary treasures to Rome.

Atarneus, in the neighbourhood of Pergamus, had formerly belonged to the Chians, who possessed several places on the mainland; they had received it from the Persians as a reward for the treachery of a deserter. It was a Mysian town, but subsequently became hellenised, though without receiving a Greek colony: such places must be carefully distinguished from real Greek towns. It was very strongly fortified, and afterwards made itself independent of Chios. In later times we find Hermias as an independent prince of Atarneus; his daughter Pythias was married to Aristotle, who himself lived with him for three years.

Greek Settlements in Macedonia and Thrace.

We shall now proceed on the north of mount Olympus along the coast of the Aegean to consider the Greek colonies there. The συνεχὴς Ἑλλάς, according to Dicaearchus, who has hitherto been our guide, extends as far as mount Olympus. He has indeed some doubts as to whether Thessaly should be included, but he decides after all in the affirmative, because Greek was spoken in Thessaly. Thessaly was evidently a hellenised country, just like the east of Germany, where formerly Wendish was spoken, while now pure German prevails, though rivers and mountains still have names which are completely Wendish. This hellenisation, however, did not extend beyond the boundaries of Thessaly; it scarcely reached as far as Peraebia, which was partly Macedonian and partly Thracian, the country beyond Olympus being inhabited by Macedonian and Thracian tribes. In the Homeric Catalogue, Thessaly extends beyond the Axius, a most beautiful river, as far as Pieria, which was regarded as part of ancient Thrace.

Pieria forms the slope of the range of mountains of which Olympus, at the mouth of the Peneus, is the highest peak, rising to the height of the snow-line; this charming coast country extends from mount Olympus as far as the Thermaic gulf. The most important among the several Greek towns along this coast were Pydna and Methone, which are called Chalcidian. It is very surprising to find, that the whole coast, from the foot of mount Olympus to the Strymon, though not continuously, yet for the greater part, is occupied by Greek, and, if we except the Dorian Potidaea, by Ionian towns, which are called Chalcidian, whence Thucydides’ expression, Χαλκιδῆς ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης. If the population of all these towns had come from Chalcis in Euboea alone, that city, nay the whole of Euboea, would have been drained; we must assume that there was only a nucleus of Chalcidian ctistae, who brought with them Chalcidian νόμιμα and took possession of the places; all the rest consisted of adventurers from all parts of Greece. Those towns were for the most part μικρὰ πολίσματα. Until the time of Philip, when Macedonia was a small and weak state, though more weak than small, they had in the most wonderful manner contrived to remain independent of Macedonia. The places on the western coast of the Thermaic gulf had no political connexion with those on the eastern side. In the reigns of Perdiccas and Archelaus, Pydna and Methone seem to have been allied with Macedonia, but only for a time; it is possible that they may have paid a tribute as a recognition, but they were free towns. Little can be said of them: Methone was conquered and destroyed by Philip, and Pydna was taken and changed into a Macedonian town. More about this will be said when I come to speak of Macedonia.

Proceeding from the coast of Pieria along that of Emathia and Bottiaea, we meet with several towns of which it is doubtful whether they were Chalcidian or Bottiaean: Therma, subsequently called Thessalonica, appears to have been Chalcidian, but I shall say more about this when I come to Macedonia.

Aenea on the promontory where the smaller and larger Thermaic gulfs separate, is called by Herodotus a Greek town, but seems to have originally been Pelasgian and to have afterwards become hellenised. Farther on the Greek towns are more closely together, though nearly all of them are without historical importance, whence I shall not enter upon an enumeration of them.

The Bottiaeans, who, at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, rose against the Athenians, were a Pelasgian people, akin to the Greeks, like the Epirots and Thessalians, but not Greek. I shall say more of them hereafter. If you will understand the first book of Thucydides, you must have a thoroughly clear notion about them, which the early commentators had not. The Bottians and Bottiaeans must be distinguished.

From the projecting Acte of Macedonia, three peninsulas run out into the sea: the easternmost contains mount Athos, which extends in a south-eastern direction, and is highest at the point where it reaches the sea; this mountain must be conceived to extend below the sea, first to Lemnos and thence to mount Ida. Pallene, the western peninsula, forms the eastern shore of the Thermaic gulf, and is connected with the Acte by a narrow isthmus. The middle peninsula is called Sithonia. The interior of the broad Acte was never inhabited by Greeks, but only by barbarians, except a few isolated points, such as Apollonia. Sithonia itself was likewise occupied by barbarians, and Μιξέλληνες existed only here and there. Pallene, on the other hand, was thoroughly Greek. This country is one of the most fertile in all Europe; it was also, like Campania, called Phlegra, a name implying a volcanic district of immense fertility. The use of manure in Pallene would be injurious and cause the wheat to shoot up too high. There are districts in that peninsula where tobacco, which otherwise exhausts the most fertile soil, is grown in ordinary corn-fields; but if it were not for the tobacco, everything would be overgrown with weeds, and it would require great labour to destroy them. Wheat there grows to a height of from five to six feet, and it is nothing uncommon to see it rise even to seven or eight feet. Hence that country was a χώρα περιμάχητος. Potidaea, one of the faces malorum of the Peloponnesian war, was situated on the isthmus of Pallene. Potidaea and Syracuse, the two ill-fated places that brought ruin on Greece in this war, were colonies of Corinth.

The towns on this coast are called τὰ πολίσματα τὰ ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης, or πόλεις Χαλκιδικαὶ ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης. It is only in an improper sense that we speak of a country of the name of Chalcidice; wherever that name occurs, it is incorrect and belongs to a late period. We must not, however, believe that none but Chalcidian towns existed there; they only formed the majority; the towns were not even all Greek. Besides the Dorian Potidaea, there existed Andrian and Eretrian towns, though they were few in number. But the Hellenic character was communicated to the neighbouring tribes, not only to the Bottiaeans and Pelasgians of mount Athos, but also to the Thracians, so that in the time of Philip many places are called Greek, which at an earlier period did not bear that name. The thirty-two Greek places on the Thracian coast, so often mentioned by Demosthenes, which were conquered and destroyed by Philip, cannot be taken as Greek towns in the strict sense of the term, but there were among them some which are called by Thucydides δίγλωττοι. I must here notice an error which is found in most maps, and even in those of D’Anville; namely, Chalcis is marked as a large town in that district, though not a trace of it occurs in our authors. It is a mere invention from the name of the Chalcidian towns, and is based on no better authority than the alleged town of Magnesia in Thessaly.

Potidaea, a Corinthian and the only Doric settlement in that part, is one of those places, the situation of which is so fortunate, that in spite of all calamities they always recover. It was conquered by the Athenians and received cleruchi, who were no doubt expelled by Lysander like the cleruchi in all the other places; it would appear, however, that the ancient Corinthian inhabitants who had been scattered in all directions, scarcely returned at all, and the few who did return became subjects of Olynthus, with which they afterwards formed a relation of sympolity. During this period, therefore, Potidaea was insignificant, and was conquered by the Athenians at the time when they recovered their maritime power; it was then probably re-conquered by the Olynthians, and finally came into the permanent possession of Macedonia. It may then have been destroyed, but it was restored from its ruins by Cassander, and called Cassandrea,⁠[78] under which name it was one of the most important Macedonian cities, and at times was the capital of the whole empire. The foundation of Cassandrea and the enlargement of Thessalonica shew that Cassander had a quick eye in discovering the appropriate sites of towns. It is a remarkable fact that these cities, although for a considerable time the kings resided in them, still were tolerably independent republics under the supremacy of the very kings who had founded them. Under Ptolemy Ceraunus and Lysimachus, Cassandrea was one of the capitals of Macedonia. After the death of the former, it was separated from Macedonia, and fell into the hands of the terrible tyrant, Apollodorus. During the wars of the Romans it was an important city, and maintained that rank throughout the middle ages down to modern times; six years ago (1822) it was destroyed, but it will undoubtedly recover from this calamity also.