Book 2 — Footnotes

1.

The map of Northern Greece was not received until that of the Peloponnese had been engraved; and being intended by the author for circulation in Germany, as well as in England, the names are given in Latin. This must serve as an apology for this want of uniformity in the two maps.

2.

See particularly Pouqueville's list of Albanian words. Compare Thunmann's Geschichte der Europäischen Völker, p. 250. Concerning the Illyrians, see App. 1, § 21, 28.

3.

Strabo VII. p. 321 A.

4.

Illyrian words in use among the Macedonians: σαυάδαι (Sileni) in Macedonian, δευάδαι in Illyrian; δράμις, bread, in Macedonian, δράμικης among the Athamanes. Orchomenos, p. 254. Compare Hesychius in βατάρα. See the copious collection in Sturz de Dialecto Macedonica.

5.

As this expression is often used in the following pages, I take this opportunity of stating, that by an aboriginal people, I mean one which, as far as our knowledge extends, first dwelt in a country, before which we know of no other inhabitants of that country.

6.

Justin, VII. 1. Compare Æsch. Suppl. 261.

7.

Herod. I. 57. See Orchomenos, p. 444.

8.

Compare, for example, δαίνειν to kill, δάνος death, with θανεῖν, θάνατος; ἐέλδω (ἐέλδωρ in Homer) with ἐθέλω; ἀδραία for αἰδρία, in which θ loses its aspiration, as φ does in κεφαλὴ (so in German haubet for haupt), ἀφροῦτις for ὀφρὺς (brow), Βίλιππος, Βερενίκη, βαλακρὸς, &c. The aspirate is also frequently lost; ἐνδομενία or ἐνδυμενία, furniture (in Polybius), with a change of υ and ο.

9.

E.g. the nominatives ἵπποτα, &c., which are also called Æolico-Bœotic, Doric, and Thessalian. Sturz ut sup. p. 28.

10.

E.g. ζέρεθρα for βάραθρα.

11.

E.g. ταγῶν ἀγὰ, the leading of the Tagus, as in Thessaly; ματτύα, dainties, a Thessalian, Macedonian, and also Spartan word.

12.

E.g. βίρροξ, hirsutus, hirtus; γάρκαν, virgam; ἴλεξ, ilex. The want of aspirates also forms a point of comparison.

13.

Apollodorus, III. 8, 1.

14.

Ap. Constant. Porph. de Themat. II. 2, p. 1453. Sturz Hellan. Fragm. p. 79. The passage of Hesiod is probably from the Ἠοῖαι, and there is no reason for supposing it spurious. The second verse should be read, υἶε δύω Μάγνητα Μάκεδνόν θ᾽ ἱππιοχάρμην.

15.

Concerning the Macedonians, see Appendix I.

16.

I allude here particularly to the ending of the genitive case of the second declension in οιο, which the grammarians quote as Thessalian.

17.

See Appendix I. § 28. The ancient Macedonian coins represent precisely the same dress as the Thessalian.

18.

Compare Θετταλικὰ πτερὰ in several grammarians, with Didymus in Ammonius in χλαμύς. More will be found on this subject in book IV. c. 2, § 4.

19.

Compare Theocritus XII. 14, with Alcman quoted in the Scholia, and b. IV. c. 4, § 6.

20.

Hesychius in δεσποίνας. See book IV. c. 4, § 4.

21.

According to Ælian, V. H. III. 15, the women of Illyria were present at banquets and wine-parties; Herod. V. 18, says the contrary of the Macedonians.

22.

Strabo, V. p. 221.

23.

See particularly Stephan. Byzant. in Ἔφυρα.

24.

Alexander Ephesius ap. Stephan. Byz. in Χαονία.

25.

Niebuhr's Roman History, vol. i. p. 46, ed. 2, English tr. Hence many names were the same in both countries; as, e.g., Pandosia (Justin, XII. 2), Acheron, Acherontia, &c.

26.

Herodotus also says, that the Ionians and Æolians had formerly been Pelasgians, having, as it were, swallowed up that nation; he must however assume that they changed their language (μετέμαθον τὴν γλῶσσαν), as the language of the Pelasgi who dwelt near Creston and Placia (which was probably nothing more than an ancient dialect) appeared to him barbarous. Æschylus (Suppl. 911) opposes them, as genuine Greeks, to the καρβανοι, or barbarians.

27.

Thus, e.g., the Amphilochians and Chaonians, according to Thucyd. II. 68, 80. The following ancient Greek forms occur in the Epirot dialect: γδοῦποσ for δοῦποσ (Maittaire, p. 141), γνώσκω, nosco, Orion p. 42, 17. Ἄσπετος Achilles, Plut. Pyrrh. 1. (α-ἕπομαι.)—The account in Strabo VII. p. 327, of two languages being spoken in some districts, doubtless refers to the coexistence of Grecian and Illyrian dialects.

28.

Polyb. XVII. 5, 8.

29.

Orchomenos, p. 253.

30.

According to Hesychius, Βρέκυς (Βερεκύντιος) is the same word as Βρύξ. Bruges was also used by Ennius, and, as it appears, by Marcus Brutus (Plutarch, Brut. 45).

31.

See the Chrestomathia of Proclus. Briges, or Phryges, in the region of Dyrrachium, Appian, Bell. Civ. II., 39.

32.

Creuzer Fragment. Histor. p. 171. Strabo XIV. p. 680. Compare Conon in Photius I.

33.

Concerning this point, see Hoeck's History of Crete, vol. I. p. 109, sqq.

34.

According to the opinion of their colonists, Herod. VII. 73. Eudoxus ap. Steph. in Ἀρμενία. Compare Heeren De Linguarum Asiaticarum in Persarum Imperio Cognatione, Comment. Gotting. vol. XIII.

35.

The Armenians frequently occur in the ancient traditional history of the oriental kingdoms; e.g., in Diod. II. 1 as conquered by Ninus. They are likewise represented as the original inhabitants in the native legends collected by Moses of Chorene.

36.

Plato, Cratyl. p. 410 A. It is remarkable that these words are also in the German language. Πῦρ (see Grimm's Deutsche Grammatik, vol. I. p. 584, 2d ed.) in ancient High German was viuri, in Low German für. Κύων, canis, hund (d added as in μὴν, μὰν—Phrygian for moon—and mahnd, mond). Ὕδωρ, in High German wazar, in Low German water; the digamma is present the genuine Phrygian form βéδυ, which, on account of ancient vicinity, was also a Macedonian and Orphic word (see Neanth. Cyzicen. ap. Clem. Alexand. Strom. V. p. 673. Jablonsky de Lingua Phrygia, p. 76), and is sometimes translated water, and sometimes air. Lastly, the Phrygian inscription in Walpole's Memoirs, especially the words ΜΙΔΑΙ ΛΑϜΑΓΤΑΕΙ ϜΑΝΑΚΤΕΙ, prove that it had a great resemblance, both in radical forms and inflexion, with the Greek.

37.

Thus the verb sum keeps in the Armenian or Haicanian the same fundamental form which it has in all the languages allied to the Greek (yem, yes, e—sum, es, est). And it is remarkable, that the three Phrygian Greek words noticed in the text have been likewise preserved in the Haicanian: πῦρ is hur (as πατὴρ hair, πéντε hink); ὕδωρ, tschur (as θερμὸς tscherm); κύων is shun. See Klaproth, Asia Polyglotta, p. 99.

38.

See Jablonsky de Lingua Lycaon. Opusc. vol. III. p. 119.

39.

That is, if the epic poet Chœrilus spoke of Lyctian Solymi in the well-known passage preserved in Josephus cont. Apion. vol. II. p. 454, ed. Haverc. &c. See Naeke's Chœrilus, p. 130, sq.

40.

E.g. ἀδαγοὺς, an androgynous deity (Hesych. in v.), from Dagon; the name Adon (Athen. XIV. p. 624); βαλλὴν king, (Hesych. in v. Eustath. ad Od. τ. p. 680. Bas.) from Baal, &c. See Blomf. ad Æsch. Pers. 663.

41.

See Orchomenos, p. 379-390.

42.

Herod. VII. 111.

43.

All their words with which we are acquainted are very unlike the Greek; e.g. the word βρία and βρέα for city, which frequently occurs, ζίλα wine, πιτῦγες treasure, Schol. Apollon. Rhod. I. 933, &c.

44.

Herod. V. 13. VII, 20, 75. Compare Hellanicus ut sup.; where read, ἐφ᾽ οὖ νῦν Μακεδόνες καλοῦνται μόνοι μετὰ Μυσῶν τότε οἰκοῦντες. This at the same time probably refers to the tradition, that the Mysians (as well as the Thynians and others) came from Thrace to Asia, according to Strabo, and Pliny H. N. V. 32, 41. VII. 57.

45.

Homer, Hymn. Ven. 113.

46.

Æginetica, pp. 12, 155. Compare also Phavorinus in Ἀχαιοὺς ἄρξωσιν. In the later times they were probably still in the territory of the Molossians, who were considered as Greeks, Herod. VI. 127.

47.

Il. XVI. 233.

48.

See Orchomenos, pp. 139, 248, sqq. Buttmann, indeed, in his Memoir on the Minyæ (Berlin Transactions for 1820, p. 13), denies the existence of these places; but several of the passages which I have quoted are decisive.

49.

According to the genealogy from the Ἠοῖαι—Dorus, Xuthus (from whom Achæus and Ion), and Æolus; see Appendix II. The genealogy in Euripides, Ion 1608. viz. Xuthus, father of Ion, Dorus, and Achæus, is distorted to suit the national feelings of the Athenians. The passage from the Ἠοῖαι, however, although in a poetical garb, is more credible than the testimony of Herodotus, who considers the Ionians as aborigines.

50.

Concerning what follows, see Apollonius Rhod. IV. 521, sqq. Schol. ad 1. et ad IV. 1125, 1149. Apollodorus ap. Stephan. Byzant. in Ὑλλεῖς (p. 434, ed. Heyn.) Scylax, p. 7. ed. Voss. Scymnus Chius 404, from Timæus (Fragm. 121. ed. Goeller) and Eratosthenes. Dionys. Perieg. 386, with Eustathius and the Scholia. Etymol. Magn. p. 776. 39, where they are called a Celtic nation (ἔθνος Κελτικον). Compare Schoenemann Geograph. Argonaut. p. 53, and book III. c. 5.

51.

Apollon. Rh. IV. 538, and others. Panyasis appears from the Scholiast to Apollonius Rhod. IV. 1149, to have mentioned two Hylluses, viz. the son of Melite and the son of Deianira. Compare Schol. Soph. Trachin. 53. Vales, ad Harpocrat. p. 126. In the Scholiast to Pindar Pyth. I. 120, Ὕλλος, ὄς ἑβασίλευσε τῶν περὶ τὴν Ἰταλίαν οἱκησάντων, where Hemsterhuis reads Οἰχαλίαν, Raoul-Rochette (Histoire de l'Etablissement des Colonies Grecques, tom. II. p. 280) proposes, not without some probability, Ἰλλυρίαν.

52.

Apollon. Rh. IV. 528.

53.

Thucyd. III. 81.

54.

Especially the connected chain of Ætolians, Epeans, Locrians (concerning whose affinity see Boeckh ad Pind. Olymp. IX. 61. p. 191), and Lelegians (Hesiod ap. Strab. VII. p. 322); and if these, as some say, are the same as the Carian nation, to which the Lydians and a part of the Mysians belonged, they would seem to compose a very numerous race.

55.

See book II. ch. 7.

56.

The ancients frequently say, that the Ionians in Asia ἐλυμήναντο τῆς διαλέκτου τὸ πάτριον. Photius in v. φαρμακός.

57.

Concerning the Doric dialect, see Appendix VI.

58.

Herod. I. 56; concerning which passage see Salmasius, de Lingua Hellenica, p. 276, and Mémoires de l'Académie des Inscriptions, tom. XXV. p. 11-28. Compare VIII. 43. Ἐόντες Δωρικόν τε καὶ Μακεδνὸν ἔθνος ἐξ Ἐρινεοῦ τε καὶ Πίνδου καὶ τῆς Δρυοπίδος ὕστατα ὁρμηθέντες.

59.

See, on the subject of this genealogy, Appendix II.

60.

Apollod. I. 7, 2.

61.

Thus Pindar, Olymp. VIII. 30, calls the Myrmidons Δωριεὺς λαὸς, in order, as I conceive, to oppose them as genuine Greeks to nations of a different origin.

62.

From the circumstance that, in Homer, Achilles the Æacides is represented as chief of the Hellenes, and that the Æacidæ were also ancient princes of Ægina, the author has in a former work (Æginetica, p. 18) explained the name of the temple of Zeus in Ægina, Ἑλλάνιον, in later times called Πανελλήνιον. For this temple is assuredly more ancient than the time when all the Greeks were called Hellenes; and it must therefore be considered as a sanctuary of the original Hellenes, who also dwelt in Phthia, as an ancient national temple of the Myrmidons.

63.

Appendix I., last note.

64.

The height of mount Olympus, according to Bernouille, is 1017 toises, or 6501 English feet; of Ossa, according to Dodwell, about 5000 feet.

65.

A more accurate description of this valley than those of Ælian and Barthélemy is given by Bartholdy, Bruchstücke zur Kentniss Griechenlands, p. 112; Clarke, Travels, part II. sect. iii. p. 273; Hawkins, in Walpole's Memoirs relating to European Turkey, p. 528; Holland, Albania, p. 291; Dodwell, Travels, vol. I. p. 103; and Pouqueville, tom. III. c. 73. Among the ancients, Theopompus, in his Φιλιππικὰ, gave an accurate description of Tempe. See Theo. Sophist. Progymn. II. p. 19; Frommel, in Creuzer's Meletemata, III. p. 141, 6.

66.

XX. m. p. in ipsis faucibus saltus, Livy from Polyb. XVIII. 10, 2, on the side of Olympus. Meletius mentions here a place called Goniga.

67.

Liv. XXXIX. 25.

68.

Il. B. 753.

69.

Herod. VII. 128, 173.

70.

Liv. XLIV. 6. Polyb. XXVIII. 11. 1. Ἀζορίου μεταξὺ καὶ Δολιχῆς.

71.

See, besides Herodotus, Liv. XLIV. 2, and Plutarch, Æmil. 9.

72.

Concerning the situation of this place see Liv. XLIV. 2 and 6.

73.

Πυθίου Ἀπολλωνος ἱερὸν, τὸ Πύθιον καὶ τὴν Πέτραν Plutarch. Æmil. 15. Pythoum (Πυθῷον) et Petra Liv. XLIV. 2, 32, 35. XLII. 53. That there was only one Pythium in this district is evident from an accurate examination of the marches. Mannert (vol. VII. p. 520, 563) has placed Pythium on the pass through the Cambunian mountains (above the modern Alesson and Sarviza), of which it lay far to the right. His opinion is contradicted by Liv. XLIV. 2. and Plutarch, ubi sup. Compare Stephanus in Πύθιον, Πυθιεῖς οἱ τὸ Πύθιον οἰκοῦντες, ἐν ῷ Ἀπόλλωνος ἱερον ἐστι, and in Βάλλα.

74.

960 toises. See above.

75.

See Plutarch ubi sup. Liv. ubi sup. and XLIV. 7. comp. Polyb. XXVIII. 11.

76.

Liv. XXXI. 41. XXXVI. 10, 13. XLII. 67. XLIV. 2.

77.

Ptolemy includes it in Pelasgiotis. Unfortunately we have not the Greek original of the passage in Livy concerning the Tripolis, XLII. 53.

78.

Orchomenos, p. 126.

79.

Liv. XXXII. 15. Strabo IX. p. 438, 440.

80.

Concerning Pelinna, see, besides Cellarius, Spanheim de Usu Numm. IX. p. 902. Salmasius ad Solin. p. 687. Wesseling ad Diodor. XVIII. 11. and Boeckh Comment. ad Pind. Pyth. X. p. 335.

81.

Besides Strabo, see Diodorus XVIII. 56. In Polyænus IV. 2, 18, should be written, Φίλιππος ἐπολιόρκει Φαρκηδόνα πóλιν Θεσσαλικήν.

82.

Concerning Tricca (Tricala 12-3/4 leagues from Larissa, according to Pouqueville) see Mannert, p. 569, and also Eustathius, vol. II. p. 250. ed. Basil. Tzetzes Chil. IX. 28.

83.

See II. B. 370, with the Scholia, and Eustathius. Pelinnus, a son of Œchalieus, Steph. Byzant. in Πέλιννα.

84.

Thus Pouqueville: according to Holland twelve miles, according to Vaudoncourt four hours.

85.

See Meletius, Pouqueville, Holland, Cockerell in Hughes' Travels, vol. I. p. 504.

86.

The latter according to Arrian I. 7; the former according to Liv. XXXI. 41. XXXII. 15. XXXVIII. 2. Compare Cæsar B.C. III. 80.

87.

Tempe was about 500 stadia from Gomphi, Plin. H. N. IV. 8, which distance should be thus divided: the length of Tempe 40 stadia, then to Larissa 160, to Tricca about 240, and to Gomphi 60.

88.

Strabo IX. p. 437. II. B. 729. Pausan. IV. 9, 1. Meteora cannot be Ithome; more probably the ruins of Kastraki. But the passage concerning Curalius and the temple of the Itonian Minerva, is a confusion of the geographer. Otherwise de la Porte du Theil Eclaircissemens sur Strabon I. 76, p. 248.

89.

Athen. XIV. p. 639, 640.

90.

Pouqueville, p. 37.

91.

Orchomenos, p. 126. Here also Acrisius of Argos dwelt. That it is this Larissa is plain from Schol. Apoll. Rhod. I. 40, compare Hellanicus fragm. 116. Pausan. II. 16. Tzetzes ad Lycoph. 836.

92.

Strabo, IX. p. 439.

93.

According to modern travellers. The ancients frequently misinterpreted Homer. In later times Eurotas, or Europus, as in the Excerpta of Strabo, i.e. the dark-coloured.

94.

Pouqueville.

95.

Thus the writers in Strabo VII. p. 328. Steph. Byzant. in Δωδώνη. See book II. ch. 11, § 3.

96.

Hieronymus, ap. Strab. IX. p. 443.

97.

Steph. Byzant. in Γόννος Liv. XXXII. 15.

98.

Orchomenos, pp. 248 sqq.

99.

If Oloosson is the modern Alassona on the road from Larissa to Macedonia, according to the opinion of the bishop of Thessalonica on Il. B. p. 333. ed. Rom. δοκεῖ δὲ φυλάσσειν καὶ νῦν τὴν κλῆσιν παραφθειρομένην βαρβαρικῶς, ἴσως γὰρ αὔτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἄρτι λεγομένη Ἐλασσών.

100.

See above, § 1. Andron ap. Strab. X. p. 475 E. τῆς Δωρίδος πρότερον, νῦν δὲ Ἑστιαιώτιδος λεγομένης. The Dorians also dwelt in Hestiæotis to the west of Pindus, according to Charax ap. Steph. Byzant. in Δώριον. According to Schol. Pind. Pyth. I. 124, and Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 385 (as emended by Hemsterhuis, p. 115), they dwelt in Perrhæbia; and Perrhæbia nearly coincides with Hestiæotis.

101.

See book II. ch. I, § 2.

102.

There was a hero named Azorus, Hesychius in Ἄζωρος.

103.

Hemsterhuis incorrectly considers them as identical, ubi sup. p. 116.

104.

Athen. XI. p. 503 D. καὶ ὁ τὸν Αἰγίμιον ποιήσας, εἴθ᾽ Ἡσιοδός ἐστιν ἢ Κέρκωψ ὁ Μιλήσιος. The confusion of the names of Hesiod and Cercops may, as it appears to me, be accounted for as follows. A verse concerning the desertion of Ariadne by Theseus for the sake of Ægle, is ascribed by Plutarch (vit. Thes. 20) to Hesiod, and by Athenæus (XIII. p. 557 A.) to Cercops; it is evidently from the Ægimius which was attributed to both these names. This verse was expunged from the poem by Pisistratus, as we learn from Hereas, quoted by Plutarch. The Ægimius therefore was at that time arranged and set down in writing, together with other epic poems. Consequently Cercops, an Orphic Pythagorean, who lived about the time of Pisistratus, cannot have been the author of it, though he might have been the διασκευαστὴς who arranged it in the same manner that Onomacritus did the other poems. Now it might easily happen, especially if his interpolations could be now and then discerned, that the whole poem should be attributed to him.

105.

Wesseling. ad Diod. IV. 37, p. 282.

106.

See Valckenaer ad Eurip. Phœn. p. 735.

107.

Schol. Apoll. Rhod. III. 584. IV. 816. The character of the ancient epic poetry, which never admitted of history arranged in a chronological order, cannot allow us to suppose that the Ægimius contained an account of the expedition of the Dorians, and of their colonies, down to the founding of Cyrene.

108.

This is the meaning of the passage in Steph. Byzant. Ἀβαντίς,—ὡς Ἡσίοδος ἐν Αἰγιμίου δευτέρῳ περὶ Ἰοῦς; —Νήσῳ δ᾽ ἐν Ἀβαντίδι δίῃ, τὴν πρὶν Ἀβαντίδα κίκλησκον Θεοὶ αἰὲν ἐόντες τήν ποτ᾽ ἐπώνυμον Εὔβοιαν βοὸς ὠνόμασε Ζεύς. These are followed by the four verses concerning Argos and Io quoted by Schol. Eurip. Phœn. 1151. Apollodorus II. 1, 3, alludes to this passage. Also what he mentions from this poem in II. 1, 5, belongs to the Eubœan fables. Apollodorus, in both passages, quotes the Ægimius under the name of Cercops. Compare Fabric. Bibliothec. vol. I. p. 592. ed. Harles.

109.

See Ephorus ap. Steph. Byzant. in Δυμᾶνες (p. 96. ed. Marx.), followed by Strabo IX. p. 427.

110.

Book III. ch. 1, § 7.

111.

Etymol. Magn. Τριχάϊκες.—Ἠσίοδος διὰ τὸ τριχῇ αὐτοὺς οἰκῆσαι, οἷον; Πάντες γὰρ τριχάϊκες καλέοντο Οὔνεκα τρισσὴν γαῖαν ἑκὰς πάτρης ἐδάσαντο. Τρία γὰρ Ἑλληνικὰ ἔθνη τῇ Κρήτῃ ἐπῴκησαν, Πελασγοὶ, Ἀχαιοὶ, Δωριεῖς. The last words must be considered as a mere ignorant addition; for the Dorians did not divide their territory into three parts, because two other Greek races went to Crete. It is, indeed, evident that a threefold division of the land conquered by the Dorians is here spoken of, which, as is plain from the fables concerning Ægimius and Hercules, took place according to the three tribes. According to the present reading, this division took place at a distance from the native country of the Dorians. There might seem some difficulty in this, since Hercules is said to have given Ægimius the third part of the territory as a παρακαταθήκη in Hestiæotis, the most ancient habitation of the Dorians (Diod. IV. 37, compare Apollodorus II. 7, 3). Hence πάτρῃς for πάτρης might be read in this sense: “The Dorians divided their territory into three parts for the families (of which the φυλαὶ or tribes consisted),” so that they then dwelt separately from one another (similarly Pindar Olym. p. VII. 74). This alteration, however, appears to be unnecessary; and the old reading is defended by the following explanation, viz., that according to the ancient fable Hyllus and his descendants did not dwell either near mount Œta, or in Hestiæotis together with the Dorians, but that they first received in the Peloponnese the third part of the territory, whither they came as colonists at a distance from their more ancient abodes (ἔκας πάτρης).

112.

Below, ch. 3, § 1.

113.

Hom. Od. XIX. 174.

114.

Ap. Strab. X. p. 475 D. and Stephan. Byzant. in Δώριον. Diodorus IV. 60. V. 80, gives nearly the same account, on the authority of Cretan historians, whom he mentions in V. 80.

115.

This may be collected from the passage of Dicæarchus (which, indeed, is much mutilated) cited in Steph. Byz. in Δώριον. It is given most faithfully in Montfaucon's Biblioth. Coislin. p. 286, 59.

116.

Τεύταμος appears to be the correct name, the same as that of an ancient prince of Larissa, on which the ancient Dorians bordered. The princes of the allied nations were doubtless confounded in tradition. See the author's Etrusker, vol. I. p. 94.

117.

The settlements which here come into consideration are, 1. the immigration, after the death of Minos (in the third generation before the siege of Troy), of various races, chiefly Hellenes, according to Herod. VII. 170; this is a mere tradition of the towns of Polichna and Præsus, and not a very credible one. 2. The colony of Althæmenes after the expedition of the Heraclidæ from Argos and Megara, and in connexion with Rhodes. 3. Dorians from Peloponnesus, Lyctus, Lampe, and other places settled from Sparta; Pharæ a colony of the Messenians; Gortyna of Amyclæans (Minyans); Phæstus colonized from Sicyon; other towns from Argos (Scylax, p. 18, Diod. V. 80). 4. Æginetans in Cydonia.

118.

Strabo X. p. 475 C.

119.

The Cretan cities were generally considered as Doric; Menander de Encom. XXXII. 1, p. 81, ed. Heeren. and others.

120.

Od. XIX. 175. ἄλλη δ᾽ ἄλλων γλῶσσα μεμιγμένη.

121.

On this migration of the Dorians from their early settlements in the north of Greece to Crete, see Appendix III.

122.

Orchomenos, pp. 233, 234. According to Andron (Strabo X. p. 475) they came directly from Hestiæotis under mount Parnassus. According to Diodorus IV. 67, the Cadmeans drove out the Dorians, who then returned to Doris (Erineus, Cytinium, Boeum). Lycophron v. 1388, might be quoted in confirmation of Herodotus, since he calls the Dorians Λακμώνιοι (Λάκμων ὄρος Περραιβίας ἔνθα ῴκουν Δωριεῖς), Lacmon being the name of the ridge of Pindus and the Cambunian mountains. But Lycophron only alludes to their settlements in Hestiæotis.

123.

Il. II. 849, XXI. 159. It is to this that Herodotus alludes, when he says that the Teucrians, to which race he refers the Pæonians, had penetrated as far as the Peneus (see the Introduction, and Appendix I. § 4).

124.

See Appendix I. § 17.

125.

Introduction, § 3; Appendix I. § 25.

126.

Amphicæa near Dadja. See Leake in Walpole's Travels, p. 509. Clarke, p. 227. Gell, Itinerary, p. 210.

127.

I here chiefly follow Dodwell, vol. II. p. 133, and Gell: compare Orchomenos, p. 41. Pouqueville is completely in error. According to him the Cephisus rises 11-1/2 hours N.E. of Artotina, which he supposes to be Erineus, and flows from the north into the Pindus, which river (he says) runs into the Gulph of Corinth, contrary to all accounts of ancient writers.

128.

The old maps are all incorrect; see now Gell's map to his Itinerary. According to Strabo the Tetrapolis lay chiefly to the east of Parnassus, but it extended also round to the west, IX. p. 417. The river Pindus is now, according to Dodwell, the Aniani.

129.

See p. 40, note i. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote below to “the Locrians,” that starts with “Thucyd. III. 95”.]

130.

See Strabo IX. p. 427. X. p. 476 A. Strabo distinguishes Erineus in Phthiotis from this town, IX. p. 434. Etymol. Mag. p. 373, 56, ὁ Ἐρινεὸς is the correct form. Mela however, and the scholiasts to Pindar and Aristophanes quoted below, call it Erineum.

131.

Strabo IX. p. 427 B. p. 434. Steph. Byz. Ἀκύφας μία τῆς Δωρικῆς τετραπόλεως.—Ὁ Ἀκύφας, Gen. Ἀκύφα, Dorice, see Bekker's Anecdota, vol. III. p. 1313.

132.

Scymnus Chius v. 591. Δωριεῖς Ἐρινεὸν, Βοιὸν, Κυτίνιον ἀρχαιοτάτας ἔχουσι, Πίνδον τ᾽ ἐχομένην. Comp. Conon. hist. 27. In answer to those who deny that Pindus was situated in this Tetrapolis, it is sufficient to quote Herod. VIII. 43. Comp. du Theil Eclairc. sur Strabon IX. tom. III. p. 118. Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 252, IV. p. 392.

133.

Strabo IX. p. 427 C. arranges them in this manner: Ætolians, Locri Hesperii, Dorians, Ænianes, Locri Epicnemidii; compare pp. 425, 430 B.

134.

Thucyd. III. 95, 102. It is the Kakiscala between Stagni and Salona. Dodwell, vol. I. p. 149, and Gell, p. 206.

135.

See Philochorus ap. Dionys. ad Ammæum c. 11. Philoch. Fragm. ed. Siebelis p. 76.

136.

Pausan. X. 33, 2.

137.

This road through Camara, Palæochori, and Neuropoli, is described by Dodwell, vol. II. p. 126. Gell, p. 241.

138.

Holland went over this road near Eleutherochori, p. 383, comp. Dodwell, p. 74. It is also the way alluded to by Procopius de Ædif. IV. 2.

139.

Liv. XXXVI. 15. For a description of Thermopylæ see Orchomenos, p. 486. Clarke, ch. 8, p. 240. Holland, ch. 18, p. 315. Gell, Itinerary, p. 239.

140.

See Stephan. Byz. in Ἀμφαναὶ from Theopompus. Eurip. Herc. Fur. 386.

141.

Strabo IX. p. 428. Liv. XXXVI. 16.

142.

Steph. Byz. in Φρίκιον, and Hellanicus, ibid.

143.

Strabo ubi sup.

144.

See Lycophron, Hecatæus, Rhianus quoted by Stephanus.

145.

Thus Andron in Strabo X. p. 476. Thucyd. I. 107.

146.

Æschin. de Fals. Leg. p. 43, 24, τὸν ἤκοντα ἐκ Δωρίου καὶ Κυτινίου. [Dr. Cramer, Description of Ancient Greece, vol. II. p. 103, corrects Δωρικοῦ Κυτίνου in Æschines, after Thucydides, who in III. 95, speaks of Κυτίνιον τὸ Δωρικόν. Transl.]

147.

Theopompus ap. Steph. Ἀκύφας. Scymnus Chius ubi sup.

148.

Strabo VIII. p. 383. Conon. 27. Scymnus. To this also refers the statement in Apollodorus I. 7, 3. that Dorus the son of Hellen τὴν πέραν χώραν Πελοποννήσου ἔλαβεν. Vitruvius IV. 1, however, gives a different account, Achaia Peloponnesoque tota Dorus Hellenis et Orseidis nymphæ (a mountain nymph) filius regnavit.

149.

Hecatæus ap. Stephan.

150.

In the scholia to Pindar, Pyth. I. 121, in which, however, there is some transposition and confusion. There is nowhere else any mention of a city in Perrhæbia named Pindus. In Pindar Πινδόθεν is used generally for the earlier settlements; for Hestiæotis and Doris both touch on the chain of Pindus. See Boeckh. Explic. p. 235. These scholia are probably followed by the scholiast on Aristoph. Plut. 385, and by Tzetzes ad Lycophr. v. 980. comp. v. 741; but without separating the erroneous parts.

151.

Tarphe was near the Doric Tetrapolis between Œta and Parnassus. It is mentioned in Iliad II. 533, as a Locrian town; according to Strabo IX. p. 426, it was afterwards called Pharygæ, which Plutarch, Phocion 33, includes in Phocis, and names near it a hill called Acrurion. Tarphe and Carphæa may be considered as different forms of the same name, t and k being often interchanged. Thus the mythological hero Talaus is sometimes Calaus. (Schol. Soph. Œd. Col. 1320.)

152.

Herod. VIII. 31, comp. Plutarch. Themistocl. 9.

153.

P. 24. Διμοδωριεῖς.

154.

Herod. VIII. 31 and 43. ἐόντες οὗτοι Δωρικὸν καὶ Μακεδνὸν ἔθνος ἐξ Ἐρινεοῦ τε καὶ Πίνδου καὶ τῆς Δρυοπίδος ὕστατα ὁρμηθέντες. According to this passage, therefore, Cytinium and Boeum may both have been inhabited by the Dryopians.

155.

According to Strabo IX. p. 434, there was a Dryopian Tetrapolis as well as a Dorian.

156.

Ap. Strab. p. 373. The scholia to Apollon. Rhod. I. 1283, furnish a genealogy, viz. Lycaon, Dia, Dryops. Followed by Tzetzes ad Lyc. 480, and Etymol. Mag. p. 288, 32. Pherecydes, however, quoted in the scholia to Apollonius, gives a different account.

157.

See book II. ch. 11, § 3.

158.

In the neighbourhood of the Malians and Myrmidonian Achæans, Pherecydes ap. Schol. Apoll. Rh. I. 1823, pp. 93, 107, ed. Sturz. Aristotle ubi sup. At the foot of Mount Parnassus, Aristotle and Pausan. IV. 34, 6. Λυκωρείταις ὅμοροι. The μετοίκησις from the Spercheus to Trachis is merely a confusion of the scholiast to Apollonius. Callimachus had only mentioned the migration to Peloponnesus, Schol. Paris. Clavier's remarks (ad Apollod. p. 323) are very inaccurate. Dryops, the son of Spercheus, dwelt at the foot of mount Œta, according to Antoninus Liberalis, 32.

159.

Ibid. 4. Κραγαλεὺς ὁ Δρύοπος ᾢκει γῆς τῆς Δρυοπίδος παρὰ τὰ λουτρὰ τὰ Ἡρακλέους. In this strange account Melaneus, the son of Apollo, a king of the Dryopes, is represented as taking Epirus and Ambracia. It is a part of the same history as the migration of the Ænianes and Neoptolemus to Molossis, Æginetica, p. 18.

160.

Book II. ch. 3, § 3.

161.

Aristot. ap. Strab. ubi sup. Apollod. II. 7, 7. Diod. IV. 37. Pausan. IV. 34, 6. Servius ad Æn. IV. 146. Πράξεις Ἡρακλέους, p. 152. Marini Ville Albani. comp. Æginetica, p. 33. Heyne Exc. ad Æn. IV. 2, p. 610. Raoul-Rochette, tom. I. p. 434. Herod. VIII. 43, οἱ δὲ Ἑρμιονέες εἰσὶ Δρύοπες ὑπὸ Ἡρακλέος τε καὶ Μηλιέων ἐκ τῆς νῦν Δωρίδος καλεομένης χώρης ἐξαναστάντες. A peculiar application of the tradition in Suidas in Δρύοπες, Κάρπος. The verse of Callimachus preserved in Etymol. Magn. p. 154, 7, should apparently be thus written, Δειλαίοις Ἀσινεῦσιν ἐπιτριπτῆρας ὀπάσσας, the explanation is given by the etymologist himself. See above, p. 45, note k. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “Parnassus,” starting “In the neighbourhood of the Malians.”]

162.

Herodot. VIII. 46. Diodor. IV. 57. Thucydides VII. 57, however, considers the Styrians as Ionians.

163.

Herodot. ubi sup. Diodor. ubi sup. The fabulous war of Amphitryon against Cythnus is probably connected with it.

164.

Herodot. VII. 90. Diodor. ubi sup. Asine in Cyprus, Stephan. Byz. Also in Cyzicus, according to Strabo XIII. p. 586.

165.

See Orchomenos, p. 496. In Æschines adv. Ctesiph. p. 68, 40, according to Didymus and Xenagoras in Harpocration, Κραυγαλλίδαι should be written.

166.

Antonin. Liberal. 4.

167.

Book II. ch. 3, § 3.

168.

Παράλιοι, Ἱερῆς, Τραχίνιοι Thucyd. III. 92. comp. Dodwell, II. p. 71. I may also remark that Scylax and Diodorus, XVIII. 11, appear to make a distinction between Melians and Malians; but in both places ΛΑΜΙΕΙΣ should be written for Μαλιεῖς and Μαλεῖς. Wesseling's opinion concerning the last passage is untenable, since there never was a town of the name of Malea. Diodorus is not quite accurate.

169.

Diodor. XII. 59.

170.

Aristot. Polit. IV. 13.

171.

Thucyd. IV. 100.

172.

See Tittmann's Amphiktyonenbund, p. 41.

173.

Strabo IX. p. 434.

174.

Æginetica, p. 17.

175.

Orchomenos, p. 253.

176.

Book II. ch. 3, § 12.

177.

Thucyd. III. 92.

178.

Strab. IX. p. 442.

179.

Thucyd. VIII. 3. Concerning the founding of Heraclea, see also Stephan. Byz. in v. Δώριον, after the hiatus.

180.

Book II. ch. 1. § 8, ch. 3. § 5.

181.

Orchomenos, p. 238. Compare in general with this chapter, Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 249.

182.

ἡ τῶν Ἡρακλειδῶν κάϑοδος. Thucydides I. 12, says Δωριεῖς ξὺν Ἡρακλεíδαις. Isocrates Archidam. p. 119 C. mentions an oracle enjoining them ἐπì τὴν πατρῴαν ἰέναι χώραν.

183.

XIX. 105.

184.

See Pausan. VII. 25. 3.

185.

Αὐτὸς γὰρ Κρονίων, καλλιστεφάνου πόσις Ἥρης, Ζεὺς Ἡρακλείδαις τήνδε δέδωκε πόλιν. Οἷσιν ἅμα προλιπόντες Ἐρινεὸν ἠνεμόεντα, Εὐρεῖαν Πέλοπος νῆσον ἀφικόμεθα. τήνδε πόλιν is Laconia. We mean the Dorians: Erineus the Tetrapolis. Strabo VIII. p. 362 has not correctly understood and applied these verses. (See below, note to ch. 7. § 10.) Tyrtæus also calls the Dorians generally Ἡρακλῆος γένος—whence Plutarch de Nobil. 2. p. 388.

186.

Herodot. V. 72. According to VI. 53, he might also have said, “I am an Egyptian.”

187.

A similar idea is entertained by Plato in his Laws, III. p. 682—viz., that the Dorians were properly Achæans, expelled from their own country after the Trojan war, and afterwards collected and brought back by one Dorieus.

188.

Pind. Pyth. V. 70. In Pyth. I. 61, he calls them descendants of Pamphylus and the Heraclidæ, not mentioning Dymas. Compare the fragment of the Isthmians, Ὕλλου στρατὸς Δωριεύς.

189.

See Pausan. IV. 2. 1. There are two other passages of Hesiod referring to the expedition of the Heraclidæ. Schol. Apollon I. 824. Θεσσάμενος γενεὴν Κλεαδαίου κυδαλίμοιο, the connexion of which is very obscure (see Bentley ad Callim. Cer. Calath. 48); and Schol. Pind. Olymp. XI. 79. e cod. Vratisl. Τιμάνδην Ἔχεμος θαλερὴν ποιήσατ᾽ ἄκοιτιν. From this passage Apollod. III. 10. 6. Pausan. VIII. 5. 1. draw their materials. This, however, might also occur among the actions of Hercules, particularly at the first Olympian festival, as may be seen from Pindar.

190.

VI. 52.

191.

Compare Pausan. IV. 2. 1. with V. 17. 4. and Valckenar. Diatrib. Eurip. pp. 58, 59.

192.

Herod. ubi sup. et c. 51. Wesseling misinterprets the first passage; its purport is, “The Lacedæmonians give a different account from all the poets, who make Eurysthenes and Procles first come to Sparta.” Schweighæuser does not see the exact meaning of the second; the sense is, “So far is the national tradition of the Lacedæmonians; in what follows, I relate the common tradition of Greece.”

193.

Herodot. IX. 26.

194.

IX. 26.

195.

In general the tragic poets successively descend, according to their age, to a later date of mythological history.

196.

Pausan. IV. 2. 1.

197.

I take this opportunity of renewing the memory of one of these Doric-Heraclide leaders, who has been so far forgotten, that in the passage of Pausanias IV. 30. 1. his name has been driven from the text. It should be thus written from the MSS.: Ὕλλου δὲ καὶ Δωριέων μάχῃ κρατηθέντων ὑπὸ Ἀχαιῶν, ἐνταῦθα Ἀβίαν Γλήνου τοῦ Ἡρακλέους τροφὸν ἀποχωρῆσαι λέγουσι, &c. This Glenus occurs as the son of Deianira in Apollod. II. 7. 8. and Schol. Soph. Trachin. 53. Diodorus IV. 37. calls him Gleneus. Pherecydes ap. Schol. Pind. Isth. IV. 104. reckons him among the children of Megara by Hercules.

198.

Ap. Longin. 27. Creuzer. Fragment. p. 54. Apollodorus II. 8. 1. almost makes it appear that the Heraclidæ had been entertained by Eurystheus; but this does not agree with what precedes. Euripides Heraclid. 13. 195. represents them as flying first from Argos to Trachis, and to Achaia in Thessaly, and then to Athens.

199.

Thus Pherecydes in Antonin. Liber. 33. Sturz (Fragm. 50. p. 196.) does not quite understand this passage.

200.

At Marathon, according to most authors. Diodorus IV. 57. mentions Tricorythus; Compare XII. 45.

201.

The outline of the narrative is furnished by Pherecydes and Herod. IX. 27. the details by Euripides in the Heraclidæ, whose account was influenced by the circumstances of the time (Boeckh. trag. Gr. princ. p. 190). Whether the Heraclidæ of Pamphilus (Aristoph. Plut. 385. Schol. ad I. p. 112, Hemsterh.) was a tragedy or a picture, was frequently contested by the ancients. The latter appears to be most probable: see Winckelmann and Meyer Kunstgeschichte, p. 166. Pamphilus painted the battle of Phlius, one of those which took place in the 102nd or 103rd Olympiad; and it may be fairly supposed that he flourished about Olymp. 97, 4, the year in which the second edition of the Plutus was brought forward, and he might have lived to be the master of Apelles, who had obtained great celebrity in the reign of Philip.—Concerning the battle, see Elmsley ad Eur. Heraclid. 860; concerning the death of Eurystheus, Wesseling. ad Diod. IV. 57. and Staveren. Misc. Obs. vol. X. p. 383. Pallene is between Marathon and Athens;—according to Strabo VIII. p. 377. the tomb was at Gargettus on the western coast; according to Pausanias I. 40. in Megaris. Concerning Macaria, see Pausan. I. 32. Schol. Aristoph. Eq. 1148. Zenob II. 61. and other grammarians in v. βάλλ᾽ εἰς Μακαρíαν. A totally different tradition is preserved by Duris ap. Schol. Plat. p. 134, Ruhnk. In the above quoted passage of Strabo, τὴν δὲ κεφαλὴν χωρὶσ ἐν ΤΗΙ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΩΙ, ἀποκόπσαντος αὐτὴν Ἰολάου περὶ τὴν κρὴνην τὴν Μακαρίαν should probably be written ἐν ΤΡΙΚΟΡΥΘΩΙ; thus in VIII. p. 383. one MS. has Τρικόρινθος. (In this correction I now find that I was anticipated by Elmsley ad Eurip. Heracl. 103.) Heyne indeed (ad Apollod. II. 8. 1.) explains ἐν τῇ Κορίνθῳ of the tomb of Eurystheus in Pausan. I. 44. 14.; but this was in Megaris, and there never was any change in the boundaries of Corinth and Megaris. Heyne also considers the tomb near the temple of the Pallenian Minerva and that at Gargettus as identical; but this is not possible, on account of the situation of the two places.—Concerning Gargettus see the article Attika in Ersch's Encyclopædia, p. 222.

202.

Demosth. de Corona, p. 147.

203.

It does not follow from Pindar Pyth. IX. 82. that Iolaus was restored to life, which must have been alluded to elsewhere. I follow the second Scholiast, ηὔξατο δὲ τῷ Διὶ ἐπὶ μίαν ὤραν ἡβῆσαι, &c. Compare Ovid. Met. IX. 408.

204.

See book II. ch. 11. § 10.

205.

Ap. Antonin. Lib. 33.—There is also a trace of another tradition in Apostolius XVIII. 7.

206.

See book II. ch. 11. § 7.

207.

Thus also Thucyd. I. 9. Plat. Leg. III. p. 686. In Schol. Eurip. Orest. 5. write αὐτοὺς μὲν (the Atridæ) ἀποστῆσαι Λακεδοίμονες, τοὺς δὲ Περοείδας βασιλεῦσαι. Polyænus I. 10. is singular in mentioning Eurysthidæ in Sparta at the time of the migration; but by Eurysthidæ must be meant “descendants of Eurysthenes,” not “Eurysthenes and his party.” See Clinton F. H. vol. I. p. 333.

208.

See particularly Plato ubi sup.

209.

Apollod. II. 8. 2. ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἀντεῖπε τῶν ἀτυχημάτων αὑτοὺς αἰτίους εἶναι. τοὺς γὰρ χρησμοὺς οὐ συμβάλλειν. λέγειν γὰρ οὐ γῆς ἀλλὰ γενεᾶς καρπὸν τρίτον καὶ στενυγρὰν τὴν εὐρυγάστορα, δεξίαν κατὰ τὸν Ἰσθμὸν ἔχοντι τὴν θάλασσαν. With the word εὐρυγάστωρ compare κύτους κοιλογάστορος, Æschyl. Theb. 478. and 1026. In later times, however, these oracles were put into an epic form, as may be seen from Œnomaus ap. Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. 20.

210.

See Herod. IX. 26. Pausan. I. 41. 3. I. 44. VIII. 5. 1. VIII. 45. 2. Diod. IV. 58. Schol. Pind. Olymp. N. 80. Van Staveren Misc. Observ. X. 3. p. 385.

211.

Pausan. VIII. 5. Apollod. II. 7. 7. Diod. IV. 58. Strabo IV. p. 427 C. Isocrat. Archidam. p. 119 B. τελευτήσαντος Εὐρυσθέως.

212.

Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 61.

213.

Apollod. II. 8. 3. In Pausan. II. 28. 3. Orsobia, a daughter of Deiphontes of Epidaurus, is the wife of Pamphylus.

214.

He was mentioned by Hesiod; see above, p. 55. note k. [Transcriber's Note: No such note on that page, nor any reference to Cleodæus.] A different genealogy is given by Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 804, viz., that Cleodæus was the son of Hyllus, the brother of Lichas and Ceyx, the husband of a certain Peridea, and the father of Temenus.

215.

See Crates ap. Tatian. cont. Græcos, p. 107. ed. Oxf. Interpret. ad Vellei. I. 1.

216.

See particularly Œnomaus ap. Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. 20.; and concerning the second see Apollod. II. 8. 2. Pausan. II. 7.

217.

Isocrates Archidam, p. 119, only supposes one expedition.

218.

Pausan. V. 3. Eusebius ubi sup. Polyæn. I. 9. Compare Heyne ad Apollod. p. 208.

219.

See Strab. IX. p. 427. Ephorus, p. 105. ed. Marx. Compare Stephanus and Suidas in Naύpaktoς.

220.

Bekk. Anecd. Græc. p. 305. 31. στεμματιαῖον. μίμημα τῶν σχεδιῶν αἷς ἔπλευσαν οἱ Ἡρακλεῖδαι τὸν μεταξὺ τῶν Ῥίων τόπον. Hesychius, στεμματιαῖον. δίκηλόν τι ἐν ἑορτῇ πομπέων δαιμόνων (as should be read for δαίμονος, rather than πομπέως for πομπέων with Siebelis ad Pausan. III. 20. 9). Δίκηλον is explained by Hesychius to be a Lacedæmonian word for “statue.” These πομπεῖς δαίμονες, the “conducting deities,” were probably Zeus Agetor (book III. ch. 12. § 5.) and the Carnean Apollo: and their festival doubtless was connected with the Carnea. At this solemnity then (as it seems) a boat was carried round, and upon it a statue of the Carnean Apollo (Ἀπόλλων στεμματίας), both adorned with lustratory garlands, called δίκηλον στεμματιαῖον, in allusion to the passage from Naupactus. Compare book II. ch. 3. § 1. ch. 8. § 15.

221.

Paus. III. 20. 9.

222.

See Orchomenos, p. 333. To the passages there quoted may be added Etymol. in v. Ἀλήτης. And see book II. ch. 8. § 15.

223.

There were in later times Acarnanian soothsayers at Thermopylæ, Herod. VIII. 221. in the case of Pisistratus, and elsewhere.

224.

Thucyd. I. 103. The city was afterwards Ætolian: Boeckh. Corp. Inscript. Gr. No. 1756.

225.

Polyb. Excerpt. lib. XII. ap. Mai, Script. Vet. Nov. Coll. vol. II. p. 386.

226.

And of Pleuron with Xanthippe the daughter of Dorus, Apollod. I. 7. 7, although Ætolus is also represented as killing Dorus the son of Apollo.

227.

Perhaps the Ætolians had from early times worshipped the three-eyed Zeus (Ζεὺς τριόφθαλμος), which Sthenelus the Ætolian brought from Troy, according to Pausanias II. 24. 5.

228.

Oxylus is said to have contracted an alliance with the Heraclidæ in the island of Sphacteria (Steph. Byzant.); but this story is probably founded merely on the etymology of the name Sphacteria.

229.

As also Pausanias, V. 1. says.

230.

Pausan. ubi sup. Strabo X. p. 463. Compare Il. ψ. 630.

231.

This is the representation given by Pausanias V. 4. 1. ἐπὶ ἀναδασμῷ τῆς χώρας.

232.

Pausan. V. 15. 7. Concerning the Tyrrhenians who accompanied them, see Orchomenos, p. 443. note 3, together with Pausan. II. 31. 3. Of the Thebans, who are said to have joined under Autesion, see a detailed account in the same place.

233.

As, e.g., Apollodorus evidently.

234.

The name of Tisamenus, as an epithet of his father (τισάμενος), corresponds to Eurysaces the son of Ajax, Telemachus and Ptoliporthus of Ulysses, Astyanax of Hector, Nicostratus the youngest son of Menelaus according to Hesiod, Gorgophone the daughter of Perseus, Metanastes the son of Archander, Aletes of Hippotes; but it cannot be inferred from this that it was mere fiction, since this method of giving names existed in historic times (Polyæn. VI. 1, 6) even in the royal family of Macedon. See also what Plutarch de Malignit. Herodot. 39, says on the names of the children of Adeimantus the Corinthian. Names derived from a characteristic of the parent (an example of which occurs in Iliad IX. 562) were called φερώνυμα, according to Schol. Steph. in Dionys. Gramm. ap. Bekker Anecd. Gr. vol. II. p. 868.

235.

Pausan. V. 4, 1. See below, ch. 7, § 6, note.

236.

Pausan. VIII. 29, 4. It is related as a stratagem of Cypselus by Polyænus I. 7. Perhaps Cypsela, a fort in Parrhasia, near Sciritis in Laconia, is the same as Basilis, Thucyd. V. 33. It would not however be very accurate to say of Basilis that it lies ἐπὶ τῇ Σκιρίτιδι. An oracle referring to the amity with the Arcadians is preserved in Schol. Aristid. Panathen. p. 191, ed. Steph.; p. 33, ed. Frommel.

237.

See Æginetica, p. 39, note e, and Euripides ap. Strab. VIII. p. 366. Sophocl. Aj. 1287. (comp. Suidas in v. δραπέτης), Hesychius in ἀνανομὴν and καταβολή.—Plato Leg. III. p. 686. Apollodorus, Polyæn. I. 6. The vase in Tischbein I. 7, represents an ἀγὼν ὑδροφορικὸς, and not this casting of lots, as Italinsky supposes. The same group indeed sometimes occurs on gems armed (Gemmæ Florentinæ, tom. II. tab. 29; compare Winckelmann Monum. ined. n. 164, vol. III. of his works, p. xxvii.); but I believe that an ἀγὼν ὑδροφορικὸς is equally meant, as, e.g., that of the Argonauts in Apollon. Rhod. IV. 1767, since the expedition of the Heraclidæ, early as it was, was not one of the usual subjects of art.

238.

See below, ch. 5.

239.

Boeckh Inscr. I. p. 81, 82.

240.

In an oracle preserved by Plutarch de Pyth. Orac. 24, p. 289, the Spartans are called ὀφιοβόροι. The word of the oracle itself doubtless was ὀφιόδειροι (ὀπφιόδειροι), as in Aristot. Mirab. Auscult. 23, which however might have been explained to have the same meaning as the former word, viz. “drawing back the skin of serpents in order to eat them.” The frog was the emblem of the Argives, as never coming out of their hole; compare ch. 8, § 7.

241.

Isocrates, Panath. p. 286 A., says far too generally, μάχῃ δὲ νικὴσαντες τοὺς μὲν ἡττηθέντας ἔκ τε τῶν πόλεων καὶ τῆς χώρας ἐξέβαλον, which he afterwards modifies considerably.

242.

V. 4, 2. An Achæan from Helice occurs as the cotemporary of Hercules in Theocrit. XXV. 165; a greater inconsistency with the received chronology than poets usually permit themselves.

243.

Pausan. VII. 1.

244.

Orchomenos, pp. 398, 477.

245.

Aristot. Pol. V. 8, according to the most probable reading.

246.

Pind. Nem. XI. 32.

247.

Peloponnesus is called the ἀκρόπολις γῆς in Phlegon de Olymp. p. 129, in Meurs. Op. vol. VII.

248.

As Pouqueville several times remarks. The mountain-chains are more connected by the Œnean promontory, and the mountains running westward from Sicyon and joining mount Cyllene.

249.

Ap. Gemin. Elem. Astron. XIV. p. 55, in Petavius Uranolog. The passage is from the work of Dicæarchus, entitled Καταμετρήσεις τῶν ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ ὀρῶν, concerning which see Pliny N. H. II. 65, and Suidas in Δικαίαρχος.

250.

Apollodorus ap. Steph. Byz. (p. 400, ed. Heyne.) Eustath. ad Hom. p. 1951, 15. According to Capt. Peytier Cyllene is 7266 Paris feet in height, Taygetus 7434, Parthenion (Zagura) 6095. These measurements make Taygetus somewhat higher than Cyllene.

251.

Holland in Walpole's Travels, p. 426.

252.

Aristot. Meteorol. I. 13.

253.

See Polybius IV. 21, 1, who particularly mentions Cynætha. Close by was the cold spring of Λοῦσοι, or Λοῦσσα; and Sprengel in his translation of Theophrastus, vol. II. p. 383, well corrects in Theophrast. IX. 15, 8, τὸ δὲ κώνειον ἄριστον περὶ Λοῦσα καὶ ἐν τοῖς ψυχροτάτοις τόποις.

254.

From the Journal of Fourmont the younger.

255.

Polyb. V. 22.

256.

According to the interpretation of the Venetian Scholiast and others.

257.

Abaris is said to have appeased a pestilence, which had been occasioned by this heat; Jamblich. in Vit. Pythagor. 19. Compare Apollon. Dyscol. Hist. Mirab. c. 4, p. 9, ed. Meurs.

258.

Theophrastus calls Laconia ῥοώδης, ἔπομβρος, καὶ ἔλειος (de causis pluviæ III. 3, 4).

259.

ῥωχμοὺς ἀπὸ σεισμῶν ἔχουσα, Eustath. ad Hom. p. 294, 10, p. 1478, 43, ed. Rom.

260.

See Des Monceaux in Corneille le Bruyn, tom. V. p. 465.

261.

Alcman ap. Athen. I. p. 31 C. Theognis, v. 879 sq. ed. Bekker.

262.

Book III. ch. 2, § 3. Boeckh's Economy of Athens, book IV. ch. 19.

263.

Ἀλιμενότης, Xenoph. Hell. IV. 8, 7.

264.

In Strabo VIII. p. 366. See Cresphont. fr. 1, ed. Dindorf.

265.

It has been beautifully said of this district that ὀφρυᾷ τε καὶ κοιλαίνεται, Strabo VIII. p. 381.

266.

Polybius XVI. 16. 4. places it about west-south-west from Corinth. Comp. Athenæus II. p. 43 E. Pindar Olymp. XI. 30. means the same place.

267.

Aristot. Meteor. I. 14. p. 755 C, and Aristides, Ægypt. vol. II. p. 351, ed. Jebb.

268.

Athen. V. p. 219 A. Lucian. Icaromenipp. 18. Nav. 20. Liv. XXVII. 31. Schol. Aristoph. Av. 969. Zenobius III. 57.

269.

According to Fourmont's Journal and Gell's Argolis.

270.

See Schol. Pind. Olymp. VII. 152. Boeckh Comment. Pind. p. 175. Siebelis ad Pausan. II. 25, 6.

271.

Elis in general is a χώρα ὕπαμμος, according to Theophrastus, Hist. Plant. I. 6.

272.

I here follow the Journal of the younger Fourmont, which appears deserving of credit: he also states that he saw iron rings on the blocks of stone.

273.

Compare with this Orchomenos, chap. 2.

274.

See Schol. Eurip. Orest. 626. comp. Manso, Sparta, vol. I. p. 11.

275.

Strabo VIII. p. 363 A.

276.

Polyb. V. 22. 6.

277.

Thucyd. I. 120. κατακομιδὴ τῶν ὡραίων.

278.

See book III. ch. 10. § 2, 5.

279.

Isocrates Panath. p. 286 C, says, that in the most ancient times there were only 2000 Dorians in Sparta; but his statement is too uncertain to found any calculation upon.

280.

See Boeckh on the four ancient tribes of Attica, Museum Criticum, vol. II. p. 608.

281.

Pausan. VII. 1. 6, 7.

282.

Pausan. VII. 18. 3, book III. ch. 4, § 8.

283.

Clarke's Travels, II. 2. p. 646, &c.

284.

Below, ch. 5. § 1 and 8.

285.

See Thucyd. I. 122. III. 85, and the example of Decelea.

286.

Εὐρυσθέος Κυκλώπια πρόθυρα, Pindar. Fragment. Incert. 48, ed. Boeckh.

287.

πολυχρυσοῖο Μυκήνης, Homer. Compare book IV. ch. 1.

288.

Fourmont supposes that he has recognised Temenium in a citadel to the south of Lerna, but it must lie to the north.

289.

See Callimach. Fragm. 108. ed. Bentl. from Schol. Pind. Nem. X. 1. Concerning the taking of Argos see Polyæn. II. 12.

290.

Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 48. p. 404. Cf. Schol. Callim. Pall. 37.

291.

Pausan. II. 28. 3. The names given by Apollodorus II. 7. 6., viz. Agelaus, Euryphylus, and Callias, are probably from the Temenidæ of Euripides. Ceisus and Phalces are mentioned by Ephorus ap. Strab. VIII. p. 389. Scymn. Chi. V. 525 sq. Pausan. II. 6. 4. II. 12. 6. II. 13. 1. Ceisus is also mentioned by Hyginus, Fab. 124 (where read Cisus Temeni filius); but his account is very confused. See Æginetica, p. 40.

292.

Pausan. II. 6. 3. Eustath. ad Il. V. p. 520. Stephanus Byzant. says Φαῖστος Ῥοπάλου, Ἡρακλέους παιδός.

293.

Νύμφης Συλλίδος; I conjecture Ὑλλίδος.

294.

Fourmont's Journal contains a detailed and accurate account of this river.

295.

Pausan. II. 11. 2.

296.

Pausan. II. 13. 1. ἐπ᾽ ἀναδασμῷ γῆs.

297.

Pausan. ubi sup. and VII. 3. 5.

298.

Pausan. III. 16. 5. Θερσάνδρου τοῦ Ἀγαμηδίδα, βασιλεύοντος μὲν ΚΛΕΕΣΤΩΝΑΙΩΝ, τετάρτου δὲ ἀπογόνου Κτησίππου τοῦ Ἡρακλέους. Since some Doric state must be here meant, ΚΛΕΩΝΑΙΩΝ, the conjecture of Kühn, seems most probable; and all doubt is removed by a comparison of Ælian N.A. XII. 31., where, however, Thersander is called the son of Cleonymus, not of Agamedidas. Perhaps Pausanias means “Thersander, the son of the son of Agamedes.”

299.

Sophocl. Acris. ap. Hesych. in ἀκτίης. Scymnus Chius 526. from Ephorus, Polyb. V. 91. 8. Conon. 7. Diodor. XII. 43. XV. 32. XVIII. 11. Strab. VIII. p. 389. Ælian. V. H. VI. 1. Plutarch. Demetr. 25. Pausan. II. 8. 4. Ἐπιδαύριοι καὶ Τροιζήνιοι, ὁι τὴν Ἀργολίδα ἀκτὴν ἔχοντες. It is different from the Ἀργολικὸς κόλπος, which is the south coast.

300.

Concerning these doubtful names (Ἀγαῖος, Ἀγραῖος), see Æginet. p. 40. The name was common in Macedonia in later times; see Harpocrat. in Ἀργαῖος.

301.

This is stated by Pausanias. See also Jamblichus Pythagor. 2. concerning the Epidaurian colony in Samos. Aristotle ap. Strab. VIII. p. 314, states that the Ionians came together with the Heraclidæ from the Attic Tetrapolis to Epidaurus. The former account is by far the most probable.

302.

Æginet. p. 43.

303.

Pausan. II. 30. 9.

304.

Book II. ch. 2, § 8. According to Pausanias II. 30. 9. Anaphlystus and Sphettus, the sons of Trœzen, passed over to Attica, and gave their names to the two boroughs so called. See Appendix II.

305.

Pausan. II. 33. 1.

306.

Pyth. IV. 49.

307.

Strab. VIII. p. 312. 377.

308.

Plutarch. de Def. Orac. p. 620. Paus. X. 18. 4.

309.

See book III. ch. 4, § 2.

310.

This is evident from Thucyd. V. 53. Κυριώτατοι τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἦσαν Ἀργεῖοι.

311.

Ibid. According to Diodorus XII. 18. the Lacedæmonians were bound to send sacrifices to Apollo Pythaëus (Πύθιος); but his account is confused.

312.

Pausan. II. 35. 2. 36. 5. Compare book II. ch. 3. § 4.

313.

Above, ch. 2, § 4.

314.

Pausan. II. 28. 2. 34. 6.

315.

Steph. Byz. in Νέμεα, where, from the context, τῆσ Ἀργολίδος should be written for Ἠλίδος.

316.

II. 8.

317.

Conon. 26. Etymol. Mag. in Ἀλήτης.

318.

Compare p. 72, note f.

319.

Aristot. ap. Proverb. Vatic. IV. 4. Μηλιακὸν πλοῖον. Compare Apostol. XIX. 89, and Suidas, Diogenianus VII. 31, explains it differently.

320.

Δέχεται καὶ βῶλον Ἀλήτης. See Duris in Plutarch. Prov. Alex. 48. p. 593. Diogenian IV. 27. Zenobius III. 22. Suidas in δέχεται, Schol. Pind. Nem. VII. 155. Perhaps Suidas in ἀδηλώσας refers to this story.

321.

Orchomenos, p. 352. See also Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 13. The delivery of a clod of earth (a common symbol of transfer of possession of land, Grimm Rechtsalterthümer, p. 110-21) also occurs in the history of the Ionic colony, Lycophron 1378. and Tzetzes Chil. XIII. p. 468. v. 112.

322.

Thucyd. IV. 42. Compare Polyæn. I. 39.

323.

Schol. Pind. Olymp. XIII. 56.

324.

Didymus Schol. Pind. Olymp. XIII. 17. Conon ubi sup. Compare Diodorus in Euseb. Chronic. p. 35. (Fragment. 6. p. 635. Wessel.) Ephorus in Strab. VIII. p. 389 D, and Scymnus Chius, 526.

325.

According to Velleius Paterc.

326.

IV. 42.

327.

Orchomenos, p. 140. According to Conon ubi sup. Aletes found Sisyphidæ and Ionians mixed with them.

328.

Orchomenos, p. 257.

329.

II. 4. 3.

330.

Pindar. Olymp. XIII. 11. Compare Boeckh's Commentary, p. 213. Callimachus ap. Plutarch. Symp. Qu. V. 3. p. 213. Ἀλητιάδαι παρ᾽ Αἰγαιῶνι θεῷ Θήσουσιν νίκης σύμβολον Ἰσθμιάδος Ζήλῳ τῶν Νεμέηθε.

331.

Herodot. V. 92. 2. This perhaps may afford some explanation of the ancient affinity between the Cypselidæ and Philaidae (see Herodot. VI. 128.), by a comparison of the table, Orchomenos, p. 465.

332.

II. 4. 4. compare V. 18. 2.

333.

See Blanchard Recherches sur la ville de Mégare, Mém. de l'Acad. des Inscr. tom. XVI. p. 121.

334.

Herodot. V. 76. Lycurg. in Leocrat. p. 196. Strabo IX. p. 293. XIV. p. 653. Conon 26. Scymnus Chius, 503.

335.

See Raoul-Rochette III p. 56. who has omitted the remarkable passage of Pausan. VII. 25. according to which the Lacedæmonians had partly taken Athens. There was at Athens a Delphian gens named Cleomantidæ, whose ancestor was said to have communicated to the Athenians the prophecy concerning the king's death, Lycurgus in Leocrat. p. 196.

336.

Lycophr. 1388. and Tzetzes' note.

337.

See particularly Schol. Pind. Nem. VII. 155. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 440. Pausan. I. 39. 4.

338.

Schol. Pind. et Aristoph. ubi sup. According to Zenobius V. 8. the Megarians mourned for a daughter of their own king Clytius, and of Bacchius the Corinthian.

339.

This event is always narrated in explanation of the proverb; see Schol. Pind. ubi sup. Schol. Plat. Euthydem. pag. 97. edit. Ruhnken. and Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 440 (from Demon). Compare Aristoph. Eccles. 828. Zenob. III. 21. Vatic. Prov. III. 13. Apostolius VII. 17. XIV. 97. Suidas, Hesychius, Dissen ad Pind. ubi sup. It is probably of this victory of the Megarians that Pausanias (VI. 19. 9.) had read in some document that it took place before the commencement of the Olympiads, when Phorbas was archon for life at Athens; but in my opinion he is incorrect in referring it to a treasury of Dontas the Lacedæmonian (Olymp. 60.), the inscription of which spoke indefinitely of a victory of the Megarians over the Corinthians, in which the Argives were supposed to have had a share. Phorbas was archon from the 173rd to the 148th year before the first Olympiad, according to Eusebius.

340.

Thucyd. I. 103. Diod. XI. 79. Plutarch Cimon. 17. It was probably in some war of this kind that Orsippus of Megara enlarged the territory of his native city, according to Etymol. M. p. 242; he was conqueror in the 15th Olympiad, see book IV. ch. 2. note. Pausan. I. 44. 1. and the epigram in Anthol. Pal. II. App. 272. See Siebelis ad Pausan. ubi sup.

341.

See the account in Plutarch. Qu. Gr. 17. p. 387.

342.

Above, ch. 3. § 11.

343.

See above, ch. 3. § 3.

344.

Called in the Doric dialect Προκλέας, Kühn ad Pausan. III. 1. According to Polyænus I. 10. Procles and Temenus together conquered Lacedæmon.

345.

Herod. VI. 52. and it is followed by Xen. Agesil. 8. Plutarch. Agesil. 19. [The same is preserved in a fragment of Alcæus (Mus. Crit. I. p. 432) ὡς γὰρ δή ποτε φασίν Ἀριστόδαμον ἐν Σπάρτᾳ λόγον οὐκ ἀπάλαμνον εἰπεῖν, as Niebuhr has remarked. History of Rome, vol. I. note 94. ed. 2.]

346.

The words of the oracle, which Herodotus paraphrases, probably were μᾶλλον δὲ γεραίτερον ἔστι γεραίρειν.

347.

V. 16. Also in Plato Leg. III. p. 683. Megillus the Spartan, to the question καὶ βασιλεὺς μὲν—Λακεδαίμονος Προκλῆς καὶ Εὐρυσθένης; answers, πῶς γὰρ οὐ, against his national tradition.

348.

Pindar Pyth. I. 65. says that the Dorians, “coming down from Pindus, immediately took Amyclæ.” Compare Boeckh Comment, p. 479. This is equally fallacious with his other statement, that Pylos fell at the invasion, see below, § 15. According to Ephorus ap. Strab. p. 364 D., Philonomus the Achæan, who had betrayed Lacedæmon to the Dorians, received Amyclæ from them as a reward for his treachery, and held the νόμος Ἀμυκλαῖος (to which his name seems to allude) as a vassal. Compare Conon Narr. 36. Nicol. Damasc. p. 445. Vales.

349.

Servius ad Æn. X. 564. and Lucilius, ibid, compare Heyne Excurs. II. ad Æn. X. Sosibius ap. Zenob. Prov. I. 54.

350.

Pausan. III. 2. 6. ib. 12. 7. ib. 19. 5. The temple was still standing in his time. Compare Orchomenos, p. 313-321.

351.

Pausan. VII. 6. 2. where Preugenes, their leader, is stated to have been descended from Amyclas.

352.

Polyb. V. 19. 2.

353.

Ap. Schol. Eurip. Orest. 46. Simonides fragm. 177. ed. Gaisford.

354.

Εὔπυργος Θεράπια, ap. Priscian. p. 1328. Fragm. 1. ed. Welcker.

355.

Isthm. I. 31.

356.

Ἐν γυάλοις Θεράπνας Pindar Nem. X. 55. The δόκανα were, according to some, tombs of this description.

357.

See Dissen's Commentary to Pindar ubi sup. p. 471.—Concerning Helen at Therapne, see Euripid. Hel. 211. and Tryphiod. 520. Schol. Lycophr. 143. Isocrat. Encom. Hel. p. 218 D. ἔτι γὰρ καὶ νῦν ἐν Θεράπναις (Μενελάῳ καὶ Ἑλένῃ) θυσίας ἁγίας καὶ πατρίους ἐπιτελοῦσιν οὐχ ὡς ἤρωσιν ἀλλ᾽ ὡσ θεοῖς. Concerning the Menelaia, see Athenagoras Leg. p. 14. A. Θεραπναῖος Ἀπόλλων Apollon. Rhod. II. 162. Therapne, according to some, was ἐν Σπάρτῃ, Schol. Apollon. et Pind. ubi sup.; according to other authors, referred to by Steph. Byz., it was Sparta itself. Both are in the wrong.

358.

It was first discovered by Gropius.

359.

Polyb. ubi sup. See ch. 4. § 3.

360.

Od. B. 327. 359. A. 459. N. 412. 414. The passage in Od. A. 10. is also to be explained in this manner.

361.

Pausan. III. 2. 6.

362.

Pausan. III. 2. 7. Phlegon Trallianus ap. Euseb. Arm. p. 130. According to Strabo VIII. p. 365 A. however it was conquered by Agis. Concerning a war between Sparta and its periœci in the time of Lycurgus, see Nicol. Damas. fragm.

363.

Pausan. III. 22. 9.

364.

See above, ch. 3. § 4.

365.

This is now evident from the restoration of the fragment of Ephorus in Strabo VIII. p. 364 D. Χρῆσθαι δὲ ΛΑΙ ΜΕΝ ὀ[χυρώματι, Ἐπιδαύρῳ (or Γυθείῳ) δὲ ἐμπορίῳ διὰ τὸ] εὐλίμενον, ΑΙΓΥΙ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς πολεμίους [ἐπιτειχισμῷ, ταύτην] γὰρ ὁμορεῖν τοῖς κύκλῳ [πολεμίοις], ΦΑΡΙΔΙ δὲ [εἰς συνόδους] ἀπὸ τῶν ἐντος ἀσφάλειαν ἐχούσῃ. Polybius II. 54. 3. calls Αἰγῦτις a boundary-district of Sparta, where no alteration is required. See Meursius ad Lycophr. 831.

366.

The νόμος Ἀμυκλαῖος according to Nicol. Damasc.

367.

See Steph. Byz. and Pausanias. The Διοσκοῦροι Λαπέρσαι are derived from this town.

368.

Ὑαμεία πόλις Μεσσηνίων τῶν πέντε, Stephanus Byz. Compare Pausan. IV. 14. 3. Μεσόλα πόλις Μεσσήνης μία τῶν πέντε. Νικόλαος τετάρτῳ, Stephanus. From this Ephorus in Strabo VIII. p. 361 C. should be thus restored, ὤστε τὴν Στενύκλαρον μὲν ἐν τῷ μέσῳ τῆς χώρας παύτης κειμένην ἀποδεῖξαι βασίλειον αὑτῷ τῆς βασιλείας, πέμψαι δὲ ἐς Πύλον τε καὶ Ῥίον [καὶ Μεσόλαν καὶ] Ὑαμῖτιν ποιήσοντας ἰσονόμους πάντας τοῖς Δωριεῦσι τοὺς Μεσσηνίους. Compare Μεσόλα καθήκουσα εἰς τὸν μεταξὺ κόλπον τοῦ Ταυγέτου καὶ τῆς Μεσσηνίας, Strab. VIII. p. 360; Ῥίον ἀπεναντίον Ταινάρου, ibid.

369.

The same termination may be observed in the name of the ancient Laconian city Ἱππό-λα, Pausan. III. 26. 6. Steph. Byz.; and in the ancient gentile name of Argos, Ἀργό-λας.

370.

See Herodotus, Pausanias, Cicero de Divin. II. 43.

371.

Cicero ut sup.

372.

See above, p. 90. note n. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “Epidaurus,” starting “Pausan. III. 16. 5.]”

373.

See Valckenaer. ad Theocrit. Adoniaz. p. 266.

374.

Plutarch. Lycurg. 2, 3.

375.

Plutarch. Lycurg. 2. Lac. Apophth. p. 234.

376.

From what is not clear, though probably from the Μέσση of the Homeric Catalogue, the position of which is however quite uncertain, since it is not connected with the city of Messene.

377.

Orchomenos, p. 366. The territory of Pylos had, according to the tradition in Pausan. IV. 15. 4. once extended as far as Καπροῦ σῆμα, near Stenyclarus.

378.

Cresphontes, as well as Aristomenes, were names in Messenia in late days, Boeckh Inscript. No. 1291.

379.

Ap. Strab. p. 633 B. He was one of the Colophonians who had settled in Smyrna.

380.

Strabo, p. 355 D. Pausanias IV. 3. 3. and others speak too generally of the expulsion of the Nestoridæ.

381.

Pausan. IV. 18. 1. IV. 23. 1. Pindar Pyth. V. 70. is not so accurate; Λακεδαίμονι ἀν Ἄργει τε καὶ ζαθέᾳ Πύλῳ ἔνασσεν ἀλκᾶντας Ἡρακλέος ἐκγόνους Ἀἰγιμιοῦ τε (Ἀπόλλων).

382.

Apollod. II. 8. 5. Pausan. IV. 3. VIII. 5. 5. Isocrates Archidam. p. 120. represents the Lacedæmonians as having long governed Messenia, which had been given them by the sons of Cresphontes. Euripides in the Merope told the story as follows:—viz. that Polyphontes killed Cresphontes, and obtained possession of his queen Merope and of his empire: that on this her son Telephon, whom Merope had sent to a friend in Ætolia, returned, and, after various tragic scenes, slew the usurper by stratagem. See the fragments of the Merope, and Hyginus, Fab. 137, with the continuation in Fab. 184. The narrative of Apollodorus is made to coincide more with the national tradition.

383.

The pedigree is, Æpytus—Cypselus—Merope—Æpytus—Æpytidæ.

384.

As it is evident from several passages in the 4th book of Pausanias.

385.

II. 171.

386.

Pausan. IV. 20. 2. 26. 5, 6. 27. 4. 33. 5. It is to this time probably that Methapus the Athenian belongs, who restored the ancient worship of Andania, with some few changes, Pausan. IV. 1. 5.

387.

Leg. III. p. 684.

388.

In the following discussion, although beginning somewhat in advance, I still take for granted what is stated in my Æginetica, p. 42. The ancient expression Λιμοδωριεῖς was referred to this migration. See Hesychius, Plutarch, Prov. 34. p. 590. Yet Didymus in Hesychius calls the Dorians who dwelt under mount Œta Λιμοδωριεῖς. See above, page 44. note e. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “Dorians as inhabitants of the sea-coast.”]

389.

The Rhodians came from Argos, according to Thucyd. VII. 57. The Coans were also of Argive origin, according to Tacit. Ann. XII. 61.

390.

The Eratidæ refer to Argos, according to the note of Boeckh, Explic. ad Pind. Olymp. VII. p. 165. Cleobulus also was a Heraclide, according to Diog. Laert. I. 6. § 89.

391.

There were different ways of making the 100 towns of Crete mentioned in the Iliad agree with the 90 in the Odyssey, as may be seen from Schol. Venet. Catal. 156.—According to Ephorus, Althæmenes founded 10 cities in Crete, so that in the time of Ulysses there were only 90, but in Homer's time 100. Strabo X. p. 479. This was the manner in which Ephorus wrote history. “Pylæmenes the Lacedæmonian” in the Venetian Scholiast is probably only a corruption of the name. Conon 47. derives the Tripolis of Rhodes from Althæmenes.

392.

VII. 99.

393.

We find in both the worship of serpents, incubation, the custom of votive tablets, &c.

394.

Pausan. III. 23. 4.

395.

Sprengel's Geschichte der Medicin, vol. I. pp. 343. 326. new edit.

396.

Rhod. Orat. II. p. 396.—Concerning the Asclepiadæ in Cnidos, see particularly Theopompus in Phot. cod. 176.

397.

Sprengel, ibid. p. 554.

398.

Vitruvius II. 8. 12. Cum Melas et Areuanius ab Argis et Trœzene coloniam communem eo loco induxerunt, barbaros Caras et Lelegas ejecerunt.—The 1200 years, mentioned by Tacitus, from the time of its founding to Tiberius, must be taken as a round number.

399.

The religious ceremonies of Halicarnassus, as shown on its coins, can be completely traced up to their origin. The head of Medusa, and of Athene, the trident, and head of Hephæstus, belong to the worship of Athene and Hephæstus at Trœzen and Athens: the tripod, lyre, and heads of Apollo and Demeter to the sacra Triopia. At Cos the insignia of Æsculapius predominated, besides those of Hercules as father of Pheidippus.

400.

Callimach. ap. Steph. in v. Ἁλικάρνασσος. compare Æginetica, p. 140.

401.

Vitruvius, ubi sup.

402.

See book II. ch. 3. § 5.

403.

Dionys. Hal. Rom. Hist. IV. 25. probably ascribes to it too much influence.

404.

Herodot. I. 144.

405.

According to the account of Gelon's ancestors in Herodot. VII. 153.

406.

Compare Herodotus with Diod. V. 54.

407.

Diod. ubi sup.

408.

Scymnus Chius, 549. Probably with the colony of Althæmenes.

409.

E.g. ε [δοξε] ταυ βουλαι και τωι δαμωι φιλ ... θενευς επεστατει γνωμα πρυ [τανιων], &c. from Villoison's papers.

410.

See the quotations in Villoison in the Mém. de l'Acad. des Inscr. tom. XLVII. p. 287. An inscription among his papers refers to the building of the temple of Apollo and Aphrodite at that place. The worship of Aphrodite appears to indicate a Laconian colony.

411.

Concerning Pholegandrus, see Mém. de l'Acad. tom. XLVII. p. 307. 339.

412.

Paus. II. 30. 8. Raoul-Rochette is wrong in stating that Scylax declares Caryanda to have been Doric.

413.

Herodot. V. 121. Ἡρακλείδης Ἰβανωλίος, ἀνὴρ Μυλασεὺς as leader of the Carians.

414.

Plut. de Mul. Virt. p. 271. 4. Polyæn. VIII. 56. According to Lycophron, v. 1388. the Doric colony also possessed Thingrus and Satnium, which were places in Caria, according to Tzetzes, in whose notes Ἰκαρίας should be twice altered into Καρίας.

415.

Concerning Noricum, see below, § 11. The coins of Synnada have ΣΥΝΝΑΔΕΩΝ ΔΩΡΙΕΩΝ; also ΣΥΝΝ. ΙΩΝΩΝ, and both together; also the expression Καστολοῦ (better Καστωλοῦ) πεδίον Δωριεών, Stephan. Byz. Xenophon mentions it twice in the Anabasis, without precisely stating its position.

416.

Compare Steph. Byz. in Ἀραὶ, Ἰωνίας (this is false. They were situated between Syme and Cnidos, Athenæus VI. p. 262.) νῆσοι τρεῖς οὅτω λεγομέναι διὰ τὰς ἀρὰς, ἅς Δωριεῖς ἐποιήσαντο πρὸς τοὺς Πενταπολίτας, ὡς Ἀριστείδης. According to Dieuchidas in Athenæus, the curse was in the time of Triopas and Phorbas.

417.

Polyb. XVI. 12. 1.

418.

See the decree of the Jasians, which includes that of the Calymnians, in the Doric dialect: Boeckh. Corp. Ins. Gr. No. 2671.

419.

Strabo VIII. p. 374, endeavours to give the tradition an historical colouring by supposing that Pelops drove away Anthes. compare XIV. p. 656. Apollod. ap. Steph. in Ἁλικάρνασσος.

420.

Ap. Steph. Raoul-Rochette also perceives this, tom. III. p. 31.

421.

II. 30. 8.

422.

Steph. Byz. in Ἀθῆναι. Hence Athens is called the son of Poseidon, Paus. II. 30, &c. Concerning the Antheadæ as priests of Poseidon see an Halicarnassian inscription in Corp. Inscript. No. 2655, and Boeckh's Commentary. It is well known that Posidonia in the south of Italy received the worship of Poseidon and also its name, from a Trœzenian colony.

423.

Indeed Pindar appears to represent him as dwelling at Argos, the native place of the descendants of Hercules, at a time when all the Heraclidæ were there living together undisturbed; and from Argos he sails to Rhodes.

424.

Olymp. VII. 24. Concerning the mother of Tlepolemus, see the epigram, quoted below, p. 121 note s. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “epigram of Aristotle,” starting “Peplus Troj.”.]

425.

In Iliad E. 628 sqq. there is no necessity for assuming that the poet intended to represent Tlepolemus as a Rhodian. In the catalogue, indeed, four insular Greeks are mentioned, Nireus of Syme, Antiphus and Phidippus of Cos, and Tlepolemus of Rhodes (Il. B. 653-680). But of these the three first are not elsewhere mentioned. Tlepolemus therefore remains the only Greek, of the Asiatic colonies, on the Achæan side, in the Iliad; and the connexion of the catalogue with the other parts of the poem does not seem to intimate as to prove this exception to have been intended by the writer of the fifth book. Tlepolemus must therefore be considered as a Grecian of the mother country. I feel convinced, that, according to Homer, no enemy of Troy comes from the eastern side of the Ægæan sea. Concerning the numerous differences between the catalogue and the genuine Homeric traditions, see the author's History of the Literature of ancient Greece, ch. 2, § 9.

426.

Il. B. 668. When Strabo XIV. p. 653, states that Tlepolemus did not lead out Dorians, but Achæans and Bœotians (as a Heraclide of Thebes), he does not follow any ancient tradition, but the chronological system of his times. The ancestors of Theron of Rhodes (Schol. Pind. Olymp. II. 14.) have no reference to this: and Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 272, mixes various accounts.

427.

See book II. ch. 12. § 6.

428.

Peplus Troj. Her. Epig. 27.

429.

Book II. ch. 11. § 4.

430.

See particularly Etymol. Mag. p. 219. 8. also Raoul-Rochette, tom. III. p. 157.

431.

Hecatæus ap. Stephan. Byz.

432.

As Raoul-Rochette, tom. III. p. 251. clearly shews from Herodotus and Aristænetus περὶ Φασηλίδος ap. Steph. Byz. in Γέλα and other words.

433.

Eckhel D. N. III. p. 68. According to Strab. XIV. p. 671 D. Ῥοδίων καὶ Ἀχαιῶν, which Raoul-Rochette, tom. III. p. 379, proposes to refer to Achæa in Rhodes, and leave out καὶ, but the Gentile name would be rather Ἀχαιεὺς than Ἀχαῖος. Solon, the Lindian, of Rhodes, is called the founder of this Soli in Cilicia, Vita Arati, vol. I. p. 3. vol. II. p. 444. Buhle.

434.

Both names in Etymol. Magn. in v. Γέλα.

435.

Herodot. VII. 153. The coins of Telos have the head of Jupiter and the Crab, like those of Agrigentum; the last symbol is also on those of Cos and Lindus.

436.

Thucyd. VI. 4.

437.

According to the spurious letters, which are correctly treated of by Bentley in several passages of his Dissertation (without, however, noticing the historical connexion), and also by Lennep in the notes.

438.

According to Hippostratus ad Pind. Pyth. VI. 4.

439.

Compare, besides Meursius, Heyne, Nov. Comment. Gotting. II. cl. philol. p. 40 sqq. That Lyons was a Rhodian colony, has, though without any grounds, been lately maintained, after Father Colonia, by count Wilgrin de Tailefer, Antiquités de Vésone.

440.

See Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 124. who also believes in the victory of Perseus over Sardanapalus.

441.

See particularly Dio Chrysost. Orat. Tars. 33, pp. 394, 406, 408. Hercules was called ἀρχηγὸς, and on the day of his festival a funeral pile was built to his honour; compare Athenæus V. p. 215 B. on the Stephanephorus or priest of Hercules at Tarsus.

442.

Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 403 sqq.

443.

Steph. Byz. in Ἰώνη.

444.

The arrival of Diomede the Argive among the Daunians may likewise refer to the founding of Elpiæ. He is said to have come with Dorians. Antonin. Liber. 37.

445.

Polyb. Exc. Leg. XX. 7. Il. Liv. XXXVII. 56.

446.

Ap. Strab. XIV. p. 676.

447.

Steph. Byz. in Γέλα. Compare Athen. VII. p. 297, from the Ὦροι Κολοφωνίων of Heropythus, and Philostephanus περὶ τῶν ἐν Ἀσίᾳ πόλεων.

448.

Book II. ch. 2, § 7.

449.

Pompon. Mela I. 14. The tradition is very ancient. Strab. XIV. p. 668. from Callinus. τοὺς λαοὺς μετὰ Μόψου τὸν Ταῦρον ὑπερθέντας τοὺς μὲν ἐν Παμφυλίᾳ μεῖναι, τοὺς δ᾽ ἐν Κιλικίᾳ μερισθῆναι καὶ Συρίᾳ, μέχοι καὶ Φοινίκης. Concerning Mopsus in Pamphylia, see also Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 334.

450.

Strab. XIV. p. 675, and others.

451.

Philosteph. ubi sup.

452.

Rhodia, near Phaselis, is also without doubt a Rhodian colony; and Mopsus (Theopompus ap. Phot. cod. 176) was the founder merely in the above sense. In the same manner probably Lyrnessus; compare Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 404 sqq., who, however, has not perceived any thing of all this.

453.

De Div. I. 40.

454.

Book II. ch. 2. § 7.

455.

Thucyd. III. 102.

456.

See § 10.

457.

For what Plutarch. Amator. and Diodor. Exc. II. 228. p. 548. Wess. relate of the expulsion of Archias, is stated by the Scholiast to Apollonius IV. 1211, of the family of the Bacchiadæ. The former affirm the accidental murder of the son of Melissus to have been the cause of the founding of Syracuse, the latter of that of Corcyra. Yet this is contradicted by the Parian Marble, I. 47. Archias δέκατος ἀπὸ Τημένου, since the Bacchiadæ derived themselves from Aletes, not Temenus. In either case Archias is an Heraclide. See Boeckh. Explic. ad Pind. Olymp. 6. p. 153. Compare Göller de situ Syracusarum, p. 5. sq.

458.

Strab. VII. p. 380 D.

459.

Strab. VI. p. 269. Compare Scymnus Chius, v. 274.

460.

See Boeckh's Introduction to the sixth Olympiad.

461.

Book II. ch. 9. § 4. ch. 10. § 1.

462.

Athen. IV. p. 167. from Demetrius Scepsius. Archilochus made mention of this Æthiops (Siebel. Fragm. p. 233).

463.

Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 298. His προσόδιον was composed before the Messenian wars, about the same time.

464.

Adoniaz. 53. compare Thucyd. VI. 77. ὅτι οὐκ Ἴωνες τάδε εἰσὶν,—ἀλλὰ Δωριεῖς, ἐλεύθεροι ἀπ᾽ αὐτονόμου τῆς Πελοποννήσου τὴν Σικελίαν οἰκοῦντες.

465.

Dio Chrys. Or. XXXVIII. 4.

466.

According to Thucyd. VI. 5. Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 319. supports the contrary opinion.

467.

Thucyd. I. 108. where this Chalcis is evidently intended.

468.

Raoul-Rochette, ib. p. 290. The coins of Alyzia do not necessarily prove it to be of Corinthian origin, since barbarous towns frequently adopted the devices of the neighbouring Greek cities. Herodotus IX. 28. does not afford any reason for supposing that Pale was a Corinthian colony; yet both here and in Thucyd. I. 27. it appears as closely united with Corinth.

469.

This I believe, because it was founded by Heraclidæ, i.e. by Bacchiadæ, according to Anton. Lib. 4; hence also the worship of Hercules existed there. Compare also concerning the Doric migration to Ambracia, the Epigram of Damagetus in the Palat. Anthol. VII. 231.

470.

Γόργος is probably the most correct form of those in Plut. Conv. VII. Sap. 17. p. 42. Strab. X. p. 452, 7. p. 325. Scymn. Ch. 427. Antonin. Lib. I. 4. p. 23. Teuchn., who alone considers him as the brother of Cypselus. See book III. ch. 9. § 6. note. The form ΓΟΡΓΟΣ is also confirmed by a coin of Ambracia. See Raoul-Rochette, Annali dell' Instituto di corrisp. archeol. 1829, p. 316.

471.

Thucyd. II. 68.

472.

See Boeckh. Corp. Inscript. No. 43.

473.

Plutarch. Themist. 24.; but the whole history is inaccurately related.

474.

Thus Schol. Apollon. IV. 1212., and from Timæus at V. 1216.

475.

Yet Timæus ubi sup. places Chersicrates 600 years after the Trojan war, the date of which he fixed (according to Censorinus de Die Nat. 21.) 417 years before the first Olympiad; consequently the date which he gives to Chersicrates is Olymp. 46. 3. 594. B.C. in the time of the Cypselidæ. But since it is scarcely credible that Timæus could place the foundation of Corcyra so low down, it is probable that he fixed an earlier date for the Trojan war, according to Clinton F. H. vol. I. p. 135. ω. III. p. 490. Compare Mustoxidi Illustrazioni Corciresi, I. 5. p. 65.

476.

Thucyd. I. 47.

477.

Strab. VII. p. 326. Scymn. Ch. 620.

478.

Scymn. Ch. 412. According to Raoul-Rochette, IV. p. 86. it was founded at the same time that Dionysius founded Lissus.

479.

Orchomenos, p. 297.

480.

Thucyd. I. 13.

481.

μάλιστα ὑπὸ ἀποίκων στεργόμεθα, the words of the Corinthians in Thucyd. I. 38. compare I. 26. Plutarch Timol. 3.

482.

I. 56. See book III. ch. 8. § 5.

483.

According to Eusebius. See Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 233.

484.

According to Hesychius Milesius de Constant, p. 48. the founder's name was Dineus.

485.

The situation of Byzantium, in a political and commercial point of view, is well described by Polybius IV. 44.

486.

Dionys. Byzant. de Thracio Bosporo in Hudson's Geogr. Min. vol. III. sacrifices were offered to her on the first day of the year. Heyne Comment. Rec. Gotting. tom. I. p. 62. has treated of the fables of Io at Byzantium with sufficient fulness, but without tracing the origin of the traditions.

487.

Ibid.

488.

See, besides others, Palat. Anthol. VII. 169. Why does not Raoul-Rochette admit here as elsewhere, the supposition of an ancient colony under the guidance of Io, an Argive princess?

489.

See Dionysius. There is something on this head also in Hesychius. Besides the names in the text, there are Athene Ecbasia—Artemis Dictynna (also Lucifera in piscinis), Ajax Telamonius, and Achilles—Rhea—Hecate and Fortune—The Dioscuri—Amphiaraus ἐν συκαῖς, Aphrodite the preserver of peace, and Aphrodite Πάνδημος.

490.

With whom there were at times dissensions. See Aristot. Pol. V. 2. 10.

491.

See, besides the decrees in Demosthenes, Constantin. Porph. Them. I. p. 1452. in Meursii Opp.

492.

Μεταμβριανων and Μεσαμβριανων on coins.

493.

According to Scymnus Chius, v. 714.

494.

Plut. Qu. Gr. 57. Æginetica, p. 67. It is probable that Perinthus also at that time received a party of Doric colonists, as it is called an allied town by the Byzantians (Demosth. de Corona, p. 255), and the worship of Hercules was prevalent there. Compare Panofka Res Samiorum, p. 22, where, however, several passages are incorrectly applied.

495.

Arrian, Periplus of the Pontus Euxinus, p. 14. Hudson. Compare Orelli Heracleot. p. 115. Raoul-Rochette places it as far back as the 30th Olympiad, but according to Scymnus Chius, 231, the founding took place in the time of Cyrus.

496.

Megara was founded in the same year as Naxus, Olymp. 11. 3, according to Ephorus (in Strabo and Scymnus); according to the more exact Thucydides some time after, 245 years before its destruction by Gelon. Gelon reigned from Olymp. 72. 2, in Gela, from Olymp. 73. 4, till 75. 3, in Syracuse (Boeckh ad Pind. Olymp. I. Explic. p. 100). From the narrative of Herodotus VII. 156, it appears that he conquered Megara in the interval of Olymp. 74. 1-3; in which case the foundation would fall about Olymp. 13. 1, 728 B.C. According then to the account of Thucydides, the arrival of Lamis the Megarean must have been some years before. This event was contemporary with the founding of Leontini, which was five years after that of Syracuse: this cannot, therefore, be reconciled with the account of Eusebius, who dates the building of Syracuse Olymp. 11. 4. (Hieron. Scal.) The statement of the Parian Marble agrees better, viz. Olymp. 5. 3. Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 214, reckons on false suppositions. Compare Heyne Opusc. Academ. tom. II. pp. 259. sq.

497.

See Passow ad Theogn. 773. Welcker ad Alcman. p. 85, adds Schol. Platon. p. 220. See also Welcker's Theognis, p. 14. In literary history many instances occur of the same persons being called citizens of the mother-state, and of the colony; e.g., Archilochus was a Parian and Thasian; Protagoras and Hecatæus the younger were citizens both of Teos and Abdera; Terpander belonged to Arne in Bœotia and Lesbos at the same time; Mimnermus was both a Colophonian and citizen of Smyrna, &c.

498.

See Orchomenos, pp. 313-359. Thrige's Res Cyrenensium (1828), pp. 23-35. Concerning a family of the Heraclidæ, see the interesting passages of Synesius, Καταστ. (p. 10. Morell.) and of Theodorus Metochita in the Supplem. ad Nicol. Damasc. Orellii. The account of the latter is very confused.

499.

Pind. Pyth. IX. Boeckh Explic. p. 325. Thrige ibid, 121 sq.

500.

Δωρικοὶ τάφοι, Synesius, ubi sup.

501.

Herodot. I. 174. Diodorus V. 53. speaks of an Argive-Lacedæmonian colony in this district.

502.

V. 9. 53. Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 1388, calls him Ἱππότης ὁ Ἀλήτης, but I can hardly think that he is the same as the ancestor of the Corinthian Heraclidæ.

503.

Diodor. V. 53.

504.

Also at Nisyrus, according to its coins.

505.

I here speak on the authority of some beautiful drawings by M. Huyot, amongst which is a plan of Cnidos; an accurate plan of the harbour was shown me by Captain Beaufort. Compare Clarke, part II. § 1, plate 13.

506.

It is stated by Diodorus V. 9, that the Cnidians in the 50th Olympiad (580 B.C.) sent a colony to Lipara under the guidance of three descendants of their countryman Hippotes, Gorgus, Thestor, and Epithersidas, who, in conjunction with 500 of the former inhabitants, founded a state. Now it was natural to call Æolus the god of the winds, who was supposed to reside on these islands, a son of the new national hero, Hippotes; and hence he became Αἴολος Ἱπποτάδης. If this is true, then the name Ἱπποτάδης in the Odyssey (K. 2. 36.) is certainly later than the Homeric age; which might be almost supposed from the statement of the learned Asclepiades, that the Æolus of Homer was the son of Poseidon (not of Hippotes), which he could hardly have said, if all the copies of the Odyssey had Ἱπποτάδης.

507.

See particularly Pausan. X. 11. 3, from Antiochus, and Diodorus V. 9, probably from the same author.

508.

Pseud-Plutarch, de fluv. Mars. Eustath. ad Dionys. Perieg. 321.

509.

See Strab. XII. p. 570. The inscription on their coins is Σελγέων Λακεδαιμονίων ὁμόνοια. Compare Mionnet Descript. III. p. 525. Raoul-Rochette, tom. II. p. 427, with whom I do not entirely agree. See also Nicephorus Blemmidas, ed. Spohn. p. 13.

510.

Dionys. Perieg. 860, where I consider that “the Amyclæans” is not a mere poetical ornament, although the testimony is not to be much depended upon. Compare Eustathius ad 1.

511.

See Raoul-Rochette's argument, tom. II. p. 428.

512.

Lycophr. vv. 452, 593. Strab. XIV. p. 682. Λακεδαίμων ἐν Κύπρῳ Eustath. ad Homer. p. 293. 45. ed. Rom. Golgi in Cyprus was founded by Sicyonians (Steph. Byz. in Γόλγοι), and it was the only colony sent out by that state, with the exception of Phæstus in Crete, whither a Heraclide of Sicyon is said to have gone; see ch. 5. § 2.

513.

Ut fertur, octavus ab Hercule, Schol. Vetust. ad Hor. Carm. II. 6. 12; and so likewise Servius ad Virgil. Georg. IV. 125. Æn. III. 551. Compare, concerning the Phalantiadæ, Steph. Byz. in Ἀθῆναι. Callimachus is referred to in a verse quoted by Schol. ined. ad Dionys. Perieg. (Spohn. Opusc. Niceph. Blemm. 29.) πάντες ἀφ᾽ Ἡρακλῆος ἐτήτυμον ἔστε Λάκωνες according to Goettling's conjecture.

514.

Ὑακίνθου or Ἁπόλλωνος Ὑακίνθου τάφος, Polyb. VIII. 30. 2.

515.

Ib. VIII. 35. 8.

516.

Scymn. Ch. 330.

517.

Strabo VI. p. 264, from Antiochus.

518.

Herodot. III. 138. IV. 164.

519.

Strabo VIII. p. 387.

520.

Pausan. III. 3. 1. Jamblichus Vit. Pythag. 10. Raoul-Rochette, III. p. 187.

521.

See book II. ch. 3.

522.

Metam. XV. 15. Grates agit ille parenti Amphitryoniadæ.

523.

See Pausan. ubi sup. The newly discovered fragments of Polybius confirm the participation of Sparta in the colonization of Locri, p. 384. Mai, inasmuch as they mention the sending of Locrian auxiliaries to the Spartans as the cause of the foundation of Locri in Italy.

524.

Justin XX. 2.

525.

Thucyd. VI. 44. Raoul-Rochette, p. 194, derives it from Dorians, who had previously settled at Cape Zephyrium: but even if there were Dorians there, they must have been Megareans.

526.

It would lead us too far from our subject to explain the tradition concerning the Lacedæmonians among the Sabines and Samnites. It is remarkable that, according to Silius Italicus, these Lacedæmonians came from Amyclæ and Therapne, the ancient settlements of the Achæans. I must also pass over the Cretan colonies, for many reasons.

527.

Paus. III. 2. 7.

528.

A war with Cnosus is very improbable and almost impossible; Paus. II. 21. III. 11. Vell. Paterc. I. 4. (Lacedæmonii in Asia Magnesiam), had probably some account of the share of the Spartans in these Cretan colonies, which will be discussed book II. ch. 3.

529.

Pausan. V. 20. I, according to Clavier, Plutarch. Lycurg. I.

530.

Λυκοῦργος ὑπὸ πάντων συμφώνως ἱστορεῖται μετὰ τοῦ Ἰφίτου τοῦ Ἠλείου τὴν πρώτην ἀριθμηθεῖσαν τῶν Ὀλυμπίων θέσιν διαθεῖναι, Athen. XIV. p. 635 F.

531.

Pausan. V. 8. 3. ἐξ οὗ γὰρ τὸ συνεχὲς ταῖς μνήμαις ἐπὶ ταῖς Ὀλυμπίασιν ἐστί—

532.

γράμματα Ἡλείων ἐς τοὺς Ὀλυμπιονίκας, Pausan. V. 21. 5. VI. 2. 1.

533.

See Aristodemus ap. Syncell. Chron. p. 196 C. Compare Goeller de Situ Syracusarum, p. 198.

534.

Pind. Olymp. VII. 86. ἐν Μεγάροισίν τ᾽ οὐχ ἔτερον λιθίνα ψᾶφος ἔχει λόγον. Compare Boeckh Explic.

535.

Plutarch de Musica, 3. 8.

536.

Sturz. Hellanici fragment. p. 79 sqq. ed. 2.

537.

Agesil. 19.

538.

In Colot. 17. p. 268. Λακεδαιμόνιοι τὸν περὶ Λυκούργου χρησμὸν ἐν ταῖς παλαιοτάταις ἀναγραφαῖς ἔχοντες. Concerning this oracle see Theodoret Græc. Affect. 9. 10. Max. Tyr. Diss. XXIX. p. 72. The oracle in Œnomaus (Euseb. Præp. Ev. V. p. 113.) is evidently a modern forgery.

539.

Above ch. 5. § 14. Eurysthenes, according to Eusebius, reigned 42 years.

540.

Suidas in Χάρων.

541.

Athen. XI. p. 475 B. concerning the καρχήσιον.

542.

XII. 12. 1.

543.

Plutarch. Lycurg. I. Diod. I. 5. who calls the ἀναγραφὴ of the kings a παράπηγμα. Eusebius says that at the beginning of the Olympiads Lacedæmoniorum reges defecerunt, which error arose from the lists ending here, which had been made for computing the preceding periods.

544.

Apollod. ap. Diod. ubi sup. Eratosthenes ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 336. ed. Colon. Compare Tatian. adv. Græcos, p. 174. Censorinus de Die Natali 21. Euseb. Scalig. p. 23. Cicer. de Rep. II. 10. who also followed the Χρονικὰ of Apollodorus.

545.

I do not contend that the chronological statements in the Spartan lists form an authentic document, more than those in the catalogues of the priestesses of Here and in the list of Halicarnassian priests (Boeckh Corp. Ins. Gr. No. 2655). The chronological statements in the Spartan lists may have been formed from imperfect memorials; but the Alexandrine chronologists must have found such tables in existence, since they could not have been produced by mere computation; and yet the date of 328 years before the 1st Olympiad was entirely founded upon them.

546.

Ap. Clem. comp. Diod. de Virt. et Vit. p. 547, ed. Vales.

547.

P. 411. Fragm. ed. Heyn. from Tatian and Clemens I. p. 327. comp. p. 309. Pausan. III. 2. 4. Eusebius's quotation of Apollodorus at the 18th year of Alcamenes is incorrect, as may be seen from Plutarch. Lycurg. I.

548.

I. 65. Pausan. III. 2. 3.

549.

Ælian. V. H. IX. 41.

550.

Simonid. ap. Plutarch. Lyc. 2. and compare Schol. Plat. Rep. X. p. 474. 21 Bekker. The latter, also, according to Aristot. Polit. II. 7. 1. Ephorus ap. Strab. X. p. 482. Compare Dieuchidas, ap. Plutarch. Lycurg. 2. et Clem. Alex. Strom. I. p. 328. ed. Colon, (p. 390 Potter). cf. Strab. X. p. 481. He took Lycurgus for a son of Polydectes and a younger brother of Eunomus, and placed him 290 years after the taking of Troy. Dionys. Hal. Arch. Rom. II. 49. calls Lycurgus the uncle of Eunomus, whom he probably places with Herodotus (VIII. 131.) after Polydectes. Thucydides I. 18. places Lycurgus not long before 800 B.C. Timæus escaped the difficulty by supposing that there were two Lycurguses. Xenophon disagrees the most (Rep. Lac. 10. quoted by Plutarch. Lyc. I.), as he says that Lycurgus lived κατὰ τοὺς Ἡρακλείδας, i.e. κατὰ τὴν Ἡρακλειδῶν κάθοδον.

551.

VIII. 131.

552.

See Clinton, F. H. vol. I. p. 144. The same explanation also diminishes the difficulty about the relationship of Lycurgus; yet there still remains the great discrepancy between Herodotus (where the emendation proposed by Marsham does not suit the context) and Xenophon.

553.

The dates of these are given, doubtless from Alexandrine chronologists, by Diodorus, fragm. 6 p. 635, where (with Wesseling after Didymus) 30 years must be assumed from the return of the Heraclidæ to the reign of Aletes, by which the computation comes out right. This has been overlooked by Eusehius, since he makes Aletes contemporary with Eurysthenes. See the Armenian Eusebius, p. 16. Mai.

554.

See above, p. 136. note t. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “district of Laconia.”]

555.

Æginetica, p. 62. Comp. Theocritus XVII. 27.

556.

As may fairly be inferred from V. 4. 3.

557.

V. 4. 4 In an inscription at Olympia (Brunck. Anal. II. p. 193.) he was called the son of Hæmon; according to common tradition, he was the son of Praxonides. In Eusebius (Hieronym.) should be written, Iphitus Praxonidis vel Æmonis f.

558.

I. 66, 67.

559.

Concerning this word see Boissonade, Classical Journal, vol. XX. p. 289.

560.

Boeckh Inscript. No. 11.

561.

E.g. by Wolf Proleg. Homer. p. 67.

562.

Of Clem. Alexand. Strom. I. p. 308.

563.

For the date of Terpander, see book IV. ch. 6. § 1. note.

564.

Scymnus Chius, v. 313. Strabo VI. p. 259.

565.

Plutarch. Lyc. 13. whose words should be thus understood, “Lycurgus did not enact any written laws, but merely sanctioned existing customs.” The ῥῆτραι however were evidently not mere ἔθη, but oracular dicta, expressed in definite words, which had been preserved from ancient times. Plutarch. Agesil. 26. calls them Αἰ καλούμεναι τρεῖς ῥῆτραι, and also de Esu Carn. II. 1. ὁ θεῖος Λυκοῦργος ἐν ταῖς τρίσι ῥήτραις; consequently this was in a certain degree a fixed number.—One of these very regulations was μὴ χρῆσθαι νόμοις ἐγγράφοις.

566.

Plutarch, de Pyth. Orac. 19. αἱ ῥῆτραι, δι᾽ ὧν ἐκόσμησε τὴν Λακεδαιμονίων, πολιτείαν Λυκοῦργος, ἐδόθησαν αὑτῷ καταλογάδην.

567.

The Delphian Inscription in Boeckh Corp. Inscript. n. 1711. The Cretan in Chishull Ant. Asiat. p. 135. The Samian and Prienian in Chandler Inscript. p. 1. 38. 1, 2, 3. Marm. Oxon. p. 25.

568.

I agree with Creuzer Histor. Ant. Fragm. p. 122. that it is unnecessary always to alter writers concerning ὄροι into ὡρόγραφοι, i.e. chronologists. The above Samian inscriptions expressly refer to historical works; and are we then to alter in Herodian p. 7. (where see the passages quoted), and in p. 39. ἐν Σαμίων ὄροις?

569.

Monumenta saxis sculpta et ære prisco, Tacitus Annal. IV. 44.

570.

I mention Eumelus in this place, as being a Lyric poet in the modern sense of the word, on account of his ᾆσμα προσόδιον for the Messenian Theoria to Delos, Pausan. IV. 4. 1.

571.

Περὶ νομοθετῶν. He must however have either invented himself, or adopted the inventions of others, if he mentioned the names of the twenty assistants and friends of Lycurgus, Plutarch. Lyc. 5.

572.

Plutarch. Lyc. 31. and 11.

573.

See book II. ch. 10. § 2.

574.

He was anciently celebrated for his mildness. Plutarch in the Life of Lycurgus, and de Adul. 16. On the other hand, Heraclides Ponticus 2. καὶ τὸν Χάριλλον (ΧΑΡΙΛΑΟΝ) τυραννικῶς ἄρχοντα μετέστησε.

575.

Plutarch. Lyc.

576.

Book III. ch. 1. The names of Eunomus as the father and of Eucosmus as the son of Lycurgus (Pausan. III. 16. 5.) belong to the class pointed out above, p. 69. note g. [Transcriber's Note: This is the footnote to “capture of Ægialea,” starting “The name of Tisamenus.”]

577.

Only Plutarch. Lycurg. 23. and Heraclid. Pont. 2. καὶ κοινὸν ἀγαθὸν τὰς ἐκεχείρας (the Pythian are probably meant) κατέστησε. The account of Hermippus is evidently, in part at least, invented.

578.

This Cleosthenes is mentioned in Phlegon Trallianus ap. Meurs. Opera, vol. VII. p. 128. and Schol. Plat. Rep. V. p. 246, 7. Bekker.

579.

Συνχώρημα Ἑλλήνων ἱερὰν καὶ ἀπόρθητον εἶναι Ἠλείαν, Polyb. IV. 73. who calls the peaceable existence of the Eleans in early times a ἱερὸς βίος; Strab. VIII. p. 357. Diod. Excerpt, p. 547. Wessel., where very absurd motives are attributed to the Lacedæmonians.

580.

Isthm. II. 23. Boeckh Explic. p. 494. Schneider Lexicon in v. et ad Xen. Hell. IV. 7. 2.

581.

The determination of this time was somewhat ambiguous. See Thuc. V. 49. ἐπαλλέλλειν is the proper word for the announcement.

582.

Herod. VI. 19. see also V. 77.

583.

Thucyd. V. 49. comp. Pausan. V. 6, 4. VI. 3, 3.

584.

As in the well-known treaty between the Eleans and Heræans, αἰ δὲ μά συνέαν, τάλαντόν κ᾽ ἀργύρω ἀποτίνοιαν τῷ Δὶ Ολυμπίῳ.

585.

Thuc. V. 31.

586.

Thuc. III. 8, 14.

587.

Pausan. IV. 4.

588.

Book II. ch. 3, § 2.

589.

Pausan. IV. 2. 1.

590.

Plutarch Romul. 25. Sympos. Qu. IV. 1. 1. Sept. Sap. Conviv. 16. Polyæn. II. 31. 2. Plin. H. N. XI. 70.

591.

See Fulgentius in Staveren Mythograph. Latin, p. 770. Si quis enim centum hostes interfecisset, Marti de homine sacrificabat apud insulam Lemnum, quod sacrificatum est a duobus, Aristomene Gortynensi et Theoclo Eleo, sicut Sosicrates scribit. Apollodorus ap. Porphyr. de Abstin. II. 55. p. 396. (comp. Meursius, Misc. Lac. II. 14.) says that the Lacedæmonians also had sacrificed a man to Mars.

592.

Paus. IV. 15. 5.

593.

Polyæn. II. 31. 3. Plin. XI. 70. Valer. Maxim. I. 8. ext., 15.

594.

Stephanus Byz., who quotes Herodotus, Rhianus, and Plutarch. Herodotus, however, does not mention the subject. What Stephanus says is taken from Plutarch de Herodot. Maled. 2. p. 291. where however for φησὶν αὐτὸς should probably be written φασὶν αὐτόν.

595.

Isocrates (Archidam. 11.) connects the Messenian war with the assassination of Cresphontes; and relates that the Spartans were much encouraged by the oracle: the narrative evidently had not at this time received the form in which it was afterwards represented. Yet he mentions the twenty years' siege (on the authority of Tyrtæus), § 66.

596.

See Antip. Sidon. VII. 161. Anthol. Palat.

597.

Pausan. IV. 16. 4. VI. 32. 5. IX. 39. 5.

598.

Lycurgus in Leocrat. 15. p. 155. comp. Isocrates Archidam. 10.

599.

Pausan. IV. 27. 4.

600.

Also Æschylus of Alexandria wrote Messeniaca, Athen. XIII. p. 599 E.

601.

See Athen. XIV. p. 857 D. Diodorus probably follows him, since he represents Cleonnis in the first war and Aristomenes as fighting together, Fragm. N. p. 637, Wessel. In XV. 66. he means him among the ἔνιοι. Boivin and Wesseling endeavour in vain to reconcile the contradictions. The genuineness of the fragment of Diodorus is however doubtful.

602.

IV. 15. 1.

603.

Concerning Rhianus see Jacobs in the Index Auctorum to the Anthology.

604.

See Strabo, VIII. p. 362.

605.

E.g. it was a Messenian account which Myron followed (Pausan. IV. 6. 2), that Aristomenes killed the king Theopompus (contrary to Tyrtæus, as may be seen from Plutarch Agid. 21.).

606.

I will now point out some instances of modern fiction in the narrative of Pausanias. The account of Polychares and Euæphnus supposes a greater power in the Areopagus than it ever possessed; nor did the quarrel come at all within the province of the Argive Amphictyons. Besides Pausanias, see Diodorus Excerpt, p. 547, who generally follows the same authorities. The Cretan bowmen must have been introduced by Rhianus from his own country; it is certain that there were no mercenaries at so early a period. How could the Corinthians have gone to Laconia without passing through an enemy's country, and who would have allowed them a free passage? The flight of the initiated to Eleusis is contrary to all probability; and this the more, as in the second war they were quiet spectators, Pausan. IV. 16. 1. Yet we are told the sacred torchbearers (δᾳδοῦχοι) fought at Athens in military array. The disposition of the light-armed troops in separate bodies (IV. 7. 2.) is contrary to the account of Tyrtæus and to ancient usage, compare IV. 8. 4. Οἱ Μεσσήνιοι δρόμῳ ἐς τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους ἐχρῶντο (IV. 18. 1.) is contrary to Herodotus (VI. 112). Many events are attributed to very improbable causes, e.g. that they left the fortified cities (IV. 9. 1.) from want of money. There is absolutely no reason given for the subjection of Messenia. That the Argives came in a private capacity, and not at the command of the state, appears from Herodot. VI. 92. The oracle in IV. 9. 2. in iambic verses is of a late date, but nevertheless more ancient than the corresponding one in hexameters preserved by Eusebius Præp. Ev. V. 27. p. 130. ed. Steph. The verse in Pausan. IV. 12. 1. ἀλλ᾽ ἀπάτῃ μὲν ἔχει γαῖαν Μεσσηνίδα λαὸς, refers to the fraud of Cresphontes at the original division. In the oracle in Pausan. IV. 12. 3. and Eusebius ubi sup. should be written, ἦ γὰρ Ἄρης κείνων εὐήρεα τείχη, Καὶ τειχέων στεφάνωμα πικροὺς οἰκήτορας ἕξει. Whence these oracles were derived does not appear: nor is it easy to decide concerning the date of such short pieces. (The above oracle is differently, and perhaps more correctly, emended by Lobeck ad Phrynich. Par. p. 621.)