/•^

This is No. 40,5 of Everyman's Library.

EVERYMAN'S LIBRARY

Founded 1906 by J. M. Dent (d. 1926) Edited by Ernest Rhys (d. 1946)

CLASSICAL

THE HISTORY OF HERODOTUS TRANSLATED BY GEORGE RAWLINSON EDITED BY E. H. BLAKENEY, M.A. IN 2 VOLS. VOL. I

HERODOTUS, born about 484 b.c. at Halicamassus. Travelled extensively in Greece and in Macedon, Thrace, Persia, and Palestine. In 45^7 was living at Samos, but about 447 went to Athens. Assisted in the foundation of Thurii, of which he became a citizen, and died there about 425^ b.c.

THE HISTORY OF HERODOTUS

VOLUME ONE

LONDON: J. M. DENT & SONS LTD. NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO. INC.

PA

o

This book is copyright. It may not be

reproduced whole or in part by any method

without written permission. AppHcation

should be made to the publishers :

J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd. Aldine House • Bedford St. • London

Made in Great Britain

by

Richard Clay and Company, Ltd.

Bungay, Suffolk

First published in this edition igio

Last reprinted 1949

BOOK

PRODUCTION

WAR ECONOMY

STANCi^RD

THIS BOOK IS PRODUCED IN COM- PLETE CONFORMITY WITH THE AUTHORIZED ECONOMY STANDARDS

EDITOR'S PREFACE

The accompanying translation of Herodotus was first issued in 1858, and since that date has had no serious rival. Rawlinson's Herodotus — like Jowett's Plato, Jebb's Sophocles, and Butcher and Lang's Odyssey — ^is become well-nigh an English classic. Up to the present time, however, its price has been practically prohibitive. In its original form it will be valued for many years to come as a great storehouse of information on all the innumerable questions and problems that must inevitably arise when dealing with an author like Herodotus. The bulk of this information is contained in elaborate essays and appendices —full of instruction, no doubt, for the trained scholar, but quite useless (and encumbering) for the " general reader."

In the present reprint all these essays have been omitted; the notes have been cut down unsparingly; and the Introduc- tion (on the Life and Writings of Herodotus), which, in the large edition, extends to nearly one hundred and twenty pages, has been reduced to about twenty.

Notwithstanding, it is hoped that, in its present shape, Rawlinson's Herodotus will prove a source of pleasure to many who have hitherto been deterred from attacking the four formidable volumes of which the original work consisted.

The footnotes are sufficient to clear up all the main difficul- ties, and only a good classical atlas is needed to make the narrative " live " for English readers to-day.

The additions to the footnotes which I have ventured to make are enclosed in square brackets. In some dozen places or so, I have silently corrected a slip, or some statement which later researches have rendered inaccurate or doubtful, and I have occasionally inserted a special note on some point of interest

^SSy?

The History of Hcrodotms

(e.g., on 'Babylon/ 'The Battle of Marathon'); but, with these exceptions, the reader may feel secure that he has before him Rawlinson's own words. I have not even replaced Jupiter by Zeus, or Juno by Here (and the like), though the substitution of a Latin nomenclature for the names of Greek deities is an indefensible practice.

E. H. BLAKENEY^

Thh King's School, Ely, December 1909.

V^ \

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ON THE TRANSLATOR

George Rawlinson (brother of the famous Sir Henry Rawlin- son, the " father of Assyriology "), born 1812, elected Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford, 1840; Bampton Lecturer, 1859; made a Canon of Canterbury, 1872; elected Camden Professor of Ancient History, Oxford, 1861; resigned, 1889; died, 1902, aged 90.

Chief v/orks:~

1. The History of Herodotus, in 4 vols., 1858; 4th edition, 1880.

2. The Seven Great Monarchies of the Ancient East, 1862-1881.

3. Commentary on Exodus {" Speaker's Commentary ") 4 The History of Phoenicia, 1889.

[Original Dedication, 1858]

TO

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE, M.P„

ETC. ETC. ETC,

WHO, AMID THE CARES OF PUBLIC LIFE,

HAS CONTINUED TO FEEL AND SHOW

AN INTEREST IN CLASSICAL STUDIES,

THIS WORK IS INSCRIBED,

AS A TOKEN OF WARM REGARD,

BY THE AUTHOR.

CONTENTS

Introduction ......

THE FIRST BOOK. ENTITLED CLIO

Causes o£ the war between Greece and Persia — i. Mythic (ch. 1-5). 2. Historic — Aggressions of Croesus — Previous Lydian History (6-25). Conquests of Croesus (26-28). Visit of Solon to the court of Croesus {29-33). Story of Adrastus and Atys (34, 45). Preparations of Croesus against Cyrus — Consultation of the oracles (46-55). Croesus seeks a Greek alliance — Hellenes and Pelasgi (56-58). State of Athens under Pisistratus (59-64). Early History of Sparta {65-68). Alliance of Croesus with Sparta (69-70). Croesus warned (71). Croesus invades Cappadocia — His war with Cjnrus (72-85). Dang« and de- liverance of Croesus (86, 87). His advice to Cyrus (88, 89). His message to the Delphic oracle (90, 91). His offerings (92). Wonders of Lydia (93). Manners and customs of the Lydians (94). History of Cyrus — Old Assyrian Empire — Revolt of Media (95). Early Median History (96-107). Birth and bringing-up of Cyrus (108-122). Incite- ments to revolt (123, 4). He sounds the feelings of the Persians — their Ten Tribes (125, 6). Revolt and struggle (127-130). Customs of the Persians (131-140). Cyrus threatens the Ionian Greeks (141). Accoimt of the Greek settlements in Asia (142-151). Sparta interferes to protect the Greeks (152). Sardis revolts and is reduced (153-7). Fate of Pactyas (158-160), Reduction of the Asiatic Greeks (161-170). The Carians, Caunians, and Lycians attacked — their customs — they submit to the Persians (171-6). Conquests of Cyrus in Upper Asia (177). Desoriptionof Babylon (178-187). Cyrus marches on Babylon (188-190). Fall of Babylon (191). Description of Babylonia (192-3). Customs of the Babylonians (194-200). Expedition of Cyrus against the Massaget» (201). The River Araxes (202). The Caspian (203-4). Tomyris — her offer to Cyrus (205, 6). Advice given by Croesus, adopted by Cyrus (207, 8). Dream of Cyrus {209-210). Two battles with the Ma^sagetas — Defeat and death of Cyrus (21 1-4). Manners and customs of the Massagetaa (215) . . . . Page 1

THE SECOND BOOK, ENTITLED EUTERPÄ

Accession of Cambyses — he invades Egypt (ch. i). Description of Egypt — Antiquity (2). Seats of learning (3). Inventions, etc. (4). De- scription of the country (5-13). Agriculture (14). Boundaries {15-

V

vi The History of Herodotus

i8). The Nile — Causes of the inundation (19-27). Sources (28) The Upper Nile (29-31). The interior of Libya (32). Comparison 01 the Nile and Ister (33, 34). Customs of the Egyptians — their strange- ness (35, 36). Religious customs (37-48). Connection of the religions of Egypt and Greece (49-57)- Egyptian Festivals (58-64). Sacred animals (65-67). The Crocodile (68-70). The Hippopotamus (71). Otters, fish, etc (72). The Phoenix (73). Sacred and winged serpents (74f 75)- The Ibis (76). Daily life of the Egyptians (77-80). Dress (81). Divination (82). Oracles (83). Practice of Medicine (84). Funerals (85-90). Worship of Perseus (91). Customs of the marsh- men (92-95). Egyptian boats (96). Routes in the flood-time (97) Anthylla and Archandropolis (98). History of Egypt — Men (99). His successors — Nitocris — Mceris (100, loi). Sesostris — his expedi- tions— his works in Egypt (102-110). His son, Pheron (in). Proteus — story of Helen (i 12-120). Rhampsinitus (122). Doctrine of metem- psychosis (123). Cheops — his pyramid (124-126). Chephren (127, 128). Mycerinus (129-133). His pyramid — history of Rhodopis (134, 135). Asychis (136). 'Anysis — Sabaco (137-140). Sethos — invasion of Seimacherib ^141). Number of the kings (142, 143)* Greek and Egyptian notions of the age of the gods (144-146). The Dodecarchy (147-152). Psarmnetichus (i54-i57)- Neco, his son (158, 159). Psammis, son of Neco (160). Apries, son of Psammis — his deposition (161-169). Tomb of Osiris (170). Egyptian mysteries (171). Reign of Amasie (172-177). His favour to the Greeks (178-182) Page no

THE THIRD BOOK, ENTITLED THALIA

Causes of quarrel between Persia and Egypt — Nitetis story (1-3). Aid lent by Phanes (4). Passage of the Desert (5-9). Invasion of Egypt — Psammenitus king (10). Murder of the children of Phanes — Battle of Pelusium (11). Egyptian and Persian skulls (12). Siege and capture of Memphis — submission of the Libyans and C3rrenaBans (13). Treatment of Psammenitus (14, 15). Treatment of the body of Amasis (16). Expeditions planned by Cambyses (17, 18). Phoenicians refuse to attack Carthage (19). Embassy to the Ethiopians (20-24). Ex- pedition fails (25). Failure of the expedition against Amnion (26). Severities of Cambyses towards the Egyptians (27-29). His out- rageous conduct towards the Persians (30-35). His treatment of Croesus (36). His madness (37, 38). History of Polycrates — his connection with Amasis (39-43). He sends ships to assist Cambyses (44). Revolt of the crews — Samos attacked (45). Aid sought from Sparta and Corinth (46, 47). Story of Periander (48-53). Siege of Samos (54-56). Fate of the rebels (57-59)- Wonders of Samos (60). Revolt of the Magi — usxupation of the Pseudo-Smerdis (61). The news reaches Cambyses — his wound, speech, and death (62-66). Reign of the Magus (67). His detection by Otanes (68, 69). Otanes conspires — arrival of Darius. {70), Debate of the conspirators (71-73).

Contents vii

Fate of Prexaspes (74, 75). Overthrow of the Magi (76-79). Debate on the best form of government (80-82). Decision of Otanes (83). Privileges of the Six (84). Darius obtains the kingdom (85-87)- His wives (88). Division of the Empire into twenty Satrapies (89-93). Amoxmt of the tribute (94-97). Customs of the Indians (98-105). Productiveness of the earth's extremities (106-116). The river Aces (117). Fate of Intaphernes (118, X19). Story of Oroetes and Polycrates (120-125). Punishment of Oroetes (126-128). Democedes of Crotona cures Darius (129, 130). His former history (131). His influence — he cures Atossa (132, 133). Atossa at his instigation requests Darius to invade Greece (134). Persians sent to explore the coasts — Democedes escapes (135-138). Persian expedition against Samos to establish Syloson (139-149). Revolt, and reduction of Babylon by the stratagem of Zopyrus (150-158). Pimishment of the rebels (159). Reward of Zopyrus (i6o) . . . Page sio

THE FOURTH BOOK, ENTITLED MELPOMENE

Expedition of Dariijs against Scythia — its pretext (i). Previous history of the Scythians — their war with their slaves (2-4). Traditions of their origin — i. Their own account (5-7). 2. Greek version of the same (8-10). 3. Account preferred by the author (11, 12). Story of Aristeas (13-16). Description of Scythia (17-20). Neighbouring nations, Sauromatae, Budini, Argippaei, Issedones, and Arimaspi (21-27). Climate of Scythia (28-31). Stories of the Hyperboreans (32-36). Universal geography — i. Description of Asia (37-41). 2. Circumnavigation of Libya (42, 43). 3. Voyage of Scylax (44). Origin of the names, Europe, Asia, Libya (45). Remarkable features of Scythia — the people (46, 47). The rivers — the Ister and its affluents (48-50). The Tyras (51). The Hypanis (52). The Borysthenes (53). The Panticapes, Hypacyris, Gerrhus, Tanais, etc (54-58). Religion of the Scyths — Gods (59). Sacrifices (60, 61). Worship of Mars, etc (62, 63). War-customs (64-66). Soothsayers (67-69). Oaths (70). Burial of the kings, etc (71-73). Use of hemp (74, 75). Hatred of foreign customs — stories of Anacharsis and Scylas (76-80). Popula- tion (81). Marvels (82). Preparations of Darius (83-85). Size of the Euxine, Propontis, etc (86). March of Darius to the Ister (87-92). Customs of the Thracians (93-96). Darius at the Ister (97, 98). Size and shape of Scythia (99-101). Description of the surrounding nations, Taiu-i, etc (102-117). Consultation of the kings (118, 119). Plans of the Scyths (120). March of Darius through Scythia, and return to the Ister (121-140). P^sage of the Ister and return to the Hellespont (141, 143). Saying of Megabazus (144). Libyan expedi- tion of Aryandes — Founding of Thera (145-149). Theraeans required by the oracle to colonise Libya — two accounts (150-155). Occupation of Pia tea (156). Settlement at Aziris (157). Colonisation of Cyrene (zs8). History of Cyrene from its foundation to the death oi Arcesi-

viii The History of Herodotus

laus III. (159-164). Application of Pheretima to Aryandes (165). Fateof Aryandes (166). Expedition against Barca (167). Account of the Libyan tribes from Egypt to Lake Tritonis (168- 181). The three regions of Northern Libya (182-185). Customs of the Libyans (i So- rgo). Contrast of eastern and western Libya (igr, 192). Account of the western tribes (193-196). Four nations of Libya (197). Pro- ductiveness of Libya {198, 199). Account of the expedition against Barca (200-203). Fate of the Barcaeans (204). Death of Pheretima (*o5) Page 287

INTRODUCTION

The time at which Herodotus lived and wrote may be deter- mined within certain limits from his History. On the one hand it appears that he conversed with at least one person who had been an eye-witness of some of the great events of the Persian war; on the other, that he outlived the commencement of the Peloponnesian struggle, and was acquainted with several cir- cumstances which happened in the earlier portion of it. He must therefore have flourished in the fifth century b.c., and must have written portions of his history at least as late as b.c. 430. His birth would thus fall naturally into the earlier portion of the century, and he would have belonged to the generation which came next in succession to that of the conquerors of Salamis.

It may be concluded that Herodotus was born in or about the year b.c. 484. Concerning the birthplace of the historian no reasonable doubt has ever been entertained either in ancient or modem times. He belonged to the town of Halicamassus, a Dorian colony in Asia Minor. The all but universal testimony of ancient writers, the harmony of their witness with the atten- tion given to Halicamassus and its affairs in the history, and the epitaph which appears to have been engraved upon the historian's tomb at Thurium, form a body of proof the weight of which is irresistible.

Of the parents and family of Herodotus but little can be said to be known. His parents' names are given as Lyxes and Dryio (or Rhoio), and he doubtless belonged to one of the wealthy and noble families of the place«

The education of Herodotus is to be judged of from his work.

No particulars of it have come down to us. Herodotus, it may,

however, be supposed, followed the course common in later

times — ^attended the granmiar-school where he leamt to read

I ♦05 ix A

X The History of Herodotus

and write, frequented the palaestra where he went through the exercises, and received instruction from the professional harper or flute-player, who conveyed to him the rudiments of music, But these things formed a very slight part of that education, which was necessary to place a Greek of the upper ranks on a level, intellectually, with those who in Athens and elsewhere gave the tone to society, and were regarded as finished gentle- men. A knowledge of literature, and especially of poetry — above all an intimate acquaintance with the classic writings of Homer, was the one great requisite ; to which might be added a familiarity with philosophical systems, and a certain amount of rhetorical dexterity.

Herodotus, as his writings show, was most thoroughly accomplished in the first and most important of these three things. He has drunk at the Homeric cistern till his whole being is impregnated with the influence thence derived. In the scheme and plan of his work, in the arrangement and order of its parts, in the tone and character of the thoughts, in ten thousand little expressions and words, the Homeric student appears; and it is manifest that the two great poems of ancient Greece are at least as familiar to him as Shakspeare to the modem educated Englishman. Nor has this intimate knowledge been gained by the sacrifice of other reading. There is scarcely a poet of any eminence anterior to his day with whose works he has not shown himself acquainted. Prose composi- tion had but commenced a very short time before the date of his history. Yet even here we find an acquaintance indicated with a number of writers, seldom distinctly named, but the contents of whose works are well known and familiarly dealt with. It may be questioned whether there was a single work of importance in the whole range of Greek literature accessible to him, with the contents of which he was not fairly acquainted.

Such an amount of literary knowledge implies a prolonged and careful seK-education, and is the more remarkable in the case of one whose active and inquisitive turn of mind seems to have led him at an early age to engage in travels, the extent of which, combined with their leisurely character, clearly shows that a long term of years must have been so occupied. The quantum of travel has indeed been generally exaggerated; but after every deduction is made that judicious criticism suggests as proper, there still remains, in the distance between the ex- treme limits reached, and in the fulness of the information

Introduction xi

gained; unmistakable evidence of a vast amount of time spent in the occupation. Herodotus undoubtedly visited Babylon, Ardericca near Susa, the remoter parts of Egypt, Scythia, Colchis, Thrace, Cyrene, Zante, Dodona, and Magna Graecia — thus covering with his travels a space of thirty-one degrees of longitude (above 1700 miles) from east to west, and of twenty- four of latitude (1660 miles) from north to south. Within these limits moreover his knowledge is for the most part close and accurate. He has not merely paid a hasty visit to the countries, but has examined them leisurely, and is familiar with their scenery, their cities small and large, their various wonders, their temples and other buildings, and with the manners and customs of their inhabitants. The fulness and minuteness of his information is even more remarkable than its wide range, though it has attracted less observation.

If anything is certain with respect to the events of our author*s career, it is that his home during the first half of his life was in Asia Minor, during the last in Magna Graecia. It is clear that his visit to Egypt, with which some of his other journeys are necessarily connected, took place after the revolt oi Inarus (b.c. 460); for he states that he saw the skulls of those who were slain in the great battle of Papremis by which Inarus established himself; and yet it could not have been long after, or he would scarcely have been received with so much cordiality, and allowed such free access to the Egyptian temples and records. There is every reason to conclude that his visit fell within the period — six years, from B.c. 460 to b.c. 455, inclu- sively— during w^hich the Athenian armies were in possession of the country, when gratitude to their deliverers would have led the Egyptians to receive any Greek who visited them with open arms, and to treat him with a friendliness and familiarity very unlike their ordinary jealousy of foreigners. His Egyptian travels would thus fall between his twenty-fourth and his twenty-ninth year.

Suidas relates that he was forced to fly from Halicamassus to Samos by the tyranny of Lygdamis, the grandson of Artemisia, who had put his uncle (or cousin) Panyasis to death; that in Samos he adopted the Ionic dialect, and wrote his history; that after a time he returned and took the lead in an insur- rection whereby Halicamassus obtained her freedom, and Lygdamis was driven out; that then, finding himself disliked by the other citizens, he quitted his country, and joined in the

xii The History of Herodotus

Athenian colonisation of Thurium, at which place he died and was buried.

Herodotus probably continued to reside at Halicamassus, taking long journeys for the purpose of historical and geo- graphical inquiry, till towards the year b.c. 447, when, being about thirty-seven years of age, and having brought his work to a. certain degree of completeness, though one far short of that which it reached finally, he removed to Greece Proper, and took up his abode at Athens. Halicamassus, it would appear, had shortly before cast off her tyrants and joined the Athenian confederacy, so that the young author would be welcomed for his country's sake no less than for his own. It was m the year B.c. 446, if we may believe Eusebius, that a decree passed the Athenian assembly, whereby a reward was assigned to Hero- dotus on account of his great historical work, which he had read publicly to the Athenians.

It is not difficult to imagine the reasons which may have induced our author, in spite of the fascinations of its society, to quit Athens, and become a settler in one of her colonial de- pendencies. At Athens he could have no citizenship; and to the Greek not bent on money-making, or absorbed in philosophy, to be without political rights, to have no share in what formed the daily life and occupied the constant thoughts of all around him, was intolerable. " Man is not a man unless he is a citizen," said Aristotle; and the feeling thus expressed was common to the Greek nation. Besides, Athens, like every capital, was an expensive place to hve in; and the wealth which had made a figure at Halicamassus would, even if it were not dissipated, have scarcely given a living there. The acceptance by Hero- dotus of a sum of money from the Athenian people would seem to indicate that his means were now low. They may have been exhausted by the cost of his long journeys, or have suffered from his leaving Halicamassus. At any rate his circumstances may well have been such as to lead him gladly to embrace the invitation which Athens now offered to adventurers from all parts of Greece, whereby he would acquire at her hands a parcel of land (KArjpov), which would place him above want, and a new right of citizenship. Accordingly, in the year B.c. 443, when he had just passed his fortieth year, Herodotus, according to the unanimous testimony of ancient writers, joined the colonists whom Pericles was now sending out to Italy, and became one of the first settlers at Thurium.

Introduction xiii

At Thurium Herodotus would seem to have devoted himself almost entirely to the elaboration of his work.

At the same time he no doubt composed that separate work the existence of which it has been the fashion of late years to deny — ^his History of Assyria. With these literary labours in hand, it is no wonder if Herodotus, having reached the period of middle life, when the fatigues of travel begin to be more sensibly felt, and being moreover entangled in somewhat diffi- cult domestic politics, laid aside his wandering habits, and was contented to remain at Thurium without even exploring to any great extent the countries to which his new position gave him an easy access. There is no trace of his having journeyed further during these years than the neighbouring towns of Meta- pontum and Crotona, except in a single instance. He must have paid a visit to Athens at least as late as b.c. 436, and probably some years later; for he saw the magnificent Propy- laea, one of the greatest of the constructions of Pericles, which was not commenced till b.c. 436, nor finished till five years afterwards.

The state of Thurium, while it was the abode of Herodotus, appears to have been one of perpetual trouble and disquiet* Soon afterwards a war broke out between the Tlmrians and the people of Tarentum, which was carried on both by land and sea^ with varied success, and which probably continued during a space of several years.

It is uncertain whether Herodotus lived to see all these vicissitudes. The place and time of his death are matters of controversy. The work of Herodotus, therefore, contains no sign that he outlived his sixtieth year, and perhaps it may be said that the balance of evidence is in favour of his having died at Thurium when he was about sixty. He would thus have escaped the troubles which afflicted his adopted country during the later portion of the Peloponnesian war, and have been spared the pain of seeing the state of which he was a citizen enrol herself among the enemies of his loved and admired Athens.

The merits of Herodotus as a writer have never been ques- tioned. Those who make the lowest estimate of his qualifica- tions as an historian, are profuse in their acknowledgments of his beauties of composition and style, by which they consider that other commentators upon his work have been unduly biassed in his favour, and led to overrate his historical accuracy«

XIV The History of Herodotus

Scarcely a dissentient voice is to be found on this point among critical authorities, whether ancient or modem, who all agree in upholding our author as a model of his own peculiar order of composition. In the concluding portion of this notice an en- deavour will be made to point out the special excellencies which justify this universal judgment, while, at the same time, atten- tion will be drawn to certain qualifying statements whereby the most recent of our author's critics has lessened the effect of those general eulogiums which he has passed upon the literary merits of the History.

The most important essential of every literary composition, be it poem, treatise, history, tale, or aught else, is unity. Upon this depends our power of viewing the composition as a whole, and of deriving pleasure from the grasp that we thereby obtain of it, as well as from our perception of the harmony and mutual adaptation of the parts, the progress and conduct of the argu- ment, and the interconnection of the various portions with one another. In few subjects is it so difficult to secure this funda- mental groundwork of literary excellence as in history. The unity furnished by mere identity of country or of race falls short of what is required ; and hence most general histories are wearisome and deficient in interest. Herodotus, by selecting for the subject of his work a special portion of the history of Greece and confining himself to the narration of events having a bearing, direct or indirect, upon his main topic, has obtained a unity of action sufficient to satisfy the most stringent demands of art, equal, indeed, to that which characterises the master- pieces of the imagination. Instead of undertaking the complex and difficult task of writing the history of the Hellenic race during a given period, he sits down with the one (primary) object of faithfully recording the events of a particular war. It is not, as has been generally said, the conflict of races, the antagonism between Europe and Asia, nor even that antagonism in its culminating form — the struggle between Greece and Persia^that he puts before him as his proper subject. Had his views embraced this whole conflict, the Argonautic expedi- tion, the Trojan war, the invasion of Europe by the Teucrians and Mysians, the frequent incursions into Asia of the Cimmerians and the Treres, perhaps even the settlement of the Greeks upon the Asiatic shores, would have claimed their place as integral portions of his narrative. His absolute renunciation of some of these subjects, and his cursory notice or entire omission of

Introduction xv

others, indicate that he proposed to himself a far narrower task than the relation of the long course of rivalry between the Asiatic and European races. Nor did he even intend to give us an account of the entire struggle between Greece and Persia. His work, though not finished throughout, is concluded; and its termination with the return of the Greek fleet from Sestos, distinctly shows that it was not his object to trace the entire history of the Graeco-Persian struggle, since that struggle con- tinued for thirty years afterwards with scarcely any intermis- sion, until the arrangement known as the Peace of Callias. The real intention of Herodotus was to write the history of the Persian War of Invasion — ^the contest which commenced with the first expedition of Mardonius, and terminated with the entire discomfiture of the vast fleet and army collected and led against Greece by Xerxes. The portion of his narrative which is anterior to the expedition of Mardonius is of the nature of an introduction, and in this a double design may be traced, the main object of the writer being to give an account of the rise, growth, and progress of the great Empire which had been the antagonist of Greece in the struggle, and his secondary aim to note the previous occasions whereon the two races had been brought into hostile contact. Both these points are connected intimately with the principal object of tiie history, the one being necessary in order to a correct appreciation of the great- ness of the contest and the glory gained by those with whom the victory rested, and the other giving the causes from which the quarrel sprang, and throwing important light on the course of the invasion and the conduct of the invaders.

Had Herodotus confined himself rigidly to these three inter- connected heads of narration, the growth of the Persian Empire, the previous hostilities between Greece and Persia, and the actual conduct of the great war, his history would have been meagre and deficient in variety. To avoid this consequence, he takes every opportunity which presents itself of diverging from his main narrative and interweaving with it the vast stores of his varied knowledge, whether historical, geographical, or anti- quarian. He thus contrived to set before his countrymen a general picture of the world, of its various races, and of the previous history of those nations which possessed one; thereby giving a grandeur and breadth to his work, which places it in the very first rank of historical compositions. At the same time he took care to diversify his pages by interspersing amid

xvi The History of Herodotus

his more serious matter tales, anecdotes, and descriptions of a lighter character, which are very graceful appendages to the main narrative, and happily relieve the gravity of its general tone. The variety and richness of the episodical matter in Herodotus forms thus one of his most striking and obvious characteristics, and is noticed by all critics; but in this very profusion there is a fresh peril, or rather a multitude of perils, and it may be questioned whether he has altogether escaped them. Episodes are dangerous to unity. They may overlay the main narrative and oppress it by their mere weight and number: they may be awkward and ill-timed, interrupting the thread of the narrative at improper places: or they may be in- congnious in matter, and so break in upon the harmony which ought to characterise a work of art. In Herodotus the amount of the episodical matter is so great that these dangers are in- creased proportionally. Nearly one-half of the work is of this secondary and subsidiary character. It is, however, palpable to every reader who possesses the mere average amount of taste and critical discernment, that at least the great danger has been escaped, and that the episodes of Herodotus, notwith- standing their extraordinary length and number, do not injure the unity of his work, or unduly overcharge his narrative. This result, which " surprises " the modern critic, has been ascribed with reason to " two principal causes — the propriety of the occasion and mode in which the episodical matter is intro- duced, and the distinctness of form and substance which the author has imparted to his principal masses." By the exercise of great care and judgment, as well as of a good deal of self- restraint in these two respects, Herodotus has succeeded in completely subordinating his episodes to his main subject, and has prevented them from entangling, encumbering, or even unpleasantly interrupting the general narrative.

Next in order to the epic unity in plan displayed in his history, and rich yet well-arranged and appropriate episode, both of which the work of Herodotus seems to possess in a high degree, may be mentioned the excellency of his character-drawing, which, whether nations or individuals are its object, is remark- ably successful and effective. His portraiture of the principal nations with which his narrative is concerned — the Persians, the Athenians, and the Spartans — is most graphic and striking. Brave, lively, spirited, capable of sharp sayings and repartees, but vain, weak, impulsive, and hopelessly servile towards their

Introduction xvii

lords, the ancient Persians stand out in his pages as completely depicted by a few masterly strokes as their modern descendants have been by the many touches of a Chardin or a Morier. Clearly marked out from other barbarian races by a lightness and sprightliness of character, which brought them near to the Hellenic type, yet vividly contrasted with the Greeks by their passionate abandon and slavish submission to the caprices of despotic power, they possess in the pages of Herodotus an in- dividuality which is a guarantee of truth, and which serves very remarkably to connect them with that peculiar Oriental people — the " Frenchmen of the East," as they have been called — at present inhabiting their country. Active, vivacious, intelligent, sparkling, even graceful, but without pride or dignity, supple, sycophantic, alv/ays either tyrant or slave, the modern Persian contrasts strongly with the other races of the East, who are either rude, bold, proud, and freedora-loving, like the Kurds and Afghans, or listless and apathetic, like the Hindoos. This curious continuity of character, which however is not without a parallel, very strongly confirms the truthfulness of our author, who is thus shown, even in what might seem to be the mere ornamental portion of his work, to have confined himself to a representation of actual realities.

To the Persian character that of the Greeks offers, in many points, a strong contrast — a contrast which is most clearly seen in that form of the Greek character which distinguished the races of the Doric stock, and attained its fullest development among the Spartans. Here again the picture drawn by Hero- dotus exhibits great power and skill. By a small number of carefully-managed touches, by a few well-chosen anecdotes, and by occasional terse remarks, he contrives to set the Spartans before us, both as individuals and as a nation, more graphically than perhaps any other writer. Their pride and independent spirit, their entire and willing submission to their laws, their firmness and solidity as troops, their stem sententiousness, relieved by a touch of humour, are vividly displayed in his narrative. At the same time he does not shrink ^rom showing the dark side of their character. The selfishness, backw^ardness, and over-caution of their public policy, their cunning and duplicity upon occasion, their inability to resist corrupting influences and readiness to take bribes, their cruelty and entire want of compassion, whether towards friend or foe, are all dis- tinctly noted, and complete a portrait not more striking in its

I 405 *A

xviii The History of Herodotus

features than consonant with all that we know from other sources of the leading people of Greece.

Similar fidelity and descriptive power are shown in the picture which he gives us of the Athenians. Like the Spartans, they are independent and freedom-loving^ brave and skilful in war, patriotic, and, from the time that they obtain a form of government suited to their wants, fondly attached to it. Like them, too, they are cruel and unsparing towards their adver- saries. Unlike them, they are open in their public poHcy, active and enterprising almost to rashness, impulsive and so changeable in their conduct, vain rather than proud, as troops possessing more dash than firmness, in manners refined and elegant; witty, hospitable, magnificent, fond of display, capable upon occasion of greater moderation and self-denial than most Greeks, and even possessing to a certain extent a generous spirit of Pan-Hellenism. Herodotus, in his admiration of the ser- vices rendered by the Athenians to the common cause during the great war, has perhaps over-estimated their pretensions to this last quality ; at least it will be found that enlightened self- interest sufficiently explains their conduct during that struggle ; and circumstances occurring both before and after it clearly show, that they had no scruples about calling in the Persians against their own countrymen when they expected to gain by it. It ought not to be forgotten in any estimate of the Athenian character, that they set the example of seeking aid from Persia against their Hellenic enemies. The circumstances of the time no doubt were trying, and the resolve not to accept aid at the sacrifice of their independence was worthy of their high spirit as a nation; but still the fact remains, that the common enemy first learnt through the invitation of Athens how much she had to hope from the internal quarrels and mutual jealousies of the Greek states.

In depicting other nations besides these three — who play the principal parts in his story — Herodotus has succeeded best with the varieties of barbarism existing upon the outskirts of the civilised world, and least well with those nations among whom refiinement and cultivation were at the highest. He seems to have experienced a difficulty in appreciating any other phase of civilisation than that which had been developed by the Greeks. His portraiture of the Egyptians, despite its elaborate finish, is singularly ineffective; while in the case of the Lydians and Babylonians, he scarcely presents us with any distinctive national

Introduction xix

features. On the other hand, his pictures of the Scythians, the Thracians, and the wild tribes of Northern Africa, are exceed- ingly happy, the various forms of barbarism being well con- trasted and carefully distinguished from one another.

Among the individuals most effectively portrayed by our author, may be mentioned the four Persian monarchs with whom his narrative is concerned, the Spartan kings, Cleomenes, Leonidas, and Pausanias, the Atiienian statesmen and generals, Themistocles and Aristides, the tyrants Periander, Polycrates, Pisistratus, and Histiaeus the Milesian, Amasis the Egyptian king, and Croesus of Lydia. The various shades of Oriental character and temperament have never been better depicted than in the representation given by Herodotus of the first four Achaemenian kings — Cyrus, the simple, hardy, vigorous moun- tain chief, endowed with a vast ambition and with great military genius, changing, as his empire enlarged, into flie kind and friendly paternal monarch — clement, witty, polite, familiar with his people; Cambyses, the first form of the Eastern tyrant, inheriting his father's vigour and much of his talent, but spoilt by the circumstances of his birth and breeding, violent, rash, headstrong, incapable of self-restraint, furious at opposition, not only cruel but brutal; Darius, the model Oriental prince, brave, sagacious, astute, great in the arts both of war and peace, the organiser and consolidator as well as the extender of the empire, a man of kind and warm feeling, strongly attached to his friends, clement and even generous towards conquered foes, only severe upon system where the well-being of the empire required an example to be made; and Xerxes, the second and inferior form of the tyrant, weak and puerile as well as cruel and selfish, fickle, timid, Hcentious, luxurious, easily worked on by courtiers and women, superstitious, vainglorious, destitute of all real magnanimity, only upon occasion ostentatiously parad- ing a generous act when nothing had occurred to ruffle his feel- ings. Nor is Herodotus less successful in his Hellenic portraits. Themistocles is certainly better drawn by Herodotus than by Thucydides. His political wisdom and clearsightedness, his wit and ready invention, his fertility in expedients, his strong love of intrigue, his curious combination of patriotism with selfish- ness, his laxity of principle amounting to positive dishonesty, are all vividly exhibited, and form a whole which is at once more graphic and more complete than the sketch furnished by the Attic writer. The character of Aristides presents a ßew

XX The History of Herodotus

point for admiration in the skill with which it is hit ofi with the fewest possible touches. Magnanimous, disinterestedly patriotic, transcending all his countrymen in excellence of moral character and especially in probity, the simple straightforward statesman comes before us on a single occasion, and his features are portrayed without effort in a few sentences. In painting the Greek tyrants, whom he so much detested, Herodotus has resisted the temptation of representing them all in the darkest colours, and has carefully graduated his portraits from the atrocious cruelties and horrible outrages of Periander to the wise moderation and studied mildness of Pisistratus. The Spartan character, again, is correctly given under its various aspects, Leonidas being the idealised type of perfect Spartan heroism, while Pausanias is a more ordinary specimen of their nobler class of mind, brave and gene/ous, but easily wrought upon by corrupting influences, Cleomenes and Eurybiades being representatives of the two forms of evil to which Spartans were most prone, — Eurybiades weak, timorous, vacillating, and in- capable; Cleomenes cruel, false, and violent, — both alike open to take bribes, and ready to sacrifice the interests of the state to their own selfish ends.

To his skill in character-drawing Herodotus adds a power of pathos in which few writers, whether historians or others, have Seen his equals. The stories of the wife of Intaphernes weeping and lamenting continually at the king's gate, of Psammenitus sitting in the suburb and seeing his daughter employed in servile offices and his son led to death, yet " showing no sign," but bursting into tears when an old friend accosted him and asked an alms; of Lycophron silently and sadly enduring every- thing rather than hold converse with a father who had slain his mother, and himself suffering for his father's cruelties at the moment when a prosperous career seemed about to open on him, are examples of this excellence within the compass of a single book which it would be difficult to parallel from the entire writings of any other historical author. But the most eminent instance of the merit in question is to be found in the story of Croesus. It has been well observed that " the volume of popular romance contains few more beautifully told tales than that of the death of Atys; " and the praise might be ex- tended to the whole narrative of the life of Croesus from the visit of Solon to the scene upon the pyre, which is a master- piece of pathos, exhibiting tragic power of the highest order^

Introduction xxi

The same power is exhibited in a less degree in the stories of the siege of Xanthus, of Tomyris, of CEobazus, of Pythius, ol Boges, and of Masistes. In the last of these cases, and perhaps in one or two others, the horrible has somewhat too large a share; in all, however, the pathetic is an important and well- developed element.

It has been maintained that Herodotus, though excellent in tragic scenes, was " deficient in the sense of the comic properly so called." His " good stories " and " clever sayings " are thought to be " not only devoid of true wit, but among the most insipid of his anecdotical details." The correctness of this judg- ment may be questioned, not only on the general ground that tragic and comic power go together, but by an appeal to fact — the experimmtum