Reginald Walter Macan, Herodotus, The Seventh, Eighth, & Ninth Books with Introduction and Commentary

---

---

ἔθνεα ἑπτά: Hdt. gives the ethnography of the Peloponnesos, not its geographical divisions, which only partially coincide with the ethnography. Of the seven ἔθνεα therein, Hdt. regards two as autochthonous and in occupation of their original seats, viz. Arkadians and Kynurians; a third, the Achaians, as autochthonous, but migrant within the Peloponnese itself. The four others are immigrant, ἐπήλυδα, Dorians, Aitolians, Dryopians, Lemnians; see further the notes below. The Homeric Catalogue may be taken as recognizing six groups in Peloponnesos (Il. 2. 559-624): i. οἳ δ̓ Ἄργος τ᾽ εἶχον κτλ. (559-568) = Argolis. ii. οἳ δὲ Μυκήνας εἶχον κτλ. (569-580) = Achaia. iii. οἳ δ᾽ εἶχον κοίλην Λακεδαίμονα κτλ. (581-590) = Lakonia. iv. οἳ δὲ Πύλον κτλ. (591-602) = Messenia. v. οἳ δ́ ἔχον Ἀρκαδίην κτλ. (603-614) = Arkadia. vi. οἳ δ᾽ ἄρα Βουπράσιόν τε καὶ Ἤλιδα δῖαν ἔναιον κτλ. (615-624) = Elis. Thucyd. 1. 10. 2 may be understood to divide the Peloponnesos into five equal fractions, assigning two to the Spartans—a division which disregards ethnology and geography alike; unless, indeed, we are to read it in the light of Pausan. 5. 1. 1— a passage obvionsly composed in view of Thucydides: ὅσοι δὲ Ἑλλήνων Πελοποννήσου πέντε εἶναι μοίρας καὶ οὐ πλείονάς φασιν, ἀνάγκη σφᾶς ὁμολογεῖν, ὡς ἐν τῇ Ἀρκάδων οἰκοῦσιν Ἠλεῖοι καὶ Ἀρκάδες, δευτέρα δὲ Ἀχαιῶν, τρεῖς δὲ ἐπὶ ταύταις αἱ Δωριέων (sc. Messenia, Lakonia, Argolis. Thucydides, by the way, reckons Messenia as part of Lakonia, in accordance with the political situation in his own time, which clearly shows that his ‘fifths’ are arithmetical fractions, not geographical) Pausanias continues (with an obvious reference to this passage in Hdt.): γένη δὲ οἰκεῖ Πελοπόννησον Ἀρκάδες μὲν αὐτόχθονες καὶ Ἀχαιοί. καὶ οἱ μὲν ὑπὸ Δωριέων ἐκ τῆς σφετέρας ἀνέστησαν, οὐ μέντοι Πελοποννήσου γε ἐξεχώρησαν, ἀλλὰ ἐκβαλόντες Ἴωνας νέμονται τὸν Αἰγιαλὸν τὸ ἀρχαῖον, νῦν δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν τούτων καλούμενον: οἱ δὲ Ἀρκάδες διατελοῦσιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐς τόδε τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἔχοντες. τὰ δὲ λοιπὰ ἐπηλύδων ἐστὶν ἀνθρώπων. Κορίνθιοι μὲν γὰρ οἱ νῦν . . Δρύοπες δὲ καὶ Δωριεῖς, οἱ μὲν ἐκ Παρνασοῦ, Δωριεῖς δὲ ἐκ τῆς Οἴτης ἐς Πελοπόννησόν εἰσιν ἀφιγμένοι. τοὺς Ἠλείους ἴσμεν ἐκ Καλυδῶνος διαβεβηκότας καὶ Αἰτωλίας τῆς ἄλλης. Pausanias then specifies—for the Hellenic period — Arkadians, Achaians, (Ionians), Dorians, Dryopians, Aitolians. (Could ζ́ or ή have dropped out after γένη δέ?)

---

κατὰ χώρην ἵδρυται emphasizes the local fixity of the two autochthonous ἔθνεα specified.

---

νῦν τε καὶ τὸ πάλαι: the date of this ‘Now’ is unfortunately obscure; no doubt the remark would hold good of any day in Hdt.'s whole life, but the precise date of the composition of this chapter is a curiosity; cp. Introduction, § 9.

The passage contains five illustrations of the force of τε καί worth observing: here, (1) of the absolute continuity of past and present; just below, (2) of Arkadians and Kynurians, as belonging to one class, and further, (3) of Dorians and Aitolians, who came in perhaps together, (4) of Hermion and Asine, cities of one folk, while (5) in ‘the many famous cities’ the conjunction is so close as to disappear altogether in our idiom.

Ἀρκάδες: to Hdt. the Arkadians are Pelasgians, cp. 1. 146, 2. 171, and βαλανηφάγοι ἄνδρες ap. orac. 1. 66. Tegea (1. 66 etc.), Mantineia (4. 161 etc.), Orchomenos (7. 202), Nonakris (6. 74), Pheneos (ibid.), Phigaleia (6. 83), Trapezûs (6. 127), Paion (ibid.), Dipaia (9. 35), and indirectly Stymphalos (6. 76), are mentioned among the cities of Arkadia. Arkadians are serving on the king's fleet from Kypros (7. 90), and perhaps as mercenaries in his army (c. 26 supra).

---

Κυνούριοι, described just below as Ionians, and nowhere else mentioned expressly by Hdt. Thuc. 4. 56. 2 enables us to identify their territory: ἀφικνοῦνται ὲπὶ Θυρέαν, ἥ ἐστι μὲν τῆς Κυνουρίας γῆς καλουμένης μεθορία δὲ τῆς Ἀργείας καὶ Λακωνικῆς: cp. 5. 14 4, and 41. 2 περὶ τῆς Κυνουρίας γῆς ἧς αἰεὶ πέρι διαφέρονται μεθορίας οὔσης (ἔχει δὲ ἐν αὑτῇ Θυρέαν καὶ Ἀνθήλην πόλιν, νέμονται δ᾽ αὐτὴν Λακεδαιμόνιοι). The great chapter out of the ἔρις περὶ χώρου καλεομένου Θυρέης is told above 1. 82; of Kynurian Authele Hdt. appears to know nothing; and it is remarkable that in one place he speaks of Thyrea as the χώρη in debate. All this does not look as if he had knowledge of the operations in the district during the Archidamian war (424 B.C., Thuc. 4. 56, 57) or even of the settlement of the Aiginetans there after their expatriation in 431 B.C. (6. 91, Thuc. 2. 27. 2).

τὸ Ἀχαιικόν: what the strict ethnological relation of the Achaians to the Pelasgians (Arkadians) and Ionians of the Peloponnese Hdt. nowhere clearly indicates. Were they also (in his opinion) Pelasgians? Topographically he must place them south of their historic province, probably in Lakonia. Historic Achaia, with its Dodekapolis, had been Ionian before it was Achaian, according to Hdt. 1. 145. The relation of the ‘Achaians’ of Peloponnesos to the ‘Achaians’ of Thessaly is not a problem abont which Hdt. concerns himself; cp. 7. 196 supra.

ἐκ μὲν Πελοποννήσου οὐκ ἐξεχώρησε: is it possible that Hdt. did not trace the ‘Aehaian’ settlements in Italy to the Peloponnesos? Or the ‘Achaians’ in Krete to the same source (Od. 19. 175)? Or does he merely mean by these words that the Achaian stock has not completely evacuated the Peloponnese, though it has shifted from one place to another within it? τῆς ἑωυτῶν: sc. historic Lakonia. τὴν ἀλλοτρίην: sc. historic Achaia.

---

Δωριέες: the legend of the Dorian invasion, or of ‘the Return of the Herakleids,’ is in part narrated 9. 26 infra, and everywhere presupposed in Hdt.; cp. c. 31 supra.

Αἰτωλοί: Hdt. apparently is acquainted with a form of the legend, which made Aitolians accompany or guide the Dorian invaders from ‘Nanpaktos’; but he nowhere expressly refers to the legend of Oxylos (Pausan. 5. 3. 5).

Δρύοπες: the ‘Dryopian’ invasion of the Peloponnesos, which left its mark in Hermion and Asine, is doubtless conceived by the Greek historians as long prior to the Dorian, though it started, according to one story, from the same quarter or cradle (Strabo 434 τὴν Δρυοπίδα τετράπολιν γεγονυῖάν ποτε καθάπερ καὶ τὴν Δωρίδα, μητρόπολιν δὲ τῶν ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ Δρυόπων νομιζομένην). They had quarrelled with Herakles in their native Dryopis, and been banished by him to the South. (Diodoros 4. 37; Strabo, etc.) The geographical positions of the Dryopians in historical times (cp. c. 43 supra) suggests a sea-route for the migration—if, indeed, the whole legend be not a fiction, and the Dryopians of historic times fragments of a wide-spread stratum of early population. According to ‘Aristotle’ ap. Strabon. 373 Dryops was an Arkadian.

Λήμνιοι, evidently a consequence of the legend narrated 4. 145; but ‘Lemnian’ is hardly an ethnic designation. Why does not Hdt. here call them Minyai? Does he expect his readers to have that passage in mind? And is this passage of later composition or insertion? (Cp. Introduction, § 9.) But see below.

---

δόκιμοι πόλιξς: e.g. Sparta, Argos, Konnth, Sikyon, Phleiûs, Epidauros, Troizen, et al.

Ἦλις μούνη. This phrase can hardly be quoted (as by Blakesley) to prove that the passage is ‘a later addition’ to the work of Hdt., for even if Strabo 336 were right in saying that the city of Elis did not exist at the time of the Persian war, still it existed before any part of the work of Hdt. But Strabo probably overstates his case. Elis increased owing to a συνοικισμός shortly after the Persian war, Diodor. 11. 54. 1 (471 B.C.) (cp. 4. 148 supra), but there was a city of Elis already; cp. Homer, Il. 2. 615, cited above.

---

Ἑρμιών, cp. c. 43 supra, in the SE. of the Argolis peninsula. It was celebrated as the spot from which there was the shortest cut down to Hades. Strabo 373.

Ἀσίνη: the place here mentioned is on the east coast of Messenia, i.e. on the west side of the Μεσσηνιακὸς κόλπος (Strabo 359), not to be confused with the Asine in Lakonia, in the neighbourhood of Helos, visited by the Athenians in 424 B.C. (Thuc. 4. 54. 4), though possibly identical with the Asine mentioned in two other places in Thucydides (4. 13. 1, 6. 93. 3). It may have derived its name from an older settlement in close proximity to Hermion, Il. 2. 560, the inhabitants of which sided with the Spartans in the Messenian and Argive wars, and were expelled by the Argives, but given a new home by the Lakedaimonians, Strabo 373; Pausan. 2. 36. 4, 3. 7. 4.

ἡ πρὸς Καρδαμύλῃ: expressly to distinguish it from the one in Argolis, which, if still existing, was a mere village (Strabo l c.). But has Hdt. correctly located it, or can πρός here mean ‘opposite’ ‘over against’? Kardamyle was in the realm of Menelaos of old: σημεῖον δέ: ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ Μεσσηνιακοῦ κόλπου καὶ τοῦ συνεχοῦς Ἀσιναίου λεγομένου ἀπὸ τῆς Μεσσηνιακῆς Ἀσίνης αἱ ἑπτὰ ἦσαν πόλεις, ἃς ὑπέσχετο δώσειν ὁ Ἀγαμέμνων τῷ Ἀχιλλεῖ “Καρδαμύλην Ἐνόπην τε κτλ.” (Il. 9. 150, 295) Strabo 359. Bursian (ii. 154) describes it as situate about 5 miles (zwei Stunden) N. of Leuktra, and 1 mile (20 min.) from the coast, upon a steep rock, the village still preserving the name, Skardamyla.

τῇ Λακωνικῇ: to distinguish it from any other place of the same name, e.g. the city on Chios mentioned by Thucyd 8. 24. 3.

---

Παρωρεῆται: according to 4. 148 the ‘Paroreatai’ and ‘Kaukones’ had been driven out of their cities by the Minyai (i.e. the Lemnians), here Hdt. appears to identify the Paroreatai with the Lemnians (i.e. Minyai) or with a part of them. The two passages must be regarded as independent, even though the Lemnian legend underlies this one. The two peoples stood on the same ground. Strabo 346 ἐλέγοντο δὲ Παρωρεᾶται τινὲς τῶν ἐν τῇ Τριφυλίᾳ κατέχοντες ὄρη περὶ τὸ Λέπρειον καὶ τὸ Μάκιστον καθήκοντα ἐπὶ θάλατταν πλησίον τοῦ Σαμιακοῦ ποσειδίου. The name no doubt means the inhabitants of the Παρωρεία, which means ‘the Highland’—though why L. & S. place this particular Paroreia in ‘Arcadia,’ unless by confusion with the town mentioned by Pausanias 8. 27. 3, is not obvious. The name is found in Thrace (Livy 39. 27) and even on the Euxine (C.I.G. 2058, B 17).

---

μοῦνοι εἶναι Ἴωνες: Hdt. appears to think that the ‘Kynurians’ were Ionians, and the only Ionians remaining in the Peloponnesos. As they occupy their original abode, he must conceive the Ionians as originally occupying more ground in the Peloponnesos than the historic Achaia.

ἐκδεδωρίευνται, ‘they have become’ more Dorian than the Dorians, or, at least, ‘thoroughly dorized.’ Cp. App. Crit. But what to Hdt. were the notes of Dorism, apart from descent?—dialect, 1. 139; dress, 5. 88; organization, 5. 68; perhaps cult, 5. 72. It is, indeed, curious how little there is to distinguish the Dorians as such; but of course to Hdt. they are the Ἕλληνες κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν: cp. 1. 56, 5. 88, 7. 93 etc. At the time Hdt. wrote this passage Thyrea can hardly yet have been in the hands of the Aiginetans; in other words, it makes against the theory of the late composition of Bks. 7-9 (cp. Introduction, § 9), and even against dating the composition, or insertion, of this chapter to the final revision (ibid. § 10).

---

ὑπό τε Ἀργείων ἀρχόμενοι καὶ τοῦ χ.: the participle is exegetical, after Argives. χρόνου is in direct regimen from the preposition, ‘by their subjection to the Argives and by lapse of time.’ Stein's last lection (cp. App. Crit.), reducing the construction to a simple genit. absol., waters down a forcible phrase.

Ὀρνεῆται: Orneai is known to the Homeric Catalogue, Il. 2. 571, in the Mykenaian (or Achaian) group (cp. 1. 1 supra); it certainly was not in Kynuria; cp. Strabo 376, Pausan. 2. 25. 5. If this whole phrase be not (as I suspect) a gloss (cp. App. Crit.), it must be inferred, with K. O. Muller (Dorier2 i. 85, 160, etc.), that Orneai had been reduced by Argos before the Persian war, or at least before the date of Hdt.'s composition, and that, like the Caerites at Rome, the Orneatai gave their name to a political status—resembling that of the perioikoi in Laconia.

At the battle of Mantineia in 418 B.C. the Orneatai are described, with the Kleonaians, as ξύμμαχοι of the Argives (Thuc. 5. 67. 2), and the reduction and destruction of Orneai is recorded later, in 415 B.C. (Thuc. 6. 7. 2). The city was at that time occupied by Argive exiles, supported by a Lakedaimonian garrison (Diodor. 12. 81. 4).

---

πάρεξ τῶν κατέλεξα: the construction is by attraction. The phrase, remarkable as a reference back to c. 72, might perhaps support the view that c. 73 is a later insertion from the author's hand; or would not Hdt. have used the perfect rather than the aorist if cc. 72-73 had been originally written in einem Flug?

εἰ δὲ ἐλευθέρως ἔξεστι εἰπεῖν. Why should there be any difficulty about free speech, free writing? Hdt. has an audience, or a reading public in view, which may be offended by his verdict. Is that public found in the ‘Achaian’ colonies of Italy? Or in Athens, at a time when the alliance with Argos, with Achaia, might be ‘in the air’? The ethnography of the Peloponnesos might have had special interest for either public.

---

ἐκ τοῦ μέσου κατήμενοι ἐμήδιζον. This verdict appears much more severe than the apology for the Argives in 7. 152 supra, and might well belong to a different stratum, a different draft, in the composition of the work.