The style, O Alexander, of Herodotus, as being simple, free, and easily suiting itself to its subject, has deceived many; but more, a persuasion of his dispositions
being equally sincere. For it is not only (as Plato says)
an extreme injustice, to make a show of being just when
one is not so; but it is also the highest malignity, to pretend to simplicity and mildness and be in the mean time
really most malicious. Now since he principally exerts
his malice against the Boeotians and Corinthians, though
without sparing any other, I think myself obliged to defend our ancestors and the truth against this part of his
writings, since those who would detect all his other lies
and fictions would have need of many books. But, as
Sophocles has it, the face of persuasion is prevalent, especially when delivered in good language, and such as has
power to conceal both the other absurdities and the ill-nature of the writer. King Philip told the Greeks who
revolted from him to Titus Quinctius, that they had got a
more polished, but a longer-lasting yoke. So the malice
of Herodotus is indeed more polite and delicate than that
of Theopompus, yet it pinches closer, and makes a more
severe impression,—not unlike to those winds which,
blowing secretly through narrow chinks, are sharper than
those that are more diffused. Now it seems to me very
convenient to delineate, as it were, in a rough draught,
[p. 332]
those signs and marks that distinguish a malicious narration from a candid and unbiassed one, applying afterwards
every point we shall examine to such as appertain to them.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.