the custom for an ancient author to check the flow of his style by introducing the names of authorities. Last of all comes the ungracious question of whether Herodotus really did undertake those extensive travels which have been generally ascribed to him. Mr. Blakesley's observations upon this subject are not so valuable as might have been expected, for he has chiefly laboured to prove that Herodotus never went to Carthage, a city which very few critics could have ever supposed him to have visited. He however states, upon the authority of Polybius, that until the time of Alexander the seas swarmed with pirates; thus totally ignoring the fact, that during the years when Herodotus must have performed his travels, namely, between the Persian and the Peloponnesian wars, the fleets of the Greek allies, under the supremacy of Athens, had cleared the Aegean of pirate and Persian, from Attica to Asia Minor, and from the shores of Thrace to the mouths of the Nile. He also quotes the statements of Andocides, that the seas were covered with war-galleys and pirates; but this was the state of things at the latter end of the Peloponnesian war, and not during the time when Herodotus was undertaking his voyages. One thing is certain, that Herodotus must have sailed from Halicarnassus to Samos, from Samos to Athens, and from Athens to Thurium. Mr. Blakesley will also admit that he might have visited Aegypt. Beside these countries the present author believes, from reasons which he has specified in the course of the present volume, that Herodotus sailed through the Hellespont, and across the Euxine, as far as the Greek port of Olbia, and that he travelled along the great highway between Sardis and Susa; and it was most probably during this or the return journey that he sailed down the Euphrates, and reached the great city of Babylon.' One fact has been missed, not only by Mr. Blakesley, but by every commentator on the Geography of Herodotus whom the present author has consulted, namely, that the political relations of Halicarnassus with Persia were especially favourable to any well-accredited native of that city, who desired to visit the Persian capital. Halicarnassus was excluded from the Dorian confederacy, worshipping at Triopium, and at the time of the battle of Salamis, was united with the neighbouring islands of Cos, Calydna, and Nysirus, under the dependent sceptre of the celebrated Artemisia; and the Carian queen gained so much upon the esteem of Xerxes, that after the defeat, he placed several of his natural sons under her care to be conveyed to Ephesus. Herodotus himself openly expresses his admiration of Artemisia, though she fought on the side of the Persians; and the little kingdom continued faithful to her and her family, even whilst Cimon the Athenian was frightening the whole Asiatic coast by his exploits. Herodotus no doubt belonged to a family of some consideration at Halicarnassus. At forty years of age he assisted in the popular revolution, which deprived the grandson of Artemisia of the tyranny. We may easily infer that he saw the socalled Indian ants preserved in the royal palace at Susa; and it is impossible to account for his acquaint 1 See also Appendix I., "Travels of Herodotus," at the end of the present volume. 2 iii. 102. ance with the Persian muster-rolls of the army and navy of Xerxes, unless this journey to Susa be admitted by the modern critic. Thus far the present writer has endeavoured to do justice to the integrity and practical experience of Herodotus, without, as he hopes, doing injustice to the valuable and much-esteemed labours of Mr. Blakesley. If the theory which has been discussed had pertained to philology, the writer would have left it for abler critics to decide. If it had referred only to the history of Herodotus, he would have passed it over as not belonging to his subject. But it directly applied to the value of that geographical information which has been embodied and illustrated in the present volume, and therefore he has been compelled to investigate the question, and record and defend his opinions against so learned and emi nent a commentator. Here then the writer concludes his present labours. Years have passed away since he commenced his task, and much of it has been accomplished under circumstances but little favourable to literary composition; but however it may be received by the scholar, he can never regret a toil which has filled his mind's eye with vivid pictures of the ancient world, painted by the hand of the Homer of history. These pictures he hopes to reproduce in a more popular volume, which is already in preparation, and which he expects will shortly be submitted to the indulgence of the public. London, August 28th, 1854. |