ordinary Greeks of the Periclean age were rather the Greeks of Herodotus, than the Greeks of Thucydides.

The broadest and deepest reason for this assertion is that the Greeks of Herodotus have all the universal features of the race, stamped upon them in all ages, while Thucydides pretends that in his day the face of society changed to a totally different type. As if the evidence of Aristophanes and Euripides his contemporaries, of Antiphanes and Alexis in the next generation, of the patriots Epaminondas and Demosthenes—as if in fact all evidence we can get in all Greek history and literature did not contradict him! The Greeks before his day, even in Homeric days, had been at times treacherous and cruel, generally dishonest and selfish, but withal often generous and gentlemanly, always clever and agreeable, and always carried away by a love of beauty more than by a respect for truth'. All these features, the heritage of early days, are found in the men of Solon and Theognis, in the men of Pindar and Simonides. They are also found in the men of Herodotus and of Euripides, whose portraits are far more faithful than those of the dry and surly Thucydides.

Let me verify these assertions by a few citations from Herodotus on each of these somewhat contrasted features. As to the meanness and lying of the Greeks in Herodotus, I may select their relations with the Asiatic monarchs, especially with Darius, as a feature

1 Thus the Egestaæans of Sicily, even in Herodotus' time, had a shrine at the tomb of the Crotoniate Philip, and offered sacrifices to him as a hero, on account of his extreme beauty (Herod. v. 47). At Athens, even old men were selected for their beauty to take part in public processions.

which remained unchanged in the historian's own day, and for generations to come.

There was at Athens a clan of Alcmæonidæ, into whose history Herodotus goes at length (vi. 121, sqq.) owing to an allegation that they had attempted to betray their city to the Persians after the battle of Marathon. This story seems to Herodotus incredible, owing to the high respectability and known miso-tyranny of the family. For,' says he,' there were no men more highly thought of among the Athenians, or more highly honoured;' and he tells us how one of this clan which was celebrated of old, who had been of service to Croesus, was invited to Sardis, and promised as much gold as he could carry away on his person. Whereupon this great Athenian nobleman puts on a very wide tunic, with hanging folds, and the very largest top-boots he can procure. Proceeding to the king's treasure-house he drops into a heap of gold dust, and having stuffed his boots full, next he puts as much into the folds of his tunic as it will hold, and then having crammed his mouth with more, and having sprinkled it through his hair, emerges so stuffed out as to be hardly like a man. Croesus bursts out into laughter, but like a thorough gentleman, adds as much more to his gift, so that Alcmeon, out of the proceeds, was able to breed horses, and conquer at Olympia.

This story which was told, as I suppose, to Herodotus by the Alcmæonidæ themselves, shows what notions they had of gentlemanly conduct. But the story is by no means isolated. All through the reign of the Achæmenid dynasty, the Greeks, and Greeks of

all cities, were going up to Susa on all manner of pretexts, promising the great king all manner of easy conquests, begging for restoration to their homes, asking for money, and paying him with perpetual ingratitude. Nothing is more striking than the goodnatured and gentlemanly contempt of Darius, who never shows vindictive feeling, but always, apparently to Herodotus' surprise, pardons, and even favours, rebels and traitors. Thus the Milesians, who had involved him in a bloody and expensive war (vi. 30), the son of Miltiades, his false friend, and bitter enemy (vi. 41), and the people of Eretria, who had burned wantonly his Lydian capital (vi. 119), when brought before him as prisoners, are treated kindly, and settled in his country. It is evident that the great king appreciated their talents and activity, though he evidently despised their treachery. I have no doubt the Persian grandees shared with him this latter feeling1, and to this, as much as to the love of Hellenic society, and city politics, do I attribute the fact that no Greeks,

་

1 To what pitch of meanness the Greek, even of those days, could descend in making money, appears from the disgusting story of Panionius the Chian, told by Herodotus (viii. 105 sqq.). The longing to return to Hellenic life is well described by Andocides (pp. 3, 58, ed. Blass). Why,' say his adversaries, will you await prosecution and danger here, when you can go to Cyprus, and there enjoy wealth and tranquillity; see you not in what a wretched state our city is?' But I, gentlemen, am of a far different mind. For I would not choose all the good things of the world, to live away from my country; and were it even in such a plight as my enemies allege, far rather would I be a citizen of it, than of others, which perhaps appear to me at present very prosperous.' I cannot refrain from adding a parallel piece of evidence from a different, and little known source. It happened to the people

however magnificently treated, could ever content themselves at Susa; they all sought to beg or to embezzle the treasures of the great king, and bring them to Hellenic homes. There was, indeed, a single exception-Scythes, tyrant of Zancle-who asked leave to visit Sicily, and returned to die in Persia, 'Him Darius considered to be the most righteous of all those Greeks who had gone up to him from Greece, in that he kept his promise to the great king.' What an evidence of Greek dishonesty! We can well fancy the Aryan barons of Darius' court speaking in the tone of the Roman Juvenal. To them, too, the Graulus esuriens was but too well known—with his fascination, his cleverness, and, withal, his mean and selfish knavery. I need hardly remind the Greek scholar that all through the Ionic revolt, and through the Persian wars, this treachery and selfishness was one of the main stays of the Persians; in fact, had they depended upon it more completely, the subjugation of Greece would have been a mere question of time. The several states were always intent upon their own interests, always ready to betray their neighbours and allies for material advantages, and had

of Posidonia,' says Aristoxenus (Athenæus, xiv. p. 632, A), who were originally Greeks, that they were utterly barbarised, and turned into Tyrrhenians or Romans, so that they changed their language and the rest of their customs, but they even now still observe one of the Hellenic feasts, in which, coming together, they call to memory their old names and customs, and having bewailed them to one another and wept their fill of tears, they separate.' How strange and affecting an evidence of the deep hold which Greek culture had taken even on those who were compelled for generations to abandon it!

not the satraps, who held them in special dislike because of their personal influence with the King, treated them with severity, doubtless much more could have been effected by combined bribery and pardon. The Ionic cities were, perhaps, injured in political morality by the prevalence of tyrants, who were generally paid, or at least supported, by the Persians: but still among the Æginetans and the Argeians, and even among the Athenians and Spartans, there are not wanting melancholy instances of the same defects1.

So far, then, Herodotus agrees with Thucydides in his picture of the generation preceding the men of the Peloponnesian war; so far, I am certain that both felt the salient weaknesses of the Greek character. But Herodotus differs in that he makes these baser motives give way at times to real patriotism and kindly justice. Most men are, with him, selfish and hard; but it is not unusual to find a just man. There is, too, a Providence rewarding goodness, and thus higher principles have their weight in Greek society. Here Herodotus openly asserts what Thucydides denies in spite of facts, and here he is in harmony with the tragic poets, with the higher aspirations of the Old Comedy, in fact, with human nature, as opposed to the refinements of the selfish moralists. With most men, the oracles,

1 How lax or peculiar must Herodotus' own notions have been, when he tells us (vii. 164) that Cadmus, tyrant of Cos, without pressure or danger, and merely from a love of justice, surrendered his tyranny; and yet that this same Cadmus went with the Samians to Sicily, where with them he seized and held the city of Zancle, thenceforth called Messana, one of the most scandalous pieces of injustice and treachery in all Greek history (vi. 23).