WtUNIVtKV^ ^IL1BRARY- < ^WEUNIVERI/A )^o" = ^lOSANCElfj> o ^^tLIBRARY6?/ ^OFCAIIFO/?^ ■■L \WEUNIVER% ^lOSANCElfj> !^i ir;^! CI HOMERIC SYNCHRONISM. owtKfv ovKfT dSr)\os (nenXfes, dW' hi irovrov Kvixacriv Alyatoio ■n-odwv kveOrjKas /5((,"as. Callini, Hymn, in Delum. 53. HOMERIC SYNCHRONISM. AN ENQUIRY INTO THE TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. BY THE Right Hon. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P., Author of '^yuventus Mundi,^' &'c. NEW YORK: HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE. 1876. 95787 t c t c t ' 5 CONTENTS, Introductory PAGE 7 Part I. CHAPTER I. Homer and the Plain Researches of Cesnola in Cyprus Discoveries of Schliemann in Troas Their bearing on the historical existence of Troy Sketch of the discussion on the Site . ; The work of Von Eckenbrecher Destroys the claims of Balidag or Bounarbashi Confutes the objections of Strabo to Hissarlik Superior claims of Hissarlik .... Want of precise correspondence in details 19 19 20 20 21 23 24 26 28 30 CHAPTER II. Homer and the Remains from Hissarlik The five couches of the Hill of Hissarlik . Schliemann's opinion on the date of Homer The prophecy of Poseidon The dimensions of Troy .... Homer's estimate of the City . Correspondence of the objects discovered with the Poems Walls and Buildings ....... 34 36 38 40 42 11 CONTENTS. Material of implements Of stone ......... Of copper ........ Objects in the precious metals : the head-dress of Andro mache The Talanta, or blades of Silver .... Relation of Silver to Gold Ornamental objects Highest works of Art in the Poems Their bearing on the question respecting the date of Homer .... Propositions touching this question Greco-Phoenician Shields Indications of writing Images for worship . Art of pottery General conclusion in favour of Homer's proximity to the Iroica ...... PAGE 45 47 48 49 51 53 53 55 56 58 60 62 65 69 71 CHAPTER III. Homer's Habitat and Date Opinion that Homer was an Asiatic Greek Counter arguments : (i) From his use of the Achaian name . (2) Of the Dorian name ..... (3) His non-use of the Aiolian name (4) His inexact treatment of the Plain . (5) His treatment of the Athenians (6) Amount of local colour in the two Catalogues respectively (7) Limit of the assertion in the Hymn to Apollo (8) Comparative knowledge of Asia Minor and of Greece 72 72 73 73 74 75 77 77 78 78 CONTENTS. Ill (9) As to positive indications of the Dorian Con- quest ...... (10) Essential Achaianism of the manners (11) Character of the traditions about Homer (12) Arguments of Wood confuted . Change in the relations of Greece and Egypt . CHAPTER IV. Homer and the Delian Hymn .... General opinion on the authorship of the Hymns Delian Hymn : argument from Aristophanes . „ ., from Thucydides . General evidence of style Suited to a Greek of the Migration Prima facie evidence of the Hymn as Chios Its high antiquity .... Examination of passages in detail : — • Dignity and birth of Apollo, i — vi Geographical discord, vii . Various discords, viii — xiii Discrepancies in the treatment of d xiv — xix .... Further discrepancies, xx — xxvi General conclusions to the Bard of ivers goddesses. PAGE 79 79 80 82 85 87 87 88 88 90 91 92 93 94 99 105 108 112 116 Part II. CHAPTER I. Homer and the Egyptian Monuments Heads of the evidence : — I. The Dardanian Link . Genealogy of Dardanos Combination against Rameses II 121 122 123 127 IV CONTENTS. PAGE II. The Achaian Link 130 Epoch of Achaian nationality 130 -.. Its duration ..... 134 Greek subjection to Egypt . 137 Combination against Merepthah . 139 Its defeat t42 Combination against Rameses III 145 III. The Theban Link 148 Epoch of the Theban supremacy . 149 The Gates of Thebes, 11. ix. 381-; 584 . t 151 The Horses of Thebes 152 Thebes in Od. iv. 125-127 . 156 Thebes of Eetion : of Bolotia 158 IV. The Sidonian Link 160 Sidon in Holy Scripture 160 Tyre in Holy Scripture 161 Sidon in Homer . . . 162 B Epoch of its fall .... 164 V. Memnon and the Keteians , 166 Common tradition as to Memnon 167 Its probable basis .... 168 Memnon in Od. iv. and xi. . 169 Who were the Keteians ? 171 Probably the Khita, or Hittites . 173 Memnon probably their leader . . 178 The Delphian Lesche . • 179 Presumption arising from the route of Menelaos 180 VI. (i) Legend of the Pseud-odusseus , , 183 Probably based on the expedition against Merep- thah • . 187 (2) Voyage of the ship Argo . . 189 The two first national efforts of Greece : the Seven against Thebes • • 190 And the Voyage of the Argo • . 192 CONTENTS. PAGE The love of Here for Jason . 194 VII. Homer and Rameses II 197 The Pentaour .... 198 Achilles and Priam 199 Chronological Summary .... 201 Childhood of Greece . . . . 204 CHAPTER II. Homer's Egyptian and other Foreign Knowledge Purpose of this Chapter Nature and sources of Homer's Egyptian knowledge Not confined to the limits of Egypt Direct indications in the Poems The Under-world of Homer .... Its characters generally foreign or pre-Hellenic Its names, Aides and Erebos .... Homer's cosmography as commonly assumed The passage to Aides is by the surface . Setting and rising points of the Sun Argument from Od. xii. 376-88 Kirke in the East Approximation of the far East and far West . Elysian Plain in the West .... Relation between extreme North and extreme South The Kimmerians ..... Accadlan cosmology Its harmony with the Poems .... The Egyptian Under-world .... The Gates . Aidoneus and Persephone .... The ethical element Sacrifice to the Dead Amenti and kindred names .... 206 206 207 209 211 219 219 220 221 222 224 225 226 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 235 237 238 240 VI CONTENTS. PAGE The god Ammon-Ra 241 Poseidon . . . . . . 242 Badide, the Libyan god .... 244 Horos and Apollo 246 Boopis and Glaukopis 248 Zeus and Ammon 250 The Cows of the Sun .... 251 Diet in the Outer Zone .... 254 Feast in the Odyssey 255 Use of mutton in Egypt . 256 Signs of foreign settlement in Ithaca 259 Moon as a crescent 260 Asklepios in Egypt .... 260 Mode of representing the Dead 261 Divine descent of Sovereigns . 261 Number of the Olympian gods 263 Numerical computation 264 Collection of particulars from Professor Lauth 265 Conclusion ..... • « . 271 INTRODUCTORY. The present v/ork has for its nucleus two papers published in the Contemporary Review for the months of July and August 1874. Its composition has been due to a belief that the time has at length come for serious efforts to connect the Poems of Homer, by means of the internal evidence which they supply, with events and personages which are now known from other sources to belong to periods, already approxi- mately defined, of the primeval history of our race. When we consider how much learning and ingenuity Have been expended in a hundred efforts (scarcely any two of the assailants, however, agreeing except in their negative or revolutionary criticism) to disintegrate the Homeric Poems, to break up into nebulous frag- ments the Sun of all ancient literature, such an attempt as I have described may seem to some a daring one. A rational reaction against the irrational excesses and vagaries of scepticism may, I admit, readily degenerate into the rival folly of* credulity. To be engaged in 8 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. opposing wrong afifords, under the conditions of our mental constitution, but a slender guarantee for being right. I am the more open to the charge, and perhaps to the danger, because, conservative as regards the Poet, I am radical and dissenter to the uttermost as respects several of the opinions too freely accepted from a lazy and incomplete tradition. Not to mention that I agree with Lucian in his criticism of some preceding critics, and believe they would have been saved from much erroneous and much gratuitous speculation, had they been more careful to observe the primary laws of poetic insight, and to acknowledge that seal and stamp with which it is the prerogative of supreme genius to authenticate its handiwork. But against besetting sins and dangers I have endeavoured to take security, by trying to dis- tinguish carefully between certainty and probability, between knowledge and conjecture; and especially, by founding all inquiries and conclusions upon close and painstaking examination of the Homeric text, and by conducting them according to the established laws of evidence as opposed to the lawlessness of ipse dixi and of arbitrary assertion. It is pleasant to see that in Germany, and even in this country, amidst the rude materialising pressure of the age, Homerology does not cease to flourish. I know not that there is authority for the word I have just INTRODUCTORY. 9 presumed to use. But when I consider how diversified is the study of the Poems, and how it branches into almost every department of living and permanent human interests, I seem to see that it has a claim of right, as well as of convenience, to a special and integral designation ; were it only for the purpose of preventing it from being confounded with the general study (im- portant as that is) of the classical, or of the Grecian, writers. It is in my view an organic whole ; a manifold and diversified portion of the great scientific inquiry, now in progress, into the early history of civilized man. In an endeavour to fix the place of Homer in History, and also in the Egyptian Chronology, which is now in some degree established, I may perhaps be allowed, for the sake of clearness, to begin by stating my point of departure. I am among those who have, in previous works, con- tended or admitted ; I. That the poems of Homer are in the highest sense historical, as a record of ' manners and characters, feelings and tastes, races and countries, principles and institutions \' 2. That there was a solid nucleus of fact in his account of the Trojan War. ' Studies on Homer and the Homeric Age, vol. i. pp. 35-6 ; Juventus Mundi, p. 7. lO TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. 3. That there did not yet exist adequate data for assigning to him, or to the Troi'ca, a place in the estabhshed Chronology \ 4. That his own Chronology was to be found in his Genealogies, which were usually careful and con- sistent, and which therefore served to establish a relative series of persons and events, within his proper sphere, but did not supply links of definite connection with the general course of human affairs outside of that sphere in time or place ^. 5. That there was no extravagance in supposing he might have lived within a half century after the War^ though he was certainly not an eye-witness of it^ 6. That there was very strong reason to believe that he flourished before the Dorian conquest of the Peloponnesos ^. And in 1868 '^ I pointed out that the time might be * Studies, vol. i. p. 3^ ; Juventus Mundi, p. 6. 2 Juventus Mundi, p. 3. ^ Studies, vol. i. p. 37. * Ibid. vol. i. p. 37, and Juventus Mundi, p. 6. * In 1867, Professor Lauth, of Munich, published his valuable tract called ' Homer und iEgypten,' in which he traces philologically numerous notes of connection fcetween the Poems and Egypt. Of these the text itself would for the most part convey no idea to the ordinary reader. I received this treatise, through his great courtesy, from himself in 1873. He describes this essay towards a connection of the two as the first (p. 40), and as, there- fore, requiring indulgence. I have endeavoured, in this work, summarily to exhibit the main results at which he arrives. His line of movement is however distinct from, though parallel to mine. To a certain extent Sir G. Wilkinson had touched on the same matter as Professor Lauth. INTR OD UC TOR Y. II at hand, when, with the aid of further investigations, it would be possible to define with greater precision those periods of the Egyptian Chronology to which the Ho- meric Poems, and their subject, appeared to be related. It appears to me that data of considerable importance, which had gradually been gathering, have recently been much enlarged ; that missing links, now recovered, enable us to frame something like, at the least, the disjecta membra of a chain of evidence ; and that the time has therefore come to expand and add to the suggestions which in former publications I ventured to submit \ I may add that Assyrian, as well as Egyptian, research now supplies us with some valuable materials in aid of the general design. In the argument I am now about to introduce, it is not necessary to beg any of the questions which relate to the existence of one or several Homers, or to the reference of the two Poems to the same authorship, or to deal with the subject of subsequent textual manipulation. By the word Homer, which probably means no more than Composer, it is not necessary at this stage to understand more than ' the Poet or Poets ,'a plural which I of course introduce under protest) from whom proceeded the substance of the Iliad and the Odyssey.' ' Juventus Mundi, chap. v. p. 143. 12 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Without at all impairing the force of these admissions, I wish now to carry the affirmative portion of my propositions greatly farther, and to offer various pre- sumptions, which combinedly carry us some way on the road to proof, of a distinct relation of time between the Homeric Poems, and other incidents of human history, which are extraneous to them, but are already in the main reduced into chronological order and suc- cession ; namely, portions of the series of Egyptian Dynasties. If this relation shall be established, it indirectly embraces a further relation to the Chronology of the Hebrew Records. The whole, taken together, may in due time come to supply the rudiments of a corpus of regular history, likely, as I trust, to be much enlarged, and advanced towards perfect order and perspicuity, from a large variety of sources, some of them Eastern, others lying at various points on the cincture of the Mediterranean Sea. We have seen that, until lately, the Poems, even if offering within their own area a wide space of solid and coherent ground, yet seemed to float, without root or anchorage, on the sea of time. The present century, and the present generation, have been enriched by a supply of new materials. When the great Egyptian Empire came to be the subject of real knowledge, another waif of history IN TROD UC TOR F. 1 3 was firmly set upon the shore ; and the deciphering of the inscriptions of the Egyptian monuments and papyri has opened new Hghts, of some of which I hope to show the direction and effect. Those who attach weight to the speculations of the ancients individually on the date of Homer or of the Poems, may find them set out and discussed in Dr. H. Diintzer's Homcrische Fragen, chap. iv. ' The different opinions seem to agree only in this, that they have no distinctly historical or evidential basis. Taken singly, they are opinions, and nothing more. But they range over the whole period between the time of the Capture, and the date of the Olympiad of Coroebus, ']']6 B.C. The Capture itself was placed by some in the twelfth century, but more commonly in the thirteenth, till Eratosthenes computed it to have taken place in the year 11 83 B.C. Collateral know- ledge, and the growth of critical arts, have opened to us paths, which were closed at earlier dates even to better men. Moreover when we view these opinions in the aggregate, we may reasonably hold that, though they do not supply proof, they indicate a strong and unbroken tradition, which raises, at least, a legitimate presump- tion, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, of the great antiquity of the authorship of the Poems. ' Leipsic, 1 784. 2 14 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Before proceeding, however, to extend generally the ground of the above-recited propositions, I shall submit ssome remarks in confirmation on the Second and Sixth of them, and thus I hope to prepare the way for the more strictly historical argument. I have divided this treatise into two Parts. The First Part, which is preliminary, treats of matters connected generally with the place and date of Homer in history. I. The plain and site of Troy. II. The Hissarlik Remains, recovered by Dr. Schlie- mann. III. The European habitat of Homer, and his priority to the Dorian conquest. IV. The authorship of the Hymn to the Delian Apollo. '^In the Second Part I come to the principal and special purpose I have in view, which is (if I may borrow a figure from the old method of bridge-building) to drive at least a single pile into the solid ground of history, as a kind of firstfruits from modern Egyptology; as a be- ginning towards marking out, and fencing in, the his- torical limits both of Homer's subject, and of his career. My warrant for introducing the topics treated in Part I is to be found in this ; that, if Homer were an Asiatic Greek, of the period most commonly supposed, at INTRODUCTORY. ■ 1 5 some time after the Dorian conquest, it is idle to talk of placing him in any particular relation to the Egyptian Chronology, and a waste of labour to trace out in detail his possession of Egyptian knowledge and traditions ; for, to Asiatic Greece, Egypt was but the name of one among foreign lands, and its wide-reaching Empire was neither any longer felt in action, nor witnessed of by patent and accessible records, nor retained in the living memory of man. In the Second Part I shall contend— I. That there are matters detailed as of fact in the Poems, which fit themselves on to other matters of fact either originally made known to us, or brought into greatly clearer light, by the Egyptian monuments. II. That we have a large number of scattered indica- tions of Homer's Eastern and especially his Egyptian knowledge, in his cosmological ideas and representa- tions, as well as in a variety of incidental notices. By these contentions, I seek to lead up to a general conclusion as follows. There are probable grounds, of an historical character, for believing that the main action of the Iliad took place, and that Homer lived, between certain chronological limits, which may now be approximately pointed out to the satisfaction of reasonable minds. Part I. CHAPTER I. HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. 'Hie Dolopum manus, hie saevus tendebat Achilles; Classibus hie locus, hie acie certare solebant.' Aeneid II. 29. The important researches of General Cesnola in Cyprus resulted in obtaining a collection of sculptured objects, which considerably enlarged the range of pre- historic Art ; and of implements and utensils^ exhibiting so extensive an use of uncombined copper, and so clear and wide an application of that metal to cutting pur- poses, as at once to suggest a modification of the theories of those who, in arranging what may be termed their metallic periods, assume that the age of bronze invariably came in immediate succession to the age of stone. These objects were partially opened to view in London during the autumn of 1872, when they were on their way to their new home in America. The discoveries of Dr. Schliemann in the Plain of Troy cannot justly be approached without an expression of admiration for his disinterested liberality, his unwearied 20 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. energy, and his generous enthusiasm : and of gratitude for the services he has rendered to the lovers and students of Homer, and to the history of the world. Having discharged an indispensable duty in this acknowledgment, I would observe that the discoveries are to be regarded from two principal points of view : — - 1. What light do they throw upon the question, whether Troy had a real, or only a mythical, exis- tence. 2. If the City were real, and the Siege historical, what presumptions do these discoveries raise as to the person, and the epoch, of the Poet who has re- corded them ? As to the first of the two questions, it is difficult to suppose that the mythical theory, always wofully devoid of tangible substance, can long survive the results at- tained by this distinguished explorer. In the Plain where the scene of the Iliad is laid ; upon the spot indicated by the oldest traditions, which for very many centuries were never brought into question, and which, as testifying to a fact the most simple and palpable, were of high presumptive authority ; at a depth of from twenty-three to thirty-three feet, with the debris of an older city beneath it, and of three more recent successive towns above it ; has been found a stratum HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. 21 of remains of an inhabited City, which was manifestly destroyed by a tremendous conflagration. To this general proposition, the statement of w'hich is of itself (I think) some part of the proof we seek, a very large amount of evidence in detail, indicative of corre- spondence between the objects unveiled and the Poems, has to be added in a subjoined Section, The pro- position, however, encounters resistance from those, who have supported the historical character of Troy and of the Poems, but have contended that the site of the City w^as to be found in some other portion of the Plain. The discussion of the rival claims has continued for near a century. It was in 1785 and 1786 that Le Chevalier^ visited the Troad. Un- happily, the debate was conducted, until a compara- tively recent period, without the advantage of a careful and accurate survey of the ground. To the British Naval Service w^as reserved the honour of supplying this deficiency in the year 1844, and the plans of Messrs. Graves and Spratt now supply an acknow- ledged topographical basis, upon which the inquirer may work with safety. The favourite but not uncontested opinion, from the time of Le Chevalier, seems to have been that the ' Le Site de Troie, selon Le chevalier ou selon M. Schliemann. Par M. Gustave d'Eichthal. Paris, 1875, p. 3. 22 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. site of the Homeric Troy lay near Bounarbashi, at a distance of not less than seven or eight miles from the present line of sea-coast. Dr. Schliemann ^ has given an account of the literature of the subject, which shows a large majority for the Balidag, or Bounarbashi, site. But Maclaren"^ in 1822 produced his Dissertation, and he deserves great praise for having at that date, in opposition to the prevailing currents of opinion, per- ceived that the claim of Hissarlik was the best. Publish- ing in 1846, Mr. Grote ^, without knowledge, apparently, of the Admiralty Survey, discussed largely the history of the Aiolic Ilion, and the question of the site ; and gave his opinion in favour of that ancient tradition, which was first disturbed by Demetrius of Skepsis, Hestiaia, and Strabo'^. In Germany, somewhat earlier (1842), Dr. von Eckenbrecher -^ had published an argument on be- half of the same site : and this argument, revised and enlarged, he has again produced ^ since the discoveries of Dr. Schliemann, but (designedly) without availing ^ Troy and its Remains, by Dr. Henry Schliemann ; translated by Mr. Philip Smith. I quote ever}'\vhere, carefully edited, from the translation published in a beautiful volume by Mr. Murray, 1875. "^ Dissertation on the Topography of the Plain of Troy, by Charles Maclaren. Edinburgh, 1822. ^ Grote's History of Greece, vol. i. pp. 436-=i3 (ed. 1831). * Ibid. p. 451. Hestiaia was of Alexandria Troas. ' Ueber die Lage des Homerischen Ilion, in the Rheinisches Museum, 1842. * Die lage des Homerischen Troja. Diisseldorf, 1S75. HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. 23 himself of the corroboration they afford. Mr. Grote had taken a view of the Hterary evidence. Maclaren proceeds mainly upon topographical considerations. Dr. von Eckenbrecher's work of 1875 contains a closely reasoned and careful statement of the entire case. Simultaneously with this valuable publication, has ap- peared the tract of M. d'Eichthal ^ which confidently upholds the site above Bounarbashi, and urges perhaps all that can be said for it : while Mr. Otto Keller'-^ has vigorously sustained the conclusions of Dr. Schliemann. The Doctor mentions the names of some other advo- cates of his own view, whose works I have not seen. I believe that the controversy has now come near its end. For my own part I have always leaned to the belief that it would not be practicable to establish in all points an accurate correspondence of detail between the de- scriptions of the Iliad and the topographical features of the Plain, either such as they now are or such as we can reasonably conceive them to have been at the date of the Troica or of the Poems. But it appears to me that the discoveries of Schliemann, and the arguments of Von Eckenbrecher, have established with all reasonable certainty the claim of Hissarlik to be ^ Le Site de Troie par M. Giistave d'Eichlhal. Paris, 1875. ^ Die entdechung llions Zu Hissarlik. Freiburg. 24 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. the site of the Troy, which the Poet of the IHad had before his mental vision : while I cannot hesitate to say that Von Eckenbrecher has utterly destroyed the claims of every other site which has been proposed. And here I refer especially to that of Balidag, above Bounarbashi, on the banks of the Mendere, which is the principal competitor. He shows, beyond all doubt, 1. That the Mendere must from its source to the sea, if at all, be the Scamander. 2. That the Bounarbashi Springs are very far from accurately corresponding with the two fountains of II. xxii. 147. 3. That the Troy of Homer was in the Plain ; whereas this theory places it at a considerable elevation on the roots of Ida. 4. That the situation proposed is wholly irrecon- cilable with the chase of Hector by Achilles, when the fugitive chief passed three times round the walls. 5. That the movement of the Armies to and fro must commonly, if Balidag were the site, have been on the Scamander ; which it evidently was not. 6. That remains of such a city as Troy must have been found on the spot ; whereas they are totally wanting. The nature of the site precludes the possi- bility of their lying at a depth below the surface, like those of Hissarlik. HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. 25 7. Zeus, in the Iliad, sees Troy from the top of Ida : but from the heights of Bounarbashi that summit is hidden by intervening eminences. '8. Homer allows, in the Iliad, barely an hour and a half for journies and transactions between the Bounar- bashi site and the sea, which would have required seven hours : a discrepancy which cannot be removed by any intermediate change, that we can reasonably suppose to have been brought about in the coast-line. 9. The Trojan watchfires of the Eighth Book are in front of the City ; therefore at no great distance ; but the voices and the music about them are heard by Agamemnon from the camp (II. x. 11— 13). The one reason, however, which, rising above all details, is alike fatal to the claims of Balidag and (not to mention other pretensions) of the Pagus Ilicn- sium, is given by Dr. Schliemann. No spot within the line of the eminences can be the site of Ilion. The old Dardanie, of which the situation still remains un- known, was on the roots of Ida. The Ilion, or Ilios, of the Iliad is a City, set on an eminence indeed, but in a Plain. To correspond with this description is the very first condition, without the fulfilment of which no spot should be allowed to compete for the honour of repre- senting the site of the Homeric Troy. With no less ability has Von Eckenbrecher conducted 26 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. his constructive argument on behalf of the Hissarhk site. He sets out fully the historical evidence ; and has occasion, in dealing with the testimonies of Horace ^ (which taken at the most bear only on the condition of the Hellenic Ilion of his day), to enter on the curious subject of the intention, charged upon Caesar, to transfer the centre of Roman power to the site of ancient Troy. He then reviews the arguments of Strabo. He iden- tifies the Dumbrek-tschai as the Simois — and there clearly is no other Simois possible ; and he agrees with Strabo that Kallikolone (II. xx. 53) is the round hill upon its banks, some hundreds of feet high, at the distance of a German mile (forty stadia) from Hissarlik. To the objection founded on the greatness of this dis- tance, he replies, that the Trojans had been in precipitate flight from Achilles on his re-appearance, that it was the purpose of Ares to rally them (p. 48), and that Homer may have given this extended range to magnify the glory of the hero in the completeness of the rout of men and chariots ; the latter of which, especially, could not but take this very line along the valley, for they were not able to mount the lateral eminences of the neigh- bourhood (p. 49). The objections generally, as taken by Strabo, are, he observes, hypercritical. Arguments, such as that founded on the supposed position of the ' Od. iii. 3. HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. tomb of Aisuetes (II. ii. 793), are of small moment for persons who, like myself, are unprepared to maintain that the Iliad exhibits in all points of detail an accurate correspondence with each local feature of the Plain. But in this particular case the identification of a spot, only once mentioned, with but a single guiding datum. and no strongly marked geographical character, can hardly be otherwise than ambiguous ; and is ill fitted to be the basis of a serious argument on the main question as to the Site. The Tschiblak range, including Hissarlik, gives only sites such as would admit of the chase of Hector by Achilles (p. 56). The objection of Hestiaia, that the plain northwards from this site had been formed by the rivers since the war is purely arbitrary (p. 57). The wild fig and the beech, he observes, were certainly in the Plain, and cannot be carried up to the Pagus I lien slum in the hills (p. 58) : and the whole argument of Demetrius and Hestiaia, adopted by Strabo, evidently without his having seen the site they favoured, was really due to their jealousy of the favours which the Ilion of their day had received on the strength of its traditionary claims. The case for Hissarlik may, for the present purpose, be set forth very concisely. It is an eminence, surrounded on three sides by the 28 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Plain, visible from the top of Ida, with nothing to prevent a chase like that of Achilles round it. It is at a distance of nearly four miles from the sea^: and it is paradoxical in the highest degree to suppose that the narrow bay can at the time of the Siege have been of so extraordinary a depth as to have come near the foot of it. Fine springs, ' one of them even double,' are found immediately below the ruins of the city wall, or at short distances, and slaked the thirst of the Explorer's workmen during the excavations^. The distance, such as we may suppose it then to have been, between the City and the Ships, would quite warrant the expressions 'far,' 'a very long way' (II. xviii. 256, Od. xiv. 496), which are essentially relative. It is also such as to correspond with the suppositions raised by the military operations of the Iliad. Dr. Schlie- mann argues, and apparently with much force, that the Plain of Troy is not alluvial " ; Odusseus tells us, that the Trojans thought of dragging the Horse to the summit of the Acropolis, and casting it down the rocks (Od. viii. 508). A vast accumulation from the debris of successive cities has disguised the natural form of the hill, and must have softened its outline while withdrawing the original floor from view: but the 1 Schliemann (Trans.), p. 42. ^ Ibid. pp. 183, 194. 3 ithaque, &c. Paris, 1869, p. 208. HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROY. 2g hill-side, we are told, still descends very abruptly on the north side, as also at the points N.E. and N.W/ The supposition that the Dumbrek-tschai is the Simois, and that a bed dry, or nearly dry, in summer, partially united it with the Scamander, best corresponds with the scene of the Iliad, which distinguishes the plain of Simois from the plain of Scamander; manifestly places Ilion between them ; precludes any idea that a ford had to be crossed between the city a«d the camp ; and yet speaks in one passage (II. v. 'J'/^) of the spot where the rhoai of the two rivers joined. We have indeed a ford over the Scamander named three times in the Poems. But in one of these passages (II, xxi. i) we are distinctly enough informed that the way over the ford was not the way to the City. In another, Hector is taken to the water at the ford when in- sensible, plainly because the banks were in general steep, and did not afford easy access (xiv. 433) '-. In the third passage, the ford offers a natural turning-point westward for Hermes on his way back to Olumpos (xxiv. 692). A very reasonable identification of the Tomb of Murine (II. ii. 811-15) is found by Schlie- mann, in a mound thirty-three feet high, at about one thousand yards from the Southern City wall ; ' Remains, p. 58 ; ibid. pp. 304, 343. '^ Von Eckenbrecher, pp. 61, 62; Remains, p. 71. 3 3© TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. an excellent spot for the Trojan Array of the Second Book. It might be hazardous to decide whether the present is also the ancient bed of the Scamander. The nature of the banks and their clothing well accord with the text : but (so far as I see) it scarcely offers a point at which there could* have been a ford lying as close to the route between the city and the camp, as the Poem would lead us to desire. There are other dry beds to the east of it. But what the Iliad seems absolutely to require is, that it should have debouched on the western, not the eastern, side of the plain. Hissarlik, then, seems upon the whole to suit the detailed descriptions of the Iliad far better than any other suggested site. But its main claims lie (i) in its adaptation to the more general descriptions of the Siege and of the situation of the beleaguered City; (2) in the remarkable testimony drawn by Dr. Schlie- mann from beneath the surface, which will be con- sidered in the next Chapter. But again I would warn the inquirer to beware of the disposition to aim at establishing an exact correspondence of detail. The hypothesis I have offered to reconcile the junction of the two rivers with the separate mouths implied in II. xii. 24 is conjectural. And there is an undeniable /aaifia in the matter of the fountains, which formed HOMER AND THE PLAIN OF TROV. 3 1 not the two sources, as has been sometimes errone- ously said, but two of the sources of the Scamander. The two springs at Hissarlik can hardly have been on the line of the chase of Hector, and it has not yet been shown how they could have been among the headwaters of that river. To this subject I shall refer more largely in Chapter III. I have not attempted, in these few pages, to set forth the whole argument respecting the site of Troy, for the object of the present work would not have justi- fied the necessary amount of detail. I have only sought to show, with the help of the evidence now before us, in the important matter of locality, that there exists an original site, mainly and in a marked way corresponding with the picture drawn in the Poems. To establish this proposition is one great step, not indeed sufficient to establish, but indispen- sable towards establishing, the place of Homer in the order of realities, and in the chain of known historical events. CHAPTER I I. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. I HAVE thus far considered the case of Hissarlik without reference to the disclosures which the Hill itself has made under the hands of Dr. Schliemann ; and have weighed only the intrinsic correspondence of the Site with the Poems. When this eminence further reveals to us itself as the site of a succession of cities, one of which, long anterior to known and regular history, was destroyed by a conflagration \ and still exhibits remains full of the appliances of life for a community, it challenges our acceptance on the -ground of internal evidence, highly diversified in its -character, branching into a multitude of details, and raising the most interesting questions, (i) Do the material objects discovered in the fourth of the five couches or layers, whether portable or fixed, agree with one another, and belong to a whole? (2) Do they agree with the Poems ; that is to say, do they present to us the same state of arts and manners, the same conditions ' Schliemann, Troy and its Remains, p. 1 7. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. '^7, of life, the same relations to history and tradition, as those presented in the Poems ? If these two questions are answered affirmatively, then not only is it esta- blished beyond doubt that Hissarlik was the Ilion conceived in the mind of the Poet, but it becomes morally certain that the composition of the Iliad must have taken place, not indeed of necessity, at or very ■: near the exact time of the Siege, but within the general limits of the age to which the event belonged. In my accounts of the objects discovered, as far as they go, I shall follow implicitly the authority of the great Explorer, to whom we owe so much. In com- paring them with the text of the Poems, there will of course be room for the exercise of an independent judgment. Dr. Schliemann is of opinion (pp. 18, 346)^ that Homer visited the Troad centuries after the Siege. This opinion would be of conclusive force, if it were the necessary or natural result of the processes in which he has been engaged. But the opinion appears to me to have arisen partly from a most warrantable inclination to coincide with what is still (I fear) the current notion as to the date of Homer, and as to his belonging to the stock of Asiatic Greeks : and partly from his imputing to the Poet ideas, which he thinks the evidence of the ' My citations continue to be from the authorised and improved English Translation published by Mr. Murray. 34 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Hill confutes. I shall endeavour to show that there is no reason to suppose the Poet entertained such ideas. He thinks (p. 19, cf. 182) that in the prophecy of Poseidon, concerning the coming dominion of Aineias and his posterity (II. xx. 307), the Poet meant to convey that this dynasty should reign in Troy, whereas (he remarks) the City was totally destroyed, and re- built by another people. He thinks that Homer pro- bably gathered from a contemporary king of Troy that he believed himself descended from Aineias. I hold, on the contrary, that this prophecy has every sign of being founded on what actually occurred im- mediately after the Troica ; and for this reason, that it was a tradition most unlikely to be invented. The part taken by Aineias in the War was not one of high distinction ; and his character, cold and timid, was one very far removed from the sympathies pf the Poet and his countrymen ; he appears as the re- presentation of the Dardanian Branch, with a sidelong jealous eye towards the predominating Ilian House of Priam. It is a statement by no means congenial to the general purpose of the Poem, which next after Achilles glorifies the Achaians, and after the Achaians, the House of Priam. But, on the other hand, nothing could be more probable or more natural than that, after the Greeks had withdrawn, some social and HOMER AND HISSARLIK. '^^ political order should be established in Troas, and that its establishment should be effected, after the ruin of the House of Priam, under the surviving representa- tive of the family which probably was a senior branch, and which manifestly stood next in influence and power. We are nowhere told that Dardanie was, like so many other cities, destroyed in the War. The friendship of ^ Poseidon possibly indicates its possession of some foreign alliance or sympathy, not enjoyed by the Trojans proper, whom Poseidon hated ; and if it be replied that such a sovereignty was more likely to be in Dardanie than in a rebuilt Ilion, I answer that this is just what the text seems to contemplate, for it says that the might of Aineias shall reign, not in Troy, but over the Trojans (Trocssin anaxei), and the Troes are the .people of the Troad (see e.g. II. ii. 824-6). If this were really the course of the actual history — and I need not say that the fictions of the Virgilian age establish no presumption adverse to it — I should next observe that this new Dardanian dynasty can hardly have been long-lived, or it would surely have left some name in history. On this ground, without dwell- ing on the supposition as more than of a certain pro- bability, I hold that the passage rather goes to support the idea that Homer lived soon after the Troica, than the contrary doctrine. 36 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. On the other hand, the recent discoveries, affording evidence of a very complete destruction by fire, have shown it to be highly improbable that Homer could have seen enough of Troy to have had a minute knowledge of its structure. If, then, his account of the passage of Hector from his home to the Skaian Gate (II. vi. 390 sq.) conveys the idea of a larger space than he really had to traverse, yet we are not warranted in going farther than to refer this either to the magnifying licence allowed the Poet, or to a most natural and trivial error of detail. It is another matter, when our Explorer deals with the subject of the general dimensions of Troy. He had originally believed that Troy must have had 5O5OOO inhabitants, and that Hissarlik was the Pergamos or citadel. In the course of his work he found (as he considered), that the palace of Priam stood in front of the Skaian gate (p. 20), and that the primeval City of the War was built upon the primitive plateau (p. 344), and was scarce a twentieth in size of what would be expected from the Iliad, yet as large as, or larger than, Athens on its Acropolis, or the wide-wayed Mukenai. It could not have contained more than 5C00 inhabitants (p. 345), nor have yielded over 500 soldiers. As I understand his estimate, the site is of about three-and-a-half acres. He has himself, in HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 3/ communication with me, compared it to Trafalgar Square. Now it is certain that Homer, in calHng the town of Troy great, cannot mean less than to imply that it was greater than the generality of the cities of his time and country. But, in the first place, it was a subject on which he might obviously be led to use some magnifying epithets. He knew the town mainly, or only, as the object of a great- international struggle and convulsion. Secondly, by his reference to Athens, and especially to Mukenai, Schliemann has removed much of his own difficulty. He had originally thought of a Pergamos apart from the City : surely in those days and countries there was hardly such a thing. He says (p. 20) Hector descended from the Palace, and hurried through the town. But in the original passage there is no descent into the town separate from a sub- sequent movement through it. Hector rushed or started along the well-constructed ways: when 'passing through the great city he came to the Skaian gate,' and so forth _(I1. vi. 390-3). Surely the Pergamos was the town ; the place of strength and defence, and of refuge for the gene- ral population hutted about the walls and the vicinity, in cabins probably of earth, with a little wood and straw ^ ' Edinburgh Review, April 1874, p. 530: following a suggestion of Mr. Clark. 95787 38 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. But Homer, making use perhaps of his own titles to exaggerate in a certain measure, is not responsible for the exaggerations which we make on his behalf. Let us proceed to examine his ideas, as he has him- self expressed them, of the size of Troy. This we must do through the medium of numbers, and first through the numbers of the Achaian army. It has been commonly supposed that he means to signify the number of the invading host at 120,000. I should think 50,000 nearer his estimate. He gives 120 to each Boiotian vessel, 40 to those of Philoctetes, ' many ' (-TroAee?) to the Arcadian ships (II. ii. 509, 610, 719). The Boiotians, with their soil, and their Phoenician connection, were not unlikely to have the largest ships of all ; moreover, the mere number of their vessels is low in proportion to the wealth and population evinced by the large group of towns, or separate settlements, which they represented. But, whatever he may have meant to suggest as the amount of the Achaian force, we know from his express and careful declaration, that the number of the Trojans proper, inhabitants of the City, was much less than one-tenth of it. TToXXat Kfv SfKoSes tevoiaTo olvoxooio. (II. ii. 1 28.) It was by contingents from without that their numbers were swelled ; 'and at each of a thousand Trojan watch- HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 39 fires, says the famous passage of II. viii. 562, there were 50 men. But anyone, who has watched the Poet's use of number, will at once perceive that this is a general and figurative expression. There are but very few attempts elsewhere in the Poems, to represent a definite number in thousands ; much less, then, in tens of thousands. We can hardly contract too much our ideas of the measurement of the primeval European cities. The city was Astu, the ordinary abode of the king or lord, with his family and dependents, the seat of the sacred buildings and place of Assembly, and the more general place of refuge in time of danger. We have traces of this fact in the connection of Faarv with ' fastness,' in the etymology and sense of the Greek hrnxos^, in the Scotch use of the word town (toun) down to the present day, for the farm inclosure ; conversely in the extended sense of the Italian castcllo, to embrace a town, and in the Anglian burh 2. What indeed are we to say, when we find that, in the period of the Incunabula of Rome, the Romans on the Palatine were probably faced by the Sabines on the hill of the Capitol ^ ? So much for the direct statements of Homer on the City and the after history. Inferences from particular ' See Arnold's Thiicydides, vol. i., Appendix iii. p. 652 ; First Edition. ^ See Professor Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, i. 92. ' Parker, Archaeology of Rome, vol. i. pp. 6, 8. 40 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. objects will be considered in the sequel. But I proceed to offer some prefatory remarks on the kinds and degrees of correspondence which we are entitled to expect in the particular subject-matter. The conche, or layer of remains, with which we are almost exclusively concerned, is the fourth from the surface, the second from the bottom. If within this layer we find various stages of any given art, for ex- ample of pottery, or various materials used for im- plements, among which a succession of time is commonly to be presumed, such facts do not of themselves destroy, or even impair, the self-consistency of the objects discovered, as belonging to the same time and place. Articles of stone, of copper, and of bronze, not to mention wood, may, taken largely, have been succes- sive, and yet in particular cases may, nay must, have been contemporaneous. Even in the same household or social rank, the superior contrivance does not at once supplant the inferior, but gradually. Differences of station and means greatly slacken the rapidity of change. Cheapness (or rather abundance and facility), ignorance, even prepossession, will cause the ruder instrument to be retained among the many, where and when the few have advanced to the more convenient or refined. Neither, again, does a want of minute uniformity between the objects discovered at Hissarlik, and the HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 4 1 objects described in the Poems, of itself suffice to prove a long interval of time between the War and the Poet. Those who dispute the intervention of centuries, do not therefore allege that Homer was contemporary with the operations. And, again, few will contend, I certainly should deny, that his acquaintance with Troas and with Troy was that of a native or a resident. The impressions of a brief inspection on a quick eye and powerful retentive faculty serve well to account for all he tells us of Hissarlik and the Plain. Of the burned City he could but have seen the more massive relics : with its portable and movable objects he can have had no practical acquaintance. Nor have we any right to suppose either that there was an ethnical identity between Greece, or Achaiis, and Troy, or that they had reached, in each and every point, precisely the same stage of wealth and social development. More Asiatic in manners \ less energetic in character, the Trojans seem to have lived longer together under the forms of civilised society, and to have been less dis- turbed by wars and revolutions. They were therefore certainly, or probably, somewhat more advanced, as to their higher class, in wealth; and the city v/as polu- chrusos poluchalcos, till it came to be exhausted by the purchase of its alliances and the other necessities of ^ Juventus Mundi, chap, xiii ; Studies on Homer, vol. iii. Ilios. 42 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. the War (II. xviii, 288-92). Homer, then, sings of a City, of which he was neither contemporary nor denizen, and whose interior Hfe he had not known by experience : and it is surely not too much to say that, if there be upon the whole a substantial correspondence between the objects discovered and the manners and arts de- scribed, the conclusion in favour of his nearness to the period of the TroTca becomes, at the least, highly probable. Let us now proceed to particulars. I. Dr. Schliemann, treating of the wall built by Poseidon (Remains, p. 345), says that Homer cannot have seen it. But if the Poet has truly described it, this fact affords if not a presumption that he saw it, yet a very strong presumption that the memory of it was recent, since a faithful account of it was not likely to be preserved for centuries after it had been buried. Now Homer's account is that it was built by Poseidon, that is to say, by artisans of a people worshipping Poseidon, and that it was kvpv re koI [xaXa KaXov, a broad and very fine wall. This solid style of building, with quarried or large drawn stones (lithoi katoruchees or rhutoi) was a Posidonian or foreign mark. We have it among the Phaiakes (Od. vi. 267), and with Poluphemos (Od. ix. 185) ; not to enter upon other cases. We have no mention in Homer of any mortar used for the HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 43 joining together of these stones, whether described as quarried, or simply as drawn. Dr. Schliemann con- siders that he has brought this wall to light, and he has drawn the course of it (pp. 291, 347, 349)- It is not easy to identify everything in his detailed descrip- tions, which, following the daily progress of his excava- tions, are necessarily given piecemeal. The thicknesses, where he states them, are great : only earth is mentioned in the interstices: and the stones, I have understood from him, are of a size which a man could not carry and which therefore would be rhutoi, or drawn stones, and would make the kind of wall which Poseidon describes as ' very fine.' ' The royal palace .... the great tower of Ilion, the Skaian Gate, and the great inclosing Wall, are generally composed of unhewn stones joined with earth, the less rough face of the stones being turned to the outside, so that the walls have a tolerably smooth appearance ' (Remains, Introduction, p. 26). He finds the Skaian Gate identified by its position, and entire in every stone (p. 349). He finds also the palace of Priam (pp. 304, 306, 349), which was on the summit of the hill (II. vi. 317), and that very marked structural feature, the great Tower of Troy (II. vi. 386), in which, as well as in the Gate, it would be hard for him to be mistaken. Further, he finds a ' beautifully paved street ' (p. 288 et alibi), leading to the Skaian Gate. There can 44 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. hardly be a finer correspondence with the text. Hector started off ei)KTt//eVas /car' ayvtas, ' along the well laid ways,' and eSre TivXas 'Uave Sxatw, ' when he reached the Skaian Gates,' there he was met by Andromache (II. vi. 391-4). The statement of the Iliad as to the Palace of Priam is that it was pericalles, 'exceedingly beautiful,' and there were in it fifty chambers of smoothed or polished stone. These must certainly have been hewn. I under- stand the expression to refer most probably to the interiors of these chambers. On this point the dis- coveries throw no light, and it is scarcely likely that, after the burning, Homer himself could have had minute information (II. vi. 242-5). Lastly on this subject : there are no traces of pillars in the architecture : and there is no mention of any in the Iliad. The domestic kiones of the Odyssey were probably wooden. So would probably be the aithousa or portico, constructed to receive the sun (II. vi. 243). Of these structural agreements I can only pretend to judge from the accounts, perfectly truthful as I know them to be, of Dr. Schliemann. But, be it ever so wise to hesitate before concluding upon his identifications in detail, there remains before us a general proposition, not less important, and I think invulnerable. Namely this : on the site of Hissarlik, at a depth of some thirty feet, with three layers of successive settlements or cities HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 45 over it, in conjunction with notes of conflagration of a nature which can hardly be mistaken, are found the remains of massive walls and other structures, such as indicate connection with the great building race of primitive history in their works on the shores of the Mediterranean, and such as are thus placed in re- markable agreement with the statement of Homer con- cerning the intervention of Poseidon, or in other words the Phoenician or foreign origin of the walls of Troy. II. Coming now from buildings to implements gene- rally, they have been found, in abundance, of stone and of copper : together with many moulds of mica-schist for casting copper weapons. Besides implements there are many weapons of both materials (pp. 2i, 22, 162, et alibi), and large masses of copper (but no tin) melted into a stratum of scoriae (p. 17). Of iron there has been, up to the present time, except a little of the Greek Colony, no discovery (p. 31). For a time it was supposed that there was no bronze. But two battle-axes found in the Treasure, that is to say, close to the Palace of Priam, have been found to contain respectively ninety- six parts of copper with nearly four of tin, and ninety parts of copper, with nearly eight and three quarters of tin. Let us now test the agreement of these data with the Poems. a. The Kuanos or (probably) bronze of Homer is 4 46 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. extremely rare, and nowhere indubitably mentioned in an implement or weapon except on the defensive armour of Agamemnon, where it appears in ten bands on the breastplate from Kupros, and in a single boss on the shield (II. xi. 24, 35). So the two battle-axes, found in immediate conjunction with the precious ornaments, were probably the possessions of royal or high-born persons, and imported from abroad, d. Iron is in Homer extremely rare and precious. He mentions nothing massive that is made of this material: but names the arrow-head of Pandaros (II. iv. 123), the dagger or knife (apparently) of Achilles (II. xviii. 34), the cutting tool of the chariot- maker for such fine work as shaping the felloe of the wheel (II. iv. 485), and a knife for finally slaying the oxen (II. xxiii. 30) in the quarters of Achilles. It was also used, when raised to a high temper, for axes and adzes (Od. ix. 301-3; cf. II. iii.). Many other proofs of its great value might be adduced. It is thus plain that, according to the Poems, there would be very little of it at Troy, and that little in small and portable objects which the captors as far as they could would carry off. It is also highly probable that objects so small would be destroyed by corrosion during so many centuries. c. With respect to stone, it very infrequently appears in Homer. Yet it may have been intended in some HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 47 cases where the material is not specified. For ex- ample, in II. XV. 707-12 he speaks of a battle between Greeks and Trojans of all ranks round the ship of Pro- tesilaos. Axes of various kinds, pelekeis and axinai, are among the weapons used by the general combatants. These could not be of iron. Though there is nothing to require, there is also nothing to preclude, the supposition that many of them may have been of stone, and such as those found by Dr. Schliemann. Of portable objects in stone, other than weapons, we neither hear, nor can conjecture, much from the Poems. There was the discos or quoit (II. ii. 774), declared to be of stone in Od. viii. 192, comp. 136. We may fairly presume the mulai of Od. xx. 106, 107 to be of stone, at which the women had to work so hard : and stones like these are often mentioned by Schliemann (p. 79, cf alibi). To ac- count for the want of notices of objects of stone in Homer, we may observe that few such objects would be carried by the army on account of their weight, and that the life described to us, except in the dwelling of Eumaios (who, however, was a proprietor, and originally of princely birth), is that of the highest class, while stone implements would be more in use with the mass of the community. The kissubion used for drinking by Eumaios (Od. xiv. 73) and by Poluphemos (Od. ix. 346) is supposed to have been of wood. The witness of 48 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Dr. Schliemann to the abundance of stone instruments and implements is unequivocal (e.g. pp. 21, 270): and if no positive argument, for the agreement of age which I seek to estabhsh, can be founded on joint testimony con- cerning the use of stone for portable objects at Hissarlik, neither can any contrary inference, I think, be drawn. d. When we come to the great article of copper for weapons, implements, and utensils, the case is far more clear. We are introduced to one of the most striking of all the correspondences between the Poems and the discoveries at Hissarlik. The Poems in this respect present to us what may properly be called the copper age ; if indeed xoKko^ be copper, and it is in my opinion impossible to establish for it any other signi- fication. So predominant was the use of chalkos, that the name of the worker in it (chalkeus) stood for the smith generally (Od. ix. 391). It is the common metal for weapons : but as tin, like iron, approached to the character of a precious metal, and is nowhere used except in the smallest quantities, the idea cannot be entertained that bronze was the ordinary material of arms and utensils. I refer on this subject to a former work^. I do not mean to imply that copper tools and arms abound at Hissarlik as compared with stone (p. 270), but this is the staple material of metallic * Juventus Mundi, pp. 529 seqq. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 49 objects. An analysis was made by Professor Landerer, who fills the Chair of Chemistry at Athens, to establish the fact that the material used was copper (p. 340). The most conclusive sign of this is the ' stratum of scoriae of melted lead and copper, from \ to i^ of an inch thick, which extends nearly through the whole hill at a depth of from 28 to 29^ feet' (Remains, p. 17). Here, I apprehend, tin must have been found, if chalcos had been bronze. Under the great head of metals for objects of utility, then, the correspon- dence is all that can be desired. III. Turning next to the precious metals proper, we find yet more pointed evidence. The Excavations have supplied from the ' Treasure of Priam ' two head- dresses or head-ornaments of pure gold : as shown in the Remains at p. '^7,^. It is not too much to say that this discovery enables us to construe a passage in the Iliad which in one part has hitherto only been rendered conjecturally. Andromache, on learning the death of Hector, in the agony of her grief, flung away from her head the desmata sigaloenta, which we may translate her glistering head-dress. Of this head- dress he proceeds to enumerate the parts. They are four. I. The kredemnon ; evidently a rare one, for it was presented by Aphrodite on the occasion of the marriage with Hector. That the kredemnon is 50 TIME AND PLACE^ OF HOMER. textile, appears from the fact that Ino Leucothee lends one to Odysseus when tossed upon the waves, to spread beneath his breast, that it may buoy him up ; adding an injunction to return it, by throwing it back into the sea on reaching the shore, which we may take probably as an indication of its great value. Its light and fine material fitted it to be worn both as a veil and as a turban ; and that it was used in this latter mode we may judge from its application to the battlements or walls of Troy on a brow such as that of Hissarlik (II. xvi. lOo). It was also worn or used as a veil by Penelope (Od. i. 334). 2. Next comes the ampux: a gold frontlet, or head- band, which crosses the forehead, and is clearly repre- sented in the upper one of the two Engravings given in the ' Remains.' This ornament was sometimes used upon horses, but only upon the horses of the gods. See II- V. 358, 363, 720; viii. 382. 3. After this comes the KCKpvcpaXov, a word used nowhere else in Homer, but found in Aristophanes and in other authors, and meaning a net-work which confined, and more or less concealed, the hair, probably near the nape of the neck. This also was textile, and has dis- appeared in the fire like the kredemnon. 4. Anadesme. Interpreted by Eustathius seira, a cord or chain, to bind round the temple (but this place is HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 5 1 already occupied by the ampux): by B. Crusius in loc. a hair-band ; by Liddell and Scott a head-band. All these seem to clash with the office of the ampux; but there was no knowledge to justify any other specific sense, until the Hissarlik discoveries produced these two head-dresses, with their rows of pendent plaited chains of gold dropping over the brow, and then double, at greater length, falling down the side-face. The force of the epithet plecte is exactly given, and likewise even that of the preposition ana, for the anadesme is not merely a tie or chain, but a tie up to something else. In point of precise rendering, nothing is now left to desire : and there seems to be strong ground for the belief that Homer's eye was conversant wuth this particular fashion of head-dress. The minute detail of the verses testifies to the significance of the ornament, and this again corresponds with its appearance, and with the effort Dr. Schliemann reasonably conjectures to have been made to rescue it. I give the passage entire (II. xxii. 468-72) :— TT\Ki 8' anit Kparos ^aike dfo-fxara (TiyaKoevra, afXTTVKa KfKpv(f>a\6v t ijbe irXeKTrfv avabianr^v, KpTjhffivov 6\ 6 pa 01 8a>Ke ^pv(r(r] 'A^poStV?; rjpaTL T(5, ore fiiv KopvdaioXos T}ydyf6 "E,KTO>p tK 86pov HfTicovos, fTTfl TTope p.vpla e8va. IV. Scarcely inferior, in their argumentative import- ance, to the head-dresses of gold, are the six ' blades ' of 5 2 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. silver, like the blade of a paper-knife in form, which were also found in the 'Treasure.' These blades, or plates, are represented in the photographic Abbildungcn, Tafel 200, and in the ' Remains ' at p. 328. They are not tools or instruments, for they are adapted to no specific purpose. Neither are they ingots of a strictly measured value ; for they are not quite uniform in weight, but they range from 171 to 190 grammes; four being a little over 5^ oz. Troy, and two near 6 oz., the one a little exceeding, the other slightly falling short. They evidently belong to an epoch when not only coinage, and exactness of weights and measures, but all use of the precious metals in ordinary trans- actions of exchange, was as yet unknown, but they were roughly and approximately divided, and, besides their ornamental use, they served as elements of stored wealth, and were also employed in considerable pay- ments or presents. Dr. Schliemann can hardly be wrong in treating them as the talanta of Homer. Weighed they doubtless were, since the same word signi- fies the piece of metal and the scales ; but not limited to a precise and uniform weight. We have several ex- amples of them in the Poems. The fee to the suc- cessful Judge on the Shield (II. xviii. 507) : the fourth prize in the chariot race (II. xxiii. 269). Each of these consisted of two talents of gold. A half talent of HOMER AND HISSARLIK. J^^ gold was the last or third prize in the foot race (ibid. 751); which Achilles made up to a whole talent (796). We have not any mention in the Poem of silver in talents ; but the two metals were nearly on the same footing. Silver is combined with pure gold in the formation of the works described in Od. xv. 460, xviii. 295. Both seem to enjoy the honour of the epithet timeeis, precious (comp. II. xviii. 475 with Od. iv. 614) : it seems doubtful whether silver were not even the more rare. It is less frequently named than gold ; and nowhere appears among the items of stored wealth. The same treatment, there can be no doubt, would generally be applied to both metals. Further, the bowls or vases (/cpjjrf^pes) of the Poems are always of silver (II. xxiii. 741-5 ; Od. iv. 615, ix. 199). But we have many cups of gold. In like manner the Hissarlik vases are all of silver : but there are cups, as well as a bottle, of gold (Remains, pp. 325-9). V. With regard to the use of the precious metals for ornament, some of the descriptions in the Poems are certainly more advanced than the workmanship and art of the objects discovered at Hissarlik. Abundance of small personal ornaments have been found : and we see from the Poems that they were deemed appro- priate for young women (II. ii. 8^2), and occasionally worn by men, as Nastes the Carian (ibid.), Euphorbos 54 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. the Trojan Prince (II. xvii, 52) ; and, when they had been captured, and so became trophies, by Achilles (II. ii. 875). But the ornaments of Euphorbos seem, from the phrase (crcprjuojvTo, to have been hair-clasps worked in the forms of wasps ; and in the Odyssey (xix. 226-31) we have a single instance of an orna- ment highly wrought with small forms of the animal species. A dog has caught and is throttling a kid : and we find here, as upon the Shield, that almost un- equalled vividness and daring of description, which seems to endow the motionless metal with the effects of real and agitated life: — TO 8e davfid^edKOv anavrfs, a>S oi p^puffeoi ovTfs, 6 fxev Xde ve^pov aTTdyxi', airap 6 €K(f)vy((iv [lepauis fjatrmpe Trobecraip. Turning to greater works, we do not find any proof that subjects were chased or wrought upon the bowls which (always in connection with Hephaistos or the East) are mentioned on several occasions. It may possibly be intended in the description of the finest of all these bowls, the first prize in the foot-race (II. xxiii. 740-7) — KoXXft fuiKa Trdaav eV* aiav rroXXdi'' eVei '2lbov(s noXvtaidaXot. ev fjcrKrjcrav ; but it is more probable that this 'fine working' might refer to shape and surface only. For the subjects HOMER A AD HISSARLIK. 55 chased, if there had been chasing, would probably have been specified, as they are on the Breastplate and other armour of Agamemnon (II. xi. 26), the brooch of Odysseus (sup.), and the belt of Heracles (Od. xi. 609-14). This belt, which is named as a surpassing work, carried not only the figures of animals but battles and man-slayings (androctasiai) upon it. The vases, goblets, or cups, found by Dr. Schliemann in that assemblage of objects, packed together, and with a copper key near them, which he calls the Treasure of Priam, seem, in the photographs, to exhibit considerable beauty of form ; but, except in the case of a panelled cup of gold (p. 325), they have surfaces without either device or design. They agree with the Poems, probably, in this respect, and also in offering to us, besides gold and silver, the Electron, which was a mixture of both. It is mentioned (Od. iv. 73) in a manner suited to such a composition, where the Poet describes in one line the glistering of gold, electron, silver, and ivory. But the remains discovered at Hissarlik exhibit no works of art so advanced as the belt, brooch, and armour of Agamemnon, above mentioned ; or, above all, as the Shield of Achilles. The attempts at de- lineating life upon the 'idols' of Hissarlik, are either doubtful or of the most elementary kind ; and can hardly be said to represent form, but rather certain .56 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. rudiments of form. Now all fine art in Homer is foreign in its associations. And there is a wide in- terval between the elegant goblets and vases of the Treasure, and the 'owl-faced idols.' The latter seem to be manifestly domestic, for we cannot conceive that such commodities would be carried over-sea, or have a value for exchange. And the want of gradation between such articles and the higher objects, suggests that at Hissarlik, as in the Poems, these were foreign also. They could hardly have been the productions of the same people at the same time. It remains to consider the second gap, between these superior objects and the far higher representations of Homer. Some, for example, Professor Conze, of Vienna, have found in this want of continuity, a proof that Homer's age was long posterior to that of Hissarlik. For it is by them assumed that the works of art which he described, were only copies of such as he had seen. In the interest of that humble class of the votaries of Poetry to which I belong, namely, its readers, I deny that the Poet is but the copying clerk of the actual world. Of and for every artist, this must be denied. If he copies only, he may be a modeller or draftsman, but an artist he is not. The artist as such is continually engaged in the endeavour to build the unseen upon the seen, to develop the seen into HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 57 the unseen : and wo be to him as an artist, when the unseen ceases to keep him company. That Homer had seen his Shield of Achilles, is in my belief just as true, or just as like the truth, as that Dante had seen his Paradise, or that Shakespeare had been personally acquainted with his Hamlet, or his Cleopatra. In an able paper, in which Professor Conze con- troverts, at least provisionally, the Homeric character of the discoveries at Hissarlik, he appears to treat in one and the same category the two classes of works from that place which I have endeavoured to distin- guish, and simply takes no notice whatever of the points of correspondence between the higher of those classes and corresponding objects in the Poems of Homer. I am unable to perceive the grounds of the assumption in the first point, or to explain the omis- sion in the second. But in truth the explanation, whatever it be in princi- ple, is wholly ineffective for the purpose at which it aims. It aims, without doubt, at placing the real Homer in an age which produced works of art such as he de- scribes. But for such a purpose, it seems to me that he must be brought down to the age of Phidias, if even that will suffice. In other words, Homer, be he singular or plural, is, according to the universal convic- tion, an archaic poet : and there was no archaic period, 58 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. in which he could have had an experience in works of art such as to enable him by pure imitation to produce the descriptions he has given us, or materially to narrow that gap which I admit now separates the best products of the Hill of Hissarlik from his glorious formations. Of course I admit freely that I cannot from these highly ornamented works of art, argue positively for his nearness in time to the events he describes. The subject is of so much importance, that I must enter somewjj^at farther into it, and endeavour to draw out with clearness the propositions I maintain : — 1. We are not yet in possession of all that the Hill contains. 2. We know from II, xviii. 288-92, that much of the stored wealth and choice ornaments (keimelia kala) had disappeared from Troy under the pressure of the War and its necessities. 3. Of such as remained the captors would as a rule succeed in carrying off the best. 4. It is singular that the only representations of life yet found, are of so indifferent an order that Homer, had he seen them, would have been most unlikely to describe them as they are : yet if he were conversant with such objects, they might surely have suggested to him similar representation of life in the beautiful and noble forms he has conceived and described. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 59 5. The most notable objects from Hissarlik, namely, vases, cups, bottles, and the two head-dresses, appear to be in close correspondence with the Homeric de- scriptions of corresponding objects, and, if taken by themselves, supply a strong presumption of proximity in time. 6. Under all three heads allowance should be made. Yet it remains a remarkable fact that Homer has certain other descriptions, including the highest re- presentation of life in metallic works of art, to which there is nothing from Hissarlik, up to the present time, that answers at all. There are — a. (Probably.) The hair-ornament of Euphorbos. b. The helmet, shield, and shield-belt of Agamemnon. c. The belt of Heracles. d. The clasp of the Nineteenth Odyssey. e. The Shield of Achilles. /. The cup of Nestor with doves about the handles (II. xi. 632); 7. I demur the inference from these facts that Homer must have lived at some far later period, when he could have seen such works. Even if he had never seen any representations of life, his imagination might have conceived them. But it is more than probable that he had seen rude representations of life, such as, or perhaps better than, the Hill contained ; and archaic 6o TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Statues, such as we must presume to have existed in the temple of Athene on the Pergamos, and therefore in other temples. From these elementary suggestions he might well have formed the higher images and noble combinations which we find in the Poems. 8. It is true that antiquity has handed down to us shields elaborately adorned, which might have suggested the Shield of Achilles. Of these specimens are to be found in the Vatican, brought from Etruria, and in the British Museum. Mr. Newton, than whom no one is of greater authority, refers them, I believe, of course approxi- mately, to the eighth or ninth century B.C., and terms the Art-period Graeco-Phcenician. But none of these Shields, so far as I have learned, exhibit either the magnificent cosmological idea, or the exuberant and all-embracing detail, of the Shield of Achilles. That Shield, it must always be borne in mind, is represented as the work of a god, executed under cir- cumstances which go far to warrant our terming it his masterpiece. Why should it thus have been referred to a divine origin, if it was merely an improvement of degree upon human productions known to the experi- ence of the Poet? Even if Homer had seen Shields, such as now remain, much must have remained to his imagination before he could achieve the description of a work which has HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 6t remained, so far as I know, without a rival ; though Ghiberti, in the fifteenth century of our era, made some approach to it on the Gates of the Baptistery at Florence, and Flaxman was content to copy from it almost in our own day. Lessing, in his Laocoon\ has discussed with luminous perspicacity the question whether the group of the Laocoon was taken from the famous description in the second ^neid, or whether the Poet copied from the Sculptor. He wisely decides that neither was a mere follower of the other. Each embodied his thought according to the laws of his own art. Shields of the Graeco-Phoenician style may suggest a similar question with regard to the great achievement of Hephaistos. If there was a relation between them, I cannot but believe that the Artist here was indebted to the Poet, rather than the Poet to the Artist. It is known that the Italian Painters of the generations following Dante, modelled their representations of the unseen world upon the conceptions of the Divina Commedia. I know no reason why the Graeco-Phcenician art should not have owed a like obligation to the Eighteenth Iliad. And this supposition seems to accord rather notably with our finding these Shields in Italy rather ' Lately made accessible to all English readers by the Translation of my accomplished friend Sir R. Phillimore. 5 62 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. than in Greece. For it is, I apprehend, to Phoenicia that we are to look, in order to supply the link of associa- tion between the sculptural art of the two Peninsulas ; and Italy affords a more likely home than Greece, both for commerce and for Art, at the period supposed. Lastly, I would observe that the conclusion^ which I submit as probable, cannot be tested by consideration of the existing monuments of Art alone, but must be judged according to the whole circumstances of the case. If strong evidence, in many forms, is found to throw the epoch of Homer back beyond the Dorian Conquest, and to shew him to have been a native of Achaian Greece, these circumstances must legitimately influence the judg- ment to be formed upon the interesting question, how far Homer described, how far he developed and advanced upon, the Art ideas and creations of his day. Nor is it possible to deny all weight to the cognate evidence derived from such other descriptions of th,e Remains from Hissarlik, as either correspond exactly with the representations of the Poems, or appear to deviate, if at all, by a shade or two of greater advance towards modernism. With these remarks I pass from the subject. VI. We last considered a case where the descriptions of the Poet were much in advance of the Hissarlik Re- mains, I now take one where he seems to be slightly behind them. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 63 There is but a single undeniable mention in the Poems of anything that can be called writing. The marks or signs, which may have been scratched or set upon the lots deposited by the Greek chiefs in the helmet of Agamemnon (II. vii. 175), cannot safely be taken into account ; but only those signs or marks of ill omen, semata lugra, which conveyed the deadly message of Proitos to the king of Lukie (II. vi. 168). Even if these signs were such as Bellerophon would have known, the matter was entirely among personages who were foreign or of foreign descent \ There was no such thing as writing for common or domestic use. The learned Editor of the ' Remains' has subjoined to the work a dissertation on the patterns, so ' strange and novel,' which are impressed upon terra-cotta whorls, seals, vases, and other objects from Hissarlik (Remains, pp. 363 sq.). Very eminent scholars have applied them- selves to find a meaning for these marks ^. Many of them are believed to be primitive sacred emblems of the Aryan race (p. 365). There is an absence ' of Egyptian, and almost equally of Assyrian influence ;' with no trace of Phoenician characters. The emblems above mentioned are found at all depths up to the Greek Ilion (ibid.). It appears to be believed by very com- petent judges, that there is an affinity between the His- * Juventus Mundi, p. 130. ' Suabo, Edinburgh Review, April 1874, p. 530. 64 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. sarlik and the Cypriote inscriptions : and to be held morally certain that those of Hissarlik are not mere ornaments or symbols, but have a meaning, and are true signs. With regard to the absence of Phcenician characters, I venture to observe that these are, I believe, the characters in the Phoenician inscriptions, of which M. Renan assures us none can be dated with confi- dence earlier than 500 B.C. The Moabite Stone is a later discovery, and, as I am told, carries the use of these characters back to the eighth or ninth century B. C. There is still an evident gap between them and the period of Homer. On the other hand, a strong connection between Cyprus and Phoenicia at the time of the Troica, can hardly be doubted. Some mystery hangs over the question what language was spoken by the Phoinikes of the Poems. It seems certain that in them the words of Semitic origin are extremely few. Nor is it doubtful that the message of Proitos carries at every point strong Phcenician and Asiatic marks. But this, whatever else it was, seems to have been a private and confidential cipher, apparently of the rarest employment. There is no direct statement that the pinax or tablet was fastened so as to be invisible to the bearer, though it was folded. But the Hissarlik inscriptions are placed upon vessels meant for convivial or social use. We seem then probably HOMER AND HISSARLTK. 6^ to have in them a more developed, and especially a more popular, state of the art of writing, than in the Poems. In this important respect, therefore, the Poems are rather the more archaic of the two. But the dif- ference may be referable to differences of seat, of habits, and of race ; for no one can suppose Trojan and Hellene to have been, in strictness, ethnically one, though both were probably of the Aryan stock. This difference is illustrated by what has already been said of the Aryan religious symbols, which are found in all the conches at Hissarlik, until we come to the Greek Ilion ; but to its inhabitants they seem to have been unknown. The negative evidence of the Poems, with respect to wTiting, I hold to be among the strongest indications of their very great antiquity. VII. I take next the important subject of the use of images for religious worship. This also, as far as the Poems are concerned, is a matter in respect to which we have but one clear instance. The solemn procession of the Sixth Iliad carries the dedicated veil or robe to the temple of Athene, on the summit of the hill, where the Priestess Theano receives it from them, and deposits it on the knees of the goddess (II. Vl. 297—303) Qr\K(.v 'AOrjvaCri^ €V yovvaaiv rjVKOixoio. From the common Homeric expression, that such and such things lie ' in the lap of the gods,' Mure argues that the use of statues of the deities must have been rather ^S TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. extensive. But might not the anthropomorphic idea of divinities, so clearly conceived by the Hellenic mind, have availed, of itself, to bring this phrase into use, apart from any great familiarity with the visible incorporation in an image ? Considering how much we hear of altars, temples, groves, and glebes, we must surely (as in the case of writing) have heard more of statues, if they had been common. Either they must have been rare, or they must have been, to the Poet, unattractive. Such being the evidence of the Poems, we turn to the Hissarlik discoveries, and find not a single relic or sign of anything that could be called a statue. But we find by hundreds, upon jugs and other objects in terra cotta, rude delineations, mostly bearing what may be taken for a resemblance to the owl. These Dr. Schliemann thinks to have been idols, and, even if not objects of absolute worship, they may have been sym- bolical in the religious sense. It is curious that the only statue of which we are intelligibly informed should be that of Athene, and that these idols, or symbols, should, as I gather from the work and from Dr. Schliemann, all be female, and be generally placed in apparent rela- tion with Athene, through her favourite bird the owl. Now we find from Pausanias that there were, down to his day, in certain temples of Greece, wooden statues of Gods (xoana), as well as statues formed of other materials (including clay) less durable than stone and HOMER AND HISSARLIK. Sj marble, or than bronze ; and that the use of these mate- rials prevailed especially in primitive times ^ Such objects were called daidala, and it was from them, he thinks, that the personal name Daidalos afterAvards arose ^. It was only by degrees that they came to represent the human form at all'*'. Only by degrees, too, they assumed the character of works of art. Indeed, if we survey the world all over at the present day, it is singular to notice how little and how rarely marked religious worship and true beauty have been associated together in images. The material of wood or clay — but wood is the most probable of the two— will account for the disappearance of any statues which may have been at Troy, under the action of fire. But the rudeness of such objects would also, probably, serve to account for the very slight notice (to say the least) taken of them by Homer. It is quite plain from the Poems that he did not describe all he saw. His mind was in the best sense eclectic, and he had a strong ingrained repugnance to the debased. It is easy to censure the Fable of Ares and Aphrodite in the Odyssey. But, in the Books of the great Voyage, he is depicting foreign manners, and it is not so much remarkable that he should have in- troduced this single specimen of their dissoluteness, ' Pans. viii. 17. 2. '" Paus. ix. 3. 2. 2 Preface of Siebelis to Pausanias, Leips., 1822, pp. xli seqq. 68 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. as that he should so greatly and so generally have purified the foul material, with which he had to deal, in the mythology and life of Syria and of Egypt. Of what constituted the distinctive character of Thoth in Egypt, we have no sign in his Hermes, except in the genial phrases eriounios and dotor eaon. Images of pollution have been discovered ' at Hissarlik (Re- mains, p. 78) : but in lieu of these, Homer gives us the touching pain and shame of Priam at the bare idea of the exposure and laceration of the person (II. xxii. 75). This is in reality by far the greatest dis- crepancy between the descriptions of the Poems, and the manners revealed at Hissarlik. It is to be accounted for not by the vain dream of a progressive growth in purity, but partly by the simpler and better manners of the contemporary Hellenes, partly by the higher standard and more refined sense of the Poet. But if even in the moral sphere this agency is traceable, much more, and more entire, must we suppose it in the do- main of the imagination. As he has commemorated the beauty of horses, so doubtless he would have recorded the beauty of statues, if they had been beautiful : and as to the ugly scratchings and attempts at delineating form upon what may have been the Penates of the Troad, it is likely that the Greeks had none such, but much more than likely that, even if Homer knew of them, ' This, if I understand the work aright, was in the lowest stratum of all. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 69 he would ' pass by on the other side,' and take no notice of their deformity. In the matter of worship and images, then, I con- ceive that the inferences to be drawn from the actual Hissarhk remains, are in favour of the Poet's proximity in time to the War of Troy. VIII. The remaining principal head of objects dis- covered at Hissarlik is that of pottery : and here also the evidence tends to show a condition of the art nearly contemporaneous with that described by Homer. The references to it are extremely slight in the Poems. The movement of the youths and maidens in the Dance upon the Shield, is compared to the running of the wheel as the potter tries it. We have here the word kerameus for the potter; but he does not appear among the demioergoi, or in any passage but this single one (II. xviii. 599) ; and only in a single place are we told of the use of earthenware vessels. Much wine was drunk out of them, on a given occasion, in the house of Amuntor, the father of Phoinix (II. ix. 469). It is pretty certain that, at a time when the potter's wheel had been invented, common pottery must have been a commodity of extensive popular use in Greece. But it is equally certain that if works of art, and of real beauty in form or decoration, had been known to Homer, we should have heard of them. The natural inference is that the wheel was just 70 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. beginning to be known, and that the common pottery in use was hand-made, without pretensions to beauty, and therefore not within the usual range of the Poet's notice. This I understand to be generally the case with the Pottery of the fourth, or Priamic, stratum at Hissarlik^ The great mass of the objects found, I learn from Dr. Schliemann, are hand-made : some are wheel-made (p. 49), and well-glazed, so as to obtain the glowing epithet of ' splendid ' (p. 15). In two cases only (p. 15) there was painting, and to judge from the specimen engraved (p. 55), very rude painting. If the objects from Hissarlik belong to a state of things at all different from that of the Poems, it is rather to a more than a less advanced condition of the art that they appear to point. I have now gone through the main classes of objects discovered. Some minor points might be mentioned. Both Hissarlik and the Poems testify to a limited amount of fine work in ivory. Both imply the absence of anything like an art of painting. The correspondence of the material and formation of the helmet with the Poems (Remains,, 279-81) is remarkable. Of coin, as might be expected, there is no trace. It is perhaps ^ In the lowest stratum of all there was pottery, excellent though not of fine workmanship, which suggested to Dr. Schliemann that it had been made by the aid not of the wheel but of some other machine. Remains, pp. 76, 77. HOMER AND HISSARLIK. 7 1 noteworthy, that no articles connected with the har- nessing of the chariot or horse have yet been found. Traces of Assyrian art in Troy, corresponding with a rehc at Mukenai (p. in ), are quite within the range of reasonable expectation ^ The inferior civilization, betokened by the layers No. 2 and No. 3 from the surface, agrees with the obscurity of Troy in the ages after the War, and before the Greek Colony. Upon the whole there appears to arise from this ) comparison strong probable evidence of a nearly corre- sponding and contemporaneous condition of arts and manners, between the descriptions of the Poems, and the disclosures of the Hill. The variations, such as ^ they are, tell both ways. At the same time it -^ must be borne in mind, that the excavations of His- -sarlik are not yet concluded, and that further results may modify materially the bearings of the case. I admire the tone of Professor Conze, who, writing in September of the present year, says that he rather puts questions, than announces inference. And, while submitting for trial my own inferences, I may pro- perly remind the reader that the evidence, with which we shall have to deal in the Second Part of this work, stands upon ground entirely independent of the discoveries of Hissarlik. ^ Juventus Mundi, p. 524. CHAPTER III. HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. I MUST confess it to be a common assumption, re- peated in a multitude of quarters, that Homer was an Asiatic Greek, living after the great Eastward Migration. The number and credit of its adherents has been such that I might have been abashed by their authority, but for the fact that the adhesion seems to have been very generally no more than the mechanical assent which is given, provisionally^ as it were, to every current tradition, before it comes to be subjected to close examination. At the point to which my endeavours to examine the text of the Poems have led me, when I confront the opinion that he was an Asiatic Greek born after the Dorian conquest, I can only say to it, 'aroint thee.' I could almost as easily believe him an Englishman, or Shakespeare a Frenchman, or Dante an American. In support of this proposition, I have met with but HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 73 little of serious argument. The elegant but very slight treatise of Wood adopted it, and occupied the field in this country, at a period (1775) when the systematic study of the text had not yet begun. The passage in II. iv. 51^ requires, I think, no such conclusion. But if it did (though this remedy is not one to be lightly adopted) it ought itself, as I hold, to be rejected without hesitation. I will only here mention a few of the arguments against the opinion which denies to Homer a home in Achaian Greece ; only premising that he lived under the volun- tary system, sang for his bread, and had therefore to keep himself in constant sympathy wdth the prevailing, and so to speak uppermost, sympathies of his audience. 1. It is the Achaian name and race, to which the Poems give constant and paramount glory. But, after the invasion of the Heraclids, the Achaians had sunk to be one of the most insignificant, and for the time discredited, portions of the Greek people. 2. Conversely, if Homer had sung at such a period, the Dorians, supreme in the Greek Peninsula, and the lonians rising in Attica, or distinguished and flourishing in Asia Minor, could not have failed to hold a prominent and favourable position in the Poems. Whereas, while the older names of Argeioi and Danaoi are constantly put forward, the Dorian name, but twice casually men- * Studies, &c., vol. i. p. 39. 74 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. tioned, is altogether insignificant ; and the Ionian name, besides being obscure, is coupled with the epithet kkKtyJ-Toives, tunic-trailing, or, if we translate in a more friendly spirit, ' with tunics that swept the ground,' in the one place where the Ionian soldiery are introduced ^ This is surely a disparaging designation for troops. 3. Not less important are the considerations con- nected with the Aiolian title. In the later Greek tradition, we have numerous notices of Aiolians as settled in various parts of Greece^. But none of these can be considered as historical, in the form they actually bear. When we go back to Homer, whom many have called an Aiolian Greek, we find that he was not even conscious of the existence of Aiolians, but only of Aiolids. He brings before us a variety of persons and families, holding the highest stations, and playing important parts in the early history of the country, who are descended from or connected with an Aiolos. This Aiolos has every appearance of a mythical Eponymist. But though Homer knows perfectly well the Dorians and lonians, while the Achaians are his main theme, of an Aiolian tribe he is absolutely ignorant. And this we perfectly understand, if (as I contend) he was an Achaian Greek, or a Greek anterior to the Dorian Conquest. But the first result of that conquest was what has ^ II. xiii. 685. ' Thirlwall, Hist. Greece, vol. i. chap. iv. HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 75 obtained the name of the AioHc migration. Many- fugitives, expelled from various parts of Greece, passed into the north, crossed to Asia Minor, conquered Lesbos, founded Cuma, occupied the country 'from Cuzicos on the Propontis to the river Hermos,' and named it Aiolis\ under which designation it has an important place in history. If Homer were an Aiolian Greek, or an Asiatic Greek at all, Aiolis having been a principal Greek conquest in Asia, and the oldest among them, how could he have been ignorant of the Aiolian name ? How could he have effectively denied the existence of that name by giving us Aiolids, scattered members of a particular family, very few in number, very illustrious in position, but no community or tribe ? The distinction is a vital one ; for as he knows nothing of a tribe in the Aiolian case, so he knows nothing of an Eponymist or family in the Dorian or Achaian cases. 4. This portion of the argument becomes yet Qiore cogent when we consider that, in the Aiolis of the period following the Dorian conquest, were included the Plain and site of Troy. Now if Homer had been an Aiolian Greek, or a Greek of the later Ionic migration, he must have sung among people many of whom were familiar * Mitford's Greece, vol. i. chap. v. sect. 2 ; Thirlwall, chap, xii (vol. ii. 82. 1 2mo. edition) ; Strabo, Bk. xiii. pp. 582, 586 ; Grote, vol. ii. p. 26 (Ed. 1851). 76 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. with the topography of the spot. But I hold it to be certain that, while he has given us the local features of the Site and Plain sufficiently for a large identification, he has handled them loosely and at will in points of detail. He has treated the Plain without any assump- tion of a minute acquaintance with it, just as one who was sketching, boldly but slightly, a picture for his hearers, and not as one who laid his scene in a place with which they were already personally familiar, and which formed by far the most famous portion of the country they in- habited. The long and almost microscopic controversy, which has been carried on by learned men in ancient and modern times with respect to the question of the Site, of itself suffices to justify my assertion as to his treatment of the features of the Plain. But I will illustrate this position by an instance. He gives us as close to Troy two fountains, which were sources of the Scamander, and of which one was hot, the, other cold. The Bounarbashi fountains may fairly be called part of the sources of the Scamander, but Bounarbashi is not Troy, and the fountains are not two but many, and are not different in temperature. The only mode of reconciliation, on this part of the case, is, that Homer might have heard of a steam over the water in one part of the year which was not seen in another, and so might have dealt with the subject, much as he has HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 77 divided the Arctic days and nights between the Kimme- rians and the Laistrugones. But this poetical solution would of itself prove the narrowness of his local know- ledge. If then we pass from Bounarbashi to the true Troy at Hissarlik, we have the advantage of minute details, carefully set out by Dr. Schliemann (p. 194). The result is that there are not two fountains, but four ; that two of them may be said to form a double one, but both have the same temperature : that none of them are sources of the Scamander at all : that the Scamander does proceed from a hot and a cold spring, but these are far away from Troy, hidden Jn Mount Ida. 5. The Athenians, who have, at the epoch of the Dorian Conquest, been the friends and hosts of the non- Dorian Refugees, must have been in very high esti- mation with a Bard sprung from the emigration which they fed. But their general position in the Poems is one of inferiority ; their chief is undistinguished ; he is even capable of terror, which never happens with any great or genuine Achaian chieftain ; and the passage of the Catalogue, in which he and they are praised, is wholly isolated, stands in odd contrast with the general strain of the Catalogue itself, and is on the whole per- haps the most justly, as well as the most generally, suspected passage in the Poems 6. In the descriptions of the Greek Catalogue, there 6 78 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. are not less than seventy points of what may be called distinct local colour or association. It consists of 265 lines. Of these from twenty to thirty give the numbers in ships, and a larger number detail historic legends. Epithets, indicating and appealing to local knowledge, and as it were challenging con- tradiction, are of incessant occurrence. There are eleven among the towns of Boiotia alone. The Trojan Catalogue, embracing the whole west coast of Asia Minor, is in sixty-two verses ; but instead of having a note of local colour for each three lines or there- abouts, has only one for each ten. How is this com- patible with the doctrine that Homer was an Asiatic Greek, that he pursued his vocation as a minstrel chiefly on the east side of the Archipelago (as the richer and more peaceful side), and that he was a comparative stranger in the Greek Peninsula ? 7. I shall deal separately in this work with the Hymn to Apollo. As it cannot, in its present form, be the work of the Poet of the Iliad and Odyssey, the authority of the passage quoted from it by Thucydides is not great ; but the assertion contained in the passage itself is not that Homer was an Asiatic Greek (inf. p. 92). It is. only that he being blind, and from the tone of the lines apparently in advanced life, was a dweller in Chios. 8. It is true that the Poet's knowledge of the South HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 79 of Greece, and especially of the Islands on the West, cannot be shown to have been either universal or exact: but of Asia Minor, except at the extreme North- Western corner, the scene of the War, he has shown very little knowledge indeed. 9. Is it conceivable that, after a Revolution involving such extensive change, and such translocation of races, as the Return of the Heraclids, not one word betraying any reference to it should be found in 27,600 lines, except (II. iv. 51) a single and doubtful passage which may be held to refer to a destruction of Sparta, Argos. and Mukenai by this Revolution ? Nay, it is im- possible to rely even upon these lines as an historical testimony or allusion to the facts of the Revolution, because it does not correspond with those facts. With respect to Argos, we are not warranted in asserting that so much as its political position was changed by the return of the Heraclids, much less that it was destroyed. There was no destruction, as far as we know, of any of the three cities. All that we can assert of it, as probably true, is that it transferred the Greek hegemony from Mukenai to Sparta. 10. But this strong negative reasoning is less strong than the positive argument. What is it, what men, what manners, what age is it tiiat Homer sings of? I aver that they are Achaian men, Achaian manners. 80 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. an Achaian age. The atmosphere which he breathes is Achaian. It is all redolent of the youth and health of the nation, its hope, its ardour, and its energy. How could the Colonies in Asia Minor have supplied him with his ideas of free yet kingly government? What do we know of any practice of oratory there, such as could have inspired his great speeches and de- bates? He shows us the Achaian character in the heroic form, with its astonishing union of force and even violence, with gentleness and refinement ; how did he learn of this but by observation of those among whom, and whose representatives, he lived ? There is an en- tireness and an originality in that Achaian life, a medium in which all its figures move, which was after- wards vaguely and faintly embodied by poets in the idea of an heroic age, such as hardly could have been, and such as we have not the smallest reason to suppose was, reproduced on a new soil, and in profoundly modified circumstances, after the Migration. II. In truth, the traditions about the birthplace of Homer are covered with marks truly mythical. That is, they are just such as men, in the actual course of things, were likely to forge. If he had lived and sung amidst an Achaian civilization, yet that civilization was soon and violently s\^?ept away. The most masculine, but the hardest and rudest, offspring of the Hellenic HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 8 1 stock were brought to the front, and became supreme for centuries ; the Dorian race, a race apparently in- capable, throughout all time, of assimilating the finer elements of Greek civilization. Together with the more genial and appreciative portion of the nation, the reci- tation of the Poems could not but migrate too. Hence without doubt the tradition, that Lucourgos brought them into Greece ; that is, he probably brought them back into Greece, to melt, or smelt, if he could, his men of iron. But, during all the time of their banish- ment from the Peninsula, these Poems may well have had an enduring continuous currency among the chil- dren of those, whose sires in recent generations had so loved to hear them, and whose remoter heroes had, or were thought to have, received from them the gift of immortality. Thus, by a natural progression, as the Poems were for the time Asiatic, all relating to them, and most of all the Singer, came to be claimed as Asiatic too. In the verse Smyrna, Rhodos, Colophon, Salamis, Chios, Argos, Athena;, we have set forth as can- didates for the honour of having given him birth, cities of which only one (Argos) has a considerable interest in the action of the ' Iliad,' but most of which, as the seats of an after civilization and power, had doubtless harboured and enjoyed the works. Such, it appears to 82 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. me, is no unnatural explanation of the growth and pro- gress of an opinion which, when tried upon its merits only, must, I think, seem a strange one to those who have at all tried to measure truly the extraordinary nearness of association and close and ardent sympathy, between Homer and the men and deeds he celebrates. The upshot seems to be, that we have ample reasons against believing Homer to have been an Asiatic Greek : but that we can also discern ample reasons why there should have arisen, in the historic times, a report and belief that he was an Asiatic Greek. It was from the Asiatic Colonies that letters and philo- sophy as matter of fact came back to Greece, and the state of historical knowledge and record was not such as to enable the inhabitants of the Greek Peninsula to distinguish with precision, in regard to a remote age and person, either the place or the date to which he belonged. Their oldest associations of literature, those of the Homeridai and the Ilian Cycle, were attached to the Hellenism of Asia, and they naturally and spontaneously, but without the means of, critical inquiry, placed Homer in company with those asso- ciations, and treated him as their Crown. 12. A few words may be required, and will be suffi- cient to dispose of the very slight pleas urged by Wood i,to whom, however, we have-much reason to be grateful), HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST 83 for accepting an Asiatic origin and habitat for Homer. They are as follows ^ — (i) That he places the Locrians beyond sacred Euboia {■niprjv tepTJs E{ij3oi?js, II. ii. ^^^). But the word -nipw does not, as he supposed* it did, require a reference to the local position of the speaker. It means ' over against.' Homer probably describes the position of the Locrians by reference to Euboie, either because of the conse- crating epithet, or because the Abantes, its inhabitants, were a particularly martial and distinguished portion of the Greek army (II. ii. 536, 541-4; iv. 464). (2) That he places the Echinades at the mouth of the Acheloos ; {iii.pr]v akas, "HAtSos avra). The sense of ' beyond ' is here sufficiently well suited to peren, though I should prefer ' over-sea ' (II. ii. 626). But the expression would have been inappropriate in the mouth of an Asiatic Greek, to whom the whole of continental Greece was 'beyond sea,' and not the Echinades in particular. It is eminently suited to an Achaian Greek ; for it treats Peloponnesos as the head and centre of Greece. It seems also to mark the regular progression in the due order of the Catalogue. The last Contingent he had named was that of Elis : 'now' we may suppose ourselves to hear him, I take next the Echinades on the other side of the water. Very 1 Wood's Essay, p. S (Ed. 1775). 84 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. intelligible, if spoken in the Peninsula, much less so if spoken in Asia. (3) Eumaios, in Od, xv. 403, places his native island Surie, ' beyond or above ' Ortugie. Wood argues that as from Ithaca, Surie, which he takes to be Syra, should have been described as nearer to the speaker than Ortugie, which he takes to be Delos. It is needless to enter here upon the attempts made to interpret the tropai eelioio, turns of the sun, in conformity with this view ; since there is no reason whatever to believe that the places are correctly identified, and every reason to the contrary. (4) He cites ^ the passage II. ix. 4, where Boreas and Zephuros blow down from Thrace upon the sea. But I am at a loss to see that it bears in any way upon the argument. (5) He cites also the violence attached by Homer to the action of Zephuros, and says this is its true Ionian character'-. But if it be the Ionian character of Zephuros, so I apprehend must it be the character of the same wind amidst the rocky islands of the west coast of Greece. If Homer has attached elsewhere (Od. iv. 567) a somewhat different character to this wind, it may be as we attach a diversity of idea to the north-west and the west wind respectively. The * Wood's Essay, p. i8. * Ibid. p. 25. HOMER AND THE DORIAN CONQUEST. 85 Zephuros of Homer covers an arc of the circle including both. (6) The Poet, he thinks \ treats countries as unfamiliar, in proportion to their remoteness from Ionia. This is directly at variance with what we observe in the Catalogue; and nowhere, except upon the Plain of Troy, have we so much local detail as in Ithaca, at the out- side of the sphere of the Poet's geographical ex- perience. I think it will be admitted that the texture of Wood's observations is extremely slight : so much so, that they could hardly have been produced at the present stage of Homeric study. I have touched on this collateral subject, for, I think, sufficient reasons. It was needful to enter my protest against the notion that the Poems were or could have had their birthplace in Asia, and after the Dorian invasion. Over the period preceding that invasion, Egypt, even in the decline of its power, still cast a majestic shadow ; from out of the bosom of that Empire it was that immigration, navigation, and probably the direct exercise of political power, had carried forth the seeds of knowledge and the arts, and had deposited them in the happiest soil in which they were ever to germinate. And with the indirect signs and effects of * Wood's Essay, p. 30. 86 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. this remarkable process, the Poems are charged through- out. I am soon about to draw attention, not only to these numerous and sometimes obscure indications, but to notes which, though few in number, are generally of a very direct character. And I feel that they could hardly appear other than an idle dream to minds tenaciously prepossessed with the belief that Homer was an Asiatic Greek of the period after the Migration. Egypt then had come to be for Greece, except occasionally, no more than a name : its greatness was forgotten ; it was neither friend nor foe, so far as we know ; the relations, which had once subsisted, were buried in utter darkness ; the primeval migrations from the East had assumed the form almost of old wives' fables, A poet of that day and place would scarcely have had occasion to give so much as a token of the existence of Egypt. And if the notes on which I shall now dwell, or the many and varied notes which others have observed, have substance in them, they certainly supply a new argument against placing the composition of the Poems, as to their sub- stance, after the Dorian Conquest. , CHAPTER IV. ON THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE HYMN TO THE DELIAN APOLLO. I SUPPOSE the general opinion concerning the Hymnl Homerici to be that which has been expressed by Mat- thiae in his Prolegomena (Leipsic, iSoo, p. lo), namely, that they cannot justly be, and are not commonly by the most competent judges, ascribed to the author of the Iliad. Speaking generally, the question has reached a stage at which pains would be wasted in discussing it. Some, however, desire to make an exception on behalf of the Hymn to Apollo : if not as a whole, yet after dividing it into two parts, whereof one is called the Hymn to the Delian Apollo, the other to the Pythian ; and, for the former of these two, the honour of Homeric authorship is claimed. Such is the language of Ilgen in his edition of 1796. And he has proceeded to assign his grounds in a recital which may properly be taken for a point of departure in these remarks. Parinii nic viovct Tlmcydidis testimojiium (iii. 104), iVictoris satis gravis ; pamm Aristophaiiis {"Opv. 574^), ' 'Jptv F( -y "Ofxripos tipaaK iKfXrjv elvai Tp-qpcuvi irfKfirj «S8 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. qui VS. 114 hynini Homeri nomine landat. Hi cftim testes, etsi antiqiii, et fide maxime digni, tamen ab Iliaci carminis cetate nimio temporis intervallo disjiincti stmt. Movet me lijignce ac sententia7'iqn similitudo, reriim con- venientia, ct vetustatis robigo. Ilgen, Hymni Homerici, 1796, Introduction, pp. xv, xvi. The citation made by Aristophanes is not of great importance ; and this not only because the passage is a suspected one (Bekker, in loc). There is a doubt whether the reference may not be made to II. v. 778 ^ rather than to the Hymn. In neither case is it exact. In the Iliad, Here and Athene are spoken of. In the Hymn, Eilithuia is included with Iris, and as the argu- ment turns on the flying of Immortals, it does not appear why both are not cited. Granting that the Hymn is probably intended in the reference, we cannot be surprised if, in his burlesque argument, Aristophanes was content to rely upon the vague sentiment then current, which loosely assigned to Homer, and described by his name, much that no one now would suppose to have been his. But the passage of Thucydides is perfectly explicit, and carries weight with some who may not have ex- amined that internal evidence, on which Ilgen relies. It may also be admitted, that the lines relating to ^ Gultman de Hymn. Horn. Hist. Crit., p. 30. HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 89 the blind Bard of Chios are of a beauty, which it is not easy to match in the other Hymns. On the other hand, it must be borne in mind that the authority of Thucydides, in a case like this, is not to be measured by his judgment or his accuracy as an historian. It is not in that character that he is writing. He had no historical data to rely on. Either he is proceeding upon a mere popular opinion, or upon a critical conclusion at which he had arrived. The popular opinion of his day was not founded on any re- sults of critical research, and for this purpose is a matter of little or no account. His critical conclusion has not the degree of weight which it would have possessed, had it been delivered in an age like our own, when the art of literary criticism has been long studied, its precepts digested, and its tradition formed. We are then within bounds in holding, that the opinion of Thucydides will not warrant us in ascrib- ing to Homer the Hymn to the Delian Apollo, if the internal evidence shall be found to tell in an opposite direction. Now this internal evidence would properly be taken first under the heads of style and diction ; secondly, with reference to the mode in which tra- ditions and manners are represented. The question of conformity or inconformity with the poems admitted as Homeric, the Iliad and the Odyssey, may thus be fairly 90 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. tried. This is the rcruvi convenicntia to which Ileen refers, but on which I venture with some confidence to question his judgment. The inquiry is relevant and material in determining whether Homer was an Asiatic Greek, who was born and bred in an age and country altogether severed from the old Achaian traditions, or whether he had habitually breathed their atmosphere in the Hellenic peninsula. For the passage in Thucydides, unless it be set aside by evidence, is a serious impediment to the reception of the latter, which is also, I apprehend, the sounder opinion : indeed, I am driven to think, the only admis- sible judgment. I do not den}' the vctiistatis robigo, alleged by Ilgen ; but I think it the rust or mould of an antiquity less remote than that of the Poems. The lingiicE ac scntcn- tiaruin similitiido I cannot admit ; but I shall deal sparingly with them in so far as they are matters of opinion, or matters involving philological knowledge which I do not possess. In regard to the rcruin con- veniejttia, what I hold is, that the mode of handling, as to manners and traditions, in the Hymn to the Delian Apollo, is entirely incompatible with any belief that it can have been produced by the antJior of the Iliad and the Odyssey. The Hymns are, in my view, such as we might HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 9 1 reasonably have expected them to be upon the sup- position that the Iliad and the Odyssey were the ofif- spring of the Greek Peninsula, but that these were produced in Asia Minor after the great migration east- wards. For what we see in the History of this Eastern Magna GrcEcia is a rather enfeebled reproduction of the Hellenic character. Compare, for example, the resist- ance of the true stock to Dareios and to Xerxes, with the easy conquests of Croisos and of Curos over ^the lonians and Aiolians of the Continent ; whose specu- lative faculty, it may be, was sharpened by Asiatic contact and probable blood-mixture, but whose general standard of manhood had obviously declined. The Poet of the Iliad and the Odyssey was surely bred in a more bracing atmosphere. It may be said with truth that the passage cited by Thucydides contains a probable testimony to the Asiatic birth or residence of Homer, and that it ought not to be repudiated on the ground of evidence drawn from the body of the Hymn, from which it may have been originally dissociated. Possibly it may be argued that Thucydides, citing the Trpooiixiov to Apollo, uses the word in its original sense of a preamble or introduction, whereas the second of his citations is hard upon the close of the Hymn as it stands. I do not say we can make sure that the composition in its detail, as it now 92 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Stands, represents the exact form in which it originally appeared. But the passage, with the farewell it in- cludes, manifestly implies that it is subjoined to the body of a composition of this nature. We cannot suppose that production as a whole to have disappeared, and the present one as a whole to have taken its place. There is then a pretty firm link of connection between the citation and the body of the Hymn generally. If indeed it were found only at one or two points to be in conflict with the Homeric method and testimony, we might venture to presume a corruption of the text. But if, as I shall endeavour to show, the mode of treat- ment is almost continuously at variance with the idea of Homeric authorship, such a plea will not avail, and the discredit of the body of the Hymn must have its influence adverse to the authenticity, that is to say, to the Homeric authorship, of the quotation. A quotation which, we may notice, does not contain a name, but merely the incident of blindness, a calamity which we cannot predicate with certainty of Homer even in his later hfe, and which also some other bard may have suffered. It should also be borne in mind that the passage in the Hymn does not directly decide the ques- tion that Homer was an Asiatic Greek. It only asserts that a blind Bard, evidently a favourite and distin- guished one, and also evidently advanced in hfe was a HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 93 dweller in Chios. If the tradition which fixes the return of the Heraclids at eighty years after the Troica be trustworthy, the passage may even speak of Homer and speak truly of him in old age, and yet the date of the great Poems may have been antecedent to the Return. But against this possibility there would still have to be set the difficulty of answering this question ; how is it that a Poet acquainted with the Return, and witness of the vast revolution it brought about, should not, even without his consciousness, have left in twenty- seven thousand lines of poetry, sufficient indications of facts which were of such overwhelming moment to the whole tenour of Greek life, and of his own ? The great antiquity of this Hymn, saving the inquiry as to one or two manifest modernisms, I do not question. I find in it no reference to the existence of Delos afloat on the sea before it was rooted. This came in at a later time, but it is recorded in Pindar as quoted by Strabo ^. And it is itself probably an ancient tradition, for it bears marks of having been copied from Egypt, where, hard by Buto, the city of Leto, there was pointed out to Herodotus the island called Chemmis as a floating island. It was covered with palms, and had a grand temple of Apollo -• Leto, be it remembered, was one of the eight Great Gods of Egypt. ^ Book X. p. 485. ^ Herodotus, ii. pp. 155, 156. 7 94 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. With these preHminary remarks, I proceed to try the case by an observation of particulars. I. Verses 2 — 4. ovTf 6fo\ Kara fiw/ia Atoy Tpofifovcriv lovra' Kai pa y avdia(Tov(nv, (Tncrxf^ov ep^^ofievoio, navTfs a(f) itpdoov, ore cf)ai8iiJia ro^a Tiraivei. The second verse of the Hymn represents the Olym- pian deities in general as trembling before Apollo when he passes through the palace of Zeus ; and in the third verse they are said to rise, or start up, from their seats as he draws his bow. There is a want of proportion and measure in these two images relatively to one another. If the gods tremble at his mere passing by, the drawing of his bow is scarcely required to cause them to rise for the purpose of showing respect. In this view, the major phenomenon follows the minor act. Rising is less than trembling. If on the other hand the act of rising is itself meant as an act of terror, we only heighten the exaggeration, which marks the passage as a whole. But, in truth, neither image is accordant with the manner of Homer. Not even Zeus, unless in wr^th, in- spires the deities with fear ; and not even to Here or Poseidon, but to Zeus alone, do they pay the tribute of HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 95 rising from their seats when he enters (11. i. 533-5). In his case the act is accounted for by his relation of pater- nity to the gods in general (Trarjjp avhpStv re QeGtv re). In the rising at the drawing of the bow, we seem to see a copy by an inferior hand of the majestic Olympian scene in the First Iliad : the element of seemliness being missed by the Author of the Hymn. If it be said that, in a Hymn addressed to Apollo, we may expect and excuse the absence of proportionate honour to other deities, who were not before the mind of the Bard, I reply that this argument is negatively good to account for the omission of their prerogatives: but cannot be good for such a displacement of the due degrees of rank and honour, and of the well- defined Homeric relation between senior and junior'. For the true Homer of the Iliad, the order of Olumpos and its Court was at least as firmly established as that of any human society: and neither his harmonic nor his moral sense would have allowed him to represent Here, Poseidon, and Athene as doing homage to Apollo. These remarks will apply generally to the words (134—5) at h apa iraaat 9afxl3eov aOdvaTai. Thambos in- dicates an amazement more or less approaching to stupefaction. Now Homer's anthropophuism does not indulge in this exaggerated colouring of divine emotion. * See e.g. Od. vi. 329. q6 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. We find its climax, I think, in the awe of the Immor- tals, with a pause (II. viii. 28, 29) after the menacing speech of Zeus : — tos €0a^'' 01 8' (ipa iravres aKijv iyevovTO (Tianfi, fivdov dyaaadfjifvoi' fiaXa yap Kparepas ayopewev. II. Verse 5. At/to) 8' 01;; fiifive napa Au TepniKfpavva. Leto alone remains sitting, by the side of Zeus, while the other deities have risen. This representation as to the place of Leto is quite inconsistent with the dignity accorded to Here in the Poems ; who appears never to leave the seat next to Zeus, doubtless on his right hand. On the other side, as it would appear, usually sate Athene, who in cour- tesy yielded her place to Thetis as a visitor (II. xxiv. 100), on a very special occasion. We again see here an incongruous imitation of the true Homer. The honours of Here are, in a spirit of exaggeration, handed over to another : and yet the act of Leto in the Fifth Iliad (447), where she tends the stunned Aineias in the temple of Apollo, is copied. The dignity accorded to Leto, however, is noteworthy : and tends to mark the Hymn as a very ancient pro- duction. HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 97 III. Verse 10. T(5 6' (Ipa VfKTQp eSoiKf Ttarrip diirai ;i^pucrfia), Zeus, we are here told, handed the cup of nectar to Apollo. This is not in accordance with the Homeric order of the Olympian Court. For the words imply either that Apollo had the seat next to Zeus, so that the cup might pass to him, or that Zeus performed the function of cup-bearer. Neither alternative agrees with the Poems : in which the cup is handed by Hephaistos (II. i. 584) : or by Hebe (II. iv. 2) : and the seats next to Zeus are held by Here and by Athene (see st/p.). The author of these verses has rather minute informa- tion about Delos : while it is only once named in the Poems (Od. vi. 162). The palm is mentioned there as well as here : but the ' great mountain ' and ' currents of Inopos ' do not appear. They are wholly unsuit- able to an island of five miles in circumference. There is no such want of harmony in the lines of the Odyssey. The genuineness of this passage is disputed among the German Editors : but the question is one beside my purpose. IV. Verses 14 — 18. TfKfs dyXaa TtKva, 'ATToXXeord t' avaKxa koL "Aprefiiv toxtaipav, 98 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. TTjv fieu iv 'OpTvyiT], tuv fie Kpavafj ev\ ArjXo), K€K\ifj.fvT] npos jxaKpov opos Koi Kvvdtov o)(6ov, ayxoTiiTO} (poivt.Ko<:, in 'ivunoio peedpois. The birth of Apollo is here severed from that of Artemis. They are commonly represented as twins : not expressly so in the Poems, but the close relation of function between Artemis and Apollo (cf. II. v. 447, XX. 39, xxiv. 605-7, Od. XV. 409), taken with the expression <^r) 80100 xeKe'ety (II. xxiv. 408), almost seems to require it. Mere brotherhood is a feeble bond, or no bond at all, in Olumpos. So that the passage here may involve a contradiction of the Poems. V. Verses 22 — 24. 7rd(rai 8e (TKOTriai rot d8ov Kai TTpaovei uKpoi vy^rjKwv ope7r(oi>, Kai Kvi8oi aiTrdvij Kai KdpTrados Tjufftoecrcraf Na^os t' r]8e Udpos 'Prjvaid re ntTprjfcraa, lOO TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. This lengthened passage is evidently the work of a later and much inferior hand : and goes far of itself to condemn the Hymn. (i) There is in Homer no example of a Catalogue of this kind, so presented. He gives, indeed, in the Eigh- teenth Iliad (39-4H) a series of thirty-three names of Nereid Nymphs: and in Od. viii. 111-19 we have the names of seventeen Phaiakian youths, who entered for the Games. In the latter case, the purpose of the enumer- ation is at once disclosed by the etymology of the names, eleven of which are compressed into three lines. In every case, except one (Laodamas), they are names connected with maritime pursuits, and they thus illustrate the character and Phcenician origin of the people. Elsewhere I have pointed out that the names of the Nereids are in a marked manner of Hellenic etymo- logy, and appear to be intended to do honour to Achilles, in whose mother ' Thetis ' the old and the new mythologies are made to meet. There, again, thirty- three names are compressed into ten verses. Only three of the names have epithets. The Poet shows his sense of the extreme vapidity of a long list of names largely diluted ; and, having a distinct purpose in his enumerations, he accomplishes them succinctly, in the most workmanlike manner. Here he is in contrast with the writer of the Hymn, where thirty-one names HOMER AND THE HYMNS. 10 1 are spread over fifteen lines, with no consistent purpose or order, and with epithets or descriptive phrases dragging after them in twenty-four cases. This mass oi padding is thoroughly un-Homeric. I have not yet mentioned the case of the Greek Catalogue in II. ii.; where enumeration is a necessity, for local indications were an essential element in the interest which the Bard had to excite. The most re- markable instance is that of the twenty-nine towns of the Boiotoi (II. ii. 496-508), which take up thirteen lines: eleven only of these have epithet or description, and nowhere more than three of them in succession, whereas in the Hymn eleven consecutively are loaded in this manner. Again, the Homeric epithets are eminently characteristic, but this can hardly be said of giving Aigine the name of vrjao<;, or of calling Peparethos afX(pia\o9, or Coos a city of articulating men, as if men elsewhere did not articulate. (2) If we take next the geographical aspect of the case, I have pointed out the care with which Homer studies topical continuity in the sections of the two Catalogues. But the composer of the Hymn has no rule or arrangement. He takes Apollo from Delos to Crete, Crete to Athens, then to Aigine on one side, then to Euboia on the other, then up as far as Thrace, back to Pelion, on again to Samothrace, then to the 102 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. continent of Asia Minor, then back across the yEgean to Skuros, and so forward in utter confusion. (3) Another point in which this author shows himself not to be Homer, is in the absolute insignificance of continental Greece in his enumeration. Here, no doubt, we have a pretty clear indication of the birth-region of the Hymnist. Among the thirty-one names, Athens alone, together with Pelion and the doubtful appellation of Eiresiai, supposed to be a town of Thessaly, belongs to the Greek Peninsula ; the rest, except the mention of Athos, are divided between the Archipelago and the continent of Asia Minor. The mental horizon is altogether different from that of Homer. (4) So, too, we miss that powerful sentiment of nation- ality, which pervades the Poems. A point of the Thracian coast and the mention of Ida are introduced, while Greece itself is almost wholly overlooked. We cannot well have a clearer indication that the Hymn belongs to the period after the Dorian Conquest, when the Greek race had, through the migration, been locally diffused, but the spirit of Greek nationality much weakened. It marks also the severance and want of intercourse with the Greek Peninsula : for the Dorian conquerors, in whatever else they may have been defi- cient, were great worshippers of Apollo, and they must HOMER AND THE HYMNS. IO3 have appeared here, if they had been familiarly known to the Poet. (5) Again we may observe that Athens, which he selects for notice, had no special relation to Apollo ; but very naturally appears in the work of an Asiatic Greek, or Greek of the migration, for which it was the supposed point of departure. (6) Next it is very remarkable how little of this lengthened geographical description has any point of contact with Homer. Eleven or more of the thirty- one places, though generally such as the Greeks of the Migration would be likely to know, are not named in either the Iliad or the Odyssey, large as is their local vocabulary. These are : — 1 Eiresiai. 5 Akrocane. 9 Naxos. 2 Peparethos. 6 Claros. 10 Paros. 3 Athos. 7 Aigagie. 1 1 Rhenaia. 4 Phocaia. 8 Cnidos And, according to Matthiae (Proleg. p. 20), 12. Samos. Lesbos in Homer has no tradition of an Aiolian founder, nor does he use the form Aiolion ; indeed, the patronymic in ion is rare with him. The Chios of Homer is simply craggy (Od. iii. 170), but the poet of the Hymn, evidently at a later date, describes this as the wealthiest or most flourishing (liparotate) of islands. 104 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Samos again, which has no epithet in Homer, is here hudrel6, well-watered, the word being foreign to the great Poems as well as the idea. Imbros, known to Homer only for its crags (II. xiii. 33, and xxiv. 78), has become eiiktimene, well-built, or well-furnished. In V. 31 we have vavcnKXuTX] t Ev^oia. Homer does not apply to the Hellenic race generally epithets drawn from familiarity with maritime pursuits, but gives these to the Phaiakes, a race of Phoenician associations whom he calls vavaUkvToi apbpes (Od. vii. 39), with other like epithets. He does instead give a very special descrip- tion (II. ii. 540-4) of the people of the island of Euboia ; but it is wholly in connection with land warfare. Conversely, while the Lemnos of Homer is well- built or well-furnished \ here the island is only in- accessible (amichthaloessa). The name Phocaia is of course in itself a proof that the Hymn is posterior to the migration eastwards (see Herod, i. 142). Strangest of all, though Homer has connected Apollo with the Lukian race (see inf. p. 1 1 1 ), the Lukian name is not found in this list at all. Generally, wherever there is a re- semblance to the Homeric text, it is by a simple adoption of a word. The conception, indeed, of Apollo's ' In the Greek of Homer ivKTifiivi) is found thirty-three times, and in- variably divided into five syllables. In this passage it is tvnTifiii'i], in four syllables. HOMER AND THE HVMNS. IO5 worship as universal, is in thorough accordance with Homer : but this long and vapid enumeration is palpably insufficient, for it presents to us no exhaustive picture either of the world or of the Greek countries, but only an arbitrary list of spots, without either selection or arrangement. And, whereas the list begins with the declared aim of setting forth the lands in which Apollo was recognised as lord, at the end it assigns to the enumeration a totally different meaning, that of de- scribing the places in which Leto vainly sought shelter for her confinement. VIIl. Verse 46. ymiutv. The form in Homer is yaiaoiv. IX. Verses 47, 51, 61. al be fiaiC irpo^tov (cat fbeiSicrav, oi/bi tis €tX»j k.t.X. . . . AtjX', ft yap K fdfXois eSos tfififvat vioj f'/xoio . . . (OS (Pdro' X^^P^ ^* A^Xos, dfxfi^oufvr) be npoa-rji^a. To ascribe to places and regions the emotions of man, to address them in the v^ocative, or to invest them with the faculty of speech, though we find it in Theocritos ', is without example in Homer, and foreign to his conceptions ; it partakes too much of ' xvii. 64. Koais 5' d\6Kv^tv dnaaa k. t. K. Io6 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. the elemental idea, and is opposed to his anthropo- phuism. Achilles, indeed, addresses the River Sper- cheios in the vocative, but this is in acknowledging him as a Deity, though one placed in the Under-world (Il.xxiii. 144). When even the Immortal horse of Achilles has spoken, the Erinus interferes promptly, to restore the order of nature. The contrariety to the Homeric mode of thought becomes yet further aggravated in vv. 6^, 4, where the Island states the case for and against, with regard to its own personal advantages or grievances. X. Verse 59. ^rjpov iivaKT (I ^ocTKOii' ol Se d(oi Ke cr €)(U>niv. This line, excluded by Matthias, is admitted by Ilgen. Its want of caesura marks it as not the work of Homer : still more does it condemn any composition to which it belongs by the phrase and idea implied in the boskein anakta, which is wholly at variance with Homer's mode of conceiving and representing such a deity as Apollo. xr. Verse 62. Ar]Toi, Kv^iaTTj Ovyarep fj.eya.Xov Koi'oto. In this verse we find two notes of an origin not Homeric. HOMER AND THE HYMNS. ic; (i) The epithet Kudiste is in Homer confined to Athene (II. iv. 515, and Od. iii. ^yS). (2) The paternity given to Koios is Hesiodic (Theog. 404) not Homeric. Leto has no relations traced upwards ; and they would not be in keeping with the Homeric conception of her, XII. Verse 66. \ir]v yap Tiva (j)a(T\v aTcicrddKov 'AnoWwva faa-fcrdai. Atasthalie in Homer means an obstinate perverse depravity, and conveys an idea standing in violent contrast with Homer's conception of Apollo, to whom he at all times assigns an unvarying conformity with the will of Zeus. XIII. Verse 67. fi(ya 8f TTpvTavevcTffiev. Ilgen himself obser\^es ' Notio ab Homeri (Zfate, ut videUir, prorsiis abJiorrens'. Matthiae properly refers us to .^sch. Prom. v. 170, Zeus . . . [xaKapcav "npyTavis, to Find. Pyth. vi. 24, and to Simonides ap. Brunck. Anal, i. 145 : and observes, ' Vox Homero ignota . . . Due turn esse verbmn airb tQv TtpvTaviaiv, a stimnio, in Asiaticis GrccccB originis iirbibtis, magistrate, nunc nota res est' I08 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. XIV. Verses 78, 79. aXX ci /xot rKaLrjg ye, 6fa, jxeyau opKov ofj-ocrcrai, tv6a8( fiiv npwTov Tfv^eiv TrfpiKaWta vrjov. The oath of a mother, even before parturition, to bind her child, may not be inadmissible in poetry for the case of an earthly parent. But the Leto of Homer, though her position is venerable, stands far beneath his Apollo, and could not have been represented as taking such an oath. It is a clumsy, dislocated imi- tation of the oath obtained by Here from Zeus before the birth of Heracles, in II. xix. 106-13. XV. Verses 90, 91. ArjTu> S' ivvfjfidp T€ Koi ivvin vvktos aeXTTTois wdiveacn nenapro. This is wholly at variance with the ideas of Homer, who reflects upon the divine life whatever is joyful and splendid in the human, but not the pains and infirmities of our nature. XVI. Verses 91 — 93. 6f(u S earav €vhn6i nacrai, orrcrai apLarm taai, Aicavri re 'Pdrj re IXvaiT] re 0e/ity Kni dyi'iaTOfos 'ApcpiTpiTt]. The human conception of humanity in its weakness HOMER AND THE HYMNS. IO9 is here carried on, and the assembly of goddesses at the hour of Leto's labour, is in all ways incongruous. First, Homer would not conceive of her as requiring their aid. Secondly, they find themselves unable to give any. Thirdly, they are assorted in a manner quite impossible for Homer. These are rather senior and matronly than principal goddesses, and the one really great goddess, Athene, is (perhaps on that account) not mentioned. Further, there is in Homer no such class or body of goddesses as is here introduced. Only two of them, Dione and Themis, belong to the Olumpos of the Poet ; that is, to his Olympian Court, in which alone we are to look fpr the greater deities. Rhea, twice mentioned in the Iliad (xiv. 203, and xv. 187), is associated with Kronos, who takes no part in divine government, and is confined to the Under- world. Am- phitrite appears in the Odyssey only as an elemental power, scarcely if at all distinguishable from the water itself, has no separate attribute or action, no sign of life except in two doubtful epithets (see inf. p. 236). And, moreover, she is nowhere found except in the Outer or foreign geographic zone (Od. iii. 91 ; v. 422 ; xiv. 60, 97). Again, the epithet 'Ixmi?;, tracker of crime, or detective, does not belong to the Homeric idea of Themis as in II. xx. 4, or Od. ii. 6^. 8 no TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. For another reason we cannot suppose these verses to have proceeded from Homer ; namely, that with him Demeter, though not a goddess of the first order, is a matron, and is more prominent than Dione, and perhaps than Themis. She could not, therefore, have failed to be named at a meeting of chief goddesses in which they were included and named. The Homeric Nereus remains always at the bottom of the sea, and it would be alien from his manner to represent Amphitrite (if she could act at all) thus in action upon earth. Still worse, to call Rhea, and her, tenants of the Olympian Palaces (v. in). Fourthly, Homer could not have described these deities as the highest, considering what is the grand figure of his Athene. XVII. Verses 96, 97. fiovvT] S' ovK iTr(7rv(TTo ixoyocTTOKOS 'ElXeldvia' TjCTTO yap aKpo) 'OXu/iTTco i^Tro ■)(^pvcrf.oicn vecfxcrcriv. We have no notice, in the true Homer, of Eilithuia as a member of the Olympian Court, or as a dweller upon the Mountain. XVIII. Verse loi. At S' '\pii> TrpovTTfpyp'av (VKTipevrjs djro vqcrov. (i) Iris is always present in the Olympian Court. HOMER AND THE HYMNS. Ill (2) She is at the disposal of no deity except either Zeus or Here, least of all could she be employed by personages like Amphitrite, when she would not even sit down to banquet with the Winds (II. xxiii. 198-213). (3) Being in a special relation to Here, she would not have been represented by Homer as made available in an intrigue against her (v. 104). (4) The idea of recom- pense to Iris for carrying a message is wholly foreign to the modes of the Homeric Theurgy. Probably the idea of this bribe is copied from the gift of Here to Hupnos ^ in II. xiv. 238. But Hupnos stands in no sort of special relation to Zeus personally. Matthiae considers that this employment of Iris es- tablishes the great antiquity of the Poem, and that in later compositions Hermes was substituted as the messenger of the gods. Evidently he had in his mind the supposed distinction in this respect between the Iliad and the Odyssey. But (i) this distinction is not sustained by the facts, for both Hermes (II. xxiv. 333) and Themis (II. xx. 4) are employed as messengers in the Iliad. (2) Iris is never employed in the Iliad as messenger by the gods collectively, or by any body of them. - I may notice in this place that I have placed the mark of a long syllable over the u in several Greek words, without reference to the quantity of the vowel in that language, and simply in order to prevent the use of the short English u (as in hut), for the sake of euphony. TI2 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. XIX. Verse 112. Tji 8' apa 6v[j.6v fTt(id(v fv\, (TTrjOeacri ^iXotcri. Eilithuia is simply an agent or secondary of Here ; see II. xix. 119. To represent her therefore as taking part in the intrigue against her, is still more against the mind of Homer than a like treatment of Iris. XX. Verses 120 — 122. ev6a ere, rjie v(s 'laoi/e? rjfpiOovTai, k.t.\. 1. This special addiction to a particular place is not in conformity with any Homeric conception in the Poems. 2. The place, which, according to Homer, would have the first claim on the god, would be his famous Delphian temple at Putho (II. ix, 404, Od. xi. 581). 3. The expression which places delight in the divine rjTop materialises too much, if not for a deity, yet for one such as Apollo. 4. The assemblage of lonians in his honour is per- fectly in keeping with the time when, in a nart of Asia Minor, these had become the representatives of the Hellenic name, but in Homer their part is altogether subordinate, and they have no special relation whatever to the god. 5. The epithet eAK€)(trcoi'es is in Homer a somewhat Il6 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. disparaging epithet ; and its introduction here looks like the proceeding of a mere copyist who introduces it in a laudatory Hymn. XXVI. Verse 162. Kpffi^aXiaaTiiv. This use of castanets, or something of the sort, and indeed the whole idea of this song or song-dance of women without men, is foreign to Homer. Having thus impeached in detail no less than twenty- six passages, found within only one hundred and thirty- nine lines, I will speak more generally of the closing passages of the Hymn. I observe especially in w. 140-164 a curious feebleness of style, and on the other hand such a crowded appropriation of marked Homeric phrase as could not have been due to Homer, and as almost assumes the character of a ce/ito. At the same time, I do not find in this portion of the Hymn that incessant and sharp shock of discrepancy which is felt in reading the earlier and larger portion. I rather lean to the opinion, which Ilgen (on verse 140) ascribes to Matthiae while rejecting it, that we have here the work of a hand, not Homer's, but different from that of the preceding part of the Hymn ; and the work of a hand which is adapted to the ordinary Delian anniversary. HOMER AND THE HYMNS. I 17 One more word on the principal portion of the Hymn (vv. i-i 63). Independently of special criticisms, Matthi^e (Proleg. p. 20) has observed that the whole subject-matter of the wanderings of Leto and the birth of Apollo in Delos are foreign to the two great Poems, and that the re- ference to Delos in Od. vi. by no means attaches to it any special honour or tradition. When we consider how largely Apollo figures in the Iliad, and with how many characteristic epithets, it seems probable that we should have found some title or circumstance con- necting him specially with Delos, if the Poet had been av\'are of this report of a local birth, which seems to mc to be an incident beneath his conception of the god. Some local relation is implied in II. v. 105 and xvi. 514, but it is to the Lukian people. Some may favour, as an hypothesis, the conception of local birth in the word XvKr]yivr)s (II. iv. loi, 119); but if it Lc co, this 13 an absolute contradiction to the Delian story, and of itself disproves the Homeric authorship of the Hymn \ * My friend Mr. J. A. Godley, observing the constantly recurring pin^e at the end of the line in the entire Hymn to Apollo, and its monotonous effect, counted the lines with and without pause throughout, and found only 132 lines without pause out of 545. But in two portions of Homer taken at random (II. ix. 430-713 and Od. xii. 1-293) he found 200 out of f 76 : or 35 per cent, instead of 24 per cent. Il8 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Nor can I close the examination without reserving a title, belonging, I think, to every reader, to impugn the Homeric authorship of the Hymn upon grounds wider than those of any particular discrepancies. For there is surely not a single passage in it, except the passage relating to the blind bard of Chios, which the author of the Iliad and Odyssey could have composed without so broad a departure from his well-marked character of composition, and such an immense descent from his general level, as at once to bring about, or at least suggest repudiation. Part II. CHAPTER I. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. The next portion of my task is to investigate the relation of certain names, which appear upon the Egyptian records in connection with specified events, to those same names as they stand in the Homeric Poems ; and the consequences which arise from the estabhshment of such relation. The heads of evidence may be arranged as follows : — I. The Dardanian link. IL The Achaian link. III. The link of Egyptian Thebes. IV. The Sidonian link. V. The Legend of Memnon, and the Keteians or Khitians of the Eleventh Odyssey. VI. The Legend of the Pseudodysseus ; and the voyage of the Ship Argo. 122 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. VII. Homer and Sesostris, or Rameses II. VIII. Computations founded on the Foregoing Sections. In approaching this department of the inquiry, we should, I think, as far as possible lay aside all Homeric and anti-Homeric prepossessions. For my own part, I now take the Poems simply as facts, and I ask nothing vi limine from such as follow Bentley, or Wolf, or Lachmann, or Nitszch, or Grote, or Paley ; though I may retain in the background my own belief that the results of all investigation truly historical will have their bearings, in various degrees and forms, on the respective theories of those learned men. I. — The Dardanian Link. The Dardanian name in the Iliad is the oldest of all those names, found in the Poems, which are linked by a distinct genealogy with the epoch of the action. I enter into no question concerning such names as laon ^ or lapetos". I pass by, for the present, the case of the Tekkera, whom some associate with Teucri. The Teu- crian is nowhere connected in Homer with Troy, its rulers, or its people. But Virgil in using it rests without doubt on some sort of tradition, be its value great or small ; ' II. xiii. 685. « U. viii. 479. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 23 and Apollodoros tells us that Teucer, son of Scamander and of an Idaian Nymph, ruled the country, and gave his daughter to Dardanos ^ in marriage. Nor do I attempt to examine the case of the name Havanu, found in the Inscriptions of the Eleventh Egyptian Dynasty, on account of the great uncertainty still attaching to the Chronology of, and before, the time of the Shepherd Kings. Hector, Paris, and Aineias are, according to the Iliad, in the seventh generation from Dardanos '. They each individually may be taken as men of mature age. Dardanos at a corresponding age may thus be taken roughly to belong to a point in time about 180 years before the War of Troy. He founded the city of Dardania, situated upon the lowest slopes of Ida. And he was the son of Zeus ; that is, in legendary language, as I apprehend, there being no mother or incident of the legendary phrase, he was the first recorded king and first recognised settler of the country. The Poem expressly states that he gave his name to the city. He also gave his name to the inhabitants; who in the seventh generation are still called Dardanioi. And this adjective is used in the feminine plural with respect to the Dardanian * ApoUod. iii. 12, i. Ml. xx. 215-40. 124 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Gates ^ ; those gates which faced the hills and probably the South, while the Skaian Gate was on the Western side of the city, towards the Scamander, and faced South-west. As the name extended also to the people, everything seems to show that this Eponumos, or Name- founder, left a deep mark. The Dardanians appear in the Catalogue^ as a separate contingent, under their own name, while the other dwellers on the roots of Ida are classed as Troosl Under the supremacy of Troy and of Priam, Anchises, their king, seems to have been a sub-sovereign ; and the famous prophecy of Poseidon, in II. XX. 307, imports not the rebuilding of Ilios, but the continuance of the Dardanian Dynasty, and the resumption of their authority over Troas. This is stated in so many words ; Tpweo-aty ava^^i. And it is generally admitted and alleged that Homer must himself have witnessed the fulfilment of the pro- phecy. The word Dardanides stands for Dardanian women, expressly distinct from the Trojan women*. So does Dardaniones^ for the men. Though the Trojan name covers the whole force in the general descriptions, the Dardans or Dardanians are always separate in the vocative addresses of the Chieftains, which are directed ' II. ii. 819; II. V. 789; XX. 694 and 413. ^ II. ii. 819. ' II. ii. 824-6. * II. xviii. 122, 334. ' II. vii. 414; viii. 154. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 25 either to ' Trojans, Dardans, and allies ',' or to ' Trojans, Lukians, and Dardans fighting hand to handV We have also two cases of Dardan warriors mentioned as such in the singular. Again, though it is rare in Homer to give a patronymic from a remote ancestor, yet Priam, and he only of contemporary personages, is many times called Dardanidesl And, lastly we learn, from the mouth of Poseidon, that Dardanos was more loved by Zeus than any other of his mortal children \ It appears probable, from the genealogical narration, that there were inhabitants in Troas before Dardanos. The Poet does not say the country was desert, but that Dardanos founded Dardanii when or because there was no city constituted in the plain, i.e. no combined and inclosed settlement, having a regular character and a government : — em ovTTco l\ios ipr) fv TTfOico TTfTToXiCTTO, 7:6\is fxfponcjv dvOpcuTToov ^ . Nor can there, I think, be reason to doubt, con- sidering the tenacious vitality, as we have seen it, of the name, that under Dardanos, and after his date, the whole of the inhabitants of the Troad, which Homer usually calls by the name of Troie, were known as Dardanians. Perhaps a conjecture might be hazarded ' II iii. 456, ei al. - II. viii. 173, et al.; II. ii. 701 ; xvi. 207. ^ II. iii. 303, and in six other places. * II. xx. 304. * II. xx. 216. 126 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. that the name poHtically revived after the destruction of Troy, and subsisted at least until the site had been reoccupied from Thrace or elsewhere : but this is little material, as Egyptology appears to afford no evidence which can be brought down so low in point of date. The succession of the family was as follows : — 1. Dardanos. 2. Erichthonios. 3. Tros ; who is called Tpcoecraiv ava^. 4. Ilos, Assarakos, and Ganumedes. 5. Laomedon, son of Ilos : Kapus, son of Assarakos. 6. Priam and others, sons of Laomedon, Anchises, son of Kapus. 7. Hector, son of Priam. Aineias, son of Anchises. 8. Astuanax, son of Hector. (Children of Aineias \) With his usual care or instinct for historic details of real weight, the Poet has here marked for us the period when the Trojan name emerged ; namely, under Tros. The building of the City in the plain was with- out doubt due to his son Ilos. But the name derived from him to the capital did not displace the name Troes, which, doubtless with that of Troie for the country, either had already become, or was becoming, the proper designation of the inhabitants. And we ' II XX 215-40. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 27 may perhaps consider that the existence of his tomb as a landmark on the plain, the cr^jua "IXov \ contributes another piece of testimony to the great importance of this sovereign in the annals of the country. Thus then it appears that the inhabitants of the north-west angle of Asia Minor, between Ida and the sea, were, for not less than two generations, that is to say, for a period of sixty years, more or less, known as Dardanians ; and were afterwards known as Trojans. Turning now to the Egyptian records, we find that, as they have now been interpreted by French in- quirers, they place the commencement of the Nine- teenth Dynasty about 1462 B.C. ; and the accession of Rameses the Second, the Sesostris of the Greeks (Sestesou-Ra or Sesou-Ra in certain of his Egyptian names), somewhere near the year 1410 B. C, In the fourth year of his reign, or about 1406 B. C, the formid- able people called Khita, of the Valley of the Orontes, the same in race with the Hittites of the Old Testa- ment, organised a powerful confederacy against him, encouraged by the troubles which he had to meet, on his accession to the throne, from the southward. This combination, besides the Asiatic nations of Armenia and the Assyrian plain, embraced the peoples of Asia Minor : of whom are enumerated (as the names are * II. X. 415 ; xi. 166, 372. 128 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. read by some) the Mysians, the Lycians, the Pisidians, and the Dardanians. As Lauth reads them, we have the 'lord of Luka' (Lukioi) and the lord of Dardani (Dardanoi) named in the War-inscription. There is also Chirabu, which may be Chalubes (II. ii. 857); and on another papyrus Pidasu (in the Pentaur Patasu), probably Pedasos^ The Pentaur also gives Maausu = Musoi. It is not necessary to pursue the history of the prolonged struggle, which ended some fifteen years afterwards in an accommodation recog- nising the independence of the Khita, and appearing to deal with them on terms of equality and reciprocity. But we have now a clear datum in time for Dardania, subject only to whatever questions may be raised on the chronology of the middle Egyptian dynasties. The year 1406^, approximately fixed, would seem to have been within the sixty years or thereabouts, when the inhabitants of Troas were known by the name of Dardanians. That is to say, the settlement of Dardania was probably founded between 1466 and 1406 B. C. And the overthrow of Troy, on the same basis of computation, would probably fall between 1286 and 1226 B. c. * Lauth, Horn, und ^gypten, p. 31. - F. I^enormant, Hist. Anc. de TOrient, Book iii. ch. iii. sect. v. Chabas, Etudes sur I'Antiquite Historique, ch. iv. p. 185. De Rouge, Memoire sur les attaques dirigees contre I'Egypte, p. 4. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 129 If, however, we are to read the Inscription as meaning that these Dardanians were Dardanians of IHos, as appears to be held by a writer of authority \ a new and rather important element is introduced, and we at once reach the time of King Ilos. We must then suppose that the rivalry of the Dardan and Trojan names for territorial supremacy had lasted for one generation longer ; and the combination against Ra- meses II thus operates with a corresponding difference on the date of the foundation of Dardania. For as Ilios was not founded until some ninety years, more or less, after Dardanos, it follows that if the name of that city was known in 1406 B. C, the epoch of Dardanos is thrown back to 1496 B.C. at the latest ; and farther, according to the number of years for which we suppose Ilios to have been founded before 1406 B.C. Thus the epoch of the Troica is thrown back at least to about 1316 B.C. As the Dardanian name must, when Ilios was once founded, have been an expiring one, we need not make any considerable addition to this high number of years. According, then, to this piece of evidence, the over- throw of Troy might have been as late as 1226 B.C., or as early as about 1316 B.C. * See Mons. F. Lenormant, Academy, No. 98, p. 315 : March 21, 1874. 130 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. II.— The Achaian link. Early in the present century, Damm observed, in his ' Lexicon Homericum,' that the Achaian name, while it was a name of the Greeks in general, had a special sense also, denoting the nobiles ct priiicipes Grcecortim ^ Thucydides ^, in his Prefatory Chapters, refers to the three great Homeric Appellatives — the Danaan, Argeian, and Achaian ; and perhaps he in- tends, by the order in which he thus places them, to indicate the order of time in which their several origins ought to stand. Endeavouring to ascertain the scope and significance of this name from the text of the Poems, I found abundant evidence to sustain the opinion of Damm that the Achaian name frequently leans towards desig- nating the chiefs in particular, and likewise the opinion, which Thucydides may have meant to indicate, that it is the youngest of the three designations. But I was also led on to two further propositions, which appear to me hardly deniable : — I. That the Achaian name was the proper national name, for that epoch, of the people who captured Troy, and who were afterwards called by the Romans, and by the moderns, Greeks ; but by themselves Hellenes. ^ Damm in voc. 'hxatoi. ^ Thuc. i. 3. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. I3I 2. That the date, at which this name thus became the proper designation of the nation, is approximately shown by the Poems. For the first of these propositions, I would appeal, not without confidence, to the simple and homely test of commonness of use. The Achaian name is used more than three times as often as the Argeian name, more than four times as often as the Danaan, almost exactly twice as often as both put together. In an age when prose and poetry exist as distinct kinds of com- position, it would be unsafe to draw an inference from the predominant use in a poem of a name which might be peculiarly a poetical name ; but it appears to me that ^ at a period when Poem and Chronicle were one, or rather perhaps when there was no Chronicle but Poem, such a prevalence of use, as I have shown, of itself establishes the proposition. And it is confirmed by that leaning of the phrase to the ruling class — the kings, chiefs, and nobles — which might if needful be shown from a score and more of passages. Three of these, lying within a very short compass indeed, may be found, by way of example, in II. ix. 370, 391, 395. Nor is it difficult to allow that, as the name does not point to a particular individual, or a particular mode ^ This question is copiously, and I think in the main soundly, argued in Studies on Homer, vol. i. pp. 402, sej.\ also Juventus Mundi, pp. 60, ieq. 132 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. of life or other speciality, political predominance was probably the cause which gave it this general currency. But then arises the question — Can we show, from the Poems, that there had been a time when the Greeks had not yet come to be called Achaians ? Now this can be shown, both by negative and by positive evidence, from the text of the Poems ; and it is necessary that this should be done at the outset, in order to establish a connexion with any given point of Egyptian chronology. For if the Achaian name had prevailed in the Greek Peninsula from an immemorial antiquity, the fact of its being used in the Egyptian ^ records would furnish no bond of chronological relation with the War of Troy ^. It is needful to establish the limit on both sides. First, then, the Achaians, although standing for the nation generally, were also still, at the time of the War, a special race in Greece. They are distinguished, among the inhabitants of Crete, from the Dorians, and from the Pelasgians. In the Catalogue, the Achaian name is especially given (i) to the inhabitants of Aigina and of Mases ; (2) to the contingent of Achilles^. Again, in the Eleventh Book, Nestor relates a local war which took place in his youth, and in it he once calls the Pulians Achaians, but the men of Elis always Eleians * OJ. xix. 175-7. ^ II- "• 562; 684. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. I33 and Epeians \ True, it is only once : but we have to remember that the narrative is given in the first person, and he has used the name of Puh'ans no more than four times in the whole of it. The use of the word Panachaioi in like manner proves that originally the Achaianswere but a part of the whole which it had come to embrace, and that the local and special sense was not yet entirely absorbed. Now, none of the above-named indications carry the Achaian name back beyond fifty or sixty years. The Legend of Nestor cannot date more than half a century back. The family of Achilles, whose subjects are con- nected with the special references in the Catalogue to the Achaian name, goes back only for two generations to Aiakos, his grandfather. When, in the Nineteenth Iliad, Here is introduced, speaking of the time just before the birth of Eurustheus, she calls the inhabitants over whom he was to rule not Achaians, but Argeians ^. This may be considered as about eighty years before the War. The legend of Bellerophon would give to Proitos a date slightly more remote. And it is said that Proitos had the power to banish Bellerophon, because he was paramount among the Argeians ^. When, however, we come down to the time of Tudeus, whose dominion was in Argolis and part of the country ' II. xi. 759. '^ II. xix. 122. ^ II. vi. 152. 134 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. over which Proitos had reigned, then we find the force which Tudeus led against Thebes described (Ihad iv. 384, and V. 803) as Achaian, and thus distinguished from the inhabitants of Thebes, who are in both narra- tives called Kadmeioi and Kadmeiones. I submit, therefore, that, according to the testimony, afforded by the text of Homer with a perfect self- consistency, the Achaian name had come to be the prevailing or national designation of the Greeks at the period of the War, but that it could not properly have been used to designate the inhabitants of Greece at any period more than fifty or sixty years before the War. Indeed the evidence might almost suggest the belief that it had still more recently come into vogue as the national name, and perhaps that it was the War itself that fully established and confirmed it in that sense. But now arises another question, which the Poems cannot answer for us ; how long after their date did the Achaian name continue to hold the same position ? The blankness and vagueness of Greek tradition in general, between the time of the Poet and the historic epoch, preclude any exact reply. But we know enough to warrant the assertion that Greece was greatly dis- organised by the incidents of its victorious war with Troy ; that the Pelopid dynasty was wounded in the person and family of its head ; that a great Dorian HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 35 invasion, within no long period after the War, altered the face of the country, and limited the range of the Achaian name to a narrow and local strip of coast. And it may also be said that the Achaian name, as a national name, has no place in the literature of Greece subsequent to Homer. It is used once only by Hesiod\ and that in a retrospective passage which refers to the Troic expedition assembled at Aulis. The Hellenic name in fact takes the place of the Achaian. It revives, indeed, with the tragedians to some extent, but of course only as contemporary with certain persons and events of their dramas, where they may be supposed to speak of Achaians, as we speak of Britons, as the inhabitants, and of Albion as the name, of our country. If then I have succeeded in fixing, with reasonable though not absolute certainty, the rise of the Achaian name as an event which happened within half a cen- tury, more or less, before the War of Troy, it may upon grounds more general, but perhaps not less trust- worthy, be alleged that its decline rapidly followed upon the War : that it could not have been known as the national name of the Greeks after the Dorian invasion, wlMch is affirmed by Thucydides '^, and is generally taken * Hesiod, tp-^a, 269. ^ Thucyd. i. 1 2. Clinton, Fasti Hellenici, i. 106, seqq. 136 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. to have occurred at a period of 80 years after the fall of Troy ; and that it is quite possible that, even before that event, it may have been superseded by the name of Hellenes, which was evidently rising above the horizon, so to speak, and beginning to come into use at the epoch of the Poems, and which appears to have obtained such currency before the great Revolution effected by the Heraclids, that the Dorian appellation itself never supplanted or made head against it as the national name. In other words, the Achaian name appears to have had a currency which cannot have exceeded 140 years, and which very possibly fell below 100 years ; in no case reaching below the period when it was driven - into an insignificant corner of the Peloponnesos, or at any rate entirely lost its national character. It must be added that, as far as the evidence goes, it came suddenly or rapidly to its supremacy. We cannot find that it rested as a local name like the Graian or the Dorian names, in particular places, for a length of time before it grew in the one case to be national, in the other to prevail over a large number of the various states of Greece. All the uses of it by Homer for periods anterior to the War are almost certainly local, because Achaians are distinguished from Cadmeians, and again from Epeians. The probable HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 37 supposition is that the great national effort of the War itself Hfted it into its clearest and fullest predominance ; and that we ought to place the commencement of its reign somewhat near that epoch, but its first emerging into more than local note at a time earlier by nearly two generations. If now we turn to the records opened by Egyptology', we find that at some point of time within the limits of the term described, soldiers of a nation bearing the Achaian name, and coming from the northward, were placed in sharp collision with that Empire, by taking part in an invasion of the country. Under Thothmes III, whose reign is computed to have extended over the first half of the i6th century B.C. (or 1600-1550), the power of the great Egyptian Empire reached its climax. He first established a maritime supremacy northwards, by means of a fleet in the Mediterranean. In all likelihood this is the change which had come down by report {aKofj) to Thu- cydides" as the act of Minos. But even that report, vague as it was, embodied this essential element, that he constituted also a dominion on land by placing his own sons as governors in the places he conquered, which, if we construe with the Scholiast, embraced ' F. Lenormant, Hist. Ancienne de I'Orient, Book iii. chap. iii. sec. 2. - Thucydides, i. 4. 138 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. most of the population of Greece. These sons were Avithout doubt so-called as being the officers and re- presentatives of the Empire thus established. In my opinion they were probably those, in whole or in part, of whom we hear in the Poems as the Aiolidai or descendants of Aiolos : for Aiolos is a characteristic, and probably a typical, name closely connected with the East, and with those through whom the East became known to Greece, that is to say, with the actual agents, almost certainly Phoenician, by whose locomotive energy this maritime supremacy was made effective. It should be observed that the Minos of Homer stands at two generations and a half before the war : and the events, be they what they may, which we are to suppose as underlying the statement respecting the establishment of his sons, would precede, but only by a little, the predominance of the Achaian name. From an inscrip- tion at Karnak, where Ammon, the supreme God of Thebes, is supposed to speak, I quote a few words : — ' I came, I suffered thee to smite the inhabitants of the isles ; those who dwell in the midst of the sea are reached by thy roaring . . . The isles of Greece are in thy power \ I permitted thee to smite the farthest bounds of the sea.' ' ' All pouvrir de tes esprits." I translate the French of M. de Roug^. See Lenormant, i. 386. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 139 The inscription then records that the Southern Isles of the Archipelago were subdued, together with a great extent of the Coasts of Greece. So, then, we learn that the inhabitants of the Greek Peninsula and Isles had once been subject to this great Empire at the zenith of its power, under the Eighteenth Dynasty. We need, therefore, feel no surprise if in the days of its decline we find them, or some of them, like the Hittites, the Libyans, and others, endeavour- ing to avenge or compensate themselves for the past, or to seek wealth for the present or security for the future, by assailing the coasts of Egypt. Under the Nineteenth Dynasty, while the aggressive energy of the Egyptian Empire had on the whole been paralyzed, its maritime supremacy had passed away. We hear of Seti, the father of Rameses II, that he reconstituted the Egyptian fleet of the Red Sea, but there is no similar statement as to the northern waters'. Rameses II, as we have seen, had had to encounter a formidable combination in the northern and north- western quarters of Asia. Under his son, Merepthah, a new danger arose from a new quarter. Libya appears now to have been possessed, at least in part, by an Aryan or Japhetic population. This people, whatever its ethnical classification, entered with others into a ^ Lenormant, Manuel d'Hist., vol. i. p. 402. 140 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. new and powerful coalition against Merepthah. I take the account of the inscription as it is to be found in the works of Viscomte de Rouge, Mons. F. Lenormant, and M. Chabas^; and though I speak in ignorance of the art of Egyptian interpretation, I understand through Dr. Birch, of the British Museum, and from the agree- ment of these authors, that there is no apparent dif- ference among the authorities as to the reading of the monumental inscription at Karnak in the more important particulars. Some four years ago, Professor Rawlinson in the Contemporary Review''- stated his objections to parts of the interpretation of this Inscription, and declined to accept its authority as a whole. He observed justly, that Achaians and Laconians had no intercourse, even in the time of Homer, with Sikels and Sardinians, and knew nothing of any foreign ships in Greek waters, except those of the Phoenicians. It is not necessary for my purpose to determine anything with respect to the races farther west 'than the Greek Peninsula, as to their local seats at the time, or otherwise. There is ' F. Lenormant in The Academy of March 28, 1874. Also his Manual de I'Histoire, vol. i. p. 429; and Premieres Civilizations, vol. i. p. 429; De Kougo, Extraits d'un memoire sur les attaques dirigues contre I'Egypte par les peuples de la Mediterranee vers le xiv"* Siecle avant notre era, p. 6 seqq. P. Smith, Anc. Hist, of the East, p. 105. Chabas, Etudes sur Antiquite Ilistorique, pp. 187-98. * Contemporary Review, April, 1870. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 141 no improbability or difficulty in the main tenour of the inscription, which shows that the invasion was princi- pally continental ; or in that portion of it, which points out Achaians, and perhaps other Greeks, as forming an auxiliary force. We are told, then, that in the reign of Merepthah, together with the Lebu or Libyans, were in arms the Shardana or Sardones (whether yet planted in Sardinia or not is little material) and some other tribes called Mashuash (the Maxyes ^), and Kahuka. There were also the Achaiusha or Achaians, and with them were the Leku or Laconians (or, less probably, Peloponnesian Lukians or Lycians). There were likewise the Turska, who are interpreted to be Tyrrhenians ; and the She- kulsha or Siculi. According to M. de Rouge's reading ", the Tyrrhenians took the initiative ; and brought more- over their families, with an evident view to settlement in the country. But this is contested by M. Chabas ', apparently with reason. At any rate it appears in- contestable, from the comparative smallness of their losses in action, that this people were in small numbers. The invasion was by the North-Western frontier. It produced the utmost alarm in Egypt. According to the monuments, the sufferings inflicted were such as had * Herodotus, iv. 191. ^ De Rouge, p. 209. ^ Chabas, Etudes sur I'Antiquite Historique, pp. 198-200. 10 142 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. not been known since the evil times of the Shepherd Kings : ' The days and the months pass, and they abide on the ground.' They went beyond Memphis, and reached the town of Paari, or Paarisheps, in middle Egypt. Here they were defeated in a great and de- cisive battle, which lasted for six hours. Nearly fifteen thousand were slain, of the Libyans, Maxyes, and Kahuka ; about looo Tyrrhenians and Sikels : the losses of the Sardones, and of the Achaians and Laco- nians, are not known, as that portion of the record is destroyed. The hands of the Achaian dead and those of the other non-African tribes, and another portion of the bodies of the Libyans and Maxyes, were brought back, either as trophies, or by way of account'. There were 9376 prisoners. While the remainder of the in- vading army fled the country, the Libyans treated for peace. But a portion of those who had in a manner planted themselves in the Delta, principally Mashuash or Maxyes, were confirmed in the possession of their lands, and became Egyptian subjects. This invasion took place near the commencement of the reign of Merepthah". His accession is placed by the French authorities at about A.D. 1350, and we * De Rouge, p. 6. ^ M. de Rouge also states, that according to the Inscription these Achaians did not include the Inhabitants of the Isles ; and he thinks they were confined to the Peloponnesos. — De Rouge, Extraits, &c., p. 28. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 43 may perhaps roughly assume 1345 B.C. as the date. Therefore the year 1345 B.C. may be taken as falHng within the term which, as we have seen, may reasonably be stated at about or possibly under 100 years, of the historic life of the Achaian name as the virtual equiva- lent for the Greek nation. That term, then, can hardly have begun earlier than 1345 B.C., and cannot, according to the criterion now applied, have ended later than 1245 B.C. But if the period of ^ay) 100 years subdivides itself, as may be the case, into what may be taken as two moieties ; the first when it was still in some degree a gentile or local name, the second when it was na- tional ; to which of these significations does the use of the name under Merepthah probably belong ? I answer, in all likelihood, to the earlier ; because the Greeks who take part in it are described as Achaians and Laconians. If, instead of Laconians, we were to read Lukians, viz., those connected with the Lucaonian tradition of the Peloponnesos, it would not affect the argument, which is that the Achaian name does not cover the whole Peninsula, or even the whole Peloponnesos : the Laconians, according to the Karnak monument, being Peloponnesians, were not at the time fully included in the designation of Achaians. Still *" this appears to be the leading name of the expeditioiij 144 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. as well as the more certain of the two, so far as Greece is concerned. Returning to the figures under this narrower speci- fication, the Invasion we speak of was probably at a date within some fifty or sixty years before the War of Troy. If so, we should have 1345 B.C. for the higher limit of the war (which could not have coincided with the invasion), and 1285 B.C. for the latest. Carried thus far, the statement and argument may rest on their own ground. But it is a notable fact, that the Egyptian records, which supply evidence of the prevalence of the Achaian name under Merepthah, at a later date also supply evidence, as does the Greek literature, that it had ceased to prevail. To that evi- dence we will now proceed. Rameses III belongs to the Twentieth Dynasty ; and he is reckoned as the last among those sovereigns of the ancient Egyptian monarchy who were distinguished by personal greatness. His function was, like that of several preceding monarchs, not to enlarge but to defend the Empire. His accession is fixed, through a date astrono- mically calculated by M. Biot, to the year 131 1 B.C., and from this time onwards we are assured that the Egyptian chronology attains almost to an absolute trustworthiness ^ ' F. Lenormant, Premieres Civilizations, vol. i. pp. 221-3. Hist. An- cienne, vol. i. pp. 443, 444. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 45 In his fifth year, or 1 306 B.C., the White (or Aryan) Libyans again invaded Egypt. A simultaneous but independent attack was made from the North and East. The Maxyes of the Delta revolted '. From beyond the continent the leading nations of the enemy were 'the Pelesta of the Mid Sea,' interpreted as meaning the Pelasgians of Crete, and the Tekkri, or the Teucrians ; who, again, are assumed to have suc- ceeded the Trojans in Troas. These Pelesta^ M. Lenormant understands to be the ancestors of the Philistines, a question beside my purpose. They entered Syria by land. Their ships, with those of the Tekkra and Shekulsha, assailed the coast, while the Daanau, the Tursha, and the Uashasha, supplied land forces only. Rameses III, having defeated the land invasion, also mastered his naval enemies by means of a Phoenician fleet. It seems difficult to dispute that these Pelesta 'of the mid sea ' were probably Cretan ; or that the Daanau represent the same people who in the war of Merepthah appear as Achaians. The point material to the present inquiry is that, if the Daanau are Greeks of the main- land, that is to say, Danaoi, or Danaans, the Achaian name had now, forty years after the War of Merep- ^ Chabas, p. 227. * F. Lenormant, in The Academy of March 22, 1874. 146 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. thah, SO far lost its currency that it no longer ade- quately represented the nation to the foreign ear. We may, however, stay for a moment to enquire whether these Daanau were really Greeks of the main- land. There is, I admit, an objection to the supposi- tion on more than one ground. First, I have argued, in conformity with Greek tradition, and with what seems to me the clear indication of the Homeric text, that the Danaan name, as a national name, was cer- tainly older, not younger, than the Achaian^ Secondly, the Achaian and the later Greeks were alike, and increasingly with time, a maritime people. Again the account (from the Harris /<7/jf;'?/j- of the British Museum) represents the Tekkra and Pelesta as supplying the aggressive fleet ; but both Trojans and Pelasgians are in Homer wholly without any sign of maritime habits ; a remarkable fact in the case of the Trojans, because they inhabited a country with a long line of sea-coast. But when we consider that the Egyptians carried on the maritime war through the Phoenicians, it seems that we can hardly rely upon as much accuracy of detail as in the records of a land warfare conducted by themselves. On the other hand, if the Achaian name had gone out of use, and no other was yet fully established, the Danaan name was a most natural one ^ Studies on Homer, vol. i. and Juventus Mundi, pp. 42-4. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 147 for Phoenicians to give to Greeks. For, as I have endeavoured to show ^, there is every reason to beHeve that the Danaan immigration into Greece came from Phoenicia, or from Egypt through Phoenicia ; and it was also an immigration into Peloponnesos. Or again, if, as has long been popularly assumed, it was from Egypt, the ascription of the name to the nation by the Egyptians is natural, even if it had gone out of use in the Peloponnesos itself. The Achaians, then, of Merepthah's reign probably are the Danaans of the reign of Rameses III. But the Achaian power predominated in the Peloponnesos till the return of the Heraclids. Reasoning from this fact alone, we might be inclined to argue that the Danaan name was not likely to have been employed until about eighty years after the fall of Troy ; and if so, that event must have occurred as far back as 1386 B.C. But the disorganization of the Peloponnesos caused by the Trojan War may, though we cannot say must, have caused the title of Achaians to descend from its zenith as rapidly as it had risen. If on this account the Achaian name had lost its lustre, and if the Danaan designation had also been, as is probable that by which the Greeks were known in Phoenicia and Egypt before the Achaian period, there seems to ' Juventus Mundi, p. 137. 148 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. be no reason why even so soon as at ten or twenty years after the war the Danaan title might not again become, for those countries, and for the Egyptian ear, the most proper descriptive title. What appears quite inadmissible is the idea that the period of Achaianism, so to call it, could have come after the time of Rameses III, when the Greeks were called Danaans ; for in that case there would have been not one but two Achaian periods before the Olympiads. On the whole, the presumptions from this part of the Egyptian evidence would place the capture of Troy some time before 1306 B.C. It is, however, possible that the Danaan name, which had its birth from within the Egyptian Empire, might be used in Egypt to describe the Greeks even at the time when they called themselves Achaioi. Too much must not, therefore, be built upon this separate head of the evidence. III. — The Theban link. Even without reference to Egyptian discovery, the references in the Homeric poems to Egyptian Thebes are remarkable. They seemed, however, rather to be brought into question than illustrated by the fact that we also heard of a Thebe in Boiotia, connected with HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 49 the Cadmeian family and with Phcenicia, and of a Thebe of King Eetion, the city of those Kilikes who dwelt near Troas. We are not in a condition duly to connect the three, until we come to know something of the great Egyptian Empire, and of its close relations with the Phoinikes', as their maritime representatives and agents, which must have gone far to identify in contemporary Greek reports what was Egyptian and what was Phoenician. But these passages have acquired a new importance in relation to my present design, from our having learned that the fame and greatness of Egyptian Thebes belong to a particular, though a lengthened, period of the history of the country '\ The old monarchy, before the great invasion of the Shepherd kings, had Memphis for its seat. Thebes is known to have existed under the later dynasties, and also under the Shepherds. But it became the capital of the country only after the expulsion of those invaders by Ahmes, the first sovereign of the Eighteenth dynasty. At this date the principal monuments of the city begin ^ This is indeed the Theban monarchy, a phrase synchro- nous with the full bloom and splendour of Egypt. It ^ See also the conjectures explained in Smith's Anc. Hist, of the East, p. 81. ^ Smith's Anc. Hist, of the East, chap. iv. ^ Ibid., p. 63, 150 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. lasts through this Dynasty of Triumph, and through the Nineteenth Dynasty of Struggle. In the Twentieth, the Dynasty of Decline, the supremacy passes away from Thebes \ which is etymologically the city of the head, or capital ^ According to Mr. P. Smith's chro- nology, this supremacy of Thebes embraces the period (approximately) between B.C. 1530 and B.C. 1100. He adopts in substance the computations of Mr. Poole, and I believe of Sir G. Wilkinson. Mr. Poole thinks the Eighteenth Dynasty began not later than 1525 B.C., and the Nineteenth not later than 1322. The com- putations followed by Lenormant carry us nearly a century further back, for the commencement of the period, but with no great difference towards the close ; and it is on his later dates that my figures have been based. But the substantial proposition which I submit is this: that the references in the Poems to Egyptian Thebes prove that they belong to the period when that city was supreme in Egypt, and was in effect the first city of the known world. The first of them is in II. ix., where Achilles declares that no amount of gift or treasure, which Agamemnon can offer or obtain for him, will induce him to compliance : ' Not if he gave ten times, twenty times what he ofi*ers ; * F. Lenormant, Premieres Civilisations, vol. i. p. 224. = Ibid., p. 23. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 151 not if all he has, or all he might have.' Then he proceeds : — ovK o(T fs 'Op)(o^(v6v TjAoriw'o-trerat, aid' ocra OrjISas AiyvnTias, 061 TrXeiCTTa Bofion eV KTrjfiaTa KelroL, aid' eKaTofinvKoL ftai, BiriKocrioi 8' du fKacrrrjv avepes f^oi)(V(vai aiiv Xmtoicnv Ka\ ox^taffnv^ . The whole passage, as to the gifts of Agamemnon, is in the nature of a climax ; passing from the actual offers to the entire property of the King, the speaker illustrates this transition by referring to Orchemenos, then a wealthy city of the Boiotoi, and from hence, to crown his argument, he moves onwards and up- wards to Thebes of Egypt, as the city which contained the greatest treasures in the world. This is wholly in- applicable and unintelligible, except with regard to the period of the actual supremacy of that Egyptian capital. Next, the Egyptian Thebes is Thebes of the hundred gates. This is not a statistical epithet, more than are those which describe Crete as the land of an hundred ^ or of ninety'*, cities. Nor does the word Hecatombe in Homer literally signify an hundred oxen : in truth, it seems to have become a mere phrase designating a solemn and splendid Sacrifice. But there is little doubt that in the other cases, where Homer was not using a customary phrase, but a poetical expression * II. ix. 381-4. ^ II. ii. 649. 3 Od. xix. 174. 152 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. of his own, he intended to signify a very large or indefinite number. A much smaller number, as I have elsewhere endeavoured to show ^, is indefinitely large for Homer, than for us. There is, then, something singular, and requiring explanation, in this account of a city with a multitude of gates. If we take even the largest walled cities, like Rome, which may have some ten or twelve, it is difficult to conceive how the epithet could be applicable to gates in the ordinary sense. This difficulty seems to have been felt of old, and Diodorus^ explained it as referring to the propulaia of the temples. I have understood that the structural forms within the city to this day exhibit what, existing in large numbers, might very well have passed in rumour as gates of the city, and might have been so represented to and by the Poet. But, besides the primacy of wealth and the number of gates, Homer characterises Thebes of Egypt by a reference to the horse, and what is more, to the horse not as an animal of draught or burden, nor as an animal used for riding, but as driven in the chariots used for war, of which he represents that there were an enormous number, literally twenty thousand, in use at Thebes. That is to say, as to the mode of using the animal, he represents a stage of development in ' Studies on Homer, vol. iii. Aoidos, sect. iii. ^ DIod. Sic. i. 45. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 53 Egypt corresponding with what we know prevailed in the Greece of his day, where the main and characteristic purpose for which horses were used was the traction of the chariot of war, or of princely travel ; another great purpose, that of riding, being altogether secondary and rare, while the use of the horse in agriculture, or for burden, was apparently not yet in view. It is probable that the epithet of klutopolos (famous for horses, or having famous horses), attached to Aidoneus (II. v. 654 et alibi), may be best explained by his correspondence in function with the Egyptian god Osiris. See inf. p. 236. In the text of Homer generally, the horse stands in special relation with the East and with Poseidon. But it also stands in connection with the name of the Phoinikes. As to this name, we must remember that it includes all those foreigners who had intercourse with Greece through ships, and since the Phoenician mariners were the medium of this intercourse as carriers, their name comes to cover what is Eastern generally. This, again, means in a great degree what was Egyptian, in common with what was properly Phoenician. If, then, we ask whether the horse of Plomer was chiefly related, as far as the text informs us, to Phoenicia or to Egypt, there is one strong reason in favour of the last-named country. It is this, that the Phaiakes of Scheria are evidently intended, from their great wealth 154 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. and maritime habits, to present to us a picture of Phoenicians proper ; and that among them there is not the smallest reference to the horse. Now, on turning to the Egyptian records, we find that the horse was not indigenous to Egypt, and was unknown there during the Old Pre-Theban Monarchy. It seems to have been introduced by the Shepherd Kings. But, under the warlike Theban kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, the value of these animals was appreciated. Viewing the connection of the animal with Poseidon, and of Poseidon with Libya, it seems likely that the Egyptian supply may have been derived in part from that quarter. We have actual information that they were obtained from Asia in immense numbers in payment of tribute \ as well as doubtless by com- merce : so that Egypt became a great horse-market", and the horse a characteristic of Egypt. Accordingly, as it was an object of the Mosaic legislation (delivered about the time of Merepthah) to check intercourse with that country, we find it written : — ' But he (the king) shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the intent that he should multiply horses 'l' ^ Chabas, Etudes, p. 441. * Chabas, p. 443. ' Deut. xvii. 16. The ass, not the horse, was the animal of personal use from Moses to David, and is accordingly introduced in the Tenth Com- mandment. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 55 And Solomon, who first in Israel had large numbers of horses, obtained them from Egypt \ Enormous ranges of stabling, we learn from Diodoros", subsisted in Thebes. Thus the reference of Homer to the chariots of Egypt is peculiarly appropriate to Thebes, and to the Theban period. But the want of any mention, excepting perhaps a single case (II. x, 498), of riding concurs with the habitual mention of chariot driving, to give yet more of character to the passage. For the monuments of the Theban kings, which abound in pictures of the horsed chariot, but seldom represent equitation I The use of the animal for agricultural draught also was making a beginning at this period. The horse is called by the name of 'kava,' and it is supposed to be derived from the root represented in the Sanscrit a9va\ Since, then, very personal and characteristic descrip- tion, when found to be also most accurate, is a strong indication of contemporary standing, the passage of the Iliad which we have been considering affords some evidence of the composition of the Poems during the period of the great Theban Dynasties. There remains the passage concerning Thebes from the Odyssey : — * I Kings X. 28. 2 i. 45. 2 Chabas, Etudes, p. 430; F. Lenormant, Prem. Civilisations, i. 307, seq. * F. Lenormant, ibid. p. 322. 156 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. ^vXoi S' apyvpeov rdXapov (f>fpf, tov oi e'BcoKep 'AX»cai/Sp7, UoKvlSoio Sd/xap' 6s tuai ivl Orj^iJi AlyvTTTijjs, 061 TvKeitTTa Sofiois iv KTT]fiaTa Kfirai . It then proceeds to relate how, while presenting this silver work-basket to Helen, Polubos gave to Menelaos two baths of silver, two cauldrons or tripods, and ten talents of gold ; while the wife of Polubos made a set of separate presents to his Queen ; namely, the afore- said basket of silver mounted on wheels, and a golden distaff. This passage both corroborates and enlarges the evidence drawn from that on which we were last en- gaged. The statement that Thebes contained in its dwellings the largest amount of stored wealth, which might have passed for a mere figure in the fervid oratory of Achilles, reappears here in the calm narrative of this Poet as the simple statement of a fact, and pretty clearly exhibits him as contemporary with the greatness of Thebes. But again, Polubos dwelt in Thebes ; it was in Thebes itself that these presents were given. But Thebes is not on the Egyptian coast ; it is removed from it by a distance of from three to four hundred miles- Why did Menelaos, a traveller by sea, penetrate so far inwards ? or, rather, why is he represented as having ' Od. iv. 125-7. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 57 visited Thebes, and as having there received the trophies of Egyptian hospitaHty ? Surely because it was the actual capital of the country. The visit of Menelaos must then be referred to a period not later than the close of the Twentieth Dynasty, for after this period 'Tanite and Bubastite Pharaohs,' as Mr. Donne ^ re- marks, were lords of the Nile valley ; and the policy and wars of Egypt probably made it expedient to move the seat of government to a point nearer the Syrian frontier. But even the Twentieth Dynasty, after the Third Rameses, witnessed, amidst much vicis- situde, times of confusion and rapid decay, which warrant the belief that the Homeric allusions to Thebes must belong to a period, if not before, yet at latest scarcely after the reign of that sovereign. In effect, we should refer the passages (always in their relation with the monumental Chronology) at least to the early part of the thirteenth century' B.C., even though the sovereigns did not fall into insignificance, nor the Empire lose at least its titular sovereignty in Asia, until the latter part of the twelfth. It was this de- cadence of Egypt which gave subsequent scope even to the small kingdom of the Hebrews, under Kings David and Solomon, for rising during a brief space into considerable power. ^ Thebffi jEgypti, in Smith's Diet, of Geography; F. Lenormant, i. 450. II 158 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. When we have been thus enabled to connect the references in Homer to Egyptian Thebes with a given historic period, the passages which touch other cities of the same name acquire a fresh interest. We may reasonably suppose that this designation, discovered in Asia Minor or in Greece, indicates a foundation effected by settlers belonging to the great Egyptian Empire, and emigrating at some time during the Theban period. The Thebes of Eetion is mentioned or referred to in the Iliad several times. In II. i. 466, it is the sacred city of Eetion (leprj ttoAis). It is connected, as we have already seen, with special excellence of horses ; and, lastly, it has lofty gates {vxI/lttvXos, II. iv. 416). It is surely remarkable that we find all these three charac- teristics reproduced in the Cadmeian Thebes of Boiotia. It is sacred {Upa -nphs reix^a @r]jii] ku\ l.iduviovs Kdi Epepfiovs Koi Ai^vrjv, lua t cipvfs ii(pap Kepaoi TeXedovaiv . Did we but know in a Menelaid the details of this eight years' tour ! Evidently it approached to, though it might not equal, the tour of Odysseus. It differs in this among other respects, that it does not lie so completely beyond the limits of Hellenic navigation and experi- ence. For Egypt and Phoenicia were to Homer, in some sense, known countries, inasmuch as, to say the least, the Greeks were assured of the existence and character of such cities as Thebes and Sidon ; while Kupros or Cyprus was, as we see from the Eleventh Iliad, partially within the Hellenic circles of political influence. » Od. iv. 81-5. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. iHl Still, the very same expression which Menelaos uses to describe his wanderings, is employed by the Seer Theo- chimenos in the Fifteenth Odyssey, and again by Eumaios, to describe those of Odysseus : 'he is one who underwent much, and travelled much \' Now, bearing in mind that the navigation of the ancients was as far as possible coast navigation, the question arises, How was it that Menelaos is represented as not having touched land anywhere along the great distance between Troas and Phoinike, except at Kupros, which we know to have been a friendly country ? As to Phoinike, it appears plain, from the Poems, that the Phoenicians took no side in the war ; and the visit of Menelaos to Egypt presumes it to have been at the time either neutral or friendly. Evidently (as I would suggest) he avoids the western and southern coast of Asia Minor, as far as Lycia, because we know it from the Trojan Catalogue to have been hostile. But, after what we have seen of the presence of Kilikes in Mysia, we at once account for his avoiding the Cilician coast on the same ground, namely, that it was held by a hostile population. There is still an intervening link, the coast of Northern Syria beyond Troas, which was in the country of the Hethites or Kheta. Is it not a fair presumption that this coast was avoided on the same * Od. XV. 1 76, 400. 1 82 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. frround ? and therefore have we not fresh reason to believe that the Kheta were also the Keteioi of the Eleventh Odyssey ? That the Phcenicians did not take part in the war is readily accounted for, not only by their distance, but by their position as the chief traders of the Mediterranean, whose business it was, with a due allowance for the liberty of kidnapping, to be at peace with both sides. Hence probably it was that they had chosen to remain all along in a modified subordination to the great Egyptian empire, rather than to avail themselves of their considerable natural advantages for resistance. That Paris had visited Sidon ^ before the war proves nothing adverse to this supposition, as he was then on the most friendly terms also with Greece itself. To sum up what has been said : we thus find Homer, with respect to the Memnonian tradition, in contact and full consistency, upon a reasonable and probable inter- pretation of his text, with the facts of real history. Memnon, with whose personality we need not be greatly troubled; was for him the son of the bright East. There- fore he could not well be Egyptian : yet Egypt might afterwards claim him, in fond connection with the tradi- tions of a period when she had proudly possessed the Empire of the East. He could hardly come from * 11. vi. 290. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 83 Susiana or Assyria, with which there is no trace whatever of social or pohtical relations. Yet he almost certainly must have come from outside the circle of the earlier Trojan alliances, and therefore from beyond Lycia, and the countries of the Musoi and Kilikes. There lie the Kheta ; and the Poet supplies us with their name, Keteioi. These warriors were separated from the Phoeni- cians generally, and therefore from relations with Greece, by their hostility to Egypt : and with this historic fact their supplying aid to Troy is in complete harmony. VI. — The Legend of the Pseudodusseus. — The Voyage of the Ship Argo. It is not the object of this Chapter to draw out from the Poems all the traces of connection betw^een Greece of the heroic age and the great Egyptian Empire ; but only such of them as tend tow^ards defining the chrono- logical limits within which, so far as we are enabled to judge from the Egyptian records or other positive testi- mony, the War of Troy historically falls. Having now set forth the principal points of contact between the Homeric text and the Egyptian and Phcenician history, I proceed to mention one or two others of minor moment, which are, however, distinctly subsidiary to those already named. 184 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER, , (I.) In the Fourteenth Odyssey, Odusseus has availed himself on his return to Ithaca, of the hospitality of Eumaios, to whom he remains unknown. Eumaios desires to learn who he is, and how and why he came to Ithaca. This demand Odusseus meets by a fictitious narrative, which I have termed the Legend of the Pseudodusseus. He describes himself as a Cretan of high extraction, not formed in industrious habits, but given to war and buccaneering. By these, being a sea-rover, he had greatly prospered ; but had afterwards been obliged to take part as a Cretan leader in the Achaian war with Troy. On his return, after only a month of rest at home, he prepared an expedition against Egypt. It consisted of nine ships, and the people readily took service init\ A fair wind brought them in five days to Egypt ; and he proceeds in the following terms : — ' I moored in the river Aiguptos. I bid my gallant men stay where they were, and haul the vessel ashore, while I sent out scouts for a survey of the land. But they, unable to restrain their eagerness and wantonness, at once fell to making havock of the well-tilled fields of the men of Egypt, slaying the full-grown males, and carrying off the women and young children. But ' Od. xiv. 199-248. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 85 the din soon reached the city. And the inhabitants, hearing it, came down at the following dawn. The whole plain was filled with chariots, and with foot- soldiery, and with the blaze of armour. And Zeus, lover of the thunderbolt, struck my comrades with a miserable panic, nor did a man of them stand firm, for mischief gathered on all sides. There they slew many of us with the sharp edge of weapons ; and some they took alive to become their bondsmen'. . . . 'As for me, I went straight to meet the king in his chariot ; and grasped and kissed his knees. He raised me, and pitied me ; and, placing me in the chariot, carried me weeping to his home. Many, indeed, rushed at me with spears, for in truth they were vehe- mently exasperated ; but he kept them off, for he had regard to the displeasure of Zeus Xeinios, the great avenger of ill-deeds.' Then he relates how he abode for years in Egypt, receiving kind gifts, and acquiring wealth, until a Phoe- nician rogue induced him to abscond. Upon this he went to Phoinike, and from thence, after a year, embarked • for Libya, where they fell into ill weather which destroyed their vessel, and new adventures followed which are not to the present purposed ' Is it possible to read this narrative in the light of ^ Od. xiv. 258-72. ^ Od. xiv. 278-309. 1 86 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. the Egyptian discoveries, and not to receive the im- pression that it was by no means a pure and arbitrary invention, but one adapted to the law of HkeHhood, and related to some known facts ? The first, because Odusseus was not merely entertaining the itching ears of a simpleton, but putting a very shrewd and intelligent man in possession of what he was to take for a real biography. The second, because of the remarkable points of resemblance with what we now know from the Egyptian records. Let us observe : — (i) How eminently Egypt is, in this tale, the land of horses, and of horses in chariots, when they are specifically mentioned as having come out in the tumultuary muster of the population against a small band of freebooters. (2) How the general course of the narrative agrees with that of the Libyan coalition ; an aggressive inva- sion, success in the first instance, severe suffering in- flicted, the ruin of the expedition through a decisive battle, great slaughter and a residue of prisoners. Even the mercy shown to Odusseus agrees with what we are told happened in the same case, when a number of the invaders were allowed to remain as subjects. (3) There is something strange, and not agreeable to Achaian habits, in the remarkable clemency of the Egyptian king to his suppliant prisoner. But Sir HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 87 G. Wilkinson, commenting on Herod, ii. 102 \ speaks of the comparative clemency of the Egyptians, and of the honour paid by Sesostris to those who gallantly withstood him. (4) Still more remarkable is the case of the escape. A Phoenician induced him to abscond from Egypt, and in absconding to go with him to Phoinike, which was the nearest place of refuge. This is perfectly explicable. But next, he persuades the supposed Cretan to go on to Libya, when we should have expected him to seek his own country, Crete. The explanation is supplied by the Egyptian records, though we have no sign from the Poems of anything like ordinary commerce or other intercourse between Greece and the coast of Africa ; the resort of a Greek to that country ceases to be inexplicable, when we find that its people had, probably within living memory, been engaged in a common enterprise with the Achaians against Egypt. Is it not evidently the expedition against Merepthah, from which this Legend thus in many important points has been borrowed? and does it not support the view, which the use in it of the word Achaians suggests, that that expedition took place at a time shortly before, or near, the date of the War of Troy? ' In Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 168. l88 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. It may indeed be said that the Legend represents a buccaneering raid, whereas the invasion was con- ducted by a coaHtion of nations. The answer is toler- ably plain ; the Egyptian records are unhappily wanting at the place where they should give the numbers of the Achaian contingents ; but they show with sufficient clearness that the numerical force of the invading army was mainly African. The Libyans (or Lebu) recorded as killed were 6359. Of another nation whose name is blank, there were 61 11, and of a third, also blank, 2370 \ As the record gives 91 11 daggers or knives taken from the Maxyes, the larger of these two numbers, it would seem, belongs to them, and the third may be that of the Kahakas. The Maxyes were much more nearly united with the Libyans than the Achaians were (though all were probably Aryan races) ; and were comprehended with them in the general designation of Tahennu, which included all the neighbours of Egypt on the West^ But when we come to the transmarine contingents, we find the Achaian name given, with the numbers blank : the Sikels, who have but 222 killed, and the Tursha, or supposed Etruscans, whose slain are 542. From this it appears probable, though not certain, that the Achaian force in the war against Merepthah was on a ^ Chabas, pp. 199, 200. ^ De Rouge's Memoir^-, pp. 14, 15. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 89 scale not widely different from that which we find in the very curious legend of the Pseudodusseus, in which the nine ships may be estimated to have conveyed not more than from four to six hundred men. (II.) Though it cannot be said that the Records of Egypt throw any direct light upon the voyage of the ship Argo, yet indirectly they suggest a sense and meaning for a legend, which it has been heretofore so difficult to supply with a probable basis of fact. We have long, indeed, been in possession of most curious information respecting the Colchians. Pindar^ calls them the dark-faced (KeAau'wTres-). Herodotus states that a colony, detached from the Army of Sesostris, settled on the Phasis. He has no doubt that the Colchians are an Egyptian race. He found that tradi- tion subsisting among them. He relies partly on their having black skin and woolly hair, which mark them as kin to the Ethiopians, but very much more on their practising circumcision. The Egyptians and the Colchians use, too, a manner of weaving unknown elsewhere ■^ I do not refer to the less weighty authorities of Diodoros and other late witnesses. But I may mention that the language of ancient Colchis, now Mingrelia, is declared to be Turanian'. 1 Pyth. iv. 377. 2 Ilerod. ii. 103-5. ^ Max Miiller, Languages of the Seat of War, pp. 11 2-4, 13 190 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. There were but two great evcnt3, antecedent to the Troica, and known to us by the general tradition of the country, in which Greece had an interest truly national. Homer, who gives us so largely the adven- tures of Phoinix, and the local war of Nestor, alludes to the events I speak of in a manner bearing no pro- portion to their historical moment. He was too skilled an artist to bring freely upon the stage any figure which could vie with the subject of his song ; and it is pro- bable that the Legends of the War of Thebes and of the ship Argo were subjects of legend competing with the War of Troy. Of the War of Thebes he gives us only glances, and those incidentally to the character and position of Diomed \ The ship Argo is named but once in the Poems '\ We have recently, I think, begun to perceive that the expedition against Thebes was a national expedi- tion ; an expedition, as Homer phrases it, of Achaians asrainst Cadmeians. Mitford had noticed it as ' the first instance of a league among Grecian Princes \ The » II. iv. 373-400; II. V. 800-8. 2 Od. xii. 70. 2 Mitford, chap. i. sect. 3. Notwithstanding his prejudices, Mitford is an author whom no one need even at this day be ashamed to consult or quote. Fifty years ago he enjoyed a monopoly of authority ; he is now perhaps unduly depressed. He surely marks one of the advancing stages of Greek historiography. — I do not find the subject noticed in the work of Bishop Thirlwall. Mr. Grote's view of the legendary period, which as coming from him carries great authority, was not favourable to the admission of HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 191 Theban country was the grand seat of foreign im- migration, and influence, in Middle and Southern Greece. Elsewhere there had been individuals or families settling in the country, rather than commu- nities. Here there appears to have been a real colony ; indeed a colony which perhaps displaced or supplanted a prior settlement by Amphion and Zethos\ The War against Thebes has notes which indicate that it was probably an early effort of the nation, just awaking, under its Achaian name, to self- consciousness and independence, in which the domestic dissensions of the ruling families of Thebes were used as the occasion for putting down an element of power in the country, which was or had been formidable by reason of its derivation from the great, though in all likelihood de- clining, Egyptian Empire. The tenacious vitality of the motives from which it sprang would seem to show that it was far more than a personal quarrel. The expedition of the Epigonoi took place after Po^u- neikes, the person by whom the movement was origi- nally prompted, was already dead. It is mentioned but slightly in Homer ^ Yet the completeness of its success seems to be attested by the decentralized the too realistic idea of nationality as among the motives which prompted mythical ornamentation. It is set forth in his sixteenth chapter. * Od. xi. 260-5. ^ il- iv. 406. 192 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. condition in which the Boiotians were mustered for the Trojan war, not as a monarchy, but under five apparently equal leaders \ Now I would suggest that the voyage of the ship Argo was probably a manifestation, and an effort, at a very slightly earlier date, of the same feeling. As it stands in the framework of ordinary Greek legend, it has been found by the ablest critics extremely difficult either to accept as history, or to etherialize and trans- late as myth '. Mitford ^ refers it to the ambition of Jason to obtain distinction by a freebooting expedition to a more remote quarter than any theretofore molested. Bishop Thirlwall laments that when the marvellous is stripped off, and only a dry husk left,' the story appears only more . meagre, and not more intelligible*. Mr. Grote treats the inquir}-, whether there be in the Legend any basis of fact or not, as hopeless. But it is plain that when once we are able to show an historic link between Egypt and Greece, importing supremacy at a given period on one side, and dependence on the other, there is nothing forced or improbable in the hypothesis that the Greeks, when the yoke had ceased to press them, might have been attracted alike by the love ■' II. ii. 494. ' Thirlwall's Greece, vol. i. chap. v. pp. 132-9. i2mo edition. ^ Chap. V. p. 143. * Part. i. chap. xiii. pp. 33 J -4. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 193 of booty and the hope of revenge to any point where Egyptian authority was represented feebly enough to invite attack. Sir G. Wilkinson^ considers that the object of the Argonautic expedition may have been to obtain a share of the lucrative trade with the East which flourished on the eastern coast of the Black Sea. But that expedition preceded the Homeric Poems, and it is surely evident that even at their date the Greeks had not attained to any such high development of their commercial conceptions. Indeed, the entire tale, unlike that of the War against Thebes, presents circumstances of improbability which, in the absence of any specific answer, are most startling. In the entire of the Poems we never hear of a merchantship of the Greeks. The Argo, if it existed, must have been a pure sea-rover's vessel fitted for booty. As a single vessel, she could not be meant for war in the sense of the Trojan ex- pedition. But if she was meant for booty only, why did she seek it at so great a distance, in a sea as yet untraversed by the Greeks? And why, above all, if she were but a pirate, was she an object of intense national feeling to the people of her own time, or why did she take so high and lasting a place in the recol- lections of the race ? If, as we know from the records, ^ In Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 169. 194 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Egypt was now no longer a maritime power in the Mediterranean, and the Achaian people were disposed to retaliate ; and if, as tradition, together with many signs, assures us, there was in the Black Sea a weak Egyptian outpost, showing probably, in Greek eyes, some of the wealth but little of the force of the old Empire ; then I think, and perhaps then only, do we attain to a rational hypothesis as to the motive and character of the Argonautic expedition. Now, slight as is the notice in the Odyssey, it gives us assistance on at least two points. While declaring that Argo, and she only, had passed through the dangerous Sumplegades, or the Bosphorus, on her voyage, it calls her TTaaiixdKovaa — an object of universal, i.e., national interest; and it states that she never would have effected the passage, except by means of the love of Here for Jason \ Why did Here thus love Jason, not (like Eos or Demeter) with a passionate or mortal, but with a divine and protecting love ? Among the surest indications in Homer, are those afforded by the introduction of a deity in connection with some special person or purpose. Now, Here is by a peculiar and exclusive excellence, the great Achaian goddess. Not like Zeus and Apollo, who are wholly liberated from merely * Od. xii. 69-72. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 95 national afifections ; or Poseidon, who everywhere holds fast by those of his own race or longitude ; or Athene, whose worship seems to have been generally diffused, and whose sympathies in the war are given to in- dividuals rather than to a race or country : the basis of her national action seeming to lie exclusively in that offence of Paris, from which she had suffered a slight together with Here\ It is Here, and Here only, on whose inner heart is written in deep characters the Achaian name ; whose energy on behalf of the army never ceases, who beguiles Zeus, who compels the Sun to set when he wishes to continue shining, who gives her sympathy to all that is Greek, and nothing that is not Greek, and whose central worship through the historic ages was in Argos, a district of Achaian settle- ment, and a centre of Achaian power. When Homer says that Argo passed the Straits in safety because Here guided her, out of her care for Jason (eTiei (piXos ri^v 'Ij/o-coi'), I read him as meaning that Jason was engaged in a true national enterprise, and that the goddess proper to the nation therefore kept him scathe- less. Much more might be said on the connection between the Greece of Homer and Egypt. I shall resume the subject in another Chapter of notices either more frag- ' II. xxiv. 27. 196 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. mentary and isolated than those we have been con- sidering, or else belonging to branches of the investi- gation different from the more strictly historical inquiry. Meantime the reader will be led to ask, why is it that, while the later and uncertified Greek tradition testifies to Egyptian influence and settlement over heroic Greece in forms so numerous that we cannot refer them all to a casual origin, the direct traces of the connection are so faintly marked in the Poems ? Again, Lauth, in his ' Homer und /Egypten,' has pursued in much curious and interesting detail the search in the Egyptian re- cords for names which we find in the Poems. I shall avail myself of the fruits of his labours ; and I shall also offer many suggestions which the Poems them- selves, under the increased and increas-ing light which now suffuses them, have stirred in my mind. But the more we are able to supply indications that the Poet must have derived much, and even must have known that he derived much, from Egyptian and Eastern sources, the more pressingly the question will be put whether as matter of fact the connection, if it existed, has not been made the subject of a designed conceal- ment in the Poems ? This is not the place to give the full answer. I will only here say, in relation to the questions I have raised, that if, when Homer sang, there was the memory of a time still recent, HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 1 97 during which the young nation, now grown so strong in self-consciousness, energy, and hope, had been in poHtical subordination to Egypt, that of itself was reason enough for a Poet with the intense Hellenism and Autocthonism of Homer to suppress or reduce as much as possible the direct tokens of the connection. Vn. — Homer and Rameses H. I have been thus far more or less upon the ground of history ; I conclude with offering what is certainly pure conjecture ; and yet, I think, conjecture not un- reasonable. Of the great Egyptian Empire of Rameses H and the Nineteenth Dynasty, Homer, or at least Hellas, may, or rather must, humanly speaking, have known something, on account of tlieir relation to continental and yet more certainly to insular Greece. But, con- sidering the military greatness of that Empire, its numerous expeditions to Syria, and the concern of the Phoenicians, who were as to all such matters the sole or main informants to the Greeks, in its affairs, some tenuis aura, some breath, at least, of the personal renown of the Egyptian kings and warriors, must have passed into the atmosphere of Greece. With respect to Thebes, we have seen that the single allusion of the kind is 198 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. one apparently founded not on vague rumour, but upon real tidings truly characteristic of their subject. There was probably some corresponding knowledge of other things and persons. Now it is to be remarked specially at this place, that Rameses II, as we are told, enjoyed what other great men before Agamemnon^ wanted — namely, the advantageous chance for fame which the muse principally bestows ^ The contemporary epic of Pentaour has recorded, and doubtless enlarged, his deeds. It was probably due to this Poem, either alone or with other causes, that in tradition he outgrew pre- decessors whose real achievements, or at least whose real power, was greater, and that he not only out- grew, but even absorbed them ; for with the world outside of Egypt, down even to our time, Sesostris was the hero of that country, and Sesostris is now believed to have been Rameses II, And this great but shadowy name was the sole but much questioned testi- mony to the fact, that the supremacy among humankind had once belonged to a great Egyptian Empire. Accord- ing to the Pentaour, this monarch personally performed in the war with the Kheta such prodigies of valour as may fairly be deemed without example, and considered to approximate to the superhuman. Was it the echo ' Hor. Od. iv. 9. 25. * Lenormant, i. 411, and Premieres Civilisat'ons, vol. i. p. 287. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 199 of these feats of war, or of this resounding celebration of them, that suggested to Homer the colossal scale of his Achilles ? a warrior against whom, while heroic strength and prowess secured only an iinpar congrcssus, mere numbers, however accumulated, were but as dust in the balance ; and the very apparition of whose form discomfited a host\ The Poet is, to say the least, notably in correspondence with the poetical account of Rameses, who is represented as surrounded when alone by 2500 chariots of the enemy, as making his appeal to Ammon, and as cutting his way through the hostile army, with great glory to the horses who drew his chariot ; all singularly in sympathy and accordance with the spirit of the Homeric picture, and with its preter-human element^. But Rameses was also, and this according to the inscriptions, a portentous sensualist \ In a long life, we are told, he had 166 children, of whom fifty-nine were sons. It was perhaps this extraordinary form of human excess— and if not it was almost certainly some similar exorbitancy — that may have suggested to the Poet a picture so intensely foreign, and so repulsive to the Greek manners, as that of Priam ; who had fifty sons, ^ II. xviii. 215-29. ^ Lenovmant, rremieres Civilisations, vol. i. pp. 289-294. ^ Lenormant, Hist., vol. i. p. 423. 200 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. with a number of daughters, nowhere specified ; but twelve were married inmates of his palace \ And his vast progeny proceeded from a combination of mothers about which we are in the dark, three only being expressly named ; and nineteen of the sons being credited to Hecabe^ I do not, however, put this forward as in itself a matter of weight. The argument for such conjectures may be summed up thus. Contemporary Hellas was subject, after the manner of an eastern empire, to the Egyptian Sovereigns of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and, titularly at least, per- haps also to those of the Nineteenth. On this account, it must have had some information as to extraordinary characters and events connected with the great Empire, whose yoke, probably a light one from the remoteness of the seat of power, it bore. The force of this consideration is heightened, when we recollect that the tribes or nation, who constituted the maritime arm of this great Empire, were also the race who, described in Homer and by the Greeks as Phoinikes, were their principal and perhaps almost sole informants concerning occurrences which took place at a distance from their own coasts. Now this Ram.eses the Second was evidently reputed ' II. xxiv. 493, b. 248. See Studies on Homer, vol. iii. p. 210, seq. ^ II. xxiv. .^96. HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 20I to be a person of the most marked individuality ; a man so extraordinary — at least in the verse of his Bard- — that though he does not represent the climax of Egyptian power, which in his reign was insensibly beginning to decline, yet he cast both his successors and his more potent predecessors into the shade through his heroic force and prominence ; and he passed into the general tradition of the world with a name which reached the historic times as that of a great conqueror, while all the rest were forgotten beyond the bounds of Egypt itself. In the Poems of Homer, while we have much that is remarkable indeed, but still within the limits of human experience, two pictures only are presented to us, which surpassed them : the character of Achilles, in its colossal dimensions both of sentiment and action ; and the menage of Priam, in its Asiatic multiformity so strangely contrasted with the modesty of early Greek life. And the hint or suggestion of both these representations is possibly to be recognised in the character of Rameses the Second. VIII. — Computations founded on the Foregoing Sections. I will now bring together the figures which are yielded by the three wars against Egypt under Rameses II, his 202 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. son Merepthah, and Rameses III. The dates of the attacks are taken in the two first, approximately at 1406 and 1345 B.C.; for the third exactly, as M. Lenormant informs us, at 1306 B.C. The characteristic names of the three Expeditions, which supply the links with Greek history, are respec- tively Dardanians, Achaians, and Danaans. The first expedition was certainly, and the second probably, before the War of Troy ; the third must in all likelihood have been later than the War. The ranges of time, which I have computed from the facts of the several attacks, would give us the following limits, as those within which the Siege of Troy must, according to the Egyptian records, have fallen — Earliest. Latest. rom the expedition against Rameses II. 1316 B.C. 1226 B.C. Merepthah 1345 » 1285 „ „ ,, Rameses III. 1387 » 1307 " The years between 13 16 B.C. and 1307 B.C. would satisfy the conditions of all these computations. And the latest year which any of them will allow, it will be observed, is 1226 B.C., a date earlier than the important catastrophe which deposed the city of Sidon from its primacy in Canaan. The names used in Homer, which bear directly on the argument, are six ; HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 203 1. The Dardanian. 4. The Sidonian. 2. The Achaian. 5. The Keteian. 3. The Danaan. 6. The Theban. And the evidence, which the text yields in connection with each and all of them, converges, positively or negatively, upon the same point. The general effect is^ to throw back the Fall of Troy perceptibly, but not very greatly, further than according to the common compu- tation ; but by no means to remove it beyond the period over which ancient argument and opinion about it ranged. Some, however, as we have seen, bring the 1 8th, 19th, and 20th Dynasties slightly lower down than the writers whose figures I have provisionally adopted. Mr. Poole's or Mr. P. Smith's figures would not greatly affect any date to be assigned, on the strength of an argument such as this, to the War or Fall of Troy. There is no method of handling the evidence in detail, as far as I can see, which will not throw the Troica back at least as far as the middle of the Thirteenth Century B.C. But the whole, it must be remembered, depends on the substantial acceptance of the Egyptian computations. The opinions which were current on this subject before it was capable of illustration by Egyptology, were learnedly discussed and summed up by Clinton '. ^ Fasti Hellenici, Introduction, sect. vi. p. 123. 204 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Diintzer^ observes, that Herodotos in his history adopts the date of 1270 B.C., and by some the event was carried as high as 1353 B.C., while others placed it as low as 1 1 20 B.C. So that the range, which on independent grounds I collect from the Monuments as the true one, is not greatly different from that of the ancient traditions. One word, before closing, on the extraordinary interest which, if my presentation of this early history be gene- rally correct, attaches to the warlike incidents of the infancy of Greece. Sic fortis Etriiria a^evit. We have examples in modern times, and even in the most recent experience, of great States which owe all their greatness to successful war. The spectacle, offered to a calm review by this process, is a mixed, sometimes a painful one. So, too, it seems, that the early life of the most wonderful people whom the world has ever seen, was largely spent in the use of the strong hand against the foreigner. That people was nursed, and its hardy character was formed, in the continuing stress of danger and difficulty. But the voyage of Argo, the march of the Seven against Cadmeian Thebes, the triumphant attack of the Epigonoi, the enormous and prolonged effort of the War of Troy, the Achaian and so-called Danaan attempts against Egypt, were not wars or expeditions of ' Homerische Fragen, p. 122 HOMER AND THE EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 205 simple conquest. They were not waged in order to impose the yoke upon the necks of others. And yet, though varied in time, in magnitude, in local destination, they seem, with some likelihood at least, to present to us a common character. They speak with one voice of one great theme : a steady dedication of nascent force, upon the whole noble in its aim, as well as determined and masculine in its execution. F"or the end it had in view, during a course of effort sustained through so many generations, was the worthy, nay, the paramount end of establishing, on a firm and lasting basis, the national life, cohesion, and independence. 14 CHAPTER I I. ON THE EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. I HAVE not entered in this work upon the ground of the broad proposition that the voyage of Odysseus, from the land of the Lotophagoi to the Island of Scherie inclusive, is in a sphere beyond the limits of the experience of Homer and his nation, and that the Poet, availing himself of the tales, true, garbled, or false, of Phcenician manners, furnished and peopled, with the materials thus obtained, an ideal world, in the mental Geography of which we neither do nor ought to find general correspondence with the more prosaic and common-place geography of experience. It was the purpose of the former Chapter to deal with those notices of persons and events in the Egyptian monuments which connect themselves with persons and events named by Homer, in such a manner as to tend to the establishment of a direct chronological correspondence. I shall now seek to s* EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 207 supply indirect corroboration of the argument by- pointing to other indications in the Poems, of which Egypt was, in all likelihood, the main yet not ex- clusive source. In speaking of the Egyptian knowledge of Homer, I am far from intruding to assume that it was original, as is the knowledge of a native, or even of a traveller. That he should have undertaken the voyage, which the very birds perform but once in the year\ and of the performance of which we never hear, except in buccaneering, or in the rare and exceptional tours of Princes, is so improbable, that we may at once dismiss the supposition. Of all men, in the heroic times, none would be so unlfkely as the Bard to become a traveller ; were it only because he lived upon the sympathy of his hearers, and the currents of that sympathy could only pass through the forms of a language free and familiar alike to him and them. But the great Egyptian Empire, which covered the Eastern coast of the Mediterranean, and had the maritime power of the Phcenicians at its service, could not but make efforts to extend itself over the nearer parts at least of that sea which they commanded. The monuments of the country, and the retaliatory * Od. iii. 322. 208 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. expedition of which mention has been made, attest the fact ; and this extra-Homeric testimony is met by another fact, that we find in the Poems a certain set of ruHng or official famiHes, all bearing the marks of foreign origin, all invested with the non- Hellenic title of ava^ avhp^v, and mostly connected with the name of Aiolos and its transmarine associations, and, through this name or otherwise, attached to the worship of Poseidon, the great Southern deity of the Outer world. It is no strained conjecture that these families, which, be it remembered, nowhere appear in Homer as a race or tribe, were the personal representatives of the central Power in the countries which it had bound to itself, by ties necessarily light and frail from the imperfect social organisation and locomotive provisions of the time. This personal representation, probably much resembling the Satrapy of later times, the Pachalic of the Ottomans down to our own day, supplied the only image or token of the existing supremacy in each subordinate region, and the only link between the two. But even so crude a form of connection could not subsist without allowing a certain amount of Egyptian knowledge to filter as it were into the provinces aggregated to the Empire ; and this less animated tradition must have been continually refreshed by the opportunities of varied information, the lesche of the EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 209 time, which the constant movement of the Phoenician mariners for the purposes of trade could not fail to afford. Again, in the phrase ' Egyptian knowledge,' I desire to include what Homer may have learned respecting Libue, of which he speaks in Od. iv. 35, and respect- ing the Aithiopes. Both of these were in relations with Egypt, during the period of its political as- cendency, such as have no parallel in later times ; nor could the methods of information, alone open to Homer, supply him with precise geographical distinctions as to these, for him, distant countries. The whole of what he learned respecting the Outer world, whether in the East and South, or in other directions, as it could only reach him, generally speaking, through the Phoenician navigators, so it would primarily associate itself with the Phoenician name. Behind this, at and near the climax of Egyptian power, would stand the name of that great Empire \ and behind this again, and indistinctly blending with it, the titles of the conterminous countries. There would, without doubt, also be in the Phoenician stories elements derived from Assyria, with which, as well as Egypt, the great race of mariners were constantly in contact". 1 Thus Cadmos was held by some to be Eg}'ptian, by some Phoenician. — Pausan. ix. 12, 2. ^ Herod, i. I. 2IO TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. I have mentioned above that Professor F. Joseph Lauth, of Munich, in the year 1867, published his valuable tract called Homer tuid ALgypten, in which he traces philologically, and without development of details, numerous notes of connection between the Poems and Egypt, of which the text itself would, for the most part, convey no idea to the ordinary reader. He claims indulgence for his work on the ground that it was a first effort towards establishing this connection. To a certain extent Sir Gardner Wilkinson had touched on the same subject-matter. Ignorant of the language, and unable to interpret for myself the monuments, I have already sought, in the preceding Chapter, and shall again attempt in this one, by a close comparison with the text of Homer, to turn to account the labours of these and other Egyptian scholars. Without the key afforded by the researches of Egyptology, no reader of the Poems would, perhaps, have been justified in ascribing to the Poet any considerable acquaintance with the facts or the tra- ditions of the Empire and country ; and we must have passed by, in despair of explanation, many matters of great interest which we can now partially under- stand. On the surface, nothing can be more meagre than the Egyptian indications of Homer. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 211 There is a river Aiguptos which is Diipetes, sky- fallen or sky-fed. There is a predatory invasion of rich fields, a sanguinary defeat, and a great humanity displayed towards the leader of the band discomfited and destroyed (Od. xiv. 249 seqq.). Then there is the notice of Thebes in the Ninth Iliad (v. 381), which, even standing alone, is of great interest, but which only opens itself out fully when we are able to consider it in the light of the Egyptian records. And there is the visit of Menelaos (Od. iv. 125) to King Polubos and Queen Alcandre at Thebes (names of which one if not both are plainly translated), the gifts they gave to their guests, and the herb Nepenthes presented to Helen by Poludamna, the wife of Thon, probably other, and local, sovereigns in Egypt. Here the Poet takes occasion to commend the medical skill of the people, who, as he says, are of the race of Paieon, and to mention the abundance of drugs which grow in the country (Od. iv. 227-32). For the country, however, as such, he has no name. Aiguptos, with him, is the Nile ; and, when Menelaos describes his travels, we find that he visited Kupros, Phoinike, Libue, and likewise not Aiguptos, but the Aiguptioi, 212 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Sidonioi, Aithiopes, and Eremboi\ We have also the tale of Menelaos and Proteus, of which the scene is the island of Pharos (Od. iv. 355) ; and which, belonging wholly to the region of the marvellous, throws but little light upon any matter of fact connected with the country. Next to the reference to Thebes, the most pointed and characteristic feature comprised in these notices is the description of the Egyptians as being universally physicians. The historical testimony of Herodotos, as well as of others '\ illustrates and sustains this statement in a remarkable manner. The materialising tendency of Hamitic civilisation seems to be indicated in the precocious forwardness of the medical art. The mark of this forwardness is what Herodotos treated simply as a peculiarity, namely that each physician dealt with a single disorder and no more (iii. 84). This divari- cation into specialism, as modern experience teaches us, is a sign of an old, not a young, condition of study and practice. This was not all ; for each Egyptian then customarily purged himself for three days monthly (ii. yy). The Prophet Jeremiah (xlvi. ^ In Od. xvii. 448, ij.rj rdxa ■niKpffv AiyvnTov /cat Kvnpop iK-qai. Damm supposes the country to be meant. But the two names are combined in the speech of Odusseus, to which this line refers (426, 443), and there we have (427) expressly the phrase hty. Trora/jios. * See Sir G. Wilkinson, in Rawlinson's Herodotus, on ii. 84. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 21 3 11) says to Egypt, 'In vain shalt thou use many medicines : for thou shalt not be cured.' Let us now proceed, with the aid we obtain from with- out, to inquire what further treasures may lie hid under the surface of the Poems. • Long before turning to the testimony of the Egyptian monuments, I had been struck by the predominance of a foreign character and associations in the Homeric Underworld of the Eleventh Odyssey. It lies, not in or near Greece, but in the region of the Outer Geography. The foreign solar goddess Kirke, and the Kadmeian Seer Teiresias, are the sources from which Odusseus obtains his directions. The recent Hellenic Dead, fur- nished by the War, are wanderers in the Shades, without fixed doom or occupation, scarcely, as it were, natural- ised in their new abode. None of the more ancient Hellenic or Achaian monarchs or warriors appear. And all, or nearly all, the characters, other than those from the Trojan Plain, are to be referred, either by the in- direct indications of the Poems, or in consonance with general tradition, to a foreign origin.' 1. Minos, the Judge in Aides (Od. xi. 568), is of Phoenician extraction (II. xiv. 34). His kingship here at once raises the presumption that those under him may be of foreign extraction. 2. Ariadne (321, 322) is his daughter. 214 V TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. 3. Orion (vv. 572-5) is mentioned elsewhere in the Poems as beloved by Eos, the Morning (Od. v. 121— 4), as gigantic in form (Od. xi. 310), and as a star (II. xviii. 486, xxii. 29 ; Od. v. 274). We have in Homer no Hellenes either unequivocally deified, or raised to the sky: or shown as giants, or as lovers of Eos ; so that all the passages tend to mark him as non-Hellenic or pre-Hellenic. That a mortal should also be a star is a conception found nowhere else in Homer, and alien to his ideas, which separate so broadly between human beings and the Nature-forces. But it seems to bear the stamp of a Chaldaean conception, for Diodorus informs us that (besides the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and the Sun, Moon, and planets) the Chaldjeans reckoned twenty- four stars, twelve in the northern, and twelve in the southern, hemisphere, of which the latter were peopled with the spirits of the dead \ In the post-Homeric tra- dition (Apollod. i. 5), Orion appears in Chios and Delos, never west of the Archipelago, and carries also this une- quivocal sign that he is the son of Poseidon (ibid.). 4. Tituos (v. 576), both by his vast size, and as the son of Gaia, is at once shown to be pre-Hellenic, though his place is in the Greek Peninsula, as appears both here and in Od. vii. 321-4. He is there also placed under Rhadamanthus, the brother of Minos (II, xiv. * Diod. Sic. ii. 30, i. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 21.5 322), which further helps to mark upon him the cha- racter of a foreigner. 5. Tantalos (582) is by tradition the father of the Pelopid Hne. Homer has suppressed all mention of their descent from him. It is difficult to account for the formal reference to Pelops as the first ancestor and founder (II. ii. 104), except as implying that in his person the line first appeared upon the soil of Greece. He is mentioned in this passage only. From Pausanias (ii. 22. 4, V. 13. 4) we learn that his tomb was shown at Mount Sipulos in Paphlagonia ; of which Diodoros makes him the king. The great wealth and greed as- signed to him universally, and indicated by his punish- ment, are not in keeping with the earliest Hellenic manners. Benfey (Wurzellexicon, ii. 258) derives the name of Tantalos from raXdo) by reduplication (raAraAos, the much-enduring). This leads to the view of him as, in truth though not in Homer's mind, a mythical personage, such as probably was Aiolos. The title of anax andron, borne by his descendants, has been found to be a note of foreign extraction (Juv. Mundi, pp. 170, 171). 6. Sisuphos (593) is also mentioned in II. vi. 153 as an Aiolid. This at once brings him into the same class. The resemblance of his character to that of Tantalos will be observed (o KepStcrros y€V€T avbpiav, II. vi. 153) '• 2t5 time and place of homer. and also the migration of his descendant Bellerophon to Lukie, where he settled, seemingly as one already having ties there. y. Heracles (60 1) has his nativity, according to the Iliad, in Kadmeian Thebes (xix. 98) : he has no sign of Hellenic extraction. See (8). 8. Alcmene, mother of Heracles, wife of Amphi- truon (266) is by tradition the daughter of Electruon, King of Mukenai. He was the son of Perseus, a foreigner and immigrant into Greece (Apollod. ii. 4). Of the line Od. xi. 631, obelised as spurious, I take no account, because of its palpable incongruity with the one which precedes it and which, if followed by any enumeration, would seem to have required a much fuller one than the mere reference to the names of Theseus and Peirithoos. I therefore proceed with the account of the Women' Shades. 9. Turo (v. 235) belongs to the pre-Hellenic period in the Peninsula, and to the Aiolid connection. Cre- theus, her husband, is described as an Aiolid (237). Salmoneus, her father, (236) is by tradition a son of Aiolos, the ruler of Thessaly (Apollod. i. 7). And her illegitimate children have Poseidon for their father (241). In her name we have the only indication, which the Poems afford, of the afterwards famous historic name of Tyre. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 21/ In Od. i. 120, Antinoos the Suitor describes Turo, together with Alcmene and Mukene, as Achaiai. They had all been inhabitants of the Greek Peninsula, and comparing them with Penelope for purposes of his own, he uses in a popular manner the only name which could have been applied to them in common, and which, on this account, can hardly be held to make them Achaians proper by extraction, 10. Antiope (260) is described as the daughter of A sop OS. But no Hellene is ever placed before us in the Poems as the child of a River or Nature-power. She is also described as the mother of Amphion and Z ethos, long anterior to the Hellenic period, and pro- bably even to the Kadmeian colonisation of Thebes. They are the first settlers and fortifiers of that city. But universal tradition assigned to it a foreign origin, und its name, if it did not localise the particular point of association in Egypt, at least associated it with the Empire, of which Thebes was the chief city. Though the name of Kadmos appears in the Poem (Od. v. S33)^ and became eponymical for the race, no genealogy from Kadmos is given, and following its etymology we must treat it as simply signifying Easterns or foreigners. 11. Megare (269), as the daughter of Kreion, belongs to the line of Cadmos. 2l8 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. 12. Epicaste (271), as the mother of Oidipous, belongs to the same connection. 13. Chloris (281) is mentioned here only. She mar- ries Neleus, an Aiolid. Jasos and Amphion, her progenitors, are pre-Hellenic, and the connection with Minyan Orchomenos is outside the Hellenic circle. 14. Leda (298) is mentioned here only. Her origin is not easy to trace. Tradition makes her the daughter of Thestios, and him either the son of Ares, or the greatgrandson of Aitolos, eponymist of Aitolia. All that can be said is, there is no evidence here of properly Hellenic extraction. 15. Iphimedeia (305) is entirely detached from Hellenic associations, as having been the mother by Poseidon of the giants, who designed to scale the heavens, and would have done it had they emerged from boyhood into fuller age and strength. For the remaining names we have no clue from the Poems. 16. Phaidre (321), by tradition daughter of Minos (Apollod. iii. i); therefore of foreign origin. 17. Procris (321), by tradition daughter of Thespios or Thestios (Apollod. ii. 7, 8). See Leda. 18. Maira (326). According to Eustathios (1688), the daughter of Proitos, who appears in the Legend EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 21 9 of Bellerophon, and is not only pre-Hellenic, but is marked as foreign by his connection with Lukie, by his having (apparently) come in among the Argives and acquired the throne, and by his possession of an art of either alphabetic or symbolical writing (II. vi, 157-70). 19. Klumene (ibid.), wife of Jasos, daughter of Minyas, mother of Atalante (Apollod. iii. 9. 2). Ac- cording to Hesiod, the mother of Phaeton by Helios {Apud Eustath. p. 1689). The latter of these tra- ditions gives her an Eastern character, and the former a pre-Hellenic origin. 20. Eriphule (ibid.). Homer refers to, though he does not detail, the legend of the necklace. By tradition she is the daughter of Talaos, who is the grandson of Amuthaon (Apollod. i. 9. 11-13). He is again the son of Cretheus (Od. xi. 258), and therefore directly descended from Aiolos, a foreign ancestor. Thus it appears, as the result of this minute review of the personages of the Underworld, that in almost every case we are able to detach them entirely from the Hellenic stocks by Homeric or traditional evidence, and that in no instance, not even that of Leda, have they any actual Hellenic stamp. The Underworld was indeed available, as we see, to receive the souls of the Achaian heroes, and the evil-minded Suitors of Penelope: 320 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. but the foreign origin of the conception and embodi- ment is strongly marked by the absence from it of personages prior to the War and yet properly Hellenic, such, for example, as would have been the spirits of the Seven who warred against Thebes. I pass now from the personages to the dwelling. The abode of the dead in Homer is called by the names of Aides and Erebos. A particular portion of the unseen world, apparently special in its character, is stated to be situate as far below Aides as our earth is below heaven (II. viii. 14-17). It bears the name of Tartaros, and it appears to have been reserved for preterhuman offenders. Hence, it is not even named in the Nekui'a of the Odyssey, inasmuch as the excursion of Odusseus is only to the region of the human dead. The references in Homer to Tartaros are three. In II. viii. 13-16, Zeus threatens that he may be disposed to cast down into it any deity who shall presume to contravene his will by assisting either party in the War, It is described as at a great distance : as the deepest abyss beneath the earth, thus showing that it is not the only one, and indeed clearly implying that Aides is in some sense subterranean. In II. xiv. 278, we find that the Titans are declared (i) to be gods, (2) to be VTioTaprapeoi, dwelling down in Tartaros, as Liddell and EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 221 Scott, in voc, seem to understand it. But the most instructive passage of the three is that of II. viii. 477—81, where Zeus addresses Here in mingled taunt and menace : — atdev 8' (ycb ovk uXcyi^oi j(ooo[ievT]Sj ov8 fi Ke to. veiara netpaB lkijol yaiTjs Koi TTouToio, IP laTTfTos re Kpovos re TJfifvoi ovT avyfjs 'Yiripiovos 'HeXi'oio ripTTovT OVT dvffioiai., j3a6vs 8e re Tdprapos dpcpis. ' I care not for your rage ; no, not even if you pass to the uttermost bound of the earth ancj sea, where Japetos and Kronos abiding have no refreshment from the rays of the supernal Sun, and the depth of Tartar OS hes about them.' While this confirms the sense of Tartaros as the abode of offending deities^ it throws also a most im- portant light on Homer's cosmology. The common opinion on this subject is that described by Sir George Lewis ' in the following words : — ' The original idea of the Earth, as we find it in the Homeric Poems, and as it still continued to be enter- tained, after a lapse of five centuries, in the time of Herodotos, was that it was a solid plane, surmounted ^ Astronomy of the Ancients, p. 3. Volcker, Homerische Geographic 50. Buchholz, Realien, vol. i. p. 47 : ' Eine flache scheibe, auf der die Lander sich rings um das mittelmeer gruppiren.' 15 222 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. and bounded by the heaven, which was a soHd vault or hemisphere, with its concavity turned downwards.' Now this conception is perfectly consistent with the belief in an Aides or Erebos below the ground on which we tread, and in a Tartaros again below the Erebos. But how are we to reconcile it with the phrase ovh'' et K€ Ta vdara Tret/ja^' 'UfjaL ? to reach or pass to would be a strange expression, wholly at variance with the Homeric style, if the way to Tartaros were through the solid earth. Volcker, indeed, contends ^ that these ex- treme bounds are the bounds taken vertically down- wards. But this completely alters and deforms the idea of the earth as a plane surface, if it is indeed a solid of a depth made up of two portions, each of which is equal vertically to the height of heaven. Nor does he notice the difficulty of reconciling his doctrine with the word ,t(cj]ai. The truth is that there is not in all Homer a single passage which imports the idea, or indicates the possibility, of our passing through the solid Earth. It is certainly true that he speaks not only of Tartaros but of Aides as below the ground ; not only, as to the latter, by implication in II. viii. i6, but also in II. ix. 56v upGw) OTTocra "EA.A7;r69 6eM rfj Atyvn-Tiq 7Te-iTou]VTaL \ It seems likely that these temples may have been of primitive foundation : at least I do not see in which of the historic periods this worship could easily have been introduced. The testimony of Herodotos to the extensive derivation of the Hellenic gods from Egypt tells powerfully in the same direction. It maybe, therefore, that the subtle vestiges of the^ alien system of animal worship, such as we find them in Homer, are given us in the very state, in which he found them already existing among his countrymen. At the same time, the art and delicacy of the modifications by which he refines, without wholly effacing its substance, the relation of the deity to the animal, are just what we should have expected from him, and may almost be thought to carry self-evidence of his handiwork. The peculiar sanctity of the Cows of the Sun in. Od. xii. is, however, shown to us with such elaborate development, that it cannot, I think, be at all under- * Paus. X. 32. 9. 252 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. stood. or accounted for, except as suggested by know- ledge which Homer himself had personally obtained. With these cows there were sheep, belonging in like manner to Eelios, though none of these were eaten by the company of Odusseus (Od. xii. 262-6, 322). These sheep we may properly connect with the ram of Ammon, who, it will be remembered, is often Ammon- Ra, the Sun-Ammon : Ra being, as Wilkinson says, ' the Father of many deities, and combined with others of the 1st, 2nd, and even 3rd order \' The Ra tradi- tions pervaded the Egyptian system ; the disc of the Sun and the crescent of the Moon were placed on the heads of other gods ; and figures in supplication were represented with the emblem near them'\ The case of the Cows in a much more pointed man- ner indicates Egyptian derivation (Od. xii. 262, 343). Nothing can be more tremendous than the penalty of destruction inflicted upon men simply for having fed upon these Cows rather than starve. The explana- tion afforded by Egyptian usages is, however, complete. We learn that it was customary only to feed upon oxen, under severe limitations ; that is, when they had been judged pure according to a variety of marks* which were carefully ascertained. For all other oxen, ' In Rawlinson's Herod., Essay iii., on Book II. ^ Ibid. ^ Herod, ii. 38, and Rawlinson's note. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 253 a mode of burial was provided, and the animal was gene- rally sacred to Apis\ But the cow was sacred in a much higher degree, and was never eaten : so that the inhabitants of Marea and Apis, towns bordering upon Libue, inquiring, at the shrine of Ammon, whether they, as Libyans, might not be allowed cow-beef, were required by the oracle to conform to the Egyptian usage". Herodotos indeed informs us that the Libyans, as far westward as the Tritonian lake, abstained from the use of cows' flesh, like the Egyptians (iv. 186). Neither did they rear swine ; and it is observable that on the Libyan coast, that is to say, in the countries of the Lotophagoi and the Kuklopes, Homer makes no mention of swine. 'The animal was sacred,' says Herodotos, 'to Isis;' whom, Wilkinson tells us, he has here confounded with Athor. The traditions of the two deities intermingle ; and both under certain cir- cumstances carry the cow's head ''. The pervasiveness of the idea of Sun-worship in Egypt supplies the link, which Herodotos does not furnish by the mere names of these goddesses; and gives to Eelios his locus standi, so to speak, as a complainant in the Twelfth Odyssey. It may not be unsuitable to refer jn this place to further indications of foreign knowledge on the part 1 Herod, ii. 41. 38. ^ Ibid. 18. ^ Wilkinson, on Herod, ii. 40. 17 254 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. of Homer, which are afforded by the usages as to food in the sphere of the Outer Geography. In the Greek entertainments of Homer, beef is the staple article of food. Mutton, pork, and goat's flesh are in the second rank. Birds and fish are in no esteem, and are eaten only when nothing else can be had (Od. xii. 331). In the Outer sphere of the Odyssey, the" dietary changes. In the Pylian feast of the Third Odyssey, eighty-one oxen were supplied, and we hear of no other meat (Od. iii. 7). But at the banquet given by Alkinoos in Scherie, the supply consists of twelve sheep, eight hogs, and only two oxen (Od. viii. 59). And the piece selected by Odiisseus, by way of special honour, for the bard is a part of the chine, not as in the Iliad, with Ajax, of an ox, but of a hog. It is not unlikely that Homer based this use of the three kinds of food among the Phaiakes on what he may have known or seen of the Phoenician mariners, who in their free movements over the world would but little represent specialities of diet, highly inconvenient under conditions of life like theirs. But in the Outer World proper, we hear no more of beef. The land of the Kuklopes has goats and sheep exclusively. When Kalupso feeds Odusseus in Ogugie with human viands, and when she stocks his vessel, there is no specifica- tion of particular kinds, such as is given elsewhere EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 255 (Od. vi. 196, 267). The same happens at the table of Kirke (x. 372, 468, xii. 19). But when he sails for Aides, she supplies him with a ram and an ewe. These are to be, and accordingly are in the Eleventh Book (xi. 30, 45), sacrificed to the dead, together with a promise to offer on his return to Ithaca a sheep to Teiresias individually, and to the dead a choice heifer. This is a clear indication that no heifers were used for food in the region where he then was, or Kirke would surely have supplied him with one, as she did with sheep. There are some particulars connected with Egypt which serve to explain these representations. Although swine and their herdsmen were deemed unclean, there was a very particular and solemn injunction for the sacrifice of two swine to Osiris (or Dionusos) and to the Moon, by every Egyptian. So binding was this injunction, that (in the case of the Moon) the poor, who could not supply the animals, offered the figures of swine made of dough \ This sacrifice took place at ' the full moon ; ' but apparently it was at some full moon in particular. That Homer had knowledge of this institution is plain : for in Ithaca we find a feast was kept, of which the special note seems to have been that the swine- • Herod, ii. 47. 8. 25*5 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. herd drove three fat hogs down to the town for sacri- fice (Od. XX. 156, 162). This was indeed a feast sacred to Apollo. But as, according to Herodotos, it was the Moon which was associated with Dionusos (i. e. Osiris) in this particular rite, although he identifies Isis gene- rally with Demeter, it is probable that the Greek Apollo appropriated some at least of the traditions be- longing to Osiris. What is certain from the text is that Homer was aware of some special use of swine in religious ceremonial ; and this does not seem to have been an Hellenic usage. It is then most likely that, knowing of an Egyptian custom, he indicated it in his descriptions of his Outer World, after the manner I have above described : and that the swine sacrifices in Ithaca were a note of foreign settlement there. But we have also seen certain indications in the Homeric Outer World, which have the appearance of being derived from a region where the flesh of sheep was more in use than that of cattle. Now this also would appear to have been characteristic of Egypt in the historic times. Herodotos has a passage in which he describes the Egyptians as abstaining from the use of flesh generally, with the exception of mutton ^ On the other hand, in describing the seven castes or classes of the Egyptians, he names cowherds {^ovkoXol), and ' Herod, ii. 45. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 257 swineherds (a-n/Scorai, ii. 164), but not shepherds. Now Plato, in the Timaios, reports a story told to Solon in Egypt, which gives six classes, and among them that of nomeis, which includes shepherds as well as herds- men \ Diodoros' also gives three classes, of whom nomeis are one, again including shepherds. But the declaration in Herod, ii. 45, as to the permission to slay and therefore feed on sheep, and on oxen declared pure, is so express as to make it certain that Herodotos, if he did not include shepherds in the word boucoloi^, has in this instance committed an oversight. His affirm- ative statement as to the use of mutton is rendered es- pecially definite by his observing that it did not extend to the inhabitants of the nome of Thebes, or to those who worshipped the Theban Zeus, namely, Amun-Ra*. All these ate goat's flesh : from which, again, the in- habitants of the Mendesian nome abstained, as Pan was held in great honour there, and as he was asso- ciated symbolically with the form of the goat. We must not indeed forget that we find written in the Book of Genesis^, that every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians ; and Joseph enjoined his brethren to assure the King that they were herdsmen from their youth up. The statement is totally different from the * Tim. iii. 24. Steph. Diod. i. 74. ^ Herod, ii. 42. * Ibid. 46. ' Gen. xlvi. 31-4 258 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. testimony of the authors we have quoted. But this circumstance imports no discredit to either. The ac- counts refer to periods very widely separated. I do not suppose that the period of Joseph's visit is, as yet, by any general consent absolutely assigned to any fixed date of Egyptian history as exhibited by the monu- ments. But it is probably safe under the circumstances to assume that the sojourn of Joseph must have been, if not, as some think, under the Hyksos or Shepherd Kings, yet in close proximity to their era. The struggle between these Nomads and Egypt appears to have been prolonged and formidable. All through that period, and as long as the remembrance of it continued to be lively in the popular mind, there was therefore a reason of a temporary character for hostility to the profession of Shepherds, and for aversion to the animal with which it was concerned, such as, not being founded on a permanent principle, would naturally pass away. The date of the Troica and of Homer was, it is pretty plain, after the Exodus, and therefore very long after the entry of the Israelites into Egypt, with which event the declaration in Genesis is associated. There is, I understand, a question, whether the Hebrew is rightly translated in the passage I have been con- sidering. Savile (on the Truth of the Bible, p. 239) says it might be rendered ' every consecrated goat is EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 259 an idol^ or object of worship with the Egyptians.' The Septuagint corresponds with the Authorised Version. With reference to what has been said of Ithaca, I may observe that the Poems supply many indications of foreign settlement in the island. Odusseus is the only Greek who in either Poem is represented to us as capable of producing a true work of art ; and this title is certainly due to the bedstead which he wrought (Od. xxiii. 184-204), and inlaid with gold, silver, and ivory. Next, we find in Ithaca the remarkable circum- stance that one of the prominent men of the island, remarkable for his wide knowledge, was named Ai- guptios\ He led in the Assembly of Book II, bears the title of heros, and had a son among the Suitors of Penelope. We have also here the harbour of PhorcQs, the old man of the sea (Od. xiii. 96, 345) ; the legendary Father of Thoosa, who bore Poluphemos to Poseidon (i. 70-3). This local appellation is indeed the most direct indication of foreign settlement at an)- particular point in Greece, which Homer has anywhere afforded us : and both the situation of Ithaca, and its beautiful and singularly sheltered harbour rendered it an admirable site for a factory or depot in the early days of navigation. There is but one PhorcQs intro- » Od. ii. 18. 26o TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. duced to us in the Poems, and he is leader of the Phrygians, a stock who competed with the Egyptians for ethnical seniority \ I may add, without entering into arguments which would occupy some space, that I think the swine-herd Eumaios may be shown, from a variety of marks which he bears, to have belonged, if not to Egypt, yet to its near vicinity. Passing now to minor resemblances, it may be worth while to notice, among these, that on the Shield the Hephaistos of Homer represents the Moon by the Sun, not in the form of a smaller disc, but of a crescent. So, at least, I have undertaken to render the term TiXr]6ovaav (II. xviii. 484) ; with what amount of assent I do not know. ' This was the mode/ says Wilkinson, ' adopted in Egypt, when the emblems of Sun and Moon were placed over the heads of deities '\' They were thus clearly and characteristically distinguished. Again, I have observed that the physicians, or healers, of the Greek camp, Podalirios and Machaon, enjoy the patronymic Asklepiades (II. iv. 204, xi. 613, xiv. 2) ; from which it follows, according to Homeric rule, that Asklepios was not, in Homer's mind, pro- perly a god. Now Wilkinson tells us that the Egyptian ' Pans. i. 14. 2. p. 34. * Essay iii. on Book II. of Rawlinson's Herodotus. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. l6l Asklepios \ though the son of Pthah, was not one of the twelve gods of the second order, not, therefore, one of the twenty whom, there is some reason for thinking. Homer supposed to make up the Egyptian thearchy. A very pecuhar conception of Homer is his sever- ance of the component elements of the human being after death. In the opening passage of the Iliad (i. 4) the shade or spirit passes to the Under-world, but the man himself (autos) remains a prey to dogs and birds of prey. More pointed is the division in the Heracles of the Eleventh Odyssey, where the Shade (eidolon) is seen below, but the man or person (autos) is enjoying himself among the Immortals. Some light seems to be thrown upon this by the Book of the Dead, where a picture represents the corpse of the dead man marching, wath his Soul behind it offering up prayers to the Sun-god". Again, the word eidolon seems to be associated, if not identified with Psuche by II. xxiii. 104. Some similar severance Lauth finds in one of the speeches of the departed in the Book of the Dead'. The Aiolid houses of Homer, and some others, have the honour of a divine descent ; often stated expressly ' Essay on Book ii. of Herod. Rawlinson's Herod, ii. 293. * Bunsen's Egypt, vol. i. p. 26. (Transl.) ^ Lauth, p. 23. 262 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. as in the case of Dardanos, or traceable piecemeal, perhaps, in other cases, from the first human ancestor. It is also the practice of the Poet to indicate the con- nection between sovereignty and deity in a very marked manner by the two epithets, — 1. Diotrephes, 2. Diogenes, His use of the word aixvfxou}' tends also to connect it very closely, if not invariably, with some special relation to Deity. In II. ii. 640, sovereigns, as a class, seem to be called Diotrephees aizeoi. It is notable that, as Homer goes further back, he assumes a closer connection of man with Deity. The divine names of certain objects, it seems to be agreed, are the older names \ So while Diotrephes is limited as above in the Hellenic or homeward zone, in the case of the Phaiakes, who belong to the Outer world, Vv'e have it applied to the whole race (Od. v. 378). Again, am union is an epithet of individuals in Greece; but it is applied (II. i. 423) to the Aithiopes collectively. It may not be inadmissible to treat as a poetical trope this idea of kings as god-born or god-reared. But the Egyptian monuments give a much greater ' I am tempted, however, to suggest that this distinction of a divine and a human nomenclature may have had some relation to a distinction like that of the hieratic and demotic speech in Egypt mentioned by Herodotos. EGFPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 263 solidity to the conception. Herodotos has suppHed an indication of it in his report that, before the human sovereigns of Egypt, the gods were kings there, down to Horos, the son of Osiris (ii. 144). Manetho, in Eusebius, gives us a series of dynasties of gods before mortals began to reign ; and the Turin papyrus has supplied documentary evidence to the same effect '. Thus, the order of Kings, following and taking up the work of the order of gods, afforded a most natural basis for the ascription to them of divine origin. Yet more evident is this, when we find that the divine title Ra (the Sun) was incorporated for a length of time in the personal names of the Pharaohs or Egyp- tian Sovereigns, Upon the exact number of the Olympian gods Homer has not committed himself, for the mythology he represents to us is one not fully formed, but in the course of formation, I have endeavoured, however, to show that the personages entitled to a seat in the select or smaller Assembly of Olumpos, corresponding with the Boule of human polities, closely approximate in number to twenty. And a plain indication on this subject is supplied by the passage (II. xviii. t^J ^) in which Hephaistos is represented as having constructed V ^ Bunsen's Eg)pt, vol. i. p. 361, seqq. (Transl.) 264 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. twenty seats for the use of the Immortals on the Mountain. The Egyptian gods were constituted, according to Herodotos, in three orders, which differed in point of seniority. The first order consisted of eight, the second of twelve ; the third order was derivative, possibly ambiguous, its members being children of or proceeding from the second, and their number not being limited. If the tradition which Herodotos re- ceived from the Egyptian priests was as old as Homer, then it would appear probable that the number of Twenty, which he has indicated for the deities of Olumpos, and which represents the sum of the two first Egyptian orders, was copied from the theistic system of that country. I do not know whether I am justified by the general sense of scholars in connecting the numerical specula- tions of Plato in the Timaios, and also in the Fhilebos, with an Egyptian source. This connection, however, appears to be more than probable. His travelling in Egypt is an accepted fact of a great life obscurely known \ Egyptian archaeology has disclosed that attention ■ to geometrical and arithmetical study in Egypt, which the single fact of the inundations of the Nile went far to impose as matter of necessity. * Grote's Plato, vol. i. p. 121. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 265 The supreme rank of this description of knowledge has been indicated by Aischulos in the Prometheus, Ka\ firjv dpidfiov e^O)(OV aocf)i(TfjiaTcjv i^fvpov aiiTois ^. And this passage of itself seems to give the discovery a pre-Hellenic and foreign stamp. Mr. Jowett points out some most important associations, in which Number was placed by the ancients -. In conjunction with other indications it is remarkable that the only narrative, and the only phrase {TTeiiTtaacTeTaL Od. iv. 412) describing actual computation in the Poems should be in the case of Proteus, a preternatural and also an Egyptian personage. Without at all professing to furnish a complete account of the work, I will now give a list of some cases in which Professor Lauth in his Homer und ^gypten derives from Egyptian sources the terms used by the Poet. Huperion, the epithet of P2elios, from Horos^ the ' one above ' {dcr oberc), as the representative and fol- lower of the Supreme God. In the number 350 ( = 7 x 50) of the cows and the sheep (Od. xii. 128), he traces the days of the lunar year, and he compares the word poea, * Prom. Viiict. 457. * Jowett's Plato, vol. iii. p. 588, Introduction to Timaios. 266 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. there used for the sheep, with the Coptic pohi of the same meaning. He points, also, to the frequent recur- rence of the number seven in the Egyptian combinations. With the Elusion pedion of Homer's West he compares the field Aalu with its spirits of light in the East. Homer, I observe, would thus appear to have exchanged the positions both of the Elysian plain and the mouth of Aides (p. 5). He shows reasons for ascribing considerable geo- graphical knowledge to the Egyptians (p. 7) ; and for supposing there were Aithiopes of Arabia, while he supposes that the visit of Poseidon (Od. i. 22) to that people was meant to imply his passing to the Red Sea from the Mediterranean. The Hauvanu among the conquered peoples of King Sanch-ke-ra, of the Eleventh Dynasty, he takes to be Hellenes (p. 9). I do not, however, suppose that name can safely be thrown back to a period over 2,000 years, or, according to Lauth, 2,600 years B.C. In the name Punt, applied to Arabia in the Book of the Dead, and now represented by Pun in the Dinka language, he finds the base of Poenus, and Phoinikeos (p. 10). Phoinix, the bird, and Phoinix, the palm, he finds in the Egyptian words benne and benmi. The Sidon of Homer is Ziduna, and Tyre is Zar ; but this name is not Homeric, unless as far as it appears in EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 267 Turo (Od. xi.). With the Hauvanu, the people over or ' behind the sea,' he connects Javan and the laones (p. 12). The name Hauvanu continued to be the standing name for Greeks upon the later monuments. It may be well to bear in mind that Attica, and Attica alone, is in the Poems the seat of the laones, and that it was a strong legendary connection with Egyptian immigration or dominion. He understands the names Tennu, Tanau, and Danj, referring to a foreign people^ to correspond with the Greek ^Danaoi ; and observes that, according to Manetho, Armais, the brother of Sethosis, himself called Aiguptos, was called Danaos (pp. 12, 13). In the former he sees a domestic name : in the latter, one connected with a foreign race or site. Of the name Akaiuscha I have already spoken ; he well compares its termination with Ntariwusch = Dareios. Scherie is akin to chersos, cherros, and means the shore or land as distinguished from the sea (p. 14). The Greek Aides, the ' unseen ' (which he places in the West), he compares with ajiiiui, meaning the hidden, according to Manetho, which he takes to be the root of Amenti. The lotos of the Lotophagoi, which in the historic times continued to distinguish a portion of the Libyan coast, he derives from the Egyptian rot, a herb; 268 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. observing that the Baschmur dialect substituted / for r, and that this usage may still be found in the Delta (p. 1 6). In the Book of the Dead, a picture represents an Island, not inhabited by the departed spirits, with the inscription ' The God of it is Ra ' ; obviously the basis of the Homeric Thrinakie, occupied by his cows and flocks, with the attendant Nymphs who were his offspring (Od; xii. 127-36). The dimension of seven ells, assigned to the Shades, he regards, with less high probability I think, as supplying the suggestion of Homei^'s giant races (p. 19). Lamos of Laistrugonie he supposes to come from the Egyptian, and to mean 'all-eater' (p. 20). The Colchiones, under the name KalcJia, bring tributes of linen to Egypt, as do the ScJiaj'dana ; and Herodotos says that the Colchian linen is called Sardonic (Sardinian) by the Greeks (Herod, ii. 105). Lauth also connects the name of Kirke with Colchoi (pp. 20, i). Teiresias he derives from repas, Egypt being the wonderland ; and he takes the promise of a black sheep for sacrifice to him, and of a ram and sheep, both black for Persephone (Od. x. 527) as southern as.sociations. The crossing of the Nile on the way to Amenti is the crossing of Okeanos (Od. x. 508). No light has as yet to my knowledge been thrown on the poplars and willows (Od. x. 510) of the Under- EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 269 world, except in so far that both Osiris and Isis appear to have had associations with trees, not common in Egypt \ * Under-world ' is his interpretation of Acheru, which corresponds with the Acheron of Homer (p. 23). The name of, Charon, which does not occur in Homer, but is declared by Diodoros to be Egyptian, appears in Caro^, the conductor. Lethe he finds in the town of Sechem, meaning ' know-not,' which the Greeks translate by Letopolis. Pcr-scJm in Egyptian is the flash of light, which I may observe agrees with Perse, the mother of Kirke, the Sun being the father. Gorgo, our author thinks, may be referred to garJm, the night (p. 23). The scirenes he refers to scJii-i^ennet ; rennet stands for virgin. He takes T/irinakie not to be Sicily, but to be the island called in the monuments the island of the Sun, between the Planctai and the Sculle-Charubdis passage: rendering T-hri-ndchiii as 'the between-prongs,' i.e., rocks. Rhadamanthus is Ret-amenti^ the man of Amenti. This has the air of an unexceptionable derivation ; but Rhadamanthus has (Od. vii. 323) the epithet ^avObs, auburn-haired, which is nowhere else, I think, given to an Eastern or ^ Botticher, Baumcultus der Hellenen, p. 498. ^ Rendered by Lauth ' Fuhrmann, Farche' ; apparently suggesting an etynaological correspondence with the latter word, which, though not found in the ordinary German, is, as I learn from Dr. Birch, said to be in use in German Switzerland. 18 i 370 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. Southern personage ; and though Aa/u (p. 27) lay to the East of Memphis, I hold fast by the locaHsation of Elysium in the West, determined by the fanning of the new-born Zephyrs (Od. iv. 567). Briareus is, according to Lauth, from the Egyptian, and Aigaion a translation of it. His reasoning on this passage again raises the question whether in those three passages^ of Homer where a divine and a human name are severally specified for the same object, the hieratic speech of Egypt can be meant by the first, and the demotic by the second. For the equivalent of Teucri we have Tekharu ; but the word is not in Homer, except as the name of the spurious brother of the Telamonian Aias. Driksu = Thrakes and Makedan = Makedon. Kckemi seems to be Kikones, and Maron (the priest of Apollo, whose name Lauth connects with that of Baal,) may be the name Marina, great lord (p. 33). Aiguptos renders Aquipto, the mid-point of earth, a title found in one of the inscriptions (p. 35) ; and P-aa-ro, the island at the mouth, represents Pharos (p. 36). The famous Greek name Thebai has been found in Ta-vabti, land of the sceptre. With Paieon is compared /fl-mt7«, 'the man for illnesses.' The King Pupui, of the Sixth Dynasty, made the ^ II. i. 403; xiv. 291 ; XX. 74. EGYPTIAN AND FOREIGN KNOWLEDGE OF HOMER. 2/1 wonderful lake of Mceris. From this name Lauth ingeniously deduces the Homeric exclamation w ttottoi, in competition with the derivation obtained from Plutarch (De Aud. Poet.), who informs us that the Aruopes called the gods popoi. I sis he refers to zV/, an eye, or the Coptic eirJie, a ray (p. 43). Echetos, the nose and ear-cutter, the proverbial bug-bear of the Odyssey, he traces to Actisanes, famous for his cruelty, who formed a settlement of men thus mutilated on the confines of the Syrian desert. More especially since this name appears in Manetho as Achthors, and on one of the monuments as Ahtes. The Phoenician resorting to Egypt (Od. xiv. 287) he compares with the statement of Manetho, that the Shepherd Kings were Phoenicians. Such are some of the more salient observations of Professor Lauth. In quitting the subject, I will briefly refer to the antecedent likelihood of Homer's possession of Egyptian knowledge. I have referred to the two sources of such knowledge for his age in general. Now, not only is it probable that Homer had personal access to these sources, but we may almost say it is certain. Certain, by reason not solely, nor perhaps mainly, of the activity of his mind and his vast power of appropriation, but also because of his station as a Bard. Families of foreign extraction, Aiolids and others, we have the 372 TIME AND PLACE OF HOMER. strongest reason to believe, held princely positions in Greece. But it was especially in the Courts of Princes that the professional minstrel was found, and there not as a menial or as an occasional visitant, but as a permanent and confidential member of the household. To these same Courts did mariners resort with slaves, or ornaments, or any article of luxury, to dispose of. So that, as an incident of his proper work and station, the Poet must have been in the way of gathering all the whispers wafted from the East and South, whether by seamen, by immigrants, or by official representatives of the great Empire and their naturalised descendants. INDEX. A. Aalu, compared with Elusion pedion, 266. Abantes, their place in the Greek army, S3. Accadian cosmological conception, its correspondence with Homer, 230- Achaia, Grecian, Homer's allusions to, 73 ; its position after tlie in- vasion of the Heraclids, 73 ; the inhabitants of, 130 et seq., 141 et seq. Achaian Army, engaged at the Siege of Troy, 38. Achaian Link, the, 121, 130 et seq. Achaiushu, of the Egyptian monu- ments, their supposed identity with the Achaians discussed, 130; 141, et seq. Acheloos, R., 83. Achilles, the dagger of, 46 ; the shield of, 55, c,,,) et seq., 226; thfB.^ Dance represented upon the shield of, 69 ; Homer's representation of, 100 ; exceptional character of his invocation of the River Sper- cheios, 106 ; the contingent of, 132 ; the family of, 133 ; and the Theban supremacy, 150 et seq.; destroys Hupoplakian Thebes, 176; his character, suggested by Rameses H, 199; otherwise men- tioned, 24, 26 et seq., 34, 53 et seq., 162, 170; Egyptian character of the moon on the shield of, 260. Actisanes, 271. Aegean Sea, 102. Aeschylus, 107. Agamemnon, the armour of, 46, 55; the helmet of, 63 ; otherwise men- tioned, 25, 59, 150. Ahmes, 149. Aiaia, the island of, 227. Aiakos, 133. Aides, the kingship of Minos* in, 213; in Homer, 220, 222 et seq.; eastern position of, 227; Gates of, 234; Egyptian and Homeric ideas of access to, 238 ; Egyptian name for, 240; the 'unseen,' 267. Aidoneus, character of, 235; his relations with Persephoneia, 235. Aigagie, 103. Aigene, epithet applied to, in the Hymn to Apollo, loi, 132. Aiguptios, a prominent man in Ithaca, 259. Aiguptos, 184, 211, 267, 270. Aineias, the character of, 34 ; tended by Leto, 96; the date of, 123; his descent from Dardanos, 126. Aiolia, 74. Aiolic Lion, Grote on the history of the, 22 et seq. Aiolic Migration, 75. Aiolos, of Homer, probably a my- thical Eponymist, 74, 215; the descendants of, 138. Aisepos, R., Memnon's tomb on the banks of the, 168. Aisuetes, the tomb of, 27. Aithiopes, to be included in Egypt, 209. y Ajax, Telamonian, 1 7 Akrocane, 103. 274 INDEX. Alcmene, of foreign extraction, 216. Amanus, M., 175. Amenophis III, 167. Ammon, Karnak inscription and, 138; his designation on all the monuments, 241 ; his resemblance to Zeus, 250. Amphion, 159, 191. Amphitrite, her character in the Odyssey, 109 et seq. Ampux, the. 50. Amiimon, the use of the word, 262. Amuntor, 6q. Anadestne, the, 50. Anax andron, note of foreign ex- traction, 215. Anchises, 124, 126. Andromache, the desmata signloenta of, 49 ; otherwise mentioned, 44, 176. Antilochus, 169. Antiope, non-Hellenic, 217. Aphrodite, 49, 67. Apollo, the Hymn to, 78, 87 ; worshipped at Chemmis, 93 ; Homer's conception of, 106, 112 et seq. ; connected by Homer with the Lukian race, 104; universal worship of, 105 ; superior to Leto, in Homer, 108 ; Kunthian epithet applied to, 114; identical with Horos, 246 ; his connection with the Sun-god Ra, 247 : and Osiris. 248. Apollo, Delian, Hymn to, its author ship, 87 et seq. ; Thucydides on the authorship of the, 89 ; internal evidence adverse to the Homeric theory, 90 et seq.; the deities of Olumpos trembling before Apollo in the, 94 ; its manifest inferiority to the Iliad, 95 : Zeus handing the cup of nectar to Apollo in the, 97 ; description of Apollo's birth in the, 98 ; Apollo represented as a lover of scenery in the, 98 ; local origin assigned to the god in the, 99; geographical details in the, loi ; its want of proper arrangement, • ib.; un ■ Homeric 'padding' of the, ib. ; indication of the author's birth region in the, 102 ; wanting in the sentiment of nationality, ib. ; posterior to Do- rian Conquest, ib ; Continental Greece scarcely mentioned in the, ib. ; descriptions of Lesbos and Chios in the, 103; verbal dis- crepancies between the Homeric text and the, 105 et seq., 107, 113 et seq.; inconsistent with Homer's conception of the god, 106 ; assigns to Koios a paternity Hesiodic but un-Homeric, 107; un-Homeric epithets in the, 107, 109, 11.^, 114, 115; un-Homeric description of the kbour of Leto in the, 108; Eilithuia in the, no, 112; Demeter in the, ib. ; un- Homeric use of the word ehibasken in the, 113; materialism of the author of, in his representations of the higher gods, 114; the assemblage of lonians in honour of Apollo, un-Homeric, 115 ; song-dance of the women in the, 116 ; criticism of the closing pas- sages of, ib., et seq. Apollodorus, 123. 175. Archipelago, Homer's mention of towns of the, 102. Ar^s, 26, 67. Argo, the Ship, 121, 189, 192, 193. Argolis, 133. Argonautic Expedition, its probable cause, 192 ; its object and char- *.^"acter, 193. Argos, 79, 81, 131. Ariadne, 213. Aristophanes, 50, 87 et seq. Armenia, combination between the Asiatic nations of the Assyrian plain and, 127. Artemis, birth of Apollo and. 98. Artist, the province of the, 56. Aryan Race, primitive sacred em- blems of the, 63 ; Trojan and Hellene probably belong to the, 65- Ascalon, 165. Asclepios, 260, INDEX. ^U Asiatic Colonies, their influence upon Greek literature and philo- sophy, 82. Asia Minor, Homer's imperfect knowledge of, 79 ; Homer's men- tion of towns of, 102. Assarakos, 126. Assyrian Research, its bearing on Homerology, (introd.) 11. Astuanax, 126. Athene, her temple on the Pergamos, 60 ; solemn procession to her temple, in the Sixth Iliad, 65 ; the statue of. 66; mentioned in the Iliad, 8S ; her place in Olumpos, according to Homer, 96 ; epithet Kitdislt', restricted to, 107 ; not the mentioned in the account of Leto's labour, in the Hymn to Delian Apollo, 109: relation between the Neith of Egypt and, 248. Athens, \V. Schliemann's reference to, 36; Apollo's visit to, loi ; mention of in the Hymn, 102 ; not specially connected with Apollo, 103. Athos, 103. Aulis, the Troic expedition assem- bled at, 135. B. Badide, identical with Poseidon, 244. Balidag, or Bournabashi, site of Troy, •22, 24, 76 et seq. Bellerophon, his knowledge of writing, 63 ; the legend of, 133. Biot, M., on the date of Rameses III, 144. Boiotoi, Homer's list of the towns of the, loi. Boopis, meaning of the epithet, 249 et seq. Briareus, 270. Buto, a city of Egypt, 93. C. Cadmeians, the, 136, 149. Calupso, 113. Caro, compared with Charon, 269. Cesnola, General, his important researches in Cyprus, 19. Chabas, M., on the Tyrrhenian settlement, 141. Chaldean cosmological conceptions, correspondence of with Homer, 230 ; resemblance of to true doc- trine, 231. Chalkos, 48. Chalubes, their probable identity with Ckirabu, 128. Charon, 269. Chemmis, Temple of Apollo in, 93. Chios, the Blind bard of, 89, n8; Homeric description of, 103. Chirabu (see Chalubes). Chloris, non-Hellenic, 218, Cilicians (see Kilikes). Cnidos, 103. Colchians, Pindar and Herodotos respecting the, 1^9; description of in the Book of the Dead, 268. Conze, Professor, on the date of Homer, 56 ; tone adopted by, 71. Coos, epithet applied to, in the Hymn to Apollo, loi. Coroebus, the Olympiad of, (introd.) Cosmic regions, the three gods of the, 232. Cosmology of Homer, 221. Crete, loi, 132. Croisos, 91. Cuma, the founding of, 75 ; Curos, 91 ; Cuzicos on the Proponlis, 75. Cypriote inscriptions, 64 ; Cyprus, General Cesnola's researches in, 19; strongly connected with PhcE- nicia, 64 ; under Hellenic influ- ence, 180. D. Daanau (see Danaoi). Daidala, Pausanias respecting, 67. Daidalos, origin of the name, 67. Damm, Lexicoti Homericum, 130. Danaoi, probably the Eg)'ptian Daanau, 145, 147 et seq. ; com- pared with Tennu and Danj, 267. Danj. 267. Dante, 61. Dardanian link, the, 121 et seq.; Dardanian Gates, the, 124. 27^ INDEX. Dardanie, the old, 25, 35, 123, 128. Dardanos, 123; the dynasty of, 1 26 ; the epoch of, 1 29. Dareios, 91. Dares, 113. David, Egypt in the time of, 157. Dead, abode of the, in Homer (see Aides. Egyptians). — sacrifice to the, in Homer, 239. — Book of the, compared with Homer, 261. D'Eichthal, M., on the Bournabashi site of Troy, '23. Delos, Egyptian origin of the story of, 93 ; minute description of, in the Hymn to Apollo, 97 ; other- wise mentioned, 99, 101, 113, 117. Demeter,how represented by Homer, 1 10. Demetrius of Skepsis, 22, 27. Diodorus Siculus, 152. Diogenes, 262, Dione, 109 et seq. Diotrephes, meaning of the epithet, 262. Donne, Mr., on the Thebes of Egypt, 157- Dorian Conquest, 72. 74. 77, §5, Dorians, the, 73, 81, J 32. Dumbrek-tschai (see Simois). Diintzer, Hotnerische Tragen, (introd.) 13- E. Ebihashen, an un-Homeric word, 113. Echetos, 271. Echinades, the, 83. Eckenbrecher, Dr. von, 22 et seq., 24. Eetion, King of Thebe, 149, 158, 176 et seq. Egj'ptian Chronology, Homer's place in the, (introd.) 9, 11, 15; when absolutely trustworthy, 144. — dynasties, (introd.) 12. — monuments, (introd.) 13 et seq.; Homer and the, 121 et seq. Egyptians, the collision between the Achaians and the, 137; Greek peninsula and isles subject to the, 139; at war with invaders from Greece, 144; war with White (or Aryan) Libyans, 145 ; Greeks and, 147; shepherd kings of the, 154; supplied horses to Solomon, 155 ; decadence, 157, iqi ; and Greeks at the period of the Troica, 167 ; the Grecian allies of the, 174; influence of the, concealed in the Homeric poems. 196 ; names, characteristic of the three expedi- tions against the, 202 ; Homer's knowledge of the, 207 ; indica- tions of the influence of the, ib. ; in- dications of the, meagreness of ap- parent, 210; knowledge of the, surface indications of, in Homer, 211; medical skill of the, 212; the moral element in their representa- tion of a future state, 237; their idea of access to Aides, 238 ; Homer's Sacrifices to the dead, taken from the, 239 ; traditions of the, traceable in the mythology of Homer, 240 ; sanctity of the Cows of the Sun amongst the, 251 et seq. ; sacrifice of Swine to the Moon by the, 255; Castes amongst the, 256 ; use of sheep amongst the, ib. ; the idea of the Divine right of kings derived from the, 262 ; order of the gods amongst the, 264 ; Plato's numerical specu- lations, derived from the, ib. Egypt, the horse of Homer chiefly related to, 153; date of the Exodus from, 161 ; no name in Homer for, 211 ; the sphere repaired to by Menelaos for knowledge. 233 ; solar worship in, 241 ; in the time of David and Solomon, i^T \ the three expeditions against, 202. Eilithuia, 88, 110, 112. Eiresiai, 102 et seq. Elis. the contingent of, 83 ; inhabit- ants of, 132. Elkeckitvries, meaning of the epithet, 115. Elysian plain, western position of the, 227; nature of, 228; com- pared with Aalu, 266. Epeians, the, 133, 136. INDEX. 277 Epicaste, 218. Epigonoi, the, expedition of, 191. Eratosthenes, (intiod.) 13. Erebos, in Homer, 220; eastern position of, 227. Ericthonios, 126. Erinus, the, 106. Eriphule, of foreign origin, 219. Espin, M., Preface to the Book of Joshua by, 161. Ethnography, Genesis the valuable source of ancient, 160. Etor, the divine, 115. Etruria, antique shields brought from, 60. Euboia. the position of the Locrians with reference to, 83; otherwise mentioned, loi. 104. Eumaios, the dwelling of, 47 ; otherwise mentioned, 84, 184. Euphorbos, 54, 59. Europe, the primeval cities of, 39. Eurupulos, 170 et seq. Eurus, 227. Eustathios, 50. Flaxman and the Shield of Achilles, 61. Food, usages as to, in Homer, 254. Fore-Asia, evidences of a connection between the Kheta and the N.W. of, 175. G. Gades, the founding of, 164. Ganumedes, 126. Germany, Homerology in (introd.) 8. Ghiberti, his work compared with the Shield of Achilles, 61 Gorgon's head, 233. Grseco-Phoenician art, 61. Graian name, the, 1 36. Graves and Spratt, Messrs., their services to Homerology, 21. Greece, Danaan immigration into, 147- Grote, on the Aeolic Lion, 22 et seq. ; on the story of the Argo, 192. H. Hauvanu, the, compared with the Hellenes, 266. Havanu, 123. Harris papyrus, the, 146. Hebrew records, relation between Homerology and the chronology of the, 12. Hecatombe, Homeric use of the word, 151. Hector, the chase of, 24 et seq., 31, 44 ; his passage to the Skaian Gates, 36 ; and Andromache, 49 ; treatment of the corpse of, 239 ; otherwise mentioned, 24, 27, 37, 126. Helen, 156. Hellenes, high standard of morality amongst the, 68 ; progress of the, 136 ; gods of the, their derivation from Egypt, 251 ; compared with Hauvanu, 266. Hephaistos, 54, 61. Heracles, the belt of, 55, 59; oath of Zeus before the birth of, 108 ; temple of, 162 ; Alcmene, the mother of, 216. Heraclids, Homer's silence respect- ing the Return of the, 79 ; prob- able effect of their Return, 79 ; date of the Return of the, 93. Here, Homer's description of, 94, 96 ; Zeus' oath to, before the birth of Heracles, imitated in the Hymn to Apollo, 108 ; and The- mis, 112 ; and the Achaian Link, 133; her love for Jason, 194; her connection with Isis, 249 ; the Achaian goddess, 294 ; other- wise mentioned, 88, iii. Hermes, 29, 11 1; the Repast of, "3- Hermos, R., 75. Herodotos, concerning Chemmis and Delos, 93 ; on the antiquity of an Egyptian temple of Heracles, 162 ; his account of Rhampsini- tus, 232 ; his account of Posei- don's name, 243. Hesiod, 135. 278 INDEX. Hestiaia, 22, 27. Hissarlik, as the site of Troy, 26 et seq., 30; Homer and, 32 et seq. ; the Pergamos or citadel of Troy, 36. Hissarlik Remains, implements found amongst the, 45; Phoenician ori- gin of the Trojan walls demon- strated by the, ib. ; copper wea- pons, etc. amongst the, 48 ; gold- headed ornaments amongst the, 49; description of certain 'blades' amongst the, 52; gold and silver vases amongst the, 53 ; idols a- mongst the, 55 ; the choicest work of art amongst the, ib. ; Professor Conze on the, 56 et seq. ; Homer occasionally behind the, 63 ; marks upon the vases, etc. in the, ib. ; absence of Phoe- nician characters on the, ib. ; Homeric Poems more Archaic than the, 65 ; traces of statues amongst the, 66 ; the chief dis- crepancy between the Homeric poems and the manners revealed by the, 68 ; ' images of pollution ' amongst the, ib. ; pottery amongst the, 69 ; favourable to theory of Homer's proximity to TrojanWar, ib.; traces of coins amongst the, 70. Hittites, the, 127, 139. Homer, the critics of, (introd.) 7 ; liis place in history, 9 ; in Egyp- tian chronology, ib. ; his account of the Trojan War, ib. ; his chro- nology to be found in his gene- alogies, 10; date of, 10, 13 et seq., 15, 56, 72, 74, 85 ; Assyrian research in connection with, 1 1 ; probable meaning of the name, ib. ; distinct relation of time be- tween the poems of, 12; the stu- dents of, in the present century, ib. ; the European habitat of, 14; the personality of, 15; the East- ern knowledge of, ib. ; and the Plain of Troy, 19 et seq.; the value of his testimony respecting Troy, 26 ; his connection with the Asiatic Greeks, 33; his ac- quaintance with Troas and Troy, 41 ; the kuanos of, 45 ; iron ex- tremely rare and precious in, 46; stone rarely mentioned in, 47 ; the talanta of, 52 ; silver vases, etc. in, 53; the 'bowls' men- tioned in, 54; fine art in, 56; state of art in the time of 54 et seq.; metallic works of art men- tioned by, 59 ; the sources of his knowledge of objects of art, ib. et seq. ; the epoch and nationality of, 62 ; writing only once men- tioned by, 63 ; great antiquity of the poems of, 65 ; the eclecticism of, 67 ; the refined sense of, 68 ; pottery in the age of, 70 ; fine work in ivory in the time of, ib. ; the nationality of, 72. 90; as to his being an Achaian Greek, 73 ; cannot be regarded as an Aiolian Greek, 75 ; the Greek Catalogue in, 77, loi ; his division of the Arctic days and nights, ib. ; geographical knowledge of, 78 ; not an Asiatic Greek, 78, 82, 86 ; the Trojan Catalogue of, 78 ; the Achaian spirit of, 79 et seq., 83 ; traditions respecting the birthplace of, 80; cities claiming to be the birth- place of 81 ; the Asiatic charac- ter of the poems of, ib. ; the Zephuros of 85 ; not, necessarily, the ' blind bard of Chios ' men- tioned by Thucydides, 92 et seq. ; his silence respecting the Return of the Heraclids, 93 ; the order in Olumpos, as represented by, 94 et seq , 97, 109 ; the anthropo- morphism of, 95 ; his purpose in naming certain Phaiakian youths, 100 ; eminently characteristic epi- thets of, 101 ; never invokes or personifies places and regions, 105 ; his conception of Apollo, 106 et seq., 112 et seq., 114 et seq., 117; the Hymn to Delian Apollo inconsistent with his conception of the god, 101 : force oi Ata'tha- lie in, 107 ; separates pain and in- INDEX. 279 firmity from the divine nature, 108 ; his conception of Themis, 109 ; his conception of Leto, ib. ; the Repast of Hermes, 113; ma- terialism, in respect of the higher gods, always delicately modified in, ik; his employment of the word elkechitories, 1 15 et seq. ; Mr. Godley's instance of a discrepancy between the Hymn to Apollo and the style of, 117; and the Egyptian monuments, 121 et seq.; and Sesostris, 122; associates Memnon with the East, 168; his treatment nf personal beauty, 169; his description of the hum of the Trojan army, 176 ; his idea of the Kheta, 177 ; on the Egyptian and foreign knowledge of, 206 et seq. ; geography of, ib. ; ruling families of foreign origin in, 208 ; foreign character of the Underworld of, 213; Nature, forces, and human beings broadly separated by, 214 ; relation between North and South in, 228; his idea of access to Aides, 238; Sacrifices to the Dead in, 239 ; usages as to food in, 254; the Book of the Dead com- pared with, 261; antecedent pro- bability of his possessing Egyp- tian knowledge, 271. Homeric Hymns, general opinion concerning the, 87. Horos, identical with Apollo, 246. Huperion, 247, 265. Hupnos, Here's gift to, iii. I. Ichnaie, not a Homeric epithet for Themis, 109. Ida, Mount, its position in relation to Troy, 25 ; Hissarlik visible from, 28. Ilgen, on the Hymni Homeric!, 88, 91 ; other allusions to the criti- cisms of, 106 et seq., 114, 116. Iliad, Homer's, 33, 88. Ilios, 174. Ilos, 126, 129. Images, use of, for religious wor- ship, 65. Imbros, 104. Ino Leucothee, 50, Inopos, 97. lonians, assembly of, in the Hymn to Apollo, 175. Iphimedeia, non-Hellenic, 218. Iris, in the Hymn to Apollo, 88 ; the idea of recompense to, no et seq. Isis, connection of, with Here, 249. Issus, Gulf of, 175. Ithaca, Homer's particular descrip- tion of, 85 ; foreign settlement in, 259- J- Jason, and the Argo, 192 ; the love of Here for, 194. Joseph, date of his visit to Egypt, 258. Josephus, on the Sidonian settle- ment at Tyre, 164. Justin, on the position and import- ance of Sidon, 164. K. Kadmeioi, the, 134, 158, Kadmos, 159, 217. Kahuka, 141. Kalupso, 228. Kapus, 126, Karcs, the, 176 et seq. Karnak, inscription at, 138, 143. Keh-iiphalon, the, 50. Keteioi, the (Kheta), 121, 127, 171, 174, 177, 180, 184. Kikones, attack of Odusseus upon the, 167. Kilikes, the, 149, 175, 176, 181. Kilix, 175. Kimmerians, the, and the Laistru- gones, 77 ; position of, 229. Kirke, Homer's account of the dwell- ing of, 168 ; the island of, 226. Kiss?ibiori, the, 47- Klumene, pre-Hellenic, 219. Koros, the paternity of, 107. Kredemnon. presented to Andromache by Aphrodite, 49 et seq. 28o INDEX. Krembaliasfus, remarks upon the word, 1 1 6. Kronos, Rhea and, lo), Kudiste, Homer's use of the epithet, 107. Kunthian, epithet as applied to Apollo, 114. Kupros (see Cyprus). L. Laconians, their identity with the Egyptian Lak/i, 141 ; otherwise mentioned, 143. Laistrugones, the, 77- Lamos, the meaning of, 268. Landerer, Professor, his analysis of the copper at, 49. Laocoon, origin of the group of, 61. Laodamas, 100. Laomedon, 126. Lauth, Horn, nnd Mgypten, 128. Lebu (see Libyans). Le Chevalier, his visit to the Troad, 21. Leda, 218. Lcmnos, of Homer, 104. Lenormant, M., respecting the Pe- lesla, 145, 165 ; the computations of, 150. Lesbos, conquered by Aiolic immi- grants, 74 ; Homer's description of, compared with that in the Hymn to Apollo, 103. Lesche, the, 179. Lessing, the Laocoon of, 61. Lethe, 269. Leto, un-Homeric character of the description of, in the Hymn to Apollo, 96, 108; Homeric concep- tion of, 109 ; the wanderings of, 117; otherwise mentioned, 107, 109. Leto, one of the eight great gods of .Egypt. 93- Libue, Aryan population of, 139; people of, identical with the Egyptian Lebu, 1 41, 188, 209. Locrians, Homer's statement re- specting the position of the, 83. Lotophagoi, the, 267. Lotos, derivation of. 267. Lucian, on the Homeric critics, 8. Lukians, the, 104, 117, 143. Lukit', King of, 63. Lukourgos, the tradition respecting, 81. Lycia, contingent from, 177. M. Maausu, probably Musoi, 128. Maclaren's Dissertation on the to- pography of the Plain of Troy, 22. Magna Grsecia, degeneration of Eastern, 91. Maira, of foreign origin, 218. Mases, the inhabitants of, 132. MatthicE, on the Homeric ques- tion, 87, 103, 106, 107, III, 113, 114, 116. Maxyes, of the Delta, 141, 145, 188. Megare, 217. Memnon, 121, 167, 168, 169, 178, 179. Memphis, 142, 149. Mendere, R., its identity with the Scamander, 24. Menelaos, 156, 162, 180, 233. Men-menu, title associated with Memnon, 169. Merepthah, 139 et seq., 142 et seq., 144, 145, 147, 154, 161, 187, 188. Minos, 137 et seq.. 213. Mitford, on the Theban War, 1 89 ; on the Argonautic Expedition, 192. Moabite Stone, the, 64. Moon, Egyptian sacrifices to the, 255- . . Mosaic legislation respectmg inter- course with Egypt, 154. Mukenai, correspondence between Assyrian Art and a relic at, 71 ; otherwise mentioned, 36 et seq., Mure, on the expression, ' m the laps of the gods,' 65. Murenu, tomb of, 29. Mysia, the people of, 129, 174. INDEX. 281 N. Nastes the Carian, 53. Naxos, 103. ^ Neith, relation between Athene and the Egyptian, 248. Neoptolemos, 169. Nereid nymphs. Hellenic etymology of the names of Homer's, 100. Nereus, of Homer, no, 169. Nestor, the cup of, 59 ; the legend of, 132 et seq., 162. Newton, Mr., on the Grseco-Phoe- nician art period. 60. Nicomedeia. in Bithynia, 168. Numerical speculations, Egyptian origin of Plato's, 264. O. Odusseus, the armour of, 55 ; his at- tack upon the Kikones, 167 ; men- tions the personal beauty of Mem- non, 169; the fictitious narrative of, 184 et seq.; otherwise men- tioned, 28, 50. Odyssey, the. — the kiones of. 44 ; the aithousa of, ib. ; mention of orna- ment wrought with animal repre- sentations in, 54 ; the clasp of the T9th, 59 ; the Fable of Ares and Aphrodite in, 67 ; number of gods in, 263. Olumpos, 29. Orchomenos. 151. Orion, un-Hellenic, 214. Ormenion, 1 71. Ortigie, supposed to be Delos, 84. Osiris, connection of, with Apollo, 248. P. Paari. or Paarisheps, the battle at, 142. Pagus Iliensium, the, 25, 27. Paieon, 270. Palton in Syria, alleged tomb of Memnon at, 168. Pan, not mentioned in Homer, 245. Panachaioi. 133. Pandaros, the arrowhead of, 46. Paris, the date of, 123. Paros, 103. Patroclus, burning of the body of, 238. Pausanias, on the statues in the temples of Greece, 66 ; respecting Xoaiia, ib. ; on the paintings of Polugnotos, 179. Pedasu, probably Pedasos, 128, 174. Pelasgians, the, 132. Pelesta, the, 145. Pehon, 101, 102. Pelopid dynasty, the, 134. Peloponnesos, Dorian conquest of the, 10, 1 5, et seq. ; regarded by Homer as the head or centre of Greece, 83; Achaian power in the, 14.7; Danaan immigration into the, ib. Penelope, 50. Pentaour, Epic of, 198. Peparethos. loi. 103. Perse, compared with Per-schu, 269. Persephoneia, matrimonial relation of, with Aidoneus, 235 ; character of, ib. Phaiakes, the, 42, 100, 104, 153, 242. Phaidimos, king of the Sidonians, 163. Phaidre, of foreign origm, 2 1 8. Pharos, 270. Phidias, 57. Philoktetes, 38. Phocaia, 103, 104. Phoenicia, as an early school of art, 62 ; Homer's account of the lan- guage of the men of, 64; the Greeks in, 147 ; Sidon the leading city of, 162 ; the principal in- formant of the Greeks concerning distant events, 200; otherwise mentioned, 149, 153, 181. Phoinix, 69, 175. Phorcfis, 259. Pinax, the, 64. Pindar, on the rooting of Delos, 93, 107; on the Colchians, 189. Pisidians, the, 127. Plakos, 176. Plato, numerical speculation of, 264. Plect<\ its force as applied to ana- dettnc, 51. 282 INDEX. Polubos, 156. Polugnotos, 179. Poluneikos, 191. Poluphemos, 47. Poole, Mr., on the Theban su- premacy. 150. Poseidon, the prophecy of, 34; the wall built by, 42 ; Homer's de- scription of, 94; his connection with Lybia. 154, 1 75 ; the worship of, 177; Eetion and, ib. ; promi- nence of, 241 ; Herodotos on the name of, 243 ; identical with Badide, 244 ; I,ibyan origin of, ib. ; otherwise mentioned, 35, 152, 162. Priam, the house of, 34 ; the palace of, 44 ; the ' treasure of,' 49 ; his character suggested by Kame- ses II, 199; otherwise men- tioned, 68, 124, 126, 171. Procris, -218. Proitos, the message of, 63 et seq ; the date of, 133 et seq. Protesilaos, the battle round the ship of, 47. Proteus, 233. Pseudodysseus, legend of the, 121, 185 et seq. Ptolemais, 168. Pillar tes kraieros, 234. Pulians, the, 132. Punt, the base of Poenus, 266. Pupui, king, connected with the ex- clamation popoi. 270. Putho, Delphian Temple of Apollo at, 115. R. Ra, connection of, with Apollo, 247. Rameses II, succession of. 127; M. Best on the date of, 144; Danaans of the reign of, 147 ; Asiatic combination against, 166; honour paid to, 187; Homer's knowledge of, 197; character of Priam suggested by, 199; cha- racter of Achilles suggested by, ib. ; otherwise mentioned, 122, 139, 148, 165, 174, 198. Rawiinson, Professor, on the Egyp- tian inscription, 140; on the countries claiming association with Memnon, 168. Renan, M., 64. Rhadamanthus, derivation of, 269. Rhampsinitus, his visit to Aides, 232. Rhea, associated with Kronos in the Hymn to Apollo, 109, no. Rhenaia. 103. Rouge, M. de, on the Tyrrhenian settlement, I41. Ruhnken, 114. S. Sacrifices to the Dead, 239. Samos. 103. Samothrace, loi. Sardinians, the, 140. Sarpedon, 179. Scamander, father of Teucer, 123.- Scamander, R., 29 et seq., 76, 124. Scheria, Phaiakes of, i-;3. Schliemann, Dr., 14, 25, 28 et seq.. 32 et seq , 37, 42, 44, 47, 55, 70, 77; see^also Hissarlik. Seirenes, derivation of the, 269. Sesostris (see Rameses II), Seti, father of Rameses II, 1 39. Shardana, or Sardones, 141, 268. Sheep, use of (see Egyptians). Shekulsha (see Siculil. Shtpherds, statement in Genesis respecting. 257. Shield of- Achilles (see Achilles). Siculi. the Egyptian Shekulsha, 141. Sidonian link, the, 121, 160 et seq. Sidon, of Homer, 160 et seq., 162; art in, ib. Sikels, the, 140. Simois, R., 26, 29. Simonides, 107. Sisuphos. mythical personage, 215. Skaian gates, 43 et seq., 124. Skuros, 102. Smith, Mr. P., on the Theban supremacy, 150. Solar worship in Egypt, 24I. Solomon, Egypt in the time of, 157- INDEX. 283 Sparta, 79. Spercheios, R., 106. Slrabo, 22, 26, 93. Sun, Homer's conception of the movements of the, 224, 225; sanctity of the Cows of the, 251. Surie, supposed to be Syria, 84. Swine, sacrifice of, 255. Symbolical system, traces of a, in Homer, 250. Syria, mythology of, 68 ; invaded by Grecian tribes, 145; the population of, 1 74 ; otherwise mentioned. 84. Tahennu, the extent of the desig- nation, 188. Tanite and Bubastite Pharaoh, 157. Tantalos, mythical personage, 215. Tartaros, references in Homer to, 220; position of, 222. Tekkera, the, 122. Telephos, 171. Tennii, compared with Danaoi, 267. Teucer, 123. Teucri, as treated by Homer and Virgil, 122 ; compared with Tek- hara, 270. Theano, priestess of Athene, 65. Theban dynasties, 150. Theban link, the, 121 et seq., 148 et seq. Thebes, 121, 134, 148, 152, 156, 157, 158. 159, 190, 191, 270. Themis, Homeric conception of, 109 et seq.; employed as a messenger, iii ; Here and, 112. Theoclumenos, the seer, 181. Theocritos, a characteristic of, 105. Thessaly, 102. Thetis, her seat in Olumpos, 96 ; old and new mythologies made to meet in. 100. Thirlwall, Bishop, on the story of the Argo, 192. Thoas, King, 163. Thoth, the distinctive character of, 68. Thothmes HI., 137, 167. Thrace, 101. Thrinakie, Egyptian basis of, 268. Thucydides, his quotation from the Hymn to Apollo, 78; the value of his judgment respecting the Homeric Hymns, 87, 89; his testi- mony respecting the nationality of Homer, 90 ; on the Asiatic character of Homer, 91 ; on the thiee great Homeric appellatives, 130 ; on the Achaian name, 135; on the achievements of Thothmes ni.,137. Tituos, pre-Hellenic, 214. Troas, the Penates of the, 68 ; the Dardanians of the, 174; Menelaos and the, 181. Troica, palace of the, in established chronology, 10 ; traditions of the date of the, 204. Trojan war. Homer's account of the, 9; Achaian name, the pre- vailing designation of the Greeks at the period of the, 134; its effects on the Peloponnesos, 147. Tros, 126. Troy, the capture of, 13; site of, 14, 21 ; burning of, 20; non-alluvial character of the Plain of, 28 ; dynasty of Aineias at, 34 ; its population, 36; position of Priam's palace in, ib.; size of ib.; distinctive characteristics of the people of, 41 ; great tower of, 43 ; remains of, ib. ; Phoenician origin of the walls of, 45 ; scarcity of iron at, 46 ; cause of disappearance of all statues from. 67 ; Assyrian art in, 71 ; its obscurity after the war, ib. ; Homer's mention of the fountains close to, 76 ; Homer and the Plain of, ib. ; building of. 126 ; date of the overthrow of, 1 29, 143, 204 (see also Balidag, Schlie- mann, Hissarlik). Tschiblak range, the, 27. Tudeus, King of Argolis, 133. Turo, 162, 216. Turska. or Tyrrhenians, 141. Tyre, date of the founding of. 161 ; only once mentioned by Homer, 162. 284 INDEX. U. Underworld of Homer, 213, 219. Utica, founding of, 164. W. Warlike incidents of infant Greece, 204. Wilkinson, Sir G., on the Theban supremacy, 150 ; his comments on Herodotos, 187. Wood, Mr., on the nationality of Homer, 73; on the Asiatic origin and habitat of Homer, 83 ; charac- ter of his observations, 85. X. Xerxes, 91. Xoana, Pausanias respecting, 66. Z. Zephuros, the Roman character of, 84; refreshes the Elysian Plain, 227. Zethos, 159, 191. Zeus, the respect paid by the other Olympian deities to, 94; LCto, seated by the side of, 96; and. Apollo, 107; his oath to Here' before the birth of Herakles, 108; Homer's representation of, 245 ; his resemblance to Amnion, 250. FINIS. V X):i,fc»' -Q "^fjmwm^ 1 3> UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. "^^87 SWt REl JUN 1 6 1990 ^ ^APRizzmn '^w/njiTw-k.ja I \ f 2 LL- CS 5 o o u- s en 3 1158 01190 7440 M\ UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY AA 000 451 454 3 "-J I J JC H J\J I