LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 .sX.<rWv\& ft.ftrt/fijLv^ 
 
 Class ' 
 
HERODOTOS 
 
 IN 
 
 THE GREEK RENASCENCE 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES 
 
 OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
 
 DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, 
 
 JUNE, 1898, 
 
 BY 
 
 DANIEL ALLEN PENICK. 
 
 BALTIMORE: 
 
 JOHN MURPHY COMPANY. 
 1902. 
 

 
 A 
 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 I. The Direct Influence of Ancient Writers upon the Renascence... ........ 1 
 
 A study of Asianism and Atticism, the Period from the Death of 
 Alexander to Dionysios of Halicarnassos. 
 
 II. Greek and Roman Estimates of Herodotos ...................................... 4 
 
 Quotations from Aristotle, Cicero, Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Dio 
 Chrysostom, Quintilian, Lucian, Greek Rhetoricians. 
 
 HI. Dio Chrysostom, Arrian, Aelian, Philostratos .................................. 8 
 
 IV. Lucian Aets elpo^evrj ................................................................. 16 
 
 Introductory Remarks upon Lucian. A Study of Herodotos' \Qu 
 flpofjievT). A Study of Lucian's Coordinate and Subordinate Con- 
 junctions and Particles, /caf, rc-Kai, /*eV, 8c, ydp, 5^, '/va, &s. 
 
 V. Lucian His Periodology ............................................................. 25 
 
 With a Study, De Verborum Ubertate, and a Consideration of the 
 Question, Whether opetTijs or ir\ayiao-fji.6s Is Preferred. 
 
 VI. Lucian His Language, Constructions, Material .............................. 32 
 
 1 1.7339 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 1. Quotations from Aristotle, Cicero, Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Dio Chrysostom, 
 
 Quintilian, Lucian, Greek Rhetoricians. 
 
 2. References to Grammars : Kriiger, Kiihner, Matthiae. 
 
 3. References to Editions of Herodotos : Stein, Merriam, etc. 
 
 4. References to Editions of Lucian: Bekker, Dindorf, Jacobitz, Reitz, Som- 
 
 merbrodt, etc. 
 
 5. Other Literature in Alphabetical Order 
 
 Allinson, American Journal of Philology, 7. 203 ff. 
 
 Bernhardy, Wissenschaftliche Syntax, pp. 306, 486, etc. 
 
 Blass, Die griechische Beredsamkeit in dem Zeitraum von Alexander bis 
 
 auf Augustus. 
 
 Boldermann, Studea Lucian ea, 1893. 
 Cobet, Mnemosyne, N. S., 5-98. 
 Croiset, Vie et Oeuvres de Lucien, 1892. 
 Du Mesnil, Grammatica, Quam Lucianus in Scriptis Suis Secutus Est, Ratio 
 
 cum Antiquorum Atticorum Ratione Comparatur. 
 Forstemann, De Vocabulis Quae Videntur Esse apud Herodotum Poeticis. 
 
 1892. 
 Gildersleeve, Amer. Jour. Phil., 1. 47; 4. 92, 416; 6. 53, 68, 262; 9. 141, 
 
 150, etc. ; Pindar, Introd., p. cix ; Justin Martyr, 1 C. 6. 7. 
 Grundmann, Quid in Elocutione Arriani Herodoto Debeatur, 1884. 
 Guttentag, De Subdito Qui inter Lucianeos Legi Solet Dialogo Toxaride. 
 Heller, Die Absichtssatze bei Lucian, 'Iva, us, tiirus. 
 Hoffmann, De Articularum Nonnullarum apud Herodotum Usu. 
 Jebb, The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus. 
 Kalinka, Dissertationes Philologae Vindobonenses. 
 Lundberg, De Ratione Herodotea Praepositionibus Utendi a Scriptoribus 
 
 Atticis Diversa, 1869. 
 
 Mees, De Luciani Studiis et Scriptis Juvenilibus, 1841. 
 Miiller, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur (Donaldson's Translation). 
 Norden, Die antike Kunstposa. 
 Planck, Quaestiones Lucianeae, 1850. 
 Rabasti, Quid Comicis Debuerit Lucianus, 1865. 
 Robertson, The Gorgianic Figures in Early Greek Prose. 
 Sagawe, 5e im Nachsatz bei Herodot, 1893. 
 Schmid, Atticismus (entire). 
 Schulze, Quae Ratio Intercedat inter Lucianum et Comicos Graecorum 
 
 Poeticis, 1892. 
 
 Smyth, Sounds and Inflections of the Greek Dialects. 
 Ziegeler, De Luciano Poetarum Judice et Imitatore, 1872. 
 
Daniel Allen Penick was born in Cabarrus County, 
 North Carolina, September 7, 1869. He received meager 
 early training until, at the age of fourteen, he began reg- 
 ular attendance in the public schools at Austin, Texas. 
 After graduation from the Austin High School, he entered 
 he University of Texas in 1887, and received the degree 
 of Bachelor of Arts in 1891. The year following he was 
 fellow in Latin and at the end of the year took the degree 
 of Master of Arts in Greek, Latin and Philosophy. In 
 1892-3 he was Assistant Principal of the High School 
 at Paris, Texas. In 1893-4 he was Professor of Greek and 
 Latin in Daniel Baker College, Brownwood, Texas. Be- 
 ginning in the fall of 1894 he pursued courses in Greek, 
 Latin and Sanscrit at Johns Hopkins University. Here 
 he was appointed University scholar and fellow in Greek, 
 and in 1898 received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 
 He attended the lectures of Professors Gildersleeve, War- 
 ren, Bloomfield, Smith, Miller, Spieker and Vos, to ail of 
 whom he takes this opportunity of acknowledging a debt of 
 abiding gratitude. 
 

NOTE. 
 
 The writer desires to acknowledge his deep indebtedness to Professor 
 Gildersleeve not alone for suggestion and direction on the present 
 work and for incomparably patient and illuminating instruction 
 through a period of four years, but also for that which is inestimably 
 greater, an inspiration to true manhood and true scholarship, the 
 pursuit of which will, throughout life, strengthen and ennoble, though 
 the goal set may never be reached. He would also express here his 
 gratitude to Professor Minton "Warren, late head of the Latin depart- 
 ment at Johns Hopkins, and to Professor Maurice Bloomfield, and 
 emphasize his lasting obligation to them for helpful guidance and 
 instruction 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, AUSTIN, 
 Aug. 16, 1902. 
 
HERODOTOS IN THE GREEK RENASCENCE. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE DIRECT INFLUENCE OF ANCIENT WRITERS UPON 
 THE RENASCENCE. 
 
 That writers of the Greek Renascence are much indebted to 
 older authorities is an undisputed fact. But it is not so clear who 
 the older authorities are possibly all the classic writers down 
 through the ten orators, or Homer, Herodotos, Early Comedy. 
 There are those who say that this influence was through later 
 writers who were themselves indebted to the old masters. 
 Especially is it claimed for any who might have used Herodotos, 
 that the authority was rather Ephoros and Theopompos, or even 
 writers still later. To refute this latter position, it is necessary 
 to study the history of prose composition between the two periods, 
 the decadence and the revival, the fall and the rise in the ex- 
 cellence of composition. Blass 1 has compiled and elaborated 
 Dionysios of Halicarnassos, Cicero, and Quintilian. 2 The desig- 
 nating terms, Atticism and Asianism, mean respectively Attic 
 simplicity and a departure therefrom, so called not from any 
 Asiatic influence, but from the fact that during the prevalence 
 of Asianism the greatest literary activity was in Asia Minor, 
 though the demoralization was prevalent in all Greek com- 
 munities, having originated probably at Athens. "The Old 
 Oratory was an art, and was therefore based upon a theory. 
 The New Oratory was a knack, and was founded upon practice." 
 The mention of oratory is significant, for it must be noted that 
 
 7 Die Griechische Beredsamkeit in dem Zeitraum von Alexander bis auf 
 Augustus. 
 * Cf. Jebb, The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus, 2, C. 24. 
 
 1 
 
2 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 the whole development of which we are treating was, as Schmid l 
 has clearly pointed out, through the department of oratory rather 
 than through philosophy or poetry, and the terms Atticism and 
 Asianism must be so understood, though the developments through 
 these influences were by no means confined to one department. 
 
 What is the period of this Asianism ? Roughly speaking, from 
 300 to 100 B. c., part of which is shrouded in darkness. 2 17 /JLCV 
 dp^aia /ecu <fcXoero<o9 prjropLKrj .... dp^a/j,ev7j JJLCV CLTTO Trj? 
 *A.\et;dvSpov rov Ma/ceSpz'09 reXevrf]? e/cTrveiv KOI fjuapaivecrOai 
 /car o\iryov, eVl Se TT}? /cad' r]^a^ ^Xt/aa? jjui/cpov Se^cracra e/9 
 re\o9 rjfyavia-Oai. In accordance with this, Cicero says 3 of De- 
 metrius : Hie primus inflexit orationem, and Quintilian : 4 quin 
 etiam Phalerea ilium Demetrium, quamquam is primus inclinasse 
 dicitur, multum ingenii habuisse et facundiae fateor. Demetrius 
 flourished from 320 B. c. His style was ornate, luxurious, artificial. 5 
 History was more influenced by the school of Isocrates. The 
 representative of decline in this school was the Isocratean, Cal- 
 listhenes, who flourished at the time of Alexander. Omitting 
 others, we find Asianism fully developed in Hegesias about 270 
 B.C., whom Strabo 6 wrongly calls the founder of Asianism. He 
 was consciously opposed to Attic Oratory, though Lysianic diction 
 can be detected in his short, choppy, oratorical style. 7 But in 
 his historical works there is more splendor, more ornamentation : 8 
 TTJV e/JL/jberpov teal evpvO^iov \eiv, o>9 ra TroXXa rcov 'Hyrjffiov 
 rov prfTopos /cal TQ>V ' Kdiavtov /caXovfievcov prjropwv. 9 These two 
 styles the pointed and choppy and the flowing and ornate con- 
 tinued for two centuries, going from bad to worse. Omitting 
 further reference to this development, we turn to the reaction in 
 favor of Atticism, which seems to have begun with Hermagoras 
 of Temnos about 110 B. c. 10 Volkmann also 11 furnishes abundant 
 
 1 Uber den Kulturgeschichtlichen Zusammenhang und die Bedeutung der 
 Griechischen Renaissance in der Romerzeit. 
 * V. Dionysios of Halicarnassos, De Oratoribus Antiquis I. 
 Brutus, 38. * 10. 1. 80. 6 V. Cicero, Orator, 92. 
 
 e C. 648. 7 Cf. Cicero, Brutus 286, Orat. 226, 230. 
 
 8 Cf. Theon, Progymnasraata, Sp. 2. 71. 9. 
 Cf. Dion. Hal., De Composition^ 4 and 18. 
 
 10 V. Blass, Gr. Bered., p. 85. 
 
 11 Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Romer. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 3 
 
 evidence that Hermagoras followed regular rhetorical divisions 
 in his work instead of making use, like his immediate predecessors, 
 of what came to him solely in practical experience, and that the 
 Asianic style of oratory, which was without technical science, 
 began to be changed first about the middle or end of the second 
 century B. c. by Hermagoras, a technologist of the first rank, 
 who united theory and practice in a most praiseworthy manner. 
 Schmid 1 claims that the reaction originated first in the island 
 of Rhodes and that Apollonios and Molon tried not so much to 
 oppose Asianism as to dampen the prevailing spirit of exaggeration. 
 In 92 B. c. L. Plotius opened a school of rhetoric in Rome, which 
 <3ate may mark the watershed. At that time Hortensius was the 
 representative of Asianism in Latin, having "combined its two 
 manners, sententious point and florid declamation." Cicero himself 
 was partly under the influence of this school, but as representative 
 of the Atticisirig style he may claim the credit of destroying the 
 ultra Asianism of Hortensius and later of leaning toward the 
 Attic. His inborn sense of strength and aptness made him strike 
 a medium and avoid the extreme rigorousness of the Atticists. 
 This success of the Romans forced the Greek writers of the time 
 to try to shape a new prose literature. Revived Atticism proper 
 may be said to date from Calvus, about 60 B. c., being completed, 
 in a sense, in Dionysios of Halicarnassos and Caecilius. Of course 
 there were various schools of Atticists, imitators of Thucydides, 
 Xenophon, Lysias, Hyperides, Demosthenes, all of them drawing 
 more or less from Greek literature as a whole or from certain 
 departments of it in keeping with their style and subject of 
 composition. 
 
 This is sufficient to show that such writers as Dio Chrysostom 
 and Lucian could have imitated no writer after 320 B.C. But 
 there has been no mention of JEphoros and Theopompos. Recall 
 the fact that Callisthenes, the Isocratean, the first historical repre- 
 sentative of Asianism, was a contemporary of Alexander. Add 
 to this that both Ephoros and Theopompos were pupils of Isocrates, 
 that both were contemporaries of Alexander, the latter quite a 
 favorite. Certainly no one could contend that Ephoros and 
 
 1 V. note 1, p. 2. 
 
4 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Theopompos were exponents of the Asianic style, but we must 
 recognize that within two or three decades after they flourished 
 Asianism was fully developed : such changes must come about 
 gradually. Dionysios of Halicarnassos l says of Theopompos : 
 el 8* vTrepelSev ev TOVTOIS, e<* ot? paXivT av eo-TrovSaice, rfj? 
 re <rvfjL7r\OKi}s rcov <f>o)vr)evT(t)v ypa/^/jLarcov /cal rfjs KV/c\i,fcfjs 
 evpvO/jLuas TWV TrepioSwv teal rr}? ojj,oL$ela<; T&V oxy/jLaTKr/jLcov, 
 TTO\V afjLiva)v av rjv avros eavrov tcara rrjv <f>pda-tv. 2 Even if 
 it be denied that these two writers show signs of Asianism, the 
 fact that they are ultra-Isocratean would preclude the possibility 
 of confusing their influence with the influence of Herodotos, 
 though they themselves may have been largely indebted to 
 Herodotos. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 GREEK AND ROMAN ESTIMATES OF HERODOTOS. 
 
 Since it is true that imitation was the main element of strength 
 in the Renascence, there must be a study of imitation, of the 
 writers imitated, of the basis of imitation, of the degree and the 
 success of imitation. Such studies have been numerous for almost 
 every field of literary composition : after the revival was begun 
 through the department of oratory and each of the more important 
 orators had a considerable following, other styles of composition 
 on other than oratorical subjects found other sources from which 
 to draw. Much has been written of the influence of Homer, of 
 the comic poets, of Plato. Herodotos has received little attention. 
 The reasons for studying Herodotos in this connection are based 
 not only upon the results to be presented in the following chapters, 
 but also upon the opinions of classical writers themselves from 
 the time of Aristotle through the Renascence, including the 
 Rhetoricians, who, by their studies and criticisms, have given 
 many points of individuality in Herodotos worthy of imitation. 
 Observe a few of their statements. 
 
 J Ad On. Pomp. 6. 2 Cf. Cicero, Orat. 151. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 5 
 
 Aristotle's all-important statement 1 is the basis of a fundamental 
 imitation of Herodotos : rrjv Se Xef iv dvdjKT) elvai, % elpofjLevrjv 
 Kal TW crvvSea/jLtt) jj,iav, coo-rrep al ev rofc SiOvpafjuftoi,*; dvaj3o\at, t 
 rj KaTO"Tpa/jLfjLevrjv Kal o/jLoiav rais rcov dp^aLwv TTOCTJTWV dvTi- 
 o-T/000049. 'n pev ovv elpofievr] Xeffc9 tf dp^aia eirriv 'HpoBoTOV 
 ovpiov 776 lo-TOpLr]^ aTroBe^if;' ravrrj yap Trporepov pev airavres, 
 vvv Se ov TroXXot ^pSyvrai. 
 
 Cicero says : 2 apud Herodotum patrem historiae et apud Theo- 
 pompum suut innumerabiles fabulae ; also, 3 tanta est eloquentia, 
 ut me quidem, quantum ego Graece scripta intellegere possum, 
 magno opere delectet; and, 4 quid enim aut Herodoto dulcius. 
 Then he particularizes : 5 alter (H.) enim sine ullis salebris quasi 
 sedatus amnis fluit ; and, 6 itaque et Herodotus et eadem superiorque 
 aetas numero caruit (this statement is contradicted by Quintilian). 
 Add : 7 si quae veteres illi (H. et . .) apte numeroseque dixerunl, 
 ea [sic] non numero quaesito, sed verborum collocatione ceciderunt. 
 
 Dionysius 8 has much to say of Herodotos by way of comparison 
 with Thucydides. After speaking of Herodotos' vTroOecn,? and 
 selection, he says : f) ^ev 'HpoSorou Sta#e<79 ev anracriv eTriei/crfs, 
 Kal rot? fjbev dryadoi? a-vvrjSo/jLevrj, rofc Se /ca/cols (rvva\>yovo'a. 
 Again, 77 icaOapa rot9 ovo/juacri, Kal rbv < ^Ckf]ViKov %apaKT7jpa 
 <rq>ovcra Sta\e/cro9. Herodotos excels likewise in evdpyeia, 77801/7;, 
 Add : dperwv 77 KVpifordrr} TO Trpenrov ravryv 6 'H/ooSoTO9 
 fjua\\ov 77 ovKvSiS'rjs, and : t,a$epovcri &e Kara rovro 
 fj,d\io-ra d\\r)\cov, OTI TO pev 'HpoSoTOV /ca\\O9 i\apov 
 fyoftepov Be TO ovKvSi$ov, and : in/ro9 Se Kal #aXXo9 Kal 
 vrpeTreiav Kal TO \ey6fievov tSto)9 7r\d<rfjLa lo-TopiKov f HpoSoro9 e%et. 9 
 
 Strabo 10 refers to Herodotos frequently and classes him as to 
 trustworthiness with Hesiod, Homer, the tragedians. 
 
 Pliny cites him in many places as an authority. 
 
 Quintilian says : n dulcis et candidus et fusus Herodotus, remissis 
 adfectibus melior, sermonibus, voluptate. Note especially : 12 et 
 historiae, quae currere debet ac ferri, minus convenissent insistentes 
 
 1 Ars Rhetorica, 3. 9. * De Legibus, 1. 1. 5. * De Oratore, 2. 55. 
 
 4 Fragment, 2. 49. 6 Orator, 39. Ib., 186. 7 Ib., 219. 
 
 Cf. Ad Cn. Pomp., Usener's edition, pp. 50 ff., and De Imitatione, pp. 20 ff. 
 
 9 Cf. De Compositione Verborum, chs. 4 and 10. 
 
 10 C. 508. 10. 1. 13. lf 9. 4. 18. 
 
6 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 clausulae et debita actionibus resperatio et cludendi inchoandique 
 sententias ratio. In Herodoto vero cum omnia, ut ego quidem 
 sentio, leniter fluunt, lum ipsa S{,d\e/cTo$ habet earn jucunditatem, 
 ut latentes etiam numeros complexa videatur : a better judgment 
 than Cicero's. Dio Chrysostom says of Herodotos just what we 
 should expect. It may be as well to quote here what he says of 
 some other historians whom we shall have occasion to consider : 1 
 fjiev ovv, et TTOTC ev$pocrvvr)s croi, 8et, pera 7roXX?}9 
 evrevj-ei. To yap dveifievov /cal TO y\vKv 
 
 Trapegec, fivOwSe? /jbd\\ov 77 lo-ropucov TO 
 elvai. Twv Be a/cpcov ovKvSi8r)s e/Aol Sorcec /cal TWV Sevrepcov 
 eoTro/ATro?. Kal yap prjTopiKOV TI Trepl rrjv d7rayy\iav TWV 
 \oya)v %!,' Kal OVK dSvvaTo? ov$e oXt<yo9 Trepl TTJV epiAfjveiav, 
 /cat, TO paOv/jiov Trepl Ta$ Xefet? ou% OVTCO fyavkov, wo-re o-e 
 \VTT7Jo-ai,. "E^>opo9 Se TroXXrjv fjuev Icrropiav 
 VTTTIOV /cal dvei/jievov Trjs dTrayye\(,a<; crou OVK e 
 
 Lucian, whom we are to study more closely, says : 2 ' HpoSorot; 
 eWe fjuev Kal TO, a\\a iMfLrjo-aadat, SvvaTov fjv ov irdvTa (frrjfjil 
 o<ra Trpoa-rfv avTut fiel^ov yap ev^rj<^ TOVTO ye aXXa KCLV ev eic 
 TO>V aTrdvTcov, olov fj /caXXo? T&V \6ytov rj dpjjLOviav avT&v TJ TO 
 oiKelov Ty 'Icovia Kal TO TT/oocr^ue? rj T^9 yvcopr)? TO TrepiTTov $ 
 oara jjuvpia Ka\d exelvos apa TrdvTa crvXkafiwv %et, Trepa rrj? et? 
 fjLif^rjatv eXTT/So?' a 8e eTrolrjaev eirl rot? o-vyypdfjLfjuacrt Kal a>? 
 TToXXoO af ^09 TO?9 f/ EXX77(Ti/ aTcaaiv ev ftpa^el /carecrrT;, Kal eya> Kal 
 (TV Kal aXXo9 av ^L^o-aLfieOa. He speaks 3 further of the great 
 reputation of Herodotos. 4 
 
 The Greek Rhetoricians say much more than can be quoted 
 here. Note first a general remark : 5 povos *HpoSoro9 ' 
 
 TO 
 
 Again, a general remark upon description : 7 
 
 TrepiijyrjfjLaTiKcx; evapy&s VTT otyw aywv TO 
 Kal Trap 1 'H/aoSorw TO eI8o9 Trjs t/3i8o? Kal TO>V LTTTTCOV TCOV 
 
 Kal TWV KpOKoSei\0)V TWV 
 
 1 Or. 18. 10. 2 Herodotus I (1. 831-832). 3 Ib., 2. 
 
 * Cf. Hist. 42 (2. 55) ; 54 (2. 64) ; Ver. Hist. 2. 31 (2. 127) ; Philops. 2 (3. 30) j 
 *Salt. 78 (2. 310) ; *De Domo 20 (3. 201) ; [Macrob.] 10 (3. 214). 
 b vep\ tyovs, Spengel 1. 262. 28. 
 
 6 Cf. Demetrius, irepi epnyveias (irepl ffvvBfTuiv ovo/j.drwi'), Sp. 3. 287. 6. 
 7 Theon., vpoyv/^vdo-futra (vepl tiuppdo-fws), Sp. 2. 118. 6. 
 
Herodotoa in the Greek Renascence. 7 
 
 Then more particularly, beginning with Hermogenes : l rb <yap 
 , /cal TO Kpoiao? r]V, /cal ra rotavra ovrco JJLCV 
 /car opOorrjra Kal KaOapov iroiel rov \6yov ical 
 <ra(f)r), el Se 7r\a<yidcrai<;, ov roiavra carat, olov Kpoicrov 6Wo? 
 /cal KavSaiiXov 6Wo9, el Xeyot9. 2 
 
 Again : 3 Xef 49 Se <y\VKia r\ re TT}? a<eXetct9 i$ia irapa rrjv 
 KaOapav prjOelaa elvcu Kal en, r) iroi^TiKr]. Tavrrj 101 Kal 
 
 'HpoSoTO? T?}? <y\VKVT7JTOS fJbd\L(TTa 7r(f>pOVTLKOD<i ^p^(7aTO JjLV 
 
 Kal /Jb6068oi,<; Kal evvolais, alairep Kal ^yLtet? e^apaKT^pL^o^ev rr)V 
 egei, re eKaa-rrj ISia fiev TT}? a^eXeta? TroXXa^oO, wcrTrep 
 , eKeldev Se fjudXtara SiapKrj ecr%6 rrjv ry\VKVT7)Ta, on Kal 
 avrrjv GV&VS rrjv StaXe/croz/ Tro^rt/cw? 7rpoeL\ero eiirelv. 
 
 Again : 4 eV roivvv rofc icaff 1 laTOpiav irav^vpLKol^ TravTjyvpi- 
 G<TTIV o 'HpoSoro?, TO S' airLov on fjuera rov Kadapov Kal 
 vs TroXt;? eo-Tt Tat? fjftovals Kal <yap ral<$ evvoLa^ /juvOiKais 
 <r'%6o'bv airdcraw Kal TTJ Xefe^ TroirjriKf Ke%pr)Tai $io\ov, KT\. 
 Again : 5 an example of 7rape/ji/3o\tf : Kpoto-o? TJV A.V So? uev TO 
 Se 'AXu drreco, rvpavvos Se eOvecov r&v eWo? f/ AXuo9 
 09 pecDV diTO fjLeo-rjfjLppi'rjs /juera^v ^vpcov [TC] Kal 
 
 Again : 6 rcov fjuevroi, KCO\COV Kal KopfjuaTayv TOIOVTCOV crvvn- 
 ?rpo9 aXX^Xa crvvicrTavTai al TrepioSoi ovofjLa^o^evaL. 
 yap 7T6ptoSo9 a'vari^^a GK KcaiXcov rj Ko^fidrcov evKaraarpo- 
 7T/309 Trjv Sidvoiav rrjv v7roKi/j,ewr)v dTrrjpTta-fjLevov . . . 77 Se 
 p^veua Ka\elrai, rj et9 Ko>\a \e\VfjLewr) ov poka 
 o-vvrjpTrjfjieva, 009 77 ^Karaiov, Kal ra irXeicrTa r&v 
 , Kal 0X0)9 77 dp^aia iracra. 7 
 
 1 Trepl t'SecSi/ (Trepl Kadapdryros % Kadapwv tvvoiwv), Sp. 2. 278. 4. [These refer- 
 ences are in the order of occurrence in Spengel.] 
 
 2 Cf. Ib., 2. 278. 17. 8 Ib. (rrcpl y\v K 6rnros), 2. 362. 8. 
 4 Ib., 2.421.5. 
 
 6 Alexander, irepl ffx-n^drav (irepl irope^jSoX^s), 3. 39. 20. The example is from 
 Hdt. 1. 6. 
 
 6 Demetrius, irepl 'Epfjnrivetas (irepl irfpi68uv), 3. 262. 17. 
 
 7 Cf. ib., 3. 264. 20; 3. 272. 15; Hermog., 2. 238 ff.; Aristotle, A.K. 3. 9ff. 
 
8 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 Dio CHRYSOSTOM, ARRIAN, AELIAN, PHILOSTRATOS. 
 
 From the reaction in favour of the old masters, the beginning of 
 which was described in the first chapter, the period of the Renas- 
 cence may be said to date, roughly stated, from the middle of the 
 first century to the middle of the third. All the writers of any 
 importance within these limits made more or less use of the old 
 classics : some took one author for a model ; some imitated slavishly 
 one or more as they used one style or another, as they wrote upon 
 one subject or another ; some thoroughly assimilated all, and so 
 used them more effectively. It is not for Herodotos alone that 
 we claim influence in the Renascence, but we would emphasize his 
 influence, because it has not been sufficiently recognized publicly, 
 and point out something of the nature of that influence. 
 
 While Lucian has been selected as the author for most careful 
 study, other great writers of the Renascence demand notice, Dio 
 Chrysostom, Arrian, Aelian, Philostratos. Much of what I shall 
 say of three of these writers is taken from Schmid in his Atticism us, 
 and Grundmann's l study of Arrian has been helpful. 
 
 Dio Chrysostom is generally admitted to be the first writer of the 
 Renascence, and so may be noted first briefly. " Dio is not exempt 
 from the unreality of his age, but the thought is deeper, the moral 
 conviction more thorough, than we find in the mere ' sophist' or 
 ' rhetorician ' of the Greek Renaissance, and his orations or, better, 
 ' essays ' are something more than rhetorical exercises. His style 
 is clear and fluent, he is a good story-teller, 2 and his Atticism, though 
 not the success it was once held to be, is more than respectable." 3 
 Philostratos 4 says of him, that he has taken the best from the best. 
 He is decidedly in opposition to the Asianic style in choice of sub- 
 ject, in aversion to excitement and pathos, in careful cultivation of 
 classic models. As a statesman he naturally attached much 
 importance to the old historians, to Herodotos in particular. Dio's 
 
 1 Quid in elocutione Arriani Herodoto debeatur, Berlin, 1884. 
 
 * The italics are mine. 3 Gildersleeve in Johnson's Cyclopaedia. 
 
 *V.S. 2.6. 30(Teubner). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 9 
 
 own estimate of Herodotos has been quoted in Chapter II. 1 
 Cobet 2 says: nullum alium scriptorem Dio diligentius lectitavit 
 quam Herodotum, cujus ubique apud eum sunt vestigia. Schmid 3 
 says that Dio allows some lonisms. He also says 4 that when Dio 
 narrates, as at the beginning of Or. 7, he has a plain, simple sen- 
 tence-position with many coordinate clauses joined by particles ; 
 but when he is sententious or philosophic, he has a more periodic 
 style. In this connection Schmid calls Plato a master in the use 
 of particles, and so he is ; but all recognize that the use of particles 
 in these late writers is not wholly dependent upon Plato. It will 
 be one of my main points that the use of coordinate clauses joined 
 by coordinate particles, especially in narrative passages, is due to 
 the influence of the one master in such prose composition, Herodo- 
 tos. This influence is claimed for Dio, though not to the same 
 extent as in some others. Being earlier than Lucian and a man of 
 less ability, in a sense, Dio is naturally more mechanical in his imi- 
 tation of Herodotos and sometimes copies almost literally. Some 
 words that Schmid gives from the use of Herodotos are : 6 
 arpeuL&iv, 1. 17. 29, Teubner Text (or. 1. 70); e/cfipd 
 1. 120. 31 (7. 239); ri/cco used as Hdt. 1. 30: TeXXw TOVTO 
 Tt)? 7ToXtO9 ev f] KOVO-VIS TralSes rjcrav /ca\oi re /casyaOot,; Xevarrfp, 
 1. 46. 20 (3. 113), from an oracle of Hdt. 5. 67 ; pvo^ai, 1. 51. 13 
 (3. 124); o-uo-Tpo^, 1. 11. 31 (1. 61); vTrepKvjrelaOai,, 1. 322. 9 
 (29. 53). Dio uses by the side of the regular forms of olSa such 
 forms as olSas, 1. 22. 7 ; oftapev, 1. 43. 23 (3. 109), cf. Hdt. 2. 17, 
 4. 16 ; oUare, 1. 371. 10 (31. 608) ; ol'Sao-t, 1. 305. 5 (23. 511), cf. 
 Hdt. 2. 43. Here, as elsewhere, enters in the question of the 
 KOWIJ, for these forms are found in the New Testament. From 
 we find re'rei^e, etc., 1. 346. 31 (31. 569), by the side of 
 , cf. Hdt. 3. 40. 8 The favorite substantivized neuter 
 adjective begins with Herodotos. 7 As to subject-matter, Dio has 
 frequently drawn from Herodotos, examples of which will be given 
 in connection with Lucian. But we may quote here the story of 
 
 1 V. Or. 18. 10. Mnem., N. S., 5. 98. Att. 3. 13. 
 
 * Att. 1. 178. Att. 1. 145. 6 Cf. Schmid, Att. 1. 84 ff. 
 
 7 V. Stein to Hdt. 1. 58, 86, 97, etc. 
 
10 
 
 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Croesus and Alcmaeon as given by the two. 1 Note the language, 
 the particles, the conjunctions, the participles. 
 
 eovra? 
 
 Herodotos. 
 ev&vs Ki6&va fjueyav /cal KO\- 
 
 7TOV 7TO\\OV KaTa\l,7r6/JLVO<} 
 TOV KlO&VOS, KoOopVOVS TOV9 
 
 evpio-K evpVT 
 VTToSrjcrdfjLevos, tfle 69 
 Orjaavpov 69 TOV ol 
 
 O-7T(70DV B 69 
 
 jjiev Trapecra^e irapa ra<$ 
 rov 'xpvaov ocrov e^cape- 
 ov ol /codopvoi' fiera Se TOV 
 TrdvTO, 7r\vjo-d/jLevo<; 
 Kal 9 
 
 /ce(f>a\f)<; SiaTrdcras TOV 
 T09 teal d\\o Xa/3a>i> 9 TO 
 (rTO/jba, %r)ie e/c TOV Oijaavpov 
 
 \KCOV fJLV /JiOyiS TOt'9 /Co06pVOV<f, 
 
 TravTi 8e Tew otVa)9 fiaXkov rj 
 dv0pa>7rq>. TOV TO TC crTOfia e/3e- 
 
 /cal TrdvTa e^ooy/ccoro. 
 
 8e TOV Kpotaov 76X0)9 
 
 Dio. 
 
 ovSe ye TOV \a/36vTa Trapa 
 "Kpoicrov rrjv Scopedv eicelvov 
 
 ' A.\KfjL(i)Va 
 
 \wv ovre 
 
 OVT 2)o- 
 
 Set9 T&V TOTC 
 a> (fraai, TOV 
 TOVS Orjcrav- 
 (f>epLV avTOV 
 
 OTTOO-OV ftov\eTa(, TOV ^pvcrov. 
 
 /cal TOV elo-e\66vra Trdvv dv&pei- 
 
 AvBbv 
 
 Scopeas, 
 
 T 
 /ca TOV 
 
 /cal Ta9 
 
 yvdOov? e/caTepa<; /JLO\I<; ego) 
 , axTTrep av\ovvTa TTJV 
 iva, yeXwra /cal 
 6eav KpotVft) Trape^ovTa /cal 
 
 Schmid 2 gives Plato and Xenophon first place as regards evi- 
 dent influence over Dio in /c\oyr) ovofjuaTcov, but compare Dio 
 1. 260. 11 with Hdt. 1. 7, especially Dio 1. 277. 6 with Hdt. 1. 66, 
 where the matter corresponds and an entire line of an oracle given 
 by Herodotos is quoted by Dio, Dio 1. 275. 6 ff., with Hdt. 1. 159, 
 Dio 1. 419. 15, with Hdt. 1. 202, Dio 2. 47. 16, with Hdt. 3. 102, 
 Dio 2. 213. 13, with Hdt. 1. 84. 
 
 Arrian. Schmid does not consider Arrian in his study of the 
 Renascence, possibly because Arrian has been generally recognized 
 as an imitator of Xenophon ; possibly because the work had been 
 
 1 Hdt. 6. 125; Dio 2. 280. 32 (78. 425). 
 
 2 Att. 1. 147. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 11 
 
 done by Grundmann. Many scholars who wrote about Arrian 
 and Xenophon also claimed incidentally for Thucydides, and 
 especially for Herodotos, an influence over Arrian. 1 But Grund- 
 mann goes further and claims more dependence upon Herodotos 
 than upon Xenophon. 2 Omitting for the present Grundmann's 
 remark about the dialect, we note : Saepius eum in rebus geo- 
 graphicis laudat, ut Herodotum ab eo diligentissime pervestigatum 
 esse cognoscamus. In elocutione autem Arrianum secutum esse 
 Herodotum. This latter statement he discusses in three chapters : 
 
 De verborum ubertate ac quodam genere pleonasmi, quod ei 
 cum Herodoto commune est ; 
 
 Deinde de ratione enuntiatorum conjungendorum, quae multis 
 locis propius accedit ad Herodoti genus dicendi, quod Xeftv 
 elpo/jLewrjv dicimus ; quocum cohaeret quaedam elocutionis negle- 
 gentia utriusque propria ; 
 
 Denique de ionismis, qui extant apud Arrianum in usu pro- 
 nominum,praepositionum, particularum ; ad quod adiciam nonnul- 
 las structuras, locutiones, vocabula, quae apud utrumque singularia 
 inveniuntur. 
 
 In the first chapter numerous examples are given of different 
 kinds of pleonasm: (1) the force of an adjective increased by an 
 added substantive, as pe^Oel fjueyas, Hdt. 1. 51, Arr. 5. 19. 5, 
 etc.; (2) the notion of the compound verb expressed more accu- 
 rately by the addition of the adverb used in composition, as 
 6K$>epeiv egco, Hdt. 3. 16.; (3) a preposition or verb more fully 
 explained by an adverb signifying the same thing, as Hdt. 4. 201. 
 606oi> 6(70) 69 TO Te%o9, 4. 168. dp^dfjievoi TTp&Toi ; (4) the same 
 word repeated two or three times recalling the same person or 
 thing, as Arr. 4. 22. 2 KOI /nd^rj^ y6vo/j,6vr)s Trpbs avrovs Kparepas 
 VIK&GW ol djjifyl Kpdrepov rf) /Jid^y, also the repetition of proper 
 names, as Arr. 1. 29. 1 teal dfyucvelrat, e? KeXatz/a? TreyLtTrrato?* 
 eV 8e rat? KeXatrat? aicpa TJV, also a verb and a participle, as 
 Hdt. 5. 95. 'AXtfa?O9 o 770^x^9 CLVTOS JJLGV (frevycov e/c^evyctf 
 (5) add the repetition of certain particles pleonastically, as Se, //,/, 
 KaL'j (6) in seeking to make their writing easily understood, both 
 
 1 Cf. Jahres. 34. 180 ff. for reviews of a number of these. V. Grundmann also. 
 *V. reviews in Jahres. 38. 275 and Phil. Anz. 15. 223. 
 
12 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Herodotos and Arrian are not afraid to use enough words in their 
 sentence-building to emphasize different clauses and separate clearly 
 protasis from apodosis : many particles are suitable for this pur- 
 pose : OVTCO or ovra) 77 is common after a clause, after a genitive 
 absolute, as Hdt. 8. 23. diray<yei\dvTwv Be TOVTCOV ra r)V ovrw 877 
 a/jLO, 77X10) o-fciBvajjievq) irdora rj crrparLrj eTrXwe, after a conjunctive 
 participle, after a parenthetic clause with yap, after an accusative abso- 
 lute, etc. : evravOa is used in the same way, and rore in the apodosis, 
 
 TOTe 77, TO VTV06V, 7T/005 TaVTCL, 7T/909 TaVTCL Br) O)Z>, TOljaptoV *. 
 
 especially noteworthy here is the use of Be in the apodosis after 
 personal pronouns, as Hdt. 3. 37. 69 Be TOVTOV? //,T) oTrcoire, eye* 
 Be o-rjfjiaLva), after the article used as a demonstrative; (7) the 
 repetition of several words, or epanalepsis, to make the language 
 plainer and more easily understood, as Hdt. 4. 76. &>? dirlicero 
 (sc. *Az>a^ap<7t<?) 5 rr)v ^KvOiicrjv, /caraBvs e? rrjv /ca\eo/jLevr)v 
 'TXatT/z/ (77 $ecrTi irKerf), e? ravrrjv 877 tcaraSvs 6 'Az>a^ap<rt9 rrjv 
 oprrjv eVereXee : there are various kinds of this epanalepsis too 
 numerous to mention here; (8) the use of short clauses to conclude 
 a narrative before beginning something else, introduced especially 
 by OVTCO 77, as Hdt. 4. 153. ovrw Srj o-reXXoim Svo Trevrijtcov- 
 repov? ? T77i; HXareav, also by c58e; (9) note finally the use of 
 the third person of the imperative, as Hdt. 1. 92. ical irepl pev 
 dvaOTj/jLarow roa-avra elpija-Oo). Similar examples are cited in 
 great numbers by Grundmann and can be seen on almost every 
 page of both Herodotos and Arrian. 
 
 The second chapter is but a continuation of the first : here again 
 is evidence of an abundance of words, an abundance acquired in 
 the same way, by the use of particles, many of them the same. 
 Xeft? eipofjuevrj is coordination where particles abound, such as 
 Se, fcai, re, re ... /cai, yap, aXXa yap, ovv(wv), where one clause 
 seems to be joined to another as if added by chance. Details 
 and examples may be omitted here, as this construction will be 
 carefully studied in the chapters on Lucian. Suffice it to say, that 
 Arrian is very close to Herodotos at this point. 
 
 These two agree also in their use of anacoluthon, as Hdt. 5. 
 37., where the fjuev clause has a participle and the corresponding 
 Be clause a finite verb : pera Be KOI ev rfj a\\r) 'Icwiy TWVTO 
 TOVTO eiroiee, rou9 fjuev J*e\avv(i)v T&V rvpdvvcov, TOU? Be e'Xa/Se 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 13 
 
 rvpdvvovs. The particle 77 is used in the same way, also 
 ov a\\d. Again, eadem ratio est, si ad appositionem adicitur 
 enuntiatum, as Hdt. 2. 134. f PoSw7rt9, yeverjv pev diro SpTjfarjs, 
 Sov\ij Se rjv 'IaS//,oi/o9. Note in this connection the expression 
 rd re d\\a nai used for the more common Attic aX\a>9 re ical, 
 as Hdt. 1. 193. rovs crv/cecov rpoirov depairevovcrt, rd re a\\a 
 KOI fyoiviKwv rov KapTrbv 7T6pi,$eov<Ti, rTJcTi, ^a\avr)<^opoi(j-i. 
 Other forms of \\09 are used. Again, there is marked free- 
 dom in shifting from Oratio Obliqua to Oratio Recta and vice 
 versa : both Herodotos and Arrian furnish many interesting and 
 varied examples. Finally, Grundmann gives a number of un- 
 classified examples from both in which a sentence is left apparently 
 unfinished, though it is really continued with a changed construc- 
 tion, as Hdt. 8. 87. /cal rj ov/c e%oucra Siafoyelv, e/^TrpocrOe yap 
 avrfa rjvav d\\cu vee? c^'Xtat, eSofe ol roSe Trorfcrat,. A note 
 of warning is sounded here which must be heeded everywhere, 
 that all these constructions are not confined to Herodotos among 
 the old masters, for Thucydides and Plato especially have them, 
 one of whom has preserved many other things from the diction 
 of Herodotos, and the other on account of the dialogue form is 
 nearer Herodotos in his language. However, a summary of the 
 evidence plainly proves that Arrian imitates Herodotos in the 
 above mentioned particulars. 
 
 Inasmuch as the title of Grundmann's third chapter already 
 cited is full and self-explanatory, and as Arrian's lonism is 
 generally recognized as an imitation of Herodotos, and as the 
 important constructions which might be mentioned here must be 
 discussed later, comment at this point is unnecessary. We may 
 quote from Dr. Allinson, 1 who studies Arrian's Historia Indica 
 in connection with Lucian's De Dea Syria and De Astrologia : 
 u Of the three pieces now under consideration the Historia Indica 
 presents the fewest difficulties. As it is transmitted as genuine, 
 the investigation is not complicated by the question of author- 
 ship. Arrian's lonism also more closely resembles the usage of 
 Herodotos. . . . Did he intend a thorough imitation of Herodotos? 
 
 1 Pseudo-Ionism in the Second Century, A. D., American Journal of Philology, 
 
 7. 203 ff. 
 
14 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 It may be assumed provisionally that he did." " The motif, 
 then, however superficially carried out, was a desire to revive 
 the style, selection of matter, and treatment of Herodotos, as 
 well as his dialect." " But the imitation of matter is more 
 successful than that of the manner." 
 
 Aelian and Philostratos mark the beginning of a general 
 break-down. They close the Renascence. In them more than 
 in any others, except possibly Arrian, is evident the influence of 
 Herodotos. 
 
 Again reserving details for the more careful study of Lucian, 
 we may give here some of Schmidts conclusions about Aelian. 
 His style is the Xeft? elpopevrj, he abounds in intentional anaco- 
 lutha as Arrian in his effort to copy Herodotos, like Herodotos 
 and Arrian he makes use of parataxis which leads to a<eXeta, 
 he shows dependence upon Herodotos especially by the frequent 
 insertion of parentheses or supplementary additions of shorter 
 syntactic independent explanations. In accordance with this 
 statement we expect and find a large proportion of Herodotean 
 particles, as d\\a yap, yap 8ij, yap ovv, ye Srj, Se in the conclu- 
 sion after foregoing conditional, relative, and temporal clauses, 
 /cai with such words as TTCLVV, paka, o-cfrobpa, /cdpra, etc., with or 
 without the article, 1 KCLI between the preposition and its noun, etc. 
 Attention will be called to the marked abundance of parenthetic 
 words and expressions. 
 
 The Ionic dialect gives pleasantness, d^eXeta, yXv/cvrr)?, as 
 may easily be seen by stripping off the dialect from some of 
 Herodotos as Dionysius has done. 2 We have learned from the 
 passage in Quintilian already quoted that the dialect of Herodotos 
 has such sweetness that it appears to contain within it some 
 latent rhythmical power. In the Renascence this effect began to 
 be striven after by Arrian and was continued by Aelian and 
 Philostratos. After allowing due credit to the KOIVY] for such 
 forms as yivo^ai, yivctxrfcco, etc., the general Ionic tendency as 
 seen in Aelian may be rightly traced to the influence of Herodotos. 
 Schmid gives as conscious lonisms in vocalization the use of (77) 
 
 1 V. Stein to Hdt. 1.71. 
 
 "Dion. Hal., De Admir. Vi Dicendi in Demosth. 41. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek 
 
 for (a) in Opfjaaa, Trer^Xoz/, 'louTUT/r^, /cprjcrtyvyerov ; (ov) for (o) 
 in 0^X09, /juovvd!;, OVVO/JLO, ; (et) for (e) in pzCKiyQrivai, /jLefatypa, 
 fj,ei\i'%ios ; also forms of the personal pronouns of the third 
 person in the function of the simple avro?, in the singular only 
 ol for avT<p and in the plural o-<j)cbv, o-^iac, a<f>a<; reflexive and 
 reciprocal. 
 
 Three principal sources for words in Aelian and the Renascence 
 generally are claimed : Comedy, Plato, Xenophon. Schmid says 
 Aelian has taken from the poets 861 words, from Plato 78, from 
 Xen. 71, from Herodotos 52, from Thuc. 27, from Dem. 11. This 
 proportion will answer for the whole Renascence as far as lan- 
 guage is concerned. A few words and expressions from Hdt. are : 
 ^d\\o^ai TI eV epavrov, 1 eOeXo/ca/ceco, 6fC7r\ec0 r&v fypevwv, 
 TTO\VS used adjectivally instead of adverbially, also imitated by 
 Arrian, free use of eiceivos referring to the following, and less 
 frequently 6'8e to the foregoing. 
 
 Finally, we see how powerfully Aelian was influenced by 
 Herodotos in a similar effort to produce an impression of credi- 
 bility, to give clear evidence of what he writes and the source of 
 his representations, to discriminate between what he knows and 
 what he thinks or hears. This he strives for by frequent refer- 
 ences, by accentuation of verbal information, by frequent citations, 
 by appeal to evident national traditions, by intimations of criticism 
 of his sources. 2 Triirva^ai Se /cal TOVTOV rov \6yov, el 8e d\r)0rf<} 
 ecTTiv OVK ol$a. o 8' ovv TreTrvcr/jLat, e/ceivo ea-riv. 
 
 Philostratos. Nearly everything that has been said of Aelian 
 may be said of Philostratos. There is Xeft? elpo^ievr] but with 
 anacolutha of a different kind, long periods being rare ; the same 
 abundance of parenthetic words and expressions. Ion isms, too, 
 present the same difficulties, but Schmid gives as clearly Ionic 
 Ls, the genitives 1/7709 and vywv, Top^/eLy 
 
 etc., in addition to some of the same given for Aelian. 
 
 He, too, has 52 words from Herodotos and uses other authors' 
 language much in the same proportion as Aelian. As Herodotean 
 
 1 V. Stein to Hdt. 3. 71. and 3. 155. 
 'Cf.VH. 53. 21. 
 
16 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 expressions, note TO fj,ev <ra<e9 OVK ol8a; 1 SrjXaxrai, /SouXoyLtat j 2 
 7&> Brj\a)a-(i) ; 3 etc. 
 
 Special mention may be made of the use of the third attributive 
 position, as eV TrarpiSa rrjv e/jujv ; 4 of the frequent use of the 
 absolute nominative. Philostratos uses this construction much 
 more frequently than Aelian. An example may be given from 
 Arrian, who here again follows his master Herodotos : ol Se dfifa 
 OVK ev r&> oyLtaXoS TraperdgavTO, aXXa .... opOLovs 
 TOV9 Xo%ov9 nroXe//,6uo9 TTpoa-ijyev. 5 Note also 717)09 
 with the genitive, which is especially common in Hdt. and his 
 imitator, Arrian. 6 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 LuCIAN. Ae 
 
 Lucian's motto is : 7 Svow Se ovrow, arr av Trapa rwv 
 Tf9 KTij<rcuTO, \ejeiv re $>vvacrQai teal Trpdrreiv ra Seovra 
 ra)v dpia-rcov teal (f>vyf r>v ^eipovoiv. 
 
 As the Renascence was a revival, a reconstruction, the literature 
 of the period must have been more or less an imitation, but it was 
 entirely possible for a gifted man so thoroughly to master the 
 ancient classics, so minutely and sympathetically to acquaint 
 himself with them, and so completely to assimilate them, that 
 he could at the same time be following them and not be guilty 
 of slavish imitation. This happy faculty combined with refreshing 
 originality belongs to Lucian and makes it difficult to find definite 
 trace of Herodotos or any one else in him. 
 
 More work has been done along the line of Lucian's depend- 
 ence upon the comic poets than elsewhere. There is more or 
 less mention of this dependence by all Lucianic scholars, and a 
 number of special works on it. Rabasti 8 claims that Lucian is 
 
 !E. 229. 13. * V. S. 28. 29. 8 Ap. 77. 24. 
 
 4 Phil., Ap. 34. 12, V. Schmid, Att. 4. 67, and for the construction in Hdt., 
 Gildersleeve's Justin Martyr, 1 C. 6. 7. 
 6 4. 5. 1. cf. Hdt. 8. 83. V. Schmid, Att. 4. 113. 
 V. Schmid, Att. 4. 465. T Adv. Indoct. 17 (3. 114). 
 
 8 Quid Comicis Debuerit Lucianus, 1865. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 17 
 
 under much obligation to the comic writers not only in material, 
 but also in form and in the manner of speaking. He has a 
 chapter entitled, Quomodo in rerum dispositione comicos secutus 
 fuerit Lucianus ; and another, Quid in genere dicendi simile 
 comicos habuerit Lucianus. 1 Kock, 2 too, has treated this subject 
 and by his own correct method of recovering lost verses of poetry 
 from several parallel quotations, has restored a number of frag- 
 ments of comic poets, some to the extent of 40 lines. " In Lucian's 
 Timon the expressions are largely drawn from a comedy of the 
 character of Aristophanes' Plutus." So also others. Not only 
 comic poets are to be considered here, for there is also marked 
 influence by the tragedians and especially by Homer. This indi- 
 cates one of the many complications surrounding the study of 
 Lucian's dependence upon Herodotos, for Herodotos himself must 
 be connected with the poets. 3 
 
 As is natural, signs of Plato are abundant in the dialogue, as : 
 r) & 09. 4 There are many Platonic short expressions and questions, 
 especially in Charon, as : TL Sal rovro rjv and TTW? yap ov ; 5 add 
 v(j)rjfjLi, avdpcojre. 6 And even here we cannot get rid of the 
 popular speech. 
 
 Schmid has given us a study of Lucian's atticisms. But of his 
 dependence upon individual authors, nothing has been said except 
 in a general way. Lucian's fondness for Plato offers abundant 
 results. In fact, here is another serious complication, for Plata 
 was strongly influenced by both tragedy and comedy, and abounds 
 in particles of all kinds. 7 His works are something of a universal 
 storehouse and often exert an influence that might be attributed 
 to Herodotos. 
 
 1 Cf. Zeigler, De Luciano Poetaruin Judice et Imitatore, 1 872 ; also Schulze, 
 Quae Eatio Intercedat inter Lucianum et Comicos Graecorum Poetas, 1883. 
 
 * Rhein. Mus. XLIII, pp. 29-59, a continuation of his article in Hermes xxi 
 (1886), p. 372 ff.: for the review of these, v. Amer. Jour. Phil., 10, p. 366. 
 
 3 Cf. Forstemann, De Vocabulis Quae Videntur Esse apud Herodotum Poeticis, 
 1892. 
 
 4 Kiihner and Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt., p. 306 ff. 
 
 6 Cf. Luc., Charon, 6 (1. 497), 12 (1. 505): this whole section is decidedly 
 Platonic in character. 
 Cf. Plat. Protag. 330 D. 
 7 Bernhardy, Wiss. Synt., p. 486. 
 
 2 
 
18 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 There has been no effort to establish the influence of Herodotos 
 upon Lucian, though many scholars have believed in it and have 
 given hints of their belief. Croiset l says : Herodote me parait 
 etre celui dont il a lu les oeuvres le plus assidument. On voit, 
 par divers passages de ses Merits, qu'il a vivement senti et admire 
 ses grandes qualites litteraires, la beautS de son style a la fois si 
 varie et si uui, cette grace ionienne qui lui est propre, la sagesse 
 et le tour heureux de ses reflexions. Le souvenir trs-vif qu'il 
 a garde de certaines scenes ou de certains e'venements racoutes 
 par le grand historien atteste qu'il u'e"tait pas moins sensible a 
 la forme dramatique de ses recits et a la grandeur simple de 
 son imagination. In a note he says : Je signale surtout le 
 premier paragraphe de 1'Herodote, ou Lucien se prononce d'une 
 rnaniere de*cide"e sur 1'impossibilite d'imiter ces qualites si 
 originales et si diverses dont la reunion constitue un genre de 
 perfection que chacun sent, mais qu'il est difficile d'analyser. 
 L'influence du style d' Herodote sur celui de Lucien ne me parait 
 pas non plus douteuse. In a second note : On peut voir notam- 
 ment dans le Charon (9-13) limitation abregee de 1'entrevue 
 de Cresus et de Solon, et, dans la suite du meme dialogue, les 
 allusions aux recits relatifs a Cyrus et a Tomyris, a Cambyse, a 
 Polycrate. Such remarks furnish confidence for this study. 
 
 The statement that Herodotos' style is the perfection of Xe^9 
 elpoftevr} demands explanation, if we would understand his style 
 and its influence. What is Xe'f 15 elpofjuevrj ? To what extent does 
 Hdt. excel in this style and in other styles? Does Lucian use 
 the same style to any extent? If so, does he use it through the 
 influence of Hdt.? 
 
 Aristotle, in the passage cited in Chapter II, continues : \eya) 
 B eipo/MevTjv r) ov&ev e%ei, reXo? xaO* avrrjv, av /JLT) TO 7Tpay/j,a 
 \yo/jivov reX.eitoOf). ecrrt, Be dr)8r)<; Sia TO aTretpov, TO yap reXo9 
 7Ta^T? ftovKovTCii Kcudopav. The rhetoricians could not improve 
 on this. Compare with this Kruger's 2 definition of parataxis : a 
 combination where clauses stand together without interdependence, 
 either syndetically by means of conjunctions or asyndetically by 
 mere juxta-position. Miiller 3 strikes the true note in describing 
 
 1 Vie et Oeuvres de Lucien, 1882, p. 94. Sprach. 59. 
 
 8 Geschichte der Griechischen Litteratur, Donaldson's Translation, I, p. 362. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 19 
 
 the style of Herodotos : " The character of his style (as is natural 
 in mere narration) is to connect the different sentences loosely 
 together, with many phrases for the purpose of introducing, 
 recapitulating or repeating a subject. These phrases are char- 
 acteristic of oral discourse. ... In this, as in other respects, the 
 language of Hdt. closely approximates oral narrative; of all 
 varieties of prose, it is furthest removed from a written style/' 
 The different members are not related to one another as principal 
 and subordinate, but as coordinates, sentences with Kai(re) /cat, 
 fjuev Se, ^(Trorepov) rj, etc. Blass 1 says that pure Xef is elpofjuevrj 
 was never actually in existence, that Hdt. was on the border 
 line between the accumulation process and the process of closer 
 connection as seen in Attic prose. Herodotos, then, is the best 
 prose representative of Xeft? elpo/juevrj, which means that his 
 narrative is marked by the purest simplicity, by the most 
 natural manner of speaking, by coordination effected by coordi- 
 nate particles, if you please, by syndetic parataxis, that his style 
 has a charm and sweetness rarely found elsewhere, and not that 
 his writings are deficient in the purest art. 
 
 There are very few statements of scholars to justify a connection 
 between Lucian and Herodotos in the use of parataxis. Lucian 
 uses it, of course, as does every other Greek writer, more or less. 
 Schmid 2 says that the inclination to parataxis (a mark of d<f>e\i,a) 
 is especially strong in Lucian's Asinus. Schmid also quotes from 
 Toxaris : 3 epol So/eel r/oefc e/celvot, rjcrav. Both of these pieces are 
 spurious, but they fall within the Renascence and can be counted 
 here, and Toxaris was proved spurious only by being proved too 
 close an imitation of Lucian. 4 However, this study is confined 
 to those confessedly Lucian's, the number of which is much 
 curtailed if we accept only those allowed by Bekker, Dindorf, 
 Sommerbrodt and more recent editors. The Ionic piece, De Dea 
 Syria, furnishes better examples of Herodotean characteristics 
 than any other, but that deserves a separate treatment. Whoever 
 be its author, no one can deny that it is an intentional imitation 
 of Herodotos. Such a claim is not set up for Lucian in general. 
 
 lAlt. Bered. I, pp. 133 ff. Att. 1. 422. 62 (2. 556). 
 
 4 Guttentag, De Subdito Qui inter Lucianeos Legi Solet Dealogo Toxaride. 
 
20 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Though there was a conscious effort to follow the best writers, 
 there was no effort to adopt any writer's style, diction, or syntax. 
 However, in the effort to assimilate all the earlier classics and 
 his immediate predecessors and contemporaries, the -elements of 
 his composition must at times appear undigested, the company 
 he kept must tell. In speaking of his " use or misuse of the 
 negative," Prof. Gildersleeve l says : " Now, Lucian was a careful 
 student of attic Greek, ... so that it could hardly have been 
 absolute heedlessness of the earlier usage; and, indeed, we find 
 him every now and then reverting to the classic norm. The 
 explanation is to be sought in the popular speech of the time. 
 Lucian, man of the world as he was, avoided all affectation and 
 followed the drift of the spoken language so far as it was not 
 rude or solecistic." This explanation must be considered in all 
 departments of the study. 
 
 We naturally look for the influence of Herodotos in narrative 
 pieces, so we should expect better result from Philopseudes, True 
 Histories, etc., though we are by no means confined to these. 
 The beginning of a narrative passage in Charon, for example, 2 
 furnishes a good example of coordination by the use of icai : opG> 
 yrjv 7ro\\r)V Kal \iuwrjv viva ueydXyv Trepippeovcrav Kal oprj 
 Kal Trora/jLOvs rov KCOKVTOV Kal TLvpi^XeyeOovTos uei^ovas KOI 
 dvOpcDirovs Trdvv <TuiKpov<? icai Tivas (f)(i)\6ov<; avrwv. Similar 
 sentences and sentences coordinated in other ways, as by jjuev and 
 Be, abound in Lucian's narrative pieces. 3 fjpepas aev ovv ovBev 
 avrodev tca0eo)p)/jLv, VVKTOS Be eTriyevofjLevrjs e^aivovro fjfuv Kal 
 a\\ai TroXXal vfjo-oi Tr\7icriov, at uev /zetfou?, al Be 
 Trvpl TTJV 'Xpoav TTpoo-eoiKviai,, Kal a\\7) Be n<; 777 icdrco Kal 
 ev avTJj Kal Trorauovs e^ovaa Kal 7re\dyrj Kal v\as Kal oprj. 
 These conjunctions are supplemented by other particles and by 
 participles : TroXXov? Be avrcov Kal eyvwpi&aaev ird\ai Trap' r]fuv 
 , ol Brj Kal 'jrpoarjeaav Kal rjaird^ovTo a)? av Kal <rvvr)de(,<; 
 , Kal r rrapa\af36vTe<$ rj/jbas teal KaraKOLfjiicravre^ Trdvv 
 l Bel; &>? etfevi^ov, TT]V re 
 
 1 A. J. P. 1, p. 47. * 6 (1.497). 
 
 8 Ver. Hist. 1.10 (2. 78); cf. Ver. Hist. 1. 8(2. 76) ; 1.25(2.90); 1.25(2.91); 
 1. 31 (2. 95) ; 1. 34 (2. 97) ; 2. 30 (2. 127) ; 2. 33 (2. 129) ; Char. 16 (1. 512) ; 
 Philops. 7 (3.36); 22(3.50). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 21 
 
 icaraa-icevdaravres ical virKT^vovfjievoL /3<z<rtXea<? re iroirja-eiv KOI 
 varpaTras. 1 The presence of re ical in this sentence is another 
 suggestion of Hdt. re is, of course, frequently used by others, 
 but Grundmann 2 says that it is peculiar to Hdt. and his imita- 
 tors to add a new thought or to elaborate an old one by means 
 of re : ravra Be <J<$>L Troitjcrao'i, ical ofyOelcri VTTO TT}? Trawrjyvpios 
 re\evrrj rov jSiov apiary eTreyevero o^eSefe re ev TQVTOKTI o #eo?. 3 
 Compare the following from Lucian : TO 8' CLTTO rovrov /j,ijiceri, 
 <f>epcov eya) rrjv ev r&> /ctfrei, Sicurav d^Oofievos re rfj 
 riva etyrovv. . . . eiravafiavres Se eirl ra va>ra KOI 
 TO) TIo(Ti,$c0vi avrov Trapa TO rpoiraiov r^fjuepa^ re T/^et 
 crd^evoL vrjvefjbia yap fjv TT? rerdprrj aTreTrXevcra/jiev.* Note also 
 in the last passage the participles and the parenthetic yap (v. below). 
 Add another sentence from Lucian : evOa Srj ical /cadecopw/jiev 
 \t,fievas re TroXXou? Trepl iracrav aic\vcrrov<s ical fieydXovs rcora^ov^ 
 re SiavyeLS efyovras r^pe^a e? rr)V Od\arrav, en Se Xe^yLtwz^a? ical 
 v\as real opvea fiova-iKa, ra fiev eTrl rwv rjlovwv aSovra, 7ro\\a 
 Be ical eTrl r&v /cXdScov drjp re fcov(j)o<; /cal evTrvovs Trepte/ce^vro 
 rrjv xcopav. 5 Again, Grundmann 6 calls attention to the frequency 
 of afjua in this connection in Hdt., and to the use by Hdt. and 
 Arrian of rd re a\\a icai for the more usual aXXw? re icai, though 
 the latter is not wanting. Sommerbrodt, commenting on apa re 
 ovv eTrirrjSeia e'So/cet rjfiepa re^vr)? evdp^ecrOai, tcdyo) TrapeSeSofjirjv 
 . . . , 7 calls attention to the parataxis and its frequency with aaa. 
 As examples of Lucian's use of rd re aXXa ical note the follow- 
 ing : . . . Sirjyov/jieOa e\6ovre<$ rd re aXXa icai r&v eraipwv rrjv 
 dfjL7re\ofjn,^Lav ; s and . . . rd re aXXa errvvOavo^Tjv teal o6ev CITJ. 
 Compare a passage already cited : rrfv re d\\rjv uTroBo^rfv ^eya\o- 
 TrpeTrfj Karaaicevdcravres ical viriayyov^voi ftacn\ea<; re Troitfo-eiv 
 /cal aarpaTra?. Finally, Herodotos uses Se in the conclusion 
 almost constantly. 9 It was a rare licence with other old writers, 
 but Lucian, like Herodotos, has made the licence the rule. He 
 
 1 Of. Ver. Hist. 2. 34 (2. 130). 3 P. 36. 3 Hdt. 1. 31. 
 
 4 Ver. Hist. 2. 1 (2. 104), 2. 2 (2. 106). 5 Ver. Hist. 2. 5 (2. 108). 
 
 6 Pp. 38, 47. 7 Luc. Somin. 3 (1. 5) ; cf. Timon 20 (1. 130). 
 
 8 Ver. Hist. 1. 9 (1. 77) ; 2. 20 (1. 117) ; cf. Mofiinann, De Particularum Non- 
 millarum apud Herodotum Usu, p. 32. 
 9 Cf. Sagawe, Se im Nachsatz bei Herodotos, 1893. 
 
22 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 uses it after participles, CODJ unctions, relative pronouns, etc. 
 eTreiSav rdyivra vvj; yevrfrai, 6 Se fcara/3d$ . . . Trepieio-iv ev /cvfc\q> 
 rr)v oliciav. . . . And ocroi be Kara rov &ai$a\ov e^prjaaro 
 
 Kalinka 2 says that Hdt. is especially partial to yap, frequently 
 using it where we should expect a relative clause. Its frequency* 
 he claims, is due to parataxis. Grundmann, too, p. 42, emphasizes 
 the paratactic association of yap. Its frequency is not, of course, 
 confined to Hdt. among the ancient classics. Plato is very fond 
 of it, but his numbers would be very much diminished if we left out 
 of the count all such expressions as 97 yap, TTW? yap ov. Hoffmann, 
 p. 19, goes to the extent of denying that Herodotos' use of yap 
 is any different from the common use. But no one who has read 
 Hdt., or what the best scholars have to say of him, can deny that 
 the Herodotean yap is decidedly paratactic, whether it merely 
 affirms a certainty or assigns a cause. If the Herodotean freedom 
 and ease is lacking in Lucian, we have abundant evidence of 
 coordination by means of yap in preference to subordination, and 
 there is a constant use of parenthetic yap, a special favorite with 
 Hdt. ov8e rov Trap avrov <f>r)/ju,, rov &t,aSovfj,evov rrjv /ce<f)a\r)v 
 rfj raivia, rov Ka\6v, TLo\VK\eLrov yap rovro epyov* etceiva) fj,ev 
 ovv TO) /jueipaKLCi), ara<r6d\G) yap TJo-rrjv, &t,/cas ena-drr^v VOD be ov 
 yap 7rl Kaiccp rwv Oewv ravra /3ov\evo/j,ev ri oir^l oiKobo/jLOvfjiev 
 teal avrol Kara ra avra eTrucvkwSovvres 7rd\\r)\a ra oprj. . . . 4 
 w f eve 'AOrjvale, elSes yap JJLOV rov rr\ovrov c . . . etVe /JLOI,, w 
 Kpoicre, olet, yap n SelcrOai rwv rr\lvQwv rovrcov rov HvOtov ; 6 
 rovrovs 670) ovtc tOeadd^v ov yap d^ifcovro. SioTrep ov$e ypdtyai 
 ro-9 <f>v<ri,<; avr&v er6\/j,r)o-a' repdcrria yap /cal dmo-ra rrepl 
 avrwv eyevovro. 7 All these are fair examples of Herodotean yap. 
 Nor are they isolated examples. Lucian's narrative pieces are full 
 of such. To give some idea of the frequency of yap, the True His- 
 tories (44 pp.) have 100 examples, or 2.5 per Teubner page ; Philo- 
 
 1 Philops. 19 (3. 47) and Imag. 21 (2. 480) ; cf. Philops. 15 (3. 43), De Domo 
 15 (3. 198), Charid. 10 (3. 624), 17 (3. 628). 
 
 8 Dissertationes Philologae Vindobonenses, 2. 145. 
 
 8 Philops. 18 (3. 46) ; cf. ib. 12 (3. 40), 15 (3. 43). *Char. 3 (1. 494). 
 
 Char. 10 (3. 502) (cf. Hdt. 1. 30). Ib. 12 (505). 
 
 7 Ver. Hist. 1.13(2. 81). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 23 
 
 pseudes (23 pp.) has 55, or 2.4 per Tetibner page. There is no 
 discrimination in these figures, but I have noted no example of 
 what might be called a Platonic yap. In Charon, where the 
 average is even higher, 2.6, or 46 occurrences to 18 pp., one 
 might cite a few instances of certain Platonic yap, naturally when 
 we consider that it is largely dialogue. In all these we find 
 many occurrences of ydp closely following one another, often 5 
 or 6 to the page, which is in keeping with simple narrative in 
 a paratactic style. And, what is more to the point, we find 
 combinations of yap with all kinds of particles such as are 
 peculiarly Herodotean, as /cal yap (9 times in Ver. Hist, part 1, 
 of 22 pp.), fjuev yap, yap By, etc., whereas there is a noticeable 
 absence of those combinations peculiarly Platonic (97 yap occurs 
 once in Ver. Hist.). These points gather strength from the 
 further point already made and emphasized by Kiihner, Kalinka 
 and others about Herodotos' frequent use of yap in parenthetic 
 sentences. This practice is very prevalent in Lucian and un- 
 doubtedly comes from familiarity with Hdt., as can be seen by 
 a glance at the examples and by the fact that the examples 
 are most numerous in narrative pieces. evpia-KO) Be avroQi TOV 
 fiev A.eovTi'Xpv ovK6Ti 6(f)6d/c6i, yap, o>9 e^acr/cev, o\Lyov Trpo- 
 ei;e\7j\v0a)<; a\\ovs Be wyyovs. . . .* eTrel fj,rjBev d\r)0es 
 i<TTopelv el%ov ovBev yap eireTrovOew a%io\oyov tVl TO TJrevBos 
 erpaTrofjurjv. . . , 2 6 Be <&ae6wv, fyrjo-iv, o T&V ev T&> rj\Lq> /car- 
 OIKOVVTWV /3ao-i\evs ol/celrai, yap &r) Kaiceivos coaTrep /cal r) 
 
 X,a/3o^T? eVeXeXotVet yap ij&rj /cal Svo ravpovs dypiovs /cara- 
 roj;vcrai>Ts aTreTrXeucra/ie^. 4 Add an analogous sentence without 
 yap : eVet Se Kara TO Si/cao-rijpiov eyevoprjv Trapfjv Be /cal 6 
 teal 6 Xdpcav /cal al M.otpai /cal al 'Eipwves o /JLCV Tt9 
 /3a<7t\ev<? 6 nXoi^Tftj^ fjLOi Bo/cel /caOijo-ro e7n,\ey6/j,evos TWV 
 
 ra ovo/jLara. 5 
 
 AT} is another Herodotean particle used by him with great 
 frequency, a claim which cannot be made for the earlier Attics, 
 
 1 Philops. 6 (3. 34) ; cf. the same section ; ib. 14 (3. 41). 
 a Ver. Hist. 1. 4 (2. 72). *Ib. 1. 12 (2. 79) ; cf. ib. 1. 36 (2. IOC). 
 
 * Ver. Hist. 2.3 (2.106). 
 
 5 Philops. 25 (3. 53). For confirmations of this usage for Lucian, v. Guttentag, 
 p. 38, and Schwidop, Observat, Luc. I, 22 ff. 
 
24 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 according to Kalinka, though its use does become somewhat freer, 
 as in Plato. Lucian makes free use of Srf and generally joins 
 it with paratactic particles, /cat,, yap, etc., a practice peculiar to 
 Hdt. and rare in most ancient Attics. Notwithstanding the fact 
 that here, too, Schmid in his study of Dio and Lucian constantly 
 refers to Xen. and Plato, I make bold to claim in narrative, at 
 least, a larger influence of Hdt., and for three reasons. 1. Because 
 it is more frequent in narrative pieces. We find in Tirnon (25 pp.) 
 only three examples of 77, whereas in True Histories we find in 
 the two parts of 22 pp. each, 12 and 24 examples respectively. 
 2. Because it is nearly always used with particles. Of the 
 examples noted in 25 pp. of Plato's Republic, less than one- 
 third are combined with particles, but in Hdt. and in Lucian's 
 True Histories more than three-fourths are in combination with 
 particles. 3. Because it is much more frequent in Herodotean 
 combinations than in Platonic. In Plato we note such combina- 
 tions as 7ro)<? 77, vvv 77, which are not found in Lucian's narrative, 
 nor in any of the pieces examined. But Lucian's fondness for /cat 77, 
 fjiev 77, yap 77 is very marked, and all of these, Kalinka correctly 
 says, are Herodotean. In the same 25 pp. of Plato, out of 45 occur- 
 rences of Srj, there are two examples of ical 77 in the combina- 
 tion /cal Srj Kaiy as against 9 examples in Lucian's True Histories. 
 KOI &rj ical is used more frequently by other writers of the 
 Renascence than by Lucian, but one passage, aXXo, re TroXXa 
 repdaria 6pya6/jLvov, /cal 8rj /cal eVt /cpo/co8ei\cov o%ovfJLvov . . . l , 
 must be compared with a passage in the first chapter of Hdt. and 
 many other passages, aXXa? re 7roXXa9 /cal Sr) /cal rov 
 Bvyarepa. Of. avvr)$pevov Se aXXot re TroXXol /cal ' 
 Add to the combinations already mentioned evda Brj and evravOa Srj. 
 An exhaustive treatment of subordinate sentences with their 
 particles would be interesting, but a few general remarks on final 
 particles will have to suffice in so short a study, dealing primarily 
 with coordination. Herodotos 7 favorite final particle is Iva. " The 
 following is the table of the number of occurrences in Hdt. : 
 (1) Iva 107; (2) Stem? 12; (3) o*o>9 av 5; (4) <>? 16; (5) *>? av 
 II." 8 iva with the subjunctive largely predominates, for after 
 
 1 Philops. 34 (3. 60). Ver. Hist. 2. 10 (2. 110). 
 
 3 Amer. Jour. Phil. 4, pp. 416 ff. and 6, pp. 53 ff. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 25 
 
 historical tenses alone the subjunctive occurs 41 times and the 
 optative only 23 times. It means nothing, of course, that Lucian, 
 too, has 107 occurrences of Iva, for his corpus, genuine and 
 spurious, is nearly twice that of Hdt., but it is not without 
 significance that he shows a very decided preference for the 
 subjunctive after iva. Heller 1 gives f iva with subj. 94 times, 
 with opt. only 8 times, and a few times with indie. Special 
 importance attaches to this when we compare the constructions 
 of w a and 009. Hdt. uses o>9 sparingly. Lucian, on the other 
 hand, uses it over 300 times. The first point is the predominance 
 of o>9 with opt. Out of 318 occurrences it is found with the 
 opt. 235 times, and is freely used after principal tenses. Why ? 
 " The opt. is dying out, and when would-be elegant writers try 
 to use it in final sentences they overdo it, as is notoriously the 
 case in Lucian, who uses &>9 with opt. freely after principal tenses." 2 
 Thus, he is not necessarily following Plato, who is partial to the 
 opt., and is here in marked contrast with his own more natural 
 use of iva. The second point is that of all these occurrences of 
 ft>9, not one is found in True Histories, his model narrative of 
 nearly 50 pp. Nor do we find O7ro>9 here; Iva occurs twice. 
 Why did Lucian prefer the subj. with iva even after secondary 
 tenses when he went to the other extreme in the use of the opt. 
 with 0)9 even after primary tenses? Why omit his elegant o>9 
 with opt. in his model stories ? In conclusion, it may be stated 
 in general terms as to Lucian's narrative pieces that there is a 
 marked preference for coordination and coordinate particles. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 LUCIAN IN PERIODOLOGY. 
 
 Periodology is a very broad term. Although it is claimed, as 
 we have seen, that Herodotos' style is the perfection of Xeft9 
 eipo/jLevrj, and although it is a fact that Aristotle and Hermogenes 
 do not touch upon periods, cola, etc., except in connection with 
 
 1 Die Absichtssatze bei Lucian, fra, s, &rs. * A. J. P. 6, p. 68. 
 
 3 
 
26 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Karea-Tpapfievrj, still Hdt. is not wholly unperiodic and in 
 any case the structure of his sentences, taking periodology in its 
 wider signification, demands a word. Blass 1 represents Hdt. as 
 one who accumulates, as one on the border line between the so-called 
 joining-on manner of speaking of the poets and old prose writers 
 and the close union which was first perfected in Attic prose. The 
 study of any author's periodology should include an examination 
 of (1) the kind of sentences, whether coordinate or subordinate, 
 the various kinds of each and the conjunctions used; (2) the 
 extent of the sentences, whether long or short, the number of 
 clauses and their arrangement ; (3) the formation of sentences 
 with regard to figures. Add as corollaries to be noticed (4) the 
 fullness of his sentences, or de verborum ubertate, and (5) the 
 general character of the narrative, whether opOorrjs is preferred 
 or TrXayiacrfjLos. 
 
 The first and most important point has been fully discussed 
 in Chap. IV. On the next point, Miiller, continuing the passage 
 cited above from Donaldson's translation, 2 says : " Long sentences, 
 formed of several clauses, are for the most part confined to 
 speeches." Schmid 3 says that in Lucian long sentences are the 
 exception. It is impossible to count cola in Hdt. as, e. g., in 
 Isocrates. In fact, as noted, the rhetoricians did not study periods 
 and cola in Hdt., and no wonder when only such definitions 
 were available as Aristotle's a<eX?) (jrepioSov) Be Xeya) rrjv 
 fjLov6tca)\ov and KCO\OV S'eVrl TO erepov /juopiov ravrrj^, and 
 Hermogenes' KCO\OV Be ecrnv aTrrjprio-fjLevr} Sidvoia. Naturalness, 
 the adding on of a clause which seems to be an afterthought, 
 the stringing along "rosary" fashion what Isocrates would care- 
 fully subordinate, stating simply with unaffected eloquence what 
 Isocrates would adorn with studied finery, is Herodotos' chief 
 charm. Yet with all this natural simplicity and apparent lack 
 of orderly consecution of colon upon colon, his sentences are 
 not composed of clauses thrown together incoherently, though 
 there may not be formed a rhetorical climax or an Isocratean 
 period. These same conditions prevail in Lucian's narrative. 
 We cannot count cola and clauses in his sentences. He has 
 
 1 Att. Bered. 1. 136 ; cf. 1. 133 for a more detailed analysis. 
 1, p. 362. Att. l,p. 422. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 27 
 
 not the Isocratean periods. He has undeniably, however, the 
 "rosary" effect, if not to the same extent as Hdt. There are 
 whole passages and numberless sentences that remind us of Hdt., 
 though, as is to be expected, much of the Herodotean charm is 
 missing. A few sentences must suffice : TJV Be /cal l^vr) Bvo 
 7r\Tjo-LOV fcVl TreTpas, TO jj,ev TrXeOpialov, TO Be eXarrov ejiol 
 Bo/ceiv, TO fjbev TOV kiovvcrov TO jM/cpoTepov, OaTepov Be 'Rpa/cXeovs : l 
 Tore Be TOV TTOTdfjibv Bia7repdo~avTe<?, y Bt,a/3aTO<; rjv, evpo/jiev 
 d/jL7re\a)v Xpfj^a TepdcrTcov TO pev yap diro TT)? 7779, o crreXe^o? 
 avTos evepvrjs teal 7ra%v$, TO Be dva) yvvai/ce? r)o~av, oaov etc 
 TO>V \a<y6vGov djravTa e^ovcrai, Te\eia : 2 av ftev oftv 9 TO (frpeap 
 KaTajSfj Tt9, dnovet TrdvT&v TWV irap'fjiMV ev Ty ryfj \eyo pevtov, 
 lav 8e 69 TO KaTOTTTpov aTroftXetyr), irdaa^ [lev 7roXet9, irdvTa Se 
 eOvrj opa &cnrep ecfrecrTcbs eicdcrTow TOT /cal TOU9 oiicelovs eyo) 
 eOeacrdfjirjv /cal 7rao~av TTJV TraTpiSa, el Be icdicelvoi e/jie ecopcov, 
 ov/c e%o> TO dcr<t>a\e<i elfrelv? The last sentence is very suggestive 
 of Hdt. eTTifjuevovTos Be TOV irvev/^aTo-^ (frepeiv ov Bwdfievoi, 
 TotovBe TL eTrevoTJaajjiev o Be TTJV fyvcofjiTjv dnrofyrivdiievos r)v 
 ^/civOapos a-KatyavTes yap ev TO) vBaTi o-Trrj\ai,ov fjueyto-TOV ev 
 TOVTO) e/JLeivapev r^^epa^ TpidicovTa, irvp dvaicalovTes /cal viTQvpevoi 
 
 TOU9 l^dv^' VpL(TKOfJL6V Be aVTOVS dvOpVTTOVT<S* 
 
 Herodotos' skill in the use of particles is reinforced by an equally 
 skilful manipulation of the participle. By means of these two he 
 adds variety, freshness, and simplicity to his narrative and avoids 
 the monotony of cola after cola with such Isocratean regularity : 
 e. g. Trapd TOVTCOV 'Hpa/cXelBai eTriTpafyQevTes effftov Trjv dp^v e/c 
 iov, /c Bov\r)$ Te T?}9 'lapBdvov ryeyovoTes real f Hpa/cXeo9, 
 fiev eVl Bvo Te /cal eiicocrL ryeveds dvBpcov, Tea TrevTe Te 
 /cal TrevTa/cocria, 7rat9 Trapd TraTpb? e/cBe/co/juevo^ TTJV dpxtfv, pexpt, 
 KavBav\eco TOV Mvpaov. 5 " Herodotos, . . . while he seems to be 
 on the whole polymetochic, shows a remarkable variation from the 
 polymetochic, 1. 123, where Harpalus sends the hare to Cyrus, 
 down to the oligometochic, 3. 41-3, the story of the ring of 
 Polykrates." 6 " It is no accident that we find in the Vera Historia 
 
 1 Ver. Hist. 1. 7 (2. 75). Ib. 1. 8 (2. 76). 
 
 S 76. 1. 26 (2. 91) ; cf. 1. 31 (2. 95). 
 
 4 Ib. 2. 2 (2. 106); cf. 2. 17 (2. 114); 2. 20 end (2. 118); 2. 41 (2. 134); and 
 many others. 5 Hdt. 1. 7. 
 
 Amer. Jour. Phil. 9. 150. 
 
28 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 of Lucian now a series of finite verbs and immediately afterwards 
 a eumetochic sentence, to be followed by ametochia and then again 
 by eumetochia." l In the light of these facts we are almost forced 
 to the conclusion that Lucian is an intentional imitator of Hdt. in 
 narrative. Not only has he used paratactic particles as Hdt., and 
 produced the " rosary " effect by means of participles, but he has 
 combined the two and, what is more to the point here, has changed 
 from one to the other in successive sentences or even in the same 
 sentence. One feels that there is an effort to tell a story as the 
 model story-teller. 2 A few sentences from Lucian will illustrate 
 this point : fypd^co TOIVVV irepl a>v /JL^TC elBov /JMJT ejraOov /jLrJTe Trap" 
 d\\a)v eirvdo/ji'rjv, eri Be fjbijre 0X0)9 OVTGDV fjujre rrjv dp^rjv yevecrQat, 
 BvvafjLevwv. Sib Bel Tot>9 VTvy%dvovTa<; /jbijBa/jLWS Tua-reveiv avrot?. 3 
 Immediately after this remarkable statement he begins his narra- 
 tive: 6pfj,r]0el<s yap irore diro 'Hpa/cXeiW CTTIJ^WV ical d<f>el$ 9 
 TOV ecTTrepiov (b/ceavbv ovpiqy dvefj,(p TOP TT\OVV eTroiov/jbrjv. Notice 
 the striking difference between the two sentences and the sudden- 
 ness of the transition. The second one is followed by an ametochic 
 sentence coordinated by KaL Again : e/ceWev Be apiraa-Oevre^ 
 avefj,<p (rtyoBpa) Tpiraioi 6*9 TOV obtceavov dnrir)ve')(67]i^ev t evda rc5 
 fdjret, 7rpt,TV%ovT<; Koi avravBpoi, /caraTroOevTes Bvo rj/jLei? fjuovoi 
 rcav a\\cov anrodavovrwv ea-(t)0r)fj,ev. 0d'\fravre<; Be roi>9 eraipovs 
 Kal vabv rcS IlocreiS&m Bei^dfjLevot, TOVTOVL rbv fiiov w//.ei>, \d%ava 
 fiev KTjTrevovTeff, l%0vs Be a-trovfjievot, /cal dfcpoBpva. 7ro\\rj Be, 
 (9 opare, 17 v\rj, Kal fjbrjv Kal d/j,7re\ovs e^ei, 7ro\Xa9> d<f> &v 
 jjBia-Tos olvo? yLyverai,' Kal rrjv Tryyrjv Be t<ra>9 eiBere Ka\\icrrou 
 KOI tyvxporaTOV vBaro?. evvrjv Be dirb TWV <j>v\~\,<ov 
 Kal Trvp a<j>6ovov Kaiofjuev Kal opvea Be Orjpevo/juev rd 
 Kal fwi/ra9 l^Ovs dypevo/juev egiovres eirl rd Ppay%la TOV Orjpiov, 
 evda Kal \ovo^e6a, owoTav eTriQvfjLrjo-Wfjiev.* 
 
 Under figures, only the Gorgianic demand attention here, because 
 they are the ones that play an important role in a study of the 
 periodic structure of sentences. These figures, though they were 
 in existence at the time of Hdt., were just then being developed 
 
 1 lb. 147. 
 
 * V. the entire article of Prof. Gildereleeve in A. J. P. cited above, and his 
 introduction to Pindar, p. cix. 
 ' Ver. Hist. 1. 4-5 (2. 73). *I6. 1. 34 (2. 97-98). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 29 
 
 by his contemporary, Gorgias, but their perfected development 
 was not reached until Isocrates. Dr. Robertson, 1 however, 
 has shown that Hdt. does use such figures, though sparingly. 
 In the narrative portions of the sixth book we have the 
 summary: antithesis 14; parison 4; paronomasia 19; pare- 
 chesis 1 ; repetition 62. In my first chapter I tried to show 
 that it was the ultra-Isocratean spirit that led to bombast and so 
 to decay. We, therefore, naturally expect that the revival from 
 this decay would present a literature with fewer Gorgianic figures. 
 Such is the case. Lucian himself warns against such figures : 
 Kal 6 prjrwp Be CTV aTrodov ra>v prj/jbdrcov rrjv Too-avrrjv airepavro- 
 \o<yi,av /ecu avruOecreis KOI Trapia-ctMrets KOI TrepioSovs KOI ftapffa- 
 picr/jLovs ical ret aXXa {3dpr) r&v \6yc0v. 2 That these figures do not 
 abound in Lucian is for us merely a negative argument excluding 
 certain influences, and needing support from other more positive 
 arguments. It would be absurd to claim that Lucian took his 
 few Gorgianic figures from Herodotos' still fewer, but their 
 absence bespeaks a style of more simplicity, less periodic, more 
 nearly approaching the Herodotean style, which is valuable enough 
 when strengthened by positive Herodotean indications, such as 
 have been given. The following passage is a fair sample of 
 Lucian's repetition and paronomasia, which may include pare- 
 chesis, and neither of them occurs even imperfectly more than 15 
 times in the first part of Yera Historia : TOVTMV S' ol ftev 
 ^uXXoToforat eTrl \/ruXX&)z> fjbe<yd\(DV hnrdfovrtu .... ^676^09 8e 
 T<OV A/ruXXo>z> oa-ov SooSe/ea eXe^ai/re?. 3 One other short passage 
 may serve to illustrate his use of parison, paromoion, and homoio- 
 teleuton ; and there are very few examples in his narratives as 
 good as this one ; TroXXot fjuev fwz^re? rjKla-Kovro, TroXXot Se KOI 
 
 In his chapter, De Verborum Ubertate, Grundmann very 
 properly warns against being too dogmatic in claiming Herodotean 
 influence when certain peculiarities of language or construction 
 found in his works exist also in most, if not all, of the best Attic 
 writers. But he claims with equal propriety the right to assert 
 
 1 The Gorgianic Figures in Early Greek Prose. 
 
 Dial. Mort. 10 (1. 374). Ver. Hist. 1. 13 (2. 80). 
 
 I&. 1. 17 (2. 84). 
 
30 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Arrian's dependence on Hdt. along this line, de verborum ubertate, 
 whenever the writings of the two abound in identically the same 
 characteristics, which others use more sparingly. He says, e. g., 
 that such expressions as peyeOei peyas and 7r\ij0e'i yue^o-rc?, etc. 
 go back to Hdt. Schmid 1 is authority for the statement that such 
 expressions were common among writers of Lucian' s time, being 
 especially frequent in Aelian. Note the following from Lucian : 
 d\\a /cat 7r6\iv rjBr) ev rfj Meo-OTrora/u'a a>/acre fiueyeOet, re /jbeyio-Trjv 
 KCLI Ka\\LC7T'rji> ) and ol/cov Be T? lBa)v jjueyedei, /AeyicrTov fcal icd\\ei, 
 icd\\Lcrrov * Grundmann 8 further points out that Hdt. and Arrian 
 often repeat a preceding thought and by means of pev oppose it to 
 what follows. Lucian follows the same practice, but in a little 
 different way. He summarizes or confirms or reasserts in a short 
 additional clause added often by Be or some similar particle, or by 
 ovTft)?, or without any particle. In Philopseudes 4 he sums up a 
 long sentence : o/ro>5 droTra Birjyelro. Again, after a marvelous 
 story which reminds one of the Bible : TOO-OVTOV fj etrpBr) eBvvrjOvj 
 KOI 6 o-r^XtTT/? cKeivos Xt#o?. 6 In the next section, after more 
 marvels : eTrel Be crvvrj\io-0r)crav t eve^vcrrjae /JLCV avra 6 Ba/3iA,ftmo9, 
 T^ Be avriica, fjid\a icareicauOri air avra VTTO rc5 fyvo-rHJuari, ^yuet? Be 
 eOavfid^o/jiev, where the very last clause seems very natural to a 
 reader of Hdt. More nearly approaching Grundmann's illustra- 
 tions is a summary in Tcae Histories : rotavTrj fiev teal 6 QaeOcov 
 TrapcKT/cevfj. 6 Again : Toiavrrj fiev TJ %copa ea-rLv V/JLCIS Be 
 r) opav OTTO)? 7 . . . . ; and ravra /JLCV ra Kara rrjv vr)o-opa%Lav 
 yevo/jieva, 8 the conclusion of the first part. Lucian makes use of 
 rotovTQ- r Toaovros in such summaries more than Hdt., who 
 seems to prefer OVTCO or OVTCO Btf, evOavra By, or the repetition 
 of the verb. After i < ascription of the terms of a peace 
 between the inhabitants n ;.* the sun and the inhabitants of 
 the moon, Lucian says : roiavrrj fj,ev 17 elprjvrj eyevero? In 
 like manner he concludes a description of food and its prepara- 
 tion : <TiT(p /j,ev Brj rptyovTai rotour^). 10 Such conclusions with 
 
 J Att. 1. 312 and 418. 
 
 Hist. Conscrib. 31 (2. 42), De Domo 1 (3. 190). p. 35. 
 
 4 5 (3. 34). 6 11 (3. 39). 6 1. 16 (2. 83). 
 
 n. 36(2. 99). 8 1.42(2. 104). 
 
 Ver. Hist. 1. 21 (2. 86). 10 16., 1. 23 (2. 88). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 31 
 
 forms of ouT09 are not hard to find. At the end of Odysseus' 
 letter to Calypso we find : ravra fj,ev e$ij\ov rj eVtcrroXTJ, KOI rrepl 
 rj/jLwv, OTTO)? gevifrOwjijLev. 1 At the close of part two, the whole of 
 the True Histories is summarized in six lines beginning ravra fj,ev. 
 The significance of such examples is materially heightened by their 
 remarkable frequency in all of Lucian's narrative, especially True 
 Histories. 
 
 All the foregoing evidence both affirms and is strengthened by 
 the fact that Lucian's style resembles the style of Hdt. in its 
 straightforward method of telling a story. There is not only 
 opOoTijs pure, the use of the nominative which carries with it the 
 use of the finite verb usually in the indicative in narrative, but 
 also the use of the participle not in the genitive absolute con- 
 struction nor in any oblique case, to any extent, which is the sign 
 of Tr^ayiao-fAos connoting Trepi/BoXij and cre/^voT?;?. 2 The rhetori- 
 cians are construed as believing that such a use of the participle is 
 to be classed under rrKayiao-pos along with the genitive absolute, 
 but it appeals to me more as a pleasing variety of opQorys, if 
 opOoTfj*; means straightforwardness. Granted, as the rhetoricians 
 contend, that the participle, whatever its construction, is a a^rjfjba 
 7Tpi/3\r)T(,K6v, is one of those forms that bring about 7rep(,/3o\rj, we 
 still contend that both Hdt. and Luc. secure the effect of straight- 
 forward narrative by the use of the partk'ple as well as by the use 
 of the finite verb, the alternation of eumetochia and ametochia in 
 both authors having been previously noticed. As an example of 
 opOoTTj? in Luc. : avrrj fiev rj rov 'EySu/uft)!^ Svva/jiis rjv. (T/cevrj 
 8e rrdvrtov 77 avrrj" Kpdvq fiev CLTTO rcov /cvdfjLW fj,yd\a { 'p Trap" 
 avrois ol KvafLOt, /cal /caprepoi" Otopafces Se (f>o\iScoruv nrdvTes 
 rd yap \e7rrj r&v Oep/jucnv o-vpk>d7r~ovT$ TTQIOVVTCU Oa)pa- 
 appr)KTov 8' etcei jLyverai, rov J ( 9f TO Xe7T09 &(T7rep icepa$' 
 Se real gi^r) ola rd 'EtXhyviKa. 3 Compare with this the 
 beginning of the narrative in True Histories : op/ii?0el? yap irore 
 diro 'Hpa/eXetW <TTri\S)v KOI d(f>el<$ e? rbv eairepiov toiceavov ovpiq) 
 dvefjuq) rov TT\OVV eTroiov/jLrjv ; 4 and again : . . . . 'jrpocreve' 
 avrrj ical 6p/jbHrd/jLvoi, airk^^v, eTTio-fcoTrovvres Se rrjv 
 
 1 2b., 2. 35 (2. 131). Cf. A. J. P. ix, 140 ff. 
 
 Ver. Hist. 1. 14 (2. 81). * 1. 5. (2. 73). 
 
32 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 ol/cov/jievrjv. . . .* Allowing that the effect of the parti- 
 ciple is to retard the movement somewhat in these and hundreds of 
 similar passages in Luc. and Hdt. does not detract from the simplicity 
 or clearness or the straightforward method of the narrative. It is 
 in a sense 6p66rrj<; connoting /caOaporrjs and a<e\em ; and both 
 Hdt. and Luc. abound in this general character of narrative inter- 
 changed with pure opOoTr)?, to the exclusion of irKa^/iao-pos, or 
 dependency, or genitive absolute. Their coordination of participles 
 is in keeping with their coordination of particles. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 LUCIAN His LANGUAGE, CONSTRUCTIONS, MATERIAL. 
 
 This chapter might easily constitute a book in itself with three 
 chapters, one each for language, constructions, and material, but 
 lack of space forbids. 
 
 Notwithstanding the fact already noted that comedy, Plato, and 
 Xenophon are the principal sources of the Renascence for words, 
 Schmid gives 85 words which he claims Ltician has taken from 
 Herodotos and other Ionic writers not including Hippocrates. 
 There are besides 300 words in the Lucianic corpus which have 
 been used by Hdt. in common with one or more of the standard 
 writers, and more than 200 that have been used by Hdt. in com- 
 mon with the poets, mostly Homer and the tragedians. Take, 
 e. g., three uncommon words in Somn. 2 : /Saz/aucro? KOI ^et/xwz/af 
 /cat a7TO%t/3oy8tft)T09. The first one is used by Soph., Ar., Xen., 
 Plat.; the second by Hdt., 8 Soph, as an adj. in a fragment, Euri- 
 pides in another sense in a fragment ; the third by Hdt. 4 and Xen. 6 
 As in the case of these last two, so in many other cases of the 500 
 taken from Hdt. and others in common, Hdt. should be placed 
 first because the word is used by him more prominently or more 
 
 1. 10 (2. 77). 9 (1. 14). J . 95 and 2. 141. 
 
 3. 42. 6 Cyr. 8. 3.37. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 33 
 
 frequently. V. Du Mesnil 1 for certain unusual forms. He gives 
 ovSafjioOi, for ovSa/jbov 2 as Ionic; also rjpv^crd^v for rjpvrjOrjv* 
 as used only by the poets and Ionic writers and once by Aes- 
 chines. But this department is the least fruitful for the whole 
 Atticismus. 
 
 Only a few unusual constructions will be mentioned, but enough 
 to show Lucian's great familiarity with Hdt. and the extent to 
 which he was influenced by Herodotean peculiarities. Schmid 4 
 and Du Mesnil 5 call attention to the joining of an accusative with 
 an article as a Herodotean peculiarity among the ancients and a 
 Lucianic peculiarity among the later writers : 6'<rrt<? ouro? o Trpocnwv 
 , 6 Kepa(T<f)6po<;, o Trjv (rvpiyya, 6 Xacrto? etc rotv o~fC6\oiv ; 6 7ro0ev 
 eTret,o-eKVK\rfdr]G-av OVTOL rj 6 Mt^p7/? e/ceivos 6 M?}8o9 o TOV 
 /cdvSvv /cal TTJV Tidpav ; 7 r) Ba/3fXa>i> Se aoi e/ceivrj etrrlv rj evTrvpyo? 
 rj rov peyav 7repif3o\ov. 8 Du Mesnil agrees with Matthiae 427 b in 
 explaining the phenomenon by the omission of e%a>i>. In the Hero- 
 dotean examples the article seems not to be expressed, though the 
 e^cov is to be supplied in the same way : TOU? Se epa-evas (/Soi)?) 
 /carapvcro-ovo-t, e/cao-roi, ev rolcri, Trpoaa-TeLoicn, TO icepas TO eTepov rj 
 KOL a/jL^oTepa vTrepe'XpvTa, sc. e%oi^ra9. 9 
 
 7Tpi with dat. for irepL with ace. is rarely used by the ancients 
 except the Ionic writers and the poets. V. Du Mesnil 10 and Lund- 
 berg. 11 The one says it is frequent in Hdt., the other in Lucian : 
 a7Torcv\i,ofj,6Vovs 67Tt K<pa\rjv evLoTi /cal TroXXa TpavfiaTa Xa/jifid- 
 vowras Trepl rpa^etat? rat9 Trer/oat?. 12 
 
 Merriam 13 says that " the third attributive position is a favorite 
 with Hdt. and his admirer, Lucian, but not very common in the 
 
 1 Grammatica, Quam Lucian us in Scriptis Suis Secutus Est, Eatio cum Anti- 
 quorum Atticorum Ratione Comparatur, pp. 4-6. 
 
 I Hermot. 3. 1 (1. 771). 3 Dial. Mer. 7. 4 (3. 298). 
 
 * 1. 234. 6 p. 9. 6 Bis. Ace. 9 (2. 801), cf. ib. t 19 (2. 814). 
 
 7 Deor. Cone. 9 (3. 533). Char. 23 (1. 522) cf. ib. 14 (1. 509). 
 
 9 Hdt. 2. 41 ; cf. 2. 134, 4. 71, etc. 10 p. 38. 
 
 II De Eatione Herodotea Praepositionibus Utendi a Scriptoribus Atticis Di versa, 
 1869, p. 26. 
 
 11 Cf. Luc. Ehet. Praec. 3 (3. 4) ; ib., 18 (3. 20) ; De Domo 7 (3. 194) ; De Hist. 
 Conscr. 23 (2. 31), etc. 
 13 V. note to Hdt. 6. 22. 3. 
 4 
 
34 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 best Attic." The original authority of this note l has modified his 
 statement 2 after a farther examination of Lucian. The only place 
 in which he uses the third position with any frequency at all is, 
 as we would expect, the narrative passage, True Histories. Here 
 there are a dozen examples and about the same number of the 
 second position, the first largely predominating everywhere. 
 
 Schmid 3 calls attention to Lucian's not infrequent practice of 
 throwing back the accent of dissyllabic prepositions, especially 
 TrepL Of the ancient prose writers only Hdt. and Plato follow 
 this practice to any extent. It cannot be claimed that Lucian 
 followed either of these or the poets, but two facts are interesting, 
 that when he calls up Hdt. 4 and makes him talk Ionic, there is an 
 anastrophic Tre/n, and that in the Syrian Goddess, which I have 
 tried to establish in another place 5 as a Lucianic composition, vre/H 
 is found no less than 15 times. 
 
 Sommerbrodt 6 remarks that &>9 for &crre is to be found in Hdt. 
 and the Attic poets. It is frequently found in Lucian. 
 
 Lucian takes another liberty with Attic prose, the use of ovSe for 
 KOL ov, for which his only authority could be Hdt. or the poets : 
 /cat vvv crv TOV KtOapwBov .... dva\a/3a)v e^evrjga) e? Taivapov .... 
 ovSe TreptetSe? /ca/ew? VTTO rwv vavrwv a7ro\\vfievov^ The Syrian 
 Goddess has several examples of this also. 
 
 It is possible that at times Lucian tried to cover up his tracks, 
 so to speak, and was intentionally at variance with the writers of 
 whom he was fond. In Somn., 8 where the Teubner text reads o><?, 
 Sommerbrodt changes to eZ? on the strength of similar passages in 
 Hdt., 9 where in each case 6/9 is used with persons, as here, for the 
 more usual TT/DO? or &>?, and also as here after the same word, 
 
 1 V. note to Prof. Gildersleeve's edition of Justin Martyr, 1, C. 6. 7. 
 
 1 Amer. Jour. Phil. 6. 262. 
 
 3 1. 234. * De Domo 20 (3. 202). 
 
 5 Studies in Honor of B. L. Gildersleeve. 
 
 6 V. note on Luc. Char. 23 (1. 521) : &s - ^ ve\Kfj<rat. 
 
 T Dial. Mar. 8. 1 (1. 308), cf. Khet. Praec. 16 (3. 17); Dial. Meretr. 7. 3 
 (3. 297); Gall. 14 (2. 724); Prom. 1 (1. 23); etc. 
 8 12 (1. 18). 
 '3.154,156,160. 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 35 
 
 Du Mesnil 1 has called attention to the expression Ufa TTOV \eycov 
 in Lucian. This pleonasm is frequent in Hdt. 2 
 
 The expression ov fypovrls 'iTTTroicheiSrj used by Hdt. 3 passed 
 into a proverb and is used by Lucian. 
 
 Lucian warns his readers at the opening of the True Histories 
 that not a word he is to utter has any truth in it, so that he can 
 be free from that deception and untruthfulness exemplified in 
 previous story-tellers who expected people to believe their every 
 word. But he seems to forget this as he becomes interested in the 
 story and makes a number of statements that sound familiar to 
 readers of Hdt. ; e. g., rather than make a plain statement, he 
 writes : eXeyoz/ro Se teal a,7rb r&v virep rrjv KaTTTraSo/ciav aa-repwv 
 fi%ew .... TOVTOV ? eya) OVK eOeaa-dfjirjv. 4 And in the same section : 
 TepdaTia yap KOI aTncrra Trepl avrwv e\eyovTo. Again : TO fjbevroi, 
 7r\f}0o<? avr&v OVK dveypatya, JULY) r&> /cal airiarov &6%rj, roaovrov TJV* 
 
 Many interesting verbal correspondences and other points of 
 interest might be cited, but no further mention of such will be 
 made except in connection with the treatment of subject matter. 
 Lucian and the Renascence in general had a great deal of what we call 
 the classic literature, how much, we cannot tell, from which to draw, 
 so that we must not always trace to Hdt. as a source what is com- 
 mon property. We can, of course, use here what is peculiar to 
 Hdt., especially when other similarities exist. In fact, in view of 
 the preceding arguments, that Herodotos' influence upon Lucian 
 in the sphere of story-telling is especially marked, we have more 
 right to claim Hdt. as the original source even of many stories 
 found elsewhere. Many of the references given are only sugges- 
 tions of comparisons, while those given more in detail furnish 
 stronger evidence. The same may be said of Dio Chr. to whom 
 parallel references are given. I have followed the order of Hdt., 
 and from this point put all references in the text. 
 
 Jo. V. Hdt. 1. 1, 1. 5, 2. 4. Cf. Luc., Deor. Dial. 3 (1. 207); 
 Mar. Dial. 7 (i. 305-307); Salt. 43 (2. 293). Cf. Dio (Teubner 
 text) vol. 1, p. 100, 1. 8 (Oration 11. 40). 
 
 1 p. 58, note on Luc. Dem. Enc. 15 (3. 502). 
 2 1. 118 ; 3. 156 ; 5. 36, 49. V. Stein to the first passage. 
 6. 129 ; cf. Luc. Here. 8 (3. 86) ; [Philopatr.] 29 (3. 618) ; Apolog. 15 (1. 724). 
 Each of the last two ends a work. 4 Ver. Hist. 1. 13 (2. 80). 
 
 */6., 1. 18 (2. 84) ; cf. i&., 1. 25 (2. 90) and Philops. 16 (3. 44). 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Europa. V. Hdt. 1. 2. Cf. Luc., Mar. Dial. 15 (1. 325-327) ; 
 D. D. S. 4 (3. 453). It is interesting to note the exact correspond- 
 ence of the account in the D. D. S. with that of Lucian, even 
 though it is a little abbreviated. 
 
 Croesus. Lucian has drawn largely upon Hdt. for all he has to 
 say about Croesus ; in fact, the correspondence is too evident to 
 admit of discussion. Hdt's. account of Croesus is given, for the 
 most part, in the first book, chapters 7-94. Chs, 8-12 tell how 
 his house came into power. Cf. Luc. [Asin.] 28 (2. 597). Cf. 
 Dio 2. 214. 18 (Or. 64.27). General references to Croesus' great 
 wealth are: Luc., Tim. 23 (1. 137); Navig. 26 (3. 265); Mort. 
 Dial. 2. 2 (1. 337). The famous dialogue between Croesus and 
 Solon, Hdt. 1. 30-33, has a very close parallel in Luc., Char. 
 9 ff. (1. 501 ff.). To Charon Hermes points out Croesus in his 
 palace at Sardis talking with Solon the Athenian. In general, 
 there is very little difference between the two accounts. Hdt. 
 makes Tellos the first in happiness, while the story about Cleobis 
 and Biton is second. Lucian reverses the order, but assigns the 
 same reasons in each case as Hdt. 
 
 Lucian. 
 
 yap 
 
 jJiOV TOV 7T\OVTOV KOI TOV9 Orj- 
 
 o-avpovs KOI 00-09 acrrj/jiosxpv 0-09 
 ea-Tiv rifuv Kal rrjv a\\r)v 
 
 7TO\VT\l,aV, 17T fJLOl, TLVO, 
 
 dv6pa)7ro)V 
 elvat,. 
 
 T>V 
 
 re 
 
 TeXXo9 o 'A0ifWM05 09 
 e/3ta> teal airkOavev VTrep rf)<! 
 
 Herodotos. 
 
 K\6vo-avTO<; Kpot<rou TOV So- 
 \cova QepaTTOvres Trepifjyov tcara 
 Tou? dycravpovs, teal eTriSei/c- 
 vvarav Trdvra eovra fjieyaka re 
 ical o\/3i,a .... eipero 6 K/ooto-o? 
 raSe- %elv 'AOrjvale .... vvv 
 <!)v i/j,po<i eTreipeaOai /JLOI eV^X- 
 Oe, i Tiva rjSij Travrow 
 
 a) 
 
 TeXXo) .... TOV fiiov v TJKOVTI, 
 a>9 r^ Trap* fjfuv, T\evTrj TOV 
 
 yap ' ^Qj]valoi(Ti fjud- 
 
 7T/909 TOU9 d(7TVy6LTOVa<; h 
 
 orjOrja-as Kal Tpo- 
 Troiijcras T&V 7roXe//,t&>i> 
 
Herodotos in the 
 6 Sevrepos $e rls av elr) ; 
 &> Se &v olSa K\eo/3iv /cal 
 
 Greek Renascence. 37 
 
 bra, riva SevTepov per 
 
 TOU? ryevecrOai,, TOVS rfjs lepeias 
 s TT}? 'ApyoOev. 
 
 OVTO<S rovs a 
 
 vTas, eirel rrjv 
 
 e f i\K.vcrav eirl Tr/9 
 Tnjvrjs a^pi jrpbs TO lepov. 
 
 ) $e, w /cddapfjua, ov aroi 
 
 elvcu ; 
 
 BeTTco olSa, w Kpotcre, $}v pr) 
 o? TO TeXo? a(f>iKrj rov ySt 
 
 eiceivov 
 
 KXeoyStz^ T real BtVwz/a. TOU- 
 TOtcri yap eov 
 
 eee TTCLVTO)^ rrjv 
 avrwv %evyel tcofjLicrOfjvai, e? TO 
 
 IpOV .... U7ToSwT9 aVTol V7TO 
 
 rrjv ev<y\r)v elXicov rrjv a/j,al;av, 
 eVt TT}? afjud^fj^ Se <r<t>i a>^e 
 
 w geive'A.O'rjvcue, f) Se 
 
 e<? TO prj&ev, axrre ovSe l&icorewv 
 avbpwv dgiovs ^//.ea? eTro^o-a?. 
 eicelvo Be, TO etpeo pe, ov KCO 
 are eya) \<yo), Trplv av 
 o-avra /ca\W9 TOV al&va 
 
 Lucian next follows Hdt. in giving the history of Croesus* 
 children. With Hdt. 1. 134 and 1. 43 cf. Luc., Jup. Conf. 12 
 (2. 635-6). Both make mention of the two sons of Croesus, one of 
 them /e<0$o9 according to both. V. Hdt. 1. 34; Luc. Pro Imag. 
 20 (2. 500) ; Gall. 25 (2. 741). 
 
 Again, we have strikingly similar accounts of the answers given 
 to Croesus when in his jealousy and alarm at the success of the 
 Persian power he sent messengers to various oracles. With Hdt. 
 1. 47, and 1. 48 cf. Luc., Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637); Jup. Trag. 30 
 (2. 676). Also Hdt. 1. 43 with Luc., Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637). 
 
 Among many other gifts sent to win the favor of the Delphian 
 oracle mentioned by Hdt., 1. 50-51, was a large amount of gold 
 which was made into half-plinths or bricks, r]^Lir\ivQia. Here, 
 then, is where Lucian gets sections 11-12 of his Charon. Cf. Jup. 
 Trag. 30 (2. 676.) 
 
 Again, Hdt., 1. 75, and Luc., [Hipp.] 2 (3. 68), give similarly 
 the plan by which Thales the Milesian enabled Croesus to lead his 
 5 
 
38 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 army across the river Halys. Cf. Luc. Jup. Conf. 14 (2. 637) and 
 Jup. Trag. 20 (2. 664), 43 (2. 691). 
 
 Once more, the story comes from Hdt. about the battle with 
 Cyrus, the defeat and capture of Croesus, the penalty adjudged 
 him, and his marvelous escape by calling upon Solon and later 
 upon Apollo. V. Hdt. 1. 86; cf. Luc., Char. 13 (1. 508): 
 /jLe/Avrjaerai, S' ovv [iiKpov varepov rov 2)oXft>i>O9, orav avrov Serf 
 d\ovra eVl rrjv irvpav VTTO rov Kvpov dva^dijvai . . . . cf. Gall. 
 23 (2. 737). 
 
 The only reference of importance from Dio is 1. 164. 25 (Or. 
 10. 26), where he is in full agreement with Hdt. in summarizing 
 the history of Croesus in connection with the Persians. 
 
 Cyrus. His history begins Hdt. 1. 107. Cf. especially 1. 122 : 
 KarkjBaXov fydriv a>9 e/CKeifjievov Kvpov KVWV e^eOpetye with Luc. 
 Sacr. 5 (1. 530): o Hepanjs Kvpo? 6 irporepov VTTO -7-179 tcvvos. 
 With Hdt. 1. 123-130, relating especially to Astyages, cf. Dio 
 1. 265. 21 (Or. 15.22); 1. 312. 16. (Or. 25. 5); 2. 292. 18 (Or. 
 80. 12). Cyrus' connection with Babylon is given, Hdt. 1. 178- 
 200. Cf. 1. 103, 106 ; 2. 150 for mention of Nineveh ; cf. Luc., 
 Char. 13 (1. 521-2) and Dio 1. 73. 27 (Or. 4. 53). Hdt. 1. 214 
 gives an account of Cyrus' death, how he was defeated by the 
 Massagetai, how Tomyris, the ruler of the Massagetai, filled a 
 skin with human blood and put Cyrus' head in it : CKTKOV e 
 7T\rj(7aa-a aiparos dvOpwTnjtov Tofjuvpw IBL^fjro ev rolcri reOve&cri, 
 Tlepcrecov rbv Jfivpov veicvv, a$9 Se evpe, evaTrrJKe avrov rrjv 
 )v 9 rov aa-Kov. Cf. Luc., [Macr.] 14 (3. 217) and especially 
 Char. 13 (1. 508): Kpoteroi/ /JLCV d\wvai, VTTO Kvpov, K.vpov Se 
 avrbv VTT Ifcewrjcrl r^9 M.a<ro-ayeTi,bo$ dirodavelv. . . . To/j,vpi,<$ 
 l/ceivr) eeri, ical rrjv /ce^aXrjz/ 76 aTrore/iouo-a rov Kvpov avrrj e? 
 da-Kov enPa\el Tr^prj at>aro9. Cf. Ver. Hist. 2. 17 (2. 114). 
 
 Libyan History. V. Hdt. 2. 32-150; 4. 43, 168-186, 191-2. 
 Cf. Lucian's Dipsas entire, noting the word dipsas in connection 
 with Herodotos' facts. Cf. Dio 1. 90. 13 (Or. 5. 1 ff.); 2. 130. 
 14 (Or. 47. 4). 
 
 Heracles, Alcmene, Amphitryon. V. Hdt. 2. 43. Cf. Luc. 
 [Charid.] 6 (3. 621); Dial. Deor. 10 (1. 229-30). 
 
 Paris, Helen. V. Hdt. 2. 112 ff. Dio 1. 178. 14 (Or. 11. 41) 
 gives the same account, but repudiates the tradition of Hdt. and 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 39 
 
 discusses the whole myth very extensively in Or. 11. V. Hague, 
 Quaestiones Dioneae, 1887, p. 47. 
 
 Cambyses has been treated quite fully by Hdt., bk. 3, in con- 
 nection with Egyptian history. Cf. Luc. Char. 13 (1. 509). Cf. 
 Dio 1. 312. 21 (Or. 25. 5); 2. 251. 15 (Or. 73. 2). Note in par- 
 ticular the account of the dishonor done the dead body of Amasis 
 by Cambyses, Hdt. 3. 16 and Dio 2. 305. 32 (Corinthiaca 37). 
 On Egyptian worship in general, v. Hdt. 3. 27-29 ; 2. 42 ; espe- 
 cially 4. 181. Cf. Luc. Deor. Concil. 10 and 11 (3. 533-4); 
 Sacr. 15 (1. 539). Cf. [Astrol.] 7-8 (2. 363-4). 
 
 India. V. Hdt. 3. 94-105. Cf. Luc. [Asm.] 53 (2. 621); 
 [Amor.] 41 (2. 442) ; Gall. 16 (2. 726). 
 
 Arabia. V. Hdt. 3. 107-113. Cf. Luc. Ver. Hist. 2. 5 (2. 
 107) ; D. D. S. 30 (3. 477). 
 
 Poly crates, Maeander, Oroetes. V. Hdt. 3. 120-125. Cf. 3. 39. 
 Cf. Luc., Char. 14 (1. 510); Necyom. 16 (1. 478-9); Navig. 26 
 (3. 265) ; Salt. 54 (2. 298). Cf. Dio 1. 276. 27 (Or. 17. 15). 
 
 Zopyrus. Hdt. gives very fully, 3. 153-60, the story about 
 Zopyrus at the siege of Babylon. He hacked himself up terribly 
 and, presenting himself to the Babylonians, complained that he 
 had been maltreated by Darius, and offered to serve the Baby- 
 lonians against the Persians. He was received and rapidly rose in 
 favor by reason of his prowess, and by a number of times killing 
 or capturing bands of Persians intentionally put into his hands by 
 Darius according to previous agreement. Finally, at the proper 
 time, he turned over the city to Darius. Hdt. adds, 3. 160 : TroXXa- 
 KIS &e Aapelov \eyerai, yvcoprjv rtfvSe aTroSegacrOat,, cos /3ov\oiTo 
 civ ZtcoTTVpov elvau aTradea TTJS acuce'iys fjid\\ov vj Ba/SvXwi/a? ol 
 el/cocn TTpo? TTJ eovcry TrpocryevecrQcu. Cf. Luc., Jup. Trag. 53 (2. 
 701) : ttXXa, co f ftp/A?), TO TOV Aapetou irdvv #aXo>9 e%oi/ eVrtV, o 
 elnrev errl TOV Ttwrrvpow wcrre ical auro? e'/3ouXoyLt?7i> av eva TOLOVTOV 
 e%eiv olov TOV Aa/ui> ^vfjufjua^ov rj iivpLas poi J$a/3v\a>vas VTT- 
 dpxeiv. Cf. D. D. S. 25 (3. 471), where the appeal made to Com- 
 babus seems very similar to that of Darius to Zopyrus, Hdt. 3. 
 155. Also the honors heaped upon Zopyrus remind us of the 
 honors here given Combabus. Note, too, that Combabus is granted 
 permission to go to the king unannounced, which has a decided 
 parallel in Hdt. 3. 84, 118. 
 
40 Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 Aristeas. V. Hdt. 4. 14, 15. Of. Dio 2. 306. 25 (Corinthiaca 37). 
 
 Scythians. Cf. Hdt. 4. 26 and Luc., Deor. Dial. 16. 1 (1. 
 243-4). Cf. Hdt. 4. 62 and Luc., Jup. Trag. 42 (2. 690) ; Sacr. 
 13 (1. 537), etc. Cf. Hdt. 4. 70 and Luc., Tox. (?) 36-8 (2. 
 544-6). Cf. Hdt. 4. 85 and Luc., [Ner.] 2 (3. 637). Cf. Dio 1. 
 312, 24 (Or. 25. 5) ; 1. 72. 8 (Or. 4. 45). Cf. Hdt. 4. 94-5 and 
 Luc., Deor. Concil. 9 (3. 533) ; Yer. Hist. 2. 17 (2. 114). Cf. Hdt. 
 4. 107 and Dio 2. 50. 15 (Or. 36. 7). 
 
 The Toxaris, which Guttentag says does not belong to Lucian 
 because it is too carefully imitative of him, furnishes many paral- 
 lels to Hdt. So his Anacharsis may be connected with Hdt. 4, 
 46, 76, 77. 
 
 Clisthenes of Sicyon. Y. Hdt. 5. 67 and cf. 6, 126. Cf. Dio 1. 
 46. 21 (Or. 3. 41) ; 1. 180. 3 (Or. 11. 47). 
 
 Pan (Datis and Artaphernes). Cf. Hdt. 6, 94 and Luc., Bis 
 Ace. 9 (2. 801). Cf. Hdt. 6. 105 and Luc., Bis Ace. 9 (2. 801) ; 
 Dial. Deor. 22. 3 (1. 271-2). With these passages cf. Hdt. 2. 46, 
 145 and Luc., Philops. 3 (3. 32). Cf. Dio 1. 211. 10 (Or. 11. 
 148). This is a very interesting study. 
 
 Alcmaeon. Y. Chap. Ill under Dio Chr. 
 
 Cimon. Y. Hdt. 6, 136. Cf. Dio 2. 252. 29 (Or. 73. 6). 
 
 Xerxes. His history is given by Hdt. in books 7 and 8. Cf. 
 Luc., Dem. Enc. 32 (3. 514) ; Rhet. Praec. 18 (3. 20) ; Dial. Mort. 
 20. 2 (1. 412). Cf. Dio 1. 72. 7 (Or. 4. 45); 1. 211. 15 (Or. 11. 
 148); 1. 247. 30 (Or. 13. 23); etc. 
 
 Nisaean Horses. V. Hdt. 7. 40. Cf. Luc., Hist. 39 (2. 52). 
 Cf. Dio 2. 61. 15 (Or. 36. 41). 
 
 Themistodes. Y. Hdt. 7. 141-2. Cf. Luc., Jup. Trag. 31 (2. 
 678). Cf. Dio 2. 252. 22 (Or. 73. 5). 
 
 Boreas and Orithya. Y. Hdt. 7. 189. Cf. Luc., Salt. 40 (2. 
 292); Philops. 3 (3. 32). 
 
 Leonidas. Y. Hdt. 7. 204. Cf. Luc., Rhet. Praec. 18 (3. 20). 
 Cf. Dio 1. 211. 15 (Or. 11. 148); 2. 283. 30 (Or. 78. 40). 
 
 Salamis. Y. Hdt. 7. 228 ; 8. 5, 59, 61, 94, etc. Cf. Luc., Rhet. 
 Praec. 18 (3. 20). Cf. Dio 1. 210. 15 (Or. 11. 145); 2. 298. 11 
 (Or. Corin.) ; 2. 295. 4 (Or. Corin.). 
 
 The story of Periander and Arion, Hdt. 1. 23-4, has been held 
 in reserve for a little more careful inspection. The accounts of 
 
Herodotos in the Greek Renascence. 
 
 41 
 
 both Lucian and Dio are very similar to the account of Hdt., even 
 in phraseology, but only the former will be given. Cf. Luc., Mar. 
 Dial. 8 (1. 308-9). Naturally, Lucian's account is much shorter 
 than that of Hdt., and he has omitted some parts altogether, but 
 there is the same beginning, the same substance, the same style 
 the same 
 
 Lucian. 
 
 TOVTOVC TOV e/c 
 
 Herodotos. 
 
 v7ro\a/36vTa Igevei/cai, eVt 
 Tawapov. 
 
 ^Apiova . . . eovTa /ciOap&Sbv 
 TWV rore eovTCDV ovSevbs Sev- 
 Tepov, /cat S(,0vpa/jL/3ov 
 
 dv0p(t)7T(DV TC0V 77/1,669 
 
 iroLrjcravTa re /cat ovvopdcravTa 
 
 . . . 7TO\\OV TOV 
 
 jSovra Trapa He 
 
 lir(,Qv^r]<jai TrXwcra^ 69 'Ira- 
 \irjv re /cat '^iKeX.i'rjv, Ipjaad- 
 pevov Se xpijfjLaTa /j,eyd\a 0- 
 \fja-ai, OTrlcra) 69 K.6pw6ov diri/ce- 
 
 rovs 
 
 ev 
 
 'Apiova e/c/3a\6v- 
 
 ovro) Sotceoi,, 7Tpt,i8eiv avrbv ev 
 rfj o-icevfj irdar) o-rdvra ev TOICTI 
 
 delcrat,. 
 
 TOV Be evbvvTa re Traeraz/ TTJV 
 <T/cevrjv /cat \a/3ovTa Trjv KiQd- 
 prjv, crTavTa ev Toim eSa)\ioicri 
 Siej;\0e2v VO/JLOV TOV opOiov . . . 
 pl-^rai fjLiv 69 Trjv 6d\ao~crav 
 
 VTro\a{3ct)v It-evrjgd/jL'rjv 69 
 Taivapov. 
 
 6 HepiavSpos, ol/j,at,, fyaipev 
 /cal 7ro\Xa^ 
 
 Tfl 
 
 o Se 7T\ouT77o-a9 irapa TOV 
 TVpdvvov eTreOvfjuTjo'e 7r\evo-a<$ 
 ot/caSe e*9 Trjv Mij6vfj,vav eVtSe/f - 
 ao~0ai TOV TT\OVTOV. 
 
 eVel Kara /j,eo-ov TO Aljalov 
 eyevovTO, e 
 ol vavTai. 
 
 eVel TavTa vfuv 
 , d\\d Trjv o~/cevr)v dva\a- 
 fie /cal aaavTa Opfjvov 
 Tiva eV e/jLavT<p e/covTa edo~aT 
 
 dve\afte TTJV (ncevrjv /cal fjo~e 
 Trdvv \iyvpov, /cal eirecrev 6*9 
 TTJV OdXaTTav. 
 
UNIVEESITY OF CALIFOENIA LIBEAEY, 
 BEEKELEY 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of 
 50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing 
 to $1.00 per volume after the sixth day. Books not in 
 demand may be renewed if application is made before 
 expiration of loan period. 
 
 T, 
 
 JAN 3 1963 
 
 75m-7,'30 
 
* 
 
 *> 
 
 $ 
 
 *> 
 
 
 i 
 
 O 
 
 '