« PreviousContinue »
set an example of the manner in which the advantages of a close federal union might be reconciled with mutual independence. They distributed their twenty-three cities into three classes: the cities of the first rank possessed each three votes, those of the second two, those of the lowest one, and each contributed to a common fund in proportion to its weight in the common council. This was held, not in any fixed place, so as to raise one city to the rank of a capital, but in one appointed for the time by common consent. A supreme magistrate and other officers were here elected, and a court was instituted for the decision of all disputes that might arise between members of the confederacy, the cities contributing, in proportion to their rank, to fill the places in the national judicature and magistracy. In the same assemblies were discussed all questions relating to peace and war, and the general interests of the united states. Had the Greeks on the western coast of Asia adopted similar institutions, their history, and even that of the mother-country, might have been very different from what it became. But whatever ill effects may be attributed to their want of union, it does not seem immediately to have checked the growth or to have diminished the prosperity of the several cities. They may, perhaps, have shot up the more vigorously and luxuriantly from the absence of all restraint. This advantage undoubtedly also resulted from the abolition of the monarchical form of government, which probably took place everywhere within a few generations after the first settlement, though the good was balanced by great evils. From the scanty fragments remaining of the internal history of the Asiatic colonies, it may be collected that they passed through the various stages of which we have given an outline in a preceding chapter, and that they suffered much from intestine discord. Thus it is related that Miletus, after the overthrow of a tyrannical dynasty, was split into two factions, designated by names which seem to indicate an oligarchy and a commonalty." The former gained the ascendant, but was forced to take extraordinary precautions to preserve it. Again we read of a struggle between the wealthy citizens and the commonalty, accompanied with the most horrible excesses of cruelty on both sides.t. It is uncertain whether this is the period to which Herodotus refers when he speaks of a civil war which lasted for two generations at Miletus, and reduced it to great distress, and was at length terminated by the mediation of the Parians, who seem to have committed the government to those landowners who had shown the greatest moderation, or had kept aloof from the contest of the parties.: These convulsions took place within the same period in which Miletus rose to the summit of her greatness as a maritime state, and in which her colonies and her commerce were extending * Plut., Qu. Gr. 32, 1 Novri, (IIAovris') and Xopanaxa. The oligarchs held their councils on shipboard. + Athen., xii., 524, from Hierocides Ponticus. Here the communalty bears the namo Foo-oo: of the remnant
the limits of the Grecian world, and opening an intercourse between its most distant regions. How far political changes were connected with the prime spring of that wonderful activity which was displayed by the Asiatic Greeks, more especially the Ionians, in the seventh and sixth centuries before our era, can only be conjectured. It seems probable that the fall of the ancient aristocracies which succeeded the heroic monarchy, and the emulation between a growing commonalty and an oligarchy which grounded its political claims solely on superior wealth, were conditions without which the Ionian genius would not have found room to expand itself so freely. On the other hand, the inferior degree in which the Dorians and AEolians were animated with the spirit of commercial adventure may have been owing to their political institutions not less than to a difference in their national character. It is, however, certain, that in the two centuries just mentioned, the progress of mercantile industry and maritime discovery was coupled with the cultivation of the nobler arts and the opening of new intellectual fields, in a degree to which history affords no parallel before the beginning of the latest period of European civilization. Among the secondary impulses which forwarded this progress, one may be thought to have proceeded from the mother-country. Thucydides fixes the beginning of the seventh century B.C. as the epoch of a considerable improvement in the art of shipbuilding, which was first adopted in Corinth, and was imparted by a Corinthian named Ameinocles to the Samians. It seems to have been after this epoch, yet not much later, that the Milesians began to plant a series of colonies on the eastern coast of the Propontis, though Cyzicus, the most important of them, is referred to an earlier origin.” The rivalry of the Phocaeans, who founded Lampsacus on the same coast, and that of the Megarians, who occupied the most advantageous positions on the European shore, may have urged them to push forward into a wider field of enterprise, and to explore the coasts of the longdreaded sea, which was supposed to have been traversed many centuries before by the Argonauts, but seems to have been now first opened for ordinary navigation by the Milesians. To them is attributed the glory of having changed its name from the Inhospitable to the Hospitable, the Eurine; and it was to the struggles which they had to maintain with the barbarous hordes on its coasts that they owed their once proverbial reputation for valour.f Here they planted the greater part of their numerous colonies, which, according to Pliny, amounted to no less than eighty, and, according to Strabo, lay almost exclusively on the Propontis and the Euxine. These colonies, unlike most of those hitherto mentioned, were undoubtedly founded with a distinct view to commercial advantages, and probably remained for a time in close connexion with the parent city. And there is some ground for believing that, during the same period, Miletus was regarded as the common protectress of the Greek settlers in this region. Hence perhaps the parental title, a valued distinction, may in some instances have been transferred to her, and her fecundity may have been exaggerated at the expense of some of the other cities which established colonies on the same coast. Thus Strabo attributes to Miletus the foundation of the Pontic Heraclea, the most western of the Greek colonies on the Asiatic side of the Euxine ; and adds that the settlers reduced the Mariandynians, the ancient inhabitants, to a state of bondage exactly resembling that of the Spartan Helots. But this very fact strongly confirms the testimony of other writers, who describe Heraclea as a Megarian colony," in which we may expect to find Dorian institutions. The earliest Milesian settlement seems to have been planted much farther eastward: for Sinope, though its history is involved in great obscurity, has apparently the best claim to this precedence.f. It became, in its turn, the mother of several flourishing cities. Amisus, on the same coast, is also assigned to the Milesians by Strabo, on the authority of Theopompus, but perhaps with no better ground than Heraclea; other authors ascribe it to the Phocaeans, and fix the epoch of its foundation four years previous to that of Heracleaf Yet it is not absolutely certain that thc southern side of the Euxine was the earliest occupied by the Greek colonists; and it is possible that before they had circumnavigated that great projection of the Asiatic coast which terminates towards the north in Cape Carambis, they may have been carried across to the Tauric Chersonesus, which became in later times one of the principal granaries of Greece, and the seat of a powerful state. The Euxine had already lost a part of its terrors before any Greek navigator ventured to explore the recesses of the Adriatic, or to launch out beyond Sicily into the western seas. The Phocaeans had the glory of opening these new tracks of commerce, in which, however, they were soon followed by bold and active rivals. In the Adriatic they were probably attracted to the mouth of the Po by the lucrative traffic in amber, for which this river—which at length was identified with the fabulous Eridanus, the scene of the fall of Phaethon, over which his sisters dropped their glittering tears'—had long been a real channel. The date of their first adventure in the Adriatic cannot be precisely fixed; but it was probably not later than the beginning of their voyages to the western coasts of Italy, where, early in the seventh century
of the acient Teucrians in the frvas Strabo, xin., p. 389 Herud, on. 43. Athen , ... , 236 –They are a rustic pop
ulation, and crush the children of the or adversaries to death
on their threshing floors the opposite party reveuges it-
* Eusebius gives two dates, B.C. 756 and B.C. 675. Mr. Clinton, F. H., 1, a, 756 and 575, supposes the first to belong to a Milesian, the second to a Megarian colon', mentioned by Lydus. De Mag., ii., 70, where, however, unless we adopt the conjecture oiki-arts, it may be doubted whether there is sufficient authority for saying that Cyzicus was founded by the Megarians. The planting of other Milesian colonies in the neighbourhood, which took place nearly at the same time, as Abydos, Priapus, and Proconnesus, seems to render it probable that Miletus had at least a share in the second settlement of Cyzicus
t , 4\al rur' jauv d'Axiao MoMatou. Athen., xii., 26.
* Scymnus, Fr., 230. Boeotians also took part in it.
t Scymnus, Fr., 310, speaks of a Milesian, named Ambron, as the first founder after the mythical times, or, at least, as having been cut off, before he had accomplished his undertaking, by the Cimmerians. While this people was overrunning Asia, on the reign of the Lydian king Ardys, between 678 and 629 B.C., a new colony seems to have been founded with better success by Milesian exiles. According to some accounts, they were headed by a Coannamed Critias or Critines. Steph. B., Xtvoorn. Eustath. on o p. 772.
1 Scymnus, 181. Not forty years, as is stated both by Raoul Rochette (Col. Gr., iii., p. 334) and by Mueller (Or. eliom., p. 291). * Hyginus, F., 154.
| B.C., they gained access to Etruria, and, as ap| pears from the story of Demaratus, were soon followed by the Corinthians. Herodotus also seems to ascribe the still more important discovery of Iberia and Tartessus—the delta of the Guadalquivir—to the Phocaeans. But perhaps he may only mean that their example encouraged other adventurers, who finally outstripped them. For in the thirty-fifth Olympiad a fortunate Samian, named Colaeus, reached Tartessus, and found, as Herodotus says, a virgin mart, from which he carried home the most profitable cargo ever imported by a Greek merchant. But if the Samian led the way, the Phocaeans did not long remain behind; and they acquired so great favour with the Tartessian king Arganthonius, that he is said to have invited the whole people to leave Ionia, and settle in his dominions. The Rhodians appear very early to have pursued the same direction, though we must reject as a fabulous legend the statement that they visited the coasts of Spain many years before the Olympiads, and even settled in the Balearic isles soon after their return from Troy. But there is no reason to doubt that they founded Parthenope, perhaps in conjunction with the Cumaeans, as its later name, Neapolis, was derived from a new colony of Chalcidians and Athenians. Hence we may the more readily believe that they established themselves at Rhode or Rhodos (Rosas, in Catalonia) before the Phocaeans had gained a footing on the neighbouring coast at Emporiae (Ampurias), and we may even suspect that the Rhone (Rhodanus) was named after them. If so, they must here also have preceded the Phocaeans, who about 600 B.C. founded their most celebrated colony, Massilia, perhaps on Ligurian ground, where they maintained themselves with the aid of the Celtic tribes, whose good-will they gained and requited by diffusing among them the arts of civilized life, and Grecian usages and letters. Miletus, however, did not neglect the commerce of the West; her fleeces, which were of singular fineness, supplied the luxury of Sybaris with clothes, carpets, and tapestry, and became the occasion of so close an alliance between the two cities, that the Milesians displayed their grief for the fall of Sybaris by a public mourning. Nearly at the same time that the Phocaeans were making their first excursions in the west of the Mediterranean, the country from which, according to general belief, Greece had in ancient times received the germs of her arts, religion, and civility, but which had long been Jealously closed against foreign settlers, was thrown open for permanent and friendly intercourse to the Greeks. About 650 B.C., a band composed of Ionians and Carians chanced, in the course of a piratical expedition, to land on the coast of Egypt, and were induced by great of. sers to enter into the service of Psammetichus, who established himself on the throne by their aid. He not only rewarded them with a grant of lands on the Nile, but gave all their countrymen free access to his dominions;" and, to promote their commerce with his subjects, consigned a number of Egyptian boys to their care, to be instructed in the Greek language, so as to form a permanent class of interpreters. His successors adhered to the same policy; and thus Greeks of various classes were drawn to Egypt, in the pursuit of knowledge as well as of gain. Of the impression produced on an inquisitive and intelligent Greek by the sight of this wonderful land, which even by its ruins, and in its lowest state of degradation, has never ceased to inspire astonishment and awe, we are able to judge from the testimony of Herodotus. Even if the effects of the intercourse between the two nations had been limited to those of a purely material traffic, they would have been incalculably great, because to this traffic Greek literature was indebted for one of the most important outward conditions of its development—a cheap and commodious material for writing, which was supplied by the Egyptian papyrus; but, undoubtedly, these effects did not terminate here, though it is difficult to estimate them, and the opinions of learned men are divided as to their nature and extent. Though we have not yet brought the political history of the Asiatic colonies down to the period at which we dropped that of the mothercountry, just before the beginning of the great struggle between Greece and Asia, as the present seems to be the most suitable place for taking a view of the progress of art and literature, which was so intimately connected with the rise of those colonies, we shall not scruple, for the sake of continuity, to trace it down to the Persian war. We have seen that several arts, subservient either to the enjoyment of the great and affluent, or to the uses of religion, had been cultivated by the Greeks before the time of Homer with a considerable degree of activity and success, and it may easily be conceived that their progress kept pace with the advance of public and private prosperity. The increase of wealth and refinement appears to have been much more rapid in the Asiatic colonies, particularly in Ionia, than among the Greeks of the mother-country, where it was not equally favoured by nature, and was long checked by the troubles which followed the Dorian conquest. The Ionian cities were probably, at an early period, distinguished by a degree of luxury before unknown to the Greeks, and hence Lycurgus is said to have visited them in order to observe the contrast between their magnificence and the Cretan simplicity.” The same fact is indicated by the legend that the daughter of Neleus, the founder, was seduced by one of the barbarians,t and is, most probably, the ground of the picture which Homer has drawn of the Phaeacians, in whom it is scarcely possible to avoid recognizing his Ionian countrymen. About the beginning of the Olympiads, the fall of Magnesia on the Maeander was ascribed by poets of the same *ntury to the prevalence of effeminate habits.f We have seen, however, that the Ionians did not abandon themselves to indolence, and the active spirit which led them to pursue their commercial adventures into unknown regions,
* This account of the matter in Herod., ii., 154, is no. doubt substantially correct, and yet it may not be a sufficient ground for rejecting the date assigned by Eusebius to the foundation of Naucrats, which, according to him, was founded by Milesians, Ol. vi., 4, confirmed by the story in Athenaeus, xv, c. 18.
found employment at home in the arts by which their private and public life was cheered and adorned. Among the cities of Greece perhaps Corinth alone can be compared to them. There the overthrow of the Bacchiads was attributed to their luxury, which probably formed a contrast to the plainness and frugality that prevailed in the other Dorian states. But though the Dorian character and institutions were adverse to luxury, they did not exclude the highest degree of magnificence in works either consecrated to the gods, or designed for the service of the state. And hence even where, as at Sparta, the Dorian freemen were not permitted themselves to cultivate any of the arts, artists of various kinds were well received, and found abundant employment; and schools of art occur more frequently in Dorian than in Ionian cities. The first steps in the arts of drawing, of painting, of moulding figures in clay, were commonly attributed to the Corinthians, who, as they afterward gave their name to one of the three orders of architecture, made the earliest improvement in the form of the Doric temple.* But Sicyon disputed the honour of some of these inventions with Corinth, and was more celebrated than her wealthier neighbour for her school of sculpture. Those of Argos and Lacedæmon, of Rhodes and Crete, and, above all, of Ægina, were fruitful and renowned, while that of Athens, though it boasted Daedalus as its founder, and transmitted his art in an uninterrupted succession of families, seems to have been barren in great works, as it was in illustrious names. But the Ionians were not behind-hand either in the richness of their productions or in the glory of new inventions. They began early to vie with one another in the magnitude and splendour of their sacred buildings, and, consequently, in all the arts which served to adorn them. The temple of Heré at Samos, the largest of all that Herodotus had seen, appears to have been begun in the eighth century B.C., or early in the seventh. It was built in the Doric style, which soon after generally gave way in the Asiatic temples to the lighter Ionic. Its architect, Rhoecus, a native of the island, was the father of Theodorus, who was equally celebrated as the builder of the Lemnian labyrinth, and the author of several memorable inventions. The most important was the art of casting metal statues, which before had been formed of pieces wrought with the hammer, and nailed together. Theodorus exerted his ingenuity in overcoming the disficulties presented by the nature of the ground, in laying the foundation of the great temple of Artemis at Ephesus.t. It would seem, too, that the art of painting had made considerable progress in Ionia, while it was in its first rudiments at Corinth, if we may believe the account that a picture of Bularchus was purchased at a high price in the eighth century by the Lydian king Candaules,t and can reconcile this fact with the Corinthian tradition, that the earliest essays in colouring were made by Cleophantus, at the time of the overthrow of the Bacchiads.) * See Boeckh on Pindar, O. xiii., p. 214. + Diog. L., ii., 103. He suggested the use of charcoal for this pu + Plin., N.H., vii., 39; rov., 34. It represented the destruction of Magnesia on the Meander, probably that which it suffered from the Cimmerian tribe, the Treres, about ol. xviii. Candaules is said to have paid its weight in gold. * Plin, Nat. Hist., xxxv., 5. He, or another artist of the
It will not be expected that we should enter
into the history of the fine arts in their various |
branches, or that we should fill our pages with the names of the masters, and with the accounts preserved by the ancients of their works. Our object is only to point out the connexion between the progress of these arts, and that which the Greeks made during the same period in other spheres of intellectual exertion. And for this purpose it will be sufficient to observe the manner in which one art—the most important, as an indication of the genius of the people, of all those which were occupied with the creation of visible forms—which, to avoid the reference to the nature of its materials implied in the word sculpture, is better termed statuary, rose within this period nearly to the summit of its perfection. We have already, in our view of the Homeric age, had occasion to notice a very difficult question relating to the origin of this art—the uncertainty whether it sprang up, and was gradually formed in Greece, or was introduced from the East in a stage of comparative maturity, at which it remained for centuries, fixed by the control of religion. It happens, by a singular coincidence, that the epoch at which the Greeks opened or renewed their intercourse with Egypt was also that in which statuary was on the point of breaking through its ancient restraints and of entering on a new career, in which it arrived, within little more than another century, at its highest point of attainable excellence. It is not surprising that two facts which in time came so nearly together, should have been thought to be related to each other as cause and effect. And hence it may seem a probable opinion that the Greek artists, as soon as they were able to visit Egypt, were instructed by the Egyptians in various technical processes which had been long familiar to them, but hitherto unknown to the Greeks, and that, by this fortunate assistance, Greek art advanced at once from a degree of extreme rudeness to the same level which it had attained in Egypt through the persevering labour of numberless generations. There is a celebrated story which has been thought to confirm this opinion: that the Samian Theodorus, and his brother Telecles, having studied in Egypt, on their return made a statue of Apollo, in such exact conformity to the rules which they had learned, that the one half, which Telecles executed at Samos, tallied with the other, on which his brother had been employed during the same time at Ephesus, as exactly as if the whole had been the work of one artist.” But if the truth of this story was certain, the inference would lose all its force, if, as there are strong reasons for believing, the two brothers flourished in the eighth century B.C. if and we should then be driven to a supposition which the language of Herodotus, seems directly to contradict,i that Egypt had been visited by Greek artists before the reign of Psammetichus. Independently, howevsame name, was said to have followed Demaratus into Italy. * Diodor., i., 98. † On the age of the brothers, see. Thiersch, Epoch., p. 181, not. 94. On the story itself, p. 51, not. 42. # It is not clear how Thiersch, who maintains the probability of the story, gets rid of this difficulty, since he seems to admit (p. 27, n. 15) that the ancient intercourse which he believes to have existed between Greece and Egypt was
ospended between the time of Homer and the reign of etichus.
er, of the evidence which the Homeric poems as: ford, to elevate our conceptions of the earlier state of Greek art, descriptions have been left to us of several elaborate works, which, though their date cannot, perhaps, be precisely ascertained, appear to belong to the period preceding the opening of a regular intercourse with Egypt, and would prove that the Greeks cannot have been much indebted to the Egyptians during this period for instruments or processes of art. A tenth of the profits made by Colaeus in his voyage, which we have already mentioned, to Tartessus, was dedicated, probably not long after, to Heré, in the shape of a huge vessel of brass, adorned with figures of griffons round its border, and supported by three colossal statues." The magnificent coffer of cedar-wood, covered with groups of figures, some of the same wood, others of ivory, others of gold, which was consecrated at Olympia by the Cypselids, was said to be the very same in which the infant Cypselus had been concealed from the search of the Bacchiads, and if so, had been, no doubt, long one of the family treasures.f The colossal throne of Apollo at Amyclao, which was constructed for the Spartans by a company of artists from Magnesia on the Maeander, and was richly adorned with sculptures, seems with great probability to be referred to the eighth century B.C., in which, after Magnesia had been destroyed by the Cimmerians, these artists may have taken refuge, and sought employment in Greece.f It seems, at all events, certain that there were other causes which operated much more efficaciously than the intercourse with Egypt, to urge the rapid progress of statuary in the century preceding the Persian wars. Among these causes might be mentioned the prefer. ence which was generally given to brass and marble over the ancient material, wood, which henceforth, when employed, was commonly overlaid with more precious substances, as ivory and gold. This change arose in part out of the invention of Theodorus, which gave a new command over the metals. The use of marble for statues is said to have been introduced in the fiftieth Olympiad by two Cretan artists named Dipaenus and Scyllis, but was, probably, most promoted by the closer alliance with architecture into which statuary began to be brought, and by the increased sumptuousness of the temples, in which, as in that of Delphi, when rebuilt by the Alcmaeonids, marble frequently took the place of ordinary stone. It may, however, be conceived, that the technical rules taught by the Egyptians had first enabled the Greeks to treat the harder material with ease and freedom. But this substitution, though an important step, did not of necessity involve any change of style, and would not of itself have prevented the art from remaining stationary at the stage to which it had been carried by the Egyptians themselves. A cause of still greater efficacy was the enlargement which it experienced in the range of its subjects, and the consequent multiplicity of its productions. As long as statues were confined to the interior of the temples, and no more were
seen in each sanctuary than the idol of its worship, there was little room and motive for innovation ; and, on the other hand, there were strong inducements for adhering to the practice of antiquity. But, insensibly, piety or ostentation began to fill the temples with groups of gods and heroes, strangers to the place, and guests of the power who was properly invoked there. The deep recesses of their pediments were peopled with colossal forms, exhibiting some legendary scene, appropriate to the place or the occasion of the building. The custom, which we have already noticed, of honouring the victors at the public games with a statue— an honour afterward extended to other distinguished persons—contributed, perhaps, still more to the same effect; sor, whatever restraints may have been imposed on the artists in the representation of sacred subjects, either by usage or by a religious scruple, were removed when they were employed in exhibiting the images of mere mortals. As the field of the art was widened to embrace new objects, the number of masters increased : they were no longer limited, where this had before been the case, to families or guilds: their industry was sharpened by a more active competition and by richer rewards: as the study of nature became more earnest, the sense of beauty grew quicker and steadier; and so rapid was the march of the art, that the last vestiges of the arbitrary forms which had been hallowed by time or religion had not yet everywhere disappeared, when the final union of truth and beauty, which we sometimes endeavour to express by the term ideal, was accomplished in the school of Phidias. The same observant and inquisitive spirit which was the inmost spring of this new life in the world of art, gave birth, about the same time, to new branches and forms of poetry. The first period of Greek poetry which is known to us otherwise than by tradition is entirely filled by the names of Homer and Hesiod. When these names are regarded as representatives of a period, they may not improperly be coupled together, as they are by Herodotus, and in the legend which describes the two poets as engaged in a poetical contest. But the works which have been transmitted to us under their names lead to the conclusion that the name of Homer marks the beginning, that of Hesiod the close of the period. This, however, is not the sole, or the main distinction between them: it may rather be said that they approach one another only in the outward forms of versification and dialect, but in other respects move in two totally different spheres. The Homeric poems, therefore, stand, throughout the whole of this period, completely alone. Yet it cannot be imagined that they exhibit more than a very small part of its poetical produce; and the silence of history as to the rest would be surprising, if it were not probable, not only that the names of many contemporary bards have been lost in the lustre of #. but that their works frequently served as a basis for celebrated labours of subsequent poets, and hence were soon neglected and forgotten. The collection which passes under the name of Hesiod contains works or fragments of many different authors; and though there may not be
sufficient reason for denying that the name properly belonged to one eminent person, yet it seems clear that it was extended to many others of less note. Thus much appears to have been generally admitted by the ancients; and in the great number of works attributed to Hesiod, one only was held to be genuine by the inhabitants of the district in which he is believed to have lived.” We are thus led to consider him as a poet who exercised an influence similar to that of Homer over his contemporaries and posterity, or as the founder of a poetical school, and to inquire by what means he obtained such influence, and what was the character of his school. In the same poem, which was alone recognised by his countrymen, the poet has given some account of his private condition, by which it appears that he was a native of the Boeotian village of Ascra, at the foot of Helicon, to which his father had migrated, sor the sake of bettering his fortune, from Cuma in AEolis. It has been suspected,t not on very solid ground, that the harsh epithets which he applies to his native village were prompted by resentment at some wrong which he had suffered in the division of his small patrimony, about which he had a dispute with his brother. In another poem he describes himself as tending a flock on the side of Helicon. Unless we entirely reject the authority of these passages, we must believe that he was born in an humble station, and was himself engaged in rural pursuits; and this perfectly accords with the subject of the poem which was unanimously ascribed to him, the Works and Days, which is a collection of reflections and precepts relating to husbandry and the regulation of a rural household. We have, perhaps, only some disjointed portions of the original work, interpolated with passages which did not belong to it. But what we have is sufficient to afford a distinct notion of the spirit and character of the whole, and it excites our surprise and curiosity as to two points. Nothing can be conceived much more homely, or more sparingly enlivened with poetical ornaments, than this didactic work, which nevertheless appears to have been the sole or the main basis of Hesiod's reputation. That it should have raised him to such celebrity is the more remarkable, as the subject itself was not one which possessed any dignity or attraction in the eyes of the warlike races which became the lords of Greece after the Return of the Heracleids. In the dull fiction, indeed, which describes a contest between Homer and Hesiod, the prize is awarded to the latter, on the ground that he had dedicated his strains to the encouragement of rural and peaceful labours, not to the description of battles and carnage. But when we remember that at Thespiae, to which the poet's birthplace was subject, agriculture was held degrading to a freeman,t and how contemptuously the Spartan Cleomenes spoke of Hesiod as the Helot's poet, in contrast with Homer, the delight of the warrior,' we may conceive with how little favour such a production as the Works and Days was likely to be received by the wealthy and powerful among the poet's contemporaries. Another difficulty
* Paus, ix., 31, 4. f By Goettling, in his edition of Hesiod, *: # Heracl. Pont., 42. * Plut., Apoph. . Cleom., 1.