We learn, moreover, from Herodotus, that Pan was the youngest of the Grecian deities; and Dionysius tells us that he was the most ancient and most honored deity of the Arcadians: so that Josephus may in some degree be justified by Dionysius himself, although Callimachus is positive that Arcadia was the birth-place of Jupiter.

But we will take a wider range. Herodotus mentions in his 8th book, that the Arcadians and Cynurii were the only autochthones of Peloponnesus who still inhabited their original countries; but he adds nothing to intimate that there was any thing worth notice in the early history of the Arcadians; and in his 9th book, where the Tegeans and Athenians contend for precedency, the raλaid, which the Tegeans bring forward, reach no higher than to Echemus, the grandson of Phegeus, and vanquisher of Hyllus the son of Hercules. Larcher turns Phegeus into Cepheus, but he admits that Phegeus is the reading of all the editions; and he knows of no other Phegeus, than him who was the son of Inachus. I affirm, therefore, that Herodotus virtually contradicts the high antiquity of the Arcadian dynasty; I affirm also, that` the civilisation or settled state of any part of Greece at so early a period is contradicted by Thucydides; and I infer from Plato's Cratylus, that in his opinion the barbarians were the earliest inhabitants of Greece; that in the opinion of Aristotle they were the earliest inhabitants of the country which was then called Arcadia, has already been mentioned; and in the Polity we are told also by that philosopher, that of all forms of government, oligarchy and tyranny are the shortest in duration : for the Sicyonian tyranny, which was the longest, lasted but 100 years, or about one-third of the time which some of the Arcadian kings are said to have lived. Isocrates, also, makes assertions about Athens and the Athenians, which, whatever may have been the boldness of panegyrical oratory, would have required some qualifying, if the antiquity of the Arcadian kingdom had been admitted. Polybius was a native of Arcadia; but we have never been told that he believed or asserted its great antiquity. Strabo's geographical work was written after Dionysius was known as an historian: yet in his 7th book, Strabo states, that, according to Hecatæus the Milesian, barbarians inhabited Peloponnesus before the Greeks; but that we may infer from tradition, that almost all Greece was formerly inhabited by barbarians.

Plutarch wrote many years after Dionysius, and did not confine himself to the strictness of history; yet he confesses that he

had no fit materials for a life of Theseus. Theseus, however, was cotemporary with Nestor, and the great hero of the Athenians, of those Greeks, to whom we allow the priority in civilisation.

To mention one more author, we may learn from Lucian or his imitator,' that if the Arcadians thought themselves older than the moon, they did so, because they were ignorant and foolish.

We may now return to Lycaon the second. Dionysius informs us2 that he had twenty-two sons, and that it was therefore necessary to divide Arcadia into as many parts. As our historiau intended to gratify the antiquary, he should have given us fuller information, particularly as the necessity of the partition is our only reason for imagining that it ever took place. We may observe, moreover, that this Lycaon must be he who was turned into a wolf, and whose daughter was turned into a bear: two animals not very civil to intruders. Plutarch does not mention the number of Lycaon's sons; but he tells us that, according to the fable, Eleuther and Libadeus were the only two who did not share in their father's impiety, and that they fled into Bootia. According to Apollodorus, the sons were fifty in number: all of whom, with the exception of Nyctimus, were destroyed. Pausanias gives the names of twenty-five; and states that Nyctimus was the oldest, and had all the power.

But we will proceed with our author's story. "On this account," (that is, as it seems, on account of its being necessary to partition Arcadia,)" Enotrus having left Peloponnesus, and having prepared a fleet, crosses the Ionian sea, and with him. Peucetius, one of his brothers. Many of their own countrymen followed them, (for the nation is said to have been populous originally,) and as many of the other Greeks as had not sufficient land."

Ah! tantamne rem tam negligenter agere! If Tyrwhitt censured Speght, who remarked, on "They connen so much craft on Wade's bote -'

1 De Astrologia.

2 I know not how I came to reduce the number to twelve in my last article. Perhaps my figures for twenty-two resembled twelve. Petavius, however, has made as bad an error on the other side; for in his Rationarium Temporum (Partis primæ, lib. i.) he says, “Pelasgi Lycaon filius 50 liberos habuit, qui omnes, Nyctimo excepto, interfecti feruntur;" and Dionysius is one of his two references. Plutarch's anecdote will be found in the 39th of his Quæstiones Græcæ, where we may also find a classical reason for Michael Scott's losing his shadow.

"Concerning Wade and his bote called Guingelot, as also his straunge exploits in the same, because the matter is long and fabulous, I passe it over;" what shall we say to our historian, who tells us so little of a matter which is so strange-so passing strange, though not at all fabulous?

According to Homer, the Arcadians neither had ships, nor concerned themselves with maritime affairs in the time of Agamemnon. According to Herodotus, the Phocæans were the first of the Greeks who made long voyages; and they also led the way to a knowlege of the Adriatic, and of Tyrrhenia, and Iberia, and Tartessus: according to Thucydides, Minos was the first who had a fleet.

"The reality of the Argonautic expedition has been questioned;" but the fiction, if it be one, may be alleged as evidence that no earlier maritime expedition had been undertaken by the Greeks; and if, not long afterwards, they fitted out a very powerful armament against Troy, we may learn from Homer that they were ten years in preparing it; and we may learn from Diodorus, that before the ship Argo was built, the Greeks had only rafts and miserable fishing-boats. But how easily does our well-informed, pains-taking, and most veracious historian reconcile himself to the expedition of Enotrus!

Seventeen generations before the siege of Troy, an Arcadian prince leaves Peloponnesus, and prepares a fleet, because his country was to be divided into twenty-two parts. A brother, and many of his countrymen, accompany him, and as many other Greeks as wanted land; so that we are to infer that Greece was already overstocked with inhabitants.-He crossed the Ionian sea.-In later times, this was more easily said than done. Hermocrates, a wise, experienced and brave officer, in the opinion of Thucydides, is represented by that historian as urging the Syracusans to meet the Athenians off Tarentum and the Japygian promontory, and to show them that the Ionian gulf must be crossed before they contended for Sicily. Such a step, he said, would greatly alarm the Athenians; and make them consider that they had much sea to cross, and that it would be difficult to preserve order on account of the length of the navigation. Now at this time Athens was at the height of her power as a maritime nation; and it is reasonable to suppose that her ships were far superior to those which were used in the expedition against Troy, although these latter were probably not inferior to the far-famed Argo. Yet if we read the speeches of Hermocrates, and his opponent Athenagoras, and also the account of the inconvenience which the Athenians

*

suffered at the blockade of Sphacteria, we shall find that even in the "most high and palmy state" of Athens, the crews, to use Mitford's expressions, "could neither sleep nor even eat conveniently aboard;" and that, in earlier times, at least, "light vessels, which with their oars could creep along the coast, watch the weather, make way in calms, and, on any threatening appearance, find shelter in shoal water, or on an open beach, were what Grecian navigation peculiarly required." I infer, therefore, that instead of being satisfied with the brief statement of our historian, we ought to inquire where Enotrus built his fleet, and where he crossed the Ionian sea.

If he left Peloponnesus by land, we must suppose that a numerous band of adventurers travelled from Arcadia to Epirus quietly and safely; that they were joined in their progress by other adventurers; that they made no attempt to settle in the countries through which they passed; that they remained long enough on the coast to collect or build a fleet; and that, instead of suffering from famine, they were able to provision themselves for a voyage of discovery. Should the fate of our own African expeditions teach us that our supposition is romantic, we may suppose that Enotrus embarked at some part of the Corinthian gulf, and sailed across to lapygia: should this supposition seem more romantic even than the other, we may suppose, that like the Greeks of later times, he crept along the coast, watching the weather, and making way in calms till he reached Corcyra or Epidamnus. Corcyra, however, was not colonised by the Corinthians till long after, and Epidamnus was colonised by the Corcyræans; and that they both possessed great natural advantages seems evident, because Corcyra rivalled Corinth, and Epidamnus in its turn rivalled Corcyra. Here then Enotrus and his companions would have found much temptation to settle; but, waving all objection to the passage of the Ionian sea, let us follow Dionysius. As soon as they reached Italy, Peucetius disembarked his men and settled. The place of disembarkation and settlement was above the lapygian promontory; and from Peucetius they who inhabited the adjacent country were called Peucetii.

This then is the earliest of all the Grecian colonies, and earlier by many centuries than the Eolic, Ionic, and Doric emigra

1 'guícavto. In this and many other instances, I have given myself much useless trouble, by trying to discover whether our historian's words were intended to bear a precise and technical meaning.

2

tions. Again, however, we have to regret a want of information on important points. That Peucetius landed, settled, and gave his name to the neighboring inhabitants, is a very scanty account, even if we do not judge by the bulk of our own reports on emigration. Yet, meagre as this account is, it contains more than we can substantiate. Strabo,' Pausanias, and Iamblichus, intimate that the origin of the Peucetii was not Greek; and as for Peucetius himself, Strabo knows nothing of him; and we may gather from Pausanias that he neither was a brother of Enotrus, nor crossed with him; Apollodorus and Meander lead to the same conclusion; Pherecydes does not contradict it, except by Sylburgius's emendation; and Dionysius contradicts himself by making Peucetius settle in Peucetia before Enotrus settled in Enotria, and yet affirming that the Enotri were the earliest of all the Greek settlers in Italy. But let us follow Enotrus. Enotrus, conducting the greater part of the expedition, came to the other gulf, which is on the western side of Italy, and which was then called Ausonian from the Ausones, who inhabited its coast, but took its present name when the Tyrrheni became masters of the sea. Shall we let so strange an occurrence pass unquestioned? Dionysius represents the brothers as leaving Greece together; and his words imply that they reached Italy together. We must infer, therefore, that Enotrus left Peucetius in his new settlement, and continued his voyage along the Italian coast till he reached the western gulf. If we look at the map, and consider the ancient manner of navigation, we shall wonder that these "Shepherds of the Ocean"4 so unnecessarily undertook, and so easily performed, a voyage of such length. Enotrus is said to have

In his 6th book, 11th section, Strabo says, that the Apulians are μóyλwTT with the Daunians and Peucetians; and in his 5th book, 3d chapter, he mentions the Peucetians, and those whom the Greeks called Daunians; but in neither place do we find any hint of the Greek origin of the Peucetians.

2 Pausanias, 1. 10. c. 13. calls them barbarians; and even if we reckon inclusively from Lycaon to Agapenor, we shall not be able to reconcile the chronology of Pausanias with the seventeen generations of Dionysius. As for Arcas being the son of Callisto, Douris, who, according to the Scholiast of Apollonius Rhodius, made him the son of Archomenus, will agree better with Aristotle. Pausanias mentions that the acorn-diet napéμuvev ivías, &c. which is no proof that notrus knew any thing about arable land.

3 See the 34th chapter of his Life of Pythagoras. Amsterdam, Ed. 4to. "Whom when I asked from what place he came, and how be hight? himself he did ycleepe, The Shepherd of the Ocean by name.' Spenser, Co. Cl. 64.