Chapter III: Part 3

The fabulous tradition about SICYON, which by a strange accident has been made a part of Greek history, ascribes to the kings of that city a greater age than to those of any other people. This tradition became incorporated with the tables of Africanus, from which it was taken by Eusebius and Hieronymus, and has thus passed into modern works. These alleged ages deserve absolutely no consideration; the very name of Sicyon is of recent origin, and its ancient name Mecone occurs in Hesiod’s Theogony: in the Homeric Catalogue it is already called Sicyon.

Even at an early period, Sicyon was a great and considerable town, and furnished important contingents to the common expeditions, e.g., to Plataeae. Its territory is one of the most fertile districts in the north of Peloponnesus; it consists of low, pleasant hills which descend down to the sea; it has neither plains nor rough mountains. It is particularly distinguished for its olives, which were very highly valued by the ancients; even now they are thought much of, though they have lost much of their former excellence, for olive trees degenerate very easily, and from this we see how even trees may change in a general catastrophe. The acropolis of Sicyon was situated on a comparatively high hill; while the city lay at a considerable distance from it in a plain towards the sea, whence its situation was not naturally strong, but its walls and fortifications protected it; hence its conquest by Demetrius Poliorcetes after a long siege gained for him great honours. This conquest is spoken of in Plautus’ “Miles Gloriosus,” which circumstance enables us to fix the age of the Greek original, which must have been composed after Olymp. 122. After the conquest, Demetrius induced the inhabitants, who were obliged to receive a Macedonian garrison, to settle on the top of the hill.

Sicyon was celebrated for its school of painting. If we may form a judgment of this school from the time at which it arose—for a trustworthy history of the progress of art does not exist—it belongs to that period when the skill and talent of individuals created a new era in art, but when real art had already lost its free development; it was a learned school, perhaps resembling that of Bologna in the time of the Caracci, and flourished during the Macedonian period until the commencement of the reign of Antigonus Gonatas; afterwards, in the time of Aratus, it was already extinct, and we hear only of paintings of deceased masters.

Sicyon is also remarkable as a place which was at an early time, and for a long period, governed by tyrants. Its first tyrants were Orthagoras and his family; for when the ancient aristocracy fell in its struggles with the democracy, the leaders of the democrats usurped the tyrannis. In the time of Philip and Alexander, it likewise had several tyrants, whose rule you may regard as an interlude, if you like. But it had also military tyrants, as in the time of Demetrius Poliorcetes, when one family established itself as such, until Aratus delivered the city. Aratus himself is considered by Strabo in the light of a tyrant; but this is unfair, if we consider the mild manner in which he managed affairs, and the odium which attaches to the name, though it is not altogether incorrect in as much as Aratus personally was actually more powerful than the magistrates and the laws. At the time when the Achaean league was broken up by the Romans, Sicyon too suffered very much; in the days of Pausanias, however much he may try to conceal it, Sicyon was only a village, though it still possessed some great buildings, but others lay in ruins or had crumbled away. Afterwards, so far as I know, it is no longer mentioned in history. At present the site of ancient Sicyon is occupied by the village of Wasiliki.

PHLIUS, situated between Sicyon and Argos[23], had, like Sicyon, arisen out of the Argive kingdom. In the Homeric Catalogue it does not bear this name, but is called Ἀραιθυρέη. The town was situated in a beautiful valley between the ranges of hills which stretch from the north of Arcadia to the Isthmus and the Onean and Geranian mountains, but are here considerably extended. Phlius has no great reputation in the history of Greece; it was less important than Sicyon, though it was an independent place as early as the Persian wars. From Xenophon’s Hellenica, it is evident that in his time Phlius was very populous, if we may judge from the number of hoplites and of the emigrants during the disturbances. But afterwards it sank and shared the general fate of Greece, so that perhaps the great population in the time of Xenophon may have been accidental, owing to the distracted state of Argos. The ethnic name is _Phliasius_, for which Cicero in one of his letters writes _Phliuntius_; but when reminded of the error by his friend, he apologises, by saying that he had allowed himself to be misled by a false analogy.[24]

AEGINA, though not in Peloponnesus, belongs to it more than to any other country out of Peloponnesus. According to the statement which makes its circumference largest, it amounted only to 180 stadia, or about twenty-two English miles; it is therefore probably much smaller than it is generally drawn in our maps, and its importance is to us a real mystery, seeing that as a maritime power it was not only equal but superior to Athens. Yet the mystery may perhaps be solved. Hydra and Spezzia are barren rocks, which Aegina is not; they are also smaller than Aegina, and yet their maritime pursuits procured them a population of several thousands; the soil of the small state of Ragusa is rocky, and produces no more corn than is required for a few months, and yet Ragusa as a republic kept many hundred ships, and even during the present revolution it has had many ships, some of which were well armed. When, however, we read of an Aeginetan fleet of from seventy to eighty galleys, each of which required about 200 marines, we cannot suppress our astonishment. Still more surprising is the statement of Athenaeus, that the island once had 470,000 slaves, for which he refers to no less an authority than Aristotle. There must be some error here, or else Athenaeus had misunderstood Aristotle, for the statement is absolutely impossible. The highest prosperity of Aegina belongs to a period when slavery did not yet prevail very much in Greece; and at other times, as I shall show presently, Aegina was by no means populous. We may indeed well understand that the island, which at an early period had a democratic form of government, may have had a navy more powerful than that of Athens before the time of Themistocles, as Athens had so long been governed by its great aristocratic landowners. During the period between the Pisistratids and the Persian wars, the struggle for the supremacy was carried on between Athens and Aegina with great exasperation and varying success, until Themistocles decided it by inducing Athens to apply all her energy to her navy, to make Phaleros a good harbour, and to build an imposing fleet. During the period between the Persian and Peloponnesian wars, the Athenians had the upper hand and subdued the Aeginetans; at the commencement of the Peloponnesian war, the Athenians expelled the inhabitants of Aegina from their island, because they did not trust them, and the Lacedaemonians gave up Cythera (Cerigo) to them.[25] The fact that they maintained and supported themselves there is a proof that their number was very small. After the Peloponnesian war they were led back, but although Athens was so much reduced, Aegina never recovered its former importance. During the first war between Philip and the Romans, P. Sulpicius took Aegina, and reduced the whole population to slavery, from which they were afterwards ransomed by the kindness of their friends on the mainland.[26] Afterwards it fell into the hands of the kings of Pergamus; but we do not know whether it remained under their dominion until the overthrow of the Achaean confederacy. Aegina is one of those places whose destruction Serv. Sulpicius laments in his consolatory letter to Cicero. It seems to have been during such a devastation that the temple of Zeus Hellenios perished, among the ruins of which were found the celebrated Aegina marbles, which are at present in the museum of Munich.

LACONIA.

Laconia was of different extent at different times. Laconia, in the reign of Aristodemus and his sons, or the country such as it was originally at the time of the Heracleid conquest, was very far from being as large as the land afterwards bearing the same name; it was not even as large as the Laconia in Strabo or Pausanias, but perhaps similar to what it was during the Macedonian period, especially after the death of Nabis, when the fate of Lacedaemon had been determined by the Achaeans. The Heracleid Laconia, therefore, at the first distribution of the peninsula, could hardly be compared with the Heracleid Argos.

As regards the origin of the kingdom of Sparta, the tradition that Eurysthenes and Procles were twin-sons of Aristodemus, is altogether mythical.[27] Any one familiar with the spirit of ancient legendary history, can clearly see the process through which the narrative has passed. Both Herodotus and a fragment of Alcaeus have preserved the statement, that, according to the common tradition, Aristodemus himself reigned at Sparta and died there. But later writers represent him as having died before he arrived with the Heracleids in Peloponnesus, being killed by Apollo at Pytho. The fact is, that as his name was not found among those of the Doric chiefs, tradition made him the father of the two kings, for as Argos had three, so Sparta had two kings corresponding with the two highest among the phylae; and the two Spartan kings are nothing but the heads of the two γένη of the Eurypontids and Agiads, belonging to two different phylae; one of them is designated as the οἰκίη ὑποδεεστέρη, because it belonged to the less noble phyle; whence we cannot be surprised at their not being called Eurysthenids and Proclids. Aristodemus is merely a mythical name, signifying that his descendants are the noblest among their people. The conquerors of Sparta, on their arrival, are said to have found Tisamenus, the son of Orestes. Those who looked upon this tradition as a piece of genuine history, felt that it was difficult to see, how the son of Orestes had come from Mycenae to Sparta; and the ancients extricated themselves by the story, that Orestes, succeeded to the throne of Menelaus by marrying Hermione—a story which is unknown to the author of the first part of the Odyssey, for he speaks of Megapenthes, a son of Menelaus, which again is only an expression of the general idea, that the house of Menelaus ended in sorrow. There can be no doubt that the most ancient form of the tradition is this, that Temenus, the Doric king of Argos, possessed the same supremacy over the sons of Aristodemus at Sparta, and over Cresphontes in Messene, as had in former times been exercised by the king of Mycenae over the whole of Achaean Peloponnesus. But Spartan pride, at an early time, endeavoured to cast this humiliating tradition into the shade. Hence also the statement that Cresphontes drew lots, as to whether he should obtain Laconia or Messene, Argos being altogether out of the question.

It is only from a fragment of Ephorus in Strabo, that we know anything about the feudal principalities of the Dorians in Laconia. This piece of information once hung upon a thread, and was nearly destroyed by a mutilation of the passage in the manuscript from which all the others are derived; if the book were lost, or but a little more mutilated, we should know absolutely nothing about this feudal system—so much our knowledge of the most important circumstances often depends upon a mere accident. Hence it is quite legitimate, in case of such information being wanting, to supply the deficiency with rational boldness, in accordance with the general principles of historical development. Now, according to Ephorus, the Dorian kings divided Laconia into six principalities. The first was Sparta, where they themselves exercised the supremacy over the other principalities, just as the Capetingian kings of Paris and Orleans, who ruled over the country as far as Orleans (Isle de France) as a distinct principality, and were recognised as kings in the rest of France, but in such a manner that their vassals again, within their own territories, were true princes or kings. In regard to the other principalities, Strabo (p. 424, D)[28] says, that _Amyclae_, at a distance of about five miles from Sparta, was given to the Achaean who, by his faithless counsel, had induced the Achaean king of the time to capitulate and quit his country; he is elsewhere called Philonomus.[29] The text of Strabo is here much mutilated; there is one line of which the greater part is legible, and of the next only a few words. I am convinced, however, that I have discovered the meaning, namely, that the remaining four kingdoms were _Las_, _Helos_, _Aepys_, and _Pherae_, the two last of which subsequently belonged to Messene.[30] These five states then stood to Sparta in the relation of isopolity, and their citizens might exercise the Spartan franchise; but the sovereignty in all foreign relations belonged to Sparta, so that the Spartan conquest at that time imposed no heavy yoke upon the feudal principalities. This relation was altered by Agis I.[31] The Spartan Dorians broke through the relation of these isopolite states in such a manner as boldly to deprive them of their rights, to depose the kings, and reduce the inhabitants to the condition of περίοικοι, in which they remained indeed free, but became dependent and lost the right of exercising the Spartan franchise. The people of Helos refused to submit to these terms, in consequence of which their town was destroyed by the Spartans.[32] The Homeric Catalogue mentions some other places in Laconia, as _Bryseae_ and _Messe_, of which afterwards not a trace occurs, and which may have been destroyed at that time. Many towns probably perished before the Spartans were masters of one-fourth of the whole country.

The geographical relations of Laconia are likewise extremely obscure; but I have very little doubt that if a person were without bias and carefully to distinguish the different periods, he might arrive at more satisfactory results than have as yet been gained.

The name LACEDAEMON was, in antiquity, not applied to the city but to the country, especially the valley of the Eurotas. In the Catalogue, it is clearly distinguished from Sparta.

Οἳ δ’ εἶχον κοίλην Λακεδαίμονα κητώεσσαν
Φᾶρίν τε Σπάρτην τε—

The Alexandrian grammarians rightly say that the κοίλη Λακεδαίμων refers to the valley of Lacedaemon, just like κοίλη Ἦλις. Sparta, on the other hand, always remained the proper name of the city, and it is only in later writers, such as Polybius, that Lacedaemon is used as the name of the city; wherever it occurs in this sense in earlier authors, it must be regarded as an exception to the rule.

The middle of the south of Peloponnesus, from Arcadia downwards, is formed by Mount TAYGETUS (now Pentedactylon), which ends in Cape Taenarus. This mountain, as I have already observed, is the seat of frequent volcanic commotions. Porphyry, the stone of which it consists, is found most commonly in volcanic mountains; the green serpentine, likewise peculiar to Taygetus, is found there in great masses, whence we meet in Roman poets with the expressions, _metalla Taygeti_, _metalla Laconica_, _virides lapides Taygeti_; _Taygeti virent metalla_. Mount Taygetus is full of caverns; the most important are those near Taenarus (now Cape Matapan), whence the legend that the entrance to the lower world was there. Just as this mountain runs between the rivers Pamisus and Eurotas, so another runs between the Eurotas and the Argolic Gulf; the latter is of no less importance, though lower than Taygetus, and terminates in Cape Malea. Taygetus is wild, and large tracts on its top are incapable of cultivation; but in its lower parts it has fertile valleys. The valley of the Eurotas (now Vasilipotamos), is broad and beautiful, and the river itself, both in length and depth, is the most important in all Peloponnesus.

SPARTA, situated on the Eurotas, was a royal city from the earliest times; according to tradition, it was the residence of Menelaus, and afterwards of the Heracleid kings. From its beginning down to the Macedonian period, it remained an open place; but, like all other Greek cities, it had an acropolis, whence the expression which is applied to Sparta as well as to other places, that it was inhabited κωμηδόν, does not exclude the existence of an ἀκρόπολις. On the heights of Epirus, too, traces of Cyclopian walls and earthen ramparts have been discovered, although it was inhabited κωμηδόν, which shows that towns thus described were not surrounded by walls, but built round a fortified central point. In this condition Sparta remained until the Macedonian period. For a long time the Spartans, no doubt, lived in their open city, as it were unconsciously, but afterwards the feeling of their own greatness and security told them that it was not worth while to build walls. When however they were visited by the Macedonians, Sparta was surrounded with walls which remained until the city was united with the Achaean confederacy, when they had to be pulled down again.

The houses at Sparta were built in an irregular and poor manner, almost all being made of clay; such was indeed the case in other Greek towns also, but at Sparta it was pre-eminently so, and the city appears to have had no regular streets at all. There were, however, a few notable buildings, though they cannot exactly be called magnificent. Under the dominion of the Romans, Sparta was the most important city in Peloponnesus, for during the Achaean war it had joined the Romans, and had thereby afforded them a welcome pretext for destroying Achaia. Ancient Sparta seems to have perished at an early part of the middle ages, when the unfortunate Peloponnesus was ravaged by the Slavonians. The building of the town of _Misitra_ is ascribed to a prince of the family of the Palaeologi, but the probable fact is that he only restored it. There are few places of which so scanty ruins are discoverable as of Sparta. _Limnae_ was a suburb of Sparta.

About five miles from it was situated AMYCLAE, which was older than the Doric conquest, and was respected by the Spartans.

Little can be said about the other places in Laconia. GYTHEION was the ἐπίνειον of Sparta even during the maritime supremacy of Athens, and remained what it then was as long as Sparta occurs in ancient history; but it is not by any means a particularly good harbour.

It is not worth while to enumerate the places along the coast, for we can say nothing about them, absolutely nothing being known except their sites. The most important among them is EPIDAURUS, surnamed LIMERA (now Monembasia or Napoli di Malvasia), to distinguish it from other towns of the same name, with a very beautiful and safe harbour, which was especially protected by a rock within it; on it was built the citadel, which from its natural position was extremely strong. But Epidaurus was too far from Sparta, and too much separated from it by mountains ever to become its port town.

SELLASIA, in the interior of the country, situated between Tegea and Sparta, in a pass where mount Taygetus and the other range of mountains come close together, was a place of great historical reputation. It was important as a military post, for it was occupied by Cleomenes in the war against the Macedonians and Achaeans, and he there suffered his unfortunate defeat. It seems at all times to have belonged to Lacedaemon. But the case of PELLANA, BELEMINA, and other places between Megalopolis and Sparta was different; they originally belonged to Arcadia, just as Epidaurus Limera, Prasiae and others belonged to Argos, to which in the end they were restored. Such change in the boundaries of Laconia took place in the time of Philip of Macedonia, in consequence of a decision which he made at Corinth after the battle of Chaeronea. Such at least must be our inference, for we afterwards find the Achaeans and Argives, without any war, in the possession of those parts, so that the Spartans must either have ceded them of their own accord, or the Achaeans and Argives were put in possession of them by force. However much, therefore, the Spartans may boast of never having stooped under the power of Macedonia, it is nothing but one of the many untruths they have uttered.

The district about Taenarus and the coast-country from the borders of Messenia to Malea, afterwards bore the name of _Eleutherolacones_. This tract of country is mentioned by Strabo and Pausanias with praise, and it is said to have contained eighteen towns, the inhabitants of which were designated by that name, because they had made themselves independent of the supremacy of Sparta. Strabo refers the origin of this emancipation to Augustus, but it probably arose from other circumstances. When T. Quinctius Flamininus entered Laconia, and Nabis indulged in several acts of insolence, the Romans, believing it dangerous to wage war against him, connived at it; meantime he committed all possible cruelties against the unfortunate Peloponnesians, and insulted the Romans into the bargain: in short, he carried matters so far, that Flamininus, contrary to his own inclinations, was forced to punish him; and although Flamininus was unwilling, utterly to annihilate him, yet Nabis was afterwards unable to recover himself. The consuls then proceeded to the towns on the coast (the modern Maina, as far as Malea, now St. Angelo), which renounced Nabis, and were constituted by the Romans as free and independent towns. If afterwards, when the Achaean confederacy was broken up, they were restored to Sparta, and remained subject to it until the time of Augustus, the Romans must have given them up at that time; and Strabo’s expression can refer only to a second constitution. But on the whole, those towns were insignificant.

The island of CYTHERA (Cerigo) is separated from Laconia by a channel of the sea; in antiquity it was the same as it is now, a rugged, volcanic island, presenting a dismal aspect on account of its dark, burned rocks. Aesthetic historians, anxious to have a more beautiful place for the temple of Cytherea, have described the island as a paradise, and supposed that a devastating change had taken place at a later period. But not a trace of this is found among the ancients. The island was thinly peopled. When the Athenians had expelled the Aeginetans from the island, the Spartans gave up Cythera to them, and from this, as I have already observed, we may infer that, as the island contained but little fertile land, the number of Aeginetans must have been small. If, therefore, Aegina once actually had an enormous population, it can have been owing only to some accidental circumstance, as was the case with Pisa at the time of the conquest of Sardinia.[33]

The real central point of the volcanic mountain-range of Peloponnesus and of the Archipelago, is the island of THERA; one branch of the volcanic range proceeds from Thera northward in the direction of Lemnos; another turns to the East towards Rhodes and the coast of Ionia, whence the frequent earthquakes in those parts. The whole district from Delos to Lemnos, thence to the Asiatic coast, and thence again to Thera, forms as it were a circle.

The ancients imagined that Laconia once contained within its boundaries 39,000 farms; but this statement is not well authenticated. The greater part of the country as far as the sea was agricultural land in the possession of the Spartans, and cultivated by their serfs or helots.

MESSENE, MESSENIA, MESSENIACA.

The third of the Dorian kingdoms is Messene, Messenia, or Messeniaca, for all these three names are applied to the kingdom of Cresphontes. The boundaries in the mythical age cannot be accurately defined, but so far as we can see, they were about the same as in the Macedonian period; it perhaps extended to the very top of Taygetus and the sources of the Pamisus. Although it was likewise a mountainous country, yet owing to the splendid valley of the Pamisus (valley of Calamata), which is one of the richest in the world, and to other fertile coast-districts, it enjoyed the reputation of being a particularly wealthy country, whence, according to tradition, it was so much the object of the cupidity of Cresphontes, when lots were drawn for Lacedaemon and Messene, that he used a false lot. At present the country is in an unspeakably miserable condition. The name Messene is said originally to have belonged to the country only, and not to a city.

Messene, too, originally consisted of one sovereign principality and several dependent ones, the Achaean princes being in a relation of dependence on the Dorian kings. But while at Sparta the ancient inhabitants were deprived of the actual exercise of their rights, they rose in Messene to a condition of equality with their Dorian conquerors, and the latter became amalgamated with the ancient inhabitants into one compact nation. The two states also differed in other respects: Sparta was ruled by two kings, while in Messene a Heracleid monarchy was established. The early history of Messene is as uncertain as that of the Roman kings; the traditions about the destruction of the kingdom are anything but authentic, and we cannot fix the time of that event within a hundred years. This observation is too important not to be repeated in this place. The colony of Messenians which is said to have been established at Zancle, is probably nothing but an inference from the subsequent name of that place; for the foundation of that colony, if we assign it to the time in which alone it can be conceived to have been established, would be separated by more than a century from the events in Messene, to which it is said to owe its origin. The only historical fact is, that the last Messenian war belongs to the period about Olymp. 80; some towns were then reduced to the condition of perioeci, but the great body of the country people became helots, and the land was divided among the Spartans. The war ended with the capitulation of the helots, who had withdrawn to the citadel of Ithome, whence the besieged obtained a free departure to Naupactus; in this latter place they afterwards lived under the protection of Athens. The chronology of the early history of Greece is so uncertain, that, although we are here speaking of the period subsequent to the Persian wars, the exact year in which the last Messenian war was brought to a close cannot be determined; its outbreak is known to belong to about Olymp. 80, as at that time Taygetus was shaken by a violent earthquake. The war lasted at least ten years. From that time till about the battle of Leuctra, a period of about eighty years, Messene remained for the most part a wilderness, as the Morea was under the dominion of the Turks, even during the time that it had already somewhat recovered (1670-1680). In this condition, the country was found by the Athenian fleet which, during the Peloponnesian war, appeared before Sphacteria; the ancient towns lay in ruins. It was a well-deserved punishment for Sparta’s tyranny and cruelty, that this was the very point at which the Athenians entered the Spartan dominion and established themselves about Pylos.

After the battle of Leuctra, Epaminondas collected all those who gave themselves out to be descendants of the ancient Messenians; and they were joined by numbers of Arcadians, Boeotians, perioeci of Sparta, and helots who had shaken off the Spartan yoke, and he led them back into Messene. This restoration of Messene was unquestionably just, and Sparta had well deserved the infliction; but for Greece it was an unfortunate event, for in the circumstances of the time, when the danger was threatening from Macedonia, the only thing which might have saved Greece, was concentration and strengthening, but by no means a going back to the ancient times. Hence Macedonia declared in favour of Messene, as well as of Argolis and Arcadia, for the purpose of weakening Sparta. Had the latter been able to renew and consolidate itself, as was subsequently attempted by Cleomenes, and had it been joined by all the Peloponnesians, Greece might still have defied Macedonia for centuries, and all the subsequent scenes of misery would not have occurred.

At the time of its restoration, Messene was not at once made so large a state as it originally was, and as it subsequently became again through the mediation of Macedonia. We still have an accidental statement in Scylax of Caryanda respecting the extent of Messene during this intermediate period between the Boeotian restoration and the later extension under Philip of Macedonia, which we know from Strabo and Pausanias. The influence of Epaminondas was brief, he established only the town of Messene itself, with which were connected the western coast and the valley of the Pamisus, but not quite as far as the sea. The towns, however, which had been built by the Spartans, as Asine, Methone, and others, were still in the hands of the Spartans, and inhabited by Dryopians, ancient subjects of Argos, who had declared themselves in favour of Sparta. Afterwards, when the boundaries of Messenia were extended, these towns also became Messenian, standing, however, not in a relation of dependence but in that of isopolity. The Messenian people during the Macedonian period, therefore, was quite a different nation from what it had been before. Some descendants of the ancient Messenians were perhaps still living in the interior; they may have returned from Naupactus, and from other parts of the world over which they had been scattered. On the sea-coast, there were a few Boeotian and Argive colonies, and also some Laconian perioeci and a number of helots, who had emigrated from Laconia and established themselves there. It was natural enough for the Messenians to represent themselves in a different light; they took into consideration only the pure germs of their origin, and to them they referred the story of Aristomenes; but ethnographers ought not to have imitated them, for the Messenians were a new people.

The PAMISUS, the river of Messenia, is only a few miles in length, but carries a great mass of water, being probably fed by subterraneous tributaries from Arcadia.

MESSENE was situated about ten English miles from the sea, its situation is very justly compared with that of Corinth; for it, too, had its ἄκρα upon an inaccessible rock (ITHOME) surrounded by a wall, which connected it with the lower town. The remains of these walls belong to the grandest of all the remnants of Greek antiquity; they consist of blocks of five feet in length and two and a half in breadth, and these are placed in such a manner as to turn their smaller side outward. It is very doubtful whether this wall was constructed in the time of Epaminondas, or whether it is a relic of an earlier period; even the ancients observed that the towers at the corners were a later addition; and modern travellers state, that this observation is evidently correct. Hence it is conjectured, that the towers were built in the time of Epaminondas; but that the fortification itself belongs to an earlier period. It can hardly be believed that, in the age of Epaminondas, such a style of building should have continued to be employed, since Megalopolis, in the building of which a whole people exerted itself, did not possess such walls. Messene and Corinth were the strongest points in Peloponnesus; and whoever was in possession of them, could control the whole peninsula. The cause of the great strength of Ithome was the circumstance that, like Acrocorinthus, the rock had a well furnishing an abundant supply of water, which was wanting in many other Greek acropoleis, as, for example, in that of Athens.

A town Messene did not exist before the time of Epaminondas. Some years ago a French antiquary asserted that Messene was more ancient, but this cannot be proved. Ithome, on the other hand, appears in the traditions of the earliest times; and during the first Messenian war, it was the centre of the country; that fortress, containing the temple of Zeus Ithomatas, was the place of refuge of the Messenians; there the treaty with the Lacedaemonians was concluded; and in the war of Aristomenes, too, it appears in the same light and under the same circumstances.

All that is related about the first Messenian wars, attests the fearful devastation which must then have taken place. Even as early as the Peloponnesian war, we no longer find any traces of the many towns that are mentioned, and which must be regarded as historical (for names of towns are not invented), such as Stenyclaros, Andania, Aepy, Pedasos, and many others. In the east of Messenia, a few places survived, and for a time belonged to Laconia, but the western part of the country was completely devastated. In the Homeric Catalogue[34] we find only a few places in the west; in the east we have Cardamyle and Pherae, and Cyparissia is the only town in the west that remained, being mentioned in the Periplus and elsewhere, as a very good harbour for small vessels. The little modern town of Arcadia is not far from the site of the ancient Cyparissia: the country around it is very fertile.

CORONE (now Coron) was built, according to an account which appears credible to me, at the time of the Boeotian interference, and named after Coronea in Boeotia, from which town it also appears to have received settlers.

ASINE was built by the Spartans at the time of the destruction of Messene, and was peopled by Nauplians.[35]

METHONE (Madon) is likewise of late origin.

In the Catalogue, all western Messenia belongs to the kingdom of Nestor, and the _Pylos_ in the Odyssey, where Telemachus visits Nestor, cannot be the Triphylian, as Strabo thinks, but must be the Messenian on the sea-coast; we have to look for it in the vicinity of Navarino. _Sphacteria_ formed the harbour of Pylos, and that island has in our days again attracted the eyes of the world.[36] It is remarkable in antiquity from the circumstance that the Spartans, inconsiderately enough, occupied it with 300 of their own citizens, and that these men were cut off and compelled to surrender by the Athenians, who had taken helots into their service, and were thus enabled to bring about negotiations for peace. Pylos is still called Pylo; Navarino is situated on the other side of the splendid gulf, where it is broadest, while ancient Pylos was situated at the point where the passage between the mainland and Sphacteria is quite narrow. We recognise the devastations caused by the Spartans in those districts from the excellent description given by Thucydides of the attack upon Pylos.

The boundaries of Messenia, as I have already mentioned, were fixed by Philip of Macedonia. The Spartans for a long time refused to recognise the independence of the country, but such obstinate resistance against actual circumstances ruins a state, and this was the cause of the ever increasing weakness of Sparta. The Messenians themselves likewise acted a sorry part in Peloponnesus, and their continued hostility against Sparta is very singular. They brought much misery upon the peninsula, and they themselves at times had to pay dearly for it; they received the last Philip at Ithome, and were on the point of becoming for ever the slaves of Macedonia. They were always jealous of the ruling power, at first of Sparta, and afterwards of the Achaeans: their constant opposition led to nothing but false steps, for they were too weak to carry out any independent policy.

ARCADIA.

The frontiers of Arcadia, on the side of Laconia, as I have already observed, were at first contracted, but afterwards extended again; in like manner, the boundary line between Elis was changed on account of the varying possession of Triphylia. The Triphylians regarded themselves as real Arcadians, but were always an object of ambition to the Eleans, by whom they were several times overpowered. They were a remnant of the former state of Pisa, which, if we may express an opinion at all on so obscure a subject, must itself be regarded as originally Arcadian.

The nature of the country has already been described in general terms; a minute description of the complicated mountains, would give you no definite view, but only confound you. According to the general belief of the Greeks, the Arcadians[37] were the most ancient inhabitants of Peloponnesus, that is, Pelasgians: in the history of nations, Arcadia is regarded as the original seat of the Greek Pelasgians. The Arcadian traditions are the only ones in Greece, that go back to the creation of man, and their Azan necessarily reminds us of Adam; but whether they had a similar tradition, or whether the resemblance of the names is only accidental, is a question which I cannot venture to decide. They considered themselves, however, as autochthons in the strictest sense of the term; though this belief referred to the rulers rather than to the whole nation. While the adjoining countries changed either their rulers or their inhabitants, the population of Arcadia remained quite intact. In the most ancient traditions we hear of no important towns, but we know three races, the _Azanes_ (Ἀζῆνες in Herodotus), the _Maenalii_ and _Parrhasii_; whether, however, they are to be regarded only as three tribes, or as three distinct nations, I cannot say. Greek history, at the time of the Messenian wars, speaks indeed of Arcadia as one entire state, under a single head, but such is not the case in the Homeric Catalogue; it is probable that they formed one whole only through the relation of isopolity. Afterwards, about the 40th Olymp., we find the first traces of towns, the importance of which, however, cannot be determined. In a war with Sparta, the inhabitants of Tegea appear as a separate state of Tegeatans, and they must have had the supremacy among the Arcadians, for otherwise we cannot explain how they could have claimed at Plataeae the supreme command of the whole army, on the ground of their being the most ancient Greeks, in opposition to the Dorians, who had immigrated. How Arcadia was divided among its three peoples, is unknown. It is surprising that, previous to the foundation of Megalopolis, the whole of southern Arcadia, which formed nearly one-half of the whole country, appears to have contained no towns of importance, owing to which very circumstance Megalopolis became conspicuous. All the more important towns were situated on the eastern frontier; near the northern boundary there also were towns, which afterwards appear as small states, but the towns themselves, though strong from their natural position, were unimportant. But this was the fate of all Greek nations, where they were not grouped round a common centre: the division increased more and more, and single towns rose by their favourable position, and isolated themselves from the Κοινόν. The most ancient and most important town of Arcadia was in the east.

This was TEGEA, situated on the frontier of Laconia. In contemporary history its territory is small, and the town decayed; but from what is related about Tegea, we can see, that it was once a great city, which afterwards lost its power. The Arcadian districts united with Laconia, had probably been taken for the most part from Tegea, whence the Laconian frontier passed so near by Tegea. In the Persian wars it was still great and populous, if we may trust the numbers in Herodotus, which, however, we are hardly justified in doing, especially in his account of the campaign of Plataeae. I do not mean to say that he intended to deceive, but I consider his numbers to be very uncritical; he was probably not correctly informed. We must make a distinction between his ethnographical and geographical inquiries, and his historical criticism, for in the latter he took matters too lightly. His statements about the numbers of Spartans must be received with particular caution, for in regard to Sparta he was ill informed.

MANTINEA is much more celebrated; it was a large and respectable city, which both during and after the Peloponnesian war, acted with energy and independence, and without any regard to the rest of the Arcadians. After the peace of Nicias, the Mantineans, together with the Argives and Eleans, joined the coalition which was brought about with such skill by Alcibiades among the Peloponnesians with the view of drawing them away from Sparta. Thirty years later, they were punished for this by the Spartans: Agis appeared before them demanding that they should destroy their city and disperse in villages. They refused, and Mantinea experienced the same fate which Milan, in the middle ages, suffered at the hands of Frederic Barbarossa, for it was demolished, and its inhabitants distributed among five villages. After the battle of Leuctra it was restored; and owing to the fertility of its territory, it remained a flourishing city for a period of 150 years, that is, down to Olymp. 139, 2, when, during the war of Cleomenes, it was taken by the Achaeans and Antigonus Doson, because it had thrown itself into the arms of Cleomenes. I will not excuse its conduct on that occasion any more than the general morality of the Greeks during that period; but its fate was fearful. The town was completely destroyed, and afterwards a new one was built on its site, by Antigonus, under the name Antigonea. Officially the name Mantinea then ceased, but in common life it still continued, and Polybius calls it by its ancient name; but on coins struck at the time of the destruction of Corinth, the inhabitants are called Ἀντιγονεῖς. Hadrian, who was fond of playing in Greek matters, restored the ancient name. Mantinea is celebrated on account of three great battles, which had more or less influence in deciding the destiny of Greece: 1. the one during the peace of Nicias, in which the Spartans gained a victory over the coalition of the Peloponnesians; 2. the battle of the Boeotians against the united Athenians and Spartans, in which Epaminondas fell; 3. the battle of Agis against Antipater, in the unfortunate attempt (Olymp. 112, 2) to restore the liberty of Peloponnesus, while Alexander was engaged in Asia. To these we may add a fourth, the battle of Philopoemen against Machanidas, tyrant of Sparta. The cause of so many battles lies in the importance of the site of the town, in a military point of view, for it is situated in a fertile plain suited for great manoeuvres, on the other side of the passes leading from Arcadia into Argolis, and commands the road which leads by Orchomenos to Corinth.

ORCHOMENOS cannot be compared in importance with the two towns just mentioned; it, too, had an independent political existence as a city at an early period, and was distinct from the three Arcadian peoples.

The fourth town on the eastern frontier is STYMPHALUS, a small place in the extreme corner of the territory of Phlius and Argos. It was situated in a hollow among mountains, on the border of a lake, with subterraneous outlets. Tradition ascribed the construction of these passages to the heroic age, and apparently with great justice. This is one of the many traces which show that Greece must have had a history which went back much farther than the current history, and which is so unintelligible to us, just because we join the poetical traditions of those nations directly to the historical ages. Such is the case, for example, with the Minyans, who are so utterly mysterious to us; but it would be mere infatuation to deny that they once were a great historical people; their subjugation of Thebes, and the numerous other traditions, have a real historical foundation, as is still attested by the ruins of the Boeotian Orchomenos, and by the tunnel carrying off the water of lake Copais. The lake itself may be of volcanic origin; but the tunnel, at all events, has at least been completed by the hand of man. The same is the case with lake Stymphalus, the carrying off of the water from which is ascribed in tradition to Heracles.

Some of the northern towns, as _Pheneos_, _Psophis_, and _Cynaetha_, are ancient but insignificant.

MEGALOPOLIS was the most recent among the Arcadian towns, for it was built after the expedition of Epaminondas. He, like many others, saw the great defect of separate and isolated peoples, whose strength was broken, and he was bent upon forming and enlarging several central points which, in the end, necessarily led to a complete division. Hence he conceived the idea of uniting all the Arcadians against the Spartans, for it was not yet clear at the time that Sparta had permanently fallen in the battle of Leuctra. The new city was built by the Arcadians themselves, under the direction of Epaminondas. These late occurrences are enveloped in strange obscurity, for we do not know whether it was intended also to draw the great Arcadian towns, Mantinea, etc., into this κοινὸν βουλευτήριον; this intention, however, was pre-supposed, and hence the undertaking was generally disliked. People looked upon it with distrust; the form prescribed to them was disapproved of, and even if it had not been insisted on, the spirit of independence of those people seemed to suffer in the undertaking. The form, moreover, in which it was intended to carry out the plan seems to have been extremely absurd. The undertaking had been announced as something grand, yet it proved to be ill-devised and useless, and did not by any means succeed as well as had been anticipated. The circumference of Megalopolis was only about five English miles, and in this space it was contemplated to crowd together the inhabitants of more than thirty places, and no one seems to have perceived that such a scheme could not succeed. The Arcadians were country people (αὐτουργοί), whose fields were not tilled by slaves; they would have been obliged to carry on their rustic pursuits at a great distance, which, as they had to live in the city, with civic institutions, was a matter of impossibility. Epaminondas was indeed a great man, but this scheme does him no credit; taking all in all, I do not think that he was as great a man as he is generally believed to have been. The population dispersed, and the coercion employed was felt to be more galling than the Spartan dominion, against which the whole plan was directed. Hence Megalopolis remained the union of only a portion of Arcadia. It had to fight against the Spartans at an early time, and, therefore, threw itself into the arms of Philip, who endeavoured to protect it by a strong frontier on the side of Sparta. After the time of Alexander, in the war of Polysperchon, it suffered severely, and had to sustain a vigorous siege; but the greatest misfortune was its capture by Cleomenes, from which it never recovered. Cleomenes took the town by surprise, because the walls were too extensive for the population, and, therefore, could not be defended; the inhabitants partly fled, and others were put to the sword. From that time Megalopolis, notwithstanding its circumference, had no more importance than an ordinary town of the Achaean confederacy, and was afterwards almost entirely deserted. Polybius was a native of Megalopolis, and although he did all he could to save his native city, it seems yet to have suffered greatly from the Romans after the destruction of Corinth, and then it was justly said Ἐρημία μεγάλη ’στὶν ἡ Μεγάλη πόλις; in the days of Strabo it was completely reduced to the rank of a village. As it had been built at a late period, Megalopolis, like all the towns which arose under the Macedonian dominion, had no great buildings, whence no ruins of it are found.

I might mention also _Phigalea_, _Melaeniae_, and other towns, but it is hardly worth while. Phigalea has become celebrated through the well-known sculptures, which are excellent in their way, and belong to the period of archaic art, that is, to the period of the Persian wars and a short time after; they were found in the ruins of a temple, and are now in England.

ELIS.

The name Elis is of more recent date than the Trojan times; the town of that name was a recent structure, and the population also is not ancient. The most northern part of Elis was inhabited during the Trojan times by the _Epeans_; the middle part, _Pisatis_, extended as far as the Alpheus, and the country south of that river belonged to the Pylian kingdom of Nestor. This division continued to exist at a later period. The Doric name for Elis was Alis, and we should, properly speaking, adopt this pronunciation, which occurs in Plautus’ Prologue to the “Captivi” (_vendidit in Alide_), and upon all ancient monuments. On coins we find ϜΑΛΕΙΩΝ, which by a strange mistake has been referred to the Faliscans, until at length some English scholar, I think it was Knight, explained it rightly, the nature of the digamma having become clear. The Pisatans were probably Arcadians. Respecting Triphylia, between Pisatis and Messenia, there are strange traditions: in the most ancient of them it is said to have been inhabited by Caucones, itself a mysterious name, which is described by some as signifying a race of Carians; according to others, the country was inhabited by Minyans, who, though they are traced to the Minyans in Lemnos, are perhaps nothing else but Pelasgians, that is, a people likewise belonging to the Arcadians. Afterwards Triphylia always was a part of the ἔθνος Ἀρκαδικόν, although the Arcadians were never united under one strategus. The Epeans were expelled by the Aetolians; the Aetolian Oxylus is said to have accompanied the Dorian Heracleids, to have guided them by way of Naupactus into Achaia, and to have received Elis as a reward for this service. This tradition must be left to stand on its own grounds: certain it is at least that Elis was Aetolian, as the three states were Dorian; but the name of the Aetolians had a different meaning in the early times from that which we attach to it at a later period, and of which I shall speak hereafter.

The history of Elis may be well put together from different documents.[38] The Aetolians ruled in the city as an oligarchy, and even as late as the Peloponnesian war the city appears as sovereign, and the perioeci as subjects; in Aristotle’s Politics, the Aetolian γένη are still described as a body of oligarchs. But this state of things was probably altered even in the course of the Peloponnesian war: the oligarchy was reduced in numbers, and was unable to maintain itself; the commonalty, on the other hand, acquired consistency, and the old citizens were united with the country population. Thus Elis became a compact state, acquiring the extent which we see in our maps, and all the free inhabitants of the country became Eleans. They were divided into twelve tribes, four of which were afterwards lost, together with a portion of the country. Further particulars will be mentioned in connection with the several towns. Elis had coal mines which were worked, but according to Theophrastus, the smiths preferred the Massilian coal.

The original Elis, then, after the Doric migration, comprised only the country of the Epeans; its capital, _Elis_, was founded by the Aetolians. This town, like the Eleans in general, does not act a brilliant part in history; but it was not insignificant, and was situated in a very fertile and thickly peopled valley, the κοίλη Ἠλις. There is only one other town in Elis proper, _Cyllene_, the ἐπίνειον for the small fleet of Elis, standing to the capital in the relation of perioeci, similar to that subsisting between Lausanne and Berne.

For a considerable period, Elis was the most peaceable and most undisturbed country in Greece, and was chiefly inhabited by small landed proprietors. Polybius too mentions the long peace, but we cannot say precisely during what period it prevailed, and, at all events, must not extend it too long. The Eleans were involved in the Peloponnesian war no less than all the other Greek states; in earlier times they had even been conquerors. _Pisa_, situated on the Alpheus, enjoyed great reputation in ancient times, but was destroyed by the Eleans at an early period (about Olymp. 90), and its territory was incorporated with that of Elis. This secured to the Eleans the prostasia at the Olympic games.

All maps have the same mistake, representing _Olympia_ as a town; it was nothing but a place containing the temple of the Olympian Zeus and the localities required for the games, a stadium, theatre, and the like. There never were Olympian citizens, nor a βουλή or a δῆμος; and there exists no ethnic name formed from Olympia. There may have been some inns for strangers, but with the exception of the season of the games, the place was never visited.