his body by Tomyris, informs the reader, that Cyrus thought himself something more than a man, and that no nation could resist his power: thus the chastisement which he receives corroborates the truth of the maxim placed in the mouth of Solon. The fourth maxim, that no man can be predicated to be happy until he has ended life in happiness, is a necessary consequence of the preceding principles. Artabanus developes it, in his speech to Xerxes, just now alluded to; and the History exemplifies it, in passages too numerous to specify. No where, however, is its truth enforced more directly, than when Croesus, fixed on the pyre, calls out, "Solon! Solon! Solon"!" In this part of the work, the sympathy of the conqueror, the raging of the flames in spite of all efforts to quench them, the miserable state of the Lydian king, from which he is rescued only by a miracle, constitute a living picture, admirably adapted to humble the proud, and painted in such vivid colours, that, when once viewed, it remains for ever fixed in the memory. Herodotus seldom permits any opportunity to slip of impressing his reader with the belief that the divinity visits great crimes with great punishment: it will be sufficient to adduce one or two instances. After proving practically that the Trojans could not be in possession of Helen, who had indeed been ravished by Paris, but was in Egypt during the war, he accounts for the disbelief shewn by the Greeks to the assertions of the Trojans: No faith was put in what they said: the cause of "which, in my opinion, was, that Providence arranged "that the destruction of the Trojan nation, by one general massacre, should convince all men, that for great mis"deeds, great are the punishments at the hands of the gods”—ὡς τῶν μεγάλων ἀδικημάτων μεγάλαι εἰσὶ καὶ αἱ τιμωρίαι παρὰ τῶν θεῶν. Pheretima, having glutted her desire of blood and vengeance, dies a most miserable 66 66 66 16 14 Lib. i. 204. 15 Lib. i. 86. 16 Lib. ii. 120. death; her body swarming, while yet alive, with maggots: Herodotus observes, Ὣς ἄρα ἀνθρώποισι αἱ λίην ἰσχυραὶ τιμωρίαι πρὸς θεῶν ἐπίφθονοι γίνονται". The same principle leads the Historian, despite of the other reasons reported, to regard the madness of Cleomenes as a punishment inflicted on him by Providence, for having tampered with the prophetess of Delphi, and procured the ruin of Demaratus 18. We now proceed to the sixth and last principle of this moral philosophy; namely, that the divinity is wont to interfere directly in human affairs. To the adoption of this maxim, Herodotus was no doubt conducted by the natural course of his studies: for the more we contemplate the world, whether in active life or the pages of history, the more convinced we are of the futility of attempting to account for every thing solely by human agency. This principle, however, in a mind guided only by the light of nature, may be reasonably supposed to superinduce something of superstition, and consequently credulity: it would be a folly to deny, that Herodotus is entirely free from those failings. He is of opinion, that tokens forebode the approach of calamities to nations and cities : Φιλέει δέ κως προσημαίνειν εὖτ ̓ ἂν μέλλῃ μεγάλα κακὰ ἢ πόλι ἢ ἔθνεῖ ἔσεσθαι. As the Grecian forces were marching up to the Persians, on the strand at the foot of Mycale, a report pervaded the army, that Pausanias had defeated Mardonius at Platea that same day; and a caduceus, or herald's wand, was related to have been seen on the shore. It would certainly have been a good stroke of policy in the Grecian leaders to animate their men by such a representation: the Historian, however, prefers attributing it to divine agency; characteristically observing, Δῆλα δὴ πολλοῖσι τεκμηρίοισί ἐστι τὰ θεῖα τῶν μάт20. Hence, likewise, the repugnance which he exhibits, in the Second Book, to enter into any discussion on the Egyptian mysteries". Let it not, however, be 17 Lib. iv. 205. 18 Lib. vi. 84. 19 Lib. vi. 27. 66 supposed, that this superstition has induced him to suppress any thing that might be used as an argument against his own principles. A little previous to the account of the battle of Salamis, he quotes a prediction of Bacis, the seer, which had been remarkably fulfilled: the comment deserves attention, as it decidedly proves that Herodotus did believe in the oracles which are so thickly scattered over his pages: "When I consider these events, and reflect that Bacis has spoken so distinctly, I dare not myself say any thing in contradiction of oracles, nor do I approve it in others 22." Yet the Historian does not scruple, in another part of his work, to unfold the avaricious views of the Pythoness herself 23; and to give it as his opinion, that those who had corrupted her were the real authors of the deliverance of Athens from the tyranny of the Pisistratidæ 24. But enough has been said on this subject to minister to the depraved appetite of those persons who love to fix on the failings of great men. The reader, who recollects that Herodotus was a pagan, and considers the immense difficulty, or, more strictly speaking, the utter impossibility, of the human mind, in that state of spiritual darkness, keeping itself properly balanced between the extremes of universal scepticism and disgusting superstition, will admire the spirit of true devotion which pervades the whole work. One striking instance, among many, may be brought forward: he has been considering the state of the Greek nations at the time that tidings were brought of Xerxes' intention to invade and subjugate the country; and shews, with great political skill, that Greece was indebted for her freedom to the decisive measures adopted by the Athenians: thence he concludes, that it was they who effectually did repel the King, next, at least, he adds-fearing the Grecian reader may be induced by the preceding political and shrewd statement of the facts to forget that he was to 22 Lib. viii. 77. 23 Lib. v. 63: compare, likewise, lib. vi. 66. thank the gods for the victories won by his forefathers— next, at least, to the gods-αὐτοὶ οὗτοι ἦσαν οἱ βασιλέα μετά γε θεοὺς ἀνωσάμενοι . Providence did not ordain that this virtuous man should have the privilege of acquiring the principles of a pure and revealed religion; but that same Providence has permitted that his works should survive the lapse of centuries, and the wreck of ancient literature; so that we, who, through the divine mercy, have the straight road pointed out to us, are enabled to avoid the errors into which the greatest men, when left to the light of nature, have fallen; and haply may be brought to a conviction of our unworthiness, when we contrast our own feelings of devotion with those even of an ethnic philosopher, whose soul was cramped under the trammels of unavoidable superstition. RELIGIOUS CHARACTER OF HERODOTUS. But as the religion of Herodotus may be attacked, at the present period, without any danger to the worldly interests of the critic, there are many passages of the History produced as proofs of superstition and credulity, which might more fairly be regarded as arguments of a very praiseworthy feeling of religion and morality. Artabazus, in his attack on the Potidæatæ, loses a good portion of his troops by a wonderful ebb and flow of the sea in the Thermaic gulf: the Historian assents to the belief of the natives, that this was a miracle wrought by Neptune, in order to punish the barbarians for having violated his temple and sacred image2. The battle of Plataa was fought near a grove sacred to Ceres: Herodotus states it to be an extraordinary fact, that none of the barbarians fell within the precinct, but that all the bodies were found on profane ground: he gives it as his opinion, that this likewise was a punishment at the hands of the goddess, because the Persians had violated her fane at Eleusis 27. The commentators do not fail to direct the 25 Lib. vii. 139. 26 Lib. viii. 129. 27 Lib. ix. 65. 28 reader's attention to the superstition of the writer: it would certainly be more honest to refer to that noble portion of the work, where Herodotus explains the moral view that he takes of sacred matters. Cambyses, in his invasion of Egypt, had insulted and derided the temples, the gods, and the rites of the inhabitants: Herodotus concludes that he must have been completely reft of his senses, οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἱροῖσί τε καὶ νομαίοισι ἐπεχείρησε καταγελᾷν a principle which, as a practical philosopher, he proves by an interesting and instructive anecdote. Eloquent and poetical as the opponents of superstition may be in their descriptions of the evils which it produces on the human mind—and the subject is one that affords an easy opportunity of displaying the ornaments of oratory, and working on the passions of men-still they will unquestionably allow that sacrilege, under whatever form, and among whatever people it may occur, is a very wicked crime; so wicked indeed, that one is tempted to regard it, like suicide, as one too horrible to enter the mind of any but a madman : and certainly that historian should not be jeered as superstitious himself, who takes every opportunity of exciting public detestation against such impious deeds: if mistaken in the religious view of the subject, he is, as a pagan, entitled to the compassion of the wise; but the solidity of the moral principle cannot fail to claim their admiration, however it may be railed at by the foolish and inexperienced. Those, on the other hand, who accuse Herodotus of too much credulity, and of attaching implicit faith to the traditions he collected in the various countries he visited, are bound, in justice, to produce classical instances of his believing in the reports he indites. The most instructive mode of conveying an idea of the state and history of any nation, particularly at the time when the Muses were written, was to give fairly the various legends, traditions, and reports credited by the inhabitants, and to leave 28 Lib. iii. 38. |