Athens; thus plainly implying his belief that the majority, at least,
of the remaining settlers did not take their departure from the same
hearth.[290]
[288] Euripid. Ion, 1546. κτίστορ᾽ Ἀσίαδος χθονός.
[289] Pausan. vii, 4, 6. Τοσαῦτα εἰρηκότα ἐς Χίους Ἴωνα εὑρίσκω·
οὐ μέντοι ἐκεῖνός γε εἴρηκε, καθ᾽ ἥντινα αἰτίαν Χῖοι τελοῦσιν ἐς
Ἰῶνας.
Respecting Samos, and its primitive Karian inhabitants, displaced
by Patroklês, and Tembriôn at the head of Grecian emigrants, see
Etymol. Mag. v. Ἀστυπάλαια.
[290] Herod. i, 146. ἐπεὶ, ὥς γε ἔτι μᾶλλον οὗτοι (_i. e._ the
inhabitants of the Pan-Ionic Dodekapolis) Ἴωνές εἰσι τῶν ἄλλων
Ἰώνων ἢ κάλλιόν τι γεγόνασι, μωρίη πολλὴ λέγειν· τῶν Ἄβαντες
ἐξ Εὐβοίες εἰσὶν οὐκ ἐλαχίστη μοῖρα, τοῖσι Ἰωνίης μέτα οὐδὲ
τοῦ οὐνόματος οὐδέν· Μίνυαι δὲ Ὀρχομένιοι ἀναμεμίχαται, καὶ
Καδμεῖοι, καὶ Δρύοπες, καὶ Φωκέες ἀποδάσμιοι, καὶ Μολοσσοὶ, καὶ
Ἀρκάδες Πελασγοὶ, καὶ Δωριέες Ἐπιδαύριοι, ἄλλα τε ἔθνεα πολλὰ
ἀναμεμίχαται. Οἱ δὲ αὐτέων ἀπὸ τοῦ Πρυτανηΐου τοῦ Ἀθηναίων
ὁρμηθέντες, καὶ νομίζοντες γενναιότατοι εἶναι Ἰώνων, οὗτοι δὲ
οὐ γυναῖκας ἤγαγον εἰς τὴν ἀποικίην, ἀλλὰ Καείρας ἔσχον, τῶν
ἐφόνευσαν τοὺς γονέας ... Ταῦτα δὲ ἦν γινόμενα ἐν Μιλήτῳ.
The polemical tone in which this remark of Herodotus is delivered
is explained by Dahlmann on the supposition that it was destined
to confute certain boastful pretensions of the Milesian Hekatæus
(see Bähr, _ad loc._, and Klausen ad Hekatæi Frag. 225).
The test of _Ionism_, according to the statement of Herodotus,
is, that a city should derive its origin from Athens, and that
it should celebrate the solemnity of the Apaturia (i. 147).
But we must construe both these tests with indulgence. Ephesus
and Kolophôn were Ionic, though neither of them celebrated the
Apaturia. And the colony might be formed under the auspices of
Athens, though the settlers were neither natives, nor even of
kindred race with the natives, of Attica.
But the most striking information which Herodotus conveys to us
is, the difference of language, or dialect, which marked these
twelve cities. Milêtus, Myûs, and Priênê, all situated on the soil
of the Karians, had one dialect: Ephesus, Kolophôn, Lebedus, Teôs,
Klazomenæ, and Phôkæa, had a dialect common to all, but distinct
from that of the three preceding: Chios and Erythræ exhibited
a third dialect, and Samos, by itself, a fourth. Nor does the
historian content himself with simply noting such quadruple variety
of speech; he employs very strong terms to express the degree of
dissimilarity.[291] The testimony of Herodotus as to these dialects
is, of course, indisputable.
[291] Herod. i, 142. Ephesus, Kolophôn, Lebedus, Teôs, Klazomenæ,
Phokæa—αὗται αἱ πόλιες τῇσι πρότερον λεχθείσῃσι ὁμολογέουσι κατὰ
γλῶσσαν οὐδὲν, σφὶ δὲ ὁμοφωνέουσι.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account