In fixing the Cimmerian invasion of Asia at 782 B. C., Mr. Clinton has the statement of Orosius, whatever it may be worth, to rest upon; but in fixing the settlement of Ambrôn the Milesian (at Sinôpê) at 782 B. C., I know not that he had any authority at all. Eusebius does, indeed, place the foundation of Trapezus in 756 B. C., and Trapezus is said to have been a colony from Sinôpê; and Mr. Clinton, therefore, is anxious to find some date for the foundation of Sinôpê anterior to 756 B. C.; but there is nothing to warrant him in selecting 782 B. C., rather than any other year. In my judgment, the establishment of _any_ Milesian colony in the Euxine at so early a date as 756 B. C. is highly improbable: and when we find that the same Eusebius fixes the foundation of Sinôpê (the metropolis of Trapezus) as low down as 629 B. C., this is an argument with me for believing that the date which he assigns to Trapezus is by far too early. Mr. Clinton treats the date which Eusebius assigns to Trapezus as certain, and infers from it, that the date which the same author assigns to _Sinôpê_ is one hundred and thirty years _later_ than the reality: I reverse the inference, considering the date which he assigns to _Sinôpê_ as the more trustworthy of the two, and deducing the conclusion, that the date which he gives for _Trapezus_ is one hundred and thirty years at least _earlier_ than the reality. On all grounds, the authority of the chronologists is greater with regard to the later of the two periods than to the earlier, and there is, besides, the additional probability arising out of what is a suitable date for Milesian settlement. To which I will add, that Herodotus places the settlement of the Cimmerians near “that spot where Sinôpê is _now_ settled,” in the reign of Ardys, soon after 635 B. C. Sinôpê was, therefore, _not_ founded at the time when the Cimmerians went there, in the belief of Herodotus. [480] Strabo i, p. 61; Kallimachus, Hymn. ad Dianam, 251-260— ... ἠλαίνων ἀλαπάζεμεν ἠπείλησε (Ἔφεσον) Λύγδαμις ὑβριστὴς, ἐπὶ δὲ στρατὸν ἱππημόλγων Ἤγαγε Κιμμερίων, ψαμάθῳ ἴσον, οἳ ῥα παρ᾽ αὐτὸν Κεκλίμενοι ναίουσι βοὸς πόρον Ἰναχιώνης. Ἆ δειλὸς βασιλέων ὅσον ἤλιτεν· οὐ γὰρ ἔμελλε Οὔτ᾽ αὐτὸς Σκυθίηνδε παλίμπετες, οὔτε τις ἄλλος Ὅσσων ἐν λειμῶνι Καϋστρίῳ ἦσαν ἅμαξαι, Ἂψ ἀπονοστήσειν.... In the explanation of the proverb Σκυθῶν ἐρημία, allusion is made to a sudden panic and flight of _Scythians_ from Ephesus (Hesychius, v. Σκυθῶν ἐρημία),—probably this must refer to some story of interference on the part of Artemis to protect the town against these Cimmerians. The confusion between Cimmerians and Scythians is very frequent. [481] Herodot. i, 28; Mela, i, 19, 9; Skymn. Chi. Fragm. 207.