The supposed mention, in Herodotus, of a fact so late as 408 B. C., perplexes the whole chronology of his life and authorship. According to the usual statement of his biography, which every one admits, and which there is no reason to call in question, he was born in 484 B. C. Here, then, is an event alluded to in his history, which occurred when the historian was seventy-six years old, and the allusion to which he must be presumed to have written when about eighty years old, if not more; for his mention of the fact by no means implies that it was particularly recent. Those who adopt this view, do not imagine that he wrote his whole history at that age; but they maintain that he made later additions, of which they contend that this is one. I do not say that this is impossible: we know that Isokratês composed his Panathenaic oration at the age of ninety-four; but it must be admitted to be highly improbable,—a supposition which ought not to be advanced without some cogent proof to support it. But here no proof whatever is produced. Herodotus mentions a revolt of the Medes against Darius,—Xenophon also mentions a revolt of the Medes against Darius; hence, chronologists have taken it as a matter of course, that both authors must allude to the same event; though the supposition is unnatural as regards the text, and still more unnatural as regards the biography, of Herodotus. In respect to that biography, Mr. Clinton appears to me to have adopted another erroneous opinion; in which, however, both Larcher and Wesseling are against him, though Dahlmann and Heyse agree with him. He maintains that the passage in Herodotus (iii, 15), wherein it is stated that Pausiris succeeded his father Amyrtæus by consent of the Persians in the government of Egypt, is to be referred to a fact which happened subsequent to the year 414 B. C., or the tenth year of Darius Nothus; since it was in that year that Amyrtæus acquired the government of Egypt. But this opinion rests altogether upon the assumption that a certain Amyrtæus, whose name and date occur in Manetho (see Eusebius, Chronicon), is the same person as the Amyrtæus mentioned in Herodotus; which identity is not only not proved, but is extremely improbable, since Mr. Clinton himself admits (F. H. Appendix, p. 317), while maintaining the identity: “He (Amyrtæus) had conducted a war against the Persian government _more than fifty years before_.” This, though not impossible, is surely very improbable; it is at least equally probable that the Amyrtæus of Manetho was a different person from (perhaps even the _grandson_ of) that Amyrtæus in Herodotus, who had carried on war against the Persians more than fifty wars before; it appears to me, indeed, that this is the more reasonable hypothesis of the two.