[102] “Not _Aegae_, as you find in most maps and in modern editions of ancient authors. In the older editions the name is correctly given, Αἰγαῖαι, pronounced according to the modern Greek Αἰγέαι, and the inhabitants are called Αἰγεεῖς. Moderns have unfortunately taken it into their heads that this is a mistake, and have unceremoniously altered it without saying anything about it: as the altered form was found in the maps of D’Anville and Barbié du Bocage, it was thought to be the correct one.” [103] “I take this opportunity of saying a few words about this not sufficiently valued author. There are writers whose works are read, without their containing any substance, and without their being at all comparable to others, merely because they have once got a name. Others deserving of respect are now neglected, while formerly they were studied. Dion Chrysostomus is one of these latter. He is indeed sophistical, but there is among his works a whole series of thoroughly beautiful orations, showing great intellect, which is, after all, the main thing. Sidonius Apollinaris’ Latinity is very rustic; but he is a man of talent; so also Libanius, although he is already too sophistical. Others, as Aelius Aristides, who are so devoid of talent and so absurd, that we feel inclined at once to throw their works among the rubbish, are placed on an equality with the former. To the same class belong Themistius and Fronto, the latter of whom does nothing but pile up words. In regard to talented writers, we must not allow ourselves to be prejudiced by the fact that they belong to a late period. The language of Dion Chrysostomus is very good; it is a fine imitation of Attic Greek, and this is not only my opinion, but the judgment of Valckenaer, Hemsterhuys, Ruhnkenius, and others; his style is like that of Xenophon, who, after all, is read and studied in schools only on account of his language.” [104] Namely in their division of the country according to what are called the natural boundaries. See above, p. 282.—ED. [105] xlv. 29. [106] xlv. 30. [107] “The _lembi_ were privateers of the Illyrians with one very large lateen sail; they were probably very quick boats, able to sail very sharply with the wind, and requiring a strong crew and bold sailors. They were the same ships as those called by the Romans _Liburnicae_, which more and more supplanted the place of triremes, quadriremes, and quinqueremes.” [108] This name is not quite certain; I have supplied it from Pliny; the MS. notes having some such name as _Voelnii_.—ED. [109] Niebuhr probably meant to say—“in the Slavonian tongue but according to the Roman rites.”—ED. [110] More correctly: under Innocent IV., A.D. 1248. See Dobrowsky, _Glagolitica_, p. 16. [111] According to a letter of his father, dated Dec. 1807, Niebuhr understood Russian, Slavonic, Polish, Bohemian, and also Illyrian. See _Life and Letters of B. G. Niebuhr_, vol. i. p. 27.—ED.