28. But when Homer uses these expressions, “Masthles commanded the Carians, who speak a barbarous language,”[174] it does not appear why, when he was acquainted with so many barbarous nations, he mentions the Carians alone as using a barbarous language, but does not call any people Barbarians. Nor is Thucydides right, who says that none were called Barbarians, because as yet the Greeks were not distinguished by any one name as opposed to some other. But Homer himself refutes this position that the Greeks were not distinguished by this name: “A man whose fame has spread through Greece and Argos;”[175] and in another place— “But if you wish to go through Hellas and the middle of Argos.”[176] But if there was no such term as Barbarian, how could he properly speak of people as Barbarophonoi (i. e. speaking a barbarous language)? Neither is Thucydides nor Apollonius the grammarian right, because the Greeks, and particularly the Ionians, applied to the Carians a common term in a peculiar and vituperative sense, in consequence of their hatred of them for their animosity and continual hostile incursions. Under these circumstances he might call them Barbarians. But we ask, why does he call them Barbarophonoi, but not once Barbarians? Because, replies Apollonius, the plural number does not fall in with the metre; this is the reason why Homer does not call them Barbarians. Admitting then that the genitive case (βαρβάρων) does not fall in with the measure of the verse, the nominative case (βάρβαροι) does not differ from that of Dardani (Δάρδανοι); “Trojans, Lycians, and Dardani;” and of the same kind is the word Troïi[177] in this verse, “Like the Troïi horses” (Τρώιοι ἵπποι). Nor is the reason to be found in the alleged excessive harshness of the Carian language, for it is not extremely harsh; and besides, according to Philippus, the author of a history of Caria, their language contains a very large mixture of Greek words. [CAS. 661] I suppose that the word “barbarian” was at first invented to designate a mode of pronunciation which was embarrassed, harsh, and rough; as we use the words battarizein, traulizein, psellizein,[178] to express the same thing. For we are naturally very much disposed to denote certain sounds by names expressive of those sounds, and characteristic of their nature; and hence invented terms abound, expressive of the sounds which they designate, as kelaryzein, clange, psophos, boe, krotos,[179] most of which words are at present used in an appropriate sense.