The thesis which I propose to put forward is that we have in the tale of Salamis one of the rare cases in which Diodorus has either obtained better information than Herodotus or made better use of his information. The arguments against the old scheme, of which the most convincing have been already stated by Professor Goodwin, are:— Since the passage between Attica and Psyttaleia is one thousand three hundred yards wide; And that between Ægaleos and Salamis one thousand five hundred yards; And between Ægaleos and St George Island one thousand two hundred yards; _i.e._ the whole channel is very narrow; (_a_) How could the Persian movement of cutting off be accomplished so secretly that the Greeks got no wind of it? (H. viii. 78; Plut Them. 12; Arist. 8.) How could the Persians have slipped along the other side of the narrow strait in the night unperceived? (_b_) Can we believe that the Greek fleet was allowed to form quietly in line of battle at the other side of this narrow strait, in the very face of the Persian fleet only a few hundred yards distant? Surely the Persian fleet, being eager to capture the Greek fleet, would have seized the ships while the crews were preparing to embark. (_c_) Æschylus, an eye-witness, testifies that it was only after the Greeks had rowed forward from their position that they were fairly seen by the Persians (Æsch Pers. 400). (_d_) Æschylus, Pers. 443–466; H. viii. 76, 95; Plut. Aris. 9, concur in the statement that Xerxes landed a body of Persians on Psyttaleia, because he thought that it would be a central point of the sea-fight. Such are Professor Goodwin’s objections to the old scheme. #NATURE OF ERROR IN HERODOTUS.# To the last I would add that Herodotus expressly describes the measures taken with regard to Psyttaleia as being synchronous with those for blocking the straits (viii. 76). Of these objections:— (_a_) is strong, as being Herodotus’ own evidence; and it is on Herodotus that the old scheme must rely. The passages quoted from Plutarch are, however, manifestly from the Herodotean source. Objections (_b_), (_c_), (_d_) seem to me unanswerable. As I read the narrative, the old scheme of Grote and others cannot stand in face of them. In so far as my experience goes, I think that it may be demonstrated that Herodotus’ mistakes, in his military history generally, arise almost wholly from— (1) Misreading of sources. (2) Use of defective or mistaken sources; not from the invention of imaginary facts. His painful conscientiousness seems to be genuine, not fictitious. But, eminently unmilitary himself, he was peculiarly liable to misunderstand the information at his disposal with regard to military matters; and this, as it seems to me, is exactly what has happened with regard to his account of Salamis, and in the following way:—