These, and no other than these, can have been the means employed by the authors who wrote on the affairs of Laconia, in the century when history was approaching to maturity, such as Hellanicus, Charon, and Herodotus; and either directly or indirectly must have afforded materials to those who treated of the times of Lycurgus during the later age of Greek learning. But how little do we recognise the ancient simplicity and liveliness which characterise all the genuine remains of that time, in the historical style of Ephorus and Hermippus,(571) and their followers. The object of these writers was to assimilate, as much as possible, the notions of antiquity to those of their own time, and to attempt in some way or other to represent every act as proceeding from such motives as would have actuated their own contemporaries. They have with a truly unsparing hand rubbed off the venerable rust of ancient tradition, and, totally mistaking the most powerful springs of action then prevalent, moulded all events of which any records had been preserved, into a connected form more suited to a modern history. It is almost impossible to describe with what unlucky zeal Plutarch, where Lycurgus only embodied in laws the political feelings of his race and nation, ascribes to that legislator plans and views generally unsatisfactory, and often absolutely childish. 6. If now we apply the method above stated to the history of Lycurgus, we shall find that we have absolutely no account of him as an _individual person_. Tradition very properly represents him as intimately connected with the temple of Delphi (by which the Dorians, and especially the state of Sparta, were at that time entirely led), and with Crete, the earliest civilized state of the Doric race. This connexion was generally represented under the form of a journey to both places; his tomb was also shown both at Cirrha and at Pergamia in Crete. It was easy to imagine that the reforms of Lycurgus were violently opposed, and produced tumults and disturbances.(572) But the story of Alcander putting out one of Lycurgus’s eyes (probably a popular tale) is founded on a false explanation of the title of Pallas Optiletis.(573) It was indeed an ancient tradition that he was guardian of a Spartan king; but the common report of this being Charilaus(574) is not quite certain, as we have seen above; and in order to account for both his travels and regency, he was reported to have abdicated the latter in order to avoid suspicion.(575) If we set aside all fictions of this description, which have almost the spirit of a moral tale, like the Cyropædia of Xenophon, there remains very little traditional lore. Of his legislation we will treat hereafter.(576)