42

to arrange properly the principal events of their country. They did not separate and distinguish; but often took to themselves the merit of transactions, which were of a prior date, and of another clime. These they adopted, and made their own. Hence, when they came to digest their history, it was all confused: and they were embarrassed with numberless contradictions, and absurdities, which it was impossible to remedy. For their vanity, as I have shewn, would not suffer them to rectify their mistakes by the authority of more antient and more learned nations. It is well observed by Tatianus Assyrius, that where the history of times past has not been duly adjusted, it is impossible to arrive at the truth: and there has been no greater cause of error in writing, than the endeavouring to adopt what is groundless and inconsistent. Sir Isaac Newton somewhere lays it

42 Thus it is said in Eusebius from some antient accounts, that Telegonus reigned in Egypt, who was the son of Orus the shepherd; and seventh from Inachus: and that he married Io. Upon which Scaliger asks: Si septimus ab Inacho, quomodo Iö Inachi filia nupsit ei? How could Iö be married to him when she was to him in degree of ascent, as far off as his grandmother's great grandmother; that is six removes above him. See Scaliger on Euseb. ad Num. cccclxxxi.

43 Παρ' οις γὰρ ασυναρτήτος εσιν ή των Χρόνων αναγραφή, παρα τετοις είδε τα της ἱστορίας αληθεύειν δυνατον* τι γαρ το αιτιον της εν τῷ γραφειο πλανής, ει μη το συνάπτειν τα μη αληθη. Tatianus. p. 269.

down for a rule, never to admit for history what is antecedent to letters. For traditionary truths cannot be long preserved without some change in themselves, and some addition of foreign circumstances. This accretion will be in every age en, larged; till there will at last remain some few outlines only of the original occurrence. It has been maintained by many, that the Grecians had letters very early: but it will appear upon inquiry to have been a groundless notion. Those of the antients, who considered the matter more carefully, have made no scruple to set aside their pretensions. Josephus in particular takes notice of their early claim; but cannot allow it: 45 They, says this learned historian, who would carry the introduction of letters among the Greeks the highest, very gravely tell us, that they were brought over by the Phenicians, and Cadmus. Yet, after all, they cannot produce a single specimen either from their sacred writings, or from their popular records, which savours of that antiquity. Theophilus takes notice of these difficulties; and

44

44 Νυν μην ομε ποτε εις Έλληνας ή των λόγων παρῆλθε διδασκαλία το xaygaon. Clemens Alexand. Strom. 1. 1. p. 364.

45 Οι μεν ουν αρχαιότατην αυτών την χρησιν είναι θέλοντες, παρα Φοινικών και Καδμα σεμνύνονται μαθειν. Ου μην εδ' επ' εκείνα τα χρόνια δύναιτο τις αν δείξαι σωζομενην αναγράφην εν ἱεροις, ετ' εν δημοσιος avana. Joseph. cont. Apion. 1. 1.

46

shews that all the obscurity, with which the history of Hellas is clouded, arose from this deficiency of letters. He complains, that the Hellenes had lost sight of the truth; and could not recollect any genuine history. The reason of this is obvious: for they came late to the knowledge of letters in comparison of other nations. This they confess, by attributing the invention of them to people prior to themselves; either to the Chaldeans, or the Egyptians: or else to the Phenicians. Another cause of failure, which relates to their theology, and still greatly prevails, is owing to their not making a proper disquisition about the true object of worship: but amusing themselves with idle, and unprofitable speculations.

Notwithstanding this deficiency, they pretended to give a list of Argive princes, of which twenty

то

46 Των δε της αληθειας ισορίων Έλληνες 8 μέμνηνται πρώτον μεν δια νεωςι αυτός των γραμμάτων της εμπειριας μετόχους γεγενησθαι και αυτοί ὁμολογεσι, φάσκοντες τα γραμματα ευρησθαι, οι μεν απο Χαλδαίων, οι δε παρ' Αιγυπτίων, αλλος δ' αν απο Φοινίκων. δεύτερον, οτι επταιον, και σται σι, περι θες μη ποιέμενοι την μνείαν, αλλα περί ματαίων και arwQ=λwr gayμarw. Theoph. ad Autol. 1. 3. p. 400.

Plutarch assures us, that Homer was not known to the Athenians till the time of Hipparchus, about the 63d Olympiad, yet some writers make him three, some four, some five hundred years before that æra. It is scarce possible that he should have been so unknown to them if they had been acquainted with letters.

preceded the war of 7 Troy. But what is more extraordinary, they boasted of a series of twentysix Kings at Sicyon, comprehending a space of one thousand years, all which kings were before the time of 48 Theseus and the Argonauts. Among those, who have given the list of the Argive kings, is 49 Tatianus Assyrius, who advises every person of sense, when he meets with these high pretensions, to consider attentively, that there was not a single coucher, not even a tradition of any record, to authenticate these histories: for even Cadmus was many ages after. It is certain, that the Helladians had no tendency to learning, till they were awakened by the Asiatic Greeks: and it was even then some time before letters were in general use; or any histories, or even records attempted. For if letters had been current, and the materials for writing obvious, and in common use, how comes it that we have not one specimen older than the reign of Cyrus? And how is it possible, if the Grecians had any records, that they should be so ignorant about some of their most famous men?

47 Eusebius. Chron. p. 24.

45 Eusebius. Chron. p. 19. Syncellus. p. 148, 152.

The kings of Sicyon were taken from Castor Rhodius.

49 Και χρη τον νενεχη συνιέναι κατα πάσης ακριβειας, ότι κατα την Ἑλληνων παραδοσιν ουδ' ίσορίας τις ην παρ' αυτοις αναγραφη Καδμος γας μετα πολλας γενεας. κ λ. Tatianus Assyrius. p. 274.

Of Homer how little is known! and of what is transmitted, how little, upon which we may depend! Seven places in Greece contend for his birth: while many doubt whether he was of Grecian original. It is said of Pythagoras, " that according to Hippobotrus he was of Samos: but Aristoxenus, who wrote his life, as well as Aristarchus, and Theopompus, makes him a Tyrrhenian. According to Neanthes he was of Syria, or else a native of Tyre. In like manner Thales was said by Herodotus, Leander, and Duris, to have been a Phenician: but he was by others referred to Miletus in Ionia. It is reported of Pythagoras, that he visited Egypt in the time of Cambyses. From thence he betook himself to Croton in Italy where he is supposed to have resided till the last year of the seventieth Olympiad : consequently he could not be above thirty or forty years prior to the birth of Eschylus and Pindar. What credit can we give to people for histories many ages backward; who were so ignorant in matters of importance, which happened in the days of their fathers? The like difficulties occur about Pherecydes Syrius; whom Suidas styles Babylonius neither the time, when he lived, nor the

so Clemens Alexand. 1. 1. p. 352. and Diogenes Laertius, from Dicæarchus, and Heraclides.