The Press.
London, England, 1858-02-20 00:00:00

THE PRESS, FEBRUARY 20,1858.

(published in Bohn's Library)— which Mr.
Bawlinson, by the way, seems contemptuously
to ignore—though able and scholarlike, is too
literal for general readers. In the version
before us a few coarse expressions are softened
or omitted, but the flavour of the style is pre-
served in terse and readable language, and
those unacquainted with Greek may be satisfied
that they will here lose as little of the original
as is possible. The volume contains, first,
an introduction, in which are discussed
the life of Herodotus so far as it can be ascer-
tained, the sources from which he drew his
history, and his merits and defects us an histo-
rian. This is followed by the translation,
illustrated by copious historical and topogra-
phical footnotes, to which succeed eleven
'essays, on the histories of Lydia, Media,
Persia, Assyria, and Babylonia, including their
religions and their affinities of race. There
.are also maps and occasional woodcuts ; and
.every topic, apparently, which the narrative
suggests has received due consideration either
from the editor himself or from one of the two
'distinguished Orientalists who have assisted
him. Among the interesting matters em-
IN aced by the book, the only two on which we
have space to say anything are-1. Mr. Raw-
iinson's view of the general credibility of
Herodotus ; 2. The light thrown on ancient
Asiatic history by the late discoveries.
The trustworthiness of the historian has
ibeen rudely assailed by the two latest writers
who have discussed his work. Colonel Mure,
svhile giving him credit for veracious inten-
tions, and ranking him higher than a mere
prose rhapsodist, lays so much stress upon
the instances of his credulity, self contradic-
tion, and other similar faults, as to leave very
little except his style, manner, and epic ar-
rangement for which he deserves praise. Mr.
Blakesley goes still further, and, adopting the
criticisms of Dionysius and Strabo, and the
supposed allusions of Thucydides, which
assign to Herodotus merely a superior rank
among the logographers or legendary histo-
rians, concludes that he himself never claimed
to be anything more, and that his work is
chiefly valuable, not as a record of what hap-
pened, but of what the Greeks believed to
have happened, during the period of which it
treats. He thinks that the nearest parallel to
him is afforded by the travels of Marco Polo.
Mr. Rawlinson claims for his author a much
higher position than either of the above
writers With regard to the Life of Herodotus,
he agrees for the most part with modern scho-
lars, though, while giving a much wider range
to his travels than Mr. 'Blakesley or
Colonel Mure are inclined to allow,
he is equally indisposed to admit the
latitude claimed for them by Dahlmann, who
seems to believe that the historian visited
almost every place which he mentions. In com-
mon with all who have examined the subject,
he disbelieves the preposterous story of the
recitation at Olympia, but supposes it pro-
bable that portions of the work may have been
read privately at Athens, where its author
probably made the acquaintance of most of
the eminent men of the period. He believes
]ling then to have accompanied a colony to
fhurium, where be spent the remainder of
his life ( with the exception of one more visit
to Athens) in retouching and elaborating his
history.
Herodotus has been frequently supposed to
have drawn a great part of his materials from
other historians. After passing these in re-
view, Mr. Rawlinson concludes that he was
indebted to none but Ilecaticus and the trea-
tises of the mythologers ; deriving, perhaps,
some of the ethical stories from a poetical
source. To the geographers be owes perhaps
greater obligations. But the chief origin of
all that he has written " was personal observa-
tion and inquiry "—traces of which are to be
found in all parts of his work. For more
remote times he would of course be dependent
on general tradition—checked or supported
by the'Juonumental records, whether consisting
of lists of kings, archons, victors at the games,
tte., or of inscriptions on temple-offerings, the
latter of which were doubtless curious and
abundant. In the Asiatic and Egyptian cities
the same records were open to him which have
lately been explored; but as he could not
read them for himself, like his modern editors,

ho was obliged to depend on priests and local
ciceroni, who, while giving him a tolerably
faithful outline, led him into numerous ►►►is-
takes of detail, and systematically concealed
or distorted eve►ything at all discreditable to
their country. Thus in the Persian annals
the early history of Cyrus is pure fable, while
the latter part is confirmed by recent dis-
coveries. Mr. Blakesley, who seems to think
Ctesias quite as good an authority as Herodo
tus, will probably modify his belief on perusing
the note at page 69, where " the Behistun
" inscription furnishes a running comment on
" the Third Book of Herodotus," which is
proved to be correct in its main incidents,
while the account of Ctesias is almost entirely
false. The main narrative of the former Mr.
Rawlinson judges on the whole to be worthy
of historical credit:—

In the portion of his history which has reference to
foreign countries and to more ancient times, the most
valuable truths and the merest fables lie often side by side.
Ile is at the mercy of his informants, and is compelled
to repeat their statements, ever, where he does not believe
them. In Greece itself, and in other countries as he
comes nearer to his own time, his information is better
and more abundant ; he is able to Rift and compare state-
ments, to balance the weight of evidence, and to arrive at
conclusions which are probably in the main correct. The
events related in his last five book. were but little removed
from his own day, and with regard to these he has almost
the authority of a contemporary historian; for his infor-
mants must have been chiefly persona engaged iu the
transactions.

• •
The episodes themselves must be judged separately,
each on its own merits. The traditions of the Scyths, of
the Medea before Cvazares, of Lydia before Gyges, and of
all countries without a literature, must be received with
the greatest caution, end regarded as having the least pos-
sible weight. But the accounts of Iggypt, Assyria, Baby.
lon, Persia, and the various states of Greece, having been
derived in part from monuments and otherwise from those
who possessed access to monuments, deserve throughout
attentive consideration. They may from various causes
often be incorrect in particulars, but they may be expected
to be true in outline, and in their details they may not un-
frequently embody the contents of authentic documents
existing at the time when Herodotus wrote, but now irre-
coverably lost to us. Critical judgment must separate in
them the probable from the improbable ; but whatever
comes under the former head, and is not contradicted by
better authority, may well be received as historical, at least
until fresh discoveries shall at once thsprove their truth,
and supply us with more authentic details tc substitute in
their place.
Mr. Rawlinson considers the merits of
Herodotus as an historian to be, that he was
diligent, honest, impartial, and free from any
political bias or national vanity. His honesty
has been impeached by Ctesias and the pseudo
Plutarch, who however, on a comparison with
Scripture, with Berosus, and with the monu-
ments, are themselves proved respectively to
deserve the name of " lying chronicler" which
they applied to him. His defects are, his
credulity, which induces him to load his nar-
rative with dreams, omens, and prodigies ;
his belief in a divine " Envy " which would
suffer no one to be prosperous but itself, a
theory which be is constantly trying to sup-
port by very farfetched examples ; and a spirit
of exaggeration, a want of accuracy, and a
want of historical insight, which make his
history almost valueless as a record of the
causes of events. As a writer, he deserves
praise for his epic unity, for the clever sub-
ordination of his episodes to the main thread
of his narrative, for his skill in the delineation
of character, for the pictorial vividness of his
descriptions, for the pathos and humour never
degenerating into either bombast or vulgarity
which distinguish his stories, and for the sim-
plicity and dramatic force with which they are
presented to the reader.
The result at which Mr. Rawlinson has
arrived concerning the history of the Mesopo-
tamian countries is, that the first paramount
power in Western Asia was (as Berosus had
implied) that of Lower Chaldtea, lasting front
II c. 2234 to 1273 ; that this was succeeded by
the Assyrian supremacy, during which Nineveh
rose to metropolitan eminence (B.C. 1.373-747,
the " era of Nabonassar "); and that the later
Babylonian empire, during which Babylon
attained her highest pitch of splendour, in-
cluded one dynasty extending feom the latter
date to the destruction of Nineveh in 625, and
another from 625 to the capture of Babylon
by Cyrus in 538. For the method by which
these results are reached we must refer our
readers to the essays themselves. Their chro-
nology, on the whole, tends to the confirmation

.187

of the scanty hints thrown out by Herodotua
and of the fuller account given by Berosus.
The &MittlllllAlllB of legend, the last King of
Assyria, is really Asshur-emit-ili, the son of
the real Sardanupalus, or Asshur-bani-pal, son
Of the Esar-haddon of Scripture, and the
most civilised, tl.ough not tl:e most powerful,
of the Assyrian monarchs. The most remark-
able of these were Sargon, who took Satnaria,
and who was the builder of sonic of the largest
palaces lately discovered ; SenAacherib, who
was equally magnificent at home, and greater
as a conqueror abroad ; and " Esar-haddon his
son," whose architectural remains are the
most splendid and extensive of all.
In Babylon, it is curious that the ruler who
most prominently figures in Scripture is the
one on whom most lightis thrown by the recent
discoveries. He seems to have been a less
beneficent Anrungzebe. His accession is
fixed at B.C. 601 (the date usually assigned).
and his death after .a reign of forty three years
at B.C. 561. The account of his military enter-
prises—so far us they touch on the Bible and
on Herodotus—given in Essay VIII., is very
interesting, but too long for extract. He was
no less great as a builder; the walls, which
are computed to have inclosed a space five
times as large as London, and are said to have
been three hundred feet high, were the work of
his captives; and the vast mounds which
still tower over the stagnant river and the
desolate plain exhibit on every calcined brick
which composes them the name of Nebuchad-
nezzar.

We have in the above remarks stated results
alone, and have not been able to enter into
any of the points in which Mr. Rawlinson
combats previous writers. Much controversy
will doubtless be excited by his chronological
schemes, and it would be obviously premature
to place absolute faith in the present stage of
the question upon any deductions whatever.
Yet in the cuneiform inscriptions it is impos-
sible not to admit that a basis of investigation
has been obtained which will not fluctuato
with the views entertained from time to time
of the credibility of Herodotus, Ctesias, or
any other writer. This is a great gain. And
it is no less a subject of congratulation that
we possess writers like Mr. Rawlinson, his
brother, and Sir G. Wilkinson, who are really
competent to do justice to these valuable ma-
terials, and who, with that talent for combine.-
don in which an English writer generally
excels his German brethren, are raising in
the work before us a monument of learning.
industry, and sagacious research worthy alike
of their own reputation and of being placed
beside the greatest historical productions
which have illustrated the nineteenth century.