The migration of the Dorians to Crete.

Cnosus, the Minoian Cnosus, was even so late as the time of Plato the first city in Crete, and the chief domicile of the Cretan laws and customs: and Plato, in his Treatise on Laws, takes a Cnosian as the representative and defender of the Cretan laws in general: although Cnosus about his time had declined from internal corruption, and the fame of having preserved the good laws of ancient Crete soon passed from her to Gortyna and Lyctus. In earlier times, however, the Cretan laws, (Κρητιϰοί νόμοι,) which Archilochus even mentions as being of a distinct character, were preserved in the greatest purity at Cnosus. Now when modern writers admit indeed that the Cretan laws were founded upon the customs of the Doric race, but affirm that this race did not penetrate into Crete before the expedition of the Heraclidæ, and that migrations subsequently took place from the Peloponnese; it is necessary for them first of all to shew that Cnosus received its Doric inhabitants from that country, i. e. probably either from Argos or Sparta. But had such been the case, the memory of these migrations would assuredly never have been lost: Argos and Sparta would have been too proud to possess such a colony.

On the double character of Apollo as a punishing and avenging, and also as a healing and protecting deity. On the meaning and etymology of his different titles of Apollo, Phœbus, Pœan, Agyieus, and Lyceus.

1. Homer, as we have already seen, had, both from hearsay and personal observation, acquired a very accurate knowledge of the Cretan worship of Apollo in the Smintheum, in the citadel of Troy, in Lycia near mounts Ida and Cragus, as well as of Pytho and the Delian palm-tree. His picture of Apollo is, however, considerably changed by the circumstance of the god acting as a friend to the Trojans and an enemy to the Greeks, although both equally honour him with sacrifices and pæans. Yet he generally appears to the Greeks in a darker and more unfavourable view. “Dread the son of Jupiter,” says the priest of Chryse to the Greeks, “he walks dark as night; the sure and deadly arrows rattle on his shoulders.” His punishments are sudden sickness, rapid pestilence, and death, the cause and occasion of which is generally unseen; yet sometimes he grants death as a blessing. His arrows are said to wound from afar, because they are unforeseen and unexpected. He is called the far-darting god; his divine vengeance never misses its aim.

On the Ephors and other magistrates of Sparta.

1. But before we treat of the powers of the cosmi, it will be necessary to inquire into an office, which is of the greatest importance in the history of the Lacedæmonian constitution. For while the king, the council, and the people preserved upon the whole the same political power and the same executive authority, the office of the ephors was the moving principle by which, in process of time, this most perfect constitution was assailed, and gradually overthrown. From this remark three questions arise; first, what was the original nature of the office of ephor; secondly, what changes did it experience in the lapse of time, and, thirdly, from what causes did these changes originate.

There is an account frequently repeated by ancient writers, that Theopompus, the grandson of Charilaus the Proclid, founded this office in order to limit the authority of the kings. “He handed down “the royal power to his descendants more durable, “because he had diminished it.” If however the ephoralty was an institution of Theopompus, it is difficult to account for the existence of the same office in other Doric states. In Cyrene the ephors punished litigious people and impostors with infamy; the same office existed in the mother-city Thera, which island had been colonized from Laconia long before the time of Theopompus.

Migration of the Dorians into the Peloponnese.

1. The most important, and the most fertile in consequences of all the migrations of Grecian races, and which continued even to the latest periods to exert its influence upon the Greek character, was the expedition of the Dorians into the Peloponnese.

It is however so completely enveloped in fables, and these were formed at a very early period in so connected a manner, that it is of no use to examine it in detail, without first endeavouring to separate the component parts. The traditionary name of this expedition is “the Return of the descendants “of Hercules.” Hercules, the son of Jupiter, is (even in the Iliad) both by birth and destiny, the hereditary prince of Tiryns and Mycenæ, and ruler of the surrounding nations. But through some evil chance Eurystheus obtained the precedency, and the son of Jupiter was compelled to serve him. Nevertheless he is represented as having bequeathed to his descendants his claims to the dominion of the Peloponnese, which they afterwards made good in conjunction with the Dorians. Hercules having also performed such actions in behalf of this race, that his descendants were always entitled to the possession of one-third of the territory. The heroic life of Hercules was therefore the fabulous title, through which the Dorians were made to appear not as unjustly invading, but merely as reconquering a country which had belonged to their princes in former times.

On the Helots of Sparta.

1. The condition of the Periœci and that of the Helots must be carefully distinguished from each other; for the latter state we have no other expression than “bondage,” to which that of the Periœci had not the slightest resemblance. The common account of the origin of this class is, that the inhabitants of the maritime town Helos were reduced by Sparta to this state of degradation, after an insurrection against the Dorians already established in power. This explanation however rests merely on an etymology, and that by no means probable, since such a Gentile name as Εἵλως (which seems to be the more ancient form) cannot by any method of formation have been derived from Ελος. The word Εἵλως is probably a derivative from ῝Ελω in a passive sense, and consequently means the prisoners. Perhaps it signifies those who were taken after having resisted to the uttermost, whereas the Periœci had surrendered under conditions; at least Theopompus calls them Achæans as well as the others. It appears to me however more probable that they were an aboriginal race, which was subdued at a very early period, and which immediately passed over as slaves to the Doric conquerors.

In speaking of the condition of the Helots, we will consider their political rights and their personal treatment under separate heads, though in fact the two subjects are very nearly connected.

General history of Sparta during the Persian and Peloponnesian wars.

1. Sparta, by the conquest of Messenia and Tegea, had obtained the first rank in the Peloponnese, which character she confirmed by the expulsion of the tyrants, and the overthrow of Argos. From about the year 580 B.C. she acted as the recognised commander, not only of the Peloponnese, but of the whole Greek name. The confederacy itself however was formed by the inhabitants of that peninsula alone, on fixed and regular laws; whereas the other Greeks only annexed themselves to it temporarily. The order of precedence observed by the members of this league may be taken from the inscription on the footstool of the statue of Jupiter, which was dedicated at Olympia after the Persian war, the Ionians, who were only allied for a time, being omitted. It is as follows; Lacedæmon, Corinth, Sicyon, Ægina, Megara, Epidaurus, Tegea, Orchomenus, Phlius, Trœzen, Hermione, Tiryns, Mycenæ, Lepreum, and Elis; which state was contented with the last place, on account of the small share which it had taken in the war. The defenders of the Isthmus are enumerated in the following order; Lacedæmonians, Arcadians, Eleans, Corinthians, Sicyonians, Epidaurians, Phliasians, Trœzenians, and Hermionians, nearly agreeing with the other list, only that the Arcadians, having been present with their whole force, and also the Eleans, occupy an earlier place; and the Megarians and Æginetans are omitted, as having had no share in the defence.

The subject classes in Crete, Argos, Epidaurus, Corinth, Sicyon, Syracuse, Byzantium, Heraclea and Cyrene.

1. After having thus separately considered the two dependent classes in Sparta, the pattern state of the Dorians, we will now point out the traces of the analogous ranks in several other states of Doric origin. Now since the Doric customs were first established in Crete, fortunate circumstances having here given to that race a fertile country, and an undisturbed dominion, the relative rights of the Dorians and natives must at an early period have been fixed on a settled basis; which we may suppose to have been made on equitable terms, as Aristotle was not aware of any insurrection of the slaves in Crete against their masters. The Doric customs required here, as elsewhere, exemption from all agricultural or commercial industry; which is expressed in a lively manner in the song of Hybrias the Cretan, that “with lance and sword and shield he reaped “and dressed his vines, and hence was called lord of “the Mnoia.” In this island however different classes of dependents must have existed. Sosidrates and Dosiadas, both credible authors on the affairs of Crete, speak of three classes, the public bondsmen (κοινὴ δουλεία), called by the Cretans μνοΐα, the slaves of individual citizens, ἀφαμιῶται, and the Periœci, ὑπήκοοι.

On the public economy of the Doric states.

1. Having now considered the individuals composing the state in reference to the supreme governing power, we will next view them in reference to property, and investigate the subject of the public economy. It is evident that this latter must have been of great simplicity in the Doric states, as it was the object of their constitution to remove every thing accidental and arbitrary; and by preventing property from being an object of free choice and individual exertion, to make it a matter of indifference to persons who were to be trained only in moral excellence; hence the dominant class, the genuine Spartans, were almost entirely interdicted from the labour of trade or agriculture, and excluded both from the cares and pleasures of such occupations. Since then upon this principle it was the object to allow as little freedom as possible to individuals in the use of property, while the state gained what these had lost, it is manifest that under a government of this kind there could not have been any accurate distinction between public and private economy; and therefore no attempt will be made to separate them in the following discussion.

All land in Laconia was either in the immediate possession of the state, or freehold property of the Spartans, or held by the Periœci upon the payment of a tribute.