Herodotus, though an artistic, is not a critical historian. A critical history was possible in that age only to a Tbueydides describing on the testimony of documents and eye-witnesses a con temporary war between Greeks. The Greeks of the generation of the Persian Wars were too busy making history to write it, and the tradition of the great struggle was already transfigured by legend and local patriotism when he took it up. Nor could he deal seientiffeally with the dim legends and inextricably crossed traditions of the East which he gathered on the frontiers of the Greek and barbarian worlds. Fortunately, he did not make the attempt. Ignorant of the lan guages, unable to decipher the records, if he had applied to the tales told him by dragomans, mi nor priests, eommereial travelers, and Greek mercenaries either his own standards of credi bility or ours, he would have deprived us not only of many a delightful story, but of much in valuable information. "It is my business to relate what is told me." he declares, "hut I am under no obligation to believe it." He does not believe that the Phoenicians got the noonday sun on their right hand in circumnavigating Africa— hut he tells us the story. And, wasting no time on vain critical discussions or pretentious phi losophies of history, he contrives to tell us more fascinating stories and interesting facts to the page than any other writer in the world. In view of this and his evident good faith. genial simplicity, and earnest piety. we may disregard the critics who impugn his honesty because his account of a crocodile would amuse a naturalist, and his description of Babylon would not satisfy a Baedeker.
The charm of his seemingly simple. artfully artless, naive, Ionic style has been celebrated by all critics, ancient and modern. Lang's entertaining parody in his Letters to Dead Au thors. gives, by exaggeration. a gond idea of it to the English reader. Macaulay's essay "On History" contains a picturesque rhetorical char acterization.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. De Quincey wrote on what he Bibliography. De Quincey wrote on what he called the "Philosophy of Ilerodotus," and his essay on "Style" has a fine digression on Herodo tus at Olympia. The chief translation is the classical work of Rawliuson in four volumes with elaborate notes and introduction (London, 1858, often reprinted). The translation of G. C. :Ma caulay (London, 1890) is well spoken of. Stein's annotated German edition (Berlin, 1901 et seq.) is read chiefly by students. Sayre, ilerodutus, i.-iii. (London, 1S83) deserves attention for his introduction. notes. and appendices. .Nlacan, Ilerodolus, iv., v.. vi., with appendices (London, 189•), is rich in historic criticism. Hauvette, 11E'rodo•le: historica des guerres int'diattes (Paris, 1894), is an excellent monograph. The volume on Iterodotus in Blackwood's Ancient Classics is readable. Consult also: Kirchhoff, Leber die .11.fassungszcit des Hcrodotisehen Geschichts werks (Berlin, 1878), and Bauer, Herodots Biographic (Vienna, 1878).