A Commentary on Herodotus Books i-iv

This commentary on Herodotus was planned and begun by Mr. H. D. Leigh, of Corpus Christi, in conjunction with Mr. How, more than ten years ago. At the time of his too early death, Mr. Leigh had written notes and excursuses on the first book; but unfortunately they were found to be on too large a scale for the present work, although the material collected in them was most valuable, and was largely used. Thus for the book as it now is we are entirely responsible. We have been frequently interrupted by more pressing duties, and we fear that in a work the composition of which has thus been spread over many years, some inconsistencies may have crept in undetected. The readers of the Clarendon Press have earned our sincere gratitude by their zeal and care in removing blemishes of form, but for any graver faults that remain we can only ask indulgence. The commentary on books i–iv, with the corresponding appendixes, has been written by Mr. Wells, that on books v–ix, also with the appendixes, by Mr. How. We have each read and re-read the other's work, but the ultimate responsibility for the views expressed rests in the first volume with Mr. Wells, in the second with Mr. How. Since the book is intended principally for the use of undergraduates, we have prefixed short summaries of the subject-matter to the various sections of the notes, and for the same reason we have, where possible, quoted English translations of foreign works, and have referred to antiquities readily accessible in museums at Oxford and in London. But we have not hesitated to add many references to foreign works and periodicals, in the hope that they may be of use to more advanced students and to teachers. A commentary is of necessity to a large extent a selection from the work of others, and on every page our debt to our predecessors is manifest. Here we can only acknowledge our principal obligations. Of commentators, Stein and, in the later books, Macan have been of the greatest assistance to us; Rawlinson has also been of use in a less degree. In the Oriental history we owe very much to Maspero, and in the history of the Persian War to Grundy and to Munro. Throughout we have derived much benefit from the learned labours of Busolt, and still more from the masterly and comprehensive history of E. Meyer. Nor must we forget our large debt in anthropology and antiquities to the untiring industry of Frazer. The plans of Thermopylae and Plataea are based on those in The Great Persian War, by the kind permission of Dr. Grundy and Mr. John Murray. So many friends in Oxford have given us help on particular points that to give a catalogue of such obligations might be tedious, but special mention must be made of the kindness of Mr. H. R. Hall, of the British Museum, who read through the whole of the notes on book ii and appendixes ix, x, and made many valuable suggestions and corrections. He cannot, however, be held responsible for any of the views finally expressed. It will be seen that our notes are almost entirely on the subject matter of Herodotus. We have accepted Hude's text, only discussing critical problems where they seriously affected the sense. As to points of grammar and translation, such notes only have been given as seemed necessary to help an ordinary scholar to understand the text. In the spelling of names we have adopted definitely the old system. It is less correct, at least in appearance; but so many names, such as “Croesus,” “Cyrus,” and “Lycurgus,” have by their use in literature become English that consistency is impossible, or at any rate would be too dearly bought. The index is not an index to the text, a want already supplied by Stein and by Hude, but to the commentary. As it is supplemented by many cross-references, only the more important notes have been indexed.