A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

POLYBIUS. POLYBIUS. 447
dary importance; they formed only the text of aggerate equally the merits of its friends and the
the political and moral discourses which it was the faults of its enemies. Hie describes in far too
province of the historian to deliver. The reflec- glowing colours the character of Aratus, the great
tions of Polybius are, it is true, characterised by hero of the Achaean league, and ascribes (ii.
deep wisdom; and no one can read them without 40) to the historical work of this statesman a deadmiring the solidity of the historian's judgment, gree of impartiality, to which it certainly was not
and deriving from them at the same time both entitled. On the same principle, he gives quite a
instruction and improvement. Still, it must be false impression of the political life of Cleomenes,
admitted, that, excellent as they are, they mate- one of the greatest men of the latter days of
rially detract from the merits of the history as Greece, simply because this king was the great opa work of art; their frequent occurrence interrupts ponent of Aratus and the league. He was likethe continuity of the narrative, and destroys, to a wise guilty of injustice in the views which he gives
great extent, the interest of the reader in the scenes of the Aetolians, of which Brandstliter has quoted
which are described. Instead of narrating the some striking instances in the work referred to
events in such a manner that they should convey below, although it must be confessed that the motheir own moral, and throwing in, as it were by dern writer is in some cases equally unjust to tile
the way, the reflections to which the narrative ancient historian, from the partiality which he disshould give rise, he pauses in the midst of the most plays for the Aetolians. Not only does Polybius
interesting scenes to impress upon the reader the exhibit a partiality for the Achaeans, but he canlessons which these events ought to teach, and he not forget that he was an Arcadian, and is equally
thus imparts to his work a kind of moralising tone, zealous for the honour of his native land. Thus he
which frequently mars the enjoyment of the reader, considers it strange that the Achaean league deand, in some cases, becomes absolutely repulsive. rived its name from the Achaean people, and not
There can be no doubt that some of the most rather from the Arcadians, whom he classes with
striking faults in the history of Polybius arise from the Lacedaemonians (ii. 38); and many other inhis pushing too far the principle, which is doubtless stances might be quoted in which he displays an
a sound one to a certain extent, that history is equal partiality towards his own people.
written for instruction and not for amusement. The style of Polybius will not bear comparison
Hence he omits, or relates in a very brief manner, with the great masters of Greek literature; nor is
certain important events, because they did not con- it to be expected that it should. He lived at a
vey, in his opinion, lessons of practical wisdom; time when the Greek language had lost much of its
and, on the other hand, he frequently inserts long purity by an intermixture of foreign elements, and
episodes, which have little connection with the he did not attempt to imitate the language of the
main subject of his work, because they have. a great Attic writers. He wrote as he spoke, and
didactic tendency. Thus we find that one whole had too great a contempt for rhetorical embellishbook (the sixth) was devoted to a history of the ments to avail himself of them in the composition
Roman constitution; and in the same manner of his work. The style of such a man naturally
episodes were introduced even on subjects which bore the impress of his mind; and, as instruction
did not teach any political or moral truths, but and not amusement was the great object for which
simply because his countrymen entertained erro- he wrote, he did not seek to please his readers by
neous opinions on those subjects. The thirty- the choice of his phrases or the composition of his
fotirth book, for example, seems to have been exclu- sentences. Hence the later Greek critics were
sively a treatise on geography. Although Poly- severe in their condemnations of his style, and
bias was thus enabled to impart much important Dionysius classes his work with those of Phylarinformation, of which we, in modern times, espe- chus and Duris, which it was impossible to read
cially reap the benefits, still it cannot be denied through to the end. (Dionys. De Compos. Verb.
that such episodes are no improvements to the c. 4.) But the most striking fault in the style of
history considered as a work of art. Polybius arises from his want of imagination. No
Still, after making these deductions, the great historian can present to his readers a striking picmerits of Polvbius remain unimpaired. His strict ture of events, unless he has at first vividly conimpartiality, to which he frequently lays claim, has ceived them in his own mind; and Polybius, with
been generally admitted both by ancient and mo- his cool, calm, calculating judgment, was not only
dern writers. And it is surprising that he dis- destitute of all imaginative powers, but evidently
plays such great impartiality in his judgment of despised it when he saw it exercised by others.
the Romans, especially when we consider his inti- It is no doubt certain that an historian must keep
mate friendship with Scipio, and the strong admi- his imagination under a strong control; but it is
ration which he evidently entertained of that equally certain that he will always fail in proextraordinary people. Thus we find him, for ex- ducing any striking impression upon the mind of
ample, characterising the occupation of Sardinia by his readers, unless he has, to some extent, called
the Romans in the interval between the first and his imagination into exercise. It is for this reason
second Punic wars, as a violation of all justice (iii that the geographical descriptions of Polybius are
28. ~ 2), and denouncing the general corruption of so vague and indistinct; and the following remarks
the Roman generals from the time of their foreign of Dr. Arnold, upon the character of Polybius as a
conquests, with a few brilliant exceptions (xviii. geographer, are quite in accordance with the general
18). But, at the same time, he does not display views we have expressed: —" Nothing shows more
an equal impartiality in the history of the Achaean clearly the great rarity of geographical talent, than
league; and perhaps we could hardly expect from the praise which has been commonly bestowed upon
him that he should forget that he was an Achaean. Polybius as a good geographer. He seems indeed
He no doubt thought that the extension of the to have been aware of the importance of geography
Achaean league was essential to the liberties of to history, and to have taken considerable pains to
Greece; and he is thus unconsciously led to ex- gain information on the subject: but this very cir