related to Priam; and Dr Leaf disagrees also. He accepts the ruling families from No. 4 to No. 8; but the first three are connected only by marriage, and to the ancient mind that did not denote real tribal connexion. If two races are closely connected, that was expressed by saying that their eponymous ancestors were brothers; but the genealogical theory, which is the true ancient mode of expression, does not admit marriage as a proof of relationship. The ninth family was too much for Strabo himself. He speaks of eight, or possibly nine, parts of Priam's kingdom; and Dr Leaf finds here, in the case of Eurypylus and the Keteioi, the culmination of the tendency to make 'Troy-land' stretch far away south to Larisa on the Hermus. The reviewer would rather take refuge with Prof. Sayce, and hold that the Keteioi and their chief Eurypylus were a branch of the Hittites or Khita and essentially opposed to Priam and the Phrygians, historically and racially. Priam had fought against the Anatolian war-priestesses, the Amazons, on the banks of the Sangarios.

How, then, do the Khita come to be allies of the Trojans? The explanation is probably to be found in the growth of the conception that the Iliad' describes a contest between European Greece and Asia, and that all Asia, together with the barbarians of Thrace, were united against the Greeks of Europe. That conception had grown into being and power between the Trojan War and the time when Homer wrote. In that interval vast racial changes had occurred both in the westcoastland and on the plateau of Anatolia, and the Hellenes of Greece regarded themselves as the natural enemies of Asia and of all barbarians from time immemorial.

Strabo and Demetrius had no conception of the geographical fact that Mount Ida is, as it were, a finger extended westwards from the lofty main plateau of Asia Minor, broken indeed and dislocated, but still essentially one with it. Hence they regard Ida as an isolated ridge with two extremities, Cape Lekton on the south and the promontory near Zeleia at the mouth of the Esepus and the coast of the Propontis on the north. As Dr Leaf says, however, the rivers of Mount Ida flow from its northern flank, and do not run towards the west and

the sea: this implies the correct view that Mount Ida stretches from the east (i.e. from the central plateau) towards the western sea, although Lekton seems to be a cape running south; but this appearance is due merely to irregularity in the western face of Ida. Geologically speaking, the Ægean Sea is not very old; and Ida with the other four fingers of the central plateau find their continuation in Greece and the Balkanic lands, as a glance at the map proves; for the islands of the Ægean form a much-broken chain which continues those five fingers, left above sea in the convulsion that produced the Egean Archipelago. On the Asian coast and the European countries those fingers usually form upheaved mountains or capes, and Lekton is one of these.

Dr Leaf would certainly have written a more popular book if he had given to the world a narrative or journal of his excursion in the Troad; but it would not have been nearly so useful for the study of Homer and of ancient Homeric criticism. As this book is constructed, almost every page contains difficult reasoning about some point or other in Homer, or in Demetrius's ideas about Homer, or in Strabo's interpretation (without any local experience) either of Demetrius's ideas or of Homer himself. The salvation of the ordinary reader lies in the additions and remarks made by Dr. Leaf's personal knowledge of the country and the valleys, the hills, and the rivers. The book is one for the Homeric enthusiast; and even he will not find it always easy to grasp it involves a strain on the attention and on the understanding. Everywhere, however, the reader finds that the guiding hand and personal knowledge (never obtruded, but present in every difficulty) of the author is a strong staff to lean on. The human interest of a narrative of travel lies in the personality of the writer. In this book the interest lies in Homer. Dr Leaf has effaced himself from his narrative except where guidance seemed to be needed: then he is always present and ready. The 'Iliad' sprang from the soil: Dr Leaf's book springs from the soil. They supplement one another; but personal knowledge of the geographical features of the Troad is needed to help the scholar and to save him from errors of misunderstanding, in spite of all the help that the modern author can give. The Iliad' assumes knowledge of the geographical

74

features; Dr Leaf supplies the knowledge; but the modern scholar is apt to interpolate his personal prepossessions, and so to fall into the very traps against which Dr Leaf tries to warn him.

Thus Dr Leaf sets out upon his exploration through the whole Troad under the guidance of Strabo, who had never seen the country, but in his turn was under the guidance of Demetrius. Demetrius wrote seventy books on the sixty-eight lines of the Trojan catalogue. Strabo was mildly sarcastic about the expenditure of so much time and work on so small a subject, and he is far from agreeing with Demetrius in every respect; but the disagreements are mainly regarding matters of opinion and not of fact. In one matter a definite statement is made by Strabo that Demetrius was wrong; and that is where he asserts that Demetrius errs in speaking of silver mining as furnishing the cause of the name Argyria in the valley of the Esepus. It is comforting to find that Demetrius was correct: Dr Leaf has been there and confirms him. There are abundant remains which prove that in ancient times silver was mined at Argyria.

This is in accordance with the general tendency in the most recent times to confirm ancient authority against the scepticism of the later ancient and of critics, who were less well equipped with knowledge than the original writers; and it is comforting to obtain time after time confirmation of the best and earliest ancient authorities, provided we begin by understanding rightly their statements and how much they imply in the way either of assumption or of peculiarities in the point of view taken generally by the ancients.

Dr Leaf attaches high value to the accuracy and lucidity of Strabo's description, after separating from it one serious error in regard to the Larisa of the Pelasgian allies of Priam. It was argued that because the leader of the Pelasgians fell at Troy, 'far from his native land,' and because his Larisa of the Pelasgians in the Troad is not literally far from Troy, therefore this leader must have come from some other Larisa; and the Larisa of the Pelasgian allies was found by Demetrius and Strabo in the old Æolic Larisa, not far from Phocæa and Cyme, that Larisa whose site the reviewer in 1880 determined

1 2 12

on the western edge of the lower Hermus valley.* Yet the Larisa of Homer was within the kingdom of Priam, governed by one of his family; and accordingly Demetrius and Strabo are forced to extend that kingdom far away to the south. This confuses the geography and leads to a train of faults. If Strabo had only possessed a good map he would probably have seen the initial error; but there is no reason to think that Strabo had ever travelled in the Troad or in Eolis. This is a remarkable fact, yet Dr Leaf is fully justified in asserting that it is the case. Strabo in this part of his 'Geography' (which he treats at unusual length and to which he attaches special importance) had never been a traveller, and speaks only at second-hand; although once he sharply criticises his authority Demetrius.

In his Introduction Dr Leaf discusses the extent of Strabo's travels and limits it much. The remarkable fact of his career is that he had travelled so little in Asia Minor, his native land. He had travelled rather widely outside of that country; he had been in the south of Egypt, on the coast of Etruria, in Armenia, at Nysa in the Mæander valley, and was probably a student in Cilicia. From Cilicia he must have reached the west coast and the Mæander valley either by land or by sea. There is one passage which has been taken by some modern travellers, and at one time by the present writer, to suggest that he had been at Savatra or Soatra in Lycaonia on the land road. He speaks of the wells there as being extraordinarily deep, and the water as being sold in the streets of Soatra: the latter was a very unusual feature, for a good supply of water was a first consideration both in Anatolia and in Greece, wherever a settlement of men grew into importance; and the idea that water should be sold by the water carriers in the streets appeared to be an outrage on the amenities of Hellenic life. Accordingly, there was at first sight some temptation to argue that Strabo must have passed through Soatra on his way from Cilicia to the Mæander valley, and thus seen the facts for himself; and in fact it is situated on or near what the reviewer has long called the Syrian Road,' ever since he observed and

determined its course in 1901. The shortest line traverses an arid region near Soatra. Dr Walter Leaf, however, rightly refrains from using this account of Soatra as a proof that Strabo had been there, a visit which would imply that he had travelled by this road from Cilicia to Nysa. It might be assumed that the road made a very slight detour by Soatra, which lies in a recess among the hills, in order to get water, for even purchased water is better than none at all, or than brackish well-water, another ugly feature of the dry region in the neighbourhood of Soatra, especially to the south.

The

It is, however, bad geography to argue that the apparently shortest way is the quickest in fact. The reviewer in 1909 chanced to be speaking with Mr Sassoun, the member of the Turkish Parliament for Bagdad. Mr Sassoun mentioned that he was starting next day from Constantinople for his constituency. Interested in roads, the reviewer asked what route he would take. answer was, C Steamer to Bombay, thence steamer to Bassora (Basra).' This enormous detour was really the shortest way. Dr Leaf, therefore, is right in cutting down to narrow limits the Anatolian range of Strabo's travels. One might, with as much right as in the case of Soatra, say that Strabo had passed by Philomelium on the same Syrian road,* because he describes so accurately and lucidly the long ridge of Sultan-Dagh and the situation of Antioch on the opposite side of the ridge. The credit for this accuracy belongs to Strabo's authority, not to himself. Near Garsaoura towards the east there are very deep wells; and Strabo may have transferred this account of the deep wells to Soatra, which he describes as adjoining Garsaoura. One may watch four women at evening pushing round a quaint machine near Garsaoura, and see how after 45 seconds' toil, they bring up a tiny goatskinful of water. The reviewer once timed the operation. There are also some deep wells on the dry south side of the hills, on whose moister northern side lies Soatra: one is called 'the

It is quite possible, indeed almost probable (unless he went by sea), that Strabo (like Cicero) followed this way; but a lucid general touch of description does not prove it, for such touches were often taken from an authority of earlier date. The ancients, like some modern writers, were not very careful to specify the sources of their knowledge of facts: 'they pounced on their own, wherever they found it.'