HISTORY OF GREECE. CHAPTER XIX . APPLICATION OF CHRONOLOGY TO GRECIAN LEGEND. "> <meta name="owner" content="GEORGE GROTE"> <meta html="" lang=" English"> <meta name="robot" content="index, follow"> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> <style type="text/css">  </style><div align="center"> <p><a href="https://www.hitwebcounter.com" target="_blank"><img src="https://hitwebcounter.com/counter/counter.php?page=7955905&style=0019&nbdigits=7&type=page&initCount=0" title="Free Counter" Alt="web counter" border="0" /></a></p> </div> <table width="695" align="center" cellspacing="10" background="../../../../images/libros.gif"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="32%" height="37" bgcolor="#FFFF99"><div align="center" class="Stil5"><font size="+3" face="Algerian"><a href="../../../../../../index.html">CRISTO RAUL.ORG </a></font></div></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table width="1300" align="center" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="20" background="../../../Medieval-History-Chapters/images/libros.gif"> <tr> <td width="234" bgcolor="#FFFF00"><a href="../../../../../divine-history/DIVINE-HISTORY.html"><img src="../../../../../../images/DIVINE-HISTORY.jpg" width="224" height="224" border="5"></a></td> <td width="645" align="center" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><h1 align="center"><a href="../../../../CRISTORAUL_ReadingHall_The-Doors-of-Wisdom.html">READING HALL</a></h1> <h1 align="center"><a href="../../../../CRISTORAUL_ReadingHall_The-Doors-of-Wisdom.html">THE DOORS OF WISDOM</a></h1></td> <td width="309" bgcolor="#FFFF00"><a href="../../../../../GENESIS/Introduction-to-the-Creation-of-the-Universe-according-the-Genesis_BOOK.html"><img src="../../../../../../images/GENESIS-CSXXI.jpg" width="299" height="224" border="5"></a></td> </tr> </table> <table width="1300" align="center" cellspacing="30" background="../IMAGES/BG3.jpg"> <tr> <td width="38" height="76"> </td> <td width="1166" align="center" valign="top" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><h1><a href="../HISTORY-OF-GREECE_book-contents.html">GEORGE GROTE'S HISTORY OF GREECE</a> </h1> <div class=WordSection1> <h1 class=MsoNormal3 align=center style='text-align:center'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>LEGENDARY GREECE </span></h1> <h1 align=center class=MsoNormal3 Estilo1 style='text-align:center'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>CHAPTER XIX <o:p></o:p> .</span></h1> <h1 align=center class=MsoNormal3 Estilo1 style='text-align:center'><strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>APPLICATION OF CHRONOLOGY TO GRECIAN LEGEND. <o:p></o:p> </span></strong></h1> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='text-align:justify'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'> <o:p> </o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>I NEED not repeat, what has already been sufficiently set forth in the preceding pages, that the mass of Grecian incident anterior to 776 BC appears to me not reducible either to history or to chronology, and that any chronological systems which may be applied to it must be essentially uncertified and illusory. It was however <span class=SpellE3>chronologised</span> in ancient times, and has continued to be so in modern; and the various schemes employed for this purpose may be found stated and compared proposed in the first volume (the last published) of Mr. Fynes Clinton’s <i>Fasti <span class=SpellE3>Hellenici</span></i>. There were among the Greeks, and there still are among modern scholars, important differences as to the dates of the principal events. Eratosthenes dissented both from Herodotus and from <span class=SpellE3>Phanias</span> and Callimachus, while Larcher and Raoul Rochette (who follow Herodotus) stand opposed to O. Müller and to Mr. Clinton. That the reader may have a general conception of the order in which these legendary events were disposed, I transcribe from the Fasti <span class=SpellE3>Hellenici</span> a double chronological table, in which the dates are placed in series, from <span class=SpellE3>Phoroneus</span> to the Olympiad of <span class=SpellE3>Corcebus</span> in BC 776 - in the first column according to the system of Eratosthenes, in the second according to that of <span class=SpellE3>Kallimachus</span>. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>“The following table (says Mr. Clinton) offers a summary view of the leading periods from <span class=SpellE3>Phoroneus</span> to the Olympiad of <span class=SpellE3>Coroebus</span>, and exhibits a double series of dates, the one proceeding from the date of Eratosthenes, the other from a date founded on the reduced calculations of <span class=SpellE3>Phanias</span> and Callimachus, which strike out fifty-six years from the amount of Eratosthenes. <span class=SpellE3>Phanias</span>, as we have seen, omitted fifty-five years between the Return and the registered Olympiads; for so we may understand the account : Callimachus, fifty-six years between the Olympiad in which <span class=SpellE3>Coroebus</span> won. The first column of this table exhibits the current years before and after the fall of Troy : in the second column of dates the complete intervals are expressed”. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Wherever chronology is possible, researches such as those of Mr. Clinton, which have conduced so much to the better understanding of the later times of Greece, deserve respectful attention. But the ablest chronologist can accomplish nothing, unless he is supplied with a certain basis of matters of fact, pure and distinguishable from fiction, and authenticated by witnesses, both knowing the truth and willing to declare it. Possessing this preliminary stock, he may reason from it to refute distinct falsehoods and to correct partial mistakes : but if all the original statements submitted to him contained truth (at least wherever there is truth), in a sort of chemical combination with fiction, which he has no means of decomposing, he is in the condition of one who tries to solve a problem without data: he is first obliged to construct his own data, and from them to extract his conclusions. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>The statements of the epic poets, our only original witnesses in this case, correspond to the description here given. Whether the proportion of truth contained in them be smaller or greater, it is at all events unassignable, and the constant and intimate admixture of fiction is both indisputable in itself, and indeed essential to the purpose and profession of those from whom the tales proceed. Of such a character are all the deposing witnesses, even where their tales agree; and it is out of a heap of such tales, not agreeing, but discrepant in a thousand ways, and without a morsel of pure authenticated truth, that the critic is called upon to draw out a methodical series of historical events adorned with chronological dates. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>If we could imagine a modern critical scholar transported into Greece at the time of the Persian war endued with his present habits of appreciating historical evidence, without sharing in the religious or patriotic feelings of the country and invited to prepare, out of the great body of Grecian epic which then existed, a History and Chronology of Greece anterior to 776 BC, assigning reasons as well for what he admitted as for what he rejected I feel persuaded that he would have judged the undertaking to be little better than a process of guess-work. But the modern critic finds that not only <span class=SpellE3>Pherekydes</span> and Hellanikus, but also Herodotus and Thucydides have either attempted the task or sanctioned the belief that it was practicable, a matter not at all surprising, when we consider both their narrow experience of historical evidence and the powerful ascendency of religion and patriotism in predisposing them to antiquarian belief, and he therefore accepts the problem as they have bequeathed it, adding his own efforts to bring it to a satisfactory solution. Nevertheless, he not only follows them with some degree of reserve and uneasiness, but even admits important distinctions quite foreign to their habits of thought. Thucydides talks of the deeds of Hellen and his sons with as much confidence as we now speak of William the Conqueror; Mr. Clinton recognizes Hellen with his sons Dorus, Eolus and <span class=SpellE3>Nuthus</span>, as fictitious persons. Herodotus recites the great heroic genealogies down from <span class=SpellE3>Kadmus</span> and Danaus with a belief not less complete in the higher members of the series than in the lower: but Mr. Clinton admits a radical distinction in the evidence of events before and after the first recorded Olympiad, or 776 BC, the first date in Grecian chronology which can be fixed upon authentic evidence, the highest point to which Grecian chronology, reckoning upward, can be carried. Of this important epoch in Grecian development, the commencement of authentic chronological life, Herodotus and Thucydides had no knowledge or took no account : the later chronologists, from Timaeus downwards, noted it, and made it serve as the basis of their chronological comparisons, so far as it went : but neither Eratosthenes nor Apollodorus seems to have recognized (though Varro and Africanus did recognize) a marked difference in respect of certainty or authenticity between the period before and the period after. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>ERATOSTHENES. THE FIRST OLYMPIAD. <o:p></o:p> </span></strong></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>In further illustration of Mr. Clinton’s opinion that the first recorded Olympiad is the earliest date which can be fixed upon authentic evidence, we have the following just remarks in reference to the dissentient views of Eratosthenes, <span class=SpellE3>Phanias</span> and Callimachus, about the date of the Trojan war : “The chronology of Eratosthenes (he says), founded on a careful comparison of circumstances, and approved by those to whom the same stores of information were open, is entitled to our respect. But we must remember that a conjectural date can never rise to the authority of evidence; that what is accepted as a substitute for testimony, is not an equivalent; witnesses only can prove a date, and in the want of these, the knowledge of it is plainly beyond our reach. If, in the absence of a better light, we seek for what is probable, we are not to forget the distinction between conjecture and proof; between what is probable and what is certain. The computation then of Eratosthenes for the war of Troy is open to inquiry; and if we find it adverse to the opinions of many preceding writers, who fixed a lower date, and adverse to the acknowledged length of generation in the most authentic dynasties, we are allowed to follow other guides, who give us a lower epoch”. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Here Mr. Clinton again plainly acknowledges the want of evidence and the irremediable uncertainty of Grecian chronology before the Olympiads. Now the reasonable conclusion from his argument is, not simply that "the computation of Eratosthenes was open to inquiry" (which few would be found to deny), but that both Eratosthenes and <span class=SpellE3>Phanias</span> had delivered positive opinions upon a point on which no sufficient evidence was accessible, and therefore that neither the one nor the other was a guide to be followed. Mr. Clinton does indeed speak of authentic dynasties prior to the first recorded Olympiad, but if there be any such, reaching up from that period to a supposed point coeval with or anterior to the war of Troy I see no good reason for the marked distinction which he draws between chronology before and chronology after the Olympiad of <span class=SpellE3>Koroebus</span>, or for the necessity which he feels of suspending his upward reckoning at the last-mentioned epoch, and beginning a different process, called “a downward reckoning”, from the higher epoch (supposed to be somehow ascertained without any upward reckoning) of the first patriarch from whom such authentic dynasty emanates. Herodotus and Thucydides might well, upon this supposition, ask of Mr. Clinton, why he called upon them to alter their method of proceeding at the year 776 BC, and why they might not be allowed to pursue their “upward chronological reckoning” without interruption from Leonidas up to Danaus, or from Peisistratus up to Hellen and Deucalion, without any alteration in the point of view. Authentic dynasties from the Olympiads, up to an epoch above the Trojan war, would enable us to obtain chronological proof of the latter date, instead of being reduced (as Mr. Clinton affirms that we are) to “conjecture” instead of proof. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>The whole question, as to the value of the reckoning from the Olympiads up to <span class=SpellE3>Phoroneus</span>, does in truth turn upon this one point : Are those genealogies which profess to cover the space between the two authentic and trustworthy or not? Mr. Clinton appears to feel that they are not so, when he admits the essential difference in the character of the evidence, and the necessity of altering the method of computation before and after the first recorded Olympiad : yet in his Preface he labors to prove that they possess historical worth and are in the main correctly set forth : moreover, that the fictitious persons, wherever any such are intermingled, may be detected and eliminated. The evidences upon which he relies, are 1. Inscriptions; 2. The early poets <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>CHRONOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF INSCRIPTIONS. <o:p></o:p> </span></strong></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>1. An inscription, being nothing but a piece of writing on marble, carries evidentiary value under the same conditions as a published writing on paper. If the inscriber reports a contemporary fact which he had the means of knowing, and if there be no reason to suspect misrepresentation, we believe this assertion : if, on the other hand, he records facts belonging to a long period before his own time, his authority counts for little, except in so far as we can verify and appreciate his means of knowledge. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>In estimating therefore the probative force of any inscription, the first and most indispensable point is to assure ourselves of its date. Amongst all the public registers and inscriptions alluded to by Mr. Clinton, there is proved not one which can be positively referred to a date anterior to 776 BC. The quoit of <span class=SpellE3>Iphitus</span>, the public registers at Sparta, Corinth, and Elis, the list of the priestesses of Juno at Argos are all of a date completely uncertified. O. Müller does indeed agree with Mr. Clinton (though in my opinion without any sufficient proof) in assigning the quoit of <span class=SpellE3>Iphitus</span> to the age ascribed to that prince : and if we even grant thus much, we shall have an inscription as old (adopting Mr. Clinton’s determination of the age of <span class=SpellE3>Iphitus</span>) as 828 BC. But when Mr. Clinton quotes O. Müller as admitting the registers of Sparta, Corinth, and Elis, it is right to add that the latter does not profess to guarantee the authenticity of these documents, or the age at which such registers began to be kept. It is not to be doubted that there were registers of the kings of Sparta carrying them up to Heracles, and of the kings of Elis from <span class=SpellE3>Oxylus</span> to <span class=SpellE3>Iphitus</span> : but the question is, at what time did these lists begin to be kept continuously? This is a point which we have no means of deciding, nor can we accept Mr. Clinton’s unsupported conjecture, when he tell us “Perhaps these were begun to be written as early as BC 1048, the probable time of the Dorian conquest”. Again he tells us “At Argos a register was preserved of the priestesses of Juno, which might be more ancient than the catalogues of the kings of Sparta or Corinth. That register, from which Hellanikus composed his work, contained the priestesses from the earliest times down to the age of Hellanikus himself ... But this catalogue might have been commenced as early as the Trojan war itself, and even at a still earlier date”. Again, respecting the inscriptions quoted by Herodotus from the temple of the <span class=SpellE3>Ismenian</span> Apollo at Thebes, in which <span class=SpellE3>Amphitryo</span> and Laodamas are named, Mr. Clinton says “They were ancient in the time of Herodotus, which may perhaps carry them back 400 years before his time : and in that case they might approach within 300 years of Laodamas and within 400 years of the probable time of <span class=SpellE3>Kadmus</span> himself”. “It is granted (he adds in a note) that these inscriptions were not genuine, that is, not of the date to which they were assigned by Herodotus himself. But that they were ancient cannot be doubted”, &c. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>The time when Herodotus saw the temple of the <span class=SpellE3>Ismenian</span> Apollo at Thebes can hardly have been earlier than 450 BC : reckoning upwards from hence to 776 BC, we have an interval of 326 years : the inscriptions which Herodotus saw may well therefore have been ancient, without being earlier than the first recorded Olympiad. Mr. Clinton does indeed tell us that ancient “may perhaps” be construed as 400 years earlier than Herodotus. But no careful reader can permit himself to convert such bare possibility into a ground of inference, and to make it available, in conjunction with other similar possibilities before enumerated, for the purpose of showing that there really existed inscriptions in Greece of a date anterior to 776 BC. Unless Mr. Clinton can make out this, he can derive no benefit from inscriptions, in his attempt to substantiate the reality of the mythical persons or of the mythical events. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>The truth is that the <span class=SpellE3>Herakleid</span> pedigree of the Spartan kings (as has been observed in a former chapter) is only one out of the numerous divine and heroic genealogies with which the Hellenic world abounded, a class of documents which become historical evidence only so high in the descending series as the names composing them are authenticated by contemporary, or nearly contemporary, enrolment. At what period this enrolment began, we have no information. Two remarks however may be made, in reference to any approximate guess as to the time when actual registration commenced : First, that the number of names in the pedigree, or the length of past time which it professes to embrace, affords no presumption of any superior antiquity in the time of registration : Secondly, that looking to the acknowledged paucity and rudeness of Grecian writing even down to the 60th Olympiad (540 BC), and to the absence of the habit of writing, as well as the low estimate of its value, which such a state of things argues, the presumption is, that written enrolment of family genealogies did not commence until a long time after 776 BC, and the obligation of proof falls upon him who maintains that it commenced earlier. And this second remark is farther borne out when we observe, that there is no registered list, except that of the Olympic victors, which goes up even so high as 776 BC. The next list which O. Müller and Mr. Clinton produce, is that of the <span class=SpellE3>Karneoniks</span> or victors at the <span class=SpellE3>Karneian</span> festival, which reaches only up to 676 BC. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>If Mr. Clinton then makes little out of inscriptions to sustain his view of Grecian history and chronology anterior to the recorded Olympiads, let us examine the inferences which he draws from his other source of evidence the early poets. And here it will be found, First, that in order to maintain the credibility of these witnesses, he lays down positions respecting historical evidence both indefensible in themselves, and especially inapplicable to the early times of Greece: Secondly, that his reasoning is at the same time inconsistent inasmuch as it includes admissions, which if properly understood and followed out, exhibit these very witnesses, as habitually, indiscriminately, and unconsciously, mingling truth and fiction, and therefore little fit to be believed upon their solitary and unsupported testimony. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>To take the second point first, he says “The authority even of the genealogies has been called in question by many able and learned persons, who reject Danaus, <span class=SpellE3>Kadmus</span>, Hercules, Theseus, and many others, as fictitious persons. It is evident that any fact would come from the hands of the poets embellished with many fabulous additions: and fictitious genealogies were undoubtedly composed. Because, however, some genealogies were fictitious, we are not justified in concluding that all were fabulous ... In estimating then the historical value of the genealogies transmitted by the early poets, we may take a middle course; not rejecting them as wholly false, nor yet implicitly receiving all as true. The genealogies contain many real persons, but these are incorporated with many fictitious names. The fictions however will have a basis of truth : the genealogical expression may be false, but the connection which it describes is real. Even to those who reject the whole as fabulous, the exhibition of the early times which is presented in this volume may still be not unacceptable : because it is necessary to the right understanding of antiquity that the opinions of the Greeks concerning their own origin should be set before us, even if these are erroneous opinions, and that their story should be told as they have told it themselves. The names preserved by the ancient genealogies may be considered of three kinds; either they were the name of a race or clan converted into the name of an individual, or they were altogether fictitious, or lastly, they were real historical names”. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Enough has been said to show that the witnesses upon whom Mr. Clinton relies blend truth and fiction habitually, indiscriminately and unconsciously, even upon his own admission. Let us now consider the positions which he lays down respecting historical evidence. He says : “We may acknowledge as real persons all those whom there is no reason for rejecting. The presumption is in favor of the early tradition, if no argument can be brought to overthrow it. The persons may be considered real, when the description of them is consonant with the state of the country at that time, when no national prejudice or vanity could be concerned in inventing them, when the tradition is consistent and general, when rival or hostile tribes concur in the leading facts, when the acts ascribed to the person (divested of their poetical ornament) enter into the political system of the age, or form the basis of other transactions which fall within known historical times. <span class=SpellE3>Kadmus</span> and Danaus appear to be real persons; for it is conformable to the state of mankind, and perfectly credible, that Phoenician and Egyptian adventurers, in the ages to which these persons are ascribed, should have found their way to the coasts of Greece : and the Greeks (as already observed) had no motive from any national vanity to feign these settlements. Hercules was a real person. His acts were recorded by those who were not friendly to the Dorians; by Achaeans and Aeolians and Ionians, who had no vanity to gratify in celebrating the hero of a hostile and rival people. His descendants in many branches remained in many states down to the historical times. His son <span class=SpellE3>Tlepolemus</span> and his grandson and great-grandson <span class=SpellE3>Cleodaeus</span> and <span class=SpellE3>Aristomachus</span> are acknowledged (i.e. by O. Müller) to be real persons : and there is no reason that can be assigned for receiving these, which will not be equally valid for establishing the reality both of Hercules and Hyllus. Above all, Hercules is authenticated by the testimonies both of the Iliad and Odyssey”. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>These positions appear to me inconsistent with sound views of the conditions of historical testimony. According to what is here laid down, we are bound to accept as real all the persons mentioned by Homer, <span class=SpellE3>Arktinus</span>, Lesches, the Hesiodic poets, <span class=SpellE3>Eumelus</span>, <span class=SpellE3>Asius</span>, &c., unless we can adduce some positive ground in each particular case to prove the contrary. If this position be a true one, the greater part of the history of England, from Brute the Trojan down to Julius Caesar, ought at once to be admitted as valid and worthy of credence. What Mr. Clinton here calls the early tradition, is in point of fact the narrative of these early poets. The word tradition is an equivocal word, and begs the whole question; for while in its obvious and literal meaning it implies only something handed down, whether truth or fiction it is tacitly understood to imply a tale descriptive of some real matter of fact, taking its rise at the time when that fact happened, and originally accurate, but corrupted by subsequent oral transmission. Understanding therefore by Mr. Clinton's words early tradition, the tales of the old poets, we shall find his position totally inadmissible that we are bound to admit the persons or statements of Homer and Hesiod as real, unless where we can produce reasons to the contrary. To allow this, would be to put them upon a par with good contemporary witnesses; for no greater privilege can be claimed in favor even of Thucydides, than the title of his testimony to be believed unless where it can be contradicted on special grounds. The presumption in favor of an asserting witness is either strong, or weak, or positively nothing, according to the compound ratio of his means of knowledge, his moral and intellectual habits, and his motive to speak the truth. Thus, for instance, when Hesiod tells us that his father quitted the Eolic <span class=SpellE3>Kyme</span> and came to <span class=SpellE3>Askra</span> in Boeotia, we may fully believe him; but when he describes to us the battles between the Olympic gods and the Titans, or between Heracles and <span class=SpellE3>Kyknus</span>, or when Homer depicts the efforts of Hector, aided by Apollo, for the defense of Troy, and the struggles of Achilles and Odysseus, with the assistance of Here and Poseidon, for the destruction of that city, events professedly long past and gone we cannot presume either of them to be in any way worthy of belief. It cannot be shown that they possessed any means of knowledge, while it is certain that they could have no motive to consider historical truth : their object was to satisfy an uncritical appetite for narrative, and to interest the emotions of their hearers. Mr. Clinton says, that “the persons may be considered real when the description of them is consistent with the state of the country at that time”. But he has forgotten, first, that we know nothing of the state of the country except what these very poets tell us; next, that fictitious persons may be just as consonant to the state of the country as real persons. While therefore, on the one hand, we have no independent evidence either to affirm or to deny that Achilles or Agamemnon are consistent with the state of Greece or Asia Minor at a certain supposed date 1183 BC, so, on the other hand, even assuming such consistency to be made out, this of itself would not prove them to be real persons. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>PLAUSIBLE FICTION. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Mr. Clinton’s reasoning altogether overlooks the existence of plausible fiction, fictitious stories which harmonize perfectly well with the general course of facts, and which are distinguished from matters of fact not by any internal character, but by the circumstance that matter of fact has some competent and well-informed witness to authenticate it, either directly or through legitimate inference. Fiction may be, and often is, extravagant and incredible; but it may also be plausible and specious, and in that case there is nothing but the want of an attesting certificate to distinguish it from truth. Now all the tests, which Mr. Clinton proposes as guarantees of the reality of the Homeric persons, will be just as well satisfied by plausible fiction as by actual matter of fact; the plausibility of the fiction consists in its satisfying those and other similar conditions. In most cases, the tales of the poets did fall in with the existing current of feelings in their audience: “prejudice and vanity” are not the only feelings, but doubtless prejudice and vanity were often appealed to, and it was from such harmony of sentiment that they acquired their hold on men's belief. Without any doubt the Iliad appealed most powerfully to the reverence for ancestral gods and heroes among the Asiatic colonists who first heard it : the temptation of putting forth an interesting tale is quite a sufficient stimulus to the invention of the poet, and the plausibility of the tale a sufficient passport to the belief of the hearers. Mr. Clinton talks of “consistent and general tradition”. But that the tale of a poet, when once told with effect and beauty, acquired general belief is no proof that it was founded on fact : otherwise, what are we to say to the divine legends, and to the large portion of the Homeric narrative which Mr. Clinton himself sets aside as untrue under the designation of “poetical ornament”. When a mythical incident is recorded as “forming the basis” of some known historical fact or institution as for instance the successful stratagem by which <span class=SpellE3>Melanthus</span> killed Xanthus in the battle on the boundary, as recounted in my last chapter, we may adopt one of two views : we may either treat the incident as real, and as having actually given occasion to what is described as its effect or we may treat the incident as a legend imagined in order to assign some plausible origin of the reality. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>In cases where the legendary incident is referred to a time long anterior to any records as it commonly is the second mode of proceeding appears to me far more consonant to reason and probability than the first. It is to be recollected that all the persons and facts, here defended as matter of real history by Mr. Clinton, are referred to an age long preceding the first beginning of records. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>I have already remarked that Mr. Clinton shrinks from his own rule in treating <span class=SpellE3>Kadmus</span> and Danaus as real persons, since they are as much eponyms of tribes or races as Dorus and Hellen. And if he can admit Herakles to be a real man, I do not see upon what reason he can consistently disallow any one of the mythical personages, for there is not one whose exploits are more strikingly at variance with the standard of historical probability. Mr. Clinton reasons upon the supposition that “Hercules was a Dorian hero”: but he was Achaean and <span class=SpellE3>Kadmeian</span> as well as Dorian, though the legends respecting him are different in all the three characters. Whether his son <span class=SpellE3>Tlepolemus</span> and his grandson <span class=SpellE3>Kleodaeus</span> belong to the category of historical men, I will not take upon me to say, though O. Müller (in my opinion without any warranty) appears to admit it; but Hyllus certainly is not a real man, if the canon of Mr. Clinton himself respecting the eponyms is to be trusted. “The descendants of Hercules (observes Mr. Clinton) remained in many states down to the historical times”. So did those of Zeus and Apollo, and of that god whom the historian <span class=SpellE3>Hekataeus</span> recognized as his progenitor in the sixteenth generation : the titular kings of Ephesus, in the historical times, as well as Peisistratus, the despot of Athens, traced their origin up to Eolus and Hellen, yet Mr. Clinton does not hesitate to reject Eolus and Hellen as fictitious persons. I dispute the propriety of quoting the Iliad and Odyssey (as Mr. Clinton does) in evidence of the historic personality of Hercules. For even with regard to the ordinary men who figure in those poems, we have no means of discriminating the real from the fictitious; while the Homeric Heracles is unquestionably more than an ordinary man, he is the favorite son of Zeus, from his birth predestined to a life of labor and servitude, as preparation for a glorious immortality. Without doubt the poet himself believed in the reality of Hercules, but it was a reality clothed with superhuman attributes. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>Mr. Clinton observes that “because some genealogies were fictitious, we are not justified in concluding that all were fabulous”. It is no way necessary that we should maintain so extensive a position : it is sufficient that all are fabulous so far as concerns from what gods and heroes, some fabulous throughout, and none ascertainably true, for the period anterior to the recorded Olympiads. How much, or what particular portions, may be true, no one can pronounce. The gods and heroes are, from our point of view, essentially fictitious; but from the Grecian point of view they were the most real (if the expression may be permitted, i.e. clung to with the strongest faith) of all the members of the series. They not only formed parts of the genealogy as originally conceived, but were in themselves the grand reason why it was conceived, as a golden chain to connect the living man with a divine ancestor. The genealogy therefore taken as a whole (and its value consists in its being taken as a whole) was from the beginning a fiction; but the names of the father and grandfather of the living man, in whose day it first came forth, were doubtless those of real men. Wherever therefore we can verify the date of a genealogy, as applied to some living person, we may reasonably presume the two lowest members of it to be also those of real persons : but this has no application to the time anterior to the Olympiads still less to the pretended times of the Trojan war, the <span class=SpellE3>Kalydonian</span> boar-hunt, or the deluge of Deucalion. To reason (as Mr. Clinton does), “Because <span class=SpellE3>Aristomachus</span> was a real man, therefore his father <span class=SpellE3>Cleodaeus</span>, his grandfather Hyllus, and so farther upwards, &c., must have been real men”, is an inadmissible conclusion. The historian <span class=SpellE3>Hekataeus</span> was a real man, and doubtless his father <span class=SpellE3>Hegesander</span> also but it would be unsafe to march up his genealogical ladder fifteen steps to the presence of the ancestorial god of whom he boasted : the upper steps of the ladder will be found broken and unreal. Not to mention that the inference, from real son to real father, is inconsistent with the admissions in Mr. Clinton's own genealogical tables; for he there inserts the names of several mythical fathers as having begotten real historical sons. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>The general authority of Mr. Clinton's book, and the sincere respect which I entertain for his elucidations of the later chronology, have imposed upon me the duty of assigning those grounds on which I dissent from his conclusions prior to the first recorded Olympiad. The reader who desires to see the numerous and contradictory guesses (they deserve no better name) of the Greeks themselves in the attempt to <span class=SpellE3>chronologise</span> their mythical narratives, will find them in the copious notes annexed to the first half of his first volume. As I consider all such researches not merely as fruitless in regard to any trustworthy result, but as serving to divert attention from the genuine form and really illustrative character of Grecian legend, I have not thought it right to go over the same ground in the present work. Differing as I do, however, from Mr. Clinton's views on this subject, I concur with him in deprecating the application of etymology as a general scheme of explanation to the characters and events of Greek legend. Amongst the many causes which operated as <span class=SpellE3>suggestives</span> and stimulants to Greek fancy in the creation of these interesting tales, doubtless Etymology has had its share; but it cannot be applied (as Hermann, above all others, has sought to apply it) for the purpose of imparting supposed sense and system to the general body of mythical narrative. I have already remarked on this topic in a former chapter. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:16.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Constantia",serif; mso-ansi-language:EN-US'>It would be curious to ascertain at what time, or by whom, the earliest continuous genealogies, connecting existing persons with the supposed antecedent age of legend, were formed and preserved. Neither Homer nor Hesiod mentioned any verifiable present persons or circumstances : had they done so, the age of one or other of them could have been determined upon good evidence, which we methodize the past, even though they do so on fictitious principles, being as yet unprovided with those records which alone could put them on a better course. The Homeric man was satisfied with feeling, imagining, and believing, particular incidents of a supposed past, without any attempt to graduate the line of connection between them and himself: to introduce fictitious hypotheses and media of connection is the business of a succeeding age, when the stimulus of rational curiosity is first felt, without any authentic materials to supply it. We have then the form of history operating upon the matter of legend the transition-state between legend and history; less interesting indeed than either separately, yet accessory as a step between the two. <o:p></o:p> </span></p> <p class=MsoNormal3 style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:4.0cm;margin-left:4.0cm;text-align:justify;text-indent:68.05pt;line-height: normal'> </p> </div> <table width="88%" border="1" align="center" cellspacing="0" bordercolor="#000000"> <tbody> <tr> <td colspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">Years before the Fall of Troy.</span></h2></td> <td width="26%"><h2><span class="Stil201">BC Eratosthenes</span></h2></td> <td width="23%"><h2><span class="Stil201">BC Chalimachus</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td width="9%"><h2><span class="Stil201">570</span></h2></td> <td width="42%"><h2><span class="Stil201">Phoroneus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1753</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1697</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">283</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Danaus</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">1466</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">1410</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td height="26"><h2><span class="Stil201">Pelasgus</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">250</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Deukalion</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1433</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1377</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">200</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Erechteus</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">1383</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">1327</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Dardanaus</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">150</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Azan, Aphidas, Elatus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1333</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1277</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">130</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Kadmus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1313</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1257</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">100</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Pelops</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1283</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1227</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">78</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Birth of Hercules</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1261</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1205</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">42</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Argonauts</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1225</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1169</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">30</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">First Theban War</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1213</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1157</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">26</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Death of Hercules</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1209</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1153</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">24</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Death of Euristheus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1207</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1151</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">20</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Death of Hyllus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1203</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1147</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">18</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Accession of Agamemnon</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1200</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1144</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">16</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Second Theban War</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1198</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1142</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">10</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Trojan expedition</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1192</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1136</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2"><h2><span class="Stil201">Years after the Fall of Troy</span></h2></td> <td><h2> </h2></td> <td><h2> </h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2> </h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Troy taken</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1183</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1127</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">8</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Orestes reign at Argos</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1176</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1120</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="3"><h2><span class="Stil201">60</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">The Thesali occupy Thesaly</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="3"><h2><span class="Stil201">1124</span></h2></td> <td rowspan="3"><h2><span class="Stil201">1068</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">The Boeoti return to Boeotia</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Eolic migration under Penthilus</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">80</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Return of the Heracleids</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1104</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1048</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">109</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Eletes reigns at Corinth</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1075</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1019</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">110</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Migration of Theras</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1074</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1018</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">130</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Lesbos occupied</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1053</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">997</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">139</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Death of Codrus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1045</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">989</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">140</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Ionic migration </span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1044</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">988</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">151</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Cyme founded</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1033</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">977</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">169</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Smyrna</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">1015</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">959</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">300</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Olympiad of Iphitus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">884</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">828</span></h2></td> </tr> <tr> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">352</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">Olimpiad of Coroebus</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">776</span></h2></td> <td><h2><span class="Stil201">776</span></h2></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'> </p> <h2 class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'> </h2> <h2 class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'><span class="Estilo1"><a href="../HISTORY-OF-GREECE-CHAPTER-20-STATE-OF-SOCIETY-AND-MANNERS-AS-EXHIBITED-IN-GRECIAN-LEGEND.html">CHAPTER XX. </a></span></h2> <h2 class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'><span class="Estilo1"><a href="../HISTORY-OF-GREECE-CHAPTER-20-STATE-OF-SOCIETY-AND-MANNERS-AS-EXHIBITED-IN-GRECIAN-LEGEND.html">STATE OF SOCIETY AND MANNERS AS EXHIBITED IN GRECIAN LEGEND.</a></span></h2> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'> </p> <p class=MsoNormal align=center style='margin-top:18.0pt;margin-right:87.9pt; margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:3.0cm;text-align:center;text-indent:59.55pt'> </p></td> </tr> </table> <p> </p> <h1 align="center" style="margin-top:12.0pt;margin-right:56.6pt;margin-bottom: 12.0pt;margin-left:42.55pt;text-align:center;text-indent:1.0cm"> </h1> </body></html>