consequently neither built large cities nor attained to any other
form of greatness. The richest soils were always most subject
to this change of masters; such as the district now called
Thessaly, Boeotia, most of the Peloponnese, Arcadia excepted,
and the most fertile parts of the rest of Hellas. The goodness
of the land favoured the aggrandizement of particular individuals,
and thus created faction which proved a fertile source of ruin.
It also invited invasion. Accordingly Attica, from the poverty
of its soil enjoying from a very remote period freedom from
faction, never changed its inhabitants. And here is no
inconsiderable exemplification of my assertion that the migrations
were the cause of there being no correspondent growth in other
parts. The most powerful victims of war or faction from
the rest of Hellas took refuge with the Athenians as a safe
retreat; and at an early period, becoming naturalized,
swelled the already large population of the city to such a
height that Attica became at last too small to hold them, and
they had to send out colonies to Ionia.

There is also another circumstance that contributes not a little
to my conviction of the weakness of ancient times. Before the Trojan
war there is no indication of any common action in Hellas, nor
indeed of the universal prevalence of the name; on the contrary,
before the time of Hellen, son of Deucalion, no such appellation
existed, but the country went by the names of the different tribes, in
particular of the Pelasgian. It was not till Hellen and his sons
grew strong in Phthiotis, and were invited as allies into the other
cities, that one by one they gradually acquired from the connection
the name of Hellenes; though a long time elapsed before that name
could fasten itself upon all. The best proof of this is furnished by