Page:History of Greece Vol III.djvu/258

242 HISTORY OF GREECE. seems to have been their chief luxury, and probably served the same purpose of procuring the intoxicating drink called kumiss, as at present among the Bashkirs and the Kalmucks. 1 If the habits of the Scythians were such as to create in the near observer no other feeling than repugnance, their force at least inspired terror. They appeared in the eyes of Thucydides so numerous and so formidable, that he pronounces them irresist ible, if they could but unite, by any other nation within his knowl- edge. Herodotus, too, conceived the same idea of a race among whom every man was a warrior and a practised horse-bowman, and who were placed by their mode of life out of all reach of an enemy's attack. 2 Moreover, Herodotus does not speak meanly of their intelligence, contrasting them in favorable terms with the general stupidity of the other nations bordering on the Euxine. In this respect Thucydides seems to differ from him. On the east, the Scythians of the time of Herodotus were sep- arated only by the river Tanais from the Sarmatians, who occu- pied the territory for several days' journey north-east of the Palus Masotis : on the south, they were divided by the Danube from the section of Thracians called Getce. Both these nations were nomadic, analogous to the Scythians in habits, military efficiency, and fierceness : indeed, Herodotus and Hippokrates distinctly intimate that the Sarmatiaps were nothing but a branch of Scythians, 3 speaking a Scythian dialect, and distinguished fcction at the Grecian games: hence, perhaps, he is led to dwell more emphatically on the corporeal defects of the Scythians. 1 See Pallas, Reise durch Russland, and Dr. Clarke, Travels in Russia, ch. xii, p. 238. 2 Thucyd. ii, 95 ; Hcrodot. ii, 46-47 : his idea of the formidable power of the Scythians seems also to be implied in his expression (c. 81), nal 6/Uyot>f, Herodotus holds the same language about the Thracians, however, as Thucydides about the Scythians, irresistible, if they could but act with union (v, 3). 3 The testimony of Herodotus to this effect (iv, 110-117) seems clear and positive, especially as to the language. Hippokrates also calls the Sauromata etfrof ZKV&IKOV (De Ae'rc, Locis et Aquis, c. vi, sect. 89, Petcrsen). I cannot think that there is any sufficient ground for the marked ethnicaj distinction which several authors draw (contrary to Herodotus) between the Scythians and the Sarmatians. Boeckh considers the latter to be of Median