66 A DOUBTFUL JEKA IN ANCIENT HISTORY 



very fairly conclude, that that eclipse only was the one alluded 

 to by the historian. 



In this attempt, however, a great diversity of opinion has 

 arisen ; no fewer than seven eclipses having been fixed-upon 

 by different writers, as the one in question ; giving a distance 

 of no less than forty-three years, from 583 B.C. to 626 B.C., 

 between the extreme periods assigned to the event related by 

 Herodotus. 



We have now arrived at that stage of this curious inquiry, 

 which shows that a full and precise knowledge only of natural 

 phenomena is available in researches of this description ; and 

 that a deficiency of such knowledge was the source of these 

 contradictions. The chronologists and commentators upon 

 Herodotus who engaged in this discussion, among whom 

 were Scaliger, Petavius, Usher, and Larcher, were suffi- 

 ciently acquainted with Astronomy, and in particular with the 

 phaenomena of solar eclipses, to perceive that the date of the 

 eclipse in question might be found by calculation. But they 

 do not appear to have been aware that the sudden and com- 

 plete darkness implied by the expression of Herodotus, that 

 46 the day suddenly became night," could have been occasioned 

 only by a total eclipse. While the smallest portion of the 

 sun's disk is uncovered by that of the moon, day-light con- 

 tinues, and though reduced in intensity, much less so than 

 would be imagined by a person previously unacquainted with 

 the phenomenon. But when the last portion of the sun is 

 covered by the moon, in a total eclipse, darkness instanta- 

 neously ensues, as most correctly expressed by the words of 

 the Greek historian, for which, however, (another corrobora- 

 tion of our argument,) he has been ignorantly censured by 

 some of his commentators. 



" It appears to me," continues Mr. Baily, after stating these 

 circumstances, " that an inattention to these singular facts has 

 been the principal cause of the various opinions that have 

 arisen respecting the time when this eclipse happened. For 

 each chronologist, having a system of his own to support, has 

 satisfied himself merely with ascertaining that a solar eclipse 

 did take place in the year that he had assigned for it ; and 

 which eclipse he supposed might be visible in that part of the 

 world bordering on the two hostile countries: but without 

 taking into his account the magnitude of the eclipse at the 

 place where the battle is supposed to have been fought. Now, 

 since the territories of the two belligerent powers were pro- 

 bably separated by the river Halys, (which was the case in 

 the subsequent reign, although we have no authentic informa- 

 tion that it was so at the period now under consideration,) 



