Kitap 10
3.4
But perhaps some person may say, that he means Aetolia was not laid waste, reckoning from the time that it had this name after the arrival of Aetolus; but he takes away the ground of this supposition, by saying afterwards, that the greatest part of the people, that remained among the Aetolians, were those called Epeii, with whom Aetolians were afterwards intermingled, who had been expelled from Thessaly together with Boeotians, and possessed the country in common with these people. But is it probable that, without any hostilities, they invaded the country of another nation and divided it among themselves and the original possessors, who did not require such a partition of their land? If this is not probable, is it to be believed that the victors agreed to an equal division of the territory? What else then is devastation of a country, but the conquest of it by arms? Besides, Apollodorus says that, according to history, the Hyantes abandoned Boeotia and came and settled among the Aetolians, and concludes as confident that his opinion is right by saying it is our custom to relate these and similar facts exactly, whenever any of them is altogether dubious, or concerning which erroneous opinions are entertained.
3.5
Notwithstanding these faults in Ephorus, still he is superior to other writers. Polybius himself, who has studiously given him so much praise, has said that Eudoxus has written well on Grecian affairs, but that Ephorus has given the best account of the foundation of cities, of the relationship subsisting between nations, of changes of settlements, and of leaders of colonies, in these words, but I shall explain the present state of places, both as to position and distances; for this is the peculiar province of chorography.As distinguished from geography. See b. i. c. i. § 16, note1.
