Kitap 1
3.2
and, as it seems to me, the whole of it had not as yet even this name; nay, before the time of Hellen, the son of Deucalion, it does not appear that this appellation existed at all; but that in their different tribes, and the Pelasgian to the greatest extent, they furnished from themselves the name [of their people.] i. e. there were different tribes, of which the Pelasgian was the predominant one, called by their different names, instead of being all comprehended under one, as they were afterwards. Or it may refer to the gradual formation of such general names even at that early period, by one tribe extending its own appellation to others. But when Hellen and his sons had grown strong in Phthiotis, and men invited them for their aid into the other cities; from associating with them, separate communities were now more commonly called Hellenes: For a striking instance of such a change in the language of a barbarian people at a much later period, I may refer to the inhabitants of the Amphilochian Argos, of whom Thucydides says, II. 68, ἑλληνίσθησαν τὴν νῦν γλῶσσαν τότε πρῶτον ἀπὸ τῶν αμπρακιωτῶν ξυνοικησάντων: οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι Ἀμφίλοχοι βάρβαροί εἰσιν. and yet not for a long time after could that name prevail amongst them all.
3.3
And Homer proves this most fully; for, though born long after the Trojan war, he has no where called them all by that name, nor indeed any others but those that came with Achilles out of Phthiotis; who were the very original Hellenes; but in his poems he mentions Danaans, Argives, and Achaeans. Nor again does he speak of barbarians; because neither were the Hellenes, in my opinion, as yet distinguished by one common term in opposition to that.
