§14.5.24φαίνεται δʼ οὔτε τοῦ Ἐφόρου τὴν ἀπόφασιν διαιτῶν ἱκανῶς τά τε τοῦ ποιητοῦ ταράττων καὶ καταψευδόμενος.
And he appears not only to fail in examining Ephorus's statement adequately, but also to confuse and misrepresent the poet's words.
Ἐφόρου τε γὰρ τοῦτο πρῶτον ἀπαιτεῖν ἐχρῆν, τί δὴ τοὺς Χάλυβας τίθησιν ἐντὸς τῆς χερρονήσου τοσοῦτον ἀφεστῶτας καὶ Σινώπης καὶ Ἀμισοῦ πρὸς ἕω;
For he ought first to have demanded this of Ephorus: why indeed he places the Chalybians inside the peninsula, when they are so far distant both from Sinope and from Amisus towards the east?
οἱ γὰρ λέγοντες τὸν ἰσθμὸν τῆς χερρονήσου ταύτης τὴν ἀπὸ Ἰσσοῦ γραμμὴν ἐπὶ τὸν Εὔξεινον, ὡς ἂν μεσημβρινήν τινα τιθέασι ταύτην, οἱ μὲν εἶναι νομίζουσι τὴν ἐπὶ Σινώπης οἱ δὲ τὴν ἐπʼ Ἀμισοῦ, ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν Χαλύβων οὐδείς· λοξὴ γάρ ἐστι τελέως.
For those who say that the isthmus of this peninsula is the line from Issus to the Euxine, positing this as a kind of meridian line, some believe it to be the one to Sinope, others the one to Amisus, but no one the one to the Chalybians; for it is completely oblique.
ὁ γὰρ δὴ διὰ Χαλύβων μεσημβρινὸς διὰ τῆς μικρᾶς Ἀρμενίας γράφοιτʼ ἂν καὶ τοῦ Εὐφράτου τὴν Καππαδοκίαν ὅλην ἐντὸς ἀπολαμβάνων καὶ τὴν Κομμαγηνὴν καὶ τὸν Ἀμανὸν καὶ τὸν Ἰσσικὸν κόλπον.
For the meridian through the Chalybians would be drawn through Lesser Armenia and the Euphrates, enclosing inside the whole of Cappadocia, Commagene, Amanus, and the Gulf of Issus.
εἰ δʼ οὖν καὶ τὴν λοξὴν γραμμὴν ὁρίζειν τὸν ἰσθμὸν συγχωρήσαιμεν, τὰ πλεῖστά γε τούτων καὶ μάλιστα ἡ Καππαδοκία ἐντὸς ἀπολαμβάνοιτʼ ἂν καὶ ὁ νῦν ἰδίως λεγόμενος Πόντος τῆς Καππαδοκίας μέρος ὢν τὸ πρὸς τῷ Εὐξείνῳ, ὥστʼ εἰ τοὺς Χάλυβας τῆς χερρονήσου θετέον μέρος, πολὺ μᾶλλον τοὺς Κατάονας καὶ Καππάδοκας ἀμφοτέρους καὶ Λυκάονας δέ, οὓς καὶ αὐτοὺς παρῆκε.
But if, at any rate, we should concede that even the oblique line defines the isthmus, most of these territories, and especially Cappadocia, would be enclosed inside, as well as what is now specifically called Pontus, which is the part of Cappadocia near the Euxine; so that if the Chalybians are to be placed as a part of the peninsula, much more so both the Cataonians and Cappadocians, and also the Lycaonians, whom he himself also omitted.
διὰ τί δʼ ἐν τοῖς μεσογαίοις ἔταξε τοὺς Χάλυβας, οὓς ὁ ποιητὴς Ἁλιζῶνας ἐκάλεσεν, ὥσπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀπεδείξαμεν;
And why did he place among the inland peoples the Chalybians, whom the poet called Halizones, as we also have demonstrated?
ἄμεινον γὰρ ἦν διελεῖν καὶ τοὺς μὲν ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάττῃ φάναι τοὺς δὲ ἐν τῇ μεσογαίᾳ· ὅπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς Καππαδοκίας ποιητέον καὶ τῆς Κιλικίας.
For it would have been better to make a division and to say that some were on the sea and others in the interior; which ought to be done also in the case of Cappadocia and Cilicia.
ὁ δὲ τὴν μὲν οὐδʼ ὠνόμακε, τοὺς Κίλικας δὲ τοὺς ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάττῃ μόνον εἴρηκεν.
But he has not even named the former, and has mentioned only the Cilicians on the sea.
οἱ οὖν ἐπʼ Ἀντιπάτρῳ τῷ Δερβήτῃ καὶ οἱ Ὁμοναδεῖς καὶ ἄλλοι πλείους οἱ συνάπτοντες τοῖς Πισίδαις,
"
οἳ οὐκ ἴσασι θάλατταν
ἀνέρες, οὐδέ θʼ ἅλεσσι μεμιγμένον εἶδαρ ἔδουσι
"
τίνα λάβωσι τάξιν;
What position, then, should those under Antipater of Derbe, and the Homanadeis, and many others who border on the Pisidians, receive—men "who know not the sea, nor eat food mixed with salt"?
ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Λυδοὺς οὐδὲ Μῄονας εἴρηκεν, εἴτε δύο εἴθʼ οἱ αὐτοί εἰσι, καὶ εἴτε καθʼ ἑαυτοὺς εἴτʼ ἐν ἑτέρῳ γένει περιεχομένους.
Moreover, he has mentioned neither the Lydians nor the Meonians, whether they are two peoples or the same, and whether they exist by themselves or are included under another tribe.
οὕτω γὰρ ἐπίσημον ἔθνος οὐκ ἀποκρύψαι δυνατόν, ὅ τε μὴ λέγων περὶ αὐτοῦ μηδὲν οὐκ ἂν δόξειε παραλιπεῖν τι τῶν κυριωτάτων;
For it is impossible to conceal so famous a nation, and would not one who says nothing about it seem to omit one of the most important things?
§14.5.25τίνες δʼ εἰσὶν οἱ μιγάδες;
And who are the mixed peoples?
οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἔχοιμεν εἰπεῖν παρὰ τοὺς λεχθέντας τόπους ἢ ὠνομάσθαι ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ ἢ παραλελεῖφθαι ἄλλους οὓς ἀποδώσομεν τοῖς μιγάσιν, οὐδέ γε αὐτῶν τινας τούτων ὧν ἢ εἶπεν ἢ παρέλιπε.
For we would not be able to name, besides the regions mentioned, other peoples either named by him or omitted whom we shall assign to the mixed peoples, nor indeed any of those whom he either mentioned or omitted.
καὶ γὰρ εἰ κατεμίχθησαν, ἀλλʼ ἡ ἐπικράτεια πεποίηκεν ἢ Ἕλληνας ἢ βαρβάρους· τρίτον δὲ γένος οὐδὲν ἴσμεν τὸ μικτόν.
For even if they were mixed, still the dominant element has made them either Greeks or barbarians; and we know of no third, mixed race.
§14.5.26πῶς δὲ τρία γένη τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐστὶ τὰ τὴν χερρόνησον οἰκοῦντα;
And how are there three tribes of Greeks inhabiting the peninsula?
εἰ γάρ, ὅτι τὸ παλαιὸν οἱ αὐτοὶ ἦσαν Ἴωνες καὶ Ἀθηναῖοι. λεγέσθωσαν καὶ οἱ Δωριεῖς καὶ οἱ Αἰολεῖς οἱ αὐτοί, ὥστε δύο ἔθνη γίνοιτʼ ἄν· εἰ δὲ διαιρετέον κατὰ τὰ ὕστερα ἔθη, καθάπερ καὶ τὰς διαλέκτους, τέτταρα ἂν εἴη καὶ τὰ ἔθνη, καθάπερ καὶ αἱ διάλεκτοι.
For if it is because in ancient times the Ionians and the Athenians were the same, let the Dorians and the Aeolians also be called the same, so that there would be two nations; but if they must be divided according to later customs, just like the dialects, then the nations also would be four, just like the dialects.
οἰκοῦσι δὲ τὴν χερρόνησον ταύτην, καὶ μάλιστα κατὰ τὸν τοῦ Ἐφόρου διορισμόν, οὐκ Ἴωνες μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ Ἀθηναῖοι, καθάπερ ἐν τοῖς καθʼ ἕκαστα δεδήλωται. τοιαῦτα μὲν δὴ πρὸς τὸν Ἔφορον διαπορεῖν ἄξιον·
And there inhabit this peninsula, and especially according to Ephorus's definition, not only Ionians but also Athenians, as has been shown in the detailed accounts.
Ἀπολλόδωρος δὲ τούτων μὲν ἐφρόντισεν οὐδέν, τοῖς δὲ ἑκκαίδεκα ἔθνεσι προστίθησιν ἑπτακαιδέκατον, τὸ τῶν Γαλατῶν, ἄλλως μὲν χρήσιμον λεχθῆναι, πρὸς δὲ τὴν δίαιταν τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἐφόρου λεγομένων ἢ παραλειπομένων οὐ δέον· εἴρηκε δὲ τὴν αἰτίαν αὐτός, ὅτι ταῦτα πάντα νεώτερα τῆς ἐκείνου ἡλικίας.
Such are the difficulties which it is reasonable to raise against Ephorus; but Apollodorus cared nothing for these things, and to the sixteen nations he adds a seventeenth, that of the Galatians—which is useful to be mentioned for other reasons, but is unnecessary for the examination of what was said or omitted by Ephorus; and he himself has stated the reason, namely, that all these things are more recent than Ephorus's time.