The δή refers back to ii. 1, after the long digression on Egypt.
The personal motive is characteristic of H. (cf. Introd. p. 45); the
alliance of Egypt with Lydia (i. 77) and mere lust of conquest
(i. 153. 4) were fully sufficient causes for the attack on Egypt.
For the Egyptian doctors cf. 129. 2 (their failure against Democedes)
and ii. 84.
The law that the Persian king should only marry from the
families of the Seven (84. 2 n.) may not yet have been passed;
but Amasis knew his daughter would be regarded as a sort of
captive; the chief wives were always Persian. The story that
Cambyses was the son of an Egyptian princess was given by Dinon
(fl. circ. 360 B. C.) and Lyceas of Naucratis (F. H. G. ii. 91; iv. 441);
that of H. in cap. 1 is even more incredible; a daughter of Apries
would have been at least 40 in 529 B. C.; Ctesias (fr. 8, p. 225) for
once agrees with H. The story of c. 2 is due to the vanity of a
conquered nation (as H. saw), claiming a share in its conqueror
(cf. App. IV. 4); but all the variants are probably derived from
Egyptians, who wished that their own country should have a share
in suggesting its own conquest. The princess is the heroine of
Ebers' famous romance, Eine egyptische Knigstochter.
No doubt the story of Phanes was familiar to H. from his childhood;
the name (which is not a common one) is read on a vase
found in many fragments (now in the B. M.) by Petrie (Naukratis,
1886; E. E. F., p. 55, pl. 33).
*)arabi/wn basile/a. H. wrongly considers the Arabians as one
nation; Cambyses' ally would be simply a powerful chief.
For the dangers of this desert cf. the sufferings of the retreating
French in 1799 (Lanfrey, i. 297).
A unique coin found at Halicarnassus and now in the British
Museum bears the inscription φαενὸς ἐμὶ σῆμα, I am the sign of
Phanes. It is at least as early as 525 B. C., and may have been
struck by the mercenary captain to pay his men. But it is more
usually connected with Ephesus, and the inscription is then translated
I am the sign of the bright one; cf. Head, H. N. p. 571.
For Kadytis cf. ii. 159 n.
The Palestine Syrians are here distinguished by H. from the
Phoenicians (so too in ii. 104); their lands also are distinguished in
i. 105 (probably), iii. 91. 1, and iv. 39. 2; in ii. 106. 1 he applies the
term to include the coast north of Mount Carmel. But the most
important reference is vii. 89, where H. distinguishes the Syrians
in Palestine from the Phoenicians, and then goes on ( 2) to use
Palestine of all the coast land, including Phoenicia, as far as
Egypt. He never uses it of Phoenicia alone. Here he means
Philistines, who were still powerful in his time (Zech. ix. 5); it is
true that he says they were circumcised (ii. 104. 3), but he says (ib.)
the same of Phoenicians. Either the neighbouring tribes had
begun to copy the Jews in this rite, or H. confuses the Jews and the
coast peoples. He cannot have meant by the Palestine Syrians
the Jews only, for they were at this time very unimportant.