ted all who would to partake of the fruits of his fields and orchards, but threw down the fences, that none might scruple to enter. He not only gave the usual entertainments expected from the rich to the members of his deme, but kept a table constantly open to them. When he went out into the streets he was commonly attended by a number of persons in good apparel, who, when they met with any elderly citizen scantily clothed, would insist on exchanging their warm mantles for his threadbare covering. It was the office of the same agents respectfully to approach any of the poorer citizens of good character whom they might see standing in the market-place, and silently to put some small pieces of money into their hands. There were some, Plutarch innocently observes, who decried this liberality as flattery of the mob, and the trick of a demagogue ;* but such slander is, he thinks, amply refuted by the fact, that Cimon was the leader of the aristocratical and Laconi which had probably been transmitted in his family, as to his competition with Cimon, or to his fear of incurring the suspicion that he aimed at a tyranny or unconstitutional power-a suspicion to which he was much more exposed in the station which he actually filled. But if his personal character might seem better adapted to an aristocratical than to a democratical party, it must also render us unwilling to believe that he devoted himself to the cause of the commonalty merely that he might make it the instrument of his own ambition. There seems to be much better ground for supposing that he deliberately preferred the system which he adopted, as the most consistent, if not alone reconcilable, with the prosperity and safety of Athens, though his own agency in directing and controlling it might be a prominent object in all his views. But he might well think that the people had gone too far to remain stationary, even if there was any reason why it should not seize the good which lay within its reach. Its great-an party, and one of the few Athenians whose ness had risen with the growth of the commonalty, and, it might appear to him, could only be maintained and extended by the same means: at home by a decided ascendency of the popular interest over that of the old aristocracy and every other class in the state; abroad by an equally decided supremacy over the rest of Greece. The contest between the parties seems for some time to have been carried on without much violence or animosity, and rather with a noble emulation in the service of the public than with assaults on one another. Cimon had enriched his country with the spoil and ransom of the Persians, and he had also greatly increased his private fortune. His disposition was naturally inclined to liberality, and he made a munificent use of his wealth. Several great works were wanting for the security of the city, and little had yet been done for its embellishment. The southern wall of the citadel was built with the treasure which Cimon brought home from Asia, and the plans of Themistocles were brought nearer to their accomplishment by preparations which were now made for joining the city to its harbours, by walls carried down on the one side to Phalerus, on the other to Piræus. The laying of the foundations of these walls was itself an arduous and expensive work, on account of the marshy ground which they crossed; and Cimon himself executed the most difficult part with magnificent solidity at his own charge. He also set the example of adorning the public places of the city with trees, and, by introducing a supply of water, converted the Academy, a spot about two miles north of the city, from an arid waste into a delightful grove, containing open lawns and courses for the exercises of the young, shady walks for the thoughtful, a scene of wholesome recreation for all. incorruptible integrity raised them above all suspicion of venality, or of ever acting from selfish motives. And he adds a story of the magnanimity with which Cimon had rejected a present offered to him by a foreigner who needed his protection. It might, perhaps, be alleged, with more colour of truth, that the ordinary relation subsisting at this period between the rich and the poor at Athens rendered such good offices so common that they could not fairly be attributed even to ambition, much less to any meaner motive. It is true that the state of things had undergone a great change at Athens in favour of the poorer class since Solon had been obliged to interpose to protect them from the rigour of creditors who first impoverished, and then enslaved them. Since this time the aristocracy had found it expedient to court the commonalty, which it could no longer oppress, and to part with a portion of its wealth for the sake of retaining its power. There were, of course, then, as at all times, benevolent individuals who only consulted the dictates of a generous nature; but the contrast between the practice which prevailed before and after the age of Solon seems clearly to mark the spurious origin of the ordinary beneficence. Yet Isocrates, when he extols the bounty of the good old times, which prevented the pressure of poverty from being ever felt, speaks of land granted at low rents, sums of money advanced at low interest, and asserts that none of the citizens were then in such indigence as to depend on casual relief. Cimon's munificence, therefore, must have been remarkable, not only in its degree, but in its kind; and was not the less that of a demagogue, because he sought popularity, not merely for his own sake, but for that of his order and his party. Such was the light in which it was viewed by Pericles, and some of the measures which This kind of expenditure was wise and no- most strongly marked his administration were ble; but it was coupled with another, mischiev-adopted to counteract its effects. He was not ous in its tendency, and seemingly degrading able to rival Cimon's profusion, and he even both to the benefited and to the benefactor. husbanded his private fortune with rigid econoCimon, it is said, not only, like Pisistratus, invi *Cim, 10. In his Life of Pericles, 9, he seems himself to adopt the same view. With regard to the removal of the fences, Plutarch's statement is not confirmed by Theopompus (Athen., xii, p. 533). and may, therefore, be sus pected of exaggeration. † Areop., c. 12 Ibid., c. 38. my, that he might keep his probity in the man- | farther conquest on the mainland between the agement of public affairs free both from tempta- newly-conquered district and Macedonia. Plution and suspicion. His friend Demonides is tarch says that he was expected to have invasaid first to have suggested the thought of ded Macedonia, and to have added a large tract throwing Cimon's liberality into the shade, and of it to the dominions of Athens. Yet it does rendering it superfluous by proposing a similar not clearly appear how the conquest of Thasos application of the public revenue.* Pericles, afforded an opportunity of effecting this with perhaps, deemed it safer and more becoming greater ease, nor is any motive suggested for that the people should supply the poorer citizens such an attack on the territories of Alexander. with the means of enjoyment out of its own We might hence be inclined to suspect that the funds than that they should depend on the expedition which Cimon had neglected to underbounty of opulent individuals. He might think take, though called for by the people's wishes, that the generation which had raised their coun- if not by their express orders, was to have been try to such a pitch of greatness was entitled to directed, not against Macedonia, but against reap the fruits of the sacrifice which their fa- the Thracian tribes on its frontier, who had so thers had made in resigning the produce of the lately cut off their colonists on the Strymon; a mines of Laurium to the use of the state. Very blow which the Athenians were naturally imearly, therefore, he signalized his appearance in patient to avenge, but which the King of Mathe assembly by becoming the author of a series cedonia might well be supposed to have witof measures, all tending to provide for the sub-nessed without regret, even if he did not instisistence and gratification of the poorer class at the public expense. We do not stop to describe these measures, because they will find a more appropriate place in a general view of the administration of Pericles. But we must here observe that, while he was courting the favour of the multitude by these arts, he was no less studious to command its respect. From his first entrance into public life, he devoted himself with unremitting application to business; he was never to be seen out of doors, but on the way between his house and the seat of council; and, as if by way of contrast to Cimon's convivial tastes, declined all invitations to the entertainments of his acquaintance-once only during the whole period he broke through this rule, to honour the wedding of his relative Euryptolemus with his presence-and confined himself to the society of a very select circle of intimate friends. He bestowed the most assiduous attention on the preparation of his speeches, and so little disguised it, that he used to say he never mounted the bema without praying that no inappropriate word might drop from his lips. The impression thus produced was heightened by the calm majesty of his air and carriage, and by the philosophical composure which he maintained under all provocations.† And he was so careful to avoid the effect which familiarity might have on the people, that he was sparing even in his attendance at the assembly, and, reserving his own appearance for great occasions, carried many of his measures through the agency of his friends and partisans. Among them the person whose name is most frequently associated with that of Pericles was Ephialtes, son of Sophonides, a person not much less conspicuous for his rigid integrity than Aristides himself, and who seems to have entered into the views of Pericles with disinterested earnestness, and fearlessly to have borne the brunt of the conflict with the opposite party. Immediately after the conquest of Thasos an occasion occurred for the two parties to measure their strength. It would appear that Cimon had received instructions, before he brought home his victorious armament, to attempt some *Plut., Per., 9, on the autnority of Aristotle. Plutarch tells a story-characteristic, if not true-of a rude fellow, who, after railing at Pericles all day, as he was transacting business in public, followed him after dusk with abusive language to his door, when Pericles ordered one of his servants to take a light and conduct the nian home. gate those who inflicted it. However this may be, Cimon's forbearance disappointed and irritated the people, and his adversaries inflamed the popular indignation by ascribing his conduct to the influence of Macedonian gold. This part of the charge, at least, was undoubtedly groundless; and Pericles, though appointed by the people one of Cimon's accusers, when he was brought to trial for treason, seems to have entered into the prosecution with reluctance. The danger, however, was great, and Elpinice came to the house of Pericles to plead with him for her brother. Pericles playfully, though, it would seem, not quite so delicately as our manners would require, reminded her that she was past the age at which female intercession is most powerful, but, in effect, he granted her request; for he kept back the thunder of his eloquence, and only rose once, for form's sake, to second the accusation. Plutarch says that Cimon was acquitted; and there seems to be no reason for doubting the fact, except a suspicion that this was the trial to which Demosthenes alludes when he says that Cimon narrowly escaped with his life, and was condemned to a penalty of fifty talents: a singular repetition of his father's destiny.* This, however, was only a prelude to a more momentous struggle, which involved the principles of the parties, and excited much stronger feelings of mutual resentment. It appears to have been about this time that Pericles resolved on attacking the aristocracy in its ancient and revered stronghold, the Areopagus. We have seen that this body, at once a council and a court of justice, was composed, according to Solon's regulation, of the ex-archons. Its character was little altered after the archonship was filled by lot, so long as it was open to none but citizens of the wealthiest class; but, by the innovation introduced by Aristides, the poorest Athenian might gain admission to the Areopagus. Still, the change which this measure produced in its composition was, probably, for a charge, but, as Wachsmuth observes, the motive of the * Aristog., p. 688. In this case he does not mention the prosecution. On the other hand, the language of Domosthenes, ὅτι τὴν πάτριον μετεκίνησε πολιτείαν, would suit very well what Plutarch says of Cimon's attempt to revive the old aristocracy, Cim., 15; but then we hear of no formal prosecution before the ostracism. Bekker's reading, Ilapior for marpiov, would put an end to this question, and would seem to show that the orator had confounded Cimon's history with his father's. THE AREOPAGUS.-ALLIANCE BETWEEN ATHENS AND ARGOS. 299 ing been made on it, they began to suspect that long time scarcely perceptible, and attended | long time passed without any impression havwith no effect on its maxims and proceedings. When Pericles made his attack on it, it was, perhaps, as much as ever an aristocratical assembly. The greater part of the members had come in under the old system, and most of those who followed them probably belonged to the same class; for though, in the eye of the law, the archonship had become open to all, it is not likely that many of a lower station would immediately present themselves to take their chance. But, even if any such were successful, they could exert but little influence on the general character of the council, which would act much more powerfully on them. The poor man who took his seat among a number of persons of superior rank, fortune, and education, would generally be eager to adopt the tone, and conform to the wishes of his colleagues; and hence the prevailing spirit might continue for many generations unaltered. This may be the main point which Isocrates had in view when he observed that the worst men, as soon as they entered the Areopagus, seemed to change their nature.* Pericles, therefore, had reason to consider it as a formidable obstacle to his plans. He did not, however, attempt, or perhaps desire, to abolish an institution so hallow-grounded on the title of her ancient kings. She ed by tradition; but he aimed at narrowing the range of its functions, so as to leave it little more than an august name. Ephialtes was his principal coadjutor in this undertaking, and, by the prominent part which he took in it, exposed himself to the implacable enmity of the opposite party, which appears to have set all its engines in motion to ward off the blow. asserted a right to the presidency of the Nemean Games, which had been long enjoyed by Argos, and to the superintendence of a temple of Heré, which was common to the two cities, and lay between them, though nearer to Mycenæ. It had no doubt been the prospect of support from Sparta that encouraged Mycena in this rivalry with her more powerful neighbour. It is not certain whether this struggle had But when the earthquake and the Messenian begun, or was only impending, at the time of insurrection had disabled Sparta from all efforts the embassy which came from Sparta to request on behalf of others, the Argives seized the opthe aid of the Athenians against Ithome. But portunity of making war on Mycena. They the two parties were no less at variance on this were assisted by Tegea and Cleonæ, defeated subject than on the other. The aristocratical the Mycenians in battle, shut them up within party considered Sparta as its natural ally, and their walls, and, in spite of a gallant resistance, did not wish to see Athens without a rival in took the city, razed it to the ground, and anGreece. Cimon was personally attached to nexed the territory to their own. It was appa Sparta, possessed the confidence of the Spar-rently very soon after this important conquest, tans, and took every opportunity of expressing the warmest admiration of their character and institutions, and, to mark his respect for them, gave one of his sons the name of Lacedæmonius. He himself was, in some degree, indebted to their patronage for his political elevation, and had requited their favour by joining with them in the persecution of Themistocles. When, therefore, Ephialtes dissuaded the people from granting the request of the Spartans, and exclaimed against the folly of raising a fallen antagonist, Cimon urged them not to permit Greece to be lamed, and Athens to lose her yoke-fellow. This advice prevailed, and Cimon was sent with a large force to assist the Spartans at the siege of Ithome. The Spartans had hoped that the Athenians, who were eminently skilful in this kind of warfare, would have enabled them speedily to reduce the place. But when they found that a • Areop., 15. to which we shall hereafter return, that they received proposals of alliance from Athens, which they gladly embraced; and the Thessalians-by what means does not appear-were included in the treaty.* This turn of events was extremely agreeable to the democratical party at Athens, not only in itself, on account of the assistance which they might hope to receive from Argos, but because it immediately afforded them a great advantage in their conflict with their domestic adversaries, and in particular furnished them with new arms against Cimon. He instantly became obnoxious, both as the avowed friend of Sparta, and as the author and leader of the expedition which had drawn so rude an insult on his countrymen. The attack on the authority of the Areopagus was now prosecuted with greater vigour, and Cimon had little influence left to ex* Mr. Clinton, Fasti Hell., on the authority of Diodorus, places the fall of Mycena in the archonship of Theagenides. O1 78, 1, B.C. 468, four years before the earthquake 4 On this subject, see some excellent remarks in Droy- at Sparta. But Diodorus seenis to be much better entitled sen's German translation of Eschylus, i., p. 176. #penλaxwy, Plut., Cim., 16. 4 μήτε την ελλαδα χωλὴν, μήτε τὴν πόλιν (τερόζυγα repoziv yeyevnévgy-the language of Cimon, reported by his contemporary, the poet lon of Chios. Plut., Cim., 16. to attention in his view of the connexion of the events, which is that taken in the text, than in his date. Independent of his authority, it is scarcely conceivable that Sparta would have permitted the destruction of Mycene if she had been in a condition to protect her ally. ert in its behalf. Yet his party seems not by to require it. One of the strongest arguments any means to have remained passive, but to for the opinion that the law of Ephialtes took have put forth all its strength in a last effort to causes of murder out of the jurisdiction of the save its citadel; and it was supported by an Areopagus and transferred them to the popular auxiliary who had some very powerful engines courts is afforded by the poem of Eschylus, to wield in its defence. This was the poet which turns entirely on the foundation of the Eschylus, who was attached to it by his char-court. Yet it must be owned that the praises acter and his early associations. Himself a of Athene rather apply to the council, and it is Eupatrid, perhaps connected with the priestly especially difficult to conceive what object Perfamilies of Eleusis, his deme, if not his birth-icles and his party could have had in touching place, he gloried in the laurels which he had that part of the criminal jurisdiction which was won at Marathon above all the honours earned at once the most venerable, the most rarely exby his sword and by his pen, though he had also ercised, and the least liable to abuse; for it fought at Salamis, and had founded a new era does not appear that hitherto the spirit of party of dramatic poetry. He was an admirer of had become so furious at Athens as to resort Aristides, whose character he had painted in to assassination, though not long after we shall one of his tragedies, under the name of an an- meet with a remarkable instance of such an excient hero, with a truth which was immediately cess. On the other hand, it may be objected recognised by the audience. The contest with that the power of the council had long ceased Persia, which was the subject of one of his to be formidable, and could not give occasion to great works, probably appeared to him the le- so earnest and passionate a contest. Yet its gitimate object for the energies of Greece. Be- dormant claims might be revived at a more seasides this general disposition to side with Ci-sonable juncture, and there were some branchmon's party against Pericles, the whole train es of the jurisdiction pertaining to its censorial of his poetical and religious feelings, nourished authority which might at all times offer a conby a deep study of the mythical and religious venient handle to the aristocratical party for traditions of Greek antiquity, engaged him in an attack on Pericles and his friends. There the cause of the Areopagus, to oppose what he was none, as the event proved, which they had probably considered as a sacrilegious encroach- more cause to fear than a charge of impiety, ment on a venerable and hallowed institution. which now came under the cognizance of the As such, he endeavoured to represent it to the Areopagus, but at a later period in the life of people, with all the power of his solemn poetry, Pericles seems to be no longer subject to it. and all the arts of theatrical illusion. In his We are therefore still inclined to think, though tragedy entitled the Eumenides, which was act- some of the highest modern authorities are on ed probably in the year of the rupture with the opposite side, that it was the council, with Sparta, and just after the conclusion of the its incidental jurisdiction, rather than the tributreaty with Argos, he exhibits the mythical ori-nal for the prosecution of murder, which Ephigin of the court and council of Areopagus in the form which best suited his purpose, tracing it to the cause first pleaded there between the Argive matricide Orestes-who pledges his country to eternal alliance with Athens-and the dread goddesses who sought vengeance for the blood which he had shed. The poet brings these terrible beings on the stage, as well as the tutelary goddess of the city, who herself in-ly stitutes the tribunal, to last throughout all ages, and exhorts her people to preserve it as the glory and safeguard of the city; and the spectators are led to consider the continuance of the blessings which the pacified avengers promise to the land as depending on the permanence of the institution which had succeeded to their functions. Nevertheless, though the composition to which this drama belongs seems to have surpassed all his former productions, the author failed in his political object; and Ephialtes carried a decree, or a law, by which the Areopagus was shorn of its authority, and only retained a few branches of its jurisdiction. Thus much is certain; but it is extremely difficult to determine the precise nature of the innovation, and whether it affected the power of the tribunal, which took cognizance of causes of murder, or that of the council, which claimed a large and indefinite superintendence over the education and conduct of the citizens, and the decision of various causes pertaining to religion and morals, and even the right of interfering with the decrees of the people in cases where, according to its own view, the public safety might seem * Paus., i., 14, 4 altes struck at and this opinion seems to accord best with the manner in which Plutarch connects the attempts of Cimon to restore the authority of the Areopagus with those which he made to revive the old aristocratical constitution.* This triumph of Pericles and his party over the Areopagus seems to have been immediatefollowed by the ostracism of Cimon, which took place about two years after the return of the Athenians from Messenia; and it is therefore not improbable that his exile may have been not so much an effect of popular resentment as a measure of precaution which may have appeared necessary even to the moderate men of both parties for the establishment of public tranquillity. The rupture between Athens and Sparta led to new movements, by which Athens gained a great immediate advantage, but lost one of her old and most useful allies. Corinth and Megara had been for some time past at war; a dispute about their frontier was probably the pretext, rather than the cause of their quarrel. The party uppermost at Megara could now rely on the friendship of Athens; it renounced the alliance with Sparta, and admitted an Athenian garrison into the city, and into the port of Pega on the Corinthian Gulf. To secure the communication between Megara and the sea, and its dependance on its new ally, the Athenians Cim., 15. For the literature of the controversy which has been warmly agitated in Germany on this question, the reader may consult note 4, p. 118, of Mueller's edition of the Eumenides. connected the city with its harbour at Nisæa by | the defence of the city, and marched out with a work similar to that which had lately been them to meet the Corinthians. The action begun between Athens and Piræus, and them- which followed was not decisive; but the Atheselves garrisoned the walls which they built for nians remained on the field and erected a trothe Megarians. phy, while the Corinthians returned home; but, While a part of their force was thus employ-being there reproached for yielding to so uneed, another was carrying on the war with Persia in a new quarter. Inarus, king of some of the Libyan tribes on the western border of Egypt, had excited an insurrection there against the Persians, and his authority was acknowledged throughout the greater part of the country. Artaxerxes sent his brother Achæmenes with a great army to quell this rebellion. An Athenian armament of 200 galleys was lying, at the time, off Cyprus, and Inarus sent to obtain its assistance. The Athenian commanders, wheth-ians missed their road, and turned into a large er following their own discretion, or after orders received from home, quitted Cyprus, and, having joined with the insurgents, enabled them to defeat Achæmenes, who fell in the battle by the hand of Inarus. They then sailed up the Nile to Memphis, where a body of Persians and some Egyptians, who still adhered to their cause, were in possession of one quarter of the city, called White Castle.* The rest was subject to Inarus, and there the Athenians stationed themselves and besieged the Persians. qual a force, twelve days after they again sallied forth, and marched to the scene of action to set up a rival trophy, or, more properly, to challenge the Athenians to another battle. The Athenians, who, perhaps, expecting a fresh attack, had remained at Megara, immediately issued from the town, cut to pieces a party of the enemy who were erecting the trophy, and then, coming up to the main body, completely defeated them. In their flight a part of the Corinthpit or quarry, from which they could find no egress. The Athenians having stationed their heavy-armed in the passage by which they entered, surrounded the place with their light troops, who with their missiles slew every man within. Thucydides does not mention the number that fell, but says that the loss was great enough to be deeply felt at Corinth. Some time before the Corinthians made this ineffectual attempt to relieve Ægina, the King of Persia, who saw himself in danger of losing his last hold on Egypt, had endeavoured to pro their countrymen in an expedition against Attica. Megabazus did not find the leading Spartans unwilling to receive his money, but they seem to have been unable to render him the service for which it was offered. Ithomé still held out; and Sparta had probably not yet sufficiently either recovered her strength, or restored internal tranquillity, to venture on the proposed invasion. Some rumour of this negotiation may have reached Athens, and have They were still engaged in this enterprise, which, from the magnitude of the force employ-cure a similar diversion in his own favour, which ed in it, might once have seemed sufficient to might draw away the Athenians from Memphis. engross their attention, in the year B.C. 457, The time had now come when the gold of Perone of the most eventful in their annals. The sia was to be found more formidable to Greece occupation of Megara had roused the most ve- than her arms. Artaxerxes sent a Persian, hement resentment at Corinth, and was follow-named Megabazus, to Sparta, with a sum of ed by a war, in which the Corinthians were join-money to be employed in bribing the principal ed by Ægina and the maritime towns of Argolis. Spartans to use their influence, so as to engage The Athenians did not wait to be attacked. They landed a body of troops near Haliæ in the Argolic Acté, but were driven back to their ships with loss by the united forces of Corinth and Epidaurus. This check, however, was soon revenged by a victory which they gained over the Peloponnesian fleet off the island of Cecryphalea, in the Saronic Gulf; and shortly afterward, under the command of Leocrates, their arms were crowned with a still more brilliant success. He defeated the allies in a great sea-quickened the energy with which Pericles now fight near Ægina, and took seventy of their galleys, and then landing his troops on the island, laid siege to the city. The Corinthians thought to effect a diversion in favour of the Æginetans by seizing the passes of Geranea and invading the Megarian territory, while they sent a small force over to Egina. They could not believe it possible that the Athenians, while they were carrying on a war in Egypt and the adjacent coasts of Phoenicia, and in Cyprus, could protect Megara without drawing their troops away from Ægina. But the spirit of Athens was even greater than her strength, and rose against dan-des, an opportunity presented itself-if it was gers and difficulties;† and she had a man within her walls perhaps not inferior to Cimon or Miltiades. Myronides collected all the citizens, young and old, who had been left at home for • ACUROV Taixos. Thuc, i., 104. Ctesias, c. 32. Diodor. (zi., 74) calls Achimenes the uncle of Artaxerxes. The Athenians were conscious of the greatness of their own efforts. In an inscription still preserved in the Louvre, the Erechthean tribe records, with emphatic simplicity, that its slain fell in Cyprus, in Egypt, in Phenicia, at Ha; lie, in Egins, in Megara, in the same year. See Dr. Arnold on Thuc, t, 104. urged the completion of the long walls, for which preparations had been made, as we have seen, some years before. But among his opponents there was a faction who viewed the progress of this great work in a different light from Cimon, and saw in it, not the means of securing the independence of Athens, but a bulwark of the hated commonalty. They, too, would gladly have seen an invading army in Attica, which might assist them in destroying the work and its authors. And in the same year which witnessed the last-mentioned victory of Myroni not procured by their intrigues-which encouraged them to hope for such a triumph. The Phocians had invaded Doris, and had taken one of its little towns. The piety of the Spartans was roused; they assembled an army of 10,000 allied troops, and 1500 of their own, marched into Doris, and compelled the Phocians to restore their conquest. But an obstacle seemed now to be placed in the way of their return. The Athenians, who had a squadron at Pega, could prevent them from crossing the Corinthian Gulf; |