HISTORY OF GREECE. the μixpà ikkλncia was not convened. It was, therefore, rexépevov of the Scholiast he supposes to have arisen fruc a misapprehension of the poet's meaning, and therefore retophanes there was a provision that the defendant should jects the opinion of Morus, who, on the authority of the be guarded on cach side while he pleaded his cause, but on Scholiast, concluded that in the decree alluded to try Ansthis very account, and because the Scholast calls the process an tiday eλia, thought that this must be a different decree from the one mentioned by Xenophon. Hudtwaicker (Die Diet., p. 94, note) agrees with Schneider as to the meaning of Aristophanes, and thinks that the Scholiast mus understood it, but nevertheless believes that the classe 23+ which Aristophanes alluded. τεχόμενον ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἀπολογεῖσθαι was really contamed in the decree of Cannonus, though it is not the part to phon, Hell., 1, 7, 39, where it is said that, in consequenc ings in the case of Callixenus, and the others who deceived He compares the proceedthe people in the affair of the generals, described by Xenothey were kept in custody by their sureties: dinov itd of the decree whch directed them ἐγγυητάς καταστήσει. τῶν ἐγγυησαμένων. In like manner, under the decree of Cannonus, it is probable that the defendant was either to be thrown into prison, and brought up to trial in chains, if he found bail, to be attended by his sureties at the bear That the Spartan assembly, such as we suppose the EKKλngia to have been, should have remained down to the latest times as completely under the control of the magistrates as in the heroic age, is certainly a remarkable fact, but in itself by no means incredible; and the powers of the ephors, instead of being inconsistent with it, seems to afford the most natural explanation of it, both according to Lachmann's view of the origin and character of their office, and according to that which we proposed in the first volume. Between these views, indeed, it will be seen there is very little difference: both are opposed nearly in the same manner to those of Mueller and Wachsmuth. Mueller's notion that the ephoralty was the movable element, the principle of change in the Spartan Constitution (Dorians, iii., 7, 1, 7), seems to contradict the whole course of its history, in which it appears steadily opposed to all revolutionary attempts, and the main stay of the oligarchical or aristocratical government. On the other hand, Wachsmuth's inference from this fact, that the ephors were chosen from the privileged class, seems to us totally inconsistent with the language of Aristotle, Pol., 11., 6, 14. Wachsmuth takes the npos mentioned by Aristotle in that passage for the peers. But we do not see how Aristotle could have said of this privileged class, ἡσυχάζει γὰρ ὁ δῆμος διὰ τὸ μετέχειν τῆς μεγίστης ἀρ Xs. The senate, though filled from the worthiest, belonged to this δήμος no less than the ephoruity; and ήσυχάζει does not exclude secret feelings of discontent, but only the outward manifestation of them; so that this statement would not be at variance with the history of Cinadon's plot, though the δήμος included the ὑπομείσιες. The word is used in the same sense as by Thucydides, i., 143, where Pericles says of the discontented allies of Athens, où yap ἡσυχάσουσι μὴ ἱκανῶν ἡμῶν ὄντων ἐπ' αὐτοὺς στρατεύειν : and Pausanias, iii., 10, 1, the Corinthians róTE μèv Typ AynotXaov deipari houxasov. So the equivalent phrases houxiavscribed by Euryptolemus, is well explained by Platner (Der ἄγειν, ἡσυχίαν ἔχειν. finding himself unable to cope with the democratical RhoXen, Hell., v., 8, 22. Ecdicus, dians, ἡσυχίαν ἦγεν ἐν τῇ Κυίδῳ, 127. The patriots in the Athenian assembly, overawed by Lysias, Eratosth., p. Lysander, οἱ μὲν αὐτοῦ μένοντες ἡσυχίαν εἶχον. As in Appendix II. we ventured to offer some conjectures on the organization of the Spartan army, we will take this opportunity of mentioning Lachmann's opinion on this subject. He sets out from the statement of Herodotus, i., 65 (mentioned p. 582), and infers from it, with Mueller, that the army was organized according to the divisions of the tribes; but observes, that the syssitia of which Herodotus speaks cannot have been the greater-which were no way connected with the lochi or the pentecostyes-but the smaller, of fifteen men each, which must therefore, he thinks, have been originally, as well as the triacades, subdivisions of the tribes. In the same way he conceives the six moras to have corresponded to the three tribes, according to that bipartition of which, as we have seen, he finds other examples in the Dorian and the Attic tetrapolis, and in the Asiatic hexapolis. The six Spartan moras he supposes to have formed the cadres of the army, in which the contingents of the provincial towns were incorporated; and he thinks it probable that it was only when they were thus filled up that they bore the name of mora. When, as at Mantinea, the army was composed of citizens only, the Spartan mora, being considered only as a part of the corps properly so called, was termed a lochus; and when the whole Spartan force was brought into the field, four of the ordinary lochi were thrown into one; but when only a part of it was called out, the smaller lochi were retained as subdivisions of the mora; and hence he would account for the various statements as to the strength of the mora, which fluctuate between three and nine hundred men. XIII. ON THE DECREE OF CANNONUS. THE modern authors who have mentioned the decree of Cannonus seem all to have agreed in the supposition that one of its main objects was, in cases where there were several defendants charged with the offence described in it, to give each the benefit of a separate trial. Schneider, in his note on the Hellenics, 1, 7, 21, endeavours to accommodate the allusion in Aristoph., Eccles., 1089, to this supposed purport of the decree. Yet it seems clear that this was not the poet's meaning, and that the young man is only compa ring his plight to that of a culprit who, under the decree of Cannonus, was placed at the bar held by a person on each side. In this sense the Greek Scholiast, though his words are corrupted, clearly understood the passage. He says, ψηφισμό γε γράφει κατεχόμενον ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἀπολογεῖσθαι τὸν κατ' εἰσαγγελίαν ἀποκρινόμενον. pear that Hesychius meant anything else, though he uses And it does not ap the plural number in the words quoted by Schneider: Kayνώνου ψήφισμα· εἰσήνεγκε γὰρ οὗτος ψήφισμα ὥστε διειλημα μένους τους κρινομένους ἑκατέρωθεν ἀπολογεῖσθαι. From the fanguage of Hesychius, Schneider collects that the word EKαTEOWOEV belongs to the decree of Cannouus; but the xa ing. Schneider's notion that diakenuutvor in the passage of Aristophanes is to be understood in a middle sense, seems youth, but his two tormentors, who are compared to the to us to destroy all the humour, and, indeed, all the meaning, of the comparison; for then it is not the embarrassed defendants under the deeree of Caunonus, while for the description, that we rest our belief that the decree of Can speaker himself there would be no point of comparison at nonus made no provision for the case of a plurality τα ερ all. it is not, however, on this allusion, but on Xenophon's fendants. The general purpose of the decree, as it is de Process und die Klagen bei den Attikern, p. 376), though he has likewise adopted the common opinion as to the clause in question. It was an extremely rigorous decree (ices Turov), designed to deprive the delinquent of all means of evading justice. Its peculiarity as to the process preceding conviction consisted in three points: First, the offence wa described in language so comprehensive as to include every possible case of treason, ἐάν τις τὸν δῆμον ἀδική he was to pérov áročíkεiv. Considering the ordinary temper of the be tried before the assembled people, iv r dig at be was to be kept in close custody till the trial was over, defe Athenian tribunals, we can hardly doubt that a clause fam separating the cases of several defendants would have been considered as favourable to them; and, accordingly, Wachsmuth (1, 2, p. 205, note 178), who adopts the common opinion as to the distinguishing feature of the decree (Des Psephisma des Kannonos von Sonderung der Sachen mehrerer Angeklagten), supposes it to have been passed under the polity which followed the overthrow of the Four Hondred. A clause of such a tendency would clearly not have been in harmony with the general spirit of the measure, and we are therefore obliged to view it with the more sex picion. On point, at least, is evident: that this clause was not the distinguishing feature of the decree; for Eur lemus supposes that the generals would no less have the benefit of a separate hearing for each, if they were presentted under the other law which he mentions, against T lege and a certain class of treasonable offences. go farther, and observe, that such a clause would have beez superfluous, as it only prescribed that which the law pre viously required; for otherwise the proposition of Calle nus would not have been contrary to law, as we presun that no one will contend that the vouos mentioned 14, 15, 27, is either the decree of Cannonus, or the other hw against sacrilege and treason. that no such clause existed; and the common opinion st This seems proof sufferi to have arisen solely out of the two words lixa EsarTY ◊ 37, which have been erroneously referred to the decree • Cannonus, though they may just as easily be taken to ex press a distinct part of the proposition of Euryptolemus. XIV. ON THE CONSTITUTION OF ATHENS UNDER T THIRTY. LACHMANN has endeavoured, in the work above aret to determine the constitution of the provincial towns of La conia, and conceives that it is illustrated by the mESCO which Lysander adopted in the cities subjected to the Star tan dominion after the Peloponnesian war. besides that which included Sparta itself), he things according to Ephorus, was divided into six provinces ** As Lacs & the division of Messenia into five provinces was almy ma ple. Now the Scholiast of Pindar, OL n. 154. ea re s by the Spartans after the conquest. There were trim t provinces, besides the tract occupied by the sover pez passage which has very much the appearanca of being st tilated, or otherwise corrupted) that there were harmosts of the Lacedæmoniaas. This would give to s APPENDIX. each of the provinces, corresponding to the Spartan kings. But again we read of a hundred provincial towns, which, as one of those named among them (thea) was in Messenia, must have answered to the ten provinces, so that the district subject to each harmost included five towns. If, as Lachmann thinks clear, Messenia was comprehended in the 30,000 parcels mentioned by Plutarch (Lyc., 8), there would be 300 to each town, and this may therefore be considered as the number of the families which possessed landed property in each township, and formed a provincial nobility. From them were elected the Councils of Ten, which, according to the analogy of Lysander's institutions, Lachmann supposes to have governed the towns under the harmosts. But the decarchy was only introduced in the towns which had been subject to another state, as the provincial towns to Sparta. The Constitution of an imperial city, like Athens, was regulated on the model of Sparta itself, as nearly as the difference of circumstances would permit. Hence a council of Thirty was established there, in imitation of the Spartan senate, while Piræus, as a distinct provincial town, Even for the Three Thousand was ruled by a decarchy. Lachmann finds a parallel in the Spartan institutions. was, as we have seen, according to him, the number of the families contained in the three tribes before the admission of the commonalty. It I the atrocities of his government from those of the French isse numerum. XV. ON LYSANDER'S REVOLUTIONARY PROJECTS THE account which Plutarch gives, on the authority of Ephorus (avopos ioтopikov Kai piλocógov, Lys., 25), of the Ingenious as these combinations are, we doubt whether, mode in which Lysander meant to bring about the revoluas it shows the degree of credulity which he attributed to with regard to Athens, they do not place the state of the tion which he meditated at Sparta, is chiefly remarkable case in a false point of view. That in the Athenian oliconst of the Euxine a young impostor named Silenus, who Lysander had pregarchical party there was a predilection, or at least an af- his countrymen. There was, it seems, somewhere on the fectation of respect for the Spartan institutions, cannot be denied. It is sufficiently indicated by the name of ephors, gave himself out as the son of Apollo. which was assumed by Critias and his four colleagues be- vailed on this youth to lend himself to his designs, and hofore the surrender of the city. Among the remaining frag-ped first to gain the sanction of the Delphic oracle for the ments of the poetry of Critias is part of an elegy, in which impostor's pretensions, and then to use his authority to at Sparta, to the effect that the state would be more proshe celebrates the superiority of the Spartan convivial usages confirm a forged prophecy which was to be brought to light over those of the other Greeks. He had paid particular atzens. Plutarch conceives that Lysander did not fall upon tention to the institutions of the Greek states, many of which perous if the kings were elected from the worthiest citihe had described in a poetical work, which, it seems, bore the same title as Aristotle's on the same subject. It would the thought of this machinery in aid of his revolutionary therefore be possible that he might be better acquainted plans until they had been so far matured that he had prothan even Lysander himself with the Spartan constitutional cured a speech to be written for him by Cleon of Halicarantiquities, for among them must be numbered the original nassus, with which he intended to recommend the measure. complement of the three Spartan tribes. But the question He was then struck with the difficulty of the enterprise, is, how far it was the design either of Lysander or of the and bethought himself of playing upon the superstition and Athenian oligarchs to assimilate the new Constitution of credulity of the Spartans. All was ready for the execution Athens to that of Sparta. That it was the number of the of his project, when one of his associates became frightenNor was it discovered until the speech Spartan senate that suggested the council of Thirty is in- ed, and withdrew; and his own untimely death soon after was found in his house, which, however, Agesilaus was indeed highly probable, if not absolutely certain; but this put an end to it. fact seems to be of very little importance, unless it was We cannot agree with Manso (Sparta, iii., 2, p. 47), that part of a plan, such as Lachmann attributes to Lysander duced to suppress by the advice of the ephor Lacratidas. and his partisans, of ordering everything strictly upon the Spartan model. But of this assertion we find no proof; and the circumstantial details with which the ancients relate something very different seems to be implied in the lan- Lysander's project place the fact beyond doubt; if its credinclined to censure the temerity with which it has been reguage of Xenophon where he speaks of the institution of ibility rested on no other ground, we should not have been the Thirty. He would lead us to suppose that it was avowedly only a temporary measure, preliminary to a new jected by a modern author, though the reason which he asConstitution, which was to be framed by Critias and his signs for his incredulity-Xenophon's silence-would not colleagues, not, however, upon the Spartan, but upon the be the less absurd; for the same motives which induced ancient Attic model; and, indeed, it would appear as if the Spartan government to hush up the affair, would cerit. Our conviction of the truth of the main fact is groundLachmann had entirely overlooked that, besides the Thirty, tainly have led Xenophon carefully to avoid all allusions to a larger council and other magistrates were actually appointed, for whom there was no pattern to be found at ed chiefly on its perfect congruence with the character and Sparta. Such professions especially became Critias, who the position of Lysander, and with several well-attested descended in a collateral line from Solon. But as Lysan-events in his history. The motives which urged Pausanias der probably aimed at nothing beyond the establishment of and Cinadon to a similar enterprise were all combined in a very narrow oligarchy, so Critias, perhaps, never intend- Lysander. The ancients, indeed, do not agree in their aced to make any farther changes as long as the councils and counts of his motives, and consequently differ as to the ancies may be easily reconciled. The authors followed by the other magistrates were subservient to his will. As to epoch when he first formed the design. But these discrepthe reasons which induced him to fix upon the number 3000 for that of the citizens who were to enjoy the new fran- Nepos ascribed it to his resentment against the ephors who Both motives may have conspired to fix his chise, it does not seem necessary to resort to Lachmann's abolished his decarchies; Plutarch, to his quarrel with hypothesis for an explanation. That number was naturally Agesilaus. suggested by its proportion to the number of the supreme resolution. It was not only, or for the first time, in the council, when the question was, whether the forms of the abolition of the decarchies that he had been thwarted by the preceding oligarchy should in this respect be retained or ephors. It appears from Plutarch (Lys., 19, 20) that still altered. But it seems clear from Xenophon's account that earlier after his triumph at Agos-potami he had experi the institution of the Three Thousand was merely an after-enced some personal humiliation from them, which must thought, which had not entered into the original plan ether of Critias or of Lysander, and would never have been conceived but for the opposition of Theramenes, and the dangers which threatened the tyrants both from within and without. then have been peculiarly irritating to him, from its contrast with the extravagant flattery which he had received Nevertheless, here again it is only the general fact that Pluabroad, especially in the Ionian cities. we can accept as probable, for it seems impossible to reconSievers, in his excellent little work on Xenophon's Helle-cile Plutarch's details with Xenophon's narrative. nius, which has thrown more light than any other we have tarch says that Pharnabazus sent envoys to Sparta with met with on the period included in the first two books, ex-complaints against Lysander, on account of damage done presses an opinion which we think much too favourable of to his territory, and that the ephors put his friend and colthe character and motives of Critias. This, however, is a league Thorax to death, and sent a scytale to recall him. point with which we have here nothing to do. But the lan- Lysander was alarmed by this message, and, before he quitan exculpatory letter for the ephors; but Pharnabazus craftguage in which he speaks of the designs of Critias seems to ted the Helle spont, prevailed on Pharnabazus to give him us hardly consistent with itself. He says, p. 50, Critias, juvemer charges. Yet no punishment appears to have been innili quodam et generoso ardore flagrans, antiquum tempus, ily submitted one which contained a repetition of his forSed hoc in consilio exfhcted on him, and a few days after he obtained leave, it is ut ita dicam, reducere conatus est. sequendo-id haud facile quisquam negaret-nihil pensi nifil sancti habuit, dummodo ad id quod vellet perveniret. said, to set out on a journey to the oracle of Jupiter AmThen follows an attempt to excuse him, and to distinguish mon. It seems clear that in this account there is much dis |