[574] Thucyd. viii, 13.

[575] Thucyd. viii, 20-23.

[576] See the earlier part of this History, vol. vi, ch. l, pp. 257, 258.

[577] Thucyd. viii, 22.

[578] Thucyd. viii, 20.

[579] Thucyd. viii, 23. ἀπεκομίσθη δὲ πάλιν κατὰ πόλεις καὶ ὁ ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν πεζός, ὃς ἐπὶ τὸν Ἑλλήσποντον ἐμέλλησεν ἰέναι.

Dr. Arnold and Göller suppose that these soldiers had been carried over to Lesbos to coöperate in detaching the island from the Athenians. But this is not implied in the narrative. The land-force marched along by land to Klazomenæ and Kymê (ὁ πεζὸς ἅμα Πελοποννησίων τε τῶν παρόντων καὶ τῶν αὐτόθεν ξυμμάχων παρῄει ἐπὶ Κλαζομένων τε καὶ Κύμης). Thucydidês does not say that they ever crossed to Lesbos: they remained near Kymê, prepared to march forward, after that island should have been conquered, to the Hellespont.

Haacke is right, I think, in referring the words ὁ ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν πεζός to what had been stated in c. 17; that Alkibiadês and Chalkideus, on first arriving with the Peloponnesian five triremes at Chios, disembarked on that island their Peloponnesian seamen and armed them as hoplites for land-forces; taking aboard fresh crews of seamen from the island. The motive to make this exchange was, the great superiority of bravery, in heavy armor and stand-up fighting, of Peloponnesians as compared with Chians or Asiatic Greeks (see Xenoph. Hell. iii, 2, 17). These foot-soldiers taken from the Peloponnesian ships are the same as those spoken of in c. 22: ὁ πεζὸς ἅμα Πελοποννησίων τε τῶν παρόντων καὶ τῶν αὐτόθεν ξυμμάχων ... ὁ ἀπὸ τῶν νεῶν πεζός.

Farther, these troops are again mentioned in c. 24, as οἱ μετὰ Χαλκιδέως ἐλθόντες Πελοποννήσιοι, where Dr. Arnold again speaks of them in his note incorrectly. He says: “The Peloponnesians who came with Chalkideus must have been too few to offer any effectual resistance to one thousand heavy-armed Athenians, being only the epibatæ of five ships.” The fact is that they were not merely the epibatæ, but the entire crews, of five ships; comprising probably from eight hundred to one thousand men (ἐκ μὲν τῶν ἐκ Πελοποννήσου νεῶν τοὺς ναύτας ὁπλίσαντες ἐν Χίῳ καταλιμπάνουσι, c. 17), since there were a remnant of five hundred left of them, after some months’ operations and a serious defeat (viii, 32).

[580] Thucyd. viii, 24, with Dr. Arnold’s note.

[581] Aristotel. Politic. iv, 4, 1; Athenæus, vi, p. 265.

[582] Thucyd. viii, 24. Καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο οἱ μὲν Χῖοι ἤδη οὐκέτι ἐπεξῄσαν, οἱ δὲ (Ἀθηναῖοι) τὴν χώραν, καλῶς κατεσκευασμένην καὶ ἀπαθῆ οὖσαν ἀπὸ τῶν Μηδικῶν μέχρι τότε, διεπόρθησαν. Χῖοι γὰρ μόνοι μετὰ Λακεδαιμονίους, ὧν ἐγὼ ᾐσθόμην, εὐδαιμονήσαντες ἅμα καὶ ἐσωφρόνησαν, καὶ ὅσῳ ἐπεδίδου ἡ πόλις αὐτοῖς ἐπὶ τὸ μεῖζον, τόσῳ δὲ καὶ ἐκοσμοῦντο ἐχυρώτερον, etc.

viii. 45. Οἱ Χῖοι ... πλουσιώτατοι ὄντες τῶν Ἑλλήνων, etc.

[583] Thucyd. viii, 25, 26.

[584] Thucyd. viii, 26, 27.

[585] Phrynichus the Athenian commander was afterwards displaced by the Athenians,—by the recommendation of Peisander, at the time when this displacement suited the purpose of the oligarchical conspirators,—on the charge of having abandoned and betrayed Amorgês on this occasion, and caused the capture of Iasus (Thucyd. viii, 54).

Phrynichus and his colleagues were certainly guilty of grave omission in not sending notice to Amorgês of the sudden retirement of the Athenian fleet from Milêtus, the ignorance of which circumstance was one reason why Amorgês mistook the Peloponnesian ships for Athenian.

[586] Thucyd. viii, 28.

[587] Thucyd. viii, 29. What this new rate of pay was, or by what exact fraction it exceeded the half drachma, is a matter which the words of Thucydidês do not enable us to make out. None of the commentators can explain the text without admitting some alteration or omission of words: nor do any of the explanations given appear to me convincing. On the whole, I incline to consider the conjecture and explanation given by Paulmier and Dobree as more plausible than that of Dr. Arnold and Göller, or of Poppo and Hermann.

[588] Thucyd. viii, 36.

[589] Thucyd. viii, 30; compare Dr. Arnold’s note.

[590] Thucyd. viii, 31, 32.

[591] Thucyd. viii, 32, 33.

[592] Thucyd. viii, 33, 34.

[593] Thucyd. viii, 34-38. Δελφίνιον—λιμένας ἔχον, etc.

That the Athenians should select Lesbos on this occasion as the base of their operations, and as the immediate scene of last preparations, against Chios,—was only repeating what they had once done before (c. 24), and what they again did afterwards (c. 100). I do not feel the difficulty which strikes Dobree and Dr. Thirlwall. Doubtless Delphinium was to the north of the city of Chios.

[594] Thucyd. viii, 38-40. About the slaves in Chios, see the extracts from Theopompus and Nymphodôrus in Athenæus, vi, p. 265.

That from Nymphodôrus appears to be nothing but a romantic local legend, connected with the Chapel of the Kind-hearted Hero (Ἥρωος εὐμένους) at Chios.

Even in antiquity, though the institution of slavery was universal and noway disapproved, yet the slave-trade, or the buying and selling of slaves, was accounted more or less odious.

[595] See the life of Lysias the Rhetor, in Dionysius of Halikarnassus, c. i, p. 453, Reisk., and in Plutarch, Vit. x, Orat. p. 835.

[596] Thucyd. viii, 35-109.

[597] Thucyd. viii, 35, 36. καὶ γὰρ μισθὸς ἐδίδοτο ἀρκούντως, etc.

[598] Thucyd. viii, 37. Καὶ ἤν τις τῶν ἐν τῇ βασιλέως χώρᾳ, ἢ ὅσης βασιλεὺς ἄρχει, ἐπὶ τὴν Λακεδαιμονίων ἴῃ ἢ τῶν ξυμμάχων, βασιλεὺς κωλυέτω καὶ ἀμυνέτω κατὰ τὸ δυνατόν.

The distinction here drawn between the king’s territory, and the territory over which the king holds empire, deserves notice. By the former phrase, is understood, I presume, the continent of Asia, which the court of Susa looked upon, together with all its inhabitants, as a freehold exceedingly sacred and peculiar (Herodot. i, 4): by the latter, as much as the satrap should find it convenient to lay hands upon, of that which had once belonged to Darius son of Hystaspes or to Xerxes, in the plenitude of their power.

[599] Thucyd. viii, 38. ἀποπλέων ἐν κέλητι ἀφανίζεται.

[600] Thucyd. viii, 39. Καὶ εἴρητο αὐτοῖς, ἐς Μίλητον ἀφικομένους τῶν τε ἄλλων ξυνεπιμελεῖσθαι, ᾗ μέλλει ἄριστα ἕξειν, etc.

[601] Thucyd. viii, 42.

[602] Thucyd. viii, 43. This defeat of Charmînus is made the subject of a jest by Aristophanês, Thesmophor. 810, with the note of Paulmier.

[603] Thucyd. viii, 43.

[604] Thucyd. viii, 44. Οἱ δ’ ἐς τὴν Ῥόδον, ἐπικηρυκευομένων ἀπὸ τῶν δυνατωτάτων ἀνδρῶν, τὴν γνώμην εἶχον πλεῖν, etc.

... Καὶ προσβαλόντες Καμείρῳ τῆς Ῥοδίας πρώτῃ, ναυσὶ τέσσαρσι καὶ ἐνενήκοντα, ἐξεφόβησαν μὲν τοὺς πολλοὺς, οὐκ εἰδότας τὰ πρασσόμενα, καὶ ἔφυγον, ἄλλως τε καὶ ἀτειχίστου οὔσης τῆς πόλεως, etc.

We have to remark here, as on former occasions of revolts among the dependent allies of Athens, that the general population of the allied city manifests no previous discontent, nor any spontaneous disposition to revolt. The powerful men of the island—those who, if the government was democratical, formed the oligarchical minority, but who formed the government itself, if oligarchical—conspire and bring in the Peloponnesian force, unknown to the body of the citizens, and thus leave to the latter no free choice. The real feeling towards Athens on the part of the body of the citizens is one of simple acquiescence, with little attachment on the one hand, yet no hatred, or sense of practical suffering, on the other.

[605] Thucyd. viii, 44: compare c. 57.

[606] Thucyd. viii, 40-55.

[607] Thucyd. viii, 39.

[608] Thucyd. viii, 45. Suggestions of Alkibiadês to Tissaphernês—Καὶ τοὺς τριηράρχους καὶ τοὺς στρατηγοὺς τῶν πόλεων ἐδίδασκεν ὥστε δόντα χρήματα αὐτὸν πεῖσαι, ὥστε ξυγχωρῆσαι ταῦτα ἑαυτῷ, πλὴν τῶν Συρακοσίων· τούτων δὲ, Ἑρμοκράτης ἠναντιοῦτο μόνος ὑπὲρ τοῦ ξύμπαντος ξυμμαχικοῦ.

About the bribes to Astyochus himself, see also c. 50.