XXVIII. On assuming his office, he first put down an insurrectionary movement in Etruria, by visiting the various towns and using conciliatory language; after this, he wished to consecrate a temple, which he had built out of the spoils of Sicily, to Glory and Valour, but being prevented by the priests on the ground that two gods could not be included in one temple, he began to build another one, being very much vexed at the opposition he encountered, but influenced by omens: for he was disturbed at this time by many portentous occurrences, such as several temples being struck by lightning, and the gold in the temple of Jupiter being gnawed by the mice. It was also reported that an ox had spoken with a human voice, and that a child had been born with the head of an elephant--so the priests kept him in Rome to conduct the expiatory rites and atonements for these, though he was fretting and eager to take the field; for no man ever was so passionately desirous of anything as he was to measure himself with Hannibal in battle. His one dream by night, his only talk to his friends and colleagues, his sole prayer to the gods was that he might meet Hannibal in a fair field. I believe that he would most willingly have enclosed both armies within a wall or palisade, and there have fought out the quarrel. Had it not been that he was now loaded with honours, and had given proofs of his superiority in wisdom and conduct to any other general, men would have said that he showed a more boyish ambition than befitted a man of his age; for he was over sixty years old when he entered upon his fifth consulship.
XXIX. However, when he had completed the necessary sacrifices and purifications enjoined by the soothsayers, he took the field with his colleague, and harassed Hannibal much in the country between the towns of Bantia and Venusia. Hannibal declined battle, but, learning that a force was detached from the Roman army to attack the Epizephyrian Lokrians, he laid an ambuscade on the mountain near Petelia, and defeated them with a loss of two thousand five hundred men. This excited Marcellus, and he led his forces nearer to those of Hannibal.
There was between the two camps a hill of some strength as a military post, overgrown with wood. Its sloping sides afforded a view of either camp, and upon them appeared the sources of several mountain streams.
The Romans were surprised at Hannibal, that, having had the first choice of so excellent a position as this, he had not occupied it, but left it to the enemy. It seems that he indeed thought it a good place to encamp in, but much better to lay an ambuscade in; and, wishing to use it rather for this purpose, he filled the woods and glens with javelin-men and spearmen, persuaded that the place itself would, from its excellent qualities, attract the Romans into it. Nor was he deceived in this expectation; for at once there was much talk in the Roman army about the necessity of occupying the hill, and men pointed out the advantages which would be gained over the enemy by encamping on it, or if necessary, by fortifying it. Now Marcellus determined to ride forward with a few horsemen and reconnoitre it, so he sent for a soothsayer and offered sacrifice. When the first victim was slain, the soothsayer showed him that the liver had no head. On sacrificing for the second time the head appeared of unusual size, while all the other organs were excellent, and this seemed to set at rest the fear which had been caused by the former. Yet the soothsayers said that they were even more disturbed and alarmed at this; for when after very bad and menacing victims unusually excellent ones appear, the sudden change is itself suspicious. But
"Not fire, not walls of iron can hinder fate,"
as Pindar says. Marcellus rode forth with his colleague Crispinus and his son, who was military tribune, in all two hundred and twenty horsemen. Of these none were Romans; they were Etruscans, with the exception of twenty men from Fregellae, who had given constant proofs of their courage and devotion to Marcellus. On the overhanging crest of the woody hill, a man, unseen by the Romans, was watching their army. He signalled to the men in ambush what was going on, so that they permitted Marcellus to ride close to them, and then suddenly burst out upon him, and surrounding his little force on all sides, struck and threw their darts, pursued such as ran away, and fought with those who stood their ground. These were the twenty Fregellans.
The Etruscans at the outset ran away panic-stricken; but these men forming together defended the consuls until Crispinus, struck by two darts, galloped away, and Marcellus was pierced through the side with a lance. Then even the few survivors of the Fregellans left him lying there, and snatching up his son, who was wounded, made their way back to the camp. The loss amounted to little over forty killed, and five lictors and eighteen horsemen taken. Crispinus, after a few days, died of his wounds. Such a misfortune as this, losing both consuls in one battle, never before befel the Romans.
XXX. Hannibal heard of the fate of all the rest with indifference, but when he was told that Marcellus had fallen he himself hastened to the place, and stood for a long time beside the corpse, admiring its strength and beauty. He made no boastful speech, and showed no joy in his countenance, as a man who had slain a troublesome and dangerous enemy, but, wondering at the strangeness of his ending, he drew the ring from the dead man's finger, and had the corpse decently attired and burned. The relics he gathered into a silver urn, upon which he placed a golden crown, and sent it to Marcellus's son. But on the way some Numidians fell in with the party who were escorting the urn, and while they tried to take it away and the others struggled to retain it, the bones were scattered on the ground. Hannibal, on hearing of this, said, "Nothing can be done against the will of heaven." He ordered the Numidians to be punished, but took no further thought about collecting or sending away the relics of Marcellus, concluding that some god had decreed the strange death and strange lack of burial which had befallen him. This is the story related by Cornelius Nepos and Valerius Maximus, but Livy and Augustus Caesar declare that the urn was brought to his son, and that it was splendidly buried. Besides his monuments at Rome there was a gymnasium at Katana in Sicily which bore his name, and statues and votive tablets from the plunder of Syracuse were set tip in Samothrace in the temple of the gods called Kabeiri, and in Lindus (in Rhodes) in the temple of Athena.
On his statue there, according to Poseidonius, these verses are written:
"This monument, O stranger, doth enshrine Marcellus, of the famous Claudian line, Who seven times was consul, and in fight His country's foes o'erthrew and put to flight."
For the writer of this epitaph counted his two proconsulates as well as his five consulates. His family remained one of the chief in Rome down to the time of Marcellus, the nephew of Augustus, who was the son of Octavia, Augustus's sister, and Caius Marcellus. He died in the office of aedile while yet a bridegroom, having just married Augustus's daughter Julia. In honour of his memory his mother Octavia established a library, and Augustus built a theatre, both of which bore his name.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 12: Il. xiv. 86.]
[Footnote 13: _Civica corona_. The civic crown was made of oak leaves, and was given only to him who had saved the life of a fellow-citizen in war.]
[Footnote 14: Interreges were appointed when there were no consuls, to hold comitia for the election of new ones.]
[Footnote 15: Vessels of five banks of oars.]
[Footnote 16: Hexapylon, the place with six gates.]
THE COMPARISON OF PELOPIDAS WITH MARCELLUS.
I. The particulars which we thought worth extracting from the histories of Pelopidas and Marcellus are related above. Their dispositions and habits were so nearly identical (for both were brave, laborious, and high-spirited) that the only point in which they differ appears to be that Marcellus put the inhabitants of several captured cities to the sword, whereas Epameinondas and Pelopidas never slew any one after they had conquered him, nor enslaved any captured city; indeed, had they been alive, it is said that the Thebans never would have so treated the town of Orchomenus. As to their exploits, that of Marcellus against the Gauls was great and wonderful, when he drove before him with his little band of horsemen so great a multitude of horse and foot together, the like of which one cannot easily find to have been done by any other general, and the killing of the chief of the enemy. The same thing was attempted by Pelopidas, but the despot was too quick for him, and he perished without succeeding in his effort. Yet with these we may compare his deeds at Leuktra and Tegyra, the most important and glorious of all his feats of arms, while we have no exploit of Marcellus which corresponds to his management of the ambuscade by which he brought back the exiled popular party to Thebes, and destroyed the despots. Indeed, of all deeds performed by secrecy and stratagem, this takes the van. Hannibal, no doubt, was a terrible enemy to Rome, as were the Lacedaemonians to Thebes; yet it is an established fact that at Tegyra and at Leuktra they gave way before Pelopidas, whereas Marcellus, according to Polybius, never once defeated Hannibal, but that general appears to have remained undefeated until the time of Scipio. But we believe, following Livy, Caesar, Cornelius Nepos, and, among Greek historians, king Juba, that Hannibal suffered some defeats at the hands of Marcellus; yet they never produced any signal result, and we may suspect that the African sometimes only pretended to have lost the day. But what Marcellus is so justly admired for, is that after such great armies had been routed, their generals killed, and the whole military system of Rome thrown into confusion, he inspired his troops with a confidence that enabled them to hold their own against the enemy. He roused his men from their former timid and disheartened condition, making them eager to distinguish themselves in battle, and, what is more, never to yield the victory without a determined struggle. And all this, as far as any single man could, was effected by Marcellus; for whereas his troops had been accustomed to be well satisfied if they escaped with their lives from Hannibal, he taught them to be ashamed of surviving defeat, to blush to give way ever so little, and to grieve if they were not victorious.
II. Since, then, Pelopidas never was defeated when he was in command, and Marcellus gained more victories than any Roman of his time; perhaps he who was so hard to conquer may, in consideration of his many successes, be held equal to him who never suffered a reverse.
Moreover, the one took Syracuse, while the other failed before Lacedaemon. But I hold it a greater feat than taking Sicily, to have marched upon Sparta, and been the first man to cross the Eurotas, unless indeed it should be said that the credit of this exploit belongs more to Epameinondas than to Pelopidas, as also does the battle of Leuktra, whereas the glory of Marcellus's achievements is all his own. For he took Syracuse alone, and beat the Gauls without his colleague, and, with no one to assist him, but every one hanging back, he measured himself with Hannibal and changed the whole complexion of the war, by being the first to introduce a daring policy.
III. As for their deaths, I can praise neither one nor the other, but I am grieved at the unworthy manner of their end. It is strange, that Hannibal was never even wounded in a number of battles which it would weary one to recount; and I admire the conduct of Chrysantas in Xenophon's 'Cyropaedia,' who, when standing with his weapon drawn, about to strike an enemy, heard the trumpet sound the recall, and leaving his man, quietly and orderly retreated. Yet Pelopidas may be excused by his excitement during a battle, and his courage, which urged him to avenge himself on the enemy, for the best thing is for the general to be victorious and to survive, and the next, for him to die "breathing forth his life in valour" as Euripides says. Thus his death becomes no accident, but a premeditated act. And besides Pelopidas's spirit, the assured victory which he saw within his grasp, could he but kill the despot, not unreasonably made him make his desperate attack; for it would have been hard for him to obtain another opportunity of distinguishing himself so gloriously. But Marcellus, without any necessity, without the excitement which sometimes in perilous circumstances overpowers men's reason, pushed heedlessly into danger, and died the death of a spy rather than a general, risking his five consulships, his three triumphs, his spoils and trophies won from kings against the worthless lives of Iberian and Numidian mercenaries. They themselves must have felt ashamed at their success, that the bravest, most powerful, and most celebrated of the Romans should have fallen among a reconnoitring party of Fregellans.
Still, let not this be regarded as a reproach to these great men, but rather a complaint addressed on their own behalf to them, especially to that courage, to which they sacrificed all their other virtues, disregarding their lives, as though their loss would fall upon themselves only, and not upon their friends and native country. After his death, Pelopidas was buried by his allies, fighting for whom he died; but Marcellus was buried by the enemy at whose hands he fell.
The first was an enviable end, but the other is greater, as the spectacle of an enemy honouring the valour by which he has suffered is greater than that of a friend showing gratitude to a friend. In the one case it is the man's glory alone that is respected, in the other, his usefulness and value are as much thought of as his courage.
LIFE OF ARISTEIDES.
Aristeides, the son of Lysimachus, was of the tribe Antiochis, and the township of Alopekae. There are various reports current about his property, some saying that he lived in poverty, and that on his death he left two daughters, who remained a long while unmarried because of their poverty; while this general opinion is contradicted by Demetrius of Phalerum in his book on Sokrates, where he mentions an estate at Phalerum which he knew had belonged to Aristeides, in which he was buried, and also adduces other grounds for supposing him to have been a wealthy man. First, he points out that Aristeides was Archon Eponymus, an office for which men were chosen by lot from the richest class, that of the Pentakosiomedimni, or citizens who possessed a yearly income of five hundred _medimni_[17] of dry or liquid produce.
Secondly, he mentions the fact that he was ostracised: now, ostracism never was used against poor men, but against those who descended from great and wealthy houses, and whose pride made them feared and disliked by their fellow citizens. Thirdly, and lastly, he writes that Aristeides placed in the temple of Dionysus tripods dedicated to the god by a victorious chorus, which even in my own time are still to be seen, and which bear the inscription: "The tribe Antiochis won the prize; Aristeides was choragus; Archestratus taught the chorus." Now this, which seems to be the strongest argument of all, is really the weakest. Epameinondas, whom all men know to have been born and to have passed his life in the greatest possible poverty, and Plato the philosopher, both exhibited excellent choruses, the former bearing the expense of a chorus of men playing on the flute, while the latter exhibited a _cyclic_[18] chorus of boys. Plato's expenses were borne by Dionysius of Syracuse, and those of Epameinondas by Pelopidas and his friends. Good men do not always refuse to receive presents from their friends, but, though they would scorn to make money by them, they willingly receive them to further an honourable ambition.
Panaetius, moreover, proves that Demetrius is wrong in the matter of the tripods, because from the time of the Persian war to the end of the Peloponnesian war there are only two Aristeides recorded as victors, neither of whom can be identified with the son of Lysimachus, as the father of one of them was Xenophilus, and the other was a much more modern personage, as is proved by his name being written in the characters which came into use after the archonship of Eukleides, and from the name of the poet or teacher of the chorus, Archestratus, whose name we never meet with in the time of the Persian war, but who taught several choruses (that is, wrote several successful plays) during the Peloponnesian war. These remarks of Panaetius must, however, be received with caution. As to ostracism, any man of unusual talent, nobility of birth, or remarkable eloquence, was liable to suffer from it, for Damon, the tutor of Perikles, was ostracised, because he was thought to be a man of superior intellect. Idomeneus tells us that Aristeides obtained the office of archon, not by lot, but by the universal voice of the people. Now, if he was archon after the battle of Plataea, as Demetrius himself admits, it is highly probable that his great reputation after such glorious successes may have obtained for him an office usually reserved for men of wealth. Indeed, Demetrius evidently tries to redeem both Aristeides and Sokrates from the reproach of poverty, as though he imagined it to be a great misfortune, for he tells us that Sokrates not only possessed a house, but also seventy minae which were borrowed by Krito.
II. Aristeides became much attached to Kleisthenes, who established the democratic government after the expulsion of the sons of Peisistratus; but his reverence and admiration for Lykurgus the Lacedaemonian led him to prefer an aristocratic form of government, in which he always met with an opponent in Themistokles, the son of Neokles, the champion of democracy. Some say that even as children they always took opposite sides, both in play and in serious matters, and so betrayed their several dispositions: Themistokles being unscrupulous, daring, and careless by what means he obtained success, while the character of Aristeides was solid and just, incapable of deceit or artifice even in sport. Ariston of Keos tells us that their hatred of one another arose from a love affair. Stesilaus of Keos, the most beautiful youth of his time, was passionately adored by both of them with an affection which passed all bounds. Nor did they cease their rivalry when this boy's youthful bloom had passed away, but, as if this had merely been a preliminary trial, they each plunged into politics with great vigour and with utterly different views.
Themistokles obtained a large following, and thus became an important power in the state, so that, when some one said to him that he would make a very good governor of Athens, provided he were just and impartial with all, he answered, "Never may I bear rule if my friends are to reap no more benefit from it than any one else."
Aristeides, on the other hand, pursued his way through political life unattended, because, in the first place, he neither wished to do wrong in order to please his friends, nor to vex them by refusing to gratify their wishes; and also because he observed that many men when they were supported by a strong party of friends were led into the commission of wrong and illegal acts. He, therefore, conceived that a good citizen ought to trust entirely to his own rectitude, both in word and in deed.
III. In spite of this, however, when Themistokles was using every kind of political manuvre to thwart him, he was forced to retaliate by similar measures, partly in order to defend himself, and partly to check the power of his opponent, which depended on the favour shown him by the people. He thought it better that he should occasionally do the people some slight wrong than that Themistokles should obtain unlimited power. At last, when Themistokles even proposed some useful measure, he opposed it and threw it out. On this occasion he could not refrain from saying, as he left the public assembly, that the Athenians could not be saved unless they threw both himself and Themistokles into the _barathrum_.[19] Another time he brought forward a bill, which was vehemently debated upon, but was at length carried.
But just before the votes of the people were given, he, perceiving from what had been said that it would prove a bad law, withdrew it.
Frequently he made use of other persons to bring forward propositions, lest the public should suffer from the contest which would otherwise take place between Themistokles and himself. Indeed, his evenness of temper was the more remarkable when contrasted with the changefulness of other politicians, for he was never unduly excited by the honours which were bestowed upon him, and bore misfortune with a quiet cheerfulness, thinking it to be his duty to serve his country, not merely without being paid for it in money, but without even gaining honour for so doing. This was the reason, I suppose, that when aeschylus's verses on Amphiaraus wore being recited in the theatre;
"Not just to seem, but just he loves to be; And deep he ploughs his noble mind with thought, To reap a harvest thence of great designs,"
all men turned and looked towards Aristeides, thinking that he came nearest to this ideal virtue.
IV. He stood up vigorously for justice, not merely when it was his interest and that of his friends, but when it was in favour of his enemies and contrary to his own personal feelings to do so. It is said that once when arguing a cause against one of his enemies in a court of law, the judges refused to hear the other party speak in his own defence, after listening to the speech of Aristeides, but were about to condemn him unheard. At this Aristeides came forward and vigorously supported his antagonist's claim to be allowed his legal right of reply. Again, when acting as arbitrator between two persons, one of them said that his adversary had done much wrong to Aristeides. "My good man," said he, "do not tell me of this, but tell me whether he has wronged you or not, for I am judging your cause, not my own."
When elected to administer the revenues of the state he proved that not only his own colleagues, but those who had previously held office, had embezzled large sums, especially Themistokles,
"A clever man, but with an itching palm."
For this cause Themistokles, when Aristeides' accounts were audited, prosecuted him on a charge of malversation, and, according to Idomeneus, obtained a verdict.
However, the better class of citizens being grieved at this, not only remitted the fine, but at once elected him to the same office. He now pretended to regret his former rigour, and was much more remiss in performing his duties, which rendered him very popular with those who were in the habit of embezzling the public money, so that they were loud in his praise, and canvassed the people on his behalf, trusting that he might be re-elected archon. But when the voting was about to begin, he rose and rebuked the Athenians. "When," he said, "I did you true and honourable service, I was disgraced by you; now, when I have permitted much of the public money to be stolen, I am thought to be an excellent citizen. But I myself am more ashamed of the honour which you now pay me, than I am of my former conviction, and I am sorry for you, because among you it is esteemed more honourable to abet evil-doers than to guard the national property."
By speaking thus and exposing the peculation which was being practised, he closed the mouths of all those who were so loudly commending him as an honest man, but gained the applause of all true and honourable men.
V. When Datis was sent by Darius, nominally to punish the Athenians for the burning of Sardis, but really to enslave the whole of Greece, he landed at Marathon, and commenced laying waste the country. Of the ten generals appointed by the Athenians for the conduct of the war, Miltiades had the highest reputation, while Aristeides held the second place. He used his influence in the council of war to support the proposition of Miltiades to fight the enemy at once, and also, as each general had sole command for one day, when his day came round, he gave it to Miltiades, thus teaching his colleagues that obedience to those who know how to command is not any disgrace, but a noble and useful act. By this means he was enabled to put an end to the rivalries between the generals, and to strengthen Miltiades by concentrating in him the power which had before been passed from hand to hand. In the battle the Athenian centre was hard pressed, as the Persians resisted longest in that part of their line which was opposed to the tribes Leontis and Antiochis. Here Themistokles and Aristeides each showed conspicuous valour, fighting side by side, for the former was of the tribe Leontis, the latter of the tribe Antiochis. After the victory was won, and the Persians forced into their ships, they were observed not to sail towards the Archipelago, but to be proceeding in the direction of Athens. Fearing that they might catch the city defenceless, the Athenians determined to hurry back with nine tribes to protect it, and they accomplished their march in one day.
Aristeides, with his own tribe, was left to guard the prisoners and the plunder, and well maintained his reputation. Although gold and silver was lying about in heaps, with all kinds of rich tapestry and other countless treasures, he would neither touch them himself nor allow the others to do so, though some helped themselves without his knowledge. Among these was Kallias, the torch-bearer in the Eleusinian mysteries. One of the prisoners, taking him for a king because of his long hair and fillet, fell on his knees before him, and having received his hand as a pledge for his safety pointed out to him a great store of gold concealed in a pit. Kallias now acted most cruelly and wickedly. He took the gold, and killed the poor man for fear that he should tell it to the others. It is said that ever afterwards the descendants of Kallias were jeered at by the comic poets, as being of the family of the man who found the gold in the pit.
Immediately after those events, Aristeides was chosen as Archon Eponymus, that is, the archon who gives his name to the year.
Demetrius of Phalerum says that he filled this office shortly before his death, and after the battle of Plataea. But in the public records of Athens one cannot find any archon of the name of Aristeides among the many who filled the office after Xanthippides, in whose archonship Mardonius was defeated at Plataea, whereas the name of Aristeides does occur next to that of Phanippus, in whose archonship the victory at Marathon was won.
VI. Of all the virtues of Aristeides his justice was that which chiefly commended itself to the people, being that which is of most value in ordinary life. Hence it was that he, although a poor man of mean birth, yet gained for himself the truly imperial title of the Just; a title which has never been emulated by kings and despots, who delight in being called the City-taker, the Thunderbolt, or the Victorious, while some are known as the Eagle or the Hawk, because apparently they prefer strength and lawless violence to justice and goodness. Yet for all this, the gods, to whom they so presumptuously liken themselves, excel mankind chiefly in three attributes, namely in immortality, in power, and in goodness, whereof goodness is by far the most glorious and divine quality. Mere empty space, and all the elements possess immortality, while earthquakes, thunderbolts, violent winds and rushing waters have great power, but justice and equity belong to the gods alone, because of the reason and intelligence which they possess. Now most men regard the gods with admiration, with fear, and with reverence; with admiration, because they are eternal and unchangeable; with fear, because of their power and dominion, with reverence and love because of their justice. Yet men covet immortality, which no flesh can attain to; and also power, which depends mostly upon fortune; while they disregard virtue, the only godlike attribute which it is in our power to obtain; not reflecting that when a man is in a position of great power and authority he will appear like a god if he acts justly, and like a wild beast if he does not.
VII. The character of Aristeides for justice at first made him beloved by the people, but afterwards it gained him their ill-will, chiefly because Themistokles circulated reports that Aristeides had practically closed the public courts of justice by the fact of all cases being referred to him as arbitrator, and that he was virtually king of Athens, although he had not yet surrounded himself with a body-guard. By this time too the common people, elated with their victory at Marathon, and thinking themselves capable of the greatest exploits, were ill pleased at any private citizen being exalted above the rest by his character and virtues. They flocked into the city from all parts of the country and ostracised Aristeides, veiling their envy of his glory under the pretence that they feared he would make himself king. This custom of ostracism was not intended as a punishment for crime, but was called, in order to give it a plausible title, a check to excessive power. In reality, it was nothing more than a safety-valve, providing a vent for the dislike felt by the people for those whose greatness offended them. It did no irreparable injury to those who fell under its operation, but only banished them for a space of ten years. In later times mean and contemptible persons were subjected to ostracism, until at last, after the ostracism of Hyperbolus the practice was discontinued. The ostracism of Hyperbolus is said to have been brought about in the following manner. Alkibiades and Nikias, the two most powerful citizens in the state, were at the head of two rival parties. The people determined to apply the ostracism to them, and would certainly have banished one or the other of them. They, however, came to terms with one another, combined their several factions, and agreed to have Hyperbolus banished. The people, enraged at this, and thinking that they had been treated with contempt, abolished the practice of ostracism. The way in which it was conducted was as follows. Each man took an oyster-shell, wrote upon it the name of the citizen whom he wished to be banished, and then carried it to a place in the market-place which was fenced off with palings. The archons now first of all counted the whole number of shells; for if the whole number of voters were less than six thousand, the ostracism was null and void. After this, they counted the number of times each name occurred, and that man against whom most votes were recorded they sent into exile for ten years, allowing him the use of his property during that time. Now while the shells were being written upon, on the occasion of which we have been speaking, a very ignorant country fellow is said to have brought his shell to Aristeides, who was one of the bystanders, and to have asked him to write upon it the name of Aristeides. Aristeides was surprised, and asked him whether Aristeides had ever done him any harm. "No," answered the man, "nor do I know him by sight, but I am tired of always hearing him called 'The Just.'" When Aristeides heard this he made no answer, but wrote his name on the man's shell and gave it back to him. When he was leaving the city he raised his hands to heaven, and prayed exactly the opposite prayer to that of Achilles, that no crisis might befall the Athenians which would compel them to remember Aristeides.
VIII. However, three years afterwards, when Xerxes was advancing upon Attica through Thessaly and Botia, the Athenians annulled their decree, and permitted all exiles to return, being especially afraid of Aristeides, lest he should join the enemy and lead many of the citizens to desert with him. In this they took a very false view of his character, for even before this decree he had never ceased to encourage the Greeks to defend their liberty, and after his return, when Themistokles was in sole command of the forces of Athens, he assisted him in every way by word and deed, cheerfully raising his bitterest enemy to the highest position in the state, because the state was benefited thereby.
When Eurybiades and his party were meditating a retreat from Salamis, the Persian ships put to sea at night and hemmed them in, surrounding both the strait and the islands. No one knew that escape was impossible, but Aristeides sailed from aegina, passed safely through the enemy's fleet by a miracle, and while it was still night proceeded straight to the tent of Themistokles. Here he called him out, and when they were alone together, he said: "We two, Themistokles, if we are wise, must cease our vain and silly rivalry with one another, and begin a more generous contest to preserve our country, you acting as general and chief, while I help and advise you. Already I perceive that you alone take a right view of the crisis, end desire to fight a battle in the narrow waters as quickly as possible. Now, while your allies have been opposing you, the enemy have been playing your game, for the sea, both in our front and rear, is full of their ships, so that the Greeks even against their will must play the man and fight; for no way of escape is left for them." To this Themistokles answered, "I would not willingly, Aristeides, be overcome by you in generosity on this occasion; and I shall endeavour, in emulation of this good beginning which you have made, to surpass it by the glory of my exploits." At the same time he explained the trick[20] which he had played on the barbarian, and begged Aristeides to argue with Eurybiades, and point out how impossible it was for the Greeks to be saved without fighting; for he thought that the opinion of Aristeides would have more weight than his own. Consequently, when in the assembly of the generals Kleokritus the Corinthian attacked Themistokles, and said that even Aristeides did not approve of his plans, because he was present and said nothing, Aristeides answered that he would not have been silent if Themistokles had not spoken to the purpose, but that as it was he held his peace, not for any love he bore him, but because his counsel was the best.
IX. While the Greek admirals were engaged in these discussions, Aristeides, perceiving that Psyttaleia, a small island in the straits near Salamis, was full of the enemy, placed some of the boldest Athenians on board of small boats, attacked the Persians, and slew them to a man, except a few of the chiefs, who wore taken alive. Among these were the three children of Sandauke the sister of the Persian king, whom he at once sent to Themistokles, and it is said that in accordance with some oracle they were sacrificed to Dionysus Omestes,[21] at the instance of the prophet Euphrantides. Aristeides now lined the shores of the islet with soldiers, ready to receive any vessel which might be cast upon it, in order that neither any of his friends might be lost, nor any of the enemy take refuge upon it.
Indeed, the severest encounter between the two fleets and the main shock of the battle seems to have taken place at that spot; wherefore the trophy that marks the victory stands on the isle of Psyttaleia.
After the battle was won, Themistokles, wishing to feel Aristeides's opinion, said to him that they had done a good work, but that a greater one remained, which was to shut up Asia in Europe by sailing as quickly as possible to the Hellespont, and destroying the bridge of boats there. Aristeides answered that he must never propose such a plan, but must take measures to drive the Persians out of Greece as quickly as possible, for fear that so great a multitude, shut up there without the means of retreat, should turn to bay and attack them with the courage of despair. Upon this, Themistokles again sent the eunuch Arnakes, a prisoner, on a secret errand to tell the Persian king that when all the Greeks wished to sail to the Hellespont and destroy the bridge of boats, he had dissuaded them from doing so, wishing to save the king's life.