CHAPTER XVIII.

LYDIA UNDER THE MERMNADÆ.

The Delphian priesthood did no service to their countrymen on the

western shore of Asia Minor when in the year 689 B.C. they helped Gyges

to the throne in spite of the resistance of the Lydians. The cities of

the Greeks on these coasts, whose founders had in days past been

expelled by war and distress from their cantons, had come to power and

prosperity in the course of the three centuries which had since elapsed.

Forced to a vigorous exercise of their powers, amid an environment of

many new impulses, they surpassed the motherland in poetry and art, in

navigation and trade. From their harbours they exported the products of

Phrygia and the manufactures of Lydia to the Cyclades, to Chalcis and

Eretria, to Corinth and the mainland of Hellas. Thus they gradually grew

up into a naval power which drove even the trading ships of the

Phenicians from the Ægean Sea, opened the Black Sea, and already began

to rival the Phenicians in the south and west of the Mediterranean.

Springing up on the soil of Lydia these cities barred the mouths of the

Lydian rivers, the highways to the sea, and excluded the Lydian people

from intercourse with the sea. Miletus, Myus, and Priene commanded the

mouth of the Mæander; Ephesus and Colophon the mouth of the Cayster;

Phocæa and Cyme the mouth of the Hermus. An active prince on the throne

of Lydia could not endure that the Greeks should remain in possession of

the coast, which they had taken from the Lydians, and keep the Lydians

for ever cut off from the sea. The new dynasty must attempt to recover

the losses which their predecessors had been unable to prevent.

When confronted by the power of the Lydians collected in the hands of a

single warrior, the Greek cities could not, for long, avoid falling into

a position similar to that in which the Phenicians at that time found

themselves as opposed to the Assyrians. Lydia was not indeed so strong

as Assyria, but it lay nearer at hand; and the resources of Phocæa,

Smyrna, Colophon, Ephesus, and Miletus, could not bear comparison with

those of Tyre, Sidon, and Aradus. In spite of their common origin and

kindred blood, the Greek cities, like those of the Phenicians, were

without any political combination. It is true that the Ionian cities

offered each year a common sacrifice to Poseidon, on the sea-shore under

the spur of Mount Mycale, but for the rest, not only was each community

isolated from the others, but the communities were often at feud among

themselves. Even in the bosom of the separate cities the opposition of

parties was not wanting: it was not long since the nobles had overthrown

the monarchy, and taken the government into their own hands. If the

citizens ventured to give battle in the open field, and the Lydians by

means of their superior forces drove them back into their walls, and

laid waste their crops, the cities which did not lie immediately on the

sea were exposed to continued devastation, and with the greater

certainty because these devastations could be made more severe by

sieges. Even the cities on the sea could hardly support for any length

of time the desolation and loss of their land. Ephesus had extended her

possessions on land from the mouth of the Cayster as far northward as

Tmolus; Colophon too had a considerable acreage of land.

Mysia and the Troad were the districts, which, as it seems, Gyges first

subjugated to his dominion.[778] The founding of Dascyleum beyond the

Rhyndacus, not far from the shore of the Propontis, which bears the name

of his father, may be ascribed to him. Next he turned against the Greek

cities, and there he found a vigorous resistance. Established at first

in conflict with the nations of the coast, these cities had grown up

amid feuds and by navigation, and contained in their walls a brave race

of men. From the time that Gyges opened the attack upon them, one

hundred and twenty years passed before they lost their independence in

spite of their isolation, though the course of the struggle inflicted

various losses upon them. Even during the continuance of this struggle

they made very considerable progress on the sea, in art and science, and

when they fell it was hardly less through the struggles which shattered

them from within, than through the arms of the Lydians. Gyges first

attacked Magnesia on Sipylus, the Greek city which lay nearest to

Sardis. After repeated devastation of the land he finally succeeded in

making himself master of the city.[779] The next attack fell on Smyrna.

It was a severe struggle. The Smyrnæans thought themselves sufficiently

strong to meet the Lydians in the open field. They withstood their

attacks in the plain, and their venturous courage was not without

success. On one occasion it happened that they were defeated by Gyges

and the Lydians, and driven into the city. The Lydians forced their way

into the gates along with the fugitives. But the courage and bravery of

the Smyrnæans were successful in hurling back the enemies.[780] Nor did

any better success attend the attack of Gyges on Miletus; but against

Colophon he obtained some advantage.[781]

Such are the accounts given by the Greeks of the deeds of Gyges. From

these it appears that Gyges justified his usurpation of the throne by

attacks, more or less successful, against the ancient opponents who

checked the rise of Lydia. It is also clear from other sources of

information, that he had himself to beat off the attacks of a mighty

enemy, and that he was by no means fortunate in withstanding them. Among

the Greeks we have only a brief and accidental statement, from which we

could conclude that Gyges had to deal with other enemies beside the

Greek cities. This statement merely tells us that the Cimmerians had

settled in Antandrus on the coast of the Troad for a century. The

Cimmerians are said to have been first driven out by Alyattes king of

Lydia, who reigned down to 563 B.C.; those Cimmerians therefore who

inhabited Antandrus, must have come there at the time of Gyges, who

reigned from 689 to 653 B.C. That Gyges had really to undergo severe

struggles with the Cimmerians we learn from the distant east, from

Nineveh. The inscriptions of Esarhaddon of Asshur (681-668 B.C.) told us

that Tiuspa, the chief of the distant land of the Cimmerians, had

submitted to him (p. 151). As the Assyrians held the Moschi, the

Tibarenes, and the Cilicians in dependence, the Cimmerians when settled

on the lower Halys, which event took place before the year 700 B.C.,

became neighbours of the Assyrian kingdom. Assurbanipal of Assyria tells

us that Gyges of Lydia submitted to him, that afterwards he was

successful against the Cimmerians, and sent in chains to Nineveh chiefs

of the Cimmerians whom he had taken in the battle. Assurbanipal, as we

saw, ascended the throne in 668 B.C.; the reign of Gyges came to an end

in 653 B.C. Hence his messages to Assurbanipal could only fall between

the years 668 and 653 B.C. It is quite conceivable that Gyges when

pressed by a new advance of the Cimmerians towards the West sought the

aid of the king of Assyria, the powerful neighbour of the Cimmerians in

the East, in order that pressure might be put from that side on these

enemies of Lydia. Assurbanipal does not tell us that he sent any

assistance to Gyges; he merely tells us that Gyges after paying homage

to him was enabled by the glory of his (Assurbanipal's) name to bring

the Cimmerians to his feet, and fought successfully against them.

Afterwards Gyges hardened his heart, put confidence in his own power,

and sent his soldiers to aid Pisamilki of Egypt, who had thrown off the

yoke of Assyria. As a punishment for this the Cimmerians conquered and

devastated his whole land; his body was thrown to his enemies, and his

servants were carried away captive.

From these statements we must conclude that the wars which Gyges carried

on against the Greek cities belonged to the first twenty years of his

reign; that new incursions of the Cimmerians into Phrygia, and a fresh

advance on their part against Lydia, put an end to the attacks of Gyges

on the Greeks; and when Gyges had summoned the assistance of Assyria,

the Cimmerians were driven back. When delivered from the Cimmerians

Gyges intended no doubt to put an end to his dependence on Assyria, and

to aid in bringing to destruction this mighty power, which both from

Cilicia and from the Halys might bring ruin upon him. With this object

he may have entered into connections with Psammetichus, agreeing to send

him Ionians and Carians to overpower his fellow-princes, in order to

maintain the contest against Assyria at the head of the newly-united

Egypt. Lydia had little to fear from Assyria, if Egypt revolted at the

same time, since it was probable that all the efforts of that country

would be directed against the valley of the Nile. Gyges could not send

auxiliary troops into Egypt later than the year 653 B.C. (for his reign

came to an end in that year). Hence his relations to Assyria would fall

within the years 665-655 B.C. Whether Assurbanipal, in order to punish

the defection of Gyges, urged the Cimmerians to resume the war, we

cannot certainly say. We cannot contest the statement of the

inscriptions of Assurbanipal that Gyges fell in this war, though it is

remarkable that the Greeks know nothing or tell us nothing of such an

important occurrence. Herodotus tells us expressly that beside the wars

against Miletus, Smyrna, and Colophon, Gyges performed no action of

importance.[782]

Of the son and successor of Gyges, Assurbanipal tells us that he sent to

him, disapproved of his father's breach with Assyria, and pledged his

own submission (p. 178). The inscriptions which deal with the relations

of Assyria and Lydia are without dates. But from the connection of the

narrative, and with reference to the statement that Gyges fell in battle

against the Cimmerians, we must assume that the accession of Ardys, the

son of Gyges, took place in the midst of the war with the Cimmerians,

and that he made his pledge of submission to Assyria in the first year

of his reign, in that time of distress. Herodotus tells us that the

Cimmerians invaded Lydia in the reign of Ardys--which continued from 653

to 617 B.C.[783]--and took Sardis, except the Acropolis; that the cities

of the Ionians were attacked by the Cimmerians, and plundered though not

conquered.[784] It would be easy to connect this second capture of

Sardis with the narrative of the Assyrians and the fall of Gyges, and

thus place it in the commencement of the reign of Ardys. But this

connection would destroy the coincidence in time between the Scythian

invasion of Asia and the Cimmerian invasion of Ionia, which Herodotus

mentions, and at the same time removes the ground which can alone

explain the combination of the two (p. 277). Herodotus places the

incursion of the Scythians into Media quite definitely in the first year

of Cyaxares of Media, _i.e._ according to his chronology, in the year

633 to 630 B.C. The second capture of Sardis, therefore, and the attack

on the Ionian cities, must have taken place about 630 B.C.

It remains to assume that the Cimmerians, after inundating Lydia in the

time of Candaules and taking Sardis, after repeated wars with varied

success against Gyges in the last decade of his reign, which finally

ended in the death of Gyges, were a source of serious danger to Ardys in

the first and larger half of his reign. Concerning the campaign of the

Cimmerians, which brought Sardis for a second time into their hands, we

learn from Greek accounts that the Cimmerians were commanded by

Lygdamis,[785] and that they brought Ephesus into great straits.[786]

"Lygdamis," so Callimachus says, "led the army of the horse-milking

Cimmerians, which lay encamped on the strait of the daughter of

Inachus," against Ephesus; in the plain of the Cayster their chariots

rested, and he threatened to destroy the temple of Artemis, but the

goddess protected her shrine. Another statement tells us, on the

contrary, that Lygdamis burnt the temple of Artemis.[787] "It was a

passing raid," says Herodotus, "not a subjugation of the cities."

It is clear that Ardys became master of his land, at any rate, in the

last third of his reign. In this period, and under his successor

Sadyattes (617-612 B.C.), there were no further incursions of the

Cimmerians, and Alyattes, the successor of Sadyattes (612-563 B.C.),

succeeded in completely breaking their power. Herodotus tells us that

Alyattes drove the Cimmerians out of Asia.[788] This was not the case:

elsewhere we find it stated that it was they who again attacked

Alyattes.[789] They were no doubt confined by the arms of Alyattes to

their abode on the banks of the lower Halys; they became subject to the

Lydians, and were lost, as we saw, in the Cappadocians, whose name among

the Armenians is Gamir, _i.e._ Gimirai, Cimmerians.[790]

The repeated incursions of the Cimmerians into the west of Asia Minor in

the course of the seventh century had important consequences for the

lands affected by them on this side of the Halys. The nearest

neighbouring states, especially Phrygia, were severely shaken by them,

more severely, beyond a doubt, than Lydia.[791] From about the year 630

B.C., under the strong guidance of Ardys, Sadyattes, and Alyattes, Lydia

arose with firmness and energy, and became a protecting power against

the Cimmerians for the west of Asia Minor. This position, and the

superiority which Lydia also possessed in the harder and severer nature

of her population, brought about the result that when Gyges had

subjugated Mysia, Phrygia as far as the Halys became dependent on the

Lydian kingdom in the last years of Ardys, or in the time of his

successor Sadyattes. For the Lydian dominion over Asia Minor the

Cimmerians had prepared the way even more thoroughly than the Scythians

had prepared the way for the Medes in the East. As Lydia and Media were

the first to recover, they soon obtained the supremacy in the one case

as in the other. If it could be said of Alyattes that he expelled the

Cimmerians from Asia Minor, the dominion of Lydia must at least have

extended to the Halys. It was on this river that the two new powers,

rising on the East and the West, came into collision.

The Greeks of course can only give us precise information about the

struggles of Ardys, Sadyattes, and Alyattes against the cities of the

coast. Herodotus tells us that Ardys like Gyges attacked Miletus,

without achieving any success: he succeeded however in taking Priene,

opposite Miletus, at the entrance of the Milesian Gulf. Other accounts

and later events show that this conquest was not maintained.[792] We

must put the attacks of Ardys on the Greek cities in the last decade of

his reign (627-617 B.C.). Sadyattes directed his efforts against Smyrna

and Miletus, which at that time was governed by the tyrant

Thrasybulus.[793] The Milesians went out to meet the Lydian army in the

open field. But they were defeated in two great battles, first at

Limeneum, and then on the Mæander, and were thus compelled to shut

themselves up in the walls. Behind these Sadyattes could do them no

harm.

Herodotus tells us that Sadyattes contented himself with destroying the

harvest of the Milesians every year as soon as the corn was ripe in the

land of the city, and with cutting down the fruit-trees. This went on

for six years till his death, when his son and successor continued the

war in the same manner. When at length he believed that the Milesians

were brought into distress and scarcity by these continual devastations,

in the twelfth year of the war, he was deceived by a stratagem of

Thrasybulus. Thrasybulus learnt from Corinth that a herald of the king

would come into the city to offer a truce. The citizens were commanded,

therefore, to bring out into the market-place all the corn which was to

be found in the houses, as though it were for sale there, and to keep

holiday with banquets and merry-making. Convinced by the account of his

herald that all his efforts hitherto had been in vain, Alyattes

concluded a treaty of peace with the Milesians.[794] No weight can be

laid on the details of this narrative. In the twelfth year of the war,

according to Herodotus, when the fields were being laid waste and the

corn burned, the temple of Athene at Assessus was set on fire. Alyattes

then fell sick, and as he remained sick a long time he sent to Delphi to

inquire about his recovery. Delphi replied: The god would give no

answer till the temple was rebuilt. This became known to Periander of

Corinth, and he imparted the information to Thrasybulus--such at least,

Herodotus remarks, is the story of the Milesians. Thrasybulus assumed

that Alyattes would ask for an armistice in order that he might be able

to rebuild the temple; and made the arrangements already described. In

any case Alyattes was in a position to obtain more accurate information

about the condition of Miletus than could be got by a herald. How could

it be supposed that there would be a want of provisions in a great

trading city like Miletus, which Alyattes had not debarred and could not

debar from intercourse with the sea? When the peace and the treaty had

been concluded, and Alyattes had built two temples in the place of the

one that had been burnt, he recovered his health.

It is certain that Miletus maintained herself against the attacks of the

Lydian kings. Undisturbed by them she founded Parium and Lampsacus on

the Hellespont. In union with Phocæa, Teos, and Clazomenæ, she entered

into trade with Egypt, whose harbours Psammetichus had opened to the

Ionians; about the year 640 B.C. she sent her fleet to aid the Eretrians

in Euboea, who were engaged in a severe struggle with the Chalcidians;

about the year 630 B.C. she sent out a new colony to Sinope, which had

succumbed to the Cimmerians (I. 545), and built Tomi at the mouths of

the Danube. That the kings of Lydia directed their efforts mainly

against Miletus is intelligible. If the most powerful city of the Greeks

were subject to them, the others would submit without any further

struggle. It is possible that the rebellion of the people against the

nobles, the fierce party struggles which followed from these and allowed

Thrasybulus to establish a tyranny in Miletus, may have excited in the

Lydians the hope of overcoming the city with less difficulty. It speaks

much for the strength of Miletus that her citizens were able to meet the

Lydians in the open field. There can hardly be a doubt that the land of

the Milesians was devastated for several successive years. The Lydians

must have attempted to wear out the city by this means, to rouse

dissatisfaction among the landed proprietors by their losses, and among

the lower classes by causing a scarcity. The owners of the land lost

each year their crops and their sheep; with these the raw material for

the important wool industry of the Milesians was destroyed, and trade

with the interior was impossible. When, however, the Lydians found that

the city held out stubbornly they at length desisted, and preferred to

win the first city of the Greeks by treaty rather than by war.

According to the dates which we obtained above for the reign of Gyges

and his successors, the twelve years' war against Miletus mentioned by

Herodotus must have begun under Ardys, and ended under Sadyattes. It was

in the last years of Sadyattes (617-612 B.C.), in the year 615 B.C., as

we saw above, that the great war began between the Medes and the

Lydians, which Herodotus puts in the time of Alyattes (612-563 B.C.).

The advances of the Median power to the West and their approach to the

Halys must have compelled the Lydians to put an end to the war with

Miletus, in order to protect the eastern border of their kingdom. We

know the supposed cause and the course of the war between Lydia and

Media, which went on to the year 610 B.C., with varying fortune, but not

to the disadvantage of the Lydians.[795] The Lydians, though far weaker

in numbers, showed themselves vigorous opponents of the Medes. The

severe struggle could find no more honourable close for Media than the

treaty which made the Halys the limit between Lydia and Media, and

united the two countries by marriage as well as by treaty. Aryanis, the

daughter of Alyattes, became the wife of Astyages, the son of Cyaxares

of Media (p. 289).

Secured in the east by the alliance with Media Alyattes could direct his

whole force to the establishment of the Lydian power within the Halys.

The Carians were subjugated.[796] Alyattes did not obtain equal

successes over the Greek cities, though Miletus, true to the treaty,

held aloof. His attack on Smyrna was perhaps the occasion on which

Mimnermus repeated in his poems to his countrymen the brave deeds of the

Smyrnæans in old days against Gyges (p. 429), and attempted to rouse the

courage of the present generation by the memory of the achievements of

the past. He reminded the Smyrnæans how they had once driven the Lydians

out of the gates of their city. In some verses which have come down to

us he praises the deeds of a hero of olden time, not without a

reproachful side-glance at the living generation: "Not of such a kind

was the courage and the brave heart of the warrior, of whom the

forefathers told me, how that they had seen him, spear in hand, on the

plain of the Hermus, driving before him the troops of the mounted

Lydians. In the courage of his stout heart Pallas Athene herself could

find nothing to reproach, when in the bloody fight he pressed onward

with the foremost, beset with the thick volley of the enemy. Never man

knew better how to withstand the tumult of battle, so long as the sun

shone on him."[797] Perhaps the Smyrnæans were no longer fired with the

martial courage of old days; in any case the superiority of the Lydians

was very great. Alyattes took Smyrna, and in order to keep the city in

more complete subjection, he caused the walls to be thrown down, and

forced the Smyrnæans to dwell in an unfortified place.[798] Colophon was

also captured. This was a rich city even before the time of Gyges; the

greater part of the citizens are said to have been prosperous.

Xenophanes reproaches his fellow-citizens of Colophon that they had

learnt luxurious habits from the Lydians, that the senators of the

city--they were a thousand in number, chosen from all the men of

property--came to the market-place in "garments wholly coloured with

purple," "pluming themselves on their beautifully-arranged hair, and

drenched with the perfumes of costly ointments." According to the

account of Athenæus the meals of the Colophonians began in the morning

and continued till the lamps were lit, to the sound of harps and flutes

played by women after the manner of the Lydians; after this the night

was spent in drinking, so that some beheld neither the rising nor the

setting sun. In this way the Colophonians had lost their old military

valour, and had infected the Milesians.[799] We are not in a position to

decide whether the fine clothes of the Colophonians and their delight in

feasting and drinking took the vigour out of their defence of the city

or not; this only is clear, that isolated cities like Smyrna and

Colophon, even with the most heroic resistance, must eventually succumb

to a kingdom like that of the Lydians. In any case we have rather to

recognise the resistance which unimportant cities such as Priene made,

than lament the cowardice of the citizens. Theognis of Megara remarks

that Smyrna and Colophon, like Magnesia before them, came to destruction

owing to their excess of valour.[800] With the subjugation of Colophon

the successes of Alyattes ended. Priene resisted a long siege with

success: from Clazomenæ he was compelled to retire with great

losses.[801]

Gradually strengthening themselves in severe struggles, the Mermnadæ had

approved their position as leaders of the Lydians. How deeply rooted was

the attachment of the nation to the expelled royal family, and what

respect the Mermnadæ paid to this stubborn preference, is clear from the

fact that Gyges himself called his son Ardys after the name of a king of

the ancient house; and in the same way his grandson and great-grandson

repeat the ancient names Sadyattes and Alyattes. The reign of Alyattes,

extended almost to half a century, appears to have borne good fruits for

the domestic relations of Lydia. The subject nations, the Mysians,

Bithynians, Phrygians, Paphlagonians, and Carians, must without doubt

have paid heavy tribute. From this, from the product of the gold washing

in the Pactolus, the mines in Tmolus and Sipylus, Alyattes collected a

large treasure in the citadel at Sardis. The Lydians preserved a

grateful memory of Alyattes,[802] "the most just and wise of their

kings," as Xanthus calls him. His guidance had set them entirely free

from the risks so often brought upon their country by the Cimmerians,

had raised them to be the dominant nation in Asia Minor, and in time of

peace the kingdom was no doubt brought into excellent order by him.

Hipponax of Ephesus points out the way to Smyrna to a friend by the

following marks: "Go through the region of the Lydians, past the grave

of Alyattes, past the monument of Gyges and the pillars, past the

monument of Attys, the great king, with your face to the setting

sun."[803] Herodotus tells us: "Lydia possesses a work which is the

greatest of all, except the works of the Egyptians and the Babylonians,

and it is the monument of Alyattes. The lower part consists of great

stones, six stades and two plethra in circumference (3800 feet); the

remainder is a heap of earth, which the merchants and the traders, the

artizans and workmen, and the courtesans built. On the monument above

stood, even in my time, five stone pillars, and the inscriptions on

these told us what each section had paid, and the measure of that which

the courtesans built was the largest."[804] Xenophon also speaks of a

large tomb in the neighbourhood of Sardis, on the summit of which were

five pillars.[805]

The princes of the Lydians had their sepulchres beyond the Hermus, on a

rocky plateau, about five miles to the north of Sardis, between the

Hermus and the southern shore of the great Gygæan lake. On this field of

the dead, which the Osmans call Bin Tepe, _i.e._ the thousand hills,

there rise to this day from sixty to eighty tombs, among which three

huge round tumuli stand pre-eminent. The smallest of these is 2000 feet

in the circuit and 110 feet in height; the largest is more than 3500

feet, and rises about 230 feet above the plain. Under this mound, right

opposite the acropolis of Sardis, rested king Alyattes. The Lydians

preferred to bury their dead in chambers of rock; where these were not

to be had, they buried them in chambers of strong masonry, over which

were placed layers of stone in a circle, to be finally crowned with the

sepulchral tumulus. In the same manner, only on a larger scale, the

tombs of the kings were prepared; and the statements of Herodotus about

the origin of the mound of Alyattes may have a foundation in so far as

the zeal of the people helped to raise it higher than the tombs of his

predecessors. In the tomb of Alyattes the flat elevation of rock was

changed into a large circular surface, but northwards the natural rock

was allowed to remain. On this wall of rock, to the south of the centre

of the circle, the sepulchral chamber of Alyattes was made to extend. It

was built of large greyish-white blocks of marble, beautifully polished.

These were cut with the greatest regularity, and carefully fitted to

each other, and united still more firmly by dovetails of molten lead.

The length of this quadrangular chamber is ten feet, the breadth six

feet, the height is more than six feet. The entrance lies on the south

side towards Sardis. This entrance was kept accessible by a portico,

which was also paved with squares of marble, furnished on either side

with blocks of marble as high as the door, and vaulted over with hewn

stones of irregular and angular shapes. The sepulchral chamber and

portico were then surrounded by masonry, which filled up the entire area

of the circle and was carried up to the same height as the sepulchral

chamber and the rock behind it. On this surface the funeral ceremonies

were held, and sacrifices offered, as is proved by a layer of cinders

two feet thick, which lies on the marble squares of the roof of the

sepulchral chamber. When the burial was over, the door of the chamber

was closed by marble blocks fitted into it, and other heavy blocks were

laid in front of these for the portico. After this the masonry, in order

to bear the mound better, was raised above the height of the chamber;

and last of all the mound was piled up in regular layers, a layer of

lime mixed with sand and large stones, a thinner layer of clay, a layer

of earth of equal thickness, on which was again placed a layer of lime

and sand broken with large stones. Finally the point of the mound was

surmounted with strong masonry of huge stones, the five pillars of

Herodotus, one pillar in each corner, and the fifth in the centre. Even

now the centre stone lies overthrown on the summit of the mound, half

buried in the earth. It is a huge block in the form of a cone, of more

than nine feet in diameter, resting on a low base. In the chamber, which

had been plundered, there was no longer any sarcophagus; some bones only

were found, and beside these jars of alabaster, clay vessels with

handles, with remains of other kinds of pottery.[806]

Croesus, the son of Alyattes, did not ascend the throne in the year

563 B.C. without opposition. His opponents intended to raise Pantaleon,

another son of Alyattes by an Ionian wife, to the throne. Among these

was Sadyattes the merchant, the richest man of Lydia. Croesus caused

him to be cruelly executed, his possessions to be confiscated, and his

landed property sold.[807] The new ruler found himself in the bloom of

life (he was 35 years of age) at the head of a well-arranged and

powerful kingdom. While for half a century, under the old Heracleids,

Lydia had not only been unable to move beyond her ancient borders, but

had even lost the land on the coast, she had gradually grown in power

since the accession of the Mermnadæ. It is true that the incursions of

the Cimmerians had brought upon Gyges and Ardys the most dangerous

struggles, and had inflicted the heaviest losses on the land; but in the

end these had been withstood successfully, and their immediate

consequence had been the extension of the Lydian power as far as the

Halys. Even from the dangerous trial of the Median war Lydia had

emerged, not only without loss, but even with honour. All Asia Minor on

this side of the Halys, with the exception of the Greek cities and the

secluded mountain territory of the Lycians, obeyed the kings of the

Lydians. Their country was on friendly terms with Babylon, and in close

relationship with Media. Even against the Greek cities, the reduction of

Smyrna and Colophon had at least opened the way to the sea. In such a

position, in the possession of such power, it was impossible but that

Croesus should be filled with the impulse to complete the work of his

forefathers, to carry to an end the subjugation of the Greek cities, and

thus gain for his kingdom in its full extent the harbours and marts

allotted to it by nature, together with a magnificent fleet.

Though for 120 years engaged in contests with the Lydians and not spared

by the Cimmerians, though torn asunder in their domestic relations by

the strife of parties, these cities continued to advance. The position

and the fortunes of Miletus down to the times of Alyattes have been

mentioned above. Ever since the attempt to smoothe the opposition of the

nation and the nobles by the rule of the "opulent" was wrecked, the

party struggles burst out in wilder fury than before, and passed into

revolutions and counter-revolutions. Nevertheless, one colony was

founded after another: Apollonia and Ordessus on the Thracian coast;

Panticapæum on the Cimmerian Bosphorus; Olbia and Tyras on the mouths of

the Dniester and the Dnieper. The Phocæans had at an earlier time

discovered the northern waters of the Adriatic; they now traded in the

land of silver beyond the pillars of Hercules, built Massalia at the

mouth of the Rhone, and fought with the Carthaginians on the Tyrrhenian

Sea. At the division of the seventh and sixth centuries the Samians

built a splendid temple to Hera, the Ephesians began to turn the ancient

shrine of Artemis into a magnificent structure, and the Phocæans to

erect a beautiful dwelling for Athene. Plastic art rose with

architecture: in skill the Greeks surpassed their Lydian teachers, while

Thales, Anaximander, and Cadmus of Miletus laid the foundations of Greek

science; the splendour of the epic, the bloom of elegiac poetry in

Ephesus and Smyrna, was followed in Lesbos by the bold flight of lyric

song; practical and political wisdom found representatives like Pittacus

and Bias. If the Greeks were more brilliant, more wealthy than in the

days of Gyges and Ardys, the dominion over them was the more to be

coveted. However splendid the resources which they had at command, there

was dissension in their midst: their vigorous colonisation, however much

it might advance trade, must at the same time weaken their population

available for war, and no city supported the other. Could such isolated

communities withstand the sovereigns who had conquered the Cimmerians,

and checked the Medes?

Gyges and his successors never intended to make a war of annihilation on

the Greek cities. We saw that it was only by the support of the Delphic

oracle that Gyges gained the throne; this source of help against his own

people he would not and could not give up. It would be utterly lost in a

war for life and death with the Greek cities. Such intentions were not,

so far as we can see, in the minds of Gyges and his successors, least of

all in the mind of Croesus. These princes wished to make the harbours

subject to their supremacy; they did not intend to put the Greeks in a

worse position than the Lydians. They worshipped the gods of the

Greeks, and gave them richer presents than any Greek city or canton

could give. Even Gyges entered into relations with Greek families of

distinction, which thus became allied to the royal house; from their

cities Alyattes took a wife. In Sardis interest was shown in Greek art;

prominent citizens of the Greek cities found a welcome at the Lydian

court. When Alyattes recovered from his sickness (p. 436), he dedicated

a silver mixing-bowl at Delphi, the base of which was made by Glaucus of

Chios. Herodotus mentions this as worthy of admiration among all the

dedicatory offerings at Delphi, and Pausanias has preserved a

description of it. Of the works of Theodorus of Samos, who first

practised the founding of brass among the Greeks, Alyattes obtained a

golden and a silver mixing-bowl--the latter contained 600 amphoræ--a

golden plane-tree, and a golden vine with bunches of inlaid precious

stones. The sculptors, Dipoenus and Skyllis of Crete, were also

employed at the Lydian court.[808]

If the Lydian kings came forward to meet the Greeks in this manner, the

latter, on their part, were full of admiration for the Lydian power, the

splendour of the Lydian court, and the wealth of the Lydian kings. The

court of the Lydian kings was a seat of the monarchical life and manners

of the East, which the Greeks saw there in immediate proximity. The

"golden Sardis," where the treasures of Asia Minor were gathered, was to

the Greeks of that time the summit of all imaginable splendour. The

palace of the kings on the steep rocks of the citadel on the Pactolus,

from which the eye ranged far and wide into the country beyond the

blooming valley of the Hermus, the ancient temple of Cybele, were no

doubt magnificent buildings, and owing to the great wealth of the land

as well as the kings in precious metals, were provided without doubt

with ornaments of massive gold, though the houses in the city were built

of clay bricks, and roofed with reeds.[809] As might be expected from

the amount of treasure heaped together at Sardis, the court of the

Lydian kings was one of extraordinary splendour. With astonishment the

Greeks beheld the Lydian sovereigns surrounded by their wives, their

numerous servants, and a multitude of eunuchs. The Lydian Alcman who at

the end of the seventh century came as a slave to Sparta, proudly said,

"that he was not of boorish manners, rude and clownish; he was neither a

Thessalian, nor an Acarnanian, nor a shepherd; he came from lofty

Sardis."[810]

If the Greeks were already half overcome by the advances of the Lydian

kings and their own admiration of Lydian power and glory, and Lydian

gold, the conduct of Croesus made resistance more difficult still. He

saw that he could never bring matters to an end with great harbour

cities, especially with Miletus, which could never be invested without a

fleet. Following the example of his forefathers, he entered into a

friendly league with the Milesians. The loss of Smyrna and Colophon had

failed to teach the Greeks that each city must help the other, that the

forces of the cities must be combined into unity, if freedom was to be

preserved. Even in the teeth of the warlike preparations of Croesus

they did not listen to the counsel given by one of themselves, which

would in all probability have saved them. Thales of Miletus proposed

that each city should name representatives; these were to form a

council, to the resolutions of which the separate cities were to be

subservient, just as the demes of a city were subservient to the

resolutions of the council of the city. The seat of this council was to

be Teos, because that city was situated in the midst of the Ionian

cities (which lay to the north and south along the coast). The Ionians

disregarded the advice of Thales; they would not arrange themselves on

the basis thus proposed. On the contrary, in spite of the warning of

Thales, Miletus again entered into a league with Lydia.[811] It may be

that the peace, which after severe internal struggles the decision of

the Parians restored to the city, tended to incline them to accept the

overtures of the king. They wished to heal the self-inflicted wounds,

and shrank from taking upon them a new and serious struggle. Croesus

strengthened his relations to Miletus by sending the most costly

offerings to the temple of Apollo at Miletus, the god of which was not

in his eyes different from the Lydian sun-god, while the antiquity of

the shrine went back beyond the settlement of the Ionians. In these

offerings the gold alone weighed more than 270 talents.[812]

By this treaty Croesus had not only placed Miletus on his side, and

separated the cities; he had also shown them that good terms could be

got. An armed attack must now be employed to induce the rest to adapt

themselves to these terms. When the Ephesians hesitated to recognise the

supremacy of Croesus as he demanded, the city was invested, and the

walls attacked. When a tower on the walls fell, the Ephesians connected

the temple of Artemis--the new structure was scarcely half finished, and

lay 2000 paces from the gates in the depression--with the walls by a

long rope, in order to put the city under the immediate protection of

the deity. Nevertheless, the city was compelled to submit.[813]

Croesus now aided the building of the temple. He caused the unfinished

half of the large monolithic pillars, which were to support the roof of

the temple in a double row, to be erected at his own cost, and presented

the goddess with golden cattle. After the subjugation of Ephesus,

Croesus proceeded to attack the remaining cities, one after the other;

and thus he became master of the whole of the cities, not of the Ionian

only, but also of the Æolian and Dorian. He granted them the most

favourable conditions: he did not even require the opening of the

cities, or their attendance in war; he contented himself with the

recognition of his supremacy and with the yearly payment of

tribute.[814] Yet in any case freedom for the trade of the Lydians, and

protection at law for the Lydians in the walls of the Greek cities, as

well as for the settlement of Lydian subjects, must have been secured.

Some cities on the Hellespont, like Lampsacus, appear to have remained

entirely free.[815]

When the cities of the Greeks had recognised his supremacy, Croesus is

said to have been occupied with the thought how to draw into the circle

of his kingdom the rich islands on the coasts--Samos, Chios, and Lesbos.

Herodotus tells us that Croesus asked Bias of Priene, who was in

Sardis soon after the subjugation of the Greek cities, what was the news

among the Hellenes? Bias answered that the Greeks of the islands were

getting together a great army of cavalry in order to march against

Sardis. When Croesus said that he should rejoice to hear that the gods

had put such thoughts in the minds of the islanders, Bias replied that

the inhabitants of the islands were no less anxious to measure

themselves against him in a battle by sea. At this Croesus is said to

have abandoned the preparations he was making against the islands. As a

fact, Croesus could not hide from himself that an attack upon the

islands was only possible by means of the naval power of the cities on

the coast. Even if these supplied ships against their countrymen in the

islands, was it to be expected that they would fight vigorously against

them?--was there not rather a fear that they would unite their arms with

those of the islands against Lydia?

By a happy combination of war and negotiation, by vigorous attack and

far-sighted concession, Croesus had put an end to the long struggle,

had subjugated the cities to his supremacy, and raised Lydia to the

summit of her fame and power. If the Lydians were the sovereign nation,

the Greeks were not to be a servile nation. They possessed complete

municipal freedom, they had not to render service in war, they had only

to pay tribute and give the Lydians and the Lydian trade as good a

position in their gates and harbours as was enjoyed by their own people

and their own trade. Croesus was at pains in everything to show a

favourable inclination to the Greeks. It was not merely that he

worshipped their gods, and made presents to their shrines. As he had

made the most costly presents to Apollo of Miletus, and Artemis of

Ephesus, so he presented a golden tripod to Ismenian Apollo at Thebes.

To Apollo of Delphi he gave presents as costly as those given to Apollo

of Miletus; to Athene of Delphi he gave a large shield of gold; to the

shrine of Amphiaraus at Thebes he gave a golden shield and a golden

lance. At other times also he showed himself favourable in every way to

the Greeks. When the Spartans wished to erect a golden statue to Apollo

on the summit of Mount Thornax, they sent to Sardis in order to purchase

the necessary gold. Croesus gave them as much as they required.[816] A

Greek merchant of Ephesus, who lent him money before his accession,

Croesus is said to have brought into the citadel, and given him

permission to carry away a cart-load of gold. Alcmæon, an Athenian

noble, who led the Athenians in the "sacred war" against Crissa, and

conquered at Olympia with his four-horse chariot, in the year 572 B.C.,

supported an embassy which Croesus sent to Delphi. In gratitude

Croesus invited him to Sardis, led him into the treasure-chamber, and

allowed him to take as much gold as he pleased. Though Alcmæon was now

advanced in years, and his son Megacles was in possession of the rich

inheritance of Cleisthenes, tyrant of Sicyon, he is said to have placed

a very free interpretation on this permission of the king. He put on a

loose coat and loose half-boots; these he crammed with gold, put

gold-dust in his hair, and filled his mouth with it, so that Croesus

when he saw the old man thus burdened and gilded, burst into laughter

and gave him as much again as he carried.[817] In addition to this

unbounded liberality Croesus engaged Greek artists, and bestowed his

favour on eminent men in the Greek cities. Miltiades of Athens, who had

emigrated to the Chersonese from the tyranny of the Pisistratids, and

had been taken in war against Lampsacus by the Lampsacenes, was set at

liberty by the powerful interposition of Croesus. The Greeks were not

insensible to the court paid to them by Croesus and his gold; they

were grateful for his liberality to their temples. Pindar in one of his

odes exclaims: "The friendly virtue of Croesus will not be

forgotten."[818]

The greatest of the Greeks, whom Croesus saw at Sardis, was Solon of

Athens.[819] Herodotus tells us, that Croesus entertained Solon for

several days in his palace, and by his servants showed him the splendour

of it, the riches and the treasure-chambers, all that he possessed in

precious stones, splendid robes, and treasures of art. Then in the pride

of the greatness of his dominion, the splendour of his throne, the

successes which he had obtained, Croesus asked Solon, whom he, who had

travelled so much in the world, considered the most fortunate of men?

Solon answered, Tellus the Athenian. Tellus lived a happy life,

according to human calculation; he had worthy sons and grandsons, not

one of whom died in his lifetime. In his day the commonwealth was

prosperous, and after a happy life he found a fortunate death; he fell

in battle for his father-land, when turning the enemy to flight, and the

Athenians buried him at the cost of the city, and paid him great honour.

Tellus had fallen, under Solon's eye, at Eleusis against the Megarians

(about 580 B.C.). Croesus further inquired, whom Solon considered the

happiest man after Tellus? Cleobis and Bito, two brothers of Argos,

Solon replied. These had possessions equal to their needs, and were

strong of body, so that both won the victory in the games, at one and

the same time. And once at the festival of Hera, when the mother of the

two young men had to go to the temple, and the oxen had not arrived, the

sons placed the yoke upon their necks, and drew their mother a distance

of 45 stades to the temple. The Argives assembled at the festival

commended the strength of the young men; the Argive women commended the

mother who had such sons. But the mother stepped before the statue of

the goddess and prayed that she would give to the sons who had done

their mother such honour the best reward that could be given to men.

When the sacrifice had been offered and the banquet held, the young men

went to sleep in the temple, and never woke again. The deed of the two

sons of Cydippe was highly praised among the Greeks. Their mother was

priestess of the ancient shrine of Hera near Argos. Each year the

Argives celebrated a great festival in honour of their goddess, to which

they marched in procession from the city to the temple, which lay in the

road to Mycenæ on the height of Euboea, at a distance of more than 40

stades from Argos. They offered a hecatomb to the goddess. The hundred

victims were crowned and led in the front of the procession; the young

men followed in their armour, and last of all the priestess of the

temple in a car drawn by two cows; the sacrifice was followed by a

banquet and games. The place of these animals was taken by Cleobis and

Bito. In remembrance of the noble deed the Argives caused statues to be

set up for the brothers at Delphi, and even at a later date a marble

group at Argos exhibited the two youths before the chariot of their

mother.[820]

Astonished at the answer of Solon, Croesus inquired of the Greek,

whether he considered the prosperity which had fallen to his

(Croesus') lot to be nothing, that he did not even place him on a

level with common men. Then Solon answered: You are asking a man about

the fortune of men, one who knows well that the deity is envious and

destructive. In a long life a man may see much that he would fain not

see, and endure much. I put the limit of man's life at 70 years. These

70 years make 25,200 days, if the intercalary months are not reckoned

in. If every other year receives a month in order that the seasons, as

is necessary, correspond, the seventy years allow 35 intercalary months,

which make up 1050 days. Of all these 26,250 days each brings something

new. Hence man is pure chance. You seem to me to be rich and the king of

many men, but the question you ask I can only answer when you have

brought your life to a happy end. He who has great possessions is no

happier than the man who has sufficient for the day, if he do not keep

his wealth till the end of life. Many wealthy men are unfortunate, and

many men of moderate possessions are fortunate. Only in two respects is

the wealthy but unfortunate man in advance of the man who is prosperous

with less wealth. The first can satisfy his desires more and bear

misfortune better; the second cannot satisfy his desires to the same

degree or resist misfortune so well; but his prosperity defends him from

misfortune. He is healthy, has worthy children, and is fair to look

upon. If in addition to all this he ends his life well, he is worthy to

be called happy. Before the end we may call no man happy; we can only

say, it is well with him. That a man should attain complete prosperity

is impossible; just as a country does not possess everything, but brings

forth one product and is in want of another, and the land which

possesses the most has the advantage, so it is with man. He does not

possess everything: one thing he has, another he has not. He who

possesses most to the end of life, and then brings his life to a noble

end, he may with justice bear the name of happy. In everything a man

must look to the issue, and many to whom the god has shown happiness he

has then cast to the ground.

In the bloom and vigour of his years, conqueror of the Greek cities,

victorious over the land of the coast, after bringing to completion the

political aims of his forefathers, in possession of an inexhaustible

treasure, at the head of a state carried to the limit of its natural

frontiers, and flourishing in trade, commanding an excellent army,

respected by his subjects, and lord of Asia Minor--Croesus, in the

year 560 B.C., had many reasons for counting himself a happy man, a

ruler specially favoured by the gods. Like all Oriental princes he was

not without a haughty confidence in his power and his success; he was in

a high degree self-conscious. Solon, when he saw Sardis, was close upon

his eightieth year. Grown up amid violent commotions in his city, amid

the fierce strife of parties, with a deed of blood before his eyes,

Solon had early had occasion to reflect on the plans and aspirations of

men, on their lust of possessions and power, on the fortune allotted to

them, on the punishments which though often late the gods awarded to

unjust deeds. Beyond other men he had devoted his life to his

fatherland, a canton of moderate extent. He had refused the position of

tyrant in order to serve his country in a much more difficult position

with unwearied devotion and perseverance. If by such fidelity he had

succeeded in turning destruction aside from his community, and

establishing a constitution which ensured order and freedom to it, this

constitution, and with it the work of his life, which he had defended

with the dedication of all his powers, was wrecked. If the form given by

Herodotus to the conversation of Solon and Croesus is a part of his

mode of narration, and the observation on the envy of the deity a part

of his view of life, Solon had nevertheless reason in his own bitter

experience to tell the sovereign of Asia Minor that no one could be

accounted happy before the end of life. Compared with his own fortune

the lot of Cleobis and Bito, who died immediately after their glorious

deed, the death of Tellus, who ended a good life by dying in victory for

his country, must have appeared a fortune to be envied.

FOOTNOTES:

[778] Strabo, p. 590.

[779] Strabo, p. 620. Nicol. Damas. fragm. 62, ed. Müller. Which

Magnesia is meant is not clear; Magnesia on Sipylus is more probable

than the other.

[780] Herod. 1, 14. Paus. 4, 21, 3; 9, 29, 4.

[781] According to Herodotus, _loc. cit._ Gyges takes the city but not

the citadel of Colophon; according to Athenæus (p. 256) he concluded a

friendly treaty with Colophon. In Polyænus also the Colophonians

remained for a long time in league with the Lydians, before Alyattes

deprived them of their country by treachery; 7, 2, 2.

[782] Herod. 1, 14.

[783] In Herod. from 681 to 632 B.C.; cf. _supra_, p. 276.

[784] Herod. 1, 6, 15.

[785] Strabo, p. 61. Plut. "Marc." c. 11.

[786] Strabo, p. 627, 647. Athenæus (p. 525), it is true, does not

entirely agree with this.

[787] Callim. "Hymn in Dian." 252-260. Hesych. [Greek: Lygdamis].

[788] Herod. 1, 16.

[789] Polyæn. "Strateg." 7, 2, 1.

[790] Vol. I. p. 549.

[791] On the long stay of the Cimmerians in Phrygia, Steph. Byzant.

[Greek: Syassos].

[792] Herod. 1, 15. Diog. Laert. 1, 83.

[793] The attack of Sadyattes on Smyrna is vouched for by Nicolaus,

fragm. 64, ed. Müller.

[794] Herod. 1, 17-19.

[795] The reasons for which I believe it necessary to maintain this date

are given above, p. 288, _n._

[796] Nicol. Damasc. fragm. 64, ed. Müller. At the time of this Carian

campaign of Alyattes, Croesus, according to this fragment, was viceroy

of the region of Adramytteum. It must therefore be placed about the year

580, since Croesus was born in 598 B.C. Adramytteum is said to have

been founded by a brother of Croesus of the name of Adramyttus: Steph.

Byz. _s. v._ In Nicolaus Adramys is an illegitimate son of Sadyattes.

The city was certainly much older. Athenæus, p. 515, mentions an old

king of Lydia of the name of Adramyttus.

[797] Mimnerm. fragm. 11, ed. Bergk. If Mimnermus, the contemporary of

Solon, is sometimes called a Smyrnæan, and sometimes a Colophonian, the

explanation is that Mimnermus derived his race from the Colophonians,

who had taken Smyrna from the Achæans. Strabo, p. 634. It is not strange

that Mimnermus as a boy may have heard the story of the struggles

against Gyges from his fathers and grandfathers. The attack of Alyattes

upon Smyrna, belongs to the period after 580, the last decade of

Alyattes, because Croesus continues the war against the Greek cities

without any break.

[798] Herod. 1, 16. Nic. Damasc. frag. 64. Strabo (p. 646) tells us that

the Smyrnæans had been compelled to dwell separately in several open

villages, and that they lived in this manner for 400 years, down to the

time of Antigonus. In this reckoning, in any case, there is a century

too much; moreover, Pindar (fragm. incert. 152, ed. Dissen) speaks of

the charming city of Smyrna. Hence the view given in the text is taken.

[799] Xenophan, fragm. 3. Arist. "Pol." 4, 3, 9. Athenæus, p. 526.

Pausan. 7, 5, 4.

[800] Theogn. fragm. 1103, ed. Gaisford.

[801] Herod. 1, 16; Diog. Laert. 1, 83.

[802] Suidas [Greek: Alyattês].

[803] Hipponact., fragm. 15, ed. Bergk. Schneidewin's conjecture to read

Alyattes for Attales ought certainly to be adopted, though Alyattes had

a son called Attales. The way must have been fixed by the largest

monument. [Greek: Attyos] for [Greek: Ôtys] seems certain; on the other

hand [Greek: Myrsilou] for [Greek: Mytalidi] is not permissible.

[804] Herod. 1, 93.

[805] Xenophon makes use of it in the Cyropædia for his own object (7,

3). Clearchus of Soli calls the tomb of Alyattes "the tomb of the

Hetæra." Athen. p. 573. Gyges loved a paramour so passionately that she

governed him and the kingdom. After her death he collected the Lydians

and heaped up a mound in her honour, which was still called the grave of

the Hetæra; it was so high that all the Lydians had it before their

eyes, and every traveller who journeyed within Tmolus. All this may be

founded on a participation of the numerous Lydian Hetæræ (vol. I. p.

566) in the tomb of Alyattes. Cf. Strabo, p. 627.

[806] Hamilton, "Asia Minor," p. 144, 145. Spiegelthal, "Monatsber. B.

A." 1854, s. 700 ff. Olfers, "Die lydischen Königsgräber, Abhandl. B.

A." 1858, s. 539 ff.

[807] Herod. 1, 92. Nicol. Damasc. fragm. 65, ed. Müller.

[808] Herod. 1, 25. Pausan. 10, 16, 1, 2. Athen. p. 210.

[809] Aesch. "Pers." v. 45. Herod. 1, 29; 5, 101.

[810] Fragm. 11, ed. Welcker.

[811] Herod. 1, 170. Diog. Laert. 1, 25.

[812] Herod. 1, 82, says: "as many as to Delphi, and like the Delphian

presents."

[813] Æl. "Var. Hist." 3, 26. Polyæn. "Strateg." 6, 50. If Ælian tells

us that Pindarus was at that time tyrant of Ephesus, and had received

the throne by inheritance, the statement is corrected by the tenor of

the narrative in which Pindarus gives advice, not orders, to the

Ephesians. The "tyranny" of Pindarus therefore was no more than a

prominent position in the city, such as would fall to a man of the race

of the Basilidæ, who carried the sceptre and wore purple. This does not

set aside the fact that Melas, the father of Pindarus, had to wife a

daughter of Alyattes: only I observe that Nicolaus of Damascus calls the

Milesian, who had to wife a sister of Sadyattes, a descendant of Melas,

the brother-in-law of Gyges.

[814] Herod. 1, 27. That the Ionians did not render service in war is

clear from the account which Herodotus gives of the war of Croesus

against Cyrus. Another point is more doubtful. Herodotus remarks, 1,

141, that the cities at the approach of Cyrus had "surrounded themselves

with walls." If we take this in the strictest sense, we might draw the

conclusion, that the cities had been compelled to throw down their walls

when subjugated by Croesus.

[815] Herod. 6, 37.

[816] Herod. 1, 69.

[817] Herod. 6, 125. If Herodotus on this occasion has in his mind the

embassy which Croesus sent to Delphi in 551 B.C., Alcmæon must at that

time have been at least 70 years old. But Croesus had sent to Delphi

earlier (Herod. 1, 85). Xenophon ("Cyr. inst." 7, 2, 7) represents

Croesus as sending to Delphi before he had any sons born to him, and

again after the death of Attys. According to the Parian Marble, Ep. 41,

42, the first mission of Croesus was 14 years before his overthrow, in

the first year of his reign.

[818] Pind. "Pyth." 1, 184.

[819] The chronological difficulties which are brought against this

meeting, and to which Plutarch refers, "Sol." c. 27, rest on the fact

that Plutarch, like Herodotus, represents Solon as going to Sardis after

the establishment of the Athenian constitution. According to this the

meeting occurred in 593, or rather in 583 B.C. Either date is

impossible: in 593 B.C. Croesus was five years old, in 583 B.C. he was

fifteen, and he did not ascend the throne till 563 B.C. The meeting with

Croesus therefore cannot be placed earlier than 560 B.C. when Solon

left Athens after Pisistratus became tyrant. After 558 B.C. Croesus

could no longer count as the happiest of mortals, with whom everything

went well, for in 558 B.C. Cyrus had already deposed Astyages, the

connection of Croesus. Herodotus says (1, 34, 46), that Croesus had

bewailed the loss of his son Attys for two years before the account of

the fall of Astyages was brought to him; Attys must have died in 560

B.C. With this the exact account of Phanias of Eresus, a scholar of

Aristotle (Suidas, [Greek: Phanias]), entirely agrees. He tells us that

Solon did not live two complete years after Pisistratus had seized the

tyranny, for Pisistratus became tyrant under the archonship of Comias;

Solon died under the archonship of Hegestratus (Plut. "Sol." 32); the

archonship of Comias falls in the year 559 B.C. Cf. Ælian, "Var. Hist."

8, 16. Diogenes Laertius, 1, 50, 62, remarks that Solon, after

Pisistratus had become tyrant, went to Croesus, to Cilicia and Cyprus;

that he died in Cyprus in his eightieth year. If Suidas tells us that

Solon went to Soli in Cilicia after Pisistratus became tyrant, this,

like the founding of the city in Diogenes, is a confusion with Soli in

Cyprus. Solon went to Cyprus, where he had been so well received between

583 and 573 B.C., where Soli, his own foundation, offered him a worthy

refuge. As there can hardly have been direct communication between

Athens and Soli, he went by way of the Ionian harbours. The general

statement of Heracleides of Pontus, that Solon lived for a long time

after the tyranny of Pisistratus (Plut. "Sol." c. 32), proves nothing

against the precise statement of Phanias, and that Solon, as Plutarch

says without giving his authority, died in Athens as the adviser of

Pisistratus, is as much opposed to the character of Solon as to the

statement that he died in Cyprus.

[820] Schol. Pind. "Olymp." 7, 152; Aen. Tact. c. 17. Pausan. 2, 20, 3.

Plut. fragm. 22, 7, ed. Dübner.

END OF VOL. III.

ERRATUM.

Page 426, line 5, _for_ milk-vessels _read_ mixing vessels

BUNGAY: CLAY AND TAYLOR, PRINTERS.

_J. D. & Co._

TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES:

1. Passages in italics are surrounded by _underscores_.

2. Carat character is used to indicate subscript in this text version.

3. Footnotes have been renumbered and moved to the end of the chapters

in this text version.

4. The original text includes Greek characters. For this text version

these letters have been replaced with transliterations.

5. Certain words use oe ligature in the original.

6. Obvious errors in punctuation have been silently corrected.

7. Other than the corrections listed above, printer's inconsistencies in

spelling, hyphenation, and ligature usage have been retained.

The History of Antiquity, Vol. 3 (of 6) · 第 18 / 18 章