The ingenuity of Aristodikus completely nullified the oracular
response, and left the Kymæans in their original perplexity. Not
choosing to surrender Paktyas, nor daring to protect him against a
besieging army, they sent him away to Mitylênê, whither the envoys of
Mazarês followed and demanded him; offering a reward so considerable,
that the Kymæans became fearful of trusting them, and again conveyed
away the suppliant to Chios, where he took refuge in the temple of
Athênê Poliuchus. But here again the pursuers followed, and the
Chians were persuaded to drag him from the temple and surrender
him, on consideration of receiving the territory of Atarneus (a
district on the continent over against the island of Lesbos) as
purchase-money. Paktyas was thus seized and sent prisoner to Cyrus,
who had given the most express orders for this capture: hence the
unusual intensity of the pursuit. But it appears that the territory
of Atarneus was considered as having been ignominiously acquired by
the Chians; none even of their own citizens would employ any article
of its produce for holy or sacrificial purposes.[354]
[354] Herodot. i, 160. The short fragment from Charôn of
Lampsakus, which Plutarch (De Malignitat. Herod. p. 859) cites
here, in support of one among his many unjust censures on
Herodotus, is noway inconsistent with the statement of the
latter, but rather tends to confirm it.
In writing this treatise on the alleged ill-temper of Herodotus,
we see that Plutarch had before him the history of Charôn of
Lampsakus, more ancient by one generation than the historian
whom he was assailing, and also belonging to Asiatic Greece. Of
course, it suited the purpose of his work to produce all the
contradictions to Herodotus which he could find in Charôn: the
fact that he has produced none of any moment, tends to strengthen
our faith in the historian of Halikarnassus, and to show that in
the main his narrative was in accordance with that of Charôn.
Mazarês next proceeded to the attack and conquest of the Greeks on
the coast; an enterprise which, since he soon died of illness, was
completed by his successor Harpagus. The towns assailed successively
made a gallant but ineffectual resistance: the Persian general by
his numbers drove the defenders within their walls, against which
he piled up mounds of earth, so as either to carry the place by
storm or to compel surrender. All of them were reduced, one after
the other: with all, the terms of subjection were doubtless harder
than those which had been imposed upon them by Crœsus, because Cyrus
had already refused to grant these terms to them, with the single
exception of Milêtus, and because they had since given additional
offence by aiding the revolt of Paktyas. The inhabitants of Priênê
were sold into slavery: they were the first assailed by Mazarês, and
had perhaps been especially forward in the attack made by Paktyas on
Sardis.[355]
[355] Herodot. i, 161-169.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account