even without taking the sense of their own board of Ten. Nevertheless the severity of the sentence pronounced indicates the alarm, as well as the displeasure, of the general body of Athenians; while it served as a disclaimer in fact, if not in form, of all political connection with Thebes.[205] [203] See Vol. VIII. of this History, Ch. lxiv, p. 196—about the psephism of Kannônus. [204] Xen. Hellen. v, 4, 19; Plutarch, Pelopid. c. 14. Xenophon mentions the Lacedæmonian envoys at Athens, but does not expressly say that they were sent to demand reparation for the conduct of these two generals or of the volunteers. I cannot doubt, however, that the fact was so; for in those times, there were no resident envoys,—none but envoys sent on special missions. [205] The trial and condemnation of these two generals has served as the groundwork for harsh reproach against the Athenian democracy. Wachsmuth (Hellen. Alterth. i, p. 654) denounces it as “a judicial horror, or abomination—ein Greul-gericht.” Rehdantz (Vitæ Iphicratis, Chabriæ, etc. p. 44, 45) says,—“Quid? quia invasionem Lacedæmoniorum viderant in Bœotiam factam esse, non puduit eos, damnare imperatores quorum facta suis decretis comprobaverant?” ... “Igitur hanc _illius facinoris excusationem_ habebimus: Rebus quæ a Thebanis agebantur (_i. e._ by the propositions of the Thebans seeking peace from Sparta, and trying to get enrolled as her allies,—alleged by Isokrates, which I have noticed above as being, in my judgment, very inaccurately recorded) cognitis, Athenienses, quo _enixius subvenerant, eo majore pœnitentiâ perculsi_ sunt.... Sed tantum abfuit ut sibimet irascerentur, ut, _e more Atheniensium, punirentur qui perfecerant id quod tum populus exoptaverat_.” The censures of Wachsmuth, Rehdantz, etc. assume as matter of fact,—1. That the Athenians had passed a formal vote in the public assembly to send assistance to Thebes, under two generals, who accordingly went out in command of the army and performed their instructions. 2. That the Athenians, becoming afterwards repentant or terrified, tried and condemned these two generals for having executed the commission entrusted to them. I have already shown grounds (in a previous note) for believing that the first of these affirmations is incorrect; the second, as dependent on it, will therefore be incorrect also. These authors here appear to me to single out a portion of each of the two _inconsistent_ narratives of Xenophon and Diodorus, and blend them together in a way which contradicts both. Thus, they take from Diodorus the allegation, that the Athenians sent to Thebes by public vote a large army, which fought along with the Thebans against the Kadmeia,—an allegation which, not only is not to be found in Xenophon, but which his narrative plainly, though indirectly, excludes.