should constitute himself king—even limited king—and determine how
much liberty he would consent to allot to the Syracusans who had
appointed him—this was a proceeding which they could not but resent
as a flagrant usurpation, and which he could only hope to maintain by
force.
The real conduct of Dion, however, was worse even than this. He
manifested no visible evidence of realizing even that fraction
of popular liberty which had entered into his original scheme.
What exact promises he made, we do not know. But he maintained his
own power, the military force, and the despotic fortifications,
provisionally undiminished. And who could tell how long he intended
to maintain them? That he really had in his mind purposes such as
Plato[255] gives him credit for, I believe to be true. But he took no
practical step towards them. He had resolved to accomplish them, not
through persuasion of the Syracusans, but through his own power. This
was the excuse which he probably made to himself, and which pushed
him down that inclined plane from whence there was afterwards no
escape.
[255] Plato, Epistol. vii. p. 335 F. p. 351 A.; Epistol. viii. p.
357 A.
It was not likely that Dion’s conduct would pass without a protest.
That protest came loudest from Herakleides; who, so long as Dion had
been acting in the real service of Syracuse, had opposed him in a
culpable and traitorous manner—and who now again found himself in
opposition to Dion, when opposition had become the side of patriotism
as well as of danger. Invited by Dion to attend the council, he
declined, saying that he was now nothing more than a private citizen,
and would attend the public assembly along with the rest; a hint
which implied, plainly as well as reasonably, that Dion also ought
to lay down his power, now that the common enemy was put down.[256]
The surrender of Ortygia had produced strong excitement among the
Syracusans. They were impatient to demolish the dangerous stronghold
erected in that islet by the elder Dionysius; they both hoped and
expected, moreover, to see the destruction of that splendid funeral
monument which his son had built in his honor, and the urn with
its ashes cast out. Now of these two measures, the first was one
of pressing and undeniable necessity, which Dion ought to have
consummated without a moment’s delay; the second was compliance
with a popular antipathy at that time natural, which would have
served as an evidence that the old despotism stood condemned. Yet
Dion did neither. It was Herakleides who censured him, and moved
for the demolition of the Dionysian Bastile; thus having the glory
of attaching his name to the measure eagerly performed by Timoleon
eleven years afterwards, the moment that he found himself master of
Syracuse. Not only Dion did not originate the overthrow of this
dangerous stronghold, but when Herakleides proposed it, he resisted
him and prevented it from being done.[257] We shall find the same den
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