The great Persian War and its preliminaries : $b A study of the evidence, literary and topographicalGrundy, G. B. (George Beardoe)
History
The great Persian War and its preliminaries : $b A study of the evidence, literary and topographical
Grundy, G. B. (George Beardoe)
Greece -- History -- Persian Wars, 500-449 B.C.
It was either late in 496 or early in 495 that Histiæus came down to
the coast. The revolt had not, indeed, prospered, but it was far from
crushed. Aristagoras had gone to Myrkinos, if not to Hades. He had
left Miletus, in all probability, before the great Persian disaster on
the Pedasos road. That disaster, in which the greatest of the armies,
if not the major part of the whole Persian force in Western Asia, had
been wiped out of existence, now put a wholly different complexion upon
affairs; and the satraps seem to have found themselves once more, in
495, in the position in which they had been in 497,—able to maintain
the existing status, but without the means necessary for taking further
offensive, for the time being. Hence the gap in this part of Herodotus’
story of the war. There is nothing recorded, because there was nothing
remarkable to record. The side which had suffered most severely in the
last round of the great fight had managed at the last moment to get in
a smashing blow; and during the next round both sides were too weak to
attempt a vigorous attack.
In one respect the circumstances were favourable to Histiæus. They
afforded him time for intrigue. If Herodotus’ story is to be believed,
he had to face the bitter reproaches of the Ionians at Chios for
having brought about the revolt. It is doubtless the case that the
Ionians were dispirited at the way in which matters had gone in the
last campaign; but, apart from the inconsistency of this attitude of
the Chians with their previous treatment of Histiæus, the story serves
to point the moral of the hopelessness of the revolt, and, so doing,
is not above suspicion. Histiæus is related to have defended himself
by saying that he sent the message because he had discovered that
Darius entertained a design of removing the Ionians to Phœnicia and
the Phœnicians to Ionia. The intense rivalry between these two
great commercial peoples may well have rendered such an allegation a
commonplace with agitators on the Asiatic side of the Ægean; but there
is no reason for supposing that it had any foundation in fact.
Histiæus now proceeded with his schemes. He was evidently convinced
that the revolt could not succeed without external support of some
kind. Upon Thrace he could not now reckon, since the news that
Aristagoras had embroiled himself with the Thracians on the Strymon
must have reached him by that time. ◆H. vi. 4.◆ He had, however,
discovered that there was at Sardes a Persian party hostile to
Artaphernes, with which he had previously conferred “about revolt.”
With it he now sought to establish communications. He was unfortunate
in his messenger—a certain Hermippos of Atarneus,—who carried the
letters straight to Artaphernes. The latter directed him to take them
to those to whom they were sent, and to bring back the answers. As
might be expected, the recipients were executed.
So the plan miscarried.
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