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.
There are two facts stated in Herodotus which may possibly account for
this delay. Artaphernes had, perhaps, been only too eager in taking
up the proposed design. Aristagoras had asked for one hundred ships;
Artaphernes had given two hundred. This accession of numbers may have
been actually embarrassing to Aristagoras, as rendering the expedition
of such magnitude as to demand the presence of a larger percentage of
the non-Greek element on board the fleet than he had either hoped for
or reckoned upon. The ships and crews seem to have been Greek; ◆H.
v. 32. _ad fin._◆ but it must be concluded from Herodotus’ account
of the gathering of the expedition that a considerable Persian force
was embarked. So long as this force was with the fleet such a measure
as that with which the revolt was opened could hardly have been
adopted with success, and would, indeed, hardly have been attempted.
The conspirators would have to wait until the non-Greek element had
disembarked and gone up country, and then would have to strike quickly
before the fleet was dispersed by official orders.
Another possible reason for this delay is that Aristagoras wished
to defer the outbreak until the close of the campaigning season, when
he would have time to make preparations to meet the coming storm. The
four months’ duration of the fruitless siege of Naxos would be in that
case all in his favour. He had to waste time at Naxos in order to gain
it on the Asiatic coast. A sturdy defence on the part of the Naxians
was the very thing from which he had most to hope.
Did Megabates or Aristagoras send the fatal message?
The tale of “the man with the tattooed head” was evidently a celebrated
tale of the time. There is no reason whatever to suspect the truth of
it. In the plot as given in Herodotus it plays the part of a second
motive. All that Herodotus knows of the message is that it “signified
revolt,” and that Aristagoras imparted it to his fellow-conspirators.
The method of communication implies that the message cannot indeed have
been a long one.
It must, however, be regarded as an extraordinary coincidence that it
should have arrived in the very brief period which must have intervened
between the return from Naxos and the first act of insurrection. It
must, in order to be effective, have suggested some powerful motive for
revolt. It cannot possibly be imagined that Aristagoras wanted Histiæus
back on the coast. The Greek conspirators were very unlikely to desire
the return of the favoured friend of the great king, except on one
assumption, namely, that Histiæus had been in the plot before ever he
made the involuntary journey to Susa.
But whatever the full contents of the message, whatever the reasons
which made it contribute to the determination of the conspirators,
there are, as has been already said, no grounds whatever for doubting
that the message did come. The question is as to the time at which it
came.
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