CHAPTER LV (55).

DEMOKEDES.-DARIUS INVADES SCYTHIA.

 

Darius had now acquired full authority throughout the Persian empire, having put down the refractory satrap Oroetes as well as the revolted Medes and Babylonians. He had, moreover, completed the conquest of Ionia, by the important addition of Samos; and his dominion thus comprised all Asia Minor, with its neighboring islands. But this was not sufficient for the ambition of a Persian king, next but one in succession to the great Cyrus. The conquering impulse was yet unabated among the Persians, who thought it incumbent upon their king, and whose king thought it incumbent upon himself, to extend the limits of the empire. Though not of the lineage of Cyrus, Darius had taken pains to connect himself with it by marriage; he had married Atossa and Artystone, daughters of Cyrus,—and Parmys, daughter of Smerdis, the younger son of Cyrus. Atossa had been first the wife of her brother Cambyses; next, of the Magian Smerdis, his successor; and thirdly of Darius, to whom she bore four children. Of those children the eldest was Xerxes, respecting whom more will be said hereafter.

Atossa, mother of the only Persian king who ever set foot in Greece, the Sultana Validi of Persia during the reign of Xerxes, was a person of commanding influence in the reign of her last husband, as well as in that of her son, and filled no inconsiderable space even in Grecian imagination, as we may see both by Aeschylus and Herodotus. Had her influence prevailed, the first conquering appetites of Darius would have been directed, not against the steppes of Scythia, but against Attica and Peloponnesus; at least, so Herodotus assures us. The grand object of the latter in his history is to set forth the contentions of Hellas with the barbarians or non-Hellenic world; and with an art truly epical, which manifests itself everywhere to the careful reader of his nine books, he preludes to the real dangers which were averted at Marathon and Plataea, by recounting the first conception of an invasion of Greece by the Persians,—how it originated, and how it was abandoned. For this purpose,—according to his historical style, wherein general facts are set forth as subordinate and explanatory accompaniments to the adventures of particular persons,—he give us the interesting, but romantic, history of the Krotoniate surgeon Demokedes.

Demokedes, son of a citizen of Croton named Kalliphon, had turned his attention in early youth to the study and practice of medicine and surgery (for that age, we can make no difference between the two), and had made considerable progress in it. His youth coincides nearly with the arrival of Pythagoras at Croton, (550-520,) where the science of the surgeon, as well as the art of the gymnastic trainer, seem to have been then prosecuted more actively than in any part of Greece. His father Kalliphon, however, was a man of such severe temper, that the son ran away from him, and resolved to maintain himself by his talents elsewhere. I le went to Aegina, and began to practice in his profession; and so rapid was his success, even in his first year,—though very imperfectly equipped with instruments and apparatus,—that the citizens of the island made a contract with him to remain there for one year, at a salary of one talent (about three hundred and eighty-three pounds sterling, an Aeginaean talent). The year afterwards he was invited to come to Athens, then under the Peisistratids, at a salary of one hundred mince, or one and two-thirds of a talent; and in the following year, Polycrates of Samos tempted him by the offer of two talents. With that despot he remained, and accompanied him in his last calamitous visit to the satrap Oroetes: on the murder of Polycrates, being seized among the slaves and foreign attendants, be was left to languish with the rest in imprisonment and neglect. When again, soon after, Oroetes himself was slain, Demokedes was numbered among his slaves and chattels and sent up to Susa.

He had not been long at that capital, when Darius, leaping from his horse in the chase, sprained his foot badly, and was carried home in violent pain. The Egyptian surgeons, supposed to be the first men in their profession, whom he habitually employed, did him no good, but only aggravated his torture; for seven days and nights he had no sleep, and he as well as those around him began to despair. At length, some one who had been at Sardis, accidentally recollected that he had heard of a Greek surgeon among the slaves of Oroetes: search was immediately made, and the miserable slave was brought, in chains as well as in rags, into the presence of the royal sufferer. Being asked whether he understood surgery, he affected ignorance; but Darius, suspecting this to be a mere artifice, ordered out the scourge and the pricking instrument, to overcome it. Demokedes now saw that there was no resource, admitted that he had acquired some little skill, and was called upon to do his utmost in the case before him. He was fortunate enough to succeed perfectly, in alleviating the pain, in procuring sleep for the exhausted patient, and ultimately in restoring the foot to a sound state. Darius, who had abandoned all hopes of such a cure, knew no bounds to bis gratitude. As a first reward, he presented him with two sets of chains in solid gold,—a commemoration of the state in which Demokedes had first come before him,—he next sent him into the harem to visit his wives. The conducting eunuchs introduced him as the man who had restored the king to life, and h grateful sultanas each gave to him a saucer full of golden coins called staters; in all so numerous, that the slave Skiton, who followed him, was enriched by merely picking up the pierce which dropped on the floor. Nor was this all. Darius gave him n splendid house and furniture, made bi n the companion of his table, and showed him every description of favor. He was about to crucify the Egyptian surgeons who had been so unsuccessful in their attempts to cure him; but Demokedes had the happiness of preserving their lives, as well as of rescuing an unfortunate companion of his imprisonment,—an Eleian prophet, who had followed the fortunes of Polycrates.

But there was one favor which Darius would on no account grant; yet upon this one Demokedes had set his heart,—the liberty of returning to Greece. At length accident, combined with his own surgical skill, enabled him to escape from the splendor of his second detention, as it had before extricate him from the misery of the first. A tumor formed upon the breast of Atossa; at first, she said nothing to any one, but as it became too bad for concealment, she was forced to consult Demokedes. He promised to cure her, but required from her a solemn oath that she would afterwards do for him anything which he should ask,—pledging himself at the same time to ask nothing indecent. The cure was successful, and Atossa was required to repay it by procuring his liberty. He knew that the favor would be refused, even to her, if directly solicited, but he taught her a stratagem for obtaining under false pretences the consent of Darius. She took an early opportunity, Herodotus tells us, in bed, of reminding Darius that the Persians expected from him some positive addition to the power and splendor of the empire; and when Darius, in answer, acquainted her that he contemplated a speedy expedition against the Scythians, she entreated him to postpone it, and to turn his forces first against Greece: “I have heard (she said) about the maidens of Sparta, Athens, Argos, and Corinth, and I want to have some of them as slaves to serve me—(we may conceive the smile of triumph with which the sons of those who had conquered at Plataea and Salamis would hear this part of the history read by Herodotus);—you have near you the best person possible to give information about Greece, that Greek who cured your foot.” Darius was induced by this request to send some confidential Persians into Greece to procure information, along with Demokedes. Selecting fifteen of them, he ordered them to survey the coasts and cities of Greece, under guidance of Demokedes, but with peremptory orders upon no account to let him escape or to return without him. He next sent for Demokedes himself, explained to him what he wanted, and enjoined him imperatively to return as soon as the business had been completed; he farther desired him to carry away with him all the ample donations which he had already received, as presents to his father and brothers, promising that on his return fresh donations of equal value should make up the loss: lastly, he directed that a storeship, “filled with all manner of good things,” should accompany the voyage. Demokedes undertook the mission with every appearance of sincerity. The better to play his part, he declined to take away what he already possessed at Susa,—saying, that he should like to find his property and furniture again on coming back, and that the storeship alone, with its contents, would be sufficient both for the voyage and for all necessary presents.

Accordingly, he and the fifteen Persian envoys went down to Sidon in Phenicia, where two armed triremes were equipped, with a large storeship in company; and the voyage of survey into Greece was commenced. They visited and examined all the principal places in Greece,—probably beginning with the Asiatic and insular Greeks, crossing to Euboea, circumnavigating Attica and Peloponnesus, then passing to Corcyra and Italy. They surveyed the coasts and cities, taking memoranda of everything worthy of note which they saw: this Periplus, if it had been preserved, would have been inestimable, as an account of the actual state of the Grecian world about 518 bc. As soon as they arrived al Tarentum, Demokedes—now within a short distance of his own home, Kroton—found an opportunity of executing what he had meditated from the beginning. At his request Aristophilides, the king of Tarentum, seized the fifteen Persians, and detained them as spies, at the same time taking the rudders from off their ships,—while Demokedes himself made his escape to Croton. As soon as he had arrived there, Aristophilides released the Persians, and suffered them to pursue their voyage: they went on to Croton, found Demokedes in the market-place, and laid hands upon him. But his fellow-citizens released him, not without opposition from some who were afraid of provoking the Great King, and in spite of remonstrances, energetic and menacing, from the Persians themselves: indeed, the Crotoniates not only protected the restored exile, but even robbed the Persians of their storeship. The latter, disabled from proceeding farther, as well by this loss as by the secession of Demokedes, commenced their voyage homeward, but unfortunately suffered shipwreck near the Iapygian cape, and became slaves in that neighborhood. A Tarentine exile, named Gillus, ransomed them and carried them up to Susa,—a service for which Darius promised him any recompense that he chose. Restoration to his native city was all that Gillus asked; and that too, not by force, but by the mediation of the Asiatic Greeks of Cnidus, who were on terms of intimate alliance with the Tarentines. This generous citizen,—an honorable contrast to Demokedes, who had not scrupled to impel the stream of Persian conquest against his country, in order to procure his own release,—was unfortunately disappointed of his anticipated recompense. For though the Cnidians, at the injunction of Darius, employed all their influence at Tarentum to procure a revocation of the sentence of exile, they were unable to succeed, and force was out of the question. The last words addressed by Demokedes at parting to his Persian companions, exhorted them to acquaint Darius that he (Demokedes) was about to marry the daughter of the Crotoniate Milo,—one of the first men in Croton, as well as the greatest wrestler of his time. The reputation of Milo was very great with Darius,—probably from the talk of Demokedes himself: moreover, gigantic muscular force could be appreciated by men who had no relish either for Homer or Solon. And thus did this clever and vainglorious Greek, sending back his fifteen Persian companions to disgrace, and perhaps to death, deposit in their parting ears a braggart message, calculated to create for himself a factitious name at Susa. He paid a large sum to Milo as the price of his daughter, for this very purpose.

Thus finishes the history of Demokedes, and of the “first Persians (to use the phrase of Herodotus) who ever came over from Asia into Greece.” It is a history well deserving of attention, even looking only to the liveliness of the incidents, introducing us as they do into the full movement of the ancient world,—incidents which I see no reason for doubting, with a reasonable allowance for the dramatic amplification of the historian. Even at that early date, Greek medical intelligence stands out in a surpassing manner, and Demokedes is the first of those many able Greek surgeons who were seized, carried up to Susa, and there detained for the Great King, his court, and harem.

But his history suggests, in another point of view, far more serious reflections. Like the Milesian Histiaeus, of whom I shall speak hereafter, he cared not what amount of risk he brought upon his country in order to procure his own escape from a splendid detention at Susa. And the influence which he originated and brought to bear was on the point of precipitating upon Greece the whole force of the Persian empire, at a time when Greece was in no condition to resist it. Had the first aggressive expedition of Darius, with his own personal command and fresh appetite for conquest, been directed against Greece instead of against Scythia (between 516-514 bc), Grecian independence would have perished almost infallibly. Fur Athens was then still governed by the Peisistratids; what she was, under them, we have had occasion to notice in a former chapter. She had then no courage for energetic self-defence, and probably Hippias himself, far from offering resistance, would have found it advantageous to accept Persian dominion as a means of strengthening his own rule, like the Ionian despots : moreover. Grecian habit of cooperation was then only just commencing. But fortunately, the Persian invader did not touch the shore of Greece until more than twenty years afterwards, in 490 bc; and during that precious interval, the Athenian character had undergone the memorable revolution which has been before described. Their energy and their organization had been alike improved, and their force of resistance had become decupled; moreover, their conduct had so provoked the Persian that resistance was then a matter of necessity with them, and submission on tolerable terms an impossibility. When we come to the grand Persian invasion of Greece, we shall see that Athens way the life and soul of all the opposition offered. We shall see farther, that with all the efforts of Athens, the success of the defence was more than once doubtful; and would have been converted into a very different result, if Xerxes had listened to the best of his own counsellors. But had Darius, at the head of the very same force which hi conducted into Scythia, or even an inferior force, landed at Marathon in 511 BC, instead of sending Datis in 490 BC, he would have found no men like the victors of Marathon to meet him. As far as we can appreciate the probabilities, he would have met with little resistance except from the Spartans singly, who would have maintained their own very defensible territory against all his efforts,—like the Mysians and Pisidians in Asia Minor, or like the Mainots of Laconia in later days; but Hellas generally would have become a Persian satrapy. Fortunately, Darius, while bent on invading some country, had set his mind on the attack of Scythia, alike perilous and unprofitable. His personal ardor was wasted on those unconquerable regions, where he narrowly escaped the disastrous fate of Cyrus,—nor did he ever pay a second visit to the coasts of the Aegean. Yet the amorous influences of Atossa, set at work by Demokedes might well have been sufficiently powerful to induce Darius to assail Greece instead of Scythia,—a choice in favor of which all other recommendations concurred; and the history of free Greece would then probably have stopped at this point, without unrolling any of the glories which followed. So incalculably great has been the influence of Grecian development, during the two centuries between 500-300 BC on the destinies of mankind, that we cannot pass without notice a contingency which threatened to arrest that development in the bud. Indeed, it may be remarked that the history of any nation, considered as a sequence of causes and effects, affording applicable knowledge, requires us to study not merely real events, but also imminent contingencies,—events which were on the point of occurring, but yet did not occur. When we read the wailings of Atossa in the Persae of Aeschylus, for the humiliation which her son Xerxes had just undergone in his flight from Greece, we do not easily persuade ourselves to reverse the picture, and to conceive the same Atossa twenty years earlier, numbering as her slaves at Susa the noblest Herakleid and Alcmaeonid maidens from Greece. Yet the picture would really have been thus reversed,—the wish of Atossa would have been fulfilled, and the wailings would have been heard from enslaved Greek maidens in Persia,—if the mind of Darius had not happened to be preoccupied with a project not less insane even than those of Cambyses against Ethiopia and the Libyan desert. Such at least is the moral of the story of Demokedes.

That insane expedition across the Danube into Scythia comes now to be recounted. It was undertaken by Darius for the purpose of avenging the inroad and devastation of the Scythians in Media and Upper Asia, about a century before. The lust of conquest imparted unusual force to this sentiment of wounded dignity, which in the case of the Scythians could hardly be connected with any expectation of plunder or profit. In spite of the dissuading admonition of his brother Artabanus, Darius summoned the whole force of his empire, army and navy, to the Thracian Bosphorus,—a force not less than seven hundred thousand horse and foot, and six hundred ships, according to Herodotus. On these prodigious numbers we can lay no stress. But it appears that the names of all the various nations composing the host were inscribed on two pillars, erected by order of Darius on the European side of the Bosphorus, and afterwards seen by Herodotus himself in the city of Byzantium,—the inscriptions were bilingual, in Assyrian characters as well as Greek. The Samian architect Mandrocles had been directed to throw a bridge of boats across the Bosphorus, about half-way between Byzantium and the mouth of the Euxine. So peremptory were the Persian kings that their orders for military service should be punctually obeyed, and so impatient were they of the idea of exemptions, that when a Persian father named Oeobazus entreated that one of his three sons, all included in the conscription, might be left at home, Darius replied that all three of them should be left at home,—an answer which the unsuspecting father heard with delight. They were indeed all left at home,—for they were all put to death. A proceeding similar to this is ascribed afterwards to Xerxes; whether true or not as matters of fact, both tales illustrate the wrathful displeasure with which the Persian kings were known to receive such petitions for exemption.

The naval force of Darius seems to have consisted entirely of subject Greeks, Asiatic and insular; for the Phenician fleet was not brought into the Aegean until the subsequent Ionic revolt. At this time all or most of the Asiatic Greek cities were under despots, who leaned on the Persian government for support, and who appeared with their respective contingents to take part in the Scythian expedition. Of Ionic Greeks were seen,—Strattis, despot of Chios; Aeakes son of Syloson, despot of Samos; Laodamas, of Phocaea; and Histiaeus, of Miletus. From the Aeolic towns, Aristagoras of Kyme; from the Hellespontine Greeks, Daphnis of Abydus, Hippoklus of Lampsacus, Herophantus of Parium, Metrodorus of Proconnesus, Aristagoras of Cyzicus, and Miltiades of the Thracian Chersonese. All these are mentioned, and there were probably more. This large fleet, assembled at the Bosphorus, was sent forward into the Euxine to the mouth of the Danube,—with orders to sail up the river two days’ journey, above the point where its channel begins to divide, and to throw a bridge of boats over it; while Darius, having liberally recompensed the architect Mandrocles, crossed the bridge over the Bosphorus, and began his march through Thrace, receiving the submission of various Thracian tribes in his way, and subduing others,—especially the Getae north of Mount Haemus, who were compelled to increase still farther the numbers of his vast army. On arriving at the Danube, he found the bridge finished and prepared for his passage by the Ionians: we may remark here, as on so many other occasions, that all operations requiring intelligence are performed for the Persians either by Greeks or by Phenicians,—more usually by the former. He crossed this greatest of all earthly rivers,— for so the Danube was imagined to be in the fifth century BC,— and directed his march into Scythia.

As far as the point now attained, our narrative runs smoothly and intelligibly: we know that Darius marched his army into Scythia, and that he came back with ignominy and severe loss. But as to all which happened between his crossing and recrossing the Danube, we find nothing approaching to authentic statement,—nothing even which we can set forth as the probable basis of truth on which exaggerating fancy has been at work. All is inexplicable mystery. Ctesias indeed says that Darius marched for fifteen days into the Scythian territory,—that he then exchanged bows with the king of Scythia, and discovered the Scythian bow to be the largest—and that, being intimidated by such discovery, he fled back to the bridge by which he had crossed the Danube, and recrossed the river with the loss of one-tenth part of his army, being compelled to break down the bridge before all had passed. The length of march is here the only thing distinctly stated; about the direction nothing is said. But the narrative of Ctesias, defective as it is, is much less perplexing than that of Herodotus, who conducts the immense host of Darius as it were through fairy-land,—heedless of distance, large intervening rivers, want of all cultivation or supplies, destruction of the coun­try in so far as it could be destroyed—by the retreating Scythians, etc. He tells us that the Persian army consisted chiefly of foot,—that there were no roads nor agriculture; yet his narrative carries it over about twelve degrees of longitude from the Danube to the country east of the Tanais, across the rivers Tyras (Dniester), Hypanis (Bog), Borysthenes (Dnieper), Hypakyris. Gerrhos, and Tanais. How these rivers could have been passed in the face of enemies by so vast a host, we are left to conjecture, since it was not winter time, to convert them into ice: nor does the historian even allude to them as having been crossed either in the advance or in the retreat. What is not less remarkable is, that in respect to the Greek settlement of Olbia, or Borysthenes, and the agricultural Scythians and Mix-hellenes between the Hypanis and the Borysthenes, across whose country it would seem that this march of Darius must have carried him,— Herodotus does not say anything; though we should have expected that he would have had better means of informing himself about this part of the march than about any other, and though the Persians could hardly have failed to plunder or put in requisition this, the only productive portion of Scythia.

The narrative of Herodotus in regard to the Persian march north of the Ister seems indeed destitute of all the conditions of reality. It is rather an imaginative description, illustrating the desperate and impracticable character of Scythian warfare, and grouping in the same picture, according to that large sweep of the imagination which is admissible in epical treatment, the Scythians, with all their barbarous neighbors from the Carpathian mountains to the river Volga. The Agathyrsi, the Neuri, the Androphagi, the Melanchlaeni, the Budini, the Geloni, the Sarmatians, and the Tauri,—all of them bordering on that vast quadrangular area of four thousand stadia for each side, called Scythia, as Herodotus conceives it,—are brought into deliberation and action in consequence of the Persian approach. And Herodotus takes that opportunity of communicating valuable particulars respecting the habits and manners of each. The kings of these nations discuss whether Darius is justified in his invasion, and whether it be prudent in them to aid the Scythians. The latter question is decided in the affirmative by the Sarmatians, the Budini, and the Geloni, all eastward of the Tanais,—in the negative by the rest. The Scythians, removing their wagons with their wives and children out of the way northward, retreat and draw Darius after them from the Danube all across Scythia and Sarmatia to the northeastern extremity of the territory of the Budini, several days’ journey eastward of the Tanais. Moreover, they destroy the wells and ruin the herbage as much as they can, so that during all this long march, says Herodotus, the Persians “found nothing to damage, inasmuch as the country was barren”, it is therefore not easy to see what they could find to live upon. It is in the territory of the Budini, at this eastern­most terminus on the borders of the desert, that the Persians perform the only positive acts which are ascribed to them throughout the. whole expedition. They bum the wooden wall before occupied, but not deserted, by the Geloni, and they build, or begin to build, eight large fortresses near the river Oarus. For what purpose these fortresses could have been intended, Herodotus gives no intimation; but he says that the unfinished work was yet to be seen even in his day.

Having thus been carried all across Scythia and the other territories above mentioned in a northeasterly direction, Darius and his army are next marched back a prodigious distance in a north­westerly direction, through the territories of the Melanchlaeni, the Androphagi, and the Neuri, all of whom flee affrighted into the northern desert, having been thus compelled against their will to share in the consequences of the war. The Agathyrsi peremptorily require the Scythians to abstain from drawing the Persians into their territory, on pain of being themselves treated as enemies: the Scythians in consequence respect the boundaries of the Agathyrsi, and direct their retreat in such a manner as to draw the Persians again southward into Scythia. During all this long march backwards and forwards, there are partial skirmishes and combats of horse, but the Scythians steadily refuse any general engagement. And though Darius challenges them formally, by means of a herald, with taunts of cowardice, the Scythian king Idanthyrsus not only refuses battle, but explains and defends his policy, and defies the Persian to come and destroy the tombs of their fathers,—it will then, he adds, be seen whether the Scythians are cowards or not. The difficulties of Darius have by this time become serious, when Idanthyrsus sends to him the menacing presents of a bird, a mouse, a frog, and five arrows: the Persians are obliged to commence a rapid retreat towards the Danube, leaving, in order to check and slacken the Scythian pursuit, the least effective and the sick part of their army encamped, together with the asses which had been brought with them,—animals unknown to the Scythians, and causing great alarm by their braying. However, notwithstanding some delay thus caused, as well as the anxious haste of Darius to reach the Danube, the Scythians, far more rapid in their movements, arrive at the river before him, and open a negotiation with the Ionians left in guard of the bridge, urging them to break it down and leave the Persian king to his fate,—inevitable destruction with his whole army.

Here we reenter the world of reality, at the north bank of the Danube, the place where we before quitted it. All that is re ported to have passed in the interval, if tried by the tests of historical matter of fact, can be received as nothing better than a perplexing dream. It only acquires value when we consider it as an illustrative, fiction, including, doubtless, some unknown matter of fact, but framed chiefly to exhibit in action those unattackable Nomads, who formed the northeastern barbarous world of a Greek, and with whose manners Herodotus was profoundly struck. “The Scythians (says he) in regard to one of the greatest of human matters, have struck out a plan cleverer than any that I know. In other respects I do not admire them; but they have contrived this great object, that no invader of their country shall ever escape out of it, or shall ever be able to find out and overtake them, unless they themselves choose. For when men have neither walls nor established cities, but are all house-carriers and horse-bowmen,—living, not from the plough, but from cattle, and having their dwellings on wagons,—how can they be otherwise than unattackable and impracticable to meddle with?” The protracted and unavailing chase ascribed to Darius,—who can neither overtake his game nor use his arms, and who hardly even escapes in safety,—embodies in detail this formidable attribute of the Scythian Nomads. That Darius actually marched into the country, there can be no doubt. Nothing else is certain, except his ignominious retreat out of it to the Danube; for of the many different guesses, by which critics have attempted to cut down the gigantic sketch of Herodotus into a march with definite limits and direction, not one rests upon any positive grounds, or carries the least conviction. “We can trace the pervading idea in the mind of the historian, but cannot find out what were his substantive data.

The adventures which took place at the passage of that river, both on the out-march and the home-march, wherein the Ionians are concerned, are far more within the limits of history. Here Herodotus possessed better means of information, and had less of a dominant idea to illustrate. That which passed between Darius and the Ionians on his first crossing is very curious: I have reserved it until the present moment, because it is particularly connected with the incidents which happened on his return.

On reaching the Danube from Thrace, he found the bridge of boats ready, and when the whole army had passed over, he ordered the Ionians to break it down, as well as to follow him in his land-march into Scythia; the ships being left with nothing but the rowers and seamen essential to navigate them homeward. His order was on the point of being executed, when, fortunately for him, the Mitylenaean general Koes ventured to call in question the prudence of it, having first asked whether it was the pleasure of the Persian king to listen to advice. He urged that the march on which they were proceeding might prove perilous, and retreat possibly unavoidable; because the Scythians, though certain to be defeated if brought to action, might perhaps not suffer themselves to be approached or even discovered. As a precaution against all contingencies, it was prudent to leave the bridge standing and watched by those who had constructed it. Far from being offended at the advice, Darius felt grateful for it, and desired that Koes would ask him after his return for a suitable reward,—which we shall hereafter find granted. He then altered his resolution, took a cord, and tied sixty knots in it. “Take this cord (said he to the Ionians), untie one of the knots in it each day after my advance from the Danube into Scythia. Remain here and guard the bridge until you shall have untied all the knots; but if by that time I shall not have returned, then depart and sail home.” After such orders he began his march into the interior.

This anecdote is interesting, not only as it discloses the simple expedients for numeration and counting of time then practised, but also as it illustrates the geographical ideas prevalent. Darius did not intend to come back over the Danube, but to march round the Maeotis, and to return into Persia on the eastern side of the Euxine. No other explanation can be given of his orders. At first, confident of success, he orders the bridge to be destroyed forthwith: he will beat the Scythians, march through their country, and reenter Media from the eastern side of the Euxine. When he is reminded that possibly he may not be able to find the Scythians, and may be obliged to retreat, he still continues persuaded that this must happen within sixty days, if it happens at all; and that, should he remain absent more than sixty days, such delay will be a convincing proof that he will take the other road of return instead of repassing the Danube. The reader who looks at a map of the Euxine and its surrounding territories may be startled at so extravagant a conception. But lie should recollect that there was no map of the same or nearly the same accuracy before Herodotus, much less before the contemporaries of Darius. The idea of entering Media by the north from Scythia and Sarmatia over the Caucasus, is familiar to Herodotus in his sketch of the early marches of the Scythians and Cimmerians: moreover, he tells us that after the expedition of Darius, there came some Scythian envoys to Sparta, proposing an offensive alliance against Persia, and offering on their part to march across the Phasis into Media from the north, while the Spartans were invited to land on the shores of Asia Minor, and advance across the country to meet them from the west. When we recollect that the Macedonians and their leader, Alexander the Great, having arrived at the river Jaxartes, on the north of Sogdiana, and on the east of the sea of Aral, supposed that they had reached the Tanais, and called the river by that name,—we shall not be astonished at the erroneous estimation of distance implied in the plan conceived by Darius.

The Ionians had already remained in guard of the bridge beyond the sixty days commanded, without hearing anything of the Persian army, when they were surprised by the appearance, not of that army, but of a body of Scythians, who acquainted them that Darius was in full retreat and in the greatest distress, and that his safety with the whole army depended upon that bridge. They endeavored to prevail upon the Ionians, since the sixty days included in their order to remain had now elapsed, to break the bridge and retire; assuring them that, if this were done, the destruction of the Persians was inevitable,—of course, the Ionians themselves would then be free. At first, the latter were favorably disposed towards the proposition, which was warmly espoused by the Athenian Miltiades, despot, or governor, of the Thracian Chersonese. Had he prevailed, the victor of Marathon—for such we shall hereafter find him—would have thus inflicted a much more vital blow on Persia than even that celebrated action, and would have brought upon Darius the disastrous fate of his predecessor Cyrus. But the Ionian princes, though leaning at first towards his suggestion, were speedily converted by the representations of Histiaeus of Miletus, who reminded them that the maintenance of his own ascendency over the Milesians, and that of each despot in his respective city, was assured by means of Persian support alone—the feeling of the population being everywhere against them: consequently, the ruin of Darius would be their ruin also. This argument proved conclusive. It was resolved to stay and maintain the bridge, but to pretend compliance with the Scythians, and prevail upon them to depart, by affecting to destroy it. The northern portion of the bridge was accordingly destroyed, for the length of a bow-shot, and the Scythians departed under the persuasion that they had succeeded in depriving their enemies of the means of crossing the river. It appears that they missed the track of the retreating host, which was thus enabled, after the severest privation and suffering, to reach the Danube in safety. Arriving during the darkness of the night, Darius was at first terrified to find the bridge no longer joining the northern bank: an Egyptian herald, of stentorian powers of voice, was ordered to call as loudly as possible the name of Histiaeus the Milesian. Answer being speedily made, the bridge was reestablished, and the Persian army passed over before the Scythians returned to the spot.

There can be no doubt that the Ionians here lost an opportunity eminently favorable, such as never again returned, for emancipating themselves from the Persian dominion. Their despots, by whom the determination was made, especially the Milesian Histiaeus, were not induced to preserve the bridge by any honorable reluctance to betray the trust reposed in them, but simply by selfish regard to the maintenance of their own unpopular dominion. And we may remark that the real character of this impelling motive, as well as the deliberation accompanying it, may be assumed as resting upon very good evidence, since we are now arrived within the personal knowledge of the Milesian historian Hecataeus, who took an active part in the Ionic revolt a few years afterwards, and who may, perhaps, have been personally engaged in this expedition. He will be found reviewing with prudence and sobriety the chances of that unfortunate revolt, and distrusting its success from the beginning; while Histiaeus of Miletus will appear on the same occasion as the fomenter of it, in order to procure his release from an honorable detention at Susa, rear the person of Darius. The selfishness of this despot having deprived his countrymen of that real and favorable chance of emancipation which the destruction of the bridge would have opened to them, threw them into perilous revolt a few years afterwards against the entire and unembarrassed force of the Persian king and empire.

Extricated from the perils of Scythian warfare, Darius marched southward from the Danube through Thrace to the Hellespont, where he crossed from Sestus into Asia. He left, however, a considerable army in Europe, under the command of Megabazus, to accomplish the conquest of Thrace. Perinthus on the Propontis made a brave resistance, but was at length subdued, and it appears that all the Thracian tribes, and all the Grecian colonies between the Hellespont and the Strymon, were forced to submit, giving earth and water, and becoming subject to tribute. Near the lower Strymon, was the Edonian town of Myrkinus, which Darius ordered to be made over to Histiaeus of Miletus; for both this Milesian, and Koes of Mitylene, had been desired by the Persian king to name their own reward for their fidelity to him on the passage over the Danube. Koes requested that he might be constituted despot of Mitylene, which was accomplished by Persian authority; but Histiaeus solicited that the territory near Myrkinus might be given to him for the foundation of a colony. As soon as the Persian conquests extended thus far, the site in question was presented to Histiaeus, who entered actively upon his new scheme. We shall find the territory near Myrkinus eminent, hereafter as the site of Amphipolis. It offered great temptation to settlers, as fertile, well wooded, convenient for maritime commerce, and near to auriferous and argentiferous mountains. It seems, however, that the Persian dominion in Thrace was disturbed by an invasion of the Scythians, who, in revenge for the aggression of Darius, overran the country as far as the Thracian Chersonese, and are even said to have sent envoys to Sparta proposing a simultaneous invasion of Persia from different sides, by Spartans and Scythians. The Athenian Miltiades, who was despot, or governor, of the Chersonese, was forced to quit it for some time, and Herodotus ascribes his retirement to the incursion of these Nomads. But we may be permitted to suspect that the historian has misconceived the real cause of such retirement. Miltiades could not remain in the Chersonese after he had incurred the deadly enmity of Darius by exhorting the Ionians to destroy the bridge over the Danube.

Nor did the conquests of Megabazus stop at the western bank the Strymon. He carried his arms across that river, conquering the Paeonians and reducing the Macedonians under Amyntas to tribute. A considerable number of the Paeonians were transported across into Asia, by express order of Darius; whose fancy had been struck by seeing at Sardis a beautiful Paeonian woman carrying a vessel on her head, leading a horse to water, and spinning flax, all at the same time. This woman had been brought over, we are told, by her two brothers, Pigres and Mantyes, for the express purpose of arresting the attention of the Great King. They hoped by this means to be constituted despots of their countrymen, and we may presume that their scheme succeeded, for such part of the Paeonians as Megabazus could subdue were conveyed across to Asia and planted in some villages in Phrygia. Such violent transportations of inhabitants were in the genius of the Persian government.

From the Paeonian lake Prasias, seven eminent Persians were cent as envoys into Macedonia, to whom Amyntas readily gave the required token of submission, inviting them to a splendid banquet. When exhilarated with wine, they demanded to see the women of the regal family, who, being accordingly introduced, were rudely dealt with by the strangers. At length, the son of Amyntas, Alexander, resented the insult, and exacted for it a signal vengeance. Dismissing the women, under pretence that they should return after a bath, he brought back in their place youths in female attire, armed with daggers: the Persians, proceeding to repeat their caresses, were all put to death. Their retinue and splendid carriages and equipment which they had brought with them disappeared at the same time, without any tidings reaching the Persian army. And when Bubares. another eminent Persian, was sent into Macedonia to institute researches, Alexander contrived to hush up the proceeding by large bribes, and by giving him his sister Gygaea in marriage.

Meanwhile Megabazus crossed over into Asia, carrying with him the Paeonians from the river Strymon. Having been in those regions, he had become alarmed at the progress of Histiaeus with his new city of Myrkinus, and communicated his apprehensions to Darius; who was prevailed upon to send for Histiaeus, retaining him about his person, and carrying him to Susa as counsellor and friend, with every mark of honor, but with the secret intention of never letting him revisit Asia Minor. The fears of the Persian general were probably not unreasonable but this detention of Histiaeus at Susa, became in the sequel an important event.

On departing for his capital, Darius nominated his brother Artaphernes satrap of Sardis, and Otanes, general of the forces on the coast, in place of Megabazus. The new general dealt very severely with various towns near the Propontis, on the ground that they had evaded their duty in the late Scythian expedition, and had even harassed the army of Darius in its retreat. He took Byzantium and Chalcedon, as well as Antandrus in the Troad, and Lamponium; and with the aid of a fleet from Lesbos, he achieved anew conquest,—the islands of Lemnos and Imbros, at that time occupied by a Pelasgic population, seemingly without any Greek inhabitants at all.

These Pelasgi were of cruel and piratical character, if we may judge by the tenor of the legends respecting them; Lemnian misdeeds being cited as a proverbial expression for atrocities. They were distinguished also for ancient worship of Hephaestus, together with mystic rites in honor of the Kabeiri, and even human sacrifices to their Great Goddess. In their two cities,—Hephaestias on the east of the island, and Myrina on the west,—they held out bravely against Otanes, nor did they submit until they had undergone long and severe hardship. Lykaretus, brother of that Maeandrius whom we have already noticed as despot of Samos, was named governor of Lemnos; but he soon after died. It is probable that the Pelasgic population of the islands was greatly enfeebled during this struggle, and we even hear that their king Hermon voluntarily emigrated, from fear of Darius.

Lemnos and Imbros thus became Persian possessions, held by a subordinate prince as tributary. A few years afterwards their lot was again changed, they passed into the hands of Athens, the Pelasgic inhabitants were expelled, and fresh Athenian settlers introduced. They were conquered by Miltiades from the Thracian Chersonese; from Elaeus at the south of that peninsula to Lemnos being within less than one day’s sail with a north  ind. The Hephaestieans abandoned their city and evacuated the island with little resistance; but the inhabitants of Myrina stood a siege, and were not expelled without difficulty: both of them found abodes in Thrace, on and near the peninsula of Mount Athos. Both these islands, together with that of Skyros (which was not taken until after the invasion of Xerxes), remained connected with Athens in a manner peculiarly intimate. At the peace of Antalcidas (387 BC),—which guaranteed universal autonomy to every Grecian city, great and small,—they were specially reserved, and considered as united with Athens. The property in their soil was held by men who, without losing their Athenian citizenship, became Lemnian kleruchs, and as such were classified apart among the military force of the state; while absence in Lemnos or Imbros seems to have been accepted as an excuse for delay before the courts of justice, was to escape the penalties of contumacy, or departure from the country. It is probable that a considerable number of poor Athenian citizens were provided with lots of land in these islands, though we have no direct information of the fact, and are even obliged to guess the precise time at which Miltiades made the conquest. Herodotus, according to his usual manner, connects the conquest with an ancient oracle, and represents it as the retribution for ancient legendary crime committed by certain Pelasgi, who, many centuries before, had been expelled by the Athenians from Attica, and had retired to Lemnos. Full of this legend, he tells us nothing about the proximate causes or circumstances of the conquest, which must probably have been accomplished by the efforts of Athens, jointly with Miltiades from the Chersonese, during the period that the Persians were occupied in quelling the Ionic revolt, between 502-494 bc,—since it is hardly to be supposed that Miltiades would have ventured thus to attack a Persian possession during the time that the satraps had their hands free. The acquisition was probably facilitated by the fact, that the Pelasgic population of the islands had been weakened, as well by their former resistance to the Persian Otanes, as by some years passed under the deputy of a Persian satrap.

In mentioning the conquest of Lemnos by the Athenians and Miltiades, I have anticipated a little on the course of events, because that conquest,—though coinciding in point of time with the Ionic revolt (which will be recounted in the following chapter), and indirectly caused by it, in so far as it occupied rhe attention of the Persians,—lies entirely apart from the operations of the revolted Ionians. When Miltiades was driven out of the Chersonese by the Persians, on the suppression of the Ionic revolt, his fame, derived from having subdued Lemnos, contributed both to neutralize the enmity which he had incurred as governor of the Chersonese, and to procure his election as one of the ten generals for the year of the Marathonian combat.

 

CHAPTER LVI (56)

IONIC REVOLT.