Page:History of Greece Vol X.djvu/119

SPHODRIAS INVADES ATTICA. 97 Even before the Lacedemonian envoys had quitted Athens, however, an incident, alike sudden and memorable, completely 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 to- gether 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. Next, they take from Xenophon the allegation, that the Athenians tried and condemned the two generals who were accomplices in the conspiracy of Mellon against the Theban rulers, TU 6vu arparriyu, ol avvymaTuadnv rijv TOV Me/l/lovof ini rovf Kepi AeovTiddrjv eiravdaraaiv (v, 4, 19). Now the mention of these two generals follows naturally and consistently in Xenophon. He had before told us that there were two out of the Athenian generals, who both assisted underhand in organizing the plot, and after- wards went with the volunteers to Thebes. But it cannot be fitted on to the narrative of Diodorus, who never says a word about this condemnation by the Athenians nor even mentions any two Athenian generals, at all. Ho tells us that the Athenian army which went to Thebes was commanded by Demophon ; he notices no colleague whatever. He says in general words, that the conspiracy was organized " with the assistance of the Athenians " (crvvm?t,af3o/j.evav 'Atir/vaiuv) ; not saying a word about any two generals as especially active. Wachsmuth and Rehdantz take it for granted, most gratuitously, that these two condemned generals (mentioned by Xenophon and not by Diodo- rus) are identical with Demophon and another colleague, commanders of an army which went out by public vote (mentioned by Diodorus and not by Xenophon). The narratives of Xenophon and Diodorus (as I have before observed) are distinct and inconsistent with each other. We have to make our option between them. I adhere to that of Xenophon, for reasons previously given. But if any one prefers that of Diodorus, he ought then to reject altogether the story of the condemnation of the two Athenian generals (who nowhere appear in Diodorus), and to suppose that Xenophon was misinformed upon that point, as upon the other facts of the case. That the two Athenian generals (assuming the Xenophontic narrative as true) should be tried and punished, when the consequences of their unau- thorized proceeding were threatening to come with severity upon Athens, appears to me neither improbable nor unreasonable. Those who are shocked by the very severity of the sentence, will do well to read the re- VOL. X. / ?OC.