Page:History of Greece Vol X.djvu/425

ENVOYS TO SICILY. 403 since to his count! y and to his family consequence, and from whence he brought back an intense antipathy to the Greek name, as Avell as an impatience to wipe off by a signal revenge the dis- honor both of his country and of his family. Accordingly, espous- ing with warmth the request of the Egestaeans, he obtained from the Senate authority to take effective measures for their protection. 1 His first proceeding was to send envoys to Egesta and Selinus, to remonstrate against the encroachments of the Selinuntines ; with farther instructions, in case remonstrance proved ineffectual, to proceed with the Egestaeans to Syracuse, and there submit the whole dispute to the arbitration of the Syracusans. He foresaw that the Selinuntines, having superiority of force on their side, would re- fuse to acknowledge any arbitration ; and that the Syracusans, re- spectfully invoked by one party but rejected by the other, would stand aside from the quarrel altogether. It turned out as he had expected. The Selinuntines sent envoys to Syracuse, to protest against the representations from Egesta and Carthage ; but declined to refer their case to arbitration. Accordingly, the Syracusans passed a vote that they would maintain their alliance with Selinus, yet without impeachment of their pacific relations with Carthage : thus leaving the latter free to act without obstruction. Hannibal immediately sent over a body of troops to the aid of Egesta : five 1 Diodor. xiii, 43. Karlarriaav arparriybv TOV 'Avvlffav, Kara VO^OVQ TOTS Baai^evovra. OVTOC 6s 7/v vluvbf fj.ev TOV irpbf Te'Auva ito7^e[j.f]aavTOQ 'Apih- KOV, /cat Trpdf 'tyztpa TeTiSVT^aavrof, v'int; 6e Teaxuvof, of 6id TT/V TOV Trarpcif 7}TTav eQvyafiev'&T], Kal KarefliuaEV ev ry Se/Ui>oi)vri. 'O 6' ovv 'Aw/3ac, >v uev /cat <j>vaei fit a eTihriv , ofiug 6e ruf TUV npoyovuv uri/uiac 8iop$uaa- (r&ai /3ov?M/j.evof, etc. The banishment of Giskon, and that too for the whole of his life, deserves notice, as a point of comparison between the Greek republics and Garth age. A defeated general in Greece, if he survived his defeat, was not un- frequently banished, even where there seems neither proof nor probability that he had been guilty of misconduct, or misjudgment, or omission. But I do not recollect any case in which, when a Grecian general thus appa- rently innocent was not merely defeated but slain in the battle, his son was banished for life, as Giskon was banished by the Carthaginians. In appre- ciating the manner in which the Grecian states, both dcmocratical and oli- garchical, dealt with their officers, the contemporary republic of Carthago is one important standard of comparison. Those who censure the Greeks, will have to find stronger terms of condemnation when they review tbl proceedings of the Carthaginians.