these attacks harmless. But that Pericles was the author of a law passed B. c. 440, restraining the exhibition of comedy, is not probable. (Thirl- wall, vol. iii. p. 83; Cic.de Rep. iv. 10, 11.) The enemies of Pericles, unable to ruin his repu- tation by these means, attacked him through his friends. A charge was brought against Pheidias of appropriating part of the gold destined to adorn the statue of the goddess on the Acropolis ; and Menon, a workman who had been employed by Pheidias, was suborned to support tlie charge [Menon]. By the direction of Pericles, however, the golden ornaments had been so fixed as to admit of being taken off. Pericles challenged the accusers to weigh them. They shrank from the test, but the probity of Pheidias was established. This charge having been fruitless, a second at- tack was made on him for having in the sculp- ture on the shield of the goddess, representing the battle with the Amazons, introduced portraits of himself and Pericles. To support this charge, again Menon was brought forward, and Pheidias was cast into prison as having shown dishonour to the national religion. According to Plutarch he died there, either by poison, or by a natural death.
The next attack was intended to wound Peri- cles on a still more sensitive side. The connection between Pericles and Aspasia, and the great as- cendancy which she had over him, has already been spoken of in the article Aspasia. (Respect- ing the benefit which the oratory of Pericles was supposed to have derived from her instructions, see Plat. MeneiiP. p. 235, e. 236, a.) The comic poet Hermippus instituted a prosecution against her, on the ground of impiety, and of pandering to the vices of Pericles by corrupting the Athe- nian women ; a charge beyond all doubt as slan- derous as that made against Pheidias of doing the same under pretence of admitting Athe- nian ladies to view the progress of his works (Thirlwall, iii. pp. 87, 89). Apparently, while this trial was pending, Diopeithes got a decree passed that those who denied the existence of the gods, or introduced new opinions about celestial pliaeno- niena, should be informed against and impeached according to the process termed ilaayyiXla (Diet, of Ant. art. Eisangelia). This decree was aimed at Anaxagoras, and through him at Pericles. Another decree was proposed by Dracontides, that Pericles should give in an account of his expendi- ture of the public money before the Prytanes, who were to conduct the trial with peculiar solemnity. On the amendment of Agnon it was decreed that the trial should take place before 1500 dicasts. Aspasia was acquitted, though Pericles was obliged to descend to entreaties and tears to save her. The fate of Anaxagoras is uncertain [AnaxagorasJ. Of the proceedings against Pericles himself we hear nothing further. (Plut. /. c. ; Athen. xiii. p. 589, where several of the gossiping stories about Pericles will be found ; Diod. xii. 39 ; Diog. Laert. ii. 12.) It was the opinion entertained by many ancient writers that the dread of the im- pending prosecution was at least one of the mo- tives which induced Pericles to hurry on the out- break of the war with Sparta. That this unworthy charge was a false one is abundantly evident from the impartial and emphatic statements of Thucy- dides. The honesty of Pericles was unimpeach- able, and the outbreak of hostilities inevitable.
When the Corcyraeans applied to Athens for assistance against Corinth, one of their main argu- ments was that hostilities between the rival con- federacies could not be postponed much longer. Pericles doubtless foresaw this when by his advice a defensive alliance was contracted with the Cor- cyraeans, and ten galleys sent to assist them, under Lacedaemonius the son of Cimon, which were only to be brought into action in case a der scent upon the territories of the Corcyraeans were threatened. Plutarch represents Pericles as send- ing so small a force through jealousy of the family of Cimon. Pericles might safely have defied the rivalry of a much more formidable person than Lacedaemonius. A larger squadron of 20 ships was sent out not long after, in case the force first sent should prove too small. (Thucyd. i. 31 — 54.) The measures taken by the Athenians with re- spect to Potidaea doubtless had the sanction of Pericles, if they were not suggested by him. (Thucyd. i. b^^ &c.) After war had been declared by the congress of the Peloponnesian alliance, as the members of it were not in a condition to com- mence hostilities immediately, various embassies were sent to Athens, manifestly rather with the intention of multiplying causes of hostility, than with a sincere intention to prevent the outbreak of war. The first demand made was, that the Athenians should banish all that remained of the accursed family of the Alcmaeonids. This was clearly aimed at Pericles, who by his mother's side was connected with that house. The design of the Lacedaemonians was to render Pericles an object of odium when the difficulties of the war came to be felt by the Athenians, by making it appear that he was the obstacle in the way of peace. (Thucyd. i. 127.) The demand was dis- regarded, and the Lacedaemonians in their turn directed to free themselves from the pollution con- tracted by the death of Pausanias. Subsequent demands were made that the Athenians should raise the siege of Potidaea, restore Aegina to inde- pendence, and especially repeal the decree against the Megarians, by which the latter were excluded, on pain of death, from the agora of Athens, and from all ports in the Athenian dominions. One of the scandalous stories of the time represented this decree as having been procured by Pericles from private motives, some Megarians having carried off two girls belonging to the train of Aspasia. (Aris- toph. Acharn. 500.) There was quite sufficient ground for the decree in the long-standing enmity between the Athenians and Megarians, which, just before the decree was passed on the motion of Charinus, had been inflamed by the murder of an Athenian herald, who had been sent to obtain satisfaction from the Megarians for their having encroached upon the consecrated land that lay be- tween the territories of the two states. This de- mand of the Lacedaemonians was succeeded by one that the Atheniiins should leave all Greek states independent, that is, that Athens should relinquish her empire, intimations being given that peace might be expected if these conditions were complied with. An assembly was held to deli- berate on the answer to be given to the Lacedae- monians. The true motives which actuated Peri- cles in resisting these demands are given by Thu- cydides in the speech which he puts into his mouth on the occasion (i. 140 — 144). Pericles judged rightly in telling the Athenians that the demands made of them, especially that about Me-
