GRECIAN AFFAIRS AFTER THE PERSIAN INVASION. 259 under Spartan guidance, there would be a continued necessity for sending out their kings or chief men to command : and the example of Pausanias showed them the depraving eifect of such mihtary power, remote as well as unchecked. The example of their king Leotychides, too, near about this time, was a second illustra- tion of the same tendency. At the same time, apparently, that Pausanias embarked for Asia to carry on the war against the Persians, Leotychides was sent with an army into Thessaly to put down the Aleuadae and those Thessalian parties who had sided with Xerxes and Mardonius. Successful in this expedi- tion, he suffered himself to be bribed, and was even detected with a large sum of money actually on his person : in conse- quence of which the Lacedsemonians condemned him to banish- ment, and razed his house to the ground : he died afterwards in exile at Tegea.' Two such instances were well calculated to were soliciting Athenian aid, after their defeat at Leuktra. v-ofiifivijaKovTE^ [lev, wf rbv jSapiSapov kocv?) u~Efiix^aavro — avafUfivfjGKOvTE^ 61, cif 'A^tj- valo'c TF VTiO Tuv 'Y,7J.7]vuv 'ijpe&tjaav Tjyefiovei tov vavriKOv, Kal tuv koivuv
- fp7;/zar6jv ^v7.aKE^, tuv AaKedat/xoviuv ravra avii3ov7.Evou.evuv • avToi te
Kara yi]v 6fio7.oyovfiEVL>g v(p' u—uvtuv tuv 'E7.7.f/vuv riyEjiove^ -TrpoKpi^EiTjaav, av/i^ov7.EVOfiEVuv av ravra rCiv 'A'&rjvalijv. • Herodot. vi, 72 ; Diodor. xi, 48 ; Pausanias, iii, 7, 8 : compare Plutarch, De Herodoti Malign, c. 21, p. 859. Leotychides died, according to Diodorus, in 476 b.c. : he had commanded at Mykale in 479 b. c. The expedition into Thessaly must therefore have been in one of the two intermediate years, if the chronology of Diodorus were, in this case, thoroughly trustworthy. But Mr. Clinton (Fasti Hel- lenic!, Appendix, ch. iii, p. 210) has sho%vn that Diodorus is contradicted by Plutarch, about the date of the accession of Archidamus, — and by others, about the date of the revolt at Sparta. Mr. Clinton places the accession of Archidamus and the banishment of Leotychides (of course, therefore, the expedition into Thessaly) in 469 b.c. I incline to believe that the ex- pedition of Leotychides against the Thessalian Aleuadaa took place in the year or in the second year following the battle of Plataea, because they had been the ardent and hearty allies of Mardonius in Boeotia, and because the war would seem not to have been completed without putting them down and making the opposite party in Thessaly predominant. Considering how imperfectly we know the Lacedtemonian chronology of this date, it is vei^ possible that some confusion may have arisen in the case of Leotychides, from the difference between the date of his banishment iind that Of his death. King Pleistoanax afterwards, having been banished for the same offence as that committed by Leotychides, and having lived
