Page:History of Greece Vol V.djvu/364

340 fflSTOEY OF GREECE. of historical fact, such as the treaty acknowledged and prerfcribe^, became actually realized. But when we reflect farther, that Herodotus ' certifies the visit of KalHas and other Athenian en- voys to the court of Susa, we can assign no other explanation of such visit so probable as the reality of this treaty : certainly, no envoys would have gone thither during a state of recognized war ; and though it may be advanced as possible that they may have gone with the view to conclude a treaty, and yet not have succeed- ed, — this would be straining the limits of possibility beyond what is reasonable.- recognized by the Greeks as belonging to him, — proof will be found in Thucyd. viii, 56 : compare Diodor. iv, 26. ' Herodot. vii, 151. Diodonis also states that this peace was concluded by Kallias the Athenian (xii, 4). - 1 conclude, on the whole, in favor of this treaty as an historical fact, — though sensible that some of the arguments urged against it are not with- out force. Jlr. Mitford and Dr. Thiiiwall (ch. xvii, p. 474), as well as Manso and Dahlmann, not to mention others, have impugned the reality of the treaty : and the last-mentioned author, particularly, has examined the case at length and set forth all the gi'ounds of objection ; urging, among some which are really serious, others which appear to me weak and untena- ble (Manso, Sparta, vol. iii, Beylage x, p. 471 ; Dahlmann, Forschungen auf dem Gebiete der Geschichte, vol. i, Ueber den Kimonischen Frieden, pp. 1-148). BotJckh admits the treaty as an historical fact. If we deny altogether the historical reality of the treaty, we must adopt some such hypothesis as that of Dahlmann (p. 40) : " The distinct men- tion and averment of such a peace as having been formally concluded, ap- pears to have first arisen among the schools of the rhetors at Athens, shortly after the peace of Antalkidas, and as an oratorical antithesis to oppose to that peace." To which we must add the supposition, that some persons must have taken the trouble to cause this fabricated peace to be engraved on a pillar, and placed, either in the Metroon or somewhere else in Athens, among the records of Athenian glories. Eor that it was so engraved on a column is certain (Theopompus ap. Harpokration. 'Arn/cotf ypufz/xaai). The sus- picion started by Theopompus (and founded on the fact that the peace was engraved, not in ancient Attic, but in Ionic lettei'S — the latter sort having been only legalized in Athens after the archonship of Eukleides), that this treaty was a subsequent invention and not an historical reality, does not weigh with me very much. Assuming the peace to be real, it would natu- rally be dravra up and engraved in the character habitually used among the Ionic cities of Asia Minor, since they were the parties most specially inter- ested in it : or it might even have been reeugraved, seeing that neai'ly a