d in his own defence; he lay on his
couch before the assembled judges, while his friends made the best
case they could in his behalf. Defence, it appears, there was none;
all they could do was to appeal to his previous services; they
reminded the people largely and emphatically of the inestimable
exploit of Marathon, coming in addition to his previous conquest of
Lemnos. The assembled dikasts or jurors showed their sense of these
powerful appeals, by rejecting the proposition of his accuser to
condemn him to death; but they imposed on him the penalty of fifty
talents 'for his iniquity.'" (Vol. iv. p. 488.)
He died shortly after from his wound.
On this narrative we must make one or two observations. The turn of
expression which the writer has selected for conveying the meaning of
the original Greek text of his authority, might lead us to imply that
when the Athenians placed a force of seventy ships at the command of
Miltiades they did not know on what _kind_ of expedition he was about to
employ them. "He would conduct them to a land where gold was abundant,
and thus enrich them." Surely no one had an idea that it was a voyage
of discovery, in search after some El Dorado that Miltiades was about to
undertake. Every one in Athens knew that the fleet was to be directed
against some of their neighbours: although, for very manifest
reasons,--the advantage of taking their victim by surprise, and of
leaving their general unfettered, to act according to circumstances,--the
objects of attack were not revealed, and on this a perfect secrecy was
allowed to be maintained. It should be also _added_ to this account,
that Zanthippes, father of Pericles, who made himself spokesman for the
angry feeling of the Athenians, was also, as Dr Thirwall tells us,
"the son of Ariphron, the chief of the rival house of the Alcmaonids,"
who were little pleased with the sudden rise of Miltiades.
From the same authority we may also learn, that "Paros was at this time
one of the most flourishing amongst the Cyclades." Miltiades directed
the expedition against Paros from personal motives, from vindictive
animosity against a Parian citizen; but Paros was rich, and could
therefore pay a ransom--the very object of the expedition; and the
pretext under which alone Athens could extort a ransom or a tribute from
its neighbours, that they had assisted the Persians, or failed in
bringing aid to the common cause
|