---
title: "On the Malice of Herodotus · De Herodoti malignitate"
author: "Plutarch"
translator: "A. G., rev. William W. Goodwin"
languages: [grc, en]
shelf: "Philosophy"
url: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/
cite: "Plutarch, tr. A. G., rev. William W. Goodwin, On the Malice of Herodotus · De Herodoti malignitate. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/"
---

# On the Malice of Herodotus · De Herodoti malignitate

*Plutarch, tr. A. G., rev. William W. Goodwin*

Plutarch defends the Greeks, and his native Boeotia above all, against the historian he accuses of spite.

> Greek: ed. Grēgorios N. Vernardakēs, from the Perseus Digital Library (canonical-greekLit, tlg0007.tlg123, CC BY-SA 4.0).

> English: A. G., rev. William W. Goodwin, from the Perseus Digital Library (tlg0007.tlg123.perseus-eng2). Notes are not included.

> Rows follow the references the two texts share (chapters and sections), cut where both reach the end of a sentence.

## Contents

1. [Sections 1–23](https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/1.md)
2. [Sections 24–34](https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/2.md)
3. [Sections 35–43](https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/3.md)

## 1. Sections 1–23

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/1/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/1/#p-N

[¶0] 1. The style, O Alexander, of Herodotus, as being simple, free, and easily suiting itself to its subject, has deceived many; but more, a persuasion of his dispositions being equally sincere. For it is not only (as Plato says) an extreme injustice, to make a show of being just when one is not so; but it is also the highest malignity, to pretend to simplicity and mildness and be in the mean time really most malicious. Now since he principally exerts his malice against the Boeotians and Corinthians, though without sparing any other, I think myself obliged to defend our ancestors and the truth against this part of his writings, since those who would detect all his other lies and fictions would have need of many books. But, as Sophocles has it, the face of persuasion is prevalent, especially when delivered in good language, and such as has power to conceal both the other absurdities and the ill-nature of the writer. King Philip told the Greeks who revolted from him to Titus Quinctius, that they had got a more polished, but a longer-lasting yoke. So the malice of Herodotus is indeed more polite and delicate than that of Theopompus, yet it pinches closer, and makes a more severe impression, — not unlike to those winds which, blowing secretly through narrow chinks, are sharper than those that are more diffused. Now it seems to me very convenient to delineate, as it were, in a rough draught, those signs and marks that distinguish a malicious narration from a candid and unbiassed one, applying afterwards every point we shall examine to such as appertain to them.

> Greek: 1. τοῦ Ἡροδότου … πολλοὺς μέν, ὦ Ἀλέξανδρε, καὶ ἡ λέξις ὡς ἀφελὴς καὶ δίχα πόνου καὶ ῥᾳδίως ἐπιτρέχουσα τοῖς πράγμασιν ἐξηπάτηκε· πλείονες δὲ τοῦτο πρὸς τὸ ἦθος αὐτοῦ πεπόνθασιν. οὐ γὰρ μόνον, ὥς φησιν ὁ Πλάτων, τῆς ἐσχάτης ἀδικίας μὴ ὄντα δοκεῖν εἶναι δίκαιον· ἀλλὰ καὶ κακοηθείας ἄκρας ἔργον εὐκολίαν μιμούμενον καὶ ἁπλότητα δυσφώρατον εἶναι. … μάλιστα πρός τε Βοιωτοὺς καὶ Κορινθίους κέχρηται μηδὲ τῶν ἄλλων τινὸς ἀπεσχημένος, οἶμαι προσήκειν ἡμῖν … ἀμυνομένοις ὑπὲρ τῶν προγόνων ἅμα καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας, κατʼ αὐτὸ τοῦτο τῆς γραφῆς τὸ μέρος ἐπεὶ τὰ γʼ ἄλλα ψεύσματα καὶ πλάσματα βουλομένοις ἐπεξιέναι πολλῶν ἂν βιβλίων δεήσειεν. ἀλλὰ δεινὸν τὸ τᾶς Πειθοῦς πρόσωπον ὥς φησιν ὁ Σοφοκλῆς, μάλιστα δʼ ὅταν ἐν λόγῳ χάριν ἔχοντι καὶ δύναμιν τοσαύτην ἐγγένηται τὰς τʼ ἄλλας ἀτοπίας καὶ τὸ ἦθος ἀποκρύπτειν τοῦ συγγραφέως. ὁ μὲν γὰρ Φίλιππος ἔλεγε πρὸς τοὺς ἀφισταμένους Ἕλληνας αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ Τίτῳ προστιθεμένους, ὅτι λειότερον μὲν μακρότερον δὲ κλοιὸν μεταλαμβάνουσιν· ἡ δʼ Ἡροδότου κακοήθεια λειοτέρα μέν ἐστιν ἀμέλει καὶ μαλακωτέρα τῆς Θεοπόμπου, καθάπτεται δὲ καὶ λυπεῖ μᾶλλον, ὥσπερ οἱ κρύφα διὰ στενοῦ παραπνέοντες ἄνεμοι τῶν διακεχυμένων. δοκεῖ δέ μοι βέλτιον εἶναι τύπῳ τινὶ λαβόντας ὅσα κοινῇ μὴ καθαρᾶς μηδʼ εὐμενοῦς ἐστιν ἀλλὰ κακοήθους οἷον ἴχνη καὶ γνωρίσματα διηγήσεως, εἰς ταῦτα τῶν ἐξεταζομένων ἕκαστον, ἂν ἐναρμόττῃ, τίθεσθαι.

[¶1] 2. First then, whoever in relating a story shall use the most odious terms when gentler expressions might do as well, is not to be esteemed impartial, but an enjoyer of his own fancy, in putting the worst construction on things; as if any one, instead of saying Nicias is too much given to superstition, should call him fanatic, or should accuse Cleon of presumption and madness rather than of inconsiderateness in speech.

> Greek: 2. πρῶτον μὲν οὖν ὁ τοῖς δυσχερεστάτοις ὀνόμασι καὶ ῥήμασιν, ἐπιεικεστέρων παρόντων, ἐν τῷ λέγειν τὰ πεπραγμένα χρώμενος ʽὥσπερ εἰ θειασμῷ προσκείμενον ἄγαν ἐξὸν εἰπεῖν τὸν Νικίαν ὁ δὲ θεόληπτον προσείποι, ἢ θρασύτητα καὶ μανίαν Κλέωνος μᾶλλον ἢ κουφολογίανʼ οὐκ εὐμενής ἐστιν, ἀλλʼ οἷον ἀπολαύων τῷ σοφῶς διηγεῖσθαι τοῦ πράγματος.

[¶2] 3. Secondly, when a writer, catching hold of a fault which has no reference to his story, shall draw it into the relation of such affairs as need it not, extending his narrative with circumlocutions, only that he may insert a man’s misfortune, offence, or discommendable action, it is manifest that he delights in speaking evil. Therefore Thucydides would not clearly relate the faults of Cleon, which were very numerous; and as for Hyperbolus the orator, having touched at him in a word and called him an ill man, he let him go. Philistus also passed over all those outrages committed by Dionysius on the barbarians which had no connection with the Grecian affairs. For the excursions and digressions of history are principally allowed for fables and antiquities, and sometimes also for encomiums. But he who makes reproaches and detractions an addition to his discourse seems to incur the tragedian’s curse on the “collector of men’s calamities.”

> Greek: 3. δεύτερον, ὅτῳ κακὸν πρόσεστιν ἄλλως τῇ δʼ ἱστορίᾳ μὴ προσῆκον, ὁ δὲ συγγραφεὺς ἐπιδράττεται τούτου καὶ παρεμβάλλει τοῖς πράγμασιν οὐδὲν δεομένοις, ἀλλὰ τὴν διήγησιν ἐπεξάγων καὶ κυκλούμενος, ὅπως ἐμπεριλάβῃ ἀτύχημά τινος ἢ πρᾶξιν ἄτοπον καὶ οὐ χρηστήν, δῆλός ἐστιν ἡδόμενος τῷ κακολογεῖν. ὅθεν ὁ Θουκυδίδης οὐδὲ τῶν Κλέωνος ἁμαρτημάτων ἀφθόνων ὄντων ἐποιήσατο σαφῆ τὴν· διήγησιν· Ὑπερβόλου τε τοῦ δημαγωγοῦ θιγὼν ἑνὶ ῥήματι καὶ μοχθηρὸν ἄνθρωπον προσειπὼν ἀφῆκε Φίλιστος δὲ καὶ Διονυσίου τῶν πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους ἀδικιῶν ὅσαι μὴ συνεπλέκοντο τοῖς Ἑλληνικοῖς πράγμασιν, ἁπάσας παρέλιπεν. αἱ γὰρ ἐκβολαὶ καὶ παρατροπαὶ τῆς ἱστορίας μάλιστα τοῖς μύθοις δίδονται καὶ ταῖς ἀρχαιολογίαις, ἔτι δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἐπαίνους· ὁ δὲ παρενθήκην λόγου τὸ βλασφημεῖν καὶ ψέγειν ποιούμενος ἔοικεν εἰς τὴν τραγικὴν ἐμπίπτειν κατάραν θνητῶν ἐκλέγων τὰς συμφοράς.

[¶3] 4. Now the opposite to this is known to every one, as the omitting to relate some good and laudable action, which, though it may seem not to be reprehensible, yet is then done maliciously when the omission happens in a place that is pertinent to the history. For to praise unwillingly is so far from being more civil than to dispraise willingly, that it is perhaps rather more uncivil.

> Greek: 4. καὶ μὴν τὸ γʼ ἀντίστροφον τούτῳ παντὶ δῆλον ὡς καλοῦ τινος κἀγαθοῦ παράλειψίς; ἐστιν, ἀνυπεύθυνον δοκοῦν πρᾶγμα εἶναι, γιγνόμενον δὲ κακοήθως, ἄνπερ ἐμπίπτῃ τὸ παραλειφθὲν εἰς τόπον προσήκοντα τῇ ἱστορίᾳ· τὸ γὰρ ἀπροθύμως ἐπαινεῖν τοῦ ψέγοντα χαίρειν οὐκ ἐπιεικέστερον, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τῷ μὴ ἐπιεικέστερον ἴσως καὶ χεῖρον.

[¶4] 5. The fourth sign of a partial disposition in writing of history I take to be this: When a matter is related in two or more several manners, and the historian shall embrace the worst. Sophisters indeed are permitted, for the obtaining either of profit or reputation, to undertake the defence of the worst cause; for they neither create any firm belief of the matter, nor yet do they deny that they are often pleased in maintaining paradoxes and making incredible things appear probable. But an historian is then just, when he asserts such things as he knows to be true, and of those that are uncertain reports rather the better than the worse. Nay, there are many writers who wholly omit the worse. Thus Ephorus writes of Themistocles, that he was acquainted with the treason of Pausanias and his negotiations with the King’s lieutenants, but that he neither consented to it, nor hearkened to Pausanias’s proffers of making him partaker of his hopes; and Thucydides left the whole matter out of his story, as judging it to be false.

> Greek: 5. τέταρτον τοίνυν τίθεμαι σημεῖον οὐκ εὐμενοῦς ἐν ἱστορίᾳ τρόπου τὸ δυεῖν ἢ πλειόνων περὶ ταὐτοῦ λόγων ὄντων τῷ χείρονι προστίθεσθαι. τοῖς γὰρ σοφισταῖς ἐφεῖται πρὸς ἐργασίαν ἢ δόξαν ἔστιν ὅτε τῶν λόγων κοσμεῖν τὸν ἥττονα παραλαμβάνοντας· οὐ γὰρ ἐμποιοῦσι πίστιν ἰσχυρὰν περὶ τοῦ πράγματος οὐδʼ ἀρνοῦνται πολλάκις εἰς τὸ παρὰ δοξον ἐπιχειρεῖν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀπίστων· ὁ δʼ ἱστορίαν γράφων ἃ μὲν οἶδεν ἀληθῆ λέγειν δίκαιός ἐστι, τῶν δʼ ἀδήλων τὰ βελτίονα δοκεῖν ἀληθῶς λέγεσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ τὰ χείρονα. πολλοὶ δʼ ὅλως τὰ χείρονα παραλείπουσιν ὥσπερ ἀμέλει περὶ Θεμιστοκλέους Ἔφορος μὲν εἰπὼν, ὅτι τὴν Παυσανίου προδοσίαν ἔγνω καὶ τὰ πρασσόμενα πρὸς τοὺς βασιλέως στρατηγούς, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ἐπείσθη φησὶν οὐδὲ προσεδέξατο κοινουμένου καὶ παρακαλοῦντος αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὰς αὐτὰς ἐλπίδας· Θουκυδίδης δὲ καὶ τὸ παράπαν τὸν λόγον τοῦτον ὡς κατεγνωκὼς παρῆκεν.

[¶5] 6. Moreover, in things confessed to have been done, but for doing which the cause and intention is unknown, he who casts his conjectures on the worst side is partial and malicious. Thus do the comedians. who affirm the Peloponnesian war to have been kindled by Pericles for the love of Aspasia or the sake of Phidias, and not through any desire of honor, or ambition of pulling down the Peloponnesian pride and giving place in nothing to the Lacedaemonians. For those who suppose a bad cause for laudable works and commendable actions, endeavoring by calumnies to insinuate sinister suspicions of the actor when they cannot openly discommend the act, — as they that impute the killing of Alexander the tyrant by Theba not to any magnanimity or hatred of vice, but to a certain feminine jealousy and passion, and those that say Cato slew himself for fear Caesar should put him to a more shameful death, — such as these are manifestly in the highest degree envious and malicious.

> Greek: 6. ἔτι τοίνυν ἐπὶ τῶν ὁμολογουμένων πεπρᾶχθαι, τὴν δʼ αἰτίαν ἀφʼ ἧς πέπρακται καὶ τὴν διάνοιαν ἐχόντων ἄδηλον, ὁ πρὸς τὸ χεῖρον εἰκάζων δυσμενής ἐστι καὶ κακοήθης· ὥσπερ οἱ κωμικοὶ τὸν πόλεμον ὑπὸ τοῦ Περικλέους ἐκκεκαῦσθαι διʼ Ἀσπασίαν ἢ διὰ Φειδίαν ἀποφαίνοντες, οὐ φιλοτιμίᾳ τινὶ καὶ φιλονεικίᾳ μᾶλλον στορέσαι τὸ φρόνημα Πελοποννησίων καὶ μηδενὸς ὑφεῖσθαι Λακεδαιμονίων ἐθελήσαντος. εἰ μὲν γάρ τις εὐδοκιμοῦσιν ἔργοις καὶ πράγμασιν ἐπαινουμένοις αἰτίαν φαύλην ὑποτίθησι καὶ κατάγεται ταῖς διαβολαῖς εἰς ὑποψίας ἀτόπους περὶ τῆς ἐν ἀφανεῖ προαιρέσεως τοῦ πράξαντος, αὐτὸ τὸ πεπραγμένον ἐμφανῶς οὐ δυνάμενος ψέγειν (ὥσπερ οἱ τὸν ὑπὸ Θήβης Ἀλεξάνδρου τοῦ τυράννου φόνον οὐ μεγαλονοίας οὐδὲ μισοπονηρίας, ζήλου δέ τινος ἔργον καὶ πάθους γυναικείου τνθέμενοι καὶ Κάτωνα λέγοντες ἑαυτὸν ἀνελεῖν δείσαντα τὸν μετʼ αἰκίας θάνατον ὑπὸ Καίσαρος), εὔδηλον ὅτι φθόνου καὶ κακοηθείας ὑπερβολὴν οὐ λέλοιπε.

[¶6] 7. An historical narration is also more or less guilty of malice, according as it relates the manner of the action; as if one should be said to have performed an exploit rather by money than valor, as some affirm of Philip; or else easily and without any labor, as it is said of Alexander; or else not by prudence, but by Fortune, as the enemies of Timotheus painted cities falling into his nets as he lay sleeping. For they undoubtedly diminish the greatness and beauty of the actions, who deny the performers of them to have done them generously, industriously, virtuously, and by themselves.

> Greek: 7. δέχεται δὲ καὶ παρὰ τὸν τρόπον τοῦ ἔργου διήγησις ἱστορικὴ κακοήθειαν, ἂν χρήμασι φάσκῃ μὴ διʼ ἀρετῆς κατειργάσθαι τὴν πρᾶξιν, ὡς Φίλιππον ἔνιοι φάσκουσιν ἂν σὺν οὐδενὶ πόνῳ καὶ ῥᾳδίως, ὡς Ἀλέξανδρον ἂν μὴ φρονίμως ἀλλʼ εὐτυχῶς, ὡς Τιμόθεον οἱ ἐχθροί, γράφοντες ἐν πίναξιν εἰς κύρτον τινὰ τὰς πόλεις αὐτάς, ἐκείνου καθεύδοντος, ὑποδυομένας. δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τῶν πράξεων ἐλαττοῦσι τὸ μέγεθος καὶ τὸ κάλλος οἱ τὸ γενναίως καὶ φιλοπόνως καὶ κατʼ ἀρετὴν καὶ διʼ αὑτῶν ἀφαιροῦντες.

[¶7] 8. Moreover, those who will directly speak ill of any one incur the reproach of moroseness, rashness, and madness, unless they keep within measure. But they who send forth calumnies obliquely, as if they were shooting arrows out of corners, and then stepping back think to conceal themselves by saying they do not believe what they most earnestly desire to have believed, whilst they disclaim all malice, condemn themselves also of farther disingenuity.

> Greek: 8. ἔστι τοίνυν τοῖς ἀπʼ εὐθείας οὓς βούλονται κακῶς λέγουσι δυσκολίαν ἐπικαλεῖν καὶ θρασύτητα καὶ μανίαν, ἐὰν μὴ μετριάζωσιν· οἱ δὲ πλαγίως οἷον ἐξ ἀφανοῦς βέλεσι χρώμενοι ταῖς διαβολαῖς, εἶτα περιιόντες ὀπίσω καὶ ἀναδυόμενοι, τῷ φάσκειν ἀπιστεῖν ἃ πάνυ πιστεύεσθαι θέλουσιν ἀρνούμενοι κακοήθειαν, ἀνελευθερίαν τῇ κακοηθείᾳ προσοφλισκάνουσιν.

[¶8] 9. Next to these are they who with their reproaches intermix some praises, as did Aristoxenus, who, having termed Socrates unlearned, ignorant, and libidinous, added, Yet was he free from injustice. For, as they who flatter artificially and craftily sometimes mingle light reprehensions with their many and great praises, joining this liberty of speech as a sauce to their flattery; so malice, that it may gain belief to its accusations, adds also praise.

> Greek: 9. ἐγγὺς δὲ τούτων εἰσὶν οἱ τοῖς ψόγοις ἐπαίνους τινὰς παρατιθέντες, ὡς ἐπὶ, Σωκράτους Ἀρι στύξενος, ἀπαίδευτον καὶ ἀμαθῆ καὶ ἀκόλαστον εἰπών, ἐπήνεγκεν ἀδικία δʼ οὐ προσῆν ὥσπερ γὰρ οἱ σύν τινι τέχνῃ καὶ δεινότητι κολακεύοντες ἔστιν ὅτε πολλοῖς καὶ μακροῖς ἐπαίνοις ψόγους παραμιγνύουσιν ἐλαφρούς, οἷον ἥδυσμα τῇ κολακείᾳ τὴν παρρησίαν ἐμβάλλοντες, οὕτω τὸ κακόηθες εἰς πίστιν ὧν ψέγει προαποτίθεται τὸν ἔπαινον.

[¶9] 10. We might here also reckon up more notes; but these are sufficient to let us understand the nature and manners of Herodotus.

> Greek: 10. ἦν δὲ καὶ πλείονας καταριθμεῖσθαι τῶν χαρακτήρων· ἀρκοῦσι δʼ οὗτοι κατανόησιν τάνθρὼπου τῆς προαιρέσεως καὶ τοῦ τρόπου παρασχεῖν.

[¶10] 11. First therefore, — beginning, as the proverb is, with Vesta, — whereas all the Grecians affirm Io, daughter to Inachus, to have been worshipped with divine honor by the barbarians, and by her glory to have left her name to many seas and principal passages, and to have given a source and original to most noble and royal families; this famous author says of her, that she gave herself to certain Phoenician merchants, having been not unwillingly deflowered by a mariner, and fearing lest she should be found by her friends to be with child. And he belies the Phoenicians as having delivered these things of her, and says that the Persian stories testify of her being carried away by the Phoenicians with other women. Presently after, he gives sentence on the bravest and greatest exploits of Greece, saying that the Trojan war was foolishly undertaken for an ill woman. For it is manifest, says he, that had they not been willing they had never been ravished. Let us then say, that the Gods also acted foolishly, in inflicting their indignation on the Spartans for abusing the daughters of Scedasus the Leuctrian, and in punishing Ajax for the violation of Cassandra. For it is manifest, if we believe Herodotus, that if they had not been willing they had never been defiled. And yet he himself said that Aristomenes was taken alive by the Spartans; and the same afterwards happened to Philopoemen, commander of the Achaeans; and the Carthaginians took Regulus, the consul of the Romans; than whom there are not easily to be found more valiant and warlike men. Nor is it to be wondered, since even leopards and tigers are taken alive by men. But Herodotus blames the poor women that have been abused by violence, and patronizes their ravishers.

> Greek: 11. πρῶτα δὴ πάντων ὥσπερ ἀφʼ ἑστίας ἀρξάμενος Ἰοῦς τῆς Ἰνάχου θυγατρός, ἣν πάντες Ἕλληνες ἐκτεθειῶσθαι νομίζουσι ταῖς τιμαῖς ὑπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων καὶ καταλιπεῖν ὄνομα πολλαῖς μὲν θαλάτταις, πορθμῶν δὲ τοῖς μεγίστοις ἀφʼ αὑτῆς διὰ τὴν δόξαν, ἀρχὴν δὲ καὶ πηγὴν τῶν ἐπιφανεστάτων καὶ βασιλικωτάτων γενῶν παρασχεῖν· ταύτην ὁ γενναῖος ἐπιδοῦναί φησιν ἑαυτὴν Φοίνιξι φορτηγοῖς, ὑπὸ τοῦ ναυκλήρου διαφθαρεῖσαν ἑκουσίως καὶ φοβουμένην μὴ κύουσα φανερὰ γένηται. καὶ καταψεύδεται Φοινίκων ὡς ταῦτα περὶ αὐτῆς λεγόντων. Περσῶν δὲ τοὺς λογίους μαρτυρεῖν φήσας, ὅτι τὴν Ἰοῦν μετʼ ἄλλων γυναικῶν οἱ Φοίνικες ἀφαρπάσειαν, εὐθὺς ἀποφαίνεται γνώμην τὸ κάλλιστον ἔργον καὶ μέγιστον τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀβελτερίᾳ τὸν Τρωικὸν πόλεμον γενέσθαι διὰ γυναῖκα φαύλην. δῆλον γάρ φησὶν ὅτι, εἰ μὴ αὐταὶ ἐβούλοντο, οὐκ ἂν ἡρπάζοντο. καὶ τοὺς θεοὺς τοίνυν ἀβέλτερα ποιεῖν λέγωμεν, ὑπὲρ τῶν Λεύκτρου θυγατέρων βιασθεισῶν μηνίοντας Λακεδαιμονίοις καὶ κολάζοντας Αἴαντα διὰ τὴν Κασάνδρας ὕβριν· δῆλα γὰρ δὴ καθʼ Ἡρόδοτον, ὅτι, εἰ μὴ αὐταὶ ἐβούλοντο, οὐκ ἂν ὑβρίζοντο. καίτοι καὶ Ἀριστομένη φησὶν αὐτὸς ὑπὸ Λακεδαιμονίων ζῶντα συναρπασθῆναι, καὶ Φιλοποίμην ὕστερον ὁ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν στρατηγὸς ταὐτὸ τοῦτʼ ἔπαθε, καὶ Ῥηγοῦλον ἐχειρώσαντο Καρχηδόνιοι τὸν Ῥωμαίων ὕπατον· ὧν ἔργον εὑρεῖν μαχιμωτέρους καὶ πολεμικωτέρους ἄνδρας. ἀλλὰ θαυμάζειν οὐκ ἄξιον, ὅπου καὶ παρδάλεις ζώσας καὶ τίγρεις συναρπάζουσιν ἄνθρωποι Ἡρόδοτος δὲ κατηγορεῖ τῶν βιασθεισῶν γυναικῶν, ἀπολογούμενος ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁρπασάντων.

[¶11] 12. Nay, he is so favorable to the barbarians, that, acquitting Busiris of those human sacrifices and that slaughter of his guests for which he is accused, and attributing by his testimony to the Egyptians much religion and justice, he endeavors to cast that abominable wickedness and those impious murders on the Grecians. For in his Second Book he says, that Menelaus, having received Helen from Proteus and having been honored by him with many presents, showed himself a most unjust and wicked man; for wanting a fair wind to set sail, he found out an impious device, and having taken two of the inhabitants’ boys, consulted their entrails; for which villany being hated and persecuted, he fled with his ships directly into Libya. From what Egyptian this story proceeds, I know not. For, on the contrary, many honors are even at this day given by the Egyptians both to Helen and Menelaus.

> Greek: 12. οὕτω δὲ φιλοβάρβαρός ἐστιν, ὥστε Βούσιριν ἀπολύσας τῆς λεγομένης ἀνθρωποθυσίας καὶ ξενοκτονίας, καὶ πᾶσιν Αἰγυπτίοις ὁσιότητα πολλὴν καὶ δικαιοσύνην μαρτυρήσας ἐφʼ Ἕλληνας ἀναστρέφει τὸ μύσος τοῦτο καὶ τὴν μιαιφονίαν. ἐν γὰρ τῇ δευτέρᾳ βίβλῳ Μενέλαόν φησι παρὰ Πρωτέως ἀπολαβόντα τὴν Ἑλένην καὶ τιμηθέντα δωρεαῖς μεγάλαις ἀδικώτατον ἀνθρώπων γενέσθαι καὶ κάκιστον· ὑπὸ γὰρ ἀπλοίας συνεχόμενον ἐπιτεχνήσασθαι πρᾶγμα οὐχ ὅσιον, καὶ λαβόντα δύο παιδία ἀνδρῶν ἐπιχωρίων ἔντομά σφεα ποιῆσαι μισηθέντα δʼ ἐπὶ τούτῳ καὶ διωκόμενον οἴχεσθαι φεύγοντα νηυσὶν ἐπὶ Λιβύης. τοῦτον δὲ τὸν λόγον οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅστις Αἰγυπτίων εἴρηκεν· ἀλλὰ τἀναντία πολλαὶ μὲν Ἑλένης πολλαὶ δὲ Μενελάου τιμαὶ διαφυλάττονται παρʼ αὐτοῖς.

[¶12] 13. The same Herodotus, that he may still be like himself, says that the Persians learned the defiling of the male sex from the Greeks. And yet how could the Greeks have taught this impurity to the Persians, amongst whom, as is confessed by almost all, boys had been castrated before ever they arrived in the Grecian seas? He writes also, that the Greeks were instructed by the Egyptians in their pomps, solemn festivals, and worship of the twelve Gods; that Melampus also learned of the Egyptians the name of Dionysus (or Bacchus) and taught it the other Greeks; that the mysteries likewise and rites of Ceres were brought out of Egypt by the daughters of Danaus; and that the Egyptians were wont to beat themselves and make great lamentation, but yet he himself would not tell the names of their Deities, but concealed them in silence. As to Hercules and Bacchus, whom the Egyptians named Gods, and the Greeks very aged men, he nowhere feels such scruples and hesitation; although he places also the Egyptian Hercules amongst the Gods of the second rank, and Bacchus amongst those of the third, as having had some beginning of their being and not being eternal, and yet he pronounces those to be Gods; but to the Greek Bacchus and Hercules, as having been mortal and being now demi gods, he thinks we ought to perform anniversary solemnities, but not to sacrifice to them as to Gods. The same also he said of Pan, overthrowing the most venerable and purest sacrifices of the Greeks by the proud vanities and mythologies of the Egyptians.

> Greek: 13. ὁ δὲ συγγραφεὺς ἐπιμένων Πέρσας, μὲν φησι παισὶ μίσγεσθαι παρʼ Ἑλλήνων μαθόντας καίτοι πῶς Ἕλλησι Πέρσαι διδασκάλια ταύτης ὀφείλουσι τῆς ἀκολασίας, παρʼ οἷς ὀλίγου δεῖν ὑπὸ πάντων ὁμολογεῖται παῖδας ἐκτετμῆσθαι, πρὶν Ἑλληνικὴν ἰδεῖν θάλασσαν; Ἕλληνας δὲ μαθεῖν παρʼ Αἰγυπτίων πομπὰς καὶ πανηγύρεις, καὶ τούτους τοὺς δώδεκα θεοὺς σέβεσθαι Διονύσου δὲ καὶ τοὔνομα παρʼ Αἰγυπτίων Μελάμποδα μαθεῖν καὶ διδάξαι τοὺς ἄλλους Ἕλληνας· μυστήρια δὲ καὶ τὰς περὶ Δήμητρα τελετὰς ὑπὸ τῶν Δαναοῦ θυγατέρων ἐξ Αἰγύπτου κομισθῆναι καὶ τύπτεσθαι μὲν Αἰγυπτίους φησὶ καὶ πενθεῖν, τίνας δʼ οὐ βούλεσθαι αὐτὸς ὀνομάζειν, ἀλλʼ εὐστόμως κεῖσθαι περὶ τῶν θείων Ἡρακλέα δὲ καὶ Διόνυσον, οὗ μὲν Αἰγύπτιοι, ἀποφαίνων ὄντας θεούς, οὗ δʼ Ἕλληνες, ἀνθρώπους καταγεγηρακότας, οὐδαμοῦ ταύτην προύθετο τὴν εὐλάβειαν· καίτοι καὶ τὸν Αίγύπτιον Ἡρακλέα τῶν δευτέρων θεῶν γενέσθαι λέγει καὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τῶν τρίτων, ὡς ἀρχὴν ἐσχηκότας γενέσεως καὶ οὐκ ὄντας ἀιδίους· ἀλλʼ ὅμως ἐκείνους μὲν ἀποφαίνει θεούς, τούτοις δʼ ὡς φθιτοῖς καὶ ἥρωσιν ἐναγίζειν οἴεται δεῖν ἀλλὰ μὴ θύειν ὡς θεοῖς. ταὐτὰ καὶ περὶ Πανὸς εἴρηκε, ταῖς Αἰγυπτίων ἀλαζονείαις καὶ μυθολογίαις τὰ σεμνότατα καὶ ἁγνότατα τῶν Ἑλληνικῶν ἱερῶν ἀνατρέπων.

[¶13] 14. Nor is this impious enough; but moreover, deriving the pedigree of Hercules from Perseus, he says that Perseus was an Assyrian, as the Persians affirm. “But the leaders,” says he, “of the Dorians may appear to be descended in a right line from the Egyptians, reckoning their ancestors from before Danae and Acrisius.” Here he has wholly passed by Epaphus, Io, Iasus, and Argus, being ambitious not only to make the other Herculeses Egyptians and Phoenicians, but to carry this also, whom himself affirms to have been the third, out of Greece to the barbarians. But of the ancient learned writers, neither Homer, nor Hesiod, or Archilochus, nor Pisander, nor Stesichorus, nor Alcman, nor Pindar, makes any mention of the Egyptian or the Phoenician Hercules, but all acknowledge this our own Boeotian and Argive Hercules.

> Greek: 14. καὶ οὐ τοῦτο δεινόν· ἀλλʼ ἀναγαγὼν εἰς Περσέα τὸ Ἡρακλέους γένος Περσέα μὲν Ἀσσύριον γεγονέναι λέγει κατὰ τὸν Περσῶν λόγον· οἱ δὲ Δωριέων φησὶν ἡγεμόνες φαίνοιντʼ ἂν Αἰγύπτιοι ἰθαγενέες ἐόντες, καταλέγοντι τοὺς ἄνω ἀπὸ Δανάης τῆς Ἀκρισίου πατέρας. τὸν γὰρ Ἔπαφον καὶ τὴν Ἰὼ καὶ τὸν Ἴασον καὶ τὸν Ἄργον ὅλως ἀφῆκε, φιλοτιμούμενος μὴ μόνον ἄλλους Ἡρακλεῖς Αἰγυπτίους καὶ Φοίνικας ἀποφαίνειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦτον, ὃν αὐτὸς τρίτον γεγονέναι φησίν, εἰς βαρβάρους ἀποξενῶσαι τῆς Ἑλλάδος. καίτοι τῶν παλαιῶν καὶ λογίων ἀνδρῶν οὐχ Ὅμηρος οὐχ Ἡσίοδος οὐκ Ἀρχίλοχος οὐ Πείσανδρος οὐ Στησίχορος οὐκ Ἀλκμὰν οὐ Πίνδαρος Αἰγυπτίου ἔσχον λόγον Ἡρακλέους ἢ Φοίνικος, ἀλλʼ ἕνα τοῦτον ἴσασι πάντες Ἡρακλέα τὸν Βοιώτιον ὁμοῦ καὶ Ἀργεῖον.

[¶14] 15. Now of the seven sages, whom he calls Sophisters, he affirms Thales to have been a barbarian, descended of the Phoenicians. Speaking ill also of the Gods under the person of Solon, he has these words: “Thou, O Croesus, askest me concerning human affairs, who know that every one of the Deities is envious and tumultuous.” Thus attributing to Solon what himself thinks of the Gods, he joins malice to blasphemy. Having made use also of Pittacus in some trivial matters, not worth the mentioning, he has passed over the greatest and gallantest action that was ever done by him. For when the Athenians and Mitylenaeans were at war about Sigaeum, Phrynon, the Athenian general, challenging whoever would come forth to a single combat, Pittacus advanced to meet him, and catching him in a net, slew that stout and giant-like man; for which when the Mitylenaeans offered him great presents, darting his javelin as far as he could out of his hand, he desired only so much ground as he should reach with that throw; and the place is to this day called Pittacium. Now what does Herodotus, when he comes to this? Instead of Pittacus’s valiant act, he tells us the fight of Alcaeus the poet, who throwing away his arms ran out of the battle; by thus not writing of honorable deeds and not passing over such as are dishonorable, he gives his testimony to those who say, that from one and the same malice proceed both envy and a rejoicing at other men’s harms.

> Greek: 15. καὶ μὴν τῶν ἑπτὰ σοφῶν, οὓς αὐτὸς σοφιστὰς προσεῖπε, τὸν μὲν Θάλητα Φοίνικα τῷ γένει τὸ ἀνέκαθεν ἀποφαίνεται βάρβαρον· τοῖς δὲ θεοῖς λοιδορούμενος ἐν τῷ Σόλωνος προσωπείῳ ταῦτʼ εἴρηκεν ὦ Κροῖσε, ἐπιστάμενόν με τὸ θεῖον πᾶν ἐὸν φθονερόν τε καὶ ταραχῶδες ἐπειρωτᾷς ἀνθρωπηίων πέρι πραγμάτων· ἃ γὰρ αὐτὸς ἐφρόνει περὶ τῶν θεῶν τῷ Σόλωνι προστριβόμενος κακοήθειαν τῇ βλασφημίᾳ προστίθησι. Πιττακῷ τοίνυν εἰς μικρὰ καὶ οὐκ ἄξια λόγου χρησάμενος, ὃ μέγιστόν ἐστι τῶν πεπραγμένων τἀνδρὶ καὶ κάλλιστον, ἐν ταῖς πράξεσι γενόμενος παρῆκε. πολεμούντων γὰρ Ἀθηναίων καὶ Μυτιληναίων περὶ Σιγείου καὶ Φρύνωνος τοῦ στρατηγοῦ τῶν Ἀθηναίων προκαλεσαμένου τὸν βουλόμενον εἰς μονομαχίαν, ἀπήντησεν ὁ Πιττακὸς καὶ δικτύῳ περιβαλὼν τὸν ἄνδρα ῥωμαλέον ὄντα καὶ μέγαν ἀπέκτεινε· τῶν δὲ Μυτιληναίων δωρεὰς αὐτῷ μεγάλας διδόντων, ἀκοντίσας τὸ δόρυ τοῦτο μόνον τὸ χωρίον ἠξίωσεν ὅσον ἐπέσχεν ἡ αἰχμὴ καὶ καλεῖται μέχρι νῦν Πιττάκειον. τί οὖν ὁ Ἡρὸδοτος, κατὰ τὸν τόπον γενόμενος τοῦτον; ἀντὶ τῆς Πιττακοῦ ἀριστείας τὴν Ἀλκαίου διηγήσατο τοῦ ποιητοῦ φυγὴν ἐκ τῆς μάχης, τὰ ὅπλα ῥίψαντος τῷ τὰ μὲν χρηστὰ μὴ γράψαι τὰ δʼ αἰσχρὰ μὴ παραλιπεῖν μαρτυρήσας τοῖς ἀπὸ μιᾶς· κακίας καὶ τὸν φθόνον φύεσθαι καὶ τὴν ἐπιχαιρεκακίαν λέγουσι.

[¶15] 16. After this, he accuses of treason the Alcmaeonidae, who showed themselves generous men, and delivered their country from tyranny. He says, that they received Pisistratus after his banishment and got him called home, on condition he should marry the daughter of Megacles; but the damsel saying to her mother, Do you see, mother, how I am not known by Pisistratus according to nature? the Alcmaeonidae were so offended at this villany, that they expelled the tyrant.

> Greek: 16. μετὰ ταῦτα τοὺς Ἀλκμεωνίδας, ἄνδρας γενομένους καὶ τὴν πατρίδα τῆς τυραννίδος ἐλευθερώσαντας, εἰς αἰτίαν ἐμβαλὼν προδοσίας δέξασθαί φησι τὸν Πεισίστρατον ἐκ τῆς φυγῆς καὶ συγκαταγαγεῖν ἐπὶ τῷ γάμῳ τῆς Μεγακλέους θυγατρός· τὴν δὲ παῖδα πρὸς τὴν μητέρα φράσαι τὴν ἑαυτῆς ὅτι ὦ μαμμίδιον, ὁρᾷς; οὐ μίγνυταί μοι κατὰ νόμον Πεισίστρατος. ἐπὶ τούτῳ δὲ τοὺς Ἀλκμεωνίδας τῷ παρανομήματι σχετλιάσαντας ἐξελάσαι τὸν τύραννον.

[¶16] 17. Now that the Lacedaemonians might have no less share of his malice than the Athenians, behold how he bespatters Othryadas, the man most admired and honored by them. “He only,” says Herodotus, “remaining alive of the three hundred, and ashamed to return to Sparta, his companions being lost, slew himself on the spot at Thyreae.” For having before said the victory was doubtful on both sides, he here, by making Othryadas ashamed, witnesses that the Lacedaemonians were vanquished. For it was shameful for him to survive, if conquered; but glorious, if conqueror.

> Greek: 17. ἵνα τοίνυν μηδʼ οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι τῶν Ἀθηναίων ἔλαττον ἔχωσι τῆς κακοηθείας, τὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς μάλιστα θαυμαζόμενον καὶ τιμώμενον ὅρα πῶς διαλελύμανται, τὸν Ὀθρυάδαν· τὸν δὲ ἕνα φησὶ τὸν περιλειφθέντα τῶν τριηκοσίων αἰσχυνό μενον ἀπονοστέειν ἐς Σπάρτην, τῶν συλλοχιτέων διεφθαρμένων, αὐτοῦ μιν ἐν τῇσι Θυρέῃσι καταχρήσασθαι ἑωυτόν. ἄνω μὲν γὰρ ἀμφοτέροις ἐπίδικον εἶναι τὸ νίκημά φησιν, ἐνταῦθα δὲ τῇ αἰσχύνῃ τοῦ Ὀθρυάδου ἧτταν τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων κατεμαρτύρησεν ἡττηθέντα μὲν γὰρ ζῆν αἰσχρὸν ἦν, περιγενέσθαι δὲ νικῶντα κάλλιστον.

[¶17] 18. I pass by now, that having represented Croesus as foolish, vain-glorious, and ridiculous in all things, he makes him, when a prisoner, to have taught and instructed Cyrus, who seems to have excelled all other kings in prudence, virtue, and magnanimity. Having testified of the same Croesus nothing else that was commendable, but his honoring the Gods with many and great oblations, he shows that very act of his to have been the most impious of all. For he says, that he and his brother Pantoleon contended for the kingdom while their father was yet alive; and that Croesus, having obtained the crown, caused a companion and familiar friend of Pantoleon’s to be torn in pieces in a fulling-mill, and sent presents to the Gods from his estate. Of Deïoces also, the Median, who by virtue and justice obtained the government, he says that he got it not by real but pretended justice.

> Greek: 18. ἐῶ τοίνυν ὅτι τὸν Κροῖσον ἀμαθῆ καὶ ἀλαζόνα καὶ γελοῖον φήσας ἐν πᾶσιν, ὑπὸ τούτου φησίν, αἰχμαλώτου γενομένου, καὶ παιδαγωγεῖσθαι καὶ νουθετεῖσθαι τὸν Κῦρον, ὃς φρονήσει καὶ ἀρετῇ καὶ μεγαλονοίᾳ πολὺ πάντων δοκεῖ πεπρωτευκέναι τῶν βασιλέων· τῷ δὲ Κροίσῳ μηδὲν ἄλλο καλὸν ἢ τὸ τιμῆσαι τοὺς θεοὺς ἀναθήμασι πολλοῖς καὶ μεγάλοις μαρτυρήσας, αὐτὸ τοῦτο πάντων ἀσεβέστατον ἀποδείκνυσιν ἔργον. ἀδελφὸν γὰρ αὐτῷ Πανταλέοντα περὶ τῆς βασιλείας αὐτῷ διαφέρεσθαι, ζῶντος ἔτι τοῦ πατρός· τὸν οὖν Κροῖσον, ὡς εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν κατέστη, τῶν ἑταίρων καὶ φίλων τοῦ Πανταλέοντος ἕνα τῶν γνωρίμων ἐπὶ γνάφου διαφθεῖραι καταξαινόμενον, ἐκ δὲ τῶν χρημάτων αὐτοῦ ποιησάμενον ἀναθήματα τοῖς θεοῖς ἀποστεῖλαι. Δηιόκην δὲ τὸν Μῆδον ἀρετῇ καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ κτησάμενον τὴν ἡγεμονίαν οὐ φύσει γενέσθαι φησὶ τοιοῦτον, ἐρασθέντα δὲ τυραννίδος ἐπιθέσθαι προσποιήματι δικαιοσύνης.

[¶18] 19. But I let pass the barbarian examples, since he has offered us plenty enough in the Grecian affairs. He says, that the Athenians and most other Ionians were so ashamed of that name that they wholly refused to be called Ionians; and that those who esteemed themselves the noblest among them, and who had set forth from the very Prytaneum of Athens, begat children on barbarian wives whose parents, husbands, and former children they had slain; that the women had therefore made a law among themselves, confirmed it by oath, and delivered it to be kept by their daughters, never to eat with their husbands, nor to call any of them by his name; and that the present Milesians are descended from these women. Having afterwards added that those are true Ionians who celebrate the feast called Apaturia; they all, says he, keep it except the Ephesians and Colophonians. In this manner does he deprive these two states of their nobility.

> Greek: 19. ἀλλʼ ἀφίημι τὰ τῶν βαρβάρων ἀφθονίαν γὰρ αὐτὸς ἐν τοῖς Ἑλληνικοῖς πεποίηκεν. Ἀθηναίους τοίνυν καὶ τοὺς πολλοὺς τῶν ἄλλων Ἰώνων ἐπαισχύνεσθαι τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ, μὴ βουλομένους ἀλλὰ φεύγοντας Ἴωνας κεκλῆσθαι, τοὺς δὲ νομίζοντας αὐτῶν γενναιοτάτους εἶναι καὶ ὁρμηθέντας ἀπὸ τοῦ πρυτανηίου τῶν Ἀθηναίων ἐκ βαρβάρων παιδοποιήσασθαι γυναικῶν, πατέρας αὐτῶν καὶ ἄνδρας καὶ παῖδας φονεύσαντας· διὸ τὰς γυναῖκας νόμον θέσθαι καὶ ὅρκους ἐπελάσαι καὶ παραδοῦναι ταῖς θυγατράσι, μήποτε ὁμοσιτῆσαι τοῖς ἀνδράσι μηδʼ ὀνομαστὶ βοῆσαι τὸν αὑτῆς ἄνδρα, καὶ τοὺς νῦν ὄντας Μιλησίους ἐξ ἐκείνων γεγονέναι τῶν γυναικῶν ὑπειπὼν δὲ καθαρῶς Ἴωνας γεγονέναι τοὺς Ἀπατούρια ἄγοντας ἑορτὴν ἄγουσι δὲ πάντες φησὶ πλὴν Ἐφεσίων καὶ Κολοφωνίων. τούτους μὲν οὖν οὕτως ἐκκέκλεικε τῆς εὐγενείας.

[¶19] 20. He says moreover, that the Cumaeans and Mitylenaeans agreed with Cyrus to deliver up to him for a price Pactyas, who had revolted from him. I know not indeed, says he, for how much; since it is not certain what it was. Well done! — not to know what it was, and yet to cast such an infamy on a Grecian city, as if he had an assured knowledge! He says farther, that the Chians took Pactyas, who was brought to them out of the temple of Minerva Poliuchus (or Guardianess of the city), and delivered him up, having received the city Atarneus for their recompense. And yet Charon the Lampsacenian, a mote ancient writer, relating this matter concerning Pactyas, charges neither the Mitylenaeans nor the Chians with any such impious action. These are his very words: “Pactyas, hearing that the Persian army drew near, fled first to Mitylene, then to Chios, and there fell into the hands of Cyrus.”

> Greek: 20. Πακτύην δʼ ἀποστάντα Κύρου φησὶ Κυμαίους καὶ Μυτιληναίους ἐκδιδόναι παρασκευάζεσθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐπὶ μισθῷ ὅσῳ δή, οὐ γὰρ ἔχω γε εἰπεῖν ἀτρεκέως· ʽ εὖ τὸ μὴ διαβεβαιοῦσθαι πόσος ἦν ὁ μισθός, τηλικοῦτο δʼ Ἑλληνίδι πόλει προσβαλεῖν ὄνειδος, ὡς δὴ σαφῶς εἰδότα Χίους μέντοι τὸν Πακτύην κομισθέντα πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐξ ἱροῦ Ἀθηναίης πολιούχου ἐκδοῦναι, καὶ ταῦτα ποιῆσαι τοὺς Χίους τὸν Ἀταρνέα μισθὸν λαβόντας καίτοι Χάρων ὁ Λαμψακηνός ἀνὴρ πρεσβύτερος, ἐν τοῖς περὶ Πακτύην λόγοις γενόμενος, τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν οὔτε Μυτιληναίοις οὔτε Χίοις ἄγος προστέτριπται ταυτὶ δὲ κατὰ λέξιν γέγραφε Πακτύης δʼ ὡς ἐπύθετο προσελαύνοντα τὸν στρατὸν τὸν Περσικὸν ᾤχετο φεύγων ἄρτι μὲν εἰς Μυτιλήνην, ἔπειτα δʼ εἰς Χίον· καὶ αὐτοῦ ἐκράτησε Κῦρος.

[¶20] 21. Our author in his Third Book, relating the expedition of the Lacedaemonians against the tyrant Polycrates, affirms, that the Samians think and say that the Spartans, to recompense them for their former assistance against the Messenians, both brought back the Samians that were banished, and made war on the tyrant; but that the Lacedaemonians deny this, and say, they undertook this design not to help or deliver the Samians, but to punish them for having taken away a cup sent by them to Croesus, and besides, a breastplate sent them by Amasis. And yet we know that there was not at that time any city so desirous of honor, or such an enemy to tyrants, as Sparta. For what breastplate or cup was the cause of their driving the Cypselidae out of Corinth and Ambracia, Lygdamis out of Naxos, the children of Pisistratus out of Athens, Aeschines out of Sicyon, Symmachus out of Thasus, Aulis out of Phocis, and Aristogenes out of Miletus; and of their overturning the domineering powers of Thessaly, pulling down Aristomedes and Angelus by the help of King Leotychides? — which facts are elsewhere more largely described. Now, if Herodotus says true, they were in the highest degree guilty both of malice and folly, when, denying a most honorable and most just cause of their expedition, they confessed that in remembrance of a former injury, and too highly valuing an inconsiderable matter, they invaded a miserable and afflicted people.

> Greek: 21. ἐν δὲ τῇ τρίτῃ τῶν βίβλων διηγούμενος τὴν Λακεδαιμονίων ἐπὶ Πολυκράτη τὸν τύραννον στρατείαν αὐτοὺς μὲν οἴεσθαί φησι καὶ λέγειν Σαμίους, ὡς χάριν ἐκτίνοντες αὐτοῖς τῆς ἐπὶ Μεσσηνίους βοηθείας στρατεύσειαν, τούς τε φεύγοντας κατάγοντες τῶν πολιτῶν καὶ τῷ τυράννῳ πολεμοῦντες· ἀρνεῖσθαι δὲ τὴν αἰτίαν ταύτην Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ λέγειν, ὡς οὐ βοηθοῦντες οὐδʼ ἐλευθεροῦντες, ἀλλὰ τιμωρούμενοι Σαμίους στρατεύσαιντο, κρατῆρά τινα πεμπόμενον Κροίσῳ παρʼ αὐτῶν καὶ θώρακα πάλιν παρʼ Ἀμάσιδος κομιζόμενον αὐτοῖς ἀφελομένους. καίτοι πόλιν ἐν τοῖς τότε χρόνοις οὔτε φιλότιμον οὕτως οὔτε μισοτύραννον ἴσμεν ὡς τὴν Λακεδαιμονίων γενομένην· ποίου γὰρ ἕνεκα θώρακος ἢ τίνος κρατῆρος ἑτέρου Κυψελίδας μὲν ἐξέβαλον ἐκ Κορίνθου καὶ Ἀμπρακίας ἐκ δὲ Νάξου Λύγδαμιν ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν δὲ τοὺς Πεισιστράτου παῖδας ἐκ δὲ Σικυῶνος Αἰσχίνην ἐκ Θάσου δὲ Σύμμαχον ἐκ δὲ Φωκέων Αὖλιν ἐκ Μιλήτου δʼ Ἀριστογένη, τὴν δʼ ἐν Θετταλοῖς δυναστείαν ἔπαυσαν, Ἀριστομήδη καὶ Ἄγγελον καταλύσαντες διὰ Λεωτυχίδου τοῦ βασιλέως; περὶ ὧν ἐν ἄλλοις ἀκριβέστερον γέγραπται· κατὰ δʼ Ἡρόδοτον οὔτε κακίας οὔτʼ ἀβελτερίας ὑπερβολὴν λελοίπασιν, εἰ τὴν καλλίστην καὶ δικαιοτάτην τῆς στρατείας ἀρνούμενοι πρόφασιν ὡμολόγουν διὰ μνησικακίαν καὶ μικρολογίαν ἐπιτίθεσθαι δυστυχοῦσιν ἀνθρώποις καὶ κακῶς πράττουσιν.

[¶21] 22. Now perhaps he gave the Lacedaemonians this stroke, as directly falling under his pen; but the city of Corinth, which was wholly out of the course of his story, he has dragged in — going out of his way (as they say) to seize upon it — and has bespattered it with a most filthy crime and most shameful calumny. “The Corinthians,” says he, “studiously forwarded this expedition of the Lacedaemonians to Samos, as having themselves also been formerly affronted by the Samians. The matter was this. Periander tyrant of Corinth sent three hundred boys, sons to the principal men of Corcyra, to King Alyattes, to be gelt. These, going ashore in the island of Samos, were by the Samians taught to sit as suppliants in the temple of Diana, where they preserved them, setting before them for their food sesame mixed with honey.” This our author calls an affront put by the Samians on the Corinthians, who therefore instigated the Lacedaemonians against them, to wit, because the Samians had saved three hundred children of the Greeks from being unmanned. By attributing this villany to the Corinthians, he makes the city more wicked than the tyrant. He indeed was revenging himself on those of Corcyra who had slain his son; but what had the Corinthians suffered, that they should punish the Samians for putting an obstacle to so great a cruelty and wickedness? — and this, after three generations, reviving the memory of an old quarrel for the sake of that tyranny, which they found so grievous and intolerable that they are still endlessly abolishing all the monuments and marks of it, though long since extinct. Such then was the injury done by the Samians to the Corinthians. Now what a kind of punishment was it the Corinthians would have inflicted on them? Had they been indeed angry with the Samians, they should not have incited the Lacedaemonians, but rather diverted them from their war against Polycrates, that the Samians might not by the tyrant’s overthrow recover liberty, and be feed from their slavery. But (what is most to be observed) why were the Corinthians so offended with the Samians, that desired indeed but were not able to save the Corcyraeans’ children, and yet were not displeased with the Cnidians, who both preserved them and restored them to their friends? Nor indeed have the Corcyraeans any great esteem for the Samians on this account; but of the Cnidians they preserve a grateful memory, having granted them several honors and privileges, and made decrees in their favor. For these, sailing to Samos, drove away Periander’s guards from the temple, and taking the children aboard their ships, carried them safe to Corcyra; as it is recorded by Antenor the Cretan, and by Dionysius the Chalcidian in his foundations. Now that the Spartans undertook not this war on any design of punishing the Samians, but to save them by delivering them from the tyrant, we have the testimony of the Samians themselves. For they affirm that there is in Samos a monument erected at the public charge, and honors there done to Archias a Spartan, who fell fighting valiantly in that quarrel; for which cause also his posterity still keep a familiar and friendly correspondence with the Samians, as Herodotus himself witnesses.

> Greek: 22. οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ Λακεδαιμονίους μὲν ἁμωσγέπως ὑποπεσόντας αὐτοῦ τῷ γραφείῳ προσέχρωσε τὴν δὲ Κορινθίων πόλιν, ἐκτὸς δρόμου κατὰ τοῦτον οὖσαν τὸν τόπον, ὅμως προσπεριλαβὼν ὁδοῦ, φασί, πάρεργον ἀνέπλησεν αἰτίας δεινῆς καὶ μοχθηροτάτης διαβολῆς. συνεπελάβοντο γάρ φησὶ τοῦ στρατεύματος τοῦ ἐπὶ Σάμον ὥστε γενέσθαι καὶ Κορίνθιοι προθύμως, ὑβρίσματος εἰς αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ Σαμίων πρότερον ὑπάρξαντος. ἦν δὲ τοιοῦτο· Κερκυραίων παῖδας τριακοσίους τῶν πρώτων Περίανδρος ὁ Κορίνθου τύραννος; ἐπʼ ἐκτομῇ παρʼ Ἀλυάττην ἔπεμπε· τούτους ἀποβάντας εἰς τὴν νῆσον οἱ Σάμιοι διδάξαντες ἐν ἱερῷ Ἀρτέμιδος ἱκέτας καθίζεσθαι καὶ τρωκτὰ προτιθέντες αὐτοῖς ὁσημέραι σησάμου καὶ μέλιτος περιεποίησαν τοῦθʼ ὕβρισμα Σαμίων εἰς Κορινθίους ὁ συγγραφεὺς προσαγορεύει καὶ διὰ τοῦτό φησι συμπαροξῦναι Λακεδαιμονίους κατʼ αὐτῶν ἔτεσιν οὐκ ὀλίγοις ὕστερον, ἔγκλημα ποιησαμένους, ὅτι τριακοσίους παῖδας Ἑλλήνων ἐφύλαξαν ἄνδρας. ὁ δὲ τοῦτο Κορινθίοις προστριβόμενος τοὔνειδος ἀποφαίνει τοῦ τυράννου μοχθηροτέραν τὴν πόλιν· ἐκεῖνος μὲν γὰρ τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ Κερκυραίους ἀνελόντας ἠμύνατο, Κορίνθιοι δὲ τί παθόντες ἐτιμωροῦντο Σαμίους ἐμποδὼν στάντας ὠμότητι καὶ παρανομίᾳ τοσαύτῃ, καὶ ταῦτα μετὰ τρεῖς γενεὰς ὀργὴν καὶ μνησικακίαν ἀναφέροντες ὑπὲρ τυραννίδος, ἧς καταλυθείσης πᾶν τε μνῆμα καὶ πᾶν ἴχνος ἐξαλείφοντες καὶ ἀφανίζοντες οὐκ ἐπαύοντο, χαλεπῆς καὶ βαρείας αὐτοῖς γενομένης; ἀλλὰ δὴ τὸ μὲν ὕβρισμα τοιοῦτον ἦν τὸ Σαμίων εἰς Κορινθίους· τὸ δὲ τιμώρημα ποῖόν τι τὸ Κορινθίων εἰς Σαμίους; εἰ γὰρ ὄντως ὠργίζοντο Σαμίοις, οὐ παροξύνειν, ἀποτρέπειν δὲ μᾶλλον αὐτοῖς ἦν προσῆκον Λακεδαιμονίους ἐπὶ Πολυκράτη στρατευομένους, ὅπως μὴ τοῦ τυράννου καταλυθέντος ἐλεύθεροι Σάμιοι γένοιντο καὶ παύσαιντο δουλεύοντες. ὃ δὲ μέγιστὸν ἐστι, τί δήποτε Κορίνθιοι Σαμίοις μὲν ὠργίζοντο βουληθεῖσι σῷσαι καὶ μὴ δυνηθεῖσι τοὺς Κερκυραίων παῖδας, Κνιδίοις δὲ τοῖς σῴσασι καὶ ἀποδοῦσιν οὐκ ἐνεκάλουν; καίτοι Κερκυραῖοι Σαμίων μὲν ἐπὶ τούτῳ λόγον οὐ πολὺν ἔχουσι, Κνιδίων δὲ μέμνηνται καὶ Κνιδίοις εἰσὶ τιμαὶ καὶ ἀτέλειαι καὶ ψηφίσματα παρʼ αὐτοῖς· οὗτοι γὰρ ἐπιπλεύσαντες ἐξήλασαν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τοὺς Περιάνδρου φύλακας, αὐτοὶ δʼ ἀναλαβόντες τοὺς παῖδας εἰς Κέρκυραν διεκόμισαν, ὡς Ἀντήνωρ ἐν τοῖς Κρητικοῖς ἱστόρηκε καὶ Διονύσιος ὁ Χαλκιδεὺς ἐν ταῖς Κτίσεσιν. ὅτι δʼ οὐ τιμωρούμενοι Σαμίους ἀλλʼ ἐλευθεροῦντες ἀπὸ τοῦ τυράννου καὶ σῴζοντες ἐστράτευσαν οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, Σαμίοις αὐτοῖς ἔστι χρήσασθαι μάρτυσιν. Ἀρχίᾳ γὰρ ἀνδρὶ Σπαρτιάτῃ λαμπρῶς ἀγωνισαμένῳ τότε καὶ πεσόντι τάφον εἶναι δημοσίᾳ κατεσκευασμένον ἐν Σάμῳ καὶ τιμώμενον ὑπʼ αὐτῶν λέγουσι· διὸ καὶ τοὺς ἀπογόνους τἀνδρὸς ἀεὶ διατελεῖν Σαμίοις οἰκείως καὶ φιλανθρώπως προσφερομένους, ὡς αὐτὸς Ἡρόδοτος ταῦτα γοῦν ἀπομεμαρτύρηκεν.

[¶22] 23. In his Fifth Book, he says, that Clisthenes, one of the best and noblest men in Athens, persuaded the priestess Pythia to be a false prophetess, and always to exhort the Lacedaemonians to free Athens from the tyrants; calumniating this most excellent and just action by the imputation of so great a wickedness and imposture, and taking from Apollo the credit of that true and good prophecy, beseeming even Themis herself, who is also said to have joined with him. He says farther, that Isagoras prostituted his wife to Cleomenes, who came to her. Then, as his manner is, to gain credit by mixing some praises with his reproaches, he says: Isagoras the son of Tisander was of a noble family, but I cannot tell the original of it; his kinsmen, however, sacrifice to the Carian Jupiter. O this pleasant and cunning scoffer of a writer, who thus disgracefully sends Isagoras to the Carians, as it were to the ravens. As for Aristogiton, he puts him not forth at the back door, but thrusts him directly out of the gate into Phoenicia, saying that he had his original from the Gephyraeans, and that the Gephyraeans were not, as some think, Euboeans or Eretrians, but Phoenicians, as himself has learned by report. And since he cannot altogether take from the Lacedaemonians the glory of having delivered the Athenians from the tyrants, he endeavors to cloud and disgrace that most honorable act by as foul a passion. For he says, they presently repented of it, as not having done well, in that they had been induced by spurious and deceitful oracles to drive the tyrants, who were their allies and had promised to put Athens into their hands, out of their country, and had restored the city to an ungrateful people. He adds, that they were about to send for Hippias from Sigeum, and bring him back to Athens; but that they were opposed by the Corinthians, Sosicles telling them how much the city of Corinth had suffered under the tyranny of Cypselus and Periander. And yet there was no outrage of Periander’s more abominable and cruel than his sending the three hundred children to be emasculated, for the delivering and saving of whom from that contumely, the Corinthians, he says, were angry and bore a grudge against the Samians, as having put an affront upon them. With so much repugnance and contradiction is that malice of his discourse filled, which on every occasion insinuates itself into his narrations.

> Greek: 23. ἐν δὲ τῇ πέμπτῃ, τῶν ἀρίστων Ἀθήνησι καὶ πρώτων ἀνδρῶν Κλεισθένη μὲν ἀναπεῖσαί φησι τὴν Πυθίαν ψευδόμαντιν γενέσθαι, προφέρουσαν ἀεὶ Λακεδαιμονίοις ἐλευθεροῦν ἀπὸ τῶν τυράννων τὰς Ἀθήνας· καλλίστῳ μὲν ἔργῳ καὶ δικαιοτάτῳ προσάπτων ἀσεβήματος διαβολὴν τηλικούτου καὶ ῥᾳδιουργήματος, ἀφαιρούμενος δὲ τοῦ θεοῦ μαντείαν καλὴν καὶ ἀγαθὴν καὶ τῆς λεγομένης συμπροφητεύειν Θέμιδος ἀξίαν. Ἰσαγόραν δὲ τῆς γαμετῆς ὑφίεσθαι Κλεομένει φοιτῶντι παρʼ αὐτήν· ὡς δʼ εἰώθει, παραμιγνὺς πίστεως ἕνεκα τοῖς ψόγοις ἐπαίνους τινὰς Ἰσαγόρης δέ φησὶν ʽὁ Τισάνδρου οἰκίης μὲν ἦν δοκίμου, ἀτὰρ τὰ ἀνέκαθεν οὐκ ἔχω φράσαι θύουσι δʼ οἱ συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ Διὶ Καρίῳ εὔρυθμὸς γε καὶ πολιτικὸς ὁ μυκτὴρ τοῦ συγγραφέως, εἰς Κᾶρας ὥσπερ εἰς κόρακας ἀποδιοπομπουμένου τὸν Ἰσαγόραν. Ἀριστογείτονα μέντοι οὐκέτι κύκλῳ καὶ κακῶς, ἀλλʼ ἄντικρυς διὰ πυλῶν εἰς Φοινίκην ἐξελαύνει Γεφυραῖον γεγονέναι λέγων ἀνέκαθεν· τοὺς δὲ Γεφυραίους οὐκ ἀπʼ Εὐβοίας οὐδʼ Ἐρετριεῖς, ὥσπερ οἴονταί τινες, ἀλλὰ Φοίνικας εἶναί φησιν, αὐτὸς οὕτω πεπυσμένος. ἀφελέσθαι τοίνυν Λακεδαιμονίους μὴ δυνάμενος τὴν Ἀθηναίων ἐλευθέρωσιν ἀπὸ τῶν τυράννων αἰσχίστῳ πάθει κάλλιστον ἔργον οἷὸς τʼ ἐστὶν ἀφανίζειν καὶ καταισχύνειν· ταχὺ γὰρ μετανοῆσαι φησιν αὐτούς, ὡς οὐ ποιήσαντας ὀρθῶς, ὅτι κιβδήλοισι μαντηίοισιν ἐπαρθέντες ἄνδρας ξείνους ὄντας αὐτοῖσι καὶ ὑποσχομένους ὑποχειρίας παρέξειν τὰς Ἀθήνας ἐξήλασαν ἐκ τῆς πατρίδος τοὺς τυράννους καὶ δήμῳ ἀχαρίστῳ παρέδωκαν τὴν πόλιν. εἶτα μεταπεμψαμένους Ἱππίαν ἀπὸ Σιγείου κατάγειν εἰς τὰς Ἀθήνας· ἀντιστῆναι δὲ Κορινθίους αὐτοῖς καὶ ἀποτρέψαι, Σωκλέους διελθόντος, ὅσα Κύψελος καὶ Περίανδρος κακὰ τὴν Κορινθίων πόλιν εἰργάσαντο τυραννοῦντες. καίτοι Περιάνδρου σχετλιώτερον οὐδὲν οὐδʼ ὠμότερον ἔργον ἱστορεῖται τῆς ἐκπομπῆς τῶν τριακοσίων ἐκείνων, οὓς ἐξαρπάσασι καὶ διακωλύσασι παθεῖν ταῦτα Σαμίοις ὀργίζεσθαί φησι καὶ μνησικακεῖν Κορινθίους ὥσπερ ὑβρισθέντας. τοσαύτης· ἀναπίμπλησι ταραχῆς καὶ διαφωνίας τὸ κακόηθες αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον, ἐξ ἁπάσης τῇ διηγήσει προφάσεως ὑποδυόμενον.

## 2. Sections 24–34

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/2/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/2/#p-N

[¶0] 24. After this, relating the action of Sardis, he, as much as in him lies, diminishes and discredits the matter; being so audacious as to call the ships which the Athenians sent to the assistance of the Ionians, who had revolted from the King, the beginning of evils, because they endeavored to deliver so many and so great Grecian cities from the barbarians. As to the Eretrians, making mention of them only by the way, he passes over in silence a great, gallant, and memorable action of theirs. For when all Ionia was in a confusion and uproar, and the King’s fleet drew nigh, they, going forth to meet him, overcame in a sea-fight the Cyprians in the Pamphylian Sea. Then turning back and leaving their ships at Ephesus, they invaded Sardis and besieged Artaphernes, who was fled into the castle, that so they might raise the siege of Miletus. And this indeed they effected, causing the enemies to break up their camp and remove thence in a wonderful fright, and then seeing themselves in danger to be oppressed by a multitude, retired. This not only others, but Lysanias of Mallus also in his history of Eretria relates, thinking it convenient, if for no other reason, yet after the taking and destruction of the city, to add this valiant and heroic act. But this writer of ours says, they were defeated, and pursued even to their ships by the barbarians; though Charon the Lampsacenian has no such thing, but writes thus, word for word: “The Athenians set forth with twenty galleys to the assistance of the Ionians, and going to Sardis, took all thereabouts, except the King’s wall; which having done, they returned to Miletus.”

> Greek: 24. ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐφεξῆς τὰ περὶ Σάρδεις διηγούμενος, ὡς ἐνῆν μάλιστα διέλυσε καὶ διελυμήνατο τὴν πρᾶξιν· ἃς μὲν Ἀθηναῖοι ναῦς ἐξέπεμψαν Ἴωσι τιμωροὺς ἀποστᾶσι βασιλέως, ἀρχεκάκους τολμήσας προσειπεῖν ὅτι τοσαύτας πόλεις καὶ τηλικαύτας Ἑλληνίδας ἐλευθεροῦν ἐπεχείρησαν ἀπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων, Ἐρετριέων δὲ κομιδῇ μνησθεὶς ἐν παρέργῳ καὶ παρασιωπήσας μέγα κατόρθωμα καὶ ἀοίδιμον. ἤδη γὰρ ὡς περὶ τὴν Ἰωνίαν συγκεχυμένην, καὶ στόλου βασιλικοῦ προσπλέοντος, ἀπαντήσαντες ἔξω Κυπρίους ἐν τῷ Παμφυλίῳ πελάγει κατεναυμάχησαν· εἶτʼ ἀναστρέψαντες ὀπίσω καὶ τὰς ναῦς ἐν Ἐφέσῳ καταλιπόντες ἐπέθεντο Σάρδεσι καὶ Ἀρταφέρνην ἐπολιόρκουν εἰς τὴν ἀκρόπολιν καταφυγόντα, βουλόμενοι τὴν Μιλήτου λῦσαι· πολιορκίαν· καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἔπραξαν καὶ τοὺς πολεμίους ἀνέστησαν ἐκεῖθεν, ἐν φόβῳ θαυμαστῷ γενομένους πλήθους δʼ ἐπιχυθέντος αὐτοῖς, ἀπεχώρησαν. ταῦτα δʼ ἄλλοι τε καὶ Λυσανίας ὁ Μαλλώτης ἐν τοῖς περὶ Ἐρετρίας εἴρηκε· καὶ καλῶς εἶχεν, εἰ καὶ διὰ μηδὲν ἄλλο, τῇ γοῦν ἁλώσει καὶ φθορᾷ τῆς πόλεως ἐπειπεῖν τὸ ἀνδραγάθημα τοῦτο καὶ τὴν ἀριστείαν ὁ δὲ καὶ κρατηθέντας αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων φησὶν εἰς τὰς ναῦς καταδιωχθῆναι, μηδὲν τοιοῦτο τοῦ Λαμψακηνοῦ Χάρωνος ἱστοροῦντος, ἀλλὰ ταυτὶ γράφοντος κατὰ λέξιν Ἀθηναῖοι δʼ εἴκοσι τριήρεσιν ἔπλευσαν ἐπικουρήσοντες τοῖς Ἴωσι, καὶ εἰς Σάρδεις ἐστρατεύσαντο καὶ εἷλον· τὰ περὶ Σάρδεις ἅπαντα χωρὶς τοῦ τείχους τοῦ βασιληίου· ταῦτα δὲ ποιήσαντες ἐπαναχωροῦσιν εἰς Μίλητον.

[¶1] 25. In his Sixth Book, our author, discoursing of the Plataeans, — how they gave themselves to the Lacedaemonians, who exhorted them rather to have recourse to the Athenians, who were nearer to them and no bad defenders, — adds, not as a matter of suspicion or opinion, but as a thing certainly known by him, that the Lacedaemonians gave the Plataeans this advice, not so much for any good will, as through a desire to find work for the Athenians by engaging them with the Boeotians. If then Herodotus is not malicious, the Lacedaemonians must have been both fraudulent and spiteful; and the Athenians fools, in suffering themselves to be thus imposed on; and the Plataeans were brought into play, not for any good-will or respect, but as an occasion of war.

> Greek: 25. ἐν δὲ τῇ ἕκτῃ διηγησάμενος περὶ Πλαταιέων, ὡς σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ἐδίδοσαν Σπαρτιάταις, οἱ δὲ μᾶλλον ἐκέλευσαν πρὸς Ἀθηναίους τρέπεσθαι πλησιοχώρους ἐόντας αὐτοῖς καὶ τιμωρέειν οὐ κακούς· προστίθησιν οὐ καθʼ ὑπόνοιαν οὐδὲ δόξαν, ἀλλʼ ὡς ἀκριβῶς ἐπιστάμενος, ὅτι ταῦτα συνεβούλευον οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι οὐ κατʼ εὔνοιαν οὕτω τῶν Πλαταιέων, ὡς βουλόμενοι τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἔχειν πόνον συνεστεῶτας Βοιωτοῖς., οὐκοῦν εἰ μὴ κακοήθης Ἡρόδοτος ἐπίβουλοι μὲν καὶ κακοήθεις Λακεδαιμόνιοι, ἀναίσθητοι δʼ Ἀθηναῖοι παρακρουσθέντες, Πλαταιεῖς δʼ οὐ κατʼ εὔνοιαν οὐδὲ τιμὴν, ἀλλὰ πολέμου πρόφασις εἰς μέσον ἐρρίφησαν.

[¶2] 26. He is farther manifestly convinced of belying the Lacedaemonians, when he says that, whilst they expected the full moon, they failed of giving their assistance to the Athenians at Marathon. For they not only made a thousand other excursions and fights at the beginning of the month, without staying for the full moon; but wanted so little of being present at this very battle, which was fought the sixth day of the month Boedromion, that at their coming they found the dead still lying in the field. And yet he has written thus of the full moon: “It was impossible for them to do these things at that present, being unwilling to break the law; for it was the ninth day of the month, and they said, they could not go forth on the ninth day, the orb of the moon being not yet full. And therefore they stayed for the full moon.” But thou, O Herodotus, transferest the full moon from the middle to the beginning of the month, and at the same time confoundest the heavens, days, and all things; and yet thou dost pretend to be the historian of Greece! And professing to write more particularly and carefully of the affairs of Athens, thou dost not so much as say a word of that solemn procession which the Athenians even at this day send to Agrae, celebrating a feast of thanks-giving to Hecate for their victory. But this helps Herodotus to refel the crime with which he is charged, of having flattered the Athenians for a great sum of money he received of them. For if he had rehearsed these things to them, they would not have omitted or neglected to notice that Philippides, when on the ninth he called the Lacedaemonians to the fight, must have come from it himself, since (as Herodotus says) he went in two days from Athens to Sparta; unless the Athenians sent for their allies to the fight after their enemies were overcome. Indeed Diyllus the Athenian, none of the most contemptible as an historian, says, that he received from Athens a present of ten talents, Anytus proposing the decree. Moreover Herodotus, as many say, has in relating the fight at Marathon derogated from the credit of it, by the number he sets down of the slain. For it is said that the Athenians made a vow to sacrifice so many kids to Diana Agrotera, as they should kill barbarians; but that after the fight, the number of the dead appearing infinite, they appeased the Goddess by making a decree to immolate five hundred to her every year.

> Greek: 26. καὶ μὴν τὴν πανσέληνον ἢδη σαφῶς ἐξελήλεγκται Λακεδαιμονίων καταψευδόμενος, ἥν φησι περιμένοντας αὐτοὺς εἰς Μαραθῶνα μὴ βοηθῆσαι τοῖς Ἀθηναίοις· οὐ γὰρ μόνον ἄλλας μυρίας ἐξόδους καὶ μάχας πεποίηνται μηνὸς ἱσταμένου, μὴ περιμείναντες τὴν πανσέληνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ταύτης τῆς μάχης, ἕκτῃ Βοηδρομιῶνος ἱσταμένου γενομένης, ὀλίγον ἀπελείφθησαν, ὥστε καὶ θεάσασθαι τοὺς νεκροὺς ἐπελθόντες ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον. ἀλλʼ ὅμως ταῦτα περὶ τῆς πανσελήνου γέγραφεν ἀδύνατα δέ σφι τὸ παραυτίκα ποιέειν ταῦτα, οὐ βουλομένοισι λύειν τὸν νόμον· ἦν γὰρ ἱσταμένου τοῦ μηνὸς ἐνάτη ἐνάτῃ δὲ οὐκ ἐξελεύσεσθαι ἔφασαν, οὐ πλήρεος ἐόντος τοῦ κύκλου. οὗτοι μὲν οὖν τὴν πανσέληνον ἔμενον σὺ δὲ μεταφέρεις τὴν πανσέληνον εἰς ἀρχὴν μηνὸς οὖσαν διχομηνίας, καὶ τὸν οὐρανὸν ὁμοῦ καὶ τὰς ἡμέρας καὶ πάντα πράγματα συνταράσσεις· καὶ ταῦτα τὰ τῆς, Ἑλλάδος ἐπαγγελλόμενος γράφειν ἐσπουδακὼς δὲ περὶ τὰς Ἀθήνας διαφερόντως οὐδὲ τὴν πρὸς Ἄγρας πομπὴν ἱστόρηκας, ἣν, πέμπουσιν ἔτι νῦν τῇ Ἑκάτῃ χαριστήρια τῆς νίκης ἑορτάζοντες. ἀλλὰ τοῦτό γε βοηθεῖ τῷ Ἡροδότῳ πρὸς ἐκείνην τὴν διαβολήν, ἣν ἔχει κολακεύσας τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἀργύριον πολὺ λαβεῖν παρʼ αὐτῶν. εἰ γὰρ ἀνέγνω ταῦτʼ Ἀθηναίοις, οὐκ ἂν εἴασαν οὐδὲ περιεῖδον ἐνάτῃ τὸν Φειδιππίδην παρακαλοῦντα Λακεδαιμονίους ἐπὶ τὴν μάχην ἐκ τῆς μάχης γεγενημένον, καὶ ταῦτα δευτεραῖον εἰς Σπάρτην ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν, ὡς αὐτός φησιν, ἀφιγμένον εἰ μὴ μετὰ τὸ νικῆσαι τοὺς πολεμίους Ἀθηναῖοι μετεπέμποντο τοὺς συμμάχους. ὅτι μέντοι δέκα τάλαντα δωρεὰν ἔλαβεν ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν Ἀνύτου τὸ ψήφισμα γράψαντος, ἀνὴρ Ἀθηναῖος οὐ τῶν παρημελημένων ἐν ἱστορίᾳ, Δίυλλος, εἴρηκεν. ἀπαγγείλας δὲ τὴν ἐν Μαραθῶνι μάχην ὁ Ἡρόδοτος, ὡς μὲν οἱ πλεῖστοι λέγουσι, καὶ τῶν νεκρῶν τῷ ἀριθμῷ καθεῖλε τοὔργον. εὐξαμένους γάρ φασι τοὺς Ἀθηναίους τῇ, Ἀγροτέρᾳ θύσειν χιμάρους ὅσους ἂν τῶν βαρβάρων καταβάλωσιν, εἶτα, μετὰ τὴν μάχην ἀναρίθμου πλήθους τῶν νεκρῶν ἀναφανέντος, παραιτεῖσθαι ψηφίσματι τὴν θεόν, ὅπως καθʼ ἕκαστον ἐνιαυτὸν ἀποθύωσι πεντακοσίας τῶν χιμάρων.

[¶3] 27. But letting this pass, let us see what was done after the fight. “The barbarians,” says he, “retiring back with the rest of their ships, and taking the Eretrian slaves out of the island, where they had left them, doubled the point of Sunium, desiring to prevent the Athenians before they could gain the city. The Athenians suspected this to have been done by a plot of the Alcmaeonidae, who by agreement showed a shield to the Persians when they were got into their ships. They therefore doubled the cape of Sunium.” Let us in this place take no notice of his calling the Eretrians slaves, who showed as much courage and gallantry in this war as any other of the Grecians, and suffered things unworthy their virtue. Nor let us insist much on the calumny with which he defames the Alcmaeonidae, some of whom were both the greatest families and noblest men of the city. But the greatness of the victory itself is overthrown, and the end of that so celebrated action comes to nothing, nor does it seem to have been a fight or any great exploit, but only a light skirmish with the barbarians, as the envious and ill-willers affirm, if they did not after the battle fly away, cutting their cables and giving themselves to the wind, to carry them as far as might be from the Attic coast, but having a shield lifted up to them as a signal of treason, made straight with their fleet for Athens, in hope to surprise it, and having at leisure doubled the point of Sunium, were discovered above the port Phalerum, so that the chief and most illustrious men, despairing to save the city, would have betrayed it. For a little after, acquitting the Alcmaeonidae, he charges others with the treason. “For the shield indeed was shown, nor can it be denied,” says he, as if he had seen it himself. But this could no way be, since the Athenians obtained a solid victory; and if it had been done, it could not have been seen by the barbarians, flying in a hurry amidst wounds and arrows into their ships, and leaving every one the place with all possible speed. But when he again pretends to excuse the Alcmaeonidae of those crimes which he first of all men objected against them, and speaks thus: “I cannot believe that the Alcmaeonidae by agreement would ever have lifted up a shield to the Persians, and have brought the Athenians under the power of the barbarians and Hippias;” I am reminded of a certain proverbial saying, — Stop and be caught, crab, and I’ll let you go. For why art thou so eager to catch him, if thou wilt let him go when he is caught? Thus you first accuse, then apologize; and you write calumnies against illustrious men, which again you refute. And you discredit yourself; for you heard no one but yourself say that the Alcmaeonidae lifted up a shield to the vanquished and flying barbarians. And in those very things which you allege for the Alcmaeonidae, you show yourself a sycophant. For if, as here you write, the Alcmaeonidae were more or no less enemies to tyrants than Callias, the son of Phaenippus and father of Hipponicus, where will you place their conspiracy, of which you write in your First Book, that assisting Pisistratus they brought him back from exile to the tyranny and would not have driven him away till he was accused of unnaturally abusing his wife? Such then are the repugnances of these things; and by his intermixing the praises of Callias, the son of Phaenippus, amidst the crimes and suspicions of the Alcmaeonidae, and joining to him his son Hipponicus, who was (as Herodotus himself says) one of the richest men in Athens, he confesses that he brought in Callias not for any necessity of the story, but to ingratiate himself and gain favor with Hipponicus.

> Greek: 27. οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ τοῦτʼ ἐάσαντες, ἴδωμεν τὰ μετὰ τὴν μάχην· τῇσι δὲ λοιπῇσι φησὶν οἱ βάρβαροι ἐξανακρουσάμενοι καὶ ἀναλαβόντες ἐκ τῆς νήσου, ἐν τῇ ἔλιπον τὰ ἐξ Ἐρετρίης ἀνδράποδα; περιέπλεον Σούνιον, βουλόμενοι φθῆναι τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἀφικόμενοι εἰς τὸ ἂστυ· αἰτίην δʼ ἔσχε Ἀθηναίοισι ἐξ Ἀλκμεωνιδέων μηχανῆς αὐτοὺς ταῦτα ἐπινοηθῆναι· τούτους γὰρ συνθεμένους τοῖσι Πέρσῃσι ἀναδεῖξαι ἀσπίδα ἐοῦσι ἤδη ἐν τῇσι νηυσὶ· οὗτοι μὲν δὴ περιέπλεον Σούνιον ἐνταῦθα τὸ μὲν τοὺς Ἐρετριέας ἀνδράποδα προσειπεῖν, οὔτε τόλμαν Ἑλλήνων οὐδενὸς οὔτε φιλοτιμίαν ἐνδεεστέραν παρασχομένους καὶ παθόντας ἀνάξια τῆς ἀρετῆς, ἀφείσθω διαβεβλημένων δὲ τῶν Ἀλκμεωνιδῶν, ἐν οἷς οἱ μέγιστοὶ τε τῶν οἴκων καὶ δοκιμώτατοι τῶν ἀνδρῶν ἦσαν, ἐλάττων λόγος· ἀνατέτραπται δὲ τῆς νίκης τὸ μέγεθος καὶ τὸ τέλος εἰς οὐδὲν ἥκει τοῦ περιβοήτου κατορθώματος, οὐδʼ ἀγών τις ἔοικεν οὐδʼ ἔργον γεγονέναι τοσοῦτον, ἀλλὰ πρόσκρουμα βραχὺ τοῖς βαρβάροις ἀποβᾶσιν, ὥσπερ οἱ διασύροντες καὶ βασκαίνοντες λέγουσιν, εἰ μετὰ τὴν μάχην οὐ φεύγουσι κόψαντες τὰ πείσματα τῶν νεῶν, τῷ φέροντι προσωτάτω τῆς Ἀττικῆς ἀνέμῳ παραδόντες αὑτοὺς· ἀλλʼ αἴρεται μὲν ἀσπὶς αὐτοῖς προδοσίας σημεῖον, ἐπιπλέουσι δὲ ταῖς Ἀθήναις ἐλπίζοντες αἱρήσειν καὶ καθʼ ἡσυχίαν Σούνιον κάμψαντες ὑπεραιωροῦνται Φαλήρων, οἱ δὲ πρῶτοι καὶ δοκιμώτατοι τῶν ἀνδρῶν προδιδόασιν ἀπεγνωκότες τὴν πόλιν· καὶ γὰρ ἀπολύων ὕστερον Ἀλκμεωνίδας ἑτέροις τὴν προδοσίαν ἀνατίθησιν ἀνεδείχθη μὲν γὰρ ἀσπίς, καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλως εἰπεῖν φησὶν αὐτὸς ἰδών. τοῦτο δʼ ἀμήχανον μὲν· ἦν γενέσθαι, νενικηκότων κατὰ κράτος τος τῶν Ἀθηναίων· γενόμενον δʼ οὐκ ἂν ὑπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων συνώφθη, φυγῇ καὶ πόνῳ, πολλῷ καὶ τραύμασι καὶ βέλεσιν εἰς τὰς ναῦς ἐλαυνομένων καὶ ἀπολιπόντων τὸ χωρίον, ὡς ἕκαστος τάχους εἶχεν. ἀλλʼ ὅταν γε πάλιν ὑπὲρ τῶν Ἀλκμεωνιδῶν ἀπολογεῖσθαι προσποιούμενος, ἃ πρῶτος ἀνθρώπων ἐπενήνοχεν ἐγκλήματα, εἴπῃ θῶμα δέ μοι καὶ οὐκ ἐνδέχομαι τὸν λόγον, Ἀλκμεωνίδας ἄν ποτε ἀναδεῖξαι Πέρσῃσι ἐκ συνθήματος ἀσπίδα, βουλομένους γε εἶναι Ἀθηναίους ὑπὸ Ἱππίῃ· κόμματός τινος ἀναμιμνήσκομαι παροιμιακοῦ μένε, καρκίνε, καί σε μεθήσω· τί γὰρ ἐσπούδακας καταλαβεῖν, εἰ καταλαβὼν μεθιέναι μέλλεις; καὶ σὺ κατηγορεῖς, εἶτʼ ἀπολογῇ· καὶ γράφεις κατʼ ἐπιφανῶν ἀνδρῶν διαβολάς, ἃς πάλιν ἀναιρεῖς, ἀπιστῶν δὲ σεαυτῷ δηλονότι· σεαυτοῦ γὰρ ἀκήκοας λέγοντος Ἀλκμεωνίδας ἀνασχεῖν ἀσπίδα νενικημένοις καὶ φεύγουσι τοῖς βαρβάροις καὶ μὴν ἐν οἷς περὶ Ἀλκμεωνιδῶν ἀπολογῇ σεαυτὸν ἀποφαίνεις συκοφάντην εἰ γάρ μᾶλλον ἢ ὁμοίως Καλλίῃ τῷ Φαινίππου, Ἱππονίκου δὲ πατρὶ, φαίνονται μισοτύραννοι ἐόντες ὡς ἐνταῦθα γράφεις Ἀλκμεωνίδαι, ποῦ θήσεις αὐτῶν ἐκείνην τὴν συνωμοσίαν, ἣν ἐν τοῖς πρώτοις γέγραφας; ὡς ἐπιγαμίαν ποιησόμενοι Πεισιστράτῳ κατήγαγον αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς φυγῆς ἐπὶ τὴν· τυραννίδα καὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐξήλασαν αὖθις, ἕως διεβλήθη παρανόμως τῇ γυναικὶ μιγνύμενος. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν τοιαύτας ἔχει ταραχάς· … τῆς Ἀλκμεωνιδῶν διαβολῆς καὶ ὑπονοίας τοῖς Καλλίου τοῦ Φαινίππου χρησάμενος ἐπαίνοις καὶ προσάψας αὐτῷ τὸν υἱὸν Ἱππόνικον, ὃς ἦν καθʼ Ἡρόδοτον ἐν τοῖς πλουσιωτάτοις Ἀθηναίων, ὡμολόγησεν, ὅτι μηδὲν τῶν πραγμάτων δεομένων,. ἀλλὰ θεραπείᾳ καὶ χάριτι τοῦ Ἱππονίκου τὸν Καλλίαν παρενέβαλεν.

[¶4] 28. Now, whereas all know that the Argives denied not to enter into the common league of the Grecians, though they thought not fit to follow and be under the command of the Lacedaemonians, who were their mortal enemies, and that this was no otherways, our author subjoins a most malicious cause for it, writing thus: “When they saw they were comprised by the Greeks, knowing that the Lacedaemonians would not admit them into a share of the command, they requested it, that they might have a pretence to lie still.” “And of this,” he says, “the Argive ambassadors afterwards put Artaxerxes in mind, when they attended him at Susa, and the King said, he esteemed no city more his friend than Argos.” Then adding, as his manner is, to cover the matter, he says: “Of these things I know nothing certainly; but this I know, that all men have faults, and that the worst things were not done by the Argives; but I must tell such things as are reported, though I am not bound to believe them all; and let this be understood of all my narrations. For it is farther said that the Argives, when they were not able to sustain the war against the Lacedaemonians, called the Persians into Greece, willing to suffer any thing rather than the present trouble.” Therefore, as himself reports the Ethiopian to have said of the ointment and purple, “Deceitful are the beauties, deceitful the garments of the Persians,” may not any one say also of him, Deceitful are the phrases, deceitful the figures of Herodotus’s speeches; as being perplexed, unsound, and full of ambiguities? For as painters set off and render more eminent the luminous part of their pictures by adding shadows, so he by his denials extends his calumnies, and by his dubious speeches makes his suspicions take deeper impression. If the Argives joined not with the other Greeks, but stood out through an emulation of the Lacedaemonians’ command and valor, it cannot be denied but that they acted in a manner not beseeming their nobility and descent from Hercules. For it had been more honorable for the Argives under the rule of Siphnians and Cythnians to have defended the Grecian liberty, than contending with the Spartans for superiority to have avoided so many and such signal combats. And if it was they who brought the Persians into Greece, because their war against the Lacedaemonians succeeded ill, how came it to pass, that they did not at the coming of Xerxes openly join themselves to the Persians? Or if they would not fight under the King, why did they not, being left at home, make incursions into Laconia, or again attempt Thyreae, or by some other way disturb and infest the Lacedaemonians? For they might have greatly damaged the Grecians, by hindering the Spartans from going with so great an army to Plataea.

> Greek: 28. ἐπεὶ δʼ Ἀργείους ἅπαντες ἴσασιν οὐκ ἀπειπαμένους τοῖς Ἕλλησι τὴν συμμαχίαν, ἀξιώσαντας ὡς ἂν μὴ Λακεδαιμονίοις, ἐχθίστοις καὶ πολεμιωτάτοις οὖσι, ποιοῦντες ἀεὶ τὸ προστασσόμενον ἕπωνται, καὶ τοῦτʼ ἄλλως οὐκ ἦν, αἰτίαν κακοηθεστάτην ὑποβάλλεται, γράφων ἐπεὶ δέ σφεας παραλαμβάνειν τοὺς Ἕλληνας, οὕτω δὴ ἐπισταμένους, ὅτι οὐ μεταδώσουσι τῆς ἀρχῆς; Λακεδαιμόνιοι, μεταιτέειν ἵνα ἐπὶ προφάσεως ἡσυχίαν ἄγωσι τούτων δʼ ὕστερον ἀναμνῆσαί φησιν Ἀρταξέρξην ἀναβάντας εἰς Σοῦσα πρέσβεις Ἀργείων, κἀκεῖνον εἰπεῖν ὡς οὐδεμίαν νομίζοι πόλιν Ἄργεος φιλιωτέρην· εἶθʼ ὑπειπών, ὥσπερ εἴωθε, καὶ ἀναδυόμενος οὐκ εἰδέναι φησὶ περὶ τούτων ἀτρεκέως, εἰδέναι δʼ ὅτι πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐστὶν ἐγκλήματα καὶ οὐκ Ἀργείοισι αἴσχιστα πεποίηται. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγειν ὀφείλω τὰ λεγόμενα, πείθεσθαί γε μὴν οὐ παντάπασι ὀφείλω, καί μοι τὸ ἔπος τοῦτο ἐχέτω ἐς πάντα τὸν λόγον. ἐπεὶ καὶ ταῦτα λέγεται, ὡς ἄρα Ἀργεῖοι ἦσαν οἱ ἐπικαλεσάμενοι τὸν Πέρσην ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα, ἐπειδή σφι πρὸς τοὺς Λακεδαιμονίους κακῶς ἡ αἰχμὴ ἑστήκεε, πᾶν δὴ βουλόμενοι σφίσι προεῖναι τῆς παρούσης λύπης. ἆρʼ οὖν οὐχ, ὅπερ αὐτὸς τὸν Αἰθίοπά φησι πρὸς τὰ μύρα καὶ τὴν πορφύραν εἰπεῖν, ὡς δολερὰ μὲν τὰ ῥήματα δολερὰ δὲ τὰ εἵματα τῶν Περσέων ἐστί, τοῦτ̓ ἄν τις εἴποι πρὸς αὐτόν, ὡς δολερὰ μὲν τὰ ῥήματα δολερὰ δὲ τὰ σχήματα τῶν Ἡροδότου λόγων ἑλικτὰ κοὐδὲν ὑγιὲς ἀλλὰ πᾶν πέριξ, ὥσπερ οἱ ζῳγράφοι τὰ λαμπρὰ τῇ σκιᾷ τρανότερα ποιοῦσιν, οὕτω ταῖς ἀρνήσεσι τὰς διαβολὰς ἐπιτείνοντος αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰς ὑπονοίας ταῖς ἀμφιβολίαις βαθυτέρας ποιοῦντος; Ἀργεῖοι δʼ ὅτι μὲν οὐ συναράμενοι τοῖς Ἕλλησιν, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὴν ἡγεμονίαν καὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς Λακεδαιμονίοις ἐκστάντες, κατῄσχυναν τὸν Ἡρακλέα καὶ τὴν εὐγένειαν, οὐδʼ ἔστιν ἀντειπεῖν, ὑπὸ Σιφνίοις γὰρ ἦν καὶ Κυθνίοις ἄμεινον ἐλευθεροῦν τεὺς Ἕλληνας ἢ Σπαρτιάταις φιλονεικοῦντας ὑπὲρ ἀρχῆς ἐγκαταλιπεῖν τοσούτους καὶ τοιούτους ἀγῶνας. εἰ δʼ αὐτοὶ ἦσαν οἱ ἐπικαλεσάμενοι τὸν Πέρσην ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα διὰ τὴν κακῶς ἑστῶσαν αὐτοῖς αἰχμὴν πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους, πῶς οὐκ ἐμήδιζον ἀναφανδὸν ἥκοντος οὐδ̓, εἰ μὴ συστρατεύειν ἐβούλοντο βασιλεῖ, τὴν γοῦν Λακωνικὴν ὑπολειπόμενοι κακῶς ἐποίουν, ἢ Θυρέας ἣπτοντο πάλιν ἢ τρόπον ἄλλον ἀντελαμβάνοντο καὶ παρηνώχλουν Λακεδαιμονίοις, μέγα βλάψαι δυνάμενοι τοὺς Ἕλληνας, εἰ μὴ παρῆκαν εἰς Πλαταιὰς ἐκείνους ἐκστρατεῦσαι τοσούτοις ὁπλίταις;

[¶5] 29. But in this place indeed he has highly magnified the Athenians and pronounced them the saviors of Greece, doing herein rightly and justly, if he had not intermixed many reproaches with their praises. But now, when he says that (had it not been for the Athenians) the Lacedaemonians would have been betrayed by the other Greeks, and then, being left alone and having performed great exploits, they would have died generously; or else, having before seen that the Greeks were favoring the Medes, they would have made terms with Xerxes; it is manifest, he speaks not these things to the commendation of the Athenians, but he praises the Athenians that he may speak ill of all the rest. For how can any one now be angry with him for so bitterly and intemperately upbraiding the Thebans and Phocians at every turn, when he charges even those who exposed themselves to all perils for Greece with a treason which was never acted, but which (as he suspects) might have been acted. Nay, of the Lacedaemonians themselves, he makes it doubtful whether they would have fallen in the battle or have yielded to the enemy, distrusting the proofs of their valor which were shown at Thermopylae; — and these indeed were slight!

> Greek: 29. ἀλλʼ Ἀθηναίους γε μεγάλους ἐνταῦθα τῷ λόγῳ πεποίηκε καὶ σωτῆρας ἀνηγόρευκε τῆς Ἑλλάδος· ὀρθῶς γε ποιῶν καὶ δικαίως, εἰ μὴ πολλὰ καὶ βλάσφημα προσῆν τοῖς ἐπαίνοις. νῦν δὲ προδοθῆναι μὲν ἂν λέγων ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων Λακεδαιμονίους, μονωθέντας δʼ ἂν καὶ ἀποδεξαμένους ἔργα μεγάλα ἀποθανεῖν γενναίως, ἢ πρὸ τούτου ὁρῶντας καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους Ἕλληνας μηδίζοντας ὁμολογίῃ ἂν χρήσασθαι πρὸς Ξέρξεα, δῆλός ἐστιν οὐ τοῦτο λέγων εἰς τὸν Ἀθηναίων ἔπαινον, ἀλλʼ Ἀθηναίων ἐπαινῶν, ἵνα κακῶς εἴπῃ τοὺς ἄλλους ἅπαντας. τί γὰρ ἄν τις ἔνι δυσχεραίνοι, Θηβαίους ἀεὶ καὶ Φωκέας πικρῶς αὐτοῦ καὶ κατακόρως ἐξονειδίζοντος, ὅπου καὶ τῶν προκινδυνευσάντων ὑπὲρ τῆς Ἑλλάδος τὴν οὐ γεγενημένην μὲν, γενομένην δʼ ἄν, ὡς αὐτὸς εἰκάζει, καταψηφίζεται προδοσίαν; αὐτοὺς δὲ Λακεδαιμονίους ἐν ἀδήλῳ θέμενος ἐπηπόρησεν, εἴτʼ ἔπεσον ἂν μαχόμενοι τοῖς πολεμίοις εἴτε παρέδωκαν ἑαυτούς, μικροῖς γε νὴ Δία τεκμηρίοις αὐτῶν ἀπιστήσας τοῖς περὶ Θερμοπύλας.

[¶6] 30. After this, when he declares the shipwreck that befell the King’s fleet, and how, an infinite mass of wealth being cast away, Aminocles the Magnesian, son of Cresines, was greatly enriched by it, having gotten an immense quantity of gold and silver; he could not so much as let this pass without snarling at it. “For this man,” says he, “who had till then been none of the most fortunate, by wrecks became exceeding rich; for the misfortune he had in killing his son much afflicted his mind.” This indeed is manifest to every one, that he brought this golden treasure and this wealth cast up by the sea into his history, that he might make way for the inserting Aminocles’s killing his son.

> Greek: 30. διηγούμενος δὲ συμπεσοῦσαν ναυαγίαν ταῖς βασιλικαῖς ναυσὶ καὶ ὅτι πολλῶν χρημάτων ἐκπεσόντων, Ἀμεινοκλῆς ὁ Κρητίνεω Μάγνης ἀνὴρ ὠφελήθη μεγάλως, χρυσία ἄφατα καὶ χρήματα περιβαλόμενος· οὐδὲ τοῦτον ἄδηκτον παρῆκεν, ἀλλʼ ὁ μὲν τἄλλα φησὶν οὐκ εὐτυχέων εὑρήμασι μέγα πλούσιος ἐγένετο ἦν γάρ τις καὶ τοῦτον ἄχαρις συμφορὴ λυπεῦσα παιδοφόνος. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν παντὶ δῆλον, ὅτι τὰ χρυσᾶ χρήματα καὶ τὰ εὑρήματα καὶ τὸν ἐκβρασσόμενον ὑπὸ τῆς θαλάσσης πλοῦτον ἐπεισήγαγε τῇ ἱστορίᾳ, χώραν καὶ τόπον ποιῶν, ἐν ᾧ θήσεται τὴν Ἀμεινοκλέους παιδοφονίαν.

[¶7] 31. Now Aristophanes the Boeotian wrote, that Herodotus demanded money of the Thebans but received none, and that going about to discourse and reason with the young men, he was prohibited by the magistrates through their clownishness and hatred of learning; of which there is no other argument. But Herodotus bears witness to Aristophanes, whilst he charges the Thebans with some things falsely, with others ignorantly, and with others as hating them and having a quarrel with them. For he affirms that the Thessalians at first upon necessity inclined to the Persians, in which he says the truth; and prophesying of the other Grecians that they would betray the Lacedaemonians, he added, that they would not do it willingly, but upon necessity, one city being taken after another. But he does not allow the Thebans the same plea of necessity, although they sent to Tempe five hundred men under the command of Mnamias, and to Thermopylae as many as Leonidas desired, who also alone with the Thespians stood by him, the rest leaving him after he was surrounded. But when the barbarian, having possessed himself of the avenues, was got into their confines, and Demaratus the Spartan, favoring in right of hospitality Attaginus, the chief of the oligarchy, had so wrought that he became the King’s friend and familiar, whilst the other Greeks were in their ships, and none came on by land; then at last being forsaken did they accept conditions of peace, to which they were compelled by great necessity. For they had neither the sea and ships at hand, as had the Athenians; nor did they dwell far off, as the Spartans, who inhabited the most remote parts of Greece; but were not above a day and half’s journey from the Persian army, whom they had already with the Spartans and Thespians alone resisted at the entrance of the straits, and were defeated. But this writer is so equitable, that having said, “The Lacedaemonians, being alone and deserted by their allies, would perhaps have made a composition with Xerxes,” he yet abuses the Thebans, who were driven to the same act by the same necessity. But when he could not wholly obliterate this most great and glorious act of the Thebans, yet went he about to deface it with a most vile imputation and suspicion, writing thus: “The confederates who had been sent returned back, obeying the commands of Leonidas; there remained only with the Lacedaemonians the Thespians and the Thebans: of these, the Thebans stayed against their wills, for Leonidas retained them as hostages; but the Thespians most willingly, as they said they would never depart from Leonidas and those that were with him.” Does he not here manifestly discover himself to have a peculiar pique and hatred against the Thebans, by the impulse of which he not only falsely and unjustly calumniated the city, but did not so much as take care to render his contradiction probable, or to conceal, at least from a few men, his being conscious of having knowingly contradicted himself? For having before said that Leonidas, perceiving his confederates not to be in good heart nor prepared to undergo danger, wished them to depart, he a little after adds that the Thebans were against their wills detained by him; whereas, if he had believed them inclined to the Persians, he should have driven them away though they had been willing to tarry. For if he thought that those who were not brisk would be useless, to what purpose was it to mix among his soldiers those that were suspected? Nor was the king of the Spartans and general of all Greece so senseless as to think that four hundred armed Thebans could be detained as hostages by his three hundred, especially the enemy being both in his front and rear. For though at first he might have taken them along with him as hostages; it is certainly probable that at last, having no regard for him, they would have gone away from him, and that Leonidas would have more feared his being encompassed by them than by the enemy. Furthermore, would not Leonidas have been ridiculous, to have sent away the other Greeks, as if by staying they should soon after have died, and to have detained the Thebans, that being himself about to die, he might keep them for the Greeks? For if he had indeed carried them along with him for hostages, or rather for slaves, he should not have kept them with those that were at the point of perishing, but have delivered them to the Greeks that went away. There remained but one cause that might be alleged for Leonidas’s unwillingness to let them go, to wit, that they might die with him; and this our historian himself has taken away, writing thus of Leonidas’s ambition: “Leonidas considering these things, and desirous that this glory might redound to the Spartans alone, sent away his confederates rather for this than because they differed in their opinions.” For it had certainly been the height of folly to keep his enemies against their wills, to be partakers of that glory from which he drove away his confederates. But it is manifest from the effects, that Leonidas suspected not the Thebans of insincerity, but esteemed them to be his steadfast friends. For he marched with his army into Thebes, and at his request obtained that which was never granted to any other, to sleep within the temple of Hercules; and the next morning he related to the Thebans the vision that had appeared to him. For he imagined that he saw the most illustrious and greatest cities of Greece irregularly tost and floating up and down on a very stormy and tempestuous sea; that Thebes, being carried above all the rest, was lifted up on high to heaven, and suddenly after disappeared. And this indeed had a resemblance of those things which long after befell that city.

> Greek: 31. Ἀριστοφάνους δὲ τοῦ Βοιωτοῦ γράψαντος, ὅτι χρήματα μὲν αἰτήσας οὐκ ἔλαβε παρὰ Θηβαίων, ἐπιχειρῶν δὲ τοῖς νέοις διαλέγεσθαι καὶ συσχολάζειν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐκωλύθη διʼ ἀγροικίαν αὐτῶν καὶ μισολογίαν, ἄλλο μὲν οὐδέν ἐστι τεκμήριον ὁ δʼ Ἡρόδοτος τῷ Ἀριστοφάνει μεμαρτύρηκε, διʼ ὧν τὰ μὲν ψευδῶς, τὰ δὲ διὰ …, τὰ δὲ ὡς μισῶν καὶ διαφερόμενος τοῖς Θηβαίοις ἐγκέκληκε; Θεσσαλοὺς μὲν γὰρ ὑπʼ ἀνάγκης ἀποφαίνεται μηδίσαι τὸ πρῶτον, ἀληθῆ λέγων· καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων μαντευόμενος ὡς προδόντων ἂν Λακεδαιμονίους. ὑπεῖπεν ὡς οὐχ ἑκόντων ἀλλʼ ὑπʼ ἀνάγκης; ἁλισκομένων κατὰ πόλεις. Θηβαίοις δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς ἀνάγκης οὐ δίδωσι τὴν αὐτὴν συγγνώμην, καίτοι πεντακοσίους μὲν εἰς τὰ Τέμπη καὶ Μναμίαν στρατηγὸν ἔπεμψαν, εἰς δὲ Θερμοπύλας ὅσους ᾔτησε Λεωνίδας· οἳ καὶ μόνοι σὺν Θεσπιεῦσι παρέμειναν αὐτῷ, τῶν ἄλλων ἀπολιπόντων μετὰ τὴν κύκλωσιν· ἐπεὶ δὲ τῶν παρόδων κρατήσας ὁ, βάρβαρος ἐν τοῖς ὅροις ἦν καὶ Δημάρατος ὁ Σπαρτιάτης διὰ ξενίας εὔνους ὢν Ἀτταγίνῳ τῷ προεστῶτι τῆς ὀλιγαρχίας διεπράξατο φίλον βασιλέως γενέσθαι καὶ ξένον, οἱ δʼ Ἕλληνες ἐν ταῖς ναυσὶν ἦσαν, πεζῇ δʼ οὐδεὶς προσήλαυνεν, οὕτω προσεδέξαντο τὰς διαλύσεις ὑπὸ τῆς μεγάλης ἀνάγκης ἐγκαταληφθέντες. οὔτε γὰρ θάλασσα καὶ νῆες αὐτοῖς παρῆσαν ὡς Ἀθηναίοις, οὔτʼ ἀπωτάτω κατῴκουν ὡς Σπαρτιᾶται τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἐν μυχῷ, μιᾶς δʼ ἡμέρας ὁδὸν καὶ ἡμισείας ἀπέχοντι τῷ Μήδῳ συστάντες ἐπὶ τῶν στενῶν καὶ διαγωνισάμενοι μετὰ μόνων Σπαρτιατῶν καὶ Θεσπιέων ἠτύχησαν. ὁ δὲ συγγραφεὺς οὕτως ἐστὶ δίκαιος, ὥστε Λακεδαιμονίους μὲν μονωθέντας καὶ γενομένους συμμάχων ἐρήμους τυχὸν ἄν φησιν ὁμολογίῃ χρήσασθαι πρὸς Ξέρξεα Θηβαίοις δὲ ταὐτὸ διὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ἀνάγκην παθοῦσι λοιδορεῖται. τὸ δὲ μέγιστον καὶ κάλλιστον ἔργον ἀνελεῖν μὴ δυνηθεὶς ὡς οὐ πραχθὲν αὐτοῖς, αἰτίῃ φαύλῃ καὶ ὑπονοίᾳ διαλυμαινόμενος ταῦτʼ ἔγραφεν οἱ μέν νυν ξύμμαχοι οἱ ἀποπεμπόμενοι ᾤχοντό τε ἀπιόντες καὶ ἐπείθοντο Λεωνίδῃ Θεσπιέες δὲ καὶ Θηβαῖοι. κατέμειναν μοῦνοι παρὰ Λακεδαιμονίοισι τούτων δὲ Θηβαῖοι μὲν ἀέκοντες ἔμενον καὶ οὐ βουλόμενοι κατεῖχε γάρ σφεας Λεωνίδης ἐν ὁμήρων λόγῳ ποιεύμενος Θεσπιέες δὲ ἑκόντες μάλιστα, οἳ οὐδαμᾶ ἔφασαν ἀπολιπόντες Λεωνίδην καὶ τοὺς μετὰ τούτου ἀπαλλάξεσθαι Εἶτʼ οὐ δῆλός ἐστιν ἰδίαν τινὰ πρὸς Θηβαίους ἔχων ὀργὴν καὶ δυσμένειαν, ὑφʼ ἧς οὐ μόνον διέβαλε ψευδῶς καὶ ἀδίκως τὴν πόλιν, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ τοῦ· πιθανοῦ τῆς διαβολῆς ἐφρόντισεν, οὐδʼ ὅπως αὐτὸς ἑαυτῷ τἀναντία λέγων παρʼ ὀλίγους ἀνθρώπους οὐ φανεῖται συνειδώς; προειπὼν γὰρ ὡς ὁ Λεωνίδης, ἐπεὶ τʼ ᾔσθετο τοὺς συμμάχους ἐόντας ἀπροθύμους καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλοντας· συγκινδυνεύειν, κελεύσαι σφέας ἀπαλλάττεσθαι· πάλιν μετʼ ὀλίγον λέγει τοὺς Θηβαίους ἄκοντας αὐτὸν κατασχεῖν, οὓς εἰκὸς ἦν ἀπελάσαι καὶ βουλομένους παραμένειν, εἰ μηδίζειν αἰτίαν εἶχον. ὅπου γὰρ οὐκ ἐδεῖτο τῶν μὴ προθύμων, τί χρήσιμον ἦν ἀναμεμίχθαι μαχομένοις ἀνθρώπους ὑπόπτους; οὐ γὰρ δὴ φρένας εἶχε τοιαύτας ὁ τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν. βασιλεὺς καὶ τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἡγεμών, ὥστε κατέχειν ἐν ὁμήρων λόγῳ τοῖς τριακοσίοις τοὺς τετρακοσίους ὅπλʼ ἔχοντας καὶ προσκειμένων ἔμπροσθεν ἤδη καὶ ὄπισθεν ἅμα τῶν πολεμίων καὶ γὰρ εἰ πρότερον ἐν ὁμήρων λόγῳ ποιούμενος ἦγεν αὐτούς, ἒν· γε τοῖς ἐσχάτοις εἰκὸς ἦν καιροῖς ἐκείνους τε Λεωνίδα μηδὲν φροντίσαντας ἀπαλλαγῆναι καὶ Λεωνίδαν δεῖσαι τὴν ὑπʼ ἐκείνων μᾶλλον ἢ τῶν βαρβάρων κύκλωσιν. ἄνευ δὲ τούτων, πῶς οὐ γελοῖος ὁ Λεωνίδας, τοὺς μὲν ἄλλους Ἕλληνας ἀπιέναι κελεύων ὡς αὐτίκα μάλα τεθνηξόμενος, Θηβαίους δὲ κωλύων, ὡς ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ φυλάττοιντο τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἀποθνήσκειν μέλλοντος; εἰ γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐν ὁμήρων λόγῳ, μᾶλλον δʼ ἀνδραπόδων, περιῆγε τοὺς ἄνδρας, οὐ κατέχειν ὤφειλεν αὐτοὺς μετὰ τῶν ἀπολουμένων, ἀλλὰ παραδοῦναι τοῖς ἀπιοῦσι τῶν Ἑλλήνων. ὃ δὲ λοιπὸν ἦν τῶν αἰτίων εἰπεῖν ἴσως δὲ ἀπολουμένους κατεῖχε καὶ τοῦτʼ ἀνῄρηκεν ὁ συγγραφεύς, οἷς περὶ τῆς φιλοτιμίας τοῦ Λεωνίδου κατὰ λέξιν εἴρηκε ταῦτα τε δὴ ἐπιλεγόμενον Λεωνίδην καὶ βουλόμενον καταθέσθαι κλέος μοῦνον Σπαρτιητέων ἀποπέμψαι τοὺς συμμάχους μᾶλλον ἢ τῇσι γνώμῃσι διενεχθέντας. ὑπερβολὴ γὰρ εὐηθείας ἦν, ἧς ἀπήλαυνε δόξης τοὺς συμμάχους κατέχειν μεθέξοντας τοὺς πολεμίους. ὅτι τοίνυν οὐ διεβέβλητο τοῖς Θηβαίοις ὁ Λεωνίδας,· ἀλλὰ καὶ φίλους ἐνόμιζε βεβαίους, ἐκ τῶν πεπραγμένων δῆλόν ἐστι. καὶ γὰρ παρῆλθεν εἰς Θήβας ἄγων τὸ στράτευμα καὶ δεηθεὶς ἔτυχεν οὗ μηδὲ εἷς ἄλλος, ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ κατακοιμηθῆναι τοῦ Ἡρακλέους, καὶ τὴν ὄψιν ἣν εἶδεν ὄναρ ἐξήγγειλε τοῖς Θηβαίοις· ἔδοξε γὰρ ἐν θαλάσσῃ πολὺν ἐχούσῃ καὶ τραχὺν κλύδωνα τὰς ἐπιφανεστάτας καὶ μεγίστας πόλεις τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀνωμάλως διαφέρεσθαι καὶ σαλεύειν, τὴν δὲ Θηβαίων ὑπερέχειν τε πασῶν καὶ μετέωρον ἀρθῆναι πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἶτʼ ἐξαίφνης ἀφανῆ γενέσθαι καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ἦν ὅμοια· τοῖς ὕστερον χρόνῳ πολλῷ συμπεσοῦσι περὶ τὴν πόλιν.

[¶8] 32. Now Herodotus, in his narration of that fight, hath obscured also the bravest act of Leonidas, saying that they all fell in the straits near the hill. But the affair was otherwise managed. For when they perceived by night that they were encompassed by the barbarians, they marched straight to the enemies’ camp, and got very near the King’s pavilion, with a resolution to kill him and leave their lives about him. They came then to his tent, killing or putting to flight all they met; but when Xerxes was not found there, seeking him in that vast camp and wandering about, they were at last with much difficulty slain by the barbarians, who surrounded them on every side. What other acts and sayings of the Spartans Herodotus has omitted, we will write in the Life of Leonidas; yet that hinders not but we may here set down also some few. Before Leonidas went forth to that war, the Spartans exhibited to him funeral games, at which the fathers and mothers of those that went along with him were spectators. Leonidas himself, when one said to him, You lead very few with you to the battle, answered, There are many to die there. When his wife, at his departure, asked him what commands he had for her; he, turning to her, said, I command you to marry good men, and bring them good children. After he was enclosed by the enemy at Thermopylae, desiring to save two that were related to him, he gave one of them a letter and sent him away; but he rejected it, saying angrily, I followed you as a soldier, not as a post. The other he commanded on a message to the magistrates of Sparta; but he, answering by his act, took his shield, and stood up in his rank. Who would not have blamed another that should have omitted these things? But he who has collected and recorded the fart of Amasis, the coming of the thiefs asses, and the giving of bottles, and many such like things, cannot seem to have omitted these gallant acts and these remarkable sayings by negligence and oversight, but as bearing ill-will and being unjust to some.

> Greek: 32. ὁ δʼ Ἡρόδοτος ἐν τῇ διηγήσει τῆς μάχης καὶ τοῦ Λεωνίδου τὴν μεγίστην ἠμαύρωκε πρᾶξιν, αὐτοῦ πεσεῖν πάντας εἰπὼν ἐν τοῖς στενοῖς περὶ τὸν Κολωνόν· ἐπράχθη δʼ ἄλλως. ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἐπύθοντο νύκτωρ τὴν περίοδον τῶν πολεμίων, ἀναστάντες ἐβάδιζον ἐπὶ τὸ στρατόπεδον καὶ τὴν σκηνὴν ὀλίγου δεῖν βασιλέως, ὡς ἐκεῖνον αὐτὸν ἀποκτενοῦντες καὶ περὶ ἐκείνῳ τεθνηξόμενοι μέχρι μὲν οὖν τῆς σκηνῆς ἀεὶ τὸν ἐμποδὼν φονεύοντες, τοὺς δʼ ἄλλους τρεπόμενοι προῆλθον· ἐπεὶ δʼ οὐχ εὑρίσκετο Ξέρξης, ζητοῦντες ἐν μεγάλῳ καὶ ἀχανεῖ στρατεύματι καὶ πλανώμενοι μόλις ὑπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων πανταχόθεν περιχυθέντων διεφθάρησαν, ὅσα δʼ ἄλλα πρὸς τούτῳ τολμήματα καὶ ῥήματα τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν παραλέλοιπεν, ἐν τῷ Λεωνίδου βίῳ γραφήσεται μικρὰ δ’ οὐ χεῖρόν ἐστι καὶ νῦν διελθεῖν. ἀγῶνα μὲν γὰρ ἐπιτάφιον αὐτῶν ἠγωνίσαντο πρὸ τῆς ἐξόδου καὶ τοῦτον ἐθεῶντο πατέρες; αὐτῶν καὶ μητέρες· αὐτὸς δʼ ὁ Λεωνίδας πρὸς μὲν τὸν εἰπόντα παντελῶς ὀλίγους ἐξάγειν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὴν μάχην πολλοὺς μὲν ἔφη τεθνηξομένους· πρὸς δὲ τὴν γυναῖκα, πυνθανομένην ἐξιόντος εἴ τι λέγοι, μεταστραφεὶς εἶπεν ἀγαθοῖς γαμεῖσθαι καὶ ἀγαθὰ τίκτειν. ἐν δὲ Θερμοπύλαις μετὰ τὴν κύκλωσιν δύο τῶν ἀπὸ γένους ὑπεξελέσθαι βουλόμενος ἐπιστολὴν ἐδίδου τῷ ἑτέρῳ καὶ ἔπεμπεν ὁ δʼ οὐκ ἐδέξατο φήσας μετʼ ὀργῆς μαχατάς τοι, οὐκ ἀγγελιαφόρος, εἱπόμαν· τὸν δʼ ἕτερον ἐκέλευεν εἰπεῖν τι πρὸς τὰ τέλη τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν ὁ δʼ ἀπεκρίνατο τῷ πράγματι, καὶ τὴν ἀσπίδα λαβὼν εἰς τάξιν κατέστη. ταῦτʼ οὐκ ἄν τις ἐπετίμησεν, ἄλλου παραλιπόντος· ὁ δὲ τὴν Ἀμάσιδος ἀποψόφησιν καὶ τὴν τῶν ὄνων τοῦ κλέπτου προσέλασιν καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀσκῶν ἐπίδοσιν καὶ πολλὰ τοιαῦτα συναγαγὼν καὶ διαμνημονεύων, οὐκ ἀμελείᾳ δόξειεν ἂν καὶ ὑπεροψίᾳ προΐεσθαι καλὰ μὲν ἔργα καλὰς δὲ φωνὰς ἀλλʼ οὐκ εὐμενὴς ὢν πρὸς ἐνίους οὐδὲ δίκαιος.

[¶9] 33. He says that the Thebans, being at the first with the Greeks, fought compelled by necessity. For belike not only Xerxes, but Leonidas also, had whipsters following his camp, by whom the Thebans were scourged and forced against their wills to fight. And what more savage libeller could be found than Herodotus, when he says that they fought upon necessity, who might have gone away and fled, and that they inclined to the Persians, whereas not one came in to help them. After this, he writes that, the rest making to the hill, the Thebans separated themselves from them, lifted up their hands to the barbarian, and coming near, cried with a most true voice, that they had favored the Persians, had given earth and water to the King, that now being forced by necessity they were come to Thermopylae, and that they were innocent of the King’s wound. Having said these things, they obtained quarter; for they had the Thessalians for witnesses of all they said. Behold, how amidst the barbarians’ exclamations, tumults of all sorts, flights and pursuits, their apology was heard, the witnesses examined; and the Thessalians, in the midst of those that were slain and trodden under foot, all being done in a very narrow passage, patronized the Thebans, to wit, because the Thebans had but a little before driven away them, who were possessed of all Greece as far as Thespiae, having conquered them in a battle, and slain their leader Lattamyas! For thus at that time stood matters between the Boeotians and the Thessalians, without any friendship or good-will. But yet how did the Thebans escape, the Thessalians helping them with their testimonies? Some of them, says he, were slain by the barbarians; many of them were by command of Xerxes marked with the royal mark, beginning with their leader Leontiades. Now the captain of the Thebans at Thermopylae was not Leontiades, but Anaxander, as both Aristophanes, out of the Commentaries of the Magistrates, and Nicander the Colophonian have taught us. Nor did any man before Herodotus know that the Thebans were stigmatized by Xerxes; for otherwise this would have been an excellent plea for them against his calumny, and this city might well have gloried in these marks, that Xerxes had punished Leonidas and Leontiades as his greatest enemies, having outraged the body of the one when he was dead, and caused the other to be tormented whilst living. But as to a man who makes the barbarian’s cruelty against Leonidas when dead a sign that he hated him most of all men when living, and yet says that the Thebans, though favoring the Persians, were stigmatized by them at Thermopylae, and having been thus stigmatized, again cheerfully took their parts at Plataea, it seems to me that such a man — like that Hippoclides who stood on his head upon a table and gesticulated with his legs — would dance away the truth and exclaim, Herodotus cares not for that.

> Greek: 33. τοὺς δὲ Θηβαίους πρῶτον μέν φησι μετὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐόντας μάχεσθαι ὑπʼ ἀνάγκης ἐχομένους· οὐ γὰρ μόνον Ξέρξης, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ Λεωνίδας μαστιγοφόρους εἶχεν ἑπομένους, ὑφʼ ὧν οἱ Θηβαῖοι παρὰ γνώμην ἠναγκάζοντο μαστιγούμενοι μάχεσθαι. καὶ τίς ἂν ὠμότερος τούτου γένοιτο συκοφάντης, ὃς μάχεσθαι μὲν ὑπʼ ἀνάγκης φησὶ τοὺς ἀπελθεῖν καὶ φεύγειν δυναμένους, μηδίσαι δʼ ἑκόντας, οἷς οὐδεὶς παρῆν βοηθῶν; ἑξῆς δὲ τούτοις γέγραφεν, ὅτι τῶν ἄλλων ἐπειγομένων ἐπὶ τὸν Κολωνὸν ἀποσχισθέντες οἱ Θηβαῖοι χεῖρὰς τε προέτεινον καὶ ἤισαν ἆσσον τῶν βαρβάρων, λέγοντες τὸν ἀληθέστατον τῶν λόγων, ὡς μηδίσειαν, καὶ γῆν τε καὶ ὕδωρ ἔδοσαν βασιλεῖ, ὑπὸ δʼ ἀνάγκης ἐχόμενοι εἰς Θερμοπύλας ἀπικέατο καὶ ἀναίτιοι εἶεν τοῦ τρώματος τοῦ γενομένου βασιλεῖ· ταῦτα λέγοντες περιεγένοντο· εἶχον γὰρ καὶ Θεσσαλοὺς τούτων τῶν λόγων μάρτυρας. ὅρα διὰ τοσούτων ἐν βαρβάροις κραυγαῖς καὶ παμμιγέσι θορύβοις καὶ φυγαῖς καὶ διώξεσιν ἀκουομένην δικαιολογίαν καὶ μαρτύρων ἀνάκρισιν καὶ Θεσσαλοὺς μεταξὺ τῶν φονευομένων καὶ πατουμένων ὑπʼ ἀλλήλων παρὰ τὰ στενὰ Θηβαίοις συνδικοῦντας, ὅτι τῆς Ἑλλάδος αὐτοὺς κρατοῦντας ἄχρι Θεσπιέων ἔναγχος ἐξήλασαν περιγενόμενοι καὶ τὸν ἄρχοντα Λατταμύαν ἀποκτείναντες. ταῦτα γὰρ ὑπῆρχε Βοιωτοῖς τότε καὶ Θετταλοῖς πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἐπιεικὲς δὲ καὶ φιλάνθρωπον οὐδέν. ἀλλὰ δὴ τῶν Θεσσαλῶν μαρτυρούντων, πῶς περιεγένοντο Θηβαῖοι; τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν ἀπέκτειναν οἱ βάρβαροι προσιόντας ὡς αὐτὸς εἴρηκε· τοὺς δὲ πλεῦνας, κελεύσαντος Ξέρξεω, ἔστιξαν στίγματα βασιλήια, ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τοῦ στρατηγοῦ Λεοντιάδεω. οὔτε Λεοντιάδης ἐν Θερμοπύλαις ἦν στρατηγός, ἀλλʼ Ἀνάξανδρος, ὡς Ἀριστοφάνης ἐκ τῶν κατʼ ἄρχοντας ὑπομνημάτων ἱστόρησε καὶ Νίκανδρος ὁ Κολοφώνιος· οὔτε γιγνώσκει τις ἀνθρώπων πρὸ Ἡροδότου στιχθέντας ὑπὸ Ξέρξου Θηβαίους ἐπεὶ μέγιστον ἦν ἀπολόγημα τῆς διαβολῆς καὶ καλῶς εἶχε τὴν πόλιν ἀγάλλεσθαι τοῖς στίγμασιν ἐκείνοις, ὡς Ξέρξου δικάσαντος ἐχθίστοις χρήσασθαι Λεωνίδῃ καὶ Λεοντιάδῃ· τοῦ μὲν γὰρ ᾐκίσατο πεπτωκότος τὸ σῶμα, τοῦ δὲ ζῶντος ἔστιξεν. ὁ δὲ τὴν μὲν εἰς Λεωνίδαν ὡμότητα δήλωμα ποιούμενος, ὅτι μάλιστα δὴ ἀνδρῶν ὁ βάρβαρος ἐθυμώθη ζῶντι Λεωνίδῃ, Θηβαίους δὲ καὶ μηδίζοντας λέγων ἐν Θερμοπύλαις στιχθῆναι καὶ στιχθέντας αὖθις ἐν Πλαταιαῖς μηδίζειν προθύμως δοκεῖ μοι, καθάπερ Ἱπποκλείδης ὁ τοῖς σκέλεσι χειρονομῶν ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης, εἰπεῖν ἂν ἐξορχούμενος τὴν ἀλήθειαν οὐ φροντὶς Ἡροδότῳ.

[¶10] 34. In the Eighth Book our author says, that the Greeks being frighted designed to fly from Artemisium into Greece, and that, being requested by the Euboeans to stay a little till they could dispose of their wives and families, they regarded them not, till such time as Themistocles, having taken money of them, divided it between Eurybiades and Adimantus, the captain of the Corinthians, and that then they stayed and had a sea-fight with the barbarians. Yet Pindar, who was not a citizen of any of the confederate cities, but of one that was suspected to take part with the Medians, having made mention of Artemisium, brake forth into this exclamation: “This is the place where the sons of the Athenians laid the glorious foundation of liberty.” But Herodotus, by whom, as some will have it, Greece is honored, makes that victory a work of bribery and theft, saying that the Greeks, deceived by their captains, who had to that end taken money, fought against their wills. Nor does he here put an end to his malice. All men in a manner confess that, although the Greeks got the better at sea, they nevertheless abandoned Artemisium to the barbarians after they had received the news of the overthrow at Thermopylae. For it was to no purpose for them to stay there and keep the sea, the war being already within Thermopylae, and Xerxes having possessed himself of the avenues. But Herodotus makes the Greeks contriving to fly before they heard any thing of Leonidas’s death. For thus he says: “But they having been ill-treated, and especially the Athenians, half of whose ships were sorely shattered, consulted to take their flight into Greece.” But let him be permitted so to name (or rather reproach) this retreat of theirs before the fight; but having before called it a flight, he both now styles it a flight, and will again a little after term it a flight; so bitterly does he adhere to this word “flight.” “Presently after this,” says he, “there came to the barbarians in the pinnace a man of Hestiaea, who acquainted them with the flight of the Grecians from Artemisium. They, because the thing seemed incredible, kept the messenger in custody, and sent forth some light galleys to discover the truth.” But what is this you say? That they fled as conquered, whom the enemies after the fight could not believe to have fled, as having got much the better? Is then this a fellow fit to be believed when he writes of any man or city, who in one word deprives Greece of the victory, throws down the trophy, and pronounces the inscriptions they had set up to Diana Proseoa (Eastward-looking) to be nothing but pride and vain boasting? The tenor of the inscription was as follows:
When Athens youth had in a naval fight
All Asia’s forces on this sea overthrown,
And all the Persian army put to flight,
Than which a greater scarce was ever known,
To show how much Diana they respected,
This trophy to her honor they erected.
Moreover, not having described any order of the Greeks, nor told us what place every city of theirs held during the sea-fight, he says that in this retreat, which he calls their flight, the Corinthians sailed first and the Athenians last.

> Greek: 34. ἐν δὲ τῇ ὀγδόῃ τοὺς Ἕλληνάς φησι καταδειλιάσαντας ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἀρτεμισίου δρησμὸν βουλεύεσθαι ἔσω εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα, καὶ τῶν Εὐβοέων δεομένων ὀλίγον ἐπιμεῖναι χρόνον, ὅπως ὑπεκθοῖντο γενεὰς καὶ τὸ οἰκετικόν, ὀλιγωρεῖν, ἄχρι οὗ Θεμιστοκλῆς ἀργύριον λαβὼν Εὐρυβιάδῃ τε μετέδωκε καὶ Ἀδειμάντῳ τῷ Κορινθίων στρατηγῷ·, τότε δὲ μεῖναι καὶ διαναυμαχῆσαι πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους ὁ μὲν Πίνδαρος οὐκ ὢν συμμάχου πόλεως ἀλλὰ μηδίζειν αἰτίαν ἐχούσης, ὅμως τοῦ Ἀρτεμισίου μνησθεὶς ἐπιπεφώνηκεν
ὅθι παῖδες Ἀθαναίων ἐβάλοντο φαεννὰν
κρηπῖδʼ ἐλευθερίας
Ἡρόδοτος δέ, ὑφʼ οὗ κεκοσμῆσθαί τινες ἀξιοῦσι τὴν Ἑλλάδα, δωροδοκίας καὶ κλοπῆς ἔργον ἀποφαίνει τὴν νίκην ἐκείνην γενομένην καὶ τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἀκουσίως ἀγωνισαμένους, ὑπὸ τῶν στρατηγῶν ἐξαπατηθέντας ἀργύριον λαβόντων. καὶ τοῦτο πέρας οὐ γέγονεν αὐτῷ τῆς κακοηθείας· ἀλλὰ πάντες μὲν ἄνθρωποι σχεδὸν ὁμολογοῦσι ταῖς ναυμαχίαις αὐτόθι κρατοῦντας τοὺς Ἕλληνας ὅμως ὑφέσθαι τοῦ Ἀρτεμισίου τοῖς βαρβάροις, τὰ περὶ Θερμοπύλας ἀκούσαντας· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἦν ὄφελος ἐνταῦθα καθημένους φρουρεῖν τὴν θάλασσαν, ἐντὸς Πυλῶν τοῦ πολέμου γεγονότος καὶ Ξέρξου τῶν παρόδων κρατοῦντος. Ἡρόδοτος δέ, πρὶν ἀπαγγελῆναι τὸν Λεωνίδου θάνατον, ἤδη ποιεῖ τοὺς Ἕλληνας βουλευομένους ἀποδιδράσκειν· λέγει δʼ οὕτω τρηχέως δὲ περιεφθέντες, καὶ οὐχ ἣκιστα Ἀθηναῖοι, τῶν αἱ ἡμίσειαι τῶν νεῶν τετρωμέναι ἦσαν, δρησμὸν ἐβούλευον εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα καίτοι τὴν πρὸ τοῦ ἀγῶνος ἀναχώρησιν οὕτως ὀνομάσαι μᾶλλον δʼ ὀνειδίσαι δεδόσθω· ὁ δὲ καὶ πρότερον δρασμὸν εἶπεν καὶ νῦν δρασμὸν ὀνομάζει καὶ μετʼ ὀλίγον πάλιν ἐρεῖ δρασμόν· οὕτω πικρῶς; τῷ ῥήματι προσπέφυκε. τοῖς βαρβάροισι αὐτίκα μετὰ ταῦτα πλοίῳ ἦλθε ἀνὴρ Ἑστιαιεύς, ἀγγέλλων τὸν δρησμὸν τὸν ἀπʼ Ἀρτεμισίου τῶν Ἑλλήνων οἱ δὲ ὑπὸ ἀπιστίης τὸν μὲν ἀγγέλλοντα εἶχον ἐν φυλακῇ, νέας δὲ ταχείας ἀπέστειλαν προκατοψομένας. τί σὺ λέγεις; ἀποδιδράσκειν ὡς κεκρατημένους, οὓς οἱ πολέμιοι μετὰ τὴν μάχην ἀπιστοῦσι φεύγειν ὡς πολὺ κρατοῦντας; εἶτα πιστεύειν ἄξιον τούτῳ γράφοντι περὶ ἀνδρὸς ἢ πόλεως μιᾶς, ὃς ἑνὶ ῥήματι τὸ νίκημα τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἀφαιρεῖται καὶ τὸ τρόπαιον καθαιρεῖ καὶ τὰς ἐπιγραφάς, ἃς ἔθεντο παρὰ τῇ Ἀρτέμιδι τῇ Προσηῴᾳ, κόμπον ἀποφαίνει καὶ ἀλαζονείαν; ἔχει δʼ οὕτω τοὐπίγραμμα
παντοδαπῶν ἀνδρῶν γενεὰς Ἀσίας ἀπὸ χώρας
παῖδες Ἀθηναίων τῷδέ ποτʼ ἐν πελάγει
ναυμαχίᾳ δαμάσαντες, ἐπεὶ στρατὸς ὤλετο Μήδων,
σήματα ταῦτʼ ἔθεσαν παρθένῳ Ἀρτέμιδι.
ἐν μὲν οὖν ταῖς μάχαις οὐκ ἔταξε τοὺς Ἕλληνας οὐδʼ ἐδήλωσεν ἣν ἑκάστη πόλις ἔχουσα χώραν ἐναυμάχησε, κατὰ δὲ τὸν ἀπόπλουν, ὃν αὐτὸς δρασμὸν προσαγορεύει, πρώτους φησὶ Κορινθίους πλεῖν ὑστάτους δʼ Ἀθηναίους.

## 3. Sections 35–43

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/3/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/plutarch-malice-of-herodotus/3/#p-N

[¶0] 35. He indeed ought not to have too much insulted over the Greeks that took part with the Persians, who, being by others thought a Thurian, reckons himself among the Halicarnassians, who, being Dorians by descent, went with their wives and children to the war against the Greeks. But he is so far from giving first an account of the straits they were in who revolted to the Persians, that, having related how the Thessalians sent to the Phocians, who were their mortal enemies, and promised to preserve their country free from all damage if they might receive from them a reward of fifty talents, he writ thus of the Phocians: “For the Phocians were the only people in these quarters who inclined not to the Persians, and that, as far as I upon due consideration can find, for no other reason but because they hated the Thessalians; for if the Thessalians had been affected to the Grecian affairs, I suppose the Phocians would have joined themselves to the Persians.” And yet a little after he will say, that thirteen cities of the Phocians were burned by the barbarians, their country laid waste, and the temple which was in Abae set on fire, and all of both sexes put to the sword, except those that by flight escaped to Parnassus. Nevertheless, he puts those who suffered all extremities rather than lose their honesty in the same rank with those who most affectionately sided with the Persians. And when he could not blame the Phocians’ actions, he sat at his desk devising false causes and framing suspicions against them, and bidding us judge them not by what they did, but by what they would have done if the Thessalians had not taken the same side, as if they had been shut out from treason because they found the place already occupied by others! Now if any one, going about to excuse the revolt of the Thessalians to the Persians, should say that they would not have done it but for the hatred they bare the Phocians, — whom when they saw joined to the Greeks, they against their inclinations followed the party of the Persians, — would not such a one be thought most shamefully to flatter, and for the sake of others to pervert the truth, by feigning good causes for evil actions? Indeed, I think, he would. Why then would not he be thought openly to calumniate, who says that the Phocians chose the best, not for the love of virtue, but because they saw the Thessalians on the contrary side? For neither does he refer this device to other authors, as he is elsewhere wont to do, but says that himself found it out by conjecture. He should therefore have produced certain arguments, by which he was persuaded that they, who did things like the best, followed the same counsels with the worst. For what he alleges of their enmities is ridiculous. For neither did the difference between the Aeginetans and the Athenians, nor that between the Chalcidians and the Eretrians, nor yet that between the Corinthians and the Megarians, hinder them from fighting together for Greece. Nor did the Macedonians, their most bitter enemies, divert the Thessalians from their friendship with the barbarians, by joining the Persian party themselves. For the common danger did so bury their private grudges, that banishing their other passions, they applied their minds either to honesty for the sake of virtue, or to profit through the impulse of necessity. And indeed, after that necessity which compelled them to obey the Persians was over, they returned again to the Greeks, as Lacrates the Spartan has openly testified of them. And Herodotus, as constrained to it, in his relation of the affairs at Plataea, confessed that the Phocians took part with the Greeks.

> Greek: 35. ἔδει μὲν οὖν μηδὲ τοῖς μηδίσασιν Ἑλλήνων ἄγαν ἐπεμβαίνειν, καὶ ταῦτα Θούριον μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν ἄλλων νομιζόμενον αὐτὸν δὲ Ἁλικαρνασέων περιεχόμενον, οἳ Δωριεῖς ὄντες μετὰ τῆς γυναικωνίτιδος ἐπὶ τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἐστράτευσαν ὁ δὲ τοσοῦτον ἀποδεῖ τοῦ πραότερον ὀνομάζειν τὰς τῶν μηδι σάντων ἀνάγκας, ὥστε περὶ Θετταλῶν διηγησάμενος, ὅτι Φωκεῦσιν, ἐχθροῖς καὶ πολεμίοις οὖσι, προσέπεμψαν, ἐπαγγελλόμενοι τὴν χώραν, αὐτῶν ἀβλαβῆ διαφυλάξειν, εἰ πεντήκοντα τάλαντα μισθὸν λάβοιεν, ταῦτα περὶ Φωκέων γέγραφεν αὐτοῖς ὀνόμασιν οἱ γὰρ Φωκεῖς μοῦνοι τῶν ταύτῃ ἀνθρώπων οὐκ ἐμήδιζον, κατʼ ἄλλο μὲν οὐδέν, ὡς ἐγὼ συμβαλλόμενος εὑρίσκω, κατὰ δὲ τὸ ἔχθος τὸ Θεσσαλῶν εἰ δὲ Θεσσαλοὶ τὰ Ἑλλήνων ηὖξον, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, ἐμήδιζον ἂν οἱ Φωκεῖς. καίτοι μετὰ μικρὸν αὐτὸς ἐρεῖ τρισκαίδεκα πόλεις τῶν Φωκέων ὑπὸ τοῦ βαρβάρου κατακεκαῦσθαι, διεφθάρθαι τὴν χώραν, ἐμπεπρῆσθαι τὸ ἐν Ἄβαις ἱερόν, ἄνδρας ἀπολωλέναι καὶ γυναῖκας, ὅσοι μὴ διαφυγόντες ἔφθησαν εἰς τὸν Παρνασόν. ἀλλʼ ὅμως τοὺς τὰ ἔσχατα παθεῖν ἐπὶ τῷ μὴ προέσθαι τὸ καλὸν ὑπομείναντας εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν ἔθετο κακίαν τοῖς προθυμότατα μηδίσασι καὶ τὰ ἔργα τῶν ἀνδρῶν ψέξαι μὴ δυνηθεὶς αἰτίας ἐκάθητο φαύλας καὶ ὑπονοίας ἐπὶ τοῦ γραφείου συντιθεὶς κατʼ αὐτῶν καὶ κελεύων οὐκ ἀφʼ ὧν ἔπραξαν,, ἀλλʼ ἀφʼ ὧν ἔπραξαν ἄν, εἰ μὴ ταῦτα Θεσσαλοῖς ἔδοξε, κρίνεσθαι τὴν διάνοιαν αὐτῶν, ὥσπερ χώρας ἀντειλημμένης ὑφʼ ἑτέρων τῆς προδοσίας ἀπολειφθέντας. εἰ τοίνυν Θεσσαλούς τις ἐπιχειρεῖ τοῦ μηδισμοῦ παραιτεῖσθαι, λέγων ὡς οὐ ταῦτʼ ἐβούλοντο, τῇ δὲ πρὸς Φωκέας διαφορᾷ τοῖς Ἕλλησι προστιθεμένους ὁρῶντες αὐτοὶ παρὰ γνώμην ἐμήδισαν, ἆρʼ οὐκ ἂν αἴσχιστα κολακεύειν ἔδοξε καὶ πρὸς ἑτέρων χάριν αἰτίας χρηστὰς ἐπὶ πράγμασι φαύλοις πορίζων διαστρέφειν τὴν ἀλήθειαν; ἐγὼ μὲν οἶμαι. πῶς οὖν οὐ περιφανέστατα δόξει συκοφαντεῖν ὁ μὴ διʼ ἀρετὴν τὰ βέλτιστα Φωκεῖς ἑλμένους ἀποφαινόμενος, ἀλλʼ ὅτι τἀναντία Θεσσαλοὺς ἔγνωσαν φρονοῦντας; οὐδὲ γὰρ εἰς ἑτέρους, ὥσπερ εἴωθεν, ἀνάγει τὴν διαβολὴν ἀκηκοέναι λέγων ἀλλʼ αὐτὸς εὑρίσκειν συμβαλλόμενος. εἰπεῖν οὖν ἔδει τὰ τεκμήρια, διʼ ὧν ἐπείσθη τοὺς ὅμοια πράττοντας τοῖς ἀρίστοις ταὐτὰ τοῖς φαυλοτάτοις διανοηθῆναι· τὸ γὰρ τῆς ἔχθρας γελοῖόν ἐστιν· οὔτε γὰρ Αἰγινήτας ἐκώλυσεν ἡ πρὸς Ἀθηναίους διαφορὰ καὶ Χαλκιδεῖς ἡ πρὸς Ἐρετριέας καὶ Κορινθίους ἡ πρὸς Μεγαρέας τῇ Ἑλλάδι συμμαχεῖν οὐδʼ αὖ πάλιν Θεσσαλοὺς μηδίζοντες οἱ πολεμιώτατοι Μακεδόνες τῆς πρὸς τὸν βάρβαρον φιλίας ἀπέστρεψαν τὰς γὰρ ἰδίας ἀπεχθείας ὁ κοινὸς ἀπέκρυψε κίνδυνος, ὥστε τῶν ἄλλων παθῶν ἐκπεσόντας ἢ τῷ καλῷ διʼ ἀρετὴν ἢ τῷ συμφέροντι διʼ ἀνάγκην προστίθεσθαι τὴν γνώμην. οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάγκην ἐκείνην, κατελήφθησαν ὑπὸ Μήδοις γενέσθαι, πάλιν μετεβάλοντο πρὸς τοὺς Ἕλληνας οἱ ἄνδρες, καὶ Λακράτης μὲν αὐτοῖς ὁ Σπαρτιάτης ἄντικρυς ἐμαρτύρησεν· αὐτὸς δʼ ὁ Ἡρόδοτος ὥσπερ ἐκβιασθεὶς ἐν τοῖς Πλαταιικοῖς ὁμολογεῖ καὶ Φωκέας παραγενέσθαι τοῖς Ἕλλησιν.

[¶1] 36. Neither ought it to seem strange to any, if he thus bitterly inveighs against the unfortunate; since he reckons amongst enemies and traitors those who were present at the engagement, and together with the other Greeks hazarded their safety. For the Naxians, says he, sent three ships to the assistance of the barbarians; but Democritus, one of their captains, persuaded the others to take the party of the Greeks. So unable he is to praise without dispraising, that if he commends one man he must condemn a whole city or people. But in this there give testimony against him, of the more ancient writers Hellanicus, and of the later Ephorus, one of which says that the Naxians came with six ships to aid the Greeks, and the other with five. And Herodotus convinces himself of having feigned these things. For the writers of the Naxian annals say, that they had before beaten back Megabates, who came to their island with two hundred ships, and after that had put to flight the general Datis, who had set their city on fire. Now if, as Herodotus has elsewhere said, the barbarians burned their city so that the men were glad to save themselves by flying into the mountains, most surely had they just cause rather to send aid to the destroyers of their country than to help the protectors of the common liberty. But that he framed this lie not so much to honor Democritus, as to cast infamy on the Naxians, is manifest from his omitting and wholly passing over in silence the valiant acts then performed by Democritus, of which Simonides gives us an account in this epigram:
When as the Greeks at sea the Medes did meet,
And had near Salamis a naval fight,
Democritus as third led up the fleet,
Charging the enemy with all his might;
He took five of their ships, and did another,
Which they had taken from the Greeks, recover.

> Greek: 36. οὐ δεῖ δὲ θαυμάζειν, εἰ τοῖς ἀτυχήσασιν ἔγκειται πικρῶς, ὅπου καὶ τοὺς παραγενομένους καὶ συγκινδυνεύσαντας εἰς τὴν τῶν πολεμίων μερίδα καὶ προδοτῶν μετατίθησι. Νάξιοι γὰρ τρεῖς ἔπεμψαν τριήρεις συμμάχους τοῖς βαρβάροις, εἷς δὲ τῶν τριηράρχων Δημόκριτος ἔπεισε τοὺς ἄλλους ἑλέσθαι τὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων οὕτως; οὐδʼ ἐπαινεῖν ἄνευ τοῦ ψέγειν οἶδεν, ἀλλʼ ἵνʼ εἷς ἀνὴρ ἐγκωμιασθῇ, πόλιν ὅλην δεῖ κακῶς ἀκοῦσαι καὶ δῆμον. ἀντιμαρτυρεῖ δʼ αὐτῷ τῶν μὲν πρεσβυτέρων Ἑλλάνικος τῶν δὲ νεωτέρων Ἔφορος, ὁ μὲν ἓξ ὁ δὲ πέντε ναυσὶ τοὺς Ναξίους ἐλθεῖν τοῖς Ἕλλησι βοηθοῦντας ἱστορήσας. αὐτὸς δὲ καὶ παντάπασιν ἑαυτὸν ὁ Ἡρόδοτος ἐξελέγχει ταῦτα πλαττόμενον. οἱ μὲν γὰρ Ναξίων ὡρογράφοι λέγουσι καὶ πρότερον Μεγαβάτην ἀπώσασθαι ναυσὶ διακοσίαις ἐπιπλεύσαντα τῇ νήσῳ, καὶ Δᾶτιν αὖθις τὸν στρατηγὸν ἐξελάσαι καταπλεύσαντα πλοίοις ἑκατόν, εἰ δέ, ὡς Ἡρόδοτος εἴρηκεν ἀλλαχόθι, τὴν μὲν πόλιν αὐτῶν ἐμπρήσαντες διέφθειραν, οἱ δʼ ἄνθρωποι καταφυγόντες εἰς τὰ ὄρη διεσώθησαν, ἦπου καλὴν αἰτίαν εἶχον τοῖς ἀπολέσασι τὴν πατρίδα πέμπειν βοήθειαν, ἀλλὰ μὴ τοῖς ἀμυνομένοις ὑπὲρ τῆς κοινῆς ἐλευθερίας ἀμύνειν. ὅτι δʼ οὐκ ἐπαινέσαι βουληθεὶς Δημόκριτον, ἀλλʼ ἐπʼ αἰσχύνῃ Ναξίων συνέθηκε τὸ ψεῦδος, δῆλός ἐστι τῷ παραλιπεῖν ὅλως καὶ παρασιωπῆσαι τὸ Δημοκρίτου κατόρθωμα καὶ τὴν ἀριστείαν, ἣν ἐπιγράμματι, Σιμωνίδης ἐδήλωσε
Δημόκριτος τρίτος ἦρξε μάχης, ὅτε πὰρ Σαλαμῖνα
Ἕλληνες Μήδοις σύμβαλον ἐν πελάγει
πέντε δὲ νῆας ἕλεν δηίων, ἕκτην δʼ ὑπὸ χεῖρα
ῥύσατο βαρβαρικὴν Δωρίδʼ ἁλισκομένην.

[¶2] 37. But why should any one be angry with him about the Naxians? If we have, as some say, antipodes inhabiting the other hemisphere, I believe that they also have heard of Themistocles and his counsel, which he gave to the Greeks, to fight a naval battle before Salamis, after which, the barbarian being overcome, he built in Melite a temple to Diana the Counsellor. This gentle writer, endeavoring, as much as in him lies, to deprive Themistocles of the glory of this, and transfer it to another, writes thus word for word: “Whilst things were thus, Mnesiphilus, an Athenian, asked Themistocles, as he was going aboard his ship, what had been resolved on in council. And being answered, that it was decreed the ships should be brought back to Isthmus, and a battle fought at sea before Peloponnesus; he said, If then they remove the navy from Salamis, you will no longer be fighting for one country; for they will return every one to his own city. Wherefore, if there be any way left, go and endeavor to break this resolution; and, if it be possible, persuade Eurybiades to change his mind and stay here.” Then adding that this advice pleased Themistocles, who, without making any reply, went straight to Eurybiades, he has these very expressions: “And sitting by him he related what he had heard from Mnesiphilus, feigning as if it came from himself, and adding other things.” You see how he accuses Themistocles of disingenuity in arrogating to himself the counsel of Mnesiphilus.

> Greek: 37. ἀλλὰ τί ἄν τις ἀγανακτοίη περὶ Ναξίων; εἰ γάρ εἰσιν ἀντίποδες ἡμῶν, ὥσπερ ἔνιοι λέγουσι, τῆς γῆς τὰ κάτω περιοικοῦντες, οἶμαι μηδʼ ἐκείνους ἀνηκόους εἶναι Θεμιστοκλέους καὶ τοῦ Θεμιστοκλέους βουλεύματος, ὃ βουλεύσας τῇ Ἑλλάδι ναυμαχῆσαι πρὸ τῆς Σαλαμῖνος ἱδρύσατο ναὸν Ἀριστοβούλης Ἀρτέμιδος ἐν Μελίτῃ, τοῦ βαρβάρου καταπολεμηθέντος. τοῦτο μὲν τοῦ Θεμιστοκλέους ὁ χαρίεις συγγραφεὺς ὅσον ἐφʼ ἑαυτῷ παραιρούμενος καὶ τὴν δόξαν εἰς ἕτερον μεταφέρων ταυτὶ γράφει κατὰ λέξιν ἐνταῦθα δὴ Θεμιστοκλέα ἀφικόμενον ἐπὶ τὴν νέα εἴρετο Μνησίφιλος ἀνὴρ Ἀθηναῖος, ὃ τι σφι εἴη βεβουλευμένον πυθόμενος δὲ πρὸς αὐτοῦ, ὡς εἴη δεδογμένον ἀνάγειν τὰς νέας πρὸς τὸν Ἰσθμὸν καὶ πρὸ τῆς Πελοποννήσου ναυμαχέειν, εἶπε οὐκ ἄρα, ἢν ἀπαίρωσι τὰς νέας ἀπὸ Σαλαμῖνος, οὐδὲ περὶ μιῆς ἔτι πατρίδος ναυμαχήσεις· κατὰ γὰρ πόλεις ἕκαστοι τρέψονται. καὶ μετʼ ὀλίγον ἀλλὰ εἴ τις ἔστι μηχανή, ἴθι τε καὶ πειρῶ διαχέαι τὰ βεβουλευμένα, ἤν κως δύνῃ ἀναγνῶσαι Εὐρυβιάδεα μεταβουλεύσασθαι ὥστε αὐτοῦ μενεῖν εὖθʼ ὑπειπὼν ὅτι κάρτα τῷ Θεμιστοκλεῖ ἤρεσε ἡ ὑποθήκη, καὶ οὐδὲν πρὸς ταῦτα ἀμειψάμενος ἀφίκετο πρὸς τὸν Εὐρυβιάδην πάλιν αὐταῖς λέξεσι γέγραφεν ἐνταῦθα δὲ Θεμιστοκλῆς παριζόμενὸς οἱ καταλέγει κεῖνά τε πάντα ἃ ἤκουσε Μνησιφίλου ἑωυτοῦ ποιεύμενος, καὶ ἄλλα προστιθείς. ὁρᾷς ὅτι κακοηθείας προστρίβεται τἀνδρὶ δόξαν, ἴδιον αὐτοῦ βούλευμα ποιεῖσθαι τὸ τοῦ Μνησιφίλου λέγων;

[¶3] 38. And deriding the Greeks still further, he says, that Themistocles, who was called another Ulysses for his wisdom, was so blind that he could not foresee what was fit to be done; but that Artemisia, who was of the same city with Herodotus, without being taught by any one, but by her own consideration, said thus to Xerxes: “The Greeks will not long be able to hold out against you, but you will scatter them, and they will flee to their own cities; nor is it probable, if you march your army by land to Peloponnesus, that they will sit still, or take care to fight at sea for the Athenians. But if you make haste to give them a naval battle, I fear lest your fleets receiving damage may prove also very prejudicial to your land-forces.” Certainly Herodotus wanted nothing but verses to make Artemisia another Sibyl, so exactly prophesying of things to come. Therefore Xerxes also delivered his sons to her to be carried to Ephesus; for he had (it seems) forgot to bring women with him from Susa, if indeed the boys wanted a train of female attendants.

> Greek: 38. ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον τῶν Ἑλλήνων καταγελῶν Θεμιστοκλέα μὲν οὔτε φησὶ φρονῆσαι τὸ συμφέρον ἀλλὰ παριδεῖν, ὃς Ὀδυσσεὺς ἐπωνομάσθη διὰ τὴν φρόνησιν Ἀρτεμισίαν δὲ τὴν Ἡροδότου πολῖτιν, μηδενὸς διδάξαντος, αὐτὴν ἀφʼ ἑαυτῆς ἐπινοήσασαν Ξέρξῃ προειπεῖν, ὡς οὐχ οἷοί τε πολλὸν χρόνον ἔσονταί τοι ἀντέχειν οἱ Ἕλληνες, ἀλλά σφεας διασκεδᾷς, κατὰ πόλεις δὲ ἕκαστοι φεύξονται καὶ οὐκ εἰκὸς αὐτούς, ἢν σὺ ἐπὶ τὴν Πελοπόννησον ἐλαύνῃς τὸν πεζὸν στρατόν, ἀτρεμήσειν, οὐδέ σφι μελήσειν πρὸ τῶν Ἀθηνέων ναυμαχέειν ἢν δὲ αὐτίκα ἐπειχθῇς ναυμαχῆσαι, δειμαίνω μὴ ὁ ναυτικὸς στρατὸς κακωθεὶς καὶ τὸν πεζὸν προσδηλήσηται ταῦτα μὲν οὖν μέτρων ἐνδεῖ τῷ Ἡροδότῳ, Σίβυλλαν ἀποφῆναι τὴν Ἀρτεμισίαν τὰ μέλλοντα προθεσπίζουσαν οὕτως ἀκριβῶς. διὸ καὶ Ξέρξης αὐτῇ παρέδωκε τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ παῖδας ἀπάγειν εἰς Ἔφεσον· ἐπελέληστο γὰρ ἐκ Σούσων, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἄγειν γυναῖκας, εἰ γυναικείας ἐδέοντο παραπομπῆς οἱ παῖδες.

[¶4] 39. But it is not our design to search into the lies of Herodotus; we only make enquiry into those which he invented to detract from the glory of others. He says: “It is reported by the Athenians that Adimantus, captain of the Corinthians, when the enemies were now ready to join battle, was struck with such fear and astonishment that he fled; not thrusting his ship backward by the stern, or leisurely retreating through those that were engaged, but openly hoisting up his sails, and turning the heads of all his vessels. And about the farther part of the Salaminian coast, he was met by a pinnace, out of which one spake thus to him: Thou indeed, Adimantus, fliest, having betrayed the Grecians; yet they overcome, and according to their desires have the better of their enemies.” This pinnace was certainly let down from heaven. For what should hinder him from erecting a tragical machine, who by his boasting excelled the tragedians in all other things? Adimantus then crediting him (he adds) “returned to the fleet, when the business was already done.” “This report,” says he, “is believed by the Athenians; but the Corinthians deny it, and say, they were the first at the sea-fight, for which they have the testimony of all the other Greeks.” Such is this man in many other places. He spreads different calumnies and accusations of different men, that he may not fail of making some one appear altogether wicked. And it has succeeded well with him in this place; for if the calumny is believed, the Corinthians — if it is not, the Athenians — are rendered infamous. But in truth the Athenians did not belie the Corinthians, but he hath belied them both. Certainly Thucydides, bringing in an Athenian ambassador contesting with a Corinthian at Sparta, and gloriously boasting of many things about the Persian war and the sea-fight at Salamis, charges not the Corinthians with any crime of treachery or leaving their station. Nor was it likely the Athenians should object any such thing against Corinth, when they saw her engraven in the third place after the Lacedaemonians and themselves on those spoils which, being taken from the barbarians, were consecrated to the Gods. And in Salamis they had permitted them to bury the dead near the city, as being men who had behaved themselves gallantly, and to write over them this elegy:
Well-watered Corinth, stranger, was our home;
Salamis, Ajax’s isle, is now our grave;
Here Medes and Persians and Phoenician ships
We fought and routed, sacred Greece to save.
And their honorary sepulchre at the Isthmus has on it this epitaph:
When Greece upon the point of danger stood,
We fell, defending her with our life-blood.
Moreover, on the offerings of Diodorus, one of the Corinthian sea-captains, reserved in the temple of Latona, there is this inscription:
Diodorus’s seamen to Latona sent
These arms, of hostile Medes the monument.
And as for Adimantus himself, against whom Herodotus frequently inveighs, — saying, that he was the only captain who went about to fly from Artemisium, and would not stay the fight, — behold in how great honor he is:
Here Adimantus rests: the same was he,
Whose counsels won for Greece the crown of liberty.
For neither is it probable, that such honor would have been shown to a coward and a traitor after his decease; nor would he have dared to give his daughters the names of Nausinica, Acrothinius, and Alexibia, and his son that of Aristeas, if he had not performed some illustrious and memorable action in that fight. Nor is it credible that Herodotus was ignorant of that which could not be unknown even to the meanest Carian, that the Corinthian women alone made that glorious and divine prayer, by which they besought the Goddess Venus to inspire their husbands with a love of fighting against the barbarians. For it was a thing divulged abroad, concerning which Simonides made an epigram to be inscribed on the brazen image set up in that temple of Venus which is said to have been founded by Medea, when she desired the Goddess, as some affirm, to deliver her from loving her husband Jason, or, as others say, to free him from loving Thetis. The tenor of the epigram follows:
For those who, fighting on their country’s side,
Opposed th’ imperial Mede’s advancing tide,
We, votaresses, to Cythera pray’d;
Th’ indulgent power vouchsafed her timely aid,
And kept the citadel of Hellas free
From rude assaults of Persia’s archery.
These things he should rather have written and recorded, than have inserted Aminocles’s killing of his son.

> Greek: 39. ἀλλʼ ὃ μὲν ἔψευσται, λόγος ἡμῖν οὐδείς ἃ δὲ τ … ψεῦσται μόνον ἐξετάζομεν. φησὶ τοίνυν Ἀθηναίους· λέγειν, ὡς Ἀδείμαντος ὁ Κορινθίων στρατηγός, ἐν χερσὶ τῶν πολεμίων γενομένων, ὑπερεκπλαγεὶς καὶ καταδείσας ἔφευγεν· οὐ πρύμναν κρουσάμενος οὐδὲ διαδὺς ἀτρέμα διὰ τῶν μαχομένων, ἀλλὰ λαμπρῶς ἐπαιρόμενος τὰ ἱστία καὶ τὰς ναῦς ἁπάσας ἀποστρέψας· εἶτα μέντοι κέλης ἐλαυνόμενος αὐτῷ συνέτυχε περὶ τὰ λήγοντα τῆς Σαλαμινίας, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ κέλητος ἐφθέγξατό τις σὺ μέν, ὦ Ἀδείμαντε, φεύγεις καταπροδοὺς τοὺς Ἕλληνας· οἱ δὲ καὶ δὴ νικῶσι, καθάπερ ἠρῶντο ἐπικρατῆσαι τῶν ἐχθρῶν ὁ δὲ κέλης οὗτος ἦν, ὡς ἔοικεν, οὐρανοπετής· τί γὰρ ἔδει τίθεσθαι μηχανῆς τραγικῆς, ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἄλλοις ὑπερπαίοντα τοὺς τραγῳδοὺς ἀλαζονείᾳ; πιστεύσας οὖν ὁ Ἀδείμαντος ἐπανῆλθεν εἰς τὸ στρατόπεδον ἐπʼ ἐξειργασμένοις αὕτη φάτις ἔχει ὑπὸ Ἀθηναίων οὐ μέντοι Κορίνθιοι ὁμολογέουσι, ἀλλὰ ἐν πρώτοισι σφέας αὐτοὺς τῆς ναυμαχίης νομίζουσι γενέσθαι μαρτυρεῖ δέ σφι καὶ ἡ ἄλλη Ἑλλάς. Τοιοῦτός ἐστιν ἐν πολλοῖς ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἑτέρας καθʼ ἑτέρων διαβολὰς καὶ κατηγορίας κατατίθησιν, ὥστε μὴ διαμαρτεῖν τοῦ φανῆναὶ τινα πάντως πονηρόν ὥσπερ ἐνταῦθα περίεστιν αὐτῷ, ἀπιστουμένους μὲν τῆς διαβολῆς, Κορινθίους ἀδοξεῖν, ἀπιστουμένης δέ, Ἀθηναίους, ἢν οἶμαι μηδὲ Κορινθίων Ἀθηναίους, ἀλλὰ τοῦτον ἀμφοτέρων ὁμοῦ καταψεύδεσθαι. Θουκυδίδης γοῦν ἀντιλέγοντα ποιῶν τῷ Κορινθίῳ τὸν Ἀθηναῖον ἐν Λακεδαίμονι καὶ πολλὰ περὶ τῶν Μηδικῶν λαμπρυνόμενον ἔργων καὶ περὶ τῆς ἐν Σαλαμῖνι ναυμαχίας οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν προδοσίας ἢ λιποταξίας ἐπενήνοχε Κορινθίοις· οὐδὲ γὰρ εἰκὸς ἦν Ἀθηναίους ταῦτα βλασφημεῖν περὶ τῆς Κορινθίων πόλεως, ἣν τρίτην μὲν ἑώρων μετὰ Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ μετʼ αὐτοὺς ἐγχαραττομένην τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν βαρβάρων ἀναθήμασιν· ἐν δὲ Σαλαμῖνι παρὰ τὴν πόλιν ἔδωκαν αὐτοῖς θάψαι τε τοὺς ἀποθανόντας, ὡς ἄνδρας ἀγαθοὺς γενομένους, καὶ ἐπιγράψαι τόδε τὸ ἐλεγεῖον
ὦ ξένε, εὔυδρὸν ποτʼ ἐναίομεν ἄστυ Κορίνθου,
νῦν δʼ ἅμʼ Αἴαντος νᾶσος ἔχει Σαλαμίς.
ἐνθάδε Φοινίσσας νῆας καὶ Πέρσας ἑλόντες
καὶ Μήδους, ἱερὰν Ἑλλάδα ῥυσάμεθα.
τὸ δʼ ἐν Ἰσθμῷ κενοτάφιον ἐπιγραφὴν ἔχει ταύτην
ἀκμᾶς ἑστακυῖαν ἐπὶ ξυροῦ Ἑλλάδα πᾶσαν
ταῖς αὐτῶν ψυχαῖς κείμεθα ῥυσάμενοι.
Διοδώρου δέ τινος τῶν Κορινθίων τριηράρχων ἐν ἱερῷ Λητοῦς ἀναθήμασι κειμένοις καὶ τοῦτʼ ἐπιγέγραπται
ταῦτʼ ἀπὸ δυσμενέων Μήδων ναῦται Διοδώρου
ὅπλʼ ἀνέθεν Λατοῖ, μνάματα ναυμαχίας.
αὐτός γε μὴν ὁ Ἀδείμαντος, πλεῖστα λοιδορούμενος Ἡρόδοτος διατελεῖ καὶ λέγων μοῦνον ἀσπαίρειν τῶν στρατηγῶν, ὡς φευξόμενον ἀπʼ Ἀρτεμισίου καὶ· μὴ περιμενοῦντα σκόπει τίνα δόξαν εἶχεν
οὗτος Ἀδειμάντου κείνου τάφος, ὃν δία πᾶσα
Ἑλλὰς ἐλευθερίας ἀμφέθετο στέφανον.
οὔτε γὰρ τελευτήσαντι τοιαύτην εἰκὸς ἦν ἀνδρὶ δειλῷ καὶ προδότῃ γενέσθαι τιμήν, οὔτʼ ἂν ἐτόλμησε τῶν θυγατέρων ὄνομα θέσθαι τῇ μὲν Ναυσινίκην τῇ δʼ Ἀκροθίνιον τῇ δʼ Ἀλεξιβίαν, Ἀριστέα δὲ καλέσαι τὸν υἱόν, εἰ μή τις ἦν ἐπιφάνεια καὶ λαμπρότης περὶ αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων ἐκείνων. καὶ μὴν ὅτι μόναι τῶν Ἑλληνίδων αἱ Κορίνθιαι γυναῖκες εὔξαντο τὴν καλὴν ἐκείνην καὶ δαιμόνιον εὐχήν, ἔρωτα τοῖς ἀνδράσι τῆς πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους μάχης ἐμβαλεῖν τὴν θεόν, οὐχ ὅπως τοὺς περὶ τὸν Ἡρόδοτον ἀγνοῆσαι πιθανὸν ἦν, ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ τὸν ἔσχατον Καρῶν· διεβοήθη γὰρ τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ Σιμωνίδης ἐποίησεν ἐπίγραμμα, χαλκῶν εἰκόνων ἀνασταθεισῶν ἐν τῷ ναῷ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης, ὃν ἱδρύσασθαι Μήδειαν λέγουσιν, οἱ μὲν αὐτὴν παυσαμένην τἀνδρός, οἱ δʼ ἐπὶ τῷ τὸν Ἰάσονα τῆς Θέτιδος ἐρῶντα παῦσαι τὴν θεόν. τὸ δʼ ἐπίγραμμα τοῦτʼ ἐστὶν
αἵδʼ ὑπὲρ Ἑλλάνων τε καὶ ἰθυμάχων πολιητᾶν
ἔσταθεν εὐξάμεναι Κύπριδι δαιμόνια.
οὐ γὰρ τοξοφόροισιν ἐμήδετο δῖʼ Ἀφροδίτα
Μήδοις Ἑλλάνων ἀκρόπολιν προδόμεν.
ταῦτʼ ἔδει γράφειν καὶ τούτων μεμνῆσθαι μᾶλλον, ἢ τὴν Ἀμεινοκλέους ἐμβαλεῖν … παιδοφονίαν.

[¶5] 40. After he had abundantly satisfied himself with the accusations brought against Themistocles, — of whom he says that, unknown to the other captains, he incessantly robbed and spoiled the islands, — he at length openly takes away the crown of victory from the Athenians, and sets it on the head of the Aeginetans, writing thus: “The Greeks having sent the first-fruits of their spoils to Delphi, asked in general of the God, whether he had a sufficient part of the booty and were contented with it. He answered, that he had enough of all the other Greeks, but not of the Aeginetans; for he expected a donary of them, as having won the greatest honor in the battle at Salamis.” See here how he attributes not his fictions to the Scythians, to the Persians, or to the Egyptians, as Aesop did his to the ravens and apes; but using the very person of the Pythian Apollo, he takes from Athens the chief honor of the battle at Salamis. And the second place in honor being given to Themistocles at the Isthmus by all the other captains, — every one of which attributed to himself the first degree of valor, but gave the next to Themistocles, — and the judgment not coming to a determination, when he should have reprehended the ambition of the captains, he said, that all the Greeks weighed anchor from thence through envy, not being willing to give the chief honor of the victory to Themistocles.

> Greek: 40. τῶν τοίνυν αἰτιῶν τῶν κατὰ Θεμιστοκλέους ἀνέδην ἐμφορηθείς, ἐν οἷς κλέπτοντα καὶ πλεονεκτοῦντα λάθρα τῶν ἄλλων στρατηγῶν οὔ φησι παύσασθαι περὶ τὰς νήσους· τέλος αὐτῶν Ἀθηναίων τὸν στέφανον ἀφελόμενος Αἰγινήταις ἐπιτίθησι, γράφων ταῦτα πέμψαντες ἀκροθίνια, οἱ Ἕλληνες εἰς Δελφοὺς ἐπηρώτων τὸν θεὸν κοινῇ, εἰ λελάβηκε πλήρεα καὶ ἀρεστὰ τὰ ἀκροθίνια· ὁ δὲ παρʼ Ἑλλήνων μὲν τῶν ἄλλων ἔφησε ἔχειν, παρʼ Αἰγινητέων δὲ οὒ· ἀλλʼ ἀπαίτεε αὐτοὺς τὰ ἀριστεῖα τῆς ἐν Σαλαμῖνι ναυμαχίας. οὐκέτι Σκύθαις οὐδὲ Πέρσαις οὐδʼ Αἰγυπτίοις τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ λόγους ἀνατίθησι πλάττων, ὥσπερ Αἴσωπος κόραξι καὶ πιθήκοις, ἀλλὰ τῷ τοῦ Πυθίου προσώπῳ χρώμενος, ἀπωθεῖ τῶν ἐν Σαλαμῖνι πρωτείων τὰς Ἀθήνας. Θεμιστοκλεῖ δὲ τῶν δευτερείων ἐν Ἰσθμῷ γενομένων διὰ τὸ τῶν στρατηγῶν ἕκαστον αὑτῷ μὲν τὸ πρωτεῖον ἐκείνῳ δὲ τὸ δευτερεῖον ἀποδοῦναι, καὶ τέλος τῆς κρίσεως μὴ λαβούσης, δέον αἰτιάσασθαι τὴν φιλοτιμίαν τῶν στρατηγῶν, πάντας ἀποπλεῦσαί φησι τοὺς Ἕλληνας ὑπὸ φθόνου μὴ βουληθέντας ἀναγορεῦσαι τὸν ἄνδρα πρῶτον.

[¶6] 41. In his ninth and last book, having nothing left to vent his malice on but the Lacedaemonians and their glorious action against the barbarians at Plataea, he writes, that the Spartans at first feared lest the Athenians should suffer themselves to be persuaded by Mardonius to forsake the other Greeks; but that now, the Isthmus being fortified, they, supposing all to be safe at Peloponnesus, neglected and slighted the rest, feasting and making merry at home, and deluding and delaying the Athenian ambassadors. How then did there go forth from Sparta to Plataea a thousand and five men, having every one of them with him seven Helots? Or how came it that, exposing themselves to so many dangers, they vanquished and overthrew so many thousand barbarians? Hear now his probable cause of it. “It happened,” says he, “that there was then at Sparta a certain stranger of Tegea, named Chileus, who had some friends amongst the Ephori, between whom and him there was mutual hospitality. He then persuaded them to send forth the army, telling them that the fortification on the Isthmus, by which they had fenced in Peloponnesus, would be of no avail if the Athenians joined themselves with Mardonius.” This counsel then drew Pausanias with his army to Plataea; but if any private business had kept that Chileus at Tegea, Greece had never been victorious.

> Greek: 41. ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐνάτῃ καὶ τελευταίᾳ τῶν βίβλων, ὅσον ἦν ὑπόλοιπον ἔτι τῆς πρὸς Λακεδαιμονίους αὐτῷ δυσμενείας, ἐκχέαι σπεύδων τὸ παρʼ αὑτὸν ἀφείλετο τὴν ἀοίδιμον νίκην καὶ τὸ περιβόητον Πλαταιᾶσι κατόρθωμα τῆς πόλεως· γέγραφε γὰρ ὡς πρότερον μὲν ὠρρώδουν τοὺς Ἀθηναίους, μὴ πεισθέντες ὑπὸ Μαρδονίου τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἐγκαταλίπωσιν· τοῦ δʼ Ἰσθμοῦ τειχισθέντος ἐν ἀσφαλεῖ θέμενοι τὴν Πελοπόννησον ἠμέλουν ἢδη τῶν ἄλλων καὶ περιεώρων, ἑορτάζοντες οἴκοι καὶ τοὺς πρέσβεις τῶν Ἀθηναίων κατειρωνευόμενοι καὶ διατρίβοντες πῶς οὖν ἐξῆλθον εἰς Πλαταιὰς πεντακισχίλιοι Σπαρτιᾶται, περὶ αὑτὸν ἔχων ἀνὴρ ἕκαστος ἑπτὰ εἵλωτας; ἢ πῶς κίνδυνον ἀράμενοι τοσοῦτον ἐκράτησαν καὶ κατέβαλον μυριάδας τοσαύτας; ἄκουσον αἰτίας πιθανῆς· ἔτυχε φησὶν ἐν Σπάρτῃ παρεπιδημῶν ἐκ Τεγέας ἀνὴρ ὄνομα Χείλεως, ᾧ φίλοι τινὲς καὶ ξένοι τῶν ἐφόρων ἦσαν· οὗτος οὖν ἔπεισεν αὐτοὺς ἐκπέμψαι τὸ στράτευμα, λέγων ὅτι τοῦ διατειχίσματος οὐδὲν ὄφελός ἐστι Πελοποννησίοις, ἂν Ἀθηναῖοι Μαρδονίῳ προσγένωνται τοῦτο Παυσανίαν ἐξήγαγεν εἰς Πλαταιὰς μετὰ τῆς δυνάμεως· εἰ δέ τι κατέσχεν οἰκεῖον ἐν Τεγέᾳ πρᾶγμα τὸν Χείλεων ἐκεῖνον, οὐκ ἂν ἡ Ἑλλὰς περιεγένετο.

[¶7] 42. Again, not knowing what to do with the Athenians, he tosses to and fro that city, sometimes extolling it, and sometimes debasing it. He says that, contending for the second place with the Tegeatans they made mention of the Heraclidae, alleged their acts against the Amazons, and the sepulchres of the Peloponnesians that died under the walls of Cadmea, and at last ambitiously brought down their discourse to the battle of Marathon, saying, however, that they would be contented with the command of the left wing. A little after, he says, Pausanias and the Spartans yielded them the first place, desiring them to fight in the right wing against the Persians and give them the left, who excused themselves as not skilled in fighting against the barbarians. Now it is a ridiculous thing, to be unwilling to fight against an enemy unless one has been used to him. But he says farther, that the other Greeks being led by their captains to encamp in another place, as soon as they were moved, the horse fled with joy towards Plataea, and in their flight came as far as Juno’s temple. In which place indeed he charges them all in general with disobedience, cowardice, and treason. At last he says, that only the Lacedaemonians and the Tegeates fought with the barbarians, and the Athenians with the Thebans; equally defrauding all the other cities of their part in the honor of the victory, whilst he affirms that none of them joined in the fight, but that all of them, sitting still hard by in their arms, betrayed and forsook those who fought for them; that the Phliasians and Megarians indeed, when they heard Pausanias had got the better, came in late, and falling on the Theban horse, were all cut off; that the Corinthians were not at the battle, and that after the victory, by pressing on over the hills, they escaped the Theban cavalry. For the Thebans, after the barbarians were overthrown, going before with their horse, affectionately assisted them in their flight; to return them thanks (forsooth) for the marks they had stigmatized them with at Thermopylae! Now what rank the Corinthians had in the fight at Plataea against the barbarians, and how they performed their duty, you may hear from Simonides in these verses:
I’ th’ midst were men, in warlike feats excelling
Who Ephyre, full of springs, inhabited,
And who in Corinth, Glaucus’ city, dwelling,
Great praise by their great valor merited;
Of which they to perpetuate the fame,
To th’ Gods of well-wrought gold did offerings frame.
For he wrote not these things, as one that taught at Corinth or that made verses in honor of the city, but only as recording these actions in elegiac verses. But Herodotus, whilst he desires to prevent that objection by which those might convince him of lying who should ask, Whence then are so many mounts, tombs, and monuments of the dead, at which the Plataeans, even to this day, celebrate funeral solemnities in the presence of the Greeks? — has charged, unless I am mistaken, a fouler crime than that of treason on their posterity. For these are his words: “As for the other sepulchres that are seen in Plataea, I have heard that their successors, being ashamed of their progenitors’ absence from this battle, erected every man a monument for posterity’s sake.” Of this treacherous deserting the battle Herodotus was the only man that ever heard. For if any Greeks withdrew them selves from the battle, they must have deceived Pausanias, Aristides, the Lacedaemonians, and the Athenians. Neither yet did the Athenians exclude the Aeginetans who were their adversaries from the inscription, nor convince the Corinthians of having fled from Salamis before the victory, Greece bearing witness to the contrary. Indeed Cleadas, a Plataean, ten years after the Persian war, to gratify, as Herodotus says, the Aeginetans, erected a mount bearing their name. How came it then to pass that the Athenians and Lacedaemonians, who were so jealous of each other that they were presently after the war ready to go together by the ears about the setting up a trophy, did not yet repel those Greeks who fled in a fear from the battle from having a share in the honor of those that behaved themselves valiantly, but inscribed their names on the trophies and colossuses, and granted them part of the spoils? Lastly they set up an altar, on which was engraven this epigram:
The Greeks, by valor having put to flight
The Persians and preserved their country’s right,
Erected here this altar which you see,
To Jove, preserver of their liberty.
Did Cleadas, O Herodotus, or some other, write this also, to oblige the cities by flattery? What need had they then to employ fruitless labor in digging up the earth, to make tombs and erect monuments for posterity’s sake, when they saw their glory consecrated in the most illustrious and greatest donaries? Pausanias indeed, when he was aspiring to the tyranny, set up this inscription in Delphi:
Pausanias, of Greeks the general,
When he the Medes in fight had overthrown,
Offered to Phoebus a memorial
Of victory, this monumental stone.
In which he gave the glory to the Greeks, whose general he professed himself to be. Yet the Greeks not enduring but utterly misliking it, the Lacedaemonians, sending to Delphi, caused this to be cut out, and the names of the cities, as it was fit, to be engraven instead of it. Now how is it possible that the Greeks should have been offended that there was no mention made of them in the inscription, if they had been conscious to themselves of deserting the fight? or that the Lacedaemonians would have erased the name of their leader and general, to insert deserters and such as withdrew themselves from the common danger? For it would have been a great indignity, that Sophanes, Aeimnestus, and all the rest who showed their valor in that fight, should calmly suffer even the Cythnians and Melians to be inscribed on the trophies; and that Herodotus, attributing that fight only to three cities, should raze all the rest out of those and other sacred monuments and donaries.

> Greek: 42. πάλιν δὲ τοῖς Ἀθηναίοις οὐκ ἔχων ὅ τι χρήσαιτο, ποτὲ μὲν αἴρει ποτὲ καταβάλλει τὴν πόλιν ἄνω καὶ κάτω μεταφέρων, οὓς Τεγεάταις μὲν εἰς ἀγῶνα λέγει περὶ τῶν δευτερείων καταστάντας Ἡρακλειδῶν τε μεμνῆσθαι καὶ τὰ πρὸς Ἀμαζόνας πραχθέντα προφέρειν ταφάς τε Πελοποννησίων τῶν ὑπὸ τῇ Καδμείᾳ πεσόντων· καὶ τέλος, εἰς τὸν Μαραθῶνα καταβαίνειν τῷ λόγῳ φιλοτιμουμένους καὶ ἀγαπῶντας ἡγεμονίας τυχεῖν τοῦ ἀριστεροῦ κέρως ὀλίγον δʼ ὕστερον αὐτοῖς Παυσανίαν καὶ Σπαρτιάτας τῆς ἡγεμονίας ὑφίεσθαι καὶ παρακαλεῖν, ὅπως κατὰ Πέρσας ἀντιταχθῶσι τὸ δεξιὸν κέρας παραλαβόντες, αὐτοῖς δὲ παραδόντες τὸ εὐώνυμον, ὡς ἀηθείᾳ τὴν πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους μάχην ἀπολεγομένους. καίτοι γελοῖον, εἰ συνήθεις; εἶεν οἱ πολέμιοι, μάχεσθαι μὴ θέλειν. ἀλλὰ τοὺς γʼ ἄλλους Ἕλληνας εἰς ἕτερον τῶν στρατηγῶν ἀγομένους στρατόπεδον, ὡς ἐκινήθησαν, φησὶ φεύγειν ἀσμένως τὴν ἵππον πρὸς τὴν τῶν Πλαταιέων πόλιν· φεύγοντας δʼ ἀφικέσθαι πρὸς τὸ Ἡραῖον ἐν ᾧ καὶ ἀπείθειαν καὶ λιποταξίαν καὶ προδοσίαν ὁμοῦ τι πάντων κατηγόρησε. τέλος μόνους φησὶ τοῖς μὲν βαρβάροις Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ Τεγεάτας τοῖς δὲ Θηβαίοις Ἀθηναίους συμπεσόντας διαγωνίσασθαι, τὰς δʼ ἄλλας πόλεις ὁμαλῶς ἁπάσας τοῦ κατορθώματος ἀπεστέρηκεν· οὐδένα συνεφάψασθαι τοῦ ἀγῶνος, ἀλλὰ καθημένους πάντας τῶν ὅπλων καταλιπεῖν καὶ προδοῦναι τοὺς ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν μαχομένους· ὀψὲ δὲ Φλιασίους καὶ Μεγαρέας πυθομένους νικῶντα Παυσανίαν, προσφερομένους καὶ ἐμπεσόντας εἰς τὸ Θηβαίων ἱππικόν, οὐδενὶ λόγῳ διαφθαρῆναι Κορινθίους δὲ τῇ μὲν μάχῃ μὴ παραγενέσθαι, μετὰ δὲ τὴν νίκην ἐπειγομένους διὰ τῶν λόφων, μὴ περιπεσεῖν τοῖς ἱππεῦσι τῶν Θηβαίων· οἱ γὰρ Θηβαῖοι, τῆς τροπῆς γενομένης, προϊππεύοντες τῶν βαρβάρων προθύμως παρεβοήθουν φεύγουσιν αὐτοῖς, δηλονότι τῶν ἐν Θερμοπύλαις στιγμάτων χάριν ἀποδιδόντες. ἀλλὰ Κορινθίους γε καὶ τάξιν ἣν ἐμάχοντο τοῖς βαρβάροις, καὶ τέλος ἡλίκον ὑπῆρξεν αὐτοῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ Πλαταιᾶσιν ἀγῶνος ἔξεστι Σιμωνίδου πυθέσθαι γράφοντος ἐν τούτοις
μέσσοι δʼ οἳ τʼ Ἔφυραν πολυπίδακα ναιετάοντες,
παντοίης ἀρετῆς ἴδριες ἐν πολέμῳ,
οἵ τε πόλιν Γλαύκοιο, Κορίνθιον ἄστυ, νέμοντες,
οἵ … κάλλιστον μάρτυν ἔθεντο πόνων
χρυσοῦ τιμήεντος ἐν αἰθέρι καί σφιν ἀέξει
αὐτῶν τʼ εὐρεῖαν κληδόνα καὶ πατέρων.
ταῦτα γὰρ οὐ χορὸν ἐν Κορίνθῳ διδάσκων οὐδʼ ᾆσμα ποιῶν εἰς τὴν πόλιν, ἄλλως δὲ τὰς πράξεις ἐκείνας, ἐλεγείᾳ γράφων, ἱστόρηκεν. ὁ δὲ προλαμβάνων τὸν ἔλεγχον τοῦ ψεύσματος τῶν ἐρησομένων πόθεν οὖν πολυάνδρια καὶ θῆκαι τοσαῦται καὶ μνήματα νεκρῶν, ἐν οἷς ἐναγίζουσιν ἄχρι νῦν Πλαταιεῖς τῶν Ἑλλήνων συμπαρόντων αἴσχιον, ὡς οἶμαι, τῆς προδοσίας τῶν γενεῶν κατηγόρηκεν ἐν τούτοις τῶν δὲ ἄλλων ὅσοι καὶ φαίνονται ἐν Πλαταιῇσι ἐόντες τάφοι, τούτους δέ, ὡς ἐγὼ πυνθάνομαι, αἰσχυνομένους τῇ ἀπεστοῖ τῆς μάχης ἑκάστους χώματα χῶσαι κεινὰ τῶν ἐπιγινομένων εἵνεκʼ ἀνθρώπων ταύτην τὴν ἀπεστὼ τῆς μάχης προδοσίαν οὖσαν Ἡρόδοτος ἀνθρώπων μόνος ἁπάντων ἢκουσε, Παυσανίαν δὲ καὶ Ἀριστείδην καὶ Λακεδαιμονίους καὶ Ἀθηναίους ἔλαθον οἱ Ἕλληνες ἐγκαταλιπόντες τὸν κίνδυνον καὶ οὔτʼ Αἰγινήτας Ἀθηναῖοι διαφόρους ὄντας εἶρξαν τῆς ἐπιγραφῆς, οὔτε Κορινθίους ἤλεγξαν, οὓς πρότερον νικῶντες φεύγειν ἀπὸ Σαλαμῖνος, ἀντιμαρτυρούσης αὐτοῖς τῆς Ἑλλάδος. καίτοι Κλεάδας ἦν ὁ Πλαταιεύς, ὃς ἔτεσι, δέκα ὔστερον τῶν Μηδικῶν Αἰγινήταις χαριζόμενος, ὥς φησιν Ἡρόδοτος, ἐπώνυμον ἔχωσεν αὐτῶν πολυάνδριον. Ἀθηναῖοι δὲ καὶ Λακεδαιμόνιοι τί παθόντες εὐθὺς τότε πρὸς μὲν ἀλλήλους ὀλίγον ἐδέησαν εἰς χεῖρας ἐλθεῖν περὶ τοῦ τροπαίου τῆς ἀναστάσεως· τοὺς δʼ Ἕλληνας ἀποδειλιάσαντας καὶ ἀποδράντας οὐκ ἀπήλαυνον τῶν ἀριστείων, ἀλλʼ ἐνέγραφον τοῖς τροπαίοις καὶ τοῖς κολοσσοῖς καὶ μετεδίδοσαν τῶν λαφύρων τέλος δὲ τῷ βωμῷ τοὐπίγραμμα τοῦτο γράφοντες ἐνεχάραξαν
τόνδε ποθʼ Ἕλληνες Νίκης κράτει, ἔργῳ Ἄρηος,
εὐτόλμῳ ψυχῆς λήματι πειθόμενοι,
Πέρσας ἐξελάσαντες, ἐλευθέρᾳ Ἑλλάδι κοινὸν
ἱδρύσαντο Διὸς βωμὸν Ἐλευθερίου;
μὴ καὶ τοῦτο Κλεάδας ἤ τις ἄλλος, ὦ Ἡρόδοτε, κολακεύων τὰς πόλεις ἐπέγραψε; τί οὖν ἐδέοντο τὴν γῆν ὀρύσσοντες διακενῆς ἔχειν πράγματα καὶ ῥᾳδιουργεῖν χώματα καὶ μνήματα τῶν ἐπιγινομένων ἕνεκʼ ἀνθρώπων κατασκευάζοντες, ἐν τοῖς ἐπιφανεστάτοις καὶ μεγίστοις ἀναθήμασι τὴν δόξαν αὑτῶν καθιερουμένην ὁρῶντες; καὶ μὴν Παυσανίας, ὡς λέγουσιν, ἤδη τυραννικὰ φρονῶν ἐπέγραψεν ἐν Δελφοῖς
Ἑλλήνων ἀρχηγὸς ἐπεὶ στρατὸν ὤλεσε Μήδων
Παυσανίας, Φοίβῳ μνῆμʼ ἀνέθηκε τόδε,
κοινούμενος ἁμωσγέπως τοῖς Ἕλλησι τὴν δόξαν ὧν ἑαυτὸν ἀνηγόρευσεν ἡγεμόνα τῶν δʼ Ἑλλήνων οὐκ ἀνασχομένων ἀλλʼ ἐγκαλούντων, πέμψαντες εἰς Δελφοὺς Λακεδαιμόνιοι τοῦτο μὲν ἐξεκόλαψαν, τὰ δʼ ὀνόματα τῶν πόλεων, ὥσπερ ἦν δίκαιον, ἐνεχάραξαν. καίτοι πῶς εἰκός ἐστιν ἢ τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἀγανακτεῖν τῆς ἐπιγραφῆς μὴ μετασχόντας, εἰ συνῄδεσαν ἑαυτοῖς τὴν ἀπόλειψιν τῆς μάχης, ἢ Λακεδαιμονίους τὸν ἡγεμόνα καὶ στρατηγὸν ἐκχαράξαντας, ἐπιγράψαι τοὺς ἐγκαταλιπόντας καὶ περιιδόντας τὸν κίνδυνον; ὡς δεινότατόν ἐστιν, εἰ Σωφάνης μὲν καὶ Ἀείμνηστος καὶ πάντες οἱ διαπρεπῶς ἀγωνισάμενοι τὴν μάχην ἐκείνην οὐδὲ Κυθνίων ἐπιγραφομένων τοῖς τροπαίοις οὐδὲ Μηλίων ἠχθέσθησαν Ἡρόδοτος· δὲ τρισὶ μόναις πόλεσιν ἀναθεὶς τὸν ἀγῶνα τὰς ἄλλας πάσας ἐκχαράττει τῶν τροπαίων καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν.

[¶8] 43. There having been then four fights with the barbarians; he says, that the Greeks fled from Artemisium; that, whilst their king and general exposed himself to danger at Thermopylae, the Lacedaemonians sat negligent at home, celebrating the Olympian and Carnean feasts; and discoursing of the action at Salamis, he uses more words about Artemisia than he does in his whole narrative of the naval battle. Lastly, he says, that the Greeks sat still at Plataea, knowing no more of the fight, till it was over, than if it had been a skirmish between mice and frogs (like that which Pigres, Artemisia’s fellow-countryman, merrily and scoffingly described in his poem), and it had been agreed to fight silently, lest they should be heard by others; and that the Lacedaemonians excelled not the barbarians in valor, but only got the better, as fighting against naked and unarmed men. To wit, when Xerxes himself was present, the barbarians were with much difficulty compelled by scourges to fight with the Greeks; but at Plataea, having taken other resolutions, as Herodotus says, “they were no way inferior in courage and strength; but their garments being without armor was prejudicial to them, since being naked they fought against a completely armed enemy.” What then is there left great and memorable to the Grecians of those fights, if the Lacedaemonians fought with unarmed men, and the other Greeks, though present, were ignorant of the battle; if empty monuments are set up everywhere, and tripods and altars full of lying inscriptions are placed before the Gods; if, lastly, Herodotus only knows the truth, and all others that give any account of the Greeks have been deceived by the fame of those glorious actions, as the effect of an admirable prowess? But he is an acute writer, his style is pleasant, there is a certain grace, force, and elegancy in his narrations; and he has, like a musician, pronounced his discourse, though not knowingly, still clearly and elegantly. These things delight, please, and affect all men. But as in roses we must beware of the venomous flies called cantharides; so must we take heed of the calumnies and envy lying hid under smooth and well-couched phrases and expressions, lest we imprudently entertain absurd and false opinions of the most excellent and greatest cities and men of Greece.

> Greek: 43. τεσσάρων δʼ ἀγώνων τότε πρὸς τοὺς βαρβάρους γενομένων, ἐκ μὲν Ἀρτεμισίου τοὺς Ἕλληνας ἀποδρᾶναί φησιν· ἐν δὲ Θερμοπύλαις, τοῦ στρατηγοῦ, καὶ βασιλέως προκινδυνεύοντος, οἰκουρεῖν καὶ ἀμελεῖν Ὀλύμπια καὶ Κάρνεια πανηγυρίζοντας· τὰ δʼ ἐν Σαλαμῖνι διηγούμενος τοσούτους περὶ Ἀρτεμισίας λόγους γέγραφεν, ὅσοις ὅλην τὴν ναυμαχίαν οὐκ ἀπήγγελκε τέλος δέ, καθημένους ἐν Πλαταιαῖς ἀγνοῆσαι μέχρι τέλους τὸν ἀγῶνα τοὺς Ἕλληνας, ὥσπερ βατραχομυομαχίας γινομένης, ἣν Πίγρης ὁ Ἀρτεμισίας ἐν ἔπεσι παίζων καὶ φλυαρῶν ἔγραψε, σιωπῇ διαγωνίσασθαι συνθεμένων, ἵνα λάθωσι τοὺς ἄλλους,· αὐτοὺς δὲ Λακεδαιμονίους ἀνδρείᾳ μὲν οὐδὲν κρείττονας γενέσθαι τῶν βαρβάρων, ἀνόπλοις δὲ καὶ γυμνοῖς μαχομένους κρατῆσαι. Ξέρξου μὲν γὰρ αὐτοῦ παρόντος, ὑπὸ μαστίγων μόλις ὄπισθεν ὠθούμενοι προσεφέροντο τοῖς Ἕλλησιν, ἐν δὲ Πλαταιαῖς, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἑτέρας ψυχὰς μεταλαβόντες λήματι μὲν καὶ ῥώμῃ οὐκ ἥσσονες ἦσαν· ἡ δὲ ἐσθής, ἔρημος ἐοῦσα ὅπλων, πλεῖστον ἐδηλήσατό σφεας πρὸς γὰρ ὁπλίτας ἐόντες γυμνῆτες ἀγῶνα ἐποιέοντο τί οὖν περίεστιν ἔνδοξον ἢ μέγα τοῖς Ἕλλησιν ἀπʼ ἐκείνων τῶν ἀγώνων, εἰ Λακεδαιμόνιοι μὲν ἀόπλοις ἐμάχοντο, τοὺς δʼ ἄλλους ἡ μάχη παρόντας ἔλαθε, κενὰ δὲ πολυάνδρια τιμώμενα τοῖς ἑκάστου, ψευδῶν δὲ γραμμάτων μεστοὶ τρίποδες ἑστᾶσι καὶ βωμοὶ παρὰ τοῖς θεοῖς, μόνος δὲ τἀληθὲς Ἡρόδοτος ἔγνω, τοὺς δʼ ἄλλους ἅπαντας ἀνθρώπους, ὅσοι λόγον Ἑλλήνων ἔχουσιν, ἐξηπάτηκεν ἡ φήμη τῶν τότε κατορθωμάτων, ὡς ὑπερφυῶν γενομένων; τί δῆτα; γραφικὸς ἁνήρ, καὶ ἡδὺς ὁ λόγος, καὶ χάρις ἔπεστι καὶ δεινότης καὶ ὥρα τοῖς διηγήμασι μῦθον δʼ ὡς ὅτʼ ἀοιδός, ἐπισταμένως μὲν οὒ λιγυρῶς δὲ καὶ γλαφυρῶς ἠγόρευκεν. ἀμέλει ταῦτα καὶ κηλεῖ καὶ προσάγεται πάντας, ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ ἐν ῥόδοις δεῖ κανθαρίδα φυλάττεσθαι τὴν βλασφημίαν αὐτοῦ καὶ κακολογίαν, λείοις καὶ ἁπαλοῖς σχήμασιν ὑποδεδυκυῖαν, ἵνα μὴ λάθωμεν ἀτόπους καὶ ψευδεῖς περὶ τῶν ἀρίστων καὶ μεγίστων, τῆς Ἑλλάδος πόλεων καὶ ἀνδρῶν δόξας λαβόντες.