Listed 8 sub titles with search on: Biographies for wider area of: "VRAVRONA Settlement ATTICA, EAST" .
FILAIDES (Ancient demos) MARKOPOULO MESSOGEAS
Peisistratidae, Pisistratids (Pisistratid). Their tyranny, put down by Lacedaemonians under Cleomenes, their expulsion from Athens, at Xerxes' court, their attempt to induce Athens to surrender.
Pisistratus, (Peisistratos). An Athenian, son of Hippocrates,
named after Pisistratus, the youngest son of Nestor, since the family of Hippocrates
was of Pylian origin, and traced their descent to Neleus, the father of Nestor.
The mother of Pisistratus (whose name we do not know) was first cousin to the
mother of Solon. Pisistratus grew up equally distinguished for personal beauty
and for mental endowments. The relationship between him and Solon naturally drew
them together, and a close friendship sprang up between them. He assisted Solon
by his eloquence in persuading the Athenians to renew their struggle with the
Megarians for the possession of Salamis, and he afterwards fought with bravery
in the expedition which Solon led against the island. When Solon, after the establishment
of his constitution, retired for a time from Athens, the old rivalry between the
parties of the Plain, the Highlands, and the Coast broke out into open feud. The
party of the Plain, comprising chiefly the landed proprietors, was headed by Lycurgus;
that of the Coast, consisting of the wealthier classes not belonging to the nobles,
by Megacles, the son of Alcmaeon; the party of the Highlands, which aimed at more
of political freedom and equality than either of the two others, was the one at
the head of which Pisistratus placed himself, because they seemed the most likely
to be useful in the furtherance of his ambitious designs. His liberality, as well
as his military and oratorical abilities, gained him the support of a large body
of citizens. Solon, on his return, quickly saw through the designs of Pisistratus,
who listened with respect to his advice, though he prosecuted his schemes none
the less diligently. When Pisistratus found his plans sufficiently ripe for execution,
he one day made his appearance in the agora with his mules and his own person
exhibiting recent wounds, pretending that he had been nearly assassinated by his
enemies as he was riding into the country. An assembly of the people was forthwith
called, in which one of his partisans proposed that a body-guard of fifty citizens,
armed with clubs, should be granted to him. It was in vain that Solon opposed
this; the guard was given him. Through the neglect or connivance of the people,
Pisistratus took this opportunity of raising a much larger force, with which he
seized the citadel, B.C. 560, thus becoming what the Greeks called turannos of
Athens.
Having secured to himself the substance of power, he made no
further change in the constitution or in the laws, which he administered ably
and well. His first usurpation lasted but a short time. Before his power was firmly
rooted, the factions headed by Megacles and Lycurgus combined, and Pisistratus
was compelled to evacuate Athens. He remained in banishment six years. Meantime
the factions of Megacles and Lycurgus revived their old feuds, and Megacles made
overtures to Pisistratus, offering to reinstate him in the tyranny if he would
connect himself with him by receiving his daughter in marriage. The proposal was
accepted by Pisistratus, and the following stratagem was devised for accomplishing
his restoration, according to the account of Herodotus: A maiden named Phya, of
remarkable stature and beauty, was dressed as Athene in a full suit of armour,
and placed in a chariot, with Pisistratus by her side. The chariot was then driven
towards the city, heralds being sent on before to announce that Athene in person
was bringing back Pisistratus to her Acropolis. The report spread rapidly, and
those in the city believing that the woman was really their tutelary goddess,
worshipped her, and admitted Pisistratus. Pisistratus nominally performed his
part of the contract with Megacles; but, in consequence of the insulting manner
in which he treated his wife, Megacles again made common cause with Lycurgus,
and Pisistratus was a second time compelled to evacuate Athens. He retired to
Eretria in Euboea, and employed the next ten years in making preparations to regain
his power. At the end of that time he invaded Attica with the forces he had raised,
and also supported by Lygdamis of Naxos with a considerable body of troops. He
defeated his opponents near the temple of Athene at Pallene, and then entered
Athens without opposition. Lygdamis was rewarded by being established as tyrant
of Naxos, which island Pisistratus conquered.
Having now become tyrant of Athens for the third time, Pisistratus
adopted measures to secure the undisturbed possession of his supremacy. He took
a body of foreign mercenaries into his pay, and seized as hostages the children
of several of the principal citizens, placing them in the custody of Lygdamis
in Naxos. He maintained at the same time the form of Solon's institutions, only
taking care, as his sons did after him, that the highest offices should always
be held by some member of the family. He not only exacted obedience to the laws
from his subjects and friends, but himself set the example of submitting to them.
On one occasion he even appeared before the Areopagus to answer a charge of murder,
which, however, was not prosecuted. Athens was indebted to him for many stately
and useful buildings. Among these may be mentioned a temple to the Pythian Apollo,
and a magnificent temple to the Olympian Zeus, which remained unfinished for several
centuries, and was at length completed by the emperor Hadrian. Besides these,
the Lyceum, a garden with stately buildings a short distance from the city, was
the work of Pisistratus, as also the Fountain of the Nine Springs. Pisistratus
also encouraged literature in various ways. It was apparently under his auspices
that Thespis introduced at Athens his rude form of tragedy (B.C. 535), and that
dramatic contests were made a regular part of the Attic Dionysia. It is to Pisistratus
that tradition ascribes the first written text of the whole of the poems of Homer,
as to which see Flach, Peisistratos und seine literarische Thatigkeit; and the
article Homerus, pp. 838-39. Pisistratus is also said to have been the first person
in Greece who collected a library, to which he generously allowed the public access.
By his first wife Pisistratus had two sons, Hippias and Hipparchus. By his second
wife, Timonassa, he had also two sons, Iophon and Thessalus, who are rarely mentioned.
He had also a bastard son, Hegesistratus, whom he made tyrant of Sigeum after
taking that town from the Mitylenaeans. Pisistratus died at an advanced age in
527, and was succeeded in the tyranny by his eldest son Hippias; but Hippias and
his brother Hipparchus appear to have administered the affairs of the State with
so little outward distinction that they are frequently spoken of as though they
had been joint tyrants. They continued the government on the same principles as
their father. Thucydides (vi. 54) speaks in terms of high commendation of the
virtue and intelligence with which their rule was exercised till the death of
Hipparchus. Hipparchus inherited his father's literary tastes. Several distinguished
poets lived at Athens under the patronage of Hipparchus, as, for example, Simonides
of Ceos, Anacreon of Teos, Lasus of Hermione, and Onomacritus.
After the murder of Hipparchus in 514, an account of which
is given under Harmodius, a great change ensued in the character of the government.
Under the influence of revengeful feelings and fears for his own safety, Hippias
now became a morose and suspicious tyrant. He put to death great numbers of the
citizens, and raised money by extraordinary imposts. His old enemies the Alcmaeonidae,
to whom Megacles belonged, availed themselves of the growing discontent of the
citizens; and after one or two unsuccessful attempts they at length succeeded,
supported by a large force under Cleomenes, in expelling the Pisistratidae from
Attica. Hippias and his connections retired to Sigeum in 510. The family of the
tyrants was condemned to perpetual banishment, a sentence which was maintained
even in after times, when decrees of amnesty were passed. Hippias afterward repaired
to the court of Darius, and looked forward to a restoration to his country by
the aid of the Persians. He accompanied the expedition sent under Datis and Artaphernes,
and pointed out to the Persians the plain of Marathon as the most suitable place
for their landing. He was now (490) of great age. According to some accounts,
he fell in the battle of Marathon; according to others, he died at Lemnos on his
return. Hippias was the only one of the legitimate sons of Pisistratus who had
children; but none of them attained distinction.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Peisistratus (Peisistratos) the son of Hippocrates, was so named after Peisistratus,
the youngest son of Nestor, the family of Hippocrates being of Pylian origin,
and tracing their descent to Neleus, the father of Nestor (Herod. v. 65). It was
generally believed that the future tyrant Peisistratus was descended from the
Homeric Peisistratus, although Pausanias (ii. 18. 8, 9), when speaking of the
expulsion of the Neleidae by the Heracleids, says that he does not know what became
of Peisistratus, the grandson of Nestor. The fact that Hippocrates named his son
after the son of Nestor shows the belief of the family, and he appears not to
have belonged to the other branches of the Neleidae settled in Attica: but the
real descent of an historical personage from any of these heroic families must
always be very problematical. The separate mention of Melanthus and Codrus (Herod.
l. c.) implies that he did not belong to that branch; that he did not belong to
the Alcmaeonidae is clear from the historical relations between that family and
Peisistratus; and we nowhere hear that the latter was connected with the Paeonidae,
the only other branch of the Neleidae who came to Attica. Hippocrates (probably
through some intermarriage or other) belonged to the house of the Philaidae (Plut.
Sol. 10; Pseudo-Plat. Hipparch. It is through an oversight that Plutarch speaks
of the deme of the Philaidae, which did not then exist). Intermarriages with the
descendants of Melanthus would be sufficient to account for the claim which Peisistratus
is represented as making (in the spurious letter in Diogenes Laertius, i. 53),
to be considered as a member of the family of Codrus, even if the statement that
he did so deserves any credit. The mother of Peisistratus (whose name we do not
know) was cousin german to the mother of Solon (Heracleides Ponticus ap. Plut.
Sol. 1). There are no data for determining accurately the time when Peisistratus
was born; but the part which he is represented as taking in the military operations
and measures of Solon would not admit of its being later than B. C. 612, a date
which is not inconsistent with the story of Chilon and Hippocrates, for the former,
who was ephor in B. C. 560, was already an old man in B. C. 572 (Diog. Laert.
i. 68, 72).
Peisistratus grew up equally distinguished for personal beauty and
for mental endowments. The relationship between him and Solon naturally drew them
together, and a close friendship sprang up between them, which, as was to be expected
under such circumstances between Greeks, soon assumed an erotic character (Plt.
Sol. 1). On the occasion of the successful attempt made by Solon to induce the
Athenians to renew their struggle with the Megarians for the possession of Salamis,
Peisistratus greatly aided his kinsman by his eloquence. The decree prohibiting
further attempts upon the island was repealed, and an expedition led against it
by Solon, again assisted by his young relative, who distinguished himself by his
military ability, and captured Nisaea (Herod. i. 59; Plut. Solon. 8, 12. Justin.
ii. 8).
After the legislation of Solon, the position of parties at Athens
was well calculated to favour the ambitious designs of Peisistratus. The old contests
of the rival parties of the Plain, the Highlands, and the Coast, had been checked
for a time by the measures of Solon, but their rivalry had not been removed; and
when Solon, after the establishment of his constitution, retired for a time from
Athens, this rivalry broke out into open feud. The party of the Plain, comprising
chiefly the landed proprietors, was headed by Lycurgus; that of the Coast, consisting
of the wealthier classes not belonging to the nobles, by Megacles, the son of
Alcmaeon; the party of the Highlands, which aimed at more of political freedom
and equality than either of the two others, was that at the head of which Peisistratus
placed himself, not because their wishes and feelings corresponded with his own,
but because they seemed the most likely to be useful in the furtherance of his
designs; and indeed his lead of this faction seems to have been a mere pretext,
to render it less obvious that he had in reality attached to himself a large party
among the poorer class of citizens (Herod. i. 59. egeire triten stasin sullexas
de stasiotas, kai toi logoi ton huperakrion prostas). These he secured by putting
himself forward as the patron and benefactor of the poor. With a species of munificence,
afterwards imitated by Cimon, he threw open his gardens to the use of the citizens
indiscriminately (Theopompus ap. Athen. xii), and, according to some accounts
(Eustath. ad Il. xxiv. extr.), was always accompanied by two or three youths,
with a purse of money to supply forthwith the wants of any needy citizen whom
they fell in with. His military and oratorical (Cic. de Orat. iii. 34, Brut. 7.27,
10.41; Val. Max. viii. 9. ext. 1) abilities, and the undeniably good qualities
which he possessed (Solon, according to Plut. Solon. 29, declared of him that,
had it not been for his ambition, Athens had not a more excellent citizen to show),
backed by considerable powers of simulation, had led many of the better class
of citizens, if not openly to become his partisans, at least to look upon him
with no unfavourable eye, and to regard his domination as a less evil than the
state of faction and disturbance under which the constitution was then suffering.
Solon, on his return, quickly saw through the designs of Peisistratus, who listened
with respect to his advice, though he prosecuted his schemes none the less diligently
(According to Isocrates, Panath. p. 263, ed. Steph. one part of his procedure
was to procure the banishment of a considerable number of influential citizens
who were likely to oppose his plans). Solon next endeavoured to arouse the people,
by speeches and poetical compositions (Plut. Solon. 30; Diog. Laert. i. 49, 50),
to a sense of the danger to which they were exposed, but in vain. Some refused
to share his suspicions, others favoured the designs of Peisistratus, others feared
his power, or were indifferent. Even the senate, according to Diogenes Laertius
(i. 49), were disposed to favour Peisistratus, and declared Solon to be mad. When
Peisistratus found his plans sufficiently ripe for execution, he one day made
his appearance in the agora with his mules and his own person exhibiting recent
wounds, pretending that he had been nearly assassinated by his enemies as he was
riding into the country. The indignation of his friends was excited; an assembly
was forthwith called, in which Ariston, one of his partisans, proposed that a
body-guard of fifty citizens, armed with clubs, should be granted to Peisistratus.
It was in vain that Solon opposed this; the guard was granted. Through the neglect
or connivance of the people Peisistratus took this opportunity of raising a much
larger force, with which lie seized the citadel B. C. 560 (Plut. Sol. 30; Herod.
i. 59; Aristot. Pol. v. 10; Diog. Laert. i. 66; Polyaen. i. 21.3) A similar stratagem
had been practised by Theagenes of Megara, and was afterwards imitated by Dionysius
(Diod. xiii. 97). Megacles and the Alcmaeonidae took to flight. Solon, after another
ineffectual attempt to rouse the citizens against the usurper, placed his arms
in the street before his door, saying that he had done his utmost to defend his
country and its laws. Peisistratus, having secured to himself the substance of
power, made no further change in the constitution, or in the laws, which he administered
ably and well.
The first usurpation of Peisistratus lasted but a short time (Herod.
i. 60. meta ou pollon chronon -- exelaunousi min). Before his power was firmly
rooted, the factions headed by Megacles and Lycurgus combined, and Peisistratus
was compelled to evacuate Athens. As, on his second expulsion, we are distinctly
told (Herod. i. 61) that he quitted Attica, the presumption is, that on the first
occasion lie did not. His property was confiscated and sold by auction, when the
only man who ventured to purchase it was Callias, the son of Hipponicus (Herod.
vi. 121). How Peisistratus cmplayed himself during his banishment, which lasted
about six years, we do not know. Meantime, the factions of Megacles and Lycurgus,
having accompolished their immediate object, revived their old feuds, and Megacles,
finding himself the weaker of the two, made overtures to Peisistratus, offering
to reinstate him in the tyranny, if he would connect himself with him by receiving
his daughter Coesyra (Suidas s. v. enkekoisuromenen) in marriage. The proposal
was accepted by Peisistratus, and the following stratagem wad devised for accomplishing
(as Herodotus supposes) his restoration. In what was afterwards the deme Paeonia,
they found a damsel named Phya, of remarkable stature and beanty (according to
Athenaeus xiii., a garland seller, the daughter of a man named Socrates). This
woman they dressed up as Athene in a full suit of armour, and placed in a chariot,
with Peisistratus by her side, instructing her how she was to maintain a suitable
carriage. The chariot was then driven towards the city, heralds being sent on
before to announce that Athene in person was bringing back Peisistratus to her
Acropolis. The report spread spread, and those in the city believing that the
woman was really their tutelary goddess, worshipped her, and admitted Peisistratus
(Herod. i. 60; Polyaesn. Strateg. i. 21.1, where there is a good deal of blundering).
"This story," lentarks Bishop Thirlwall, "would indeed be singular, if we consider
the expedient in the loght of a stratagem, on which the confederates relied for
overcoming the resitaince which they might otherwise have expected from their
adversaries. But it seems quite as likely that the pageant was only designed to
add extraordinary solemnity to the entrance of Peisistratus, and to suggest the
reflection, that it was by the especial favour of heaven that he had been so unexpectedly
restored". It is said that Phya was given in marriage to Hipparchus (Athen. l.
c.). Peisistratus nominally performed his part of the contract with Megacles;
but not choosing to have children by one of a family which was accounted accursed,
treated his wife in the most odious manner. She complained to her mother of the
indignity to which she was exposed; and Megacles and the Alcmaeonidae, incensed
at the affront, again made common cause with Lycurgus, and Peisistratus was a
second time compelled to evacuate Athens (Herod. i. 61). This time he left Attica,
and retired to Eretria in Euboea (The very extraordinary statement in Eusebius,
Chro. Olymp. 54. 3, and Hieronymus, that Peisistratus went into Italy, is doubtless
a blunder. Vater conjectures that the name Italy has been substituted by mistake
for that of some place in Attica, perhaps Icaria, and that the statement refers
to the first exile of Peisistratus). His property was again offered for sale (hokos
ekpesoi, Herod. vi. 121), and again Callias, who had been one of his most active
opponents, was the only purchaser.
On reaching Eretria Peisistratus deliberated with his sons as to the
course he should pursue. The advice of Hippias, that he should make a fresh attempt
to regain his power, was adopted. Contributions were solicited from the cities
which were in his interest. Several furnished him with large sunis. Thebes especially
surpassed all the rest in the amount of money which she placed at his disposal.
With the funds thus raised he procured mercenaries from Argos. Ten years elapsed
before his preparations were complete. At last, however, with the forces which
he had raised, a Naxian named Lygdamis having also of his own accord brought him
both money and a body of troops, he crossed into Attica, and lauded at Marathon.
Here his friends and partisans flocked to his standard. His antagonists, who had
viewed his proceedings with great indifference, when they heard that he was advancing
upon Athens hastily marched out to meet him. The two armies encamped not far from
each other, near the temple of Athene at Pallene, and Peisistratus, seizing the
opportunity with which the remissness of his antagonlists furnished him, and encouraged
by the soothsayer Amphilytus of Acharnae, fell suddenly upon their forces at noon,
when, not expecting any thing of the kind, the men had betaken themselves after
their meal to sleep or play, and speedily put them to flight. He then, with equal
wisdom and moderation, refrained from pursuing the fugitives with his troops,
but sent forward his sons on horseback, who, having overtaken the flying Athenians,
told them they had nothing to fear if they would disperse quietly to their homes.
The majority obeyed these directions, and Peisistratus entered Athens without
opposition (Herod. i. 61-63; Polyaen. Strat. i. 21.1. The account of the latter,
however, is full of blunders). Lygdamis was rewarded for his zealous co-operation
by being established as tyrant of Nxos, which island Peisistratus conquered.
Having now become tyrant of Athens for the third time (1)
, Peisistratus adopted measures to secure the undisturbed possession of his supremacy.
Hetook a body of foreign mercenaries into his pay, and seized as hostages the
children of several of the principal citizens, placing them in the custody of
Lygdamis, in Naxos. Others of the Athenians either fled or were exiled. Among
the latter was Cimon, the father of Miltiades, who, however, was afterwards permitted
to return. The revenues which Peisistratus needed for the pay of his troops, were
derived partly from Attica (the produce, very likely, in part at least, of the
mines at Laureion), partly from some gold mines on the Strymon. How he became
possessed of these we do not know. It is most likely that they were private property,
and came into his hands during his second exile, somehow or other through his
connection with the royal family of Macedonia, a connection of which we subsequently
see a proof in the offer of the town of Anthenmus made by Amyntas to Hippias (Herod.
v. 94). It appears to have been shortly after his restoration, that Peisistratus
purified tile island of Delos, in accordance with the directions of an oracle,
by removing all the dead bodies which had been buried within sight of the temple
to another part of the island (Herod. i. 64; Thucyd. iii. 104). Besides the subjugation
of Naxos, the only other foreign military expedition which we hear of his undertaking
in this third period of his tyranny was the conquest of Sigeum, then in the hands
of the Mytilesnaeans. The Atheniains had long before laid claim to the island,
and had waged war with the Mytilenaeans for the possession of it, and it was awarded
to them through the arbitrationt of Periander. Peisistratus established his bastard
son Hegesistrattis as tyrant in the town (Herod. v. 94, 95). Polyaenus (Strat.
v. 14) mentions some operations conducted by his son Hippias, for the suppression
of piracy.
Having now firmly established himself in the government, Peisistratus
maintained the form of Solon's institutions, only taking care, as his sons did
after him (Thucyd. vi. 54), that the highest offices should always be held by
some member of the family. He not only exacted obedience to the laws from his
subjects and friends, but himself set the example of submitting to them. On one
occasion sion he even appeared before the Arciopagus to ansswer a charge of murder,
which however was not prosecuted (Arist. Pol. v. 12; Plut. Solon. 31). His government
seems to have been a wise admixture of stringelcy as regards the enforcement of
the laws and the prevention of disorders, and leniency towards isndividuals who
offended him personally (For anecdotes illustrating this see Plutarch, Apopth.
Peisist.; Polyaen. Strut. v. 14; Val. Max. v. 1. ext. 2). He enforced the law
which had been enacted by Solon, or, according to Theophrastus (ap. Plut. Solon.
31) by himself, against idleness, and compelled a large number of the poorer class
to leave A thens, and devote themselves to agricultural pursuits (Aeliasn. V.
H. ix. 25; Dion Chrysost. vii., xxv.). The stories of his compellings the people
to wear the Catonace (Hesychius and Suidas s. v. tatonake ; Aristoph Lysist. 1150,
Eeeles. 724 Schol. ad 1. 755; Schol. ad Lysist. 619), probably have refereecce
to this. Those who had no resources of their own he is said to have supplied with
cattle and seed. His policy taste taste combined also led him to employ the poorer
Athenians in building. Athens was inidebted to limi for many stately and useful
buildings. Among these may be mentioned a temple to the Pythian Apollo (Suidas
s. v. Puthion; Hesych. s. v. en Puthioi chesai). Vater has made a great mistake
in supposing that Thucydides (vi. 54) states that this temple was built by Peisistratus
the son of Hippias: Thucydides only says that the latter set up an altar in it),
and a magnincent temple to the Olympian Zeus (Arist. Pol. v. 11), for which he
employed the architects Antistates, Callaeschrus, Antimachides, and Porinus (Vitruvius,
Praef. vii.15). This temple remained unfinished for several centuries, and was
at length completed by the emperor Hadrian (Paus. i. 18.6; Strab. ix.). Besides
these, the Lyceum, a garden with stately buildings a short distance from the city,
was the work of Peisistratus (Suidas, s. v. Lukeion), as also the fountain of
the Nine Springs (Eneakrounos, Thucyd. ii. 15; Paus. i. 14.1). The employment
of the sons of Peisistratus in superintending works of this kind, orcompleting
them after their father's death, will probably account for slight variations in
the authorities as to whether some of these were built by Peisistratus himself
or by his sons. According to most authorities (the author of the letter in Diog.
Laert. i. 53; Suidas, s. v. kai sphakeloi poiousin ateleian; Diodor. Vatic. vii.-x.
33) Peisistratus, to defray these and other expenses, exacted a tithe of the produce
of the land, an impost which, so employed, answered pretty nearly the purpose
of a poor's rate. He was also (Plut. Sol. c. 31) the author of a measure, the
idea of which he had derived from Solon, according to which those disabled in
war were maintained at the public expense.
Peisistratus likewise bestowed considerable attention upon the due
performance of public religious rites, and the celebration of festivals and processions
(Epist.ap. Diog. Laert. i. 53), an example which was followed by his sons, who
are even said to have invented thalias kai komous (Athen. xii. 44). The institution
of the greater Panathenaea is expressly ascribed to Peisistratus by the scholiast
on Aristeides; and before the time of Peisistratus we do not hear of the distinction
between the greater and the lesser Panathenaea.
He at least made considerable changes in the festival, and in particular introduced
the contests of rhapsodists. Peisistratus in various ways encouraged literature.
It was apparently under his auspices that Thespis introduced at Athens his rude
form of tragedy (B. C. 535, Clinton, F. H. sub anno), and that dramatic contests
were made a regular part of the Attic Dionysia. "It is to Peisistratus that we
owe the first written text of the whole of the poems of Homer, which, without
his care, would most likely now exist only in a few disjointed fragments." (Respecting
the services of Peisistratus in relation to the text of Homer, and the poets who
assisted him in the work, see the article Homerus,
and the authorities there referred to). Peisistratus is also said to have been
the first person in Greece who collected a library, to which he generously allowed
the public access (A. Gellius, N. A. vi. 17; Athen. i.). The story that this collection
of books was carried away by Xerxes, and subsequently restored by Seleucus (A.
Gellius, hardly rests on sufficient authority to deserve much notice). It was
probably from his regard to religion and literatre that many were disposed to
class Peisistratus with the Seven Sages (Diog. Laert. i. 122). Either from his
patronage of diviners, or from his being, like his son Hipparchus, a collector
of oracles, he received the surname of Bakis (Suid. s. v. Bakis; Schol. ad Aristoph.
Pax, 1036 or 1071).
"On the whole, though we cannot approve of the steps by which he mounted
to power, we must own that he made a princely use of it, and may believe that,
though under his dynasty, Athens could never have risen to the greatness she afterwards
attained, she was indebted to his rule for a season of repose, during which she
gained much of that strength which she finally unfolded." (Thirlwall, Hist. of
Greece, vol. ii. p. 65.)
Peisistratus was thrice married (including his connection with the
daughter of Megacles). The name of his first wife, the mother of Hippias and Hipparchus,
we do not know. The statement of the Scholiast on Aristophanes (Eqzuil. 447) that
her name was Myrrhine, arises probably from a confusion with the wife of Hippias.
From Plutarch (Cato Major, c. 24) we learn that when Hippias and Hipparchus were
grown up, Peisistratus married Timonassa, a lady of Argolis, and had by her two
sons, Iophon and Thessalus. It is a conjecture of Vater's that Timonassa was connected
with the royal house of Macedonia. Nothing more is known of Iophon; he probably
died young. Hegesistratus, a bastard son of Peisistratus, has been already mentioned.
Mention is also made of a daughter of Peisistratus, who was forcibly carried off
by a youth named Thrasybulus, or Thrasymedes, and was afterwards married to him
with the consent of her father, when, having put to sea, and fallen into the hands
of Hippias, he was brought back (Plut. Apophth. Peisist.). Thucydides (i. 20,
vi. 54) expressly states, on what he declares to be good authority, that Hippias
was the eldest son of Peisistratus (a statement which he defends by several arguments,
not all very decisive, though they at least confirm it), contrary to the general
opinion in his day, which assigned the priority of birth to Hipparchus. The authority
of Thucydides is fully supported by Herodotus (v. 55) and Cleidemus (in Athen.
xiii.). Peisistratus died at an advanced age (Thuc. vi. 54) in B. C. 527, and
was succeeded in the tyranny by his son Hippias (Herod. l. c. ; Cleid. l. c.)
though the brothers appear to have administered the affairs of the state with
so little outward distinction, that they are frequently spoken of as though they
had been joint tyrants (Thucyd. l. c. ; Schol. ad Aristoph. Vtesp. 502, ho de
Hippias eturannesen, ouch ho Hipparchos: koinos de pantes hoi Peisistratidai turannoi
elegonto). They continued the government on the same principles as their father.
Thucydides (vi. 54) speaks in terms of high commendation of the virtue and intelligence
with which their rule was exercised till the death of Hipparchus ; and the author
of the dialogue Hipparchus speaks of their government as a kind of golden age.
There seems no reason to question the general truth of this description, though
particular exceptions may be adduced, such as the assassination of Cimon, the
father of Miltiades (Herod. vi. 39, 103) They exacted only one-twentieth of the
produce of the land to defray their expenses in finishing the buildings left incomplete
by Peisistratus, or erecting new ones (though according to Suidas, s. v. to Hipparchou
teichion, Hipparchus exacted a good deal of money from the Athenians for building
a wall round the Academy) for maintaining their mercenary troops, who bore the
appellation Lukopodes (Suid. s. v.; Schol. ad Aristoph. Lys. 664), and providing
for the religious solemnities. Hipparchus inherited his father's literary tastes.
It was he who erected on the roads leading to the country towns of Attica busts
of Hermes, inscribed on one side with the distances from the city (which distances
were measured from the altar of the twelve gods set up in the agora by Peisistratus,
the son of Hippias, Thuc. vi. 54 ; Herod. ii. 7), and on the other side with some
moral maxim in verse (Pseudo-Plat. Hipparch.). He also arranged the manner in
which the rhapsodes were to recite the Homeric poems at the Panathenaic festival.
Several distinguished contemporary poets appear to have lived at the court of
the Peisistratidae under the patronage of Hipparchus, as, for example, Simoides
of Ceos (Pseudo-Plat. Hipparch.; Aelian. V. H. viii. Anacreon of Teos (ibid.),
Lasus of llermione, and Onomacritus (Herod. vii. 6). The latter was employed in
making a collection of oracles of Musaeus, and was banished on being detected
in an attempt to interpolate them. This collection of oracles afterwards fell
into the hands of Cleomenes (Herod. v. 90). The superstitious reverence for oracles
and divination which appears to have led Hipparchus to banish Onomacritus again
manifests itself in the story of the vision (Herod. v. 56). That he was also addicted
to erotic gratification appears from the story of Harmodius, and the authority
of Heracleides Ponticus, who terms him erotikos.
Of the particular events of the first fourteen years of the government
of Hippias we know scarcely anything. Thucydides (vi. 54) speaks of their carrying
on wars, but what these were we do not know. It was during the tyranny of Hippias
that Miltiades was sent to take possession of the Chersonesus. But a great change
in the character of his government ensued upon the murder of Hipparchus (B. C.
514), for the circumstances connected with which the reader is referred to the
articles Harmodius
and Leaena.
Hippias displayed on the occasion great presence of mind. As soon as he heard
of the assassination of his brother, instead of rushing to the scene of it, he
went quietly up to the armed citizens who were forming the procession, and, as
though he intended to harangue them, directed them to go without their arms to
a spot which he pointed out. He then ordered his guards to seize their arms, and
to apprehend those whom he suspected of being concerned in the plot, and all who
had daggers concealed about them (What Polyaenus, i. 21.2, relates of Peisistratus
has probably arisen out of a confusion with these events). Under the influence
of revengeful feelings and fears for his own safety Hippias now became a morose
and suspicious tyrant. His rule became harsh, arbitrary, and exacting (Thucyd.
vi. 57-60). He put to death great numbers of the citizens, and raised money by
extraordinary imposts. It is probably to this period that we should refer the
measures described by Aristotle (Oeconom. ii.), such as having houses that were
built so as to interfere with the public convenience put up for sale; and, under
pretence of issuing a new coinage, getting the old coinage brought in at a low
valuation, and then issuing it again without alteration. Feeling himself unsafe
at Athens he began to look abroad for some place of retreat for himself and his
family, in case he should be expelled from Athens. With this view he gave his
daughter Archedice in marriage to Aeantides, the son of Hippoclus, tyrant of Lampsacus,
an alliance which he would doubtless have thought beneath him, had he not observed
that Hippoclus was in great favour with Dareius.
The expulsion of the Peisistratidae was finally brought about by the
Alcmaeonidae and Lacedaemonians. The former, since their last quarrel with Peisistratus,
had shown unceasing hostility and hatred towards him and his successors, which
the latter met by tokens of similar feelings, insomuch that they not only demolished
their houses, but dug up their tombs (Isocrates, de Big. 26). The Alcmaeonidae
were joined by other Athenian exiles, and had fortified a stronghold on the frontier
of Attica, named Leipsydrion, on the heights of Parnes, above Paeonia (Aristot.
ap. Schol. ad Aristoph. Lysist. 665; Suidas, s. v. epi Leipsudrioi mache and Lukopodes.
Thirlwall remarks that the description seems to relate to some family seat of
the Paeonidae, who were kinsmen of the Alcmaeonidae). They were, however, repulsed
with loss in an attempt to force their way back to Athens, and compelled to evacuate
the fortress (Suidas, l. c.). Still they none the more remitted their machinations
against the tyrants (Herod. v. 62). By well-timed liberality they had secured
the favour of the Amphictyons and that of the Delphic oracle, which they still
further secured by bribing the Pythia (Herod. v. 63). The repeated injunctions
of the oracle to the Lacedaemonians to free Athens roused them at length to send
an army under Anchimolius for the purpose of driving out the Peisistratidae (though
hitherto the family had been closely connected with them by the ties of hospitality).
Anchimolius landed at Phalerus, but was defeated and slain by Hippias, who was
assisted by a body of Thessalian cavalry under Cineas. The Lacedaemonians now
sent a larger force under Cleomenes. The Thessalian cavalry were defeated on the
borders, apparently at a place called Pallenion (Andoc. de Myst. 106), and returned
home; and Hippias, unable to withstand his enemies in the field, retreated into
the Acropolis. This being well supplied with stores, the Lacedaemonians, who were
unprepared for a siege, would, in the judgment of Herodotus, have been quite unable
to force Hippias to surrender, had it not been that his children fell into their
hands, while being conveyed out of Attica for greater security, and were only
restored on condition that Hippias and his connections should evacuate Attica
within five days. They retired to Sigeum, B. C. 510 (Herod. v. 64; Paus. iii.
4.2, 7.8; Aristoph. Lysist. 1150). The family of the tyrants was condemned to
perpetual banishment, a sentence which was maintained even in after times, when
decrees of amnesty were passed (Andoc. de Myst.78). A monument recording the offences
of the tyrants was set up in the Acropolis (Thuc. vi. 55).
The Spartans before long discovered the trick that had been played
upon them by the Alemaeonidae and the Delphic oracle; and their jealousy of the
Athenians being stimulated by the oracles, collected by IIipparchus, which Cleomenes
found in the Acropolis, in which manifold evils were portended to them from the
Athenians, they began to repent of having driven out their old friends the Peisistratidae,
and accordingly sent for Hippias, who came to Sparta. Having summoned a congress
of their allies, they laid the matter before them, and proposed that they should
unite their forces and restore Hippias. But the vehement remonstrances of the
Corinthian deputy Sosicles induced the allies to reject the proposal. Hippias,
declining the offers that were made him of the town of Anthemus by Amyntas, and
of Iolcos by the Thessalians, returned to Sigeum (Herod. v. 90-94), and addressed
himself to Zeuxippus had Brachyllas assassinated, a crime Artaphernes. (Respecting
the embassy of the Athenians to counteract his intrigues, see Artaphernes)
He appears then with his family to have gone to the court of Dareius (Herod. l.
c.): while here they urged Dareius to inflict vengeance on Athens and Eretria,
and Hippias himself accompanied the expedition sent under Datis and Artaphernes.
From Eretria he led them to the plain of Marathon, as the most suitable for their
landing, and arranged the troops when they had disembarked. While he was thus
engaged, we are told, he happened to sneeze and cough violently, and, most of
his teeth being loose from his great age, one of them fell out, and was lost in
the sand; an incident from which Hippias augured that the expedition would miscarry,
and that the hopes which he had been led by a dream to entertain of being restored
to his native land before his death were buried with his tooth (Herod. vi. 102,
107). Where and when he died cannot be ascertained with certainty. According to
Suidas (s. v. Hippias he died at Lemnos on his return. According to Cicero (ad
Att. ix. 10) and Justin (ii. 9) he fell in the battle of Marathon; though from
his advanced age it seems rather unlikely that he have been engaged in the battle.
The family of the tyrant are once more mentioned (Herod. vii. 6) as at the court
of Persia, uirgilng Xerxes to invade Greece.
Hippias was in his youth the object of the affection of a man named
Charmus (who previously stood in a similar relation to Peisistratus; Plut. Solon.
1), and subsequently married his daughter (Athen. xiv.). His first wife was Myrrhine,
the daughter of Callias, by whom he had five children (Thucyd. vi. 55). One of
his sons, named Peisistratus, was Archon Eponymus during the tyranny of his father.
Of Archedice, daughter of Hippias, mention has already been made. According to
Thucydides (l. c.) Hippias was the only one of the legitimate sons of Peisistratus
who had children.
What became of Thessalus we do not know. He is spoken of as a high-spirited
youth (Heraclid. Pont. 1), and there is a story in Diodorus (Fragm. lib. x. Olymp.
lxvi.) that he refused to have any share in the tyranny of his brothers, and was
held in great esteem by the citizens.
Commentary:
(1) There is a good deal of difficulty with regard to the chronology
of Peisistratus. The dates of his usurpation and death may be fixed with tolerable
accuracy, as also the relative lengths of the periods during which he was in possession
of the tyranny and in exile. Aristotle (Pol. v. 12) says, that in the space of
thirtythree years he was in possession of the tyranny during 17 years; his sons
holding the tyranny after him for eighteen years, making thirty-five years in
all. His tyranny commenced in B. C. 560; his death happened in B. C. 527. He had
three distinct periods of government, with two periods of exile, the latter amounting
together to fifteen years. The second period of exile lasted ten years complete
(Herod. i. 62). That would leave about five years for the first exile. Clinton
(Fasti Hellen. vol. ii. p. 203) assigns six years for the first period of government,
one for the second, and ten for the third. In doing this he assumes that Hippias
was born in the first year of the tyranny of Peisistratus, and that it was in
the first period of his rule that Croesus sent to Greece to form alliances against
Cyrus. To this scheme it is objected by Vater that it is clear from the narrative
of Herodotus (i. 59 ; comp. i. 65, init), that it was in the third period of the
government of Peisistratus that Croesus sent to Greece; that Peisistratus was
expelled shortly after he seized the citadel, before his power was firmly rooted
(a strange mode of describing a period of six years); and that on the occasion
of his marriage with the daughter of Megacles, Hippias (according to Clinton)
would be only thirteen years old, his brother Hipparchus still younger; and yet
they are called Weanias by 13erodotus, snd Hipparchus is stated to have married
Phya; and when Peisistratus shortly after retired to Eretria they were both old
enough to assist him with their advice (Herod. i. 61). The mention of Hippias
in connection with the battle of Marathon is not in the least inconsistent with
his being eighty or eighty-five years old (his teeth were then so loose from age
that one of them dropped out when he sneezed). That Hippias was born before tile
year B. C. 560 is also shown by the fragments of the poetry of Solon, in which,
immediately after the capture of the citadel by Peisistratus, he reproaches the
Athenians with having themselves aggrandized their tyrants (Plut. Sol. 30). The
plural would indicate that Peisistratus had sons at that time. Vater places the
commencement of the tyranny of Peisistratus in the latter part of B. C. 561; assigns
half a year for the first period of government; five years and a half for the
first exile; half a year for the second tyranny; ten years and a quarter for the
second exile; and sixteen years for the third tyranllny. The embassy of Croesus
is the only point that can occasion any diiiculyity; blut tliess same writer has
shown that it is probable that the capture of Sardes is placed a few years too
early by Clinton. That it much shorter interval than Clinton supposes elapsed
between the embassy of Croesus to Gireece and the capture of Sardes, is shown
by the circumstance that the presents sent by the Lacedaemonians to Croesus did
not reach him before he was taken prisoner. (Herod. i. 70)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited June 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Pisistratidae, (Peisistratidai). The legitimate sons of Pisistratus. The name is used sometimes to indicate only Hippias and Hipparchus, and sometimes in a wider application, embracing the grandchildren and near connections of Pisistratus (as by Herod.viii. 52, referring to a time when both Hippias and Hipparchus were dead).
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
KYDANTIDES (Ancient demos) MARKOPOULO MESSOGEAS
Nicias (ca. 470-413 B.C.) An Athenian politician prominent during the first half
of the Peloponnesian War (431-404). Nicias is best known for arranging a halt
to that war in 421 ("Peace of Nicias') and for presiding over an Athenian
military disaster in Sicily in which he lost his life.
Family
Little is known of Nicias' father, Niceratus. A wealthy man, Nicias
was one of the biggest known slaveholders in late fifth century Athens. The family's
money came from interests in silver mines (Plut. Nic. 4 ). Nicias continued the
family investment and was said to have employed 1,000 men in the mines (Xen. Ways
4.14 ).
Biography
Since Niceratus is unknown in Athenian politics, Nicias may have had
to proceed as a newcomer. Nicias probably sought the patronage of Pericles. Plutarch
implies that he was Pericles' political heir (Plut. Nic. 2 ). Thucydides makes
no mention of Nicias' early political significance. There Nicias appears for the
first time in 427 leading an Athenian expedition to the island of Minoa just off
Megara (Thuc. 3.51 ). In the years thereafter Nicias held important (but not momentous
) military commands (Thuc. 3.91; Thuc. 4.42 ).
It was also in 425 that a confrontation occurred in the assembly which
provides insight into Nicias' character (Thuc 4.26-41 ). As general that year
Nicias was held responsible by the demagogue Cleon for the stalemate at Sphacteria.
Cleon demanded in the assembly that Nicias act decisively to capture the Spartans
on the island. Cleon pointed to Nicias and claimed that "if only the generals
were real men" the Spartans could be easily brought back to Athens and boasted
that if he himself were in command the matter would be quickly resolved (Thuc.
4.27 ). Nicias replied by turning his command over to Cleon. Ancient and modern
observers have judged Nicias harshly for bowing to the reckless Cleon (Plut. Nic.
9 ).
In 424 Nicias achieved his greatest military success. A force under
his command occupied Cythera, a large island off the southern Peloponnesus. Thucydides
says that the occupation of Cythera brought Spartan morale to a low level (Thuc.
4.55 ). From 423 to 421 Nicias was closely involved in peace negotiations with
Sparta. In March 423 an armistice was arranged and in 421 a fifty-year alliance
was concluded (Thuc. 4.119, Thuc. 5.17-24 ). Nicias was present at these conferences,
taking the oath of peace on each occasion. As the most important Athenian at the
time, the peace came to be named after Nicias. The contemporary Thucydides does
not refer to the accord as the "Peace of Nicias" but Andocides does
use such terminology (Andoc. 3.8 ).
At this point in the Peloponnesian War, Nicias is usually considered to be the
spokesman for conservative elements which constituted a "peace party"
at Athens. Plutarch implies that Nicias forged an alliance with the wealthy and
older citizens as well as with rural landlords and peasants. These men had the
most to gain from an end to hostilities (Plut. Nic. 9 ). Nicias himself also had
reason to hope for peace. Thucydides states (Thuc. 5.16 ): "Nicias wished
to rest upon his laurels, to find an immediate release from toil and trouble both
for himself and for his fellow citizens."
By 420 the peace between Sparta and Athens had collapsed. In that
year Nicias made a last attempt to repair the rupture. He traveled to Sparta to
seek, among other things, Spartan help in the return of Amphipolis. In the balance
lay not only war or peace but also Nicias' own strategy. The embassy failed and
hostilities soon resumed. Thucydides reports that Nicias was attacked upon his
return to Athens for the failure of his peace (Thuc. 5.46 ).
The opposition to Nicias and his supporters came from new demagogues,
most notably the young and talented Alcibiades. The two men were thorough contrasts.
In 418 Nicias was approximately 52 years old while Alcibiades was perhaps 32.
More than the different values and temperaments of two generations divided the
men. Nicias had appeared on the political scene from a relatively unknown family;
Alcibiades was a descendant of the famed Cleisthenes and nephew to Pericles. Nicias
was a conservative in politics and war; Alcibiades was brilliant and daring. Finally,
Nicias was superstitious and pious (Thuc. 7.50; Plut. Nic. 3.4 ); while Alcibiades
became infamous for sacrilege.
By 417 a crisis of leadership had developed. Alcibiades and Nicias
were elected generals but advocated imcompatible military policies. The solution
proposed by Hyperbolus was the old Athenian practice of ostracism. It was assumed
the process would eliminate either Nicias or Alcibiades and leave the state with
a single leader and policy. The wily Alcibiades, however, thwarted Hyperbolus
and allied himself with Nicias. The result was that Hyperbolus' name appeared
on a majority of the ostraka and the demagogue was promptly ostracized (Plut.
Nic. 11; Plut. Alc. 13 ).
The alliance between Alcibiades and Nicias was only temporary. A debate
in the assembly over the proposed Sicilian expedition revealed the differing policies
and characters of the two men (Thuc. 6.8-26 ). The Athenians voted to send 60
ships to Sicily under Alcibiades, Nicias and Lamachus. Nicias was utterly opposed
to the project. When the assembly met to consider the logistics of the expedition
Nicias leveled a bitter attack on Alcibiades and Athenian adventurism and asked
the Athenians to reconsider, calling on support from older men. Nicias emphasized
the strength of the Sicilian cities and reminded the Athenians that they were
risking a two-front war (Thuc. 6.10,20-22 ). (It is interesting to note that many
of the concerns Nicias voiced in the debate--for example his fears over the Syracusan
cavalry and Athenian supply lines--turned out to be well-founded. ) In a last
attempt to dissuade the Athenians Nicias recommended that only a very large force
could succeed in the project (Thuc. 6.19 ). This strategy was indeed a blunder.
Not only did the Athenians quickly approve Nicias' request, they also gave the
generals powers to call on whatever forces they saw fit. Instead of giving the
Athenians cause to pause in their plans, Nicias actually increased the risks of
the Sicilian expedition. Perhaps most surprising of all is Nicias' decision to
take part in an expedition he opposed.
The drama of the Athenian expedition to Sicily (415-413 B.C ) is vividly
treated by Thucydides in books six and seven. Modern historians have often assigned
Nicias a large part of the blame for the Athenian defeat in Sicily. Thucydides
does not explicitly do so, but does record numerous strategic blunders committed
by the general. Two in particular loom large. The first allowed reinforcements
to reach Syracuse when Nicias neglected to complete his northern wall around Syracuse
(Thuc. 7.1,6 ). Later, when the Athenian position had deteriorated and speedy
withdrawal was critical, the superstitious general delayed a breakout for an entire
month because of a lunar eclipse (Thuc. 7.50. The eclipse can be pinpointed to
August 27, 413 B.C.) In the intervening period the Syracusans sealed the harbor
to trap Nicias and the Athenians. When attempts to breakout finally came it was
too late. In Nicias' defence it should be noted that the general suffered from
a kidney illness in Sicily and had personally written to Athens asking to be relieved
(Thuc. 7.8-15; Plut. Nic. 17-18 ). On the eighth day of the Athenian retreat from
Syracuse Nicias surrendered to Gylippus in hopes of saving his men and was soon
executed (Thuc. 7.85 ).
Ancient and Modern Views of Nicias.
Nicias stands as one of the most important personalities in Thucydides'
History. Although many of his actions in the History are blameworthy, the final
judgement of Thucydides on Nicias is surprising: "he was killed, a man who,
of all the Hellenes in my time, least deserved to come to so miserable an end,
since the whole of his life had been devoted to the study and practice of virtue
arete." This statement has led to much modern debate about Thucydides' view
of Nicias. Several of Aristophanes' comedies also contain contemporary references
to Nicias: see, for example, Aristoph. Birds 593-595. Contemporary Athenians may
not have been as charitable as Thucydides in their view of Nicias after the Sicilian
debacle. The second century A.D. travel writer Pausanias records having seen a
stele commemorating the Athenian generals who had died in Sicily. Nicias' name
had been left off the list. Pausanias' reason for the omission was that Nicias
had been "unmanly in war" (Paus. 1.29.11-12 ).
Vincent Burns, ed.
This text is cited August 2004 from
Perseus Project URL bellow, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Nicias, Nikias. An Athenian general who was a man of birth and fortune; but one in whom a generous temper, popular manners, and considerable political and military talent were marred by unreasonable diffidence and an excessive dread of responsibility. Nicias, however, signalized himself on several occasions. He took the island of Cythera from the Lacedaemonians, subjugated many cities of Thrace which had revolted from the Athenian sway, shut up the Megarians within their city-walls, cutting off all communications from without, and taking their harbour Nisaea. When the unfortunate expedition against Syracuse was undertaken by Athens, Nicias was one of the three commanders who were sent at its head, the other two being Alcibiades and Lamachus. He had previously, however, used every effort to prevent his countrymen from engaging in this affair, on the ground that they were only wasting their resources in distant warfare and multiplying their enemies. After the recall of Alcibiades, the natural indecision of Nicias, increased by ill-health and dislike of his command, proved a principal cause of the failure of the enterprise. In endeavouring to retreat by land from before Syracuse, the Athenian commanders, Nicias and Demosthenes (the latter had come with re-enforcements), were pursued, defeated, and compelled to surrender. The generals were put to death (B.C. 414); their soldiers were confined at first in the quarry of Epipolae, and afterwards sold as slaves. There is a life of Nicias by Plutarch.
This text is from: Harry Thurston Peck, Harpers Dictionary of Classical Antiquities. Cited Nov 2002 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Nicias> One of the most celebrated of the Athenian generals engaged during
the Peloponnesian war. He was the son of Niceratus, from whom he inherited a large
fortune, derived mainly from the silver mines at Laureium, of which he was a very
large lessee, employing in them as many as 1000 slaves (Xen. Mem. ii. 5.2, de
Vect. 4.14; Athen. vi.). His property was valued at 100 talents (Lys. pro Arist.
Bonis). From this cause, combined with his unambitious character, and his aversion
to all dangerous innovations, he was naturally brought into connection with the
aristocratical portion of his fellow-citizens. He was several times associated
with Pericles, as strategus; and his great prudence and high character gained
for him considerable influence. On the death of Pericles he came forward more
openly as the opponent of Cleon, and the other demagogues of Athens; but from
his military reputation, the mildness of his character, and the liberal use which
he made of his great wealth, he was looked upon with respect, and some measure
of attachment, by all classes of the citizens. His timidity led hint to buy off
the attacks of the sycophants. This feature of his character was ridiculed by
more than one comic poet of the day. Tile splendour with which he discharged the
office of choregus exceeded anything that had been seen before. On one occasion,
when charged with the conduct of the Theoria to Delos, he made a remarkable display
of his wealth and munificence. To prevent the confusion which usually ensued when
the Chorus landed at Delos amidst the crowd of spectators, he landed first at
Rheneia; and having had a bridge prepared before he left Athens, it was thrown
across the channel between Rheneia and Delos, in the course of the night, and
by daybreak it was ready, adorned in the most sumptuous manner with gilding and
tapestry, for tile orderly procession of the Chorus. After the ceremonies were
over he consecrated a brasen palm tree to Apollo, together with a piece of land,
which he purchased at the cost of 10,000 drachmae, directing that the proceeds
of it should be laid out by the Delians in sacrifices and feasts; the only condition
which he annexed being, that they should pray for the blessing of the god upon
the founder. His strong religious feeling was perhaps as much concerned in this
dedication, as his desire of popularity. It was told of him that he sacrificed
every day, and even kept a soothsayer in his house, that he might consult the
will of the gods not only about public affairs, but likewise respecting his own
private fortunes. Aristophanes ridicules him rather severely in the Equites for
his timidity and superstition (l. 28, &c., 80, 112, 358). The excessive dread
which Nicias entertained of informers led him to keep as much as possible in retirement.
He made himself difficult of access; and the few friends who were admitted to
his privacy industriously spread the belief that he devoted himself with such
untiring zeal to the public interests, as to sacrifice enjoyment, sleep, and even
health, in the service of the state. His characteristic caution was the distinguishing
feature of his military career. He does not seem to have displayed any very great
ability, still less anything like genius, in the science of strategy; but he was
cautious and wary, and does not appear on a single occasion to have beemi guilty
of any act of remissness, unless it were in the siege of Syracuse. Hence his military
operations were almost invariably successful. In B. C. 427 he led an expedition
against the island of Minoa, which lies in front of Megara, and took it (Thuc.
iii. 51). In the following year he led an armament of sixty triremes, with 2000
heavy-armed soldiers, against the island of Melos. He ravaged the island, but
the town held out; and the troops being needed for an attack upon Tanagra, he
withdrew, and, after ravaging the coast of Locris, returned home (Thuc. iii. 91;
Diod. xii. 65). He was one of the generals in B. C. 425, when the Spartans were
shut up in Sphacteria. The amusing circumstances under which he commissioned his
enemy, Cleon, to reduce the island, have already been described in the article
Cleon. In the same year Nicias led an expedition into the territory
of Corinth. He defeated the Corinthians in battle, but, apprehending the arrival
of reinforcements for the enemy's troops, he re-embarked his forces. Two of the
slain, however, having been left behind, whom the Athenians had not been able
to find at the time, Nicias resigned the honours of victory for the purpose of
recovering them, and sent a herald to ask for their restoration. He then proceeded
to Crommyon, where he ravaged the land, and then directed his course to the territory
of Epidaurus. Having carried a wall across the isthmus connecting Methone with
the main land, and left a garrison in the place, he returned home (Thuc. iv. 42-45;
Diod. xii. 65). In B. C. 424, with two colleagues, he led an expedition to the
coasts of Laconia and captured the island of Cythera, a success gained with the
greater facility, as he had previously had negotiations with some of the Cytherians.
He stationed an Athenian garrison in the island, and ravaged the coast of Laconia
for seven days. On his return he ravaged the territory of Epidaurus in Laconia,
and took Thyrea, where the Spartans had settled the Aeginetans after their expulsion
from their own island. These Aeginetans having been conveyed to Athens were put
to death by the Athenians (Thuc. iv. 54; Diod. l. c.). In B. C. 423, Nicias and
Nicostratus were sent with an army to Chalcidice to check the movements of Brasidas.
They obtained possession of Mende, and blockaded Scione; while thus engaged they
entered into an agreement with Perdiccas. Having finished the circumvallation
of Scione, they returned home (Thuc. iv. 130- 132).
The death of Cleon removed out of the way of Nicias the only rival
whose power was at all commensurate with his own, and he now exerted all his influence
to bring about a peace. He had secured the gratitude of the Spartans by his humane
treatment of the prisoners taken at Sphacteria, so that he found no difficulty
in assuming the character of mediator between the belligerent powers. The negotiations
ended in the peace of B. C. 421, which was called the peace of Nicias on account
of the share which he had had in bringing it about (Thuc. v. 16, 19, 24, vii.
86). In consequence of the opposition of the Boeotians, Corinthians, and others,
and the hostile disposition of Argos, this peace was soon followed by a treaty
of defensive alliance between Athens and Sparta. According to Theophrastus, Nicias,
by bribing the Spartan commissioners, contrived that Sparta should take the oaths
first. Grounds for dissatisfaction, however, speedily arose between the two states.
The jealousy felt by the Athenians was industriously increased by Alcibiades,
at whose suggestion an embassy came from Argos in B. C. 420, to propose an alliance.
The Spartan envoys who came to oppose it were entrapped by Alcibiades into exhibiting
an appearance of double dealing, and it required all the influence of Nicias to
prevent the Athenians from at once concluding an alliance with Argos. He induced
them to send him at the head of an embassy to Sparta to demand satisfaction with
respect to the points on which the Athenians felt themselves aggrieved. The Spartan
government would not comply with their demands, and Nicias could only procure
a fresh ratification of the existing treaties. On his return the alliance with
Argos was resolved on (Thuc. v. 43, 46).
The dissensions between Nicias and Alcibiades now greatly increased,
and the ostracism of one or other began to be talked of. The demagogue Hyperbolus
strove to secure the banishment of one of them that he might have a better chance
of making head against the other. But Nicias and Alcibiades, perceiving his designs,
united their influence against their common enemy, and the ostracism fell on Hyperbolus.
In B. C. 415, the Athenians resolved on sending their great expedition to Sicily,
on the pretext of assisting the Segestaeans and Leontines. Nicias, Alcibiades,
and Lamachus were appointed to the command. Nicias, who, besides that he disapproved
of the expedition altogether, was in feeble health, did all that he could to divert
the Athenians from this course. He succeeded in getting the question put again
to the vote; but even his representations of the magnitude of the preparations
required did not produce the effect which he wished. On the contrary, the Athenians
derived from them grounds for still greater confidence; and Nicias and the other
generals were empowered to raise whatever forces they thought requisite. When
the armament arrived at Rhegium, finding the hopes which the Athenians had entertained
with regard to the Segestaeans futile, in a conference of the generals Nicias
proposed that they should call upon the Segestaeans to provide pay, if not for
the whole armament, at least for the amount of the succours which they had requested,
and that, if they furnished these. the forces should stay till they had brought
the Selinuntines to terms, and then return home, after coasting the island to
display the power of Athens. But the intermediate plan of Alcibiades was finally
adopted. After the recall of Alcibiades Nicias found no difficulty in securing
the concurrence of Lamachus in his plans. From Catana, which had come over to
the Athenians and been made their head-quarters, Nicias and Lamachus proceeded
with all their forces towards Segesta. On their way they captured Hyccara. Nicias
went himself to Segesta, but could only obtain thirty talents. On their return
they seem to have remained almost inactive for some time, but in the autumn they
prepared to attack Syracuse. By a skilful stratagem the Athenians without molestation
took possession of a station near the Olympieum, by the harbour of Syracuse. A
battle took place the next day, in which the Syracusans were defeated. But, being
in want of cavalry and money, the Athenians sailed away, and for the first part
of the winter took up their station at Naxos. They were unsuccessful in their
endeavours to induce Camarina to join them, but secured the assistance of several
of the Sicel tribes. Even some Etruscan cities promised aid, and envoys were sent
to Carthage. From Naxos Nicias removed to Catana. Additional supplies were sent
from Athens, and arrived at Catana in the spring (B. C. 414). Nicias now made
preparations for seizing Epipolae, in which ho was successful; and the circumvallation
of Syracuse was immediately commenced. The work proceeded rapidly, and all attempts
of the Syracusans to stood it were defeated. In a battle which took place in the
marsh Lamachus was slain. It fortunately happened at this juncture that Nicias,
who was afflicted with a painful disorder of the eyes, was left upon Epipolae,
and his presence prevented the Syracusans from succeeding in a bold attempt which
they made to gain possession of the heights and destroy the Athenian works. The
circumvallation was now nearly completed, and the doom of Syracuse seemed sealed,
when Gylippus arrived in Sicily. Nicias, for the first time in his life probably,
allowed his confidence of success to render him remiss, and he neglected to prevent
Gylippus from making his way into Syracuse. lie seems now to have supposed that
he should be unable to stop the erection of a counter-wall on Epipolae, and therefore
abandoned the heights and established his army on the headland of Plemmyrium,
where he erected three forts. His forces were defeated in an attempt to hinder
the completion of the counterwork of the Syracusans. Succours were now called
in by the Syracusans from all quarters, and Nicias found himself obliged to send
to Athens for reinforcements, as his ships were becoming unsound, and their crews
were rapidly thinned by deaths and desertions. He requested at the same time that
another commander might be sent to supply his place, as his disorder rendered
him unequal to the discharge of his duties. The Athenians voted reinforcements,
which were placed under the command of Demosthenes and Eurymedon. But they would
not allow Nicias to resign his command.
Meantime, Gylippus induced the Syracusans to try their fortune in
a sea-fight. During the heat of the action he gained possession of the forts on
Plemmyrium. The sea-fight at first was against the Athenians; but the confusion
caused by the arrival of the reinforcements to the Syracusans from Corinth enabled
the Athenians to attack them at an advantage, and gain a victory. Other contests
followed in the great harbour, and in a severe engagement the Athenians were defeated
with considerable loss. But at this moment the Athenian reinforcements arrived.
At the suggestion of Demosthenes, a bold attempt was made in the night
to recover Epipolae, in which the Athenians, after being all but successful, were
finally driven back with severe loss. Demosthenes now proposed to abandon the
siege and return to Athens. To this Nicias would not consent. He professed to
stand in dread of the Athenians at home, but he appears to have had reasons for
believing that a party amongst the Syracusans themselves were likely in no long
time to facilitate the reduction of the city, and, at his urgent instance, his
colleagues consented to remain for a little longer. But meantime fresh succours
arrived for the Syracusans; sickness was making ravages among the Athenian troops,
and at length Nicias himself saw the necessity of retreating. Secret orders were
given that every thing should be in readiness for departure, supplies were countermanded,
and nothing seemed likely to prevent their unmolested retreat, when an eclipse
of the moon happened. The credulous superstition of Nicias now led to the total
destruction of the Athenian armament. The soothsayers interpreted the event as
an injunction from the gods that they should not retreat before the next full
moon, and Nicias resolutely determined to abide by their decision. The Syracusans
now resolved to bring the enemy to an engagement, and, after some successful skirmishing,
in a decisive naval battle defeated the Athenians, though a body of their land
forces received an unimportant check. They were now masters of the harbour, and
the Athenians were reduced to the necessity of making a desperate effort to escape.
Nicias exerted himself to the utmost to encourage the men, but the Athenians were
decisively defeated, and could not even be induced to attempt to force their way
at day-break through the bar at the mouth of the harbour. They set out on their
retreat into the interior of Sicily. Nieias, though bowed down by bodily as well
as mental sufferings, used all his arguments to cheer the men. For the details
of the retreat the reader is referred to Thucydides. Nicias and Demosthenes, with
the miserable remnant of the troops, were compelled to surrender. Gylippus was
desirous of carrying Nicias to Sparta; but those of the Syracusans with whom Nicias
had opened a secret correspondence, fearing lest its betrayal should bring them
into difficulties, eagerly urged that he should be put to death. His execution
draws the following just remarks from Bishop Thirlwall: " His death filled up
the measure of a singular destiny, by which the reputation he had acquired by
his prudence and fortune, his liberality and patriotism, his strength as well
as his weakness, all the good and the bad qualities of his mind and character,
his talents and judgment, as well as his credulity and superstition, his premature
timidity, his tardy courage, his long protracted wavering and his unseasonable
resolution, contributed in nearly equal degrees to his own ruin and to the fall
of his country. The historian deplores his undeserved calamity; but the fate of
the thousands whom he involved in his disasters was perhaps still more pitiable."
According to Pausanias (i. 29.12), his name was omitted on a monument raised at
Athens to the memory of those who fell in Sicily, because he surrendered himself
voluntarily (Plut. Nicias; Diod. xii. 83; Thuc. vi. and vii.).
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited July 2005 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
The Peace of Nicias
Cleon, the most prominent and influential leader at Athens after the Athenian
victory at Pylos in 425, was dispatched to northern Greece in 422 to try to stop
Brasidas. As it happened, both he and Brasidas were killed before Amphipolis in
422 B.C. in a battle won by the Spartan army. Their deaths deprived each side
of its most energetic military commander and opened the way to negotiations. Peace
came in 421 B.C. when both sides agreed to resurrect the balance of forces just
as it had been in 431 B.C. The agreement made in that year is known as the Peace
of Nicias after the name of the Athenian general Nicias, who was instrumental
in convincing the Athenian assembly to agree to a peace treaty. The Spartan agreement
to the peace revealed a fracture in the coaltion of Greek states allied with Sparta
against Athens and its allies because the Corinthians and the Boetians refused
to join the Spartans in signing the treaty.
This text is from: Thomas Martin's An Overview of Classical Greek History from Homer to Alexander, Yale University Press. Cited July 2005 from Perseus Project URL below, which contains bibliography & interesting hyperlinks.
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
