ened by constant plots and treasons of the agents of the Persian government, without a geographical chart, without machines for the construction of bridges-in a word, without any aid such as modern armies have. The deep religious sentiment by which the Hellenic army was inspired is especially worthy of notice. That sentiment was one of its strongest supports amid trying circumstances. From Trapezus it became necessary to march through Bithynia before reaching Thrace, where the Greeks finally arrived only after the lapse of four more months. During this march from the coasts of Asia Minor to Kunaxa, and from Kunaxa to Trapezus, and from Trapezus to Thrace, this army lost one half of its original force.

Xenophon, three years after his return to Hellas, was again in military service under the Lacedæmonian king Agesilaus, in the expedition which the latter undertook against the Persians. But during the two years after this latter event, Athens became a party to the war against Sparta, and, since Xenophon continued to serve as commander of the Cyreians in the army of Agesilaus, the Athenians passed upon him sentence of banishment. Having thus become an exile, he established himself on an estate not far from Olympia in the Peloponnesus, which he either bought or received from the Spartans as a present. In this place, as well as in Corinth, where he afterward lived, and where in 355 B. C. he died at the age of ninety-two, he composed most of his writings. But his name was immortalized by his command in the retreat of the Ten Thousand-a march ever wonderful in the history of the military art. A small number of men, in the depths of Asia, surrounded by hostile myriads, with no hope of assistance and suddenly deprived of their commanders, nevertheless succeed, though for nearly eight months constantly marching and fighting, in returning home with their arms in their hands. What an astonishing sight! What is the retreat of the French from Russia, which finally

ended in their utter ruin, compared to this Hellenic achievement? or what was wanting to that nation which had such soldiers, in order to have the material rule of the world, over which for so long a time it had held intellectual supremacy? Ah! what was wanting? What they lacked was thus expressed by Aristotle: "The race of the Hellenes is free and well governed, and capable of ruling over all, if only under one government." In other words, there was lacking political union, without which the most wonderful advantages in the political life of a nation become abortive. This political union the ancient Hellenes did not cease to pursue, but they were destined never to accomplish it during the first period of their history, either under the supremacy of the Athenians, of Sparta, or of the Thebans.

CHAPTER III.

EARLY DECLINE OF THE SPARTAN RULE.

Causes of Weakness.

THE supremacy of Sparta, as we have seen, began to decline shortly after its establishment, through the disaffection of the Corinthians, Megarians, and Thebans, and by the abolition of the oligarchy at Athens. Soon after, by reason of the assistance given to Cyrus, she drew upon herself another dangerous enemy. But these were not the only causes of her decline. About 400 B. C. this hegemony preserved its power complete. All the islands and many coasts on the Ægean paid tribute to it, and were occupied by its garrisons. During this time Sparta imposed her will as absolute mistress on the Eleians. The latter in the Peloponnesian war had often acted against her interests, and to

punish them she sent an embassy requiring the Eleians to make good the unpaid arrears of the quota assessed upon them for the cost of the war against Athens; and further, to relinquish their authority over their dependent townships, or Periœki, leaving the latter autonomous. The Eleians refused to obey, alleging that their dependent cities were held by the right of conquest. Upon this King Agis ruthlessly ravaged their land (a productive country under flourishing cultivation), and compelled them to destroy their walls, surrender their war-vessels, and give up every claim of rule over adjacent cities.

Sparta, availing herself of this triumph, forced the remainder of her ancient enemies, the Messenians, who, by the protection formerly granted by the Athenians, had sought refuge at Naupaktus and Kephallenia, to depart from the neighborhood of the Peloponnesus, and to take shelter, some in Sicily, others at Kyrene.

But while externally Sparta seemed all-powerful, she was internally preyed upon by an evil destined to destroy that once powerful frame. Her extended sway was antagonistic to her ancient constitution. Compare the state of the city during the beginning of the Peloponnesian war with that at its end. During the former epoch Sparta had not one tribute-paying subject, no common treasury, nor any regular revenue from her citizens; while during the second not only did Lysander surrender to her a great amount of gold and silver, but she regularly collected a heavy tribute from the subject states. During the year 432 B. c. she was slow in her resolutions, and especially averse to any remote expedition. In 404 and thereafter she became aggressive, and eager not only to subdue neighboring powers, but also to undertake wars with distant enemies, with a view to territorial aggrandizement. Up to 432 she preserved her ancestral customs, diligently avoiding every association, not only with foreigners, but also with other Greeks. But at the end of the war

her foreign relations reached such a magnitude that they formed the principal business of her magistrates. Hence the gathering of strangers at Sparta and the emigration of Spartans to other countries became constant and inevitable, and the Lycurgan legislation was neglected. This change necessarily produced various evils. It brought into the management of affairs men whose love of command was foreign to the ancient constitution, limited to a few the exercise of political rights, engendered violent animosities in the pursuit of office, and corrupted the basis of Spartan power, the Lycurgan obedience.

Intrigues of Lysander.

Lysander, the most competent and powerful man brought out by the hegemony of Sparta, had recently lost much of his influence through the ephors and kings, but he did not lay aside his aspirations and pretensions. From all parts of Hellas voices were heard urging him to assume the highest office in his country; while at Samos pæans were sung in his honor, poets were writing his encomiums, and the Sophist Kleon of Halikarnassus wrote a discourse proving that Lysander had well earned the regal dignity, that genius ought to prevail over legitimate descent, and that the crown ought to be offered to the most worthy among the Herakleids. Lysander therefore began seriously to foster the idea of breaking the succession of the two regal families, and opening for himself a door to reach the crown. He endeavored to obtain from Delphi, Dodona, and Zeus Ammon in Libya, oracles favorable to his plans. But none of these oracles could be induced to render a decision repealing the established law of succession to the Spartan throne. Finding his schemes thus thwarted, he was compelled to resort to stratagem.

At the end of the Peloponnesian war the two kings of Sparta were Agis, son of Archidamus (426-399), and Pau

sanias, son of Pleistoanax (408-394). Agis died about a year after his expedition against Elis, leaving by his wife. Timæa a son, Leotychides, but about whose legitimacy many doubts existed. Advantage was taken of these doubts by Agesilaus, the younger brother of Agis, who was powerfully seconded by Lysander. The latter made the mistake of supposing Agesilaus to be of a disposition particularly gentle and manageable. They planned to exclude Leotychides and give the throne to Agesilaus. Lysander now believed that, since through him Agesilaus had become king, he himself must sooner or later reach the crown.

Agesilaus II.

Agesilaus was then at the mature age of forty. Having nothing to expect but a private station, he had trained himself strictly in Spartan diet and obedience. He was simple in his manners and kind to his fellow citizens. "Agesilaus," says Plutarch, "was singular in this, that before he came to govern he had learned to obey." He was short of stature, feeble, and lame. These defects caused Lysander to suppose that, in case he should succeed in settling the crown upon him, he himself might eventually rule in his stead and thus satiate his inordinate ambition. But he was grievously disappointed. As soon as Agesilaus became king, he proved himself one of the strongest men of ancient Hellas-an excellent general, strictly and inflexibly just, rigidly respecting "money transactions." Agesilaus certainly had faults, but even these served to display more prominently the noble nature of the man. "In his conduct with respect to the other citizens," says Plutarch, "he behaved better as an enemy than as a friend. If he was severe toward his enemies, he was not unjustly so; his friends he countenanced even in their unjust pursuits. If his enemies performed anything extraordinary, he was not ashamed to take honorable notice of it; his friends he could not correct when they